Lower Winooski River Study: Summer 1975


LOWER WINOOSKI RIVER STUDY
Swwner 1975
REPORT OF DATA
November 1975
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region I
Surveillance and Analysis Division
Needham, Massachusetts 02194

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title Page
OVERVIEW 1
HYDROLOGICAL AND PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
Dams
River Bed Cross Sections
Gaging
TIME OF TRAVEL STUDIES 5
EFFECTS OF PHOTOSYNTHESIS AND DAMS ON DISSOLVED OXYGEN 6
CONCENTRATIONS
Photosynthesis Oxygen Production 6
Dams 7
RIVER AND WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS 8
River Water 9
Wastewater 13
SEDIMENTS 14
TABLES
FIGURES
APPENDI CES

-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 State of Vermont, Department of Water Resources —
S mm ry Table of Technical Requirements
2 Relative Order of Significant Locations
3 Abbreviations Used in Report
4 Power Generation and Water Discharge
5 Cross Section Locations
6 Elevations at Bottom of Cages with Corresponding
Mid-River Depths
7 Continuous Liquid Level and/or Dissolved Oxygen
Recorder Locations
8 Light and Dark Station Locations
9 Winooski River Light and Dark Bottle Dissolved
Oxygen Results
10 Effect of Winooski River Dams on Reaeration
11 Water Quality Station Locations
12 Wastewater Treatment Facility Discharge Locations
13 Winooski River Water Quality Results
14 Winooskl River Wastewater Treatment Facility Results

-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure No. Title
1 Winooski. River Study Area
2 Flow versus Time as Recorded at the U.S.G.S. Gage
below Essex Junction, Vermont
3 River-Elevations at Station WQO5 Relative to Gage Datum
4 River Elevations WQO9 Relative to Gage Datum
5 Graph of Sunlight Intensity vs. Time
6 Dissolved Oxygen Fluctuations versus Time at
Station WQO2
7 Dissolved Oxygen Fluctuations versus Time at
Station WQO5
8 Dissolved Oxygen Fluctuations versus Time at
Station WQO9

-------
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX I. Winooski River Cross Sections
APPENDIX II. Winooski River Time of Travel — June 24 and 25, 1975
APPENDIX III. BOD Reaction Rate, K

-------
LOWER WINOOSKI RIVER STUDY
Summer, 1975
OVERVIEW
In response to a request for assistance from the State of Vermont
Agency of Environmental Conservation (AEC), the United States Environ—
DEntal Protection Agency (EPA), Region I, Surveillance and Analysis
Division, conducted a data gathering study of the lower 33.1 kilome-
ters (20.5 miles) of the Winooski River. This area extends from the
railroad bridge which crosses the river upstream from IBM in Essex
Junction to the demolished bridge near the confluence of the river with
Lake Champlain in Burlington. The purpose of the study was to gather
enough data to properly model the stretch of the river investigated.
This modelling will be done by the AEC with assistance from EPA’s
Region I, Systems Analysis Branch. All samples, with the exception of
selected wastewater samples collected to determine long—term oxygen
uptake, were analyzed by EPA. The long—term oxygen uptake samples were
analyzed by AEC.
The stretch of river from the railroad bridge upstream from IBM In
Essex Jctto the demolished railroad bridge near the mouth of the river
is classified “C”. The stretch from the demolished railroad bridge to
Lake Champlain is classified “B”. Table 1 shows the Vermont water
quality requirements for these classifications.
Table 2 shows the river kilomete; (mile), for all data gathering
points, dams, and cross section areas referenced in this report. For
the purpose of this study, the demolished railroad bridge near the

-------
mouth of the river was considered river kilometer 0. Figure 1 shows
the study area.
The study was divided into five distinct phases; each will be
presented separately.
1. Hydrological and Physical Characteristics
A) Dams
1. Power
2. Run of the River
B) River Bed Cross Sections
C) Gaging
2. Time of Travel Studies
3. Effect of Photosynthesis and Dams on Dissolved Oxygen
A) Photosynthesis
B) Dams
4. River and Wastewater Characteristics
A) River Water
B) Wastewater
5. Sediments
A) Oxygen Demand
B) Benthic Biological Quality
This report will be a compilation of the data gathered during the
study and, when necessary, information from other sources and/or past
studies. A list of abbreviations used in this report is presented in
Table 3.
—2—

-------
HYDROLOGICAL AND PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
Dams
There are three dams within the stretch of river studied. See
Figure 1. Two of the dams, Green Mountain Power’s (GMP) Dam No. 19
at Essex Junction, kilometer 29.0 (mile 18.0) and G1’fl’ Dam No. 18 at
the Gorge, kilometer 18.7 (mile 11.6). Power generation at these ac-
tive hydroelectric generating stations dictates the down river flows.
Water is pooled behind these dams and used to generate electricity from
morning until the water supply is exhausted. During the July — August
water quality portion of the study, power was usually generated from
0800 hours to 1300 hours. The Gorge facility usually begins and ends
operation one hour after Essex. Flows during power generation at each
facility are shown in Table 4. Flows measured by the U.S.G.S. gage in
Essex Junction between the two dams at river kilometer 26.1 (mile 16.2)
are shown in Figure 2. From this figure and the corresponding hours of
power generation at the Essex Station, it Is easily seen that most of
the average daily river flow below the Essex Dam occurs during power
generation. During non—generating periods seepage is generally the only
water passing the structures.
The remaining dam along the stretch studied is a run of the river
crib dam at Winooski, river kilometer 16.4 (mile 10.2). This dam does
not regulate the quantity of water flowing over it, and retains a mini—
mum pool behind it. Its main effect on the river water is reaeration.
The net effects of all three dams on oxygen transfer will be discussed
later.
—3—

-------
River Bed Cross Sections
Most models use the relationship between velocity and depth to
establish a reaeration rate (K 2 ) for a river. The relationship is
usually of the form 1(2 = A yb/Dc where A, b, and c are coefficients,
V — river velocity, and D = average river depth. Thus, cross sec-
tions are very important in developing data for a model. A total of
eighteen cross sections were measured. At most water quality stations,
the depth of water relative to temporary gage heights was also tied in.
These cross sections are shown and described in Appendix I and Table 5,
respectively.
Gaging
The flows in the river during study periods were received from
the U.S.G.S. records at their Essex Junction gage and from data supplied
by GMP for their Essex and Gorge Power Stations. These flows did not
always correlate exactly, but were generally consistent with one another.
Figure 2 shows the flows reported by the U.S.G.S. for the period of the
water study, while Table 4 shows the flows supplied by GMP for their
Essex and Gorge facilities during power generation. It can be seen
that during non—power producing periods, leakage from the Essex Dam
and any overland runoff amounts to approximately 1.7-2.0 CMS (60—70
CFS) as measured at the U.S.G.S. gage approximately 2.74 kilometers
(1.7 miles) below the dam.
In addition to the flow information listed above, staff gages
were set up at each water quality station where the water level was
not already being recorded. The staff gages were set up at station
—4—

-------
nba. WQO1-WQO6 and WQO9. Where possible, staff gage elevations were
tied into existing bench mark elevations and the height of the water at
each water quality station during sampling was noted and reported.
Table 6 shows the actual river elevations versus gage readings for all
water quality stations. In addition these gage readings are tied into
actual river depths where possible.
Continuous liquid level recorders were set up at or near three
water quality stations to establish diel fluctuations. See Figure 1
and Table 7. The results for stations WQO5 and WQO9 are given in
Figures 3 and 4, respectively. A problem with wave action from motor
boats which kept knocking the liquid level float off the recorder
prevented any reportable data from Station WQO2.
TIME OF TRAVEL STUDIES
Knowledge of the time it takes for a hypothetical slug of water
to travel from one place to another, and consequently the time of travel
for any pollutants, is very important in trying to simulate a river
system where multiple discharges and non—conservative substances such
as biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) are being modeled.
Two time of travel studies are usually performed on any river sys-
tem; one at a high flow and one at a low flow. By plotting these two
flows versus respective time of travel for specific reaches on loga-
rithmic paper, and assuming a straight line relationship between these
points, the time of travel at any reasonable flow can be approximated.
However, due to the extreme hourly fluctuations in flows due to power
production, a different approach was to be used. During June 1975, one
—5—

-------
time of travel study was conducted only during periods of power genera-
tion with one exception which is explained In Appendix It. A time of
travel study during periods of non—generation was to be undertaken the
week of September 26, but heavy rains just prior to the scheduled study
enabled Green Mountain Power to generate power around the clock during
the month of October. This second study will be attempted during Novem-
ber, and the results will be presented in an addendum to this report,
when and if they become available.
The results of the June time of travel study are given in Appendix
II.
EFFECTS OF PHOTOSYNTHESIS AND DAMS ON DISSOLVED OXYGEN CONCENTEATION
Quantifying sources and sinks of dissolved oxygen (DO) in a river
system are necessary to properly simulate a river model. Normally,
one expects to find a diel net oxygen increase due to photosynthesis
if algal counts and chlorophyll a concentrations are high, and an
Increase as water flows over a dam. During the July — August water
quality study, the former held true, but the latter did not.
Photosynthesis Oxygen Production
Aquatic—chlorophyll bearing plants (algae) produce oxygen through
photosynthesis which occurs during daylight periods only. These plants
respire, however, 24 hours per day. If present n large numbers,
oxygen—supersaturation may occur during daylight hours, while respira-
tion causes DO depletion at night. Moreover, during hot, dry weather,
large masses of these algae may die and produce a DO deficit during
non—daylight hours. It is this photosynthesis—respiration cycle of
—6—

-------
algae when present in large numbers that causes diel DO fluctuation
in rivers. Generally the greater the sunlight intensity, the greater
the DO production from photosynthesis. To measure the sunlight in-
tensity, a recording pyrheliometer was used. The sunlight Intensity
during the study duration is shown in Figure 5.
Generally, however, algae produce a net increase in dissolved
oxygen as measured by the light and dark bottle technique. The loss
of oxygen in the dark bottle compared to the initial DO concentration
represents planktonic respiration and oxygen used for bacterial metab-
olism. The change in oxygen concentration in the light bottle as com-
pared to the initial reading represents net oxygen production due to
photosynthesis, respiration, and bacterial metabolism. Thus, the
difference between the light and dark bottles represents the gross
oxygen production by the plankton. One should note that the light
and dark bottle technique represents only the oxygen produced by
planktonic forms of vegetation, and does not account for any oxygen
production from the periphyton; the submerged or attached vege-
tation. Tables 8 and 9 show the light and dark station locations and
DO results. With the exception of LDO6, significant photosynthesis
activity was prevalent at all locations.
Dams
As previously mentioned, there are three dams on the stretch
of river studied; G1,IP No. 19 at Essex Junction; GNP No. 18 at the
Gorge; and a run of the river crib dam at Winooski. GNP’s No. 18 and
No. 19 dams have pool capacities of 2.04 x 106 cubic meters and 0.495 x
106 cubic meters (1,653 acre feet and 401 acre feet), respectively.
—7--

-------
The crib dam at Winooski has virtually no pool. GMP No. 19 dam has a
normal drop from an elevation of 83.5 meters (274.0 feet) to 63.9
meters (209.5 feet) or 19.7 meters (64.5 feet). GMP No. 18 dam has a
normal drop from an elevation of 57.6 meters (189 feet) to 47.6 meters
(156 feet) or 10.1 meters (33 feet). The total drop over the crib
dam—rapids area appears to be approximately 15.2 meters (50 feet).
This 50 feet includes rapids areas above and below the dam. The effects
of the three dams on river reaeratlon are shown in Table 10.
The water in the pools behind GMP No. 19 and No. 18 was super-
saturated at almost all samplings. After passage through the respective
penstocks, the dissolved oxygen concentrations decreased with a few
exceptions. Of the 30 measurements made above and below these dams,
only once did the DO increase, while the DO remained unchanged three
times. The loss of oxygen through these penstocks is natural since,
over any drop, the water will tend toward saturation conditions. If
the upstream water is already DO supersaturated, a loss of DO will occur
in an attempt to reach saturation equilibrium. The net effect of the
G No. 19 and No. 18 dams was a decrease in DO.
RIVER AND WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS
During the ten—day study from July 29 through August 7, 1975, nine
river stations and seven wastewater treatment facilities were sampled.
Station locations are shown and described in Figure 1 and Tables 11 and
12, respectively.
—8—

-------
River Water
The 33.1 kilometers (20.5 miles) of river sampled were divided
into two five—day sampling periods. The upper portion of the river,
river kilometer 33.1 to river kilometer 18.1, was sampled during the
first week (July 29—August 2), while the lower 18.1 kilometers were
sampled during the-second week (August 3—August 7). River station
WQ 05 at river kilometer 18.1 was sampled the entire two weeks to pro-
vide continuity of data. Three sets of grab samples were collected
daily at each station and analyzed for DO, BOD 5 , total phosphorus,
nitrogen (ammonia, nitrite—nitrate, and TKN) and chlorophyll a. In
addition sample temperatures were noted at each sampling. The water
level at each station was recorded during each sampling period. The
times and dates of sampling, water levels, and analyses results are
shown in Table 13. The following is a thumbnail sketch of the results:
Temperature
Normal sut er water temperatures were found which ranged from
20—32°C. The temperature—DO relationship showed the river to be
in a generally supersaturated condition during daylight hours in
the upper stretch (river kilometer 18.7 — 33.1).
Dissolved Oxygen
Dissolved oxygen was measured using a DO probe with continuous
recorder and wet chemistry on individual grab samples.
Continuous DO Recorders
Continuous DO recorders were installed at three locations.
See Figure 1 and Table 7. The DO at WQO9 was recorded from
July 29—August 2; from August 3—7 at WQO2; and from July 27—
—9—

-------
August 7 at WQO5. Despite some problems with the probe membrane
clogging at station WQO5, a general trend can be seen from
Figures 6—8.
Figure 8 shows the diel variations at WQO9. The DO fluctuated
over 4 mg/l, and most of the time the water was supersaturated
with oxygen during the daylight hours. This was due to excessive
photosynthetic DO production.
Station WQO2 exhibited a smaller diel variation indicating
algae and, hence, photosynthetic activity not nearly as preva-
lent as at WQ09. Most of the time the water was not supersaturated.
See Figure 6.
Figure 7 shows the diel variation at WQO5 which was directly
below the Gorge Dam and immediately below the South Burlington
WWTF discharge. The DO at this station exhibited sharp DO rises
corresponding to durations of power production at the Gorge facil-
ity with gradual DO decline until power production began the next
day. The DO rise is readily attributable to the supersaturated or
nearly supersaturated water passing through the dam penstocks
during power production periods. The gradual DO decline after
power producing hours is due to the lessened flow and the effect
of South Burlington’s WWTF discharge.
Grab Samples DO’s
Grab samples were collected at all water quality stations
three times daily and measured for DO using the Modified Winkler
—10-

-------
Chemistry method. The results of these samplings can be seen in
Table 13. Supersaturation conditions occurred at stations WQO6,
WQO8, and WQO9 most of the time, during power production periods
at WQO5, and intermittently at stations WQO1 through WQO4 and
WQO7.
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BaD )
Five—day BOD’s (BOD 5 ) were run on samples collected at all
water quality stations three times per day. Table 13 shows the
results. The BOD varied from less than one to six over the
study area. The upstream or relatively “clean” station, WQO9,
had a BOD 5 range of one to three. The highest consistent BOD 5
station was WQO6 which had a BOD 5 range of two to eight. There
was no drastic BOD 5 change in water quality stations upstream
versus downstream of industrial and/or municipal waste discharges.
The two BOD 5 values of 5 mg/i at WQO5 could be due to the South
Burlington WWTF discharge ii iediate1y below the sampling area.
Eddy currents and sampling too close to the effluent could have
led to this contamination.
Total Phosphorus (Total P )
The total phosphorus concentration generally increased going
downstream with an average concentration of 0.028 at WQO9 and
0.063 mg/i at WQO1. See Table 13 for individual values at each
station. High individual values such as 0.51 mg/i and 0.09 mg/i
can be explained by the fact that the station was immediately
above the South Burlington WWTF, and during the early morning
hours and low river flows a combination of sampling too close to
—11—

-------
the effluent plume,eddy currents, darkness, etc., might well have
led to inclusion of part of the effluent in the water quality
sample. The BOD 5 and TKN values of these samples bear this out,
also.
Nitrogen (NH 3 , NO 7 — N03, TXN )
The nitrogen values are shown in Table 13. All values remain
fairly consistent with the exception of somewhat higher NH 3 and
TKN values at WQO4. WQO4 is the first station below the discharge
from the primary WWTF at South Burlington. WQO5 exhibited two
high values of NH 3 and TKN which can be explained for the same
reasons high BOD 5 values were encountered during the same sampling
period.
Chlorophyll a
As previously mentioned, photosynthesis DO plays an important
role in river DO concentrations if significant amounts of photo-
synthetic plankton are present. Chlorophyll a is used to estimate
the amount of photosynthetic plankton present. Table 13 gives
the trichromatic (uncorrected) and spectrophotometric (corrected)
chlorophyll a values. The trichromatic method measures both
chlorophyll a and pheophytin a. Pheophytin a is a natural degra-
dation product of chlorophyll which has an absorption peak in
the same region of the visible spectrum as chlorophyll a. The
spectrophotoinetric method corrects for pheophytin and yields a
value more representative of chlorophyll only. Table 13 shows
that chlorophyll a values, whether corrected or not, are high
throughout the entire stretch of the river studied, indicating
high algal activity or the potential for it.
—12—

-------
Was tewat e r
Seven wastewater treatment facilities were sampled during the
study. Table 12 describes the treatment plant locations. Table 14
shows the results of the samplings at each plant.
All WWTF’s discharge 24 hours per day with the exception of IBM.
IBM usually discharges combined industrial and sanitary wastewater
during the daylight shift (0800—1600 hours). After approximately 1600
hours, the Industrial wastewater is held in a lagoon until 0800 hours
the following day. During this time between 500,000 and 600,000
gallons are stored. These are then dumped in approximately 2—3 hours
beginning around 0800 hours. IBM has the facilities to lagoon the
sanitary waste, also resulting in a discharge only during the 0800—
1600 shift. It was understood IBM would lagoon both wastes during the
study period, but due to a misunderstanding the combined wastes were
lagooned only during the first day, July 29. As a result, IBM ’s effluent
was sampled during the hours of 0800 and 1600 even though the sanitary
wastes were being discharged continuously after the first day. To
determine the approximate flows from IBM when the lagoon was discharging,
the lagoon volume was divided by 3 hours.
Generally, there Is no discharge at IBM over the weekend, but due
to internal problems, a discharge of mostly cooling water was being dis-
charged on Saturday, August 2. The results of each facility are typical
of the degree of treatment represented. Primary WWTF’s WTO4 and WTO6
show high values of NO 2 — NO 3 . The secondary treatment facilities on
the other hand showed low BOD 5 , TKN, and Total P and high NO 2 — NO 3
—13—

-------
values. The only exception to this was WTO1 which exhibited interine—
diate TKN, NH 3 , and NO 2 — NO 3 results. This was probably due to the
fact sludge bulking was occurring during the sampling period.
In addition to the analyses shown in Table 14, samples were
collected and submitted to the Vermont Agency of Environmental Conser-
vation to determine the oxygen uptake of these wastes over two 15—day
periods. From their results the Systems Analysis Branch of EPA,
Region I, determined the BOD reaction rate constant K, using the Thomas
Slope Method. The oxygen uptakes, calculated ultimate BOD and K, and
notes of explanation are given in Appendix III.
SEDIMENTS
The river sediments were looked at with regard to sediment oxygen
demand (SOD), and qualitative biological quality. Results of these
studies should be available by the end of the year. These results will
be published as an addendum to this report when they become available.
—14—

-------
TABLE I
STATE OF VERMONT
DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES
SUMMARY TABLE OF TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS
Dissolved oxygen
As naturally occurs.
Determined by
management types
in accordance with
water type speci-
fications.
Determined by
management types
in accordance with
water type speci-
fications.
Not less than 3 mg/i.
Normal, seasonal and
diurnal variations will
be maintained.
Sludge deposits,
solid refuse,
floating solids,
oil, scum & grease
None other than of
natural origin.
None other than of
natural origin.
None other than of
natural origin.
None other than of
natural origin.
Color and turbidity
None other than of
natural origin.
None in such
concentrations
that would impair
any usages speci-
fically assigned to
this class. Also
see Discharge
Requirements in
Appendix.
None in such
concentrations
that would impair
any usages speci-
fically assigned to
this class. Also
see Discharge
Requirements in
Appendix.
None In such concen-
trations that would
impair any usages
specifically assigned
to this class. Also
see Discharge Require-
ments In Appendix.
Coliform bacteria
Total coliform not
to exceed 100/100
ml. Fecal coil—
form-—none attrlb—
utable to the dis-
charge of domestic
or industrial
wastes.
Total coilform
not to exceed 500/
100 ml. Fecal
coliform not to
exceed 200/100 ml.
Fecal coliform not
to exceed 1000/100
ml.
Fecal coliform not to
exceed 2000/100 ml.
Item Class A Class B Class C - Class D

-------
TABLE 1 (Continued)
Class A
None other than
of natural origin.
As naturally occurs.
Class B
None in such
concentrations
that would impair
any usages speci-
fically assigned
to this class nor
cause taste and
odor in edible
fish.
Class C
None in such
concentrations
that would impair
any usages speci-
fically assigned
to this class nor
cause taste and
odor in edible
fish.
6.5—8.0 6.0—8.5
Class D
None in such concen-
trations that would
impair any usages
specifically assigned
to this class.
6.0—9.0
Temperature
As naturally occurs.
Determined by
management type
in accordance
with water type
specifications.
Determined by
management type
in accordance
with water type
specifications.
Determined by manage-
ment type in accordance
with water type
specifications.
Free of
pollutants that:
(a) Affect the
composition of
bottom fauna;
(b) Affect the
physical or
chemical nature
of the bottom;
and
(c) Interfere with
the propagation of
fish.
(a) Affect the
composition of
bottom fauna;
(b) Affect the
physical or
chemical nature
of the bottom; and
(c) Interfere with
th propagation of
fish.
Item
Taste and odor
pH

-------
TABLE 2
RELATIVE ORDER OF SIGNIFICANT LOCATIONS
River River
Kilometer Mile Location
33.1 20.5 WQO9, XS17, CR03, LDO1—1 and 3
31.6 19.6 WTO7
29.7 18.4 XS16
29.0 18.0 WQO8
28.9 17.9 Essex Darn (GMP No, 19)
27.5± l7.O WQO8B
27.5 17.0 WTO6
26.8 16.6 WQO7, LDO2—1
26.1 16.2 U.S.G.S. Gage
21.6 13.4 XS15
20.0 12.4 WTO5
19.2 11.9 XSL4
18.7 11.6 WQO6
18.5 11.5 Dam at the Gorge (GMP No. 18)
18.1 11.2 WQO5, XS13, LDO3—2
18.0+ 11.1+ WTO4
18.0 11.1 CR02
17.4 10.8 WQO4, XS12
16.4 10.2 Crib Darn in Winooski
16.1k 10.0+ xsll
15.T 9•7+ WQO4B, XS1O
15.7 9.7 WTO3
15.5 9.6 WTO2

-------
TABLE 2 (CONT.)
RELATIVE ORDER OF SIGNIFICANT LOCATIONS
River River
Kilometer Mile Location
1.4.7 9.1 XSO9
13.2 8.2 XSO8
11.3 7.0 WQO3, XSO7A, LDO4—2
11.1 6.9 XSO7
8.4 5.2 XSO6, LDO5—1 and 4
7.6 4.7 XSO5
6.3 3.9 XSO4
5.0 3.1 XSO3
4.4 2.7 WQO2, CR01, LDO6—1 and 5
2.7 1.7 WTO1, XSO2
0.0+ 0.0+ WQO1, XSO1, LDO7—1 and 5
0.0 0.0 Demolished railroad bridge at confluence of
river with Lake Champlain

-------
Table 3
Abbreviations Used In The Report
Abbreviation
Description
Units of Measure
Temp
DO
MG!)
CMS
BOD
B0) 5
K
Total P
L1H 3
N0 2 -N0 3
TK
Chlorophyll a
Trich
Spect
temperature of sample
dissolved oxygen
million gallons per day
cubic meters per second
biochemical oxygen demand incubated
at 20°C
BOD after five days
BOD reaction rate (base 10)
total phosphorus
ammonia nitrogen
combined nitrite nitrate nitrogen
combined organic and ammonia nitrogen
chlorophyll a
trichroinatic method of analysis
(Uncorrected for pheophytin)
spectrophotometric method of analysis
(corrected for pheophytin)
degrees centigrade (°C)
milligrams per liter mg/l
million gallons per day
cubic meters per second
mg / 1
mg/i
1/day
mg/i as phosphorus
mg/i as nitrogen (N)
mg/i as N
mg/i as N
micrograms/liter (ugh)
ug / 1
ug / 1
•1. f
Symbols preceding a report value denote the following:
J = approximate, value not accurate
K = less than
R results not reported
= no sample collected

-------
TABLE 4
POWER GENERATION AND WATER DISCHARGE
75/08/03
Essex Darn (CMI’ No. 19)
Water Dishcarge
CMS—CFS
No Power Generated
Gorge Darn (GMP No. 18)
Hydrogeneration Water Discharge
(MWH) CMS—CFS
tiycirogenerat i.on
Date
75/07/29
Time
0800
4.6
33.8—1195
—
——
0900
4.9
36.0—1273
3.0
41.6—1470
1000
5.5
40.5—1429
3.0
41.6—1470
1100
5.2
38.2—1351
3.0
41.6—1470
1200
——
3.0
41.6—1470
75/07/30
0800
0900
1000
1100
1200
5.4
5,4
5.3
5.1
——
39.7—1403
39.7—1403
39.0—1377
37.5—1325
——
2.5
3.0
3.0
3.0
34.7—1225
41.6—1470
41.6—1470
41.6—1470
75/07/31
0800
0900
1000
1100
1200
1300
3.6
4.9
5.2
5.2
5.2
——
26.5— 935
36.0—1273
38.2—1351
38.2—1351
38.2—1351
——
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
0.8
41.6—1470
41.6—1470
41.6—1470
41.6—1470
11.1— 392
75/08/01
0800
0900
1000
1100
1200
4.7
5.2
5.0
5.2
5.0
34.6—1221
38.2—1351
36.8—1299
38.2—1351
36.8—1299
——
2.8
3.0
2.9
2.9
38.8—1372
41.6—1470
40.3—1422
40.3—1422
75/08/02
1000
1100
1200
4.7
4.9
5.0
34.6—1221
36.0—1273
36.8—1299
—
3.0
3.0
41.6—1470
41.6—1470
75/08/04
0900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
1700
1800
1900
5.5
5.0
5.1
5.1
4.8
4.9
4.8
4.9
5.0
4.9
2.3
40.5—1429
36.8—1299
37.5—1325
37.5—1325
35.3—1247
36.0—1273
35.3—1247
36.0—1273
36.8—1299
36.0—1273
16.9— 597
——
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
2.8
2.7
2.7
2.7
2.7
——
41.6—1470
41.6—1470
41.6—1470
41.6—1470
41.6—1470
38.8—1372
37.5—1324
37.5—1324
37.5—1324
37.5—1324

-------
TABLE 4 (CONT.)
POWER GENERATION AND WATER DISCHARGE
Date Time
Essex Dam
Hydrogenerat ion
( )
(GMP No. 19)
Water Discharge
CNS—CFS
Gorge Dam
Hydrogenera t ion
(MWR)
(CMP No. 18)
Water Discharge
CMS-CFS
NOTE: Hydrogenerating data gotten from Green Mountain Power Company records.
The conversion from megawatt—hours of power to CMS (CFS) is the following:
a) Essex Dam (GMP No. 19) 3.85 MWH = 28.3 CMS (1000 CFS).
b) Gorge Dam (GMP No. 18) 2.04 MWH = 28.3 CMS (1000 CFS).
75/08/05
0900
5.2
38.2—1351
——
——
1000
5.1
37.5—1325
2.0
27.8— 980
1100
5.0
36.8—1299
3.0
41.6—1470
1200
4.7
34.6—1221
3.0
41.6—1470
1300
——
1.0
13.9— 490
75/08/06
0900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
4.9
4.9
5.2
5.5
5.1
——
36.0—1273
36.0—1273
38.2—1351
40.5—1429
37.5—1325
——
2.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
1.0
— 980
41.6—1470
•Z1.6—1470
41.6—1470
13.9— 490
75/08/07
0800
0900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
4.8
5.3
5.5
5.4
5.4
5.5
35.3—1247
39.0—1377
40.5—1429
39.7—1403
39.7—1403
40.5—1429
——
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
1.5
41.6—1470
41.6—1470
41.6—1470
41.6—1470
41.6—1470
20.8— 735

-------
TABLE S
CROSS SECTION LOCATIONS
Latitude Longitude Rivet
Station 0 I Kilometer/Mile Description
XSO1 44 31 52 73 16 202 0.0+10.0+ Corresponds to Water Quality Station WQO1.
xs02 44 31 43 73 16 02 2.7 /1.7 Opposite the City of Burlington’s north end WWTF.
XSO3 44 31 20 73 15 03 5.0 /3.1 At the last hairpin turn shown on the 1966 Coichester Point,
Vermont—New York, Quadrangle.
XSO4 44 31 43 73 14 29 6.3 /3.9 The northernmost point of the river shown on the 1972 photo—
revised Coichester, Vermont, Quadrangle.
XSO5 44 31 01 73 14 23 7.6 /4.7 Just downstream from the island opposite Ethan Allen Park
shown on the 1972 photo—revised Colchester, Vermont, Quadrangle.
XSO6 44 30 56 73 14 05 8.4 /5.2 Just upstream from the island opposite Ethan Allen Park shown
on the 1972 photo—revised Coichester, Vermont, Quadrangle.
XSO7 44 30 27 73 13 38 11.1 /6.9 Approximately 153 meters (500 feet) downstream from Water
Quality Station WQO3.
XSO7A 44 30 24 73 13 33 11.3 /7.0 Corresponds to Water Quality Station WQO3.
XSO8 44 30 14 73 12 35 13.2 /8.2 Just downstream from southernmost island shown on the 1972
photo—revised Coichester, Vermont, Quadrangle.
XSO9 44 29 37 73 12 09 14.7 /9.1 Approximately 034 kilometers (0.2 miles) downstream from
the railroad bridge crossing the Winooski River below Winooski.
XS1O 44 29 20 73 1]. 47 15.7+19.7* Corresponds approximately to Water Quality Station WQO4B.
XS1 I 44 29 15 73 11 21 l6.l+i .Q..O+ Approximately 0.25 kilometers (0.15 miles) downstream from the
Routes 2 and 7 Bridge in Winooski.

-------
TABLE 5 (C0NT.)
CROSS SECTION LOCATIONS
Latitude Longitude River
Station 0 ‘ “ 0 ‘ “ Kilometer/Mile Description
XS12 44 29 06 73 10 54 17.4/10.8 Corresponds to Water Quality Station WQO4.
XS13 44 29 13 73 10 24 18.1/11.2 Corresponds to Water Quality Station WQO5.
XS14 44 29 16 73 09 55 19.2/11.9 Approximately 0.25 kilometers (0.15 miles) below the Lime
Kiln Bridge.
X815 44 29 28 73 08 36 21.6/13.4 ApproxImately 3.1 kilometers (1.9 miles) upstream of Green
Mountain Power Dam No. 18 (Gorge).
XS16 44 28 50 73 06 34 29.7/18.4 Approximately 0.72 kilometers (0.45 miles) upstream from
Green Mountain Power Dam No. 19 (Essex).
XS17 44 28 52 73 04 56 33.1/20.5 Immediately below the railroad bridge crossing the Winooski
River upstream from IBM.

-------
TABLE 6
Elevations At Bottom Of Gages
- With Corresponding Mid-River Depths
Elevation at Corresponding
Bottom of Gage+ Midriver Depth
Station Meters Feet Meters Feet
WQO1 28 85 94.64** 5.87 19.27
WQO2 28.78 94 39** 4.06 13.33
WQO3 * * 1.44 4.71
WQO4 45.39 148.88 0.95 3.12
WQO5 45.98 150.83 0.89 2.92
WQO6 56.51 185.35 * *
WQO7 * * 0.0 0.00
WQO8 82.31 270.00 * *
WQO9 83.68 274.48 1.52 5.00-
is mean sea level = 0
* Data not available
** The elevation of the river water s!lrface at WQO2 was found to be
approximately 0.3 (0.3 feet) lower than that at WQO1. Part of this
could be a slight rise in the river surface elevation as it enters
Lake Champlain. Another could be a s1 ght settling or rising of the
•bench marks used to determine the elevations. For all practical pur-
poses, one can consider river water elevations of WQO2 and WQO1 to be
the same.

-------
TABLE 7
CONTINUOUS LIQUID LEVEL MID/OR DISSOLVED OXYGEN RECORDER LOCATIONS
Latitude Longitude River
Station ‘ “ ° —, ‘ Kilometer/Mile Description
CR01 44 30 17 73 17 04 4,4/ 2.7 Continuous dissolved oxygen recording station corresponds to
Water Quality Station WQO2.
CR02 ‘44 29 14 73 10 25 18.0/11.1 Continuous dissolved oxygen and liquid level station installed
at the Route 89 Bridge just below the South Burlington WWTF
discharge.
CR03 44 28 52 73 04 56 33.1/20.5 Continuous dissolved oxygen and liquid level station corresponds
to Water Quality Station WQO9.

-------
Station
LDO1—1 and 3
LDO2—l
LDO3— 2
LDO4— 2
LDO5—l and 4
Latitude
o 9
44 28 52
44 28 34
44 29 13
44 30 24
44 30 56
Longitude
o e
73 04 56
73 08 11
73 10 24
73 13 33
73 14 05
4.4 / 2.7
O.0 / 0.0k
TABLE 8
LIGHT AND DARK STATION LOCATIONS
River
Kilometer/Mile
33.1 /20.5
26.8 /16.6
18.1 /11.2
11.3 / 7.0
8.4 / 5.2
Descri t ion
Corresponds to Water Quality Station WQO9 at depths of one
and three feet, respectively.
Corresponds to Water Quality Station WQO7 at a depth of
one foot.
Corresponds to Water Quality Station WQO5 at a two foot
depth.
Corresponds to Water Quality Station WQO3 at a two foot
depth.
Station is off Ethan Allen Park by the rock ledges just
above the island shown on the 1972 photo—revised Coichester,
Vermont, Quadrangle at depths of one and four feet,
respectively.
Corresponds to Water Quality Station WQO2 at depths of one
and five feet respectively.
Corresponds to Water Quality Station WQO1 at depths of one
and five feet, respectively.
LDO6—l
and
5
44
30
17
73
17
04
LDO7—l
and
5
44
31
52
73
16
20

-------
Initial
DO
(mg / 1)
Average
Light DO
(mg / 1)
Average
Dark DO
( mg/i )
Gross Oxygen
Product ion
(5—6)
mg/i
TABLE 9
Winooski River Light And Dark
Bottle Dissolved Oxygen Results
1
2
3 4
5
7
8
Station
Depth of
Samples
Meters (Feet)
Date
Put
Down
— 07/29 9.4
9.3
10.8
9.7
8.4
8.4
2.4
1.3
LDO1—i
LDO1—3
0.30 (1.0)
0.91 (3.0)
LDO1—i
LDO1—3
0.30 (1.0)
0.91 (3.0)
07/30 9.6
9.9
12.4
10.7
8.5
8.8
3.9
1.9
LDO1—1
LDO1—3
0.30 (1.0)
0.91 (3.0)
07/31 9.0
9.1
12.6
10.2
8.2
8.4
4.4
1.8
LDO1—l
LDO1—3
0.30 (1.0)
0.91 (3.0)
08/01 9.4
9.6
11.8
10.2
8.2
8.6
3.6
1.6
LDO2—1
0.30 (1.0)
07/29 10.1
12.8
9.0
3.8
0.30 (1.0)
07/30 9.9
12.2
8.7
3.5
0.30 (1.0)
07/31
12.7
7.8
4.9
0.30 (1.0)
08/01 9.8
11.4
8.2
3.2
LDO3—2
0.61 (2.0)
07/29 9.3
11.9
8.6
3.3
0.61 (2.0)
07/30 9.0
12.8
7.8
5.0
0.61 (2.0)
07/31 9.9
9.9
8.6
1.2
0.61 (2.0)
08/01 9.7
10.6
8.0
2.6
0.61 (2.0)
08/02 8.6
10.0
6.9
3.1
0.61 (2.0)
08/03 7.4
6.8
6.2
0.4
0.61 (2.0)
08/04 6.4
6.0
5.6
0.4
0.61 (2.0)
08/05 6.5
7.0
5.9
1.1
0.61 (2.0)
08/06 6.7
7.5
5.4
2.1
LDO4—2
0.61 (2.0)
08/03 8.9
9.6
6.6
3.0
0.61 (2.0)
08/04 5.6
6.9
5.0
1.9
0.61 (2.0)
08/05 7.0
9.8
6.0
3.8
0.61 (2.0)
08/06 7,7 8.5
6.5 2.0

-------
TABLE 9 (CONT.)
Winooski River Light And Dark
Bottle Dissolved Oxygen Results
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Gross Oxygen
Depth of Date Initial Average Average Production
Samples Put DO Light DO Dark DO (5—6)
Station Meters (Feet) Down ( mg/i) ( mg/i) ( mg/i) mg/i
LDO5—l 0.30 (1.0) 08/03 10.0 9.2 7.4 1.8
LDO5—4 1.21 (4.0) 8.6 7.6 6.9 0.7
LDO5—1 0.30 (1.0) 08/04 5.7 6.0 4.8 1.2
LDO5—4 1.21 (4.0) 6.3 5.3 4.8 0.5
LDO5—l 0.30 (1.0) 08/05 6.8 8.2 5.8 2.4
LDO5—4 1.21 (4.0) 6.5 6.5 5.6 0.9
LDO5—l 0.30 (1.0) 08/06 6.8 7.0 6.4 0.6
LDO5—4 1.21 (4.0) 6.2 5.8 4.0 1.8
LDO6—i 0.30 (1.0) 08/03 8.2 7.5 6.8 0.7
LDO6—5 1.52 (5.0) 8.1 6.7 6.5 0.2
LDO6—i 0.30 (1.0) 08/04 5,5 4.6 4.5 0.1
LDO6—5 1.52 (5.0) 5.9 5.9 5.9 0.0
LDO6—1 0.30 (1.0) 08/05 5.8 7.0 4.6 2.4
LDO6—5 1.52 (5.0) 5,4 5.2 4.6 0.6
LDO6—1 0.30 (1.0) 08/06 5.8 5.8 5.3 0.5
LDO6—5 1.52 (5.0) 5.8 4.6 4.6 0.0

-------
TABLE 10
EFFECT OF WINOOSKI RIVER DAMS
ON REAERAT ION
Darn Location
Essex Darn (GNP
No. 19)—upstream
station corres-
ponds to WQO8
while downstream
station corres-
ponds to WQO8B
Upstream
DO
(mg /1)
8 • 4*
9 • 7*
11.2*
i0.8
9 ,7*
11.8*
12.0+
10.7*
13.0*
10.0*
11.6*
10.8*
11.2+
93*
12.1*
Downstream
DO
(mg/i)
8.1+
9.1+
8.0+
7. 8
8.0+
8. 6
7.6+
10.7+
8.3+
74+
97*
8.4k
6.8+
7.6
7.1+
DO Difference
(m / 1)
—0.3
-0.6
—3,2
—3.0
—1.7
—3.2
—4 • 6
0.0
—4.7
—3.0
—1.9
—2.4
—4.4
—1.7
—5.0
*Indicates supersaturation
+Indicates no temperature measurement; therefore,
determined
Date
75/07/29
75/07/30
75/07 / 31
75/08/01
75/08/02
75 /07/29
75/07130
75 /07/31
75/08/01
75/08/02
75/08/03
75/08/04
75 / 08 / 05
75/08/06
7 5/08/07
Gorge Dam (GMP
No. 18)—upstream
station corres-
ponds to WQO6
while downstream
station corres-
ponds to WQO5
Crib Dam in
Winooski—ups trearn
station corres-
ponds to WQO4
while downstream
station corres-
ponds to WQO4B
8.7+
9.2*
11.2*
10.1k
9,4*
9.1*
11.1+
99*
J11 .0*
10.2*
9 • 4*
10.7*
10.0+
7.8
10.0*
5.0+
7.0
7.1
47+
6.3
6.5
4.8
6.8
8.0*
4.7
7.5+
8.0
5.6
7.1
8. 2
7.0k
97*
8.0
74+
7.6
9.1*
74+
7.4
8.6*
7.7
7.4
8.7*
74+
7.8
8.0*
6.0k
6.7
8.P
59+
6.1
8.3+
6. 6
7.3
8.3k
6.4k
8.0+
8. 6
6.9k
8.4+
8.5k
—1.7
+0.5
—3.2
—2.7
—1.8
0
—3’ 7
—2.5
—32.4
—2.5
—2.0
—2.0
—2.6
0
—2.0
+1.0
—0.3
+1.0
+ 1.2
— 0.2
+1,8
+1.8
+0.5
+• 3
+1.7
+0.5
+0.6
+1 • 3
+1.3
+0.3
degree of saturation not

-------
TABLE 11
WATER QUALITY STATION LOCATIONS
Latitude
Station a ‘ “
Longitude
0
River
Kilometer/Mile
Description
WQO1
44
31
52
73
16
20
0.0 , 0.0+
Approximately 61 meters (200 feet) upstream from the mouth of
the river.
WQO2
44
30
17
73
17
04
4.4
/ 27
Immediately upstream of the Route 127 Bridge connecting
Burlington with Coichester.
WQO3
44
30
24
73
13
33
11.3
/ 7.0

At approximately the location of the proposed road construction
connecting Route 127 with Pine Island as shown on the 1972
photo—revised Coichester, Vermont, Quadrangle.
WQO4B
44
29
20
73
11
46
15.7
/ 9.1+
Just upstream of the Burlington Riverside W TF discharge and
approximately 640 meters (2 ,1.00 feet) downstream from the
Routes 2 and 7 Bridge.
WQO4
44
29
06
73
10
54
17.4
/10.8
Approximately 915 meters (3,000 feet) upstream in the south
channel from the Routes 2 and 7 Bridge in Winooski.
WQO5
44
29
13
73
10
24
18.1
/11.2
Just upstream of the Route 89 Bridge connecting South Burlington
with Coichester and just above the South Burlington Airport
Drive WWTF discharge.
WQO6
18.7
/11.6
Just upstream from Green Mountain Power Dam No. 18 at the Gorge.
WQO7
26.8
/16.6
Approximately 0.6 4 kilometers (04 miles) above the U.S.g.S. Cage.
WQO8B
27.5
/17.0
Just above the Village of Essex Junction WWTF discharge.
WQO8
29.0
/18.0
Just upstream from Green Mountain Power Dam No. 19 at Essex.
WQO9
33.1
/20.5
Beneath the railroad bridge upstream from IBM, Essex Junction,
Vermont,
44
29
24
44
28
34
44
28
36
44
28
57
44
28
52
73 10
73 08
73 07
73 06
73 04
09
11
43
53
56

-------
TABLE 12
WASTETJATER TREATMENT FACILITY DISCHARGE LOCATIONS
Stat ion
Latitude
0 ‘
Longitude
0 ‘ “
River
Kilometer/Mile
Description
WTO1
WTO2
WTO3
WTO4
WTO5
WTO6
w’roi
44 31 43
44 29 22
44 29 20
44 29 13
44 29 22
44 28 36
44 28 41
73 16 02 2.7/ 1.7
73 11 55 15.5/ 9.6
73 11 47 15.7/ 9.7
73 10 24 18.0/11.1+
73 09 32 20.0/12.4
73 07 44 27.5/17.0
73 05 40 31.6/19.6
City of Burlington North End WIF.
City of Winooski WWTF.
City of Burlington Riverside WW F.
City of South Burlington WWIF.
Coichester FD No. 1 WrF.
Village of Essex Junction WWTF.
IBM WWTF, Essex Junction, Vermont.

-------
TABLE 13
WINOOSKI RIVER
Water Quality Results
Time
of
Collection
Nitrogen
N113 N02—N0 3
(mg/i) (mgIl) _
Chlorophyll a
TKN (ugh)
( mg/i) Trich Spect
Station Date
WQO1 75/08/03
75/08/04
75/08105
75 / 08/06
75/08/07
WQO2 75/08/03
75/08/04
75/08/05
75/08/06
(Hours)
0032
Staff Gage
Reading
cm—inches
4.72—12.0
Temp
(°c)
29.0
DO
(mg/i)
8.9
BOD 5
(mg/i)
J2
Total
Phosphorus
(mg/i)
0.05
KO.l0
0.01
0.21
18.35
13.35
0740
4.72—12.0
29.0
8.2
32
0.04
1(0.10
KO.Ol
0.42
18.80
16.02
1640
4.33—11.0
28.0
9.6
J4
0.04
1(0.10
0.01
30.68
22.90
6.68
0050
4.92—12.5
29.0
8.8
31
0.04
1(0.10
0.01
30.38
13.43
8.01
0755
4.33—11.0
28.0
6.8
1(1
0.05
K0.l0
R
0.23
13.45
10.68
1655
4.33—11.0
28.0
5.8
1
0.08
.0.21
0.03
0.32
12.27
6.68
0025
—— ——
27.0
6.7
1
0.06
0.15
0.04
0.39
14.12
5.34
0800
3.94—10.0
28.0
4.9
1
0.06
0.17
0.04
0.38
12.26
4.68
1555
4.33—11.0
30.0
5.7
3
0.08
0.14
0.07
0.46
15.17
9.34
0100
3.94—10.0
28.0
7.6
3
0.07
0.16
0.10
0.54
14.31
7.34
0800
3.94—10.0
——
5.5
2
0.07
0.16
0.11
0.39
9.62
6.01
1655
3.94—10.0
26.0
5.5
2
0.08
0.18
0.16
0.42
13.61
10.02
0030
4.13—10.5
24.0
5.4
2
0.10
0.18
0.15
0.30
9.62
2.67
0810
4.13—10.5
21.0
5.3
3
0.07
0.18
0.13
0.32
11.43
R
1630
4.13—10.5
20.0
6.0
2
0.06
0.13
0.11
0.35
13.19
5.34
0050
4.33—11.0
29.0
9.1
32
0.04
1(0.10
0.01
0.37
35.31
24.03
0755
4.33—11.0
28.5
8.0
J2
0.05
1(0.10
0.02
0.31
25.59
12.02
1655
4.33—11.0
28.0
8.7
32
0.04
K0.10
0.02
J0.31
19.98
13.35
0110
4.13—10.5
30.0
7.8
J2
0.04
K0.10
0.01
J0.28
13.93
8.01
0810
4.33—11.0
28.0
7.9
J2
0.04
1(0.10
0.02
0.42
17.87
8.01
1510
4.72—12.0
28.0
6.8
1
0.07
K0.10
0.05
0.32
R
R
0040
3.74—09.5
27.0
5.7
Ki.
0.11
0.17
0.20
0.54
14.01
6.68
0815
3.94—10.0
27.5
5.8
1
0.10
0.19
0.16
0.45
11.84
6.00
1610
3.94—10.0
30.0
6.4
3
0.07
0.13
0.09
0.63
8.12
6.01
0115
3.94—10.0
28.0
5.9
2
0.06
0.13
0.07
0.47
10.97
7.30
0815
1710
3.74—09.5
3.94—10.0
26.0
26.0
5.8
6.4
2
3
0.06
0.05
0.14
0.10
0.07
0.14
0.47
0.33
9.57
25.58
400
.19.36

-------
Time
TABLE 13 (CONT,)
WINOO SKI RIVER
Water Quality Results
of Staff Gage
Collection Reading
( Hours) cm—Inches
Total
Phosphorus
(mg/i)
Nitrogen
NE. N0 2 —N0 3
(ing/1) (mg/i)
Chlorophyll a
TKN (ugh)
( mg/i) Trich Spect
Station Date
DO
( mg/i )
BOD 5
( mg/i )
Temp
( °c )
25.0
20.5
20.0
29.0
28.5
30.0
29.0
27.5
28.0
27.0
27.0
28.0
27.0
26.0
26.0
25.5
20.5
75/08/07
0045
3.94—10.0
6.3
2
0.07
0.12
0.16
0.26
14.36
9.34
0820
3.94—10.0
6.3
2
0.06
0.13
0.18
0.44
16.92
12.02
1640
4.13—10.5
7.6
3
0.07
1(0.10
0.20
0.43
25.64
17.36
WQO3
75/08/03
0115
0820
1720
2.36—06.0
2.36—06.0
6.30—16.0
7.0
7.7
10.7
J2
J2
J2
0.07
0.08
0.05
1(0.10
1(0.10
1(0.10
0.11
0.08
0.01
0.40
0.31
30.31
29.81
30.98
46.63
24.03
24.03
33.38
75/08/04
0205
0830
1735
2.36—06.0
2.36—06.0
4.72—12.0
7.8
6.1
7.9
J2
Jl
1
0.06
0.07
0.07
1(0.10
1(0.10
K0.10
0.13
0.16
0.06
30.42
0.39
0.20
30.50
26.17
15.54
21.36
14.69
10.68
75108105
0115
0830
1635
2.36—06.0
2.17—05.5
2.36—06.0
7.0
6.9
7.7
1(1
1
2
0.06
0.07
0.09
1(0.10
0.10
0.12
0.10
0.11
0.16
0.35
0.40
0.29
11.90
11.56
10.00
9.35
9.34
5.34
75/08/06
0200
0830
1730
1.97—05.0
1.97—05.0
2.36—06.0
4.7
7.4
8.7
2
2
2
0.07
0.06
0.06
0.12
0.12
1(0.10
0.13
0.12
0.10
0.32
0.46
0.33
10.62
9.65
21.89
9.23
7.34
11.35
75/08/07
0115
0840
1700
1.97—05.0
1.97—05.0
3.15—08.0
8.4
7,7
9.3
2
2
2
0.06
0.04
0.04
1(0.10
1(0.10
K0.10
0.10
0.11
0.10
0.33
0.17
0.15
17.29
20.78
21.12
13.42
13.36
10.68
WQO4
75/08/03
0250
0950
1925
3.23—08.2
3.15—08.0
3.15—08.0
——
29.0
28.0
5.0
7.0
7.1
J3
J2
32
0.11
0.10
0.25
0.10
0.29
0.05
0.03
0.08
0.39
0.37
30.64
20.93
16.60
12.27
13.35
5.34
8.01
75/08/04
0345
1000
1940
1.97—05Q0
12.20—31.0
8.66—22.0
——
27.0
27.0
4.7
6.3
6.5
33
Jl
1(1
0.14
0.06
0.05
0.26
1(0.10
KO.10
0.05
0.06
0.06
30.61
0.38
0.39
12.27
13.65
18.93
8.01
9.35
13.35
75/08/05
0255
1000
1810
1.77—04.5
7.07—18.0
3.15—08.0
27.0
28.0
29.0
4.8
6.8
8.0
3
2
2
0.16
0.11
0.09
0.38
0.18
0.21
0.10
0.09
0.08
0.81
0.38
0.45
9.57
6.87
9.92
6.68
5.34
4.68
75/08/06
0310
1015
1910
3.15—08.0
12.20—31.0
——
24.0
——
26.0
4.7
7.5
8.0
3
3
2
0.17
0.42
0.09
0.36
1(0.10
0.16
0.09
0.07
0.08
0.67
0.22
U.45
14.07
12.48
14.84
8.68
4.68
14.02

-------
TABLE 13 (CONT.)
WINOOSKI RIVER
Water Quality Result8
Time
of
Collection
Chlorophyll A
TKN (ugh)
(mg/i) Trich Spect
Station Date
DO
( mg / 1 )
Temp
( oc )
20 • 0
20.5
BOD 5
(mg/i)
Total
Phosphorus
(mg/l)
14113
(mg/l)
Nitrogen
N0 2 —N0 3
(mg/i)
75/08/07
(Hours)
Staff Gage
Reading
cm—inches
2.16—05.5
5:6
2
O 0O
0.19
0.36
0.10
0.66
20.44
10.68
1015
13.0—33.0
7.1
3
0.03
1(0.10
0.06
0.23
17.52
13.36
1845
3.54—09.0
8.2
3
0.09
0.20
0.05
0.55
22.36
20.03
WQO5
75/07/29
75/07/30
0430
1520
2130
0355
0730
1955
3.94—10.0
3.94—10.0
4.72—12.0
——
3.94—10.0
4.72—12.0
——
25.5
24.5
——
23.0
26.0
7.0
9.7
8.0
7.4
7.6
9.1
5
J3
2
5
2
J2
0.51
0.03
0.02
0.09
0.03
0.02
0.72
1(0.10
1(0.10
1(0.10
KO.l0
K0.10
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.02
0.02
1.84
J0,26
0.28
1.17
0.30
0.39
11.47
13.98
20.72
27.80
15.00
19.23
4.01
8.01
14.69
16.02
10.68
6.68
75/07/31
0155
0635
1855
——
3.94—10.0
3.94—10.0
——
24.5
26.5
7.4
7.4
8.6
J2
3
2
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.47
1(0.10
1(0.10
0.01
0.03
0.02
0.77
0.31
0.22
14.06
16.28
29.85
9.35
6.68
24.03
75/08/01
75/08/02
0720
1905
0230
1035
2010
——
3.94—10.0
3.94—10.0
——
12.2—31.0
4.72—12.0
26.0
26.0
28.0
——
27.5
28.0
7.7
7.4
8.7
7.4
7.8
8.0
4
1
3
2
2
J2
0.03
0.02
0.03
0.02
0.03
0.03
KO.10
K0.l0
1(0.10
1(0.10
K0.10
K0.1O
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.24
0.70
0.34
0.32
0.21
0.36
25.99
16.63
32.03
21.25
31.26
24.21
R
12.02
14.69
10.68
20.03
1.34
75/08/03
0330
1025
2000
3.94—10.0
3.94—10.0
3.94—10.0
29.0
29.5
28.0
6.8
7.7
7.0
J2
1
J2
0.03
0.03
0.03
1(0.10
1(0.10
K0.10
0.02
0.01
0.02
0.21
0.52
30.33
18.93
16.83
16.23
13.35
13.35
9.35
75/08/04
0410
1030
2020
3.94—10.0
12.i2—31.O
3.94—10.0
28.0
28.0
29.0
6.3
6.9
6.7
Ki
J2
1(1
0.03
0.03
0.04
K0.10
1(0.10
1(0.10
0.02
0.02
0.05
J0.32
0.35
0.25
12.85
17.40
12.85
5.34
10.68
10.68
75/08/05
0325
1030
1845
3.74—09.5
12.2—31.0
3.94—10.0
27.0
28.0
27.0
6.2
6.2
7.3
1
1
2
0.06
0.05
0.04
1(0.10
K0.10
KO.10
0.06
0.05
0.05
0.20
0.38
0.26
10.05
13.16
19.44
6.68
8.02
13.35
75/08/06
0340
1100
1950
3.86—09.8
13.0—33.0
3.94—10.0
26.0
——
——
6.1
6.5
6.9
1
3
3
0.02
0.05
0.03
1(0.10
1(0.10
K0.10
0.05
0.02
0.05
0.29
0.34
0.24
12.80
23.76
17.92
10.68
19.36
10.02

-------
Time
TABLE 13 (CONT.)
WINOOSKI RIVER
Water Quality Results
of Staff Gage
Collection Reading
}1ou ) cm-inches
Nitrogen
NH 3 N0 2 —N0 3
(mg/i) (mg/i)
Chlorophyll A
TKN (ugh)
( rngfl Trich Spect
Total
Station
Date
75/08/07
3.94—10.0
Temp
(°C)
21.0
DO
(mg/i)
66
B aD 5
(mg/i)
3
Phosphorus
(mg/i)
0325
0.04
K0.lO
0.06
0.25
15.12
10.02
1045
13.00—33.0
20.5
6.7
2
0.04
1(0.10
0.08
0.30
20.91
16.69
1930
3.94—10.0
——
7.8
2
0.03
1(0.10
0.02
0.15
26.64
20.03
WQO6
75/07/29
75/07/30
75/07/31
75/08/01
75/08/02
0345
1355
2040
0340
0800
1920
0145
0700
1830
0215
0740
1840
0215
1020
1940
18.11—46.0
16.93—43.0
16.93—43.0
16.93—43.0
16.93—43.0
18.11—46.0
18.11—46.0
16.53—42.0
16.93—43.0
16.93—43.0
16.14—41.0
16.93—43.0
16.53—42.0
16.14—41.0
18.11—46.0
——
26.0
25.0
——
24.0
26.0
——
25.0
30.0
28.0
27.0
32.0
——
28.0
31.0
8.7
9.2
11.2
10.1
9.4
9.1
11.1
9.9
311.0
10.2
9.4
10.7
10.0
7.8
10.0
2
J5
6
2
3
J3
J2
3
3
8
3
3
2
2
32
0.05
0.03
0.04
0.04
004
0.02
0.04
0.03
0.04
0.20
0.05
0.04
0.04
0.03
0.02
1(0.10
1(0.10
KO.lO
1(0.10
1(0.10
1(0.10
KO.10
K0.l0
1(0.10
1(0.10
1(0.10
1(0.10
1(0.10
1(0.10
K0.10
0.02
0.03
0.02
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
1(0.01
0.02
0.01
0.66
J0.67
1.48
0.37
0.67
0.36
0.28
0.25
0.40
0.39
0.58
0.34
0.31
0.36
0.26
17.33
19.70
20.87
15.00
13.60
19.66
14.64
13.95
25.48
111.24
30.40
23.74
3.49
33.30
18.09
13.35
9.34
17.36
935
8.01
4.01
0.00
9.35
21.36
69.42
24.03
22.69
0.00
16.02
16.02
WQO7
75/07/29
75/07/30
75/07/31
0230
1300
1925
0240
0840
1810
0110
0745
1740
5.24—13.3
7.01—17.8
5.12—13.0
5.16—13.1
14.80—37.6
5.00—12.7
5.12—13.0
5.63—14.3
4.b8—124
——
26.0
25.5
——
22.5
27.0
——
23.5
28.0
4.9
10.4
9.6
5.7
8.1
10.2
6.2
5.7
10.8
2
J2
4
2
2
31
J2
2
2
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.01
0.03
0.04
0,02
K0.10
KOlO
K0.10
K0.1O
K0.10
K0.10
1(0.10
0.10
K0.l0
0.20
0.08
0.10
0.14
0.07
0.06
0.10
0.10
0.06
0.39
J0.34
0.34
0.35
0.34
0.21
0.28
0,52
0.26
9.46
5.50
2.91
1.75
25.41
3.38
7.72
15.54
7.24
2.67
2.67
1.34
1.34
18.69
0.00
5.35
9.35
5.34

-------
Staff Cage
Reading
cm—inches
TABLE 13 (CONT.)
WINOOSKI RIVER
Water Quality Results
Time
of
Collection
Station Date ( Hours )
75/08/01
0150
4.88—12.4
Temp
(°c)
26.0
DO
(mg/i)
5.0
BOD 5
(mg/i)
3
Total
Phosphorus
(mg/i)
0.04
NH 3
(mg/i)
Nitrogen
N0 2 —N0 3
(mg/i)
Chlorophyll a
TKN (ug/l)
(mg/i) Trich S ect
K0.1O
0.11
0.28 6.66 2.67
0825
13.70—34.8
25.5
6.2
2
0.07
KO.lO
0.06
0.61 24.79 16.02
1745
4.64—11.8
30.5
10.2
2
0.02
KO.1O
0.05
0.22 6.66 5.34
75/08/02
0145
0930
1850
4.64—11.8
8.98—22.8
4.64—11.8
——
27.5
30.0
4.2
6.8
7.7
2
2
. 12
0.02
0.05
0.01
K0.1O
0.10
KO.1O
0.09
0.11
0.08
0.31 10.63 17.36
0.42 13.90 9.35
0.20 3.38 0.00
WQO8
75/07/29
0105
0935
1735
18.42—46.8
15.35—39.0
16.01—40.8
22.0
23.0
24.5
8.4
9.7
11.2
2
J2
3
0.02
0.02
0.02
KO.1O
1 (0.10
1(0.10
0.10
0.08
0.04
0.31 12.44 6.68
J0.38 7.98 401
0.34 23.77 17.36
75/07/30
0150
0925
1640
17.72—45.0
14.17—36.0
14.64—37.2
——
24.0
26.0
10.8
9.7
11.8
2
3
J3
0.01
0.07
0.02
K0.10
K0.1O
1(0.10
0.03
0.02
0.01
0.34 11.84 4.01
0.35 14.42 12.02
0.26 14.75 9.35
75/07/31
0030
0835
1645
15.59 39.6
12.28—31.2
——
25.0
27.5
12.0
10.7
13.0
J3
3
4
0.02
0.03
0.03
K0.iO
K0.10
K0.10
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.25 11.47 9.35
0.28 15.69 8.01
0.33 23.26 R
75/08/01
0110
0915
1640
14.41—36.6
13.70 34.8
8.98—22.8
27.0
27.5
31.0
10.4
11.6
10.8
2
2
3
0.02
0.02
0.02
K0.10
K0.10
K0.10
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.36 13.43 12.01
0.28 18.45 16.02
0.10 12.74 12.02
75/08/02
0100
0840
1745
10.87—27.6
13.22—33.6
9.92—25.2
——
28.0
31.0
11.2
9.3
12.1
2
2
J2
0.02
0.02
0.02
K0.10
K0.10
1(0.10
0.01
0.01
K0.01
0.19 26.57 22.70
0.31 13.22 10.68
0.26 12.85 12.02
WQO9
75/07/29
75/07/30
0040
0850
1710
0135
0950
1620
12.01—30.5
11.02—28.0
10.63—27.0
11.73—29.8
8.66—22.0
9.45—24.0
23.0
23.0
26.0
——
24.0
26.5
8.9
8.2
10.1
10.8
9.3
11.8
2
J2
3
2
3
J3
0.02
0.02
0.04
0.01
0.04
0.02
K0.10
1(0.10
1(0.10
1(0.10
1(0.10
1(0.10
0.13
0.11
0.05
0.03
0.05
0,01
0.18 3.77 2.67
.10.24 4,33 1.34
0.33 9.83 10.68
0.18 4.44 1.34
0.27 9.25 9.25
0.27 13.47 9.35
75/07/31
0015
0910
1625
10.63—27.0
9.25—23.5
6.69—17.0
——
25.0
27.0
10.0
8.6
11.1
J2
3
2
0.02
0.03
0,02
1(0.10
K0.10
1(0,10
0.01
0.02
0.04
0.22 9.25 6.68
0.39 9.72 5.34
0.25 16.13 14.68

-------
TABLE 13 (cONT.)
WINOOSKI RIVER
Water Quality Results
Time
of
Collection
Station Date ( Hours )
75/08/01
75/08/02
0050
Staff Gage
Reading
cm—inches
8.66—22.0
Temp
OC
27.0
DO
g/l)
10.4
BOD 5
(mg/I)
2
Total
Phosphorus
(mg/i)
NH 3
(mg/i)
Nitrogen
NO 2 —N0 3
(mg/i)
Chlorophyll a
TIG (ugh) —
(mg/i) ‘frich Spect
0.03
KO.1O
0.01
0.24 21.49 17.36
0945
5.51—14.0
26.5
9,0
1
0.06
KO.1O
0.01
0.31 27.59 R
1630
3.15—08.0
30.0
10.8
2
0.03
1 (0.10
0.01
0.12 21.99 22.69
0820
5.31—13.5
27.0
8.8
2
0.04
KO.10
0.01
K0.l0 30.40 26.70
1236
7.09—18.0
——
10.1
2
0.02
1(0.10
1(0.01
KO.10 23.19 18.69
1720
3.54—09.0
31.0
11.6
J3
0.02
KO.lO
0.01
0.33 21.88 18.69

-------
Time
TABLE 14
WINOOSKI RIVER
Wastewater Treatment Facility Results
of
Collection
(Hours)
Instantaneous
Flow
CMS-MGD
Nitrogen
NH 3 N02—N0 3
(mg/i) (mg/i)
(mg/i)
Station Date
WTO 1 75/08/03
75/08/04
75 / 08 / 05
75/08/06
75/08/07
WT O2 75/08/03
75/08/04
75/08/05
75/08/06
Total
0.042—0.95
Temp
°C
——
BOD 5
(mg/i)
K5
Phosphorus
(mg/i)
2.19
5.07
0.08
6.30
0015
0815
0.024—0.56
25.5
K5
2.09
4.25
0.16
5.49
1610
0.044—1.0
8
1.13
28.3
0.08
J4.13
0025
0.042—0.95
29.0
8
1.83
4.50
0.09
J6.16
0725
0.031 U.7u
230
6*
1.56
4.78
0.08
5.20
1625
0005
0730
1530
0.048—1.1
-— 0.0441.00 -
0.044—1.00
23.0
——
K5
6
K5
6
2.45
3.15
2.25
2.08
5.72
6.10
4.84
5.13
0.05
0.03
0.08
0.05
6.89
6.90
5.80
5.99
0045
0.039U.90
22.0
K5
3.20
5.36
0.04
6.88
0730
0.033—0.75
21.0
5*
2.01
4.57
0.09
6.10
1620
0.039—0.90
——
K5
0.92
3.21
0.10
4.07
0005
0.039—0.90
21.0
K5
1.88
4.35
0.06
5.24
0730
- 0.026—0.60
—
1*
2.33
4.15
0.17
4.66
1600
- 0.046—1.05
K5
1.68
3.90
0.12
4.23
0230
- 0.0090.20
——
11
6.24
0.68
14.64
3.17
0940
1905
0.024 0.55
0.0220.50
24.5
——
14
14
5.63
5.60
R
1.27
14.04
17.54
3.49
J2.78
0330
0.008—0.175
0.028—0.65
24.0
6
5.22
0.13
16.00
J2.60
0940
24.0
5*
4.60
0.10
17.14
2.00
1705
0.026—0.60
——
K2
6.12
0.15
17.52
2.47
0235
0.009—0.20
29.0
5
5.43
K0.10
15.23
2.39
0940
0.033—0.75
24.0
3
4.45
K0.10
16.21
2.13
1755
0.022—0.50
——
6
7.11
K0.10
21.36
2.64
0250
0.009—0.20
24.0
4
5.63
K0.10
16.24
2.13
0945
- 0. 026—O.6O
——
5*
•
5.26
K0.10
17.84
2.29
1900
0.026—0.60 4 6.23
K0.10 22.06 2.14

-------
TABLE 14 (CONT.)
WINOOSKI RIVER
Wastewater Treatment Facility Results
T itne
of
Collection
(Hours)
Station
WTO3
WT04
Date
75108/ 07
75 /08 /03
75/08104
75/08/ 05
75/08/06
75/08/07
75/08/03
75/08/04
75/08/05
75/08/06
Instantaneous
Flow
CMS—MCD
Temp
°C
21.0
BOD 5
(mg/I)
6
Total
Phosphorus
(mg/i)
NH 3
(ing/i)
Nitrogen
N0 2 —N0 3
(mg/i)
TKN
(mg/i)
6.29
0250
0.006—0.15
K0.10
11.25
2.25
1000
0.026—0.60
5*
5.64
K0.].0
21.36
2.42
1830
0.035—0.80
5
6.67
K0.l0
24.42
2.52
0210
0.031—0.70
28.0
K5
1.70
K0.l0
7.26
0.25
0910
0.039—0.90
28.0
9
1.61
1 (0.10
7.33
0.83
1830
0.046—1.05
——
1(2
1.79
1(0.10
874
J0.98
0310
0.031—0.70
27.0
K2
1.79
1(0.10
8.42
.10.93
0910
0.059—1.35
27.0
1*
1.72
1(0.10
824
0.99
1845
0.048—1.10
27.0
6
2.27
K0.10
8.36
1.29
0220
0.035—0.80
29.0
K2
1.97
K0.10
7.83
0.35
0925
0.055—1.25
28.5
K2
1.86
1(0.10
6.20
1.09
1730
0.048—1.10
28.5
5
2.81
4.20
10.07
6.04
0240
0.026—0.60
23.5
K2
2.72
0.33
12.82
2.03
0930
0.053—1.20
3*
2.54
K0.10
11.97
2.10
1830
0.042—0.95
26.0
K2
2.82
0.87
13.66
2.58
0230
0.024—0.55
——
K2
317
1(0.10
-- 14.46
- 1.44
0930
0.057—1.30
2*
2.90
1(0.10
13.19
1.12
1805
0.048—1.10
3
2.70
0.65
11.83
2.51
0340
0.018—0.40
24.0
150
7.67
20.8
0.32
27.9
1010
0.041—0.93
21.5
180
8.10
26.0
0.12
31.3
2020
0.0—3—0.75
——
180
9.24
22.5
0.04
J28.6
0420
0.017—0.38
21.0
160
9.23
27.7
0.07
R
1010
0.041—0.93
21.0
110*
7.72
28.2
0.04
34.1
2040
0.035—0.80
——
200
10.80
27.6
0.10
36.1
0335
0.018—0.40
——
150
935
25.2
R
34.9
1015
0.041-0.93
21.5
130
8.20
27.0
0.06
34.9
1905
0.039—0.90
——
75
9.39
25.7
0.08
32.2
0355
0.018—0.40
20.0
140
8.72
25.4
0.08
32.2
1040
0.044—1.00
——
100*
8.05
30.7
0.08
39.6
2010
0.035—0.80
——
200
10.12
29.1
0.11
39.2

-------
Was tewater
TABLE 14 (coNT.)
WINOOSKI RIVER -
Treatment Facility Results
Time
of
Collection
(Hours)
Date
Total
Nitrogen
Phosphorus
(mg/i)
N H 3
sing/i)
N0 2 —N0 3
(mg/i)
TKN
(mg/i)
Station
WTO5
WTO6
Instantaneous
Flow
CMS—MGD
Temp
°C
15.0

——
BOD 5
(mg/i)
190
100*
140
75/08/07
0335
1030
1945
0.016—0.36
0.044—1.00
0.039—0.90
9.65
7.83
8.86
27.5
28.2
23.1
0.10
0.08
0.12
34.1
R
31.2
75/07/29
0315
1330
2005
0.044—0.10
0.021—0.47
0.008—0.18
——
23.0
2*
K5
K5
3.95
4.14
4.26
K0.l0
0.36
K0.10
11.44
13.63
13.09
2.28
J2.56
2.47
75/07/30
0255
0825
1835
0.018
0.018—0.40
0.008—0.18
——
22.0
——
9
10
8
4.05
4.44
4.20
K0.10
0.24
0.26
8.80
13.13
13.67
1.60
2.77
2.43
75/07/31
75/08/01
0120
0725
1800
0200
0805
1810
0.009—0.20
0.009—0.21
0.004—0.10
0.017—0.29
0.014—0.32
——
22.0
——
23.0
24.0
——
8
6*
10
K5
3*
11
3.97
3.38
4.36
3.74
1.81
5.10
0.25
0.30
0.26
K0.i0
K0.i0
0.31
12.90
13.25
13.39
8.43
11.16
11.96
2.43
2.38
2.60
1.50
2.32
2.42
75/08/02
0200
0955
1910
0.006-0.15
0.025—0.58
0.008—0.19
——
24.0
——
5
7
8
6.22
5.25
5.80
K0.10
0.40
0.25
9.58
12.16
12.46
2.35
2.74
2.22
75/07/29
0200
1210
1830
0.035-0.80
0.035-0.80
22.0
21.0
——
65*
160
150
5.21
7.19
6.87
16.0
28.0
22.0
0.07
0.16
0.16
26.3
J36.4
28.2
75/07/30
0230
0900
1720
0.026—0.60
0.035-0.79
0.035-0.80
——
19.0
——
160
110
140
7.58
6.50
6.29
27.0
23.8
19.2
0.08
0.07
0.14
33.7
31.0
27.5
75/07/31
0055
0800
1710
0.039-0.90
0.025-0.57
0.035-0.80
——
21.0
28.0
180
49*
140
7.23
6.43
6.64
23.5
23.6
24.3
0.09
0.10
0.10
30.7
32.4
30.2
75/08/01
0130
0845
1720
0.028-0.65
0.031—0.70
0.035—0.80
21.0
21.5
——
140
130*
160
6.76
6.37
7.09
19.9
23.2
20.3
0.08
0.05
0.11
32.7
30.7
30.0

-------
Time
TABLE 14 (CONT.)
WINOOSKI RIVER
Wastewater Treatment Facility Results
of
Collection
(Hours)
Instantaneous
Flow
CNS-MGD
(mg/i)
* Indicates BOD 5 values obtained from the State of Vermont ABC
+ Approximate flow arrived at by dividing the approximate lagoon gallonage (600,000)
by the time required to drain it (3 hours)
Station
WT O7
Date
75/08/02
75/07/29
75/07/30
75/07/31
75/08/01
75/08/02
Nitrogen
NH 3 N0 2 —N0 3
(mg/i) (mg/i)
0130
0915
1830
0920
0935
0855
0925
0830
Temp
oc
21.0
30.0
24 • 5
25.5
26.5
24.0
28.0
0.026—0.60
0. 035—0. 80
0. 035—0. 80
0.219—5.0+
0.219—5.0+
0.219—5.0+
0.219—5.0+
0.219—5.0+
BOD5
( mg/i )
140
110
150
8
7
10*
12 *
9
Total
Phosphorus
(mg / 1)
6.60
6.13
6 • 75
0.52
0.69
0.49
0.75
0.51
21.0
20.0
17,8
01.63
03.24
02.70
02.43
01.29
0.07
0 • 06
0.10
4.81
9,83
7.09
7.96
4 • 92
31.3
28,7
25.2
J2. 22
04.07
03.42
03.17
02.48

-------
Figure 1
Winooski River Study Area
Abandoned Railroad Bridge
WQO1, XSO1, LDO7—l and 5
WTO1, XSO2
Route 127 Bridge
WQ02, CR01, LDO6—1 and 5
XSO3
XSO4
XSO5
XSO6, LDO5—]. and 4
XSO 7
WQO3, XSO7A, LDO4—2
XS 08
XSO9
2 and 7 Bridge
Lime ‘lCiln Bridge
.JT 05
Bridge
WTO2
WT O3
WQO4B, XS1O
xS11
Winooskj Crib
WQO4, XS12
CR02
Route 1—89 Bridge
XS14
XS15
WQO7, LDO2—1
WT06
WQO8B
WT O7
WQO9, XS17, CR03, LDO1—1 and 3
LAKE
1Q08
XS16
Railroad Bridge

-------
)o—-
:TtTi:
— H-- ’
• j

S
.
:
-- t t

.
I
-: Flow
-
(CMS/CFS)
H ZHTTITi i T i± T iHT iL
i
—i rH.
- — - - --1 - -.
Versus Time (hours) as Recorded
LH
—-
.:
H-
H
- -
at the
H :
ii Ti Ti-LTTT!iiHTH-TiiTiHiITii Ti
H L ‘L’ •
-H-
- - - -
USGS Gage Below Essex junction,
.
• H
—--
1T
H
-
—--4-
:
-
.
CMS/CF
34.0/12
31.1/11
28.3/10
25. 5/09
22. 6/08
19.8/07
17.0/06
14.2/05
__1
•
-
. —:----.
:
-

H-

1i- - -I
:

iL
HH
— TT-
1 :
.li
i
•1-
i
-:
I—
.
.
.

H
I

•


-
—
-
,
——
_
11.3/04
8.5/03
5.7/02
2.8/01
0/
LI
— — I
.


.
IHTi
.
HL•.


H:
- -
•••
-1 HiTi:I.H :J
.
h
••
H
I
—I--- — — -

H-i •.L H
‘- ——- -- —---
• •LJ _._
-
Figure 2(Cont.)
.

•
L
HR
T4ff_

:
I
:
-
H
Ti -
;
•_L.
:_
—
-

:
.
::
---i


••

-
j
—
•
•
-
:—
L
—L -
•
H

- 1
-
:
:
•:
•
12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
2400 1200 2400 1200
08/02 08/03
10 11 1?
2400
08/ 04
7 2 9 10 11
1 2 12d0 ‘ 2400 1200 24 0
08/ 05

-------
6
2400
li_i -
ft
ow (CMS/CFS) Versus Time (Hours) as Recorded at the USGS Gage Be1o
H
-i-T i ± i- iz ffHTi iti
N
Essex Junction, VI
ii -
CMS/CP
2.5/1
39. 6/14
36. 8/13
34.0/12
31.1/11
28. 3/10
25. 5/09
22. 6/08
19.8/07
17.0/06
14.2/05 )O
11. 3/0 03
8.5/o oo
5. 7 /O 2 j O
2.8/n1 rrn
II
o.
‘ (
—
- I — —
/ LI
E
rn
/\ç7LT
/
A
t I
0/
:
2400
12 1 2 3 4
1200
07/29
7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2
1200 1200
07/30 07/31
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
2400 1200 2400
08 / 01

-------
CMS /CF
39.6/1.
38.6/12
34.0/12
31.1/11
28.3110
:
.
•
Flow (CMS/CFS)
—
.. .
± [ _i--
j___
H iI
-
-

Versus

-.
.
T TH4E H_ III .
Time (Hours) as Recorded at
r
. 1 TTTT

I ——
T
the
-.
:
4
t
USGS Gage Below Essex Junction, VT
— — -—
-

:1
-
25. 5/09
22.6 10E
19.8/07
17.0 / 0 C
i4.2/0
—
H
--
=ij _J
11.3/ OL
8.5/u:
5.7/0
2.8/0:
0/1
1’
H
—
—j
-IT:-:- 1ITT:iI -
--i---

-‘—-4
-



±-
.
—

HTI


t. -
4
::t
jL

T EE
H


J
- 4--
-H - j
I — I—
F ure2(Co t) I
:


. L
-

—
—
1
:

i
-
H
H

L
±
T
-
--
:
IT
--H-
ti
-..
- :
.


-
.
-
H
12 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 8 9 10 11 12
2400 1200 2400 1200 2400
08/06 08/07
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

-------
I I J__ I JTi :I
River Elevations at Station WQO5
Relative to Gauge Datum
0
0
0
0
Di .0
w
4- )
w
E
•rl
4-)
a,
0
0
0
Lfl
0
0
0
07/30/ 75
Lquid Level
0
0
,0
. 0
‘-I
I ;
:
-
E __
: • t--
;—-

-H --
f
:
L
.
H I
±L____
HI
IIIT L
—
-
-
--
—
-_—
--
—_---
—
-.
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
— —
— —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
— —
a,
H
S
0
,0
C 4
0
“-4
L:
—1
Recorder
Malfunction
-I
-I
I
12 1 2
Eigure 3
NOON
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 891011
— — — — — — —
— — — — — — — —
—

-------
I
‘ .4
a)
U
a)
U
a)
0
0 ;
—
River Elevations at Station WQO5
Relative to Gauge Datum
i ti
0
—
I 1 F #i
— I
/
i J i
:
————
07/31/75
————
-
-
i:
,
±

Li
—-k——
ii
iii
————— ——
— ———
,0
c..4
1 .
0
m
0
0
0
- I
H
—
a)—
0
—
I —
I —
--h-
0
0
0
In.
0
0
C,,
0
c 1,
08/01/75
- I -- .
E I
H HuI
1 2
-
4 •5 6
— — — - I — - - —
— — —
-— -- —I --- —- — -
8
_ : - -
i i — Figure 3 (Cont.)
I I TT
—— — —
10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
NOON

-------
Ti
-T
River Elevations at Station WQO5
Relative to Gauge Datum
—
— -— —
_
—f i i
— — — —
LIii i
EiTTTT ETii ii iiO8/O2/75
— — — —
-F

i ii-±i-
— — — —
— — — —
— — — —
— —

— —
Lii—f- ii
-
— — - — —
L LJ
0 )
Ii
w
w
U
w —
0 —.
0
0
‘-4.
0
0
1
H” “F
0
I
——
LTT -H
-- -
I1 I
H
ET ,IIEEEEEEE EEE
i

-L
08/03/75
EE1EEEEEEEEH
EEEEE EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEI H
-

—

-
T
—
TIiiTIIiIiIiIiiiiIIIiTii
-——————
=__
:
‘ Hiii
-H--
-H--
-Er- EIE H
Figure 3 (Cont.)
12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 4 b 1 8 1O U
NOON

-------
Ii.1
1 )
0
0
0
0
f— I I— River Elevations at Station WQO5
; t
I
I
EEJi
li
I
-F
Re
ative to Gauge Datum
08/04/75 —— —f---- I
0
0
Id
0
I
I
p
0
‘-I
I
w
C)
‘H
0
0
1-4
H-
E ____t 7T
TF: i I- 1
4;H t
— — — J — — — — — — — — — — I —


T1, T1 IIiII

--
LH i 1 -1 J
-F- I
12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
i-
Figure 3 (Cont.)
12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 89
NOON
1
10
11 12

-------
I
E ±
i L L
River Elevations at Station WQO5
- Relative to Gauge Datum
EI1 1i ti ii i ci
r-
-
—
{- - - ____
08 / 06 / 75
-
if
—1—— 1—
— 1
ti
- I
I
It
0)
0)
1-)
0)
——
IILI
T E I
IE i iE
0
‘-4
0
0
0
H
0)—
—
U —
—
H —
0 —
=
0 —
•
----p
08/07/75
I
1 T :t TT k
.0
‘ -I
EE E Hi
————
I
—
12 1 2 3 4
7
--- ——
Figure 3 (Cont.)
NOON
8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8
10 11 12

-------
I l—T
1 --
__J-i -_-
---f-
--.- -. -
i -_
-
:.
- :i

-



-
- _-_
-
-
i i
.
_ 1 - E
±! E_
.

,
IE
-_ -
:
LI
-
±
7 i

j
:

Ti
iI4Ti
ff
11
Ti
Ti
i
II
j
IE
0•

C)’ e’.l G
E
•r40 U
u c:
H
00
12 1
0
co
a)
4J
a)Q
0
0
In
I _
I I I J I J
River Elevations at WQO9
Relative to Gauge Datum
0
0
0
C . ’,
EEEEEE ELEEEEEEEEEEEEEEPEFEIE
!T _ _ I
07/29/75 z :L:


I!
i4:
.0
In
c i )
c i)
C-)
H
0
N
0
- --H — :i: :
I 1 __ TiT i iiT iii
0
0
‘-4
0
‘-4
‘—4.
0
0.
‘ -I
0
C’
- t- -
Li
------ --- - -----
! ‘i
iii
i
± i
111 J1 11
TtE EEEEEEEEEE-T±
L ±i
ii
L
11
L IE EE :
Liquid Level
DO Recorder
ii iii
I TiTTiTiT IIIII.. ‘

1-- —-.
i : :
—
i:i:i i —
111111 III -

.


-

.
Ti i
TI TT

ii

ii
Malfunction ii
I111 1 IT IITII III1IT 11
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE 111 EE:T
iii::
11
III
— — -- --
-——--——— - --—---- -----
--—

::-
- - - — —
L
:
J J4
t __
E 1

Figure4
,
.
!
I I
2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
NOON

-------
-
4 -
o o
Lr1 C 4
L
River Elevations at WQC
9 Relative to Gauge Datum
-
0
0
0
a)
1J
Qr-1
0
0
C’
0
0
—-
-
E !I-
I
-——----—--—- —- ---
1

I

:
+
-_

r’
:L
L
:
r1
0
a)
U
p- I
0
0
ITJTTI
08/01/75
- i-if
41LE T
4 -4
0 0
&.1
0

ii
iii
TT1T TJTTT
iiii iiiiiiiii iii

Figure4(Cont.)
.
.TTTT TT TTT
.
L
.
,i

.
,
H-iuuui T
-- --—- -----
t
12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
NOON
9 10 11 12

-------
0
a.’
0
.1o
w N
U
IJO
U
-
I,. I rrr ”
— -
I
I I I I I
I I
0
U
0
0
c’1
0
0
i::: :

L:•
TTLT .
•

River Elevations at
HE- I-
WQO9
Relative
to Gauge Datum
-
:
:
L
I
t

iii
.
‘ ‘ EL
——__

,
S

‘

12 1 2
I —
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
NOON
I —
H—
TEE:
TEE:
j
TETETEfE:
:
EH EE
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 9 10 11 12

-------
I {L ij
i i- - Graph of Sunlight Intensity (Gram—Calories/cm 2 ) vs Time (Hrs ) — - ____
:-- ( - 1 FE± t 44-l I
:::
_ i
--
-— —
::i
.
- — -
—
Readings Initiated -i j II
I I I I I I I ______
at 1600 07/29/75
.- —— ..—-— —
— --- —- —- ------
.
Ti
- 07/30/75
tN’ EI ±’

ETII

-
±
—————
TE


1
i


TEiTE


I -
TTI
-


Tiit

:
T
-


o—

i:

E
_

I IJIIIII



h

ii



———————..7.——————t——.—
IL
. IT
-
:
J 11
--
4E
T
i



T
¶‘

i



:


. :
:

i



HE I_H E : Ei ’
07/ L
lit-i L i_H:
I —

08/01/75 EE
H’ I
I

—

U
: :

1•”
——

11
I
?
——

±1
: ii ii iiiii 111111 :ii i1 ii ii III i : : E TT

- Readings Interupted by Mechanical_Failure
— ——— —.--—————— — ——— . —— —— —

H
liii
1
IT

T

:

Z
—

1
i
1T
—
-1
111
—
:::
—
E
—
TE
—

J1
—

—
. -
IE
i
i
i
i
!
i
m
T
r:J J
-
T
:
I
•.
i
: i
:iit

T

T
E
T

E
T
H

T
J.
__ 11
Figure 5
T T
T

1

t
L
1
!
E
E
t

T__
07/29/75
4--
EH
-
—-I -—— — 1 I
_ i# i4i
Ii
—4 —
----1
05
0.o
0.5
0
0.5
12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
NOON
T(i

-------
—I-H —f---1--
:

iiiii ii ii
--——I —
--+-
Graph of Sunlight Intensity (Gram—Calories/cm 2 ) vs. Time (Hrs.)
1 110
0.5
0.0
1.0
0.5
0.0
1.0
0.0
1.0
0.5
0.0
08/02/75
; L L’T I
bHT E ± * TTI:,_: ::::
:03/7 i kiL_ - , -

IILI I IH
r I1
:
1T1
1 LL±± J TLJ flJIfIf±
4TI’ E
Figure 5 (Cont.)
12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8
l’400N
Time
——
10 11 12

-------
H tH
--- : : —I :
4 _ :.:i; -- .--
08/06/75
S _ • _‘ —-
- - ---
--
H I :H :
I I
— —-
0.0
- -
Graph of Sunlight Intensity (Gram—Calories/cm 2 ) vs. Time (Hrs.)
::: I I
I I
—
I I
0
— ::::: ::
‘ ‘ “-t-

-I--_—----
a)
, .1
- - t-- -—
E :

T 08/07/75 : H --- Readings Terminated
at101008/07/75___
S
-
Iiiii -_
-
L

:i

:
I
I
I
1
1
1
I I 1HH
i
1
I L
IT
i
TI TI
--- ---
TI
IT
IT TI
TIIIT
TI
- -- - -I -—
1
—


iEj IT Ti
!
—
1T Ti TI IT IT TI T 1 14 I T
- ITII I T
12 1 2 3 4 5 6
Figure 5(Cont.)
11’TTT I T I T
10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6
NOON
P4iiii i
8
9 10 11 12

-------
rr
. L E—j I I I 1 -l-4 l I I 1 t
— Dissolved Oxygen_Fluctuation Versus_TimejHours at Station_W(’02
T r

—-- T j - -•::: H H- :: :: : i
— - 4 — L-- • - n-.—- - ii: ii i T —- -— I
±H ItI IrI lilt


T. rr
1 iEL± ± I-1-I-H ;L /1
= Ii I L
:ifl H’Tt
1200 1600 2000 2400040008C0 1200 1600200024000400 08001200 16002000 2400 04000800 12001600 2000 2400 0400 08001200
08/03 08/04 08/05 08/06 08/07
FT F 1 1I I I 1 I I I 1 i I II T i1rrI I 1 T 1T I 1 I I

-------
H
Ii
i
I
:
L:
J
I LE E1I
T
H
77L_77__
+Ii Dissolved Oxygen Fluctuation Versus_Time_(Hours) at Station
THIi ‘L
-.

I --—
i _i -
:
W(05
h
I
!______
±1
—
—
TTTT TI
- —— —---‘-
1 —_ -_ — —
-— H
I Figure 7 -
2400 1200 2400 1200 2400 1200 2400 1200
07/27 07/30 07/3]. 08/01, 08/02
/
/

-------
I- i —i
—— t -
—
1•
-f
+
1-
+
-__
I I I I
I I TI
+
+
t
—4
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
I T I TITIT

TI TIT
L.
-I--
—i —
- -
— -
-
—--4—-
-
-H---
---
I I
-- -
I
‘1
TT4 I T
I
-i
IT IT
-
DO Probe
:leaned
————-T,
—
--
-4----
HIT
\ —
I
— ---IT-
— F
TI IT IT
IIIIITTTETEIT I T I T 1T
Ii HT
1200
Probe
III Cleaned
J
--
—H
1
08/02 08/03 08/04
Figure 7(Cont,)
2400 1200 2400 1200 2400 1200 2400 12
1
08(05 08/06
‘U

-------
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
f: H L :HI: HHH H I I I iH
Dissolved Oxygen Fluctuation Versus Time (Hours) at Station WQO5
- -

4

I

! i1ij Ig zI! lit IIH_______________
:
- -- i_ [
08/06
-
7400 12
0 2400
-- !H’-’ Figure 7 (Cont.)
i _ _ i
08/07

-------
-- —
- -
PHI
i F I Ir1Th
._I
: :- -i - Dissolved
--
Oxygen Fluctuation Versus
I
I
:: i
:
--
Time (Hours) at
Station
WQO9
±Th : L •
: i i iii I- . Hi Hi :i: Tiii - ii Ti iii liii i i 1 111 iii i
I—___


I rnr r ’
-+ I F E ; --- —____
:
1 ILL1 r t’1 tjELIIIIIH
- i
ii iii
liii
iii
1J
L

1600 2Q00 2400 1200 2400 1200 2400 1200 2400
07/29 07/30 07/31 08/01 08/02

-------
Appendix I
Winooskj River Cross Sections
Area: 467 Square Meters
5020 Square Feet
XSO2
Area: 35 Square Meters
3835 Square Feet
Area: 246 Square
Meters
2644 Square
SCALE: HorIzontal 1 cm = 3.05 meters (1 Inch = 10 feet)
Vertical 3. cm 0,305 meters (1 inch = 1 foot)

-------
I
Appendix I (Cont.)
Wj.nooskj. River Cross Sections
Area: 133 Square Meters
1430 Square Feet
Area: 109 Square Meters
1171 Square Feet
SCALE: Horizontal 1 cm = 3.05 meters (1 inch = 10 feet)
Vertical 1 cm — 0.305 meters (1 Inch 1 foot)
280 Square Meters
3006 Square Feet

-------
Appendix I (Coat.)
Winooski River Cross Sections
Area: 425 Square Meters
4565 Square Feet
XSO8
‘I Area: 118 Square Meters
1271 Square Feet
Area: 104 Square Meters
1122 Square Feet
Area: 105 Square Meters
1130 Square Feet
SCALE: Horizontal 1 cm = 3.05 meters (1 inch = 10 feet)
Vertical 1 cm = 0.305 meters (1 inch = 1 foot)

-------
Appendix I (Cont.)
Winooski River Cross Sections
Area: 66 Square Meters
714 Square Feet
Area; 55 Square Meters
586 Square Feet
Area: 77 Square Meters
825 Square Feet
SCALE: Horizontal 1 cm = 3.05 meters (1 inch = 10 feet)
Vertical 1 cm 0.305 meters (1 inch = 1 foot)
Area:
XS14
253 Square Meters
2721 Square Feet

-------
Appendix I (Cont.)
Winooski River Cross Sections
XS 16
Area: 454 Square Meters
4872 Square Feet
SCALE: Horizontal 1 cm = 3.05 meters (1 Inch = 10 feet)
Vertical 1 cm = 0.305 meters (1 inch — 1 foot)

-------
APPENDIX 11
Winooski River
Time of Travel
June 24 and 25, 1975
Time of travel measurements were made in the Winooski River
during June 24 and 25, 1975. The stretch under consideration i
extends from the mouth of the river, upstream 32.6 Kilometers (20 miles),
to the Central Vermont Railroad Bridge. For the purpose of time of
travel, the study area was divided into four reaches as follows:
REACH DESCRIPTION LENGTH IN METERS (FEET )
1 Crib dam in Winooski 16,154 (53,000)
at the U.S. Route 2
and 7 Bridge to the
mouth of the river
2 Green Mountain Power 2,134 ( 7,000)
Station No. 18 to
crib dam in Winooski
3 Green Mountain Power 10,058 (33,000)
Station No • 19 to
Green Mountain Power
Station No. 18
4 Central Vermont R.R. 4,267 (14,000)
Bridge to Green
Mountain Power Station
No. 19
The time of travel measurements provided are based on times
during which Green Mountain Power Company was generating power.
Flows as recorded at G #19, GMP #18, and the U.S.G.S. gage at
Essex Junction during the study are given in Table Il—i. The dis-
charge in the river was severely reduced during non-production periods
and river velocities were almost negligible. Time of travel data is
shown in Table 11—2. Time of travel data for Reaches 2, 3, and 4,

-------
11 -2
are based entirely on periods of power production. Time of travel
for Reach 1 is based on a combination of generation and non-
generation periods.

-------
TABLE II—].
River Flows DurinR June Time of Travel StudT
Date Time Flows in CMS-CFS
( Hours) GMP #19 Essex Jct. Gage GMP #18
6/24/75 0100 1.1—39
0200 — 1.2-4]. -
0300 1.3—45
0400 1.4-49
0500 1.5—54
0600 1.6-58
0700 19.4— 684 1.8-63
0800 38.7—1368 34.8-1231 18.4— 650
0900 38.7—1368 34. 5-1220 35.4—1250
1000 40.2—1421 34.2-1210 35.4—1250
1100 38.7—1368 33.4—1180 42.5—1500
1200 38.0—1342 33.4—1180 42.5—1500
1300 37.3—1316 33.1—1170 42.5—1500
1400 36.5—1289 32.8—1160 42.5—1500
1500 37.3—1316 32.8—1160 35.4—1250
1600 38.0-1342 32.5—1150 35.4 -1250
1700 36.5—1289 32.3—1140 35 .4—1250
1800 37.3—1316 32.3—1140 35.4—1250
1900 10.9—385 35.4—1250
2000 — 3.4—120
2100 — 1.9—68
2200 — 1.5—53
2300 1.4—49
2400 1.4—48

-------
TABLE II—]. (Cont.)
River Flows During June Time of Travel Study
Date Time Flows in CMS-CFS
( Hours) G1 #19 Essex Jct. Gage GMP #18
6/25/75 0100. 1.4—51
0200 1.6—55
0300 1.6—58
0400 1.7—61
0500 1.9—68
0600 19.4—684 6.6-234
0700 37.3—1316 35.1—1242
0800 4]•7..)474 36.4—1286 42. 5—1500
0900 41.7—1474 36.1—1275 42.5—1500
1000 38.0—1342 35.8—1264 42.5—1500
1100 41.7—1474 35.4—1253 42 • 5-1500
1200 37.3—1316 35.1—1242 42.5—1500
1300 40.2—1421 34.8—1231 39.6-1400
1400 37.2-1316 34. 5—1220 35 .4—1250
1500 38.0—1342 34.2—1210 7.1—250
1600 36.5—1289 34. 0—1200 42.5—1500
1700 37.2-1316 33.7—1190 41.1—1450
1800 38.0—1342 33.4—1180 35 .4—1250
1900 17.1—605 26.8—948 35.4—1250
2000 5.4—192 17.0—600
2100 2.4—84
2200 1.6-57
2300 1.4-48
2400 1.3—47

-------
TABLE 11—2
Winooski River
June Time of Travel
Hour of Observed Pick Up Calculated
Reach Dye Dump* Distance Traveled Time Ve locitT Time of Travel
( Meters) ( Hours) ( Mfsec.) ( Hours )
1 0920 15454 26.0 0.02 27.2
2 0920 2134 1.3 0.47 1.3
3 1145 9174 8.8 0.29 9.5
4 1305 2438 7.3 0.09 12.7
* All dye dumped on June 24.
(A) Pick up time includes periods of nongeneration. If velocity aud hence distance travelled
by the dye during nongeneration was considered negligible, the time necessary to travel
the 15454 meters during continuous power generation would be 14 hours • The corresponding
velocity would be 0.31 M/sec. and calculated time of travel for the entire reach 14.6 hours.

-------
APPENDIX III
BOD REACTION RATE, K
Grab samples were collected at all seven wastewater treatment
facility (WWTF) effluents. With the exception of IBM, three samples
per WWTF were submitted to the Vermont Agency of Environmental Con-
servation for long term oxygen uptake study. Two samples were ana-
lyzed from IBM. Attachment 111—1 contains the long term oxygen up-
take data as obtained from the AEC, together with pertinent notes
and observations.
Prom the long term oxygen uptake results, EPA’s Systems Analysis
Branch calculated the ultimate BOD and oxygen demand rate, K, using
the Thomas Slope Method with and without adjustment for positive and
negative lag.
Use of the Thomas Slope Method without accounting for positive and
negative lag resulted in negative K in many Instances. Individual BOD
values which decreased from one day to the next were assumed to be
erroneous, or if the value was within a reasonable range, the BOD was
assumed to be the same as the preceding day.
Incorporating positive and negative lag into the Thomas Slope
Method produced all positive K’s. Positive lag was accounted for by
discounting the BOD values for the first and third days.
Both the adjusted and unadjusted ultimate BOD and K values are
shown in Table 111-1. Only the adjusted values should be used for
modeling, however. The unadjusted values are presented for informa-
tion purposes only.

-------
TABLE Ill—i
ADJUSTED AND UNADJUSTED ULTIMATE BOD, K, AND K’ RESULTS
Location
Adjusted Results
Date
Time
Ultimate
Ultimate
Sampled
Sampled
(hours
BOD
(in /l)
K Base 10
(l/dav
Kt Base
(l/dav
BOD
(!n2/l
K Base 10
(1/day)
K’ Base
(1/day)
Unadjusted Results*
WTO1
8/04/75
0725
25
0.967
2.226
217
0.002
0.004
Burlington
8/06/75
0730
11
0.586
1.350
9
0.055
0.126
North End
8/07/75
0730
Average
9
15
0.746
0.766
1.718
1.765
6
0.042
0.097
WTO2
8/04/75
0940
8
0.197
0.454
—2
—0.064
—0.146
Winooski
8/06/75
8/07/75
0945
1000
Average
9
11
9
0.360
0.382
0.313
0.829
0.879
0.721
—9
—19
—0.028
—0.017
—0.064
—0.039
WTO3
8/04/75
0910
77
2.346
5.402
—15
—0.015
—0.034
Burlington
8/06/75
0930
24
1.516
3.491
10
0.029
0.067
Riverside
8/07/75
0930
Average
8
36
0.917
1.593
2.113
3.669
12
0.012
0.027
WTO4
8/04/75
1010
305
0.627
1.444
172
0.085
0.195
South
8/06/75
1040
264
0.046
0.106
264
0.046
0.106
Burlington
8/07/75
1030
Average
297
289
0.617
0.430
1.422
0.991
176
0.084
0.192
WTO5
7/29/75
0315
32
1.748
4.026
—2
—0.055
—0.127
Coichester
7/31/75
8/01/75
0725
0805
Average
17
9
19
0.573
0.556
0.959
1.319
1.280
2.208
14
—2
0.051
—0.055
0.117
—0.126
WT O6
7/29/75
0200
533
1.733
3.991
82
0.098
0.227
Essex
7/31/75
0800
148
0.761
1.753
83
0.081
0.187
Junction
8/01/75
0845
Average
444
375
0.831
1.098
1.913
2.552
258
0.074
0.169
WT O7
7/31/75
0855
34
1.113
2.564
16
0.101
0.234
IBM
8/01/75
0925
Average
36
35
0.979
1.046
2.254
2.409
18
0.098
0.227
*These results should be disregarded.
Included for informational purposes only.

-------
ATTAC1 NT 111—1
15 Day BOD Study: Burlington Area Wastew ter
Pollution Control Facilities
Effluents
A fifteen day BOD effluent study of seven Burlington
area Wastewater Pollution Control Facilities was conducted
by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Vermont
Department of Water--Resources. The facilities tested were
Burlington-Northend, Burlington-Riverside, South Burlington-
Airport Parkway, Winooski, Coichester, Essex Junction, and
IBM. All facilities were sampled on three separate dates
wjth the exception of IBM which was tested twice. An EPA
mobil unit collected the composited samples and delivered
these samples to the Vermont Water Resources Laboratory
where the 15 day BODs were run.
Immediately upon arrival, sample preparation was begun.
Samples were checked for residual chlorine and neutralized
accordingly with O.025N Sodium Thiosulfate. The samples’
dissolved oxygen level were determined and adjusted to an
appropriate level with controlled temperature aeration. All
effluent dilutions were made in two liter graduated cylinders.
The dilution components were added directly to the graduated
cylinder. The components consisted of 2 milliters of each
BOD nutrient, 2 milliters of the influent seed, an appropriate
effluent aliquot, and distilled water to make up a final
volume of 2 liters. Each effluent was run at two dilution
levels determined from previous data.

-------
ATTACH) NT 111-1
After the effluent dilutions were mixed well, they
were carefully syphoned into pre-labeled BOD bottles.
Two initial oxygen contents were run for each sample
dilution. The residual oxygen content was checked on day
1 and every subsequent odd day up to and including day 15.
Duplicate residuals were determined for day 5 and day 15.
Reaeration of sample dilutions was done as necessary,
reaeration decreased the total number of days for which
the sample dilution BOD was checked.
The 15 day results are summarized in the attached tables.
Also included in the tables are the blank depletions which
were inconsistent and of a magnitude greater than anticipated.
In two cases, i.e. Burlington—Northend and Burlington—Riverside,
the results obtained are questionable, due to a lack of
significant oxygen depletions. The more concentrated
effluent dilution was used to calculate the BODs reported.
Toxicity was noted for the Coichester effluent, the 50%
effluent dilution exerted a much greater depletion than the
75% effluent dilution.

-------
Table 1. 15 Day BOD Values, for the Dilution Water Blanks and Influent Seed Material
Sample
Dilution
Sampling
and Setup
Date
1
7/29/75 0.26
7/31/75 0.22
Day
3
0.44
0.22
5
0.47
0.37
7
mg/i
1.14
0.40
9
1.62
0.40
11
1.22
0.72
13
1.04
0.52
15
1.24
0.22
Water
8/1/75 0.02
1.04
1.07
1.14
1.14
1.34
1.24
1.28
Blank
8/4/75 —
8/6/75 0.2.7
8/7/75 0.37
0.68
0.37
0.37
0.23
0.49
0.48
0.80
0.39
—
0.38
—
0.68
—
0.39
0.68
0.40
0.79
0.68
0.45
1.00
0.78
Influent
7/29/75 29
7/31/75 73
8/1/75 72
76
130
92
100
180
140
95
200
170
—
—
150
120
330
170
140
330
280
180
330
290
Seed Material
8/4/75 36
8/6/75 41
8/7/75 28
68
52
58
76
100
80
66
110
100
86
110
97
87
130
120
110
134
120
200
235
146

-------
Table 2. 15 Day BOD Values for Burlington Area Wastewater Pollution Control Facilities
Wastewater
Treatment
Facility
Effluent
Sample
Sampling
and Setup
Date
Day
.
7 9
1 3 5 mg/i mg/i 11 13 15
Essex
Junction
7/29/75 22 28 65 59 65 71 73 76
7/31/75 18 37 49 54 56 59 71 98
8/11/75 76 91 130 140 170 160 270 310
Coichester
7/29/75 0.18 — 1.6 3.0 3.5 5.3 5.4 4.6
7/31/75 1.6 4.2 6.4 8.8 9.2 10 10 13
8/1/75 — 0.58 2.8 5.4 5.7 7.2 8.3 9.9
IBM
Sanitary
7/31/75 4.2 7.6 10 — 11 — 14 16
8/1/75 3.7 9 12 — 14 — 15 17
Burlington
Riverside
8/4/75 — 1.9 1.3 4.4 6.6 7.6 7.6 9.4
8/6/75 1.0 1.2 2.8 — 3.8 3.8 5.8 7.8
8/7/75 — 0.7 2.0 2.1 2.2 3.2 3.3 3.7
Burlington
Northend
8/4/75 — 2.5 5.7 6.2 6.7 9.7 9.7 16
8/6/75 1.2 2.4 4.7 4.8 6.2 6.6 7.2 7.6
8/7/75 1.2 0.15 1.4 1.8 3.6 6.2 4.7 4.9
So. Burlington
Airport Parkwa
8/4/75 26 89 110 160 140 150 150 160
8/6/75 35 55 100 140 180 180 130 150
8/7/75 28 80 100 150 140 150 150 150
Winooski
8/4/75 0.13 3.0 5.0 6.1 7.9 9.6 10 13
8/6/75 0.37 3.2 4.7 5.8 6.8 8.9 13 13
8/7/75 0.53 3.3 5.1 6.8 8.5 9.9 13 14

-------