COMFIUNCK
in fclw Mtt«* of
Polltttlon of th« Int«r»t«t« Water* of th*
UPPM HIIIIiSIPTX iXVBR
VOLUME V
St. Psul,
February 19*4
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFA.aR
W««hinfton, D.C.
-------
OOOR64006
COMItUWCI
IB tto Mttwr of
Pollution of tka Inter*tat* Wator* of the
urn* Misfittippi axvet
VOLUME v
St. P««l, MiwMMta
Fabraary
U.S. DEPA1TMEWT OP HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND VELPAEE
Washington. D.C.
Enviro
ironmen«al P<^°° ^"^
.„•«*
-------
tTATPgNT OF; PJLG1
EUGW1 V. JtfKlY 1254
CLIFfOKD W. H4MKJ* 1281
D. J. THINilN 1283
KHYIN L. MICK 1294
JOHN P. BADALICH 1447
KLMHUPOLIS-ST. PAUL SAtfl
B
C
D
E
f
TUH DISTRICT PAGE
1299
1327
1343
1390
1426
-------
E. V. Avery
MR. STEIN: Let us continue.
1254 !
St. Paul.
MR. SMITH: All right. The next is the City of
Is the City Engineer here?
MR. AVERY: Yes.
STATEMENT OP EUOENE V. AVERY, CHIEF
ENGINEER, DEPARTMENT OP PUBLIC WORKS,
CITY OP ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA
MR. AVERY: Chairman, distinguished conferees,
ladies and gentlemen:
My name is Eugene Avery. I am Chief Engineer,
Department of Public Works, City of St. Paul. I am here
speaking on behalf oi' the City Council of St. Paul and to
present this statement, which has been approved by them.
The City of St. Paul through the years has been I
and is now cognizant of the problem of maintaining proper
river water qualities in its portion of the Mississippi
River. St. Paul has and will continue to cooperate and
participate with other interested parties in controlling and j
1
reducing water pollution to the greatest extent possible and
financially feasible. Much has already been accomplished
in St. Paul's direct action and In its action through the
Minneapolis-St. Paul Sanitary District. In addition, current
-------
E. V. A very jg^ !
!
work physically underway and plans for the future offer
promise of continued progress.
Approximately three decades ago, in recognition
of the problem, St. Paul Joined with Minneapolis in the
formation and the subsequent operation and financing of the
Minneapolis-St. Paul Sanitary District and in the expenditure
of many millions of dollars for the construction of a centra:,
sewage treatment plant and a system of major intercepting
sewers. These intercepting sewers, in the St. Paul area,
for example, intercepted major sanitary flows at all of the
locations where they formerly went directly to the river
untreated, and directed this flow instead to the central
treatment plant. As a part of these interception works,
however, it was necessary to provide for diversion or by-
pass of greatly diluted sewage directly to the river during
major storm water flows. This was and is still necessary
because most of the Twin Cities sewer system developed over
approximately 100 years carries combined storm and sanitary
flows. Obviously, it was not practical to design the
interceptor system and plant to handle the vast volumes of
storm water involved. However, St. Paul has, particularly
in the last ten years, been separating portions of its systeu
and constructing separate additions to the system wherever
possible, physically and financially. j
The percentage of the total sewage flow by-passed !
-------
1256!
E. V. Avery
from the St. Paul sewer aystea which Is above the plant
is very minor, as demonstrated by the original design and
by actual operational checks. For further information on
this subject, the conference is referred to the Minneapolis-
St. Raul Sanitary District's statement, Exhibit A, which Is
the report of their five-year study of sewage disposal
problems. Attention is also directed to Mr. Rademacher's
report for the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare,
presented earlier in this conference. Figures 6 and 7,
following Page 41, present coliform counts upstream from
St. Paul, and also just above the treatment plant.
The former sewer outlets are Inspected twice
monthly in a program aimed at keeping direct discharge to
the river at a minimum. A copy of the last inspection
report, dated January 30, 1964, is attached for the Informa-
tion of this conference. On the basis of these reports,
the regulating devices are inspected and adjusted or cleaned
if necessary. The complete modernization of these devices
and installation of telemetering equipment for better
utilization of the interceptors is planned. It is recognized
that though the percentage of sewage by-passed from the
sewer system is small, it nevertheless is not desirable In
i
the river. The regulator Improvements and the separation j
program are intended to reduce the by-passed flows.
-------
I
J-
1257
E. V. Avery
Further Information about the treatment plant
i
and interceptors la presented In the separate statement of -
the Minneapolis-St. Paul Sanitary District. Over the years
St. Paul citizens and those connected through St. Paul
by contract have participated in the expenditure of many
millions of dollars for their share in operation and
maintenance and the necessary capital addition for Sanitary ;
District facilities over and above the original costs. This [
[
includes the current $23 million expansion and improvement ;
t,
of the treatment plant. This is financed, of course, by j
i
St. Paul and Minneapolis, who together provide the funds for<
the Sanitary District capital outlays, aa well as operating |
and maintenance coats. ;
i
In its own sewer system activities, St. Paul has j
i
and will continue to hold water pollution abatement as one ;
i
of its major objectives. The construction, separation and '
improvement of sewers is of a very high order of magnitude f
in comparison with current expenditures for other city
services. Of the approximately five million dollars of \
expenditures for sewers anticipated in 196*1, approximately ;
four and a half million dollars relate directly to construc-
tion of separate lines or storm water relief lines. !
Recently completed at an expenditure of approximately four :
i
million dollars was the St. Peter-Rondo Storm Water Relief ;
-------
1258
E. V. Avery
Sewer Outfall Tunnel, which is designed to provide a atorm
water outlet for the ultimate separation program In a
densely populated 2,300 acres partly within and westerly of
the downtown area. Presently under contract and expected
to be completed In Nay of 1964, Is the two Billion dollar j
Rivervlew Storm Water Relief Sewer Outfall Tunnel, which will
have a similar function as the St. Peter-Rondo line. Planne(|
i
for construction contract during 1964 is additional work i
in the Rivervlew program totaling $575,000 and the two and 1
a half million dollar first phase of the St. Anthony Park
Storm Water Relief Sewer. The latter project, which is an
outfall tunnel similar to the St. Peter-Rondo and Riverview
projects, is the first phase of a ten million dollar system \
I
of main trunks to relieve existing sewers and to provide ;
i
facilities for a program of ultimate separation of 3*600
i, much of it heavily populated or used industrially,
In the northwest part of the city and contiguous suburban
areas. Separation of the sewer system In the downtown
clearance and urban renewal areas is planned as a part of
that project. The Battle Creek area In the southeast portiorj
of St. Paul and contiguous connected suburbs is being
developed with a completely separate system, as is the River-
view Industrial Park of the St. Paul Port Authority.
These examples are only a partial list, but
-------
1259
E. V. Avery
they do demonstrate that St. Paul Is taking tangible steps
of a very high order of costs, over and above its Sanitary
District participation to abate water pollution. Severe I
t
i
financing problems have been and are being encountered, and, j
J
of course, are anticipated to continue. St. Paul does ;
I
recognize, however, the need for the program and Intends to j
continue it just as rapidly and to the extent that resources
can be made available consistent with demands for other
urban services.
In addition to the previously described construc-
tion and planning activities, St. Paul pursuant to recent
legislation and In cooperation with Minneapolis, the
Sanitary District, the State Department of Health and others
is preparing a long-range plan for collection and conveyance j
t
to the plant of sewage from the entire east metropolitan !
t
area likely to be served through St. Paul by approximately !
i
the year 2000, The St. Paul portion of the plan which will i
*
also include a finance plan is scheduled for completion by j
Nay 1, 1964. Attached for the information of this conference
Is a copy of the December 17, 1963, Progress Re port, which
describes the study procedure. More Information on this
study will be contained in the statement of the Minneapolis-
St. Paul Sanitary District.
Following the May 1, 1964* report it is planned
-------
1260
E. V. Avery
to continue the work of the special fulltime St. Paul study
group In detailing and updating the needed program in the
i
St. Paul system. Objectives of the continuing planning
i
process will be storm water relief and separation where
possible, In addition to sanitary sewage capacity. Certain
separation projects will be given highest priority because •
of a need to remove storm water from Jointly-used inter- \
i
i
ceptors where the capacity will be needed for sanitary flows ;
from the present and future connected suburbs.
In addition to the planning and construction of ;
i
physical facilities, St. Paul has been giving increasing •
!
attention to regulatory measures consistent with long-range :
I
separation objectives and to achieve the best possible use
of the existing sewer system, for example, in September
of 1963, the building code was revised to require separate
plumbing systems and separate connection of clear water
flows to storm sewers when suoh become available. Action
pursuant to this ordinance is In progress. Another example
is that in areas of United combined sewer capacity roof
drains are disconnected or roof impounding is used.
With respect to industrial pollution, St. Paul
has and will continue to cooperate with others in all
reasonable ways. Policies on standards requirements and
enforcement should probably be set on a State level so that
-------
1261
E. V. Avery
affects oan bt uniform on appreciable etretchea of the
riv«r and not confined to one particular municipality or
area.
In olofing thla statement on Mississippi River
pollution, It ahould be noted that streams tributary to
the Mississippi contribute pollution alao. Control and
abatement meaaurea on thaae atreaaa will have favorabla
effect on the Mississippi Rlvar. Alao advisable, we believe,
would be more action on a subdivision law regulating aala
of lota and aubdlvlalon activity on the baaia of aoil
percolation and ground water taata to anaura adequacy of
sewage disposal arrangement* In outlying areaa and prevent
overbuilding.
The City of St. Paul la grateful for thla
opportunity to present ita viewa on thla Batter. If further
questions arlae or If additional Information la desired*
the City Council of St. Paul and its technical ataff will
be happy to cooperate.
(The Inapection report referred to la aa followa:
-------
60a«r
Aevised 5/1/38
MINNEAPCLLb-.'lAlNi' PAUL 3AN1T\HY OlbTtUGT
INSPiCTK-.N OF r JRM£3 SZWEJ* CUTLETS IN SAim
'^n the above date fen inspection of form*? sewer outlets into the
River was made by th« S^nit&ry District. The outlet location* and discharge
condition* are tabulated below.
jutlet location Discharge Condition C^,uiej_Loca^ion Pis charge^
isustis Ave. (Somerviile) JBP_yiJOW Minnesota
- tis Ave. MJ_ ffMSNt ^ Ced*r ________
Robert
Eaton
iviarshall Ave.
Portland Ave.
nor no*
Princeton Ave,
Jefferson Ave.
Randolph W. __
Scheffer
•_ tto
Jackson
Sibley
MO FLOW
Davern
Ctto E.
Randolph ^.
Drake
Smith
no rum
Broadway
Moses _____
Custer ___
Arthur _^__
ilobie
State
Minnetonka
Sherman
Eagle
Trout Brook at 4th St
Trout Brook at River
Urb&n Ml
St. Peter
Belt JUne
Inspected by:
S.M
-------
1263
K. V, Avery
PROGRESS REPORT
EAST METROPOLITAN SEVER AND FINANCE STUDY
Prepared In connection with an Informational
and discussion nesting between representa-
tives of Saint Paul and the outlying affected
communities on December 17, 1963
CITY OP SAINT PAUL
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
BUREAU OF ENGINEERING
Pursuant to legislation passed at the 1963
Session of the Legislature, the cities of St. Paul and
Minneapolis and the Minneapolis-St. Paul Sanitary District
with the advice and counsel of the Water Pollution Control
Commission, the State Board of Health, and affected out*
lying communities are proceeding with the coordinated
preparation of comprehensive long-range sewage collection
and treatment plans and financing and service charges per-
taining thereto, In accordance with the legislation and
as directed generally by a coordinating committee meeting
monthly at the Sanitary District offices, the cities of
-------
1264
E. V. Avery
St. Paul and Minneapolis will prepare collection system
plans and related finance and service charge plans for
the easterly and westerly portions of the metropolitan area
likely to be served through these cities. The two central
cities expect to utilize consistent, coordinated criteria in
developing their plans which are to be forwarded to the
Sanitary District. The Sanitary District will put the
information from the central cities together with its plans
for sewage treatment and Interceptors, other than those
through St. Paul and Minneapolis, all together in one
comprehensive plan to be submitted to the Water Pollution
Control Commission by October 1964.
The particular report contained herein, with the
above general background, is concerned only with the St.
Paul activities. The meeting at which the report is
presented is the second of a aeries to be held every 60
days for the purpose of informing affected communities of
the planning activities. Other Information arrangements
that have been made include the sending of minutes of the
monthly meetings of the coordinating committee and conferences
between the special St. Paul engineering study group that hasj
been set up and engineers representing the various areas.
Inquiries, suggestions and Information from the outlying
communities have been solicited by letter and may be made
-------
1265 :
E. V. Avery
at any ti»e by anyone interested to the study group in Room ,
38 of th« City Hill, Telephone No. Ca. 4-4612, Ext. 439. ]
This inforuation was also transmitted by letter to all the i
designated engineers on August 7, 1963, and to the
representatives present at the first general informational
meeting held in October. In addition to the foregoing, a ;
St. Paul Council liaison committee is meeting weekly to •
study the problem and oversee the study generally. i
N
In making an intermediate report of this type, it ;
must be recognized that the work is in progress and for that •
i
reason some of the final answers desired have not yet been .•
determined. However, certain general comments are included ,
hereinafter concerning the engineering and finance stud'es. •
A nap is attached which depicts our current thinking as to •
the most likely and best interceptor system. It appears t
that the recommended system will be somewhat similar, but '
have a number of differences from the preliminary plans pro- ;
duced previously, these differences being based on more
i
i
detailed analysis. It should be noted at this point that •'
the study is still proceeding and the plan is still subject j
to change. It should be noted also that it is understood ;
that pending the construction of some of the major facili- j
ties, various localized interim solutions, not necessarily ;
completely compatible with the ultimate system may be
-------
E. V* Avery
desirable and indeed necessary. Certainly, however, the inter
solution should be made aa compatible as possible with the
long-rang* comprehensive plan.
ENGINEERING STUDY COMMENTS
A* OBJECTIVES - The objective of the study Is to
prepare the best overall plan for the collection and disposal
of sewage from the entire area likely to be served through
the City of St. Paul. In addition to planning the sewage
collection facilities, a plan for financing these facilities
and a formula for apportioning the coat to the various
municipalities is to be prepared by the City of St. Paul
and submitted to the Minneapolis-St. Paul Sanitary District
by May 1, 19#*. The twin fundamental objectives of the
beat and most economical long-range plans for sewage
collection and water pollution abatement are kept constantly
in mind.
B. STUDY PROCEDURES - In order to accomplish these
objectives, the City of St. Paul has formed an engineering
study group to prepare the physical plan and a special
finance group to prepare a plan for financing and a formula
for apportionment of cost. The study is utilizing to the
greatest extent possible available information from past j
-------
1267!
E, V. Avery
studies and from a variety of other sources as Indicated j
in the slide program accompanying this report. In general,
the collection system plan of this Investigation is concerned!
only with Jointly-used interceptors, and not the local ;
i
collection system of a given area or community. It is
planned that a point of outlet in the Jointly-used system
!
would be provided adjacent to or within a given area or
•
community. In general, the procedure is to evolve the j
i
best and most economical long-range interceptor plan for •
t
i
the entire east metropolitan area likely to be served through!
St. Paul by the year 2000. It is recognized that the best
overall plan may not be the best for each and every eommurjj ty
considered by itself. One of the objectives of the finance •
study is to consider this problem and propose methods of i
adjustment. It appears that administratively it would be ,'
desirable for one agency rather than several or many agencies'
to construct and maintain the Jointly-used facilities and •
the study will consider possible ways to accomplish this. j
The study will also be concerned with combined sewer separa- j
tlon and sewage diversion regulators. Some further study
and reports are planned to follow the initial one on May 1,
!
1964, on an overall interceptor system proposal. j
c- ENGINEERING STUDY GROUP - In July, 196?, the St. :
Paul mayor's office contacted 33 municipalities requesting
-------
1268
E. V. Avery
that each name a policy-making representative and an
I
engineering representative to participate in this sewer plan.
As of December 10, 1963, 20 of these 33 communities have
named persons as engineering representatives. In a letter j
4
prepared August 7* 1963, the Chief Engineer of the St. Paul j
Public Works Department contacted these 20 engineering j
representatives and requested as an initial step that nine
different items of information be submitted to the engineer-
ing study group to assist in preparation of the overall
j
sewer plan. As of December 10, 1963, 11 of the 20 have j
j
responded to thi§ request to some extent. These 11 are: ]
Arden Hills, Blrchwood, Falcon Heights, Hugo, Mrndota
Heights, Northdale, East Oakdale, Pine Springs, Shoreview,
White Bear Lake and Woodbury Township. In this same letter
it was requested that these engineering representatives
arrange to meet with the city's study group to discuss the
sewer plan as it relates to their specific community and to
discuss any engineering studies or reports which may have
been made on a community basis. On several occasions, some ]
of these engineering representatives have arranged to dis- !
cuss certain aspects of the planning] however, it is hoped i
s
that all of the engineering representatives will offer 1
I
their participation more fully in these later stages of the j
study. We would like to see their suggestions and localized ;
-------
1269
E. V. Avery
plans made as compatible as possible within the best over-
all plan, and vice versa.
PERIOD - The facilities being planned under
this study are those required to serve the area through the
year 2000.
E. IESION CRITERIA - The design criteria being used
in tWs study in general are those used in the I960 Report
on the Expansion of Sewage Works prepared by Toltz, King,
IXivall, Anderson & Associates, Inc. These criteria were
developed after considerable study and research and are
still valid for use at this time. A great number of addi-
tional information sources, such as those shown on the
slide program accompanying this report, have also been used.
The one exception to the design procedure used in the \
T.K.D.A. Report is that where deep gravity trunk sewers are •
designed, the probable saturation population would be pro-
vided for, rather than the estimated year 2000 population.
P. BOUNDARIES OF SERVICE - It has been necessary to ;
estimate boundaries of service by the year 2000 for areas to ;
be sewered through St. Paul. This estimate is based on
topography and watershed boundaries, on future population
projections, in some Instances on municipal boundaries, on
existing sewer connections and contracts, and other related
factors. In some locations these boundaries are very
-------
1270 ;
E. v. Avery
indefinite, especially around the north end of Shoreview I
and in the Mendota Heights area, i
G. POPULATION ESTIMATES - The population estimates
for the year 2000 as shown In the T.K.D.A. Report have been ;
,i
reviewed and revised upward in some Instances. Unfortunately
M.P.C. do«» not have population estimates beyond the year !
I960, which are broken down by community and can be used :
i
directly for this study. Their overall projections, however,!
i
indicate some upward revision of the T.K.D.A. estimates are j
in order. A further meeting with M.P.C., Minneapolis, and I
i
i
Sanitary District representatives, is scheduled for December
17th, to work further on this problem and to ensure that all
participants start from the same basic assumptions.
H. STATUS OF PRELIMINARY INTERCEPTOR SEWER LAYOUT -
The engineering study at this time consists of comparing
various alternate arrangements and locations of Interceptor
sewers, pumping stations and force mains. This study of
alternates is not complete and, therefore, the arrangement
shown on the attached map is not a final answer, but rather
a preliminary layout. The map does represent the arrangement
most likely to be selected, based on information available
at the present time. In some instances sizes of proposed
facilities are fairly well established; in other instances
sizes have not yet been calculated due to boundary
-------
1271
F. V. Avery
uncertainties or other unresolved problems.
I. COST ESTIMATES AND SCHEDUT£ OF CONSTRUCTION - j
i
When the current study of alternates Is resolved, preliminary
coat estimates will be prepared for all required facilities.;
A decade by decade study of interim needs will be undertaken
to set up a schedule of construction. \
t
J. STUDY COMPLETION - As previously agreed and apeci- i
1
fled at coordinating committee meetings, St. Paul expects to!
complete Its report and forward it to the Sanitary District !
\,
by May 1, 1964, The report outline and form is being
refined and given considerable thought in order to ensure
maximum utility.
FINANCE STUDY COMMENTS
I
A Preliminary Statement of Cqneideration Involved
For the study of construction finance and the
j
service charge or rate "formulas" for charging construction
and operating costs, St. Paul has retained an eminent and
well qualified consultant. The completion of this study,
of course, is necessarily related to and phased somewhat ;
later in time than the engineering study. It is anticipated
that this particular report would be completed and forwarded
-------
1272
E- V. Avery
to the Sanitary District by middle or late summer. Obvi-
ously, It is premature to attempt to present at this time
any final conclusions or recommendations. However, the
following comments on general considerations and objectives
are offered by the consultant in the interests of informa-
tion and background.
*• GENERAL - This very preliminary statement is
presented at this time to advise the communities concerned
of the progress and present status of this aspect of the
omprehenslve sewage works planning investigation now under
way. Until such time as engineering and cost data on the
finally selected comprehensive plan and its consideration
by officials of the City of St. Paul and affected suburban
areas, apportionment of sewage works should now be considered
only in its general aspects. It is hoped that this state-
ment, even though It is of necessity preliminary in coverage,
will further the cooperative consideration of this problem
on a progressive basis by the St. Paul suburban areas.
The aim of a satisfactory apportionment method
i3 to achieve fairness to all concerned. This is a matter
of viewpoint and definition. A degree of definition, in
general terms, has been provided by the enactment of
Chapter 874 Sessions Laws of 1963* which contains the
following provision (Section 11 — Subdivision 6):
-------
1273
E. V, Avery
"Subd, 6 - All rates and charges shall be
reasonable and shall be sufficient to compensate
for all costs of devoting the sewage disposal
plant, equipment, its collector system, and
personnel to the accomplishment of the purpose
of the service to be rendered, but shall not
include profit. When the sewer system of any
municipality or any part thereof is devoted to
the use of another municipality, all charges
for such use shall tie reasonable and shall be
sufficient to compensate for all costs of such
use, but shall not include profit."
B. SEWAGE WORKS ELEMENTS ON WHICH COSTS ARE TO BE
APPORTIONED - A variety of sewage works structures of
varying capacities are involved in the question of cost
apportionment between the City of St. Paul and tributary
suburban areas. Some of these are used by the entire metro- j
I
politan connected area (the Pig's Eye Lake sewage treatment
plant, for example) and progressing "up-sewer'1; others are
used by only a fraction of the area, terminating in trunks
and branch sewers used only by a single suburban community.
Some of the proposed works are designed for a long time in
the future (35-^0 years) and others for only a period of
-------
127^
E. v- Avery
15 to 20 years. The existing works of the Minneapolls-
St. Paul Sanitary District have been use<3 for 1 to 25 years,
but certain portions of the trunk sewers have been in use
for more than 80 years. Furthermore, most of the trunk
sewers of St. Paul Into which suburban areas discharge were
designed for multiple service; i.e., storm water runoff and
sanitary sewage collection. Their augmentation by separation
Involves a number of questions associated with apportionment.
1. Existing Works - The existing works are
divided into those paid for jointly by Minneapolis
and St. Paul and those paid for only by St. Paul.
The former includes the treatment plant (with
capital additions to date) end the joint inter-
ceptor from the plant to the western city limits of
St. Paul. (Depending on their location suburban
areas use varying lengths of this joint interceptor.
The existing works paid for only by St.
Paul Include the original intercepting sewers, and
the trunk and branch combined sewers within the city
which presently do, and In the future could, serve
outside areas.
**• Proposed Works - The proposed works can
be divided into the following categories:
-------
E, V. Avery
a. Intercepting sewers used jointly by
the city and one or More suburban areas. These
can further be subdivided Into works within
the city and those outside.
b. Intercepting sewers and other sewage
works used exclusively by suburban areas
(within and outside the city). In addition
to intercepting sewers, metering, sampling,
and possible chlorinating stations are involved
as would be works which are provided for
volume and organic load equalization, pre-
trefitment or treatment.
o. Certain trunk sewers required under a
separation program by the City of St. Paul
to improve river quality and to increase capacity
to serve outside areas. !
!
d. The expansion program of the Minneapolis-'
St. Paul Sanitary District including the j
treatment plant and possible intercepting sewers
and control works.
C. COSTS WHICH MUST BE APPORTIONED - The capital
costs, including interest where applicable, and the opera-
tion and maintenance costs of the units of the sewage works
system described previously, must be apportioned among the
-------
1276'
E. v. Avery j
i
various communities using them In whole or in part. To date^j
data in available on only the existing works, much of the
proposed program not having been engineered to the point
where reliable coat estimates can be prepared.
D' SOME BASIC GQNfiJBEHAyiONS - Lacking costs, capacity,
and other detailed data on many of the sewage works which
must be apportioned, It is impossible to "spell-out" at this
time the many factors which might be incorporated in an
apportionment plan or "formula." With the fundamental aim
being fairness to all users and beneficiaries of the
i
system, and with a method which is as uncomplicated as is
possible consistent with the primary objective, some general ,
observations based on experience elsewhere can be made.
1. On the assumption that the sewage from all
suburban areas will be approximately the same con-
centration (consisting only of domestic and usual
commercial sewage — but free of large volumes of
concentrated or deleterious industrial waste) the
annual average volume of sewage contributed by
a suburban community is a reasonable measure of its
use and benefit provided by the sewage treatment
plant and can be applied to both capital and opera-
tion and maintenance costs. Otherwise pretreatment
of the industrial wastes should be required to the
-------
1277
1. V. Avery
level of domestic sewage or the community assessed
a surcharge baled on organic and suspended 00lid*
load to provide for the extra cost of treatment.
To accept strong wattes from one municipality on
a baain of apportionment which includes only volume
would Increase the costs and be unfair to all other
areas. In any event no discharge of deleterious
or toxic wastes should be peraltted.
2. Sisjllarly it would be reasonable to pro-
vide for a credit to a Municipality which by storage
or treatment occasions a lesser use of the sewage j
i
works. 1
3. As a general rule, the costs of Inter-
cepting sewers and related facilities used exclusive-
ly by one municipality should be paid for by it,
either presently or on a deferred baaia.
4. The oosts of all other sewage works
(lateral and branch sewers, metering and sampling
stations, etc.) used exclusively by one municipality
should be paid for by that municipality.
5. when sewage works are used by more than (
one municipality It becomes more difficult to
make simple generalized statements at this time.
Too many overall decisions on engineering and
-------
1278
E. V* Avery
financial aspect* oust b« made first by the groups
charged with the responsibility of comprehensive
sewage works planning before a fair method of appor-
tionment for these differing and more complicated
situations can be made.
6, Because the principles of apportionment
in final result are not exact, and are subject to
legal sanctions and restrictions and because
departures from great accuracy must be made in order !
S
to make the methods finally selected practical and '
workable, and because areas grow at different rates
with respect to sewage service, it seems desirable
that the charges against outside areas would, in
addition to routine month by month examination, be
reviewed periodically (perhaps at three to five
years intervals) to ensure that unfairness had not
inadvertently developed because of varying growth
i
or for other reasons. Furthermore, It should be
pointed out that if one basic method of apportion-
ment, uniform in its application throughout all the
suburban areas, is adopted, procedures should ensure
exceptions in foreseen special situations, so that
unfairness will not result.
7. As stated at the outset, this is a very
-------
1279
E. V. A very
preliminary statement of some considerations
Involved in cost apportionment prepared principally
for communication reason*. It must be understood
that the city cannot act unilaterally since
*
the entire plan must also be approved by the \
i
Minneapolis-St. Paul Sanitary District and the !
Minnesota Miter Pollution Control Commission, and |
in its final application subject to appeal and
review by the courts.
-------
Boundary of Sewered Area -Year 2000
——• Proposed Joint Interceptor
»•••• Pumping Station
Local Trunk Sewers
SANITARY INTERCEPTOR SEWERS
PRELIMINARY
SUBJECT TV CHANGE
DECEMBER 17, 1963
CITY OF STFAUL.
DEPARTMENT Op PUBLIC WORKS
METROPOLITAN COMPREHENSIVE
SANITARY SEWER PLANNING OFFICE
ROOM 38, CITY HALL 8 COURT HOUSE
ST PAUL, MINN
224-4612 E«t 439
OCT 22,1963
-------
1280
E. V, Avery ]
MR. STEIN: Thank you very auch for a very good j
statement.
Ar« there any comments or questions?
DR. HARGRAVES: Do you have copies of your report?
However, it is our hope that we can achieve separation in
substantial areas between now and perhaps ten years from
now, and also achieve the complete reconstruction and
modernizing of the regulating devices, which we believe
offers more opportunity for progress per dollar spent.
MR. STEIN: Thank you very much.
MR. SMITH: The next will be a statement, I
believe, from the St. Paul Water Department.
MR. AVERY: The reporter has a copy. ]
MR. STEIN: I just have one short question. How
long do you think it will be before you complete your \
!
!
separation program if you go into this? !
i
MR. AVERY: The separation program In St. Paul >
is an extremely difficult and costly one, if you think of !
it In terns of complete separation, because complete j
i
I
separation, of course, involves very substantial and ex- j
\
panslve construction almost in every street in the city. j
!
It involves not only construction within the :
i
streets, but within the buildings, so it is likely to be j
•
many years before complete separation would be achieved. \
-------
1281
C. V. Ha»blln
STATEMENT OP CLIFFORD W. HAMBLIN, GENERAL
MANAGER, ST. PAUL WATER DEPARTMENT, ST.
PAUL, MINNESOTA
MR. HAMBLIN: Mr. Chairman, conferees, ladles
and gentlemen:
My name is Clifford Hamblin, General Manager
for the St. Paul Water Department.
I am going to read a statement for the Board of
Water Commissioners of the City of St. Paul.
The Board of Water Commissioners of the City of
St. Paul, whose responsibility it is to supply a potable
water to the population of St. Paul and all adjacent suburbs
thereto, are most vitally concerned with the sanitary quali-
ties of the Mississippi River. The Mississippi River has
been relied upon by St. Paul for its source of water supply
since 1925, and with the future anticipated Increase in
copulation and use demands, will be more dependent upon
the river to supply the St. Paul area population. The
Board's intake is located at Pridley, Minnesota, and to
date no detrimental pollution has been encountered; however,
in the future, all possible means should be taken to control
pollution in the reaches of the river above the St. Paul
-------
1282
C. W. Hamblin
Intake to safeguard against any sanitary hazard that could
be harmful In providing a potable water to the St. Paul area
population.
Thank you.
MR. STEIN: Thank you very much, sir.
Are there any confluents or questions?
(No response. )
MR. STEIN: If not, thank you very much for your
statement.
MR. SMITH: I would like next to go to the
Minnesota River, and the first municipality in the area
with which we are concerned is North Mankato.
Is there anyone from North Mankato present?
(No response. )
MR. SMITH: If not, I would like to ask Mr.
Thltnsen again to read the paragraph indicating the treatment
provided.
-------
1283 !
D. J. Thlnwen |
FURTHER STATEMENT OF DONALD J. THIMSEN, j
i
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, SECTION |
i
ON WATER POLLUTION |
*
j
I
MR. THIMSENj North Mankato: |
!
I
Plans for a forcemain to carry raw sewage from j
North Mankato across the Minnesota River to an existing j
j
Interceptor sewer in Mankato were approved on August 7, \
I
1963. A contract has been made for treatment of the North j
Mankato sewage In the Mankato sewage treatment plant. The
forcenain Is now under construction and Is expected to be
in operation early in the spring.
MR. STEIN: All right, Mr. Thirasen. Will you
stay, Mr. Thinsen? There is a whole series of them, one
right after another. I think we will proceed, unless there
are any questions.
MR. SMITH: The next one would be Mankato. Is
there a representative fro» Mankato present?
(No response.) j
MR. THIMSEN: Mankato:
The Mankato plant was constructed in 1961 and is
a primary plant consisting of a control building, two primary
settling tanks, a chlorination contact tank, two sludge
-------
1284
D. J. Thimsen
cii««ater», a sludge drying bed, and a sludge lagoon. The
pl«D- tfl designed for a sewage and waste flow of 5.82 mgd
BOD of 250 ng/1. Part of th« sewer system Is
anltary and storo.
MR. SMITHS St. Peter?
MR. THIMSEN» St. Peter:
The St. Peter sewage works were constructed in
; i, a«d consist of a lift station and forcemain, two
• * and one secondary raw sewage stabilization ponds.
: pr; ?aery ponds have a total surface area of about 148
acres» and the secondary pond has a liquid surface of about
4? acres. The ponds are designed to treat a sewage and
•*?.9te flow of about 1.1 mgd with a 5-day BOD of about 270
mff./I. Th« storage time at the design flow of 1.1 mgd is
?,^out ??o days, based upon a depth of 4 feet in the primary
pood® and 5 feet in the secondary pond. These facilities
njrjo serve the State Hospital at St. Peter.
. SMITH? LeSueur?
MR. THIMSEN: LeSueur:
A lift station and forcemain and two primary and
>n€- secondary raw sewage stabilization ponds were constructed
in 1963. The ponds are designed to treat a sewage and waste
flow of about 0.397 ogd with a 5-day BOD of about 3^5 n»g/l.
The prlts&fy ponds have & total surface area of about 60
-------
1285
D. J. Thimsen
acres. The secondary pond has a surface area of about 21
acres. The storage time in the ponds at the design flow
is about 285 days, based on a storage depth of four feet in
the primary ponds and five feet in the secondary pond.
MR. SMITH: The village of Henderson?
MR. THIMSEN: Henderson:
This is the only sewered Municipality located
on the Minnesota River which does not provide treatment, or
has not yet made arrangements for treatment, of the sewage
before discharging it to the river. On August 5, 1963, the
Commission informed the village that planning for the orderlyj
i
development of adequate facilities for treatment of the i
sewage and Industrial waste for which they are responsible
must proceed without delay. The village thereupon employed
a consulting engineer to conduct an engineering study and
prepare a preliminary report and so advised this Commission
on November 21, 1963.
MR. SMITH: Belle Plaine?
MR. THIMSEN: Belle Plaine:
The borough sewage works were constructed in 1963 }
and consist of one primary and one secondary raw sewage J
stabilization pond. The ponds are designed to treat a
sewage and waste flow of 0.20 mgd with a 5-day BOD of about
390 mg/1. The primary pond has a surface area of about 33
-------
1286 f
I
D. J. Thimsen j
\
a
acres and the secondary pond has about 14 acres. A storage ;
I
i
period of about 250 days is provided at the design flow. I
t
MR. SMITH: Chaska? !
h
MR. THIMSEN» Chaska: j
i
The Chaska sewage treatment plant was constructed j
i
in 1963 and is a secondary plant consisting of bar screens ;
and comrainutor, grit removal equipment, a contact aeration I
ij
j
tank, a reaeration tank, an aerobic sludge digestion tank, j
i
r:
settling tanks, and chlorine contact tanks. It is designed -
}
i
to treat a sewage and waste flow of 0.75 mgd with a 5-day ]
i
BOP of about 200 mg/1. Since there are no other sewage jj
4
treatment plants of this type in operation in Minnesota, ;
i
»
the plans were approved with the reservation that modiflea- I
|
tlons to the plant would be required if performance is not :
<
satisfactory. |
MR. SMITH: Shakopec? ;
i
MR. THIMSEN: Shakopee: |
i
i
This plant was constructed in 1961. It Is a j
i
t
primary plant and includes a control building, a dua? j
!
primary settling tank, a dual ohlorination tank, two sludge |
i
digestion tanks, and a sludge drying bed. The plant is ;
i
designed to treat 0.90 mgd of sewage and waste at a 5-day j
BOD of about 300 mg/1 to produce an effluent of about 200
mg/1. Provision is made in the design of the Interceptor
-------
128?
D. J. Thimsen
sewer for the possible future discharge of the Rahr Malting
Company wastes to the municipal plant for treatment when
secondary units are constructed.
MR. SMITH: Savage?
MR. THIMSEN; Savagei
A new sewage treatment plant was constructed
in 1963 and replaced a plant which was constructed in 1939.
The new plant consists of a control building, a primary
settling tank, a high-rate trickling filter, a secondary
settling tank, a heated sludge digester, and a sludge drying
bed. Provision is also made for chlorination of the plant
effluent. The plant is designed to treat 0.39 mgd or
sewage and waste with a 5-day BOD of about 210 mg/l to
produce an effluent of about 40 mg/l. Final disposal of
the plant effluent Is to a creek which joins the Minnesota
River.
MR. SMITH: Is there anyone here from Burnsville
Township?
(No response. )
MR. SMITH: I have a statement, Mr. Chairman,
which was submitted.
MR. STEIN: Would you want to read that? It
looks rather short.
MR. SMITH: I believe It should be read.
-------
1288
MR. STEIN: Yes.
MR. SMITH: It !• addressed to the Commission and
reads aa follows:
"We have received notice of the hearing to
be held Febnaary 7» 196** on pollution of the
Mississippi River from the Run River through Lake
Pepin including major tributaries. The following
statement is provided in accordance with that notice.
"Burnsvllle Township has recently completed
the first portion of a trunk sewer system and
aewage treatment plant which will ultimately serve
. an estimated 80,000 people in this township. The
sewage treatment plan in present use Is designed to
handle 500,000 gallons per day or approximately
1600 homes. It Is a modified activated sludge
plant providing primary and secondary treatment with
chlorlnation of the effluent. Discharge is into a
small creek which flows into Black Dog Lake and
thence into the Minnesota River. The plant is
designed for expansion with additional increments
expected to be built as the demand grows. This
plant is considered to be a permanent type interim
plant.
"It is respectfully requested that the
present and future needs of this community for use
-------
1289
of the Minnesota River for disposal of sewage
plant effluent be considered consistent with reason-
able standards of pollution control downstream.
This township has in the past and will continue to !
cooperate with the Water Pollution Control Commission i
in maintaining proper stream standards." I
I
This is dated February 5, 1964, j
!
MR. STEINs Thank you, Mr. Smith. I hope these j
i
permanent-type interim plants aren't like our temporary ;
buildings in Washington that have been there since World
War I.
MR. SMITH: I also have a statement from the
Eagan Township Board. Is there a representative hers from
that township?
(No response.)
MR. SMITH: If I may, Mr. Chairman, I will read
that.
MR. STEIN: If you would.
MR. SMITH: This again Is addressed to the Water
Pollution Control Commission, dated February 4, 1964, and
reads:
"Your notice has been received of the
conference of Feb. 7, 1964 on pollution of the
Mississippi River from the Rum River downstream
through Lake Pepin, including major tributaries.
i
-------
Z290
"We 9+3 providing the followl>?«; statement in
accordance with your notice.
"At the present time, one area of Eagan Town-
ship having approximately 600 homes is being
served by a small franchise sewage treatment plant
which discharges its effluent into the Minnesota
River. This is an activated sludge plant providing
primary and secondary treatment with chlorinatlon i
of the final effluent. |
i
j
"It is expected that this plant must be i
.1
i
expanded as the demand grows within the area j
*
included in the franchise. Additional plants of j
this or similar type are expected to be required .
to serve the other parts of the township and to !
have ultimate disposal in the Minnesota River. !
Interim plants of this nature will be necessary for j
many years unless and until a sewage interceptor ;
i
system is installed to serve this general area. i
Such use is essential if ground water pollution is j
to be avoided.
"Eagan Township respectfully requests that
the requirements of this area for the use of the
Minnesota River for sewage plant effluent disposal
be favorably considered. It is expected that
reasonable standards of pollution control will be
i
i
I
-------
1291
"established consistent with our us* requirements."
MR. STEIN: Thank you.
MR. SMITH: I also have a statement addressed
to the United States Public Health Service with respect to
the Cedar drove Utilities Coapany, which operates the sewage
treatment works referred to In the Eagan Township letter.
I have a number of copies of this, Mr. Chairman.
MR. STEIN: You want to have this put Into the
record as If read, do you?
MR. SMITH: Yes, certainly.
"Please be advised that our flna represents
Cedar Qrove Utilities Company, a Minnesota
Corporation, and Suburban Utilities, Inc., a
Minnesota Corporation, both of who* are currently
operating privately owned sewage disposal plants,
one situated in Eagan Township, Dakota County,
Minnesota, and the other situated In Inver Qrove
Township, Dakota County, Minnesota.
"Cedar Grove Utilities Cost pa ny plant presently
serves 800 homes and can be expanded to service
additional homes as the demand arises. Treatment
at this plant is presently averaging 90 to 95Jf
B.O.D. removal and the effluent Is being chlorinated.
Following the chlorination of the effluent, It Is
drained Into a creek which flows into the Minnesota
-------
1292
"Riv«r, fh« high degr*« of efficiency of this
plant renuita in w pollution of the water-
way! under consideration by your body in our
"Suburban Ufcj lifcl««, Inc., prt»tntly op«ratea
facilities ••rvint; 150 ho»«§. These facilitiaa
tre no deiiigtwd that they sun bt axpandtd to
•trvlc* tdditiotnal hoas«§ a« iwicded, This plant
alac op*ratt» at a 90 to 95# I.O.D. r«»oval
•ffJci«ncy. a^d *g»Ir; *t- <* our poiltn*" that th«
chlorinated «ff?u«Rt diaohargad Into a natural
drainage cour§« }*sa no sff«ot on th* pollution
of th« river. In fact, undtr th« pr«a«nt opera-
tion, the ttffluant diaoharg® is abaoroed in the
sandy soil prlo^ to reaching the riv«r, This plant
is to be taken over by the Tow nan ip of Inver Grove,
probably within on* year,
"It is our intention that by thia letter our
interests nay be no tad in th« record, of tha pro-
eeedingaj that we will be informed of any further
hearinga and reqxieat that sorreapondence in theea
mattera be addreased to Cedar Grove Utilitiea
Company, 3216 South Orove Ijtne, South St. Paul,
Minnesota.
"In cloaing, ne wlah to nott our opinion that
-------
1293
"the Minnesota Department of Health has excellent
facilities for the supervision of Installations
such as we have constructed. Their cooperation and
assistance ia a vital factor In the creation of
the efficient operations we presently conduct."
MR. STEIN: Thank you.
MR. SMITH: Having gone down the Minnesota River,
we again would start at the confluence of the two rivers
and continue down the Mississippi River.
Next I would like to call on the Minncapolls-
St. Paul Sanitary District.
-------
1294
K. L. Mick
STATEMENT OP KERWIN L. MICK, CHIEF
ENGINEER AND SUPERINTENDENT, MINNEAPOLIS-
ST. PAUL SANITARY DISTRICT
MR. MICK: Mr. Chairman, distinguished conferees,
ladles and gentlemen:
The statement that I have, although we are
probably the biggest single polluter In this area, is one
of the shortest, except for the exhibits. I have six
exhibits, five of which are enclosed in the yellow
envelope which each of the conferees has, and the sixth,
really Exhibit A, the first one, is in the package at the
end of the table and consists of the five-year study of
the sewer disposal problem in the metropolitan area that
was mentioned by other speakers today.
The other exhibits, Exhibit B through Exhibit F,
are contained in the envelope, and I would request that they
be entered into the record; but Exhibit A is too voluminous
for that and should be entered only as an exhibit to be
attached. We would like all of the exhibits, except Exhibit
A, to be part of the record.
MR. STEIN: Let me look at this exhibit, if you
don't mind, for a moment.
-------
1295
K. L. Mick
Without objection, they will be entered In the
record.
MR. MICK: Proceeding with the statement itself,
a notice of this conference dated January 7, 196^, was
received from Robert N. Barr, M.D., Secretary of the
Minnesota State Water Pollution Control Commission. The
notice states, in part: "... those municipalities ...
contributing directly to pollution ... are asked to tell
what they have done and what they propose to do toward
abatement of such pollution." This statement is intended
to summarize the work of the Minneapolia-St. Paul Sanitary
District in this regard.
The District submits the following summary points <
i
of information:
(1) Pursuant to requests from the Minnesota :
State Department of Health, the Cities of Minneapolis
and St. Paul pioneered by placing in operation In
the first sewage treatment plant serving a j
metropolitan area anywhere on the main stem of the j
i
Mississippi, the Missouri, and the Ohio Rivers. J
This primary treatment plant operated for nearly twenty i
i
years with little or no complaints of unfavorable i
4
1
river conditions. \
j
(2) The population explosion of the 1950's ;
-------
K. L. Mick 1296
and the fact that the treatment plant was reaching
Its design loading led the Board of Trustees of this
Sanitary District to make a comprehensive study
(1956-61) of the sewage disposal problem of the
metropolitan area, with recommendations for several
possible solutions. The report on this study was
published in four volumes, copies of which are sub-
mitted with this statement (Exhibit A). j
I
(3) Although the 1961 session of the State j
legislature failed to pass enabling legislation for \
\
f
the creation of a metropolitan-wide sanitary |
I
district because of insufficient agreement between r
j,
the cities and the suburbs, the Board of Trustees i
i
If
of this Sanitary District waited no longer, but ;
.
without prodding or Federal assistance proceeded ;
at once (June 1961) with the design of an expansion jj
of the present plant to provide secondary treatment.
i
This expansion Is now under construction and la •
expected to cost approximately $23*000,000. j
i
(4 ) The current plant expansion program is j
i
designed to serve the central cities and the 2k \
i
suburbs connected at the time of design (April 1962), !
i
providing for their estimated growth to the year i
1980 with a design removal of 75% of the biochemical
oxygen demand and with disinfection of the effluent
-------
1297
K. L. Mick
during the summer season. The plant is designed
to be readily expandable to serve additional area
and to provide still higher degrees of treatment
when proved necessary.
It was mentioned this morning by one of the other
speakers that they have now under contract with the city
not 24 suburbs, but 37 plus six agencies, or a total of
43. That means if we expand the plant, when it is done
it will not last until the year 1980 for the 2k suburbs,
but will have to be expanded again sometime prior to that.
(5) Under the provisions of the Ashbach
Bill passed in the 1963 session of the State legis-
lature (Chapter No. 882), this Sanitary District,
together with the Cities of Minneapolis and St.
Paul, has been proceeding since June 1963* with
the preparation of a comprehensive plan for sewage
collection and disposal for the entire area likely
to be served by the sewage treatment facilities of
this District. The completion date for this plan
is currently scheduled for October 1, 1964. It is
to be submitted to the State Water Pollution
Control Commission.
This Sanitary District believes that the record
outlined above constitutes reasonable and adequate progress
-------
12 9r
K. L. Mick
with the solution of that portion of the sewage disposal
problem for which it Is responsible.
The six exhibits which we are submitting with
this statement consist of the five-year study report, which
is Exhibit A.
Exhibit B is a subsequent report entitled "Staff-
Recommended Solution to the Metropolitan Sewage Disposal
Problem, dated January 22, 1962.
Exhibit C is a District statement made at the
hearings referred to by previous speakers, hearings by the
Minnesota State Board of Health and Water Pollution Control
Commission, relative to proposed classification and
adoption of water quality standards for the Mississippi
River in the Minneapolis-St. Paul area.
Exhibit D is a statement presented by this
District on June 27, 1962, relative to operation of the head->
water reservoirs. It was presented at a hearing held by
the United States Army District Engineer in Grand Rapids,
Minnesota.
Exhibit E is a statement dated July 1Q, 1962,
again presented at the hearing relative to the classifica-
tion of the river in this area.
Exhibit P is a summary statement presented at
that hearing.
-------
1299
(The Minneapolis-St. Paul Sanitary District
Exhibits B through P are as follows:
EXHIBIT B
MINNEAPOLIS-SAINT PAUL SANITARY DISTRICT
REPORT TO THE BOARD OP TRUSTEES
ON
STAFF-RECOMMENDED SOLUTION TO THE
METROPOLITAN SEWAGE DISPOSAL PROBLEM
KERWIN L. MICK
CHIEF ENGINEER AND SUPERINTENDENT
January 22, 1962
-------
men: Re: STAFF-RECOMMENDED SOLUTION
TO THE; METROPOLITAN SEWAGE
DISPOSAL PROBLEM
I
1300 ;
L. MICK HiOWE: PR. 1-88^*5 D. D. WOZNIAJK
C-^JJiP /.NOINEER AMD SUPERINTENDENT ATTORNEY -
MINNEAPOLIS-SAINT PAUL SANITARY DISTRICT
2400 CHILDS ROAD
SAINT PAUL 6, MINNESOTA \
3
•"fftHD OF TRUSTEES j
j
I1. 1IONER ROBERT F. PETERSON, Chairman, St. Paul 1
1
M;'YGFt 8EOROE J. VAVOULIS, St. Paul . \
I
• "'••••• •& ARTHUR NAFTALIN, Vice-Chairman, Minneapolis \
1 :':«MH ROBERT P. JANES, Minneapolis j
ARNOLD J. IMSDAHL, Corporate Secretary, St. Paul •
t
MA70R JOSEPH J. JAQUNICH, Eveleth j
I
i
NATHAN HARRIS, Minneapolis j
LOUIS J. BARTSCHER, |
Executive Secretary j
ADDRESS ALL COMMUNICATIONS \
it
TO THE SECRETARY UNLESS !
4
OTHERWISE REQUESTED j
To the Board of Trustees Presented January 22, 1962 |
i
i
i
-------
1301
Report Requested.
Preparation of this report was requested by the
Board on November 27, 1961.
Scope of Report.
The purpose of this report is to present specific
staff recommendations for the solution of the metropolitan
sewage disposal problem. The detailed reports (Volumes J-Iv
of the programed five-year study just completed by this
sanitary district contain a number of recommended alternat've
solutions to the problem with respect to types of organ: zr-
tlonal structure, boundaries, sewage collection and treatmen
projects, apportionment of costs, and repayment of equities
in the present system. These alternatives have been dis-
cussed extensively by different interested groups and legis-
lative committees during the past year or more but no
general agreement has been reached. The Board of Trustees
of this sanitary district has not yet taken a position on
these alternatives, but to facilitate consideration of the
problem it has now requested specific staff recommendations
for an adequate and equitable solution.
As most of the alternatives were discussed
extensively in the reports of the five-year study, such
-------
I
1
1302 1
S
discussion will be held to a minimum in this report and j
I
i
some references to the preceding reports will be made. j
*
i
i
!
Recommendations. I
1. Int roduot i on* Because of Inter-relationshipsL
i
specific recommendations as to organizational structure, j
!
boundaries, sewage collection and treatment projects, and j
i
apportionment of oosta cannot be made separately or inde- i
I
pendently of each other. Whatever la recommended for one of j
I
f
these facets of the problem will influence consideration of |
t
k
I
most of the remainder. This results in a considerable '
!
number of possible combinations. Prom a staff viewpoint, \
>
however, a consideration of a really adequate solution to ;
»
the problem reduces the usable combinations very markedly. J
*
The principal objectives which must be achieved I
j
in providing an adequate solution to the sewage disposal ;
|
problem of the metropolitan area may be stated as follows: •
a. Protection of water supplies and reduction I
of health hazards to a minimum.
b. Elimination of nuisance conditions resulting
from inadequate sewage disposal.
c. Restoration and preservation, to the
greatest extent practicable, of the recreational use
of watercourses.
-------
1303
In order to achieve these objectIves, It is
necessary to consider the sewage disposal problem not only
as It exists at the present time, but In the long-range
future with the population of the metropolitan area expected
to double within the next forty years, to approximately
i
E
3*000*000 people. [
2. Genera 1 Re commend a 11 on._ In order to ade- f
quately achieve the stated objectives in solving the sewage j
i
disposal problem, the staff recommends that the sewage be :
s
collected from the area of major concentration of population jj
q
(90# or Bore) in the metropolitan area in an articulated ;
i
sewer system tributary to a single treatment plant located i
below the major populated area. It is of Interest to reonll ;
j
that raore than thirty years ago the Metropolitan Drainage ;
Commission arrived at substantially the same conclusion «
[
(Annual Report 1928) after studying a number of alternative |
(
u
solutions. This recommendation does not necessarily apply '
!
to the Lake Minnetonka and the Southeast Regions (Figure i
i
2-20, Volume III). These regions could each be served by |
one or more separate sewer systems and treatment plants as
contemplated in the reports of the five-year study, without
being inconsistent with the above general recommendation.
3. Specific Recommendations. With the foregoing
general recommendation as a basis, the following more
specific recommendations are made as to organizational
-------
structure, boundaries, sewage collection and treatment
projects, and apportionment of costs,
A* Organizational Structure. In order to
achieve the stated objectives and general recommendation,
the staff is of the opinion that it will be necessary to
utiliEe one of the following two types of organizational
structures s
(l) The j>rase nt Minneapo 118-Sa i nt Pau 1 Sanitary
District, with expanded provisions for contracting with and
construction for outside areas; for review and possible
revision of existing contracts including rate structures,
upon appeal by any affected municipality; for long-range
planning and construction in accordance with a master
plan; and for possible representation on the Board of
Trustees fro® the outside area (possibly two additional
board members, appointed by the Governor or the Mayors of
the central cities as is done in Detroit).
(2) A jiew metropolitan sanitary district^ with
expanded boundaries and authority, with representation on
the Board of Trustees from the entire area, with provisions
for repayment of equities in existing jointly used sewage
works, and with an equitable method of apportioning costs
for the construction and operation of all Jointly used
collecting sewers and treatment works.
As to a choice between an enlarged metropolitan
-------
1305 '
d
sanitary district and continuation of the contract system,
the staff believes that either one could be made to function .
satisfactorily, with proper enabling legislation, and a
choice should come after consideration of the remaining facet
of the problets. Other Metropolitan areas using one or the
other of these two organizational structures are Hated in
Table 1 attached.
Re^iona1 sanitary districta. Another type of
organizational structure has been considered, involving
a continuation of the present sanitary district and the
formation of a number of other regional, independent
sanitary districts (of which the existing North Suburban
Sanitary Sewer .District would be one), which might or might
not contract with the present district through the central
ities. Such a system is not recommended by the staff
because of lack of assurance that the objectives and general
recommendation as stated in this report would be achieved,
Unless the regional projects conformed to the above general
recouHBendation for essentially complete downriver discharge
of treatment plant effluents, they could result in added
pollution in the pool above St. Anthony Palls, from which
the water supply of the central cities and some connected si.
urbs is taken, added pollution in the Minnesota River just
above the proposed new Ft. Snelling state park and above
St. Paul, and added pollution in the lakes in the White Bear
-------
1306
vicinity draining toward the water supplies of the central
cltiee (Figure 4-3, Volume III).
For these reasons the staff does not favor the
formation of a number of Independent regional sanitary
districts In the area of major population concentration,
with the possible exception of the Lake Minnetonka and the
Southeast Regions and except as might prove advantageous
to facilitate the construction and operation of regional
sewage collecting systems connecting to the main Inter-
ceptors provided under either organizational structure (l)
or (2 } above.
B. Boundaries.
Present Boundaries. If the method of \
i
contractual agreements between the suburbs and the central j
ft
oities and this sanitary district becomes the organizational ;
!
structure of choice, then the present district boundaries •
t
I
could remain unchanged. This is one of the advantages of |
the contract systemj there is no boundary problem, except
as to decisions on sewer capacities.
Ultimate Limits of Service. If it is
decided to create an enlarged metropolitan sanitary district,
the question of where to set the boundaries becomes more
complicated. In the staff's opinion, the maximum area
-------
1307 j
i
which should be considered for inclusion in the district j
I
should be that represented within the "Ultimate Limits ]
of Future Sanitary District" as shown on Figure 2-20 in
Voluae Three and Figure 1 of this report. Compared with
the boundaries of the present sanitary district which are
the city Haiti of the central cities, enclosing approximate-
ly 115 square miles, the "Ultlnate Limits" encompass 1,170
square miles, or ten times the present district. These are
considered to represent the limits of a single articulated
sewer system which could serve, with one treatment plant
(except for the Southeast Region), over 90# of the present
and future population in the metropolitan area.
Parta of the "ultimate limits" area, however,
would not become sufficiently populated to support a
sewer system even by the year 2000. It is not usually
financially feasible to provide sewers in an area having
less than 125 dwelling units per quarter square mile or
about 3 persons per acre. Although complete coverage of
the area with sewerage systems is not expected within the
next forty years, all major sewage works undertaken in the
area should be part of a unified master plan.
Intermediate Boundaries. The initial
boundaries of an enlarged district could be smaller than
the "ultimate limits," with provision for further expansion.
This would simplify the organizational, administrative, and
-------
1308 !
i
financing probleous somewhat, but would make it more dlffl-
cult to follow a unified waster pla^ *ar the area and to
construct adequately Biased sewers for the long-range future
(40 years or more).
The following considerations facilitate the
selection of "Intermediate boundaries." The 114 square mile
Lake Nlnnetonka Region night be omitted on the basis of
economic considerations and sparse population, estimated at
1.7 persons per acre of service in 1980 and 1.9 in the year
2000 (pp. 2-29 and 2-30, Vol. Ill), which is rather low to
finance sewage works except in scattered areas of con-
centration. Individual community plants in such areas
must discharge into the lake as do the existing plants at
Wayzata and Excelsior. The nutrients discharged into the
lake may eventually cause nuisance algae blooms, although
it way be possible to avoid this by the use of effluent
lagoons, where algae growths in a confined area would con-
sume the nutrients. If it is considered necessary to keep
effluents out of the lake, however, cost estimates (p. 2-44,
Vol. Ill) favor a separate regional system with a plant on
the Minnesota Biver above Shakopee near Chaska, approximatelyj
24 miles above Mendota. ;
<
I
The 175 square mile Southeast Regicn might also
be excluded from the enlarged sanitary district on the
basis that it lies downriver from the heavy concentration
-------
I
i
1309 '
!
of population and requires one or more separate sewer ;
systems and treatment plants as indicated In Volume III.
It would not be part of the single articulated sewer system
and treatment plant that is possible for the major part of
the metropolitan area. It already has three municipal
treatment plants and several industrial waste treatment
works. The Southeast Region will place a considerable
load on the river due to industrial wastes, in addition to
that frota the relatively smaller domestic population. The
principal reason for including it in an enlarged metro- •
t,
polltan sanitary district would be to exercise some coordlna-i
tion and control over the performance of treatment works ;
in that region on the basis that they, along with the :
i
Minneapolis-St. Paul plant, share in using the assimilative j
i
«
capacity of the river in the Hastings Pool. Coordination ;
and control should be exercised by some agency. At present j
*
»
this control lies only in the State Water Pollution Control '
\
Commission which is not presently adequately staffed or •
funded to perform such coordination on a day-to-day basis. )
I
The boundaries of an enlarged sanitary district
might be further reduced initially, as compared with the
"ultimate limits," by omitting some of the fringe areas
which would probably not receive sewer service for twenty
years or more. An inspection of the estimated areas of
service on Fig. 2-21, Vol. Ill, indicates that the five
-------
1310
townships of Dayton, Eagle Creek, Oneka, Grant, and possibly
East Oakdale, a total area of approximately 127 square
miles, might be excluded from the initial district on this
basis.
Intermediate boundaries accordingly might be
based on the "ultimate limits" of 1,170 square miles less i
the Lake Minnetonka Region, the Southeast Region, and the
five outer fringe townships, leaving an initial district of j
i
approximately 750 square miles. j
A map showing the present Minneapolis-Saint Paul j
»
i
Sanitary District, the 2U suburbs presently served under
contract agreements, and possible future boundaries of an
enlarged district is shown on Figure No. 1.
C. Sewage Collection and Treatment Project.
The staff recommends Project "A," described in Volume III,
as the best project to accomplish the long-range objectives
i
set forth in this report and permit the greatest degree of |
beneficial use of the water resources of the metropolitan :
area. This is the project that would collect the sewage
from the area of major concentration of population (90# or
i
more) in the metropolitan area in a single articulated sewer \
system with one treatment plant in the Pigs Eye Lake area. !
This project could be accomplished at a reason-
able cost either under a modification of the present con-
tracting system or under an enlarged, metropolitan sanitary
i
i
i
i
-------
1311 ;
district. ;
j
i
i
D,.Apportionment of Costa. :
i
Whether the organizational structure be j
an enlarged district or an extension of the present contract \
I
system, it is contemplated that the charges apportioned 1
to a given municipality would, as at present, be billed as i
i
a lump BUS, broken down into fixed charges and operating j
costs, which could then be procured by the municipality in »
any manner it sees fit, e.g., by sewage service charge, j
I
connection charge, ad valorem tax, area charge, special |
assessment, etc. j
Apportionment Under a Contract System. 1
Under the contract system, the total annual charges appor- !
tioned to a given municipality would be in accordance with ]
the terms of the contract agreement between that municipalityi
1
and the central city or the sanitary district. Payment of :
equities for use of existing sewage works would be included J
i
in the terms of the contract, as at present. There appears j
i
to be a need for a review of existing contracts, particularly!
i
as to uniformity and as to rate structures, i.e., whether 1
they are adequate and equltajble for present and future j
I
conditions. There might well be some procedure whereby a j
municipality which becomes dissatisfied with the terras of j
-------
1312
a contract agreement with one of the central cities could
appeal to another body for a review and arbitration of
the points of disagreement. This appeal could be to the
district court or even to the Board of Trustees of the
sanitary district, particularly if its membership included
representation from the suburban areas as suggested above
under "Organizational Structure." Wisconsin has a State
agency, the Wisconsin Public Service Commission, to which
sewage works rate structures can be appealed. Minnesota
has only the Railroad and Warehouse Commission, which at
present Is not set up to hear appeals on sewage rate
structures.
Apportionment Under An Enlarged Metropolitan
Sajiitary District. Under an enlarged metropolitan sanitary
district, the apportionment of costs becomes more complicated
It is necessary to work out in advance and include in the
enabling legislation a cost apportionment formula applicable
generally over a large area, together with a method of
repayment of present user's equities in existing sewage
works which are or will be used Jointly with others, in
proportion to such use. This problen was considered In
Considerable detail in Fart Three of Volume Two, wherein
IS methods of cost apportionment and four methods of equity
repayment were studied.
-------
Of
the methods for repayment of equity in existing sewage --orks,
there seems to be some agreement on the "present worth"
basis, I.e., reproduction cost less depreciation and
obsolescence. The staff recommends the present worth basis,
specifically basis "D" as defined on p. 70 of Volume II,
Part Three, without subtracting federal PWA grants.
Preliminary values totaling nearly $70 million for the
equities on the present worth basis were presented In
Table No. ^ of Volume II and in subsequent studies. Tables
408*1-20 and 21 and 4084 -33a, b, c, and d. Further detailed
studies would be necessary to determine more exact values
for these equities for use in actual cost apportionment
work.
Methods of Cost Apportionment Considered.
Of the 18 methods for apportioning the costs of constructing
new works, Volume II did not specifically recommend any one
method, but did indicate which methods would be most
equitable under various circumstances. For example, the
simpler methods (l through 5) would be equitable for a
relatively small sanitary district, such as the present
sanitary district or one encompassing approximately the
area served under the past contract agreements. For these,
the report indicates (p. 20, Volume II, Part Three) that
Methods 2 or 5 would merit consideration.
-------
1311*
Method 2 la the one now being used by the present sanitary
district whereby all coats for new construction,
operation and maintenance are apportioned between
the two cities on the basis of the annual average dry ]
weather sewage volume contributed by each.
Method 5 i* the one which was used by the present sanitary
district until 1955, whereby all construction costs
were apportioned on the basis of the assessed valua-
tions of the two cities and operation and maintenance
costs on the basis of annual dry weather sewage
volumes.
For a much larger sanitary district, however,
taking in additional large areas for which new sewage works
would have to be constructed by the district, more complex
apportionment formulas would have to be used if it is
desired to follow the principle that all works should be
paid for "by users and properties for whose use, need, and
benefit the facilities of the works are provided, approxi-
mately in proportion to the cost of providing the use and
benefits of the works" (p. 66, Vol. II, part Three). This
principle is followed in the methods suggested for a large
sanitary district, e.g., Methods 15, 16, or 18 (pp. 18, 20,
and 75-77, Vol. II, Part Three). The staff endorses this
principle although recognizing some merit on the side of
-------
1315
those who ask,"Should the municipalities located farthest
from the sewage treatment plant pay all of the greater costs
Involved in transporting their sewage to the disposal aite
when the entire area benefits from centralized disposal?"
(Study Guide, League of Minnesota Municipalities, November
22, 1961.)
Method lgj> on» of the three methods suggested in Volume II
as being among the most equitable for large sanitary
districts, apportions construction coats for works used
exclusively by a given area to that area on an assessed
valuation basis. Construction costs for jointly used '
sewers and treatment works are apportioned to and withitjs
i
the regions requiring them on the basis of proportionate
capacity. Operation and maintenance costs are appor- :
tioned on the basis of annual average dry weather <
sewage volume (Vol. II, Part Three, pp. 6 and 75). ;
Method 16, is more complicated in that it attempts to i
allocate the charges between present users and property >
on an equitable basis, thus insuring that vacant propertfy
pays a share of the capacity provided for it instead of
having the costs borne by current users entirely. The
user's share of the construction cost of interceptor |
i
sewers would be allocated to them, on the basis of j
maximum wet weather sewage volume, that percentage of
-------
1316
the total capacity occasioned by maximum wet weather
sewage volume. The user's aha* - of the construction
cost of sewage treatment plants would be allocated to
them, on the basis of annual average dry weather
sewage volume, that percentage of the total capacity
required for dry weather sewage volume. The property
share of the cost of construction of all unused
capacity (for the future) in all sewage works would
be allocated to property on a gross area basis.
Operation and maintenance charges would be allocated
to users on the basis of annual average dry weather
sewage volume (Vol. II, Part Three, pp. 6 and 76).
Method 18„__ the third method suggested as being suitable
for large sanitary districts is similar to Method 16.
The only difference is that the user's share of the
construction cost of interceptor sewers would be
allocated to them, on the basis of annual average dry
weather sewage volume (instead of maximum wet weathe r
sewage volume), that; percentage of the total capacity
occasioned by maximum wet weather sewage volume
(Vol. II, Part Three, pp. 6 and ?6).
Method 16A, a modification of the above three methods,
was suggested during the lengthy discussions which
were held by various groups studying the problem
following publication of Volume II, Part Three, in
-------
1317
December I960. This was an effort to find a method
that would be easier to understand and simpler to
applyt and still be equitable. Under Method 16A, con-
struction costs would be apportioned In a manner
which charges each municipality a portion of the costs
of each sewage works in which capacity has been pro-
vldsd for the municipality, with the charge being
based on the ratio that the allocated capacity for
the amnielpallty bears to the total allocated capacity
In the works. Apportionment of operation and main- \
i
tenance costs would again be based on annual average j
!
dry weather sewage volume. The charges for construction
costs would be on the basis of the allocated capacities <
i
i
estimated at the time of design and construction. At j
regular intervals over the years, it would be advisable ;
to reassess the capacity allocations, crediting or j
debiting the municipalities in accordance with their
actual need and use as time goes on. In effect, this •
1
would correspond to buying and selling capacity in the j
i
system between the various municipalities, as is done j
In Rahway Valley, N. J., in Los Angeles County Sanlta- •
tlon Districts, and is done here under the present i
i
contracting systen to some extent (Bloomlngton pur- I
i
chases some of Richfield's capacity. New Hope some of j
Golden Valley's, etc.).
-------
1318
'[Jnlforta Apportionment. As previously stated, there are
who argue that the costs should he spread uniformly ove
the entire district on the groands that inasmuch as the
entire metropolitan area would be acting Jointly to
i
solve a cornaon problem and obtain the best solution for]
]
4
the area as a whole from a sanitation viewpoint, then \
no on* should be penalized because of geographic loca-
tion In the district. Proponents of this viewpoint j
\
succeeded in getting the bill, considered but not j
pasted by the 1961 legislative session, to Include pro-
visions for the uniform distribution of costs in excess
of 106# of the average (H.P. No. 2, Sec. 14, Subd. 3,
Extra Session 1961). More recently, the Metropolitan
Affairs Committee of the League of Minnesota Munici-
palities on January 3* 1962, passed a motion favoring
cost allocation equally among all sewage system users
in the proposed sanitary district regardless of loca-
tion. Practice In other cities of the country can be '
1
found both ways, some allocating costs uniformly and ;
some not. Table 2 contains a summary of financing j
procedures in some other metropolitan areas.
!
j
Staff Recommended CostApportionment For An 1
Enlarjged Met ro po II t a n PI strict. The total cost of a metro- ;
politan project as estimated for this area is reasonable, '•
-------
1319
in the opinion of the staff, and the per capita costs would
be neither prohibitive nor inequitable if apportioned
according to any of the suitable methods as discussed above, 1
j
\
The purpose of this report, however. Is to j
furnish a more specific staff recommendation as to a choice \
between the various suitable alternatives. Accordingly, ;
the staff recommends Method 16A as described above for I
>
i
allocation of costs in an enlarged sanitary district, with j
review and possible adjustment of the capacity and coat
allocations at intervals determined by the governing board
of the district, auch Intervals not to exceed five years.
|
Application of this formula, with repayment of equity on !
a present worth basis, would result in annual costs to the
j
central cities and core area suburbs (p. 52, Vol. II, Part j
Three) which are about equal or slightly less than those i
I
estimated for the central cities and core area suburbs to j
"go it alone" under estimated 1980 conditions. ;
4. Suromary Re coamendations. Although some ?
specific recommendations have been made in the foregoing j
i
i
sections of this report, a choice between alternate solution^
to certain facets of the problem was not made, pending dis- >
|
cuBSion of other facets. This discussion now having been I
presented, the following summary recommendations are made:
(l) In order to adequately achieve the
stated objectives in solving the long-range sewage disposal
-------
1320
problem of the metropolitan area, the staff recommends
that the sewage be collected from the area of major concentre
tlon of population (90£ or more) in an articulated sewer
system tributary to a single treatment plant located below
the major populated area, as typified by Project "A" in
Volume III.
(2) The organizational structure under
which recoaaaendation (1) could be accomplished may be either
the present Minneapolis-St. Paul sanitary district with a
system of contract agreements with outside areas, or an
enlarged metropolitan sanitary district. While the latter
type of structure would, in the staff's opinion, lend itself
to a better coordinated solution to the problem, neverthe-
less it la possible to obtain a satisfactory solution under
a system of contract agreements. If agreement on the make-
up of an enlarged sanitary district is not reached in the
immediate future, the staff recommends that a solution to
the problem be sought at an accelerated pace under a system
of contracting with the central cities or the sanitary
district. To facilitate this, it is recommended that further
amendments be prepared to the present legislative act,
Chapter 445* Minnesota Statutes, as amended, with expanded
provisions for contracting with and construction for outside
areas; for review and possible revision of existing contracti
Including rate structures, upon appeal by any affected
-------
1321
municipality) for long-range planning and construction in
accordance with a roaster plan adopted by the board of
trustees| and for representation on the board of trustees
|
from the outside areas (suggest two additional board members!
I
appointed by the Governor or the Mayors of the central I
j
cities as Is done In Detroit). i
(3) *f* however, an enlarged metropolitan
sanitary district is the organizational structure agreed
upon, the following recommendations pertain:
^undarles^ For simplification it is suggested that
the initial boundaries of an enlarged district be similar
to those described above under "Intermediate Boundaries"
(B), with provision for further expansion in the future.
The initial boundaries would then encompass approximately
750 square miles and wou!3 be less than the "Ultimate
Limits" developed in Volume Three (Pig. 2-20) through sub-
traction of the Lake Minnetonk* Region, the Southeast
Region, and five outer fringe townships, viz., Dayton, Eagle
Creek, Oneka, Grant, and East Oakdale.
Sewage Collection and Treatment Project. Project
"A," described in Volume III, is recommended as the best
project to economically and satisfactorily accomplish
Summary Recommendation No. (l), above, under either the
contract system or an enlarged district.
Repayment of Equity in Existing Sewage Works
-------
1322
R»j>ftjp»em; of »h@ae equities on the basis of
i;present north," specifically basi® "DM as defined in
Volume II, Part Three, p. 70, is recommended. Present worth
in ietiirmlned by computing reproduction cost, less deprecia-
tion and obsolescence for works not usable in the future.
Apportionment of Costs For New Construction and
F';-' Oreratlon. and Maintenance, ftor an enlarged sanitary
d:,*c:fi;?t of a size suggested under "Boundaries," it is
recommended Chat th« cost of new construction be apportioned
.,r«^f* Method 16A described above, whereby each municipality
b® charged a portion of the costs of each sewage
in which capacity has been provided for the munici-
pality, The charge would be based on the ratio that the
allocated capacity for the municipality bears to the total
allocated capacity in the works. Operation and maintenance
co»ts t^ould be apportioned on the basis of annual average
dr.v weather sewage volume.
i
Acknowledgement. The cooperation and advice of other memberi
of the Sanitary District /itaff and consulting engineers,
Toitz, King, lAivall, Anderson and Associates, Inc., during
the preparation of this roport is gratefully acknowledged.
Respectfully submitted,
/•/ Kerwin L. Mick
KIM a- Chief Engineer and Superintendent
* * *
-------
To the Board of Trustees January 22, 1962
M inn e ap o 1 i s - Sa i n t Paul Sanitary District
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURES
IN SOME OTHER METROPOLITAN AREAS
PROVIDING SEWAGE SERVICE
(Based on information in Vol. II, Part Two)
Central Cities Providing Service to
Outside Areas by Contract Agree- Metropolitan Sanitary Districts
ment or Ordinance or Sewer Authorities
Cincinnati Boston
Cleveland Chicago
Detroit Green Bay, Wis.
Los Angeles Madison, Wis.
Philadelphia Milwaukee
Portland St. Louis
Toledo Buffalo
Washington, D. C. Pittsburgh (1)
Rahway Valley
Seattle (1)
(!) Although these are metropolitan authorities, long term sewage
disposal contracts were executed with each area outside the
central city to back up the sale of bonds.
-12-
-------
(M
rg
rt
a
d
rt
0)
•4-*
tn
o
-d
V
43
•M
O
H
(Nl
y
j
cq
2 2 H
£S£ 5
^° *
£88 a
METHODS OF COST A
FOR SEWAGE
N SOME OTHER METR
d on information in Vol.
HH CU
CO
rt
CQ
fc^
r**»
-*-»
'3
tr
V
M
o
VM
00
d
•3
f
0
d
>>
rt
0,
4->
U
• i-l
t-4
*»
CO
• rt
-d
-d
cu
•d
d
rt
Cu,
w *— *
cu '
v CO
<- fc
.5 cu
,„ •*
CO 4-1
rt O
4> w
"! -*
O* £ £ " ,~.
ion. (Vol. II, Method N
ate in entire district; ne-
iy constructed and paid fc
ized assessed valuations.
(Vol. II, Method No. 2
•5 * « -3
3 « g 5 «
1 Sf-2 ^ g
™ ** > cu y
> ^ CO ^J
••-< M w O
13 fi ft « >
CO ,1 CO jj ,n
CO g ^ « S)
CU M M — ^
to O O , >
« ra ^ S
^ 5 d .• w
61-J -H -rt H
^ ^ is
T3 T3
•> «
to rt co
rt o pQ rt
cq oo CQ
rt £
co 5 cu m
*e .Ji * *i
CO _,* •, to
0 u n °
u u u u
i— i >— <
^-i i-<
<: <«:
cu
§co
^
» ^s
U
>< d
rt -r|
ft &
to
rt «
S &o
2 rt
* •£
cu rt
•d oc
•^H
00 M
1 °
0 -d
9
cu cu
00 00
rt rt
> ^
CU CU
co en —^
*~1 »— 4 CU
rt rt h«n
a a ?
M IH ™
0 of;
d d u
- - o
•tH
d d xT
i— » u I-H rt
Q.
to QJ tn ^
•rt _, -rt a)
43 ~i
jj 4-1 a> to
W) C 00 £
M .5 M £
rt ,„ rt rt
43 43
U "J U r^J
>H O) ^ -rt
3 cu 3 to
CO 4-1 CO -^
< * < o
1 I
•rt 43
*J 00
jS ^
5 3
•5 -0
u *
d JJ
•rH -rt
U CU
d
V
T^
"
•r4
CO
V
^,
t-i
cu
OH
O
o
.
fNJ
*
r-H
J3
•s
o
8
a
o
I-l
<+H
Service Charge.
operating costs obtained
ecton. )
>- "S S
— i d d
43 rt o
^ to U
O cu *j
*«s oc c
•< "jSj
8 .3 g!
^ 0.3
•a * &
c x «
D -2 M
d fc. °
o
'd
cu
CO
rt '
pq cu
•— i
w *»
•w *J
co rt
S «
>— t
i— (
<
to
rt
cu
0)
m
4->
a
O
PQ
m
4-"
CQ
O
O
g
•rt
4->
U
3
V-l
4->
CO
d
o
U
to
T3
o
43
4->
V
-d
cu
d
0
O
g
•rt
4->
rt
3
13
t-l
O
t-l
g
cu
4-1
to
cu
>s
rt
a
g
O
4J
fH
O
a,
ft,
• rt
rt «
5 oc
3 rt
ft £
o 5
CU en
•O
d
rt
i—t
co
w 55
O ,H
CQ O
-------
1325
4->
d
cu
6
a
o
•f<
Outside Areas
4>
U
Cj
rt
Ul
M
O
»! j
4)
>**\
UAJ
t^i
transportation cha]
>>
rt
ft
•3
03
0
•fH
W>
•r^
r-c
O
rH
o
T)
4)
X
rt
J3
CO
•g
3
r-l
4J
>>
4-*
•i-l
U
>4-l
O
4)
f •
rt
OJ
.
>s
4J
• .H
U
rt
£
u
*
*j
§
M
CU
CU
4-*
CO
0
O
T)
rt
CO
M
o
4->
CU
use of main interce
M
O
• 4->
T)
C
rt
5»
4J
on allocated capaci
>.
rt
ft
CO
•H
en
rt
XJ
*
O
r— 1
•4-1
cu
60
rt
*
CU
CO
CU
00
rt
4)
CO
icated capacity and
ime basis.
U 3
r— ( r-H
3 °
< >
CO
3
t— i
(X
*
4)
•M
rt
M
>N
4^
• r4
U
4)
X!
+4
CO
4)
6
• H
4-1
-*
. — 1
>-.
rt
ft
nfiltration charge.
• H
C
rt
A
CO
J«!
M
O
^
?
00
d
•r-l
*-J
CO
•s
0>
d
•t-4
>-
4^
U
4)
r-l
O
V-l
>«
rt
ft
-M
•H
cu
X
4->
C
-rH
CU
4->
rt
r-l
CO
rt
CU
S
rt
CO
4)
CO
•r-l
r-l
cu
rC
+->
0
i
o
I
CO
_^
TJ
O
*: fj
i-4 **
S |
u ^
i "0
4)
(M C
•H
V JO
3 6
rt o
H U
o
• H
*4-l 4-*
o 2
w M
4>
• a-
.M
n
rt
ffl
CO
CO
0
u
d
o
• rH
0
3
M
4->
CO
d
o
U
cu
60
rt
p>
4)
CO
>»
•r-l
u
rt
(X
rt
O
T3
4)
4J
rt
u
O
r— 1
p^
<
4J
• M
0
14
4J
V
Q
cu
z§
Ui co
cu
6
U
d
rt
r
CU CO
• f-<
CO
rt
rt
r-l
CD
d
cu
O
T3
d
3
ft
r—l
enera
O
r-l
4)
_fH
r^4
4->
O
TJ
d
rt
X
rt
4->
CO
cu
r-H
rt
CO
^
X
rt
4->
ilorem
TO
T3
<
4)
QD
rt
?
cu
CO
fj
O
•rH
15
j3
"rt
>
T3
4)
ssess
<
cu
ao
rt
*
CU
CO
>.
4->
• vH
U
rt
cu
rt
O
T3
CU
llocat
4)
bo
?
4)
w
cu
bo
M
rt
rd
U
d
o
•r-«
4->
onnec
O
4)
QD
rt
*
4>
fO
>N
4->
• r4
0
rt
CU
rt
U
T3
cu
llocat
<
rt
r-l
4)
d
4)
QD
O
CO
i— i
rt
4)"
CJ
3
i— i
O
>
D
bO
Ly sewa
r-4
rt
/^
rincij
ft
bO
rt
O
0
v-i
4->
d
o
M
<4-<
TJ
d
rt
rt
CU
)-l
rt
d
rt
d
o
CO
^
cu
S
ssess;
rt
4)
SO
rt
4)
CO
>s
4->
•rH
U
rt
CU
rt
U
tJ
cu
llocat
<
(0
CO
cu
TJ
bO
d
<;
n
O
J
4)
0)
Milwauk
rt
•d
J3
a
Philadel
Toledo
^
d
0
4->
Washing
•r*
t-^.
15
•»
Madison
4)
rt
1^
rt .
Pi Z
-------
1326
PRESENT MINNEAPOLIS-MINT PAUL
SANITARY DISTRICT
PRESENT CONTRACTED AREA
POSSIBLE INTERMEDIATE BOUNDARIES
ULTIMATE LIMITS AS SHOWN IN VOLUME THREE
PRESENT AND POSSIBLE FUTURE SANITARY DISTRICT BOUNDRIES
NO.—I
-------
KERWIN L. MICK
CHIEF ENOINEER AND SUPUIN
PHONE. PP 1-8845
1327
D. D. WOZNIAK
ATTORNEY
MINNEAPOLIS-SAINT PAUL SANITARY DISTRICT
24QO CHILD* ROAD
•A1NT PAUL, * II MINNESOTA
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
COMMISSIONER ROBERT f. PETERSON, CHAIRMAN, ST. PAUL
MAYOR GEORGE J. VAVOULIS, ST. PAUL
MAYOR ARTHUR NAFTALIN, VICE-CHAIRMAN, MINN«APOLI«
ALDERMAN ROBERT P. JANES. MINNIA-OLI*
ARNOLD J. 1MSDAHL, CORPORATE SECRETARY. ST. PAUL
MAYOR JOSEPH J, JASUNICH. EVBLETH
NATHAN HARRIS, MINNEAPOLIS
l.OUlS J. BARTSCHER.
EXKCUTIVC SECRETARY
ADDRESS ALL COMMUNICATIONS
TO THE SECRETARY UNLESS
OTHERWISE REQUESTED
May 28, 1962
Robert N, Barr, M. D., Secretary
Minnesota State Board of Health
Minnesota Water Pollution Control Commission
University Campus
Minneapolis 14, Minnesota
Gentlemen:
Relative to your proposed classification and adoption
of water quality standards for the Mississippi River in the
Minneapolis-Saint Paul area, this sanitary district submits the
attached statement.
Very truly yours,
Kerwin L. Mick
Chief Engineer & Superintendent
Approved by the Board of Trustees
May 25, 1962
-------
MINNEAPOLIS-SAINT PAUL SANITARY DISTRICT
STATEMENT FOR PRESENTATION
AT HEARING OF
MINNESOTA STATE BOARD OP HEALTH
MINNESOTA WATER POLLUTION CONTROL COMMISSION
May 28, 1962
The District's Intermit in Proposed Standards
We believe your commission is to be commended for
proposing river water quality standards rather than waste
effluent standards. By so doing, you will specify the
desired river conditions and leave some incentive to
accomplish other measures which would help achieve the
desired conditions, such as low flow augmentation.
The Minneapolis-Saint Paul Sanitary District
has a vital and direct interest in the proposed classifica-
tion and adoption of standards for the Mississippi River in
the vicinity of Minneapolis and St. Paul. The District's
principal area of control involves that section of the river
from the Pigs Eye Lake Sewage Treatment Plant to the mouth
of the St. Crolx River. Into this zone of the river,
the effluent froa the District's treatment plant is dis-
charged, utilizing the natural assimilative capacity of the
-------
1329 :
river for the completion of the stabilization process.
As the sewerage system tributary to the District's treat- j
ment plant serves over 90 percent of the Metropolitan
Area's sewered population, the plant effluent is the major
source of pollution in the down-river section. Other
communities and industries also contribute substantial
pollutional loads to the river and share the responsibility j
for the river water conditions which prevail. !
Because of the direct bearing of the extent and j
cost of sewage treatment on the aalntenance of various levelsf
of quality of the river water, the District endorses ;
I
reasonable standards for river water quality which are
commensurate with the downriver water uses. It is however
i
an economic necessity to make reasonable use of the diluting *
and natural purification afforded by the receiving stream.
In the section of the river between St. Anthony !
Palls and the sewage treatment plant, the District's
Interests in the proposed standards are less direct than in
the lower section, but are also important. The quality of
the river water above the treatment plant influences the
degree of treatment required at the plant, and therefore the
District is concerned with overflows from combined sewers
and other waste discharges above the plant, and with the I
condition of both the Minnesota and Mississippi Rivers. i
About two miles above the treatment plant, a
-------
1330
sewage bypass structure provided as part of the original
intercepting works at Third and Comae, -Iml Streets permits
the bypass of the flow in the Main Joint Interceptor to the
river during emergency periods. The occasional utilization !
of this bypass facility is essential to the proper main-
tenance of the treatment works.
Treatment Objectives of Past Years
Placed in operation during the summer of 1938,
the treatment plant at Pigs Eye Lake was designed to provide
treatment for an average sewage flow of 134 million gallons
per day expected from a tributary population of 910,000.
Because of the wide variation in the discharge
of the Mississippi River which receives the plant effluent,
the plant was designed to provide primary treatment during
normal river flow and intermediate treatment by chemical
precipitation during unusually low river flow conditions.
The operation of the plant and the system of
Intercepting sewers has been aimed toward the abatement
of pollution and the maintenance of reasonable river water
conditions through and below the Twin Cities. In recent
years* the annual cost of operation and maintenance of the
plant has exceeded one million dollars.
Treatment objectives were based upon a statement
-------
1331
of requirements issued by the Minnesota State Board of
Health in 1928. The statement provided essentially that
the pollution of the river should be restricted to such an
i
extent that the public health hazard would be reduced to a '
minimum, that the health of livestock would not be endangered!,
that the public nuisance would be eliminated, and that fish ;
life in the river, at least below the mouth of the St. Croix,,
would not be Jeopardized. These objectives subsequently
were interpreted by the Metropolitan Drainage Commission and J
Minneapolis-Saint ^aul Sanitary District engineers as
meaning that practically all the sewage should be collected '
and conducted to a treatment plant located downstream from
i
the densely populated areas. Interpretation of the require- |
i
raents was also made in terms of the minimum dissolved oxygen j
levels which would be maintained in the Hastings Pool and j
i
in the Mississippi below the junction of the St. Croix. ;
A complete resume of these requirements and their ;
interpretation is presented as Appendix I of this statement, j
Over the years the District has established
approximately 24 river water sampling stations which extend
93 miles from North Minneapolis down through Lake Pepin. '.
Annually more than 600 regularly scheduled river samples
are collected and over 5,000 analytical determinations of
the water quality are made.
-------
Pro g ram o f Res ear c h a nd Inv e st_iga t ion
In May of 1956 the Board of Trustees of the j
!
Minneapolis-Saint Paul Sanitary District authorized a five-
year r-ogram of Research and Investigation to assist in the
determination of future requirements for Sanitary District
sewage works. The overall program was directed toward the
determination of the most economical and satisfactory solu- J
tion to the sewage disposal problem of the Minneapolis- j
caint Paul Metropolitan Area. The research phase of the
program included comprehensive analysis of the past thirty- j
five years' records of river conditions and the prediction
of the capacity of the Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers to
receive and assimilate the pollution discharged from sewage
treatment plants and other sources In the area. The j
t
investigation part of the program involved a systematic :
evaluation of the existing interceptor sewer system to '
determine its adequacy to convey expected future flows from j
an enlarged area of service and the development of a long- :
range plan for the expansion of sewage works in the Metro-
politan Area. ,
All reports prepared as a part of the Program ';
of R; sea- i h arid investigation have been previously submitted j
to the Water Pollution Control Commission. As these reports!
relate directly to the subject of this hearing, we are i
-------
1333
presenting as exhibits those which are applicable as follows .•
The report entitled "Pollution and Recovery '.
Characteristics of the Mississippi River for the Period
1926-1955" - Volume One - Part One (January, 1958) which
presents a detailed analysis of deoxygenation characteristics
of the river, the frequency of occurrence of dissolved
oxygen values, and an analysis of the bacteriological
quality of the river was prepared by the Sanitary Engineering
Division of the Civil Engineering Department of the University
of Minnesota.
The report "Pollution and Recovery Characteristics
of the Mississippi River" - Volume One - Part Three
(September, 1961) is a report of the Sanitary District pre-
pared by the Sanitary Engineering Division of the Civil
Engineering Department, University of Minnesota, This report
presents an investigation of the characteristics of the
Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers In the vicinity of
Minneapolis and Saint Paul, deoxygenation rate constants for
the receiving rivers and the treatment process effluents,
the reaeration of the receiving rivers, the capacity of the
rivers to assimilate pollution, the degree of treatment to
maintain dissolved oxygen levels, and methods of supple-
menting the dissolved oxygen content of the Mississippi
River downstream of the treatment plant effluent additions.
The "Expansion of Sewage Works in the Minneapolis-
-------
Saint Paul Metropolitan Area" - Volume Three (September,
I960), a report prepared by Toltz, King, Duvall, Anderson <
4
and Associates, Incorporated, includes preliminary plans <
and estimates of cost of alternate sewage works projects j
for an extensively enlarged service area.
The "Report on Activated Sludge Pilot and
I
Demonstration Plant Test Program" - Volume One - Part Two i
i
(August, 1961), a final report on an investigation conducted :
i
by the Sanitary Engineering Division, Department of Civil j
I
Engineering, University of Minnesota, has been used in this
investigation of sewage treatment works requirements. The !
j
report summarizes the results of thirty-six months of pilot
and demonstration plant tests of the activated sludge
i
i
process and its modifications. i
<
"Report on the Expansion of Sewage Treatment Works'
i
in the Minneapolis-Saint Paul Metropolitan Area" - Volume j
Pour (November, 1961) by Toltz, King, Duvall, Anderson and <
:
Associates, Incorporated, presents an investigation of ;
the expansion of the Pig» Eye Lake Sewage Treatment Plant
covering a determination of the required degree of treatment;!
the applicability and feasibility of various methods of
sewage treatment and sludge disposal; and the development
I
of a design basis, preliminary plans and cost estimates ,
i
for the expansion of the treatment works.
-------
1335
Proposed Expansion of Treatment Plant
At a recent meeting of the Board of Trustees,
a three-year construction program was adopted which is
aimed at the completion of a large expansion project and the
commencement of secondary treatment operations in 1965.
Final contract plane are presently being prepared for this
treatment plant enlargement, based upon employment of the
high-rate activated sludge process. The estimated coat of
this expansion project is $21,710,000. The Minneapolis-
Saint Paul Sanitary District is, therefore, actively pro-
ceeding with treatment works which, when completed,
will result in improved river conditions and substantial
compliance with the proposed river standards.
Proposed River Standards
With our engineering staff and our consulting
engineers, we have reviewed the standards as proposed for
three sections of the Mississippi River. Based upon the
extensive studies of the pollution and recovery charac-
teristics of the river made as a part of the Program of
Research and Investigation, knowledge of the workings of
the main sewerage system of the Metropolitan Area, and the
experience of administering and operating the present sewage
-------
1336
treatment plant, we concluded that the proposed standards, j
i
If interpreted as objectives to be achieved gradually over j
a period of years, are reasonable and proper.
The minimum dissolved oxygen requirements appear ;
to be consistent and reasonable in all three zones, as do
the maximum limits on the concentrations of various waste
s
chemicals. In the upper zone, the rather strict require-
ments to prevent new pollution and eliminate existing
pollution are recognized by this Sanitary District as being
necessary to protect the increasing use of this section of
the river as a source of water supply for a large number
of people.
The existence of a considerable number of over-
flow outlets from old combined sanitary and atormwater
sewers In the two upper zones, however, will make it
t
i
expensive and require a long-range program before the centra^
i
cities could comply entirely with the proposed standards ;
i
for those two zones. Combined storm water and sewage i
systems were constructed in the two cities many years ago ;
before sewage treatment was considered necessary. In 1957
there were some 21 such outlets in the Minneapolis sewer
system and 34 in St. Paul. Provision of contact chambers
and equipment for disinfecting the overflow to the river
from these outlets would be an extensive and very costly
project.
-------
1337 i
Complete separation of the combined sewer systems j
j
!
Into separate storm sewers and sanitary sewers would also
be a very expensive project for which this sanitary district \
\
has made no specific cost estimates. Those sewers are >
owned and operated by each city. Both cities have, however, ]
i
3
accomplished some separation in the past few years, |
i
especially Minneapolis. The latter city has now separated j
\
more than half of its sewered area and could probably ;
i
complete the separation in the upper zone in a relatively
i
short time. There are only seven overflow outlets in this ;
upper zone, which is the most critical zone from the view- ;
i
i
point of protection of water supplies. There are some 48 \
overflow outlets in the second zone, 14 in Minneapolis and
i
34 in St. Paul. j
In the intermediate zone, the present location i
i
of an emergency bypass of the main Sanitary District j
Interceptor, we call attention that provision of facilities
i
for the disinfection of the very infrequent discharge from ;
this outlet cannot be considered as economically Justified. '
!
Because the Minnesota River enters the Mississippi;
i
at St. Paul and has a considerable effect on the condition
i
of the Mississippi through and below St. Paul, we urge you
j
to consider establishing water quality standards for the j
i
i
Minnesota River also. '
In summary, this Sanitary District endorses the
-------
1338
proposed water quality standards as objectives to be
achieved gradually over a period of years, because of the
large expenditures and tine-consuming construction which
would be required. The recently approved twenty-two
million dollar program of plant expansion Is a step toward
compliance with these proposed standards.
Prepared for Board of Trustees
By
/s/ Kerwin L. Hick
Chief Engineer Ik Superintendent
* * # #
APPENDIX NO. 1
PRESENT OBJECTIVES FOR RIVER WATER QUALITY IN
THE MINNEAPOLIS-SAINT PAUL AREA
River water quality objectives which apply to
the Mississippi River downstream from Saint Paul are based
upon a statement of requirements issued in 1928 by the
Minnesota State Board of Health. At that time, the State
Board of Health, cooperating with the Minnesota Coamissloner
of Game and Fish and the Wisconsin State Board of Health,
in replying to an inquiry from the Metropolitan Drainage
-------
1339
Commission, presented the following statement (page 142-3*
1928 Report, Minnesota State Board of Health, as published
with the "Second Report of the Metropolitan Drainage
I
CoWBiMion" - 1926): j
I
"That the pollution of the river (Mississippi) j
I
should be restricted to such an extent that the j
public health hazard will be reduced to a minimum,
that the health of livestock will not be materially
endangered, that the present public nuisance will
be eli»inated, and that fish life in the river,
at least below the mouth of the St. Crolx, will |
!
not be jeopardized." !
j
"In order to accomplish these results, it
will b« necessary at least to collect a very large
part of the sewage and industrial wastes from the
Metropolitan Area embracing Minneapolis, Saint
Paul, South St. Paul, and Newport and the
populated areas adjacent thereto, and to treat
the sewage and industrial wastes so that the pollu-
tion of the river will be restricted to the extent
above indicated. Such additional measures as
may be required to restrict the pollution below
the Metropolitan Area can best be determined after
further Investigation."
"It may not be found possible to maintain
-------
that portion of the river above the Junction with
the St. Croix Rlv«sr in such a condition that it
can be used for fish cultural purposes. This IB
due to certain variable factors, such as sudden
stream flow fluctuations, the wide variations in
the quantity and strength of sewage and industrial
wastes and the unforeseen contingencies which may
sometimes Interfere with the normal operation of ;
i
sewage treatment works." •
These objectives were interpreted by the Metro-
politan Drainage Commission and by the Minneapolis-Saint i
Paul Sanitary District engineers to mean that practically
all the sewage should be collected with intercepting sewers
t
and conducted to a treatment plant located as far downstream !
from the more densely populated areas as feasible, where j
the sewage could be treated and the plant effluent disin-
fected to destroy pathogenic organisms. The Sanitary
District established the minimum dissolved oxygen levels ;
for the Hastings Pool of the Mississippi River which would
meet the State Board of Health requirements. Subsequently,
these determinations were employed as the basis for the design
of the existing sewage treatment plant. As presented in the
"Second Report of the Minneapolis-Saint Paul Sanitary i
District" - 1934 (page 31), the dissolved oxygen criteria are;
1-
as follows:
-------
"(l) Two parts per million of dissolved oxygen
shall be maintained 90 percent of the time for each
of the various summer months. In the computation
the months were taken cumulatively throughout the
^3-year period for which discharge records are
available and based upon average monthly river dis-
charge at Saint Paul, Each calendar month was
considered separately; for instance, the May dis-
charge records for the entire period were considered
independently of the records for other months, and
43-year flow duration curves for each month were
prepared. The monthly average discharges, exceeded
90 percent of the time and used as criteria, were
read from these curves."
"(2) One part per million of dissolved oxygen
shall be maintained 100 percent of the time during
each of the various summer months. In the computa-
tion the months were taken cumulatively throughout
the ^3-year period of discharge records and based
upon average monthly discharge records at Saint
Paul. Each calendar month was considered separately,
as explained in the previous paragraph."
"(3) A trace of dissolved oxygen shall be
-------
1342
"maintained during periods of absolute minimum flows
prevailing for periods of 3 to 5 days."
"The degree of treatment shall be increased above
that required to meet the above standards if they
do not permit the maintenance of about four parts
per million dissolved oxygen below the St. Croix."
-------
134 3
EXHIBIT D
REGULATION OP THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER HEADWATERS RESERVOIRS
A STATEMENT PRESENTED BY THE MINNEAPOLIS-SAINT PAUL
SANITARY DISTRICT
at the
Public Hearing
Called by the
U. S. Army, District Engineer, St. Paul, Minnesota
at
ORANJ) RAPIDS, MINNESOTA
June 27, 1962
KCRWIN L. MICK
CHIEF ENaiNEUi AND SUPEJUNTENDENT
PHONE PR. 1-8849
D. D. WOZNIAI
ATTORNEY
MINNEAPOLIS-SAINT PAUL SANITARY DISTRICT
24OO CHILD* ROAD
•AINT PAUL. • it MINNESOTA
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
COMMISSIONER ROBERT F. PETERSON. CHAIRMAN, ST PAUL
MAYOR OEOROE J. VAVOULIC, ST. PAUL
MAYOR ARTHUR NAFTALIN, VICI-CHAIRUAN. MINNIAFOLI.
ALDERMAN ROBERT P. JANES. MINNEAPOLIS
ARNOLD J. IMSOAHL, Co«ronAT« S(e»TAKr, Sr PAUL
MAYOR JOSEPH J. JAOUNICH. EVILITH
NATHAN HARRI*. MlNMKAroLI*
June Z5, 1962
LOUIS J. BARTSCHER.
EXECUTIVE SKCRKTANY
ADDRESS ALL COMMUNICATION
TO THE SECRETARY UNLESS
OTHERWISE REQUESTED
-------
W. B. Strandberg, Colonel
Corps of Engineers, District Engineer
U. S. Army Engineer District, St. Paul
1217 U. S. Post Office and Custom House
St. Paul 1, Minnesota
Re: Mississippi River Headwaters Reservoirs
Dear Sir:
In response to your May 28 notice of public
hearing to be held June 27, 1962 at Grand Rapids, Minnesota,
this Sanitary District submits the attached statement on the
regulation of the Mississippi River Headwaters Reservoirs.
The statement was prepared with the assistance of the
District's consulting engineers, Toltz, King, Duvall, Ander-
son and Associates of St. Paul and advisory consultant,
George J. Schroepfer of Minneapolis.
The statement shows the relationship between low
river flow augmentation and the degree of sewage treatment
and Indicates that even if the most complete form of sewage
treatment Is installed, augmentation of low flows in the
river will be necessary to maintain satisfactory water
quality. It points out the increasing national recognition
of the need for low stream flow augmentation to assist in
attaining adequate sewage disposal. For example. Report
No. 29 of the Senate Select Committee on National Water
Resources dated January 30, 1961, states that, "even when
-------
13^43-1346
advanced practices for waste treatment are applied, large
quantities of water are needed for waste dilution, if ]
quality standards are to be maintaineu which safeguard
domestic supplies and permit use of lakes and streams for ;
.utdoor recreation purposes and for fisheries."
With the Headwaters Reservoirs now being
utilized at less than half of their total usable capacity,
the statement suggests the possibility of increased utiliza-
tion without serious detriment to recreational and other -
interests in the reservoir area. Of the six Headwaters
Reservoirs, Winnibigoshish and Leech have by far the largest .
storage capacity. It appears reasonable for the purposes
of this statement to exclude Pokegama, Sandy, Pine, and
Gull from consideration as a significant source of stored
water.
With more than half the population of the
state expected to be concentrated In the Minneapolls-St.
Paul metropolitan area before 19^0, it becomes imperative
to secure adequate stream flow for water supply, stream
sanitation and other needs. The sanitation situation will
be further aggravated if a 12-foot navigation channel is
constructed, as compared with the present 9-foot channel.
In 1961 this Sanitary District completed a 5-year
study costing half a million dollars to evaluate the present .
and future sewage disposal problem in the metropolitan ares
-------
13^7
and to provide Information leading to the best engineering
solution. Pour of the reports on this study are submitted I
with this statement. In June 1961, the Board of Trustees |
of this Sanitary District authorized the design of a ;
secondary treatment plant for an average sewage flow of 218 ;
million gallons daily, which will more than double the
present degree of treatment, with construction now scheduled !
t
for completion during 1965 at an estimated cost of 2 i '
million dollars.
Preliminary studies by your Army Engineers St.
Paul District office, reported to this Sanitary District
by letter of June 22, I960, indicate that a considerable
amount of low flow augmentation from the reservoirs is
practicable. Cost estimates contained in the Sanitary
District statement submitted herewith indicate that reason-
able amounts of low flow augmentation would effect savings
in sewage treatment costs ranging from $750 to $2,700 per
day and are necessary in any event if the desirable water
quality objectives are to be met.
The Minneapolis-Saint Paul Sanitary District
hopes and believes that the study currently being made by
the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers will result in reasonable
low river flow augmentation from the Headwater Reservoirs
as a regular operating procedure, without excessive detri-
ment to local Interests in the reservoir area.
-------
Very truly yours, \
/a/ Kerwin L. Mick |
i
i
?
Chief Engineer and Superintendent
!
KLM:J
j
Approved by the Board of Trustees this date. j
i
Copies to Minnesota Congressional Delegation. <
* # *
A, INTRODUCTION 1
i
i
The Minneapolis-Saint Paul Sanitary District j
and its predecessor, the Metropolitan Drainage Commission, j
have maintained a continuous interest in the matter of i
regulation of the headwaters reservoirs for more than 30 j
i
years. The position of the Sanitary District is that stream
sanitation, or effluent dilution, is one of the basic bene- ',
i
ficial uses of the waters of the Mississippi River, along j
with water supply, navigation, flood control, power, recrea-
tion, fish and wildlife, and wild rice cultivation. This
statement is limited primarily to the effects of low flow j
i
augmentation on the degree of sewage and waste treatment ;
necessary to maintain desirable standards of water quality.
-------
1349
The need for low flow augmentation as well as
expansion of sewage treatment works has become apparent j
with the rapid growth in this metropolitan area experienced \
i
In the past 10 years and likely to continue in the future.
In 1930 the population in the metropolitan area comprised ;
of the state population. By I960 this had increased to
; in I960 it IB estimated that this value will be 52#, j
!
increasing to 59# in the year 2000. The study area
population as a basis of sewage works planning was 830,000
in 1930, and had Increased to 1,390,000 in I960; correspond-
ing values for I960 are 2,140,000 and for the year 2000, j
2,740,000. •
The various uses of the waters of the Mississippi
i
River are Interrelated, and have varying effects on each
other. Aa an illustration, the construction of Look and
Dam No. 1 in 1914, and the construction of Locks and Dams
Nos. 2 and 3 In the early thirties had a very marked effect
upon the stream sanitation situation, to which reference was
made in several of the reports of the Metropolitan Drainage
Commission, the Minneapolis-Saint Paul Sanitary District,
j
the Minnesota Department of Health, and the U. S. Public ',
Health Service. The construction of these dams retarded
the velocity of flow, with the result that the pollution !
i
situation through and for a distance below the metropolitan ;
area was markedly aggravated. Their construction, however,
-------
1350
made it unnecessary to employ the headwater reservoirs in i
i
the interest of navigation to the former extent, and I
greater emphasis was placed on the maintenance of more uni- i
4
i
fora levels in the six headwater reservoirs to meet local
requests for such unifo3r*mity.
This sanitation situation will be further
aggravated if a 12-foot navigation channel is constructed
by raising the pool elevations in the three pools referred
to. The possibility of a 12-foot navigation channel as it
affects the Minneapolis-Saint Paul Sanitary District Sewage
Treatment Works, was the subject of an earlier statement
submitted to the District Engineer on September 10, 19^5.
It is mentioned here for the purpose of showing the inter-
acting effect of construction and operation for navigation
purposes on the sewage treatment requirements and water
quality attainments of this Sanitary District.
B. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
The Minneapolis-Saint Paul Sanitary District and j
its predecessor organization, the Metropolitan Drainage
Commission, for the past 30 years have been vitally
interested in the method of operation of the headwater i
reservoirs and the resulting effect on the problem of sewage
and industrial waste disposal in the metropolitan area.
-------
1351
Both have an effect on costs, as well as the quality of the
river water downstream from this metropolitan area. This
interest iB shown by the fact that statements were presented
at public hearings held at the call of the St. Paul District
Engineer, on January 22, 1931* March 28, 1935* and January
16, 19^5. In addition, the Sanitary District haa
communicated with the Diatrict Engineer at St. Paul on
several occasions when critical low flow conditions obtained
in the Mississippi River at St, Paul. The Sanitary District '
also submitted a statement at a January 26, I960 meeting
of the Upper Mississippi Reservoir and Minnesota River Valley
Development Commission, a state legislature interim commission,
Because of marked pollution conditions in the
Minneapolis and St. Paul stretch of the river, aggravated
by the construction of navigation dams No. 1 and No. ?,
the Sanitary District was created by the 1933 Legislature
and In 193^ began the construction of a system of sewage
works designed to alleviate the unsatisfactory conditions.
The treatment plant was placed in operation in June of 1928.
Since that time the rapid growth in this metropolitan area
previously discussed has made it necessary for the Sanitary
District to consider expansions of its sewage works. In
May, 1956, the District inaugurated a 5-year program of
investigation and research designed to provide information
leading to the best engineering solution to this problem.
-------
1352
This inveatlgation resulted in the preparation of a number
of final reports, four of which are considered pertinent
to this statement, and are submitted herewith for the record.
These are entitled: "Pollution and Recovery Characteristics
of the Mississippi River," Vol. 1, Part l, dated January
1958, and Vol. 1, Part 3, dated September 1961. Also in-
cluded are Vol. 3 and Vol. 4, entitled "Report on the
Expansion of Sewage Works (and treatment works) in the
Minneapolis-Saint Paul Metropolitan Area," dated September
I960 and November 1961, respectively.
As a consequence of this investigation and as a j
basis for the first stage expansion of the sewage treatment
plant, the Board of Trustees on June 26, 1961, authorized
the preparation of the plans for a treatment plant of the j
high-rate activated sludge type designed to serve the centra3
i
cities and twenty-four presently committed suburbs tributary [
to the Minneapolis-Saint Paul sewer system. The plant is
expected to cost approximately 23 million dollars and is ;
being designed for an average sewage flow of 218 million
gallons daily, expected from a sewered population equivalent ,
of 2,610,000 in the year 1980. It is a modification of the
original project 1-10 and is in conformance with Project
A in the 5-year study. The plant can be readily enlarged i
f
when necessary to serve additional areas. The Board of
Trustees on April 9, 1962, adopted a budget providing for
-------
1353
the first year (1963) of construction on the expansion
project which Is expected to be completed during 1965.
The treatment plant is being designed to provide
for a removal of organic matter, expressed as BOD (bio-
chemical oxygen demand) of 75#* of suspended solids 8556,
and of bacteria expressed as coliform organisms of 99.9/$.
This is essentially the type and degree of treatment that
is provided at several of the New York City plants, and at
the Philadelphia and Washington, D. C. plants, among others
C. RECOGNITION OF LOW PLOW AUGMENTATION
FOR STREAM SANITATION AS A BENEFICIAL USE
The Metropolitan Drainage Commission and the
Sanitary District through statements submitted at previous
hearings conducted by the District Engineer since i931
have conaistently maintained that river sanitation should
be considered as a beneficial use of the water resources
similar to navigation, flood control, power, water supply,
recreation, etc. In fact, the Sanitary District feels
that with the provision of a satisfactory and reasonable
degree of sewage treatment, this is one of the higher uses.
A number of other organizations and experts in
the field of water resources have arrived at the same
-------
conclusion, A few of these sources will be cited. In a
report dated January 1961, entitled "Report No. VI of the
Low-Flow Augmentation Project" to the National Institutes
of Health, U, S. Public: Health Service, prepared by Johns
Hopkins University, the following statement is made:
"The release of water from multiple-purpose
reservoirs for stream sanitation is a beneficial
water use which has received relatively little
support in the past. It appears that this con-
servation measure Is destined to become more
important In the future. Increasing waste loads
from growing population centers and expanding
Industries will inevitably cause stream-pollution
problems which, unless solved, will endanger the
health, welfare, and economy of large areas, and
indeed, of the entire nation. The increasing
importance of these stream-pollution problems
demands that all possible avenues of correction
be explored thoroughly to provide the best overall
solution for each case."
In 1950 the President of the United States
established the President's Water Resources Policy Commis-
sion and instructed it to study existing Federal legislation
and policies in the water resources field. The following
is a summary of a statement concerning this which was
-------
1355
Included in the report on low flow augmentation referred
to above;
The President's Water Resources Policy Commis-
sion, in its own summary of the reviews submitted by the '-.
various Federal agencies, noted that:
"In some oases, it has been found that
aggravated pollution conditions can be abated most
economically by primary sewage treatment plants
augmented by increased low flow of rivers with
upstream storage reservoirs to increase the low
flow of rivers ..."
In its report submitted to the President (December
1950), the Policy Commission outlined a recommended water
policy for the nation. Two of the principles set forth are
quite pertinent to this study, as follows:
"Pollution control should be considered in
the planning of river basin programs. It should
be recognized as a major contribution to the
Nation's objectives in the fields of water supply,
recreation, and fish and wildlife ..."
and
"Multiple-purpose reservoirs should, as far
as consonant with other major purposes, be planned
and operated so as not to aggravate but to contribute
to the control of pollution. This should Include
-------
1356 :
"regulation of releases of water to make fullest
use of the stream's potential self-purification j
i
capacity, with advance determination of the ;
schedule of releases to permit proper classification >
of the stream by the Public Health Service for
pollution control purposes." ;
i
The same report quotes a statement from a report '
on the economic evaluation of projects by the Federal Inter-
Agency River Basin Committee, published in 1950. The i
methods of evaluation relative to pollution abatement were
summarized as follows:
"Corps of Engineers'. Practice on Navigation, Flood
Control and Multi-Purpose Projects
"Benefits measured by the cost of providing the ',
most economical alternative methods of waste '
treatment or disposal, or reduction in maintenance
and operating cost, where alternative methods of
pollution abatement are not economical."
Report No. VI points out that another milestone
in the development of Federal water policy was reached
in December 1952 with the issue of the Bureau of the Budget's
Circular A-47. Circular A-^7 directs that the economic 1
evaluation of a program or project shall include an estimate
of the primary benefits. Among those primary benefits are
-------
1357 '
thoae resulting from: "... the reduction in the cost of
pollution abatement by stream flow augmentation. Such
benefits should be calculated as the residual benefits
possible after allowing for all direct measures to control
pollution at the source that would normally be required or
considered necessary by the Public Health authorities
concerned." :
Circular A-4? points out in paragraph 9 that a
valuation of the cost of a program or project "shall include]
i
a statement of economic costs expected to be induced by the
program or project such as the costs of: a
b. decreased value of ... water quantity or quality and !
other water or related land resources, where not reflected
in market values, and c. rectifying adverse effects upon
sanitation, transportation, ..." This circular lists those
purposes to which costs may be allocated. These are: i
"1. Flood control
2. Reclamation
3. Navigation
4. Watershed management :
5. Electric power and energy
6. Domestic, municipal, or industrial water
supply i
7. Recreational development :
8. Pish and wildlife development
-------
9. Pollution control or abatement"
A summary statement In Report No. VI contains
the following} "The foregoing discussion of Public Water
Policy can be summed up briefly. Both Federal and State
agencies and officials generally have recognized low flow
augmentation for pollution abatement as a beneficial use of
water. Federal Water Policy calls for consideration of
pollution abatement as a potential function of government
projects, but prohibits the development of water resources
for this purpose at Federal expense."
At its annual meeting in February, 1959* the
Mississippi Valley Association adopted a broad statement
on water pollution policy. "America's water pollution
control program must recognize the multi-purpose nature of
our water resources, including the use of this nation's
streams for the carrying of treated wastes." The committee's
report goes on to state, "The Association has embarked
on a pollution control program because pollution abatement
is considered by the organization to be an essential and
l
inseparable component of this nation's water resource manage-|
ment program - fully as important as dams to store water,
channels to make our streams navigable, and conservation ;
farming to prevent erosion." j
i
Report No. 29 of the Senate Select Committee :
on National Water Resources, dated January 30, 1961, contains;
-------
the following at the beginning of Its summary statement:
"The foregoing summarization of the situation
with respect to the nation's water resources indi-
cates that serious problems lie ahead. Adequate
measures must be adopted to deal with situations
that can now be foreseen to make sure that shortages
of water will not control the future destiny of the
nation, The provision and management of water supplies
for waste dilution, irrigation of arid lands, outdoor
recreation, and the conservation of fish and wildlife
appear to pose the most serious water problems, for
the following interrelated reasons:
"1. Even when advanced practices for waste
treatment are applied, large quantities of water are
needed for waste dilution, if quality standards
are to be maintained which safeguard domestic supplies
and permit use of lakes and -streams for outdoor
recreation purposes and for fisheries.
In a letter to Colonel Strandberg, District
Engineer of St. Paul, dated March 28, 1962, Dr. Robert N.
Barr, Secretary of the Minnesota Water Pollution Control
Commission stated in part: "The Commission feels that
augmented stream flow should not be a substitute for but
rather a supplement to operation of sewage and waste
-------
1360
"treatment facilities at their maximum capability. How-
ever, the establishment of a regulated minimum discharge is
of vital economic importance to the municipalities and
industries depending upon the Mississippi River for dilution
of treated effluent, particularly those in the Twin Cities
j
Metropolitan Area." Th« Sanitary District concurs in this j
statement. It proposes to enlarge and to increase the
degree of treatment provided in the present plant at an
expenditure of $23*000,000 for construction in the next three
years, and to operate the expanded plant at its maximum
capability.
D. THE SADWATER RESERVOIRS
In the period from 1884 to 1913 the Federal
Government constructed a system of storage reservoirs at j
the headwaters of the Mississippi River, which now number
i
!
six, namely, Winnibigoshish, Leech, Pokegama, Sandy, Pine, ;
and Gull. These reservoirs were originally constructed in
the interest of navigation downriver from Minneapolis, with j
i
secondary usage, for flood control. With the completion of '
the locks and dams at Hastings and below in 1936, the
I
utilization of the reservoirs for navigation became relatively
unimportant. In fact, the present requirements are limited i
to a flow for lockages which is less than 300 cfs. (cubic ;
-------
feet per second, or second feet) during the maximum months
of river traffic.
The total usable capacity of these reservoirs i*>
approximately 828,000 second foot days. (A second foot day
is the volume of water corresponding to a flow of one cub!.1
foot per second for a period of 24 hours. ) The normal
operating capacity is now stated to be approximately 480,000
second foot days. The reservoirs are operated under War
Department regulations dated February 4, 1936. At that time
the desired Minimum storage was set at 313,000 second foot
days, but subsequent revisions resulted in a reduction to
258,000 second foot days on April 1, 1945, with a slight
Increase to 265,000 second foot days ordered in effect on
September 1, 1952. In the period from 1931 to 1955 inclusive,
the storage available at the end of the year varied from 8
low of 64,000 in 1934 to a high of 659,000 in 1944.
Wlnnibigoshlsh and Leech Lake reservoirs have ->y
far the largest storage capacity. The other four reservoirs
have considerably lesser amounts per foot of drawdown.
Because of its proximity to the Minneapolis-Saint Paul
Metropolitan area, Pokegaroa Reservoir is valuable, however,
for immediate discharge of stored water which could be
restored when releases from Winnlbigoshish and Leech reach
there approximately two weeks later. It appears reasonable
for purposes of this statement to exclude Sandy, Pine and
-------
1362
i
Gull reservoirs from consideration as a significant source i
i
of stored water. The two principal reservoirs of practical
«
significance therefore in the matter of low flow augmenta- ]
i
tion are Wlnniblgoshish arid Leech. Together they have a
storage capacity of 95,000 second foot days per foot of
water at ordinary operating levels, which would provide for a
release of approximately 1,600 cfs. for a period of 60 days.
As will be shown later the water represented by even as
little as one foot of drawdown would be of significant
assistance in meeting an extreme low water crisis in the
metropolitan area. Greater drawdowns would sometimes be
necessary. :
To illustrate the physical and operating features :
i
of one of these reservoirs, the following additional details |
are provided concerning the Winniblgoshish Reservoir. The 1
dam regulating the flow from this reservoir was designed i
for a stage of 1^.2 feet, which is designated as "full ;
reservoir level." Plottage rights, however, were secured to I
s level of 18 feet. The minimum level in this reservoir ,
i
as established in 1931 is 6 feet. Under the present
regulations a total of 6.2 feet of variations might be
considered the maximum available. However, the normal
minimum stage is 8 feet and the normal maximum 12 feet,
ajthough where possible in the recent past the desirable
operating ranges heve been aimed at the range from 8 feet
-------
1363
to 10-i feet, or a variation of only 2-£ feet, compared to
the 8.2 feet permissible even under the present operating
regulations and physical design facilities. In the period
from 1884 to 1957* the average annual variation in stage
has been 3.75 feet, with a maximum range in one year of
8.6 feet, and a minimum of 1.1 feet. In the period from
1938 to 1957 which were generally wet years, the average rangle
has been 3.3 feet, with a variation from a minimum of 1.8 to
j
a maximum of 5.3 feet. Another feature of this reservoir of j
j
interest is the storage capacity per foot in the normal ;
!
operating range, viz., 33,000 second foot days. The in-flow j
into this reservoir has averaged 179,000 second foot days, :
with a minimum of 28,000 in 1934, and a maximum of 496,000
in 1905. !
The extent of development on this reservoir In
1959 compared to the other five, is shown by the following: i
Type of
Development
Resorts
Cottages
Year Round
Number on
Winnibigoshlsh All
16
113
1
*
*
Reservoirs
411
2416
830
Percent
of Total
3.9
4.8
0.1
All but 38 miles of shoreline on this reservoir
are currently in public holding.
-------
1364
E. RIVER DISCHARGES
The flow of the Mississippi River fluctuates
widely as shown by the fact that the discharge at Mile 13.8
(Robert St. Bridge-St. Paul) has varied from a maximum
daily value of 125,000 ofa. to a minimum dally discharge
of 632 ofs. The average annual flow at this point in the
period from 1892 to 1957, was 8540 cfs. (geometric mean).
Similar average discharges for the months of February and
August are 3260 cfs. and 6**90 cfs., respectively. The '
i
minimum recorded monthly discharge for the month of February j
i
i
was 1300 cfs. in 1895. The corresponding value for the |
i
month of August was 864 cfs. recorded in 193^*. The minimum i
recorded daily discharge during the month of February occurred
in 1933 at a value of 1100 cfs., and for the month of August i
the corresponding value was 632 cfs. recorded in 1934. The |
discharge frequency distributions for this same station for j
the months of February and August and for the annual average,!
are shown in Figures 6, 7 and 8, of Vol. 1, Part 3* which is
i
submitted with this statement. As shown by Figures 6 and 7, i
!
the monthly average flows exceeded 70# of the time during '.
the month of February are 2540 cfs. and during the month ,
of August, 4470 cfs. These values are significant in that
they are approximately the basis of calculations on the
possibility of the low flow augmentation which will be
-------
1365
mentioned subsequently. The above values are corrected
for the extraction of water for the Minneapolis-Saint Paul
water supply pumpage In the period from 1938 to 1957. In !
other words# to the discharges recorded at St. Paul, the i
water consumption pumpage has been added in these later years;
Prom what has been stated previously concerning
*
variations in flow and annual averages, it will be apparent i
that there is no shortage of water on a long-time average !
annual basis. The problem relates to distribution of this
flow over years of low discharge and then only during
certain aonths and days of those years when adverse river !
assimilation characteristics combined with low discharges,
make flow augmentation imperative if desirable conditions
are to be maintained downstream.
In reviewing the discharge record at St. Paul
for the period from 1892 to 1957 it should be recalled thet '
for most of this period (from 1892 to 1936), that a degree :
of low flow augmentation was necessarily practiced in the
interest of navigation downstream. Had this'method of
operation of the reservoirs not been practiced, the flows
during the summer months of July, August and September, would;
have been materially lower than the values shown. This fact
makes calculations relative to the effect of low flow
augmentation on river sanitation somewhat indefinite since
there is no district base line to illustrate the before and
-------
I
i
1366 i
after effects.
F. EFFECT OF DISCHARGE ON WATER QUALITY ]
i
i
i
The occurrence of low discharges during certain !
of the critical summer months of July, August and September -
and the winter months of Deceaber, January and February in i
i
a relatively few years makes it impeiative that river
discharges at St. Paul be augmented in the interest of stream
sanitation. This applies both to the Mississippi River above
t
)
the sewage treatment plant located at Pig's Eye Lake, as '
well as to the sections of the river below the plant in the '
Hastings Pool and below the confluence with the St. Croix j
River. !
The recreational use and the aesthetic condition <
of the river in the stretch of the Mississippi River from j
St. Anthony Falls to the sewage treatment plant will oe j
Impaired unless low flow augmentation for stream sanitation ;
is practiced. This would result from the fact that the •
i
i
sewers of the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul are largely j
of the combined type, with periodic discharges of sewage
necessarily occurring to the river during tines of rainfall. !
When consideration is given to the fact that by the year
i
1980 the water supply usage by Minneapolis and St. Paul will !
approach the minimum river discharges at this point during
-------
136?
the month of August, an extremely foul situation could be
created In this 18-mile stretch of the Mississippi River
under these conditions. Complete separation of the sewer
systems Is an economic Impracticability, although a partial
separation program is under way in both cities.
Of even greater significance is the condition of
the Mississippi River below the sewage treatment works of
the Sanitary District. This condition can be expressed in
terms of dissolved oxygen content, bacteria, turbidity,
temperature, etc. For purposes of this presentation, the
dissolved oxygen criteria will be employed, since it Is a
good indicator of the effect of pollutlonal load on a river.
The five-year program of research conducted
cooperatively by the Sanitary District and the Sanitary
Engineering Division of the University of Minnesota,
culminated In the preparation of a report previously
mentioned and entitled "Pollution and Recovery Character-
istics of the Mississippi River," Vol. 1, Part 3* dated
September 1961. Particular attention is called to Section
V of this report, beginning on page 99* and to Section VI,
beginning on page 123. Section V entitled "River Capacity
Investigations" presents information on the variables and
the analysis conditions which were considered in the
calculations of the river's capacity to receive and
assimilate pollution. Section VI, entitled "Degree of
-------
1368
Treatment Requirements" shows the dissolved oxygen level
which can be maintained under various river flow and other
conditions.
The information which follows is based on the
information contained in these two sections of the report.
Table 1 herein corresponds to Table 54 in the report with
certain additions. This table shows the percent of tine
that various degrees of treatment are necessary, and the
maximum degree of treatment required during various critical
river conditions. For the years 1965, 1980 and 2000 this >
i
table Illustrates the critical nature of the months of i
i
August and February during which higher degrees of treatment i
are necessary for a greater percentage of the tijae. The !
I
growth effect of the metropolitan area is Illustrated by !
i
the progressive higher requirements of treatment in I960 and '.
2000, as compared to 1965. As stated earlier, the degree j
I
of treatment on which plans for plant enlargements are now ;
i
being prepared, is based on a removal of BOD (biochemical i
oxygen demand) of 75 percent, with facilities to destroy :
i
more than 99.9/# of the conform organisms. :
Itea 3 of Table I, baaed on annual average '
conditions, illustrates the very small percentage of the
time that treatment greater than a removal of 75# of the i
i
BOD is necessary. While under extreme conditions, even in j
1965, a removal for a very short period of 90.2# would be
-------
1369 ;
required, the average time during the year that greater
than 75# treatment is necessary is only 2-|#. This increases
!
to 12,2% in the year 2000. A removal of 90# is as high as
can be reasonably expected with any degree of certainty even ;
with the best treatment now provided by conventional sewage ;
treatment plants. This degree of treatment would be
}
required lees than 0.1 of 1% of the time in the year 1965, j
and up to only 0.8 of 1% of the time in the year 2000. Even '
this degree of treatment would not suffice for 100$ of the i
time in 1980 and 2000, when maximum short-time degrees of
treatment up to 9^ and 95.5$ respectively are indicated.
As further shown in Item 3, the capacity in a ulant beyond
treatment would essentially stand idle for more than
# of the time based on 1965 conditions and more than
of the time based on 1980 conditions, to maintain the
contemplated water quality objectives. As previously indi- ;
eated, the above statements are based on river discharges
which occurred in the past, during much of which low flow
augmentation for navigation purposes was practiced.
The information contained in Table 1 is presented
graphically in Figures 1 and 2. Referring to Figure 1,
which is based on 1965 conditions, with a 9-foot channel,
the lower portion of the graph, namely that below 75%,
represents the work that will be done by the sewage treatment
plant on an annual basis, or 75# of the total necessary.
-------
1370
The upper portion of the curve represents what natural
purification in the river will provloe^ without flow aug- -
3
y
mentation other than was practiced in the past. This amounts
*,
to 24.8$ of the total. The shaded portion of this graph ]
represents the maximum degree of treatment, namely 90.2$ j
and the duration of time that; this treatment would be
s
necessary, namely 2-4$. The shaded area represents the |
i
degree and the time for which treatment beyond 75$ would ?
be necessary and comprises only 0.2 of 1$ of the total j
purification task or problem.^ It would be an economic
impracticability to accomplish this by a major Investment [
in plant facilities which would stand idle most of the time. :
Flow augmentation for relatively short periods of time is
a much more reasonable solution from an engineering stand-
point. The same type of information for the year 1980 is
shown in Figure 2.
The previous graphs were on an average annual
basis. Figure 3 shows the duration and the degree of
treatment for conditions which are expected to prevail under
August 1980 conditions. The upper line shows the conditions
with no flow augmentation. They correspond to the informa-
tion in Item 1, of Table 1 for the year 1980. The two
lower lines in the shaded area show the effect of 500 and
1000 ofs. of flow augmentation on both the degree of treat-
ment and duration of time that this treatment will be
-------
1371
necessary. Table 2 and Figure b show similar information
for the critical months of February and August on a I960
and 2000 basis. The four graphs in this figure are enlarge-
ments of th« shaded portion in the previous figures and show
the very marked effect of flow augmentation on the duration
and degree of treatment. Any flow augmentation both in
amount and tine beyond what is necessary to maintain the
wat«r quality objectives which are the basis of the calcula-
tions would, for the same degree of treatment, improve
the quality of water downstream from the plant.
The points of zero flow augmentation in Figure '4
represent river discharges at St. Paul (including water
supply pumpage) of the following amounts:
February August
Mean. Monthly Discharge exceeded
90# of Time 1760 2630
Mean. Monthly Discharge exceeded
90# of Time 820 760
Min. 5-Day Discharge exceeded 99$
of Time 630 710
The estimated water pumpages from the Mississippi
River and the net river flows at St. Paul available for
effluent dilution are shown in Tables 51 and 52 of the report
-------
137? '
The effect, of low . lo'-; augmentation on the treat-
ment requirements can be shown in another way, for August •
i
1980 conditions. By employing Figure y., in the Part 3
report, it can be shown that a difference of 100 cfs. in !
flow at St. Paul affects the removal percentage required by
0.5$. Thus the degree of treatment increases 5$ "or every
i
1000 cfs. that the flow is reduced. A reduction from 4000 j
cfs. to 3000 cfs. would necessitate an increase in the
degree of treatment from 15% to 80$ to maintain the same j
water quality. The above applies to a minimum dissolved i
oxygen value of 2.0 ppm. The effect is somewhat greater ]
i
at a level of 1.0 ppm, being approximately 6% for every :
1000 cfs.
i
To illustrate the effect of flow augmentation
• HI water quality expressed in terms of dissolved oxygen, ;
Table 3 has been prepared from Figure 91. This table indi-
,-ates that for every 1000 cfs. increase in flow the mirlmum
dissolved oxygen level would increase 0.5 to ?.0 ppm
(usually 1.0 to 1.5 ppra) depending somewhat on the awount
of augmented flow, the degree of treatment and the dissolved
oxygen level. The dissolved oxygen values downstream from
the point of the minimum level would also be greater.
This is a very significant increase, one which would be ''
very expensive to provide by increased treatment or arti-
ficial river aeration because f the short duration
-------
1373
requirements.
0. FLOW AUGMENTATION CONSIDERED NECESSARY
AND PRACTICABLE
Frev ious S tat erne nta^ At the January 22, 1931
hearing, the Metropolitan Drainage Corwnisalon suggested a
desirable schedule of minimum flows for sanitation purposes
(with sewage treatment works In operation) which provided
for flows at St. Paul of 5500 cfs., in July and 4200 cfs.
In August, and flows at Prescott of 4800 cfs. in January,
February and March. Suggested minimum desirable flows
during other months were considerably less. At the March
28, 1935 hearing, the Minneapolis-Saint Paul Sanitary
District submitted a schedule of desirable low discharges
with the suggestion of 5700 cfs. during the month of July
and 4800 cfs. during the month of August, and with the same
winter discharge at Prescott of 4800 cfs. The discharges
at Prescott were stated in both statements because the
section below the junction with the St. Croix River is
critical from the standpoint of fish life. Since the
minimum flows at Prescott during the month of February
are approximately 2000 cfs. greater than corresponding flows
at St. Paul, the value of 4800 at Prescott would correspond
to a discharge at St. Paul approximately 2800 cfs. At the
-------
1374
January 16, 19^5 hearing, the Sanitary District referring to
earlier suggested values, stated: "It is possible that in
the light of actual experience during the past 6 years of
sewage treatment plant operation and a study of the effect of
such operation on river conditions, that slightly lower
values, particularly during the summer season, would be per-
missible.11 In the meantime, however, the Metropolitan Area
has experienced a very rapid growth which has increased
the treatment and effluent requirements.
The previous statements could be summarized to
indicate a desirable minimum July and August flow at St.
Paul between 4800 and 5200 cfs. and a desirable winter
flow of at least 2800 cfs. (in the two statements where
definite values were presented).
At a meeting held in the offices of the Minneapolijs-
Saint Paul Sanitary District in the winter of I960, attended
by representatives of the Army Engineer St. Paul District
Office, the Division of Waters of the State of Minresota,
the Sanitary District's consulting engineers.and engineers
of the Sanitary District, a minimum discharge at St. Paul
of 4500 cfs. during the critical summer months and of 2500
cfs. during the critical winter months, was suggested by
the Chiei Engineer of the Sanitary District as a basis of
study by the District Engineer's Office. These values
Include the water supply diversions by Minneapolis and
-------
1375-13*76
St. Paul.
Practical Flow Augmentation. At a hearing j
called by the Minnesota Water Pollution Control Commission ;'
and the Minnesota State Board of Health held on May 28, 1962jj
Colonel Strandberg, District Engineer of the St. Paul Officej
i
submitted a statement from which the following is extracted:
4
"On the subject of augmentation of the low j
I
river flows from the standpoint of the Corps of -
Engineers, it is considered proper to state that
it is believed possible to augment low flows by
releases from the headwaters reservoirs
Our Office made a preliminary study to determine .if
the three main reservoirs, namely, Winnibigoshish,
Leech and Pine River Reservoirs, could have been
operated to supply sufficient discharges to sustain
flows at St. Paul of 4500 cfs. during the period
July 1 to September 10, and 2500 cfs. during the
period of December 15 to March 15th. This study
covered the period 1931-1959, and Indicated the
following; In the 1930's there were a number of
years the desired flows could not be sustained at
the desired summer amounts, but could have provided
the following:
-------
I
I
1377
"Year Plow in Sec. Ft. at St. Paul (Incl. diversion^)
Actual With reservoir supplements
1931 1720 3170 :
1932 1670 33^0 !
1933 1630 2050
193^ 1010 1670 I
1935 3290 4500
1936 1280 2300 j
1937 3400 4500
1939 2980 4250
1940 2500 3830"
The study shows that in thia 29-year period the
winter flows of 2500 cfs. could have been maintained In all
i
of the years from 1937 on, and during the summer months in ;
21 of the 29 years. Even during the extreme low water
years of 1931 to 1936, the possible low flow augmentation !
varied from a minimum of 420 cfs. to a maximum of 1670 cfs.,
which occurred in 1933 and 1932 respectively. i
With the reservation that the study was made from
a hindsight point of view with full knowledge of the flow
Irregularities in the years ahead, the District Engineer i
i
concluded his letter of June 22, I960 to the Chief Engineer :
of the Minneapolis-Saint Paul Sanitary District as follows:
-------
1378
"In conclusion, th:s brief study Indicates
that for the period 1931-1959* the summer and winter
minimum total riv«*r flows at St. faul of 4500 and
2500 cfi, respectively, could have been met with
the assistance of the headwaters reservoirs except
during the drought of the 1930*8."
H. EFFECT OF DISCHARGE ON SEWAGE WORKS
CONSTRUCTION AND ANNUAL COSTS
i
Certain of the beneficial effects of the installa-i
j
tion of pollution abatement works, such as the reduction i
t
i
in possible health hazards and aesthetic considerations,
while very important are Intangible and impossible of
monetary evaluation. In some cases these are the principal
reasons for the construction of sewage treatment plants.
In thia statement only the tangible and calculable effects
of low flow augmentation are presented, even though it is
recognized that the intangible factors associated are of
considerable importance.
While the previous statements and presentations
concerning the effect of flow augmentation on the duration
and degree of treatment required, were necessarily based on
the pollutional load from the entire metropolitan area,
whether served by the present or proposed enlarged plant,
-------
1379 '
the estimates of costs which will be presented below are
Delated only to the presently contracted area consisting
of Minneapolis and St. Paul and 24 suburban communities.
It is quite likely that the number of communities served
will increase in the future.
The existing sewage treatment plant of the
Minneapolis-Saint Paul Sanitary District provides for primary
treatment by sedimentation augmented at times of low river
discharge by chemical treatment. Prom the time the plant
was placed in operation in 1938 to 1957 inclusive, river
flows were favorable and satisfactory conditions could be
maintained downstream without the necessity of chemical
treatment. Beginning in 1958 low flows developed during
critical summer and winter seasons and it was necessary '
to add chemicals for extended periods. Even with additions
of $1200 per day of chemicals, water quality objectives '.
could not be maintained downstream. In addition extra
expenditures for sludge disposal were necessary. While
recognizing that the plant was moderately overloaded, the
experiences during the past several years pointed up the ,
importance of river flow on costs of sewage treatment and
water quality.
As stated, a sewage treatment plant of the high ;
rate activated sludge type based for a BOD removal of 75
percent, is now under design. As previously shown, this
-------
degree of treatment will suffice for all but 2-£* of the
tine in 1965, and all but 6.9* of tr«j time in 1980. However,!
for a few days1 duration over a period of years removals as i
high as 90.2* in 1965 and 94* in 1980 would be required. !
If a conventional activated sludge plant capable of removing •
up to 90* of the BOD were installed, it would have to be s
utilized to full capacity less than 0.1 of 1* of the time in
1965* and less than 0.4 of 1* of the time in 1980. Even
then, this plant would not be able to meet the maximum very
short time removals of 94* required in 1980. The compara-
tive costs of the two types of plants based on 1980 condi-
tions are as follows:
Removal of BOD of;
75* 90*
Total Construction Costa $22,800,000 $38,700,000
Fixed Charges at 5.33* 1,216,000 2,064,000
Annual Operations and
Maintenance Costs 2,677,000 3,108,000
Total Annual' Charges 3*893»000 5,172,000
The additional investment of $15,900,000 would
stand idle much of the time in the period from 1965 to 1980.
The fixed charges on this investment over a 30-year period
(the bond period) are estimated at $25,440,000.
-------
1381
j
Another way of evaluating the effect of low flow j
augmentation Is aa follows: The total annual charges per
100 pounds of BOD removal are estimated to be $3.01 for a
plant designed for 75$ removal and $3.32 for a plant which
provides 90# BOD removal, an average of $3.17. It was
shown previously that the degree of treatment would have to
oe increased *>% for every 1000 cfs of reduced flow. The
1980 estimated raw sewage BOD is estimated to amount to
470,000 pounds per day. For every 1000 cfs. of augmented
flow a reduction of 23,500 pounds per day can be made in
BOD removals necessary, or a saving of $750 per day that
this level of augmentation is practiced. Greater augraenta- !
j
tlon will proportionately decrease the costs. Augmentation ;
i
to a discharge of 4500 cfs. on the minimum monthly recorded
flow of 864 cfs. at St. Paul would reduce the costs by
approximately $2700 per day. It should be pointed out that
these are not daily operation and maintenance costs, but
include as well the fixed charges on the necessary invest-
ment.
-------
1382
TABLE 1
DURATION OF, AND MAXIMUM DEGREES OF
SEWAGE TREATMENT REQUIRED
Percent of Time Various
Degrees of Treatment are Necessary
2.
3-
l*.
5-
Period
August
1965
1980
2000
February
1965
I960
2OOO
Twelve Months
1965
1980
2000
Dec-Jan-Peb.
1965
1980
2000
July-Aug-Sept.
1965
1980
2000
Greater
Than
75*
7.8
25.0
35-5
6.0
11.8
19.0
2.5
6.9
12.2
3-3
7.6
15.5
4.8
14.3
21.8
Greater
Than
8056
4.o
12.5
21.0
3-6
7-2
11.5
1.0
3-*
6.2
1.6
4.0
8.4
2.1
6.9
11.7
Greater
Than
85*
1.7
4.8
9.0
2.0
4.1
6.0
0.35
0.8
2.4
0.6
1.6
3-8
0.7
2.5
4.5
Greater
Than
90*
2.2
4.2
*
2.0
3-0
*
0.4
0.8
«
0.6
1-3
.
0.8
1.6
Maximum
Degree of
Treatment,*
88.4
93-2
95-5
90.2
94.0
95.1
90.2
94.0
95-5
90.2
94.0
95-1
88.4
93-2
95-5
* Less than 0. 1 of 1% of time.
-------
1383
irv
o
t-
I
tM
W
»— ]
m
M-l
H
en
J
W
W
£7J
o
0
w
r
1
0
en
in
i — \
Q
fi°
W "-1
H S
^ £
en Z
M
H H
U.>
~X
XI O on O f^ oQ
•P -P XI UNO O ^NjS? Q +> 4) ^^S? Q *& O Q
O >OQ HHOJ HHOJ > 3 HHOl Hi-IOJ
H O 9) O G O
O OJ P,r-j CO -rl CO
O CO CO Ul r-l -r-l
A<>HTHOO •nd'b
G) no ON «H ^» "x^ *o ^>
•P-HS-r XI bp S -rj (3 X< S)
2 9< ft « 50 a> 7 A cfl a 1> P
jSRi^-p^*4 ^ ot-Pafi <
W -H d -r-4 a
63 O -r fj 4) -H a
u a d d od 3
Ja-Hcria'o o a a
+» CO " "
CO
M T^ * •
H S rH OJ
+>
V
XI
•p
•s
+3
d
0)
o
0)
ft.
o
ON
•o
3
OJ
0)
o
x
0)
CO
§0
oJ
XJ
t)
CO
^
t
I-J
XI
C •
Q 03
3
§&)
^
(y ^]*
a
-p "3
<3 3
-d >>
OJ H
d d
31
as
1
a v<
d
D CO
bOXl
0 Q
rH O
O -H
03 -P
CO -r-i
•H fn
od o
°l
If
*1^
11
fi -d
^-^
H
v^^
-p
>
01) M
d erf
•rH 3
a) f.
•P X>
d OU
g (^
o
d
0;) (fl
bOXl
O Q
rH 0
O -rH
(0 -P
CO 1-4
•H r-l
rfj CJ
Vi OJ
0 Xi
«•*
Is1
V*
O *d
x^^»
OJ
•*^*
-------
1384
irv
T)
0)
^
.,-4
•*J
C
O
U
"" '
fM
W
!_J
CQ
<^
H
CO
W
W
i-3 oa
>-p 4-<
<^< o
W •
0 J
X §
c 2
-p
p 3
w H
> 3
0 3
CO
CO >
5 _ -H
Q o
H ~
H ^
O O\m
H C^ l>-GO
O O OJ -^ irv O
-H v25 1>~ C*~ C^~OO CO
. 00 O O J- O CVJ
Ol t~j* f- HCO H
"Nl t~CO CO CO CO O\
a
o
•H
<0 t^J O H CO CM UN
f(7N C7\ ON CO ON ON
<
c --»
CU CO
to cu •»_ •
+*• fH "^QQ i^OQ
•P 'd X CD ^D OD O ^^ CD O
t>^ » 0) tt) iJQ ON ON O OA cK O
Ofl > 0 HHCU rHHCM
O H M CO
HO 0 3 -H
Q «^ CO *r-l *O
(£ J^ -H £} >>
bfl-rt Vl *b 1 CO -p
a oc o v u> 3 ta
•H a Ei 3
•p -H a> ^ s .0 §i
3 P< a -P i PL, <;
w -H Vi a -3
CO -P T C
,3 «H < g a
4^ tO
CO
•d
w
y
V
0)
!
o
D)
•tH •
"d p
d* Q
i J^
ITN
1 "
C?
i P
H
O "S
&«
•3
-------
TABLE 3
EFFECT OF LOW FLOW AUGMENTATION ON THE
MINIMUM DISSOLVED OXYGEN LEVEL FOR VARIOUS
DEGREES OF TREATMENT: - August 1980 Conditions
1385
Degree of Treatment
Mean Monthly Discharge
Exceeded 99$ of Tine, Cfs.*
Dissolved Oxygen, ppm. vith
Augmentation of: -
500 cfs.
1000 cfs.
1500 cfs.
2000 cfs.
2500 cfs.
3000 cfs.
3500 cfs.
IfOOO cfs.
75 80
.-30 -30
0 0
0 0
o 0.5
0 l.lf
0.7 2.1
1.5 2.6
2.1 3.0
2.5 3-3
§£ 9°
1+30 if30
o 1.7
i.o 2.9
2.1 3-5
2.7 3-9
3.2 If. 2*
3-5 fc.U±
3.8 4.6 i
lf.l± 4. 8 i
* Net Discharge, 760 - 330 (Water Supply Diversion)
-------
1386
Projects A, 1965 Estimated Pollutional Load.
Hastings Pool (9 ft Channel)
U
t,
Ol
0,
4
V
k.
H
100
yo
80
70
60
40
10
0
1
I
ML
Natural Purification in River
Will Provide This Treatment
High-Rate Activated Sludge Process
Will Provide This Treatment
) 10 ZO 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1
Percent of Time that Various Degrees of
Treatment are Necessary
Additional Treatment Required
DURATION OF DEGREES OF TREATMENT IN EXCESS OF
75 PERCENT - Annual Basis, 1965
Figure 1
-------
Projects A, 1980 Estimated Pollutional Load.
Hastings Pool (9 ft. Channel)
100
90
I 8°
u
u ?0
DH
.5 60
I
ni
0)
50
40
"o 30
OJ
M 20
Q
10
L
Nat
Wi]
ural
1 Pr
Purification in Riv
ovide this Treatme
er
at
High-Rate Activated Sludge Process
Will Provide this Treatment
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percent of Time that Various Degrees of
Treatment are Necessary
Additional Treatment Required
DURATION OF DEGREES OF TREATMENT IN EXCESS OF
75 PERCENT - Annual Basis, 1980
Figure 2
-------
1388
Projects A, 1980 Estimated Pollution Load.
Hastings Pool (9 ft. Channel)
100
90
e
0)
u
11
0,
c
g 50
s
S 40
h
H
30
JJ zo
60
Q 10
80
70
60
l~ No Flow Augmentation
/ /" 500 cfs Flow Augmentation
/ / /-1000 cfs Flow Augmentation
Vt
k
7
/
IK
I
Natural
Wil
b»
1 Pro
1
Purification in Riv
vide This Treatme
sr
nt
. High-Rate Activated Sludge Process
Will Provide This Treatment
—
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percent of Time that Various Degrees of
Treatment are Necessary
Additional Treatment Required
DURATION OF DEGREES OF TREATMENT IN EXCESS OF
75 PERCENT - August, 1980
Figure 3
-------
1389
1980
100
FEBRUARY
AUGUST
tsoo
Flow Augmentation, cfs
-?.
10
20
0
10
20
30
40
Percent of Time that Various Degrees
of Treatment are Necessary
2000
FEBRUARY
100
AUGUST
c
1)
Ss
M v
t"1 u
v^ *<
oo
€
Q
90
SO
70
Flow Augmentation, cfs
10
20
0
10
20
30
40
Percent of Time that Various Degrees
of Treatment are Necessary
EFFECT OF LOW FLOW AUGMENTATION ON THE DEGREE
AND DURATION OF TREATMENT
Figure 4
-------
•;<•
K>HWIN L. MICK PHONE: PR. 1-SS45 -. D. D. WOZNIAK
CMIV hMUMMi AMI SvMMOTpMirr ' ATTOIMCY
V
MINNEAPOLIS.SAINT PAUL SANITARY DISTRICT
S400 CHILD* ROAD
•AMT PAUL, e It MINNKSOTA
•CARD OP Tituerrm
ROMERT w. nrrMMN. duiw*m *r. P&W. LOUIS J. BARTSCHER,
J. VAVOUU*. *r. HML B»BWTIYB ••C..TAHT
MATOW AWTHUII WAFTAtJI*. Vl«.C».«»... MWMUW.I. ADDREM ALL. COMMUNICATIONS
ALDCHMAN RO««HT f. JAMM. MIHMBMH.I* To TH£ »[CRrrARY UNLESS
AMMOC* J. 1MCOAHL. CmvaiwTC SacaBrAiR, »r. P»UL OTHIMWISC REQUESTED
MAYO* JOMPM J. JA4UNICM. Iv«um.
MATHJM HAMttS. I
July 19, 196Z
&obmrt N. B»rr, M. D. , Secretary
Mimicaota. Wat«r Pollution Control Commi«*ion
Mioneaot* Stat* Board of Health
U of M Campui
Minneapolis 14, Minnesota
Gentlemen:
In order to aisiat the Commission in its study e»d avaluation of the
proposed Mississippi River water quality standards for th« third zone, the
attached statement and factual analytical data are herewith preuertted.
Emphasis is made in this statement as to occurrences of minimum
dissolved oxygen levels at key sampling stations and in a well defined
stretch of the Mississippi River during the past twenty-year period. 1942-
1961, inclusive.
All sampling data contained in this statement were collected under
my
Also included is a brief presentation of facts concerning pollutional
loadings to this stretch of the Mississippi River.
Yours truly,
Maurice L. Robins
Chief Chemist 8c Sanitary Engineer
MLR:j
-------
1391
MINNEAPOLIS -SAINT PAtfL SANITARY DISTRICT
Statement for Presentation
At Hearing Of
Minnesota State Board of Health
Minnesota Water Pollution Control Commission
* *
AN ANALYSIS OF RIVER QUALITY DATA
BELOW THE
MINNEAPOLIS-SAINT PAUL SANITARY DISTRICT TREATMENT PLANT
JULY 19, 1962
* # #
Introduction
While data on river quality has been collected
and published for a 100-mile stretch of the Mississippi
River for a period of more than 35 years (for the past 29 yeats
by the Minneapolis-Saint Paul Sanitary District), the detailed
information Is distributed among many reports and volumes.
To assist the Commission and others interested in the con-
sideration of this data in connection with the proposed
quality standards for the stretch of the Mississippi River
-------
1392
from the outfall of the existing Minneapolis-Saint Paul
Sanitary District (MSSD) treatment plant to a point immedi-
ately above the confluence with the St. Croix River below
Hastings, a compilation of dissolved oxygen (DO) conditions
for the twenty-year period (19*12-1961) and for a 38-mile
stretch of the river has beer, prepared. This data is
presented as Appendices A through ? to this statement. To j
j
be of further assistance this data has been analyzed and j
summarized in a series of tabulations and charts the presenta-
tion of which is the principal subject of this statement, ,'
Genera1
The MSSD sewage treatment plant has been in
operation since July, 1938. The South St. Paul (SSP)
sewage treatment plant began its operations in August, 19^1.
Inasmuch as the effluent discharges from both of these treat-
ment plants materially affect DO conditions in the
Mississippi River, this analysis of the river.water sampling
data commences with the 19^2 calendar year even though the
data in the attached Appendices A through P begin with 1938.
The analytical data contained in the frequency
tabulations, charts, and appendices of this statement have
been summarized from a total of 8,918 river water samples
collected during the aforementioned twenty-year period.
-------
1393
These samples were collected in the 38-mile «treteh of the
Mississippi and St. Crolx Rivers from M 18.0, one mile
below the MSSD effluent discharge, to M 56,! at the Red Wing
Lock and Dam,
Conditions At Sampling Station M 39.1
Tables 1, 2 and 3 indicate the twenty-year
frequency of occurrence of DO values in the Mississippi
River at sampling station M 39.1» Hastings Highway Bridge,
during the low flow-ice cover winter period of January-
February-March, the low flow~high water temperature (summer
period of July-August-September, and the annual observa-
tions, respectively.
Table 1 shows that of the 1,805 days comprising
the twenty winter periods under discussion, none of these
indicate DO values less than one ppm; 56 days, or 3.1$ oi'
the time, evidence values of less than two ppm; and only on
140 days, or 7,8$ of the time, were the DO levels less than
three ppm. It is apparent from Table 1 that 90 of the 140
days occurred during the past three years when DO concentra-
tions in the Mississippi River were aggravated Dy unfavor-
able river flows and overloaded conditions at the MSSD
sewage treatment plant.
In Table 2 the DO frequencies for the twenty
-------
simmer periods, totaling 1,840 days, reveal that at no time
during these summer periods was the *>3 level less than three
ppu. Moreover, values of leas than four ppm are indicated
on only six days, 0.3$ of the tlaae, with five of these
occurring during 1961.
On an annual observation basis a total of 7*305
day* are involved in the course of the twenty-year period.
The data of Table 3 Indicate that at no tloe was the DO
level below one ppa and that for only 0.8# of the time (56
days) was a DO value of less than two ppra obtained. Further-;
tuo re, on only 1^5 days or 2.0# of the time were values of
leas than throe ppea obtained.
Conditions At Sampling Stations M 56.3
Tables ^,5 and 6 contain the data concerning !
the Mississippi River at sampling station M 56.1, Immediate-
ly above the Red Wing Lock and Dam, for the same winter, ;
summer, and yearly periods as for stations M 39.1. These
tabulations indicate that unfavorable DO conditions did not j
exist in this section of the Mississippi River froo 19^2 I
through 1961. Whereas only 0.8# or 14 days of the 1,805 j
days of the January-February-March winter periods (Table 4) i
i
Indicate DO values of less than four ppa with none less than '
three ppra, the 1,8^0 days of the July-August-September
-------
summer periods (Table 5) contain no observed DO values less
than four ppm. The Table 5 summer data also show that 98.6$!
of the 1,840 days indicate DO values greater than five ppm.
The annual data of Table 6 yields the information that at '
this sampling station, M 56.1, DO levels were greater than -
four ppm for 99.8# of the time; greater than five pptn for
98.1# of the time; with no observed DO values of less than ;
three ppm.
i
i
Conditions At Sampling Station M 41.7
Tables 7, 8 and 9 present similar DO data with
respect to the St. Croix River at sampling station M 41.7*
immediately above its confluence with the Mississippi River '
at Prescott, Wisconsin. Data included in these tabulations
show the DO level at this station always above two ppm
with only 4 days or 0.1$ of the time (these occurring
during the July-August-September periods ) indicating values
of less than three ppm. Values of greater than four ppm
are indicated for 99.7% of the time on an annual basis.
Conditions in The Hastings Pool (M 16.0-M 37.8)
Table 10 summarizes the dissolved oxygen
frequency data for the Hastings pool stretch of the
-------
1396 '
Mississippi River between stations M 18,0 and M 37.8 at the
Hastings Lock and Dam. This tabulation Indicates frequency !
i
of occurrence during any one year from 1942 through 1961 for i
those DO values less than one and two ppm. Although DO
values In recent years, 1958 through 1961, of less than one
ppm were observed between 12,0$ and 32.9$ of the time, and
I
those of less than two ppw between 23.8$ and 42.5$ of the j
tiwe, the average values for the entire twenty-year period '
1
were less than 1 ppm for only 5.0$ of the ti»e and less than j
2 ppm for 8.7$ of the time. The increase in occurrence
of lower DO levels in recent years in this stretch of
the Hastings pool can be attributed in a large measure to
\infavorable river flows and increased pollution loads in
the effluent discharges from the MSSD sewage treatment plant,
the SSP sewage treatment plant, and other municipal and
industrial installations above and below these plants.
Simultaneous Occurrence
Appendices A through P contain the river
sampling data showing the minimum DO values at either
M 39.1» M 41.7* or M 56.1, as base or comparison stations,
during the January-February-March and July-August-September
periods and compares these values with samples obtained on
the same or nearest day at other stations between M 39.1
-------
1397
and M 56.1. Also Included are average river flow data
during these periods as well as the minimum DO values ob-
tained In the Hastings Pool on the same or nearest days as
those of the base station. The minimum DO value for each
year at each of the base stations was then plotted as
Chart I along with the DO values obtained at the other two
base stations on the same or nearest day for both the
January-Pebruary-Maroh and July-August-September periods.
Also plotted are the minimum observed values in the Hastings
Pool stretch of the river on the same or nearest sampling
day.
-------
1398
WPCC - July 19, 1962
Chart I indicates the following:
A) M 56. 1 as base station
Page 4
Period
Jan-Feb-March
July -Aug- Sept.
B) M39. 1 as base
Period
Jan-Feb-March
July- Aug -Sept.
C) M41. 7 as base
Period
Jan-Feb-March
July- Aug -Sept.
Minimum
DO Observed
ppm
3.20 (1959)
4. 15 (1959)
station
Minimum
DO Observed
ppm
1.30 (1959)
3.40 (1961)
station
Minimum
DO Observed
ppm
8.00 (1943)
2.90 (1955)
DO On Same or
Nearest Da/ At:
M39. 1 M41.7
1.80 10.60
4.05 8.20
DO On Same or
Nearest Day At
M41.7 M56.1
10.90 4.40
8.55 4.30
DO On Same or
Nearest Day At
M39.1 M56. 1
9.05 7.70
5. 50
Minimum DO In
Hastings Pool On
Same or Nearest Day
0. 20
0. 25
Minimum DO In
Hastings Pool On
Same or Nearest Day
0. 00
0. 10
Minimum DO In
Hastings Pool On
Same or Nearest Day
7.00
2.00
-------
The relationships shown In Chart I indicate that
although unfftvorau :*- DO conditions of less than one and two !
ppsn have existed a* times in the Hastings pool stretch or
the Mississippi River from 29^? through 1961, the river !
recovery characteristics have resulted in no less than three :
ppm being observed in the fourteen mile stretch from the
i
confluence with the St. Groin River to Station M 56 , 1 at the ;
Red Wing LOOK and Dem,
Variations Alon^ The I-et^s ;, , The Hastings Pool
Where minimum DO concentrations are reported
In Appendices /> through F for the Hastings pool stretch of
the river, this data la not meant to infer that these
minltaum values were prevalent over the entire stretch of the
Hastings pool. The majority of these minimum occurrences
were observed at one of several but not necessarily the same
sampling station in an approximate eleven -mile stretch of
the pool extending from M 26.5, four railea b«low Inver
Grove, to M 37.8 at the Hastings Lock and Dam.
A percentage of time value for the dissolved
oxygen comparisons was used in preference to a percentage
of samples collected because during ,>eriods f unfavorable
dissolved oxygen observances the practice is to sample the
critical stretches of the river at a greater than normal
-------
1*100
frequency.
Past and Future Pollutional Load
i
As previously mentioned in this statement the ;
effluent discharges from both the MSSD and SSP sewage !
treatment plants materially influence DO conditions in the I
i
Mississippi River, especially during periods of low river i
flows. Calculations of the pounds per day of biochemical j
oxygen demand (BOD) in both the raw sewage and effluents
4
from these plants, as presented in Table 11, Indicate trends *
in the pollutlonal loads since 19*42. The figures of Table !
11 show that although the pounds per day of raw sewage '.
BOD load increased 82# from 1942 to 1961, the effluent BOD \
increased approximately 110$, A graphical presentation of :
the total raw sewage and effluent BOD loading trends is shown]
on Chart II. ;
Estimated 1965 and I960 BOD loadings have also .
been calculated based on 75$ removal of BOD in the discharges!
from the MSSD and other plants downstream. These values are j
shown in Table 11 and on Chart II and indicate that a 15%
BOD reduction in 1965 will produce a total dally effluent
load comparable to those discharged from 19**2 to 19^6,
j
inclusive. For the same 75# reduction in BOD the estimated j
daily loading to the Mississippi River in 1980 would be ,
-------
14 01
less than previously discharged during the past seven years. ,
Relative to the MSSD treatment plant, Table 11
(Column 3) shows that bated on 1965 conditions with the
expanded plant In operation the effluent la estimated to
contain approximately 90*000 pounds of BOD per day compared
to about 200,000 pounde In the laat several years. Ever
sine* 19^2 the load on the river from this plant has been
greater than 100,000 pounds. Even In 1980 the estimated
load on the river from the MSSD effluent will be only 2/3
of the present load on a pound basis. In addition* the
effluent from the expanded plant will be much more stable,
as far as rate of decomposition Is concerned, than the
present effluent.
Summary
This analysis of the Mississippi and St. Crolx
Rivers, along with the other pertinent data, has been
presented In this concise form in order that.it may be of
immediate benefit and assistance to those concerned with the
task of establishing equitable water quality standards in
this stretch of the Mississippi River above the confluence
with the St. Crolx Xlver.
-------
1*02
Referencesi
(1) KSSD - "Kiesissippi River Analytical Data/'
annual publication, 19*2-1961* inclusive.
(2) "Report On Th» Expansion of Sewage Works
In The Minneapolis-Saint Paul Metropolitan Area," Voluae 3 -
Part 1, ToltB, King, Dura11, Anderson, and Associates,
Report to MSSD.
(3) South St. Paul Sewage Treatment Plant Annual
Reports, 19*2-19*6, inclusive.
-------
14 03
rH
0)
rH
£>
CO
EH
rH
ON
X
c
O
•H
-P
CO
4J
w
bo
c
•H
H
PU
B
CO
W
_p
CD
C
0)
bO
J>^
X
o
T)
0)
^
H
0
CO
CO
•H
O
V-i
O
0)
o
c
0)
^
t*
o
o
o
VH
O
^
(J
c
a*
0)
tk!
,c
o
^
CO
^sr
1
^
^
re
3
c_t
_o
0)
pL4
1
£*j
(H
CD
C
h-^
C
CD
^
-P
10
(0
(Jj
rH
to
CD
5
c^
0)
fao
x'
o
T3
co
^
rH
O
10
to
•rf
P
CO
CD
P
VH
O
(H
0)
E
3
X)
rH
^
rH
rH
1
t
B
p.
v.
C
0>
b£
^2
X
O
TJ
i-H
O
Ifl
10
•H
0
H
rH
ON
rH
O O O O O
ON ON ON ON ON
OJ
rH
-3" ON ON O NJD rH O rH O VD O
CO C^OOONOOONON ONONIAON
rH
rH
OJ J-OOI>-rHONOOOtAHONO
C^- HCN-OOOOOOOOONONIACXJIAOO
O
rH
ONOOONMDONrHMDCOOrHOJtAlA
OJ ON rH O- CN- OO C^- CO OO tA C^ Oj 0s-
ON
rH IA O J" KN, -d" i — 1 M3 IA VD OJ O O rH
OJ CO C^- NO VO C*^ CO LA rA VO ON
oo
oj oj co C*^ oj IA ON -j~ o IA rA O
O
ON
oo
oo
-4-
oo
co
OJ
oo
O rH
ONOO
O OJ O
ONOO CO
-J~ KN ON rH
OC VD C^- ON
OO -3" OO O
\O lA C^- ON
ON rH C^- KN
tA -J" C^ CO
O -d" VD rH
r-H-3" IAOJV^)
ON
(N
rH
fN.
ON
IN
rH
IA
ON
f^
H
O
KN
QN,
H
O OJ
ON oj
IA
rH
tA CN-
00 OO
OJ
H
oo vo
c^ -^
O
rH
IA H
VO O
OO
oo oj
IA CO
IA
CO ON
J- H
(A
O- tA
KN CO
IA
rH ON
fNj OJ
OJ
KN O
H
B
•H
£-<
-------
OJ
H
ft
cfl
£-4
H
•
KN,
*"•
C
0
•H
ro
4_>
C/3
to
n
•H
H
ft
tO fl)
^o
ffl §
-p
C ft
a> CD
fco w
j>j
X 1
o
•O CO
0) 3
> tc
( — t £3
o «t
(0
to i
•H
H
O *-?
o
C
o>
^
3
0
0
o
<*-<
o
>>
0
C
d>
p
a-
^
C
n)
^r*
-P
CO
10
01
to
as
*
a
0)
ta
X
o
•o
0>
rH
o
(0
10
•H
CO
ID
P
•3
CO
ID
•H
P
s
*i-
^p
fl
3
SZ
00£
O-lKN.
U5|0
IH
mjo
J-l
KNJ
•Ml
HI
ajLj-
flJlON
O KNONKN-4"-3~ H ONlPvrH IT\OJ OJV£> ONv^D-3" ONKN
cooo c^vo r^vo^-^coco c^-oo ONOOMDVOCO c^-oo
OK>ONlAOJ(HO-d-IAv£iOHf<>H-^ONrHOvD
t>-V£> -4- IAOO J VO
OOON-^-vOOOC^vO COHON-4- OO ON O- CN- ON K> lA
LT\KN rHrH r\JOJK>KN-4-KSKNirH-d--4-trs
OJHOOCN-OO oooojoNc^vC'i'OonoN
KN H OJ H OJ
OO H OOOOOOOOITN
O O
KNJ- IAVO JNOO ONO H OJ KN^- IT\VO 1>-OO ON O H
^•-d'^fj'-d"-^'^' IT\ IA miAlAlfNlAlAlAlAvO^
ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ^ ON ON ON ON ON ON. ON. ON ON ON. ON
C^
H
CO
rH
ITN
P^
KN
0
H
CO
VO
m
H
LT\
H
VO
O
O
0
H
4J
O
O
0
rH
ON
•
ON
ON
"?
ON
ON
-i-
MD
ON
IA
•
OJ
OO
KN
•
co
ON
•
0
OJ
•
OO
•7
o
o
o
o
-------
KN
H
f
CO
EH
ON
KN
a
a
o
•rH
CIS
-P
CO
hD
C
•H
H
PH
CO
-P
OS
a
CO
rH. 3
O C
«J S3
10 "^
•H
Q
£
CO
EH
to
10
Q)
oo
IA
V£>
O\O
H CO O
LA
VD
1A
CO
WO tA
CO
KN
KN-H-V£>v£)OJ[NOJINKN(NHOOJ-
KN OJ O [NOO
•Hir jc;
o. to
rNOJVOUN.rH,^- KNHON ONCO H VO U3 fA IA K\
OJOJHHOJOJOJOJOJOJHOJHOJOJOJOJOJCMOJ
IA
O
OO
OJ
CO
OJ
CN
-4-
CO
OJ
nj
OJ
IN
OJ
ON
H
(N
ON
VD
OJ
lA
VO
OJ
LA
ON
ON
CO
ON
ON
ON
ON
LA
ON
ON
LA
CO
ON
(N
*
ON
LA
CO
fA
O
OJ
0)
O
S
M
3
O
O
O
O
c!
IA
LA H C"- fA KN LA •
OJ KN
VD LA IA OJ KN LA O
KN V£> H H J- •
H OJ
CO O CO OJ OO v£l OO
KN LA •
O
O O O O O O
H eti «M
-------
.
0)
H
CG
E-t
,
H
VO
LA
£
C
o
•H
4-i
CO
-P (3
w rt
60 e-i
•H CO
H CO
ft 0}
Bj_3
*^
n3
co co
X! «j
•P 0 >
fS k
n5 C
C »e-, CD
3
r? o
O ^
Cd T3
•O 3
> ,Q H
H 4) O
O (^ CO
CO CO
CO 1 -H
•H 0
P >i
^ CO
-
03 ffi
f~f *v
CJ P
0) (0
O >-3 «H
C 0
CD
,
tt,
6
fij
ft
C
•!
tH 1
I
i
VO 1
H 1
CAl
HI
-4-10 H
Hi ON ON
K>| ON oo O O
Hi 00 OO ON ON
(\)| -*• ON O vo t>-
H| OO IN ON CO OO
Hi f\J KN KN O H ON
Hi O- H tN ONCO l>-
Ol VOOOVOHCNHtNO
Hi OJON KNCOt>-ONt>-ON
ON| -J-lA O-3-OOONVC-4'
H OO VO f\l VO VD OO
OOlOVO OfNJOKNKN
IA UN U"N O-
t>-| O KN O KN KN f\J
-3" KN -4" VO
VO I KN -3" -^J- -cj"
f\J H KN KN
IA| O fNJ -3- O
(M
-3-1 O O
KM
CMl
H|
ti ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON
>H HHHHHHHHH
g
OO
00
VD
OO
j.
CO
AJ
OO
r~i
00
O O
ONCO
O ON ON
ON co tN
O ON c^ ^ ON ON
H CO KN O CNJ -j" CN- ^j- ON
ON CO -4" ON C^ VO O- CO CO
O CM KN CM ON KN-d- H ON
lAO-CUO- LTNJ-O-OOJ-
O O -* O O LAOO O lA-d-
ON IA VD -^- H C^- tN KN
_
t^- UN ON rH VO IA (M
O- O COOO (NJKNKN
fVJ H CO VO KN
O O c^ co KN o
VO f*S H
-* iH O
IA KN
O -*
O
H CVJ KN«* iA\O C^ OO ON O rH
WX IA ITN tA IA IA 4A lf\ I/N,\O VO
ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON
HHHHHi-»tHHr-»»-.H
IA
O
OO
H
KN
O
CO
H
H
O
CO
H
ON
ON
C"*1-
H
1>_
ON
C^v
H
vo
ON
tN
H
LA
ON
c^
H
ON
CO
fs_
H
f\J
[x_
H
CO
IA
IA
H
CNJ
CN
ru
H
^r
ON
H
VO
j.
O
^J-
KN
OJ
fNJ
H
H
H
J-
0
O
O
H
a
+*
o
fr<
O
o
H
ON
ON
CO
•
ON
ON
^
•
ON
ON
VO
•
ON
ON
IA
ON
ON
-d-
ON
ON
H
•
ON
ON
IA
*
IA
ON
KN
VO
OO
IA
O
tN
IA
(NJ
IA
rg
J-
KN
j-
•
CNJ
fNJ
^
•
C\J
H
H
•
VO
CO
0*
O
0
o
ft E-i
1406
-------
VO
1*407
c
0
•H
-P
CO
-P
to
to
C
•H
r-l
ft
S
c/>
^
-P CD
CO ,£)
S
c o>
3 W
CO rH 3
H O faO
W 3
to
i — |
0
to
w
•H
P
10
»>.
r*\
to
P
V;
O
SH
CD
£>
e
^J
fe
|H| OJ
S
ft
ft
*-
d
r-M ON
Ol oj iH r\j oj
H| ON 00 ON ON
ON| OJO-Oj f\j OJ i— 1 oj O- OJ rH oj
ONCO ON ON ON LTv ONCO ON ON ON
bD
*>^
X
0
T3
CD
^
H
O
to
to
•H
P
CO 1 -3" KN. C^ OJ ON _j- O-- C^ rH ON OJ OJ OO
oocooo ONCS-OO H r>-oooo,co ONOU
C^l i — 1 OO ^O ON i — 1 O O UN C^- C'\ C^ O ON
OO V£) C^- iT\ UN vo rH lf\ -d" LP\ v»O OO C^
**£) I OJ t/N Oj KN OJ ON ^~ CI5 O OO VO rH UN
HU"NUN,ojrr\rH ^f^^r^-^-OJ
UNfOJ-OOOOO OOOON
rH
-*l O O
KM
OJ OJ
ON ON
oj oj O UA
ON ON ONOO
OJ O OJ rH O O-
ON ON ON ONCC1 t>-
oo
H
O
OJ
oo
00
UN
o-
rH
OJ
O
MD
rH
H OJ O (NJ C\J H -4-
H
H
ON
r-
j-
OJ
o
o
H
ON
OO
G-.
UN
UN
ON
H
oo
oo
KN
VO
OJ
o o o
o o
o o
o
rH rH H H
ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON
HHHHHHHrHrHrHHHHrHH
CO V-i CD
•P O E
O -H
-------
0)
rH
,0
(0
EH
VO
IA
£
c
o
TO
co
bO
O
•H
4-5
nj
C
(D
60
>5 W
X .rl
O W
re
IS PQ
0)
> H
H CO
O 3
W (3
CO (3
P
O
(3
0)
o
o
o
o
d
col
c
us
EH
W
CO
•O
10'
HI
HI
LfN
VO
VD
VD
OO
-d-
KN
O
-d-
CN
LT\
VDV.O
IA
LT\
VD
!>-L^^^^-^^ LT\C\J
H OH OJOOO
OJ
(MOO H
O- H OJ -d~ K>. CO ON
LA 00 IN H OO OJ H
rA K> OJ fA OJ KN tA
rH IAO
rH OOO K~\OJ
O O -d-
HHHHHH HHHHHHHAJHHHHrH
HHH
rHH
HH
ITNrH
f\l
OO
OOJ-O
H|
IA O
O O
f\ H
O-
1408
H
O
KN
ON
OJ
CO
OO
OJ
O
CO
oj
O-
00
00
OJ
L>-
IA
ON
H
00 CO CO
[N
H
ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON
HHHrHHHHHHHrHHHHrH
O
O
O
H
Cti
-P
O
EH
ON
ON
ON
ON
ON
ON
OO
ON
ON
ON
ON
ON
ON
MD
ON
ON
O-
oj
ON
OJ
LA
ON
VO
IA
O
OJ
VD
oo
OJ
00
IA
O
VD
H
-d-
ON
co
ON
OJ
•
IA
ON
ON
•
-d-
00
M->
*
H
O-
ON
•
VO
LA
ON
*
O
.HT
oo
vo
00
U\
O
rH
ON
TVJ
O
O
O
O
-------
1*09
CN
0^
H
^Q
OS
fN
rH
s
(3
O
•H
-P
tO
-P
bO
a
•H
,H
ft
W
_p
rt
d
d'
>S
X
O
TJ
0)
>
O
(Q
ra
•H
f^
o
0)
o
c
f-1
*-!
o
o
0
o
^
o
0)
;y
tt)
f-,
,£*
o
£_,
4?
A,
1
>,
SH
CO
y
fa
o
CD
"T t
1
In
Ctf
3
C
os
"-3
f3
Cti
XJ
EH
W
!0
0)
W
fO
*7^
£^
0)
faC
x"
o
t?
0)
£>
H
0
[Q
(0
•rl
P
w
>:
tO
p
tH
0
SH
0>
a
>-^
B
p.
P-
V
c
bfl
X
O
T)
0)
j>
H
O
ra
(Q
•H
P
SI
^>
H
t<\\
rH|
OJ
H
H
H
0
H
CN
30|
M
H
O IA
o> o
OO
H
O IN OJ
ON OO O
OO
i — 1
O rHOOO O rHOOO OONOrHLA O>
ON CT% ON ON ON O^ ON CT\ ON ON ON CO ON ON v£> o_
C^-
rH
H HOOC--ONrHOOO(NO-HrtAHOONONLn-^- rH
C^- -d~ CN- CO CO ON [N ON ON CO CO CQCNONOOlA[NCGC\j _HT
lAi
H
CO O-d" OJ rHVO-^-OCvD ON^OCO LAONONtArH OO -J- OJ LA
HON IAINvDvsOIAlA[>.tNlAlA-3-OOVDN"N.-d->^OrH O
H
H
O ^O O O oj IA OO -dr rH CN ON ON rN OJ CO i — I O O CO O C^
VJD -d" LA -d" TA -d" -cj" VO ^O ^ rH FA C^- ^t" f — i i — 1 ON
VO
IA OOO-d-O-HlAOjONOOIAOO O OO
-dr OJHrAlAOj VDOJ OO
OJ
O OOOOOO OO O
O
O
o
0
o
c
o
H
OJ NN, _d" IA v£) [N OO ON O i — 1 OJ KN -^" IA VO CN- CO ON O p — 1 CO
-d" -d" -Jr -4~ -^t* -d" -J" -d" tA IA IA LA IA LA IA IA LA IA VO vo -p
ON ON ON ON ON ON 0^ C7\ ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON O
HHrHHHHHHrHHHHHHfHHHHHrH fr>
O
O
H
OO
•
ON
ON
VO
•
CO
ON
_.,.
•
LA
CO
OJ
H
VyQ
^O
•
oo
K^
O
MD
rH
O
O
O
o
o
o
o
o
-------
i4io
CO
> u
X -•->
O ft
Q_)
T3 tO
1
H
O -P
to to
to 3
•H faO
Pi 0
*^
OH
O t
1) >^
0 H
a 2
t) >-3
^
^
;3
0
o
O
o
o
fl
3
a4
a>
(H
ti
a
EH
to
to
o
t-3
03
fl!
C
^
X
O
0)
£>
tH
O
CO
'.0
•rl
P,
to
f>^
05
^
O
!H
0)
,0
g
j3
s
B
ft
ft
H|
HJ
OJl
H!
HI
Hi
°l
HI
ON|
«•
C 1
CD i
he-
>^co|
ol
T5
Of
j>
H
O
1C
to
•H
P
D-|
-ONOOH
I^cO ONCOVJD HCOJ- K>f\l CM
VOf\l
r-t
^r^O
•OO S£) K\ O-
H OJ H
O O O O O
oj
OO
O
o
H
ON
ON
ON
O-
ON
ON
KN
ON
ON
OO
ON
VO
-d-
ON
OO
oo
so
si)
0
H
O
OJ
H
OJ
SO
OO
H
O
OJ
J- OJ
•
o
o o
HHHHH
rHi-IHr-lrHHHr-H
HHHHH
H
(C
-------
. o
> -H >• L;
C ! X tr O ; :
\ o ro ""
C ' p ; T< O
r ' "3 1'
I | (L> rH > ^
^ f, r- ' ^.
E->l rH 3 C , '>
O C (T ' - ,
me! to* ^
(D < -H tfi
•H P
O
OJ
T"1
K P
r|
O t)
P
(1)
O tf-l
C O
0)
£-4 (H
^ 01
3 .Qj
u E
U 3|
O ^
O
>>
o
c
0)
cr
0)
JL|
fr.
I'N,
H
-t
rH
rA 1ALAVO
H VO VO VO
OJ ON VO IA
rH IA KN O
(A lA rA
rH OO rH rH
rH -J- OJ -i-
OJ (A OJ
O -4" CO ON
rH O IN H
OJ OJ OJ
ON| IA C^ O
CO H ON
H OJ rH
OOl CO H OJ
-d- LA LA
H H rH
L>-l -4" ON-d"
rH O OJ
rH rH rH
VO 1 OJ OO VO
OJ -H- VO
lAl O O OJ
tA
-4-1 O
KM
cul
H|
^ oj rA-d-
(0 -4- -3~ -d"
QJ ON ON ON
Ix H H H
vo ir\
V£ VO
IA t \
lALAvO U^l^^fAH
VO VD VO vo VO 1AVO
IA IA K\ r^"\ fN, K^ KN,
tAlALNVO LAN"NIN-4- LAiTNlAvO lAOJJ-vD OJ
VO VO ^O VO VO VO ^A\ VO VO VO VO V3 VO ViJ VO -4" IA
IA IA (A K^\ fA IA lA lA IA IA KN, fA IA IA rA IA KN
CN- LA OJ OJ LA fVJ i — 1 OJ IA O- -d~ LA LA I" A t — 1 VO -4"
OJ rA -4" LA -4" -4" OJ IA IA OJ OJ -J~ OJ O OO IA VO
hA KN, fA fA K , IA IA K\ IA K\ IA IA KN. IA OJ IA OJ
ONO-IAKNLAO IAO OjvO ONHCO !AO- LACO
cocooi-ioc^-ONOoo-d'r^ojoN-T KN o H
OJ IA f\j IA KN OJ OJ IA (XI OJ r\J KN O^ OJ OJ IA OJ
t>- OJ VC' 'M Cx ON OJ lA O KN O IN -4- (? i O OJ OJ
-4-LP\-OjcO-4-vO-4 ONCOOJCO
<\lO,Oil\JOjOjOJOJOJrHOJOJOjHHOJt-t
CO OOVOOJ O-LALACO IAONlA-4" H LP\rHfA
-4" C^- LA ON i — ! ON rH CO IA -4" VO KN, LT^- VO LA, fA _^-
HrHHHO.jHajrHHHHr\IHHHrHrH
COvOLAIAoOD^O-4-^t-HINvOCC'OHLACO
OJOJCOOvOOJOJrHIAHrHO^OJlAOJOlN
rHH HHHHrHHHr-H rHHrHrH
IA EN rH H VO O OJ O i — 1 VO O vO (N ON fA KN ON
ON CO KN IA -4" LN- IN CO i — I ON IN- H CO -4" -4- -4" OJ
rH H
OL^-HOlAOHrHHONfAOLT, ONOIAO
lAVDrH IN -d-VDCNLA-4- VOOJ IA
OfAO O COVOIAINrH LA-cr VO
-3- H OJ rH KN r-H
O OOOOO OO O
OJ
-3-
0
LPVVO CNCO ONO H OJ rAJ- IA VO C^-OO ON O H
•^~ -^" -C}" -^" -J" LP\ (f\ LPt (f\ (f\ IT\ tf\ IT\ LP\ LT\ ^O VO
O^ O*^ CT*1 O^ O^ ON CTs O^ O*^ O*^ O^ CT^ CJ^ CT\ CT^ Cy^ O^
rHHHrHHrHHrHHHrHHrHHrHHH
IA
o
IA
IN
oo
00
OJ
^
VO
IA
OJ
IN
J-
H
lf\
VD
H
O
VO
LA
vo
vo
VD
-4-
J-
fA
LT\
IA
OJ
J-
OJ
H
O
IA
H
rH
OJ
c^-
LA
ON
rH
O
OJ
J-
O
O
rH
0) <»H
-P 0
o
EH -«
O
o
rH
OC
ON
ON
rH
•
ON
o-
OJ
•
ON
CO
r^_
•
VD
[*V»
ON
•
fA
vO
-4"
•
cO
-4"
-4-
IA
fA
LT\
•
O
OJ
ON
CT^
(N
k
OJ
K"N
•
o
H
O
O
o
0)
e
•H
-------
1412
Table 10
Frequency of Occurrence of Dissolved
Oxygen Values Below Two ppm in Hastings Pool
(M 18.0 - M 37.8)
Total No. of Total No. of Percent of Percent of
Days - DO Days - DO Time - DO less Time - DO less
Year Below 2 ppm Below 1 ppm than 2 ppm than 1 ppm
1942 000 0
1943 000 0
1944 000 0
1945 000 0
1946 000 0
19V? 8 1 2.2 0.3
1948 ?8 0 7.7 0
1949 43 4 11.8 1.1
1950 000 0
1951 000 0
1952 000 0
1953 000 0
195^ 7 0 1.9 0
1955 26 2 7.1 0.5
1956 38 10 10.4 2.7
1957 000 0
1958 101 65 2?.7 17,8
1959 144 116 39.5 ?l ^
I960 87 44 23.8 r?.
-------
1413
Table 11
Average Daily 5-Day 20°C BOD (Ibs/day) Of Raw Sewage And
From Minneapolis-Saint Paul Sanitary District
And South St. Paul Treatment Plants
Minneapolis-St. Paul
Sanitary District
Effluents
Year
1965
1980*
Raw Sewage
16?990
176030
178350
187930
198990
209500
204830
202960
214200
202410
193940
223585
244990
271400
288200
284300
283200
293400
307000
307550
361800°
560520C
Effluent
100800
104300
107000
118600
114300
125600
122800
119700
133600
120800
116000
140000
153600
175070
184220
175030
184020
191010
209520
208390
90450°
140130°
South St
Raw Sewa_g_e
57000
82815
72490
66670
62870
70200
74440
90140
85180
96320
90750
87250
80900
1053^0
85030
99650
84900
100870
102JOO
101460
. Paul.
Effluent
17100
41830
21530
14400
8500
19800
23030
26220
26070
22190
27660
31530
27730
42570
30290
40170
35260
31300
33620
40360
135200
207360°
d
33300'
5l84oc
Tot
Raw Sewage
224990
258845
250840
254600
261860
279700
279270
293100
299380
298730
284690
310835
325890
376740
373230
383950
368100
394270
409300
409010
495000
767880
a 1
Effluent
117900
146130
128530
133000
122800
145400
145880
145920
159670
142990
143660
171530
181330
21?64o
214510
215200
219280
222310
243140
248750
123750
191970
(a) Values for South St. I'aul are for the fiscal year April 1 - March 31
and have been used for that calendar year corresponding to the begin-
ning of each fiscal year.
(b) 1965 and 1980 estimates are based on 75% BCD reduction at conditions
of Sewage Works Project A, as presented in "Report on the Expansion
of Sewage Works in the Minneapolis-Saint Paul Metropolitan Area,
Volume 3 - Part 1."
(c) These values are the estimated pollutional load from the expanded
Metropolitan Area, as presented in Volume 3 - Part 1.
(d) These values include the entire Southeast Region.
-------
-------
CHART H
1415
' <*i' HIS fnlc T ' A: r'b1
.';: .---rr,.Tt- ;•! __i ir :
FROM MINNE APO I'TS- ^AI NT
SOU Hi Si, PAUL TKEA'iMENl I .A i'!\S
-------
1416
Appendix A to F
-------
S
U
Q cc
H
<
n
_5
O Z
to M
C/D O
O X
O
go
M CiJ
H >
< cn
No, of Samples
Represented
Rema rks
iding DO Values on Same Date 1 Low DO Values in Hastings Pool s Discharge, cfs** "
Correspo
Minimum DO
CO
CM
in
.,_
"1
tM
in
S
*
r~-
t— 1
•
CM
CM
1
i*v3
>d-
ON
CM
CM
^
O
•a-
vO
r~.
o
0
o
CO
O
in
en
0
vo
^f
CTi
00
r--
m
S
CM
rn
O
r--.
Ch
'•"N
ro
O
r^
o
i—i
m
O
o
.-H
r~4
m
0
r-H
r-l
i— I
O
r--
0
O
m
O
en
S
Cn
rH
OJ
O
o
f^-
CT>
o
00
a^
o
00
00
o
*JD
Ox
ri
r— )
CM
tn
o>
o
m
m
o
o
r-t
CM
O
m
m
_
o
LO
'/I
O
vO
tn
0
o^
o^-
o
LO
CO
o
o
-^
ON
i — i
CM
CN
•£>
O
r~*
00
O
tO
CO
m
o
CO
m
m
in
'vO
o
o
o
rH
O
o
-a-
o
r-
r-
-.,
O
r-l
CO
o
(Tl
o>
o
r**.
vO
o
o
^
en
r— 1
^
~^
o>
f
CO
"0"
(T-
C"
O
r-.
o
^D
CO
CM
O
r»*
CM
r^
O
O
.-1
^f
o
CJs
cn
O
o
r~l
O
U~l
U~)
O
O
~4
.
O
r-
c'»
v£>
CO
r-j
O
i— t
OJ
•J-
ul
O
m
SJ
ri
04
1O
xi>
C1")
c>
rH
l'"l
O
t
vO
-•"I
cn
o
o
CM
•
o
CO
s
<£>
CM
m
o
m
r--
v^y
i/i
CM
>J3
r-.
O
CM
VD
§
r--
O
O
.
3
00
CO
»:
j- .
i—l
CM
o
o^
CM
g
c
CO
•d-
CM
O
O
ON
CM
O
OO
oo
CM
S
3
CO
CO
S
d-
CM
CM
O
•*
^f
a>
p^
..
o
ON
m
o
CM
en
CM
0
m
vO
cn
QO
cn
S
rH
CM
O
r--
m
no
0
CM
m
CO
o
o
r^-
co
s~*
&*
O
i—4
CO
O
vO
CM
0
P-v
cn
^
cn
CM,
OO
r-t
..
rv
CM
r-H
*—v
O
rH
^D
in
m
in
-*
r-4
C4
r-l
CO
«t
CO
00
CO
s
o
C~4
r-l
0
-»
CO
o
0
CM
VD
S
r-*
0
CO
VD
rH
CO
m
CM
CM
O
m
ON
ITl
rH
O
CM
00
CO
O
CO
rH
CM
rH
CO
CO
s
r-t
CO
0
m
CO
CM
o
vD
in
CM
rH
0
m
m
0
CM
ON
0
in
CO
o
r*-
O-
rH
CO
rH
1
O
in
ON
rH
CO
CO
rH
O
-d-
vO
vO
o
00
ON
CM
o
vD
VO
CO
00
CO
X
00
CM
CM
0
in
CO
CO
0
r*.
in
CO
rH
0
-s-
in
O
0
ON
0
m
CO
o
r^
CO
00
CM
O
m
ON
rH
1 —
CM
-*
rH
O
-s-
VO
vD
O
00
ON
CM
0
VO
VO
CO
00
CO
S
00
CM
O
s*
CO
vO
rH
in
CM
rH
m
rH
O
00
rH
VO
0
CO
rH
CM
0
in
0
~*
00
CO
S
-3-
CM
rH
O
ON
CO
0
vO
VD
vD
rH
O
rH
m
m
rH
\_*
O
ON
rH
O
ON
CO
0
VO
-*
-------
a u
z c
w o
a
g
rH
0<
X
rH
O
u
a
S
o
< t/1
OH CO
O Q
Is
r/3
OJ
O-
CO
<4H
O
o
K
*
O
X
o
o
ex,
Wl
WJ
C!
-r-(
•W
.S
C
en
cu
5
g
5
OJ
5
E
CO
o
TO
3
r-H
O
Q
M
•H
a
en
OJ
o
s
§
.a
c
•H
S
Represented
Remarks
CO
CM
£
rH
•d-
CO
a
tation
CO
•*
00
CO
E
^
CM
0
-*
O
CM
O
r-
co
.n
o
o
o
-*
'D
-ct
T— 1
CM
ffl
O
O
r-
o
CO
O
^
CO
CO
S3
01
CM
CM
O
rH
CO
b'
o
r^
o
o
vO
O
CM
O
o
CO
-d-
CO
CM
CM
*"""""
CM
O
O
CN
rH
O
o
0
o
CO
CO
X!
a.
CO
CM
CO
CM
CM
rv.
O
m
.n
o
ON
CN
CO
vO
C)
CO
O
CO
i-H
CO
rH
r-l
CM
m
CM
CO
0
*
o
o
CO
0
CO
CO
0")
ON
N
3
.H
(N
O
t
O
o
f
I ,
CO
c >
r-t
Cv
O1
CN
CM
f£"
vD
O
O
CO
o
CO
co
fO
r-H
CM
CM
1C
r-1
CM
CM
O
O
"*
o
-XI
*
in
CO
'rC1
,H
O
CM
CJ
CO
CM
r^
0
O
o
0
CO
CO
CO
r-.
.-M
o
J
CO
C-J
r-l
s.1
f"\
ro
c-j
O
OJ
^
o
CO
CO
o
^
CtJ
r--
co
O
CO
r-H
CM
O
o
^
o
o
.0
o
rH
CO
o
CO
•H
CO
CM
(O
o
r-
vr,
O
o
to
o
CO
CO
ro
.-H
CN
in
CM
CM
O
o
*
o
CN
-d-
if\
r-.
CO
.j-)
CM
CM
CM
0
O
O
CM
O
-3-
•d-
m
CO
-J
o
cr.
O
O
O
o
CO
rH
CM
CM
O%
m
o>
o
CM
CO
O
O
J-
O
CM
CO
CM
O
CO
t— *
CO
CO
rH
rH
CM
m
CM
O
CO
CM
0
CO
in
-*
o
in
o
m
CM
O
r-!
rH
rH
rH
CM
O
0
"*
O
CM
CO
CM
O
00
rH
CO
CO
1^
rH
CM
0
CM
O
O
CM
CO
O
-3-
0
VO
O
O
CM
0
CO
rH
r- 1
CM
O
o
VO
o
CO
o
CO
o
CM
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
m
rH
0
S
•*
O
m
in
vD
o
in
rH
0
00
rH
CO
CO
r~
CM
rH
D>
O
CO
-3-
O
CO
CM
CM
O
CM
CO
CO
CO
CM
1— 1
0
o
o>
CM
in
-d-
0
rH
O
CO
in
m
CM
rH
O
O
o
rH
CO
CM
rH
O
CO
o
CO
CM
CM
O
CM
CO
CO
vO
rH
O
o
•->
in
o%
vO
in
m
CO
CM
o
0
rH
O
CM
vO
rH
O
0
o
CM
CO
CM
O
CO
^
CO
2
CO
CM
in
CM
o
0
o
in
in
0
-*
O
VO
O
m
CM
o
0
CM
CM
O
CO
•*
o
CO
CM
O
U-|
CM
CO
CO
0
CM
rH
O
0
in
vO
tn
CO
m
0
vO
rH
o
o
CO
CN
O
CM
rH
rH
CO
0
CO
§
vO
0
CO
0
CO
o
CM
CO
in
o
CO
o
rH
CO
0
CO
o
o
CO
o
m
o
CO
in
0
rH
O
0
rH
CO
CM
O
I— 1
CO
rH
i-l
CO
O
00
•*
O
CO
CM
CN
O
in
CM
CO
CO
rH
rH
in
ON
0
rH
CO
in
vo
m
in
vO
0
r-
rH
m
ON
o
vO
CM
-d-
rH
i-H
VO
rH
CM
CO
O
CO
0
CO
CM
CM
0
CN
CO
CO
CD
rH
0
o
CM
CO
m
ON
vO
CM
CO
m
vo
in
CM
CO
in
co
CN
O
O
CM
CM
CO
CO
rH
-------
o c
K o
p.,
DM
<
K H
M <
H
?C 00
O
>*
'-d <
> 5
o s:
o
> e
H >
<5 j
-------
o
CM
~J
X
r-4
O
2
g
S
o
H 63
10 CO
CQ
<
H
<
H
cog
co
O U3
a
CO W
CO CJ)
o
go
H >
2 o
< co
PH CO
3= 5
riS
-
CO
I— 1
CM
in
cn
rH
CO
m
cn
0
m
o
m
0
o
0
GO
m
o
CO
oo
r-l
cn
o
CO
o
r-4
O
t~4
rH
r— i
in
oo
0
,— i
m
cn
I-l
r-*
in
cn
O
t— <
o
cn
en
CO
m
CO
m
cn
cn
i
cn
in
cn
O
0
CM
0
CO
0
CO
o
CM
i— 1
cn
oo
CO
rS
m
0
CO
2
rH
CO
O
CM
m
CO
ON
o
00
ON
0
1 —
o
CM
^
m
CO
o
T-H
rH
CO
ON
m
ON
CO
i
0
ON
6970 ! (15)3/30
o
CM
in
CM
o
o
m
o
CO
S
o
CO
CO
o
00
vO
tn
rH
m
00
CO
m
in
i —
m
CO
m
rH
r-
o
ON
0
CO
CO
0
ON
rH
1
rH
ON
m
O
CO
£
ON
CM
ro
O
00
CO
o
CO
o
rH
O
ON
ON
O
-------
Q
Z
oi
X
h-l
o
cj
H 6J
CO CO
Q PQ
Z
S3 H
t- <
O
Z
H
"*
en
< c/>
O Q
U
S3 §
U ^
& H
< Z
£ M
to
cj
tu
w
CD
a
6
cd
UH
O
O
z
•o
cu
Represent
Remarks
Lues on Same Date Low DO Values in Hastings Pool | Discharge, cfs**
Minimum DO ' Corresponding DO Va
00
CM
g
1 —
»— 1
St
g
00
t— 1
g
c
o
CO
CO
cu
s
8
in
04
g
*
S
cn
a
CO
en
S
VD
s
cu
U
1-1
CO
CJ
r-l
1
CM
a-*
r-l
0
St
r~-
o
o
0
cn
o
vD
in
o
en
1— 1
o
1 —
vo
o
CO
CO
o
r-
r-l
o
o
r--
o
CO
in
r-l
CM
st
o
1
en
in
en
o
cn
cn
0
o
m
o
00
CO
00
r~
cn
m
o
o
^
o
r--
o
o
00
r-l
m
o
o
0
o
r^-
en
cn
cn
i
cn
en
cn
CM
O
O
en
o
in
cn
o
CO
1 —
cn
m
o
en
oo
o
o
r-l
o
en
r-l
cn
o
o
o
cn
CO
o
o
r-l
en
st
CM
1
m
en
CM
O
O
O
r-l
o
CN
cn
o
in
o
en
en
CN
o
o
r--.
o
CO
C*
st
o
o
o
CO
o
o
r-l
CM
in
CM
5
CM
O
00
o
m
CO
en
o
en
st
CO
en
O
en
m
O
o
o
~
o
r-
vO
o
o
CN
c
en
CM
CM
•
CM
o
m
o
CM
en
CM
o
vO
en
CO
m
\o
CM
O
CM
CM
O
en
st
o
o
o
~
g
en
O
CM
CM
O
CM
o
in
cc
CM
00
O
vQ
vD
0
00
CN
O
vD
en
CO
cn
CM
o
cn
O
cn
in
oo
o
o
r-H
CO
o
cn
^
CO
o
cn
o
m
CM
O
in
1
o-
0
CT>
O
1— t
o
cn
o
in
o
cn
CM
O
O
in
CO
o
vO
CO
o
CO
o
-st
vO
o
vO
r-
CM
CM
r- 1
m
CM
ir
CM
O
CM
OO
CM
r-4
0
o
CO
en
CM
O
CO
O
i— t
O
o
en
OS.
t?
o
CO
CO
o?
o
CO
o
ov
cn
CM
CM
in
en
m
en
o
o
0
CM
o
CO
CO
vD
O
O
CO
en
cn
m
en
i —
/-s,
o
r— 1
O
o
o
CM
C*
o
m
in
o
r—i
m
en
o
•^
en
en
en
in
i
I"M
r—l
O
vO
CO
o
r-4
O
m
o
r-.
vO
CO
en
CM
in
i —
CO
i— i
o
in
r— t
o
en
o
1— 1
r-4
m
r--
r- 4
r-4
in
CO
C*
o
r~4
CM
S
..
m
m
en
CM
O
0
vO
CM
r- (
O
O
O
CT-
r-
ee
en
en
o
cn
CM
r— 1
O
en
CM
T— I
o
CO
0>
CM
in
i~ i
CM
O
en
CO
vO
CM
en
in
in
cr,
m
CM
en
O
en
CM
r-
o
m
en
O
en
CO
en
CM
m
m
CM
en
O
CM
-st
cn
T— I
m
CO
cn
in
en
m
in
CM
o
0
^
en
r-l
vO
in
•n
i — i
CM
O
r-.
vO
O
O
vD
en
o
t— i
en
CO
cn
in
CM
O
en
i~(
,-s.
rH
O
in
en
i— t
o
oo
•st
0
oo
r-4
o
en
0
o
^
vO
T— 1
CM
15)2/29
o
VO
o
o
VO
en
O
cn
CO
tn
CM
O
-st
rH
tn
o
cn
in
CO
•n
o
o
r-l
O
•st
o
-*
CO
CM
CM
1
r-
m
0
en
m
in
o
r-
CM
o
vO
CM
CO
cn
vD
CM
O
vO
O
vO
vO
O
CM
O
ej\
O
vO
0
o
r-
CM
CM
m
o>
CM
CO
in
o
m
CM
T-t
O
m
o
o
0
CO
00
en
cn
m
o
CO
m
O
in
o
o
r— 1
m
o
CO
0
m
CO
cn
CO
m
en
in
O
o
en
st
O
CM
en
CM
o
CO
r-l
00
cn
CM
O
CM
O
O
st
O
VO
O
O
CO
0
CN
O
o
CM
cn
r-l
CN
in
,(16)2/11
o
0
en
0
CM
en
CN
0
00
r-l
00
en
g
o
CN
o
o
vO
r-l
st-
,—1
o
m
o
i— i
in
0
o
o
en
0
r-4
CM
,(17)2/26 :
o
0
en
O
CM
cn
CN
0
oo
r-l
en
g
vO
CM
o
o
o
1 —
in
00
1 —
o
o
o
en
in
en
o
o
•*
in
CM
CM
-
o
o
CM
O
00
o
en
o
CM
r-H
en
CO
en
g
en
in
o
o
in
in
o
0
CO
in
r-l
O
in
•*
en
en
en
i
o
sO
o\
vO
en
CO
r-l
o
o
m
CM
o
o
00
en
vo
cn
m
vO
o
CO
r-4
m
en
in
CO
tn
00
CO
CO
CO
r-l
£
O
o
en
m
i— (
en
0
vO
o>
r-l
1
CO
&
CM
m
CM
^
O
vD
vO
0
r-.
CM
m
CO
"*
m
CM
r-l
o
vO
vO
r-l
* St. Croix River
** Mean Monthly Discharge: M 13.8 - Miss. R. flow at Robert St. plus MSSD flow; M 24.8 - Miss. R. flow measured downstream of confluence with St. Croix R. ;
M 41.7 - St. Croix R. flow (difference between , M 13.8 and M 42.8)
-------
CM
-a-
o
z
K
X.
M
O
ft
u
**
C73
H H
&W
w O
Z
CO M
•Z. H
ta <
o
$n t/1
R W
°3
Q <
O td
to O
i!
sg
PH O
W Z
H
CO
en
r— 1
(X
en
UH
O
o
tz
en
CJ
QJ
V-
en
•H
Q
O
O
OH
CO
c
CO
£
C
CO
0)
g
_1
QJ
a
CU
R
ct)
CO
C
O
W
3
rH
g
&0
•H
-a
o
a
en
U
8
•S
a
•rl
g
•o
cu
4J
c
CJ
01
11
|H
a.
ii
oi
en
i
cu
CO
CM
rH
g
00
CO
rH
g
;ation
CO
tf
^t
ON
*O
CM
m
CM
CM
X
ON
0
U"l
0
m
CO
m
o
CM
CO
O
r-l
m
0
r^
m
vO
m
O
CM
CO
m
CM
tn
tn
CM
tn
CM
rH
o
vO
ON
o
1
rH
vO
ON
r^
CM
CM
S
in
o
CM
X
CO
o
rH
O
o
CO
CM
CO
o
o
3 CM
O,
CD C
cu
O S
rH 4J
14H OJ
Pi CU
• S
tn cu
c/: i-i
•n oj
S<4H
00^
ro £
a cj
rH 4-1
Jl C/J
C rH
CO -3-
CU
-------
c-;
g
M
03
X
rJ
PU
H
<
px oo
£ u
o a
rJ Z
O Id
Q O
W Q
> u
rH >
H rJ
<£ O
K 00
< OO
CU M
Cu O
w z
00 r-l
«
01
rH
&.
s
ffl
en
iw
0
o
2
*
*
Ifl
M-»
O
11
M
ri
r
o
CO
•l-l
Q
rH
O
o
PU
CO
W
C
.^
CO
CO
X
C
CO
4)
3
r-*
iS
8
5
rJ
01
a
(8
DO
C
O
cfl
01
3
rH
5
o
Q
r
-r-t
T3
rt
rrespo
o
8
• rl
C
.1-4
S
•o
111
.u
C
HI
w
01
r*
&
0)
a;
W
X
IH
1
00
CM
->
,— 1
i—l
1
CM
•d
ON
r- t
CM
y-N
I-I
O
CM
•d
m
r- 1
O
o
NO
in
0
CM
CO
ON
m
NO
CM
s
r-t
1 —
o
r*»
CM
o
rH
NO
o
NO
o
r^
NO
rH
in
•d-
o
NO
m
CO
r-~
CM
-d-
ON
rH
CM
rH
co
-j
ON
00
CM
^
CM
0
Ov
r^
rH
CO
O
0
ON
00
0
ON
00
CM
CM
ON
en
CO
S
oo
r-»
in
en
O
-a-
in
o
.-H
rH
1
vj
s*
ON
rH
O
00
00
ON
en
0
CM
ON
rH
rH
O
NO
ON
r*
CM
in
o
CO
S
ON
(^
O
r^
in
o
CO
in
o
m
o
m
m
o
NO
O
rH
-d-
o
1 —
3
ON
O
•d-
o
o
CM
O
m
-*
NO
o
ON
m
1 —
CNI
m
NO
CM
js
CO
1 —
o
ON
m
o
CO
m
o
in
CO
O
r^
in
CO
m
in
o
m
— i
rH
o
a^
m
cr>
r— (
lO
o
m
IS
vO
r-
LJ~I
<»-
LO
m
m
m
m
o
o
cr>
fO
o
vO
r--
O
r-
0
r— i
CO
o
r*.
O
*—l
•&
CO
o
CN
^D
CN
O
r-
0
^
r^
CN
CN
S
O
CO
O
CO
0
f—l
1
CTv
-£>
O
v£J
O
m
vD
o
LO
O
0
^J-
v£>
a^
o
^O
rH
CO
o
CO
>J
vD
m
o
CO
S
m
vO
CN
S
rH
CO
O
1— »
CO
O>
O
Os
vO
O
r-
o
00
^o
o
in
O
m
^0
CT-
CO
o
m
o
o
o
s
cr>
o
CT>
I— 1
CO
o
in
o
LO
m
o
CO
S
rH
0>
O
o^
CO
o
1— (
o
in
vO
o
CO
^D
O
O
CO
o
00
o
in
*-O
o>
o>
0
i
r— 1
m
o\
rH
l/l
rH
00
rH
rH
O
m
o
vO
r-H
O
CTv
C^
Ul
O
^0
0
o
rH
m
o
m
2.
m
o
o
vD
m
m
VD
in
o
\o
o
vO
in
0
v£)
0
O
rH
in
^o
CM
s
CO
o
CN
o^
m
o
vO
O
0
rH
CT.
CO
CO
s
CM
CO
O
0
CO
in
o
CM
m
o
CO
S
00
o
00
m
in
rH
0
00
0-
o
m
O
^0
m
o
r~-
in
o
CO
vO
o
r*
m
^D
CM
S
CO
CO
o
rH
CO
CO
rH
UO
rH
vD
in
oo
m
in
in
^o
o
CN
VJD
o
vO
in
o
CO
•-O
00
0
o
o
ON
rH
O
0
rH
ON
0
O
0%
ON
m
0
CO
rS
rH
CO
o
CO
CO
1
1
1
m
0
m
m
rH
LO
O
m
0
CT>
m
o
o
CM
ON
O
CN
O
o
ON
r-
0
in
rH
CO
O
m
r-
O
rH
CO
O
CM
O
r^.
r*-
O
CO
vO
in
rH
f-
o
CO
o
m
vr>
oo
ON
\Q
m
ON
rH
O
O
ON
i —
O
m
rH
CO
o
m
r-
in
ON
r-.
t
r-
m
ON
rH
r~
co
rH
CM
0
vO
CO
rH
CM
O
\D
r
)tscharg
roix Ri
>
H >, .
fii rH U
A in
rl C 1
O O
• ca
-------
•o
X -
h-4 U
O C
a o
ta cj
(X, v^
§
U
• Cd
H tn
in <;
QM
Z <
CO
en -J1
t-t
tn S
H H
tn
go
W M
II
> tn
Z H
Id <
O
O Id
tn o
in SH
si
>
,3
B
§
CO
1)
r-l -O
i-s
n e
in 01
U)
U-l 4)
O h
e
o <*
2
u
V
a
as
$
CO
,
01
60
M
U
CO
O
r-t
8
«
bO
•r-l
4J
(0
S
c
CO
tu
3
5
8
s
S
01
tu
c
o
to
_
O
in
en
o
CM
to
CM
cJ
^
2
-------
H
CO
Q
I-H <:
a.
P-. rH
CO S
W
SE- O
hH
U H
CO
&
rH O
2
B H
°3
Q <
rJ B
O W
uj O
CO bn
si
\-t >
H rJ
g
to
-H
r!
rrespo
g
1
a
c
a,
0
o
in
cr-
j, ,
,-
a.
00
r-~
O
CO
CO
o
CM
rH
O
CN
O
CO
S
r-
O
CO
«d-
p
o
in
p
o
in
o
in
m
o
o
m
OS
r-
m
I
i
OC
0
0
O
OS
m
o
o
c
CM
00
O
•*
00
o
in
00
m
r-H
m
X)
in
in
so
O
o
in
oo
!
.r
CN
in
^
o
o
o
CO
o
o
00
m
o
CM
O
&
00
O
CO
in
£
o
-t
in
0?
m
•*
in
OS
in
o
o
-d-
in
CO
CM
Os
in
OS
rH
CM
O
O
CM
OS
O
O
O
in
CO
o
&
CM
r-
in
00
-*
0
in
--t
m
o
rH
O
rH
O
rH
OS
•*
O
o
0
m
sO
m
CO
r-
CO
1
1
cr>
H
O
CO
CM
O
o
CO
LT
CO
CO
CO
-
r--
-d-
CN
in
SO
rH
rH
in
m
10(11)
m
m
m
00
-d-
m
i-
£
in
OS
13)8/16
o
o
Os
O
o
J
o
o
OS
*
OO
m
CO
CM
CO
O
•*
CO
r—4
in
o
co
un
m
CO
rH
0
m
r-H
m
CO
00
m
m
i
cr>
CO
0
in
r~-
•
o
o
o
C-J
rH
ro
CO
CO
0
CO
•*
rH
O
o
m
i-H
m
m
m
•*
rH
O
m
m
in
m
00
CO
£J
CO
1
r-.
m
-d-
CM
r--
s~\
m
o
(N
CO
o
rH
O
CO
CO
CO
CO
ro
rS
0
CO
CO
-
o
•*
in
rH
O
-------
1426
EXHIBIT F
KHiMEAPOUS-SAIMT PAUL SAKITAKY DISTOICT
SUMMARY Sf ATEMEOT
to
MIHME30TA WATER POLLUTION CONTROL COMMISSION
RBQARJDDtQ HEARINGS 1KOM MAY 26, 1962, TO SEPTEMBER 22, 1962
OCTOBER 1, 1962
The District's Interest in Proposed River Water Quality
Standard*
The Minneapolis-Saint Paul Sanitary District has
a vital and direct Interest In the proposed classification
and adoption of standards for the Mlaaiaaippi River In the
vicinity of Mlnneapollti and Saint Paul. The District's
principal area of control Involve* that section of the river
froB the Pig*a Eye Lake Sewage Treatment Plant to the mouth
of the St. Crolx River, Into thia zone of the river, the
effluent from the District's treatment plant is discharged,
utilizing, to a reasonable extent, the natural assimilative
capacity of the river for the completion of the stabilizatloi
-------
142?
process. Ac th* sewerage aystem tributary to the District's
treatsmnt plant serves over 90 percent of the Metropolitan
Area's sewered population, the plant effluent is the major
source of pollution in the down-river section. Other
coswunltles and industries also contribute substantial
pollutional loads to the river and share the responsibility
for the present and future river water conditions.
Because of the direct bearing of the extent and
cost of sewage treatment on the maintenance of various
levels of quality of the river water, the District endorses
reasonable standards for river water quality which are
commensurate with the downriver water uses. It is, however,
an economic necessity to make reasonable use of the diluting
and natural purification afforded by the receiving stream.
Treatment Objectives of Past Years
Placed in operation during the summer of 1938,
the treatment plant at Pig's Eye Lake wan designed to provide
treatment for an average sewage flow of 134 million gallons
per day expected from a tributary population of 910,000.
Over the years, 24 suburban communities have
chosen to contract with Minneapolis or Saint Paul as the
most advantageous solution to their sewage disposal problem,
increasing the sewage flow to the plant to 162 MOD in 1961
-------
1428
fro* «n estimated tributary population of 1,110,000.
Treatment objectives were baaed upon a statement
of requirements iaaued by the Mlnnaaota State Board of
Health in 1988. The statement provided essentially that
tha pollution of tha river should ba raatriotad to ouch an
extent that tha public health hazard would ba reduced to a
minimus, that tha aealth of liveetook would not ba endangered
that tha public nuisarwe would ba eliminated, and that fiah
Ufa In tha rivar, at least below tha mouth of tha St.
Croix, would not ba Jeopardized.
Over tha years tha District has established
approximately 24 river water aanpllng stations which extend
93 milea from North Minneapolis down through Lake Pepin.
Annually more than 600 regularly scheduled river aamplea are
collected and over 5,000 analytical determinations of the
water quality are made.
A detailed analyaia of the water quality sampling
reaulta has ahown that low diasolved oxygen levela have
been recorded in the Hastings pool in recent,years. The
inoreaae In ocourrenoe of lower 00 levela in recent years
in the Hastings pool can ba attributed in a large measure to
unfavorable rivar flowa and Increased pollution loada in the
effluent diaohargea from the Minneapolis-Saint Paul Sanitary
District's aewaga treatment plant, the South Saint Paul
sewage treatment plant, and other municipal and industrial
-------
1429
installations above and below these plants. Except in
19^9» water quality objectives were met in all years prior
to 1956 and they were met in 1957 and in 1962. Conditions
in the Red Wing pool (below the mouth of the St. Crolx)
with respect to dissolved oxygen level have been satisfactory
over all years through 1961, with no dissolved oxygen level
lower than 3 ppm being recorded.
Program of Research and Investigation
In 1956 the Board of Trustees of the Minneapolis-
Saint Paul Sanitary District authorized a five-year Program
of Research and Investigation to assist in the determination
of future requirements for Sanitary District sewage works.
The overall program was directed toward the determination
of the most economical and satisfactory solution to the
sewage disposal problem of the Minneapolis-Saint Paul
Metropolitan Area. The research phase of the program In-
cluded comprehensive analysis of the past thirty-five years'
records of river condition and the prediction of the
capacity of the Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers to receive
and assimilate the pollution discharged from sewage treatment
plants and other sources in the area. The investigation part
of the program Involved an evaluation of the existing inter-
ceptor sewer system to determine its adequacy to convey
-------
expected future flows from an enlarged area of service and
the development of a long-range plan for the expansion of
sewage works In the Metropolitan Area. Reports on these
studies have been submitted as exhibits.
As a part of the District's studies, a plan was
developed for the expansion of the existing sewage works
required to serve a growing Metropolitan area to the year
2000. Proa an investigation of many alternate sewage works
projects to serve the area, four advantageous projects were
presented in the reports. These included sub-projects for
the Northwest Region, an area of 229 square miles (19
communities) which essentially includea the North Suburban
Sanitary Sewer District.
It was concluded in the reports that a new inter-
ceptor sewer from the Northwest Region to the west terminus
of the existing Joint Interceptor Sewer was a feasible
project. On a long-range basis, the estimated cost of
construction of this Interceptor sewer and the necessary
enlargement of the Pig's Eye Lake sewage treatment plant is
approximately the same as that of an upriver regional sewage
treatment plant to serve the Northwest Region.
A detailed evaluation of the capacity and
utilization of the Minneapolis-Saint Paul Sanitary District's
Joint Interceptor extending from the west limits of St.
Paul to the Pig's Eye lake treatment plant has shown that
i
-------
under the "A-l" or "B-2" project, capacity will be available
to convey the sewage fron the Northwest Region under year
2O00 requirements. Future utilization of the Joint Inter-
ceptor is dependent to an extent upon the storm water
separation programs of Minneapolis and Saint Paul.
Proposed Expansion of Treatment Plant
A three-year construction program was adopted
recently by the Minneapolis-Saint Paul Sanitary District
which is aimed at the completion of a plant expansion project
and the commencement of secondary treatment operations in
1965. Final contract plans are presently being prepared
for this treatment plant enlargement, based upon employment
of the high-rate activated sludge process. Treatment
requirements in excess of 75 percent removal of 5-day BOD
will be met with non-continuous supplementary processes
such as chlorinatlon and direct river aeration. The esti-
mated cost of this expansion project Is $22,800,000. The
Minneapolis-Saint Paul Sanitary District is, therefore,
actively proceeding with treatment works which, when
completed, wlJkl result in improved river conditions and
compliance with the proposed river standards.
Though the proposed standards do not apply to
the Red Wing pool downstream from the mouth of the St. Crolx,!
-------
1432
water quality in thia part of the rivtr will also be main-
tained at aatiafactory levela aa Indicated by the statement
dated July 19 *nd preeented at the hearing of September 22.
While the propo»ed expanaion of the treatment
plant la baaed upon the year i960 development of the
Central Citiea and 24 contracted auburbs, the 218 MOD
deaign providea capacity in exoeaa of preeent requirementa
to the extent of 56 MOD. Should other areas contract for
aervice. Including the North Suburban Sanitary Sewer Diatrict
the plant will be able to handle the additional flow. The
effect of incluaion of aewage from areaa outaide the deaign
area will be to ahorten the deaign period or to require
further expanaion at an earlier date than 1980. Aa planned*
the aeoondary plant layout will facilitate future incre-
sent a 1 expenaion of the treatment plant aa may be necessary.
Degree of Treatment and Ita Relation to Low Flow Augmentation
of the River
The Minneapolia-Saint Paul Sanitary Diatrict1a
atudy reporte on the prppoaed degree of treatment are
extenaive and complicated. Perhapa the beat brief
presentation of thia axibject ia contained on pagea 10
through 16 of the atatemeot on the "Regulation of the
Niaaiaaippi River Headwater Reaervoira" preaented at the
-------
June 27, 1962 hearing held by the 0, S. Army District
Engineer In Orand Rapid* and introduced aa evidence at the
Water Pollution Control Coamlaelon hearing on September 21,
1962.
With more than half the population of the State
expected to be concentrated in the Minneapolis-Saint Paul
metropolitan area before 1980, it becomes imperative
to secure adequate stream flew for water supply, stream
sanitation and other needs. The sanitation situation will
be further aggravated if a 12-foot navigation channel is
constructed, aa compared with the preaent 9-foot channel.
Preliminary studies by the Army Engineers St.
Paul District office, indicate that a considerable anount
of low flow augmentation from the reservoirs la practicable.
Cost estimates for the expanded Minneapolis-Saint Paul
Sanitary District Plant indicate that reaaonable amounts of
low flow augmentation would effect aubatantial savings in
sewage treatment ooata and would permit the further upgrading
of the river water quality.
Summary
With our engineering staff and our consulting
engineera, we have reviewed the standarda aa propoaed for
three sections of the Mississippi River. Based upon the
-------
extensive studies of the pollution and recovery charac-
teristics of the river made •• a part of the Program of
Research and Investigation, knowledge of the workings of
the aain sewerage system of the Metropolitan Area, and th
experience of administering and operating the present sew
treatment plant* we concluded that the propoaed standards
are reasonable and proper.
Population aatteataa indicate that nearly 60
percent of the population of the State will be centered I
the Minneapolis-Saint Paul Metropolitan Area in the year
2000, Considering theae projectiona and the sanitation
problems which they imply, it would appear that whether th
contract system to suburban communities is extended or a
metropolitan agency ia formed, the basic objectives of the
river standards will be accomplished through the coHectic
and conveyance of sewage to a treatment plant or plants
located downstream from the major concentration of popula-
tion of the Metropolitan Area.
for the Minneapolis-Saint Paul Sanitary Dietrlc
/a/ D. D. wozniak, Attorney
/a/ Kerwin L. Mick, Chief Engineer
and Superintend*!-)
Approved by the Board of Trustees
October 1, 1962
* * *
-------
K. L. Mick 1435
MR. NICK: That concludes my formal statement.
I wonder, Mr. Chairman, If any of the people who
•ubmlt atatemante here today will have an opportunity to
read and comment on the previoua atatements that have been
made here today?
MR. STEIN: Veil, you have the floor now. The
general rule la that when you are called on to make your
statement, you have free aalllng. Ck> ahead.
MR. MJCKj What Z Mean by that la, we thought we
heard aome atateventa that were made with regard to BOD in
the river, and ao forth, that didn't seem to be quite correct
MR. STEIN: Oo right ahead.
MR, MICK: And in order to be aure they are
correct, we would have to aee the statements.
MR. STEIN: Were those statements by some of the
technical people of the Federal Government, or the States?
MR. MICK: One of them was Mr. Jordahl of the
Department of the Interior.
MR. STEIN: He isn't here now. I think this is
one of the things that we certainly want to be right on.
I know Mr. Jordahl* and he is one of the best
public service man we have. He la the Department of the
Interior'a coordinator for thla region. I am sure Mr.
Jordahl, on aomethlng like a BOD, has taken information
which has been given to him.
-------
1436 !
K. L. Mick
Bow that we have flagged thla, I will ask our
s
technical pepple to gat together with you and aee what the i
i
i
point la, and we can talc* thia up with Mr. Jordahl and see :
if we can a*ke an adju»t»ent.
MX. MICK i Wall, Mr. Winiewtki has given me a !
copy of hit atateaent here, and ha pointa out the paragraph
that I have IB Bind, If I oan Juat refer to it?
MR. mm i do right ahead.
MR. HZOKt He aaya that in February of 1962,
the DO'a averaged 0.5 part* par Million between the bridge
and daa at Heatlnge and Anoka. I don't think that ia
correct beeauae I don't know what bridge he ia referring to.
We don't saaple any place between a bridge and a dam. We
sample at the dam, and than btlow the da* at the bridge,
and the DO at the bridge ia alwaya oonaiderably higher
than at the dam beoauae ef the aeration through the dam.
Maybe the bridge ha la referring to ia a bridge
above there like the Roberta Street Bridge, We were
wondering whether ha waa referring to the old Haatinga Pool.
Anyway, for February 1962, we did check on our
/
figures for that* The DO rangea from 6~£ parta per million
at Mile 20, which ia down at South St. Paul, to 6.2 at
Mile 22.7, 4.7 at Mile 26.5* 3.15 «t Mile 30.5* and finally
you get down to the dan itaelf at Mile 37.8, and it waa
-------
1437
lower there in February. It was 0.4, but It isn't averaged
in the pool anywhere near that. That is Just one station.
Then there vat Mr. Sprifgle'a remark on the
Red Wing plant. Be referred to eoae ooat figures there of,
I believe, $12 to $13 per capita versus a dollar and a half
for our plant.
Well, I think that 1* like comparing apples and
oranges, you Bight say, because, in the first place, our
figure of $1*50 slid not include the oost of operation and
maintenance of any of the sever systesui that are connected
to our plant. There are SOB* alsioat 3,000 Biles for that,
except for one 9-«ile section just above the plant. The
coat per capita in a smaller plant is always larger than
it is in the larger plant.
That is what I meant by saying if we had an
opportunity to read over these statementa snd make cosnents
on questions like that, it would help.
MR. STEIN: Yes.
MR. NICK: I would Just like to point,out, in
concluding, that any standards that are set any time, in
my opinion, should always be reasonable. Anything they do
has to be reasonable and realistic — that is, actually
capable of being achieved at ail times.
I would just like to bear that in Bind whenever
we talk about standards, because in aany cases they can be
-------
1438
X. L. Mick
achieved part of the tine* or a good share of the time, bu
not all the tine,
MR. 9TKIN) Thank you. Do you want to wait ju;
a nonent* Mr. Mlok?
MS. MICKi Yea.
V
MR. aniNi By the way, I thoroughly agree with
you on that laat sentlnent. I think it would be better
for the operating planta and the people having the
responsibility for running planta and the regulatory
agenolea if you had atandarda which oould. be net at all
tinea.
MR. MICKi It la very dlaoouraglng.
MR. 8TIINi And you could cone out there on any
day and know whether the atandarda are net. Both aides
would know what the situation waa.
I don't think that those are Impossible of
achievement either.
MR. MZCKi What I «eant there waa that it is a
little bit dlsoouraging to aak for a larger anount of
money than ia necessary to build planta to neet standards
that our conditions indicate eould not be net.
I don't nean by that the existing standards, but
If they are raised too high, to a point that I have heard
people oomnent on at various tinea, we can show from our
-------
K. L. Mick
conversation* that these can never be net 100 percent of
the time, and therefore they are not realistic.
MR. STEIN: Mr, Wilson?
MR. WILSON: Mr. Miok, may I just call your
attention to a point?
In this statement that you have submitted, you
have stated that the treatment works which the District has
under construction, when completed, will result in improved
river conditions and compliance with the proposed river
standards. Is that still your opinion?
MR. MICK: Yes.
MR. WILSONi Now, this statement was submitted
by the District at the hearings before those standards were
actually adopted.
MR. MICK: That is correct.
MR. WILSON: Have you examined the standards
that were adopted after the conclusion of those hearings?
MR. MICK: Yes.
MR. WILSON) Does the District still adhere to
the statement here that your works, when completed, will
comply with the standards as actually adopted?
MR. MICK: Yes.
MR. WILSON: I want to point out, Mr. Chairman,
that with the exception of the appeal taken by the North
Suburban Sanitary Sewer District from the standards for
-------
1440
K. L. Mick
the upper son* of the river, no appeals have been taken
by the Twin Cities District, the City of Minneapolis and
St. Paul, or South St. Paul, or by anyone else, and the
time for appeal has expired.
MR. STEIN: Thank you.
Are there any other comments or questions here?
(No response.)
MR. STBIN: What kind of plant do you propose
for that 75 percent removal?
MR. MICK) High rate activated sludge.
MR. STEIN} Generally speaking, is this about
the level you expect from this plant? Supposing you need
more. You indicated you could provide a higher degree of
treatment, that it is readily expandable.
Would you provide the same kind of treatment,
high rate activated sludge? What actually would you do?
MR. MICK: Well, the high rate activated sludge
plant is being constructed merely by having additional
aeration tanks, and with more aeration you can go up to,
if not conventional activated sludge, at least to the region
where you get 90 percent or more.
MR. STEIN! You believe with 75 percent reduction,
you are going to meet the standards?
MR. MICK: We were a little bit worried about 100
-------
1441 j
i
K. L. Mick
percent of the time. •
\
For a very areal'i percau1; of the tine, we might ;'
i
have trouble, but we have in mind auxiliary measures to j
tide us over for those very small percentages of the time; ;
end those auxiliary ros^aur;-.. iirt Juch things as heavy ;
i
chlorlnation of the eV.:'lu»i „ t^nC direct aeration at the j
dan, which we have been wo/'Hiv "ith the Corps of Engi -jeers
on, as Colonel Handing said. Tills is wore than double the :
aeration we were sietMr,.-; ,»; n That la what we are con-
sidering, which would tide ua over those small percentages
i
of the tin*.
!
MR. STEIN! A» 1 understand this --
MR. NICK: Also — excuse me?
i
MR. STEIN: I'm sorry. j
i
MR. MICK; We are also hoping that we should be ,
entitled to some low flow faujmentatlon at the critical
low flows that oocur on the river.
MR. STEIN: Well, I don't know how optimistic
you could be for* Inw flow augmentation with 75 percent
reduction.
MR. MICK: Lan't that claysed as secondary
treatment?
MR. StEIN: tf-ail, it ia secondary treatment, but
you are kind of scraping ;he low t*nd oJ the spectrum.
-------
1442
K, L. Mlclc
MR. MICK: I think it ia conventional for high
rate activation. We hope we can get more than that.
MR. STEINi I don't want to preclude this, and
I certainly don't know all the facts. I want to be open
on this.
There ia one more question for ny own clarifiea-
!
s
tion here. I don't know that it ia completely clear. As j
I understand this, this $23 million plant will Just serve
the areas under your jurisdiction now, and not these proposed
new metropolitan-wide sanitary districts for which the
legislation did not pass. Is that correct?
MR. NICK: That is not entirely correct. It is
being designed to serve the two cities and 24 suburbs that
were connected at the tine the design was closed up, until
the year 1980 -- their growth up to the year 1980.
MR. STEINj I understand, but If this bill had
passed in the 196! session, there would be more areas in
there which would not be taken care of, or could not be
taken care of, by your design capacity in this plant. Is
that correct?
MR. MICK: If, as a result of this Ashbach
Bill plan, for example, we should have in the near future
most of the rest of the suburbs In the metropolitan area,
then the plant that is being built now would still take care
-------
K. L. Mick
of then! but not up until I960 — maybe only until 1970 or
1975. Then it would have to be expanded again.
?
i
MR. STEIN; Then I am missing something there In ;
j
the middle. <
In Paragraph (§) you say, "Although the 1
1961 session of the state legislature failed to pass en- \
abllng legislation for the creation of a metropolitan-wide
sanitary district...." That is in Paragraph (3) of your
statement. Is that right?
MR. MICK: Yes.
MR. STEIN: If we go along with the assumption
that lightning would strike, or by some hypothetical situa-
tion that the legislation had passed, would this plant
expansion of $23 million that you are proposing now be
sufficient to have taken care of that whole metropolitan-
wide area that was proposed in the 1961 legislation?
MR. MICK: It would for a few years; very few
years.
MR. STEIN: And then it would have to be
expanded again?
MR. MICK: Yes.
MR. STEINt Thank you.
MR. WILSON: Mr. Chairman, may I?
MR. STEIN: Yes.
-------
1444
K. L. Mlok
MR. WILSON: Bight on that point, I think this
will clarify it.
Will you step over here to the Map, Mr. Mick?
First, the fa«t is that the Minneapolis-St.
Paul Sanitary District oonalata of the area within the city
limits of Minneapolis ami St. Paul, doea it not?
MR. MICK: Yen.
MR. WILSON: Will you point out on the map the
limit* of the oltiea of Minneapolis and St. Paul?
MR. MICK: Here (indicating).
MR. WILSON: That la a comparatively small
section of this entire area. Mere ia a pointer, ao you
can get back.
MR. MICK: Yea (indicating).
MR. WILSON: Now, then, they have undertaken
by contract to aerve a considerable surrounding territory,
which la indicated by the blue line.
Will you run your pointer around the blue line
showing the territory outside the Twin Cities that is now
being served, the suburban territory now being served by
contract?
MR. MICK: Her* (indicating) and alao up here
too (indicating).
MR. WILSON: And that includes these 42 cities,
-------
1445
K. L. Miok
villages, and other suburban unit* that have been referred to
MR. MICK: Yes.
MR. WILSON: Now will you run your pointer around-
t
the black line, which shows the boundaries of the district i
t
that was described in the 1963 revised bill for creation of
a metropolitan-wide sanitary district? i
MR. NICK: Yes (indicating). ;
»
MR. WILSON: That includes these outlying towns, <
where there is big suburban development that was described
here, of Burnsvllle and Eagan and Cottage drove over in <
\
Washington County, and a very considerable area outside, i
i
which Includes about all the territory that would be within
such a district in the foreseeable future, does it not?
MR. MICK: Yes.
MR. STEIN: In other words, what is the red line,
the bill that failed?
MR. WILSON: That was 1961.
MR. STEIN: That's right. In other words, you
kind of modified your proposal and pulled in your horns a
little bit on your new proposal.
MR. MICK: It is pulled in mostly on the corners i
there.
MR. WILSON: Yes. One of the objections to the
1962 proposal was that it took in too much territory
-------
1446
K. L, Miok
MR, STEINi Yt». Well, I think that certainly
clarifies it for •• on what the factual situation la.
Are there any futrther oomments or questions?
MR. NICKs Thank you.
MR. STEIN) Thank you very much.
MR. SMITH» W« have ten ooples of a statement
fr«« South St. Paul.
-------
J. P, Badalich
.;'fATEMENT OP JOHN P. BADALICH, CITY
ENGINEER, CITY OP SOUTH ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA
MR. BADALICH: We have submitted ten copies of
the statement here, and If you would like us to get up and
read the oral summary of one of the statements, we will
certainly be glad to do it. Otherwise, everything is self-
explanatory in that statement.
MR. SMITHi I believe possibly your statement
should be read,
MR. BADALICH: All right.
Mr. Chairman, distinguished conferees, ladies
and gentlemen:
I SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
The City of South St. Paul owns and operates
the second largest sewage treatment facility in the Twin
City Metropolitan Area. Located also in South St. Paul is
the nation's second largest meat packing and stockyards
center, being the second largest industry In the State of
Minnesota, second only to agriculture Itself.
-------
J, P. Badalich
The South St. Paul Sewage Treatment Plant la
located near th« southerly city Halts of the City of South
St. Paul on the west bank of the Mississippi River, approxi-
mately 3~£ alles downstream from the Minneapolis-St. Paul
Sanitary District Plant. The City of South St. Paul Is a
city of the second class, with a population of 23,032 (i960
Census), having an industrial and sanitary sewage flow with
a population equivalent oi 792,(XX). This arises by reason
of the character and volume of the sewage wastes from the
major neat peeking center located in the city.
Many persons confuse the South St. Paul Sewage
Treatment Plant with the Minneapolis-St. Paul Sanitary
District Plant. The latter treats the sewage from
Minneapolis and St. Paul, while the former handles the
sewage and industrial wastes from the City of South St. Paul,
a separate city and adjacent to and southerly from the St.
Paul city limits.
Prior to 1940, the large packing plants of
Armour and Swift and several small packing plants in the
City of South St. Paul discharged wastes into the Mississippi
River without treatment. This was not an intentional
misuse of public property, since for many years it appeared
that the 11,800-sec. ft. average flow of the Mississippi
River was large enough to take care of the sewage of
-------
1449 '
J. P. Badalich
Minneapolis, St. Paul and South St. Paul by dilution. No
doubt this was an influencing factor in the location of
these industries.
In 1914, however, the Twin City Lock and Dam
was built. This created a large quiescent pool which rapidly
became offensive due to its aeptic condition and to floating
sludge solids. It beomr^ apparent that the Twin Cities must
do something about the sewage which emptied into this pool;
but before plans could be made for corrective measures, the
Federal Tovernoent came out with a River and Harbors program.
This program was the "Nine Foot Channel Project" which would
make possible large barge traffic on the Mississippi, up
to St. Anthony Falls.
To create the 9-foot channel required for this
irnpr1':, 'C:r -it below the Twin City lock and Dam and through
the Cities of St. Paul and South St. Paul, another lock
and dam had to be built about 30 miles below the Twin City
Dam. This dam is now Known as Hastings Dam.
When the 9-foot channel project was announced,
it was obvious that on its completion the Twin Cities and
South St. Paul would have two septic pools instead of the
one oreviously mentioned. Accordingly, Interested parties
such as the Minnesota Public Health Department, the
Metropolitan Drainage Commission and th? South St. Paul
-------
1450
i
J, P. Badalich |
engineers curried out extensive studies to determine what i
should be dons to eliminate the pollution of the Mississippi.
These studies showed that (1} it was advisable for the
Twin Cities and South St. Paul to treat their waates (this
was upheld by the Minnesota State Legislature and in 1933
a law was passed making it Mandatory for the metropolitan
area to treat all its sewage and Industrial waste); (2)
the Cities of St. Paul and Minneapolis should build a
sewage treatment plant; and (3) the City of South St. Paul
should build a sewage treatment plant.
Therefore, recognizing its responsibility with
respect to both sewage collection and treatment and upon
completion of preliminary studies, the City of South St.
Paul proceeded with the construction of the necessary
intercepting sewers and a sewage treatment plant at a total
cost of $1,235,227.04. The South St. Paul plant, as
designed and constructed, is one of primary treatment plus
jingle stage filtration and final settling with facilities
for chlorinatlon and provides for the removal of solids and
disposal of same in open aludge lagoons. Basic operation
consists of processing the sewage through grit chambers,
floccuiatlon tanks, primary olarlflera, filters and final
clarifiers, with final disposal being made into the
Mississippi River. Final effluent during normal operation
-------
1451
i
J. P. Badalich
flows by gravity through a 48-inch outfall line to the river.
When the river elevation rises to a point where
gravity flow is not possible, the final effluent is then
diverted to Wet Well No. 3 of the control building. By
means of two 10 MOD pumps and one 5 NOD pump, the effluent
is pumped from the outfall line to the river.
Operating records through 1962 show that the
South St. Paul Treatment Plant processes approximately
12,000,000 gallons of sewage daily, consisting of an average
flow of 13.04 NOD for weekdays, and 6.94 NOD for Sundays
and holidays. Raw sewage BOD (Biochemical Oxygen Demand)
is 1356 ppn for weekdays and 168 ppm for Sundays and
holidays (based on average dally flows from April 1962
through March 1963)* An average BOD removal of approximately
67 percent was achieved during the few years preceding the
year 1963. Also the overall removal of settleable solids
was 86.6 percent for the same period.
In an effort to improve the quality of the
existing sewage treatment effluent, studies and pilot plant
operations beginning in September 1938 were conducted by
the superintendent and chemist of the South St. Paul
Treatment Plant on further treating the plant effluent by
use of an anaerobic waste stabilization pond. The report
entitled "History of the South St. Paul Anaerobic Waste
-------
J. P. Badalich
Stabilization Pond to November 1, 1963" accompanies this
presentation.
After years of further study and testa, this
method of additional treatment of the plant effluent
proved conclusive so that; in November 1961 the City of
South St. Paul engaged the consulting engineers, firm of
Coastook & Davis, to prepare a preliminary report and plan
on a proposed sewage stabilization pond.
After completion of this report and acceptance
by the Minnesota State Board of Health, final plans and
specifications were prepared and bids received on Nay 7,
1962, for the construction of this 27-acre pond. Total
cost was in excess of $155*000, which included $13,500 for
land acquisition.
In February of 1963* the plant effluent was
pumped into the stabilization pond and the pond put In
operation. After a short operation, leakage was detected
and the pond drained and the inside of the dike was sealed
with an impervious elay material. In Nay of 1963, the pond
was again filled and a short tine later relatively uniform
operation was achieved with the following results in
sewage treatment based on a six-month operational average.
The overall average BOD removal was Increased
to 88.2 percent. The overall removal of suspended solids
was an average of 94.9 percent. Prom these results, it
-------
1453
J. P. Badallch
ia seen that the overall efficiency of our sewage treatment
operation has Increased well over 50 percent. In BOD
removal alone through use of the stabilization pond, the
BOD loading to the river has decreased in exceae of 60
percent over the amount previously discharged from the aaln
plant,
In view of the above Improvement, it ia evident
that the City of South St. Paul has recognized its responsi-
bility further with re*peot i.o sewage treatment and river
conditions and that we in South St. Paul have been able to
meet efficiently and effectively, our needs for sewage
treatment and disposal.
II STORM SEWERS
The City of South St. Paul, like the Cities of
St. Paul and Minneapolis, being one of the older municipali-
ties in the metropolitan area, has a combined sanitary and
storm sewer system.
Here again, the City of South St. Paul has
recognize1 its responsibility of discharging diluted sewage
into the Mississippi River during the time of rainfall and
surface runoff. Since 1955 the city has expended funds to
separate both aysteias of sewerage collection.
-------
J. P. fiadalloh
In 1955* in conjunction with th« building of
Highway Interstate 494, the City of South St. Paul constructed
a 120" storm water outlet to the Mississippi River so as to
provide an outlet for storm water drainage from the southern
half of the city. The cost of this river outlet was in
exoeas of $500,000. Them again in 1957* $1,300,000 in bonds
were issued for the construction of storm sewers within the
city, thereby eliminating many miles of combined sewers. With
part of this bond money, a 60" storm outlet to the
Mississippi River was also constructed in the north end of
the city, eliminating again some combined sewers. To this
date, the entire bond Issue has been expended and additional
monies are being used to further this separation of storm
and sanitary sewers.
Presently and since the start of the separation
of storm and sanitary sewers, all new sewer construction
and additions to the sewerage system is accomplished under
a separate basis.
In conclusion, we in South St. Paul are one
existing unit of government that has successfully met its
responsibilities in respect to sewage collection, treatment
and disposal and will continue to do so in the future.
* * *
-------
1455
J. P, Badalich
SEWAGE TREATMENT AT SOOTH ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA
The South St. Paul Sewage Treatment Plant is
located near the southerly city Halts of the City of South
St. Paul on the west bank of the Mississippi River approxi-
mately *»-£ alles downstream frya the Minneapolis-St. Paul
Sanitary District Plant. The City of South St. Paul is a
eity of the second class with a population of 22,032, having
an Industrial and sanitary sewage flow with a population
equivalent of 553»OOO.
Many persons confuse the South St. Paul Sewage
Treatment Plant with the Minneapolis-St. Paul Sanitary
District Plant. The latter treats the sewage from
Minneapolis'and St. Paul, while the former handles the
sewage and industrial wastes from the City of South St.
Paul, a separate city and adjacent to and southerly from
the St. Paul city limits.
Prior to 19*10, the large packing plants of
Armour and Swift and several small packing plants in the
City of South St. Paul discharged wastes into the Mississippi
River without treatment. This was not an intentional mis-
use of public property, since for many years it appeared
that the 11,800-sec. ft. average flow of the Mississippi
-------
1456 '
J. p. Badallch j
River was large enough to tak« care of the sewage of
Minneapolis, St. Paul and South St. Paul by dilution. No 't
doubt this was an Influencing factor in the location of these
industries.
I
In 1914, however, the Twin City Lock and Dam \
l
waa built. This created a large quiescent pool which 1
rapidly became offensive due to its septic condition and to
floating sludge solids. It became apparent that the Twin
Cities must do something about the sewage which e«ptied into
this pool; but before plans could be made for corrective
measure, the federal Government came out with a River and
Harbors program. This program was the "Nine Foot Channel
Project" which would make possible large barge traffic on
the Mississippi, up to St. Anthony Falls.
To create the 9-foot channel required for this
improvement below the Twin City Look and Dam and through the
Cities of St. Paul and South St. Paul, another lock and dam
had to be built about 30 miles below the Twin City Dam.
This dam la now known as Hastings Dam.
When the 9-foot channel project was announced it
was obvious that on its completion the Twin Cities and South
St. Paul would have two septic pools instead of the one
t
previously mentioned. Accordingly, Interested parties such j
i
as the Minnesota Public Health Department, the Metropolitan .»
-------
J. P. Badalieh
Drainage Commission and the South St. Paul engineers carried
out extensive studies to determine what should be done to
eliminate the pollution of the Mississippi, These studies
showed that (l) It was advisable for the Twin Cities and
South St. Paul to treat their wastes (this was upheld by
the Minnesota State legislature and In 1933 « law was passed
making It Mandatory for the metropolitan area to treat
all its sewage and industrial waste). (2) The Cities of
St. Paul and Minneapolis should build a sewage treatment
plant, and (3) the City of South St. Paul should build a
sewage treatment plant.
Upon completion of preliminary studies, the City
of South St. Paul proceeded with the construction of the
necessary intercepting sewer and a sewage treatment plant
at a total cost of $1,235,227.04. The South St. Paul
plant as designed and constructed is one of primary treatment
plus single stage filtration and final settling, with
facilities for chlorinatlon, and provides for the removal of
solids and disposal of same in open sludge lagoons. Expecte
removals and reduction of oxygen demand is 70 percent. Fund
were not available for the inclusion of sludge treatment
units for Incineration, but the plant was laid out to permit
the future addition of these units if they become necessary. '
Operating records up to the present time show that expecter
-------
1458
J. P. Badalich
removals can b« exceeded and that the type of treatment
and design of plant haa been very satisfactory.
The plant waa designed on the basis of 10 MGD
flow* The raw sewage first passes through one inch
manually cleaned bar screens. Thence to Vet Well No. 1 and
raw sewage pumps which are two 10 MOO and one 5 MOD motor-
driven units located below sewer level for continuous prime;
one 10 MOD pump is equipped with gas drive unit (125 H.P.)
able to pupp up to 13 MOD rate in case of power failure.
The sewage la pumped from Wet Well No. l to the
three unit primary settling (roughing) tanks through Venturl
meters. Each primary unit is 10.5 ft. wide by 8 ft. water
depth by 110 feet long, affording a 30-minute detention at
10 MOD rate. Each tank is equipped with sludge and grit
removal mechanisms and skimming and scum removal mechanisms.
Sludge from the primary tanks is carried by a
cross conveyor to an ejector and ejected by air to lagoons.
As this material piles up some is burned and some is sold
to a processing plant for use as a fertilizer base.
The grease and scum from the intermediate and
final tanks is disposed of by lagooning, while the grease
from the primary tank is sold to a rendering plant, for
which the plant receives several thousand dollars a year.
The best year netted better than $18,000.
-------
1459
J. P. Badallch
Fron the primary settling tanks, the sewage
flows by gravity to the mechanical floooulation tanks. Three
units, each 33 ft. wide by 8 ft. liquid depth by 55 ft. long
with motor-driven paddle-type agitator* are there. Theae
units provide a 45-minute detention at a 10 MOD rate.
From the floooulation units the sewage flowa by
gravity to intermediate settling tanks. These three settling
units are 33 ft. wide by 8 ft. liquid depth by 110 ft. long
equipped with sludge collectors, cross collectors, skimming
and scum removal equipment. The weir length is 540 feet whicjh
at 10 MOD gives a rate over weirs of .019 million gallons
per foot per day. The settling rate at 10 MOD is equal to
920 gallons per square foot of tank area. The detention
period at 10 MOD is 1.5 hours.
From the intermediate settling tanks the sewage
flows by gravity to Wet Well No. 2 and thence to intermediat«
sewage pumps — two 10 MOD and one 5 MOD motor-driven
horizontal pumps located below sewage level for continuous
prime. All effluent of intermediate settling tanks over a
range of 10 MOD can be pumped to a storage unit and applied
to filters when the normal flow falls below a 10 MOD rate,
thereby leveling off the plant flows over a 24-hour period.
This is done when the conditions of the Mississippi River
require additional treatment.
-------
1460
J. P. Badallch
From Wet Well No. 2 the sewage is normally
pumped by the above-mentioned pumps to the six primary filters.
Each filter is 113 ft. Inside of wall diameter with average
rook depth of 6 ft,, with a total rock area of 1.26 acres.
The filters are arranged for back-washing.
Back-washing is accomplished by flowing approxi-
mately 450,000 gallons per filter of plant effluent upward
into the filter from the bottom through the tile channels,
along with simultaneous air wash. The waste back-wash
water flows by gravity to the lower section of the storage
unit and at night it is fed back into the plant along with
the raw sewage. Back-washing has been done at intervals
of from two to four weeks, depending on operating conditions
The filters are not equipped with dosing tanks.
Intermediate effluent is pumped directly to the rotary
distributors.
Since back-washing of trickling filters is not
a common procedure, it may be worth-while to .discuss this
process in more detail. For back-washing, as previously
stated, 450,000 gallons of plant effluent is used for each
filter. The wash water is not pumped directly into the
filters, but instead is pumped to an elevated storage tank
of 475,000-gallon capacity.
During back-washing the elevated tank is allowed i
-------
1461 !
i
J. P. Badallch !
to empty very rapidly through a 48-in. concrete conduit.
The flow through the filter* is at the rate of 15,000 galIons i
per minute, with a hydrostatic pressure at the base of the
filter of 6.3 to 4.7 pounds. To aid in back-washing* a
grid of air lines with orifices spaced 18 inches from
center to center, was placed 7 inches above the bottom of
the filter rook. To furnish air for this aeration system
a blower delivering 6,500 cubic feet per minute is used.
It delivers 3 pounds pressure at the discharge of the blower.
Proa the filters the sewage flows by gravity
to final settling tanks, which are the sane design aa inter-
mediate tanks, with the saae sludge and scum collection and
detention period (1.5 hours).
The sewage flows by gravity to the Mississippi
River, or during high river stage to Vet Well No. 3, and
thence to the river by pumping. This pumping adds con-
siderably to the cost of treatment, but could not be avoided
due to the relative elevations of the Intercepting sewer
and treatment plant. Chlorination is provided for with two
machines, both manual, which can delivery chlorine at three
points in the plant.
The average sewage flow for killing days (killing
days are the days the packing plants are killing) during the
past five years was 11,246,000 gallons per day. On Sundays
-------
1462
J, P. Badalich
and holidays it was only 6,590,000 per day. Weir studies
indicated that better than 90 percent of the sewage flow
on week dayi is industrial waste from Armour and Company,
Swift and Company, and the Stockyards Company, the city
domestic flow contributing less than 10 percent of the total
flow.
All data subsequently reported is based on 24-
hourly samples composited according to flow for the raw
sewage and for the primary, intermediate, and plant effluent: and
12 bI-hourly samples also composited according to flow.
BOD
On killing days, the BOD of the raw sewage for
the last ten years averaged 1,252 ppm, with a peak monthly
average of 2,159 and a low of 756 ppm.
The BOD of the plant effluent for week days has
averaged 449 ppra. This represents an overall reduction of
64.1 percent. Using only killing days, with an average flow
of 11.25 MOD, the average dally removal of BOD was 75*400
pounds. Because of the heavy loading of paunch manure,
It is possible to remove 15.2 percent of the raw sewage
BOD in the grit chambers alone, and an additional 23.v
percent in the mechanical flocculators and primary settling
-------
1463
J. P. Badalieh
tanks. Thus approximately 61.0 percent of the total
reduction of 64.1 percent la accomplished by primary sedi-
mentation. The trickling filters remove more BOD than might
be expected, for the sewage going on the filters has an
average BOD of 762 ppm. Of this 313 ppm are removed by
the filters and the final settling tanks, which is 40.0
percent of the applied BOD.
Settleable Solids
As might well be expected of a plant with
trickling filters, practically all the settleable solids
are removed. Of the raw average of 16.5 nl/1 of settleable
solids, 17.7 Bl/1 are removed. This represents an overall
removal of 95.8 percent.
Suspended Solids
Of the 991 ppm of suspended solids entering the
plant, 862 ppm were removed, nils gave an overall removal
of 86.8 percent. Of this 37.0 percent was removed by the
grit fhembero and 43.4 percent by the primary sedimentation
tanks, with 19.6 percent removed by the trickling filter
and final sedimentation tanks.
-------
J. P, Badalich i
The high percentage of removal by the grit i
chambers and primary sedimentation tanks is attributed to the
nature of the sewage, Ite raw sewage has enough heavy
organic Material in suspension mo that whan it becomes
quiescent in the grit chambers and in the primary sedinentati
tanks this material quickly settles out* removing the
suspended aolidc nearly as effectively as a chemically pro-
duced floo,
The operation and maintenance of the plant is
under the direction of a three-wan sewage disposal commission
created by ordinance and appointed by the City Council. The
annual operating budget is approximately $105*000. 90 per-
cent of this la paid by the industries and the remaining 10
percent by the city. Thi« is in accord with a 15-year
agreement entered into by the industries and the city. The
city's 10 percent is raised toy a sewage rental charge, which
originally was established as 30 percent of the amount of
water bills for the quart »»r ending March 3 1st of the
previou* year; this 30 percent has since been reduced to a
15 percent charge. The operating personnel consists of an
operator and helper on each of three shifts and two relief
men, three laborers on the day shift, a chemist and a
superintendent .
Every precaution is taken to safeguard the health
r
-------
1465
J. P. Badallch
and life of plant personnel. AJ1 have been Inoculated
against typhoid and paratyphoid A and B. Safety equipment
is provided In the nature of carbon monoxide detector,
hydrogen sulflde detector, Wolf Safety Lamp for detection
of oxygen deficiency, two all-purpose gas masks, one
chlorine gas mask, safety helmets, dust respirators, goggles.
safety harness (for lowering men Into hazardous areas) and
complete first-aid equipment.
-------
o
•H
•U
O
•3
m
CM
00
m
-3-
vO
a
CJ
T3
1466
ON
m
•
V0
O1
in
m
•
•JD
c
0)
3
V
U
W
•r^
•a u
a) C
3 QJ
4) •-<
JJ U-l
C >«
M H
(Tl
CN
O\
O
•
O
§
tM
*
CM
«M
C
s
V
U
«
•r4
•O U
OJ C
B
-------
Filters
1467
FLOW DIAGRAM
-"1
r~
n
'
i*~~"
r
Waste wash
water
and
Sewage Storage
S,
S
5
M
i
o
*
O
j
t ;i
Intermediate
Clanfiers
> t f
Floculation
P 1 T
hi
1;
ll
|
1
r~
i
i
i
I
dJ
Garbage!
8rmd«r 1
_
—
Pump
House
and
Control
8ldg.
i
»
*
*
i
1 r -
jijr
1 , i
i ' ,
' '
uJ
1 x"
A-
_TO_MississipJ2« Riy
Final
Clan hers
To Lagoons
Sewage
Backwash
Lines used for
both sewage
and backwash
Sludge
Sewage Treatment Plant
South St. Paul, Minnesota
-------
1468
***************************** T*"is'*
* *
TifENTir-THIBD AKNUAL 3SPORT
* *
* SEWAGE DISPOSAL COMMISSION. SOUTH SAINT PAUL, MIMN- *
* *
APRIL ls 1962 to MARCH 3.1,, 1963
* *
# «<* *#**;£#* * & * * * # "* * >* * •* * -" •* * * * •!-' * •*
SSWAGS DISPOSAL C»MMIS3IOK
Mr. E, B- L'cCr eight ,...,.„.- Fr en id a nt
Mr. Joseph Sartl , c - , r r ., . ,Vice-Frfc^
Kr, Eeua-y it-ilra , . , , , ., < , ., Secretary
-------
FINANCIAL STATEMENT
FISCAL YEAR ENDING MARCH 31 , 1963
SEWAGE DISPOSAL COMMISSION
SOUTH SAINT PAUL, MINN.
OPERATING AiCD MAINTENANCE S3WAGS TESATSSI-TT PI^HT
%
BALANCE ON HAND MARCH 315 1962 $ 11,013 15
BSVENUg
Collections $105,973 43
Sales (grease, sludge {
scrap) 7 .,960 -50
Ee.t'unds & F.aimhurssrr.snts^ §^L?®.^^.
$114,001 32
$ _!£'>, 001 3^_
$ 125,0'=?? 17
EKPEHDITUEBS
Salaries $ 84.454.08
Liglrt & ?ov;^r 21-037 32
Rapaiffl & Efcpl a- slants 10,338 39
Manorial &, Supplies 1,8*1:00
I ii Durance 1 , 448 . 42
Ccy - Gvi-..as» - Oil 5<2,.7S
C-C &r Gi7era;i.i,vc-. ^"ireases 1,995,83
7,75
O'C.':«r Ariiuinistr at ?.vs E:;p , 1 1 053 , 5
$122,553,08
Total S::pencUtur©3 _$ 122, 558 86
ff~'4fc*«."'.i3Ft*"*i^Ssi. TZ:—'- "-•- • ""--•>
PT-> .,,.,,-,(. -., ry ,nfa ?.".v.n«T- ^T TO'"'-? -^ 9 .-i7 O.t .'itUlU i\d.\ •. i- «3 X .1 i-' t' J «,» <4t j '*; -'.- '•--•,
-------
1470
PLANT OPERATION
5 DAY B.OoDc IN P..P.H. FOR YiSBK DAYS
AVERAGES OF 2-'-:- HOUR COMPOSITES
APRIL
KAY
OU1-IW
^IJLY
i.M,
FuFT )
OCT..
l:ov.
DKC •
V I, -> .| \r$
FEL1 •
H£l
J> »*• *V* IV # h ««p* O4i »A W,V
;.">}/ 851
X3.27 3^29
1317 1118
1313 11^3
137-v 1204
"|"'J6 113$
129? 1184
149', 121?
1617 1519
15V; 1^63
1432 12?6
1W 1 }2Q
671
655
729
?23
778
,y, Q
G93
792
?S3
9V 4
930
870
« r--- O
;- ;„
336 7 u ..»-'•
M3 si-4.?
409 C4<6
476 ^.-.3
49:1 6: o
5H -:-?«3
616 ^r-.->
6?0 ^?,o
635 :;--:
-------
1471
PLANT OPERATION
SUSPENDED SOLIDS IK P.P.M. WEEK DAYS
1962 RAW PRIMARY INTER, FINAL % REDUCTION
APRIL
MAY
JUKE
JULY
AUCK
SEPT .
OCT.,
KOV.
DSGc
JAK , ' 63
FEE ,
M*R,
?10
821
871
87?
836
83^
977
1046
979
1106
855
930
55k
633
641
653
657
625
726
8^9
729
719
6 S3.
f/q s.
i J~>'
211
204
254
217
266
245
419
382
394
369
371
351
107
74
116
106
109
82
156
15?
164
184
194
182
85 <.l
91-0
86,3
83-9
86.8
90 c 2
83.9
85.0
33« 3
'~, >•* •"-.
O^: - J
on p
fro'1
83. o£
908 634 30?
-------
PLANT OPERATION
SETTLEABLE SOLIDS ML/L. FOR WEEK DAYS
AVERAGES OF 24 HOUR COMPOSITES
1472
1962
RAW
PRIMARY
INTER,
FINAL % REDUCTION
APRIL
MAY
JUHE
JULY
AUG.
SSS-T.
007. «
MOV,
DSC,
J,UU>
F'J.V- v
MAH,
13 o
14.
14.
15.
14.
14.
16.
18.
15.
63 16.
Jj ?lt B
16.
8
7
6
6
9
6
6
1
6
4
6
1
5
7
1
?
6
6
8
9
8
S
9
8
.7
.1
.6
.1
.3
.6
.2
.5
,1
,1
.1
A •->
-92
089
1.33
.95
1.66
1,3.6
3.?2
3,08
3 <• « - 9
3 o 06
1,90
1.48
o77
069
.61
»47
o?8
069
1.43
1,16
1.00
1.81
1.78
0 C'rf,
94»
95 «
95 o
97.
94.
95.
91.
53 o
93-
«e _
'^0
5:;«
4
2
7
0
6
4
4
/^
o
Z1"
a
5
0
^0/,RJ5Y AVERAGE
15,
5
?
.6
1 = 95
1.00
Cj3 o
,4
-------
PLANT OPERATION
TOTAL SOLIDS IN P.P.M. FOR ViKEK
OF 24 HOUR COMPOSITES
1962
RAW
PRIMARY
INTER.
APRIL
MAY
JUHS
JULY
AUG.
SEPT.
OCT.
1407 o
DEC .,
JAN, '£
FED ,
MAKo
Y&jJRL}
2546
2686
2771
2?C4
2799
2644
2830
2969
290?
£ 29?Q
2773
2B22
I AVERAGE
2230
2426
2507
2616
2560
2392
2552
2651
2691
2546
2505
2526
-
2029
2030
2241
2253
2202
2058
22,52
2238
2305
2246
2192
15??
1924
1826
1939
2002
1909
1779
1902
1895
2066
1933
1969
1919
62,2
860
632
902
BS-'O
nt-5
928
10?3
8AI
967
SCfc
903
102
2517
1926
-------
1474
YEAR
SOUTH ST.PAUL SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
B.O.D,
YEARLY AVERAGES WEEK DAYS
RAW PRIMARY INTER. FINAL % REDUCTION
1953-1954
1954-1955
1955-1956
1956-1957
1957-1956
1958-1959
1959-1960
1960-196!
1961-1962
1962-1963
1077
1108
1364
112?
1286
1294
1431
1423
133?
1356
936
930
1140
953
1048
1102
3.245
1226
1189
1206
674
733
912
724
779
• 785
806
843
823
809
433
412
521
432
509
442
462
465
432
491
59.8
62.8
6lo 3
61,6
60.4
65 -.a
67,.?
6?, 2
6? „ 1
63«2
10 yoap
1280
78?
o
-------
YJSAR
SOUTH ST. PAUL 8SWAQS TRT5ATMKNT PLAKT
SUSPENDED SOLIDS
YS/vRLY AVERAGES FOR W3EK DAYS
PRIIiARY
INTER. FINAL # REDUC
1953-193^
1954-1955
1935-1956
195&-195?
1937-1953
1958-1959
i95$-196o
19-5C--1961
1962.- -1962
19-52-1963
10%
1016
1298
1096
95?
100/!
'x "IP
Oyc?
910
89t.
906
691
686
859
768 '
691
657
715
681
6^3
68^
273
350
^37
325
299
282
233
£93
2Si/
307
lif-1
139
1?2
135
1^6
3,16
138
13.8
\V4
135
86,^
860 3
37.0
87.1
ft'-. 7
U^'o /
nn *>
OS ' o J
Co. 2
8?.l
e?.3
35d
10 year
-------
1476
SOUTH ST, PAUL SEWAGE TREATMENT
3ETTLEABLE SOLIDS ML/L
YEARLY AVERAGES FOR WEEK D
YEAR
1953-1954
195401955
1955-1956
1956-1957
1957-1958
1958-1959
195S-2.990
1$£C- 1961
19'1 -1962
1962-1963
RAW
19«8
19.5
22.8
19.1
18 -.4
IS. 2
18.7
17.0
15-f*
15.5
PRIMARY
8.1
7,1
10n*V
8,2
7-7
7.4
v-3
7*9
7.0
7.6
INTER*
1.6
4.1
'4,7
1 , 8
2.0
1,6
•5 "3
•- <• «••
I..'/
*l -*
-i, ^ _/
1.9
FINAL ^ :-'^l-«;r
,4? ?M
..69 96 3
1.35 9j:-2
»?6 96 'v
cj'j <•:-, ?.
r* JtJ j, , .- *
090 95<:i
1,14 ;!3-9
,96 s':--^
,n6 ?^ ^
loOo ?;!.6
yoar
18.5
We",
-------
1477
POPULATION EQUIVALENTS
FLOW M.G.D,
AVERAGE
WEEK DAY3
B..O.D. RAW POP.
AVG- /
APRIL fl62
MAY
JUKE
JULY
AUG.,
SEPT .
OCT..
MOV.
•>F,fl .
,,„ '63
i'Ea,
BAP ,
12
12
11
12
12
13
13
3,2
12
13
13
U
.36
.70
.96
,<•#
,80
-13
-.15
»90
.70
,?>*
,83
,70
1016
112?
1317
1313
137*
1226
129V
1V/C
1-51?
15/3
.V*32
lhU;j
582.
663,
72?,
75V,
813,
7^r
879..
393,
9^7.
1S,W,
91i3,
Op'1:.
,1' • ''' ,-•
000
000
coo
coo
000
OCA'!
coo
0 1*0
000
000
000
oca
-, rv-'
« »> '- i'
-------
SOUTH ST. PAUL SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
COST ANALYSIS FOR YEAR 1962-63
1478
APRIL 1962
MAY
Ji'*u:
JULY
AU&,
SS?T,
OCT.
NOV.
DSO .
JAN. 1963
FED,
MAR,
MONTHLY COST
OP OPERATION
$ 11,946.54
10,988,5°
2,^370*40
; 10,073.10
10,009.03
8,965.88
10, 745 ..13
11,026.9?
7,641,01
10, -640 .72
10,010.29
9,951*20
M.a. op
PLOW
319
336
3r-£
330
350
328
362
332
328
365
340
394
COST PER
M.S.,
$ 37.80
32. 50
:.U!,2J
30.i!0
£3.60
27.30
29770
33-20
23*30
29*20
29.50
25.20
COST OF
SJSCTRICTY
PER H.CK
5- .11
5,73
0 122,568»86
, 094
29.90
@ 5.02
-------
1479
COST B&TA
LOCATION
PLKNT
Yt&H
MIDDUC8XX 00,
JACKSON,HIGH, i960
TOLEDO,OHIO I960
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA I960
GRAND RAPIDS,MICH. 19oO
WINNIPEG, CAKAPA
BOXS.rf, IDAHO
Ay£RAO£ OF
ABOVE 10
45.6
59*2
17« 3
30.1
10,3
53.5
:,ns<
91.0
COST PSB COST PER COST PER
M.&. * TOU B.O.D. TON SUSP.
RKH. 30LID8 R£H,
$7.29
JK»,OO
a3.62
26.76
60.62
33^74
22.68
19-33
23,00
j 225.50**
320.00**
113.70
31.60
134.00
si. 90
53.80
63 OO
35.15
$ 76.60
117.30
67.80
13-15
62.30
48.60
49.20
46.90
29, SO
\-~ .*>.'
$ 24.37
73-78
57.'1-6
SOUTH ST PAUL,MINN. 1962-63 11.21 | 29*90 $ 10.90 $ 12.20
"BPERATION
** Not In
***8outh St. paul averagea are for all days*
»#*»» ffj10 C0fi£ ^at;& for the 10 cltlea abfeve was
of Water pollution Control Federation and annue? r r
from the Journal
-------
Filters
1480
FLOW DIAGRAM
To Sludg*—-.
Lagoon
Intermediate
Clanfiers
Floculation
Woste wosh
water
and
Sewage Storage
0»
01
a
M
o
m
e
\ 1
) ,
*
i
/tfeT\
/Weiri
_L _
Pump
House
and
Control
Bldg.
I
1
t
i
1
\|
-------
148J
-------
1482
J. P. Btdallch
HISTORY OP THE SOUTH ST. PAUL ANAEROBIC
WASTE STABILIZATION POND TO NOVEMBER 1,
1963
GLASS CYLINDER TESTS
Froa September 19, 1958, to October 6, 1958,
teats were conducted by filling 1000 Nl. glass graduates
with plant effluent. Tests Indicated that with a 5-day
detention period up to 63 percent of the BOD could be removed
WOODEN BARREL TESTS
These tests were conducted from October 6, 1958,
to January 16, 1959. The first tests were Inconclusive
as the barrel was covered with a copper screen which cane in
contact with the liquid,. Copper sulphate formed which
apparently controlled the algae* bacterial and protozoan
growth. The copper screen was removed and the testa con-
tinued.
Results of this phase of the investigation
indicate that a 3-day detention period would remove 53
percent of the BOD, while 8 to 10 days would reoove up to
-------
1483
J. P. Badallch
75 percent of the BOD In a noreal plant effluent.
In addition to the BOD removal, two toxicity
teats were taken. The first was conducted by placing minnows
in a 50 percent solution of the barrel effluent. The Minnows
showed some ill effects but recovered when they were placed
in clean water. The second teat consisted of placing
minnows in a 25 percent solution of the barrel effluent and
showed no ill effects after 24 hours. All solutions were
constantly aerated. Results of these tests indicated that
the effluent, in reasonable quantities, would not have a
toxic effect on fish life.
WASTE STABILIZATION POND
With the encouraging results obtained by the
above-mentioned tests, it was deemed advisable to conduct
further studies on a larger scale. The top compartment of
the waste wash water storage reservoir was used for the
study which took place from July 23* 1959* to August 28,
1959, and from October 18, 1959* to November 5> 1959.
This pilot pond had a capacity of 450,000
gallons, 12,000 square feet of surface area, and was operated
at a depth of approximately 5 feet. A pump, calibrated at
158 gpm, was used to pump the plant effluent into the pond.
-------
J. P. Badalich
In an attempt to duplicate heavy loading periods, the
effluent was pumped Into the pond* (at a constant rate)
from 11 a.BE. to 9 p.m. during "kill" dayi (Monday through
Friday). No plant effluent was pumped into the pond from
9 P.»* to 11 a.m. on "kill" days nor was any pumping done
on Saturdays* Sundays or holidays.
The pond was "seeded" with 4 gallons of liquid
from Green Lake to start algae growth. Samples were taken
of the pond influent and pond effluent every 2 hours,
composites made and analyzed. Three series of tests were
conducted. The first was made by pumping the final plant
effluent into the pond; the second was made using the
intermediate tank effluent (by-passing the filters and final
clariflers); and the third duplicated the second, but was
conducted in cold weather and without a "seeding" period.
Results of these tests Indicate:
(1) Approximately 50 percent of the
plant effluent BOD could be removed in
5 days' detention.
(2) Approximately 58 percent of the inter-
mediate tank effluent BOD could be
removed in 5 days.
(3) Approximately 48 percent of the Inter-
mediate BOD could be removed in cold
-------
1485
J. p. Badalieh
weather in 5 days without seeding
or conditioning the pond.
It can readily be seen that the reaulta obtained
by these studies indicate a BOD reitovai of approximately 50
percent in the present aewage treatment plant effluent could
be expected with the installation of a stabilization pond
following the present existing treatment process. In the
latter part of 1961, this report and study was presented
to the South St. Paul Sewage Disposal Cowaisslon and the
City Council and received very favorably.
Therefore, on November 6, 1961, the City of
South St. Paul engaged the oenaulfcing engineering f Ira of
Constock * Davis to prepare a preliminary plan and report
on a proposed sewage stabilization pond.
On January 22, 1962, the consulting engineers
completed their report and said report was accepted by the
South St. Paul City Council and referred to the Minnesota
State Board of Health for their approval and recomaendation.
On February 2, 1962, this preliminary report
/
and plan was raoonaended for construction by Mr. Lyle H.
Saith, Chief, Section of Water Pollution Control for the
State Board of Health.
Therefore, on February 5, 1962, at their regular
council Meeting, the City Council of South St. Paul again
-------
i486
J. P. Badalich
engaged the firm of Cornstook & Davia to prepare final plans
and specifications for this stabilization pond project.
On April 16, 1962, the consulting engineers
completed their final plans and specifications and these
plans and specifications were accepted by the City Council
and the project advertised for bids.
On May 7, 1962, bids were received and the Job
of constructing this sewage stabilization pond was awarded
to the Park Construction Company of Minneapolis for a lump
sun of $129,500.
The completion of this project was scheduled for
August 1, 1962, but due to high river waters during the
late spring and summer of that year and the seemingly never-
ending rains, the project was not completed until December
1962.
The pond, as built, is generally L-shaped
with a perimeter of little over one mile, and with an area
of 26.4 to 27.7 acres, depending on operating depth. The
pond is divided by a 10-foot baffle wall so that the flow
in the pond Is directed away from the main part of the
plant for approximately half a Mil*, and then returned to
the outlet structure near the main part of the plant. This
outlet structure contains a Parshall flume for measuring
the pond effluent, and adjustable weirs for regulating the
-------
1U87
j. p. Bidaiish
pond level from 5 feet to 8~£ feet. At 8-$ feet the pond
will hold approximately 72,604,000 gallons of sewage,
(See as built planview).
BREAK-IN FKASE
At 2t05 p.m., February 7, 1963* which happened
to be Thursday* the first plant effluent was pumped into the
pond. At first only daytime pumping was carried out and
not on Saturday or Sunday. The result was that the pond
filled very slowly and the first time the water built up
high enough to produce an effluent was on February 19th at
3«30 p.m.
At this time the effluent water temperature was
36°F with an influent temperature of 73°F.
On February 20th the coldest weather of the
winter occurred. The wind chill was reported from -45°p to
-60°?, with an actual temperature of -19°F. This resulted
in forming an ice cover on one-haIf to two-thirds of the
total pond area. By the week-end, February 23-24, the ice
was thick enough on the effluent end of the pond to support
a man.
However, the icing oover did not cause too much
-------
1488
J., P. Badalich
trouble, and It is felt that had the pond bottom been free
of ice and frozen dirt, and had a continuous pumping
schedule been maintained, considerably less ice would have
formed at the effluent end of the pond. Even under these
adverse conditions the BOD removal by the pond was about
38,5 percent based on Influent to effluent with no considera-
tion of flow. (See table.) Daring the latter part of
February the pond was operated with a weir gate and the
aeration caused by dropping over the gate resulted in
considerable foam collecting in the river which froze in
mounds 2 to 3 feet high.
By March 2nd all the ice on the pond was gone and
another problem appeared. A considerable leak in the dike
on the river side of the pond near the outfall structure
was discovered. About this time the first chloroplastic
protozoans and algae were noted, but the operation of the
pond had to be discontinued to repair the dike. After
considerable study it was decided the leak might best be
stopped by laying a clay blanket on the inside of the dike.
By March 29th an 8-inch thick compacted clay blanket was
in place, protected by a compacted clay key 1 to l-£ feet
thick at the toe of the slope. This blanket extended along
the east dike from the outfall structure for a distance of
some 500 feet. The next day the pond • is again put iu
-------
1489
J. P. Baaallch ;
eervioe. The blanket Mas vary affactiva and no further leaks,
occurred In thla area. It algfct tea atated hera that bafora i
i
the clay blanket waa decided on aa the baat method of J
sealing, several ao-callod experta on aoll eealing ware
consulted. Moat of theaa expejrta turned out to be aalaa
engineers. They caae up with all kinds of f&.^> ideas, all
of which would have coat aevarml tiawa what the «lay blanket
coat, and none of then would guarantee their work uncon-
ditionally. By April 4th additional leaka on the southwest
corner of the pond and along Haltby Street aawer fill were
discovered, and we alao found tteat there waa considerable
infiltration into the HaItby atom aewer. Our City Engineer,
John Badalioh, waa concerned le»t this infiltration into
the sewer night damage it by washing the sand and gravel
fill under the aewer into iteeIf and oat to the river with
a subsequent settling throwing tfee sewer out of line..
Based on our previous good results, a similar clay blanket
and key waa plaeed the entire 1,300 feet along the Ma It by
aewer and up some 500 feet along the weat aide of the poa4.
This ao effectively sealed the bank of the sewer that the,
aewer aetually dried up with not even a trickle of water
at its Mouth during dry weather.
OPERATIOU
-------
1490
J. P. Badallch
On May 20, 1963, the pond was again being filled,
but It warn not until the latter part of July that relatively
uniform operation w*» achieved.
Prom Table No, 2 on* notes that the average raw
sewage flow at the South St. Paul Sewage Treatment Plant on
killing daya at the Packing Plants for the months of July,
August, September and October, 1963, was 13,810,000 gallons
a day. For all practical purposes the influent to the
pond was the same as the raw sewage flow. It is true that
a small amount of flow is lost In the primary plant due to
the sludge pumping and evaporation, but this is insignificant
Thereforet the pond Influent is considered the same as the
raw sewage flow, or 13,810,000 gallons per day.
The third column of that table indicates the
pond effluent flow to be 8,720,000 gallons. This represents
a loss of volume of 5*090,000 gallons, or approximately 37
percent of the original volume. Of the water that leaches
into the ground some of it eventually reaches, the Mississippi
River. However, we feel it would be safe to assume that
nearly 100 percent of the suspended solids and practically
all of the BOD have been filtered out in traveling in the
soil 50 to several hundred feet. Therefore, if one converts
the BOD to pounds per day one arrives at 57,122 pounds for
the influent and 18,025 pounds per day for the effluent.
-------
1491
J. P. Badalich
This represents an overall removal by the pond, as far as
the Mississippi River IB concerned, of 66.5 percent of the
BOD; whereas, if one compared the BOD in mg/1 in the In-
fluent and effluent to one another one would get a little
less than 50 percent or 49.2 percent, to be exact. This
COBpares very favorably with our original estimate of a
possible 50 percent removal. In the original studies there
was no leaching, and evaporation was not considered.
For the three months reported, without the use of
the pond, the overall plant removal would have been 62.8
i
percent, but with the additional removal by the pond it :
i
actually reached 86*2 percent. i
!
It may be of Interest to note that the loading •
|
of BOD entering the pond was in excess of 2,000 pounds per i
acre per day with an average of approximately 8.2 pounds of j
i
BOD per 1,000 cubic feet. ,
The State Board of Health, Division of Environ- '
mental Sanitation, did some studies on the pond. Their
studies indicated approximately 53 percent BOD removal based j
on influent to effluent, not considering flow, which was
somewhat better than the results I obtained for the same days;.
Turning to Table No, 3 one sees that the removal !
i
of suspended solids, as might be expected, was even better i
than for BOD. It might be pointed out "r ere that t-ve BOD
-------
1492
J. F. Badalich
solids ^«£plits of the i>**fti were not filtered,
at is toy tw® p®jpfe0ns- testing pond effluents. The
: •• • TOlids F®sB0v»d toy the pond was 74.6 percent,
an overall removal by the plant of 94.9 percent, as
• .,- 82,2 percent for tto* original plant. The pH
effluent appears to be in the neighborhood of
tht pond is operating nonwlly.
$n studying the effectiveness of letting the pond
aown on week-tndfi without adding any noraal plant
j, ma operated in Qotober* with the olosing of the
gates on week-ends but with no addition of norsutl plant
, as operated in September, one finds the following
For four typical Sundays in September -- when the
closed and there were no additions — the average
of BOB leaving the plant on Sundays was 7*500 pounds.
In October — with the pond effluent gatea open and no
additions <-*> the average pounds of BCD of the combined
efflut^ti (normal plaint and pond) were 11,200 pounds BOD.
; this la not the whole picture, for in September
killing day flow for the pond was a little over
2*000,000 gallons »or« per day than similar days in October.
Tlila produced a load to the river of 4,9<&30D store per
killing d«y« and since there are five killing daya per week
it aiiounti to approxiiiately 21,200 pounds no re BOD. That
-------
1493
J. P. Badalich
is the difference between 24,900 and 3,700 (difference
between plant effluent BOD on Sunday for September and
October) which equals 21,200 pounds BOD added due to the
higher flows on the average killing days. It is true the
flow from the pond on Saturday should be subtracted from
this — 21,200 pounds BOD minus 7,800 pounds BOD equals
13,400 pounds BOD, which was the overall savings. This
amounts to approximately 15 percent reduction in the load to
the river.
The pond method of tertiary treatment, at least
for industrial sewage treatment plants, has two other very
distinct advantages over second stage filtration besides
doing a better job than could be expected from second stage
filtration. In the first place, it acts as a dally and a
weekly equaliser of the plant effluent flow as well as of
the plant effluent loading in BOD and suspended solids on
the receiving body of water.
As can be seen from Oraph No. 1, the loading of
settleable solids coming into the plant for an average 24-
hour period fluctuates over an almost unbelievable range.
The graph was made from the averages of the 24-hour data
from two typical Wednesdays in each of the months of July,
August, September and October of 1963. As might be expectedj
the low flow for the 24 hours is less than 50 per -ent of t)
-------
J, F. Badalieh
flow* and the io* settlaable aoIJUii alto oocur at the
Qt the low flow. Therefore, If on« Multiplies the
a® iMAiured in thousand* of gallon per hour by the
tatfeleable solids one gats a relative load value par
Thiaahows that tha p*»alc loading ooalng into the
In approxistttely 39 tis*a at great as tha low loading.
one cannot aay that th« loading In BOD leaving
the plant varlaa ov«r tha aasa oonaldarabla rangaa, for any
plant Mill tafca out sacra of a haary loading than a light,
but It ia at onoa apparent that tha loading of BOD laaving
the plant will ba several tlaw»» greater in tha daytlae than
the loading leaving the plant at night. However, this is
not tnae froa the pond. Testa of nighttime BOD and daytime
BOP show then to be nearly the aaae while the flow varies
only slightly. It would be interesting to run BOD's on the
pond influent and effluent every two hours for several days
to what these figures would actually be, but I have not
had time to do this. It would be a good project for eo»e
graduate student.
I/a SOBM snail stream this leveling of the load
eight be & olg factor in being able to keep a DO in the
stream* and as was pointed out earlier, the pond can be used
an a Mthod of equalising tha day-to-day loading on the river
by Diitsifig out a heavier loaded effluent during week-ends
-------
J. P. Badalich
than would oocur with conventional treatment, where the
water la held in the plant for only a few hours.
The aeoond advantage la that a plant equipped
with a pond can hold from the receiving body of water the
entire plant effluent for aeveral hours, or even a few days
in case of an emergency, at another plant on the same water-
course which has to bypass some or all of its flow.
Many persons are interested in odor from an an-
aerobic stabilisation pond. Our experience is that the
odor at the pond'a edge is probably leas than that from
high-rat* heavily loaded trickling filters, but definitely
should not be considered odor-free, as some writers have
suggested.
I as) attaching to this paper a list of references.
It should not be construed that this paper is baaed In any
way on the references except that ay original Idea started
from reading the article by Dr. Parker. They are placed
there for your convenience in looking up material on both
aerobio and anaerobic ponds. I have all of these references
in aqr laboratory and they are available for your study In
the laboratory. The references with an * in front of the
number are alao available in the Library of the State Board
of Health.
-------
1496
J. P. Baa*lioh
CONCLUSIONS otm EXPERIENCE TO DATE
I, An &nft«s*obi@ wgBte stabilisation pond as a
tertiary tr«at@«nt Mtfciod following * first-stag* trickling
filter plant, providing; the land !• available at a reaaonabK
price, Mill cost only e fraction of th* ooat of second-stage
filters* and if th® topography la favorable, «van leas.
2. That such a pond can be expected to remove
better than 00 percent of the BOD and suspended aolida put
In it in loea than five days' detention.
3. The operation of a waate •tabilixatlon
pond will be only a fraotion of the ooat of filters and
could be further reduced if the direction of flow could be
obtained without a wooden baffle wall auoh aa we have.
4. The pond as a tertiary method of treatment
acta aa an equalizer of th@ flow and of the load to the
receiving body of water, This ia very important for
industrial waate trsatRumt plants where the flow and load
fluctuate froffl hour to hour and day to day over a wide range
5* Such a plant oan withhold its entire flow
during emergencies at other plants.
6. Odor froii an anaerobic plant is probably
less than the odor froa heavily loaded trickling filters,
-------
1497
J. P. Badalich
but ahould be considered as a factor In its choice of use.
REFERENCES
*1. PurlfloatIon of Sewage in Lagoons by Dr.
C. D. Park** and others of Melbourne, Australia. Sewage
and Industrial Wattes Journal of the Federation of Sewage
and Industrial Waste Association. Volume 31 No. 2 133-152,
February 1959.
*S. Waste Stabilization Lagoons — design,
construction and operation practices among Missouri Basin
States — a committee report January 21, I960, Department
of Health, Education, and Welfare, U. S. Public Health
Service, Region VI; obtained from:
Water Supply and ^Pollution Control Activities
2000 Federal Offlee,Building
911 Walnut Street
Kansas City 6, Missouri
*3 Sewage Stabilization Ponds in Minnesota.
March 1963* Minnesota Department of Health, Division of
Environmental Sanitation, Section of Water Pollution
Control, University Campus, Minneapolis 14, Minnesota.
Also reprint 5051 by Lyle H. Smith & Harvey
G. Rodgers, May 1958. Also report on Investigations of
Operation of Raw Sewage Stabilization f^nds, Albr
-------
1498
J. P. Badalich
Minnesota, June 16, 1935-June 2, 1956
*4. Proceedings of Synpoaiua on Waste Stabiliza-
tion Lagoon*. Kansas City, Missouri, August 1-5, 1960.
Sam* address aa 2 above.
5. Unique Wilson Haste Plant cuts BOD to Low
Level. The National Provision*?, July 16, I960. Volume
148 No. 3* pages 26, 27, 28 and Ml.
6. Stabilisation Ponda for Treatment of Sewage
(praotioe in Western Canada) by Dr. D. R. Stanley of
Stanley, Qimble, Rublin Ltd., Edmonton, Alberta.
*7, Operation Experience in Anaerobic Treatment
of Packinghouse Wastes by A. J. Staffer, Wilson & Co., Inc.,
Chicago, Illinois.
8. A New Concept in Waste Disposal ~- Wilson
Treatment Plant, Albert Lea, Minnesota. Reprint frora the
Albert Lea Evening Tribune of Tuesday, June 7, I960.
*9. Fast Action in Savannah's Lagoons, by C. C.
Steadaan, Dept. of Public I«prov«nents. The American City,
July I960, pgs. 112 and 113.
•10, Lagoon Systems of Sewage Disposal by Pat
Thomson. Mater ft Sewage Works Reference Number 1959 R-318,
319 and 320.
•11. Sewage Lagoons by Theodore Jaffe. Water
and Sewage Works Reference Number 1958 R-277--R-280.
-------
J. P. Badalioh
i
*12. Aerated Lagoon For Suburban Sewage Disposal
i
by Ross B. McKlnney & Howard Edde. University of Kansas, '
!
Lawrence, Kansas. \
i
*13. Pond Treatment of Meat Packing Plant !
i
Wastes by F. W. Sollo, presented at the 15th Annual Purdue
Industrial Waste Conference, May I960, (Probably obtainable
through Swift & Co., Chicago, Illinois.)
*l*l. Can You Use a Sewage Lagoon? By L. E.
Webber. The American City, November 1959* pages 175-181.
*15. Municipal Sewage Lagoons by Donald E. French
i
Water & Sewage Works. Reference Data 1956, R-261-265. ;
i
*16, Sewage Lagoon With A Difference by W. A.
Bersohauer. March 1961, The American City, pages 89-90.
-------
A/0. /
-------
TAJU 1
DATA on fond Purina
OMratlai
DAT!
2/19/63
2/20/63
2/22/63
2/24/63
Sunday
2/26/63
2/27/63
2/28/63
3/5/63
3/6/63
Avaraga
DAT!
2/16/63
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3/1/63
2
3
Raw S.
1390
14*0
130
1625
1240
1510
1575
1470
HIGH
25
34
34
31
13
-1
14
19
23
10
20
24
21
34
40
37
Normal Plant aff.
?o*4 iafluwt
635
995
SO
620
600
725 Mir 1.
595
Noraa! Plant R
660
WEATHI1 DURIH
LOU
14 -
10
20
13
-13
-19
-9
-8
-7
-9
-11
-9
-1
13
24
27
Pond aff.
Taajp .
33°P
3S.5°P
40*
3§»F
37.5«F
39.5°?
42°f
44°F
aa»v«l
55.0t
G TOME Tit
MIAN
20
22
27
22
0
-10
3
6
8
1
5
10
7
K
34
33
Paac* aff.
499
45*
450
385
310
420
450
406
li
WIND
VELOCITY
HIGHEST
11
10
14
31
35
28
17
12
17
15
11
13
13
X Baawval
of Pon<^
23?0
23.5
38,0
37.0
41.8
24.3
38.5
DIKICTIOH
S
sw
NNE
WWW
NV
NNV
WNW
NW
MM
mu
s
NNE
SV
total I
Rtcpval
64.6
W.6
76.2
69.2
72.1
71.6
72.31
CLOUD
COVER
90
100
97
85
35
5
7
13
33
1
10
62
ft
-------
Q> « O
6 ft, PQ
C (U
•-; £
Q 5
§ 8
-tad
SI"
ca a
. O
OS O I
y-( .
H O PQ
O X
. §
c o
•*•! O
*O O -
O •-» U T3
. -O M
O « *U ^
§^•3
Cb ffl w I
o.
o
.2 g-
e -a
M-l A
<4-l 5
u •-<
SS;
§ s
Sirt
-------
I
4J
• w > o
b a g M i
«i 4 I
i ft. m M
&;
. ?
vO f.
in r)
D.-J -0 <-4
3-^2^
0 B M
co co rvi z
4J
8
•O 3
M t-l >W B
•O 0 C Q
O CO l-l
O • 6 Q)
ft. « -rf PL,
1
ft.
•o
iO CT» *4P
§ § 8 8 §
0 *>O O 00 iO
*^ ^ (M .^4 •rf
\A Np 9< CM «*4
(A ^ f** sC ^
M< ^4 r-4 v^ <^
tsj o m —* M
O GO ^* *** ^
» QO o r» •
* r^ -*
M k, JE
« rv
* s
s •
-i M
33
u
a.
u
5 i
-------
1504
J. P. Badalich
Mr. Chairman, I have submitted to the reporter
an attached exhibit which we would like to have incorporated
In the record.
MR. STEIN) Very wall. That will be done.
MR. BADALICH: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
MR. STEIN: Thank you.
Are there any comment* or questions?
(No response.)
MR. STEINs You muat have a very sympathetic
State agency. They gave you three years to teat that pilot
plant, for studies and plant operations on your pond. I
guess you muat have a very good relationship.
DR. HARORAVES: We think research pays off.
MR. BADALICHt Thank you.
MR. STEIN: Mr. Smith?
MR. SMITH: The next community on the river going
downstream ia Newport, I do have a written statement I
would like to read which will be put in the record.
This la dated February 6, 1964.
"This letter is written by us at the request
and direction of Mr. Basil Loveland, Mayor of the
Village of Newport.
"This letter is intended to constitute a
statement by the Village Council of the Village
-------
1505
Hof Newport pertaining to sewage treatment
facilities, through us as Vlllstd& Engineers.
"The Village of Newport currently has under
construction a separate sanitary sewage collection
system and sewage treatment plant.
"The sewage treatment plant la intended to
treat all of the sanitary sewage tributary thereto
plus a very nominal amount of Industrial wastes.
There are no major waste producing industries
within the Village of Newport, currently in operation.
"The sewage treatment plant under construction
is of the contact stabilization type with aerobic
digestion, a modification of the activated sludge
process. It is anticipated that the plant will
provide a minimum of 9Q£ removal of five day B.O.D.
It is anticipated that the plant will be in operation
prior to the completion of the sanitary sewage
collection system. This Is a requirement of the
Minnesota Department of Health. It is not anticipated
that there will be a discharge of raw sewage directly
to the river at any time. The plant includes pro-
visions for chlorination."
MR. STEIN{ Thank you.
MR. SMITH: The next community is St. Paul Park.
Is there a representative here from St. Paul Park
•0 878-•
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agencv
Region V. Library X
230 South Dearborn Street --""
Chicago, Illinois 60604
------- |