-------
available, the survey data indicated that 50% of the  sites  on  the  south,
north, and  east shores had  undersized septic  tanks.   Only 14%  of  the
septic tanks found along the  western shore were  undersized.  This  shore-
line has  the  fewest  number of ST/SAS which are  older  than 10 years  and
consequently a  larger  number  comply with the standards for septic tank
size.

     Site Limitations.   Because  no  percolation  test  is  required for  a
permit and  because depth  to  groundwater is shallow throughout much of
the  Proposed  Service Area,  it  is  suspected  that  many on-site  systems
violate the standards  with respect  to site limitations.  MPCA standards
for  individual  sewage  treatment systems (WPC-40) require that the size
of the drainfield be determined  by the soils percolation  rate.  Although
the  SCS soils  survey has  not been  completed  for the  Study Area,  avail-
able survey data indicate that the soils are quite  variable.   Generally,
suitable  sandy and  sandy loam  soils  are found along  Green  Lake,  but
impervious  clay areas  are  not uncommon.   Some excessively permeable
soils along the  west shore,  and some impervious soils around Nest Lake
have  been  noted  as  having  site  limitations  (by  telephone,  Steve
Peterson,  May 1978).

4.   PROBLEMS  WITH EXISTING  SYSTEMS

     Numerous   violations  of  the  standards   for   ST/SAS   conditions
throughout  some parts of  the Study Area  have   led  to  the question of
whether existing  systems  along  the lakeshore are causing  public  health
or water quality problems.  The  distinction should  be made  between water
quality and public  health problems  on  the  one hand  and nuisance or
community improvement problems on the other hand.  On-site  systems known
to  contribute  to violations  of water quality  standards  or changes in
trophic status  pose  water quality problems.   Public  health problems  may
result from ponding  of effluent on the soil surface  or contamination of
groundwater supply in  excess of drinking water  standards.  Where lakes
are  used  for  contact recreation, violation of the fecal coliform stan-
dard  also  constitutes  a   public  health hazard.  Community improvement
problems  include  odors,  restrictions  on  water  use and  restrictions on
building expansion.

5.   PUBLIC HEALTH PROBLEMS

a.   Backups/Ponding

     Despite numerous  alleged violations of the County's  standards  for
on-site  systems,  and  an  alleged  shallow  depth  to  groundwater found
throughout  much of  the  Proposed  Service Area, the  number of  systems
which pose  public  health  problems as a result  of backups  or  ponding is
relatively  few.  The County  has indicated that where problems do occur
they  are  usually the  result  of  residents  converting  from seasonal to
permanent  status.   When  this  happens,  the individual soil  absorption
systems may not be  large  enough to  accommodate the extra flow.  Con-
version from  seasonal  to  permanent  status has been most frequent along
the eastern shore.

     The  County  indicated  that  the  number of failures around Nest Lake
is  also  low;  although impermeable  soils are found  in some  areas,  the

                                  65

-------
lots are adequately sized and many of the  systems  have been upgraded  (by
telephone, Steve Peterson, May 1978).

     Based  on  data  gathered during  the  Sanitary  Survey only  13%  (9
systems)  had  ever  experienced  problems  with  backups  or   pondings.
Appendix C-9 summarizes  data on these systems.  At  least  three of  these
problem systems were in need of maintenance  which  is expected  to  correct
the problem.   Only five  ST/SAS or  7% of  those surveyed had backups  or
ponding on more than one occasion each year.   It is  not  clear  that  these
problems are the  result  of site limitations.   All of these systems were
more  than 10 years  old, at  least  one septic  tank was undersized  and
three  had  a poor  maintenance  record.  However,  all five systems were
suspected of being in an area where the groundwater  level  was  high  (less
than 8 feet).  The location of these few systems with recurring problems
was limited to the north and east shores of  the lake.

     The EPIC aerial  photographic  survey  was  flown  in August  of  1978 to
identify  surface  malfunctions.   As  Figure   11-11  shows,   only  three
marginally  failing  ST/SAS were  detected along the Green Lake  shoreline.
The two marginally failing systems observed  along  the north shore may be
in an area with a high groundwater level.  Since many of the  systems  are
poorly maintained,  however,  these  surface malfunctions  cannot be attri-
buted  to  site limitations  without  further  investigation.  One  failing
and one marginally failing system were observed along the  north shore of
Nest  Lake.   Some  impervious soils  are  known  to  exist  in  this  area.

b.   Groundwater  Contamination

     As  discussed   in  Section  II.B.2  only  localized  high  nitrate
concentrations in groundwater have been found  in the Study Area.  Out of
97  water well  samples  tested  in  July 1977,  only  two samples showed
nitrate  concentrations  in  excess  of the public  health drinking  water
standard  of 10  mg/1.   Their  samples  were  from wells located in  the
northeast  and  east  lakeshore  areas (see Appendix  C-l  for  well data).

c.   Water Quality Problems

     Based  on  data available through the National Eutrophication Survey
and  the  results  of  the  "Septic Snooper" analysis   (see  II.B.I)  septic
tanks  are  not significantly contributing to  water  quality degradation.
It  is  estimated  that septic tanks contribute  only 6% of the  total  phos-
phorus  load to Green Lake and  that the lake  is  mesotrophic  in  status.
Kerfoot  (1979)  observed that  only a  small  number of septic leachate
plumes were being discharged into Green Lake during  a March  1979  survey.
These  plumes were  associated  mainly with sites  along  the north shore;
the  phosphorus  loadings  at  a location adjacent to  the plumes were  in-
significant  compared  to  the load contributed  by  the Middle  Fork of the
Crow River.

     There   is  no  evidence  that  existing  systems  are  contributing
significant  bacterial  loads.   Bacterial levels  along nearshore  areas
were  generally below the  Minnesota  State  Health   Department, and MPCA
standards   for  recreational  waters  (Green  Lake   Property  Association
1970-1971;  MPCA 1968-1968;  and SW  State  University 1975-1977).   Values
in  excess of the standards were found in inlet  and outlet  streams  and

                                  66

-------
these levels could not  be  attributed to septic tank leachate.  Kerfoot
(1979) detected very low levels  of fecal coliform (generally less than
10 counts/100 ml) in surface  water located  at  the  discharge  of  a  septic
leachate plumes.

d.   Other Problems

     Some  residents  served by on-site  systems have reported localized
algal growth  along  the Green Lake shoreline.   While localized algal
growth may be  considered  a  nuisance since it interferes  with recrea-
tional activity and  is  aesthetically displeasing,  it is not  necessarily
indicative of a water quality problem.

     The  sanitary survey  investigated the  extent  of  Cladophora  growth
along the  Green Lake shoreline.   Since the natural nutrient level  in
Green Lake is low,  growth of the  filamentous algae,  Cladophora is  depen-
dent  on  localized nutrient sources.  Table II-8 summarizes  the results
of the  Cladophora  study.   The dead Cladophora found  washed up  on  the
north and west  shore  may  not have  grown adjacent to  those  sources.
Green Lake had been lowered prior  to the  time of the  survey and there
were  signs  of  dead  Cladophora  along the   shoreline  where  no live
Cladophora was  found in water.

     Dense  patches  of  Cladophora  were  observed  only  along the north
shore and at the point  of  outflow of the Canal  on  the east  shore.
D.   BIOTIC RESOURCES

     Of the 16,700 acres in the Green Lake Study Area,  40% is water,  19%
is forested, 30%  is  under cultivation,  and 4% is developed for  residen-
tial and  industrial  purposes,  (including  the New London  National Fish
Hatchery).  The 7% remaining  is in open space:  wetlands,  hay  meadows,
fallow land in private  ownership,  Minnesota wildlife  refuges or Federal
waterfowl  areas.  Scattered throughout  the Study Area, the forests  and
open lands provide habitat  for a variety of wildlife, including  amphi-
bians,  reptiles,  birds,  and mammals.

     The State of Minnesota regards wildlife as a resource and regulates
the  shooting  of  upland birds  and game  mammals,  as  well  the taking  of
fur-bearing animals  in  season.  A major concern  about  the Green Lake
project is  the  maintenance or improvement of  the  quality of  lake  and
stream waters in  a manner that will conserve valuable  wildlife  habitat.

1.   AQUATIC BIOLOGY

a.   Aquatic Vegetation

     The  production  of  plant  material ultimately determines the  number
and kinds of animals  that can  be supported in a lake or stream.   Further-
more, the number of species of aquatic plants arid their relative numbers
indicate in a qualitative manner the degree of nutrient pollution of  the
water.   In  the  poor quality  water of  midwestern  eutrophic lakes,  the
relatively  few  species  of aquatic  vascular  plants*  are  dominated  by
                                  67

-------
                                  Table II-8

                          RESULTS OF SANITARY SURVEY
                       (# of Homesites with Cladophora)
Shoreline
North
West
South
East
Total
Homes
Surveyed
33
11
20
10
74
Slight to
Moderate
Cladophora
5**
5
9
4
21
Heavy
Cladophora
2
0
0
0***
2
Heavy
Dead*
6
5
0
0
11
*     This algae was not necessarily associated with the home adjacent to where
      algae was found.

**    Only 16 sites were free of ice cover.

***   Heavy Cladophora  growth was found near canal.
                                      68

-------
water  milfoil.    Blue-green  algae  or  late  summer  algal "blooms"  may
produce  green-colored  water  in eutrophic lakes  and  foul-smelling piles
of decaying vegetation on the shorelines (Lind and Cottam 1969).

     A limited survey  of  the aquatic plants of Green Lake and Nest Lake
conducted  in  1971 by  DNR found a mix  of semi-aquatic*  (shoreline)  and
rooted aquatic plants* but no  water milfoil.   The algal blooms reported
to be  heavy at times  in  the Nest Lake did not  appear  to significantly
reduce light  penetration  during  critical  times of year  for  the rooted
plants.

     The DNR  surveyors estimated  that  only 1% of the  surface  of Green
Lake was covered with emergent plants (bulrushes,  cattails,  manna  and
other  grasses)  probably  because  of  its  great  average  depth  and  the
absence  of embayments.   Green  Lake's  exposed  shoreline is  regularly
scoured  by  waves  and ice, both detrimental to  the production of rooted
aquatic  vegetation.  In Green  Lake,  rooted  aquatic plants were found to
a depth of 35 feet, indicating  very clear  water.   Rooted vegetation grew
from depths of 30 feet in Nest Lake,  7%  of whose surface was estimated
to be covered with emergent plants.

b.   Fishes

     Green Lake and  Nest  Lake  are important for recreation and serve as
habitats and  spawning areas for  fish  and  wildlife.   These  lakes  have
been  classified  by the Minnesota DNR  as follows (by  telephone,  Elvin
Tews, October 1978):
Lake      Ecological Classification

Green     Bass, panfish, walleye

Nest      Bass, panfish, walleye
            (northern pike)
Management Classification

     Same Species

     Same Species
The fact  that  the  management classification is the same as the ecologi-
cal  classification indicates  that the  composition  of the  fishery  is
consistent with management goals based on the physical parameters of the
lakes.

     Woodcock  Lake supports populations of only bullheads  and minnows.
The  fauna is  determined  in  part  by frequent  "winterkills",  or  fish
die-offs, caused by  severe reductions in the level of dissolved oxygen.
Winterkills are most common in shallow lakes where a long period of snow
cover  can  reduce  or  prevent  significant photosynthesis  by  aquatic
plants.  In Woodcock Lake, this problem is aggravated by the high oxygen
demand resulting  from the  breakdown  of organic wastes discharged from
the Spicer wastewater treatment facility.

     The  most  recent survey  of  lake fishes was conducted  by Minnesota
DNR in 1971  (by telephone,  Elvin  Tews,  October 1978).  A  list of the
number of species  and their relative densities for  Green  Lake and Nest
Lake appears in Appendix E-l.  Although the densities varied, the

                                  69

-------
similar  composition  indicates a  healthy  diversity of  sport  and rough
fishes  in  these  lakes.   Results of  the  survey are  summarized  in the
following table which also shows  changes since  1954.
Lake      1971 Status

Green     Walleyes,  perch,
          rockbass,  green
          sunfish, bull-
          heads ,  pumpkin-
          seed above State
          average; others
          average.

Nest      Walleyes,  perch &
          bluegills  above.
Change since 1954
	survey   	

Increase in number
of bluegills; de-
crease in Cisco.
White crappie
decline in number.
   Important as
 spawning grounds for

  Walleyes, smallmouth
  bass, panfish,
  Cisco
Northern pike
and panfish.
     DNR  from  its  surveys  concluded that  population fluctuations are
common natural occurrences and  that  the  Lakes  are supporting large and
diverse fish populations.   (The New  London Fish Hatchery produces only
Salmon fry and fingerlings for release in Lake  Superior).

c.   Waterfowl,  Shore and  Wading Birds

     The  Study  Area  provides varied nesting  and  feeding  habitat for
waterfowl  and  other  water  birds.   It contains  five Federal waterfowl
protection areas plus the Dietrich  Lange  State  Wildlife Management Area.
Such marsh birds  as  great blue heron, black-crowned  night heron, little
green heron and American  egret feed  on  fish, crustaceans,* insects and
small vertebrate  animals  living in shallow water or  adjacent wetlands.
Waterfowl,  including mallards,  American mergansers, and  Canada geese
breed and  feed  on area  lakes.  Although  most birds are  summer residents
only,  some,  such as  the  small  numbers  of Canada geese which  use the
unfrozen section  of  the  Middle Fork  of the Crow  River and feed  in corn-
fields,  remain   in   the   Study Area  throughout the  winter  months.
Kandiyohi County,  located near the  Mississippi  Flyway, and with  about  40
State and Federal wildlife and waterfowl  areas, attracts migratory birds
(including waterfowl) especially in the autumn.

2.   TERRESTRIAL BIOLOGY

a.   Forest

     The  major  forests  in the  Study  Area  are   mixed  hardwood types,
including  many  elm  and  cottonwood  trees  (Kandiyohi  County  Economic
Development Plan  1977).   Forested  areas  are confined primarily  to river
and  stream banks, lakeshores  and  steep  hills; the  largest are  located
north  of  Green  Lake  and  Nest  Lake.  With the soils of the Study Area
continuing  to be  productive  for agricultural  crops,  neither  reforesta-
tion nor growth of the timber or pulp industry  is likely in  the  foresee-
able future there.
                                  70

-------
b.   Wildlife

     Vertebrate  wildlife  is  found throughout  the Study Area  wherever
there  is  habitat for  feeding  or  nesting.   Wildlife  is  likely  to con-
centrate  in  the state  wildlife  management areas  and  Federal waterfowl
protection areas,  but  undeveloped private  lands  are probably  locally
important  as  well.   Hunters  seek ring-necked  pheasants  in the  high
quality habitat provided by small wetlands found on many farms south and
east of Green  Lake,  and the ruffed grouse and  American  woodcock in the
forests.  Migratory waterfowl are major game  birds.

     The  forests,  especially  those north  of  Green  Lake,  provide  im-
portant habitat  for  the most valuable big game animal, the  white-tailed
deer,  which  although  it feeds  mostly  in  open  lands and crop  lands,
usually spends  periods  of inactivity in  forests.   Other  hunted  species
that may  rely  heavily  or solely on forest habitat are both  fox and gray
squirrels, raccoons,  and to  a  lesser extent, red  foxes  (by  telephone,
Charles Gernes,  24  October  1978).   Mammalian species  in  the  Study Area
valuable  for  sport  or as  food  for valuable  mammals  are  listed  in
Appendix  E-2.   Of  these,  a  small mammal, the 2-ounce meadow vole may be
the most  numerous;  it  is a staple food item in the diets of most larger
carnivorous  mammals  as well  as  of hawks, owls, and many large  snakes.
Meadow voles are  numerous  in grasslands or cattail marshes, often shar-
ing  the  latter with  their  close  relative,  the muskrat.   According  to
Charles  Gernes,  Manager of  the  New London Fish  Hatchery, both  the
American bald eagle, classified as endangered by the Federal Government,
and the great  horned owl hunt in the Study Area; the owls nest there as
well.

3.   WETLANDS

     Wetlands deserve particular  consideration  because of their role in
purifying water, their value to wildlife, their potential susceptibility
to the  adverse  effects  of construction,  and their diminishing frequency
of occurrence within the Study Area.

     The  State  of Minnesota  recognizes  that wetlands are  valuable for
preserving and  maintaining  groundwater  levels,  as habitat for wildlife,
and as spawning grounds for certain important fishes, including northern
pike.  Even  lands not available for public use or not connected with any
navigable  waterway  are considered  to  be a  resource of  the  State;  the
alteration of  a wetland larger than 50 acres requires an application by
the landowner and a subsequent hearing.   In the event that permission to
drain  the wetland  is denied, the State must be prepared to  purchase the
lands under  either the State or Federal waterbank system.

     Part  of the  State's concern about the preservation  of wetlands  is
the  realization that although  they can  be  destroyed, directly  or  in-
directly,  within  a  short  time,  wetlands  cannot  be  reconstructed  or
restored  like  terrestrial or  water environments.  Wetlands  are formed
over  hundreds   or  thousands of  years by deposition  of sediments  and
organic  debris during  natural processes,  creating acid,  water-logged
soils  and a  range of other features that cannot be restored after harsh
disturbance.   For instance,  the lowering of the water table  by as little
                                  71

-------
a;  two or  three  feet  can cause  the  organic matter in the peaty soils to
b<  lost  through  oxidation within a short span  of months  or years (de-
pt nding partly en  whether the  soils  are burned).  The  raising of the
w.-«er table 5 years later  will  not  restore the  conditions that formerly
e: ..sted,  and in  this sense  wetlands  cannot be  restored.

     The  lack of shallow  embayments  and  coves  along  Green Lake's sym-
m tcical   shoreline  retards  the  development  of  large wetlands areas
ttore.

     Ditching to improve the drainage  for agricultural purposes  has led
tr  the  loss  of  much  wetland   area within  the  Green  Lake  Study Area,
d  Teasing  wildlife   habitat.    Nevertheless,   on  almost   every farm,
p f.'-hes  of land  remain,  some   several  acres  in extent, which  are too
p urly drained to be plowed and  planted.   (Such  moist patches of  wetland
m .>' be  vegetated by  cattails,  sedges,  willows  and alders.   Crops are
g nerally planted right up  to the edge of  intermittent  streams, drainage
d tches or  hay meadows.)   In addition to  those  near agricultural areas,
t i^re  are   several  extensive wetlands  near  other  lakes  and  streams,
c>vered by  herbaceous  growth and dominated by cattails.   Many of these
w tland areas have been  incorporated  into State-run wildlife management
ateas and  Federally managed waterfowl  areas.  The total wetland  acreage
io estimated to  be approximately 7%  of the Study Area  (see Figure II-7).

     Wetlands are  vital  to the  maintenance  of  wildlife   populations.
Alteration  of  some proportion  of  wetlands  would alter both  fish and
wildlife  populations   and  almost  certainly  reduce   the   recreational
potential of the Study Area.

4.   THREATENED OR  ENDANGERED SPECIES

     Kandiyohi County does not lie  within  the  primary  or peripheral
range of the  gray  wolf,  nor is  it within either the breeding or winter
t.ibitat of the American bald eagle.  Both  animals have  Threatened status
and are protected by  the Endangered Species  Act of 1973 (P.L. 93-205).
furthermore, none of  the  two  species  of butterflies  or five species of
pjants that have been proposed for special   status by the US Fish and
Vildlife Service is known in Kandiyohi County.   According to a  Letter of
iO April 1979 of D.H. Rasmussen,  Acting Regional  Director,  US Fish and
Wildlife Service,  no   species of  plant or animal  that is  additionally
protected by Minnesota law is known  to exist in  the Study Area.
E.   POPULATION AND  SOCIOECONOMICS

1.   POPULATION

a.   Introduction

     Population  information  for the  Green Lake  Study  Area is  derived
from published  data  and  primary field data collected during the  prepar-
ation  of this  EIS.   Published  information  from the US  Bureau  of  the
Census and other sources is available for Kandiyohi  County and  the  minor
civil  divisions (villages,  cities,  and  townships)  within the  County.
                                  72

-------
The Study Area consists of New London Village,  Spicer City,  and portions
of the New  London  Township,  Green Lake Township,  Harrison Township,  and
Irving Township.   It is not possible to accurately disaggregate existing
published data below the  township  level for the purpose of  describing
the population characteristics of the portions  of  the townships included
in the Study  Area.   Thus,  published socioecoiiomic data  is presented  for
the entirety  of  each  of  the minor civil divisions  wholly  or  partially
within the Study  Area.

     Primary  field  data was  gathered for the Proposed EIS  Service Area
(see Figure 1-3).   For the purpose of this  study,  the  Propos.ed Service
Area was  divided into  25  segments.   A map of  the segments  is  contained
in  Figure  11-13.   Population related  data collected  through  primary
field study include the number of permanent  and seasonal dwellings.   The
dwelling  counts  served  as  the  basis for  estimates of  permanent  and
seasonal population within the Proposed Service Area.

b.   Existing Population

     The  Proposed  Service  Area had an estimated  1976 permanent popula-
tion of  2,400 and  a seasonal population of  4,500.   The  1976  population
estimates were based on  field surveys.   Thus,  the Proposed  Service Area
had  a  total  summer population  of  6,900  with seasonal  and  permanent
residents accounting  for  65%  and 35% of the  total,  respectively.   New
London Village and  Spicer  City had the largest number and proportion of
permanent residents, while Green Lake Township, New London Township,  and
Irving Township all had large seasonal populations (see  Table  II-9  for a
detailed  breakdown  of  1976  permanent  and seasonal  population by minor
civil divisions).   No  data  specific  to  the Proposed  Service  Area  are
available on  either the permanent or seasonal  population prior to  1976.

c.   Population Projections

     Permanent and  seasonal  baseline Proposed  Service  Area populations
were projected for the year 2000.  Permanent population  projections were
based on projections developed by the Minnesota State Demographer (1978)
and the  Kandiyohi  County  Planning Commission (1977) for the minor  civil
divisions containing the Proposed Service  Area.  These  projections were
applied  to  the 1976 Service  Area estimates and adjusted  to reflect  the
proportion  of  future  population  growths   in minor  civil   divisions
expected to occur within the Proposed Service Area.

     Seasonal population for the year 2000 was  projected on  the basis of
1976 estimated seasonal population.   Projections  of seasonal  population
for  the  year 2000  were   estimated  for  each  segment  of the  Proposed
Service  Area.  The  future  ratio  of seasonal  to permanent population  was
revised  downward to  reflect  the  assumption that the ratio is  declining.
Built into  this  assumption is the understanding  that the conversion of
seasonal  residences to permanent residences  will  outnumber  new seasonal
residential construction.   A drop  of  20% in  seasonal  population  (from
4,500 to 3,600)  is  projected to occur by  the year  2000.

     A  total  summer population   was  calculated  based  on  seasonal  and
permanent population.  Permanent,  season?!  and total summer populations
                                  73

-------

-------
s
I
feuoseas
o auauHiiii

o
CM

01 jamnns XB3°1

M
g
rJ
S TlpHQ^^^^

0
*
rH
— —

^BUOStjag

O aU9UHUL13d
jannnns IH^OX
1
i
2 TBUOSB3S
vO

iH


JdulUftS [to4uX











00
rH
«-4
r-
00



in
O
r-j


r-
*ff
rH

rH

CO
rS
00
O


s
o
rH

00
CO
en
r*.


00

ov

a
•H
J3
a
o

3
2
a
01
01
H
o
m
00
o
CM


en
00
cn


en
rH
CM

VO

in
vO
CM
8
O
•H
1
I
*"*
in
cn
rH*
00
en


m
in
•*
rH



a.
f*
a
o
H
eo
5
g
M
CM
vO
CM
cn
vO
in


in
CM
00


r—
CM
cn

CM
CM
cn
m
CM
m
1-1
rH
sl-
av
•
rH
cn
rH
in
cn

vO
a\
rH
rH
CM


m
CO
VO
CM
a.
-H
A
a
o

c
o
•a
a

s
z
o
o
CM
CM


O
CM
CM


O



o
CM
CM
O
CM
CM
O


3
S
r*

O

s



S
^


(U
00
d
1— )
•H
>
§
•a
c
3
3
z
m
CM
o




-a-



m


a
CM
O
rH
cn
o
r*.
CM

s
rH
M
rH
O
rH
vO
en
cn
in
cn


rH

O
rH






•H
U
01
u
•H
O.
at
i
vO
i
*a-
*

iH
00
0

CM

sr


cn
in
r-
CM
8
rH
§

cn
i
*
i
oo
o
a
rH
O
„
CM
rH
O

^0


w
58
w
u
1
C/l
^
s
H

-------
are    : <   .. i  Tcibie  11-9.   A detailed explanation of the methodology of
cal    (• /  ':he>:e  population projections  is  provided  in  Appendix F-l.

      •>  -i"  \.-uf  ?OQO,  the  total  summer population  of  the  Proposed
Ser           , .•  projected  to be 8,407, an increase of 18% over the 1976
pop   .:  :.  estimate.   The  largest  absolute  increase  is  projected  to
occ    u KJW  London  Township which is expected to gain 828 residents by
the   cir ct;00.   The  permanent to seasonal population  ratio is expected
to    r: . e  ecu] d  have  on individual households.   The data  presented below
rep asent  income figures  for permanent residents.  3Mo data is available
for population income of seasonal residents.

     lu  1970,  the  mean  average family  income in the  Green Lake Study
Are   was  7.9,285  (see Appendix F-2).   Although  the Study  Area's mean
fam.ly  income  was  slightly  greater  than  the  county mean,  it was sub-
sta cially  less  than  the  national   and  state figures  of  $10,999  and
$11 048.   Significant  variation in mean incomes  of  the  individual com-
mun ties  within  the  Study  Area  were  evident,   ranging  from a  low  of
$6,  :.6  in  Irving Township  to a high of  $14,385  in Harrison Township.
Thu  , it appears that while aggregate figures for  the  Study Area were
ind Dative of a  moderate income area, pockets of low income households
wer  present.

     Compared  to Minnesota,  both  Kandiyohi County  and tbe  Green Lake
Stu y  Area  were  characterized by a  large proportion of lower  income
fam  Lies   (see Appendix   F-2).   Approximately  50%  oi  the  families   in
Min ,*sota  had an  income in 1970  of less than  $lf;,000,  while similar
sta istics  for  the  county  and the  Study Area  were 61.3%  and  64.6%,
respectively.

     The relatively low incomes experienced in the Study Area could have
bee-  the result of a number  of  factors such as:

     «     The agricultural  and tourism orientation  of the local economy
           providing  relatively low   skill/low wage  employment opportu-
           nities; and

     9     A  large  portion  of  the  population  was comprised  of elderly
           people, who were retired and living  on  fixed incomes.
                                  76

-------
b.   Poverty Levels

     In  1970  there  was a  slightly higher  incidence  of poverty  among
families in  the Study  Area  and Kandiyohi  County than in the  State  of
Minnesota  (see  Appendix F-2).   The  family poverty  rate  for the  Green
Lake Study Area was 10.8% for  this  period and for the state was  8.2%.
The proportion  of  families with incomes below the poverty level varied
considerably among  communities  in   the Study Area from a high  of 22.8%
in Irving Township to a low 4.4% in Spicer Village.

     A large proportion of persons with incomes below the poverty level
are elderly or 'retired and living on fixed incomes.   In 1970, persons  65
years or older accounted for  23% of all persons of poverty status in the
Study Area (see Appendix F-2).   New London Township  had an especially
high number (44%) of people who were 65 years or older and classified  as
living in poverty.

c.   Employment

     In  1970,  Kandiyohi County and  the State  of Minnesota were  char-
acterized  by  similar employment characteristics  with the exception  of
two  sectors:   agriculture and manufacturing.  Kandiyohi County and the
region were relatively more dependent on agriculture for employment than
the  state  as  a  whole.   More  current information  on  this  trend  will not
be available until  the  1980  Census.   The county's manufacturing employ-
ment  was  considerably   lower  than  either  the  region  or  the  State.
Although   agricultural  activity  has  been  declining  since  1960,  the
service  and  trade  industries  have  become  the  primary   sources  of
employment (see Table 11-10).

     Tourism played  a  significant  role in the local economy in  1972.   A
comparison of tourism-related services in Minnesota and Kandiyohi County
shows  the  importance   of  these  activities  to  the  county  (see  Table
11-11).   Hotels,  automotive  and  amusement  services  accounted  for  a
larger proportion  of services  in the county than  in the  State.  Retail
trade statistics  reinforce the observation of the importance of tourism
to the local economy (see Table 11-12).  Over 20% of all retail  trade  in
Kandiyohi  County  in 1972 was  related  to building  material   and farm
equipment  compared to 7% for Minnesota.  This divergence could be attri-
buted  to  retail  sale  for farm equipment  since  the  local  economy was
largely oriented toward agriculture.

     Financial Characteristics.  Financial  characteristics of the local
governments in  Green Lake Study Area are presented in Table 11-13.  The
information  includes taxable valuation of  real  property, total revenue
receipts,  total current expenses,  total capital outlay, and total in-
debtedness.  Such information is helpful in evaluating various financing
alternatives available  to local governments.

     In  Minnesota,  counties  serve as  agents  for subordinate government
units,  acting  as  the  collector  and  distributor  of  taxes  and grants.
Revenues are generated  from three major sources:
                                  77

-------
                               Table 11-10

                     KANDIYOHI  COUNTY PERCENT SHARE  OF
                    EMPLOYMENT  BY INDUSTRY 1960 and  1970
Agricult re

Construe .; on

Manufact' .-ing

Transpor'ation

Wholesale and
  Retail Trade

Finance

Public
  Adminis tration

Service( )

Utilitie.  and
  Commun"cation

Mining
State
1960
14,9
5.7
20.1
5.1
20.1
4.2
3.9
22.0
2.4
1.5
1970
7.7
5.7
21.0
4.1
22.0
4.6
3.8
27.6
2.5
1.0
Region 6E
1960
37.4
5.9
10.6
3.2
18.5
2.4
2.5
17.7
1.7
0.1
1970
21.9
6.2
19.4
2.8
20.7
2.6
2.7
21.7
1.9
0.1
Kandiyohi
1960 1970
29.8 '
7.2
8.5
6.4
18.3
3.1
2.8
21.9
1.8
0.2
17.4
6.6
11.1
4.6
24.6
2.7
3.1
27.7
2.1
0.1
(1)  Includes business and repair services, personal service workers, en-
     tertainment and recreation, professional and related services workers.

Sources:  Minnesota Socio-Economic Population
          Characteristic-Employment, Volume 2.

          Minnesota Analysis and Planning System (MAPS).
                                     78

-------
                               Table II - 11
                          SELECTED SERVICES - 1972
                           Minnesota
                               Kandiyohi County(1)
                    Receipts      Percent of    Receipts     Percent of
                    ($1,000)  Industry Receipts ($1,000)  Industry Receipts
 Hotels
$  188,879     10.8
$  332
14.9
Automotive
  Services
   185,916     10.7
   369
16.6
Amusement
   192,008     11.0
   326
14.7
Total Services       1,734,051
                              2,223
(1)  Excludes Willinar
Source:  U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census, Census of Selected
         Services 1972.
                                    79

-------
Building
 Materials,and
 Farm Equipment

General
 Merchandise
Food Stores
Automotive
 Dealers
Gasoline
 Service
 Station
Apparel Stores
Furniture Stores
Eating and
 Drinking Places
Drug Stores
Miscellaneous
 Retail Stores

Total
                                Table 11-12
                            RETAIL  TRADE  -  1972
                            Minnesota
                  	     Kandiyohi County(1)
  Sales     Percent of      Sales    Percent of
($1.000)    all Trade     ($1.000)   all Trade
$   601,195    7.1
 1, 240,686   14.8
 1,583,252    18.9
 1,503,205    17.9
   710,548     8.5


   369,731     4.4


   378,425     4.5



   659,344     7.8


   246,132     2.9



 1,059,879    12.7

$8,352,397
$   4,233    23.0


     (D)


    2,449    13.3



    4,130    22.4
    2,722    14.8


     (D).      ~


      404
2.2
    1,245      6.7


      (D)



    2,180     11,8

  $18,370
(1)  Excludes Willmar.
(D)  Withheld to avoid disclosure.
Source:  U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census, Census of Retail
         Trade-1972.
                                    80

-------
M


 
                *" >i
                                                                                 .8   ~
                                                                                 e   c
                                                                                 g
                                                                                 £
                                  —i  at
                                   t  >
                                   4J  OJ

                                   o  efi
                                *J 3 X

                                O L5 W
 .


"°
                                                            81

-------
     *    General property tax;
     •    Federal revenue sharing;  and
     •    State aid  to  local governments,  usually $25-$30 per  capita.

     From  these  revenues,  expenditures  for  general   government  and
capital outlays are  made.   Counties,  townships,  and cities all  can take
on debt in the form of general obligation bonds.   The debt  limit on such
bonds is  set  at  6-2/3%  of the taxable valuation of the  government unit.
General obligation bonds  require  voter approval in Minnesota.   In con-
trast, revenue bonds  have  no set  debt limit and do not  require  a public
referendum.

     According to Table  11-13  only the entities of Kandiyohi  County and
Spicer Village  have  outstanding debt.   At  the  end of  fiscal year 1975
Kandiyohi County had  a  total indebtedness of $3,464,780.  Of this debt
$1,155,000  were  general  obligation  bonds;   $2,109,780  were   special
assessment bonds; and $200,000  were other types of bonds.  The  general
obligation debt amounts  to $1,155,000, which was relatively low  compared
to a  debt limit of  $5,252,684.   The  Village  of Spicer's  debt was com-
prised of $18,000  in general  obligation bonds and $200,000  in  special
assessment  bonds.    Spicer  had  a  debt  limit  of  $104,417  on  general
obligation bonds.

3.   HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS

     The  total dwelling  unit count for the Proposed EIS Service Area in
1976  was  1,502 units.  Of  these,  753 units or 50%, were  occupied on a
year-round basis.   In 1970,  seasonal units accounted  for 11.9% of the
housing stock in Kandiyohi County  (see Table 11-14).

     Age  characteristics  of the  permanent  housing stock  provide  an
indication  of construction  trends in  the area.   The  distribution  of
housing ages  for the Study Area closely corresponds to  age distribution
for  the   State  and county.   However,  a wide variation in ages  exists
between the  communities  within the Study Area.   Irving Township  has a
relatively old stock, with 81.7%  of units built before 1939.   Both New
London  Township and  Green  Lake  Township  experienced   substantial  in-
creases in  residential  construction  between  1965  and  1970,  while very
little construction  activity was  evident in the villages  of  New London
and Spicer.

     The  median value of owner-occupied units and the median  gross rent
for  rental units  in the  Study Area were  considerably lower than the
national  and  state medians (see Table 11-15).  The  low values  could be
attributed to such factors as:

     *    The rural location of the Study Area;

     •    The  structural  conditions  and  amenities  of individual units;
          and

     •    Second homes and vacation homes are often of lower  value than
          year-round units.
                                  82

-------
               *- W

               i (C

               O i-H
                  SSf
              §5
              is,
                  2:'
              •o -H] M
              c .e tv
              e
                               o^«   c c


                               *c in   O
                               -n r-   in ir>








H
1
H
H
O
P^
Oi
i— i
CO
o
H
CO

w
Pd
u
y
O *^] 4>
CO .£ P.
i-1 CO
b C
I- > U
cc £ tv
= H •§
2

4-1
C
0
c o
1=11
c =
O 3 1-;
o S &;
             £Hii
•8
               •o hj
                3 «

               « i
               VJ I *T I
                               Cv —   C C
                                     v£i <•

                                     -s m
                                                       CO O n
                                                       r- O^ tN
                                                       *j «n m
                          —i    ra o
                                     g.2^
                                     I" C. c
                                             tu ^ u
                                             -I U O
                                             O.O
                                             -a

-------
                               Table II -15

                           HOUSING VALUE - 1970


                                     Median Value                 Median
                                Of Owner Occupied Unit          Gross Rent


        United States                 $17,130                      $110


        Minnesota                     $18,054                      $117


        Kandiyohi County              $14,779                      $ 94
Source:  U.S.  Bureau of the Census,
         County and City Data Book -  1972.
                                    84

-------
     Little  information  concerning  the  characteristics   of  seasonal
dwelling  units  in  the  Study  Area  is  available.1   The  1970  census
provides detailed  information on housing age, tenure patterns,  vacancy
rates, and other housing  characteristics for permanent  residences only.
Seasonal units  by  nature of  their  use  as  second homes or  vacation  re-
treats  are  likely  to differ  from  year-round homes  in  terms of  size,
value, condition and amenities.

4.   LAND  USE

a.   Existing  Land  Use

     Significant land uses in the Study Area include (see Figure 11-14):

     •    Small urban communities of  New London  Village  and the City of
          Spicer with a mix of commercial,  residential and  institutional
          uses;
              1 >
     •    Single family residential/recreational development adjacent to
          the shoreline of Green Lake and Nest Lake;

     •    Agricultural lands; and

     •    Open land consisting  mostly  of woodlands,  wetlands and lakes.

     Major  transportation  routes  serving  the  area include  Minnesota
Routes 9 and 23 which run east-west and US 71 which provides north-south
circulation.  The Burlington Northern  Railroad runs  north-south through
the Study Area but does not provide direct service to the area.

     The lakes, streams,  woods,  and  hills in the area provide aesthetic
value which, combined with the recreational value of  Nest Lake and Green
Lake  has  resulted  in  considerable  residential  development  of  land
bordering  these  lakes.   A majority of  these homes  are occupied on  a
seasonal basis only.

     Other   than   scattered,   tourist-serving   commercial   functions
throughout  the townships,  most commercial  activities  are located  in
village  centers or the  approaches  thereto.    Industrial  land  uses  con-
stitute  a minor percentage of  land use activity within  the Study Area.
The major  industrial  activities are gravel pit  operations  located  pri-
marily  in  the Green  Lake Township-New London Township  portions  of  the
Study Area.

b.   Future Land Use

     A Comprehensive  Zoning  Ordinance  for Kandiyohi  County was prepared
in 1977, and contained a zoning map.   This map was reviewed to obtain an
appraisal  of future  land use  patterns.   This zoning map  is  the  only
     Although specific information  is  available  for permanent units,  it
     is  not  reasonable  to  assume  that  permanent  and  seasonal  units
     exhibit similar characteristics.
                                  85

-------

-------
available information relating to future land use patterns for the Study
Area.  A majority of future land uses in the Study Area will be residen-
tial and  agricultural (see Figure  11-15).   As can be  seen from  Figure
11-15,   future  residential land  uses  were projected to be concentrated
around  Green  Lake,  Nest Lake,  Woodcock Lake,  New London Village  and
Spicer Village.

c.   Growth Management

     Kandiyohi County's  Shoreland Management  Ordinance established  the
major land development controls affecting acreage adjacent to Green Lake
and Nest Lake.  The Minnesota Shoreland Management Act requires counties
throughout  the State  to adopt  regulations  which attempt  to  reconcile
future  lakeshore development  pressures  with the environmental sensitiv-
ities and development capabilities of a lakeshore.

     The Kandiyohi County  Shoreland Management Ordinance has been inte-
grated  with the  county zoning ordinance  (see  Figure  11-15).   Shoreland
acreage around Green Lake and Nest Lake has (with minor exceptions) been
zoned  R-l  Residential:  Shoreland  Management District.   The  shoreland
management  district  is  intended  to  accommodate  residential development
"along  the  shores  of lakes,  streams and rivers, and in natural environ-
ment areas,"  while "retain(ing)  the physical  features  of the shoreland
and natural areas."

     Permitted uses  in  the   shoreland  management district  include  the
following:

     •    General agricultural pasture and minimum tillage cropland uses
          (drainage   of   wetland  areas  without  Planning  Commission
          approval is prohibited);

     •    Single-family non-farm detached dwellings, included individual
          mobile homes, of either a seasonal or permanent nature;

     •    Parks and other public recreation facilities owned or operated
          by county or other governmental agencies;

     •    Public  and private  camping  and  oiiting  areas operated on  a
          non-profit basis; and

     •    Historic sites and markers, commemorative public areas.

     Conditional  uses  permitted  in  the shoreland  management  district,
subject  to public  comment  and  Planning Commission  and  County  Board
review and approval, are:

     •    Golf  clubhouses,   country  clubs,  or  public  swimming  pools;

     •    Public  sewage  treatment  facilities,   and  similar  essential
          public utility and service structures;

     •    Recreation-oriented commercial establishments;
                                  87

-------

-------
     •    Churches;

     •    Recreational  vehicle  camping  (subject  to  Minnesota  health
          regulations; and

     •    Planned  residential  subdivision  developments   (subject  to
          special requirements).

     Special  provisions  for  planned  residential  subdivisions  relax
established density  restrictions  for  the  purpose of encouraging cluster
development, multiple dwellings and modular unit developments.   Minimum
required  land  area  is  20  acres.   Public  or community water and sewer
systems  are  required.    Maximum  permitted residential  densities  are
doubled, provided that  25% of the land (lakeshore area) is reserved for
public use  and  75%  of the lakeshore is left in a natural  state.  County
Planning  Commission  and  County   Board  review  and approval of planned
residential subdivision plot  and  site plan, together with issuance of a
conditional  use  permit,   are  required under  terms  of the  provision.

     Additional  provisions  influencing  the development  of  shoreland
acreage include:

     •    Restriction of cutting  or other disturbance of  natural forest
          ecology within  a 100 foot  wide  strip paralleling  the shore-
          line;

     •    Prohibition  of  construction in   areas  requiring grading  or
          filling where  such activity may  impair  water quality through
          erosion and sedimentation;

     •    Allowance  for clustered  residential  development,  subject  to
          plan  approval  by the Commission of Natural  Resources and the
          County  Commissioners,  with  higher net  residential  densities
          conditional upon provision   of  central  sewage  facilities  and
          preservation of  open space  through restrictive  deed covenants
          or public dedication; and

     •    Establishment  of   procedures  for   designation  of   special
          districts  in   areas  of acute  environmental sensitivity  re-
          quiring more  stringent  protective measures  than those other-
          wise available.

     Minimum  lot size,  frontage, and  setback  from the  lakeshcre  for
single-family   residential  development   in  the  shoreland  management
district vary with a lake's classification (see Table 11-16).

     Green  Lake  and  Nest Lake  have   both   been  classified as  general
development lakes.   A maximum density of two dwelling units per acre is
possible  for  residential  development  in   these  shoreland  management
districts.  Densities of  up  to four dwellings per acre are possible for
approved  planned  residential  subdivisions  or  cluster   developments.

     The  zone  outside contiguous  lake areas are  restricted  to general
agricultural activities including cash crops and animal husbandry.  This
is done to  regulate  the encroachment  of non-farm activities on agricul-
tural lands.
                                  89

-------
                                 Table 11-16

                    SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
                   RESTRICTIONS IMPOSED BY KANDIYOHI COUNTY

                             Minimum           Minimum        Minimum Setback
 Lake Classification         Lot Size        Lot Frontage     from Lakeshore

Natural Environment
  Lake (NE)                80,000 sq.ft.        200 ft.           200 ft.

Recreational
  Development .Lake (RD)    40,000 sq.ft.        150 ft.           100 ft.

General Development
  Lake (GD)                20,000 sq.ft.        100 ft.            75 ft.
          Source:  Kandiyohi County Shoreland Management Ordinance
                                      90

-------
5.   CULTURAL RESOURCES

a.   Archaeological Resources

     The Minnesota  State  Historical  Society  has  indicated the presence
of a number of important archaeological sites within the Study Area.   It
is  reported  that the area  immediately  to the east  of Green  Lake  was
occupied by  a Sioux  Indian Village led  by  Little Crow,  a  hereditary
chieftain and last  of his dynasty.   Remnants of a corn storage hole  are
still to be  seen at this campsite.  Lakotah Sioux bands  established a
great camp  on the north  shore  of  Green Lake.  This camp existed for well
over 100 years.  The burial mounds  for the camp were located just south
of the  Green  Lake outlet.   This  is  one  of the larger Indian mound com-
plexes in the State  of Minnesota.

b.   Historic Resources

     The State Historic  Preservation  Officer  (SHPO) has identified sites
and buildings of  historic significance in  the Study Area.  However, none
is  listed  on the National Register  of Historic  Sites.  The  Green Lake
Village was homesteaded beginning in 1869, with a number of settlements
as well as a  post office,  and grist mill.  One of the first missionary
sites  in  the state was located  contiguous  to the  Indian camp  on  the
north shore of Green Lake.

6.   RECREATION

a.   Potential

     One of the  prime attractions of the  Green Lake Area is its recrea-
tional  potential.   Major  activities  include  boating,  fishing, camping,
and swimming.   Table 11-17 indicates  in relative terms how much use each
lake has received and the potential  for overuse.

b.   County Parks

     County Park  4.   This park  is  located  on  the  southwest  shore  of
Green Lake  in the  community of  Spicer.    This park is  used only during
the day as a  public beach and picnic area.  It is 8 acres  in size  and
contains picnic tables,  bathhouse, beach,  off-street parking, fireplaces
and a well.

     County Park  5.   This park  is  situated  on  County  Road 30  on  the
northeast shore of  Green  Lake.   It  is a  heavily  wooded area with camp-
sites, picnic area and paved roads.

c.   Wildlife Areas

     Several wildlife management  areas  managed by the Minnesota Depart-
ment of Conservation exist within the Study  Area.  These  are listed in
Table 11-18 and  delineated  in  Figure 11-13.  In addition,  three Federal
waterfowl protection areas exist  near Green Lake.
                                  91

-------
    Name

Green

East Woodcock

Woodcock

Nest
                                 Table 11-17

                       RECREATIONAL POTENTIAL OF LAKES
                            WITHIN THE STUDY AREA

Acres
5,820
150
170
1,020

Shore
Miles
11.2
2.7
3.7
8.1

Crowding
Potential
Negligible
High
High
Low
Relative
Water
Crowding
High
High
Medium
High
            Source:  Kandiyohi County Planning Commission, 1971.
 Name of Unit

Dietrich Lange

Ringo Nest

   Total
                                 Table 11-18

                       MAJOR WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT AREAS
                            WITHIN THE STUDY AREA
Acres
Owned
1,045
452
1,497
Acres
Projected
-
448
448
Miles From Town

 3 E-NE Spicer

  2 NW Spicer
            Source:  Kandiyohi County Planning Commission, 1971.
                                     92

-------
                                 Table 11-19

                        PUBLIC ACCESS TO LAKES IN THE
                            GREEN LAKE STUDY AREA
Municipality

Townships of
New London,
Iriving,
Green Lake,
Village of
Spicer

Same as
above
New London
Township

Same as
above
   Lake
Green Lake
Green Lake
Nest Lake
Shore
Miles
Facility
Description
Approximate
Shoreline
Frontage
11.2
Same
 as
above

 8.1
Nest Lake     Same
               as
              above
County Park No. 5 -
swimming, boating,        800 ft.
rafting, camping
County Park No. 4 -
swimming, boating,        600 ft.
rafting, diving

Wayside Rest             1500 ft.
           Public access point       100 ft.
   Source:  Telephone interview with T. Peterson, 6E Regional Development
            Commission, Willmar, Minnesota, 3/15/78.
                                      93

-------
d.   Public Access

     Public access  to  Green Lake and  Nest  Lake is  relatively  limited
(see Table 11-19).  Although there is a total of approximately 23 miles
of lake  shoreline  in  the Study Area, less than 3% of  the  lakeshore  is
available for public access.
                                  94

-------
                              CHAPTER III

                    DEVELOPMENT  OF ALTERNATIVES
A.   INTRODUCTION

1.   GENERAL APPROACH

     New alternative systems for wastewater  collection  and  treatment in
the Proposed EIS Green  Lake  Service Area  (see  Figure  1-4) are. developed
in  this  chapter.   In  Chapter  IV,  the alternatives  are described and
compared, in  terms  of  cost-effectiveness, with  the Proposed Action in
the  Facilities  Plan Report:   Proposed Green  Lake  Sanitary Sewer and
Water  District  (Rieke   Carroll Muller  Associates  1976).   Chapter  V
assesses  the  environmental   and  socioeconomic  impacts  of all   these
systems.

     The development of new alternatives  in the EIS  focuses  on  those
aspects and implications of  the proposed  wastewater management plan for
the  Service  Area which  either  have been  identified as major issues or
concerns, or were not adequately  addressed in  the Facilities Plan.  The
high  cost  of  the  Facilities  Plan  Proposed  Action and  the potential
impact on area residents make the  cost-effectiveness of  proposed facili-
ties a major  concern.   Since the  collection  system  accounts  for approx-
imately 80% of  the  Proposed  Action, the extent of  servicing necessary,
along with alternative wastewater  treatment systems  and  the  use of  newer
technologies for wastewater  collection are investigated in  detail.  The
development of  alternative  treatment facilities  has been undertaken by
matching available  technologies,  both conventional  and alternative or
innovative,  to  the  site  conditions,  such as  soil  characteristics and
housing density in  the Proposed EIS  Service Area.

     Chapter I  of  this   EIS  emphasized  that an  important  issue is the
overall  need   for   the  project   proposed  in  the  Facilities   Plan.
Documenting a clear need for  new wastewater facilities  requires evidence
that the existing on-lot  systems  are directly related  to water quality
and public health problems.  Such a need  is  shown  when  one or  more of the
following conditions exist:

     •    Standing  pools of  septic  tank effluent or raw domestic sewage
          in yards  or public areas  where  direct contact with residents
          is likely.

     •    Sewage  in  basements  from  inoperable   or   sluggish  sewage
          disposal  systems.

     •    Contaminated   private wells  clearly  associated  with  sewage
          disposal  systems.

     The Proposed EIS  Service Area  exhibits some   indirect  evidence of
the unsuitability of site conditions  for  on-site soil  disposal systems.
The  evidence  includes  high  groundwater,  slowly  permeable soils,  small
                                  95

-------
lot  sizes,  proximity  to lakeshores  and substandard  setback  distances
between wells and  private wastewater facilities.   Available information
on  these  factors  was used  early  in the  preparation of  this EIS  to
develop the decentralized alternatives  designated EIS Alternatives 3, 4
5, and 6.

     Indirect  evidence  is   insufficient to  justify  Federal  funding,
however.  Federal  water pollution  control  legislation and regulations
require documentation of actual water quality or public health problems.
Section  II.C.  summarizes  the  extensive  efforts  mounted  during  the
preparation of  this  EIS  to  document  and  quantify  the  need for improved
facilities around Green Lake.

     The  dollar cost  of the  Facilities Plan  Proposed Action  and  its
impact  on area residents make cost  effectiveness  an issue equally  as
important as  documentation.   Since  the  collection system  accounts  for
the  major  share   of the  construction  costs  in  the  Facilities  Plan
Proposed Action, the extent  that sewers are needed and the use of other
technologies  for wastewater  collection  have been investigated in detail
here,   as   have   alternative   wastewater   treatment  systems.    The
technologies assessed are listed below:
             WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT COMPONENTS AND OPTIONS
Functional Component

Flow and Waste Load
Reduction
Options
     household water conserva-
     tion measures
     ban on phosphorus
     rehabilitation of existing
     sewers to reduce
     infiltration and inflow
Collection of Wastewaters
Wastewater Treatment
Processes
Effluent Disposal
     limited service area
     pressure sewers
     vacuum sewers
     gravity sewers

     conventional centralized
     treatment plus chemical
     treatment to reduce
     phosphorus concentrations
     land application
     on-site treatment
     cluster systems

     subsurface disposal
     land application
     discharge to surface
     waters
                                  96

-------
Sludge Handling                         -     anaerobic digestion
                                             dewatering

Sludge Disposal                         -     land application
                                             landfilling
                                             composting
                                             contract hauling

     Next,  appropriate  options  were  selected  and  combined  into  the
alternative systems that are described  in  Chapter IV.  The last section
of Chapter III considers  implementation, administration and financing of
the alternatives.

2.   COMPARABILITY OF  ALTERNATIVES:   DESIGN  POPULATION

     The  various   alternatives  for  wastewater  management  in  the  EIS
Service Area must  provide  equivalent  levels  of  service if their designs
and costs  are  to  be  properly compared.  A  design population of 8407 has
been  assumed  (see  Section  II.E.I)  in  the  following  evaluation  of
alternatives.   The design  population  is   that  population  projected  to
reside in  the  EIS  Service  Area  in the year  2000.  The methodology used
to develop this estimate  is presented  in Appendix E-l.

     The same year 2000  design population has been used as the basis for
all the EIS alternatives and the Facilities  Plan Proposed Action in the
interest  of equitable comparison;  it  must  be recognized,  however,  that
each  alternative  carries  its own constraints and that  the  wastewater
management system  chosen may itself be  a significant determinent of the
EIS Service Area's actual population  in  the year 2000.
3.   COMPARABILITY OF ALTERNATIVES:   FLOW  AND WASTE
     LOAD  PROJECTIONS

     Design  flows   for  centralized  treatment:  facilities  and  for  the
cluster systems are based  on a  design domestic  sewage flow of 60 gallons
per  capita  per day  (gpcd)  in  residential  areas  for both permanent and
seasonal residents.  Infiltration and inflow*  (I/I) into gravity sewers
was  added  to  the  calculated sewage  flow  in appropriate alternatives.
These data are summarized  in Table  I1I-1.

     The design flow used  in the  Facilities Plan  for the Proposed Action
ranged  from  15-190 gpcd,  including  I/I.   To compare  costs  properly in
this  EIS,   flows  developed  for  the EIS  alternatives were   used  to
re-calculate flows  for  the Proposed  Action.

     The  domestic   sewage  generation  rate  depends  upon   the  mix  of
residential, commercial, and institutional  sources in the area.  Studies
on  residential  water usage   (Witt,  Siegrist, and Boyle 1974;  Bailey et
al.  1969;  Cohen and Wallman  1976)  reported  individual household water
consumptions varying widely between  20  and 100 gpcd.  However, averaged
values  reported  in those  studies  generally  ranged  between  40-56 gpcd.
On  a  community-wide basis,  non-residential domestic (commercial, small
                                  97

-------




r~9
O
H
£










M
t^cj
M
H

*>
H
M
O
2









~
0>
g
H-
3

n>
*
o
1^
n>
(D
3

f
0)

fD
J?
fD
fD
3

t~*
?D
Jjij*
fD
>
»-(
fD







CO
£3*
0
fD

O
i-i
fD
fD
3

IT1
fu

fd
*^x



C/5
^
H-
O
fD
(^

<
H-
M
1— '
P3
OQ
fD
M

£)
fD
CO
rt
•0
H-
O
fD
i-i

>
i-l
fD
(U










fD
Qi
CO
rt
fD
i-l
0

sf
1 — »
HI

a
fD
CO
rt

t-1
IB
a
(D
CO
rt
r1
p)
^7*
n>
>
i-i
fD








ff
§J
,_,
0
y
p.
O
0
^>
l-(
fD
fo






00
4>-
O
o
^j
u>
                CO

h-1 Ml-'
VD Ln KJ
M 4>- CO
W N3 NJ
i-y
C! H
f O
> H
Si5
i



t-1 I-1
Ln ON 1 — '
O CO M
-P^ ON ON



o
<-a

t~* n
I> 2
H H
M M
o ta
a
w
CO
M
CD
si
Tl g
Si
0 W
2W
^> P"J
2
o
JYJ
M n
f Z*
o 2






H
to
cr
i-1
fD

M
M
M
1
1— '
                                                                                   0
       O Ui
       u> o
       oo -e-
                       NJ
                                       O

                                       t-o
                              O

                              —I
O O
s: H
o
o
O
OJ

J^

Ui
o u>
w o
CO -~l
o
CO
             o
             vO
                                                            f
                                                            o s:
                                                            O
                                                               w
                               98

-------
industrial, and  institutional) water  use increases  per  capita flows.
The extents of such increases are  influenced  by:

     •    the importance of the community as  a  local or  regional trading
          center;

     •    the  concentration  of  such  water-intensive  institutions  as
          schools  and hospitals; and

     •    the level of small industrial  development.

For  communities  with populations  of less than  5,000,  EPA regulations
allow design  flows in  the  range  of 60  to  70 gpcd  where existing per
capita  flow  data  is  not  available.    In  larger communities,  and  in
communities within Standard Metropolitan Statistical  Areas, the maximum
allowable flow ranges up to 85 gpcd.

     Water  consumption   by  seasonal   users  varies   much  more  than
consumption by  permanent  residents.   The actual  rates of consumption
depend upon such factors  as type  of accommodations in the area and type
of recreation areas  available.  EPA  regulations  (EPA  1978) suggest that
seasonal population can be  converted to  equivalent permanent population
by using the following multipliers:

          Day-use  visitor     0.1  to 0.2

          Seasonal  visitor    0.5  to 0.8

     A  multiplier  of   1.0   was   applied to  the  projected  seasonal
population  to  account  for  both  day-use  and  seasonal  visitors.
Considering   the   possible   error   in  projecting   future   seasonal
populations,  the   preponderance   of present  seasonal  visitors  using
well-equipped  private  dwellings   and   the   lack of  data  on  day-use
visitors,  this  multiplier  was  thought  conservative  i.e.,  it probably
overestimates flows to some degree.

     The design flow figure  of 60  gpcd  does not reflect reductions in
flow  from   a  program   of   water  conservation.    Residential  water
conservation devices, discussed in Section III.B.I.a,  could reduce flows
by 16 gpcd.   Later in this chapter, to  demonstrate probable impacts of
such  reduction  in  flow,  the  Facilities  Plan  Proposed  Action  has  been
redesigned and recosted.
B.   COMPONENTS  AND  OPTIONS

1.   FLOW AND WASTE  REDUCTION

a.   Residential Flow Reduction Devices

     A variety of  devices which reduce  water  consumption and sewage flow
are available.  A list of some of the devices is presented in Appendix
F-l with  data on  their water saving potential  and costs.  Most of these
devices will require no  change in the  user's hygienic habits and are as
                                  99

-------
maintenance-free as standard fixtures.  Others, such as compost toilets,
may  require  changes in hygiene practices  and/or  increased maintenance.
The  use  of any of  these  devices  may be justified  under  certain condi-
tions, for instance when no other device can provide adequate sanitation
or  when  excessive   flows  cause  malfunctions  of  conventional  on-site
septic  systems.   In  most  cases,  however,  the justifications  for flow
reduction devices are economic.

     Table III-2  presents  a  list  of proven  flow  reduction devices and
homeowner's  savings  resulting from  their  use locally.   Data on the
devices listed in Appendix F-2 and local cost assumptions listed beneath
the  table were used to develop these estimates.  The homeowner's savings
include   savings   for  water  supply,  water  heating  and  wastewater
treatment.   With  a  combination  of shower  flow control  insert device,
dual  cycle  toilet and  lavatory  faucet flow  control  device  the annual
savings would be approximately $80 per year.

      If all  residences  in  the Proposed EIS Service Area were to install
these  flow  reduction devices,  they could  not  all save  the $1.40/1000
gallons  in  wastewater treatment costs  (see  assumption in Table III-2).
This  is due to the fact that a substatial portion of this charge goes to
pay  off  capital,  operation and maintenance costs which will remain con-
stant  even  if  flow is reduced.  For everyone to benefit fully from flow
reduction then  wastewater  collection,  treatment and disposal facilities
would  have  to be  designed with flow capacities  that  reflect the lower
sewage flows.   Use  of the three types  of  devices  cited above would re-
duce  per capita sewage flows by approximately 16 gpcd.  To  calculate the
cost-effectiveness of community-wide flow reduction, the Facilities Plan
Proposed Action (see Section IV.B.2) was redesigned and recosted using a
design flow based on 44 gpcd instead of 60 gpcd.

      The  estimated  savings   in  project  capital  cost (1980)  would  be
$1,245,000 and  the  operation and maintenance  cost  savings  would be ap-
proximately  $8,000  per  year.  To  achieve this  savings,  approximately
$9,000  worth of  flow  reduction devices would  be  necessary.  The total
present  worth*  of  savings  over  the  20-year design period  would  be
$1,126,000 or 13% of the Facilities Plan Proposed Action.

      These  economic  analyses  of homeowner's saving  and  total present
worth reduction assumed all  dwellings  would  be  sewered.   However, for
dwellings which continue to use on-site systems the economic benefits of
flow reduction  devices cannot  be readily  estimated.   State regulatory
agencies  generally   do   not  allow  a  reduction   in  the  design  of
conventional on-site systems based upon proposals  to  use flow reduction
devices.  However, it is likely that reduced  flows will prolong  the life
of  soil adsorption systems there by saving money in the long run.

      With  some  decentralized technologies,  substantial  reductions  in
flow  may  be   required  regardless  of  costs.   Holding   tanks,  soil
adsorption   systems   which   cannot   be   enlarged,   evaporation  or
evapotranspiration  systems  and sand mounds are examples of technologies
which would  operate with less risk of malfunction  if  sewage flows  could
be  reduced  to  the minimum.  Sewage flows  on the  order of  15 to 30 gpcd
can  be   achieved  by  installation  of  combinations  of   the   following
devices:

                                  100

-------
                               Table III-2

            ESTIMATED  SAVINGS WITH FLOW REDUCTION DEVICES
Shower flow control insert device
Dual cycle toilet3
Toilet damming device
Shallow trap toilet3
Dual flush adapter for toilets
Spray tap faucet
Improved ballcock assembly for toilets
Faucet flow control device
Faucet aerator
First Year
Savings
(or Cost)
$41.29
7.96
10.72
8.97
7.64
(65.33)
4.35
5.14
0.89
Annual Savings
After First
Year
$43.29
2.7 . 96
13.97
13.97
11.64
11.87
7.35
8.14
3.39
  First year expenditure assumed to be difference in capital cost between
  flow-saving toilet and a standard toilet costing $75.
Assumptions

Household:  Four persons occupying dwelling 328 days per year.   One bathroom
            in dwelling.

Water Cost: Private well water supply.  Cost of water = $0.02/1000 gallons
            for electricity to pump against a 100 foot hydraulic head.

Water Heat- Electric water heater.  Water temperature increase = 100 F.
ing Cost:   Electricity costs $0.03/kilowatt-hour.  Cost of water heating =
            $7.50/100 gallons.

Wastewater  Assumed that water supply is metered and sewage bill is based on
Cost:       water supply at a constant rate of $1.40/1000 gallons.  Rate is
            based on a 1980 Study Area sewage flow of 0.5 mgd and local costs
            of $254,000 in 1980 for the Facilities Plan Proposed Action as
            estimated in this EIS.
                                    101

-------
     •     Reduce  lavatory water  usage  by installing spray tap faucets.

     »    Replace  standard toilets with  dual  cycle  or other low  volume
          toilets.

     •     Reduce  shower  water  use  by  installing  thermostatic   mixing
          valves  and flow control  shower heads.   Use of showers  rather
          than baths  should be  encouraged whenever possible.

     •     Replace  older  clothes  washing machines  with  those equipped
          with water-level   controls  or  with  front-loading machines.

     •     Eliminate  water-carried toilet wastes by  use of  in-house  com-
          posting  toilets.

     •     Recycle  bath  and  laundry  wastewaters  for  toilet flushing.
          Filtering  and  disinfection  of bath and laundry wastes for  this
          purpose  has   been   shown  to   be  feasible  and   aesthetically
          acceptable   in  pilot   studies   (Cohen   and   Wallman  1974;
          Mclaughlin  1968).    This   is  an  alternative  to  in-house
          composting  toilets  that  could  achieve  the  same  level  of
          wastewater flow reduction.

     •     Recycle  bath  and  laundry wastewaters for lawn  sprinkling  in
          summer.   The  feasibility  of  this  method  would  have  to  be
          evaluated   on  a trial  basis  in  the  Study Area  because   its
          general  applicability is  not certain.

     •    Commercially available  pressurized  toilets  and  air-assisted
          shower  heads using  a common air compressor of small horsepower
          would reduce  sewage  volume  from  these  two largest household
          sources  up to  90%.

b.   Minnesota Ban on Phosphorus

     Phosphorus is  frequently the  nutrient controlling algae growth  in
surface waters and is therefore an  important influence on  lake or  stream
eutrophication.  Enrichment  of the waters with  nutrients  encourages the
growth of algae  and  other microscopic plant  life;  decay of the  plants
increases biochemical oxygen  demand,  decreasing dissolved oxygen  in the
water.    Addition  of nutrients  encourages  higher forms  of  plant life,
thereby hastening the aging  process  by which  a lake  evolves into a bog
or  marsh.  Normally,  eutrophication  is a natural process  proceeding
slowly  over  thousands  of years.  Human activity  however,  can  greatly
accelerate  it.  Phosphorus  and other nutrients, contributed to  surface
waters  by  human  wastes, laundry  detergents  and   agricultural  runoff,
often  result  in  over-fertilization,  over-productivity of  plant matter,
and  "choking" of a  body  of water  within a few  years.   Appendix  C-4
discuss  the process  and data  pertinent for the Green Lake  Study Area.

     In  1977  the Minnesota  legislature limited  the  amount of phosphorus
in  laundry  and cleaning  supplies sold in the  state  to 0.5%.   Presently,
there  is no  enforcement of  this  law because an  injunction has  been
issued as a result of a lawsuit.
                                  102

-------
     The  Minnesota  Pollution  Control  Agency  estimates  that  for  the
Minneapolis-St.  Paul area  (where  a  local  phosphorus  ban is  in effect) a
35%  reduction  in  phosphorus  loading  in  raw  wastewater  effluent  has
resulted.  The Twin Cities  have  experienced  a 1.1 pound per capita  per
year reduction  in  phosphorus  loading  from 1971 to  1974 (by telephone,
Craig Affeldt, MPCA,  April, 1978).

     Treatment plants and  on-site disposal  facilities  in the Study Area
could  experience  a  similar  reduction  in   phosphorus  concentration.
However,  such  characteristics  of the  Green  Lake  area  as  the number of
residential laundry facilities may  differ  from those in the communities
where data were  collected.   Clearly,  the  extent of phosphorus" reduction
can only  be determined  by a survey of  the characteristics  of the  Study
Area.   One  approach  to  the  reduction of  phosphorus  is to  require that
household detergents be free of phosphates.

     Reduction of phosphorus by  control of detergents  will not  achieve
the effluent  discharge  limits  of  1  mg/1 (see Appendix G-l  for Effluent
Limits)   for    discharges   to   area   lakes   or   their   tributaries.
Consequently,  facilities for phosphorus removal is  required  in treatment
plants which  discharge  to  any  of the surface water  bodies  in the  Study
Area except for  the  Middle Fork of the Crow  River below Green Lake.  A
phosphorus ban would result in  an unquantifiable reduction in phsophorus
entering surface waters with septic  tank leachate.

c.   Rehabilitation  of Existing Sewers  To Reduce Infiltration
     and  Inflow

     Infiltration/Inflow Analyses conducted in New  London and Spicer  for
the Facilities  Plan  revealed that infiltration was  substantial  in both
sewer systems  and that combined sewers in  New London  receive significant
inflow.  Sewer system evaluation surveys (SSES), were recommended in  the
Facilities Plan and were performed in May  1978.  The  costs and projected
flow reduction for the rehabilitation effort  are incorporated in  all  EIS
Alternatives except No Action.

2.   COLLECTION

     The collection system proposed  in the Facilities  Plan  is estimated
to cost  $6.4  million  — 80% of the  total  cost of  the Proposed Action --
and  is  the single most expensive portion of the sewerage facilities.
Since not all parts  of collection systems are  eligible for Federal  and
State funding, the costs of the collection system can affect the  local
community  more  than  other  components  of   the   project.   There  is,
therefore, considerable incentive at local,  state  and national levels to
choose less expensive alternatives to conventional  sewer systems.

     Alternative means of wastewater collection are:

     •    pressure sewers  (including  grinder pumps or  STEP systems);

     •    vacuum sewers; and

     •    small diameter gravity sewers (Troyan and Norris 1974).
                                  103

-------
     An alternative  collection  system  may economically sewer areas with
site conditions that increase the cost of conventional sewerage, such as
shallow  depth to  bedrock,  high  groundwater  table,  or  hilly  terrain.
Housing  density  also  affects  the  relative  costs  of  conventional  and
alternative wastewater collection techniques.

     The  alternative  most  extensively  studied  is  collection  by  a
pressure  sewer  system.   The  principles  behind  the  pressure  system and
the  gravity  flow system  are  opposite  to each other.   The  water system
consists  of  a  single  point of  pressurization  and a  number   of  user
outlets.   Conversely,  the  pressure sewer  system has  inlet points  of
pressurization and a single outlet.  Pressurized wastewater is generally
discharged to the treatment facility or to a gravity sewer.

     The  two  major  types  of pressure sewer systems are the grinder pump
(GP)  system  and the  septic tank  effluent  pumping  (STEP)  system.   The
differences between  the two  systems  are in  the on-site equipment  and
layout.   The  GP system  employs individual grinder  pumps to  convey raw
wastewater to the  sewer.   In the STEP system septic tank effluent from
individual households is pumped to the pressure main.

     The  advantages of pressure sewer systems are:

     •    elimination of infiltration/inflow;
     •    reduction of construction cost; and
     •    use in varied site arid climatic conditions.

The  disadvantages  include   relatively  high  operation and  maintenance
cost,  and the requirement  for  individual home  STEP systems  or grinder
pumps.

     Vacuum  sewers  provide similar advantages.   Their  major components
are vacuum mains, collection tanks and vacuum pumps, and individual home
valve  connection  systems.   A recent review  of vacuum sewer technology,
however,  noted  significant  differences  among design of four major types
of current systems (Cooper and Rezek 1975).

     As   a  third  alternative  to  conventional  gravity  sewers,  small
diameter  (4-inch)  pipe  can be  used if septic tank effluent, rather than
raw  waste,  is  collected.    Such  pipe  may  result   in lower  costs  of
materials,  but the  systems  retain some  of  the  disadvantages of larger
sewers.   The  need  for deep excavations and pump stations is unaffected.

     This document  analyzed the   reliability,  site  requirements,  and
costs  of the alternative  sewer systems  considered  for  the  Green Lake
area.   The  STEP-type  low-pressure sewer  system  was  found  the  most
advantageous  of  the  three  alternatives.   A  preliminary STEP system
serving   residents  around  Green  Lake  was,  therefore,  developed  to
determine the differences  in project costs  if  it were substituted for
the  gravity system specified by the Facilities Plan.  The arrangement of
the  STEP system house pump and sewer  line  connection is illustrated in
Figure  III-l.
                                   104

-------
                                         CONTROL PANEt
                                         ft ALARM LIGHT
                                                                     COMMON
                                                                     TRENCH
   EXISTING OR
   "STWAtjT PIPII
          PINO

   EXISTING SEPTIC TANK
                                                TANK UNIT
             TYPICAL  PUMP  INSTALLATION  FOR PRESSURE SEWER
                             Figure  III-l
3.   WASTEWATER TREATMENT

     Wastewater treatment options  include  three  categories:   centralized
treatment  prior  to discharge  into surface water; centralized  treatment
prior to disposal on land; and decentralized  treatment.

     "Centralized  treatment" refers  to  treatment at  a central  site  of
wastewater  collected  by a  single  system  and transported  to a  central
location.   Centralized  treatment systems may  serve  all  or  a part of the
service  area.   Centrally treated  effluent  may be discharged to  surface
waters  or  applied  to  the  land;  the  method and  site of disposal affect
the treatment process requirements.

     "Decentralized  treatment"   defines  those  systems   processing  a
relatively  small  amount of  wastewater.   Decentralized treatment can  be
provided on-site  or off-site.   Typically, effluent disposal occurs  in

                                   105

-------
close proximity to the  source  of sewage elimiating the need  for  costly
transmission of sewage to distant disposal  sites.

     A major purpose  of this EIS is to assess  the  technical  feasibility,
relative costs, environmental impacts, and  implementation  problems asso-
ciated with  these  three  approaches to wastewater  treatment in the  pro-
posed Green Lake EIS  Service Area.

a.    Centralized  Treatment —  Discharge  to  Surface  Waters

     The Middle Fork  of the Crow River, east of Green  Lake,  was  selected
by the Facilities  Plan  as  the  point of disposal for treated wastewater.
The  Facilities Plan  evaluated two  options for  centralized  treatment:
wastewater   stabilization   lagoons,   which  would  permit   controlled
discharge of treated  wastewater;  and a mechanical oxidation ditch which
would allow for continual discharge.

     Four methods  of  centralized  treatment involving  effluent discharge
to surface  water were  developed  for the new  alternatives  in this  EIS,
including a waste stabilization lagoon, a mechanical oxidation ditch,  an
extended  aeration  treatment plant  and  an activated  sludge  plant.   A
rapid  infiltration system,  which  involves the discharge  of recovered
wastewater to the Middle Fork of the Crow River, is discussed  in Section
III.3.b.  All  methods of treatment, which  are  briefly described  below,
were designed to comply with MPCA's current effluent standards ILsted  in
Appendix G-l.

     The  first centralized  treatment scheme  for the new  alternatives
consists  of a  0.59  mgd stabilization  lagoon facility with  controlled
effluent discharge to the  Middle Fork of  the  Crow  River.   The  facility
involves  a  dual or  parallel  system of ponds  operating in  series which
allow  for the  shutting down  of  one side during  the  low flow  winter
months.   The ponds will require an area of 75 acres  located at  a  site
east of Green Lake.

     The  treatment  process  is  identical to that   proposed   in the
Facilities  Plan.   A   flow  diagram  of this  plant  is presented in  Figure
III-2.  The "preliminary treatment" component  shown in the diagram simply
involves the removal of coarse solids.
RAW
WASTEWATER
PRELIMINARY
TREATMENT


STABILIZATION
POND


CHLORINAT10N
                                                         PERIODIC
                                                        _ DISCHARGE  M|OOLE FORK
                                                        ^         CROW  RIVER
                          STABILIZATION POND
                         CONTROLLED DISCHARGE
                             Figure III-2
                                  106

-------
     The  second  centralized  treatment method  considered  for  the  EIS
Service Area  includes a 0.59  mgd mechanical oxidation  ditch plant with
continuous discharge  to the Middle  Fork of the  Crow River east of Green
Lake.  The  treatment  process  is  identical  to  that  proposed  in  the
Facilities  Plan.    Tertiary filtration  is included  in this  process to
provide  sufficient removal of  organic  substances  (BOD,,  and suspended
solids)  in compliance with  MPCA  effluent quality  standards.   A flow
diagram   of   this  plant   is   illustrated  in  Figure   III-3.   Again,
preliminary treatment  involves the removal of  coarse solids.
RAW
WASTE WATER
Pf
T

LUMINARY
REATMENT



OXIDATION
DITCH

                                                                     DISCHARGE TO
                                                                     MIDDLE  FORK
                                                                     CROW  RIVER
                                                 (AEROBIC
                                                 DIGESTER
                                            SLUDGE
                                           HAULING
                    OXIDATION DITCH WITH FILTRATION
                             Figure  III-3
                                   107

-------
       The  third  method of  centralized treatment  evaluated in the  deve-
  lopment of new  alternatives  in this EIS involved  the upgrading of  the
  Village of New  London's  wastewater treatment plant.   The  existing  plant
  has   sufficient  capacity  to  meet  the  design flow  but  only  provides
  primary treatment.  The  upgraded plant (0.10 mgd) will provide  tertiary
  treatment of wastewater  and  consists of a conventional activated sludge
  process,  chemical  addition for  phosphorus  removal  and filtration  (see
  Figure  II1-4).
                                       tALUM   I
                                     a POLYMER I
        PRELIMINARY
        TREATMENT
RAW
WASTEWATER
  FINAL
CLARIFICATION
                                                 I ---
                              I	J
                               RETURN  SLUDGE
              LEGEND

              EXISTING
              PROPOSED ADDITIONS
 FILTRATION
•O
                     CHLOfllNATJON

                           [DISCHARGED
                       I    I TO MIDDLE
                       I	1 FORK CROW
                              RIVER
                                                  ANAEROBIC
                                                  DIGESTER
                               PROPOSED UPGRADE OF
                               NEW LONDON PLANT
                               Figure III-4
       The fourth method  of centralized treatment  that  was  developed as a
  component  of one  of the new  alternatives  involved  the  upgrading  of
  Spicer's secondary  treatment plant.   The  existing  plant does  not. have
  sufficient capacity  to  meet the design flow.  Enlargement of the Spicer
  plant  to  design  flow  capacity required  the preliminary design of  a
  parallel plant.   The capacity of the parallet plant  (0.054 mgd)  is equal
  to the difference between the capacity of  the existing plant  (0.086 mgd)
                                     108

-------
design  flow (0.14 mgd).   The parallel plant was designed as a prefabri-
cated  extended  aeration  plant  with  filtration and phosphorus  removal
(see Figure  III-5).
                                         ALUM a POLYMER
                                        I	•
                                        I
                                                                 LEGEND

                                                           	 EXISTING
                                                           	PROPOSED ADDITIONS
              PRELIMINARY     PRIMARY
              TREATMENT   SEDIMENTATION
   TRICKLING
    FILTER
 SECONDARY
SEDIMENTATION
                                  I    ALUM
                                  I  a POLYMER .
                                  L	.	1
                   INFLUENT
                   PUMPING
            •1
                        \
                        r
 PREFABRICATED
EXTENDED AERATION I	
    PLANT     |
             I
                                                    FILTRATION
                                                      r  i
                                                      I
                                                         I
                     DISCHARGE TO
                      WOODCOCK
                        LAKE
                             -*•
                                     SLUDGE
                                    HAULING

                    PROPOSED UPGRADE AND ENLARGEMENT
                               OF SPICER PLANT
                              Figure III-5
b.   Centralized Treatment  —  Land Disposal

     Land  treatment  of municipal  wastewater  involves the  use  of plants
and the  soil to  remove many wastewater constituents.   A wide variety of
processes  can be used to achieve many different objectives of treatment,
water   reuse,  nutrient  recycling,   and  crop  production.  The  three
principal  types of land application systems are:

     1.    Slow  rate (irrigation)
     2.    Rapid infiltration  (infiltration-percolation)
     3.    Overland flow (EPA  1977).
                                    109

-------
     The  effluent  quality  required for  land application  in  terms  of
organic content  (BOD and  suspended solids)  is not as  critical  as  with
stream  discharge  options.   Pretreatment  of  wastewaters is  necessary,
however,  to  prevent nuisance  conditions,  insure  a   higher  level  of
constituent removal  through  the soil,  reduce  soil  clogging,  amd insure
reliable   operation   of   the   distribution   system.    Generally,   the
equivalent  of secondary treatment  of  wastewaters  is  required  prior  to
land application.  (Great Lakes Upper  Mississippi  River Board  of State
Sanitary Engineers 1971).

     Storage  of  wastewater is  necessary  with land application systems
for  nonoperating  periods  and  periods   of   reduced  application  rates
resulting  from  climatic  constraints.   In  Minnesota   land  application
systems must  have storage  facilities  for holding  wastewaters  over the
winter months.

     A  recent  memorandum  from  EPA  may alter  the   requirements  for
pretreatment  prior   to   land   application.    To  encourage  both  land
treatment  and  land   disposal  of wastewater,  EPA  has  indicated  that:

     "A universal minimum of secondary treatment for direct surface
     discharge...will  not be  accepted  because it  is  inconsistent
     with the basic concepts of land treatment.

     ...the   costs  of  the  additi.onal  pre-application  increment
     needed   to  meet  more  stringent  pre-application  treatment
     requirements  [than  necessary]  imposed  at the  State  or local
     level would be ineligible for Agency funding and thus would be
     paid for from State or local funds."  (EPA 1978)

     The  EPA  policy  has   important  ramifications  for land  treatment
alternatives.  By  allowing Federal  funding of land used for storage and
underwriting  the  risk of failure for  certain land-related  projects the
policy promotes their consideration.

     The Facilities Plan  (August 16, 1976) did not  develop a land appli-
cation  system for  the  proposed  Service  Area.   In this EIS,  both the
spray irrigation and  rapid infiltration methods of  land application were
evaluated  as  treatment  options  tor  the EIS Service  Area.   These are
described below.

     Spray  irrigation.  The 0.24 mgd spray irrigation facility evaluated
in  one of  the new  alternatives for  this  EIS consists  of preliminary
treatment  (bar screen, comminator, primary settling basin), a stabiliza-
tion pond,  and a chlorination process to disinfect  the  effluent prior to
its  application  on  cropland.   The  treatment  plant  component  would
provide secondary  treatment prior to spray irrigation  as recommended by
the  MPCA  (MPCA  1972).   An application  rate of  2  inches per  week was
determined  after calculating  the  nitrogen loading rate and found that
there would be no need  for under-drainage at this  rate.  Higher loading
rates may produce poor crop growth.  Alfalfa was the chosen cover crop
over  corn  since  alfalfa  allows   a  higher  application rate  with its
growing  season  limited  solely  by  climatic  factors.    The  pond system
                                  110

-------
shall have a  storage  period of 210 days.
is illustrated in Figure III-6.
A flow diagram of  this plant
                                                                SPRAY
                                                                IRRIGATION

RAW
WASTE
WATER

PRELIMI-
NARY
TREAT-
MENT








                             LAND  APPLICATION
                             SPRAY  IRRIGATION
                             Figure III-6
     Rapid Infiltration.  The  rapid  infiltration method  of land treat-
ment is evaluated  in two of the new  wastewater management alternatives
(0.34 mgd  and  0.24 mgd).  Rapid infiltration of wastewater was selected
for further  investigation  as  a component option, because it usually re-
quires  less  area  for  operation  as  compared  to  spray  irrigation.
Furthermore,  as  a  result  of  reduced  land requirements  the  site  can
usually  be  located  closer  to wastewater  transportation  lines,  thus,
reducing capital, operation and maintenance costs of interceptors and/or
force mains.

     After land  application the  renovated wastewater will be drawn from
recovery wells (see Figure III-7) and discharged into the Middle Fork of
                    RECOVERY OF RENOVATED tfHTER BY WELLS
                             Figure III-7
                                  111

-------
the  Crow  River  above  Nest Lake.   Consideration in  selection of  the
method of  land application and a  potential  site are  discussed  in  the
section  on  disposal  options.   A  flow  diagram  of  this  plant   is
illustrated in Figure III-8.
RAW
WASTE
WATER

PRELIMI-
NARY
TREAT-
MENT


'-^

STABILIZATION POND




CHLORINATION



1

RAPID
VFIL1

RATIOI

BASINS

RECOVERY
n \ T0 »
\~J it
f MIDDLE FORK
/ CROW RIVER
"WELLS
                              LAND  APPLICATION
                              RAPID  INFILTRATION
                             Figure III-8


c.   Decentralized Treatment and Disposal

     A number of technologies are available which can provide decentral-
ized  treatment  either  on-site  or  at  sites near  the point  of  sewage
generation.  Disposal of treatment wastewaters can be  to  the  air,  soil
or surface waters  and normally  occurs near the treatment site.  Some of
the available technologies  are:

     •    Alternative toilets:

               Composting toilets

               Toilets using  filtered and disinfected bath and laundry
               wastewater

               Waterless toilets using  oils  to carry  and  store  wastes

               Incineration toilets

     •    On-lot treatment  and disposal:

               Septic tank  and soil absorption systems  (ST/SAS)

               Septic tank  and dual, alternating soil disposal  system

               Aerobic treatment and  soil  disposal system

               Septic tank  or  aerobic  treatment  and  sand  filter  with
               effluent discharge to  surface waters

               Septic tank  and evapotranspiration system
                                  112

-------
               Septic tank and mechanical evaporation system

               Septic tank and sand mound system

               Rejuvenation  of  soil   disposal   fields  with  hydrogen
               peroxide (H^CO treatments

     •    Off-lot Treatment and Disposal:

               Holding tanks

               Cluster systems  (multiple  houses  served by a common soil
               disposal system)

               Community  septic  tank  or  aerobic  treatment  and  sand
               filter with effluent discharge to surface water

               Small  scale  lagoon with seasonal effluent  discharge  to
               surface waters

               Small  scale  lagoon  with  effluent  discharge  at  rapid
               infiltration land application site

               Small  scale  lagoon with seasonal effluent  discharge  at
               slow rate land application site

               Small  scale,  preconstructed  activated  sludge  (package)
               treatment  plants  with  effluent  discharge  to  surface
               waters.

     Because all of  the  developed  portions of the Study Area are tribu-
tary  to  lakes,  decentralized  technologies  which discharge  to  surface
waters are not  further  considered  here.  All of the remaining technolo-
gies,  used  alone   or in  combination  with  each  other  or  with  flow
reduction devices,  could  be useful in  individual situations  within the
Study  Area.    It  is  expected  that,   technologies   selected  for  each
dwelling will be appropriate  to the problem being  remedied (or  lack of
problem) to  the soil  and  groundwater  site  characteristics,  and to the
expected use of the systems.

     Lacking necessary information to select appropriate technologies on
a  site-by-site  basis,  this EIS assumes  that the  best known and  most
reliable  decentralized technologies  will  be  used.   Continued  use  of
on-site  septic  tanks and  soil  absorption systems is  the  technology of
choice  where acceptable  public health and  environmental  impacts  are
attainable with them.  Where  on-site systems (including alternatives to
ST/SAS)  are  not  economically,  environmentally  or otherwise  feasible,
cluster  systems are  assumed to be  used.  The assumption that only these
two  technologies will be used  is  made  here to form  the basis  for  cost
and   feasibility   estimates  and   is   not  meant  to preclude  other
technologies for  any site(s).  Estimates  of their frequency  of repair
and construction are conservative to reflect the possibility that other,
more appropriate technologies may be more expensive.
                                  113

-------
     Continued  use  of  septic  tank-soil  absorption  systems  for  most
dwellings in  the  Proposed EIS Service Area would  perpetuate  violations
of Minnesota's Shoreline  Management  Act  as discussed in Section II.C.3.
However, the  substantial  amount  of  field investigation  undertaken for
this EIS  has  indicated that  most existing  systems  are  operating  with
acceptable environmental  and  public  health impacts.   More detailed site
investigations  may  indicate  that  renovation  or  replacement of  some
existing on~site  systems  is  necessary.   To estimate the investment this
might  require,  it  is  assumed  that  50% of  on-r.ite  systems will  be
replaced with new septic tanks and soil absorption systems.

     Detailed  site   evaluations   may  show   for  some  dwellings  that
continued .use of  on-site  systems  is not  feasible  or  that repairs for a
number  of  dwellings  is  more expensive  than  joint  disposal.   Cluster
systems  are  subsurface  absorption  systems  similar  in operation  and
design  to  on-site  soil  absorption  systems but  are  large   enough  to
accommodate  flows  from  a  number  of   (approximately  20)  dwellings.
Because  of  the need  to collect  and  transport  wastes,  cluster  systems
include  limited  collection  facilities   using  pressure  sewers,  small
diameter  sewers  and/or  pumps  and  force mains.   Generally,  existing
septic tanks would continue to be used for settling and stabilization of
wastewater.

     An  analysis  of  soil  conditions  at  13 sites  around  Green Lake was
conducted in  October 1978 by the Soil Conservation Service, St.. Peters,
Minnesota.  With the exception of one site south of the lake,  50 to 100%
of each site had only slight or moderate  limitations for subsurface dis-
posal  of  septic  tank effluent.   The size and distribution of  apparently
suitable sites is such that any portion of Green Lake shoreline could be
served  by  cluster systems  if necessary.   Before  use  of  sites for this
purpose,   additional  analysis  of  soils  and   groundwater   would  be
necessary.  The  locations of sites  investigated by  the  SCS  as  well as
cluster  system  sites considered  in preparation of  the Facilities Plan
are  illustrated  in  Figure  III-9.  The results of the October 1978 SCS
investigations are presented  in Appendix A-l.

     The exact number and locations of dwellings requiring off-site dis-
posal  of wastewater would be  determined after detailed  evaluation of
existing systems are estimated to be abandoned.

     The  cost for cluster systems were developed based on the design of
a "typical" cluster  system serving approximately 20 residences along the
shoreline of  Green Lake and Nest Lake.  The costs  include a 50% replace-
ment of septic  tanks.  The total  cost  for cluster systems to serve 25%
of existing residences was then based on  the cost per  residence from the
typical  cluster system design.  Design assumptions for this cluster sys-
tem  design appear in  Appendix H-l.  Design  criteria for the cluster
systems  recommended  by the  State of Minnesota  was  considered  in the
development of  the typical cluster system design.  Presently, there are
a number of successfully  operating cluster systems in  Otter Tail County,
Minnesota  (by  letter,   Larry Krohn,  Department  of  Land  and Resource
Management, Otter  Tail  County, October 18, 1978.
                                   114

-------
 W
 w
 S
 til
 H
ri g
O O


2
O
C
as

o
               §
               2
                -

            C K

            M -

            H -
CQ  pi
   w
Q  CQ
W  O
(X  H
SL,  O
                       1
                                        HI


                                         •
                   C7
                                          O


                                           of.

                                              115

-------
4.   EFFLUENT DISPOSAL

     Three approaches exist for disposal  of  treated wastewater.  Reuse,
perhaps the most desirable of  the  three,  implies  recycling  of  the efflu-
ent by industry, agriculture  or groundwater  recharge.   Land application
takes advantage of  the  absorptive and renovative capacities of soil  to
improve effluent quality and reduce the quantity  of wastewater requiring
disposal.   Discharge to  surface  water  generally  implies the  use  of
streams  or  impoundments  for  ultimate  disposal of  treated  effluent.
a.
Reuse
     Industry Reuse.   There  is  no industrial  development  in the  Study
Area, consequently industrial reuse does not seem to  be  a feasible  means
of effluent disposal.
     Agricultural Irrigation.    The  use  of   treated
irrigation is addressed in Section III.B.4.6.
                                                   wastewaiters  for
     Groundwater Recharge.   Groundwater  supplies  all  of  the  potable
water in  the  EIS  Service Area.   The availability of  ample quantities  of
water from  sand and  gravel  deposits is  a  significant resource  of the
area.  There  is no  evidence  that these resources are being  depleted  to
the extent that supplemental  recharge is necessary.   Wastewater reuse  by
groundwater recharge has therefore not been  evaluated.

b.   Discharge to  Surface Waters

     This EIS evaluates surface water discharge of treated wastewater  at
several locations in the Green Lake Study Area, as listed  below:
Treatment Method
Waste stabilization pond
Mechanical oxidation ditch
Rapid infiltration, with reno-
vated wastewater collected

Conventional activated sludge
Extended aeration
                              Potential Location of Surface
                              	Water Discharge	

                              Middle Fork of the Crow River
                              below Lake Calhoun

                              Middle Fork of the Crow River
                              below Lake Calhoun

                              Middle Fork of the Crow River
                              above Nest Lake

                              Middle Fork of the Crow River
                              above Nest Lake

                              Woodcock Lake
     Effluent  quality limitations  promulgated by the MPCA and  EPA will
 govern  the feasibility of implementing any of  the  wastewater treatment
 components  listed  above.    Concern  over  low dissolved  oxygen due  to
                                  116

-------
organic loading  (BOD,,  and  Total Suspended Solids  [TSS]) of  streams  has
prompted the MPCA to stipulate effluent limitations of 5 mg/1 BOD,, and 5
mg/1 TSS  (see  Appendix G-l).   Concern over the cultural eutrophication*
of  lakes  in  Minnesota  has  prompted  MPCA  to   stipulate  that  total
phosphorus levels in  effluent  be restricted to 1.0 rag/1.  The  State is
currently  reviewing  effluent  limitation requirements  and  expect  some
revision  of  the standards  in  approximately  one  year.   The  effluent
quality  limitation  regarding total phosphorus  for discharge  to lakes,
however,  will  remain  at  1  mg/1 (by telephone, Lanny  Piessig,  MPCA,  20
October 1978).

c.   Land Application

     Land application methods of wastewater treatment that are evaluated
for potential  use in the Study Area have been briefly described in Sec-
tion III.D.S.b.  These methods, spray irrigation and rapid infiltration,
are  illustrated  in  Figure  111-10.  The  locations of  land  application
sites evaluated in this EIS are shown in Figure III-ll.

     Soil  suitability  for renovation  of wastewater at  these locations
has been  determined  by SCS on the basis of on-site field investigations
conducted  in  1978.   Maps  illustrating soil suitability of  these sites
are  included  as  in  Appendix  A-l.   Both sites have  soils  with moderate
permeability  for the  most  part,  and  have  moderate limitations  for
wastewater disposal.

     The rapid infiltration site, located north of Nest Lake, is charac-
terized by  gently rolling  knolls and side  slopes.   The  sandy and loamy
soils are  well drained and deep to groundwater.   The  depth  to the sea-
sonal high water table is estimated to  be  10  to  20 feet  based upon an
inspection of  a  nearby abandoned quarry several hundred yards away from
the rapid infiltration site.  This site is reported to be representative
of the  soil  conditions that exist beneath  the  rapid  infiltration site.
(Interview, Al Giencke,  Soil  Scientist,  SCS, Kandiyohi, County, October
24,  1978).   There   are  no  streams  that  traverse  the potential  land
application area.   The sandy-loamy  soils  at  the  spray irrigation site
are also well drained.

     It  is  emphasized here  that  any serious  consideration  given  to
implementing  an  EIS  alternative involving  either  rapid infiltration or
spray irrigation must  be  preceded by a  detailed  field investigation of
the  existing  soil   and  groundwater  conditions.   The  detailed  soils
mapping of  these  two sites performed by SCS personnel during the course
of this project is useful only as a planning tool for the development of
wastewater management alternatives.

5.  SLUDGE HANDLING  AND DISPOSAL

     Two  types of sludge  would be generated by the wastewater treatment
options  considered  above:   chemical/biological sludges  from secondary
and  terriary  treatment processes;  and solids pumped  from  septic tanks.
The residues from treatment by lagoons and land application are grit and
screenings.   Since  the  oxidation  ditch was  not  selected,  sludge  from
                                  117

-------
SPRAY
APPLICATION
  ROOT ZONE
   SUBSOIL
                             FIGURE III- 10

                   LAND APPLICATION METHODS  EVALUATED
                      FOR THE GREEN LAKE STUDY  AREA
                         EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
i  PTd A  A A  .VMTAA
                •
                                                                 VARIABLE
                                                                 SLOPE
                                                                  DEEP
                                                                  PERCOLATION
                              (A)  SPRAY IRRIGATION
                                  EVAPORATION
                                               SPRAY OR
                                               SURFACE APPLICATION
                  •//•;/; INFILTRATION >"T: .
    ZONE OF AERATION
    AND TREATMENT
   &v#£REC ARGE MOUND x^

— "v.

• o

LOW
fe
                                                                  •^TS^'fe-.-i:
                                                                  •** ~m

                           (B) RAPID INFILTRATION
                                  118

-------
119

-------
this source was not considered further by the Facilities  Plan.   Disposal
of  sludge  from stabilization ponds  was  not addressed in detail by the
Facilities Plan.

     This EIS has  estimated  the costs of these alternatives by assuming
that a  contract hauler  would be responsible for hauling  and disposal of
sludge.  A  cost of  $81  per million  gallons of sewage was  used,  based
upon $30/1000 gallons of  sludge and 2700 gallons of  sludge per million
gallons  of  sewage.   These  costs  have  been  incorporated  into  the
cost-effectiveness analysis presented in Chapter IV.

     Alternatives   using  residential  septic tanks  for on-lot  systems,
cluster systems, or STEP sewer systems must provide  for periodic removal
and disposal of the accumulated solids.   For the purpose of design and
costing these alternatives, it is assumed that pumping would occur  every
3  years and  would  cost  $45 per  pumping.   Local  septage  haulers  are
licensed to operate in Kandiyohi County.   Farm lands  are  typical septage
disposal sites.
C.   RELIABILITY OF COMPONENTS

1.   SEWERS

     Gravity Sewers.  When  possible,  sewer systems allow  wastewater to
flow  downhill  by force  of gravity.   This type  of  system,  known  as
gravity  sewer,  is  highly  reliable.   Designed  properly,  such  systems
require  little  maintenance.   They  consume  no  energy  and  have  no
mechanical components to malfunction.

     Problems  associated with  gravity  sewers  include  clogged  pipes,
leading to  sewer backups;  infiltration/inflow,  increasing the volume of
flow beyond the  design  level;  and broken  or  misaligned  pipes.   Major
contributors  to  these  problems are  improperly jointed  pipes and  the
intrusion of  tree roots  into the sewer,  which  tend to be more prevalent
in older systems.

     Where  ground slope  is  opposite to the direction of sewage flow, it
may  be necessary to pump  the  sewage through  sections  of pipe  called
force  mains.   The  pumps  add  a  mechanical component which  increases
operation and maintenance  (O&M) requirements  and decreases  the  system
reliability.  To  assure uninterrupted operation of the system, two pumps
are  generally installed, providing a backup in case one malfunctions.
Each is usually able to handle at least twice  the peak flow.   A standby
generator is  usually provided  to ensure operation of the  pumps  in case
of a power  failure.

     Because the  flow through force mains is intermittent, solids may be
deposited during periods of no flow.   In addition, when  the  pumps shut
off, the  sudden  cessation  of  flow may  cause  the hydraulic  conditions
known as "water  hammer"  in the force main, a phenomenon marked by sudden
sharp surges in water pressure that may result  in burst pipes.  However,
both deposition of  solids  and water hammer may be  controlled  through
proper  design procedures.   The  reliability of properly  designed force
mains is comparable  to that  of gravity sewers.

                                  120

-------
     Pressure Sewers.  Pressure  sewers  transmit wastewater  uphill  when
ground  topography  does not  allow  gravity flow.  Because the  system is
always under pressure, pumping  is  required to force the wastewater  into
the sewer

     Grinder Pumps.   Grinder pumps  are  used  primarily to grind and  pump
raw domestic  sewage from  an individual house to the  collection system
and  occasionally for  small  lift  stations.   They are  either of  the
semi-positive displacement  or  the centrifugal type, depending  upon the
mode of operation.   The reliability of both types is high.

     One problem may arise  during  a power failure.   Standby power for a
grinder pump would  not usually  be available at  an  individual  house and
the residence would be  without  sewage removal.   This is a lesser problem
than  might  be  supposed,  for  a  power  failure   would  curtail  many
operations that generate wastewater.

     There were  problems in the  operation of  the  first generation of
grinder pumps when  pressure  to  pump wastewater or  power to  grind solids
was  insufficient.   Modifications  have  been  made   in  their design and
construction, and  the  second generation  of these  pumps  is  appreciably
more  reliable.   Periodic  maintenance  is required  to  clean or replace
parts of the grinder pump.

     Septic Tank Effluent Pumps* (STEP).  It  is  sometimes desirable  to
pump wastewater  from an  existing septic tank rather than directly  from
the  house,  using  STEP  rather  than  a  grinder   pump.   In  this   way
difficulties associated with suspended solids are largely avoided.   STEP
pumps  are  relatively  simple modifications  of conventional  sump pumps.

     The reliability of  STEP made  by experienced manufacturers is good.
Newer  entries  into  the   field  have not  yet accumulated the  operating
experience  necessary  to demonstrate  conclusively  the  reliability  of
their products.  In the  event  of failure of a  STEP system,  an overflow
line may be  provided,  which permits passage of the septic tank effluent
to the old drainfield for emergency disposal.

     Pipes.  Pressure  sewer pipes  are  subject to  the  same  problems as
force  mains,  discussed above.    As  with force mains,  proper design can
prevent clogging and breaking  of pipes, the most common  cause of sewer
problems.  Because  pressure sewer piping has no mechanical  components,
the reliability is high.

2.   CENTRALIZED  TREATMENT

     Conventional.   The reliability of conventional wastewater  treatment
has been  tested by  time.  Most  unit processes have been used  for  many
years,  and  there is consequently  much information on  their design and
operation in nearly all  climates.   In general,  the larger the  treatment
facility, the more  reliable  its  operation,  because the large volumes of
flow  require  multiple  units per  treatment process.   For  instance,  a
large  facility  will  have  several  primary  clarifiers,  and  if   one
malfunctions,  the   remaining   units   can   handle  the  entire  load.
Therefore, difficulties  that arise  as  a result of failure  of  a single
                                  121

-------
unit process, or of severe weather conditions such as heavy rain or very
cold temperatures,  are less likely to affect  operations.   Conventional
wastewater  treatment  plants can  be designed  to  handle most  problems.

     Advanced Treatment.  Advanced treatment serves  primarily  to remove
toxic substances and nutrients  that would stimulate biological  activity.
The technology  is  relatively new;  experience in design and operation of
advanced  treatment  processes   is  therefore  limited.    However,   when
designed properly, the reliability of these processes is high.

     Land Application.   Application  of treated  sewage  effluent to  the
land is  still  infrequent in the  United  States, but its use is growing
steadily. .  Local  climatic conditions  such as  heavy  rains or  very  low
temperatures  may  make  the  technique unsuitable  in a  particular  area.

     Potential problems with land application include:   groundwater con-
tamination;  dispersal  of microbial  mass  by airborne  transport;  odors;
surface  water contamination;  accumulation of metals  in the vegetation;
and possible toxic effects upon  local animals.  These  problems  can be
minimized  with proper  design,  but  there  is not  yet  the  extensive
practical  experience   required  to develop  advanced  design technology.

3.   ON-SITE TREATMENT

     Septic Tanks.  The design and operation of modern septic tanks have
benefited   from  long  experience.    Properly designed  and  maintained,
septic  systems will provide satisfactory service with  minimum mainte-
nance.   Care  must be  taken not to put materials  in the system that may
clog  it.  The principal maintenance requirement  is  periodic pumping of
the tank, usually every two or three years.

     Problems   of  septic  systems  include  heavy rain  saturating  the
ground,  clogged  drainfields  caused by  full  septic tanks, clogged or
frozen pipes,  and broken pipes.   Current environmental laws restricting
sites  according to soil suitability, depth  to  groundwater and bedrock,
and other factors are  limiting  the cases  where septic  systems  can be
used.

     Sand Mounds.  Elevated sand mounds four or five feet above original
ground   level  are   an  alternative  treatment   system  where  siting
restrictions  do not allow the use of standard drainfields.  Because they
do  not  always provide satisfactory service and are  considerably more
expensive  than conventional  drainfields,  they  have not been universally
accepted.

4.   CLUSTER SYSTEMS

     Cluster   systems   are   localized   wastewater  disposal  mechanisms
servicing  several  (approximately  20)  residences.   The  reliability is
similar  to that  of  a septic system, except that a malfunction affects
not  just  one, but a  number of  residences.   Because a  cluster system
requires more piping  to connect individual houses to the treatment tank
than  does a series of  individual systems, there  is a greater chance for
                                   122

-------
pipes to break or clog, or for I/I to occur during heavy rain.   If pump-
ing is  required,  the  reliability  of the system declines because of  the
mechanical nature of the pumps and their dependence upon electricity  for
power.

     The experience with cluster systems in Otter  Tail  County, Minnesota
is described in Appendix F-3.
D.   IMPLEMENTATION

     The  process  by  which  a  wastewater  management  plan  is  to be
implemented  depends  upon  whether   the   selected  alternative  relies
primarily  upon  centralized  or  decentralized  components.   Since  most
sanitary  districts  have  in  the past been  designed around  centralized
collection  and  treatment of  wastewater,  there   is  a  great  deal of
information  about  the  implementation of  such systems.  Decentralized
collection and treatment is,  however,  relatively new and there  is  little
management experience on which to draw.

     Regardless  of  whether   the   selected  alternative is   primarily
centralized or decentralized,  four aspects of  the  implementation program
must be addressed:

     •    There must be  legal  authority  for a managing agency  to  exist
          and financial authority for  it  to  operate.

     •    The  agency must manage construction, ownership and  operation
          of the sanitary district.

     •    A choice must  be made between  the several types of  long-term
          financing that  are  generally required  in paying  for capital
          expenditures  associated with the project.

     •    A  system  of  user charges  to  retire  capital  debts,  to  cover
          expenditures  for  operation  and maintenance,  and to  provide  a
          reserve for contingencies  must  be  established.

     In the  following  sections, these requirements are examined  first
with  respect to centralized  sanitary districts,   then  with  respect to
decentralized districts.

1.   CENTRALIZED DISTRICTS

a.   Authority

     The  Green  Lake  Area Facilities Plan identified the proposed  Green
Lake  Sanitary  District   as  the legal  authority   for  implementing  the
Plan's Proposed  Action.   Under Chapter  176A of the Minnesota  statutes,
the District  would  have  the  authority to implement this system and to
contract with the villages and townships  for services.
                                  123

-------
b.    Managing  Agency

     The  role  of  the  managing  agency  has   been  well   defined  for
centralized  sanitary  districts.   In  general,  the agency  constructs,
maintains  and  operates  the  sewerage   facilities.   Although  in  fact
different contractual relationships exist between the agencies;  and their
service  areas,   for  the  purposes  of this  document ownership  of  the
facilities  may   be   assumed  to  reside   with  the  agency.   For  gravity
sewers,  such  ownership  has  traditionally  extended  to   the  private
property.   For   STEP  or  grinder  pump  stations  connected  to pressure
sewers several options exist:

     •    The station may be designed to  agency specifications, with the
          responsibility   for   purchase,   maintenance   and   ownership
          residing with the homeowner.

     •    The station may be specified and purchased by  the  agency, with
          the homeowner repurchasing and  maintaining it.

     •    The station  may  be  specified  and owned  by  the  agency,  but
          purchased by the homeowner.

     •    The  station  may  be  specified,  purchased  and owned  by  the
          agency.   Regardless,   however,  of  the  option selected,  all
          residences are treated equally.

c.   Financing

     Capital  expenses  associated with  a  project may  be  financed  by
several techniques.  Briefly, they are:

     •    pay-as-you-go methods;
     •    special benefit assessments;
     •    reserve funds; and
     •    debt financing.

     The  Facilities    Plan  indicated that much  of the  Proposed Action
would  not be funded by Federal and State  grants,  and  recommended that
loans  be sought from  the Farmers  Home Administration.  The Plan did
indicate  that  Spicer  and  New  London  should  seek such  construction
grants.

d.   User Charges

     User charges  are  set at a level that will provide  for  repayment of
long-term  debt  and   cover  operating  and  maintenance  expenses.   In
addition, prudent  management agencies frequently add an extra  charge to
provide a contingency  fund for extraordinary expenses and replacement of
equipment.

     The  implementation program  proposed  by the  Facilities Plan is an
example  of  a scheme   calling  for  a  County  to  recover the  costs  of
wastewater management  from the local municipalities.  The municipalities
                                  124

-------
would,  in  turn,   charge  the  users  of  the  system.   Because  of  the
potential  economic impacts,  the  charges  must  be  carefully  allocated
among various  classes  of users.   Recognized  classes of users  include:

     •    Permanent residents/Seasonal residents
     •    Residential/Commercial/Industrial users
     t    Presently sewered users/Newly sewered  users
     •    Low- and fixed-income residents/Active income  producers

     Each class of user imposes different requirements on  the  design and
cost of each alternative,  receives different benefits, and  has different
financial capabilities.

2.   SMALL WASTE FLOW DISTRICTS

     Regulation of on-lot  sewage  systems has  evolved  to the point where
most  new  facilities   are  designed,  permitted  and inspected by  local
health  departments  or   other  agencies.   After  installation,   local
government  has  no further  responsibility  for these systems  until mal-
functions  become   evident.   In  such  cases  the local  government  may
inspect and issue permits for repair of the systems.   The  sole basis for
government  regulation  in  this  field has been its obligation  to protect
public health.

     Rarely have  governmental  obligations  been  interpreted more broadly
to include  monitoring  and control of other effects  of on-lot  system use
or misuse.  The general  absence  of information  concerning  septic  system
impacts on ground and surface water quality has  been coupled with  a lack
of knowledge of the operation of on-site systems.

     Methods  of   identifying  and  dealing  with   the  adverse  effects  of
on-lot  systems  without building  expensive  sewers are  being  developed.
Technical  methods include  both   the  wastewater treatment  and  disposal
alternatives discussed in Section III.B and improved monitoring of water
quality.   Managerial methods  have already been  developed  and  are being
applied in various communities as discussed in Appendix  1-1.

     As with  any  centralized  district,  the issues of  legal  and  fiscal
authority,  agency management,  project financing, and user charges must
all be resolved by small waste flow districts.

a.   Authority

     Minnesota presently  has no  legislation which explicitly  authorizes
governmental  entities  to  manage wastewater facilities  other  than those
connected   to  conventional   collection  systems.    However,   Minnesota
Statutes  Sections 444.085,  444.065 and 444.075, and Chapter  116A have
been  interpreted  as  providing cities,  villages, counties, and special
purpose water and sewer  districts, respectively, with sufficient  powers
to manage decentralized facilities (Otis and Stewart 1976).

     California and  Illinois,  to  resolve  interagency  conflicts  or  to
authorize access to private properties for inspection and  maintenance of
wastewater  facilities, have passed legislation  specifically intended to
                                  125

-------
facilitate  management  of  decentralized facilities.   These  laws  are
summarized in Appendix 1-2.

b.   Management

     The purpose of  a  small waste flow district is to balance the costs
of management with the needs of public health and environmental quality.
Management of such a district implies formation of  a  management agency
and  formulation of  policies for  the  agency.  The  concept of  such an
agency  is  relatively  new.   Appendix  1-3   discusses   this  concept  in
detail.

     The range of functions a management agency may provide for adequate
control  and use  of  decentralized  technologies  is  presented  in Table
III-3.   Because the  level  of funding for these  functions  could become
an economic burden, their costs and benefits should be considered in the
development of  the management agency.   Major decisions which have to be
made  in  the  development  of  this  agency  relate  to  the  following
questions:

     •    Should engineering and operations  functions be provided by the
          agency or by private organizations under contract?

     •    Would off-site  facilities  require  acquisition of property and
          right-of-way?

     •    Would  public  or  private  ownership  of  on-site  wastewater
          facilities be more likely to provide cost savings and improved
          control of facilities operation?

     •    Are there environmental, land use, or economic characteristics
          of  the  area   that  would  be  sensitive  to  operation  and
          construction  of  decentralized technologies?   If  so,  would
          special   planning,   education   and  permitting   steps   be
          appropriate?

     Five  steps are  recommended  to  implement an  efficient,  effective
program  for the management of wastewater in unsewered areas:

     •    Develop  a  site-specific environmental  and  engineering  data
          base;

     •    Design the management organization;

     •    Agency start-up;

     •    Construction and rehabilitation of facilities; and

     •    Operation  of facilities.

     Site Specific Environmental and Engineering Data Base.    The  data
base  should include  groundwater monitoring, a house-to-house investiga-
tion  (sanitary  survey),  soils and engineering  studies,  and a survey of
                                  126

-------
                                    Table III-3

          SMALL WASTE FLOW MANAGEMENT FUNCTIONS BY OPERATIONAL COMPONENT
                        AND BY BASIC AND SUPPLEMENTAL USAGE
   Component
       Basic Usage
      Supplemental Usage
Administrative
Engineering
Operations
Planning
User charge system
Staffing
Enforcement
Adopt design standards*
Review and approval of plans*
Evaluate Existing systems/
  design rehabilitation
  measures
Installation inspection*
On-site soils investigations*
Acceptance for public
  management of privately
  installed facilities

Routine inspection and
  maintenance
Septage collection and
  disposal
Groundwater monitoring
Grants administration
Service contracts supervision
Occupancy/operating permits
Interagency coordination
Property and right-of-way
  acquisition
Performance bonding
  requirements

Design and install facilities
  for public ownership
Contractor training
Special designs for alternative
  technologies
Pilot studies of alternative
  technologies
Implementing flow reduction
  techniques
Emergency inspection and
  maintenance
Surface water monitoring
                                  Land use planning
                                  Public education
                                  Designate areas sensitive
                                   . to soil-dependent systems
                                  Establish environmental, land
                                    use and economic criteria
                                    for issuance or non-issuance
                                    of permits
* Usage normally provided by local governments at present.
                                        127

-------
available technologies likely  to  function adequately in the area.  This
baseline  information will  provide the  framework  for  the  systems  and
technologies appropriate to the district.

     A  program for  monitoring groundwater  should include  sampling of
existing  wells and  possibly additional  testing  of the  aquifer.   Such
monitoring should be  instituted  early enough to provide  data  useful in
selecting and designing wastewater disposal systems.

     The  sanitary  survey should  include interviews with residents  and
inspections  of  existing systems.   A  trained  surveyor  should  record
information on lot size and location; age and use of dwelling-; location,
age, and  type  of sewage disposal system; adequacy of the maintenance of
the existing system;  water-using  fixtures; and problems with the exist-
ing system.

     Detailed site analyses may be required to evaluate operation of the
effluent  disposal fields and to determine the  impacts  of effluent dis-
posal  upon local groundwater.   These  studies  may include  probing  the
disposal  area; boring  soil samples;  and  the  installation  of shallow
groundwater observation  shafts.    Sampling  of the  water  table downhill
from  leach fields  aids  in evaluating  the  potential for  transport of
nutrients  and  pathogens  through  the  soil.   Soil  classifications near
selected  leach fields may  improve correlations between  soils  and leach
field  failures.   An  examination  of  the  reasons  for  the  inadequate
functioning of existing  wastewater systems may avoid such problems with
the rehabilitation or construction of new systems.

     Design the Management  Organization.   Both  the Facilities  Plan  and
the  EIS  have  recommended   the  Green  Lake  Sanitary  Sewer  and  Water
District  as the  agency best suited to managing wastewater facilities in
both  unsewered  and  sewered  areas  of  the  Study Area.   The  role of
organizations  such  as the Department of  Health should  be examined with
respect  to  avoiding interagency conflicts and duplication of effort and
staffing.

     Determination  of the  basic  and  supplementary management functions
to be provided will be influenced by the  technologies appropriate to the
Study  Area.   In this respect,  the  questions  raised  earlier regarding
formulation of management policies must be resolved.

     The  product of  these analyses should be an organizational design in
which  staffing  requirements,  functions,  interagency  agreements,  user
charge systems and procedural guidelines  are defined.

     Agency Start-Up.   Once the  structure and responsibilities  of  the
management  agency have been defined, public review is advisable.  Addi-
tional  personnel required  for construction and/or  operation should be
provided.   If  necessary,  contractual arrangements with private organiza-
tions  should  be developed.  Acquisition  of  property should  also be
initiated.

     Construction and Rehabilitation of Facilities.  Site  data collected
for the  environmental and engineering data base should  support selection
                                   128

-------
and design of  appropriate  technologies for individual residences.   Once
construction and  rehabilitation begin, site conditions may be  revealed
that   suggest   technology   or  design  changes.    Since   decentralized
technologies   generally  must  be  designed  to  operate  within   site
limitations instead of overcoming them,  flexibility should be provided.
Personnel authorized to  revise  designs in the field  would provide  this
flexibility.

     Operation of Facilities.   The administrative planning, engineering,
and operations  functions listed in Table  III-4 are  primarily  applicable
to  this  phase.   The  role of  the management  agency  would  have  been
determined in the organizational phase.  Experience  gained during agency
start-up  and   facilities construction  may indicate  that  some  lower  or
higher level of effort will be necessary to insure long term  reliability
of the decentralized facilities.

c.   Financing

     The financing of a small waste flows  district is similar  to that of
a  centralized  district.   Such  financing  was   discussed  in   Section
III.D.I.e.

d.   User Charges

     Although renovation and replacement costs for on-site systems  owned
by  permanent   residents  are  eligible  for Federal  funding,   such  costs
incurred  by  seasonal residents are  not.   The major difference in  the
financing  of   the  two systems  arises from  the  question of  seasonals1
ownership of on-site  systems.   With respect to the  Study Area, where a
significant proportion  of  the  users  would be seasonal,  the  absence  of
Federal funding would  transfer  a  large fraction of  the project  costs to
the local users.   This  would  be  reflected in either  1) capital outlays
by  the  users   for  construction,  2)   increased   user  charges  covering
increased local costs or 3) both.

     User charges  and  classes have been discussed in Section  III.E.l.d.
The significance of  decentralized districts  lies in  the  creation  of  an
additional  class  of users.   Since residents of  such districts may  be
differentiated  in  terms  of  centrally  sewered  areas  and  decentralized
areas, user charges  may  differ.  As a result many  different  management
functions are conjoined.   For example, permanent users on septic systems
may be  charged less  than  those  on  central  sewers.   Seasonal  users  on
pressure  sewers may  have high annual  costs associated with amortization
of  capital expenses; permanent  users  of pressure sewers may  be charged
less than seasonal users, because Federal funding reduced their  share of
the capital  costs.   Alternatively, the management  agency may choose  to
divide all costs equally among all users.   For the analyses in this EIS,
public  ownership  of  permanent and  seasonal on-site systems  has  been
assumed.

     Problems  such  as  these  have not been adequately  addressed by the
historical  sources  of  management information.    Development  of  user
charges by  small  waste flows  districts will  undoubtedly  be  complicated
                                  129

-------
by the absence of such historical records.   EPA is preparing an analysis
of equitable means  for  recovering costs from users  in  small waste flow
districts and combined sewer/small waste flow districts.
                                  130

-------
                              CHAPTER  IV

                          EIS ALTERNATIVES
A.   INTRODUCTION

     The  preceding   chapter  described  options  for   the   functional
components of wastewater  management  systems for the communities  in  the
Study  Area.   This  chapter  examines  alternative wastewater  management
plans, or alternative courses of action for the Study Area.   A No  Action
Alternative and a Limited Action Alternative are also examined.

     The  Proposed  Action  developed  in  the Facilities  Plan  (described
earlier) provides for centralized collection and treatment of wastewater
generated  in  the  area shown  in Figure 1-3.   In  response to  concerns
about  the need  for  and expense of the  Proposed  Action,  the  development
of  EIS   alternatives  emphasized  decentralized  and   alternative   or
innovative technologies:   alternative  collection systems,  decentralized
treatment  and  land  disposal  of wastewaters.   The  EIS  alternatives
provide for management  of wastewaters  in a slightly  larger Service Area
than that proposed in the Facilities  Plan.   The eastern half  of the Nest
Lake shoreline was added to the Facilities  Plan Proposed Service Area in
order  to  examine  the  water quality impacts each alternative  would have
on  this  eutrophic  lake  (see  Section H.B.7.C.).   The data  gathered
during  the  1979 "Septic  Snooper"  survey indicated a need for  improved
wastewater  management  facilities  on  this portion  of  Nest  Lake  (see
Figure  11-10).   Five  of  the  EIS alternatives,  including the Limited
Action Alternative use decentralized  treatment to partly avoid the costs
of sewers.

     Because the cost  of  collection  in the Proposed  Action is high,  the
cost effectiveness of pressure sewers,  vacuum sewers, and small-diameter
gravity sewers was compared.  These sewers  were,  therefore,  incorporated
into the design of two completely centralized systems,  one calling for a
stabilization pond (EIS Alternative 1), the other for an oxidation ditch
(EIS Alternative  2).   However,  pressure  sewers did not prove to be a
cost-effective  method  for  collection  of wastewater in the  Green Lake
Service Area.

     Where site  conditions such as soils and  topography are  favorable,
land   disposal   of  wastewater  offers  advantages  over  conventional
biological treatment systems that discharge to surface  waters:  the  land
is used  as a natural  treatment facility system; reduced  operation  and
maintenance may result from relatively simple operations; and savings in
capital and operating costs are possible.

     Analysis    of  decentralized   treatment   technologies   and   site
conditions revealed that there are feasible alternatives to sewering  the
entire  Green  Lake,  and part  of  the  Nest Lake shorelines.  It  would be
possible  to  combine multi-family  filter  fields (cluster  systems) with
rehabilitated and new  on-site treatment systems to  meet the  wastewater
treatment needs in portions of the Study Area.
                                   131

-------
     The assumptions used in  design  and  costing  of the alternatives are
presented in Appendix H-l.  The  major  features  of the Proposed Action,
the EIS Alternatives, and the Limited  Action Alternative are listed in
Table IV-1.
B.   ALTERNATIVES

     The action proposed by  the  Facilities  Plan has been compared with
the  "do-nothing"   (no  action)  alternative,  and  seven  new approaches
developed in this  EIS.   The  alternatives  discussed  below are summarized
in  Table  IV-1, and  Table  IV-2  lists the  cost-effectiveness  of each.
Detailed cost  data for  each  alternative  are provided in Appendix H-2.
To facilitate the  development of  wastewater  management  alternatives, the
Proposed EIS Service Area  was  divided into  24 segments; the location  of
these is shown in Figure 11-13.

1.    NO ACTION

     The EIS  process  must  evaluate  the  consequences  of  not  taking
action.  This "no  action" alternative implies that EPA  would not provide
funds  to support  new construction,  upgrading, or expansion of existing
wastewater   collection  and  treatment  systems.    Presumably,  no  new
facilities  would be built;  wastewater would  still be treated in existing
plants and  on-site systems.

     If  this  course  of  action  were taken,  additional  flows  to  the
treatment plants  at  Spicer and  New London  would be prohibited because
the  plants   are  already  overloaded  and  have  difficulty  meeting MPCA
effluent discharge  standards.   Existing  on-site   systems  in  the  EIS
Service Area would continue  to be used in their present conditions.   In
the  absence  of a small  waste flows  management  agency,  the Kandiyohi
County Tax  Assessors  Office would continue to issue  permits  to build and
repair on-lot systems.

     The No Action Alternative is  unlikely  to be selected.  It implies
that  the treatment plants at  New London and Spicer would continue  to
violate  NPDES  and   MPCA  discharge  conditions.   Consequently,  new
facilities  to  adequately treat wastewaters  would  be needed in the near
future.

2.    FACILITIES PLAN PROPOSED  ACTION

     The  Facilities  Plan  recommended treatment  of   all wastewaters
generated in the  Proposed  Service Area in a stabilization  pond  treating
0.63  mgd.    The  plant,  located  east  of   Green   Lake,   would   retain
wastewater   for 210  days  and periodically discharge effluent  to  the
Middle Fork  of  the Crow River (see Chapter  I for  a  brief description  of
the Proposed Action).  The design of the proposed  facilities  is  outlined
in  detail in Chapter VII of the Green Lake Area  Facilities  Plan  (Rieke
                                   132

-------
            is
r *—>
g-3
O u
                                                               §-3
                                                                         a a
g
C/l


4J
ca
CO
W

j:"
Ui
0
z
.3
c
eu
V
Ui
O

<4H
o
CO
2
o
&
I
CO



n
cQ
u

.e
i
j
e


Ui
CJ


o

41
0
to
0)
z


o


rH
j=

CO
01
4J
3
O



4J
n
CO
w

£
Ui
o
z
,J
c


Ui
o


o
0)
01
1
CO
V
z

UH
o


i-t
CO
A

to
ca
4)
I




CO



•A
0
Z
HJ
c
01
at
Ut



o
to
01
0
CO
01
z


o


rH
J

tfl
S
J3   U
.   «
    CA
    M
    td
    Cd
    g
    C£
    2

    i






4J
1
**4
Cxi

•o
41

A
a (A
rH
fl) rH

•H O
4J 6-4
•a TJ
•a c
< Q






rH
g
CO
o

a


PC

1

0)
•o
,_,
o
CO
ai

o
o
"•S
ao
rW
Ul
j= FH
to TJ
O £




V C
3 0
"O •«
u
•o e
D at
•H 41
3 TJ
0*
Ui JS
w "
12


V

2

g
u
U
01
u




to
X
o

 -4H
« g- «J «H
rJ 00 Oi CQ
SI
CO

CO -O
y
0) 4J 4)
ja e 3
a) cr
T3 3 -H
OJ rH g

3 U 01
cr u
41 4)

u"S
O »*H O
zoo.
t) ? y
Z u 4>
.. 01 8
§•5 s
tj
P S
M y
SUt tH
o a
Z t«. CO

to

ot

tH
•H
b

CO /—•
•r« CO
TJ TJ




X CO
5; -5
(U
4J
<
CO
•H
U

CO «03
tO ^k

CA 4J
1
CO
c
Ui
ot
-LJ
rH
<

CA
UJ

CO \D
CO =**

i ?
CO -H
CO u
            I M I


01 1>
aa Ui
O 0)
£5
-e
r-t 01
«: co


41
31


3
<


u
ot
y
u

r-t Ul
i-t 01
< CA
Ui

%
O
a
o
Ui
a
rH
<
44 CO
Ui 01
0 Ui

£M
0) J=
u u
X 3
0) O
4) TJ
Uj B



0)
3
c
41
U
CO

B
O
TJ
J
»
01
Z
•a at
g 1,
41
* CO
&*
"5
u> y
 *

|s
iJ 01
y
41 CX
Z CA
01
g,
a>
ca
to
e
u
I
y
CO TJ

X
|«
o u>
hJ 01
y
Z «
                                                                                        15
                                                                                        o a
                                                                                        nJ CO
                                                                                        SI
                  C C
                  (8 O
                  u JJ
                  3g.
                           i
                         E cn
                                                       HH O
                                                       W ^

                                                       CO CO
                                               133


TJ


O rH
•rl rH
CQ UH
N
i-t ca
s g
A O
CO 00
4J CO
41
U
CO
B
U
-------
    S!
    O
                       CO
                       00
                                                        CM
                                                       oo
                                                       oo
                                                                          in
                                                                          vC
                                                                          CM
vo  CO

W  iJ
M  O
Ed
    6-S
    m
    CM
                      O
                      CO
                      oo
                        ft
                      CM
ON
  •


CO
                                           in


                                           o

                                            •t
                                           •»
    Ed
    H
CO
M
Ed
                      r-
                      t-i
                      CM
                       9.
                      •3-
                                        ON
                                        co
              in
              VO
              co
                *
              in






CM
1
H
i-l
f^





















•
W
Ed
M
H
Ed
H
0
to
M
ANALYS

Ed
M
H
Ex!
Eh
Ed
H
CO
o
0














BE!
Ed
H
W u
Ed
K
CM
*
Ed
H
»
H t_>
Ed
in
CM

CM

H
Ed


i-l
CO
I-l
Ed

S5
Z 0
^C H~l
J H
O-i U
<3
en
Ed p
M Cd
H c/>
M O
J CU
M O
U 05
< d<


1-4
in
ON
*
co


r-l
r-
CM
oo
«
-S-


i-H
ON
SO
00

^1
VO
CM
00
00



iH
VO
in
rH
«
00






O>
ON
CO



ON
00
CO


m
oo
CM


in
oo
CM




o
oo
CO









vO
CM
ON
O
*
in


^
i-i
i-i
*


in
m
S
ON

CM
ON
CO
ON



CO
t-l
•H

*
00






in
i



o
o
vO
m


o
oo
vO
oo


in
d
vo
00




in
d
r~-






       O
•W     O
O  C O
tt)  O   «
i-) -H i-l
O  4J 
W  O  X
CXi  3 ^x


4J  JJ  tO
C  W  4J
0)  C  W
woo
fl)  CJ U
                                      O
                                      O
                                      O
                               o  o
                               0)
                               a)  to  u
                               M  C  »
                               300
                                                  C
                                                  a) x-s
                                                  to o
                                                  a) o
                                                  n o
                                                 Pn   «
                                                    ft
                                                 i-l 
                                                  O
                                                 H
                            to
                            o
                       iH U
                        CO
                        3 -u
                        C  C
                        C  (U
                       < 1-t
                            CO
                        0)  >
                        00 -H
                        CO  S
-------
Carroll Muller Associates 1974)  and the  process  is  illustrated  in Figure
IV-1.   As discussed in  Chapter  III,  the Facilities Plan  Proposed Action
has been  upgraded  in this EIS  in order that its  cost-effectiveness be
compared to that of the  EIS Alternatives.

     The   Proposed  Service   Area  and   location  of   the  proposed
stabilization pond  are illustrated in Figure  IV-2.

3.    EIS  ALTERNATIVE 1

     EIS Alternative 1,  with  a  design  flow of 0.59 mgd,  is  identical to
the Proposed  Action  involving  treatment  by stabilization  ponds.  The
intent  of  New  Alternative   1  was  to  consider  different collection
methods.  'Low pressure  sewers  and low  pressure  sewers  in  combination
with conventional  gravity  sewers  were  considered.   None  of  the segments
studied was  advantageous for alternate  methods of collection.  In all
cases  the  conventional  collection system proved  to be the most  cost
effective method.   The  area  to be served by the  system, the  treatment
plant  location  and the  transmission  line routings are  shown  in Figure
IV-2.

4.   EIS  ALTERNATIVE  2

     EIS  Alternative  2  is a  modification of  one of the  alternatives
examined  in   the Facilities  Plan  (August 1976),  with  pressure  sewers
again  used in conjunction  with  gravity services to collect  sewage  prior
to  treatment  at  an  oxidation  ditch  plant.   Discharge   of treated
wastewater (0.59 mgd)  as  in  EIS  Alternative 1, would be to the Middle
Fork of the Crow River.   This alternative is  illustrated  in  Figure  IV-4.

5.   EIS  ALTERNATIVE  3

     EIS Alternative  3  is partly  decentralized;  portions of  the  Green
Lake EIS Service Area would employ on-site and  cluster  systems  while the
remaining  flow would be treated   by land application (rapid  infiltra-
tion).  This  alternative is  illustrated  in Figure  IV-5.  Approximately
0.38  mgd  (from the  western  part  of  the area)  would  be collected and
conveyed to a central treatment facility.

     Wastewater  would   be   pretreated   in   a   stabilization   pond,
chlorinated,    and   disposed   of   by  rapid   infiltration.     Renovated
wastewater would  be  drawn from  recovery wells and  discharged  to the
Middle Fork of the  Crow River.

     The remaining portions  of  the Green Lake  shoreline  would  be  served
by  a   combination  of cluster  systems  and on-site systems  suitable to
local   soil   conditions.   The  preliminary  design,  comparison,  and
assessment of decentralized  systems  (in this Alternative as well  as EIS
Alternatives   4,  5, and  6)  were based  upon  the following  assumptions:

     Cluster Systems.   Cluster systems would be used  for those parts of
the EIS Service Area  where rehabilitation and  continued use of on-site
systems  would result  in  unacceptable  public  health  or environmental
                                   135
-------
O
g-

I- M
m >
O H
CO
0-D
X O
> Z
3D O
CD
m
                  m
                  3J
   >

•°  F
o  C
Z  M
o  5

   o

                     O
                     I
                     r~
                     o
                     5



                     1
                     o

                      . CD O
                       m
                      m


                    -o
                    m a?
                                     H-
                                    TO
                  <
                  I
                      136
-------
137
-------
138
-------
<&<$&>
/ v\ VI " <, \ \ V*i 'v \ (.
~\ A iy>\^ ) ) ))^> )i
^ \ (^ uul
i yij

K


•«
                       139
-------
140
-------
impacts.   It  was  assumed  that  25%  of  those  residences   utilizing
decentralized systems would be tied into cluster systems;  suitable  soils
exist  at  the  sites  for which  these systems  are  proposed.   The  costs
developed were based on  a  "typical" cluster system that  would  serve  23
residences.

     On-lot Systems.   Residences not served by sewers  or  cluster systems
would use on-lot  systems.   This alternative would include a program  of
replacement  or rehabilitation  of  on-lot  systems where necessary  to
alleviate existing malfunctions.

     The  specific requirements  for upgrading  existing   on-lot  systems
were  estimated by  analysis of  the data  presented  in  the  Green  Lake
sanitary survey,  the "Septic  Snooper"  investigation,  and other environ-
mental data.   Based  upon these, 50% of the on-lot  systems were assumed
to  require  replacement  of  both  septic   tank  and  drainfield.   Site
evaluations  and  selection  of appropriate  replacement or  rehabilitation
technologies are  likely  to  result in variation from this assumption  in
both  the  number  of  systems affected and the mix  of  technologies.  The
assumption of  50% replacement  results  in cost estimates  expected  to  be
conservatively high.

6.   EIS  ALTERNATIVE 4

     EIS Alternative  4  is  identical  to Alternative  3  except  that the
areas  surrounding Nest  Lake  would be  added  to  the areas  that  were
proposed  for  on-site  treatment  in  Alternative 3.  Consequently,  flow
from  the sewered  area  would be reduced by  0.10  mgd  to 0.28 mgd.   Flows
from  the City  of  Spicer, the Village of New  London,  and segments  1,  2,
9,  10 and 11  would  be collected and treated by  land application  using
rapid infiltration.

     The  locations  of  wastewater  facilities   and  service  areas for
Alternative 4 are shown in Figure IV-6.

7.   EIS  ALTERNATIVE 5

     New Alternative 5  is  identical to  Alternative 4 except that  spray
irrigation would  be  substituted for rapid infiltration.   An application
rate  of 2  inches/week  was  used based on the nitrogen loading  rate.  The
crop  chosen  was alfalfa  because a high rate  of  application and because
the plant is  a perennial.   Storage of wastewater  for 15  weeks was used
in design of the facilities (EPA, 1977).

     The locations of  cluster systems,  on-site disposal  areas,  and the
land application site (0.28 mgd) are shown in Figure IV-7.

8.    EIS  ALTERNATIVE 6

     This alternative would include decentralized treatment  for portions
of the  EIS  Service Area. The area would be divided into  two centralized
districts; one for the  City of  Spicer  and segments 9,  10,  and  11, and
the other for the Village of New London  and segments 1 and 2.   All  other
areas of Green Lake and Nest Lake would  utilize a combination  of cluster
systems.

                                   141
-------
142
-------
143
-------
     The New  London and Spicer  treatment plants would  be upgraded  to
tertiary* (advanced) treatment and their capacity expanded to  handle  the
design flows.   The New London plant has sufficient hydraulic capacity to
meet  design  flow  (0.12  mgd)  but provides  only  primary  treatment.
Aeration, alum addition, final clarification,  mixed-media filtration  and
chlorination would be added in upgrading the plant.

     The Spicer  plant  does  not have  sufficient hydraulic capacity  to
handle  the  design  flows  (0.086 mgd)  and would  be  expanded  by  con-
structing a parallel plant.  Upgrading from secondary to  advanced treat-
ment  would  require provision  of  the  following processes:   alum  and
polymer  addition,   a   prefabricated   extended   aeration  plant   and
mixed-media filters.

     A map of this alternative is presented in Figure IV-8.

9.   LIMITED ACTION

     A "limited action" wastewater management alternative for  the design
period has been developed and evaluated in this EIS.   Under this  scheme,
there  would be  no  expansion  of presently  sewered  communities  in  the
Study Area (i.e., New London and Spicer).   The existing sewage treatment
plants  at  New  London and  Spicer  would both  be upgraded to  tertiary*
(advanced)   treatment with  capacity expanded as necessary to  handle  the
design  flows.   The  capacity  of  these  facilities is increased  only  to
handle  wastewater  generated  by  growth in  the existing  sewered areas.
The  design  flow of the New  London  plant  is estimated to be  0.098  mgd;
effluent discharge  would be  to the Middle Fork  of the Crow River above
Nest  Lake.   The estimated  year  2000  flow  of the Spicer plant  is  0.12
mgd, with effluent discharged to Woodcock Lake.

     Existing and future residences in the EIS Service  Area  outside of
New  London  and Spicer would  be  served by on-lot systems.  As with  EIS
Atlernatives  3,  4,  5, and  6,  it  is  assumed that  50% of  the on-lot
systems  would require  replacement  of  both  septic  tank  and  drainfield
over  the design  period.  No cluster systems are proposed for  service in
this alternative.

     Implicit in  this  alternative  is the assumption  that the  designated
wastewater  management  agency   would   not  be  authorized  to  acquire
easements and rights-of-way or otherwise secure land, given that no land
application systems or cluster systems are proposed.

     The configuration of the Limited Action Alternative is very similar
to that for EIS Alternative 6:  The former has no cluster systems around
Green Lake and Nest Lake, and segments 1,  2, 9, 10,  and 11 are served by
on-site systems, no sewers.
                                   144
-------
145
-------
C.   FLEXIBILITY OF  ALTERNATIVES

     The flexibility of the Proposed Action and the EIS Alternatives to
accommodate  future  growth  in  the   service  Area  along  with  their
operational  flexibility  over  the  design period  is evaluated  in this
section.
1.   FACILITIES PLAN PROPOSED ACTION

     This  alternative  provides good  flexibility for  growth  since,  as
long  as  land  is  available,   stabilization  ponds  can be  expanded  to
accommodate increased  flows  relatively easily.   Flexibility for future
growth is, however,  reduced somewhat because the  entire proposed Service
Area is to be sewered.   More  flexibility  for future  expansion is usually
available for alternatives that require  a  smaller initial commitment of
resources.

2.   EIS  ALTERNATIVE 1

     Except for  the  use of pressure  sewers  for wastewater collection,
this alternative  is  identical to  the  Facilities Plan Proposed Action.
Such pressure sewers  provide more  flexibility for design than do gravity
sewers since pressure sewers do not require suitable ground  contours for
economical construction.  The  flexibility  for expansion  is  the same as
for the Facilities Plan Proposed Action.

3.   EIS  ALTERNATIVE 2

     With the exception of the treatment  process,  this  alternative is
identical to EIS  Alternative 1.  The treatment scheme in EIS Alternative
2 provides greater flexibility of  operation than does  the stabilization
pond.  The flexibility of expanding an  oxidation  ditch  is dependent upon
the availability of  land.  Much less  land,  however, is required for an
oxidation ditch  than  for a  stabilization  pond.

4.   EIS  ALTERNATIVE 3

     Unlike the alternatives that propose  discharges of effluent to the
Middle Fork of the Crow River, EIS Alternative 3 proposes that effluent
be  disposed of  by  rapid  infiltration.    The  addition  of  preliminary
treatment  and  rapid  infiltration  to   the  stabilization  pond treatment
process  reduces  operational  flexibility over  the  plain stabilization
pond process.  From  the standpoint of  expansion, rapid infiltration is
less flexible than spray irrigation because siting restrictions are more
severe.  However, rapid infiltration requires much  less  land area than
spray  irrigation.  Also, the  operational flexibility of rapid infiltra-
tion is  good  since  it  has a  wide  range  of possible application rates,
and can be  used  year round, even  in cold weather.   EIS Alternative 3 is
somewhat more flexible  than previous  alternatives  because  only part of
the proposed  Service Area would  be  sewered.   This  limits  the initial
commitment  of  resources  and increases  the  flexibility  for  future
planning and design.

                                   146
-------
5.   EIS  ALTERNATIVE  4

     Operational flexibility is the  same  as  for  EIS Alternative 3.  The
flexibility  for future  expansion  is  slightly  greater  than  for EIS
Alternative  3  because  the  amount  of sewered  area  is  slightly   less.

6.   EIS  ALTERNATIVE  5

     This alternative is similar  to  EIS Alternative 4  except  that  spray
irrigation,  rather  than  rapid  infiltration,  would  be used for effluent
disposal.   Spray  irrigation is  subject  to  fewer  siting  restrictions,
therefore  has  increased flexibility for expansion, but  requires much
more  land  than rapid infiltration.   The  range of  application rates is
more   limited   for   spray   irrigation  than  for  rapid   infiltration.
Additionally, spray irrigation  may not be  feasible  in very  cold weather.

7.   EIS  ALTERNATIVE  6

     Upgrading and  expanding an  existing  facility  provides less flexi-
bility than  does constructing  a  new one.  When planning and designing a
new  treatment  plant,  factors  such  as location,  treatment process, and
plant  configuration  can be optimized.  When expanding or upgrading an
existing facility,  the  components  that  are already in  use  constrain the
design  and  reduce  flexibility.   Upgrading  and  expanding  the existing
Spicer  and  New  London  wastewater  treatment  plants  appears to  be  a
relatively  simple  operation.   Since the improvements will involve only
process  additions   with little   or  no  interactions  between new and
existing  components,  the main limitation of  flexibility will  be the
availability of surrounding land  for expansion.

8.   LIMITED ACTION

     The Limited Action  Alternative represents  the  maximum  decentralized
approach  of all wastewater  management schemes  evaluated  in  this EIS.
With  no  provision  of improved collection and treatment facilities for
present and  future  residents  outside  currently  sewered areas, it also
represents   the  least   flexible   of  all  alternatives  in  terms  of
accommodating future growth in  the EIS Service  Area.

D.   COSTS OF ALTERNATIVES

     Project  costs  were  grouped  by  capital  expenses,  operating and
maintenance  expenses,  and  salvage  values  of  the equipment  and  land
required  for  each  alternative.    A  contingency fund   amounting  to
approximately  25%  of capital  costs  was  included  to  provide for such
expenses as  engineering  and legal  fees,  acquisition of rights-of-way,
and  administration.   The   methodology and  assumptions   used  in  the
analyses  are  described in Appendix H-l.   Detailed  costs   for  each
alternative are also presented  in  Appendix H-2.
                                   147
-------
     The present  and future project  costs for the  upgraded  Facilities
Plan Proposed Action, EIS Alternatives and Limited Action are  summarized
in  Table  IV-2.    The  analyses  of  total  present  worth and  annual
equivalent costs of  each alternative  are also presented  in this  table.
(Debt service on financing and local share is not  included.)   Discussion
of Federal/State cost  sharing  and remaining local costs  is included in
Section V.E.
                                   148
-------
                               CHAPTER V

                                IMPACTS

A.   IMPACTS ON  SURFACE WATER QUALITY

1.   PRIMARY IMPACTS

a.   Analysis of Eutrophication  Potential

     This section  discusses  the effect of nutrient loading "associated
with  different  wastewater management  alternatives  upon  the  trophic
status of open waters in  Nest  Lake,  Green Lake, and Woodcock Lake.  To
evaluate  the  impact of  each  alternative,  nutrient  loading levels for
phosphorus were  calculated.  The empirical  model developed by Dillon was
used  to project  future   trophic  conditions  associated  with different
phosphorus  loading scenarios  based  on the  EIS  wastewater management
alternatives.

     The  major  sources  of  phosphorus  for Nest Lake,  Green  Lake, and
Woodcock  Lake  were  identified  earlier   in  the   following  order  of
significance:

     •    tributaries  (Middle  Fork  of the Crow River  to Nest Lake and
          from Nest Lake  to Green Lake);

     •    wastewater treatment  plants  (Belgrade and  New London to Middle
          Fork Crow River  and Spicer  to  Woodcock Lake);

     •    septic tank  systems;  and

     •    immediate drainage around the  lake.

The relative  contributions of  phosphorus to Nest  Lake,  Green Lake, and
Woodcock  Lake  made  by   these  sources  under  present  conditions are
illustrated  in  Figure  V-l.    Other  sources  known  to  contribute  to
nutrient  loading  such as  groundwater,  detritus,  waterfowl,  and release
from sediments  are less   significant in the Study Area  in terms of the
time scales considered.

     Future Phosphorus Loading  Scenarios.    In  this  analysis,  future
phosphorus loading  levels have been  projected  for  the year 2000.   The
immediate problem  in deriving  these  loads  is  the  phosphorus loading in
the Middle  Fork of the  Crow  River upstream  from  Belgrade.  This load
varies with the flow in  the river from  year to year.  A  normalized load
proportional to  the average flow in the  river over the record period was
used.  Furthermore, this  normalized load was assumed to  remain the same
until the  year  2000,  because  future  land use  changes  were uncertain.
Phosphorus output  from Nest Lake represents  a significant  contribution
to  Green  Lake.    In  this  analysis,   the retention   coefficient  for
phosphorus in Nest Lake   observed  during  1972-73  (56%)  was used.   The
septic  tank   leachate,  and  wastewater  treatment plant  discharge  loads
were  calculated  according  to  each  wastewater management  alternative
                                   149
-------
   4,000  -
    5,000 -
(C
X-

I
o
z
o
I
to
cc
I  2,000
V)
o
a.

^
?
    1,000 -

1 /o
1 °/o
2%
96%

.
mmlimil

3S;'
•
LEGEND
|pJ --] NON-POINT SOURC- (TRIBUTARIES)


7////z PRECIPITATION

• II

M NON-POINT SOLIRC-: (IMMEDIA'll



SEP

'•'v>£x: po!
DRAINAGE)
FIG TANKS
MT SOURCES
^^^^ TANKS (WOODCOCK
8%
2%
17%
73%

jiimimm


LAKE)
6% (:;':/;$

NEST GREEN WOODCOCK
LAKE LAKE LAKE
                          Figure V-l

COMPARISON OF PHOSPHORUS LOADINGS BY SOURCE CONTRIBUTIONS EOR
                   THE GREEN LAKE STUDY AREA
                              150
-------
developed.   The  immediate drainage  contribution is usually  relatively
insignificant in  this case  and  was assumed  to be constant  until  year
2000  for  practical  purposes.   The  total  phosphorus  inputs  associated
with various alternatives  for  Nest Lake and Green Lake are presented in
Table  V-l.   The  1972-73  loading  levels are  included for  comparison.

     Future Trophic Conditions.  Figure V-2 summarizes the  results  from
the  modeling analysis  with respect to various wastewater  management
alternatives.  Nest  Lake  is predicted  to  remain eutrophic for  all the
alternatives with  slight  improvement in water quality.  Green Lake  will
also  maintain  its  trophic  status  in  the  mesotrophic category.   This
small  improvement  in the  quality  of open waters  suggests  the signifi-
cance of the non-point source loading associated with the Middle Fork of
the  Crow  River  which  is  uncontrollable at the  present time.   In addi-
tion,  cautions  have to  be exercised when interpreting the  results be-
cause  of  the yearly variation  of  phosphorus   inputs  existent   in  the
River.  That is,  this  variation  may be so  significant that it masks the
reduction  of  phosphorus   inputs   incurred   for  Green  Lake  by  some
alternatives.

     The modeling  analysis described above  cannot be used to assess the
trophic status  of Woodcock  Lake,  due  to the landlocked  nature  of  this
water  body.   In any  event,  phosphorus  input to Woodcock Lake will de-
crease dramatically (more than 50%) under any proposed wastewater manage-
ment  scheme  evaluated in  this  EIS.  This  reduction would result  from
either  the  discontinuation  of the present Spicer  wastewater treatment
plant  discharge or from  the proposed upgrading  of  the plant  to provide
effluent phosphorus concentrations of 1.0 mg/1.

b.   Bacterial  Contamination

     Lakes  in  the  Study  Area have met State  standards  for  fecal  and
total  coliform bacteria.   Where  human  wastes have  been implicated  as  a
contributor  to coliform  counts  in the  lakes,  it is expected that all of
the  wastewater  management alternatives should  effectively abate  such  a
problem.

     Land application  of wastewater is an effective way  of  eliminating
or immobilizing sewage-borne pathogens  particularly if some pretreatment
(stabilization  pond)  precedes  the  application  (Johnson  et  al.  1977).
Bacterial pathogens  undergo  rapid die-off  in the  soil matrix.  Studies
have  shown  the  summer survival  rate of fecal  coliform organisms to be
0.001% after a period of 35 days (Miller 1973).

     With  the   centralized  alternatives,  pumping  station  malfunctions
could  result  in  substantial   bacterial contamination  of  the  lakes.
Rigorous  inspection  and  maintenance of pumping  stations,  back-up elec-
trical power supplies, standby pumps and an overflow  alarm would mini-
mize  the  possibility  of  this  happening.   Similar measures  should be
taken with pumping stations for cluster systems.
                                    151
-------
                              Table V-l




     TOTAL PHOSPHORUS INPUTS (KG/YR) TO  NEST LAKE AND GREEN LAKE






   Alternative                   Nest Lake               Green Lake;




1972-73 Conditions               4,329.9                  2,605.1




No Action                        3,029.2                  1,969.1




1 & 2 (Proposed Action)          2,355.8                  1,679.6




    3                            2,707.8                  1,827.7




    4                            2,386.4                  1,686.3




    5                            2,355.8                  1,672.9




    6                            2,474.0                  1,724.9
                                   152
-------
    i.o r
CM
 E
    O.I  -
   0.01
            EUTROPHIC
                    NEST LAKE
                  1972-1973 COND.
     NO ACTION
  ALTERNATIVE 3
  ALTERNATIVES
ALTERNATIVE 1.2,4,5
GREEN LAKE
O 1972-1973 COND.
O ALTERNATIVES 1-6, AND NO ACTION
                                               OLIGOTROPHIC
      1.0                           10.0                           100.0
                          MEAN DEPTH(METERS)

                   L=AREAL PHOSPHORUS  INPUT (<}/m2/yr)
                   R=PHOSPHORUS RETENTION COEFFICIENT
                   PS HYDRAULIC FLUSHING RATE (yr"1)

      FIGURE V- 2  TROPHIC STATUS OF NEST LAKE AND GREEN LAKE
                    IN TERMS OF VARIOUS WASTEWATER
                   MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES
                                153
-------
c.   Non-Point  Source  Loads

     Primary impacts on  surface water  quality  related  to the construc-
tion of ST/SAS  and the  replacement  of old systems is likely to result in
increased soil  erosion.   Similarly,  installation of sewers, especially
those that pass under the many small drainage ways leading to the lakes,
will increase erosion.

     Compliance with state  and  local  soil  erosion control requirements
could substantially reduce the erosion  problem  and the subsequent impact
on water quality.

2.   SECONDARY  IMPACTS

     Increasing  housing   development   along  lake  shores may  increase
nutrient   and   sediment   loads   into  the   lake  as   a   result  of
the following:

     •    increased runoff from  construction of impervious surfaces such
          as rooftops and parking areas;

     •    lawn  and  garden  fertilization  creating  unnaturally  high
          nutrient levels in the runoff; and

     •    soil disruption  by human activities  (i.e.,  housing construc-
          tion, leveling  of forested area,  etc.).

Soil organic debris and dissolved materials mobilized and transported to
temporary  runoff  channels  during storms  are  settled, filtered and
absorbed on  the  land or  in pools  if the runoff  channels are long  or if
adequate  storage areas,   such  as  wetlands,  occur.   Increasing housing
density normally accelerate storm runoff thereby  increasing not only the
amount  of  runoff but  also  its  ability to  erode soil  and to transport
contaminants.
B.   IMPACTS ON GROUNDWATER

     Groundwater  impacts  fall  into two categories, those affecting the
available  quantity  of  the  resource,  and those  affecting its quality.

1.   GROUNDWATER QUANTITY IMPACTS

     The  conversion  from sewage disposal practices based on  individual
soil  absorption  systems  to central  collection and  treatment  systems
without land application of effluent can result  in  a  loss  of groundwater
recharge.   The  significance  of this loss depends upon its relationship
to  the  recharge  from  all other sources, including  downward infiltration
and  percolation  from  precipitation and surface  water bodies  and  inflow
from adjacent aquifers.  The precise quantification of  this significance
requires an accurate delineation of the aquifer(s)  plus knowledge  of its
hydrology  (precipitation,  runoff,  evapotranspiration,  discharge,  etc.)
                                    154
-------
and hydraulic  characteristics  (transmissivity*, storage  coefficients",
etc.)-   There  is  not enough  data to  attempt  such quantification  for
Green Lake.

     Because the confining layer above the buried outwash aquifer in the
Study Area  is  impermeable,  essentially no significant recharge  of  this
aquifer takes place by  means  of infiltration within the  boundary of the
aquifer which includes  the  entire Study Area.  The aquifer is recharged
mainly by underflow from the surficial glacial deposits northwest of the
Study Area,  but  the  extent  of  recharge  is  unknown  (Lindholm et  al.
1974).   Because  the  source of  recharge is  outside of the  Study Area,
none  of  the alternatives  will affect  this  aquifer.  Furthermore,  the
estimated domestic water  use by the Facilities Plan Proposed Action of
0.63  mgd  in the year 2000  is  very small and unlikely to significantly
affect quantities  of  water within the buried  outwash aquifer  or  sur-
ficial groundwater which  Lindholm et al., indicated will  support addi-
tional development for domestic and irrigation supplies (1974).

2.   GROUNDWATER QUALITY IMPACTS

     Human  wastewater disposal  can  affect  the quality  of  groundwater
through  three  main types of  pollutants.   The  first type  includes  sus-
pended solids,  bacteria  and  other  forms of  organic  matter  which  are
normally removed  by  downward movement  through approximately 5  feet of
soil  above  the water table of aquifers.   These  contaminants are  very
unlikely to reach the  buried outwash  aquifer  because the  impermeable
confining layer  provides  an adequate barrier depth to this  aquifer is
generally more than 20 feet.

     Groundwaters  overlying the  buried outwash  aquifer  are  more  sus-
ceptible to  the  influence of  wastewaters applied to the  soil either by
land  application  or  through  soil absorption  systems.   The  surficial
aquifer  is  apparently unconfined  and the water table is  near the ground
surface  in  many places  near lakes.   Organic  or bacterial contamination
of this  surficial  aquifer by  spray irrigation  or  vapid  infiltration of
wastewaters  can  be avoided by  using only  sites  where the  water  table
will  remain  deeper than 6 feet below ground surface and  where soils are
fine enough to filter wastewater efficiently.  The most likely source of
contamination  to  this aquifer  is soil absorption  systems  in low-lying
areas.   It  was partially on  the  basis  of such  contamination that the
applicant applied  for grants  to  build sewers.   While there  is little
doubt  that  these  contaminants   enter  the  surficial  aquifer  in  some
places,  their  effects appear  from available data to be  very localized.
Well  data   submitted  by  the  applicant  shows   the presence  of  total
coliform  bacteria  in  some  wells  but  there  is   no support  to   the
implication  that  their  source  was  soil  absorption  systems.  A  more
likely cause of the  well contamination is the design and  condition of
the wells themselves.   Nevertheless, if continued use of  soil absorption
systems  is   recommended,  a  substantial program of  well  inspection  and
sampling  should be  undertaken to include  location  of  suspect wells;
inspection  of  their  casing,  seal  and  grouting;  identification of  all
potential sources  of  contamination near the wells:  sampling of properly
designed wells  for fecal  coliform bacteria, and nitrates  at  a minimum;
and measurement of groundwater flow direction aiid rate  in representative
areas around the lake shores.

                                    155
-------
     In the Study Area,  the impermeable  confining  layer  above  the buried
outwash aquifer  should  also serve  as  an effective barrier against the
entry  of   nitrates  into  the aquifer  by infiltration.   The  surficial
aquifer is not so protected and  is likely receiving nitrates  from  soil
absorption systems  as  well  as  from agricultural  sources and  lawn  fer-
tilization.  With the exception  of two  wells sampled by the  applicant,
groundwater have  nitrate  concentrations below the drinking water stan-
dard of  10 mg/1  as  nitrogen.   As  housing  densities increase in areas
dependent  on   soil  absorption  systems,  nitrate   levels  will increase
especially if  development  involves multiple  rows of dwellings.  A sampl-
ing program to determine  the levels  and sources  of nitrates  and other
contaminants in wells is  required if alternatives using soil  absorption
systems are funded.

     It is possible  that  some nitrates  from wastewater applied to  land
might  reach surface waters  via  overland runoff,   lateral interflow*  in
soils,  or  transport in percolating groundwaters.   However,  application
rates  for  spray  irrigation  of effluents  would  be set to maximize  crop
uptake  of  nitrogen,  minimizing  its   concentrations   in   groundwater.
Because of the high application  rates for rapid  infiltration, recovery
of  rennovated  effluent by  recover  wells or drains  may be  necessary.

3.   MITIGATIVE MEASURES

     Groundwater quality should  be  carefully monitored  for  all alterna-
tives  involving the  use of ST/SAS's,  cluster systems and land applica-
tion systems   to  check  that  water quality  is  not being  significantly
degraded and to  signal  the existence of malfunctions,  inadequate treat-
ment or the need for corrective  action.

     The potential for groundwater contamination from the sewage  lagoons
required in the  Facilities Plan  Proposed Action and EIS Alternatives  1,
3, 4 and 5 will be low if  the lagoons are adequately designed.  Existing
engineering and hydrogeologic procedures would prohibit  the  construction
of these systems  directly  in the aquifer, and would require an adequate
distance between the lagoon bottom and the groundwater.   Also,  an imper-
vious  layer of soil material such as bentonite clay would  be used  as a
line for  the   lagoons'  sides and bottom to  insure leakage  of  untreated
wastewater does  not occur.  As  a  final protection measure,  groundwater
quality monitoring wells would be used to identify any changes in ground-
water  quality  that may be a result  of  leakage  from  a sewage  lagoon.
This would insure  that corrective  action  could be taken before  any
serious contamination develops.
C.   POPULATION AND LAND  USE  IMPACTS

     Population  and  land  use  impacts  associated  with various  system
alternatives  are  evaluated   in  this section  (see  Table  V-2).   These
impacts are summarized below:
                                    156
-------
                                 Table V- 2

                COMPARISON OF POPULATION AND LAND USE  IMPACTS
                  ASSOCIATED WITH MAJOR SYSTEM ALTERNATIVES
CO
•H C
4-i O
a -H
0) 4-1
l-i cti ,C
O> i-l 4-1
<4-< 3 &
4-1 a. o
•H O I-l
O fx, O
                    Centralized Wastewater
                     Management Facilities
                              + 5-10%
                               Decentralized  Wastewater
                                 Management Facilities
                                       Base Case
H
a
W
w
o
I"-}
Q

H
33
H
t£
0



0
•H

0)
tn
cfl
S
o
C
H



I-l
cd
•rl
4-J
c
01
•H
tn
01
Pi







01
60
0)
}_j
CJ
<3
                          +30-40 Acres
                                       Base Case
O
    6   4J
    P. C -H
    o M w
    ^H 01 C
    01 4J 0)
    > 4J 4-1
    QJ cd C
    P PH H
Increase in lakeshore  den-
sities and in extent of
shoreline development.
                                             Continued scattered residential
                                             development, limited by on-
                                             site  limitations in lakeshore
                                             areas.
        c
        o
      >^ -rl
      4J 4-1
      •H -H
      C to
      3 O
      i i-
      o o
      o u
  4-1 01
  •rl 4-1
  C O
        O
Accelerated conversion
from seasonal to year-
round occupancy status;
loss of lower-income
population base due to
displacement pressure.
                   Increase in lakeshore
                   densities and in  extent
                   of shoreline develop-
                   ment.
                                             Existing composition influenced
                                             by demographic pressures un-
                                             related to facility provision.
                              Continued scattered residen-
                              tial development, limited by
                              on-site limitations in
                              lakeshore areas.
                                      157
-------
     «    A majority of residences  directly contiguous  to Green Lake and
          Nest Lake arid not  located  within the boundaries of  Spicer or
          New  London   are  currently  utilizing  on-site  waste  disposal
          systems.   An estimated 30 to 40 additional lakeshore  acres are
          likely to be developed with provision of centralized sewerage
          facilities.

     •    Some increase in the  density of residential  development along
          the lake  is  also likely to result from centralized  facilities.

     •    Population growth  of  5  to  10% above  levels possible without
          centralized  facilities may  accompany  anticipated  increases in
          residential  acreage and intensity.

     •    Centralized   facilities  will  place  severe financial  pressure
          upon  lower-  and  middle-income families,  resulting  in  the
          dislocation   of  many  less   affluent  residents.  In  addition,
          these alternatives  will accelerate  the conversion  of  occupancy
          patterns   from  seasonal  to  year-round status.   Disruption of
          the  prevailing  community  environment  will  be   a   possible
          by-product of economic and financial pressures  associated with
          centralization.

     •    Decentralized  wastewater  management  facilites  should  only
          moderately  influence   the   composition  and  character of  the
          Green Lake area.

1.   INTRODUCTION

     The  capacity  of  an  area  to  support development varies   with the
degree  to  which wastewater facilities are site-related.  On-lot waste-
water treatment  facilities  are  site-dependent because they  are limited
to sites with  suitable soils.   Sewers allow development  to  be  much more
independent of site characteristics because the soil permeability, slope
and  drainage  are  not  such strong  constraining factors.  Thus,  sewers
increase the  inventory of developable land.   Sewers  also  increase the
possible  density  of  development.   The  amount of  additional  growth
actually occurring  in  the  area  if  sewers are provided is dependent, not
only  upon  increases in development  potential but  also  upon demand for
additional  residential  development in  the  area.   This  demand reflects
the residential amenity of the area in comparison to other areas and the
reduction in the cost of residential land when the supply of developable
land is increased.

     Population and land  use  impacts are estimated in this  Section for
completely  centralized  (Proposed Action  and  EIS Alternatives  1  and 2)
and  completely dencentralized  (No Action)  alternatives.   Impacts are
also  estimated  for EIS Alternatives  3,  4,  5 and  6,  which incorporate
partial  sewering   and   cluster  systems.   These  alternatives,  while
described as  decentralized,  are actually hybrid or intermediate systems
in terms of population and land  use impacts.
                                     158
-------
2.   POPULATION

     If centralized facilities  were  provided, minor differences in popu-
lation would  occur over levels  expected  for decentralized facilities.
With  centralized  facilities,  population  in  the Service Area  would be
anticipated to increase between  5 to  10%  above the levels expected for
decentralized wastewater management  alternatives.   Centralized facili-
ties would concentrate growth within the nearshore segments of the Green
Lake  EIS  Service Area.  With site-dependent, decentralized facilities,
nearshore  areas  would be  developed  at a  lower  density or may  not be
developed at all, resulting in  more  development  in areas remote from the
lakeshore..

3.   LAND USE

     Implementation of  centralized  facilities  should not significantly
affect future land use except  in certain lakeshore segments.   Segment-
by-segment analysis of  the  Green Lake  shore  yielded an estimated 30 to
40  lakeshore  acres likely  to be developed only with provision of cen-
tralized facilities.

4.   CHANGES IN COMMUNITY COMPOSITION AND  CHARACTER

     The  composition  and character  of  the Green Lake  community would be
only  slightly influenced  by  the provision  of centralized facilities.
Additional  costs  of  wastewater  treatment  would  displace some  lower
income  permanent  and  seasonal  residents.   These  residents   would be
replaced by higher  income  persons able to afford the additional waste-
water  treatment  costs.  Higher  costs  would also accelerate the current
trend  of seasonal  to year-round residence because  fewer  people could
afford to maintain second  homes.

     The  rural character of the  area  would be  diminished only slightly
by the increased amount of  land that would be devoted  to residential and
associated  uses  with  centralized  facilities.   Moderate change  in the
character of the area could also occur  with EIS  Alternatives 3, 4, 5 and
6  as  population growth and land development would  take place in areas
serviced by sewers and the  numerous  cluster systems.

     Adoption of a  Limited Action  or a  No Action  Alternative  would
encourage preservation  of  the  area's prevailing  community character and
composition.  There would  be very little  economic displacement pressure
in  the Green Lake area  and  land  use patterns  would be  unlikely to
change.
D.   DEVELOPMENT ON  ENVIRONMENTALLY  SENSITIVE AREAS

     The  following  areas  have been identified as being environmentally
sensitive to building or construction  in the  Study Area:
                                     159
-------
          Floodplain and shoreline  area;
          Wetlands:
          Natural areas;
          Archaeological and historical  sites;
          Steep slopes;  and
          Prime agricultural land.

     As stated  in Section  II.E.4,  implementation of EIS Alternatives  1
or 2  or the Facilities Plan Proposed Action  would probably result  in
conversion of  approximately 30 to  40 acres from agricultural to  resi-
dential use.   If no  wastewater treatment  facilities  are  provided,  no
substantial conversion of agricultural lands is likely.

1.   FLOODPLA1NS AND  SHORELINE  AREAS

     The 100-year floodplain  in the Study  Area includes  a  narrow ribbon
of land along the Middle Fork of the Crow River and  surrounds  the numer-
ous lakes  located in the  Study Area.  The largest individual areas  of
floodplain in the Study Area  have  been incorporated into the  New London
Fish Hatchery  and the  Dietrich  Lange Wildlife Management Area  and  are
consequently under State and Federal protection.

     Kandiyohi County has  a floodplain  management ordinance  intended to
provide suitable areas for orderly  and aesthetic development which would
retain the natural  features of  the shoreline and adjacent areas.   This
ordinance, which  recognizes that control of shoreline development will
assist  in  the maintenance  of  good  water quality and the  prevention of
erosion,  is  critical to the  development of the  22 miles of shoreline
around Green Lake and Nest Lake. Placement and construction  of sanitary
and wastewater disposal  facilities  are governed by the  ordinance  (Kandi-
yohi County  Overall  Economic  Development Plan 1977).  It  also requires
that the basement floor of any structure to be  used  for human  habitation
be more than 4 feet  above the 100-year flood elevation.

     Primary  physical   impacts  on  the shorelines would  occur with  all
alternatives; such  impacts are likely  to  be more severe  with the cen-
tralized  treatment  systems i.e., EIS Alternatives  1 and  2,  Facilities
Plan Proposed Action which require  construction of sewer  lines.

2.   WETLANDS

     Figure  II-7  indicates that wetlands are  widespread throughout  the
Study  Area.   More  than 1800  acres  of wetlands  are  under Federal  and
State management  as  part of waterfowl protection and wildlife  management
areas.  Potential impacts   of  construction  on privately owned wetlands
also need  to be assessed in view of  the importance of wetlands  to both
groundwater levels and wildlife and because the agricultural  practice of
ditching  and draining  lands  has  already   reduced  certain wetlands  to
small areas.

     If     a    centralized    alternative     is     chosen,     primary
construction-related  impacts  on certain wetlands will  be unavoidable.
The  water  table might be  lowered,  erosion  and  siltation  increased,
streamflow altered  and  habitat modified.   Impacts might  be minimized by
excavating  during low  flow or  during the  six cold months of the year,

                                    160
-------
and by immediate restoration of the area.   However,  wetland  areas  may be
permanently damaged if the water table even drops  one  or  two feet.   Some
wetlands may  become dried up by  a process that may not be reversible.

     Wetlands might be permanently altered by EIS Alternatives 1,  3,  4
and 5.   Scattered throughout the  areas  of the selected land  treatment
sites, wetlands  could be  avoided  during   construction.  In  selecting  a
site,  the   importance of  any  wetland to the watershed,  its  storage
capacity, its habitat  type,  and the effects of construction on wildlife
should be considered.

     There  are currently no regulations regarding  discharge  of  municipal
wastewater'  into  wetlands  other  than  the  requirement to  obtain   a
Minnesota  Pollution  Control  Permit  (MPCP).   Nevertheless,  compliance
with effluent limitations  for  surface water would be  required  (by tele-
phone, Dale Wikre, MPCA,  April 1978).

3.   NATURAL AREAS

     The  existing  natural  areas  within  the Study Area  have  been
delineated   in Figure  11-13  and include  State wildlife  management and
Federal waterfowl protection areas.

     In  addition,  current  easements  give the Federal  government the
right  to manage additional  acreage  of waterfowl   habitat  in  the  Study
Area if they so decide (Economic Development Plan  1977).  The large size
and  low  population  density of  these wetlands  means that the  direct
impacts  on  these wetlands  resulting  from wastewater  management  alter-
natives  should  be minimal.  However,  secondary impacts resulting from
human activities could pose future problems for these  areas.  The  degree
to which development  rates  will differ among the  alternatives  cannot be
determined.

4.   ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND  HISTORICAL SITES

     Numerous archaeological sites are believed to be  located within the
Proposed Service  Area.   Several historic  sites are located  in the Study
Area.  Construction of pipelines  around  Green Lake and Nest Lake  could
have potentially significant impacts on these sites with  EIS Alternative
1  and  2 and  the Facilities Plan  Proposed Action,  Those  alternatives
which  provide  increasingly  centralized   sewerage  service  would  have
greater  long-term secondary impacts due to induced growth  and develop-
ment near the lakes.

     Upon the selection  of a  final  alternative,  detailed   designs and
specifications will have  to be sent to the State  Historic  Preservation
Officer.  At  that time,  detailed  site investigations  will  be  performed
by an  archaeologist/historian to  resolve  potential conflicts  with any
archaeological or historic site which could be disturbed  by  construction
activities.
                                    161
-------
5.   STEEP SLOPES

a.   Primary Impacts

     The  difficulties  of  installing  on-lot  systems  on  steep  slopes
appear to be a  factor  historically  limiting home  construction of lake-
shore and other  level  of  rolling  sites.  Nonetheless, suitably designed
on-site  systems  may be  constructed on  steep  slopes,  as  can  sewers.
Adherence to the Sediment and  Erosion  Control Act of 1972 should mini-
mize the impacts of erosion  from construction.

b.   Secondary  Impacts

     The availability of off-lot  treatment systems provided for cluster
systems, along with the apparent  demand  for residential development may
result in construction  activity on steep-sloped  areas.  Accelerated soil
erosion  particularly  on  any  steep  bluffs surrounding  the  lakes  can
result  in  additional  non-point source runoff in  the form of sediment.

c.   Mitigative Measures

     The municipalities should  adopt  performance standards with specific
slope-density provisions.   Developers would then  have  to  meet the per-
formance  standards  burden  of  proof that  the  sloped  areas  are  not a
hazard  to  development.  Zoning ordinances  should  limit growth in steep
sloped areas.

     If  cluster  systems or  septic tanks  are placed in areas with steep
slopes  a series of drop  boxes should be  used.  With this  method,  no
hillside seepage should occur  unless the sewage flow exceeds the design
capacity.

6.   PRIME AGRICULTURAL  LAND

     Some agricultural land within the Study  Area will be used for the
implementation of all potential actions.   For areas  requiring extensive
sewering  (EIS  Alternatives  1  and  2 and  the  Proposed Action),  it is
estimated that 30 to 40 acres of land would be used for the construction
of  sewer lines  and wastewater treatment facilities.  The EIS Alterna-
tives  that  rely on decentralized cluster  systems (3, 4,  5  and 6) may
require  significant  acreage for  construction,  but  these  clusters are
concentrated to  the north  of Green Lake, where sandy-gravelly  (non-
prime)  agricultural  land would be  used.  No treatment  facilities are
proposed  for the area of greatest  concentration of prime agricultural
land, to the south of Green  Lake.
                                    162
-------
E.   ECONOMIC  IMPACTS

1.   INTRODUCTION

     The economic impacts of the alternative wastewater systems  proposed
for the Proposed  Green  Lake Service Area are evaluated in this  section.
These  impacts  include:   the  financial  pressure placed on residents  to
move away  from  the  Service Area; financial pressure  to convert  seasonal
residences  to  year-round   residences;  and  the  net benefits  of  water
quality on the economy of the Green Lake area EIS Service  Area.'

2.   USER CHARGES

     User  charges represent  the  costs  billed periodically to  the  waste-
water  system  customers.   Total  annual  user  charges have  been developed
for  seven  alternative wastewater systems.   The user charge consists  of
three parts:  debt service (repayment of principal and  interest),  opera-
tion  and   maintenance  costs, and  a  reserve fund  equalling  20% of  the
capital costs.  Annual  user charges  are presented in  Table V-3 and  are
expressed  in  terms  of   1)  the   entire  Service  Area,  2)  the currently
sewered communities  of  Spicer  City  and New London Village,  and  3)  the
currently  unsewered  portions of  the  proposed  Green  Lake EIS Service
Area.

a.   Eligibility

     Eligibility  refers  to that portion of  wastewater facilities  costs
determined  by  EPA to be eligible for  a Federal  wastewater  facilities
construction  grant.   Capital costs of wastewater  facilities  are  funded
under Section 201 of the 1972 Federal Water Pollution Control  Act  Amend-
ments.  Section 201  enables EPA to fund 85% of the total  eligible capi-
tal  costs  of  innovative and alternative systems.  Innovative  and  alter-
native systems considered in the EIS Alternative include land  treatment,
pressure  sewers,  cluster  systems, and  septic tank rehabilitation  and
replacement.

     The  percentage  of   capital  costs  that is eligible for Federal  and
State  funding greatly affects the cost that local users must  bear.   The
capital costs  of treatment,  on-site  systems,  and cluster systems were
assumed  to be  fully eligible  for  grant  funding.  However, collector
system  capital  costs  were  subject  to Program  Requirements  Memorandum
(PRM 78-9).  This PRM established three main conditions that must  be  met
before collector sewer costs may be declared eligible:

     •     Systems in use for disposal  of wastes from the  existing popu-
           lation  are creating  a  public  health  problem,  contaminating
           groundwater or violating point source discharge requirements;

     •     Two-thirds of the  design  population (year  2000) served by a
           sewer must have been  in residence  on  October  18,  1972;  and

     •     Sewers  must   be  shown to be  cost-effective  wnen compared  to
           decentralized or on-site alternatives.
                                    163
-------
                                  Table V-3

                 FINANCIAL BURDEN AND DISPLACEMENT PRESSURE
                                              Spicer/New          Currently
Alternative                Entire System    London Village     Unsewered Area
Facilities Plan Proposed
Action

• Displacement Pressure        1-5%             1-5%                1-5%
« Financial Burden            10-20            10-20               10-20
& Can Afford                  80-90            80-90               80-90

EIS Alternative 1

• Displacement Pressure        5-10%            1-5%                5-10%
o Financial Burden            20-30            10-20               20-30
o Can Afford                  70-80            80-90               70-80

EIS Alternative 2

• Displacement Pressure        1-5%             1-5%                5-10%
• Financial Burden            10-20            10-20               20-30
* Can Afford                  80-90            80-90               70-80

EIS Alternative 3

• Displacement Pressure        1-5%             1-5%                1-5%
• Financial Burden            10-20            10-20               20-30
• Can Afford                  80-90            80-90               70-80

EIS Alternative 4

• Displacement Pressure        1-5%             1-5%                1-5%
• Financial Burden            10-20            10-20               10-20
• Can Afford                  80-90            80-90               80-90

EIS Alternative 5

• Displacement Pressure        1-5%             1-5%                1-5%
• Financial Burden            10-20            10-20               10-20
• Can Afford                  80-90            80-90               80-90

EIS Alternative 6

• Displacement Pressure        1-5%             1-5%                 <1%
• Financial Burden            10-20            10-20               10-20
• Can Afford                  80-90            80-90               80-90

Limited Action

• Displacement Pressure         <1%             1-5%                 <1%
• Financial Burden             5-10            10-20                1-5
• Can Afford                  90-95            80-90               95-99
                                     164
-------
     A determination of the eligibility of wastewater management facili-
ties in  the Green Lake Study Area  for Federal funding  has been made by
the  Facilities  Planning  Branch  of EPA,  Region  V  (June 1979).   This
determination  stipulates   that   capital costs  involved  in  95%  of the
publicly-owned  on-site  systems   along  Green Lake   will be eligible for
85%  Federal  funding.  Ninety-five (95)  percent  of  the  cluster system
capital  costs  proposed   in  the  decentralized  alternatives  are  to  be
eligible for  85% Federal  funding.  The State  of Minnesota's  funding of
these  systems will  be 60% of  the non-Federal  eligible  capital costs.

     Furthermore,   gravity  collector  sewer  (not  interceptor)  capital
costs  will- be  80%  eligible  for  75% Federal  funding.    Pressure  sewer
capital  costs will  be 80%  eligible  for 85% Federal  funding.    State
funding  of these  systems will  be 80%  of  the  non-Federal  share of eli-
gible  costs.   Neither hook-ups  for  gravity  and pressure   systems  or
operation  and maintenance (O&M)   costs  are  eligible for funding under the
EPA Construction  Grants Program.

b.   Calculation of  User  Charges

     User  charges are  presented in Table  V-4.   The user charges have
been  calculated  for  two  different conditions:    1)  the  costs  of the
system were divided  equally  among all  of  the  system's  users throughout
the  currently  sewered  (Spicer   City   and  New  London Village)   and the
unsewered  areas,  and 2)  the  costs were  prorated  between the currently
sewered  and  unsewered portions  of   the  Proposed  Service   Area.   The
Facilities  Plan  allocated local costs  to  future  residents of the Plan's
Proposed Service Area.  The  authors of the  Facilities Plan  assumed the
allocation  would  be based on   each  resident's  proportionate  share  of
collection  and  treatment costs.   The allocation method of spreading
                               Table V-4


                           ANNUAL USER CHARGES


                          Cost Distributed Evenly      Spicer City/         Currently
 Alternative                   Over Entire System      New London Village     Unsewered Areas

 Facilities Plan Proposed Action          160                 160              170

 EIS Alternative 1                   190                 ",10              240

 EIS Alternative 2                   J10                 150              240

 EIS Alternative 3                   150                 100              180

 EIS Alternative It                   130                 140              120

 EIS Alternative 5                   120                 150              110

 EIS Alternative 6                   130                 150              120

 Limited Action                      80                 120              60
   All  on-lot systems  along the  lake  are assumed  to  be publicly-owned.


                                     165
-------
costs  throughout  the  entire system  is presented  for  the  purpose  of
illustration.   To  be  equitable,  the  costs  for areas  to  be served  by
existing  sewers have  been  segregated  from those  associated with  the
unsewered areas.  This prevents  the situation where  the sewered  areas of
Spicer City and New London Village subsidize the construction and opera-
tion of sewerage in the currently unsewered areas.

     The  calculation  of  the user  charges was  based  on  local  capital
costs being  paid through  the use of a  30  year bond at 6-7/8% interest.
Some communities may  be  eligible for a 40 year loan at 5% interest from
the Farmers  Home Administration  to reduce the financial burden  of local
capital costs.  The Facilities  Plan used an interest  rate of 7% over a
20  year period  in the  computation of  the various alternatives  cost.

     The centralized alternatives i.e., Facilities  Plan Proposed Action,
EIS Alternatives 1 and 2 are the most costly to the  unsewered area users
(and all  users  if  costs  are spread out  over  the entire system).  Total
annual  user  charges  for  each household range  from  $160  to $210 for the
entire  system,  $170  to $240 for the  unsewered areas,  and $110  to $160
for the communities Spicer and New London.

     EIS  Alternatives 3,  4, 5,  and  6  combine centralized  and decen-
tralized  components   and  are less  costly  than the centralized alter-
natives for  the total  system and the  currently unsewered areas.    The
costs  of  these alternatives  for Spicer and New London  Village  are not
significantly different from the costs of the centralized alternatives.
Annual  user  charges  range from  $120 to $150 for the entire system, $100
to  $150 for Spicer and New  London,  and $110  to $180  for  the currently
unsewered areas.

     The  Limited Action  Alternative offers the  lowest  user  charge; over
the entire system and incurrently unsewered areas,  while EIS Alternative
3 offers the lowest user charge in Spicer and New London.

     The decentralized alternatives involve the least amount of sewering
and the lowest  annual user  charges for  the  entire  system and residents
in the  currently unsewered areas.

     In addition to  user  charges, households  in the newly sewered areas
would  have  to  pay  the capital  costs  (approximately $25  to $1,950 for
each connection) of  a house sewer on their property to connect to grav-
ity and pressure collector sewers.  Seasonal homeowners also may have to
pay  the full price  for  the replacement or  rehabilitation of their on-
site systems  (septic  tanks and  soil absorption  systems)  if they do not
cede these systems to the local wastewater management agency.  Assuming,
however,  a  high  proportion of  public on-site  system  ownership,  EIS
Alternatives  3,  4,  5  and 6  would  offer a  substantial  reduction in pri-
vate costs.   Overall, private costf- would vary from household to house-
hold due  to  the differences in the distance to the collection sewer and
the condition of on-site  systems.
                                    166
-------
3.   LOCAL COST BURDEN

a.   Significant Financial  Burden

     High-cost wastewater  facilities  may place  an excessive  financial
burden on users  of  the  system.   Excessive burdens  may  cause  families to
alter  their  spending  patterns   substantially  by  diverting  money  from
their  normal  expenditure  categories.   The Federal  government has de-
veloped criteria  to identify high-cost  wastewater projects  (The  White
House  Rural Development  Initiatives  1978).   A project is identified as
high-cost when the annual user  charges  are:

     •    1.5% of median household incomes  less than  $6,000;
     •    2.0% of  median household incomes  between $6,000 and  $10,000;
          or
     •    2.5% of median household incomes greater  than $10,000.

     The 1978 median household  income  for the proposed Green Lake  Study
Area has been estimated  to be  $18,000  for permanent  residents.  No data
are  available for seasonal resident income characteristics.   According
to  the Federal  criteria,  annual  user charges  should not  exceed  2.5%
($450) of  the $18,000  median household income figure.  Any  alternative
having annual user  charges  exceeding  $450  is  identified as  a  high-cost
alternative and  is likely to place a  financial  burden on users of the
system.  None of  alternatives are classified  as  a  high-cost  alternative
under the Federal criteria.

     Significant  financial  burden is  measured by  comparing  annual user
charges with the distribution of household  incomes.  Families not  facing
a significant financial  burden  are the only families  able to afford the
annual wastewater user  charges.   The percentage  of households  estimated
to face a significant financial  burden  under each of  the  alternatives is
listed in Table V-2.

b.   Displacement Pressure

     Displacement  pressure  is  the determination  of  the percentage of
families likely  to move away from the  EIS  Service Area as  a  result of
costly user charges.  Displacement is  measured by determining the  number
of  households having annual user charges  exceeding 5% of their  annual
income.  Displacement pressure  for each of  the alternatives  is  listed in
Table V-2.

     Displacement pressure for  the entire  system ranges  from 1-10% with
the  greatest  displacement pressure occurring  under  EIS Alternative 1.
Residents of  Spicer  City and New London Village  would  face  displacement
pressures of  1-5% under each of  the alternatives.   Displacement pressure
is greatest under  EIS  Alternatives 1  and 2 for  the  currently unsewered
area.
                                   167
-------
c.   Conversion  Pressure

     Costs of  providing  wastewater  facilities  are likely to accentuate
the  trend of  converting seasonal  residences  to  permanent residences
already underway in the area.   Capital  requirements impose a higher cost
burden on seasonal  residences  than  on  permanent residences on the basis
of relative use.  Seasonal  residences are used  only three or four months
during the year are charged capital  costs throughout the year.  This may
place a  financial  burden on  seasonal  residents who are supporting full
year  residences in addition  to seasonal residences.  The  higher cost
burden of  centralized  alternatives  will exert more conversion pressure
than the lower cost decentralized alternatives.  The averaging of opera-
tion  and maintenance  costs  among permanent and  seasonal  residents  in
addition to capital costs will intensify conversion pressures.

4.   MITIGATIVE  MEASURES

     The significant financial burden and displacement  pressure on users
in  the  currently  unsewered areas may  be mitigated by the selection of
EIS Alternatives 4, 5  or 6.   The local wastewater management authority
may seek to obtain a loan or grant from the  Farmers Home Administration.
Such a loan would decrease  annual user  charges  by  spreading  out the pay-
ment  of  the  local share  over  a  longer period  of time with  a lower
interest rate.  The impacts of financial burden on seasonal  users; may be
mitigated  by  not   charging  the  seasonal  residents  for  operation and
maintenance  during the  months  that   seasonal residences  are  vacant.
                                   168
-------
IMPACT CATEGORY
                                  SECTION V.F.

  COMPARISON OF ENVIRONMENTAL  IMPACTS ASSOCIATES WITH MAJOR SYSTEM ALTERNATIVES

                      IMPACT TYPE
 RESOURCE              & DEGREE         IMPACT DESCRIPTION
Surface WaCer
Quality
,Nutrient
'loading
Primary:
long-term
                     Eutrophication
                     potential
                      Primary:
                      long-term
All Alternatives:
Nutrient loads from septic tank drainfields and municipal
wastewater treatment plant discharges are reduced with Limited
Action, Proposed Action and EIS Alternatives 1-6, but tributaries
continue to be a major source of phosphorus and nitrogen.
Estimated total phosphorus load (with phosphorus ban)
decreases (relative to existing conditions) as follows:
Green - 27-33%; Nest =• 24-27%; Woodcock - 77-92X.

All Alternatives:
Green Lake - eutrophication potential decreased most sharply
with complete sewering of Service Area (P.A. and EIS Alterna-
tives 1 and 2).  EIS Alternative 5  (spray irrigation), atvd EIS
Alternative 344  (rapid  infiltration):  Sharpest decrease
in loading * eutrophication potential is still within the
range imposed by existing conditions.

Nest Lake and Woodcock Lake - eutrophication potential
decreases but lake remains eutrophic (nutrient rich).
Groundwater
                     Groundwater
                     quantity
                     Groundwater
                     quality
                     Primary:
                     long-term
                                          Secondary:
                                          long-term
                     Primary:
                     long-term
Environmentally
Sensitive Areas
 Floodplain
                     Shoreline
                      Secondary:
                      long-term
                                          Primary:
                                          short-term
                                          long-term

                                          Secondary:
                                          long-term

                                          Primary:
                                          short- and
                                          long-term
                                          Secondary:
                                          long-term
                 All Alternatives:
                 Failure to return  wastewater flows to groundwater system
                 results in negligible loss of groundwater recharge to outwash
                 aquifer(s).

                 All Alternatives:
                 Loss of aquifer surface recharge area as a result of possible
                 development of impervious surface cover is minimal.       _—-

                 No Action:
                 With the continued reliance on septic systems, there is the
                 possibility of localized high groundwater nitrate concentra-
                 tions.   Phosphorus from septic systems will continue to
                 leach in amounts sufficient to support localized algae growth.

                 EIS Alternatives I.  2. Proposed Action:

                 Sewering the entire lakeshore area eliminates any possibility
                 of septic systems  as a source of nitrates for localized
                 groundwater contamination and phosphorus as a nutrient source
                 for localized algae growth.

                 EIS Alternatives 3,  4, 5, and 6:  A combination of renovation of
                 septic  systems and cluster system construction around lakeside
                 areas will significantly reduce nitrate and phosphorus levels
                 leaching into groundwacer  systems.

                 All Alternatives:

                 Impacts on flood hazard areas are expected to be minimal.

                 EIS Alternatives 1,  2, 3, and Proposed Actlonj
                 Construction impacts are unavoidable and directly related to
                 total length of sewet lines.

                 Impacts are judged to be minimal.

                 Development away from the  lake  (tiers) may be directly
                 related to number  of miles of sewer lines.

                 EIS Alternatives 4,  5, 6, and Limited Action:

                 Construction impacts will be unavoidable.  Duration of impacts
                 depends on season and method of construction and extent of
                 restoration.

                 Development will be variable in Study Areas depending on
                 proximity to sewer line or suitability for on-lot soil
                 disposal system.
                                                          169
-------
IMPACT CATEGORY
Environmen'.ally
Sensitive .'Teas
(Continued,
                     Archaeological/
                     Historical  Sites
                     Steep Slopes
                     Prime
                     Agricultural
                     Lands
 Mpulation
                     Rate of growth
                                         IMPACT TYPE
                                           &  DEGREE
Primary:
short- and
long-term
                                          Secondary:
                                          long-term
Primary and
Secondary:
short- and
long-term

Primary:
short-term
                                          long-term
                                          Secondary:
                                          long-term
Primary:
short-term
                                          Secondary:
                                          long-term
Secondary:
long-term
                                                          IMPACT DESCRIPTION
EIS Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and Proposed Action:
Construction impacts will be unavoidable.  Extent of impact
will be directly related to extent of sewerage.  Duration of
impact will relate to the timing of construction and the
swiftness of restoration.

EIS Alternatives 4, 5,6, and Limited Action;

Except for unavoidable effects of construction, impacts will
be minimal.

All Alternatives:

Some development may occur near or in wetlands, although less
so in the centralized treatment plans.

All Alternatives:

Potential impacts due to construction and induced growth can
be minimized with proper identification of valued sites.


All Alternatives;
Temporary increases in erosion and sedimentation can be
minimized with proper construction methods.   Impacts would
be more significant for EIS Alternatives 1, 2, and the
Proposed Action.

EIS Alternatives 3, 4, 5, 6, and Limited Action:
Impacts associated with decentralized alternatives will be
minimal because only systems designed for steep slopes will
be used.

Limited Action;

Development will continue to be minimal, and  impacts will be
slight with the use of proper design.

EIS Alternatives 1. 2, and Proposed Action:

Increased development may result with extensive sewerage.

EIS Alternatives 3. 4, S, and 6;

Less induced growth will result compared to EL'S Alternative 1,
2, and Proposed Action.

Limited Action:

No significant impact is expected  to occur.

EIS Alternatives 1-6 and Proposed Action:
About 30-40 acres will be used for combinations of  sewer
lines, ditches, lagoons, and/or treatment facilities.

Limited Action:
Large lot requirements may result  ir.  some losu of  prime
agricultural lands.

EIS Alternatives 3, 4, 5, and 6:
Some prime agricultural  lands may  be  lost to  Induced growth
near cluster systems.

EIS Alternatives 1, 2, and Proposed Action:

Because induced growth will  occur  primarily n«ar  the  lakes,
less prime agricultural  land will  be  lost.

Proposed Action, EIS Alternatives  1 and  2:
Population growth  in  projected to  Increase bet.ween  5 and  10Z
above that possible without  centralized  facilities.

EIS Alternatives 3, 4, 5, and 6; Limited Action;
Growth  opportunities  will be moderate.

No Action;
Growth  opportunities  are limited.
                                                         i/U
-------
IMPACT CATEGORY


Land Use
RESOURCE


Developable
acreage
                                          IMPACT TYPE
                                           & DEGREE
                                          Secondary:
                                          long-term
Local Economy
                     Development
                     patterns and
                     density
Financial Burden
Displacement
Pressure
                     Secondary:
                     long-term
Primary:
long-term
                     Conversion
                     Pressure
                                                           IMPACT DESCRIPTION
Proposed Action. EIS Alternatives 1 and 2:

Provision of site-independent facilities increased the inventory
of developable acreage.  Less than 30 to 40 lakeshore acres were
found which were likely to be developed.

EIS Alternatives 3, A, 5, and 6; Limited Action;
Development opportunities are considered to be limited for
these alternatives.

No Action;

Development is considered limited.

Proposed Action, EIS Alternatives 1 and 2:

Some increase in the density of residential development along
the lake is likely.

EIS Alternatives 3, 4, 5, and 6;

Development density will remain at approximately the same
rate.

Proposed Action, EIS Alternatives 1 and 2:

Displacement pressure  (5-30%) and financial burden (30-602)
are highest for the residents of currently unsewered areas.
Spicer and New London Village residents would face displace-
ment pressures ranging from 1-10% and a financial burden
ranging from 10-40%.

EIS Alternatives 3, 4, 5, and 6:
Displacement pressure would range from <1-5Z and financial
burden from 5-30% for residents of the currently unsewered
areas.  The residents of Spicer and New London Village would
face displacement pressure ranging from 1-5% and a financial
burden ranging from 10-20%.

All Alternatives:

Conversion pressure in the currently unsewered area would be
highest under the centralized alternatives (Facilities Plan
Proposed Action, EIS Alternatives 1 and 2) and minimal under
the decentralized alternatives (EIS Alternatives 3, 4, 5, and
6).  Conversion pressure would be moderate for the residents
of Spicer and New London Village.  Conversion pressure would
be highest under the Facilities Plan Proposed Action and lowest
under EIS Alternative 3.
                                                         171
-------
                              CHAPTER VI


                  CONCLUSIONS AND  RECOMMENDATIONS


A•   INTRODUCTION

     .-'s discussed in Section  I.D.I,  EPA has  several possible courses of
act  o. Ja addition to  the  Facilities Plan Proposed Action.  The Agency
may

     *    Approve the  original  grant application,  possibly with recom-
          mendations  for   design  changes  and/or  measures  to  mitigate
          impacts of  the Facilities Plan Proposed Action;

     e    Return  the   application  with recommendations  for additional
          Step I analysis;

     »    With the applicant's and State's concurrence, approve Step II
          funding  for  an  alternative  to the  Facilities  Plan Proposed
          Action;

     •    Reject the  grant  application.

     The choice of one  of  the above options depends upon how the Altern-
atiT-'es in the EIS compare  to the  Facilities Plan Proposed Action.

B•   SUMMARY OF EVALUATION

     Four primary criteria  were  used in  selecting  the EiS  Reommendation
cost ,  impact,  reliability,  and  flexibility.   Within  each  category
sevi.val  factors  were   compared.    Cost  factors  for  example,  included
present worth,  user charges for  central  sewered areas,  small waste  flow
disl/ict user  charges,  and total 1980 private  costs.  Impacts which EPA
considers to be  decisive in selection of an alternative are identified
and  considered.   The  reliability  of  alternatives  is  measured against
centralized collection and  treatment  as the standard.

     A matrix  offers a simple way  to visualize the relationship between
alternatives and  the criteria used to evaluate them.  By tabulating for
each alternative the  factors that influence the range of choice, one can
quioKly  compare  the  effect  of  each alternative upon  that factor.   A
matiix  relating alternatives to environmental impacts  is  presented in
Section V.F.   Table VI-1 presents  a  matrix summarizing  the relationship
between the  alternatives  and their  costs, environmental impacts,  reli-
ability, and flexibility.

     Table  VI-1  also  ranks the  alternatives  according  to their  total
present worth.  This  ranking has  two  purposes:

     *    Costs  are  easily  quantifiable, perhaps  the  least subjective
          measure of value.
                                   172
-------
S  J!Si3
S? .8 ".2
..5a«u

iJhl|i
"3 IU S3
 .SSVB.il
•asss
00  y

a'o -5,


  3
C fl »
jSj, i
i  £
S  "•
a S u «
S3 8-
T* y 5 o
I?la!
"" a •-•§ 2 (•.
•SBSS-S
       8.
       o
                                                    SS







H
2
i
B
u
HI
UN AT IV
u
2
<





















SIJ "I
O < Q --.
M z OB as z
o (*• aa o g a
o « z 3
o
M
< en


g
C!g
$
U
Q «J H <
M H OT Ed
S Z w

0
ft- PS
£ U
j Sgg


§ S °"H
§ °
i «
§
b O1 M
ac
en
1 U

Z M 3 C> §
X O
_] w u cn
-J H 3 H» ai H
< w o atf w w
£ < j H w O
w 3 u. cn 3 o
H O
U OB Z U
U O Ofi U
u a S u m
M £d Z cn *£
Cu Z S 3 S


O O
(M PI
B i— I *J 1
•H 44 fl C O-
Q.ca O-H js^-ofl o)
SWCIO-OJSX "XX>
lH*QOrVUj< w j»f w .*
Ea)0)o)ktflbi-H aio -H o oc w o>
01)0)1 10) 0) B u flB
•Hb~4tt*aa> ^ •* B B i-*
uflAu«3a> flfl SB u
U S) 01 u C W k> W 8OO).B>
3 M T3 I- « OlOJ^^TJO.k.JrfO-^
UUOtlOIJSOOa IU8 TH ffl r-» i-l 0 -H M
C C. 03 TJ kirn C&.B tffa)>«VUBO)
U-H3«rH4J^S tJiHB 0*O'O«*J4)««
• • •
15 1^ ,
§*J D t 3
(ft y TJ rH
4J W 3 3 O
So o a.
0 01 b
•H-H 00 k.
e w fl at c
•H a >, *j o
rH 0) 01 C fl "H
U « fl « 3 w
13
fl O >v C
O y 1 0) W t 1 1 rH -H
rH, w o **-i u) •u 3 (M j^f^ uv^ca Bu
wa-taflflwciH • uatf-iou v w i to c^ u •Hwflvtajtfoi-H
Siuh a. « a* t3 « T3 fl3fl B 4J o i) w w >j i « x o J= « e o i- j:
« -a w -H 3 S o)u «jeao)0) g j: 73 o) o 
-------
           a
          i 5 u




















|r


§
CO
O



I
ft.





















































1
*< I-l H


g ft*
CO
U tt
(V M
C o
M
ft-
CO
it
« »s
BURD1
SPICER










i >-

M M
S £

DA
S
I

SURFACE WATEt
ill
H
ji||
c
fH S 2
OH Z C
CO _]
g
*
g
e-





B

i









M

a
X
1

as
O fl£


s
1
g i
z S

11
c
si
z S



_
S M
3 s

§
P
S B»
0. Z

&M

i<
CO


eg
il

QUALITY
IMPACTS
il
°
ll

gi
co <

"
re o
H 2
s *
^J.



P §
V
£ ***
b ft)
c
.. a
•s s
W *J
-5 ^
3 S
1 -D
fH C
•H a
JB *H
•H
K V

C2
3
•O <4-
* ȣ
o >>
e *>

1 K
PH in



1 M
fH m

00
CM n

28
^

0) *H
|§

II
O 0
•
1
1
*J P
is.
k. &.
U 0
"C
n v
a n
3 £


US
« C
» Slgnific
red uc tic

»•%
" |
•
S

2

§
fH

r^
<*>
fH
rH
\O
S
vl
0
c
P
W *W *
co to
O W
P P
u E O
OB «H
3 X
U rH *H
•0 0 -H
5"
«-
D

01 0)
at N
3 t-t
S 25

C *t4
e 3
rH ,C «












O 01
>
0>-H
i a. w
) X <0

« 0)
T^ 4J
4 *J CD

1
01 S



c
^

•C
1 « 8
n 3 S
nitrate
phosphol
levels :
i
Action except
nutrient loac
ing fron














l°i
S n
*j a •
&S5
*c S
C 
0 P C
6C 0 0)
iw £
*» 4J

> W* S
-H -rl P
C .O 00
iSi
fH fH t)












P
0) t?
•D 01

0 -H
U rH
01 TJ
•H 0)








(
•o
e *
§8
P £
(D
4J 60 4J
5 v. S
01
5SJ

^ i i
5*5
a*:
U r4 «
D..-J u














52
n 3
CO

fii"0 ,;
0 rt P
Us
> u
5 » £









W
•H
n




























"8
ellminal

•o
4J
n
e
la
0)














E
4J
<
CO
W
W *
1 1
w W






*
en a>
Er
a a
"1
33

j^t
f-t
V


1 K


K

O O
fH 
CM
O
in
S
t-(
4J
o
0)

<
en
u
8*
^ -3
CO 4J






*>
CO «
W M
a «
"E
IS


^4

V


1 M


AS

o o
CO 41

U vl
n «
"I
6 <->
CO
U
525
« 0) 0
E *J >
ffi IH -H
W < *J
"O
n oi
« » C
i 1°
M fc<

n
CO a)
Sane as
Alternal
n
Same as EIS
Alternative i
fH

O
fH
-H

O
in


in
in
s
m
01
*H
£
E
V

rH
in
H
S
I
w







CO
M
to
i
1

w
rH
V


|


I
o
fH

i
CO

u
n
w
£
3
CO
U
(D
ta
3


i



CO
rH
U
10
a
i
3

CO
m
a
I
3
S

g

S


m
r-.
o
in
^*
S

I






«
^
"





n


5
terna
»"j






H
in

O
CM

g
01
;>
•H
n
c
P
d
4J
< •»


1
id rt
rH -H
< JJ
^

0.-H
O u
P U

«fc
I
Alternal
m
Alternative /














E
11)

<
to
U
a *
IS
CO 4J






*
CO 4>
El
OB a
" £
li
5<

M
*H
V


1 »~«
fH m

fH m

o o
iH (M
IB 01

U -I
n «
a c
IS
332
CO
u
Of 47 0V
i -w >
flj *H -H
to < w
•o
CO 0)
«gg
a) a -H
Sou
a P u
CO &4 <

C
CO V
AJ
Sane as
Alternai
Mb
Same as EIS
Alternative i
i

o
<£>

O
CM


(M
r*.
00
00
CM
?
^H
•O «
2§E
_l _l 01
•* ** _

u<£
•SiS
 :^3
-------
     •    EPA Construction  Grants regulations require  selection  of the
          most  cost-effective  alternative,   that  is,  the  alternative
          meeting project goals with  the least total present worth with
          acceptable environmental and socioeconomic impacts.

     Selection of the cost-effective alternative requires identification
of trade-offs between  costs  and other criteria.   The evaluation factors
included with total present worth in Table VI-1 are those EPA has  deter-
mined to be  most  important in identifying trade-offs  for  this  project.

C.   CONCLUSIONS

     In  regard  to the  existing  on-site  systems  around Green  Lake and
Nest Lake, information  gathered  during the preparation of  this EIS has
indicated the following:  1) Approximately 25 effluent plumes were found
entering Green  Lake and  12  entering  Nest Lake.   2)  Five  septic  system
surface  malfunctions*  were  confirmed by field verification of  aerial
photography.   3)  Sanitary  surveys  have   revealed  that periodic  sewage
backups  in  some  households  have  occurred.   4)  Effluent  plumes  from
septic systems  do not  contribute  significant quantities of nutrients to
Green  Lake  or  Nest  Lake.   While  detailed  site-by-site   analysis  may
reveal more  problems,  field  studies conducted so  far  indicate  that the
percentage of systems causing problems are small.

     Most of the on-site systems presently in use within the EIS Service
Area are poorly maintained and many are inadequately designed.   Routine
maintenance  for all on-site  systems  and upgrading  of inadequately de-
signed systems  will substantially reduce the number  of problems  caused
by them.

     Where problems cannot be solved by routine maintenance or upgrading
alone, alternatives  to the  conventional septic tank  --  subsurface ad-
sorption systems  are feasible in the Study Area which will minimize or
eliminate the problems.

     Future  growth  in  the  Green Lake watershed  depends  on how  many new
lots  can be  developed  and the allowable density.   Wastewater  disposal
alternatives relying on continued use of on-site systems as compared to
extensive sewering around the lake would restrict both the number of new
lots as  well as their  density.  An effect of these limitations  would be
to preserve the present character of the community.

     Total present  worth  for the centralized  alternatives (Facilities
Plan  Proposed  Action,  EIS  Alternatives  1, 2, and  3)  are  substantially
higher than  for the decentralized alternatives  (EIS  Alternatives  4,  5,
6, and Limited  Action).   As calculated in this EIS, the Facilities Plan
Proposed Action is 57%  more expensive  than  EIS Alternative 5 and 91%
more  expensive  than Limited  Action.   Differences in  water quality im-
pacts  of the  alternatives  are  not  proportionate  to these  large  dif-
ferences in costs.

     Because of the high  costs  and  limited  benefits to  water quality
with  the centralized alternatives  (Facilities Plan  Proposed Action and
EIS  Alternatives  1, 2  and  3),  they are  not  cost-effective and are not
recommended.

                                   175
-------
     The  No Action  Alternative  was  unacceptable   for  three  reasons:

     •    Existing treatment  plants  at  New  London and  Spicer do  not
          comply with effluent requirements and contribute  substantially
          to high productivity in Nest Lake and Woodcock  Lake.

     •    There are some problems  with on-site systems in  the  remainder
          of the  Proposed EIS  Service Area  which  should  be  addressed
          through monitoring,  improved maintenance  of the existing  and
          future systems,  residential water conservation, and renovation
          or replacement of existing systems.

     «    Improved surveillance and regulation of on-site systems  in  the
          Green  Lake  watershed  to  insure maintenance  of  the  lake's
          unique scenic  and recreational values is recommended.

     The  remaining  alternatives,  EIS  Alternatives  4,  5 and 6,  include
the use of  alternative  on-site  and small scale  off-site systems  around
Green Lake and  Nest Lake.   They differ in their methods for treating  and
disposing of New  London's  and Spicer's wastewaters:  Alternative  4 uses
joint pretreatment and rapid infiltration;  Alternative  5  uses joint pre-
treatment  and   spray  irrigation;  and  Alternative   6  employs  separate
tertiary treatment facilities for both communities.

     Costs and  environmental impacts are similar for these  three altern-
atives.   Lack  of  detailed data  on  site  characteristics  creates  some
uncertainty in  the determination of reliability for  the land  application
alternatives.    In  addition the possible  unavailability  of  land  appli-
cation sites may prove a potential problem for implementation.

D.   DRAFT EIS RECOMMENDATIONS

     Because EIS  Alternatives  4   and  5  (decentralized approaches with
land  application)  and 6 (decentralized  approach with  upgrade/expansion
of  wastewater  treatment plants  at  Spicer  and New  London)  can all  be
considered  cost-effective,  and because  they  differ sub, stanitally from
the   Facilities  Plan  Proposed   Action  (centralized  approach  with
stabilization  ponds), the  recommendation  of  this EIS  :.s  to  return  the
grant  application  to  the  Green  Lake Sanitary Sewer and Water  District
(GLSSWD)  for   additional  Step  1  analysis.    The  scope  of  additional
analysis  will  depend on  the  applicant's  own  decisions}  regarding  the
feasibility of the small waste  flows approach for  Greet}  Lake  arid Nest
Lake  and  the merits  of  land application for wastewaters  from Spicer  and
New London.

     Alternatives 4, 5, and  6 differ in the type and lovtion of  treat-
ment  and  disposal  facilities  for  Spicer's and New London's wastewaters.
The  GLSSWD  will need to  conduct  additional Step 1  analyses,  funded by
EPA,  of  alternatives  to  serve  Spicer  and  New   London  jointly   or
separately.  EPA encourages the use of land application and will require
evaluation  of   land  application  including  detailed site  analyses.   If
GLSSWD  chooses Alternative  6,  the  Step  1  analyses must include  the
following:
                                   176
-------
     •    Applicant's  own  analysis  of  the  feasibility  and  costs  of
          treatment plant upgrading;

     •    Engineering,   cost and environmental  analysis  of sludge  man-
          agement options; and

     •    Engineering,   cost,  and  environmental  analysis  of  effluent
          disinfection options.

EPA  will  participate  in funding additional  site  specific analyses  of
existing on-site systems, their design,  usage and environmental impacts.
These additional analyses will address:

     •    Development  of  a site-specific  environmental  and  engineering
          data base;

     •    Design of the management organization; and

     •    Start-up of the management district.

The  applicant  will need  to complete additional Step  1  requirements  by
taking the following actions (40 CFR 35.918):

     •    Certify  that construction  of the  project and  operation and
          maintenance  program  will  meet  local,   State  and  Federal
          requirements.  As  a  first  step,  this certification involves a
          lot-by-lot investigation  of existing septic tank  systems and
          site  suitability  for wastewater  treatment.   If  it can  be
          demonstrated  that existing systems do not  degrade  lake  water
          quality  or  promote public health problems,  despite  the  find-
          ings  of  the lot-by-lot  investigation,  then  the  GLSSWD  may
          initiate  variance  procedures  for  these   systems  under  the
          Minnesota Shoreland  Management Act which  has been adopted and
          amended by Kandiyohi County.  The specific variance that would
          be negotiated between the GLSSWD and the  County involves the
          Act's  stipulation that  there be  a 4-foot  vertical  distance
          between  the   bottom   of  the  septic tank  drainfield and  the
          highest known groundwater elevation.

     •    Obtain assurance of unlimited access to each individual system
          at  all  reasonable  times  for such  purposes  as  inspections,
          monitoring,  construction,  maintenance, operations,  rehabili-
          tation and replacement.

     •    Plan  for  a  comprehensive  program of regulation and inspection
          for individual systems.
E.   IMPLEMENTATION

     Management  of  centralized and  decentralized  wastewater facilities
is discussed  in  Section III.D. and Appendix  1-3.   Two  topics which the
District will  have  to address in regard  to  small  waste flow management
are discussed below.
                                   177
-------
1.   COMPLIANCE  WITH  STATE  AMD LOCAL  STANDARDS  IN
     THE  SMALL WASTE  FLOWS  DISTRICT
     As discussed in Section II.C. many existing on-sile systems do not
conform to  current  design standards  for  site,  design o •  distance from
we.;.is or  surface  waters.   For some  systems,  such  as  tfyjse with under-
sized septic  tanks,  non-conformance  can  be  remedied  .• t latively easily
ano  inexpensively.   In other  cases   the  remedy may  b?  disruptive and
expensive and should be undertaken only where the need 3s clearly iden-
tified.    Data  on the  effects of  existing systems inj-cate - that many
existing  non-conforming systems, and  future  repairs t> i I  still may not
conform to  design  standards,  may operate  satisfactorily.   Where com-
pl ance with design standards  is either  1)  unfeasible ,or  too expensive
or 2) site monitoring  of ground and surface waters shows that acceptable
inrpacts are  attainable,  then  a variance  procedure  to 3.1 low renovation
an>- continued use of non-conforming system is  recommended.  Decisions to
gr;mt variances should be based on  site-specific  data or  or. a substan-
ti 1 history of similar sites in the  area.

     Local and  state  decisions on variance  procedures  would likely be
influenced by  the degree of authority vested  in  the  small waste flows
district.   If  the district has the  authority and sufficient financial
means to  correct  errors,  plus  the  trained personnel  to minimize errors
in  granting  variances, variance  procedures may  be  more  liberal than
where financial  and professional  resources  are  limited.   Higher local
costs, caused by  unnecessary repairs  or abandonment of  systems would be
expected  to  result from  very  conservative or  no  variance guidelines.
Conversely,  ill-conceived or improperly implemented variance procedures
would cause frequent water quality problems  and demands for more expen-
sive off-site technologies.

2.   OWNERSHIP  OF ON-SITE SYSTEMS SERVING  SEASONAL RESIDENCES

     Construction Grants  regulations  allow Federal funding for renova-
tion and  replacement of publicly owned on-site  systems serving permanent
or seasonally occupied residences  and of privately owned on-site systems
serving   permanent    residences.    Privately  owned   systems   serving
seasonally  occupied residences are  not  eligible  for Federally  funded
renovation and replacement.

     Depending  on the  extent  and  costs  of  renovation  and replacement
necessary for  seasonal residences, the municipalities or  a small waste
flows district  may  elect to  accept  ownership of  the on-site systems.
Rehabilitation  of  these  systems  would   then  be  eligible  for Federal
assistance,  and local  costs  for seasonal  residents would be dramatically
reduced.  Any decision to  accept  ownership on  a  community-wide basis
should  await the conclusions  of  the site-specific  environmental and
engineering analyses  and  preliminary determination of the functions of
the management  agency.  Ownership  of seasonally used  systems may  create
responsibilities  that  the agency is not equipped to discharge.
                                   178
-------
                             CHAPTER VII

             THE  RELATIONSHIP  BETWEEN SHORT-TERM USE
                    AND  LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY
A.   SHORT-TERM  USE OF  THE  STUDY AREA

     The Green Lake  Study Area has been, and will continue  to be used as
a residential/recreational  area.   The  site was initially disturbed when
construction of houses began approximately 20 years  ago.

     Disturbance of  the  site by routine residential/recreational activi-
ties will continue.   Implementation of either the action proposed by the
Facilities  Plan or   recommended  in  this  EIS  is  not  expected  to alter
these disturbances.
B.   IMPACTS UPON LONG-TERM  PRODUCTIVITY

1.   COMMITMENT  OF NON-RENEWABLE RESOURCES

     If  the  Facilities  Plan Proposed Action  were  implemented,  an in-
creased potential  for  development may result in some loss  of terrestrial
habitat.  Such would be expected to a lesser extent  by implementation of
the EIS Recommendations.

     Non-renewable resources associated with either  action would include
concrete for  construction.  Consumption of electric power by pumps may
also increase.  Manpower  would  also be committed  to  the construction,
operation and management of new or rehabilitated facilities.

2.   LIMITATIONS OF BENEFICIAL USE  OF THE ENVIRONMENT

     Aquatic  recreation  is one of the major benefits enjoyed  by people,
residents and  visitors  alike,  in  the Green  Lake  Study  Area.   Public
access   to this 5400 acre  recreational resource has  become increasingly
restricted over the past 20 years, with approximately 85% of the Green
Lake shoreline  currently  supporting  year-round and seasonal  cottage
development.   It  is judged  that the implementation  of any centralized
wastewater management  plan, such  as the Proposed Action or EIS Alter-
natives  1  and 2,  would   significantly  increase  the  current  level  of
recreational   activity through  induced  near-shore  development.   This
activity may  become aesthetically displeasing to current residents, many
of whom come to   Green Lake during  the vacation season to leave urban
crowds.  The  implementation of decentralized EIS alternatives (3, 4, 5,
6,  and Limited Action)  would have  a  less  significant  effect  on the
recreational  benefits  of  the  Green Lake  area,  because  induced growth
would be less dense and more scattered than that afforded  by centralized
wastewater management.
                                  179
-------
                             CHAPTER  VIII

    IRREVERSIBLE  AND  IRRETRIEVABLE  COMMITMENT  OF  RESOURCES
     The resources that would be committed during implementation of any
of the EIS Recomme.idations include those associated with construction and
maintenance  of  vastewater systems.   These  were  discussed  in  Section
VI.B.I.

     In addition,  growth expected  in the Study  Area  would -require  a
commitment ,of  r ^sources  to  the  construction  of  new  dwellings  and
commercial  establishments,  construction  or  improvement  of roads  and
facilities associated with water sports.  Besides construction  materials,
such  as  lumber,  steel,  concrete  and  glass,  electricity and  manpower
would also be comn.itted  to new development.

     Human resources would include  construction  personnel and,  perhaps
infrastructural  personnel  to service the added community needs.
                                   180
-------
                             CHAPTER  IX

       PROBABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS WHICH CANNOT  BE AVOIDED
     If the  action proposed by  the  Facilities  Plan were  implemented,
some destruction of terrestrial  habitat would result from  construction
of new  dwellings.  Such  would  be true,  but to a lesser extent, if any
EIS Recommendations were  implemented.

     Construction of sewage  lagoons or new sewer  lines would disturb the
soil, resulting in  sediment  runoff.  This runoff  would cause a  temporary
increase in siltation in both  streams and offshore  areas.   This  type of
runoff can also  be caused  by  the  extensive  excavation  required during
upgrade or rennovation  of  on-site septic  systems  and off-site  cluster
systems.
                                  181
-------
                               GLOSSARY
ACTIVATED SLUDGE PROCESS.   A method of secondary wastewater treatment in
     which a  suspended microbiological culture is maintained  inside an
     aerated treatment basin.  The  microbial  organisms oxidize the com-
     plex organic matter in the wastewater to  carbon dioxide,  water,  and
     energy.

ADVANCED WASTE TREATMENT.   Wastewater treatment beyond the secondary or
     biological  stage  that  includes removal of nutrients  such  as  phos-
     phorus  and  nitrogen  and a  high percentage  of  suspended  solids.
     Advanced waste treatment, also known as  tertiary treatment,  is  the
     "polishing  stage" of  wastewater  treatment  and  produces  a  high
     quality of effluent.

AEROBIC.  Refers to life or processes that occur only in the presence of
     oxygen.

ALGAL BLOOM.  A  proliferation of algae on the surface of lakes,  streams
     or  ponds.   Algal  blooms are  stimulated by phosphate  enrichment.

ALKALINE.  Having  the qualities  of a base,  with  a pH of more  than 7.

ALLUVIAL.  Pertaining  to  material  that  has been  carried by  a  stream.

ALTERNATIVE  TECHNOLOGY.   A  technology  whose  use  has been widely sup-
     ported by  experience,  but  is  not a  variant  of  conventional bio-
     logical or physical/chemical treatment.

AMBIENT AIR.   The unconfined portion of the atmosphere; the outside air.

ANAEROBIC.  Refers  to life  or processes  that  occur in  the  absence of
     oxygen.

ANNULAR  SPACE.    The   open  space  between particles  of  soil  material.

AQUATIC  PLANTS.   Plants  that grow in  water,  either  floating on  the
     surface, or rooted emergent or submergent.

AQUIFER.  A  geologic  stratum or  unit that contains water and will allow
     it  to  pass through.   The water may  reside in  and  travel through
     innumerable spaces between rock grains in a sand or gravel aquifer,
     small  or  cavernous  openings  formed  by solution  in a  limestone
     aquifer, or fissures,  cracks,  and  rubble in  such harder rocks as
     shale.

ARTESIAN AQUIFER.   A  water-filled layer that is sufficiently compressed
     between less permeable layers to cause the water to rise above the
     top  of  the aquifer.   If the  water  pressure  is  great,  water will
     flow freely from artesian wells.

ARTESIAN  WELL.   A  well  in  which  flow  is  sustained  by the hydrostatic
     pressure of the aquifer.  See Artesian Aquifer.
                                   182
-------
BACTERIA.  Any of a large group of microscopic organisms living in soil,
     water or organic matter, important to man because of their chemical
     effects as  in  nitrogen  fixation,  putrefaction, or fermentation, or
     as pathogens.

BAR SCREEN.  In wastewater treatment, a screen that removes large float-
     ing and suspended solids.

BASE  FLOW.   The  rate  of movement  of  water  in  a stream  channel  which
     occurs typically  during  rainless  periods when stream flow is main-
     tained largely or entirely by discharges of groundwater.

BASIC  USAGE.   In  regard to  functions of  small waste  flow  districts,
     those  which  would   be  required  to  comply  with EPA  Construction
     Grants regulations governing individual on-site wastewater systems.

BEDROCK.  The solid rock beneath the soil and subsoil.

BIOCHEMICAL  OXYGEN DEMAND  (BOD).    A  measure of  the amount  of oxygen
     consumed in  the  biological  processes that decompose organic matter
     in  water.   Large  amounts of organic waste  use  up large  amounts of
     dissolved oxygen;  thus, the  greater the degree  of pollution,  the
     greater the BOD.

BIOMASS.   The  weight  of  living  matter in a  specified unit  of environ-
     ment.   Or,  an expression  of  the  total  mass or  weight  of a given
     population of plants or animals.

BIOTA.   The plants and animals of an area.

BOD,..   See "Biochemical   Oxygen  Demand."   Standard  measurement is made
     for 5 days at 20°C.

BOG.   Wet,  spongy  land;  usually  poorly  drained,  and  rich  in  plant
     residue, ultimately producing highly acid peat.

CALCASEOUS.  Resembling,   containing  of composed of  calcium  carbonate.

CAPITAL  COSTS.   All costs  associated  with  installation (as  opposed to
     operation) of a project.

CAPITAL  EXPENDITURES.  See Capital Costs.

CHLORINATION.  The  application  of  chlorine to drinking water, sewage or
     industrial  waste  for  disinfection  or  oxidation  of  undesirable
     compounds.

COARSE FISH.  See Rough Fish.

COLIFORM BACTERIA.  Members  of  a large group  of bacteria  that flourish
     in  the  feces and/or intestines of warm-blooded animals, including
     man.  Fecal coliform bacterial,  particularly  Escherichia coli  (E.
     coli), enter  water  mostly  in fecal matter, such  as sewage or feed-
                                   183
-------
     lot  runoff.   Coliform  bacteria apparently  do  not  cause  serious
     human diseases,  but these organisms are abundant in polluted waters
     and  they  are fairly easy  to detect.  The  abundance of  coliform
     bacteria  in  water,  therefore,   is   used  as  an  index   to   the
     probability  of   the  occurrence  of  such  diease-producing  bodies
     (pathogens)  as  Salmonella,  Shigella,  and  enteric viruses.  These
     pathogens  are relatively difficult  to detect.

COLIFORM  ORGANISM.   Any of  a  number of organisms common to  the intes-
     tinal tract  of  man and  animals whose presence  in  wastewater is an
     indicator   of pollution  and   of  potentially  dangerous bacterial
     contamination.

COMMINUTOR.  A  machine that breaks  up wastewater solids.

CONNECTION FEE.  Fee  charged by municipality to  hook up house connection
     to lateral sewer.

CLUSTER  SYSTEM.   A  soil  dependent  waste disposal  system  that  uses  a
     common septic drainfield for up to  25 individual residences.

CRUSTACEANS.    Zonal  growths  of  algae,   masses,  lickens,  or  liverwarts
     having variable  coverage  and  thickness of only  a  few  centimeters.

CUBIC FEET PER SECOND (cfs).   A measure  of the  amount of water passing a
     given point.

CULTURAL  EUTROPHICATION.  Acceleration by  man  of  the  natural  aging
     process of bodies of water.

DECIDUOUS.  The term describing  a  plant that periodically  loses all of
     its  leaves,  usually in  the  autumn.  Most broadleaf  trees  in North
     America,  and a  few conifers,  such  as larch and cypress, are decid-
     uous .

DECOMPOSITION.   Reduction of the net energy level and change in chemical
     composition  of  organic  matter by   action  of aerobic  or anaerobic
     microorganisms.    The breakdown  of  complex  material  into  simpler
     substances by chemical or biological means.

DETENTION  TIME.   Average  time  required to flow  through  a  basin.  Also
     called retention time.

DETRITUS.  (1)  The heavier debris moved  by natural watercourses, usually
     in  bed  loam form.   (2) The sand,   grit, and  other coarse  material
     removed by differential sedimentation in  a relatively short period
     of detention.

DISINFECTION.   Effective killing by  chemical  or  physical  processes of
     all  organisms capable of causing infectious disease.  Chlorination
     is  the  disinfection  method  commonly employed  in  sewage treatment
     processes.
                                   184
-------
DISSOLVED  OXYGEN  (DO).   The  oxygen  gas  (0  )  dissolved  in water  or
     sewage.  Adequate  oxygen  is necessary for maintenance  of  fish and
     other  aquatic  organisms.   Low  dissolved  oxygen  concentrations
     generally are  due to  presence  of excessive  organic  solids having
     high BOD in inadequately treated wastewater.

DRAINAGE BASIN.   (1)  An area from which  surface  runoff  is carried away
     by  a  single drainage  system.   Also  called  catchment area, water-
     shed,  drainage  area.    (2)  The  largest natural  drainage area sub-
     division of a continent.  The United States has been divided at one
     time or  another,  for  various administrative purposes, into some 12
     to  18 drainage basins.

DRAINAGEWAYS.  Man-made  passageways, usually lined with grass  or rock,
     that carry runoff of surface water.

EFFLUENT.  Wastewater  or other liquid, partially or completely treated,
     or  in  its  natural state,  flowing out of a reservoir,  basin, treat-
     ment plant, or industrial treatment plant, or part thereof.

EFFLUENT LIMITED.  Any stream  segment for which  it  is  known that water
     quality  will meet  applicable  water quality  standards after  the
     application of effluent limitations.

ELEVATED  MOUND.    A   mound,  generally  constructed  of  sand,  to  which
     settled  wastewater  is  applied.   Usually  used in  areas where con-
     ventional on-site treatment is inadequate.

ENDANGERED  SPECIES  (FEDERAL CLASSIFICATION).  Any species  of animal or
     plant declared  to  be  in known  danger of  extinction throughout all
     or  a  significant part  of its  range.   Protected under  Public  Law
     93-205 as amended.

ENDANGERED  SPECIES  (STATE  CLASSIFICATION).   Minnesota's  list  includes
     those species on the Federal list that are resident for any part of
     their life cycle in Minnesota.  It also includes indigenous species
     the State believes are uncommon and in need of study.

ENDECO.  Type 2100 Septic Leachate Dector.  See "Septic Snooper".

ENVIRONMENT.   The  conditions  external  to a particular  object,  but
     generally  limited  to  those  conditions  which  have  a  direct  and
     measurable  effect on  the  object.   Usually  considered to  be  the
     conditions  which  surround   and  influence  a  particular  living
     organism,  population,  or  community.   The  physical  environment
     includes  light,  heat,  moisture,  and  other  principally  abiotic
     components.   The components  of  the  biotic environment  are other
     living organisms and their products.

ENVIRONMENTAL  IMPACT STATEMENT.   A  document  required by  the  National
     Environmental Policy  Act  (PL  91-190,  1969) that  is  used  in the
     decision-making  process  to  evaluate  the effects  (impacts)  of  a
     proposed action on the human, biological,  and physical environment.
                                   185
-------
EPILIMINION.  The  upper layer  of  more or  less  uniformly warm,  circu-
lating,   and   fairly   turbulent  water  in  lakes  during   the   spring
heating season.

EROSION.  The process by which an object is eroded,  or worn away,  by the
action  of   wind,   water,   glacial   ice,   or   combinations   of   these
agents.   Sometimes used  to refer  to  results  of  chemical  actions  or
temperature  changes.    Erosion  may  be  accelerated   by  human  activ-
ities .

EUTROPHIC.  Waters with a  relatively large concentration  of  nutrients
and  hence 'a  large production  of organic  matter,  often  shallow,  with
periods of oxygen  deficiency.

EUTROPHIC LAKES.   Shallow  lakes,  weed-choked  at the edges and  very rich
     in  nutrients.   The  water  is  characterized  by  large  amounts  of
     algae,  low water transparency,  low dissolved oxygen  and  high BOD.

EUTROPHICATION.  The normally slow aging process by which a lake evolves
     into  a  bog or marsh,  ultimately  assumes  a  completely  terrestrial
     state  and  disappears.   During  eutrophication  the  lake becomes so
     rich  in nutritive compounds,  especially  nitrogen  and  phosphorus,
     that  algae and plant  life become  superabundant,  thereby  "choking"
     the  lake  and  causing  it eventually to dry  up.   Eutrophication may
     be accelerated by human activities.

EVAPOTRANSPIRATION.   A process by  which  water  is   evaporated  and/or
     transpired from water, soil, and plant surfaces.

FECAL  COLIFORM BACTERIA.    The  group of organisms common  to the  intes-
     tinal tracts  of man and of animals.  The presence of fecal coliform
     bacteria  in water  is  an indicator of  pollution  and of potentially
     dangerous bacterial contamination.

FLOE.  A  sheet of  floating  ice.

FORCE MAIN.  Pipe  designed  to carry wastewater under pressure.

GLACIAL DEPOSIT.   A mass  of rock, soil, and earth material deposited by
     a  melting  glacier.   Such material  was  originally picked  up and
     carried  along  its path  by  the  glacier,  and  usually  varies  in
     texture  from very  fine  rock  flour  to  large  boulders.   Named
     according to  their location and shape.

GLACIAL DRIFT.   Material which  has  been  deposited  by  a  glacier or in
     connection  with  glacial  processes.   It  consists  of  rock  flour,
     sand,  pebbles,  cobbles, and  boulders.  It may  occur in a  heter-
     ogeneous  mass or  be  more or  less  well-sorted, according  to its
     manner of deposition.

GRAVITY  SYSTEM.   A  system  of  conduits  (open  or  closed) in which no
     liquid pumping is  required.

GROUNDWATER.  Water that is below the water table.


                                   186
-------
GROUNDWATER  RUNOFF.   Groundwater  that  is   discharged  into  a  stream
     channel as spring or seepage water.

HABITAT.   The  specific place  or the  general  kind of  site  in which  a
     plant  or  animal  normally  lives  during  all  or  part of  its  life
     cycle.

HOLDING TANK.  Enclosed tank, usually of fiberglass or concrete, for the
     storage  of  wastewater  prior  to  removal or  disposal  at  another
     location.

HYDROPONIC.  Refers  to  growth  of plants in a nutrient solution, perhaps
     with the mechanical support of an inert medium such as sand.

HYPOLIMNION.  Deep, cold and relatively undisturbed water separated from
     the surface layer in lakes.

IGNEOUS.   Rock  formed  by  the  solidification of  magma  (hot  molten
     material).

INDIAN MOUND SYSTEM.  See Elevated Mound.

INFILTRATION.  The  flow of  a  fluid  into  a  substance  through  pores  or
     small  openings.  Commonly used in hydrology to denote the flow  of
     water into soil material.

INFILTRATION/INFLOW.  Total  quantity of water  entering  a  sewer system.
     Infiltration means  entry through  such  sources  as  defective  pipes,
     pipe joints,  connections,  or manhole walls.  Inflow signifies dis-
     charge  into  the  sewer system through service connections from such
     sources as  area or foundation drainage,  springs  and  swamps,  storm
     waters, street wash waters, or sewers.

INTERCEPTOR  SEWERS.   Sewers  used  to  collect  the  flows from  main and
     trunk  sewers  and carry  them to a  central  point  for  treatment and
     discharge.   In  a combined  sewer system,  where  street  runoff from
     rains  is  allowed  to  enter the system along the sewage,  interceptor
     sewers allow some of the sewage to flow untreated directly into the
     receiving  stream,  to  prevent the  treatment plant  from  being over-
     loaded.

INNOVATIVE  TECHNOLOGY.   A  technology whose  use  has  not been  widely
     documented  by  experience  and  is  not  a  variant  of  conventional
     biological or physical/chemical treatment.

LAGOON.   In wastewater  treatment, a shallow  pond,  usually man-made,  in
     which  sunlight,  algal and bacterial  action and  oxygen  interact  to
     restore the wastewater to a reasonable state of purity.

LAND TREATMENT.   A  method  of treatment  in which the soil, air, vegeta-
     tion,  bacteria,  and  fungi  are employed  to  remove  pollutants from
     wastewater.   In its  most simple  form,  the method  includes  three
     steps:  (1)  pretreatment  to screen out large solids; (2) secondary
     treatment  and  chlorination; and  (3)  spraying  over cropland, pas-
                                   187
-------
     ture, or natural vegetation to allow plants  and soil  microorganisms
     to remove additional pollutants.  Much  of the sprayed  water evapo-
     rates, and the  remainder may  be allowed to percolate  to  the water
     table,  discharged through  drain  tiles, or   reclaimed  by  wells.

LEACHATE.   Solution  formed  when water percolates  through solid  wastes,
     soil  or  other materials and  extracts  soluble or  suspendable sub-
     stances from the material.

LEACHFIELD.  Soil component  of a septic system which removes particulate
     matter and nutrients.

LIMITING  FACTOR.   A  factor whose  absence,  or excessive  concentration,
     exerts some restraining influence upon  a population.

LOAM.   The textural  class  name for soil having  a moderate  amount  of
     sand, silt, and  clay.   Loam soils contain  7  to  27%  of clay, 28  to
     50% of silt, and less  than 52% of sand.

LOESS.  Soil  of wind-blown origin, predominantly  silt and fine sand.

MACROPHYTE.   A large  (not  microscopic)  plant,  usually  in an  aquatic
     habitat.

MELT  WATER.   Water which is  formed from the melting of  snow,  rime,  or
     ice.

MESOTROPHIC.  Waters  with a  moderate supply  of nutrients and no signifi-
     cant production of organic matter.

MESOTROPHIC LAKE.  Lakes of intermediate characteristics  between oligo-
     trophic and eutrophic.   They contain a  moderate supply  of  nutrients
     and plant life.

METHEMOGLOBINEMIA.   The presence of methemoglobin  in the  blood.   Methe-
     moglobin  is  the oxidized  form of  hemoglobin  and  it  is  unable  to
     combine reversibly with oxygen.

MICROSTRAINER.   A  device for screening  suspended  solids that  are  not
     removed by sedimentation.

MILLIGRAM  PER LITER   (mg/1).  A concentration of  1/1000  gram  of a sub-
     stance in  1  liter of  water.   Because 1  liter of pure  water weighs
     1,000  grams,  the concentration  also can be  stated  as 1  ppm (part
     per  million,  by weight).   Used to measure and  report the concen-
     trations  of most  substances  which  commonly  occur in natural  and
     polluted waters.

MORPHOLOGICAL.  Pertaining to Morphology.

MORPHOLOGY.  The form or structure of a plant or animal, or  of  a feature
     of the  earth,  such as a  stream,  a lake,  or  the  land in general.
     Also,  the science  that is  concerned  with the  study  of  form  and
     structure  of  living organisms.   Geomorphology deals with the form
     and  structure of the earth.

                                    188
-------
NON-POINT SOURCE.  A  general  source of pollution not originating from a
     single controllable  source.   Surface  water runoff is an example of
     a non-point source that is not easily controlled.

NUTRIENT BUDGET.  The amount of nutrients entering and leaving a body of
     water on an annual basis.

NUTRIENTS.   Elements  or  compounds  essential  as  raw  materials  for
     organisms  growth and development,  e.g.  carbon,  oxygen,  nitrogen,
     and phosphorus.

OLIGOTROPHIC.    Waters with  a   small  supply of  nutrients and  hence  an
     insignificant production of organic matter.

OLIGOTROPHIC LAKES.   Deep lakes that have a low supply of nutrients and
     thus  contain  little organic matter.   Such  lakes are characterized
     by high water transparency and high dissolved oxygen.

ORDINANCE.  A municipal or county regulation.

OUTWASH.   Drift carried  by melt  water  from  a  glacier and  deposited
     beyond the marginal moraine.

OUTWASH PLAIN.   A  plain formed by material deposited by melt water from
     a glacier  flowing  over  a  more or  less flat surface of large area.
     Deposits of this origin are  usually  distinguishable from ordinary
     river deposits by  the fact that they often grade into moraines and
     their constituents  bear evidence  of  glacial origin.   Also called
     frontal apron.

PARAMETER.  Any  of a  set of physical properties  whose values determine
     characteristics or behavior.

PERCOLATION.   The  downward  movement of  water  through  pore  spaces  or
     larger voids  in soil or rock.

PERMEABILITY.  The property or capactiy of porous rock, sediment, or soil
     to transmit a fluid, usually water or air;  it  is a measure of the
     relative  ease  of   flow  under  unequal pressures.   Terms  used  to
     describe the  permeability of  soil are:   slow,  less than 0.2 inch
     per  hour;  moderately slow, 0.2 to 0.63 inch; moderate, 0.63 to 2.0
     inches;  moderately  rapid.  2.0 to 6.3  inches; and rapid,  more than
     6.3  inches per hour.  A very slow class and a very rapid class also
     may be recognized.

PETROGLYPH.  An ancient or prehistoric carving or inscription on a rock.

PHOSPHORUS LIMITED.   Of all the primary nutrients necessary to support
     algal growth,  phosphorus   is  in the  shortest supply and therefore
     can limit additional algal growth.

PHYTOPLANKTON.   Floating  plants, microsopic  in size,  that  both supply
     small animals with food and give polluted water its  green color and
     bad taste.
                                   189
-------
POINT SOURCE.  A stationary source of a large individual  emission.   This
     is  a  general  definition;  point  source is  legally and  precisely
     defined in Federal regulations.

POVERTY  LEVEL.   An index  providing  a range  of  poverty income  cutoffs
     adjusted by such factors as family size, sex of family  head,  number
     of  children under  18  years of age,  and farm or non-farm residence.

PREHISTORIC.   A term  which  describes the  period of human  development
     that   occurred   before   the  advent  of  written   records.    More
     generally,  any period  in  geologic  time before  written  history.

PRESENT WORTH.  The sum of money that must be set aside  at the beginning
     of  the  planning period  in order to amortize the costs  of a project
     over the planning period.

PRESSURE SEWER SYSTEM.   A wastewater collection  system  in  which house-
     hold  wastes  are   collected  in  the  building   drain  and  conveyed
     therein  to the pretreatment  and/or pressurization facility.   The
     system  consists  of  two major  elements, the on-site  or  pressuri-
     zation  facility,  and  the primary conductor  pressurized sewer main.

PRIMARY  PRODUCTION.  Growth  of green plants resulting from  solar energy
     being fixed as sugar during photosynthesis.

PRIMARY  TREATMENT.   The  first stage  in  wastewater treatment  in  which
     substantially  all floating  or  settleable  solids are  mechanically
     removed by screening and sedimentation.

RAPID INFILTRATION.  A form of land treatment where wastewater is placed
     into spreading basins and applied to the land  to  undergo percola-
     tion into the soil.

RARE SPECIES.   A species  not Endangered or  Threatened but  uncommon and
     deserving of further study and monitoring.   Peripheral  species, not
     listed  as  threatened, may be included  in this  category along with
     those  species  that were once "threatened" or  "endangered"  but now
     have increasing or protected, stable populations.

RECHARGE.  The process by which water is added to an aquifer.  Used also
     to  indicate  the  water that is added.  Natural recharge occurs when
     water from rainfall or a stream enters the ground and percolates to
     the water table.  Artificial recharge by spreading water on absorp-
     tive ground  over  an aquifer or by injecting water through wells is
     used to store  water and to protect  groundwater against the intru-
     sion of  sea water.

ROOTED  AQUATIC PLANTS.  Aquatic  or water borne  plants  which take root
     below water.
                                   190
-------
ROUGH FISH.  Those fish species considered to be of low sport value when
     taken  on tackle,  or of  poor eating  quality;  e.g.  gar,  suckers.
     Rough  fish  are  more  tolerant  of  widely changing  environmental
     conditions than are game fish.  Also called coarse fish.

RUNOFF.  The  portion  of rainfall,  melted snow  or  irrigation water that
     flows  across  the  ground  surface  and eventually  is  returned  to
     streams.  Runoff  can pick  up pollutants  from the air  or  the land
     and carry them to the receiving waters.

SANITARY SEWERS.  Sewers that transport only sanitary wastewater.   Storm
     water runoff is carried in a separate system.   See sewer.

SANITARY SURVEY.  A method  used to determine possible  sources  of water
     quality  and public  health  problems  and  to locate  inadequately
     functioning  wastewater  systems  by  making site-specific  investi-
     gations of existing lots and systems.

SCENIC  EASEMENT.   A  partial  transfer  of  land rights to preserve  the
     aesthetic attractiveness of the land by restricting activities such
     as  the  removal of  trees,  placement of billboards,  or  development
     incompatible with the scenic qualities of the land.  Just compensa-
     tion  is  given  to owners for rights lost.   The right of  legal tres-
     pass  is generally not included as part of this easement.

SECCHI DISK.  A round plate, 30 cm (1 foot) in diameter, that is used to
     measure  the  transparency of  water.   The  disk is  lowered  into  the
     water until  it no  longer can be seen  from the  surface.  The depth
     at  which  the disk  becomes invisible is a  measure of transparency.

SECONDARY TREATMENT.  Wastewater treatment in which bacteria  consume the
     organic  parts  of  the  wastes.  This  biochemical  action  is  accom-
     plished  by  use of  trickling  filters  or the  activated  sludge pro-
     cess.   Effective  secondary treatment  may  remove approximately  9070
     of both BOD  and suspended solids.

SEEPAGE  CELLS.  Unlined wastewater lagoons designed so that  all or part
     of wastewater percolates into the underlying soil.

SEMI-AQUATIC.  Plants that can exist on both land and in water.

SEPTIC SNOOPER.  Trademark for the ENDECO (Environmental Devices Corpor-
     ation)  Type  2100  Septic  Leachate  Detector.  This instrument con-
     sists  of an underwater  probe,  a water intake  system,  an analyzer
     control  unit  and  a  graphic  recorder.    Water  drawn  through  the
     instrument  is  continuously analyzed  for  specific fluorescence  and
     conductivity.   When  calibrated  against  typical  effluents,  the
     instrument  can  detect  and  profile  effluent-like  substances  and
     thereby  locate  septic  tank  leachate or other  sources  of domestic
     sewage entering lakes and streams.

SEPTIC  TANK.   An underground  tank used  for the  collection  of domestic
     wastes.   Bacteria  in the wastes decompose  the  organic  matter,  and
                                   191
-------
     the  sludge  settles  to  the bottom.   The  effluent  flows  through
     drains into the ground.   Sludge is pumped out at regular intervals.

SEPTIC  TANK  EFFLUENT  PUMP  (STEP).   Pump  designed to transfer  settled
     wastewater from a septic tank to a sewer.

SEPTIC  TANK  SOIL ABSORPTION  SYSTEM (ST/SAS).   A system of  wastewater
     disposal in  which  large  solids are retained in a tank;  fine solids
     and liquids  are  dispersed  into the surrounding soil  by  a system of
     pipes.

SEWER, COMBINED.  A  sewer, or system of sewers,  that is  used to  collect
     and conduct  both sanitary  sewage  and storm-water runoff.,   During
     rainless periods,  most  or  all  of  the flow  in a  combined sewer is
     composed of  sanitary sewage.   During  a storm, runoff increases the
     rate of flow and may overload the sewage treatment  plant  to which
     the sewer  connects.  At  such times,  it is common to  divert  some of
     the flow,  without treatment, into  the  receiving water.

SEWER, INTERCEPTOR.   See Interceptor Sewer.

SEWER, LATERAL.   A sewer designed and installed to collect sewage from a
     limited number  of  individual  properties  and conduct it  to  a trunk
     sewer.  Also known as a  street sewer  or collecting sewer.

SEWER, SANITARY.  See Sanitary Sewer.

SEWER,  STORM.   A  conduit  that collects and transports storm-water run-
     off.   In  many  sewerage  systems,  storm  sewers  are separate  from
     those carrying sanitary  or industrial  wastewater.

SEWER, TRUNK.   A  sewer designed and installed to  collect  sewage from a
     number of lateral sewers and conduct  it to an interceptor sewer or,
     in some cases,  to a sewage treatment plant.

SHOALING.  The  bottom effect  that influences  the height  of waves moving
     from deep to shallow water.

SINKING  FUND.   A fund  established  by periodic  installments  to  provide
     for the retirement of the principal of term  bonds.

SLOPE.  The incline of the surface of the  land.  It is usually expressed
     as  a  percent (%) of slope  that equals the  number of feet  of fall
     per 100 feet in horizontal distance.

SOIL  ASSOCIATION.   General  term used  to   describe  taxonomic units of
     soils, relative proportions, and pattern of  occurrence.

SOIL LIMITING FACTOR.  Any physical characteristic which  impedes
     the proper renovation of wastewater in soils.

SOIL  TEXTURAL CLASS.   The classification  of soil  material according to
     the proportions  of sand,  silt,  and   clay.   The  principal  textural
     classes  in  soil,  in increasing  order of  the  amount of silt and
                                   192
-------
     clay, are  as follows:   sand,  loamy sand,  sandy loam,  loam,  silt
     loam, sandy  clay  loam,  clay  loam, silty  clay loam,  sandy  clay,
     silty clay,  and  clay.   These class names are modified  to indicate
     the  size  of  the sand  fraction  or the  presence of  gravel,  sandy
     loam, gravelly loam,  stony  clay,  and cobbly loam,  and  are used on
     detailed  soil  maps.   These terms  apply only  to  individual  soil
     horizons or to the surface layer of a soil type.

STATE EQUALIZED VALUATION  (SEV).  A measure employed within  a  State to
     adjust actual assessed valuation  upward  to  approximate true market
     value.  Thus it is possible to  relate debt burden to the full value
     of taxable property in each community within that State. •

SPRAY IRRIGATION.   Desposing of semi-treated wastewater by spraying upon
     the land at slow application rates.

STRATIFICATION.  The  condition of a lake,  ocean, or other body of water
     when  the  water  column  is  divided into  a  relatively  cold  bottom
     layer and  a  relatively  warm surface  layer, with a  thin  boundary
     layer (thermocline) between  them.   Stratification generally occurs
     during the  summer and  during  periods  of ice cover  in  the winter.
     Overturns, of  periods of mixing,  occur in the  spring  and autumn.
     This condition is most common in middle latitudes and is related to
     weather conditions, basin morphology,  and altitude.

STUB FEE.  See Connection Fee.

SUCCESSION.  The  ecological  process  by  which terrestrial  and aquatic
     environments age.

SUPPLEMENTAL  USAGE.    In  regard  to  functions   of  small  waste  flow
     districts, those  which are  not  required to comply with  EPA  Con-
     struction Grants  regulations governing  individual,  on-site  waste-
     water  systems.    May  be  necessary  to  achieve administrative  or
     environmental objectives.

SUSPENDED  SOLIDS  (SS).  Small solid  particles  that  contribute to  tur-
     bidity.    The examination   of  suspended  solids  and  the  BOD  test
     constitute the two  main  determinations for  water quality performed
     at wastewater treatment facilities.

TERTIARTY TREATMENT.   See Advanced Waste Treatment.

THREATENED SPECIES  (FEDERAL CLASSIFICATION).   Any species of animal or
     plant that  is  likely  to become an  endangered  species  within  the
     foreseeable  future  throughout  all or  a significant part  of  its
     range.  Protected under Public  Law 93-205, as amended.

TILL.   Deposits  of  glacial  drift  laid down in place  as  the glacier
     melts.  These deposits  are  neither sorted  nor  stratified  and  con-
     sist of a heterogeneous  mass of rock flow,  sand, pebbles, cobbles,
     and boulders.
                                   193
-------
TOPOGRAPHY.  The  configuration  of  a surface area including  its  relief,
     or relative  evaluations, and  the  position of its natural and  man-
     made features.

TRICKLING FILTER PROCESS.  A method of  secondary wastewater treatment in
     which  the  biological growth  is  attached to a  fixed medium,  over
     which  wastewater  is  sprayed.   The filter  organisms  biochemically
     oxidize  the   complex  organic  matter  in  the  wastewater to  carbon
     dioxide, water, and energy.

TROPHIC LEVEL.  Any  of  the feeding levels through which  the passage of
     energy  through  an  ecosystem  proceeds.   In simplest  form,  trophic
     levels   are:   primary   producers   (green  plants)   herbivores,
     omnivores, predators, scavengers,  and decomposers.

WATER QUALITY.  The relative condition of a body of  water as judged by a
     comparison between  contemporary  values  and certain more or  less
     objective standard values for biological, chemical,  and/or physical
     parameters.   The  standard  values  usually are  based  on a  specific
     series  of  intended  uses,  and may vary as  the  intended uses vary.

WATER TABLE.   The upper level of groundwater that is not confined by an
     upper  impermeable  layer  and   is  under atmospheric  pressure.   The
     upper  surface  of   the  substrate  that  is  wholly   saturated  with
     groundwater.

WATERSHED.  The area drained by a stream.

WELL LOG.   A chronological  record of  the soil  and  rock  formations en-
     countered  in the   operation of sinking  a  well,  with  either their
     thickness or the elevation of the top and bottom of each formation
     given.   It  also usually  includes statements about  the lithologic
     composition  and water-bearing  characteristics  of  each formation,
     static and pumping water levels, and well yield.

ZONING.  The regulation by governmental action (invested by the State to
     cities, townships,  or counties)  of the use of  the land, the height
     of buildings, and/or  the proportion of the land surface that can be
     covered by structures.
                                   194
-------
                             BIBLIOGRAPHY
Acroyd,  E.A.,  W.C.  Walton,  and  D.L.  Hills.   1967.  Groundwater  con-
     tribution to  streamflow and its relation to  basin  characteristics
     in  Minnesota.   Report  of  Investigations  6.  Minnesota  Geological
     Survey.  University of Minnesota,  Minneapolis.

Ames Engineering and  Testing Co.   1976.   Report  and logs of exploratory
     soil borings  for  sanitary  sewer,  Green Lake MN.  Unpublished data.

Ames Engineering and Testing Co.  Undated.  Report of subsurface investi-
     gations for Green Lake sanitary sewer, Spicer MN.   (Mimeo) Ames IA.

Arthur Beard Engineers,  Inc.   1978.   correspondence regarding:  1)  unit
     prices and  collector sewer construction costs; 2)  wastewater  flow
     projections for  Green Lake;  and 3)  "typical" cluster system, Green
     Lake.  Chevy Chase, MD.

Clean  Water Act of  1977.  Public  Law  95-217.   (33  U.S.C.  466 et seq.)

Cohen, S.  and  H.  Wallman.  1974.  Demonstration  of waste flow reduction
     from households.  Environmental Protection Agency, National Environ-
     mental Research Center.   Cincinnati, OH.

Cooper,  I.A.,  and J.W.  Rezek.   1977.    Septage  treatment and disposal.
     For EPA, Technology Transfer.

Council  on Environmental Quality.   1973.   Preparation of environmental
     impact statements:  Guidelines.  1 August 1973.

Dearth,   K.H.    1979.    Current   costs   of   conventional  approaches.
     Presented  at EPA National Conference on  Less  Costly  Wastewater
     Treatment  Systems   for Small   Communities.    12-14  April  1977.
     Reston, VA.

Dillon,  P.J.   1975.   The application of the phosphorus-loading concept
     to  eutrophication  research.    Scientific  Series  No. 46.   Canada
     Centre for Island Waters.  Burlington, Ontario.

Endangered  species Act of 1973.   Public Law 93-205.

Environmental Protection  Agency, Environmental Photographic Interpreta-
     tion Center.  1978.

EPA.   July  1974.   Manual for preparation of environmental impact state-
     ments  for wastewater  treatment works,  facilities  plans,  and 208
     areawide waste treatment management plans.  July 1974.

EPA.   June 1975.   Cost  of  wastewater  treatment  by  land application.

EPA.   June  1976.   Small  community wastewater   treatment  facilities.
                                   195
-------
EPA.  October  1977.   Process  design manual for land  treatment  for land
     treatment of municipal wastewater.   EPA 625/1-77-008.

EPA.  January 1978a.  Construction costs for municipal wastewater treat-
     ment plants, 1973-1977.  MCD 37.

EPA.  May  1978b.  Analysis  of O&M costs for municipal wastewater treat-
     ment systems.  MCD 39.

EPA.  May  1978c.  Construction  cost for municipal  conveyance  systems,
     1973-1977.  MCD 38.

EPA,  National Eutrophication  Survey.    1974a.   Report  on Green  Lake,
     Kandiyohi County, Minnesota.  Working Paper No.  101.

EPA,  National  Eutrophication  Survey.   1974b.   Report  on  Nest  Lake,
     Kandiyohi County, Minnesota.  Working Paper No.  117.

EPA, National  Eutrophication Survey.   1974c.   Report on  Wagonga  Lake,
     Kandiyohi County, Minnesota.  Working Paper No.  133.

EPA, National  Eutrophication Survey.   1975.   Report on Woodcock  Lake,
     Kandiyohi County, Minnesota.  Working Paper No.  141.

Federal  Water Pollution  Control  Act  Amendments  of  1972,  Public  Law
     92-500.

Fisheries  Research Unit.   1955.   Lake survey  report.   Diamond  Lake,
     Kandiyohi County.

Fisheries  Research  Unit.   1955.   Lake  survey  report.    Nest  Lake,
     Kandiyohi County.

Gates, Larry F. ,  and  Howard F.  Krosch.   1975.   Water quality monitoring
     program  on  representative  fish lakes,  1974.   Special  Publication
     No.  111.  Minnesota  Department of Natural Resources,  Division of
     Fish and Wildlife.

Giencke,  Allan G.  1978.  Various correspondence to WAPORA, Inc.
     regarding soil  suitability for wastewater treatment  in  the  Green
     Lake vicinity.

Great Lakes  Upper Mississippi River Board of  State  Sanitary Engineers.
     1978.   Recommended standards for sewage works.  Albany,  NY.

Green Lake  Property Owners  Association.  1970-1971.   Bacterial data for
     Green Lake.

Green  Lake Property  Owners  Association.   1976.  A book  of  names  and
     numbers.  Directory for Green Lake.

Green Lake  Sanitary Sewer and Water District.  Attachment No.  1.   File
     No.  741001-2.
                                   196
-------
Groszyk,  Walter.   1977.   Septic  tank  problem analysis:   Impact  on
     groundwater.  Information memorandum 77-164.  USEPA, Water Planning
     Division, Washington DC.

Hummel, Mark.   Green Lake  construction grants  sanitary  survey.   1978.

Illinois  Environmental  Protection Agency.   1977.   Issuance of  final
     Illinois  guidelines for  the  preparation  of facilities plans  for
     unsewered communities.   Memorandum.  16 September 1977.

Johnson, Elden.  1969.  The prehistoric peoples of Minnesota.  Minnesota
     Historical Society.  St. Paul MN.

Jones, R.A.  and  G.F.  Lee.   1977.  Septic Tank disposal systems as phos-
     phorus  sources  for surface  waters.   EPA-600/3-77-129.  Robert  S.
     Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory.

Kandiyohi  County Board of  Commissioners.   July  1977.   Kandiyohi  County
     Overall Economic Development Plan.

Kandiyohi  County  Board of Commissioners.   1977.   Letter  to  Paul E.
     Davis,   MPCA,   from   Virgil   Olsen.    Additional  information  to
     facilities plan.

Kandiyohi  County Board of  Commissioners.   1973.   Kandiyohi  County Sub-
     division regulations.   Willmar MN.

Kandiyohi  County Board  of  Commissioners.   1977.   Resolution  amending
     comprehensive zoning ordinance.   (Mimeo) Willmar MN.

Kandiyohi  County  Board  of  Commissioners.    1971.    Zoning  ordinance,
     Kandiyohi County, Minnesota.  Willmar MN.

Kandiyohi  County Historical Society.   Undated.   A  guide  to historical
     sites in Kandiyohi County, Minnesota.  Willmar MN.

Kandiyohi  County Planning  Commission.   1973.   Comprehensive water  and
     sewer plan for Kandiyohi County, Minnesota.

Kandiyohi  County Soil and  Water  Conservation District.   Undated.   Con-
     servation  needs  for  the  future:  Kandiyohi  County,  Minnesota.

Kandiyohi  County  Zoning  Administrator.  Undated.  Home sewage treatment
     systems, Kandiyohi County.  (Mimeo).  Willmar MN.

Kerfoot,  W.   1979.   Investigation  of  septic  leachate  discharges  into
     Green Lake  and  Nest Lake, MN.  K-V Associates, Inc., Falmouth, MA.

Library  Reference Service,  Federal  Aid  in  Fish and  Wildlife.   1974.
     Minnesota State Index:   Fish.  Denver CO.

Lindholm, G.F., D.F.  Farrell, and J.O. Helgesen.  1974.  Water resources
     of  the  Crow River  watershed,  south-central Minnesota.   Hydrologic
     investigations  atlas   HA-528.    US  Geological  Survey,   Reston  VA.

                                   197
-------
Machmeier, Roger  E.   1977a.   Get  to know your  septic  tank.   Extension
     Folder  337.    University  of  Minnesota   Agricultural   Extension
     Service, St.  Paul.

Machmeier, Roger  E.   1977b.   How to run a percolation  test.   Extension
     Folder  261.    University  of  Minnesota   Agricultural   Extension
     Service, St.  Paul.

Machmeier, Roger  E.   1977c.   Town  and country sewage treatment.   Exten-
     sion Bulletin 304.   University of Minnesota Agricultural Extension
     Service, St.  Paul.

Machmeier, Roger E.  1978.  Shoreland sewage  treatment:   Recommendations
     for  identifying  and eliminating  nonconforming  systems.   Extension
     Bulletin  394.   University  of  Minnesota  Agricultural   Extension
     Service, St.  Paul.

Mclaughlin, E.R.   1968.   A  recycle system for conservation of water in
     residences.  Wate and Sewage Works 115(4):175-176.

Minnesota  Analysis  and  Planning  System,  Institute  of  Agriculture,
     University of Minnesota.

Minnesota  Bureau  of Fisheries.  1959.  Lake  survey  information  summary
     sheet:  Green Lake.

Minnesota  Department  of  Administration.   1976.   Minnesota  state publi-
     cations.  St. Paul MN.

Minnesota  Department of  Conservation.  1970.   Rules  and  regulations.
     Chapter 6:   Statewide  standards and criteria for management shore-
     land areas.  St. Paul MN.

Minnesota Department  of Conservation,  Division of Game and Fish.  1964.
     Sounding map, Green  Lake, Kandiyohi County MN.

Minnesota Department  of Convervation,  Division of Game and Fish.  1964.
     Sounding map, Nest Lake, Kandiyohi County MN.

Minnesota Department  of Conservation,  Division of Game and Fish.  1964.
     Sounding map, Diamond Lake, Kandiyohi County MN.

Minnesota Department of Conservation, Division of Waters.  1959.   Hydro-
     logic atlas  of Minnesota.  Bulletin No.  10.  St. Paul MN.

Minnesota Department of Manpower Services.  Undated.   Employment by type
     and   broad   industrial   sources   1971-1975,   Kandiyohi  County.
     Unpublished  report.

Minnesota  Department of  Natural  Resources.   1976.   Rules  and  regula-
     tions.   Chapter  6:    NR 92-84.   Standards  and criteria  for  the
     management of municipal  shoreland areas.  St. Paul MN.

Minnesota  DNR.    1975.    The  uncommon  ones:    Animals  and  plants which
     merit special consideration and management.

                                    198
-------
Minnesota DNR.   Undated.   Proposed  rules  NR 5020-5029:   Standards and
     criteria  for  granting  permits  to change  the course,  current,  or
     cross section of public waters.   (Mimeo).

Minnesota Division of  Game and  Fish.   1971.   Fisheries  lake  survey;
     Green Lake.  MN.

Minnesota Division of Game and Fish.   1971.  Fisheries lake survey, Nest
     Lake.

Minnesota Division of  Game and  Fish.   1971.   Fisheries  lake  survey,
     Diamond Lake.

Minnesota Division of Game  and  Fish, Bureau of Research and Planning.
     1958.  Fisheries lake survey report:   Green Lake, Kandiyohi County.

Minnesota  Pollution  Control Agency.   1977.   Draft  program for  land
     disposal  of municipal  wastewater sludges.   (Mimeo).  Roseville MN.

MPCA.   1977.   Land application  and utilization of septage:  Recommended
     guidelines.   (Mimeo).  Roseville MN.

MPCA.   1972.   Recommended design  criteria for disposal  of effluent by
     land application.  MPCA #566. 9 p.

MPCA.   1972.   (WPC2)  Rules,  regulations,  classifications,  and  water
     standards.  St. Paul MN.

MPCA.   1972.   Rules and  regulations.   Chapter 1:   Ambient air quality
     standards.

MPCA.   Undated.   Proposed  rules  governing standards   for  individual
     sewage treatment systems.   Roseville MN.

MPCA, Division of Solid Waste.   1973.  Solid waste disposal regulations.
     St. Paul MN.

MPCA, Division of Water Quality.   1975.  Recommended design criteria for
     sewage stabilization ponds.   (Mimeo) Roseville MN.

MPCA,   Division  of  Water  Quality.    1975.    Upper  portion,  upper
     Mississippi River  basin plan.   Department of  Administration,  St.
     Paul, variously paged.  Vol. 1 and Vol. 2.

MPCA, Division of Water Quality.   1972.  Recommended design criteria for
     disposal  of  effluent by  land  application.   (Mimeo)  Roseville MN.

MPCA, Division of Water Quality.   Undated.  Report memorandum on investi-
     gation of water quality of Green Lake, Kandiyohi County.

MPCA.   1973.   Minnesota State Rules,  Regulations,  classifications, and
     water standards.   WPC 14.

Minnesota Socio-Economic Population  Characteristic-Employment Volume 2.


                                   199
-------
Minnesota  Soil  Conservation  Service.   January 1978.   Watershed-river
     basin status report.

Minnesota  State  Planning Agency:   Kandiyohi  County  Population  Projec-
     tions 1975-2000.

Minnesota State Planning Agency, Water Resources Coordinating Committee.
     1969.   Background  information  for framework  statewide water  and
     related  land  resources planning in Minnesota.   Technical  Bulletin
     No. 2.  St.  Paul, MN.

Morey,  G.B.  (Complier).   1976.   Geologic  map  of  Minnesota.   Miscella-
     neous Map Series, Map M-24.  Minnesota Geological Survey-University
     of Minnesota, Minneapolis.

Nason,  Wehrman,  Chapman Associates, Inc.  July 1971.   Kandiyohi  County
     Comprehensive Plan.  Minneapolis MN.

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969,  Public Law 91-190.

National Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations.   40 CFR 141.

National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration,  Environmental  Data
     Service.  1976.  Local climatological  data:  St. Cloud, MN.   Annual
     summary  with  comparative data.   USDC  National  Climatic:  Center,
     Asheville NC.

Noyes  Engineering  Service.   1977.   Green  Lake  well  water  survey.
     (Mimeo).  Willmar MN.

Noyes  Engineering  Service  and Rieke  Carroll  Muller  Associates,  Inc.
     December 16, 1974.   Preliminary feasibility report, water pollution
     control   facilities,   Green   Lake  vicinity,   Kandiyohi   County,
     Minnesota.

Nupson, H.   2970-1.   Reports  to Green Lake Property Owners Association.
     Work orders 2379, 5375, and 7892.  Minnesota Valley Testing Labora-
     tories, Inc., New Ulm MN.

Paulson,  Richard 0.,  SCS.  1978.   Letter  to  Eric  Hediger.   Information
     concerning soils for Green Lake area.

Pollution  Control  Agency.  Undated.  6  MCAR.   4.8040 Individual  sewage
     treatment systems standards.

Public Water and Sewer Systems, Chapter 116A.01.

Report  of the State Auditor  of Minnesota.  Revenues, expenditures,  and
     debt of the cities in Minnesota.  November 1977.

Report  of the State  Auditor  of  Minnesota.   Revenues,  expenditures and
     debt of local governments in Minnesota.  August  1977.

Report  of the State Auditor  of Minnesota.  Revenues, expenditures,  and
     debts of the towns in Minnesota.  January  1978.

                                   200
-------
Rieke  Carroll Muller  Associates  Inc.   1976.   Water  pollution  control
     facilities  plan,   Green  Lake  Sanitary  Sewer  and Water  District.
     Hopkins MN.

Rieke Carroll Muller Associates,  Inc.   1977.  Letter  to  James P.  Roth,
     MPCA,  From  William  G.   Hendrickson.   Additional  information  to
     Facilities Plan.   July 25, 1977.

Rose, Robert.  1978.  Field notes:  Green Lake.

Safe Drinking Water Act.  Public Law 93-523.

Southwest  State  University.    1972-1973,  1975-1977.   Water  quality data
     sheets for Green Lake.

State of  Minnesota.  Undated.   [Legislation  concerning]  Water pollution
     control; sanitary districts.  Sees.  115.15-115.42.

State  of  Minnesota.    1975.   Outdoor  recreation  system  (Legislation,
     Chapter 86A).

STORET.   1977.  Printouts on Green Lake, Kandiyohi County, MN.

Swanson,  Lester W.   1977.  Inventory  and  evaluation,  soil and  water
     resources:  Soils  and engineering  interpretations  for  New  London-
     Green  Lake-Diamond Lake  area.  USDA Soil  Conservation  Service,  in
     cooperation  with  Kandiyohi  County Soil and  Water  Conservation
     District, Willmar MN.

Troyan, J.J., and D.P.  Norris.   March 1977.   Cost-effectiveness analysis
     of  alternatives  for  small  wastewater  treatment  systems.   For EPA
     Technology Transfer.  Municipal Design  Seminar on Small Wastewater
     Treatment Systems.  Seattle WA.

US Bureau of the Census.   1972.  County and City Data Book.

US  Census  of  Housing.   1970.   Summary  Data  and  Fifth Count  Summary
     Tapes.

USDA Soil  Conservation Service.   1977.   Proposed rule, prime and unique
     farmlands:  Important farmland inventory.   42 F.R. 42359, 23 August
     1977.

USDA  Soil  Conservation  Service.   1971.   Soil  survey interpretations.
     Lincoln NE.

USDA  Soil  Conservation Service,  in cooperation  with MN  Agricultural
     Experiment  Station.   1966.    Soil  survey  laboratory  data  and
     descriptions  for   some  soils  of  Minnesota.   Soil  Survey  Investi-
     gations Report No. 9. 79 p.

US Department of Commerce.  1972.  Bureau of  Census.  Census  of Retail
     Trade  1972.
                                   201
-------
US  Department  of  Commerce.   Bureau  of  Census.   Census  of  Selected
     Services 1972.

US  Department  of Commerce,  Bureau  of Economic Analysis.   1977.   Local
     area personal income 1970-1975, Vol. 5:   Plains region.

US  Department  of  Interior,  National  Park  Service.   1976.   National
     Register of Historic Sites.   Washington DC.

USGS, Water  Resources  Division.   1977.  Index map  of  Minnesota showing
     availability of flood-prone area maps published by USGS.  'St. Paul.

Vollenweider,  R.A.   1968.   The  scientific  basis  of  lake and  stream
     eutrophication,    with   particular  reference  to phosphorus  and
     nitrogen  as  eutrophication factors.  Technical Report OECD.  DAS/
     CSI/68.  27:1-182.  Paris, France.

Walton,  William  C.    1972.   Lists  of  references  and  selected books
     bearing on water  resources  in  Minnesota.  Water Resources  Research
     Center,  University of  Minnesota  Graduate School, Minneapolis  MN.

White House Rural Development Initiatives 1978.

Zappetillo,  David B. ,  and  Howard  F.  Krosch.   1976.   Water  quality
     monitoring  program on  representative  fish  lakes,  1975.   Special
     Publication No.  114.  Minnesota DNR, Division of Fish and Wildlife.
                                   202
                                                           GPO »41 -904
-------