U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
I NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
REPORT
ON
CLYDE POND
ORLEANS COUNTY
VERMONT
EPA REGION I
WORKING PAPER No, 15
PACIFIC NORTHWEST ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
An Associate Laboratory of the
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER - CORVALLIS, OREGON
and
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
-------
REPORT
ON
CLYDE POND
ORLEANS COUMJY
VERMONT
EPA REGION I
WORKING PAPER No, 15
WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
VERMONT AGENCY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION
AND THE
VERMONT NATIONAL GUARD
JULY, 1974
-------
1
CONTENTS
Page
Foreword ii
List of Vermont Study Lakes iv
Lake and Drainage Area Map v
Sections
I. Conclusions 1
II. Introduction 3
III. Lake and Drainage Basin Characteristics 4
IV. Lake Water Quality Summary 5
V. Nutrient Loadings ii
VI. Literature Reviewed
VII. Appendices 20
-------
11
FOREWORD
The National Eutrophication Survey was initiated in 1972 as a
research project in response to an Administration commitment to
investigate the nationwide threat of accelerated eutrophication to
fresh water lakes and reservoirs.
OBJECTIVES
The Survey was designed to develop, in conjunction with state
environmental agencies, information on nutrient sources, concentrations,
and impact on selected fresh water lakes as a basis for formulating
comprehensive and coordinated national , regional and state management
practices relating to point-source discharge reduction and non-point
source pollution abatement in lake watersheds.
ANALYTIC APPROACH
The mathematical and statistical procedures selected for the
Survey’s eutrophication analysis are based on related concepts that:
a. A generalized representation or model relating
sources, concentrations and impacts can, in fact, be
constructed.
b. By applying measurements of relevant parameters
associated with lake degradation, the generalized model
can be transformed into an operational representation of
a lake, its drainage basin and related nutrients.
c. With such a transformation, an assessment of the
potential for eutrophication control can be made.
LAKE ANALYSIS
This report documents the first stage of evaluation of lake and
watershed data collected from the study lake and its drainage basin.
It is formatted to provide state environmental agencies with specific
information for basin planning [ g303(e)], water quality criteria!
standards review [ 3O3(c)], clean lakes [ 5314(a,b)], and water quality
monitoring [ lO6 and §305(b)] activities mandated by the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972.
-------
111
Beyond the single lake analysis, broader based correlations
between nutrient concentrations (and loading) and trophic
condition are being made to advance the rationale and data base
for refinement of nutrient water quality criteria for the Nation 1 s
fresh water lakes. Likewise, multivariate evaluations for the
relationships between land use, nutrient export and trophic
condition, by lake class or use, are being developed to assist
in the formulation of planning guidelines and policies by EPA
and to augment plans implementation by the states.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The staff of the National Eutrophication Survey (Office of
Research & Development, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency)
expresses sincere appreciation to the Vermont Agency of Environmental
Conservation for professional involvement and to the Vermont National
Guard for conduct of the tributary sampling phase of the Survey.
Martin L. Johnson, Secretary of the Vermont Agency of Environmental
Conservation; Gordon R. Ryper, Commissioner of the Water Quality
Division; David L. dough, Director, James W. Morse II, Biologist, and
Wally McLean, Sanitary Engineer of the Water Quality Division, provided
invaluable lake documentation and counsel during the study. Reginald
A. LaRosa, Director of the Water Supply and Pollution Control Division,
and James F. Agan, Chief of the Operations Section of the Environmental
Engineering Division, were most helpful in arranging for the sampling
of wastewater treatment plants involved in the Survey.
Major General Reginald M. Cram, the Adjutant General of Vermont,
and Project Officer Major Howard Buxton, who directed the volunteer
efforts of the Vermont National Guardsmen, are also gratefully
acknowledged for their assistance to the Survey.
-------
iv
LAKE NAME
Arrowhead Mountain Lake
Clyde Pond
Harriman Reservoir
Lake Champlain
Lake Lamoille
Lake Memphremagog
Waterbury Reservoir
COUNTY
Chi ttenden, Franklin
Orleans
Windham
Addison, Chi ttenden,
Franklin
Lamoille
Or] eans
Washington, Lamoille
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
STUDY LAKES
STATE OF VERMONT
-------
V
/
\
Li
1
Ji
/
4
/
CLYDE
POND
x
Tributary Sampling Site
Lake Sampling Site
Immediate
Drainage Area Limits
I
I — ,
0
imile
VERMONT
Scale
-------
CLYDE POND
STORET NO. 5002
I. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:
When studied, Clyde Pond was eutrophic, although the
relatively low algal assay control yield and phosphorus
and nitrogen concentrations were more indicative of a meso-
trophic condition. However, the very short hydraulic resi-
dence was suppressing the effects of very high nutrient
loading rates.
B. Rate—Limiting Nutrient:
The results of the algal assay show that Clyde Pond was
phosphorus limited; these results are supported by the pond
data.
C. Nutrient Controllability:
1. Point sources--During the sampling year, Clyde Pond
received a total phosphorus load at a rate over two times
greater than a eutrophic rate (see page 16). Of this load,
it is estimated that the villages of Derby Center and Island
Pond contributed about 19%. Even complete removal of phos-
phorus at these sources would only reduce the loading rate
to 6.8 g/m 2 /yr (still about twice a eutrophic rate). There-
fore, it is concluded that point-source phosphorus control
would not result in a significant improvement in the trophic
condition of Clyde Pond. However, these sources also impact
-------
2
Lake Memphremagog and are considered further in the report on
that lake.
2. Non-point sources--The mean annual phosphorus export
of the Clyde River was about the same as the exports of unim-
pacted Vermont streams in other drainages (see page 17). How-
ever, the drainage area/lake area ratio of 365/1 will insure
an excessive non-point phosphorus load to Clyde Pond from the
Clyde River alone.
-------
3
II. INTRODUCTION
Clyde Pond (see map, page v) is a small shallow body of water
of natural origin; however, the natural water level has been altered
by an outflow control dam which was put in operation in early 1957
for power production.
The Pond supports only limited recreation, and public access is
practically nil. Fishing is reported to be only fair, and other water-
based recreation is discouraged by the Citizens Utilities Company which
operates the power plant.
-------
4
III. LAKE AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS
A. Lake Morphometry:
1. Surface area: 140 acres.
2. Mean depth: 11 feet.
3. Maximum depth: 20 feet.
4. Volume: 1,540 acre/feet.
5. Mean hydraulic retention time: 3.6 days.
B. Tributary and Outlet:
(See Appendix A for flow data)
1 . Tributaries -
Name Drainage area* Mean flow*
Clyde River 134.8 mi 2 205.6 cfs
Minor tributaries & 2
immediate drainage - 5.0 mi 7.6 cfs
Totals 139.8 mi 2 213.2 cfs
2. Outlet -
Clyde River 140.0 mi 2 ** 213.2 cfs
C. Precipitation -I -:
1. Year of sampling: 47.4 inches.
2. Mean annual : 36.9 inches.
* Drainage areas are accurate within ±1%; gaged flows are accurate within
±15%, and ungaged flows are accurate within ±20%.
** Includes area of lake.
t See Working Paper No. 1, “Survey Methods”.
-------
5
IV. LAKE WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
Clyde Pond was sampled three times during the open—water season of
1972 by means of a pontoon-equipped Huey helicopter. Each time, samples
for physical and chemical parameters were collected from two or more
depths at a single station on the lake (see map, page v). During each
visit, a single depth-integrated (near bottom to surface) sample was
collected for phytoplankton identification and enumeration; and during
the last visit, a single five—gallon depth-integrated sample was collected
for algal assays. Also each time, a depth-integrated sample was collected
for chlorophyll a analysis. The maximum depth sampled was 15 feet.
The results obtained are presented in full in Appendix B; and the data
for the fall sampling period, when the lake was essentially well-mixed,
are summarized below. Note, however, the Secchi disc summary is based on
all values.
For differences in the various parameters at the other sampling times,
refer to Appendix B.
-------
6
A. Physical and chemical characteristics:
FALL VALUES
(10/05/72)
Parameter Minimum Mean Median Maximum
Temperature (Cent.) 13.1 13.2 13.2 13.3
Dissolved oxygen (mg/l) 8.0 8.5 8.5 9.0
Conductivity (pmhos) 160 160 160 160
pH (units) 6.6 6.7 6.8 6.8
Alkalinity (mg/i) 54 55 55 57
Total P (mg/i) 0.019 0.020 0.021 0.021
Dissolved P (mg/i) 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006
NO + NO (mg/l) 0.100 0.107 0.100 0.120
Ani onia mg/l) 0.040 0.047 0.040 0.060
ALL VALUES
Secchi disc (inches) 60 68 66 77
-------
7
B. Biological characteristics:
1. Phytoplankton -
Sampling Dominant Number
Date Genera per ml
06/03/72 1. Dinobryon 259
2. Merismopedia 241
3. Melosira 211
4. Synedra 145
5. Cyclotella 139
Other genera 512
Total 1,507
07/03/72 1. Chroococcus 1 ,2l3
2. Dinobryon 558
3. Schroederia 226
4. Micractinium 181
5. Gleocapsa 136
Other genera 421
Total 2,735
10/05/72 1. Dinobryon 1,190
2. Cyclotella 376
3. Fragilaria 346
4. Flagellates 331
5. Cryptomonas 286
Other genera 2,215
Total 4,744
-------
8
2. Chlorophyll a -
(Because of instrumentation problems during the 1972 sampling,
the following values may be in error by plus or minus 20 percent.)
Sampling Station Chlorophyll a
Date Number ( pg/l )
06/03/72 01 (not done)
07/03/72 01 10.2
10/05/72 01 4.8
C. Limiting Nutrient Study:
1. Autoclaved, filtered, and nutrient spiked -
Ortho P Inorganic N Maximum yield
Spike (mg/l) Conc. (mg/fl Conc. (mg/l) ( mg/l-dry wt. )
Control 0.007 0.163 0.2
0.006 p 0.013 0.163 1.8
0.012 P 0.019 0.163 3.3
0.024 P 0.031 0.163 3.9
0.060 P 0.067 0.163 4.3
0.060 p + 10.0 N 0.067 10.163 28.1
10.0 N 0.007 10.163 0.2
2. Discussion —
The control yield of the algal assay shows that the
productivity of Clyde Pond was quite low at the time the sample
was collected. Also, the increased yields with increased levels
of ortho-P (to about 19 pg/i) show that Clyde Pond was phosphorus
limited. Note that the addition of only nitrogen produced a
yield no greater than the control yield.
-------
9
The lake data indicate phosphorus limitation at the other
sampling times as well. The N/P ratio in June was 38/1 and
in July was 16/1, and phosphorus limitation would be expected.
D. Trophic Condition:
Data obtained during the Survey indicate that Clyde Pond
is eutrophic. However, the apparent trophic condition of the Pond
is greatly influenced by the very short hydraulic retention time of
3.6 days.
With such “flow—through” conditions, the accumulation of
nutrients is minimal ; and the concentrations of nutrients are
directly dependent on, and vary directly with, the concentrations
in the Clyde River inlet. This accounts for the fact that, even
though the Pond was receiving a total phosphorus loading in excess
of 74 lbs/acre/yr (8.3 g/m 2 /yr), the mean total phosphorus concen-
tration in the Pond was relatively low.
The relatively low mean nutrient concentrations and the low
algal assay yield are more indicative of a mesotrophic condition.
However, the consistent, though not extreme, depression of dis-
solved oxygen with depth, only fair Secchi disc transparency,
and a relatively high mean chlorophyll a concentration indicate a
eutrophic condition.
-------
10
Whatever the trophic condition of Clyde Pond appears to
be, the fact remains that only the flow-through hydraulic
regime of the Pond is preventing extreme eutrophication.
-------
11
V. NUTRIENT LOADINGS
(See Appendix C for data)
For the determination of nutrient loadings, the Vermont National
Guard collected monthly near-surface grab samples from each of the
tributary sites indicated on the map (page v), except for the high
runoff months of April and May when two samples were collected. Samp-
ling was begun in July, 1972, and was completed in July, 1973.
Through an interagency agreement, stream flow estimates for the
year of sampling and a “normalized” or average year were provided by
the New England District Office of the U. S. Geological Survey for the
Clyde River outlet (station 500222); these flows, adjusted for immedi-
ate drainage and minor tributary flows, were used to determine loadings
at station 500821 at Derby Center.
The latter tributary station was originally selected as a Lake
Memphremagog tributary site and is also shown on the site map for that
lake. The upstream Clyde River station originally selected for Clyde
Pond (500221) is located about 12 stream miles above Derby Center; but
because of the distance from Clyde Pond, the site could not logically
be used as an inlet station. Further, the intervening Pensioner Pond,
Lubber Lake, and Salem Pond may be nutrient traps; however, it is likely
the hydraulic retention time of these water bodies is very short, like
that of Clyde Pond, and minimal accumulation of nutrients occurs.
-------
12
In this report, nutrient loads for sampled tributaries were calcu-
lated using mean concentrations and mean flows; and nutrient loadings
for unsampled “minor tributaries and immediate drainage” (“ZZ” of U.S.G.S.)
were estimated by using the nutrient loads, in lbs/mi 2 /year, in nearby
Johns River at station 0851 and multiplying by the ZZ area in mi 2 .
The untreated sewage discharges of the villages of Derby Center and
Island Pond were not sampled during the Survey, and nutrient loads were
estimated*. In this report, all of the nutrient loads from Derby Center
are assumed to have reached Clyde Pond during the sampling year; however,
since the Village of Island Pond is some 20 stream miles above Clyde Pond
and discharges to Island Pond, the headwaters of the Clyde River, it is
assumed that 60% of the total phosphorus load and 10% of the total nitrogen
load from that source were sedimented and/or biologically assimilated in
the intervening waters during the sampling year. In the following tables,
the nutrient loads attributed to the Clyde River are those measured at
station 21 (upstream from the Derby Center discharge) minus the estimated
Island Pond loads.
* See Working Paper No. 1, “Survey Methods”.
-------
13
A. Waste Sources:
1. Known municipal
Pop .* Mean* Receiving
Name Served Treatment Flow (rngd) Water
Derby Center 430 None 0.043 Clyde River
Island Pond 300 None 0.030 Island Pond -
Clyde River
2. Known industrial - None
* Estimated; see Working Paper No. 1, “Survey Methods”.
-------
14
B. Annual Total Phosphorus Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
lbs P1 % of
Source yr total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
Clyde River 8,080 77.8
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 330 3.2
c. Known municipal -
Derby Center 1,510 14.5
Island Pond 420 4.0
d. Septic tanks* - 30 0.3
e. Known industrial - None -
f. Direct precipitation** - 20 0.2
Total 10,390 100.0
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - Clyde River 8,810
3. Net annual P accumulation - 1 ,530 pounds
* Estimated 50 dwellings in immediate drainage; see Working Paper No. 1.
** Estimated; see Working Paper No. 1, “Survey Methods”.
-------
15
C. Annual Total Nitrogen Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
lbs NI % of
Source yr total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
Clyde River 329,350 93.1
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non—point load) - 15,480 4.4
c. Known municipal -
Derby Center 4,040 1.1
Island Pond 2,540 0.7
d. Septic tanks* - 1,180 0.3
e. Known industrial - None - -
f. Direct precipitation** - 1 ,350 0.4
Total 353,940 100.0
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - Clyde River 384,880
3. Net annual N loss - 30,940 pounds
* Estimated 50 dwellings in immediate drainage; see Working Paper No. 1.
** Estimated; see Working Paper No. 1, “Survey Methods”.
-------
16
D. Mean Annual Non-point Nutrient Export by Subdrainage Area:
Tributary lbs P/mi 2 /yr lbs N/mi 2 /yr N/P Ratio
Clyde River 60 2,443 41/1
E. Yearly Loading Rates:
In the following table, the existing phosphorus loading
rates are compared to those proposed by Vollenweider (1973).
Essentially, his “dangerous” rate is the rate at which the
receiving waters would become eutrophic or remain eutrophic;
his “permissible” rate is that which would result in the
receiving water remaining oligotrophic or becoming oligo-
trophic if morphometry permitted. A mesotrophic rate would
be considered one between “dangerous” and “permissible”.
Total Phosphorus Total Nitrogen
Units Total Accumulated Total Accumulated
lbs/acr /yr 74.2 10.9 2,528.1 loss*
grams/rn /yr 8.32 1.22 283.4 -
Volle weider loading rates for phosphorus
(g/m /yr) based on mean depth and mean
hydraulic retention time of Clyde Pond:
“Dangerous” (eutrophic rate) 3.40
“Permissible” (oligotrophic rate) 1.70
* There was an apparent loss of nitrogen during the sampling year. This may
have been due to nitrogen fixation in the lake, solubilization of previously
sedimented nitrogen, recharge with nitrogen-rich ground water, unknown and
unsampled point sources discharging directly to the lake, or underestimation
of the nitrogen loads from the villages of Derby Center and Island Pond.
Whatever the cause, a similar nitrogen loss has occurred at Shagawa Lake,
Minnesota, which has been intensively studied by EPA’s National Eutrophica-
tion Research and Lake Restoration Branch.
-------
17
F. Controllability of Nutrients:
1 . Point sources--During the sampling year, Clyde Pond received
a total phosphorus load at a rate nearly 2½ times greater than a
eutrophic rate. Of this load, it is calculated that the villages
of Derby Center and Island Pond contributed about 19%. Even com-
plete removal of phosphorus at these sources would only reduce the
loading rate to about 60 lbs/acre/yr or 6.8 g/m 2 /yr (a rate still
about twice the eutrophic rate). It is concluded, therefore, that
point-source control of phosphorus would not result in a significant
improvement in the trophic condition of Clyde Pond. However, the
Clyde River is also tributary to Lake Memphremagog; and, because of
the minimal phosphorus retention in Clyde Pond (about 15%), the
controllability of these point-source phosphorus loads is discussed
further in the Lake Memphremagog report (Working Paper No. 19).
At the time of preparation of this report, plans for secondary
treatment at the Village of Island Pond (Brighton Town) have been
approved, and a preliminary engineering report on secondary treat-
ment at the Village of Derby Center has been approved (Morse, 1974).
2. Non-point sources--The mean annual phosphorus export of the
Clyde River drainage (see page 16) was about the same as the exports
of unimpacted Vermont streams studied outside of the Clyde River
drainage system (mean = 52 lbs/mi 2 /yr; range = 30-65 lbs/m1 2 /yr),
-------
18
and the N/P ratio of 41/1 indicates that unknown point sources,
if any, are minimal . However, the drainage area/lake area ratio
of 365/1 will insure an excessive phosphorus load to the pond from
the Clyde River alone of about 58 lbs/acre/yr (6.5 g/m 2 /yr) until
inputs from non-point sources can be reduced.
-------
19
VI. LITERATURE REVIEWED
Clough, David, 1973. Personal coniiiunication (Derby Center discharge
point; literature coefficients; uses of Clyde Pond). Dept. Water
Resources, Montpelier.
Gormsen, Paul, 1973. Personal communication (estimated contributing
population of Derby Center; industries in drainage; literature
coefficients).
Morse, James W., 1974. Personal communication (status of Vermont
water pollution control facilities, Jan., 1974). Dept. Water
Resources, Montpelier.
Morse, James W., II, and P. Howard Flanders, 1971. Primary productivity
study of three Vermont lakes. Water Qual. Surv. Ser. Rept. No. 2,
Agency of Env. Cons., Montpelier.
Vollenweider, Richard A., 1973. Input-output models. MS, Canada Centre
for Inland Waters, Burlington, Ontario.
-------
20
VII. APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
TRIBUTARY FLOW DATA
-------
TRISUTAPY FLOW INFOSMATION FOP VERMONT
7/9/74
LAcE CODE 500?
CL TOE POND
TOTAL D AINAGE AREA OF LAKE 140.00
SUH—DRAINA(E
TPINUTA9Y A°EA
NORMALIZED FLOWS
JAN FEll MAR APR MAT JUN JUL AUG
SEP OCT NOV DEC I4EAN
29.00 24.60 ‘3.70 48.40 172.00 62.40 32.80
111.0’) 94.10 90.60 185.00 659.00 239.00 125.00
140.00 119.00 114.00 234.00 832.00 301.00 158.00
TOTAL 1)RA INAGE AREA OF LAKE r
SUM OF SUB-DRAINAGE AREAS
MEAN MONTHLY FLOWS AND DAILY FLOWS
18.70 19.40 19.70 30.20 41.80 37.10 44.16
71.70 74.10 75.50 115.00 160.00 142.00 168.96
90.40 93.50 95.20 145.00 202.00 179.00 213.22
SUMMARY
TP I9UIA”Y ‘MONTH
(EAR 4EAN FLOW DAT
FLOW DAT FLOW DAY
FLOW
7 7? 39.60
8 72 27.00
9 72 11.40
10 72 20.90
11 7? 45.10
1? 72 42.30
I 73 49.20
2 73 61.50
1 73 102.00
4 71 127.00
S 73 98.60
6 73 73.50
7 73 95.00
7 72 152.00
8 72 103.00
Q 72 43.80
IT 7 (9.60
II 7? 173.00
1? 72 162.00
I 71 IRP.00
2 73 159.00
3 73 388.00
4 73 487.00
c 73 3711.00
6 73 280.00
7 71 364.00
IS 91.00
12 98.20
10 38.20
15 59.20
9 451.00
7 472.00
24 664.00
21 110.00
21 626.00
23 454.00
6 393.00
1 472.00
500227
500?? I
500???
140.00
TOTAL
FLOW
IN
2561.80
140.00
TOTAL
FLOW
OUT
=
2563.10
500?ZZ
S00?2I
23 809.00
-------
COlE 00’
CLY’ POJU
TPL (JTA Y FLOW 1NFO- MAT1ON FOP V MONT
7,9,74
‘1EA’ i M N1HLY FLU v’-, AND )AILY FLO lS
TRP- ’J rA- Y
0 ) ?72
1 O iT-f YEA ME AJ FLOW I)AY
fLOW DAY
7
7
1 ?.) 0
IS
115.00
7 ?
130.1)0
12
124.00
9
7?
55.20
19
48.20
10
/2
luO.O0
15
7’+.60
[ 1
7?
? 1R.00
568.00
I’
7
‘04.00
7
5Q5. 00
I
73
238.00
‘4
37.00
‘
73
200.00
?1
139.00
3
73
491.00
21
790.00
.
71
615.00
17
665.00
5
73
476.00
496.00
5
71
354.00
7
7i
45Q.0O
7
595.00
FLOW
FLOW DAY
573.00
1021.00
23
23
-------
APPENDIX B
PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA
K - Value is less than indicated
3 - Value known to be in error
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 74/07/02
DATE
FROM
TO
TIME DEPTH
DAY FEET
32217
CHLRPHYL
a
UG/L
10.2J
4.8J
500201
44 56 00.0 072 10 05.0
CLYDE POND
50 VERMONT
I IEPALES
3
2111202
0012 FEET DEPTH
00010
00300
00077
00094
00400
00410
00630
00610
00665
00666
DATE
TIME
DEPTH
WATER
DO
TRANSP
CNDUCTVY
PH
T
Alic
N021.N03
N’13—N
PHOS-.TOT
pwOS—ois
FROM
OF
TEMP
SECCHI
FIELO
CACO3
N—TOTAL
TOTAL
TO
DAY
FEET
CENT
G/L
INCHES
MLCROMHO
SIJ
MG/L
t4(,/L
MG/L
MG/L P
MG/ I. P
7?/06/03
17 05 0000
18.5
8.7
6
100
7.50
36
0.170
0.050
0.016
0.006
17 05 0015
17.8
8.3
100
7.40
36
0.180
0.050
0.012
0.006
72/07/31
16 15 0000
77
145
8.40
54
0.060
0.050
0.021
0.009
16 15 0004
23.3
10.0
145
8.40
54
0.100
0.070
0.022
0.009
16 is 0009
22.4
9.0
135
7.60
54
0.070
0.140
0.04
0.011
72/ 10/OS
10 30 0000
60
160
6.80
55
0.100
0.040
0.019
0.006
10 30 0004
13.3
9.0
160
6.80
54
0.100
0.040
0.021
0.006
10 30 0009
13.1
8.0
160
6.65
57
0.120
0.060
0.021
0.006
72/07/31 16 15 0000
72/10/OS 10 30 0000
-------
APPENDIX C
TRIBUTARY and WASTEWATER
TREATMENT PLANT DATA
K — Value is less than indicated
J - Value known to be in error
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 74/07/02
500222
44 56 00.0 072 10 30.0
CLYDE RIVER
50 15/MEMPHREMAGOG
0/CLYDE POND
NEWPORT CITIZENS UTILITY PLANT
I1EPALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
00630 00625 00610 00671 00665
DATE TIME DEPTH N02 .NO3 TOT KJEL NH3-N PHOS—DIS PHOS—TOT
FROM OF N—TOTAL N TOTAL ORTr4O
TO DAY FEET MG/L MG/L MG/L MG/L P MG/L P
7?/07/1S 11 12 0.096 1.025 0.056 0.010 0.030
7/08/ 12 11 30 0.078 1.300 0.036 0.008 0.027
7?/Q9/19 10 15 0.104 1.050 0.068 0.008 0.025
72/10/15 12 18 0.290 0.450 0.140 0.005K 0.030
7?/1I/09 1? 20 0.200 0.380 0.056 0.008 0.024
7?/l2/07 09 50 0.240 0.320 0.024 0.009 0.014
73/02/21 09 00 0.390 0.940 0.470 0.006 0.015
71/03/21 10 45 0.370 0.380 0.031 0.005K 0.020
73/04/17 10 15 0.280 0.440 0.168 0.005K 0.015
71/04/23 14 10 0.240 0.480 0.027 0.005K 0.015
73/05/06 09 15 0.190 0.300 0.016 0.005K 0.023
73/05/23 11 05 0.189 0.420 0.023 0.006 0.025
73/07/07 11 00 0.105 2.100 0.990 0.005K 0.025
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 74/07/02
500821
44 50 30.0 072 10 30.0
CLYDE RIVER
50019 15/CLYDE POND
I/LAKE MEMPHREMAGOG
DERBY CENTER BRDG
1 1EPALES
4
2111204
0000 FEET DEPTH
00630
00625
00610
00671
00665
DATE
TIME
DEPTH
N02&N03
TOT KJEL
N’13—N
PHOS—DIS
PHOS—TOT
FROM
OF
N—TOTAL
N
TOTAL
ORTHO
TO
DAY
FEET
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L P
MG/L P
72/07/15
11
36
0.148
0.650
0.028
0.009
0.018
72/08/12
ii
10
0.112
0.830
0.044
0.009
0.016
72/09/19
10
30
0.180
0.250
0.044
0.008
0.011
72/10/15
12
32
0.190
0.400
0.080
0.019
0.039
7?/1I/09
12
30
0.195
0.630
0.094
0.066
0.100
7?/l2/07
10
05
0.2S
0.300
0.029
0.012
0.014
73/01/24
14
10
0.350
0.390
0.052
0.005K
0.015
73/02/21
10
05
0.370
1.000
0.440
0.005K
0.010
73/03/21
14
45
0.360
0.200
0.020
0.005K
0.015
73/04/17
10
35
0.270
0.260
0.030
0.005K
0.010
73/04/23
14
35
0.250
1.050
0.046
0.005K
0.010
71/05/06
10
50
0.170
0.280
0.011
0.005K
0.010
73/05/23
73/07/07
08
09
55
00
0.168
0.089
0.370
1.760
0.039
1.300
0.005K
0.005K
0.010
0.020
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 74/07/02
500221 LS500221
44 50 30.0 072 01 30.0
CLYDE RIVER
50 15/MEP4PHREMA&OG
I/CLVDE POND
BRDG CHARLESTON CENTER SCHOOL
11EPALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
00630 00625 00610 00671 00665
DATE TIME DEPTH NO?&N03 TOT KJEL NH3—N PHOS—DIS PHOS—TOT
FROM OF N-TOTAL N TOTAL ORTHO
TO DAY FEET MG/L MG/L MG/L MG/L P MG/L P
72/07/15 12 07 0.152 0.850 0.038 0.005K 0.021
7?/08/1? 11 00 0.098 0.460 0.028 0.008 0.017
72/09/19 10 50 0.139 0.450 0.046 0.008 0.011
72/10/15 12 50 0.195 0.400 0.072 0.005K 0.010
7?/11/09 12 50 0.234 1.800 0.100 0.078 0.115
7?/1?/07 10 ?0 0.320 0.350 0.023 0.011 0.014
73/01/24 14 30 0.370 0.690 0.250 0.005K 0.015
73/02/21 10 20 0.260 0.200 0.054 0.005K 0.010
73/03/21 14 30 0.260 0.400 0.105 0.005K 0.010
73/04/17 10 50 0.210 0.230 0.017 0.005K 0.010
73/04/23 14 50 0.180 0.600 0.017 0.005K 0.010
73/05/06 09 30 0.160 0.290 0.029 0.005K 0.015
73/05/23 09 10 0.110 0.380 0.015 0.005K 0.015
73/07/07 09 10 0.056 0.480 0.147 0.005K 0.015
------- |