-------
Since residual chlorine concentrations in the receiving stream can have a toxic effect on
aquatic life, dechlorination was also required for all surface water discharge strategies with a
low dilution factor.
Lime softening was required only in the case of effluent reuse at the power plant. The soften-
ing eliminates excessive scaling of heat transfer surfaces and resultant loss in cooling
efficiency.
Effluent equalization was required for all of the cases involving small stream discharges and
was required in order to reduce fluctuations in the trace contaminant levels remaining in the
effluent. Equalization was included in the power plant alternative in order to insure a more
uniform flow of water to the power plant. The storage of flows during inclement weather
results in equalization of wastewater contaminants in those alternatives involving agricultural
reuse of the effluent, groundwater recharge, and application of the effluent to wetlands.
Reaeration to provide an effluent dissolved oxygen value of 5 mg/1 or greater was assumed
to be required for all stream discharges except the Wisconsin River case.
7.04 Cost Estimation and Cost Comparison
In each case, once the required degree of treatment was determined, the processes to be utilized
and preliminary costs for achieving the required degree of treatment were furnished by Con-
sultant II (CH2M HILL). These treatment costs were then added to the pumping and trans-
mission costs developed by Consultant I (O'Brien & Gere Engineers) to arrive at an overall cost
estimate for each respective discharge strategy.
All of the wastewater treatment and discharge alternatives under consideration would require
at least primary and secondary treatment with disinfection. It was assumed that this treatment
would be provided at the Nine Springs location by the work completed under the Fifth
Addition, as well as any other improvements to the secondary facility that may be found
necessary. Costs for primary treatment, secondary treatment, and disinfection, up to the
average design flow of 50 MOD in the year 2000, were therefore taken as "sunk costs".
Cost estimates included there include only the costs of construction and operation of any
necessary advanced treatment facilities, as well as any facilities required to convey the treated
wastewater to the location of ultimate disposal.
Table 7-5 lists estimated capital and operation-maintenance costs for the advanced treatment
processes considered in the preliminary review of alternatives. Capital costs include a 15 percent
allowance for legal, administrative and engineering fees, and a 25 percent contingency
allowance. Operational and maintenance costs include a 25 percent contingency allowance.
Figures 7-1 and 7-2 present estimated construction costs for pumping stations and transmission
mains, respectively. Costs for pumping stations include buildings, structures, site finishing,
equipment and appurtenances. Costs for transmission mains include price of site-delivered pipe,
necessary valves and fittings, and normal installation (four to six feet of cover). Normal
allowances are included for rights-of-way and special crossings of roadways, railways and
watercourses. A 40 percent engineering, legal, administrative, and contingency allowance was
added to the pumping station and transmission main costs in the cost estimation for each
alternative.
Force mains were sized to handle a peak flow of 90 MGD, and friction losses were calculated
by the Hazen-Williams Equation using a "C" factor of 100. Pumping costs were estimated
based on discharging the average flow rate against the total system head. Power costs were
estimated at 3C/kwh.
7—7
-------
Table 7-5
Costs for 50 MGD Advanced Treatment Facilities
EPA STP Index = 260
System
Capital Costs
(includes 40%
allowance for
legal, admin.,
engr. contingency)
Nitrification
Filtration
Nitrification plus3
Dentrification
Selective Ion Exchange13
(ammonia removal)
Tertiary Chemical Treatment0
(phosphorus removal)
Two-Stage Lime-Soda Softening
Breakpoint Chlorination
(of2mg/!NH3-N)
Dechlorination
Holding Pond (25 MGD)
a) Assumes sludge treatment costs are small
b) Includes costs for brine regeneration and reuse
c) Includes costs for sludge handling and disposal
(Courtesy of CH2M HILL)
Annual O & M
(includes 25%
contingency
allowance)
Million
$ 9.8
4.9
16.0
11.5
8.5
19.5
1.02
0.37
1.72
Million/Yr.
$0.89
0.84
2.46
1.75
0.82
2.22
0.32
0.08
0.06
7-8
-------
Alternatives were developed in the preliminary review on a present worth basis. Present worth
was defined as the January 1, 1976 value of the construction costs plus the annual operating
and maintenance costs multiplied by a "present worth factor" of 10.594, reflecting 20 years of
operation and an interest rate of seven percent. For purposes of preliminary review, staged
construction or salvage value of facilities were not considered.
Table 7-6 is a comparison of the present worth values of the alternatives developed during pre-
liminary screening, along with a rating of each alternative in terms of cost considerations.
Ratings indicated are as follows:
Lower one-third of cost range
Middle one-third of cost range
Upper one-third of cost range
+ (desirable)
0 (neutral)
- (undesirable)
Table 7-6
Alterative
Category A
Rating of Alternative Costs
Total Capital Total Annual
Cost Cost
(Million) (Million)
1. Wisconsin River
2. a) Black Earth Creek @ Cross Plains
b) Black Earth Creek @ Middleton
3. Sewage Canal to Wisconsin River
4. Groundwaier Recharge near Mazomanie
Category B
5. a) Badger Mill Creek @ Verona
b) Sugar River @ Belleville
6. Rock River below Yahara
7. Proposed Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant
8. a) Koshkonong Creek — Cottage Grove
b) Koshkonong Creek — Rockdale
9. Agricultural Reuse — Rock County
Category C
10. Badfish Creek — Present site
11. a) Yahara River — above Stoughton
b) Yahara River — below Stoughton
Category D
12. a) LakeMendota
b) Lake Monona
c) LakeWaubesa
d) Lake Kegonsa
13. Agricultural Reuse — Dane County
14. Wetlands Discharge — Dane County
Category E
15. Split Discharge — Badfish Creek and Lake Waubesa
16. Split Discharge — Badfish Creek and Yahara River
$ 62.0 $ 7.50
55.1 4.81
45.2 6.85
Infeasible — no costs developed
Infeasible — no costs developed
151.2
23.1
42.6
42.6
53.3
13.90
4.81
6.77
6.77
10.00
Present
Worth
(Million)
$ 75.7
83.9
72.7
38.1
55.0
60.5
90.8
36.2
53.6
6.35
8.00
8.50
3.02
6.15
8.00
67.2
84.7
90.2
32.0
65.3
84.6
147.0
51.0
71.7
71.7
105.7
37.3
35.0
55.0
151.2
56.0
8.16
7.82
10.30
13.90
6.20
86.8
82.8
108.8
147.0
65.0
Cost
Rating
0
0
0
N/A
N/A
-t-
0
30.7
29.6
6.81
5.46
71.9
57.9
7—11
-------
7.05 Evaluation of Environmental Impact
For purposes of preliminary review, the environmental impacts of the 23 discharge alternatives
were compared according to three categories:
D Effects of the water quality and the biota present in the receiving environment;
D Effects on land resources;
D Effects on water balance in the Yahara River Basin
Effects on water quality and biota were compared in terms of the ability of an alternative to
support long range water quality and quantity goals. An important factor under this category
is the desire for long range improvement of the quality of surface waters to support beneficial
uses. This includes lake rehabilitation as well as the cancellation of existing stream quality
variances. Any improved water quality would have an accompanying improvement in the
condition of the biological community found in the receiving waters.
Effects on land use were obtained by comparing the compatibility of a proposed discharge
alternative with existing and planned land use patterns as well as the ability of the alternative to
maintain the land resource for beneficial uses.
Effects on the water balance situation reflect what was found to be the undesirable effect
of wastewater diversion from the Yahara and Rock River basins. The results of an analysis of
the hydrologic effects of diversion are presented in Appendix C. Substantial annual and dry
weather base flow reductions were predicted for strategies that would divert wastewater from the
Yahara River or Rock River basins.
Detailed discussions regarding the anticipated environmental impacts of each alternative strategy
are contained in Appendix F of the Facilities Plan.
Wastewater discharge alternatives were rated in terms of environmental impact by use of a
matrix technique. Alternatives were rated as desirable, neutral, or undesirable with respect to
the three environmental impact categories previously described above.
The average rating of the three values was judged to be the net rating of the alternative. For
instance, if any two of the three assigned ratings are either (-), (0) or (+), the net rating would
be the same value as the most common rating. Various combinations of ratings and their net
effect are shown in an example in Table 7-7 below.
Table 7-7
Example Environmental Impact Matrix
Alternative Impact #1 Impact #2 Impact f 3 Net Impact
Desirable + + o +
+ + - +
Neutral 0 0 + o
0000
00-0
+ 0-0
Undesirable - - + _
0
7—12
-------
FIGURE 7-1
200
g
<
O
Q
LU
-I
i
CO
100
80
60
40
30
20
10
8
0.2
I
7
0.4
0.6 0.8 1.0
2.0
3.0 4.0
6.0 8.0
CONSTRUCTION COST, MILLIONS OF DOLLARS
ENR INDEX = 2400
MMSD FACILITIES PLAN
CONSTRUCTION COSTS FOR
PUMPING STATIONS.
ENGINEERS INC
-------
FIGURE 7-2
fe 240
O
U_
220
or
2 20°
z
-1 180
a: o
SI 2 I6°
T
CVJ
eg it | 40
^ UJ i 20
0 g
a z
100
OT ^
O "z-
O UJ
60
o
K 40
O
| 20
Z
8 2
MMSD FAC1LITIE
CONSTRUCTION CO
TRANSMISSION MA
S/
^
x
1
y/
/
/
/
/
:
1
i
4 36 48 60 72
PIPE DIAMETER, in
.S PLAN
STS FOR
INS
-------
In the evaluation of the environmental impact of the alternative involving continued discharge
to the present site on Badfish Creek, the projected conditions were compared with those condi-
tions which would be felt to exist were the effluent to cease being discharged to that water body.
This approach to the evaluation was deemed necessary by Consultant I in order to insure that a
built-in bias in the comparison procedure did not unfairly influence the continuation of the
existing discharge strategy with a higher degree of treatment.
Table 7-8 is a summary tabulation of the ratings assigned to the various environmental impacts
anticipated for each alternative. The net environmental impact rating for each alternative shown
in the last column is the environmental impact rating for that alternative.
Table 7-8
Summary ol Environmental Impact Evaluations
Alternative
Category A
1. Wisconsin River
2. a) Black Earth Creek @ Cross Plains
b) Black Earth Creek @ Middleton
3. Sewage Canal to Wisconsin River
4. Oroundwater Recharge near Mazomame
Category B
5 a) Badger Mill Creek @ Verona
b) Sugar River @ Belleville
6. Rock River below Yahara
7. Proposed Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant
8 a) Koshkonong Creek — Cottage Grove
b) Koshkonong Creek — Rockdale
9. Agricultural Reuse — Rock County
Category C
10. Badfish Creek — Present site
11 a) Yahara River — above Stoughton
b) Yahara River — below Stoughton
Category D
12. a) LakeVlendota
b) Lake Monona
c) LakeWaubesa
d) LakeKegonsa
13. Agricultural Reuse—Dane County
14. Wetlands Discharge — Dane County
Category E
15. Split Discharge — Badfish Creek and Lake Waubesa
16. Split Discharge — Badfish Creek and Yahara River
Impact on
Water Quality
and Biota
Impact
on Land
Resources
Impact
on Water
Balance
Net
Environmental
Impact
The general guidelines used in assigning the ratings for each category were as follows:
A. With Respect to Impacts on Water Quality and Biota:
D Discharges to small streams with little or no dilution were judged to have a negative
impact on both water quality and the accompanying biota since under adverse low flow
conditions, it is possible that some of the more sensitive aquatic micro-organisms would
be damaged.
7-13
-------
D Discharges to medium sized and large streams where dilution is afforded were judged to
have a neutral impact on the receiving water quality since it would be neither substantially
improved nor degraded.
D Discharges to the land as in the case of agricultural reuse, groundwater recharge, or
discharge to wetlands was deemed to have an undesirable impact due to the high mineral
content of the effluent and the potential for contamination of groundwater resources
by mineral constituents such as chlorides, sodium, etc.
D Discharges to the Madison Lakes were judged to be undesirable since they would result
in an increase in trace elements in the lakes with a resulting increase in algal growth
and/or a shift in the predominance pattern of the micro-organisms toward the growth
of more nuisance algal forms.
B. With Respect to Impacts on Land Resources:
D Discharges, directly to the land, of the highly mineralized effluent were judged to be
undesirable because of potential damage to the soil structure and since large areas of
land would be taken from other uses and dedicated to waste treatment purposes.
D Discharges to the Madison Lakes were deemed to have a negative effect on the properties
surrounding the lakes as a result of projected lower water quality in the lakes, and
resulting increase in nuisance algal conditions.
LJ Discharge to a sewage canal flowing to the Wisconsin River was judged to have a negative
impact since it would result in the utilization of a large strip of land and result in a
hindrance to land utilization.
D Discharges to Koshkonong Creek were judged to have a negative impact since flooding
of sizeable land areas adjacent to the creek occurs at present. Increased base flows in
the creek during flooding occurrences would tend to accentuate the flooding problem
and might result in the inundation of larger land areas in the future.
G Discharges to flowing streams where the flow is somewhat confined within a defined
stream bed were judged to have a neutral impact on the surrounding land.
C. With Respect to the Impact on the Water Balance Situation in the Yahara and Rock River:
D Discharges which result in diversion of the effluent from the entire Rock River basin or
the entire Yahara River basin were judged to have an undesirable impact.
D Discharges which result in a minimum of diversion from the Yahara River basin and
maintain a base flow in the vicinity of the Stoughton Treatment Plant were judged to
have a desirable impact.
D The discharge to Badfish Creek was judged to have a neutral impact on the water balance
situation since it would result in the augmentation of flow in the lower portion of the
Yahara basin but would not result in an augmentation of flow past the City of Stoughton
and therefore would not provide assimilation capacity for the Stoughton discharge.
7-14
-------
7.06 Evaluation of Operational Reliability and Flexibility
Operational reliability and flexibility was taken as a rather broad group of treatment and
discharge system qualities, including:
HI Likelihood of process upsets
G Seasonal treatment variations
Hj Buffering capacity in receiving streams
G System expandability to meet future needs
G Flexibility to meet future water quality standards and goals
For purposes of comparison under this category in the preliminary review, alternatives were
classified as having desirable characteristics, neutral characteristics or undesirable characteristics
in each category. The net rating is the average of the ratings in each category. Table 7-9 is a
summary tabulation of the ratings assigned to each alternative.
Table 7-9
Summary of Operational Reliability and Flexibility
Operational Operational
Alternative Reliability Flexibilil} Net Rating
Category A
1. Wisconsin River + - 0
2. a) Black Earth Creek @ Cross Plains
b) Black Earth Creek @ Middleton -
3. Sewage Canal to Wisconsin River -
4 Groundwater Recharge near Mazomame - - -
Categor}' B
5. a) Badger Mill Creek® Verona 000
b) Sugar River @ Belleville 0
6. Rock River below Yahara + - 0
7. Proposed Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant - -
8. a) Koshkonong Creek —Cottage Grove 000
b) Koshkonong Creek — Rockdale 0 - -
9. Agricultural Reuse — Rock County -
Category C
10 Badfish Creek — Present sue 0 -t- -r
11 a) Yahara River — above Stoughton 000
b) Yahara River — below Stoughton 000
Categor) D
12. a) LakeMendota + 0 +
b) Lake Monona + •*• -r
O LakeWaubesa + +
d) Lake Kegonsa + 0 +
13. Agricultural Reuse — Dane County -
14 Wetlands Discharge —Dane County -
Category K
15. Split Discharge — Badfish Creek and Lake W'aubesa 0 +• -t-
f6. Split Discharge — Badfish Creek and Yahara River 0 -i- -t-
7-15
-------
A. Criteria Utilized in the Assignment of Reliability Ratings were as Follows:
C Discharges to medium sized and large streams were judged to have a desirable reliability
rating since the dilution available tends to afford protection against drastic changes in
receiving water quality due to fluctuations in the level of treatment provided.
G Discharges to the land or to wetlands were judged to have an undesirable reliability rating
in the Madison climate because of the dependency on warm and dry weather periods for
application.
C Discharges to small streams were judged to have a neutral reliability rating. The lack of
sufficient dilution as a buffer against treatment upsets is offset by the inclusion of a
twelve-hour equalization facility in each alternative in this category.
C Discharges to the Madison Lakes were judged to have a desirable reliability rating since
the lakes offer excellent buffering against sudden changes in water quality.
D The discharge to the Proposed Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant was judged to have an
undesirable reliability rating since, at the present time, the plant has not been approved
for construction by the regulatory agencies. By the same token, when and if the plant is
constructed, it is likely that there will be periods of time when the plant would be shut
down and unable to utilize the MMSD effluent for cooling purposes. At such times an
alternate discharge location would be required.
D Discharges to Black Earth Creek were judged to have an undesirable reliability rating.
Even with equalization, it would be difficult at all times to meet the high level of water
quality assigned to this very sensitive aquatic environment.
D The discharge to the sewage canal to the Wisconsin River was judged to have an undesir-
able reliability rating because of the lack of dilution at all times of the year.
B. Criteria Utilized in the Assignment of Flexibility Ratings were as Follows:
C Alternatives which allocate greater than 70% of their capital costs in advanced treatment
facilities at the MMSD site were judged to have a desirable flexibility rating.
_I Alternatives which allocate from 40% to 70% of their capital costs to advanced treat-
ment facilities were judged to have a neutral flexibility rating.
Z Alternatives which allocate less than 40% of their capital costs to advanced treatment
facilities and consequently commit greater than 60% of their capital costs to relatively
inflexible pipeline or channel strategies were judged to have an undesirable flexibility
rating.
7.07 Evaluation of Technical and Legal Constraints
Even the most cost-effective or environmentally sound alternative will not be practicable if it
cannot be implemented due to over-riding technical or legal constraints. Such constraints may
be due to limits of technology or legal problems resulting from inter-basin water transfer, and
other factors affecting public water rights. Alternatives were compared in relative terms as
favorable, neutral, or unfavorable for implementation with respect to each category. The net
rating assigned represents the average of the two separate ratings.
Table 7-10 is a summary tabulation of the evaluation ratings assigned to each category.
?—m
-------
Table 7-10
Summary of Evaluation of Technical and Legal Constraints
Technical Legal
Alternative Constraints Constraints Net Rating
Category A
1. Wisconsin River + - 0
2. a) Black Earth Creek ©Cross Plains -
b) Black Earth Creek @ Middleton -
3. Sewage Canal to Wisconsin River - - -
4. Groundwater Recharge near Mazomanie - - -
Category B
5. a) Badger Mill Creek ©Verona -
b) Sugar River @ Belleville -
6. Rock River below Yahara 000
7. Proposed Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant 000
8. a) Koshkonong Creek — Cottage Grove - - -
b) Koshkonong Creek — Rockdale -
9. Agricultural Reuse — Rock County -
Category C
10. Badfish Creek — Present site -
11. a) Yahara River — above Stoughton - 0 -
b) Yahara River — below Stoughton 0 -
Category D
12. a) Lake Mendota -
b) LakeMonona -
c) LakeWaubesa - - -
d) Lake Kegonsa - - -
13. Agricultural Reuse — Dane County -
14. Wetlands Discharge — Dane County - - -
Category E
15. Split Discharge —Badfish Creek and LakeWaubesa -
16. Split Discharge — Badfish Creek and Yahara River 0
Criteria used in the assignment of ratings were as follows:
A. With Respect to Technical Restraints:
D All discharges to small streams with minimal dilution were judged to be unfavorable
because of the lack of technology to economically facilitate reductions of certain trace
contaminants such as PCB's and pesticides to the extremely low levels (nanograms/liter)
desired in the streams in order to protect the most sensitive organisms.
D Discharges to the land for agricultural reuse, groundwater recharge and wetlands
application were assigned an unfavorable rating because of the technological limitations
which prohibit the application of the highly mineralized effluent to the soil.
D Discharges to the Madison Lakes were assigned an unfavorable rating because of the
lack of proven and economical technology which would produce a sufficiently low level
of phosphorus (0.1 mg/1) to allow the treated effluent to be discharged to the lakes.
D Discharges to the Rock River and the proposed Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant were
assigned a neutral rating because the lack of technology for extremely high levels of trace
contaminants removal will have a far less serious effect on the larger stream which affords
a higher level of dilution.
7—17
-------
D Discharge to the Wisconsin River was rated favorable because the large dilution factor
present does not result in a problem with trace contaminant levels due to the lack of
adequate technology.
B. With Respect to Legal Constraints:
D All discharges which result in the export of water from the entire Rock River basin or
from the Rock River basin above the City of Janesville were judged to have an
undesirable rating from a legal standpoint. This rating reflects the possibility that legal
action could be instituted by downstream water users to prevent the diversion and thus
maintain the natural water flow in the basin for their own beneficial use. The possibility
of additional water losses in the lower reaches of the Rock River by evaporation at the
Proposed Nuclear Power Plant would result in an extremely serious depletion of base
flows in the lower reaches of the River resulting in very serious infringements on the
water rights of other users.
D All discharges which result in the export of water from lower Yahara basin and retain
the flow in the Rock River basin were judged to have a neutral rating from a legal stand-
point. This export of water would result in a reduction in the summer low flows in the
Yahara River, however, this condition is more amenable to an economical solution such
as a controlled program of water level management in the Madison Lakes as explained
in Appendix C. Thus, the need for other water users to resort to legal remedies is much
less likely in this situation.
C The discharges to Koshkonong Creek were judged to have an undesirable rating from a
legal standpoint because of the serious flooding problem that exists and the possibility
that the landowners subject to flooding would seek some form of injunctive relief from
the likelihood of increased flooding.
D All discharges to the Madison Lakes were judged to have an undesirable effect
from a legal standpoint since the existing laws of the State prohibit discharge to the lakes
unless it can be shown that the discharge would not contribute to the creation of
nuisance conditions in the lakes. It is probable that this law would have to be amended
to allow these discharge alternatives to be implemented, and the arguments for amending
the law are felt to be extremely weak since algal bio-assay testing conducted during this
study definitely showed that the discharge of treated effluent to the lakes would
accelerate the growth of nuisance algal species.
D The discharge to Badfish Creek was also assigned a negative rating from a legal
standpoint. This rating indicates the very real possibility that injunctive relief may be
sought by downstream water users, thus possibly delaying implementation of that
alternative.
D Discharges to the land for agricultural reuse in both Dane and Rock Counties were
judged to have negative ratings from a legal standpoint since their technical feasibility
could be challenged in the courts.
C Discharge to the wetlands in Dane County was judged to be undesirable from a legal
standpoint since there would seem to be no solid assurance that the ecology of the wetlands
would not be damaged by their use in this manner. Any legal challenge of this alterna-
tive would be judged to be extremely vulnerable.
7—18
-------
7.08 Summary of Preliminary Screening
Table 7-11 is a summary tabulation showing the ratings assigned in each of the areas evaluated.
The Net Evaluation Rating in the next-to-last column reflects the overall average rating of that
alternative. The final column reflects the recommendation for each alternative as a result of the
Screening. All of those alternatives having a final rating of (0) or ( +) were retained for further
detailed study. Those having a final rating of (-) were deleted from further consideration as
viable discharge alternatives for the purpose of this study.
Alternative
Category A
1. Wisconsin River 0
2. a) Black Earth Creek @ Cross Plains 0
b) Black Earth Creek @ Middleton 0
3. Sewage Canal to Wisconsin River N/A
4. Groundwater Recharge near Mazomanie N/A
Category B
5. a) Badger Mill Creek @ Verona +
b) Sugar River @ Belleville 0
6. Rock River below Yahara
7. Proposed Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant +
8. a) Koshkonong Creek — Cottage Grove -<•
b) Koshkonong Creek — Rockdale 0
9. Agricultural Reuse — Rock County
Category C
10. Badfish Creek — Present site +
11. a) Yahara River — above Stoughton 0
b) Yahara River — below Stoughton 0
Category D
12. a) LakeMendota
b) Lake Monona -
c) LakeWaubesa 0
d) LakeKegonsa
13. Agriculture Reuse —Dane County
14. Wetlands Discharge — Dane County +
Category E
15. Split Discharge — Badfish Creek and 0
Lake Waubesa
16. Split Discharge — Badfish Creek and +•
Yahara River
Table 7-11
Summary Comparison of Alternatives
Technical
Environmental Reliability & Legal
Cost Impact & Flexibility Constraint Net
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating
Recommenda-
ations from
Screening
Further Study
Delete
Delete
Delete
Delete
Delete
Delete
Further Study
Further Study
Delete
Delete
Delete
Further Study
Further Study
Further Study
Delete
Delete
Delete
Delete
Delete
Delete
Delete
Further Study
7-19
-------
Table 7-12 ranks in order of increasing cost (present worth) those alternatives which were
subjected to more intense study prior to recommendation of a single discharge strategy.
Table 7-12
Final Ranking of Alternatives
After Preliminary Screening
Ranking Description
1 Proposed Koshkonong Nuclear
Power Plant
2 Badfish Creek
3 Badfish Creek & Yahara River
4 Yahara River above Stoughton
5 Yahara River below Stoughton
6 Wisconsin River
7 Rock River
Present Worth
32 million dollars
51 million dollars
57.9 million dollars
71.7 million dollars
71.7 million dollars
75.7 million dollars
90.2 million dollars
The Proposed Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant, by itself, was found to be unsuitable as a
complete alternative since the effluent would, of necessity, have to be discharged elsewhere if
the nuclear power plant were not approved. Also, the effluent would have to be discharged
elsewhere during those times that the power plant were shut down for malfunctions, inspections,
etc.
The choice of the back-up discharge site would be made on the basis of detailed mathematical
modeling and would logically be chosen as either Badfish Creek, the Yahara River or the
Rock River since the pipeline to the power plant would cross all three streams.
The Rock River alternative itself did not offer any additional advantages to offset the greatly
increased cost due to the longer pipeline. However, the Rock River was a viable back-up discharge
site for the power plant alternative.
Thus, the power plant alternative was studied further only with the assumption that there
would be a back-up discharge point at either the Rock River, the Yahara River or Badfish Creek.
The Rock River alternative was deleted from further consideration except as a back-up site
for the discharge when the power plant would not be able to utilize the effluent.
It should be noted that the values assigned to the various rating categories for each discharge
strategy were judgment decisions by Consultant I with advice from various individual members
of the Facilities Planning Advisory Committee. Final decisions with regard to the ratings,
however, were made by the Consultant, and it should be recognized that individual members of
the Facilities Planning Advisory Committee may reserve the right to agree or disagree with the
rationale utilized and/or the assigned ratings.
It should be further noted that the judgments expressed regarding potential legal constraints
were judgments made by Consultant I based upon the results of a legal review conducted by the
attorneys for the MMSD. Such judgments should not be interpreted to reflect the specific
judgments of trained legal personnel but were merely an interpretation by the Consultant of a
broad opinion given him by a qualified legal source.
Table 7-13 lists the final discharge strategies which were thus retained for further intensive study.
7—20
-------
Table 7-13
Alternatives Subject to Intensive Study
1. Discharge of nitrified, softened and filtered effluent to the Proposed
Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant with a back-up discharge site at either the
Rock and Yahara Rivers or Badfish Creek.
2. Direct discharge of nitrified, filtered and equalized effluent to Badfish Creek
using the present discharge strategy.
3. A split discharge with the present discharge volume (35 MOD) to be given the
additional treatment described above before discharge to Badfish Creek.
Additional volumes of effluent (15 MOD) would receive the same high degree
of treatment and be pumped to the Yahara River for discharge with re-
aeration provided at the end of the pipeline.
4. Direct discharge of the entire effluent volume after nitrification and filtration
to the Yahara River either north or south of Stoughton utilizing a pipeline
with re-aeration provided at the discharge point.
5. Direct discharge of a nitrified effluent to the Wisconsin River utilizing a
pipeline paralleling Black Earth Creek.
Final selection of a recommended discharge strategy was dependent upon the results of an
intensive study of the following factors:
a. Detailed cost comparisons including more detailed calculations of present worth, which
include salvage value.
b. Detailed mathematical modeling of the receiving waters.
c. Detailed investigations of potential in-stream concentrations of several toxic substances.
d. A more detailed assessment of the overall environmental impact.
e. A more detailed assessment of the potential technical and legal constraints to implementa-
tion of each alternative.
Results of the intensive study of the remaining alternatives are contained in Chapter 8.
7—21
-------
SECTION 8 - COMPARISON OF REMAINING ALTERNATIVES
8.01 General
This Chapter summarizes the detailed investigations carried out in an effort to compare the five
alternatives remaining after preliminary screening and to select the one best alternative which
would result in the most cost effective and environmentally sound treatment and discharge
strategy.
Each of the five alternatives listed below was subjected to much more detailed study.
A. Discharge to the proposed Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant
B. Discharge to Badfish Creek
C. Split discharge between Badfish Creek and Yahara River
D. Discharge to Yahara River above or below Stoughton
E. Discharge to the Wisconsin River near Mazomanie
The study began with a comprehensive literature search of data relating to the characteriza-
tion of secondary sewage effluent. The search centered on data concerning the known physical,
chemical and biological characteristics of secondary effluent.
Upon completion of the literature search, an extensive effluent characterization program was
initiated whereby all of the significant parameters in the sewage plant effluent were identified
and quantified.
The detailed studies then encompassed a review of the water quality goals adopted in the Plan
of Study and comparisons of projected effluent qualities with the water_quality required in
ejicjiieisiviflg-Strearn for each of the potential beneficial uses of that stream.
Upon completion of these tasks, the levels of treatment provided for each alternative were re-
viewed to assess the validity of the initial assumptions made during the preliminary screening
process.
Once the required levels of treatment were reconfirmed, a detailed "basis of design" was
finalized by CH2M HILL for each of the treatment alternatives. Utilizing the "basis of design"
criteria, preliminary process schematics were made which served as the basis for cost estimation
of the various alternative treatment strategies.
The alternate treatment strategies were then compared for each level of effluent quality and the
most cost effective treatment system was chosen for each alternative.
More detailed designs were then formulated for the pumping and transmission facilities re-
quired in each of the alternatives. A "basis of design" was established for each discharge
alternative and cost estimates were prepared for each discharge system.
With the completion of this work, the total cost for each treatment and discharge alternative
was estimated. In each case, the most cost effective treatment process developed by CH2M HILL
was coupled with the most cost effective discharge strategy developed by O'Brien & Gere in
order to develop the estimated cost for the overall treatment and discharge system.
With the alternative costs developed, the Study then proceeded with a comparison of the final
alternatives. Each of the alternatives was rated with respect to the categories listed in Table 8-1.
8—1
-------
Table 8-1
Categories Used in Final Alternative Comparison
Cost (present worth basis)
Environmental Impact
Reliability
Flexibility
Implementability
Matrix comparisons were made with respect to each of the listed categories, and a final matrix
was constructed to compare the alternatives with respect to the total of all of the categories. On
the basis of the final matrix, a single treatment and discharge strategy was recommended.
8.02 Review of Effluent Characteristics
A. Literature Search
A detailed literature search was conducted to identify the numerous characteristics associated
with secondary effluent discharges and their effect upon the receiving water. Table 8-2 lists the
various characteristics which were considered in the review.
Discussions of numerous effluent characteristics are included in Appendix G (Volume V) of this
report.
Table 8-2
Effluent Characteristics
Subjected to Literature Research
Physical Features
pH Suspended Solids
Turbidity Odor
Temperature Color
Chemical Characteristics
Solids
Collective Parameters
Heavy Metals
Organic Refractories
Biological Characteristics
Pathogenic Bacteria
Viruses
Disinfectants
8—2
-------
B. Effluent Characterization
Once the literature search was completed, a detailed study was made of the characteristics
of the effluent from the existing Nine Springs treatment plant. Four-hour composite
samples were collected over the entire 24 hour day on three separate occasions. The three
dates were chosen so as to represent three different days of the week and to encompass
three separate months. A total of eighteen composite samples of secondary effluent were
collected as follows:
Six 4-hour composites on Wednesday, July 30
Six 4-hour composites on Monday, August 25
Six 4-hour composites on Friday, September 26
In addition, on July 30, six 4-hour composite samples were collected of the effluent from a
nitrification pilot plant and from a phosphorus removal pilot plant being operated at the
Nine Springs treatment plant. The effluent from the nitrification pilot plant was used to
analyze the effluent simulating an advanced treatment process utilizing powdered carbon to
achieve nitrification in the existing aeration system tankage. The effluent from the
phosphorus removal pilot plant was used to analyze the effluent from an advanced treat-
ment process simulating the addition of alum in the existing aeration tanks for phosphorus
removal.
In order to simulate a lime softening process, portions of the six secondary effluent samples
from September 26 were treated with lime to a pH of 11.0 and allowed to settle. The super-
natant was analyzed and a second portion of the supernatant was filtered and analyzed in
attempts to document reductions achieved by lime softening with and without filtration
polishing.
A total of sixty different parameters were analyzed for each of the following categories:
18 Secondary effluent samples
6 Alum treated secondary effluent samples
6 Nitrified secondary effluent samples
Twenty-two of the parameters were analyzed for the six lime treated samples, and nine of
the most critical parameters were investigated utilizing composite samples of filtered lime
softened effluent.
Over 2300 individual effluent analyses were performed in what could be considered one of
the most extensive effluent characterization programs ever performed as a part of a facilities
planning study.
Table 8-3 shows average concentrations for those parameters analyzed in the secondary
effluent, nitrified secondary effluent and alum treated secondary effluent. More detailed
analytical data on the effluents is contained in Appendix G.
From a comparison of the secondary effluent characteristics with those values found in the
literature search to be present in a normal secondary effluent, the following general state-
ments can be made.
D The effluent would appear to be a typical secondary effluent with respect to the normal
physical characteristics and the traditional sanitary engineering parameters used such as
BOD, COD, oil and grease, phenols, nitrogen and phosphorous.
D Mineral characteristics of the effluent in large reflect the "hard" groundwater supply
utilized as a water source in the Madison Area.
8—3
-------
D The low concentrations of most metallic salts present in the effluent generally reflect the
influence of the several small metal finishing industries in the Madison area.
D Total and fecal coliform counts confirm that the plant is achieving a satisfactory level
of disinfection as determined by the State and EPA requirements.
D Several characteristics of the effluent differ from the characteristics that one would
expect to find in a typical secondary effluent.
D Sodium and chloride are both present in higher concentrations than one would suspect.
There is no doubt that the increased concentrations are due primarily to the prevalent
use of home water softeners in the Madison area. The many tons of salt (NaCl) used
each year for the regeneration of the home softeners are undoubtedly discharged to the
sanitary sewers of the area.
D Also the large use of salt by the area's major industry, Oscar Mayer, Inc., results in a
major increase in the salt content of the sewage. The high values of total dissolved solids
are felt to also reflect the increased salt content of the sewage.
D The data for the nitrified effluent shows an excellent conversion of ammonia along with
further reductions in COD and TOC as would be expected with any nitrification system.
n The addition of carbon to the system is felt to be responsible for the apparent reductions
in color and odor along with reductions in pesticides, PCB's, and phenols.
D The reductions found in several of the metals are felt to be associated with the longer
aeration times and thus longer detention times for the metal ions to be adsorbed on to
the biological floe. It is known, however, that certain metal ions form complexes with
organic matter (i.e. cyanides) and thus may be adsorbed onto the activated carbon.
D The extremely low concentrations of suspended solids in the nitrified effluent may also be
responsible for the lower metal concentrations found, since many of the metals may be
present as fine precipitates.
D The data for the alum treated effluent shows the higher aluminum and sulfate con-
centrations and the slightly lowered pH expected for this process. The phosphorus
residual of less than 1 mg/1 shows that the process performed its intended function.
D Slight reductions in color, odor and turbidity are felt to accompany the lower con-
centrations of suspended solids in the alum treated effluent. Certain reduced metal con-
centrations are felt to also be a function of the lower suspended solids levels. COD,
TOC, TKN and ammonia reductions are felt to be the result of the lower concentration
of volatile suspended solids in the effluent.
Table 8-4 is a comparison of analytical results from the samples of September 26, 1975.
The data compares the present secondary effluent with a lime softened effluent and a filtered
lime softened effluent.
D The data shows that lime softening has little effect on removal of organic materials and
ammonia constituents. However, concentrations of certain metals including silver,
chromium, iron, aluminum, lead, zinc and manganese were reduced substantially. Filtra-
tion of the lime softened effluent achieved further reductions in aluminum, lead and
zinc and achieved some reduction in the mercury content of the effluent.
D Thus, it can be concluded that the addition of lime softening will achieve additional
removals of certain metal concentrations over and above those removals achieved by
Secondary treatment.
8—4
-------
Table 8-3
Comparison of Effluent Qualities
Secondary Effluent Versus Nitrified and Alum Treated
Nitrified Secondary
Effluent
Effluents
Alum Treated
Secondary Effluent
rarameier
Color
Odor
Turbidity
Settleable Solids
Total Solids (dissolved)
Total Suspended Solids
Volatile Suspended Solids
nH
pn
Total Acidity (as CaCO3)
Total Alkalinity (as CaCo3)
Methylene Blue Active
Substances (MBAS)
Phenols
C9CVUUUMIJ
Value
33.33
5.50
20.00
1.21
900
26
19
7.15
51
389
0.20
0.089
Polychlorinated Biphenyles (PCB) 0. 195
Chlorinated Pesticides 0.7
Organo-Phosphate Pesticides 2.8
Organo-Sulfur Pesticides 28.0
Total Oil & Grease 7.06
Total Organic Carbon 39.05
Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Boron
Cadmium
Chromium Total
Copper
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Molybdenum
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Strontium
Tin
Vanadium
Zinc
Ammonia (as N)
Calcium
Magnesium
Potassium
Phosphate (as P)
Bicarbonate (us CaCO3)
Chloride
Fluoride
Nitrate (as N)
Sulfate
Nitnte (as N)
Sulfide
Cyanide (total)
Totai Combined Chlorine
Total Coliform
Fecal Coliform
Fecal Streptococcus
Total Viral Count
Polio
Coxsackie
Echo Virus
Adeno Virus
21.1
75.77
15.02
0.344
0.039
0.037
0.635
<0.001
<0.01
<0.001
0.016
0.015
0.181
0.044
0.121
2.22
<0.001
0.024
0.047
0.003
0.039
<0.001
<0.01
0.096
13.29
8.9
43
13.1
6.3
496
222
1.05
3.29
58
0.10
<0.01
0.157
0.985
24
13
5.8
6.4
10' 7
10' «
1020
HilHUCBIl
Units
PCU
JTU
ml/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
units
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
Mg/1
Mg/l
Mg/1
Mg/l
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
Mg/l
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
col/ 100 ml
col/ 100 ml
col/ 100 ml
PFU/lOOml
Value
15.80
1.20
8.0
0
935
0.5
0.33
7.3
29
275
0.23
0.036
0.008
0.017
1.2
<0.1
3.50
8.33
16.20
0.25
0.73
<0.1
0.013
0.53
<0.001
<0.01
<0.001
0.016
0.008
0.08
<0.001
0.003
1.91
<0.001
<0.001
0.033
<0.01
0.06
<0.001
<0.01
0.021
0.166
0.92
42
15.8
6.1
275
219
1.08
83
<0.01
0.047
0.95
3
2.5
Units
PCU
JTU
ml/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
units
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
Mg/l
Mg/l
Mg/l
Mg/l
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
Mg/l
mg/i
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
col/ 100 ml
col/ 100 ml
col/ 100 ml
Value
20
4.0
10
0.13
901
6
3.8
"7 1
/ . 1
28
285
0.20
0.047
0.111
0.037
2.70
1.66
11.5
11.0
25.0
9.4
1.4
<0.01
0.02
0.33
<0.001
<0.01
<0.001
<0.001
0.005
0.067
<0.001
0.003
2.4
<0.001
<0.001
0.038
0.015
0.053
<0.001
<0.01
0.034
7.4
88
41
0.91
285
224
0.72
150
<0.01
0.07
0.45
12
2.3
6.3
Units
PCU
JTU
ml/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
unite
UHIL^
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
Mg/l
Mg/l
Mg/l
Mg/l
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mfe/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
Mg/l
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
col/ 100 ml
col/100 ml
col/100 ml
TCID 50/100 ml
TCID so/100 ml
TCID so/lOO ml
8-5
-------
Table 8-4
Comparison of Effluent Quality
Secondary Versus Lime Softened and Filtered Softened Effluent
Lime Softened Lime Softened
Parameter
Total Organic Carbon
Ammonia (as N)
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Silver
Calcium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Iron
Mercury
Magnesium
Fluoride
Aluminum
Nickel
Lead
Zinc
Silica
Arsenic
Barium
Manganese
Selenium
MBAS
PCB
Secondary Effluent
Value
29
15.6
16.7
<0.01
83.5
<0.01
0.01
0.008
0.043
1.53
36.70
0.99
0.14
0.051
0.133
0.107
—
0.04
0.5
0.291
0.003
0.066
0.323
Units
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
Mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
Mg/1
Secondary Effluent
Value
11
15.6
16.5
<0.001
90
0.005
0,003
0.032
<0.001
1.71
1.12
0.87
0.05
0.077
0.003
0.031
19.5
0.06
0.022
0.006
0.012
—
—
Units
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
Mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
and Filtered
Value
—
—
—
<0.001
—
—
—
0.017
—
1.18
—
—
0.045
—
<0.001
0.019
—
0.06
—
—
—
0.04
0.321
Units
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
Mg/1
8.03 Review of Water Quality Objectives
A. General
The general goals and objectives adopted by the MMSD and the Facilities Planning Advisory
Committee for an effluent discharge to surface waters, as contained in Section 2.04, are as
follows:
D To provide for the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife in all
possible receiving waters.
D To provide a quality effluent sufficient to protect the health of humans, domestic
animals, and other wildlife utilizing the disposal site. In the event of surface water dis-
posal, the receiving water should be of sufficient quality to provide for recreation in and
on the water including whole body contact by humans.
G To provide for the protection and preservation of the hydrological and morphological
characteristics of the disposal area from any significant or adverse effects from discharge
volumes. Included in this goal is the intent to protect the natural wetlands as well as
the existing land use plans and goals of communities which might be affected by dis-
charge volume.
D To provide a quality effluent which will permit the use of any receiving water for
multiple purposes including aesthetic, agriculture, aquatic and wildlife, industry, waste
assimilation, potable water supply, hydropower, navigation and recreation or any other
reasonable use projected within the planning period as may be applicable.
8—6
-------
If the listed goals and objectives are to be met, then each of the water bodies considered as
a potential discharge site must have, after discharge, water of sufficient quality for:
1. Preservation of Aesthetic Values
2. Protection of Recreational Uses
3. Protection of Livestock
4. Protection of Fish & Aquatic Life
5. Protection of Wildlife
6. Protection of Industrial Water Supplies
7. Protection of Potable Water Supply Sources
Detailed comparisons of existing and projected future water quality were carried out for
each of the receiving streams considered as a final discharge site, for each of the beneficial
uses designated. The detailed discussion of each of the beneficial use areas is contained in
Section 5 of Appendix F. The following is a summary of the conclusions resulting from
the comparison.
B. Water Quality for Preservation of Aesthetic Values
In general the water quality for preservation of aesthetic values was found to be largely
preserved by the provision of adequate secondary treatment along with effective retention
and removal of floating debris and scum. However, for the Yahara and Rock Rivers and
Badfish Creek, it is felt that filtration is necessary to both maintain minimum dissolved
oxygen concentration to avoid septicity and to avoid the creation of sludge deposits.
Each of the receiving streams including the Wisconsin River, would further require re-
aeration of the effluent at the discharge site in order to eliminate local septic conditions in
the area of the waste discharge.
Table 8-5 is a tabulation of the degrees of treatment required for each alternative solely
from the standpoint of the preservation of aesthetic values.
An evaluation of nutrient balances in the Yahara and Rock River basins showed that removal
of phosphorous and nitrogen in the MMSD effluent would not result in significant re-
ductions in the nitrogen and phosphorus concentrations in the impoundments on the Yahara
and Rock Rivers and, therefore, could not be expected to exert any positive influence on
the limitation of phytoplankton activity. Thus, it is the consultant's opinion that insufficient
justification exists for the expenditures that would be required for the removal of nutrients
from the MMSD effluent.
C. Water Quality for the Protection of Recreational Uses
Limited contact recreational uses for boating can be adequately protected by the levels of
treatment afforded for the preservation of aesthetic values.
Water quality criteria for whole-body contact recreational uses such as swimming, bathing,
etc. require adequate treatment for protection of aesthetic values and the addition of
breakpoint-chlorination for effective inactivation of potential bacterial and viral pathogens
in those streams with minimal dilution such as the Yahara and Rock Rivers and Badfish
Creek. A discharge to the Wisconsin River would require normal disinfection procedures.
Table 8-6 is a tabulation of the levels of treatment required solely for protection of
recreational uses of the waters.
8-7
-------
Table 8-5
Tabulation of Required Treatment Levels for Each Alternative
for Preservation of Aesthetic Values Only
Effective
Secondary
Treatment
Skimming
Floatables
Alternative #1
Proposed Koshkonong NPP and Rock
River
I. Aesthetics X }
Alternative #2
Badfish Creek
1. Aesthetics X )
Alternative #3
Badfish Creek & Yahara River
1. Aesthetics X )
Alternative #4
Yahara River below Stoughton
1. Aesthetics X 3
Alternative #5
Wisconsin River
1 Aesthetics X )
A — Re-aeration is needed at alternate discharge site on Rock River
Re-aeration
of
Discharge
XA
Filtration
X
Table 8-6
Tabulation of Required Treatment Levels for Each Alternative
for Protection of Recreational Uses Only
Effective
Secondary'
Treatment
Skimming
Floatables
Alternative #1
Proposed Koshkonong NPP and Rock
River
2. Recreation X )
Alternative #2
Badfish Creek
2. Recreation X >
Alternative #3
Badfish Creek & Yahara River
2. Recreation X J
Alternative #4
Yahara River below Stoughton
2. Recreation X >
Alternative #5
Wisconsin River
2. Recreation X )
A — Re-aeration is needed at alternate discharge site on Rock Rjver
B — Break-point chlonnation is required
Re-aeration
of
Discharge
XA
Filtration
Chlonnation
XB
XB
XB
XB
8-8
-------
D. Protection of Livestock Water Supplies
Comparisons of effluent quality and recommended criteria showed that the secondary
effluent would be suitable for use in livestock watering for most parameters. Lead and
selenium concentrations, however, were found to be at higher than recommended con-
centrations in the effluent on a peak 4-hour composite sample. Average values were found
to be within the recommended limits.
Analyses of pollutant concentrations in the receiving streams indicated that, from a chemical
standpoint, there would seem to be no reason why livestock could not be watered from
any of the receiving streams including Badfish Creek with the present secondary effluent
discharge. It is recognized, however, that certain taste and odor conditions in Badfish Creek
during portions of the year may serve to discourage livestock from drinking the water.
In summary, the provision of effective secondary treatment and the elimination of genera!
nuisance conditions would result in the protection of each of the receiving streams for
use as livestock water sources.
While the concentrations of lead and selenium found in the effluent would not be excessive
on an average concentration basis, it is possible that future peak concentrations of these
materials might result in higher than recommended concentrations resulting in the streams.
It is thus suggested that MMSD locate point sources of lead and selenium in the system
and apply source controls to these discharges.
Table 8-7 is a summary of the levels of treatment required solely for the protection of
livestock utilizing the receiving streams as a water source.
Table 8-7
Tabulation of Required Treatment Levels for Each Alternative
for Protection of Livestock Only
Effective
Secondan,
Treatment
Slumming
Floatable*
Alternative #1
Proposed Koshkonong NPP and Rock
River
3. Livestock X :
Alternative #2
Badfish Creek
3. Livestock X ;
Alternative #3
Badfish Creek & Yahara River
3. Livestock X ;
Alternative #4
Yahara River below Stoughton
3. Livestock X J
Alternative #5
Wisconsin River
3. Livestock X )
A — Re-aeration is needed at alternate discharge site on Rock River
Re-aeration
of
Discharge
XA
Filtration
Source
Control
Metals
8—9
-------
E. Protection of Fish and Aquatic Life
1. General
The criteria for water quality for the protection of fish and aquatic life encompass a
wide range of physical and chemical parameters which have been found to have either a
direct effect on fish species or a detrimental effect on the numerous aquatic organisms
that make up the food chain for the fish community. General categories of such criteria
include the following:
d] Physical criteria such as dissolved gases, suspended matter, etc.
L General chemical criteria such as mineral constituents
C Inorganic toxicants such as ammonia, chlorine and heavy metals
Z Organic toxicants such as pesticides and PCB's
Concentrations of many potential contaminants were monitored in the present Nine
Springs secondary effluent during the effluent characterization program from July to
September of 1975 and are reported in previous sections of this report. Likewise, con-
centrations of many of the potential contaminants were also measured in the receiving
streams under consideration.
The evaluation of the numerous effluent parameters affecting fish and aquatic life showed
that the following key parameters require additional attention.
2. Dissolved Oxygen
The dissolved oxygen level in a receiving stream is perhaps the prime factor governing
the types of fish and aquatic life that inhabit the stream. In the absence of dissolved
oxygen, septicity occurs with the resultant change in the entire ecosystem. Fish of all
types are absent and the aquatic community is largely dominated by undesirable types of
micro-organisms which are typical of highly polluted waters. As the level of dissolved
oxygen increases, the general level of aquatic life increases and the diversity of species
increases.
In the case of fish life, the level of dissolved oxygen in the receiving stream determines
the suitability of the waters to support higher levels of fish life. Carp and suckers may be
able to survive and reproduce at a level of 2 mg/1. However, 4 mg/1 of dissolved oxygen
would have to be present to preserve a population of perch and sunfish. The game fish
such as bass, pike, and trout require even higher concentrations (from 5-7 mg/1).
Trout are perhaps the most sensitive species of fish found in the waters of Wisconsin.
During the spawning season, a dissolved oxygen level of 7 mg/1 is required in order to
protect the eggs.
Standards promulgated by the USEPA and the Wisconsin DNR require that at least
5 mg/1 of dissolved oxygen be present in the receiving stream at all times to provide
adequate protection for the desirable forms of fish and aquatic life.
Detailed analysis of the dissolved oxygen data on the Badfish Creek and the Yahara River
showed that an extensive zone of oxygen depression occurs in the Badfish Creek during
summer conditions with the present discharge of secondary effluent from the Nine
8—10
-------
Springs plant. It was likewise suspected that the discharge of secondary effluent to any
of the streams of the area, with the possible exception of the Wisconsin River, would
result in a similar dissolved oxygen depression condition.
In order to determine the projected dissolved oxygen concentrations in the various
receiving streams, simplified mathematical modeling was performed as a part of the pre-
liminary screening process using assumed levels of treatment.
In order to refine the required treatment levels, more detailed modeling was performed
in order to simulate the effect of the effluent on the various receiving streams.
More details on the modeling effort are contained in Appendix F of the Facilities Plan,
and the detailed description of the mathematical simulations is contained in Appendix I.
A summary of the results of the mathematical modeling is as follows:
a) Proposed Koshkonong Power Plant and the Rock River
Water quality in the Rock River is largely a function of the quality of the waters of
Lake Koshkonong and the Madison Lakes. Since both lake water sources are high in
algal nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus), their waters are characterized by extensive
algal blooms during low flow summer conditions when minimum flows are likely to
occur.
The algal cells washed out of the lakes impose severe diurnal fluctuations on the
dissolved oxygen content of the Rock River. Thus, while the algae are producing
oxygen during the daylight hours, the dissolved oxygen levels in the River may rise to
supersaturated levels. However, at night the algal respiration demands large quantities
of oxygen resulting in dissolved oxygen levels approaching zero.
In its present condition, the Rock River could not be expected to consistently meet
the dissolved oxygen standard for fish and aquatic life during Q7 K> even in the
absence of any discharge of MMSD effluent.
Mathematical modeling of the Rock River at Qj 10 flows while receiving Madison's
effluent after treatment, use, and concentration by the power plant showed that the
MMSD effluent being discharged through the power plant would have some detri-
mental effects on the water quality in the Rock River.
Since there would be times when the power plant could not utilize the effluent, it was
necessary that the Rock River also be investigated as an alternate discharge site for
the entire effluent volume.
Modeling of this condition, again for the Q7 \Q flow showed that the effluent volume
and its accompanying dissolved oxygen contribute to a small decrease in the dissolved
oxygen levels in the Rock River, in the vicinity of the discharge.
b) Bad fish Creek
The natural water quality in Badfish Creek is a function of the quality of groundwater
in the area and the quality of the agricultural runoff which augments the stream flow.
The hydraulic gradient of the creek is such that velocities, and subsequently re-
aeration rates, are better than found in most of the larger rivers in the area. Because
of the velocity of the stream and the absence of impoundments, excessive phyto-
plankton activity is not present as in the case of the other receiving streams.
8—11
-------
Verification modeling of Badfish Creek, in its present condition with MMSD discharge,
was able to satisfactorily reproduce existing dissolved oxygen and loading conditions
in the stream.
Modeling of Badfish Creek assuming the elimination of the MMSD discharge predicted
future dissolved oxygen concentrations at Qi \Q flows less than the 5 mg/1 recom-
mended for the protection of fish and aquatic life. The low dissolved oxygen values
are the apparent result of both sediment oxygen demand and the discharge of wastes
from the Oregon Sewage Treatment Plant.
It should be recognized that the predicted low dissolved oxygen concentrations could
be a temporary condition since it is likely that the bottom sediments could become
oxidized, over some time period, to the point that they no longer exert such a strong
influence. Likewise, improvements could be made in the quality of the Oregon treat-
ment plant effluent if the need is justified.
It should also be recognized, however, that the flow of effluent has, over the years,
changed the nature of the stream such that the riffles and pools which once contributed
to significant re-aeration are no longer in the same condition.
It is anticipated that several years of reduced flow will be required before the riffle
areas, sediment oxygen demand, and the stream's dissolved oxygen approach their
pre-diversion conditions.
On the other hand, if the effluent were to continue to discharge to Badfish Creek
with the higher level of treatment assumed, the modeling showed that dissolved levels
in the stream at O^ 10 flows would remain above 5 mg/1. Average yearly concentra-
tions could be expected to be above 7 mg/1. The modeling further showed that non-
point runoff from agricultural sources is relatively insignificant from a dissolved
oxygen standpoint. In fact, the higher flows and the high dissolved oxygen in the
runoff waters result in an increase in dissolved oxygen levels in the stream.
c) Yahara River
The Yahara River, like the Rock River is fed by lake waters containing high con-
centrations of phytoplankton during summer conditions. The same high diurnal
fluctuations exist in the Yahara River as a result of the phytoplankton cycle which
varies between photosynthetic oxygen production during daylight hours and respira-
tion during darkness. Likewise, sediment oxygen demands are relatively high.
Modeling of the Yahara River showed that average dissolved oxygen levels at future
Qi 10 flows are expected to be below the recommended 5 mg/1 level even without the
MMSD discharge.
The discharge of MMSD effluent into the Yahara River would produce a beneficial
rise in the dissolved oxygen of the Yahara River for some distance downstream of the
discharge due to the large amounts of oxygen carried in the effluent. However, the
effluent quantity would not be sufficient to introduce the required dissolved oxygen
to raise the level above 5 mg/1. The introduction of effluent from the Stoughton
Treatment Plant has the same beneficial effect, although its benefit to the dissolved
oxygen concentrations in the River is less significant.
In such a situation, the main concern then involves determining the optimum dis-
charge point whereby the dissolved oxygen in the effluent would benefit the largest
stretch of the River.
—12
-------
There are a total of four impoundments on the Yahara River as a result of dams
located at^ Stoughton, Dunkirk, Stebbinsville, and Fulton. The modeling of the
Yahara River showed that the impoundment from the Stoughton Dam causes the
largest detrimental effect on the dissolved oxygen in the Yahara River. This is due to
the fact that the Stoughton Dam maintains the largest impoundment having large pool
areas with extremely low re-aeration rates.
Thus if effluent were to be discharged to the Yahara River, it is suggested that it
be discharged to the flowing section of the River below the Stoughton Dam.
It should be realized, however, that the discharge of the total effluent to the Yahara
River would not contain sufficient dissolved oxygen under Q? 10 conditions to main-
tain the entire River stretch at dissolved oxygen levels above 5 mg/1.
d) Wisconsin River
As with the Rock and Yahara Rivers, the lower Wisconsin River is fed by a lake, in
this case, Lake Wisconsin. Dissolved oxygen readings taken during the summer of
1975 in conjunction with the modeling program showed dissolved oxygen levels of
approximately 4.5 mg/1 downstream of the Lake. It is suspected that the Wisconsin
River is also subject to high levels of phytoplankton activity and high diurnal dissolved
oxygen fluctuations.
Modeling of the Wisconsin River showed that the MMSD effluent would have little
or no observable effect on the dissolved oxygen concentrations in the River. However,
again as in the case with the Rock and Yahara Rivers, the receiving stream was pro-
jected to have depressed dissolved oxygen values without the presence of the discharge.
3. Suspended and Settleable Solids
High concentrations of suspended and settleable solids are thought to have detrimental
effect on the aquatic community. Suspended solids may irritate the gills of fish while
settleable solids may blanket the bottom organisms and interfere with spawning.
The 1972 edition of Water Quality Criteria lists the following maximum values as pro-
viding varying levels of protection for the aquatic community.
High level of proiection — 25 mg/1 or less
Moderate level of protection — 25-80 mg/1
Low level of protection — 80-400 mg/i
Very low level or protection — 400 mg/1 or more
From the data reviewed on concentrations m the effluent and in the stream, it would
appear that no additional degrees of treatment are warranted from the standpoint of
suspended solids removal alone. The filtration provided for removal of suspended BOD
in those alternatives involving discharge to Badfish Creek, the Rock and the Yahara
Rivers would at the same time, provide a sizeable reduction in suspended solids and
would result in lowering further what would seem to be already acceptable concentra-
tions from an aquatic life standpoint.
Discharge of an unfiltered secondary effluent to the Wisconsin River would result in
insignificant increases in the already low suspended solids concentrations.
8—13
-------
4. Temperatures
The temperature of a receiving stream plays an important role in the determination of
the type of aquatic life inhabiting its waters. This inter-relationship is further defined
in the discussion of temperature considerations contained in Appendix F.
It is anticipated that any additional steps of treatment which increase the detention time
of the sewage will tend to bring the sewage temperature closer to the ambient air
temperature during all seasons. Thus in the summer, the sewage effluent would tend to
be warmer, and in the winter the effluent would tend to be colder. It is anticipated,
however, that this effect would result in a net change in effluent temperature of
not more than 1 to 2 degrees. Hence, it would not materially change the temperature
of the stream presently receiving the discharge.
However, the discharge of effluent to a stream, not presently receiving effluent, would
tend to increase the average annual temperature of the receiving stream. This can be
seen from the pre- and post-diversion data of the Badfish Creek in Appendixes A and F
in which the average annual stream temperature increased 2°C and the average summer
temperature increased 1 °C after diversion close to the mouth of Badfish Creek. Just
below the confluence of Effluent Ditch with Badfish Creek, the stream's average annual
temperature increased 6°C and the average summer temperature increased 4°C. As
reported in Appendix E, the higher winter stream temperature could alter the insect
fauna of the stream.
5. Total Dissolved Solids
The total dissolved solids content of the MMSD sewage effluent was found to be
noticeably higher than both the groundwater and the receiving streams since the sewage
is heavily influenced by the large quantities of salt brine (NaCl) which result from the
regeneration of zeolite home water softeners. The discharge from the Oscar Mayer plant
was also found to contain higher levels of salt (NaCl) which contribute to the higher TDS
content of the effluent.
There is little or no agreement on the specific limiting concentrations of TDS that are
required in order to protect fish and aquatic life. There would seem to be a consensus of
opinion, however, that rapid changes in TDS concentrations would definitely have
harmful effects from an osmotic pressure standpoint.
The biological survey conducted by the University of Wisconsin as a part of this facilities
plan found no drastic differences in the fish communities in the Yahara River above and
below the discharge of Badfish Creek. It can, therefore, be assumed that the increased
salinity in the Yahara River below its confluence with the Creek did not appreciably
effect the aquatic community.
No additional levels of treatment are recommended for TDS reduction. The TDS levels
in th effluent can be expected to remain essentially the same as at present.
The possible concentration and discharge of the effluent by the proposed nuclear power
plant, however, poses a more potentially serious problem with respect to the TDS levels
in the effluent at Q7 i0 low now conditions, depending on the location of the power
plant discharge.
While the highest projected concentration (1720 mg/1) for the Rock River near Indianford
Dam would not seem to cause any serious damage to the fish and aquatic life in the
Rock River, it would be necessary that the effluent be discharged into the River in such a
8—14
-------
fashion that would be slowly blended with the River water over a considerable length of
the river, thus avoiding a situation where migrating fish would have to travel through an
entire river cross-section with extremely high TDS values.
It should be pointed out that at any point in the Rock River below the confluence of
the Yahara River, the TDS concentrations would be essentially the same regardless of
the source of water used by the power plant. However, the concentrations at that point
would be slightly higher than at present due to the evaporative consumption of water in
the cooling towers at the power plant.
6. Ammonia
As referenced in Chapter 2 of this report, a level of 0.02 mg/1 of un-ionized ammonia is
recommended in Water Quality Criteria, 1972 as the allowable limit for a receiving stream
from a toxicity standpoint.
Therefore, the total ammonia levels that can be present in the stream without exceeding
the level of 0.02 mg/1 of un-ionized ammonia will vary throughout the year as stream
temperature and pH vary. The requirements are most stringent for the summer stream
conditions when the water temperture is at its highest point and the pH is relatively high
as a result of algal activity. Figures 8-1, 8-2 and 8-3 show the ammonia concentrations
allowable in the MMSD effluent if it were to be discharged to the Wisconsin River,
Badfish Creek or the Yahara River. It snould be noted that the calculations take into
account the natural background ammonia concentrations in the receiving streams.
The allowable ammonia concentrations in the MMSD effluent for each case in order to
meet the critical summer conditions are as follows:
Badfish Creek — 0.43 mg/1
Yahara River — 0.13 mg/1
Rock River — background value exceeds allowable concentration
Wisconsin River — 2.25 mg/1
These concentrations essentially govern the required effluent ammonia concentrations
and thus were a part of the effluent characteristics used as input to the mathematical
models used for the projection of dissolved oxygen profiles.
While dissolved oxygen requirements might allow higher ammonia levels in the effluent,
the allowable ammonia levels from a toxicity standpoint require much higher levels of
removal. Thus, it was recommended by CH2M HILL that breakpoint chlorination of the
nitrified effluent be instituted for the discharges to Badfish Creek, Yahara and Rock
Rivers in order to reduce the effluent ammonia levels to the extremely low values required
to protect the fish and aquatic life from toxic effects of un-ionized ammonia.
7. Residual Chlorine
Chlorination of the effluent has been found to be necessary in order to protect the waters
of all of the potential receiving streams for recreational use. Likewise it has been recom-
mended that breakpoint chlorination be instituted in the case of discharges to Badfish
Creek, the Yahara River, and the Rock River both to inactivate the viruses in the
effluent and to remove the small quantities of ammonia remaining after nitrification.
8—15
-------
The level of residual chlorine required in order to achieve the desired results of break-
point chlorination would result in residual chlorine levels of from 0.5-1.0 mg/1 in the
treated effluent.
The 1972 edition of Water Quality Criteria states that "aquatic life should be protected
where the concentration of residual chlorine in the receiving system does not exceed
0.003 mg/1 at any time or place". It recommends that the total chlorine residual should
not exceed 0.05 mg/1 for a period up to 30 minutes until more is known about short-
term effects.
The Wisconsin DNR has established a maximum stream total residual chlorine limit
of 0.05 mg/1.
Residual chlorine data is not available for any of the receiving streams. However, the
relatively low dilution factors at Q?. 10 flow in Badfish Creek and the Yahara River re-
quire that the effluent levels be reduced to essentially the value recommended for the
receiving stream. Thus dechlorination would be required in these cases.
In the case of the Wisconsin River, the large dilution factors available would make de-
chlorination of the effluent unnecessary.
8. Heavy Metals
Numerous heavy metals found in the Madison sewage effluent are known to have
detrimental effects on fish and aquatic life in a receiving stream.
It should be noted that in most cases, the allowable concentrations specified in the litera-
ture for the protection of fish and aquatic life are much lower and more stringent than
those specified for the protection of drinking water for livestock and humans.
A comparison of heavy metal concentrations in the effluent with reported allowable
concentrations for the protection of fish and aquatic life found the following metal con-
stituents to be either borderline or above the recommended concentrations.
^L Aluminum
Z Copper
L! Lead
^ Mercury
C Silver
H Zinc
A comparison of in-stream concentrations of these parameters showed that concentrations
of several of the elements are higher in some of the natural streams than they are in the
Affluent.
For instance, the Rutland Branch of Badfish Creek was described by Magnuson and
Herbst in their report (Appendix D, page 22) as a pristine stream. Yet, the data collected
shous the concentration of certain metals including aluminum, copper, mercury and zinc
to exceed, at times, the average values found in the Nine Springs effluent. Likewise,
the waters of Spring Creek, another rather natural tributary, contain concentrations of
copper, mercury and zinc which are all in excess of the average concentrations found in
the sewage effluent.
It is apparent that the average concentrations present in the MMSD effluent are not
decidedly toxic.
8—16
-------
FIGURE 8-1
rO
X
LU
D
_l
U_
u_
UJ
2 25
MMSD FACILITIES PLAN
ALLOWABLE AMMONIA IN EFFLUENT FOR
DISCHARGE TO WISCONSIN RIVER
_j
a:
h-
cn
f— OBRIEN&GERE
-------
FIGURE 8-2
10-i
9-
8-
7-
-J
\
e
5 —
to
X
K *
2
LU
U.
LU
o
0.43
0-
JAN
t
6
7 8
MONTH
10
12
DEC
MMSD FACILITIES PLAN
ALLOWABLE AMMONIA IN EFFLUENT FOR
DISCHARGE TO BADFISH CREEK.
G
O'BRIEN&GERE
ENGINEERS INC
-------
FIGURE 8 -3
5-1
3
o>
E
to
X
l±J
ID
u.
UJ
I —
o.i;
i
4
JAN
5 6
MONTH
10 II
I
12
DEC
MMSD FACILITIES PLAN
ALLOWABLE AMMONIA IN EFFLUENT FOR
DISCHARGE TO YAHARA RIVER
O'BRIEN & GERE
ENGINEERS, INC
-------
The allowable values used in all comparisons are those values which, if present in the
stream on a consistent basis, would protect the aquatic life from chronic long-term
toxicity. The values are usually arrived at by taking a reported concentration (TLm or
LC50) at which 50% of the test individuals were killed in some time (24-96 hrs.) and then
multiplying that value by an application factor of from 1/50 to 1/100 of that value to
protect against chronic or long-term toxicity.
Fish and other forms of aquatic life are able to withstand higher concentrations than
those allowed, for short periods of time, without severe detrimental effects, provided
that the absolute change in concentration is not too abrupt, and the individual species
have time to acclimate to a gradually increasing concentration.
In order to alleviate potentially rapid changes in the concentrations of heavy metals,
equalization of the effluent should be considered.
As shown in the effluent characterization study (Appendix\G), the provision of equaliza-
tion would result in a sizeable reduction in the fluctuations of heavy metal concentra-
tions that would be imposed on the receiving stream. In general, the larger the period of
equalization, the better the protection offered.
Since, in general, the high values are pronounced peaks which rise and fall substantially
within a given 8-hour manufacturing period, the choice of equalization time should be
chosen as 8 hours or more. Since the passage of the peaks through the treatment plant
tends to depress and spread out any peak, it is felt that a twelve hour equalization period
would be the optimum choice for depressing peak metal values. Any equalization period
greatly exceeding 8-12 hours would tend to create a detrimemtal effect in that algal
growth could occur in the equalization structure thus creating an additional oxygen
demand on the receiving stream.
It would appear, from an analysis of heavy metal data, that average heavy metal con-
centrations in the secondary effluent would not be detrimental to fish and aquatic life in
any of the receiving streams.
Peak concentrations of certain elements, however, including aluminum, copper, lead,
mercury, silver and zinc could cause temporary detrimental effects to certain of the
more sensitive species in those streams with little or no dilution water at low flow.
In order to further alleviate the possibility of these temporary detrimental effects, it is
recommended that a structure providing twelve hours of equalization of the effluent be
provided for all cases except the Wisconsin River.
Effluent filtration, which was recommended to reduce the suspended BOD load on the
stream, would undoubtedly achieve further removals of the metals of prime concern.
It is also recommended that MMSD institute a vigorous industrial waste program whereby
the MMSD would locate industrial sources of the referenced heavy metals in their system
and take appropriate steps to remove large portions of the key metal contaminants at
their source.
8—20
-------
9. Cyanides
Cyanides are utilized in certain metal plating operations. Cyanides, which have for ages
been known to be toxic to man, also have decidedly toxic effects on fish and aquatic
life. Both free and complexed cyanides are usually present in wastewaters from industrial
plating operations.
Free cyanide (HCN) can be satisfactorily destroyed by the micro-organisms in a biological
treatment system when the system is acclimated to the material, the concentrations do
not change radically from hour to hour or day to day, and the concentration is jelow
toxic limits (up to 30 mg/1 in influent).
Complexed cyanides, on the other hand, are usually bound up with metallic complexes
containing copper, zinc or other heavy metals which inhibit the biological breakdown of
the complex. By the same token, complexed cyanides are usually contained in fine pre-
cipitates with the metal and thus are susceptible to removal by filtration.
While free cyanides were not measured, total cyanides were found to be present at widely
varying levels in the MMSD effluent. Many of the samples were virtually free of cyanide,
and on those occasions when cyanide was present, the concentration rose abruptly and
fell off rapidly reflecting the possibility of an industrial release of the material. Since
the material passed through the secondary treatment unit, it is assumed that much of the
material is in the complexed form. Thus, it is anticipated that additional removals would
be accomplished by the filtration recommended for suspended BOD removal.
The addition of a biological nitrification step should insure that free cyanides will be
effectively broken down in the treatment process. Filtration will remove much of the
complexed cyanide material which could possibly revert to free cyanide. In addition, it is
recommended that MMSD locate sources of cyanide in their system and insure that any
free or complexed cyanides are either destroyed before discharge or are discharged at a
rather uniform rate such that the treatment system can adequately remove them.
10. Pesticides & Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB)
Many of the chemical compounds which man has invented in order to protect our
environment and improve the quality of life have been shown to have detrimental
effects on both terrestrial and aquatic components of the ecosystem. Some of the com-
pounds have been shown to be relatively resistant to chemical decay and thus to persist
in the environment for long periods of time. Chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides, poly-
chlorinated biphenyls and mercury compounds are examples of compounds which are
known to be concentrated in the aquatic life chain such that a cumulative effect
develops in the entire food chain. The cumulative concentration will eventually reach
the point where lethal or toxic effects are evident at some level of the food chain, either
in fish, wildlife or in man.
Thus, in most cases, the allowable concentrations of these compounds in water are
established at a level which has been found necessary to protect man against the excessive
concentrations found in fish or wildlife.
Mercury, which is used in mercury pesticides and fungicides, has been discussed as a
part of the heavy metals problem; however, the general problem of mercury is one that
is also closely tied with any discussion of pesticides and PCB's.
Low levels of pesticides and PCB's were found in the Nine Springs secondary effluent
and the concentrations found were in excess of those levels recommended for protection
8—21
-------
of fish and aquatic life. At the same time, low levels of pesticides were found to be
present in both the Rutland Branch of Badfish Creek and in Spring Creek.
However, the data collected by Hilsenhoff and Karl on macro-invertebrates and the data
collected by Magnuson and Herbst during their studies of Badfish Creek do not tend to
confirm the fact that pesticides and PCB's in the effluent are causing the level of damage
that might be anticipated.
Since it is an established fact that pesticides and PCB's tend to adsorb to paniculate
matter, the contaminants in the effluent may have been effectively removed from solution
and concentrated in the bottom sediments along certain slow-moving sections of the
stream.
Likewise, it could be anticipated that filtration of the effluent for suspended BOD
removal would also result in the increased removal of pesticides and PCB's that may
be adsorbed onto the suspended matter, thus greatly reducing the concentrations in the
effluent.
As with the heavy metals, it is suggested that MMSD strive to locate the sources of
pesticide and PCB dishcarges into their system. Relatively large quantities would have to
exist in order to represent the total poundage levels left in the effluent. Thus, trie
search could begin with a scanning of the larger potential sources.
As in the case of mercury, one could suspect that agricultural use of pesticides might
result in pesticide levels in agricultural run-off. The limited pesticide data collected on
the Rutland Branch and in Spring Creek leads one to believe that levels of pesticides and
PCB's might exist in the same relationship as was found for mercury.
In summary, while pesticides and PCB's would appear to be a potential problem area,
the extent of the problem cannot be fully defined without considerably more investigative
work. Such work should include the gathering of pesticide and PCB data on both the
receiving streams and suspected contributors in the sewer system.
11. Summary for Protection of Fish and Aquatic Life
In summary, the additional degrees of treatment required for the protection of fish
and aquatic life are as follows:
a) Rock and Yahara Rivers and Badfish Creek
3 Reduction of BOD5 in the effluent by secondary treatment and filtration to a
monthly average level of 10 mg/1 or less.
~] Reduction of ammonia concentrations by nitrification and breakpoint chlorination
to a level of 0.13 to 0.43 mg/1 or less during the summer as shown in Figures 8-2
and 8-3.
G Dechlorination of the effluent to eliminate remaining traces of chlorine to below
a level of 0.05 mg/1.
u Equalization of the effluent over a twelve-hour period in order to dampen the
fluctuations in heavy metal concentrations.
8-22
-------
b) Wisconsin River
C Reduction of BOD5 concentrations to a level consistently below 30 mg/1 by
effective secondary treatment.
n Reduction of ammonia concentrations by nitrification to a level below 2.25 mg/1
during summer low flow and high pH conditions as shown in Figure 8-1.
Regardless of the point of effluent discharge, it is felt that MMSD should institute
a thorough review of industrial discharges into their system in order to locate sources
of the following materials and institute source controls on their discharge.
Aluminum Mercury Cyanides
Copper Silver Pesticides
Lead Zinc PCB's
At the same time, it is felt that continuing studies should be undertaken to monitor
the concentrations of these materials in the effluent as well as in the Rutland Branch,
Spring Creek and in the upper reaches of the Yahara River.
Table 8-8 is a summary of the increased treatment levels required solely for the protec-
tion of fish and aquatic life.
F. Protection of Wildlife
The prime concerns with respect to protecting wildlife are to eliminate excessive concentra-
tions of pesticides, PCB's and mercury which accumulate in the food chain and could
damage wildlife which ingest aquatic species as food.
Protection of wildlife from excessive concentrations of pesticides, PCB's and mercury in-
volve the protection of fish and aquatic life as the primary control. If the aquatic Ifie
is protected, the materials will not be concentrated in trie wildlife which feed on the aquatic
life.
In summary, protection of wildlife in the vicinity of the receiving streams would seem to be
provided at a moderate level by the providing of treatment required to protect other benefi-
cial uses of the waters. No additional levels of treatment are justified solely for the protec-
tion of wildlife species. However, further research into the sources of pesticides, PCB's and
mercury is recommended.
Table 8-9 is a summary of additional requirements for the protection of wildlife. The re-
quirements are essentially the same as those for the protection of aquatic life since aquatic
forms of life serve as the food for the various wildlife species.
8—23
-------
Ill
ill
» o .*
X t-
x
x
3.5
SC
X
x
a.
X
II
§ *
X
X
X
Z Ji
ai
.-3 •—
-3
o
•o
a £
o
-o
cr
=*
E §.u.~
* i *•• t»
§ .S 2
•—on
« c. «
« "« >.
-------
c
<5
*E 8
a £2
S S •-
J22
3 C u
005
X (J «
I
o
i «
A.£
X
X
x
X
X
a ™
Si
X
X
X
I I!
•O o
o S
a
.a
X
X
tr o
o »•
-------
G. Protection of Industrial Water Supplies
Numerous industries in south central Wisconsin use large quantities of water for various
purposes. Most of the industries which require a high quality water utilize the extensive
ground water resources in the area. However, those industries, such as power plants, etc.
which require very large sources of water for non-contact cooling find it attractive to utilize
the surface waters of the many lakes and streams in the area. In general, the surface water
quality of the Yahara and Rock Rivers is poor from a standpoint of recirculating cooling
use because of the high hardness, alkalinity and dissolved solids concentrations which tend
to limit the cycles of concentration that can be achieved without excessive scaling.
One industry, Wisconsin Electric Power Company (WEPCO), is proposing to construct a
nuclear power plant on the south side of Lake Koshkonong. Since WEPCO had pro-
posed the use of surface waters from Lake Koshkonong for cooling purposes and was
planning to soften the lake water before use, WEPCO was approached regarding thei:
potential interest in purchasing treated and softened effluent from the Nine Springs Treat-
ment Plant.
Analytical data on the effluent was reviewed by WEPCO, and it is possible that the effluent
could be utilized as a substitute for softened Koshkonong Lake water in the cooling processes.
Little specific information is available regarding the quality of water required for nuclear
power plant cooling systems. However, from published data on the use of sewage effluent
by conventional power plants, it was assumed that calcium hardness would have to be reduced
to a level which would preclude calcium scaling of heat exchange surfaces upon concentrating
the wastewater a minimum of two to three times.
Likewise, since the power plant will utilize chlorine to control microbial growth in the
system, the ammonia levels in the effluent would have to be drastically reduced in order to
enable the use of an economical chlorine dose.
Since viruses in the effluent could possibly be spread over the entire facility by the spray
from the cooling tower, it was further assumed that break-point chlorination would be
required.
Equalization of the effluent was assumed to be necessary in this case from the standpoint
of equalizing wastewater volume, such that the power plant would receive a relatively
constant flow of water.
The levels of treatment mentioned were assumed to be required strictly b\ the projected
industrial use of the water. Other levels of treatment would be required, in addition ic those
mentioned, due to the fact that the effluent would be discharged to a stream caring those
times when the power plant would need only a portion of the effluent.
Table 8-10 shows the additional degrees of treatment required in each case strictly for the
protection of industrial water supplies. In the case of discharge to the receiving streams, no
additional degrees of treatment beyond secondary treatment are felt to be necessary strictly
for the protection of industrial water supplies since it is assumed that the individual industries
would provide whatever treatment they deem necessary for the intended water uses.
8—26
-------
Table 8-10
Tabulation of Required Treatment Levels for Each Alternative
for Protection of Industrial Water Supplies Only
Effective
Secondary Skimming
Treatment Floatables Nitrification Chlorination Equalization Softening
Alternative # I
Proposed Koshkonong NPP and Rock
River
6. Industrial Water Supply X X X XB X X
Alternative #2
Badfish Creek
6. Industrial Water Supply X X
Alternative #3
Badfish Creek & Yahara River
6. Industrial Water Supply X X
Alternative #4
Yahara River below Stoughton
6. Industrial Water Suppry X X
Alternative^
Wisconsin River
6. Industrial Water Supply X X
B — Breakpoint chlonnation is required
H. Protection of Public Water Supply Sources
While the surface waters of the area are not widely used as water supply sources, the
adopted goals of any wastewater management plan for MMSD call for the protection of
surface waters for potential use as sources of public water supply.
In a review of present effluent characteristics, the following parameters were found to be
above the recommended values for a potable water supply source:
Odor Mercury
Total Dissolved Solids Selenium
Ammonia Phenols
Manganese Oil ana Grease
The marginal odor level of the effluent would be reduced even furtner b> tne application of
filtration and re-aeration as suggested in previous sections for the prevention of nuisance
conditions.
The total dissolved solids concentration of the effluent, while normally unacceptable, would
be considered acceptable by EPA standards if no other source of drinking water were avail-
able. Thus, this recommended limit becomes based more on preference than on necessity.
The higher ammonia content can be reduced to within the allowable limits by nitrification
of the effluent and/or breakpoint chlorination on the effluent. Biological nitrification
would result in converting the ammonia to nitrate and would result in a probable violation
of the nitrate standard. Denitrification could be provided in order to break down the nitrate
with the release of nitrogen gas. Breakpoint chlorination of the ammonia, on the other
8—27
-------
hand, would result in the direct breakdown of the ammonia with the release of nitrogen gas.
The slightly higher than allowable concentration of mercury would, an all probability, be
reduced below allowable levels by filtration since mercury is known to be associated with
particulate matter.
On the other hand, it is anticipated that the concentration of manganese and selenium would
not be noticeably reduced by filtration of the effluent and would remain problems which
should be corrected at their source.
The concentrations of oil and grease and phenols found in the effluent could be substantially
reduced by additional biological treatment; however, the extremely low recommended value
for phenols of 0.001 mg/1 could, in all probability, only be met with the use of activated
carbon columns. Even the nitrification pilot plant utilizing powdered carbon did not remove
phenols to the recommended level for potable water sources.
The treated effluent by itself would not be suitable as a source of domestic potable water
supply. Because of the nature of certain contaminants remaining and the extremely low
concentrations required in certain cases, the treatment required to upgrade the effluent
to drinking water quality would require the expenditure of large quantities of capital. It is
highly unlikely, with the abundance of groundwater found in the Madison area, that there
would ever be valid reason for utilizing the undiluted effluent as a drinking water source.
Thus, there would seem to be no justification for the level of expenditures required to
produce effluent of drinking water quality.
Evaluations of the water quality in natural streams in the area which are unaffected by the
MMSD discharge revealed that they also fail to meet the strict standards for suitability as a
source of potable water supply.
When one looks at the water quality existing in the Rutland Branch and in Spring Creek
during runoff conditions, the following measured parameters all exceed the recommended
levels for a potable water source.
Rutland Branch Spring Creek
Iron Chromium
Mercury Iron
Manganese Mercury
Ammonia Manganese
Ammonia
It could be concluded that during certain times of the year, the Badfish Creek, even with-
out the MMSD effluent, would not be suitable as a source of domestic water supply due to
the contaminants naturally present in the agricultural runoff waters.
For the Yahara River, above the confluence of Badfish Creek, the iron and manganese
values would exceed those levels recommended for a source of potable water.
8—28
-------
It could be also postulated that the Yahara River, without the effluent discharge would not
be a suitable source for water supply use. Also, it would not be suitable for use as a water
supply source if the effluent were to discharge to the River.
An evaluation of the Rock River showed that the water flowing out of Lake Koshkonong
and above any influences of the Yahara River is not suitable as a source of public water
supply. The following parameters are all present in quantities exceeding the recommended
levels, during some portion of the sampling period:
Cadmium Manganese
Iron Phenols
Lead Ammonia
Likewise, the discharge of effluent into the Rock River at or near the Indianford Dam would
not materially alter the basic characteristics of the waters except for increasing the total
dissolved solids concentrations.
An evaluation of Wisconsin River water quality revealed that even the Wisconsin River does
not meet all of the strict levels recommended for a public water supply source. Both iron
and mercury levels in the River exceed recommended values, and the limited manganese
results indicate that it also is close to the upper limit.
Even the Wisconsin River, with its much larger flow for the dilution of MMSD's wastewater
would not be acceptable as a water supply source if one were to assume that potable drink-
ing water source standards were to be met in the receiving stream.
In summary, it must be concluded that the goal of the FPAC, MMSD and the Rock County
Board of Supervisors to preserve the quality of the receiving waters for potable water supply
use is not attainable at this time due to the excessive background contaminant levels found
in the various streams under prime consideration.
Since the quality of the receiving streams under consideration is not now sufficient to permit
their use as a potable water supply source, any expenditure of additional funds to produce
an effluent of such a quality would be an unnecessary and unjustified expenditure of funds.
I. Summary of Required Treatment Levels for Beneficial Uses
In summary, the following levels of treatment are required for each of the receiving streams
for protection of the beneficial uses which are recommended:
1. Discharges to Badfish Creek and/or Yahara River
a) Protection of Aesthetic Values
C Effective secondary treatment
LI Control of floating materials and scum
LI Removal of suspended solids
LI Artificial re-aeration at point of discharge
b) Protection of Recreational Uses
LJ Item I.I.a. above
LJ Breakpoint chlorination of the effluent
8-29
-------
c) Protection of Livestock Watering
HD Item I.I.a. above
D Source control of metals
d) Protection of Fish and Aquatic Life
Z Item I.I.a. above
Z Nitrification and filtration to enhance dissolved oxygen levels in the stream
Z Breakpoint chlorination for ammonia toxicity removal
Z Dechlorination to reduce residual chlorine toxicity
D Equalization and source control for heavy metals
Z Source control for pesticides & PCB's
Z Further research on pesticides & PCB's in the environment
e) Protection of Wildlife
Z Item I.l.d. above
Z Continuing research on toxic effects of pesticides in the environment
2. Discharges to the Proposed Nuclear Power Plant and Rock River
a) Protection of Aesthetic Values
Z Effective secondary treatment
Z Control of floating materials and scum
Z Filtration for removal of suspended matter
Z Re-aeration of effluent at back-up discharge site
b) Protection of Recreational Uses
Z Item 1.2.a. above
Z Break-point chlorination
c> Protection of Livestock Watering
Z Item 1.2.a. above
Source control of metals
d) Protection of Fish and Aquatic Life
Z Item 1.2.a. above
Z Nitrification and filtration to protect dissolved oxygen in stream utilized as
back-up discharge site
Z Break-point chlorination for ammonia toxicity control in case of stream discharge
Z Dechlorination to reduce residual chlorine toxicity in case of stream discharge
Z Equalization and source control for heavy metals
~ Source control for pesticides & PCB's
Z Further research on pesticides & PCB's in the environment
e) Protection of Wildlife Food Sources
Z Protection of fish and aquatic life food sources (Item I.2.d. above)
Z Source control of certain metal contaminants
8—30
-------
0 Protection of Industrial Water Supplies
C Effective secondary treatment
D Control of floating materials and scum
C Nitrification of effluent to reduce chlorine demand
C Filtration of the effluent to reduce chlorine demand
D Break-point chlorination to reduce possibility of disease transmission by aerosols
3. Discharge to the Wisconsin River
a) Protection of Aesthetic Values
G Effective secondary treatment
D Control of floating materials and scum
D Artificial re-aeration at discharge site
b) Protection of Recreational Uses
C Item 1.3.a. above
G Effective chlorination of the effluent
c) Protection of Livestock Watering
D Item 1.3.a. above
G Source control of certain metals
d) Protection of Fish and Aquatic Life
G Item 1.3.a. above
G Source control for heavy metals
G Source control for pesticides & PCB's
G Further research on pesticides & PCB's in the environment
G Seasonal Nitrification
e) Protection of Wildlife
G Protection of fish and aquatic life food sources
C Source control of certain metal contaminants
G Further research on pesticides & PCB's in the environment
Table 8-11 is a tabulation of the various levels of treatment required for each of the five
remaining alternatives in order to protect the receiving water for all of the beneficial uses
studied. The use of the receiving streams for sources of public water supply is not included
in the tabulation since it was concluded that this goal is not economically attainable nor
justified.
With the exception of the power plant alternative, the levels of treatment recommended for
the protection of fish and aquatic life are satisfactorily stringent that all other beneficial
uses are protected. Softening is required as an additional treatment step in the case of the
power plant discharge only for protection of the industrial water supply.
8—31
-------
XX X
XX X
XX X
XX X
XX X
XX X
XX X
XX X
XX X
XX X
XXX X
XXX X
XXX X
XXX X XXX X
I
XX
X X X X
XXX
XXX
XXX
S
I
3
X XX X
XXX
XXX
XXX
SI I
SS i
X XX X X XX X X XX X
I !| I
" ii :
11 i
Ac a
3 « "
?« =E
1* l
I u
3 t e*
! 1 I
XXXXX X XXXXX X XXXXX X XXXXX X
XX X X
XXXXXXX
xx x
xx x
xx x
xx x
XXXXX X XXXXX X XXXXX X XXXXX X
!•§
11
XXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXX
1 i'S
XXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXX
3
a:
?^?
Ill
c. «>
- "S
^ ^"
< a: i
8—32
-------
8.04 Cost Effective Analysis of Treatment Alternatives
A. General
Once the levels of required treatment for each alternative discharge location were con-
firmed, CH2M HILL performed cost effective comparisons of the treatment systems re-
quired to meet each specific effluent quality. Three effluent qualities were evaluated in the
comparison as follows.
Effluent I was defined as an effluent containing on a monthly average less than ^0 mg/1 of
BOD and suspended solids on a year-round basis and less than 2.25 ppm of ammonia during
August conditions. The effluent would be partially nitrified and subjected to normal
chlorination procedures before discharge to the Wisconsin River.
Effluent II was defined as an effluent containing, on a monthly average, less than 10 mg/1
of BOD and suspended solids with ammonia values ranging from 0.13 mg/1 to 0.43 mg/1
during the summer months, depending on the receiving stream considered. The effluent
would be nitrified year-round. To achieve the low ammonia requirement, it was essential
that break-point chlorination be included. Breakpoint chlorination would achieve adequate
inactivation of viruses. De-chlorination was also found to be required from a toxicity stand-
point. This quality was required for those alternatives where the effluent was to be discharged
to either the Badfish Creek, the Rock or Yahara Rivers since the Qy ]o flow in all of the
streams are in the same low range.
Effluent III was defined as the same quality as Effluent II with the addition of softening to
facilitate reuse of the effluent for cooling water at the proposed Koshkonong Nuclear Power
Plant. Lime-soda softening was evaluated to obtain the required effluent for reuse.
B. Cost Effective Comparisons
Investigations reported by CH2M HILL in Chapter 4 of Volume II describe incremental
facilities needed in all alternatives in order to upgrade the secondary treatment plant upon
completion of the Fifth Addition which is currently under construction. Such costs are
included in each of the alternatives on a common basis.
Additional investigations reported in Chapter 6 of Volume II show the following results
of a screening of treatment processes.
[I Granular nitration was the most economical and efficient system for removal of sus-
pended solids and associated BOD, at this particular facility.
U Biological nitrification would be more economical and efficient than break-point chlor-
ination, ammonia stripping, or ion exchange for ammonia removal only.
ill Break-point chlorination would be the only effective process for oxidizing the remaining
small quantities of ammonia after biological nitrification.
— Lime-soda softening of the effluent would be more economical than ion exchange soften-
ing.
In the final screening of treatment processes, the cost for the total treatment system is
dependent upon the type of biological nitrification system utilized.
Details of the basis of design and the costs associated with each treatment alternative are
contained in Chapters 8, 9 and 10 of Volume II.
8—33
-------
The following processes were investigated in a cost comparison for Effluent I:
System Present Worth
1. Single-Stage Activated Sludge $29,710,000
2. Zimpro Biophysical System Utilizing
Carbon $38,900,000
3. Rotating Biological Contactors (RBC) $29,730,000
Rotating Biological Contactors and single-stage activated sludge were found to be the least
costly methods for achieving the partially nitrified effluent required in this case.
The following processes were evaluated in the cost comparison for producing the effluent
quality specified as Effluent II:
System Present Worth
1. Single-Stage Activated Sludge $43,540,000
2. Two-Stage Activated Sludge $46,570,000
3. Rotating Biological Contactors $42,590,000
4. Zimpro-Biophysical System $48,150,000
5. Activated Bio-Filter $39,310,000
Single-stage activated sludge, activated bio-filter, and the rotating biological contactors
were found to be the least costly systems for providing nitrification for Effluent II.
Since Effluent III requires only the addition of two-stage lime softening, no cost compari-
sons were made for this effluent quality. Cost comparisons made between lime recalcining
and using purchased lime indicated that recalcining would be the least costly method.
For suspended solids removal, two-stage lime softening proved to be more economical than
single-stage softening followed by filtration.
A cost-effective analysis of the treatment process alternatives was performed by CH2M
HILL. The detailed results of this evaluation are contained in Chapter 12 of Volume II. I;
was found by CH2M HILL that biological nitrification using rotaiing biological con-
tactors was the most cost-effective treatment process for Effluent I and Effluent II.
For Effluent III, the most cost-effective treatment was found to be n;\-;fica::or; using reel-
ing biological contactors, two-stage softening, break-point cnlorinatiGr., dechlor.nav.cri.
and equalization at a total present worth of $88,540.000.
C. Summary
Figures 8-4 through 8-6 show the process schematics for the systems selected as most cost-
effective for Effluent I, Effluent II and Effluent III.
The treatment systems and their associated costs for each alternative discharge strategy are
as given in Table 8-12.
8—34
-------
Discharge Alternative
Discharge to proposed
Koshkonong Nuclear Power
Plant & Rock River
Continued discharge to
Badfish Creek
Split discharge
Badfish Creek and
Yahara River
Discharge to Yahara
River south of
Stoughton
Discharge to Wisconsin
River
Courtesy: CH2M HILL
Table 8-12
Treatment Systems and Costs for
Each Discharge Alternative
Treatment System
Improved secondary
treatment
Nitrification (RBC)
2-stage lime softening
Break-point chlorination
Dechlorination
Equalization
Improved secondary
treatment
Nitrification (RBC)
Filtration
Break-point chlorination
Dechlorination
Equalization
Improved secondary
treatment
Nitrification (RBC)
Filtration
Break-point chlorination
Dechlorination
Equalization
Improved secondary
treatment
Nitrification (RBC)
Filtration
Break-point chlorination
Dechionnation
Equalization
Improved secondary
treatment
Seasonal nitrification (RBC)
Chlorination
Cost (present worth)
$88,540,000
$42,590,000
$42,590,000
$42,590,000
S29,730,000
8.05 Refinement of Discharge Alternatives
During this phase of the work, more detailed investigations were conducted with respect to
the pumping and transmission requirements for each of the alternatives. A detailed basis of
design was developed for each discharge system, and more detailed cost estimates were pre-
pared for each case. The cost estimates developed were expanded to include the present worth
of staged construction and operating costs and salvage values were taken into account.
8—35
-------
FIGURE 8-4
GRIT INFLUENT
Tn SANITARY ,.. '
LANDFILL RAW SEWAGE
» METER VAULT
j
1 GRIT «._ GRIT
WASHERS CHAMBERS
'"" ' SIM i
y
JUNCTION BOXES
NO 1 AND 2 — '
t
PRIMARY INFLUENT HEADER
*
PS . /" PRIMARY CLARIFIERS ^\
f ^"^ \^ NO. 1,2 AND 5-16 y
x"-^s SN t
\ THICK" /' ' . - » _ *
Vi^y ^r^V— -( AERAN^T,85AS1NS)
X*" \ 1 ^V THICK- j i
X N 1 \ FNFR / •
/ANAEROBtcX ! NS-^-X MIXED LIQUOR
I DIGESTERS^^^_y T HEADER
V y t U~ FLOTATION - i
^ ^ ! SLUDGE /"""' 'N
• i THIfKFNFR WAS( SECONDARY CcARIFIERS ].
1 * •.—,. IHIUKtlNtK <...,V NQ ICA-IJFA /
1 V i-1'
A ! i
i __^.. •
i ROTATING BIOLOGICAL
f CONTACTORS
DIGESTED NO 1-136
bLUUt3t lU ( ciiLcnriE ^ _ I
BhNtl-IOlAL \ ^'"-^i"1"!- y ^ Y
REUSE EFFLUENT —
FROM SLUDGE ' — •• i
LAGOONS 1 f
1 EFFLUENT —
| STORAGE RESERVOIRS *
1 '" - - £
™
EFFLUENT ^,FT A^D j
PUMP STATIONS |
1 *
OVERFLOW ErcL^E^~ ~0
NINE' SPRINGS A'Vwpc'N
CREEK RlvER
LEGEN
MMSD FACILITIES PLAN NORMAL
PROCESS SCHEMATIC OF RECOMMENDED EMERGE
LIQUID S
ALTERNATIVE, EFFLUENT I —- SOLIDS
PS PRIMARY
RAS RETURN
WAS WASTE
SN SUPERN
(COURTESY OF
1
H i
1
| BYPASS
[ f[ STRUCTURE
i i
1 !
i 1
RAS 1 I
- J j
• . i
^ CHLORINE^ |
i
DIVERSION J
STRUCTURE *J
1
• 1
5
i
D
OPERATiON-
TREAMS
MCY OPERATION5-
TREAMS
STREAMS
L OPERATIONS
' SLUDGE
ACTIVATED SLUDGE
ACTIVATED SLUDGE
ATANT / DECANT
CH2M HILL)
O'BRIEN 6 GERE
ENGINEERS INC
-------
FIGURE 8-5
GRIT
TOCA^llT/\pY _
LANDFILL
A
t
' GRIT «
WASHERS
PS /
f ^
/^X SN ,_
INFLUENT
1
RAW SEWAGE
METER VAULT
t
fc.._ GRIT
CHAMBERS
SN 1
^^J
JUNCTION BOXES
NO 1 AND 2
|
PRIMARY INFLUENT HEADE
*
PRIMARY CLARIFIERS
NO 1,2 AND 5- 16
V
1
1
I
)l
t
BYPASS "{
[ SLUDGE )¥
\ THICK- / I f X
\ ENER / /GRAVITY \^ WAS..
v r-^ *-J SLUDGE f^
1 \ THICK- /
/—X ' ^J
/ANAEROBIC^ __T fT
IDIGESTERSP A L-j FLOTAT,ON
V S SLUDGE /
^^-y-^ 1 THICKENER
-------
FIGURE 8- 6
INFLUENT
PRIMARY
TREATMENT
I
SECONDARY TREATMENT
(YEAR- ROUND
NITRIFICATION )
INTERMEDIATE
PUMP STATION
SN
J
' S ' "~"~ '
-IH
FLOW EQUALIZATION BASIN
RAPID MIX
FLOCCULATION
CHEMICAL CLARiFIERS
p» RECARBONATiON REAQTQR ;
FuOCCu^ATiON
. T
f'•\_RECARBONATlQN C^AR,F
-------
The basis of design and cost information for the pumping systems for each alternative is con-
tained in CH2M HILL Report, Volume II. Basis of design and cost information by O'Brien &
Gere for the pipelines required in each alternative is given in Appendix F. Figures 8-7 through
8-9 illustrate the pipeline routings chosen for each alternative.
A summary of pumping and transmission costs for each alternative is contained in Table 8-13
below.
Table 8-13
Pumping and Transmission Costs
Final Discharge Alternatives
Proposed Koshkonong
Nuclear Power Plant
Present Worth
Pumping Cost
$5,085,000
Present Worth
Transmission Cost
$29,404,000
Present Worth
Total Discharge
System
$34,489,000
Badnsh Creek
Badfish Creek and
\ ahara River
Vahara River
Vv isconsm River
$4,325,000
$6,258,000
55,085,000
$6,830,000
$ 305,000
$ 5,356,000
$ 9,548,000
$33,234,000
$ 4,630,000
511,614,000
$14,633,000
$40,064,000
8.06 Comparison of Total Alternative Costs
With the present worth costs finalized for both the treatment and discharge portions of each
alternative, the total project costs for each of the five remaining alternatives were developed on
a present worth basis. Table 8-14 is a summary tabulation of the total project cost for each
alternative on a present worth basis.
Table 8-14
Present Worth Costs Comparison
of Alternatives
Effluent Treatment
Effluent Pumping
Transmission
Revenue from
Sale of Water
Totals
Wisconsin
River
$29,730,000
6,830,000
33,234,000
—
$69,744,000
Proposed
Koshkonong NPP
$88,540,000
5,085,000
29,404,000
-54,880,000<"
$68,149,000
Badfish
Creek
$42,590,000
4,325,000
305,000
—
$47,220,000
Yahara
River
$42,590,000
5,085,000
9,548,000
—
$57,223,000
Spin to
Badfish Creek
and
Vahara River
542,590,000
5,953,000
5,661,000
—
$54,204,000
"> Based on 45C/1.000 gals, and 40 MGD use. WEPCO has indicated that 45«/l,000 gals, is the maximum that they would be
willing to pay for softened effluent.
8-39
-------
A comparison of total project costs showed that continued discharge to Bad fish Creek with a
much higher level of treatment is the least cost solution.
From a cost standpoint, the choice would be to continue to discharge to Badfish Creek with the
higher level of treatment specified. If, however, at some later date, the power plant project
is approved and favorable rates could be negotiated for the sale of the effluent, the possibility
of discharging the effluent to the power plant could be re-evaluated.
8.07 Evaluation of Environmental Impact
A. General
While cost is certainly one of the more important factors in choosing an optimum manage-
ment strategy, the cost of the system should be evaluated as only one of the components.
Of equal importance to such an evaluation would be the environmental impact of each of
the alternatives.
Each component of the total system including the treatment plant, pump station, pipelines
and the effluent discharge itself will have impact upon the environment in some fashion
even though some of the impacts may be negligible. The total impact for each alternative
can be looked at as the sum of the impacts by each system component on the waters,
surrounding lands and the air.
Detailed evaluations of the projected impacts of each alternative treatment and discharge
strategy are contained in Appendix F and additional discussions of Environmental impact
are contained in the Environmental Assessment Statement which is the second part of
Volume I of this Facilities Plan.
B. Comparison of Environmental Impacts
Any comparison of environmental impacts must look at both the short term impacts that
occur during construction and the long term impacts that result from the implementation
of each plan. In addition, there are certain areas where the short term impact may result in
damages that will have intermediate or relatively long term effects.
Table 8-15 is a matrix comparison of the total impact that is envisioned for each of the
alternatives.
In preparing the matrix, the following criteria were utilized.
Long term impacts that would endure for the 20-year life of the project such as absolved
oxygen levels, water balance considertions, etc. were rated on a scale from 10 to 50.
Since most of the short term impacts occur during the period of construction which is
estimated at approximately 2 years, the weighting of the short term impacts has been
established at 1/10 of the long term weighting or from 1 to 5.
In one case, the impact of the suspended solids from pipeline construction on the water
quality of Black Earth Creek is estimated to be of greater duration ranging from 5 to 10
years. Therefore, the weighting in this case reflects an intermediate range from 5 to 25.
8—40
-------
o
c ti
£ g£ 1
£§ I&4
»-• 5 _ °
1 1 £ 1 5
HO
^
B
99
9C
B
"O ~™
B
3
3
X
_ "
§1 1
£ a o
W Q >
£H , §
f Q § '5
S--o o E
C c
= •0 2.|
E = M S
§ 2 55 =
""^fcU
— C
fc« (^ C _O
TJ S 3 "
* "» E >
' * WQ
u c
~Z 0 0
£ ° |
i.
3 |
i" ! ra h:
a. "
5*
t c -J-
Dt ~ <™
_C
|
K
,/>
c g
l|
10 U
Id
So
il
c >,
o jo
^ 7j
S. a
~ —
E
V
H
00
c
o
E
S
f-
c
0
—
E
ct
oo
c
o
I
H
«
0
c
H
0
E
H
t!
O
53
E
OJ>
c
o
_j
?i
o E
C/3 2
C
E
^
f-
!^
-c
t/!
^
c:
^
g
_
S
u
00
c
o
£
H
00
c
0
_
c.
M
s.
f—
i! i
=l
o
6 °
o
"? o
o —
o
"? o
c —
o
o —
^ t
— "~'
o
"? o
0 ^
£4 0
•? —
0
—
o
S 2
o
"? c
o ^
00 —
c c
I "8 =f
£ £ o ^ IT
00 c D.J= J
•c •= £ o I
^ CL fi. tMi OH
"
8—44
-------
In those cases where it has been determined that there will be a negligible impact, such an
impact has been rated at 10 in the case of long term effects and at 1 in the case of short term
effects.
Where the impacts are above the negligible level, the alternative with the least impact has
been rated at 10 or 1. The alternative with the most pronounced impact has conversely been
rated at 50 or 5, and those in between have been rated at 20, 30 and 40, or 2, 3 and 4
respectively in line with their increasing level of impact.
Based on a total environmental impact standpoint, the Badfish Creek alternative has the
least negative environmental impact.
From an environmental impact standpoint, the rankings of the other alternatives would be
as follows:
2nd choice — Yahara River
3rd choice — Proposed Koshkonong Power Plant
4th choice — Badfish Creek and Yahara River
5th choice — Wisconsin River
As in the case of the ratings assigned during the preliminary screening, it should be pointed
out that the assigned judgments and rating factors are those thought to be appropriate by
Consultant I and in no way imply approval or disapproval by individual members of the
Facilities Planning Advisory Committee or the Committee as a whole.
8.08 Evaluation of System Reliability
A. General
In order to properly protect the receiving waters for their designated beneficial uses, it is
essential that any management system be sufficiently reliable that such protection is offered
on a continual basis.
The reliability of the entire system should consider the reliability of each component in the
entire system. Thus, the reliabilities of the treatment plant, the pump stations, the pipelines
and the receiving stream each require assessment.
A discussion of the various reliability factors for each alternative is included in Appendix F.
B. Comparison of Total System Reliabilities
Table 8-16 is a tabulation of the relative reliabilities of various components of each treat-
ment system.
8—45
-------
1 1
1 1
1 1
] 1
3 1
1 2
1 1
1 2
1 3
1 1
5
4
5
6
6
Table 8-16
Comparison of System Reliabilities
Final Alternatives
Treatment Pump Receiving Total
Plant Station Pipeline Stream System
Alternate Reliability Reliability Reliability Reliability Reliability
Proposed
Koshkonong
Power Plant
Badfish Creek
Baonsh Creek and
"»a'.ara River
>ahara Ruer
V\ i-consin River
For the purposes of this tabulation, the following criteria were used in the assignment of
ratings:
A rating of one (1) was assigned to each category where there were no noticeable reasons for
questioning the reliability.
Ratings higher than one (1) reflect the magnitude of concern by Consultant I over the poten-
tial lack of reliablity that could result from the factors mentioned in Appendix F.
The relative difference in total reliability are somewhat small, reflecting marginal concerns
over any deficiencies in the reliability ratings.
On the basis of Consultant I judgements as expressed in Table 8-16, the order of preference
of discharge alternatives based solely on reliability would be as follows:
1 — Badfish Creek
2 — Koshkonong Power Plant
2 — Badfish Creek and Yahara River
4 — Yahara River
4 — Wisconsin River
8.09 Evaluation of System Flexibility
A. General
Since many of the plant components such as the pipelines, etc. have design lives far in excess
of the 20-year design life of the facilities plan, it would seem to be advisable that some
evaluation be made of the potential future use of the facilities that are a part of each alterna-
tive.
8—46
-------
The relative flexibility of each alternative system is largely a function of that system's ability
to handle changing waste loads and flows that may be realized at some future date due to
either continual population growth or the location of a major new waste source within
MMSD service area.
Likewise, flexibility should also encompass the relative ease with which the plant could be
adapted to produce a higher effluent quality if such were required in the future.
Each of these aspects is discussed in detail in the study of discharge alternatives contained
in Appendix F.
B. Comparison of System Flexibilities
Table 8-17 is a tabulation of ratings assigned to each alternative from a flexibility stand-
point.
Table 8-17
Comparison of System Flexibilities
Final Alternatives
Flexibility Flexibility Flexibility for
Flexibility for for Higher for Higher Altering Discharge Total
Alternate Higher Flows Influent Load Effluent Quality Location Flexibility
Proposed
ko^hkonong
Nudear
Power Plant 50 50 50 10 160
Badfish Creek 50 50 50 40 190
Baafish Creek and
Sahara Rr.er 50 50 50 20 170
YaharaRner 50 50 50 30 180
\\:scons:n River 50 50 50 50 200
Criteria utilized in the assignment of ratings were as follows:
Flexibility from the standpoint of accepting higher flows would be designed into each system
including both the treatment facilities and the discharge facilities. The increased cost for
providing such flexibility would be small and be approximately equal in ail cases. However.
the cost for providing the needed facilities would be relatively high and would be expended
at some future date when the need would occur.
The same criteria were utilized with regard to the flexibility for accepting Higher influent
loadings and producing higher effluent quality.
The flexibility for altering the discharge location, however, is an aspect which involves con-
sideration of high initial costs with incremental increases in the cost at a later date. The
variations in this category reflect the variations in the flexibility that are included in each of
the alternatives as proposed. Thus, considerable variation is apparent.
8—47
-------
It should be noted that from a flexibility standpoint, the alternatives have the following
order to preference:
1. Proposed Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant
2. Badfish Creek and Yahara River
3. Yahara River
4. Badfish Creek
5. Wisconsin River
8.10 Evaluation of System Implementability
A. General
While any of the five alternatives reviewed would lead to a bettering of conditions in the
receiving waters, none of the alternatives can be implemented without first receiving
numerous approvals from local, State and Federal Agencies.
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 insures that, on projects involving
the expenditure of Federal Funds, the opinions and concerns of the public will be actively
solicited and considered.
The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources and the U.S. Environmental Protect -;.
Agency have both agreed that the controversial nature of the project warrants tne prepara-
tion and distribution of a detailed Environmental Impact Statement. It is estimated that
from six months to one year could be required for the preparation and processing of
the Environmental Impact Statement regardless of the alternative chosen.
An additional period of from one to two years would be consumed in preparing the detailed
design drawings for the improvements and preparing the necessary contract documents to
receive bids for the work and award the necessary contracts.
Assuming a two to three year schedule for construction of the facilities, it is estimated that
any recommended improvements will be in operation sometime between the end of 1979
and the middle of 1982. With State and Federal review and approval of grants-in-aid, it is
more likely that completion of the facilities will be closer to the 1982 date.
The construction cost of sewage treatment facilities has been escalating at an average rat; ,r"
9-10% per annum in recent years, thus, it is in the best interest of the public tha: necessary
facilities be constructed as soon as they are documented to be necessary. Any needless ae'.^y *
in the design and construction schedule can result in greatly increased costs.
It becomes imperative that each alternative waste management strategy be evaluated from
the standpoint of the potential for costly delays which could greatly escalate the total
project cost and thus the cost to the individual sewer user.
Appendix F discusses the potential barriers which could cause expensive delays in the im-
plementation of each of the recommended alternatives. The potential barriers can be
classified into three distinct classes as follows:
Z Barriers as a result of present technology
G Barriers due to human misunderstanding
Z Legal barriers
8-48
-------
B. Summary of Comparative Implementability
Table 8-18 summarizes the ratings assigned to each alternative from an implementability
standpoint.
Table 8-18
Comparison of System Implementabilities
Final Alternatives
Potential Barriers
Potential from Human Potential To.al Rating
Alternative Technical Barriers Misunderstanding Legal Barriers Implementability
Maintaining Maintaining
Receiving Effluent
Stream Discharge
Water Quality
Quality
Proposed
Koshkonong Nuclear
Power Plant 5 I 4 4 14
Bad fish Creek 1 1 5 3 10
rtadtibh Creek and
Yahara River 5 1 3 2 11
Yahara River 51219
Wisconsin River 5 1 1 5 12
The following criteria were utilized in the assignment of the ratings.
Each of the alternatives except for Badfish Creek was given a rating of 5 from the stand-
point of barriers to maintaining desired water quality in the receiving stream since
mathematical modeling showed that in no case would the dissolved oxygen at Q7j i0 condi-
tions be continually maintained at or above the 5 mg/1 level due to the excessive phytoplank-
ton activity. The Badfish Creek alternative was rated one (1) in this respect since it is pro-
jected that a dissolved oxygen level of 5 mg/1 or higher will be maintained at all times.
Each of the alternatives was given a one (1) or negligible rating from the standpoint of
barriers to maintaining desired effluent quality from a technological standpoint.
Ratings assigned for potential barriers due to human misunderstanding vary from one to
five with the Wisconsin River posing the least barrier since it would be relatively easy to
comprehend discharging the effluent to a very large river. Likewise, the Badfish Creek was
assigned a rating of 5 since it would be difficult to understand the rationale for discharging
to such a small stream.
The ratings assigned for the potential legal barriers reflect the relative potential for legal
actions as a result of depriving downstream users of their beneficial rights to the water.
From an implementation standpoint, the alternatives have the following order of preference:
1. Yahara River
2. Badfish Creek
3. Badfish Creek & Yahara River
4. Wisconsin River
5. Proposed Koshkonong Power Plant
8—49
-------
8.11 Selection of Recommended Alternative
A. General
Table 8-19 is a summary of the ratings assigned to each category for a final comparison
of alternatives.
Table 8-19
Summary of Final Alternatives Ratings
Cost
Factor
Environmental Reliability Flexibility lmplementabili;\
Impact
Alternative
Proposed Koshkonong
Nuclear Power Plant
Badfish Creek
Badfish Creek and
Vahara River
*> ahara Riser
\\isconiin Ri\er
Total Points Up to 250 Up to 250 Up to 100 Up to 50
250
50
100
150
250
200
50
200
i50
250
60
20
60
100
200
10
40
20
30
50
tploSO
50
20
30
10
40
Totals
Up to 700 Points
570
180
410
440
690
The rationale utilzied in assigning each value is explained in the following paragraphs.
Costs were rated from 50 points for the lowest cost alternative to 250 points for the highest
cost alternative with the others reflecting their relative positions to the highest and lowest
cost in Table 8-14.
Environmental impact was considered on an equal basis with cost, and again the values
assigned varied from 50 to 250. A rating of 50 representing the least total adverse impact
and 250 representing the highest adverse impact with the others reflecting their relative
positions to the highest and the lowest in Table 8-15.
Reliability was judged to be less important than cost or en\ironmcatal impact, yd L: r.io/e
importance than flexibility or implementabilit>. Thus, it was assigned rating _;'.:e:> -f from
20 to 100. The system with the highest reliability was aligned d rauru of 20, and the
system with the lowest reliability was assigned a rating of 100 with the otners, reflecting their
relative positions to the highest and the lowest in Table 8-16.
Flexibility and implementabiiit> were judged to be of approximately equal \eieh. and of
approximately the same weight since each of them deals with the relative ease of accomplisn-
ing a task. Likewise, each of these categories is felt to be of less importance than Cost,
Environmental Impact, or Reliability. Thus, these categories were assigned relative values
from 10 to 50 points. The systems having the highest flexibility and the highest imple-
mentability were assigned a value of 10, and those systems with the lowest flexibility and
implementability assigned values of 50 with the others reflecting their relative positions to
the highest and lowest in Tables 8-17 and 8-18.
The alternative with the lowest total rating value is considered to be the most favorable
alternative for the final discharge site.
8—50
-------
The total ratings in Table 8-19 show the following order of preference as a result of the
comparisons:
1. Badfish Creek
2. Badfish Creek and Yahara River
3. Yahara River
4. Proposed Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant
5. Wisconsin River
It is recommended that the MMSD effluent be treated to the level specified and discharged
to Badfish Creek as it is the most cost-effective wastewater management system.
8—51
-------
SECTION 9 — RECOMMENDED TREATMENT AND DISCHARGE PLAN
9.01 General
The comparison of the five remaining alternatives described in the preceding Section justifies
the selection of the Badfish Creek as the discharge site of the MMSD effluent. If at a later time,
the power power plant project is approved and favorable rates could be negotiated for the sale
of the effluent, the possibility of discharging the effluent to the power plant should be re-
investigated.
The recommended treatment and discharge plan is composed as follows:
Those treatment and discharge facilities necessary for upgrading the effluent for discharge to
Badfish Creek would be designed, bid, awarded for construction and placed into operation.
In addition to the structural solutions recommended, there are numerous non-structural actions
which should be undertaken at the earliest possible opportunity in order to effectively imple-
ment the overall plan and protect the receiving waters.
9.02 Recommendations for Discharge to Badfish Creek
A. General
The following facilities are recommended in order to upgrade the present discharge of
effluent to Badfish Creek and provide for proper digestion of the produced sludges.
B. Treatment Facilities
I. General
It is recommended that MMSD complete the construction of the Fifth Addition as plan-
ned, and then proceed with the design of both the modifications to the secondary treat-
ment plant and the advanced treatment facilities for Effluent II as outlined in the CH2M
HILL, "Wastewater Treatment Systems Report", Volume II.
2. Modifications to Existing Facilities
The following facilities have been found by CH2M HILL to be necessary for the con-
tinued and efficient operation of the secondary treatment facilities at the Nine Springs
Plant, in addition to those facilities presently being constructed as a part of the Fifth
Addition. Details of the recommended modifications are contained in Volume Ii.
a) Grit Chamber Renovation
An additional 9,000 cubic feet of aerated grit chamber capacity should be installed
in parallel with the existing units. Tubular grit removal conveyors and grit washers
should be installed for all grit chambers.
b) Overflow Spillage Reduction
To avoid overflows, the elevation of No. 2 junction box should be raised, and a 42-
inch sluice gate should be installed to control bypassing.
9—1
-------
c) Refurbishing Primary Clarifiers
The six "low level" primary clarifiers should be refurbished on a "one by one" basis
with repair and replacement of parts as needed, resurfacing of concrete and repairing
the stoplogs in those locations where deemed necessary.
d) Aeration Tanks and Aeration System
Indicating valve stems should be installed on the aeration tank influent gate operators
and spalled concrete in the older aeration basins should be repaired. Expansion of
the air system may also be required if not accomplished under the Fifth Addition
project.
e) Secondary Clarification
Longer weirs should be installed in clarifiers 5FA and 6FA, and missing weirs should
be replaced. In addition, rate-of-flow controllers should be installed on the influent
line to each existing clarifier in order to properly balance the flows to the clarifiers.
f) Return Sludge Pumping and Metering
Return sludge pumping capacity should be increased to 50 MGD by modification of
the existing pumps in Aeration Control Building #2. In addition, flow meters M-7
and M-8 should be replaced by magnetic flow meters having indicators, totalizers,
recorders, and ultrasonic cleaners.
g) Waste Sludge Pumping and Metering
The waste sludge pump in Aeration Control Building #1 should be replaced with
pumps of a capacity of at least 4 MGD. In addition, existing sludge meters M-51 and
M-52 should be replaced with magnetic flow meters, and a larger range flow recorder
should be installed on Meter M-62. A metered connection should also be made
between the 48-inch mixed liquor line and the sludge wet well to facilitate direct wast-
ing of mixed liquor, if not provided by change order during the Fifth Addition.
h) Disinfection Improvements
A new chlorine gas line should be installed parallel to the existing line between the
chlorine building and the effluent pump station in order to provide standby chlorina-
tion service in the event of a line break.
i) Effluent Pumping Improvements
New impellers and/or other effluent pump station modifications should be made to
the existing effluent pump station in order to reduce pump cavitation.
j) Automatic Samplers
Automatic, composite samplers should be installed on the major flow streams to
facilitate gathering of flow-proportioned composite samples for analysis.
k) Safety Improvements
Wooden channel planking used throughout the plant should be replaced with
aluminum gratings. In addition, improvements may be needed in the storage of flam-
mable materials.
9-2
-------
1) Personnel and Administrative Facilities
MMSD should consider the construction of a unified operations and administrative
headquarters at the Nine Springs plant in order to facilitate operations and administra-
tive efficiencies. The facilities should also include facilities for the plant operators
and operator training programs.
3. Advanced Waste Treatment Facilities
The advanced wastewater treatment facilities necessary in order to protect the water
quality of Badfish Creek should consist of the following:
Z Additional secondary clarifier capacity
.. Nitrification utilizing rotating biological contactors
JI Filtration
— Breakpoint chlorination
'..-. Equalization of twelve hours effluent flow
._". Dechlormation utilizing sulfur dioxide
More detailed descriptions of these facilities are contained in the CH2M HILL "Waste-
water Treatment Systems Report" (Volume U). Information regarding the Basis of
Design for each process is included in Table 9-1.
4. Sludge Treatment Facilities
Additional facilities are necessary for thickening and digestion of the additional organic
sludges produced by the expanded and upgraded treatment plant. The Basis of Design
for the solids handling facilities is presented in Table 9-2.
a) Gravity Sludge Thickener Improvements
The mechanisms on the two original gravity thickeners should be refurbished and
worn parts should be replaced as needed. An additional 55 ft. diameter gravity thicken-
er may be needed to supplement the two original units and the two units being con-
structed as apart of the Fifth Addition.
b) Dissolved Air Flotation Thickeners
Dissolved air flotation thickeners should be constructed in order to pre-thicken waste
activated sludge prior to digestion.
c) Sludge Digestion Improvements
A total of five new digesters (two primary and three secondary digesters) should be
constructed to serve the plant through the year 2000. The units should be two-stage
digesters operating in the mesophilic temperature range. A new digester control
building should also be constructed.
9-3
-------
o
5
C M
:i •=.
is 2;
o
Sol
3 E
•— c
Q — —. OU
. *00 00 -
3 E E-)
S £ S o
v
ob
< _ _
.£• oo ~ "-•„
£-- c~ «|
c oo oo r^ <^ c =
a° 6 E^<> '^
oo ao
y! z
1 s
000
o ^
« 5 s -s -=
9- a c. = s 15
i an y; < "c.C <
= O n 50 ex —
•a go o S >, o
? ' -. >. —' "^ I— •*
± ^ = •-) S j= j=
5 > E i 2 s is
£ 5 o 5 ' * *
^S5:
9-4
-------
Table 9-2
Basis of Design for Additional Sludge Facilities
Anaerobic Digesters
Type — Mesophilic, high rate, completely mixed
mixing mode — compressed digester gas
Primary Digesters
Hydraulic Detention Time 15 days
Volatile Solids Loading Rate 0.1 Ib. VSS/cu. ft./Day
Secondary Digester (thickening mode — supernatant
draw-off; mixing mode — compressed digester gas)
Hydraulic Detention Time 10 days
Gravity Thickeners
Type — Center feed
Surface Overflow Rate 800 gal/day/sq. ft.
Solids Loading Rate
Primary 201bs/day/sq. ft.
Secondary 5 Ibs/day/sq. ft.
Flotation Thickeners
Type — Dissolved air
Surface Overflow Rate 1 gal/min/sq. ft.
Solids Loading Rate 3 Ibs/hr/sq. ft.
Note: Values used for preliminary design estimates
Courtesy: CH2M HILL
Modifications should be made to the existing digesters including resealing, replace-
ment of heat exchangers, the addition of gas mixing equipment and the renovation of
the waste gas burners. In addition, MMSD should consider installation of a super-
natant treatment system in order to return supernatant from the secondary digester
back to the head end of the treatment plant. The supernatant draw off systems would
be used only on the secondary digesters (non-mixed tanks).
d) Sludge Reuse Facilities
The sludge processing facilities required for reuse are discussed in detail in
CH2M HILL's Organic Solids Report which is Volume III of this Facilities Plan.
9-5
-------
5. Construction Costs and Staging of Treatment Facilities
Table 9-3 is a schedule of construction staging for the additional facilities which include
the modifications to the existing plant after the Fifth Addition, the advanced waste treat-
ment, and the sludge processing facilities necessary to implement the continued discharge
to Badfish Creek. It should be noted that the construction is staged such that the majority
of the facilities are completed in 1980 with incremental additions to the rotating biological
contactors, secondary clarifiers, filters and anaerobic digesters in 1985 and 1990 to meet
the higher anticipated flows at that time.
Table 9-4 is a cost estimate for the recommended treatment facilities. The estimate depicts
the staged construction and shows the costs to be met in 1980, 1985 and 1990 for con-
siruction of the facilities. The total cost in January, 1976 dollars for all of the treatment
facilities, including the modification to the existing plant, is estimated to be $29,280,000
with $26,250,000 of that total scheduled for expenditure in 1980. Operation and main-
tenance costs for the expanded treatment facilities are estimated to be $3,200,000/year,
with $1,350,000 of that amount allocated to the purchase of electric power.
C. Pumping and Transmission Facilities
1. General
A more detailed study of the capacity of the existing pump station and pipeline system
was performed as a part of the preliminary design of the discharge facilities for the recom-
mended discharge to Badfish Creek. That study concluded that it would be possible to
utilize the existing pump station and force main for the duration of the planning period
if some equalization of flows was instituted to limit the pressure in the existing effluent
force main to 100 psi.
2. Equalization of Peak Flows
The existing pump station and pipeline have been judged by O'Brien & Gere to have a
peak capacity of 75 MGD when the worn impellers are replaced by larger impellers and
the pumps are operating in conformance with the published pump curves. Peak flous
through the year 2000 are anticipated to reach 90 MGD with an average flow of 50 MGD.
Therefore, any equalization which would lower the peak flow to 75 MGD would result
in eliminating the need for additional pipeline and pumping capacity. Figure 9-1 depicts
the volume of storage needed to reduce the peak flow of 90 MGD to a value of 75 MGD
as approximately six million gallons.
The discharge to Badfish Creek should include twelve hours or 25 million gallons of
effluent storage in order to equalize contaminant concentrations. Only 24% of the
25 million gallons of such storage would be required in order to equalize the flows in the
suggested manner. It is recommended that the equalization and storage lagoon be
designed in order to facilitate both purposes i.e., flow equalization and contaminant
equalization.
3. Pumping Station Operation
With the peak flows equalized to a value of 75 MGD or less, all of the effluent flows
for the design period through the year 2000 can be pumped utilizing the existing pump
station. However, in order to protect against cavitation of the pumps, the water level
may have to be raised in the wet well feeding the effluent pumping station. Detailed
studies should be conducted during final design of the facilities to determine the need
for increased net positive suction head (NPSH) for the existing pumps. If additional NPSH
9—6
-------
FIGURE 9-1
-STORAGE REQUIRED
APPROXIMATE 6 MG
50
0
18
21
HOUR OF DAY
ASSUMPTION:
Peak Diurnal fluctuations similar to
normal Diurnal fluctuations.
SOURCE-
CH2M HILL
MMSD FACILITIES PLAN
ESTIMATED DIURNAL PEAK FLOW FLUCTUATIONS
G
CTBRIEN6OERE
ENGINEERS INC
-------
Table 9-3
Item (Quantity)
Liquid Treatment Facilities
Grit Removal Equipment
Grit Chamber (1)
Grit Removal Mechanisms (3)
Grit Washers (3)
Grit Washing Pumps (2)
Overflow Spillage Prevention
No. 2 Junction Box Modifica-
tions
Bypass Control Modifications
Primary Clanfier Upgrading
Refurbish Mechanisms (6)
Aeration Basin Flow Control
Influent Valve Modifications
Concrete Work
Air Blowers
Blower Building No. 1
Blower Building No. 2
Supply to RBC's and
Aeration Basins No. 12-15
Secondary Clanfiers
Weir Modifications
Meter Modifications
Clanfier No. UFA
Clanfier No. 12FA
Return Sludge Pumps
Meter Modifications
Pump Modifications
further Pump Modifications
Chlorine Piping
Waste Sludge Pumps
Meter Modifications
Pump Modifications
Piping Modifications
Rotating Biological Contactors
Shaft No 1-162
Shaft No. 163-176
Shaft No 177-196
Filters
Filter Building
Filters No. 1-6
Filter No. 7
Recommended Construction Staging for Improvements
Nine Springs Wastewater Treatment Plant
Description
Year
on Line
9,000cu. ft. volume, aerated,
parallel and similar to existing units
4-inch diameter tubular conveyers
12-inch diameter screw conveyers
to grit bin
120 gpm secondary effluent
Top of box elevation 34.00
42-inch sluice gate
Inspect and repair as needed
Indicating Valve stems (10)
Resurface spalled concrete
Modifications to air piping
supplying Aeration Basins
No. 1 to 11
31,000 SCFM capacity
ClarifiersNo 5FAand6FA
Magnetic flow meters (10)
130ft. diameter
130ft. diameter
New magnetic flov,meters M-7
andM-8
Additional 4 MGD pumping
capacity
Additional 6 MGD pumping
capacity
Filamentous control
New magnetic flowmeters M-51
and M-52, larger indicator
and recorder for M-62
8 MGD combined pumping
capacity
Metered waste mixed liquor line
in Aeration Control Building
41.3 MGD capacity
44.9 MGD capacity
50.0 MGD capacity
25,000sq. ft structure
10,560sq. ft. area
l,760sq. ft. area
1980
1980
1980
1980
1980
1980
1980
1980
1980
1980
1980
1980
1980
1985
1980
1980
1990
1980
1980
1980
1980
1980
1985
1990
1980
1980
1990
9—8
-------
Table 9-3 (Cont'd.)
Breakpoint Chlormation Facilities
Railroad Spur
Chlormator System
Effluent Holding Pond
Holding Pond
Mixing Equipment
Dechlonnation Facilities
Chlorine Room Modifications
Sulfur Dioxide Feed System
Channel Planking
Wooden Plank Replacement
Sampling Equipment
Samplers No 1 to 6
Solids Treatment Facilities
Grasity Thickeners
Refurbish Mechanisms (2)
Gra\ny Thickener No. 5
Thickener Sweetening Equip-
ment
Di-^oKed Air Flotation Thickeners
Flotation Thickeners No. i
and 2
Flotation Thickener No. 3
Sludge Blenders No. 1 and 2
Anaerobic Digesters
Digester Upgrading
Heat Exchanger Modifications
Digester Control Building No. 2
Primary Digester No. 4
Primary Digester No. 5
Secondary Digester No. 3
Secondary Digester No. 4
Twin spur and liquid chlorine
transfer docks (2)
1,250 Ibs/hr capacity
25 MG volume
25 hp floating mixers (10)
Liquid sulfur dioxide storage
225 Ibs/hr capacity
Aluminum gratings
Modular automatic samplers
Inspect and repair as needed
55 ft. diameter
500 gpm secondary clarifier
effluent to each gravity
thickener
500 sq. ft. surface area
250 sq. ft. surface area
15 ft. diameter
Gas mixers, roof sealing,
overall refurbishing
New external heat exchanger
with water softener
Housing for controls, boilers,
pumps, and mixers
Volume 18,000cu. ft.,
diameter 85 ft.
Volume 181.000cu.ft.
diameter 85 ft.
Volume 181,000 cu. ft
diameter 85 ft
Volume 181,000cu. ft
1980
1980
1980
1980
1980
1980
1980
1980
1980
1980
1980
1980
1990
1980
1980
1980
1980
1980
1985
1980
Secondary Digester No. 4
Secondary digester No. 5
Digested Sludge Thickening
Equipment
Personnel Facilities
Operations and Administrative
Headquarters
Volume 181,000 cu. ft.,
diameter 85 ft.
Volume 181,000cu. ft.,
diameter 85 ft.
Supernatant drawoff piping
9,000 sq. ft structure
1980
1985
1980
1980
Courtesy CH2M HILL
9—9
-------
Table 9-4
Estimated Costs for Advanced
Treatment and Plant Modifications
1. Capital Costs
Liquid Treatment Facilities (1)
Solids Treatment Facilities (1)
Effluent Ditch Modifications
and Any Required Crossings
Subtotal
Engineering (12%)
Legal, Administrative
and Fiscal Costs (3%)
Contingency (15%)
Total Capital Costs
2. Operation and Maintenance Costs
(Including Contingencies)
Electrical Po\\er (1)
Other O&M(1)
Stream Monitoring &
Flow Gauging Program
Construction Costs (year on Line)
1980
$16,650,000
3,240,000
300,000
$20,190,000
2,420,000
610,000
3,030,000
$26,250,000
Sl,350,000/yr
Sl,800,000/yr
S 50,000/yr
Total Operation & Maintenance Costs S3,200,000/yr
3. Bio-Assay Studies $ 60,000
Note: All costs are given in January, 1976 dollars
(1) Courtesy: CH2M HILL
1985
$1,015,000
$1,015,000
120,000
30,000
155,000
$1,320,000
1990
$1,150,000
165,000
$1,315,000
160,000
40,000
195,000
$1,710,000
9—10
-------
is needed, the walls of the wet well could be extended, and the lift station transferring the
effluent from the equalization lagoon would then be designed to lift the effluent to a
slightly higher elevation.
4. Pipeline, Effluent Ditch, and Badfish Creek
It is recommended that the effluent be pumped through the existing concrete pipeline to
its present discharge location at the head end of the effluent ditch. It would then flow
down the ditch in the present manner to discharge at the present location in the Oregon
Branch of the Badfish Creek.
In response to concerns from residents in the Town of Dunn, fencing of the effluent
ditch should be provided at those locations where the effluent ditch is in close proximity
to residential areas. The fencing would alleviate the potential hazard to children that
may be playing close to the effluent ditch. Covered sections of pipe should be installed
to form bridges in those locations where the ditch artificially divides substantial portions
of a single farm and the need for a crossing has been documented. Figure 9-2 shows those
portions of the effluent ditch where fencing is suggested.
In addition to the fencing specified, the entire ditch and creek should be examined for
possible improvements to any areas where erosion and/or tree growth are causing any
problems.
5. Re-aeration of the Effluent
The treated effluent is projected to discharge from the pipeline with 0-2 mg/1 of dissolved
oxygen, and it is felt that the dissolved oxygen concentration of the water in the effluent
ditch prior to its junction with the Badfish Creek should be 5 mg/1 or higher. The existing
re-aeration steps currently provide this level of re-aeration and it is anticipated that with
the reduced oxygen demand of the better treated effluent, even higher concentrations of
dissolved oxygen will be present in the ditch in the future.
D. Possible Discharge to the Proposed Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant
As mentioned earlier in this section, the alternative discharging the effluent to the proposed
Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant is only a valid alternative if the power plant is approved
for construction and then only if favorable rates for the sale of the effluent can be negotiated.
While a rate of 45C/1,000 gallons for the sale of softened water was used in the comparison
of alternames. such a rate should not be considered as either binding or non-negotiabie
in further discussions with WEPCO representatives.
It is recommended that if the power plant is approved, additional discussions with WEPCO
representatives be held to establish if the rate of 45C/1,000 gallons could be negotiated
further. This alternative would then be considered further only if an economical rate for
the sale of uater could be agreed with WEPCO. In order for the sale of effluent to be
acceptable, me rate should generate suficient revenues to cover the debt retirement costs as
well as the operating and maintenance costs that would be incurred to treat the effluent for
reuse at the proposed power plant. In addition, the revenue from the sale of water should
provide sufficient incentive for MMSD to make the required additional investment to enable
such a project to be undertaken.
9-11
-------
FIGURE 9-2
NINE SPRINGS
EFFLUENT PIPELINE
MMSD FACILITIES PLAN
EFFLUENT DITCH - AREAS PROPOSED
FOR FENCING.
LEGEND-
rr=. PROPOSED FENCED AREAS
O'BRIEN &GERE
ENGINEERS INC
-------
9.03 Non-structural Recommendations
A. General
While a major emphasis should be placed on the structural facilities required in order to
upgrade the quality of the effluent, a similar degree of emphasis should be placed on several
non-structural actions which are an important part of the overall plan for protection of
the water quality in the Rock and Yahara River Basins. The several non-structural recom-
mendations are detailed in the following paragraphs.
B. Source Control of Specified Pollutants
During the evaluation of requirements for meeting water quality standards for numerous
beneficial uses (Section 8), it was recommended that the sources of several pollutant cate-
gories be identified and efforts be made to institute source control programs. The pollutants
thus identified are as follows:
1. Heavy Metals
a) Selenium
b) Cadmium
c) Lead
d) Aluminum
e) Copper
f) Mercury
g) SiKer
h) Zinc
2. Potentially Toxic Organic Chemicals
a) Cyanides
b) Pesticides
1. Chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides
2. Organo-sulfur and organo-phosphcrus pesticides
c) Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB)
The effluent concentrations of ail of the referenced contaminants are in what would
nominally be considered a very low range, thus effectively precluding any economical treat-
ment method from being applied to the entire effluent flow. However, the relative lack of
dilution in the receiving streams of the area requires that the concentrations in the effluent
be lowered even further. Source control of these parameters would appear to be the best
effectixe solution.
It is therefore recommended that MMSD initiate an intensive analytical monitoring program
to locate the sources of these materials in their system and to develop an approximate
material balance for each parameter.
Such a program should start with an identification of the relative concentrations of the
parameters in the raw water supply and in the sewage effluent. Several samples should be
taken at various times of the year in order to encompass possible seasonal fluctuations in
the ground water quality.
9—13
-------
Once the net poundage increase in the sewage is established for each listed parameter,
MMSD should proceed with the second phase of the program and attempt to identify the
individual sources of each parameter.
The source survey should begin with an intensive sampling of a typical residential area.
The results of this portion of the survey should reveal the approximate nature of the con-
taminants originating from normal household sources such as copper dissolving from
copper water pipes and copper resulting from the use of "blue" toilet bowl cleaners. House-
hold sources of copper and other materials could be determined in this manner.
The source survey should continue with a survey of the contaminants in major industrial
discharges including the Oscar Mayer Company effluent. All of the normal metal finishing
operations in the MMSD service area should be interviewed, and their wastewater should be
sampled and analyzed. In addition, research facilities conducting pesticide studies should be
interviewed to ascertain the magnitude of their contributions.
Once a complete material balance is developed for each contaminant, various alternate
strategies for reducing the contaminant levels can be detailed, and the most cost effective
solution can be implemented.
C. Regulation of Madison Lake Levels
An mregrai part of the recommended alternative involves the continued study of tne ba->e
flow recession in the Yahara River basin as a result of effluent diversion. The recommended
discharge alternative maintains the base flow in the lower Yahara River, however, the flows
in the upper Yahara River may drop to zero during prolonged dry weather periods on a
regular basis. Appendix C discusses two potential methods for maintaining base flows in
upper Yahara. The method involving importation of water from the Wisconsin River basin
is fairlv expensive and would be difficult to implement. The method of maintaining base
flov,-, b> regulating the water levels in the Madison Lakes, however, would seem to provide
a relaiAelv low cost solution. It is recommended that MMSD continue to cooperate with
other area groups including the Dane County Regional Planning Commission, the Madison
Water Utility, the Dane County Park Commission, and the Wisconsin Department of
Natural Resources to further define the effects of wastewater diversion on the hydrology
of the Upper Yahara River Basin and then establish any required remedial programs.
D. Continuing Work on Water Quality of the Madison Lakes
Since the critical dissolved oxygen conditions in both the Yahara River and 'ne Rock River
occur during the night as a result of phytoplankton respiration, it is essential that the levc;
of phvtopiankton activity be reduced if a level of 5 ing/l of dissolved oxygen is to be mam-
tamed a; ail times. Intensive efforts are underway in the City of Madison and surrounding
communities to reduce the amount of nutrients reaching Lakes Mendota and Monona from
urban runoff. Efforts are underway to also control nutrients in the lower two lakes bv
providing sewer service for the areas adjacent to the lakes. However, since the lower two
lakes are located in a more rural environment, it is felt that some reduction in agricultural
nutrient runoff will have to be achieved in order to effectively reduce the level of phytoplank-
ton activitv m these lakes.
It i- recommended that MMSD actively encourage and work with other groups in the area
in the,- attempts to improve lake water quality. Continued active and vigorous support of
the Dane County Regional Planning Commission in their 208 Areawide Wastewater Manage-
ment Stud> is felt to be the most effective method of MMSD to assist in this area of concern.
9—14
-------
E. Continued Effluent and Stream Monitoring
Because of the complexity of water quality problems in the Yahara and Rock Rivers and
because of the intensified levels of concern expressed by downstream residents, it is recom-
mended that MMSD continue the present system of twice per month monitoring of the
effluent ditch, Badfish Creek, and the Yahara and Rock Rivers. It is suggested that the
existing sampling stations as listed below be retained in the future sampling program.
Station #NS — Nine Springs Effluent
Station #A — Effluent Ditch below first aerator (dissolved oxygen only)
Station #B — Effluent Ditch prior to second aerator (dissolved oxygen only)
Station #1 — Badfish Creek after junction with effluent ditch
Station #3 — Mouth of Rutland Branch
Station #4 — Badfish Creek below Rutland Branch
Station #7 — Badfish Creek below Frogpond Creek and Spring Creek
Station #8 — Badfish Creek just prior to junction with the Yahara River
Station #9 — Yahara River below Badfish confluence
Station #10 — Yahara River above Badfish confluence
Station #15 — Rock River at Indianford Dam
Station #16 — Rock River at STH Bridge north of Janesville
In addition, it is recommended that the following new sampling points be established as a
part of the continuing monitoring program.
Station C — Effluent Ditch just prior to entering Badfish Creek
Station D — Oregon Branch of Badfish Creek just upstream of discharge of effluent
ditch
Station 5A — Mouth of Spring Creek before confluence with Badfish Creek
Station 6A — Mouth of Frogpond Creek before confluence with Badfish C;eek
Figure 9-3 is a map shov-ing the locations of all of the listed sampling sites. While it is
realized that sites C and D are not presently accessible by use of an all-weather road, it is
felt that data from these sites is sufficiently important that provisions should be made \\ith
adjacent landowners to gam year-around access to these locations. One access road may be
suitable for both sampling sites.
All of the listed stations should be sampled on a twice-per-month basis as in the past. Stations
A and B should be sampled for dissolved oxygen content only. The following analyses should
be performed on each of the samples as is done at present.
1) BOD,
2) NHrN
3) Total Suspended Solids
4) Volatile Suspended Solids
5) pH
6) Fecal Coliforms
7) Dissolved Oxygen
8) Temperature
9) Total Phosphorus
In addition, the following supplemental analyses should be run on each of the samples:
10) Selenium
11) Cadmium
12) Lead
13) Aluminum
9—15
-------
14) Copper
15) Mercury
16) Silver
17) Zinc
18) Cyanides
19) Pesticides (Chlorinated Hydrocarbon)
20) Pesticides (Organo-Phosphorus)
21) Polychlorinated Biphenyls
While it is realized that considerable incremental costs will be incurred in such an intensified
monitoring program, it is, nevertheless, deemed to be of sufficient importance to justify
such an expenditure.
It should be recognized that numerous other pollutant sources beyond the control of MMSD
have a significant role in establishing the overall water quality in Badfish Creek, the Yahara
River and the Rock River. The implementation of the recommended monitoring program
should provide the necessary data to more closely pinpoint the source of any future water
quality problems in the area.
F. Increased Flow Gauging Activities
Much of the data gathering effort during this Facilities Plan was hampered by the lack of
reliable flow gauge readings. While accurate readings were available at certain locations,
flows for others were arrived at through an iterative process.
One of the most effective means of determining the impact of various pollutant sources on
the streams in the area is to develop a material balance flowsheet for each parameter. In
order to develop a meaningful material balance flowsheet for any of the pollutants, it be-
comes necessary that adequate flow information be available. It is recommended that a series
of flow gauging stations be established.
The existing flow gauging station at McFarland should be maintained in working condition
a; all times.
Additional flow gauging stations should be established in the following locations.
1. Near the mouth of the Badfish, below the entrance of Spring Creek and above the
confluence with the Yahara River.
2. On the Yahara River between the outlet of the Stebbinsville Dam and the confluence
of the Badfish Creek.
3. On the Rock River between the outlet of Indianford Dam and the confluence of the
Yahara River.
Since the Wisconsin DNR is considering further study of the Yahara and Rock Rivers as a
separate 208 Study and Wisconsin Electric Power Company has discussed the need for a
gauging station below Indianford Dam, it is suggested that MMSD meet with representa-
tives of both of these organizations as well as the U.S. Geological Survey to discuss the
possibility of jointly sponsoring the establishment of such gauging stations.
G. Bio-Assav Studies
Since the effluent characterization survey revealed concentrations of several parameters in
excess of the levels recommended for the protection of fish and aquatic life, it is recom-
mended that MMSD undertake rather comprehensive bio-assay studies to determine the
effects of the effluent on fish and aquatic life.
9—16
-------
FIGURE 9-3
Loke
Woubeso
NINE
SPRINGS
WASTE WATER
TREATMENT
PLANT
Edgerton
Fulton
MMSD FACILITIES PLAN
LOCATIONS OF EXISTING AND
PROPOSED STREAM MONITORING
STATIONS
LEGEND^
DAM
EFFLUENT PIPELINE
(T) EXISTING SAMPLING STATION
PROPOSED SAMPLING STATION
G
O'BRIEN fiGERE
ENGINEERS INC
-------
Such studies could begin using unchlorinated secondary effluent and simulating the nitrifica-
tion process to alleviate any possibility of ammonia toxicity. Dissolved oxygen could also be
artificially maintained. Therefore, any toxicity exhibited would be due to some other condi-
tion existing in the effluent. If toxicity is exhibited, more detailed studies would be re-
quired to determine the cause of such toxicity.
Upon completion of the advanced waste treatment facilities, the studies should be repeated
using the effluent from the expanded facilities. As in the previous case, the extent of the
studies necessary would be determined by the existence or absence of toxicity in the initial
screening tests.
It is recommended that MMSD contract with recognized experts in bio-assay work for such
studies. Representatives of the Departments of Entomology and Zoology at the University
of Wisconsin, who supervised the Badfish Creek studies conducted as a part of this Facilities
Plan, should be consulted to ascertain their interest in undertaking such work. In the
absence of an interest on their part, they should be asked to recommend several persons
and/or organizations whom they believe to be capable of performing the work.
9—18
-------
SECTION 10 — PROJECT COSTS AND FINANCING
10.01 Background
In accordance with Section 35.935-13 of CFR Title 40, MMSD is developing a system of User
Charges and an Industrial Cost Recovery Program as a grant condition for the Fifth Addition
to the Nine Springs Wastewater Treatment Plant. The User Charge and Industrial Cost
Recovery systems developed in conjunction with the Fifth Addition construction will be
expanded to cover subsequent additions relating to sludge handling and advanced wastewater
treatment. This section has been developed to estimate the costs effects on the average residential
customer and on industrial users.
In addition to the basic User Charges which cover operation, maintenance, replacement and
MMSD debt service costs, industrial users subject to Industrial Cost Recovery will also be
required to repay that portion of the Federal grant used for the construction of treatment
capacity for industrial users. These payments will be made over a 30-year period with no interest
charged.
The MMSD estimates that there will be a surplus of $2,000,000 in MMSD's Construction
Account at the completion of construction of the Fifth Addition. These funds will have ac-
cumulated through benefit charges collected from new users and through delayed grants. These
grants were received for projects financed entirely by MMSD through general obligation
bonds. At the time of construction, these grants were not available, and since MMSD financed
the construction through its Construction Account when the grants were received, they were
deposited in the Construction Account.
The MMSD anticipates receiving grants for 75 percent of the capital costs of the Organic Solids
Reuse Project, the AWT Solids Treatment Facilities, and the AWT Liquid Treatment Facilities.
10.02 Construction Sequence
The initial construction phase of the various projects are proposed to be bid as follows:
January, 1978 Organic Solids Reuse
July, 1978 AWT Solids Treatment
January, 1979 Organic Solids Reuse
July, 1979 AWT Liquids Treatment
January, 1980 Organic Solids Reuse
January, 1981 Organic Solids Reuse
January, 1982 Organic Solids Reuse
The five separate Organic Solids Reuse projects cover the initial costs associated with lagoon
improvements, the sludge distribution system components, and the components of the land
application system as discussed in Volume III of the Facilities Plan.
The AWT Solids Treatment Facilities initial construction phase includes the thickening and
digestion facilities discussed in Chapter 13 of Volume II of the Facilities Plan. These facilities
are proposed to be operational in January, 1980.
The AWT Liquids Treatment Facilities initial construction phase includes the treatment facilities
detailed in Table 13-7 of Volume II of the Facilities Plan. These facilities are proposed to be
operational in January, 1982.
10—1
-------
10.03 MMSD Costs with No Grants
If no grant money is available for financing the capital costs of the various projects, the $2
million Construction Account surplus will be depleted during construction of the AWT Solids
Treatment Facilities in July, 1978. Since MMSD must have sufficient capital on hand at the
time the contracts are awarded, it is anticipated that MMSD would sell a bond issue in December,
1977 to cover construction costs through 1982. This bond would be for approximately $33
million.
Table 10-1 shows the estimated costs for the various MMSD functions during the initial
construction phase of the Organic Solids Reuse Project, the AWT Solids Treatment Project,
and the AWT Liquids Treatment Project if no grants are received.
Table 10-2 shows the estimated costs for the average residential customer if no grants are
received. The costs are shown in January, 1976 dollars and are adjusted upward anticipating an
8 percent rate of inflation.
Table 10-1
Estimated Total Annual Costs
Without Grants
^vdminisiration
Collection and Transmission
Pnmar> & Secondary Treatment
AWT Liquids Treatment
Etflueni Pumping
Solids Treatment
Ortianic Solids Reuse
196] Bond Debt Service
1971 Bond Debt Service
197~ Bond Debt Service
Total Annual Cost
1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982
$ 15^.000 S 165,000 $ 173,000 S 182,000 S 191,000 $ 200,000 S 210,000
269,000
725,000
0
326,000
246,000
73.000
1,160,000
397,000
0
293,000
997,000
0
361,000
284,000
80,000
1,188,000
387,000
0
320,000
1,316,000
0
399,000
312,000
235,000
1,204,000
427,000
3,083,000
348,000
1,447,000
0
442,000
343,000
408,000
1,233,000
414,000
3,083,000
380,000
1,592,000
0
489,000
471,000
436,000
1,260,000
401,000
3,083,000
414,000
1,751,000
0
541,000
518,000
463,000
0
1,937,000
3.083,000
451,000
2,006,000
1,675,000
662,000
569,000
452,000
ti
0
3,0«3,000
$3,353,000 $3,755,000 $7,469,000 $7,900,000 $8,303,000 $8,907,000 $9.108,000
10—2
-------
Table 10-2
Estimated Annual Cost for the Average Residential Customer
Without Grants
•\dministration
C ollection and Transmission
Primarv and Secondary Treatment
\V> T Liquids Treatment
Effluent Pumping
Solids Treatment
Organic Solids Reuse
[96! 4 I9"l Bond Debt Service
lv~~ Bond Debt Service
Total (January, 1976 Dollars)
Adjusted Total
(8 Percent Inflation) $33.51 $37.03 $76.13 S79.83 $83.03 $87.67 $91.13
10.04 MMSD Costs with 75 Percent Grants
If MMSD receives grant money to cover 75 percent of the capital costs of the Organic Solids
Reuse Project, the AWT Solids Treatment Project, and the AWT Liquids Treatment Project,
the S2 million Construction Account surplus will be depleted during construction of the AWT
Liquids Treatment Facilities in July, 1979. Thus, it is anticipated that MMSD would sell a bond
issue in December, 1978 to cover the remainder of the construction in the initial construction
phase. This bond would be for approximately $7.3 million.
Table 10.03-4 sho\ss the estimated costs for the various MMSD functions during the initial
construction phase of the various projects if grants are received for 75 percent of the eligible
capital costs.
Table 10.03-4 shows the estimated cost for the average residential customer if grants are
received for 75 percent of the initial construction costs. The costs arc shown in January, 1976
dollars and are adjusted upward anticipating an 8 percent rate of mfkit.on.
1976
$ 2.26
2.09
8.03
0
2.26
3.12
0.94
14 81
0
$33.51
1977
$ 2.18
2.08
9 80
0
2 29
3.30
0 94
13.70
0
$34.29
1978
$ 2.09
2.07
11.83
0
2.31
3.31
2.53
12.97
28.16
$65.27
1979
$ 2.00
2 06
11.90
0
2 34
3 33
4.02
11 98
25 74
S63.37
1980
$ 1.92
2 06
11.97
0
2.37
4.19
393
11 05
23 54
$61.03
1981
$ 1.84
2.05
1205
0
2.39
4.21
3.82
11.78
21 53
$59.67
1982
$ 1 77
2.04
12.63
10.98
2.68
4 23
3 41
0
1969
$57.43
10—3
-------
Table 10-3
Estimated Total Annual Costs
With 75 Percent Grants
Administration
Collection and Transmission
Primary & Secondary Treatment
AWT Liquids Treatment
Effluent Pumping
Solids Treatment
Organic Solids Reuse
1961 Bond Debt Service
1971 Bond Debt Service
1978 Bond Debt Service
Total Annual Cost
Administration
C Election ana Transmission
Pnniarv & Secondary Treatment
\\V] 1 iquids Treaimeni
1 niucni Pumpiii::
Sohds Treatmer:
Organiv. Solids Reuse
]y6i & 1971 Bond Debt Service
1978 Bond Debi Service
Total (January. 1976 Dollars)
Adjusted Total
(8 Percent Inflation)
1976
$ 157,000
269,000
:nt 725,000
0
326,000
246,000
73,000
1,160,000
397,000
0
$3,353,000
1977
$ 166,000
293,000
997,000
0
361,000
284,000
80,000
1,188,000
387,000
0
$3,756,000
1978
$ 176,000
320,000
1,316,000
0
399,000
312,000
235,000
1,204,000
427,000
0
1979
S 187,000
348,000
1,447,000
0
442,000
343,000
408,000
1,233,000
414,000
689,000
$4,389,000 $5,511,000
1980
$ 198,000
380,000
1,592,000
0
489,000
471,000
436,000
1 ,260,000
401,000
689,000
$5,916,000
1981
$ 210,000
414,000
1,751,000
0
541,000
518,000
463,000
0
1,937,000
689,000
$6,523,000
1982
$ 223,000
451,000
2,006,000
1,675,000
662,000
569,000
452,000
0
0
689,000
$6,727,000
Table 10-4
Estimated Annual Cost for the Average Residential Customer
With 75 Percent Grants
1976
S 226
2 09
•nt 8 03
0
2 26
3 12
0.94
e 14 81
0
rM S33.51
1977
S 2 19
2 08
9 80
0
2 29
3 30
0 94
13 70
0
$34.30
1978
S 2 12
2 ()-
11 83
0
2 31
1 31
2 53
12 97
0
S37.14
1979
S 2 06
2 06
11 90
0
2 34
1 33
4.02
11 98
5 60
S43.29
1980
S 1 99
2 06
11 9"
0
2 i"7
4 19
3 93
11 05
5 12
$42.68
1981
S 1.93
205
12 05
0
2 39
4 21
3.82
11 ->8
4.69
$42.92
1982
S 1.88
2.04
1263
10 98
2 68
4 23
3 41
0
4 29
S42.14
$33.51
$37.04
$43.32
$54.53
$58.06
$63.06
$66.87
10—4
-------
10.05 Construction Grants Availability
Besides the two possibilities of no grants and 75 percent grants for construction of MMSD pro-
posed facilities, other possibilities that would affect MMSD financing of these projects are:
a) The Federal government may discontinue grants for advanced wastewater treatment. This
would mean there would be a reduction in the grant for the AWT Liquids Treatment
Facilities.
b) The State of Wisconsin may provide funding for a portion of the facilities in which case
there would be an increase in the grant amounts received for the various projects.
c) Various combinations of the above grant availability possibilities could result in increases
or decreases in the amount of grant money received by MMSD.
10.06 Industrial Cost Recovery
Section 204 (b)(l)(B) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972
(PL 92-500) requires that industrial users of the treatment works make payments for that
portion of the cost of construction of such treatment works which is allocable to the treatment
of such industrial wastes. Money spent by MMSD for treatment works construction will be
recovered through the user charges system. The portion of the grants received by MMSD thai is
used :o Construct treatment capacity for industrial wastewater will be recovered through the
industrial cost recovery (1CR) system. The recovery period will cover the useful life of the
facilities or thirty years, \\hiche\er is less, in accordance with Section 39.118 of CFR Title 40.
The MMSD anticipates a 30-year recover> period. This period \vill start the year the facilities
become operational.
Table 10-5 shows the estimated 1CR rates for the various projects anticipating 75 percent
Federal construction grants and a 30-\ear recovery period. The construction sequence detailed
in Section 10.02 is also used in developing this table. The rate structure used to make the
estimates is the proposed rate structure currently being reviewed by MMSD.
With no construction grants, the industrial users will pay for their share of the construction
costs entirely through the user charge system. These costs would appear as debt service costs
over a 20-year period and would include interest on the debt, estimated at 7 percent.
if 75 percent of the construction costs are funded by Federal grants, the remaining 25 percent
of the construction costs would be recovered through user charges, and the 75 percent grant
amount would be recovered through the industrial cost recovery (ICR) system. Money recovered
through the ICR system would have no interest charged and would be recovered over a 30-year
period.
10—5
-------
Date
July, 1977
July, 1978
JuU, 1979
January 1980
luK, 19X0
JuK, 1981
Januarv, 1982
January. 1983
Table 10-5
Estimated Industrial Cost Recovery Rates
for Initial Construction Phase
Industrial Cost Recovery Rates
Project
Fifth Addition
Accum 1CR Rates
Organic Solids Reuse
Accum ICR Rates
Organic Solids Reuse
Accum. ICR Rates
AWT Solids Treatment
Accum ICR Rates
Organic Solids Reuse
Accum 1C R Rates
Organic Solids Reuse
Accum 1C R Rates
AWT Liquid-. 1 reatment
Accum It R Rates
Organu Soiiiis RCUM.
Accum !CR Rates
Vol.
S/MG
2 97
297
0
2 97
0
2 97
0 30
3 27
0
3 27
0
3 2~
9 9"
13.24
0
13 24
BOD
$/LB
0.00335
0 00335
0.00045
0.00380
0 00005
0 00385
0.00203
0 00588
0.00011
0 00599
0 00006
0 00605
0 00234
0.00839
0 (XX>38
D 008"~
ss
$/LB
0.00136
0.00136
0.00068
0.00204
0.00008
0 002 1 2
000309
000521
0.00016
0 0053"
0.00009
0 00546
0 00176
o(xr2:
0 (XX)5~
0 007^9
N
S/LB
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-------
SECTION 11 - SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
11.01 Summary
A. General
The Madison Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) serves an area of approximately 143
square miles in South Central Dane County, Wisconsin encompassing three cities, five
villages and twenty-six municipal customers located within ten townships. The City of
Madison is the largest customer.
The MMSD's Nine Springs Wastewater Treatment Plant provides secondary treatment for the
present waste flow of 36.5 MGD. Since 1958, the effluent from the Nine Springs plant has
been diverted from its prior discharge location to Lake Waubesa and has been discharged
to a small stream in Southern Dane County called Badfish Creek. Badfish Creek drains
south and east through lower Dane County and adjacent Rock County to join the Yahara
River above its confluence with the Rock River. The diversion of the effluent into Badfish
Creek has been a continuing source of controversy between residents in Dane and Rock
Counties since its inception and potential legal remedies to the problem have to date provided
little or no solution to the problem.
The MMSD was offered an EPA construction grant in 1974 to provide additional secondary
treatment capacity through a "Fifth Addition" to the facility. A condition of the construc-
tion grant stipulated that a "Facilities Planning Study" be completed by MMSD to address
the following points.
1) The future location of the effluent discharge
2) The degree of treatment required for the future effluent discharge.
3) The method of utilizing organic solids (sludge) so as to achieve agricultural reuse of
the material.
-\ Facilities Planning Advisory Committee (FPAC) to the MMSD was created in 1974
\vhicn included representation from both Dane County and Rock County, as well as
representatives from the Rock Valley Metropolitan Council, the public at large, the
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and the United States Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA). The goal of the committee was to provide guidance in conduct-
ing the Facilities Planning Study.
With the assistance of the FPAC, MMSD formalized certain goals and objective- for the
study, developed a detailed plan of study which was approxed by EPA and subcontracted
with various groups for the execution of the study.
The Facilities Planning Report was developed by a combined effort of the following groups:
1 i Madison Metropolitan Sewerage District Staff
2) O'Brien & Gere Engineers, Inc.
^) CH2M HILL Engineers, Planner^, Economists, Scientists
4) Dane County Regional Planning Commission
5) Rock Valley Metropolitan Council
11 — 1
-------
Assistance and advice was rendered throughout the study on a regular basis by the FPAC
as well as by each individual member of the committee.
The basic study plan was divided into two separate phases. One phase pertained to the
additional treatment and discharge of the effluent and the other pertained to agricultural
reuse of the organic sludges.
B. Effluent Discharge Alternatives
A total of us ent) -three potential effluent discharge sites both within the Yahara River basin
and outside of the Yahara basin were developed for preliminary consideration. In each case,
the qualiiy of effluent required for the particular discharge location was established by
O'Brien & Gere Engineers. The accompanying treatment alternatives for each location
were then developed by CH2M HILL, and the total cost as well as the environmental impact
of each alternative was evaluated. The preliminary screening of the twenty-three alternatives
compared cost, environmental impact, reliability, flexibility, and legal constraints of the
alternatives in an attempt to define those alternatives which were worthy of detailed study.
One of the more significant factors evaluated in the preliminary screening process v as the
quantification of the severe effects associated with diversion of water out of the Upper Yahara
River Basm.
it vvdj also discovered that the extremely low dilution factors at Q7 10 flows afforded by
the streams in the Yahara River and Rock River basins dictated that a very high level of
treatment be provided for each alternative.
Upon the completion of the preliminary screening phase, the following five alternatives
\vere considered to be worthy of more intensive study:
i ; \dditional treatment and discharge of the effluent to a proposed nuclear power plant
tor reuse as cooling tower make-up water.
2) Additional treatment and discharge to the Badfish Creek at the present location.
3) Additional treatment and a split discharge between Badfish Creek and the Yahara River.
4; Additional treatment and discharge to the Yahara River.
^) Aaditional treatment and discharge to the Wisconsin River.
A,; mienv. e ^tudy of these remaining alternatives included the following:
,1) An extensive effluent characterization program
b) An extensive evaluation of non-point source contaminants
- > \ de'aned mathematical modeling effort for each of the receiving streams
',;) Detailed evaluations of the treatment requirements for the protection of each potential
beneficial use of the receiving streams
;) Detailed cost evaluations for both treatment and discharge facilities
11—2
-------
f) Detailed evaluations of the environmental impact, reliability, flexibility and imple-
mentability of each treatment and discharge alternative
g) Development of relative ratings for each alternative for each of the listed categories
and a matrix evaluation of the alternatives
On the basis of the matrix comparison, a recommended plan of treatment and discharge
\\as formulated. Based on the results of the intensive study of discharge alternatives, as
was shown in the matrix comparison, it was recommended that MMSD provide additional
levels of treatment including nitrification, filtration, breakpoint chlorination, dechlorina-
tion and equalization, and that the effluent continue to be discharged to Badfish Creek at
the present discharge location.
C. Organic Solids Reuse
A separate portion of the facilities plan dealing with agricultural reuse of the organic solids
from the Nine Springs plant was prepared by CH2M HILL.
Their work started where previous studies by Greeley and Hansen Engineers, and Roy F.
Weston Inc. terminated with the assumption that agricultural reuse of the organic sludges
was the most cost effective method of ultimate disposal.
The organic solids reuse study encompassed a rather complete characterization of both the
produced sludges and the sludges contained in the existing sludge lagoons. Future quantities
of organic sludges were estimated and regulations governing the application of sewage
sludges on land were reviewed.
A study was made of the potential sludge application sites in Dane County and permissible
sludge loading rates were established for different types of soils. Subsequently, meetings
were held with representatives of the farm community in order to ascertain the degree of
participation that could be expected. Alternative methods of sludge transportation and
application were discussed with the farm community, as a part of an evaluation of their
applicability to the local situation.
On me basis of the evaluations performed, a sludge reuse program was recommended for
implementation by MMSD. The recommended program also includes specific suggestions
pertaining to the development of informational, marketing, and monitoring programs
which are an essential part of the overall solution.
11.02 Conclusions
A. General
Certain general conclusions were developed as a part of the Facilities Planning Study, both
with respect to effluent treatment and disposal, and organic solids reuse. These conclusions
are presented in the following paragraphs.
B. Conclusions with Respect to Effluent Treatment and Disposal
1) The present secondary effluent from the Nine Springs Wastewater Treatment Plant con-
tributes to a substantial degradation of water quality in Badfish Creek during the warmer
parts of the year, when low stream flows are prevalent.
11—3
-------
2) While the completion of the Fifth Addition to the Nine Springs plant will result in an
improvement in effluent quality, the incremental increase in quality will not be sufficient
to allow the maintenance of adequate dissolved oxygen in Badfish Creek on a year-around
basis to protect fish and aquatic life.
3) Diversion of the wastewater effluent out of the Madison lakes and into Badfish Creek
has caused a serious recession in the Q?t jo flows in the upper Yahara River which drains
the lakes.
4) Approximately 5.45 MOD of infiltration and up to 14.14 MGD of inflow exists for
several days each year in the sewer systems collecting the sewage and in the interceptor
sewers transporting the waste to the treatment plant. It has been shown that it is not cost
effective to do a Sewer System Evaluation Survey, but it appears to be cost effective to
do a limited Sewer System Evaluation Survey where investigative efforts would be con-
centrated on known bad I/I pockets within the MMSD. Arrangements are being made
for the conduct of such a survey.
5) A design period of 20 years from 1980 to 2000 is a reasonable design period for the
facility.
6) Increased populations and accompanying increased waste flows can be expected within
the MMSD service area in the future. Wastewater flows are anticipated to rise to an
average daily flow of 50 MGD by the year 2000.
7) Diversion of larger volumes of wastewater effluent in the future will further reduce base
flows in the Yahara River beyond the present level and will result in occasions when the
flow in the River at McFarland will be essentially zero.
8) Pump Station No. 7 needs expansion to handle peak flows.
9) Centralized treatment of the areas currently served by MMSD at the Nine Springs plant
for the future waste flows is preferable to treatment at satellite treatment plants within
MMSD.
10) The background water quality in the Yahara and Rock River basins is presently seriously
impaired by the high levels of phytoplankton activity in the lower Madison lakes and in
Koshkonong Lake. The high level of phytoplankton activity is due, in large part, to the
high leveis of nutrients draining from the extremely fertile farm lands in the basins.
11) Because of the oxygen demand introduced by phytoplankton respiration and the rather
low re-aeration capabilities of the Yahara and Rock Rivers, the waters of both of these
streams are projected to be below the dissolved oxygen standard of 5 mg/1 required for
the protection of fish and aquatic life during Qv )o low flow conditions in the absence
of any effluent discharge from the Nine Springs plant.
12) Water quality in the Wisconsin River near Prairie du Sac was found during sampling to
contain less than 5 mg/1 of dissolved oxygen at times and is projected to contain less than
5 mg/1 at Q7> 10 low flows without the Nine Springs effluent discharge.;
13) Dissolved oxygen levels in Badfish Creek are projected to be less than 5 mg/1 for an
initial period of time if the effluent is removed from the creek due to sediment oxygen
demand and reduced re-aeration.
11—4!
-------
14) Additional treatment levels including nitrification, filtration, break-point chlorination,
dechlorination and equalization will be required for any discharge to the Rock or Yahara
Rivers or to Badfish Creek because of the extremely low Q?, 10 flows.
15) Sand filtration of the effluent is the most cost-effective method of reducing BOD and
solids to a level of 10 mg/1 or less on a continuous basis, at the Nine Springs Plant.
16) Nitrification with rotating biological contactors is the most cost-effective method of
removing ammonia to a level of 2 mg/1 as N, at the Nine Springs Plant.
17) Breakpoint chlorination is required in order to achieve extremely low levels of ammonia
to avoid toxicity to fish and aquatic life and to deactivate virus cells.
18) Dechlorination of the effluent is required in order to protect fish and aquatic life from
the toxic effects of residual chlorine.
19) Equalization of the effluent is required for the protection of fish and aquatic life from
varying heavy metai concentrations, with discharge to Badfish Creek.
20) Seasonal nitrification and chlorination would be required for a discharge to the Wisconsin
River in the vicinity of Prairie du Sac.
21 ,i A discharge to the proposed Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant wouid require softening
of the effluent to anow its reuse as cooling tower make-up.
22) Since the power plant cannot utilize all of the effluent at all times, the effluent would
ha\ e to receive the level of treatment required for discharge to the Yahara or Rock Rivers.
23) The power plant alternative is not a valid alternative until and unless the facility is ap-
proved for construction and favorable rates could be negotiated for sale of the treated
effluent.
24) Additional land will be required for construction of advanced wastewater treatment
facilities.
25) Discharge of nitrified and filtered effluent to the Yahara River will not further depress
the existing low dissolved oxygen levels but would tend to increase ihe dissolved
oxygen levels in the River. However, the increase would not result in the maintenance of
5 mg/1 of dissolved oxygen at Qv 10 flows.
26) The discharge of a nitrified, filtered, and softened effluent to the Rock River after use as
cooling tower make-up might depress the dissolved oxygen within a four-mile reach of
the point of discharge above Indianford Dam.
27) The discharge of a nitrified effluent to the Wisconsin River would have a minimal effect
on the dissolved oxygen level in the River and would not result in raising the level above
5 mg/1 at all times.
28) The discharge of a nitrified, filtered, and re-aerated effluent to Badfish Creek would
result in the maintenance of dissolved oxygen levels above 5 mg/1 during Q-j \Q flows
and at an average of 6 mg/1 or higher during other times of the year.
29) Dissolved oxygen levels in the lower Yahara River would be improved b> the upgraded
discharge to Badfish Creek.
11—5
-------
30) Any plan for consistently maintaining dissolved oxygen levels of 5 mg/1 or above in the
Yahara and Rock Rivers must include a reduction in the levels of phytoplankton activity
in the lakes feeding the Rivers.
31) Regulation of the levels of the Madison lakes could provide sufficient water to augment
the flow, in the Yahara River during low flow periods of up to 120 days. However, a level
of 5 ma 1 of dissolved oxygen could not be maintained with the flows resulting from
such an augmentation plan if algal blooms are present at the time.
32) Source control of heavy metals, pesticides and PCB's is the most effective method of
achieving the extremely low concentrations of these materials necessary for the consistent
protection of fish and aquatic life in the area's receiving streams.
33) Bio-assay testing is the only valid procedure for determining the toxicity of the treated
effluent.
C. Conclusions with Respect to Organic Solids Disposal
1) The existing sludge disposal system utilizing large storage lagoons should not be continued
m the future.
2) Immediate work is required to stabilize portions of the lagoon dikes in order to prevent
dike failure.
3) The sludge existing in the storage lagoons should be remo\ed in order to prevent future
potential contamination of the environment.
4) Digested organic sludge production at the Nine Springs treatment plant is expected to
rise from a level of 5350 tons of dry solids/year to 6000 tons/year upon completion of
the Fif'r1 Addition. Production will rise to 8520 tons/year by the year 2000 with the
recommended advanced waste treatment facilities.
5) The ex:-;.ng storage lagoons contain approximate!} 89,"700 dry tons of organic sludge at
an a\era_e solids content of 10.5To.
6) Based on current fertilizer costs, the total value of the sludge stored in the lagoons and
the sludge production during the 20 year planning period would be roughly S3,800,000.
7) Approximately 91,000 acres of farmland exist within a ten-mile radius of the Nine Springs
plant that could accept of MMSD sludge for many years to come.
8) About 40,000 acres or 44°/o of the cropland in the Organic Solids Reuse study area has
suitable son and ground water characteristics for the application of sludge.
9) Nitroger fading rates will generally be the limiting factor for land application ot the
organic solids.
10) The dige-vd treatment plant sludge will supply about 3ffro of the study area's nitrogen
requirements.
-------
11) Land requirements will rise from 1930 acres in 1980 at the outset of the program to 5700
acres during those years when the stored lagoon sludge is being removed. By 1986, when
lagoons are emptied, land requirements will recede to 2400-3000 acres.
12) Approximately 6 farmers in the study area representing a combined ownership of about
5000 acres have indicated a willingness to utilize sludge on their lands.
13) Because of the high level of farm community acceptance, leasing of farm land by
MMSD would not be recommended nor required.
14) Since land application of the organic sludges would be practiced heavily in April and
May and September through October, sludge storage facilities will be necessary both at
the treatment plant and at some farm sites.
15) One-half of the existing #1 Lagoon would be used to provide the required seasonal
storage for sludge at the treatment plant.
16) Three to five-acre farm lagoons would be required in order to store sufficient sludge
for application to a 100 acre parcel of land.
17) Transportation of the sludge should initially be by truck with pipelines to be installed at
such a time that their location becomes practical.
18) Field application of the sludge should initially be accomplished by truck spreaders.
Additional spreading capacity would be furnished by sub-surface injection equipment
and tractor spreaders. Sub-surface injection should be used near populated or sensitive
areas.
19) MMSD personnel should administer the program and provide management and monitor-
ing services.
20) A monitoring program should include periodic monitoring of the sludge, soils, crops,
and groundwaters affected.
21) An active marketing program is required for such a program to be successful.
22) A contingency sludge disposal plan would involve the utilization of the seasonal storage
lagoon with return pumping of the lagoon supernatant to the treatment plant. This
would provide approximately three years storage for the total produced sludge volume
at 10% solids.
23) Total estimated capital costs for the program are $2,666,000 over the 20-year period
with $2,130,000 required in the initial ten years of the program.
24) Operation and maintenance costs for the program are expected to be 5250,900/year in
the initial ten years and $108,800/year in the latter ten years of the program.
25) Sludge user fees are felt to be advisable and would account for revenues ranging from
$6400 per year to $5000 per year throughout the program.
26) Net total annual costs to MMSD for the program are estimated to be S402,200/year
from 1978-1987 and $313,300/year from 1988-2000 when the sludge lagoons would have
been emptied.
11—7
-------
27) Costs to the average residential customer for sludge disposal will rise from the present
level of $1.14/year to a level of $1.78/year if Federal and State construction grant funds
are received for 80% of the capital costs of the improvements. If aid is not received, the
costs could rise to a level of $3.09 for the average residential customer.
28) Through utilization of existing MMSD funds, the total annual cost to the average
residential customer may be reduced to a level of $1.45/year on an average yearly basis
over the life of the program.
11.03 Recommendations
In order to implement all of the facets of the total plan for effluent treatment and disposal as
well as organic solids reuse, a number of actions on the part of MMSD are necessary. The
following paragraphs outline a step-by-step implementation program which is designed to
accomplish an orderly implementation of the recommended plan.
A. Organic Solids Reuse and Solids Treatment
I) As soon as possible upon completion of the required hearings and the incorporation of
public comments, the portion of the Facilities Plan dealing with the organic solids reuse
plan should be submitted to WDNR and USEPA for concurrent review and processing.
2) Since there have been no noticeable signs of controversy surrounding the organic solids
reuse program, the MMSD should contend that a detailed Environmental Impact
Statement on this portion of the project is unnecessary.
3) Work should begin as soon as possible on the program for stabilizing the dikes of the
existing lagoons in order to prevent dike failures.
4) An application for a Step 2 grant for preparation of plans and specifications for the
organic solids reuse portion of the plant should be initiated in the very near future.
5) Upon approval of the Step 2 grant application, MMSD should proceed immediately to
negotiate a contract with a consulting engineering firm for the preparation of the con-
tract drawings and documents necessary to advertise for bids for the improvements.
6) During the design period, the MMSD should initiate an active marketing program and
add the additional staff which would be required to initiate an extensive monitoring
program.
7) Upon completion of design of the organic solids reuse improvements, the contract
documents and drawings should be submitted to WDNR and USEPA for review and
approval. A Step 3 construction grant application should be submitted concurrently
with the contract drawings and documents.
8) As soon as a construction grant is awwarded, MMSD should bid the project and award
the construction and purchase contracts to the lowest responsible bidders. The contracts
should specify a reasonable time limit in which the facilities are to be completed.
9) During the period of construction, MMSD should finalize arrangements with those
individuals who will be accepting the organic solids, and complete the background
monitoring required for each application site.
11—8
-------
10) Upon completion of the construction, and as soon as conditions permit, MMSD should
begin the process of transferring sludge to the individual users for application on their
agricultural land.
11) Continued monitoring as recommended should be carried out in a thorough and business-
like manner for the duration of the entire land application program.
B. Effluent Treatment and Disposal
1) Upon completion of the required hearings and the incorporation of public comments,
the entire Facilities Plan should be submitted to the WDNR and the USEPA.
2) A specific representative of MMSD should be assigned to process and answer any
questions or requests for additional information that may surface during the review
process.
3) The same assigned individual should be made available to fully co-operate with the
USEPA in an attempt to expedite the preparation of a formal Environmental Impact
Statement for the effluent treatment and discharge portion of the plan.
4) MMSD should implement, as soon as possible, the recommended continuing monitoring
program for industrial wastes, and also implement the expanded program of receiving
water quality monitoring. Effluent bio-assay work should also be initiated.
5) MMSD should get options on the land required for AWT facilities.
6) Upon review and approval of the Facilities Plan by WDNR and USEPA, MMSD should
submit a formal application for a Step 2 grant for the preparation of design drawings
and specifications.
7) After completion of the Environmental Impact procedures by USEPA and upon award
of the Step 2 grant, MMSD should select a consulting engineering firm for the prepara-
tion of contract drawings and specifications and negotiate the engineering contract for
the work. The contract documents should specify that the work be accomplished in a
stated period of time, preferably not to exceed one year.
8) During the period of design, MMSD should continue to gather data on industrial
waste sources of the MMSD system and data on the water quality in the area streams.
This data should be thoroughly reviewed prior to the completion of the final design of
the facilities.
9) If, during the design phase of the work, the power plant is approved for construction,
MMSD should re-evaluate the possibility for the sale of water to the power plant.
10) If, however, the possibility of the sale of effluent to the power plant still seems remote at
that time, MMSD should proceed with the design of the facilities without further con-
sideration of the power plant alternative.
11) Upon completion of the contract documents and drawings for the work, MMSD should
submit the materials to WDNR and USEPA for review and approval. A Step 3 con-
struction grant application should accompany the submittal.
12) Upon approval of the submittal and subsequent to a Step 3 grant award, MMSD should
bid the work and award the contracts to the lowest responsible bidders.
11—9
-------
13) The construction should be completed with a two-year time period, and a high level of
construction review and inspection should be provided either by MMSD staff or through
contracts with the design consultant.
14) During construction of the facilities, MMSD should add to their staff, those individuals
who will be associated with the operation and maintenance of the expanded facilities.
Such individuals should be familiarized with the facilities as they are being constructed.
15) Upon completion of the facilities, MMSD should continue to operate the expanded plant
with the same high level of efficiency that currently exists.
10
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSIW
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT STATEMENT
WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND DISCHARGE
MADISON METROPOLITAN SEWERAGE DISTRICT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Section 1 — Background 1-1
1.01 General 1-1
1.02 Description of Proposed Actions 1-1
1.03 Location of Proposed Actions 1-3
1.04 Water Quality and Quantity Problems in the Area 1-3
1.05 Water Quality and Quantity Objectives 1-4
1.06 History of the Madison Wastewater Treatment and Disposal 1-7
1.07 Program Costs and Financing 1-7
Section 2 — The Environment Without the Proposed Actions 2-1
2.01 General 2-1
2.02 Climate 2-1
2.03 Topography 2-2
2.04 Geology 2-3
2.05 Soils 2-4
2.06 Hydrology 2-6
2.07 Biology 2-14
2.08 Air Quality 2-19
2.09 Land Use 2-20
2.10 Significant Environmentally Sensitive Areas 2-20
2.11 Population 2-23
2.12 Other Water Quality Management Programs in the Area 2-24
2.13 Aesthetics and Recreation 2-25
2.14 Energy 2-25
2.15 Public Health 2-26
2.16 Historical and Archeological Sites 2-27
Section 3 — Wastewater Discharge and Treatment Alternatives 3-1
3.01 General 3-1
3.02 Categorization of Discharge Alternatives for Preliminary Evaluation 3-1
3.03 Methodology for Preliminary Evaluation of Wastewater Discharge
Alternatives 3-1
3.04 Preliminary Evaluation of Wastewater Discharge Alternatives 3-6
3.05 Environmental Impacts of Remaining Alternatives 3-12
3.06 Operational Reliability of the Remaining Alternatives 3-25
3.07 Flexibility of the Remaining Alternatives 3-28
3.08 Treatment Alternatives 3-30
3.09 Cost Effective Comparison of the Remaining Alternatives 3-32
3.10 Implementation of the Remaining Alternatives 3-34
3.11 Selection of the Recommended Alternative 3-37
-------
Section 4 — Description of the Proposed Actions 4-1
4.01 General 4-1
4.02 Recommendations for Discharge to Badfish Creek 4-1
4.03 Discharge to the Proposed Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant 4-4
4.04 Non-Structural Recommendations 4-4
Section 5 — Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Actions 5-1
5.01 General 5-1
5.02 Adverse Impacts Which Cannot be Avoided Should the Proposed Action
be Implemented 5-11
5.03 Relationship Between Local Short Term Usage of the Environment and
the Maintenance and Enhancement of Long Term Productivity 5-12
5.04 Irreversible or Irretrievable Commitment of Resources Which Would be
Involved if the Proposed Actions Should be Implemented 5-13
Section 6 — Public Participation 6-1
6.01 General 6-1
6.02 Facilities Planning Advisory Committee 6-1
6.03 Information Sources 6-1
6.04 Public Information Meetings 6-1
6.05 Public Hearings 6-2
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table Title Page
1-1 AWT Solids Treatment Facilities, Capital Costs 1-8
1-2 AWT Liquid Treatment Facilities, Capital Costs 1-9
1-3 Estimated Total Annual Costs Without Grants 1-10
1-4 Estimated Annual Cost for the Average Residential Customer Without
Grants 1-11
1-5 Estimated Total Annual Costs with 75 Percent Grants 1-12
1 -6 Estimated Annual Cost for the Average Residential Customer with
75 Percent Grants 1-12
1-7 Estimated Industrial Cost Recovery Rates for Initial Construction Phase ... 1-14
2-1 Geologic Units Dane-Rock Counties, Wisconsin 2-3
2-2 Soil Associations of Dane and Rock Counties 2-4
2-3 Flow Data, Lower Rock River Basin 2-7
2-4 Flow Data, Lower Wisconsin River Sub-Basin 2-10
2-5 Flow Data, Sugar River Basin 2-12
2-6 Surface Water Fisheries 2-16
2-7 Wisconsin Endangered Species List 2-17
2-8 Rare & Endangered Animal Species — USEPA Region V 2-18
2-9 1974 Air Quality Data 2-19
2-10 Dane County — Land Use 2-21
2-11 Rock County — Land Use 2-22
2-12 Public Scientific Areas 2-23
2-13 Population Data 2-23
3-1 Wastewater Discharge Strategies 3-2
3-2 Summary of Environmental Impact Evaluations 3-7
3-3 Rating of Alternative Costs 3-8
in
-------
3-4 Summary of Operational Reliability and Flexibility 3-9
3-5 Summary of Evaluation of Technical and Legal Constraints 3-10
3-6 Summary Comparison of Alternatives 3-11
3-7 Alternatives Subject to Intensive Study 3-12
3-8 Required Treatment Levels for Remaining Discharge Alternatives 3-16
3-9 Annual Electrical Energy Consumption MMSD — 1975 3-24
3-10 Anticipated Electrical Power Consumption for Remaining Alternatives .... • 3-25
3-11 Preliminary Screening Summary, Advanced Treatment Facilities Nine
Springs Wastewater Treatment Plant 3-31
3-12 Degree of Effluent Treatment Required 3-33
3-13 Present Worth Costs Comparison of Alternatives 3-34
4-1 Anticipated Effluent Characteristics 4-3
4-2 Existing and Proposed MMSD Monitoring Stations 4-7
5-1 Projected Effluent Quality 5-3
5-2 Estimated Badfish Creek Flood Flow Values 5-5
IV
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Title Page
1-1 MMSD Service Area 1-5
3-1 Discharge Alternatives 3-3
3-1 a Discharge Alternatives 3-4
3-2 Discharge Alternatives Retained for Intensive Evaluation 3-13
-------
SECTION 1 - BACKGROUND
1.01 General
Under provisions contained in the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972,
the Madison Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) initiated studies for the development of
a 201 Wastewater Facilities Plan. The objective of the 201 Study is to determine a wastewater
treatment and discharge alternative which will meet the requirements of the Federal and State
legislation regarding water quality protection. Also included in the 201 Facilities Plan is the
development of an organic solids (sludge) reuse alternative.
These studies are in compliance with Wisconsin Pollutant Discharge Elimination Permit No.
WI 0024597. This permit requires completion of a Facilities Plan prior to any further design or
construction of advanced wastewater treatment, effluent discharge or sludge disposal facilities.
This repon will assess me alternatives available for treatment and disposal of wastewater from
the Nine Springs Wastewater Treatment Plant. Evaluation of the various receiving streams was
made during the course of this study. Based on these evaluations, determination of the treatment
required to protect the environment was made.
1.02 Description of Proposed Actions
The proposed actions relating to the treatment of wastewater at the Nine Springs Wastewater
Treatment Plant and discharge of the effluent are summarized below.
It is recommended that the effluent from the Nine Springs plant continue to be discharged to
the Badfish Creek. In order to meet the water quality goals and objectives of the Facilities
Planning Advisory Committee (FPAC) as well as the requirements of State and Federal regula-
tions, upgrading of the treatment facilities is needed.
An investigation of the various treatment alternatives available to provide the required degree
of treatment, indicated that rotating biological contactors followed by breakdown chlorination
\vas the most cost effective alternative. Dechlorination would be required prior to discharge to
prevent possible toxicity problems in the receiving stream due to chlorine residuals in the
effluent.
The proposed treatment facilities are expected to provide the following degree of effluent
quality values:
Max. 5 Consecutive
Monthly Ave. Da>/Month Max. Day
Biochemical Oxygen Demand 8 mg/l 12mg/l 16mg/l
(BOD5)
Suspendea Solids 8 mg/l 12 mg/l 16 mg/l
Ammonia (NHj-N, O.lmg/i 0.2 mg/l 0.4 mg/l
1 — 1
-------
The goals and objectives of the study require that the water quality of the receiving stream he
maintained at sufficient levels to protect the integrity of the stream for the propagation of fish
and aquatic life and other beneficial uses. A stream water quality survey and review of other
recently collected water quality data showed that the background concentrations of several sub-
stances (certain heavy metals, pesticides, PCB's) were already above the recommended levels
for the protection of fish and aquatic life and other beneficial water uses.
While the levels of some of these same substances were found to exceed the recommended
levels in the Nine Springs effluent, the levels were generally lower than the background levels
found. The reduction or removal of such low concentrations was not felt to be justifiable in
light of the background levels present in the area streams including streams such as the Rutland
Branch, which do not receive any municipal or industrial discharges. However, in order to
reduce the possibility of peak loading of these substances to the receiving stream, it has been
recommended that an equalization facility be included at the Nine Springs plant. This facility
would also be utilized to equalize the flow such that the existing effluent pump station and
discharge pipeline could be used in the future. In connection with the reduction of the trace
amounts of heavy metals, pesticides and PCB's found in the Nine Springs effluent, it has been
recommended that a source control program be instituted to forbid the discharge of these
potentially toxic substances to the sewage collection system.
Other recommendations inciude the expansion of the current receiving stream monitoring.
Presently samples are collected at a number of points on the effluent ditch and along the Badfish
Creek, Yahara River, ana Rock River by MMSD. However, meaningful interpretation of the
data is hampered by the lack of corresponding stream flow data. Such flow data should be
obtained in the future. MMSD should investigate the requirements with USGS and other local
agencies, to establish flow gauging stations at a number of points in the Rock and, particularly,
in the Yahara River basin. Other sampling stations should be established on the Oregon Branch
of Badfish Creek upstream of the confluence with the effluent ditch; on the effluent ditch
immediately upstream of the confluence with the Badfish Creek; and on Frog Pond and Spring
Creeks upstream of ihe confluence with the Badfish Creek. Data from these stations could be
utilized in the future to develop a materials balance for the streams mentioned.
Continued discharge of the Nine Springs effluent to the Badfish Creek is anticipated to have an
increasing impact on the base flow of the Yahara River above the confluence of the Badfish
Creek. Appendix C, "Base Stream Flow Recession Study", shows that the base flow in the
Yahara River may be reduced to zero as often as once in two years if the projected wastewater
flows to the Nine Springs plant is diverted to the Badfish Creek. To offset this impact, it is
recommended that a program of regulating the levels of the Madison Lakes be investigated. By
storage of water in the lakes, sufficient amounts of water would be available for controlled
release to the Yahara River to augment the stream flow during critical periods.
In addition to the proposea advanced treatment facilities, it was determined that there were a
number of items wh.ch should be implemented for improvement of the existing and the Fifth
Addition secondary treatment facilities. Such recommendations are detailed in Volume II,
"Wastewater Treatment Systems Report", by CH2M HILL. It was recommended that
improvements should be made in the following general areas:
influent punping
flow meter.ng
grit remova;
aeration system L
secondary clarification
sludge handling
back-up disinfection capability
combustible material
effluent pumping
concrete restoration
personnel facilities
sampling
channel planking
storage
1—2
-------
Implementation of the proposed actions would begin after approval is received from the
regulatory agencies. It is anticipated that review of the proposed actions should be completed by
early 1977.
1.03 Location of Proposed Actions
The MMSD serves the City of Madison and the neighboring communities providing wastewater
treatment and disposal for a population of approximately 225,000 (1974 population, Appendix
K, "Wastewater Flow Forecasts and Socioeconomic Trends").
Wastewater is collected throughout MMSD service area and conveyed to the Nine Springs
Wastewater Treatment Plant located south of Madison on Raywood Road. After treatment, the
effluent is pumped approximately 5.4 miles via a 54-inch pipeline to a point in the Town of
Dunn. From there it continues to flow southward approximately 3.8 miles in an open channel
to the Badfish Creek. The general area of the existing MMSD service area and facilities is
shown in Figure 1-1.
After an evaluation of several alternative discharge locations and wastewater treatment alterna-
tives, it was recommended that the effluent from the Nine Springs plant continue to be dis-
charged to the Badfish Creek. Treatment facilities are required to be upgraded such that the
water quality of the receiving stream would be able to meet various water quality standards. All
proposed treatment facilities would be constructed at the Nine Springs plant site.
The disposal of organic solids has been discussed in detail in Volume III which proposes that
the organic solids be applied to agricultural lands such that its fertilizer value can be utilized.
1.04 Water Quality and Quantity Problems in the Area
A. Water Quality Problems
Major water quality problems evident in the study area are the pollution loadings on the
area's streams and lakes and the resultant degradation of these water bodies. The discharge
of wastes to the streams places a demand on their assimilative capacity and contributes to
the eutrophication of the lakes.
Sources of pollution in the area include the direct discharge of waste materials at a given
location. These are the point sources of pollution and include the discharge of effluent from
wastewater treatment plants and industrial discharges.
There are twenty-six (26) municipal discharges in the Lower Rock River Basin. Flow rates
from these discharges range from nearly 36 MGD (MMSD) to less than 0.10 MOD (several
communities). There are thirty-one (31) industrial discharges ranging from 88.1 MGD
(Madison Gas & Electric Co.) to less than 0.01 MGD (several industries).
Municipal and industrial discharges to the Sugar River Basin number eleven (11) and three
(3) respectively. Each of these discharges have flow rates of less than 0.5 MGD. The Lower
Wisconsin River Basin study area has four (4) municipal and two (2) industrial discharges,
each with flow rates less than 0.5 MGD. For a detailed listing of these point sources dis-
charges, see Appendix A.
All of the municipalities in the area provide primary and secondary treatment of their waste
water prior to discharge. Some plants are presently overloaded and produce a poor quality
effluent adding to the problem of maintaining water quality in downstream areas.
1—3
-------
Sources of non-point pollution are overland runoff from urban and rural areas, precipita-
tion containing paniculate matter and inflow of groundwater locally contaminated by leach-
ate from improperly designed and operated sanitary landfills or soil absorption systems
(septic tank drain fields). Increases in the nitrogen and phosphorus levels reaching the area's
waterways are due to weathered leaves, lawn and garden clippings, and runoff from urban
and agricultural lands. Soil losses occurring during rainfall events results in siltation of
streams and increased turbidity.
Methods which can be implemented to reduce non-point source pollutional loadings include
the improvement of soil conservation practices, increased street cleaning operations and
proper use of fertilizers.
Water quality management programs presently underway include monitoring and surveil-
lance programs, soil conservation programs, wastewater treatment plant planning and con-
struction, waste load identification and land use controls. Continuation and expansion of
these programs will aid in relieving current water quality problems.
B. Water Quantity Problems
Water quantity has not been a significant problem in the past. The practice of withdrawing
the water supply from the groundwater and then returning it to the surface waters within the
same drainage basin after use does not generally affect the amount of water available.
Problems may arise, nowever, if the water is not returned to the same general area from
where it was withdrawn. Substantial withdrawal and diversion of water from one drainage
basin or part of a drainage basin to another may have severe impacts on the water supply.
Data contained in Appendix C, "Base Stream Flow Recession Study", indicates that the low
flow values at the USGS stream flow gaging station at McFarland have been reduced approx-
imately 70 percent since the diversion of the MMSD effluent to Badfish Creek. Additionally,
the groundwater table in the areas around the wells has been drawn down by as much as
iwenty (20) feet in some instances. The area south of Lake Wingra was once an excellent
wetland area. However, the lowering of the groundwater table due to pumping has allowed
an entirely different plant community to become established.
C. Water Rights
Unreasonable use of the surface or groundwater which is detrimental to other riparian land
owners is prohibited. If an individual, company, municipality or other agency causes the
downstream users' use of the water resources to be adversely affected, then those users
have the right to seek court actions in their behalf.
1.05 Water Quality and Quantity Objectives
A. General
Federai policies regarding the water quality of the surface and groundwater resources are
set forth in the .Nc.;.onal Water Pollution Control Act and in the 1972 amendments
(PL 92-500) to that act. The goal of PL 92-500 is to eliminate the discharge of pollutants to
navigable waters bv 1985. An interim goal of PL 92-500 is that water quality suitable for the
propogation of fish and aquatic life and for contact recreation should be attained by 1983.
The states are cnarged with the responsibility of adopting appropriate water quality
standards, consistent with the national goals and to encourage a regional approach to water
quality management.
1—4
-------
FIGURE l-l
N
Mountsha
River
MMSD FACILITIES PLAN
MMSD SERVICE AREA
NINE SPRINGS WASTEWATER
TREATMENT PLANT
EFFLUENT DITCH
EFFLUENT PIPELINE
O'BRIEN fiGERE
ENGINEERS. INC
-------
Chapters 74 and 134 of the Wisconsin Statutes establish the state's policy in response to the
federal legislation. Water quality standards are set forth in NR 102 of the Wisconsin
Administrative Code.
There are no water quantity goals directly established by the federal or state policies. Un-
reasonable use of the groundwater or of a surface water which causes harm to the use of the
water or of the land of a riparian owner is prohibited by Wisconsin state law.
B. Water Quality Goals
Several area agencies and concerned citizens groups have established lists of water quality
goals. Among the agencies which have expressed concern over the area's water quality
problems are the following: Dane County Regional Planning Commission, Dane County
Board (Lake Quality Improvement Council for Lakes Mendota and Monona) and the Rock
County Board. While the specific format and wording of these lists are different, the
basic objectives are essentially the same; identification of pollution sources and the develop-
ment of management alternatives and systems with which to cope with area water quality
problems.
The study goals and objectives as adopted by the MMSD and the Facilities Planning
Advisory Committee (FPAC) for the current 201 Facilities Planning Study are as follow:
Objectives Related to Effluent Discharge to a Water Source:
1. To provide for the protection and propogation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife in all
possible receiving waters.
2. To provide a quality effluent sufficient to protect the health of humans, domestic
animals, and other wildlife utilizing the disposal site. In the event of surface water
disposal, the receiving water should be of sufficient quality to provide for recreation in
and on the water including whole body contact by humans.
3. To provide for the protection and preservation of the hydrological and morphological
characteristics of the disposal area from any significant or adverse effects from discharge
volumes. Included in this goal is the intent to protect the natural wetlands as well as the
existing land use plans and goals of communities which might be affected by discharge
volumes.
4. To provide a quality effluent which will permit the use of any receiving water for multiple
purposes including aesthetic, agriculture, aquatic and wildlife, industry, waste assimila-
tion, potable water supply, hydropower, navigation and recreation or any other reason-
able use projected within the planning period as may be applicable.
Objectives Related to Effluent Disposal to Land
1. To protect the healtn and propogation of humans, domestic animals and other wildlife
associated with the disposal sites.
2. To protect the groundwater supply from any contaminants which would interfere with
its use as a potable water supply.
3. To preserve the morphological characteristics of the disposal site from any perturbations
which would interfere with the planned future use of the disposal site.
1—6
-------
4. To provide for the maximum utilization of the disposal area for agricultural, industrial,
or recreational use consistent with the preservation of the health of humans and other
animals.
Objectives Related to Plant Design
1. To assure the design of a treatment plant which will provide a sufficient degree of treat-
ment that the goals established for the disposal site are met in the most cost-effective
manner,
2. To seek methods for recycling of products to avoid their disposal to the environment.
3. To assure design of a treatment plant which will provide for a maximum degree of con-
servation of energy and non-renewable resources.
1.06 History of the Madison Wastewater Treatment and Disposal
Municipal treatment of wastewater in Madison was started in the late 1890's. The first treat-
ment facility discharged to the Yahara River above Lake Monona. A succession of treatment
plants, including the Burke treatment facility, were put into operation during the next twenty
years, all of which also discharged above Lake Monona.
In 1928 the initial Nine Springs treatment facility was constructed to serve the southern and
western portions of the city. The Nine Springs plant discharged to the Yahara River above
Lake Waubesa. In 1930, the Madison Metropolitan Sewerage District was formed. The Nine
Springs plant has been modified a number of times to increase the capacity of the plant and to
upgrade the treatment processes, the most recent being the Fifth Addition currently under con-
struction.
The Burke plant, retired from full service in 1936, served as the treatment facility for the
Truax Army Air Field from 1942 to 1946. The plant was used to handle bypassed flows during the
construction of the eastside interceptor around Lake Monona from 1947 to 1950, at which time
it was leased to the Oscar Mayer Company to be used for pretreatment of their meat packing
wastes prior to discharge to the MMSD system.
The Madison Lakes have been subject to excessive growths of algae and rooted plants even prior
to the discharge of effluent from the first municipal treatment facility. The written accounts of
Professor William Trelease indicated that such problems were present at least as early as 1882.
Concern expressed by a number of groups over the years regarding the condition of the Madison
Lakes indicated that some method of alleviating the pollutional loading to the lakes was desired.
In 1943, the Wisconsin legislature passed a bill which essentially prohibited discharge of the
effluent from the Nine Springs plant to the Madison Lakes. Due to special restrictions concern-
ing the enforcement of the bill and various legal problems, MMSD did not initiate plans to
comply with the bill until the early 1950's. Compliance to the bill was effected in 1958 with the
diversion of the Nine Springs effluent to the Badfish Creek. Since the diversion project was
begun, and continuing to the present time, the discharge of the secondary effluent to the
Badfish Creek has been a continuing source of controversy between MMSD and Rock County.
1.07 Program Costs and Financing
A. Background
In accordance with Section 35.935-13 of CFR Title 40, MMSD is developing a system of
User Charges and an Industrial Cost Recovery Program as a grant condition for the Fifth
1—7
-------
Addition to the Nine Springs Wastewater Treatment Plant. The User Charge and Industrial
Cost Recovery systems developed in conjunction with the Fifth Addition construction will
be expanded to cover subsequent additions relating to sludge handling and advanced waste-
water treatment. This section has been developed to estimate the cost effects on the average
residential customer and on industrial users.
Industrial users subject to Industrial Cost Recovery will be required to repay MMSD for
their share of the capital costs in addition to the basic User Charges.
MMSD estimates that there will be a surplus of $2,000,000 in their Construction Account
at the completion of construction of the Fifth Addition. These funds will have accumulated
through benefit charges collected from new users and through delayed grants. These grants
were received for projects financed entirely by MMSD through general obligation bonds.
At the time of construction these grants were not available, and since MMSD financed the
construction through its Construction Account, when the grants were received they were
deposited in the Construction Account.
MMSD anticipates receiving grants for 75 percent of the capital costs of the Organic Solids
Reuse Project and the solids and the liquid treatment facilities of the Advanced Wastewater
Treatment (AWT) Project.
B. Capital Costs
Table 1-1 details the capital costs of the AWT Solids Treatment Facilities. The cost to
MMSD is shown both with and without grants, and the grant amounts subject to Industrial
Cost Recovery (ICR) are listed. It should be noted that the amount subject to ICR will only
be used in determining ICR rates, and that this is not the total amount of money that will
be recovered. The amount recovered will depend on the industrial usage of the facilities.
Table 1-1
AWT Solids Treatment Facilities Capital Costs
Item Total Cost MMSD Cost Amount Subject
(no grants) (75% grants) to ICR
1. Gravity Thickeners S 130,000 S 32,500 $ 97,500
2. Flotation Thickeners 650,000 162,500 487,500
3. Anaerobic Digesters 2,460,000 615,000 1,845,000
4. Subtotal 3,240,000 810,000 2,430,000
5. Engineering (12%) 390,000 97,500 292,500
6. Legal and Fiscal (2.5%) 80,000 20,000 60,000
7. Administration (0.5%) 20,000 5,000 15,000
8. Contingencies (15%) 490,000 122,500 367,500
9. TOTAL $4,220,000 $1,055,000 $3,165,000
General Notes:
— MMSD Cost calculated as 25% of the Total Cost.
— Amount subject to Industrial Cost Recovery (ICR) is calculated at 75% of the Total Cost.
— All amounts are expressed in January, 1976 dollars.
— Courtesy: CH2M HILL
1—8
-------
Table 1-2 details the capital costs of the AWT Liquid Treatment Facilities. Note that the
land cost (Item #24) is not grant eligible.
Table 1-2
AWT Liquid Treatment Facilities Capital Costs1
Item Total Cost MMSDCost Amount Subject
(no grants) (75% grants) to ICR
1. Grit Removal Equipment $ 230,000 $ 57,500 $ 172,500
2. Overflow Spillage Prevention 10,000 2,500 7,500
3. Primary Clarifier Renovation 30,000 7,500 22,500
4. Aeration Basin Flow Control 25,000 6,250 18,750
5. Air Blowers and Building 1,500,000 375,000 1,125,000
6. Secondary Clarifiers 725,000 181,250 543,750
7. Return Sludge Pumps 60,000 15,000 45,000
8. Waste Sludge Pumps 30,000 7,500 22,500
9. Rotating Biological Contactors 7,840,000 1,960,000 5,880,000
10. Filters 3,220,000 805,000 2,415,000
11. Breakpoint Chlorination 440,000 110,000 330,000
Facilities
12. Effluent Holding Pond 520,000 130,000 390,000
13. Dechlorination Facilities 210,000 52,500 157,500
14. Sampling Equipment 30,000 7,500 22,500
15. Personnel Facilities 675,000 168,750 506,250
16. Intermediate Pumping Station 280,000 70,000 210,000
17. Effluent Pump Modification 40,000 10,000 30,000
18. Effluent Ditch Modifications2 300,000 75,000 225,000
19. Laboratory Modifications 50,000 12,500 37,500
20. Channel Grating 30,000 7,500 22,500
21. Landscaping and Site Work 470,000 117,500 352,500
22. On-site Roads 50,000 12,500 37,500
23. Fences 40,000 10,000 30,000
24. Land 130,000 130,000 0
25. Effluent Spring Creek and Well 15,000 11,300 3,700
26. Subtotal 16,950,000 4,342,550 12,607,450
27. Engineering (12%) 2032,000 520,600 1,511,400
28. Legal and Fiscal (2.5%) 423,000 108,400 314,600
29. Administration (0.5°7o) 85,000 21,700 63,300
30. Contingencies (15°7o) 2,540,000 650,800 1,889,200
31. TOTAL $22,030,000 $5,644,050 $16,385,950
General Notes:
— MMSD Cost calculated as 25% of the Total Cost.
— Amount subject to Industrial Cost Recovery (ICR) is calculated as 75°7o of the Total Cost.
— All amounts are expressed in January, 1976 dollars.
1. Courtesy: CH2M HILL except as noted.
2. Estimated by O'Brien & Gere Engineers.
1—9
-------
C. Construction Sequence
The initial construction phase of the various projects are proposed to be bid as follows:
January, 1978
July, 1978
January, 1979
July, 1979
January, 1980
January, 1981
January, 1982
Organic Solids Reuse
AWT Solids Treatment
Organic Solids Reuse
AWT Liquids Treatment
Organic Solids Reuse
Organic Solids Reuse
Organic Solids Reuse
The five separate Organic Solids Reuse projects cover the initial costs associated with lagoon
improvements, the sludge distribution system components, and the components of the land
application system as discussed in Volume III.
The AWT Solids Treatment Facilities initial construction phase includes the thickening and
digestion facilities discussed in Chapter 13 of Volume II. These facilities are proposed to be
operational in January, 1982.
D. MMSD's Costs with No Grants
If no grant money is available for financing the capital costs of the various projects, the $2
million Construction Account surplus will be depleted during construction of the AWT
Solids Treatment Facilities in July, 1978. Since MMSD must have sufficient capital on hand
at the time the contracts are awarded, it is anticipated that MMSD would sell a bond issue in
December, 1977 to cover construction costs through 1982. This bond would be for approx-
imately $33 million.
Table 1-3 shows the estimated costs for the various MMSD functions during the initial con-
struction phase of the Organic Solids Reuse Project, the AWT Solids Treatment Project,
and the AWT Liquids Treatment Project if no grants are received.
Table 1-3
Estimated Total Annual Costs
Without Grants
•\dmmistr,iiion
C ollecnon and Transmission
HriinatA & Secondary Treatment
\V> T 1 iquids Treatment
t (fluent Pumping
Viiids Treatmeri'
' Jrgdiik Solids Reuse
1961 Bond Debt Service
1971 bond Debt Service
1977 Bond Debt Service
Total Annual Cost
1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982
S 157,000 S 165,000 S 1 "'3,000 $ 182,000 $ 191,000 S 200,000 S 210,000
269,000
725.000
0
326,000
246,000
73, (XX)
,160,(XXJ
397, (XX '
0
293, (XX)
99", (XX)
0
361, (XX)
284, 000
SO, (XX)
1,1 88, (XX)
387,000
0
320,000
1,316,000
0
399,000
312,000
23 5, (XX)
1,204, (XX)
42", 000
3,083,000
348,000
1,447 .(XX)
0
442.000
343,000
408,000
1,233,000
414,000
3,083,000
380,000
1,592,000
0
489, (XX)
471,000
436,000
1.260,000
401,000
3,083,000
414,000
1, "5 1,000
0
541,000
M\000
463, OCX)
0
i.93-,000
3,083,000
45 1 ,000
2.006,000
1,675,000
662,000
569,000
452,000
0
0
3,083,000
S3.353.000 $3,755,000 $7,469,000 $7,900.000 $8,303,000 $8,907,000 $9,108,000
1—10
-------
Table 1-4 shows the estimated cost for the average residential customer if no grants are
received. The costs are shown in January, 1976 dollars and are adjusted upward anticipating
an 8 percent rate of inflation.
Table 1-4
Estimated Annual Cost for the Average Residential Customer
Without Grants
Administration
Collection and Transmission
Primary and Secondary Treatment
AWT Liquids Treatment
Effluent Pumping
Solids Treatment
Organic Solids Reuse
1961 & 1971 Bond Debt Service
1977 Bond Debt Service
Total (Januao, 1976 Dollars)
Adjusted Total
(8 Percent Inflation)
1976
$ 2.26
2.09
8.03
0
2.26
3.12
0.94
14.81
0
$33.51
1977
$ 2.18
2.08
9.80
0
2.29
3.30
0.94
13.70
0
$34.29
1978
$ 2.09
2.07
11.83
0
2.31
3.31
2.53
12.97
28.16
$65.27
1979
$ 2.00
2.06
11.90
0
2.34
3.33
4.02
11.98
25.74
$63.37
1980
$ 1.92
2.06
11.97
0
2.37
4.19
3.93
11.05
23.54
$61.03
1981
$ 1.84
2.05
12.05
0
2.39
4.21
3.82
11.78
21.53
$59.67
1982
$ 1.77
2.04
12.63
10.98
2.68
4.23
3.41
0
19.69
$57.43
$33.51
$37.03
$76.13
$79.83
$83.03
$87.67
$91.13
E. MMSD's Costs with 75 Percent Grants
If MMSD receives grant money to cover 75 percent of the capital costs of the Organic Solids
Reuse Project, the AWT Solids Treatment Project, and the AWT Liquids Treatment Project,
the $2 million Construction Account surplus will be depleted during construction of the
AWT Liquids Treatment Facilities in July, 1979. Thus, it is anticipated that MMSD would
sell a bond issue in December, 1978 to cover the remainder of the construction in the initial
construction phase. This bond would be for approximately $7.3 million.
Table 1-5 shows the estimated costs for the various MMSD functions during the initial con-
struction phase of the various projects if grants are received for 75 percent of the eligible
capital costs.
Table 1-6 shows the estimated cost for the average residential customer if grants are received
for 75 percent of the initial construction costs. The costs are shown in January, 1976 dollars
and are adjusted upward anticipating an 8 percent rate of inflation.
1—11
-------
Table 1-5
1976
Administration $ 157,000
Collection and Transmission 269,000
Pnmarv & Secondary Treatment 725,000
AWT Liquids Treatment 0
Effluem Pumping 326,000
Solids Treatment 246,000
Organs Solids Reuse 73,000
1961 Bond Debt Service 1,160,000
1971 Bond Debt Service 397,000
1978 Bond Debt Service 0
Total Annual Cost $3,353,000
Estimated Total Annual Costs
With 75 Percent Grants
1977 1978 1979
$ 166,000 $ 176,000 $ 187,000
293,000 320,000 348,000
997,000 1,316,000 1,447,000
000
361.000 399,000 442,000
284,000 312,000 343,000
80,000 235,000 408,000
1,188,000 1,204,000 1,233,000
387,000 427,000 414,000
0 0 689,000
$3,756,000 $4,389,000 $5,511,000
1980
$ 198,000
380,000
1,592,000
0
489,000
471,000
436,000
1,260,000
401,000
689,000
$5,916,000
1981
S 210,000
414,000
1,751,000
0
541,000
518,000
463,000
0
1,937,000
689,000
$6,523,000
1982
$ 223,000
451,000
2,006,000
1,675,000
662,000
569,000
452,000
0
0
689,000
$6,727,000
Table 1-6
Estimated Annual Cost for the Average Residential Customer
With 75 Percent Grants
Xdmmisiraiion
Collect.on and Transmission
Pnmar> i. Secondarv Treaiment
•\\\ T Liquids Treaiment
t Illucni Pumping
Solids Treatment
Organic Solids Reuse
1961 & 19" 1 Bond Debt Service
1978 Bond Debt Service
Total (January, 1976 Dollars)
Adjusted Total
(8 Percent Inflation)
1976
S 226
2 09
8 03
0
2.26
3 12
0 94
14 81
0
$33.51
1977
S 2 19
2 08
V M)
0
2 29
3.30
0 94
13.70
0
$34.30
1978
S 2 12
: ir
11 83
0
2 31
3.31
2.53
12 97
0
$37.14
1979
5 2 06
2 I*)
II 90
()
2.34
3 33
4 02
U 98
5 60
$43.29
1980
S 1 99
2 06
1 1 97
0
2 37
4 19
3.93
11.05
5 12
$42.68
1981
S 1 93
2 05
1 2 05
0
2 39
4 21
3 82
11 78
4 69
$42.92
19X2
S ! X8
2 04
12 63
10 98
2 68
4 23
3 41
0
4 29
$42.14
$33.51
$37.04
$43.32
$54.53
$58.06
$63.06
$66.87
1—12
-------
F. Construction Grants' Availability
Besides the two possibilities of no grants and 75 percent grants for construction of MMSD's
proposed facilities, other possibilities that would affect MMSD's financing of these projects
are:
1. The Federal government may discontinue grants for advanced wastewater treatment.
This would mean there would be a reduction in the grant for the AWT Liquids Treat-
ment Facilities.
2. The State of Wisconsin may provide funding for a portion of the facilities in which case
there would be an increase in the grant amounts received for the various projects.
3. Various combinations of the above grant availability possibilities could result in increases
or decreases in the amount of grant money received by MMSD.
G. Industrial Cost Recovery
Section 204 (b)(l)(B) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972
(PL 92-500) requires that industrial users of the treatment works make payments for that
portion of the cost of construction of such treatment works which is allocable to the treat-
ment of such industrial wastes. Money spent by MMSD for treatment works construction
will be recovered through the user charges system. The portion of the grants received by
MMSD that is used to construct treatment capacity for industrial wastewater will be recovered
through the industrial cost recovery (1CR) system. The recovery period will cover the useful
life of the facilities or thirty years, whichever is less, in accordance with Section 39.118 of
CFR Title 40. MMSD anticipates a 30-year recovery period. This period will start the year
the facilities become operational.
Table 1-7 shows the estimated ICR rates for the various projects anticipating 75 percent
Federal construction grants and a 30-year recovery period. The construction sequence de-
tailed in part B of this section is also used in developing this table. The rate structure used
to make the estimates is the proposed rate structure currently being reviewed by MMSD.
With no construction grants, the industrial users will pay for their share of the construction
costs entirely through the user charge system. These costs would appear as debt service
costs over a 20-year period and would include interest on the debt, estimated at 7 percent.
If 75 percent of the construction costs are funded by Federal grants, the remaining 25 percent
of the construction costs would be recovered through user charges, and the 75 percent grant
amount would be recovered through the industrial cost recovery (ICR) system. Money
recovered through the ICR system would have no interest charged and would be recovered
over a 30-year period.
1-13
-------
Table 1-7
Estimated Industrial Cost Recovery Rates
for Initial Construction Phase
Industrial Cost Recovery Rates
Date
July, 1977
July, 1978
July, 1979
January, 1980
July, 1980
July, 1981
January, 1982
January, 1983
Project
Fifth Addition
Accum. 1CR Rates
Organic Solids Reuse
Accum. iCR Rates
Organic Solids Reuse
Accum. ICR Rates
AWT Solids Treatment
Accum. ICR Rates
Organic Solids Reuse
Accum. ICR Rates
Organic Solids Reuse
Accum. ICR Rates
AWT Liquids Treatment
Accum. ICR Rates
Organic Solids Reuse
Accum. ICR Rates
Vol.
$/MG
2.97
2.97
0
2.97
0
2.97
0.30
3.27
0
3 27
0
3.27
9.97
13.24
0
13 24
BOD
S/LB
0.00335
0.00335
0.00045
0.00380
0.00005
0.00385
0.00203
0.00588
0.00011
0.00599
0.00006
0.00605
0.00234
0.00839
0.00038
0.00877
ss
S/LB
0.00136
0.00136
0.00068
0.00204
0.00008
0.00212
0.00309
0.00521
0.00016
0.00537
0.00009
0.00546
0.00176
0.00722
0.00057
0.00779
N
$/LB
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.149
0 149
0
0.149
Customer
$/eq. meter
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.408
0.408
0
0408
1 — 14
-------
SECTION 2 - THE ENVIRONMENT WITHOUT THE PROPOSED ACTIONS
2.01 General
A more detailed write-up of the environmental conditions as they exist in Dane and Rock
Counties may be found in the "Environmental Inventory" which is included in Volume IV as
Appendix A of the Facilities Plan. The material presented in the following sections is a brief
summary of the material and data included in Appendix A.
2.02 Climate
A. Temperature
South-central Wisconsin's climate is typical of the continental interior of North America.
Annually, temperatures vary over a wide range. In summer months (June, July, August
and September) mean temperatures reach a high of 70.1 °F in July while the January mean
temperature is 16.8°F. Extreme temperature values recorded at the National Oceanic and
Atmosphere Administration weather station, located at Dane County Regional Airport in
Madison, over the past 15 years (1959-1974) reached a maximum of 98°F during July,
1965 and a minimum of - 30°F during January, 1963. These values have been exceeded in
the area by a high reading of 107 °F recorded during July 1936 at the Madison City Office
Building and by a minimum of - 37 °F recorded during January, 1951 at the Dane County
Regional Airport.
B. Precipitation
Precipitation is generally sufficient throughout the year to supply the needs of crops. The
Madison area receives the water equivalent of, on the average, 30.47 inches per year while
the Beloit area receives an average of 32.64 inches annually. The water equivalent value
accounts for precipitation in all forms (rainfall, snow, sleet, hail, etc.). There are no pre-
dominantly "wet" or "dry" seasons, however, during the summer months most of the pre-
cipitation occurs during thunderstorm activity. As a result, there may be short periods when
soil moisture falls below the optimum for crop growth. Many areas experience some minor
effects of drought. The problem has not been of such severity to warrant general use of
supplemental irrigation to supply water to agricultural areas.
C. Snowfall
The snowfall in Dane and Rock Counties averages approximately 35.5 inches per year. The
maximum amount recorded in Madison since 1935 was 67.1 inches during the winter of
1970-71. Due to the normally low temperatures during the winter months, there is often a
snow cover on the ground from December to mid-March.
D. Winds
The winds have an annual mean speed of 10.0 mph. Coming out of the west-northwest and
northwest during the months of January through April, they carry relatively cold, dry air
masses which account for the normally low temperatures and snowfall of the area. During
the summer and autumn, the winds are generally southerly. Maximum wind speeds are
associated with storm events. The maximum recorded value at the weather station was
77 mph, during May, 1950.
2—1
-------
E. Severe Climatological Events
Severe climatological events include hurricanes, tornadoes and severe thunderstorms.
Hurricanes have not occurred in Wisconsin, being limited to the Atlantic and Gulf of
Mexico coastal states and those states immediately inland. Tornadoes pose some threat to
the area. Over the past 60 years, an average of one tornado in four years has been reported
in the Madison area. The northwest quadrant of Wisconsin experiences the most tornado
occurrences in the State.
Thunderstorms occur on the average of seven (7) days per month during the period of July
to September. High winds and short periods of intense precipitation often accompany
thunderstorm events.
2.03 Topography
A. General
The south-central portion of Wisconsin is an area of varied terrain. Glaciers, which pro-
gressed over much of the area from the northeast, resulted in the formation of two distinct
geographical provinces. A line running approximately northwest to southeast and passing
through the areas of Lake Wisconsin, Middleton and Janesville separates the Driftless Area
to the west and the Glaciated Area to the east.
B. Driftless Area
The Driftless Area is found in the southwestern corner of Wisconsin. The western portions
of Dane County and Rock County are included in this area. During the glacial periods, this
area was not covered by the glaciers as was the remainder of the area. The absence of the
scouring, erosion and deposition of morainal material associated with glacial action,
preserves an area of Wisconsin in its pre-glacial condition.
The topography of this Driftless Area is typified by a hilly terrain with narrow, steep sided
valleys of the Western Uplands. The streams in this area have a well developed branching
or dendrite pattern, typical of older topographical regions.
C. Glaciated Area
The Glaciated Area covers the remaining areas of Dane and Rock Counties. This area was
covered by the Green Bay Lobe of the latest glaciation and the topography shows the effects
of the ice movement. Relief is typified by the gentle slopes and broad valleys of the Eastern
Ridges and Lowlands. There are numerous lakes and wetland areas present here which are
virtually absent in the Driftless Area.
Two features unique to glaciated regions are common here. These are the kettle or pothole
lakes found in depressions left by ice blocks broken off from the receding glaciers and the
numerous drumlins present. Drumlins are low, elongated hills of unconsolidated glacial
material. They are interesting in that the long axis of the drumlins indicate the direction of
the glaciers' movements.
2-2
-------
2.04 Geology
The study area is underlain by a series of rock formations and above these a layering of uncon-
solidated material. Table 2-1 describes the geologic layering in Dane and Rock Counties.
Dane —
System Geologic Unit
Quaternary Pleistocene and Recent Deposits
Ordovician Maquoketa Shale
Platteviile, Decorah,
Galena Formation
Si Peter Sandstone
Prairie du Chien Group
Cambrian Trempeaieau Formation
Franconia Sandstone
Dresbath Group
Galesville Sandstone
tau Claire Sandstone
Mi Simon Sandstone
Pre-Cambnan — — —
Table 2-1
Geologic Units
Rock Counties, Wisconsin
Thickness (ft.)
Primary Characteristics
0-372 Unconsolidated deposits of sjlt, sand, gravel, boulders
and organic materials
0-100 Dolomite shale; found only in southwestern Dane
County
0-315 Dolomite layers with some fine to medium grained
sandstone in some areas
0-185 Fine to medium grained sandstone with some areas
of chert, shale and conglomerate
0-203 Dolomite layers with some areas of chert, shale and
sandstone
28-125 Fine to medium grainec sandstone and fine grained
siltstone
70-155 Fine to medium grained sandstone with some areas
of fine grained siltstone
25-150 Fine to medium grained sandstone
50-348 Fine to medium grained sandstone with extensive
areas of shale and siltstone
223-850 Medium grained sandstone with some shale layers
300- Igneous or me;amorphic rocks such as granite, basalt
and rhyolite
The precambrian rocks are the oldest found in the area and occur at a minimum depth of 300
feet below the surface. Granite, basalt and rhyolite are common igneous and metomorphic
rock types of the Precambrian system.
Overlying the Precambrian system are the dolomites, sandstones and shales of the Cambrian
system. These rocks are sedimentary formations deposited during periods when the area was
covered by ancient seas. The Cambrian system rocks are utilized as the primary source of water
supply by most municipalities in Wisconsin. The following rock formations make up the
Cambrian system:
Mount Simon Sandstone
Eau Claire Sandstone
Galesville Sandstone
Franconia Sandstone
Trempeaieau Formation
Dresbach Group
2—3
-------
The Ordovician system is geologically younger than the Cambrian rocks. Having been deposited
at a later time than the underlying formations, these rocks have been subjected to more of the
erosional forces. As a result, the layering is not as consistent in this system, with some rock
layers having been completely removed by wind and water erosion or by glacial action. The
following rock formations make up the Ordovician system:
Prairie du Chien Group
St. Peter Sandstone
Platteville, Decorah and Galena Formation
Maquoketa Shale
The Quartenary system contains the deposits of most recent origin. Materials making up this
system include loess, glacial lake deposits, morainal deposits and other unconsolidated
deposits. These deposits range from sand, silt and gravel to organic matter. Erosional forces,
acting on the rock formations of older geologic systems, have helped form these deposits.
2.05 Soils
Soils are those materials making up the uppermost surface of the earth's covering except where
unweathered bedrock is exposed. The soil is composed of various combinations of inorganic
materials originating from the underlying bedrock and of organic materials resulting from the
decomposition of plant and animal life.
The hundreds of different soil types are differentiated from one another by their texture, color,
slope, stoniness, permeability and other physical and chemical properties. Soil series, groupings
of soil types with similar characteristics, have been further grouped into soil associations. The
soil associations are mapped for areas having distinctive patterns of soil areas.
In Dane County, the over ninei> soil series which are present have been grouped into seven soil
associations. The sixty soil series present in Rock County have been grouped into nine soil
associations. Mapping of the soil associations can be used as a guide for general planning
purposes. For detailed agricultural management or construction design work, the soil series
data are required. Table 2-2 summarizes the characteristics of the soil associations in Dane and
Rock Counties.
Soil Associations
(""a of Association)
Dane Count)
1 Si Charles (40%)
McHenry (30%)
Ossian(10%)
Minor Soils (20%)
2 Piano (50%)
Rmgwood(30%)
Gns^old (10%)
Minor Soils (10%)
3 Ossian(30%)
Kegonsa(30°M>)
Palms (10%)
Minor Soils (30%)
Table 2-2
Soil Associations of Dane and Rock Counties
Drainage Terrain
gentle to
moderate
slopes
lined
poor to
good
gentle
slopes
level to
gently
sloping
Limitations Limitations tor
Texture for Cropping On-Site Sewage Disposal
silt> da} loam slight to
to sandy loam severe
siltv to slight to
sandy loam moderate
silt loam to
sand> da>
loam
slight to moderate
slight to moderate
moderate very severe
(when drained)
2—4
-------
Soil Associations
(ro of Association)
Dane Count)
Drainage
Table 2-2 (Cont'd.)
Terrain Texture
Limitations Limitations for
for Cropping On-Site Sewage Disposal
4.
5.
6.
Dodgeville(20%)
New Giarus (20%)
Sogn(10%)
Minor Soils (50%)
Dunbarton(30%)
Basco (20%)
Elkmound (20%)
Minor Soils (30%)
Granby (30%)
Alluvial Land,
Wet (20%)
Adrian (20%)
Minor Soils (30%)
D;:rinda(30%)
Calamme(30%)
New Giarus (10%)
Minor Soils (30%)
good
good
poor
poor to
good
gently
sloping to
very steep
gently
sloping to
very steep
level to
gently
sloping
gently to
steeply
sloping
silty clay
loam io clay
silt loam to
silty clay loam
and clay
sandy soil with
organic
materials
silty cla> loam
to clay
moderate to moderate to v ery s<
very severe
moderate to .evere
severe
severe very severe
moderate very severe
Rock Couim
1
•)
3
4.
s
6
7
8
4
fv.oder (26%)
St. Charles (17%)
Minor Soils (57%)
Dresden (40%)
St. Charles (20%)
"Warsaw (10%)
Minor Soils (30%)
H ano '35%)
v\ arsav. (22%)
Dresden (8%)
Minor Soils (35%)
.^•»ev,£.(30%)
Kane 1,25%)
M, nor Soils (45%)
Pecator.ica(15%)
Ogle (14%;
Duranci(il%)
M, nor Soils (60%)
fc^morid(18%)
Rockion(12%)
Vvnalen (10%)
Minor Soils (60%)
Mahaiasville(40%)
EiDurr. (25%)
Minor Soils (35%)
C olwood (20%)
M.nor Soils (63%)
Marshan(22%)
C otham (18%)
D.ckrran(13%)
M.nor Soils (47%)
fair to
good
fair to
good
fair to
good
poor
fair to
good
good
poor
poor
poor to
excessive
level to
steeply-
sloping
level to
steeply
sloping
level to
gently
sloping
kn el to
gently
sloping
level to
gentlv
sloping
level to
very
steeply
sloping
level to
gently
sloping
level
level io
gently
sloping
sandy cla\
loam to silty
clay loam
-and\ and siltv
cia> loam to
sand and gravel
silty and sandy
clay loam to
sand and gravel
day loam 10
lo loam and
loamy sand over
sand and gravel
moderate sligm to moderate
slight to severe
moderate
slight severe
moderate to moderate to severe
severe
moderate slight
moderate severe
slight to moderate to severe
moderate
severe severe
severe severe
2-5
-------
2.06 Hydrology
A. General
The Madison Metropolitan Sewerage District lies primarily within the Rock River drainage
basin. Portions of the District are within the Wisconsin or Pecatonica-Sugar River drainage
basins. The present effluent discharge is to the Badfish Creek which is within the Rock River
Basin. Other alternatives considered during the development of the 201 Facilities Plan for
the MMSD included discharge to streams in other drainage basins. The Wisconsin River and
Pecatonica-Sugar River drainage basins were also considered. The following sections are a
summary of the information available for these basins. A more detailed account of water
uses, sources of pollution, water quality and water resources management of the basins
may be found in Appendix A, "Environmental Inventory."
B. Lower Rock River Basin
1. General
The Lower Rock River Basin drains approximately 1900 square miles of south-central
Wisconsin, including large areas of Dane, Rock, Jefferson, Waukesha, and Walworth
Counties. Much of the basin is included in the Eastern Ridges and Lowlands geographical
province, a result of pa>t glaciation. Major tributaries of the Rock River include the
Bark ana Yahara Rivers, Turtle, Koshkonong. Marsh and Bass Creeks. Wetland areas
and lakes are common to tnis region. Major lakes located in the basin are Lakes Mendota,
Wingra, Monona, Waubesa and Kegonsa on the Yahara River and Lake Koshkonong
on the Rock River.
The groundwater resources are abundant in the basin. Virtually all public, industrial
and private water supplies are drawn from the groundwater aquifer.
2. Surface Water Resource^
The Rock River flows for approximately sixty miles in the Lower Rock River Basin from
north of the City of For; Atkinson, through Lake Koshkonong and south to the Illinois
border.The River falls approximately 50 feet in the basin and this fall is largely absorbed
by the Indianford, Janesville, Monterey and Blackhawk dams.
Major tributaries of the Lower Rock River, as given above, drain the upstream tributary
areas. Flows of these streams are shown in Table 2-3. The discharge of wastewater to a
stream must consider these low flows in determining the degree of treatment required to
protect the environment.
2—6
-------
Table 2-3
Flow Data, Lower Rock River Basin
Stream
BadfishCr.
Badfish Cr.
Yahara R.
Yahara R.
Yahara R.
RockR.
RockR.
Turtle Cr.
Turtle Cr.
Koshkonong Cr.
Koshkonong Cr.
Koshkonong Cr.
Location
near Stoughton
U.S.G.S. 5-4301
Mouth
McFarland
U.S.G.S. 5-4295
at Stoughton
Mouth
Indianford
Afton
U.S.G.S. 5-4305
Delvan
Clinton
U.S.G.S. 5-4315
Sun Prairie
Cambridge
Rockdale
Drainage
Area,
Sq. Miles
43.5
83.1
327
407
2,600
3,331
80.7
202
151
190
Low Flow
.
cfs
1.9a
8.8a
4.7b
6.6"
15.4a
34 c
200 c
3.5d
24.0d
0.02d
8.4d
10.0d
Average*
Discharge
cfs
52.4
148
540
1,723
110
100 >T Flood
Discharge,
cfs
871'
867'
970"
15,300h
20,200h
12,500'
(460)J
(1,620)J
(1,700)J
Period
of
Record
1956-66
1930-
1914-
1939-
a HarzaEngr. Co., "Water Quality of Badfish Creek", 1971.
b Determined for post diversion flow data, by O'Brien & Gere.
c Wise. Electric Power Co., "Environmental Report", L. Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant, 1975.
d U.S.G.S., "Low-Flow Characteristics of Wisconsin Streams at Sewage Treatment Plants", 1974
e L.S.G.S., "Water Resources Data for Wisconsin", 1974.
f Maximum rcorded discharge, period of record.
g U.S.G.S., Open file report.
h U.S.G.S., "Floods on Rock R. in Northern Rock County Wisconsin", 1970.
i U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, "Flood Plain Information, Turtle Creek, Rock County, WI.", 1967.
j Ten year flood discharge.
Flood flows in the basin are relatively low due to the small relief of the basin as well as
the storage capacity provided by the many lakes, impoundments and wetlands. Flooding
is generally limited to low lying agricultural and undeveloped lands adjoining the streams.
Spring runoff has resulted in flooding of some residences in low-lying areas. In the
cities of Janesville and Beloit, where substantial development has occurred on the flood-
plain, chances of more severe flood damages are present.
The surface waters of the Lower Rock River Basin are utilized for a number of beneficial
practices. Recreation, stock watering, industrial cooling water, fish and aquatic life
propagation, wastewater assimilation and power generation are the major uses of the
surface waters in the basin.
Surface waters of the basin are generally rich in nutrient materials and profuse growth
of aquatic vegetation and algae are common in many of the basin waterways. These
conditions are due in part to the natural fertility of the basin, but are augmented by
the urban and agricultural activities in the basin. A summary of the water quality of
the lakes and streams of the Lower Rock River Basin is found in Appendix A. Sampling
and analysis of the streams in the basin is conducted by several different agencies. MMSD
currently collects samples from twelve monitoring stations on the Yahara River, Badfish
Creek and the Rock River on a bi-weekly basis. Additional samples are collected by the
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources on a monthly basis. In addition to these
samples, a special water quality monitoring program was conducted during the course
of the current 201 Facilities Plan Study at several stations on the Badfish Creek, Yahara
River and on Lakes Waubesa and Kegonsa.
2-7
-------
Pollution of surface waters may occur as the result of point source or non-point source
discharges. Point source discharges (direct discharges) generally originate either from a
municipal or industrial wastewater treatment plant.
There are twenty-six municipal wastewater treatment facilities currently holding permits
to discharge to the Lower Rock River Basin. The largest discharge is from the MMSD
which presently discharges approximately 36 MOD to the Badfish Creek. Other discharges
range all the way down to approximately a 0.01 MOD flowrate.
Thirty industries are inventoried by the WDNR as contributing point source pollutional
loadings to the basin. Many industries utilize land disposal or discharge uncontaminated
cooling water to the surface waters.
Non-point source discharges (indirect discharges) may result from overland runoff, con-
taminated groundwater discharge, or from precipitation which contains particulate
matter.
Much of the materials reach the surface waters from urbanized areas via storm sewers.
In rural areas the non-point source loading reaches the surface waters via overland run-
off. The non-point source materials contribute heavily to the sediment loading, nutrient
loading and oxygen demands on the surface waters.
The surface waters of the Lower Rock River are managed by the WDNR as a part of the
Rock River Basin. An interim basin plan was prepared in accordance with Public Law
92-500. Management includes water quality monitoring, non-point source studies, self-
surveillance of point-source dischargers, and administration of the construction grants
for pollution abatement facilities. Future management goals include the continuation
and expansion of the above programs as well as implementation of an area-wide waste
management study under Section 208 of Public Law 92-500.
3. Groundwater Resources
Lower Rock River basin has an abundant groundwater supply. A deep aquifer consisting
of sandstone and dolomitic deposits contains much of the groundwater utilized for
deep well water supply in the basin. Shallow wells draw groundwater from the glacial
till, ground moraine and outwash deposits. The surface deposits are, in general,
sufficiently permeable to permit moderately rapid recharge of the groundwater.
Surface water flow in the basin is normally augmented by groundwater discharge. In
Dane County, it has been estimated (Cline, D.R., 1965) that approximately 60 to 95
percent of the annual average stream flow is contributed by groundwater discharge. In
areas of heavy groundwater pumpage, such as in the immediate vicinity of the City of
Madison wells, drawdown of the groundwater may result in recharge by the nearby
surface waters.
Groundwater quality is good in the basin. High concentrations reported for dissolved
solids and total hardness (Cotter, R.D., et.al.,1969) result from the percolation of the
groundwater through the sandstone and dolomite which make up the area's aquifer.
Due to the high hardness, many homeowners in the area have had water softeners in-
stalled. In a few isolated wells, iron concentrations have been sufficiently high to cause
staining problems. The background concentrations of nitrate nitrogen are less than
5 mg/1. A few isolated wells have had concentrations reported in excess of the accepted
drinking water standard of 45 mg/1 (U.S. Public Health Service).
2—8
-------
As discussed above, the groundwater aquifer furnishes virtually all the water utilized in
the basin for public, industrial and private water supplies. The City of Madison, a major
water user in the basin, currently withdraws approximately 35 MOD.
Potential contaminants of the groundwater may reach the aquifer from a number of
sources, including poorly located or designed sanitary landfills, industrial or municipal
wastewater seepage lagoons, private wastewater septic tank drainage fields, animal feed-
lots, and improperly conducted fertilization programs. Materials applied to the soil sur-
face at rates faster than they can be removed by surface runoff or utilized by the flora or
fauna, then pose a threat to enter the groundwater and potentially contribute to its pollu-
tion.
The WDNR and the USGS have established a groundwater monitoring network on a
statewide basis. This program enables these agencies to monitor the groundwater quality
and to locate quality problem areas.
Regulations and guidelines have been established to control activities which may lead to
groundwater contamination. Siting and design criteria for septic tank systems and sanitary
landfills and fertilizer application rates help to minimize the hazards of groundwater
pollution from these sources.
C. Lower Wisconsin River Basin
1. General
The Lower Wisconsin River Basin between Portage and its mouth at Prairie du Chien,
drains approximately 3140 square miles of southwestern Wisconsin. The information in-
cluded in this section is limited to a sub-basin of approximately 800 square miles between
the Prairie du Sac dam and the Village of Lone Rock.
The basin lies entirely within the Driftless Area of Wisconsin and the area dislays the
steep slopes and narrow valleys typical of the Western Uplands. Several small streams are
tributary to the Wisconsin River in this area including the Blue Mounds, Roxbury,
Otter, Mill, Sneed, Honey and Dunlap Creeks. There are no major lakes other than
those created by damming of the river such as Lake Wisconsin, which is located north
of Prairie du Sac.
2. Surface Water Resources
The Wisconsin River flows roughly east to west for 32 miles in the sub-basin falling
approximately 50 feet in that stretch. The river is characteristically broad, with a sandy
bottom and many sand bars and islands. The tributary creeks are dentritic in nature,
with steep slopes and many branches.
Available streamflow data is listed in Table 2-4. The low flow of the Wisconsin River
is relatively large due to the large contributing drainage area. Tributary streams have
small low flow values. Floods on the Wisconsin River are limited somewhat by 23 up-
stream reservoirs but may cause localized property and crop damage. Pressure to develop
areas of the floodplain for residential use increases the risk of future flood damage.
2—9
-------
Table 2-4
Flow Data, Lower Wisconsin River Sub-Basin
Drainage Low Flow Average 100 Yr. Flood
Area, (Q7 I0) Discharge, Discharge,
Stream Location Sq. Miles cfs cfs cfs
Wisconsin R. Prairie du Sac 8,950 2,31 la — —
Wisconsin R. Muscoda 10,300 2,660 8,613 116,000
U.S G.S. 5^070
Honey Cr. Black Hawk 62 12 — —
Black Earth Cr Cross Plains 23 4 — —
Black Earth Cr. Black Earth 47 13 30 —
U.S G.S. 5-4065
Black Earth Cr Mazomanie 69 18 — —
Blums Cr. Roxbury 10 0.01 — —
a Estimated based on drainage area
Source: U.S. Geological Sur\e>
The surface waters of the sub-basin are used for recreation, hydroelectric power
generation, fish and aquatic life propagation, and waste assimilation. Many of the tribu-
tary headwaters are suitable for trout habitat. As such, they are utilized extensively for
recreation. The Wisconsin River, as part of the "Wisconsin Water Trail" is heavily used
for recreational canoeing and boating. The river valley in the sub-basin is scenic and
largely undeveloped. It is currently being considered for protection under the National
Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. The production of hydroelectric power does not remove or
divert water from the basin, however, water quality and temperature changes occur as a
result of impoundment.
Surface water quality in the Lower Wisconsin River Basin is generally good. Although
serious water quality problems exist in the Wisconsin River upstream of the sub-basin,
sufficient downstream recovery occurs such that water quality in the sub-basin is generally
adequate to meet most uses. Fish and aquatic life standards for dissolved oxygen and
un-ionized ammonia are generally met in the sub-basin. The naturally shifting sand bottom
of the Wisconsin River in the sub-basin is such that benthic loads and aquatic weed pro-
duction are not a problem. Problems with mercury, however, do exist. Fish taken from
the Lower Wisconsin River have been found to exceed the Federal Food and Drug Ad-
ministration limit of 0.5 mg/1 mercury (dry weight basis) (WDNR, 1970), and sportsmen
have been advised to limit their consumption to fish taken from these waters to once per
week.
In the Lower Wisconsin River Basin, water quality is monitored by the Wisconsin Depart-
ment of Natural Resources monthly at Prairie du Sac and at Bridgeport, both on the
Wisconsin River. A summary of this water quality data is found in Appendix A.
Four municipalities discharge treated wastewater to tributaries of the Wisconsin River.
One industry discharges wastewater directly to the Wisconsin River, while another dis-
charges to the Black Earth Creek. Besides these discharges, many industries and
municipalities provide soil adsorption of wastewaters and/or discharge only non-
contaminated waters to surface waters of the sub-basin.
2—10
-------
Non-point source discharges may result from overland runoff, contaminated ground-
water discharge or from precipitation which contains paniculate matter. Values for
pollutional loadings from urban areas are expected to be similar to those of the Rock
River Basin. Due to the steeper slopes, contributions from rural runoff could be some-
what higher than in the Rock River Basin. Due to the instances of municipal and
industrial land application of wastewater in the basin, chances of contaminating the
groundwater are present.
The Lower Wisconsin River Basin surface waters are managed by the WDNR as a part
of the Wisconsin River Basin. Management includes water quality monitoring, non-point
source studies, self-surveillance of point-source dischargers and administration of the
construction grants for pollution abatement facilities. An interim basin plan has been
prepared in accordance with Public Law 92-500. The possible inclusion of the basin
under the National Wild and Scenic Rivers Program could necessitate more strict
management of the surface waters and land areas adjacent to the streams to protect the
environmental quality of the basin.
Future management goals include the continuation and expansion of these programs as
well as the initiation of area-wide waste-management studies pursuant to Section 208 of
Public Law 92-500.
3. Groundwater Resources
Surface deposits vary in permeability from slow to rapid, with the more slowly permeable
soils being found in the uplands and rapidly permeable soils in stream and river
valleys.
It is estimated that 80 percent of the average annual discharge of streams is due to
groundwater inflow (Hindall, S.M., and Borman, R.C., 1974). Depth to water table
varies from zero to about 500 feet in the sub-basin. Semi-confining strata produce artesian
conditions and perched water in some upland areas.
Groundwater is withdrawn in the sub-basin for public and private domestic supply, for
industrial use, and for irrigation. Only a very small percentage of the available ground-
water resources are currently being utilized, due to their abundance and the relatively low
population in the sub-basin.
Groundwaters of the Lower Wisconsin River Basin are generally of good quality and are
suitable for most uses. Hardness levels in the groundwater may necessitate softening
prior to use in some instances. High nitrate levels, indicative of contamination from
surface sources, have been found to exist in a few isolated areas.
Pollution of groundwaters may result from infiltration of surface pollutants. The danger
of groundwater contamination is greatest in the sub-basin in the uplands, where soils are
thin over fractured bedrock, and in the river bottoms, where rapidly permeable superfi-
cial deposits are utilized as a groundwater source.
The WDNR and USGS have established a groundwater monitoring network as described
for the Lower Rock River Basin. This program, along with regulations and guidelines
controlling possible sources of groundwater pollution, help to minimize the hazards of
groundwater pollution.
2—11
-------
D. Sugar River Basin
1. General
The Sugar River Basin drains approximately 693 square miles of south-central Wisconsin.
The basin includes a varied topography with narrow stream valleys and steep slopes in
the unglaciated northwest and west-central portions, with more subdued topography in
the glaciated region. Tributaries of the Sugar River include the Sugar River West Branch,
Little Sugar River, Allen, Searles, Sylvester, Taylor, Spring, Badger Mill, and Willow
Creeks. There are no major lakes or wetland areas in the basin.
Groundwater is available everywhere in the basin. Virtually all public, industrial and
private water supplies are drawn from the groundwater aquifer.
2. Surface Water Resources
The Sugar River flows approximately 65 miles from north to south in the basin, falling
about 250 feet from its source to the Illinois-Wisconsin state line. Available flow
information for the Sugar River and its tributaries is presented in Table 2-5.
Table 2-5
Flow Data, Sugar River Basin
Drainage Low Flow Average 50 Yr. Flood
Area, (Q7 )0), Discharge, Discharge,
Stream Location Sq. Miles cfs cfs cfs
Sugar R. Belleville 175 19 —
Sugar R. Brodhead 530 94 338 13,000
U.S.G.S. 5-4365
Badger Mill Cr 1.0 mile S. of 19 0.01 — —
Verona
W.Br. Sugar R. l.lmileS. of I.I 0.13 — —
Mt. Horeb
Allen Cr Evansville 28 0.77 — —
LittleSugar R. New Glarus 23 3.1 — —
W. Br. Little Monticello 34 6.4 — —
Sugar R.
Source. Hindall, S.M & Skinner, E.L., "Water Resources of Wisconsin — Pecatomca-Sugar River Basin,
Atlas HA-153, USGS, 1973.
Surface water resources of the Sugar River Basin are fair to good for most uses. Some
local pollution exists but water is generally of adequate quantity and quality. Current
uses are for fish and aquatic habitat, recreation, and waste assimilation. Recreational
boating is limited to canoeing and boating on the two relatively small impoundments of
the Sugar River at Belleville and Brodhead.
Water quality data for the Sugar River at Brodhead are collected on a monthly basis by
the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. No violations of the minimum dissolved
oxygen limit or the recommended un-ionized ammonia nitrogen value have been observed.
2—12
-------
Eleven municipalities and three industries are inventoried by the Wisconsin Department
of Natural Resources as discharging point sources of pollution to the surface waters of
the Sugar River Basin. Other wastewaters are either non-contaminated, or are disposed
of by land application, and are not included here.
Non-point sources of surface water pollution are contributed by precipitation, rural
runoff, urban runoff, and pollution contributed by groundwater inflow. Of these, the
major sources are provided by rural and urban runoff. Non-point source loadings in
the Sugar River Basin can be expected to be similar to those for the Lower Rock River
Basin.
The surface water resources of the Sugar River Basin are managed by the Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources as part of the Pecatonica-Sugar River Basin Plan-
ning Unit. An interim Basin Plan has been prepared, pursuant to Section 303 of Public
Law 92-500, in combination with the Rock River Basin Planning Unit. Current
management activities include water quality monitoring programs, self-surveillance by
dischargers of point sources of pollution, and the administration of the discharge permit
and the grants program for the construction of pollution abatement facilities. Future
management activities will include the continuation and expansion of these programs as
well as area-wide waste management planning studies, in accordance with Section 208 of
Public Law 92-500.
3. Groundwater Resources
Groundwater is available everywhere in the basin. The sandstone aquifer is the most
important water bearing unit in the basin and is commonly utilized. The undifferentiated
deposits are also widely used for domestic and farm supplies in areas of sufficient
saturated thickness. Sand and gravel deposits are limited in areal distribution to the river
valleys, but are capable of supplying large quantities of groundwater. Surface water
flow in the basin is normally augmented by groundwater discharge.
Groundwaters of the basin are withdrawn for municipal, industrial, agricultural and
domestic use. The rate of withdrawal is small relative to the total water available, due to
the abundant supply and non-urbanized nature of the basin.
Groundwater quality of the basin is adequate for most uses. High hardness levels, re-
flective of the presence of dolomitic deposits in the bedrock geology, may require soften-
ing of groundwaters prior to some uses. Objectionable deposits of iron and manganese
may be found locally, especially in the sand and gravel aquifer. Nitrate nitrogen levels
above the USPHS limit have not been found to be a problem in the Sugar River Basin.
Groundwater pollution results from contamination by surface sources such as human
and animal wastes, fertilizers, and decomposition of organic matter. Potential for such
contamination is greatest in the basin in the uplands, where soil may be thin over
fractured bedrock, and in the stream bottom areas, where the superficial deposits are
rapidly permeable.
The WDNR and USGS have established a groundwater monitoring network as described
for the Lower Rock River Basin. This program, along with regulations and guidelines
controlling possible sources of groundwater pollution, help to minimize the hazards of
groundwater pollution.
2—13
-------
2.07 Biology
A. General
The study area biology includes all the animal and plant life of both terrestrial and
aquatic habitats. The native and introduced species of mammals, birds, reptiles, fish,
amphibians, insects, trees, shrubs and grasses are all a part of the area's environment.
B. Mammals
Mammal species of Wisconsin have been reported to have numbered 78 species in all (Wild-
life, People and the Land, 1970). Some species such as the bison, cougar and wolverine
have disappeared from the State. Other species remaining in the area include squirrels,
foxes, weasels, white-tailed deer, mice, muskrat, rabbits, bats and badgers. While some
species are found exclusively in fields, others in woodlands and others in marshy habitats,
many species are found in overlapping habitat areas. The south-central portion of Wisconsin,
including Dane and Rock Counties, is extensively cultivated. As a result, species found
primarily in field and light woods are common. This would include the rabbits, mice,
skunks, foxes and some weasels. Species found in woods and deep woods are not common
or not found at all in the area. White-tailed favor such habitat and are found in limited
numbers in the area. The black bear prefers the deep woods and is not found at all locally.
C. Reptiles
Reptiles common to the area include many snake, turtle, and a few lizard species. These are
important in the control of the insect and small rodent populations. Two species of poison-
ous snakes are found in Wisconsin, the massasaqua and the timber rattlesnake. However,
neither of these are found in the Dane and Rock County area.
D. Amphibians
The amphibians, frogs, toads and salamanders, find ample habitat areas in the eastern
portions of Dane and Rock Counties in the numerous wetlands and along streams and
rivers. They are not as abundant in the western areas of the counties due to the scarcity of
wetlands. The amphibians also play an important role in the control of the insect popula-
tion.
E. Birds
The bird species of Wisconsin include upland game species, waterfowl, shore birds, birds of
prey and song birds. Depending upon the species, bird habitats can range from the wild lake
and woods areas favored by the bald eagle to the typical backyard inhabited by the
sparrows, robins and other song birds. Some species are year-round inhabitants while others
are migratory or only occasional visitors to the area. The upland game birds and the watefowl
species offer abundant opportunities for hunting in the area.
A record number, 91 bird species, were recorded in the Madison vicinity during the 1974
annual Christmas Bird Count sponsored by the Audobon Society (Passenger Pigeon, Spring
1975). Similar counts in Evansville, Cooksville and Beloit recorded 37, 28 and 49 species,
respectively.
2—14
-------
F. Invertebrates
Invertebrates include all of the various species of spiders, ticks, grasshoppers, crickets,
beetles, dragonflies and the many other related groups found in Wisconsin. A complete listing
of the invertebrates is impossible since not all species have been enumerated or classified as
yet. An investigation of the aquatic insects of the Badfish Creek and at two locations on the
Yahara River was conducted during the summer months of 1975. The results of that program
are found in Appendix E.
It was reported in Appendix E that the macroinvertebrate diversity of the Badfish Creek
had been profoundly affected by the MMSD effluent. High levels of nutrients including
nitrogen and phosphorus, and other cations such as chlorides and sodium have probably
had some detrimental impact on the macroinvertebrate fauna of Badfish Creek, but it was
felt that the effect from these cations has been minimal. It was indicated that the primary
factor in altering the macroinvertebrate population has probably been the relatively high
BOD loadings.
Predictions regarding the possible impact of greatly reduced BOD and nutrient loadings
were that if both pollutants were greatly reduced in the stream then it may be anticipated
that the macroinvertebrate population may become similar to that found in Sugar Creek, a
relatively clean stream in southern Wisconsin. Reduced loadings of BOD only would probably
result in a fauna comparable to that found in the Sugar and the Yahara Rivers.
G. Fish
Fish species of Wisconsin range from the intolerant game species such as the rainbow
trout to the very tolerant rough fishes such as the carp and bowfin. Many fish species
are quite sensitive to water quality and habitat changes while others are not and may be
found in a variety of habitats. An analysis of a water body's fish population may be useful
in indicating the general water quality of a lake or stream. During 1975, a fish sampling
program was conducted on the Badfish Creek, on the Rutland Branch and at two locations
on the Yahara River. Results of that program are found in Appendix D. Table 2-6 is a
summary of the types of fish which may be found in the Dane and Rock Counties' waters.
H. Endangered Species
The United States Department of the Interior (USDI) has published an extensive listing of
the species which are threatened with extinction throughout the world. This list has been
utilized by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) as an aid in developing
a similar list for the State. This listing (Table 2-7) is much more restricted than that of the
USDI. The only species included on the WDNR list which may now be found in the study
area is the ornate box turtle. Members of this species occur along streams in wooded areas
and may possibly occur in the western regions of Dane County. Also at one time an
active fishery for cicso was reported to be the Madison Lakes. However, this species is no
longer found due to a combination of intensive fishing pressure and changes in the water
quality and habitat of the Lakes.
2-15
-------
Table 2-6
Surface Water Fisheries
Typical
Gamefish
Species
Typical
Panfish
Species
Forage Rough
Fish Fish
Badfish Creek
Black Earth Creek
Koshkonong Creek
Lake Kegonsa
Lake Koshkonong
Lake Mendota
Lake Monona
Rock River
Lake Waubesa
Wisconsin River
Yahara River
Sugar River
CQ
CO
o
C/5
.*
•£ '£
'&• c
»
W
o. £ .is
3 ca •— jz
— i- 3 •-»
oa u CQ >
X X X X X
X
X X X X X
X X X X X
X X X X X
XXX
X X X X X
X X X X
X X
XXX
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
2—16
-------
Table 2-7
Wisconsin Endangered Species List
Mammals
Canada lynx — Lynx canadensis
Martin — Martes Americana
Timber wolf — Canis lupus lycaon
Birds
Bald eagle — Haliaetus leucocephalus
Osprey — Pandion haliaetus
Double crested cormorant — Phalacrocorax
Peregrine falcon — Falco peregrinus
Reptiles
Ornate box turtle — Terrapene ornata
Queen snake — Natrix septemvitatta
Massasauga — Sistrurus catenates
Wood turtle — Clemmys insculpta
Fishes
Greater redhorse — Maxostoma valenciennesi
Ozark minnow — Dionda nubila
Pugnose shiner — Notropis anogenus
Longjaw cisco — Coregonus alpenae
Kiyi — Coregonus kiyi
Shortjaw cisco — Coregonus zenithieus
Shortnose cisco — Coregonus reighardi
Source: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
2-17
-------
The Rare and Endangered Animal Species list provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region V, is shown as Table 2-8. The blue pike (Stizastedium vitreum glaucum)
included on this list is a subspecies of the commonly found walleyed pike (Stizostedium
vitreum). The blue pike was found in Lakes Erie and Ontario but reports of the species have
been so sporadic that it is now thought that the species has totally disappeared from the
lakes (Scott and Grossman, 1973). The Kirtland's warbler (Dendroica kirtlandif) and the
Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis) are not found in Wisconsin.
Table 2-8
Rare & Endangered Animal Species — USEPA Region V
Fish
Salmoniformes
Longjaw Cisco — Coregonus alpenae
Perciformes
Blue Pike — Stizostedion vitreum glaucum
Birds
Falconiformes
Arctic Peregrine Falcon — Falco peregrinus tundrius
Passeriformes
Kirtland's Warbler — Dendroica kirtlandii
Mammals
Chiroptera
Indiana Bat — Myotis sodalis
Carnivora
Eastern Timber Wolf — Canis lupis tycoon
Source: U.S. List of Endangered Fauna, U.S. Dept. of
the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, May 1974.
I. Vegetation
Native terrestrial vegetation species of the study area included the grasses, shrubs, wild-
flowers and marsh plants common to the once extensive prairie lands and wetlands. Through
the increased activities of man, these areas have been drastically reduced, so that at present,
only scattered and isolated areas of prairie land remain and the acreage of wetlands remain-
ing is becoming less each year. In the western portion of the study area, hardwood trees of
the northern deciduous forest are common. These include maples, oaks, hickory and birch
trees.
2—18
-------
Some species of wildflowers are protected under Wisconsin statutes. Trailing arbutus, lady
slippers, American bittersweet, pitcher plants and various wild lily species are protected
from cutting, injury, destruction or removal from any public lands or from private lands
without the owner's permission.
Aquatic vegetation includes the large rooted plants and the free floating and attached algae.
The species found in any given water body are dependent upon the water quality and physical
characteristics of the lake or stream. Many algal species have been grouped into the broad
categories of clean or polluted water algae. Various investigators (Birge and Juday, 1922;
Lawton, 1950; Fitzgerald, 1955) have found the dominant species of algae in the Madison
Lakes have been from the polluted water species. These species include the Melosira,
Anabaena and Anacystis. A sampling program to identify the algae species present in the
Badfish Creek was conducted during 1975. Results of this program are found in Appendix E.
2.08 Air Quality
The Federal government has established the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
which would, if universally met, provide for the protection of the public health with an adequate
margin of safety. Among the various air pollutants for which maximum recommended standards
have been set are the following:
H. Sulfur oxides
H Particulate matter
H. Carbon monoxide
H Photo chemical oxidants
— Hydrocarbons
Z Nitrogen oxides
Air quality monitoring stations have been established in Dane and Rock Counties at several
locations in Madison and Beloit, respectively. Data for 1974 collected at these stations are
summarized in Table 2-9. During 1974, the stations in Madison and Beloit have met the
standards set by the NAAQS. Measurements taken over the past five to ten years have indicated
a reduction in the amount of particulate matter in the Madison area. The annual geometric
mean for particulate matter in 1961 was 76 Mg/m3. A steady decline has resulted until, as shown
in Table 2-9, the 1974 value is 42.32 ^g/m3. Other data show that the dustfall in Madison has
decreased from 24.1 tons/sq mi/month in 1966 to 13.1 tons/sq mi/month in 1972.
Table 2-9
1974 Air Quality Data
Madison, Dane Co. Beloit. Rock Co. Primar> Ambient
Pollutant (avg. for all sla) (avg. for all sta) Time of A\gs. Air Qual. Stan.1
sulfuroxides 1637jjg/m' 14.38 ^g/m1 Ann. Arrilh. Mean SOpig/m1
paniculate matter 42 32w5/ni' 52.98 ^g/m' Ann. Geo. Mean 75,
carbon monoxide 7 38 ppm Max. — 8 hours
total oxidants 105.0^g/m1 Max. — 1 hour
nitrogen dioxide 5I.71jjg/m' Ann. Anth. Mean
I National Ambient AirQualiu Standards
2 V alue for photo ihcmical oxidants
2—19
-------
2.09 Land Use
Land use inventories for Dane and Rock Counties have been prepared by the Dane County
Regional Planning Commission and the Rock County Planning Department. Aerial photo-
graphs and field investigations have been utilized by the two agencies in developing a thorough
compilation of the land uses. Tables 2-10 and 2-11 summarize the data collected for the two
counties.
There has been increased development in each county as increasing populations have required
additional acreage for housing, services, transportation and recreational opportunities. Vacant,
agricultural and natural land use categories have shown the greatest declines as it is generally
from these categories that the needs of the increasing population for developed land are satisfied.
Other losses, especially in Dane County, have resulted from the annexation of acreage formerly
under the jurisdiction of rural townships to existing urbanized areas. This again is the result of
the demands of the increasing population.
As the population continues to increase, if past trends are followed, additional land areas will
be developed to accommodate the greater number of people. Based on a projected year 2000
Dane County population of 400,000 (an increase of approximately 38% over the 1970 population
of 290,272), the Dane County Regional Planning Commission has estimated that additional
acreages would have to be developed.
2.10 Significant Environmentally Sensitive Areas
A. General
Areas with significant environmental sensitivity include areas of unique or scarce wildlife
habitat or of scientific interest. Wetlands, wood lots, geological formations and prairie lands
are typical of environmentally sensitive areas. Special care must be taken to protect these
areas from change or destruction.
B. Wetlands
The wetlands provide many valuable services including the following:
Z Watershed protection
Z Recreation
Z Education
Z Scenic value
However, it is not often that the value of such areas is readily apparent in monetary terms.
Consequently, there is pressure from private owners and developers to initiate drainage or
other measures which would enhance the immediate monetary value of a wetland area.
Wetlands of Dane County have been studied (Bedford, et al., 1974) and a priority rating
system has been set up. This has been an attempt to rate the quality and importance of each
wetland area in the county. Priority groups range from I to V, with I being the highest
rating. The ratings can be used as an aid in planning future development within the county.
Rock County has not had an intensive study of its wetlands. Most of the wetlands in Rock
County are located in the Yahara and Rock River valleys. In 1968, a survey indicated that
there were approximately 4,200 acres of wetlands within the towns of Union, Porter, Fulton,
Milton and Janesville.
2—20
-------
Table 2-10
Dane County — Land Use
1970
1964
Land Use
in acres
29,969.6
15,595.1
747.5
913.7
11,756.2
56.8
528.0
123.0
249.3
991.2
34,392.0
29,144.0
5,248.0
1,941.8
515.8
1,426.0
6,382.0
1,049.1
5,332.9
11,632.2
678,716.1
22,651.4
786,676.3
85,308.8
Percent Land Use
of total in acres
3.8 24,291.9
N.C.
N.C.
N.C.
N.C.
N.C.
N.C.
N.C.
N.C.
.1 N.C.
4.4 N.C.
25,992.7
N.C.
.2 N.C.
N.C.
N.C.
.8 N.C.
N.C.
N.C.
1.5 11,459.6
86.3 686,555.8
2.9 16,270.3
100.0 778,232.9
10.8 75,406.8
Percent
of total
3.1
N.C.
N.C.
N.C.
N.C.
1.5
88.2
2.1
N.C.
9.7
RESIDENTIAL
Single Family
Two Family
Multiple Family
Farm Dwellings
Group Quarters
Mobile Homes
Hotel and Motel
Seasonal Dwellings
MANUFACTURING
TRANSPORTATION AND
UTILITIES
Street and Road R.O.W.
Other
COMMERCIAL
Wholesale
Retail
SERVICES
General
Government and Education
RECREATION
AGRICULTURAL AND
VACANT
WATER
TOTALS
DEVELOPED ACREAGE
N.C. — Not Comparable, similar data was not collected in 1964
Source: Dane County Regional Planning Commission
Note: The increased total area reported for 1970 is accounted for by the exclusion, in 1969, of
the surface area of several lakes. The area of these lakes was included in 1970. Also
corrected were minor mathematical errors which had been noted.
2—21
-------
Table 2-11
Rock County — Land Use
1973 1968
Land Use Percent Land Use Percent
in acres of total in acres of total
Residential 9,565.50 2.18 8,400.00 1.91
Trailer Park 236.25 .05 26.00 .01
General Industrial 33.00 .01 18.50 —
General Extractive 519.50 .12 401.25 .09
Transportation, Communication
and Utilities 901.75 .21 782.25 .18
Street and Road way R.O.W. 12,216.75 2.78 11,932.00 2.71
Railroad R.O.W. 1,684.00 .38 1,755.00 .40
General Commercial 260.50 .06 145.50 .03
Motels and Hotels 23.25 .01 12.00 —
Personal and Business Services 236.25 .05 136.00 .03
Government Services 51.00 .01 17.00 —
Educational Institutions 146.50 .03 61.00 .01
Cemeteries 158.75 .04 159.50 .04
Cultural, Entertainment and
Recreational 956.00 .22 233.75 .05
Public Parks and Waysides 954.75 .22 663.00 .15
Agricultural 375,573.25 85.58 380,336.00 86.28
Vacant Land 4,135.50 .59 2,571.25 .59
Vacant Buildings 38.75 .01 31.50 .01
Woodland 28,591.25 6.51 29,190.25 6.62
Water 4,135.50 .94 3,920.75 .89
TOTAL 438,854.70 100.00 440,792.50 100.00
DEVELOPED ACREAGE 27,982.50 6.38 24,774.25 5.62
Source: Rock County Planning Board
Note: The discrepency of the total area figures may be accounted for by changes in the reporting
of land use categories.
2—22
-------
C. Scientific and Natural Areas
In order to aid in the protection of other environmentally sensitive areas, the Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources has established the Scientific Areas Preservation Council.
This Council has identified and listed many sites within the state which have significant
value for their educational, research, scarce or unique characteristics. Examples of native
prairie land, wood lots, wetlands and geological formations are among those areas listed.
Most of the sites inventoried and listed by the Scientific Areas Preservation Council are
privately-owned and are not open to the public for their use nor is there any direct control
over the use or management of such sites. A relatively few (approximately 124 in the state)
are under public ownership or management. Two public sites are located in Dane County
and three in Rock County. These are listed in Table 2-12 below.
Table 2-12
Public Scientific Areas
Site Location Acres
New Observatory Woods Dane County 13
Waubesa Wetlands Dane County 129
Avon Bottoms Rock County 40
Swenson Prairie and Oak Opening Rock County 40
Newark Road Prairie Rock County 22.5
Additions to the listing of scientific areas are continually being made as more areas are
identified and inventoried. At present there are about 70 privately owned sites in Dane
County and 95 similar sites in Rock County in the Council's data file.
2.11 Population
Population data is collected and tabulated by the United States Bureau of the Census,
Wisconsin's total population has increased from the 30,945 reported by the Bureau of Census
in 1840 to 4,417,731 for 1970.
Dane and Rock County's population in 1970 had increased significantly in the decade since
1960. Table 2-13 summarizes the population changes between 1960 to 1970.
Table 2-13
Population Data
1960 1970 % Change
Wisconsin 3,951,777 4,417,731 +11.8
Dane County 222,095 290,272 +30.7
Rock County 113,913 131,970 +15.9
City of Madison 126,706 173,258 +36.7
As evidenced by the above data, the urban areas have experienced the greatest population
increases.
2—23
-------
2.12 Other Water Quality Management Programs in the Area
A. General
The present 201 Facilities Plan Study for the Madison Metropolitan Sewerage District is
being conducted under the scope of Section 201 of Public Law 92-500. It is the goal of the
201 Study to identify an environmentally sound and economically feasible wastewater
treatment and discharge strategy and a sludge disposal program which will be consistent with
other region-wide plans.
Other programs concerned directly with water quality management or wastewater treatment
and discharge in the area include the following:
1. 208 Planning Program for Dane County
2. 201 Facilities Plan Studies for the Villages of Verona, Deerfield, Mt. Horeb, Brooklyn
and Marshall and the City of Sun Prairie
3. National Wild and Scenic Rivers System Study for the lower portion of the Wisconsin
River
B. Dane County 208 Planning Program
The Dane County Regional Planning Commission has been designated as the 208 Planning
Agency for Dane County. This planning effort will investigate various operational and
administrative alternatives and determine the most practicable program which will insure
the protection of the surface and groundwater quality. The work plan for the program has
identified the following work elements:
C Non-point Sources
LJ Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plants
G Water Quality Standards
n Waste Load Allocations
H Land Use — Water Quality Linkages
" Institutional Considerations
Z Wisconsin Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
H Protection and Preservation of Streams
~ Protection and Preservation of Marshes and Wetlands
Each of these work elements will be investigated and recommendations or aid will be given
in appropriate areas which will help to implement the goal of the program.
C. 201 Facilities Planning Studies
In addition to the 201 Facilities Plan being conducted for the Madison Metropolitan
Sewerage District, the Villages of Verona, Mt. Horeb, Deerfield, Brooklyn and Marshall
and the City of Sun Prairie are also conducting similar studies. An investigation of alter-
native discharge sites and treatment processes is an integral part of a 201 study. The recom-
mendations of a 201 study should be compatible with other study plans in the area.
2—24
-------
D. Wisconsin River — National Wild and Scenic Rivers System Study
It is the objective of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act passed by the U.S. Congress in 1968 to
preserve and protect "for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations" the
rivers or sections of the rivers which possess "outstandingly remarkable scenic, recreational,
geologic, fish and wildlife, historic, cultural or other similar values". The Wisconsin river,
in that section reaching from its mouth at Prairie du Chien, upstream to Prairie du Sac,
has been included as being worthy of further study under this act. Dependent upon the
results and recommendations of the initial study,various land use and water management
alternatives may be implemented.
2.13 Aesthetics and Recreation
A. Aesthetics
Aesthetic qualities are difficult to evaluate. Enjoyment of natural areas, scenic overlooks,
pleasing architectural styles or even the knowledge that the opportunities exist to enjoy these
areas are a part of the aesthetic quality of an area. Dane and Rock Counties offer ample
opportunities to observe native wildlife in their natural habitats. The University of Wisconsin
Arboretum in Madison is an excellent area in which to view not only many mammals, birds
and other animal species but also a variety of the scarce habitat regions (wetlands, prairie
and oak openings) that were once common in Wisconsin. Numerous other sites in Dane
and Rock Counties are available for those interested in the enjoyment of nature.
B. Recreation
Recreation facilities are readily available in Dane and Rock Counties. County parks offer a
variety of outdoor sports opportunities including skiing, golf, picnicking, camping, swim-
ming and fishing. Privately-owned and village-operated areas are also available for use.
The many lakes and streams in the area have generally easy public access and are widely
utilized for water orientated activities. Fishing and boating are popular with both area
residents and visitors. Hunting for the upland game birds and waterfowl species are also
important recreational outlets available in the area. During 1974 a total of 54,599 regular
fishing licenses and over 55,000 hunting licenses were sold in the area. In addition, approx-
imately 25,000 "Voluntary Sportsmen's" licenses were sold in Dane and Rock Counties.
These licenses entitle the holder to all fishing and hunting privileges (except deer and bear
hunting) while providing a means to contribute funds directly to fish and game management
programs.
2.14 Energy
A. General
Electrical power in the Dane and Rock County area is supplied primarily by the Wisconsin
Power and Light Company and by the Madison Gas and Electric Company (MG&E).
MG&E supplies the power needs for the City of Madison and other areas in the immediate
vicinity. MMSD obtains its power from MG&E for most facilities. Wisconsin Power and
Light furnishes power for Pump Station #9.
2—25
-------
B. MMSD Energy Usage
Electrical energy is utilized by the Madison Metropolitan Sewerage District to operate the
multitude of motors, pumps and miscellaneous equipment required to collect, convey, treat
and discharge the wastewater from MMSD. The total electrical energy requirements of
MMSD have increased annually as the wastewater flow has increased and the degree of
treatment has been upgraded. In 1937, the first year after the activated sludge treatment
process was added, the electrical requirements of MMSD were 2,415, 590 KWH. At that
time, it is estimated, only 20% of MMSD's power requirements were used for the treatment
and discharge of the wastewater.
By 1974 total electrical requirements had reached 19,262,456 KWH. Discharge pumping
alone is estimated to demand 60% of the total.
Gasoline and diesel fuel are used to run the trucks, cars, earth moving equipment and
gasoline powered pumps. The 1974 consumption of gasoline and diesel fuel for the opera-
tion and maintenance of the Nine Springs Wastewater Treatment Plant was: gasoline,
approximately 4,158 gallons and diesel fuel, approximately 19,600 gallons. All of the diesel
fuel and an estimated 75% of the gasoline was utilized for the processing and storage of
organic solids (sludge). Not included in the above figures is the gasoline utilized in the
MMSD automobiles for administrative purposes.
2.15 Public Health
A. General
The State and local public health agencies have the responsibility of maintaining a sur-
veillance of the areas which could affect the public health. Food inspection, well water
analysis, swimming area water analysis and mosquito control are only some of the areas in
which the public health agencies are involved.
B. Waterborne Diseases
Typhoid, cholera and dysentery are caused by bacteria associated with improper wastewater
collection, treatment and disposal. Periodic epidemic outbreaks of these and related diseases
were not uncommon in the United States even into the early 1900's. There have been no
major occurrences of waterborne diseases in either Dane or Rock County in recent years.
Only isolated individual cases resulting from well water contamination by improper septic
tank placement or maintenance have been reported.
Occasional outbreaks of schistosome dermatitis, or "swimmers itch", have occurred at
various beaches on the Madison Lakes. This is a relatively minor skin irritation caused by
a parasitic blood flute. The species found in Wisconsin appears to be incapable of sur-
viving in a human host and, therefore, the irritation is limited to the skin at the region of
initial contact.
2—26
-------
C. Mosquito Control
There are no area-wide mosquito control programs in effect in either Dane or Rock County.
Limited spraying or fogging operations are conducted primarily in recreational facility
areas such as picnic or camp grounds as much for nuisance control as for prevention of
disease.
Mosquitoes can transmit such diseases as yellow fever and encephalitis. During 1975, a
number of cases of the St. Louis strain of encephalitis were reported in Missouri and
Illinois. Locally, two or three suspected cases were reported, but it could not be confirmed
that the individuals had contracted the disease locally as all had travelled outside of the
state. There are many lakes, streams and wetland areas in the eastern portion of the study
area which provide abundant breeding for the mosquito population. The presence of
mosquitoes and other insect populations may become a nuisance in some localities. As
noted above, local spraying operations are conducted primarily for nuisance control rather
than for the prevention of disease.
2.16 Historical and Archeological Sites
A. Historical Sites
There are many sites of local, state and national historical significance in Dane and Rock
Counties. A total of 26 sites in Dane County have been listed in the National Register of
Historic Places. Twenty-one of these sites are located within the City of Madison. There
are six sites in Rock County which have been listed. The hamlet of Cooksville, located
in the Town of Porter, has been included as an historic district due to several examples of
early architecture found there. In addition to the National Register of Historic Places listing,
which is limited to sites of more than local significance, there are numerous sites connected
with local history.
B. Archeological Sites
The State Historical Society of Wisconsin maintains a data file on known archeological
sites. It has been reported by the Historical Society that there are many known archeological
sites located in Dane and Rock Counties. These sites include indian effigy and burial
mounds, campsites and village sites.
2—27
-------
SECTION 3 — WASTEWATER DISCHARGE AND TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES
3.01 General
This section describes the alternative sites which were evaluated as possible discharge strategies
for the effluent from the Nine Springs Wastewater Treatment Plant. Greater detail concerning
the evaluation of each alternative is included in the "Summary Facilities Plan Report" (Sections
7 and 8) and Appendix F, "Evaluation of Discharge Alternatives".
Regardless of the particular discharge strategy being evaluated, treatment of the wastewater
must be sufficient to protect and/or enhance the environmental balance of the receiving stream.
Alternative wastewater treatment strategies are also described in this section. A detailed evalua-
tion of the advanced treatment alternatives is found in Volume II, "Wastewater Treatment
Systems Report" by CH2M HILL.
3.02 Categorization on Discharge Alternatives for Preliminary Evaluation
A listing of discharge alternatives to be evaluated was developed after review of past studies,
area topographical maps and interviews with a number of people in the area. The alternatives
included surface water as well as groundwater discharge strategies.
The water balance situation as discussed in Appendix C, "Base Stream Flow Recession Study",
was considered to be of prime importance in the evaluation of the discharge alternative strategies.
The alternatives have been grouped according to their effect on the overall water balance of the
major river drainage basins in the area. Table 3-1 lists the discharge alternatives evaluated and
are shown in Figures 3-1 and 3-la. The groundwater recharge near Mazomanie and the agricul-
tural reuse in northern Rock County alternatives are not shown on these figures.
3.03 Methodology for Preliminary Evaluation of Wastewater Discharge Alternatives
Each discharge alternative was evaluated in sufficient detail such that a decision could be made
relative to the degree of treatment required to protect the receiving stream's and the surrounding
area's environment. The factors which were considered in this evaluation are discussed below:
A. Effluent Quality Limitations for Surface Water Discharges
1. Avoidance of nuisance conditions
Nuisance conditions include the presence of objectionable deposits, unsightly debris or
scum and odors associated with improper wastewater treatment. The removal of materials
contributing to the presence of deposits and debris in a receiving stream is generally ac-
complished by appropriate levels of physical and biological treatment. Odors are
prevented by the maintenance of aerobic conditions in the effluent and receiving stream.
2. Maintenance of dissolved oxygen levels
Dissolved oxygen is consumed by the biodegradation of organic materials and by the
nitrification of ammonia. Such materials are discharged to a surface water by point source
dischargers, non-point source discharges and by resident pollution (benthic deposits and
primary production).
Dissolved oxygen is continuously supplied to a stream by surface reaeration from the
atmosphere. The rate of reaeration is a function of stream hydraulics, temperature and
other in-stream characteristics.
3—1
-------
Table 3-1
Wastewater Discharge Strategies
A. Diversion of the effluent from the entire Rock River Basin by discharge to:
1. Wisconsin River
2. Black Earth Creek
a. near Cross Plains
b. near Middleton
3. Sewage canal to Wisconsin River
4. Groundwater recharge near Mazomanie
B. Diversion of the effluent from the entire Yahara River Basin but retained in the Rock River
Basin by discharge to:
5. Sugar River
a. Badger Mill Creek near Verona
b. Sugar River near Belleville
6. Rock River below confluence of Yahara River
7. Discharge to the proposed Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant near Lake Koshkonong
8. Koshkonong Creek
a. near Cottage Grove
b. near Rockdale
9. Agricultural reuse in northern Rock County
C. Diversion of the effluent from major segments of the Yahara River by discharge to:
10. Badfish Creek
11. Yahara River
a. upstream of Stoughton
b. downstream of Stoughton
D. Retention of the effluent within nearly the entire Yahara River Basin by discharge to:
12. Madison Lakes
a. at inlet of Lake Mendota
b. Lake Monona
c. at inlet of Lake Waubesa
d. at inlet of Lake Kegonsa
13. Agricultural re-use in northern Dane County
14. Wetlands in Dane County
E. Combination of discharge strategies by discharging to:
15. Lake Waubesa and Badfish Creek
16. Yahara River and Badfish Creek
3-2
-------
FIGURE 3-1
MMSD FACILITIES PLAN
DISCHARGE ALTERNATIVES
NINE SPRINGS
WASTEWATER TREATMENT
PLANT
13
O'BRIEN & GERE
FNRINEERSINC
-------
FIGURE 3-la
MMSD FACILITIES PLAN
DISCHARGE ALTERNATIVES
NINE SPRINGS WASTEWATER
TREATMENT PLANT
O'BRIEN & GERE
ENGINEERS INC
-------
Effluents high in oxygen demanding materials or low in dissolved oxygen concentration
may place a severe stress on the receiving stream. Such effluents may utilize all available
dissolved oxygen in the stream, resulting in an oxygen deficit. Minimum dissolved oxygen
levels are required to maintain a healthy fish and aquatic life and to prevent odors from
developing.
To avoid creating an environment conducive to an abundant growth of nuisance algae
and other potentially undesirable aquatic vegetation, nutrient removal may be required
for some receiving water bodies.
3. Avoidance of toxic conditions
Toxicity due to the presence of trace contaminants, un-ionized ammonia, and residual
chlorine may affect the fish and aquatic life of a receiving stream. Appropriate waste-
water disinfection is required to meet stream bacteriological standards. The receiving
stream flow must be considered in its ability to dilute any discharge to the stream.
B. Effluent Quality Limitations for Land Application
The application of wastewater effluent to the land as a means of final disposal is not a new
concept. It is, however, gaining in popularity. In order to protect the soil's beneficial
properties and groundwater quality, several states have drafted or finalized guidelines or
regulations regarding the land application of wastewater. The U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency has also drafted a set of guidelines. Based on a review of these documents, the
minimum pre-treatment requirements for a land application are as follows:
irrigation — primary, secondary, disinfection
groundwater recharge — primary, secondary, nitrogen removal, disinfection
C. Cost Estimation
All wastewater treatment and discharge alternatives evaluated require primary and secondary
treatment as well as disinfection. This degree of treatment will be furnished with the com-
pletion of the Fifth Addition currently under construction. Costs considered here include
those required for any advanced wastewater treatment construction and operation and the
cost of any facilities required to convey the effluent to a given discharge location. The costs
developed for the alternatives were compared on a present worth basis. For the purpose of
this evaluation, alternatives in the lower one-third of the range of estimated costs of all
alternatives were considered desirable, those in the middle one-third were considered neutral
and those in the upper one-third were considered undesirable.
D. Environmental Impact
For the environmental impact evaluation, wastewater discharge alternatives were rated as
either desirable, neutral or undesirable with respect to the impact on the categories described
below.
1. Effects on the water quality and the biota present in the receiving environment
Data concerning the present water quality, biota and other environmental factors are
presented in Section 2 of this Report and in Appendix A, "Environmental Inventory".
Evaluation of the alternatives compared the ability of the alternative to support long
range water quality and quantity goals. Included in the long range goals are the improve-
ments of surface water quality to support higher beneficial uses. Continuation of lake
rehabilitation programs and the cancellation of existing water quality variances were also
important considerations in the environmental impact.
3—5
-------
2. Effects on land resources
Effects on the land use were obtained by comparing the compatibility of an alternative
with existing and planned land use patterns. Maintenance of the beneficial uses of the
land resource were also considered.
3. Effects on the water balance of the Yahara River Basin
The results of an analysis of the hydrologic effects of the diversion of wastewater from
the Yahara River Basin is presented in Appendix C. Substantial annual and dry weather
base flow reductions have been noted since diversion of the Nine Springs plant effluent
to the Badfish Creek. Such reductions are predicted to be more pronounced in the future
in the event of continued diversion of wastewater from the basin.
E. Operational Reliability and Flexibility
Operational reliability and flexibility were taken as a broad group of treatment and discharge
system qualities including: the likelihood of process upsets, seasonal treatment variations,
the relative buffering capacity provided by the base flow, system expandability to meet
future needs, and the relative flexibility to meet possible future changes in water quality
standards and resource goals. Each alternative was rated as either desirable, neutral or un-
desirable in each of these categories.
F. Technical and Legal Constraints
Alternatives which are desirable based on other considerations may not be technically feasible
to implement. Legal constraints regarding the inter-basin transfer of water and other public
water rights may also have a tremendous bearing on the ability to implement any given
alternative. Each alternative was rated as either favorable, neutral or unfavorable in each
of these cateaories.
3.04 Preliminary Evaluation of Wastewater Discharge Alternatives
A detailed evaluation of each discharge alternative with respect to the categories discussed in
Section 3.03 may be found in Appendix F. Tables 3-2 through 3-5 indicate the ratings assigned
to each alternative in these categories. The net rating for a given alternative was determined by
the most frequently occurring rating for that alternative. Table 3-6 summarizes the net rating in
each category for the alternatives.
On the basis of this preliminary screening, the initial list of alternative discharge locations was
narrowed to five. These alternatives, listed in Table 3-7 and shown on Figure 3-2, were retained
for a more intensive evaluation.
Direct discharge to the Rock River, while receiving a neutral net rating, was not retained for
further study since there were no distinct advantages over discharge to the Yahara River to
offset the additional transmission costs. Discharge to the Rock River is, however, a viable backup
discharge site for the power plant alternative.
It should be noted that due to the current uncertainty of the approval and construction of the
proposed Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant, the implementation of this alternative is also
uncertain. Back-up discharge points must be maintained on either the Rock or Yahara River.
3—6
-------
Table 3-2
Summary of Environmental Impact Evaluations
Alternative
Category A
1. Wisconsin River
2. a) Black Earth Creek @ Cross Plains
b) Black Earth Creek @ Middleton
3. Sewage Canal to Wisconsin River
4 Groundwater Recharge near Mazomame
Category B
5. a) Badger Mill Creek @ Verona
b) Sugar River @ Belleville
6. Rock Ruer below Yahara
7. Proposed Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant
8 a) Koshkonong Creek — Cottage Grove
b) Koshkonong Creek — Rockdale
9. Agricultural Reuse — Rock County
Category C
10 Badfish Creek — Present site
1! a) Yahara River— above Stoughton
b) Yahara River — below Stoughton
Category D
12 a) Lake Mendota
b) Lake Monona
c) Lake \\aubesa
d) Lake Kegonsa
13 Agricultural Reuse — Dane County
14. \Vetiands Discharge — Dane Countv
Category K
15 Spi'i Di*v.r.arge — Badfish Creek and Lake \\auhesa
16 Spin Discharge — Badfish Creek and Yahara River
Impact on
Water Quality
and Biota
Impact
on Land
Resources
Impact
on Water
Balance
Net
Environmental
Impact
3—7
-------
Table 3-3
Alternative
Category A
Rating of Alternative Costs
Total Capital Total Annual
Cost Cost
(Million) (Million)
1. Wisconsin River
2. a) Black Earth Creek @ Cross
b) Black Earth Creek @ Middleton
3. Sewage Canal to Wisconsin River
4. Groundwater Recharge near Mazomanie
Category B
5. a) Badger Mill Creek @ Verona
b) Sugar River @ Belle\>!le
6. Rock River below Yahara
1. Proposed Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant
8 a) Koshkonong Creek — Cottage Grove
b) Koshkonong Creek — Rockdale
9. Agricultural Reuse — Rock County
C alegor) C
10. Badfish Creek — Present sue
II a) Yahara Ri\er — above Stoughlon
b) Yahara River — below Stoughton
Category D
12. a) LakeMendota
b) Lake Monona
c) Lake Waubesa
d) LakeKegonsa
13. Agricultural Reuse — DaneCounty
14. Wetlands Discharge — Dane County
Category E
15 Split Discharge — Badfish Creek and Lake Waubesa
16. Split Discharge — Badfish Creek and Yahara River
$ 62.0 $ 7.50
55.1 4.81
45.2 6.85
Infeasible — no costs developed
Infeasible — no costs developed
38.1
55.0
60.5
908
36.2
53.6
151 2
23 1
42.6
42.6
53.3
37.3
35.0
55 0
151 2
56.0
30.7
29.6
6.35
8.00
8.50
3.02
6.15
8.00
13.90
4 81
6 77
6 ^7
10.00
8 16
7.82
10.30
13.90
6.20
6 81
5.46
Present
Worth
(Million)
$ 75.7
83 9
72.7
67.2
84 7
90 2
32.0
65.3
84.6
147 0
51 0
71 7
71 7
105 7
86.8
82.8
108.8
147.0
65.0
71.9
57.9
Cost
Rating
0
0
0
N/A
N/A
3-8
-------
Table 3-4
Summary of Operational Reliability and Flexibility
Alternative
Category A
1. Wisconsin River
2. a) Black Earth Creek @ Cross Plains
b) Black Earth Creek @ Middleton
3. Sewage Canal to Wisconsin River
4. Groundwater Recharge near Mazomanie
Category B
Operational
Reliability
Operational
Flexibility
Net Rating
5. a) Badger Mill Creek @ Verona
b) Sugar River @ Belleville
6. Rock River below Yahara
7. Proposed Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant
8. a) Koshkonong Creek — Cottage Grove
b) Koshkonong Creek — Rockdale
9. Agricultural Reuse — Rock County
0
0
-f
0
0
0
0
0
Category C
10 Badfish Creek — Present site
11 a) Yahara River — above Stoughton
b) Yahara River — below Stoughton
Category D
12. a) LakeMendota
b) LakeMonona
c) LakeWaubesa
d) Lake Kegonsa
13. Agricultural Reuse — Dane County
14. Wetlands Discharge — Dane County
Category E
15. Split Discharge — Badfish Creek and Lake Waubesa
16. Split Discharge — Badfish Creek and Yahara River
3—9
-------
Table 3-5
Summary of Evaluation of Technical and Legal Constraints
Technical Legal
Alternative Constraints Constraints Net Rating
Category A
1. Wisconsin River + — 0
2. a) Black Earth Creek @ Cross Plains -
b) Black Earth Creek @ Middleton -
3. Sewage Canal to Wisconsin River - - -
4. Groundwater Recharge near Mazomanie - - -
Category B
5. a) Badger Mill Creek @ Verona -
b) Sugar River @ Belleville -
6. Rock River below Yahara 000
7. Proposed Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant 000
8. a) Koshkonong Creek — Cottage Grove - - -
b) Koshkonong Creek — Rockdale -
9. Agricultural Reuse — Rock County - - -
Category C
10. Badfish Creek —Present site -
11. a) Yahara River — above Stoughton - 0 -
b) Yahara River — below Stoughton 0
Category D
12. a) LakeMendota - - -
b) Lake Monona - - -
c) LakeWaubesa - - -
d) Lake Kegonsa - - -
13. Agricultural Reuse— Dane County - - _
14. Wetlands Discharge — Dane County - - _
Category E
15. Split Discharge—Badfish Creek and Lake Waubesa - - -
16. Split Discharge—Badfish Creek and Yahara River 0 -
3—10
-------
Table 3-6
Summary Comparison of Alternatives
Alternative
Category A
1 Wisconsin River
2. a) Black Earth Creek @ Cross Plains
b) Black Earth Creek @ Middleton
3. Sewage Canal to Wisconsin River
4 Groundwater Recharge near Mazomanie
Category B
5 a) Badger Mil! Creek (a Verona
b) Sugar River @ Belleville
6 Rock River Deiow Yahara
7. Proposed Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant
8 a) Koshkonong Creek — Cottage Grove
b) Koshkonong Creek — Rockdale
9. Agricultural Reuse — Rock County
Category C
10 Baiifisn ( rcex — Present sue
il a) \aharaRivcr— above Stoughion
b) Sahara River — below Stoughton
Categon D
Cost
Rating
0
0
0
N/A
N/A
Environmental
Impact
Rating
Reliability
& Flexibility
Rating
Technical
& Legal
Constraint
Rating
Net
Rating
12
n
14
Lake Mendota
Lake Monona
Lake Waubesa
Lake Kegon<;a
Agriculture Reuse — Dane Count)
Vi etland- Discharge — Dane Countv
Category I.
15 Split Discharge — Badfish Creek and
Lake V* aaoesa
16 Split Discharge — Badfish Creek and
Yahara Ri.er
Recommenda-
ations from
Screening
l-unher Siudy
Delete
Delete
Delete
Delete
Delete
Delete
Further Stuav
Further Study
Delete
Delete
Delete
Further Siuuv
Further SiuJ>
Further Studv
Delete
Delete
Delete
Delete
Delete
Delete
Delete
Further Study
3—11
-------
Table 3-7
Alternatives Subject to Intensive Study
1. Discharge of nitrified, softened and filtered effluent to the Proposed
Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant with a back-up discharge site at either the
Rock and Yahara Rivers or Badfish Creek.
2. Direct discharge of nitrified, filtered and equalized effluent to Badfish Creek
using the present discharge strategy.
3. A split discharge with the present discharge volume (35 MOD) to be given the
additional treatment described above before discharge to Badfish Creek.
Additional volumes of effluent (15 MOD) would receive the same high degree
of treatment and be pumped to the Yahara River for discharge with re-
aeration provided at the end of the pipeline.
4. Direct discharge of the entire effluent volume after nitrification and filtration
to the Yahara River either north or south of Stoughton utilizing a pipeline
with re-aeration provided at the discharge point.
5. Direct discharge of a nitrified effluent to the Wisconsin River utilizing a
pipeline paralleling Black Earth Creek.
3.05 Environmental Impacts of Remaining Alternatives
A. General
Each of the five (5) remaining discharge alternatives was subjected to more intensive evalua-
tion of the impacts each would have on the environment.
The total system including the treatment plant, pump station, pipelines and the effluent
discharge itself will have some impact upon the environment. The total impact for each
alternative can be looked at as the sum of the impacts by each system component on the
waters, surrounding lands and the air.
This section summarizes the anticipated impacts and compares the relative magnitudes of
the impacts for each of the remaining alternatives as established in Section 3.04. A detailed
analysis of the intensive evaluation may be found in Volume I, "Summary Facilities Plan
Report" and Appendix F.
B. Impacts to the Receiving Water Quality
1. General
The impact of each alternative on the receiving waters is chiefly a function of the treated
effluent quality. There is also a definite impact of certain alternatives on the quantity of
water that would be present in the Yahara and Rock River basins during low flow condi-
tions. Other impacts on the receiving waters would be present during construction activi-
ties. In some cases these impacts could be serious. The following sections describe the
anticipated impact on various water quality parameters.
3—12
-------
2. Dissolved Oxygen
Mathematical modeling is a useful tool in determining the effects the discharge of treated
wastewater will have on the dissolved oxygen (DO) levels of a given stream. Each dis-
charge alternative was evaluated with varying degrees of wastewater treatment. In each
case, the effects were determined at low flow conditions in the receiving stream. Input
data needed to run the model was obtained from the latest available records. In instances
where additional data was necessary, field samples were collected. Further information
regarding the mathematical modeling may be found in Appendix I, "Mathematical
Modeling".
The results of the modeling indicate that there would be a lowering of DO levels within
a small portion of the Rock River at the point of discharge if the MMSD effluent were
to be utilized by the proposed Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant for cooling purposes.
This effect would not be as great as the effect that photosynthesis and respiration have
on the entire Rock River. Levels of DO measured in the Rock River by the WDNR
(unpublished data) show that minimum values below 5 mg/1 of DO are currently found.
This is below the minimum accepted level required to protect fish and aquatic life. Super-
saturated DO levels have also been recorded. Photosynthetic and respiration activity
resultant from the growth of algae and other aquatic vegetation contributes heavily to the
DO problems.
The Yahara River below the Madison Lakes currently has widely varying DO values
with projected minimum values falling well below the 5 mg/1 level. This again results from
the photosynthetic and respiration activity of the phytoplankton present in the stream.
The modeling indicates that with the discharge of effluent to the Yahara River during
low flow conditions, the DO level would be improved slightly due to the higher re-
aeration rate induced by the increased flow. It would not, however, increase the DO to
the 5 mg/1 level at all times.
Presently, the DO values in the Badfish Creek fall below the 5 mg/1 level and are due
in part to the discharge of effluent from the Nine Springs and Oregon sewage treatment
plants, which contribute to the oxygen deficits. If the Nine Springs effluent were to be
-=™nved from the creek, sediment oxygen demand would be expected to cai^e low DO
.;-.•_•.- u,/.;; the sediment deposits become vub'^jj. Modeling indicates that the discharge
ot ihe Nine Springs effluent, with reaeration at the point of discharge to the Badfish
Creek, is anticipated to provide for the maintenance of DO levels above 5 mg/1 during
low flow conditions. This would be a substantial improvement over existing conditions.
Further improvement of stream DO levels could be provided by improving the Village
of Oregon's wastewater treatment plant effluent quality.
The Wisconsin River DO levels, due to the relatively large volume of flow even during
low flow conditions, would not be appreciably affected by the discharge of the Nine
Springs effluent. There were indications noted during field sampling conducted during
1975, that DO levels may fall below the 5 mg/1 standard. This may be the result of
relatively high levels of photosynthetic and respiration activity in Lake Wisconsin during
summer months.
3—14
-------
3. Chemical Constituents and Toxic Materials
The chemical constituents currently found in the effluent discharged from the Nine
Springs Wastewater Treatment Plant have been evaluated in Appendix F in regards to
the protection and preservation of the goals and objectives as adapted by MMSD and
the Facilities Planning Advisory Committee. Each of the water bodies considered as a
potential discharge site must have, after discharge of the Nine Springs effluent, water of
sufficient quality for:
D Preservation of Aesthetic Values
D Protection of Recreational Uses
C Protection of Public Water Supplies
[j Protection of Livestock and Wildlife
C1 Protection of Fish and Aquatic Life
C Protection of Industrial Water Supplies
LJ Protection of Waste Assimilation Capacity
LJ Protection of Power Generation
n Protection of Navigation
Comparison of both the existing and future effluent quality, provided by various degrees
of treatment, and of each of the receiving streams have been made with the recommended
values for the protection of the listed beneficial uses. Criteria utilized in the comparison
are those listed in the 1972 volume of Water Quality Criteria which was developed by
the National Academy of Science and Engineering for the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency.
Data on the effluent quality and data available on the background water quality of each
of the receiving streams indicate that the continuation of the present degree of treatment
would not provide an effluent of sufficient quality to fully protect the receiving streams.
Upgraded wastewater treatment, as shown in Table 3-8, would provide an effluent
which, it is felt, would meet the recommended criteria where practicable. As discussed
in Appendix F, it was not judged to be justifiable to provide treatment of the wastewater
influent to the Nine Springs treatment plant for the removal of some materials to the
recommended levels.
3—15
-------
cc
X
at
X
II
M <•-
c
'J!
X
_
X
X
V
a*
a
1 x
cc
X
X X
ffi
X
u>
5
> 0>
» =:
-"<
c *
CO O g>
CO E «
* « o
•g £•£
-S HO
X
V o>
££
'
X
ec
cr
X
X X
1J X
a ?
X
X
3
z
Jb
c
c
o
s
0 *
y a
a «
1 t
CC X
.= o
o -r
ex n
-
00 OS
EB EC
3—16
-------
Evaluations of the receiving streams' water quality also indicated that the background
concentrations of several contaminants were in excess of the recommended levels. For
example, it is generally believed that excessive algal growth can be controlled by reducing
the total nitrogen and/or total phosphorus to the following concentrations:
For Lakes (Water Quality Criteria 1972)
Total Phosphorus — less than .01 mg/1
Total nitrogen — less than .3 mg/1
For Flowing Streams (Water Quality Plan — Rock River Basin Draft 303 Plan,
WDNR, 1974)
Total Phosphorus — less than 0. ] mg/1
For Streams Flowing into Impoundments
(Water Quality Plan — Rock River Basin Draft 303 Plan, WDNR, 1974)
Total phosphorus — less than 0.05 mg/1
During the evaluation of the remaining alternatives, it was determined that even with 80%
removal of nitrogen and phosphorus from the Nine Springs treatment plant effluent and
from other plants' effluents in the Rock River basin, the residual concentrations of these
nutrients would still be significantly above the level at which limitation of algal growth
occurs in the Yahara and Rock Rivers. Since these streams had high concentrations in
areas not affected by existing sewage treatment plant discharges, it was not justifiable
that MMSD provide the additional degree of treatment required to lower the concentra-
tions in the effluent.
During the evaluation of the Nine Springs effluent, it was noted that in many cases the
recommended concentrations of several substances required to protect fish and aquatic life
were even more stringent than those recommended for the protection of livestock and
wildlife or for public water supplies. In general, by meeting the recommended limits
for the protection of fish and aquatic life, the other recommendations would also be
met. Where other limits are more restrictive than for fish and aquatic life, then
these were considered. When no recommended limits were given, the lowest concentration,
as reported by the referenced investigations in Water Quality Criteria, necessary to protect
any member of the aquatic ecosystem felt to be a potential inhabitant of the receiving
waters under consideration, was utilized.
Source control of certain substances would help to minimize their discharge to the sewage
system and thus lessen their presence in the effluent of the Nine Springs treatment plant.
Additionally, flow equalization of the effluent was evaluated as a means to lower the
concentration of these substances in the effluent discharged to a receiving stream. Sub-
stances which were found to exceed the limits for the protection of fish and aquatic life
in the effluent (See Appendix G, "Effluent Characterization"), included: aluminum,
copper, lead, mercury, silver and zinc. However, values for some of these substances
were found in the upper Yahara River and in tributaries to the Badfish Creek, unaffected
by sewage treatment plant discharges, (See Appendix B, "Receiving Stream Quality
Data"), to be higher than either the recommended limits or the values found in the Nine
Springs effluent. A discussion of this may be found in Appendix F, "Evaluation of
Effluent Discharge Alternatives".
3—17
-------
Organic toxicants including cyanides, detergents, pesticides and polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCB's) have been found to have detrimental effects on fish and aquatic life. Small con-
centrations of these substances, less than the recognized lethal concentrations for aquatic
organisms, may accumulate in the body tissues to potentially toxic levels for organisms
higher in the food chain. For this reason, greater concern has been given to these sub-
stances in recent years.
As discussed in Appendix F, concentrations in the Nine Springs effluent for cyanides,
pesticides and PCB's were found to exceed the recommended limits. Since these sub-
stances tend to adsorb to paniculate matter in the effluent, they may be effectively re-
moved from solution and concentrated in the bottom sediments along slow-moving
sections of the receiving stream. The filtration of the effluent, which has been recom-
mended prior to discharge to four of the remaining alternatives to reach the required
biochemical oxygen demand level as shown in Table 3-8, may, as an incidental benefit,
reduce the level of complexed cyanides, pesticides and PCB's by removing the fine parti-
culate matter. Free cyanides may be further broken down during the nitrification process
recommended for all alternatives. The natural stream flow of the Wisconsin River would
provide the dilution which would allow in-stream concentration to approach the recom-
mended limits.
The provision of treatment processes, as outlined above, and dilution of the effluent m
the receiving streams coupled with an intensive effort to control the point source dis-
charge of these substances to the sewage system, would constitute the practicable means
of meeting the recommended limits.
4. Temperature
Temperature is a prime regulator of natural processes within the water environment. It
determines which aquatic species may be present; it regulates spawning and hatching of
young; it regulates their activity and stimulates or suppresses their growth and develop-
ment. It can also become lethal if the water become heated or chilled too suddenly. Colder
water generally suppresses activity while warmer water generally accelerates activity.
Most aquatic organisms tolerate only those temperature changes that occur within a
narrow range to which they are adapted, whether it be high, intermediate, or low on the
temperature scale. The inhabitants of a water body that seldom becomes warmer than
70°F are placed under stress by 90°F water. Similarly the inhabitants of warmer waters
are at a competitive disadvantage in cool water. The temperature change in water must
be gradual for the inhabitants to tolerate the extreme temperatures.
Trout populations require relatively cold water temperatures. Temperatures of 13°C to
15°C are preferred and temperatures above 25 °C to 26°C are reported to be lethal.
Spawning and hatching of trout is most successful in water with temperatures below 15 °C.
Temperatures preferred by species such as the large mouth bass, northern pike and other
warm water varieties may range up to 22°-25°C. Present MMSD wastewater temperatures
approach 24°C during summer months and can be expected to change slightly with ad-
vanced treatment.
3—18
-------
Prior to diversion of the MMSD effluents in 1958, temperatures in the Badfish Creek
were recorded to average 9.6°C on an annual basis and 16.9°C during the summer months
as shown in Appendix F. After diversion took place, these values were raised to 13.7°C
and 19.5°C respectively. These changes raised the temperatures to above the ranges
preferred by trout. The MMSD effluent temperature is expected to increase slightly due
to the advanced treatment processes. Temperature changes of even 2-3 °C from the current
temperatures would not adversely affect the spawning of the fish species found in the
Badfish Creek prior to diversion.
Discharge of MMSD effluent to a cold water stream, supporting a trout population such
as Black Earth Creek, may have severe detrimental impact on the existing trout population.
Discharge to an essentially warm water stream such as the Yahara River, would have
considerably less of an impact on the fish and other aquatic life present there.
5. Treatment Plant and Pump Station Impacts
The treatment plant and pump station's direct impacts on the water quality would be
limited to those water bodies (Nine Springs Creek, Lake Waubesa) in the immediate area
of the facilities and be the result of construction activities.
Due to required earth moving operations to install new treatment and pumping facilities,
exposed soil may be subject to erosion. By utilizing recognized construction methods
such as providing adequate site drainage and sheeting where required, the amount of
material lost through erosion can be minimized.
There may be periods during the construction when the wastewater may have to be
re-routed around some portions of the plant. However, the degree of treatment provided
during these periods must be at least equal to that achieved prior to construction. The
development of the final design and specifications for the construction of the treatment
plant facilities should include provisions for the maintenance of the present effluent
quality at all times during construction.
The overall impact of an upgraded degree of treatment is felt to outweigh the temporary
impacts of the construction activities.
6. Ditch and Pipeline Impacts
The proposed routes for each of the discharge alternatives are described and shown in
Appendix F, "Evaluation of Discharge Alternatives". The impacts on the water quality
of the receiving streams are associated with the construction of the pipeline. As with the
construction of the treatment plant and pump station, required earth moving operations
during the installation of the pipeline would allow erosion of exposed soil during rainy
periods. Runoff, carrying the soil particles would result in increased siltation of nearby
streams. Also where it is necessary that a stream be crossed there would be direct dis-
turbance of the stream-bed and adjacent banks. The degree of the impact of the pipeline
construction would depend upon the length of the pipeline and the number of required
stream crossings.
All of the discharge alternatives would require that some construction take place in the
vicinity of the Nine Springs treatment plant. Thus, the impact on Nine Springs Creek
would be essentially equal for all alternatives.
3—19
-------
The discharge of effluent to the proposed Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant would
require a new pipeline from the end of the existing pipeline to the proposed power plant
site as shown in Appendix F. This would require that stream crossings of both the Yahara
and Rock Rivers be made. Adverse impacts can be minimized by utilizing proper con-
struction methods including prompt stabilization and reseeding of the disturbed areas.
The Yahara River discharge alternative would require a new pipeline from the end of the
existing pipeline to the Yahara River south to Stoughton. There would be no major stream
crossings required. As above, adverse impacts can be minimized by use of proper con-
struction methods.
The Badfish Creek discharge alternative would utilize the existing pipeline.
The Wisconsin River discharge alternative would require the construction of a pipeline
to run west and then north to a point west of Middleton. From there it would parallel
Black Earth Creek to a point near Mazomanie where it would turn north to the Wisconsin
River. The Black Earth Creek valley is relatively narrow and steep sided necessitating
the pipeline to parallel the Creek and to intercept the small streams tributary to it. Even
with the utilization of proper construction methods to minimize erosion and siltation
impacts, it is anticipated that the resultant increase in sediment loading would effectively
destroy the excellent trout habitat found in much of the stream. Siltation would occur in
the pool areas of the creek which are favored by the native and stocked trout for resting
and eating.
New pipeline construction would require excavation and backfilling operations in addition
to the stream crossings noted above. Such construction necessitates the disruption of
the ground surface and the vegetation thereon. In order to minimize the impact on an>
unique or scarce plant community, sites which have been inventoried by WDNR's
Scientific Areas Preservation Council as described in Appendix A, should be avoided in
laying out a final pipeline route. In all other areas, the final design and specifications
should require that surface vegetation be restored upon completion of the pipeline
installation.
Impacts on Water Balance Considerations
The diversion of the Nine Springs effluent around a portion of the Yahara River beginning
in December, 1958, has had a significant effect on the low flow conditions of that portion
of the River as discussed in Appendix C. Continued diversion of the effluent to the present
discharge location, the Badfish Creek, is expected to increase the effects on the low flow
values as water usage increases with the growing population. It is anticipated that flows
may fall to zero as often as once in two years by the year 2000 if diversion is continued.
Discharge alternatives which continue the present degree of diversion or increase the extent
of the diversion would have increasingly severe impacts on low flow values of the affected
streams.
Discharge to the Wisconsin River would have the most severe impact as flow would be di-
verted entirely out of the Yahara-Rock River Basin. As discussed in Appendix C and above,
low flow values may be decreased to zero in the Yahara River once in two years by 2000.
The impact on the use of the River flow for waste assimilation and power generation by
downstream users would be severe for those dependent upon the maintenance of some
minimum flow value. The impact on low flows on the Rock River would not be as severe
as flow in the Rock River is obtained from other areas and streams in addition to the Yahara
River and its drainage basin. However, the volume of water available to downstream users
would be decreased.
3-20
-------
Appendix C describes two methods of augmenting the flow in the Yahara River during
critical periods. One would be the importation of ground water from the Wisconsin River
Basin by means of pumping. The second would be the control of the levels of the Madison
Lakes utilizing portions of the lakes water to augment the flow during critical periods. If
discharge to the Wisconsin River were to be implemented, then these and other flow aug-
mentation alternatives would require further study.
Discharge of the effluent to the proposed Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant would have
the same effects on the flows in the Yahara River but would not affect the flows in the Rock
River. Maintenance of a base flow in the Yahara River during critical periods, as described
above, may be required.
Other discharge alternatives would not divert the flow completely out of the Yahara River
Basin. As a result, the impacts on the low flow values in the Yahara River would not be as
severe. Flow augmentation requirements would be minimized.
D. Impacts on Use of Surrounding Lands
1. General
The impacts of each alternative on the use of surrounding lands can be divided into three
areas as follows:
LJ Impact of the treatment plant and pump station on surrounding lands
TJ Impact of the pipelines and ditches on surrounding lands
[J Impact of the effluent volume on surrounding lands.
Each of these areas is discussed in more detail in the following paragraphs.
2. Treatment Plant and Pump Station Impact
The major impact of the treatment plant is the utilization of additional land areas for
expansion of the treatment plant.
While the presence of the treatment plant could have a detrimental impact on the land
use in the immediate vicinity of the plant from an aesthetic standpoint, it should be noted
that encroachment of both commerical and residential development has taken place in
recent years. Proper zoning of the area surrounding the treatment plant site would pro-
vide a buffer zone between the treatment plant and other land use activities. Impacts
on surrounding land use would then be kept at a minimum boiii now and in the future.
Of the five alternatives remaining, each requires some expansion of the existing treat-
ment plant acreage in order to accommodate advanced treatment facilities.
The Wisconsin River alternative requires the smallest incremental land usage since only
minimal additional treatment facilities are required in the form of partial nitrification.
The alternatives discharging to Badfish Creek, and the Yahara River all have the same
treatment requirements including nitrification, filtration and equalization. These facilities
will require the utilization of additional land at the Nine Springs plant site.
The power plant alternative with the addition of lime softening will require still further
incremental land over and above the Badfish and Yahara River alternatives. Thus, this
alternative has the highest land use requirement.
3—21
-------
While there is a difference in the amounts of additional land required, the increased
land usage is felf to be a rather minimal impact since the total program including the
advanced treatment and organic solids reuse programs will result in an overall reduction
of land acreage devoted to sewage treatment and the gradual return of portions of Nine
Springs Marsh to its natural condition.
3. Pipeline and Ditch Impacts
The existing discharge pipeline and effluent ditch were installed prior to the 1958 diversion
of the effluent to Badfish Creek. There are negligible impacts felt from the presence of
the pipeline as it is buried sufficiently deep to enable normal agricultural land use activities
to be carried on above it. Development directly over the pipeline, such as the construction
of buildings, is prohibited. The ditch, at the time of construction, was placed in agri-
cultural and vacant land areas and did not interfere with any existing development. Since
that time, some development has taken place in close proximity to the ditch and possible
problems not evident at the time of construction have been brought to the attention of
MMSD as listed below:
D Hazards to the safety of children in the area by the relatively steep banks and the
current in the ditch
D Source of odors to surrounding residents
D Hindrance to effective farm management by division of some farm fields
[J Generation of local fogging conditions due to temperature differentials between
the atmosphere and the water in the ditch at certain times
D Detrimental effects on muskrat farming in Grass Lake by lowering the water level
through exfiltration
An investigation into these alleged problems concerning the existing effluent ditch indi-
cated that some remedial actions could be taken. Encroachment of residential develop-
ment has contributed to the safety hazard for children who might not otherwise have had
the opportunity to be in the vicinity of the ditch. Zoning regulations may have helped to
prevent such encroachment from occurring in the past. Placement of fencing along the
ditch in stretches of the ditch near existing development should alleviate a major portion
of the safety hazards. Fogging conditions are normal occurrences on most streams but
may be aggravated due to the generally warmer temperatures of the Nine Springs effluent.
The equalization of the effluent flow would tend to bring the effluent closer to the at-
mospheric temperature prior to discharge, thus reducing the fogging potential.
At the time of the construction of the effluent ditch and improvements to the Badfish
Creek, crossings were provided for those farmers requesting them. Other farmers accepted
a cash settlement for any inconvenience caused by the effluent ditch.
Odor problems result from anaerobic conditions in the ditch. Improved treatment of the
wastewater would provide that aerobic conditions be maintained, thus alleviating this
problem.
3—22
-------
It was felt by area residents that after construction of the effluent ditch around the
area of Grass Lake in the Town of Dunn, the water level of the lake fell causing a
detrimental impact on the muskrat farming in the lake. It was felt that water was seeping
out of Grass Lake and into the effluent ditch. An investigation of this concern indicated
that the effluent ditch, which flows from north to south, was placed at a higher elevation
than the lake at the northern end to prevent such a condition. At the southern end of
the lake, the effluent ditch is at a lower elevation than the lake. It was indicated by MMSD
officials that the adjacent property owner had requested that a culvert be installed which
would allow the level of the lake to be lowered. Such a culvert was installed as requested.
Installation of the pipelines necessary to convey the effluent from the Nine Springs treat-
ment plant to any of the remaining alternatives would not lead to any of the problems
noted above for the existing effluent ditch. Each of the discharge alternatives evaluated
would be implemented by the installation of a buried pipeline and not utilize any addi-
tional open ditch. Impacts on land use would be associated with the construction of
these pipelines. There may be temporary disruption of traffic patterns in areas where a
pipeline may follow a roadway and temporary disruption of agricultural activities where
the pipeline routes traverse farmlands. After installation, land use activities would return
to normal.
4. Effluent Volume Impacts
An adverse impact on the use of surrounding lands could result if the increased volume
of flow in any of the streams due to the discharge of the Nine Springs effluent greatly
accelerates either the frequency or the extent of flooding of the adjacent lands. The
impact of discharging the effluents from the Nine Springs treatment plant to a receiving
stream would depend, to a great extent, on the relative flow of the receiving stream.
The most noticeable impact of flooding would occur in the receiving streams with the
smallest flows. These are the Badfish Creek and Koshkonong Creek. Hydraulic modeling
of Badfish Creek and Koshkonong Creek as well as of the Yahara and Wisconsin Rivers
was conducted during the course of this study and the results are presented in Appendix
H, "Hydraulic Modeling".
The hydraulic modeling of the Badfish Creek indicated that the discharge of a projected
effluent flow of 78 cfs would increase the flooding in the Creek for the once-in-two year
and once-in-five year floods. Only minimal damages are expected to occur as the result
of these floods. The once-in-ten year flood was predicted to top the level of the stream
banks by three feet in some areas. Flood flows of the once-in-ten year flood would be
limited to agricultural or uncultivated land adjacent to the Creek. The once-in-ten year
flood flow is predicted to be 1,388 cfs. The effluent flow of 78 cfs represents only 5.6%
of the total flow. During periods of flood flows of less frequency, the effluent would
represent even less of a percentage of the total flow volume.
The discharge of the Nine Springs effluent to the other alternative receiving streams (not
including Koshkonong Creek) would represent only very small increases in predicted
flood flow volumes. Therefore, the impact of the Nine Spring effluent would be virtually
non-existent in these streams.
3—23
-------
E. Impacts on Air Resources
It is estimted that the impact of the expanded treatment plant on the air resources of the
area will be negligible. Whatever small impact is present will be in a positive direction since
the upgrading of the treatment plant and the effluent quality will result in the potential
release of less odors into the air than at present.
The discharge of the effluent to the receiving streams would have no adverse impacts on the
air quality of the surrounding areas as the improved treatment would insure that aerobic
conditions would be consistantly met.
The alternative of discharging to the proposed Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant would
require lime softening of the effluent. As a part of the lime softening process, a lime recal-
cination furnace would be installed. Proper utilization of emission controls on such a furnace
would minimize any potential adverse impacts from this source.
F. Impacts on Population Distribution
The discharge of the Nine Springs effluent to any of the five remaining alternative locations
would not appear to in any way have a major impact on population distribution within the
area. Improved wastewater treatment and protection of the water quality of the areas' water
resources could result in the removal of any potential barriers to population growth from
that standpoint. As discussed earlier regarding potential impacts on land use, zoning regula-
tions prohibiting further development in the area surrounding the treatment plant facility
may be beneficial to all concerned. This could result in a localized impact on population
distribution.
G. Impacts on Energy Consumption
All of the remaining alternatives would have definite impacts on the amount of energy con-
sumed for the treatment and disposal of sewage in the Madison area.
Current annual energy consumption for wastewater treatment and disposal, as shown in
Appendix A, is summarized in Table 3-9.
Table 3-9
Annual Electrical Energy Consumption
MMSD-1975
Wastewater Collection approx. 5,295,000 KWH
Wastewater Treatment approx. 5,465,000 KWH
Effluent Pumping approx. 8,195,000 KWH
TOTAL approx. 18,955,000 KWH
Estimated incremental usages of electricity for treatment and discharge of the effluent for
each of the alternatives have been developed in Volume II, "Wastewater Treatment Systems
Report" and in Appendix F, Volume V. Table 3-10 summarizes the anticipated annual
electrical energy consumption for wastewater treatment and discharge associated with each
of the remaining alternatives.
3—24
-------
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
8.2
8.2
8.2
8.2
8.2
34.9
28.3
28.3
28.3
16.2
3.8
3.7
3.9
3.8
10.8
52.4
45.7
45.9
45.8
40.7
Table 3-10
Anticipated Annual Electrical Power Consumption
for Remaining Alternatives
Alternatives Present Usage1 Estimated Additional Future Usage2 Total Future
Treatment Effluent Pumpage Treatment Pumpage Usage
Proposed Koshkonong
Nuclear Power Plant
Badfish Creek
Badfish Creek,
Yahara River
Yahara River
Wisconsin River
Note: All values given in KWH x 106
1. Estimated from 1975 utility billings.
2. Includes power consumption estimates for Fifth Addition, other necessary secondary treatment upgrading and advanced
wastewater treatment.
H. Comparison of System Environmental Impacts
The environmental impacts of the remaining alternatives, based on the categories discussed
above, would indicate the following order of preference:
D Badfish Creek
D Yahara River
D Proposed Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant
D Yahara River — Badfish Creek Combination
D Wisconsin River
3.06 Operational Reliability of the Remaining Alternatives
A. General
The reliability of the wastewater management system should consider the reliability of each
component of the entire system. Thus, the reliabilities of the treatment plant, the pump
stations, the pipelines and the receiving stream each require assessment.
B. Treatment Plant Reliability
The reliability of any treatment plant depends upon the guarantees provided to insure that
operation of the unit processes are continuously maintained. This usually requires providing
backup power sources either in the form of alternate line sources or emergency power
generation equipment. Such backup is required by both State and Federal agencies.
Treatment plant design should also include the capability to provide treatment of the waste-
water through alternative paths within the plant such that when any one treatment process
is down for servicing the entire flow can be routed through other processes with only minimal
reduction in treatment efficiency.
3-25
-------
A good preventive maintenance program,.properly administered, contributes greatly to the
day-to-day reliability of individual pieces of equipment and subsequently to die treatment
process as a whole. Prevention of equipment failures would protect against plari? upsets and
possible discharge of slug loading (organic or hydraulic) to the receiving stream.
As shown in Table 3-8, all of the remaining alternatives with the exception of discharge to
the Wisconsin River include the requirement of filtration and equalization prior to discharge.
These processes provide protection to the receiving stream against slug loading bv dampening
the effects of peak loadings to the plant or of possible equipment failure. Neither of these
processes are subject to excessive mechanical failure rates. In the case of the Wisconsin
River, equalization and filtration were not provided because of the negligible impact of the
effluent on the large quantities of water in the Wisconsin River.
C. Pump Station Reliability
The reliability of any pump station, like the treatment plant reliability, is dependent upon
its design, maintenance and operation. Backup power sources and additional pumping
capacity, capable of handling the volume of flow, should be provided. A good preventive
maintenance program is essential to the continued reliable operation of a pump station.
A properly designed, maintained and operated pump station would have a high performance
reliability as evidenced by those pump stations serving the MMSD.
D. Pipeline Reliability
Pipeline reliability is dependent upon its design, maintenance and operation. During the
design of any pipeline, consideration should be given to the criteria which may have some
impact on that particular pipeline installation.
Actual construction of the pipeline should be closely supervised to insure that installation
of the pipe and the joints conform to the design specifications. A common cause of pipe-
line failure results from faulty installation. A properly designed and installed pipeline would
have a high degree of reliability.
E. Receiving Stream Reliability
Reliability of a given receiving stream depends partially upon the actual low flow value of
that stream relative to the volume of the effluent discharged to it and partially upon the
reliability of the projection of that low flow based on flow records.
In general, it can be said that a receiving stream which would provide- a large dilution of the
effluent would be able to tolerate fluctuations in the quality of the effluent without greatly
affecting the aquatic community Conversely the aquatic community ir streams with small
flows in comparison to the effluent flow (i.e. Badfish C/eek) would not be able to tolerate
fluctuations in the effluent quality to any great extent $ince, during low flow periods, the
flow in the stream may be Comprised almost entirely of effluent. Based on this, the receiving
streams, in order of their decreasing reliability to tolerate effluent quality fluctuations,
would be as follows:
D Wisconsin River
D Rock River f
D Yahara River
D Badfish Creek
3—26
-------
During the mathematical modeling which was done to simulate the affects the discharge of
the treated Nine Springs effluent would have on each of the remaining discharge alterna-
tives (see Appendix I, "Mathematical Modeling"), the low flow values used were the once-
in-ten year, seven-consecutive day (Qj 10) values. These flows were obtained when possible,
from U.S. Geological Survey publications.
Since the modeling for Bad fish Creek assumed 2.0 cfs base flow for dilution at the confluence
of the effluent ditch, it is assumed that the reliability of maintaining that nominal flow level
would be at a high level.
Modeling of the Yahara River assumed the maintenance of a minimum base flow (8.9 cfs
at the outlet of Lake Kegonsa and 11.9 cfs at the point of effluent discharge) through the
regulation of the levels of the Madison Lakes. Continuation of the export of ground water,
as discussed in Appendix C, "Base Stream Flow Recession Study", indicates that the pro-
jection of a base flow in the Yahara River is subject not only to the controlled release of
water from the Madison Lakes but also on climatic events that would cause the maintenance
of the base flow value to be somewhat unreliable.
The Q7 10 flow of the Rock River downstream of Lake Koshkonong has been projected to
be 35 cfs based on flow records collected at other locations on the river. It should be
recognized that this value is somewhat questionable since no flow records exist for that
specific location. Thus, the reliability of that base flow is somewhat in question.
Modeling of the Wisconsin River assumed a Q7 10 base flow of 2400 cfs which seems to
be rather well documented in past records. Because of the large number of dilutions available
in the Wisconsin River, rather minor deviations from the assumed flow would not cause
any changes in the overall reliability of the large base flow itself.
F. Comparison of Total System Reliabilities
It must be assumed that an equal amount of care would be utilized in the design, maintenance
and operation of the facilities required to implement any one of the remaining alternatives.
Therefore, the reliability of the actual facilities for any given alternative would be as high as
it is practicable to obtain.
Variances in the total system reliabilities were based on the capability of the receiving streams
to accept and to tolerate changes in the effluent quality as they were modeled, (see
Appendix I). It was judged, based on the overall reliability placed on the modeling, and the
provision of filtration and effluent equalization, that the order of preference of the discharge
alternatives would be as follows:
— Badfish Creek
C Proposed Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant
Yahara River — Badfish Creek Combination
r— Yahara River
I— Wisconsin River
3—27
-------
3.07 Flexibility of the Remaining Alternatives
A. General
The flexibilities of the remaining alternatives are dependent upon their ability to accommodate
fluctuations in wastewater flows and strengths. Such fluctuations may result from changes
in the population served by the system, either in numbers or in the character of the waste-
water.
Flexibility also includes the relative ease with which the plant could be adapted to produce a
higher effluent quality, if such were required in the future, or to alter the discharge loca-
tion.
B. Flexibility to Accept Increased Flows
The addition of treatment and pipeline facilities required to implement any of the remaining
alternatives would be designed based on the projected average daily flow of 50 MOD and
the projected peak daily flow of 90 MOD for the design period. In the event of a major new
waste source which would significantly increase the design flow to the plant, some means of
accommodating the flow would have to be provided. Additional treatment units can always
be added to hajidle the flow provided that hydraulic bottlenecks do not limit the entire system
capacity.
With a projected average flow of 50 MOD and a projected peak flow of 90 MOD during
the design period, the system should be able to easily handle the flows. The pump station
and pipeline, however, have useful lives beyond the 20-year design period chosen. Thus,
some attention should be given to possible future plans for expansion of the system.
Two definite possibilities exist for upgrading the discharge system in the future as follows:
D Equalization of effluent flows
D Increased pumping capacity
The remaining alternatives, except for discharge to the Wisconsin River, would have equal-
ization facilities incorporated into the treatment design. Initially, the equalization would be
utilized mainly to dampen the effects of effluent quality fluctuations. It is projected that
with adaptations to the equalization facilities in the future, fluctuations in flow could be
significantly dampened allowing the pump station and pipeline to handle an equalized flow
of75MGD.
It is also possible in the future to add additional pumping capacity in order to transmit
higher flows through the same pipeline, provided that the pipeline design pressures are suf-
ficiently high to accept such conditions.
It should be noted, however, that the 100 psi theoretical capacity of the original pipeline
from the plant to the effluent ditch poses a definite hindrance to further system expansion
without the addition of a parallel pipeline.
It is felt that increased discharge to the Wisconsin River would not significantly affect the
flow in the river due to its large volume in comparison to the projected effluent flow.
Consideration would have to be given to the pumping capacity and the pipeline to handle
increased flows as mentioned above.
3—28
-------
C. Flexibility to Accept Higher Influent Loadings
Maintenance of a high effluent quality is dependent upon the design waste loadings. Modi-
fications to the treatment process units can usually be made, up to a point, to increase their
treatment efficiency. If higher volume or strength wastes require treatment capacity beyond
the limit which modifications can handle, then the addition of other treatment units must
be considered.
The wastewater treated at the Nine Springs Wastewater Treatment Plant is fairly typical of
a primarily non-industrial community. The largest single industrial discharger to the system
is the Oscar Mayer, Inc. meat packing plant. It is difficult to project very far into the future
regarding possible location within the area of any large industrial complexes which may
generate some unforeseen waste loading to the Nine Springs plant. At the present time, there
are no known plans for the location of such a waste source in the area.
The wastewater treatment processes outlined in Table 3-8 would be capable of providing an
effluent of sufficient quality to protect the environment of the receiving stream. Any
moderate increase of the influent loading could be handled by these treatment processes.
D. Flexibility to Produce Higher Quality Effluent
It should be recognized that long-term possibilities regarding future effluent quality require-
ments pose definite problems during the design of any facility. It is recommended that
such possibilities be considered, at least in a preliminary fashion, in the layout of any new
facilities at the Nine Springs plant.
Provisions should be made in the plant layout to facilitate the future addition of activated
carbon and the installation of a carbon regeneration system or other advanced wastewater
treatment system which may become necessary. These considerations should be included in
the design and layout of the treatment facilities required for each of the remaining alterna-
tives.
E. Flexibility to Alter the Discharge Location
It should be recognized that changes in the natural conditions of the receiving stream or
in technology could necessitate a possible alteration in the discharge strategy at some time
in the future. Flexibility in altering the discharge location would be dependent, in part, upon
the pipeline location and on the pumping capacity. Increases in required pumping capacity
have been discussed earlier.
Four of the alternatives involve discharge to the Rock River basin at various locations.
Localized water quality problems in the Rock and Yahara Rivers and their tributaries might,
at some time, dictate that the effluent discharge be relocated in order to more advantageously
utilize the dissolved oxygen in the effluent or to maintain some minimum flow value during
low flow conditions.
The discharge of effluent to the proposed Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant would have a
high degree of flexibility since it would be possible to incorporate into the pipeline means
of discharging to either the Badfish Creek, or the Yahara or Rock Rivers.
Discharge to either the Badfish Creek or Yahara River alone would have less flexibility.
Discharge location alteration could only be implemented in those cases by the construction
of a new pipeline to some other location as required.
3—29
-------
The combination Yahara River — Badfish Creek discharge alternative would also have a
high degree of flexibility. Discharge flow could be regulated to vary the volume discharged
to each stream.
Discharge to locations other than these could only be implemented by the construction of
an additional pipeline as required.
Discharge to the Wisconsin River offers little flexibility in this regard. It would seem remotely
possible that, at some date in the future, the effluent pipeline might be further extended to
facilitate discharging the effluent either further downstream in the Wisconsin River or directly
into the Mississippi River. Such an extension of the pipeline would in all likelihood be
extremely expensive and the possibility of the need for such actions would seem to be extreme-
ly remote. It would also seem to be extremely remote that discharge to other streams along
the pipeline route, such as Black Earth Creek, would become feasible in the future.
F. Comparison of System Flexibilities
It was judged that the flexibility of each of the remaining discharge alternatives were essential-
ly equal in the first three categories discussed above providing sufficient considertion would
be given during facility design as described. Therefore, the remaining alternatives have the
following order of preference regarding flexibility based primarily on the flexibility of dis-
charge location alteration:
D Proposed Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant
D Yahara River — Badfish Creek Combination
D Yahara River
D Badfish Creek
D Wisconsin River
3.08 Treatment Alternatives
A. General
After the evaluation of the alternative discharge sites to establish the degree of effluent
quality required to protect the water quality and the environment of the various receiving
streams, the firm of CH2M HILL was charged with evaluating alternative wastewater treat-
ment methods to attain the specified effluent quality. As discussed earlier (Sections 3.05) it
was judged that various degrees of effluent quality would have to be provided to meet the
objective of protecting the water quality and the environment of the receiving streams under
consideration.
As a part of their evaluations, CH2M HILL also recommended a number of modifications
to the existing facilities which was felt should be made regardless of the discharge alterna-
tive recommended. The following sections summarize the various treatment alternatives
which were considered. A detailed evaluation may be found in Volume II, "Wastewater
Treatment Systems Report", by CH2M HILL.
3—30
-------
B. Modification to Existing Facilities
During the investigation of the existing facilities by CH2M HILL, several modifications
which should be made to the existing facilities became apparent. At various points in the
Nine Springs plant capacity of individual process units, pumps or pipelines should be expand-
ed to handle anticipated flow increases by the year 2000. In some cases, the capacity of
some units are already overtaxed especially during peak flow conditions. It was concluded
by CH2M HILL that upgrading of the existing plant would require the installation of a third
aerated grit chamber, installation of flow meters for the secondary clarifiers, return sludge
lines and waste sludge lines, and renovation of digesters and sludge thickeners.
In addition, it was noted that some of the existing process tanks required renovation to
improve the deteriorated condition of concrete surfaces. These should be repaired. It was
also noted that there are areas in the plant which may not meet existing safety standards.
These areas include: railings over the grit chamber, ventilation in the existing pipe galleries,
gas leaks around domes of digesters and sludge storage tanks, deteriorated wooden planking
over channels, and need for additional storage space for combustible materials. It was
recommended that these possible safety deficiencies be corrected. The modifications to the
existing facilities are discussed in detail in Volume II, "Wastewater Treatment Systems
Report", by CH2M HILL.
C. Advanced Treatment Alternatives
Several advanced treatment alternatives were evaluated. The requirements to furnish an
effluent of specified quality could be met in a number of ways. Table 3-11 indicates the alter-
natives which were evaluated and summarizes the reasons for elimination or retention of
each alternative.
Table 3-11
Preliminary Screening Summary
Advanced Treatment Facilities
Nine Springs Wastewater Treatment Plant
Treatment
Objectives
Soluble BOD
Reduction
Suspended Solids
Removal
Processes Considered
Granular Carbon Adsorption
Zimpro Bio-Physical Process
Filtration
Microstrammg
Chemical Treatment
Results of Screening
Eliminated because of high cost for separate carbon adsorption It
would cost about 14C/TG (14C per thousand gallons) The same benefits
could be provided at less cost with the Zimpro Bio-Plusical process
Provides carbon adsorption in conjunction with nitrification tor about
6C/TG. Selected for further study
Selected for evaluation because of demonstrated effectiveness and
anticipated low costs (4C/TG).
Eliminated because it would give poorer clarification and cost more
than filtration (5
-------
Table 3-11 (Cont'd.)
Treatment
Objectives Processes Considered
Ammonia Removal Activated Sludge
Contra Costa System
Trickling Filters
Packed-bed Reactors
Rotating Biological Disks
Conventional Ammonia
Stripping
Ammonia Removal and
Recovery Process for
Mainstream
Ammonia Removal and
Recovery Process for Lagoon
Supernatant
Breakpoint Chlonnation
Selective Ion Exchange
Softening Demmerahzation with
Ion Exchange, Electrodialysis,
or Reverse Osmosis
Lime-Soda Softening
Disinfection Chlonnation
Ozonation
Dechlorination Sulfur Dioxide
Carbon Adsorption
Source — CH2M HILL Engineers
Results of Screening
Several modifications were selected for further study. Costs would
range from 4C to 10C/TG.
Eliminated because high alkalinity and high soluble BOD content make
primary lime treatment impractical.
Eliminated because of poor reliability and low efficiency.
Eliminated because the technology is still experimental. It would
require development and testing to design with confidence.
Selected for further study because of low anticipated O&M costs, good
reliability.
Eliminated because of freezing problems in winter.
Eliminated because of lack of development for dilute, mainstream
Applications
Eliminated for removing high-level ammonia in supernatant. Treatment
by the main plant nitrification system is more economical. Breakpoint
chlonnation will eliminate any ammonia breakthrough.
Eliminated as sole nitrogen-removal method because of high cost
(20C/TG) Selected for polishing unoxidized ammonia residuals from
the nitrified effluent because no technical alternative exists. It would
then cost about 1«/TG.
Eliminated because of high cost (18C/TG).
Eliminated because of high costs (over 40C/TG) and brine handling
problems associated with demmerahzation.
Selected over demmerahzation because of lower costs (about 33C/TG)
and capability for lime recovery and recycle.
Selected because breakpoint chlonnation for ammonia removal would
achieve disinfection without additional costs.
Eliminated because of high costs (about llc/TG). Not needed with
breakpoint chlonnation.
Selected because of low cost (about 0.1 c/TG)
Eliminated because of high cost (11C/TG).
3.09 Cost Effective Comparison of the Remaining Alternatives
A. Treatment Alternatives
Once the levels of treatment required for each of the remaining alternative discharge loca-
tions were determined (see Section 3.05), CH2M HILL performed cost effective comparisons
of the treatment systems required to meet each specific effluent quality. Three effluent
qualities were evaluated in the comparison as shown in Table 3-12.
3—32
-------
Table 3-12
Degree of Effluent Treatment Required
Degree of Treatment
(Monthly Average) Discharge Location
Effluent I BOD — less than 30 mg/l Wisconsin River
Suspended Solids — less than 30 mg/l
NH3-N — less than 2.25 rag/11
Chlorination
Effluent II BOD — less than 10 mg/l Badfish Creek
Suspended Solids — less than 10 mg/l Rock River
NHj-N — less than 0.13-0.43 mg/l2 Yahara River
Breakpoint Chlorination
Dechlorination
Effluent III Same degree of treatment as Proposed Koshkonong
Effluent II with the addition Nuclear Power Plant
of: Lime softening
1. Required during periods of high temperature and low stream flow (summer months).
2. Value depends on the receiving stream. Required during periods of high temperature and low
stream flow (summer months).
Investigations as reported in Volume II, "Wastewater Treatment Systems Report", by
CH2M HILL, indicated that the most cost effective method of achieving the required BOD
and suspended solids levels for Effluents II and III was filtration. Biological nitrification
was more cost effective than either breakpoint Chlorination or ion exchange for ammonia
removal for all three Effluents. Chlorination was found to be the most cost effective means
of providing disinfection; and breakpoint Chlorination following biological nitrification
was found to be cost effective in providing the low ammonia levels required in Effluent II
and III. Dechlorination was required following breakpoint Chlorination to avoid toxicity
problems. Lime softening was the most cost effective method of softening the effluent for
Effluent III. The cost effectiveness for the total treatment system is dependent upon the
type of biological nitrification system utilized. In the case of each of the effluents, it was
determined that rotating biological contactors was the most cost effective method of nitrifi-
cation.
B. Pumping and Transmission Alternatives
More detailed investigations were conducted with respect to the pumping and transmission
requirements for each of the remaining alternatives. A detailed basis of design was developed
for each discharge system and cost estimates were prepared for each case. The cost estimates
developed were expanded to include the present worth of staged construction, operating
costs, and salvage value. The detailed cost estimates may be found in Volume II and Appendix
F.
C. Comparison of System Costs
Total costs estimated (present worth) for each of the remaining alternatives are summarized
in Table 3-13.
3—33
-------
Table 3-13
Present Worth Costs Comparison
of Alternatives
Effluent Treatment
Lt'fluem Pumping
Transmission
Revenue from
Sale of Water
Wisconsin
River
$29,730,000
6,830,000
33,234,000
Proposed
Koshkonong NPP
588,540,000
5,085,000
29,404,000
- 54,880,000' "
Badfish
Creek
$42,590,000
4,325,000
305,000
Yahara
River
$42,590,000
5,085,000
9,548,000
Split lo
Badfish Creek
and
Yahara Ri\tr
$42,590.(KX)
5,953.000
5,661,000
Totals
$69,744.000
$68,149,000
$47,220,000
$57,223,000
$54,204,000
'" Based on 45C/1,000 gals and 40 MOD use. WEPCO has indicated that 45«/t,000 cals. is the maximum that they would he
willing to pa> for softened effluent
Based solely on a comparison of the present worth costs, the order of preference for the
alternatives would be as follows:
Z Badfish Creek
Z Yahara River — Badfish Creek Combination
Z Yahara River
Z Proposed Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant
Z Wisconsin River
3.10 Implementation of the Remaining Alternatives
A. General
Each of the remaining alternatives, as discussed, would lead to an improvement of the exist-
ing conditions in the receiving waters, however, none could be implemented without first
receiving approval from local, State and Federal agencies.
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 and subsequent amendments to it,
assures that the opinions and concerns of the public would be considered for all projects
involving Federal funding. Due to the controversial nature and magnitude of the present
project, it was agreed by WDNR and USEPA that an Environmental Impact Statement
would be prepared. It is estimated that from six months to one year could be required for
the preparation and processing of a formal Environmental Impact Statement.
An additional one to two years would be required to prepare, receive approval and obtain
bids on the detailed design documents for the recommended alternative.
Assuming a two to three year schedule for construction of the facilities, it is estimated that
any recommended improvements would not be in operation until sometime between the
end of 1979 and the middle of 1982. With State and Federal review and approval of grants-
in-aid, it is more likely that completion of the facilities would occur closer to the 1982 esti-
mate.
3—34
-------
Construction costs have been escalating at an average rate of 8-10 percent per year. Un-
necessary delays to the implementation of the recommended alternative would undoubtedly
result in greatly increased costs. Each of the remaining alternatives was evaluated in regard
to the potential for implementation delay which would result in escalated project costs as
noted above.
The potential barriers to the prompt implementation of any given alternatives fall into three
categories:
D Technical barriers
G Human misunderstanding barriers
C Legal barriers
The following sections summarize the barriers to implementation.
B. Technical Barriers
As discussed in Section 3.05, the maintenance of water quality in the receiving streams
sufficient to meet the recommended standards for fish and aquatic life does not appear to
be justifiable based on in-stream concentrations of various parameters.
Each of the receiving streams have been found to be below the dissolved oxygen standards
for the maintenance of fish and aquatic life at Q7 ]0 flows for existing conditions. These
dissolved oxygen deficiencies have been found to be due to the prolific growth and release
of phytoplankton from the lakes which feed the Rock, Wisconsin and Yahara Rivers. Badfish
Creek is in a substandard condition largely as the result of sewage discharges.
The mathematical modeling as described in Appendix I indicates that even with the proposed
level of treatment, only the Badfish Creek would meet the required dissolved oxygen levels.
The affects of phytoplankton activity at other discharge locations would effectively mask
the dissolved oxygen levels introduced with the Nine Springs plant effluent.
While existing technology for tne control of pollutants from sewage discharge has reached
a highly advanced state, the exiting technology for controlling the growth of phytoplankton
in the feeder lakes has only recently emerged and is, in large part, untried and/or unproved.
The control of nitrogen and phosphorus, known stimulants to excessive phytoplankton
growth, may be incorporated into the treatment of wastewaters, yet there is an inability to
successfully control their content in urban and rural runoff.
The same technological barriers exis: with respect to the excessive concentrations of other
potential contaminants which \\ere found to exist even in the Rutland Branch which has
been referred to as a "pristine" stream.
If it is assumed that each wa^tewater management system is designed, constructed and
operated in the intended manner, there would seem to be no barriers to the maintenance of
the specified effluent quality which have been described earlier. Thus, from the standpoint
of the effluent discharge there should be no valid reasons why each of the receiving streams
should be adversely effected in any large degree.
3—35
-------
C. Human Misunderstanding Barriers
Concern regarding the impacts of discharge to any given receiving stream may arise from
members of the public who may live in the immediate vicinity of the stream and from other
individuals who want to be assured that proper consideration has been given to protection
of the environment. A barrier to the implementation of any alternative may exist until those
persons concerned about potential adverse impacts are convinced that due consideration has
been given to their concerns and that the possibility of such potential adverse impacts has
been minimized.
It is essential that an open dialogue be maintained with concerned members of the public
to assure that information regarding protection of the environment is readily available. Only
with a concerted effort of all parties to continue such a dialogue, can the barriers raised by
misunderstanding be eliminated in sufficient time to allow the project to be implemented
without delay.
Many people are adamantly opposed to the approval and construction of the proposed
Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant. While this study is in no way meant to express approval
or disapproval of that project, the alternative for discharging the effluent to the power plant
for cooling purposes might be implied to foster an added incentive for its approval and
construction. Thus, this alternative may be subject to a great deal of human misunder-
standing.
D. Legal Barriers
Legal barriers may be raised to the implementation of any given alternative by those who
may be affected by such implementation. Documentation gathered as a part of this planning
effort and shown in the various volumes of the Facilities Plan Report would provide MMSD
with a large data resource as a backup for the choice of a discharge site.
Diversion of the effluent from the Nine Springs plant out of the Yahara-Rock River
basin may also raise the possibility of legal action in the future. People who have alleged to
have been damaged by the presence of the effluent in the past might find themselves in the
position of being damaged again in the future, not by the presence of the effluent but b\ the
lack of water brought about by diversion of the effluent. The greater the degree of diversion,
the more people there are who would be affected by it. Trr.'s, the discharge alternative to
the Wisconsin River which would divert the effluent entirely out of the Yahara-Rock River
basin would seem to provide the greatest chance for the institution of legal actions from
this standpoint.
Legal action may result from people in the area of the receiving stream of the recommended
alternative if they feel the right to the beneficial use of the water has been impaired by the
discharge. Documentation regarding the choice of a given alternative, as mentioned above,
should provide MMSD with the data it would need to defend its position.
3—36
-------
E. Comparison of the System Implementation
The implementability of the remaining alternatives was based on the factors described
above. The order of preference based solely on implementation considerations was judged
to be as follows:
CH Yahara River
D Badfish Creek
D Yahara River — Badfish Creek Combination
D Wisconsin River
C Proposed Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant
3.11 Selection of the Recommended Alternative
The selection of one alternative as the recommended treatment and discharge strategy was based
on the evaluation of each of the remaining alternatives relative to the categories discussed earlier
in this section. The categories were given consideration according to an assigned value rating as
discussed in Appendix F. The total ratings show the following order of preference as a result of
the comparison:
C Badfish Creek
D Yahara River — Badfish Creek Combination
D Yahara River
D Proposed Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant
C Wisconsin River
It was thus recommended that the MMSD effluent be treated to the level specified and dis-
charged to Badfish Creek.
In order to provide the degree of treatment necessary for the Effluent II level of effluent quality,
the following treatment alternatives are recommended for implementation:
Z Ammonia Removal — rotating biological contactors (RBC)
Z Suspended Solids Removal — filtration
Z Disinfection — breakpoint chlorination (would also remove 1-2 mg/1 of ammonia residuals
from nitrified effluent)
Z Dechlorination — sulfur dioxide
Z Trace Contaminant Minimization — equalization
If softening were to be required in the event of supply of the Nine Springs effluent to the pro-
posed Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant (Effluent III), it is recommended that lime-soda
softening be implemented.
3—37
-------
Section 4 — Description of the Proposed Actions
4.01 General
The comparison of the five remaining alternatives described in the preceeding section justifies
the selection of the Badfish Creek as the recommended alternative for the discharge of the
MMSD effluent. If the proposed Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant is approved and favorable
rates for the sale of the MMSD effluent can be negotiated, the discharge of the effluent to the
power plant should be re-evaluated at that time.
Those treatment and discharge facilities necessary to complete the discharge to Badfish Creek
should be designed, prepared for bidding purposes, constructed and placed into operation.
In addition to the construction of the physical structures recommended, there are several non-
structural actions which are recommended to be implemented to effectively obtain the overall
plan and to protect the receiving stream as outlined in the goals and objectives of the Facilities
Planning Advisory Committee.
4.02 Recommendations for Discharge to Badfish Creek
Facilities required for the implementation of the recommended discharge to the Badfish Creek
are summarized in the following paragraphs. A more detailed discussion of the modification to
the existing treatment units and recommendations for additional treatment untis needed to
provide the effluent quality required to protect the receiving stream may be found in Volume I,
"Summary Facilities Plan Report", by O'Brien & Gere and Volume II, "Wastewater Treatment
Systems Report", by CH2M HILL.
A. Modifications to Existing Facilities
The following facilities have been found by CH2M HILL to be necessary to the continued
and efficient operation of the existing facilities at the Nine Springs plant. These modifications
would be in addition to those facilities presently being incorporated as a part of the Fifth
Addition.
D Grit Chamber: An additional 9000 cubic feet of aerated grit chamber capacity plus
improved grit removal conveyors and washers should be provided.
D Number 2 Junction Box: Overflow spillage and improved bypass control should be
provided by raising its elevation and installation of a sluice gate.
D Primary Clarifiers: Refurbish and repair or replace, as necessary, worn equipment
and concrete surfaces of each of the existing units.
D Aeration Tanks and Aeration System: Improved influent gate operators and additional
air system capacity may be required if not accomplished under the Fifth Addition. The
concrete walls should be resurfaced as required.
D Secondary Clarifiers: Flow meters and improved overflow weirs should be provided
on existing secondary clarifier to properly balance the flows in each unit.
D Return Sludge Pumping and Metering: Modification of the existing pumps should be
made to increase pumping capacity to 50 MOD. Improved flow metering should also
be included.
D Waste Sludge Pumping and Metering: Increased pumping capacity should be provided
by replacing the existing pump. Improved flow metering may be required if not
accomplished under the Fifth Addition.
4—1
-------
D Disinfection: A backup chlorine line should be provided as a precaution in the event
of a break in the existing line.
D Effluent Pumping: Modifications to the existing effluent pumping station should be
made to reduce pump cavitation.
D Automatic Samplers: Automatic composite samplers should be installed on the major
flow streams to facilitate gathering of flow proportioned samples for analysis.
D Safety Measures: Wooden planking currently in use should be replaced with aluminum
grating. Improvements may be needed in the storage of flammable materials.
D Existing Digester Facilities: Existing digesters should be repaired as necessary to
improve their efficiency.
D Personnel and Administrative Facilities: A unified operation and administrative facility
should be constructed at the Nine Springs plant location. The facilities should pro-
vide improved facilities for the plant operation personnel.
B. Advanced Waste Treatment Facilities
The advanced waste treatment facilities necessary to protect the water quality of Badfish
Creek would consist of the following:
D Secondary Clarification: Additional clarification units should be constructed in stages
as wastewater flows increase to maintain design clarifier surface settling rate loadings.
n Nitrification: Rotating biological contactors (RBC) should be provided to achieve
tertiary nitrification. Flow through the units would be by gravity and no additional
pumping of the secondary effluents would be required.
D Filtration: The RBC units are not anticipated to add significant amounts of suspended
solids to the effluent. However, in order to reduce the suspended solids and BOD
loadings as much as possible, sand filtration of the effluent should be provided.
D Breakpoint Chlorination: Breakpoint chlorination should be provided for the dis-
infection of the effluent. It would be utilized also as a polishing step and as a backup
to the ammonia removal accomplished in the RBC units.
D Equalization: Twelve hours of effluent storage should be provided in order to equalize
contaminant concentrations. Level controls should also be provided to allow equal-
ization of effluent discharge flow as well.
D Dechlorination: Dechlorination of the effluent with sulfur dioxide prior to discharge
should be provided to prevent possible chlorine toxicity problems in the receiving
stream.
D Sludge Treatment Facilities: Additional sludge treatment and handling facilities
including: gravity and air flotation sludge thickeners, digester units, and sludge
loading equipment should be provided to maintain adequate sludge treatment as the
wastewater flow increases and to facilitate the implementation of the proposed Organic
Solids Reuse Program.
A more detailed description of these facilities may be found in Volume II, "Wastewater
Treatment Systems Report" and Volume III, "Organic Solids Reuse Plan".
The recommended advanced treatment facilities would provide the treatment required to
produce an effluent with the characteristics as shown in Table 4-1.
4—2
-------
Table 4-1
Anticipated Effluent Characteristics
Max. 5 Consecutive Max.
Monthly Avg. Day/Month Day/Month
Biochemical Oxygen
Demand (BOD5) 8 mg/l 12mg/l 16mg/l
Suspended Solids 8 mg/l 12 mg/l 16 mg/l
Ammonia (NH3-N) 0.1 mg/l 0.2 mg/l 0.4 mg/l
The total capital costs for the treatment facilities in terms of January 1976 costs are estimated
to be 529,280,000. Implementation of the recommended alternative has assumed that the
construction of the majority of these facilities would be completed in 1980. Additional
facilities for anticipated increased flows would be put into operation by 1985 and 1990 as
required and costs for these have been included in the cost estimate.
C. Effluent Pumping and Transmission Facilities
As a part of the preliminary screening of discharge alternatives, an investigation into the
capacity of the existing effluent pumps and pipeline system was performed. It was concluded
that the existing pump station with new and larger impellers and pipeline would have a
capacity of 75 MOD.
As mentioned above, if effluent flows are equalized to a value below 75 MOD, the existing
pump station would have sufficient capacity to handle the anticipated flows. However, in
order to prevent possible cavitation problems, the water level in the wet well feeding the
effluent pumps may have to be raised. A detailed investigation of this should be conducted
prior to final design.
It is recommended that the existing effluent pipeline and ditch be utilized to convey the
effluent from the Nine Springs plant to Badfish Creek. Concerns have been expressed regard-
ing several conditions resulting from the presence of the existing effluent ditch. These have
been discussed earlier and are shown on Figure 9-2 in Volume I, "Summary Facilities Plan
Report." It is recommended that portions of the effluent ditch be fenced, especially near
residential areas. This would help alleviate the concerns regarding the safety of children in
the area.
It is felt that aeration would be provided by the existing cascade structures in the effluent
ditch such that dissolved oxygen levels would be maintained at 5 mg/l or above.
The total estimated capital costs for the effluent pumping and transmission facilities is
approximately $790,000. This includes costs for the lift station and for fencing portions of
the existing effluent ditch.
4—3
-------
4.03 Discharge to the Proposed Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant
As mentioned earlier, the alternative discharging the effluent to the proposed Koshkonong
Nuclear Power Plant is only a valid alternative if the power plant is approved for construction
and then only if a favorable rate for the sale of treated effluent between MMSD and the
Wisconsin Electric Power Company (WEPCO) can be negotiated.
It is recommended that an acceptable rate for the sale of the effluent should as a minimum,
generate sufficient revenues to cover the debt retirement costs as well as the operating and main-
tenance costs for the incremental facilities needed to soften the water, dispose of the lime sludge
and deliver the softened water to the power plant.
4.04 Non-Structural Recommendations
A. General
There are several non-structural actions which should be undertaken to help attain the water
quality goals and objectives of the current study. While the implementation of the recom-
mended facilities discussed in the previous section would represent a significant effort to
meet the required effluent quality, institution of additional actions would play an important
part of the overall plan for the protection of the water quality in the Yahara and Rock
Rivers.
B. Source Control of Specified Pollutants
During the evaluation of requirements for meeting water quality standards for several
beneficial uses (Section 3.05), it was recommended that the sources of several pollutant
categories be identified and efforts be made to institute source control programs.
Potential contaminants which should be included in such a source control program include
the following:
Heavy Metals:
Z selenium Z copper
~ cadmium Z mercury
Z lead Z silver
Z aluminum Z zinc
Organic Materials
Z cyanides
Z polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB's)
Z pesticides; chlorinated hydrocarbon, organo-sulfur and organo-phosphorus
The concentrations of these materials in the Nine Springs plant were found to be in the
low range of potential toxicity. As discussed in Section 3.05, additional removal of these
potential contaminants would be accomplished by the recommended advanced treatment
processes (i.e. filtration). However, due to the relatively low flow of the recommended
receiving stream, even lower concentrations than can be effectively provided by the advanced
treatment processes may be required to protect the in-stream environment.
4—4
-------
MMSD should initiate an intensive analytical monitoring program to locate the sources of
these materials in their system and to develop a material balance for each parameter.
Sampling and analysis should begin with the raw water supply to establish natural back-
ground concentrations. The program should continue with sampling and analysis of various
residential, commercial and industrial areas to determine the loadings from each of these
sources.
Once a complete material balance is developed for each contaminant, various alternate
strategies for reducing the contaminant levels can be detailed, and the most cost effective
solution can be implemented.
C. Yahara River Low Flow Augmentation
Appendix C, "Base Stream Flow Recession Study", discussed the impacts that the diversion
of the Nine Springs plant effluent has had on the low flow in the Yahara River since 1959.
The study also projected the anticipated impacts that continued diversion may have in the
future assuming an increase of effluent flow from an average daily flow of 36 MGD to
50 MGD. The recommended discharge alternative maintains the base flow in the lower
Yahara River, however, the flows in the upper Yahara River may drop to zero during pro-
longed dry weather periods on a regular basis.
Two methods were discussed in Appendix C of augmenting the base flo\\ of the Yahara
Rner during low flow periods. The method of importing ground water from the Wisconsin
Ri\er basin was evaluated and found to be expensive and difficult to implement. There may
also be problems associated with the legal barriers to its implementation.
The other method evaluated of augmenting the flows in the Yahara River was the systematic
regulation of the water level of the Madison Lakes. It was shown that through the careful
control of the lake levels, a minimum base flow could be maintained in the Yahara River
below the dam at McFarland without appreciably affecting the recreational or other uses of
the lakes.
It is recommended that MMSD continue to cooperate with other area groups including
WDNR, USGS, DCRPC, Madison Water Utility and other area agencies or groups to
further define the effects of wastewater diversion and to establish any required remedial
programs.
D. Madison Lakes — Water Quality Improvement
Critical dissolved oxygen levels in both the Yahara and Rock Rivers occur during the night
as a result of phytoplankton respiration. It is essential then that phytoplankton activity be
reduced if minimum dissolved oxygen levels are to be maintained. Reduction of the nutrient
loadings to the Madison Lakes and to area streams would help alleviate the problem of
excessive phytoplankton growth.
Intensive efforts should be made in the City of Madison and other communities which con-
tribute urban runoff to the lakes to reduce such runoff and the subsequent nutrient loadings
to the lakes. Efforts such as the installation of sewers in areas around Lake Kegonsa should
be continued.
4—5
-------
Rural runoff should be minimized through wider implementation of improved management
practices such as contour plowing. This and similar agricultural practices could reduce the
loss of valuable topsoil and fertilizers. Lowering of the nutrient loadings to the streams and
subsequently to the lakes would thus be accomplished.
E. Effluent and Stream Monitoring Programs
Effluent and stream monitoring programs should be continued in the future. Samples are
currently collected at a number of stations along the effluent ditch, Badfish Creek, Yahara
River and Rock River once every two weeks as shown on Figure 2.06-11 of Appendix A. It
is recommended that the existing sampling stations be retained and that four additional
sampling stations be established by MMSD. Table 4-2 lists the existing and proposed
monitoring stations.
The following parameters are currently measured on the samples:
Z BOD5 11 fecal coliforms
Z NH3-N Z dissolved oxygen
Z total suspended solids Z temperature
Z volatile suspended solids Z total phosphorus
Z PH
In addition, it is recommended that the following parameters should be analyzed for:
Z selenium H silver
Z cadmium i_ zinc
Z lead Z cyanides
Z aluminum Z pesticides (chlorinated hydrocarbons)
H copper Z pesticides (organo-phosphorus)
Z mercury Z polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB's)
It should be recognized that numerous other pollutant sources beyond the control of MMSD
have a significant impact in establishing the overall water quality in Badfish Creek, the
Yahara River and Rock River. The implementation of the recommended monitoring program
should provide the necessary data to more closely pinpoint the source of any future water
quality problems in the area such that remedial actions can be taken.
F. Increased Flow Gauging Activities
In conjunction with the effluent and stream monitoring program, efforts should be made
to collect reliable flow measurements at several points. Currently, the USGS maintains a
gauging station on the Yahara River at McFarland. In addition to the continued operation
of this station, it is recommended that additional flow gauging stations be established as
follows:
Z Near the mouth of Badfish Creek, below the entrance of Spring Creek and above the
confluence with the Yahara River
Z On the Yahara River, below the outlet of the Stebbinsville dam and above the entrance
of Badfish Creek
Z On the Rock River, below the outlet of the Indianford Dam and above the entrance
of the Yahara River
4-6
-------
Table 4-2
Existing and Proposed MMSD Monitoring Stations
Existing Stations
Station #NS — Nine Springs Effluent
Station #A — Effluent Ditch below first aerator (DO only)
Station #B — Effluent Ditch prior to second aerator (DO only)
Station #1 — Badfish Creek after junction with effluent ditch at Sunrise Rd. bridge
Station #3 — Mouth of Rutland Branch at CTH A bridge, Town of Rutland, Section 16
Station #4 — Badfish Creek below Rutland Branch at CTH A bridge, Toun of Rutland,
Section 15
Station #7 — Badfish Creek below Frogpond Creek and Spring Creek
Station #8 — Badfish Creek just prior to junction with the Yahara River at STH 59 bridge,
Town of Porter, Section 4.
Station #9 — Yahara River below Badfish confluence at STH 59 bridge, Town of Porter,
Section 10
Station #10 — Yahara River above Badfish confluence in impoundment behind Stebbinsville
Dam
Station #15 — Rock River below Indianford Dam
Station #16 — Rock Ri\er at STH 14 bridge north of Janesville
Proposed Stations
Station C — Effluent Ditch just prior to entering Badfish Crtek
Station D — Oregon Branch of Badfish Creek just upstream of discharge of effluent ditch
Station 5A — Mouth of Spring Creek before confluence with Badfish Creek (at STH 59
road crossing)
Station 6A — Mouth of Frogpond Creek before confluence with Badfish Creek (near existing
monitoring Station #4)
4—7
-------
It is suggested that MMSD meet with representatives of the WDNR and the Wisconsin
Electric Power Company as well as the U.S. Geological Survey to discuss the possibility
and requirements for establishing the flow gauging stations.
G. Bio-Assay Studies
The effluent characterization survey revealed concentrations of several parameters in excess
of the levels recommended for the protection of fish and aquatic life. It is recommended
that MMSD undertake comprehensive bio-assay studies to determine the effects of the
effluent on fish and aquatic life.
Such studies should begin using unchlorinated secondary effluent and simulation of the
nitrification process to alleviate any possibility of ammonia toxicity. Dissolved oxygen
should be artificially maintained. Any toxicity exhibited would be due to some other con-
dition existing in the effluent. If toxicity is exhibited, more detailed studies should be con-
ducted to determine the cause of such toxicity and establish a program to eliminate any
exhibited toxiciu.
Upon completion of the advanced waste treatment facilities, the studies should be repeated
using the effluent from the expanded facilities. As in the previous case, the exten* of the
studies necessary would be determined by the existence or absence of toxicity in the initial
screening tests. These bio-assay tests would provide documentation for MMSD as 10 the
effects of the upgraded effluent on the aquatic community. The> could also be utilized to
establish and evaluate an> program for the elimination of any toxicity observed with the
studies. Facilities for conducting the bio-assay tests could be provided at the Nine Springs
plant site.
4—8
-------
SECTION 5 - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTIONS
5.01 General
The proposed actions for the treatment and discharge of wastewater from the Madison
Metropolitan Sewerage District's Nine Springs plant, as described in Section 4, include the treat-
ment of the wastewater required to produce a level of quality earlier specified as Effluent II. Also
proposed is the discharge of the effluent to the Badfish Creek.
The treatment facilities would be provided at the existing Nine Springs plant site. Modification
to existing process units as well as the addition of advanced treatment processes are recom-
mended.
Discharge of the effluent would utilize the existing pump station and pipeline to transmit the
effluent from the treatment plant to the Badfish Creek. Additional capacity would not be
requited if the recommended equalization facilities are implemented.
The following sections provide information regarding the impacts which the proposed actions
are expected to have on the environment.
A. Climate
The implementation of the proposed treatment and discharge facilities would have hale or
no impact on the general climatic conditions of the south-central Wisconsin area. The present
discharge of effluent through the effluent ditch south of the plant has resulted in some
localized fogging conditions in the past. These are the result of temperature differentials
between the effluent and the atmosphere at certain times. Such conditions are normal
occurrences on most streams but may be intensified due to the generally warmer temperatures
of the Nine Springs effluent. The equalization of the effluent flow would tend to bring the
effluent closer to the atmospheric temperature prior to discharge, thus reducing the fogging
potential.
B. Topography
Implementation of the proposed treatment facilities would require that additional land areas
be dedicated to wastewater treatment processes. All such development could be accomplished
on lands in the immediate area of the Nine Springs plant location. Construction of the various
required structures and tanks would not have a significant impact on the general topography
of the area.
The plant is currently visible from nearby public roads and residential areas. The proposed
actions do not include any recommendations for screening the plant from view. It is recom-
mended that attractive architectural design and landscaping be included in the final design to
lessen any potential visual impacts the plant may have to some individuals.
The proposed discharge to the Badfish Creek would not require any additional topographical
changes as the existing pipeline would be utilized in the future. Portions of the effluent
ditch would be fenced for safety reasons.
5—1
-------
C. Soils
An initial review indicated that, at the Nine Springs plant location, many of the soils are
not suitable for structures although other areas of the plant site have reasonable soil condi-
tions. Final siting of the proposed treatment facilities should include detailed soils testing in
order to take advantage of favorable soil conditions.
The proposed discharge facilities would have no impact on soil conditions.
D. Water Quality
As discussed in Section 3.05 of this report and in Volume I, "Summary Facilities Plan
Report" and Appendix F, "Evaluation of Effluent Discharge Alternatives", it does not
appear that it would be justifiable to require treatment of the Nine Springs plant effluent
to the extent that the effluent would meet all the suggested criteria (" Water Quality Criteria",
1972) to protect the receiving stream water quality for all of the potential beneficial uses.
Several of the streams in the area including the upper Yahara River, (above the Madison
Lakes), the Rutland Branch and Spring Creek which are not subject to sewage treatment
plant discharges, have background concentrations exceeding the suggested limits for several
potentially toxic substances.
The presence of concentrations in excess of the suggested criteria does not appear to ha\e
adversely affected the aquatic communities or beneficial use of these streams. The suggested
water quality criteria for the protection of fish and aquatic life are even more restrictive in
almost all cases than those for the protection of water quality for other beneficial uses in-
cluding drinking water supply. As noted in Appendix D, Rutland Branch was found to
contain good populations of several fish species generally regarded as relatively intolerant
of poor water quality.
Nutrient (nitrogen and phosphorus) loadings to the area waterways have been a persistent
problem resulting in excessive weed and algal growth. The Madison Lakes in particular ha\e
exhibited annual periods of weed and algal growth which have limited their use for recrea-
tional purposes. Remedial measures to alleviate this problem have included continued physical
removal of excessive growths and the use of chemicals to kill the weed and algal growths in
specific areas.
Both rural and urban runoff are major sources of nutrient loadings as shown in Appendix
A, "Environmental Inventory". In several cases it was shown that even if complete removal
of the nutrients from the effluent could be implemented, the in-stream concentrations would
still significantly exceed the levels which would promote weed and algal growth. Likewise,
the complete removal of other potentially toxic materials as mentioned above, still would
not reduce the existing background levels in the receiving streams to below the suggested
limits.
Implementation of the proposed treatment actions would provide an effluent of a quality
earlier specified as Effluent II. The expected effluent quality to be discharged to the Badfish
Creek is shown in Table 5-1.
5—2
-------
Table 5-1
Projected Effluent Quality
Max. 5 Consecutive Max.
Monthly Avg. Day/Month Day/Month
Biochemical Oxygen
Demand (BOD5) 8 mg/1 12mg/l 16mg/l
Suspended Solids 8 mg/1 12 mg/1 16 mg/1
Ammonia (NH3-N) 0.1 mg/1 0.2 mg/1 0.4 mg/1
In addition, it was recommended that flow equalization be provided. This would accomplish
two purposes.
First, it would minimize any peak loadings of the potentially toxic materials. In Appendix
F it was determined that while it would not be practicable to provide treatment to remove
the trace amounts of the potentially toxic materials; by providing an equalization facility,
peak concentrations could be reduced such that shock loadings to the receiving stream would
be avoided.
Secondly, it would allow the continued use of the existing effluent pump station and pipeline
by the reduction of peak hydraulic flows.
E. Water Quantity
The average daily influent flow to the Nine Springs plant is currently about 36 MGD. As
discussed in Appendix C, "Base Stream Flow Recession Study", the diversion of the Nine
Springs plant effluent from the Yahara River to the Badfish Creek has had dramatic impacts
on the flows in each stream.
The one-in-ten year, seven-consecutive-day low flow (Q7 10) of the Yahara River has de-
creased 70 percent from 16 cfs to approximately 5 cfs at the USGS gauging Station at
McFarland. The Ch 10 fi°w is tne value used in the design ot \vastewater treatment plants
as the flow in the receiving stream which can be used for waste assimilation. The City of
Stoughton's wastewater treatment plant discharges to the Yahara River in that portion of
the River where flow has been decreased.
Flow values of the Badfish Creek have been increased substantially due to the diversion.
Limited flow measurements taken before the diversion indicate that the Q7 10 flow was
approximately 2 cfs. Since 1959, an average treated effluent flow of 41 cfs has been dis-
charged to the Badfish Creek.
5—3
-------
Anticipated flows to the Nine Springs plant are expected to average 50 MOD by the year
2000. (Appendix K, "Wastewater Flow Forecasts and Socioeconomic Trends", by DCRPC).
A statistical analysis of the Yahara River flows and the projected flow diverted to the
Badfish Creek indicated that continued diversion would have even greater impacts on low
flows in the Yahara River in the future. It is projected that the low flow in the Yahara River
affected by the diversion may be reduced to zero as often as once in two years. Such reduc-
tions in flow would obviously have severe impact on the waste assimilation capacity of the
River at Stoughton; the hydroelectric power generation potential at Dunkirk and Stebbins-
ville; and other beneficial use of the River in the affected area. In Appendix C, two methods
were discussed for augmentation of the flow in the Yahara River during critical periods. These
were the importation of groundwater from the Wisconsin River basin and the controlled
storage and release of water in the Madison Lakes. Of the two, it was felt the management
of the Madison Lakes was the more feasible.
The regulation and control of the water levels in the Madison Lakes could provide storage
for a sufficient volume of water to augment the low flows in the Yahara River during
critical periods. Such regulation must be compatible with other uses. Currently, the greatest
impacts on the use of the lakes (primarily recreational use) are felt when the water levels
are drawn down to levels such that the littoral regions of the lakes became quite shallow.
This makes operation of boats in these areas more difficult and hazardous at times. Also,
the resulting shallowness allows sunlight to penetrate to the bottom in the littoral regions,
possibly contributing to the nuisance weed and algal growth. Water level control would
maintain the water at higher levels than are currently practiced and thus help to alleviate
some of these problems as an added benefit. Any regulation of the lake levels would require
that the maximum levels be maintained below flood stage to prevent damage to low-lying
areas.
It is recommended that prior to the initiation of any flow augmentation program, a thorough
investigation be conducted regarding its need and impacts on the area. If it is determined
that low flow augmentation is required, the development of a detailed management plan
should include provisions for protection of the area's environment.
A study conducted on the hydraulic impacts of increased flow in the Badfish Creek is in-
cluded as Appendix H, "Hydraulics Report". The diversion of the Nine Springs plant effluent
to the Badfish Creek has significantly increased the average flow as noted above. The in-
creased flow may have contributed to some stream bank erosion, especially in the unchannel-
ized portion of the creek in Rock County.
It was determined, however, that the flood flows that were projected for the Badfish Creek
have not been, nor would the\ be significantly affected by the presence of the Nine Springs
plant effluent. The maximum recorded flow at the gauging station which had been maintained
by USGS (from 1956-1966) on the Badfish Creek was 871 cfs which occurred on January 13,
1960. At that time the Nine Springs plant discharge was averaging approximately 22.5 MOD
(35 cfs). This represented approximately 4 percent of the gauged flow. Table 5-2 shows
the anticipated 1, 2, 5 and 10 year flood flows at both the former USGS gauging station
location and at the mouth of the Badfish Creek compared to the projected year 2000 Nine
Springs discharge of 50 MOD (78 cfs).
5—4
-------
Table 5-2
Estimated Badfish Creek Flood Flow Values
Nine Springs Discharge
Flood Flow (cfs) (78 cfs) Percent of Total
Former USGS
Flood Gauging Station Mouth of USGS Gauging Mouth of
Frequency Location Creek Station Location Creek
1 year 308 458 34 21
2 year 468 738 20 12
5 year 678 1108 13 8
10 year 843 1388 10 6
While it cannot be denied that the effluent flow does contribute to the increase of the flood
flows, it should be noted that as the severity of the flood increases, the influence of the
effluent decreases.
The Badfish Creek flows through primarily agricultural or \acant lands. Inundation from
floods would be limited to those areas. Flooding, even at the higher flow values, would
do relatively little damage to structures along the creek. Appendix H, "Hydraulic Report",
includes data indicating that even for the once in ten year flood, no existing structures would
be inundated by waters from the Badfish Creek.
Farm management in the Badfish Creek basin is such that most areas subject to frequeni
flooding are utilized as pasture or are uncultivated. The impact of flooding on areas used
for these purposes is not significant. Dairy cows, horses or other stock can be temporarily
relocated to other pastures until flood waters recede. Relatively little land subject to frequent
flooding is planted in crops. Where crops have been planted in fields subject to flooding,
the amount of damage sustained by the crop will depend 01, the stage of crop growth and
the duration of flooding. Farmers who utilize any fields which are subject to flooding for
crops should be aware of the potential loss of a portion of the crop.
F. Water Uses
The evaluation of the present and projected effluent quality is presented in Section 3.05 of
this report and in more detail in Appendix F. As discussed, the recommended treatment
facilities would provide an effluent of sufficient quality to protect the water quality of the
Badfish Creek.
Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), suspended solids and ammonia-nitrogen loadings to
the creek would provide for the protection of water quahu for the various beneficial use<>
as outlined in "Water Quality Criteria" 1972. Modeling of the Badfish Creek, as presented
in Appendix I, "Water Quality Modeling, Analysis of Discharge Alternatives", indicated
that given the recommended degree of treatment, stream DO standards would be consistently
met. Dissolved oxygen levels would be maintained due to the treatment and removal of
oxygen demanding materials and the provision for aeration at the discharge facilities.
Paniculate matter would be removed by filtration.
5—5
-------
Sampling and analysis of the current Nine Springs plant effluent indicated that a number of
substances (certain heavy metals, pesticides) were present in concentrations exceeding the
suggested limits. It was also noted that several substances were present in even higher con-
centrations in streams not receiving the discharge from any sewage treatment plants such as
the upper Yahara River, Rutland Branch and Spring Creek. The beneficial use of these
streams has not been impaired. Indeed, one stream, the Rutland Branch was described as a
"pristine" stream and was found to contain many fish species generally regarded as relatively
intolerant of poor water quality (See Appendix D).
It was judged that the removal of these potentially toxic substances to the suggested con-
centrations could not be justified since the background levels in the area water ways were
already greater than the suggested limits. Even if total removal could be accomplished
through additional treatment, the receiving stream would still exceed the suggested limits.
The recommended treatment facilities would provide for the reduction of these substances
in the effluent during the filtration process since many of them have an affinity for parti-
culate matter which would be removed by the filtration. It was also recommended that a
source control program be initiated to identify and control the discharge of these sub-
stances prior to their entering the sewer system.
The recommendation for equalization of the effluent flow would accomplish the dual pur-
poses of reducing the peak loadings to the receiving stream of these substances and of
permitting the continued use of the existing pump station and pipeline as was described
earlier.
G. Water Quality Management
The proposed actions would result in a substantial improvement of the water quality of the
Badfish Creek. The goals and objectives of the Facilities Planning Advisory Committee in-
cluded the provision that the recommended treatment and discharge strategy would protect
the receiving stream water quality. In the case of the Badfish Creek, this was taken to mean
the water quality prior to diversion of the Nine Springs effluent. State and Federal regula-
tions also call for the protection and improvement of water quality such that higher beneficial
use of the waterways become possible and that current stream standard variances will be no
longer needed.
The \vater quality of Badfish Creek has been monitored by MMSD since 1955, two years
prior to the diversion of the Nine Springs plant effluent. As discussed in Appendix A, the
Badfish Creek has shown a marked decrease in water quality subsequent to diversion. The
implementation of the recommended treatment facilities is expected to produce an effluent
which would substantially meet the goals and objectives of the FPAC and the State and
Federal regulations. The results of the sampling and analysis cf potential receiving streams,
including Badfish Creek, is discussed in Appendix F. It was found that each of the four
potential receiving streams retained for intensive evaluation contained background levels
for several contaminants in excess of the limits set for waters to be utilized for potable water
supply. The proposed treatment facilities would reduce the levels of these contaminants in
the effluent below those found in the streams. However, the levels in the effluent would not
be low enough to reduce the background levels to the required values for use as a potable
water suppK.
H. Air Quality
CH2M HILL reports that some complaints have been received regarding odors eminating
from the Nine Springs plant in the past.
5—6
-------
The proposed treatment facilities would greatly reduce or completely eliminate the existing
sources of odor production (headworks, gravity thickeners and grit dump). Another source
of odors at the Nine Springs Plant has been the sludge storage lagoons.
The improved treatment would remove most paniculate matter and reduce oxygen demand-
ing substances in the effluent. Consequently, odors resulting from the deposition of solids
in the receiving stream and the formation of septic conditions in the receiving stream would
no longer present a problem.
I. Land Use
At the Nine Springs plant, additional land would be required to construct the recommended
treatment facilities. The MMSD currently owns significant acreage at the Nine Springs plant
location, but the acquisition of additional land has been recommended for the implementa-
tion of the recommended facilities. Final siting of the treatment facilities would have to be
made during the preparation of the final design.
In Volume II, "Wastewater Treatment Systems Report", CH2M HILL evaluated the land
use in the vicinity of the plant. It was noted that encroachment of residential, commercial
and industrial activities have brought land use activities not fully compatible with a waste-
water treatment plant within relatively close proximity to the plant. It was recommended
that consideration be given to revising existing land use zoning in the vicinity of the Nine
Springs plant such that further encroachment would be prevented. By preventing any add-
itional development close to the plant site, potential problems resulting from mcompatability
of neighboring land uses would be avoided.
The discharge of the treated effluent to the Badfish Creek would have a continued impact
on the land use in areas adjacent to the effluent ditch and stream. As discussed earlier,
there have been concerns raised regarding the safety of children and localized fogging.
Recommended fencing of the ditch in the immediate area of existing residential develop-
ment would alleviate this problem. Again, it would be proposed that some consideration be
given to revisions in zoning to prevent possible further encroachment of development too
close to the effluent ditch. The fogging problem is basically a natural phenomenon which
may have been aggravated to some extent by the discharge of the Nine Springs effluent.
The recommended equalization facilities would help to alleviate this problem.
No changes have been recommended regarding land use or zoning in areas adjacent to the
Badfish Creek itself. Improved effluent treatment would provide for the improvement of
the water quality in the Creek. Downstream land owners have expressed concern regarding
the degradation of the water quality and increased flooding resulting from the diversion of
the Nine Springs plant effluent to the Creek. The implementation of the proposed treatment
would provide an effluent capable of meeting suggested water quality levels except as dis-
cussed previously.
Concerns regarding the flooding of lands adjacent to the Creek being greatly increased by
the discharge of effluent appear to be unjustified. It is undeniable that average daily flows
in the Creek have increased significantly. However, the projected natural flows associated
with floods of various recurrence periods as shown earlier, are much larger even than the
projected average Nine Springs plant discharge (50 MOD in the year 2000). Therefore,
the proposed discharge to the Badfish Creek should have negligible impacts on land use due
to increased flooding.
5—7
-------
J. Biology
The water quality required to protect fish and aquatic life was given consideration in the
development of the degree of treatment to be provided. Review of available data regarding
suggested water quality criteria needed to protect the water quality and environment indicated
that protection of fish and aquatic life limits were generally more restrictive than limits for
other uses such as: recreation, livestock watering and even as a source for drinking water
supply. Where other uses had more restrictive limits than those for fish and aquatic life, then
they were considered instead.
Toxic effects on the fish and aquatic species may be manifested in a variety of ways. Sub-
stances such as cadmium, mercury, lead, copper and others may interfere with normal life
functions such as respiration, digestion, or reproduction. Shock loading may result in the
nearly immediate death of all individuals. Sub-lethal concentrations may not result in any
immediate effects but may accumulate in body tissue to be transmitted to species higher in
the food chain.
Studies conducted as a part of the Facilities Plan evaluated the fish, algae and macroinverte-
brate populations of the Badfish Creek, Rutland Branch and the Yahara River at various
locations, (see Appendixes D and E). It was noted in these appendixes that the species
presently found in the Badfish Creek are typically those found in water of poor quality.
It was concluded in these reports that if the water quality of the creek were to be improved
(i.e. reduction of nutrient, BOD, and suspended solids loadings, etc.) then species found in
the Badfish Creek and even in the Yahara River would probably improve also.
The proposed treatment facilities would provide advanced treatment to the influent waste-
water of the Nine Springs plant BOD and ammonia removal would reduce the loading of
oxygen demanding materials discharged to the receiving stream. Modeling of the Badfish
Creek (Appendix I) has shown that with the proposed degree of treatment, the dissolved
oxygen le-.el in the creek would be maintained at all times above 5 mg/1 during Q7 10 flows
and at an average of 6 mg/1 or higher during other periods.
The reduction of potentially toxic materials in the effluent is best accomplished through the
recommended source control program which would be aimed at prevention of the discharge
of these substances to the sewer system. The proposed equalization facility would eliminate
peak loadings to the receiving stream. Disinfection of the effluent would reduce the
potential of public health hazards by the destruction of pathogenic organisms. The utilization
of breakpoint chlorination would provide the higher level of ammonia removal required
for the protection of the creek and provide for the inactivation of viruses. Dechlorination
is then recommended to avoid the potential problems of chlorine toxicity.
K. Environmentally Sensitive Areas
Areas with significant environmental sensitivity include wetlands, prairie lands and unique
geological formations. Many of these areas have been inventoried and listed by the Scientific
Areas Preservation Council of the WDNR.
The proposed treatment facilities would be constructed on lands immediately adjacent to
the existing treatment units. Discharge to the Badfish Creek would utilize the existing pipe-
line and discharge point and not require the disturbance of any additional land areas.
5—8
-------
The proposed actions should not constitute any threat to the types of areas mentioned above.
The proposed abandonment of a significant portion of the existing sludge storage lagoons
as discussed in Volume III, would eventually result in the return of over 100 acres of the
Nine Springs wetlands to its original condition, a complete reversal of the trend of drainage
and consequent loss of wetland areas in the past.
L. Aesthetics and Recreation
The aesthetic qualities and recreational opportunities outlined in Section 2.13 are important
to the quaity of life enjoyed by the residents and visitors of the study area.
The diversion of the Nine Springs effluent to the Badfish Creek has resulted in the degradation
of its water quality, especially in the upper reaches. The presence of excessive weed and algal
growth has been, at least in part, contributed to by the nutrient loading of the Nine Springs
effluent. As a result, fishing and other recreational utilization of the Badfish Creek has
dwindled to negligible use in recent years.
The implementation of the proposed actions would provide an effluent of sufficient quality
to permit the aesthetic enjoyment and recreational utilization of the Badfish Creek to be
regained. Dissolved oxygen levels would be consistently maintained at or above 5 mg/1.
Suspended solids, floatable solids, pathogenic organisms and other parameters which might
have an effect on the full use of the creek would be maintained within recommended limits.
M. Energy
The implementation of the proposed treatment facilities will require a substantial increase
in the consumption of electrical power needed to operte the additional pumps, motors and
other miscellaneous equipment included in the advanced treatment recommendations.
Anticipated increases in flow will also account for some of the increased power usage. Power
requirements for effluent pumping will increase only as the total flov, increases since the
recommended discharge point is the same as at present.
Present power consumption (1975 data) for wastewater treatment at the Nine Springs plant
was estimated to be 5.5 million KWH. Anticipated additional power consumption required
for the year 2000 to treat the flow of 50 MGD is estimated to be 28.3 million KWH, an in-
crease of 515%. As stated above, future power consumption for pumpage to Badfish Creek
v,ould increase only as the flow increases. Present power consumption for effluent pump-
ing has been estimated to be 8.2 million KWH. The additional 2000 year power usage for
discharge to be Badfish Creek is estimated to be 3.7 million KWH, an increase of 45% over
present usage.
The increase in energy consumption is required to provide the advanced wasiewater treat-
ment needed to protect the receiving stream environment. A comparison of the various al-
ternatives available which can provide the required degree of treatment indicated that the
proposed treatment facilities utilized the least electrical power. Other treatment alternatives
required up to 30 x 106 KWH for operation.
5—9
-------
N. Public Health
The proposed treatment facilities include disinfection of the effluent to destro\ pathogenic
organisms. Waterborne diseases such as typhoid, cholera and dysentery are caused by
bacteria associated with improper wastewater collection, treatment and disposal. Periodic
outbreaks of these and related diseases were not uncommon in the United States even into
the early 1900's. The use of chlorine for effluent disinfection was introduced in the late
1800's but did not come into common usage until the 1920's. The incidence of waterborne
diseases has decreased since then, to a point where no epidemic outbreaks of such
diseases has been reported in recent years in connection with a disinfected wastewater
effluent.
An investigation of chlorination and other methods of disinfection was conducted by CH2M
HILL and the results of the investigation are reported in Volume II. It was concluded
that the advantages of disinfection utilizing chlorination outweighed its disadvantages and
the advantages of the other disinfection methods. The use of breakpoint chlorination would
not only provide the required degree of disinfection but also would provide an effluent
polishing and backup ammonia removal capability to the treatment facility. It was also
judged (Volume I) that breakpoint chlorination should be recommended prior to discharge
to the Badfish Creek (as well as for the Yahara River and Rock River alternatives) for the
deactivation of viruses since the Q7 K, base flow is relatively small in comparison to the
effluent discharge. Toxicity problems attributable to residual chlorine would he removed
with the proposed dechlorination facilities.
O. Historical and Archeological Sites
There are 26 sites currently included on the National Register of Historic Places in Dane
County. The majority (21) of these are located within the City of Madison, with the others
located at various places around the County. There are none located at the existing Nine
Springs Wastewater Treatment Plant location. In Rock County, six sites have been designated
for the National Register of Historic Places. One of these1, the hamlet of Cooksville, con-
tains several excellent examples of the homes built during the early settlement of the area.
This entire hamlet has been designated as an historic district.
The proposed receiving stream, Badfish Creek, passes a quarter mile to the north of
Cooksville. Hydraulic modeling of the Badfish Creek (Appendix I) indicated that the floods
with a 10 year recurrence period would not affect any existing structures in the hamlet. As
noted earlier, higher flood flows (those with greater intervals between anticipated recurrence)
are influenced less and less by the discharge from the Nine Springs plant. Therefore, it is
felt that the potential for damage to the area from flooding due to the discharge of
effluents to the Badfish Creek is not significant.
The director of the State Historical Society of Wisconsin was contacted regarding the
locations of sites of known archeological importance. A data card file is maintained at the
Historical Society offices with information on the location, contents and condition of the
sites. The status of the sites, as to whether they have been inventoried by knowledgeable
researchers, is also maintained.
5—10
-------
It was indicated that continued use of the existing discharge pipeline and effluent ditch
would pose no threat to known or potential archeological sites. It was also indicated that
the use of the area immediately to the west of the existing treatment plant facilities would
not pose a threat to any known archeological sites. Prior to final siting and design of the
proposed treatment facilities, a field investigation should be conducted by a qualified
individual in order to insure that there are no areas of archeological interest present.
If, however, during construction of the proposed treatment facilities, any artifacts of an
historical nature are unearthed, the Historical Society should be notified immediately so
that proper disposition can be made.
Inquiry was also made to the State Historical Society regarding the use of existing agricultural
lands for the application of sludge (organic solids) as described in Volume III. There would
be no threat to any archeological site and no need for field inspection of any proposed site
providing the sludge applications were limited to existing agricultural lands. The use of only
such land's was recommended in Volume III.
5.02 Adverse Impacts Which Cannot be Avoided Should the Proposed Action be
Implemented
There are a number of adverse impacts which cannot be avoided should the proposed actions
be implemented. These impacts, however, can be minimized by careful planning, site investiga-
tion and program management.
A. Short Term Impacts
The proposed actions require that a substantial amount of construction be undertaken at the
Nine Springs Wastewater Treatment Plant site. During construction there would be
temporary increases in noise and dust levels in the immediate area resulting from construction
activities.
Due to the nature oi construction activities connected with the installation of new treatment
process units, associated facilities and service roads, there would be some amount of earth
excavation and backfilling required. Soil erosion and possible sedimentation in nearby
waterways is possible.
During construction, accepted measures such as adequate sue drainage and sheeting where
required should be utilized to minimize soil erosion impacts. If noise levels are such that
neighboring residents have cause for complaint, use of noise abatement equipment and
appropriate scheduling of particularly noisy activities should be implemented.
Most of the actual construction activities would be done on the plant site. However, there
may be relatively minor disruption of traffic patterns and inconvenience to the public,
especially along Raywood and Moorland Roads which run adjacent to the plant site.
As noted, such disruptions to traffic patterns and increased noise and dust levels should be
of only a short term nature. Once the proposed treatment facilities have been installed, there
should be no further impacts felt.
5—11
-------
Discharge to the Badfish Creek is also proposed. In response to the concerns raised regarding
the safety of children living near the existing effluent ditch in the Town of Dunn, it has
been proposed that portions of the ditch be fenced. The fencing of the ditch in areas close
to residential areas which have been created since the initial construction of the ditch should
alleviate these concerns.
Short term impacts resulting from the installation of the fencing would be similar to those
mentioned above. Since the installation would be more directly concerned with the ditch,
the potential impact of soil erosion due to required earthwork may be of more immediate
concern. Proper construction techniques should minimize these impacts.
B. Long Term Impacts
The installation of the proposed treatment facilities would mean that the land area required
for the facilities would not be available for other uses. The acquisition of additional land
areas at the Nine Springs plant has been recommended for the installation of the proposed
facilities and to provide a buffer zone around the facilities.
Improved wastewater treatment would provide an effluent which would substantially meet
the water quality criteria for various beneficial uses, as suggested in "Water Quality
Criteria, 1972", where practicable. Because of the high dissolved solids in the effluent, the
Badfish Creek would not meet the criteria as a source of potable water and it would be of
questionable quality as a source for irrigation water. The proposed improvement to treatment
would allow the reestabhshment of many beneficial uses of the Badfish Creek. The aesthetic
quality of the Creek would also be improved.
Presently, odors are sometimes emitted from the area of the Nine Springs plant and the
Badfish Creek due, in part, to the overloading of the existing treatment facilities. The
proposed treatment facilities would alleviate the current overloading of the Nine Springs
plant and provide sufficient capacity for future increased flow to be treated properly. This
\\ould also alienate the septic conditions which are, at times, found in the effluent ditch
and in the BadMin Creek, resulting in the emission of odors. However, there may be times
that odors might still be emitted from the area of the Nine Springs plant if a plant upset was
to occur.
Continued discharge to the Badfish Creek would mean that flow would continue to be
diverted around a portion of the Yahara River. As flow to the Nine Springs plant increases
in the future due to anticipated increased population and development, the impact on the
flow in the Yahara River would also increase to a point where there would be negligible
stream flow at certain times. The possible regulation of lake levels in Madison would allow
water to be released from the Lakes to augment the Yahara River flow during critical
periods thus, coi.'iteracting the impact of diversion.
5.03 Relationship Between Local Short Term Usage of the Environment and the
Maintenance and Enhancement of Long Term Productivity
Water quality of the proposed receiving stream would be substantially improved from its existing
condition upon imp emulation of the proposed actions. The quantity and quality of the flow
in the Badfish Crei.K would provide ample habitat for fish, especially the downstream areas
which have not be^-.. channelized in the past. That portion of the Creek in Rock County in
particular, has a \aneu ol habitat areas (pools, swift currents, overhanging stream bank
vegetation, etc.) wh^h would provide the areas for resting, feeding and reproduction required
to maintain a good t,-,h population.
5—12
-------
Improvement of water quality parameters including dissolved oxygen, suspended solids,
and other chemical and physical properties of the Nine Springs effluent would provide for a
gradual change in the quality of Badfish Creek allowing desirable fish species to make use of
the existing habitat areas in the Badfish Creek. In conjunction with the proposed improvements
to the treatment facilities, some changes should be made in the local agricultural community
farming practices to reduce nutrient loadings from non-point runoff.
With improved water quality in the Badfish Creek, other recreational uses of the Creek would
be possible, such as canoeing. The development of the receiving stream including provision for
adequate public access and removal of fences crossing the Creek might be considered in the
future.
5.04 Irreversible or Irretrievable Commitment of Resources Which Would be
Involved if the Proposed Actions Should be Implemented
The proposed actions would have the following irreversible or irretrievable commitments:
Z Additional land at the Nine Springs plant site would be dedicated to treatment facilities
Z Manpower and energy resources expended in the construction of the facilities would not
be available for other uses.
Z Diversion of water from a portion of the Yahara River basin would continue.
5—13
-------
SECTION 6 - PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
6.01 General
The general public has always expressed a strong interest and concern for the protection of the
water quality of the area's waters as evidenced by the number of committees, groups, councils
and other organizations which have met over the years regarding these problems. The actions
taken to alleviate some of the water quality problems have resulted, at least in part, as a response
to the input of these organizations.
6.02 Facilities Planning Advisory Committee
The Facilities Planning Advisory Committee (FPAC) was established in the fall of 1974 by the
MMSD to act as an advisory group to MMSD and the engineering firms engaged to complete
the Facilities Plan. Voting members of the FPAC include representatives from the MMSD,
Dane County Regional Planning Commission, Rock County Board, Rock Valley Metropolitan
Council and an independent private citizen. Also attending committee meetings as non-voting
members were representatives of the WDNR and the USEPA.
The committee met regularly during the course of the study to monitor the progress of the
study work and to offer advice to the engineers regarding areas of concern. The FPAC meetings
served as a time: for presentation of work progress, to interchange views on areas of concern,
and to identifx additional stud\ tasks. All committee meetings were open to the public and news
media. The location of the FPAC meetings was changed occasionally to permit easier attendance
by members of the public from various localities. Meetings generally \vere held in Madison, but
Janesville, Stoughton, Beloit and Rockford were the sites of other meetings.
6.03 Information Sources
During the course of this study, information was obtained from a number of sources.
Governmental agencies including Federal, State and local agencies provided much information
in the form of published reports and studies, unpublished file data and personal communication.
Other sources of information included personal contact with a number of individuals associated
with the L'niv ersity of Wisconsin who were able to furnish information on a number of specific
questions.
Librar> resources were also utilized to retrieve data not available from other sources. The
Madison Public Library and the Water Resources Department Library and Limnology Depart-
ment Library at the University of Wisconsin in particular had much valuable data.
6.04 Public Information Meetings
In November, 1974 two initial public information meetings were held to explain the organiza-
tion and goals of the FPAC as well as the conduct of the study. These meetings were held in
Madison and Janesville.
6—1
-------
Presentation of the alternatives being considered for the discharge of the effluent from the Nine
Springs plant and the procedures to be utilized in the preliminary evaluation of these alternatives
were made at meetings in June, 1975. These meetings again were held in Janesville and Madison.
After completion of the preliminary evaluation, results of that evaluation were presented at
meetings held during January, 1976, in Janesville and Madison. Also presented were the strong
and weak points of the alternatives which were to be retained for intensive study.
Public input at each of the meetings was received in both verbal and written form. Suggestions
and comments regarding the course of the study were noted and, where appropriate, were in-
corporated in the work plan. Due to the controversial nature of this particular project, it was
anticipated that the early opportunity for public participation in the project would facilitate the
implementation of the recommended alternative.
6.05 Public Hearings
On July 13 and 14, 1976, formal public hearings were held in Janesville and Madison, respective-
ly, to present to the public the recommended wastewater treatment and discharge alternative
and the environmental assessment of that alternative. Notice of the hearings was published in
several area newspapers prior to the hearing dates with the official notice published in the
Wisconsin State Journal on June 15, 1976. A copy of the notice is included at the end of this
Section. The hearing notice was mailed directly to individuals and organizations who had pre-
viously expressed a desire to be kept informed of projects relating to the environment in the
Dane-Rock County area. A list of ail of the individuals and organizations to whom notices of
the environmental assessment hearings were mailed is contained as Exhibit No. 3 of the July 13,
1976 hearing transcripts (Appendix Q, Volume VIII). Copies of the draft "Environmental
Assessment Statement" and "Summary Facilities Plan" were available for public review for a
period of thirty days prior to the hearings at several locations as indicated on the hearing notice.
The hearings were conducted by a representative of MMSD who presented a summary of the
past and present wastewater treatment in Madison. A brief description of the purpose and scope
of the Facilities Planning Study was also given.
Members of the engineering firm of O'Brien & Gere took part in the presentation and reviewed
the extensive investigations which had been made during the course of the Study. Included in
the presentation was a review of the preliminary screening of discharge alternatives, a description
of the methodology utilized in the intensive investigation of alternatives, the results of the
intensive evaluation and a discussion of the anticipated impacts of discharge to the recom-
mended receiving stream.
A presentation of the recommended treatment processes required to protect the water quality
of the receiving stream was given by a representative of the engineering firm of CH2M HILL.
A description of the various wastewater treatment processes evaluated which would provide
the required degree of treatment was also given.
Questions and comments from the public, relative to the Study, were accepted from those in
attendance. In addition, statements regarding the content and findings of the Study were read
into the record from those in attendance. Written comments were accepted at the MMSD offices
for a period of fifteen days following the hearings for inclusion as a part of the record.
6—2
-------
Statements given by Mr. David Holman, Environmental Protection Agency Director, Rock
County, Mr. Donald Hann, Director, Rock Valley Metropolitan Council and others expressed
a concern regarding the adequacy of the investigations and evaluation which had been done in
the preliminary screening and final evaluation of discharge alternatives.
It was questioned if the mathematical modeling was of sufficient sophistication to accurately
predict the impact of discharging the Nine Springs treatment plant effluent to the alternate
receiving streams under consideration. The modeling which was done during the preliminary
screening was intneded to give an indication of the dissolved oxygen (DO) levels which could be
anticipated to occur in the alternative receiving streams at various waste loading conditions.
The results of the preliminary modeling along with the environmental impact, reliability, flexi-
bility, legal constraints and costs of each alternative were adequately developed to be utilized in
the decisions made regarding the reduction of alternatives to five for further intensive evaluation.
An extensive dissolved oxygen mathematical modeling effort was made on the Badfish Creek,
Yahara and Rock Rivers. These three streams included four of the five alternatives which had
been retained for intensive evaluation. The fifth, the Wisconsin River, was also subject to addi-
tional modeling during the intensive evaluation, although, due to a lack of sufficient water
quality data, the modeling was not calibrated as well as the other three streams. The final
modeling included data concerning point source loading, nonpoint source loading, stream
flow, climatic conditions and other pertinent data. It is fell that the degree of sophistication
included in the final modeling provided an adequate prediction of the impact of the proposed
discharge to the final alternative sites.
Mr. Donald Hann indicated that he felt that cost and environmental biases were included in the
evaluation of the Badfish Creek discharge alternative. He had requested, earlier in the evaluation
process, that the Badfish Creek be considered in its prediversion (1958) condition when evaluat-
ing the potential environmental impacts of discharge to this stream. This was done to the
extent that the Badfish Creek was evaluated based upon no MMSD discharge to the Badfish
Creek.
Mr. Hann had also requested that the cost of the existing force main, which currently conveys
the effluent from the Nine Springs treatment plant to the Badfish Creek, be discounted in
estimating the costs of discharge to the Badfish Creek. Federal regulations regarding 201
Facilities Plans specifically requires that "sunk" costs for existing equipment \vhich can be
utilized in the future be credited toward the recommended plan. Therefore, in the costs shown
in the Facilities Plan, the cost estimates for the Badfish Creek alternative do not include a cost
for the construction of a new pipeline. Subsequent to the public hearings, a comparison was
made to see what effect the inclusion of the cost for a new pipeline would have on the cost ratings
of the final five alternatives. Even vvith the cost of a new pipeline included, the Badfish Creek
alternative had the least present worth of the final alternatives. If in the final evaluation (Table
8-19 of the Facilities Plan Summary) the cost factor was eliminated, the Badfish Creek alter-
native would still have been the most favorable alternative.
Mr. David Holman stated three major environmental concerns of Rock County as follows:
1. "The reduction ot water quality from prediversion water quality in the Badfish Creek,
Yahara and Rock Rivers."
2. "The reduction of assimilative capacity and dilution water for diluting toxic and hazardous
waste and organic waste loads."
3. "The reduction of low flow in the upper Yahara water basin if low flow augmentation
cannot be implemented and there is no implementation plan adopted at the present time."
6—3
-------
It is granted that a reduction of water quality in Badfish Creek and Yahara River and to a small
extent the Rock River has occurred with secondary effluent being discharged to the Badfish
Creek. However, with the proposed advanced treatment, the proposed continued discharge to
Badfish Creek with a much higher degree of treatment will have much less effect on the
receiving stream. It is projected that the goals and objectives, as adopted by the Facilities
Planning Advisory Committee and MMSD, will be substantially met. The only beneficial use
that the receiving stream cannot be used for is as a source of potable water supply and possibly
for irrigation purposes. Both are due to the high dissolved solids present in the effluent that
cannot economically be removed at present. However, there is no demand for the receiving
stream as a source of potable water supply and the only time that it would have a demand for
irrigation would be in cases of extreme drought.
It is projected, with the recommended treatment and source control program, the dissolved
solids in the effluent will be the only constituents that will prevent the use of the receiving streams
for all beneficial uses specified in Water Quality Criteria, 1972.
The characteristic of the Badfish Creek water in terms of phosphorus, nitrates, dissolved
solids and flow will be greater than prediversion conditions. These increases would be much
less in the Yahara River and negligible in the Rock River. The only time that there would be
noticeable increases in the Rock River would be during Q7 10 flow conditions. Even under
present discharge conditions, there is no noticeable difference, on an annual or summer average
basis, between the MMSD monitoring stations on the Rock River above and below the con-
fluence with the Yahara River in terms of nitrogen, phosphorus, suspended solids and BOD5
concentrations.
With respect to the assimilative capacity of the receiving stream expressed by Mr. Holman and
Mr. Hann, the mathematical modeling that was done shows that increasing the discharge to the
Badfish Creek with the same effluent quality as that projected, will result in a greater dissolved
oxygen in the stream. Therefore, more effluent with the same projected quality could be dis-
charged without reducing the assimilative capacity of the stream.
With respect to toxic and hazardous wastes, a 12 hour equalization facility has been recom-
mended to equalize and dilute possible slug loads of these materials before being discharged.
The equalization facility and the recommended source control program should prevent the
discharge of toxic and/or hazardous wastes to the receiving stream in concentrations harmful
to the environment.
The reduction of flow in the upper Yahara River as a result of wastewater diversion has been
addressed in Appendix C, Volume IV. As stated in Mr. Holman's statement, an implementation
plan has not been adopted at the present time. This is correct but it will take time to adopt an
implementation plan since there are several governmental units which need to become involved to
develop and adopt a comprehensive low flow augmentation plan. It was recommended that the
effects of diversion on the low flow be defined more closely before adopting any low flow aug-
mentation plan. Further study is required in this area. It should be pointed out that there are at
present, WDNR regulations requiring an operator of a dam structure on a navigable waterway
to pass 25 percent of the seven day low flow with a two year recurrence (Q7 2).
6—4
-------
It was also stated by Mr. Holman that additional treatment to that proposed would be required
for discharging to the Badfish Creek. The additional treatment suggested by Mr. Holman con-
sists of carbon adsorption, stabilization lakes with microscreening and/or precipitation of sus-
pended solids and in-stream aeration. The evaluations performed as part of the Study showed
that the recommended additional treatment and proposed discharge is the most cost effective
treatment and discharge system to meet the required stream standards. It was pointed out that
if carbon adsorption becomes a requirement at a later date because of more stringent effluent
requirements due to changes in stream standards, it can be added to the treatment plant. The
addition of stabilization lakes would create DO problems in the receiving stream due to algal
growth in the stabilization lake. The in-stream aeration suggested by Mr. Holman would alleviate
the DO problems only in the vicinity of the in-stream aerator. It was presented in the Study that
there would not probably be any additional algal growth in the Yahara or Rock Rivers resulting
from MMSD discharge to Badfish Creek since the nitrogen and phosphorus level in the two
Rivers, from sources other than sewage effluent, is greater than what would be required for
algal growth. Therefore, nutrient removal was not recommended. Nutrient removal should be
considered at such time as other sources of nutrients can be controlled.
Mr. Robert Schoenbeck, representing the City of Madison, read into the record a resolution
endorsing and supporting the recommended treatment and discharge system. The resolution
had been passed b> the City of Madison's Common Council and signed by Mayor Paul R.
Soglin. Mr. Schoenbeck expressed a concern that the costs should be kept down and that extra
facilities should not be added, as suggested by Mr. Holman, for good measure without actual
need for such facilities being shown.
Mr. Robert Meyer, who is a farmer through uhose land the Badfish Creek flows and who is
also a Supervisor on the Board in the To\vnship of Rutland, expressed great concern over odor,
erosion and flooding problems and a lack of brush and iree cutting along the Badfish Creek in
Dane County. Mr. Lyman Anderson, State Representative from the 47th Assemblv District,
through whose District the Badfish Creek flows, stated that everything that Mr. Meyer said
was justifiable. Both gentlemen expressed a concern that everything recommended might not
be done. Also, they both suggested that downstream farmers should be included among the
MMSD commissioners.
Subsequent to the hearing, a representative of O'Brien & Gere visited the farms of four Rutland
Township farmers along the Badfish Creek. Also, three MMSD staff members canoed the
effluent ditch and Badfish Creek from Highway B to Cooksville to see what work was necessar>
to clear the effluent ditch and Badfish Creek of trees and brush.
As a result of the two investigations, the following is recommended:
A. Stabilize the banks of the Creek in the areas identified in the trip reports of MMSD and
O'Brien & Gere staff as soon as possible to prevent further deterioration of banks of the
critical areas identified therein.
B. More extensive brushing and weed cuttings, than have been done in the past, should be
accomplished this fall and/or winter and continued on an annual basis to prevent a build
up of brush along the banks and debris from accumulating as at present.
C. All property owners along the Badfish Creek, in the improved sections, should be noti-
fied of the amount of work to be done. They should be kept informed, on a yearly basis,
of the work that is scheduled for that year or any other planned improvements in the
future.
6—5
-------
D. Annual inspections of the Creek should be made to evaluate its condition and to schedule
the work to be done.
E. A detailed survey and evaluation of the entire Badfish Creek should be made in conjunction
with the design of improvements and advanced treatment facilities at the Nine Springs
plant. The survey and evaluation should establish the requirements to eliminate any major
potential or existing maintenance problems.
It should be noted that the odor problems reported by Messrs. Meyer and Anderson should be
minimized once the Fifth Addition is completed and completely eliminated once the recommended
advanced treatment is completed.
A petition signed by land owners in the Town of Rutland, who have land adjoining the present
Badfish Creek Drainage District, was received opposing any increase in discharge to the Badfish
Creek for the following reasons:
1L. The present ditch is not properly maintained
Z The water presently being discharged is not adequately treated
Z There are odors from the Creek
1- The land adjacent to the Badfish Creek has decreased in value
It is projected that the concerns raised by the farmers adjoining Badfish Creek will be minimized
once the Fifth Addition is completed and eliminated once the proposed advanced treatment is
completed.
Written comments were received from Mr. G. H. Teletzke, President of Zimpro, Inc.
Mr. Telezke presented calculations and evaluations of the cost comparison of the various
processes evaluated for nitrification of the effluent. His evaluation indicated that the Zimpro
biophysical system was the most cost effective treatment system.
CH2M HILL Engineers reviewed the issues raised by Zimpro, Inc. in their written comments
of July 26, 1976. A re-evaluation was done by CH2M HILL as a result of Zimpro's comments.
This re-evaluation indicates that the cost analysis performed by Zimpro is incorrect.
Nitrification with rotating biological contactors is the most cost effective treatment process
evaluated for the Nine Springs plant as presented in Volume II.
6—6
-------
fHE MADISON METROPOLITAN SEWERAGE DISTRICT WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND DISCHARGE SYSTEM
Assessment
The recommended discharge loca-
tion for the treated wastewater from
the Madison Metropolitan Sewerage
District is the present site on the
Eadfish Creek. The advanced waste
treatment alternative recommended
to provide protection for the receiv-
ing stream includes activated sludge
followed by rotating biological con-
tactors, filtration, and other related
processes. Detailed information re-
garding these recommendations and
their possible impacts on the en-
vironment will be presented at this
hearing.
JULY 13,1976
A final public hearing on the environmental assessment of the
future wastewater treatment and discharge recommended for
MMSD will be held on Tuesday, July 13, 1976 at the Rock
County Courthouse in Janesville at 8 p.m.
Rock County Courthouse — 51 South Main Street. main floor. County Board
Meeting Room
JULY 14,1976
And on Wednesday, July 14, 1976 in Bolz Auditorium in
Madison at 8 p.m.
Bolz Auditonum — rwo blocks south of Regent Street at corner ot Brooki
and Mound Streets.
PUBLIC TESTIMONY INVITED
Interested persons, groups and agencies are invited to hear this
discussion and to give public testimony on the environmental
and technical aspects of the project. Also, written testimony
will be accepted for 15 days following the public hearing and
should be addressed to:
Mr James Nemke
Madison Metropolitan Sewerage District
104 N First Street
Madison, WI 5T04
A record of all public testimony will be submitted as part of
the environmental assessment statement to the United States
Environmental Protection Agency. Copies of the environ-
mental assessment statement can be reviewed at the following
locations-
PUBLIC LIBRARIES
Beloit College Milton
Belvidere
Edgerton
Evansville
Janesville
1 Iniversity of
(Memorial Union)
TOWN HALLS
Dunn
Fitchburg
Fulton
Rutland
Stoughton
AND AT THE OFFICES OF THE FOLLOWING-
Municipal Reference Service. City County Building'
Director of Public Works. Madison. CiiyCountv Building
City Engineer, Madison. City County Building
Cit\ Clerk Madison Citv County Building
DaneCounu Clerk Madison, Citv Countv Building
Rock Countv Clerk Janesville Countv Court House'
Department of Natural Resoun.es, Southern District
Roik Vallev Metropolitan Council, -401 W State St , Rocktord'
DaneCounu Regional Planning Commission, 14 So Carroll Madison
Madison Metropolitan Sewerage District, 104 M First St . Madison'
() Brit-n and Gere Engineers silOW Wingra Dr . Madison'
( lUM Hill tngmeerx 2>;2V \ MaifairRd Milwaukee
\pptrnclixts jsMKijttd »nh tnvimnmc-nul ^ssessmeni Suicmcni j\ jiljblt tor review
This is an opportunity for the public to learn the details for
this important pollution control project, and to present their
views regarding its environmental and technical aspects.
MADISON METROPOLITAN
SEWERAGE DISTRICT
N-l
-------
REFERENCES
Air Pollution in Wisconsin with Special Consideration of Madison and Dane County. League
of Women Voters. 1970.
Air Quality Data Report, 1974. Madison: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. 1975.
American Public Health Association, American Water Works Association, and Water Pollution
Control Federation. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater.
13th Edition. New York: American Public Health Association. 1971.
Annual Report, 1972. Madison: Madison Department of Public Health. 1972.
Bedford, B. L., E. Zimmerman, and J. H. Zimmerman. The Wetlands of Dane Count},
Wisconsin. Madison: Dane County Regional Planning Commission. 1974.
Bertucci, J., C. Lue-Hing, and D. R. Zenz. Inactivation of Viruses in AnaerobicaUy Digesting
Sewage Sludge. Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago. May, 1973.
Bertucci, J., C. Lue-Hing, D. R. Zen^, and S. J. Sedita. Studies on the Inactivation of Four
Enteric Picornaviruses in Anaerobically Digesting Sludge. Metropolitan Sanitary District
of Greater Chicago. August, 1974.
Blue Book, 1975. Madison: Wisconsin Legislatne Bureau. 1975.
Brynildson, O. M. and J. W. Mason. Influence of Organic Pollutants on the I)ensit> and Pro-
duction of Trout in a Wisconsin Stream. Technical Bulletin No. 81. Madison: Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources. 1975.
Burrous, W., R. M. Le\\art, and J. W. Rippon. The Textbook of Microbiology — The
Pathogenic Micro-organisms. 19th Edition. Philadelphia, Pa.: W. B. SaundersCo. 1968.
Chane>, R. L. Crop and Food Chain Effects of Toxic FJements in Sludges and F^f fluents. Pro-
ceedings of Joint Conference on Recycling Municipal Sludges and Effluents on Land.
Champaign, Illinois. 1973.
Chaney, R. L., M. C. White, and P. \V. Simon. Plant Lptake of Heavy Metals from Sewage
Sludge Applied to Land. Proceedings of National Conference on Municipal Sludge
Management and Disposal. Anaheim, Cal August, 1975.
Chronological History of Sludge Disposal. Madison Metropolitan Sev-erage District. 1975
Climates of the States — Volume 1. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Port
Washington, Nev» York: Water Information Center. 1974.
Cline, D. R. Geology and Groundwater Resources of Dane County, Wisconsin. Waier Supply
Paper 1779-U. L'.S. Geological Survey. Washington, D.C. 1965.
Cotter, R. D., et al. Water Resources of Wisconsin, Rock-Fox Basin. Hvdrologic Imestiganons
Atlas HV360. U.S. Geological Survey. Washington, D.C. 1969.
County Park and Open Space Plan. Madison: Dane Counts Regional Planning Commission, n.d.
R-l
-------
Dane County Interim Soil Survey Report. Soil Conservation Service. U.S. Department of
Agriculture. 1975.
Dean, R. B. and J. E. Smith, Jr. The Properties of Sludges. Proceedings of Joint Conference
on Recycling Municipal Sludges and Effluent on Land. Champaign, Illinois. 1973.
Dickinson, W. D. Handbook of Amphibians and Turtles of Wisconsin. Milwaukee Public
Museum. 1965.
Ditmars, R. L. Reptiles of North America. Doubleday Co. 1936.
Douglas, N. B., Historical Surveyor, Rock County Historical Society. Personal communication.
October, 1975.
Eddy, S., and T. Surber. Northern Fishes. Newton Centre, Mass.: Charles T. Branford Co. 1960.
Endangered Animals in Wisconsin. Madison: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. 1973.
Environmental Report — Lake Koshkonong Nuclear Power Plant. Wisconsin Electric Power
Company. 1975.
Fassett, N. Grasses of Wisconsin. University of Wisconsin Press. 1951.
Flood Plain Information, Turtle Creek, Rock Count>, Wisconsin. U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers. 1967.
Floods on Rock River in Northern Rock Count>, Wisconsin. U.S. Geological Survey. 1970.
Forest Trees of W isconsin. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. 1974.
Geotechnical Evaluation of Sludge Lagoon Embankments. CH2M HILL Engineers. Corvallis,
Oregon. 1975.
Greene, C. W. The Distribution of Wisconsin Fish. State of Wisconsin Conservation Commis-
sion. 1935.
Guide to Dane Countj Parks. Dane County Park Commission, n.d.
Hilsenhoff, W. L. Aquatic Insects of Wisconsin. Technical Bulletin No. 89. Madison: Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources. 1975.
Hindall, S. M. and E. L. Skinner. Water Resources of Wisconsin, Pecatonica-Sugar River Basin.
Hydrologic Investigations Atlas HA-453. U.S. Geological Surve>. Washington, D.C. 1973.
Hindall, S. M. and R. G. Borman. Water Resources of Wisconsin, Lower Wisconsin River
Basin. Hydrologic Investigations Atlas HA-479. U.S. Geological Survey. Washington, D.C.
1974.
Hine, R. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. Personal communication. October, 1975.
Hynes, H.B.N. The Enrichmenl of Streams. Presented at the Symposium on Eutrophication:
Causes, Consequences, Correctives. Madison, Wisconsin. 1967.
R-2
-------
Kirkham, M. B. "Disposal of" Sludge on Land: Effects on Soils, Plants, and Groundwater."
Compost Science, Volume 15, No. 2. 1974.
Klienert, S. J. and P. E. Degurse. Mercury Levels in Wisconsin Fish and Wildlife. Technical
Bulletin No. 52. Madison: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. 1970.
Konrad, J. G., S. J. Klienert, P. E. Degurse, and J. Ruhland. Surveys of Toxic Metals in
Wisconsin. Technical Bulletin No. 74. Madison: Wisconsin Department of Natural Re-
sources. 1974.
Lake Kegonsa, Dane County, Wisconsin. Working Paper No. 40, PB-239639. U.S Environ-
mental Protection Agency. 1974.
Land Uses in Dane County. Madison: Dane County Regional Planning Commission. 1972.
Land L'se Plan. Madison: Dane County Regional Planning Commission. 1973.
Lavuon. G. W. "The Madison Lakes Before and After Di\ersion." Algae and Metropolitan
Wastes. Technical Report No. W61-3. R. A. Taft Sanitary Engineering Center. 1960.
LeRoux. E. F. Geolog> and Groundwater Resources of Rock Countv, Wisconsin. L.S
Geological Survey. Washington, D.C. 1963.
Local Climatological Data, Annual Summan with Comparative Data, 1974, Madison,
V\ isconsin. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 1975.
Low-Flow Characteristics of Wisconsin Streams at Sewage Treatment Plants. U.S. Geological
Sur\e\. 1974.
L\nam, B. T.. C. Lue-Hmg, R. R. Rimkus, and F. C. Neil. The Utilization of Municipal
Sludge in Agriculture. Presented at United States''Soviet Seminar on "Handling, Treatment
and Disposal of Sludges." Moscow, U.S.S.R- Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater
Chicago. 1975.
Madison Metropolitan Sewerage District. File Data.
Manson. R. J. and C. A. Merritt. '"Land Application of Liquid Municipal Vv'astewater
Sludges." Journal of Water Pollution Control Federation. Volume 47, No. 1. 1975.
Map of Historic and Scenic Sites of Dane Count>. Dane Coum> Historical Societs . n.cl.
Martin. L. The Phvsical Geographv of Wisconsin. Um\ersit\ ot Wisconsin Press. 1965.
McKec, J. E. and \\ . H. Wolf. Water Qualitv Criteria. California State Water Pollution Control
Board. 1963.
Mcl.eod, R. L, A Digital Computer Model for F.stimative Hydrologic Changes in the Aquifer
S>>tem in Dane Count}, Wisconsin. Open File Report "75-304. U.S. Geological Sur\e\.
Washington, D.C. 1975.
Melsted, S. W. Soil-Plant Relationships (Some Practicable Considerations in Waste Manage-
ment). Proceedings of Joint Conference on Rec\ cling Municipal Sludges and Effluents on
Land. Champaign, Illinois. 1973.
R-3
-------
Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes. U.S. Environmental Protection Aaency.
1974.
National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering. Water Quality Criteria, 1972.
L'.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1972.
National Register of Historic Places in Wisconsin, The. State Historical Society of Wisconsin.
1975.
Nine Springs Sewage Treatment Works Sludge Disposal Study. Roy F. Weston Engineering
Company. 1974.
Number of Inhabitants, United States Summary. Bureau of the Census, U.S. Department of
Commerce. Washington, D.C. 1971.
Pelczar, M. J. and R. D. Reid. Microbiology. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, inc.
1968.
Pheasant Branch Watershed — Fish and Wildlife Resources Inventory. U.S. Department o<~
Agriculture. 1975.
Quality of Madison's Air, The. Engincu s and Scientists for Social Responsibility. 1970.
Report on Sewage Treatment Additions to the Nine Springs Sewage Treatment \\orks. Greelex
and Hansen Engineers. 1971.
Rock County Knvironmental Inventory. Rock Valley Metropolitan Council. 1975.
Rock County Official County Parks and Highway Map. Rock County Park and Conservation
Commission. 1974
Rock River Basin, The. Madison: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. 1975.
Scott, \\ . B. and E. J Crossman. Freshwater Fishes of Canada. Bulletin 184. Fisheries Research
Board of Canada. 1973.
Smitn. Dr. J. \1. State Historic Preser\ation Officer. State Historical Society of \\ is^otisin.
Persona! communication. December, 1975.
Soil Survey of Rock County, Wisconsin. Soil Conservation Service. U.S. Department 01
Agriculture. 1974.
Son/ogm, W. ( . and G. F. Lee. "Nutrient Sources t'or Lake Mendota — 19"'2." Transactions
of Wisconsin Academy of Science. Arts and Letters. 1974.
"Summer Birds 01 the Arboretum." Arboretum News. Volume 18. No. 2. 1969.
Surface Water Resources of Dane County. Wisconsin Conservation Department. 1961.
Surface VS ater Resources of Rock County. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resource^. 970
\\aterQualitv of Badfish Creek, 1971. Harza Engineering Co. 1971.
Water Resources Data for Wisconsin. L .S. Geoloeicai Sur\e\. 1974.
R-4
-------
* Water Resources Task Group. A Technical Evaluation of Land Disposal of Wastewaters and
the Needs for Planning and Monitoring Water Resources in Dane County, Wisconsin.
Madison: Dane County Regional Planning Commission. 1971.
Waterways: 208 Areawide Waste Treatment Management Planning Work Program. Madison:
Dane County Regional Planning Commission. 1975.
Wildflowers of Wisconsin. Madison: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. 1973.
"Wildlife Resources of Wisconsin, The." Wildlife, People and the Land. 1970.
"Winter Birds at the Arboretum." Arboretum News. Volume 15, No. 1. 1966.
Wisconsin Registered Landmarks. State Historical Society of Wisconsin, n.d.
Wisconsin Trout Streams. Madison: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. 1974.
"Yahara River Flood Data." U.S. Geological Survey. Open File Report.
R-5
-------
U S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 5, Library (5PL-16)
230 S. Dearborn Street, Room
IL 60604
-------
s
5
H
m
TO
m
"D
r
-------
i o -=: 3fl 3
' -•• 3 0> < O O -"• ^< _J -
• o o o o ia o
0 -•• =1 — •
C rt- fP O O
-i. O r+ •
: c 33 ;u CD co
3- o o » o/ a
DOOH" £ 5O 70 *>
-o
m
o
o
c:
33
m
8
-------
C 1 fD C J" — "
"
r|^^^:i>~ac-,3»r-riG->cocaca<~>rocPC-,-ac.c
Or* O rT •—' -J • -•• O yr (
o -5 ce> O ~o zr o ;) ai n -( -irs:
d — ^c ci t" u ro j i: i?
O-OLi Z3--i;Q_tTl
a.- -• . a T 3 -• n 3
^J 33 33'a 33 33
^J CU O O —
3 3 1— —•
^30 O 0> fD
s
I §
o
c
en
2
OJ
l\>
-------
Gl
if
m*
a s -i
-< m ~
m z rn
tn -i (/)
Ci
c
-------
I 2
33 O
8 F
•I®
m
o
m
m x 33 c
0
3!
CD
c
rn
oo
(O
-------
CO
o
2 Z
m m
s s
O
33
m
CO
CD
03
-------
O O
W 3)
I O
"a
(/)
o
3
o
is
rn -n
33 o
T3 V
r~ rn
> o
-^
in
T)
>
Z
r~
o
z
o
:" Z z
«>- -i o
rn
c
33
m
o>
~J
-------
-- Q. g
H I
m >
m o
§i
15 - o ^ 2 <
m m
m
*
<
R
33
T) S
O O
*I
m J
'I
?§
> (7)
H m
1§
§
<
g
U)
a
<3
33
O
c.
m
en
m
CD
c
-------