EIS-76-4918D
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION V
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
DRAFT
Sewage Treatment Facilities
for the South Bloomington
and Lake Monroe Service Areas
Bloomington, Indiana
March 1976
-------
-------
Project No. C180560 01
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
Foe
SEWAGE TREATMENT FACILITIES
FOR THE SOUTH BLOOMINGTON AND LAKE MONROE SERVICE AREAS,
BLOOMINGTON, INDIANA
Prepared By The
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION V
Chicago, Illinois
With The Assistance of
GILBERT ASSOCIATES, INC.
READING, PENNSYLVANIA
AP
CtaRO L 60604-3590
VniCB&u, REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR
MARCH 1976
-------
SUMMARY SHEET
(X) Draft
( ) Final
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region V, Chicago
1. (X) Administrative Action
( ) Legislative Action
2. Descr iption of the Action
Tne analysis of alternatives indicates that the needs of
the South Bloomington Service Area would most adequately be
served by a 15 MGD two-stage activated sludge sewage treatment
plant (STP) with sand filters located at the Dillman Road site.
(The present flow diversion of 2 MGD to the north STP will
continue.) Sludge treatment recommended is aerobic digestion,
concentration by centrifugation followed by composting, agro-
nomic land spreading and/or landfilling of the processed sludge.
Discharge of the treated effluent will be to Clear Creek.
Constructing a new sewage treatment plant at the Dillman
Road site will result in abandonment of the existing Winston
Thomas STP and will require the construction of a connecting
sewer approximately 2 miles long paralleling Clear Creek from
the Winston Thomas plant site to the Dillman Road site. The
South Bloomington Service Area is located in Monroe County,
Indiana.
3. Environmental Impact
Water
Tne present waste load allocation on Clear Creek will be
met by the proposed project. This will result in a significant
improvement in the existing water quality in Clear Creek.
i
-------
Increased siltation and temporary flow interruption may occur
during construction of the connecting sewer along Clear Creek.
and also from relocation and channelization of Clear Creek at
the Dillman Road site.
Air Quality
Dust generated from construction activities may temporarily
change ambient conditions. No significant change in air quality
is anticipated from implementation of this project.
Land Use
Implementation of the project provides the opportunity for
growth to occur in the South Bloomington Service Area while
retaining centralization of sewer service consistent with the
geographic drainage area and the 20 year population projections.
Biology
Terrestrial plants and animals will be displaced by con-
struction activities. Revegetation after construction will
provide some biological recovery.
4. Alternatives Considered
a) Regionalization of the South Bloomington Service Area
and the Lake Monroe Regional Waste District.
b) Continuing diversion of approximately 2 MGD to the
North Bloomington Service Area STP for treatment.
c) Site Locations
1) 4 sites on Clear Creek
2) 1 site on Salt Creek
d) Treatment Processes
1) Activated Sludge
2) Pure Oxygen
ii
-------
e) Sludge Processing and Disposal - 9 alternative com-
binations examined.
f) Discharge points
1) Clear Creek
2) Salt Creek
g) No Action.
5. Irreversibleand Irretrievable Commitment of Resources
Capital, labor and energy expended in construction of the
proposed facilities. Land use of the Dillman Road site (in-
cluding relocation of Clear Creek) for a sewage treatment
plant over the useful life of the proposed facilities and
associated operation and maintenance costs.
6. Feder al, State and Local^ Agenc ies Not if ied of this Action
Federal
Senator Birch Bayh
Senator Vance Hartke
Representative Lee Hamilton
Representative John Myers
Council on Environmental Quality
Environmental Protection Agency
Army Corps of Engineers, Louisville, Kentucky
Department of the Interior
Geological Survey
Fish & Wildlife Service
Dept. of Health, Education and Welfare
Farmers Home Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana
Forest Service
National Park Service
iii
-------
State
Honorable Otis R. Bowen, M.D.
Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board
Indiana Highway Planning Commission
Indiana Legislative Council
Department of Natural Resources
Planning, Service Agency, Department of Commerce
Indiana Geological Survey
Lqca.^
Francis McCloskey, Mayor, City of Bloomington
Monroe County Planning Commission
City Environmental Control Commission
City of Bloomington Utilities
School of Public and Environmental Affairs, Indiana
University
Chamber of Commerce
Environmental Quality and Conservation Commission
Lake Monroe Regional Waste District
6. Dates
Draft statement made available to :
The Council on Environmental Quality March 1976
The Public March 1976
Acknowledgements
This document was prepared with the assistance of Gilbert
Associates, Inc. of Reading Pennsylvania.
Portions of this Environmental Impact study were taken
directly from Gilbert Associates final report to USEPA.
11 Investigations of Key Issues ... for Sewage Treatment
iv
-------
Facilities for the South Bloomington and Lake Monroe Service
Area, "(December 1975), the Facilities Plan (December 1974)
and First Amendment (December 1975) for the Bloomington, Indiana -
Lake Monroe Area prepared by Black & Veatch, Kansas City, Missouri
and the "Lake Monroe Regional Waste District's Facilities Plan"
(October 1974) prepared by Beam, Longest & Neff, Inc., Indianapolis,
Indiana.
v
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Summary
Sheet
Acknowledgements
Chapter
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
Chapter
A.
B.
Chapter
1 Background
Identification of Grant Applicants and Consultants
Desciption of the Applicants' Proposed Action
General and Specific Location of the Proposed Action
Water Quality and Water Quantity Problems in the Area
Other Water Quality and Quantity Objectives
Cost and Financing
History of Application
Issues Evaluated
2 The Environment Without the Proposed Action.
General
Detailed Description
1 . Climate
2 . Topography
3. Geology
4. Soils
5. Water Resources
6. Parks and Historical Sites
7 . Cemetary
8. Environmental Constraints
9. Air Quality
3 Issues and Alternatives
Page
i
iv
1-1
1-1
1-1
1-5
1-7
1-8
1-8
1-10
2-1
2-1
2-1
2-1
2-2
2-2
2-2'
2-3
2-3
2-3
2-4
Task 1 Evaluation of Regionalization/Projected Population and
1
1
1
Land Use Patterns
.1 Issues, Basic Assumptions and Findings
.2 Population and Flow Projections
1.2.1 Summary of Findings
1.2.2 Flow Variations
.3 Population Projections/Demand Calculations
1.3.1 Introduction
1.3.2 Alternate Projections/Bloomington 201 Plan
1.3.3 Adjustments to Projections/1970 Under Reporting
1.3.4 Projected Population Distribution
1.3.5 Population Distribution and Sewer Service Areas
1.3.6 Variances with Bloomington 201 Plan Projections
1.3.7 Alternate Projections/Lake Monroe Regional Waste
District
1.3.8 The Seasonal and Second Home Market
3-1-1
3-1-1
3-1-3
3-1-3
3-1-4
3-1-6
3-1-6
3-1-6
3-1-8
3-1-8
3-1-9
3-1-10
3-1-12
3-1-19
-------
2
1.4 Systems /Coordination and Compatibility with Projected
Land Use Parterns 3-1-21
1.4.1 Summary 3-1-21
1.4.2 Coordination with City Land Use Plans 3-1-23
1.4.3 Coordination with County Land Use Plans 3-1-24
1.4.4 Plant Site and Environs/Land Use Compatibility 3-1-24
Task 2 Evaluation of Pure Oxygen Process 3-2-1
Task 3 Renovation and Expansion of Winston Thomas Sewage
Treatment Plant 3-3-1
Task 4 Plant Capacities 3-4-1
Task 5 Clear Creek Treatment Plant Tradeoffs Evaluation 3-5-1
Task 6 Present Worth Analysis 3-6-1
6.1 Plant Site and Interceptor Alternatives 3-6-1
6.2 Explanation of Present Worth Analysis for Interceptors 3-6-3
6.3 Explanation of Present Worth Analysis for Site
Development 3-6-3
6.4 Evaluation of Interceptor Alternatives 3-6-4
6.5 Wastewater Treatment Systems 3-6-5
6.5.1 Land Application Alernative for Bloomington 3-6-5
6.5.2 No Action Alternative 3-6-7
6.6 Present Worth Analysis - Smithville and Sanders 3-6-7
6.6.1 Alternative No. 1 Sewage Treatment at Dillman Rd. 3-6-8
6.6.2 Alternative No. 2 Sewage Treatment at the Caslon
Treatment Plant 3-6-8
6.6.3 Fairfax 3-6-8
6.7 Project Costs 3-6-9
Task 7 Distribution of Costs 3-7-1
Task 8 Sludge Treatment and Disposal 3-8-1
8.1 Introduction and Summary 3-8-1
8.2 Sludge Production 3-8-2
8.3 Unit Processes 3-8-4
8.3.1 Aerobic Digestion 3-8-4
8.3.2 Anaerobic Digestion 3-8-5
8.3.3 Sludge Lagoon 3-8-6
8.3.4 Sand Drying Bed 3-8-6
8.3.5 Incineration 3-8-7
8.3.6 Centrifuge 3-8-7
8.3.7 Vacuum Filter 3-8-8
8.3.8 Thickener 3-8-9
8.4 Sludge Treatment Alternatives 3-8-9
8.5 Sludge Disposal Alternatives 3-8-10
8.5.1 Composting 3-8-10
8.5.2 Soil Injection or Land Application 3-8-10
8.5.3 Sludge Lagoons 3-8-11
8.5.4 Land Requirements for Injection or Surface
Spreading 3-8-11
8.5.5 Hauling Costs 3-8-13
8.5.6 Sludge lagoon Costs 3-8-14
8.6 Conclusion and Recommendations 3-8-14
-------
-3-
Chapter 4 Environmental Effects of Alternatives
Task 9 Physical Environmental Impacts
9.1 Impact on the Ecology
9.1.1 General
9.1.2 Aquatic Ecology
9.1.3 Terrestrial Ecology
9.2 Impact on the Visual Aesthetics
9.3 Impact on the Traffic Pattern
Task 10 Induced Development - Lake Monroe
10.1 Introduction
10.1.1 Regionalization Issue
10.1.2 Other Questions and Considerations
The Unique Role of the State of Indiana
Sewer System Development
Projected Land Use Patterns/Zoning
Physical Constraints
Discussion of Secondary Impacts
Impact of Not Sewering Lake Monroe
10,
10,
10,
10,
10.6
10.7
Task 11
11.1
11
11
11
11
11
11.2
11
11
11
11.2
Mitigative Measures for Minimizing Physical Effects
Construction Activities
,1 Revegetation
,2 Pipe Crossings in Stream Beds
3 Pipes Laid Parallel to Stream Banks
4 Channel Relocations
5 Tunneling Operations
Plant Operation Activities
2.1 Slduge Disposal by Land Application
2.2 Odor Control
2.3 Disinfection of Treated Sewage Effluent
4 Visual Impact
11.2.5 Clear Creek Recreation
11.2.6 Zoning
4-9-1
4-9-1
4-9-1
4-9-1
4-9-6
4-9-8
4-9-9
4-10-1
4-10-1
4-10-1
4-10-1
4-10-2
4-10-4
4-10-5
4-10-7
4-10-8
4-10-9
4-11-1
4-11-1
4-11-1
4-11-2
4-11-3
4-11-4
4-11-5
4-11-6
4-11-6
4-11-6
4-11-8
4-11-8
4-11-8
4-11-9
12.1 Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of Resources
to the Proposed Action Should it be Implemented 4-12-1
13.1 The Relationship Between Local Short Term Uses of Man's
Environment and the Maintenance anc( Enhancement of Long
Term Productivity 4-13-1
Chapter 5 Conclusions and Recommendations
Chapter 6 Federal/State/Local Agency Comments and Public
Participation
A. Federal Comments
B. State Comments
C. Local Agencies and Interest Groups' Coments
D. Letters From Individuals
5-1
6-1
6-2
-------
-4-
Plates
1. Alternative Regional Sewage Treatment Plants
2. Existing & Proposed Sewage Transmission
3. Recommended Plan
4. Demand Centers - Lake Monroe Area
-------
-5-
APPENDICES
A. Physical Parameters
A. Municipal Waste Loads A-l
B. Receiving Water Quality A-A
C. Winston Thomas Wastewater Plant Flow Measurements A-10
D. Sludge Composition A-13
E. Effluent Limits for the Proposed South Bloomington STP A-16
B. Aquatic Ecology - Lake Monroe
A. General Information B-l
B. Physiography of Lake Monroe B-5
C. Physico-Chemical Properties of Lake Monroe B-ll
D. Organisms B-36
E. Summary B-69
F. References B-71
C. Hardin Ridge Recreation Area - Discharge Monitoring Report C-l
D. Lake Monroe Land Suitability Study - Executive Summary D-i
Introduction D-l
Geology D-5
Terrestrial Ecology D-ll
Aquatic Ecology D-l5
Land Use D-21
Institutional Framework D-25
E. Air Quality Sampling Data & Ambient Air Quality Standards E-l
F. Engineering & Cost Calculations
I. Evaluation of Pure Oxygen Process F-l
II. Present Worth Analysis ~ South Bloomington
A. Site Development F-21
B. Calculated Cost of Treatment Plant F-26
C. Calculate 0 & M Costs F-29
III. Present Worth Analysis - Lake Monroe F-31
IV. Present Worth Analysis - Interceptors and Pumping Stations
A. Unit Prices F-35
B. Interceptor Systems - Construction Costs F-36
C. Stream Crossings F-38
D. Railroad Borings F-39
E. Pumping Stations F-40
-------
7
List of Tables and Figures
Chapter 1 Page
Figure
1.1. Location Map of Bloomington Indiana 1-2
1-2 Surface Drainage in the Bloomington Area 1-3
1-3. Planning Area Map 1-4
Chapter 3
Table
1-1. Flow Comparisons (MGD) Year 2000 3-1-27
1-2. Comparison of Population Projections (Not adjusted) 3-1-28
1-3. Comparison of City Planning and 201 Plan Population
Projections and Allocations 3-1-29
1-4. South Drainage Area 1970 Population Estimates
Restructured to Reflect Population Contributory to
Interceptors 3-1-30
1-5. 1970 Census Discrepancies 3-1-31
1-6. University Enrollment 3-1-31
1-7. 1970 Monroe County Employment & Jobs 3-1-32
1-8. Projected Total Employment 3-1-33
1-9. Current Municipal Population Trends-Lake Monroe
Regional Waste District 3-1-34
1-10 Household Characteristics 1970 LMRWD 3-1-34
1-11 Estimate 1970 Population - Lake Monroe Area 3-1-35
1-12 Existing 1970 Institutional & Recreational Flow
Capacities 3-1-36
1-13 Estimate of Existing Flows - Year-Round Residences 3-1-37
1-14 Projected Year-Round Population Lake Monroe Area -
Year 2000 3-1-38
1-15 Projected Flows - Year 2000; Year-Round Residences 3-1-38
1-16 Institutional & Recreational Projected Flows 3-1-39
1-17 Proposed Seasonal/Second Home Flows 1998 3-1-40
1-18 Land Use Comparisions/Alternate Sites 3-1-41
Figure
1-1 A Comparison of Monroe County Population Projections 3-1-42
1-2 Drainage Jurisdictional Boundaries 3-1-43
1-3 Flow Comparisons - Year 2000 3-1-44
Table
2-1 Cost of Pure Oxygen Versus Air at the Salt Creek and
Clear Creek Sites @ 15 MGD 3-2-4
Figure
2-1 System Differences - Pure Oxygen vs. Conventional
Activated Sludge 3-2-5
-------
-8-
Table
5-1 Comparison of Salt Creek and Clear Creek Sites 3-5-4
6-1 Cost of Interceptor Sewer Alternatives 3-6-10
6-2 Interceptor Design Criteria 3-6-11
6-3 Interceptor Cost Guidelines 3-6-12
6-4 Cost of Site Development 3-6-13
6-5 Liquid Treatment Process @ 15 MGD 3-6-14
6-6 Present Worth Analysis of Treatment
Alternatives @ 15 MGD 3-6-15
6-7 Present Worth Analysis-Smithville & Sanders 3-6-16
6-8 Project Costs 3-6-17
6-9 Cost Effectiveness - Treatment Alternatives 3-6-18
7-1 Cost Sharing, for Dillman Road Site 3-7-2
8-1 Unit Process Cost-Sludge Handling 3-8-16
8-2 Alternative Sludge Treatment Cost 3-8-17
8-3 Land Disposal - Hauling Costs (10% Solids Concentration) 3-8-18
8-4 Composting - Hauling Costs (20% Solids Concentration) 3-8-19
8-5 Summary of Sludge Treatment and Disposal Cost 3-8-20
Figure
8-1 Sludge Treatment and Disposal Process 3-8-21
Chapter 4
Table
9-1 Major Physical Impacts of Project at Alternative Sites-
A Comparison 4-9-11
9-2 Aquatic Orgatiisms Found in Lake Monroe and Expected
in Salt Creek 4-9-12
9-3 Trees of the River Bottoms 4-9-21
-------
CHAPTER 1
BACKGROUND
A. Identification of Grant Applicants and Consultants
The grant applicants for the proposed wastewater treatment
facilities are the City of Bloomington Utilities (CBU), and
the Lake Monroe Regional Waste District (LMRWD) in Indiana.
The facilities plan for the City of Bloomington was prepared
by Black & Veatch, Kansas City, Missouri. The facilities
plan for the LMRWD was prepared by Beam, Longest & Neff, Inc.
of Indianapolis, Indiana.
These facilities plans were submitted to USEPA as one document
with the City of Bloomington as the lead agency since regionali-
zation of the two wastewater treatment service areas is one of
the major considerations in developing a facilities plan for
the planning areas. The consulting firm of Gilbert Associates,
Inc., Reading, Pennsylvania was hired by USEPA to provide
additional analyses of alternatives and impacts associated with
implementation of various plans.
B. Description of the Applicants' Proposed Action. *
Construction of a 20 MGD single stage complete mix activated
sludge STP with sand filtration of the effluent, aerobic
digestion of sludge followed by lagooning and soil injection
on the Salt Creek site. This STP would be a regional facility
providing service to the South Bloomington Service Area (20 yr.
flow projection of 17 MGD) and the Lake Monroe Regional Waste
District (20 yr. flow projection of 3 MGD). To transport the
existing flows from the Winston Thomas STP to the Salt Creek
site a 13.4 mile, 50 MGD gravity sewer along Salt Creek would
be constructed.
C. General and Specific Location of the Proposed Action.
Bloomington, Indiana is located approximately 50 miles SSW of
Indianapolis, Indiana (see Figure 1-1). Figure 1-2 displays
surface drainage in the Bloomington area. The planning areas
under consideration for sewage treatment facilities are the
South Bloomington Service Area, and the Lake Monroe Regional
Waste District (see Figure 1-3). The South Bloomington Service
Area is presently served by both the Winston Thomas and Blucher
Poole STP. (Approximately 2 MGD is pumped via force main from
the South Service Area for treatment at Blucher Poole STP).
The LMRWD Service Area has package treatment plants located
primarily around Lake Monroe. The communities of Smithville,
Sanders, and Harrodsburg in the LMRWD do not have sewerage
service and rely on septic systems for sewage treatment.
* Based on applicants' facilities Plans
1-1
-------
-------
MONROE
RESERVOIR
-------
Figure 1-3
i0 WORGAM-MONROE 3
FOREST
i \l«-l__Beanblossom
«j^ / Creek
^ Blucher"PooTe^STP
STT> "-" _
'
Dillman Rd. Site .,
Ketcham fW. Srte
Salt Creek
LEGEND
«« ' Lake Monroe Regional Waste District Service Area Boundary
«' City o' Bloornington Planning Area Boundary
».._._..<_.__._ Drainage Area Boundary
PLANNING AREA MAP
-------
Effluent discharges in the south drainage basin of the planning
area are to Clear Creek (from the Winston Thomas STP and Caslon
Package Plant) which flows generally south to its confluence
with Salt Creek. (Lake Monroe discharges to Salt Creek with a
minimum controlled release of 32 MGD.) Salt Creek flows into
the East Fork of the White River which becomes confluent with
the West Fork of the White River near Petersburg, Indiana.
The White River flows west into the Wabash and the Wabash
flows generally south discharging to the Ohio River. In the
north drainage basin, the Blucher Poole STP discharges its
effluent to Bean Blossom Creek which flows into the West Fork
of the White River.
D. Water Quality and Water Quantity Problems in the Area
1. Sources of Water Supply in the Service Area.
The major sources of water in the Bloomington area are the Lake
Lemon, Griffy Creek, and Lake Monroe Reservoirs with Lake Monroe
being the primary water supply for the City of Bloomington and
the LMRWD. Groundwater does not supply a significant quantity
of water in the planning area due to the proximity of the lime-
stone bedrock near the surface throughout much of the area. As
in other limestone regions, water from ground supplies or
issuing from springs is not filtered as well as water taken
from sand or gravel aquifers. Pollution of the groundwater
supply by infiltration from septic tank drainage fields and
polluted suface water can be a serious problem. Unfavorable
geological conditions require deep wells drilled through bed-
rock and generally such wells do not yield adequate quantities
of good quality water for household use. For this reason, most
rural development is served by rural water districts that pur-
chase water from the Bloomington municipal water system which
utilizes Lake Monroe water as its major source. At the present
time there are no municipal water supplies in Monroe County
using groundwater, however, a number of private wells are
located in the planning area.
2. Wastewater Treatment in the Planning Areas
a- The City of Bloomington
The City of Bloomington presently has two sewage treatment plants
(STPs). The north drainage area is served by the Blucher Poole
STP. This plant has a design capacity of 6 MGD with approximately
2/3 (2 MGD) of the present 3 MGD flow being pumped via force main
from the south drainage area. The treated effluent is discharged
to Bean Blossom Creek. The south drainage area is served by the
Winston Thomas STP which has a design capacity of 7 MGD and hy-
draulic capacity of 10 MGD. Flows in excess of 10 MGD receive
primary treatment and are diverted to a 16 acre lagoon while
flows in excess of 14 MGD by-pass the STP and go directly to
the lagoon. Discharge of treated effluent is to Clear Creek
(Clear Creek has a 7 day once in 10 year low flow of zero).
This STP was built in 1934 and expanded in 1955 and 1969.
1-5
-------
The Winston Thomas SIP is difficult to operate efficiently and
is frequently overloaded (1974 average daily flow was 11.2 MGD).
The municipal waste laods, flows, treatment efficiericies,
metal content of sludges, D.O. conditions in the receiving
streams and effluent permit standards for the proposed
facilities are in Appendix A. Building a new sewage treat-
ment plant to serve the South Bloomington area has a state
priority number of 14.
b. The Lake Monroe Regional Waste District
Package STPs and septic systems presently serve the LMRWD.
The present flow to package plants during the summer season
is approximately .2 M3D. The projected summer flow in 20
years from the Lake Monroe Regional Waste District is estimated
to be 1 MGD. Constructing an STP to serve the LMRWD has a
state priority of 139. Listed below are the point source
discharges within the LMRWD.
Facility Development Capacity Discharge To
1. Hardin-Monroe, Inc. 16 Residences 6,000 G.P.D. Lake Monroe
2. Hardin Ridge U.S.
Forest Service
3. Boy Scout Camp
4. Salt Creek
5. Paynetown Recreational
State Dept. of Natural
Resources
Camping Area
Scout Camp
Residences
40,000 G.P.D.
6,500 G.P.D.
15,000 G.P.D.
Camping Area 43,700 G.P.D.
6. Water Filtration Plant Sludge Lagoon
City of Bloomington Overflow
19,200 G.P.D.
Lake Monroe
Lake Monroe
Lake Monroe
Lake Monroe
Lake Monroe
9
Fairfax Recreational
Area State Dept. of.
Natural Resources
Flood Control -
Dam U.S. Corps of
Engineers
Caslon STP
Camping Area 46,100 G.P.D. Lake Monroe
Office & Overlook
at Dam 10,000 G.P.D.
The Pointe
115,650 G.P.D.
Salt Creek
Clear Creek
A major concern of the existing sewage discharges to Lake Monroe
is their effect on water quality. The Aquatic Ecology section
of the Lake Monroe Land Suitability Study provides detailed
information on existing physical-chemical and biological
conditions in Lake Monroe and is reproduced in Appendix B.
(The sewage treatment plant in Nashville, Indiana discussed
in Appendix B, is not in the planning area under consideration
in this EIS. However, the poor quality effluent reported for
1-6
-------
Nashville which flows into Lake Monroe is based on 1968-1972
data. The effluent quality should be changed significantly
as a result of expansion during 1975 of the Nashville STP
to .25 MGD and a general upgrading of the facility.)
The largest point source discharges to Lake Monroe within
the LMRWD are Paynetown, Fairfax and Hardin Ridge Recreation
Areas. Although no monitoring of effluent quality was done
for Paynetown and Fairfax Recreation Areas, the state of
Indiana has authorized the construction of an interceptor
that diverts the flow of the Fairfax Recreation Area from
Lake Monroe to the Caslon STP for treatment with subsequent
discharge to Clear Creek. This action will eliminate the
most significant treated sewage discharge to Lake Monroe in
the LMRWD. Based on existing water consumption, the discharge
effluent from Paynetown is seasonal with the peak flows of
approximately 30,000 GPD during the summer. Effluent quality
information for Paynetown was not monitored and as a result
no detrimental effects on Lake Monroe are known due to dis-
charge from the Paynetown Recreational Area. Constructing
an interceptor to serve the Paynetown Recreational Area is
considered in this EIS.
The Hardin Ridge Recreation Area is located on the east side
of Lake Monroe and regionalization with other facilities is
presently not economically feasible, nor is it necessary
based on the effluent quality found in Appendix C. Elimina-
tion of poorly functioning septic systems in the LMRWD by
constructing sewerage facilities is desirable only when
sewering an area is the most cost effective method to solve
the problem. Documentation of the severity of existing septic
system problems and alternate costs of solving those problems
should be evaluated by the LMRWD prior to its decision to
construct sewers to replace septic systems.
c. Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) in the Winston
Thomas STP System
PCBs have been detected in raw sewage of the Winston Thomas STP.
Monitoring efforts are underway by EPA to determine the sources
and concentrations of PCBs and the appropriate action that
should be taken to correct the problem. Background information
on PCBs is discussed in a July 1975 paper by EPA titled "State-
ment of Concerns of the Lake Michigan Toxic Substances Committee
Related to Polychlorinated Biphenyls".
)
E. Other Water Quality and Quantity Objectives
1. The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of
1972 (Public Law 92-500) require:
a. Secondary treatment of wastes for municipal sewage
and best practicable treatment for industrial
discharges by July 1, 1977.
1-7
-------
b. Best practicable waste treatment technology for
municipal wastes and best available treatment for
industrial wastes by July 1, 1983, and form the
basis for design of projects funded by EPA from
FY 1975 01: later allocation.
c. All point-source discharges require a permit under
the NPDES program (National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System). The NPDES permit states the
allowable waste loading and flow volume that can
be discharged to a receiving stream, Lake or ocean.
2. The National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 requires the
designation oi: flood-prone areas in the United States
(based on 100 year flood) and participation by the
appropriate communities and homeowners to qualify for
national flood insurance protection.
Portions of the Bloomington Metropolitan Area have been
mapped for flood prone designation and HUD is presently
pursuing appropriate public comment procedures prior to
issuing an official 100 year flood-prone map.
3. A Lake Monroe Land Suitability Study has been published
by the school of Public and Environmental Affairs, Indiana
University. This study evaluates existing environmental
conditions in a 100 square mile portion of the Lake Monroe
Watershed, identifies issues that need to be considered in
planning for future changes in the study area, and sum-
marizes the institutional framework that affects land use
and wetter quality decisions for the Lake Monroe area.
The executive summary of this study is found in Appendix D,
F« Cost and Financing
Detailed costs of the various alternatives are summarized in
Chapter 3 Table 6. The funding of the recommended proposal
would be apportioned as follows:
1. 75% federal funding of eligible project costs
2. 10% State of Indiana funding of eligible project costs
3. The local communities must provide the capital to pay
the remaining costs.
G- History of Application - Sewage Works Projects; C180560-01
and C180-561-01
June 3, 1974 Application for facilities plan grant sub-
mitted to the State of Indiana
July 9, 1974 "Facilities Plan Agreement" between the City
of Bloomington and the LMRWD for conducting a facilities
plan.
1-8
-------
- August 20, 1974 Revised application for facilities plan
grant submitted to State of Indiana.
September 12, 1974 Application for completion of Sewer
System Evaluation Survey (SSES) (C180561-01) submitted
to State of Indiana.
- October 25, 1974 State of Indiana conditionally certi-
fied application covering June 3, August 10, and Septem-
ber 12, 1974 applications.
- December 20, 1974 State of Indiana certified the Facili-
ties Plan segment and SSES to EPA.
_ January 22, 1975 Meeting at Region V offices in Chicago
to discuss deficiencies in facilities plan with City of
Bloomington, LMRWD and Black & Veatch.
March 20, 1975 Black & Veatch transmitted 1st Amendment
to Facilities Plan to EPA.
May 14, 1975 EPA issued notice of intent to prepare an
EIS on the South Bloomington - Lake Monroe Facilities
Plans.
May 29, 1975 Environmental Assessment hearing by the City
of Bloomington Utilities Service Board on the Facilities
Plan in Bloomington.
June 25, 1975 EPA made grant award to City of Bloomington
for facilities plan preparation subject to supplemental
information which might be requested during EIS process.
July 14, 1975 Gilbert Associates commences preparation of
an analytical report on South Bloomington, Indiana - Lake
Monroe EIS issues.
July 16, 1975 EPA Holds community information meeting
to explain EIS Process, to identify key issues on the
proposed wastewater treatment facilities and to announce
preparation of analytic report by Gilbert Associates.
November 7, 1975 Gilbert Associates transmits preliminary
analytic report to EPA.
December 4, 1975 EPA summarizes preliminary findings of
GA report in letter to City of Bloomington, see Chapter 6.
- December 23, 1975 GA submits final report to EPA.
January 17, 1976 EPA approves and releases final report
of GA.
1-9
-------
H. Issues Evaluated:
1. Regionalization - should there be one STP to serve the
South Bloom:.ngton and Lake Monroe areas or separate
STPs?
2. Evaluation of the pure oxygen wastewater treatment process
for all regional plants as contrasted with the activated
sludge process.
3. The desirab:.lity of renovation and expansion of the Winston
Thomas STP.
4. The capacity(ies) and location!s) of a regional STP or
separate STPs as determined by existing needs and pro-
jected populations of the South Bloomington and Lake
Monroe areas;.
5. The tradeoffs involved in constructing a treatment plant
on sites along Clear Creek with a 5 BOD , 5 SS effluent
vs. the Salt Creek site with a 10 BOD 10 SS effluent.
6. Present Worth Analysis of alternatives.
7. Distribution of Costs.
8. The process of sludge treatment and disposal best suited
for the wastewater treatment facilities recommended.
9. The full range of environmental impacts in implementing
the various alternatives.
10. The induced growth implications for the Lake Monroe Area
if one regional STP is constructed.
11. The mitigative measures that can be implemented to mini-
mize undesirable physical environmental impacts.
The above issues are evaluated in Chapters 3 and 4,. They are
organized by tasks corresponding to the order in which they
are identified. Tasks 1-8 are in Chapter 3 and tasks 9-11
are found in Chapter 4.
1-10
-------
CHAPTER 2
THE ENVIRONMENT WITHOUT THE PROPOSED ACTION
A. General
The planning area consists of three regions referred to as the
north, south, and Monroe Reservoir service areas. The proposed
new wastewater treatment facilities will primarily affect the
south and Monroe Reservoir service areas.
The south service area consists of most of the City of
Bloomington and the lower Clear Creek drainage area. Approxi-
mately 28,230 acres of developed land or land suitable for
development are contained within the City and the surrounding
fringe areas south of the City. It is anticipated that resi-
dential development will continue to expand into this area.
An additional 24,300 acres are contained in the lower Clear
Creek area located between Dillman Road and Salt Creek. This
area is sparsely populated farm land, with several stone quarries
scattered throughout the area. Extensive development is not
anticipated in this area during the period considered in this
study. Concentrated development is more likely to occur in areas
adjacent to the City of Bloomington and near Monroe Reservoir.
The Monroe Reservoir service area is located about 8 miles
southeast of Bloomington. The reservoir covers approximately
10,750 acres of the total 40,000 acres within the Lake Monroe
Regional Waste District boundaries. Some of the area has
rugged terrain and limited development has occurred. The area
is subject to extensive recreational use, especially over
holiday weekends. Greater detail on the Lake Monroe Area
is found in Appendix D .
6. Detailed Description
1. Climate
Indiana has a climate of warm summers and cool winters.
tJloomington has a mean maximum temperature in January of 42 F
and in July of 89 F. The annual mean temperature is 55.3° F
and the annual mean precipitation is 44.04 inches.
2. Topography
The area in the vicinity of Clear Creek between Bloomington
and the confluence of Clear Creek with Salt Creek is rugged and
characterized by steep land slopes. The rugged topography
limits the potential treatment plant sites south of Bloomington.
There are relatively few areas which have sufficient level
ground to allow construction of a treatment plant adequate
to handle existing and future neeeds. The few level areas
available are generally dissected by a railroad track, roads,
or Clear Creek. The rugged topography also influences the
2-1
-------
location and the difficulty of construction of the main
interceptor for the proposed wastewater treatment facility.
3. Geology
Bloomington and its immediate surroundings are located in the
northern portion of the famous Bedford-Bloomington limestone
area. It is an important mineral producing area, with many
stone quarries and milling operations. Four limestone forma-
tions (Barrodsburg, Salem, St. Louis, and St. Genevieve) underlie
much of the central and western portions of the county. Weather-
ing of this limestone has resulted in the formation of the long,
narrow karst plain that extends from northwestern Monroe County
all the way to Kentucky.
The limestone bedrock which extends the entire length of Clear
Creek will complicate the construction of the main interceptor
sewer. It will require use of explosives in the construction
of the sewer.
4. Soils
Soils in the areas underlain by the limestone have extremely
variaole thickness and are a function of topography. Three
general geologic soils types are present: residual, colluvial,
and alluvial. Most soils in Bloomington and vicinity are of
residual and colluvial origin and are derived largely from the
weathering of limestone. Residual soils are those that were
formed in place by progressive weathering of rock. Colluvial
soils were formed by accummulations of the soils from higher
slopes sliding downhill. Colluvial soils are generally thicker,
less nomogeneous, and less well compacted. All four limestone
formations are overlain by residual soils on the flat upland
slopes, but colluvial soils are dominant on the steep slopes
of the valleys near stream level. Most colluvial areas, how-
ever, are character izied by gently rolling topography without
steep slopes. Alluvial soils are soils deposited by moving
water and are found only in the large stream valleys.
Subsoils in the upland areas are moderately to slowly permeable,
depending upon topography. Soils in the Salt Creek and Monroe
Reservoir areas are underlain by relatively impervious siltstones
and shales.
5. Water Resources
As in other limestone regions, water from ground supplies or
issuing from springs is not filtered as well as water taken
from sand or gravel aquifers. Pollution of the ground water
supply by infiltration from septic tank drainage fields and
polluted surface waters can be a serious problem. Unfavorable
geologic conditions require deep wells drilled through bedrock
and generally such weslls do not yield adequate quantities of
good-quality water for household use. For this reason, most
rural development is served by rural water districts that
2-2
-------
purchase water from the Bloomington municipal water system
which utilizes surface water supply sources. At the present
time there are no municipal water supplies in Monroe County
using ground water. However, a number of private wells are
located in the planning area.
Surface drainage is distinctly different in the central and
western areas of the county as compared to eastern areas.
Drainage in some parts of the limestone region is through under-
ground passages or into small streams ending in sinkholes. Sur-
face drainage in the east and southeast areas of the county is
more clearly defined. The area is severely dissected by stream
beds cut deeply into the bedrock. The high runoff rates in this
area cause minor flooding problems on the lower reaches of Clear
and Salt Creeks during periods of heavy rainfall.
There are no natural lakes in Monroe County. Reservoirs, water-
filled quarries, and ponds, however, are scattered throughout
the area. Lake Lemon and the Monroe and Griffy Reservoirs
are used extensively for recreational purposes and also serve
as municipal water supply sources for most of the county.
6. garks and Historical Sites
There are no parks or prominent historical sites within the
limits of the proposed project. There are state and national
forests along the eastern part of Monroe Reservoir. There are
also recreational areas adjacent to Monroe Reservoir to the
east of the Salt Creek Site.
7. Cemetery
A cemetery is located near one of the potential treatment plant
sites. It is east of Victor Pike and slightly more than one
mile south of Dillman Road. The cemetery would be within about
250 feet of the Ketcham Road site, but would be separated
from the plant by Clear Creek.
8. Environmental Constraints
Topography and geology are factors which place serious constraints
on the project. The rugged terrain and existing development limit
the number of potential treatment plant sites. The prevalence of
rock throughout the area will complicate construction of a con-
necting main sewer for all sites except Winston Thomas and
South Rogers.
Tne quantity of water available for effluent dilution is another
consideration. A higher degree of treatment must be provided
for a plant located on Clear Creek due to the lack of dilution
water during low flow periods.
Provisions must be made to protect the treatment facilities
from floods. Levees can De provided for flood protection for
the 100 year flood level. The flood protection measures
2-3
-------
must not result in excessive restriction of the flood plain.
9. Air Quality
The air quality in the Bloomington area (based on the monitoring
station at 4th and Walnut Streets) is within the ambient air
quality standards. Air sampling frequency distributions and
the ambient air quality standards are found in Appendix F .
2-4
-------
CHAPTER 3
ISSUES & ALTERNATIVES
TASK 1*
EVALUATION OF REGIONALIZATION/PROJECTED POPULATION
AND LAND USE PATTERNS
1.1 ISSUES, BASIC ASSUMPTIONS AND FINDINGS
The regionalization issue, which would probably result in one large
plant at Salt Creek to serve the South Bloomington Service Area (SBSA)
and the LMRWD, hangs upon the demand and need for sewering Lake Monroe.
There is no other apparent reason for treating sewage some eight miles
from its major source, the Bloomington Area. As such, the decision
becomes, in the Consultant's opinion**, more of a politcal than an
engineering one, for the analysis of the issues and related consid-
erations raises some serious doubts as to the need for sewering the
Lake Monroe area.
A desire for the improvement of the economic climate may be the sole
reason for the lakewide sewer system, which would aid in opening the
lake area for development. Even if this sytem could be financed by
tying it into the Bloomington Sewer System and thereby spreading the
cost of this economic development program over a wider population
(the Bloomington Urban area), it would still be prudent to defer
such action until the environmental effects of development can be
better evaluated in light of the lake's ability to accommodate such
change. Lake Monroe is too valuable a natural resource and asset
to the area to treat it like a commodity.
If Lake Monroe were not served by a lakewide interceptor sewer system,
the Salt Creek Plant site location and regional scheme would not be
necessary. Both the Lake Monroe and Bloomington 201 Plans recommended
this regional plant and the lakewide interceptor system. The latter
system was sized and designed to facilitate seasonal, second home
and resort complexes proposed at various locations around the lake.
There is no absolute answer about the need for sewering the lake.
Data given the Consusltant was not in sufficient detail to conclude
that a regional waste treatment system is economically feasible,
when in fact it might be needed, or who might be participating in its
financing. This system, as designed, consists of a force main collector.
Therefore, economically speaking, it will only be available to rather
large developments, those which can underwrite the temporary treatment
facility depreciation and provide f)or the pumping and other extra costs
necessitated by such a system. These potential second home and resort
developers were unable, for the most part, to respond to the LMRWD
Consultant in sufficient detail to ascertain a timetable for construction.
In effect, this system would be planned for developments which have not
been scheduled and may never be constructed.
* Pages in Chapters 3 & 4 are numbered as follows 1st digit = chapter #,
2nd digit = task # and 3rd digit = page #.
** The (Consultant's opinion/Consultant) not explicitly identified in
Chapters 3 & 4 is Gilbert Associates.
3-1-1
-------
The attempt to determine the potential seasonal housing market at Lake
Monroe produced unsatisfying and somewhat inconclusive results. There
are too many significant variables affecting this market. One aspect
is that it would be possible to purchase a housing unit located on the
lake but not in line of sight with the lake, nor having any access for
swimming or boating except at designated public facilities such as
Fairfax State Park. T^is holds true for all developers except the
State of Indiana. At present, the State leases land from the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, with full property rights including direct
lake access. The State, in turn, is able to sublease land, and has
done so for commercial development such as the Four Winds Marina.
There is no way of determining what the State will do in the future;
but theoretically, the State is in a more advantageous position than
private developers with respect to the market and inducing development.
It is possible that with the present market uncertainity, it is the
market and not the sewer system that may prove to be the more central
issue in Lake Monroe's development future.
There is one seasonal/second home development now under construction
and it has i':s own temporary sewerage treatment facility. This
development, The Pointe, is a planned community of some 1400 units.
At its present rate of completion, The Pointe may not be completed
until after 1990. The Pointe is a first class seasonal-recreational
facility; and it has advantages that other developers may not be able
to equal, such as lake access thorough the Marina.
In the course of this independent analysis, the Consultant was able to
locate individual demand centers or areas of sufficient population
size and densities felt to warrant sewerage service. In addition,
these demand centers were evaluated with respect to their geographic
and hydraulic location to one another with a view toward determining
their potential relationship to service from alternative site
locations. "t was not possible, with the data available at this time,
to ascertain economic feasibility of alternative total systems for
servicing Lake Monroe. The Consultant* is of the opinion that such
feasibility studies are premature considering that it is not
known for certain how, when and where sewerage service will be needed
around the lake. This preliminary analysis was helpful in suggesting
some alternate possibilities for handling the major sewerage demands
within the Lake Monroe area. The major demand centers in the Lake
Monroe Area are shown on Plate 4.
The major sewerage demand in the Lake Monroe area consists mainly of
year-round housing located in several of the older hamlets. One
grouping, the. Sanders-Smithville area, could actually be better served
at the Dillman rather than the Salt Creek Site. Harrodsburg fits in
with the Salt. Creek Site location but could just as well be served at
The Pointe's facility. The sewering of these older areas would be
more desirable in the event of the documentation of on-lot disposal
system failures within these older settlement areas.
* Gilbert Associates.
3-1-2
-------
Some areas around the lake, particularly near the causeway, are
actually located closer to the Winston Thomas site than the Salt Creek
Site. On the south side of the lake, the developments could probably
treat their effluent outside the lake drainage district; although some
of these proposed developments are too small to reasonably expect
service.
Even if it were determined that serving the Lake Monroe area would
induce immediate development, sufficient doubts have been raised about
the environmental effects of such development to warrant further study
before taking action.
1.2 POPULATION AND FLOW PROJECTIONS
Since people create the demand for sewerage service, it is important
not only to carefully match the rate of population growth to the
sizing and scheduling of sewer development, but also to coordinate
sewer system development with anticipated changes in land use
activities to maximize the benefit of that improvement.
Any projection, whether demographic, economic or social, is based upon
a multitude of assumptions and value judgements as to the reasonable
expectations for the future. Demographic projection is not a science,
because the future will consist of those events and changes that
cannot be forseen as well as those that can. The only certain thing
is that conditions underlying projections can, and often do, change
overnight.
Since the preparation of the Bloomington and the Lake Monroe Regional
Waste District 201 Plans, some changes have occured in local growth
assumptions regarding the university, industrial trends, and other
factors that warranted independent analysis to determine what, if any,
significance these changes might have on flow calculations. In
addition, the original population analysis outlined in the 201 Plan
was not organized in a manner suitable for evaluation of alternative
regional schemes. Considering this situation, the Consultant decided
to independently prepare population and flow projections as an aid in
evaluating regionalization.
1.2.1 Summary of Findings
The following paragraphs describe the methodologies, procedures and
assumptions used by the Consultant in developing projections and
estimates of flows.
The Bloomington 201 Plan estimated increases in residential and
student populations, industrial jobs, and commercial activities to
determine flow increments; adding to these projections those of the
Lake Monroe 201 Plan.
3-1-3
-------
The Consultant, in preparing independent projections;, used a similar
projection method and flow parameters as found in the Bloomington 201
Plan.
Figure 1-1 shows a comparison of various population projections for
Monroe County.
Using quite different growth assumptions and expectations for flow
increases in the residential, industrial and university segment, the
results only varied 10% from those in the Bloomington 201 Plan as
amended.
Table 1-1 summarizes the differences in flow calculations between
those of the Bloomington 201 Plan and this Consultant. The existing
flow figure of 11.2 MGD does not include the total flow from the south
now pumped north and treated at the Blucher Poole plant. The
Bloomington 20]. Plan recommended that this pumping be discontinued,
but this Consultant feels that there are compelling arguments for its
continuation. Therefore, for convenience of comparing the two
calculations in Table 1-1, the current Blucher Poole flow was deleted
from the southern regional plant sizing consideration. The rationale
for this recommendation is the excess capacity at the northern plant
and the fact that the use of this capacity will aid in producing a
better effluent and allow more efficient operation. In addition, the
lower level of treatment required at the northern plant means that it
will more than likely be operated at an equal or lower cost, than a new
regional facility, even considering the minimal extra costs associated
with pumping.
In the case of Lake Monroe, it was extremely difficult to corroborate
the expectations for a sewage flow of 3.0 MGD. Instead, a near term
flow estimate of 1.0 MGD was used in the alternative comparison.
1.2.2 Flow Variations
To adequately understand the differences between flow projections in
the 201 Plan arid those developed by this Consultant, it is necessary
to understand the various drainage and jurisdictional areas within
Monroe County. The boundaries of these areas are shown in Figure 1-2.
The flow comparisions indicated in Table 1-1 are shown graphically in
Figure 1-3.
1.2.2.1 Residential
Local agencies indicated that the Bloomington 201 Plan County
projections for the county were quite high as evidenced by
Figure 1-1. In addition, the 201 Plan considered the entire
population living south of the drainage divide to be "contributory to1
and therefore to be served by the regional sewer system. But, in
fact, there are extensive areas within Monroe County that will not be
3-1-4
-------
economical to serve in the foreseeable future. Both of these
differences would tend to reduce the original 201 estimate, but
they were offset, by other considerations. First of all, local
planning officials did not agree that such a high percentage of the
total county population (even if overstated) would be located in the
northern section of their jurisdiction, instead of the south and
southeast areas, the more traditional growth areas. Secondly, the
local planners envision more of the total population residing within
range of future sewers. Even with these differences, the overall
difference between flow calculations as shown in Figure 1-3 was not
too significant, particularly considering that this Consultant used
the City Planning Commission's more conservative growth projections.
The differences between flow calculations in the case of Lake Monroe
are more at variance and are documented in this task and in Task 10,
Induced Development - Lake Monroe. The Lake Monroe 201 Plan assumed
that all the population within the district and all the seasonal
developments would be served. This Consultant's review indicates
that it is almost impossible to predict the lake resort seasonal and
resort prospects based on available information.
The differences between this Consultant's and the Lake Monroe 201
Plan projections are quite significant, and are rooted more in basic
assumptions than in differences in opinions as to rates of growth and
household sizes.
The Lake Monroe 201 Plan assumed a rather rapid rate of population
growth for the lake area, presumably in anticipation of a forthcoming
real estate boom. The future of the Lake Monroe area in terms of
population growth lies in the seasonal and second home market. While
the 201 Plan treated all the plans submitted to date as if they would
be built, this Consultant feels that with the particular situation
at Lake Monroe and the current market, this assumption cannot be
corroborated. This consultant assumed, based upon the details
presented later in this text, that the south side of Lake Monroe
and even the causeway area did not at this time justify service,
and furthermore, that the entire interceptor concept would be quite
an expensive system. Passing on added costs of an expensive sewerage
system would in turn affect the competitiveness of each project.
1.2.2.2 Industrial
The main difference in the industrial iflow calculations is that the
Bloomington 201 Plan inadvertantly used Region 10 overall economic
employment projections as an industrial employment projection for
Monroe County.
3-1-5
-------
1.2.2.3 Indiana University
University officials indicated that they anticipated the enrollments
to peak prior to construction startup and decline thereafter. As a
result, this Consultant did not consider the university as having any
future increase. /
1.2.2.4 Commercial
As an independent check, this Consultant calculated commercial flow at
50 gallons per person daily. With an anticipated 19,000 more people
to be served by the year 2000, an increase in commercial flow of about
1.0 MGD might be expected rather than the 0.8 in the 201 Plan.
1.3 POPULATION PROJECTIONS/DEMAND CALCULATIONS
1.3.1 Introduction
The population projections for Monroe County from the 1974 Bloomington
Facilities Plan anticipate a significantly higher rate, of growth than
projections from either the Bloomington City Planning Commission or
the Bureau of Research in the Indiana University School of Business.
Personal interviews with officials in both agencies substantiate this
disparity.! The variation in population projections is shown in
Figure 1-1.
Population projections reflect basic underlying assumptions regarding
birth, death, and migration rates. The Bloomington 201 Facilities
Plan population projections are thought to be based upon pre-1970
census data embodying underlying assumptions such as a continuation of
Monroe County's population increase commensurate with its share of
1960-1970 population growth which represented 90 percent of the total
of Economic Region 10. However, during the 1960-1970 period,
several changes occurred that were responsible for Monroe County's
accounting for such a large share of Region 10's population change,
and local authorities do not feel that these events will reoccur in
the future. These changes included doubling of University enrollments
and a rapid increase in manufacturing jobs resulting from the
relocation of the Otis Escalator Plant, employing 1000 persons, into
the area. In addition, the 201 Facility Plan projections were based
on pre-1970 birth rate trends which would result in a much higher
population level than if current birth rates were utilized.
1.3.2 Alternate Projections/Bloomington 201 Plan
1.3.2.1 Indiana University School of Business, Bureau of Research
One set of alternate population projections was prepared by the
Indiana University School of Business, Bureau of Research. While
these projections incorporated more current birth rate trends, they do
Bloomington City Planning Commission; Indiana University, Bureau of Reasearch
^School of Business.
Includes Monroe, Owen, Lawrence and Greene Counties.
3-1-6
-------
not offer a fair comparison due to the manner in which university
student population was projected. The methodology used was a five
year age-sex, cohort-survival method; but student populations were
aged forward rather than replaced as the overall population was aged
forward for each five year period. As a result, by 1990 the 15-24
age group, where one would expect to find most university students,
was one third the size of that age group in 1970. The 1970 university
student population being aged forward resulted in an abnormally large
35 to 44 year age group by the year 2000. While these two errors may
offset each other, the resulting projection is significantly lower
than if the error was not introduced.
1.3.2.3 Bloomington City Planning Commission
Another source for locally prepared population projections is the
Bloomington City Planning Commission. This agency is responsible for
the planning and land use control for the more populated portion of
Monroe County, the Bloomington jurisdictional area. This Commission
is now in the process of preparing a report dealing with future
population growth within the Bloomington area. It was the lead agency
responsible for discovering, among other census irregularities, that
the 1970 census total population was greater than that reported.
The city has prepared population projections for its jurisdictional
area as well as for Monroe County. These projections consist of a
high and low series reflecting somewhat different birth rate levels
and are quite conservative in comparison to the Bloomington 201 Plan.
The reason for this wide disparity is that the basic underlying growth
assumptions in the city's projection run contrary to those of the 201
Plan. The former assumes a reduced birth rate commensurate with
current trends, a much slower rate of economic growth, and anticipates
university population stabilizing in the very near future. The City
Planning Commission projections are more attuned to the areawide 1950-
1960 rather than 1960-1970 growth trends. They consider the latter
period to be atypical due to birth rate levels, the university
enrollment explosion, and the rather rapid growth of industrial
employment.
Their Monroe County projections ranged from a low of 95,000 to a high
of 110,000 by the year 2000, from a 12 to 30 percent increase. For
comparison purposes, the average population change anticipated was
used. The city's high estimate is about ten years behind the
population levels envisioned in the Bloomington 201 Plan, while the
city's low estimate was twenty years behind the same 201 Plan
forecasts.
The Bloomington 201 Plan envisions Monroe County to increase in its
population by 62 percent by the year 2000 versus a more modest 21
percent envisioned by the city. Certainly, neither projection will be
absolutely correct. Short term trends evident today, such as greatly
3-1-7
-------
reduced birth rates, slow growth in university enrollment, and less
than dynamic economic conditions would appear to lean more toward
corroborating the city's growth assumptions rather than the 201
Plan's.
Intercensal population estimates for Monroe County pinpoint the
county's 1973 population3 at 89,806 persons. If these figures are
reasonably accurate, then the short term county population growth
rate trend would more clearly approximate those in the Long Range
Water and Sewer Flan for 1980. If this estimate is on course in
context of the Icng run period, then even the city's high projection
would appear to be somewhat conservative, while the 201 Plan would
still fall on the high side.
1.3.3 Adjustments to Projections/1970 Under Reporting
Both the 201 Plan and the City Planning Commission projections were
estimated without the benefit of adjusting for 1970 census under
reporting. While it is fairly evident that the 1970 city and,
therefore, county population was actually larger than reported, by
how much has not yet been definitely determined.
4
If the city's projections are adjusted upward by 6000 persons the
city's high side population projection fits remarkably well with the
curve in the Long Range Water and Sewer Plan, while the adjusted
average would approach the former high population projection. The
average adjusted projection was utilized herein as an independent
population projection to compare with the 201 Plans.
1.3.4 Projected Population Distribution
The Bloomington 201 Plan not only assumed a faster rate of population
growth within the county, but a somewhat different distribution of
population than envisioned in the city projections; and more importantly
a somewhat larger population "contributory to" the southern area.
The Bloomington 201 Plan distributed future population change almost
equally between locations north and south of the major drainage
divide running through the center of the city. Under this allocation,
the northern area, which accounts for about 20 percent of the 1970
population, would account for 33 percent of the total county population
by 2000. In this regard, the 201 Plan also anticipates a more rapid
rate of development for this northern area than did the City Planning
Commission. The Planning Commission expects the major thrust of new
residential development to continue within the southern and southeastern
sectors of its jurisdictional area. One reason the cityS offers for
this is that the northern section of the Bloomington jurisdictional
area is restricted by flood plains, steep slopes, limestone problem
3
Table 1. Population 1970 and 1973, and Related Per Capita Income (PCI) for
.Revenue Sharing Area, U.S. Bureau of Census.
See paragraph 1.3.6.1, Census Discrepancies.
Conversation with the Bloomington City Planning Commission Staff.
3-1-8
-------
areas, quarries, existing industrial development, and city and
university ownership of large tracts of land. These factors are
significant constraints to residential development. This is in
contrast to the less physically restricted traditional south and
southeast growth corridors.
The portion of the northern drainage area that has recently reported
rapid population growth is the Elletsville area which is located
beyond the Bloomington jurisdictional area. Elletsville has its own
sewer system which has apparently already reached its capacity. The
City Planning Commission is of the opinion that the lack of additional
sewage treatment capacity there would tend to limit growth of Elletsville.
While the City Planning Commission has not yet allocated its population
growth projections, it does not anticipate a widening gap between the
proportion of population north and south of the drainage divide.
Instead, the City Planning Commission is of the opinion that the
present 20/80 percent distribution of population is likely to continue
in the future. Therefore, even using the City Planning Commission's
population projection for Monroe County for the year 2000, which is
30,000 persons below that shown in the Bloomington 201 Plan and the
city's distribution assumptionst it is apparent that some 7,000
fewer people would reside in the southern drainage district in the
year 2000 (Table 1-3).
1.3.5 Population Distribution and Sewer Service Areas
The Bloomington 201 Plan used the total anticipated change in population
for all areas of the county located south of the major drainage
district in determining incremental increases in sewage flows, even
though some of this population was located within drainage areas not
planned to be served by future interceptors.
The Bloomington 201 Plan referred to some 63,000 persons as residing
"contributory to" the southern drainage district, with 90,000 people
anticipated by the year 2000. Not all of this population will be
served by sewers by the year 2000 regardless of the plant site
location; however, the 25,000 persons increase was used in the
Bloomington 201 Plan to calculate increase in future sewage flows.
With this in mind, the Consultant, using U.S.G.S. 7-1/2 minute
quadrangle sheets and counting houses, attempted to determine existing
population distribution with the natural drainage area that would be
served by the southwest and southeast interceptorsthe two interceptors
planned for construction within the 20 year planning period for the
proposed plant. A part of the southeast drainage area even goes far
enough south to include a part of the District Service Area" of Lake
Monroe Regional Waste District.
Lake Monroe 201 Plan.
3-1-9
-------
Based on the foregoing analysis, it was determined that only 70
percent of the 1970 population residing south of the major drainage
boundary actually resided within any of these natural drainage
districts: the central, southeast and southwest. This percentage
should be adjusted upward to 80 percent taking into account the 1970
census under reporting.
The Consultant assumed that this southern drainage area, noted by the
City Planning Commission to be the major growth area within its
jurisdictional area, would attract an ever increasing percentage or
share of population growth in the future. Although not definitively
ascertained, this proportion was anticipated to increase from 80 to 85
percent by 1990.
The Consultant, using the city's growth projections, calculated an
18,000 person increase within the combined central, southwestern, and
southeastern drainage areas. At an average sewage flow of 100 GPCD
this would add 1.8 MGD rather than 2.5 MGD to southern sewage flows.
This calculation does not yet include consideration for the Lake
Monroe waste district flow increases.
1.3.6 Variances with Bloomington 201 Plan Projections
1.3.6.1 1970 Census Discrepancies
The 1970 census count for the City of Bloomington and the south
drainage flows should be adjusted upward by 5,000 to 6,000 persons to
reflect census discrepancies. This would directly affect all
previously prepared population projections such as found in the
Bloomington 201 Facility Plan by enlarging the population base quite
significantly, amounting to an equivalent of 1/6 of the city's total
1970 population. Not all of this error is within the City of
Bloomington, but most of it is certainly located within the southern
drainage districts.
As well as can be determined, this under reporting occurred primarily
within the university student population. The 1970 census was self-
reported so there is no way to definitively determine the extent of
under reporting with the data at hand, but the calculations in Table
1-5 provide at least an estimate of the magnitude of total error.
From this cursory analysis, it appears that about 8 percent of the
university student population probably commutes to and from the
university from locations outside Monroe County.
1.3.6.2 Indiana University Enrollment Trends/Flows
The university is the city and county's largest single industry. A
good share of the 9,714 persons employed by public and private schools
within the county owe their livelihood to the university.
3-1-10
-------
The 30,370 student population in 1970 was equivalent to 3/4 of the
city's population as reported in the census. Adjusting for suspected
discrepancies, the university student population accounts for 2/3 of
the city's total population.
Current and future university enrollment trends indicate that the
Indiana University enrollments will peak prior to 1979-1980 school
year. After this the enrollment may stabilize or even decline
slightly.
The unofficial 1975 enrollment at Indiana University is expected to
fall within the range of 31,000 to 32,000 students.' An average of
31,500 students would indicate an increase of 1,132 students, a rate
of change less than a 1% per year since 1970. At this rate of change,
enrollment may peak out at approximately 32,350 students in the 1978-
1979 school year; some 2,500 fewer students than anticipated in the
Bloomington 201 Plan.
These enrollment projection rates may be slightly overstated
considering the current economy. The university noted a one to two
percent higher ratio of enrollment to the total state population age
pool that the university draws upon for its enrollment and apparently
a higher proportion of undergraduates remaining for graduate work.
This condition is felt to reflect current employment opportunities and
will probably not become a permanent condition. It is quite possible
that university enrollments will actually decline in the 1980's as a
reflection of the current statewide decline in the size of the
elementary and secondary school age group.
There are no known absolute limits to long term enrollment changes at
the Bloomington Indiana University campus. The university owns
considerable acreage upon which to expand. There are, however,
practical short term limits. At present, the university is faced with
a limit in the amount of classroom capacity.8 With the immediate
prospects for declining enrollments, it is not very likely that the
State of Indiana will be entering upon any new era of university
enlargement in the near future.
With an anticipated 1978-1979 enrollment increase of less than 2,000
students over the 1970 levels, increase in university flows may be
closer to .09 MGD rather than the.2 MGD increase projected in the 201
Plan. In fact, considering that university enrollments will have
peaked prior to the completion of the sewage treatment plant, and may
even decline thereafter, incremental changes in sewage flows from the
university may be negligible.
7Telecon with Mr. Shellhamer, I.U. Registrar's Office, September, 1975.
8Telecon with Mr. James Perin, Indiana University Budget Office, September, 1975.
3-1-11
-------
1.3.6.3 Economic Trends
g
The economy of Region 10 improved rapidly in the 1960's as a result
of the university enrollment doubling and an increase in electrical
machinery employment. Otis Elevator located a new factory in the
Bloomington area hiring 1,000 persons. Most local sources forsee a
slowdown in economic growth, and the future growth prospects for the
university appear to be limited. Increases in manufacturing
employment normally result more from growth within existing industries
rather than relocations,and the probability of another large
manufacturing plant relocating to the Bloomington area is felt to be
remote.
One reason is thai: the Bloomington area, particularly the
manufacturing sector, is rather limited with respect to labor supply.
It is estimated that nearly 1/4 of all 1976 jobs in the Bloomington
area were held by residents of other counties and that nearly 1/2 of
all manufacturing job opportunities within the Bloomington area were
held by outsiders, Any additional labor would have to drive from more
distant areas. 11: appears that from both a labor demand and supply
standpoint this area will probably not grow at a very fast rate in the
future.
1.3.6.4 Manufacturing Employment Trends
The Bloomington 201 Facility Plan estimate of projected growth of
manufacturing employment was based upon employment trends anticipated
in an "Indiana Regional and Economic Development and Planning
Study."10 The 201 Plan calculation of Monroe County's share of
Region 10's manufacturing employment actually represented the total
projected employment increase which includes both the manufacturing as
well as the non-manufacturing sectors of employment opportunity.
Increases anticipated in manufacturing flows as recalculated by the
consultant are equivalent to about 1/3 that projected in the 201 Plan.
Note that the recalculations were taken to the year 2000, while those
embodied in the Bloomington 201 Plan were to the year 1990.
1.3.7 Alternate Projections/Lake Monroe Regional Waste District
1.3.7.1 Existing Year-Round Population
Lake Monroe Regional Waste District's 201 plan estimated the
district's 1966 population at 5,000 persons in 1,404 household units,
assuming 3.7 persons per average household. It was not determined
where these 5,000 persons resided nor if they were favorably located
with respect to fostering development of an economically viable
sewerage treatment system. Also, the plan did not differentiate
between year-round and seasonal residential development.
9
Includes the counties of Monroe, Greene, Lawrence, and Owen.
Richard L. Pfister, Indiana University, Division of Research, School of Business.
3-1-12
-------
It is desirable to isolate the concentration and distribution of
year-round sewage flows from that which might accrue from seasonal,
second home, and recreational inputs. This is important because
seasonal growth is not directly related to normal economic and
population growth factors. Furthermore, there is normally a difference
in flow volumes per dwelling unit between these types of units.
The Consultant duplicated the LMRWD methodology, but updated the 1966
housing counts to 1970, and instead of using a blanket 3.7 persons
per household,.utilized individual 1970 municipal household sizes.
This 3.7 persons per household figure used in the 201 Plan is much
higher than reported in the 1970 Census. The 1970 figures predate
seasonal and second home construction around the lake and are assumed
to fairly accurately represent existing year round household sizes.
The results of the recount of population by this Consultant were not
exactly similar to the LMRWD 201 Plan figures. Possibly part of the
difference might result from the difference in boundary delineations
for the Lake Monroe Regional Waste District shown in the two 201
plans. The LMRWD population estimates probably include people
residing in the State Route 37 corridor, although this corridor does
not appear to lie within the district boundaries. There is no doubt,
however, that this corridor should be also served by sewers, especially
if Harrodsburg is, since together they represent one of the larger
demand centers found within the entire area.
The major demand centers in the Lake Monroe area are shown on Plate 4.
1.3.7.2 Population Distribution/Demand Centers
Suprisingly. the majority of the 3,500 persons estimated by the
Consultant** to be residing in or contiguous to the LMRWD or within
the District's Service Area (Figure 1-2) are located some distance
from the lake, principally in older hamlets and villages as distinct
from new subdivisions, and not within the district boundaries.
About 1,600 persons resided within the boundaries of the original
Lake Monroe regional waste district in 1970; and, more importantly,
there were few population concentrations warranting sewer services
based on population density or concentration. Most residential
developments in the lake district proper consisted of residential
development along the ridge roads. Portions of this district population
are physically isolated from the rest of the county by Lake Monroe,
which is the largest man-made lake in Indiana. Those isolated segments
of Salt Creek and Polk Townships are also lightly populated, and
these two areas are predominantly forested with some steep terrain.
In addition, much of the land here is maintained by the U.S. Forest
Service as part of the Hoosier National Park. The only concentration
of year-round housing found within the LMRWD was at Harrodsburg.
Gilbert Associates, Inc.
3-1-13
-------
The District's Service Area (DSA) is located contiguous to and north
of the LMRWD boundary. As estimated by Gilbert Associates, Inc.,
this area contained 55% of the 3,518 persons residing with the combined
LMRWD and DSA. The DSA is contiguous to the city of Bloomington
jurisdictional area; part of it is also located within the southeast
drainage basin of the city. This means that part of the DSA population
is favorably located with respect to possible gravity sewage flow to
the Dillman or Ketcham sites.
The DSA population is located mainly with the small older settlements
such as Handy, Sanders and Smithville. Handy and Sanders are located
just at the edge of the city's southeast watershed boundary, but
sewage would have to be pumped over this ridge to be treated at any
of the Clear Creek sites. However, except in the case of Smithville,
these sewage flows would also have to be pumped over ridges to reach
the Salt Creek Site.
1.3.7.3 Estimates of Potential Flow From Existing Development
There are two existing residential demand centers that warrant
sewering.12 The largest is the Harrodsburg/State Route 37 corridor
and the smaller an amalgamation of the small hamlets located in the
DSA. Discounting the isolated and scattered residential developments
typical in the area, it is estimated that less than 2,500 persons
reside in areas of favorable density and in locations that warrant
near term sewerage service. This figure also includes 600 persons
outside the district in the State Route 37 corridor. Another .12 MGD
should be added to this estimated .24 MGD year-round residential flow
to reflect contributions from the three elementary schools and
recreational flows; from Fairfax State Park.
1.3.7.4 Year-Round Population Projections
In the LMRWD 201 plan the population increase was assumed to be an
average annual rate of 3.47% per year. At this rate Monroe County
would have a population of 180,000 persons by the year 2000. This
rate of growth evtm exceeds that found in the Bloomington 201 Plan
which is itself probably overstated. At this rate, the Bloomington
201 plan population projection of 138,000 would be attained in the
mid 1980's; and the City Planning Commission's county projection for
2000 would be attained in approximately 1977.
Current population trends within the district reflect a turn-around
from 1960 to 1970 population changes (Table 1-9), when the reservoir
construction was largely responsible for an estimated 500 person
population loss in the townships adjoining the lake. These current
1970-1973 growth trends range from 1.0 to 1.7 percent per annum
increase within these lakeside municipalities. The census does not
ennumerate seasonal populations so that this increase will not
include new recreational and resort projects. These most current
figures are, however, only estimates.
12
Assuming a minimum of 300 units.
3-1-14
-------
The City Planning Commission population projections estimated a 3,650
person population increase between 1970 and 2000. in that part of the
county located outside their jurisdictional area. The corresponding
growth rate usin& their projection is 16.7 percent over the 30 year
period. At this rate of increase, the year round district population
would enlarge to slightly over 4,000 persons. If the area growth
rates were to continue at the 1970 to 1973 levels of approximately 1.5
percent per annum, this area could reach a population level of about
5400 persons.
The same 16.7 and 45,0 percent growth rates for a thirty year period
were used to estimate the magnitude of year-round population change
anticipated within the Lake Monroe demand centers. It appears from
these calculations that year-round residential flows in the Lake
Monroe area will be in the vicinity of .30 MGD.
1.3.7.5 Recreational and Institutional Projections
The recreational and institutional flow projections were utilized
directly from the LMRWD 201 Plan. It appears that within the time
frame in question, the three small schools may eventually be con-
solidated into one school, the location of which may not even be in
the Lake Monroe Regional Waste District. This particular proposition
was recently on the ballot for voter approval at a strain Ridge Road
location and was voted down.
The only real net increase in recreation flow is projected at the two
major state recreation areasFairfax and Paynetown. While the
Fairfax recreation area is rather favorably located with respect to
incorporation with other flow into the Little Clear Creek interim
package plant, Paynetown is ill-located - about five (5) miles
directly north and east of Fairfax. Without crossing Moore Creek and
Ramp Creek inlets, this distance may actually increase to nine (9)
miles and the path between is lightly populated.
1.3.7.6 Seasonal Population/Background
Lake Monroe is a Corps of Engineers multi-purpose reservoir, a flow
augmentation and flood control reservoir, a major water supplier for
the City of Rloomington, and a major state recreational facility.
Since its completion in 1965, the lake has been the scene of intense
real estate as well as environmental activity. The latter is a
response to the real or imagined threat of development
indiscriminantly destroying the lake with sewage discharges, coupled
with the possibility of construction and operation of developments .
resulting in an increased sedimentation and siltation, fertilizer
runoff, etc.
The State of Indiana passed special legislation to form the Lake
Monroe Regional Waste District solely to address the wastewater
3-1-15
-------
problem around the lake. This group, in turn, contracted for the
preparation of sewerage system plans. In recognition of the linkage
between the sewerage service and land usage and environmental effects
it also spearheaded a three phase environmental survey and baseline
study of Lake Nonroe to include a capability model for determining
optimum land usage around the lake. This model is not available and
the first phase conclusions were preliminary and could not be used in
this report.
The Corps of Engineers purchase line for the lake ensures that no one
can privately cwn frontage and have direct access to the lake. Lake
access is limited to selected state facilities for boating and
swimming, such as Fairfax, Paynetown, etc. Reportedly, this lake line
was designed so that views from boats on the lake toward the shore
would remain natural looking even if developed. The Indiana State
Department of Natural Resources controls the construction of boat
docks, slips, itarinas, and ramps into the lake. In turn, the quantity
of these facilities controls the intensity of boating on the lake.
The major selling point of Lake Monroe from a real estate viewpoint
for marketing seasonal home developments is the view and aesthetic
appeal, micro-climate of a lake, and relative proximity to boating
opportunities. Interestingly enough, the lake itself seems to have
very little to do with the only viable development under construction
at Lake Monroe - - The Pointe. The Pointe is inward and recreation
oriented, built around a golf course, tennis, etc. Lake usage is
possibly by special arrangements with the Four Winds Marina or at the
State Park, both of which are located off-site. Even at The Pointe,
the lake presence or the fact that this development adjoined the lake
was not very visually apparent.
1.3.7.7 Seasonal Development Proposals
At present the major private seasonal-resort developments are The
Pointe, a planned unit condominium development with a recreation
orientation, and the Four Winds, a resort-motel-marina located within
Fairfax State Park on subleased land. Quite a few development schemes
have been presented for various properties located on the perimeter of
the lake. These proposals range from campsites to highly commercial
developments such as resort-motels, etc. Very few of these developers
could provide a definite timetable or construction schedule to the
LMRWD Consultant. Some developments are apparently being held in
abeyance unless and until there is a regional sewer system; while
others, such as the Inland Steel proposal, have been temporarily or
perhaps permanently abandoned.
The Pointe is the only development where construction is in progress
and following reasonably close to a construction schedule. Subsequent
to the LMRWD 201 Plan, the Pointe constructed a 0.1 MGD temporary
package sewage treatment plant along Little Clear Creek.
3-1-16
-------
The existing developments proposed around the lake have selected
the west and north side of the lake. This may also reflect
ownership patterns since most of Salt Creek and Polk Creek Townships
are federally owned forest lands, but it also reflects environmental
constraints such as soil and steepness of slopes. Of all the
developments proposed to date, only The Pointe and Land and Leisure
are located so they would drain naturally to Little Clear Creek and
the Salt Creek Plant. Except for proposed developments clustered
around the north side of the causeway, most are separated from one
another by significant distances of open land which is wooded, with
rugged terrain, steep slope, and numerous lake inlets.
Most of the Lake Monroe perimeter within Salt Creek and Polk Creek
Townships is surrounded by U.S. Forest Service lands, part of the
Hoosier National Forest. These forest lands surround every potential
development around Lake Monroe except for The Pointe, Land and
Leisure, Seven Flags and Brendon Shores. The U.S. Forest Service has
taken a stance that it will not allow sewer line easements across its
lands without the protection afforded by an areawide plan for the
entire lake, presumably addressing the impact of such development.
1.3.7.8 Existing Seasonal Development/The Pointe
The Pointe, a condominium apartment development, is the sole major
seasonal development being constructed around Lake Monroe. The first
village, one of seven planned, was partially completed in August 1975,
with 96 of the 200 planned units under roof. Each of the seven
villages is planned to have a pool and tennis courts as its focus and
draw. Each will contain approximately 200 units. Central recreation
features now include a championship golf course. Joint arrangements
have been made with Four Winds for use of their marina. Plans include
a central sports complex centered around golf and tennis pro shops and
restaurant facilities.
Current purchasers reside mainly in Indianapolis and Terre Haute,
using their units for second homes. They are predominately
professional's in their 40's and 50's.^ The latter may be more of a
reflection on the mix of units built in this first section which was
predominantly three bedroom apartments.
Of the 96 units under roof (August 1975), some 45% reportedly have
been sold. ^ This represents approximately a one year construction
and marketing effort with respect to the residential aspects of the
project. At this rate The Pointe may not meet its expected 1985
completion date. In fact, at this rate the completion might extend
considerably beyond 1985. Certainly the overall market for housing is
a little soft at this time, although this seasonal housing market
consists mainly of affluent families, better capable of improving
their relative position in a period of economic uncertainty. Units
in this development range in price from $25,000 to $85,000 with
Conversation with Ron Jarrett, The Pointe.
3-1-17
-------
most units probably priced in the $45,000 range. A sizable front end
investment has been made in this project, such as an 18 hole golf
course, roads, water, sewage treatment plant, etc., which would lead
one to believe that it will be completed, and become a guaranteed
part of future sewage flows within this area.
1.3.7.9 LMRWD 201 Plan Projections
According to the LMRWD 201 Plan, seasonal flow projections for the
major developments proposed at one time or another around Lake Monroe
could total approximately 6400 units with an estimated flow of over
L.5 MGD by 1998., assuming a regional collection and sewer system.
The LMRWD consultant queried each potential developer to determine
his projected 1998 sewage flows and their startup and completion
schedules. Only three developers responded with schedules. Land and
Leisure and Brendon Shores indicated a 1974 startup, while Graves and
Moore indicated they were awaiting the public sewer system. Construction
activity was apparent only at The Pointe during an August 1975 flight
over the lake.
In Table 1-17, the Consultant has rearranged the projected LMRWD 201
Plan flow data by geographical location around the lake and grouped
together developments that are relatively geographically contiguous.
Those seasonal developments reasonably close to the Salt Creek site
and the interim facility on Little Clear Creek include The Pointe,
Land and Leisure, Fairfax State Park and the Four Winds Marina. Flow
projections for Fairfax State Park includes the Four Winds. This
grouping of developments, etc., represents the area with the greatest
potential for completion as well as for sharing sewerage services.
The seasonal development within these two developments represents
one-half of the proposed year 2000 sewage flows for the north and
west side of the lake. This service area could also handle about
one-half of thai projected flow increase expected to be contributed
by regional recreational facilities.
The Inland Steel project now lies dormant and the remaining second
home projections on the north side of the lake have a potential waste
load of .23 MGD, not including the Paynetown State Park. About 5 to
9 miles of open land separates this area from Fairfax, depending on
whether or not Moores Creek Inlet is to be crossed by a sewer line.
This particular area is located closer to Winston Thomas than it is
to the Salt Creek site. Due to the lack of definite plans and schedules
for development the feasibility for servicing this area is uncertain.
Considerably less seasonal development has been proposed for the south
side of the lake. The largest of these proposals, Seven Flags, lies
practically on top of the Salt Creek site. Seven Flags, Brendon
3-1-18
-------
Shores and Chapel Hill proposed developments together account for
one-half of the projected seasonal development sewage flow on the
south side of the lake. Each is located close enough to the lake
drainage divide to enable them to discharge effluent outside the Lake
Monroe drainage district without worrying about discharges into the
lake.
Developments on the southern side share with those on the northern
side a lack of definite timetable and a wide distance separating each
development from its so called neighbor.
Another factor complicating regional service is that national forest
lands surround most of these developments and any joint collection
system would require right-of-way easements through these Federal
lands. This does not appear to be an immediate certainty, since the
Forest Service has stipulated as a precondition to granting such
easements that a coordinated areawide planning for the lake be
developed. The latter may result as an outgrowth of the Lake Monroe
Land Capability Study, but is probably some years away from becoming
a reality.
1.3.8 The Seasonal and Second Home Market
Little regional analysis is available either from a governmental or an
institutional sources that would enable the determination of the
aggregate market for resort, seasonal and second homes within the Lake
Monroe area. At present there are some 6400 units or lots which
have been conceived and planned. Some of these plans have already
been cancelled^-*, while others cannot offer much in the way of
providing start-up dates, scheduling, etc. At present there is no
definitive answer as to whether any of these units will ever be
constructed.
The prospect of a regional plan being developed as a result of the
Lake Monroe Land Capability Study now underway may be a limiting
factor to large scale seasonal development around the lake. Such
a plan may limit or constrain lakeside development for environ-
mental reasons, and possibly increase the cost of construction.
The U.S. Forest Service's reluctance to allow easements across
their land, without an overall land use plan for the lake should
be considered another important constraint. In addition, the
Indiana Department of Health discharge requirements will add
to the list of limiting factors.
Dr. Morton Marcus, Indiana University, Bureau of Research and Planning,
Graduate School of Business.
Inland Steel Project, for example.
Beam, Longest and Neff, Survey of Lake Monroe Developers.
3-1-19
-------
Lacking areawide data, this Consultant investigated some national and
regional literature on the second home market which isolated various
usage and ownership characteristics. Several reports indicate that
the second home market consists primarily of affluent metropolitan
residents (two-thirds of all owners nationally), arid most of these
homes were located within a 100 mile radius of their year round
residence. ^>18 The Indianapolis and Terre Haute SMSA's would,
therefore, make up the primary market areas for Lake Monroe seasonal
housing, being the most accessible to Lake Monroe, within a one and
one-half hour commuting time. However, a 100 mile radius from Lake
Monroe includes all of Indiana's Standard Metropolitan Areas except
for the Gary-Hammond-East Chicago, South Bend and Fort Wayne. In
fact, even the Cincinnati and Louisville SMSA's falls within this
radius.
Nationally, the second home boom accelerated between 1950 and 1970,
directly correlated with the viability of the economy and rising
affluence of families in metropolitan areas. In that period,
one-half of all the total second homes units were constructed.
Nationally second home owners consist mainly of small families, one
or two persons, with one-third of all families having three to four
members. About one-fifth of all seasonal homeowners nationally are
over 65 years of age.
Second home usage will also vary with the local climates, and whether
the location is suitable for "four season" usage. Nationally, usage
will range from 90 to 180 days. In 1967 second homes were mainly used
almost exclusively by their owners with only ten percent of them
rented. ' In 1967 the average second homeowner reported a medium
income nationally of $9600 - well beyond the overall national medium.
Experiences in the Pocono Mountain Region of Pennsylvania, an
established four season vacation area serving the northeast
megalopolis, Indicates that less than one-fifth of all the seasonal
lots existing at the time of the survey were built upon, and that land
prices range from an average of $3,640 to $11,590 for lake-front
locations.1^ Ninety percent of all lots were without community
sewerage and fifty percent without public water. Electricity and
roads seemed i:o be the major common improvements available. Retirees
only comprised 10% of the buyers, and the median family income of
Pocono land buyers was $16,098.
Housing Report, Series 121, U.S. Bureau of Census and the U.S. Forest Service,
U.S. Government Printing Office, 1969.
18
Supply Characteristics of the vacation home in Pocono Mountain Region, Center
for Business Economics and Urban Studies, Lehigh University, Bethlehem,
Pennsylvania, update.
19
Housing Report, Series 121, U.S. Bureau of Census and the U.S. Forest Service,
U.S. Government Printing Office, 1969.
3-1-20
-------
Usually, the major attraction for seasonal and second homes is a body
of water, and Lake Monroe is the largest man-made lake in the state of
Indiana. Counterbalancing this attraction is the fact at Lake Monroe
access cannot be purchased but is owned by the Corps of Engineers,
which may discourage boating and swimming enthusiasts.
While the economy is a big factor in second home purchase, there are
some positive factors in the second home market. The November 1974
House and Home Magazine, a housing trade publication, attributed the
resort market's apparent survival of environmental pressures, gas
shortage (at that time), runaway inflation, etc., to the fact that
this market consists mainly of the affluent who have a greater
discretionary income either less affected by inflation; or afraid that
with inflation, their buying power will not be increased in the
future. Many are buying as an investment and thinking about
retirement. The projects that are in best shape are those that have
the best combination of design and planning and the most attractive
environment. The latter includes recreation attractions and
facilities and thoughtful unit design.
Other factors that might stimulate this market include an innovative
real estate concept called time-sharing, now emerging in Florida and
California. Under time-sharing, a buyer actually buys a time frame
for occupying the unit which is centrally managed for all buyers.
Another more conventional method to reduce the investment needed or
help defray owners costs is to sublease the second home. Buyers of
units at The Pointe can take this course of action, although some
developments prohibit subleasing.
1.4 SYSTEMS/COORDINATION AND COMPATIBILITY WITH PROJECTED LAND
USE PATTERNS
1.4.1 Summary
Within this subtask, attention has been given to comparing and
evaluating the relative differences between each plant site system
with respect as to how well they relate to locally desired long range
development goals, plans, and land use compatibility.
With respect to serving the near term urban area growth of the
Bloomington area, the Winston Thomas site appears to be the best of
all four choices; but from a long term viewpoint, the advantage falls
to the Dillman site which was presumably selected as an optimal
location to receive gravity flow from the two drainage districts
flanking the urban area that are considered to be the long range
growth areas. The Ketcham Road site also appears favorably with
respect to the latter consideration. In fact, at first glance the
Ketcham site is even better located since it could also collect
gravity flows from the western drainage district. However, providing
sewer service to the Western district with the resulting large
3-1-21
-------
interceptor would conflict with the Bloomington Use Plan which
attempts to discourage intensive development on the environmentally
sensitive lands within a large portion of this district. The Long
Range Water and Sewer Plan also did not schedule the western
interceptor. This apparent locational advantage of the Ketcham site
is not really an asset in the time-frame under consideration.
The Ketcham and Salt Creek sites, particularly the Latter, would be
the more disruptive to the desired land use pattern for the urban
region systems. Both would foster leap-frogging and sprawling type of
development pattern on cheaper lands accessible to the interceptor
sewer line. One Bloomington Land Use Plan goal is to foster the
centralizing future development in higher density patterns to take
advantage of the existing community infrastructure. Leap-frogging
would tend to dissipate this effort by helping in dissipating the
central area g.rowth potential. This same leap-frogging and sprawling
development pa.ttern would have play havoc on those lightly populated
rural areas that are little prepared to cope with the associated
problems and costs.
In a total economic sense, uncontrolled development is the worst
choice for both the public and the private economic sectors and both
must pay for t.he extra costs that result. Granted, the control of
sprawl is a difficult matter, but strong utility policies could play a
most important: role in this effort. The land use goal of higher
density in more centralized locational patterns where the community
framework develops gradually outward from the existing network is also
a most economical pattern with respect to utility system development.
A side benefit: is that less pressure is put on less suitable vacant
lands by speculative interests.
The list of total economic costs is long, involving both operating and
capital expenses, and public and private interests. These are well
documented in "The Costs of Sprawl," prepared in 1974 for the Council
of Environmental Quality by the Real Estate Research Corporation.
This same publication also documents the overall environmental effects
as well as personal effects of sprawl in the community and the
residents.
In terms of plant site location and compatibility with proposed land
use and zoning patterns, the Salt Creek site is in obvious conflict
with the existing zoning ordinance. The site is zoned for residential
use as are its environs. Most of this site, which lies on a floodway,
is not suitable for residential usage without the added expenses of
flood protection and/or flood proofing. Existing document search did
not clarify whether the South Rogers site was zoned or not, but the
Land Use Plan indicated a residential usage pattern here. The other
sites and their immediate environs are for the most part zoned for
non-residenti.al usage which would not conflict with a plant being
located at those sites.
3-1-22
-------
With respect to existing development patterns, Winston Thomas and
South Rogers Site are the only two sites that have already been
encroached upon by residential development. The Rogers Site is in
fact occupied by a rather large mobile home park. It is difficult to
assess just how critical the land use conflicts are at the Winston
Thomas Site, since it was built and in operation long before the
adjoining residential development occurred.
One very serious shortcoming complicating the entire land use issue is
the lack of long range guidelines for development around Lake Monroe.
The county zoning pattern appears to have placed part of the lake on
hold, i.e., requiring extremely large residential lots in both Polk
and Salt Creek townships as well as some other areas; although
allowing unlimited residential development in Clear Creek and Perry
townships. This same map, except for a few commercial zones, bears
little relationship to the multitude of development proposals offered
the lake. The analysis made possible with the present time
constraint, unfortunately, has probably raised more questions than
were answered. More importantly, the lack of planning around the lake
puts the Consultant in the hazardous position of interfering in local
land use decisions. This could result from the acceptance of a
particular sewerage plan solution, which will by fiat establish a land
use plan whether the municipalities desire that particular plan or
not. The development of an overall totally coordinative land use and
sewerage plan for the lake should be a priority item in Monroe County.
1.4.2 Coordination with City Land Use Plans
The City of Bloomington is responsible for charting the future growth
and development of the urban area of Monroe County, while the county
exercises that responsibility in the other areas which includes Lake
Monroe.
The Bloomington Land Use Plan, circa 1970, maps land use patterns
desired within the city's jurisdictional area, along with highway and
utility plan improvements. The City Planning Commission's staff is of
the opinion that this plan is a conceptually correct and acceptable
portrayal of how the area might ultimately develop. The city's Land
Use Plan recognizes most of the recommendations of the Long Range
Water and Sewer Plan such as the southwest, southeast, northeast, and
northwest interceptors. The Long Range Water and Sewer Plan
recommendation for the western interceptor was largely ignored,
reflecting the land use goal to preserve rather than develop the
environmentally sensitive western area. The plan shows the proposed
treatment plant site location at Dillman Road.
The Bloomington Land Use Plan might be considered an optimum plan. It
does not provide specific guidance in terms of the desired phasing of
growth and development, such as when and where it would be most
desirable to encourage growth and development. The Bloomington City
20
August 1975 conversation with Tom Grossman, Executive Director, and his
assistant, Stuart Rueller.
3-1-23
-------
Planning Commission Staff was able, however, to supply some direction
in this regard. The answer to this question will depend largely upon
the staging of l;he construction of the various proposed interceptor
sewers.
The City Staff is of the opinion that physical growth constraints are
more limiting to the west and northwest of the city than in any other
directions. These mainly result from the unique Karst geological
formation with Lts associated problems such as the development of
sinkholes, solution cavities, and easy linkage to the groundwater
supply. Other Limiting factors in this sector, particularly for
residential development include large areas now quarried and large
industrial tracts located west of the city. In addition, State
Route 37 Bypass and the railroads have cut this sector into smaller
areas reducing residential appeal.
To the north of the city, the floodplain areas and rugged steep
hillsides, are the major physical limitations. In addition, much of
the remaining usable land is largely tied up in municipal watershed or
university ownership. The rugged wooded topography which adjoins Lake
Monroe extends westward toward the city to form a physical barrier to
eastward expansion of the city. The more physically suitable and
readily developable areas lie to the south and southeast of the city;
the historic direction for residential growth. This potential urban
growth area to the south extends down to Dillman Road which is fairly
close to the Lake Monroe District Service Area. Within this latter
service area, the nature of the terrain quickly changes to that of
rugged wooded hills.
1 . A . 3 Coordination with County Land Use Plans
Monroe County does not have a long range planning guideline document
available from which to make similar comparisons as in the city's
jurisdictional
1.4.4 Plant Site and Environs/Land Use Compatibility (See Plate 1)
1.4.4.1 Winston Thomas /Rogers Site
This plant site and immediate environs are in predominantly
non-residential land usage pattern, except for the south portion of
the Rogers Site which is now occupied by an 80 unit trailer park.
While Old State Route 37 to the east of the site has developed
commercially, residential development has occurred across the creek
and railroad right-of-way west of the Winston Thomas Plant, the plant
site construction preceded this residential development. The latest
addition to this residential fabric is a new middle school opening
21
Conversation with Mr. Lee Hardy, August 1975.
3-1-24
-------
this year at the corner of Rogers Road and Gordon Pike. Much of the
view toward the Winston Thomas site from the higher residential
development is partially screened on the western side of the plant by
the creek and railroad tree lines. Much of the existing plant site
lies within the floodplain of Clear Creek.
The Bloomington Land Use Plan for the Winston Thomas site reflects
its non-residential potential, while the Rogers Site and most peripheral
areas are considered suitable for low density residential development,
except east of Old State Route 37 where commercial development is
contemplated. The site is zoned for special conservation and light
manufacturing with a low density residential zone on the northern
periphery. The east side of Old State Route 37 is zoned for arterial
business. Either the city's zoning jurisdiction ends at Gordon Road,
or the Zoning Map is incomplete, because zoning district lines were
not indicated south of Gordon Road.
The special conservation district is designed to protect lands with
high water tables or flooding, and most of the treatment plant site
lies within this zone. The city has adopted floodway and fringe area
regulations for the 100 year flood contour. Permitted uses within
this floodway mainly include agricultural and recreational activities
having a non-structural character that would tend not to obstruct,
confine, or impede flood flows.
1.4.4.2 The Dillman Site
The Dillman Site is located between two railroad rights-of-way
paralleling Clear Creek. Most of the land is now vacant. State
Route 37 cuts the site into two pieces. The general land use character
of the environs is rolling pasture land and fallow bottomland with
homes located up on the hillside to the west of the site along Victor
Pike. This site has little potential other than for an open and
agricultural usage, and is not well suited for residential development.
The Dillman Site is located at the extreme southern edge of the
optimum plan area. An analogy has been made that the Dillman Site is
now located with respect to urban growth as was the Winston Thomas
Site some years back. This observation ignores the fact that the
area available for expansion increase is directly proportional to the
square of the radius as development radiates outward. Furthermore,
it is unlikely at the present rate of growth that the Dillman Site
would be surrounded by residential development, even if the zoning
allowed residential development.
Both the Bloomington Plan and the County Zoning Ordinance consider
this area to be more suitable for non-residential usage. The
Bloomington Plan shows most of the site in a special conservation
floodplain district with commercial development at the northeast
3- 1-25
-------
corner of Dillman Road and State Route 37. The Bloomington Land Use
Plan does not portray residential development below Clear Creek. The
Dillman site, as well as the Ketcham Road Site, is located within a
huge proposed industrial zoning district, some 5-1/2 square miles in
area. Except for a few level upland areas, most of this industrially
zoned land has little suitability for industrial usage, except
possibly for quarrying, etc., a predominant existing industrial
activity.
1.4.4.3 Ketcham Site
The Ketcham Site, like Dillman, consists of bottomland located between
the two railroad rights-of-way. The general environs of the Ketcham
Site is even more rural than at Dillman. Land use is typified by
occasional small farms, fallow lands, rural housing, and what appears
to be an abandoned quarry. A plant located here should not interfere
with any current land use activities.
1.4.4.4 Salt Creek Site:
The Salt Creek Site consists mainly of a wide bottom which is now
farmed at the confluence of the Clear and Salt Creeks. The main value
of this land is for agricultural purposes, however, the soils here
appeared to be poorly drained and tile fields have been installed to
dewater the site area for farming. The only possible land use in
compatibility might be with a proposed seasonal development that could
be located up the hill from the proposed site. The site area is now
zoned residentrLally.
3-1-26
-------
TABLE 1-1
FLOW COMPARISONS (MGD) YEAR 2000
Consultant Bloomington
(Gilbert Associates, Inc.) LMRWD 201 Plans Differences
Existing Flow* 11.2 11.2
Increase
Residential 1.9 2.5 +.6
Industrial 0.4 1.0 +.6
University - 0.2 +.2
Commercial 1.0 0.8 -.2
Subtotal Bloomington
Region 14.5 15.7 +1.2
Lake Monroe Regional
Waste District
Year Round >4
Seasonal .55
Subtotal Lake Monroe 1.00 3.0 +2.0
TOTAL 15.5 18.7 +3.2
SOURCE: Bloomington 201 Facility Plan, and independent analysis by Consultant
(Gilbert Associates, Inc.)
*Neither includes 1.9 MGD flow currently pumped north to Blucher Poole Plant.
Notes: (1) Assumes 0.30 MGD from residences (Ref. Table 1-15) and 0.15 MGD
from institutional and recreation areas (Ref. Table 1-16)
(2) Assumes flows only from "The Pointe" and "Land and Leisure"
(Ref. Table 1-17)
3-1-27
-------
TABLE 1-2
COMPARISON OF POPULATION PROJECTIONS (Not adjusted)
1970 198Q 1990 2000
Monroe County
City Planning Commission* 84,850* 90,500* 95,500* 102,500*
Bloomington 201 Plan 84,850 105,000 122,000 138,000
City Jurisdictional Area
City Planning Commission* 63,000 68,00.0 72,000 77,000
Remainder of County
City Planning Commission* 21,850 22,500. 24,000 25,500
*Average between high and low projections -
Sources: City Planning Commission; Rloomington 201 Plan.
3-1-28
-------
TABLE 1-3
COMPARISON OF CITY PLANNING COMMISSION AND 201 PLAN
POPULATION PROJECTIONS AND ALLOCATIONS
1970 1980 1990 2QQQ
Monroe County
- City Planning Commission, 90,849 96,500 102,000 108,500
Adjusted3
- Bloomington 201 Plan 85,000 105,000 123,000 138,000
City Jurisdictional Areab
- City Planning Commission 69,000 74,000 78,000 83,000
(Adjusted)
County Population North
of Major Drainage Divide
- City Planning Commission 22,570 23,530 24,000 24,600
- Bloomington 201 Plan6 20,000 28,500 37,000 44,000
County Population South0
of Major Drainage Divide
- City Planning Commission 68,290 72,970 78,000 83,900
- Bloomington 201 Plan6 63,000 74,000 83,000 90,000
Central Southwest and
Southeast Drainage Areas^
- Gilbert Associates, Inc. 47,410 52,540 58,500 65,440
- Adjusted3 53,410 58,540 64,500 71,440
Source: Unpublished Projections City Planning Dept., Gilbert Associates, Inc.
Calculations of Distributions for North and South Drainage Area.
aAdjusted upward by 6,000 students, assumed to be city residents and reside
in the southern drainage area.
Includes city plus two mile perimeter, some areas of which fall outside
natural drainage ways of southwest interceptors.
Q
Includes Lake Monroe and southern area of county.
Includes only population within these two natural drainage areas.
g
Does not include total county population.
3-1-29
-------
TABLE 1-4
Township
Benton
Bloomington
Richland
Van Buren
Perry
Salt Creek
Polk Creek
Clear Creek
Indian Creek
Total
SOUTH DRAINAGE AREA 1970 POPULATION ESTIMATES
RESTRUCTURED TO REFLECT
POPULATION CONTRIBUTORY TO INTERCEPTORS
1970
Bloomington
201 Plan
South
Drainage
990
23,410
2,300
6,600
24,550
793
290
2,470
876
Southwest
& Southeast
Interceptors*
-
23,410
*
1,135*
22,864**
-
-
-
.-
62,279
47,409
Change
-990
-2,300
-5,465
-1,686
-793
-290
-2,470
-876
-14,870
* Gilbert Associates calculations; also does not include population now
pumped into system.
** Excludes 800 persons of the population residing within the LMRWD
(Districts Service Area).
3-1-30
-------
TABLE 1-5
197Q CENSUS DISCREPANCIES
U.S. Census
Persons enrolled In college* 22,708
Indiana University
1970 enrollment 30,368
Net difference 7,660
U.S. Census
Population in group quarters* 12,434
Indiana University
Estimate of student housing 18,000
Net difference 5,566
Net difference population enrolled 7,660
Net difference population in group quarter 5,566
Estimate of student commutation** 2,594
* Residents of Monroe County
** Est. of students living outside of Monroe County
Source: U.S. Bureau of Census, Bloomington 201 Plan.
TABLE 1-6
Estimated Estimated
Enrollment Increase GPCD Flow (MGD)
Bloomington 201 Plan 4,500 45 0.20
University Est. 1,980 45 0.09
3-1-31
-------
TABLE 1-7
1970 MONROE COUNTY EMPLOYMENT & JOBS
Employment
Jobs
Manufacturing
Non-Manufacturing
Total
U.S. Census
Indiana Employment Service
c
From counties other than Monroe.
Count.y
Residents
6,435
26,572
33,007
Employed
in Monroe
5,600
23,120
28,720
Total
9,300
27,550
36,850
Held by-
Commuter0
3,700
4,400
8,100
Commuter
As %
of Total
40.0
16.0
22.0
3-1-32
-------
TABLE 1-8
PROJECTED TOTAL EMPLOYMENT*
ECONOMIC REGION NO. 10 (BLOOMINGTON)
BLOOMINGTON 201 PLAN
Projected Total Employment
Change 1975-1990 8,000
Monroe County Share (90%)a 7,200
Bloomington 201 Plan
Manufacturing Employment Est. 7,200
Employment Change 1975-2000 14,000
Monroe County Share (90%)a 12,600
Ratio Mfg/Non-Mfg (25%)c 3,150
Percent in southern ,
drainage district (83.3%) 2,620
Increase in Manufacturing Flow
Bloomington 201 Plan (MGD)
(7,200 x 165 gpcd) - 1.18
Gilbert Associates
(2,620 x 165 gpcd) - 0.43
Based on Monroe County's share of 1960 to 1970 population growth, Bloomington
201 Plan
Straight line extrapolation to the year 2000
CIndiana Employment Security Office 1970
Estimated current ratio of industrial flow
Source: Richard L. Pfister, Indiana University School of Business; Gilbert
Associates Extrapolations & Flow Recalculations.
3-1-33
-------
TABLE 1-9
CURRENT MUNICIPAL POPULATION TRENDS
LAKE MONROE REGIONAL WASTE DISTRICT
1960 - 1970 - 1973 (EST)
Municipality
Clear Creek Township
Perry Township
Polk Township
Salt Creek Township
1960
2
6
,250
,461a
572
837
1960-1970
Change
Net %
-224
2,071
-278
- 39
-10
32
-48
- 4
.0
.1
.6
.7
1970
2,474
8,532
294
798
1970-1973
Change
Net %
100 4
b 5
15 5
37 4
.0
.3C
.1
.6
1973
2,574
b
309
835
10,120
978
9.6 12,098
Total excludes city of Bloomington and Broadview (U).
Not comparable with 1960 and 1970 figures.
Includes the City of Bloomington and Broadview (U).
SOURCE: U.S. Bureau of Census
TABLE 1-10
HOUSEHOLD CHARACTERISTICS 1970
LAKE MONROE REGIONAL WASTE DISTRICT
SELECTED MONROE DISTRICT MUNICIPALITIES
Population
per Household
Clear Creek Township
Perry Township *
Polk Township
Salt Creek Township
3.36
2.73
3.09
3.28
Households
736
8,772
95
234
* Includes City of Bloomington and Broadview (U).
SOURCE: U.S. Census
3-1-34
-------
TABLE 1-11
ESTIMATE 1970 POPULATION
LAKE MONROE AREA
LMRWD
Townships
Clear Creek
Perry
Polk
Salt Creek
Total
Units
300
75
50
66
491
Pop.
l,008a
205
155
216
1,584
DSA
Units
213
446
-
_
659
Pop.
716
1,218C
*!"
1,934
TOTAL
Units Pop.
513
521
50
66
1,150
1,724
1,423
155
216
3,518
% Total
Municipal
Population
70
17b
50
27
29
Includes 440 persons residing in Harrodsburg area.
Percent of Township excluding city of Bloomington and Broadview.
p
Includes about 328 persons living within gravity flow district of Dillman.
SOURCE: Gilbert Associates, Inc. - Quad Sheet (1965-1966) housing count
updated to 1970 by 104.8 percent, except for Clear Creek where
this method would have exceeded the 1970 housing count.
3-1-35
-------
TABLE 1-12
EXISTING 1970 INSTITUTIONAL AND
RECREATIONAL FLOW CAPACITIES
Perry Township
Sanders School
Clear Creek Township
Water Plant
Fairfax State Park*
U.S.C.E.**
Sraithville School
Harrodsburg School
MGD
.01
Population
Equivalent
Subtotal
.11
770
160
930
Salt Creek Township
Residences
Paynetown State Park
Subtotal
Polk Creek Township***
Residences
Hardin Ridge U.S.F.S.
Boy Scout Camp
Subtotal
TOTAL
.01
.04
.01
.06
.21
772
* Includes Four Winds Marina
** Discharges to Salt Creek
*** East Side of Lake Monroe
SOURCE: LMRWD 201 Plan.
3-1-36
-------
Clear Creek Twp,
Units
Population
Flow (MGD)
Perry Twp.
Units
Population
Flow (MGD)
Total
Units
Population
Flow
TABLE 1-13
ESTIMATE OF EXISTING FLOWS
YEAR-ROUND RESIDENCES
LMRWD Harrodsburg
DSA
Outside And
Other Locations
Total
60
202
.02
mm
-
60
202
.02
131
440
.04
_
-
_
131
440
.04
136a
457
.05
80b
218
.02
216
675
.07
173
581
.06
193C
527
.05
366
1,108
.11
500
1,680
.17
273
745
.07
773
2,425
.24
Smithville
Sanders
°Handy plus area that drains toward Dillman or Ketcham Sites.
SOURCE: Gilbert Associates, Inc., estimate only includes significant
population concentrations. Polk and Salt Creek Townships were
considered too sparsely settled to include.
Note: 1. LMRWD figures on this table do not include Harrodsburg.
2. DSA = District's Service Area (see Figure 1-1)
3-1-37
-------
TABLE 1-14
PROJECTED YEAR-ROUND POPULATION
LAKE MONROE AREA- YEAR 2000
Towns hij3
Clear Creek
Perry
Polk
Salt Creek
Total
SOURCE:
LMRWD
A
1176
240
180
252
B
1460
298
224
312
DSA
A
836
1420
-
*»
B
1038
2060
-
Total
A
2012
1660
180
252
B
2498
2358
224
312
1848
2294
2256
3098
4104
5392
Gilbert Associates, Inc.
A. Assumes city planning commission growth rate of 16.'
B. Assumes current 1970-73 trend rate of 45.0%,
TABLE 1-15
PROJECTED FLOWS - YEAR 2000
YEAR-ROUND RESIDENCES
Clear Creek
Population
Flow (MGD)
Perry Township
Population
Flow (MGD)
Total
Population
Flow (MGD)
LMRWD
A B
750
.08
-
750
.08
930
.09
-
930
.09
DSA
A
532
.05
254
.02
786
.07
B
662
.07
316
.03
978
.10
Other
A
678
.07
608
.06
1286
.13
B
842
.08
764
.08
1606
.16
Total
A
1960
.20
862
.08
2822
.28
B
2434
.24
1080
.11
3514
.35
Including Harrodsburg.,
SOURCE: Gilbert Associates, Inc.
A. Assumes city planning commission growth rate of 16.7%.
B. Assumes current 1970-73 trend rate of 45.0%.
3-1-38
-------
TABLE 1-16
INSTITUTIONAL AND RECREATIONS
PROJECTED FLOWS
Perry
Sanders - School
Clear Creek
Smithville School
Harrodsburg School
Filter Plant
Fairfax State Park
U.S.C.E.
Salt Creek
Residences
Paynetown State Park
Polk Creek
Residences
Hardin Ridge U.S.F.S.
Boy Scout Camp
Subtotal
Subtotal
Subtotal
TOTAL
1998 Flows
MGD
.01
.02
.01
,02
.09
.01
.15
.02
.09
Net Increase
1970 - 1998
.11
.01
.04
.01
.06
.33
.04
.04
.04
.04
.08
SOURCE: LMRWD 201 Plan, Beam, Longest and Neff.
3-1-39
-------
TABLE 1-17
PROPOSED SEASONAL/SECOND
HOME FLOWS 1998
CMAJOR DEVELOPMENTS ONLY)
Est. of
Residential Est. of
Units Population
North Side of Lake
Clear Creek
The Pointe (under construction)
*Land and Leisure
Subtotal
Salt Creek
Inland Steel 1,
*Graves, Moore, etc.
Holiday Hills
Subtotal
TOTAL NORTH SIDE
South Side of Lake
Polk
Tan Tara
Aliens Creek
Chapel Hill
Subtotal
Clear Creek
*Brendon Shores
Seven Flags
Subtotal
TOTAL SOUTH SIDE
1,440
560
2,000
300
740
205
2,245
4,245
625
480
100
1,005
450
700
1,150
2,155
2,880
1,020
3,900
2,600
1,650
450
4,700
8,600
1,250
960
200
2,410
900
1.400
2,300
4,710
Est.
Flows
MGD
.50
.05
.55
.26
.15
.08
.49
1.04
.13
.10
.02
.25
.09
.14
.23
.48
GRAND TOTAL 6,400 13,310 1.52
3 Estimated by the Consultant at 100 GPCD, and 50 GPCP for campsites.
Project now inactive.
* Did not reply to LMRWD consultants query as to potential startup dates.
SOURCE: LMRWD 201 Plan, Gilbert Associates Estimate of Units and Population.
3- 1-40
-------
£
EH
M
rJ
rH
CO
M
H
W
r/
CJ ri
rH C
(M C
fcj <
5 p
a
o
5
en
Jsj
SM
H
H £-*
»*
O O
1
u
s
iH
rH
01
o
X
u
o
4J
8
cS
41 n
o -a
X 01
W 41
1
C
ri
M
O
M
O MH
|
o
N
3
1-
i COORDINATION
w
en
?
J rJ
«
&
CJ U
,5 <
M CT
H S
CO
M p
X 2
W 5
rJ
s
O 41
B< rH
A
O -H
4>J 4-t
cd
^ &
13 §
[x U
41
CO
o .«
rH B
°5 .
PROJECTED
DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS
Good: Major weakness too
in fit gravity configurat
seriously encroached upon
GOALS
Excellent:
Encourages
centralization
CO
R
Q
JS
H
B
O
4J
W
H
M
CO
CO
B
iH
3
0
4>
rH
rH
41
O
X
w
o
o
J
\4^ >M
0 E
as
Good to Excellent: At ed
Projected development pat
good gravity system fit.
Excellent:
Encourages
centralization
c*
I
3
rH
H
Q
^j
CD
O
*»
41
W
C CO
41
rH rH
rH r f
1) td
U
U 0
41
tl
Good: Optional for full
gravity fit, but may indui
development in Western
ecologically sensitive
district
Good to Fair:
Would encourage
leapfrogging,
decentralizatior
to some degree.
§
C
U
x<
M
C
at
rH
H
ai
g
M
HJ
O
4J
*O
o
o
u
r?
H
?:...
Poor: With respect to sei
Bloomington Jurisdictiona]
Area
Poor: Would
encourage
decentralization
more than other
alternatives
8
41
rl
0
4J
rH
(d
CO
CO
H 4J
n
td oi
01 r.
rl O
Monroe Area, although the a
density, residential, and f
ommercial districts.
u
01 »
M 8 -0
plan for the La
on industrial, 1
ith some isolate
01 iH 9
CO 4J
s *O
2 §
U rH
U-)
n floodways except the Salt
latter property Is In the
H 41
J3 JG
4J +J
i-*
>-s
8«
4-1 0)
Cd O
gg
rH Si
. 3°
S!JS
H 4J
4J rH
cd <;
V4 1
01 1
4J j
i4
Cd 4J
C
i-t n)
i-H f '
< CM
|
U
z
«
3-1-41
-------
FIGURE - 1-1
A COMPARISON OF
MONROE COUNTY POPULATION PROJECTIONS
CO
o
CO
=
o
CL.
o
130 U
120 h
NO h
100 h
90 h
80 I-
70
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
1, STRAIGHT LINE EXTRAPOLATED BY GAI FROM 1990 TO 2000
2, MEAN AVERAGE POPULATION ADJUSTED UPWARD BY 6000 PERSONS FOR 1980, 1990 AND 2000
TO REFLECT 1970 UNDERREPORTING
3-1-42
-------
FIGURE - 1-2
DRAINAGE JURISDICTION BOUNDARIES
l WASHINGTON
-4
! IBLOQWNGTON
USALT\CREEK
INDIAN CREEK { CLEAf CREEK
1
I
LEGEND
A. COUNTY BOUNDARY
B. NORTH-SOUTH DRAINAGE DIVIDE
C. CITY PLANNING JURISDICTION AREAS
D. LAKE MONROE REGIONAL WASTE DISTRICT
E. DI STB I CIS SERVICE AREA
F. CENTRAL DRAINAGE DISTRICT
G. SOUTHEAST DRAINAGE DISTRICT
H. SOUTHWEST DRAINAGE DISTRICT
I. WESTERN DRAINAGE DISTRICT
+ ALTERNATE TREATMENT SITE LOCATIONS
3-1-43
-------
FIGURE 1-3
FLOW COMPARISONS - YEAR 2000
(MGD)
BLOOMINGTON
201 PLAN
INDEPENDENT
ANALYSIS
18.7
15.7
14.9
14.7
13.7
11.2
11.2
LEGEND
LAKE MONORE
COMMERCIAL
U777A UNIVERSITY
INDUSTRIAL
RESIDENTIAL
|| EXISTING FLOW
3-1-44
-------
TASK 2
EVALUATION OF PURE OXYGEN PROCESS
The use of oxygen rather than air in the activated sludge process is an
advancement that often offers higher quality treatment from existing plants and
construction of new facilities at reduced cost. The pure oxygen process
requires a covered oxygenation tank and high purity oxygen (90-100 percent
volume). Because of higher DO levels, the biological solids settle faster
resulting in reduced detention times. There is less wasted activated sludge and
a higher BOD load at comparable effluent quality. A comparison of the unit
processes for pure oxygen and conventional activated sludge is given in Figure
2-1.
A cost comparison wa^ made utilizing the pure oxygen process and the complete
mix activated sludge process utilizing air. The analysis included comparing
both processes using Clear Creek and Salt Creek effluent standards.
According to Indiana State regulations, the following effluent standards will be
required by 1977 for discharges to Salt Creek and Clear Creek.
BOD (Biochemical Oxygen
Demand)
Suspended Solids
Phosphorus
Ammonia Nitrogen
Salt Creek
10 mg/1 or 95%
removal
10 mg/1 or 95%
removal
1 mg/1 or 80%
removal
Clear Creek
5 mg/1 or 97.5%
removal
5 mg/1 or 97.5%
removal
1 mg/1 or 80%
removal
6.5 mg/1 in summer 1.5 mg/1 summer
no limitation in 3.0 mg/1 winter
winter
The significant difference between a Salt Creek plant site and Clear Creek plant
site is the nitrogen effluent standards. In order to obtain a NH-j-N (ammonia
nitrogen level) of 1.5 mg/1, a two stage aeration process is recommended. A
single stage nitrification process would be suitable to meet Salt Creek effluent
requirements.
The single stage nitrification process achieves biological oxidation of
carbonaceous and nitrogenous compounds in one aerated unit with a corresponding
clarifier unit. The system is based on a single sludge culture of mixed
organisms.
3-2-1
-------
The two stage system consists of two essentially identical sets of activated
sludge units with two sets of sedimentation units. Each activated sludge unit
has its own separate sludge system. The first system oxidizes the carbonaceous
matter (conventional activated sludge), the second oxidizes nitrogenous compounds
(nitrification).
The cost analysis was based on the aeration and clarifier treatment units alone
at a flow of 15 MGD. It was assumed that the pure oxygen process would produce
a sludge of sufficient density that would eliminate the need for a thickener.
It was assumed the air process would require a thickener. Operation and
maintenance costs in the analysis only concerned the aeration units, clarifiers
and thickeners.
Sizing of the pure oxygen process components (aeration, clarifier and power
requirements) was done in1consultation with manufacturers of equipment for the
process. Significant design parameters concerning the pure oxygen are as
follows:
Single Stage Two Stage
(Salt Creek) (Clear Creek)
Detention Time (hrs.) 3 3(1.5 hours each)
MLSS (mg/1) 4,500 4,500
Recycle Flow (% of Q) 30 30
Clarifier Dia. (ft.) 115 115
Brake Power 594 626
The significant design parameters concerning the air process are as follows:
Single Stage Two Stage
(Salt Creek) (Clear Creek)
Detention Time (hrs.) 6 8 (4 hrs. each)
MLSS (mg/1) 3,000 3,000
Recycle Flow (% of Q) 43 43
Clarifier Diameter (ft.) 100 100
Brake Horsepower 516 543
The above data indicates that it was assumed that aeration volumes did not vary
as a result of the site being located on either Salt or Clear Creek, however,
detention times significantly varied between the air (8 hours) and pure oxygen
(3 hours). The power required to run the aeration systems at ultimate load
3-2-2
-------
(15 MGD during the summer) did not vary significantly between plant sites or
process. It should be noted that the pure oxygen process did require more power
than the air process. There was a significant difference in equipment costs
between the air and oxygen process. The equipment required for an air process
was quoted at $390,000 while the pure oxygen equipment was quoted at $1,900,000.
Clarifier size was a process variable. Clarifiers were designed on a basis of
700 GPD/sq. ft. overflow rate and a solids loading of 25 Ibs/sq. ft. The air
process required clarifiers to be sized at 100 ft. in diameter. However, the
pure oxygen process required clarifiers to be designed with a diameter of 115
feet. The increased diameter was required because of the higher solids
concentration being carried in the pure oxygen process and therefore an
increased solids loading to the clarifier over the air process.
As stated previously, the two stage process requires a second set of clarifiers
because of the two separate sludge systems, whereas the single stage process
only requires one set of clarifiers.
Power costs for pumping return activated sludge will favor the pure oxygen
process as the percent return sludge is less with the pure oxygen process. The
two stage process will require additional pumping costs in the form of both
capital and operating as there are two sludge systems.
Construction costs for the aerations tank and equipment as well as the clarifier
tank and equipment were calculated by obtaining manufacturers' quotes for the
equipment and performing takeoffs for the concrete, excavation, etc., for the
aeration and clarifier tanks. Power costs were determined by using 2C/KWH.
Material and supply costs were determined by using "Estimating Costs and
Manpower Requirements for Conventional Wastewater Treatment Facilities."
Construction, operation and maintenance costs for the thickener were determined
from this source also.
Table 2-1 shows construction, project, operating and salvage costs. These costs
have been put in terms of present worth. It is evident from the analysis that
the complete mix activated sludge process utilizing air is more economical than
the pure oxygen process for either the single stage or two stage system. A
summary of the table follows:
Alternative Present Worth
Single Stage - Air 3,498,000
Single Stage - Oxygen 5,510,000
Two Stage - Air 6,060,000
Two Stage - Oxygen 7,925,000
3-2-3
-------
C C -
ceo
g g
i I OJ
1.1 I,'
i c _c|
C
C
C
£ c
c
-------
FIGURE 2-1
SYSTEM DIFFERENCES
PURE OXYGEN VS. CONVENTIONAL ACTIVATED SLUDGE
Pure Oxygen Activated Sludge
Salt Creek
OXYGENATION
i
CLARIFIER
RETURN SLUDGE
Clear Creek
OXYGENATION
CLARIFIER
I RETURN SLUDGE
OXYGENATION
CLARIFIER
1 RETURN SLUDGE
Conventional Activated Sludge
Salt Creek
Clear Creek
AERATION
i
CLARIFIER
RETURN SLUDGE
THICKENER
f
j RETURN SLUDGE
1 1
- PTTTTTPTJ *3T TTHPIT
T
THICKENER
3-2 -
-------
-------
TASK 3
RENOVATION AND EXPANSION OF WINSTON THOMAS SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
The present plant is a secondary treatment plant with grit removal facilities,
primary clarification, biofiltration, secondary clarifiers, chlorination and an
oxidation pond. Sludge handling is accomplished by anaerobic digestion and
drying beds.
Portions of the plant date back to 1934, with improvements and expanded
facilities added in 1955 and 1969. The present plant has primary units capable
of handling 7 MGD average daily flow and the secondary units have a capability
of handling a 5 MGD average daily flow. The plant is currently processing
average daily flow of 11.2 MGD.
A tour of the Winston Thomas plant was completed as part of the scope of work
for this project. The inspection of the plant revealed a facility showing signs
of its age; the units are 20 and 40 years old. The primary clarifier drive,
sludge collector equipment and gear bores are badly worn. The concrete in the
final clarifiers is structurally damaged. The biofiltration design is an
outdated fixed nozzle design. The biofiltration units require considerable
maintenance for cleaning and repairing nozzles since the nozzles are specially
manufactured and must be constructed individually at the plant. There are also
cracks in the concrete walls of the digester which have allowed sludge leakage.
It is the opinion of the Consultant that use of the existing Winston Thomas
plant would be very inconvenient considering process, operating and maintenance
problems. The treatment process required to meet the new effluent standards
would not normally incorporate the biofiltration process. If the new plant were
to use the biofiltration process and activated sludge process to meet the new
effluent standards, it would require plant personnel to operate and maintain two
entirely different processes. The previously mentioned differences concerning
the equipment and structures of the existing treatment facilities would require
considerable maintenance, repair and replacement dollars.
It is also the Consultant's opinion that the phased construction of new
facilities along with the required demolition and renovation of existing
facilities would require that the effluent standards (30 mg/1 BOD5 and 30 mg/1
suspended solids) could not be met at all times.
Therefore, it is not recommended that the existing facilities be considered as
a viable alternative for providing the required treatment plant facilities.
However, there is sufficient land available for a 15 MGD plant on the
Winston Thomas plant site, west of the existing facilities. If the plant were
placed in the area, continuous operating of the existing facilities could be
practiced while the new plant was constructed without any interruption or
degradation of effluent quality. When the new plant was completed, flow to the
old plant would simply be shut off and diverted to the new plant.
3-3-1
-------
TASK 4
PLANT CAPACITIES
The population projections developed in Task 1 indicate that design capacities
for the proposed plants should be somewhat less than those indicated in the
201 Facilities Plan.
Examination of present population densities and projected development patterns
within the 20 year planning period indicates that a regional plant to serve both
the Bloomington area and the Lake Monroe area is not feasible at this time.
Instead, based on present population projections, it appears to be more realistic
to build a separate plant to serve the Bloomington south drainage area and serve
the Lake Monroe area with one or more smaller plants.
Based on the population projections, a plant capacity of 15 MGD will be required
to serve the south Bloomington service area through 1995. This capacity would
apply to the Winston Thomas, South Rogers Street, Dillman Road, and Ketcham Road
sites. A total flow of 1 MGD is projected for the Lake Monroe Area.
The 15 MGD figure developed for the south Bloomington drainage area assumes the
continuation of pumping of 1.9 MGD at the central lift station of sewage from
the south drainage area to the north plant. The north plant is presently
greatly underutilized and is expected to remain so for the foreseeable future.
The low operation and maintenance costs for the pumping and force main indicate
that this practice should be continued.
In evaluating the effects of inaccurate flow metering at the Winston Thomas
plant, it appears that 11.2 MGD represents the present average daily flow to the
plant.
The possibility of phased construction was considered for the new Bloomington
south plant, but was rejected because of the relatively slow growth rate
now projected for the Bloomington area. If the projected growth were slow
for the first ten years of the design life and rapid for the last ten, staging
of construction (building a new plant now, with an expansion later on) would be
appropriate.
3-4-1
-------
TASK 5
CLEAR CREEK TREATMENT PLANT TRADEOFFS EVALUATION
5.1 INTRODUCTION
In addition to the issue of regionalization (of the Bloomington and
Lake Monroe areas), a number of other factors must be considered in
the determination of the final treatment plant site location.
For the City of Bloomington, a treatment plant site on Salt Creek
means the construction of a long outfall sewer (13.4 miles); but since
effluent requirements are less stringent on Salt Creek, a less
expensive plant can be built than would be required on Clear Creek.
It is assumed, in this analysis, that the same treatment process train
would be used for any of the alternative sites on Clear Creek.
5.2 TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS
The Clear Creek and Salt Creek effluent standards are as follows:
Clear Creek Salt Creek
BOD5 (mg/1) 5 10
Suspended Solids (mg/1) 5 10
Phosphorus (mg/1) ' 1 1
Nitrogen (mg/1)
Summer 1.5 7.9
Winter 3.0 N/A
The significant difference between the Salt Creek and Clear Creek
effluent standards is in the nitrogen standard. Nitrogen conversion
is not required during the winter months, defined as 5 months of the
year, if discharge is to Salt Creek. Nitrogen conversion is required
year round if discharge is to Clear Creek. The degree of nitrogen
conversion also varies depending on the point of discharge. During
the summer months, an ammonia nitrogen discharge level of 1.5 mg/1 is
required at Clear Creek, while a level of 7.9 mg/1 is mandated
for Salt Creek. (Based on a 15 MGD flow )
Because the two stage nitrification system is capable of essentially
complete nitrification at all times, and because incomplete
nitrification is characteristic of winter performance of single stage
systems, the two stage system was chosen for Clear Creek sites and the
single stage system for the Salt Creek site.
3-5-1
-------
The single stage nitrification process achieves biological oxidation
of carbonaceous and nitrogenous compounds in one aerated unit with a
corresponding clarifier unit. The system is based on a single sludge
culture of mixed organisms. The two stage system consists of two
essentially identical sets of activated sludge units with two sets of
sedimentation units. Each activated sludge unit has its own separate
sludge system. The first system oxidizes the carbonaceous matter
(conventional activated sludge); the second oxidizes nitrogenous
compounds (nitrification).
Concerning costs, a two stage system has both higher capital and
operating cost. As discussed previously, the two stage system
requires two sets of clarifiers with corresponding additional capital
and operating costs. Also, because a two stage system has two
separate sludge systems, return sludge pumping costs are twice those
of a single sludge system. Additional construction costs are
necessary for additional piping, pumps and pump structures. Because
there are more facilities to operate in a two stage system as opposed
to a single stage system, more manpower will be required to operate a
two stage system. Power costs for the single stage system are less
than the two stage system by the nature of the effluent requirements,
since no ammonia conversion is required during nine months of the
year.
Concerning process reliability, a two stage system affords protection
of nitrifying organisms from sludge loads of toxic materials, high
organic loads and peak flows. It is important to realize that the
nitrifying organisms are unique and that the mixed liquor suspended
solids must not be allowed to escape from the system. A two stage
system by its very nature affords better protection of the organisms
and can provide a better flexibility for growing the organisms as well
as phosphorus removal. Both systems can readily be followed by
clarification units.
In summary, it is the Consultant's opinion that a. single stage
nitrification is appropriate for Salt Creek effluent standards and a
two stage system is appropriate for Clear Creek effluent limitation.
The following is a tabular presentation of the trade offs between the
two systems.
Clear Creek Salt Creek
(Two Stage) (Single Stage)
Construction Co&t $3,320,000 $1,975,000
0 & M @ 15 MGD $ 205,000 $ 138,000
Present Worth $6,060,000 $3,498,000
Man power (hourss) (annual) 7,500 5,500
3-5-2
-------
5.3 OTHER FACTORS
Table 5-1 lists a number of additional factors considered in the
comparison of the Salt Creek and Clear Creek plant sites. In terms of
the cost required to meet effluent requirements, the Salt Creek site
has a definite advantage. However, in terms of the quality of the
discharge, a Clear Creek plant would produce a superior effluent
because of the higher degree of treatment required. Furthermore, the
two stage process which would be utilized at the Clear Creek site
would be more reliable in terms of maintaining a consistently high
effluent quality than the single stage process which would be employed
at the Salt Creek site.
A water supply intake for the City of Bedford, Indiana is located on
Salt Creek approximately 13 miles downstream from the confluence of
Clear Creek and Salt Creek. If the Bloomington south treatment plant
were located at any of the Clear Creek sites, the added travel
distance in Clear Creek would provide more instream aeration of the
discharge before it reached the Bedford intake, than if the plant were
on Salt Creek. However, in terms of immediate dilution in the
receiving stream, the Salt Creek site would be favored because of the
higher flow in Salt Creek.
The high cost of the long outfall sewer necessary for the Salt Creek
site, plus the probability of adverse environmental effects resulting
from the construction of the outfall definitely favor a Clear Creek
site. However, more land is available at Salt Creek for plant
construction and future expansion. In addition, large areas of bottom
land suitable for sludge disposal are located closer to Salt Creek
than the Clear Creek site.
In terms of plant operating costs and energy costs, the Salt Creek
site is favored because it would be a single stage process as opposed
to a two stage process at any of the Clear Creek sites.
A final point favoring the construction of the plant at a Clear Creek
site is the fact that by not discharging the effluent to Clear Creek,
the flow in the creek could at times be reduced to zero.
3-3-3
-------
TABLE 5-1
COMPARISON OF SALT CREEK AND CLEAR CREEK SITES
Favor
Clear Creek
Factor Sites;
1. Effluent requirement?! (cost to attain)
2. Effluent requirements (water quality) X
3. Distance from discharge to Bedford water
supply intake X
4. Cost for outfall sewer from Bloomington X
5. Environmental effects of outfall sewer X
6. Land area available
7. Plant operating costs
8. Effluent dilution in receiving stream
9. Effect on low flow in Clear Creek X
10. Reliability of process to maintain
effluent quality X
11. Energy requirements
12. Proximity to land suitable for sludge
disposal
Favor
Salt Creek
Site
X
X
X
X
3-5-4
-------
TASK 6
PRESENT WORTH ANALYSIS
6.1 PLANT SITE AND INTERCEPTOR ALTERNATIVES
Alternative treatment plant site locations are shown on Plate 1. All
locations have sufficient land area available to permit future
expansion of the presently proposed 15 MGD plant to 30 MGD.
All pipe sizes and lengths for interceptors are the same as shown in
the 1974 201 Facilities Plan and the 1975 amendment. Sizes and
lengths of various interceptor sections are shown in the calculations
in the Appendix F of this report.
6.1.1 Alternative 1
The treatment site for this alternative would be located at the
confluence of Clear Creek and Salt Creek. The site offers 320 acres
of land. Approximately 60 acres of this would be sufficient for the
plant's needs. Flood protection and 1000 feet of stream relocation
are necessary at the Salt Creek site. The present worth analysis does
include a separate item for additional land (320 - 60 = 260 acres)
available at Salt Creek.
Sewage would be transported by an interceptor that would flow entirely
by gravity from the existing Winston Thomas plant site along Clear
Creek to the Salt Creek plant site. The total length of pipe would
be 71,000 feet. The proposed routing would also require 25 concrete-
encased stream crossings and 15 railroad borings. A minimal expenditure
in maintenance would be necessary for the interceptor.
6.1.2 Alternative 2
This scheme would also use the Salt Creek treatment plant site
discussed under Alternative 1. The interceptor would flow by gravity
from the Winston Thomas plant site along Clear Creek to a pump station
near Jackson Creek. A force main would carry sewage along the Monon
Railroad to Smithville where it would discharge into a gravity sewer.
This sewer could be constructed in the abandoned railroad right-of-way,
then flow along Little Clear Creek to the Salt Creek site. The total
length of the interceptor would be 57,500 feet. A significant reduction
in stream and railroad crossings could be realized by using this
alternative rather than Alternative 1. However, the savings would be
partially offset by the cost of the pump station. The pump station
would have a peak capacity of 40 MGD and a total dynamic head (TDK)
of 140 feet.
6.1.3 Alternative 3
This alternative would utilize a treatment plant located on Clear
Creek at its intersection with Ketcham Road. The Ketcham Road site
offers approximately 60 acres of land for a plant site. Clear Creek
3-6-1
-------
makes a circuitous path through the existing site and it is presently
subject to flooding. Therefore, 2,500 feet of stream relocation would
be required with dikes for flood protection.
The transport system would be a gravity interceptor from the Winston
Thomas plant site along Clear Creek to the Ketcham Road site. The
total length of this interceptor would be 23,400 feet.
6.1.4 Alternative 4
This alternative is similar to Alternative 3. The treatment plant
would be located on Clear Creek immediately upstream from its
intersection with Dillman Road. The Dillman Road, site has available
60 acres of land. Clear Creek meanders through the site. In order
to construct a treatment plant at the site, 2,000 feet of stream
would have to be relocated along with flood protection.
The interceptor would follow the same route along Clear Creek as
Alternative 3, but would terminate at the Dillman Road site. Alternative 4
would require 12:,600 feet of interceptor sewer pipe, the least of any
of the alternatives considered.
6.1.5 Alternative 5
Under this alternative, sewage would be pumped from the southwest and
southeast interceptors upstream along Clear Creek to the South Rogers
Street Site. Two pump stations would be required, one to pump the
flow from the southwest interceptor and the other to pump the flow
from the southeast interceptor. The southwest pump station was sized
on an average daily flow of 3.5 MGD and a TDH of 52 feet. The
southeast pump station was sized on an average daily flow of 6.5 MGD
and a TDH of 71 feet. The total length of the force main would be
15,000 feet.
The South Rogers Street Site presents a unique problem. There is an
existing mobile home development on the site which would have to be
relocated. An assumed cost of $500,000 has been included in site
development costs for the South Rogers Street Site to purchase the
mobile home development and relocate the existing homes. The South
Rogers Street Site is comprised of approximately 40 acres which will
require approximately 4,500 feet of stream relocation and flood
protection.
A separate evaluation of transmission of sewage to the Winston Thomas
plant was not undertaken. However, its proximity to the South Rogers
Street Site suggests that the cost for transporting sewage to either
of them would be approximately equal.
Sufficient land is available to the west of the existing Winston
Thomas treatment facilities to provide for a complete 15 or 16 MGD
plant. In order to accomplish this, a stream relocation of approximately
3,200 feet would be necessary. Flood protection would also be required.
It is assumed that the land is owned by the City of Bloomington.
3-6-2
-------
A basic uncertainty in the costing of this alternative is the timing
of construction of the southeast and southwest interceptors. Without
these interceptors, the force main and pumping stations would not be
needed to transport sewage upstream along Clear Creek to the plant
site. In the basic analysis for this alternative, it has been assumed
that the southeast and southwest interceptors would be constructed in
1985 (year 10). The location of the proposed interceptors is shown on
Plate 2. The assumption of construction in 1985 is based upon this
consultant's best estimate of when population will grow to a
sufficient level in the southwest and southeast drainage areas to
warrant construction of the interceptors. However, because of the
degree of uncertainty in the timing of these interceptors, alternative
estimates have been made for Alternative 5. Alternative 5A assumes
that the southeast and southwest Interceptors will be built in 1990,
while Alternative 5B assumes that they will not be built until after
the year 2000.
6.2 EXPLANATION OF PRESENT WORTH ANALYSIS FOR INTERCEPTORS
A summary of -design criteria for the interceptor alternatives is found
in Table 6-2.
A number of assumptions were made in the compilation of the cost
table. Capital costs, obtained from unit price take-offs (see
Table 6-3) are converted to project costs by multiplying by a factor
of 1.3. This factor includes allowances for engineering and legal
fees, contingencies, right-of-way costs, etc.
Operation and maintenance costs for the gravity systems are very
small. One or two man-days per month would be required to maintain
the lines. The O&M gradient for these systems is assumed to be zero
because the labor costs would not increase with the capacity of the
system. Operation and maintenance of Alternatives 2 and 5 is more
costly because of the electrical, labor, and material and supply costs
required to operate the pump stations.
The service life of the facilities is assumed to be 50 years.
Assuming the value of the facilities depreciates linearly with time,
at the end of the 20 year design period the salvage value will equal
30/50 of the original value.
6.3 EXPLANATION OF PRESENT WORTH ANALYSIS FOR SITE DEVELOPMENT
A present worth analysis for site development costs has been prepared
for each of the prospective sites. A summary of this analysis is
presented in Table 6-4. The items of concern in this analysis are
stream relocation and restoration, flood protection, dikes, and
available land. The costs of general site clearing, grading, etc.,
have not been included in this analysis as they would be common to all
sites. Land costs have been assumed to be $2,500 per acre at each
site.
3-6-3
-------
6.4 EVALUATION OF INTERCEPTOR ALTERNATIVES
The least costly alternative based on present worth analysis is
Alternative 5. The total present worth is $1,766,600. The low cost
of this alternative is due to a high salvage value at the end of the
design period. Because flow in the southwest and southeast
interceptors can presently be routed through the City of Bloomington
to the Winston Thomas Plant, the main interceptor need not be
constructed until 1985. Therefore, by 1995, only 10 years of the
50 year useful life of the sewer pipe will be exhausted.
Estimates for the capital costs of the pump stations indicated that a
3.5 MGD station should cost $600,000.* Experience with similar pump
stations has indicated that these figures are not adequate to cover
the cost. Consequently, the cost of the 3.5 MGD station was estimated
at $1,000,000 and the 6.5 MGD station at $1,400,000.
The second least costly alternative is Alternative 4. This ranking is
caused by Alternative 4 having the shortest interceptor length and no
pump stations.
Alternative 3 is third least costly. It is similar to Alternative 4
except that 10,000 additional feet of interceptor would have to be
installed to reach the Ketcham Road plant site.
Alternatives 1 and 2 both utilize the Salt Creek plant site. Because
of the much greater length of interceptor required to reach this site,
these alternatives are the most costly. Under Alternative 2,
assumptions similar to those in Alternative 5 had to be made regarding
capital costs of pump stations. Therefore, the graphic takeoff cost
of 1.3 million for a 15 MGD pump station was thought to be inadequate
and the estimated cost was adjusted to 2.5 million for the 15 MGD pump
station.
A summary of the present worth costs is given in Table 6.1.
"Estimating Costs & Manpower Requirements for Conventional
Wastewater Treatment Facilities," Black & Veatch, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Act 1971.
"Basis of Cost Estimates," Camp, Dresser & McKee, Pennsylvania
Department of Environmental Resources, COWAMP Studies,
March 8, 1974.
2
Some of the cost estimates are for 15 MGD capacity and others
are for 16 MGD. The 1.0 MGD discrepancy reflects the projected
additional flow from the Lake Monroe District. The comprehensive
cost table (Table 6-6) is based on 15 MGD because it would not
be feasible to transport the Lake Monroe flow to most of the
treatment plant: sites.
3-6-4
-------
6.5 WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS
This discussion is limited to the liquid treatment portion of the
wastewater disposal process. Sludge handling alternatives and
costs are discussed in another section.
The Consultant recommends the use of a complete mix activated
sludge plant without the use of primary clarifiers. The plant
process includes raw wastewater pumping, preliminary treatment,
clarification, dual media filtration, and disinfection. Phos-
phorus removal would occur in the clarification basins. A flow
equalization basin is included to reduce peak flows.
The only variation in liquid treatment process would be the use
of a single stage activated sludge system for a plant located
along Salt Creek as opposed to a two stage activated sludge system
for a plant located along Clear Creek. Costs for the liquid treat-
ment portion of the plant for both two stage and single stage
systems have been calcuatled and are summarized in Table 6-5.
Construction and operating cost data was determined from "Estimating
Costs and Manpower Requirements For Construction of Wastewater
Treatment Facilities" with the exception of flow equalization and
filtration costs. These costs were determined from "Flow Equali-
zation - EPA Technology Transfer Seminar Publication" and "Advanced
Wastewater Treatment Seminar Manual" by Gulp, Wesner and Culp.
These sources were required because flow equalization and filtration
costs were not available in the "Estimating ... " reference.
Construction costs for the aeration and clarification units were
derived from take off and manufacturers' quotes as they were
necessary for the pure oxygen versus air cost analysis.
Costs also included in this discussion are clearing and grubbing,
piping, roadways, structures, electrical work, heating, ventilating
and plumbing.
6.5.1 LAND APPLICATION ALTERNATIVE FOR BLOOMINGTON
The area within a 10-mile radius of the existing Winton-Thomas
plant was evaluated for potential sites for land application of
treatment sewage effluent. All wastes would receive a minimum
of secondary treatment before application to the'land. (The area
north of Bloomington, which drains into Bean Blossom Creek was
eliminated since pumping of the total flow of 15 MGD would be
necessary to cross the drainage divide.) The following parameters
were considered in the evaluation: soil depth, soil permeability,
geology and topography.
Soils in the Bloomington area are of variable depth, ranging from
2-20 feet in the vicinity of Lake Monroe. The U.S. Department of
Agriculture Soil Map for Monroe County indicates the frequent
occurrence of shallow soils (2-4 feet) in the Bloomington area.
3-6-5
-------
Since land application of treated sewage effluent requires a
uniform minimum soil depth of 5-6 feet, certain measures would
likely be needed to insure proper effluent treatment. Such
measures might include underdrains or use of more than one
application, site with minimum soil depth requirements.
The major soils found in the Bloomington area are silt loams.
Because these soils are relatively fine-grained., their permea-
bility is gjenerally poor. For land application systems, a
relatively permeable soil is needed to allow for percolation
and removal of nutrients from the effluent.
The Bloomington area is underlain by cavernous Mississippian
limestones,, A number of quarries and caves are presently in
the vincinlty, and sinkholes, some of which are filled with
water, are abundant. Since much of the drainage in this area
is underground, special attention would need to be given to
site location to insure that improperly treated effluent would
not enter surface streams.
The topography of the Bloomington area is rugged and is character-
ized by steep-sided streams valleys. Since land application
requires a relatively flat area to minimize soil erosion and
surface runoff, potential application sites in the Bloomington
area would be severly limited by the topography.
A land application system serving a 15 MGD treatment plant would
require 4000 to 7000 acres of land, and based on the physical
parameters evaluated, there are no areas of this size within
ten miles of the existing treatment facility. Therefore, it
can be concluded that the area within ten miles of the Winston-
Thomas plant is not conducive to land application of sewage
effluent.
A potential site was located outside of the ten mile radius
about seven miles southwest of the Salt Creek site by Black
and Veatch in the Bloomington 201 Facilities Plan. However,
the great length of effluent line required between the other
proposed treatment plant sites along Clear Creek and this
disposal site renders the land application alternative not
cost-effective for Clear Creek sites.
Cost calculations for a transport, storage,, capacity and spray
irrigation system with secondary treatment by complete mix
activated sludge (CMAS) are compared with other liquid treat-
ment alternatives for the Salt Creek site in Table 6-10 . The
present worth cost of the land application alternative (2C) is
approximately twice that of other liquid treatment alternatives
for the Salt Creek site evaluated in the Facilities Plan.
Black & Veatch Facilities Plan for Bloomington, Indiana -
Lake Monroe Area, 197A.
3-6-6
-------
In summary, because of the unavailability of a suitable site
(based on physical parameters), land application of treated
sewage effluent is not feasible for any of the proposed treat-
ment plant sites except the Salt Creek site. Furthermore, the
high cost figures for land application indicate that even if
the Salt Creek location were chosen, land application is not
the most cost-effective alternative.
6.5.2 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
The no action alternative for the South Bloomington Service
Area would result in continued use of the Winston Thomas STF.
As indicated in Chapter 1, the present flow of 11.2 MGD exceeds
the design capacity resulting in a poor quality effluent.
The no action alternative would not enable the City of Bloomington
to meet NPDES standards consistent with P.L.92-500 and would
result in a continuously poor water quality in Clear Creek.
6.6 PRESENT WORTH ANALYSIS - SMITHVILLE AND SANDERS
A present worth analysis was made of the following two alter-
natives for providing sewage service to the communities of
Smithville and Sanders. ~~
1. Treatment at the Dillman plant site with the necessary pump
station, force main and gravity lines.
2. Treatment at the Caslon treatment plant at an expanded capacity
of 0.6 MGD and necessary gravity interceptor to reach the Caslon
plant.
3-6-7
-------
6.6.1. ALTERNATIVE NO. 1 SEWAGE TREATMENT AT DILLMAN ROAD
In order to convey Smithville and Sanders waatewater to the Dillman
site, it is estimated that one pump station with 6,500 lineal feet
of 4 inch force main and 5,500 lineal feet of 8" gravity sewer
would be required.
Smithville and Sanders would be responsible for their share of the
project and operating costs of the Dillman plant. The Dillman plant
will be 15 MGD and Sanders Smithville ultimate flow is expected to
be 80,000 gpd. Therefore, their share of the Dillman costs would
be .08/15 or 0.53 of the costs.
6.6.2. ALTERNATIVE NO. 2 SEWAGE TREATMENT AT THE CASLON TREATMENT PLANT
In order to reach the plant, 18,500 feet of 8" gravity interceptor
would be required. The Caslon plant presently has a capacity of
0.09 MGD. The 20 year growth projection for the Caslon Development
is 0.5 MGD. For the purposes of this analysis, it was also assumed
that Harrodsburg (.04 MGD) and the communities of Smithville and
Sanders (.08 MGD) to the north would also join in this plant.,
Therefore, .5 MGD of additional capacity would be required at
the Caslon plant. Smithville would be responsible for .08/.6
or 14% of those costs. Also, a relief outfall sewer would be
required as a result of the additional flows.
The present worth analysis, summarized in Table 6-7, reveals that
it is more economical for Smithville and Sanders to convey and
treat their waste at the Dillman site.
It would still be possible for the Harrodsburg area to be served
by the existing Caslon Development plant on Little Clear Creek.
Another possibility, if Harrodsburg would be served by the plant,
would be to move the plant to an alternate location at the con-
fluence of Clear Creek and Little Clear Creek.
6.6.3. FAIRFAX
A construction and project estimate was made for conveying waste-
water from Fairfax to the plant serving the Caslon Development
(The Point«). It was assumed that three pump stations would
be required and 2,000 feet of 8" gravity sewer with 16,000 feet
of 4" force main. It was also assumed that use of the existing
interceptor would be made by Fairfax although no costs were
added for their proportionate share. A construction cost of
$486,000 and project cost of $632,000 were estimated. (The
Indiana State legislature has appropriated 300,000 to design
and construct an interceptor connecting the Fairfax Recreation
Area to the Caslon lift station with treatment at the Caslon
package plant.) The Caslon interceptor was originally sized
to accommodate flows from the Fairfax Recreation Area.
3-6-8
-------
6.7 PROJECT COSTS
Table 6-8 presents a summary of project costs (excluding sludge
disposal) for the various alternative sites. The project cost
represents the capital cost of the project times a 1.3 factor
for engineering, legal, and miscellaneous costs of completing
construction. The table shows the Dillman Road site to have
the lowest project cost of the alternatives.
3-6-9
-------
to
g
tH
^
§
W
3
O ' CM
H *-< IS CN
rH
O
CJ O
WJ QJ O
cfl 3 ^-x «
> rH oo r-.
JT! rH 0) ^ £>
H (0 > co
(*; co
O ft
is
H
^
W
to
s
K s o
,-N at
' tN
O rH
o
4J O
O to
o CO ,-N in
H CJ O
PL|
rH
CN
CD O
tO 3 ^
> tH m m
rH tO ^ tO
CO >
tN
rH
O
o
m
o
o
at
in
tH
O
O
o
in
CT-
*
0
o
o
CTt
O
o
m
tN
o
in
00
rH
O
""1
rH
O
rH
rH
0
O
rH
tN
O
O
m
o
o
o
f)
tN
rH
rH
O
O
*D
0^ vO
r 1 VD
m r-
CN rH
O o
o o
o o
O O"i
Csl
ro
O O
0 0
r- o
CN m
en CM
00 O
CN m
CM
O O
o o
o o
0 0
o >
H -3
0 0
O
O
cr«
r~-
o o
o
o
1^,
rH
in
rl
iH
O O
0
in
in
0 0
o
o
CN
to
C-J
CN
O
^
tH
tO
-3-
,
CJ
IH
O
CO
rH
CJ
CO
H
01
4J
H
CO
CO
w a
> 0)
M OI
H rl
< CJ
§ 4J
W rH
H to
3 "
0
a: 4-1
1 s
CO 4J
p-
& CO
0 0
H rl
CM oi
W 4J
y c
u
B r?
rH -H
tO
O
1
rH
H
M
*j]
10
H
^
CO
01
rl
CJ
4J
rH
a
CO
o
c
H
CO
e
01
u
rl
o
MH
t)
to
rl
O Ai
4J 01
PH 01
01 rl
O CJ
u
01 rl
4J CO
c oi
CJ
4-1 01
H rH
CO 4-1
O ,4
1
CN
IS
M
^J
5
B
^
0)
CO
iH
CJ
V4
10
CI
tH
CJ
10
rl
^»
CO
H
W
T)
ca
o
[?
10
.c
CJ
4J
01
«
O
H
4J
O.
O)
O
rl
01
4J
C
4J
rl
CO
O
1
CO
>
M
H
^
01
01
M
CJ
M
CO
CJ
rH
0
CO
rH
£>
0)
H
CO
13
to
0
c
r]
e
rH
rH
H
O
O
4J
H
4J
a-
o
u
01
c
5*
H
to
o
1
>
M
!H
?}
(_(
l^l
Q
rH
C
a)
a)
j-i
u
co
(U
rH
U
cd
T*
>
(U
4-1
>H
(0
OJ
(U
Vj
4-1
CO
W
J-i
0)
to
o
p^
J=
3
o
CO
o
4J
C
CO
E
CO
Q
1
in
>
M
H
3
CD
O
O
CN
tH
CO rt
rl 01
r*-i t>>
in u
rH 01
C 14H
H tO
0) 01
01 01
rH V-l
CJ CJ
10 CO
01 O)
iH tH
CJ CJ
tO to
H -H
> >
01 01
4J 4J
H -H
CO CO
4-1 4-1
0) 01
01 01
rl rl
4J 4J
CO CO
CO CO
01 01
60 M
O 0
p£ PH
s: A
3 3
0 0
C/i CO
0 0
4-> 4J
C C
'io 'cO
B e
CO CO
£ £
ti-i PH
1 1
< ta
in in
w W
M M
H H
< <
?i ^
ia
H
in o
tN O
rH o
in o
tN o
rH CO
o
o
o
o
CN
iH
4J 4J
H CO
0. 0
O
rH
0
o
0
tN
rH
CN
to
0
O
r^
tN
CO
CN
-a-
o
o
r-~
to
o
r*.
<
O
o
o
Ot
r^
rH
CN
O
0
CS
o
*
tN
-3-
O
0
CN
O
HI
DO
0)
rH
tO
CO
^_^
-3
CO
-3
m
^
X
ro
rH
X
rH
tH
0
cj
n
4J
CO
O
CJ
4J
U
0)
o
VI
PH
CO
m
^^
in
tN
*-"
*
rH
O
u
+
^
CO
m
O
^^
r_l
CO
f.^
tN
tH
O
CJ
n
a
*o
o
3-6-10
-------
TABLE 6-2
INTERCEPTOR DESIGN CRITERIA
A. Pipe
1. Gravity Severs
a. Reinforced concrete
b. Steel joints with 0-ring gasket
c. Size - 42" to 78" dia.
2. Force Mains
a. Ductile iron
b. Tyton joint
c. Size - 24" to 48" dia.
3. Excavation
a. Two-thirds of the distance from Winston-Thomas to Salt Creek
Site is classified as rock excavation.
b. Average trench depth - 10 feet.
c. Trench width - pipe diameter plus two (2) feet.
B. Stream Crossings
1. Length - 40 feet.
2. Concrete encasement.
C. Railroad Crossings
1. Length - 80'
2. Tunnel
D. Highway Crossings
1. Open cut.
3-6-11
-------
TABLE 6-3
INTERCEPTOR COST GUIDELINES
A. Pipe
Size and Type Price for Pipe & Labor*
24" DIP $ 66 L/F
30" DIP 71
42" RCP 88
48" DIP 105
54" RCP 132
60" RCP 149
66" RCP 165
72" RCP 187
78" RCP 209
*Excavation and backfill not included
Rock Excavation $25/C.Y.
Soil Excavation $ 5/C.Y.
Backfill $ 6/C.Y.
B. Manholes
$1,500 each
C. Pumping
1. Electricity - 2c/kw-hr
2. Labor - $6/hr.
D. Stream Crossing
1. Pipe Prices - 1.5 X Standard Unit Prices
2. Excavation and Backfill
a. Rock Excavation - $50/C.Y.
b. Soil Excavation - $10/C.Y.
c. Backfill - $12/C.Y.
E. Railroad Crossings
Pipe Size and Type Price for Pipe & Tunneling Operations
42" RCP $230/L.F.
54" RCP 300
60" RCP 340
66" RCP , 370
72" RCP 400
Excavation for boring pit - $2,000/Pit
3-6-12
-------
CO
Total
Present
Worth
o
o
o
m
r-
r^
0
o
o
*.
in
i-l
r-~
M
O
o
0
«1
\D
ro
r-
0
0
o
V
oo
ON
00
o
o
0
*t
e^
m
oo
o
o
0
m
m
3
4J rH iH
C « CO
0) W) >
w
01 14-1
(-1 O
o
o
o
o
o
o
*
m
o
o
o
t
m
o
o
o
o
o
o
»
m
vf
I
w
w
Q
W
H
Project
Cost
o
o
o
m
o
o
o
m
o
o
o
1-1
00
0
o
o
en
o
o
0
oo
00
0)
HI
U
4-1
(0
O
H
C/3
O
C
o
H
4-1
U
3
M
CJ
13 4J
C cn
CO O
i-J 0
O
o
o
vD
CTi
m
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
CN|
o
o
o
o*
00
o
o
o
A
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o o o
m m m
rH i-l rH
o
O
O
M
O
m
H
cd
W
0)
O
ffl
o
^o
CM
ni
C
O
H
4J
H
CO
C
(-1
CD
CO
cfl
o
X!
H
C
O
4-1
CO
C
H
IS
3
O
CO
C
§
I
CJ
4->
Ol
01
OJ
cfl
on
0)
0)
CJ
co
CO
4J
c
o
a
o
3-6-13
-------
I §
i
3
III
,,
, --- £ a c
i jC ^ ' ~ E
JCM ^- c r
-
"5
c/: TI
x '
i- C C
C C, 0- C,
> ) !T tt c
.- C t O J-
C C C C C
3-6-14
-------
Total
o
o
o
r\
m
CO
oo
0
0
o
yi
m
r-
r^
O
O
O
A
oo
«*
co
0
0
o
V
CO
o
1 1
o
0
0
t
ON
00
cfl
60 CO
XI O
3 (3.
rH CO
rf\ *f_j
o
4J
c
cu cu
60 0
T> 4-1
3 cfl
r-t 01
f/^ t.J
WJ M
H
4-1
13
13 CU
H 6
3 4J
cr cfl
H CU
iJ rl
H
4-1
c
CU
e
cu a
4J O
H rH
co cu
^
CU
o
t-l
o
4J
a
CU
o
(-1
cu
4-1
(3
0
o
p~
*
vO
r^
o
rH
co-
rH
0
o
CO
A
CM
>*
CO
CO
>
o
0
o
s
o
o
o
A
r-
vO
r*-
n
rH
O
O
r^
n
vO
r~
O
rH
r7
O
O
CO
n
CM
-
rH
0
o
o
A
f-
vO
r~
V
rH
O
o
I>~
ft
vO
r-
O
rH
^~*\
rH
^**
O
o
CO
n
CM
CO
CM
o
o
o
n
vO
CO
r^
O
O
O
s
o\
rH
CO
*,
CM
O
o
r-.
\
vO
1^.
0
rH
/"**.
rH
^^
O
O
CO
CM
<(
CO
CO
O
O
O
f\
<)
r~-
00
CO
CM
O
o
o
*s
oo
3
O
CO
fi
cfl
E
rH
rH
rt
0
0
cO
43
O
4J
CU
W
A!
cu
cu
rl
u
4-1
rH
CO
CO
60
rj
H
XI
cfl
CU
M
p,
CO
cu
a
cfl
*4H
M
3
CO
>-l
43
X)
a)
5
o
rH
rH
o
IH
60
a
H
60
14-1
^
J-l
4J
g
O
X)
g
Lgestion
13
O
H
43
O
j_i
CU
cfl
en
cu
CO
CO
*
G
O
H
4-1
m vj
CO CU
CU S-i
? CO
H
4-1 CO
CO (3
C 0
Li !-<
M ^i
CU 4->
4-1 CO
rH 4J
CO CO
» OH
r-l 6
1 3
VO P.
CU 13
rH C
43 CO
CO
H C
H
CU CO
cu e
CO
cu
u
*-i
m o
00 M-l
0
CO 4-1 CM
cu c
0 0) M
3 M O
CO CU
-------
O O
O O
O O
00 -*
O
O
O
*v
CM
LTl
0
O
O
i t
m
in
O
O
O
ro
ro
00
iH
O
0
O
r^
LO
CNI
O
O
O
00
oo
[-^
CO CO
M Pd
CO W
CO
vo
W
iJ
PQ
<
H
H
Pi
CO H
W M
PM CO
01
3
r-H
cfl
M-l >
O
(1)
3 Ml
PU Cfl
CO
O
d)
O O
M O
oo
«
> -
iH
tti
CO
O
O
O
O
O
o
»\
00
o
o
o
o
O
O
O
O
O
M
CO
01
en
o
o
o
CO
CN
O
o
o
o
o
O
O
o
M
ON
00
CO
o
o
o
oo
o
o
o
ON
o
o
o
o
vD
CO
O
o
o
en
o
U
a.
0)
o
c
H
60
C
H
T3
CJ
0)
0)
4J
H
CO
c
0)
E
C
cd
4-1
o
to
o
CJ
C
O
O 4.J
3 co
M O
4J C.)
CO
e
o
u
o
o
o
r.
CN
O
CO
S-l
o
4J
ex
a)
C
Cfl
e
i-H
rH
H
Q
O
Vi
0)
4-1
C
M
C
cfl
_J
PM
C
a)
a
cfl
0)
J-l
H
i-H
cfl
4-J
0
H
c
o
rH
CO
Cfl
O
o
o
o
0
o
m
^j
o
4J
P.
OJ
O
^1
0)
4J
rj
H
0
O
0
txf
-^-
oo
4-1
C
cfl
rH
PM rH
rH
4J CO
C HH
0) 4-1
e a
4J 0
Cfl
0) T3
t-i C
H cfl
y-N
5
rr^J
d a)
CO M
Cfl
0) .C
iH CO
H Cfl
> (-1
j; cu
4-J 'O
H C
E: cfl
CO CO
o
H
'-M
O
§
a)
CO
(D
M-l
o
CO
in
CO
cu
CO
to
-------
TABLE 6-8
PROJECT COSTS
Interceptors
Site Development
Total
Winston-
Thomas
3,023,000*
775,000
.8,383,000
1,787,500
13,968,500
South
Rogers
3,023,000*
1,745,000
18,383,000
1,787,500
$24,938,500
Dillman
Road
2,832,700
781,000
18,383,000
1,787,500
$23,784,200
Ketcham
Road
6,118,700
943,000
18,383,000
1,787,500
$27,232,200
Salt
Creek
18,502,500
884,000
16,130,000
886,600
$36,403,100
* Present worth of 5.512 million dollars 10 years hence. See Table 6-1, column 6
for project cost in 15 and 20 years respectively.
** Project costs of aerobic digestion and centrifuge for all sites except Salt Creek
which would have aerobic digestion and sludge lagoon.
3-6-17
-------
C S5 a
c « o
< O U
00
c
U eo
at >
O- O I
W O
CT.
vD
ft
cd
H
X
*{
U
03
0.
(0
rH
CQ
£
u
01
*-»
o
Cu
n
o
U
CM
hi
X
hi
3J8
00 W
o
at
09
CO
U O
CO
01 00
P C
41 -rt CO
SS*
M Q I
eg u
§ 6
hi
u
rH
o
o
o
vD
CM
CM
O
«n
§
0
in
r-
CN
0
o
0
CM
CM
-31
CM
rH
O
O
0
o"
o
m
|
M
^
Ti
n
M
O
o
o
r^
CO
>a
C1
e>
S
o
o
a>
r-l
o
§
iri
00
-3
oc-
tn-
J
hi U
a at
-i oa
(x O
OC U
C -H
rH O
.* hi
0 0)
*
rH
O
8
en
rH
CM
O
0
O
r-
O
rH
*
rH
O
o
o
CN
vO
CM
rH
0
O
o
o
0
en
0
o
o
1^
oo
in
sr
CN
O
O
0
rH
00
^
en
O
0
o
o
m
00
rH
O
0
o
*G
m
o»
oo
rH
15 g
4J -H
b. oi
00
00 -H
C 0
rH .-4
^ cO
x&
H
«
0
O
O
0
in
o
o
0
ON
o
rH
O
o
o
r*.
oo
-3-
O
rH
O
0
o
0
0
CN
O
o
o
in
vO
CN
O
CN
O
O
0
^
CN
rH
en
§
0
cT
oo
-3-
rH
O
o
o
rH
£
m
iH
X
I
p*
o
en
*
CM
O
8
VO
in
oo
CM
CM
O
o
0
in
0
a*
O
o
o
CM
CO
f"~
oT
0
o
o
0
o
00
CM
8
0
^J
^
CO
CO
rH
O
o
0
o>
o
°1
CM
O
0
o
o
in
en
rH
§
O
in
to
in
,/
tH
n c
E o
hi 00
0. CO
0
*&
<| (M
S
03
CM
O
O
O
i?
CO
m
0
0
O
rH
O
o
0
CO
CN
O
0
en
o
0
o
O
0
o
in
o
o
o
^
in
o
vO
0
o
o
ON
OO
rH
0>
0
o
0
o
0
CM
m
o
o
o
in
vO
0
NO
"*
X
hi rH
CO CO
E in
vH O
^ a.
tx u
*H
o a
* -o
c
V) ttj
^
o
o
o
o
en
O
in
o
CN
O
0
o
fN
CO
o
*-t
o
0
o
^
CN
rH
rH
rH
0
O
o
o
0
CN
en
o
§
o
v*
rH
CN
O
O
O
00
o
en
m
§
0
o
00
rH
o
8
CN
CO
m
>o
rH
xl
CQ W
E 4)
-^ 00
a. o
K *H
CO
Ul 3
< O
S
O
0
0
in
H
in
00
CN
0
O
o
<*
0
en
rH
o
0
o
9i
rH
rH
rH
rH
O
o
o
0
o
3-
en
O
o
o
Oi
00
en
rH
CM
O
O
o
vO
a»
CN
en
O
8
o
in
rH
O
o
o
en
CM
in
vO
~"
g
CO
X 01
hi oo
E a
-H
hi U
a. .H
"» "o
<2
m
o
o
<3
S
o
n
§
e3
00
CM
rH
O
§
CM
en
^*
CM
rH
O
o
o
o
§
*
0
o
o
CM
*
^
CM
o
o
o
o>
vO
en
o
o
0
o
en
00
rH
1
en
00
00
rH
a
0
H
4-*
^4
4!
tJ
01
o
c
01
4J
X
ut
s
c^
e
in
o
o
o
r-l
CM
r-l
0
8
r-
rH
^
in
rH
o
8
o
o
in
""
O
8
^
i*^
-------
TASK 7
DISTRIBUTION OF COSTS
The initial purpose of this task was to identify costs for a regional treatment
facility serving both Bloomington and the Lake Monroe Area and to break those
costs down to each service area, namely Bloomington and Lake Monroe. However,
based on the discussions in other tasks of this report, such a regional plant is
not recommended, and hence a detailed breakdown of costs is not needed.
The Consultant has recommended that a 15 MGD plant be built on the Dillman Road
plant site with the necessary interceptor from Bloomington. An analysis of Lake
Monroe has revealed that it is less costly for the communities of Sanders and
Smithville to have their wastewater treated at the Dillman site rather than at
the Caslon site. Smithville - Sanders will require 80,000 gallons per day (0.08
MGD) of treatment plant capacity.
If the City of Bloomington and Smithville - Sanders agree to build a plant on
the Dillman site, both project and operating costs will be shared. As stated
previously, the plant should have a capacity of 15 MGD, and Smithville - Sanders
will be responsible for .08/15 = 0.53% of the project and operational costs at
design capacity. Each community will be responsible for its own interceptor to
reach the plant.
Table 7-1 shows the sharing of costs for the respective shares of the plant
costs and individual interceptor costs.
It should be noted that this analysis does not list the collection system
project costs for Sanders and Smithville.
A sewage collection system for the Sanders-Smithville area would, of course, be
needed. A very rough approximation of the cost for such a system is based on
27,000 lineal feet of sewer line at an in-place construction cost of $25 per
foot. This would produce an approximate construction cost for the collection
sewer system of $675,000, or a total project cost of approximately $877,500.
Assuming receipt of a federal grant for 75 percent of the cost and a state
grant for 10 percent of the cost, the local share of the project cost would be
$131,625.
3-7-1
-------
TABLE 7-1
COST SHARING FOR DILLMAN ROAD PLANT SITE
Treatment @ 15 MOD
Bloomington
Smithville and Sanders
Total
Interceptors and Pumping Station
Bloomington
Smithville and Sanders
Bloomington Total Costs
Smithville/Sanders Total Costs
Project Cost O&M (g 11 MGD
$ 16,776,000 $ 524,000
89,000
3,000
$ 16,865,000 $ 527,000
$ 2,833,000 $ 1,000
393,000 8,000
$ 19,599,000 $ 532,000
$ 482,000 $ 11,000
NOTE: Project cost for sewage collection system for Smithville and Sanders
would be approximately $877,500.
Total project cost for collection, interceptors and treatment = 1,359,500
Assuming 75% federal grant, 10% state grant:
Local Share = $203,925
Annual Cost, assuming 20 years at 6^5% = $17,960
3-7-2
-------
TASK 8
SLUDGE TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL
8.1 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY
A major problem facing the designer of any sewage treatment plant
today is the ultimate disposal of the solids removed in the treatment
processes. Environmental regulations concerning the disposal of
sewage treatment plant sludges are becoming increasingly stringent as
adverse effects of past disposal practices become known. In
investigating sludge handling alternatives for the new Bloomington
south treatment plant, a number of treatment and disposal processes
were evaluated. The sludge volume to be produced by the proposed
plant was first calculated, and costs for the various handling
processes were then determined.
Potential sludge disposal sites in the Bloomington area were
investigated by examining topographic maps, aerial photographs and
soils maps. It was determined that with the recommended agronomic
loading rates there would not be sufficient land available at the
Salt Creek site to sustain land application of all sludge produced at
the plant for the 20 year planning period.
The least costly alternative for sludge handling and disposal at the
recommended Dillman Road site is aerobic digestion followed by a
sludge lagoon with ultimate disposal by soil injection. This
arrangement, however, limits future flexibility for sludge disposal,
since other methods of disposal (composting, landfilling) require a
higher solids concentration than soil injection (20% solids vs 10%
solids). More flexibility could be built into the system by adding
centrifuging instead of the sludge lagoon, even though the costs, both
initial and operating, would be higher. This would provide the
flexibility of being able to use other methods of sludge disposal such
as composting, landfilling, or land application.
The alternative of composting was considered for sludge disposal
because of the proximity of the Scarab Composting Company and the
recent request by Scarab to take large volumes of sewage treatment
plant sludge. The Scarab offer appears quite attractive since the
city would do away with much of its problem of ultimate disposal, and
a useful product would result from the operation. However, the city
should approach composting with some caution for several reasons:
1. The history of composting operations in the U.S. is not good.
Most operations have failed.
2. The composting system must be extremely reliable, or provisions
must be made to stockpile the sludge. Sludge will be produced
every day and must be placed somewhere.
3-8-1
-------
3. The city would still be responsible for disposal of the sludge in
the event the composting operation were shut down.
Landfilling or land application would be viable alternatives should
the composting arrangement fail.
8.2 SLUDGE PRODUCTION
The daily sludge volume produced by the proposed treatment plant: was
calculated by performing a mass balance analysis on the treatment
plant. The assumptions and calculations used in this analysis are
listed below.
Influent:
Flow = Q = 15 MGD
BOD = 144 MG/L = 18,020 //BOD/Day
SS = 180 MG/L = 22,520 //SS/Day
Assume: 95% BOD and SS removal efficiencies
A. Biological Sludge Production
Effluent:
BOD = 7 MG/L = 876 //BOD/Day
SS = 9 MG/L = 1126 //SS/Day
Sludge Produced:
BOD = 18,020 #/Day - 876 ///Day = 17,144 //BOD/Day
SS = 22,520 ///Day - 1126 ///Day == 21,394 //SS/Day
Assume:
0.5 //VSS Produced per //BOD Removed
17,144 //BOD/Day x 0.5 //VSS///BOD = 8572 //VSS/Day
Biological Sludge Production = 21,394 //SS/Day -I- 8572 7/VSS/Day
= 29,966 //Dry Solids/Day
B. Chemical Sludge Production for Phosphorus Removal
Influent:
4 MG P04/L = 1.3 MG P/L
80% Removal Required.
Effluent:
1.3 MG P/L X 0.2 = 0.26 MG/L
P Removed =1.0 MG/L
Stoichiometric Relationship for Aluminum (AL) to P is:
0.87/1 by Weight
3-8-2
-------
Assume: 2.2 AL/1.0 P Ratio because of competing reactions and
Low P Concentration. Aluminum Sulfate (AL,, SO^) = 9% AL
2.3 AL - 26"° ^2 S°4
0.9 AL 1.0 P 1.0 P
96 0 AT ^O
*. \J m V £VLj /* \J\S f __ _ f. _- _, .. » __ -
1.0 P
#AL, P0,/Day
Since additional alum was added in excess of the
Stoichiometric requirements, AL(OH)~ will be formed.
Stoichiometric Requirement
0.87 AL 1.0 AL SO. ._ Mr AT
1 Q p X 2 4 " 10 MG AS
1>U P 0.09 AL Z
Excess Alum =26.0 MG/L - 10 MG/L =16.0 MG/L
AL(OH) Produced = 16.0 MG AL SO, X 156 =
^ * 600
4.2 MG AL(OH).
'3/L
jduce
15 MGD = 525 #AL(OH).
Pounds AL(OH)3 Produced =4.2 MG/L X 8.34 X
3/Day
Total Chemical Sludge Production:
3255 #AL2P04/Da + 525 #AL(OH)3/Da = 3780 # Dry Solids/Day
C. Total Sludge Production = Biological + Chemical
29,966 #/Day + 3780 ///Day - 33,748
Use 33,750 # Dry Solids /Day
Assume: Solids Concentration from the
Clarifier = 2% = 20,000 MG/L
_ Solids Production, ///Day _
~ Solids Concentration, MG/L X 8.34
_ 33.750 ///Day
20,000 MG/L X 8.34
=0.20 MGD
3-8-3
-------
Summary :
Flow = 0.20 MGD
Solids Concentration = 20,000 MG/L Total Solids
VSS normally equals 75% of TSS in a Biological Sludge.
Due to the addition of Chemical Sludge Assume
VSS = 73% TSS
Solids Production = 33,750 #TSS/Day
= 24,640 //VSS /Day
8.3 UNIT PROCESSES
Figure 8-1 presents eleven unit processes for sludge stabilization,
dewatering, drying and disposal. The size and cost of each process
appears in the following pages. The design criteria and assumptions
are based on design recommendations appearing in Metcalf and Eddy,
Inc., Wastewater Engineering, McGraw - Hill Book Co., 1975.
8.3.1 Aerobic Digestion
8.3.1.1 Aerobic Digester Design
Design Criteria:
SRT = 20 Days -
Solids Loading = 0.024 - 0.14 #VS/FT /Day
Oxygen Requirements = 2 #02/#VSS
Energy For Mixing
Mechanical Aerators - 0.5-1.0 hp/1000 FT
Air Mixing - 20-35 SCFM/1000 FT3
Volume of Sludge
Assume: Specific Gravity = 1.03
1.03 (620.02)
= 26>26°
Volume of Digester , o
V = 26,260 FT /Day X 20 Day = 526,000 FT
Check Solids Loading
#VS/FT3/Day = 24,640 //VS/Day = ^ check
526,000 FT
3-8-4
-------
0_ Requirements
Assume: 40% VSS Reduction
//02/Day = 24,640 //VSS/Day (0.40) (2.0 //02/#VSS)
= 19,720 //00/Day
Volume of Air
Assume: 10% Transfer Efficiency
£
Air Requirement = - 7870 CFM
Air/1000 FT of Digester
7870 P"R*M "^
526 = 15 CFM/1000 FT TOO LOW FOR ADEQUATE MIXING
Mixing Requirements Govern
30 SCFM/1000 FT3
Air Requirement = 15,780 SCFM
8^3.1.2 Aerobic Digested Sludge
Assume: 4% Solids Concentration
40% Volatile Solids Reduction
24,640 ///Day X 0.40 = 9860 #VSS/Day
Total Solids = 33,750 #TSS/Day - 9860 #VSS/Day =
23,900 #TSS/Day
Flow - 23,900 ///Day _
F1°W ~ 40,000 MG/L X 8.34 ~ °'°72 MGD
Summary :
Flow = 0.072 MGD
Solids Concentration = 40,000 MG/L
Solids Production = 23,900 //Dry Solids/Day
8.3.2 Anaerobic Digestion
8.3.2.1 Anaerobic Digester Design
Assume:
Heated Digester
Solids Retention Time = 15 Days
40% Volatile Solids Reduction
Specific Gravity CF Sludge =1.03
3-8-5
-------
Sludge Volume - (1.03) (^'^(O^) ' 26,260 FT3/Day
Digester Volume = (Sludge Volume) (Solids Retention Time)
= (26,260 FT3/Day) (15 Days)
» 394,000 FT3
8., 3.2.2 Anaerobic Digested Sludge
Assume: 4% Solids Concentration
Summary :
Flow = 0.072 MGD
Solids Concentration = 40,000 MG/L
Solids Production = 23,900 //Dry Solids /Day
8.3.3 Sludge Lagoon
Flow = 0.072 MGD = 9630 FT3/Day
Solids Retention Time = 1 year = 365 days
Volume of Lagoon = 9630 FT3/Day (365 days)
= 3,520,000 FT3
Assume :
No Solids Reduction
Effluent Solids Concentration
_- _ 23.900 //Dry Solids/Day
now - (100)000 MG/L) (8.34)
= 0.029 MGD
Summary :
Flow « 0.029 MGD
Solids Concentration = 100,000 MG/L
Solids Production = 23,900 //Dry Solids
Day
8-3.4 Sand Drying Bed
3
Assume: Loading Rate = 20 //Dry Solids/FT /Year
Solids Production = 23,900 ///Day = 8,725,000 ///Year
Drying Bed Surface Area = 1,725,000 J^Year
20 ///FT /Year
= 436,250 FT2
= 10.0 Acres
3-8-6
-------
Assume: 30% Solids Concentration
23.900
i
TT i c 01 j
Volume of Sludge =
1240 FT3/Day
8.3.5 Incineration
Assume: 80 Hours/Week Operating Time
Solids Production = 33,750 #/Day = 236,250 #/Week
_ , _ 236,250 #/Week
Feed Rate = oh Tr,T
80 Hours/Week
= 2950 #Dry Solids/Hour
Assume: Sludge Feed Characteristics
Solids Concentration = 200,000 MG/L
VSS = 73% of Total Solids
Assume: 0% Moisture Content in Ash
Density = 2000 #/YD3
Summary: 2.3 Tons of Ash/Day
=2.15 YD3 Ash/Day
2000 #/YD"
= 58 FT Ash/Day for Disposal
8.3.6 Centrifuge
Assume: 40 Hours/Week Operating Time
Solids Production = 23,900 #/Day
Flow = 0.072 MGD = 504,000 Gallons/Week
_ , _ 504.000 Gallons/Week
Feed Rate « ^= 77;f
40 Hours/Week
= 12,600 Gallons/Hour
= 210 GPM
Sludge Cake Summary:
Flow = 0.014 MGD
Solids Concentration = 200,000 MG/L
Solids Production = 23,900 //Dry Solids
Day
3-8-7
-------
8.3.7 Vacuum Filter
2
Assume: Yield Rate =3.5 #/FT /Hour
40 Hours/Week Operating Time
Solids Production = 23,900 ///Day = 167,300 ///Week
167,300 ///Week
Surface Area of Vacuum Filter
C40 Hours/Week)(3.5 ///FT2/Hour)
= 1200 FT2
Sludge Cake Summary:
Flaw = 0.014 MGD
Solids Concentration = 200,000 MG/L
Solids Production = 23,900 //Dry Solids
Day
8.3.8 Thickener
2
Assume: Solids Loading Rate = 10 ///FT /Day
Solids Loading = 33,750 ///Day
Surface Area of Thickener - 33,750 ///Day
10 f/FT /Day
= 3375 FT2
Assume: 6% Solids Concentration
No Solids Reduction
Summary:
Flow = 0.067 MGD
Solids Concentration = 60,000 MG/L
Solids Production = 33,750 // Dry Solids
Day
3-8-8
-------
8.4
SLUDGE TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES
Utilizing the Information developed in the Unit Process Section, nine
Sludge Treatment Alternatives were evaluated. The alternatives are as
follovs:
Alternative
1
2
7
8
Unit Processes
Aerobic Digester
Sludge Lagoon
Aerobic Digester
Vacuum Filter
Thickener
Vacuum Filter
Incineration
Aerobic Digester
Centrifuge
Thickener
Aerobic Digester
Sand Drying Bed
Anaerobic Digester
Sludge Lagoon
Anaerobic Digester
Vacuum Filter
Anaerobic Digester
Centrifuge
Thickener
Anaerobic Digester
Sand Drying Bed
Solids Requiring Disposal
Tons Dry Solids/Day
FT3/Day
11.95
11.95
2.15
11.95
11.95
11.95
11.95
11.95
11.95
3720
1870
58
1870
1240
3720
1870
1870
1240
All of the nine alternatives shown above could be used at any of the
proposed treatment plant sites for sludge treatment. Each alternative
requires the disposal of solids, which will be covered in the next
section.
3-8-9
-------
Table 8 -1 presents the capital cost, annual operation and maintenance
cost, salvage value and the present worth for each unit process.
Table 8 -2, "Alternative Sludge Treatment Cost," presents the total
present worth of the sludge treatment alternatives. The alternatives
are ranked on the basis of total present worth.
8 .5 SLUDGE DISPOSAL ALTERNATIVES
8 .5.1 Composting
Three alternatives for sludge disposal were investigated. The first
alternative is hauling the sludge to the Scarab composting site. The
present worth of the hauling costs are as follows:
Plant Site Present Worth
Winston Thomas $ 161,700
Dillman $ 156,900
Ketcham $ 226,000
Salt Creek $ 349,600
It was assumed that the sludge would have to be at a minimum of 20%
dry solids, therefore, sludge treatment alternative #4 was used in
calculating the total sludge treatment and disposal cost for
composting.
8-5.2 Soil Injection or Land Application
The second alternative is hauling the sludge via existing roads to a
centralized distribution point located south of the Valley Mission
Church in Lawrence County. The present worth of the hauling cost are
as follows:
Assuming sludge at 10% dry solids
Plant Site Present Worth
Winston Thomas $ 682,400
Dillman $ 582,800
Ketcham $ 549,600
Salt Creek $ 412,300
3-8-10
-------
Assuming sludge at 20% solids
Present Site Present Worth
Winston Thomas $ 342,500
Dillman $ 292,400
Ketcham $ 276,000
Salt Creek $ 207,000
The sludge is transferred from the hauling vehicle to an application
vehicle at the land disposal site. The application vehicle would
inject the 10% solids sludge into the soil and spread the 20% solids
sludge on the soil surface. The present worth of the sludge
application cost are as follows:
Sludge Concentration Present Worth
10% $ 736,300
20% $ 734,200
8.. 5.3 Sludge Lagoons
The third alternative is construction of sludge lagoons for the
disposal of the sludge. The costs for lagoons with 20 years capacity
and the costs for lining the lagoons were calculated. The present
worth of the lagoons are as follows:
PRESENT WORTH
Lagoon Capacity With Liner Without Liner
20 Years $ 2,975,400 $ 1,781,500
8.5.4 Land Requirements for Injection or Surface Spreading
Sludge disposal alternative #2, land spreading requires a large land
area. The calculations are as follows:
Sludge Production » 11.95 Tons Dry Solids/Day
- 4362 Tons Dry Solids/Year
8.5.4.1 Application Rate
Heavy Metals Criteria;
Equation - Total Quantity of Dry Solids, Tons/Acres
CEC (meq/lOOg Unamended Soil) X 1.63 X 10
Tons/Acre = mgZn - 50) + 2 S ( mgCu 25) + 8 X ( MgNi )
[1 X Kg Sludge Kg Sludge Kg Sludge -25]
Assume: CEC » 25 meq/lOOg Unamended Soil
3-8-11
-------
Use Winston Thomas sludge heavy metal analysis of September 17, 1975.
Element Concentration, MG/KG Dry Weight
Cu 980
Cr 585
Fe 5940
Ni 282
Cd 29
Zn 430
Using these assumptions, the total quantity of dry solids equals 90
Tons/Acre.
Therefore, the annual application rate for the twenty year design life
equals 4.5 Tons Dry Solids/Acre/Year.
Use 5.0 Tons Dry Solids/Acre/Year
Agricultural Plant Growth Requirements;
Using equations in EPA's proposed sludge disposal guidelines, it was
calculated that the annual sludge application rate for plant growth
requirements would be approximately 5 Tons Dry Solids/Acre/Year.
Therefore, the land requirements for land disposal are as follows:
T . . 4362 Tons Dry Solids/Year _..- .
Land Area = =-= =; e , .. ,. 7^- = 873 Acres
5 Tons Dry Solids/Acre/Year
Because of the large land area requirements for land disposal, it is
recommended that Bloomington should not purchase the land at the Salt
Creek Site for disposal purposes. It was assumed that the sludge
would be spread on farmland as it is done at the Bucher-Poole Plant.
Due to the lack of available data, it was assumed that the sludge
would be spread on farmland located on the Salt Creek Flood Plain from
the Salt Creek Plant site to areas located in Lawerence County.
Because the sludge is assumed to be hauled in 20 Ton loads by trailer
trucks, primary roads were chosen in determining the distances to the
disposal site from the various plant sites.
It is recommended that the sludge not be applied in excess of the
agronomic rate because of the possibility of nitrate leaching. This
is also within the limits of the proposed EPA sludge disposal
guidelines which will probably be enforced in the near future.
3-8-12
-------
8.5.5 Hauling Costs
Table 8-3 presents hauling costs for land disposal and composting.
It was assumed that Bloomington would contract with a hauling firm to
transport the sludge and that a trailer truck with a 20 ton load limit
would be used.
Table 8-4 presents the cost for the application vehicle. The capital
and operation and maintenance costs were obtained from Mr. Rich Schapland,
Big Wheels, Inc., Paxton, Illinois.
Application Vehicle Cost
10% Solids Concentration 20% Solids Concentration
Sludge Injection Surface Spreading
Capital Cost of Vehicle $ 37,000 $ 33,000
Annual Capital Cost 49,802 44,418
6.125% Interest
5 Year Life
Annual Cost 1,000 1,000
0 & M (insurance, tires,
truck maintenance, etc.)
Fuel Cost 7,040 7,040
8 Gallons/hour
$.55/Gallon
1600 Hours/year
Operator 9,600 9,600
$6.00 Hour
1600 hours/year
Total Annual Cost 67,442 62,058
Year 20
Total Annual Cost 62,242 56,858
Year 1
Total Present Worth 736,300 734,200
3-8-13
-------
8.5.6 Sludge Lagoon Costs
Sludge lagoon costs are as follows:
ANNUAL COST
Capital O&M O&M O&M Salvage
Cost 11 MGD 16 MGD Gradient Value
Without Liner $1,228,200 39,000 46,000 350 958,000
With Liner 2,353,200 39,000 46,000 350 1,835,500
PRESENT WORTH
Project Salvage Present
Cost O&M Value Worth
Without Liner $1,597,000 477,500 293,000 1,781,500
With Liner 3,059,200 477,500 561,300 2,975,400
The 20 year capacity lagoon would require 90 acres of land.
Therefore, It was assumed that the lagoons could only be utilized at
the Salt Creek site.
8 .6 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Table 8-5 presents the Summary of Sludge Treatment and Disposal
Costs. The sludge treatment alternatives, aerobic digester-lagoon and
aerobic digester-centrifuge have the lowest present worth for
producing sludge at 10% and 20% solids concentration, respectively.
Composting has the lowest present worth of the disposal alternatives
but it requires treating the sludge to 20% solids. Therefore, this
combined treatment and disposal alternative is not the most economical
alternative.
The least cost combined treatment and disposal alternative at each
site is treating to 10% solids and soil injection. This is assuming
that land is available for soil injection at no cost to the City of
Bloomington.
It should be pointed out that the 20 year capacity unlined lagoon and
the aerobic digester alternative is the least costly alternative at
the Salt Creek Site but the land area requirements of the lagoons is
too great for inclusion at the other sites. However, if a lagoon site
could be found within reasonable distance from the other plant sites,
this could become a viable alternative at the other plant sites.
3-8-14
-------
To provide the most flexibility and reliability, it is recommended
that the sludge be treated to 20% solids via aerobic digestion and
centrifugation. This would allow disposal via composting, landfilling
and/or surface spreading. Therefore, should the composting
arrangement fail, the City of Bloomington would have alternative
disposal mechanisms readily available.
Soil injection of the 10% sludge is the least cost alternative for
sludge disposal. This is predicated on the assumption that
Bloomington will not purchase the disposal land.
However, due to the land area requirements and the unreliability of
land management arrangements, the more costly system is recommended.
3-8-15
-------
rH C ,C
CO CU 4-1
U CO M
O CU O
H M 3
P-I
O
o
O
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
CO
O
"T rH
00 vO
CU
00 OJ
CO 3
> rH
rH CO
CO >
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
3
IS
O
3
H
2:
u
c/l
w
c£
(X
o
o
m
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
HI CO
1-1 O
O CJ
o
o
CO
ON
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
a\
o
o
o
o
O
o
CO
CU
00 CU
CO 3
> rH
O
O
CD-
CD
O
O
o
o
o
a
KO
o
o
o
o
1
00
u
J
to
S
sl
u3 *t>
CO
O
00
o
o
-if
o
o
s
"3
O
o
VI
2<
in
rH
O
o
m
in
O
0
CN
rH
CN
O
O
0
.a
o
o
m
rH
rH *
O
0
rH
CN
O
'O
o
o
CN
rH
O
o
CO
CO
rH
O
o
^3-
f-^
o
o
o
o
o o
S 8
o
o
o
o
o
o
CO
rH
H
O.
CO
U
01
o
CJ
o
0
o
5
o
0
o
CO
m
ID
0
-.0
in
t
iH
O
0
o
CN
O
8
CN
O
CN
0
O
o
OO
oo
o
0
o
00
00
o
rH
o
0
o
vO
H
CU
01
00
TH
Q
U
CO
01
00
iH
Q
U
tU
no
13
a
r? '5
H U
>< CO
O 01
1-1
01
01
oo
3
rH
« co
ZZ CO
< o
o o.
CO
O -H
O
rH B
% CO
U B
CU 01
'? s
h« rt
(X, 01
hi
EH
-< CU
M
3
[I] rH
CO
CO 14
O
*> rH
CO
01
-H
*J
H
rH
-H
U
CO
(X
U
B
01
S
CO
01
H
CO
3
B
jg
B
CX
CO
til
Q
CO
CO
CJ
o
hi
PM
sr
ON
rH
n
hf
01
J3
0
U
O
«k
hi
01
*4H
n
B
to
hi
EH
r-,
00
O
0
B
O
01
H
CN
B
rH
O
CJ
cn
B
3
rH
0
CJ
n
rH
^^
O r-l
CM
3
t t
0
CJ
^j D
B
(U *J
H CO
« 0
M
CJ «U
u
5C
** M
O A*
X-N
0
CO
C?
£
3
rH
0
u
+
F*»
^
rH
x_x
CN
a
3
rH
O
CJ
1
as
o
^.-^
S
*»x.
CD
rH
N..X
VD
1-5
§
rH
O
O
IU
3
rH
eg
>
ClO
<0
!>
rH
eg
CO
oo
B
rH
o
o
1
B
rH
^N O
CO CJ
0 +
m.
0
"*' C
U*1 rH
BS
3 i
rH
O X
CJ U
o
01 J-l
3 B
rH 01
CO CO
> 01
01 PM
00
C« rH
> eg
rH U
J5.2
* , I
B U B U
CO E CU CO
CO M CJ >
H
01
U
r!
e
o
CJ
o o o o o
u cj u u u
3-8-16
-------
TABLE 8-2
ALTERNATIVE SLUDGE TREATMENT COST
Alternative Unit Processes
1 Aerobic Digester
Sludge Lagoon
2 Aerobic Digester
Vacuum Filter
3 Thickener
Vacuum Filter
Incineration
4 Aerobic Digester
Centrifuge
5 Thickener
Aerobic Digester
Sand Drying Bed
6 Anaerobic Digester
Sludge Lagoon
7 Anaerobic Digester
Vacuum Filter
8 Anaerobic Digester
Centrifuge
9 Thickener
Anaerobic Digester
Sand Drying Bed
Total Present Worth
$ 1,788,800
$ 3,818,900
$ 6,393,000
$ 3,342,300
$ 4,085,700
$ 1,951,900
$ 3,982,000
$ 3,505,400
$ 4,488,000
Rank
NOTE: TOTAL PRESENT WORTH DOES NOT INCLUDE COST FOR SLUDGE DISPOSAL, i.e.,
LAND SPREADING, LANDFILL AND COMPOSTING TRANSPORTATION COST.
3-8-17
-------
oo
vO
00
00
SO
to
SO
£\
oo
o
sO
00
M
C >*
O tO IN
H O -^
o
o
00
o
o
00
so
o
o
00
SO
o
o
00
o o o o
o o o o
^ 00 sD CO
I w > *
CN CN o> CN
oo oo -a .-I
SO U~l U^ >^
o
rH
-*
o o o o
o o o o
LH
> ^H ^^
00
0
00
O
m
-a-
o
t^ *-^
-^ to ,
a co
1 0
B
0
H
^%.
CO
CO CO c*1
ij
r^
rH
i t
CN
CO
CN
in
o"
CN
SO
CN
O
00
in
oo
so
m
a
m
ii
00
CN
r*
r*«
-a
SO
ESENT WORTH
Thomas
K C
O-i O
CO
c
-H
3
B
1
r-H
H
O
CU
CU
B r-l
CO CJ
.C
O *J
4J i-l
CU CO
^ CO
C >"*
O CO CN
H CS ^
H co
fc O
CO
a
o
o
in
-9
CO
CU CU
>t O *J
o
u -o
rH CO
ao >> B co
CO O >*
eg «ft e H at
00 O ~^ Q
T3 O H CN
SO rH O
rH r~ O O
CO rH CN > CN
-a-
-a-
U
H
£
O
f
H
co
,c
o
CU
CU
I-l
CJ
I
3-8-18
-------
TABLE 8-2
ALTERNATIVE SLUDGE TREATMENT COST
Alternative Unit Processes
1 Aerobic Digester
Sludge Lagoon
2 Aerobic Digester
Vacuum Filter
3 Thickener
Vacuum Filter
Incineration
4 Aerobic Digester
Centrifuge
5 Thickener
Aerobic Digester
Sand Drying Bed
6 Anaerobic Digester
Sludge Lagoon
7 Anaerobic Digester
Vacuum Filter
8 Anaerobic Digester
Centrifuge
9 Thickener
Anaerobic Digester
Sand Drying Bed
Total Present Worth
$ 1,788,800
$ 3,818,900
$ 6,393,000
$ 3,342,300
$ 4,085,700
$ 1,951,900
$ 3,982,000
$ 3,505,400
$ 4,488,000
Rank
NOTE: TOTAL PRESENT WORTH DOES NOT INCLUDE COST FOR SLUDGE DISPOSAL, i.e.,
LAND SPREADING, LANDFILL AND COMPOSTING TRANSPORTATION COST.
3-8-17
-------
00 00
rH in
o>
M)
in
CO
CO
00
O-
~~ ra O +~\
00 .-H
-it rH
J
CO
o
CO
-a-
T3
re
to
c >i ^
o re CN
H O -<
-a-
rH
CN
-a
rH
CN
H re
t. o
o
o
00
vO
O
o
oo
O O
O O
00 00
VO ^O
O O O O
o o o o
0
rH
M 00
re ^ o
> >H ^ »
0
m
-a-
o
~~- re -a -a-
«. o ^- m
CN
^ 1
10
01
rH
rl >, r^
S « rH
1 Q rH
C CN
O
H
CN
CTN
m
f
en
-a-
VC
CM
VO
^
CN
CO
O
00
rH
O
a\
*.
0
o
.
-a-
0
CN
IT)
O
I-N.
i-H
vO
vC
*
o
m
00
ro
IT,
i 1
CT>
r^-
CN
t i
H
os
o
3 CO
M
JZJ o
fr] r?
« H
W
M C
OH 0
4J
CO
C
iH
3
X.
01
01
c 6 ^
§re u
.c
rH U U
rH 4J (H
rl 01 »
(3 Jx( W
2
0
HH
E-i
S
P
U
z
o
o
(/)
a
M
>J
O
C/]
5^
O
CN
^
00
in
M
m
CN
CN
r--
CM
rH
^O
vC
O
rH
O
-a-
00
»
I)
Csl
O
cs
,
Cft
o
iH
O
o^
CM vO
^ in
lA ^J"
n
o m
CN .H
vO 00
CTi CN
i
CN r^
O r^
rH
CO -tf
m
-a-
re
o
o
o
CN
TJ
01
U IH
T3 rH «
rH re -rl 01
3ro o 32 >-
re o j i
33 > ~~~- C CO
~- CO O >*
a) a= c H re
oo o ^- Q
a o H CM
DO rH O
rH r-« O O
W rH CM O> CN
m
«*
m
U
H
hJ
CU
c
H
re
.e
o
|
§
j:
3-8-18
-------
00
o
SI
ol
00
00
0
H|
r»
rH
O
r-
o
-3-
i
oo
M
tJ
s
H
s
O
O
z
rH
rJ
1
|
STING
O
PM
1
O
§
H
H
^
O
CJ
en
0
t-H
iJ
O
V)
X
o
(N
fo
£
^_
«
«
w
01
rH
H
£
1
c
0
H
0}
a
a)
>\ s
ml -a-
ol en
(S
n
a
0)
>
r^
O
CM
f-H
\o
ro
«1 0
Cll VC
>
10
O
>,
CM
P^
00
vC
rH
VC
en
st
oo
m
o
r^
-3-
o
rH
o *o
vO \D O*
in tM «
rH CS CO
^
Q>
01
C B M
5 8 U
rH (J AJ
rH 4J rH
H 0) CO
Q M M
^ j
H Bl
fe a I
m
-9-
m
-3-
3-
m
CM
01
01 01
rH O -U
OO
VO
en
H
3-8-19
-------
* *
o o o o o o
o o o o o o
. *
o o o
o o o
o o o o o
o o o o o
-3- VD ON 00 O"\
0
H
o
3
o o o
o o o
o o o
o o o
ooo
o o o
ON OJ O
o o c o o
o o o o o
OJ 4J
01 rl
01 o
rl 3
a.
OO v£> rH
rH r- \o
-cr o I-H
m o *c
00 rH CN
CN O CM
O
u
» *
01 OJ
00 U
-a i
C T3
0 to
H CD
C 0) 4-1
M U [0
CO O
rH UH D.
TH rl g
O 3 O
en c/3 c_>
U O. OO
CMC
m *»H
C OJ 4J
rH U »
CO O
C "O
O CO
B 01 4J
rH CJ 0}
CO O
rH UJ O.
H rl B
O 3 O
Vj U3 U
c -a
O CO
H 0)
U U
CJ CL 00
01 C/5 B rJ
-t-i -H
C 01
c c
o o
O O
00 M
to CO CO
0 OJ 01
e** **
0 O O
U CN (N
o o o
o o o
-CO c»1 r~)
00 CN CN1 -
o o o
o o o
OO CN CM
o o o
000
00 co CO
CO CN CM
O O O O O
o o o o o
uu r" 1 I' 1 sr *d"
co CN CN n r-
oo ^j ^* m w"t
H E
aj o)
00 4J
O rH
3 01
00 00 00 00 00
a a o
CJ CJ CJ
a a o
o o o
kw U H
CJ OJ OJ
a o a
U O O
Q a Q Q a
O CJ O CJ O
o o o o o
*4 h *J h V4
4) (U D
-------
3
o
1
a
co
o
B
c
o
M
s
H
O
C
00
C
co
o
a.
o
00
0) C
00 O
o o
3 00
i-l efl
CO hJ
00
"O C
a -H -a
(0 >> 0)
CO M PQ
Q
c
JS
o
H
l-l
S!
I8
33
ca -H
> Pw
eu
oo
£
u
U 0)
H 4J
43 CO
O 0)
Vi 00
-------
CHAPTER 4
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF ALTERNATIVES
TASK _9
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
9.1 IMPACT ON THE ECOLOGY
9.1.1 General
The ecosystem of the area will be adversely impacted during
construction and operation of the proposed wastewater treatment plant
only if the mitigative measures recommended in Task 11 are not
practiced. It is recommended that a member of the Bloomington Utility
Board make frequent inspections during construction operations to
ensure that the recommended mitigative measures are implemented.
The caliber of adverse physical environmental impacts which can result
from poor engineering practices and which should be avoided in the
proposed project are described in an article appearing on page 3 of
the July 1969 Bloomington Newspaper, "The Balancer," which reports
sewer lines, siphon boxes and manholes constructed in the Bean Blossom
Flood Plain were not buried and covered properly. As a consequence,
during heavy rains the pipe lines dammed up water which became
stagnant and served as a hatching area for mosquitos. The pipelines
were uncovered and heavy siltation of the creek occurred below the
facilities.
In the following paragraphs, the possible sources of physical damage
to the aquatic and terrestrial environments due to construction and
operation activities will be considered. Table 9-! compares the
physical impacts by alternative sites for the wastewater treatment
plant.
9.1.2 Aquatic Ecology
Rare and Endangered Aquatic Organisms
No aquatic organisms appearing in the area of the proposed project are
considered rare or endangered as defined in The Federal Register
(July 1, 1975) and the U.S. Department of Interior (1974). Table 9-2
lists the aquatic organisms which have been found in the subject area.
Impacts of Interceptors and Outfalls on the Aquatic Environment Storm
water runoff carrying silt from areas excavated for interceptors,
outfalls and other facilities associated with the project could affect
the biota of Clear and Salt Creeks. The smothering influence of silt
could affect the primary producers as well as all other levels of the
food chain. Filter-feeding zooplankton are harmed because their
feeding apparatus becomes clogged. Aquatic plants are affected
because silt suspended in the water blocks out light and inhibits
photosynthesis. Dying plants consume oxygen and lower dissolved
4-9-1
-------
oxygen (DO) of the water. A decrease in DO could be harmful to fish
when they are smothered as a result of silt particles clogging their
operculum cavity and gill filaments. Silt settling on fish eggs
decreases oxygenation of the eggs, which die. This effect on fish
populations is the most severe effect of silt production.
Because the depth of soil over the bedrock is much greater in the
alluvial portion of Clear Creek near its confluence with Salt Creek,
the quantity of silt in runoff is greater there than in the upper
portions of the creek. This situation contrasts to the waters of
Clear Creek further north where topsoil is not as thick and runoff is
not as silt-laden. Observation made of the creek in August of 1975
confirmed that: near the confluence of Salt and Clear Creeks the water
was very muddy. Between Bloomington and Ketcham road, Clear Creek was
relatively clear. Heavy siltation of the creek during construction
activities would worsen the already bad siltation problem in the
southern end of Clear Creek and create a new and adverse condition if
it occurred in the northern reaches of the creek. Silt production can
be minimized if the recommended engineering practices mentioned in
Task 11 are followed.
Crossing of the creek with interceptor lines and rerouting the creek
are construction activities which are potential sources for
alterations in the natural aquatic ecology of the area if good
engineering practices are not followed. Because the creek bed is
solid limestone the dredging and blasting required for these
activities is not expected to produce a great deal of silt. While the
trench is being dug, habitats for benthic organisms in the immediate
area will be disrupted; however, after the encased pipeline is
installed the trench will be refilled with riprap consisting of the
caliber of heavy stones which now line the creek bed. These stones
will be recolonized by organisms seeded from the water passing over
them.
Proof of the ability for Clear Creek to recover from localized
devastation is shown by two historical occurrences:
1. The installation of the tertiary lagoon in the Winston Thomas
Sewage Treatment Plant
2. Rerouting the creek to accomodate expansion of the Winston Thomas
Sewage Treatment Plant
Prior to 1969, when the tertiary lagoon was built, the poor water
quality of the creek was reflected in the low species diversity for
invertebrates! and absence of fish. Since the lagoon has been
installed and the quality of sewage effluent flowing into the creek
has improved, species diversity of invertebrates has increased and the
more tolerant Cyprinidae such as the stoneroller (Campostoma anomalum)
and the creek chub (Semotilus atromaculatus) have been found near the
outfall (D.G. Frey - personal communication).
-------
When the creek was rerouted, the water channel was simply transferred
from one bedrock channel to a new one with no apparent disruptions of
the creek south of the rerouting.
Impacts of Operation on the Aquatic Ecology - Effluent
The physical effects of the effluent will depend on where the outfall
is located and the degree to which the sewage is treated. According
to Indiana State .regulations, the following levels of treatment will
be required by 1977 for discharges to Salt Creek and Clear Creek.
Salt Creek Clear Creek
BOD (Biological 10 mg/1 or 95% 5 mg/1 or 97.5%
Oxygen Demand) removal removal
Suspended Solids 10 mg/1 or 95% 5 mg/1 or 97.5%
removal removal
Phosphorus 1 mg/1 or 80% 1 mg/1 or 80%
removal removal
Ammonia Nitrogen 6.5 mg/1 in summer 1.5 mg/1 summer
no limitation 3.0 in winter
in winter
The requirements for a greater degree of treatment for effluent
discharged into Clear Creek is due to the lower dilution rate which
occurs there. When comparing the potential physical effects of the
effluent discharged into Clear Creek and Salt Creek, the two primary
considerations are:
1. The decreased flow which would occur in Clear Creek if the
effluent were no longer discharged into it
2. The chemical characteristics of the effluent when it reaches
a water intake for the city of Bedford, 13 miles downstream from
the Lake Monroe dam
Canoeing of Clear Creek is impossible during low flow conditions
which normally occur during the summer. On four sampling dates
between February 22, 1975 and April 2, 1975 (a high flow period for
the creek) the flow of Clear Creek averaged 200 MGD
(Pullman G. Douglas, 1975).
If the flow from the city's sewage treatment plant was removed from
Clear Creek and discharged into Salt Creek, Clear Creek would be
unnavigable by canoe sooner than it is now. If the outfall is moved
farther south on Clear Creek, the flow from Bloomington to the new
location will be reduced from its present level. This reduced flow
4-9-3
-------
rate which could occur if effluent were removed from Clear Creek is
significant from another standpoint: it would no longer dilute the
pollutants which drain into the creek from a variety of sources.
Hartzel et al. (1971) reported that pollution of Clear Creek above
the Winston Thomas Sewage Treatment Plant outfall came from the
following sources:
1. Oil from a creosote plant
2. Indiana University via the Jordan River which is located on
campus
3. Faulty septic tank drainage fields
4. Runoff from Bloomington
On April 2, 197L, water quality parameters which were more severe
above the sewage treatment plant when compared to those below it
included:
1. Bicarbonate alkalinity
2. pH
3. Nitrate
4. Resistivity
These parameters were improved below the outfall due to the effect of
dilution. Parameters which were more severe below the plant included
dissolved oxygen, calcium, and total phosphate. Removing the effluent
from Clear Creek or upgrading the treatment to the projected level
required for 1977 would generally improve the water quality of Clear
Creek. However, those pollutants which enter from above the point of
discharge of the Winston Thomas plant would no longer be diluted and
their concentrations would become higher than they are now below the
discharge of the Winston Thomas Plant.
Two questions have been raised concerning the effect sewage will have
on the City of Bedford's water intake on Salt Creek. The first is
whether the effluents could raise the nitrage level in the water to a
level which would be toxic to humans drinking it. The nitrate
concentrations above and below the present Winston Thomas Treatment
Plant on April 2, 1971, were 5.6 above the discharge and 2.0 ppm below
the discharge, and 3.9 and 6.6 ppm on April 9. On April 12, 1975 at
7 P.M., the nitrate concentration was 3.2 ppm at Clear Creek, 0.29 ppm
on Salt Creek and 0.3 ppm at their confluence. These were high flow
conditions. During low flow conditions, the nitrate levels may be
4-9-4
-------
considerably higher. In addition to the effluent, another source of
nitrate is the sludge injected into the land, which could be washed
off during floods. This is a potential problem only at the Salt Creek
site where the sludge injection system is proposed and where frequent
flooding occurs. The amount of nitrate which could be washed off
during floods can be controlled through manipulation of the
application rates. As discussed in Section 11.2.1, it is recommended
that if the Salt Creek site is selected, a study be carried out to
determine the application rates. Pollution of surface or ground water
with other materials as a result of the sludge injection system would
not be expected (Ken Dotson EPA, Cincinnati, personal communication).
After the effluent is discharged into a creek, the nitrate
concentration will drop as a consequence of denitrification and
nitrate reduction which occurs naturally as the creek flows southward.
There is no possibility that the nitrate concentration could reach the
50 ppm level which has been associated with infant methemaglobinemia
(Maxey-Rosenau, 1965).
There has also been some question about toxic chlorinated organics in
the effluent reaching the intake for the City of Bedford's water
supply. The chlorinated organics form as a result of the chemical
reaction of chlorine, added to the sewage for disinfection purposes,
and the organics discharged into the sewage by industries and
university laboratories. No definite statement can be made at this
time concerning this potential problem except that natural degradation
of the compounds is more likely to occur in Clear Creek which is well
aerated and further from the reservoir than will occur in Salt Creek
which is less aerated and closer to the intake. In addition, the
greater degree of treatment required for sewage discharged into Clear
Creek may result in the decomposition of the organics which could
react with chlorine and will decrease the quantity of chlorine
required for disinfection. It is recommended that the raw sewage and
chlorinated effluent from the Winston Thomas Sewage Treatment Plant be
analyzed by the gas chromatographic mass spectro-photometric method to
identify toxic chlorinated compounds that may be formed during the
chlorination process. If they are detected, alternative disinfection
systems can be designed into the proposed treatment plant.
Alternatives which could be considered include:
1. Ozonation
2. Chlorination - dechlorination
3. Bromine chloride
4. No disinfection
*"... uncontrolled and excessive use of chlorine for wastewater
disinfection may result in potential harm to both human and aquatic
life (A/WPR, April 28, 1975, p. 166) ...Alternative means of
disinfection control (dechlorination) must be considered where public health
hazards and potential adverse impact on the aquatic and humand environments
coexist, but disinfecting should not be required in those instances where
benefits are not present." (A/WPR, August 25, 1975, p. 332).
4-9-5
-------
9.1.3 Terrestrial Ecology
Rare and Endangered Terrestrial Organisms
A search of the .scientific and other literature was conducted to
determine if rare or officially designated "endangered." species might
occur in the area. Table 8-3 lists terrestrial vertebrates of
potential occurrence which are listed as "threatened" and/or
"endangered" by the U.S. Department of the Interior, Office of
Endangered Species and International Activities (1973, 1974). Because
critical nesting habitat for the two birds is abs-.nt from the area,
and caves which would attract the bat (Hall 1962) are unknown in the
areas potentially affected, it is believed that effects of
construction would be neglible at any site proposed.
Impact of Interceptors and Outfalls on Terrestrial Ecology
Interceptor and connector sewers necessary for the several
alternatives under study would require trenches of depth and width
appropriate to provide drainage by gravity. If the Salt Creek site is
chosen, it will require interceptors. The interceptors will require
trenches about 2m (6 feet) wide, no less than 2.7 m (9 feet) deep, and
extending for varying lengths, but in no instance less than several
kilometers.
One hundred foot construction right-of-ways and 50 foot permanent
right-of-ways are required for interceptors. After the trench was
closed, vegetation could become reestablished along the right-of-way,
and in fact would be essential to prevent damage from erosion and to
limit penetration of frost.
It would be necessary to maintain a road for vehicles along the entire
length of the right-of-way to permit inspection and repair to the
facility. Manholes would protrude at intervals. Consequently,
construction of any sewer so large as the several proposed in
alternative plans in the present project must be assumed to have
significant effect, much of which will not diminish for the useful
life of the sewer, and much lasting long after the sewer line has lost
its utility. The following paragraphs discuss in some detail uhe
effects probable from constructing such sewers.
The effects of clearing a wide swath through fields and woodlands, or
along the riparian vegetation bordering such a stream as Clear Creek,
are manifestly significant, whether or not they can be quantified in a
particular instance. Vegetation would be destroyed. Consequently,
4-9-6
-------
the area would become untenable, at least during construction, for
many kinds of animals dependent on that vegetation. Any such project
as those considered here clearly has unavoidable influence on vast
areas. For example, a right-of-way only 100 feet wide would occupy
about 12 acres per mile (i.e., a right-of-way 30 m wide and 1.6 km
long would occupy 4.9 ha).
If the interceptor is built to the Salt Creek site, it should clearly
affect riparian communities to the almost total exclusion of uplands,
and the right-of-way would traverse cropland at almost every point
where it was not in woods.
The riparian vegetation which would be removed by construction is
suitable habitat for a variety of game species of recreational
importance, as well as some species which are apparently incompletely
harvested Ce.g., raccoons, Procyon lotor). More hunter pressure is
apparently placed on upland game birds (e.e., ring-necked pheasants,
Phasianus colchicus) in the adjacent croplands, and destruction of
forest growth would probably increase the attractiveness of the area
traversed by the sewer to hunters during a brief part of the year.
Clear Creek is a moderately severely polluted stream, presently
ill-suited for most aquatic sports for much of its length. However,
it is presently used during the period of high water in the winter for
canoeing; it has been characterized as the "only" sizable reach of
water suitable for canoeing in a radius of 30 miles or more from
Bloomintgon. The riparian growth, while difficult to traverse on
foot, offers a potentially rewarding experience to hikers along the
stream. The Cedar Cliffs preserve, owned by the Nature Conservancy,
is in fact worthy of protection as a wild area; and it is recommended
strongly that no construction be considered which would degrade the
area.
The presently proposed sewer routing, and any other along Clear Creek
that seems to be economically feasible, would have little adverse
effect on agriculture. Digested sludge probably would be a beneficial
soil adjuvant in the area, and consequently its availability would
encourage agricultural use of bottom lands.
The importance of forest industries in the region appears to be small
at present, though some large and consequently merchantable trees have
been noted in the riparian community. However, the destruction of
timber associated with construction of the proposed sewer would be
deleterious in proportion to its extensiveness.
4-9-7
-------
The use of Clear Creek for recreational purposes might be fostered if
adequate sewage treatment were to be instituted to ensure its
attractiveness throughout the year. Use of the creek for aquatic
sports, including fishing, might well induce the construction of
summer homes or year-round residences along its course. Such use
would probably depend upon the availability of convenient sewer
connections.
Information on potential industrial development which might be
encouranged by constructing the sewer is not known.
Man can influence succession in many ways. Some of these involve the
establishment of almost permanent disclimaxes. Egler and Foote (1975)
provide a hook-length summary of techniques for stabilizing the
vegetation of rights-of-way, and review the scientific literature.
One economically advantageous course of management of the right-of-way
would provide for establishing shrubs along the boundaries of the
affected area and limiting growth in the center to grasses and other
herbaceous vegetation too low to interfere with the passage of off-
road vehicles. Experience elsewhere suggests that such
self-sustaining plant communities could be established in this area by
making appropraite plantings initially. However, experiments have not
to our knowledge yet been performed which would definitively
demonstrate the feasibility of such techniques, and it may be
necessary to limit growth in part by mechanical and/or chemical means.
However, if vegetation on rights-of-way is maintained, we assume here
that a stable plant community can in fact be established, and that the
growth-form of the plants will be various, ranging from grasses and
low shrubs to tall trees. The habitats afforded by such a community
will be more productive of game and other animals than if a sharp
delimintation of forest from an artifically-maintained grassland type
existed, because of the phenomenon of edge effect (Leopold
1933:131-132, Ghiselin 1975).
9.2 Impact on the Visual Aesthetics
While the design of the plant and the arrangements may differ slightly
from site to site, the visual impact of the plant site will depend
largely upon its position wihin the landscape with .respect to both
terrain and natural vegetation, as well as upon the number and
position of potential viewers, and the duration or frequency of the
view. Since each sense is not entirely independent of each other, the
odor associated with a plant might easily influence the visual
register of the plant.
Of all the potential sites, only one, the existing Winston Thomas Site
is located within an existing or planned development corridor. One
might theorize that this plant has been there for such a long time
4-9-8'
-------
that the average person wouldn't even be visually bothered by a
different plant site configuration. Nonetheless, it is here where
trailers, residences, and apartments are located in relatively close
proximity on the hills overlooking the site to the west of Clear
Creek. A good part of the view from this residential development
along Rogers Road is visually screened from the site by the natural
tree line found between the residences and along the railroad and
Clear Creek. In addition, views are possible from the Gordon Road
trailer development as well as from traffic passing along Old State
Route 37, the main north-south artery.
Both the Salt Creek and the Dillman Plant Sites would be visible from
State Route 37 Bypass, the Dillman Site for a shorter duration than
the Salt Creek Site. The latter is, however, more distant from the
viewer, in this case from a vehicle, than would be the Dillman Site.
The Dillman Site is, however, tucked into a narrow landform depression
at a point where the highway alignment changes quickly and, therefore,
probably eliminating any long duration vistas toward the site, which
might be more prevalent at the Salt Creek Site.
The Ketcham Site is the most visually removed of all the sites. Both
Dillman and Salt Creek are located well outside the limits of planned
growth corridors, so they shouldn't be surrounded by development which
might intensify their future visual impact. The Salt Creek site does,
however, sit adjacent to the boundary of a potential seasonal
development which would overlook the site.
9.3 Impact on the Traffic Pattern
Traffic impacts are expected to be minimum with peak truck traffic
expected during sludge removal. Most of the plant sites are located
relatively close to major arteries; with Dillman, Ketcham, and Salt
Creek having access via State Route 37 Bypass; and Winston Thomas and
Rogers via Old State Road 37. In this regard, the impact will be
relatively more significant in the more urbanized locations, however,
all of these major highways have significant traffic capacity to add a
few more trucks, approximately fifteen round trips per day.
The Dillman Site cannot be reached without a new bridge over Clear
Creek since the present bridge is one lane wide and limited to five
tons. Construction truck traffic, especially cement trucks, would
have trouble getting to this site unless a new bridge were to be
constructed. The fact that a new bridge would be constructed here as
part of the creek relocation would result in a positive impact.
The Ketcham Road Site probably has the most inadequate and hazardous
highway access of all the sites. Not only is Ketcham Road narrow, but
its intersections with State Route 37 and Fluckmill Road are
hazardous. In addition, the railroad underpass may be too low to
allow for construction truck traffic to pass under it. The only other
access way to this site is via Victor Road, a narrow, curving, rural
residential road.
The Salt Creek site offers few, if any, potential traffic impacts.
4-9-9
-------
References
Egler, F. C.; and S. R. Foote, 1975. The Plight of the Right-of-way Domain,
Victim of Vandalism. Futura Media Services, Inc., Mount Kisco, N.Y. 2 vols.
Ghiselin, J. 1975. The Edge Index: A Method for Comparing Terrestrial
Species Diversity. Bull. Ecol. Soc. Amer. 56(2):14. (Abstr.)
Gray, H. H.; Howe, P. A.; Randolph, J. C.; Roberts, M. C.: and White, N. L.
1975. A Technical Report on a Selected Portion of the Lake Monroe Watershed.
Indiana University School of Public and Environmental Affairs, Center for
Urban and Regional Analysis Bloomington.
Hall, J. S. 1962. A Life History and Taxonomic Study of the Indiana Bat,
Myotis sodalis. Reading Publ. Mus. Sci. Publ. No. 12. 68 pp.
Hartzel, M. H.; Hobbs, H. H.; Paterson, K.: and Seechausen, S.; 1971. The
Headwaters of Clear Creek Drainage - A Comparative Study - A Class Report
for Dr. D. G. Frey, Unpublished. U. of Indiana, Bloomington.
Hawn, G.; and J. A. Huber. 1975. A Study of the Diversity of the
Macroinvertebrates of Clear Creek After Sewage Outfall. A class Report for
Dr. D. G. Frey, Unpublished. U. of Indiana, Bloomington.
Leopold, Aldo. 1933. Game Management. New York (Charles Scribner's Sons):
xxi + 481 p. ill.
Maxcy, K. F.; and M. J. Rosenau. In Preventive Medicine and Public Health,
P. E. Sartwell, Ed. (New York, Appleton - Century - Crofts, 1956).
Pullman, Douglas G., 1975. A Survey of Clear Creek and Salt Creek Near
Their Confluence South of Bloomington, Indiana - A Class Report for
Dr. D. G. Frey, Unpublished. U. of Indiana, Bloomington.
Restle, Barbara, 1969. State To Investigate Bloomington's Sewer Installation,
The Balancer, July P. 3 Bloomington, Indiana.
Shelford, Victor E. 1963. The Ecology of North America. Urbana (Univ.
111. Press): xxii + 1-610 pp., 195 ill.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife,
Office of Endangered Species and International Activities. 1973. Threatened
wildlife of the United States. Resource Publ. 114. 289 pp.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of
Endangered Species and International Activities. 1974. United States
list of endangered fauna. 22 pp.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 1975. Threatened
or Endangered Fauna or Flora Tuesday, July; 1975. Federal Register.
4-9-10
-------
c -
CU t, O C
O. O -H O
O 14-j 4J *H
T-H U 4J
en TH 3 u
CO T3 00 3
T3 ---i O C >H
C 4-1 |H *H 4-1
3 C Pu IH CO
0 01 3 C
i-l 4-J 4-t Q O
O O i-H CJ
Cu -H
§ §
O O
c c
e e
o
vO
o
IN
O
O
o -o
cu
4-> OP
H 3
tO T3
H O
PL, -H
O ~-' cn
14H CU ptj
O IH
CJ J3 73
4-1 4-1 CU
eu IH TH u
o) to 3 3
In 0) T3
T-H 01
CJ pti
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
"i os
o <
Pi PL,
tn
S Z
PL, 04
U
OS H
01 CU
00 ^
V4 tO
tO 4-1
J= C
O M
CO
e to
o 3
I-l
tt, T3
0) O
(J UH
C "O
to 0)
4J PQ
CO
H O
Q H
a o o
H 14J
4-1 4-1 CU
c c pa
cu 01
4J (= 4J
o -u e -
PL, to 01 01
M rH to
Jd H 14H 4-1
CU <4H C
01 i-l W M
CJ I-, T3 T3
3 0) IH
4-1 4-1 00 O
rH to IH MH
tO Z to T3
en js o)
IH CJ P3
C O CO
O t4H *H
o
E
o
T3
to
o
O IH
Z rH
00 T5
C CO 01
H t-H IH
CO CU -H
01 C 3
O C CT
T3
01
O CO g
Z tO 10
CO
00 T3
C 0)
H
CO
to
3
cj cu 6 cr
C 4J IH 01
w en cj ocj
CU T3
IH 01
O IH 3
IH to cr
01 01 CU
O! T-H «
0)
>H
CO CO
01 01
>H >H
tti CU
c
0)
00
o
PS
13
tO
o
a
s:
o
4-9-11
-------
Fish
TABLE 9-2
AQUATIC ORGANISMS FOUND IN LAKE MONROE AND
EXPECTED IN SALT CREEK1
Largemouth bass
Bluegill
White crappie
Black crappie
Yellow perch
Yellow bass
Carp
Black bullhead
Yellow bullhead
Channel catfish
White sucker
Spotted sucker
Redear sunfish
Pumpkinseed
Longear sunfish
Green sunfish
Warmouth
Orange-spotted sunfish
Redhorse
Rockbass
Smallmouth bass
Flathead catfish
Northern pike
Micropterus salmoides
Lepomis macrochirus
Pomoxis annularis
Pomoxis nigromaculatus
Perca flavescens
Morone mississippiensis
Cyprinus carpio
Ictalurus melas
Ictalurus natalis
Ictalurus punctatus
Catostomus commersoni
Minytrema melanops
Lepomis microlophus
Lepomis gibbosus
Lepomis megalotis
Lepomis syanellus
Lepomis gulosus
Lepomis humilis
Moxostoma sp.
Ambloplites rup_estr_is
Micropterus dplomieui
Pylodictis oliyari^
Esox lucius
From Gray et al 1975
4-9-12
-------
TABLE 9-2 (Continued)
Nannoplankton Algae and Protozoa
Melosira italica
Meloslra sp.
Dinobryon divergens
Dinobryon bavaricum
Stephanodiscus sp.
Merismopedia tenuisslma
Merismopedia minor
Ankistrodesmus sp.
Cryptomonas sp.
Fragilaria crotonensis
Chroococcus limenticus
Chroococcus minor
Mallomonas akrokomas
Mallomonas sp.
Coelastrum sp.
Asterionella formosa
Anabaena lemmermanni
Coelosphaerium kutzingianum
Strombidium viride
4-9-13
-------
TABLE 9-2 (Continued)
Zooplankton
Protozoa
Codonella
Ceratium
Difflugia cristata
peritrich
Rotifera
Ascomorpha
Asplanchna
Branchionus
Colurella
Conochilus
Filinla
Gastropus
Kellicottia
Keratella cochlearis
Polyarthra euryptera
Polyarthra vulgaris
Rotatoria
Trichocerca
Cladocera
Alona sp.
Alonella sp.
Bosmina coregoni
Ceriodaphnia lacustris
Chydorus spaericus
Daphnia laevis
Daphnia retrocurva
Diaphanosoma leuchtenbirgeanum
Holopedium gibberum
Leptodora kindtii
Pleuroxus denticulatus
Pseudosida bidentata
Sida crystallina
Copepoda
Cyclops (2 sp.)
Limnocalanus
Diaptomus
Ostracoda
4-9-14
-------
TABLE 9-2 (Continued)
Phytoplankton
1. Cyanophyceae
Chroococcales
Chroococcus
Coelospaerium
Dactylococcopsis
Gloeocapsa
Gomphosphaeria
Marssoniella
Merismopedia
Microcystis
Chaemae s iphonales
Pleurocapsa
Oscillatoriales
Anabaena
Lyngbya
Oscillatoria
2. Chlorophyceae
Chloroccoccales
Ankistrodesmus
Crucigenia
Lauterborniella
Oocystis
Pediastrum
Scenedesmus
Tetraedron
Tetrasporales
Gloeocystis
Volvocales
Volvox
Zygnematales
Closterium
Cosmarium
Gonatozygon
Micrasterias
Spirogyra
Staurastrum
3. Chrysophyccae
Dinobryon
Mallomonas
Ochromonas
4. Xanthophyceae
Asterogloea
Ophiccytium
5. Bacillariophyceae
Centrales
Cyclotella
Meloslra
Stephanodiscus
Terpisnoe
Pennales
Amphiprora
Amphora
Asterionella
Cymbella
Fragilaria
Gyrosigma
Navicula
Neidium
Nitzschia
Surirella
Synedra
Tabellaria
4-9-15
-------
TABLE 9-2 (Continued)
Aquatic Organisms Found in Clear Creek
Monera
Sphaerotilus
Algae
Chlorophyta (green algae)
Volvocales
Chlamydomonas
Tetrasporales
Tetraspora
Ulotrichales
Ulothrix
Stigeoclonium
Chaetophora
Coleochaete
Cladophorales
Cladophora
Oedogonlales
Oedogonium
Zygnematales
Zygnema
Spirogyra
Chlorococcales
Ankistrodesmus
Desmidiales
Closterium
Cosmarium
Euglenophyta (euglenoids)
Euglenales
Euglena
Peranema
Chrysophyta (yellow-green algae & diatoms)
Chrysomonadales
Synura
Pennales
Tabellaria
Diatomella
Meridion
Diatoma
Fragilaria
Synedra
Asterionella
Ceratoneis
4-9-16
-------
TABLE 9-2 (Continued)
Cocconeis
Brebissonia
Gyrosigmia
Anomoeneis
Amphipleura
Navicula
Cymbella
Amphora
Gomphonema
Gomphoeneis
Aphanotheca
Nitzschia
Bacillaria
Denticula
Centronella
Cyanophyta (blue-green algae)
Anacystis
Oscillatoria
Lyngbya
Spirulina
Vascular Plants
Najadaceae (pondweed)
Potomogeton
Protozoa
Sarcodina
Amoeba
Ciliata
Vorticella
Coelenterata
Hydrozoa
Hydra
Platyhelminthes (flatworms)
Turbellaria
Dugesia
Aschelminthes
Nematoda
Rotifera
4-9-17
-------
TABLE 9-2 (Continued!
Tardigrada
Annelida
Oligochaeta
Aeolosoma
Tubifex
Lumbricus terrestris
Hirudinea
Glossophonidae
Piscicolidae
Pisicola
Mollusca
Gastropoda (snails)
Lymnaea
Goniobasis
Campeloma
Physa
Helisoma
Pelecypoda (bi-valves)
Sphaerium
Musculium
Arthropoda
Chelicerata
Arachnida
Arthropoda
Crustacea
Malacostraca
Isopoda
Asellus
Lirceus
Amphipoda
Ganmarus
Haustoriidae
Decapoda
Cambaru8 laevis
C_. d_^ diogenes
Orconectes p. propinquus
Insecta
Apterygota
Collembola (springtails)
4-9-18
-------
TABLE 9-2 (Continued)
Pterygota
Ephemeroptera (mayflies)
Ephemeridae
Hexagenia
Heptageniidae
Stenonema
Baetidae
Neocloeon
Odonata (dragonflies)
Anisoptera
Aeschnidae
Gomphidae
Zygoptera
Agrionidae
Nehallenia
Plecoptera (stoneflies)
Perlidae
Atoperla
Isoperlidae
Isoperla
Hemiptera (true bugs)
Corixidae
Notonectidae
Gerridae
Neuroptera
Corydalidae
Corydalus
Coleoptera (beetles)
Elmidae
Stenelmis
Haliplidae
Peltodytes
Hydrophilidae
Psephenidae
Psephenus
Trichoptera (caddisflies)
Rhyacophilidae
Hesperophyla
Hydropsychidae
Drydropsyche
Hydrophilidae
Limnephilidae
4-9-19
-------
TABLE 9-2 (Continued)
Diptera (flies)
Tipulidae
Chironomidae
Chironomus
Tipulidae
Hexatoma
Simulidae
Culicidae
Culex
Chordata
Osteichthyes
Cyprinidae (carps & minnows)
Campostoma anomalum
Pimephales notatus
Semotilus atromaculatus
Ericymba buccata
Centrarchidae (sunfish)
Lepomis cyanellus
Percidae (perch)
Etheostoma spectabile
_£._ flabellare
E. nigrum
Amphibia
Urodela (salamanders)
Plethodontidae
Anura (frogs & toads)
Rana catesbeiana
Reptilia
Squamata (lizards & snakes)
Natrix s. sipedon
4-9-20
-------
TABLE 9-3
TREES OF THE RIVER BOTTOMS
Common Name Scientific Name
Black walnut Juglans nigra
American hornbeam Carpinus caroliniana
Oak Quercus sp.
Chestnut oak Quercus prinus
Elm Ulmus sp.
Hackberry Celtis sp.
Sassafras Sassafras albidum
Sycamore Platanus occidentalis
Wild black cherry Prunus serotina
Water locust Gleditsia aquatica
Silver maple Acer saccharinum
Basswood Tilia americana
Ash Fraxinus sp.
RARE AND ENDANGERED TERRESTRIAL VERTEBRATES POTENTIALLY
OCCURRING IN THE STUDY AREA
Common Name Scientific Name Remarks
Peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus sspp. Possibly transient
Kirtland's warbler Dendroica kirtlandii Possibly transient
Indiana bat Myotis sodalis Possibly summer
resident
4-9-21
-------
Common Name
True Solomon's seal
Hydrangea
Wood-sorrel
Poison ivy
Jewel weed
Black-eyed Susan
Ironweed
TABLE 9-3 (Continued)
HERBS AND SHRUBS OF THE RIVER BOTTOMS
Scientific Name
Polygonatum commutatum
Hydrangea sp,,
Oxalis sp.
Rhus radleans
Impatiens sp.
Rudbeckia hirta
Vernonia sp.
4-9-22
-------
TASK 10
INDUCED DEVELOPMENT - LAKE MONROE
10.1 INTRODUCTION
10.1.1 Regionalization Issue
The issue of induced development and its secondary impacts on Lake
Monroe assumes the eventual development of sewerage service. The
issue of how this service will emerge or develop and what form it will
take is also the issue within the regionalization issue. Without a
regional interceptor around the lake and a near term demand of 3.0 MGD,
there would really be little need to locate a plant sized to serve the
Bloomington Region at the lake.
Both the Bloomington and the Lake Monroe Regional Waste District 201
Plans assumed that the Lake Regional System and single regional
treatment at Salt Creek was the best alternative. The reaction
following this conclusion was that widespread environmental damage
would result from the increased development at the lake.
10.1.2 Other Questions and Considerations
The Consultant, based upon independent analysis and many unanswered
questions about the market potential, timing, and other factors, has
found it extremely difficult to theorize induced impacts at Lake
Monroe. There are no real assurances that many of these proposed or
potential developments around the lake are actually viable
undertakings. On this basis, the economic feasibility of the regional
sewer system for the lake is questionable, as is the matter of how
such a system could somehow be constructed so as to logically and
sequentially serve development proposals as they fall due. It is also
difficult to corroborate the Lake Monroe Regional Waste District
rationale for near term sewerage service in light of the lack of firm
commitments.
Also worthy of consideration is the possibility that sewer development
itself may well not be the overriding consideration on whether the
Lake Monroe area grows or not. In fact, considerations of the market
for second homes, the money market, and potential income tax reform
might override the sewer question.
One thing that is obvious is that the nature of the regional system as
proposed benefits the large scale developer who can afford the interim
treatment facilities needed, costs of pumping and injecting into the
force main, and what is anticipated to be a rather expensive system to
operate.
4-10-1
-------
There are enough other uncertainties attached to expectations for
development around the lake to further cloud the issue, the main one
being the fact that the State of Indiana is the biggest and most
successful developer around the lake.
Further complicating this analysis is the lack of readily available
data, the multiplicity of public and private interests which are often
times strongly Intertwined, and the lack of any overall coordinated
water and land use goals and policies.
The potential growth of the lake area will for the most part depend on
future expectations in seasonal and recreational housing. Trends
within the latter market are probably far more significant with
respect to inducing development than the construction of a regional
sewer system around Lake Monroe. Conversely, without the market,
there will in aLI probability be no demand for such a sewer system.
Present knowledge of the potential market for seasonal and
recreational development at Lake Monroe is indeed limited, even as
limited as current information regarding the multitude of lake side
private projects talked about, but never evidently entering the
planning and scheduling stages. Balanced against the total market
considerations must certainly be the physical, chemical, and
recreational carrying capacity of the lake itself, and the watershed
draining into it. Hopefully, the ongoing land capability plan will
better address some of these issues.
There are a multitude of federal and state agencies in a position to
influence the development in and around the lake either directly or
indirectly. These include the U.S. Forest Service, the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, the Farmers Home Administration, and EFA at the
federal level. At the state level, the Department of Natural
Resources and Department of Health are in a position to influence land
development potential. At the local level, the Lake Monroe Regional
Waste District and the Monroe County Planning Commission are in a
position to directly influence the rate and direction of growth.
10 .2 THE UNIQUE ROLE OF THE STATE OF INDIANA
The State of Indiana, through its Natural Resources Department,
occupies a very special and privileged role in the real estate aspects
of Lake Monroe development. The State indirectly influences lake
recreational usage by controlling public access points to the lake and
lakeside facilities, since they are the only lakeside developer having
direct access to the lake from the shoreline other than the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers.
This consideration means that the State may be in a position to
influence development and change within the Lake Monroe watershed to
an even greater degree than some of the proposed seasonal
developments, particularly when one investigates the complete lack of
a definitive timetable for the latter.
4-10-2
-------
How did the State get into this unique pisition? The Corps of
Engineers and the State shared in the cost of developing the lake with
the Corps retaining ownership of abutting lands. For the most part,
this ownership corresponds to a specified lineal height above the
flood pool elevation. In some cases this lake buffer strip is rather
narrow. In other cases, additional lands were purchased to protect
and control waterside views, etc. While many argue that the buffer is
too narrow and possibly not totally enforced, in fact, there are no
properties abutting the lake that have direct access to the lake
because of this buffer, except those leased by the State.
The State leases its recreational areas, boat ramps and campgrounds
from the Corps of Engineers on a long term basis. In turn, the State
subleases this prime waterfront property to private developers. A
good example at Lake Monroe is the Four Winds Marina initially built
by Ramada Inns and recently sold to Aircoa. The Four Winds Marina is
a resort hotel with recreational facilities and water facilities
including direct lake access. At present, there are only two ways of
enjoying the lake, either going to a public access point or to the
Four Winds.
If there are no major restrictions on subleasing of leased recreation
areas, the major portion of which consists of open land, then it would
be inconceivable for another commercial-resort type of development
locating at the lake and competing with Four Winds without similar
lakeside access unless the development were non-water oriented. If
the lake access is taken away, there should be little, if any,
incentive to locate a resort near Lake Monroe.
The State was asked if it had a master plan for development of its
property around the lake. The reply indicated that the Department of
Natural Resources felt the Lake Monroe Regional Waste District 201
Plan was the Lake Master Plan.
The State's influence in a real estate sense is not just confined to
its properties, but has application and impact upon seasonal and
second home development expectations around the lake. An example in
this regard is The Pointe. The Pointe is a planned condominium
development being constructed along the northwestern shoreline of Lake
Monroe. The shoreline is fairly wooded and The Pointe does not have
lake access. In fact, the tree line along the shore all but hides the
view of the lake from intermediate and lower slope positions below the
tree line. The developers of The Pointe have spent considerable
monies and taken great pains to develop key front end recreational
draws such as a tournament golf course, club house and pro-shop. Each
phase or village within the development will have tennis courts and
swimming pools as the major attractions. Even with these attractions,
the developers made arrangements with the Four Winds Marina (which
sits on land subleased from the State) for access to the lake for
boating and swimming.
Telecon, with Carl North, Department of Natural Resources, State
of Indiana.
4-10-3
-------
Assuming there will be a limit to the number of private agreements
that the Four Winds Marina can make, the combined draw of The Pointe
recreation and water access will make it extremely difficult for other
developers to compete with it, since later developments will probably
not be able to emulate The Pointe's fortuitous position, i.e., not
able to overcome this competitive advantage, unless the State
subleases additional lands.
If there are to be no more subleases and arrangements for private lake
access, then all subsequent developers will have to appeal to a market
of persons prepared to drive a considerable distance to a lake that
they cannot see or directly use, except at public facilities, the use
of which will probably be self-governing due to congestion that will
discourage use somewhat.
10.3 SEWER SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT
Basic to the question of servicing Lake Monroe is the question of how
such a system might develop. Sewer systems are not developed in a
vacuum years in advance of actual need. Nor are systems conceived,
designed, funded and constructed overnight. The regional system
proposed around Lake Monroe in the 201 Plan consists of a force main
with each individual proposed development served by a lift station,
lifting the sewag;e up the hill. A force main is pressurized, and
access is limited to points where sewage may be injected into the
system. This would tend to effectively limit the size of developments
around the lake t:o large ones. It is not likely that small
developments would be able to pass through pump station and other
associated costs onto the cost of housing as effectively as large
scale developers.
Except for public recreation areas and facilities and The Pointe
seasonal development, there is no current or near term demand for a
regional collection system around the entire lake. Of the
developments proposed around the Lake, few if any are located near
enough to one another to easily support a regional collection system.
The collection system would have to pass through large sections of
open land with little prospect of picking up additional flows along
the way. Few, if any of these seasonal projects, can at this time
produce even a tentative time table or development schedule. In fact,
no one can say with certainty, if or even when, these projects will
ever be constructed, although it seems safe to conclude that The
Pointe will be completed.
This means that the lakewide system as proposed in the LMRWD 201 Plan
would have to develop internally with each development culminating in
either a package treatment plant or connection to the regional
collection system, if accessible at that time in that area. This will
increase the total economic cost of the system since the temporary
sewage treatment costs will have to be quickly written off. The
financing of such a system has to be tenuous when one considers that
potential customers along the way may not be ready to participate at
4- 10-4
-------
the time the collector system is being financed, or that if one or two
developments along the system have financial difficulties or fold, the
costs would then be picked up by few users.
The U.S. Forest Service is in a position to influence the routing and
timing of interceptor development, and it has gone on record as
intending to withhold permission for sewer line easements across its
property. In some cases, this will merely mean rerouting, in others
it might mean that no service can be provided.
The west side of the lake has been shown to be more suitable for
development because it is more accessible; the general terrain is more
amenable for development; and temporary sewerage service is now
available there. Three of the five seasonal developments proposed on
the south side of the lake could pump their sewage up and discharge
effluent out of the lake basin without having to construct an
expensive collection system. Such an opportunity is not possible on
the north and west side of the lake. The proposed development around
the causeway near Paynetown recreation area is physically located
closer to the existing Winston Thomas treatment plant than to the
proposed Salt Creek site, but drains toward the lake.
Even if the sewers were to be constructed, there is no guarantee that
every seasonal development proposed for the lake will in fact be
constructed. Rather, this will depend more upon the market demand and
the money market for seasonal housing.
10.4 PROJECTED LAND USE PATTERNS/ZONING
No real pattern has developed to date around Lake Monroe. The lack of
an overall coordinated land use plan for Lake Monroe is detrimental to
orderly development in light of the intricate web of governmental,
quasi-governmental, and private interests in and around the lake.
There is not a single level of government that is not intricately
involved in Lake Monroe's development; and yet there is not one single
agency or mechanism that can guarantee or ensure such coordination at
this time.
The actual responsibility for land use planning and the legislative
controls rests with the Monroe County Planning Commission. The Lake
Monroe Regional Waste District, a single purpose agency responsible
for utility planning and development, has taken the role of the lead
agency in fostering coordinative land use planning. This agency
contracted with the Indiana University of Public Affairs to prepare an
environmentally oriented land capability plan for eventual use by
local officials. This plan reportedly will show how to best plan for
the long term use and enjoyment of the land compatible with continued
beneficial use of the lake. Unfortunately, this material is only
approaching the stage where it can be utilized in land policy planning
efforts; and this report must precede those efforts.
4-10-5
-------
The Monroe County Zoning Ordinance is the land use control document in
effect around the lake. This document was prepared after the Lake
Monroe 201 plan, but the zoning pattern does not particularly
correspond to or reflect the sewer plan, except in some isolated
spots.
The land surrounding Lake Monroe is zoned for a wide variety of
activity patterns. Most of Salt Creek and Polk Townships are located
within a Forest Reserve Zone.2 The intent of this zone is to include
rough terrain and also publicly owned forest land. While these
townships are almost exclusively zoned for reserve usage, which is
quite restrictive in its standards, huge tracts of land within this
reserve are set aside for business, presumably to allow for planned
developments and commercial recreational activities within these two
townships. The largest business districts correspond roughly with the
Graves-Monroe-Inland Steel tracts near the north end of the causeway,
and Tan-Tara on the south side of the causeway. Neither of these
projects now have a definitive time schedule. It would appear that
the force main needed to serve these units will require an easement
across Federal Forest Land, unless the Moore Creek inlet on Lake
Monroe is to be crossed nearer the Paynetown recreation area. The
county zoning plan requires a minimum lot size of 4.5 acres in this
forest reserve, and the county health department requires a permit for
lots under ten acres in size. Within the business district,
residences may be built at a density of 6 units per acre with public
sewers.
Most of the remainder of the lakefront within Clear Creek and Perry
Townships is zoned for residential usage with .4 acre lots allowed
with community water systems and on-lot sewerage;, and .8 acre lots
with on-lot water and sewer systems. The only substantial sized
business district here adjoins the Fairfax recreation area .and
Harrodsburg. What fostered this delineation of these two districts in
this location is not known. The Consultant has no knowledge of
specific developments proposed here. It is interesting that the only
planned unit development under construction in the county was not
zoned similar to the many other potential seasonal developments
located around the lake which were zoned for business.
Another curious zoning district configuration is the noticeable lack
of an agricultural district within the Lake Monroe area except for the
property immediately surrounding The Pointe. Considering the
potential for sewering this area, it would appear that this would be a
prime area for additional development. The intent of the agricultural
district is, according to the County Zoning Ordinance, to provide
areas in which little or no urbanization has occurred or is likely to
occur in the near future. Lots used for residences in the
agricultural district would have to be the same size as in the Forest
Reserve District, 4.5 acres.
Monroe County Zoning Ordinance
4-10-6
-------
The remainder of the land is residential!;? zoned. The intent of the
residential zoning is either to include, areas that can be served by
water and sewage utility systems, principally near state highways and
present urban centers, or to include areas that have been subject to
urbanization on a scattered pattern, principally along county
highways.
Under the terms of the county zoning ordinance, approximately 16.5
square miles of land around the lake is zoned for residential use; 3.5
for agricultural; 25 square miles for forest reserve; and about 3
square miles for business. Under the present zoning umbrella, some
13,200 lots could be spread out on these 16.5 square miles supporting
some 32,000 to 40,000 people, with on-lot sewers and septic tanks
flowing into rather unsuitable receiving soils.
1Q5 PHYSICAL CONSTRAINTS
The lake is assumed to have an absolute limit in terms of recreation
carrying capacity although this limit has not yet been ascertained.
Some sources have indicated that based upon certain standards of boats
per acre of water, the lake is now overutilized. The Department of
Health has evidently held off issuing permits to discharge effluent
into the lake. Statements have been made that the lake is
environmentally phosphate sensitive. Land activities such as clear
cutting for development and exposing unstable and easily erodable
steep soils, if uncontrolled, will only increase the potential for
soil erosion and sedimentation. Once areas are developed, additional
nutrients will be derived from fertilizer runoffs, etc., even if the
sewage problem is solved. Development not sewer connected will only
increase the potential for groundwater seepage and lake pollution. As
more development occurs, it is probable the usage of the lake will
increase. With increased boating, the chance for wave and bank
erosion and oil spill finding its way into the reservoir becomes more
likely.
With few exceptions, the general landform, geology, topography soils
and rather poor road structures would not be considered conducive to
normal construction and development. The road pattern is almost
exclusively restricted to the ridges, since the impoundment covers the
former valley floor.
Lake Monroe's soils are severely restricted in terms of development of
new highways, basements, and on-lot septic systems. The major
limiting factor is the steep slope, and the next is shallow bedrock
conditions. The Lake Monroe terrain is quite rough and steep, and
highly credible. The area's present land use is predominantly
woodland. Any changes in land use are bound to have more of a
physical Impact here than elsewhere on less sloping lands.
4-10-7
-------
It is anticipated that ongoing land capability studies and future
models will better pinpoint the specific limiting parameters of the
environment at Lake Monroe, The environmental capability plan is a
forerunner in this regard, and is expected to culminate in the
adoption of additional environmental constraints and controls on
development designed to protect the quality of the lake and its
environs.
1Q.6 DISCUSSION OF SECONDARY IMPACTS
The secondary impacts from the proposal generally fall into one of two
categories, physical or fiscal impact. The physical impacts relate to
changes as they result from cutting of vegetation, clearing and
improvement of land, paving over of pervious soils, reworking the
landscape, changes in density of population and their effects on
traffic, sewage flow, water usage, increased demands upon lake usage,
fertilizer runoffs, etc. The fiscal impacts include all the increased
demands upon municipal services and facilities resulting from the
development.
Fiscal impacts are normally evaluated in a cost-benefit analysis
wherein the incremental changes in revenue of a development are
evaluated against the incremental Increases in the cost of government.
Normally, in a community development cost-benefit analysis, the number
and type of housing units planned are of paramount importance, since
this has a direct bearing upon the family size, the number of children
and their impact upon the school system. The latter usually comprises
the major share of total municipal expenditure, sometimes reaching 75Z
of the total expenditure. Data shows that, for example, apartments
will generate less school children for each similar size unit than a
single family house. In addition, the larger the housing unit the
greater the expectation for more school age children. The remaining
municipal costs often are considered on a per capita basis.
Rut second and seasonal home developments do not fit well into a
normative cost-benefit analysis. Each such analysis must be tailored
to each specific plan, and a picture of local services and financial
structure. In seasonal developments, school age children become less
of an issue since so few of these units will become occupied year
round by families with small children that will enter the local school
system. Without entering Into a detailed set of calculations, resort
and seasonal developments accrue taxes to the school system without
the concomitant Influx of students, and therefore usually overshadow
other municipal cost considerations, such, as road and bridge
maintenance, other public works, hospitals, fire protection, police
protection.
The shortcoming of most cost-benefit analyses is their preoccupation
with the operational stage of development while often ignoring the
initial capital expenditures that such developments may foster, suck
as new road, storm sewers where not previously present, etc.
3
Cost Revenue Impact Analysis, Urban Land Institute, June 1975.
4-10- 8
-------
Without a fairly definite plan to peruse, it is difficult to forecast
the magnitude of demand for services and facilities that might be
generated by these proposed lakeside developments. In fact these
developments could be augmented or diminished overnight to change the
picture rapidly. With seasonal housing, the length of occupancy and
type of covenants and restrictions on subleasing are also critical in
determining equivalent demands upon municipal services. The Lake
Monroe area does not appear as an area having much in the way of a
four season attraction, having little to offer in the winter.
Therefore, less than full year-round occupancy probably could be
anticipated.
10.7 IMPACT OF NOT SEWERING LAKE MONROE
The impact of not developing the force main interceptor and providing
regional sewer service will fall mainly upon the expectations of the
larger developments proposed around the lake. It is the large scale
developers who stand to benefit by such a system, and conversely, get
hurt if it is not built.
The physical nature of this regional system encircling the lake would
essentially limit individual lot by lot hook-up, since a pump station
would be needed. This means that certain population levels would need
to be reached before pumping can become economical to the lot owner or
small developer. The lack of service would probably be no more
limiting than a regional force main.
The Pointe development did not wait for the regional system and
thecefore gained permission to build package treatment plant and
discharge into Clear Creek. Design plans are now underway to add
the Fairfax Recreation Area to the Caslon package plant, thereby
eliminating the most significant sewage discharge to Lake Monroe.
This plant might relieve the development pressure from other lake
locations for the interim period, since it could serve this area
that has the more amenable landform and better potential for
development.
4-10-9
-------
-------
TASK 11
MITIGATIVE MEASURES FOR MINIMIZED PHYSICAL EFFECTS
11.1 CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES
11.1.1 Revegetation
For right-of-ways, it is desirable to maintain low growing vegetation
that will allow for easy access to the area and at the saae time
prevent undesirable native vegetation from overgrowing the area.
Dr. Marion T. Jackson, Professor of Life Sciences at Indiana State
University, offered the following information on plant species which
could be used to revegetate the area.
"1. If it would survive that far south, Sweetfern, Myrica
asplenifolia, would be a strong choice. It is characteristic of
the Indiana Dunes area where it covers extensive areas,
particularly in combination with bracken fern, Pterldium
aquilinum. Myrica is presumed to be a nitrogen fixer, which
would enhance its value as a site-recovery shrub species.
"^* Corylus americana (American hazelnut) and Ribes cynosbati
(pasture gooseberry) are shrubs with wildlife value, and possible
cover species. Both occur in extensive stands when well
established. Corylus grows quite tall on better sites, but
usually reaches less than a meter on poor soils. Both species
are found throughout Indiana.
"3. Ceonothus americanus (Jersey tea) does well on dry sites where it
grows less than a meter tall. It has possibilities as a cover
species, but I doubt that it would exclude tree seedlings or
other later successional species.
"4. Two species of shrubby dogwoods offer promise. Roughleafed
(Cornus asperifolia) is a wet site species for the most part
where it grows quite tall. Gray dogwood (C. racemosa) is found
in both wet and dry sites, but is more common in N. Indiana than
in the south. It is generally of a shorter stature (1-2 m) than
roughleaf dogwood. Either would be an interesting species for
trial plantings.
"5. Coralberry (Symphpricarpos orbiculatus) occurs in extensive
stands in both full sun and under thin forest canopies. The
limber shrub is usually less than a meter tall. This species
seems to be one of the strongest candidates for utility corridor
plantings.
4-11-1
-------
"Other possibilities include Lonicera japonica (Japanese honeysuckle)
although I personally prefer native to exotic species. Also, the
honeysuckle often gets out of hand and spreads flagrantly. Some of
the greenbriers (Smilax) could be used, but they often grow in nearly
impenetrable tangles. Perhaps such species could be used to impede
the corridor construction crews!" Reference: Jackson, M., 1975,
personal communication.
Before the construction begins, the Consultant recommends that an
Indiana botanist such as Dr. Jackson be consulted.
In the case of revegetation to prevent erosion of areas disturbed by
major excavation and grading activities, the objective is to select a
grass or group of grasses which germinate quickly. Pasture grasses
which are known to grow well in the area include alfalfa, red clover,
broome grass, tall fescue and orchard grass.
11.1.2 Pipe Crossings in Stream Beds
Type of Site:;
1. Rock strata, gradually sloping banks, rocky stream bed.
Generally found in upper drainage area.
2. Alluvial stream, high banks, significant depth to rock strata
under stream bed. Generally found in lower drainage area.
Comments:
Type 1 is a young stream, with high velocities during floods, steep
slopes. Large rocks are transported by flow, and bars may form at
various locations and move along the stream.
Type 2, in alluvial material, is probably meandering. Difficult to
predict future stream channel alignment. Bed is made of fine
material. Significant scour during runoff events.
Suggestions for Minimizing Environmental Impact
1. Conduct construction operations during dry weather when stream
flows are low, on the average.
2. Store excavated material on stream banks, outside of stream bed
and above anticipated flood level for mean annual flood.
3. If stream is flowing, consider a downstream rock dam, possibly
with a filter layer on the upstream face, to prevent downstream
movement of material.
4-11-2
-------
4. In Type 1 stream, excavate pipe into rock strata, blasting if
necessary. Use selected fill, topped with native stream bed
stone. Keep top of pipe 1 ft. below normal stream bed, as a
minimum.
5. For Type 2 stream, especially if banks are high, consider the use
of a pipe bridge, rather than burying pipe. These streams are
generally unstable and scour or meandering may expose buried
pipe. Keep pipe bridge foundations away from stream bank as far
as possible.
6. If pipe is buried in a Type 2 stream, bury deep enough that
general scour during floods will not disrupt pipe.
7. During trenching, consider dikes to divert one-half of the stream
around construction, fill, and perform construction on other
side, A better method would be to divert entire stream around
construction area until backfill is completed. If dikes are
used, hydrology of area should be re-evaluated to determine
optimum duration of construction. Stability of materials should
be evaluated with respect to erosion and slippages.
8. Replace stream bed in as near its original condition as possible.
9. Protect disrupted banks with mulch or temporary lining (jute
mesh, etc.). Seed with native vegetation. Re-establish vegetation
as soon as possible.
10. In severely disrupted areas of the stream bank, consider the use
of rock riprap to prevent erosion.
11.1.3 Pipes Laid Parallel to Stream Banks
In general, follow good construction erosion control practices.
1. Keep excavation as far from stream bank as possible.
2. Use ditch checks in sloping areas to prevent erosion along pipe
trench. Checks may be of any less credible materials such as
clay.
3. Seed, mulch, and re-establish native vegetation as soon as
possible.
4. Use temporary linings such as jute mesh in steep areas.
5. Use temporary sediment basins to collect sediment in areas where
runoff is concentrated. Hay bales could be used in some
instances to form temporary dikes.
4-11-3
-------
6. Avoid disrupting or intercepting natural drainage areas. Bury
pipe deep enough to return bed to original elevations.
7. Keep excavated material away from stream channel, and revegetate
d isrup t ed areas.
8. Leave existing vegetation on all areas where possible until
necessary to remove to grade for construction.
9. Stockpile topsoil to be spread on surface when preparing final
grade.
10. Use temporary seeding on areas that must be scalped but will not
be finished for a period of time.
11.1.4 Channel Relocations
This is a difficult problem, because when a stream channel in alluvial
material is disrupted, it will usually cause a reaction at some other
location, such as headcutting, general channel erosion, deposition, or
new meandering. There is no particular problem in nonerodable stream
channels except for the disruption of the aquatic habitat and sediment
production.
In an alluvial channel, the relocated channel should have the same
characteristics, as far as possible, as the channel which has been
replaced. For example, if the new channel is shorter than the old
channel, the friction slope will increase and erosion will occur.
Thus, a solution would be to add riprap to increase friction losses in
the new channel and protect the bottom. Generally, riprap channels
are quickly rehabitated by aquatic organisms and haive a somewhat
natural appearance. The use of smooth concrete channel linings for
relocated channels should be avoided. Ideally, the relocated channel
should have as near as possible the same length, bank width, and bed
features as the old channel. Since this is not possible, one should
isolate the main considerations and study each separately and as a
combination. The principal considerations for diversion locations
are:
1. Outlet conditions
2. Topography
3. Land use
4. Agricultural operations
5. Soil type
6. Length of slope
-------
The design of a diversion involves:
1. The above generalities
2. Velocities as high as possible but not eroding
3. Grades dependent on site
4. Peak runoff capacity dependent on site
5. Appropriate friction coefficients
6. Available construction equipment
Finally, they should be inspected annually and after heavy floods.
Suggestions for Minimizing Environmental Impact
1. Conduct operations during dry period when stream flows are low.
2. Replace old channel in kind, and design based on river mechanics
to transport sane sediment load.
3. Store excavated materials outside flood levels (mean annual
flood).
4. Consider use of open graded rock dam with filter material on
upstream face to prevent downstream movement of sediment.
5. After construction, seed, mulch, and revegetate disrupted areas.
Use temporary linings or riprap as necessary to prevent erosion
in channel.
6. Use standard erosion control measures as necessary:
Ref: "Guidelines for Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and
Implementation" EPA-R2-72-015, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. August 1972.
"Erosion Control on Highway Construction Projects" Project
20-5, Topic 4-01, Natural Cooperative Highway Research
Program, Highway Research Board, Washington, B.C., Draft
January 1973.
11.1.5 Tunneling Operations
Environmental impact should not be serious.
Generally:
1. Dispose of excess material in an acceptable manner to prevent
erosion and downstream sediment problems. Example, outside
stream flood plains, revegetate, no steep slopes.
4_ 11-5
-------
2. Revegetate disrupted areas, or protect with artificial materials
to prevent erosion.
11.2 PLANT OPERATION ACTIVITIES
11.2.1 Sludge Disposal by Land Application
Minimizing the adverse environmental impact which could result if
excessive amounts of sludge were applied on land is contingent on
proper application rates. It is recommended that a research project
be conducted to determine the best application rates for sludge
produced at the plant when it is constructed for the different soil
types on which it will be applied.
11.2.2 Odor Control
Control of odors at wastewater treatment plants is of utmost
importance particularly when communities are located near the
treatment plant., This has been an occasional objection to the Winston
Thomas treatment: plant. Sources of odors include the following:
1. Grip and grit chambers both in and out of service.
2. Septic wastewater screenings and grease at wetwells.
3. Pre-aeration tanks in which odorous gases are stripped from
wastewater.
4. Primary settling tanks where gasification of sludge may be caused
by infrequent sludge withdrawal and floating solids.
5. Biological facilities in which aerobic conditions may not always
be maintained. Causes such as clogged diffusers in aerators or
surcharged air-intake channels should be identified.
6. Tank walls, open channels, boxes and pits which are cleaned
infrequently.
7. Secondary settling tanks with accumulations of floating solids.
8. Over chlorination.
9. Oxidation ponds with odorous sludge accumulations.
10. Digesters of the anaerobic or aerobic type in which optimum
conditions have not been maintained.
11. Sludge holding and thickening facilities in which the contents
are not aerobic.
4-11-6
-------
12. Sludge dewatering facilities processing odorous sludges.
13. Incinerators that have exit gas temperatures below 1400°F.
The existing plant is overloaded. The new plant will not be
overloaded; and, furthermore, it will use the activated sludge process
with denitrification which will lend itself to better controls and
efficiency of operation. If odors should develop at the new plant,
the following mitigative measures will be used:
1. The first control strategy will evaluate physical and chemical
control measures that are permanent and effective in reducing
odors below the detectable level at the plant property line.
These may consist of:
a. Oxidation by chlorine, ozone, or hydrogen peroxide.
b. Chemical precipitation of sulfides.
c. Treatment of liquors such as supernant, centrate, filtrate,
and thickener overflow with lime powdered carbon, or
chemical oxidants.
d. Adjustment of loadings upon all biological facilities to a
level not in excess of design capacity. This may include
requiring pre-treatment of strong industrial wastes to an
acceptable strength.
e. Maintaining optimum operating conditions in all treatment
facilities.
f. Installation of environmental enclosures as required.
Filter and scrub air prior to discharge to atmosphere.
2. The second control strategy will evaluate corrective measures to
be implemented should an odor episode occur such as killing of
biological processes by toxic substances. These corrective
measures may include:
a. Staffing and equipment to identify sources and causes of
odors either at the plant or at the discharge source
responsible for the odor
b. Masking of odors
c. Emergency chemical treatment
d. Interim modification of plant operation
4-11-7
-------
11.2.3 Disinfection of Treated Sewage Effluent
Because of the possibility that chlorinated effluent could contain
toxic compounds which would reach the water supply of Bedford, 13
miles south of the Lake Monroe dam, it may be desirable to choose an
alternative disinfection system. It is recommended that chlorinated
sewage from the Winston Thomas plant be analyzed by gas
chromatographic mass spectropholometric (GC-MS) techniques to
determine if potentially toxic compounds are present. The results
should be compared to unchlorinated sewage at Winsiton Thomas to
determine which compounds result from the addition of chlorine. The
Environmental Protection Agency's laboratory in Athens, Georgia may be
commissioned to do the GC-MS work. If toxic compounds are detected
alternative disinfection agents which should be considered include:
1. Ozone
2. Bromine chloride
3. Chlorine - sulfur dioxide (i.e., chlorinatiori - dechlorination)
4. No disinfection
11.2.4 Visual Impact
The visual impact: of the plant sites can be mitigated by redesigning
the landscape features, creating berms from site excavated materials
and by strategically locating these berms where they will minimize the
more unsightly visual elements of the plant site. Much of this can be
done in conjunction with rechanneling, floodproofing and soil erosion
and sedimentation control activities. In addition, trees and natural
vegetations make ideal foils to hide unsightly views. The added
benefit resulting from carefully designed mitigative efforts will be
better noise control, since noise travels on a lirie-of-sight.
11.2.5 Clear Creek Recreation
Reference has been made to the fact that Clear Creek is sometimes used
for non-white water leisure type canoeing, and as such, is one of the
few creeks in the area with enough flow for canoeing. While the
Consultant was unable to substantiate this claim, it is quite certain
that with the Salt Creek site configuration in low flow periods such
as the summer, there will not be enough water in Clear Creek to
support canoeing since most of the flow now in the summer consists of
effluent. The only way to remedy this would be to augment Clear Creek
flow upstream with dams, etc., which is not likely to happen.
4- 11-8
-------
11.2.6 Zoning
The non-structural mitigative measure with the greatest potential for
easing land use frictions which are more apparent during the
operational stage is the standard zoning ordinance and the floodplain
ordinance. Most sewage treatment plants are located in or near the
flood plains, since a low-lying location is necessary to facilitate
gravity flow and to provide for ready discharge to a waterway. This
location is less than ideal for residential locations since they
normally can less afford expensive flood protection devices. A
floodplain ordinance can restrict and control floodway and floodway
fringe development. Such a provision is incorporated into the City of
Bloomington's zoning ordinance which would affect the Winston and
South Rogers sites. The county zoning ordinance, applicable to all
other sites, does not have a similar provision.
Rarely is a sewage treatment plant located in the middle of an
existing residential development. Usually the plant is located prior
to residential development. One aspect of zoning that can be used to
ensure that this situation is controlled to require that sewage
treatment plants, because of their unique operating conditions, come
in for a special exception or a conditional use permit. Usually this
requires that special preconditions be met in the course of plant
location such as extra wide setbacks and yards, and the special
exceptions procedure usually requires a public hearing and public
notification of adjoining property owners as a prerequisite to any
hearing. The Bloomington Zoning Ordinance is silent with respect to
sewage treatment plant locations and does not precondition or make
special exception to plant location, while the county zoning considers
the sewage treatment plant as a special exception and requires open
and unutilized yards having 300 feet depth as its sole condition.
Probably the most pertinent aspect of zoning in relation to mitigating
the effects of sewage treatment plants would be to zone the site and
immediate area for other than residential uses to ensure that people
do not build at the edge of sewage treatment plants. This would
protect people from making poor locational decisions that they may
later regret, and then use pressure to work for the removal of sewage
treatment plants, pump stations, or other utility facilities.
The Dillman and Ketcham Road sites are protected from residential
encroachment. Both are located within a rather large industrial
district that does not allow location of residences therein. At Salt
Creek, the land is zoned for residential usage, which under the
provisions of the Monroe County Zoning Ordinance allows for a variety
of residential housing types ranging from single family to apartment
units depending upon the availability of public sewerage. While it
seems unlikely that residences would be constructed in this poorly
drained bottom land, the current zoning ordinance would, on the face,
allow such a condition to develop.
4-11-9
-------
The Rogers Site is apparently not zoned. The County Zoning Map shows
it within the city's jurisdiction, and the City Zoning District
boundaries terminate at Gordon Road. This should be rectified.
The development pattern around the Winston Thomas site is fairly well
established and would probably not be affected by any change in zoning
designations, although redesignation of the low density residential
strip bordering the northern boundary of the site might better be
classified as light manufacturing, the present site designation.
4-11-10
-------
12.1 Irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources to the proposed
action should it be implemented.
Two classes of irreversibillty and Irretrievability need to be identified
in evaluating the commitment of resources. Class I is the irreversible
and irretrievable decisions that cannot be reversed such as the expenditure
of energy. And Class II commitments are the decisions to commit resources
which are not likely to be retrieved or reversed during the useful life
of the project.
Class I commitments resulting from the construction of the proposed
sewage treatment plant include the capital costs, energy, and labor
necessary to construct and make operational the proposed facility.
Class II commitments for the proposed STP include: the operational
requirements of chemicals, energy, mechanical equipment, labor, the
use of 60 acres of land zoned as industrial and the tax loss associated
with alternate uses of the site. Clear Creek will be relocated and
channelized to provide maximum utilization of the Dillman Road site.
The habitat for typical wildlife such as birds, rabbits, field mice,
etc. will be diminished.
4-12-1
-------
13.1 The relationship between local short term uses of man's environment and
the maintenance and enhancement of long term productivity.
The construction and operation of the proposed South Bloomington Sewage
Treatment Plant will result in efficient treatment of sewage generated
in the South Bloomington Service Area and a general improvement in the
water quality of Celar Creek and Salt Creek. To accomplish this im-
provement in surface water quality a commitment of energy and resources
necessary to operate the proposed facility (flow through the STP is
projected to be 15 MGD by the year 2000) and the removal from the tax
roles of approximately 60 acres of land zoned industrial will be
required.
4-13-1
-------
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1. A 15 MGD two-stage activated sludge sewage treatment plant with
rapid sand filters and sludge treatment via aerobic digestion
and centrifugation should be constructed at the Dillman Road
site to serve the South Bloomington Service Area.
2. The present 1.9 MGD diversion from the south service area via
a force main to the Blucher Poole STP should continue.
3. The processed sludge from the proposed STP should not be applied
to farmland until: 1) the extent of the PCB problem in Bloomington
has been determined 2) corrective actions are taken that reduces
the PCB levels to those determined to be safe for agricultural
application. When the PCB problem is resolved, land spreading
of the sludge on farmland at agronomic rates consistent with
Federal and State of Indiana regulations for land application
is one recommended alternative. The composting operation that
presently utilizes some of the Winston Thomas (W.T.) sludge
should be sampled to determine if heavy metals or PCB's due to
the W.T. sludge are at concentrations such that application of
the composted material should be restricted to certain uses
until the heavy metal and/or PCB problem is resolved. If PCB's
or heavy metals are present at an unacceptable level in both
processed sludge and the compost product, then landfilling of
the south service area sludge should be practiced until the
nature of the sludge changes (due to pretreatment requirements
or changes occur in the composition of the sludge) so that the
alternatives of composting and land spreading can meet the
standards promulgated by Federal and State agencies.
4. Regionalization of the South Bloomington Service Area and the
Lake Monroe Regional Waste District as proposed in the Bloomington
201 plan is not cost-effective. The Dillman Road STP could provide
service to the communities of Smithville and Sanders via an 80,000
GPD interceptor if it is determined that this is the most cost-
effective alternative. (An approval facilities plan would have
to be completed for the LMRWD prior to any grant award for design
and construction of these facilities. Furthermore, it must be
demonstrated that properly operated and maintained septic systems
cannot function as designed due to existing soil and bedrock con-
ditions.)
5. Other areas in the Lake Monroe District can be adequately served
with existing and proposed facilities, e.g. Paynetown, served by
an existing package plant and the Caslon plant serving the Pointe
and Fairfax. The Caslon plant could also be expanded (if cost-
effective) to handle a flow from Harrodsburg and from development
along Old State Route 37. Another possibility, if Harrodsburg
would be served by the plant, would be to move the Caslon package
plant to an alternate location at the confluence of Clear Creek
and Little Clear Creek.
5-1
-------
-------
CHAPTER 6
FEDERAL/STATE/LOCAL AGENCY COMMENTS AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
The written comments in this chapter were received or trans-
mitted during the preparation of the draft EIS. The order
of the comments is as follows:
A) Federal, B) State, C) Local Agencies and Interest Groups,
and D) letters from individuals.
6-1
-------
A) FEDERAL COMMENTS
6-2
-------
Uniteb &tate* Senate
MEMORANDUM
Please note the attached letter from
a constituent which I am forwarding for
your consideration. It would be greatly
appreciated if you would check into this
matter. Upon completion of your inves-
tigation, please advise me of the status
of this case in duplicate and return the
original letter in an envelope addressed
to the attention of Parry. Sragow.
Thank you for your assistance.
Sincerely,
Birch
United States 'Senator
6-3
-------
INDIANA UNIVERSITY
Department of I'liysics
SWAIN ItAI.LWEST I I I
BLOOM I.N'CTON, INDIANA 4740
«L. NO. «i2 337-265C
November 13, 1975
Senator Birch Bayh
363 Old Senate Office Bldg.
Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear Senator Bayh:
enclosed a copy of a letter sent to Mr. Hirt of the EPA, Region
V, in Chicago. It is important that the full interests of the community be
considered in this matter.
As mentioned in the letter to Mr. Hirt, some members of the Bloomington
Utilities Service Board have placed a high priority upon the economic
consequences of the delays in initiating our wastewater treatment project.
The delays reflect a long public discussion and a broad concern with the
ecological impact of the location of the treatment plant. A priority that
is governed solely by economic concerns and not responsive to the environ-
mental considerations is, in our opinion, misplaced.
It is important that you understand that the costs for this project
have not increased solely because of inflation. More detailed engineering
studies and changes in the treatment ^oe± have also affected the cost esti-
mates.
The Envi?:onmental Impact Statement being prepared >by EPA will resolve
our particular problem and bring the public debate to a conclusion. The
citizens of the United States must have an agency that works in a responsible
manner to preserve the best interests of our land. The economic and ecolog-
ical factors must be viewed together and properly balanced. The Congress
has given this responsibility to the EPA and defined the Environmental Impact
Statement as one of the instruments to be used to meet this obligation. The
EIS must be prepared carefully and completely if it is to serve its purpose.
Sincerely yours,
David L. Dilcher Hugh j Martin
Member, Utilities Service Board Member, Utilities Service Board
Dept. of Plant Sciences Dept. of Physics
Indiana University Indiana University
Bloomington, IN 47401 Bloomington, IN 47401. -
DLD/HJM:mlc
enclosure
6-4
-------
E'"'IRONMENTAL PROTECTION
DEC 10 1975
Honorable Birch Bayh
United States Senate
Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear Senator Bayh:
The Environmental Protection Agency is fully aware of the need to
address all pertinent issues in the siting of new sewage treat-
ment facilities for the South Bloomington Sewage Service Area as
indicated in the Nov. 13, 1975 letter from David L. Dilcher and
Hugh J. Martin. To aid us in our environmental evaluation the
consulting firm, Gilbert Associates of Reading Pennsylvania, was
hired and is completing an analytical report on key issues related
to the proposed projects. When the draft environmental impact
statement is issued, the final report of Gilbert Associates will
also be available, and a public hearing will be held to consider
all comments on these documents.
I aa also enclosing a copy of the Nov, 3, 1975 letter from other
members of the Utilities Service Board and our response of Nov* 20,
1975. Based on the concerns of the citizens of Bloomington, it is
clear to us that the EIS process provides a viable mechanism for
resolution of these important concerns.
Your interest in this matter is appreciated and copies of the draft
and final EIS will be mailed to you when they are available.
Sincerely yours,
A/.
cc: Office of Legislation
Planning & Standards Branch
OCIR
Valdas V. Adamkus
Acting Regional Administrator
6-5
-------
Respectfully referred to:
E.P.A.
Waterside Mall
401 M. Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
Because of the desire of this office to be
responsive to all inquiries and communications,
your consideration of the attached is
requested. Your findings and views, in
duplicate form, along with return of the
i
enclosure, will be appreciated by
Senator Vance Hartke
ii.s.s.
Attns Janis McClintock
447 Federal Building
Indianapolis, Indiana
46204
6-7
-------
TOOK
v^Vx vyjLv.
November 3, 1975
The Honorable Vance Hartke
313 Old Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Senator Hartke:
The Utilities Service Board of the City of Bloomington recently requested the
Environme*^*1-! Protection Agency to provide .information .concerning, -the, direct
and indirect costs lpf.,,the,..Envirojimental. Impact Statement that EPA jLs. currently
preparing 'on Bloomington' s proposed wastewater treatment "facility. (See the"1* ''
attached" letter of August 21, 1975, from Utilities Project Coordinator Richard
S. Peoples.) As you can see from Mr. Harlan Hirt's response of September 19, 1975
which is also attached, EPA does not seem disposed to divulge this information,
which we feel should be a matter of public record.
As citizens of Bloomington who are very interested in this project and as federal
taxpayers who are concerned with the total environmental and economic costs of
the new wastewater treatment facility, we sincerely believe we have the right
to know what the direct and indirect costs of the Environmental Impact Statement
will be. As one of our elected federal representatives, we would appreciate it
if you would look into this matter to help us secure, this information.
Sincerely,
mjh
Enclosures
cc: Mr. Harlan Hirt
6-8
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
DEC 11 1975
Honorable Vance Hartke
447 Federal Building
Indianapolis, Indiana 46204
Dear Senator Hartkez
This is in response to your request for information concerning
a letter you received from several members of th« Utilities
Service Board (USB) of the City of Bloonington, Indiana. The
Environmental Protection Agency has responded to the Cook In-
corporated letter of Mov. 3, 1975 signed by several members of
the US3. Our response is detailed in the attached Nov. 20, 1975
EPA letter.
During November a second letter from two other members of the
DS3 was received by EPA. I am attaching this letter and the local
newspaper article which accompanied it. These letters illustrate
the differing viewpoints which exist on the USB regarding the
preparation time for the draft EIS. EPA is concerned about project
delays but also recognizes the need to fully evaluate all alter-
natives in the proposed project and the associated environmental
impacts.
When the draft EIS is issued, the final report of Gilbert Associ-
ates will also be available, and a public hearing will be held to
consider all comments on these documents. Based on the concerns
of the community it is clear to us that the. EIS process provides
a viable mechanism for resolution of these important concerns.
Your interest in this matter is aopreciated and copies of the
draft and final EIS will be mailed to you when they are available.
Sincerely yours.
R. J. Schneider
Acting Regional Administrator
7G
LEE HftHH-TO*J /fA/i>.. T&ttV Mf^KS t*
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGE* CY
0£C 41975
Mr. Gary R. Kent
Director of Utilities
City of Bloomington Utilities
P.O. Box 1216
Bloooington, Indiana 47401
Dear Mr. Kent:
This letter is a response to your November 20, 1975 letter concerning
preliminary findings with respect to the Environmental Impact Statement
for the South Bloonington-Lake Monroe Service Area. As you know EPA
has received a draft report from the consulting firm of Gilbert Associates
on the proposed wastewater treatment facilities. While some revision
of this report is necessary and ongoing, a clear position with respect
to comparing the Salt Creek Site and the Clear Creek Sites can be stated.
We will not support construction of the new sewage plant for the South
Blooaington Service Area at the Salt Creek Site in the Draft EIS. We
have determined that three Clear Creek Sites (Winston Thomas,, Dillman
Road and Ketchun Road) are preferable to the Salt Creek Site on an
environmental, economic and geographic basis. Preliminary present worth
analyses indicate that the Salt Creek Site is more costly than the three
Clear Creek Sites by several million dollars.
i
Furthermore, selection of the Salt Creek Site would result In less
centralization of sewer interceptor facilities, extensive disruption of
the Clear Creek stream banks, a poorer quality effluent, a less reliable
sewage treatment facility, and might cause an acceleration of the
development of the Lake Monroe Area prior to a full opportunity by the
local planning commission, with appropriate citizen input, to discuss and
evaluate land use options for the Lake Monroe Area.
I wish to point out that the above position la not a final determination
by EPA which can only be taken in the Final EIS after reviewing and
responding to agency and public comment. Our present analyses indicates
that the Salt Creek Site is not cost-effective and is not the optimum
environmental alternative. We cannot advise you on the manner In which to
respond to your purchase option on the Salt Greek Site. This letter can
only identify the position that will be presented in the Draft EIS.
6-10
-------
DEC 41975
Mr. Gary R. Kent
Page Two
When the Draft EIS Is Issued, the final report of Gilbert Associates Will
also be available and a public hearing will be held to consider all
comments on these documents.
Sincerely yours,
Valdas V. Adankus
Acting Regional Administrator
6-11
-------
November 20, 1975
Cook Incorporated
925 South Curry Pike
P. 0. Box 439
Blooraington, Indiana 47401
Gentlecten:
Ue have received your latter of November 3, 1975 regarding
costs of preparing the SIS for the Bloowdngton project and
are responding within tha procedures of the Freedom of In-
forraation Act.
Ky staff advises that tha Utilities Service "oard and others
involved in the Bloomin^ton EIS have provided excellent co-
operation. We dafinitaly want to continraa in that spirit of
cooperation. Unfortunately, r-ost of tha information. yon ara
requesting is not available without consujaing a sraat deal
of effort in additional study and would require a mmber of
8tiV]octi79 fi3suRption3 which would lo.ive a ^ood bit of douht
as to th* ras'.ilt* £a ainply do not have tha r-aapover to con-
duct such n study.
The only readily available feet in response to your requast
is that our contract on the EIS io for $32,690. VJe estioate
we cay Jarvota approximately one tr.an-year of in-house effort
at an estimated cost of about $16,000.
Although we recognize that compliance with the National En-
vironmental Policy Act does involve delays when Inpact State-
ment preparation is initiated late in the planning process,
it was our judgment that the Sloosdngton proposal required
an EIS to satisfy the statute. Wa also feel thnt the poten-
tial savings in environmental irepact and dollar costs out-
weigh the potential costs of lost tine.
I trust f:hat through continuing cooperation we can bring tha
process to a rapid conclusion and nove forward to design and
construction at an early date.
Sincerely yours,
HDTIirf.p 11/20/75
Ilenry L. Longest II
Director,, Water Division
6-12
-------
. UN1TED STATES
Ti ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
23° SOUTH DEARBORN ST.
CHICAGO. ILLINOIS 60G04
September 19, 1975
Mr. Richard S. Peoples, Project Coordinator
City of Bloomington Utilities
P. 0. Box 1216
Bloomington, Indiana 47401
Dear Mr. Peoples: .
In your letter of August 21, 1975, you requested direct and
indirect cost data to all parties related to the prepara-
tion of the Bloomington-Lake Monroe Indiana Draft and Final
BIS. First, let me identify that the decision to do an
EIS on a proposed project is not based on direct or indirect
costs, but on whether or not the proposed Federal action
(in this case a grant award for construction of wastewater
treatment facilities) is a major Federal action signifi-
cantly affecting the quality of the human environment (NEPA
Section 102(2)(c)). Furthermore, the final regulations
for Preparation of Environmental Impact Statements of EPA,
40 CFR Part 6, April 14, 1975, Sections 6.200 and 6.510,
identify criteria for determining when to prepare an envi-
ronmental impact statement.
i
With respect to the Bloomington-Lake Monroe, Indiana pro-
ject, it was apparent to EPA, based on the NEPA Act and our
regulations, that unresolved environmental concerns, such as
the optimum location for a new wastewater treatment facil-
ity existed and could most efficiently be resolved through
the environmental impact statement process. As you know,
both the Bloomington Utilities Board on April 4, 1975 and
the Mayor of Bloomington on April 10, 1975 officially re-
quested an EIS for the proposed project, being aware that
the EIS process generally takes 8-12 months until a grant
award can be made.
Once a Federal agency or a Federal court has declared that
an EIS is required, the time period necessary to complete
the EIS process is considered an essential step for the
project to proceed. (The courts have, in fact, stopped
construction of nuclear power plants, etc., until satisfac-
tory EIS was prepared.)
6-13
-------
. -2-
The EIS process also provides the public a greater oppor-
tunity to identify their concerns and have their concerns
addressed in a written document subject to review by the
public, local, state and Federal agencies.
In the environmental impact statement EPA will address
costs through the cost effective analysis required under
P,L. 92-500. The cost effectiveness analysis with proper
concern for environmental impacts will be the basis upon
which a specific recommendation for wastewater treatment
facilities will be made. Direct and indirect: costs assoc-
iated with the project will not be identified unless they
relate specifically to the cost effective analysis re-
quired under P.L. 92-500.
Sincerely yours,
BarIan D. Hirt
Chief, Planning Branch
6--14
-------
B) STATE COMMENTS
6-l5
-------
-------
STATEr
INDIANAPOLIS, 46204
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
JOSEPH D. CLOUD
DIRECTOR
September 12, 1975
Mr. Dale Luecht
Project Officer
Environmental Protection Agency
230 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Dear Mr. Luecht:
We have reviewed the proposed wastewater treatment facilities to serve the
South Bloomington-Lake Monroe area and find that no known historic sites
will be effected.
This area has not been surveyed and if you find that your project has a
direct effect or is in close proximity to any older structures, please
contact us at the earliest possible time.
I understand that you have already been in contact with the Glenn A.
Archaeology Laboratory about archaeological sites in the area. Any
recommendations they forward should be included in your assessment.
Very truly yours,
Black
J/bs-ephlD. Cloud,
!»r
irtment of Natural Resources
JDT;:EG:jm
rr F i v
rLAJ.ViVl.JVjr
f'l.
6-16
-------
C) LOCAL AGENCIES' AND INTEREST GROUPS' COMMENTS
6-17
-------
CITY OF BLDDMINbrDN UTILITIES
P. D. BOX 1216
BLDDMINGTON, INDIANA 47401
TELEPHONE AC 812 339-2261
November 20, 1975
Dale Luecht
Planning
U.S.. E. P.A. Region V
230 South Dearborn
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Dear Mr. Luecht:
During the past few months, we have stressed the
importance of the completion of the draft EIS prior to
December 12, 1975 as the City has invested and stands
to lose some $20,000 on land options at the proposed
Salt Creek site. I realize that it is impossible for
you to issue the draft EIS by December 12th.
It is imperative that we receive as much advise
and assistance as possible from your agency prior to
the expiration of these options. Therefore, we are
hereby requesting that you consider our situation and
its urgency. We do need guidance from (E.P.A. so that
the City can decide whether it should exercise, renew,
or drop the options on the Salt Creek site.
Any assistance you can give will be most appreciated
Sincerely,
Gary R. Kent
Director of Utilities
GRK/sew
cc: Utilities Service Board
Richard Peoples, Project Coordinator
6-18
-------
T'TY DF BLDDMINGinN UTILITIES
P. 0. BOX 1216 j
BLODMINGTON, INDIANA 47401
TELEPHONE AC t\i 339-Z261
August 21, 1975
Dale Luecht
Planning .
U.S. E.P.A. Region V .. .- .
230 South Dearborn
Chicago, Illinois 60604 .
Dear Mr. Luecht:
It would seem appropriate that the citizens have an opportunity
to know the cost for an Environmental Impact Statement. There
appears to be three vital areas which need to be explored in a
study of this type:
Cost to the Federal government for the study. This
should include employee time for an Environmental
Impact Statement and cost of any outside consultants.
Cost to the state and local bodies who have instigated
the project. This section should include items such
as principle and interest on funds expended on the
project. Parts of prior engineering or design, which
may have been discarded by the Environmental Impact
Statement, should be included.
Increased cost of construction
during the period required for
Environmental Impact Statement.
resulting from
preparation of
inflation
the
6-19
-------
Dale Luecht
August 21, 1975
Page 2
For the sake of good order, we, the Utilities Service Board of
Bloomington, Indiana respectfully request that the Environmental
Protection Agency include a section in its Environmental Impact
Statement entitled Summary erf Direct and Indirect Costs for the
Envi ronmental Impact Statement.
Sincerely,
Richard S. Peoples
Project Coordinator
RSP/ses
cc: Utilities Service' Board
Environmental Impact Statement (file)
6-20
-------
INDIANA UNIVERSITY
Department of Ph\tics
SWAIN HALL WEST ! 1 '
BLOOMINGTON, INDIANA 47401
TEL. NO. . ! 2 337-2650
November 13, 1975
Mr. Harlan Hirt
Chief, Planning Branch
EPA Region V
230 South Dearborn
Chicago, IL 60604
Dear Mr. Hirt:
You recently received a letter from several members of the Bloomington,
Indiana, Utilities Service Board expressing their concern with the delays and
costs associated with the preparation of the Environmental Impact Statement
for our wastewater treatment plant. We want to make it clear that this
position is not supported by all members of the board. The initial request
for an EIS was made by the Utilities Service Board knowing full well that
costs and delays would be incurred. To now make an issue of the dollar costs
can only serve to thwart the reasons for the initial request.
The location of the wastewater treatment plant has been a controversial
issue in our community for several years and has remained so despite extended
public discussions. Both economic and ecological concerns were expressed.
In our nation's past, decisions of major importance were often based on
economic considerations alone. The Environmental Impact Statement insures
that both economic and ecological factors are considered in decisions involving
public funds. A proper balance between these factors is necessary if, in
the future, we are to sustain the quality of life we enjoy and preserve the
land we occupy.
We appreciate the work that EPA is doing on this project and the respon-
sibility that is assumed when preparing an EIS. A hastily-prepared statement
would not be adequate. To dismiss the concerns of any segment of the community
would not be proper. The time required for careful preparation of the EIS
will be only a small fraction of the time that we must live with the actions
that are to be taken.
Sincerely yours,
j
David L. Dilcher Hugh J. Martin
Member, Utilities Service Member, Utilities Service Board
Board Department of Physics
Dept. of Plant Sciences Indiana University
Indiana University Bloomington, Indiana
Bloomington, IN A7401 47401
DLD/HJM:mlc 6~21
Copies to: Senators Bayh, Hartke; Representatives Meyer, Hamilton
-------
fctalenvirbnmei t
By DON JORDAN
H-T Outdoor Editor
Environmental protection is coming under fire from all quarters
of business and industry these days with critics beating the same
dam with the same tune that protecting the environment costs too
much.
F'art of the difficulty environmentalists have in countering these
charges is that the large majority of business-oriented individuals
put price I ags on everything But how do you put a price tag on the
environment?
Many enviornmental thinkers point to the what they call "ex-
ternalities" of continued growth without environmental concerns
figured
LYNTON K. CALDWELL. lU's environmental and political
science leader, is fond of pointing out these externalities of ex-
pansion when the total environment is not considered.
When William Cook of the Bloomington Utilities Service Board
recently blasted an environmental impact statement being
prepared by the U S Environmental Protection Agency, lie in-
sisted that economics is part of the the environment.
Environmentalists accept that argument, but Cook went one step
: farther, claiming that economic considerations must always come
first, then environmental protection is fine.
But what about those externalities9
Dollar figures can be placed on providing schools, streets,
sewers, water lines, sidewalks, transportation. These factors must
also be considered as part of the environment, and all have large
price tags afixed And, when all of these environmental factors are
. included, costs incurred by government in drawing up impact
statements fade in comparison.
COOK CLAIMED THE IMPACT statement for the new south
- sewage plant will end up costing millions. But what will be the
ultimate cost to the citizens of Bloomington and Monroe County if
an environmental mistake is made in selecting the site for the
plant?
Utilities Director Gary Kent has pointed out that when new
service areas are picked up by the city, funds used to purchase the
utility lines from developers come from utility revenues.
'in other words, all customers served by the utility end up paying
for new service. Such practices result in millions of dollars over
long periods of time. >
Likewise, when new utility services like the new sewage plant are
built, it is the customers who always end up paying the bills. Utility
rate increases result and tax increases are eventually needed to
provide those myriad other services demanded by new residents.
Tcix base increases seldom provide increased income over the long
run when new services must be maintained into infinity.
BY NARROWLY DEFINING the environment, business and
industry leaders detail economic considerations and seldom talk
at out the environment as a whole.
Who asks about the environment of Bloomington and Monroe
County as a whole not just that narrow economic spectrum ?
Unfortunately, the asking of that question is in this area lefl in the
hands of private citizens or environmental groups like Sassafras
Andubon Society, Sierra Club, Izaak Walton League and others.
This is unfortunate, but necessary, since government officials are
many times not sensitive to preserving the environment that
makes this area attractive.
Claude Ferguson recently pointed out that he likes this area and
wouldn't move to a metropolitan area like New York or Washington
for double his salary. Likewise, said Ferguson, his wife wouldn't
leave her favorite turkey wood for any salary.
PEOPLE HAVE MOVED to the Bloomington area because they
like the total environment oi the area. The sprawling forests and
riijgelines provide a relief from the tensions of modern society.
When considering economics as a part of the environment of this
area, it would be good to wonder how far we can go in changing it
before people in other areas say: "I wouldn't take double my salary
to move from here to someplace like southern Indiana."
When those words are uttered is when the real economic crisis
w II hit southern Indiana.
6-22
-------
"COOiV
November 3, 1975
Mr. Harlan D. Hirt
Chief, Planning Branch
U.S. E.P.A. Region V
230 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Dear Mr. Hirt:
At the di^^tion of the Utilities Service Board of the City of Bloomington,
Mr. Richard S. .Peoples, Utilities Project Coordinator, in a letter of August
21, 1975, requested a summary of direct and indirect costs for the Environmental
Impact Statement that the Environmental Protection Agency is currently preparing
on our proposed wastewater treatment facility. In your response to Mr. Peoples
of September 19, 1975, you state: "Direct and indirect costs associated with
the project will not be identified unless they relate specifically to the cost
effective analysis required under P.L. 92-5QQ."
As you are well aware, the Environmental Protection Agency has requested a
great quantity of information from the Bloomington Utilities Department, the
consulting engineers Black & Veatch, and other interested parties. To our
knowledge all of this information has been provided with willingness; nothing has
been withheld or refused. Since the direct and indirect costs of the Environmental
Impact Statement are a genuine concern of local residents, we feel that the
Utilities Service Board's request for this information from the Environmental
Protection Agency is both legitimate and reasonable. Your response to Mr.
Peoples' letter, however, seems to indicate that the Environmental Protection
Agency does not believe that the people of Bloomington have the right to know
this information. As citizens of Bloomington who are very interested in this
project and as federal taxpayers t;ho are concerned with the total environment
and economic costs of the new wastewater treatment facility, we respectfully
disagree.
When a study such as an Environmental Impact Statement is undertaken, the cost
of the study is just as important as the other data that is collected. We feel
that the value and merits of an Environmental Impact Statement should be measured
at least in partby the cost of collecting the information. An Environmental
Impact Statement takes time; in this day, time, unfortunately, can be measured
by the rate of inflation. Without knowing the cost due to lost time, might not
the economic environment of an entire community be jeopardized? Here in Bloomington,
for example, the possibility of a moratorium on growth in the southern drainage
area exists because the present wastewater treatment plant is overloaded and
antiquated. Inflation since 1972 has increased the cost of Bloomington's proposed
6-23
-------
Mr. Harlan D. Hirt
November 3, 1975
Page 2
wastewater facility from $27 million to $40 million. This inflationary cost
increase suggests that each month used to study the environment costs $360,000.
We realize that it is impossible to place a price tag on the environment; however,
we believe that it would be in the best interests of all people if the Environmental
Protection Agency would thoroughly review its Environmental Impact Statement
process, keeping in mind the economic ramifications of such studies.
>
In our particular case here in Bloomington, we sincerely feel that withholding
this information about the direct and indirect costs of the Environmental Impact
Statement seriously hampers the spirit of cooperation that the people of this
community have attempted to foster between themselves and the Environmental
Protection Agency. With this in mind, we once again request that the Environmental
Protection Agency provide us with a statement that details the costs related to
the Environmental Impact Statement currently being conducted on Bloomington"s
proposed wastewater treatment facility.
Sincerely,
njh
cc: Senator Birch Bayh
Senator Vance Hartke
Congressman John Myers
Congressman Lee Hamilton
6-24
-------
INCOKFUKAii^iJ
WOV13I975
November 3, 1975
The Honorable John Myers
103 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Mr. Myers:
The Utilities Service Board of the City of Bloomington recently requested the
Environmental Protection Agency to provide information concerning the direct and
indirect^yists of the Environmental Impact Statement that EPA is currently
preparing on Bloomington 'o proposed uastewater treatment facility. (See the
attached letter of August 21, 1975, from Utilities Project Coordinator Richard
S. Peoples.) As you can see from Mr. Harlan Hirt's response of September 19,
1975, which is also attached, EPA does not seem disposed to divulge this infor-
mation, which we feel should be a matter of public record.
As citizens of Bloomington who are very interested in this project and as federal
taxpayers who are concerned with the total environmental and economic costs of
the new wastewater treatment facility, we sincerely believe we have the right
to know what the direct and indirect costs of the Environmental Impact Statement
will be. As one of our elected federal representatives, we would appreciate
it if you would look into this matter to help us secure this information.
Sincerely,
Enclosures fy /
cc: Mr. Harlan Hirt
6-25
-------
CITY OF BLDDMINGTDN UTILITIES
P. D. BOX 1216
BLDOMINGTQN, INDIANA 474D1
TELEPHONE AC 812 339-2261
August 12, 1975
Dale Luecht
PI anning
U.S. E.P.A. Region V
230 South Dearborn
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Dear Mr. Luecht:
Attached are the position papers for the individual Utilities
Service Board members concerning the improvement program as
outlined in the Bloomington South Facilities Program.
I must apologize for the delay in getting this document to you
as the positions were presented by the Board at the June 3, 1975
Utilities Service Board meeting.
If you have further questions for the Board or need clarification,
please direct your questions to me and I will see that they are
transmitted to the Board.
Sincerely,
Gary R. Kent
Director of Utilities
GRK/ses
cc: James R. Quin, Gilbert Associates, Inc.
Utilities Service Board members
PUNNING BRANCH
FflENO~-
6-26
-------
UTILITIES SERVICE BOARD
JUNE 3, 1975
The Utilities Service Board members gave the following recommendations
as to site alternatives for the proposed treatment plant site:
DAVID DILCHER: Dilcher affirmed his belief that Dillman Road is the best
site for the location of the proposed sewage treatment plant. He stated
that this site best satisfies the needs of the City and the Region for
the following reasons:
1. It accomodates a gravity flow for the main lines and interceptors
adaptable for picking up both City and Regional waste.
2. It is removed from residential areas and can be properly screened
With proper county zoning, residential development can be
restricted.
3. It would provide a higher level of treatment for the effluent.
4. It would provide a more constant and easily controlled treatment
because the two-stage plant planned for this site is less
susceptible to upsets.
5. It would be less distruptive to the Clear Creek Valley.
6. The Lake Monroe Region could tie in,in total or in part.
7. The cost would be equivalent to or less than the Salt Creek site
in the long run considering the lower operations and maintenance
expense.
8. It would not encourage stringer type development along a long
outfall sewer and will allow the development of city-centered
f a c i 1 i t i e s .
9. Space would be provided for expansion to 40 MGD.
10. It would best serve the Region by providing easy pick-up from the
Smithville and Paynetown areas and it would not require such long
interceptor sewers as the Salt Creek site.
11. There is the distinct possibility of a force main from the south-
west section of the Lake being extended up Clear Creek Valley to
Dillman Road.
6-27
-------
UTILITIES SERVICE BOARD
JUNE 3, 1975
WILLIAM COOK: Cook indicated that he accepts the Black & Veatch summary
that the Salt Creek site is the most desirable. The selected plan in-
cludes a gravity sewer from the existing South Plant along Clear Creek
to a 20 MGD plant at the Salt Creek site.
The selected proposal is as described under Section Ten of the Facilities
Plan except that the initial design flow is 20 MGD. This site is the most
desirable based on environmental concerns and cost effectiveness. In
addition, the plan is well adapted to providing service to the Lake
Monroe Region. If service were to be extended to the Lake Monroe Region
the selected plan would be modified by the construction of a 5 MGD plant
addition approximately fifteen years after the initial start-up.
Availability of land is a great difference between the Salt Creek and
Dillman Road sites. Unlimited land is available at the Salt Creek site
for disposal of wastes, composting, and future plant expansion.
The Salt Creek site could service Lake Monroe and also the southern
Monroe County area. Since we supply their water Cook feels we should
consider providing sewage treatment. He feels that we must provide for
the future so that growth will take place in southern Monroe County. Cook
mentioned that in the Land Suitability Study the southwest section is the
greatest portion of land available for any kind of development at Lake
Monroe. Cook indicates disagreement with Dilcher as far as cost of
operation is concerned. He stated there would be a $200,000 operations
savings on a year-to-year basis of operation at the Salt Creek site which
would result in lower sewer bills for residents.
JACK MARTIN: Martin listed his reasons in support of the Dillman Road
site. He feels that a higher degree of sewage treatment is offered by
the two-stage plant proposed for the location. Because the effluent
discharged from Dillman Road eventually passes Salt Creek a higher degree
of treatment is indicated and with less impact for Salt Creek.
The main difference Martin sees between the Dillman Road and Salt Creek
sites is that the Dillman Road site is the most cost effective for the
near future. The arguments for Salt Creek are based upon predictions for
the distant future and projections about what will happen in different
areas of the City and the Lake Region. Because construction costs for
Salt Creek are three million dollars more than for Dillman Road, Martin
feels it would take a great number of years for Salt Creek to become more
6"28
-------
UTILITIES SERVICE BOARD
JUNE 3, 1975
cost effective than Dillman Road. The areas of clear cost differential
according to Martin are: (1) the difference between the one-stage Salt
Creek plant and the two-stage Dillman Road plant, and (2) the difference
between the outfall sewer required by Salt Creek and a snorter sewer
required by Dillman Road. If drying beds were constructed at Dillman
Road the sludge disposal costs would be about the same. The degree of
treatment offered at Dillman Road would result in 97.5% removal of BOD
and suspended solids as opposed to 95.7% removal offered at Salt Creek.
The two-stage plant would employ additional people in the daily plant
operation. Martin stated that the costs are based on a 20 MGD plant
flow which is a higher flow than has been projected for the first
twenty years.
Martin went on to state that he finds the question of a Regional plant
a rather difficult concept. In looking at the argument that a central
plant is the most effective way to treat sewage, it seems unrealistic
that sewage must be moved so far to implement that concept. In applying
this to our present situation, Martin stated that with the exception of
the southwest part of the Lake the Salt Creek site is relatively
inaccessible to the rest of the Region and Bloomington. Martin indicated
that his belief was that perhaps a separate plant should be considered
for the southwest part of the Region.
Martin then outlined his uncertainties concerning the projections for the
Region. He feels that looking at a 40 MGD plant to service a Bloomington
population of 200,000 is looking too far into the future. He finds the
Region predictions troublesome for the fact that if the plant is built at
Salt Creek to service the Region and the projected growth fails to occur
then the plant will be serving a very small base of people. Martin stated
that Region growth predictions are based on: (1) growth in a basically
rural area projected to increase by 1007, (2) growth in the Lake Monroe
recreational areas is predicted to double, and (3) large growth of those
building developments around the Lake. Martin disagrees with the rural
area growth stating that it would be difficult to determine the high
density areas. He concluded his remarks by restating his feelings that
the arguments for the Salt Creek site seem to be much more uncertain
and difficult to assess than arguments for Dillman Road.
RICHARD FEE: Fee stated that as a result of ten years experience he feels
that the most suitable site is the one located as far downstream as possibl
the Salt Creek site. He indicated that the former sewage treatment plant
was located just two miles north of the present Winston Thomas site so if
we are not to make the same mistake again we should move as far downstream
-3- 6-29
-------
UTILITIES SERVICE BOARD
JUNE 3, 1975
as possible. Fee feels that the Salt Creek site would be better suited
to meeting changing dilution requirements, sludge disposal requirements,
and degree of treatment in future years.
response to the argument that string-type development will be
:ouraged, Fee gave two reasons stating why he feels this will not
1. The pipe is neither in the flood plain nor inaccessible to
normal development.
2. The land around it is not suitable for development. There
are too many quarries on the west and it is economically not
feasible to build there.
ROBERT SCHMUHL: Schmuhl stated that he favors the Salt Creek site.
According to Schmuhl initial costs would be higher at Salt Creek but long
term operating and maintenance costs and the cost for equipment replace-
ment would be lower.
Schmuhl feels that there would be a greater expanse of available and
suitable land at Salt Creek. This would be beneficial because more
efficient sludge disposal and sufficient space for additional facilities
would be provided. At Dillman Road there would be no room for construction
of additional facilities if further advanced treatment processes were
mandated in the future.
AILEEN SCHALLER: Schaller stated that because the total costs between
the Salt Creek and Dillman Road sites are not much different that cost
cannot be a basis for decision.
Although no permanent environmental damage will result from either site,
Schaller feels there are two areas of possible concern: (1) the outfall
sewer, and (2) the Lake Monroe Region. With careful attention to
revegetation, long range damage will be prevented in the area of the out-
fall sewer. As for damage to the Lake Monroe Region, the plant will not
be crucial to development but will instead be of use to the Region.
Regarding other environmental concerns, Schaller stated we must not over-
look the aesthetic and odoriferous considerations. She stated that the
plant should only be located along a major entry corridor to the City as
6-30
-4-
-------
UTILITIES SERVICE BOARD
JUNE 3, 1975
a last resort. The Dillman Road site would be on constant display, while
the Salt Creek site will use less of our dwindling energy year in and
year out.
Physical characteristics should also be considered in choosing a plant
site. The plant should be located on level ground relatively free of
rock. There should be adequate room for expansion and on-site sludge
disposal. Undeveloped land should be available for a buffer zone. There
should be natural screening of the plant.
In closing Schaller stated that the Salt Creek site meets all of the
preceding criteria while the Dillman Road site meets none.
Further discussion of the plant sites followed the Board members pre-
sentations. Fee recognized additional pluses for the Salt Creek site as
being the lessened effects of an accident due to greater dilution possibl<
He also mentioned that the plant would probably be resized down to 15 MGD
by the Environmental Protection Agency.
Utilities personnel were then asked to give their opinions as to the plan'
site choice. Director of Utilities Gary Kent stated that major consider-
ations should be the cost of operation as far as local dollars are concen
the balance of commodities in operation, the ability to serve the potenti.
growth and the plant layout. He indicated that some costs are questionab
for both sites but he favors the Salt Creek site. Utilities Treatment
Engineer Mike Phillips added that he felt the Salt Creek site was best fr
the operating standpoint and Project Coordinator Rick Peoples concurred.
Fee moved, Schmuhl seconded a motion that the Salt Creek site be
recommended to the Environmental Protection Agency as the site chosen by
members of the Utilities Service Board and by Black & Veatch engineers to
be the most suitable for the proposed treatment plant. The vote was four
to two in favor of the Salt Creek site.
6-31
-5-
-------
RECEIVED
''^ 2: 1076
EVALUATION OF GILBERT
A direct comparison between the Gilbert Report
and the Facilities Plan prepared by Black & Veatch is
extremely difficult. However, our preliminary review
reveals a number of areas where serious questions exist.
Among these are:
1. On page 5-1, a misunderstanding of the
nitrogen discharge requirements of the State of
Indiana is apparent. On Clear Creek the winter
requirement should be 3.0 and not 6.5. On Salt
Creek the summer discharge should be 7.9 rather
than 3.0.
2. The additional cost of facilities to
provide second stage nitrification at Clear Creek
sites is estimated on page 6-14 of the report at
$1,722,000. It would seem that this second set
of aeration, sedimentation and sludge handling
facilities should cost about 20% of the liquid
treatment cost (page 6-14) or about $3,400,000.
3. The cost of operating and maintaining a
two stage nitrification plant on Clear Creek is
estimated at only 8% more than operating a single
stage nitrification plant at Salt Creek, despite
the fact that the Salt Creek plant must nitrify
only during the summer months while a Clear Creek
plant must nitrify twelve months a year.
4. Either no rock excavation is included
or the quantity of rock is seriously underestimated
for the necessary channel relocations for Clear
Creek sites.
6-32
-------
EVALUATION OF GILBERT REPORT
PAGE TWO
5. The cost of the gravity sewer to the Salt
Creek site shown on page 36-A is over-estimated.
The price for all sewers larger than 42" in diameter
is based on an over-sized pipe that is not needed to
carry the anticipated flow. Current quotations on
sewer pipe are from 20 to 35% less than those used
for each pipe size.
6. In our experience, we have never found it
necessary to construct and maintain a permanent road
for vehicles along an outfall sewer. (page 8-6)
7. On page 10-1, the report states that the
Salt Creek site is not adequate to sustain land
application of sludge produced there. A call to
Joseph B. Farrell, Chief of the Ultimate Disposal
Section, of the Municipal Environmental Research
Laboratory, of the U.S. EPA in Cincinnati, revealed
that the formula used in the Gilbert Report was not
current. Using the correct figures would allow about
2 1/2 times the sludge loading proposed in the report.
8. The report states on page 10-20 that the
costs for the recommended haul and application of
sludge from Dillman Road and Salt Creek sites are
within 8% of each other, even though the sludge
application site is immediately across the creek from
the Salt Creek site, according to Plate 3. In addition,
the report assumes that the owners of this property
will accept the sludge.
6-33
-------
EVALUATION OF GILBERT REPORT
PAGE THREE
9. It is extremely doubtful that a new 15 mgd
two stage nitrification treatment plant can be built
on the Winston Thomas site west of the existing
facilities as stated on page 3-1. In addition, the
report reveals a lack of understanding of the exist-
ing Winston Thomas facility when it refers to the
obsolete, fixed-nozzle, sprinkling filters as
"Bio-filters."
10. The assumption that pumping 1.9 mgd north
to the Blucher Poole plant will provide a less cost-
ly treatment scheme than handling it in its natural
watershed. (page 1-4) It does not consider the fact
that the Blucher Poole plant will have to be upgraded
to meet substantially the same standards as discharges
to Clear Creek.
11. Page 31-A of the report discusses the need
for one pump station to serve Smithville while Plate
3, illustrating this facility, shows two.
12. The statements in Section 5 to the effect
that two stage nitrification by a plant on Clear Creek
is, per se, superior to single stage nitrification on
Salt Creek, suggests that it is considered that the
State of Indiana has not properly allocated waste
loading to the streams of the State.
If a detailed comparison between this Report and the
Facilities Plan would be of value, we at Black & Veatch
respectfully request that this Report be presented on a
basis comparable to the Facilities Plan.
6-34
-------
Blooming-ton, Indiana
May 3, 1975
Steve Riggins, President
Monroe County Plan Commission
County Courthouse Annex
Bloomington, Indiana
Dear Mr. Riggins s
A number of organizations concerned with implementation of the
Land Suitability Study of the Lake Monroe area, in process of
completion by the Indiana University School for Public and
Environmental Affairs, would like a place on the agenda of the
May 20th meeting of the Monroe County Plan Commission in order
to present two requests:
l) for formulation and adoption of a policy and plan for
the use of the Lake Monroe Land Suitability Study, and
2) for consideration of applying for a Planning Grant for
a similar study for the remainder of the County.
Enclosed is a statement which we are sending to the members of
the Monroe County Plan Commission, the Monroe County Council,
and the Monroe County Commissioners.
Yours sincerely,
Anne Rippy /
809 S. Stull, representing the
organizations
cc: Bob Snoddy
6-35
-------
TO: TIDE MONROE COUNTY PLAN COU.ilSSION
FROM: CONTACT, 13LOOMINGTON LEAGUE Oi-1 V/Ol.IEj! VOTERS, iiLOOi.Ij.,IGTO;J rL.
MENTAL DUALITY AND CONSERVATION COLLiIS^IOiI, SADoAl^fAS AUDUBON SOCIETY
The Land Suitability Study being conducted by the Indiana University School
of Public and Environmental Affairs covers approximately a 100 square mile
area around Lake Monroe and v/ill provide a valuable data base and Land Capa-
bility Model for use in planning for that area. It is an important first
step in terms of the study and planning needed for the entire Lake Llonroe
Watershed.
The value of such a study, however, v/ill not be realized until the results
of the study are incorporated into planning and decision-making for that
region. We ask that the Monroe County Plan Commission formulate and adopt
a policy and plan for the implementation of the study. Those involved in
making the study will demonstrate how to retrieve and interpret the data,
but we need a firm committment to its use to gain the benefits inherent in
the study.
We believe that the time is appropriate, also, for undertaking a compre-
hensive land use study for the remainder of Monroe County with the joal of
incorporating the two studies with the zoning ordinance recently adopted
into a Comprehensive Master Plan for the County.
The need for such a study is apparent. For example, the Indiana University
School of Business recently predicted a 25,000 population increase in the
south drainage basin of the. County within the next two decades. Y/e need
to identify critical areas such as fragile lands, renewable resource lands,
natural hazard lands, mineral resources, etc and protect them through
planning --- as well as seek an over-view of our land-use problems and potential.
Funding for such a study is available through a Federal 701 Planning Grant
which would pay 2/3 of the cost with the local governing body providing 1/5-
701 Planning Grant funds are allocated by the Indiana State Planning Services
Agency which could conceivably give high priority to a project which would
include land-use planning for Lake Monroe as one of its components.
Many kinds of data are available which would minimize the cost of the study.
The Soil Survey of Monroe County is well advanced and expected to be com-
pleted within two years. The Indiana Geological Survey will provide geo-
logical and hydrological data and both the Soil Conservation Service and
the Geological Survey will provide expert services in interpretation of
this data. A recently completed study of the karst region of the west side
of the County should prove valuable. The services of the Region 10 planner
and cooperation with the planning services of the City of Blooniington could
also expedite planning and minimize costs.
We would appreciate early consideration by the Monroe County Plan Commission
of an application for a Planning Grant.
6-36
-------
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND CONSERVATION COMMISSION
ON THE SITING OF THE PROPOSED
BLOOMINGTON SEWAGE TREATMENT FACILITIES
R F n
i-ilJ. NO-,-
1
6-37
-------
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
AND CONSERVATION COMMISSION ON TliC SITING OF THE PROPOSED
BLOOMINGTON SEWAGE TREATMENT FACILITIES
1. General Background
Almost since its inception during the spring of 1972 the Environ-
mental Quality and Conservation Commission (EQCC) has been studying
the environmental aspects of the placement of a new waste-water treat-
ment facility in southern Bloomington. This is demonstrated by the
record of the EQCC meetings, whichis summarized in the Appendix. The
EQCC has discussed the siting of the facilities during many civic
meetings, has supported several pertinent studies, and has participated
in studies carried out by others. We have presented recommendations
and relevant information to the citizens of Bloomington, to the Common
Council, to various members of the City Administration, and to State and
Federal officials. Relying on these experiences and the understanding
we have gained from them, we present this report as our analysis of
the environmental factors -associated with the siting of the proposed
facilities.
From an environmental perspective, there are two major siting
options: the proposed Salt Creek site and the alternative sites on
upper Clear Creek. Possible alternative sites mentioned to date include
the present Winston Thomas site and sites on South Rogers Street, on
Dill man Road, and on Ketcham Road.
6-38
-------
-2-
II. Recommendations
Based on their community involvement referred to above and on
their professional expertise in such areas as physics, chemistry, eco-
logy, and soil science, the members of the EQCC have unanimously con-
cluded that all of the Clear Creek sites are environmentally preferable
to the Salt Creek site. Of the Clear Creek sites, the EQCC believes
that the total environmental impact of construction and operation at
the Dillman Road site will be the least. Therefore, the EQCC recommends
that the treatment facility be placed at the Dillman Road site. This
report will present our reasons for this recommendation; first, the
environmental issues differentiating all of the Clear Creek sites from
Salt Creek; second, the environmental and social issues which differ-
entiate Dillman Road from Winston-Thomas and South Rogers St. There
are four main reasons for selection of a Clear Creek Site:
a. The terrestrial and aquatic destruction involved in running
the outfall sewer to Salt Creek will be avoided.
b. The level of effluent quality from the Clear Creek sites will
be greater.
<
c. The Salt Creek site is within the floodplain of Salt Creek,
directly below the spillway at the reservoir and located on
a soil type known to be subject to waterlogging. (Soe Soil Survey)
d. The possibility of adverse secondary effects of facilitated
development at Lake Monroe because of placement at Salt Creek
will be less severe.
The primary considerations differentiating Dillman Road from Winston
Thomas/St. Rogers St. are the adverse aesthetic impact of a wastewater
treatment facility placed in the more densely populated areas and the
6-39
-------
-3-
social impact of relocation of several families living in a trailer
park on the proposed site.
III. Comparison of the Environmental Effects of Clear Creek and
Salt Creek Siting
A. Outfall Sewer Effects
Locating the waste-water treatment plant at the distant Salt
Creek site requires a long outfall sewer. There are five alternative
sewer routes from Bloomington to that site:
(1) under Clear Creek;
(2) along Clear Creek, but higher upon the banks and slicing
across the creek's bends;
(3) as in (2), but using a force main to cut across the broad
westerly bend of the creek;
(4) along Clear Creek to the Ketcham Road area, then across the
hills via a force main to lower Little Clear Creek, then
south along Little Clear Creek and Clear Creek;
(5) as in (4), but to upper Little Clear Creek.
The proposed outfall sewers to the Ketcham Road and Dill man Road sites
follow route (2) above, but for much shorter distances. Both the South
Rogers Street and Winston Thomas sites would require 9000 ft. force
mains running up the Clear Creek bed from the proposed southeast inter-
ceptor sev.^r. It should also be noted that, should the Lake Monroe
Regional Waste District decide to have its wastewater treated at a
Bloomington Clear Creek facility, a force main running overland from
6-40
-------
-4-
from Smithville to the Clear Creek bed will have to be built.
Outfall sewer construction and maintenance will have detrimental
environmental effects; the longer the sewer is, the worse these effects
will be. These effects can result from earth-moving during construction
and may also include permanent environmental damage caused by right-
of-way clearance and maintenance. All of these effects are magnified
by the proximity of a natural area, Cedar Bluffs. Following is a
more detailed consideration of these factors.
The right-of-way for construction of sewer alternative (2), which
is the one recommended by Black & Veatch, is 100 feet wide and about
60,000 feet long. An area of six million square feet will thus be
subjected to physical abuse. A trench averaging twelve feet deep will
be dug down the length of this right-of-way. Much of the 4.3 million
cubic feet of earth that will have to be removed is limestone, which
will have to be blasted out. Some of this spoil will be bulldozed and
graded to level the right-of-way for maintenance access. It is rather
difficult to believe that bulldozing and blasting on this scale could
be done with an eye to "limiting environmental disruption" (Black &
!
Veatch, p. X-16). It is more reasonable to believe that construction
activity will result in the destruction of much terrestrial and aquatic
wildlife habitat, in addition to impairing the stream's aesthetic value.
Despite the promise to grade and reseed "as soon as practicable,"
it may work out that, considering the frequency of rain and flash-
flooding in the area, erosion may set in before vegetative cover does.
In the case of alternative (3), erosion may also result from unrevege-
tated sewer line easements in the hills above the creek. In any case,
the resultant siltation of the stream could have an effect on the aquatic
6-41
-------
-5-
biota more permanent that that caused by sewer construction itself.
The EQCC also has reservations about the effects of the twenty-odd
creek crossings proposed under alternatives (1) and (2). The provisions
for keeping the line from being dug up by the action of the stream are
not described in the Black & Veatch report. This makes it impossible
to comment on them specifically except to hypothesize that there may
be permanent changes in the substrate of the creek which could affect
stream biota, flow characteristics, and aesthetics adversely.
Though specific techniques for right-of-way maintenance have not
been described by Black & Veatch, usual procedures involve defoliation
with herbicides. This would constitute a chronic perturbation to the
immediate and neighboring wildlife habitat as well as a possible source
of pollution from runoff.
Another problem is the proximity of the Cedar Bluffs area to the
Clear Creek sewer route. Sewer construction arid maintenance could affect
the integrity of this area through the resultant noise, dust, and impair-
ment. While the sewer does not pass through the area, alternatives
place the line just across the creek from it. On the basis of the above
5
considerations, the EQCC recommends that the important potential negative
environmental effects of the outfall sewer be minimized by minimizing
the length of the sewer, subject to constraints described below.
B. Effluent Quality Effects
The Salt Creek facility is to be a one-stage plant, while current
state water quality standards require that a Clear Creek plant, because
of the low dilution capacity of the receiving stream, be a two-stage
6-42
-------
-6-
plant. A one-stage plant is somewhat more susceptible to rapid
changes in plant variables such as water volume than a two-stage plant.
Rapid changes in water volume do occur in the Bloomington area during the
summer. It is conceivable that at that time a one-stage plant could
discharge improperly treated effluent.
More importantly, however, a one-stage plant will be unable to
discharge effluent of a quality high ehough to meet the standards
currently required for 1983 by Public Law 92-500. Yet the Black &
Veatch study which judges the cost effectiveness of the Salt Creek
and Dillman Road sites to be similar assumes a one-stage plant at the
Salt Creek site. The EQCC questions the rationale behind a twenty-
year cost effectiveness study predicated on water quality standards that
will be superseded by more stringent ones after only five years. Clearly,
with respect to present water quality standards, a Dillman Road plant
would be more cost effective thafi a Salt Creek plant, because the former
would discharge a higher quality effluent for the same cost; with respect
to future standards, a cost effectiveness study would have to consider
fines the City might have to pay due to the emission of an illegal
effluent by a Salt Creek plant. The EQCC concludes that, environmentally,
and legally, a two-stage plant is better than a one-stage plant and
that, economically, a two-stage plant at Dillman Road is better than a
two-stage plant at Salt Creek.
An added benefit of a Clear Creek site with the relatively clean
effluent it is required to discharge is the potential recreational use
of Clear Creek as a canoe stream. Such areas are not abundant around
Bloomington. If the Salt Creek site is chosen, the flow in Clear Creek
6-43
-------
-7-
will be too low to permit its use for this purpose.
C. Hydrological Effects
The proposed method of sludge disposal at the Salt Creek site is
subsurface soil injection over an area comprising most of the site.
During the spring rains of 1975, this area was heavily waterlogged. The
EQCC cautions that sludge injection into land which is subject to
periodic leaching by rain water, and which abuts major receiving streams,
may result in periodic large influxes of nutrients, untreated heavy
metals, and other matter into the streams. It should be noted that this
creek water is a water source for Bedford, only thirteen miles down-
stream. These problems are not addressed in the facilities plan.
These possible detrimental hydrological effects may be exacerbated
by the location of the Salt Creek site within a 100-year flood plain.
Until flood-plain alterations potentially caused by the Lake Monroe
dam are known, it would be wise to require that the facility's constr-
uction plans include safeguards to prevent discharge, leakage, or
leaching of untreated wastes from the plant area into the creeks during
periods of high water. '
D. Secondary Effects of Unplanned Development in the Lake Monroe Area.
Another major concern of the EQCC is the possible adverse effect
on the Lake Monroe area resulting from development in the lake's
watershed stimulated by the placement of the treatment facility at
Salt Creek. We anticipate this facilitation because, according to
92-500
Public Law / development cannot occur without suitable wastewater
treatment. While the dollar costs to Bloomington at. Dillman Road or
6-44
-------
-8.
Salt Creek are similar, the cost to LMRWD*1s much less if the Bloom-
ington Plant is at Salt Creek. The advantage of this Salt Creek hookup
is that several existing sources of effluent will be removed from the
lake. This is the main environmental benefit of this arrangement.
This is balanced by the possibility that cheaper sewage treatment will
permit more rapid development than would otherwise occur. In principle
the development of private living structures and even commercial ones,
need not lead to the deterioration of the lake region, providing that
sufficient planning controls and enforcement procedures are established
and maintained. No such planning structures and controls exist in the
region at this time. The Lake Monroe Land Suitability Study recently
carried out is not intended to guarantee the planning needed in the
area although it can serve as background for the development of such
a plan. In view of this situation EQCC is evaluating potential environ-
mental effects based on recent and current planning and construction
methods.
The EQCC considers the primary functions of Lake Monroe to be
1) flood control water impoundment, 2) a recreational resource,
3) a major source of domestic water for the City of Bloomington and its
environs. It is the potential deterioration of these functions of the
lake with which we are concerned. In addition, much of the land around
the lake presently has an undisturbed, natural quality which is important
in and of itself and also as it enhances the recreational value of the
whole region.
Development without a regional land use plan and construction
practice regulations potentially could detract from the functions listed
*Lakc Monroe Renional Waste District
6-45
-------
above in the f61 lowing ways:
1) Conversion of privately owned natural areas into develop-
ments which will decrease the amount of natural landscape for aesthetic,
wildlife and recreational use. This effect will be concentrated in.
certain areas.
2) Improperly controlled construction destroys foliage and ground
cover, resulting in erosion, increased sedimentation and potentially
decreased water quality.
3) Increased use of motor-driven boats and motor vehicle traffic
on land will probably result in increased amounts of oil-based products
and heavy metals entering the lake.
4) Motor boat traffic may result in incre?sed shoreline erosion.
5) Unaesthetic construction on and around the lake's shoreline
will detract from the natural quality and recreational value of the
lake area.
One very important variable which must be considered in evaluating
possible development around Lake Monroe is the opinion of those people
who use the Lake. Wise (1975) has surveyed opinions of users and found
1
significant expressions in favor of preserving the semi-natural quality
of the area. Most users prefer swimming, camping, and boat fishing as
recreational activities. A substantial plurality favored fewer condo-
miniums and houses around Lake Monroe than presently exist. Facilities
which those interviewed did not desire included motels, sporting goods
stores, condominiums, houses, and boat ramps. ATI but 3% found the
forest around the lake attractive. The attribute which people like best
is the beauty of the lake. The attributes ]_iked least are the crowding
and facilities. EQCC's conclusion about public opinion is that the type
6-46
-------
-10-
of development likely to be facilitated by placement of Bloomington's
sewage treatment plant at Lake Monroe (houses, condominiums, commercial)
is precisely the type of development which Lake users do not want.
Further, such development might destroy those aspects of the Lake envir-
onment which the users appreciate the most (attractiveness, forests,
fishing) and exacerbate problems which they already perceive (crowding
and facilities).
EQCC is concerned that the necessary regional planning does not
exist to control such effects on the lake's primary functions as those
listed above. We therefore believe that development should not be
facilitated by placement of the plant at Salt Creek. He recognize the
environmental value of removing present sources of effluent from the lake,
but are not certain that this value overweighs the other negative effects
which potentially might result.
E. Summary
The Salt Creek site will require a longer and thus more environ-
mentally disruptive outfall sewer than any of the Clear Creek sites.
A Clear Creek plant will produce effluent of higher quality than the
proposed Salt Creek plant, whose effluent will be outside legal limits
shortly after commencement of operation. Hydrological considerations
indicate that a Salt Creek plant may periodically cause stream pollution.
Finally, the Salt Creek site is more likely than a Clear Creek site to
lead to unplanned development in the Lake Monroe area, with all the
environmental deterioration this, implies. Because the environmental
costs of the Salt Creek site are obviously much higher than those of
6-47
-------
-li-
the Dillman Road site, and because the economic costs are similar, the
Salt Creek site can be eliminated from further consideration.
IV. Comparative Evaluation of jthe jjeiar J>§ek jj>i_tes
Differences among the impacts of the various ciearCreek sites on
the physical environment are minor compared with the difference in
impacts between any of the Clear Creek sites and the Salt Creek site.
The outfall sewer to the Dillman Road site would be a little longer
than the force main from the southeast interceptor to the Winston Thomas
or South Rogers Street sites, and the outfall sewer to the Ketcham
Road site will be a little longer still. On the other hand, if the
new plant is not built at the Winston Thomas site, that site can be
converted to a park, though the South Rogers site would use part of the
present site and decrease the value of a park there. Selection of the
Winston Thomas site may lead to better re-use of existing materials.
Thus, in terms of physical environmental impact, the only clear advan-
tage at this point is that of Dillman Road over Ketcham Road. Given
its higher economic costs, also the Ketcham Road site can be eliminated
from further consideration'.
The major drawback to the present location seems to be the con-
struction disturbances and the possibility of increased odors in the
vicinity which is heavily populated, and the possible need to relocate
several households. The Dillman Road site is not presently densely
populated and for topographic reasons dees not seem threatened by nearby
settlement. EQCC finds that, while all the Clear Creek sites seem
preferable to Salt Creek, we would rank Dill man Road ahead of Winston
Thomas/S. Rogers St. primarily for social reasons.
6-48
-------
-12-
V. The Need for an Environmental Impact Statement
EQCC recommends that if the Salt Creek Site is selected, EPA
should definitely prepare an EIS to investigate not only the points
made above but also many other specific points concerning possible
routes for the outfall sewer, the advisability of sub-surface injection
as a means of sludge disposal, and specific treatment plans. The issue
most difficult for us, as citizens, to predict and understand about
the problem of site selection is the question of secondary impact of
development in the Lake Monroe Area. EQCC recommends that, because of
the complexity of this problem, major efforts should be made by EPA
to predict, evaluate and Suggest solutions to these secondary impacts.
A list of points needing investigation in an EIS follows this section.
Some members of EQCC believe that an EIS might be desireable irrespective
of which site is chosen and so points related to both sites are included
on the list.
1. Environmental desirability of returning Clear Creek to its pre-
i
Winston Thomas flow level in order to restore the original biota;
comparative study of Little Clear Creek biota might be made to determine
if change has occurred.
2. Extent of direct destruction of wildlife habitat by outfall sewer
construction.
3. Quantitative assessment of Clear Creek siltation which might be
caused by sewer construction; effect on Bedford drinking water.
4. Extent of indirect environmental degradation caused by outfall
6-49
-------
-13-
sewer construction due to activities by the work crew such as
driving equipment into and out of right-of-way, parking automobiles,
etc.
5. Identification of those areas where blasting must be done and
assessment of the impact of the resulting fallout and noise on
nearby wildlife habitat and cultural areas, e.g., Cedar Bluffs,
Ketcham Road cemetery.
6. Differentiation of sewage treatment alternatives with respect
to effluent quality, especially between alternatives 2A and 3A in
Facilities Plan; analysis of economic-environmental tradeoffs.
7. Extent to which revegetation is necessary following sewer con-
struction, how soon it must be done, and how likely it is to be
successful, given the area's hydrology; differentiation between degrees
of erosion expected with and without revegetation.
8. Environmental impact of overland sewer routing, including conside-
rations similar to those given above for creek bed routing. Judgment
on the advisability of building alternatives 3, 4, 5, and LMRWD
Smithville-Clear Creek force main.
9. Reevaluation of economic-environmental costs of outfall sewer alter-
natives for Salt Creek site, expecially with respect to alternatives
2 vs. 5A; analysis of environmental tradeoffs of greater overland as
opposed to less creek bed routing for alternative 5A; amount of eco-
nomic difference LMRWD might fund as their share of Little Clear Creek
sewer to have a plant on Salt Creek instead of Clear Creek.
6-50
-------
-14-
10. Description of biota of wildlife habitat to be destroyed at
Ketcham Road and Salt Creek sites and determination of its rarity.
11. Measures to be taken to ensure that holding ponds, etc., will
not be flooded.
12. Environmental assessment of possible landfill and soil injection
sites to determine potential for water pollution due to flooding or
leaching after rainfall.
13. Comparisons of degrees of buffering needed and possible for various
sites and various treatment and disposal methods to shield local residents
and visitors to natural and cultural areas from noise, odor, and ugli-
ness of sewage treatment.
14. Assessment of tradeoffs between biotic-geologic costs and social
costs, the latter accruing from #13 above and from forced relocations
at some of the sites. (See also #23)
15. Current aesthetic values of undeveloped sites.
i
16. Comparative analyses of economies of land use for various sewage
treatment and sludge disposal alternatives.
17. Size of the work crew required for construction, where they will
commute from and what social costs they might impose on the community.
18. Social benefits with respect to reducing unemployment of con-
struction of plant.
*
19. Comparative analysis of energy and resources required for various
site, treatment, and disposal alternatives.
6-51
-------
- i o-
20. Environmental effects of travel over, entry to, and exit from
right-of-way by maintenance crews.
21. Precautions that must be taken to prevent the creek from digging
through to the sewer at crossing points; effects of these precautions
on biota and flow characteristics; impact of altered flow character-
istics on downstream creek ecosystem.
22. Impact of possible herbicide use during right-of-way maintenance
on environment, both directly on biota and indirectly due to possible
water pollution this might cause.
23. Surveys of local residents as to what impact they feel the Winston
Thomas plant and its proposed expansion or removal to South Rogers
Street has or will have on their lives; income distribution of resi-
dents so affected and assessment of their political power.
24. Environmental benefits accruing to Clear Creek sites due to
potential recreational uses of Clear Creek resulting from maintaining
its present flow level.
i
25. Possibility that a regional plan should be a prerequisite for
selection of the Salt Creek site.
26. Total environmental analysis of the effects of unplanned development
around Lake Monroe facilitated by the Salt Creek site, including poten-
tial biotic, geologic, and social costs accruing from any destruction
of forest, degradation of the water supply, and increase in population
6-52
-------
density and potential social gains accruing fro'm economic growth;
tradeoff analysis of these costs and gains.-
27. Environmental and economic costs and gains accruing from
sludge disposal by means of treating it and selling it as fertilizer.
28. Determination of any upper "ceiling which geologic restrictions
may place on south-planning-area population and deduction of largest
sewage treatment design capacity that will ever be needed.
JCR/nan
Acknowledgements
James Chiesa, S.P.E.A. graduate student, has permitted use of
portions of an unpublished manuscript as well as volunteering editorial
help. The following report was cited in the text:
Wise, Charles. 1975. User preserences of policy alternatives:
the case of recreational user attitudes toward development
and regulation at Lake Monroe, Indiana. School of Public and
Environmental Affairs Occasional Papers, No. 4.
Soil' Survey, 1973. Interim Soil Survey, Vol. 2, Information
and Interpretation, Blooinington, Indiana. U. S. Department of
Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, Purdue Uni-versity.
6-53
-------
APPENDIX
Brief synopsis of items discussed during Environmental
Quality and Conservation Commission meetings which pertain to
Lake Monroe, water quality, and the sewage treatment plant.
6-54
-------
HISTORY OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION'S INVOLVEMENT WITH LAKE MONROE
Based on 1972 minutes
May 10 -- reported that Rod Crafts and Barbara Restlc would travel to
Indianapolis to speak with John Cregor, an attorney who is the foremost
leading authority in the country on riparian rights, about the City's
power to control development in Lake Monroe, The Water'Quality Commit-
tee wished to issue a warning about the possibility of Inland Steel
encroaching upon Lake Monroe and requested the Commission's support and
approval for enlisting the aid of other groups in the effort. A motion
was made and approved that The Water Quality Committee should accumulate
as much factual information as they can before the next Commission
meeting with their suggestions as to what action the Commission can
take respecting Lake Monroe,
July 12 -- The resolution on Lake Monroe development was read and David
Docauer presented a background report on the resolution. He said that
the resolution was^beginning step in seeking protection for Lake Monroe,
The vote was unanimous, John Patton directed that the absent members be
polled to ensure a majority giving approval,
August 9 -- A notion made that: The Commission reques'' the City of Bloom-
ington to name a representative to sit in on the final hearing of the
Department of Natural Resources; to request from Inland Steel's attorney
a copy of the plans to be made available as soon as possible; and a
representative be named to appear at the hearing of the Stream Pollution
Control Board on Tuesday, August 15, 1972, Whitehead offered an amendment
asking that Inland Steel give the plans of their development within the
drainage basin of Lake Monroe and that they also name a representative
to come before the Commission to discuss the development. The motion and
amendment were approved unanimously,
October 11 -« Dick Hilliker, Representative of Inland Siael Development
Corp,, presented maps, gave a report on a proposed development around
Lake Monroe and discussed the development proposal with the Commission
and the audience, A Water Quality Committee report submitted by Docauer
was accepted, Donald ^Hiitehead and David Docauer agreed to write a
letter to the Stream Pollution Control Board and the University on
behalf of the Commission stating their views on the ISDC's plans,
November 8 Ted Najam, Administrative Assistant to the Mayor, read
a statement from the Office of the Mayor concerning the proposed Position
Paper prepared by David Docauer and Donald Whitehead on land development
around Lake Monroe; the present state of Lake Monroe and a projection
of its future in relation to presently proposed developments and future
developments. The statement basically said that the Commission should
not make such statements without making it clear that it is not necessarily the
position of the City and "A statement of this kind with such broad
ramifications should be made only after there has been broad partici-
pation by all those City departments and commissions which have something
to contribute," Discussion followed, and some changes were made on
the position paper. The paper was approved. It was decided that Don
Whitehead would represent the Commission before the Common Council,
December 13 -- Donald Whitehead reported that the Common Council passed
a resolution accepting and concurring in the Commission's Position Paper,
Bron added that at the end of the discussion a suggestion was made by '
Council President ChaMotte Zietlow for the formation of a body to look
6-55
-------
into the ecological factors that concern the lake and the long range
view. Chairman Patton would contact Zietlow to request that the
Commission be included in such a body if it was not already constituted.
6-56
-------
SUMMARY OP ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION'S INVOLVEMENT WITH LAKE MONROE
Based on 1973 minutes
January 10 The Commission's draft statement.on the Black and Veatch report
was presented. In the discussion that followed, it was brought out that there
would be federal funding but the City does not require an impact statement,
Dave Rogers(President of the Board of Works) said he worked with the Black and
Veatch Report and thought the comments of the statement appropriate. Cn finding
Number two (Monroe Reservoir) he felt the comments were well taken, but said
that Black and Veatch were only asked to do a bare bones study so the report
does not take into account the impact of increased development. The construc-
tion of waste water facilities would of necessity require federal grants, which
would in turn require an impact study, though that study would be directed
primarily toward alerting the public rather than binding any specific agen cy
to a set course of action. Mr. Rogers said also that Lake Monroe Reservoir would
not provide all of Bloomingtcn's future water need. The city plans to continue
to develop dependencies on Griffey Creek-Bean Blossom, though dependence on
Lake Monroe would continue to be very important. He added that the state makes
a good profit from the city of Bloomington bv providing the water from the
Lake Monroe Reservoir and that the state owed the city considerable consideration
in protecting the security of that water supply.
Barbara Heise asked if Mr. Rogers thought the tertiary xreatment facilities
should be funded immediately. He acknowledged the need and said the city would
file for both federal and local funds, but he warned that the costs would be
astronomical. Mr. Spencer asked whether effluent from the .treatment plant was
delivered to Salt Creek below the dan, and whether any study had been made on
plans to deliver processed water in the same area where the sewage system is
proposed. Mr. Rogers said that the sewage plant was in one of the areas which
the Public Service Commission had currently given to one of the rural water
corporations and that the outflow main that goes down through Clear Creek actually
goes through a no man's land where there is currently no allocation of responsi-
bility. Mr. Bron asked about future additional water sources besides Lake Monroe
Rogers said that Griffey Creek-Bean Blossom was not delivering the high quality
water it could if the treatment system were improved. He expected that once
improved, the city could receive good water from it at a price below that the
city is paying to the state for water from Lake Monroe, Mr. Cron asked what
population was projected by fiat plan and Mr. Rogers answered that it ought to
be done just on the basis of present population because of the high price the
city is paying for Lake Monroe water. To meet projected need both systems would
have to be improved, and the plant on Lake Monroe doubled. Mr Bron said it was
his personal feeling that, in view of the high taxes to be paid by city
residents:, it was not unreasonable to ask that whatever development occurs be
controlled so that it doesn't damage the lake. My Rogers answered that he
didn't think there was any conflict with that, but he was not sure whether the
government had the current ability to control development. Barbara Heise asked
if it wasn't true that the city has virtually no control over development. Mr.
Rogers responded affirmatively saying the city really could only make hopeful
statements.
Mr. Docauer spoke about the Griffey Creek Reservoir saying that it has good
quality water because it is well forested, but the quantity is insufficient.
He had little personal knowledge of Bean Blossom, but had heard it was very
turbid and hard to process. He doubted if it would serve if the population
increased. He said some of tho mistakes in the Black and Veatch Report had
not been corrected. His comments were: I, That all growth projected in the
report until 19^0 occurring within Bloomington was unlikcly--much should occur
outside the city. 2. That more growth would occur in the city than in the
county was also unlikely. 3, The overloaded south plant was designed for
7,000,000 gallons whereas before the Commission was told 10,000,000.
6-57
-------
4. The tertiary treatment facilities need to be placed now. Sometimes tertiary
lagoons cause problenis--high algae growth causes secondary pollution. No sure
method exists to remove the algae by sedimentation a.id the city ought to con-
sider this. In response to Barbara Heise's question as to whether tertiary
lagoons were the method of tertiary treatment now in use, Mr. Docauer said
there were other methods (electrolysis, chemicals) depending on the purpose of
the tertiary treatment.
Chairman Patton suggested an amendment to the wording of the statement of the
effect that "all future additional water needs must cone from Monroe Reservoir"
be changed to "and much of the foreseeable future additional water need of
Bloomington must come from the Monroe Reservoir." The motion was accepted and
the amendment adopted.
February 14 -- George Walkenshaw, of the City's Utilities Department, spoke
about the problems facing the City's other sources of water, Lake Lemon and
Lake Griffey. He pointed out that the City was never able to utilize fully
Lake Lemon water because tt has_to flow down a creek ten miles before it is
collected and rcpunped to the Griffey Water Treatment Plant, a facility which
was never designed to treat a water with a high turbidity content. Thus, in
the past year the city has only been able to use Yfater taken directly out of the
Griffey Reservoir, He mentioned that water from Lake Monroe was costing the
city about three million dollars a day. It would be Black and Veatch's
recommendation to expand and remodel the Griffey Water Treatment Plant so that
the water from Lake Lemon could be fully utilized. This would involve extensive
settling and floculation facilities because of the sludge problem. He knew of
no perfect solution to the dewatering of alum plant sludge, but said, the City
is presently constructing some pave drying beds frori which the sludge could
be scraped after it has been dried by mechanical equipment, then hauled off
and buried in land fills. Other methods arc under investigation. Other
problems included storm water entering the South Sanitary Treatment Plant, and
the plant is a dry ditch situation allowing little oxidation of the organic
material in the stream thereby causing odor. He then spoke on solutions ancl a
discussion followed.
The Water Quality Committee introduced a resolution to support the Lake
Shore Protection Bill now in the state legislature. The Bill would give the
Natural Resources Commission the right to review, all development within two
miles of state owned or managed reservoirs. Docauer remarked that the purpose
of the Bill was to make the NRC into a kind of Plan Commission for the lake
which would examine all aspects of planning. The Stream Pollution Control
Board presently hasn't the power to do this and neither does the NRC. Cor-
poration-owned land within the Monroe watershed is about 33OO acres, all but
about 600 acres inside the two mile area. The Bill gives the NRC
power to make decisions which it previously was not able to make.
March 21 Barbara Restle of the Water Quality Committee, presented a prelimi-
nary report on a sedimentation survey of Lake Monroe. Since the area is under-
going rapid change, it is necessary to start now to obtain accurate records of
the sedimentation rate, which is thought by the Army Corp of Engineers to have
a worse effect on a reservoir than sewage or industrial pollution. The Corp may
not survey Lake Monroe for 4 to 5 years and the only soil surveys of the area
now are based on a 1922 study. A recconnaissance stxidy of the Lake is in order.
now to determine roughly what the rate might be, especially since the original
surveys were made with no projected Change in the land use around the reservoir.
A motion was made for the Commission "to encourage the City to take cooperative
action with the county as soon as possible to get the Corps of Engineers to
make a recconnaissance sedimentation study of Lake Monroe at its earliest pos-
sible opportunity in view of the probable effects of the proposed developments
around the lake,"
6-58
-------
May 9 -- Barbara Hci.se reminded the Commission of the position it had taken
last year, that in the absence of good regional planning, massive development
around Lake Monroe was unwarranted. Since that time, Inland Steel has been
given its nearly final approval to build. Heise noted that the county zoning
ordinance would be having public hearings during the summer and urged Commis-
sioners to attend these meetings to' defend tighter controls for the two mile
fringe. Jan Biar.chi indicated that a representative of the Army Corps of
Engineers had indicated that the Corps may not be favorably disposed to issuing
a permit to Inland.
June 13 A letter from the Army Corps of Engineers said that the Corps planned
to resurvey the Lake, completing the other range installations, in 1977. In
the meantime a preliminary survey would be conducted and the results would be
communicated to the City. The letter added that the Corps did not fear a
potential reduction of the lifespan of the lake due to sedimentation even
though studies of otl.cr reservoirs indicate that initial projections of that rate
are incorrect, Bianchi suggested, in light of Senator Dayh's recent disapproval
of the Indianapolis Heservoir project, that the Commission could exercise a lit-
tle more force in pursuit of a survey. More pressure could be brought to bear
upon the Corps at least to get a study on track for 1977* Bron argued that
1V77 may well be too late because the dcvelopnent around the Lake appears to be
irninent. Heise asked what results could be expected from a preliminary survey.
In response Barbara nestle, new chairwoman of the Water Quality Committee,
indicated that such a survey would probably be quite trivial. A comprehensive
survejr is quite complex and must give an indication of where the sedimentation
is coning fror:, not just iiow nuch deposition there is. Such information would
be necessary in order to design sedimentation basins to protect the reservoir
from further sedimentation. Responding to a question of the cost of such a
study, Fix estimated around 020,000. He thought the Commission should
ascertain the estimate cost and then go directly to Washington for the appro-
priation. Bron agreed that the City has much to lose should it not pursue this
course. Patton proposed that the Commission take initial steps to carry out
Fix's proposal by seeking a cost estimate.
The Environmental Commission has been asked by the Plan Staff, to appoint
a member to attend meetings at Purdue on the ramifications and possible uses of
the information gathered by the Skylab experiments over Lake Monroe,
Bianchi reported that Inland Steel had still not accepted the restric-
tions placed upon then by the Stream Pollution Control Board and were not on
the agenda for the June meeting. In another development, the proposed county
zoning ordinance has been amended to provide that no development visible from
the shores of Lake Monroe would be permitted, and to require drainage and
erosion controls around the lake. This amendment will be discussed June 14,
and could use the support of all Commissioners. Bron added that the Forest
Service had also decided to deny permits to cross Forest Service land with
utility pipelines until a regional plan is devised. Heise pointed out that this
would have particular significance for Granves-Monroe and Inland Steel.
July 11 -- Assistant City Planner, Stu Heller, and Dr. David Frey reported on
the Lake Monroe-Skylab project and its possible ramifications for environ-
mental concerns.
Bianchi reported that the estimated cost of a sedimentation survey of
Lake Monroe is $24,000 for a resurvey of the existing ranges, and 320,000
to complete the range installations. The Corps said its preliminary study
scheduled for July should give a reasonable indication of the scdirient in the
project now. In light of Barbara Restle's opinion that it is more important to
know where the sediment is cor.iing from, such a preliminary study would pro- >
bably not help rr.uch, added Hianchi. She pointed out that Sen. Bayh sits on
tli c iiiDremriftfcioas.CoBinitteo and coyld be contacted for help in this matter.
6-59
-------
The initial response from the Mayor's office, she reported, was a willingness
to pursue the request in Washington, asking that the appropriations be nade now,
rather than in 1977.
September 12 Ted Najam discussed the letter, sent to Birch Dayh, concerning
a sedimentation study of Lake Monroe. He explained that an earlier letter
had been sent to the Louisville District Army Corp of Engineers in reference
to the study. Their reply was that they could give only a quick visual esti-
mate at this time, but that funds for an in-depth study would not be available
until 1977, Sen. Bayh explained that the 1974 appropriations bill for the Corps
has already been passed by Congress arid therefore it is impossible to amend
it for such a large amount. He expressed his desire to work with the City in
getting appropriations for this study during the next funding session. This
would make the study possible 2 to 3 years earlier than predicted and in
this sense he was encouraging.
In reference to the Department of Utilities' proposal to close Lake Lemon
as a water supply, Marcia Gelpe replied that the Water Quality Committee has
begun to look into the proposal and tactics that could be used to clean up
Lake Lemon, They expressed their feeling to the City's Utilities "oaru. The
reasons for closing have to do with estimates of renovating the facility
compared to the cost of Lake Monroe, volume of \/ater and the plant. Patton
cc .im en ted that several inversti gations are taking place, one of which is a
sedimentation report and he assumed the decision won't be made until the
information is in,
October 1O The Water Quality Corr.ni tteo has bpen studying the ^rob] en of
spills of raw sewage into Salt Creek from the Nashville Sewage Plant and sent
a letter to the County Commissioners of Crown County asking that a joint
meeting be set up to discuss the source of the problem as well as possible
solutions. The Commission agreed to send a letter to the Crown County Com-
missioners endorsing the idea of a joint meeting and asking to be kept informed
on the progress on solving the problem.
November 14 -- Dennis King presented a report concerning the meeting of the
Lake Monroe Regional Waste District Board and City Utilities Service Board
and a request of the Water Quality Committee submitted for an additional
hearing on an environmental assessment hearing to determine the environmental
effects of the regional sewer treatment plant that is goir-g to be constructed
by the City Utilities Service Board and of the diversion system that will be
put in by the LMRVD3. The Water Quality Committee said that the LMRWDB had
not filed any information prior to the meeting in conjucction with regulations
that the EPA has stated and therefore did not give the public a 30-day notice
to study the information. The outcome of a request that they hold another
meeting was a letter which indicated that another meeting would not be held,
but they would put some information on file and answer questions, if there
are any. A motion was made by the Environmental Commission and approved that
a hearing be held at the regular December Environmental Commission meeting with
the Utilities Service Board and their engineers answering questions from the
Commission and the public. In addition, the LMRWBD and the Monroe County Plan
Commission were requested to attend. Barbara Rcstle stresi;ed the interrela-
tedness of these two projects in the Water Quality Committee report.
December 12 see attached minutes.
6-60
-------
HISTORY OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION'S INVOLVEMENT WITH LAKE MONROE
Based on 197^ minutes
February 13 Barbara Restle read . the minutes of the last Water Quality
monthly meeting. In short, it said there waa concern on the part of many members
that an environmental impact statement should be requested by the committee
that would deal with the effects of the new sewage plant in greater detail. A
working subcommittee was formed to study the assessment hearings held by the
USB. It was hoped that this subcommittee would reach a conclusion on the course
of action the Water Quality Committee should pursue. No questions or comments
were added.
Restle presented to the Commission a summary of the considerations from the sub-
committee. She said the summary was by no means complete. The two considera-
tions presented were in the areas of population data projections for Monroe
County and problems with the treatment p-lant site and outfall sewer. Patton
recommended that these comments, if approved by the Commission, should become
part of the December 12^ meeting, Restle agreed but added that more considera-
tions than these two are being questioned. Restle stated that, although
the population data appears complete in the assessment it is not. Dennis King
explained that one of the first considerations to be included in an assessment
is a description of the effect of population distribution concentration on any
growth that might occur if the project is undertaken. He said that, with that
in mind, the subcommittee went through the Infiltration and Inflow Study and
the hearing record for the October 25- environmental assessment hearing and
the December 12^ information meeting to determine what RSH Associates had done
in regard to population projections. King said his impression was that the
statistics used in the assessment had projections to 1980-1990 based on the
census of 1950-1960, If it is based on these years there would be no influence
from the lake on the extraurban area because the lake was not constructed
until 19^3? King said that the alternatives to the temporary plant site were
not mentioned with regards to growth in different volumes and directions. He
said the Water Quality Committee is recommending further study. Heise asked
if the Water Quality Committee was asking for an environmental impact statement.
King replied that at this time they are n6t asking fcr an environmental impact
statement but only trying to point out subjects that are not adequately investi-
gated. Patton summed up King's comments by saying that the population projection
studies are not adequate and the effect of the waste water disposal plant on
changes in population have not been assessed at all. King's final comment pointed
out that if the population projections have not been adequately looked into
one can not design capacity of a plant properly, A copy of these questions will
be sent to the USB and EPA administrators. The Commission voted unanimously to
forward them.
Jim Ferro reported that at the last monthly meeting of the Water Quality commit-
tee another working group was formed composed of Jim Pres, David Docauer, and
himself. This working group will investigate the effects of construction
activities around Lake Monroe with regards to water run-off. The second major
project the working group is considering is one concerning Lake Lemon. This
would involve sampling the shoreling during a rainy period to measure runoff,
April 10 -- Jim Ferro said the water sampling project which is being planned to
test the quality of the run-off in the Lake Monroe watershed is being organized
and should be underway soon.
September 11 -- An ad hoc committee consisting of Rick Peoples, Dave Parkhurst,
Rick Darby, and Barbara Heise agreed to study the USB report on the Long Range
Plan Water Supply and Distribution Facilities for Bloonington, IN.
Rick Darby gave his report on Lako Vonroe. This report concerned the legal
standing; how can a reservoir outside of the city boundaries be controlled and
what is the relationship of the Commission to that lake, and whether there is
6-61
-------
anything the Commission can look into other than water quality itself.
September 25 Barbara Restle said that interests in the Water Quality Committee
are too broad. There are Legal problems, bacteriological problems, limnological
problems, sedimentary problems, and more. The committee needs to form subcommit-
tees and she asked for suggestions on restructuring.
November 13 Rick Darby gave a report on Lake Monroe. Ho said that Lake
Monroe is a large interest requiring tremendous work. There is no way one
person can provide the Commission with enough information for the Commission
to feel it is in control with the situation. He has therefore arranged with
Professor Vhite in the Law School for students to receive credit for participa-
ting in a project designed to prepare a paper or pamphlet which would ade-
quately describe the jurisdiction of various governmental bodies over Lake
Monroe, interaction and jurisdiction between this commission and the City,
of Bloonington in those various bodies and the rights
generally given to individuals in Indiana in the
Environmental field. Rick feels with this help, by the first of the year, a
comprehensive and fairly clear statement of exactly where the Commission stands
can be provided. He then went on to state the legal proceedure the Commission
wouid have to go through if it was to take action and suggestions the Commission
should consider. Walter Bron asked if Rick had a specific group in mind other
than Water Quality, Rick said no. Rick Peoples gave a report on the status
of the Water Quality Committee. The first meeting was held. Only four people
showed up but only one was interested in participation.
6-62
-------
CITY
OF
BLOOMINGT
N
PO BOX 100, MUNICIPAL BLDG., BLOOMINGTON, INDIANA 47401
'Environmental Commissic
June 5, 1975
Mr. Harlan D. Hirt
Chief, Planning Branch
United States Environmental
Protection Agency, Region V
230 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Dear Mr. Hirt:
The Environnental Quality and Conservation Commission of
Bloomington would like to amntend its "Recommendations of the
Environmental Quality and Conservation Commission on the Siting
of the Proposed Bloomington Sewage Treatment Facilities." The
report has been sent to you within the past week.
The amendment takes the form of clarification of some of the
points made in the original "Recommendations" and additional
points which we raise in the hope that they will be addressed
in the forthcoming Environnental Impact Statement. These addi-
tional items stem primarily from the discussions which occurred
during the Environmental Assessment Hearing held in Bloomington
on May 29.
The amendment is enclosed.
Sincerely yours,
./I
W. E. 3ron, Chairman
Bloonington Environmental Quality
and Conservation Coninission
VED/1!-
6-63
-------
Amendment to the "Recommendations of the
Environmental Quality and Conservation Commission (EQCC)
on the Siting of the Proposed
Bloomington Sewage Treatment Facilities"
1. Comparison of the Effluent Quality Effects between the Salt. Creek
Site and Any of the Clear Creek Sites.
Discussion during the May 29, 1975 Environmental Assessment Hearing
brought out the point that current requirements on effluent, based
on the dilution capacity of the receiving stream, may not (or may)
be changed in the future to meet the 19?'3 goals stated in Public
Law 92-500. If the requirements are not increased, then clearly the
one-stage Salt Creek plant could continue to be in compliance with
the legal requirements. In any event, however, as regards full cost
effectiveness, a Clear Creek plant is more cost effective than the
Salt Creek plant, because the former would discharge a higher quality
effluent for the same cost. Moreover, with regard to future stan-
dards, a Clear Creek plant would discharge an effluent more clearly
in the spirit of Public Law 92-5OO than would the Salt Creek plant.
2. The EQCC recommends that every effort be made to consider construction
of a plant at the Dillman Road site without relocating Clear Creek.
An amount of about $1.3 million has been estimated by Black and
Veatch for the cost of relocating the creek. An additional Si million
appears to have been included for aligning the plant to fit the site
after relocation of the creek. It appears to the EQCC that for
6-64
-------
$2.3 million (and probably for considerably less), a«w«r link* can
be built between components of the facility which would need to be
located on either side of the creek. We request that the EIS con-
sider the environmental consequences of relocating the creek com-
pared with the construction of sewer links, and also the relative
cost effectiveness of these alternatives.
3. At the Environmental Assessment Hearing, Black and Veatch claimed
that the need for vacuum drying of sludge at the Dillman Road site
results from the lack of two to three level acres of land needed to
build drying beds. The relative additional cost for vacuum drying
over drying beds is projected to be 51 million (projected worth).
This additional expenditure is assessed only on the Dillman Road
site. A study of a geodetic map of the site suggests that the
required two to three acres of land are available, even if the
Black and Veatch layout is adhered to. In any event, it appears to
the EQCC that the required acreage can be constructed for consider-
ably less than the incremental Si million. The EQCC requests that
this cost differential be investigated.
4. The EQCC questions the need for an additional amount of 3lOO,OOO
yearly attached by Black and Veatch to the labor costs at any of the
Clear Creek sites compared to the Salt Creek site. The only explana-
tion of this amount given by Black and Veatcli to date is that the
Clear Creek sites do not require nore personnel but, rather, higher
quality personnel. Since Black and Veatch has stated that the com-
plexity of operation is the sane at all sites, the EQCC fails to
6-65
-------
understand the basis for this incremental assessment against the
Clear Creek sites. The EQCC requests that this cost differential
also be investigated.
6-66
-------
MVmONNENTAI. PROTBCTIOI1 A8EMCY
RECEIVED
.;--.!i02lS75
PLANNING BRANCH
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND CONSERVATION COMMISSION
ON THE SITING OF THE PROPOSED
BLOOMINGTON SEWAGE TREATMENT FACILITIES
6-67
-------
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
AND CONSERVATION COMMISSION ON THE SITING OF THE PROPOSED
BLOOMINGTON SEWAGE TREATMENT FACILITIES
1. General Background
Almost since its inception during the spring of 1972 the Environ-
mental Quality and Conservation Commission (EQCC) has been studying
the environmental aspects of the placement of a new waste-water treat-
ment facility in southern Bloomington. This is demonstrated by the
record of the EQCC meetings, whichis summarized in the Appendix. The
EQCC has discussed the siting of the facilities during many civic
meetings, has supported several pertinent studies, and has participated
in studies carried out by others. We have presented recommendations
and relevant information to the citizens of Bloomington, to the Common
Council, to various members of the City Administration, and to State and
Federal officials., Relying on these experiences and the understanding
we have gained from them, we present this report as our analyses of
the environmental factors associated with the siting of the proposed
facilities.
From an environmental perspective, there are two major siting
options: the proposed Salt Creek site and the alternative sites on
upper Clear Creek. Possible alternative sites mentioned to date include
the present Winston Thomas site and sites on South Rogers Street, on
Dill man Road, and on Ketcham Road.
6-68
-------
-c-
II. Recommendations
Based e»f» their community involvement referred to above and on
their professional expertise in such areas as physics, chemistry, eco-
logy, and soil science, the members of the EQCC have unanimously con-
cluded that all of the Clear Creek sites are environmentally preferable
to the Salt Creek site. Of the Clear Creek sites, the EQCC believes
that the total environmental impact of construction and operation at
the Dillman Road site will be the least. Therefore, the EQCC recommends
that the treatment facility be placed at the Dillman Road site. This
report will present our reasons for this recommendation; first, the
environmental issues differentiating all of the Clear Creek sites from
Salt Creek; second, the environmental and social issues which differ-
entiate Dillman Road from Winston-Thomas and South Rogers St. There
are four main reasons for selection of a Clear Creek Site:
a. The terrestrial and aquatic destruction involved in running
the outfall sewer to Salt Creek will be avoided.
b. The level of effluent quality from the Clear Creek sites will
be greater.
i
c. The Salt Creek site is within the floodplain of Salt Creek,
directly below the spillway at the reservoir and located on
a soil type known to be subject to waterlogging. (see Soil Survey)
d. The possibility of adverse secondary effects of facilitated
development at Lake Monroe because of placement at Salt Creek
will be less severe.
The primary considerations differentiating Dillman Road from Winston
Thomas/St. Rogers St. are the adverse aesthetic impact of a wastewater
treatment facility placed in the more densely populated areas and the
6-6.9
-------
-3-
social impact of relocation of several families living in a trailer
park on the proposed site.
III. Comparison of the Environmental Effects of Clear Creek_a_n_d
Salt Creek Siting
A. Outfall Sewer Effects
Locating the waste-water treatment plant at the distant Salt
Creek site requires a long outfall sewer. There are five alternative
sewer routes from Blo:mington to that site:
(1) under Clear Creek;
(2) along Clear Creek, but higher upon the banks and slicing
across the creek's bends;
(3) as in (2), but using a force main to cut across the broad
westerly bend of the creek;
(4) along Clear Creek to the Ketcham Road area, then across the
hills via a force main to lower Little Clear Creek, then
south along Little Clear Creek and Clear Creek;
(5) as in (4), but to upper Little Clear Creek.,
The proposed outfall sewers to the Ketcham Road and Dillman Road-sites
follow route (?) above, but for much shorter distances. Both the South
Rogers Street and Winston Thomas sites would require 9000 ft. force
mains running up the Clear Creek bed from the proposed southeast inter-
ceptor sewer. It should also be noted that, should the Lake Monroe
Regional Waste District decide to have its wastewater treated at a
Bloomington Clear Creek facility, a force main running overland from
6-70
-------
-4-
from Smithville to the Clear Creek bed will have to be built.
Outfall sewer construction and maintenance will have detrimental
environmental effects; the longer the sewer is, the worse these effects
will be. These effects can result from earth-moving during construction
and may also include permanent environmental damage caused by right-
of-way clearance and maintenance. All of these effects are magnified
by the proximity of a natural area, Cedar Bluffs. Following is a
more detailed consideration of these factors.
p ^
The right-of-way for construction of sewer alternative (2), which
is the one recommended by Black & Veatch, is 100 feet wide and about
60,000 feet long. An area of six million square feet will thus be
subjected to physical abuse. A trench averaging twelve feet deep will
be dug down the length of this right-of-way. Much of the 4.3 million
cubic feet of earth that will have to be removed is limestone, which
will have to be blasted out. Some of this spoil will be bulldozed and
graded to level the right-of-way for maintenance access. It is rather
difficult to believe that bulldozing and blasting on this scale could
be done with an eye to "limiting environmental disruption" (Black &
<
Veatch, p. X-16). It is more reasonable to believe that construction
activity will result in the destruction of much terrestrial and aquatic
wildlife habitat, in addition to impairing the stream's aesthetic value.
Despite the promise to grade and reseed "as soon as practicable,"
it may work out that, considering the frequency of rain and flash-
flooding in the area, erosion may set in before vegetative cover does.
In the case of alternative (3), erosion may also result from unrevege-
tated sewer line easements in the hills above the creek. In any case,
the resultant siltation of the stream could have an effect on the aquatic
6-71
-------
-5-
biota more permanent that that caused by sewer construction itself.
The EQCC also has reservations about the effects of the twenty-odd
creek crossings proposed under alternatives (1) and (2). The provisions
for keeping the line from being dug up by the action of the stream are
not described in the Black & Veatch report. This makes it impossible
to comment on them specifically except to hypothesize that there may
be permanent changes in the substrate of the creek which could affect
stream biota, flow characteristics, and aesthetics adversely.
Though specific techniques for right-of-way maintenance have not
been described by Black & Veatch, usual procedures involve defoliation
with herbicides. This would constitute a chronic perturbation to the
immediate and neighboring wildlife habitat as well as a possible source
of pollution from runoff.
Another problem is the proximity of the Cedar Bluffs area to the
Clear Creek sewer route. Sewer construction and maintenance could affect
the integrity of this area through the resultant noise, dust, and impair-
ment. While the sewer does not pass through the area, alternatives
place the line just across the creek from it. On the basis of the above
5
considerations, the EQCC recommends that the important potential negative
environmental effects of the outfall sewer be minimized by minimizing
the length of the sewer, subject to constraints described below.
B. Effluent Quality Effects
The Salt Creek facility is to be a one-stage plant, while current
state water quality standards require that a Clear Creek plant, because
of the low dilution capacity of the receiving stream, be a two-stage
6-72
-------
-6-
plant. A one-stage plant is somewhat more susceptible to rapid
changes in plant variables such as water volume than a two-stage plant.
Rapid changes in water volume do occur in the Bloomington area during the
summer. It is conceivable that at that time a one-stage plant could
discharge improperly treated effluent.
More importantly, however, a one-stage plant will be unable to
discharge effluent of a quality high ehough to meet the standards
currently required for 1983 by Public Law 92-500. Yet the Black &
Veatch study which judges the cost effectiveness of the Salt Creek
and Dillman Road sites to be similar assumes a one-stage plant at the
Salt Creek site. The EQCC questions the rationale behind a twenty-
year cost effectiveness study predicated on water quality standards that
will be superseded by more stringent ones after only five years. Clearly,
with respect to present water quality standards, a Dillman Road plant
would be more cost effective than a Salt Creek plant, because the former
would discharge a higher quality effluent for the same cost; with respect
to future standards, a cost effectiveness study would have to consider
fines the City might have to pay due to the emi.ssion of an illegal
effluent by a Salt Creek plant. The EQCC concludes that, environmentally,
and legally, a two-stage plant is better than a one-stage plant and
that, economically, a two-stage plant at Dillman Road is better than a
two-stage plant at Salt Creek.
An added benefit of a Clear Creek site with the relatively clean
effluent it is required to discharge is the potential recreational use
of Clear Creek as a canoe stream. Such areas are not abundant around
Bloomington. If the Salt Creek site is chosen, the flow in Clear Creek
6-73
-------
-7-
will be too low to permit its use for this purpose.
C. Hydrological Effects
The proposed method of sludge disposal at the Salt Creek site is
subsurface soil injection over an area comprising most of the site.
During the spring rains of 1975, this area was heavily waterlogged. The
EQCC cautions that sludge injection into land which is subject to
periodic leaching by rain water, and which abuts major receiving streams,
may result in periodic large influxes of nutrients, untreated heavy
metals, and other matter into the streams. It should be noted that this
creek water is a water source for Bedford, only thirteen miles down-
stream. These problems are not addressed in the facilities plan.
These possible detrimental hydrological effects may be exacerbated
by the location of the Salt Creek site within a 100-year flood plain.
Until flood-plain alterations potentially caused by the Lake Monroe
dam are known, it would be wise to require that the facility's constr-
uction plans include safeguards to prevent discharge, leakage, or
leaching of untreated wastes from the plant area into the creeks during
periods of high water. »
D. Secondary Effects of Unplanned Development in the Lake Monroe Area.
Another major concern of the EQCC is the possible adverse effect
on the Lake Monroe area resulting from development in the lake's
watershed stimulated by the placement of the treatment facility at
Salt Creek. We anticipate this facilitation because, according to
92-500
Public Law / development cannot occur without suitable wastewater
treatment. While the dollar costs to Bloomington at Dillman Road or
6-74
-------
Salt Creek are similar, the cost to LMRWD*IS much less if the Bloom-
ington Plant is at Salt Creek. The advantage of this Salt Creek hookup
is that several existing sources of effluent will be removed from the
lake. This is the main environmental benefit of this arrangement.
This is balanced by the possibility that cheaper sewage treatment will
permit more rapid development than would otherwise occur. In principle
the development of private living structures and even commercial ones,
need not lead to the deterioration of the lake region, providing that
sufficient planning controls and enforcement procedures are established
and maintained. No such planning structures and controls exist in the
region at this time. The Lake Monroe Land Suitability Study recently
carried out is not intended to guarantee the planning needed in the
area although it can serve as background for the development of such
a plan. In view of this situation EQCC is evaluating potential environ-
mental effects based on recent and current planning and construction
methods.
The EQCC considers the primary functions of Lake Monroe to be
1) flood control water impoundment, 2) a recreational resource,
3) a major source of domestic water for the City of Bloomington and its
environs. It is the potential deterioration of these functions of the
lake with which we are concerned. In addition, much of the land around
the lake presently has an undisturbed, natural quality which is important
in and of itself and also as it enhances the recreational value of the
whole region.
Development without a regional land use plan and construction
practice regulations potentially could detract from the functions listed
"Lake Monroe Ueflional Waste District
6-75
-------
-y-
above in the f61 lowing ways:
1) Conversion of privately owned natural areas into develop-
ments which will decrease the amount of natural landscape for aesthetic,
wildlife and recreational use. This effect will be concentrated in
certain areas.
2) Improperly controlled construction destroys foliage and ground
cover, resulting in erosion, increased sedimentation and potentially
decreased water quality.
3) Increased use of motor-driven boats and motor vehicle traffic
on land will probably result in increased amounts of oil-based products
and heavy metals entering the lake.
4) Motor bo?t traffic may result in increased shoreline erosion.
5) Unaesthetic construction on and around the lake's shoreline
will detract from the natural quality and recreational value of the
lake area.
One very important variable which must be considered in evaluating
possible development around Lake Monroe is the opinion of those people
who use the Lake. Wise (1975) has surveyed opinions of users and found
1
significant expressions in favor of preserving the semi-natural quality
of the area. Most users prefer swimming, camping, and boat fishing as
recreational activities. A substantial plurality favored fewer_ condo-
miniums and houses around Lake Monroe than presently exist. Facilities
which those interviewed did not desire included motels, sporting goods
stores, condominiums, houses, and boat ramps. All but 3% found the
forest around the lake attractive. The attribute which people like best
is the beauty of the lake. The attributes 1iked least are the crowding
and facilities. EQCC's conclusion about public opinion is that the type
6-76
-------
-10-
of development likely to be facilitated by placement of Bloomington's
sewage treatment plant at Lake Monroe (houses, condominiums, commercial)
is precisely the type of development which Lake users do not want.
Further, such development might destroy those aspects of the Lake envir-
onment which the users appreciate the most (attractiveness, forests,
fishing) and exacerbate problems which they already perceive (crowding
and facilities).
EQCC is concerned that the necessary regional planning does not
exist to control such effects on the lake's primary functions as those
listed above. We therefore believe that development should not be
facilitated by placement of the plant at Salt Creek. We recognize the
environmental value of removing present sources of effluent from the lake,
but are not certain that this value overweighs the other negative effects
which potentially might result.
E. Summary
The Salt Creek site will require a longer and thus more environ-
mentally disruptive outfall sewer than any of the Clear Creek sites.
A Clear Creek plant will produce effluent of higher quality than the
proposed Salt Creek plant, whose effluent will be outside legal limits
shortly after commencement of operation. Hydro!ogical considerations
indicate that a Salt Creek plant may periodically cause stream pollution.
Finally, the Salt Creek site is more likely than a Clear Creek site to
lead to unplanned development in the Lake Monroe area, with all the
environmental deterioration this, implies. Because the environmental
costs of the Salt Creek site are obviously much higher than those of
6-77
-------
-li-
the Dillman Road site, and because the economic costs are similar, the
Salt Creek site can be eliminated from further consideration.
IV. Comparative Evaluation _of the Clear Creek _SHes
Differences among the impacts of the variousCiearCreek sites on
the physical environment are minor compared with the difference in
impacts between any of the Clear Creek sites and the Salt Creek site.
The outfall sewer to the Dillman Road site would be a little longer
than the force main from the southeast interceptor to the Winston Thomas
or South Rogers Street sites, and the outfall sewer to the Ketcham
Road site will be a little longer still. On the other hand, if the
new plant is not built at the Winston Thomas site, that site can be
converted to a park, though the South Rogers site would use part of the
present site and decrease the value of a park there. Selection of the
Winston Thomas site may lead to better re-use of existing materials.
Thus, in terms of physical environmental impact, the only clear advan-
tage at this point is that of Dillman Road over Ketcham Road. Given
its higher economic costs, also the Ketcham Road site can be eliminated
from further consideration'.
The major drawback to the present location seems to be the con-
struction disturbances and the possibility of increased odors in the
vicinity which is heavily populated, and the possible need to relocate
several households. The Dillman Road site is not presently densely
populated and for topographic reasons does not seem threatened by nearby
settlement. EQCC finds that, while all the Clear Creek sites seem
preferable to Salt Creek, we would rank Dill man Road ahead of Winston
Thomas/S. Rogers St. primarily for social reasons.
6-78
-------
-12-
V. The Need for an Environmental Impact Statement
EQCC recommends that if the Salt Creek Site is selected, EPA
should definitely prepare an EIS to investigate not only the points
made above but also many other specific points concerning possible
routes for the outfall sewer, the advisability of sub-surface injection
as a means of sludge disposal, and specific treatment plans. The issue
most difficult for us, as citizens, to predict and understand about
the problem of site selection is the question of secondary impact of
development in the Lake Monroe Area. EQCC recommends that, because of
the complexity of this problem, major efforts should be made by EPA
to predict, evaluate and Suggest solutions to these secondary impacts.
A list of points needing investigation in an EIS follows this section.
Some members of EQCC believe that an EIS might be desireable irrespective
of which site is chosen and so points related to both sites are included
on the list.
1. Environmental desirability of returning Clear Creek to its pre-
?
Winston Thomas flow level in order to restore the original biota;
comparative study of Little Clear Creek biota might be made to determine
if change has occurred.
2. Extent of direct destruction of wildlife habitat by outfall sewer
construction.
3. Quantitative assessment of Clear Creek siltation which might be
caused by sewer construction; effect on Bedford drinking water.
4. Extent of indirect environmental degradation caused by outfall
6-79
-------
-13-
sewer construction due to activities by the work crew such as
driving equipment into and out of right-of-way, parking automobiles,
etc.
5. Identification of those areas where blasting must be done and
assessment of the impact of the resulting fallout and noise on
nearby wildlife habitat and cultural areas, e.g., Cedar Bluffs,
Ketcham Road cemetery.
6. Differentiation of sewage treatment alternatives with respect
to effluent quality, especially between alternatives 2A and 3A in
Facilities Plan; analysis of economic-environmental tradeoffs.
7. Extent to which revegetation is necessary following sewer con-
struction, how soon it must be done, and how likely it is to be
successful, given the area's hydrology; differentiation between degrees
of erosion expected with and without revegetation.
8. Environmental impact of overland sewer routing, including conside-
rations similar to those given above for creek bed routing. Judgment
on the advisability of building alternatives 3, 4, 5, and LMRWD
Smithvilie-Clear Creek force main.
9. Reevaluation of economic-environmental costs of outfall sewer alter-
natives for Salt Creek site, expecially with respect to alternatives
2 vs. 5A; analysis of environmental tradeoffs of greater overland as
opposed to less creek bed routing for alternative 5A; amount of eco-
nomic difference LMRWD might fund as their share of Little Clear Creek
sewer to have a plant on Salt Creek instead of Clear Creek.
6-80
-------
-14-
10. Description of biota of wildlife habitat to be destroyed at
Ketcham Road and Salt Creek sites and determination of its rarity.
11. Measures to be taken to ensure that holding ponds, etc., will
not be flooded.
12. Environmental assessment of possible landfill and soil injection
sites to determine potential for water pollution due to flooding or
leaching after rainfall.
13. Comparisons of degrees of buffering needed and possible for various
sites and various treatment and disposal methods to shield local residents
and visitors to natural and cultural areas from noise, odor, and ugli-
ness of sewage treatment.
14. Assessment of tradeoffs between biotic-geologic costs and social
costs, the latter accruing from #13 above and from forced relocations
at some of the sites. (See also #23)
15. Current aesthetic values of undeveloped sites.
i
16. Comparative analyses of economies of land use for various sewage
treatment and sludge disposal alternatives.
17. Size of the work crew required for construction, where they will
commute from and what social costs they might impose on the community.
18. Social benefits with respect to reducing unemployment of con-
struction of plant.
«
19. Comparative analysis of energy and resources required for various
site, treatment, and disposal alternatives.
6-81
-------
-15-
20. Environmental effects of travel over, entry to, and exit from
right-of-way by maintenance crews.
21. Precautions that must be taken to prevent the creek from digging
through to the sewer at crossing points; effects of these precautions
on biota and flow characteristics; impact of altered flow character-
istics on downstream creek ecosystem.
22. Impact of possible herbicide use during right-of-way maintenance
on environment, both directly on biota and indirectly due to possible
water pollution this might cause.
23. Surveys of local residents as to what impact they feel the Winston
Thomas plant and its proposed expansion or removal to South Rogers
Street has or will have on their lives; income distribution of resi-
dents so affected and assessment of their political power.
24. Environmental benefits accruing to Clear Creek sites due to
potential recreational uses of Clear Creek resulting from maintaining
its present flow level.
1
25. Possibility that a regional plan should be a prerequisite for
selection of the Salt Creek site.
26. Total environmental analysis of the effects of unplanned development
around Lake Monroe facilitated by the Salt Creek site, including poten-
tial biotic, geologic, and social costs accruing from any destruction
of forest, degradation of the water supply, and increase in population
6-82
-------
density and potential social gains accruing from economic growth;
tradeoff analysis of these costs and gains.
27. Environmental and economic costs and gains accruing from
sludge disposal by means of treating it and selling it as fertilizer.
28. Determination of any upper'ceiling which geologic restrictions
may place on south-planning-area population and deduction of largest
sewage treatment design capacity that will ever be needed.
OCR/nan
Acknowledgements
James Chiesa, S.P.E.A. graduate student, has permitted use of
portions of an unpublished manuscript as well as volunteering editorial
help. The following report was cited in the text:
Wise, Charles. 1975. User preserences of policy alternatives:
the case of recreational user attitudes toward development
and regulation at Lake Monroe, Indiana. School of Public and
Environmental Affairs Occasional Papers, No. 4.
Soil Survey, 1973. Interim Soil Survey, Vol. 2, Information
and Interpretation, Bloonington, Indiana. U. S, Department of
Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, Purdue University.
6-83
-------
APPENDIX
Brief synopsis of items discussed during Environmental
Quality and Conservation Commission meetings which pertain to
Lake Monroe, water quality, and the sewage treatment plant.
6-84
-------
HISTORY OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION»S INVOLVEMENT WITH LAKE MONROE
Based on 1972 minutes
May 10 reported that Rod Crafts and Barbara Resile would travel to
Indianapolis to speak with John Cregor, an attorney who is the foremost
leading authority in the country on riparian rights, about the City's
power to control development in Lake Monroe. The Water Quality Commit-
tee wished to icsue a warning about the possibility of Inland Steel
encroaching upon Lake Monroe and requested the Commission's support and
approval for enlisting the aid of other groups in the effort. A motion
was made and approved that The Water Quality Committee should accumulate
as much factual information as they can before the next Commission
meeting with their suggestions as to what action the Commission can
take respecting Lake Monroe.
July 12 -- The resolution on Lake Monroe development was read and David
Docauer presented a background report on the resolution. He said that
the resolution was^beginning step in~ seeking protection for Lake Monroe.
The vote was unanimous. John Patton directed that the absent members be
polled to ensure a majority giving approval.
August 9 A motion made chat: The Commission request the City of Bloom-
ington to name a representative to sit in on the final hearing of the
Department of Natural Resources; to request from Inland Steel's attorney
a copy of the plans to be made available as soon as possible; and a
representative be named to appear at the hearing of the Stream Pollution
Control Board on Tuesday, August 15, 1972. Whitehead offered an amendment
asking that Inland Steel give the plans of their development within the
drainage basin of Lake Monroe and that they also name a representative
to come before the Commission to discuss the development. The motion and
amendment were approved unanimously.
October 11 - Dick Hilliker, Representative of Inland Steel Development
Corp., presented maps, gave a report on a proposed development around
Lake Monroe and discussed the development proposal with the Commission
and the audience. A Water Quality Committee report submitted by Docauer
was accepted. Donald Whitehead and David Docauer agreed to write a
letter to the Stream Pollution Control Board and the University on
behalf of the Commission stating their views on the ISDC's plans.
November 8 -- Ted Najam, Administrative Assistant to the Mayor, read
a statement from the Office of the Mayor concerning the proposed Position
Paper prepared by David Docauer and Donald Whitehead on land development
around Lake Monroe; the present state of Lake Monroe and a projection
of its future in relation to presently proposed developments and future
developments. The statement basically said that the Commission should
not make such statements without making it clear that it is not necessarily the
position of the City and "A statement of this kind with such broad
ramifications should be made only after there has been broad partici-
pation by all those City departments and commissions which have something
to contribute," Discussion followed, and some changes were made on
the position paper. The paper was approved. It was decided that Don
Whitehead would represent the Commission before the Common Council.
December 13 Donald Whitehead reported that the Common Council passed
a resolution accepting and concurring in the Commission's Position Paper.
Bron added that at the enrl of the discussion a suggestion was made by '
Council President ChaMotte Zietlow for the formation of a body to look
6-85
-------
into the ecological factors that concern the lake and the long range
view. Chairman Patton would contact Zietlow to request that the
Commission be included in such a body if it was not already constituted.
6-86
-------
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION'S INVOLVEMENT WITH LAKE MONROE
Based on 1973 minutes
January 10 The Commission's draft statement on the Black and Veatch report
was presented. In the discussion that followed, it was brought out that there
would be federal funding but the City does not require an impact statement.
Dave Rogers(President of the Board of Works) said he worked with the Black and
Veatch Report and thought the comments of the statement appropriate. Cu finding
Number two (Monroe Reservoir) he felt the comments were well taken, but said
that Black and Veatch were only asked to do a bare hones study so the report
does not take into account the impact of increased development. The construc-
tion of waste water facilities would of necessity require federal grants, which
would in turn require an impact study, though that study would be directed
primarily toward alerting the public rather than binding any specific agen cy
to a set course of action. Mr. Rogers said also that Lake Monroe Reservoir would
not provide all of Bloomington's future water need. The city plans to continue
to develop dependencies on Griffey Creek-Bean Blossom, though dependence on
Lake Monroe would continue to be very important. He added that the state makes
a good profit from the city of Bloomington by providing the water from the
Lake Monroe Reservoir and that the state owed the city considerable consideration
in protecting the security of that water supply.
Barbara Heise asked if Mr. Rogers thought the tertiary treatment facilities
should be funded immediately. He acknowledged the need and said the city would
file for both federal and local funds, but he warned that the costs would be
astronomical. Mr. Spencer asked whether effluent from the .treatment plant was
delivered to Salt Creek below the dam, and whether pny study had been made on
plans to deliver processed water in the same area where the sewage system is
proposed. Mr. Rogers said that the sewage plant was in one of the areas which
the Public Service Commission had currently given to one of the rural water
corporations and that the outflow main that goes down through Clear Creek actually
goes through a no man's land where there is currently no allocation of responsi-
bility. Mr. Bron asked about ^uture additional water sources besides Lake Monroe
Rogers said that Griffey Creek-Bean Blossom was not delivering the high quality
water it could if the treatment system were improved. He expected that once
improved, the city could receive good water from it at a price below that the
city i. s paying to the state for water from Lake Monroe. Mr. Bron asked what
population was projected by that plan and Mr. Rogers answered that it ought to
be done just on the basis of present population because of the high price the
city is paying for Lake Monroe water. To meet projected need both systems would
have to be improved, and the plant on Lake Monroe doubled. Mr Bron said it was
his personal feeling that, in view of the high taxes to be paid by city
residentsi it was not unreasonable to ask that whatever development occurs be
controlled so that it doesn't damage the lake. My Rogers answered that he
didn't think there was any conflict with that, but he was not sure whether the
government had the current ability to control development. Barbara Heise asked
if it wasn't true that the city has virtually no control over development. Mr.
Rogers responded affirmatively saying the city really could only make hopeful
statements.
Mr. Docauer spoke about the Griffey Creek Reservoir saying that it has good
quality water because it is wall forested, but the quantity is insufficient.
He had little personal knowledge of Bean Blossom, but had heard it was very
turbid and hard to process. He doubted if it would serve if the population
increased. He said some of the mistakes in the Black and Veatch Report had
not been corrected. His comments were: 1. That all growth projected in the
report until 1980 occurring within Bloomington was unlikely--much should occur
outside the city. 2. That more growth would occur in the city than in the
county was also unlikely. 3« The overloaded south plant was designed for
7,000,000 gallons whereas before the Commission was told 1O,000,000.
6-87
-------
4. The tertiary treatment facilities need to be placed now. Sometimes tertiary
lagoons cause problems--high algae growth causes secondary pollution. No sure
method exists to remove tne algae by sedimentation and the city ought to con-
sider this. In response to Barbara Heise's question as to whether tertiary
lagoons were the method of tertiary treatment now in use,, Mr. Docauer said
there were other methods (electrolysis, chemicals) depending on the purpose of
the tertiary treatment.
Chairman Patton suggested an amendment to the wording of the statement of the
effect that "all future additional water needs must come from Monroe Reservoir"
be changed to "and much of the foreseeable future additional water need of
Bloomington must come from the Monroe Reservoir." The motion was accepted and
the amendment adopted.
February 14 George V/alkenshaw, of the City's Utilities Department, spoke
about the problems facing the City's other sources of water, Lake Lemon and
Lake Griffey. He pointed out that the City was never able to utilize fully
Lake Lemon water because it haSjto flow down a creek ten miles before it is
collected and rcpunped to the Griffey Water Treatment Plant, a facility which
was never designed to treat a water with a high turbidity content. Thus, in
the past year the city has only been able to use w,ater taken directly out of the
Griffey Reservoir. He mentioned that water from Lake Monroe was costing the
city about three million dollars a day. It would be Black and Veatch's
recommendation to expand and remodel the Griffey Water Treatment Plant so that
the water from Lake Lemon could be fully utilized. This would involve extensive
settling and floculation facilities because of the sludge problem. He knew of
no perfect solution to the dewatering of alum plant sludge, but said, tlie City
is presently constructing some pave drying beds from which the sludge could
be scraped after it has been dried by mechanical equipment, then hauled off
and buried in land fills,, Other methods are under investigation. Other
problems included storn water entering the South Sanitary Treatment Plant, and
the plant is a dry ditch situation allowing little oxidation of the organic
material in the stream thereby causing odor. He then spoke on solutions and a
discussion followed.
The Water Quality Committee introduced a resolution to support the Lake
Shore Protection Bill now in the state legislature. The Bill would give the
Natural Resources Commission the right to review all development within two
miles of state owned or managed reservoirs. Docauer remarked that the purpose
of the Bill was to make the NRC into a kind of Plan Commission for the lake
which would examine all aspects of planning. The Stream Pollution Control
Board presently hasn't t'he power to do this and neither does the NRC. Cor-
poration-owned land within the Monroe watershed is about 33OO acres, all but
about 600 acres inside the two mile area. The Bill gives the NRC
power to make decisions which it previously was not able to make.
March 21 Barbara Restle of the Water Quality Committee, presented a prelimi-
nary report on a sedimentation survey of Lake Monroe. Since the area is under-
going rapid change, it is necessary to start now to obtain accurate records of
the sedimentation rate, which is thought by the Army Corp of Engineers to have
a worse effect on a reservoir than sewage or industrial pollution. The Corp nay
not survey Lake Monroe for 4 to 5 years and the only soil surveys of the area
now are based on a 1922 study, A recconnaissance study of the Lake is in order.
now to determine roughly what the rate might be, especially since the original
surveys were made with no projected change in the land use around the reservoir.
A motion was made for the Commission "to encourage the City to take cooperative
action with the county as soon as possible to get the Corps of Engineers to
make a recconnaissance sedimentation study of Lake Monroe at its earliest pos-
sible opportunity in view of the probable effects of the proposed developments
around the lake."
6-88
-------
.May 9 Barbara Heise reminded the Commission of the position it had taken
last year, that in the absence of good regional planning, massive development
around Lake Monroe was unwarranted. Since that time, Inland Steel has been
given its nearly final approval to build, Heise noted that the county zoning
ordinance would be having public hearings during the summer and urged Commis-
sioners to attend these meetings to defend tighter controls for the two mile
fringe, Jan Bicr.chi indicated that a representative of the Army Corps of
Engineers had indicated that the Corps may not be favorably disposed to issuing
a permit to Inland,
June 13 A letter from the Army Corps of Engineers said that the Corps planned
to resurvey the Lake, completing the other range installations, in 1977. In
the meantime a preliminary survey would be conducted and the results would be
communicated to the City, The letter added that the Corps did not fear a
potential reduction of the lifespan of the lake due to sedimentation even
though studies of other reservoirs indicate that initial projections of that rate
are incorrect, Bianchi suggested, in light of Senator Bayh's recent disapproval
of the Indianapolis Reservoir project, that the Commission could exorcise a lit-
tle more force in pursuit of a survey. More pressure could be brought to bear
upon the Corps at least to get a study on track for 1977. Bron argued that
1977 may well be too late because the development around the Lake appears to be
iminent, Heise asked what results could be expected from a preliminary survey.
In response Barbara Restle, new chairwoman of the Water Quality Committee,
indicated that such a survey would probably be quite trivial. A comprehensive
survey is quite complex and must give an indication of where the sedimentation
is coning from, not just how much deposition there is. Such information would
be necessary in order to design sedimentation basins to protect the reservoir
from further sedimentation. Responding to a question of the cost of such a
study, Fix estimated around S20,OOO, He thought the Commission . should
ascertain the estimate cost and then go directly to Washington for the appro-
priation, Bron agreed that the City has much to lose should it not pursue this
course, Patton proposed that the Commission take initial steps to carry out
Fix's proposal by seeking a cost estimate.
The Environmental Commission has been asked by the Plan Staff, to appoint
a member to attend meetings at Purdue on the ramifications and possible uses of
the information gathered by the Skylab experiments over Lake Monroe,
Bianchi reported that Inland Steel had still not accepted the restric-
tions placed upon them by the Stream Pollution Control Board and were not on
the agenda for the June meeting. In another development, the proposed county
zoning ordinance has been amended to provide that no development visible from
the shores of Lake Monroe would be permitted, and to require drainage and
erosion controls around the lake. This amendment will be discussed June 14,
and could use the support of all Commissioners, Bron added that the Forest
Service had also decided to deny permits to cross Forest Service land with
utility pipelines until a regional plan is devised, Ileise pointed out that this
would have particular significance for Granves-Monroe and Inland Steel,
July 11 -- Assistant City Planner, Stu Reller, and Dr, David Frey reported on
the Lake Monree-Skylnb project and its possible ramifications for environ-
mental concerns,
Bianchi reported that the estimated cost of a sedimentation survey "of
Lake Monroe is $24,000 for a resurvey of the existing ranges, and 520,000
to complete the range installations. The Corps said its preliminary study
scheduled for July should give a reasonable indication of the sedinent in the
project now. In light of Barbara Restle's opinion that it is more important to
know where the sediment is coming from, such a preliminary study would pro- <
bably not help much, added Bianchi, She pointed out that Sen, Bayh sits on
tli c anBremriations.Coiainitteo and coyld be contacted for help in this matter.
6-89
-------
The initial response from the Mayor's office, she reported, was a willingness
to pursue the request in Washington, asking that the appropriations be made now,
'rather than in 1977.
September 12 Ted Najam discussed the letter, sent to Birch Bayh, concerning
a sedimentation study of Lake Monroe. He explained that an earlier letter
had been sent to the Louisville District Army Corp of Engineers in reference
to the study. Their reply was that they could give only a quick visual esti-
mate at this time, but that funds for an in-depth study would not be available
until 1977. Sen. Bayh explained that the 197^ appropriations 'bill for the Corps
has already been passed by Congress and therefore it is impossible to amend
it for such a large amount. He expressed his desire to work with the City in
getting appropriations for this study during the next funding session. This
would make the study possible 2 to 3 years earlier than predicted and in
this sense he was encouraging.
In reference to the Department of Utilities' proposal to close Lake Lenon
as a water supply, Marcia Gelpe replied that the Water Quality Committee ha?
begun to look into the proposal and tactics that could be used to clean up
Lake Lemon. They expressed their feeling to the City's Utilities Board. The
reasons for closing have to do with estimates of renovating the facility
compared to the cost of Lake Monroe, volume of water and the plant. Patton
commented that several investigations are taking place, ine of which is a
sedimentation report and he assumed the decision won't be made until the
information is in.
October 1O The Water Quality Comnittee has been studying the problem of
spills of raw sewage into Salt Creek from tho Nashville Sewage Plant and sent
a letter to the County Commissioners of Brown County asking that a joint
meeting be set up to discuss the source of the problem as well as possible
solutions. The Commission agreed to send a letter to the Brown County Com-
missioners endorsing the idea of a joint meeting and asking to be kept informed
on the progress on solving the problem.
November 14 -- Dennis King presented a report concerning the meeting of the
Lake Monroe Regional-Waste District Board and City Utilities Service Board
and a request of the Water Quality Committee submitted for an additional
hearing on an environmental assessment hearing to determine the environmental
effects of the regional sewer treatment plant that is going to be constructed
by the City Utilities Service Board and of the diversion system that will be
put in by the LMRVDS. The Water Quality Committee said that the LMRWDB had
not filed any information prior to the meeting in conjucction with regulations
that the EPA has stated and therefore did not give the public a 30-day notice
to study the information. The outcome of a request that they hold another
meeting was a letter which indicated that another meeting would not be held,
but they would put some information on file and answer questions, if there
are any. A motion was made by the Environmental Commission and approved that
a hearing be held at the regular December Environmental Commission meeting with
the Utilities Service Board and their engineers answering questions from the
Commission and the public. In addition, the LMRWBD and the Monroe County Plan
Commission were requested to attend. Barbara Restl* stressed the interrela-
tedness of these two projects in the Water Quality Committee report.
December 12 -- see attached minutes.
6-90
-------
HISTORY OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION«S INVOLVEMENT WITH LAKE MONROE
Based on 1974 minutes
February 13 Barbara Restle read the minutes of tht last Water Quality
monthly meeting. In short, it said there was concern on the part of many members
that an environmental impact statement should be requested by the committee
that would deal with the effects of the new sewage plant in greater detail. A
working subcommittee was formed to study the assessment hearings held by the
USB. It was hoped that this subcommittee would reach a conclusion on the course
of action the Water Quality Committee should pursue. No questions or comments
were added.
Restle presented to the Commission a summary of the considerations from the sub-
committee. She said the summary was by no means complete. The two considera-
tions presented were in the areas of population data projections for Monroe
County and problems with the treatment plant site'and outfall sewer, Patton
recommended that these comments, if approved by the Commission, should become
part of the December 12^ meeting, Restle agreed but added that more considera-
tions than these two are being questioned, Restle stated that, although
the population data appears complete in the assessment it is rot. Dennis King
explained that one of the first considerations to be included in an assessment
is a description of the effect of population distribution concentration on any
growth that might occur if the project is undertaken. He said that, with that
in mind, the subcommittee went through the Infiltration and Inflow Study and
the hearing record for the October 25^ environmental assessment hearing and
the December 12^ information meeting to determine what RSH Associates had done
in regard to population projections. King said his impression was that the
statistics used in the assessment had projections to 1980-199O based on the
census of 195O-1960. If it is based on these years there would be no influence
from the lake on the extraurban area because the lake was not constructed
until 1963; King said that the alternatives to the temporary plant site were
not mentioned with regards to growth in different volumes and directions. He
said the Water Quality Committee is recommending further study. Heise asked
if the Water Quality Committee was asking for an environmental impact statement.
King replied that at this time they are not asking fdr an environmental impact
statement but only trying to point out subjects that are not adequately investi-
gated. Patton summed up King's comments by saying that the population projection
studies are not adequate and the effect of the waste water disposal plant on
changes in population have not been assessed at all. King's final comment pointed
out that if the population projections have not been adequately looked into
one can not design capacity of a plant properly. A copy of these questions will
be sent to the USB and EPA administrators. The Commission voted unanimously to
forward them.
Jim Ferro reported that at the last monthly meeting of the Water Quality commit-
tee another working group was formed composed of Jim Pres, David Docauer, and
himself. This working group will investigate the effects of construction
activities around Lake Monroe with regards to water run-off. The second major
project the working group is considering is one concerning Lake Lemon, This
would involve sampling the shoreling during a rainy period to measure runoff,
April 10 -- Jim Ferro said the water sampling project which is being planned to
test the quality of the run-off in the Lake Monroe watershed is being orgaaized
and should be underway soon,
September 11 -- An ad hoc committee consisting of Rick Peoples, Dave Parkhurst,
Rick Darby, and Barbara Heise agreed to study the USB report on the Long Range
Plan Water Supply and Distribution Facilities for Bloomington, IN,
Rick Darby gave his report on Lake Monroe, This report concerned the legal
standing; how can a reservoir outside of the city boundaries be controlled and
what is the relationship of the Commission to that lake, and whether there is
6-91
-------
anything the Commission can look into other than water quality itself.
September 25 -- Barbara nestle said that interests in the Water Quality Committee
are too broad. There are legal problems, bacteriological problems, limnological
problems, sedimentary problems, and more. The committee needs to form subcommit-
tees and she asked for suggestions on restructuring,
November 13 Rick Darby gave a report on Lake Monroe. He said that Lake
Monroe is a large interest requiring tremendous work. There is no way one
person can provide the Commission with enough information for the Commission
to feel it is in control with the situation. He has therefore arranged with
Professor White in the Law School for students to receive credit for participa-
ting in a project designed to prepare a paper or pamphlet which would ade-
quately describe the jurisdiction of various governmental bodies* over Lake
Monroe, interaction and jurisdiction between this commission and the City,
of "Bloomington in those various bodies and the rights
, generally given to individuals in Indiana in the
Environmental field. Rick feels with this help, by the first of the year, a
comprehensive and fairly clear statement of exactly where the Commission stands
can be provided. He then went on to state the legal proceedure the Commission
would have to go through if it was to take action and suggestions the Commission
should consider. Walter Bron asked if Rick had a specific group in mind other
than Water Quality. Rick said no. Rick Peoples gave a report on the status
of the Water Quality Committee. The first meeting was held. Only four people
showed up but only one was interested in participation.
6-92
-------
LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS
BLOOMINGTON. INDIANA
1975
To: City of Bloomington Utilities Service
Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board
Region V Environmental Protection Agency
Lake Monroe Regional Sewage Board
From: League of Women Voters of Bloomington-Monroe County
Subject: Addition to our statement of May 29, 1975 for the
record of the assessment hearing for the proposed
sewage treatment facility at the confluence of
Salt and Clear Creeks in southern Monroe County
Our initial statement consisted of an outline of the
positions of the League on the issues of water resources and
land use, followed by questions regarding the six major issues
of EPA concern as stated in the announcement of requirement
for an environmental impact statement.
The purpose of this addition to the first statement is
twofold. We would like to express our disappointment in the
reception given our questions. For most of them there seemed
to be little serious attempt to answer tnem at the assessment
hearing. Second, we would like to outline, this time in
statement form, our reservations and doubts about the
Facilities Plan and First Amendment prepared by Black and Veatch:
I. Regionalization
The concept of regionalization, as it has been used in
this long conflict over expansion of treatment facilities
for Bloomington's south service area, is fuzzy. The most
widely understood meaning of a regional facility is that of
a facility planned by two or more local governmental bodies
with existing needs which can be more efficiently and
economically met by a common facility. That Blocmington's
situation fits tnis description is extremely doubtful.
An additional complication is a semantic problem which
has arisen with the use of the words "region" and "regional".
These words have been used to describe both the domain of the
Lake Monroe Waste District and the larger service area including
the Bloomington South Area. The confusion is most obvious when
someone uses the phrase "regional plant" which might be for the
lake only (3 mgd) or for the larger proposed region (15 or 20 mgd).
AFFILIATED WITH TH« 1.IAOUI OF WOMCN VOTIKI OF THI UNITID «TAT» AND OF INDIANA
6-93
-------
Page 2 Addition to LWV statement of May 29, 1975
The needs of the Lake Monroe area are quite small at the
present time and are projected to reach 3 million gallons per
day only in 199&. The Lake Monroe area has individual treat-
ment facilities for each of its few developments, since no
construction is permitted without approval of treatment
facilities. Those which discnarge an effluent must have
NPDES permits and meet schedules for upgrading their treatment
as required by Public Law ^2-500.
The replacement of these small treatment facilities with a
collector sewer almost completely circling the lake basin
west of the causeway and a single treatment plant is a plan
which may not, by itself, be economically feasible. There
may never be enough users to pay for it. The facilities
plan for the Lake Monroe Regional /n'aste District lists costs
of more than $8 million for the collector and interceptor
sewers. Presumably these costs are at prices as of October 23,
197^, the date of publication of the report. The construetiion
cost listed for a 3 mgd plant is approximately 83.& million.
These costs are to be borne by a present user population of
about 1900 home equivalents (370 gpd per home). To finance
the total of $11.8 million in construction costs amounts to
about $6000 per home equivalent. It seems clear and has been
so stated publicly that large developers will be needed to bring
the costs per dwelling within reasonable limits.
At the 1998 projected population of about bOOO home
equivalents (3 million gpd, 100 gpd per person, 3.7 persons
per home equivalent), the cost still amounts to about $1500
per home equivalent for construction alone; and this does not
include lateral sewers from collector to dwelling.
In addition single family dwellings not able to be served
by planned collector sewers nave been included in present and
projected user populations for the Lake Monroe Regional Waste
District. They will have tne additional cost of building a
sewer from their lot line to the region interceptor sewer.,
The cost to serve scattered single family dwellings v/culd be
extremely high.
There is no existing legal mechanism for forcing homes
now using eeptic tanks to hook onto the planned sewers.
There is a state law requiring homes within 300 feet of a
sewer to hook on; but this nas not been uniformly enforced
even within the Blooraington city limits. Moreover there does
not seem to be a mechanism for taking existing small treatment
plants out of service and forcing tneir users to hook onto the
region's interceptor. It seems probable that many users
would reject this expensive alternative unless there are
legal means to compel them to accept it.
6-94
-------
Page 3 Addition to LWV statement of May 29, 1975
If the concept of providing sewer service for these areaa
of low population density proves unworkable, we are ]eft with
a rather small probable service area for a Lakt Monroe regional
plant at the site proposed. This area might reasonably include
The Pointe, the Fairfax area, Seven Flags Corporation, possibly
Harrodsburg. The total projected flow from tnese communities
by 1998 is 843,663 gpd compared to 3,000,000 gpd for tne whole
lake area, (page 15, Lake Monroe region facilities plan)
There is already in existence a treatment plant built for
The Pointe with a capacity of 116,000 gpd. The effluent of
this plant discharges into Little Clear Creek, out of the
Lake Monroe watershed. This "interim plant" represents a
large investment and might not be willingly abandoned even
if Bloomington chooses the proposed Salt Creek site for its
South Area plant.
In summary of our thinking on the regional concept, we
would like to see more cost factors discussed. At what
population density does it become cost effective to go to one
big regional plant? Do any cost projections consider a
planning span long enough to include replacement of sewers?
What is the state of the art for small (less than 1 mgd) treat-
ment plants? For individual hone treatment? Is there an
increased cost for "old" users when their sewer service area
is broadened? Should a densely populated, efficient service area
share treatment plant construction costs with a sparsely
populated, inefficient service area? Do the growth projections
accurately predict wnat will happen when a service area is
greatly expanded? Might not a slowly growing Bloomington Soutn
area find itself paying the costs for a rapidly growing area
southwest of LaKe Monroe?
II. The Capacity (ies) and Location(s) of a_ Kegional STP or
Separate STPs
A. Capacity
There are a number of important unanswered questions
relating to the amount of new plant capacity which is needed.
In the original facilities plan (December 4, 1974) a figure of
14.9 mgd was given for the Bloomington South area for 1^96.
In the First Amendment to tnt facilities plan (March HO, 1975),
after a recalibration of flowmeters at tne Winston Thomas plant,
this figure was cnanged to 17.6 cigd. (In both cases the flow
contribution estimated for tne Lake Monroe area is 3 mgd.)
Included in these figures is 1.9 mgd now treated at
Bloomington*s north treatment plant, tne Blucher Poole plant.
This compares to a total of 2.7 mgd treated at tnat plant.
6-95
-------
Page k Addition to LrtV statement of May ^9, 197b
tVnen this 1.9 mgd is taken away from the flow at tne ncrtn plant,
only O.b mgd remains,, a figure well below tne design capacity
of the plant (6 mgd)., Are we justified in building new plant
capacity for this 1.9 mgd? Witnout it the South area flow
would be 15.7 mgd for 1996.
Another uncertain factor is the final outcome of
infiltration/inflow studies now underway. The Facilities Flan
lists figures cf 1.6 mgd for present dry weather infiltration
and 0.5 mgd additional wet weatner infiltration. Another 0.9
mgd from infiltration/inflow is projected for 1998. This
amounts to 3 mgd out of a total of 1?,6 mgd for 1996. (Tnese
infiltration/inflow figures were not repeated in the First Amendment, so the
figures given are from tne original Facilities Plan.)
~ ." ., The Facilities
Plan analysis of t..is situation is: "inflow and infiltration into
the existing sewers will tend tc increase with age of the system.
Maintenance of the system will be continued but the recent
inflow/infiltration studies nave indicated that extensive repairs
will not be cost-effective." Tne studies are stilJ in progress,
however, and the final conclusions may be different. Neitner of
the firms involved ir. the first phase of tne study will be involved
in the second pnase. Tne Utilities Board nas recently accepted
the bid of American Consulting Services, Inc. of Minneapolis, Minn.
for tne second phase. It is to be hoped tnat tneir calculations
of the cost-effectiveness of renovation will include the costs
of new plant treatment capacity construction.
The two factors discussed above are applicable to eitner
the Bloomington Soutn area alone or combined with the Lake
Monroe area. A third factor applies only to tne larger service
area. This lactor, discucsed above under regionalization, is
that cf the probability of success for completion of trie
collector and interceptor se'.vers around Lake Monroe. Tne 1996
flow figure for the lake area (3 ragcU is based on the complete
network as shewn in the Beam, Longest and Neff Facilities Plan.
If the complete network cannot be financed, then a plant at
tne Salt Creek site mignt serve only tnose developments within
two or three miles of tne plant. The flow from tnis restricted
area might not exceed 1 rr.gd and could be amen less if the
new "interim plant" is not abandoned.
A final factor not even mentioned in tne Facilities Plan
is the conservation of water use which mignt be acnieved within
the plan period. This mignt be brougnt about by consumer
education, a reform in the rate structure to reward conservation
rather tnan high volume use, tr.e depressed economy, or the higher
rates resulting from tne planned construction. The Facilities
Plan projects an increasing per capita consumption in a tine
when there is rapid development of the technology for water reuse
6-96
-------
Page 5 Addition to LWV statement of May 29, 1975
and even individual home treatment. These trends in the technology
have obvious cost benefits to the buyer of water and sewer services.
To summarize our thoughts on plant capacity, there would
appear to be a number of reasons to question an initial design
capacity of ^0 mgd (as recommended in the First Amendment).
For the Bloomington South area 15 mgd is a preferable design
capacity, with provision for staged enlargement of capacity.
If the decision is made to serve tne Soutn area and tne Lake
Monroe area with a single plant, the 15 mgd would still be adequate
with staged enlargement depending on the speed of development in
the area.
B. Location
Obviously the location problem is tied up with the choice
between one large and two or more smaller plants to serve the
region. If the choice is one large plant and it is expected
that the entire Lake Monroe interceptor sewer system can be
built, the Salt Creek site might be the best location (only location
is considered here), but it would certainly seem foolish to build
a gravity outfall sewer all the way down Clear Creek and a
parallel interceptor sewer down Little Clear Creek valley when
the two might be combined in Little Clear Creek valley. If,
however, it is decided that tne southwest corner of the lake
might be served by its own plant (the "interim plant", already
constructed/ Siscnarges out of the lake watershed), then tne
remainder of the lake service area mignt be just as well served
by a plant at Dillman Read or Ketcham Road. This would remove tne
necessity for the interceptor sewer from Smithville down the
Little Clear Creek valley to Salt Creek and the necessity for
11 miles of outfall sewer down Clear Creek.
No cost comparisons nave been made for the alternative
just described, with a small plant serving the south part of
the lake and a Bloomington plant at Dillman Road or Ketcnam Road
serving the north part of the lake area. (The Facilities Plans
calculated costs for a separate lake plant serving the entire
lake area.) It might turn out to be/cost-effective solution
for the planning region. It would eliminate most of the Clear
Creek gravity outfall sewer wnich has caused so much environmental
concern.
Ill. The Treatment Process Best Suited tj> Specific Sites
We wilJ not attempt to evaluate the relative merits of
available sewage treatment processes. Tnis does, however,
seem to be an engineering specialty in whicn tnert. is much
current research and a great many developing new methods.
In addition, the requirements of Public Law 9^-500 are for
increasingly high effluent quality to tne point where tne
eize of the receiving body of water wiJl not be considered
as important as it is at present.
The implication of the above situation for Bloomington's
choice are as follows:
6-97
-------
Page 6 Addition to LWV statement of May 29, 1975
a) The treatment chosen should be capable of being changed
or treatment steps adaed, to the extent possible with
present knowledge.
b) It seems likely that treatment level required in the
future will be higher than that required at present.
c) The level of treatment required for the Clear Creek sites
probably is closer to future requirements tnan that
required for tne Salt Creek site.
d) The larger acreage at tne Salt Creek site probably gives
more improvement flexibility, depending on the space
requirements for improvements.
e) The cost balance between Salt Creek and Clear Creek sites
might well change before tne end of the planning period
if a higher level of treatment becomes mandatory at tne
Salt Creek site, since the cost effectiveness of the
latter depends on its lower level of treatment.
f) Alternatives involving small treatment pla.nts depend
on the ability of sucn plants to produce effluent of
high quality.
IV. The Environmental Impacts of Construction and Cperation
of ST^s, Interceptors and Outfall Sewers
The most important environmental impact of the construction
and operation cf the STPs would seem to be tne quality of the
effluent produced, and possibly tne odor in the immediate
vicinity of the plant. Anotner impact, of course, would be
the amount of site preparation necessary. The Audubon Society
has questioned tne stream recnannelizat ion whicn is proposed
in the Facilities Plan. We leave this point to them and the
engineers .
With regard to tne quality of the effluent produced, any
of the Clear Creek sites is superior to the Salt Cretk site
in this respect.
As far as secondary A/ater quality impacts are concerned,
we feel unable to predict tnese. The number of septic tanks
abandoned, small treatment plants snut down, facilitation of
development in the Lake Monroe area, water quality impact of
that development, are all unknown quantities. There are water
quality arguments on botn sides of the controversy. Statements
have been made that, a large regional plant is essential to
Lake Monroe water quality, *nd that a large regional plant is
fatal to Lake Monroe water quality. he are unable to reach
either of these conclusions. Botn sides of the argument seem
to nave been overstated. A small Lake Monroe region treatment
plant can easily be built and would seem to have the same
advantages and disadvantages for Lake Monroe water quality as a
larger plant bui^t by Bloomin^ton. We would like to see tne
primary emphasis placed upon other factors.
6-98
-------
Page 7 Addition to LWV statement of May 29,
The direct environmental impact of the interceptor and outfall
sewers construction and operation is considerable. Discussion of
this issue is omitted here because others have addressed this
problem. Alternatives should be evaluated with a goal of minimizing
sewage construction impact. It is not clear that the present plan
does this.
The secondary effects of sewer construction are another
matter entirely. In the absence of otner more powerful forms of
planning for development, the construction of sewers is equivalent
to planning for development. One may therefore expect that a loose,
sprawled network of sewers will lead to tne same sort of development.
These in turn require loose, sprawled networks of roads, schools,
school buses, refuse collection. All of tnese services cost more
than their clustered counterparts, and this probably means that
they have more environmental impact as well.
Considering the effects of sewer placement, a plant for
Bloomington should be placed close to the planned development
area for Bloomington, and a plant for Lake Monroe should be placed
close to the area of planned or expected development for Lake
Monroe. If long connecting sewers passing tnrough undeveloped
areas are planned, then some means of controlling development
along them should be found in advance of construction.
It is not clear how development along the interceptor sewer
ringing Lake Monroe could be controlled, except in the inaccessible
force-main portions. In tnis respect, several carefully planned
and well regulated small treatment plants might be preferable, if
they are capable of achieving effluent of the required quality.
V, Tne Induced Growth Implications for tne Lake Monroe Area
of Building a_ Regional Sewage Treatment Plant
On this issue like the Lake Monroe water quality issue,
extreme statements have been made. On one side it nas been
said that construction of a regional plant at the Salt Creek
site will result in rapid, unplanned development of tne lake
area. On the other side it has been f=aid that development
will take place even witnout a regional plant. Both sides
cite lake water quality as an important concern. Both sides
(despite the threat of development without a plant) seem to
feel that development of tne Lake Monroe area is closely
linked to obtaining a regional treatment plant at the Salt
Creek site. It is this link wnicn is holding up a long
overdue expansion of treatment facilities for Blooming-ton's
south area.
A great improvement in everyone's logical though
processes mignt be achieved at this point if Bloomington's
future and Lake Monroe's future were considered separately,
as regards sewage treatment needs. Tnis probably means
separate sewage treatment plants. It is riot necessarily
6-99
-------
Page fe Addition to LWV statement of May 29, 1975
true that Lake Monroe development would ride along on the
coattails of Bloomington's treatment plant expansion. But the
best way to be sure of fair consideration of both interests is
to find a cost equivalent plan for two or more plants to serve
separate density areas.
VI. The Best Method of_ Sludge Treatment and Disposal
This issue, like the one involving treatment processes, is
for experts in the technology. The situation does seem to be
under intensive study as indicated by published articles.
Changes are likely in recommended methods. It would therefore
not seem wise to base arguments for choice of plant site on a
disposal method which might change even before the plant :.s
built. From the same line of tninking, several disposal
alternatives should be possible for each site.
VII. Conclusions
There is an alternative to a large regional plant which
should be considered. This alternative would involve first
selecting a plant site which would best serve tne Bloomington
South area present and future needs. After site selection
it would then be determined whicn portions of tne Lake Monroe
area could be served at the chosen site. Other treatment
facilities for the lake area might then be planned at one or
two sites near expected dense development.
The Land Suitability Study prepared by the Indiana
University School of Public and Environmental Affairs has
indicated the southwest corner of the lake as the area most
suitable for development. Planning for sewage treatment
for the lake area might focus on this corner until the
economics of the lake interceptor sewer plans are worked out.
Either the Dillmaii or Ketcham Road site could serve the
north lake area,- while a small plant near the dam cculd
serve the south lake area.
This alternative would avoid the considerable difficulty
of planning a sewer network to connect two planning areas which
are separated by a large stretch of undeveloped land. It would
avoid both the environmental and unplanned development impacts
of building long sewers through open countryside.
The Salt Creek site has tne advantage of larger size
and smoother terrain. The use of Salt Creek for dilution and
of site acreage for sludge injection may be undesirable in the
near future and should not count as reasons in favor of the
site. Use of the site involves the problem of vtry long
6-100
-------
Page 9 Addition to LWV statement of May 29,
sewer to connect it to the present plant. The long controversy
which has been centered on this site is a reason in itself for
not choosing it if acceptable alternatives are available.
The question of initial capacity contains several issues
which should be examined further; the infiltration/inflow
problem, the future use of the north treatment plant, conservation
by users, and the portion of tne lake area to be served. An
adequate solution would seem to be a 15 mgd plant to which
5 mgd capacity could be added when needed, depending on the
issues listed above.
Sincerely,
Shirley Cordes, Chairman
Environmental Duality Committee
League of Women Voters of
Bloomington-Monroe County
(2728 Pine Lane, R.R. 3)
339-9364
6-101
-------
Hay 29, 1975
US Environmental P
Region V
230 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604 «____» .....
SASSAFRAS
of IAWRENCE qREENE MONKOE *W ]/ \ AtdUDON
BROWN MORqAN ANd OWEN COUNIJES y , SOCIETY
Dear I.ir. Hirt:
In regard to your letter of l.Iay 14, 1975, the Sassafras Audubon Society
is interested in contributing to the preparation of the Draft Environmental
Impact Statement on the location of the new wastewater treatment system in
the South drainage basin of Bloomington, Monroe County, Indiana. The
principal question, as stated in your letter, is whether to build one
sewage treatment plant (STP) for south Bloomington and the Lake Monroe
area or separate STPs.
Y/e believe that a site near Bloomington would be advantageous in terms of
curbing urban sprawl and strip development, in minimising environmental
disruption, and in overall economy of operation and maintenance. We rec-
ommend serious consideration of the Dillman Road Site without rerouting
of Clear Creek.
We further recommend that sewage treatment facility expansion at Lake
Monroe be curbed until comprehensive land-use planning is in effect for
at least the area encompassed in the Lake Monroe Land Suitability Study.
We see serious consequences if a Regional Sewerage System is instituted
at Lake Monroe prior to land-use planning for the Lake Monroe ₯atershedo
The Sassafras Audubon Society in March, 1974, sent Region V, EPA (under
cover letter to Francis Mayo), a file of bibliographical material, corres-
pondence, news articles, etc on issues and problems surrounding Lake Monroe.
Region T also has a copy of the lengthy statement we presented at the
Hearing on the Black & Yeatch Facilities Plan held in March of this year,.
We enclose with this letter the brief statement we prepared for the May
29, 1975 Environmental Assessment Hearing on the siting of the STP, as
well as a statement sent to the Monroe County Plan (3ommission (MCPC) by
a number of organizations seeking implementation of the Lake Monroe Land
Suitability Study.
As you know, the MCPC has jurisdiction for land-use planning of a large
and vital area of the Lake Monroe Watershed. The MCPC made no comments on
the Draft Eake Monroe Land Suitability Study though asked to do so by the
Director of the study (the MCPC received one of the four draft copies).
They have said that when the study is in final form, they will read it
and discuss it.
Please let us know how we can contribute to preparation of the Draft En-
vironmental Impact Statement.
Yours sincerely,
6-102 Lake Monroe Committee ior the
Board of Directors, Sassafras Audubon Society
-------
Of UWRENCE . qREENE MONKOE
BROWN MORqAN Ar^H OWEN couNiits Y SOClETy
May 1975
Statement presented at Environmental Aseeement Hearing on Facilities Flan
for Wastewater Treatment System, South Drainage Basin, Bloomington,
Th« Sassafras Audubon Society baa studied the various sites Black & Teateh
nave considered for placement of the south basin wastewater treatment
system, and recommend* the Dillman Boad Site. This site, while rural, is
oloee to the Bloomington Metropolitan Area and a gravity feed system is
possible without serious environmental disruption.
We would ask, however, that Black & Teatoh prepare an alternative plan for
the Dillman Site without rerouting Clear Creek. The proposed plan (Figure
7III-5) would sacrifice a substantial pert of the longest continuous pieee
of the site for a new creek channel. Examination of the site suggests that
the present major piece of land between the railroad and the creek channel
would be adequate for most of the design capacity. Adjacent acreage could
be utilized if necessary and still maintain a compact unit for operation
and maintenance, even though line(s) across Clear Creek might be involved.
Besides, channelisation has proven repeatedly to be a destructive manage-
ment practice entailing considerable costs in construction and maintenance,
downstream damages to stream ecology.
Two statements which Black & Teatoh make with regard to the Dillman Site
have little merit* 1) "By tt?8 it is not unlikely that the plant site would
become surrounded by development comparable to that which presently rings
the Winston Thomas Site." (7III-4), and "Acceptance of the Dillman Road
Site is questionable due to the close proximity of State Route 37 Bypass."
(EX-1) . The Dillman Site, if accepted, could be effectively zoned to pre-
vent build-up in the plant area. The greater part of the site is adequately
buffered in terms of SR 37 1 and more could be done, if necessary, to lessen
the affront to sensitive motorists I
Mention is also made with regard to the Dillman Site that "There would be
no surplus area available for construction of additional facilities if fur-
thereftdvanoed treatment processes, such as denitrification, were mandated
in the future. " (VIII-4). This needs clarification, since the possibility
exists that denitrification may be required by the Federal Government within
a few years. Couldn't the space used for nitrification facilities be con-
verted to denitrifioation? When denitrification is required, wouldn't this
nullify the advantage of the Salt Creek Site over the Clear Creek Sites,
as emphasized by Black & Voatoh on pages IIZ-1 and 111-27
6-103
-------
The Black & Teatch Reports continue to seem slanted toward maximizing
the advantages of the Salt Creek Site while minimising the advantages of
the aitoe significantly closer to the Bloomineton riotropolitan Area. Ho
assessment of the environmental damages which could result from construc-
tion of the lengthy transport system to the Soli Creek Site have been
made by Black & Yeatch. Environmental damages should be considered a cost
of the project and not disnissed under the euphenisn of "temporary dis-
ruption." (DC-9).
The fact that there is sufficient acreage at the Salt Creek Site for use
of the sludge injection process is stressed as an advantage of the site,
yet no evaluation As given of the soils of the area in tenas of the
process, nor of difficulties which might be encountered* Composting of
sludge should be considered for all sites* (See Sassafras Audubon Society
Statement to Utility Service Board, February 1973* pages 2*3.).
Black & Veatch assort (IX-10) that "Sewerage service for the Lake Monroe
region is necessary to preserve the ecologic value of the area." While
there is grave need for a new wastewater treatment eystea in the south
drainage basin of Uonroe County, ve continue to asocrt that sewerage
is but one of the facto IB that oust be considered in the protection of
Lake Monroe. LAUD-IKS PLAHNINC PQH TUB LAKT. 1IUKIOE WATERSHED SHOULD HATE
AS HIGK t'HIORIOT AS Tllil DLTELOPLI3IIT OP A RaC-IOHAL .'Ja/ERAGB SYSTSI. In-
pleaentation of the Lako Honroe Suitability Study by the Monroe County
Plan Commission should be of prime importance to the ttloomin^ton-Uonroe
County Poraminity.
The Board of Directors
Sassafras Audubon Society
6-104
-------
Harlas D. Hirt, Chief
Region T Planning Branch^EPA
2JO South Dearborn Street^AKVl/Vc UM,A
Chicago, Illinois 60604 ****&__ «Afl
THE f
SASSAFRAS
of IAWRENCE qREENE MONUOE ^^ V\ AIJC«!JbON
BROWN MORQAN ANd OU/EN couNiits T ' SOCIETY
June 16, 1975
Dear Mr. Hirt:
We would like to call the attention of the Planning Branch of Region 7,
EPA, to the Strain Ridge School controversy in Monroe County, as it has
implications with regard to the siting of the new treatment plant.
There was organized opposition to the placement of a school at Strain
Ridge when it was first proposed, because Smithville citizens wanted
to retain their community school, and the citizens of Harrodsburg and
Kirksville sought a community school near the center of their popula-
tions (combined) which would require significantly less bussing than
to Strain Ridge.
We are enclosing several recent news items from the Bloomington Daily
Heraid-Telephone which will give you some idea of the interest and argu-
ments this issue has engendered. The issue is more complicated than can
be presented here, but we do not feel the issue is whether the children
in these particular areas will be deprived of proper educational facili-
ties, but where those facilities should be placed. It jshould be noted
that if a Sewage Treatment Plant (STP) were placed at the Dillnan Road
Site, it could service a community school at Siaithville.
THE SASSAPltAS AUDDBOH SOCIETY WOULD LIKE TO REITERATE ITS
SUPPORT FOR A STP IFEAR THE BLOOIIHIGT01T METROPOLITAN AREA.
?/E BELIEVE THAT A PLANT AT THE DILLIIAH SITS GOULD 3E A
REGIOUAL STP IN TIE BEST SENSE OF THE WORD, SERVING THE
1IEEDS OP All EXPANDING, SEWERED, METROPOLITAN POPULATION,
BUT ALSO STIMULATING THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SEiffiRAGE SYSTELI
FOR THOSE BUILT-UP AREAS IN THE SOUTH BASIH SERVICED BY
RURAL Y/ATER SUPPLY SYSTEMS BUT STILL DEPENDENT OH SEPTIC
TAIUCS. CCMC.11VAr5LY, ALSQ PARTS OF THE ITORTII \7ATERS1I3D O-1
LAKE HOimC,^ VnilCII 'JOULD T.!ICLUDE THE PAYIIETOWH RECRfiATIOU
i\REA, etc WOULD BE \7IT11IN A HI3ASONABLE RAHGE.
V/e v^ere disturbed at the Final Assessment Hearing in Hay to hear the
stress placed on the advantage which the Salt Creek Site had over Clear
Creek Sites in terms of dilution water, (by Black & Veatch and a pepre-
sentative of the 17ater Pollution Control Division of the Indiana State
Board of Health.) We must deal with realities in terns of lack of imple-
mentation of provisions for the high degree of treatment (or zero dis-
charge) sought by the recent Federal \7ater Pollution Control Act Amdnd-
ments, and insufficient appropriations for constructing STP's capable
of such treatment. Nevertheless, we do have goals, we are working on
6-105
-------
the technology arid planning for achieving those goals. It is not good
policy to use a lesser standard as a selling point 102? a site on the
grounds that it is cheaper.
I'urt'icm ;re, it is possible that in the future Lake I-Ionroo's function
as the principal water supply resource of the entire Region will assume
top priority in the management of the lake. The Sassafras Sudubon Society
is working for that top priority recognition. It is conceivable then
that low-flow downstream would become a lesser /unction of the lake during
periods of prolonged drought. If so, the site advantage could become a
disadvantage«,
We advocate sludge recycling but object to the approach of recommending
a process of sludge disposal (soil injection) as an advantage of the
Salt Creek Site prior to an evaluation of the soils and the process
through on-site research. Me quote front the Abstract of the paper
of Paul Blalceslee "Monitoring Considerations for Ilunicipal \7astewater
Effluent and Sludge Application to the Land" presented at the Joint
Conference on Recycling Ilunicipal Sludges and Effluents on Land in 1973:
"Monitoring the performance of the many interrelated systems which
are involved in any project employing wastewater or wastewater
sludge application to the land can not be looked upon as a sub-
stitute for a full understanding of system response prior to
project coTrunittment."
We would appreciate having the Dilliaan Road Site re-evaluated from the
standpoint of "environmental" engineering, to see if the site could be
utilized to better advantage thai projected in the First Amendment to
Facilities Plan of Black L Veatch.
Will there be an opportunity to meet with representatives of Region V
SPA on this matter when they are in the area?
Sincerely yours, ^ _.
y-n^s &*S»-L^L &. *=*z:/*4-<*r^"
R3, Snith Road, Blooningftn, HI 47401
Tor the Board of Directors
Sassafras Audubon Society
6-106
-------
Dale Leucht
Planning Division
Region V EPA
230 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604 !! mm,,* >.«-
SASSAFRAS
Of UWRENCE qREENE MONKOE ^W V \ AUQUDON
DROWN MORqAN ANfi OU/EN COUNllfeS Y , SOCIETy
July 2, 1975
Dear Mr. Leucht:
Enclosed are copies of three recent news items from the Bloomington Herald-
Telephone which relate to the siting of the south side sewage treatment plant.
On June 17 the Utility Service Board heard a presentation from Scarab Compost-
ing Company of Bloomington for accepting all the city's sludge. The proposal
is being considered by the Board. The implications of this proposal are ob-
vious, if implemented, since a leading argument for the Salt Creek Site is
the space available for the sludge injection process. We have advocated con-
sideration of composting as an alternative to the injection process, and would
like to see serious consideration given to this proposal.
The Statement of the Monroe Engineering Society (signed by Ray Graham, County
Surveyor and member of the Monroe County Plan Commission, and Ray Long, City
Engineer) backing the Salt Creek Site is essentially an endorsement of the
Black cc Veatch recommendations, using similar arguments for their decision.
Emphasis is placed both in the engineers statement arid the H-T editorial on
the argument th&t the operation and maintenance expenses would be higher at
the Clear Creek sites. This is based on the higher degree of treatment which
would be required at the Clear Creek sites and high costs of sludge disposal
at same sites. We have discussed these matters previously and can only reit-
erate that they have not considered all the factors involved, e.g. what the
situation might be if effluent standards are adopted and enforced, implement-
ing recent amendments to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, if denitri-
fication facilities are required at both sites, if water supply is recognized
as a top priority function of Lake Monroe (as we believe it should be) etc.
The Engineering Society also fails to consider any alternative to landfill
for the Clear Creek sites and blindly accepts the sludge injection process
for the Salt Creek Site as if it had neither problems nor expenses associated
with it. There are unknowns associated with the sludge injection process
which can only be resolved by research and continuing studies in the field.
Particularly important is thorough analysis of the capabilities of the site
which in this instance is lacking although the survey of soil types of t!-e
area has been made. Perhaps better drainage might be needed, and this would
be a cost of the proiect. In addition, also, to the costs of storage, trans-
poT't, and injection of sludge, wou!1 rt be the need for continuing research on
what happens to the sludge components in the soil and in the crons etc.
6-107
-------
GUP- Society would like to see the sludge recycled whatever process is used. We
realize that it could be expensive, perhaps, especially in initial stages when
an adenuate and acceptable Method is being developed. However, a community
should feel an obligation toward recycling such a resource.
The assertion by the engineers that permanent damage in Clear Greek Valley can't
be substantiated reflectsvthe viewpoint that 9 **e en^ justifies the mean, arid
9) ignorance of the word "damage" from an ecological standpoint, actually, one
type of damage which could result from interference with the stream channel,
and its watershed, has been widely demonstrated in our country in terms o'f changes
in natural systems,, drainage patterns etc. It is difficult to see how long-lasting
damage could b<= avoided if there are numerous crossings of Clear Creek involved
in th<= lading of the iery large interceptor sewer. Recent experiences with rock-
slides at road cuts on South 37 indicates the complexity of problems associated
with construction in this area.
Both at the last environmental assessment hearing and in the engineers statement
it was noted that nature ranidly heals scars of construction and the Korth Sewage
Plant outfall sewer was given as an example of how soon a sewer construction pro-
ject can be hidden by nature. What is not recognized is that out of sight (dis-
guised by vegetation or hidden under the creek) is not necessarily out of mind
in terras of continuing effects if serious alteration of channel and watershed
has been effected.
We also take exception to the comparison of the North sewer line with the oro-
nosed line to Salt Creek because of the greater length involved to Salt Creek
and the magnitude of the topographical problems. The North line had one short
passage through rugged terrain and then followed the f]ood p]ain to the Bottom
Road plant. Even so, the laying of the north line was a travesty of environ-
mental planning! Enclosed is a copy of page 3 of The Balancer [newspaper of
Soil Conservation District) which depicts and describes the situation. As we
understand it, the City had to absorb costly changes in the laying of the line.
The news article on the Engineering Society's statement ends on the note that
one plant is more economic than two, and that the Lake Monroe Regional Waste
District will probably construct a plant somewhere south of Har^odsburg if the
Clear Creek site is selected. While we would agree that one regional plant
would be more economic than two, there are alternatives which haven't been fully
considered for dealing with effluent now entering the lake and questions of
policy concerning the management of Lake Monroe are still to be answered which
could affect what is needed in the way of a plant at that site (or if there is
any need at all beyond the plant raw in process of construction at Little Clear
Creek).
We reiterate our concern for any action which would promote growth and develop-
ment around Lake Monroe An AREA OF CRITICAL Ei^lOiriE.^ J/C .M3ERN BECAUSE
IT IS THE CHIPS' (AlID LAST) WATER SUPPLY RESOURCE OP TVE I3LOOHIKGTON ; IUHCHOLI L\i,N
AREA l-wmnnrjj-! the absence of any combined effort on the part of governmental
agencies concerned with its management to evaluate and determine what levels of
development and use can be absorbed without seriously affecting water quality.
The issue is what is best for the public interest in this instance as the Lake
was created with public funds and the life of a community is involved.
6-108
-------
A land-use policy for the perimeter and the entire watershed ofl Lake Monroe
needs to be adopted but has not *MK been considered as yet. St&ndards must
necessarily be more stringent for protection of a communal water supply.
Our Society would also like to go on record as favoring a 20 mgd plant in
order to provide for built-up areas in need of sewer service and for future
expansion around the metropolitan southern area.
In conclusion, we would like to stress a point already covered but which needs
to be emphasized since the argument used for the Salt Creek Site tends to
center around degree of dilution water:
"The emphasis of national water pollution control policy is now on
the amount of wastes that can be kept out of surface waters, rather
than on the amount of wastes that can be assimilated by the waters.
This emphasis will guide future acceptable water resource policies."
(Prom Characteristics and comparative magnitude of non-
point sources by Raymond C. Loehr, Journal of1 Water Pollii'f";'NTi
Control Federation, 1974, ^6-(S) :' 1?49-1872. Mr. Loehr is
professor of civil and agricultural engineering, Cornell
University, Ithaca, N.Y.
Yours sincerely,
for the Board of Directors,
Sassafras Audubon Society
R3. Smith Road
Bloomingtan, Indiana 4*740-
6-109
-------
-------
D) LETTERS FROM INDIVIDUALS
6-110
-------
7i;l Eigenmann Center
Indiana University
Bloomington, IN
June 3, 1975
Region V Office
Environmental Protection Agency
1 North Wacker Drive
Chicago, IL 60606
Gentlemen:
With regard to the environmental impact statement you have decided to
write concerning the siting of the proposed Bloomington sewage treatment
plant, I believe that the following points, in addition to those made
in the report of the Bloomington Environmental Quality and Conservation
Commission, should be considered:
(l) The amount of rock to be removed by blasting during the construction
of the outfall sewer. The assumption made by Black & Veatch in their
Facilities Plan that the soil depth along Clear Creek is equal to the
average Monroe County soil depth is tenuous. More blasting would quite
probably result in higher economic and ecological costs.
(2) Identification of sludge injection sites in the Dillman Road site
vicinity. If soil injection could be used as a sludge disposal method
at that site, it would substantially reduce the present worth of that
alternative from the Black & Veatch estimate.
(3) Identification of the soil types at the various sites and their impli-
cations for plant construction and ionic leacjning from sewage.
While I realize that resource constraints may prohibit a full investiga-
tion of these points, I think that, to the extent that they can be con-
sidered, the EIS will benefit from them.
Sincerely,
6-111
-------
Indiana University Alumni Association
AKEA CODE S12 / SS7-17I1
Office of the Executive Secretary
1975
June 17, 197;
o
w
S
fc
Mr. Dale Luecht
United States Environmental Protection
Agency, Planning Branch
12th Floor
230 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 6o6oU
Dear Mr. Luecht:
I would like to endorse the Salt Creek site as the best location
for the Waste Treatment Plant to serve Bloomington and that part
of Monroe County which is in the natural drainage area.
I believe the Salt Creek site will not only serve a much larger
area for a collection system, but it will also result in less
environmental damage than any other site to which serious attention
has been given.
I am interested in environmental considerations for our community
and believe that the Salt Creek site will provide the greatest
protection.
B. Jone
Alumni Secret
FBJ:jh
Winner of three national Alumni Administration awards for comprehensive excellence in alumni programming
6-112
-------
BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION TRADKS COUNCIL
IN AFFILIATION WITH
BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION TRADES DEPARTMENT
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR CONGRESS OF INDUSTRIAL OKGAM/ATIONS
'-MV'WENTAL
of HJriter 2555 Vernal Pike. BloomingtonT Ind.
! V K
o
June 18,
Mr. Dale Luecht
United States -Environmental Protection
Agency, Planning Branch
12tt Floor
230 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Dear Mr. Luecht;
The Bloomington Building & Construction Trades
Council is a Council of representatives from all the
fifteen Construction Unions in this area. As it was
impossible for us to attend the public meeting this
letter is to advise you that the Council has went on
record to support the Salt Creek site for Construction
of the new Waste Treatment Plant for the Bloomington
Indiana area.
This site would serve a much larger area that
badly needs a sewage system.
6-113
-------
of
LOCAL UNION No. 1664
2335 VERNAL PIKE
ELODMINGTQN, INDIANA 474OT
PHDNC: a7Z/336-43SQ
June 18,
Mr. Dale Luecht
United States Environmental Protection
Agency, Planning Branch
12m Floor
230 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604-
Dear Mr. Luecht:
The Carpenters in the Bloomington, Indiana are
very much interested in the proposed Waste Treatment
Plant for this area.
When building a house, apartment, store, office,
school, factory or what ever, it is only good business
to design and locate the structure so that it will be
utilized to its .fullest extent. For these reasons
and others we want to urge your approval of the Salt
Creek site for this plant.
As you may know Monroe County Indiana does not
have maney areas that are suitable for Septic Systems.
The Engineering report given in the local paper
recomended this site to service a large area and
thereby eleminating maney other possible environmental
problems in the future.
We further think this plant should serve the
greatest number of people at the lowest possible cost.
The Salt Creek site is the best suited to do this
pluss protecting the environment of the largest
possible area.
pkins
6-114
-------
JAMES R. REGESTER
COWARD W.NAJAM.JR.
REGEBTEH S NAJAM
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
I OO Vt WEST SIXTH STREET
BLO D MIM BTDN, INDIANA
TELEPHONE
AREA CODE 812
332-3334
June 4, 197^
Mr. Dale Luecht
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Region V, Planning Branch
230 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604
j i 1575
RE: City of Bloomington, Indiana
Wastewater Treatment
Disposal of Sludge
Dear Mr. Luecht:
It is our understanding that you are presently evaluating
various proposals for construction by the City of Bloomington of a
new wastewater treatment facility. You have been referred to us by
Mr. Gary Kent, Director of Utilities, and Mr. Rick Peoples, Utilities
Chemist.
The Scarab Compost Company has developed a process for
the accelerated decomposition of organic matter. The Company can
process virtually any organic substance, e.g., leaves, grass, saw-
dust, wood chips, cardboard, paper, etc., and can convert such
organic material into a mineral rich dirt in a period of thirty
(30) days.
The Company has worked with the Indiana State Board of
Health in cleaning up the Bloomington Packing Company by disposing
of its organic refuse through composting. The Company has also, by
way of experimentation, disposed of sludge left over from the City
of Bloomington wastewater treatment process.
The Company now has a tentative agreement for a contract
with the City of Bloomington to dispose of the sludge material
produced by both the Winston Thomas and Blucher Poole waste treat-
ment plants. The end product from this process will be a harmless,
odorless and mineral rich black dirt.
6-115
-------
Mr. Dale Luecht
June 4, 1975
Page Two
We believe that the process which Scarab has developed
holds great promise as an alternative to conventional land applied
means of disposing of sewage sludge. We would like to discuss this
process with you or other representatives of the Environmental
Protection Agency, with emphasis on the high cost effectiveness of
the Scarab method and the environmental benefits.
Please let us hear from you at your earliest convenience.
Very truly yours,
SCARAB COMPOST COMPANY, INC.
EWN:ap
6-116
-------
REQEBTEH S NAJAM
ATTORNEYS AT LAW TELEPHONE
IOO14 WEST SIXTH STREET AREA CODE 812
JAMES R. REOESTER
EDWARD W.NAJAM,JR. Hl^Q OMIN QTPN, IMDIANA
August 8, 1975
Mr. Dale Luecht
United States Environmental
Protection Agency
Region V, Planning Branch RE: City of Bloomington, Indiana,
230 South Dearborn Street Contract for Sludge Disposal
Chicago, Illinois 60604 Through Composting
Dear Mr. Luecht:
Since I met with you and Cathy Grissom in Bloomington
on July 17th, the Scarab Compost Company has signed a sludge
disposal contract with the City of Bloomington to compost the
sludge produced by the City's present wastewater treatment plants.
A copy of the Contract is enclosed herewith.
The purpose of this letter is to request that the
Environmental Protection Agency and its consulting engineers fully
consider and evaluate composting as a sludge treatment alternative
in preparing the Environmental Impact Statement for Bloomington's
proposed wastewater treatment facility.
In our Contract with the City, our objective is to
demonstrate, in practical use, the desirability and feasibility
of composting sewage sludge. We believe that composting is the
most effective method of sludge treatment and disposal both in
terms of environmental protection and solid waste resource re-
covery and utilization.
Our Contract with the City provides for testing and
evaluation of digested sludge both before and after composting.
We anticipate that, given the constituent character of Blooming-
ton's digested sludge, the concentration of heavy metals and other
contaminants before composting will be acceptable and will improve
in the future with pre-treatment. After the sludge is composted
with other organic materials, e.g. leaves, sawdust, corn cobs, etc.,
there is a significant dilution factor in the finished product.
6-117
-------
Page Two
Dale Luecht
August 8, 1975
The Scarab compost process also achieves significant
pathogen reduction. Accelerated bio-degradation generates tem-
peratures which disinfect the digested sludge in a natural pro-
cess of stabilization through bacterial action.
In addition, the Scarab aerobic or "open stomach"
method requires a limited energy investment, a factor of in-
creasing significance which should be considered in evaluating
various sludge disposal alternatives.
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of
1972 call for the development of alternative means of sludge
disposal and utilization. As you know, traditional land appli-
cation of digested sludge presents significant problems of soil
and water contamination. These problems can be controlled and
significantly reduced or eliminated by adequate composting under
controlled conditions.
To insure safe operation and control while the sludge
is being processed, our Contract provides for inspection by the
City and other appropriate public agencies, including the Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency. We invite you and your consulting
engineers to participate in the evaluation which will be conducted
by the City's Environmental Quality and Conservation Commission.
There are not many people qualified and capable of
producing large amounts of compost on a commercial scale through
an accelerated process of bio-degradation. The President of our
Company, William Addison, was among the original group of persons
involved in the 1930's in compost research at George Washington
University at College Park and Beltsville, Maryland. Mr. Addison's
early work involved field research in agriculture and animal hus-
bandry and the creation of organic substitutes to commercial ferti-
lizers. In his early research Mr. Addison worked with Dr. E. E.
Pfeiffer who was responsible for the fundamental research in
composting during that period. Mr. Addison's composting experience
spans forty years. Three years ago he sold his sole proprietorship
and began the commercial production of compost within the present
corporation, the Scarab Compost Company.
As I indicated to you in my letter of June 4, 1975,
Mr. Addison and the Company have worked with Indiana State
Board of Health in cleaning up the Bloomington Packing Company
6-118
-------
Page Three
Dale Luecht
August 8, 1975
which was under an order to close unless it disposed of its
organic refuse. The Packing Company now has a clean bill of
health and Scarab composts all of the offal remaining after the
meat packing process.
Mr. Addison has worked with numerous officials from
the State Board of Health. Among those who may be contacted
are Mr. Frank Kuhns, Field Supervisor in the Division of Meat
and Poultry. Mr. Lee Parsons of the Agricultural Waste Disposal
Section is also familiar with Mr. Addison*s work.,
Composting deserves serious and systematic consideration
in preparation of the Environmental Impact Statement wherever the
proposed treatment plant is to be located. One reason we have
obtained the present Contract with the City is that our proposal to
compost the City's sludge is the most reliable and cost-effective
means of disposal. The Scarab process also offers an environmental
control factor not available with other methods. Further, composting
could result in a substantial savings to the City in eliminating the
need to purchase land for a sludge farm operation.
We look forward to hearing from you or your consulting
engineers in the very near future.
Very truly yours,
SCARAB COMPOST COMPANY, INC.
EWN:rn
Edward W. Najam, Jr.
VJ
6-119
-------
ets" W-if v^ ~$f/>>
«v>!f; -3 :'> 4 £
',' K-: j - 'i> :7^v^- ^.P'F^r'
-r./fe:-J;V m^^^^W:^^'^
?^r-^rr^^rr^mrw^"iT ^fe^^-rf1^^
- i. - i^-njl"-^ >3 -. , -,-.j>rv-«^f iLfiE^-^.iL^h^A', A *s. '-i?4 r ,-^1^%'*^*
E,GEND
C^> DEMAND CENTER
A EXISTING SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
A ALTERNATE SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT SITE
-------
r\ - MVJ '
r" ""'*5/ - vs--naf" I TTT-..-\ ' 7T^~ "" X/%%i*tf\rtf(f TOK^^-fWH^ fwtliwW?^/ ^
: ." - ^:&fiA£-tm%-MA) --.r\ > "-. i-- vv-k^t"^;. K.i.
-------
\
a^^fl^JPS^
* V^ «M« I q n^« I(]J I
I 5-,. » t\X LIFT 3TATI6MM
yjr>3\ -Jfrf \mil3L->^., --r^cpf,-:mH
_-":',rfU -^»*S-^-A * -"^.7^y:fe> ^ "
C-V^cf -f^K
DRAINAGE AREA DIVIDE
PROPOSED TRUNK SEWERS OR INTERCEPTORS
EXISTING a PROPOSED SEWAGE
TRANSMISSION 8 TREATMENT FACILITIES
SOUTH SERVICE AREA
-------
r T~!FH ! W':
-F-t-J[ ft',\ /Civ-
.-
-:^#%
; ^T-^r^H"7"" : mAut^^s jiTREET^^V V vM.^fea^^^'^'^s
i ' Jfi>, ? ' ' \ , , J/-T 'ipi-SN-t jnTe '- I, . s-J3j-\ . I VV^F«*S^i*sx^l ~J ^
-. ,.«..iffe1" '4->xr:-V-| :-L// -' l .Mi'j"^ v^Hwi^Lii r
i '*'''' T -4 H*: .aL, \ [V i-ft-: -i7"X.- -1- X',H- A .v^'Wfe^r^v.VJsv.-"^
-v -/T^Mh^H^-1- - "s\^lP^-w? -> - >=^^V*Vw4£fe*'^as₯/
^t' -'^. ./^f>~n/ - ^"\a-^^»f -^^
*r^->i'- ^f.^'Jv-M: ^_. ^-^r-, rc?s^"V^/,'*-^Vv\»Ay \*
'**'.- ! ?" "ii'., v //w-a«^"W " Y^T^M-^V *xx.-'-"5^^-v^VK \
- -T-'-r.v ^^^ ^--pATf-^-ptMtT-srrT^ ~"-JU-f, ^r.-^^t ~^>'&!";:>' >:^'^~^r' * .*. 1
' <-';- ^--iwA\ : - ;v<; m~t'--: e'v^^ -.^fj *"/' i;,. ^/- A
-A-^- ^-// y~^ ^r;Ai vjt%Y-'-t *$*-§ *--->-'- > vj^l' * r, :
" - --- v- - j -T . f K". " - v*-"^ ^"-A -j 3r-^eHt a ' i , j ,j- ^./SP-SS '.\ ?'A "ii^ '
: ', " Sfi^rr^'K^cH^fe,, '\; 45<^S-^":J^.;^^n .>. tJ^iedL
v>.;^
/M'
.,
' ' '
. i
V ''I'^A
ALTERNATIVE REGIONAL SEWAGE
TREATMENT PLANT SITES
-------
APPENDIX A
PHYSICAL. PARAMETERS
A. MUNICIPAL WASTE LOADS.
Data for each of the Bloomington wastewater treatment plants are shown
in Tables IV-1, V-l, V-2. This data indicates the chemical and biological.
characteristics of untreated and treated wastes.
There is a substantial change between the recently recorded data and
similar data for 1971. A comparison of the 1971 and 1973-74 data is shown
in the following tabulation:
Average Concentrations
North Plant South Plant
(Blucher Poole) (Winston Thomas)
Year BOD5 J3S_ BOD5 j>S_
1971 125 89 196 261
1973-74 164 187 137 146
The change in waste characteristics at the Blucher Poole plant may be
attributed to the fact that since September 1973 waste has been pumped
from the south drainage area to the north drainage area.
Reasons for the change in strength of waste at the Winston Thomas
plant are not clear. There is no known significant change in industrial
waste contributions. The quantity of flow during the 1973-74 period
was slightly lower than in 1971, which would suggest less infiltration/
inflow.
Bloomington has historically experienced problems with the operation of
the anaerobic digesters at the existing Winston Thomas plant. High concen-
trations of heavy metals in the raw waste have been partially responsible
for the operational problems. An industrial waste ordinance has been
passed in recent years to allow control of industrial waste discharges.
A-l
-------
Table IV-1
RAW WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
BLUCHER POOLE PLANT
Total
Date BOD ^ DO pH Phosphate Chlorides Alkalinity
1973
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
Jun.
Jul.
Aug.
Sep.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
1974
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
105
172
200
160
140
110
150
158
171
147
205
139
158
199
201
201
165
103
185
106
140
70
73
75
136
200
165
431
234
227
217
261
314
243
3.3
3.2
4.3
3.5
2.1
1.6
1.0
0.8
0.9
0.6
1.2
2.4
2.8
2.1
2.4
1.9
1.9
7.2
7.3
7.3
7.2
7.2
7.2
7.1
7.1
6.9
6.9
6.9
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.1
7.1
7.0
5.2
3.5
4.3
7.5
4.6
7.4
8.5
10.8
6.8
4.5
2.9
3.2
3.6
2.9
2.7
9.2
53
43
37
42
45
37
40
36
40
43
47
72
59
59
50
46
120
250
200
206
199
113
186
180
160
180
167
171
153
152
A-2
-------
Date
BOD
SS
Table IV-2
RAW WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
WINSTON THOMAS PLANT
Total
DO _gH Phosphate Chlorides Alkalinity
1973
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
Jun.
Jul.
Aug.
Sep.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
1974
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
185
366
150
96
95
70
105
106
127
129
153
118
108
114
136
133
128
166
174
130
81
110
98
88
165
180
174
223
155
113
137
157
164
159
5.2
5.4
6.8
5.7
3.8
3.7
3.0
2:5
2.6
2.8
5.1
4.8
6.4
3.9
8.0
5.2
4.7
^ .
7.3
7.3
7.4
7.0
7.0
7.1
7.0
7.0
6.8
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.2
7.2
7.0
6.7
7.0
3.3
2.4
5.3
3.3
6.3
4.9
5.5
7.5
4.9
3.5
2.7
3.2
2.9
4.0
10.8
55
49
45
45
41
46
44
34
44
57
95
67
56
51
46
86
185
170
160
107
174
212
164
176
168
151
164
152
159
A-3
-------
An industrial waste monitoring program is scheduled to start in the fall of
1974. Heavy metals concentrations will be monitored as part of this program.
Heavy metals concentrations in the raw waste during recent months are shown
in Table IV-3.
B. RECEIVING WATER QUALITY
The receiving stream for the Blucher Poole plant is Bean Blossom Creek
and for the Winston Thomas plant it is Clear Creek. The receiving stream
for the new regional plant will be either Clear Creek or Salt Creek,depending
on the site selected.
Data for dissolved oxygen levels in the streams above and below the
existing treatment plants have been obtained by the City and are recorded
in Table IV-4.
A-4
-------
Table IV-3
CHEMICAL ANALYSES - RAW WASTE (WINSTON THOMAS PLANT)
4 1 * "
Date _
1 07-3
i.7 / J
Sep. 19
Sep. 25
Oct. 3
Oct. 16
Oct. 24
Oct. 31
Nov. 7
Nov. 14
Nov. 21
Nov. 28
Dec. 12
Dec. 19
1974
Jan. 9
Jan. 16
Jan. 24
Jan . 30
Feb. 6
Feb. 14
Feb. 20
Feb. 27
Mar. 6
Mar. 13
Mar. 20
Mar. 27
Apr. 3
Average
Cu
-
0.06
0.09
0.15
0.11
N/T*
0.14
N/T*
0.08
0.11
0.11
N/T*
0.12
0.12
0.07
0.07
0.05
0.09
0.07
0.06
0.11
0.06
0.02
0.04
0.12
0.11
0.09
Cr
-
0.03
0.07
0.18
0.11
0.09
0.04
0.16
0.06
0.17
0.15
0
0.01
0.04
0.05
0.04
0.02
0.03
0
0
0.01
0.09
0.08
0.06
Nl
0.02
0.14
0.21
0.12
0.09
0.18
0.26
0.21
0.07
0.10
0.06
0.05
0.05
0.06
0.08
0.05
0.09
0.09
0.05
0.04
0.06
0.09
0.10
-" "* "'£
Fe
1. 1, . , ,
0.45
0.82
3.10
0.77
1.51
0.49
0.71
1.95
1.02
0.73
0.54
0.68
1.10
1.7
1.08
0.63
0.44
0.26
0.11
0.32
1.45
1.65
0.98
-,1 -i-
Zn Mg
0.16 7.6
0.47 7.1
1.99 7.6
0.34 6.6
0.59 8.37
0.60 8.1
0.86 8.1
0.42 8.7
0.47 8.8
0.33 8.4
0.21 11.2
0.17 10.26
0.24 9.44
0.40 9.44
0.35 9.4
0.25 8.6
0.18 10.7
0.11 9.2
0.11 9.1
0.13 9.2
0.55 8.9
0.50 9.7
0.43 8.84
Ca
54.9
26.0
47.1
42.7
32.3
23.3
29.8
30.2
40.8
63.1
70.6
75.6
56.4
47.3
32.2
71.9
66.9
63.4
78.0
59.3
61.1
51.1
*N/T = No Test.
A-5
-------
Table IV-4
DISSOLVED OXYGEN LEVELS IN STREAMS
BLUCHER POOLE PLANT WINSTON THOMAS PLANT
Date Above Outfall
1973
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sep.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.*
1974
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
13.6
14.0
11.9
11.0
9.5
7.0
6.4
6.2
6.5
6.4
8.3
9.1
12.5
12.4
10.4
9.4
8.2
Below Outfall
13.2
12.0
12.0
10.0
8.7
6.6
6.1
5.4
4.6
4.2
6.1
8.3
12.7
12.1
10.2
9.2
8.2
Above Outfall
13.1
14.4
13.0
11.0
8.9
7.7
7.1
6.9
7.2
7.6
8.7
9.3
10.9
11.4
10.1
10.8
8.7
Below Outfall
9.2
10.0
11.0
8.8
8.9
7.6
7.1
6.3
4.8
5.8
8.1
7.8
10.1
9.7
9.2
8.3
8.7
*Estimated
A-6
-------
Table V-l
ANALYSES OF NORTH PLANT WASTE
(BLUCHER POOLE)
Suspended Solids
BOD
Date
1973
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sep.*
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
1974
Jan.
Feb.
Flow
(mgd)
0.41
0.40
0.84
1.03
0.41
0.48
0.38
0.45
1.44
2.21
2.34
1.76
2.59
3.36
Raw
(mg/1)
103
185
106
140
70
73
75
136
200
165
431
234
227
217
Final
(mg/1)
18
18
38
7
7
27
32
23
27
38
32
29
21
20
Raw
(mg/1)
105
172
200
160
140
110
150
158
171
147
205
139
158
199
Final
(mg/1)
10.4
13.4
8.8
6.7
4.4
9.5
10.2
9.7
5.6
11.0
14.4
7.0
6.2
13.1
* Since September 1973, flow has been pumped from the south basin
to the north plant through the central lift station.
A-7
-------
Table V-2
ANALYSES OF SOUTH PLANT WASTE
(WINSTON THOMAS)
Suspended Solids
Date
1973
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sep.*
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.**
1974
Jan.
Feb.
Flow
(mgd)
9.1
8.9
10.6
11.2
7.9
8.4
8.2
7.2
5.6
5.3
5.8
6.4
7.8
7.2
Raw
(mg/D
166
174
130
81
110
98
88
165
180
174
223
239
113
137
Final
(mg/1)
29
38
40
45
39
36
32
46
34
24
44
58
18
19
Raw
(mg/1)
185
366
150
96
95
70 '
105
106
127
129
153
121
108
114
Final
(mg/D
40
59
47
41
30
27
35
41
35
20
31
19
18
17
* Since September 1973 flow has been diverted to the north plant
through the central lift station.
** Estimated.
*** See pages A-9 to A-ll of this appendix for correction of flows due to
inaccurate metering devices.
A-8
-------
L.fY DF BLOOMINGTU UTILITIES
P.O. BOX 1216
BLDDMINGTDN, INDIANA 47401
TELEPHONE AC «12 339- 2261
March 18, 1975
Robert Denman
Field Engineer
Municipal Wastewater Section
Indiana State Board of Health
1330 West Michigan Street
Indianapolis, Indiana 46206
Dear Mr. Denman:
Attached is a copy of work we have done checking the accuracy
of our raw sewage meter.
o - . -r
Our work seems to indicate that the actual flow is only about
84% of the metered flow. We are contacting the meter manufac-
turer and hope to have them re-calibrate it in the near future.
If you have any questions on what we have done or need additional
information, please contact me.
Very truly yours,
Michael M. Phillips
Treatment Engineer
MMP:jf
Attachment
cc:F. Beatty^Black & Veatch
G. Kenti
. File
A-9
-------
, Ct WINSTON THOMAS WASTEWATER PLANT
FLOW MEASUREMENTS
As part of our routine maintenance policy, the factory represen-
tative was contacted -to inspect and calibrate our magnetic raw
sewage meter.
On August 28 the meter was worked on for the first time. Because
of the large increase indicated by the meter, he was called back
on September 30 and October 21 to inspect and re-adjust it. Table
I gives information on flows for the Blucher Poole and Winston
Thomas Plants from 1973 to the present, along with the monthly
measured precipitation. Graph I shows this pictorially.
To check the accuracy of the meter, three methods were used:
displacement of the dosing tank, chemical gauging, and a". weir.
The volume of the four dosing tanks was calculated from the blue
prints and checked by addition of a known amount of LiCl. The
number of times the tanks filled times their volume, was then
compared to the gallons indicated by the meter totalizer for the
same period of time. These values were then converted to MGD.
Chemical gauging was the second method used to check the flow.
A known concentration of tracer, LiCl, was metered into the waste-
water flow and samples were then collected down stream of the
meter. The samples were analyzed for lithium by a model 403
Perkin Elmer Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer, and the flow
was calculated by the formula:
(0^) 1440 min/day
o ** x
u
CD 3785 ml/gal
Where: CD *= downstream concentration Li mg/1
flow of injected stream ml/min
concentration of injected stream mg/1
Qu = flow MGD
Figure I shows the arrangement of equipment and sample point.
As a final test we constructed a 3 foot weir and placed it in
one channel leading to the aerated grit chambers. The other side
was then shut- off and all flow passed over the weir.
A-10
-------
r
The comparison of the results of these three methods is as follows
Dosing tank 84.4% of indicated flow
Chemical gauging 83.5% of indicated flow
Weir 84.6% of indicated flow.
MMP:jf
3-75
A-ll
-------
\
o
*
--- .-.
.
-
.._ r _. ^^
w ..
..
..
" -
«*
'
A-12
' i
o
ro
o
to
3 ~
p
H
to
Ln
to
N
-
oo
oo
in
to
»
^
.
to
L>>
a
>
ro
2
3
T>
3
cr
R>
*
-J
O
VO
Ul
to
s
oo
to
.p»
n
ro
u
o
:
£
^
O
n
rt
0
y
ro
oo
ON
Ul
ro
ro
-j
Ul
i^
o
ro
10
-j
0
^
^
en
n>
X)
rt
ft>
g-
HI
^
Os
to
Ln
M
^»
o
oo
«>
o
.4
^
Ul
u>
10
_l
>
si
1
^
c
M
ft
h-
jj
VO
>J
vl
ON
ON
o
ON
ON
ON
to
-J
«
u>
t-l
c
X
Ul
DO
oa
oo
ON
,_,.
>
>J
*
"
_«
o\
_«
B
n>
oa
jj
oo
oo '.
Ul
VO
o
w
vj
to
ON
"
ro
o
oo
«>
(U
-p-
.J
ON
vj
*
OO
u.
-0
3
.
ro
00
0
-j
a
j
^
»
M
O
o
ro
ro
/i
ON
oa
o
LO
-J
^
-J
31
B)
n .
J3T
I
I-1
0
to
o
o
oo
M
>
^,
^«J
oo
oa
oa
OJ
>o
^«
to
~j
ro
cr
M
P
K
ro
ro
oo
oa
vo
ro
ro
3N
t-f
^
ro
LO
*
-A
ON
P»
-J
_J
/I
J
C-.
(U
p
D)
ro
vO
vO
*
VO
Ul
O»
00
LJ
^
"
ro
ON
i«i
o
UJ
Ln
^«B
ON
_4
O
JN
3
§
t-4
55
. (
"o
M
T»
£
*
«*
§:»
HH
**!>
^P
*
D
PJ
so
M
1*
Sr5
P
HH
"^
"*
"o
M
*"
O *O
32
HH
O
vl
O*
o
o
l-t
n>
CL
o
s:
CD
vl
Ul
-------
D. Sludge Composition
CITY DF BLDDMINGTDN UTILITIES
P. 0. BOX 1216
BLDDMINGTDN, INDIANA 474D1
TELEPHONE AC 812 339-2261
September 17, 1975
Dale Leucht
Planning
US EPA Region V
230 South Dearborn
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Dear Dale:
The following is the information you requested:
1. Winston Thomas sludge composition in mg/kg
dry weight:
Cu 980
Cr 585
Fe 5940
Ni 282
Cd 29
Zn 430
Winston Thomas sludge which is now picked
up by the public for use in gardens and
composting is about 65% solids.
2. Blucher Poole sludge composition in mg/kg
dry weight:
Cu 690
Cr 82
Fe 2900
Cd 23
Ni 55
Zn 380
Blucher Poole sludge used for injection is
about 8% solids. That used for land appli-
cation is about 2070 solids.
A-13
-------
Dale Leucht
September 17, 1975
Page 2
3. Enclosed is a copy of a Winston Thomas sludge
test run by Purdue's Soil Testing Laboratory.
4. Tentative plans for sludge disposal at the
Salt Creek Site include injection on approx-
imately 240 acres. The Site will be divided
into thirds. In a particular year one third
will be injected, one third fallow, and one
third farmed. We now plan to grow corn, beans,
and grass.
I hope this response answers all of your questions. If not,
please contact me.
Sincerely,
Richard S. Peoples
Project Coordinator
RSP:jf
Enclosure
cc: J. Quin, Gilbert Associates
G. Kent, Blgtn. Utilities Director
F. Beatty, Black & Veatch
File
A-14
-------
PURDUE UNIVERSITY sou TESTING IAIORATORY - - AGRONOMY DEPARTMENT - - IAF AYETTE, INDIANA - - AES FORM 400
zc-2
SOIL TEST REPORT
for
Richard S. Peoples
City of Bloonington Utilities
Box 100
Bloomington, Indiana 47401
A COPY OF irilS REPORT HAS BEEN SENT TO
Monroe COUNTY EXTENSION OFFICE.
AN EXTRA COPY HAS BEEN SENT TO:
1/16/74
IDENTIFICATION
LAB
NUMBER
9549
9550
FIELD
NUMBER
1
1
Mr. Pe
I shot
extrac
plant.
For yc
Cheait
V^J J .3..
Total
NUTRIENT RECOMMENDATIONS *
N
IBS/A
NO RB
RtQOE
t, 05
IBS/A
K,0
IBS/A
COMMENDATION
STED
" " t ."
oples:
Id explain that
tions" of soils,
OUT- a
_that
ur purposes, yon are
ts' Office for nitorg
nitrogen- is not -a par
_ _
LIME
laly
is,
nore
init
5 *-,
t of
SOIL TEST RESULTS
SOIL-
BUFFER j»
-
-
rieai ;
to be
inter
i. Yo
routi
SOIL-
WATER j)H
7.4
7.0
nroeec
it duj
isted
t wou)
»e soi
IBS / ACRE
PHOSPHOSUS
__.oS^
915
1080
wrr
licatc
in tot
d reqt
1 anal
POUSSIUM
Ol?o
210
210
W )
-------
E. EFFLUENT LIMITS FOR THE PROPOSED SOUTH BLOOMINGTON STP.*
BOD,
Salt
Creek
Site
10 mg/1
95%
10 mg/1
95%
30 day average
7 day average
per cent removal
Suspended Solids
30 day average
7 day average
per cent removal
Phosphorus
maximum
or
per cent removal
Fecal Coliform Bacteria
30 day geometric mean 200/100 ml
7 day geometric mean 400/100 ml
pH Range 6.0-8.5
* NH3 limits are on p. A-17.
1.0 mg/1
Clear
Creek
Site
5 mg/1
97.5%
5 mg/1
97.5%
1.0 mg/1
80%
200/100 ml
400/100 ml
6.0-8.5
A-16
-------
STATEr
INDIANA
STREAM POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
INDIANAPOLIS 46206
1330 West Michigan Street
633-5467
xxx 5467
January 31, 1975
Mr. Gary R. Kent
Director of Utilities
City of Bloomlngton Utilities
P. 0. Box 1216
Bloomlngton, Indiana 47401
fit AC c A
Dear Mr. Kent:
Re: Nitrification Requirements for Potential
Bloomlngton Wastewater Treatment Plant Sites
In response to your letter of January 9, 1975, concerning the effluent
ammonia nitrogen limitations for Bloomlngton's potential wastewater treatment
plant sites, the following limits have been established:
Existing Site or
S. Rogers St.
(0:1 Dilution Ratio)
Ketcham Road
(0;1 Dilution Ratio)
BOD
SS
NH3- N
Summer
Winter
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
1.5 mg/1
3.0 mg/1
1.5 mg/1
3.0 mg/1
Salt Creek
(1.6:1 D.R.) (2"l;l D.R.)
10 mg/1
10 mg/1
10 mg/1
10 mg/1
6.5 mg/1 7.9 mg/1
The 1.5 mg/1 NH3-N limitation 1s based on the best practicable technology and the
other NHs-N limitations are based on a maximum allowable toxlclty concentration of
2,5 mg/1 with 1.6 % un-1on1zed NH3 1n the stream. The 1.6:1 dilution ratio 1s based
on a 20 mgd facility and the 2.1:1 dilution ratio 1s based on a 15 mgd facility.
The more rigid requirements for ammonia nitrogen limitations were outlined 1n
a letter dated October 21, 1974, from Region V, U.S. EPA 1n connection with Issuance
of NPDES permits. The cities of Connersvllle, Crawfordsvllle, New Castle, Richmond,
and Warsaw have similar restrictions.
A-17
-------
-2-
Mr. Gary R. Kent January 31, 1975
If you have any more questions concerning this matter, please do not
hesitate to contact this office.
Very truly yours,
Oral H. Hert
Technical Secretary
MAScherer/Jam
cc: Black and Yeatch
A-18
-------
Appendix B
AQUATIC ECOLOGY-LAKE MONROE
A. GENERAL INFORMATION
The situation and shape of the Monroe Reservoir appears
in Figure 4.1. The area of the lake watershed is approximately
1008 Km2 or 420 square miles, with about 80% of the runoff
entering the lake through the three forks of Salt Creek
(Figure 4.1). Docauer (1972) compares the population, settle-
ments, urban development, etc. of the three major forks of
Salt Creek (Table 4.1). Most available information concerns
the North Fork of Salt Creek drainage system for the following
reasons: (1) Nashville and its associated tourist attractions
coupled with inefficient sewage treatment facilities; (2) relative
size of the drainage system (almost equal to the combined areas
of Middle and South Forks); and (3) relative accessibility
to the University.
The effects of Nashville's sewage plant effluent can be
seen in Table 4.2 from McAhron's (1972) survey of North Fork of
June 19, 1972. A relative decrease in efficiency of BOD removal
can be seen in Table 4.3 for the influent and effluent of the
sewage plant spanning the years of 1968, 1970, and 1972.
More recently. Nelson (1974) sampled from March 19 to
June 26, 1974, from six stations at regular weekly intervals
to determine the actual characteristics of the North Fork water
and its variation with discharge, seasonal effects, and location.
A partial summary of her findings (Table 4.4) tends to show the
following: (1) during high flows, before fertilization, the
B-l
-------
Aquatic Ecology
Figure 4.1; Lake Monroe Basin and Watershed Map showing the
permanent water sampling stations.
MOROANCO.
MONROE CO.
r
JOHNSON CO.
BROWN CO.
I BARTHOLOMEW
CO.
MONROE RESERVOIR WATERSHED MAP
B-2
-------
..
rH
<
0)
rH
.a
(0
E-"
,x
cu
cu
v_i
u
-p
H
w
4-1
O
en
0
H
in
^
1 \
/N
A3
H
J-l
-P
CO
CO
^1
,C
4J
CO
,£
-P
M-)
0
c
o
w
H
}_l
to
Cli
g
o
u
1
ft T3
3 CO
a c
cn-d o
rd Q)
P.C >i
C 03 rH
CU M
Cr1 1
}^
a)
4J
3
»Q
H
VH
EH
r** vo co
.
o r~ r^
rH fN rH
in en in
o VD o
rH ,H CO
r~ in CM
r~- oo CN
n rH CM
vo 0^3*
.
rH O
O 00 OO
rH
o
en o CN
en in in
vc en ^^
rH
CU
£ H A
-P ,V T3 ri4 -P ,M
)H JH 'd S-l O M
O O -HO O 0
2 CL, S fa 03 fa
B-3
, ^
CN
r~.
en
rH
^
£_(
0)
(0
u
o
.
Q
J_j
OJ
4J
"4-H
*(
x-^'
Aquatic Ecology
-------
Aquatic Ecology
stream maintains a high dissolved oxygen concentration and a
dilution of nutrients; (2) after a peak flood on April 9, dis-
charge then decreased; (3) after field fertilization began,
obvious station-to-station variations became evident. Nutrient
load, conductivity, etc. increased and the oxygen concentration
decreased downstream. One might notice that the effects of the
Nashville sewage plant appear masked in the overall dilution
effect. However, when the water gauge reading becomes available
from Nashville's gauge, the weekly discharge information will
be related to nutrient concentration.
Docauer (1972), in Table 4.6, shows the fate of total
phosphate from Nashville to the causeway within the lake. The
spring and summer data show first the effects of dilution (spring)
and also the possible increase of effluent nutrients from the
Nashville plant during the tourist season of June-July.
A survey of the chemical and physical aspects of the three
tributaries of Salt Creek is shown in Table 4.7 for October 2 and
29, 1974. The effects of discharge on concentration is apparent
particularly at station #2 on Green Valley Road, two miles below
the Nashville plant. Notice, however, that less total phosphate
and soluble reactive phosphate is reaching the upper basin (#6)
during this extremely low flow than reported by Docauer's Tables
4.5 and 4.6. Much utilization occurs removing these nutrients.
Interest in the upper reaches of the South Fork at #3 and
#4 stations is due to the extensive farming practices present in
B-4
-------
Aquatic Ecology
this area. Middle Fork is of special interest since it is
forested with less farming. It will serve as a "control"
system in the upper head waters.
Since about 80% of the volume of yearly discharge occurs
during the late winter, spring, and early summer, there is a need
to concentrate most heavily on the interrelationships between
nutrient loading and discharge at this time (Lee, 1969). Like-
wise, the overall pollution of non-point source loading needs to
be investigated, since recent information shows that non-point
sources are considerably greater than formerly thought (Loehr,
1974). Possible methods for controlling or decreasing the non-
point sources may need to be considered.
B. PHYSIOGRAPHY OF LAKE MONROE
Monroe Reservoir is a shallow basin-shaped lake with a
mean depth of 3 to 4 meters. The old Salt Creek channel meanders
across the bottom as a 7 to 11 meter trench. The lake is divided
into three distinct basins (Figure 4.1). The upper basin above
the causeway is a shallow (3-5 meter mean depth) basin with
approximately 1927 hectares area of lake surface. This basin
receives the water from the three tributaries of Salt Creek.
The middle basin lies between the causeway and the down stream
narrows (station #5) and has an approximate mean depth of 5-6
meters. The lower basin extends downstream to the dam and has
B-5
-------
Aquatic Ecology
Table 4.2:
Survey of North Fork Salt Creek near Nashville, Indiana
State Board of Health
All concentrations in parts per million (ppm) except
fecal coliforms.
Station BOD
100 meters 1.5
Above
Sewage
Plant
76 meters 4.6
below
Sewage
Plant
3.2 Kilo- 1.7
meters
below
Plant
4.83 Kilo- 1.6
meters
below
Plant
7.2 Kilo- 1.6
meters
below
Plant
June 19, 1972
From McAhron
Table 4.3:
Nashville Sewage
Surveys
Dissolved
Oxygen
7.3
6.0
5.0
5.1
5.0
*
(1972) .
Plant, Brown
PO.-P NO-.-N NH0-N Fecal Coli- Total
433
0.1 0.1 0.2
1.4 0.2 0.4
0.5 0.3 0.4
0.4 0.3 0.3
0.4 0.4 0.3
County IndianaState
forms-*/ Solids
100ml.
90 110
20,000 170
11,000 100
386 110
290 110
Board of Health
All concentrations in ppm.
Date and Station
June 6, 1968
influent
effluent
efficiency
August 16, 1970
influent
effluent
efficiency
June 19, 1972
influent
effluent
efficiency
B.O.D. Total PO,-P Suspended
490
120
75.5%
570
290
49.8%
350
260
25.7%
29
37
-27%
500
160
68%
48
43
10.4%
Solids Total Solids
850
600
29.4%
880
760
13. 6%
910
710
21.9%
June 6, 1968, August 16, 1970 (Hall 1971) and June 19, 1972
(McAhron 1972).
B-6
-------
^
JH
O
fa ^*
r-
43 en
4J rH
to
O -
2 Q)
m 3
O ^
03 43
U CP
H 3
4J O
ED M
H 43
to -P
QJ
4J 43
O O
rd to
to tO
rd g
43
U E
O
i | ^j
rd MH
O
H rd
03 C
>i td
CU TJ
(3 4J
E43
0) 03 T3
43 i IH 0)
rH 10 (D
43 fO 4->
EH < CO CO
1 "P
C C
O 0
H E 03
4-1 0)
tO M 43
4-> 0 0
H <*H C
a -H
-H rH
o m c
Q) 4-1 -H
M O
(1)
0) 4J
43 43
rH W
o o
CO 43
1
Q)
4-1 rH
(OX.
to tn
4-J 3
H
2
55
1
5 ,
H X
In b"1
4-1 3
H
2
s^
4-1
H
> 6
H U O
4-1 X
O o 03
30O
-d CN 43
C E
O O
U 4-> 3.
ro
O
r) p
03 a
O &
d
r^
c
>i 03
X
O *°
td
4J
01
Q)
^j
rd
Q
£ - - ;
r* en ro o
00 ^* rH "rj*
ro ro U3 rH
O O o in
"31 ^D 1^ CN
(Ti in H r-»
0 ^ 0 rH
m <* r-n ro
O ro ro 00
i-H rH rH CN
r-» CM o vo
rH rH CN rH
rH rH rH rH
o ro oo in
00 CN O O
CN CN ro ^J1
O ** CT, **
r* ^D us r-
rH CN ro «>
in a\ CN CN
oo r^ en oo
rH i-H rH rH
. . QJ
to to >i C
tO DJ (0 3
S i C
rd O* rd 3
s < s; >-j
o r~- O o r- oo ro
^3* 00 OO *^* *^* VO LO
rH
o oo m in co m r-
co ro r- in oo ro co
in ^f in ro i i ro
o o ro o r- m ro
r-H ro rvj rH CN ro o
H
rH in r- ro (Tl rH CN
ro i I r\j ro i 1 ro ro
rH rH rH rH rH rH rH
ro oo ^r ^3* i i r*- r^
vo CN o *£> ro ro *
o^ ^o r^ f^ v^ c^ PO
vc ^>o ^«o r^ ViO ^«o r^*
en in ID in en CN ^r
rH LO r^ rH ^D ^ in
en r^ co co i oo ^o
^ * ^t ^D V£> kO U3
d)
in >-t >, j-i n >, c
fd CX fC (0 Cb fO ^
s < s s < s b
Aq
E
O *
M 03
MH 3
Q
1-1 i
fd rH
4H O
C CJ
H
rd T)
J_| £J
tO
>1
rH »
rl T3
rO >H
T3 O
4H
t3 T3
rjj Q)
CnCQ
rd
3
rfl O
E
OJ >i
43 OJ
4-> CO
UH »
0 C
O
C 4-1
O CP .
H C rQ
to s to
E 0 -H
^ K 0 'O
r- 3 rH q
CTi CO CQ H
rH
^^ 1
c c
O 0
W -H
rH -P
(U (0
2 4-)
H
E Cu
0 -H
IH U
fa QJ
IH
p ,
*
»<
Aquatic Ecology
B-7
-------
Aquatic Ecology
Table 4.5:
Seasonal averages of inorganic (soluble reactive) phosphate in
micrograms PO.-P per liter.
Station and
location on
figure 1
North Fork #6
Pine Grove-c
0 meters
5 meters
Causeway-#4
0 meters
5 meters
Winter
Feb.
10
11
9
1
1
Spring
Mar. -Apr.
49.4
28.8
28.6
10.1
10.1
Summer
May-Aug .
12.9
4.9
14.6
3.7
4.8
Fall
Sept. -Oct.
21.5
18.0
25.4
2.5
0.0
Middle Fork 11.7 5.5
(Elkinsville)
South Fork
(Maumee) 20.0 15.4
From Docauer (1972).
Table 4.6:
Seasonal Averages of Total phosphate in micrograms per liter PO.-P
*
Station and
location on
figure 1
Winter
Feb.
Spring
Mar . -Apr .
Summer
May-July
North Fork 17.5 84.0
Nashville #1
North Fork
Green Valley #2 28.0 251.0
North Fork
Kent Road #6 45 79.5 144.0
Reservoir -c 35 52.0 149.0
Pine Grove
Causeway #4 21 33.0 84.7
Middle Fork 89.5
(Elkinsville)
South Fork
(Maumee) 163.0
From Docauer (1972).
B-8
-------
Aquatic Ecology
r-
*a*
rH
X)
IT}
£H
0)
XI
o
4-1
O
o
&
H
3
o
^
(U
(U
U
4-1
rH
flj
C/3
O
Ul
(U
r-l
(0
4-1
3
Q
*M
U
EH
fl.
Ui
r-l
4-»
(1)
4->
U-l
O
(0
O
H
1 \ ^^
M «»
H t->-
0) rH
4J
O -
ITJ ON
rH - rv) J OO CO f\J rH
H^rM -r\j
a
(It
^
C rH
P Lo \O IA CN*- O ON ON _,f ^- r 1 ' f> ON ON
K3J-H -.fO rvl rVjrH r rArA
H
iHJmi Ol Ol rul i i
(HI 1 1 1 1 vO 1 C\l 1
M^ONI r\)l voi rvji «i if
O O f J 1 OO 1 HI rH 1 CM 1 VO i
(n 1%
.
4»
C H
Gj X
0 11)
W'JOCIA IAO Of>- ON-d" rACj OfA
rH-UONlA OON rAf\J r-lrH r-irH rAIA
00 J- H
10 '** «M
E
a o.
IV t-,
> 1
rH rl Is- CO f\J IA OO CV ONOO O CN- rA IX
10 I*J CN rH OO f\J ON r*- ON O- CM OO O rA
W !> H rH
H X
0 0
>.^
HO
> O
H rvl
*^ l O 'A rH O r\j oo CN- O C^- O IX- O
OKJlAfM IAO IAOO rAvO OOO ^Ar^
3OrHfv) iH<\J rHH rHH rHAJ rHOj
a E
55
^
4}
rl
C-^Hrvl ONO rorvl rAo r-l'A vo^j-
rl O' vD IA ^i" IA no rH CO O VO ON rAvO
^
trl vo rvl vo rvl t*^ IA IA IA vo *A vo rvl
Mi . J . . -. t 4 . t 1. «
i^o. f>r>-irxrx f>i^- r>-rx r>-r>-
n. ni o o vo O ON o oo rA lA IA o
oo OfA O
U »: Ifc Si: ',( It- tt
CO
ON ON vO oo
IAr-1 CO rH
vO IA O O
rvl ON HOD
rH ON rA
rA IA CO rH
rvl oj-d-
1 IA 1
O 1 1
1 rH 1
CO 1 HI
Ov O -H- -*
OH H rvl
ON O CJNVO
t
ONOO CO VO
rAvO CO ON
rH rH rH H
rvl H J- rvl
IM l^ fAcO
IAON vo rvl
r>-vo r«- ix
rACO J- CO
rH rA O rvl
rH H rH rH
<* rn « «
iH r-l fV) (NJ
'., IM I«4 r^
~£ ; ; ;.* ^
>h Ifc ^t: 'tt
U>vO
tA rvl
0 0
H CX
IA IA
rvj
l
IA 1
t 1
rA 1
H -H-
H rH
IX IA
c* tx
O O
-d" VD
H rH
1 VO
i
1 0
1 rv/
1
ro o
rH rH
«< ca
H rH
M '0
rJ .-I
It *
tx lAH
rArv) O
H
lA O O
CO H -*
J- IAO
lAH rvl
Tl !
H 1 1
rvl i i
rvl o *
lArv) fj
rArAOO
i t i
ON ^5 Q
(H rH
coco J-
H rvl rv)
oo fv- |H
-T CO fA
t
H O H
vq rvlJ-
4 i
rx rx" fx
O lAlA
O J- tA
rH H rH
<< CQ 03
rH (A-H-'
(H IN liJ
M ' J t1
It -ifc -;b
B-9
-------
Aquatic Ecology
an approximate mean depth of 7-8 meters. The surface area of
the combined lower basins is approximately 2875 hectares. (For
more information see Table 4.8).
Four main, interdependent categories of physical factors
control biological production in Lake Monroe, as in all natural
waters. They are associated with (1) radiant energy input, (2)
nutrient input and loss, (3) oxygen supply, and (4) interactions
of morphometry and motion (Mortimer 1969).
On a global scale, variables related to solar energy appear
to have a greater effect than those related to nutrient avail-
ability. This solar energy is a key factor in driving wind-
induced and convective circulation, regulating water temperatures,
and governing local climatic conditions. However, when restricted
latitudes are considered, factors related to nutrient availability
assume a much greater importance.
A comparison of the watershed to lake surface area yields
a ratio of 25/1 for Lake Monroe. Vollenweider (1971), using
information from various sources, has shown that the "surround-
ing factor" (drainage area/lake surface) and primary production
in European lakes are strongly correlated. Obviously, lakes
with a large "surrounding factor," or with a high nutrient
input, or both, will be greatly enriched by nutrients from the
watershed. As these nutrients enter the lake, their dilution
will be governed by the total volume of the lake. Since temperate
lakes are notorious for stratification and incomplete mixing,
B-10
-------
Aquatic Ecology
Vollenweider suggests that the mean depth (relating volume to
unit surface area) as an index of the biological effectiveness
of loading is, at present, the best compromise. The relative
shallow mean depth of Lake Monroe forces one to consider the
statement made by Brylinsky and Mann (1973: 1-15) which reads,
"However, if one wished to make comparisons on the basis of
production per unit volume, the shallower lakes would be more
productive and would be expected to have a more dense phytoplankton
population. Hence, it is reasonable to think of shallow lakes as
compressed versions of deep lakes, in terms of productivity per
unit area." The relatively shallow basins found in Monroe
Reservoir must be regarded as an important factor in all future
considerations.
C. PHYSICO-CHEMICAL PROPERTIES OF LAKE MONROE
The chemical and physical methods of water analysis are
shown in Table 4.9. Methods not included in this table are dis-
cussed within the text.
1. Transparency
Secchi disc readings obtained from June to October 1974
are shown in Figure 4.2. This figure suggests that there is
a significant increase in transparency from the months June to
August. Following a decrease in September, transparency slightly
increased in October. Maximum Secchi disc transparency occurred
B-ll
-------
Aquatic Ecology
TABLE 4.8:
The following data have been converted or calculated from
figures reported in Report #9, Indiana Flood Control and Water
Resources Commission, 1956.
Stream
Gaging Stations in Salt Creek Watershed
Drainage
Location Area Sq. km. Period & Record
Salt Creek near 1507 1939-1950
Peerless
Salt Creek near 1142 1955-1956
Harrodsburg
North Fork of Salt 311 1946-1956
Discharge,m3/sec.
Mean Max. Min.
19.2 577.9 0.02
11.2 133.1 0.03
133.1 430.6 0.
Creek near Belmont
Annual
Storage
Precipitation: Mean Max. Min.
1.06m 1.54m 0.72m
Capacity: Total
for flood control
for increasing low flow
for sediment storage
55 km3
32
20
03
Total volume corresponds to 0.482 meters run off from drainage area
of 1142 sq. km.
Maximum flood control pool elevation
Normal pool level
corresponding to a pool of
Sediment storage below
Approximate mean depth (max.)
Approximate mean depth (min.)
169.5m
164.3m
43.3km2
157.0m
7m
4m
B-12
-------
Aquatic Ecology
in late August and agreed well with measurements in 1968 and 1971
by Zimmerman and Allanson. Transparency increased from the
upper basin to the lower basin with an increment of 0.3 to 1.1
meters. The high variance occurring in late July and August
is due to fluctuations of phytoplankton species abundance and
biomass. The high variance shown in September and October
is contributed to by rapid climatic changes.
A set of extinction curves for sunlight versus Secchi disc
readings is given in Figure 4.3 for Station 4 and Station 1 from
July to October. The one percent level of transmission occurred
at 4.5-8.5 meters during this period. The simultaneous Secchi
disc reading was calculated and it demonstrated that the disc
disappeared at 10 to 25 percent of surface illumination. Allanson
et al. (1973) suggested that this was due to extensive scattering
of light by particulate material.
A comparison of Secchi disc readings from 1968 to 1971
with data from this study is given in Table 4.10. The means and
their standard deviations suggest that no significant change in
transparency occurred in these years/ but a decline in the
mean transparency for 1974 was found. Two possible explanations
could be given: (1) an increase in planktonic production as
a result of nutrient additions, or (2) an increase in soil
deposit and non-biological particulate matter. It should be
noted that similar patterns of weed distribution were found, so
the competitive interactions would remain of roughly the same
magnitude and no increases in phytoplankton from this phenomenon
would result.
B-13
-------
Aquatic Ecology
tn
tn
H
cu
s-l
o
to
O
U
CU
CO
tn
Q)
CP
c
(0
x:
fN U
'S' rH
(0
0 C
Sj °
3 tn
Oi to
H 0)
-P
O
O
H -H (N
43 H
O O CU
U W 4-J
CU -H CU
CO Q S
CN
OJ
CO
4-J
CO
>1
iH
3
4J
U
cu
CO
4J
CO
3
Cn
>1
-H
3
0)
3
CTi
CO
c
O
4-)
10
C
--H
cn
(0
X!
5-1
0)
CO
c
O
H
-P
(C
-P
CO
«c
^
cu
co
3
(0
C
cu
>
O
X!
(0
13
(C
cn
(0
cu
B-14
-------
Aquatic Ecology
Figure 4.3:
Extinction curves for sunlight at two stations in Lake Monroe,
June to October, 1974.
Secchi disc transparencies are recorded as perpendicular lines.
STN 4 STN 4 STN 4
25 50 75 100% 25 50 75 100% 25 50 75 100%
STN 1
25 50 75 100%
STN 1
25 50 75 100%
STN 1
25 50 75 100%
7.17
STN 1
25 50 75 100%
8.25
9.7
10.24
B-15
-------
Aquatic Ecology
Table 4.9:
Chemical and Physical Methods of Water Analysis
A. Chemical
1. Alkalinity (methyl orange alkalinity) - using 0.01 N
sulfuric acid with pH determined end point of 4.4
pH. This gives milliequivalents (meq). To
determine ppm CaCO->, multiply meq. by 50.
2. Dissolved Oxygen- YSI Dissolved Oxygen Meter Model 54
or Azidemodified Winkler Method with N/80
Thiosulfate.
3. Nitrogen-Three types: (Stainton, Capel and Armstrong, 1974)
A. Ammonia-N- indophenol blue color with phenol and
hypochlorite.
B. Nitrite-N- pink azo dye; reduce quantitatively nitrate
N-l Napthyethylene diamine dihydrochloride.
C. Nitrate-N- Pink azo dye; reduce quantitatively
nitrate to nitrite-treat for nitrite.
4. Phosphate-Two types: (Golterman and Clymo, 1969)
A. Soluble Reactive Phosphate - blue colored complex
with acidic molybdate, ascorbic acid
reductant and antimony as a color en-
hancing species.
B. Total Phosphate - same as above except treat sample
(25 ml) with acid and 1 gm potassium
persulfate-autoclave for 1 1/2 hour. Cool
and use 1 N acid-molybdate sol.
5. Reactive Silicate- blue colored complex with acidic
molybdate. A reducing solution of metol
and oxalic acid added to reduce the
silicomolybdate complex and simultaneously
decompose phosphate and arsenate inter-
ferences. (Strickland and Parson, 1972).
B.
Physical
1. Conductivity- Hach Model 2510 (Battery Operated)
Conductivity Meter in micromhos - 20°C.
2. pH-Corning pH Model 7 meter with a Bradley-James
Combination Electrode
(continued)
B-16
-------
Aquatic Ecology
3. Turbidity- Hach Model 2100 Turbidimeter in NTU units.
4. Temperature- Whitney Model TC-5A Thermistor or YSI
Model 54 Thermistor (with the Dissolved 02 probe).
5. Light-
A. Whitney Underwater Light Meter with the following
filters:
RG2-red, OG2-yellow orange, VG9-green,
BG12-blue, BG15-near ultra violet.
Filters are Schott colored filters from
Jenaer Glaswerk, Schott & Gen, Mainz.
B. Secchi Disc- 20cm diameter.
B-17
-------
Aquatic Ecology
Some reasonable degree of correlation between Secchi disc
transparency and eutrophication can be found in natural lake
situations. Rodhe (1965) demonstrated a relation of Secchi disc
transparency, light extinction, and trophic status in a number
of European lakes (Table 4.11). From this demonstration it was
suggested by Allanson et al. (1973) that Monroe Reservoir had
already reached a mildly eutrophic or mesotrophic level. It is
known, however, on the basis of primary production, nutrient
chemistry, and plankton data from this study, that Lake Monroe
is not as well advanced as suspected. Light scattering by
suspended non-biological particles decreases the Secchi disc
transparency. We therefore propose that Lake Monroe is
oligotrophic or, at most, mildly mesotrophic.
2. Temperature
A typical sequence of seasonal temperature profiles is shown
by Docauer (Figure 4.4A) for 1972. Similar temperature curves
were observed by Allanson et al. (1973) for the years 1971 and
1968. Stratification becomes apparent in late May to early June,
reaching a maximum in late July to mid August. Isothermal
conditions occur generally in late September-early October.
Partial turnovers or mixing do occasionally occur, especially
after periods of cooler weather. Docauer (1972) indicates that
at least two such events (August 8 and September 22) appeared
in the Pine Grove Station (c). Likewise, Smith reported a
similar mixing down to 6 meters in August 1971 at Station 1.
B-18
-------
Aquatic Ecology
Table 4.10: Secchi Disc Transparency (Meters) in
Monroe Reservoir Irrespective of Sampling
Site, July-October 1968, 1971 and 1974.
1968
4.00 4.25
2.33 3.50
3.50 3.50
Mean (x)
Std. Dev.
n
2.50
3.00
2.00
1.50
2.00
2.85
0.99
17
2.00 5.00 2.00
2.50 3.35 1.75
1971
4.10 2.10
3.60 4.25
1.60 3.75
2.20 3.50
Mean (x)
Std. Dev.
n
3.05
1.70
2.95
4.00
2.00
5.10
3.70
2.00
3.08
0.94
25
4.35 3.50 3.25
2.40 3.55 2.00
2.70 2.30 3.55
1974
1.15 1.05
2.35 2.10
3.70 2.40
1.60 1.50
2.20 2.05
Mean (x)
Std. Dev.
n.
1.30
3.00
3.25
2.40
2.50
1.10
1.20
3.10
2.10
3.10
2.28
0.80
32
1.90 2.10 2.20
1.80 2.10 2.20
4.60 1.25 2.40
2.80 2.70 2.80
B-19
-------
Aquatic Ecology
Table 4.11:
A Comparison of Secchi Disc Transparency, Light
Extinction, and Degree of Eutrophication in a
Number of European Lakes.
E=Total Visible Energy
Productivity
Very eutrophic
Eutrophic
Oligotrophic
Lake
Lago di Varese
Erken
Gr. Ploner See
Ziarichsee
Bodensee
Tornetrask
Lago di Garda
Depth
Date Secchi disc
19
23
9
1
11
16
25
.iv.57
.vii. 57
. iv. 57
.v.57
.v.57
.vii. 58
. iv. 57
2.
2.
5.
4.
4.
13.
12.
3
4
3
5
0
7
0
in meters
E.
6
8.
7.
8.
7.
17
27
1%
5
0
5
5
Data From Figure 2 in Rodhe (1965).
B-20
-------
Aquatic Ecology
Both Stations 1 and 4 showed midsummer partial or complete
mixing during 1974. Figures 4.4(B) and 4.4(C) indicate that
maximum stratification in both basins occurred around the 17th
of July. The unusually cool weather of late July and early August
lowered the lake water temperature considerably. This caused the
shallower, upper basin to mix completely before September 1.
However, in the deeper, lower basin at Station 1, the thermocline
was depressed to about 7 meters with partial mixing occurring in
the upper waters. During the first week of September, this
basin, likewise, completely mixed. This isothermal condition
persists as demonstrated by the November 6 temperature profiles
for both basins. Chemical uniformity also confirms this con-
clusion.
3. Specific Conductance
Conductivity is related to the concentration of ions
present and therefore directly related to the alkalinity in
lakes similar to Monroe, in which the dissolved electrolytes
are chiefly calcium and magnesium bicarbonates. Table 4.12
shows the bottom water conductivity corrected to 20°C for the
years 1968, 1971, and 1974. There is only a slight increase
in the conductivity from 1971 to 1974 which may well be within
the range of instrument error. Mean conductance was only
slightly different in the surface and bottom samples, suggesting
that density currents were not present during the sampling
B-21
-------
Aquatic Ecology
period. Also, the low uniform conductance may be a reflection
of the early mixing of the basins, resulting in a lower standard
deviation.
4. Alkalinity
The data for the three years (1968, 1971, and 1974) are
presented in Table 4.13. The high values determined by Allanson
(1971) must be questioned. There are two reasons for such a
statement. First, conditions within the lake appear to be similar
for the two years, in particular, the low summer and fall
precipitation. Second, if Allanson's alkalinity readings are
correct, then his conductivity values are about 100 micro-ohms
too low. Data from Brummet's Creek, a tributary of North Fork,
shows the following trend (Hartzell, unpublished):
A. 19 samples ranging from 60 to 78 ppm CaCO^ have an
average conductivity of 229.6 micro-ohms at 20°C.,
B. 11 samples ranging from 27 to 39 ppm CaCO-, have an
average conductivity of 136.5 micro-ohms at 20°C.
Similar trends are apparent from the major forks of Salt Creek.
Therefore, the alkalinity estimate by Allanson (1973) is
highly questionable and probably should be similar to the 1974
mean value.
5. pH
The available data is given in Table 4.14. No significant
difference in the mean surface or bottom pH values? appears over
B-22
-------
Aquatic Ecology
Figure 4.4:
Temperature Profiles from Pine Grove, Station 4, and Station 1.
(A)
a
4*
t)
e
P.
O
0 -
1 -
3 -
5
6 -J
e.
10 15 20
Degrees Celsius
25
30
(A) Pine Grove temperature
profiles 1972 by
Docaucr
Top numbiTO represent the
following datec.
1. Feb. 27, 1972
'd. Apr. S.1972
3. Way ?0,.1?72
4. J«ly2i>,l$>72
5. Sept cH, 1972
6. Oct. 6,1972
7. Oct.30,lrJ72
8. Nov. j},1972
B-23
-------
Aquatic Ecology
Figure 4.4 (continued)
(B) Gtation '>
» 'i
0 _
o
(H
o
-p
o
C
p,
o
n
1 .
2 -
3 -
k
5 -I
(C) .'Jtat. icn 1
0 .,
S v 4
0)
n
9 -1
10
6 'i
10
15 20
Degrees Celsius
no
Decrees Celsius
32
_J
30
(B) Station 'l ter.ipcraturo ;,:of:'
197** from June 7~;.'ov.7s J //''
Top numbers reprer.cnt the
following dates.
1. Juno 7,197^
2. JulylO,197-1
3. Ju.lj.l7,197i:
k. Aug. 2,197A
5. AUG.15,197^
6. Sept. 1,197*1
7. Scpt28,197;f
8. Nov. 7,197^
(C) ^tr.tion 1 tc-mperatiu e profile-.
197^ from Juno 2 to
Top nuriVers I'cprec-^
foDlouin;, acjtor,.
1. June ;-2, 19?'f
2. June 23, 197':-
3. July 17, 1974
*t. /.ujj. 8, 197;f
5. Au";. 25, 19?''
6. f.cpt. 7, 197'(
7. Oct. 3, 197^
8. Mov. 7, 197'f
B-24
-------
Aquatic Ecology
three years. Th^ .n,.,,', ;,JLTI .,jff-. '-ences in pH occurred during
stratification in mid-July. "Y.-> -drjy isothermal mixing of
September accounts :"oc the lew icviation from the mean for
1974.
6. Phosphorus (:>i;IuLie Reactive Phosphate).
The extremely low levels of soluble reactive phosphate are
shown in Table 4.15 and 4.16 Allanson (1973) estimated the surface
concentration as 6 ug/1 PO,,-P for the fall of 1971. Unfortunately,
there is little data showing the effects of stratification and
the usual phosphate trap system. However, the August 25 data at
Station 1 does show a slight phosphate concentration increase on
the bottom (Table 4.15). By September 7, the phosphate con-
centrations became uniform (small standard deviation) as a result
of mixing.
A comparison of all stations (Table 4.16) shows that soluble
reactive phosphate is slightly higher at Station 5 (the division
between two major lake basins), and undetectable at Station 4.
The effectiveness of the upper basin as a nutrient sink can
vividly be observed from Tables 4.7 and 4.17. The average con-
centration for October at Station 6 (Kent Farm Road) was 7.6
ug/1 PO.-P. As this water moves down into the lake, its PO.-P
concentration is utilized by the macrophytes, bacteria, and
algae. Water reaching the Pine Grove station (c) has, therefore,
a concentration of 1-2 ug/1 phosphate. Docauer (Table 4.5) shows
a similar trend, although his values are higher. These findings
B-2!
-------
Aquatic Ecology
Table 4.12:
Comparisons of specific cor,auct_ance (n; Lcrornhos / cm) at
20 degrees Celsius of bottom water in Monroe Reservoir
during July/August 1968*, September/October 1971** and
August/October 1974.
196i
88 112 72 98
95 81 80 73
x 100 94 88 92
83 82 84 62
Mean (x)
Std. dev.
n
86. 5
12.2
16
1971
120 112
116 125
116 125
145 125
123.0
10,2
8
1974
142 134 123
1.30 126 127
132 1.26 125
132 126 126
129.1
4,9
14
129
130
*Zimmerman (1968)** Allanson (1973).
Table 4.13:
Methyl Orange Alkalinity (as mg/1 CaCO_,) Averaged values for
surface and bottom waters in Monroe Reservoir during July/August
1968 (Zimmerman), September/October 1971 (Allanson) and August/
October 1974.
Mean
Std.
n
Surface
(x) 37.5
dev. 5.11
16
1968
Bottom
42. 5
14. 37
16
1971
Surface Bottom
72.3 77.6
12.69 9.50
11 9
Surface
3 3.32
2.22
23
1974
Bottom
34. 64
2.15
13
B-26
-------
Aquatic Ecology
Table 4.14:
Comparisons of the Averaged pH of surface and bottom waters
in Monroe Reservoir during July/August 1968 (Zimmerman),
September/October 1971 (Allanson) and August/October 1974.
Surface
Mean (x) 7.8
Std. dev. 0.29
n 16
1968
Bottom
7.2
0.49
16
1971
Surface Bottom
7.7 7.4
0.35 0.33
14 13
Surface
7.7
0.18
21
1974
Bottom
7.5
0.18
14
B-27
-------
c
g
rH
O
C
fl
,4
CJ
QJ fi3
e o
H
QJ 4->
X! M
4-1 CJ
TJ
C QJ
tn
S-l C*
QJ -H
QJ TJ
6 Q)
! cn
co >,
ra
e c
O rfl
4J
4-1
O
in
LD
H
QJ
rH
X)
(C
M CO
QJ in
4J O
QJ
! QJ
O XI
"^ E
3
OJ f4
O
(0 QJ
i j i f-1
V-l 4-1
tn io
H
QJ
x; TJ
4-J QJ
C rH
H O
5 C
O -H
x:
co O
tn
rO 'I
4-1 <£
tfl
1)
-0 'J
O D
-H
e
QJ T5
X! 4J
U CO
tn
4-1
(0
O
H
rH
H
CO
4-1
_£
rH Q-
03 en
4J 0
o x;
4-1
O 0)
CJ fO
os x;
CL
05
rH O
o x;
CO &<
(0
H
C
O
e
5
QJ
4J
rfl
j_i
-P
-H
Z
0)
4J
-H
S-l
4-1
H
Z
ffl
X! V-J
4J (D
0,4-1
0) 0)
Q e
QJ
4-^
ft
Q
C
O
-H
4-1
CN CT\ O CTl
CM PO VD CNCNrH rHCNCTl
m VD o"*
CN CN rH
CN T VO
in co oo omo OCNO
. +i . . +, . . +i
oo in CN r-- '-o oo ro CN vo
rH rH rH
O kO CN
rH rH
m oo o
T"~^ CD "^J* VO CO CD
rH O « O
O ^T +1 O O +1 rH rH -H
"» r~- o
»
rH O rH
CO
LO CN
VD
CN -31 rH
ro ro +i r- r~ ft ro in +i
«3* oo ro
VO "3* CN CN O rH
vovo in vo t~~ CM CM , i
rH in CN
o o m in m o
VO «»O i 1
CN vo +i r^ vo -H f- o> -n
rH in ro ro ro rH
«a* vo r~
ro
VD 0 rH
mo+i a o o CM CN o
+1 +1
OCNOO CNCNO rOOOCN
o 4.) " ^> ' ^^
3 a. o c
f-"C Q) Z -H
> C/! > > W
CD CJ CJ (0
T) Ti T3 CQ
* * M
T3 Tl Ti QJ
4-1 4-1 4-lS
to i/i cn O
rH + | -f | rf- 1 J
-««= x x x
r^ o
ro vo in VO "* rH
o « i -*-! in ^ +i
OO CA ro ro ro vo
rH rH VO rH rH T
oo ro
rH rH
in CN
OO OO rH rH O rH
-H +1
vo ro CN CN ro CN
rH rH rH rH
in ro
rH rH
in CN
*3* CN O O
o o
rH CN +1 H rH -H
r- rH
rH rH
r~- o>
*
in CN
rH I1 +1 O\ CF\ +1
ro oo
ro ^r in *r
rH CO rH rH rO
rH
^ ro
CN CN in o
o o
r- r- +i CN CN +i
0 rH rH CN
f-- CN
rH
0 rH
.
ro ro o rH rH O
+! -H
O O 00 rH rH rH
O rH
O CO O CO
*~* '-* ^
VO ro VO ro QJ
rH II 0 || S
1 Z 1 Z O
4-1 > J
a, o
QJ Z '
CO > > QJ
Q) QJ C rH
03 TJ O T3
H -O
W -H
4-1 [ i ^
W t/1 -H U
m +i 4-1 Q c
=»= X X (0
p1- vo
o m CN ^j4 vo o
O ro -H CN CN +1
rH rH rH VD VO CTl
rH rH fN CN
rH VD
rH
o-\ co
r^ o CN r ro o
+1 +1
CN r~ o r-» vo CN
rH rH rH rH
rH rH
r- rH
in ro r*- co
o o
CN rO +1 rH rH -H
ro r-
»
CM rH
CT>
T
o
rH CM
CN rH +1 ^T CO +1
o^ * ro
tri f\j \^ ^^* «
CN "=3* VO CN CN 'J*
CN CM
CO CM
00 CN ro ro
o o
T,H VD +1 CO CO +1
rH rH rH rT
in co
rH
in rH
oo o o in in o
+1 -H
rH CM rO rH rH in
rH rH
O CO O CO
^^ < s
rH rr vo ro
0 || 0 ||
1 Z 1 Z
4-1 > ~
a, o c
OJ Z -H
CO > > (/J
QJ QJ rO
T3 T3 £3
r4
T3 t3 QJ
4J 4J a
to co a,
*! +1 +1 D
=«*= x x
B-28
-------
Aquatic Ecology
*
*
Q)
CU
-P
ft
0)
co
c
o
in
Tl
C
nJ
ro
en
C
O
H
-P
(0
-P
Ul
,-1
O
V-i
-P
tn
H
E
Q)
x;
0
0)
o
C
o
Ul
" 03
VO rg
rH
rH
^ id
U
-P
rH flJ
-P O
O -H
Id rH
CU -H
« CO
CU
4->
m
x:
rH ft
id ui
-P 0
o x:
EH CX.
-P
U 0)
id -P
a> id
<* x;
. ft
01
rH O
o x:
a 04
-H
c
o
|
-P
a)
M
-P
2
cu
-P
-H
i-i
-P
z
U]
f^ it
-P (U
ft4J
<1J 01
Q E
0)
-P
03
Q
C
O
H
-p
id
4J
CO
o\ co ^ ro
in ^ o oo
vo cr> r-» r>-
CN rH rH
o m r- r--
f- P* oo !»
rr o vo o
. . . .
O CN O O
CN OA r^ co
in
in m ^r m
. . . .
r» ^ ro ro
o in rH in
CN rH rH rH
x-s
CU
rH
Tf
jgj
O O w» O O
r~ r- v-i r- r~
o o a) o o
i 131^-1
4J -> 4-> O-P c 4-> -
ft C ft 1-3 ft-H pi C
OJ -H CO (U Ul Q) -H
cowco-'COidcoui
id c CQ (0
ffl O CO
H (U
(H Ul rH M
Q) -H TJ 0)
3 > t> ft
O -H -H ft
rH t-3 LO Q ro J2 ^* *I3
** ** ^= -^ ^=
ft
3
0)
4J
H
rH
>H
(U
/^
ft
Ul
g
id
)_i
0>
o
}-|
r\
H
g
c
-H
Ul
c
o
,H
-P
-i
rd Q)
-P
rH -H
ft
O
XI
E
a,
-P 'Ji
a E
cu id
CO rH
Cn
C O
O )H
o
C -H
CD E
rd C
S-l 0)
H »H
O id
ui
U]
c:
O
03
0) M
O -P
n c
C 0)
o o
M-l CJ
o
Ul
(d
XI
VI U)
H
.. 03 3
r- tl w
rH
rH 0)
v oj x:
O -P
Q) -H
H E E
XI (U O
(d x: >-i
EH U «W
B-29
o o
> -p
H (0
-P O
O -H
lO rH
K M
4J
It
rH "ft
o! Ul
-P 0
o x:
EH 04
A.'
0 0)
OJ -P
cu id
pi x:
ft
Ul
rH O
o x;
CO CU
m
H
c
o
(U
4J
OJ
^(
-p
0)
-p
H
V-l
H
^
03
Q
C
O
H
LJ
id
j
co
m i
CO 1
ro |
r- rH
H rH
CN CN
00 O
rH rH
vo n
r- r-
in co
CN "»
o m
*
rH rH
r-i 00
O 0
1 1
P -P
ft O
a; o
CO
^
3
t\ ^^
U
O ^
H
0)
rH 1
VO 1
00 1
o in
o b
CN CN
^* ^*
rH O
TJ" f^
00 ^*
rH rH
CN rH
m CN
CNCO
rH rH
rH 00
0 O
1 1
-P -P
ft O
0) O
CO
0) >i
rH rH
13 C
TJ O
H
Xi S to
p ^
3 T3 V-I
O C O
CO OJ <4H
in :
CN I
0 I
rH 1
00 00
CN 00
rH rH
in ro
rH O
m co
co cn
CM
O ro
CN rH
O^ O
O rH
rH OO
O O
1 1
P 4-1
ft U
0) O
CO
U)
£t rg
V-I 0)
O C
Cn -H
rQ
rH E
rH O
tf C_)
0 1
0 1
rH 1
rH 1
P» rH
CN r~-
rH rH
in ro
CN O
CN rH
vo co
CN
oo ro
«
T rH
ro ro
rH rH
rH 00
0 O
1 1
4-> ±>
ft U
CU O
CO
>,
id
3-*
CU =«=
U)
3
(Q
U
-------
Aquatic Ecology
simply stress the importance of the upper basins of this lake
as phosphate regulators. This is generally attributed to the
extensive macrophyte beds and their associated epiphytic algae
along with the greater diatom populations in this basin (Allanson
et al., 1973).
7. Phosphorus (Total Hydrolysable Phosphate).
Total phosphate tends to follow rather closely the general
scheme for soluble reactive phosphate. During stratification,
the greatest concentration is found near the bottom but as mixing
occurs the concentration is uniform in the vertical water column.
Table 4.16 shows that all stations had similar surface concen-
trations on September 7. There is a tendency for an increase
in total phosphates as the fall progresses, perhaps indicating
an increased algal biomass. This same trend can be traced in
the upper basin. The higher soluble reactive phosphate levels
are closely paralleled with higher total phosphate (greater algal
biomass) and as the soluble reactive phosphate declines, so does
the total P04.
8. Nitrogen
The forms of nitrogen present in lake waters may be
grouped as:
(1) molecular nitrogen (N_) in solution;
(2) organic nitrogen compounds, including decomposition
products (ranging from proteins to simple compounds
like amino acids and urea);
(3) ammonia (NH* and NH4
-------
Aquatic Ecology
(4) nitrite (N0~);
(5) nitrate (NO~).
The combined nitrogen of lakes is probably derived mainly from
inflowing water (Hutchinson, 1956). However, recent evidence
shows that precipitation can carry considerable quantities of
nitrogen into a lake (Likens and Bormann, 1974) .
9. Nitrogen (Nitrite).
Nitrites are intermediates in the oxidation or reduction
processes of bacteria. The low concentration of this nutrient
throughout the current investigation suggests that this form of
nitrogen plays a very minor part in the nitrogen dynamics of
Lake Monroe. A more typical year with a longer stratification
period might have yielded a different conclusion.
10. Nitrogen (Nitrate).
The extremely low concentrations of nitrate-N found through-
out the reservoir is surprising when one views the stream data for
Station 6 on North Fork and those on Middle and South Forks of
Salt Creek (Tables 4.7 and 4.17). The efficiency of the macro-
phytes, etc. in removing this nutrient is obvious. These
extremely low readings do not coincide with Allanson's mean
value of 124 ug/1 NCU-N for 1971. Only when the water begins
to cool and light decreases does one see an appreciable increase
in nitrate concentration (Station 1 on Nov. 6).
11. Nitrogen (Ammonia).
Ammonia is produced by practically all heterotrophic bacteria
B-31
-------
Aquatic Ecology
in the course of organic decomposition. This explains the
large accumulation of ammonia during stratification on the
bottom of the lake, as seen at Station 1 (Table 4.15), The
ammonia also became uniformly distributed during the fall mixing.
Large amounts can leave the system at this time and may explain
the decrease in ammonia concentrations during October. However,
several algae are capable of utilizing this nutrient as well
(Hutchinson, 1957). When one looks at the surface concentration
across the lake (Table 4.16), there is no apparent trend to the
varying concentrations.
12. Silicate
Silica is the most abundant acidic substance other than
bicarbonates in lakes, and is of immense significance as a
major nutrient for diatoms. At the pH values of natural water,
Silica occurs mainly as ortho silicate (reactive) in an undis-
sociated condition (Hutchinson 1957).
The distribution of silicate throughout the lake is puzzling,
The data indicate that the high concentrations at Station 6 and
the Middle and South Forks (Table 4.17) are effectively removed
as the water moves down through these upper basins. However,
the gradual increase of reactive silicates from Station 4 to 1
(Table 4.16) is difficult to explain. On November 6, sampling
again showed the greater concentration of silicate at Station 1.
The apparent difference in silicates throughout the basins
has two possible explanations: (1) the respective diatom
B-32
-------
Aquatic Ecology
populations of the basins may vary considerably, with the lower
basin having the least diatoms; or (2) this difference may
depend upon the morphometric slope and depth of the respective
basins. This problem needs more investigation, specifically
because the relation of phytoplankton distribution and abundance
to the silicate concentration is not clear.
13. Oxygen
There is a close relationship between the thermal regime
and the distribution of dissolved oxygen. This thermal regime
affects both the concentration of the gas dissolved in the water
and its distribution in the water column.
Figures 4.5 and 4.6 compare the temporal distribution of
oxygen at these stations. One must agree with the statement of
Allanson et al. (1973), that "rapid changes in the distribution
of dissolved oxygen are linked directly with the thermal regime."
During the midsummer mixing of the basins, the oxygen is evenly
distributed in the water column. As the water cools during the
fall, the concentration of oxygen increases due to its increased
solubility.
Allanson found no significant change in the dissolved oxygen
content between the period of 1968 and 1971. Only in the deeper
Salt Creek channel does one find any serious oxygen depletion.
The relative volume of this old creek bed is minor, though, in
comparison to the basins. The 1974 oxygen concentrations agree
with the findings of Allanson et al. (1973).
B-33
-------
Aquatic Ecology
QJ
EH
0)
fl
H
rtf
T3
^
,
o
c
o
u
CM
o
II
U)
0
tN
T)
> >
O rH
;a o
1 (0 _+.
ITS Ul -*
:t -rl
O '
ft (MO
' S H
t--'
o rH
o p
. 1A 1 U ...-
H r\ a -*
i Tt -H ,
r n
'
' ~T n! E <\|-
" 4-> 0,
UJ 'J,
^ fO .^v-
H °
C
C
' "~ * ~
3 (M -* >J3
t
p*
12
o
fH
OO
rH
, 0-
H
*
^O
rH
en
C
O
H
-P
fl
-P
CO
o
ffl
W
1
^
C^
0
^ 00
X
o
Ti >^J
O
H
o J-.
U)
M
H
CM-
E
P.
O.
...-*--..
V'~ ""**
. . . - «^^ % ^ t
O ' ' ' ' ' 1 » ' 1
o
.0
*^*
' S
HI
H
(\J
' rvj
oj
O
(M
O fvJ -^j1" ^-O co
O P<
rt rH*1 ' ' ""
LO
sT en'
-4- 0
13
?S vo-
'-3 O
1 >
f\ ra -)--
t H
Q
rt R ,
-PP. ^
t/1 P4
-1
""'f'-*(- *.«,«,
- ----^
':\
" »
w
** -J. \.
'
' i i > 1 1 i 1 1 1
o
E-1
VO
,
H X
fe O
-O
-------
TJ
Aquatic Ecology
4J
-U
G
*
c
H
(0
cq
o
75
H
Hi
*)
f3
0)
bO
>>
X
0
O
W
rt
13
Pi
P.
o
_
i
ay
vo.
_
-*..
rvi-
VJ
C
r *....*...
X f "> **^ "" J > i < -*^i J TU «M J- vO to
ifN
fl
5 £
^ X
C^ ^3
***»
*~* O > fl>
o o >
tAj^ ^ *0
P< ^fc W
M rU ^t vo CO o
,
.-*"
"^o
o
^
'H
Pi
4;
o
>)
m
vO
V
0)
M
D>
fe
^^
-H
0}
n
«.
0)
o
J.-J
r-y
u>
C
o
-H
n)
4J
07
o ^
^ 1 o
wo*
1 10 ^
H M
Q
5fl *
01 Pi
p<
C
o
X
fi
O i
1° °°-
x"
o
c*.
iH TJ VO-
' 0
>> >
H r-t
4S ^
I W
fH H
U° *-
a i;
4> Pf
") M,
O
O
^"^''T**^*'***'!^]^!* _,K -- J.
" ** "
i^
\-.-.~.
*"~*"~*^«.^
* H
)
"* >1 co'
N » X
»
0 P, >
*~* 9 r-t
PJ . UJ O
OJ P, 1 10 J-
E -* «J
« Ifc -rl
c^ n
rvj 4> c
01 Pi
p.
O O-
nj
C
c^ o
«
M) j
> > .
^ H r-l
3 O J-.
-^ 0. rj Ul
(MB 1 10
« .f -r4
l-« It Q
"\ or
(M at a
*> P,
nJ w kl< __
>J OT
o
^*-*..
*'^**^ * £*«
.-_.~.^
^*^
) f>J J- \O CO O
^,^ j_r--a
^«te^ ^fc
"***"<'l**^\
9
\ v v
'"*.
*..*.*..»..,
L
r i i i i i i i i i r
f\l -^ vo *X5 O
H
vO
nl
*
^-.
> »
*
Pi
.0 e
(V 01
*
AX
rf
.
f>j
_~
-^ o
Tu'ri
. R
41
-O E-t
f\l
CO
H
-------
Aquatic Ecology
D. ORGANISMS
Methods of biological assessment of the lake waters are
described in Table 4.18.
1. Phytoplanktqn
A list of net phytoplankton from Lake Monroe is given in
Table 4.19. Nannoplankton algae identified from a 19 October
1974 sample are listed in Table 4.20.
With few exceptions, the diatoms, Melosira, Fragilaria,
and Asterionella and the chrysophyte, Dinobryon divergens were
the dominant forms on all sampled dates and at each depth.
Diatoms, Dinobryon, and the blue-green algae, Anabaena, were
most abundant in 57, 38 and 10 percent, respectively, of the
samples counted.
Correlation coefficients were calculated by Schaefer (1974)
for relationships between selected algae and three environmental
variables: light, temperature, and dissolved oxygen. Melosira.
and Dinobryon showed little correlation with temperature and
oxygen. Fragilaria was correlated with dissolved oxygen and had
low negative correlation with light (as did Melosira and Dinobryon)
Asterionella showed high positive correlation with light (r=0.5139)
and negative correlation with dissolved oxygen (r=0.6177).
Schaefer (1974) also computed the Shannon-Weaver index of
general diversity (H), which indicated that one or two forms were
predominant in the upper lake levels (0-3 meters). At greater
depths, increased diversity was found. The index ranged from
0.0473 to 0.9050, indicating that the composition and abundance
B-36
-------
Aquatic Ecology
of plankton populations were highly variable and not static.
Well stratified algal populations existed in areas not circulated
by wind action (e.g., Station 4), and during calm periods
(Station 3).
Large-scale differences were apparent when plankton popu-
lations from the three basins were compared. (Tables 4.21, 4.22,
and 4.23). For example, the middle basin may contain more plankton
organisms per liter than the upper basin or much less than the
upper basin. It may become essential in further work to regard
the reservoir as three separate, functional units, since dramatic
chemical plankton changes occur in moving from the upper basin to
the middle basin, and again to the lower basin.
Both the large number of phytoplankton genera present and
the prevalance of diatoms and Dinobryon suggest a low electrolyte
situation. Nutrient loadings above current levels would serve
to bring about the dominance of fewer algae and a decrease in
community diversity and stability. Blue-green algae would
probably show the largest increases since they are capable of
fixing atmospheric nitrogen, and are not retarded by low
concentrations of dissolved nitrogen that occur in summer and
early fall (see Table 4.15). One of those blue-green algae,
Anabaena is presently dominant in 10% of the sample.
Seasonal changes in phytoplankton population density
were measured by pigment estimation, which has been found to
be a good indicator of nutrient conditions and an accurate
estimator of population density and primary production (Brylinsky
B-37
-------
Aquatic Ecology
Table 4:18
Methods of Biological Assessment
1.
Phytoplankton:
Sampled with Kemmerer sampler operated at various
depths and preserved with Lugol's solution.
Qualitative sampling with vertical hauls of a
Wisconsin standard plankton net.
One ml aliquots of concentrated samples were placed
in a Sedgwick-Rafter cell and enumerated under 100X
magnification with a Leitz Wetzlar Ortholux micro-
scope.
Nannoplankton were observed with a Nikon inverted
phase microscope.
Phytoplankton/1 = cell count X 1000mm3 125 ml ,nnn
50mm (1.74mm) (1mm) (2) V (ml) X
where:
1000mm3 = volume of Sedgwick-Rafter cell
50mm = length of Sedgwick-Rafter cell
1.74mm = width of strip counted
1mm = height of Sedgwick-Rafter cell
2 = number of strips counted
V = sampled volume of water in mis.
125ml = concentrated volume of sample
a) Chlorophyll determination
Pigment estimations were determined by the Strickland
and Parson (1972) technique of dissolving 0.34 u Millipore
filter paper following filtration in 10 ml of 90% acetone
solvents for about 20 hours in the dark, then stirring and
centrifugation. The top supernatant liquid was decanted
into a 1 cm cell. Readings were made on a Beckman DU-2
spectrophotometer at 665, 645 and 630 mu. Triplicate
determinations were made at each depth and samples were
taken from each meter 0-8. The results were then
calculated, using the equations formulated by Strickland
and Parsons (1972):
Chi a = 11.6 E665 - 1.31 E645 - 0.14 E630
Chi b = 20.7 E645 - 4.34 E665 - 4.42 E630
Chi c = 55 E630 - 4.64 E665 - 16.3 E645
continued,
B-38
-------
Aquatic Ecology
b) Algal Bioassay Tests
Method I
The March 6-10, 1973 experiment was made, using water
taken from the surface at the causeway with additions of
three different levels of phosphate (PO.-P) 5, 15, and 50
ug/1 and of three different levels of nitrate (NCK-N) 75,
225, and 750 ug/1, which were added into 300 ml B.O.D.
bottle in 250 ml of water. Seven different concentrations
of samples and one opaque control sample, were inoculated
with 1 ml of Naai,CO,, and placed into an environmental
chamber on a shaker set of 100 rpm under 450 + 20 foot-
candle illumination for 4 continuous day's incubation.
At 6 hours, 25 hours, 48 hours, 72 hours, and 96 hours,
after incubation, 50 ml of sample was removed from the
bottle and filtered through 0.45 y Millipore membranes
at a vacuum of 0.25 atmospheres. The filters were placed
onto an aluminum planchett for desiccation, then exposed
to HC1 fumes for 10 minutes to remove inorganic Cllf. The
filters were counted on a Geiger-Miiller counter.
Method II
The October 1-3, 1974 experiment was conducted, using
the standard algal assay procedure (EPA, August 1971).
The water sample was taken from the surface at Station 3
with two different concentrations of phosphate (PO^-P),
5 ug/1 and 25 ug/1, and two different concentrations of
nitrate (NO-j-N) , 25 ug/1 and 125 ug/1, added into a 2
gallon jar with 2 liters of lake water. This constituted
8 different levels of concentration. There were:
1) Control (pure lake water), 2) Control plus 5 ug/1
phosphate, 3) Control plus 25 ug/1 phosphate, 4) Control
plus 25 ug/1 nitrate, 5) Control plus 125 ug/1 nitrate,
6) Control plus 5 ug/1 phosphate and 25 ug/1 nitrate,
7) Control plus 5 ug/1 phosphate and 125 ug/1 nitrate,
and 8) Control plus 25 ug/1 phosphate and 125 ug/1
nitrate. Then the 8 jars with different concentrations
of nitrogen and phosphorous were placed into an environ-
mental chamber with previously described conditions.
After an initial measurement, every 24 hrs. 50 ml of sample
were removed from each bottle. Triplicate measurements
of each concentration were made. Each sample was filtered
through 0.45 u Millipore Membrane at a vacuum of 0.25
atmosphere and washed with distilled water to remove
inorganic C11*. The filters were counted using an LS 100
Scintilliation Counter. The counts after corrections
were coverted to obtain relative rates of growth to
the control.
continued
B-39
-------
Aquatic Ecology
Table 4.18 (continued)
2.
Zooplankton:
Sampled with a metered Clarke-Bumpus trawl equipped
with a no. 18 wire mesh bucket. Integrated vertical
hauls as well as horizontal tows were taken at depths
of 0, 3, 6 arid 9 meters. Samples were concentrated
to a volume of 125 ml and entire 1 ml sub-samples were
counted on a Sedgwick-Rafter cell at 40X using a
Leitz Wetzlar microscope.
Total volume of concentrated sample (ml)
Zooplankton/m3 = X zooplankton/ml of cone, sample 1000 liter
volume of water sampled (liters) x m"3
B-40
-------
Aquatic Ecology
Table 4.19:
Phytoplankton Organisms Identified from Lake Monroe,
June-August 1974.
Cyanophyceae
Chroococcales
Chroococcus
*Coelospaerium
Dactylococcopsis
Gloeocapsa
Gomphosphaeria
Marssoniella
Merismopedia
Microcystis
Chaemaesiphonales
Pleurocapsa
Osciliatoriales
*Anabaena
Lyngbya
Oscillatoria
Chlorophyceae
Chlorococcales
Ankistrodesmus
Crucigenia
Lauterborniella
Oocystis
Pediastrum
Scenedesmus
Tetraedron
Tetrasporales
Gloeocystis
Volvocales
Volvox
Zygnematales
Closterium
Cosmarium
Gonatozygon
Micrasterias
Spirogyra
Staurastrum
Chrysophyceae
*Dinobryon
Mallomonas
Ochromonas
Xanthophyceae
Asterogloea
Ophiocytium
Bacillariophyceae
Centrales
Cyclotella
*Melosira
Stephanodiscus
Terpisnoe
Pennales
Amphiprora
Amphora
*Asterionella
Cymbella
*Fragilaria
Gyrosigma
Navicula
Neidium
Nitzschia
Surirella
Synedra
Tabellaria
*most commonly encountered phytoplankters.
B-41
-------
Aquatic Ecology
Table 4.20:
Nannoplankton Algae and Protozoa. Identified from a
19 October 1974 Lake Monroe sample at Station 4 (Upper Basin]
Melosira italica
Melosira sp.
Dinobryon divergens
Dinobryon bavaricum
Stephanodiscus sp.
Merismopedia tenuissima
Merismopedia minor
Ankistrodesmus sp.
Cryptomonas sp.
Fragilaria crotonensis
Chroococcus limneticus
Chroococcus minor
Mallomonas akrokomas
Mallomonas sp.
Coelastrum sp.
Asterionella formosa
Anabaena lemmermanni
Coelosphaerium kutzingianum
Stombidium viride
B-42
-------
Table 4.21:
Phytoplankton organisms per liter from
integrated vertical samples, 15 June 1974
Aquatic Ecology
Dinobryon
Asterionella
Fragilaria
Melosira
Neidium
Ceratium
Chrysophyceae
Pediastrum
Gomphosphaeria
small Chlorococcales
peritrichs
Pleurosigma
Totals
% Dinobryon
% diatoms
% blue-green algae
(Middle Basin)
station 3
X/i
1562
4778
233
144
18
539
18
18
18
162
18
-
7508
20.8
68.9
0.2
a
76
560
76
51
25
102
25
25
25
25
25
-
559
(Upper Basin)
station 4
X/Jt, a
1035
3506
230
374
-
201
29
-
29
58
-
29
5518
18.8
75.0
0.5
0
490
81
122
-
41
41
-
41
81
-
41
410
B-43
-------
Aquatic Ecology
Table 4.22:
Phytoplankton organisms per liter
From integrated vertical samples
28 June 1974
Fragilaria
Synedra
Melosira
Asterionella
Dinobryon
small chlorococcales
Microcystis
(Lower Basin
station 1
X/£
483
39
39
248
575
91
39
Anabaena 1280
peritrichs , 52
Ceratium
f
Staurastrum
Gornphosphaeria
Crucigenial
Stephanodiscus
Navicula
Gloeocapsa
Pleurosigna
Ankistrodesmus
Surirella
Chrysophyceae
Totals
% Dinobryon
% diatoms
% blue-green algae
157
52
13
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
2835
20.3
28.5
45.6
a
166
18
18
18
111
18
18
333
37
74
37
18
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
794
(Middle Basin)
station 3
X/£
599
240
1030
814
264
96
-
24
-
383
240
-
24
96
96
24
24
24
24
-
3760
7.0
77.7
1.3
a
373
0
34
68
373
68
-
34
-
136
0
-
34
0
68
34
34
34
34
-
305
(Upper Basin)
station 4
X/£
86
86
115
86
1610
-
-
230
345
316
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
28
2902
55.5
12.8
7.9
a
122
41
163
122
410
-
-
163
0
203
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
41
41
B-44
-------
Table 4.23:
Phytoplankton organisms per liter
from integrated vertical samples
5 July 1974
Aquatic Ecology
Tabellaria
Asterionella
Nitzschia
Navicula
Cymbella
small Chlorococcales
Ceratium
Synedra
Fragilaria
peritrichs
Chrysophyceae
Gloeocapsa
Microcystis
Amphora
Dinobryon
Melosira
Stephenodiscus
Anabaona
Stauastrum
Synedra
Crucigenia
Totals
%Dinobryon
% diatoms
% blue-green algae
(Lower Basin)
station 1
X/£
594
441
19
399
19
38
57
38
1974
307
38
57
57
19
192
651
498
2050
77
-
7530
2.5
61.3
28.7
a
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
(Middle Basin)
station 3
X/l
-
166
-
11
-
-
33
-
796
387
11
44
11
-
1360
-
-
2708
44
44
11
6157
22.1
16.5
44.9
a
-
16
-
16
-
-
16
-
156
47
16
31
16
-
109
-
-
109
0
31
16
234
(Upper Basin)
station 4
X/SL
-
205
-
-
-
20
123
82
328
801
-
20
20
-
7944
862
-
1663
28
-
82
12340
64.4
11.3
13.8
a
-
58
-
-
-
29
116
116
58
87
-
29
29
-
784
58
-
261
29
-
116
1393
B-45
-------
Aquatic Ecology
and Mann, 1973). The correlation of estimation between phyto-
plankton chlorophyll a and biomass, as indicated by Brylinsky
and Mann, was 0.98. This value indicates that it estimated
chlorophyll a almost as well as phytoplankton populations. The
correlation between photosynthetic efficiency and chlorophyll a.
was 0.92. All these suggest that pigment estimation constitutes
a good means of estimating primary production and population
density (Brylinsky and Mann, 1973).
Pigment estimations were made from August to October
(Figure 4.7). The highest total chlorophyll reading was found in
the beginning of August. The lowest measurement was taken in the
middle of September. Maximum difference, excluding the month
of August, was less than 8mg/m3, which was insigificant compared
to the variance of any single measurement (Figure 4.8). The
exceedingly high variance shown in the month of August was
probably due to strong patchiness of aggregated phytoplankton
biomass at certain depths in the water column. Maximum
chlorophyll content was frequently found from 0-3 meters in
depth. Little vertical difference was obtained after August's
measurements, indicating circulation in the lake.
An increase in population density is generally associated
with increases in light extinction as measured by the minimum
extinction coefficient. However, no strong correlation was
found between them in Monroe Reservoir. Poor correlation is
likely due to the contribution to varying quantities of organic
and inorganic detritus and dissolved colored matter (Bindloss
B-46
-------
Aquatic Ecology
et al., 1972). It may also be influenced by changes in species
composition of the phytoplankton.
No significant relation was found between population density
and nitrogen concentrations, but a negative correlation was seen
with soluble reactive phosphorus and also with reactive silicate
(Figure 4.9 and 4.10). This appeared to be an immerse relation
to what Brylinsky and Mann found. If, however, total phosphorus
was plotted against population density, a strong positive cor-
relation would result. Brylinsky and Mann found the following
correlations between chlorophyll a and mean nutrient concen-
trations: soluble reactive phosphorus, +0.78; nitrate, +0.59;
and total nitrogen, +0.49. Exactly the opposite correlation
found here may be due to the rapid consumption of dissolved
phosphorus and reactive silicate by phytoplankton populations
in Lake Monroe. This suggests that a great increase of aquatic
macrophytes competing for available nutrients would essentially
control phytoplankton blooms in the upper basin. Similarly, if
the weeds were removed, increases in phytoplankton would result.
Two separate algal assay tests were conducted during March
6-10, 1973, and October 1-3, 1974. The techniques applied to
the two experiments were somewhat different, and are stated
separately in Table 4.18. The readings for the first method
were corrected and plotted in Figure 4.11; results of Method II
are shown in Figure 4.12.
The two bioassay experiments show similar results. The
addition of phosphate (PO -P) stimulates a rapid rate of growth.
B-47
-------
Aquatic Ecology
Prolonging the time of incubation stimulates a much higher growth
'rate. The addition of nitrate, after an initial increase,
produces no significant increase in growth rate (Figure 4.12).
The addition of phosphate and nitrate shows a continuous increase
in rates of production with longer incubation periods. It is
shown that the rate of growth of combined nutrients has a 1.7
times higher rate than the control (Figure 4.12).
To summarize the data, the increase of phosphate content
is of great importance in the growth of algae in Monroe Reservoir.
Limiting the phosphate (PO.-P) input to the reservoir is the
best method of controlling algal blooms.
2. Zooplankton
In the fall of 1971, the zooplankton population was
dominated by a calanoid, a cyclopoid, their copepodites and
nauplii. Rotifers, especially Keratella, were abundant.
Daphnia laevis and Daphnia retrocurva were both present, although
less important. Ceratium was locally abundant (Allanson et al.,
1973). Allanson et al. also concluded that a pelagic community
of zooplankton is present in Lake Monroe, even though the reservoir
is fairly shallow.
Table 4.24 lists zooplankton observed from June to August,
1974. Tables 4.25 and 4.26 show variations in integrated vertical
samples between stations. Table 4.27 gives populations at dis-
crete levels.
Codonella, a vase-shaped ciliate, showed wild population
fluctuations, varying between 0 and 60,000 organisms/m3 in
B-48
-------
Aquatic Ecology
Figure 4.7: ,-, i_ -, -,
Phytoplankton population density as mg. Chlorophyll
per nr vs, depth and temperature.
(I)
August 12 Chi. mg/rrT
0.5 1.0
(I) ,
September 16 Chi. mg/m
Q.5 1.0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Temp. 21 22 23 24 25°C
Temp. 21°C 21.5
September 28(1) Chi. mg/m"
0.5 1.0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
October 8 (I) Chi. mg/m'
0.5 1.0
1
2
.3
4
5
6
7
8
Temp. 18°C
19°C
15°C Temp. 16°C
B-49
-------
Aquatic Ecology
Figure 4.8:
Variations in population density shown as ing.
Chlorophyll per m3 (n = 9)
cm. a
IS
CM. b
CM. c
/o
10
«. J°
/o
-f
U .Sept I Sept ife Sept 3.t I Stp-t 16 Sept at* oc.t 8 Oct
B-50
-------
Aquatic Ecology
Figure 4.9:
Regression between Total Chlorophyll and PO4~P (soluble reactive
phosphorus).
\n u3/l
/.O
-------
Aquatic Ecology
Figure 4.10:
Regression between Total Chlorophyll and reactive Silicate,
ISOO
SIO,
10 00
T= -
1.0
Chlorophyl I
B-52
-------
Aquatic Ecology
Figure 4.11:
Algal bioassay incubation test, March 6, 1972.
-" Li«iVvt Control (
OT»AQUE C.ONTROL ( )
LflKE RON'ROt
/oo
-time
B-53
-------
Aquatic Ecology
Figure 4.12:
Algal assay with different additions of nutrients.
1-7
Relative.
rate. cV
0
i
/. Control
2. Control f 0.005."i<]?Ov/L
3. Control t
V- Control i- 0. o2S;«
5. Control f 0.125m
*. Control
i 0- OOSMtJ^C., f 0. W-
7. Control ^
r 0. 005*3 TOiyt-o.
8. Control
-t- o. o^crTo^ +- o.
21 Hours
Hours
B-54
-------
Aquatic Ecology
one month. The dinoflagellate Ceratium, as well, showed great
variation in population size.
A very diverse assemblage of rotifers was found (12 genera).
Of these, Keratella cochlearis and Polyarthra vulgaris were
most common.
One calanoid and two cyclopoid copepods were found. Their
larval stage, the nauplius, was quite abundant throughout June
and July.
Bosmina coregoni was the most abundant Cladoceran, reaching
a density of 140,000/m3 on 24 June 1974 at a depth of 3m at
station 4. It declined logarithmically after this peak.
Two species of Daphnia were encountered, retrocurva and
laevis. D. retrocurva was much more abundant and also showed
pronounced helmet development (cyclomorphosis).
Other Cladocera were more rare than Bosmina and Daphnia,
although Pseudosida and Holopedium were at times quite common.
Genera peculiar to a littoral habitat are discussed in the
macrophyte section.
It is apparent from Tables 4.25 and 4.26, that in lake areas
not widely separated, differences can be found in their plankton
populations. Stations 3 and 4 supported similar populations, but
they had developed independently. The upper (and sometimes the
middle) basin contains the greatest density of zooplankters,
both being larger than populations in the lower basin. In
addition, the percentage of Cladocera of the total zooplankton
population could be nearly identical (cf. 15 June), or vary
markedly (cf. 24 June), from station to station.
B-55
-------
Aquatic Ecology
TABLE 4.24:
Zooplankton in Lake Monroe
June - August 1974.
Protozoa
*Codonella
*Ceratium
*Difflugia cristata
*peritrich
Rotifera
Ascomorpha
Asplanchna
Brachionus
Colurella
Conochilus
Filinia
Gastropus
*Kellicottia
*Keratella cochlearis
Polyarthra euryptera
*Polyarthra vulgaris
Rotatoria
Trichocerca
Cladocerna
+Alona sp.
+Alonella sp.
*Bosmina coregoni
Ceriodaphnia lacustris
+Chydorus sphaericus
*Daphnia laevis
*Daphnia retrocurva
Diaphanosoma leuchtenbirgeanum
*Holopedium gibberum
Leptodora kindtii
+Pleuroxus denticulatus
*Pseudosida bidentata
+Sida crystallina
Copepoda
*Cyclops (2 sp.)
Limnocalanus
*Diaptomus
Ostracoda
*most commonly encountered organisms
+Cladocera associated primarily with
aquatic plants
B-56
-------
Aquatic Ecology
Table 4.25:
Zooplankton Organisms/m3 from integrated vertical samples
(15 June 74)
Codonella
Ceratium
Keratella
Polyarthra
Trichocerca
Colurella
Bosmina
Daphnia retrocurva
Holopedium
Nauplius larvae
Cyclops
Diaptomus
Totals
% Cladocera
(Middle Basin)
Station 3
3125
143000
6250
2344
781
781
30500
3125
3125
14060
2344
781
170216
21.6
(Upper Basin)
Station 4
7500
100000
11250
8750
3750
-
38750
-
-
8750
-
178750
21.7
B-57
-------
Aquatic Ecology
TABLE 4.26:
Zooplankton from an integrated vertical sample,
28 June 74, organisms/m3
Codonella
Ceratium
Keratella
Polyarthra
Trichocerca
Filinia
Conochilus
Kellicottia
Bosmina
Daphnia
retrocurva
Daphnia
laevis
Pseudosida
Holopedium
Nauplius
Cyclops
sp. 1
Cyclops
sp. 2
Diaptomus
Ostracod
Chaoborus
Total
%Cladocera
(Upper Basin)
Station 4
2500
110000
8750
2500
-
2500
-
-
26250
6250
-
1250
1250
10000
1250
1250
2500
-
-
176250
19.8
(Middle Basin)
Station 3
2083
162500
6250
13540
-
1042
14580
-
15625
-
1042
-
-
7292
-
-
1042
4170
-
229166
7.3
(Lower Basin)
Station I
2273
71590
5680
5110
-
3409
1136
568
23925
5110
-
568
2841
4545
-
-
-
-
-
131755
28.4
B-58
-------
Aquatic Ecology
TABLE 4.27:
Vertical Variation in Zooplankton (organisms/m3) at
Station 1. Lower Basin, 28 June 1974.
Codonella
Ceratium
Keratella
Polyarthra
Trichocerca
Filinia
Conochilus
Kellicottia
Bosmina
Daphnia
retrocurva
Daphnia
laevis
Pseudosida
Holopedium
Nauplius
Cyclops
sp. 1
Cyclops
sp. 2
Diaptomus
Chaoborus
Totals
% Cladocera
0 meters
595
20635
6350
1885
-
-
1190
595
3175
290
-
-
992
4266
-
-
198
99
40270
11.1
3 meters
426
14347
4830
4260
142
142
3125
-
20170
2273
852
284
568
2840
142
426
1562
-
56389
51.7
6 meters
2261
67154
7980
5850
133
266
7048
-
9574
798
931
266
665
3058
133
665
133
-
106915
11.4
B-59
-------
Aquatic Ecology
Vertical variation in populations was also found (Table 4.27).
Certain zooplankters are capable of dramatic vertical movements,
usually away from the surface during the day and towards it at
night, which further complicates the pattern of their distribution.
Cladoceran peaks during daylight hours were commonly at 2-3 meters.
As lake water transparency increased during summer, their peak
occurrence was at greater depths. Similar results were found
in 1971 (Allanson et al., 1973).
Similar consequences to that suggested for phytoplankton
species diversity, following nutrient additions, apply here
as well. Large increases in numbers of a few species and a
lower number of total species present would be expected. The
diverse congregation of zooplankters is indicative of low nutrient
conditions. The occurrence of the genus Holopedium in the lake
suggests a low calcium content and oligo- or mesotrophy (Flossr.er,
1972). Secchi disc transparency in a Holopedium lake should be
at least 1.8 meters (which it is). Leptodora, also, by its
presence implies similar conditions. With greater nutrient
loading per area of lake surface, surface blooms of blue-green
algae would develop. The resultant light attenuation from these
blooms would deny sufficient light to certain forms and alter
the composition of the phytoplankton. In turn, any changes in
the phytoplankton would involve the replacement of some zooplankters
(e.g., Holopedium) with more tolerant forms. The increased
eutrophy would place more biomass in undesirable forms and reduce
the energy available to fishes.
B-60
-------
Aquatic Ecology
3. Bacterioplankton
Studies of bacteria in the lower basin were made by Smith
in 1971 (Allanson et al.f 1973). She found a predominance of
Gram negative organisms. Gram positive organisms (Cprynebackterium,
Micrpcoccus, Staphylbcoccus) rarely exceeded 25% of the total
bacterial population. Of the Gram negative organisms, only
two were facultative aerobes. Shigella and Salmonella, both
enteric pathogens, showed maxima of 5.2 and 2.5 percent of the
total population, respectively. Obligate aerobes (Pseudomonas,
Achrobacter, Alcaligenes, Flavobacterium) normally comprised
greater than 80% of the total bacteria.
4. Benthos
No studies on benthic animals have been conducted on Lake
Monroe. Shallow-water insects are an important prey item for
fishes, incorporating animal or plant tissue into larger mass
units. Tubificids, and chironomids as well, serve as food
sources; in addition, they may have profound effects on the
sediment through which they burrow, recycling materials from the
rich organic deposits (Davis, 1974).
5. Macrophytes
Aquatic plant distribution and development in 1974 was very
similar to that found in 1971 (Allanson et al, 1973), yet much
different from that encountered in 1972 by Docauer (1972). (See
Figures 4.13 and 4.14). Macrophytes were well-developed in the
relatively shallow upper basin, especially in the North and
B-61
-------
Aquatic Ecology
Middle Forks of Salt Creek. Allanson et al. (1973) described
two separate communities: a Potamogeton-Najas-Myriophyllum-
Ceratophyllum association found in open water and a Sagitaria-
Potamogeton-Najas grouping in sheltered cover. The Sagittaria
community was found along the margins of the upper and middle
basins, and off the western shore of the lower basin (near
the Fourwinds Marina).
In addition to the plants described in Allanson, Najas
quadalupensis was found to be widespread. It was distributed
across nearly the entire bottom of the lower basin, with the
exception of the deeper channels, probably due to the increased
light penetration at Station 1 (see section on Secchi disc
transparency).
An above-average rainfall in spring would increase reservoir
water level and turbidity resulting in later, and perhaps less,
weed development. Conversely, low stages would permit increased
weed growth.
In 1974, dense growths of Myriophyllum were found in the
upper basin. Weed beds developed slowly until July and then
increased rapidly. The Myriophyllum beds appear to be extremely
important to the reservoir, acting as sediment traps of the silty
flow from the North Fork. Plans to decrease weed beds by various
means, whether for better fishing success or water quality, appear
unwise in light of recent evidence (Mulligan, 1969; Peterson,,
Smith, and Malueg, 1974). Aquatic plants have been demonstrated
to have an antagonistic or antibiotic effect on algae (Hasler and
B-62
-------
Aquatic Ecology
ro
G
QJ
AS
m
Q
I
-H
0
Q)
co
Q)
K
(U
O
C
O
s
co
a
01
-P
a
o
o
ITS
s
-d
G
(0
*
H
0)
M
x:
P
a
0)
0) CO
CO 14
3 (1)
ttf -P
U 0)
X! 0
P S
4J
0)
> O
O -P
eg
Q) T3
M 03
(D XI
CO
CO 0)
G >
O O
H
-P
(0 S
> O
M rH
0) rH
co n)
0
O to
[ 1 jj
CO CO
o o
S S
B-63
-------
Aquatic Ecology
cu
H
fa
.
-4J
a,
0)
CU 0)
tn -p
3 CU
fC £H
u
tn
c
H
tn
to
ffl
cu
cu
X!
EH
CU
X!
-P
tn
C
H
U
O
,£
CO
1
^1
H
0
[>
^1
CU
tn
cu
PS
0)
o
M
C
O
s
cu
CU C
x; o
-P
(0
d)
> 0
O -P
Xt
4J
e ?
0 O
M n
t3 m en
cu
C CU tJ
cu n to
X CU X!
M 3»
to w
Q tn CD
1 C >
WOO
T3 -H O
CU -P
CQ fO £
> O
i tn tO
X! 43 X!
di O W
O
!-i -P -P
o t/) tn
fO O O
S S S
-------
Aquatic
Jones, 1949; Fitzgerald, 199) . Large blooms of the noxious
blue-green algae Anabaena and Microcystis have resulted following
weed removal (Brakke, 1974) .
Primary production in Myriophyllum is mainly accomplished
by only the active photosynthetic leaves forming a canopy near
the water surface. The factors most important in Myriophyllum
net production are light penetration and the distribution of
leaf tissue (Adams, Titus, and McCracken, 1974).
In addition to macrophyte production, there is also an
additional utilization of nutrient inputs and production by the
abundant growths of attached periphyton (especially diatoms) .
Macrophytes and their associated periphyton act together as a
complex, and compete with the phytoplankton for available
nutrients.
Aquatic plants are colonized by an algal-fungal-bacterial
assemblage. In turn, this grouping serves as a substrate for a
very diverse community of animals that either graze on the periphtic
algae and bacteria or prey upon other animals. (All of these
organisms are collectively referred to as Aufwuchs.) Further,
the diverse animal community appears to be very important as a
food source for fish fry and fingerlings.
The animal component of the Aufwuchs, identified from a
29 June 1974 sample, were collected from a Myriophyllum bed.
They included: Cladocera (Daphnia retrocurva, Chydorus sphaericus,
Pleuroxus denticulatus, Sida crystallina, Bosmina coregoni) ,
copepods (Cyclops) , snails, several species of rotifers, ostracods,
B-65
-------
Aquatic Ecology
midges, damselflies and the oligochaete worm, Chaetogaster.
Cladocera were not abundant in the June sample, but showed
increases in September.
6. Fish
Fish stocking began in November 1964, and was completed in
December 1965. Table 4.28 shows a list of species and numbers
of fish introduced.
On January 1, 1967, Monroe Reservoir was opened to fishing.
Annual surveys were conducted for 1968, 1969, and 1970 and 1971
by the Fishery Research section, Indiana Department of Natural
Resources, Division of Fish and Wildlife.
Table 4.29 shows species composition and relative abundance
of fish collected in Monroe Reservoir.
Bluegill is the only sunfish species of any significance
to the fishery. Others are so few in number that they contribute
little except as forage. Bluegill population growth was high.
Yellow perch are increasing rapidly due to lack of predation upon
them and what appears to be ideal habitat. Crappie numbers
fluctuate to some extent but are high enough to provide good
fishing. Although channel catfish reproduction seems to be
limited, an excellent channel cat fishery exists. Carp and
suckers appear to have no threat to the fishery; however, an
adequate predator population must be maintained.
Monroe Reservoir is following the typical aging pattern.
The bass population, which was larger, is now decreasing, a
B-66
-------
Zoology
TABLE 4.28:
Species, size, number and number per acre of fish stocked
in Monroe Reservoir.
Species Size Number Number/acre
Large mouth bass
Blue-gill
Channel catfish
Flathead catfish
Red ear
Northern Pike
Black crappie
6.0-12.5 in.
4.0-7.0 in.
6.0-22.0 in.
1.0-25.0 Ibs.
5.0-6.0 in.
1.0-25.0 in.
9.0-12.0 in.
14,821
2,816
113,275
433
56
48
87
1.38
0.26
10.54
0.04
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
Source: Ridenour, 1972.
B-67
-------
Aquatic Ecology
TABLE 4.29:
Species Composition and Relative Abundance of Fish
Collected in Monroe Reservoir, 1968-1971.
PERCENT OF SAMPLE
SPECIES
Largemouth bass
Bluegill
White crappie
Black crappie
Yellow perch
Yellow bass
Carp
Black bullhead
Yellow bullhead
Channel catfish
White sucker
Spotted sucker
Redear sunfish
Pumpkinseed
Longear sunfish
Green sunfish
Warmouth
Orange- spotted sunfish
Redhorse
Rockbass
Smallmouth bass
Flathead catfish
Northern pike
Total Number of Fish
in Sample
Total Number of Species
Represented
1968
37.3
16.2
0.9
0.4
6.4
*
0.3
0.3
9.0
3.5
9.6
0.1
0.7
*
*
4.9
3.4
0.1
0.6
0.2
*
*
0.1
3,103
18
1969
26.2
38.8
8.9
*
3.7
*
1.7
2.0
0.4
1.9
4.0
3.7
0.7
*
1.4
2.2
1.5
**
0.2
0.1
**
**
*
2,298
19
1970
18.1
24.7
23.5
0.7
11.0
3.4
2.4
1.5
1.5
1.0
4.9
3.1
0.6
0.4
1.0
0.6
1.4
*
0.1
*
*
*
*
2,491
18
1971
23.7
35.5
4.6
2.9
16.9
0.6
1.5
*
0.1
1.2
4.4
0.5
1.6
*
3.3
0.6
1.9
0.1
0.1
*
*
*
*
856
17
*None collected.
*:VLess than 0.1 per cent collected.
Source: Ridenour, 1972.
B-68
-------
Aquatic Ecology
phenomenon that occurs in artificial reservoirs. The 1972 fishery
survey (Ridenour, 1973) indicated the following order of abundance:
bluegill (30.59%), yellow perch (18.38%); largemouth bass (15.23%),
yellow bass (5.56%), warmouth ( ?? ), carp (3.98%), golden shiner
( ?? ); redear sunfish (3.5%) white and black crappie (5%); bull-
heads (brown, yellow, black) (5%), channel catfish (0.96%). This
suggests that Lake Monroe will sustain a good bass population for
a longer period of time.
Yellow perch and yellow bass, which do not have the habitat
preference of largemouth bass, are potential threats to Monroe's
fishery. Predator-prey relationships between northern pike and
yellow perch and between walleye and both yellow perch and
yellow bass suggests that stocking northern pike fingerlings
and walleye fry in Lake Monroe may be a solution (Ridenour, 1972).
E. SUMMARY
(1) Watershed Nashville, Indiana is a major point source
of nutrients on the North Fork. Other sources may contribute
heavily, especially during spring rains. A regional land- and
water-use management is advised.
(2) Lake Monroe Morphometry Three distinct, major basins
are present; mean depth increases from the pond-like upper basin
(above the causeway) to the lower basin (near the dam).
(3) Nutrients Phosphorus and nitrogen in 1974 were lower
than previously reported.
B-69
-------
Aquatic Ecology
(4) Thermal Stratification Cool weather in mid- to
late-summer may bring about isothermal conditions and result
in partial or complete circulation. Allanson et al. (1973)
showed stratification into October in 1971.
(5) Chemistry Hydrogen ion concentrations and conductivity
have not changed much since 1968 or 1971. Alkalinity results did
not agree (1971 results are in error by a factor of 2X).
(6) Secchi Disc Transparency A decline in mean trans-
parency indicates increases in turbidity from 1971-1974, from
added phytoplankton or non-biological particulate matter. Continuous
study of plankton and sedimentary conditions is advised.
(7) Bioassay Experiments demonstrate that in spring algal
growth is limited by phosphorus concentrations and not retarded
by nitrogen. In fall, (October 1974) growth was limited primarily
by phosphorus; additions of nitrate enhanced phytoplankton develop-
ment.
(8) Chlorophyll A strong negative correlation occurred
between chlorophyll a^ and soluble reactive phosphorus and also
with reactive silicates. This indicated a fast uptake of reactive
phosphorus and silicates by the phytoplankton.
(9) Plankton Need for a continuation of studies on
seasonal succession and other quantitative aspects of both phyto-
plankton and zooplankton.
(10) Benthos Need for initiation of studies on benthic
animals and secondary production in general.
B-70
-------
Aquatic Ecology
(11) Macrophytes Aquatic plants, especially in the
shallow, upper basin, appear to effectively compete with the
phytoplankton for available nutrients. Decreases in weed
distribution would result in increased phytoplankton density.
(12) Trophic Status Lake Monroe is a low alkalinity,
oligotrophic system. Whole lake experiments have shown that'
lakes of this type are quite sensitive and respond rapidly to
phosphorus enrichment (Schindler, 1974). Steps must be taken
to avoid phosphorus effluents from entering the reservoir.
Research is currently underway under the directorship of
Dr. David G. Frey with student assistance to establish the
following: (1) a general study of the watershed and lake to
provide a baseline for observing the rate and duration of bio-
logical changes; (2) an understanding of the lake's biology
useful in predicting the probable importance in biotic changes
connected primarily with eutrophication; and (3) special studies
to contribute original information to reservoir biology.
F. REFERENCES
Adams, M.S., J. Titus, and M. McCraken (1974). "Depth Distribution
of Photosynthetic Activity in a Myriophyllum spicatum
Community in Lake Wingra." Limnol. Oceanogr. 19:377-389.
Allanson, B.R., C.J. Zimmerman, and O.K. Smith (1973). "A Report
on the Limnology of Monroe Reservoir, Indiana." School of
Public and Environmental Affairs-Occasional Papers No. 1,
January 1973. Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana.
B-71
-------
Aquatic Ecology
Bartsch, A.F. (1971). Algal Assay Procedure Bottle Test. National
Eutrophication Research Program-Environmental Protection
Agency, Corvallis, Oregon.
Bindloss, M.E., A.V. Hoiden, A.E. BaileyWatts, and I.R. Smith.
(1972). "Phytoplankton Production, Chemical and Physical
Conditions in Loch Leven." In: Productivity Problems of
Freshwaters, pp. 639-659. Z. Kajak and A. Hillbricht-
Ilkowska (eds.). Proceedings of the IBP-UNESCO Symposium,
Kazimierz Dolny, Poland, 1970.
Brakke, D.F. (1974). MS, "Primary Production in Culturally
Enriched Lake Sallie, Minnesota Following Weed Harvest."
Brylinsky, M. and K.H. Mann (1973). "An Analysis of Factors
Governing Productivity in Lakes and Reservoirs." Limnol.
Oceanogr. 18(1): 1-15.
Davis. R.B. (1974). "Stratigraphic Effects of Tubificids on
Lake Sediments." Limnol. Oceanogr. 19:466-488.
Docauer, D. (1972). "Human Development and Its Effect on Lake
Monroe." (unpublished) Environmental Protection Agency
(1971). Algal Assay Procedure Bottle Test. National
Eutrophication, Research Program.
Fitzgerald, G.P. (1969) . "Some Factors in the Competition or
Antagonism Among Bacteria, Algae and Aquatic Weeds."
J. Phycol. 5:351-359.
Flossner, D. (1972). "Branchiopoda, Branchiura." Die Tierwelt
Deutschlands, 60. Teil:l-501.
Golterman, H.L. and R.S. Clymo (1969). "Methods for Chemical
Analysis of Fresh Waters." IBP Handbook No. 8. Blackwell
Scientific Publications, Oxford.
Hasler, A.D. and E. Jones (1949). Demonstration of the Antagonistic
action of Large Aquatic Plants on Algae and Rotifers. Ecology
30:359-364.
Hutchinson, G.E. (1956). "A Treatise on Limnology." Volume 1.
Geography, Physics, and Chemistry. John Wiley and Sons,
Inc. New York.
Lee, G.F. (1969). "Analytical chemistry of plant nutrients."
pp 646-658. In: Eutrophication; Causes, Consequences,
Correctives. Rohlich, G.(ed)Proceedings of a Symposium.
National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C.
B-72
-------
Aquatic Ecology
Likens, G.E. and F.H. Bormann (1974). "Linkages Between
Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecosystems." BioScience 24:447-446.
Loehr, R.C. (1974). "Characteristics and Comparative Magnitude
of Non-point Sources." Journal WPCF 46:1849-1872.
McAhron, R. (1972). "The Nashville Sewage Plant." (unpublished).
Mulligan, H.F. (1969)'. "Management of aquatic vascular plants
and algae." In: Eutrophication; Causes, Consequences,
Correctives, pp 464-483. G. Rohlich (ed.).Proceedings
of Symposium. National Academy of Science. Washington,
D.C.
Nelson, M. (1974). "Some Chemical and Physical Aspects of the
North Fork of Salt Creek Near Nashville, Indiana." (unpublished)
Peterson, S.A., W.L. Smith, and K.W. Maleug (1974). "Fullscale
Harvest of Aquatic Plants: Nutrient Removal from a Eutrophic
Lake. J. Wat. Poll. Contr. Fed.. 46:697-707.
Ridenour, R.L. (1972). Monroe Reservoir Fishery Status Report
1968-1971. Fishery Research Section, Indiana Department of
Natural Resources, Division of Fish and Wildlife.
Ridenour, R.L. (1973). Monroe Fisheries Survey 1972. Fishery
Research Section, Indiana Department of Natural Resources,
Division of Fish and Wildlife.
Rodhe, W. (1965). "Standard Correlations Between Pelagic
Photosynthesis and Light." In: Goldman, C.R. (ed.)
pp. 365-381. Primary Productivity in Aquatic Environments.
Mem. 1st. Ital"Idrobiol. 18 Suppl. University of California
Press, Berkeley.
Schaefer, A. (1974). Phytoplankton Cycling and Species Diversity
in Lake Monroe, Indiana and Relations to Environmental
Factors. 1974 NSF Summer Science Institute, Indiana University,
Bloomington.
Schindler, D.W. (1974). "Eutrophication and Recovery in
Experimental Lakes: Implications for Lake Management."
Science 184:897-899.
Stainton, M.P., M.J. Capel, and F.A.J. Armstrong (1974). The
Chemical Analysis of Fresh Water. Research and Development
Directorate, Freshwater Institute, Winnipeg, Manitoba.
B-73
-------
Aquatic Ecology
Strickland, J.D.H. and T.R. Parsons (1972). "A Practical
Handbook of Seawater Analysis." Fisheries Research Board
of Canada-Bulletin 167 (second edition). Ottawa. R.A.
Vollenweider(1971).Scientific Fundamentals of the
Eutrophication of Lakes and Flowing Waters, with Particular
Reference to Nitrogen and Phosphorus as factors in
Eutrophication. U.N. OECD
Zimmerman, C.J. (1968). Progress Report on Limnological Investi-
gations in the Monroe Reservoir Basin-1968. Indiana University
Water Resources Center and Department of Zoology, Bloomington,
Indiana.
B-74
-------
c-i
-------
APPENDIX D
LAKE MONROE LAND SUITABILITY STUDY
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Indiana University
School of Public Environmental Affairs
Center for Urban and Regional Analysis
July 1975
D-i
-------
PREFACE
The purpose of this Executive Summary is to provide a concise, easily read review of the major points
of the Lake Monroe Land Suitability Study Technical Report for the benefit of elected and appointed
officials as well as other persons with a general interest in the topic.
D-ii
-------
CONTENTS'
INTRODUCTION 1
Description of the Watershed 2
Study Area Defined 2
Reservoir Purposes 2
The Demand for Use 3
GEOLOGY 5
General Information 6
Geologic Description of the Area 6
Soil Material Characteristics 7
Land-Use Considerations 8
TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGY 11
General Information 12
Forests 12
Wildlife 12
Forest and Wildlife Management 13
Land-Use Considerations 13
AQUATIC ECOLOGY 15
General Information 16
Physical-Chemical Properties 16
Organisms 18
Land-Use Considerations 19
LAND USE 21
General Information 22
Land-Use Survey 22
Land-Use Maps 23
Land Capability Model 24
Land-Use Considerations 24
INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK 25
General Information 26
Federal Agencies 27
State Agencies 29
Local Agencies 32
* Maps Identified In The Executive Summary Have Not Been Reproduced In
This EIS.
D-ui
-------
INTRODUCTION
D DESCRIPTION OF THE
LAKE MONROE WATERSHED
D STUDY AREA DEFINED
D RESERVOIR PURPOSES
D THE DEMAND FOR USE
D-J
-------
DESCRIPTION OF THE LAKE MONROE WATERSHED
Monroe Reservoir, with a surface area of 10,750 acres, is the largest impoundment of water in Indiana.
It is situated in the south-central part of the state, about ten miles south and east of Bloomington. The
major portion of the reservoir lies within Monroe County with the upper end of the reservoir
extending into Brown and Jackson Counties. A very small part of the reservoir's drainage area lies in
Lawrence County.
The reservoir occupies the main valley of Salt Creek and extends into several tributary valleys. From
the reservoir, Salt Creek flows southwesterly through Lawrence County to its confluence with the
East Fork of the White River about five miles southwest of Bedford, Indiana. The drainage area of the
Salt Creek basin is 647 square miles, of which 441 square miles he upstream from the damsite. The
dam is located 25.6 miles above the mouth of Salt Creek, about two miles east of Harrodsburg in
Monroe County.
STUDY AREA DEFINED
The specific focus of the geology, ecology, and land use studies ol this report was an area of
approximately 100 square miles immediately surrounding the lake (see Map 1). The institutional
study describes the jurisdiction of county, regional, state, and lederal agencies within the entire Lake
Monroe drainage basin.
RESERVOIR PURPOSES
Monroe Reservoir was constructed for two primary purposes:
Flood control
Low flow augmentation of Salt Creek below the dam and the East Fork of the White River
The reservoir's secondary purposes are:
Recreation
Fish and wildlife
Water supply
D-2
-------
THE DEMAND FOR USE
Since 1965, the demand for the multiple use of Lake Monroe beyond the original purposes hasgrown
considerably. As a result, the following are emerging:
Lake Monroe provides drinking water to Bloomington and Bedford. It is estimated that the
City of Bloomington, alone, will have an average daily use of 12 million gallons per day by
1980 and 16 million gallons per day by 1990. Maximum daily use is expected to be 21
million gallons in 1980 and 28 million gallons in 1990. The available pool can supply 36
million gallons per day.
A "major center of commerce" has been predicted for the Lake Monroe region due to the
presence of Lake Monroe and the attractiveness of other recreational sites nearby.
Tourism and recreation are already major industries in the area. Development of
numerous residential areas are proposed.
Eutrophication and other deterioration of the lake may be significantly accelerated due to
human activities around the lake. The usual resultant problems of prolific weed and algal
growth, deteriorating fisheries, impaired water quality, and sediment infilling may pose a
serious threat to the utilization of the lake.
D-3
-------
GEOLOGY
D GENERAL INFORMATION
D GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
OF THE AREA
D SOIL MATERIAL CHARACTERISTICS
D LAND-USE CONSIDERATIONS
D-5
-------
GENERAL INFORMATION
The geologic and soil conditions of an area are important factors in determining the suitability of land
for a particular use. Among the land-use factors that are directly affected by the underlying geology
are:
Suitability for septic tank waste disposal
Foundation and excavation conditions
Slope stability
Ground water availability
The purpose of this section is to identify basic geologic features of the Lake Monroe area and to relate
them to these land-use factors. Many other land-use factors, such as soil fertility, tree growth rates,
and erosion hazard, also are influenced by geologic features and are discussed in other sections of this
report.
GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION OF THE AREA
In parts of the Lake Monroe study area, bedrock is the most important geologic element and the
overlying soil materials are directly related to the bedrock. In other parts, soil materials are not
directly related to the underlying bedrock and the soil materials themselves are the most important
geologic element.
There are principally two types of bedrock in the Lake Monroe study area: limestone and siltstone.
Siltstone bedrock underlies much of the eastern part of the study area, whereas limestone bedrock
underlies some of the central and most of the western part of the area. The two bedrock areas are
subdivided based on steepness of topography into areas of less than 20 percent slope and areas of more
than 20 percent slope. These are shown on the geologic map (Map 2) as:
Area I: Limestone bedrock arid less than 20 percent slope
Area II: Limestone bedrock and greater than 20 percent slope
Area III: Siltstone bedrock and less than 20 percent slope
Area IV: Siltstone bedrock and greater than 20 percent slope
D-6
-------
Parts of the study area where soil materials are not directly related to bedrock are divided into two map
Areas (Map 2):
Area V: Valley-flanking terraces along Salt Creek and its tributaries
Area VI: Flat bottomland areas underlain principally by stream-deposited materials
Areas severely disturbed by man are shown (Map 2) as:
Area VII: Quarries, rock cuts, fills, and other disturbed areas
These seven Areas differ in geologic characteristics and land-use capability. Many geologic
characteristics such as slope, depth to bedrock, and soil texture vary somewhat within each Area. The
discussion that follows is in terms of these Areas.
SOIL MATERIAL CHARACTERISTICS
Thickness of soil materials in the study area ranges from a few inches to more than 70feet. The thicker
soils generally are in areas of the gentler slopes; the thickest soils are in terrace or valley-bottom
positions. The soil materials specific to each area are as follows:
Area
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
Soil Materials
0-5 feet of silt loam and silty clay loam overlying up to 20 feet of
plastic silty clay and clay, slightly stony in places
0-2 feet of silt loam and silty clay loam overlying up to 5 feet of plastic
silty clay and clay, stony in places
0-10 feet of silt loam and silty clay loam with some silty clay at depth,
slightly stony
0-3 feet of silt loam and silty clay loam, very stony
Contains a complex of soil materials ranging from 5 to 70 feet in thickness,
mostly silt loam with some pebbly, sandy loam, sandy clay loam, and
loamy sand at depth
Generally silt loam but contains some clay rich zones, stony or pebbly in
places
D-?
-------
LAND-USE CONSIDERATIONS
The geologic features of the Lake Monroe study area importantly influence four land-use factors:
On-Site Septic Disposal
Adverse geologic and soil conditions are important factors leading to the failure of private septic tank
waste disposal systems. Overloading of the drainfield is the primary cause of failure, and conditions
that cause overloading are in many ways tied to the geologic and soil conditions. The following factors
influence the effectiveness of the drainfield:
Permeability and thickness of the soil
Highest seasonal water table
Slope of the land
The geologic data indicate that much of the study area is unsuitable for private septic tank waste
disposal. Specifically:
All of Areas JI and IV are unsuitable for septic tank disposal because of excessive slope.
Area VI is unsuitable because oi high water lable and/or frequent flooding.
Use of septic tanks in parts of Area I and parts of Area V is limited by the presence of
impermeable fragipan or heavy clay zones in the soil.
Area I is underlain by cavernous bedrock. Therefore, pollution of local ground water
supplies may result if the septic systems fail.
Parts of Area III are suitable for septic tanks, dependent on local slope, water table depth,
and soil thickness.
Foundation and Excavation Conditions
Many geologic and soil factors influence the type and design of footings and foundations for buildings.
In particular, the following factors should be considered in foundation design:
Slope of the land
Depth and type of bedrock
Water table conditions
Soil drainage
Strength, compressibility, and shrink-sweH capacity of the soil
D-8
-------
Parts of the study area are potentially hazardous for residential and light commercial construction
because of one or more of the above factors (larger industrial buildings require a much more detailed
analysis of soil conditions than has been presented in this study).
Areas I and II, which are underlain by limestone, present two potential building problems.
The bedrock surface is irregular and rock that is difficult to remove may be encountered in
basement excavations. In addition, clay and silty clay in the subsoil possess high shrink-
swell properties that may cause damage to footings and foundations unless adequate soil
drainage is provided.
Area III is underlain in places by soft consistency materials of low bearing capacity.
Area VI has a high seasonal water table and the possibility of surface flooding.
Areas II and IV have bedrock at shallow depth and slopes which are too steep for most
conventional types of construction.
Slope Stabiity
Some parts of Area IV and adjacent parts of Area V are prone to landslides, particularly along cut
slopes parallel to hillsides where soil material is removed by excavation. This leaves material on the
slope above the excavation with no lateral support. Slope stability problems in Area IV result from
steep slopes and impermeable bedrock at shallow depth. Foundations, roads, utility lines, and other
kinds of construction should be designed so as to avoid problems with this kind of earth movement.
Ground Water
The same geologic features that make the study area an excellent location for a reservoir also make it
an area of very limited ground water supply. As a result, nowhere in the study area are ground water
sources abundant enough for more than private residential use.
In the eastern and central parts of the area, wells completed in siltstone are dry or yield
water at only a few gallons per hour.
In the western part of the area, wells completed 100 to 150 ieet through the limestone into
the top of the underlying siltstone generally have yields adequate for single family
domestic use. In the limestone area, however, pollution of the ground water by effluent
from faulty septic tank systems is common.
Soil materials of the terrace and valley-bottom areas (Areas V and VI) are insufficiently
permeable to yield water in usable quantity.
D-9
-------
TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGY
D GENERAL INFORMATION
D FORESTS
D WILDLIFE
D FOREST AND WILDLIFE
MANAGEMENT
D LAND-USE CONSIDERATIONS
D-ll
-------
GENERAL INFORMATION
The forests surrounding Lake Monroe are one of the most valuable assets of the region. Land uses such
as outdoor recreation, timber production, wildlife management, watershed management, and the life
of the reservoir itself, al! depend, directly or indirectly, on these forested lands.
The purpose of this section is to identify the structure and composition of these forests and to indicate
the importance of the forests to land-use considerations. In addition, the wildlife common to the area
will be discussed.
FORESTS
To help identify the structure and composition of the forested areas, a generalized vegetation map
(Map 3) was compiled to show the extent and location within the study area of the following:
Early "old field" successional vegetation
Young successional or disturbed forests
Mature forests
Analysis of forest species composition, on the basis of the vegetation map and the data obtained from
field surveys, revealed that the forests of the Lake Monroe region have remained very much the same
in species composition as that of pre-settlement time, namely, Beech-Oak-Maple-Hickory forests. This
type of vegetation is not extensive in southern Indiana and is one of the most interesting plant
communities of the state because of the great number of species sharing dominance.
WILDLIFE
Due to its ruggedness and sub-marginal value for farming, much of the Lake Monroe region has
remained forested. As a result, an abundance of wildlife exists within the area, including:
50 species of amphibians and reptiles
40 species of mammals
30 species of birds which are common permanent residents, 55 which are common summer
residents, 15 which are common winter residents, and 64 which are common migrants
D-12
-------
It should also be noted that two species of birds occurring in the Lake Monroe region have sub-species
(the Southern Bald Eagle and the Peregrine Falcon) which are classified as "endangered" by the
Department of the Interior. Although the sub-species have not actually been sighted in the Lake
Monroe region, their range does encompass the area.
FOREST AND WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT
A large extent of the forested areas in the l^uko Monroe region are public lands under the supervision
of the National Forest Service and the Division of Fish and Wildlife. These agencies currently have
management programs which utilize the forests for multiple purposes including:
Timber production
Soil and water conservation
Wildlife protection and production
Outdoor recreation
LAND-USE CONSIDERATIONS
Land-use changes in the Lake Monroe region can be expected in the future, especially in the immediate
vicinity of the lake. When such changes require extensive clearing and construction, terrestrial
ecosystems will be affected. Of particular importance is the clearing of forested areas which often
results in accelerated runoff and erosion. Forests help retard runoff and erosion because:
The forest canopy intercepts the falling rain and diminishes the energy of impact.
The canopy, understory vegetation, and leaf litter layer are effective in absorbing rainfall.
Forest soils typically absorb large quantities of water rapidly.
Since much of the Lake Monroe region is characterized by sleep slopes and credible soils, the
extensive forests present in the area are clearly important in retarding runoff and soil erosion as well
as moderating stream flow and sediment discharge into the reservoir. This should be kept in mind
when major land-use changes are proposed.
D_13
-------
AQUATIC ECOLOGY
D GENERAL INFORMATION
D PHYSICAL-CHEMICAL
PROPERTIES
D ORGANISMS
D LAND-USE CONSIDERATIONS
D-
-------
GENERAL INFORMATION
Monroe Reservoir is a shallow lake with a mean depth of 10-13 feet and a surface area of approximately
10,750 acres. The lake is comprised of three distinct basins (see Figure 1), with the mean depth
increasing from the pond-like upper basin (above the causeway) to the lower basin (near the dam).
The old Salt Creek channel meanders across the bottom of the reservoir as a 23-36-foot trench.
PHYSICAL-CHEMICAL PROPERTIES
The physical and chemical conditions within any body of water largely determine what aquatic
communities can exist within it. While there are many different physical and chemical characteristics
that can be discussed, only several of the more important ones will be dealt with here.
Transparency
Suspended materials can interfere with the penetration of light into water by scatteringand absorbing
the rays. If enough suspended material is present, the water will become turbid and, as a result, the
photosynthetic zone will become restricted. A comparison of transparency readings taken from 1968
to 1971 with the readings obtained in the Land Suitability Study reveals that there is a decline in the
mean transparency of the lake. Two possible explanations for this are: (1) an increase in planktonic
populations as a result of nutrient additions and (2) an increase in suspended soil particles and other
non-biological particulate matter.
Oxygen
Oxygen is important to the survival, reproduction, and growth of a variety of aquatic organisms, most
notably fish. Oxygen is also an essential element for the decomposition of organic materials. When
organic materials are present in relatively large quantities in the water, the demand for oxygen by
microorganisms to decompose these materials is high. Under such conditions, oxygen depletion may
result and this, in turn, may have a deleterious effect upon fish and other organisms.
The Land Suitability Study shows that the dissolved oxygen levels are not significantly different from
those obtained in the 1968-71 study. Only in the deeper Salt Creek channel does serious oxygen
depletion occur, and the relative volume of this old creek bed is minor in comparison to the three
basins.
D- 16
-------
o
u.
-o
-3
w
OS
en
C
'33
H
v
_c
H
M)
O
£
£
c
o
-------
Nutrients
Phosphorous and nitrogen are essential nutrients for aquatic plant growth. When present in large
quantities, however, these nutrients can cause unnatural enrichment of the lake, commonly referred
to as eutrophication. Readings taken during the course of the Land Suitability Study indicate that
phosphorous and nitrogen levels in the lake are generally low.
ORGANISMS
Plankton
Tests indicate that nutrient loadings above the current levels would serve to bring about the
dominance of fewer species and a decrease in community diversity and stability of phytoplanktonand
zooplankton within Lake Monroe. An increase in phosphate content, in particular, would likely lead to
the development of large surface blooms of blue-green algae. These blooms would deny sufficient light
to certain forms and alter the composition of phytoplankton. In turn, any changes in the
phytoplankton would involve the replacement of some zooplankters with more tolerant forms.
Macrophytes
Aquatic plants, especially in the shallow upper basin, appear to compete effectively with the
phytoplankton for available nutrients. Any decrease in weed distribution would most likely result in
increased phytoplankton density.
Fish
A 1972 survey indicated that Lake Monroe contains the following fish:
Bluegill (31%) Carp (4%)
Yellow Perch (18%) Redear sunfish (4%)
Largemouth bass (15%) White and black crappie (5%)
Yeltew bass (6%) Bullheads (brown, yellow, black) (5%)
Channel catfish (1%)
Golden shiner and warmouth are also present within the lake, but their abundance is currently
unknown.
D- 18
-------
The fact that the bass population has not declined as much as typically occurs in artificial lakes
suggests that Lake Monroe is potentially a greater producer of bass and should sustain a good bass
population for a longer period of time.
LAND-USE CONSIDERATIONS
On the basis of the Land Suitability Study, Lake Monroe does not appear to be mildly eutrophic as
suggested by the 1968-71 study. However, experiments have shown that lakes of Monroe Reservoir's
nature are quite sensitive and respond rapidly to phosphorous enrichment. The resultant problems of
prolific weed and algal growth, deteriorating fisheries, and impaired water quality can pose a serious
threat to the utilization of the lake. Therefore, care should be taken to minimize the entrance of
phosphorous effluents into the reservoir.
D-19
-------
LAND USE
D GENERAL INFORMATION
D LAND-USE SURVEY
D LAND-USE MAPS
D LAND CAPABILITY MODEL
D LAND-USE CONSIDERATIONS
D-21
-------
GENERAL INFORMATION
A land-use survey is carried out to provide a description of the surface utilization of an area at a certain
moment in time. In essence, this type of survey provides an answer to the question, "How is the land
being used in this region?" The information gathered in a land-use survey permits the construction of
a land-use map. This map shows the clustering of certain uses and the stringing out of others. It shows,
in total, the impact of man on the natural landscape.
The purpose of this section is to provide detailed information about the use of land around one of
southern Indiana's most heavily used recreation areasLake Monroe. Both a land-use survey and
land-use maps are employed to generate this information in a format suitable for forming the basis for
future planning decisions for the Lake Monroe area.
It should be carefully noted that for the results of this section to be meaningful, it is essential that the
land-use information is periodically updated. This can most easily be accomplished by
institutionalizing the whole process by making it a function of an agency such as the Monroe County
Planning Commission.
LAND-USE SURVEY
The classification system for the land-use survey is designed to be:
Easily followed and understood by someone not involved in either its construction or in
the actual data collection;
Comprehensive enough so that if the decision is made to complete the land-use inventory
of the entire watershed, then the original classification will need little or no modification;
Comprehensive enough at the outset to eliminate the need for any kind of expensive and
time-consuming reconnaissance study;
Compatible with computer data processing procedures.
The land-use classification system encompasses rural as well as urban land uses. The classification has
nine major categories:
Residential Agricultural
Commercial Communications and Transport
Business Services Public and Quasi-Public
Industrial Recreational and Open Space
Forestry
D-22
-------
Within each of these groups, further subdivisions were instituted giving a more detailed breakdown of
a land-use category. (A complete listing of these categories can be found in Appendix A of the Land
Use Survey section of the Land Suitability Study Technical Report.)
Data was collected using a grid system for the study area. Each section was divided into 64 ten-acre
cells and these cells were the unit for which data was categorized. The data gathered in the land-use
survey reveal that:
Forests comprise 30,362 acres (63%) of the study area, of which 15,613 acres (32%) are
public lands.
Parks and recreation areas comprise 2,997 acres (6%) of the study area.
Agriculture accounts for 6,659 acres (14%) ol the study area, ol which 2,494acres (5%)
are utilized croplands and 2,419 acres (5%) arc abandoned croplands.
The total number of acres classified as residential in the study area is 1,762 (4%).
LAND-USE MAPS
Two types of land-use maps have been constructed:
A general map (Map 4) which portrays all major categories of land use;
A set of maps showing individual land uses (refer to the Appendix in the Land Use section
of the Land Suitabilitv Study Technical Report).
When the reader examines these maps, there should be the realization that since the east side of the
lake is largely in public ownership, the pressures for development will be primarily on the west side of
the lake.
D-23
-------
LAND CAPABILITY MODEL
A land capability model is being designed on the basis of the information gathered in the Land
Suitability Study. This model will be a useful tool for considering alternative development proposals
in terms of their environmental impact. While the model will be of particular use to the
planner/analyst, it can be used by almost anyone who is willing to study carefully the Computer Model
User's Manual which provides the procedure for using the model as well as the accompanying data
base.
LAND-USE CONSIDERATIONS
One of the most demanding and complex issues facing the residents of the Lake Monroe region is that
of land development, zoning, and the impacts of land-use change. Questions such as the following
emerge:
What is the impact of an individual development on the whole community?
What are the legal ramifications of a given land-use decision? Will these be long-term
implications?
What are the potential costs to the community (police protection, solid waste disposal,
etc.) of a new development?
Are there environmental impacts of a given development which have not been considered?
Is low-income housing being considered as well as high-income housing?
What is the recreational carrying capacity of the lake and the implications of this on
residential and commercial development?
This section on land use does not, and cannot, provide complete answers to these problems. It does,
however, provide the basic information for land-use decision making.
D-24
-------
INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK
D GENERAL INFORMATION
D FEDERAL AGENCIES
D STATE AGENCIES
D LOCAL AGENCIES
D-25
-------
GENERAL INFORMATION
A myriad of federal, state, and local agencies exist which have powers that directly bear on the
planning and development of the Lake Monroe region. The purpose of this section is to identify these
agencies and to clarify their roles as they relate to the Lake Monroe area. To assist in this process, a
series of charts is presented on the following pages. While the charts discuss in some detail the
functions of each agency, it should be kept in mind that these descriptions are by no means complete.
The Land Suitability Study Technical Report should be consulted if a more detailed description is
desired.
D- 26
-------
en
w
U
-s
H O
fc
I
o
O tu
o
u*
"c3
o
n
is
ti
-o v
a ~a
a £
§1
en w
S£
- - o -c
~rt ^ *- ^a "^ -^
n s
-a
£
a,
-S
h ° -a
cu
S «
C n
C 3
« "3 °
- S T
a 2 u
2 j'S
.«Z S
a
o ** c
en O -
" ~~ -.3 to
" on
cu
en eo .S _C^
o jS
I" 3
t- u. "-
5 .2 £
a
B 13
o S
g^ 2
§."£
i^
«> m U
2 § 2P
SK^2
o a m
= ^'M
S -| £
S * 2
* I 2
'' ''S *
1 5 a
2 .S I
a &>
I 8P
< a
n)
^2 S
. o
2 o
o
o -2
**H
V
u
3 tu "O
s§ o i
17 a ^
^ - .2 .§
"p a M >
C jjjj O.
o -r cu 3
O S S en
a
-e
cu _e co -
HJ BO e 2
3 g .2 3
o 2 "0 -JT
.S 5
§
-
u O
1 s - £
C C
cu
o
, o -c .5 a. o
^2 « -H « E .£,
j --
1 ! - i -s j! -5 1
«--*--
S 1 -
a. 2 2
2 2 *
a, E E
kA» p» -
j- E o
o ~ "j
a -a ;- o
* '
oe
protectio
Lake Mo
cu *"
§ 2
he
_. ^
-a o
*^ a
o 2
« §.
-2 E
cu
II
11
£'3
3 ...
<-+* -_1
II
CU O
M ">
> a
" T3
tP t.
§"£
*- T^
0 0
cu t-
ot
t- i'
n)
J3 5
0 on
a "
>
tu
o
3
u
tU
a.
o
-o
as
7\j ~ tn
^2 ^
3 . u
.,__, >-» tfl
= JI»
< "o £ o
- » 2 -
3 g w 5
£ s S.-2
I «^
O tu
*- -3
.
cu
5
cu
u
a.
to o
CU CU
-o ac
-1" !3
-^ 2
« "3
"*- /5
D
a
JO
a.
S 0 ^
C "" O3
on
fo
u
u > ~
BC o a
tO k- u
I* Q. -
tu a. £
'T, a
co ~ _2
S.H I
o^£
.2 o
«-2 «
en CO
cu a 5
> 2
IT", « at
u i
cu
b
3
3
U
u
a
v
ac
a
o
C
cu
'u
a
cu
Q
I
'I
a
v
a
o
D-27
-------
O "O co
4i *
<£ c
ooc
5L~ S
SIS
1
ca o>
*l&
B *.l
T3 °
§S3
v 5 *>
8.8
O
'>
V
u-l
o
o c
I s
S a
-S 'a
c ap
3 '«
§2
'So g
S i
u <_,
S.S
c **
s^=
2 «
ke
J S
c °-
O en
2
u
13 -d
* -JJ
^
JS 5 *;
- B 2
3 E 2 -t:
2.2
g.SS.4}
8..&JI
-O 4)
>
"
Top-leve
""- 5, -
^ -^
CO tn -d a;
B -S - -
I 11 s
^2 >»
ca u
-I
o
S I
11'
S g>
>- >->
11
IP
« ^
t-i
scessa
V
J
In
S
bfl
£
H
-^ '
aoZ
.5 >*
§ S:
S c *
S^ S
8"? o
^ £ S
00^
a, a <-i o
CD en O
-c 2 -o
^|s
en h C
f 5
en u. O
C O .i-
- 2
*» ea "*3
- 8..-
c o.1^
O cd u
1 £ |
E <2 §
E £S
o tu _,
a -s -S
Ml
03
OH -3 i
b ^1
2 hr D O.
.S iu t-
* o
en BO O ""
J2 .S -3 ed
at
o>
o
'C
o
E
c
o
'o
B
3
O
CJ
o
1)
k«
cd
OH
-------
1
I
2
**
a,
C -^ 0
o c i
- <* c
m
o ;." 2
-C £
^^ _3
2 -S "o
5^
Eg
» ts i;
SoS^
u HI
15 S -
tv
1 <8 "s
j!-*
g£g
!£J8
§: 2 -
cS C en
1_ u
>%to o
_i e^-i (n
*-" U. Ui
C tp tu
CD Q. >
u. O
U en w
3 * -C
en ^3 en
'" CD
., -^ _Q
-3
IM
§
CQ
"o
1*
c
o
U
c
^o
_3
"o
0<
LH
<
CD
-3
n)
-o
exercises
ry service
-3 2
§ I
CQ en
C 3
I *
ll
JJ
rough which the Environmental
possesses a wide variety of powers
S ^
S 2
v
en
V
-C
CD
Js
bC
Si
03
en
Ul
V
3
u
O
e*-i
eluding:
The issuance and enforcement o
.S *
en
CD
V
V
E
o
c
o
-3
rt
-C
en
V
en
>-,
(13
>->
^
a.
a.
3
en
l_
eU
a
&
CB
.~ en
ca be
-1
11
"1 -2
3 -Q
3.S.
°.»
.1 a>
*- nj
s *
J s
-3 "S
C8 "3
en
t. O
U O,
o .2
M "3
»^i
3
-C
'%
en
La
U
M
en
'«
rt
en
V
-C
u*
0
C
.0
3
"o
D-
C
V
~,
c
ca
jr modification of
Issue permits for construction (
pollution control facility.
csi
0 S
as 6
°
oa
2 3
a
o
CQ
C
v
v
1°
a)
C
o
.£
"ta
tu
<-*.
o
-3
fcn
n
O
03
C
O
C
o
o
a-
E
0)
i;
D-29
-------
W
W
H H
OS <
< H
£-2
"1
O u_
S 0
CO
.s & .
E s 5
~ -C *
2 0 In
a'SJI
<«.s<;
p
1
^
1
1
""
Administer the National Pollution Disc
co
*- u
£S
s*
t« tu
ao u
e<2
°"3
<_. en
S *«
S °
8.S
^fi
C« 3
W .3
d 5
CU 0
z .S
en
6 c
JH 5
en
b»
V
!
en
o
fc«
v2
-8
-S
c
CO
en
£g
§ c
N
« w
« Jj
* J
g 8P
11
ep "tj
TJ .S
§ £
J5 2
en en
2 _§
a-
O) u_
W o
-f1
o
1
8.
-S
en
CO
C
tu
2.
UN
O
Q
CU
_C
H
(A
'So
£
"O
CD
>-,
5
S
"s
U
Ui
tu
CO
u
^
en
O
4-<
JO
t)0
£
g
CO
i ">
_tu
"3
^
_c
eo
IS
CO
en
u
f H
4
T3
?
o
eJS *
2 js
SeS
S -
S Jl
«£
tN
o a !-§
- en e .
U u C en en
'S 5 u IS g
. n t s. r .§
ec en V eu -C S
.2 . £ Q - c
3 "CO " « * «
"3 3 'o - - .5
^ "» c £ ^ S o
34 1^ l§£
__° SSi*. *ofe
Lease state-owned lands for lodging and
Set aside nature preserves and lands
historical significance.
Approve the sale of timber from state li
Purchase or condemn land for constr
well as approve changes in shorelines o
Assist in the prevention of floods.
this is not a complete listing of all the po
1 Resources, it demonstrates the need t
n almost any project involving Lake Moi
ro *f m -c i~ c- 2
ae 3 c
§S 6
J= z r
*-* M
< "o S.
I
CO
Oj
c
'3
u
O
^
1
tu
bri
po
1
«
o
u
V
JS
0
V
>
Ji
^tu
u
(/>
c
o
'S
'>
o
b
p ,
(n
tu
O
u
£
C
u
!* s.
» en tn
10 t" T1
111
-S rt ">
72 ~o c
tn -3 co
flj W ^
S o o.
>?"% "^
III
o a °
* ~3 §
i??
-psi
g a JS
§29-
'o'g 1
B,« §
Bo 8
S"1? g
X <
S *>
u cu tu
« £ 3
1 ll
'? 2 "
MJ^ S
f-°-f
"° "is
"a 3 ^
ja *- m
= 1 "s
« -C B
*.
o cT o
or variances may be necessary.
-,
II I I I
en -J- Q < en
D- 30
-------
"S C/)
3 W
O W
Bo
w
<:
B
u
i
Q
ft.
o^
1
5-
5
en
C
.8
c
CO
feb
O
Jc
.y
'C
CU
en
"o
X
t_l
$
CU
Js
3
t*
CU
u
en"
.21
is
u
c
£
T3
CO
en
1
i
3
e
CO
-C
en
s
en
_g
'en
-Q
£
.1
Ui
S
cn
cO
U
U
4P
C
J{
>-.
CO
uience
CU
C
o
o
-o
CO
Ift
necesi
~o
CU
en
8.
en
3
-o
C
CO
CO
CD
*"*
tj
_CU
"3
u
_c
o
IS
u
o
£
V
a
Q.
CU
«
^
-S
.M)
?
-------
en
w
c
description of POUH
-i
J
1. a)
the Lake Monroe
the Commissioners
§a
» .2
U 4->
SJ
II
-1
b S
S o
C N
*C t^^
a. o
sioners'
issuance
CO
'3 V
E J3
E -
O -C
U M)
II
^
S,
o
. Q-
£* >.
I!
l-s
21
BC
1 .2
«>-
o 2
1 S
"S 1-
J £
8:5
a -
u £
"3 S
C co
co C
V
Z3 u
u :£
CO _,
.£§
0 CQ O
£ -1 "N
*
8.
u
S £
ItS B
i§
CO V
« -5
£.S
-§,3
-2 g
ir
e *
8 |
c -S,
S .SP
O.J3
0 u
S S
en
CD ,
^_, ijp
8:5
> .S
, 3
« £
bO 5
S '*
CO H
jB C
u
. -a
lain tain,
athorize
* (0
CO
"5
8.
n
'-5
S
swers.
1 sanitation as well i
«^§
I15
CO f
It
2 "
"° 2
0 «
u *}
<~ S
-o c
C n)
-2 S
-S
11
v *-
-o a.
c o
o -o
U <
* LO
CO
c
'3
Ui
-o
"a,
_u
£
V
cu CO
I!
&0.
u- 0-
0 <
0
rdinances;
o
QO
1
>-.
C
3
O
u
C^ri
e enforcement o:
^
t-,
£
^
"33
SP
J3
en
.H
'u
en
-3
u- i
Q
(A
OJ
S
c
J
00
'S
u
V
mmissioners cone
o
U
>^
c
3
O
U
u
ft
CU
.2
-a
CO
O
_co
"3
§ E
co o
*-l Q
V
O, co
^^
B
to be enforced. A
area should consult
and restrictions
:he Lake Monroe ;
LO
G C
o -
'A 8
II
CO
U
JC 6C
- .s
(/I *^
n J2
P<
1 1
* C
to O
CO O
c
o
'o
CO
^
CO
BO
G
.2
2
V
-o
3
u
._o
ja
c
^o
CO
'i
'o *
oc
B-S
I a
Is.
Monroe County si
, organizing, and o
encompasses the
ions are planning
0
o C
'S3
to
^ .2,
u 2
ts s
5 -
? U
o
2 c
S o
.2 S
&C*5
CP CD
U J<
< J
E
V
CO
>^
cn
"i
8.
to
3
JD
to
CO
J
"T3
CU
C8
C
^
O
0
o
-o
B '
(S
1
«
ner technical assis
S
o
-a
B
jS
"3
o
_o
CO
jB
CP
70
>.
£
ex
to
.2
o
B
BC
CO
U
to
V
H
ew regula-
owners.
he agencies have i
n control property
~ CO
B
c *
O ti
S 2
§1
g-S
S s
_CO «
'o "3
CO u
u
SP c
C v
hn
concern
ind, in j
B m
S t-
.2 u
11
o >->
-i. ti
.S 2
w.
o
-o
u
CO
o
CQ
cu
S
c/5
u
to
CO
CO
_O
U
B
5
S
cu
i<
co
Q.
to
O
E
V
u
£
c/r
JN
S S
c£ 33
Q
B
C
o
co
>
S
B
"g
-f*
3C
C
3
o
B
a
o
c
D-32
-------
I
1
owing them to
bly, this could
mile radius of
us powers all
mits. Conceiva
s within a 10-
6^7
3 « -
B§
I
Q
u
3
£
I
S 8 S *
2 - " 2
ttb'S _g u
c-S -^
»
-------
PROJECT IDENTIFICATION
AUTHORS: Henry H. Gray, Indiana Geological Survey
Richard S. Howe, School of Public and Environmental Affairs
J.C. Randolph, School of Public and Environmental Affairs
Michael C. Roberts, Department of Geography
Nicholas L White, School of Law
Indiana University
Bloomington, Indiana
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY EDITED BY: William A. Kelley, School of Public
and Environmental Affairs
FINANCIAL SUPPORT: Office of State Planning with the cooperation of the
Monroe County Commissioners
Mr. William Cook, President, Cook, Inc.
The City of Bloomington Utilities Board
Caslon Development
RELATED REPORTS
Lake Monroe Land Suitability Study: A Technical Report on a Selected Portion of the Lake Monroe
Watershed
Land Capability Model for the Lower Lake Monroe Watershed
Computer Program User's Manual
FURTHER INFORMATION
For further information contact:
Richard S. Howe
School of Public and Environmental Affairs
Indiana University
400 East Seventh Street
Bloomington, Indiana 47401
D-34
-------
-------
E
in
M
z
o
v n
-* K-
** 13
r^
< o:
r^ K-
*X I 1
C H
CJ .
"an
c» i , K-
M r- <
r- li 1-
't .£.'.
3 »
r-
iS « U.
l/l r-.
13 u.
n cj 10
M CI CJ
l»! LJ I'l
CJ CO CC
. 0 b) Z 0
3: ti M (- 3 .. x
M '> Cl 0 _,
U ll CJ C1 (. , 11
M M a- o >; ij
C~i r1' b>
» LJ u H-
O 10 > > I/I
0 .. C' 0 Ll
n 11 LO <-'> "i ui r«
t-1 M Z 0 " <
.. M ^ !
U .. I M Z Z r-
LJ O IJ »- r- ° O ^
O IJ z Q>1/1 H n C»
13 t- o O «t *~ r-
K- n r 4 z uj > U.
r- ZZ^JcULjU-
CJ
r
n I
i )
>-
CJ t-
l> <-> 2
-41
t K M
0 ,_ U o
-^ l.J tj LJ LJ
c. *- ci ' o.
_l LJ ID LJ ,_
Ll CJ r ^
n ..>=. CJ o >"
.. n o: >- rl 13 o »~
0 t J 17 CJ <-< z °
H 3 ^X O *^ ^* o
t-l r- H >4 U.
CJ 3 ^- «t 0 I 3
c/ o n K~ o y Zj cy
_J CJ (,1 Ll << > i _j LJ
0 r-
u. Z
Cl
a: c>
n
i -z
( 1 ...1 M
PI u) <
^1 M ^"" c~)
« «J: LJ
!> f~ H r-
-* if O "^
in z <» 10
iH .-1 _l X
CJ C J UJ «~l
CJ U. (- >- '1
CJ *! CJ 1-4 LJ
CO f- Z Z 2 >
I/) t (/i c^ o CJ t 1 H
LJ CJ r 4 H '-1 O r- r- .
rH ~5 UJ «t «I f*t
0 C- .J -J I" Ci
Ct >-73^O^ «
UJ CL K- d. Cl- M M tl
il V. 0 CJ 0 K- r-
cj >- >. o. a. iij a. z
o o o a: o LJ
1.1 Z Z > 0 1 U. i
t LJUI* cj**a.3£
n c*j o M c. o r> o
i
1
U
o
u
M a
a. £
u
s:
o
UI Z J
o < - i
UI
3:
i
a:
(- C')
M >
o: -<.
f- X
11 <
MI '
Q X
Z «*
-CM E
in
01
u
01
I/I
LJ
_J
M
I-
Z 0
-LJ r~
u
rv
Ll
0.
O
UI
-J
r
Lv
. -4
i: ci
H CO
>- o
Ecn
Z 0
LJ
C) 11
O r-
CJ M
r- ii
Z o 3
< 0
I-- X 0
13 r- Z
_J U «<
of -J
Q. r- <
z- :>
t n o:
re r^ o ui
i- _i >- z
CC _l LJ M
«T O 3"
-3 CX
C^
I
CK
*C
UI |
i
a- o
en , ID
>
M H
I
i
' UI f*l
IM Kl
*)' . H
CO Cl
en ui
*
01 en
CO O
r-t «-<
"
_
« «
CM l>-
ro LO
r-4
. . .
01 01
CO CJ
r-t iH
'
01 Ol
CO . CJ
.-4 r-l
,
r~ »
CO CJ
«
r- tj
i h* co
1
CJ r-4
h- Ul
1 . t
O Iff
' " - rj
en ' i
(- O t~ CJ
LJ -S UN.
1 s: co x: o
>H 0 H 3
LJ > t LJ >
1
r-< r-4 -1 O M .H _l O
r-OO-T r-ClCJT
D. ^ » | C, rf> |
< ri 1 *r «t n 1 «.
O. »-4 M rl ' O- r-l M CJ.
Ml MX
r-4 T4
M 1 M
U ', U
1 I 1
M ' M
r- i t-
i
' t
, !
1 »H tO 4T
M ^ CJ CJ
O , t> O
in LT in
r-j M rj
, * V- M* '
a a; D:
L| Ll Ll
H- 1 t-
11 LJ L |
OH 0 yr U5J 0
M -M H H
a: is C£. ^ a: r> : o.
h- O HO HO H
LJ X Ll X U X LJ
a: o ac c-> i: to ' z
M n , H Z3 M 3 H
CJ > U > UJ > I J >
*r,o: orce o r> °
M r-4 -J O « HrH-JO MM -JO MrH-J
r-ClOx HOO-n HOOT HOO
D.rH>i ^,^>| o_^*>i o: ,-< >
*t f i 1 j* **n'rf ** r> 1 ^ «*^il
a. H H M a -H n (J a ^^ M rj a. H n
,rHX »HI rHX HX
*H rl rj «H
fO ^ rH * f'J
U C) U CJ i
1 1 . 1,1
M M ' * ^*
(*- r- r- r-
>* ! !
fO
r .
'
i
M
t
.
_ j
i
j
i
9 1
^
t >
,
r-
i
t
r-
h-
i
i^.
r-
r-
(*-
j
fw *
>>-
10
*
r ' ,
« )
! 0
tf
1
*
r-
CJ
i )
_>
^ i
**
tt:
r^
J
E t
1 f
*3 ' (
^ t
tl 3
D »
LJ :
< c
4J c
3 0
3 H r-4 .
I 1- 0 <
1 0 M ?
J 0- r-l r
rH ;
, r4
Hi
O
1
£
f~
-------
in
,-4
"Z.
O
^ n
'' 1"
«jt 3
iJ (XI
t-
t IX
I- »-
«f (.1
O 1 I
I) f
i) 2
1 4 Ji. *t .
rr u 1 4
*~ ': "
~ rJ 1 4
0 0
r- LJ ..
i ' re
«t U. Cl
.4
' 3- -
~ tr i l
<" L. *~
H H- -t
1- u- t-
«t «f 1 1
-" ^J
*"
-
f
111
f^
1
rt
1
r-
CJ
l
I
31
t~
z u,
i/i (-
CJ U-
L1 CJ IJ
H CJ CJ
cj o> o:
2: c j u 3
O LJ Z O
E: ci ,-4 r- 3 .. i
n M u o _i
IJ UJ [J C 11 Cl
T 4 r- 1 a- c> i: c i
r CD
< cr 1 1 LJ t-
CJ 0 > > 11
Cl .. C> 0 1 .
ri i J 3 ? cj to :*
r j H n cj «* «x
. UJ . . I n z i: t-
LJ Cl LJ ^~ K- O cj SI
cj :> 2 re n M M o
:j i- o -- M r-j -- LJ «t > u,
t- 2 i: >! x; UJ LJ U-
«tO(..K-|_.J_||.'
J -J LJ 3 3 U LJ 0
,_
z
»< '
^j;
OJ
X -I
t- «*
a- n
0
_J C
_l 11
x r
o
>- ' '
1
H 1
o
>-
CJ 1-
-I M «*
o " IT
_i
o « *', ^ a:
_J O 0 1. 1 H-
t ( C ' c * *^ il
c.-« . . >- « CJ 0 >-
.. n c: H- M cj o >~
^ t j ( j (.3 H
o LJ ^ o cj i: <->
>-*>< o ** o
»-i- n r^ u.
O --^ h- *I O *! ^3
OOHl--Oj-_JOC
_j O e'l C1 < O _J U
O t
' a. z
i j
' ct o
H
Cl 4-1 , H
O LJ «t
o r> 2 f^
» » < LJ
cj r» . n i-
& .3* ^ i *t
U) ' 2 O U>
M 0 LJ
H »-l _J X
U CJ LJ l ** *~*
O U- f- > O
t_j <( O^^LJ
CQ |- *: 2 . 2 >
M K- VI O O UJllM
O 3 u o z
LJ O- i- a. L. M n n
CJ V O 0 CJ (- t-
O>->-O-tl.LJCL.Z
o o o ct: o uj
LJ z z >- o. l cj. i:
H* LJ L*J K* U *t CL
o: ««
t- X
H s:
O X
J, 2:
0
o
0"*
tl
u
_J
n
K-
^ (J
ui r-
1 0
t- a: o
3 »- 2
-J IJ <
-J 3~
0 1 _l
a t- t
1 Z >
< 0 CK
a; K- o uj
uj n x » '
Ct "_J LJ M
a o x.
3 Q.
a
\ 1
ct ,
c '
UJ ;
*
,
1 !
01 M 1*- 10 ' U> H U>
eo a~ ^
o
01 t J f- ul *J Cl >
^ rH ' m 0 CJ hi M
LJ
(-J UJ J» U» ^1 L.) f >
r- rsj h- %tj M * *
o
o j r* L> ^» ct o>
M " i-i " M t> ^' . _ f > ^
C-J
f-*
. * " i
Ol t'i &" r- > i * CJ f
LJ --H M ^ f J f J r 1
h,
*
co tj ej ri r-t M r*-
U3 H 's* t-1 «H r^ rH
1
**
r-4 LJ U> "l 1 11 ri M
^f ^^ r-4 iH '-* rH . «H
' * ' *
rH ^J u> " f j , 1 » M tH
.1*1 '1 »H i-*
O tl O O O
« h 1 H «f-l »M M
LJ *! C_> MO M O t-;- CJ " M tJ 05
M «« < -t rH«* rH«C
O O O O . O
M M M M M
i; z a: ir r
*««*«<«<«<
L. U. b_ U- U.
* >-* -J ''> -J LJ _J . (O J UJ _J L.1
!-« *^ M 3 * «-| ^ -* ,-|r>« 5« ^ O . H «
(J LTO HO Ho I'-V 1>O CJ
1 1 1 1 1
Ul , 1 1 Ul Ui Ul lij L> lit L) I-J U*) LI
rj , ^ M ;r csi 2» rj 7 oj 2* M * fJ
«- ( M M «- M M w M »- ' »-
1 -4 J -J _J J !
tt.Mo; MCC MCC *~*Q: M[X.I oc
UJ ' ^ U r* Ul ^ U 21 IjJ ^* UJ ' LJ
h- LU I'l LJ tl UJ t'1 Ui Cl LJ
1 os: oi- oa. oz 01 OE O3C
M , CT. C ft C' CV x
OCZ>' 3
h-o c;o c'o ceo ceo oso'ouo
uv, uj «*s u <\ u X - X X X X H. 1 J
H«* oo; o ' o: oc. OC^.OQ; oj
«t a M LJ M LJ M i-i M *-i H uj n
i J<0 C") J O-J O_J O_J O»J "we
la'oi cocr net me; no: COCCLJKO:
Mr-*-JO -OrHZJO Z>rH^O I3tHnO I^i-irJO r3t-4r?O O>HIJO
iv- o» o I u. en en x u. 01 tri i u- OT o i u. *o n x u. en tn x cc 01 o x
PT»-*>I _J»H t _JrH 1 _JrH t J«H 1 _J»H l'»-fMtJl
H X '(MO CJ O C\J O CM -3
i* * H, Mi M ' * ' ' *r
la a ' o u ' o a a
i | i i i : i i
-------
u
u u
j T '.)
LI
<-<
_^
0
5C 1- 1
Z l~
< ^
Ul 01
H
«t cr
t- t-
«t 1,1
u t
f - «
o: o r i
l- 11 i j
u t.i z
s: j n
O c^
c: L,
ui ci: «
< U- Ll
rt
J ^~ **
< - J
z r: L
C) Ul (~
iii.*
1-
LJ o LJ
0 n Z
13 (- o
1- |- , Nl
*- z s:
** O *"
-1 -j S>
h.
_l
-
1
M
C)
Ci
_J
o
«*
CJ H-
CJ 11
^- uJ LJ
O (-> .1;
^ a. '-1
0 -,' U.
-- 0
M >r j
0 .. 1
c ~- z
-1 UJ CJ
1 1 wj
o
-!>.««
t- 1-
I .
0 0-
cc v
ij a. t-
O V
o >- >-
C> CJ CJ
LJ Z Z
1 LJ UU
W < «
»-
L. «
»-
U U.
C) U
u>
CO
IJ LJ
UJ L-l z
r-l f*- ^
fl C) o -1
L 1 I J CC I I
r 1 « o S£
r i L>
31 LJ L.I
> >
«. CJ 0
O CJ CO
Z c> < <
n Z
I n z z
K- l~ [j O
l£ L) n M
0 < 1 1
>- LJ < <
> >
E E LJ LJ
^ - -J -J
13 Z> LJ Li
i
c(
M
(J
t.
U J
j;
j;
O
<_j
1
>-
1
n <
o
t
fc n
^ z
^ n
LJ CJ
CJ Z CX
C- <
.« LJ O
^ rl
M t-
C3 ti
c ' rc
LJ (-
i. ~ z
1 *> CJ CJ
'O UJ
c5 o
n n
l or
t- o »: -i
Ll t C'l _|
O
a.
cc
M
-
-. o
z z z
0 0 Ll
1 1 M Ul CD
1- 1- t
-1 -J Z CI
3 O O Z
Ci- CL M » <
O 0 CJ 1-
tL 0- CJ CC
CC O
>- CL 1 OL
1- 0 «f Cv
M c< ft. 3
CJ < LJ I/I
I/I
££
~\
O
I
1 1
CJ
^_
L 1
LJ
;*
^j.
^~
0
*
U.
u.
t.)
y~
h-
H ""
O
U-
o
C£
LJ
»-
Z
LJ
(j
;£
M
a
LJ
<-
O UO
o *.o
J V
f-l
11
M LJ
>
IJ M
I- I
H U
1/1
1-
z
u
JE
I
0
0 ,
Ul
0
o
M 0
CC D-
LJ
I
O
U Z
0 <
Ul
E
I
l~ O
' H >
a <
-
k- -J >- Z
o: _i LJ n
«r 0 T.
t> 0.
CT
1
a
^
UJ
r
u>
i-
t
T\
U)
^
0"»
^1
*
rj
(NJ
^
*
,
n>
1
t-->
*
n
t*
^
'O
«
h-
r-4
M
H
t
*H
^
H-
iX
U.
1
LJ
H-
u> n
* 2
u: <-J
to
ft: ui
a:
»-< u
Cl f-
O LJ
1 1 y.
LJ z r>
O L , 0
M *t N
X Z O
o o
H
u cr
LJ
Z J
UJ cu re
O CJ O
0 4- =J 0
G: 01 CQ i
H- r. |
H n M .f
z 10 < n
OJ CD
1 "*
^
u
1
1 to
t-
)
IJ
CI
X
CJ
M
U
Z
. u
o
a
h-
M
Z
rH
U
1
a-
r-
Q
^
f^
rvj
M
M
rj
r>
r j
t/>
i>
t
01
*
I-)
ti*
n
y
f-4
if
j^
rj
o
r4
fO
*
a- n
* u.
I
LJ
1-
y n
r* Z **
UJ
Ll O
«< X
Z CJ)
D
U
-J
oi a -
a) "~y
a- 3 0
fl CJ 3f
TJ 1
r 1 H .t
o < rsi
rj CD
d-
ID
. Ul
n
a-
CO
Lt
**">
10
Cl
*
CJ
M
t
*
(M
K>
, *
'*
in
o
irt
rJ
««
0,
LJ
CJ LJ
0 f.
I
LJ 1- 3
C3 Ll U
M H V
x e>
O 3
M LJ
0 _!
CO
Z
rl
CJ
1
7
r-
H
t~
r<
Ul
CO
M
(SI
h-
C-l
M -
CO
»
a
M
c j
. L3
*
CM
U
«
UT
rj
9
&
ft
t^
(M
rj
-
. »~
n n
cc
lj_
1
u
h*
en (H
z
L, CJ
Lt
CC Ll
< M
»!
H
3 CC
. M Ll
U) 1-
O Ul
Ll 3Z
LJ Z ^J
CJ 1 1 C>
M *t X
X Z CD
O O
H
a a
Ll
Z _l
LJ CJ CC
o cj n
O » 3 O
D. C'l Cl I
h- rj |
M n "1 «
Z 10 < M
fsj O
^
C4
u
1
a1
r^
en
ui
H
in
o
t
PI
M
*
10
M
U0
in
t
01
*
u>
' i/i
01
a-
r-
^
o
1
ii
r i
I-
,-1
t-
v>
in
0)
to
M
1.1
* 11
if
rH
J"
^*
M
J
f >
1-
uo D*i
rj a:
u.
1
UJ
I
UJ M
- rt Z
CI
1 CC 10
J ^ (M
" ta«
r
K 3 CC
J H IJ
J 0 i J
; HE
3 LJ Z 0
> C3 HO
v H < N.
0 X Z C3
30 ^J
M
Q a
LJ
Z -J
K LJ CO (C
DO 0) 13
D a » o o
c ci. n oj 3;
l H- r, i
tc M r j ui »
i z o < IM
-------
Ambient Air Quality Standards
TSP (ug/m3)
Annual geo. mean
Max. 24-hr cone.**
Primary
75
260
Secondary
60
150
SO?
Annual arith. aver.
Max. 24-hr cone.**
Max. 3-hr cone.**
80 (.03 ppm)
36b (.14 pp-n)
1300 (0.5 ppm)
CO (mg/m3}
Max. 8-hr cone.**
Max. 1-hr cone.**
10 (9 ppm)
40 (35 ppm)
10
40
O_3_ (ug/m3)
Max. 1-hr cone.**
160 (.08 ppm)
160
HC
Max. 3-hr cone.**
160 (.24 ppm)
160
(ug/m3
ANNUAL ARITH. AVER.
100 (.05 ppm)
100
**Not to be exceeded more than once a year.
Source of data: 36 F.R. 8187, April 30, 1971;
38 F.R. 25678, Sept. 14, 1973.
£- H-
-------
APPENDIX F
ENGINEERING & COST CALCULATIONS
I. TASK 2 EVALUATION OF PURE OXYGEN PROCESS
A. Two Stage Aeration (Air)
Design Flow = 16 MGD
Assume Detention Time 4 hours
Assume three parallel reactors
Reactor Flow = 16 MGD/3 = 5.33 MGD
Reactor Volume = 5.33 x 10^ gals x 4 hours
24 hours
= 8.85 x 1.0 gals per reactor
8.85 x 105 gal
7.48 gals/ft3 = 1.18 x 105 ft3 per reactor
Assume liquid depth of 15 ft
118 x 103 ft3/15 = 7.8 x 103 ft2 = 78 x 102
Use 90 x 90 x 15 SWD @ 3 each
Volume supplied - 90 x 90 x 15 » 122 x 103
Io22 x 105 > 1.18 x 105 O.K.
Air Required for First Stage
Lbs. of BOD = 16 x 8.34 x (144-5) = 18,600# BOD
Lbs. of BOD/Tank = 18,600/3 = 6.200 # BOD
Air Requirements - 1,500 c/air/lb of BOD
(includes 50% safety factor)
Total Blower Capacity = 1,500 cf/air x 18,600
- 2.8 cf x 107/1.44 x 103
= 2 x 104 cfm of air
Return Sludge Pumps
Assume Aerator Vss = 3,000 mg/1
F-l
-------
Assume Return Sludge Vss = 10,000 mg/1
3,000 (Q + Qr) = 10,000 (Qr)
3,000 Q = 7,000 Qr
Qr/Q = 3/7 = .43
Oxygen Requirement for Salt and Clear Creek; calculate 02
requirement by the following equation.
Lbs. 02/day = 1.5 BOD + 4.6 NH3-N
Assume carbonacious demand (1.5 BOD) is negligible.
Salt Creek
Winter - No requirement
Summer - 3 mg/1
(12-3) x 8.34 x 16 x 1.5 = 1,800 Ibs. of NH3-N
Lbs. of 02 = 4.6 x 1,800 = 8,300 Ibs. 02/day
Clear Creek
Winter - 6.5 mg/1
Summer - 1.5 mg/1
Winter (12-6.5) x 8.34 x 16 x 1.5 = 1,100 Ibs. of NH3-N
Summer (12-1.5) x 8.34 x 16 x 1.5 = 2,100 Ibs. of NH3-N
Lbs. of 02 Winter 4.6 x 1,100 = 5,100 Ibs. 0,/day
Summer 4.6 x 2,100 = 9,700 Ibs. 02/day
Volume for Second Stage
Source of Design Data:"Nitrification and Denitrification
Facilities" EPA Technology Transfer Seminar Publication.
F-2
-------
Assume
Q - 16 MGD
NH3-N concentration « 12 mg/1
MLVss = 1,500 mg/1
Minimum operating temperature = 10°C
Operating pH » 7.8
Effluent requirements
Salt Creek - 7.9 mg/1 summer
N/A winter
Clear Creek - 3.0 mg/1 winter
1.5 mg/1 summer
It is to be noted that effluent requirements will affect operating
costs (amount of air required) rather than capital costs (size of
tanks).
NH-^-N Load
Maximum
Salt Creek
1.5 x 16 x 8.34 x (12 - 7.9) - 1,100 Ibs/day
Maximum
Clear Creek
1.5 x 16 x 8.34 x (12 - 1.5) =
2,250 Ibs/day
Tank Volume
From Figure II-3, page 24
Volumetric Load =8.2 lbs/1,000 ft3
Clear Creek
2,250/8.2/1,000 - 275,000 ft"3
Salt Creek
1,100/8.2/1,000 = 134,000 ft3
Tank Volume Adjusted to pH 7.8
Correction factor according to Figure III-4, page 23 = 0.88
F-3
-------
Salt Creek
134,000/.88 = 153,000 ft
Clear Creek
327,0007.88 = 315,000 ftj
Detention Time ,
315,000 x 24 x 7.48/16 x 10° =3.6 hours Clear Creek
153,000 x 24 x 7.48/16 x 106 = 1.8 hours Salt Creek
Therefore, assume the detention time is 4 hours on Clear Creek
and 2 hours on Salt Creek for nitrification.
Estimate Concrete (Two Stage - Air)
90 x 90 x 17 (2 ft of freeboard)
J
i
270'
_ Ty
j*1 i
"' f
r
Assume Thickness - Bottom Slab 1.25*
Walls 1'
Concrete Slab - 1.25 x 270 x 90/27 =
Walls - 4 x 1 x 90 x 17/27 -
Walls - 2 x 270 x 17 x 1/27 =
Rock = 10' x 90 x 270/27 =
Excavation = 5' x 270 x 90/27
1/2 bh
1/2 5 x 90 x 2 + 1/2 x 2 x 5 x 270
450 + 1350
27 27
1,110 yds
230
340
1,680 yds
9,000
4,500
100
4600
F-4
-------
Construction Cost
Concrete
Rock
Excavation
1,680 x 400
9,000 x 10
4,600 x 4
Two Stage
2 x 780,000
Concrete, Rock, Excavation
Equipment
Install
Project Cost
Project Cost @ 15 MGD
Salvage Value » 1,560 x 1.30 x 30/50
Salvage Value @ 15 MGD
672,000
90,000
18.000
780,000
1,560,000
1,560,000
390,000
80.000
$2,030,000
2,639,000
2,474,000
1,216,000
1,140,000
B. Single Stage Aeration (Air)
Detention Time = 6 hrs
/
vo
2.'
Concrete
Slab
Walls
Walls
Excavation
Excavation
270 x 115 x 1.25 x/27
4 x 1 x 115 x 17/27
2 x 270 x 17 x 1/27
10 x 115 x 270/27
1,420
300
340
3,020
11,560
5' x 270 x 115/27 5,750
1/2 x 2 x 5 x 115 + 1/2 x 2 x 5 x 270 100
5,850
F-5
-------
Construction Cost
Concrete 2,060 x 400 824,000
Excavation 17,300 x 4 70,000
Equipment 310,000
Install 62,000
1,266,000
Project @ 15 MQD $1,645,000
Salvage Value
1.30 x 10/30 (824,000 + 108,400) = 811,000
C. Two Stage, Aeration - Oxygen System
The following parameters were given by oxygen manufacturers.
Detention Time - 1-1/2 hours for first stage
1-1/2 hours second stage
MLSS - 4,500 mg/1
Depth of reactor 13 deep
Allow 4 ft freeboard for oxygen absorbtion.
Each unit should have three cells
Recycle Flow 30%
Mixing BHP 261
Oxygen BHP 365 Turndown 60%
Assume three reactors
Q/reactor = 5.33 MGD
Liquid Depth = 13 deep
Detention Time = 1.5 hours
Volume req'd = 5.33 x 10 gal/day x 1 day/2.4 x 10' hrs x
1.5 hours
= 3.33 x 105 gallons
33.3 x 104 gals/7.48 gals/ft3 = 4.45 x 104 ft3
F-6
-------
Surface Area - 44.5 x 103 ft3/13 ft
3.423 x 103 ft2
3423 ft2
Use 60 x 60 x 13 SWD Basins
Volume Supplies
60 x 60 x 13 = 46,800 ft3
46,800 > 44,500 O.K.
Uc.lU
I So
Concrete
Bottom Slab
Walls
Walls
Top Slab
Rock
Earth
1.25 x 180 x 60/27 =
4 x 1 x 180 x 17/27
4 x 60 x 1 x 17/27
1/2 x 180 x 60/27 -
8' x 180' x 60'/27 =
5 x 180 x 60/27 =
2 x 1/2 x 5 x 5 x 180/27
2 x 1/2 x 5 x 5 x 60/27
500
450
150
1,100
200
3,200 yds
2,300 yds
200
50
2,550 yds
F-7
-------
Construction Cost
Concrete
Rock
Earth
1,100 x 400
200 x 200
3,200 x 10
2,550 x 4
Two stage will require 2 x 522,000
Concrete, Rock, Excavation
Equipment
Install
Project (30% does not apply because of equip)
Project @ 15 MGD
Salvage Value
1,044,000 x 1.3 x 30/50 =
@ 15 MGD
I,
I
440,000
40,000
32,000
10,000
$522,000
1,044,000
1,044,000
1,900,000
80,000
$3,024,000
3,639,000
3,420,000
814,000
765,000
D. Single Stage Oxygen System
Concrete
Bottom Slab
Walls
Walls
Earth
Earth
1.25 x 180 x 120/27
4 x 1 x 180 x 17/27
4 x 1 x 120 x 17/27
8' x 120 x 180/27
5 x 120 x 180/27
2 x 1/2 x 5 x 5 x 180/27
2 x 1/2 x 5 x 5 x 120/27
1,000
450
300
1,750
6,400
4,600
200
110
11,300
F-8
-------
Concrete 1,750 x 400 700,000
Earth 11,300 x 4 45,000
Equipment 1,900,000
Install 80.000
2,725,000
Project Cost 3,260,000
Project Cost @ 15 MGD 3,064,000
Salvage Value
1.3 x 30/50 (700,000 + 45,000) = 581,000
@ 15 MGD 546,000
E. Clarifiers for Air & Oxygen Systems
Size Air Clarifiers
Assume 3 units
Overflow rate - 700 gals/ft2/day
Solids Loading - 25 Ibs/ft2/day
Q clarifier = 16/3 =5.33 MGD
Area Req'd = 53.3 x 10^/7 x 102 = 7,650 ft2
Use 100 ft dia. units
7,850 ft2 > 7,650 O.K.
Check Solids Loading
Lbs. to Clarifier = 3,000 x 8.34 x 5.33 (It. 43)
3,000 x 8.34 x 7.6
191,000 Ibs/day/reactor
191,000/25 Ibs/ft2/day = 7,650 ft2
7,850 ft2 > 7,650 O.K.
F-9
-------
Assume 12 deep clarifiers
7,850 x 12 = 94,000 ft3
94,000 ft3 x 7.48 gals/ft3 = 705,000 gals.
705,000 gals. = 131 days =3.1 hours O.K.
5,330,000 gals/day
Size Oxygen Clarifiers
Assume 3 units
Overflow Rate = 550 gal/ft2 (oxygen mfs received)
Solids Loading 25 Ibs/ft2/day
Area Req'd 5.33 x 105/5.5 x 102 = 9,750 ft2
Check Solids Loading
Q recycle = 30%
MLSS = 4,500 mg/1
I 4,500 x 8.34 x 5.33 (1 + .3) = 260,000*
Area Req'd = 260,000/25 = 10,400 ft2 req'd
10,400 > 9,750 solids loading governs
Use 115 i unit = 10,400 ft2
10,400 - 10,400 O.K.
Depth 11 ft (supplied by oxygen mfs)
Construction Costs
\ c
F_10
-------
Concrete
Slab 1.25/27 x .785 x 1002
1.25/27 x 7,850 = 330 yds 1.25/27 x 10,400 = 470
Walls 14/27 x .798 (1012 - 1002) 13/27 x .785 (1162 - 1152)
14/27 .875 x 201 = 80 yds 13/27 x .785 x 231 = 90
330 + 80 - 410/each 470 + 90 = 560/each
Rock (assume 5 deep)
7'/27 x 7,850 = 2,000 yds/ea. 6'/27 x 10,400 = 2,400 yds/ea.
Excavation
5/27 x 7,850 = 1,400 yds/ea. 5/27 x 10,400 = 2,000/ea.
Clarifier Mechanisms & Weirs & Baffles
100' 6 $52,000/each
115' 6 $71,000/each
Source - Envirex phone call.
Area Required
Air Oxygen
Single Nitrification 3 x 7,850 = 23,000 3 x 10,400 = 31,200
Dual Nitrification 47,000 62,400
Air - Single Stage
Concrete 3 x 410 yd x $400/yd = 492,000
Rock 3 x 2,000 yd x $10 day 60,000
Earth 3 x 1,400 yd x $4/yd 16.800
568,000
Equipment 52,000 x 3 156,000
Install 156,000 x .2 31,200
Installation cost assumes 20% of equipment price.
F-ll
-------
Oxygen - Single Stage
Concrete
Rock
Earth
Equipment
Install
3 x 560 x 400
3 x 2400 x 10
3 x 2000 x 4
71,000 x 3
213,000 x .2
672,000
72,100
24,000
768,100
213,000
42,600
255,600
Equipment
Inst.
Concrete
Rock
Earth
30% Project.
@ 15 MGD
Air
1 stg 2 stg
156,000
31,000
492,000
60,000
16.000
756,000
982,000 + 1,965,000
923,000 1,847,000
1 stg
Oxygen
2 stg
213,000
42,600
672,000
72,100
24,000
1,024,000
1,332,000 +
1,252,000
2,662,000
2,502,000
Salvage Value (982,000 - 187,000) 30/50
477,000
(1,332,000 - 256,000) 30/50
645,000
@ 15 MGD
448,000
896,000
606,000
1,212,000
F-12
-------
o o
o o
CM O
ON CD
t-H 10
CO-
o
O
CM
co-
O
O
vO
CM
r-.
O O
O O
O O
M A
Ol f-
CM O\
co-
o
o
vO
CM
O
O
co
g
bC
CM
m
u
to
o
S
««
O
Q
N r»
rH
VO
x x
o
o o
o o
CM "
* 00
ro co
vO
O
o o
o o
00 ~
> m
* vO
vO
c
(U
60
o o
o o
vO O
CO-
O
O
VO
cT
vO
O
O
vO
o o
o o
CM O
Oi vO
tH CO
O
o
CM
M
m
o>
CO-
GS
o
m
ft
o\
00
§
4-1
0)
^
CO
0)
II ^1
vO «
X O
O
O O
o >
vO O
CM
CM H
3 cd
O -H
a ^
I
-------
M
vO
CO-
CO
o
CJ
-ll
Hi
O O
O O
r^ r^.
ft f,
CM rH
O
O
o
o
-3"
f.
CT>
CM
C
0
H
4-1
Cfl
0)
P.
O ^O
i-H
1
H CU
- 1 Kf
^n OL
W rH
rH
p3
o
^_f
4J
CO
^4
CU
-------
VD
CO-
o
u
at
o
s-
£
4-1
e
H
a
0)
M
at
4-1
CO
o o
o o
m o
A A
.
co
§
o o
o o
O CM
cn-
O
O
CM
A
en
o
o
CM
CO-
o
o
°J
enl
o
o
CM
A
CM
-------
I. Return Sludge Pumping Costs
GPM x HEAD x SP. GR/3,960 x EFF. = B.H.P.
16 x .43 = 6.88 HGD 30'
694 (6.88) (30) (1)/3,960 x .75 = 48.2 hp
@ 95% Motor Eff » 50.8 hp
50.8 x 24 hr x 365 x .0149 $/hp hr = $6,630/yr
@ 15 MGD $6,232
16 x .30 = 4.88 20'
694 x (4.8) (20) (1)/3,960 x .75 = 22.4 hp
@ 95% Motor Eff = 23.6 hp
23.6 x 24 x 365 x .0149 = $3,080/yr
@ 15 MGD $2,895/yr
J. Air & Oxygen Power Costs
The following data were supplied by manufactuers of oxygen
systems and air systems. The air systems were based on a
submersed tubing with 30% efficiency.
The following data was supplied by manufacturers and pertains
to oxygen systems.
Salt Creek
16 MGD
Winter
414 x 24 x .0149 x 270 = 39,972
Summer
594 x 24 x .0149 x 90 = 19.117
$59,089
6 15 MGD 55,543
F-16
-------
11 MGD
Winter
289 x 24 x .0149 x 270 - 27,903
Summer
415 x 24 x .0149 x 90 - 13.356
41,259
Clear Creek
Oxygen
16 MGD
Winter
520 x .0149 x 24 x 270 - 50,205
Summer
626 x .0149 x 24 x 90 - 20.147
70,352
@ 15 MGD 66,130
11 MGD
Winter
364 x .0149 x 24 x 270 = 35,144
Summer
438 x .0149 x 24 x 90 - 14,096
$49,240
The following data was supplied by manufacturers and pertain
to Air systems.
Clear Creek
15 MGD
Winter
485 BHP x 24 x .0149 x 270 - $46,831
Summer
317 BHP x 24 x .0149 x 90 - 16.536
$63,367
F-17
-------
11 MGD
Winter
361 BHP x 24 x .0149 x 270
Summer
380 BHP x 24 x .0149 x 90
Salt Creek
Air
15 MGD
Winter
342 x 24 x .0149 x 270
Summer
516 x 24 x .0149 x 90
11 MGD
Winter
254 x 24 x .0149 x 270
Summer
317 x 24 x .0149 x 90
$34,855
12,229
$47,184
$32,947
13.668
$46,615
$24,698
10,202
$34,890
K. Present Worth Comparison of Air & Oxygen at Clear Creek
Operating Costs
Air
11
63,784
47,184
29,400
9,140
15
89,500
63,367
39,500
12,464
Clarifier
Aeration
Return Sludge
149,508 204,831
(204,831 - 149,508)720 = 53,323/20
= 2,766
Oxygen
11
84,420
45,240
30,000
4,246
JJj
118,400
66,130
41,100
5.790
167,894 231,420
(231,420 - 167,894)/20
3,176
F-18
-------
Present Worth of Constant 0 & M
Air Oxygen
11.47 x 149,508 - 1,715,000 11.47 x 167,854 = 1,925,744
Present Worth of Variable 0 & M
86.01 x 2.766 - 238,000 86.01 x 3176 - 273,167
Initial Project Cost
Air , Oxygen
Aerators 2,474,000 3,420,000
Clarifiers 1,847,000 2,502,000
Add 500.000 500.000
4,821,000 6,422,000
Present Work of S.V.
Aerators 1,140,000 765,000
Clarifiers 876,000 1,212,000
Add 300.000 900.000
2,336,000 2,277,000
714,000 696,000
Initial Cost 4,821,000 6,422,000
P.W. of O&M 1,715,000 1,926,000
P.W. of O&M 238.000 273.000
6,774,000 8,621,000
S.V. 714.000 696.000
$6,060,000 $7,925,000
L. Present Worth Comparison of Air and Oxygen at Salt Creek
Operating Costs
Air Oxygen
11
41,662
34,890
21,000
4,570
15
56,900
46,615
28,700
6,232
11
53,268
41,255
22,200
2,123
15
72,600
55,543
30,400
2,895
Clarifier
Aerator
102,122 138,447 118,850 161,438
(138,447 - 102,620)720 - 1816 161,438 - 118,850 = 2129
F-19
-------
Present Worth of Constant 0 & M
Air Oxygen
11.47 x 102,120 = 1,171,000 11.47 x 118,852 - 1,313,232
Present Worth of Variable 0 & M
86.01 x 1816 = 156,000 86.01 x 2,129 = 183,115
Initial Project Cost
Air Oxygen
Aerators 1,645,000 3,064,000
Clarifiers 923,000 1.252.000
2,568,000 4,316,000
Present Worth of S.V.
Aerators 542,000 546,000
Clarifier 448.000 606.000
.3058 990,000 1,152,000
303,000 352,000
Initial Cost 2,508,000 4,316,000
P.W. of Con. O&M 1,189,000 1,363,000
P.W. of Var. O&M 159.000 183.000
3,916,000 5,862,000
S.V. 303.000 352.000
3,613,000 5,510,000
Assume oxygen system will eliminate sludge thickening device.
Construction Cost = $210,000
Project Cost = $274,000
Assume Equipment Cost = $30,000
S.V. = (274,000 - 30,000)30/50
146,000
F-2C
-------
0 & M @ 15 MGD « $ 28,000
@ 11 MGD - 20.600
7,200/20 = 360
P.W. of Constant 0 & M - 20,600 x 11,470 - 236,287
P.W. of Variable 0 & M » 360 x 86.01 - 30,963
P.W. of S.V. m 1,146,000 x .3058 = 44,000
Project Cost 274,000
P.W. of 0 & M 236,000
31,000
541,000
S.V. 44.000
497,000
II. PRESENT WORTH ANALYSIS - SOUTH BLOOMINGTON
A. Site Development
Winston Thomas
1. 3200 feet of stream relocation
(Assume 5' deep)
2. Flood elevation 675'
Length 3800'
South Rogers
1. Relocate Trailer Park
Assume $500,000
2. Relocate streams
1300 feet and 3200 feet. Assume 5' deep
3. Levee Elevation
Upper 676 and lower 672
Length of Dike = 2500
Depth
Dillroan Road
1. Levee
F-21
-------
2. Stream Relocation
2000 Feet. Assume 10* deep cut.
Salt Creek
Stream Recollection 1000'
Assume 10* deep
Ketcham Rd
1. Levee
Length - 2200'
2. Relocate stream
2500 ft. Assume 10' deep
Salt Creek
Salt Creek Flood Elevation - 512
Assume grade is 505 and top of levee 515
L = 3400 feet
CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Winston Thomas^
Stream relocation
Volume = 3200 x [20 x 5 + 2 x 1/2 x 5 x 2]/27
3200 x [100 + 10]/27
13,037 yd x $10/yd = $130,000
Rip Rap 2 x 3200/9 x (5.4/2) = 1920 sq.yd.
1920 sq. yds x $20/yd. = $38,000
Stream Fill = 5 x 1600 x 20/27 x $l/yd = $6000
F-22
-------
Dike
Volume - 3800/27 [10 x 10 + 1/2 x 10 x 10 x 2]
- 28,148
28,148 x $15/yd = $422,000
Stream Fill 6,000
Stream Relocation 130,000
Rip Rap 38,000
Levee 422,000
Construction Cost 596,000
30% 179,000
Total $775,000
South Rogers
Stream Relocation
Volume = (1300 + 3200) [20 x 5 + 2 x 1/2 x 5 x 2]/27
4500 [100 + 10]/27 = 18,333
18,333 x 10 = $183,000
Rip Rap = 2 x 4500/9 x 5.4/2 = 2700
Stream Fill = 2700 x $20 = $54,000
1500/27 x 20 x 5 x $l/yd - $6,000
Dike
Volume - 4500/27 [100 = 100] = 33,333 yds.
Land - 33,333 x $15/yd $500,000
40 acres x 2500 100,000
Stream Fill 60,000
Land 100,000
Trailer Park Relocation 500,000
Dike 500,000
Stream Relocation 183,000
Rip Rap 54,000
Construction $1,343,000
Project Cost (30%) $1,745,000
S.V. = 100,000
P.W.S.V. = 30,000
F_23
-------
Ketcham Rd.
Stream Relocation
Volume = 2500 [20 x 10 + ]/2 x 4 x ]0 x 2]/27
92.6 [200 + 40]
21,574 yd.
21,574 x 10 = $216,000
Rip Rap 2 x 2500/9 (10.5/2) = 2516
2516 x 20 = $58,000
Stream = 1800/27 x 20 x 5 x $l/yd. = $7,000
Dike
2200/27 (10 x 10 x 1/2 x 2 x 10 x 10) + 900/27 (10 x 5 x 1/2 x 2 x 5 x 10)
16,296 + 3,333
19,625 x $15/yd. = $294,440
Land - 60 acres x 2,500 = $150,000
Land
Stream Fill 7,000
Stream 216,000
58,000
Dike 295,000
Land 150,000
$726,000
Project $943,000
*
P.W.S.V = $45,000
Dillman Site
Land - 60 acres x 2500 = $150,000
Stream Relocation
Volume = 2000/27 [20 x 10 + 1/2 x 2 x 10 x 4]
74 (200 + 40)
17,777 yds.
17,777 x 10 = $178,000
Rip Rap = 2000 x 2/9 x 10.5 = 4667
4667 x $20 = $94,000
F-24
-------
Stream Fill = 3000/2 x 20 x 5 x $l/yd = 12,000
Dike
Volume = 1500/27 (10 x 10 + 1/2 x 2 x 10 x 10)
40.74 x 200
11,111 x $15/yd. = $167,000
Land 150,000
Stream Fill 12,000
Stream Relocation 178,000
Rip Rap 94,000
Dike 167.000
601,000
Project Cost $781,000
P.W.S.V. - 45,000
Salt Creek
Stream Relocation
1000/27 (20 x 10 + 2 x 1/2 x 10 x 4)
8888 yds. x $10 day = $89,000
Rip Rap = 1000 x 2/9 [105 x $20/yd] = $47,000
Stream Fill = $l/yd x 10/27 x 20 x 2100 = $16,000
Dlke . - LJSL,
Volume = 3400/27 (10 x 10 + 1/2 x 2 x 10 x 10)
125.93 x 200 = 25,185
25,185 x 15 - $378,000
Land = 160 x 2,500 = $150,000
Stream Relocation 89,000
Rip Rap 47,000
Stream Fill 16,000
Dike 378,000
Land 150,000
$680,000
Project Costs $884,000
S.V. = 45,000
7-25
-------
P.W.
Winston Thomas - $ 775,000
South Rodgers - 1,745,000 - 30,000 $1,715,000
Ketcham - 943,000 - 45,000 $ 898,000
Dillman - 781,000 - 45,000 $ 736,000
Salt Creek - 884,000 - 45,000 $ 839,000
Salt Creek (extra land) - $ 455,000
B. Calculated Cost of Treatment Plant
Items Required
1. Preliminary Treatment
a. Grit removal equipment
b. Pumps
c. Pump station building
0 =16 MGD
avg
Tnax
32 MGD
Construction Cost = $700,000 (1971)
Construction Cost = 7000,000 x 232/151 = $1,075,000 (1975)
Project Cost = 1,075,000 x 1.3 = 1,398,000
2. Administration Building
a. Clerical
b. Laboratory
Construction Cost = $150,000 (1971)
150,000 x 1.54 = 230,000 (1975)
Project Cost = 1.3 x 230,000 = $300,000
3. Garage & Shop Facilities
Construction Cost = $45,000 (1971)
Construction Cost = $45,000 x 1.54 = $70,000
Project Cost = $70,000 x 1.3 = $90,000
F-26
-------
4. Chlorine Building and Equipment
32 x 8.34 x 8 = 2135 Ibs/day
Construction Cost = $110,000
Construction Cost = $110,000 x 1.54 = $170,000
Project Cost = $170,000 x 1.3 = $220,000
5. Chlorine Contact Basins
TO ir>6 gals day 1C 1 hour
32 x 10 -5 - x . J x 15 mm. x 77; =
day 24 hour 60 mm
» x .07.48 - 44,100 ft3
Construction Cost = $700,000
Construction Cost = $700,000 x 1.54 = $1,078,000
Project Cost = $1,401,000
6. Return Activated Sludge Pumping
Use Q = 16 MGD
Install = 32 MGD Use thru pumps
@ 11 MGD
Firm capacity = 22 MGD
Construction Cost = $250,000
Construction Cost = $250,000 x 1.54 = $385,000
Project Cost = $385,000 x 1.3 = $500,000
7. Pumping to Filtration Units
Use 22 MGD
Project Cost = $500,000
8. Filtration Units
Use 2.5 gpm/ft2
16 x 106 gals/day x \ **? . = 11.11 x 103 gpm
mln
11.11 x 103/2.5 gpm/ft2 = 4,480 ft2
Construction Cost = $900,000
Construction Cost = 232/175 x 900,000
= 1,200,000
Project Cost = $1,550,000
Source EPA Suspended Solids Removal
F_27
-------
9. 0 & M
Manhours
N = ^ 80
N = 460 x 16'°^ A60 x 5.2 = 4232 hours
N = 460 x 11 460 x 6.8 = 3128
Materials & Supply
F = 1.0; Q = 16
S = i (FQ)J i = 17.40; j = .8
at 16 MGD
17.40 x 16 = 17.4 x 9 = $150,000
at 11 MGD
17.4 x 11 = 17.4 x 6.8 = $120,000
10. Equilization Basin
Basin size required = 10 Mg
Basin size - 2.4 MG Costs = $595,000
, 595,000/.36
10
$1,700,000 x 232/175 = $2,253,000
Source: Flow Equilization EPA Bulletin
11. HVAC, Plumbing & Electrical Work
Assume 25% of other work costs
.25 x 11.942,000 = 3,000,000
12. Yard Work
Assume 20% of other construction costs from EPA Bulletin
.20 x 14,942,000 = 2,988,000
Use $3,000,000
F_28
-------
Summary of Costs - Project Costs
Preliminary Treatment $ 1,398,000
Administration Building 300,000
Garage & Shop 90,000
Chlorine Bldg. 220,000
Chlorine Contact Basin 1,078,000
Return Sludge Pumping 500,000
Pumping to Filtration Units 500,000
Filters 1,550,000
Electric Substation 750,000
Pond 2,253,000
Aeration & Clarifiers 2,566,000
Electrical, HVAC, Plumbing 3,000,000
Yard Work 3,000.000
Project Cost $17,205,000
@ 15 MGD 16,130,000
C. Calculate 0 & M Costs
Wastewater pumping 11 16
Labor 1500 hrs. 2000 hrs.
$ 9000 $12,000
Electricity 10,000 20,000
Material & Supply
(1800 x 1.53) 3.000 (2800 x ) 4,500
$22,000 $36,500
Use above figures for pumping to filters
Preliminary Treatment l± 16
Labor 3600 4800
$22,000 $29,000
Material & Supply 4.5QO 6,000
$26,500 $35,000
F-29
-------
Chlorination 11 16
1850 2500
Labor $ 11,000 $ 15,000
Material 2,500 3,000
Chlorination 180,000 117,000
Yardwork l± l<±
Labor
Material & Supply
Laboratory
Labor
Material & Supply
Administration
Labor
General Expense
Pumping
Manpower
$9,074 $ 12,630
Filtration (Source: Gulp, Weiser & Gulp)
EPA STP Index - 200
@ 16 MGD = 180,000 x 231/200 = 208,000
@ 11 MGD = 130,000 x 231/200 = 150,000
Equalization Basin
Assume same costs at 11 MGD as 16 MGD
Assume 300 HP
Power costs * 200 x 24 x 365 x .0145 = 26,000
Material 2,000
Manpower = 3800 x 6 23,000
$51,000
>iy
'ly
Electric
Manpower
$
$
$
$
$
$
2,000
3,000
15,000
U,
4,100
25,000
2,000
27,000
n.
2,800
17,000
7,000
24,000
4,574
4,500
$
$
$
$
$
$
3,500
4,500
25,500
li
4,300
26,000
4,500
30,500
I6.
4,500
27,000
8,000
35,000
6,630
6,000
F-30
-------
Summary 0 & M
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Raw & intermediate
pumping
Preliminary Treatment
Chlorination
Aerator Clarifiers
Filtration
Pumping
Yardwork
Laboratory
Administration
Equalization Basin
II
$ 44,000
27,000
80,000
99,000
150,000
10,000
15,000
27,000
24,000
SljOOO
$527,000
16
$ 73,000
35,000
117,000
141,000
208,000
13,000
26,000
31,000
35,000
51,000
$730,000
@ 15 MGD 684,000
P.W. and 0 & M
$527,000 x 11.47 = $6,045,000
P.W. - ($684,000 - $527,000)/20 x 86.01 = $675,000
= $6,720,000
III. TASK 6 - PRESENT WORTH ANALYSIS - LAKE MONROE
Smlthville and Sanders at Dillman
One P.S. Q = .08
6500 FM @ 4" avg
5500 @ 8 gravity
Head - 820 - 730 - 90 static - 80 friction
u & n
Labor
.5
6
$6
:?/uu
,000
,700
P.W. of 0 & M 11.47 x 6700 77,000
P.S. 55,000
6500 @ 15 98,000
5500 @ 27 149,000
302,000
Project Cost 393,000
S.W. = 393,000 x 31/50 x .3052 = 72,000
P.W. 393,000
77,000
-72,000
$398,000
F- 31
-------
Smithville and Sanders Costs at Dillman
Smithville and Sanders require .08 MGD reserved capacity. Their
proportionate share is .08/15 x 100 = .53%.
Smithville and Sanders are responsible for:
.0053 x (28,583,000 - 2,319,000) = 139,000
Smithville and Sanders (Clear Creek)
Gravity Line - 18,500 @ 8"
Construction Cost = 18,500 x $17/ft = $499,500
Project Cost = $499,500 x 1.3 = $649,000
S.W. = $649,000 x 30/50 x .305 = $118,000
P.W. = $531,000
Clear Creek Plant
Castore 500,000 - 100,000 = $400,000
Harrodsburg 120,000
Smithville 80,000
600,000 gpd
Assume package plant
Equipment $500,000
Instrumentation 100,000
Building - $20/sq. ft. 100,000
$700,000
Project Cost $910,000
S.W. 910,000 x 6 = 546,000
P.W.S.V. 546,000 x .3058 = 166,000
P.W. 910,000 - 133,000 = $777,000
Interceptor Q = .12 + .08 = .20
Use existing interceptor for Castore
500 ft @ 8" x $27/ft. = $135,000
Project Cost 176,000
S.V.P.W. = 176,000 x .6 x .3052 = 26,000
P.W. $150,000
F_32
-------
Land = 5 acres x $2500
S.V.
Clear Creek Plant Construction Cost
Plant
Int.
Land
$13,000
$13,000
$ 700,000
135,000
13,000
Project Cost
$ 848,000
$910,000 + $176,000 + $13,000 - $1,099,000
0 & M
For 1 MGD
Filtration
Q Start-up
$100,000
30.000
$130,000
Q Down
Caston
Harrodsburg
Smithville
.03
.10
.06
.20
.5
.12
.08
.70
Cs/(QL/Qs)
Cs/(l/.20)
CT/(5)'55
Lt
CL/2.4
Cs
Cs
Cs
Cs
Cs = .42 Cs
.55
Cs = Cs/(l/.70)
Cs
Cs
Cs
.6
Cs/(1.43)
Ca/1.24
.81 Cs
.6
0 & M @ .2 = .42 x $130,000
0 & M @ .7 = .81 x $130,000
Present worth
55,000 x 11.47
50,000/20 x 86.01
$55,000
$105,000
$630,850
215,025
$845,875
F-33
-------
Fairfax to Caslon
5000 ft @ 8" gravity
16,000 ft @ 4" P.M.
3 p. s.
0 & M Pump Station
Power = 3 @ $200
Labor
$ 600
12,000
$12,600
5000 ft @ $27/ft.
16,000 ft @ $15/ft.
P.S. + $55,000 @ 3
Construction Cost
Project Cost
$135,000
240,000
165,000
$540,000
$702,000
$ 81,000
240,000
165,000
$486,000
146,000
$632,000
F-34
-------
IV.
TASK 6 - PRESENT WORTH ANALYSIS - INTERCEPTORS AND PUMPING STATIONS
A. Unit Prices - Interceptor Sewer
Normal Excavation - $5/c.y.
Rock Excavation - $25/c.y.
Trench Backfill - $6/c.y.
PIPE PRICES
Size
24"
30"
42"
48"
54"
60"
60"
66"
72"
78"
Type
D.I.
D.I.
RCP
D.I.
RCP
RCP
RCP
RCP
RCP
RCP
Mat. & Labor
$66/L.F.
71
88
105
132
149
149
165
187
209
Normal Rock
Excav . * Excav . *
$37/L.F.
42
51
56
60
65
$13/L.F.
14
15
16
Backfill*
$9/L.F.
10
12
13
15
16
16
17
18
19
Total
$112/L.F
123
151
174
207
230
178
196
220
244
*Trench depth « 10'
Trench width = pipe diameter + 2 feet
V"
-------
B. Interceptor Systems - Construction Costs
Alternative 1 - Gravity Interceptor to Salt Creek Site
Item
42" RCP (rock)
54" RCP (rock)
60" RCP (rock)
66" RCP
72" RCP
78" RCP
Manholes
Railroad Boring
Quantity
10,000 L.F.
7,500
29,000
6,000
8,500 L.F.
10,000
134
15
Stream Crossing 25
Total Construction Cost
Alternative 2 -
Item
42" RCP (rock)
48" DIP (rock)
60" RCP (rock)
60" RCP
72" RCP
78" RCP
Manholes
Railroad Boring
Steam Crossing
Unit Price
$151/L.F.
207
230
196
$220/L.F.
244
$1,500 ea.
L.S.
L.S.
Gravity Interceptor and Force Main to
Creek Site
Quantity
10,500 L.F.
13,000
14,800
3,700
6,500
9,000
78
2
2
Pump Station 1
Total Construction Cost
Unit Price
$151/L.F.
174
230
178
220
244
$1500 ea.
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
Total
$ 1,510,000
1,550,000
6,670,000
1,180,000
$ 1,870,000
2,440,000
201,000
426,000
365,000
$16,212,000
Salt
Total
$ 1,590,000
2,260,000
3,400,000
660,000
1,430,000
2,200,000
120,000
40,800
31,900
2,500,000
$14,232,700
F-36
-------
Alternative 3 - Gravity Interceptor to Ketcham Road Site
Item
42" RCP (rock)
54" RCP (rock)
60" RCP (rock)
Manholes
Railraod Boring
Stream Crossing
Total
Quantity
9,600 L.F.
8,800
5,000
45
6
5
Construction Cost
Alternative 4 - Gravity Interceptor to
Item
42" RCP (rock)
54" RCP (rock)
Manholes
Railroad Boring
Stream Crossing
Total
Quantity
9,600 L.F.
3,000
29
2
2
Construction Cost
Unit Price
$151/L.F. $
207
230
$1500 ea.
L.S.
L.S.
$
Dillman Road Site
Unit Price
$151/L.F. $
207
$1500 ea.
L.S.
L.S.
$
Total
1,450,000
1,820,000
1,150,000
68,000
151,200
67,500
4,706,700
Total
1,450,000
620,000
44,000
40,800
24,200
2,179,000
Alternative 5 - Force Main to South Rogers Street Site
Item
24" DIP (rock)
30" DIP (rock)
Pump Station #1
Pump Station #2
Railroad Boring
Total
Quantity
6,000 L.F.
9,000
1
1
1
Construction Cost
Unit Price
$112/L.F. $
123
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
$
Total
672,000
1,107,000
1,000,000
1,400,000
61,200
4,240,200
F-37
-------
C. Stream Crossings
For stream crossings, use 2 x excavation and backfill prices and
1.5 x material and labor prices.
Stream crossings are 40', manhole to manhole.
Alternative 1
Size #
42"
54"
60"
66"
72"
78"
Alternative
Size #
72"
78"
Alternative
Size #
42"
54"
60"
Crossings
1
3
15
3
1
2
Total
2
Crossings
1
1
Total
3
Crossings
1
3
1
L.S. Per Crossing
$ 10,320
13,920
15,420
12,380
13,860
15,340
L.S. Per Crossing
$ 13,860
18,060
L.S. Per Crossing
$ 10,320
13,920
15,420
Total
$ 10,320
41,760
231,300
37,140
13,860
15,340
$365,060
Total
$ 13,860
18,060
$ 31,920
Total
$ 10,320
41,760
15,420
Total $ 67,500
F-38
-------
Alternative 4
D.
Size # Crossings
42" 1
54" 1
Total
Alternative 5
No stream crossings.
Railroad Borings
Railroad borings are 80 ' .
Unit Prices
24" - $150/L.F.
30" - 180
42" - 230
48" - 270
54" - 300
Excavation for boring pit
Alternative 1
Size # Borings
42" 2
54" 2
60" 7
66" 3
72" 1
Total
Alternative 2
Size # Borings
42" 2
L.S. Per Crossing Total
$ 10,320
13,920
60" -
66" -
72" -
78" -
- $2,000/pit.
L.S. Per Boring
$ 20,400
26,000
29,200
31,600
34,000
L.S. Per Boring
$ 20,400
$ 10,320
13,920
$ 24,240
$340/L.F.
370
400
450
Total
$ 40,800
52,000
204,400
94,800
34,000
$426,000
Total
$ 40,800
F-39
-------
Alternative 3
Size
42"
54"
60"
# Borings
2
2
2
L.S. Per Boring
$ 20,400
26,000
29,200
Total
$ 40,800
52,000
58,400
Total
Alternative 4
Size
42"
Alternative 5
//Borings
2
Size
// Borings
3
L.S. Per Boring
$ 20,400
L.S. Per Boring
$ 20,400
42"
E. Pumping Stations
1. Construction Costs (based on peak flows)
Pump Station within S.T.P.
40 MGD Peak (16)
$151,200
Total
$ 40,800
Total
$ 61,200
Basic cost
Total cost
16 MGD Peak (6.5)
Basic cost
Total cost
9 MGD Peak (3.5)
Basic cost
Total cost
$650,000 x 232.1/150.6 = $1,001,000
$820,000 x 1.54 = $1,263,000
$300,000 x 1.54 = $462,000
$400,000 x 1.54 = $616,000
$190,000 x 1.54 = $293,000
$230,000 x 1.54 = $354,000
F-40
-------
Pump Station outside of S.T.P.
62
c = 250 Q* - Camp. Dresser and McKee
40 MGD 250(40)*62 = $2,500,000
16 MGD 250(16)-62 = $1,400,000
9 MGD 250(9)-62 = $1,000,000
2. Labor Costs (Ref. EPA)
40 MGD
Operating labor 1200 mhr
Maintenance labor 930 mhr
2130 @ $6/hr » $12,780/yr.
16 MGD
Operation 730 mhr
Maintenance 600 mhr
1330 @ $6/hr = $7,980/yr.
9 MGD
Operation 600 mhr
Maintenance 510 mhr
1110 @ $6/hr = $6,660/yr.
3. Material and Supply Costs - Based on Average Flow
16 MGD $2500 x 171.2/112.2 - $3,825/yr.
6.5 MGD $1050 x 1.53 = $l,606/yr.
3.5 MGD $650 x 1.53 = $ 995/yr.
4. Annual Electrical Costs
S.W. 45 hp pump
45 x 24 hr. x 365 days x .0149 $/hp* hr. = $5,874/yr.
S.E. 115 hp pump
115 x 24 x 365 x .0149 = $15,000/yr.
Central 550 hp pump
550 x 24 x 365 x .0149 = $71,800/yr.
F-41
-------
5. Summary of O&M Costs
Alternative 2
O&M
Electrical Power $ 71,800
Labor 12,780
Material and Supplies 3,825
Annual O&M $ 88,405/yr.
Alternative 5
O&M S.E. S.W. Total
Electrical Power $ 15,000 $ 5,874 $ 20,874
Labor 7,980 6,660 14,640
Material and Supplies 1,606 995 2,601
Annual O&M $ 38,115
F-42
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1976 653-345
------- |