[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]







                                                                                 95.4.5


                                  NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION MODEUNG
                                             OF THE OYSTER RIV     .ER/


             Final report submitted to the

                                          New Hampshire Coastal Program
                                               Office of State Planning
                                                  21/2 Beacon Street
                                          Concord, New Hampshire 03301



     Vr-      By

                                     M. Robinson Swift, Jon Scott, Jerome Dubois,
                                      Ata Bilgili, Stephen Jones, Richard Langan
                                               and Barbaros Celikkol
      rx


                                               Mechanical Engineering
                                                 Ocean Engineering
                                            Jackson 'Estuarine Laboratory
                                            University of New Hampshire
                                           Durham, New Hampshire 03824







                               This report was funded in part by a grant from the Office
                               of State Planning, New Hampshire Coastal Program, as
                               authorized by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
                               Administration (NOAA), Grant Award Number
                               NA57020320.
               01-CoasIfal Program
            TD
             ')A
             N4                                   September, 1996
             092
             '1996












                                        TABLE OF CONTENTS





            ABSTRACT   ............  ...................................

            INTRODUCTION   ...........
                          ...... ;.... .. ... ....... .
                PURPOSE
                OYSTER RIVER PROBLEM     ...............                          3
                OBJECTIVES    .........................................           6
                APPROACH   ...............     ...........................        7


            WASP   ...................................................          10
                STRUCTURE    ..........................................         10
                THEORY    .............................................         11
                INPUT/OUTPUT    .......................................         13
                     Data Requirements     ..............................       13
                     Calculated Results     .............................       14


            HYDRODYNAMICS    ..........................................         15


            SALINITY DISTRIBUTION AND MIXING      .......................       20


            BACTERIA   ................................................         26
                APPLICATIONS    .......................................         26
                STEADY STATE    .......................................         27
                     Loadineis and Boundary Conditions      ...............     27
                     Sensitivity Analysis     ...........................       28
                     ComRarison to Field Data     .......................       31
                POTW ACCIDENTAL RELEASE     .........  o ..................     33
                RAINFALL EVENT     .....................................        35


            DISSOLVED OXYGEN AND NUTRIENTS                                      38
                DISSOLVED OXYGEN     ...................................        i8
                NUTRIENTS   ............................     o .............    40
                     Modeling Considerations      ........................      40
                     Nitrogen   ...............  o.......................       40
                     Phosphorus   ........ o..... o........  o....... o .....   41


            DISCUSSION   ...........................    o.o ......... o .....   45


            REFERENCES o.o..    .................  o.o  ...................     48


            APPENDIX   ...............................................          52












                                       ABSTRACT

              The Water Analysis Simulation program (WASP) was applied to

          the tidal Oyster River, New Hampshire. WASP is a personal

          computer-based, compartmentalized water quality model with

          branched one-dimensional links between nodes. The tidal Oyster

          River is 2.8 miles long, has a mean tidal height of 6 feet and a

          peak tidal current of 1 knot. Programs within the WASP package

          were applied to the system  calibrated and verified using

          previously obtained field data.

              The tidal hydrodynamics were analysed first to predict

          currents and sea levels which served as input to the water

          quality programs. Salinity distribution was modeled next to

          calibrate mixing parameters. Bacteria simulations included

          predictions for steady state tidal conditions with average

          freshwater tributary discharge, a point source release from a

          waste water treatment plant, and a once-a-year rainfall event.

          Dissolved oxygen was modeled to predict the impact of the

          treatment plant (very small) and the rainfall event (very large

          in the upper river). The "flushing time" of the river was found

          to be 3 days. The distribution of total dissolved nitrogen and

          that of phosphate, due to the tributary and treatment plant

          loadings, were computed for average conditions.

              In general, the trends and processes were reproduced well by

          WASP. The field data, however, exhibited some.scatter, and the

          differences between point measurements and volume-averaged

          predictions became apparent.

                                         iii












                                     INTRODUCTION


          PURPOSE



              With the construction and upgrading of wastewater treatment

          facilities in communities along tributaries of NHI S Great

          Bay/Pisctaqua River estuarine system, nonpoint source (NPS)
          pollution has become the significant contamination problem. This

          has occurred in the oyster River which is representative of the

          six tidal rivers that enter either Great Bay, Little Bay or

          directly into the Piscataqua River (see Fig. 1). These tidal

          rivers are typically dammed within an inland town or city and

          have a treatment plant just downriver from the dam. The rivers

          are augmented by several smaller creeks and flow through

          residential and agricultural land before entering the main

          system. Like the others, the Oyster River is heavily used for

          recreational boating, fishing and swimming in spite of having

          continued pollution problems. A recent field study indicates that

          NPS pollution arising from private on-site wastewater systems as

          well as storm water runoff are the prime causes of-this

          contamination.

              In this study we address this problem by implementing,

          calibrating and verifying a water quality computer model for the

          tidal part of the Oyster River. The model is the EPA's Water

          Analysis Simulation Program (WASP), a personal computer based

          simulation for toxic substances, nutrients, dissolved oxygen and

          bacteria. This one-dimensional, compartmentalized (box) model

          accounts for transport and mixing by currents, and includes















                                                     MAINE


                                                                         43@7


                                                  0
                                                                 5
              Oyster River                               km

      Durham.

                                         Piscataqua
                                              River



                             --Li  le
                                Say




                 Great  Bay             Portsmouth
                                           Naval
                                          ShiWq':k. 3t-.d        Portsmouth
                                                                    Harbor




                                                                  Atlantic
                              NEW HAARISIM
                                                                   Ocean
                                7CP50'                                  Af40'






                       Fig. 1 The Great Bay estuarine system.


                                          2









          chemical and biological processes.

              The completed model can be employed to answer questions

          regarding the effects of changes in land use,regulations as well

          as contributing to the scientific understanding of pollution

          processes. This information can be employed by state and local

          authorities for planning purposes. In particular, the NH Office

          of State Planning (OSP), the NH Department of Environmental

          Services (NHDES), town boards and ad hoc citizen's groups can

          make use of this approach.

              The presence of NPS pollution in the Oyster River, as well as

          other parts of the Great Bay/Piscataqua River system, has been

          described by the NH DES (1989), Flanders (1989), the KH Fish and

          Game (1991) and by Jones et al. (1992). The setting of priorities

          and the need to develop management plans to mitigate this problem

          have been discussed by the NH DES (1989, 1992). The application

          of WASP to the Oyster River provides an important tool for

          addressing these issues.






          OYSTER RIVER PROBLEM




              The issue addressed in this study is NPS pollution in the

          tidal portion of the Oyster River, Durham, NH (see Fig. 1). The

          Oyster River is representative of six tidal rivers that drain

          into the Great Bay estuarine system and is typical of many of the

          smaller New England estuaries. The existence of NPS pollution


                                          3









         problems in the Great Bay drainage area in general and the tidal

         oyster River in particular have been well documented by the NH

         Department of Environmental Services (NHDES) (1989), Flanders

         (1989) the NH Fish and Game Department (NHF&G) (1991) and by

         Jones et al. (1992).

             The tidal oyster River starts at the Mill Pond dam (see Fig.

         2) where the discharge over the dam is normally 10 cfs but can

         increase by over an order of magnitude during storm or spring

         runoff events. The watershed drained by the freshwater Oyster

         River is nearly 20 square miles. Downriver from the dam is a

         publically owned treatment works (POTW) which serves the town of

         Durham. Several creeks enter the river draining a combined

         watershed area of about 11 square miles including urban,

         residential and agricultural areas. The mouth of the Oyster River

         (entering Little Bay) is 2.8 miles from the dam and is subject to

         a mean tidal height of 6 ft and a peak tidal current of 1 knot.

             The Oyster River has recently been the subject of a two-year

         field program that was carried out by S.H. Jones and R. Langan of

         the Jackson Estuarine Laboratory, UNH. Problems identified

         include fecal-borne bacterial contamination, high levels of

         ammonia and insufficient dissolved oxygen. Contamination has been

         attributed to on-site wastewater systems, agriculture and urban

         runoff. During the first year, the main river channel was sampled

         with limited additional data taken in tributaries as discussed by

         Jones and Langan (1993). Water samples were taken throughout the

         year and were analyzed for fecal coliforms, enterococci, ammonia,


                                         4






















































                                                                                  T%LAr
                                                                                   PLujwr




                                                                                   R H       A M           72
                                                                                                                                   MUM
















                                            Fig. 2 The Oyster River, New Happshire


                                                                              5









         nitrate, phosphate, pH, salinity, temperature, chlorophyll a,

         dissolved oxygen and suspended solids. The next year, the focus

         was on tributary input from Beard's Creek and Johnson Creek (see

         Fig. 2) and the POTW plume (Jones and Langan, 1994).

             In this study, we built on the observation effort by applying

         a water quality model to the system. The model, WASP, is

         described by Ambrose et al. (1993a, b) as a computer simulation

         which can be used for predicting concentrations and transport of

         toxic substances, nutrients, dissolved oxygen and bacteria. This

         is a branched, one-dimensional, compartmentalized (box) model

         which accounts for transport by currents, mixing by dispersion

         and turbulence, resuspension and settling of sediments, as well

         as chemical and biological processes. In previous work, we have

         applied WASP5 to the main Great Bay/Piscataqua River system to

         predict lead transport and have found the model to be suitable

         for pollution investigations such as this study.




         OBJECTIVES




             The objectives of the this study were to:



             1. Implement WASP for the Oyster River by specifying

                channels and compartments according to the system's

                geography, bathymetry,,freshwater input and tides. The

                model was set up to predict salinity, bacteria,

                nutrients and dissolved oxygen.


                                         6









              2. Calibrate the model using data from the two-year field

                 program. Model coefficients and parameters were

                 optimized for consistency between model predictions and

                 measured concentrations.



              3. Conduct application studies to evaluate the impact of

                 typical loadings to the system. Several scenarios of

                 interest originated from specific requests of a state

                 agency and a citizens, group. In addition, the model was

                 used to determine river sensitivity to changes in

                 individual source loadings and to determine their relative

                 importance.




          APPROACH




              The tidal oyster River system was modeled using WASP which

          allows the time varying processes of advection, dispersion, point

          and diffuse loadings and boundary exchanges to be modeled. The

          model operates on tidal time scales to allow examination of the

          dynamics of the system.

              WASP was implemented by modeling the Oyster River system as a

          sequence of compartments with interconnecting "channels". The

          modeling was based on existing maps and depth data. Fluid flow

          boundary conditions and freshwater input, were specified from

          previous UNH work. Dispersion (mixing) coefficients, process

          parameters and coefficients were estimated initially. Final


                                          7










         values were determined during the calibration phase.

             During model calibration, coefficients and parameters were

         adjusted to give the best fit between model predictions and the

         available field observations. The first step was to calibrate the

         hydrodynamic component of the program. Friction parameters,

         channel cross-section areas and effective depths were adjusted so

         that tidal elevations, currents and volume rates of flow agreed

         with field observations reported by Shanley (1972), Garrison

         (1979), Schmidt (1981) and Swift et al. (1991).

             Next, dispersion coefficients were determined by calibrating

         to the observed salinity distribution reported by Shanley (1972),

         Garrison (1979) and Schmidt (1981). Salinity is conservative, so

         it is a good test of a model's ability to predict transport

         processes without the added complication of sources and sinks.

             Bacteria and chemical process parameters.were then

         established using the appropriate measurement data from the Jones

         and Langan field program. NPS loadings, including input from

         private on-site wastewater treatment systems, agriculture and

         urban runoff, were incorporated as loadings from creeks entering

         the tidal river. Point source load from the Durham POTWis taken


         into account since it can be the dominant factor for some

         parameters. (This study did not, however, include developing

         watershed models.)

             Sensitivity studies were conducted by varying the strength of

         individual sources and source types and predicting the impact on

         river contamination levels. Applications include steady state


                                          8




   I
   I      scenarios Iduring average conditions, accidental sewage releases .
   I      and rainfall events.
   I
   I
   I
   I
   I
   I
   I
   I
   I
   I
   I
   I
   I
   I              .I
   1                                      9
   1













                                        WASP


          STRUCTURE

             A concise description of the personal computer-based programs

          available through WASP is provided in this chapter (especially

          those features important in modeling the Oyster River). The

          complete documentation is available in reports by Ambrose et al.

          (1986, 1993a,b). The current version of the software is WASP5

          which has been used in this study.

             WASP consists of a package of three water quality related

          programs - DYNHYD, TOXI and EUTRO. DYNHYD is a hydrodynamic model

          for calculating current and water surface elevation. TOXI is set

          up to model toxic substances but can be used for bacteria, any

          conservative substance or substances having decay

          characteristics. EUTRO is used for eutrophication processes

          involving dissolved oxygen, biological oxygen demand and

          nutrients. EUTRO offers a full range of model sophistication

          depending on the level of complexity desired.

             DYNHYD is run separately and prior to the other two in order

          to calculate current and water levels. The pre-calculated current

          and water level file then serves as input to TOXI and EUTRO.

             In WASP the geometry of the system is represented by an array

          of compartments (nodes or boxes) connected by conduits (links or

          channels). Storage and chemical/biological processes take place

          within the nodes, and properties are assumed uniform within the

          node volume. Transport takes place between nodes through the

          links. Flow and dispersion through the links is one-dimensional.


                                         10








          The link-node array may, however, be one-dimensional or branched'

          in two or three dimensions.

              The link-node array used in this study is shown in Fig 3. The

          node locations were chosento correspond to Jones and Langan main

          channel sampling locations, the POTW and the two major tributary
          inlets of Bunker Creek and Johnson Creek.' Additional nodes were

          also introduced to maintai n an approximately uniform distance

          between nodes.




          THEORY

              For DYNHYD, the basic governing equations are conservation of

          mass (continuity) and the equation of motion (Newton's Second

          Law). Conservation of mass is applied to the water within the

          node volumes. The one-dimensional equation of motion is applied

          to the link flow between nodes. Terms account for local

          acceleration, advective acceleration, slope-induced pressure

          gradient and friction. Friction is parameterized using a user-

          specified manning number. The ordinary differential equations

          governing the dynamics are solved using a Runge-Kutta approach.

             For TOXI and EUTRO, the basic equation is the conservation of

          mass law applied at each node to each substance considered.

          Transport processes of advection and dispersion between nodes are

          incorporated. Dispersion coefficients are user-specified and

          serve as an important calibration parameter. Within each node

          volume, production, decay and speciation terms and auxiliary

          equations may be included depending on the substance(s)









                                                  Durham                             Johnson Creek    Bunker Creek
                                                              Beards Creek        POTW               6 .
                                                       Dom   13                                          5
                                                           0                                    0
                                           Mill Pond                                          Deer Meadow Creek     3
                                                                                                                       2
                                                                                                                                    10














                                                                                                  low               2"0
                                                                                                                                     LITTLE











                                           Fig. 3 Node locations for TOXI and EUTRO. DYNHYD uses the
                                                        nodes but are numbered 1 - 15 starting at the mouth









          considered. To solve these equations, WASP uses an explicit one-

          step Euler solution. The potential for instability or numerical

          dispersion is controlled by manipulating the time step.



          INPUT/OUTPUT

          Data Requirements

              In all cases, information on the simulation geometry must be

          input. This includes node planform areas and depth along with

          link orientation, length, cross-section area and depth. The

          connectivity between nodes and links in the grid must be

          specified.

              In general, dependent (state) variable initial conditions and

          boundary conditions are also necessary. Pollution and other

          loadings to the system are critical input data as well. Bio-

          chemical parameter values and equation coefficients need to be

          entered to quantitatively specify the processes to be simulated.

          Simulation control information, such as start and stop time, time

          step and print interval, is also part of the input file.

              For DYNHYD, water level at open boundaries must be input.

          This allows, for example, the system to be driven by user-

          specified tides which are critical to the Oyster River model.

          Freshwater discharge from,tributary (or other sources) is

          similarly an important data requirement. Specifying the Manning

          number on a channel by channel basis is necessary and is normally

          employed to tune the the hydrodynamic model calibration.

              For TOXI and EUTRO, pollution initial condition and boundary


                                         13









          condition concentrations are required as well as pollution

          loading from tributaries, point or distributed sources.

          Dispersion coefficients and mixing lengths are specified for each

          channel and serve as a principal means for model calibration

          (particularly for conservative substances). When utilized,. decay

          rates, partition coefficients and reaction rates may be entered.

          In the case of an EUTRO application, regeneration coefficents,

          saturation values and interaction coefficients between dissolved

          oxygen, biological oxygen demand and nutrients can be quantified

          in the input file. Specific data requirements depend on the level

          of complexity desired.



          Calculated Results

              Calculated values of each dependent variable for each node

          (or "segment") at each print interval are stored in an output

          file. A limited amount of post-processing is available with the

          WASP package. Segment concentration as a function of time can,

          for example, be quickly plotted. For higher quality or custom

          plots, however, it is better to use the output file in connection

          with a standard spreadsheet or graphics software.














                                          14












                                     HYDRODYNAMICS

              DYNHYD was implemented for the tidal Oyster River and

          calibrated by comparison with field data. Since.this model

          supplies the necessary current and sea level input to TOXI and

          EUTRO, it was applied first. Decisions regarding model geometry

          were, therefore, made at this time. Comparisons with data include

          low, average and high freshwater tributary discharge conditions.

              The link/node grid selected is shown on Fig. 3. The density

          of segments is greater than measurement sites for any of the

          field studies any of the models were compared with. Yet node

          spacing is not so close that segments are distorted in planform,

          nor are there problems with computation time and storage. It

          should be noted that DYNHYD uses a different node numbering

          scheme from TOXI and EUTRO as described in the Fig. 3 caption.

              The Oyster River dynamics is driven principally by the tides,

          and the mouth boundary condition was taken to have a tide height

          of'0.91 m (interpolated from Swift and Brown, 1983) and a semi-

          diurnal tidal period of 12.41 hours. The simulations were started

          at high tide with an initial condition elevation of 0.455 m and

          an initial condition current speed of zero.

              Freshwater tributary.discharge was input at Bunker Creek,

          Johnson Creek, Beards Creek and the upper Oyster River (at the

          dam). Input from other sources (such as the POTW and Deer Meadow

          Creek) had a negligible effect on current though pollution

          loadings could be significant. There was some inconsistency in

          the published literature regarding discharge rates. This was


                                          15









         because discharge varies from year to year as well as on a daily

         and seasonal.basis. The calculations described here were based on

         the 31 year average provided by Shanley (1972) for the upper

         Oyster River. The tributary imput was then prorated on the basis

         of relative watershed areas and flow ratios obtained from Jones

         and Langan (1994).

             The standard calibration parameter for DYNHYD is the Manning

         number which controls bottom friction. In the Oyster River

         application, however, the tidal response was relatively

         insensitive to Manning number changes. The principal set of

         parameters affecting response were channel widths. Effective

         widths had to reflect the breadth of the deep part of the river

         channel between the shallow mudflats on each side. The best and

         proper width was such that the product of width and depth

         equalled the actual cross-section area. Input files for the three

         conditions discussed here are provided in the Appendix.

             DYNHYD predictions were compared with current data from

         Shanley (1972), Swift (1990) and Swift et al. (1991) as shown on

         Figs. 4 - 6. Agreement is good considering that the comparisons

         are between point measurements in a non-uniform flow field and

         channel-averaged model predictions. It should also be noted that

         there is a certain amount of tidal asymmetry, and current depends

         mostly on the tides and is not sensitive to discharge. For

         extreme rainfall or snowmelt events, however, discharge can

         change by more than an order of magnitude, and mean, outflowing

         current can become more pronounced.


                                         16




                                         low                                                                                              'M








                  60






                  50


                                                                                                             0



                  40




                             0

                           %           ......
                  30



                               e DYNHYD Flood
                  20              DYNHYD Ebb
                               o Measured Flood
                               A Measured Ebb

                  10





                    0
                    0-1      1-2    2-3     3-4     4-5     5-6     5-7     7-8     8-9    8-10    10-11   11-12   12-13   13-0

                                                                    Channel
                               Fig. 4 computed and measured current during                 low discharge
                                         conditions. Channels are indentified              by node end points
                             .0



















                                          shown on Fig. 3.

















                60





                50





                40                                        ......





                30

        00


                20           DYNHYD Flood
                             DYNHYD Ebb
                          o Measured Flood
                          & Measured Ebb                                                         OL
                10





                 0
                 0-1    1-2   2-3    3-4   4-5    5-6    5-7   7-8    8-9   8-10  10-11  11-12 12-13   13-0

                                                         Channel

                            Fig. 5 Computed and measured current during average discharge
                                    conditions. Channels are identified by node end points
                                    shown on Fig. 3.

















                60





                50





                40





                30                                        0




                20            DYNHYD Flood
                              DYNHYD Ebb
                           o  Measured Flood
                .10           Measured Ebb



                 0
                 0-1    1-2   2-3    3-4    4-5   5-6    5-7    7-8   8-9   8-10   10-11 11-12  12-13  13-0


                                                         Channel

                         Fig. 6 Computed and measured current during high discharge
                                  conditions. Channels are identified by node end points
                                  shown on Fig. 3.










                          SALINITY'DISTRIBUTION AND MIXING

              The hydrodynamic output files from the DYNHYD simulations

          were next used with TOXI to model the salinity distribution.

          Though salinity is important as a fundamental physical/chemical

          variable, its significance in this study was as a conservative

          tracer. Salinity was modeled so that dispersion parameters could

          be calibrated and the transport processes of advection and mixing

          could be validated. The modeling was done with TOXI having one

          nonzero dissolved variable, no chemical reactions and no decay.

          The calibration parameters available were the dispersion

          coefficient and mixing lengths. The Oyster River studies reported

          by Shanley (1972) served as the source of salinity data for

          comparison.

             All simulations used the same Fig. 3 grid as the DYNHYD

          applications (but with the nodes renumbered). Salinity boundary

          conditions at the mouth and head varied sinusoidally in time

          between high and low tide values or were constant. The

          simulations started at high tide with a slight time offset

          because DYNHYD must run through a full day before TOXI begins its

          computations. Boundary conditions for low, average and high

          freshwater discharge rates are provided in Table 1. Initial

          condition concentrations were specified by interpolating between

          the starting mouth boundary condition and the starting head

          boundary condition. No explicit provision was made in TOXI for

          tributary input. The freshwater dilution effect was incorporated

          through the current transport and volume changes resulting from


                                         20












          Table 1 Salinity boundary conditions at mouth and head (in
                    parts per thousand).





                           Low             Average         High
                           Discharge       Discharge       Discharge


          Mouth
          High Tide        30.4            28.0            14.2


          Mouth
          Low Tide         29.6            24.5            11.4



          Head
          High Tide        13.3                0                0


          Head
          Low Tide           2.7               0                0





























                                             21









         the DYNHYD input fil e. A dispersion coefficient of 10 was used

         based on previous WASP applications to similar estuaries. To

         begin the calibration process, mixing lengths were specified as

         the corresponding distance between nodes.

             The general trend of the Shanley (1972) observations

         consisted of high salinity penetration through the lower river

         with a pronounced decrease approaching the head. The physical

         explanation'is increased tidal current mixing in the open

         sections near the mouth, and inhibited exchange in the narrow,

         restricted upper channel. To enhance model dispersion in the

         lower river, mixing lengths (inversely proportional to dispersion

         transport) had to be decreased in the average discharge

         conditions simulation. This modification was not necessary for

         low discharge and high discharge applications. Input files for

         the three salinity prediction applications discussed are provided

         in the Appendix.

             The comparison between high and low tide predicted salinity
         distribution and data from Shanley (1972) are shown on Figs 7 -          11

         9. The overall trends are evident and consistent. Discrepancies

         may again be due to the difference between point measurements and

         volume-averaged predictions. Another factor is that the Shanley

         (1972) longitudinal distribution source figures were apparently

         hand-contour plots derived from the raw data. Nevertheless, the

         agreement and confidence in the comparison was sufficient to

         conclude that the optimum mixing parameters had been chosen for

         subsequent WASP water quality applications.


                                         22



   low          oft dos "Me              II= so                   as M                                   'go An no







                40








                30                         0
                                                                 0







                20 -
                              TOXI High
             U)            o---TOXI Low
                           o Measured High
                              Measured Low
                10








                  0
                   0     1    2     3      4    5    6     7     8    9     10    11   12    13    0
                                                     TOXI Segment

                           Fig. 7   Computed and measured salinity during low       discharge.

















               40








               30


                                      0


                                                           0
            0
            .A

               20



            U)

                           TOXI High
                           TOXI Low
               10       0 Measured High
                        A Measured Low





                0
                 0    1    2     3    4    5    8     7    8    9    10   11   12    13   0
                                                TOXI Segment

                    Fig. 8 Computed and measured salinity    during average  discharge.




        OW 40 4W Am kne W so on 00 j" M



                                                                                    ,go.,
                             low                   OW 011111 VIM                                an OR







              40





                            TOXI High
              30 -          TOXI Low
                          o Measured High
                          ,& Measured Low



              20
        Ln  E



                                    0


                1 k.
              10



                                                                       0



                                                                  06


                0
                0    1    2    3    4    5    6    7    8    9    10   11   12   13   0
                                              TOM Segment

                     Fig. 9 Computed and measured salinity during high discharge.












                                      BACTERIA


         APPLICATIONS

             Three important and representative TOXI applications to

         bacteria distribution are presented in this report out of the

         wide range of loadings and environmental conditions considered.

         In the applications presented here, predictions are made for

         fecal coliforms (FCs), while simulations for enterococci and c.

         perfringens are done similarly. The included analyses are for

         steady state conditions, a time variable point source release at

         the POTW and a-rainfall event.

             The steady state simulations were for the average discharge

         conditions discussed in the HYDRODYNAMICS and SALINITY

         DISTRIBUTION AND MIXING sections. Tributary input and boundary

         conditions were specified using field data from the Jones and

         Langan (1993) study. sensitivity analyses were performed by

         varying loadings, bacteria decay rate and mixing parameters.

         Predictions are compared with average yearly data and data

         obtained on specific dates.

             A simulation for a short (4 hour) accidental release at the

         POTW illustrates the transient flushing characteristics of the

         estuary. This analysis was specifically requested by Chris Nash

         of the NH Coastal Program for use in assessing the impact of a

         release on nearby shellfish beds. Model predictions are also

         compared with those of CORMIX - an effluent discharge model

         applied to the accidental release problem.

             The rainfall event simulation computed the response to a


                                         26









          once-a-year, 2.5 inch rain storm over an 8 hour period. The

          highly time variable tributary discharge impact was specified

          based on field data supplied by Schmidt (1981). This problem was

          suggested at a meeting of the Oyster River Watershed Committee,

          and results were presented to that group on April 25, 1996.




          STEADY STATE


          Loadings and Boundary Conditions



              TOXI was applied to the problem of calculating FC

          distribution while the system'was subject to steady state tides

          and mean freshwater input. Current and sea levels used were

          computed by DYNHYD for average tributary discharge conditions as

          discussed in the HYDRODYNAMICS section. Mixing coefficients were

          those calibrated for salinity distribution under the same average

          discharge conditions (see SALINITY DISTRIBUTION AND MIXING).

              Boundary conditions were taken as the geometric average end

          point conditions for 1992-93 provided by Jones and Langan (1993).

          Specifically, a concentration of 8 FCs/100 ml was used at the

          mouth, and 79.2 FCs/100ml was used at the head. Initial

          conditions were arbitrarily taken to be 20 FCs/100ml. Tributary

          loadings at Bunker, Johnson and Beards Creeks were determined by

          multiplying the Jones and Langan (1993) concentration by the

          corresponding tributary discharge. Since this information was not

          availablefor Deer Meadow, yet this source was observed to be

          important, its loading had to be estimated. Based on similar


                                         27










         watershed area and shore development characteristics, the Deer

         Meadow loading was taken to be the same as Bunker Creek.

             Using these values the TOXI input file was formulated and is

         listed in the Appendix. Bacterial decay is not included in the

         base run application, though decay is considered in the

         sensitivity analysis. The resulting predicted time series for

         selected stations is shown on Fig 10. It is seen that steady

         state tidal response is quickly achieved, and the general trend

         is increasing FC concentration from mouth to head. Since most

         field measurements were taken at low tide, low tide values (peaks

         in the time series) are plotted as a function of longitudinal

         position in Fig 11.



         Sensitivity Analysis



             The sensitivity of the Oyster River system to changes in

         user-specified parameters was investigated by varying input

         values. Tributary FC loadings were doubled with very little

         increase in predicted Oyster River concentration. Main channel

         increases were less than 15%, while concentration increases in

         Bunker and Johnson Creeks were less than 35%. Halving the

         loadings induced an essentially negligible decrease. Thus the

         simulated system is relatively insensitive to intermediate

         loadings and is dominated by the mouth boundary condition at

         Little Bay, the head boundary condition at the main stem dam and

         mixing processes in between.


                                         28



                               @m                     'low       low                               aw




                  20 -                                           20 -    Node 5


                  17                                             is -
               0
               0
                  14      Node 2                                 15

               U
                                                                 12
                       AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
                    0     2     4     6     8     10               0     2      4     6     8     10
                                  Days                                            Days



                          Node 10                                60
                  36 -


                                                                 50
                  31 -

                                                               0
                                                                 40
                  27
                                                               to
                                                               P4 30'     Node 12
                  23


                                                                 20
                  19           -4           1      i
                     0    2     4 Days6     8     10                0'    2     4 Days6     8      10


                              Fig. 10 FCs at selected nodes during average conditions.

















                        100 -

                                                                                                                             0
                         90 -


                         80 -               TOM
                                            TOM with decay
                         70 -          x J&L 08/11192
                                       o J&L Average 92-93
                         60 -          a J&L Average 93-94
                                       x J&L 09108193
                   CD
                   T-
                         50 -
             0                                                               0               0
                                                                     C)              0
                   LL    40 -

                                                                                                     0
                                                                                             Cl                              x
                         30 -
                                                                                                                  o
                                                                                             x
                                                                     0
                         20 -                                                        x                      or
                                                                     x


                         10 -
                                                                                                            0
                          0                  x                                                              R
                             0       1       2       3       4       5       6       7       8       9      10      11      12      13       0

                                                                             TOM Segment


                                  Fig. 11        FC concentration            at low tide during average conditions.




                                                          'W                 011111111
             40, '00 ON '1111111151 AM I a '"M                                                                           "JIM 00 -.00                         '40       M









              The sensitivity of bacteria prediction to decay was

          investigated by using the decay term in the TOXI model and

          employing a range of decay coefficients. Results for a decay

          coefficient of 0.693 /d , corresponding to a half-life of one

          day, are shown in Fig. 11. It is seen that decay processes can

          decrease river bacteria concentration significantly.

              The effects of changing mixing coefficients was also

          considered. This was motivated by physical reasoning which

          suggested that mixing exchange by turbulence and dispersion would

          be reduced at low tide. Mixing coefficients were varied by up to

          an order of magnitude, and time variable mixing coefficients were

          introduced in which low tide mixing exchange was made negligible.

          Predicted bacteria concentration did increase somewhat when

          dilution processes were inhibited by decreased mixing, but the

          effects are small compared to the changes in mixing coefficient

          required. since legitimate mixing coefficients had been

          established by calibrating f or salinity and the sensitivity of FC

          prediction to changes in mixing coefficients was small, the

          original mixing coefficients were retained without adjustment.



          comparison to Field Data



              Low tide predictions were compared with FC concentration

          measurements obtained by Jones and Langan (1993, 1994). Shown on

          Fig. 11 are yearly, geometrically averaged data for 1992-93 and

          1993-94, as well as the specific dates of August 11, 1992 and


                                          31










         September 8, 1993 (for which runoff conditions were assumed to be

         commensurate).

             The general trends are in approximate agreement,  though there

         is observed to be some scatter in the data. There also appears to

         be some anomalous behavior particularly in the vicinity of the

         POTW (node 10) and Beards Creek (node 12). The decrease in

         measured concentration near the POTW was explained by Jones and

         Langan (1993) to be the result of chlorinated effluent

         disinfecting the area. Chlorination has since been discontinued,

         so no effort was made to modify TOXI to account for this process.

         The peak concentration measurements in the vicinity of Beards

         Creek were attributed to a leaking sewage pipe. Durham is

         undergoing a program to replace old, leaky pipes including this

         one. The high 1993-94 value at node 5 was due to an unusually

         large fall "event" which biased the yearly geometrically averaged

         data at that point.

             other high values near nodes 6, 7 and 8 could be due to

         direct, unaccounted for loadings. The area is highly developed

         with houses having private septic systems. Seepage at low tide,

         when river water volume is extremely small, can have a pronounced

         effect on sampling. In addition, these site s were not sampled as

         often as some of the other sites, and annual mean values could be

         biased by the time period when most samples were collected. Also,

         the measured values could reflect elevated concentrations near


         sources in water not well-mixed.

             Since model computations did not exhibit a general trend of


                                         32









          over-predicting bacteria concentration, decay coefficients were

          not introduced as a calibration parameter. In fact, introducing

          significant decay would instead make the predictions worse. Time

          scales associated with mixing, dilution and flushing appear to be

          quite short, so it is not surprising that a conservative mixing

          approach provides the best match with observations.




          POTW ACCIDENTAL RELEASE

              The TOXI model was applied to the problem of an untreated

          sewage release from the Durham waste water treatment plant on

          the Oyster River. R. Langan of JEL and H. Gallagher, a graduate

          student in the UNH Civil Engineering Department, were consulted

          regarding the specific problem to be considered that would yield

          the most useful information. They had previously applied the

          effluent discharge and mixing model CORMIX to several scenarios

          related to the sewage release problem. CORMIX provides a detailed

          analysis of the plume distribution but does not take into account

          the time and spatial variation of the tidal current as do the

          WASP models.

              The problem identified as being most relevant was a 4 hour

          release of fecal coliform (FC) starting at high slack water.

          Bacteria were assumed conservative (ie., no decay) in the TOXI

          application. Other input data were:

              POTW discharge rate = 1.3 million gallons per day

              FC concentration   2 x 10 FC per 100 ml

              Average tributary freshwater discharge conditions


                                          33










             No FC concentration in tributary input and at the Little

             Bay boundary.

             Results included a prediction for maximum concentration at

         the mouth segment of 88 FC/100 ml with a maximum concentration of

         180 FC/100 ml for the next segment upriver from the mouth. The

         time of the first maximum level was low tide (= 6.2 hours from

         the start of release at high water). Significant peaks occurred

         at the next 2 low tides as well. After 6 low tides, bacteria

         concentration was diluted significantly. Thus the "flushing time"

         for cleansing the system is about 3 days.

             This compares with a corresponding CORMIX application (with

         decay) predicting a peak of 421 FC/100 ml at the mouth at 4.17

         hours after the start of release at high water. The higher CORMIX

         prediction can be attributed in part to differences between point

         and spatially-averaged quantities. The CORMIX model predicted a

         plume extending over only a third of the channel width. The

         concentration within the plume varies transversely, and the  peak

         centerline concentration is given. WASP, on the other hand,

         calculates concentrations which are spatially-averaged over  full

         segment volumes. Other contributing factors include dilution by

         clean Little Bay water at the mouth and reduced transport just

         downriver from the POTW due to shallow water depths.

             As a check on the WASP computations, an overall mass balance

         analysis for the entire system was completed. Results indicated

         that total FC amounts could be accounted for in the predicted

         distribution.



                                         34









              Overall, the comparison may be interpreted as indicating that

          CORMIX predicts the worst case that can be expected. The WASP

          simulation, on the other hand, provides evidence that peak

          concentrations may actually be diluted significantly by mixing

          processes. The question remains as to what level of mixing best

          describes "typical" or special conditions.



          RAINFALL EVENT

              TOXI was used to simulate bacteria distribution during a

          once-a-year rainfall event. The storm consisted of 2 1/2 inches

          of rain falling during an 8 hour period following a dry weather

          period. Base conditions before and after the storm were the

          "average conditions" described in the STEADY STATE section. The

          main concern was the transient behavior of FC distribution as the

          storm passed through.

              In applying WASP, particular attention was paid towards

          specifying the time varying tributary freshwater discharge and

          the time varying tributary bacteria loading. All other parameters

          could remain at "average conditions" values.

              Freshwater discharge was obtained from Schmidt (1981) who

          gauged Pettee Brook during a specific storm corresponding to that

          being analyzed here. Discharge rates for the Oyster River main

          stem and other tributaries were inferred using their relative

          watershed areas.

              FC loadings were specified by multiplying time varying

          tributary discharge by an assumed concentration. In specifying


                                          35









         concentration, consideration was given to the argument that

         runoff should wash more pollutants into the feeding streams thus

         increasing bacteria concentration especially during initial

         discharge conditions. The counter-process is dilution from

         increased freshwater flow later during the event. Both

         observations have been made in the Oyster River. A compromise

         concentration value representing no change from average

         conditions was used in the model. The time varying loadings are

         consequently due directly to volume rates of flow changes. In

         addition, it was assumed that the POTW was functioning properly

         and did not release storm related bacteria.

             TOXI predictions, shown on Fig. 12, clearly show the

         transient nature of the Oyster River bacteria concentration

         response. Values increased substantially by approximately 30

         The largest effects were in the creek tributaries, and changes

         were more pronounced going upriver. Fecal coliform concentration

         returned to normal after 4 days. Thus the "flushing time" of

         about 3 days after the event is consistent with that determined

         in the accidental release simulation.



















                                         36



  JEW low          Aw 68 -400 190 11", 60 im              me aw as                    *a @Iw so @w




                  14 -                                           31 -

                                                                               Node 5
                0 13            Node 2                         0 25
                0                                              0
                0                                              0
                                                                 20



                U
                N 10                                             is


                                                                 10
                   8
                    0     2     4      6     8     10              0     2     4     6     8      10
                                  Days                                           Days






                  @46 -                                          78

                 H               Node 10                                     Node 12
                 0 40 -                                          67

                 0                                             0
                 0                                             0
                   33                                          H 57

                                                               to
                 44 26                                           47


                   201                                           361           1-,
                      0    2     4     6     8     10              0     2     4     6     8     10
                                   Days                                          Days



                      Fig. 12 FC concentration at selected nodes during a rain event.












                           DISSOLVED OXYGEN AND NUTRIENTS


          DISSOLVED OXYGEN

             The dissolved oxygen (DO) component of this study was

          undertaken mainly by J. Dubois as a Mechanical Engineering senior

          project under the supervision of M. R. Swift. Modeling methods

          and results are detailed in his senior project report (Dubois,

          1996), while main points are summarized here.

             DO field data taken at the same time as the Jones and Langan

          (1993, 1994) studies consisted of results of a one year sampling

          program at stations distributed over the length of the tidal

          oyster River. Great Bay Watch (1995) established a much longer DO

          data set for one station in the Oyster River which was sampled

          twice a month. Observations indicated concentrations on the order

          of 8 mg/l but with considerable variability. Schmidt (1981)

          measured BOD in Pettee Brook, which runs into Beard's Creek, as

          part of his Oyster River watershed modeling effort. He observed

          BOD concentrations varying from less than 25 mg/l to over 250

          mg/l during the rainfall event discussed in the BACTERIA modeling

          chapter. Other than BOD loading due to runoff events and the

          potential for POTW loading, previous work did not reveal any

          dominant sources or sinks. Under normal conditions, DO fluctuates

          somewhat randomly in the vicinity of the saturation value.

             Since the POTW is always a possible source of BOD, one

          modeling objective was to assess the impact of the POTW on DO in

          the tidal Oyster River. The major focus, however, was to apply

          WASP to a significant rainfall event to evaluate DO reduction


                                         38











          from NPS runoff.

              In both applications, the EUTRO component of the WASP suite

          of models was applied to the simulation of BOD and DO.

          Specifically, the Streeter-Phelps set of equations were selected

          to simulate the decay of BOD, the reduction of DO by BOD and the

          replenishment of Do by reaeration.

              The first application involved determing the effects of the

          POTW during normal runoff conditions. The maximum DO deficit was

          calculated as 0.3 mg/l from an average DO concentration of about

          8 mg/l. Even when the POTW BOD loading was increased by a factor

          of 10, the DO deficit at the POTW was on the order of 0.4 mg/l.

          These simulations, therefore, indicate that the point source POTW

          loading is not an important degrader of DO under normal

          conditions.

              The rainfall event application corresponds to the same storm

          discussed in the BACTERIA chapter - a once-a-year storm

          consisting of 2 1/2 inches of rain in an 8 hour period. As in the

          bacteria modeling, DYNHYD was used to simulate current and

          surface elevation due to both tides and the time varying,

          tributary freshwater input. The time dependent tributary flow was

          inferred from data obtained from Schmidt (1981). This source also

          provided the time varying BOD concentration necessary to specify

          the tributary BOD loadings and model boundary conditions.

              EUTRO predicted an extreme drop in DO at the head of the

          Oyster River (momentarily negligible) with a moderate reduction

          (1 mg/l deficit) at the mouth. DO,drops were largest during the


                                          39











         first 4 low tides with a return to normal conditions within 5

         days of the start of the storm.




         NUTRIENTS


         Modeling-Considerations

             The nutrients modeled in this study were nitrogen and

         phosphorus, the two critical elements of nutrient NPS

         contamination. Nitrogen in the forms of ammonium (NH4) and

         nitrate (N03) and phosphorus in the form of phosphate (P04) were

         studied extensively by Jones and Langan (1994). Both

         concentrations in the river and loadings were measured. They

         found that the most important loading was due to the POTW with

         the remaining contributions distributed among the tributaries. No

         important sinks were discussed, while the effects of tidal

         advection and mixing processes could be identified from the data

         distribution.

             In view of these observations, TOXI was applied to nitrogen

         and phosphorus using the measured loadings and boundary

         conditions at head and mouth but without decay. In each

         application TOXI was run for steady state tidal conditions over

         several cycles during a time of average freshwater discharge (see

         Appendix for input files). TOXI low tide predictions were then

         compared with yearly-averaged, measured low tide concentrations.



         Nitrogen

             Jones and Langan (1994) observed wildly fluctuating


                                         40









          proportions of ammonium and nitrate in the effluent from the

          POTW, the principal source to the Oyster River. Total dissolved

          nitrogen (ammonium plus nitrate) was much more well-behaved, and

          loadings to the river were provided for this combination (rather

          than individual contributions). Thus TOXI was also applied to

          total dissolved nitrogen (NH4 + N03). Loadings and boundary

          conditions were specified from the Jones and Langan (1994)

          report, and TOXI was run for average tributary freshwater

          discharge conditions. The TOXI input file is provided in the

          Appendix.

              Predicted concentrations at low water are plotted in Fig. 13

          along with data from Jones and Langan (1994) low water

          measurements. Other than at the POTW, general trends are

          consistent though there is some scatter. At the POTW, the

          measured concentration is much higher. This is because the sample

          was obtained from the effluent plume right at the outfall, while

          the WASP prediction represents an average over the entire segment

          volume and, therefore, should be less.




          Phosphorus

              Phosphate (P04) was modeled, using TOXI, for average

          freshwater discharge conditions. Loadings and boundary conditions

          were specified from the Jones and Langan (1994) report, and the

          input file is provided in the Appendix.

              Predicted and measured (yearly averaged) low tide

          concentrations are plotted on Fig. 14 for comparison. As in the


                                          41













               400



                                                                     0
               350




               300


               250           TOXI
                          o Measured
            :L


            0  200
            z
            +

            z  150



               100




                50

                             0                       0    0
                 0
                 0     1     2   3    4    5    6    7    8     9   10    11   12   13   0
                                                TOXI Segment

                      Fig. 13 Total dissolved nitrogen (NH4 +  N03) at low water during
                             0







                               average discharge conditions.



                  ve          me 'Im low                                        am



        @jw" 4OW                                    *01 Jme *W 11*0 line 00 1100 'A" Im
                                         A







              35


                                                                 .0


              30 -





              25


                           TOXI
                         o Measured
              20

           d)


           CL
           U)
           0

           CL



              10





               5


                                                        0


               0
                0    1    2    3    4    5    6    7    8    9    10   11   12   13    0
                                              TOXI Segment
                                                                            0



                                                                   ---------- L-I I






                     Fig. 14 Phosphate (P04) at low water during average conditions.










         case of total dissolved nitrogen, the general trends are

         consistent with reduced concentration away from the POTW and high

         concentration at the POTW. Measured concentration at the POTW is

         again higher than the predicted concentration due to the

         difference in what they represent. The measurement was taken at

         the outfall pipe and contains a portion of straight effluent,

         while the prediction is a spatial average including the

         surrounding water within the segment.


































                                         44












                                      DISCUSSION

              In completing the modeling work, the basic processes

          characterizing the tidal Oyster River have emerged. The system is

          dominated by tidal mixing and has a short 3 to 4 day residence

          time. Substances entering the system are quickly flushed out the

          mouth intothe diluting waters of Little  Bay. This type of mixing

          dynamics can also be expected to prevail in the other major

          tributaries to the Great Bay estuarine system.

              Computed concentrations were not strongly sensitive to

          loadings or changes in mixing parameters that could be justified

          physically. End point (mouth and head) boundary conditions, on

          the other hand, are very important to predicting substance

          concentrations.

              In comparing predictions with observations, generally good

          agreement was obtained, and overall trends and fundamental

          processes were reproduced. In comparing details, however, the

          difference in interpretation between field measurements and WASP

          predictions becomes important. Each field measurement was taken

          at a single point, usually in the main channel and often at a

          position giving an extreme value (near a pollution loading site,

          for example). The WASP predictions, on the other hand, are

          volume-averaged over a complete segment area and depth. WASP

          results were, therefore, less variable and extreme, but more

          representative of the segment as a whole.

              Though the known tributary and point source pollution

          loadings were included in the simulations, there remains a


                                          45









          possibility of additional loadings not accounted for. Ground

          water and private septic system seepage, for example, had not

          been quantified in previous field studies and consequently were

          not included in the calculations. These sources, however, could

          influence the field measurements which were done mostly at low

          water when tidal mixing and dilution are minimized. Here again,

          the measurement program was oriented towards identifying extreme

          (worst case) values, while the purpose of WASP is to compute

          representative averages made over larger volumes.

             Despite the care necessary in interpreting results, WASP is

          sufficiently reliable for planning purposes. In fact, WASP was

          used in this way on two occasions during the study. "What if?"

          questions posed by the Office of State Planning and by the oyster

          River Watershed Committee were answered through WASP simulations.

          Though WASP does not contain a watershed modeling component,

          normally previous information is available to estimate changes in

          tributary loading when considering a new application.

             WASP does incorporate a comprehensive set of estuarine,

          bio/chemical equations And is widely-recognized as a standard in

          water quality modeling. Successful application depends on

          accurate observational data for calibration and loading, and the

          best data for this purpose are measurements which are

          characteristic and representative.

             our experience indicates that WASP is suitable for extension

          to the entire Great Bay system. Great Bay is normally well-mixed

          vertically, so 2-dimensional branching (in plan view) is


                                         46









          appropriate for water column modeling. To complete a

          comprehensive model, sediment compartments can be added as well

          to account for bottom exchange processes. Though not necessary in

          the Oyster River because of its short residence time, exchanges

          with the bottom sediments become important when considering the

          entire estuarine system.








































                                         47












                                     REFERENCES




         Ambrose, R.B., S.B. Vandergrift and T.A. Wool (1986) IIWASP3, a

             Hydrodynamic and Water Quality Model - Model Theory, User's

             Manual, and Programmer's Guide", Environmental Protection

             Agency Report Number EPA/600/3-86/034, Athens, Georgia 30613.



         Ambrose, R.B., T.A. Wool and J.L Martin (1993) "The Dynamic

             Estuary Model Hydrodynamics Program DYNHYD5 Model

             Documentation and User Manual", Envronmental Research

             Laboratory, Athens, Georgia 30605.



         Ambrose, R.B., T.A. Wool and J.L. Martin (1993) "The Water

             Quality Analysis Simulation Program WASP511, Environmental

             Research Laboratory, Athens, Georgia 30605.



         Chadwick, J. (1993) "Application of the Water Quality Model WASP3

             for the Great Bay Estuary", M.S. Thesis, mechanical

             Engineering, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH 03824.

         Dubois, J.A. (1996) "Non-Point Source Pollution: A Dissolved

             Oxygen Study of the Oyster River", Senior Project Report,

             Mechanical Engineering, University of New Hampshire,

             Durham, NH 03824.

         Garrison, K.M. (1979) "Development of a One Dimensional Finite

             Difference Dispersion Model", M.S.*Thesis, Electrical

             Engineering, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH 03824.


                                         48









           Flanders, R.A. (1989) "Interagency Report on the Shellfish Waters

               of New Hampshire", Staff Report #163. Department of

               Environmental Services, Department of Health and Human

               Services, and Fish and Game Department, Concord, NH

               03302.




           Jones, S.H.,  F.T. Short and M. Webster (1992) "Pollution" in

               The Ecology of the Great Bay Estuary, New Hampshire and

               Maine: An Estuarine Profile and Bibliography, F.T. Short

               (ed.), NOAA-Coastal Ocean Program Publ., Washington, DC,

               57-90.




           Jones, S.H. and R. Langan (1993) "Oyster River   Nonpoint Source

               Pollution Assessment FY 1993 Final Report:   July, 19 92 - June,

               199311, Final report submitted to the New Hampshire Office of

               State Planning, 2 1/2 Beacon St., Concord, NH 03301.



           Jones, S.H. and R. Langan (1994) "Land Use Impacts on Nonpoint

               Source Pollution in Coastal New Hampshire Waters", Final

               Report submitted to the New Hampshire Office of State

               Planning, 2 1/2 Beacon St., Concord, NH 03301.



           New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (1989) "New

               Hampshire Nonpoint Source Pollution Management Plan",

               NHDES-WSPCD-89-9, NH Department of Environmental Services,,,

               Concord, NH 03302.


                                            49









         New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (1992) "New

             Hampshire Water Quality Report to Congress 305(b)", New

             Hampshire Department of Environmental Services, Concord,

             NH 03302.



         New Hampshire Fish and Game Department (i991) "Coastal Shellfish

             and Water Quality: Progress Report", Marine Fisheries

             Division, NH Fish and Game Department, Concord, NH 03302.



         Pavlos, J. (1994) "The Application of a One-Dimensional Pollution

             Fate Model to the Great Bay Estuarine System", M.S. Thesis,

             ocean Engineering, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH

             03824.




         Schmidt, E.J. (1981) "Water Quality Impact of Non-Point Source

             Contaminants in Small Tidal Rivers", Ph.D. Dissertation,

             Civil Engineering,*University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH

             03824.




         Shanley, G. (1972) "The Hydrography of the Oyster River Estuary",

             M.S. Thesis, Earth Sciences, University of New Hampshire,

             Durham, NH 03824



         Swift, M.R. and W.S. Brown (1983) "Distribution of Bottom Stress

             and Tidal Energy Dissipation in a well-Mixed Estuary,

             Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 17, 297-317.


                                        50









           Swift, M.R., B. Celikkol, C.E. Goodwin, and J. Chadwick (1991)

               "Protective Oil Booming in Great Bay Part I: Tributary

               Protection", Final report submitted to the New Hampshire

               Office of State Planning, 2 1/2 Beacon St. Concord, NH 03301.



           Swift, M.R. (1990) Unpublished current data taken on flood and

                ebb tides near the mouth of the Oyster River, UNH, Durham,

                NH 03824.


















































                                          51












                                      APPENDIX




             WASP input files for representative applications are listed

         in the following order:



             DYNHYD hydrodynamic  analysis during low discharge.

             DYNHYD hydrodynamic  analysis during average discharge.

             DYNHYD hydrodynamic  analysis during high discharge.

             TOXI salinity analysis during low discharge.

             TOXI salinity analysis during average discharge.

             TOXI salinity analysis during high discharge.

             TOXI FC analysis during average conditions.

             TOXI total nitrogen analysis during average  conditions.

             TOXI phosphate analysis during average conditions.
























                                         52








              DYNHYD hydrodynamic analysis during low discharge:


              ******Dynhyd5+ 1995 6 DAY RUN FOR OYSTER RIVER MODEL RUn 7*** OR7S.INp
              ******UNH Ocean Engineering - Low Flow - NOVEMBER 29 1995****
              ******PROGRAM CONTROL DATA*******
                 15    14     0   15      5     1 0000   12 0000
              *****PRINTOUT  CONTROL DATA******
                     0.00           1    15
                    1    2 .  3     4     5     6    7     8   9     10   11    12    13  14    15
              *****SUMMARY CONTROL    DATA*******
                    1    1 0 0 12.5       6     3
              **********JUNCTION DATA***********
                    1     0.91    130000.       -4.10      1
                    2     0.91    141000.       -3.90      1   2
                    3     0.91    118000.       -3.60      2   3
                    4     0.91      83800.      -3.70      3   4
                    5     0.91      83800.      -3.40      4   5
                    6     0.91    112000.       -2.10      5   6      7
                    7     0.91      1460-0.     -1.30      6
                    8     0.91    107000.       -1.90      7   a
                    9     0.91      82600.      -1.80      8   9     10
                 10       0.91      25300.      -1.30      9
                 11       0.91      67600.      -2.30    10   11
                 12       0.91      49800.      -2.00    11   12
                 13       0.91      38700.      -1.50    12   13
                 14       0.91      19500.      -1.40    13   14
                 15       0.91      10700.      -1.40    14
              **********CHANNEL DATA*********
                    1     420.         78.        4.90     101.0       .040      .00000    1     2
                    2     402.         95.        3.80     109.0       .040      .00000    2     3
                    3     280.         75.        3.50     147.0       .040      .00000    3     4
                    4     440.         68.        4.00     148.0       .040      .00000    4     5
                    5     366.         58.        2.80     147.0       .040      .00000    5     6
                    6     366.         10.        1.30     164.0       .040      .00000    6     7
                    7     558.         63.        1.50     062.0       .040      .00000    6     8
                    a     393.         48.        2.40     118.0       .040      .00000    8     9
                    9     421.         15.        1.30     157.0       .040      .00000    9    10
                 10       604.         30.        1.70     106.0       .040      .00000    9    11
                 11       343.         30.        2.30     104.0       .040      .00000   11    12
                 12       393.         25.        1.40     075.0       .040      .00000   12    13
                 13       320.         25.        1.30     065.0       .040      .00000   13    14
                 14       238.         25.        1.50     056.0       .040      .00000   14    is
              **********CONSTANT    INFLOW  DATA********
                    5
                         7   -0.0020
                       10    -0*0090
                       11    -0.0447
                       13    -0.0050
                       15    -0.0280
              **********VARIABLE INFLOW DATA*********
                    0
              **********SEAWARD BOUNDARY DATA********
                    1
                    1    1    1 100       0     0    0 1.0
                    12.41         0.0
                         0          0           0          0       0.91          0         0

                    0
                     PRECIPITATION OR EVAPORATION DATA
                    0
              *****  JUNCTION GEOMETRY DATA
                    0

                                                         53













               CHANNEL GEOMETRY DATA
              0
           ***** MAP TO WASP4
              0. 15
              1    0
              2    1
              3    2
              4    3
              5    4
              6    5
              7    6
              8    7
              9    a
             10    9
             11  10
             12  11
             13  12
             14  13
             15    0




















































                                          54








             DYNHYD hydrodynamic analysis during average discharge:


             ******Dynhyd5+ 1995 12 DAY RUN FOR OYSTER RIVER MODEL Run 6S** OR6S.INP
             ******UNH ocean Engineering - SEPTEMBER 22 1995****
             ******PROGRAM CO NTR OL DATA*******
                 15     14    0   15     5    1 0000     12 0000
             *****PRINTOUT   CONTROL DATA******
                    0.00            1  is .
                    1   2     3     4     5   6      7      8   9   10    11    12    13   14    15
             *****SUMMARY CONTROL DATA*******
                    1   1 0 0 12.5        6   3
             **********JUNCTION DATA***********
                    1      0.91   130000.        -4.10      1
                    2      0.91   141000.        -3.90      1   2
                    3      0.91   118000.        -3.60      2   3
                    4      0.91     83800.       -3.70      3   4
                    5      0.91     83800.       -3.40      4   5
                    6      0.91   112000.        -2.10      5   6    7
                    7      0.91     14600.       -1.30      6
                    8      0.91   107000.        -1.90      7   8
                    9      0.91     82600.       -1.80      a   9   10
                 10        0.91     25300.       -1.30      9
                 11        0.91     67600.       -2.30   10    11
                 12        0.91     49800.       -2.00   11    12
                 13        0.91     38700.       -1.50   12    13
                 14        0.91     19500.       -1.40   13    14
                 15        0.91     10700.       -1-40   14
              **********CHANNEL DATA*********
                                       78.       4.90       101.;0      .040     .00000      1     2
                    1      420.
                    2      402.        95.       3.80       109.0       .040     .00000      2     3
                    3      280.        75.       3.50       147.0       .040     .00000      3     4
                    4      440.        68.       4.00       148.0       .040     .00000      4     5
                    5      366.        58.       2.80       147.0       .040     .00000      5     6
                    6      366.        10.       1.30       164.0       .040     .00000      6     7
                    7      558.        63.       1.50       062.0       .040     .00000      6     a
                    8      393.        48.       2.40       118.0       .040     .00000      a     9
                    9      421.        15.       1.30       157.0       .040     .00000      9   10
                 10        604.        30.       1.70       106.0       .040     .00000      9   11
                 11        343.        30.       2.30       104.0       .040     .00000    11    12
                 12        393.        25.       1.40       075.0       .040     .00000    12    13
                 13        320.        25.       1.30-      065.0       .040     .00000    13    14
                 14        238.        2S.       1.50       056.0       .040     .00000    14    15
                          CONSTANT INFLOW   DATA********
                    4
                         7     -0.030
                        10     -0.166
                        13     -0.099
                        15     -0.522
              **********VARIABLE INFLOW DATA*********
                    0
              **********SEAWARD BOUNDARY DATA********
                    I
                         1     1 100      0      0   0 1.0
                    12.41         0.0
                         0          0            0          0      0.91          0           0


                    0
                     PRECIPITATION OR EVAPORATION DATA
                    .0
               ***** JUNCTION GEOMETRY DATA
                    0
                     CHANNEL GEOMETRY DATA


                                                            55

















                   0
                     14AP TO WASP4
                       15
                         0
                   2     1
                   3     2
                   4     3
                   5     4
                   6     5
                   7     6
                   8     7
                   9     a
                  10     9
                  11   10
                  12   11
                  13   12
                  14   13
                  15     0




















































                                                      56









              DYNHYD hydrodynamic analysis during high discharge:

               ******Dynhyd5+ 1995 12 DAY RUN FOR OYSTER RIVER MODEL Run.8A*** ORSA.INP
               ******UNH Ocean Engineering High Flow - NOVEMBER 8 1995****
               ******PROGRAM CONTROL DATA*******
                  15    14     0   is     5    1 0000       12 0000
               *****PRINTOTJT CONTROL DATA******
                     0.00             1. 15 .
                     1  2   '  3      4   5    6     7      8   9   10     11    12  13     14   15
               *****SUMKARY CONTROL   DATA*******
                     1  1 0 0 12.5        6    3
               **********J-UNCTION t)ATA***********
                     1     0.91    130000.        -4.10     1
                     2     0.91    141000.        -3.90     1   2
                     3     0.91    118000.        -3.60     2   3
                     4     0.91       83800.      -3.70     3   4
                     5     0.91       83800.      -3.40     4   5
                     6     0.91    112000.        -2.10     5   6    7
                     7     0.91       14600.      -1.30     6
                     a     0.91    107000.        -1.90     7   a
                     9     0.91       82600.      -1.80     8   9   10
                  10       0.91       25300.      -1.30     9
                  11       0.91       67600.      -2.30     10 11
                  12       0.91       49800.      -2.00     11 12
                  13       0.91       38700.      -1.50     12 13
                  14       0.91       19500.      -1.40     13 14
                  is       0.91       10700.      -1.40     14
               **********CHANNEL DATA*********
                     1     420.         78.       4.90      101.;0      .040      .00000      1    2
                     2     402.         95.       3.80      109.0       .040      .00000      2    3
                     3     280.         75.       3.50      147.0       .040      .00000      3    4
                     4     440.         68.       4.00      148.0       .040      .00000      4    5
                     5     366.         58.       2.80      147.0       .040      .00000      5    6
                     6     366.         10.       1.30      164.0       .040      .00000      6    7
                     7     558.         63.       1.50      062.0       .040      .00000      6    8
                     a     393.         48.       2.40      118.0       .040      .00000      a    9
                     9     421.,        15.       1.30      157.0       .040      .00000      9  10
                  10       604.         30.       1.70      106.0       .040      .00000      9  11
                  11       343.         30.       2.30      104.0       .040      .00000   11    12
                  12       393.         25.       1.40      075.0       .040      .00000   12    13
                  13       320.         25.       1.30      065.0       .040      .00000   13    14
                  14       238.         25.       1.50      056.0       .040      .00000   14    15
               **********CONSTANT INFLOW     DATA********
                     4
                         7     -0.115
                        10     -0.637
                        13     -0.379
                        15     -2.000
               **********VARIABLE INFLOW DATA*********
                     0
               **********SEAWARD BOUNDARY DATA********
                     1
                     1   1     1 100       0      0   0 1.0
                     12.41         0.0
                         6            0           0         0      0.91           0           0

                     0
               *****  PRECIPITATION OR EVAPORATION DATA
                     0
               ***** JUNCTION GEOMETRY DATA
                     0
                      CHANNEL GEOMETRY DATA




                                                            57



















          0,
        ***** MAP TO WASP4
          0 15
          1  0
          2  1
          3  2
          4  3
          5  4
          6  5
          7  6
          8  7
          9  8
         10  9
         11 10
         12 11
         13 12
         14 13
         15  0
















































                               58








              TOXI salinity analysis during low discharge:
              TEST OYSTER R TOXI.INPUT' FILE: DATE: 11/30/95             FILE: ORT7S.INP
              LINKED to   OR7S.HYD
              USEG NSYS  1CFL MFLG  JMAS NSLN INTY ADFC      DD HHMM         A:MODEL OPTIONS
                13     2     0     0    1     0    1 0.0       0 0000
                 1     2     3    11   12    13
                 1
                0 00625         10.

                0.041667        10.
                 0     1     1     1    1     1
                 1     0     +          +          +           +          +          B:EXCHANGES
                 1         1.0         1.0                              (water  column diffusion)
                14
                     382        210     0     1
                     361        201     1     2
                     263.       140     2     3
                     272        220     3     4
                     162        183     4     5
                      13        183     5     6
                      95        279     S.    7
                     125        147     7     a
                      20        421     a     9
                      51        604     a    10
                      69        343    10    11
                      35        393    11    12
                      33        320    12    13
                      38        238    13     0

                  10.00           0.      10.00       365.
                 0     1     1     1    1     1
                 2     0        1.0     +          +           +          +           C: VOLUMES
                 1.0000      1.0000
                       1           0          1    620400           0           0          0           0
                       2           0          1    436600           0           0          0           0
                       1           0          1    31@440           0           0          0           0
                       4           0          1    293300           0           0          0           0
                       5           0          1    229600           0           0          0           0
                       6           0-         1     21170           0           0          0           0
                       7           0          1    203300           0           0          0           0
                       8           0          1    148680           0           0          0           0
                       9           0          1     40480           0           0          0           0
                      10           0          1    128440           0           0          0           0
                      11           0          1     94620           0           0          0           0
                      12           0          1     52245           0           0          0
                                                                                                       0
                      13           0          1     26325           0           0          0           0
                 3     1     OR7S.HYD +            +           +          +          D: FLOWS
                 0     1     1     1    1     1
                       2     +          +          +           +          +          E: BOUNDARIES
                    1.00        1.00                                          Salinity
                 1    13
                  30.37     0.00000       30.40   0.04309       30.32    0.08618      30.16    0.12927
                  29.96     0.17236       29.76   0.21545       29.63    0.25854      29.60    0.30163
                  29.68     0.34472       29.83   0.38781       30.04    0.43090      30.24    0.47399
                  30.37     0.51708
                13    13
                  12.85     0.00000       13.27   0.04309       12.28    0.08618      10.14    0.12927
                    7.43    0.17236        4.87   0.21545         3.15   0.25854        2.73   0.30163
                    3.72    0.34472        5.86   0.38781         8.57   0.43090      11.13    0.47399
                  12.85     0.51708
                       2                                                                    S1


                                                          59

















                     1.00        1.00
                   1    13
                   06.00     0.00000      06-00     0.04309       00.00    0.08618       00.00     0..12927
                   00.00     0.17236      00.00     0.21545       00-00    0.25854       00.00     0.30163
                   00.00     0.34472      00.00     0.38781       00-00    0.43090       00.00     0.47399
                   00.00     0.51708
                 13     13
                   00.00     .0.00000     00.00     0.04309       00.00    0.08618       00.00     0.12927
                   00.00     0.17236      00.00     0.21545       00.00    0.25854       00.00     0.30163
                   00.00     0.34472      00.00     0.38781       00.00    0.43090       00.00     0.47399
                   00.00     0.51708
                        0      +          +           +         +            +          F: LOADS
                        0                                                     si
                        0                                                     (KPS LOADS)
                        0      +          +           +         +            +          G: PARAMETERS
                        +           +           +           +          +           +     At  H: CONSTANT
                 GLOBALS            0
                CHEMICALI           0
                SEDIMENT1           0
                        0      +          +           +         +            +       I:TIME FUNCTIONS
              cl                                                0   0.0          40 J:INITIAL    Cs
                 1:      30.30         1.0    2:      28.90         1.0    3:      27.40         1.0
                 4:      26-00         1.0    5:      24.50         1.0    6:      23.10         1.0
                 7:      21.60         1.0    8:      20.20         1.0    9:      18.70         1.0
                10:      17.30         1.0    11:     15.80         1.0    12:     14.40         1.0
              si 13:     12.90         1.0                      0   0.0           40
                 1:      00.00         0.0    2:      00.00         0.0    3:      00.00         0.0
                 4:      00.00         0.0    5:      00.00         0.0    6:      00.00         0.0
                 7:      00.00         0.0    8:      00.00         0.0    9:      00.00         0.0
                10:      00.00         0.0    11:     00.00         0.0    12:     00.00         0.0             it
                13:      00.00         0.0



































                                                          60








             TOXI salinity analysis during average discharge':

             TEST OYSTER R TOXI INPUTFILE: DATE: 11/27/95              FILE:ORT6FS.INP
             LINKED to  0R6S.HYD
             NSEG NSYS ICFL MFLG JMAS    NSLN INTY ADFC DD, HHMM            A:MODEL OPTIONS
                13      2     0    0     1    0     1 0.0      0 0000
                   1    2     3  11   12    13
                   1
                0.00625         10.
                   I
               0.041667         10.
                   0    1     1    1     1    1
                   1    0     +          +          +          +         +          B:EXCHANGES
                   1       1.0        1.0                              (water column diffusion)
                 14 382       42.0       0    1
                    361       40.2       1    2
                    263       28.0       2    3
                    272       44.0       3    4
                    162         366      4    5
                        13      366      5    6
                        95      558      5    7
                    115         393      7    8
                        20      421      8    9
                        51      604      8  10
                        69      343   10    11
                        35      393   11    12
                        33      320   12    13
                        38      238   13      0


                   10*00          0*     10*00        365*
                   0    1     1    1     1    1
                   2    0       1.0      +          +          +         +            C: VOLUMES
                   1.0000     1.0000
                        1          0          1     620400           0         0          0          0
                        2          0          1     436600           0         0          0          0
                        3          0          1     A8440            0         0          0          0
                        4          0          1     293300           0         0          0          0
                        5          0          1     229600           0         0          0          0
                        6          0          1     213.70           0         0          0          0
                        7          0          1     203300           0         0          0          0
                        a          0          1     148680           0         0          0          0
                        9          0          1     40480            0         0          0          0
                        10         .0         1     128440           0         0          0          0
                        11         0          1     94620            0         0          0          0
                        12         0          1     52245            0         0          0          0
                        13         0          1     26325            0         0          0          0
                   3    1     0R6S.HYD, +           +          +         +          D: FLOWS
                   0    1     1    1     1    1
                        2     +          +          +          +         +          E: BOUNDARIES
                    1.00        1.00                                         Salinity
                   1    13
                   27.85      0.00000    27.98      0.04309    27.66     0.08618      26.96    0.12927
                   26.06      0.17236    25.22      0.21545    24.65     0.25854      24.51    0.30163
                   24.83      0.34472    25.54      0.38781    26.44     0.43090      27.28    0.47399
                   27.85      0.51708
                   13   13
                   00.00      0.00000    00.00      0.04309    00.00     0.08618      00.00    0.12927
                   00.00      0.17236    00.00      0.21545    00.00     0.25854      00.00    0.30163
                   00.00      0.34472    00.00      0.38781    00.00     0.43090      00.00    0.47399
                   00.00      0.51708
                                                                                           S1
                        2



                                                         61















                     1.00        1.00
                   1   13
                   00.00    0.00000       00-00    0.04309       00.00     0.08618       00.00    0.12927
                   00.00    0.17236       00'. 00  0.21545       00.00     0.25854       00.00    0.30163
                   00.00    0.34472       00.00    0.38781       00.00     0.43090       00.00    0.47399
                   00.00    0.51708
                 13    13
                   00.00    .0.00000      00.00    0.04309       00.00     0.-08618      00.00    0.12927
                   00.00    0.17236       00.00    0.21545       00.00     0.25854       00.00    0.30163
                   00.00    0.34472       00.00    0.38781       00.00     6.43090       00.00    0.47399
                   00.00    0.51708
                        0     +           +          +          +            +          F: LOADS
                        0                                                     Sl
                        0                                                    (NPS LOADS)
                        0     +           +          +          +            +         G: PARAMETERS
                        +          +                       +                       +         H: CONSTANT
                 GLOBALS           0
               CHERICALI           0
               SEDIMENT1           0
                        0     +           +          +          +            +       I:TIME FUNCTIONS
              Cl                                                0   0.0          40 J:INITIAL    Cs
                 1:      27.85         1.0    2:      23-04         1.0    3:      21.40         1.0
                 4:      18.82         1.0    5:      16.68         1.0    6:      13.41         1.0
                 7:      13.41         1.0    8:      11.11         1.0    9:      11.11         1.0
                10:        7.58        1.0   11:        5.57        1.0    12:       3.27        1.0
                13:        0.00        1.0
              si                                                0   0.0           40
                 1:      00.00         0.0    2:      00.00         0.0    3:      00.00         0.0
                 4:      00.00         0.0    5:      00.00         0.0    6:      00.00         0.0
                 7:      00.00         0.0    8:      00.00         0.0    9:      00.00         0.0
                10:      00.00         0.0   11:      00.00         0.0    12:     00.00         0.0
                13:      00.00         0.0






































                                                          62








              TOXI salinity analysis during high discharge:
              TEST OYSTER R TOXI INPUT.FILE:. DATE: 11/10/95              FILE: ORTBE.INP
              LINKED to   ORSA.HYD HIGH FLOW
              NSEG NSYS   ICFL MFLG JMAS NSLN INTY ADFC       DD HHMM         A:MODEL OPTIONS
                 13       2    0     0     1    0     1 0.0    0 0000
                    1     2    3   11   12      13
                    1
                 0.00625         10.
                    1
                0.041667         10.
                    0     1          1     1    1
                    1     0    +           +          +        +             +        B:EXCHANGES
                    1       1.0        1.0                               (water column diffusion)
                  14
                     382         210       0    1
                     361         201       1    2
                     263         140       2    3
                     272         220       3    4
                     162         183       4    5
                          13     183       5    6
                          95     279       5    7
                     115         147       7    8
                          20     421       8    9
                          51     604       a    10
                          69     343    10      11
                          35     393    11      12
                          33     320    12      13
                          38     238    13      0

                    10.00          0.      10.00        365.
                    0     1    1     1     1    1
                    2     0      1.0       +          +         +            +          C: VOLMMS
                    1.0000     1.0000
                          1          0          1     620400           0         0           0          0
                          2          0          1     436600           0         0           0          0
                          3          a          1     31  8440         0         0           0          0
                          4          0          1     293300           0         0           0          0
                          5          0          1     229600           0         0           0          0
                          6          0          1     21170            0         0           0          0
                          7          0          1     203300           0         0           0          0
                          8          0          1     148680           0         0           0          0
                          9          0          1     40480            0         0           0          0
                          10         0          1     128440           0         0           0          0
                          11         0          1     94620            0         0           0          0
                          12         0          1     52245            0         0           0          0
                          13         0          1     26325            0         0           0          0
                    3     1    OR8A.HYD +             +         +            +         D: FLOWS
                    0     1    1     1
                          2    +           +          +         +            +         E: BOUNDARIES
                     1.00        1.00*                                          Salinity
                    1     13
                    14.08      0.00000     14.19      0.04309      13.93     0.08618    13.36     0.12927
                    12.65      0.17236     11.97      0.21545      11.52     0.25854    11.41     0.30163
                    11.67      0.34472     12.23      0.38781      12-95     0.43090    13.63     0.47399
                    14.08      0.51708
                    13    13
                     0.00      0.00000       0.00     0.04309      0.00      0.08618       0.06   0.12927
                     0.00      0.17236       0.00     0.21545      0.00      0.25854       0.00   0.30163
                     0.00      0.34472       0.00     0.38781      0.00      0.43090       0.00   0.47399
                     0.00      0.51708
                          2                                                                   S1



                                                            63


















                      1.00      1.00
                   1    13
                    00.00   0.00000       00.00   0.04309      00.00    0.08618      00.00    0.12927
                    00.00   0.17236       00.00   0.21545      00.00    0.25854      00-00    0.30163
                    00.00   0.34472       00.00   0.38781      00.00    0.43090      00-00.   0.47399
                    00.00   0.51708
                  13    13
                    00.00   0.00000       00.00   0.04309      00.00    0.08618      00.00    0.12927
                    00.00   b.17236       00.00   0.21545      00.00    0.25854      00.00    0.30163
                    00.00   0.34472       00.00   0.38781      00.00    0.43090      00.00    0.47399
                    00.00   0.51708
                          0   +          +          +          +          +         F: LOADS
                          0                                                si
                          0                                                (NPS LOADS)
                          0   +          +          +          +          +         G: PARAMETERS
                          +        +                      +          +          +         H: CONSTANT
                  GLOBALS          0
                CHEMICALl          0
                SEDIMENT1          0
                          0    +         +          +          +          +       I:TIM FUNCTIONS
               Cl                                              0  0.0          40 J:INITIAL  Cs
                  1:      14.00        1.0   2:      13.70        1.0   3:      13.30        1.0
                  4:      13.00        1.0   5:      12.50        1.0   6:      12.00        1.0
                  7:      11.50        1.0   8:      11.00        1.0   9:        9.30       1.0
                 10:       7.60        1.0   11:       6.00       1.0   12:       3.00       1.0
                si 13:      0.00       1.0                     0  0.0          40
                  1:      00.00        0.0   2:      00.00        0.0   3:      00.00        0.0
                  4:      00.00        0.0   5:      00.00        0.0   6:      00.00        0.0
                  7:      00.00        0.0   8:      00.00        0.0   9:      00.00        0.0
                 10:      00.00        0.0   11:     00.00        0.0   12:     00.00        0.0
                 13:      00.00        0.0





































                                                        64








              TOXI FC analysis during average-conditions:

               TEST OYSTER R TOXI INPUT' FILE: DATE: 05/24/96              FILE:ORT6GSC2.INP
               LINKED to  OR6S.HYD
               NSEG N-SYS ICFL MFLG   JMAS NSLN INTY ADFC      DD HHMM         A:MODEL OPTIONS
                  13      2    0      0    1     0    1  0.0      0 0000
                    1     2    3   11   12    13
                    1
                  0.00625         10.
                    1
                 0.041667         10.
                    0     1    1      1    1
                    1     0    +           +          +           +         +           B:EXCHANGES
                    1       1.0         1.0                               (water column diffusion)
                  14
                      382       42.0       0     1
                      361       40.2       1     2
                      263       28.0       2     3
                      272       44.0       3     4
                      162         366      4     5
                          13   10000       5     6
                          95      558      5     7
                      115         393      7     8
                          20   10000       a     9
                          51      604      8  10
                          69      343   10    11
                          35      393   11    12
                          33      320   12    13
                          38      238   13       0


                    10.00           0.     10.00        365.
                    0     1    1      1    1     1
                    2     0       1.0      +          +           +         +           C: VOLUMES
                    1.0000     1.0000
                          1           0          1    620400           0          0           0         0
                          2           0          1    436600           0          0           0         0
                          3           0          1    31:8440          0          0           0         0
                          4           0          1    293300           0          0           0         0
                          5           0          1    229600           0          0           0         0
                          6           0          1    21170            0          0           0         0
                          7           0          1    203300           0          0           0         0
                          8           0          1    148680           0          0           0         0
                          9           0          1    40480            0          0           0         0
                          10          .0         1    128440           0          0           0         0
                          11          0          1    94620            0          0           0         0
                          12          0          1    52245            0          0           0         0
                          13          0          1    26325            0          0           0         0
                    3     1    OR6S.HYD    +          +           +         +           D: FLOWS
                    0     1    1      1    1     1
                          2    +           +          +           +         +           E: BOUNDARIES
                      1.00        1.00                                          Fecal Coliform
                    1     13
                    0.0800     0.00000     0.0800     0.04309     0.0800    0.08618     0.0800    0.12927
                    0.0800     0.17236     0.0800     0.21545     0.0800    0.25854     0.0800    0.30163
                    0.0800     0.34472     0.0800     0.38781     0.0800    0.43090     0.0800    0.47399
                    0.0800     0.51708
                    13 ,  13
                    0.79200    0.00000     0.79200    0.04309     0.79200   0.08618     0.79200   0.12927
                    0.79200    0.17236     0.79200    0.21545     0.79200   0.25854     0.79200   0.30163
                    0.79200    0.34472     0.79200    0.38781     0.79200   0.43090     0.79200   0.47399
                    0.79200    0.51708
                          2                                                                   S1



                                                            65
















                      1.00        1.00
                   1    13
                    00.00     0.00000       00.00    0.04309        00.00     .0.08618       00.00    0.12927
                    00.00     0.17236       00.00    0.21545        00.00     0..258.54      00.00    0.30163
                    00.00     0.34472       00.00    0.38781        00.00     0.43090        00.00    0.47399
                    bO.00     0.51708
                   13    13 -                                                                                         I
                    00.00     .0.00000      00.00    0.04309        00.00     0.08618        00.00    0.12927
                    .00.00    0.17236       00.00    0.21545        00.00     0.25854        00.00    0.30163
                    00.00     0.34472       00.00    0.38781        00.00     0.43090        00.00    0.47399
                    00.00     0.51708
                          4     +           +            +          +           +          F: LOADS
                       1.0          1.0
                   6      2
                    1.172           0.      1.172        365.                                  Cl
                   7      2
                    1.172           0.      1.172        365.                                  Cl
                   9      2
                    5.063           0.      5.063        365.                                  Cl
                   12     2
                    2.232           0.      2.232        365.                                  Cl
                          0                                                      si
                          0                                                     (NPS LOADS)
                          0     +           +            +          +           +           G: PARAMETERS
                          +           +           +           +                        +         H: CONSTANT
                   GLOBALS            0
                CHEMICALl             0
                 SEDIMENT1            0
                          0     +           +            +          +           +        I:TIME FUNCTIONS
               Cl                                                   0  0.0    5.70E10 J:INITIAL      Cs
                   1:     0.2000         1.0    2:       0.2000        1.0    3:       0.2000        1.0
                   4:     0.2000         1.0    5:       0.2000        1.0    6:       0.2000        1.0
                   7:     0.2000         1.0    8:       0.2000        1.0    9:       0.2000        1.0
                   10:    0.2000         1.0    11:      0.2000        1.0    12:      0.2000        1.0
                si 13:    0.2000         1.0                        0  0.0           40
                   1:      00.00         0.0    2:       00.00         0.0    3:       00.00         0.0
                   4:      00.00         0.0    5:       00.00         0.0    6:       00.00         0.0
                   7:      00.00         .0.0   8:       00.00         0.0    9:       00.00         0.0
                   -10:    00.00         0.0    11:      00.00         0.0    12:      00.00         0.0
                   13:     00.00         0.0





























                                                            66








               TOXI total nitrogen analysis during average conditions:
               TEST OYSTER R TOXI INPUT FILE: DATE: 07/31/96               FILE:OR T6GSC6.INP
               LINKED to    OR6S.HYD
               NSEG NSYS   ICFL MFLG JMAS NSLN INTY ADFC DD HHMM               A:MODEL OPTIONS
                  13     2    0     0     1     0    1 0.0       0  0000
                   1     2    3     11   12   13
                   1
                  0.00625         10.
                   1
                  0.041667        10.
                   0     1    1     1     1     1
                   1     0    +           +          +           +          +           B:EXCHANGzs
                   1         1.0         1.0                              (water column diffusion)
                  14
                      382        .42.0    0     1
                      361        40.2     1     2
                      263        28.0     2     3
                      272        44.0     3     4
                      162         366     4     5
                        13      10000     5     6
                        95        558     5     7
                      115         393     7     8
                        20      10000     8     9
                        51        604     a   10
                        69        343    10   11
                        35        393    11   12
                        33        320    12   13
                        38        238    13     0

                    10.00           0.     10.00         365.
                   0     1    1     1     1     1
                   2     0        1.0     +          +           +          +            C: VOLUMES
                   1.0000     1.0000
                         1          0           1    620400           0           0          0           0
                         2          0           1    436600           0           0          0           0
                         3          0           1    318440           0           0          0           0
                         4          0           1    2R3300           0           0          0           0
                         5          0           1    229600           0           0          0           0
                         6          0           1     21170           0           0          0           0
                         7          0           1    203300           0           0          0           0
                         8          0           1    148680           0           0          0           0
                         9          0           1     40480           0           0          0           0
                        10          0           1    128440           0           0          0           0
                        11                      1     94620           0           0          0           0
                        12          0.          1     52245           0           0          0           0
                        13          0           1     26325           0           0          0           0
                   3     1    OR6S.HYD    +          +           +          +           D: FLOWS

                                                                            +           E: BOUNDARIE S
                         2    +           +          +           +
                      1.00       1.00                                           Fecal Coliform
                   1    13
                   0.0100    0.00000      0.0100    0.04309      0.0100    0.08618      0.0100    0.12927
                   0.10100   0.17236      0.0100    0.21545      0.0100    0.25854      0.0100    0.30163
                   0.0100    0.34472      0.0100    0.38781      0.0100    0.43090      0.0100    0.47399
                   0.0100    0.51708
                  13    13
                  0.01820    0.00000     0.01820    0.04309      0.01820   0.08618     0.01820    0.12927
                  0.01820    O.i7236     0.01820    0.21545      0.01820   0.25854     0.01820    0.30163
                  0.01820    0.34472     0.01820    0.38781      0.01820   0.43090     0.01820    0.47399
                  0.01820    0.51708
                         2                                                                    S1



                                                            67



















                     1.00        1.00
                   1    13
                     00.00   0.00000       00.00    0.04309       00.00   0.08618        00.00   0.12927
                     00.00   0.17236       00.00    0.21545       00.00   0.25854        00.00   0.30163
                     00.00   0.34472       00-00    0.38781       00.00   0.43090        00.00   0.47399
                     00.00   -0.51708
                   13   13
                     00.00   0.00000       00.00    0.04309       00.00   0.08618        00.00   0.12927
                     00.00   0.17236       00.00    0.21545       00.00   0.25854        00.00   0.30163
                     00.00   0.34472       00.00    0.38781       00.00   0.43090        00.00   0.47399
                     00.00   0.51708
                          4    +          +          +            +         +          F: LOADS
                       1.0         1.0
                   6,     2
                     0.268         0.      0.268        365.                               Cl
                   9      2
                     1.678         0.      1.678        365.                               Cl
                   10     2
                     5.248         0.      5.248        365.                               Cl
                   12     2
                     1.147         0.      1.147        365.                               Cl
                          0                                                   si
                          0                                                  (NPS LOADS)
                          0    +           +         +            +         +           G: PARAMETERS
                          +          +          +           +                      +         H: CONSTANT
                   GLOBALS           0
                 CHEMICALl           0
                 SEDIMENTI           0
                          0    +           +         +            +         +        I:TIME FUNCTIONS
                Cl                                                0 0.0     5.70E10 J:INITIAL    Cs
                   1:     0.0100        1.0    2:     010100        1.0     3:     0.0100        1.0
                   4:     0.0100        1.0    5:     010100        1.0     6:     0.0100        1.0
                   7:     0.0100        1.0    8:     0;0100        1.0     9:     0.0100        1.0
                   10:    0.0100        1.0   11:     '0.0100       1.0   12t      0.0100        1.0
                   13:    0.0100        1.0
                si                                                0 0.0           40
                   1:     00.00         0.0    2:       00.00       0.0     3:     00.00         0.0
                   4:.    00.00         -0.0   5:       00.00       0.0     6:     00.00         0.0
                   7:     00.00         0.0    8:       00.00       0.0     9:     00.00         0.0
                   10:    00.00         0.0    11:      00.00       0.0   12:      00.00         0.0
                   13:    00.00         0.0


























                                                           68








              TOXI phosphate analysis during average conditions:
              TEST OYSTER R TOXI INPUT FILE: DATE: 08/05/96               FILE: OR T6GSC7.INP
              LINKED to OR6S.HYD
              NSEG NSYS   ICFL MFLG   JMAS NSLN MY ADFC       DD HHMM         A:MODEL OPTIONS
                  13      2     0     0    1     0   1 0.0      0 0000
                    1,    2     3  11      12  13
                    1
                  0.00625         10.
                    1
                 0,041667         10*
                    0     1     1,    1
                    1     0     +          +         +                      +          B:EXCHANGES
                    1       1.0         1.0                              (water column diffusion)
                  14
                      382       42.0       0     1
                      361       40.2       1     2
                      263       28.0       2     3
                      272       44.0       3     4
                      162         366      4     5
                          13    10000      5     6
                          95      558      5     7
                      115         393      7     8
                          20    10000      8     9
                          51      604      8  10
                          69      343      10 11
                          35      393      11 12
                          33      320      12 13
                          38      238      13    0


                    10.00             0.   10.00        365.
                    0     1     1     1    1     1
                    2     0       1.0      +         +           +          +           C: VOLUbMS
                    1.0000      1.0000
                          1           0          1   620400             0         0          0            0
                          2           0          1   436600             0         0          0            0
                          3           0          1   318440             0         0          0            0
                          4           0          1   293300             0         0          0            0
                          5           0          1   2i9600             0         0          0            0
                          6           0          1    21170             0         0          0            0
                          7           0          1   203300             0         0          0            0
                          8           0          1   148680             0         0          0            0
                          9           0          1    40480             0         0          0            0
                          10          0          1   128440             0         0          0            0
                          11          ..0        1    94620             0.        0          0            0
                          12          0          1    52245             0         0          0            0
                          13          0          1    26325             0         0          0            0
                    3     1     OR6S.HYD   +         +           +          +           D: FLOWS
                    0     1     1     1    1     1
                          2     +          +         +           +          +           E: BOUNDARIES
                      1.00        1.00                                          Fecal Coliform
                    1     13
                    0.0012      0.00000'   0.0012    0.04309     0.0012     0.08618     0.0012    0.12927
                    0.0012      0.17236    0.0012    0.21545     0.0012     0.25854     0.0012    0.30163
                    0.0012      0.34472    0.0012    0.38781     0.0012     0.43090     0.0012    0.47399
                    0.0012      0.51708
                    13    13
                    0.00190     0.00000    0.00190   0.04309     0.00190    0.08618    0.00190    0.12927
                    0.00190     0.1-723.6  0.00190   0.21545     0.00190    0.25854    0.00190    0.30163
                    0.00190     0.34472    0.00190   0.38781     0.00190    0.43090    0.00190    0.47399
                    0.00190     0.51708
                          2                                                                    S1




                                                            69


















                     1.00        1.00
                     1.  13
                     00.00    0.00000        00.00    0.04309        00.00    0.08618       00.00     0.12927
                     00.00    0.17236        00.00    0.21545        00.00    0.25854       00.00     0.30163
                     00.00    0.34472        00.00    0.38781        00.00    0.43090       00.00     0.47399
                     00.00    0.51708
                     13  13
                     00.00    0.00000        00.00    0.04309        00.00    0.08618       00.00     0.12927
                     00.00    0.17236        00.00    0.21545        00.00    0.25854       00.00     0.30163
                     00.00    0.34472        00.00    0.38781        00.00    0.43090       00.00     0.47399
                     00.00    0.51708
                          4      +           +          +           +           +           F: LOADS
                       1.0          1.0
                     6    2
                     0.0187         0.       0.0187       365.                                 cl
                     9    2
                     0.0724         0.       0.0724       365.                                 cl
                     10   2
                     0.7260         0.       0.7260       365.                                 cl
                     12   2
                     0.0603         0.       0.0603       365.                                 Cl
                          0                                                       si
                          0                                                      (NPS LOADS)
                          0      +           +          +            +          +           G: PARAMETERS
                          +           +            +          +           +           +           H: CONSTANT
                     GLOBALS          0
                 CHEMICALl            0
                 SEDIMENT1            0
                          0      +           +          +            +          +        I:TIME FUNCTIONS
                cl                                                   0  0.0     5.70E10 J:INITIAL     Cs
                          0.0010          1.0      2:   0.0010          1.0     3:    0.0010          1.0
                     4:   0.0010          1.0      5:   0.0010          1.0     6:    0.0010          1.0
                     7:   0.0010          1.0      8:   0.0010          1.0     9:    0.0010          1.0
                     10:  0.0010          1.0    11:    0.,0010         1.0   12:     0.0010          1.0
                     13:  0.0010          1.0
                si                                                   0  0.0          40
                     1:    00.00          0.0      2:     00.00         0.0     3:      00.00         0.0
                     4:    00.00          0.0      5:     00.00         0.0     6:      00.00         0.0
                     7:    00.00          0.0      8:     00.00         0.0     9:       00.00        0.0
                     10:   00.00          0.0    11:      00.00         0.0   12:        00.00        0.0
                     13:   00.00          0.0























                                                              70




                                                                                               I
                                                                                               i
                                                                                               I
                                                                                               I
                                                                                               i
                                                                                               I
                                                                                               I
                                                                                               I
                                                                                               I
                                                                                               I
                                                                                               I
                                                                                               I
                                                                                               I
                                                                                               i
                                                                                               I
                                                                                               I
                                                                                               I
                                                                @                    -         I
                                                                @ 3 6668 14109 2652            1