U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
PACIFIC NORTHWEST ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
An Associate Laboratory of the
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER - CORVALLIS, OREGON
and
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
-------
-------
REPORT
ON
CARD RESERVOIR
TUSCOLA COUNTY
MICHIGAN
EPA REGION V
WORKING PAPER No, 190
WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
AND THE
MICHIGAN NATIONAL GUARD
FEBRUARY, 1975
M.S. Environmental Protection Agw»O
Region 5, Library (PL-12J)
11 West Jackson Boufevard, 12tt!
CWcago.lt 60604-3590
-------
CONTENTS
Page
Foreword ii
List of Michigan Study Lakes iv
Lake and Drainage Area Maps v,vi
Sections
I. Conclusions 1
II. Lake and Drainage Basin Characteristics 4
III. Lake Water Quality Summary 5
IV. Nutrient Loadings 9
V. Literature Reviewed 14
VI. Appendices 15
-------
FOREWORD
The National Eutrophication Survey was initiated in 1972 in
response to an Administration commitment to investigate the nation-
wide threat of accelerated eutrophication to fresh water lakes and
reservoirs.
OBJECTIVES
The Survey was designed to develop, in conjunction with state
environmental agencies, information on nutrient sources, concentrations,
and impact on selected freshwater lakes as a basis for formulating
comprehensive and coordinated national, regional, and state management
practices relating to point-source discharge reduction and non-point
source pollution abatement in lake watersheds.
ANALYTIC APPROACH
The mathematical and statistical procedures selected for the
Survey's eutrophication analysis are based on related concepts that:
a. A generalized representation or model relating
sources, concentrations, and impacts can be constructed.
b. By applying measurements of relevant parameters
associated with lake degradation, the generalized model
can be transformed into an operational representation of
a lake, its drainage basin, and related nutrients.
c. With such a transformation, an assessment of the
potential for eutrophication control can be made.
LAKE ANALYSIS
In this report, the first stage of evaluation of lake and water-
shed data collected from the study lake and its drainage basin is
documented. The report is formatted to provide state environmental
agencies with specific information for basin planning [§303(e)], water
quality criteria/standards review [§303(c)], clean lakes [§314(a,b)]>
and water quality monitoring [§106 and §305(b)] activities mandated
by the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972.
-------
Beyond the single lake analysis, broader based correlations
between nutrient concentrations (and loading) and trophic condi-
tion are being made to advance the rationale and data base for
refinement of nutrient water quality criteria for the Nation's
fresh water lakes. Likewise, multivariate evaluations for the
relationships between land use, nutrient export, and trophic
condition, by lake class or use, are being developed to assist
in the formulation of planning guidelines and policies by EPA
and to augment plans implementation by the states.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The staff of the National Eutrophication Survey (Office of
Research & Development, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency)
expresses sincere appreciation to the Michigan Department of
Natural Resources for professional involvement and to the
Michigan National Guard for conducting the tributary sampling
phase of the Survey.
A. Gene Gazlay, former Director, and David H. Jenkins, Acting
Director, Michigan Department of Natural Resources; and Carlos
Fetterolf, Chief Environmental Scientist, and Dennis Tierney,
Aquatic Biologist, Bureau of Water Management, Department of Natural
Resources, provided invaluable lake documentation and counsel during
the course of the Survey. John Vogt, Chief of the Bureau of Environ-
mental Health, Michigan Department of Public Health, and his staff
were most helpful in identfying point sources and soliciting municipal
participation in the Survey.
Major General Clarence A. Schnipke (Retired), then the Adjutant
General of Michigan, and Project Officer Colonel Albert W. Lesky,
who directed the volunteer efforts of the Michigan National Guardsmen,
are also gratefully acknowledged for their assistance to the Survey.
-------
IV
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
STUDY LAKES
STATE OF MICHIGAN
LAKE NAME
Allegan Res.
Barton
Belleville
Betsie
Brighton
Caro Res.
Charlevoix
Chemung
Constantine Res
Crystal
Deer
Ford
Fremont
Higgins
Holloway Res.
Houghton
Jordon
Kent
Long
Macatawa
Manistee
Mona
Muskegon
Pentwater
Pere Marquette
Portage
Randall
Rogers Pond
Ross
St. Louis Res.
Sanford
Strawberry
Thompson
Thornapple
Union
White
COUNTY
Allegan
Kalamazoo
Wayne
Benzie
Livingston
Tuscola
Charlevoix
Livingston
St. Joseph
Montcalm
Marquette
Washtenaw
Newago
Roscommon
Genesee, Lapeer
Roscommon
Ionia, Barry
Oakland
St. Joseph
Ottawa
Manistee
Muskegon
Muskegon
Oceana
Mason
Houghton
Branch
Mecosta
Gladwin
Gratiot
Midland
Livingston
Livingston
Barry
Branch
Muskegon
-------
CARO RESERVOIR
Tributary Sampling Site Sewage Treatment Facility
X Lake Sampling Site (J' Direct Drainage Area Limits
0 5 ,0 Ml .
-------
-------
CARO RESERVOIR
X Lake Sampling Site
Sewage Treatment Facility
1/0 Mi.
-------
-------
CARO RESERVOIR
STORE! NO. 26A1
I. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:
Survey data show that Caro Reservoir is eutrophic. Of the
35 Michigan lakes sampled in November when essentially all were
well-mixed, 24 had less mean total phosphorus, 15 had less mean
dissolved phosphorus, and none had a higher mean inorganic nitro-
gen; of all 41 lakes sampled, 21 had less mean chlorophyll cu
but only one had less mean Secchi disc transparency*.
Survey limnologists observed abundant rooted aquatic vege-
tation in the shallower areas of the reservoir.
B. Rate-Limiting Nutrient:
A significant change in nutrients occurred in the algal assay
sample between the time of collection and the beginning of the
assay, and the results are not representative of conditions in
the reservoir at the time the sample was collected (09/19/72).
The lake data indicate nitrogen limitation in September but
phosphorus limitation in June and November.
C. Nutrient Controllability:
1. Point sourcesDuring the sampling year, Caro Reservoir
received a total phosphorus load at a rate nearly ten times the
* See Appendix A.
-------
rate proposed by Vollenweider (in press) as "dangerous"; i.e.,
a eutrophic rate. However, it is probable that Vollenweider's
model does not apply to water bodies with short hydraulic
retention times, and the hydraulic retention time of Caro Reser-
voir is certain to be very short. For example, the maximum
depth sounded by Survey limnologists was six feet; and, even
if it is assumed that the mean depth of the reservoir is also
six feet, the mean hydraulic retention time would be less than
two days.
Now, it is calculated that the communities of Caro and Cass
City contributed nearly 30% of the total phosphorus load to Caro
Reservoir during the sampling year. In view of the flow-through
characteristic of the reservoir, it is likely that a high degree
of phosphorus control at these two sources, including the possi-
ble industrial source (see page 10), would result in persistent
phosphorus limitation (see page 8) and improvement in the trophic
condition of Caro Reservoir, as well as provide additional pro-
tection for downstream Lake Huron.
2. Non-point sources (see page 12)--During the sampling year,
the phosphorus export of the Cass River was somewhat high as com-
pared to other Michigan streams sampled. However, the export
N/P ratio of 47/1 indicates point sources probably were not
-------
involved, and it appears that the geological characteristics
of the drainage, agricultural practices, or both are the
cause of the somewhat higher export rate.
In all, it is estimated that non-point sources, including
precipitation, contributed about 70% of the total phosphorus
load to Caro Reservoir during the sampling year.
-------
II. LAKE AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS
A. Lake Morphometry :
1. Surface area: 200 acres.
2. Mean depth: unknown.
3. Maximum depth: unknown.
4. Volume: unknown.
B. Tributary and Outlet:
(See Appendix B for flow data)
1. Tributaries -
Name Drainage area* Mean flow*
Cass River 612.0 mi2 302.2 cfs
Minor tributaries & 2
immediate drainage - 24.7 mi 12.4 cfs_
Totals 636.7 mi2 314.6 cfs
2. Outlet -
Cass River 637.0 mi2** 314.6 cfs
C. Precipitation***:
1. Year of sampling: 32.8 inches.
2. Mean annual: 27.8 inches.
t Fetterolf, 1973.
* Drainage areas are accurate within ±5%; mean daily flows for 74% of the
sampling sites are accurate within ±25% and the remaining sites up to
±40%; and mean monthly flows, normalized mean monthly flows, and mean
annual flows are slightly more accurate than mean daily flows.
** Includes area of lake.
*** See Working Paper No. 1, "Survey Methods, 1972".
-------
III. LAKE WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
Caro Reservoir was sampled three times during the open-water season
of 1972 by means of a pontoon-equipped Huey helicopter. Each time, samples
for physical and chemical parameters were collected from a single station
on the lake and usually from two depths (see map, page v). During each
visit, a single depth-integrated (near bottom to surface) sample was col-
lected for phytoplankton identification and enumeration; and a similar
sample was collected for chlorophyll ^analysis. During the second
visit, a single five-gallon depth-integrated sample was collected for
algal assays. The maximum depth sampled was 4 feet.
The results obtained are presented in full in Appendix C, and the
data for the fall sampling period, when the reservoir essentially was
well-mixed, are summarized below. Note, however, the Secchi disc
summary is based on all values.
For differences in the various parameters at the other sampling
times, refer to Appendix C.
-------
A. Physical and chemical characteristics:
Parameter
Temperature (Cent.)
Dissolved oxygen (mg/1)
Conductivity (ymhos)
pH (units)
Alkalinity (mg/1)
Total P (mg/1)
Dissolved P (mg/1)
N02 + N03 (mg/1)
Ammonia fmg/1)
Minimum
FALL VALUES
(11/15/72)
Mean Median
Maximum
3.6
9.6
850
7.9
240
0.116
0.021
3.410
0.340
3.6
9.6
850
7.9
251
0.117
0.022
3.485
0.350
3.6
9.6
850
7.9
251
0.117
0.022
3.485
0.350
3.6
9.6
850
7.9
262
0.119
0.024
3.560
0.360
ALL VALUES
Secchi disc (inches)
14
27
30
37
-------
B. Biological characteristics:
1. Phytoplankton -
Sampling
Date
06/17/72
09/19/72
11/15/72
Domi
nant
Genera
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Stephanodiscus
Navicula
Dinobryon
Synedra
Nitzschia
Other genera
Total
Flagellates
Cyclotella
Lagarheimia
Cryptomonas
Macrinactum
Other genera
Total
Rhaphidiopsis
Lyngbya
Navicula
Oscillatoria
Achnanthes
Other genera
Number
per ml
679
622
283
181
113
577
2,455
2
2,
620
440
723
602
331
874
7,590
1,386
301
36
24
6
31
Total
1,784
-------
8
2. Chlorophyll a_ -
(Because of instrumentation problems during the 1972 sampling,
the following values may be in error by plus or minus 20 percent.)
Sampling Station Chlorophyll a_
Date Number (yg/1)
06/17/72 01 3.6
09/19/72 01 28.9
11/15/72 01 3.4
C. Limiting Nutrient Study:
There was a loss of 29% of the dissolved phosphorus and
a 70% gain in inorganic nitrogen in the assay sample from the
time of collection to the beginning of the assay. As a result,
the N/P ratio was shifted from 10/1 in the reservoir (nitrogen
limited) to 29/1 in the assay sample (phosphorus limited).
Consequently, the assay results are not representative of con-
ditions in the reservoir at the time the sample was collected
(09/19/72).
The reservoir data indicate nitrogen limitation in September
(N/P ratio = 10/1) but phosphorus limitation in June and Novem-
ber (N/P = 23/1 and greater).
-------
IV. NUTRIENT LOADINGS
(See Appendix D for data)
For the determination of nutrient loadings, the Michigan National
Guard collected monthly near-surface grab samples from each of the
tributary sites indicated on the map (page vi), except for the high
runoff month of May when three samples were collected. Sampling was
begun in October, 1972, and was completed in September, 1973.
Through an interagency agreement, stream flow estimates for the
year of sampling and a "normalized" or average year were provided by
the Michigan District Office of the U.S. Geological Survey for the
tributary sites nearest the lake.
In this report, nutrient loads for sampled tributaries were
determined by using a modification of a U.S. Geological Survey
computer program for calculating stream loadings*. Nutrient loading
for "minor tributaries and immediate drainage" ("ZZ" of U.S.G.S.) were
estimated by using the mean concentrations in the Cass River at station
A-4 and the mean ZZ flow.
The operators of the Caro, Caro State Home, and Cass City waste-
water treatment plants provided monthly effluent samples and corres-
ponding flow data. In this report, the loads attributed to the Cass
River are those measured at station A-2 minus the Cass City loads.
* See Working Paper No. 1.
-------
10
The Caro State Home wastewater plant actually discharges to the
Cass River downstream from Caro Reservoir. The analytical data are in-
cluded in Appendix D for informational purposes only.
A beet-sugar processing plant at Caro operates seasonally. Wastes
are treated in two groups of ponds on either side of the Cass River down-
stream from the Survey inlet sampling station (A-2). Discharges from the
ponds (if any) were not sampled and may account for the phosphorus and
nitrogen loading imbalance observed during the sampling year (see page 13)
A. Waste Sources:
1. Known municipal -
Pop.
Name
Caro
Cass City
Caro State
Home
Served*
1
1
,315
,065
856
Treatment
trickli
filter
trickli
f i 1 ter
act. si
ng
ng
udge
Mean
Flow
0.
0.
0.
(mgd)
395
383
176
Recei
Water
Cass
Cass
Cass
vi
Ri
Ri
Ri
ng
ver
ver
ver
below res<
2. Known industrial -
Mean Receiving
Name_ Treatment Flow (mgd) Water
Sugar plant at ponds ? Cass River
Caro (seasonal)
* Estimated on the basis of the effluent total nitrogen load of 7.5 Ibs
per capita per year.
t Lehner, 1972.
-------
11
B. Annual Total Phosphorus Loading - Average Year:
1". Inputs -
Ibs P/ % of
Source yr total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
Cass River 40,320 67.2
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 1,810 3.0
c. Known municipal STP's -
Caro 9,860 16.4
Cass City 7,990 13.3
d. Septic tanks* - ?
e. Known industrial -
Sugar plant, Caro ?
f. Direct precipitation** - 3JD <0.1
Total 60,010 100.0
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - Cass River 73,050
3. Net annual P loss - 13,040 pounds
* Probably insignificant.
** See Working Paper No. 1.
-------
12
C. Annual Total Nitrogen Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
Ibs N/ % of
Source y_r total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
Cass River 1,904,140 93.2
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 91,710 4.5
c. Known municipal STP's -
Caro 26,950 1.3
Cass City 18,610 0.9
d. Septic tanks* - ? -
e. Known industrial -
Sugar plant, Caro ?
f. Direct precipitation** - 1,930 0.1
Total 2,043,340 100.0
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - Cass River 2,167,920
3. Net annual N loss - 124,580 pounds
D. Mean Annual Non-point Nutrient Export by Subdrainage Area:
Tributary Ibs P/mi2/yr Ibs N/mi2/yr N/P Ratio
Cass River (A-2) 66 3,111 47/1
**
Probably insignificant.
See Working Paper No. 1.
-------
13
E. Yearly Loading Rates:
In the following table, the existing phosphorus loading
rates are compared to those proposed by Vollenweider (in press).
Essentially, his "dangerous" rate is the rate at which the
receiving water would become eutrophic or remain eutrophic;
his "permissible" rate is that which would result in the
receiving water remaining oligotrophic or becoming oligotrophic
if morphometry permitted. A mesotrophic rate would be consid-
ered one between "dangerous" and "permissible".
Note that Vollenweider's model may not be applicable to
water bodies with very short hydraulic retention times.
Total Phosphorus Total Nitrogen
Units Total Accumulated Total Accumulated
Ibs/acre/yr 300.0 loss* 10,216.7 loss*
grams/m2/yr 33.63 - 1,145.1
Vollenweider loading rates for phosphorus
(g/m2/yr) based on surface area and mean
outflow of Caro Reservoir:
"Dangerous" (eutrophic rate) 3.50
"Permissible" (oligotrophic rate) 1.75
* An apparent loss of some 13,000 Ibs of total phosphorus and 125,000 Ibs
of total nitrogen occurred during the sampling year. While nitrogen loss
can occur with certain conditions, losses of both nutrients at this mag-
nitude makes it almost certain that a point source not accounted for was
involved. In this case, the wastes from the beet-sugar processing plant
are believed to be the unmeasured point source.
Any discharges or seepage from the waste disposal ponds would enter the
Cass River downstream from the Survey "inlet" station A-2 and would not
be measured there. However, the nutrient impact of such discharges would,
in part at least, be measured at the outlet sampling station A-l and thus
result in the observed nutrient imbalance.
-------
14
V. LITERATURE REVIEWED
Lehner, Richard A., 1972. Treatment plant questionnaires (Caro,
Caro State Home, and Cass City STP's). MI Dept. Publ. Health,
Lansing.
Vollenweider, Richard A. (in press). Input-output models. Schweiz,
I. Hydro!.
-------
15
VI. APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
LAKE RANKINGS
-------
1 1 Z
i in i
z -* in oo
jo n ut
co oj j- CT- < =o
O O O O C\J <
O O O
z
cr
z
UJ
X
z
UJ
-J
UJ UJ
(T
UJ
o:
o
_j
_j
o
r
o
-o
CM
O UJ
t _(
CE -J
< oJ
OD CD
,0 »
OJ OJ
UJ
(/)
UJ
CD
O
OJ
UJ
z.
o
r
5
fO
OJ
o
a:
X
u
UJ
I
1^
sC
f\J
t/)
UJ
o:
o
£ CHEMU^
STANTINE
< o
-J U
CO .
f\J OJ
UJ
_J
o
QC
0
u.
0
o
UJ
"" O
f\l f\J
< UJ
»- _J
UJ <
^: u uj
h- UJ -,
z ^ z
UJ <
(\J
- UJ
TWATER L
z
UJ
0.
in
^
i\i
UJ
g
z
a:
-,
o
OJ
Z Z UJ
rt o (-
x z x
-------
^
o
1 Z
in >-«
i z
o
ii
3 <
_1 X
4 Z 0
UJ T
j z: o
j
u
UJ
m
1 Z
o <
O UJ
in z
z
a
< o
UJ Z
n
Aj
3
J 0.
4
> Z in
^ in
_l UJ «
_i z a
^
A.
0.
_i
z ^
< »-
UJ O
S t-
0
(VI
-»
00
f*>
30
in
in
^
*o
vO
M
vO
,j
^
M
(VJ
r^
n
&*
0
o
^.
O
">
o
0
0
o
»*
>o
CO
CTI
(VI
o
o
o
o
CO
(*)
>o
^
0
*o
o
o
o
^
0
o
o
^
o
-t
o>
(*1
^
0
^4
0
0
in
00
*o
M
OC
o
o
in
o
0
3
^.
o
o
o
0
0
(VI
33
r-
ii-4
(VJ
ff>
n
ro
00
o
(VJ
-*
.0
n
-
o
ao
o
o
o
03
4
o
o
o
o
33
»
r~
vD
0>
r-^
f-t
O
00
CO
,s.
o
>*
^
<*)
-*
0
(7-
CVJ
o
o
f)
*
o
o
o
0
sO
CO
(*)
n
CO
v»4
^4
vO
vD
9
-»
>0
-*
O
^~
rvj
0
0
!VJ
f*i
0
O
o
0
O
n
«-4
^.
*
^
^4
*^
0
o
00
o
V*
*
^
£>
Ln
o
o
.n
o
o
o
-o
0
0
<
or
UJ
z
|H|
Q
UJ
3
UJ
00
O
\-
<
»
^
o
UJ
^
<
_J
UJ
f.
z
UJ
4
UJ UJ
* 0
< o
_J O
or
i «
o
or
UJ
in
UJ
tn
i *
^
0
_/
H-
(/)
n
C7*
^
(V)
UJ
<
1
1
^
f-
(/)
V
a:
u
^.
o^
-0
(VI
Ul
<
_J
in
z
1-4
15
O
I «
r
in
j\
>o
(VI
UJ
4
Z
O
>-
I
t3
3
O
r
vO
CJv
J3
(VI
UJ
Z
o
in
Q.
s:
o
X
H-
r^
ON
V0
(VJ
_l
UJ
H-
I
Ul
D
O
or
;£
UJ
or
Ul
Q.
CO
o\
^
(VI
Ul
_J
or
or
UJ
no
f
^
ac
in
o-
Q\
*O
(VJ
-------
i ooj^-^^4 ,0 r-j _ _ oj~n:of\ioojLfi,oojojoco.o
m ~* oj
*o cr- PJ -
ro oj oj
> z o
< -J
_j uj r
_j z u
M OJ - OJ
I O <
t O UJ
I l/l X
^H - OJ
«msOr^^ftjv.osOf*--o
X tfl
UJ
zoo.
K- _1
- < Z trt
x > -
t uJ O
l 2T f-
UJUJ
v: o
< o
_l O
tr
O
>
a:
X
UJ O
i: >
0 X
r
£ £ £
t/)
UJ
O UJ
Z UJ ^ U)
I -« UJ -J < UJ
I 2
-------
X
UJ O
Q Z
V
(VI
a
n v
in *
in
o
-t
ifl
r
in «
in
UJ
_J <
< a:
> z o
(VI
tv
f\J
in
in oo
ft
(M
rvj
UJ
in
I Z
o <
O MJ
in z
n
in
(\j
in in
in
-o
co
_l
<
>
X
T.
Jl
UJ
-< in
cvi (vi
< o
I ~< tVI 00
3 a.
_i
< z in
> o
0
o
(VI
-
p*4
in
UJ
^
4f
_J
1
0.
I
o
I
h-
r-
^
*o
(VI
-
(^
>o
UJ
J(^
^
_l
UJ
h-
t-
UJ
o
o
IX
z
UJ
QC
Ul
Q.
CO
*o
CV)
>-
fO
-s-
*4j
^
^
1
y.
o:
a
UJ
3D
X
<
t
in
o
^
s0
(VI
-------
-------
APPENDIX B
TRIBUTARY FLOW DATA
-------
^ "3 O O
_J -I
< =1
t
o o
i ti "- '
-------
APPENDIX C
PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA
-------
Jl
*c »« d.
\O Q
^O I _|
o './} X
o O O
x s:
a.
o --* J> -4" »-H
f- -* rvj rvj (\j
o o o o o
in o
1.
LJ
O
rvj LU
o aj
IM u_
^O I
o t/>
00
X
O
i z _J _i
O I <[ X
O^Ol O
o r o s:
z >-
CO < .O J>
o r-- -o -H -H
i-H O O *^ -^
- -t &
* -* 3 t J1
fM» 3:
3 I
2 2
o o r
10 *> -5
t r
o i_
o
CO
i O '
o
X
l T
'J
/; I U
-2 _) r
T J 'J
uJ
r
A i
-V| I
-5 t
"S 3
J" J1 O O
, _ _ J-, ij!
3> ^ rs
o .n o
uJ
_l
i
o
1
/I
XX X
-O T
XXX
A) ^
XXX
X "V) \i
-------
APPENDIX D
TRIBUTARY and WASTEWATER
TREATMENT PLANT DATA
-------
o
s x
h-
O. Q.
V5 UJ
O Q
X
H-
/)
r-4 O «
< tr
i r-
< -M yi
-c n
* o
o
>
-£
> uJ
s\
UJ
en
jj
/>
_j
X U
D -s
O
X
r
UJ
t-
o
sOh r-(«~«OOOOOO * r-* 4< r<
on x oooooooooooooo
o O ^D
r 3:
T.
!/} o o fvl rvj co ij* sO f^i i^J 'T^ *O ^ '-D f^)
* >-* o **^ [j^ \_f) ^ ^ f\j ftj f\j f*1 \O 'J^ ^0 -^ *"\J
IV-OO OOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OIX^J
-3/1H-X OOOOOOOOOOOOOO
o o a: ^
r o r
~~* 2T J «j ^-trorvjfrvjoooOvVjLD-^rvjo
-C I 3 X .......t.t....
O"Ol-!j: OOOOOOOOOOOOOO
o r o 5:
^3 i
j^ 'oj -^" f*^ '.n o o rvj ^ 'j") o o ^ o o o
O ~yZ X
o > s:
o
I
OOOOOO 3OOOOOOO
C5 *O [ H-
Q. 'jj
UJ UJ
o u.
LO i/l -^ C^ '3 ^J '^ O t/^ ^3 C^ L^ **^ ^5
LxJ C3 LP fl O ^TI ^ ^ o PO ^^ C5 sj ^H ^J
x u. >-
*C T3 L/l ^D ^ ^^ 00 ''O ^** *~* ^ xj O OC
fM M ^3 fVJ C\) f^ ^"* ^3 "^ rO f^ ^U f^l f^
UJZ XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
<%.* "-^OOOOOOOOOO'JO
Ou. xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
rvj rvj ro f*i ro ro "0 ^ ro ."O f^ i*) fi ^
-------
D
"X.
3.
c_>
£
n
Y
-P d D
\J
-I
ti
1J
y
oJ
T Z
/I
J-.
O
\l
>- -3
i O.
T2 d
O ~>
D I
n r
TO x;
r i
,_p PT) _,
330
o r^ o^ .3 > n *o "vi
.JJ"!'-<'\JOC\JO
< Ji "vj c _n -n
OO 3 -3
I
"1
r
.n u_i
"VI ~) _l
-D £ X
O ^3
o > 7_
O
o r> ir
OOOOOO30
rvj r-. rvi < ^
X
(M
O
X
r
^O O 4 _J
£ ~Z i- X
-> <> o o
7- ^. i- s:
o i
r; f\j LTI
t:
\
ijj
o
i
o
' IT
tv u~ ro rv o f
i O
ccc^xC 13 ^ T, n r^ < r 4 3T
/\jfvo(\i(\j(\j'^o< n (\i f\j n M
xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
3-" «i\lrr)J'Tl JlJI-Or^-X 7>
< O O O O "3 '3 3OOO3O
xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
-------
r.
cj
-> "i
_!
rt t ij
^ 3
o > r>
r ~»
r u i
n T-
-> T o r
M ~J D
o xi ox ^
<""> « AJ \l
I L J
A] "VI
J ~j
r 3 -i
r V Cf- C
c i i o !\i < (
^ o < _i
.c ,r i- x
T £ O -D
-> x »- :>
,AJ \l O .O ,"VJ O
T
t I
"i uJ
JJ iLl
~J U.
N- LO m cv o ji o in '_n o n -o
c. 3 < o LT r>
~> -i T ^ ? i t ji 4- ^ _p t 4 P fv
1.1 t c i: r~ z i ^ -. T t o
> i i
XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
-------
T
O. h-
i- "L
_) T
> r
run
3 r o r
^ ^ J
D ~> TT >- r>
tO t u
-T r ~i i) j
" ji r -i
-* ~~ r> ' ij a
c ,/; _) '_ ii
"M "O c( P X .J '
^ j vj j> J
*
i>
X
net
71 ,1
O "5
r
^ ~
f\ 1
-1 1
- r,
.?: ^i
r
X
i
X
3 T
ii ,v ri
~J -1 3)
J tJ 7)
\; j- "vi " -^ M r £
i i r~, ' ~t ".: o _n
.-5 c; 'J -. -3 J) -- 0
^ o ' ~J
0 "* "
O
Z -J
-3 r r>
r*- ^e ~, -3 ts-CJ-^^y-s-t
-t .n I; ~> J> J- -D d 1 J 7> c- »
» "3 « \J "Vj CM ~3 O .3 « fM r-« .o
'XJ ->
o ,?
C-- 1
o
o o A;
J- >(>-
i i rv "vi
o o D ^
4p'N--o.n
<\J -^ -< i
o o
'rr MO f
o
5 -n j r>
n O - -4 ,c j- -3 t
<\jr\jorM(MM'oin'M'vn.-M
xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
-TV _ _. -« M r*i 4 n,r>-nx>~- »T
o j o -> o o o o j .-3 T> o
XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
'M ^j ") rn ,-n -o *} > m i -o -o r-i .1
-------
r
T 3
t O
\J =
O O *
n z D 2
O _1 D
£ i
1
o
T!
_n
AJ
^>
o o
o o
- 3>
I O
PO
I X
X
o *-
rj c . i rvj
o o
o o
X I X X I X X
D 1 o O >- ^
^ x x
^ r^ o f^ i
I X
X
D
I X
o o
O o
(M
OJ
X I
X)
i\! fn
OJ OJ
X X
D T> .
o o
o o
o o
o o
OJ OJ
X X
i a i
X X X - X
.~i a. "i ~) a 'i
f- o r~ ^ o f^-
0 O
o =
J> T
* o
O OJ
OJ OJ
I X X I
-~ M -<
» < o >-
** X X
i "n * i
X X X
-------
o
o r
in h-
O.
o u
O Q
a.
t
-t uj
O LL|
OJ U.
1/1 -to
~« to o -tNOP~*oojr\Jo
< o oj o m h- ,3 > x rt r- * <\j (\j o
*O O l/J t-H Z _J « f\J * CVJ C\J t\J f\J
'vjo o^ix
yi o o d * h- o r> o o o o o
< 'Si Z. Z> ~Z
r- O _l O
MOO: o u. z
<*> < 3
Xjjo> ooinoiprvjoo
OZI ^-iOJ1^0vD^)T>
o _n uj inaujT M -H tvi t\j -\j -,_
o^c^o'x oo>~
I^UJjJ O_l<>- O O 3 O O 00
o« i;->ui (/iu.o:i/)
i r^ H- >-i '.J 2
Ji n o -c _j -i
-« o i <
< -\i o ^I^J
OLOX'XJ^JJ^O-OsD^
OO O
I S
-H MH Q_ ^ O O O O 0s O O -3 O
O -O H- N. -"3 *1 xf f\j -t O (\J ^ -D --\J
a; ji o £ n
ooo
'xj r o
<
^
-J
-_f
f\J
OOOOOOOOC5OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
O OO OO OO OO OO OOO OO OO OO O « *--3O -i-~-<-y~'Mn-,m4-_4-un_'nc~^)'^r, i>iT~oTJ~-VI-<
«a.^;i ->f oot oo> oot oo> o->* ooot OOH-O-! -- > «» . ^» «ot o
OU_ X XX XXXX XX.XX XXX~X.X XX XX XX XX X
-"-''
-------
o
a.
t uj
O UJ
<\J lj_
-< o o xiTj
rvj o "n > ON- f*- ro
> o '.n X _i M i: o u. s
.n i
^ O 00 *C
o :t '-«^>rr»'.n
0_l<>-
-« /I
< "0
15
3
O
C?
O
O
.X.
J
O
3
^
xf
3
'/)
c
l\J
^
0
xt
O 0
o o
LP T
f P
0 /I
0 '"VJ
vC ^
o
o
^r
4-
o
o
u
"0
^
D
n
JD
in
"i
in
3
-'
OJ
^
-C
-^
-3 o
-C 1/1
cr
3
1
_
,3
0
in
o
,r
..*
D O
T "*
ro f\i
j>
r
j-
,^i
r
sC
0000000000:300000.300000
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OO OO O < « * O 3 ' * O 3 ' t. «O O ' '
XXIXXIXXIXXIXXIXXIXXIXXIXXIXXIXXIX
XX XX XX XX XX XX XXXX XX XX XXX
-------
o
o
1.
UJ
"VJ
n
o
"VJ
'_>
r.
O 'ij
<\J U-
-* o
-t O
rvj o
.0 -c Z _J
o o i r
O 3 ^5 h-
n T o 2
O _l J
IT
CJ
n
oJ T
.0
\J
M ->
r
n
T o
J V)
i
i r
o o
X I X
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
2J)
------- |