EIS810533F1
Water Division
ction 230 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604
May 1981
Environmental
Impact Statement
Bemidji Wastewater
Treatment System
Beltrami County
Minnesota
Final
Volume 1
-------
EPA-5-W-BELTRAMI-BEMIJJI-WWrP
FIMAL ENVIRONMENTAL 'IMPACT 3TAL'EMUMT
3EMIOJI ^ASTEWATER TREATMENT 3YSPEM
3EL,rRAMI COUNTY,
Prepared by the
UNITED 3IAPES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION I
REGION V
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS
and
MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY
R03EVILLE, MINNESOTA
and
WAPORA, INCORPORATED
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS
May 1981
Appr oved by:
VALDAS V.
ACTING REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR
-------
For farther information contact:
Charles Ouinl.un, Project 01 1 icer
US Environment.-!] Protection Agency, Region V
luiv Lroniiiental Engineering Branch,' ELS Section
23U South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604
(312) 353-2157
' ABSTRACT
The effluent discharged from the wastewater treatment plant at Bemidji
significantly affects the quality of the. culturally and economically important
lakes on the Upper Mississippi River downstream from the outfall sewer (Lakes
Bemidji, Wolf, Andrusia, and Cass). A permanent solution to the wastewater
>lisposal problem lias been sought for more than 12 years, primarily because of
the continued search for a means to eliminate entirely a surface water dis-
charge. Numerous land application search efforts have been conducted, and
numerous geotechnical investigations and engineering reports have been com-
pleted during the past ten years. This EIS addresses this long alternatives
development process. At this time it appears that the only technically feas-
ible, environmentally and socially acceptable, and cost-effective solution to
the problem is the construction of a new tertiary wastewater treatment plant
at the. site of the existing plant in Bemidji with discharge to the Mississippi
River channel to Lake Bemidji. It also appears that an effluent phosphorus
concentration limitation of 0.3 mg/1 (the most practical treatment) will
protect Lake Bemidji from accelerated eutrophication and may contribute to
improved water quality in the downstream Upper Mississippi River Chain of
Lakes. A final decision concerning the selected action and the phosphorus
standard will be made following the completion of the EIS process and will be
reflected in the Record of Decision.
-------
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Part I j'gge
COVER SHEET i
ABSTRACT . ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS iii
LIST OK FIGURES vi
LIST OF PHOTOGRAPHS vi
LIST OF TABLES vii
SUMMARY viii
1.0. PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION 1-1
1.1. Introduction and Legal Basis for Action 1-1
1.2. Project History 1-4
1.3. EIS Process 1-9
1.4. Summary of Comments on Draft EIS and Supplement . . . 1-11
2.0. DISCUSSION OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES 2-1
2.1. Existing Wastewater Conveyance and
Treatment System 2-1
2.1.1. Existing Service Area 2-1
2.1.2. Flows 2-1
2.1.3. Existing Treatment and
Effluent Disposal System 2-2
2.1.4. Existing Sludge Handling and
Disposal System 2-6
2.2. Identification of Alternative Wastewater
Treatment Systems 2-6
2.2.1. Design Factors 2-6
2.2.2. System Components 2-8
2.2.2.1. Flow and Waste Reduction 2-9
2.2.2.2. Collection System 2-10
2.2.2.3. Wastewater Treatment Processes. . . 2-11
2.2.2.4. Effluent Disposal 2-11
2.2.2.5. Sludge Treatment and Disposal . . . 2-13
2.3. Previously Considered Alternatives 2-13
2.3.1. No-action Alternative 2-13
2.3.2. Alternatives Considered in
Original Facilities Plan 2-14
2.3.3. Alternatives Considered in
Facilities Plan Supplement 2-14
2.3.4. Alternatives Considered
through EIS Process 2-16
2.3.5. Summary of Draft EIS Selected
Action Alternative 3 2-21
(643-E)
-------
Na
3.
3.
3.
tural
1.1.
1.2.
1..3.
Envi roujuon
Atmosphere
La nd . .
3.1.2.1.
3.1.2.2.
3.1.2.3.
3.1.3.1.
3.1.3.2.
t
Existing WUTP Si
Sludge Disposal
Surface Water
Groundwater . ,
i_te
Sites
2.4. Additional Alternatives Proposed Subsequent
to Publication of Draft EIS 2-24
2.4.1. "Alternative 7" 2-25
2.4.2. Maple Ridge Alternative 2-26
2.5. Conclusions 2-27
3.0. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 3-1
3.1. Natural Envi roiuuent 3-1
3-1
3-2
3-2
3-4
3-4
3-6
3-6
3-14
3.1..4. Endangered, Threatened, and Rare Species . . . 3-15
3.2. Man-made Environment 3-16
3.2.1. Economics 3-16
3.2.2. Demographics 3-17
3.2.2.1. Past and Present Population .... 3-17
3.2.2.2. Future Population .... 3-20
}.2.'], Land Use 3-22
3.2.3.1. Existing Development Patterns. . . . 3-22
3.2.3.2. Projected Development 3-24
3.2.3.3. National Wild and Scenic
Rivers System 3-25
3.2.4,. Public Finance 3-25
3.2.4.1. Revenues and Expenditures 3-25
3.2.4.2. Tax Assessments 3-26
3.2.4.3. City Indebtedness . . 3-26
3.2.4.4. User Costs 3-27
3.2.5. Archaeological, Historical, and Cultural
Resources 3-27
3.2.6. Public Sentiment 3-28
4.0. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUKNCES 4-1
4.1. Construction Impacts 4-1
4.2. Operation Impacts 4-6
4.2.1. Surface Water 4-6
4.2.2. Sludge Disposal 4-11
4.2.3. User Costs and Public Finance 4-12
4.3. Secondary Impacts 4-16
4.4. Impact on State Government of Any Federal Controls
Associated with the Proposed Action 4-16
IV
-------
4.5. Minimization of Adverse Impacts 4-17
4.5.1. Minimization of Construction Impacts .... 4-18
4.5.2. Mitigation of Operation Phase Impacts .... 4-20
4.5.3. Minimization of Secondary Impacts 4-21
4.6. Irretrievable and Irreversible Resource Commitments . 4-21
5.0. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT EIS 5-1
5.1. Adequacy of Alternatives Development
and Evaluation Process 5-1
5.2. Environmental Concerns 5-8
5.3. Socioeconomic Concerns 5-9
6.0. LITERATURE CONSULTED 6-1
7.0. COORDINATION, LIST OF PREPARERS, AND LIST OF THOSE
SENT DRAKT EIS 7-1
7.1. Coordination 7-1
7.2. List of Preparers 7-1
7.3. List of Those Sent Draft EIS 7-2
8.0. GLOSSARY OF TECHNICAL TERMS 8-1
9.0 INDEX 9-1
APPENDIX A. SLUDGE DISPOSAL SITES
Part II
MPCA SUPPLEMENT TO DRAFT EIS
WRITTEN COMMENTS ON DRAFT EIS
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
1-1 Bemidji area 1-2
2-1 Location of existing WWTP at Bemidji 2-3
2-2 Location of existing and proposed sludge disposal sites . . 2-7
2-3 Location of existing and potential wastewater stream
discharge points in the Bemidji area 2-12
2-4 Location of land application search
areas and sites in the Bemidji area 2-15
2-5 Alternative treatment plant sites and force main routes . . 2-19
2-6 Location of proposed force main, treatment and storage
ponds, and land treatment area in Alternative 6 2-20
3-1 Existing WWTP site 3-5
3-2 Mississippi River flow regime and major surface
water in the Bemidji area 3-7
4-1 Preliminary site layout for Alternative 3 4-2
LIST OF PHOTOGRAPHS
2-1 City of Bemidji' s WWTP 2-4
vi
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Page
2-1 Estimated wastewater contributions
by class of system user ,.,,.,. , . . . 2-1
2-2 Summary of 1979 operating data for the
wastewater treatment plant ......... r ....ซ -~3
2-3 Summary comparison ot costs for the s:ix vcjst.^water
treatment: alternatives considered in the Braf* KTS . , . . - 2~22
2-4 Comparison of estimated costs for the tertiary
treatment option of Alternative 3 ,.,....- 2--24
2-5 Comparison cf "Alternative 7" with Alternative 3 ... , - - 2-2':>
3-1 Watershed land usage ........', .,,.....ซ. 3-3
3-2 Average yearly flows for points downstream from Bemidji, . . 3-8
3-3 Summary of lake basin morphometry for Lakes
Irving, Stump, Wolf and Andrusia ................ 3-10
3-4 Lake Bemidji morphometry .................. VI3.
3-5 Selected population data for the period 1950-1976 ..... 3-19
3-6 Projected populations for the City of Bemidji .- = .,.- 3-21
3-7 Summary cf year-2000 land requirement for urban
growth in Remidji and surrounding; townships - , , . . . 3-24
3-8 Common municipal debt measures ,,.,... = ,.,..<. 3-26
4-1 Projected water quality conditions for Lake Bemidji. ..... 4-8
4-2 Projected water quality conditions
in the downstream Chain of Lakes .............. '.-1C
4-3 Summary of projected user charges .,..,.. - . 4-14
j-1 Iruk'K to cixnnients on the Draft K1S
and MPCA's Supplement , , . 5-2
VT.1
-------
SUMMARY
1. NiiED FOR ACTION
There is significant need for the City of Bemidji, Minnesota, to improve
the quality of the effluent discharged from its wastewater treatment plant
(WWTP) to the- Upper Mississippi River. The WWTP effluent constitutes the
first major discharge of treated wastewater to the Mississippi River. The
effluent phosphorus contributes to the total loading of phosphorus in Lake
Bemidji and the Upper Mississippi River Chain of Lakes downstream from Bemidji
(Wolf Lake, Lake Andrusia, and Cass Lake, within the Leech Lake Indian Reser-
vation). These lakes are utilized for recreational fishing, swimming, boat-
ing, hunting, and ricing, and are an integral part of the local tourist-based
economy and the Native American culture.
The uncontrolled discharge of phosphorus to the Mississippi River down-
stream from Lake Bemidji during the period from 1956 to June 1978 has con-
tributed significantly to the enrichment of the Chain of Lakes with phos-
phorus. The addition of this critical nutrient has been linked directly to
biologically over-productive conditions in the lakes (accelerated lake eutro-
phication). This condition has had a detrimental effect on the quality and
sport fisheries of these lakes, and has diminished their attractiveness for
water-based recreation. This has affected adversely the areas' recreation-
based economy.
In 1978, the City oฃ Bemidji was required by the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency (MPCA) Board to provide for interim control of phosphorus at
the existing WWTP and to relocate the point of discharge from the Mississippi
River downstream from the Lake Bemidji outlet to the inlet of Lake Bemidji.
This order was based on the Board's decision that the eutrophication problem
should be reduced to the extent possible with interim measures until a new
WWTP with advanced phosphorus removal capability or a land treatment system
could be implemented. The improvement in the quality of the downstream lakes
since these improvements were implemented in June 1978 has been significant,
as evidenced by 1979-1980 water quality data; however, the quality of Lake
Bemidji is being affected adversely.
An exceptionally large number of wastewater system alternatives have been
I nvest Lj',,1 ted during the past twelve years ns potential solutions to the prob-
Leui ol wuutewa ter disposal at. liemldjL. Laud treatment of wastewater has been
considered by many as the best solution because it would eliminate the direct
discharge of effluent to the Upper Mississippi River system. Numerous land
treatment proposals have been developed and considered in detail through at
least five separate search efforts. These searches have identified many
potential sites, some very close to the City and others as distant as 25 to 30
miles. Soil borings and more detailed geotechnical investigations were con-
ducted at a number of the more promising sites. At the conclusion of each
search effort, land treatment has been rejected because of the lack of tech-
nical feasibility, cost effectiveness, or because of unacceptable social
and/or environmental impacts.
Six wastewater treatment system alternatives were considered in the Draft
KIS; these alternatives were determined to represent the most feasible options
,-iv.j i 1 al> )< ID th'' CLty. These alternatives we-re the subject of supplemental
faciLLti.es planning by the City's engineering consultant during 1979 and 1980.
Vlll
-------
2. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED IN THE DRAFT EIS
Publication of the Draft EIS by USEPA and MPCA on 1 August 1980 culmi-
nated over 3 years of the ElS-preparation effort, during which, numerous waste-
water treatment alternatives, especially on-land alternatives, were considered
in detail. The six wastewater treatment system alternatives considered in the
Draft EIS as active proposals for solving Bemidji's wastewater management
problem included five conventional treatment systems and one land treatment
system. For each conventional alternative, two phosphorus treatment options
were addressed: advanced-secondary treatment to reduce the effluent phosphorus
concentration to l.C rug/1, and a tertiary treatment option that would reduce
the effluent phosphorus concentration to 0.3 mg/1.
Alternative 1 proposed the construction of a new 2.0 million gallon per
day (mgd) WWTP at a site presently owned by the City adjacent to the Missis-
sippi River east of Lake Bemidji (about 2,000 feet downstream from the Lake
Bemidji outlet). This alternative had an estimated capital cost of
$11,374,000 for the advanced-secondary treatment option and $14,303,000 for
the tertiary option (all costs are in 1980 dollars). The respective annual
O&M costs were estimated to be $431,000 and $539,000. This alternative ranked
second of the six alternatives in terms of lowest cost.
Alternative 2 proposed the construction of a new 2.0 mgd WWTP at the site
of the existing WWTP in BemidjL. The effluent would be pumped via a new force
main to the Mississippi River immediately downstream from the Lake Bemidji
outlet for discharge. The capital cost for the advanced-secondary option was
estimated to be $11,649,000, and was $14,578,000 for the tertiary option. The
annual O&M costs were estimated to be $437,000 and $545,000, respectively,
This alternative ranked third in cost of the six alternatives.
Alternative 3 proposed the construction of a new 2.0 mgd WWTP at the site
of the existing WWTP in Bemidji. Discharge would be directly to the Missis-
sippi River inlet channel to Lake Bemidji adjacent to the plant site. The
estimated capital cost for the advanced-secondary option was $9,975,000, and
was $12,904,000 for the tertiary option. The annual 06-M costs were $417,000
and $525,000, respectively. This alternative was the lowest in cost of the
six alternatives.
Alternative 4 proposed the construction of a new 2.0 mgd WWTP at the site
of the existing WWTP in Bemidji, with effluent pumped via a new force main to
Grass Lake, northwest of Bemidji, for discharge.. The capital cost of the
advanced-secondary option for this fifth most expensive alternative was esti-
mated to be $13,290,000, and was $16,219,000 for the tertiary option, and the
respective annual O&M costs were $492,000 and $600,000.
Altern.itIv1- 5 proposed the construction of a new 2.0 mjd WWTP at a site
adjacent to Grass Lake with effluent discharged directly to the Lake. The
estimated capital cost for the advanced-secondary treatment option was
$12,932,000, and was $15,861,000 for the tertiary option. The estimated
annual O&M costs for the two options were $492,000 and $600,000. This alter-
native ranked fourth of the six in terms of lowest cost.
ix
-------
Alternative 6 proposed that the raw wastewater would receive preliminary
treatment at a new pumping station at the site of the existing WWTP. From
there it would be pumped via a new force main to treatment/storage ponds in
Section 16 of Eckles Township northwest .of Bemidji. The preliminary design
included multi-celled aerated ponds that would provide the equivalent of
secondary treatment. Pond effluent would be applied to 1,170 acres of forest
land via a solid-set irrigation system and to 250 acres of cropland with a
center-pivot irrigation system. The maximum application rate to forest lands
would be 24 inches/year at the 2.0 mgd design flow; cropland irrigation would
be on an "as needed" basis. Underdrainage would be required, which would be
collected and discharged into open ditches. The ditches would be excavated to
convey underdrainage to established waterways. The estimated capital cost for
this alternative was $24,457,000, which was significantly higher than any of
the other alternatives. The projected annual O&M cost was $612,000.
Thus, of the six alternatives, Alternative 3 was selected as the most
cost effective. It also is the alternative that would have the least poten-
tial for significant, adverse construction and operational phase impacts.
Therefore, Alternative 3 was proposed as the selected action in the Draft EIS.
3. RESPONSE TO DRAFT EIS
Considerable public response was received by USEPA and MPCA on the Draft
EIS, both in writing and through testimony at the Public Hearing on the Draft
EIS on 11 September 1980 at Bemidji. Despite the number of land treatment
proposals studied and rejected in the past, significant issue was taken by
downstream interests concerning the absence of a feasible agricultural waste-
water irrigation alternative and the lack of discussion of the economic bene-
fits of clean water downstream in the Draft EIS.
The City proposed an "Alternative 7" concept, which was to have been a
viable, on-land alternative east of Bemidji, to be developed instead of Alter-
native 3. While there was considerable support for the inclusion of Alterna-
tive 7 in the Final EIS, there also was significant criticism expressed at the
potential to delay further the EIS process and the implementation of a solu-
tion by considering yet another land treatment proposal. Residents of Frohn
Township, where "Alternative 7" was to be located, especially were vocal in
their opposition to the proposal.
In response to what was viewed as deficient in its own Draft EIS, MPCA
published a Supplement on 15 December 1980 that addressed the cost for con-
struction and O&M of a new tertiary WWTP, the cost to users, the economic
benefit to the downstream recreation-based economy from improved water qual-
ity, and an alternative projection of water quality, with considerable empha-
sis on the projection of degradation of Lake Bemidji. The City, during the
same period, proceeded to develop further its "Alternative 7" proposal with
the assistance of engineering consultants. They concluded, as previous
studies of the same site areas had, that because of site limitations (i.e.,
poorly suited soils and high water table), that cropland irrigation could not
be accomplished in a cost-effective manner. Only low rates of application are
suitable because of the glacial till in Frohn Township. Because the short
growing season at Bemidji limits the application season, wastewater must be
stored during an extended period (at least 7 months), requiring too much land
-------
for irrigation during suitable conditions. Similarly, the costs estimated by
the City's consultants for cropland irrigation at the site in Eckles Township
considered for forest irrigation in Alternative 6, and the Maple Ridge site
about 25 miles north of Bemidji, are much higher than that for the tertiary
treatment option of Alternative 3.
4. FINAL EIS SELECTED ACTION
Based on the response to the Draft EIS and the additional information and
refinement of existing information presented in MPCA's Supplement, it appears
that the construction of new tertiary wastewater treatment facilities at the
site of the existing WWTP is the most cost effective and environmentally satis-
factory solution to the wastewater management problem at Bemidji. MPCA's re-
vised construction cost for the new plant, which will be capable of attaining
an effluent phosphorus level of 0.3 mg/1 prior to discharge to the Mississippi
River between Lakes Irving and Bemidji, is $11,945,000 (1980 dollars). The
local share of the construction cost will be about $1,900,000. The revised
annual O&M cost, as estimated by MPCA, is $362,000. The total present worth
cost, therefore, is $15,000,000, and the total equivalent annual cost is
$1,430,000.
The 0.3 mg/1 effluent phosphorus level will preclude acceleration of
nutrient enrichment of Lake Bemidji, and will provide the maximum practicable
protection for the downstream Chain of Lakes. Protection of the surface water
resource is essential to maintaining the water-based tourism economy of the
area, and the economic and cultural values of the native Chippewa people. A
final decision concerning the selected action and the effluent phosphorus
standard will be made following the completion of the EIS process and will be
reflected in the Record of Decision.
5. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF SELECTED ACTION
Construction Phase
Major direct impacts from the construction of the new tertiary WWTP at
the site of the existing WWTP primarily will be localized to the treatment
plant site. Noise, fugitive dust, emissions from construction equipment,
destruction of surface vegetation, erosion and runoff, and the occassional
interruption of traffic flow that would be associated with construction activ-
ity will create short-term nuisance conditions in the area adjacent to the
construction work. Additional site survey work will determine whether any
significant archaeological resources are present and will recommend mitigation
measures, which may include salvaging artifacts.
The 2.0 mgd design capacity of the new plant will provide for consider-
able growth in the Bemidji service area. The expenditure of nearly $12 mil-
lion of public capital for construction will provide a direct economic stimu-
lus and will induce secondary income and expenditures, while precluding the
use of the funds for alternative public purposes. Local income and earnings in
the local construction sector will be increased, as they will in several
sectors of the regional economy. Over 100 short-term construction related
jobs will be created during the 1982 and 1983 construction seasons, with an
accompanying, but unquantifiable, increase in the number of local indirect
jobs. In addition, an unquantifiable amount of construction materials, fuel
and other energy resources, and manufactured electrical, mechanical, and other
xi
-------
specialised equipment will hp irretrievably committed. The site will be
re-committed to use for wastewater treatment for at least the 40- to 50-year
life of the facilities.
Operational Phase
The most significant operational phase effects are related to the level
of phosphorus loading reduction attainable in Lake Heraldji and the downstream
Chain of Lakes, and the cost to system users for treatment system operation.
By Uniting the WWTP effluent phosphorus concentration to 0.3 mg/1, the high
quality of the waters of Lake Bemidji will be preserved and the maximum prac-
tical reduction in phosphorus loadings to the Chain of Lakes will be attained.
This will provide for a reversal of the trend towards advanced eutrophication
in these lakes that was initiated in 1956 when the City began discharging
effluent directly to the Upper Mississippi River downstream of Lake Bemidji.
Federal regulations require that users of municipal wastewater treatment
facilities constructed with Federal funds through the National Construction
Grants Program pay user charges in proportion to their use of the system.
Therefore, the City of Bemidji must convert its existing inverted rate struc-
ture to a proportionate cost system. Once the new treatment plant is opera-
tional, users must pay for both the annual O&M cost and the retirement of the
estLnated $1.9 million construction debt. Although these costs are expected
to be significantly higher than current OSul costs for the existing WWTP,
resident Lai user charges are projected to remain at about the current level
(because of the conversion of the rate structure). Commercial users, including
the University, however, are projected to pay considerably higher user costs
for wastewater service in the future.
The operation of the tertiary WWTP will generate an estimated 640 tons
(dry basis) of sludge per year. The sludge will be disposed on agricultural
land in Bemidji Township (a total of 340 acres on four quarter section sites),
No significant adverse effects are anticipated, providing that the disposal
operations are conducted according to established MPCA guidelines and the
Sludge Diposal Plan.
xii
-------
1.0. PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION
1.1. Introduction and Legal Basis for Action
The Upper Mississippi River flows through Bemidji, Minnesota, approxi-
mately 55 meandering river-miles (22 air-miles) downstream from its source at
Lake Itasca. The effluent from the wastewater treatment plant serving Bemidji
constitutes the first significant discharge of wastewater to the Mississippi
River in its 2,348-mile course to the Gulf of Mexico. The effluent has con-
tributed to the degradation of downstream water quality in the River system.
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) notified the City of Be-
midji in 1968 of the need to upgrade the quality of the effluent, that was
discharged from its wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) to the Mississippi
River. Twelve years later, a final solution to the problem of reducing the
pollutant loadings to the economically and culturally significant Upper Mis-
sissippi River Chain of Lakes downstream from Bemidji (Wolf Lake, Lake Andru-
sia, and Cass Lake, within the Leech Lake Indian Reservation, Figure 1-1)
still is being sought. This Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) addresses
the numerous alternative wastewater treatment systems that have been proposed
and those that currently are considered to be the most feasible options for
the City of Bemidji.
The existing wastewater treatment system at Bemidji is old, deteriorated,
and hydraulically overloaded. The WWTP is incapable of meeting the effluent
limitations required by the State of Minnesota to achieve improved water
quality in the Mississippi River and the Chain of Lakes. The City installed
an interim phosphorus control system at the WWTP during 1978 that effectively
reduced the average phosphorus level in the effluent from over 7.0 mg/1 to
about 1.3 mg/1. The location of the effluent discharge also was changed in
1978 from the Mississippi River immediately downstream from Lake Bemidji to
the inlet channel to Lake Bemidji. These short-term actions have reduced
significantly phosphorus loadings from the City's effluent to the downstream
Chain of Lakes while increasing somewhat the phosphorus contribution to Lake
Bemidji. A new, permanent system to treat Bemidji's wastewater is needed.
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (FWPCA, Public Law 92-
500), as amended in 1977 by the Clean Water Act (CWA, Public Law 95-217),
establishes a uniform, nationwide water pollution control program within which
all water quality programs operate. The MPCA administers this program in
Minnesota, although the US Environmental Protection Agency CUSEPA) retains
approval and supervisory control.
Minnesota was required by the Federal law to establish water quality
standards for lakes and streams and effluent standards for discharge to them.
Federal law stipulates that, at a minimum, discharges must meet secondary
treatment requirements. In some cases even stricter effluent standards are
necessary to preserve water quality. State Water Quality standards are sub-
ject to USEPA approval and must conform to Federal guidelines.
Federal funding for wastewater treatment projects is provided under Sec-
tion 201 of the CWA. The Act provides 75% Federal funding for eligible plan-
ning, design, and construction costs. Portions of projects that are defined
as innovative or alternative are eligible for 85% funding under the CWA.
1-1
-------
-------
The disbursement of Federal funds is made to local applicants via the Na-
tional Municipal Wastewater Treatment Works Construction Grants Program which
is administered by USEPA. The program consists of a three-step grant process:
Step 1 includes wastewater facilities planning; Step 2 involves the develop-
ment of detailed engineering plans and specifications; and Step 3 covers
construction of the pollution control system. The Bemidji project currently
is in Step 1, which involves planning for wastewater facilities that will be
serviceable for at least 20 years, or until the year 2000.
The State of Minnesota, through the MPCA, administers the Federal Con-
struction Grants Program at the State level. The State also provides an
additional 15% of the costs for planning, design, and construction, except
where the Federal share is larger than 75%. In such a case, the State's share
is reduced. because Federal grant regulations are, for the most part, the
controlling factor in determining the selected (fundable) alternative, they
significantly influence how the State grant funds are spent.
Communities may choose to construct wastewater treatment facilities
without financial support from the USEPA/State Grants Program. In such cases,
the only requirements are that the design be technically sound and that the
MPCA is satisfied the facility will meet discharge standards.
If a community chooses to construct a wastewater treatment plant with
USEPA grant assistance, the project must meet all requirements of the Grants
Program. The CWA stresses that the most cost-effective alternative be identi-
fied and selected. USEPA defines the cost-effective alternative as the one
that will result in minimum total resource costs over the life of the project,
yet meet Federal, State, and local requirements. However, the cost-effective
alternative is not necessarily the lowest cost proposal. The analysis for
choosing the cost-effective alternative is based on both the capital construc-
tion costs and the operation and maintenance costs for a 20-year period,
although only the capital costs are funded. Social, environmental, and other
resource costs also must be factored into the cost-effectiveness decision.
A new wastewater treatment facility also is subject to the requirements
of Section 402 of the FWPCA, which established the National Pollutant Dis-
charge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program. Under the NPDES regula-
tions, all wastewater discharges to surface waters require an NPDES permit and
must meet the effluent standards identified in the permit. The USEPA has
delegated authority to establish effluent standards and to issue discharge
permits to the MPCA. The USEPA, however, maintains review authority.
The Natlo-idl Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) requires a Federal
agency tu prepare an EIS on "...major Federal actions significantly affecting
the quality oฃ the human environment ...". In addition, the Council on Envi-
ronmental Quality (CEQ) published regulations (40 CFR Parts 1500-1508) to
guide Federal agencies in determinations of whether Federal funds, such as
those that may be committed to the Bemidji project through the Construction
Grants Program, or Federal approvals, would result in a project that would
significantly affect the environment. USEPA developed its own regulations (40
CFR Part 6) for the imp le men tat ion of the EIS process. Pursuant to these
regulations, USEPA Region V determined that an EIS was required for the pro-
posed project at Bemidji before grants, or approvals, for Step 2 and Step 3
1-3
-------
could be made. USEPA's Notice of Intent to Prepare an EIS was issued on 30
March 1977. A Draft EIS was published by USEPA on 1 August 1980 and a hearing
to receive comments on the document was conducted on 11 September 1980.
The MPCA also determined that an KtS should be prepared for this project
under the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act of 1973 (6 MCAR Section 3) prior
to the approval of design and construction funds and the finalization of an
NPDES permit. This EIS, therefore, serves both as a Federal and a State
document. The MPCA also published a supplement to the Draft EIS on 15 Decem-
ber 1980 addressing the cost for advanced phosphorus removal, user charges,
water quality, and economic benefits of clean water. A public meeting on the
supplement was conducted at Bemidji on 15 January 1981.
1.2. Project History
The following chronological list highlights the major eveats in the
evolution of the wastewater treatment alternatives discussed herein, with
emphasis on recent events (based on Stewart & Walker (1973) and supplemental
information):
Time Period
October 1968
January 1969
July 1970
June 1971
November 1971
January 1972
January 1972
June L972
Event
MPCA notified City of Bemidji that WWTP effluent
quality must be improved (reduction of BOD from
50 to 25 nig/1 and phosphorus from 15 to 1 mg/1)
MPCA notified City that WWTP effluent must
comply with US Department of the Interior (USDI)
Interstate Water Quality Standards
MPCA held public hearing to establish effluent
standards
City served with Order to Abate Pollution by
State, which established a compliance schedule
for construction of a new WWTP by May 1973 to
meet effluent quality of 25 mg/1 BOD, 30 mg/1
suspended solids, 1.0 mg/1 phosphorus
Lawsuit filed against City under Minnesota
Environmental Rights Act by Dr. Ludwig claiming
WWTP effluent was violating water quality
standards
MPCA sought injunction to require CLty to con-
struct a new WWTP capable of meeting proposed
effluent standards
City filed Preliminary Engineering Report with
MPCA that recommended land treatment of waste-
water
City filed grant application with MPCA and USEPA
1-4
-------
Time Period
Event
September 1972
September 1972
October 1972
November 1972
April 1973
October 1973
December 1973
December 1975
December 1975
July 1976
November 1976
January 1977
January 1977
City filed Supplemental Engineering Report with
MPCA
MPCA held public meeting at Bemidji to discuss
land treatment system and to receive comments
FWPCA passed into law, establishing Wastewater
Treatment Works Construction Grants Program
MPCA Board determined that proposed land treat-
ment was not implementable socially and that a
conventional treatment plant with phosphorus
removal would be required if a non-controversial
land treatment site could not be found within 90
days
City ordered to construct a new conventional
WWTP
City and State stipulation settlement of January
1972 enforcement action: Preliminary Report due
December 1973; Plans and Specifications due 1
December 1974; Construction to commence when
grant funds become available
City files Facilities Plan (Stewart & Walker
1973) with MPCA that addresses construction of a
bio-disc secondary plant with chemical phos-
phorus removal
MPCA certifies Facilities Plan to USEPA that
proposed construction of a new conventional WWTP
at site adjacent to Mississippi River downstream
from Lake Bemidji outlet
City obtains deed to 73-acre site for a conven-
tional treatment plant adjacent to Mississippi
River downstream from Lake Bemidji outlet
City requests and receives authorization from
MPCA to re-evaluate land treatment alternative
City files Facilities Plan Supplement (Stewart &
Walker and others 1976) that proposes a land
treatment alternative in Eckles Township
MPCA recommends to USEPA the preparation of an
EIS on the project
City of Bemidji applies to MPCA for reissuance
of NPDES permit to discharge effluent to Missis-
sippi River
1-5
-------
Time Period
March 1977
October 1977
December 1977
February 1978
February 1973
June 19/8
June
July-September 1978
December 1978
February 1979
June 1979
Event
USEPA issues Notice of Intent to Prepare an EIS
on the project and contracts with WAPORA, Inc.,
to assist in its preparation
Public hearings at Bemidji and Cass Lake con-
cerning reissuance of NPDES permit for discharge
by Bemidji WWTP
Publication of DEIS suspended to allow for
further detailed investigation of potential for
a land treatment alternative
Revised plan developed by USEPA Cor investi-
gation of additional land treatment alternatives
Based on State Hearing Examiner's Report, the
MPCA Board determines that it will reissue
City's NPDES permit and requires that interim
control of phosphorus be implemented and that
the point of discharge be moved from Mississippi
River to inlet channel to Lake Bemidji adjacent
to WWTP site (original discharge location) by 1
June 1978
WWTP discharge is changed from Mississippi River
downstream from Lake Bemidji to Lake inlet
channel adjacent to WWTP .^rui tnte.rim phosphorus
control facilities become operational
Completion of Land treatment site selection
process; site investigations delayed because
access to several sites was refused
MPCA initiates court action to obtain access to
private property for site suitability investiga-
tions by WAPORA
Final report on field investigations at poten-
tial land treatment sites completed
Meeting of City, its engineering consultant
(RCM), MPCA, USEPA, and WAPORA establishes final
work tasks to complete engineering and environ-
mental studies for the project
City officials express concerns about population
and flow projections to agency officials and
legislators in Washington DC
1-6
-------
Time Per LoJ
Event
August 1979
October 1979
December 1979
March 1980
Hay 1980
July 1980
1 August 1980
11 September 1980
16 September 1980
15 October 1980
29 October 1980
4 November 1980
1 December 1980
City Council evaluates five proposals for co-
operative, cropland wastewater application
alternatives from local farmers; City selects
"Cronemiller" site in Eckles Township
City develops optional land treatment proposal
involving State of Minnesota and tax forfeited
lands to supplement Cronemiller property when
other landowners withdrew interest
Suitability assessment of site completed by
WAPORA; forest or cropland irrigation considered
technically feasible
City's engineering consultant, RCM, completes
Facilities Plan Supplement outlining five ter-
tiary treatment alternatives and a land treat-
ment alternative
Preliminary Draft EIS completed
City proposes more study of agricultural irriga-
tion east of Bemidji in Frohn Township
Draft EIS published and circulated for comment
Public hearing on Draft EIS conducted at Bemidji
At meeting between MPCA staff and City of Be-
midji, City indicates that area east of Bemidji
(Frohn Township) is not technically suitable for
irrigation of effluent; further study of Eckles
Township proposed by City
At meeting between MPCA staff and City of Be-
midji, City indicates that Eckles Township does
not appear technically feasible for irrigation;
bog storage and cropland irrigation in Maple
Ridge Township is proposed by City
MPCA staff respond to City's Maple Ridge pro-
posal by questioning the City's conclusion that
Maple Ridge is cost effective
City submitted new costs for Maple Ridge pro-
posal; USEPA rejects further land application
study
City Council passes resolution to request fund-
ing for additional on-land treatment studies in
Maple Ridge area
1-7
-------
Time Period
4 December 1980
12 December 1980
15 December 1980
16 December 1980
Event
19 December 1980
7 January 1981
IS January 1981
2 February 1981
4 February 1981
17 February 1981
MPCA staff sends letter to City indicating that
they cannot justify supporting the Maple Ridge
proposal
USEPA reiterates position of
further study of Maple Ridge
not supporting
Supplement to Draft EIS issued by MPCA
Maple Ridge area farmers present discussion on
Maple Ridge alternative to MPCA Board:; the Board
directs MPCA staff to provide additional infor-
mation; special Board Information Meeting on
Bemidji project scheduled for 7 January 1981
City Council votes not to participate in any
additional studies that will delay EIS; resolves
to construct a conventional plant at the exist-
ing site; takes position that 1.0 mg/1 phos-
phorus standard is fair unless more stringent
standard will "not place an onerous and unfair
burden on the citizens of Bemidji"
MPCA staff present detailed
Bemidji project to MPCA Board
information on
Public Meeting at Bemidji on MPCA's supplement
to Draft K1S; concerns about Maple Ridge alter-
native expressed by public
City Council passes resolution urging quick
completion of EIS and desire for inclusion in
EIS of sludge management concerns
Public comment period closes on Draft EIS and
MPCA's supplement to the Draft EIS
Bemidji City Council votes to support 0.3 mg/1
effluent phosphorus standard.
In summary, the period of time since MPCA first notified the City of
BemidjL in 1968 to clean up its effluent has been characterized by cyclical
decisionmakin^ as the City, the MPCA, and USEPA have searched for a cost-
effective, environmentally suitable, and socially acceptable solution to the
wastewater discharge problem. The time span has been marked by no less than
fiv/e independent attempts (1972, 1976, 1978, 1979, and 1980) to find a land
treatment wastewater disposal alternative, to eliminate the discharge of waste-
water effluent to the Upper Mississippi River. It also has seen law suits
filed against the City by a private citizen (Dr. Ludwig) and by the State of
Minnesota. The Ludwig suit later was dismissed by the District Court and the
State suit resulted in a stipulation agreement whereby the City was ordered to
construct a new WWTP that would be capable of reducing effluent phosphorus to
1 ing/1. The State also invoked local action against several rural residents
1-8
-------
in 1978 to obtain access to private property for geotechnical investigations
at potential land treatment sites in Grant Valley Township.
The first three years lapsed while a reasonable-cost approach to elimi-
nate phosphorus from the discharge was being considered by the City and while
the Federal-State legislation establishing the Construction Grants Program was
being finalized. By waiting until 1972 to apply for a grant, the City quali-
fied to receive grants totaling 90% (75% Federal, 15% State) of the planning,
design, and construction costs, as compared to the 30% Federal funding that
was available in 1969 (Stewart & Walker 1973).
The City's proposal of 1972 to acquire 1,600 acres to operate a land
treatment system was deemed to be socially unacceptable by the MPCA Board in
April 1973. The City proceeded to have its engineer complete planning reports
for a conventional treatment plant with phosphorus removal, as stipulated by a
court settlement, during 1973.
During the time from the completion of the initial Facilities Plan in
December 1973 to 1976, the City, MPCA, USEPA, and concerned citizens pursued a
re-evaluation of the potential for land treatment of wastewater,, A Facilities
Plan Supplement was completed by the City's consulting engineers in November
1976 that addressed a land treatment alternative on publicly-controlled lands
in Eckles Township. Because of uncertainties about the environmental effects
of land treatment, doubts concerning the accuracy of population and flow
projections, questions about the ability of the existing WWTP to be upgraded
and project costs, and the controversial nature of the selection of a fundable
wastewater treatment solution, USEPA and MPCA opted to prepare an EIS on the
project. The EIS process has spanned four years and has been the principal
mechanism through which additional alternatives have been explored, contro-
versial aspects have been resolved, and technically and socially feasible
alternatives have been identified and evaluated.
The MPCA Board ordered that the location of the WWTP discharge be moved
from the Mississippi River downstream from Lake Bemidji to the inlet channel
to Lake Bemidji and the installation of interim phosphosus control facilities
at the existing plant to achieve reduction in phosphorus loadings to the lakes
while the EIS was being completed. These measures were implemented in June
1978 and have served to improve the quality of the Chain of Lakes downstream
from Lake Bemidji. This EIS presents alternative solutions to the long-term
need for a reliable wastewater treatment system, and the relative environmen-
tal and socioeconomic benefits and costs associated with such solutions.
1.3. EIS Process
Major work on the preparation of the Draft EIS by USEPA's ECS Contractor,
WAPORA, Inc., commenced in April 1977. The following identifies the various
interim reports prepared by WAPORA that were submitted for review to the
Bemidji Citizens Evaluation Committee (later referred to as the Citizens
Advisory Committee), as well as several proposals that provided rationale for
changes in the scope of the EIS:
Submittal Date Title
15 June 1977 Existing Environmental Conditions in the Bemidji
Project Area (WAPORA 1977a)
1-9
-------
Submittal Date
Title
14 October 1977
18 October 1977
18 November 1977
(This report was never
circulated for review
because of USEPA/MPCA
decisions to pursue ad-
ditional alternatives)
10 February 1978
(Revised 24 April 1978)
9 June 1978
Alternatives: Development and Screening for the
City of Bemidji Wastewater Treatment Facilities
(WAPORA 1977b)
Impacts of Component Options and System Alterna-
tives for the City of Bemidji Wastewater Treat-
ment Facilities (WAPORA 1977c)
Proposed Actions and Their Impacts
(Preliminary Draft, WAPORA 1977d)
Proposal to Complete the Environmental State-
ment on the Proposed Wastewater Treatment
Facilities at Bemidji, Minnesota (WAPORA 1978a)
Sites Exhibiting Potential Suitability for Land
Treatment of Wastewater Near the City of
Bemidji, Minnesota (Task 1.0 Report; WAPORA
1978b)
14 December 1978
22 December 1978
Report on Preliminary Field Investigations at
Potential Land Treatment Sites Near the City of
Bemidji, Minnesota (Task 2.0 Report; WAPORA
1978c)
Interim Report of Costs for Alternative Waste-
water Treatment Systems at Bemidji, Minnesota
(Memorandum)
15 May 1979
14 December 1979
(Revised 16 January 1980)
16 May 1980
11 July 1980
Revised Plan of Study to Complete the Envi-
ronmental Statement on the Proposed Wastewater
Treatment Facilities at Bemidji, Minnesota
(WAPORA 1979a)
Preliminary Assessment of the Suitability of
Land Treatment of Wastewater at a Proposed Site
in Eckles Township (WAPORA 1979b)
Preliminary Draft Environmental Statement on
Proposed Wastewater Treatment Facilities at
Bemidji, Minnesota (WAPORA 1980a)
Draft Environmental Statement on Proposed Waste-
water Treatment Facilities at Bemidji, Minnesota
(WAPORA 1980b)
1-10
-------
The City of Bemidji contracted with Rieke Carrol Muller Associates, Inc.
(RCM), to prepare supplemental engineering information to interface with the
preparation of the Draft EIS. The various interim reports prepared by RCM
were:
Subinittal Date Title
18 July 1979 Development of Design Flows Working Paper
(Task 1; RCM 1979a)
10 August 1979 Evaluation of Alternate Phosphorus Removal
Methods Working Paper (Task 2; RCM 1979b)
December 1979 Evaluation of Sanitary Sewer System (Task 3)
and Determination of a Lake Irving Treatment
Plant Site (Task 4) (RCM 1979c)
27 March 1980 Preliminary Development and Cost Estimates of
Selected Wastewater Management Alternatives
(Task 5; RCM 1980)
RCM's "Task 5" Report presents the preliminary design and costs for the six
wastewater treatment alternatives addressed in detail in the Draft EIS.
The Draft EIS on the Bemidji Wastewater Treatment System was published
jointly by USEPA and MPCA on 1 August 1980. The Draft EIS culminated 3.5
years of research, field investigations, meetings, interim reports, and deci-
sion making. A Public Hearing was conducted by USEPA and MPCA on 11 September
198U to receive comment on the Draft EIS. On 15 December 1980, MPCA published
j supplement to the Draft EIS (MPCA 1980b; Part II of this EIS), reflecting
new information and refinement of issue-oriented discussions presented in the
Draft EIS. A Public Meeting was conducted on 15 January 1981 by MPCA to
receive comments on the supplemental information. The official public comment
period on the Draft EIS (and MPCA's Supplement) closed on 4 February 1981.
An active public participation program has been conducted throughout the
EIS process. A 22-member Citizens Evaluation (Advisory) Committee was estab-
lished at the outsat, and has continued to meet throughout the 4year period,
Numerous public meetings have been conducted to inform the citizens of the
Bemidji area of progress and interim findings, and to solicit comments and
suggestions. Issues raised by the Committee, other interested citizens, and
various j;<>veriunental agencies were summarized in Section. 1.4 of the Draft EIS,
1.4. Summary of Comments on Draft EIS and Supplement to Draft EIS
Public response to the Draft EIS has been significant. The magnitude of
the response (213 individual items of written response, 75 presentations at
the 11 September 1980 Public Hearing, and 32 presentations at the 15 January
1981 Public Meeting) attests to the highly controversial nature of the project
(see Section 3.2.6.) and to the effectiveness of the EIS public involvement
process. The majority of the responses were statements of opinion and/or
positions, either in opposition to on-land treatment alternatives, or in favor
of land application of wastewater as a means to eliminate the discharge 01
1-11
-------
wastewater to the Upper Mississippi River, thus providing maximum protection
for the downstream Chain of Lakes.
There was a considerable expression of interest voiced at the Hearing by
Bemidji residents and the downstream community (MC-MG, Leech Lake Business
Committee, Leach Lake Reservation Tribal Councils, resort owners and visitors,
and residents of Cass Lake) in having an "Alternative 7" considered in the
Final ELS. "Alternatu/e 7" was another agricultural irrigation system pro-
posal for the area east of Bemidji, which would eliminate the discharge of
effluent to the Mississippi River. Shortly before the Hearing, the City had
expressed publicly that such an alternative was feasible and less costly than
Alternative 3, the Draft EIS selected alternative. Additional study of the
proposal by the City and its consultants, however, failed to produce such a
system, either in Frohn Township, Eckles Township, or in the Maple Ridge-
ALislca-Ncbish Townships area.
Cons iderable opposition also was expressed .it the Hearing regarding the
"Alternative 7" concept, especially by Frohn Township residents. The Minne-
sota Department of Natural Resources, Eckles Township Board, MN-1PINE, Inc.,
and numerous residents of the area northwest of Bemidji presented concerns
about Alternative 6 proposed in the Draft EIS, a forest land wastewater irri-
gation project on public lands in Eckles Township, and about "Alternative 7."
Thus, positions on the various alternatives have remained polarized.
MPCA published a supplement, to the Draft EIS (reprinted in Part II of
this document) on 15 December 1980. The Supplement addressed their concerns
about the protectLon of downstream water quality, the incremental costs for
phosphorus removal at a new conventional WWTP, the economic benefits related
to increased water quality, and the estimation of future residential user
charges. Comments on MPCA's Supplement were heard at the 15 January 1981
Public Meeting. The Leech Lake Reservation Business Committee subsequently
provided comments on the water quality and economic aspects of the MPCA docu-
ment, especially concerning the economic and cultural significance of the
annual wild rice harvest within the Reservation, and the Importance of good
water quality to tho maintenance of their local economy -ind culture.
The City of Semidji strongly criticized the selection of the existing
WWTP as the site for a new plant (Alternative 3) at the Hearing, and recom-
mended instead "Alternative 7." The lack of a feasible land treatment site,
and the lack of a suitable alternative site for a new conventional WWTP,
however, forced the City into their present position of supporting a new
tertiary WWTP at the existing WWTP site.
The majority of respondents, regardless of taeir position, are unified in
their desire to see a speedy resolution to the more than 12-year-old problem.
As stated by one respondent:
As taxpayers and 13-year residents of Bemidji, we are appalled at
the on-going sewage extravaganza which appears to resemble the
skirmishes of the historic 100-Years War.
The same individuals pointed out anther widely-shared opinion, "The search for
a solution has become a problem unto itself." This reflects on the project-
1-12
-------
related issues which have, over the years, pitted rural neighbors against each
other, and Bemidji residents and residents of the area downstream of Bemidji
against rural residents surrounding Bemidji.
Section 5.0. presents a detailed discussion of the pertinent comments on
the DraCt ELS and MPCA.'s Supplement. All written responses are reproduced in
Part 1[ of this document.
1-13
-------
2.0. DISCUSSION OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES
2.1. Existing WastewaLer Conveyance and Treatment System
2.1.1. Existing Service Area
Approximately 90% of the population of Bemidji currently is served by
sanitary sewers, including 350 connections to the sewer system that are not
connected to the City's water system. (The service area is outlined on a map
in Appendix A of the Draft E1S.) As of 30 October 1980, there were 2,088
residential and 429 commercial connections to the system, including 30 connec-
tions that serve Bemidji State University (2,517 total; MPCA 1980). The
commercial users include numerous restaurants and motels (505 motel rooms that
can accommodate 1,362 persons) that serve the summer-season influx of tour-
ists, as well as residents from the Bemidji region (Personal communication,
Mr. Don Dougherty, City Manager, to WAPORA, Inc., 27 January 1979). The
ch.ir.ir.Ler Lsl Ic.s of the w.isl.ewa Ler collection system are described in Section
2.I.L. ot the Draft KLS.
2.1.2. Flows
The quantity of wastewater conveyed by the sanitary sewer system and
treated at the WWTP has been the subject of considerable debate during the
past several years. From 1976 through Spring 1978, the wastewater flow meter-
ing equipment at the WWTP was gradually failing, which resulted in much con-
fusion about the actual flow rates. The flow meter during that period probab-
ly was underestimating the flow by 200,000 gallons per day (gpd), and thus the
flow records for that period are not reliable. A new flow meter was installed
on 16 May 1978.
The average daily flow for the 12-month period following the installation
of the new flowmeter was 1.25 million gallons per day (mgd). The ratio of
maximum monthly flow to average monthly flow for that period was 1.22 (RCM
1979a). A peak-day flow of 1.895 mgd occurred on 2 July 1978, the Sunday of
the Fourth of July weekend (peak summer tourist season). Estimated flow
contributions from various classes of users, as presented in flPCA (1980), are
displayed in Table 2-1. These estimates are based on City water billings
because wastewater flow is not metered for each user. The per capita resi-
dential Elow is about 70 gallons/capita/day (gpcd) (MPCA 1980b).
Table 2-1. Estimated wastewater contributions by class of system user (de-
rived from water billing records; MPCA 1980b).
User Class Flow (mgd) % of Total
Residential 0.379 41.8
Commercial
Motels 0.052
Bemidji State University 0.129
Other 0.346
0.906
Infiltration/Inflow 0.28
Total Flow 1.19
2-1
-------
2.1.3. Existing Treatment and Effluent Disposal System
The existing wastewater treatment plant is located in Bemidji on a narrow
strip of land that separates Lake Irving and Lake Bemidji (Figure 2-1 and
Photograph 2-1). This isthmus is a congested commercial, utility, and trans-
portation corridor linking downtown Bemidji (immediately northwest of the WWTP
site) to the Nymore, eastern, and southern sections of the City (RCM 1979c).
The WWTP was constructed in 1934. A major expansion of the plant was
completed in 1956. The remodeled plant includes grit removal equipment, a
comminutor, one primary settling tank, a high-rate trickling filter, two
secondary settling tanks, a chlorination chamber, two anaerobic sludge di-
gestors, sludge drying beds, and a sludge lagoon (RCM 1979c). In 1978 the
City added a chemical foed system (alum and polymer) to facilitate removal of
phosphorus from the wastewater. A tank truck to haul liquid sludge to rural
farmlands for land spreading also was purchased during that year (MPCA 1978) ,
The treatment plant was designed to treat an average flow of 1,320,000
gpd and to reduce the influent BOD level from 225 mg/1 to 50 mg/1 in the
effluent. From 1956 until June 1978, the treated effluent was discharged
directly to the Mississippi River. The effluent was pumped through an 18-inch
reinforced concrete pipe around the south and east sides of Lake Bemidji and
discharged to the Mississippi River about 700 feet downstream from the outlet
of the Lake. Since June 1978 the effluent sewer has been closed, and effluent
now is discharged to Lake Bemidji via the channel between Lake Irving and Lake
Bemidji.
The WWTP has been inspected on a variety of occassions by professional
engineers to evaluate the physical condition and capacity of various units.
An evaluation was made as part of the EIS process to estimate the potential
for and the cost of modifications to the existing plant to comply with efflu-
ent limitations (Clark, Dietz & Associates 1977). The plant also has been
inspected by MPCA personnel as part of their Compliance Monitoring Survey
Program (MPCA 1977, 1978a). These surveys indicate that the facility exhibits
signs of deterioration and obsolescence. The facility also is overloaded
hydrau1ically. A detailed discussion of each of the existing treatment units
Ls presented in Section 2.1.3. of the Draft KIS.
Tr i-atment pLanl operating data tor 1979 are summarized in Table 2-2.
These data represent monthly averages. The reported effluent BOD_, suspended
solids, fecal coliform, and total phosphorus levels met the interim require-
ments of the NPDES effluent discharge permit of 55 mg/1, 40 mg/1, 200 MPN/100
ml, and best practical phosphorus removal, respectively.
The addition of chemicals (alum and polymer) has resulted in a signifi-
cant decrease Ln phosphorus concentration in the effluent (from more than 7
mg/1 prior to June 1978 to an average of about 1.3 mg/1 currently). The
chemicals also appear to have improved the overall treatment plant perform-
ance, as indicated by the reduction in concentration of BOD and suspended
solids in the effluent.
2-2
-------
2-3
-------
Photograph 2-1. City of Bemidji's WWTP.
(Note: View is from access road at First Street
looking south at plant across the Burlington Northern
railroad tracks. Round,1domed structure at right is
the trickling filter; primary clarifiers are inside
one-story building at center; lab is on second floor
of building at left, with garages attached and sludge
digesters at rear. Lake Irving is behind the plant
and the Mississippi River channel between Lakes Irving
and Bemidji is to the right.)
2-t-
-------
t5
>.
4-J
c
o
c
o
a)
03
tC
C
ct)
r-l
rx
4-1
ttf
0)
4-J
a)
4-J
cn
erf
r-i
g
ra
0)
O
Ifl -1-1
13 3
50 T3
S 0)
vH i-H
4-> T-l
to m
VJ
a> en
ex co
o
CO
CT* 4-1
r^ s-i
CT\ O
~+ O,
OJ
*4-4 V-J
o c
o
>, T-l
S 0)
3 a.
C/3 O
,0
CO
H
tt O
O M-l
a) T-I
PM r-1
CJ
D-.
to
3
o,
to
o
o
ca
3
O
O
CO
T3
C
01
ex
to
D
t/)
ac
e
tf
r-l
C
00
00 vO
O
O
O
OO
O
O O
O -i
oo
CXI
CXI
CXI
CO
CNl
ปx| CM ^
ON
CM
10 ON cxi
' crx f
CO CM CXI
10
rO
OJ
o
r^
CM
CM
CXI
o
CO
OO
CXJ
CXI
ON
CO
CO
co
, 1
I
^
^
CO
^J
c
cd
00
CO
CO
O
ON
, I
{?
CO
3
o
0)
rn
LO
co
co
a\
o
CM
f-;
0
M
frt
Is
C^ sD O
r^- uo i^-.
CM ex) CM
!T> O I
CM O ^
CXI CO CM
r-l
r-i a)
J-l K*^ C
CX CO 3
a
a)
O
u~i
ON
CXI
CO
cxi
CM
0)
60
a)
)-i
a)
ฃ>
-------
2.1.4. Existing Sludge Handling and Disposal System
Sludge from the primary clarifier, which consists of both primary and
secondary sludge, is produced at the rate of 3.5 million gallons per year
(equivalent to 612 dry tons per year; KBM 1980). The chemical content is
typical of that produced by domestic WWTPs in that no excessive levels of
heavy metals or other constituents have been measured (Table 2-3 of the Draft
E1S and Table 1 of KBM 1980). The liquid sludge is digested anaerobically in
a two-stage digestor system. Digested liquid sludge is pumped into a 3,000-
gallon tank truck and is spread on land farmed by Mr. Jon Hall just east of
Bemidji (110 acres in the SW^ of Section 13 and 79 acres in the NW^ of Section
24 in Bemidji Township Figure 2-2).
2.2. Identification of Alternative Wastewater Treatment Systems
i\n exceptionally Large number of potential solutions to the wastewater
treatment problem at Bemidji have been considered during the past twelve
years. There appears to be no one solution that will satisfy the goal of
reducing the downstream phosphorus loadings to the maximum extent possible
and, at the same time, not create some level of direct and indirect impact to
various sectors of the human and natural environment.
2.2.1. Design Factors
Since 1971, an effluent phosphorus concentration of 1.0 mg/1 has been the
planning objective for alternatives involving a surface water discharge. The
MPCA staff, however, revised this goal to zero discharge of phosphorus in
January 1978 (By letter, 6 January 1978, from the MPCA Executive Director to
USEPA Regional Administrator):
Present estimates indicate that a discharge from a new or upgraded
Bemidji plant will continue to contribute significantly to the total
phosphorus load of Wolf Lake, Lake Andrusia and Allen's Bay. This
has led us to conclude that any discharge of phosphorus is likely to
cause pollution or impairment of the affected waters by tending to
increase the frequency, intensity, and duration of nuisance algal
conditions. Under these circumstances, the most environmentally
sound approach is to control phosphorus to the fullest practicable
extent and a requirement of no phosphorus discharge for Bemidji
shoald be established In lieu of tVie currently applicable Minnesota
standard of 1 mg/1.
Because no wastewater treatment plant has been designed that can produce
an effluent entirely free of phosphorus, the MPCA and USEPA determined in
February 1979 that the City's engineering consultant, RCM, should evaluate
alternativo phosphorus removal methods. This activity culminated in the
production <>l the "Task 2 Report" (RCM 19/9b). This product was part of RCM's
overall effort to develop supplemental facilities planning information.
Based on the review of RCM's Task 2 Report, MPCA and USEPA staff
concluded that an effluent phosphorus concentration of 0.3 mg/1 appeared to be
2-6
-------
Figure 2-2. Location of existing and proposed sludge disposal sites
in Bemidji Township (after KBM 1980).
-------
the best practical standard that could be met by a new tertiary treatment
plant at Beraidji. RCM, therefore, was directed to utilize the 0.3 rag/1 phos-
phorus standard in the development of preliminary engineering and cost esti-
mares for proposed now conventional treatment systems. '''he design effInert
standard for BOUc is 25 rag/L, 30 rog/1 for suspended solids, aad 200 MPN/100 mi
for fecal coliform, as originally established by MPC.A in 1971. The K?CA will
establish the final standards for effluent discharge through ths approval of
the City's NPDES permit application (expected to be the ssrcie "^ tHฐ design
standards).
The design flow for new treatment facilities also has been controversial
and is an issue that was resolved during the SIS prepare tion process. Th<*
resolution of a design-year population estimate of lh,"iOO (.Section 3.^.2-) and
the installation of the new flow meter in 197^ provided the. basis for the
projection of design flow.
RCM presents a thorough discussion of the basis for a design flow for the
year 2000 at Brmidji in their "Task 1 Report" (1979a). The Task. 1 Report
recommends the following design flow values for new wastewater treatment
facilities:
Average day flow 2.00 mgd
Average day, maximum month ....... 2.30 mgd
Maximum day , 3.40 ingd
Maximum hour ,.......,.. r>.00 ragd
RCM's Task 2 Report (1979b) includes a discussion of current wastewater
characteristics and the loading projections necessary for system design. "CM
reviewed the operating records for the existing treatment plant: and tho, re-
sults of a comprehensive 3-day wastewater survey conducted in July 1970, and
projected the following BOD, suspended solids, and phosphorus for .loadings for
a new treatment facility:
BOD Suspended Solids PbosDhcrjas
Loading Loading Loading
(Ib/day) Ratio .U-^/Aay) Satio l^LL^JL
Annual average L.0 4,000 1.0 4,000 1-0
Average day,
maximum month 1.2 4,800 1.3 5,200 l.j 230
Maximum day 1.8 7,200 2.0 8,000 2,0 35.0
Maximum 4-hour 3.0 12,000 2.6 10.400 2.S 490
2.2.2. System Components;
The development of alternative wastewater management sy.ste.nvi for Re.pi.n'.dji
involved consideration of five principal components:
Flow and waste reduction
Collection system
2-8
-------
Wastewater treatment processes and sites
Effluent disposal methods and discharge locations
Sludge handling and disposal.
These components and the optional technologies or programs available for each
were discussed in detail in Sections 2.3.2.1. through 2.3.2.5. of the Draft
EIS. Presented in the following subsections are summaries of those discus-
sions .
2.2.2.1. Flow and Waste Reduction
Wastewater flow and waste reduction options often can be implemented at a
cost that is relatively lower than the cost of designing additional collection
system or treatment plant capacity and treating the additional flow and load.
As discussed in Section 2.1.2., the existing residential wastewater flow of
about 70 gallons per capita at Bemidji is average and attainment of reductions
in wastewater generated from this user class would be difficult. A signifi-
cant reduction in flow from the commercial sector may be attainable, however.
Two potentially feasible options for reducing flow at Bemidji, which have not
been explored in detail to date, are:
Inflow reduction
Conservation of water used by the commercial sector (including
the University).
Wasteload reduction does not appear to be necessary or easily attainable at
Bemidji because of the absence of industrial flows.
INFLOW REDUCTION
Infiltration is unwanted groundwater that enters the sewer system and
service connections. Water discharged to the sewer system from roof leaders,
foundation drains, basement drains, cross-connections with storm sewers,
manhole covers, or similar sources is termed inflow. Based on an evaluation
of the flow information in 1979, RCM (1979a) concluded, "It is apparent...that
direct inflow enters the Bemidji sanitary sewer system." RCM estimated the
inflow rates for three different days when storms occurred at about 500 gpm,
with an average of 110,000 gallons of inflow each time. No specific sources
of inflow have been identified. Attempts should be made by the City to locate
and eliminate sources of inflow where practical.
CONSERVATION OF WATER
Water conservation as a means of reducing wastewater flows can be diffi-
cult to attain and sometimes is only marginally effective. Traditional water
conservation practices often have proven to be socially undesirable,, except in
areas where water shortages exist. Furthermore, such measures may succeed in
limiting only luxury water usages such as lawn watering, car washing, or
swimming pool use which do not impose loads on sanitary sewer systems.
Mandatory water conservation in the commercial sector at Bemidji through
the imposition of plumbing code restrictions could reduce wastewater flows
from motels and restaurants. Two primary targets would be toilet tanks and
2-9
-------
shower heads. Typical plumbing code restrictions include a requirement that
all new or replacement toilets have a 3.5-gallon capacity and that new or
replacement shower heads deliver no more than 3 gpra. Such measures would
reduce water demand and sewage Clow directly.
Other measures Include educational campaigns on water conservation in
everyitny living and flu1 i ns rail at ion of pressure-reduction valves in areas
where the water pressure Ls excessive (greater than 40 to 60 pounds per square
inch). Educational campaigns usually take the form of spot television and
radio commercials, and the distribution of leaflets with water and sewer
bills. Water saving devices miist continue to be used and maintained for flow
reduction to he effective. Pressure reduction valves can be used where water
pressure Ls higher than necessary, sometimes on a neighborhood basis. How-
ever, where older pipes (especially iron pipes) are present, the excess pres-
sure is necessary.
The efficacy of water conservation is complex and the potential for flow
reduction is difficult to project. A comprehensive water conservation alter-
native therefore is not proposed. The City should consider the implementation
of water conservation measures, however, as a means of reducing wastewater
flow, to reduce wastewater treatment costs. Reduction of flows also would
extend the capacity-life of the treatment system beyond the currently pro-
jected year-2UOO design.
2.2.2.2. Collection System
The existing collection system is described briefly in Section 2.1.1.
RCM's Task 3 Report (1979c) provides a thorough discussion of the existing
sewer system. RCM (1979c) identified that nine of fifteen major components (8
trunk sewers, 6 pump stations, 1 force main) of the sanitary sewer system
would be inadequate to accommodate the year-2000 design flows of 2 mgd average
flow and 5.0 mgd maximum flow. Six of the nine potentially deficient compo-
nents were judged to be required regardless of which treatment alternative is
selected:
The trunk sewer following Park, Del ton, and Mississippi
Avenues, which then runs southeasterly, generally parallel-
ing the railroad, to the main pumping station (3 components)
The Industrial lift station
The Nymore lift station
The 23rd Street lift station.
No cost estimates were prepared for these improvements. Therefore, the costs
presented herein for wastewater system improvement do not include the cost of
sewer bystem improvements that also must be undertaken during the 20-year
design life. When sewer improvement projects are implemented, system users
will ex|ierieiu-e propo r t i onal el y higher user eharj'.es than are projected herein.
2-10
-------
2.2.2.3. Wastewaler Treatment Processes
Numerous wastewater treatment process options have been considered during
the twelve years that the treatment problem has been considered (Stewart &
Walker 1973; Stewart & Walker and others 1976; WAPORA 1977b, 1977c, 1977d,
1973b, 1978c, 1979b; RCM 1979b, 1979c, 1980):
Conventional treatment processes
Secondary processes
. upgrading the existing trickling filter
. activated sludge
. bio-surf (rotating biological contactors)
. aerated lagoons
. oxidation lagoons
. facultative lagoons
Tertiary processes (for phosphorus removal)
. chemical addition before secondary clarifier (1.0.
mg/1 P)
. chemical addition before secondary clarifier with
multi-media filtration (0.5 mg/1 P)
. chemical addition to secondary effluent with tertiary
clarification and multi-media filtration (0.3 mg/1 P)
. lime addition to secondary effluent followed by
filtration (0.1 mg/1 P)
Land treatment processes
- Infiltration/percolation
Rapid infiltration
Spray irrigation (center pivot, traveling gun, fixed
set), on cropland and forest land, at both slow and
moderate application rates.
The range of treatment processes investigated is sufficiently exhaustive to
cause consideration of additional treatment processes to be extremely
marginal.
2.2.2.4. Effluent Disposal
A similarly exhaustive study of various surface water effluent discharge
locations has been conducted in recent years. Sites include (Figure 2-3):
1) Grant Creek (Section 18, T147N, R34W)
2) Tributary of Grant Creek (Section 31, T147N, R34W)
3) Mississippi River downstream from Stump Lake (Section 10,
T146N, R32W)
4) Turtle River (Section 4, T147N, R34W)
5) Wetland tributary to Lake Bemidji (Section 13, T147N,
R34W)
6) Judicial Ditch (Section 11, T147N, R34W)
7) Tributary adjacent to Horseman Lake (Section 32, T148N,
R33W)
8) Mississippi River upstream from Lake Irving (Section 19,
T146N, R33W)
2-1 1
-------
e
OJ
cc
CO
AJ
c
to
a-
to
0)
"O
c
tt
tc
c
0)
-H
X
u-j
o
i
CJ
c
-------
9) Mississippi Rivo.r immediately downstream from Lake Bemidji
(Section 2, T146N, R33W)
10) Grass Lake (Section 2, T146N, R34W).
All discharge points considered would be required by the MPCA to meet at least
a 1.0 mg/1 phosphorus discharge standard, and possibly a 0.3 mg/1 standard.
This requirement negates any possible advantage from a cost perspective of
removing the effluent from the Mississippi River and pumping Lt long distance
for discharge to a receiving watซr where a less stringent phosphorus limita-
tion would be required. Numerous on-land effluent disposal sites also have
been considered (see Section 2.3.3.).
2.2.2.5. Sludge Treatment and Disposal
RC11 (1980) proposes that sludge produced in a new tertiary treatment
plant be digested anaerobically, thickened with assistance of a belt filter,
then transported for disposal on land. RCM projects that 3,500 Ib/day (639
tons/year) of digested sludge from a new tertiary WWTP (0.3 mg/1 P removal)
will require final processing and disposal (Letter of 11 July 1980 from RCM to
tlPCA) . Other alternatives include aerobic digestion, which is exceptionally
energy intensive; incineration of thoroughly dewatered sludge, which also is
energy intensive; pyroJysis and wet oxidation, which are not practical for the
small-scale operation at Bemiaji; and co-disposal, which involves utilizing
dried sludge as a supplementary fuel in boilers, which also is not feasible at
Bemidji.
The Bemidji Sludge Disposal Plan developed by KBM, Inc. (1980) for the
City of Bemidji proposes two additional quarter-section sludge disposal sites
east of Bemidji (90 acres in the SB-1*; of Section 13 and 61 acres in the SW^ of
Section 25 of Bemidji Township). These sites also are farmed by Mr. Jon Hall.
The Plan was developed based on the existing chemical composition of the
sludge. It recommends that sludge solids application rates be limited to 2.7
to 6.1 tons per acre, depending on the soil conditions of the site, for sur-
face spreading on cropland consisting of corn, alfalfa, and pasture (based on
nitrogen as the limiting constituent).
The Plan concludes that because of cumulative heavy metal additions, the
maximum application life of an acre is 27 years (it was determined that copper
addition is the limiting heavy metal). It also concluded that the combined
340 acres (total usable acres in aJ1 4 quarter-sections) offer a projected
sludge disposal life of 112 years at the existing sludge production rate of
612 tons of sludge per year. Considering the projected rate of 639 tons per
year for a new, tertiary WWTP at Bemidji, the 4 sites cumulatively offer
approximately 117 years' life.
2.3. Previously Considered Alternatives
2.3.1. No-action Alternative
As previously stated, numerous wastewater treatment alternatives have
been considered during the twelve years that a solution to Bemidji's WWTP
discharge problem has been actively sought. The "no action" alternative was
addressed in Secton 2.2. of the Draft BIS. It has been concluded that because
2-13
-------
the existing WWTP is in need of replacement, and because significant improve-
ment in the treatment of wastewater at Betnidji is required to improve down-
stream water quality, that not taking action is an unacceptable alternative.
2.3.2. Alternatives Considered in Original Facilities Plan (1968-1973)
The original Facilities Plan (Stewart & Walker 1973) discussed various
measures considered between 1968 and 1973, These include:
Consideration of pu'nping the effluent to a drainage system
where nutrient removal was not required
Treatment in lagoons with disposal in seepage basins sup-
plemented by ridge and furrow irrigation at a site near
School Lake east of Bemidji (Site S., Figure 2-4)
Remodeling the existing plant
Construction of a new conventional WWTP
Lagoons followed by spray disposal (Site C, Figure 2-4)
Aeration basins followed by spray disposal (Site A, Figure
2-4).
The alternative recommended in the Facilities Plan was the use of lagoons
for preliminary treatment and storage followed by spray disposal on farm land
east of Bemidji (Site A, Figure 2-4). The estimated capital cost for con-
struction was $3,050,000 (1972 dollars), At that time it was proposed that
the City purchase the lagoon and disposal site, although landowner groups
opposed this concept at each of the sites considered* After hearing strong
objection to the proposal during meetings at Bemidji during November 1972, the
MPCA Board determined that land treatment was socially infeasible. Although
the City protested the decision, the Board determined, instead, that either
the existing WWTP be upgraded to remove phosphorus or that a new WWTP capable
of advanced phosphorus removal be constructed.
2.3.3. Alternatives Considered in Facilities Plan Supplement (1974-1976)
The City purchased a 73acre site near the Mississippi River east of Lake
Bemidji in 1975 with the expectation of building a new tertiary treatment
plant at that location. A land treatment solution continued to be soupbt by
the City, MPCA, USEPA, and local citizens interested in attaining the goal of
zero discharge of phosphorus. A Facilities Plan Supplement was completed
during 1976 (Stewart & Walker 1976) that included identification of 11 poten-
tial land treatment sites within 3 major search areas (Figure 2-4) and culmi-
nated with an intensive investigation of and recommendation for a land treat-
ment site in Eckl.es Township, northwest of Bemidji. The proposal incorporated
the use of publicly-owned land for siting aerated treatment and storage basins
and for center-pivot spray irrigation of wastewater on. cropland.
In 1976 dollars, the three options available (two were presented in the
original Facilities Plan) were estimated to have the following capital costs:
Conventional treatment plant, at Mississippi River
Site (immediately downstream from Lake. Bemidji) .... $7,407,000
2-14
-------
K v ;i~ A \ i i i u ^ N ^ ( Q u i R, i N oj >;. |^_
! , "r;,,^ .ซ- V^x -vfs.
4 '-*/ , .H.. it *'
SITES OF GEOTECHMCAL
INVESTIGATIONS, 1978
1978 SEARCH AREA SITES
CITY SEARCH AREA/SITES,
1979
n ALTERNATIVE 6 CONSIDERED
IN DRAFT EIS (1980)
=== MAPLE RIDGE SITE (1980-31)
~~ IRRIGATION AREA
WASTEWATER STORAGE
AREA
)Js^7., F&IPTF*^
r -v" .sl^;""^
' ^ Si-^wJT ,; LANGUAGE
NORTHERN, ' I | CAMp
[SEARCH '"^
CAMP ^Jmrfi
SITE ..rfTT!
TURTLE R?VER
AREA fTf^'
SEARCH AREA
SCHOOL "WV *
AandAI ' '[ ""
H
S
pq
e
H
en
OJ
0)
M
cfl
C3
a)
en
O
H
O
H
O.
O,
T3
C
tO
M-i
O
C
O
H
4J
tO
O
O
I
(N
QJ
!-i
3
M
H
-------
Spray irrigation at Kckl.es Township
Site (Site C, Figure 2-4) , $8,371,000
infiltration-percolation system (Site S, Figure 2-4) , . $6,722,000
However, when operation and maintenance (O&M) costs and crop revenues were
figured in, Stewart & Walker (1976) indicated that the spray irrigation alter-
native actually was more cost-effective than the other two,
2.3.4. Alternatives Considered through EIS Process (1977-1981)
INITIAL EIS ALTERNATIVES (1977)
In Marc1"! 1977, USEPA and MPCA determined that an EIS should be prepared
on the various proposals advanced in the Facilities Plan and Plan Supplement.
Through the EIS, USEPA's EIS consultant, WAPORA, Inc., initially considered a
total of 33 wastewater treatment alternatives (WAPORA 1977b). These alterna-
tives incorporated various previously considered and new combinations of
treatmc-nt, siting, conveyance, effluent disposal, and sludge disposal options.
Basically they fell into five categories:
Upgrade the existing trickling filter plant, including
addition of tertiary treatment for phosphorus removal
followed by discharge to the Mississippi River
A new conventional treatment plant at either the existing
location or at the City's alternate site near the Missis-
sippi River just east of Lake Bemidji
Spray irrigation of secondary effluent to grow one of sev-
eral marketable crops at the Eckles Township site (Site C,
Figure 2-4)
Infiltration/percolation (low rate) of secondary effluent
in Eckles Township (Site C area, Figure 2-4) with under
drainage discharged to Grant Creek, or in Frohn Township
(School Lake site, Figure 2-4) with discharge of recovered
water to the Mississippi River
Rapid infiltration at School Lake site (Site S, Figure 2-4)
of either primary or secondary effluent with discharge to
the Mississippi River or with recharge to the gcoundwater.
Continued use of the existing treatment plant site was considered in six
of the alternative;;. Basically two methods of effluent disposal were pro-
posed: t > the Mississippi River just east of Lake Bemidji and on land either
at the Krkle; Township .site (Site C) or in Frohn Township (School. Lake site).
Tlii'M*1 we i o tin' s.ime .1L u- rna L iven proposed by Stewart & Walker (1976), which
included spray irrigation at the Eckles site; alternatives for the School Lake
site included either infiltration/percolation with drainage to the Mississippi
River or rapid infiltration with groundwater discharge.
Tne City's Mississippi River site east of Lake Bemidji also was chosen as
a potential treatment plant location. Four alternatives using this site
2-16
-------
differed only in the treatment method or means of conveyance. All of these
involved the discharge of effluent to the Mississippi River just east of the
Lake. The sludge produced hy these proposed treatment plants would be dis-
posed of by land application.
Seventeen alternatives considered land treatment at the School Lake site
in Frohn Township using various combinations of treatment and effluent dis-
posal. The treatment proposals included the use of oxidation lagoons, aerated
ponds, and facultative lagoons. The effluent would be disposed of by infil-
tration/percolation with recovered water being discharged to the Mississippi
River (requiring 220 to 440 wetted acres), by spray irrigation (requiring 425
to 6t J wetted acres), or by rapid infiltration with eventual groundwater
discharge.
The other six alternatives considered the land treatment potential of the
Eckles Township site. Like the other land treatment alternatives, the pro-
posed treatment methods included oxidation lagoons, aerated ponds, or faculta-
tive lagoons. On this site, however, the recovered renovated water from the
infiltration/percolation system (220 to 440 acres of wetted area) would be
discharged to Grant Creek. Spray irrigation (425 to 613 acres of wetted area)
also was considered as a possible effluent disposal process.
USEPA identified upgrading the existing treatment facilities to meet the
effluent limitations with continued discharge to the Mississippi River or
rapid infiltration of wastewater at the School Lake site following primary
treatment at the existing WWTP as the two alternatives for further scrutiny
(WAPORA L977d). Because both of these alternatives were shown to have a
continued effect on the downstream Chain of Lakes, the MPCA staff recommended
that additional search for on-land alternatives was needed in an attempt to
achieve a zero phosphorus discharge goal.
1978 ON-LAND SEARCH EFFORT
Therefore, WAPORA was directed to conduct another search of the Bemidji
area during 1978 in an attempt to identify additional potential rapid infil-
tration and slow-rate irrigation sites. This search identified 4 potential
sites for moderate-rate application and 23 potential sites for rapid infiltra-
tion generally within a five-mile radius of Bemidji (Figure 2-4; WAPORA
1978b). Geotechnical investigations were to be conducted at five most promis-
ing sites (Sites I, 24, 25, 26, and 27) to obtain the site-specific informa-
tion necessary to verify their suitability and to evaluate potential impacts.
The sites were Identified by May 1978, but field studies did not commence
until September because of problems in obtaining access to the private pro-
perty involved at prospective sites. Once court-approved access was obtained
by the M.PCA, the geotechnical investigations were completed and a report was
produced (WAPOKA 1978e). The report indicated that none of the sites studied
were suitable because of hydraulic limitations of the site soils for the
application rates considered.
USEPA and MPCA then concluded that there appeared to be no feasible
on-Land alternatives to consider further. It was determined that supplemental
"Step 1" Facilities Planning work on conventional treatment alternatives by
2-17
-------
the City's engineering consultant, RCM, would be required to facilitate pro-
gression from "Step 1" planning to "Step 2" design work for new wastewater
fac Llit Les.
1979 "COOPERATIVE" AGRICULTURAL APPLICATION SEARCH EFFORT
During Spring 1979, the MPCA introduced the concept of a cooperative
agricultural irrigation system to Bemidji area farmers. The City joined the
effort to promote this concept and a number of informational meetings were
conducted. At a City Council meeting on 31 August 1979, the alternatives were
ranked based on the Council's preliminary investigations and on the recom-
meiid.i tiont> of the City's engineering consultant, RCM:
Rank Site Name Index No. (Figure 2-&)
1 John Cronemiller Area City - 2
2 Alaska-Nebish Area City - 3
i llag.t LL-O'lir Leu Area City - 4
4 George Landreth Area City - 5
5 Jon Hall Area City - 1
After the City's decision to concentrate their attention on the Cronemiller
site (named after Mr. John C. Cronemiller, the participant with the largest
land area involved), all of the farmers other than Cronemiller withdrew their
original indication of interest. Most notably, the withdrawal of the acreage
farmed by Mr. Jack Kelm in Liberty Township reduced the amount of available
acres to less than that required for a feasible land treatment system.
During October 1979, the City developed an option that would utilize
publLcly-owned forest lands in Eckles Township, including County-controlled
tax forfeited lands in Sections 10, 11, and 15, and State of Minnesota land in
Section 16 of tickles Township (a total of 2,340 acres), in conjunction with
agricultural irri.gati.on at the John CronemLller farm. The area involved is
only somewhat different than Site C proposed in 1976 by Stewart & Walker
(figure 2-4).
WAPOK.A (1979b) completed a preliminary assessment, from a land capability
perspective, of the suitability/desirability of utilizing the proposed lands
for treatment of the City's wastewater. RCM incorporated this information
into the preliminary design of a land treatment system. This alternative was
presented as Alternative 6 in the Draft EIS (Section 2.4.6.).
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED IN SUPPLEMENTAL FACILITIES PLAN (1979-1980)
The preliminary design and costs for six potentially feasible alterna-
tives for the management of Bemidji's wastewater were presented in KCM's Task
i> Repori., entitled "Preliminary Development and Cost Estimates of Selected
Wastewater Management Alternatives for the City of Bemidji, Minnesota" (RCM
1980). These six alternatives subsequently were considered in detail in the
Draft EIS. Five were conventional mechanical wastewater treatment plants
capable of advanced phosphorus removal with a surface water discharge (Figure
2-5) and one was the Eckles Township land-treatment alternative (Figure 2-6).
2-18
-------
2-19
-------
,*# ^'T-'ar^
T ฃป tor stflfcs - ปa
40*r
^^r.jfc:^
&J&-
& It
,ซN
P'Sii* ^j^Zr-** * **f,
'l^g/^r
' *^^ &*# A VFftT.P 1
'J" *<$&: 'f 4-* W^ rr- -
3^-ff^/wiL^" ,k
l-st*
.'! --.
6-> j
H "i'JV , '"-iX \
:."!! ' &&..'' ,
N-^""
" K^^:S*>.
\ Itr.f"'*
.0 j o "* H 4 ^Li ..I ^_ " - .-"
Vlr-'iff
_,"C, *"''"';''"; ^' ~~ ' ซK .'v'
\r*-l*-4ซvi':1' *x -**'''ป I
-. x '"w- ^ fei i*-i Li
J*4i>,r^ ^rpw-ซs. "f
4 *Li,j ,1 |L3.^w- ir
^
,w^. * >
,V_ 5rf
ป\' > -! -'" "ป,">
' - | V* f- 1
ปw* * I'isL Jf
'1ซ
^"'Lt
^ "*ซ;!
->*.
*\. f
APPROX SCALE IN FEET
o o o
'lป ^
10 v I MILE
vv*
Figure 2-6. Location of proposed force main, treatment and storage ponds, and
treatment area in Alternative 6 (from RCM 1980).
2-2Q
-------
A summary of the estimated costs of the six alternatives;, as considered
in the Draft EIS, including the relative Federal, State, and City of Bemidji
share of the costs for the two treatment options, is displayed in Table 2-3.
The lowest cost alternative, in terms of total capital cost and total present
worth and annual cost, is a new treatment system at the existing plant site at
Bemidji with discharge to the inlet channel to Lake Bemidji (Alternative 3).
The capital cost of Alternative 6, the forest land application alternative, is
nearly twice that of the tertiary treatment option of Alternative 3, and 64%
more in terms of present worth.
2.3.5. Summary of Draft EES Selected Action Alternative 3
As presented in the Draft EIS, Alternative 3 proposed the construction of
a new conventional WW'LT at the site oฃ the existing plant (Site 2 in Figure
2-5). Treated effluent from the new plant would be discharged directly to the
channel between Lake Irving and Lake Bemidji, mixing with the river flow into
Lake Bemidji. The existing WWTP would continue to treat Bemidji's wastewater
until the new plant would be operational.
A new pumping station would be constructed at the site to replace the old
plant lift station. A new advanced-secondary WWTP at the existing WWTP site
would incorporate the following treatment processes to attain an effluent BOD
level of 25 mg/1, 30 mg/1 suspended solids, and a phosphorus level of at least
1.0 rag/1: primary clarification; activated sludge (biological) secondary
treatment; alum and polymer addition prior to secondary clarification, chlori-
nation; and discharge. As proposed in the Draft EIS, attainment of an efflu-
ent phosphorus level of 0.3 mg/1 would require further chemical addition after
secondary clarification followed by tertiary clarification, granular-media
filtration, chlorination, and discharge. All process units, except the acti-
vated sludge and chlorine contact tanks, would be covered with domes or other-
wise will be "indoors" to prevent cold weather from inhibiting their operation
(RCM 1980).
Sludge would be removed from the primary, secondary, and tertiary clari-
fiers. Sludges would be subjected to gravity thickening, followed by anaero-
bic digestion. Solids from the digestor would be stored, further dewatered,
and eventually disposed on land, as discussed in Section 2.2.2.5. (A schema-
tic diagram of the entire treatment process is presented in Figure 1 of RCM's
Task 5 Report.)
The tertiary treatment components proposed by RCM (1980) and presented in
Alrernat ive ) in the Drall KLS, (I.e., tertiary clarification and filtration)
also would reduce further the BOD,- and suspended solids concentrations. It is
conceivable that actual average operating conditions for a tertiary plant
might produce an effluent with BOD,- and suspended solids concentrations of 10
mg/1 or less. Therefore, estimated effluent loadings to the Mississippi River
at the point of discharge in 1990 and 2000 would be within the following ranges:
Flow/Concentration
Year-2000 2 mgd design
flow for advanced-secondary
treatment (25-30-1.0 mg/1
effluent concentration)
(Ib/day)
417
SS
(Ib/day)
500
(Ib/day)
16
2-21
-------
ซ <
4_1 TI p-i -H
C T3 S 4-1
o) -H cd
0 0 4-> fi
4J 0) Cd M
cd pq x: O>
Q) 4J 4-> 4-1
!-< VJ iH C
4J o cu <; oi
<4-< 4-1 0
>, 0 M (U
S-i t3 2 O H
cd 0) ^ Cu
H s-i a,
4-J 0) tH d
>-i T3 x-^, a) LO
0) -H O >
4J en oo cu en
C CT> I-H -
T) o M -J2 T3
rl ,0 P. C
T-H 4J o cn cd
~-^ cd r~ป O
M a <^ ,C c/i
-a ? M a) M
QJ a) w -H w
O 4-1 42
d en 4-i cj 4->
cd cd m cd ^
> 9 a cs
13 ^ IH M
cd X Q o Q
U-l CO O> 4J 0)
O X! CO 43
gj 4-1 O 4-1
en 42 o
4J 4-J C ^
CO -H T3 O
o M a)
CJ O T3 4J C
m cu cd Q
M-l 4J 0 -i-l
o en fi -T-I 4->
C! 0) 4J Ctf
C o en en u
O -H 01 0) -H
U) 4J M i-H
H CL, CX O) JD
^ O J3 D
cd en 4-1 ex
ex ^-N cd
6 a, -x) o)
O " Q) 43
o t i cd d 4-1
^- 4J -H
>~, M o <4-i a)
>-i 0 en a) o
cd oi ป-! c
0 CO C -H
0 C en en
3 o -H cd
co ^ S fi c*i
CO
1
CM
0)
r-H
cd
H
c
>
i~i
c
u
a;
4-1
^
in
0)
>
15
C
u
11
i
*ฃ
ป
A)
Ui
4^
<
m
S
1-4
4_t
C
1-1
OJ
CM
OJ
>
4_l
C
1
^
-
'D
>
tj
a
^
4-t
3
-i o
4-t -C O
^ c *
ฃ O
C S "
re J-J al
U Jrf 4-J
4-1 y TH
CO
'-0 O
ซ cfl o
4-J Tj U '
C 'fl
O S HI
3 co^-s
c m ^ ^ ^
1 ' fll X T)
3 U -3
^-^
co to o
w --j n) o
a. 4-t w o
to TW *-* x
GJ x aj
C K i) 00 *>
^^^ 4J lJ CJ
4-1 J fl ^
13 en jn eg
^_^
X O
4J 0) O
H Jl^ O
4J 3 eg .
TJ p-J --
aj -o CQ
0) 4J -H O
H 0) Cb O
u X QO "H
a u en ป
fl 50 eo '0
a, i-t 73 to >;
4^ to co * '
x^- (y ^C flJ U
4-> >
TJ 3 ai
O '"N
H U 4-t O
0,4-' ^ O
CL -H o) Q* O
H W ซ) 0. -
'fl l^ i^ 4
j *J ^ ซ '/>
1 T) "f J ^ X
rW 0, W ซ
j: T-J .H ^,
)-i ฃ U
3 U _C OJ
c- S "3 "S ^
QJ
en T-H
O so
5
IX
O i
~-" 00
e
m ^
O 00
e
CU
O ^
r-t 00
E
o
3-
. ~^_
O 00
~
a,
o i
-4 00
s
CX
O 00
s
CU
O r-t
4 00
ฃ
Oi
ซ "x^
o oo
B
a.
O -1
~^.
~* e
ป>
CM (^ < CN
-H
IA c^ CM in
0% p- -.
CO O ^ CM lA
r^ cn
^n O O CM m
r. f. 0
-T 'O ป fM
2 S3 ฃ
m ^ un r-* m
ซ *. . ^r
-4 ^ ^ -
T]
X
O
^
-
O
U 3J
lo T! 0) 0)
73 "ซ T CB
0 r-* M M
l-i OI -M T^
i "O " a o
W J) *J Q
-T) ir M J I
^ 'T
*J C
5 <
^ o
co en
*. -
r- oO
CM
^-4 r--
in in
*n O
*
^r ao
-3" 00
00 0
r-t &
p-i r^-
"^
CM
en aT
4
OO en
CT\ CM
- .
^ S
^ 5
ป ป
m x
- ^
a> cO
.
-
t-i
qj o?
D 0
* U
4-1
0) U
00 O
ซ 3
fO C
en cj
M
-y
cr>
oo
CM
vO
ro
(M
-
*
vy-
O
O
en
CM
00
ซ.
tn
CM
ซ-
CM
f*J
V>
S.
fj
o>
00
o
"1
<^
CO
c
0
, i
rH
4-1 Cl
c ^o
^ o
^ o
> o
- T
5-
i ' C.
^
2 ^
3 ฐ
\^^
S
OJ
-fl
en
c
Q
1-t
i_l
0)
o
'-<
o
4-4
Ca
o
u
3
CJ
fl
i)
3
Q
:3
1)
4-1
LJ
fl
u
U
H
?T\
CM
'
^
4->
13
'fl
TJ
-u
O
O
t3
D
tJ
03
>
O-
5*
o
<>
rtj
CO
C
O
3)
-H
01
tj
cn
4-1 CU
to >
O i-4
CJ 4-f
T)
J-4 C
rtj i-i
r-l OJ
B r-l
H 03
CO
_n
4-1
1 OO
CM G
Q
2 i
i t as
H w
o
3 a>
c u
3
0 J
3 y
D
D T3
Tl
C
"0 T-l
a) ui
CO U
i *
H <
2-22
-------
Flow/Concentration
Year-2000 2 mgd design
flow for tertiary treatment
(10-10-0.3 mg/1 effluent
concentration)
Estimated 1990 daily flow
of 1.6 mgd and 25-30-1.0 mg/1
effluent concentration
BOD5
(Ib/day) (Ib/day) (Ib/day)
169
334
169
400
13
Estimated 1990 daily flow
of 1.6 mgd and 10-10-0.3 rag/1
effluent concentration
133
133
Other constituents In the treated effluent would include nitrogen, as
either organic nitrogen, ammonia, nitrite, or nitrate; chlorides; soluble
salts (measured as alkalinity); sodium; sulfates; various metals in minute
concentrations, such as magnesium, manganese, iron, lead, chromium, copper,
nickel, zinc, cadmium, mercury, and boron; silica; fluoride; and coliform
bacteria. Effluent limitations traditionally are not established for these
parameters, because the concentrations present in domestic wastewaters usually
do not pose public health or other environmental problems in surface waters.
Exceptions are fecal coliform bacteria and ammonia-nitrogen. The standard for
fecal coliform bacteria is 200 MPN per 100 ml. The proposed chlorination
facilities at the new plant are designed to disinfect the treated wastewater
prior to discharge, which would control the level of coliform bacteria in the
effluent.
Part II of MPCA's supplement to the Draft EIS (MPCA 1980b) proposed
revisions to the preliminary engineering design and cost information presented
in the Draft EIS. I1PCA has concluded, based on an MPCA study of the opera-
tional data from seven WWTPs in Minnesota that employ advanced phosphorus
removal, that the potential cost of the tertiary treatment plant proposed in
Alternative 3 will be less than that presented in Table 2-3. Specifically,
MPCA staff have concluded that the tertiary clarifier (final solids contact
clarifier) will not be needed (MPCA 1980b):
A well-run, properly designed secondary mechanical wastewater treat-
ment plant with alum addition and effluent filtration should be able
to consistently achieve an average phosphorus effluent level of
below 0.3 mg/1 and not exceed a phosphorus level of 0.5 mg/1.
Inclusion of the final clarifier would provide increased reliability for
the phosphorus treatment process to insure that a 0.3 mg/1 phosphorus standard
consistantly would be met (RCM 1979b). A final clarifier also would allow
greater flexibility in operation to offset occassional periods of otherwise
poor performance that potentially might occur. As indicated by MPCA (1980b),
however, "it is difficult to quantify the benefits of adding the solids con-
tact clarifier."
2-23
-------
MPUA's survey of other WWTPs in the State that practice advanced phos-
phorus removal also has provided the basis for refinement of the estimated
staffing requirements at the proposed new WWTP at Bemidji. As presented in
MPCA's supplement to the Draft EIS (MPCA 1980b), the MPCA staff have concluded
that approximately six staff would be required to operate and maintain the new
wastewater treatment plant, thus reducing significantly the estimated annual
operation and maintenance (O&M) cost. They also proposed revised chemical
costs for phosphorus removal, further reducing the estimated O&M cost for
Alternative 3. The net adjustment in the capital and O&M cost estimates for
the tertiary treatment option (0.3 mg/1 P) are presented in Table 3-4. As
shown, the proposed $1,007,000 reduction in capital cost and the proposed
$163,000 per year reduction in O&M costs reduce the estimated annual equiva-
lent cost from $2.30 to $1.96 per 1,000 gallons treated.
Table 2-4. Comparison of estimated costs (Ln thousands of 1080 dollars) for
the tertiary treatment option of Alternative 3.
Cost from Cost from
Item DraftJEIS MPCA (1980)
Capital cost $12,904 $11,945
Federal share 9,055 8,381
State share 1,811 1,676
Local share 2,037 1,887
Annual O&M 525 362
Kytimatcd salvage value 3,184 2,944
Total present worth cost3 17,608 15,000
Total equivalent annual cost3 1,678 1,430
Equivalent annual cost per 1,000 gallons $2.30 $1.96
Based on 20-year analysis period .at 7.125% discount rate,
2.4. Additional Alternatives Proposed Subsequent to Publication of the Draft
EIS
Confronted with the high costs of building and operating a tertiary
treatment plant at Bemidji that would continue to discharge effluent contain-
ing some phosphorus to Lake Bemidji and thus to the downstream Chain of Lakes,
City officials continued to pursue additional on-land wastewater treatment/
disposal alternatives even while the Draft EIS was being finalized and printed
(summer 1980). The City, with significant support from downstream residents,
proposed at the Public Hearing that "Alternative 7," an undefined agricultural
land application alternative, should be investigated and included in the Final
EIS. Through subsequent work by the City's Facilities Planning Consultant,
RCM, and through meetings among the City, its consultants, MPCA, and USEPA,
each of the additional proposals were rejected for lack of technical feasibil-
ity and/or cost effectiveness. These alternatives are presented in the fol-
lowing subsections.
2-24
-------
2.4.I. "Alternative 7"
During sa inner 1980, while the Draft ELS was being finalized and printed,
the City Council authorized RCM to investigate further on-land agricultural
irrigation alternatives. RCEl developed preliminary cost estimates for crop-
land irrigation in a generalized area about four miles east of Bemidji (in
Frohn Township no specific site was identified) and for the area in Eckles
Township that was proposed in Alternative 6 for forest irrigation. The re-
sults of RCM's work were presented to the Council on 10 July 1980. The esti-
mated cost for a high-rate wastewater application system (36 inches per year)
on unspecified properties east of Bemidji was shown to be more cost effective
than Alternative 3, the conventional treatment alternative (Table 2-5).
Table 2-5. Comparison of "Alternative 7" with Alternative 3.
Alternative 3
(0.3 mg/1)
$12,904,000
525,000
17,608,000
1,678,000
$2.30
Application to Cropland
Total construction cost
Annual 0&I1 cost
Present worth cost
Equivalent annu.il cost'
Equivalent annual cost
per 1,000 gallons $2.30 $2.04 $2.50
Based on a discount rate of 7.125% over a 20-year analysis period.
East of Bemidji
(36 inches/year)
$13,853,000
286,000
15,626,000
1,489,000
$2.04
Eckles Township
(24 inches/year)
$17,587,000
317,000
19,159,000
1,826,000
The local cost for the Frohn Township agricultural alternative also was
projected to be lower than Alternative 3 (0.3 mg/1 P option) because most of
the project construction costs would qualify for 85% Federal funding and an
additional 9% State grant, thus reducing the debt retirement burden on system
users. Furthermore, the annual O&M costs were estimated to be lower than for
the proposed mechanical/chemical tertiary treatment plant.
Support for "Alternative 7," irrigation of cropland in Frohn Township,
was expressed at the Public Hearing on the Draft EIS by the City, the Leech
Lake Indian community, and other downstream residents. However, subsequent
investigations by RCM and Barr Engineering Co., a specialty firm retained by
the City to provide another independent opinion on the feasibility of the
Frohn Township alternative, confirmed the conclusions of previous studies by
WAPORA (1977b, 197/c, and I978b) and Stewart and Walker (1973 and 1976)
that the application area causes even low-rate application to have marginal
technical feasibility. Thus the "Alternative 7" concept was dropped by the
City because of lack of technical feasibility. The Council also determined
that the high cost of an agricultural wastewater irrigation alternative at the
site in Eckles Township also eliminated it from further consideration.
2-25
-------
2.4.2. Maple Ridge Alternative
The "Alternative 7" concept was revived in October 1930 when the City
Council voted unanimously to have RCM conduct an investigation of a wastewater
disposal alternative site 20 miles north and west of Bemidji in Maple Ridge
Township. The concept, promoted by Mr. Jim Sackett, an instructor at the
Agricultural Vocational Training Institute, involves storage of wastewater in
natural boglands near Bog Lake for withdrawal by area farmers for cropland
Irrigation (Figure 2-4).
RCM presented preliminary cost estimates for bog storage and cropland
irrigation of wastewater in Maple Ridge Township to the City Council on 17
October 1981. The total construction cost was estimated to be $22,764,000,
with an annual O&M cost of $273,000. This equates to a total present worth
cost of $25,383,000 (based on 7.125% discount rate), an annual equivalent cost
of $2,419,000, and an annual equivalent cost per 1,000 gallons of $3.32.
Relative to the cost of Alternative 3 (0.3 rag/1 P level; Table 2-5), this cost
is much higher and well above the range for worthwhile comparison.
MPCA (by letter of 29 October 1980) and USEPA (by letter of 4 November
1980) subsequently informed the City that they could not support further study
of the j'laple Ridge alternative because of its high cost and the many engineer-
ing and environmental concerns associated with the proposal. The City (by
letter ot 4 November 1980), in conjunction with RCM, countered with a refined
cost estimate that projected the cost to be somewhat lower than originally
estimated (a minimum construction cost of $17,459,000). Both MPCA (by letter
of 4 December 1980) and USEPA (by letter of 12 Decmeber 1980) reiterated their
previous reservations about the lack of technical feasibility, cost effective-
ness, and environmental compatibility, again indicating their opinion that the
Maple Ridge concept is not a reasonable alternative.
On 16 December 1980, several farmers from the Maple Ridge area made a
presentation to the MPCA Board and requested reconsideration of the alterna-
tive. The Board requested the MPCA staff to prepare information on the Maple
Ridge alternative for presentation at their 7 January 1981 meeting.
On I1) December 1980, the City Council voted to support a conventional
t ron tint-ill plant alternative locati-d af Lh<- existing ulte (Alternative 3).
Their resolution (//3012) indicates "that a limit of 1.0 mg/1 of phosphorus is
fair for Bemidji" and that the Council will vary from this position only if:
A level lower than 1.0 mg/1 is established and enforced for all
municipalities throughout the State, or
A comprehensive program is undertaken in this area to remove
phosphorus from all sources, and it can be shown that Bemidji's
effluent after treatment to 1.0 mg/1 will contribute propor-
tionately more phosphorus to the waters of this area than other
sources, or
The State of Minnesota or the US Government agrees to assume
the added capital and operating costs of a plant with a more
stringent phosphorus limit than 1.0 mg/1, or
2-26
-------
The final cost figures prove to be to the satisfaction of the
City and its engineers that a more stringent phosphorus limit
other than 1.0 rag/1 will not place an onerous and unfair burden
on the citizens of Bemidji.
This remained their position as the Final EIS went to the printer.
Public comments both for and against the Maple Ridge alternative were
presented at the 15 January 1981 public meeting at Bemidji, which was con-
ducted by MPCA to receive comments on their 15 December 1980 supplement to the
Draft EIS. These comments are presented along with all other comments on the
Draft EIS and MPCA's supplement in Volume II of this Final EIS.
2.5. Conclusions
After twelve years of developing and evaluating an exceptionally large
number of alternatives, the least-cost alternative for treating Bemidji's
wastewater that meets the criteria of technical feasibility and environmental
and socioeconomic compatibility, especially the concern for the quality of the
Upper Mississippi River system, is Alternative 3 a new WWTP at the site of
the existing plant at Bemidji with discharge to the inlet channel to Lake
Bemidji. The most practical treatment level for wastewater phosphorus by a
conventional treatment plant at Bemidji appears to be 0.3 mg/1.
The revised construction cost for this project (in 1980 dollars) is
$11,945,000, and the annual O&M, present worth, and equivalent annual costs
are estimated to be $362,000, $15,000,000, and $1,430,000, respectively.
Reduction of eEElueat phosphorus lo such a low Level, while expensive, meets
the objective of providing the maximum possible protection to the economically
and culturally important Upper Mississippi River and Chain of Lakes.
The final decision regarding an effluent phosphorus standard will be made
through the upcoming NPDES permit process (see Section 1.1.) by the MPCA
Board. The MPCA and USEPA will make their final decisions concerning the
fundable treatment system and phosphorus standard at the conclusion of the EIS
process.
The following sections describe in more detail the existing environmental
and socioeconomic conditions of the Bemidji area and how the construction and
operation of: new wastewater treatment facilities at Bemidji will affect the
natural and human environment.
2-27
-------
i.D. AI-'KKCTKI) KNVI Iซ>NM!''.NT
This section presents a discussion of the the existing condition of those
aspects of the environment that could be impacted by the construction and/or
operation of the proposed new tertiary wastewater treatment facilities at
Beinidji. This includes the construction site area, the surface waters af-
fected by the discharge of effluent, the land area affected by sludge dis-
posal, and the socioeconomic environment of the users of the system who must
pay the increased costs for debt retirement and O&M. Additional information
on the natural and man-made environs of the Bemidji area is summarized in
previous planning reports, including WAPORA (1977a, 1977b, L977c), Stewart &
Walker (1976), ROM (1979a, 1979b, 1979c, 1980), the Draft EIS, and MPCA's
Supplement to the Draft EiS (19805).
i.l. Natural iMiviroiiiiient
j. 1. 1. Atmosphere
Elements of the atmospheric environment that are relevant to the consi-
deration of the proposed wastewater treatment facility include temperature,
precipitation, wind, and noise levels. Air quality in the project area is
excellant and is not expected to be affected significantly; therefore, air
quality is not discussed.
The climate of the Bemidji area is characterized by large seasonal vari-
ations in temperature and frequent fluctuations in temperature over short
periods ot time. The average annual temperature is approximately '38ฐF.
January Is usually the coldest month with temperatures averaging 4.7ฐF, where-
as July, with average temperatures of 68.2ฐF, is generally the warmest (Gale
Research Company 1978). The growing season is approximately 107 days.
The average annual precipitation, as recorded at the Bemidji Airport, is
21.66 inches. The maximum annual precipitation occurred in 1975 when 31.69
inches were recorded. The minimum was 12.47 inches in 1917 (Gale Research
Company 1978). Most of the annual precipitation falls as rain between May and
September. On the average, between 45 and 55 inches of snowfall are recorded
annually in Bemidji, accounting for approximately 30% of the average annual
precipitation. The ground is covered by at least 1.0 inch of snow about 36%
of the year.
Average annual runoff to surface water courses in the Bemidji area has
been estimated to be approximately 4 inches per year (USGS 1968) or less than
20% of the normal annual precipitation. The remainder either percolates
through the ground and replenishes the groundwater or re-enters the atmosphere
via evaporation or transpiration. April through June usually are the months
of largest runoff, because precipitation is augmented by the melting of snow
and ice that has accumulated during the winter months.
The prevailing winds are from the northwest and southeast. Wind rarely
comes from the northeast. Wind speeds average less than 9 miles per hour,
The existng WWTP is located on the narrow isthmus between Lakes Irving
and Bemidji, only several blocks east and south of downtown Bemidji. Noise
from the operation of the existing WWTP has not been reported as a problem.
The isthmus is a busy transportation and commercial corridor and noise from
3-1
-------
the operation of the WWTP is perceived as part of the overall area background
noise. Based on several noise measurements in the Bemidji area, background
noise levels are well within State standards for a quality environment.
Odors from tin- c-xlstlng WWTP orr.as Ion a I 1 y have been noticeable Ln the
downtown area. This primarily has occurred during infrequent sludge digestor
maintenance activities when the wind has been from the south or east.
3.1.2. Land
3.1.2.1. Bemidji Area
TOPOGRAPHY, GEOLOGY, AND SOILS
Surface elevations in the Bemidji area range from 1,340 to 1,480 feet
above mean sea level (msl). The area generally is level to sloping, and there
is little topographic relief except for isolated areas with slopes larger than
10% south and southwest of Bemidji.
Glacial activity primarily is responsible for the area's terrain. Most
of the surficial deposits are outwash sands. Meltwater from the glacial front
deposited this fine grained material over a wide area. Deposits of outwash
gravel arc found west of Bemidji. Both the sand and gravel are very permeable.
Surrounding the outwash deposits (east and north of Bemidji) are deposits of
unsorted, or undifferentiated, material ranging in size from clay to boulders.
These end moraines were formed by the glacier when it was stationary. Ground
moraines, or till plains, are located in the southern part of the project area.
These are deposits laid down as the glacier receded. Moraines generally are
not as permeable as the outwash deposits and, thus, are less desirable for
land application of wastewater for other than very low-rate application.
Isolated segments in the Bemidji area (predominantly northwest, as in the
Maple Ridge area, and southwest of the City of Bemidji) are covered with
glacial lake peat deposits. These areas previously were glacial lakes that
weri; covered by vegetation after the retreat of the last glacier. The con-
tinual presence of water Ln the lake basin inhibits the. comiplete decay of
organic material, thus forming peat.
Soils in the Bemidji area have been formed since the retreat of the last
glacier 10,000 to 15,000 years ago. Most of the soils in Beltrami County were
formed under forest vegetation and, as a result, have low organic content. A
comprehensive, modern soil survey for Beltrami County currently is being de-
veloped. The primary soil associations in the Bemidji area are Menahga-Mar-
quette, Beltrami-Nebish-Shooker, and Nebish-Beltrami (USDA Soil Conservation
Service, n.d.). Minor soils, including sandy soils that have depth-to-water
table less than six feet, organic soils, sandy soils underlain by silty and
clayey glacial till, and sandy soils with an argillic horizon, make up about
20% of the Menhaga-Marquette association. These soils limit the potential for
irrigation of sewage effluent.
l.ANDSCAI'1'.
The Bemidji area is in a transition zone between the northern boreal
forest and the eastern deciduous forest, and the vegetation of the area con-
tains biotic elements typical of both forest types. A detailed description of
the land use/land cover types in the area is given in WAPORA (1977a) .
Eighteen landscape types were identified, fifteen with vegetation, and three
3-2
-------
with little or no vegetation, and the characteristics of each were discussed.
A brief review of the existing land usages in the watersheds of Lakes Irving,
Bemidji, iVolf, Andrusia, and Cass, as presented in MPCA (198(Jb) is presented
in this section. A more detailed description of the sites/corridors that
would have been affected by each of the treatment alternatives presented in
Section 2.4. of the Draft K1S Is presented 1n Section 3.1.2.1. of that docu-
ment . A detailed discussion of the existing WWTP site area, the site proposed
for the new tertiary WWTP, is presented in the following subsection.
The extent of various landscape types in the watersheds of Lakes Irving,
Bemidji, V/olf, Andrusia, and Cass is illustrated in Table 3-1. The watersheds
of the lakes are considered as being curamulative; i.e., the watershed area of
all downstream lakes includes the watersheds of any lakes upstream. Lake
watershed areas were delimited from USGS topographic maps of the study area
and calculated by the computerized Minnesota Land Management Information
System. (MLMIS) of the Minnesota State Planning Agency's Land Management Infor-
mation Center.
Table i-I . Watershed land usage (after Ml'CA LOBOb; data from Minnesota Land
Management Information System).
Land Usage
Category
Forested
Cultivated
Pasture - Open
Water
ilars'a
Urban Residential
Mixed Urban ซ
Transpo r La t Ion
Extract ive
TOTAL
0.6
0.0
100
Lake Watershed (in pcrcents)
Irving
75.7
12.1
5.7
3.6
1.3
1.0
Bemidji
73.2
12.0
6.0
5.1
1.5
1.4
Wolf
72.0
12.3
6.5
5.6
1.5
1.6
Andrusia
71.4
11.8
6.2
6.6
1.6
1.6
Cass
71.4
8.1
6. 1
10.2
2.0
1.6
0.8
0.01
100
0.5
0.01
100
0.7
0.01
100
0.6
0.01
100
The data In Table 3-1 Indicates that the land uses in all of the water-
shed areas arc similar. The majority of the surface area in all of the water-
sheds i.s I o rob ted (71% to 76%). The next most prominent type is cultivated
land (8.1% to 12%), followed by pasture/open land (5.7% to 6.45%), and water
3-3
-------
(3.fo% to 10%). The remaining land use categories combined account for less
than 5% of the area of any of the watersheds. The total area classified as
urban is small (1.37% to 2.19%) in each of the watersheds, and is related
almost entirely to the City of Bemidji and the surrounding development.*
Because of the generally poor quality of the soils, agriculture has not
been intensively developed. Farms are generally small and scattered. Pre-
dominant crops are small grains and hay. An insignificant percentage of the
total watershed surface area was devoted to row crop agriculture such as corn
witn values ranging from 0.2% to 0.4% of total land area. Additionally,
existing land usage in agriculture is generally found in upland areas and not
adjacent to surface waters in the watershed.
Two State P'-irks and numerous State and National Forest lands and recre-
ation facilities cover a significant portion of the watershed, including
Itasca State Park, Bemidji State Park, Chippewa National Forest, and Missis-
sippi Headwaters State Forest. The downstream portion of the study area is
located within the Leecn Lake Lndian Reservation.
3.1.2.2. Existing WWTP Site
As discussed in Section 2.1.3., the existing WWTP is located on 10.5
acres owned by the City of Bemidji in a commercial/industrial area on the
northern shore of Lake Irving (Figure 3-1). The elevation of the site ranges
several feet above L,340 feet msl, the shoreline of the lake. The original
surface features have been masked by the development of the site and surround-
ing area. The site also includes the City Garage and associated storage areas
(ROM I'J/'Jc). The sLt" Ls bordered on the north by railroad tracks, on the
west by the riississippi River channel between Lakes Irving and Bemidji, on the
south by Lake Irving, and on the east by private property (Dickinson Lumber
Company) and railroad yards (RCI1 1979c) .
3.1.2.3. Sludge Disposal Sites
Active and proposed sludge disposal sites on land farmed by Mr. Jon Hall
east and southeast of Bemidji previously have been presented (Figure 2-2).
The existing land cover of each quarter-section site area, as presented in KBM
(1980), are displayed in Appendix A of this document. These areas primarily
are irregularly shaped cultivated fields with interspersed forested, areas and
wetlands. Site-specific information is presented in the following sub-
ject ion:;.
*l)ue to the method of calculation ot the land usage categories, minor errors
uay have been produced. The Minnesota Land Management Information System
(ML! IIS) is a computerized natural resource data system based on 40-acre
parcel interpretations of land use as estimated by land cover. Generally
speaking, marsh and bog areas are underestimated while urban areas tend to be
overestimated. For the Bemidji study area, the extent of the marsh land use
category may significantly underestimate actual marsh areas, while it is
believed that urban area is adequately assessed (MPCA 1980b) .
3-4
-------
c
H
-u
cn
H
!ซ!
W
3-5
-------
SITE A
Approximately 110 acres of Site A (SW^, Sec. 13, Bemidji Twp. Figure
2-2) currently serves as a disposal site for liquid sludge from the existing
VMTP. The application area generally is flat, with a very gentle slope to the
southwest (less than 5%, mostly 1%). The site primarily constists of Beltrami
sandy loam soil, with "apparent" seasonally high water levels of 2.5 to 6.0
feet. Subsoils consist of sandy clay loams (glacial till) to depths of 34
inches below the surface (KBM 1980).
SL'L'R B
Approximately 79 acres of Site B (NW^, Sec. 24, Bemidji Twp. Figure
2-2) also currently is used for sludge disposal. The application area is
flat, sloping at less than 2% (mostly 0.6%) to the northwest. Site soil is
Beltrami sandy loam, with a similar water level as Site A (2.5 to 6.0 feet
depth on a seasonal basis, greater than 6.0 feet otherwise).
SITE C
KBM (1980) proposed that approximately 90 acres of Site C (SE^, Sec. 13,
Bemidji Twp. Figure 2-2) can be used in the future for sludge application.
The site is relatively flat, with a general slope of 1.2% (maximum 2.5%) to
the northeast. According to Mr. Steve Stark, Soil Scientist with MPCA, the
soil primarily is Nebish fine sandy loam overlying clay loam and loam. The
seasonally high water table is between 5.0 to 10.0 feet.
SITE D
Sixty-one acres of Site D (SWLz;, Sec. 25, Bemidji Twp. Figure 2-2) also
are estimated by KBM (1980) to be suitable for future sludge application. The
proposed application area is flat to moderately rolling, with a general slope
to the southeast of about 2.0% (maximum 3.3%). According to Mr. Steve Stark
of MPCA, the soil is Nebish fine sandy loam over clay loam and loam, with a
seasonally high water level at a depth of 5.0 to 10.0 feet.
3.1.3. V/ater
3.1.3.1. Surface Water
SETTING AND FLOW
The City of Bemidji is located in the extreme northwest region of the
Upper Mississippi River basin. This is an area abounding in lakes, ranging
from the size of small potholes upwards to thousands of acres, and wetlands.
The Mississippi Rivrer at Bemidji, some 55 meandering river-miles or 22 air-
miles from its source at Lake Itasca, is the major surface water drainageway
in the Bemidji area (Figure 3-2). Several of the larger lakes in the region
are a part of a chain-of-lakes regime through which the Mississippi River
flows. Those lakes downstream of the point of discharge from the existing
(and proposed) WWTP that would be affected by the quality of the effluent
include Lake Bemidji, Stump Lake (artificially formed behind the Otter Tail
Power Dam downstream from Lake Bemidji), Lake Andrusia, Wolf Lake, and Cass
Lake.
3-6
-------
tfl
0)
l-l
cfl
E
0)
CO
J-l
0)
0)
o
cc
U-l
O
ซ'
CO
01
H
00
01
g
M
0)
B.
Cu
CD
03
CO
CD
ro
OJ
60
3--7
-------
There is no permanent continuous recording strearaflow measurement gauging
station on the Mississippi River or its tributaries in the Bemidji area. The
closest station is considerably downstream at the Winnebigoshish Dam, where
the contributing drainage basin is 1,442 square miles. The entire drainage
basin above Winnebigoshish Dam, including the subbasin above Bemidji, lies
within the same hydrologic region (USD01 1976). The average water produc-
tivity characteristics, therefore, should be quite similar. For the period
from 1884 through 1975, the average discharge was 516 cubic feet per second
(cfs), or a drainage basin productivity of 0.358 cfs per square mile. Average
flows for points downstream from Bemidji, based on this productivity and
specific drainage areas, are tabulated in Table 3-2.
Table 3-2. Average yearly flows (in cubic feet per second) for points
downstream from Bemidji.
Estimated from Estimated by
USGS (1975) MPCA (1980b)
Entering Lake Bemidji208202
Leaving Lake Bemidji 225 225
Entering Wolf Lake 238 229
Leaving Wolf Lake, entering Lake Andrusia 244 245
Leaving Lake Andrusia, entering Cass Lake 261 256
Leaving Cass Lake 403 406
Low-flow data have been collected very intermittently since 1965 for the
Mississippi River at Highway 11 southwest (upstream) of Bemidji (prior to its
junction with the Schoolcraft River). Because of the small number of measure-
ments (16) and their intermittent nature, the statistical significance is li-
mited. The average of these low-flow measurements was 66.4 cfs, with the
minimum (28 cfs) occurring in September 1976. The USGS (1968) estimated the
7-day, 2-year minimum flow at this point to be 39 cfs, and 27 cfs for the
Schoolcraft River. Assuming that these two low-flow periods occur simultane-
ously, the minimum low flow occurring for 7 consecutive days every two years
at the inlet to Lake Bemidji is approximately 66 cfs.
WATER USES
Recreational pursuits such as sport fishing, swimming, water-skiing,
boating, wildlife observation, and waterfowl hunting are the primary uses of
surface waters in the Bemidji area. The numerous lakes in the northwoods
setting cause them to be a significant attraction to vacationers. The Bemidji
region is well known for its prime sport fishing lakes, which provide excel-
lant walleye, northern pike, muskellunge, yellow perch, and rock bass fishing.
Other significant uses include production of wild rice (the most important
element of the native economy), watering of livestock and wildlife, and waste-
water disposal. Withdrawal of water for irrigation in the area is limited,
and there are no known uses of surface water for public water supply. In
short, the surface water resource in the Bemidji region is the key to the
region's economy.
3-8
-------
IndusLridL consumption of surface water in the Bemidji area essentially
is restricted to the Otter Tail Power Company. The generating plant, located
on the southeast shore of Lake Bemidji, utilizes lake water as plant cooling
water. Two pumps with a combined capacity of 6,250 gallons per minute are
utilised as needed for cooling purposes. Water is returned to the Lake.
Otter Tail Power Company uses the Mississippi River for hydroeleotric genera-
tion at its dam approxmately 7.U miles downstream from Lake Bemidji. The
facility utilizes two turbine/generator units with a combined generating
capacity of 7UO,OUO kilowatts.
The City of Bemidji presently discharges treated domestic wastewater from
its WWTP located on Lake Irving to the channel between Lake Irving and Lake
Bemidji (Section 2.1.3.). The trickling filter plant is designed to provide
secondary treatment for sewage flows of approximately 1.3 million gallons per
day (mgd). The average discharge in 1979 was approximately 1.22 mgd, with a
maximum of 1.3 mgd.
The Mississippi River has been recommended for inclusion in the National
Wild and Scenic River System (USDOI 1976). The status of this proposal is
discussed in Section 3.2.3.3.
LAKE MORPHOMKTRY*
Lake T rv i ng
Lake Irving has a surface area of about 613 acres with a mean depth of
7.7 feet (Table 3-3). This shallow basin has a greatest depth of 16 feet,
which provides the entire basin as a littoral area. The generally elliptic
basin is oriented with the main axis in an east-west direction. Water enter-
ing from the Mississippi River at the south-central shore probably flows
approximately 90 degrees to the main axis, north to Lake Bemidji.
Lake BcmidjjL
Lake Bemidji covers as area of 6,420 acres. The mean depth is 31.3 feet
with the greatest observed depth of 76 feet in the north basin. Total volume
is 200,660 acre feet. The percentage of the lake basin less than 15 feet in
depth, defined as the littoral zone, is 30%, or 1,960 acres (Table 3-4).
Tne eLLiptic lake basin is oriented with the maximum length in a north-
south direction and the minor axis in an east-west direction. There are no
islands complicating the basin bathometry; however, there are two distinct
basins. As may be seen in Figure 3-2, the River flows into the southwest
corner of Lake Bemidji and the outflow occurs in the eastern mid lake area
acress the southern lake basin.
Because of the distinct nature of the Lake Bemidji sub-basins, estimates
of their physical characteristics were calculated (Table 3-4). Approximately
23% of the lake surface area and about 21% of lake volume occurs in the south
basin. Generally, the lake depths are of less magnitude in the south basin
and the mean depth is 27.9 feet versus 32.3 feet in the north basin. Littoral
zone development is essentially equal in both basins.
*This section is an edited version of pages 4 to 10 of Part III of MPCA's
Supplement (1980b see Part II of this document).
3-9
-------
03
3
S-l
fO
H
cfl S-l
H 4-1
03 CU
t-4 >T *
~ J2
C7N
ON t-H
r~^ <
l vO
C 0)
<3 S-l
r^
CU 03
^ -H
cfl i-l
_J 60
C
w
CM rj
i-t CO
S
O
ON m
VO i 1
CM
O
H
M
4-1
0)
cu S
.5 co
r-
.-t VD
r-. CM
i < -vf"
cfl
,J
CU
H ,d
O CO
J
60
ฃ
w
^H
CM O
*rH tfl
a
co m
vD O
O --I
^
CO
.
1 CO
1 ^-1
4-"
U-l
1 O
1 VO
E
co
1 00
1 1
4-1
1 O
1 ^^
vO
4-1
14-1
!N
CM
m
I
a)
S-l
o
cfl
CM
O
CM
0)
S-l
o
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CM
0
03
0)
l-i
CJ
tfl
CM
CO
03
CU
S-l
o
cfl
CO
CO
CM
O
CO
CM
O
CO
cx
s
CO
60
>
S-l
S-l
o
P.
H
4-1
CO
CO
o
cu
o
e
CO
H
S
00
-a-
CM
4-1
I
d)
S-l
O
CO
co
CM
CM
oo
03
CU
SJ
CJ
CO
CM
CO
CO
S-l
4-1
CJ
s
o
fl
a.
S-l
1
03
tO
a)
^i
cO
O
>>
a
CO
CO
I
ro
,
tO
H
60
C
H
S-l
t-\
CU
^
cfl
O ^
H
S-l ON
4-1 ' '
CU -t
S '
.C! Cxi
03 -H
H S
J
60 00
c
-------
Table 3-4. Lake Bemidji morphoraetry (after MPCA 1980b).
Item English Units Metric Units
WHOLK, LAKE
Drainage basin area
Lake surface area
Length of shoreline
Maximum depth
Mean depth
Lake volume
Littoral area
Elevation
608.8 mi
6,420 acres
14.8 mi
76 ft
31.3 ft
200,660 acre-ft
1,960 acres (30.5%)
1,339 ft
1,577 km
2,599 ha
23.8 km
23.2 m
9.5 m
247,534,669 m3
793 ha
SOUTH BASIN
Lake surface area
Maxunum depth
Mean depth
Lake basin volume
Littoral area
1,496.2 acres (23%)
56 ft
27.9 ft
41,760 acre-ft (21%)
475 acres (31.8%)
606 ha
17.1 m
8.5 m
51,515,753 m2
192.2 ha
NORTH _B AS_IN
Lake surface area
Maximum depth
Mean depth
Lake basin volume
Littoral area
4,924 acres (77%)
76 ft
32.5 ft
158,899 acre-ft (79%)
1,484 acres (30.1%)
1,993.4 ha
23.2 m
9.8 m
196,018,917 m3
600.6 ha
Stump Lake
Stump Lake is a publicly-owned artificial lake with one direct access
area. The total surface area is 290 acres and the mean depth is 7.7 feet
(Table 3-3). This lake was created in 1909 by the construction of the Stump
Lake hydroelectric generation dam, which is operated by Otter Tail Power
Company. It is a shallow, highly flushed extension of the River with the
greatest depth development at the dam. The maximum depth at this location is
about 24 feet (MONK 1977). The littoral area represents over 80% of the lake
surface area.
3-11
-------
Wolf Lake
Wolf Lake (also called Big Wolf Lake has a surface area of 1,051 acres
and a mean depth of 22.7 feet (Table 3-3). The maximum depth of about 60 feet
occurs in the southern portion of the lake. The lake volume is 23,838 acre-
feet, much less than that of Lake Bemidji. The littoral development, however,
is similar to that of Lake Bemidji and equals 32% of the lake surface are-i.
The major axis of Wolf Lake is oriented in a north-south direction and 1.:
about i.5 miles long. The inlet and outlet of the lake are situated in c.o^o
proximity (0.4 mile-s) on the north end of the lake. It is probable that Wolf
Laki- is not completely mixed, with a significant portion of the incoming water
flowing directly across the north end to the outlet (USEPA 1974b).
Lake Andrusia
Lake Andrusia receives water flow from Wolf Lake and is abou t one mile
downstream from it. The lake surface area is about 1,510 acres (Table 3--.'-5) .
The mean depth is 24.6 feet and the volume was calculated to be 37,202 acre--
feet. The extent of the Littoral zone translates on an aceal basis to A'-i
acres, which is 30% of the total lake surface. The maximum '.er.g-.Ji is u ii:.
2.5 miles and is oriented in a north-south direction,, Predorrri.i ant we >:-
flowage from the River is believed to occur in the south has Li a/ea ..-,,.,.;
inlet and outlet are less than one mile apart. As was indicated ฃ"': Woli
Lake, Lake Andrusia may not be completely mixed; instead, some -.i OL' - clrr.n I lei'
[low in.iy occur according to the path of Least res Lstauce from *>.
Ilorphome trie similarities may be observed between the bastes of
Andrusia and Wolf and the south basin of Lake BemLdji. These basias ha*a
similar surface areas, mean depths, volumes, and littoral areas.
Cass Lake
Cass Lake is tne largest of the chain of lakes in the study area wi):"'
surface area of 15,596 acres. Volume calculations were not attempted becc^
of the lack of accurate bathymetric maps. The volume esvimate of 33^
acre-feet (USEPA 1974d) does demonstrate, nonetheless, that this "a'/.ฃ conca.-.rr-
many times the water volume of the other lakes under consideration- The 'uvin
depth Ls estimated to be about 25 feet and the littoral zone Is a r. jfns-: "*-/,!
of the total surface area.
Several islands occur in the lake basin producing a complicated bathy-
metry in Gass Lake. The largest island, Star Island, essentially separates
the western arm of the lake from the rest of the basin produciag what is
called Allen's Bay. The principal hydrologic vector is the Mississippi River,
which flows into the far eastern corner of Allen's Bay and exits at the north-
2astern lake perimeter. The City of Cass Lake is located along the south-
western shoreline of Cass Lake.
iVATER QUALITY
Information concerning the quality of the Upper Mississippi River and the
Jpper Mississippi Chain of Lakes has been compiled from three study poricds-3 ,
3-12
-------
representing the efforts of three different agencies over a period of eight
years. In 1972, USEPA surveyed Lakes Beraidji, Wolf, Andrusia, and Cass as
part of the National Eutrophication Survey (NES) . Five lake stations were
sampled three times over the period from July through September 1972. Stream
flow measurements and tributary sampling also were conducted in this study.
MPCA collected spring and summer data at five lake stations on Wolf Lake and
Lake Andrusia during 1976, 1977, and 1978. In 1978, spring and summer data
also were collected for Lake Bemidji and for Allen's Bay of Cass Lake. Stream
flow measurements were not obtained. During the period from 1978 through
1980, Bemidji State University (BSU) conducted an extensive data collection
program under contract with MPCA, sampling five lake and twelve stream sta-
tions (MPCA 1980b) .
Available information indicates that existing surface water quality for
the Mississippi River, its tributaries, and the Chain of Lakes downstream from
liemiilji generally is good in regard to standard chemical and biochemical
parameters. Of primary concern is the phosphorus loading, which contributes
to the eutrophication of the Chain of Lakes.
A detailed discussion of the existing surface water quality is presented
in Section 3.1.3.1. of the Draft EIS, as amended by pages 11 through 35 of
MPCA's Supplement (Part II). Readers interested in a tecnical, quantitative
discussion are urged to consult MPCA's Supplement. A qualitative summary
discussion is presented in the following.
The major water quality concern in the Bemidji area today is the accel-
eration of eutrophication in the Upper Mississippi River Chain of Lakes.
Eut roplurat Ion Is a term which, in its classical sense, is used to describe
the natural aging process of lakes. Most bodies of freshwater are nutrient
deficient during their early stages of existence and produce relatively small
quantities of aquatic plants and animals. But as time passes, nutrients and
sediments contributed to the lake through runoff from its drainage basin and
its own biologic communities accumulate, gradually filling in the lake with
silt and organic debris. Normally, eutrophication is a slow process occurring
over a period of many hundreds or thousands of years; however, the rate of
eutrophication is greatly accelerated if abundant nutrient sources are located
within the watershed of the lake. When these nutrient sources are the result
of human activities, the result is termed accelerated or cultural eutrophica-
tion, to describe the rapid nutrient enrichment which takes place. Nutrient
contributions from such human activities as wastewater treatment plant efflu-
ent disposal, urbanization, intensive lakeshore development, and agricultural
activities can cause even large lakes to become eutrophic, or over-nourished,
in only a few years.
Lake Beuiial
The quality of Lake Bemidji apparently has been degraded by the reintro-
duction of WWTP effluent phosphorus in June 1978. Mean transparency (as
measured with a Secchi disc) was 2.1 m (6.9 ft) in September 1972, and chloro-
phyll a_ concentrations ranged from 6.6 to 9.2 ug/1, averaging 7.8 ug/1.
During 1974 and 1975, lake transparency was measured weekly by volunteers
through the MPCA Citizen Lake Monitoring Program. During July-August of these
two years, transparency in the extreme northern basin of Lake Bemidji averaged
3-13
-------
/>.6r) in (ป.7 ft). After tin- relocation of the WWTP discharge to Lake Bemidjt
La ly/tt, however, lake, transparency appraently has decreased.. Transparency
readings indicated better transparency in the northern Basin than the southern
basin. Measurements of whole lake transparency during 1980 indicate a de-
crease in transparency to an averge depth of 1.58 meters (5.2 ft), with a
minimum recorded measurement of 1.2 m (3.9 ft) occurring in the southern
basin. Chlorophyll a_ concentrations in Lake Bemidji indicated a 3-fold in-
crease in 1980 relative to 1978 (8.8 ug/1 in 1978, 9.5 ug/1 in 1979, and 24.4
ug/1 in 1980).
Wolf Lake
In contrast, to Lake Bemidji, Wolf Lake apparently has improved signifi-
cantly In quality sLnee the change of the point of effluent discharge from the
Bemidji WWTP and the application of interim phosphorus controls at the plant.
The NES study in 1972 reported July and September secchi disc transparency
measurements of 0.84 m (2.75 ft) and 1.5 m (5 ft), respectively. Chlorophyll
a values for the same period were 13.0 and 12.7 ug/1, though a degree of error
has been associated with these values. During 1976 and 1977, July-August
transparency measurements averaged 1.17 in (3.8 ft), ranging from 0.8 m (2.6
ft) to 1.5 m (4.9 ft). Corresponding chlorophyll a_ concentrations averaged
43.5 ug/1, ranging from 26.0 to 73.0 ug/1. After reloction of the WWTP dis-
charge, mean July-August transparency ranged from 1.44 m (4.7 ft) in 1980 to
2.22 m (7.3 ฃt) in 1979, with a 3-year minimum value of 1.2 m (3.9 ft)
relative to an average transparency of 1.2m prior to 1978. Corresponding
chlorophyll a measurements indicate July-August concentrations of 9.4 ug/1 in
1978, 9.8 ug7l in 1979, and 19.2 ug/1 in 1980. The lower mean concentration
of chlorophyll a and increased water transparency indicate that, in general,
lake productivity has decreased and water quality has improved in Wolf Lake
since the 1978 change in the location and quality of the WWTP effluent.
Lake Andrusia
Water quality data for Lake Andrusia also indicate improvement since the
relocation of the WWTP discharge in 1978. Single measurements in July and
September 1972 indicated a transparency of 1.1 m (3.5 ft) and: 1.5 m (5 ft),
respectively. The average of 2 chlorophyll a_ measurements during the 2 months
was 10.8 ug/1. Water transparency during 1976 and 1977 (8 samples) averaged
about 1.4 meters (4.6 ft) in the summer, ranging from 0.9 m (3.0 ft) to 1.8 m
(5.9 ft). Corresponding chlorophyll a_ surface concentrations averaged 27 ug/1
in both the south basin and the north basin. During the summers of 1978-1980,
the mean transparency exceeded pre-1978 measurements and ranged from 1.7 m
(5.6 ft) to 2.1 m (6.9 ft). Mean summer chlorophyll ^concentrations varied
from 8.5 to 21 ug/1 during the same periods.
3.1.3.2. Groundwater
The availability of groundwater in the various surficial deposits in the
Bemidji area is well documented by WAPORA (1977a) and USDI (1970), Groundwater
characteristics pertinent to the construction and operation of an on-land
wastewater treatment system at Bemidji, which includes consideration of near-
surface groundwater levels and quality, is presented in Section 3.1.3.2. of
the DIM ft E1S.
3-14
-------
The water table tn the Bemidji area does not remain stationary but fluc-
tuates in response to the loss or gain of groundwater. Many field studies
have been made in the Upper Mississippi River Basin and in hydrologically
similar areas. They have shown the close relationship between groundwater
levels and precipitatLon (USD! 1970). The groundwater level is highest in
April or May and lowest during January or February. The fluctuations, how-
ever, do not appear to be of a large magnitude at Bemidji.
At Bemidji, the water-table elevation is approximately the same as the
water level in Lake Bemidji at any given time. Records of lake levels, there-
fore, give groundwater elevations. The following fluctuations in surface
elevations have been observed for Lake Beraidji and Wolf Lake (WAPORA 1977a):
Annual Long-Term
Fluctuation Fluctuation.
Lake Bemidji +1.5 to -1.5 + 2 to -2
Wolf Lake +0.5 to -0.5 +1.0 to -1.0
Because groundwater is not expected to be significantly affected by a new
tertiary treatment plant at Bemidji, additional discussion of the subject is
not warranted (refer to Section 3.1.3.2. of Draft EIS for further discussion).
3.1.4. Endangered, Threatened, and Rare Species
One species classified as endangered on the Federal list of endangered
and threatened species (44 FR 3636-3654) may be present in the Bemidji project
area: the American peregrine falcon. The peregrine falcon no longer breeds
in Minnesota, and would be present in the project area only during migration
periods.
Two species classified as threatened on the Federal list inhabit the
project area: the bald eagle and the gray wolf (also called timber wolf).
More than 100 pairs of bald eagles are known to breed in the Chippewa National
Forest, which surrounds most of the Leech Lake Indian Reservation to the east
of Bemidji (Mathisen 1977). This is the largest breeding population of bald
eagles Ln the coterminous United States. Two bald eagle nests reportedly are
locate 1 ddjacent to Lake Andrusia and one is located along the stretch of
river between Lake Bemidji and Stump Lake (Mathisen 1977).
The gray wolf is considered by Federal authorities to be endangered in 47
of the 48 coterminus states, but populations in Minnesota are sufficiently
large so that the species has been given threatened status in the State. A
small population of approximately 30 to 50 individuals is present in the
Chippewa National Forest east of Bemidji (By telephone, Mr. John Mathisen,
Chief Biologist, Chippewa National Forest, to WAPORA, Inc.), but only rare
sightings have been recorded for the project area.
The State of Minnesota has no official list of endangered and threatened
species. Under present State law, the State list is the same as the Federal
list. A publication prepared by the MDNR (Moyle 1980) contains an unofficial
list of 5 species considered to be endangered and 6 species considered to be
threatened within the State. The list includes 8 species not on the Federal
list, but none of these other species are known to occur within the Bemidji
3-15
-------
area. The publication also contains a list of 35 species designated as Prior-
ity Species, which are considered to be uncommon or local within the State but
are not presently threatened or endangered. Eleven of these species have been
recorded in the Bemidji area. The endangered, threatened, and priority spe-
cies known or likely to inhabit the project area are listed in Table 3-6 of
the Draft EIS. None of these species are expected to be affected by the
proposed wastewater management project.
3.2. Man-made Environment
3.2.L. Economics
Tourism is an extremely important eomponiMi I of the economy 1 n the Bซmidji
re;',ion. The iiiiiwions high-quality I I sli Lng lakes in the uorthwoods setting of
t lie Bemiilji area is an attraction to tourists from throughout the Midwest.
Trades and services that seek to satisfy the demands of visitors to the area
include resorts, motels, gas stations, and restaurants. To the exent that
changes in the quality of the recreational waters of the area affect their
desirability for recreation, the degradation of water quality by WWTP effluent
discharge can affect the area economy.
The importance of the recreational industry to the Bemidji area is dis-
cussed in detail in pages 6 to 36 of Part I of MPCA's Supplement to the Draft
EIS. According to the data collected and evaluated by MPCA staff, the Bemidji
area is estimated to support 535,925 visitor days of water-based recreation.
The 4'i,l(S9 acres of surface water supplied by Lakes Bemidji, Andrusia, Wolf,
and Ca.ss, most of ซrhich is suitable for recreation, is roughly 14% of the
ava LI ,ih I..: recreational Lake area of Bel tain L and Cass Counties. The area
support^ j/ resorts, or roughly 378 resort units, 31 campgrounds (496 units),
45 water access areas, 49 beaches, and 454 seasonal homes.
Seven different estimates of the magnitude of expenditures by visitors to
the Upper Mississippi Chain of Lakes area, each based on different assump-
tions, are presented in MPCA's Supplement (page 13 of Part I of the Supple-
ment). These range from $4.6 to $30.1 million annually. The tourist expendi-
tures result in additional economic activity (respending) in the area, result-
ing in what is termed the "multiplier" effect (estimated to be 2.19 times the
total direct tourist expenditures). Thus, for each dollar spent by a visitor
in the region, an additional $1.19 in economic activity is generated.
Based on Nordie and Smith (1974), MPCA staff determined that about $28 is
spent per visitor-day per family in the Bemidji area, and that an average
Length of stay is roughtly 13 days. This leads to the conclusion that a
family may spend $3b5 in the region on a trip; the multiplier indicates that
$434 of additional spending will take place as the result of the initial
expenditure.
The initial tourist expenditure, as well as the induced expenditure,
provides income for the residents of the region. By utilizing appropriate
income multipliers, MPCA calculations indicate that the initial expenditure by
tourists generates between $11,532,122 and $21,316,623 of income annually to
the region. This is roughly 14% to 25% of the total area income. The overall
income multipliers for the area is estimated to be 2.68. This means that for
every dollar of household income in the region generated by tourist sales, an
3-16
-------
additional $1.68 of income is generated throughout the local economy. Based
on the assumption that each tourist family spends $365 on a trip to the re-
gion, the multiplier indicates that $978 of regional income is attributable to
this expenditure.
Increased area income translates directly into increased employment.
Employment information for Beltrami and Cass Counties and the City of Bemidji
indicates a large proporton of service and retail trade sector employment (see
Table VII, page 25, of Part I of MPCA's Supplement). Thus it can be concluded
that income, employment, and earnings in the Bemidji area all are significant-
ly dependent on the water-based tourism industry of the area. This, in turn,
largely is dependent on the quality of the recreation experience; i.e., the
quality oE the Upper Mississippi River Chain of Lakes. (Additional informa-
tion about employment and major employers in the Bemidji area is presented in
Section 3.2.1.2. of the Draft EIS.)
MiiJJIAM FAMILY INCOME
Median family income is used by USEPA as an indicator of a community's
ability to afford new wastewater facilities. In 1979 the median family income
for Beltrami County was $12,200. Median family income data for the City of
Bemidji for 1979 are not available. The distribution of family income for
Bemidji, however, has been compiled from the 1970 Census by the Minnesota
Analysis and Planning System (MAPS). Based on the assumption that the rela-
tive distribution of incomes has remained constant over the period since 1970
and that the 1970 values can be inflated based on inflation of the Consumer
Price Index over the same period, an estimate of $14,018 for the median family
income of the City of Bemidji is derived (see Table II of Part I of MPCA's
Supplement). This is roughly $1,800 higher than that estimated for Beltrami
County. The higher median family income for Bemidji relative to the rest of
the County is typical of trends in other regions of the US.
Beinidji and Beltrami County are relatively poor; median incomes lag well
behind those for the US ($17,300) and the North Central Census Region, which
includes Minnesota ($18,400 over the area, $16,750 for the non-SMSA areas; HUD
1979). The estimated $14,018 median family income for Bemidji is 24% lower
than that for the US as a whole and 20% less than the overall non-SMSA areas
of the North Central Census Region.
For 1979 the threshold poverty level for non-farm families in the US was
$7,410 (By phone, Ms. Roberson, Librarian, Bureau of Labor Statistics, to
WAPOHA, Inc., 12 May 1980). At least 20% of the families in Beltrami County,
including residents of Bemidji, are below this threshold.
3.2.2. Memographics
3.2.2.1. Past and Prey tut Population
Bemidji is the largest city in Beltrami County, Minnesota. During 1980,
the State Demographer estimated the 1980 Bemidji population to be 12,271;
however, the 1980 Preliminary Census population is 10,868. This figure indi-
cates a loss of 804 persons (7%) since 1970 (1970 Census population was
11,490).
3-17
-------
In 1970, Bemidji was one of only 47 municipalities in Minnesota with a
population within the 10,000 to 50,000 size range. The composition of the
population of Bemidji is similar to the other municipalities of this same size
range. According to 1970 data, each have predominantly white populations (98%
of the Bemidji population), females outnumber males (51% of the Bemidji popu-
lation), and each exhibits a young age profile (the median age of the popula-
tion in Bemidji was 23.2 years).
Past population data are presented in Table 3-5. Data are shown for the
State, the five Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas (SMSAs) in Minnesota,
a seven-county region that includes Beltrami County, for Beltrami County, the
City of Bemidji, Bemidji State University, and the six townships adjacent to
Bemidji (Bemidji, Eckles, Frohn, Grant Valley, Northern, and Turtle River
Townships). Additional data are shown for an aggregate "Bemidji urban area"
that includes the City of Bemidji and the six adjoining townships.
Population in Minnesota shifted from rural areas to urban areas during
the period from 1950 to 1970. Population in the SMSAs grew at a much faster
rate than the State as a whole. Correspondingly, the population of the seven
county rural area that includes Beltrami County decreased. In contrast with
the seven-county area, Beltrami County lost population during the 1950 to 1960
period, but gained population between 19bO and 1970.
The rural population (the County population excluding the Bemidji urban
area) decreased by an average of 158 persons per year (Table 3-5) between 1950
and 1960, and continued to decrease at a lower average annual rate of 75.2
persons between I960 and 1970. The substantial growth of Bemidji between 1960
and 1970 (+15.4%) accounted for the overall increase in Beltrami County's
population during that decade.
Since 1970, the trend has reversed and the 1976 US Census Estimates
indicate that the rural population is now growing at an average of 311 persons
annually. During the period from 1970 to 1976, the rural area of Beltrami
County accounted for 49.47, of the population growth. The Bemidji urban area
percentage1 ol. the County population decreased trom 63.5% to 61.8% during this
same six-year period.
An analysis of the Bemidji urban area population data indicates that
during the period from 1950 to 1976, the population of the City and the six
adjacent townships increased by 5,575 people (Table 3-5). The rate of in-
crease grew from an average of 40 person per year between 1950 and 1960, to
310 persons per year between I960 and 1970. A slight reduction in the rate of
increase (an average of 305 persons per year) occurred during the six years
following 1970. This was primarily the result of the significant decline in
enrollment at Bemidji State University during this period (439 students).
The share of the growth in the Bemidji area occurring within the City of
Bemidji is declining as the adjoining townships attract new growth and the
urbanised area expands and fills In. Analysis of the 1976 US Census Popula-
tion Estimates indicates that Bemidji's population decreased by 75 persons
between 1970 and 1976. If the revised 1976 population for Bemidji of 11,789
is used, then Bemidji grew at an average of only 0.4%, or 123 persons per year
between 19/0 and 1976 (1.8% average annual growth in the resident population
3-18
-------
o
\o
ON
o
m
en
3
co
C
0)
u
3
to
0)
pq
CO
to
i
o
TJ
O
H
P -H
O CO
U-l rJ
cu
co >
4-ป *H
CO C
TJ ^3
d a)
O 4-1
CO CO
ii
3 -H
CX T->
O T3
a, -H
E
ID (II
CU M
4-1
O -
0) CT\
rH r-
0) ON
CO rH
ro
CO
-
CO
H
O
m
CO cd
m o
^r o
,n
3
K
*
^
0)
4-1
n)
g
CO
CU
1
1^
c_>
CO
CO
cd
s
rj
g
cd
4-1
rH
cu
PQ
.
CO
a.
|rj
CO
ง
0
H
^i
&
H
r
H
Pฃ<
CU
rH
4J
>H
3
H
rrj
c
cd
in
d
S-i
4-1
E3
cd
o
n
C
o
M
^
CO
cu
rH
*y^
O
w
M
-H
I)
H
0
CU
pq
en
3
i
1~^
a,
H
ปi j
T)
H
0
CU
cq
MH
O
!=->
4-1
H
C_3
3-19
-------
excluding BSU). Consequently, while the City of Bemidji accounted for 76.3%
of the Bemidji urban area population in 1960, it accounted for only 68.6% by
1970, and 63.4% in 1976 (based on the revised L976 Bemidji population esti-
mate) .
While the Bemidji urbanized area is growing at approximately the same
number of persons per year as the rural area (305 persons and 311 persons per
annum, respectively), and has accounted for over half (51.6%) of Beltrami
County's growth between 1970 and 1976, the City is losing ground in terms of
the percentage of total County population. Furthermore, if the current trends
continue, the City of Bemidji will represent a decreasing percentage of the
total urban area of the county as a whole.
3.2.2.2. Future Population
At least seven different projections of future population have been made
for Bemidji by six different agencies, consultants, or government entities.
Most of the project tons are arithmetic extrapolations based on historical
population data. These vary according to the assumptions made by the analyst
making the projections. For example, some projections are based on historical
data for the period from 1940 to 1970, while others are based only on popula-
tion trends between 1960 and 1970. Some analysts have separated the Bemidji
State University student population from the resident population and computed
separate projections for each to arrive at a composite figure. Other projec-
tions have been made computing Bemidji's population as a percentage of the
total Beltrami County population or have attempted to take into consideration
more subjective factors such as proposed industrial growth in the Bemidji area
or national trends in population migration between urban and rural areas. The
projections also sometimes represent a median between several projections
based on different assumptions (i.e., high and low scenarios). In summary,
there is no "correct" projection methodology. All projections fall into the
realm of "reasoned judgement." While some projections can be considered
better than others on a relative scale, none can be considered accurate or
precise.
The population projections for Bemidji for the year 2000 range from
13,553 to 18,500 (Table 3-6) and have been the topic of considerable dis-
cussion and debate. Stewart & Walker, Inc., the original Facilities Planning
engineers, recommended a year-2000 design population of 17,500 (Stewart &
Walker 1976). WAPORA estimated the year-2000 population as 14,183 in 1977 and
revised this number to 14,640 in 1979. In June 1979 the Bemidji City Council
passed a resolution supporting an estimate of 18,500 as the desired year-2000
population. Following passage of the resolution, Bemidji officials met with
USEPA, MPCA, and Congressional officials in Washington DC to determine, among
other things, which projection should be used in the wastewater treatment
facility design process. It then was decided that all further studies for the
treatment system would be based on a "resident service population" of 16,500.
This figure is not an exact projection for the City of Bemidji, but rather a
compromise that was arrived at to allow design work to proceed. No estimates
of non-rasident, transient population to be served by the wastewater treatment
facility were made. The estimate is intended to account for sewer service to
Bemidji residents, transients, and several developed areas presently outside
the sewer service area that may be served by sewers by the year 2000,.
3-20
-------
The basis for this projection, as proposed by the City of Bemidji is (By
letter of 18 July 1979 from Mr. Donald G. Dougherty, Bemidji City Manager, to
MPCA):
Present Population ... 12,000
Year 2,000 Population (1% increase per year
from 1 July 1979 to 31 December 1999 = 20.5% ,
Service Area (from Stewart & Walker 1976)
1,000 population x 2% growth per year . . . ,
Addition of Hillcrest Manor (By actual count:
240 houses x 3.5 people per house in area
defined as from new Highway 71 to Lake
Bemidji, and from 30th to 38th St., and also
to include Hillcrest Manor Trailer Court). . ,
TOTAL
Rounded estimate for year 2,000
2,460
1,060
840
16,360
16,500
Table 3-6. Projected populations for the CLty of Bemidji (after RCM 1979a).
Year
1990
1995
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
Population
14,600
16,600
13,553
14,183
16,080
16,726
17,500
18,500
16,500
Comments
Projection by Aguar Jyring Whiteraan Moser
(1971) in 1971 Comprehensive Plan
Projection by Stewart & Walker (1973)
in Facilities Plan
Projection by Minnesota Analysis and
Planning System based on population
trends from 1940 to 1970 (Hoyt and
others 1973)
Projection by WAPORA (1977a) in Existing
Conditions Report
Projections by Barton-Aschman Associates (1978)
ranged from 11,490 to 22,580 depending
on the projection methodology utilized,
with 16,080 suggested as the appropriate
planning guide
Projection by Minnesota Analysis and
Planning System based on population trends
from 1960 to 1970 (Hoyt and others 1973)
Projection by Stewart & Walker (1976)
in the Facilities Plan Supplement
Bemidji City Council passed resolution
June 1979 supporting this figure
"Service Population" for City of Bemidji agreed
to by MPCA, USEPA, and the City of Bemidji
3-21
-------
3.2.3. Land Use
J.2.3.1. lixi sting Development Patterns
Working Paper #4, "Development Patterns and Opportunities," was prepared
by Barton-Aschman Associates (1978b), as a component of the Growth Management
Plan commissioned by the City of Bemidji during 1978. The document is the
most recent summary of existing land use in Bemidji. The working paper indi-
cates that residential and commercial/industrial land uses are predominant in
Bemidji, with institutional and other public and quasi-public uses represent-
ing the majority of the remaining land area within the City of Bemidji.
According to Barton-Aschman (1978b):
Residential development makes up the majority of Bemidji's de-
veloped area. In the 1960s approximately 560 acres were in
residential use. Most residential development is single-family
dwellings. The residential development pattern reflects the
general pattern of development in the Bemidji area. Development
has stretched along the western shore of Lake Bemidji across the
narrow isthmus between Lake Irving and Lake Bemidji to the south
and the eastern shores of Lake Bemidji. Urban development
reaches approximately one mile back from the west and south
shores of Lake Bemidji. Virtually, the entire lakeshore of Lake
Bemidji has experienced some degree of development. Development
also has extended out along the major roads (US 2 & S.H. 71)
serving Bemidji. Low intensity, scattered residenticil develop-
ment occurs throughout the Bemidji Area generally locating in
areas with access and natural amenities. The natural amenity of
the Mississippi River and Lake Irving has attracted residential
development both within Bemidji and outside of Bemidji,.
Multi-family development tends to be concentrated near the down-
town area and Bemidji State University. While some apartments
have been built in other parts of the city, none are located
south of Lake Bemidji in the Nymore neighborhood. The mobile
home parks in the area are located at the edges of the city or
outside the city proper.
Commercial and industrial development occupies a lesser amount of
land than residential. The primary concentrations are located in
the Central Business District (CBD) and along U.S. 2 on the north
end of town. Other small commercial areas are located elsewhere
such as the northern end of Bemidji Avenue, and the Lake Irving-
Lake Bemidji isthmus.
Industrial development has concentrated in areas served by rail.
Industrial development is located just south of the CBD, along
the south shore of Lake Bemidji and in the industrial park at the
southern tip of the City.
3-22
-------
Bartou-Aschman analyzed building permit data for the four previous years
and presented in the working paper those areas where recent development has
occurred:
Residential growth has occurred predominately on the east side of
the city, along county roads 12 and 19 and in the Nymore neigh-
borhood. Some building has also occurred on the northern edge of
Bemidji. Extensive growth has occurred outside Bemidji as ex-
hibited by population increases between 1960 and 1970 in Northern
and Bemidji townships. During that period Northern and Bemidji
Townships grew 99% and 67%, respectively. By comparison the City
of Bemidji grew 15%.
Commercial and industrial development has occurred along the
major arterial routes through the community - US 2 and US 71, and
within the CBD. Other key growth areas have been the industrial
park area and the northwest edge of. Bemidji in the vicinity of US
2. The most notable growth in the area is the Paul Bunyan Mall,
the new hospital, the Minnesota State Office Building and the
Holiday Inn. Non-tourism related commercial/industrial growth
outside the City limits has been extremely limited.
Barton-Aschman Associates (1978b) also noted that the existing develop-
ment pattern in Bemidji has been formed by the numerous natural growth bar-
riers (the lakes and wetlands). Nearly half of Lake Bemidji and almost all of
Lake Irving are within the City boundaries. A variety of wetlands exist
within or adjacent to the City; wetlands border on the west and north of the
City.
Land available to accomodate future development does exist, both within
the existing City boundaries and in adjacent areas, according to Barton-
Ajchiuan Associates (I978b):
Within Bemidji there i r; [sic] approximately 2,000 acres of vacant
laud. Most of tlii;: Land Ls at the outer edges of the city. Some
of the vacant land is in small scattered parcels. More than 500
acres of the vacant land is wetland. Of the remaining 1,500
acres approximately 200 is served by existing sewer and water.
This land represents opportunity areas for urban development.
Outside Bemidji city limits, stretching in all directions, is
extensive areas of farmland, pasture land, woodlands and open
land. This land, even though it may currently be used, repre-
sents areas where urban development could occur. Much of this
land is particularly appealing because of its natural features
(proximity to water or forest character) and has experienced
development, pressures.
Bartoii-Atichman Associates (I978b) qualified their discussion of develop-
ment opportunities in the following way:
It .should be noted that Bemidji would have a difficult time, even
if desirable, to accommodate all future growth within Its present
corporate boundaries. The challenge becomes how to attract and
guide desired development into those areas of the community in a
3-23
-------
manner consistent with public resources and private needs. Since
much of anticipated developments will occur outside present
corporate limits, a partnership must be forged with other govern-
mental jurisdictions to assure orderly development in the best
long-range interest of all area residents.
They outlined basic principles that should be incorporated into the planning
for future development in Workpaper #9 (Barton-Aschraan 1979).
The discussion of basic urban services available in Bemidji is presented
in Barton-Aschman's Working Paper #5, "Urban Systems Summary: Existing Condi-
tions, Principles, and Preliminary Policies" (1978c). Their report summarizes
the existing condition of public utilities (water, sanitary sewer, and storm
sewer), the transportation system, emergency services, and recreation oppor-
tunities. Because of the pertinence of some of this information to under-
standing the importance from a growth perspective of providing expanded and
upgraded wastewater treatment facilities, the entire working paper was re-
produced in Appendix A of the Draft EIS.
3.2.3.2. Projected Development
Barton-Aschman's Working Paper #3, "Development Projections," (1978d)
provides estimates of the number of acres of land required to support antici-
pated population growth in the Bemidji area. Their projections are based on a
year-2000 population for the City of Bemidji of 16,080, which corresponds
roughly with the year-2000 wastewater treatment plant design population within
Bemidji, as selected by the City of Bemidji and the Minnesota Pollution Con-
trol Agency (Section 3.3.1.2.).
As presented by Barton-Aschman Associates (1978d), 2,200 to 2,500 acres
of presently vacant or agricultural land in the Bemidji area may become urban-
ized by the year 2000 (Table 3-7). This land area represents nearly as much
land as currently is developed (i.e., represents a doubling in the size of the
urbanized area).
Table 3-7. Summary of year-2000 land requirement for urban growth in Bemidji
and the surrounding townships (after Barton-Aschman 1978d).
Type of
Development
Residential
Commercial
Industrial
Of f ice/Gov/ Service
Recreation
Public R.O.W.3
Total Urban Growth
City of Bemidji
(acres)
438
27-44
26
24
46
213-218
773-796
Su r rounding
Townships
(acres)
901
0
54
50
91
404
1501
Total for
Bemidji Area
(acres)
1,339
27-44
80
74
137
617-623
2,274-2,297
Estimated public rights-of-way land necessary to provide streets, utility
corridors, etc. was based on 25% of total acreage.
3-24
-------
A breakdown of this development projection for each land-use category in
5-year increments, as presented by Barton-Aschman (1978d), was provided in
Appendix G of the Draft EIS.
As discussed in the previous section, the projected growth cannot be
accommodated within the existing city boundaries. There are only about 1,500
acres of developable land remaining within the city. Therefore, at least 700
to 1,000 acres of the projected development will occur outside the municipal
boundaries. The actual percentage of growth may be somewhat higher than that
projected because the surrounding townships are growing more rapidly than
Bemidji is, and the controls on growth are less stringent in the townships
than within Bemidji. The future growth patterns and the. degree to which
growth actually occurs within the municipal boundaries depends on Bemidji1s
success in implementing the recommendations in the Growth Management Plan.
3.2.3.3. National Wild and Scenic Rivers System
The Upper Mississippi River has been recommended for inclusion in the
National Wild and Scenic River System (USD1 1976). The National Park Service
(NFS) completed the draft Upper Mississippi River Master Plan in August 1980
and held Public Meetings on it during September. The Plan proposes that six
segments of the River be included in the National System. Two additional
segments would be eligible for inclusion upon request by the Governor. In the
Bemidji area, the 48-mile reach from the River's source at Lake Itasca to the
Iron II rid ,',(. (Beltrami County Road 7) southwest of Bemidji would be designated
as the Headwaters UnLt and classified "wild." The Unit would be iranaged
jointly by the State and Beltrami, Clearwater, and Hubbard Counties through a
cooperative agreement. The reach from County Road 7 to Lake Bemidji and the
reacSi from Otter Tail Dam to Allen's Bay of Cass Lake originally was proposed
to be classified as "recreational;" however, they were excluded from the Plan
because of shoreland development. The recognition of segments of the Upper
Mississippi River for inclusion in the National River System indicates further
the importance for maintaining the water quality of the River at Bemidji.
3.2.4. Public Finance
A variety of community services are provided the residents of the City
of Br-midji, including education, transportation facilities, full-time police
and fire protection, library and recreation facilities, garbage collection and
disposal, wastewater collection and treatment, and water supply. The ability
to maintain or improve these services is dependent on the continued ability of
City residents to finance them.
3.2.4.1. Revenues and Expenditures
In 1979, the City of Bemidji collected revenues totaling $4,336,617. In-
tergovernmental transfers (55.5%), revenues from special assessments (17.7%),
taxes (10.07,), and charges for services (4.8%) were the four largest sources
of revenue. All monies are allocated to one of the five governmental funds
(see Appendix H of the Draft EI3).
The general fund and the special revenue fund together received $3,349,028
(77.0%) of the City's 1979 revenues., These two funds provide for most of the
City's operating budget. General fund monies are used to meet the day-to-day
expenses of the City. The largest expenditures are for public safety (42.0%),
streets (19.5%), and general governmental expenses (15.7%). Special revenue
-------
fund;? .ire used to support permanent institutions such as the library, park,
airport, and permanent public improvements.
The remaining funds, special assessments, debt service, and capital
projects, received $987,589 of the total collected revenue. These are non-
discretionary .nonies already allocated to specific projects or accounts. As a
result, these resources cannot be transferred easily to other funds.
The City of Bemidji is not responsible for the revenues and expenditures
of the school system. School operations are the responsibility of the school
district and, therefore, are not included in the City audit.
3.2.4.2. Tax Assessments
BeraidjL property taxes were assessed at a rate of $124.251 per $1,000
assessed valuation in 1979. This included taxes levied by the county
($39.697/^1,000 valuation), the school district ($59.853/$l,000 valuation),
the City ($24.559/$l,000 valuation), and the Headwaters Regional Development
Commission ($0.142/$1,000 valuation) (Minnesota Department of Economic De-
velopment 1979). A breakdown of the total tax rate was presented in Appendix
II of the Draft EIS.
As required by State law, most property in Bemidji is assessed at 43% of
market value. However, market values often are underestimated arid some resi-
dents receive Homestead Tax Credits or Mobil Homestead Tax Credits. Thus,
property taxes cannot be estimated solely on the basis of assessed valuation
and will rates.
3.2.4.3. City Indebtedness
The City of Bemidji appears to be financially sound and not over burdened
with debt. The outstanding debt of the City, payable from tax levies, was
$825,OUu at the end of 1979 (liy letter, Mrs. Dorothy Boe, Acting City Manager,
28 March 1980, to WAPORA, Inc.). This debt, equivalent to $83.20/ capita, is
extremely low relative to an average community. By comparison,, the latest
available data (1976) show that the average non-metropolitan Minnesota city
incurred total debts equivalent to $486/capita (Minnesota State Planning
Agency 1978) .
Whether a city can incur additional debt safely can be estimated by
applying two common debt measures shown in Table 3-8. (Moak and Hillhouse
1975). As illustrated by the table, Bemidji falls well below the upper limits
set by Moak and Hillhouse (1975). Thus the City should be able to sustain
additional debt, such as its share of the new wastewater treatment facilities,
without excessive strain on its financial system.
Table i-8. Common municipal debt measures.
o
Parameters Standard Upper Limits Bemidji 1979
Debt/Total Assessed Valuation 10% of current market value 4.1%
Debt Service/Total Revenue 25% of total revenues 1.5%
a
Input values are discussed in Appendix H of the Draft EIS.
3-26
-------
3.2.4.4. User Costs
Existing user costs for wastewater collection and treatment, water sup-
ply, and. refuse collection and disposal are determined by the City Council and
are subject to periodic re-evaluation. New rates were established in April
1980 when the Council voted to raise the charges for sewage by 20% and the
charges for water and refuse by 17% each. A Bemidji household could expect to
pay, at minimum, about $48.00/quarter for all three services (Appendix H of
the Draft EIS).
Existing user costs for wastewater collection and treatment (sewage) are
based on the metered amount of water for a household (because sewage is not
metered). The basic charge is $21.60/quarter ($7.20/month) for up to 9,000
gallons of metered water (3,000 gallons/month). For usage that exceeds 9,000
gallons/quarter, sewage charges are calculated to be 168.136% of the water
charge. The charge for water in excess of 7,000 gallons per quarter increases
according to an inverse scale; i.e., the more water used, the cheaper per
gallon It becomes (see scale in Appendix H of Draft EIS). Thus, the more
sewage produced, the lower is the user cost per 1,000 gallons. For example,
$21.60 for 9,000 gallons equates to $2.40/1,000 gallons; the charge for 30,000
gallons is $48.24, or $1.61/1,000 gallons. Carried further, the charge for a
major system user, using 900,000 gallons/quarter, would be $577.80, or $0.64/
1,000 gallons.
3.2.5. Archaeological, Historical, and Cultural Resources
An inventory of known prehistoric and historic cultural resources within
a 10-mile radius of Bemidji, Minnesota, was conducted by WAPORA, Inc. (1977a).
The National Register of Historic Places and the files of the Minnesota His-
torical Society, Fort Snelling Branch, St. Paul, Minnesota were consulted.
According to Mr. Ted Lofstrom, Archaeologist (Personal communication, 27 May
1977), "No systematic surveys have been conducted to locate either historic or
archaeological resources the chances that there are additional significant
cultural resources in your study area are very good." The exact locations of
known prehistoric sites must remain confidential to protect them from possible
vandalism.
The majority of the known sites are outside of the area that might be
affected by the siting of the proposed wastewater treatment or conveyance
facilities (WAPORA I977a). The historic, physical, and cultural sites, struc-
tures, and properties that do fall within the immediate area include:
Chief Bemidji's Statue. This impressive piece of sculpture
stands at 3rd Street and Bemidji Avenue in Bemidji, Minne-
sota
Fur Trading Post Sites. Fur trading posts were established
at Lake Bemidji during 1785 and 1832. Remains of these
posts may exist on the south side of the Mississippi River
and in the Town of Bemidji. The 1785 post was operated by
the Northwest Company
3-27
-------
The Town of Bemidji. Bemidji was an important logging
center during 1894 (USDI 1976).
Prehistoric archaeological sites within the immediate area include:
Site 21BL22. Mounds and village site in the City of Be-
mid j i near Lake Irving
Site 21BL25. Colvin habitation site on Lake Irving.
The prehistory and history of Bemidji and the Headwaters Region of the Upper
Mississippi River is presented in WAPORA (1977a).
J.Z.O. Public Sentiment
Residents of the area downstream from Bemidji, especially the Minnesota
Chippewa Tribe and the Leech Lake Reservation, have been actively concerned
for a number of years about the quality of the effluent from the Bemidji WWTP
and the water quality of the Upper Mississippi River and Chain of Lakes. A
group named Mississippi Clean, Minnesota Green (HC-MG) was organized in 1976
to oppose discharge of wastewater effluent to the Upper Mississippi River by
the City of Bemidji and to advocate land treatment of wastewater and the
general preservation of the natural resources of the area. This organization
has had active support from the City of Cass Lake, the Minnesota Chippewa
Tribe, the Leech Lake Reservation, and the Cass County Board of Commissioners.
These groups reiaaiu actively involved in water quality in the Mississippi
Headwaters area.
During October 1977, public hearings were conducted by the MPGA Board in
Bemidji and in Cass Lake as part of the consideration of reissuance of Be-
midji's NPDES permit. There was considerable public comment by MC-MG and
numerous citizens and groups concerning impacts from the City's wastewater
discharge on the Mississippi River and the importance of high water quality to
area residents. Numerous individuals presenting testimony at the hearing
indicated their perception of the importance of high water quality to Indian
and other residents, resort operators, and recreational users. The Hearing
Examiner noted that an atmosphere of "strong feeling" and "anxiety" was exhi-
bited at the hearing, indicating the highly emotional nature of the proceed-
ing. The Leech Lake Reservation Business Committee was an intervening party
to the hearing.
Subsequent to the hearing, the 11PCA Board concurred with the recommen-
dations of the State's Hearing Examiner that Bemidji should install an interim
phosphorus removal system aad change the point of discharge from the Missis-
sippi River downstream from Lake Bemidji to the inlet channel to Lake Bernidji
(the original location). The MPCA Board also requested to be notified of all
additional hookups to the Bemidji sewer system and directed that. Board ap-
proval be required prior to any extension of the sewer system in Bemidji.
Landowners and residents In areas proposed Eor land treatment, of waste-
water often have organized Ln opposition to the siting of a land treatment
facility in the area. They are concerned about the possible condemnation of
their property as well as the potential for groundwater contamination, the
3-28
-------
potential health effects from wastewater aerosol, and the potential adverse
effects on property values in areas adjacent to the wastewater facilities. In
Eckl.es Township, the Eckles Township Environmental Committee has more recently
organized MN-PINfi, Inc., a non-profit organization. They have retained legal
council to assist them in their opposition to Alternative 6.
A number of Township Boards have passed resolutions against the concept
of land treatment in their townships, including Eckles Township, Grant Valley
Township, and Liberty Township. 'While it is uncertain what legal basis the
Townships would have for actually prohibiting the siting of wastewater treat-
ment facilities, their resolutions reflect the sentiment of many rural area
residents.
The BeLtrami County Board of Commissioners passed a resolution on 5
February 1980 opposing land treatment of wastewater on the Memorial Forest
la-ids in Kckles Township. The County Board's approval is required to remove
the Memorial Forest designation and therefore allow for alternative use of the
property.
Another group of local government officials, the Beltrami County Associ-
ation of Township Officers, passed a resolution by a 45-to-l margin during
October 1979 opposing the use of Memorial Forest for land treatment of waste-
water. This group also passed a resolution in February 1980 by a 44-to-2
margin supporting "a mechanical-chemical plant with a discharge point at its
present location, the Lake Irving Outlet."
On 22 April 1980, the Bemidji Wastewater Planning Citizens Advisory
Committee met to discuss RCM's Task 5 Report. After debating the issue, the
Committee voted, by a unanimous vote of the 18 of 22 members attending, to
support Alternative 3, the conventional, tertiary treatment plant at the site
of the existing WWTP. Their resolution also points out that the Committee
"did in fact recommend by resolution in 1977 that a wastewater treatment
(mechanical-chemical) plant be built at the present location with discharge
also at the present site..." The numerous Committee meetings during the
preparation, of the EIS have served as a forum for eliciting comments from a
cross-section of local residents and for stimulating debate of the issues.
The idea that land application still could be possible again arose during
the summer and fall of 1980 while the Draft EIS was being finalized and
printed. PrDponent^ of land treatment expressed strong support for the
"Alternative 7" concept at the Hearing on the Draft EIS in September and later
for the Maple Ridge Alternative, when "Alternative 7" died for lack of feasi-
bility and/or cost effectiveness. Opponents to the proposed sites presented
arguemeiit.3 against land appllc.it ion. As expressed at the Public Meeting on
MPCA's Supptenant to the Draft EIS on 15 January 1981, however, most involved
parties appeared willing to concede that the only iinple^nentable solution was
Alternative 3 with the maximum practical phosphorus removal capability.
In summary, there has existed strong sentiments both in favor of land
treatment of wastewater to eliminate effluent phosphorus loadings in the
downstream Chain of Lakes, and against the concept of land treatment of waste-
water. The various individuals and groups that have been involved in the
3-29
-------
wastewater problem during the number of years that the issue has been debated
have expended considerable amounts of: personal resources and are strongly
polarized. In the final analysis, land treatment has been found to be either
too costly, or technically infeasible at the numerous sites proposed. Compro-
mise in building a mechanical-chemical treatment plant at the existing WWTP
site with the best practical removal of phosphorus now seems possible.
3-30
-------
4.0. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
The potential environmental consequences of the iinpleraentatioa of each of
the six wastewater treatment system alternatives in ROM's Task 5 Report were
described in detail in Section 4.0. of the Draft EIS. The "no action" alter-
native and five of the six alternatives (excluding Alternative 3) are not
considered further herein because they either are not viable solutions to the
need to improve the quality of the wastewater discharge at Bemidji, or are not
cost effective relative to Alternative 3. Therefore, only the effects of
Alternative 3, the proposed action, are discussed in the following.
The various construction (Section 4.1.) and operation (Section 4.2.)
phase effects from the tertiary treatment facilities proposed by Alternative 3
will be both beneficial and adverse and will vary in duration and degree of
significance. Environmental effects are classified either as primary or
secondary impacts: primary impacts are those effects that would be related
directly to construction and operation activities (i.e., the noise produced by
construction equipment); secondary impacts (Section 4.4.) are indirect or
induced effects (i.e., stimulation of population growth because of the avail-
ability of excess wastewater collection and treatment capacity). Many of the
potentially adverse effects may be reduced or eliminated by various techniques
(Section 4.5.).
4.1. Construction Impacts
Assuming that "Step 2" design work for a new tertiary treatment plant at
Bemidji will proceed by summer 1981, construction of new treatment facilities
at the site of the existing WWTP could begin by Spring 1982. Construction
activities would span two construction seasons. The preliminary site layout
for the new plant, as proposed by RCM (1979c) is presented in Figure 4-1. All
of the existing treatment units at the site eventually will be removed. The
construction of the new plant would be phased to allow for continued operation
of the old plant while new units are being built. The new plant control/lab/
maintenance building would be built partially on land presently occupied by
the trickling filter. It thus would not be built until after the new treat-
ment units were operational and the trickling filter demolished.
Construction activities will produce short-term impacts to the local en-
vironment. Excavation, grading, and other construction activities at the
proposed treatment plant sites will generate fugitive dust and noise, occas-
sionally cause interruption of traffic flow, and impair aesthetics. The
construction project would irretrievably consume significant quantities of
resources, including public sector capital, energy, land, labor, and
materials. A number of short-terra construction jobs would be created.
AIR QUALITY, ODORS, AND NOISE
Air quality at Bemidji will not be significantly affected by the con-
struction of the new WWTP. The excavation for and construction of the various
treatment units illustrated in Figure 4-1, and the demolition of the existing
structures, will, however, create localized fugitive dust. Fugitive dusts
include respirable particles less than 30 micrometers (0.0012 inches) in
diameter, w?hich might remain in suspension and be transported by wind several
miles from their source. Particles larger than 30 micrometers tend to settle
4-1
-------
oc
o
a\
s
t*
0)
.U
Cfl
**^s
ro
H
.u
ttf
c
VJ
CL'
4J
-U
3
O
H
to
>.'
C
H
rH
0)
P-l
-------
out within 20 to 30 feet of their source (USEPA 1976b). The very small par-
ticles can be inhaled by people and wildlife and deposited deep in the most
sensitive areas of the pulmonary region. A severe fugitive dust problem at a
construction site thus can contribute to acute and chronic respiratory
problems.
In addition to particle size, the chemical composition of the dust par-
ticles and the prevailing wind speeds determine how fugitive dust emissions
will affect air quality. Wind speeds must be significant to carry the dust
away from its source. Other factors affecting fugitive dust emissions include
source activity, moisture content of the disturbed surface material, humidity,
temperature, and time of day.
Construction equipment will generate hydrocarbon emissions and fumes that
occassionally will produce short-term nuissance conditions within 1,000 feet
of the site, depending on wind conditions. Similarly, construction noise
occassionally may bo a nuisance up to 2,000 feet from the site, and will be
audibLe in downtown Bemidji and to recreationists on Lakes Irving and Bemidji.
GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND GROUNDWATER
No signifcant effects to geology, topography, soils, or groundwater are
expected as a result of construction activities. The site of the proposed
WWTP already has been modified for construction of the existing WWTP. Deep
excavations for the new pumping station and treatment units may be problematic
because of the high water table (nearly the same elevation as that of Lake
Irving) .
TKKRl'.STIUAL IUOTA
Because the site and surrounding area have been developed for commercial
and industrial use for a number of years, there is no significant vegetation
or habitat for terrestrial wildlife. The construction of a new WWTP at the
proposed site therefore will not have any detectable effect on terrestrial
biota.
SURFACK WATER, WETLANDS, AND FLOODPLAINS
Groundwater pumped from the excavations for the new treatment units and
wet-weather runoff from disturbed soils will impact Lake Irving, the Missis-
sippi River channel between the lakes,- and Lake Bemidji if not properly con-
trolled by mitigative measures. Turbidity contributed from such sources could
cause sedimentation, affecting benthic organisms, and can affect fish and
contribute to increased temperature and decreased dissolved oxygen levels, if
soil particles remain is suspension.
No wetlands will be affected by the project. However, the Flood Hazard
Boundary Map for the City of Bemidji (Community Panel No. 270711-0-001-A)
developed by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (USHUD) indi-
cates that the extreme southeastern portion of the site is within a Special
Flood Hazard Area (southern part of "area 16" on Figure 4-1); i.e., within the
100-year lake floodplain (1% chance floodplain). No construction activities
4-3
-------
are proposed for that area, although future plant expansion in that area of
the site may be required. Appropriate flood proofing measures thus would be
required for such future facilities in that area.
CULTURAL RESOURCES
No historic, archaeological, or cultural sites are known to exist at the
existing WWTP site. A portion of the proposed site already has been disturbed
by excavations during construction of the existing plant. The potential
exLsts, however, that significant archaeological resources exist on undis-
turbed portions of the site that could be damaged by excavations for new
treatment units. The State Historic Preservation Officer should be consulted
during "Step 2" design work regarding the need for a detailed site archae-
ological survey. If archaeological resources are discovered on the site, the
site layout may have to be altered or the resources salvaged to permit con-
struction .
LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION
The site proposed for the new WWTP already accommodates the existing WWTP
and the City Garages. It is isolated from the Midway Drive commercial corri-
dor along US Highways 2 and 71 by two sets of railroad tracks and by First
Avenue, and immediately abuts a railroad track on the north and a log and
lumber storage yard owned by Dickinson Lumber Company on the east (Figure 2-1
and 3-1). The entire northern and eastern shoreland area of Lake Irving,
including the WWTP site, is zoned 1-2, General Industrial. Construction of a
new WWTP at the proposed site will not cause a change in existing use and will
be compatible with the existing zoning and other existing development in the
surrounding industrial/commercial area. The new WWTP will have an operational
life of 40 to 50 years, however, and once the site is redesignated for such a
use, future redevelopment efforts for that section of the Lake Irving shore-
line will be precluded.
Traffic into and out of the site during construction activities will
create some congestion in the busy Midway Drive transportation corridor
(16,185 vehicles use the roadway per day, the busiest roadway in Bemedji).
Slow-moving and turning trucks and other construction-related vehicles will
create a traffic hazard. Dirt and mud tracked onto roadways by vehicles from
the construction site also can create hazardous roadway conditions. Ingress
and egress of the site via the two unguarded railroad crossings will present a
hazard to construction workers.
ECONOMICS AND DEMOGRAPHICS
The service capacity design of the WWTP is for a population of 16,500.
This will allow for significant growth within the sewer service area, or for
annexation of new service areas. In terms of flow, the 2.0 mgd design capac-
ity will provide for an increase in tributary flow of more than 50%. This
capacity may attract commercial and/or industrial growth, which requires the
availability of wastewater collection and treatment capacity (see Section 4.4
for discussion of impacts of induced growth).
4-4
-------
The expenditure of nearly $12 million for the new wastewater facilities
will provide a direct economic stimulus and also will induce secondary income
and expenditures. Although most of the mechanical equipment and materials for
the new plant will be purchased from specialty manufacturers from outside the
Bemidji area, a significant amount of local materials, especially ready-mix
concrete and fuels, likely will be contracted locally. The initial expendi-
ture for plant construction, therefore, will increase income and earnings in
the construction sector locally and in several economic sectors in the re-
gional perspective.
Over 100 short-term, direct construction-related jobs are expected to be
created during the two construction seasons (1982 and 1983). An additional,
but unquantif iable, number of indirect jobs also will be created in the ser-
vice sector as the construction expenditures are "turned over" several times
in the economy. The extent that construction jobs are available to local
residents will be determined by the local supply of labor in the various skill
categories required, and by labor union requirements.
RESOURCE USE
An iisLimato.il $12 million (1980 dollars) In public capital will be irre-
versibly committed through the contruction of the new tertiary treatment
facilities. An unquantifiable amount of engineering, administrative, legal,
construction, and related labor similarly has/will be committed. In addition,
iron, steel, concrete, and other materials; manufactured electrical, mechani-
cal, and other specialized equipment; and significant amounts of fuel and
other energy resources will be irretrievably committed. The 10.5-acre site
will be committed to use as a site for wastewater treatment at least for the
40- to 50-year physical life of the facilities.
PUBLIC FINANCE
The nearly $12 million construction cost will be capitalized with public
funds. The National Municipal Waslewater Treatment Works Construction Grants
Program, administered by USEPA, will provide approximately $8.4 million (75%
of "gr.niL i-lLglble" costs); the Statu, tliorugli the- MPCA, will provide approxi-
mately an additional $1.7 million (15% of "eligible" costs), and the City of
Bemidji must provide approximately $1.9 million (10% of "eligible" costs plus
all grant ineligible costs). The availability of Federal and State grant
monies is subject to the appropriation of funds for this purpose and their
availability relative to competing needs. The Bemidji project holds a high
priority for funding; therefore, Federal and State grant monies should be
available for "Step 2" design during 1981 and "Step 3" construction during
1982 and 1983.
Bemidji's $1.9 million share will be capitalized through revenue bonds,
with the debt being retired with a portion of the user charges collected. The
effect of debt retirement charges on sewer system users is discussed in con-
junction with the effect of O&M costs in Section 4.2.3.1.
AESTHETICS
Odors, noise, spoil piles, increased heavy-vehicle traffic, and other
unaesthRtin aspects will accompany construction of the new plant. These
4-5
-------
effects will be short-term and localized in nature, but directly will affect
recreationists on Lake Irving and, to a lesser extent the Midway Drive commer-
cial area, downtown Bemidji, and recreationists at the south end of Lake
Bemidji.
Once constructed, the new WWTP will constitute a relatively permanent
"industrial" feature on the northshore of Lake Irving. It will be consider-
ably larger in size (i.e., will cover more surface area) than the existing
WWTP and will be readily noticeable from Lake Irving, but not from the Midway
Drive commercial area.
4.2. Operation Impacts
The operation of the new tertiary WWTP at Bemidji with advanced phos-
phorus control wilL improve the quality of the treated wastewater effluent
relative to that discharged by the existing plant. The discharge of treated
effluent to the Mississippi River channel between Lakes Irving and Bemidji,
however, will contain a low level of phosphorus (Section 2.3.5.), which will
continue to contribute to the nutrient enrichment of Lake Bemidji, Stump Lake,
and the downstream Upper Mississippi River Chain of Lakes. Operation of the
new WWTP also will generate a considerable amount of sludge that must be
disposed of and will increase significantly the cost to commercial users of
the wastewater system. These operational phase aspects of the proposed proj-
ect are discussed in detail in the following subsections.
4.2.1. Surface Water
As discussed in Section 3.1.3.1., the major water quality concern in the
Bemidji area is the acceleration of eutrophication in the lakes downstream
from Bemidji"s WWTP effluent discharge. The proposed treatment facilities
will improve significantly the wastewater treatment capability by providing
tertiary treatment processes, especially advanced phosphorus removal. This
will minimize pollutant loadings on the downstream system.
Phosporous loading reduction has been determined to be the key to lake
quality restoration for the Upper Mississippi River Chain of Lakes. Reduction
in the external supply of total phosphorus (TP) to Lake Bemidji and the Chain
of Lakes will cause a direct reduction in aquatic plant production in an
immediate (same year) and continuous fashion (after Smith and Shapiro 1980).
The tertiary treatment system currently proposed for Bemidji is considered to
provide the maximum practicable level of treatment at Bemidji, considering
technology and economic constraints. In the perspective of practicable point
source pollutant control, only an alternative that would eliminate a surface
water discharge entirely could improve downstream water quality more than that
proposed. As described in Section 2.3., an exhaustive search for a technic-
ally and economically feasible alternative to a direct discharge has not
produced one. The following analysis, therefore, addresses the projected
future water quality situation in Lake Bemidji and the Upper Mississippi River
Chain of Lakes with the continued discharge of low levels of phosphorus from
the proposed treatment facilities.
4-6
-------
WATER QUALITY PROJECTION METHODOLOGY
A variety of water quality models have been developed in recent years
that attempt to predict future water quality conditions based on potential
levels of nutrient supply to lakes. Because all lakes have different lim-
nological characteristics, differences among lakes have been factored into
models through coasideration of such parameters as lake basin characteristics
(mean depth and surface area) and water flow into and out of the lakes.
01 the several currently available models with application to the Bemidji
situation, that developed by Dillon and Rigler (1974), as expanded by Larsen
and Mercier (1975) and Reckhow (1979), has been selected by MPCA on which to
base a forecast of the future water quality of Lake Bemidji and the downstream
lakes (see Parts III and IV, MPCA's Supplement Part II of this document).
Prior to the modeling of water quality in the Bemidji area, however, several
precautions were employed by I1PCA to insure the accuracy and appropriateness
of the model application:
Only phosphorus predictive models derived from lakes of similar
physical characteristics (hydrology, morphology, and geology)
to Lake Bemidji were utilized
The phosphorus predictive models were validated or corroborated
based on performance with historical data
The phosphorus-chlorophyll and chlorophyll-secchi disc regres-
sions were compiled from lakes surrounding the Bemidji area in
Minnesota
The last point is especially significant because application of
lake models derived for New York or Canadian lakes may not
quantify local variations in climate, hydrology, or geology.
Phosphorus predictive models can, through proper applications, provide
good estimates of average summer aquatic plant growing season conditions.
They cannot provide estimates, however, of what will happen in nearshore
areas, what seasonal effects will be, or how many algal blooms can be ex-
pecied. In short, it is possible to predict average summer lake quality
conditions considering fluctuations of climate (cloud cover, temperature, and
precipitation), biological effects (zooplankton, littoral zone, and algal
species), nutrient supply rates exerting day-to-day variations, and in-lake
gradients.
Prediction of future water quality conditions, once the new plant is
operational, can in part also be correlated with recently monitored water
quality changes. Relocation of the wastewater discharge to the inlet of Lake
Bemidji and the implementation of interim phosphorus control measures during
1978 have resulted in considerable changes in water quality in all of the
study lakes. Since 1978, Lake Bemidji has received a 25% increase (under mean
flow conditions) in phosphorus loading even with the effluent phosphorus
concentration averaging 1.3 mg P/l. The increased phosphorus load has re-
sulted in more aquatic plant accumulations (chlorophyll ji) and decreased water
clarity. Additionally, because of the twin-basin configuration of Lake Be-
midji and the location of the inlet and outlet, the southern basin has been
4-7
-------
impacted to a greater extent. Conversely, the nutrient loading to the down-
stream lakes has decreased, and improvements in water have been monitored.
The lakes have responded positively to the interim effluent phosphorus abate-
ment program and thus provide additional evidence (pre- and post-discharge re-
location data) for the prediction of the consequences of restoration options.
LAKE BEMIDJI
A summary of the projected water quality effects to Lake Bemidji from the
discharge of effluent from the proposed tertiary WWTP at Bemidji is presented
in Table 4-1. The projection is based on design flow conditions (2 mgd dis-
charge maximum design condition) with a range of Mississippi River flow
conditions and effluent phosphorus concentrations.
A 1.0 mg P/l effluent concentration would contribute from 20% to 46% of
the phosphorus supplied to Lake Bemidji at the 2.0 mgd design flow condition.
(The significance of the WWTP load may increase further if bioavailability of
nutrient sources is considered (MPCA 1980b).) Within the same range of water
flows, the WWTP contributed phosphorus load decreases to 7% to 20% of the
total phosphorus supply with a 0.3 mg P/l average effluent concentration.
Table 4-1. Projected water quality conditions for Lake Bemidji under most
probable conditions and with variable flow-through volumes (MPCA
1980b).
Loading
Average WWTP
Effluent Conccn-
Concentration tration
(Ibs P/yr) (mg P/l) (%)
Low Flow
7,257
9,085
13,351
Conditions
0.0
0.3
1.0
(116 cfs)5
0
20
46
Average Flow Conditions (225 cfs)
11,963
13,791
18,057
High Flow
24,423
26,251
30,517
0.0
0.3
1.0
conditions
0.0
0.3
1.0
0
13
34
(318 cfs)5
0
7
20
Predicted
TP2
(ug P/l)
R(p)=0.45
18
22
32
R(p)=0.25
20
23
30
R(p)=0.2
31
34
38
R(p)=0.
19
24
35
R(p)=0.
19
22
29
R(p)=0.
27
29
34
Mean Mean
Predicted Predicted
Chlor a Transparency
(ug/1)
4
7
12
23
25
7
10
17
3
15
17
22
(meters/feet)
2.8/9.2
2.3/7.5
1.7/5.6
2.8/9.2
2.5/8.2
2.0/6.6
2.1/6.9
2.0/6.6
1.7/5.6
1
Percent WWTP contribution relative to the total phosphorus load to the lake.
"Predicted total phosphorus concentrations in ug P/l from Larsen-Mercier model.
Mean predicted chlorophyll a_ in ug/1 from range of TP.
Mean secchi disc transparency from range of chlorophyll ^.
'20% and 80% (percentile) flow conditions.
4-8
-------
Comparing the results of the modelling of possible future effluent phos-
phorus concentrations to historical conditions allows several conclusions to
be made:
If no discharge of phosphorus could be attained (0.0 mg P/l),
Lake liemid j i would achieve conditions encountered before 1978,
with secchi disc transparancy in a range of 2.1 to 2.8 m (7 to
9 ft) and mean total phosphorus concentrations ranging from 19
to 27 ug P/l
Adopting a 1.0 mg P/l effluent standard, which basically is
equivalent to the current interim effluent phosphorus condi-
tion, would prolong the existing condition and may eventually
decrease secchi disc transparency compared to values experi-
enced in 1979-1980, with periodic dense algal blooms of blue-
green species expected to become a common summer occurrence.
These algal occurrences likely would have significant adverse
consequences for recreational and other uses of the water
Adoption of a 0.3 mg P/l standard would, with low to average
water flow conditions, produce lake quality similar to pre-1978
conditions with total phosphorus averaging 22 to 24 ug P/l and,
depending on stream flow and weather conditions, secchi disc
transparency in a given year falling within a range of 2.0 to
2.5 m (6.6 to 8.2 ft) .
Reduction of phosphorus loading also has beneficial secondary effects.
Reducing the phosphorus mass supplied to the lakes may alter the ratio of
total nitrogen to total phosphorus (TN:TP) concentrations found in the water,
which tends to discourage noxious nitrogen fixing blue-green algae from domi-
nating the lake in late summer (Schindler 1977 and Shapiro 1978).
DOWNSTREAM CHAIN OF LAKES
For the lakes downstream from Lake Bemidji, the rates of phosphorus
loading have been estimated for various WWTP effluent phosphorus levels and
flow conditions encountered during 1980 (Table 4-2). An effluent phosphorus
concentration of 1.0 mg/1 would increase the supply of phosphorus by 54% to
59% for all downstream lakes during relatively low flow conditions. Siiui-
larily, the phosphorus contributed by the WWTP with an effluent phosphorus
concentration of 0.3 mg/1 would amount to 16% to 18% of the total phosphorus
contribution from all sources.
Quantitative prediction of downstream conditions is not possible because
of the unique hydrology, configuration, and historical levels of phosphorus
loadings (Part IV, MPCA's Supplement). Several qualitative predictions may be
applied, instead, for these lakes. With reduced effluent phosphorus concen-
trations, it is probable that over time Wolf, Andrusia, and Cass Lakes will
demonstrate significant improvements in water quality relative to their cur-
rent conditions. These lakes have undergone a substantial change in phosphor-
us loading as a result of the relocation of the point of wastewater discharge
and now may experience significant sediment release of phosphorus. It is not
known how long it will take for the lake basins to flush out accumulated
sediment phosphorus. Overall, the reduction in phosphorus loadings may permit
these lakes to eventually improve further in quality relative to the 1980
condi tions.
4-9
-------
Table 4-2. Projected water quality conditions in the downstream Chain of
Lakes.
Average WWTP Effluent
Lake Phosphorus Concentration
WOLF 0.0
0.3
1.0
ANDRUSIA 0.0
0.3
1.0
CASS 0.0
0.3
1.0
Increased P over
Background Loading (%)
0
17
58
0
16
54
0
18
59
Total P
Loading Rate
(gm/m /yr)
0.71
0.62
0.24
Assumes WWTP operating at 2.0 mgd design flow.
EFFECTS OF RESTORATION OPTIONS ON LAKE FISHERIES
Qualitative changes occurring in the fisheries of the lakes can be de-
scribed in general terms as they relate to nutrient abatement options. In-
creasing the lake fertility by over-nourishment increases plant growth, which,
in turn, has variable effects on the fisheries. The most severe impact pro-
bably would occur on walleye reproduction as a result of increased periphyton
growth in spawning beaches, causing increased egg mortality. A secondary
effect on the fisheries may be realized from accelerated rates of decomposi-
tion accompanying increased plant growth, causing a decline of oxygen in the
water column. The larger the nutrient supply, the greater production of
biomass and the greater the degree of oxygen consumption by decaying plant
material. Depletion of the oxygen could eliminate the white fish and tullibee
cold water species from Lake Bemidji.
SUMMARY
The previous discussion can be summarized as follows:
Relocation of the wastewater discharge to the inlet of Lake
Hemidji in 19/8 his resulted in decreased water quality in Lake
Bemidji; conversely, the downstream lakes have shown increased
average water clarity and declines in average phosphorus con-
centrations, indicative of improved lake quality.
The rates of cultural and natural lake nutrient enrichment have
been quantified over a range of Mississippi River flow condi-
tions. Phosphorus predictive models were employed with region-
ally developed chlorophyll and secchi disc transparency regres-
sions to predict the consequence of altering the rates of
culturally derived eutrophication.
4-10
-------
* Of the lake management options, a 1.0 mg P/l WWTP effluent
level will cause the continued, gradual decline of the quality
of Lake Bemidji. Predicted average summer secchi disc trans-
parency (under the specified conditions) ranges from 1.7 to 2.0
meters, which will correspond to conditions encountered in
1980. Predicted chlorophyll a_ concentrations also will corre-
spond to 1980 conditions with an estimated range of 17 to 23
ug/1 (1980 mean equalled 24 ug/1). Conditions in the south
basin of Lake Bemidji may exceed these predictions.
If a 0.3 mg P/l effluent concentration is established as a
discharge standard, Lake Bemidji will assume similar water
quality conditions to those experienced prior to 1978 with low
to average, flow conditions. Under average to high flow condi-
tions, the lake quality would marginally degrade as WWTP flows
increase in the future, but will show improvement relative to
average conditions of 1980. Predicted impacts for the 0.3 mg
P/l effluent phosphorus concentration tend to overestimate lake
impacts unitl the 2.0 mgd design condition is reached (year
2000). The downstream lakes since 1978 already have, and will
continue to receive, substantial decreases in phosphorus load-
ing that may be attributed to the WWTP, which in turn may cause
significant decreases in average phosphorus concentrations and
aquatic plant growth. However, it is not possible to quantita-
tively predict the magnitude or the timing of the decreases.
Secondary effects from phosphorus reduction include reduction
of oxygen depletion rates and possible biomanipulation result-
ing in fewer occasions of blue-green algal blooms.
4.2.2. Sludge Disposal
Section 2.2.2.5. describes the proposed sludge production, treatment, and
.llspos.i! process lor rlie new WWTP. As dLsussed there, approximately 640 tons
(dry weight basis) per year of sludge will be disposed at four sites in Be-
midji Township (Figure 2-2).
A sludge disposal plan (KBM 1980) for these sites has been approved by
MPCA. MPCA evaluated the plan to determine whether the analysis of environ-
mentally safe sludge application levels contained in the plan is consistent
with theLr criteria, "Recommendations for Application of Municipal Wastewater
Sludges on Land" (August 1978). Application of the existing Sludge Plan to
the proposed situation once the new WWTP is operational will require further
MPCA approval.
As i.ndL'Mted in Section 2.2.2.5., the site areas proposed in the Sludge
Plan have adequate capacity to accommodate the additional sludge from the new
UWTP for more than the 40- to 50-year life of the plant. Use of the site must
comply with MPCA's criteria. Monitoring reports on the sludge disposal ac-
tivities are required to be filed annually with MPCA and routine site inspec-
tions are made periodically by MPCA staff to determine whether the approved
Plan is be Lag implemented properly.
4-11
-------
The sludge disposal issue has been subject to controversy at Bemidji in
the past because of suspected nitrate contamination of several local wells in
Frolui Township. MVCA's report (1979) on the water quality Eield investiga-
tions in the vicinity of the sludge application sites revealed that several
area wells did have a water quality problem. The report concluded, however,
that no evidence existed to relate the problem to the application of sludge.
A cooperative program of groundwater monitoring is continuing in the site
area.
In summary, the application of properly treated and processed sludge from
the Bemidji WWTP on the sites presented in the approved Sludge Plan, at an
application rate and manner to be approved by MPCA, should not adversely
affect the environment. The nutrients and moisture contained in the sludge
should, instead, serve as a soil conditioner and fertilizer, improving the
agricultural yield of the crops grown on the application sites. If sludge
disposal should fail to be performed in the manner approved, there exists a
potent l.-il for problems to dcvolop; primarily, uncontrolled surface runoff from
the site would Increase nutrient levels in the local drainageways. Because
the more harmful constituents that are associated with sludges from industrial
process waters are absent at Bemidji, the sludge cake will be a relatively
safe and stable product.
4.2.3. User Costs and Public Finance
Users of the wastewater system at Bemidji currently pay for the operation
and maintenance (O&M) of the sewer system and wastewater treatment plant
(Section 3.2.4.4.). System users will have to pay for the retirement of the
new bonded indebtedness on the new treatment plant ($1.9 million local share),
for any future improvements to the sewer system (Section 2.2.2.2.), and for a
significantly higher annual O&M cost, once the plant (and new sewers) are
built.
This analysis of the relative impact of new wastewater facilities on the
system users only addresses those costs associated with the new wastewater
treatment plant. As discussed in Section 2.2.2.2., sewer system improvement
projects will be required in the future, but no cost estimates presently are
available. Similarly, that share of the user cost related to the annual O&M
on the sewer system (estimated to be $6.50/month currently for a typical
household, see Section 4.2.3.1. and Appendix H of Draft EIS) have not been
carried forward into the projection of future charges because of the uncer-
tainty about their future level. Furthermore, Federal regulations (40 CFR
35.905) require that users of systems constructed with Construction Grant
Program funds must pay a user charge that reflects the proportionate share of
the O&M cost (including replacement) necessitated by their use of the system.
Thus, it is assumed that the City of Bemidji will restructure its existing,
inverted rate structure to meet Federal regulations. This will result in
large system users, who currently pay proportionately less per gallon contri-
buted to the system than those contributing small flows (Section 3.2.4.4.),
paying user charges in direct proportion to the amount of flow they contri-
bute. Thus, the residential share of the new system O&M cost actually will be
significantly less than it is currently.
4-12
-------
Ba.-5f.il ou the estimated existing flow coatr ibu L ions per user class pre-
sented in Table 2-1 (Section 2.1.2.), on a per capita residential contribution
in Bemidji of 70 gallons/capita, and an average family size of 2.57 (MPCA
1980b), the estimated charge to the user for the $362,000 annual O&M cost for
the proposed treatment facilities will be (after MPCA 1980b):
Residential: (0.418)($362,000) = $72.47/connection/year
2,088 connections
General commercial: (0.44)($362,000) = $399/connection/year
including motels 399 connections
University: (0.142)($362,OOP) = $1,713/connection/year.
30 connections
Debt service for the $1.9 million local share also must be borne by the
system users. This debt, amortized at 7.125% over 20 years, will require an
annual service payment of approximately $180,000. By attributing this esti-
mated annual debt service to system users, based on the proportionate flow
from each user class, the following charges would be assessed:
Residential: (0.418)($179,880) = $36.02/connection/year
2,088 connections
General Commercial, (0.44)($179,880) = $199.00/connection/year
including motels 399 connections
University: (0.142)($179,880) = $851.00/connection/year.
30 connections
The 7.125% interest rate used is consistent with the interest rate used for
other time-dependent costs herein; however, the City will sell revenue bonds
to finance the plant. Recent market rates for municipal revenue bonds have
been as high as 11% to 12% recently. Therefore, if Bemidji must pay more than
7.125% interest on its bonds, or if a shorter pay-back period is used, the
debt service portion of local user charges would increase significantly.
Combined O&M and debt service costs to be paid by system users are pre-
sented in Table 4-3. By converting the user charge system to a proportionate
share basis, the Universtiy and the commercial sector will be paying a signi-
ficantly increased share of system user costs relative to the current situ-
ation. Compiled with the increased O&M costs relative to current conditions,
the quarterly sewer bills to the commercial sector will increase to the point
of potentially affecting the profitability of some commercial enterprises that
are large system users. In contrast, residential users can expect their user
charge to be about the same as it has been:
Existing billing system (Section 3.2.4.4.):
2.57 persons x 70 gal/person/day x 90 days/quarter = 16,200
gal/quarter
existing charge for 16,200 gal./quarter - $31.40
4-13
-------
New billing scheme:
16,200 gallons = typical residential connection = $9.04/month
$9.04 month x 3 months = $27.12/quarter.
When the cost for sewer system maintenance is added (possibly as much as
$6.50/inonth), as is included in the existing rate structure, the future quar-
terly charge probably will be several dollars higher than the existing rates.
Table 4-3. Summary o[ projected charges to users of Bemidji's sewer system
once the new, tertiary WWTP is operational (1980 dollars; after
MFCA I980b).
User Class O&M Debt Service Total
1) Total Annual Cost
Residential $151,316 $75,200 $226,516
General commercial (total 159,280 79,140 238,420
Bemidji State University 51,404 25,540 76,944
2) Typical Residential Connection Charge (2.57 family size)
Monthly O&M $ 6.04
Monthly debt service 3.00
To L.I! imnil hly 9 .04
Total annual $108.00
3) Typical Commercial Connection Charge (399 connections)
Monthly O&M $ 33.26
Monthly debt service 16.53
Total monthly 49.79
Total annual $598.00
4) Bemidji University Connection Charge (30 connections)
Monthly O&M $142.78
Monthly debt service 70.94
Total monthly 213.72
Total annual $2,564.00 (x 30 connections = $76,920)
The economic significance of the impact of the proposed wastewater facil-
ities on users of the new system at Bemidji can be evaluated by relating
estimated user charges to several established guidelines. National confer-
ences during 1978 on "Shopping for Sewage Treatment: How to Get the Best
Bargain for Your Community or Home" (USEPA 1978) resulted in suggested guide-
lines indicating that an "economic hardship" on a community may result if:
More than 2% of median family income will be spent on user
fees
More than \% of median family income will be spent on debt
service for the in'w systom.
4-14
-------
Current US EPA guidance concerning funding of wastewater treatment proj-
ects requiring treatment more stringent than secondary (PRM//79-7; USEPA 1979)
indicates that:
A project shall be considered high-cost when the total average
annual cost (debt service, operation and maintenance, connection
costs) to a domestic user exceeds the following percentage of
median household incomes:
1.5% when the median income is under $6,000
2.0% when the median income is $6,000 to $10,000
2.5% when the median income is over $10,000.
Proposed USEPA regulations concerning review of Advanced
Secondary Treatment (AST) projects, which appear in the 20 June
1980 Federal Register, state that a project's costs will be
considered significant when the total annual cost to a user
exceeds the following percentage of median household income
(based on April 1980 income levels):
1.00% when the median income is under $10,000
1.50% when the median income is $10,000 to $17,000
1.75% when the median income is over $17,000.
System users at Bemidji have an estimated median family income of $14,000
(Section 3.2.1.). Based on the average family size of 2.57 persons, the
$108/year residential user charge indicates that less than 1% of median family
income would he spent on wastewater user fees (in 1980 dollars). This is
significantly below the more stringent 2% guideline suggested by the Confer-
ence. This also is significantly below current and proposed USEPA guidance
concerning high-cost projects. The debt service cost of $36/year also is well
below the Conference's suggested 1% guideline comparing debt service to median
family income.
The local share of capital cost for the new wastewater treatment system
may be somewhat overstated because of the uncertainty about what the actual
interest cost will be during construction. For example, as estimated the
interest daring construction for the tertiary treatment option for Alternative
3 would cost the city approximately $770,000, which is 41% of the City's $1.9
million loc.il share of the project capital cost. The potential exists for
significant savings in interest costs relative to that projected through
short-term investments of capital by the City during construction operations.
Reduction of the interest cost would lower the long-term debt service cost,
and thus user fees, proportionately.
Consistent with the needs of a growing community, the City will need to
incur indebtedness in the future for other capital improvement projects in
addition to this project. As discussed in Section 2.2.2.2., significant
additional capital expenditures will be required to upgrade components of the
sewer system during the same period when the treatment plant revenue bonds are
being retired. The extent that debt retirement for additional capital im-
provement projects is passed on to Bemidji residents will determine the signi-
ficance of their total future financial burden.
4-15
-------
4.3. Secondary Impacts
Potential secondary impacts include the indirect or induced effects that
result in land use, demographic, and other socioeconomic changes. These
changes may be manifested by higher population density and increased develop-
ment made possible by the availability of excess wastewater treatment capacity
or lower rates of growth in Bemidji versus the surrounding area because of
high user charges for wastewater services. As these changes occur, associated
impacts may be created. These include: air and water pollution; changes in
the tax base; increased consumption of energy and other resources; increased
noise levels; demand for expanded public infrastructure; conversion of agri-
cultural lands, wetlands, and environmentally sensitive areas to developed
uses; decreased wildlife habitat; increased employment and business activity;
change in property values; and changes in the cost of public services.
The proposed 2.0 mgd design capacity for the new WWTP will provide con-
siderably expanded wastewater treatment capacity for Bemidji capacity for
as much as 40% more population equivalents compared to present service for the
existing community of 12,000. Because other aspects of the urban infrastruc-
ture at Bemidji are being, or recently have been, expanded (i.e., water sys-
tem, streets, City Hall, etc.), wastewater treatment capacity can be judged to
be a limiting factor to growth within Bemidji. The proposed expanded treat-
ment capacity is expected to facilitate, but not stimulate, additional growth
of Bemidji.
The growth of Bemidji will produce the types of environmental effects
discussed above. Because it cannot be assumed that the level of growth for
which the wastewater system is designed to accommodate is directly dependent
on the provision of new wastewater treatment facilities, further discussion of
the impacts of such growth is unwarranted.
4.4. Impact on State Government of Any Federal Controls Associated with the
Proposed Action
This Final E1S constitutes a State of Minnesota E1S under the Minnesota
Environmental Policy Act of 1973 (6 MCAR Section 3) in addition to being a
Federal EIS under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. This section
specifically is required to fulfill the requirements of 6 MCAR Section 3.030
that otherwise are not fulfilled by the remainder of this document.
The principal Federal regulatory agency directly involved with the pro-
posed action is USEPA. The Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972
(FWPCA), as amended in 1977 by the Clean Water Act (CWA), establishes a uni-
form nationwide water pollution control program within which all MPCA programs
operate. The MPCA administers this program while the USEPA retains approval
and supervisory control. The following USEPA programs impact this project and
State government.
WATER QUALITY AND EFFLUENT STANDARDS
States are required to establish water quality standards for lakes and
streams and effluent standards for discharge to them. Federal law requires
that, at a minimum, discharges meet secondary treatment requirements. In some
4-16
-------
cases even stricter effluent standards are necessary to preserve water qual-
ity, State Water Quality Standards are subject to USEPA approval and must
confonn to Federal guidelines.
CONSTRUCTION GRANTS PROGRAM
The USEPA Construction Grants Program provides 75'7o fu id tag of eligible
construction costs for the construction of wastewater treatment firLliti.es.
The State of Minnesota provides an additional 15%. Becai.se Federal grant
regulations are, for the most part, the controlling factor in determining the
selected (fundable) alternative, they influence how the State grant funds are
spent.
Communities inay choose to construct wastewater tre.itment facilities
outside of the USEPA/State Grants Program. In such cases, v:he only require-
ments are that the design he technically sound, and that thcj. MFC A be satisfied
that the facility will meet discharge standards.
If a community chooses to construct a wastewater treatment plant with
USKPA grant assistance, the project must meet ail requirements of the Grant
program. The prime requirement of the program is that the proposal be cost
effective (basically, that is the alternative with the lowest cost and least
environmental impact). If the community wants to construct
-------
these measures are applied will determine the ultimate impact of the selected
action. The following sections discuss potential measures for alleviating
construction, operation, and secondary effects presented in Sections 4.1
through 4.4.
4. "3.1 Minimization of Construction Impacts
The construction oriented impacts presented in Section 4.1 primarily are
short-term effects resulting from construction activities at the WWTP site.
Fugitive dust at the construction site must be controlled through the applica-
tion of various corrective measures. Spoil-piles and unpaved access roads
should be wetted periodically to reduce dust generation; alternatively, spoil-
piles can be covered with matting, mulch, or similar material to reduce sus-
ceptibility to wind erosion.
Street cleaning of First Street where trucks and equipment will ingress
and egress the construction site and of nearby US Highways 2 and 71, the
primary artery, will reduce loose dirt that otherwise would generate dust,
create unsafe driving conditions, or be washed into roadside ditches or storm
drains. Trucks transporting spoil material or sludge to disposal sites should
cover their loads to eliminate the escape of dust while in transit.
Proper maintenance of construction equipment and application of emission
control devices would minimize emissions of hydrocarbons and fumes. Construc-
tion noise is difficult to reduce. Construction activities should be sche-
duled to avoid evening and night work to minimize the disturbance to periods
when background noise would be reduced.
Erosion and sedimentatiou must be minimized at the construction site.
USEPA's Program Requirements Memorandum 78-1 establishes requirements for
control of erosion and runoff from construction activities. Adherence to
these requireiaents would serve to mitigate potential problems:
Construction site selection should consider potential occur-
rence of erosion and sediment losses
The project plan and layout should be designed to fit the
local topography and soil conditions
When appropriate, land grading and excavating should be kept
at a minimum to reduce the possibility of creating runoff
and erosion problems which require extensive control
measures
Whenever possible, topsoil should be removed and stockpiled
before grading begins
Land exposure should be minimized in terms of area and time
Exposed areas subject to erosion should be covered as quick-
ly as possible by means of mulching or vegetation
Natural vegetation should be retained whenever feasible
4-18
-------
Appropriate structural or agronomic practices to control
runoff and sedimentation should he provided during and after
construction
Early completion of stabilized drainage system (temporary
and permanent systems) will suhstantially reduce erosion
potential
Access roadways should be paved or otherwise stabilized as
soon as feasible
Clearing and grading should not be started until a firm
construction schedule is known and can be effectively co-
ordinated with the grading and clearing activity.
Planning of routes for heavy construction equipment and materials should
ensure that surface load restrictions are considered. In this way, damage to
streets and roadways should be avoided. Routing construction vehicles along
primary arteries will minimize the threat to public safety and to reduce
disturbance in residential environments.
Access to construction sites should be restricted to prevent accidents.
Traffic control may be needed where construction equipment/truck traffic will
be entering streets and highways on a frequent basis (e.g., access to existing
WWTP from US Route 2). Signals should be installed at the railroad crossings
leading to the site.
The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Executive Order 11593
(1971), The Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974, and the 1973
Procedures of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation require that care
must be taken early in the planning process to identify cultural resources and
minimize adverse effects on them. US EPA's final regulations for the prepara-
tion of KLSs (40 CKK 1500) also specify that compliance with these regulation
is required when a Federally funded, licensed, or permitted project is under-
taken. The State Historic Preservation Officer must have an opportunity to
determine that the requirements have been satisfied.
To provide adequate consideration of potential archaeological resources
on the undisturbed portions of the proposed construction site, a reconnais-
sance survey must be conducted of the area of primary impact, from which an
assessment of archaeological cultural resources will be made (By phone, Ms.
Susan Hedin, Office of the State Historic Preservation Officer, to WAPORA,
Inc., 25 February 1981). Therefore, a thorough pedestrian archaeological
survey must be accomplished for those areas affected by the proposed facility
during "Step 2" design. The survey will include a detailed literature review,
consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer and other know-
ledgeable informants, controlled surface collection of discovered sites, and
minor sub surface testing.
Once the survey is completed, the State Historic Preservation Officer
again will be consulted. It first will determined whether any of the re-
sources located by the survey appear to be of significance. Subsequently, an
evaluation will be made of the probable effects of the project on these re-
sources and what mitigation procedures may be required.
4-19
-------
Project construction costs and debt retirement burdens could be lessened
somewhat through the construction of a smaller, less costly WWTP system. A
smaller system, however, may result in a limitation on community growth at
Bemidji prior to the year 2000. More importantly, however, is the effluent
phosphorus limitation for the conventional treatment alternatives; i.e., a
less stringent discharge standard (1.0 mg/1 compared to the proposed 0.3 mg/1)
would allow a somewhat larger amount of phosphorus to be discharged to the
Mississippi River/Chain of Lakes system but would cost less (as discussed in
Section 2.4. and 2.5. of the Draft ELS) .
4.5.2. Mitigation of Operation Phase Impacts
The most significant adverse operational aspect of the proposed tertiary
treatment facilities relates to the discharge of effluent to surface waters
and to the high cost of minimizing the discharge of phosphorus. As discussed
in Section 1.0. and elsewhere, the discharge from the new conventional WWTP to
surface waters requires an NPDES discharge permit from the MPCA. The terms of
the permit will specify the concentrations and loadings for various parameters
and will require daily monitoring of the effluent quality. Periodic plant
inspections and compliance monitoring would be conducted by MPCA. If the
conditions of the permit were violated, enforcement action would be taken
against the City to force compliance. Citizens also could file suit to re-
quire compliance. A similar situation exists concerning the permits governing
sludge disposal.
To guard against operational failures of the new WWTP, and thus guard
against short-term degradation of water quality, the facilities must be de-
signed to provide the maximum reliability at all times. The WWTP should be
capable of operating during power failures, flooding, peak loads, equipment
failure, and maintenance activities. Therefore, the WWTP design ("Step 2")
should incorporate the following considerations to ensure system reliability:
Duplicate sources of electric power
Standby power for pumping stations and essential plant
elements
Multiple units and equipment to provide maximum flexibility
in operation
Replacement parts readily available
Holding tanks or basins to provide for emergency storage of
overflow and adequate pump-back facilities
Flexibility of piping and pumping facilities to permit
rerouting of flows under emergency conditions
Provision for emergency storage or disposal of sludge
Dual chlorination units
Automatic controls to regulate and record chlorine residuals
4-20
-------
Automatic alarm systems to warn of high water, power fail-
ure, or equipment malfunction
No treatment plant or sewer system by-passes
Design of interceptor to permit emergency storage without
causing back-ups
Enforcement of pretreatment regulations to avoid industrial
waste-induced treatment upsets
Flood-proofing of treatment plant
Plant Operations and Maintenance Manual to have section on
emergency operation procedures
Utilize highly-qualified plant operators
Provide room in the site layout for adding a final solids
contact clarifier process if later warranted by inadequate
phosphorus removal.
Through the incorporation of these types of factors in the design and opera-
tion of the wastewater control system at Bemidji, the system will be capable
of extremely reliable performance.
Reduction of costs for system operation could result from reduction of
the amount of alum and polymer that are added to facilitate the precipitation
of phosphorus. Through experimentation, plant operators should be able to
optimize the chemical addition requirements in conjunction with maximizing the
use of the multi-media filter and thus reduce chemical costs somewhat. I
-------
4.6. Irretrievable and Irreversible Resource Commitments
The major types and amounts of resources that would be committed through
the implementation of the proposed new WWTP are presented in Sections 4.1. and
4.2. These include public capital, energy, land, labor, and unsalvageable
materials, for which there will be a significant consumption of these re-
sources with no feasible means of recovery. Thus, non-recoverable resources
would be foregone for the provision of the proposed wastewater control system.
Accidents that could occur from system construction and operation could
cause irreversible bodily damage or death, and damage or destroy equipment and
other resources,, Unmitigated treatment plant failure potentially could kill
aquatic life in the immediate mixing zone and in the southern basin of Lake
Bemidji.
The potential accidental destruction of undiscovered archaeological sites
through excavation activities is not reversible. This would represent perma-
nent loss of the site.
Once the construction of a new WWTP system is completed with the conse-
quent expenditure of a large amount of public funds, future options may be
precluded. As discussed in Section 4.1., redesignation of the existing WWTP
uttc lor continued u:;c l:or wastewater treatment will preclude any potential
future restoration of the northern shore of Lake Irving for alternative uses,
such as residential development. The construction of a new conventional
treatment plant with advanced phosphorus control will cause a future decision
(within the next 40 to 50 years, the potential useful life of the system) to
provide treatment by land application to be made only at an exceptionally high
cost, in terms of the abandonment of the new facilities. The selection of an
alternative at this time is a decision that will not easily be reversible.
4-22
-------
5.0. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT EIS
An exceptionally large number of letters and statements were submitted in
response to the invitation for public comment on the Draft EIS. The formal
comment period was held open for six months, from the time the Draft EIS was
published on 1 August 1980 until 4 February 1981. During that time, addi-
tional on-land wastewater treatment options were studied, the MPCA completed a
Supplement to the Draft EIS, and comments were taken at a formal Federal
Public Hearing and a formal State Public Meeting.
All written comments received by USEPA and MPCA are reproduced in Part II
of this EIS. An index to each submittal is presented in Table 5-1. Comments
presented orally at the 11 September 1980 Public Hearing on the Draft EIS were
recorded and a transcript was prepared. Similarly, a transcript was prepared
of the 15 January 1981 Public Meeting conducted by MPCA to receive comments on
their Supplement to the Draft EIS. Copies of these transcripts are being
included in the mailing of the State Final EIS, and may be examined at the
MPCA office in Roseville, Minnesota, and at USEPA Region V in Chicago, or can
be purchased from the respective reporter services. An index of those pre-
senting oral testimony at both meetings also is presented in Table 5-1.
Because of the magnitude of letters and statements submitted as comments
on the Draft EIS, presenting an individual response to each one would be ex-
tremely cumbersome. Many of the comments offered opinions or stated positions
for the record, which are hereby acknowledged. Others reiterated similar
concerns and are conducive to a singular response. The response to some
comments has been incorporated directly into the text of the Final EIS and
thus they are not discussed herein. Therefore, for purposes of addressing the
comments on the Draft EIS, the many responses have been summarized and cate-
gorized by issue. The major categories of comments are:
Adequacy of alternatives development and evaluation process
Environmental concerns
Socioeconomic concerns.
An index number often is provided in the following response to issues to
reference the specific letter or the public hearing transcript from which the
comments were derived ("Tl" is designation for transcript of 11 September 1980
Public Hearing; "T2" is designation for transcript of 15 January 1981 Public
Hearing). Where written statements and oral statements coincide, the written
one is referenced.
5.1. Adequacy of Alternatives Development and Evaluation Process
Issue 1; The majority of comments received favored inclusion of "Alter-
native 7," agricultural land application at an unspecified site east of Be-
midji, in the Final EIS as the potential "selected action" (see 22, 8, 10, 11,
12, 29-34, and numerous individuals). Expansion of Alternative 6 to include
consideration of an agricultural land application system also was proposed
(Tl), as was the idea of using lands in the Chippewa National Forest some
distance east of Beinidji (6). Finally, the Maple Ridge Alternative was the
subject of discussion before the MPCA Board on 7 January 1981 and at the
5-1
-------
a
a
^
i
e
o
o
50
cr
u
E
CTJ
T
o
>
,-1
t?
C
>
c
bJ
3 *
a) O
a cj
x -
QJ O
T3 Z
C
r
u-
^
u
i
i
^
c i
>. aj
0 *""
-
c -c1
^ w
. *^
u O
1 >,
E -^
u
01 a1
w
14-1 CC
?^ -H
H liw
o o
C '
S oo
- CO ^
0> 1 1
o
t~ ' 4 rs;
U
J
* 1 >-
i- C *-
^ ic r
^ ^ A
2? " "
ฃ a J'
-: c -
^ ac C
.j er -*'
7 >., ^
C ปj C
CJ u ^
^ 1 1
u ,
a! ฃ y
60 U S
W p" C
^ e >>
>% c ^
^j -j O
n *"" c
ฃ T E E
OJ u E Ji
~ " ^ 1
5 ae "e U
cr i-
^ C
1 -C
ฃ ^
c/: /
/-. C
~ C T"
r- r *<
C cr c1
ac 01 -^
~- (d
c ""
v a: c
LJ cr Q-
01 f ปJ
c a a> M
if ^T ^ ^
E 03
O ?.' CO V
^ ^ 5 t!
c ซ ^
TT _, O '
^ 'o ff
s-^ ^ -^ ?.
C C *j E rf
L: u c o) y
OJ CD
k. i-
W 4J . X
a. u o --- a1
co co u: ^j cc
oo no oo ac
II il
' -I '
"-i ^T O-i >X"
r-M rj r^j rJ
C
*-
_
V
c
cr
-
C-
C1
C
I-' k-l
c
rr
ซ r
O u-j"
V1 C-
< -li
en
- o
I- SL
a
^ . t*.
!--!
>. p oc
-H 1-. -
U (p ^
C O' C
H X ^
0' -rJ C
cc a: crt
CD OO
1 |
(N r^
1 1
r^ oo
(SJ
_L
i1
0-
E
J
CO
I-
c/;
>,
C1
3:
OJ
u
k-
1
0
^
!_
Ci, 0>
s ^
c e
ฐ r=
o) a;
u <:
c
rt E
"o ป
01
a
to
a
a
R) P
00
SJ-
0 r^
4-1 ao
S
e J1
o
^"
c
L
*
cL
cr
ฃ
c^
c
r f
_^ !*
JS ^
0'
ฃ ^
f 4.1
, a.
ง c.
zป ^
(t ""
u c
tr- ,_
* X:
d
s :
o
C O1 C
0) tJ T-
a < 3:
o c
CC CC
1 t
C i
c j; i -a c
r ^ ~ ii ^ "~
T. i *" < 7^
y *J ^ C r- S
ฐ- S cc
"! c | ^ ^ . ^
rr A -J ^ y &* fcJ
r- t-1 [/ pi
M L" U Cfl
= S1 u C ซ u
z S " r ง - "^ T
*" - d c r tfl' d
T* *o o
IT u . "? u, *
1 ซ C gcJW^ C
^ ^ a) *-* ^H o
33 ^ ฐ ^*j"uj< U
w w y m ^ re
i S ^ 3 cฐ 5
5 (L1 ^ CO- CJ
ti c (c S u 5 S
^ rJฃฐCfla> i-l
"-"o^uiO^-r^ * aj
D. tr *~ i ^T! ;>^|~J ex
Ks^r^r^J Sci eงr
o
o o n co *
C> or on r 1 Xi
00 1 1 O ' I
00 W 1 -H
1 I ! c^ ^1 |
(vj "i ^r L/I ,0 r^
^
O
Cw
E
J
5C
1-
^
C
3:
i
i
g
CJ
G O
3 P
v- q,
c 4
55
??
s
30
t
1
05
=
"~
.
S
"
1
-J
tc
(T
U
*"
U
e
e
0)
o
(U
c?
i
H
r"
f3
0>
u
C.
ป
n K
a 7^
(53
i
o
o>
Jj
OJ
C-
5
J
tjj
u
X
^
'J
"
E
O
O
UJ
C 0
= M
u "J
61
U
>- -J
01 O
W u
D T-t
U M
H CD
ฃ t
QJ CA
yb o
c rf
o **
>
c "ฐ
u S
"o "ซ
w c
o
1 ซ
- ot
i! K
i^epa rtment of Agr
mesota State Office
Department of Corame
nini^tr^ition
S ฃ !' S
O
O 00
CO 1
i i
epa rtrapnt of the
rth Central Region
LH; pa r tmenc of Heal
r^:-1
00 X)
t 1
1
""I |
u o
01
s Iง
n M ซ
ฃ 5s
4J fcj flt
S 5 -
3 u C
-H OJ 0)
3 4J O
U C
i -J
De p a r trae n t of Ag ;
lional Forest
Department of the
:reation Service , La
c/i rt y 0*
^ X ^ QL
-a
c ^
ra oo -^
^ 5 -A
^ ^ 2^
^o r--.
H
ง
O
^-1
S
_
0)
O)
i
0
Bus ines;
-
Tribes
?ch Lake Reservatiot
i ir*aan
T? cy ฃ:
ti -5 U
rt
C!
ฐi
""M
n oo
w i
S
r
(0 00
c
2
i
oT
"~\
ซi
z:
O)
O)
5
ป
CO
01
p
CO
-
?ch Lake Reserva tioi"
J
ac
l
0>
0) ffl C >,
1 -S-E s
-C 3 lJ
>, U O U
-H (U * W
a3 m M en
- ฃ ^ o a >
tu i u q i-
4^ t*> a , cc o
1 ฃ = ซ S 3 I
" J^|^ ฃซ
Ic-5 .=* -
^ 0 ^H W - '
4j re -C re o) c
^ U 0 -H * S -
* S - S'o <
ilrnan
?ch Lake Reservatior
iii~ian , and Alfred P
ch Lake Reservation
; Minnesota Chip pew;
1 Lake Rand of Ch
linaan and Royce C.
i Lake Fisheries
5352ฃ3>S2r
O O i
CO OO i CO
1 1 CO 1
! t 1 1
2 r ^^ 2
H 4-1 03
ฃ tO 01
^ X X
f~l fS C
tl -rr? D
=" ฃ 5
,
a/ . w
S ^ u
i ซ s
ป | ^
05 fO
W h
W 0 *ซ
:ch Lake Reserva tior
tiraan
;ional Agencies
ines*.} ta Historical
. tarie Preservation (
neso ta Department
: 3 6 S ?. S S
o
fl
t 0> CO CO
CO f 1 1
1 01 1 I
3
-H i-l .-H ^J
15
CO
OJ
XI
_o
j:
a.
ซ
B:
-
E
=
0
1
>
01
*j
i' "i?
I 5
CO
1
1
e c
!-l C
CO 01
4)
W
u
fl3 -
ฃ ป
_CJ O
0
c "*
o g^
** j
" "S
a. 3
t/!
^ ฐ .3
, I rman
inesota Department (
issioner
loestita Oepartiiwnt
^rne. Deputy CoiuinlbH
tn c p c
-------
ฃ
is
"^
r-J
E
_c
CO
_,
(0
d
ฃ
e
w
e d
n' S
c! 1
C 0
X
4ฃ
- TJ ซ
Z ^ >
Q) ~
re
" ฃz =
cr E -H
O O "-> *
^5 -C U
P 0 05 g
U- CO O #
tT 0) 3
ct d ^i
E - 0 d
cr c LI 01
C HI (0 CO
o o o o
co co co oo
i i i i
oooo
1 1 1 1
S e
e a-
0' EC
E"
c re
a. tr jr
H 0> tj[
f. C -
cr c L.
ฃ
H "t cr;
C X X
.C +J LI
tJ QJ 11
O O
CO CO
o o
1 1
ซ
1*4
o
1
r
ฃ
^
O 3
"3 2
O
30
O
!
U-
!s
1-1
H
?T
-H
T3
c
0
"1
o
CO
1
o
1
&
f
f~
o
a,
<
a:
en
o-
H*
S)
-:
CO
i
o
1
1-J
5 5
s e
S tt> -H
^ ;ซ p Eg
S ซ $ ฃ - J?
OB " ซ t? x a.
d" s .c * o fc
c o o>
e) ฃ *-ซ o < _a
HOD O
oo >, u
o o o o o 0
1 ! 1 1 1 1
0 0 -*
1 1 1 1 1 t
o> cr> c^ c^ {?N cr>
H i
QJ i-J
US
CJ
1-1 ^
3 ง
0 ฃ
* J
s^
eu
3ฃ
O O
00 CO
1 1
ฃ Pฃ ^g^S -5
&J -HU -H^EH 01
o -or} oi-ccc LI
ฃ 1 E = - 2 ,; 2 "
ป "to ^oo03 aj o ^ a! -^ o
5 ฃ J J ฃP^j (^^"0^2 .
to Q)2?Ci)?^, *COE*JCC QjfO1^1
O ,j cflปe^rt^j .casj:
.^^.S^-C:^ *" ซ -Z^3
oooooozrcooooo
oooococococoxcococococrjco
1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 1
Tj JJ -
" 3 '
en =
O ฃง iJ ca
g -g | ซ ^"
-^ "re K o ^
S ^ ^ o -o
m ca aj " "
n oo ฃ u
01 <-3 CJ ~
OJ QJ Tl
Q iJ I? S J^ eQ
oooo o
CO CO CO CO CO
T? i1
""" [^
^: o
bC -^ -5
race
tv 3 -H d
d o -^i 3
CU H TJ 0
Li C E
0 0 c= W
13 ป C N
~o g r s
>. B
O >-<
(I1 d 73
01 i-H Cfl
oooo
CO CO CO CO
1 1 1 1
1 1 t 1
H
T?
E
CO **!
5 "S
^ ^
ฃ ?
^ .
^ E
o o
CO CO
C
H
4J
C
O
o
5
to --) "^
CO -0 OJ
re *-* -2
CJ B ซ
- BO
Q - cr
r.23
j= c 3
0) L. ฃ
-3 CQ LO
!" W J
H U L.
ง . 1
- 2 5
"'
"Z.
S
o
0
en
CO
C
P
O
CO
u to -J ep "-1 H
3 me S^gojwS-S ^ -H.J"
r-l3cO'l-'Kal-H'':cOW'HOC O O
*J ป.,-4,-| . ffltO 'duSltiHClicflH
atOdcy-cDm rtaiLiW-Hdie-rJ *
>, aij-r-i .3 O'-'a. ^ijjB-H.c:^
c u DJcn - _c a. a) i ' cj o M o *o *- a> T
u-3o>!OOgIc3 "j^ijaicijrtBjodv
D-COOCU- >,-tOoC tOCK
0 C r-< . JI^H 3Ef3^- :
sSซซ&'ll3:sliB;|.;R5ffg5-g ;
|f3ciซcj^^rofc^^<^^
MN
ji HN
PF Ecological Associates,
, Cass Lake MN
TJ Oi LI
CO ซH (fl
H E - ^J
rH 01 *-> 3
O 00 W 03
CO dO
C CO ^
d co o cj
D " 0) N
H Li O
3 d *J JT cd
5 W W 3 J3
4 Ll O
T3 cj c
- W cj d ^
' co t-t o *j j:
s
i,
T3
BO
CD
5o
c
^H
T)
a
o
Q
CO
Z
i MN, Frohn Township
?
E
D
ca
CO
CO
fi
e
a)
u
d
CU
o
en
n)
u
u
Oi
CD
OS
d
CO
d
X
1
S
a
ฃ
4-1
90
CJ
Cu
o
so
w
o
I
u
1-t
4-1
A-
d
oj
0
-~l
0)
M
*
1
ol
a.
U)
U
o
H
3
o
ฃ
0)
i
J?
O
s
t>0
CO
*J
u
o
a
cO
It
LI
c
CO
V)
N
lj
oj
3
U
T)
*f3
I
tckinson Realtors, Bemidj:
mage r , Otter Tall Power
0 r
u d
--ป c
-H
d >
0 -H
in d
u 2P
J > E!
*T3 -H
j= rO -3
0 d E
Z ง
ft
S ffl
01 m
CJ
eg t
56"
-H Li
a ' 0)
0) E
0) ซ 3
e H w
r it i
-HS
d co
LI fti
M ง ฃ
r-i O S
ro S
H >,
C (8
W CJ) "1
j e
s to
c -d
s ^5
^ 5
I
(U
^-"000
O O O O O cO
COCOCOCOO3 OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
l I I i i 'cococococococoaooocococococococoeo
u~'
O O O O O CC CO
00 CO CO CC CO I I
I I ! I IOC
"
H
*~-T ~-r -t -T
5-3
-------
jj
c
Oj
E
U
oc
c
*J
c
^
o
i/3
fl
"C
>
9
M
>,
*J
-H
*J
UJ
C C
1> i
to
c.
"^
c
3
O
H
if,
"cD
o
ฃ~ C
*i T
C ฃ
if1 ri 5"
C ^
S 1r c:
o no
S < "J
ซ S ^
J. ^r
t" ^> J
to ^: ^ -
< i S |-s
o. 2? ซ
* X 3 3 "-t
1 -S - 1 1,
x as ซ E
^ J3 ^ o
en ฃ - J^ >'
& CC fti > ,-ซ
3 o: *j Q)
B. Q, j*; N
- cฃ c v
C <3) X
y *> *j fc cซ
;>ฃ cr , -
* -0 T
41 v; 1^
00 n! C T)
^ f*1 IE 01 f'
o --< 1- * t-
(S cc rS rr a
CO CO TO CO OO
111 uA '
V to cr
ซ j c C
e T* f*
*-> ป- JsJ
E: co.
0. f O
cC C ~
M -
P- C
00 M O
c n
T-H .-' l~)
? * w .
^C Cm
^ g - IS
T- O C r-j
-- >. o -^
e -x *-" >- u
Q U' C - C
ซ" t. 4J " 10
C. F C tn
oi ~l *-- W <
cei a- (-
(p ซ ,,
< Qtf C- >- rH
*J Di fl) a,' J^
v a oo , a.
u - ซ 3 a -H
KC * Z C y ^ J= S
fa) C S S- (J J3m2-
a! ^ ซ E . M c
*- F -H "^ c S f<
-H t n) M -^i 7* 3O-^a
'-i .*: t-> ,-> -D P o H -O CO
3 fl) V* fl -^ W ^ H -H
i- ^ E b CS^
g -* o o> ix c j= o) o
OJU-.I EC U J^O^W
m^^-t* - OVJ-*-1
ซ: D: 41 >% a.J^ fc* sin
^ ^^r^ocu ."
co -H 1-1 -a; >-* -c "
1; 4) >' CO [0 " COC ป
^ J* -^ H ป^ C OCOOCJ
-j tj i-j a) erf ซ wi-icOJ*
ซ*.>> *- i-.aiCu
r-H X i5 C". P- (I1 Tl G 1W f~>
ic _ai rs c a < GO
*J C -J w *-> < p-,
0- ^-ซ CO ซH 0) H ^ Wfil-H
a1 E -^ w ^ a> ts Qj n C i)
":' -<: -or cu w R; o S "o o &
co -- * ' i
f CO CO ^ CO
rvj csl i r-J <*"> t) T3 "J T1
Cl
"01
c
b
H p.
C J=
-C a)
o c
it Z 3
l*-< X! C. O
-H H
SCL-r-i^zIJi CD- S
S -H T? S* ฃ C J= ^1 **
x -H 3 o aj:
Hm^-rJ-Hri M ซH (fl 0)
i rt u *-i -, a M t*. JT ? '
V ? (6 if T3 i-t M S -t
HO --''.re "Co "d
G H E E K ^ K3H cfi
QJ a.i)owco j-o c
CGW-HUCGHO&ijZ HG O
tu^o oia-jr ^^: .j
a.ni-Htn^Biait-' -oco
H pi .M e M cc to >^, ^3x:iJ Z-3
^ us ป a -^ s z-HOfcn g^s
03,WO^H --(LlStOX S BH d>
gwg H3ZJ=>.^ 0 ZCJfc. >,y-HZ
a-ttfe- o2:ooi-s;-Ha. >, zzn-(SeQ z ^tC"-iE:
oo z>-> 3-^0-^3 4i r S i -S toH-c
H+.j(i)S:OJtJXct)StJtlC*' W T3-H*Z 03^>-i
IQJ^ -Hdl^jDrt -H O -<".< -H 1 C S -H CXr-IB-V;
apnco-H'Ho;wMti.-ac-: o. Tป-] e 73 o i s^tym
Ey~J-1~icrj om zoicS 3 T3tia;-^W'--(-3 cx-toeso
OTH -o>*a-'aT3E:cQ o- i-(T-i(aE^-^-^ O-
vjt]in-H Jjpsc: ^ BS aiat'OS ctf*Pi3
B- toG*jaia.rtra>>ซ>cj K cu ai - co ^2 i a> oi^osc-.
^jrtacc -J 2ฐ^ ^ EQCQC uscc
'-'P v-CCrfCJDrH^M - *wiKC3'2:cc--'k-i-'ซ:^w
O^-OiCJ iHX'3Oo)-H a C G CtJ ' O ctO*~:QJi-i^3
rt~ce^ ซjs!*Jcocn*JSu-H(oo ,ปo *-*ous
*Jfi?O *C03ป-(Xi T^ l*j^jto ^ZiHCflCu) *"0'^ttJ*J
w 'to --HMH^CDM -V-C^WM^-IC; ajaoonrafto-ONco
j: +4 ^ & (5 3ajeT-*a)w-Hoojocz"UfflaiJ.!-K 3
_y[;nj-tS'-jx 'otuTcj^jsrszmrt cu ^ ^t u t, *o -H
M *d :i "ป -H 4J fll"-2 i^ eo>T30tiJ*J*fl-^ปNNCV7 ปW
-"3CJ^'OtM^-2 ^JW-TSO-^ViZO ' 0) 3- S >ป
tJ CJ1^ ErCai C UHUo Ztt^'HOi'HtWOii-i "W01
F-" *" B ^XOW^d) Q'-MftJ 0) -H 0) J-s kl F-<
o gajoJjii wv-uw j^ . JIMW ซซ-i(nt*ac-Hv*fOC
<^r-5-j3'^3Ho--Stocn^a:E^:J-3^;x:ซ3=ปn'^ฃ3(SSco
'DT!-a'aT3-a-'3-c''arara"a-3'o o-oi3fT3'i:i*3"O'aTj"a"3"TJ'a
"O
0
H
C
o
,0
n)
H
i-J
c
g
S
cj
00
c
4_>
4-1
si
jC
3
CO
*
3
a
>
H
a
*~H
>,
w
ป*
c
w
o c
2 |
ฃ *:
*
a) o
~O Z
C
gs
H
3 s
s ง
a' ai
cc e
H
- (X
u
CNl CN
g
w
s -^
O
>> tti
-iJ
CD 13
O C
a re
5 ฃ u
H T) C
* ' C o>
*a ft EC
i i-i e
ฃ= 3 a
ซ X U
c c
o 41 eu
Jj .ฃ<
H -^ ta
3 <
CC
.C . iM
ซJ IT K<
3 U O
a, re a
co co co
i t i
CM fO r"i
1 1 1
**- CO O^
"N CN CM
Ci.
"ป
C
3i
o
HjJ
ฃ,.1
*
*J t-J
M O
O 2E
5E
00
3 w
-H X
T3
ฃ.S
11 CO
ca ,J
* V,
e m
0) (B
T3 CJ
-H
W -
0>
X v
t-( .r-
S3
^ K
*e
c
CJ t-J
CJ >
X '
o nJ
) J
CO '5
A, A
1 1
0-
ฃ
f^
CC
<-a
n
o
w
Iw
OJ
0?
.
CU
c
p.
c;
F
c
o
a:
u-
a
ฃ
>,
c
~>
CO
iA
i
CJ
ri
u
C
>-,
ex
D.
3
to
g
*
>-.
V-
c
~
0
u
North
E
Cu
z J
-i E
t~) CC
*U '
E -^
O -H
EC "C
CO
O->
1
f">
ri
a
Z
X
i c
c
H *J
t3 ""!
~H JX
E
01 ซ
CC -0
ซ o
E >
01
z " .5
ซJ LJ
' fO ซ
"-> ^: 3C
c
i-1 c .
E Jr cr
a* o t-ซ
ซ ^ s
TO CC
f 1
CN 1
1 C1
-* in
S
c
c
*-J
H
3
o
r-4
O
>
c
>J
5
ij
CO
A
^0
n~i
*S
Q
O
ป
-H
rf
to
S.
rt
o-
^4
5
e
ft"
^i
ง|
^ i
3 JJ
E a'
a>
"S
0* fl
C E
ซ -o
S ซ
t to
a
>.
C QJ
OJ tf
f- -O
T3 *-*
< to
CO CO
1 1
A A
53
ฃ>s
-o
-^H -H
B ป-ป
d) -D
E
erf ฃ
oi n
Vi ^'
QJ 4>
00 DO
3 3
ซ a>
U C
-H co cr.
"3 ^ M o
jT ป W Z Z CO ^
Z (B a? -S X ^ o-
p z Z "^ ^ < z mz
3 XX-^J^ ft) >ป >ป S ro s^
O ^ ,V,K ^ ^ -^ !K ^J p
^ ^XWK omป>,x < -H m
^ jฃ jd Socj<; -^Sj
^f)ป- G.D.tr-HZ- -r:ra
jr oozz i-ipso-^XK -H e
*j o.a;cr;z\n; S
w CCEฃ-H*oiyQjCa;ฑ)Cn^ 53
- nJeocuaj-HEuti-Q-ccccidZ-t/; ปx:
c t-ijcoca^ i- CLou""1
5 S S - - - J J ซ S C ~ . 5" ฃ "3
fr-i-CMtic'; a1 n ai ฃ pn ^
<-ซ! (J*Jni 'WlWdJ C
* coffiaiiycjoo-s^paajaij ป^
*ป 33mflJ'~iu 01 i ซr" o; ^j
^zaitDa'tu'-'T-'Wflajf-'&cai . ^
C iH-H [^ :>JUf-tU* 13 TJ
*J^J^Jr_.>, 5^ -C4iW--WB;^drHU
co--~i<,cr\0ซH(N)ro~3-mvr)
a: ป
3: i- ai oo - .*
o e (u -H w ป u
HUJ-MU * ce ซ m l
f-, -tw T; CO (U v< *O "*
C-HO-uJe ป u t-> f-'
FO ."SiwSoS
ai e*: kซ i (5-0
ce ^0 pa -H W *o
WC 1C tJ
- >, U ^4 -0 ซ C [0
c^o; > >, -H ซ-H a) e
O+-"^!THI-I e u i o
T^OO C|(3 OiTSrHtU
W CO OS ^rfcQ
-------
c
C"
!^
t^
fcC
c
c
>
w
0
w
a
VI
rnoon
0)
5
y
^i X
tr c
*r c m :z
cj tfcoN^r^tj ^^
6C CC>3O U C 3l OJ BC
^ej cjk-*w-^u.rj ^ฃ-I*.CGC>.S<: z
o J D y ec *->;i-,_j[ijHCL*oO(i)J3y w
t/i -J tt. Cu C d/ iป ป-) (13 CiJ
H ^OCWMCJo*-'a)^-'XJrซ U
flฐS5*53 JD ซC
o n) O ui
. d ai o
O
"w
tyj
!
T-
s
UJ
o
H
W
(0
J?
rnooa
^
a
t
OJ
CO
t-i
(a
<:
c
o
tf>
p
4-*
ฃ
lJ
o
JS
a;
"3 *
C^PO 0 CDC P
osojJWjiittaica.CC'-it1 u^!
r; CP I t-i .ฃ M g U X ffi WJ= ฃ _* M CJ
= a; ;j a. ,~i T-< งnjซ~<-J u r C a) .u y
Q; i-i ON-H. IC_J J Cฃ CO H to 5 ฃ
*J d! >, " *O 'J CJ aj eฃ 1!
c a, u o a- cu
K w 01 C tr CQ;
u -OOGtcaJti-
C *B q) WctO1"! *-* '-^ ~
bjPcBe tuctocO'T'1-'
P
03 3 w rt
iHl
cccc
C X
c ซ --<
r~t O QJ O
QJ O O
ar o> ra
e to w
^-i -T-I o;
ฃ S^^
OJ
li
re ^
1 ฃ
Q S
H
O
0 C
(X O
.2 c'-n
M 1 ( T
T3 01 0) C/
-* K (C
TO ^T
-, SI "W O T?
M i-f o? e u
^: H x ft! 0 tfl i
ซ 5 J ฃ ? ! ,3 I
60 -
) 5 O -H O K CJ
C > O CO O fe
3 i-t X 3 C *-'
2 O l-i Ci. 1 tij W
'35uu ^^ ,
^r S,
J 3
a -> v
J tO r-1
S fH X C
5 "o to 1
i W -<
-o o
5 '? e c
3030
3 W U H
W CO>w OWCtCQJ S'-'X'fl JS -*
W O> Q.QJ O*-J-HEM 3U4>*JN 'OWQ. W i*
o TJ w ^ o*-ป fljuijac tfl'j5j:j-N ccsj=sซiaJ e
Lnj-JU-rJtjOJii-H^'j-ars-^ jOSi-iffTj rtOT)*J^-(rD[ijJ_iT3
o[ ^ &. c >* xt3 cs i^cjitJ'^""1^^'^ rcwoaco
*J QJ 4-ป O M C C ni flJ 0) WO'-'Jm nj u C i^
5-5
-------
Public Meeting on 15 January 1981 (T2, 37, 38, 213, and a number of indi-
viduals) .
In contrast, there was considerable opposition expressed to the further
.study of any additional on-land options because oฃ the numerous studies al-
ready completed (Tl, T2, 211, and numerous letters). There also was signifi-
cant opposition to the Maple Ridge proposal (T2 and, especially, 13 and 212,
plus numerous individual letters).
Response: The "Alternative 7" concept has been included in the Final EIS
(Section 2.4.2). "Alternative 7" never became more than a conceptual alter-
native, however, because no technically feasible, cost-effective sites could
be found by the City. Numerous previous attempts to locate an agricultural
on-land alternative had reached similar conclusions. The area in Frohn Town-
ship considered by the City was found to have poor soil and water table con-
ditions for irrigation and would require extensive land acquisition to sustain
the low wastewater application rates dictated by the "tight" soils (as previ-
ous studies had concluded). The City also had RCM cost an agricultural alter-
native at the Eckles Township site proposed for forest irrigation in Alterna-
tive 6 (see 22). This effort indicated that the agricultural option there
still was considerably more expensive than a new tertiary WWTP (Section 2.4.1).
The Maple Ridge Alternative is described in Section 2.4.2. The estimated
$22,764,000 construction cost is nearly double that of the new tertiary plant.
Investigation of the technical feasibility of the bog storage site and the
development of an adequate environmental impact assessment could take a number
of months. The cost difference and the low probability of the bog storage
component being technically feasible were enough for the Agencies to determine
that this alternative warranted no further consideration.
Issue 2: The statement was made that it is not clear why each of the
numerous land treatment sites studied over the years was eliminated from con-
sideration (20,172).
Response: Detailed re-accounting of the results of each of the previous
area searches and sLte evaluations would require a volume unto itself:. Sec-
tion 1.2. summarizes the search efforts for on-land alternatives in a chrono-
logic fashion. Considerably more information is provided in Sections 2.3. and
2.4. For more detail than is presented there, one is directed to the original
documents addressing the site/area searches and site evaluations, i.e., the
original Facilities Plan (Stewart & Walker 1973), the Facilities Plan Supple-
ment (Stewart & Walker and others 1976), various reports by WAPORA (see Sec-
tion 1.3. for references), and work by RCM (1980, letter included in comment
#22, and several other letter reports). In addition, the actual determina-
tions concerning the disposition of such alternatives subsequent to the com-
pletion of the engineering reports is documented in numerous letters between
MPCA, USEPA, and the City of Bemidji. These factors support the decision that
this alternative warranted no further consideration.
Issue 3: The City (22), the Bemidji Chamber of Commerce (29), and
several Beiuidji business interests (Tl, 50, and others) objected to the con-
sideration of the existing WWTP for continued use for wastewater treatment, as
proposed in Alternative 3. In particular, the City Planner provided a number
5-6
-------
of reasons why it is not a good WWTP site, stating that "the existing sewage
treatment plant does not represent the highest, and best use of that valuable
Lake shore property" (see 22).
Response: While this was an issue at the time of the Hearing on the
Draft EIS, the City is now on record as supporting the construction of a new
conventional WWTP at the existing site (Resolution #3012, 19 December 1980).
RCM's Task 4 Report (1979c) confirmed the adequacy of the existing site in
terms of physical area and area for future expansion. Section 4.1. of this
document discusses the impacts of siting the new plant at the existing site.
The primary problem created by the rededication of the site for waste-
water treatment is that it may preclude any future redevelopment of the entire
northern and eastern shorelands of Lake Irving, all of which presently are
dedicated to industrial use. The potential for such a dramatic redevelopment
program is not known, but is not expected to be very great. In contrast, the
site is very attractive for siting the new WWTP for a variety of reasons,
including:
Bemidji's sewer system is designated to converge all flows at
this point; changing the location of the WWTP would require new
force mains
Use of the existing site avoids the cost, environmental impact,
and the significant controversy associated with a new site
The site is directly adjacent to the proposed point of effluent
discharge, the inlet channel to Lake Bemidji; alternative
discharge sites are extremely controversial
The site is located centrally and so can best accept additional
flows from growth of Bemidji to the north and west and east and
south of Lakes Irving and Bemidji, and is accessed easily
There will be room for expansion of the facilities.
Issue 4: Significant concerns from an engineering point of view has been
expressed concerning the level of treatment (1.0 mg/1 vs. 0.3 rag/1 effluent
phosphorus level) to be provided, the ability of the new WWTP to actually meet
a 0.3 mg/1 effluent standard, and whether flexibility exists for changes in
the future (4, 10, 28).
Response: A treatment plant designed to meet a 1.0 mg/1 effluent standard
for P often can achieve effluent P concentrations on a day-to-day basis of
much Lower than 1.0 mgP/1 (possibly even as low as 0.3 mg/1), during optimum
operating conditions. Similarly, a plant designed to meet a 0.3 mg/1 effluent
phosphorus standard should consistently provide treatment to below that level.
If: future water quality conditions indicate that a 0.3 mg/l standard for P is
not necessary, then the plant could treat to a higher phosphorus level (say
1.0 mg/1 for P) through operational changes, reducing the cost of chemicals,
possibly by-passing the filter, etc. However, if a plant is built to achieve
a 1.0 mg/1 standard for P, additional treatment units would need to be added
to significantly improve the P removal capability.
5-7
-------
RCM, the City's Facilities Planning engineering consultant, has cautioned
against KPCA's reducing the reliability o(~ the proposed new WWTP (28). Part
II of ;iPCA's Supplement concludes that the final solids contact clarifier
proposed by RCM in the preliminary design of the proposed WWTP is not es-
sential to meeting a 0.3 rag/1 standard Tor P. RCM's response, however, is
presented in letter #28:
The PGA comments indicate that the treatment process which RCM
suggested for meeting an effluent phosphorus requirement of 0.5 mg/1
will in fact meet a 0.3 rag/1 phosphorus requirement. One must be
careful in defining performance evaluation criteria when making such
projections. The NPDES permit system is based upon monthly average
performance, although long term phosphorus impacts on a lake could
perhaps be viewed on an annual average basis. However, a treatment
plant that averages 0.3 mg/1 on an annual basis will most certainly
have at least one monthly performance result that exceeds 0.3 mg/1,
and would be a violation of the NPDES permit. The treatment process
schemes developed by RCM for various effluent phosphorus standards
are based on the NPDES permit approach to standards.
It is recommended in Section A.5.2. that the design of the new WWTP provide
the means and space for addition of final contact clarifiers if, at a later
date, operational performance ana water quality warrant their addition.
5.2. Environmental Concerns
The two broad environmental issues related to the Bemidji wastewater treat-
ment project have included the concern for improving the water quality of the
Upper Mississippi River Chain of Lakes and the potential for adverse environ-
mental impacts from land treatment/ disposal of wastewater. The downstream
water quality issue is of extreme importance because of the economic and
cultural importance of these waters to the tourist-based economy of the region
and to production of wild rice and livelihood for the native Chippewa people
of the Leech Lake Reservation. Environmental concerns about land application
of wastewater are based on fear of odor and aerosol production from storage
ponds nnd irrigation <"|u i |>ijion t .ind ground wn ti- r cont.iminat 1 on .
Issue 1: The discussion concerning future water quality in Lake Bemidji
and the downstream Chain of Lakes included as Section 4.2.2. led to concern by
the Leech Lake Reservation Business Committee (Tl and 15) and various resort
owners .and users of the Chain of Lakes that downstream values were not being
given enough consideration.
Response: MPCA's Supplement largely satisfies this need for additional
coverage of the subject. Part I of the Supplement addresses the economic
importance of clean water to the downstream areas water-based recreation
economy. Part III addresses the. limnological/water quality issues in more
detail, especially Lake Bemidji. Sections 3.1.3.1., 3.2.1., and A.2.1. of
this document summarizes the. information produced by MPCA. Additional com-
ments on the subject are presented by the Leech Lake Reservation Business
Committee in their letter of response to the Supplement dated 3 February 1981
(item #15). The Committee quantified the economic importance of annual har-
vest of wild rice to the Indian community and discussed the cultural signifi-
cance of the Upper Mississippi surface water resource and of the rice harvest.
5-8
-------
Further discussion of the prediction of future water quality is presented
in comment #172 by Professor Patrick T. Trihey, Chairman of the Biology De-
partment of Bemidji State University, who has overseen the water quality
sampling program in the Chain of Lakes since 1978.
Issue 2: The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR; 17) and
several others (primarily 36 and 107) raised a number of technical questions
concerning the environmental impact of Alternative 6, forest land application
of wastewater on public lands in Eckles Township. Major concerns include the
potential for groundwater contamination from nitrate and phosphorus break-
through, and the effects on groundwater hydrology and the forest system eco-
logy. The lack of experience with similar types of sytems was noted by DNR as
a significant drawback to the Alternative 6 proposal. They cited another
study to support their contention: "Unless local experience exists, a small-
scale experiment before any large-scale development is recommended."
Response: The DNR is quite correct in its contention that there are numer-
ous potential problems with Alternative 6. The inability to predict quanti-
tatively groundwater nitrate and phosphorus concentrations and the effects on
local and regional hydrology do stimulate doubt about the practicality of
proceeding with the full-scale development of such a project. Because this
alternative no longer is being considered as a potential solution for Be-
midji 's wastewater disposal problem, a detailed discussion of each of the
comments by DNR and others is unwarranted.
Issue 3: The Minnesota Department of Transportation expressed concern
about the potential for interceptor sewers to cross or parallel State trunk
highway rights-of-way.
Response: Several of the alternatives, especially Alternative 6, discussed
in the Draft EIS did propose highway crossings or construction of interceptors
following the rights-of-way of State highways. Alternative 3, the alternative
proposed for construction at Bemidji will not affect any State Highway in the
Bemidji area because it proposes no new interceptor sewers.
5.3. Socioeconomic Concerns
Issue 1: The primary socioeconomic concern about the project is the eco-
nomic and cultural impact in the downstream area from the discharge of waste-
water effluent to the Upper Mississippi River (Tl, T2, 12, 15, 160, and
others) .
Re s po ns e: The Draft EIS failed to address this issue in detail. Part I of
MPCA's Supplement, however, addresses the importance of the area's water-based
recreation industry to the local economy and the potential adverse effects
created by degraded lake quality. Section 3.2.1. of this document summarizes
that discussion.
The Leech Lake Reservation Business Committee has contended, however, that
MPCA's consideration of the subject does not address the importance of the
wild rice harvest to the sustenance and continued existence of the Indian race
in Minnesota. Their letter of 3 February 1980 (comment #22) provides quanti-
tative information concerning the economic significance of the rice crop:
5-9
-------
Wild rice is the single most important element in the native eco-
nomy. Many hundred of our people are engaged in gathering the rice
each year which produces an annual harvest averaging L million
pounds. The cash receipts from the sale are widely distributed
amongst all who participate in the harvest. It is the only realis-
tic opportunity available to virtually all our people to work and
earn money, each on his own and according to his individual initi-
ative, unhindered by the vagaries of the job market, and need for
interviews, formal education, various objectively and subjectively
imposed qualifications, competition and capital investment . . .
Without question, any inwater discharge system upsets the natural
balance and has an adverse impact on the wild rice crop. Because of
the importance of the crop, virtually any diminution is devastating,
the ma nmade devastation which is avoidable is simply unconscionable.
The LLRBC emphasized the desire for a long-range monitoring study to quanti-
tatively determine the impact of man-induced accelerated eutrophication of the
area lakes on the water-based tourist economy.
Issue 2: Several individuals commented on the existing and projected level
of user charges for wastewater service at Bemidji, as presented in the EIS
(43, 169).
Response: User charges were refined by MPCA in their supplement (see Part
II of Supplement). Based on additional information obtained from water bill-
ings at Bemidji, MPCA staff were able to disaggregate the non-motel commercial
share of wastewater system use from residential use. This provided for recal-
culation of tlie resident. LaL user charges.
Sections 3.2.4.4. and 4.2.3. discuss the existing and potential future user
charges, respectively. The existing inverted rate structure described in
Section 3.2.4.4. must be replaced with a new rate structure where user charges
are to be proportionate to the share of the system costs associated with the
user. As discussed in Section 4.2.3., this change in the rate structure
should cause residential rates to be about the. same with the new plant as the
current rates; however, the commercial users and the University will be paying
significantly higher charges.
Item 3: MDNR pointed out that a mechanism for conserving water, and thus
reducing sewage flows, is to change the price structure (17).
Response: Agreed. This aspect of water conservation could be included in
.Section 2.2.2.1. oC tae KIS with the other conse rvation/f low reduction tech-
niques. As discussed for Issue 2 of the section, the rate structure at Be-
midji will have to be changed. Rates have been high enough (proportionate to
income "levels) that conspicuous water use already should be somewhat cur-
tailed; however, it usually takes an educational campaign of the type dis-
cussed in Section 2.2.2.1. to make system users aware of the dollar savings
attained through elimination of conspicuous water consumption and actual
conservation of water, as it relates to reduction of sewage flow.
5-10
-------
6.0. LITKRATURIi CONSULTED
Anderson, Mikkel R. 1978. A case study of soil phosphorus and heavy metals
due to extended effluent irrigation. In: McKim, HarLan "L. (Coordina-
tor), State of knowledge in land treatment of wastewater. Volume 2.
Proceedings of an international symposium, 20-25 August 1978, sponsored
by US "\rrny Corps of Engineers. Hanover NH, 423 p.
Anonymous. 1980. Map of Bemidji Industrial Park. The [Beu.idji tfM] Pioneer
(22 January 1980), p.1.
Anthony, Robert G., Gregg R. Bierei, and Rosemarie KozLowski, 1978. Effects
of municipal wastewater irrigation on select species of mammals. _Jn_:
'IcKim, Harlan L. (Coordinator), State of knowledge in land treatment of
wastewater. Volume 2. Proceedings of an international symposium, 20--25
August 1978, sponsored by US Army Corps of Engineers. Hanover NK, ^'23 p.
(p. 281-287).
Anthony, Roln-rt C. and Cone W. Wood. 19/9. Effects ot municipal wasf.ew.i.ter
irrigation on wildlife and wildlife habitat. J_n: Sopperv William E. and
Sonja N. Kerr (Editors), Utilization of municipal sewage effluent: and
sludge on forest and disturbed land. The Pennsylvania State University
Press, University Park PA, 537 p. (p. 213-223).
Aguar Jyring V/hiteman Moser Inc. 1979. Comprehensive water and sewer plan
for Beltrami County MM. Duluth MM. variously paged.
Ayensu, Edward S. and Robert A. DeFilipps. 1978. Endangered and threatened
plants of the United States. The Smithsonian Institution and the World
Wildlife Fund, Inc., Washington DC 403 p.
Bacton-AGchuian Associates, Inc. 1978a. Bemidji growth management plan:
population projections. Prepared for the City of Bemidji MN. Ilinncapc-
iis MN.
Barton-Aschraan Associates, Inc. 1978b. Development patterns and opportuni-
ties, working paper #4. Prepared for the City of Bemidji UN. Minneapo-
lis MN.
Barton-Aschmati Associates, Inc. 1978c. Urban systems summary" eicl&ting
conditions, principles, and preliminary policies, working pnuer if 5.
Prepared for the City of Bemidji 101. Minneapolis MN.
Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. 1978d. Development projections, working
paper #3. Prepared for the City of Bemidji MN. Minneapolis MN.
Barton-AsL'.hiTian Associates, Inc. 1979. Implementation plan, working paper #9.
Prepared tor the City of Bemidji MN. Minneapolis MN.
Bierie, G.R., G.W. Wood, and R.G. Anthony. 1975. Population response and
heavy aietal concentrations in cottontail rabbits and small mammal:; in
wastewater irrigated habitat. In: Wood, G.W. et al. (Editors), Faunal
response to spray irrigation of chlorinated sewage effluent- Institute
for Research on Land and Water Resources Research Publication $7. The
Pennsylvania State University, University Park PA, pp. 1-9.
6-1
-------
Braude, George L, Ralston B. Read, Jr., and Charles F. Jelinek. Use of waste-
waier on land-food chain concerns. In: McKim, Harlan L. (Coordinator),
State oi knowledge ia land treatment of wastewater. Volume 1. Proceed-
ings of an international symposium, 20-25 August 1978, sponsored by US
Army Corps of Engineers. Hanover Nil, p. 59-64.
Burton, Thomas M. and James E. Hook. 1978. Use of natural terrestrial vege-
tation .for renovation of wastewater in Michigan. In: McKim, Harlan L.
(Coordinator), State of knowledge in land treatment of wastewater.
Volume 1. Proceedings of an international symposium, 20-25 August 1978,
sponsored by US Army Corps of Engineers. Hanover NH, 423 p. (p. 199-206).
Carlson, Rebecca L. 1980. National Park Service plans hearings on Wild,
Scenic River Plan. The [Bemidji MM] Pioneer (15 February 1980) p. 1, 2.
Chang, A.C. and A.L. Page. 1978. Toxic chemicals associated with land treat-
ment, ol wastewater. in: McKim, Harlan L. (Coordinator). State of know-
ledge in land treatment of wastewater. Volume 1. Proceedings of an
international symposium, 20-25 August 1978, sponsored by US Army Corps of
Engineers. Hanover NH, p. 47-57.
Clark, Dietz & Associates. 1977. Sewage treatment plant evaluation, Bemidji,
Minnesota. I_n_: WAPORA, Inc., Alternatives development and screening for
the City oฃ Bemidji wastewater treatment facilities, Appendix C (revised
draft). Prepared for USEPA Region V. Chicago IL.
Cole, Dale W. and Peter Schiess. 1978. Renovation of wastewater and response
of forest ecosystems: The Park Forest Study. In: McKim, Harlan L.
(Coordinator), State of knowledge in land treatment oE wastewater.
Volume 1. Proceedings of an International symposium, 20-25 August 1978,
sponsored by US Army Corps of Engineers. Hanover NH, p. 323-331.
Cooley, John H. 1979. Effects of irrigation with oxidation pond effluent on
tree establishment and growth on sandy soils, jn; Sopper, William L.
and Sonja N. Kerr (Editors), Utilization of municipal sewage effluent and
sludge on forest and disturbed land. The Pennsylvania State University
Press, University Park PA, 537 p. (p. 145-153).
Demirjian, Y.A., Ph.D. 1975. Design seminar for land treatment of municipal
waslewater effluents. Prepared for US Environmental Protection Agency
Technology Transfer Program. Muskegon MI, 91 p.
Dewalle, David R. 1979. Microclimate and wastewater spray irrigation in
forests. _In: Sopper, William L. and Sonja N. Kerr (Editors), Utiliza-
tion of municipal sewage effluent and sludge on forest and disturbed
land. The Pennsylvania State University Press, University Park PA, 537
p. (p. 225-239).
Dillon, P.J. 1974. A critical review of Vollenweider's nutrient budget model
and other related models. Water Resources Bulletin 10: 969-989.
Dillon, P.J. and F.H. Rigler. 1974. A test of a simple nutrient budget model
predicting the phosphorus concentration in lake water. In; J. Fisheries
Research Board of Canada, 31:1771-1778.
6-2
-------
Dindal, Daniel L., Linda Theoret Newell, and Jean-Pierre Moreau. 1979.
Municipal wastewater irrigation: effects on community ecology of soil
invertebrates. In: Sopper, Wtl. Liam 1.. and Sonja N. Kerr (Editors),
Utilization of municipal sewage effluent and sludge on forest and dis-
turbed land. The Pennsylvania State University Press, University Park
PA, 537 p. (p. 197-205).
Dressier, Richard L. and Gene W. Wood. 1976. Deer habitat response to irri-
gation with municipal wastewater. Journal of Wildlife Management 40(4):
639-644.
Fernald, Merritt L. 1950. Gray's manual of botany. Eighth edition, cor-
rected printing, 1970. D. Van Nostrand Co., New York NY, 1,632 p.
Gale Research Company. 1978. Climates of the states, Volume I. Detroit MI,
596 p.
Grau, J. 1980. City council approves utility rate increases. The [Bemidji
MN] Pioneer (22 April 1980), p. I, 2.
Hinesly, T.D., R.E. Thomas, and R.G. Stevens. 1978. Environmental changes
from long-term land applications of municipal effluents. US Environ-
mental Protection Agency, Office of Water Program Operations. Publi-
cation No. MCD-26. Washington DC, 31 p.
Hoyt, John S., Jr., David M. Nelson, and Scott Robbins. 1973. Minnesota
economic data: counties, and regions. Minnesota Analysis and Planning
System, Agricultural Extension Service, Institute of Agriculture, Uni-
versity of Minnesota. Population projections 1975-2000, #22.
KBM, Inc. 1980. Sludge disposal plan for land spreading, Bemidji, Minnesota.
Grand Forks ND, 36 p. plus appendix.
Ki'i-iicy , D.K. uid I..M. W'llnh. I'J/H. MOM I ( <> r I n;^ rcqu 1 rcinc n r s lor land treat-
ment systems. In: McKim, Harlan L. (Coordinator), State of knowledge in
land treatment of wastewater. Volume 1. Proceedings of an International
symposium, 20-25 August 1978, sponsored by US Army Corps of Engineers.
Hanover Nil, p. 365-375.
King, Darrell L. 1978. The role of ponds in land treatment of wastewater.
In: McKim, Harlan L. (Coordinator), State of knowledge in land treatment
of wastewater. Volume 2. Proceedings of an international symposium,
20-25 August 1978, sponsored by US Army Corps of Engineers. Hanover NH,
423 p. (p. 191-198).
Lago, I'.K. 1971. The Lloodplaln forests of the upper Mississippi River,
Minnesota. Masters thesis (unpublished). Bemidji State University,
Bemidji MN, 71 p.
Larson, D.P. and II.T. Mercier. 1975. Lake phosphorus loading graphs: an
alternative. Working paper no. 174, US Environmental Protection Agency.
Latvala, Howard. 1977. Memo, Howard Latvala, Minnesota DNR, Area Fisheries
Manager to Stan Daley, Regional Fisheries Manager, Division of Fish and
Wildlife, 28 February 1977, 2 p.
6-3
-------
Lee, G. Fred, Walter Rast, and R. Anne Jones. 1978. Eutrophication of water
bodies: insights for an age-old problem. Environmental Science and
Technology 12(8) :900-908.
l.i'wis, S. I. 1977. Avian coinunm i I i iป; ,iml li,il>lt.its or natural and w.iHtewater
irrigated vegetation. Master's thesis, Pennsylvania State University,
University Park PA.
Linden, D.R., W.E. Larson, and R.ti. Larson. 1978. Agricultural practices
associated with land treatment of domestic wastewater. In: McKim,
Harlan L. (Coordinator), State of knowledge in land treatment of waste-
water. Volume L. Proceedings of an international symposium, 20-25
August 1978, sponsored by US Army Corps of Engineers. Hanover NH, p.
Mathisen, John. 1977. Annual bald eagle-osprey status report. Chippewa
National Forest, Minnesota.
Minnesota Department of Conservation. 1952. Waterfowl and muskrat habitat
survey: Grass Lake, Beltrami County MN. Division of Game and Fish,
Bureau of Wildlife Development.
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. 1977. Fisheries survey: Stump
Lake. Area Fisheries Office, Bemidji MN, variously paged.
Minnesota Department of Economic Development. 1979. Bemidji MN community
profile. Industrial Development Division, St. Paul MN, 4 p.
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 1977. Report on compliance monitoring
survey at the Bemidji municipal wastewater treatment facility,, Bemidji
MN, 15 p.
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 1978a. Report on compliance monitoring
survey at the Bemidji municipal wastewater treatment facility. Bemidji
;IN, 15 p.
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 1978b. Minnesota code of agency rules.
Office of the State Register, Department of Administration. St. Paul MN,
variously paged.
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 1979. Report of water quality field
investigation of well and surface water quality in the vicinity of waste-
water sludge land applications in Frohn and Bemidji Townships, Beltrami
County, Minnesota. MPCA Region III, Detroit Lakes MN, 3 p. plus attach-
ments .
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 1980a. Water quality data collected by
Dr. Pat Trihey, Bemidji (MN) State University for MPCA, Division of Water
Quality, Surface and Groundwaters Section (unpublished).
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 1980b. Supplement to the Draft EIS on
wastewater treatment facilities at Bemidji MN. Roseville MN, variously
paged.
6-4
-------
Minnesota State Planning Agency. 1978. State-local fiscal study: report on
debt. Office of Local and Urban Affairs, St. Paul MM, 101 p.
Moak, L.L. and A.M. HLllhouse. 1975. Concepts and practices in loe.il govern-
ment finance. Municipal Finance Officers Association of the (JS and
Canada, Chicago IL, 454 p.
Morrey, G.B. 1974. Minnesota geological survey map, M-24.
Moyle, John B. 1980. The uncommon ones. Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources, Bureau of Information and Education. St. Paul MW, 20 p.
Nordie. David and Pete Smith. 1974. North country vacation survey. Unpub-
lished, Bemidji State College, Bemidji MN, variously paged.
Nutter, Wade L. , Richard C. Schultz, and Graham H. Brister. 1978. Land
treatment of municipal wastewater or steep forest slopes in the h;ur>id
southeastern United States. In: McKim, Harlan L. (Coordinator), State
of knowledge in land treatment of wastewater. Volume 1. Proceedings of
an international symposium, 20-25 August 1978, sponsored by US Army Corps
of Engineers. Hanover NH, p. 265-274.
Rechkow, K.H. 1979. Empirical lake models for phosphorus: developraant,
application, limitations, and uncertainty. In: Perspectives on lake
eutrophication modeling, D. Scavia and A. Robertson, editors. University
of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor MI.
Richenderfer, James L. and William E. Sopper. 1979. Effects of spray irri-
gation of treated municipal sewage effluent on the accumulation and
decomposition of the forest floor. In: Sopper, William L. and Sonja N.
Kerr (Editors), Utilization of municipal sewage effluent and sludge on
forest and disturbed land. The Pennsylvania State University Press,
University Park PA, p. 163-177.
Rieke Carroll Muller Associates, Inc., 1979a. Supplemental information for
the Becnidji, Minnesota Facilities Plan. Task 1: Development of design
flows working paper. Prepared for the City of Bemidji, MN. Hopkins MN,
variously paged.
Rieke Carroll Mailer Associates, Inc., 1979b. Supplemental information for
the Bemidji, Minnesota facilities plan. Task 2: Evaluation of alterna-
tive phosphorus removal methods, working paper. Prepared for the City of
Bemidji MN. Hopkins MN, variously paged.
Rieke Carroll Muller Associates, Inc., 1979c. Supplemental information for
the Homjdji, Minnesota facilities plan. Task 3: Evaluation of sanitary
sewer syot^:a and Task 4: Determination of a Lake Irving treatment plant
site. Prepared for the City of Bemidji MN. Hopkins MN, variously paged.
Rieke Carroll Muller Associates, Inc., 1980. Supplemental information for
the Bemidji, Minnesota facilities plan. Task 5: Preliminary development
and cost estimates of selected wastewater management alternatives.
Prepared for the City of Bemidji MN. Hopkins MN, variously paged.
6-5
-------
Schindler, D.W. 1977. Evolution of phosphorus limitation in lakes. Science
195:260-262.
Shapiro, J., J. Lamarra, and M. Lynch. 1975. Biomanipulation: an ecosystem
approach to lake restoration. Contribution No. 143 from the Limnological
Research Center, University of Minnesota, variously paged.
Sidle, R.C., J.E. Hook, and L.T. Kardos. 1976. Heavy metals application and
plant uptake In a land disposal system for wastewater. Journal of Envi-
ronmental Quality. 5(1): 97-102.
Sidle, R.C. and W.E. Sopper. 1976. Cadmium distribution in forest ecosystems
irrigated with treated municipal wastewater and sludge. Journal of
Environmental Quality. 5(4): 419-422.
Smith, V. H. and J. Shapiro. 1980. Chlorophyll-phosphorus relationships in
individual lakes: their importance to lake restoration stratagies.
Contribution 70.215, Limnological Research Center, Uiversity of Minne-
sota.
Snider, J.R. arid G.W. Wood. 1975. The effects of wastewater irrigation on
the activities and movements of songbirds. In: Wood, G.W. et al. (Edi-
tors), Faunal response to spray irrigation of chlorinated sewage efflu-
ents. Institute for Research on Land and Water Resources Research Publi-
cation 87, The Pennsylvania State University, pp. 20-49.
Sopper, William E. and Sonja N. Kerr. 1979a. Renovation of municipal waste-
water in eastern forest ecosystems. In: Sopper, William L. and Sonja N.
Kerr (Editors), Utilization of municipal sewage effluent and sludge on
forest and disturbed land. The Pennsylvania State University Press,
University Park PA, 537 p. (p. 61-76).
Sopper, William E. and Sonja N. Kerr (Editors), 1979b. Utilization of munici-
pal sewage effluent on forest and disturbed land. The Pennsylvania State
University Press, University Park PA, 537 p.
Sorber, Charles A. and Bernard P. Sagik. 1979. Wastewater aerosol stirs
controversy. Water & Sewage Works. February: 56-57.
Stewart & Walker, Inc. 1973. Wastewater treatment processes: a trilogy of
preliminary studies. Prepared for the City of Bernidji MN, variously
paged.
Stewart a Walker, Inc.; Ellerbe, Inc.; and E.A. Hickok, Inc. 1976. Facil-
ities plan supplement: on-land wastewater management study. Prepared
for the City of Bemidji MN, variously paged.
Urie, Dean H. 1979. Nutrient recycling under forests treated with sewage
effluents and sludge in Michigan. In; Sopper, William E. and Sonja N.
Kerr (Editors), Utilization of municipal sewage effluent and sludge on
forest and disturbed land. The Pennsylvania State University Press,
University Park PA, 537 p. (p. 7-17).
6-6
-------
Urie, Dean II., John II. Cooley, and Alfred Ray Harris. 1978. Irrigation of
forest plantations with sewage lagoon effluents. In: McKira, Harlan L.
(Coordinator), State of knowledge in land treatment of wastewater.
Volume 2. Proceedings of an international symposium, 20-25 August 1978,
sponsored by US Army Corps of Engineers. Hanover NH, 423 p. (p. 307-213).
US Bureau of the Census. 1950. General population characteristics - Minne-
sota. Department of Commerce, Washington DC.
US Bureau of the Census. 1960. General population characteristics - Minne-
sota. Department of Commerce, Washington DC.
US Bureau of the Census. 1970. General population characteristics - Minne-
sota. Department of Commerce, Washington DC.
US Bureau of the Census. 1979. Population estimates and projections: 1976
population estimates and revised 1974 per capita income estimates for
counties, incorporated places, and selected minor civil divisions in
Minnesota. Department of Commerce, Washington DC.
US Department of Housing and Urban Development. 1979. 1969 and estimated
1979 decile distributions of family income by SMSA and non-metropolitan
counties. Office of Economic Affairs, Economic and Market Analysis
Division. Minneapolis-St. Paul MM.
US Department of the Interior. 1976. The upper Mississippi: a wild and
scenic river study (draft). Bureau of Outdoor Recreation. Ann Arbor MI,
250 p.
US Department of the Interior. 1970. Groundwater and geology, Appendix E.
In Upper Mississippi River Basin Commission Study, Volume III. Prepared
for UMRCBS Coordinating Committee, St. Paul Minnesota.
US Department of the Interior. 1978. Revised wolf controlf measures proposed
by service. Endangered Species Technical Bulletin 3(8):1-3. US Fish and
Wildlife Service, Washington DC.
US Environmental Protection Agency. I974a. National eutrophication survey,
report on Lake Bemidji, Beltrami County, Minnesota, working paper #84.
Prepared by Pacific Northwest Environmental Research Laboratory. Corval-
lis OR, 13 p.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1974b. national eutrophication survey,
report on Wolf Lake, Beltrarai and Hubbard Counties, Minnesota, working
paper #136. Prepared by Pacific Northwest Environmental Research Labora-
tory. Corvallis OR, 13 p.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1974c. National eutrophication Survey,
report on Lake Andrusia, Beltrami County, Minnesota, working paper #81.
Prepared by Pacific Northwest Environmental Research Laboratory. Corval-
lis OR, 14 p.
6-7
-------
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1974d. National eutrophication survey,
report on Cass Lake, Beltrami and Cass Counties, Minnesota, working paper
//92. Prepared by Pacific Northwest Environmental Research Laboratory.
Corvallis OR, 14 p.
US Environmental Protection Agency. I976a. Quality criteria for water.
Office of Water and Hazardous Materials. Washington DC. 25b p.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1976b. Direct environmental factors at
municipal wastewater treatment works. EPA-430/9-76-0035. Washington DC,
variously paged.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1978. Proceedings from national confer-
ences on shopping for sewage treatment: How to get the best bargain for
your community or home (draft), April 23-30, and June 4-6. Office of
Water Program Operations, Washington DC, 119 p. (p. 53).
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1979. Grant tunding of projects requir-
ing treatment more stringent than secondary. Construction grants program
requirements memorandum PRM#79-7. From Thomas C. Jorling, Assistant
Administrator for Water and Waste Management, to Water Division Direc-
tors, Regions I-X, 9 May 1979. Washington DC.
US Geological Survey. 1968. Water resources for Minnesota water year 1967.
St. Paul, MN.
US Geological Survey. 1975. Water resources for Minnesota water year 1974.
St. Paul, MN.
US Geological Survey. 1979. Water resources data for Minnesota. Vol. 2,
Upper Mississippi and Missouri River Basins. USGS water-data report
MN-78-2, water year 1978. St. Paul, MN.
US Soil Conservation Service, n.d. Beltrami County MN general soils map. US
Department of Agriculture.
WAPORA, Inc. 1977a. Existing environmental conditions in the Bernidji project
area - Beltrami County, Minnesota (preliminary draft). Prepared for
US EPA Region V. Chicago IL, 110 p.
WAPORA, Inc. 1977b. Alternatives: development and screening for the City of
Bemidji wastewater treatment facilities, Beltrami County, Minnesota
(revised draft). Prepared for USEPA Region V. Chicago IL, 50 p.
WAPORA, Inc. 1977c. Impacts of component options and system alternatives for
the City of Bemidji wastewater treatment facilities, Beltrami County MN
(preliminary draft). Prepared for USEPA Region V. Chicago IL, 82 p.
WAPORA, Inc. 1977d. Proposed actions and their impacts (preliminary draft).
Prepared for USEPA Region V. Chicago IL, 32 p.
WAPORA, Inc. 1978a. Proposal to complete the environmental statement on the
proposed wastewater treatment facilities at Bemidji, Minnesota. Prepared
fur USKl'A iU^lou V. Chicago IL, 16 p.
6-8
-------
WAPORA, Inc. 1978b. Sites exhibiting potential suitability for land treatment
of wastewater near the City of Benidji, Minnesota (Task 1.0 Report).
Prepared for USEPA Region V. Chicago IL, 14 p.
WAPORA Inc. 1978c. Report on preliminary field investigations at potential
land treatment sites near the City of Bemidji, Minnesota (Task 2.0 Re-
port). Prepared for USEPA Region V. Chicago IL, 44 p.
WAPORA, Inc. 1979a. Revised plan of study to complete the environmental
statement on the proposed wastewater treatment facilities at Bemidji,
Minnesota. Prepared for USEPA Region V. Chicago IL, 18 p.
WAPORA, Inc. 1979b. Preliminary assessment of the suitability of land treat-
ment of wastewater at a proposed site in Eckles Township, Beltrami
County, Minnesota. Prepared for USEPA Region V. Chicago IL, 36 p.
WAPORA 1980. Preliminary draft environmental impact statement on proposed
wastewater treatment facilities at Bemidji, Minnesota. Prepared for
USEPA Region V. Chicago IL, variously paged.
Wood G.W. and D.W. Simpson. 1973. The effects of spray irrigation of treated
sewage effluent on wildlife. Transactions of the Northeast Fish and
Wildlife Conference 29: 84-90.
Wood, G.D., D.W. Simpson, and R.L. Dressier. 1973. Effects of spray irriga-
tion of forests with chlorinated sewage effluent on deer and rabbits.
In: Sopper, W.E. and L.T. Kardos (Editors), Recycling treated municipal
wastewater and sludge through forest and cropland. The Pennsylvania
State University Press, University Park PA, p. 311-323.
6-9
-------
7.0. COORDINATION, LIST OF PREPARERS, AND LIST OF THOSE SENT DRAFT EIS
7.1. Coordination
This Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) has been prepared as a coopera-
tive Federal government/State of Minnesota project. The USEPA and MPCA co-
ordinated closely in the development of this document. It is intended to meet
both Federal (40 CFR 1500) and State (6 MCAR Section 3) requirements for the
preparation of an EIS.
7.2. List of Preparers
The Draft and Final Environmental Statements (DES and FES) were prepared
by the Chicago Regional Office of WAPORA, Inc., under contract to USEPA Region
V. USEPA and MPCA approved the DES and published it as the Draft EIS, and
hereby publish the FES as the State/Federal Final EIS. USEPA, MPCA, and
WAPORA staff involved in the preparation of the DES/DEIS and FES/FEIS during
the past four years include:
Name
USEPA
Charles Quinlan
Layne Lange
MPCA
Douglas A. Hall
Gordon Meyer
John Hensel
Willis Mattison
John Hoick
Craig Affeldt
Bennet Davis
Patricia Frederick
I. Sam Higuchi
Larry Liversay
Mike Vennewitz
Bruce Wilson
Sandra Larson
Elizabeth Henderson
Patricia Chabot
Dan Green
Tim Larson
Don Perwien
Karen Hinrichs
WAPORA, Inc.
Daniel L. Sweeney
E. Clark Boli
Kathleen M. Brennan
Richard C. McKean
Highest Degree
M.A.
M.S.
M.S.
M.F.
M.S.
B.S.
Project Assignment
Project Officer
Project Officer (former)
ETS Coordinator
Acting Chief, Groundwater Section
Senior Engineer
Regional Director
Soil Scientist
Preparation of MPCA Supplement
Preparation of MPCA Supplement
Preparation of MPCA Supplement
Preparation of MPCA Supplement
Preparation of MPCA Supplement
Preparation of MPCA Supplement
Preparation of MPCA Supplement
Preparation of MPCA Supplement
Preparation of MPCA Supplement
Preparation of MPCA Supplement
Preparation of MPCA Supplement
Preparation of MPCA Supplement
Preparation of MPCA Supplement
Preparation of MPCA Supplement
Project Manager, Environmental
Engineer, and Principal Author
Project Administrator and
Editor
Biologist
Biologist
7-1
-------
Name
Anita C. Locke
William C. McClain
-Tame s Whe e le r
.Ian L. Saper
Greg Lindsey
Gregg S. Larson
J.P. Singh
John Rist
Mirza Meghji
Gerald D. Lenssen
James D. MikolaLtis
Dennis Sebian
Mark J. Brandl
Calvin Hoskins
Steven Wolf
Robert M. Cutler
Gerard M. Kelly
Gerald 0. Peters
Kimberly Smith
Valerie Krejcie
Peter Woods
William L. Bale, Jr.
Kent A. Peterson
Elizabeth Righter
David L. Marshall
David Dike
Alfred Hirsch
Dan Glanz
Highest Degree
B.S.
B.S.
M.A.
M.A.
B.A.
M.A.
M.S.
M.S.
Ph.D.
B.S.
M.S.
M.S.
B.A.
B.S.
B.S.
M.S.
M.S.
M.S.
M.E.M.
M.A.
B.L.A.
M.S.
M.S.
M.A.
M.S.
Ph.D.
Ph.D.
Project Assignment
Botanist
Botanist
Aquatic Biologist
Public Finance and Editor
Public Finance and Land Use
Demographics
Sr. Environmental Engineer
Environmental Enginee>r
Sr. Water Quality Scientist
Agricultural Engineer
Environmental Engineer
Environmental Engineer
Chemical Technician
Chemist
Acoustical Analyst
Air Analyst
Health Scientist
Environmental Scientist
Environmental Scientist
Graphics Specialist
Graphics Specialist
Graphics Specialist
Hydrogeologist
Cultural Resources Specialist
Economist
Geologist
Geologist
Water Resources Specialist
7.3. List of Those Sent Copy of the Draft EIS
Federal
Senator Rudolph E. Boschwitz
Senator David Durenberger
Representative Arlan Stangeland
Council on Environmental Quality
Department of Agriculture
Department of Commerce
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Department of the Interior
US b'ish & Wildlife Service
Geological Survey
Bureau of Indian Affairs
Heritage Conservation & Recreation Service
National Park Service
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
Department of Labor
Department of Transportation
US Army Corps of Engineers
US Soil Conservation Service
USEPA Regional Offices
7-2
-------
State
Senator Gerald Willet
Representative John Ainley
Office of the Governor
Office of. the Lieutenant Governor
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
Minnesota Water Resources Board
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
Minnesota Department of Health
Minnesota State Planning Agency
Minnesota Environmental Quality Board
Minnesota Department of Transportation
Minnesota Energy Agency
Minnesota Department of Agriculture
Local
Mayor, City of Bemidji
City Council, City of Bemidji
Bemidji State University
Bemidji Area Chamber of Commerce
Chairman, Beltrami County Board of Commissioners
Township Clerks for Bemidji, Grant Valley, Eckles, Liberty, Northern, and
Frohn Townships
Minnesota Chippewa Tribe
Leech Lake Business Committee
City of Cass Lake
Citizens and Groups
This list is available upon request from USEPA.
7-3
-------
3.0. GLOSSARY OF TECHNICAL TERMS
Activated sludge process. A method of secondary wastewater treatment Ln
which a suspended microbiological culture is maintained inside an
aerated treatment basin. The microbial organisms oxidize the complex
organic matter in the wastewater to carbon dioxide, water, and energy.
Advanced secondary treatment. Wastewater treatment more stringent than
secondary treatment but not to advanced waste treatment levels.
Aeration. To circulate oxygen through a substance, as in wastewater treat-
ment, where it aids in purification.
Aerobic. Refers to life or processes that occur only in the presence of
oxygen.
Aerosol. A suspension of liquid or solid particles in a gas.
Algae. Simple rootless plants that grow in bodies of water in relative
proportion to the amounts of nutrients available. Algal blooms, or
sudden growth spurts, can affect water quality adversely.
Algal bloom. A proliferation of algae on the surface of lakes, streams, or
ponds. Algal blooms are stimulated by nutrient enrichment.
Ambient air. Any unconfined portion of the atmosphere: open air.
Ammonia-nitrogen. Nitrogen in the form of ammonia (NH-) that is produced
in nature when nitrogen-containing organic material is biologically
decomposed.
Anaerobic. Refers to life or processes that occur in the absence of
oxygen.
Aquifer. A geologic stratum or unit that contains water and will allow it
to pass through or to yield economically significant quantities of
groundwater to wells and springs. 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 harder rocks such as
shale.
Bar screen. In wastewater treatment, a screen that physically removes
large floating and suspended solids.
Bathometry. Study of the depths of water bodies.
Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD). A bioassay-type procedure in which the
weight of oxygen utilized by microorganisms to oxidize and assimilate
the organic matter present per liter of water is determined. It is
common to note the number of days during which a test was conducted as
a subscript to the abbreviated name. For example, BOD indicates that
the results are based on a five-day long (120-hour) test. The BOU
8-1
-------
value is a relative measure of the amount (load) of living and dead
oxidizable organic matter in water. A high demand may deplete the
supply of oxygen in the water, temporarily or for a prolonged time, to
the degree that many or all kinds of aquatic organisms are killed.
Determinations of BOD are useful in the evaluation of the impact of
wastewater on receiving waters.
Bio-disc. See rotating biological contactor.
Bio-surf. See rotating biological contactor.
Cation. A. positively charged atom or group of atoms, or a radical which
moves to the negative pole (cathode) during electrolysis.
Cation exchange. A chemical reaction in which hydrated cations of a solid
are exchanged, equivalent for equivalent, for cations of like charge
in solution.
Chlorination. The application of chlorine to drinking water, sewage or
industrial waste for disinfection or oxidation of undesirable com-
pounds .
Chlorophyll a_. A magnesium chelate of dihyrodoporphyrin that is esterified
with phytol and has a cyclopentanone ring; occurs in all higher plants
and algae.
Claritier. A settling tank where solids are mechanically removed from
waste water.
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 bacteria, particularly Escherichia coli (E. coli),
enter water mostly in fecal matter, such as sewage or feed lot runnoff.
Coliforms 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 coliforms in water, therefore, is used as an
index to the probability of the occurrence of such disease-producing
organisms (pathogens) as Salmonella, Shigella, and enteric viruses.
The pathogens are relatively difficult to detect.
Comminutor. A machine that breaks up wastewater solids.
Cultural resources. Fragile and nonrenewabie sites, districts, buildings,
structures, or objects representative of our heritage. Cultural
resources are divided into three categories: historical, architec-
tural, or archaeological. Cultural resources of especial significance
may be eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic
Places.
Decibel (dB). A unit of measurement used to express the relative intensity
of sound. For environmental assessment, it is common to use a fre-
quency-rated scale (A scale) on which the units (dBA) are correlated
8-2
-------
with responses of the human ear. On the A scale, 0 dBA represents the
average least perceptible sound (rustling leaves, gentle breathing),
and 140 dBA represents the intensity at which the eardrum may rupture
(jet engine at open throttle). Intermediate values generally are: 20
dBA, faint (whisper at 5 feet, classroom, private office); 60 d3A.
loud (average restaurant or living room, playground); 80 dBA, very
Loud (impossible to use a telephone, noise made by food blender or
portable standing machine; hearing impairment may result from pro-
longed exposure); 100 dBA, deafening noise (thunder, car horn at. 3
feet, loud motorcycle, loud power lawn mower).
Uesicdtion. The drying out and death of plants and insects caused by
chemicals.
Detention time. Average time required to flow through a basin. Also
called retention time.
Digestion. In wastewater treatment a closed tank, sometimes heated to 95ฐF
where sludge is subjected to intensified bacterial action.
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.
Dissolved yxygen (DO). Oxygen gas (0~) in water. It is utilized in respi-
ration by fish and other aquatic organisms, and those organisms may be
injured or killed when the concentration is low. Because, much oxygen
diffuses into water from the air, the concentration of DO is greater,
other conditions being equal, at sea level than at high elevations,
during periods of high atmospheric pressure than during periods of jow
pressure, and when the water is turbulent (during rainfall, in rapids.
and waterfalls) rather than when it is placid. Because cool water can
absorb more oxygen than warm water, the concentration tends to be
greater at low temperatures than at high temperatures. Dissolved
oxygen is depleted by the oxidation of organic raattet and of various
inorganic chemicals. Should depletion be extreme, the water may become
anaerobic and could stagnate and stink.
Effluent. Wastewater or other liquid, partially or completely treated, or
in its natural state, flowing out of a reservoir, basin, treatment
plant, or industrial treatment plant, or part thereof.
Endangered species. Any species of animal or plant that is in known danger
of extinction throughout all or a significant part of its range.
Eutrophication. The process of enrichment of a water body with nutrients.
Fauna. The total animal life of a particular geographic area or habitat.
Facultative lagoon. A lagoon in which anaerobic microorganisms can grow
under aerobic conditions.
Fecal coliform bacteria. A group of organisms found in the intestinal
tracts of people and animals. Their presence in water indicates
pollution and possible dangerous bacterial contamination.
8-3
-------
Flow equalization. Process whereby peak flows are retained/stored and are
returned to the treatment system during periods of lower flow.
Flowmeter. A guage that indicates the amount of flow of wastewater moving
through a treatment plant.
Flora. The total plant life of a particular geographic area or habitat.
Force main. A sewer designed to convey wastewater under pressure.
Gravity sewer, A sewer in which wastewater flows naturally down-gradient
hy the force of gravity.
Groundwater. Subsurface fresh water that occurs in the zone of saturation,
as distinguished from soil moisture, water of the capillary fringe,
water of the zone of aeration, etc.
Infiltration. The water entering a sewer system and service connections
from the ground through such means as, but not limited to, defective
pipes, pipe joints, improper connections, or manhole walls. Infiltra-
tion does not include, and is distinguished from, inflow.
Inflow. The water discharged into a wastewater collection system and
service connections from such sources as, but not limited to, roof
leaders, cellars, yard and area drains, foundation drains, cooling
water discharges, drains from springs and swampy areas, manhole
covers, cross-connections from storm sewers and combined sewers, catch
basins, storm waters, surface runoff, street wash waters or drainage.
Inflow does not include, and is distinguished from, infiltration.
Interceptor sewer. A sewer designed and installed to collect sewage from a
series of trunk sewers and to convey it to a sewage treatment plant.
Lagoon. A shallow pond where sunlight, bacterial action, and oxygen work
to purify wastewater.
Land treatment. Method of wastewater treatment whereby wastewater is
sprayed, spread, or otherwise applied to land. The soil microorgan-
isms, chemical compounds, and physical properties serve to "treat" the
wastewater.
Leachate. Liquid that filters through a mass, such as soil, and conveys
dissolved substances.
Leaching. Process by which nutrient chemicals or contamiants are dissolved
and carried away by water, or are moved into a lower layer of soil.
Lift station. A component of a sewer system, consisting of a receiving
chamber, pumping equipment, and associated drive and control devices,
that collects wastewater from a low-lying district at some convenient
point, from where it is pumped to another portion of the system that
could not be reached by gravity flow.
8-4
-------
Littoral zone. The bLogeographic zone between the high- and low-water
levels.
Loam. Soil mixture of sand, silt, clay, and humus.
Mac ropliytrs. A maero.scop lo |>laiit, especially one In an aquatic habitat.
Mesotrophic lakes. Those in an intermediate condition between oligotrophic
and eutrophic.
Milligram per liter (mg/1). A concentration of 1/1000 gram of a substance
in 1 liter of water. Because I liter of pure water weighs 1,000
grams, the concentration also can be stated as 1 ppm (part per mil-
lion, by weight). Used to measure and report the concentrations of
most substances that commonly occur in natural and polluted waters.
Moraine. A mound, ridge, or other distinctive accumulation of sediment
deposited by a glacier.
Morphometry. Study of the physical form of water bodies.
National Register of Historic Places. Official listing of the cultural
resources of the Nation that are worthy of preservation. Listing on
the National Register makes property owners eligible to be considered
for Federal grants-in-aid for historic preservation through state
programs. Listing also provides protection through comment by the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation on the effect of Federally
financed, assisted, or licensed undertakings on historic properties.
Nitrate-nitrogen. Nitrogen in the form of nitrate (NO,,). It is the most
oxidized phase in the nitrogen cycle in nature and occurs in high
concentrations in the final stages of biological oxidation. It can
serve as a nutrient for the growth of algae and other aquatic plants,
and is highly soluble in water.
Nitrite-nitrogen. Nitrogen in the form of nitrite (NC^) It is an in-
termediate stage in the nitrogen cycle in nature. Nitrite normally is
found in low concentrations and represents a transient stage in the
biological oxidation of organic materials.
Nonpoint source. Any area, in contrast to a pipe or other structure, from
which pollutants flow into a body of water. Common pollutants from
nonpoint sources are sediments from construction sites and fertilizers
and sediments from agricultural soils.
Nutrients. Elements or compounds essential as raw materials for the growth
and development of an organism; e.g., carbon, oxygen, nitrogen, and
phosphorus.
Oligotrophic lakes. Deep clear lakes with low nutrient supplies. They
contain little organic matter and have a high dissolved oxygen level.
5-5
-------
Outwash. Sand and gravel transported away from a glacier by streams of
meltwater and either deposited as a floodplain along a preexisting
valley bottom or broadcast over a preexisting plain in a form similar
to an alluvial fan.
Oxidation. Oxygen combining with other elements.
Oxidation lagoon (pond). A holding area where organic wastes are broken
down by aerobic bacteria.
Percolation. The downward movement of water through pore spaces or larger
voids in soil or rock.
pH. A measure of the acidity or alkalinity of a material, liquid or solid.
pH is represented on a scale of 0 to 14 with 7 being a neutral state;
0, most acid; and 14, most alkaline.
Phosphorus. An essential food element that can contribute to the eutrophi-
cation of water bodies.
Point source. In regard to water, any pipe, ditch, channel, conduit, tun-
nel, well, discrete operation, vessel or other floating craft, or other
confined and discrete conveyance from which a substance considered to
be a pollutant is, or may be, discharged into a body of water.
Polychlorinated blphenyls (PCBs). A group of organic compounds used es-
pecially in the manufacture of plastics. In the environment, PCBs
exhibit many of the same characteristics as DDT and may, therefore, be
confused with that pesticide. PCBs are highly toxic to aquatic organ-
isms, they persist in the environment for long periods of time, and
they are biologically magnified.
Primary treatment. The first stage in wastewater treatment, in which
approximately 65% of settleable solids are removed by sedimentation.
Pumping station. A facility within a sewer system that pumps sewage/
effluent against the force of gravity.
Pyrolysis. Chemical decomposition by extreme heat.
Rotating biological contactor. This secondary treatment process (also
sometimes referred to as biodiscs or rotating biological surfaces)
consists of a series of closely spaced discs (10 to 12 feet in dia-
meter) mounted on a horizontal shaft within a tank of wastewater.
iXiring operation, the discs are covered with a layer of biological
slime and are rotated with about one-half of their surface area im-
mersed in wastewater. As the discs rotate, they carry a film of
wastewater into the air, where it trickles over the slime surface and
the microbes oxidize the organic material in the wastewater. As the
discs complete their rotation, this film mixes with the wastewater in
the tank, adding to the oxygen in the tank, and excess biological
growth is sheared from the discs. The attached growths are similar in
concept to a trickling filter, except that the media with the microbes
attached is passed through the wastewater rather than the wastewater
passed over the microbes.
8-6
-------
Runoff. Water from rain, snow melt, or irrigation that flows over the
ground surface and returns to stroams. It can collort pollutants from
air or land and carry Lhem to the rece Lv ing waters.
Sanitary sewer. Underground pipes that carry only domestic or commercial
wastewater, not stormwater.
Screening. Use of racks of screens to remove coarse floating and suspended
solids from sewage.
Secchi disc. An opaque white disk used to measure the transparency or
clarity of water by lowering the disk into the water horizontally and
noting the greatest depth at which it can be visually detected.
Secondary treatment. The second stage in the treatment of wastewater in
which bacteria are utilized to decompose the organic matter in sewage.
This step usually is accomplished by introducing the sewage into a
trickling filter, an activated sludge process, rotating biological
contactor, or other process. Effective secondary treatment processes
remove virtually all floating solids and settleable solids, as well as
90% of the BOD and suspended solids. USEPA regulations define second-
ary treatment as 30 mg/1 BOD, 30 mg/1 suspended solids, or 85% removal
of these substances.
Seepage. Water that flows through the soil.
Settling tank. A holding area for wastewater, where heavier particles sink
to the bottom and can be siphoned off.
Sludge. The accumulated solids that have been separated from liquids
such as wastewater.
Storm sewer. A system that collects and carries rain and snow runoff to a
point where it can soak back into the groundwater or flow into surface
waters.
Surface water. All bodies of water on the surface of the Earth.
Suspended solids (SS). Small solid particles that contribute to turbidity.
The examination of suspended solids and the BOD test constitute the
two main determinations for water quality that are performed at waste-
water treatment facilities.
Tertiary treatment. Advanced treatment of wastewater that goes beyond the
secondary or biological stage. It removes nutrients such as phos-
phorus and nitrogen and most suspended solids.
Threatened species. Any species of animal or plant that is likely to
become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant part of its range.
TiLL. Unsorted and unstratified drift, consisting of a heterogeneous
mixture of clay, sand, gravel, and boulders, that is deposited by and
underneath a glacier.
8-7
-------
Trickling filter process. A method of secondary wastewater treatment in
which the biological growth ฑs 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.
Wastewater. Water carrying dissolved or suspended solids from homes,
farms, businesses, and industries.
Water quality. The relative condition of a body of water, as judged by a
comparison between contemporary values and certain more or less objec-
tive standard values for biological, chemical, and/or physical para-
meters. 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.
Wetlands. Swamps or marshes.
8-8
-------
9.0. INDEX
Agriculture, 3-3, 3-4
wild rice production, 3-8, 5-9, 5-10
See also Land use
Air quality, xi, 3-1, 3-2, 4-1, 4-3,
4-5, 4-18
Alternatives :
considered, viii-x, 2-13, 2-14, 2-16,
2-22, 2-25, 5-6
costs, viii-xi, 2-16, 2-22, 2-24 - 2-26
most cost effective, ix-xi, 1-3, 2-21,
2-27
No-Action, 2-13, 2-14
Aquatic fauna:
impacts on, 4-10, 4-11
Archaeology. See Cultural resources
Bemidji, City of:
economic impacts, 4-5
financial assessment, 3-25, 3-26
legal requirements of, viii
recommendations, 1-12, 2-26
Birds:
endangered, 3-15
priority species, 3-16
threatened, 3-15
BOD,
loading, 2-8, 2-21, 2-23
of treatment plant effluent, 1-4, 2-2,
2-5
projected levels, 2-8, 2-21, 2-23
standards, 2-2, 2-8
Cass Lake.
Chain of Lakes
Chain of Lakes:
phosphorus loading, viii, xii, 2-6, 4-9
physical characteristics, 3-10, 3-12
water quality, ii , viii, 1-9, 3-14, 4-9
project ions, 4-9, 4- L'O
watershed land usage, 3-3
Climate, 3-1
Construction:
environmental impacts, xi, 3-1, 4-1,
4-3, 4-4, 4-18
site alternatives, ix, xi
Construction Grants Program, xii, 4-17
See also Funding
Costs:
construction, ix, xi, 2-22, 2-24, 2-27
operation and maintenance, ix, xi,
2-22, 2-24, 2-27
per household, xii, 4-12 - 4-15
See also Funding
Cultural resources, 3-27, 3-28, 4-19
impacts on, 4-4
Draft EIS, 1-9, 1-11
alternatives considered, viii-x, 2-18,
2-21, 2-22
comments on, x, 1-11, 5-1
responses to, 5-1
recommendations, x, 2-21
supplement to, 1-12
Economics, 3-16, 3-17
impacts on, viii, xi, 3-17, 3-29, 4-5
See also Costs
Effluent, See_ Wastewater
Employment, xi, 3-17
Erosion, xi, 4-3, 4-18, 4-19
Eutrophication, ii, viii, xii, 3-13, 4-6
See also Phosphorus
Facilities Plan, 1-5, 1-9
alternatives, 2-14 - 2-18
costs, 2-14, 2-16
recommendations, 2-14
supplemental, viiJ, 1-5, 2-14, 2-18
Fecal coliforms:
in treatment plant effluent, 2-5
standards, 2-2, 2-8, 2-23
-------
Federal funding. See Funding, federal
Final EIS
issues addressed, ii, 1-1
recommendations, ii, xi
Funding:
federal, xii, 1-1, 1-3, 1-9, 4-5, 4-17
local, 4-5
state, 1-3, 1-9, 4-5
Geology, 4-3
Groundwater, 3-14
contamination, 3-28
levels, 3-15, 4-3
monitoring, 4-12
quality, 3-15, 4-3
Lake Andrusia. See Chain of Lakes
Lake Bemidji:
phosphorus loading, xii, 4-7 - 4-9
physical characteristics, 3-9, 3-11
water quality, viii, x, 3-13, 3-14,
4-3, 4-7 - 4-11, 5-8
projections, 4-8, 4-9
watershed land usage, 3-3
Land treatment, ii, viii
alternative methods, viii, x, 1-7, 1-12,
2-11, 2-14, 2-16 - 2-18, 2-24 - 2-26,
3-29
application rate, x, 2-25
area requirements, x, 2-17
costs, x
capital, x, 2-16, 2-22, 2-25, 2-26
operation and maintenance, x, 2-16,
2-22, 2-25, 2-26
design flow, x
feasibility, viii, x, 2-17, 2-25, 3-30,
5-6
public concerns, 3-28, 3-29, 5-1
sites, viii, 1-6, 2-15, 2-17, 2-18, 2-20,
2-26
See also Groundwater, quality
Land use, 3-3, 3-4, 3-22 - 3-24, 4-4
projections, 3-24, 3-25
Mississippi River, 3-6, 3-25
physical characteristics, 3-8
w.iler quality, viii, 3-12, 3-13
See also Chain of Lakes
National Wild and Scenic River System,
3-25
Noisr, xi , VI , A-I , 4-'), /,-|.8
NPDES, 1-3, 1-6, 4-17
permit limits, 2-2
Odors. See Air quality
Phosphorus:
in surface waters, 4-9
in treatment plant effluent, ii, ix,
xi, 1-4, 2-2, 2-5, 5-7
loading, viii, xii, 2-6, 2-8, 2-21,
2-23, 4-6 - 4-9, 4-11
projected levels, 2-8, 2-21, 2-23, 4-8
removal, 2-2
standards, 1-8, 2-2, 2-13, 5-7
See also Eutrophication
Population:
growth rates, 3-18, 3-21, 4-16, 4-20
past, 3-17 - 3-20
present, 3-17
projections, 2-8, 3-20, 3-21
Project history, 1-4, 1-11
Public finance, 3-25 - 3-27, 4-5,
4-12 - 4-15
Public Hearing, x, 1-6, 1-7
issues raised, x, 1-11, 1-12, 2-25, 3-28
Recreation, viii, 3-8, 3-16, 5-9
Sewer system. Sejs Wastewater system
Sludge:
application rate, 2-13
chemical analyses, 2-6
disposal sites, xii, 2-6, 2-7, 2-13,
3-4, 3-6, 4-6, 4-11
environmental impacts, xii, 4-12
production, 2-6, 2-13, 4-11
treatment, 2-6, 2-13, 2-21
Soils, 3-2, 3-6
suitability of, x, 2-17
See also Erosion
-------
Suspended solids:
in treatment plant effluent, 2-5
loading, 2-8, 2-21, 2-23
projected levels, 2-8, 2-21, 2-23
standards, 2-2, 2-8
Terrestrial fauna. See Wildlife,
terrestrial
Topography, 3-2, 3-3, 3-6, 4-3
Vegetation:
aquatic, 4-6, 4-9
impacts on, 4-3
terrestrial, 3-2, 3-3
Wastewater:
design effluent standards, 2-8
design flow, 2-8, 2-10
discharge options, 2-11 - 2-13, 2-16
flow reductions, 2-9, 2-10
per capita use, 2-1
present flow rate, 2-1, 2-9
quality projections, 4-6
Wastewater system, 2-1, 2-10
condition of, 2-2, 2-10
force mnin route, 2-19, 2-20
infiltration, 2-1, 2-9
remodeling of, ix, x
service area, 2-1
user costs, xii, 3-27, 4-12 - 4-15, 5-10
Wastewater treatment:
alternatives, viii-x, 2-16, 2-22, 5-6
primary, 2-21
secondary, ix-x, 2-11, 2-21, 2-23
tertiary, ix, 2-11, 2-13, 2-21, 4-6
See also Land treatment
Wastewater treatment plant:
existing, 1-1, 2-2 - 2-4, 3-4, 3-5
design flow, 2-2, 3-9
discharge relocation, viii, 1-1, 1-6,
1-9
discharge sire, 1-1, 1-9, 2-2, 2-3
operating data, 1-1, 2-2, 2-5
new, 1-3, 1-8, 2-21
capital cost, ix, xi, 2-22, 2-24, 2-27
design effluent standards, 2-21
design flow, ix, 4-4, 4-8
discharge sites, ii, ix, 2-21
operation and maintenance costs, ix, xi,
2-22, 2-24, 2-27
site alternatives, ix, 2-19, 2-20
system reliability, 4-20, 4-21
Water conservation, 2-9, 2-10, 5-10
Waterfowl. See Birds
Water quality, 3-12 - 3-14, 4-16
dissolved oxygen, 4-10
impacts on, ii, 1-1, 2-6, 3-14,
4-3, 4-6, 4-8 - 4-11, 5-8
measurements, 3-13
modeling, 4-7, 4-9
projections, 4-8
Water use, 3-8, 3-9
Wetlands, 4-3
Wildlife, terrestrial:
endangered species, 3-15
impacts on, 4-3
priority species, 3-16
threatened, 3-15
Wild rice. See Agriculture
Wolf Lake. See Chain of Lakes
-------
APPENDIX A.
FOUR SLUDGE LAND APPLICATION
SITES (AFTER KBM 1980)
-------
SITE A
SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF ShfTION 13
3EMIDJI TOUNSHIP
TUGN, R331J
T
A-l
A-2
ฎ
T
i?3
1ฐ
A-7 jo
\0
A
-3 I A-4 | A-5 [ A-6 J (i
I
ฉ!
WOODED <3ft
,__''# ซ AREA
^
\G<0 WOODED AREA
Plot or Field
A-3
A-6
A-l
A-2
A-4
A-5
A-7
A-8, A-9
A-10
SCALED l"=500'
= Suiinner Application Only
Crop Present
Corn
Alfalfa
Summer Fallow
Alfalfa
Alfalfa
Alfalfa
Pasture
12) =SOIL BORING
[ J - Winter and Summer Appli-
cation
Future (5 years)
Corn-4 yrs.; Alfalfa-1 yr
Alfalfa - 5 yrs.
- Corn-4 yrs.; Alfalfa-1 yr
Corn-4 yrs.; Alfalfa-1 yr
Alfalfa - 5 yrs.
Alfalfa - 5 yrs.
Pasture - 5 yrs.
A-l
-------
SITE f3
NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 24
m'MiD.n IOWUSIIIP
M46N, R33W
PLOT OR FIELD
-1.
-3
-4
-5
-6
B-2
SCALE: l"= 500'
Q=Summer Application Only
CROL_PRiSML
Pasture
Summer Fallow
Pasture
Alfalfa
Summer Fallow
JD_
ฉ = SOIL BORING
I 1 "Winter A Summer Application
FUTURE.
Pasture-Permanent
Alfalfa - 5 Years
Pasture - 5 Years
Alfalfa - 5 Years
Corn or Alfalfa - 5 Years
\-2
-------
SITE C
SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 13
BCMIDJI [O'JNSHIP
T146N', R33W
SCALE: I =500
12) = SOIL BORING
-.^
i~J -Summer Use Only
Ii Winter & Summer
_PL_0_T 0_R_fJELD
C-l
C-2
C-3
C-4
C-5
CROP PRESENT
Alfalfa
Pasture
Corn
Posture
Alfalfa
F_U1URI
Alfalfa - 5 Years j
Pasture - Permanent
Corn - 4 Yrs.; Summer Fallow-! Yr.
Pasture - Permanent |
Alfalfa - 5 Years
A-3
-------
SITE D
SOUTHWEST 1/4 CF SECTION 25
111 MI DO I IOWNSIIIP
I146N, R33U
W^o&3% / \ 69)
t^pA^O^g / 1^
&^0^ ( ' |
x ฐ4 V
\ ^ A, 1
V f~L' ' ' ' \ i
~\ T. ป. ' /^Ss. X >
\^-Wฉ:;:\ . L_
\ v j? . . . x v__
\ . : . . : : : X
N ^
\::; ' 'X
. ,'^\ | -^\
@ N | ~/^ \
|^ <" " D-3 "^
1
-_- ^ | _. -11
/^v'^^
^9 lง2^o?
|^
1 (ฃ/
------- |