c.
905D80101
' Water Division
m 230 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604
xvEPA
Environmental
Impact Statement
Bemidji Wastewater
Treatment System
Beltrami County
Minnesota
Draft
-------
905D80101
OR\FT E!WIRONME*jr\L IMPACT ST\rSMENT
3EMIOJI '/TC3 PESTER
COUNTY,
Prepared by the
UNITED
\ZWCY
REGION V
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS
and the
MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY
and
, I^CDRPOR^TSO
SO, ILLINOI3
August, 1930
ional Administrator
-------
SUMMARY
(X) Draft Environmental Impact Statement
( ) Final Environmental Impact Statement
US Environmental Protection Agency, Region V
230 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604
1. NAME OF ACTION
Administrative (X)
Legislative ( )
2. NEED FOR ACTION
The City of Bemidji is required by State and Federal regulations to
improve the quality of the effluent discharged from its wastewater treat-
ment plant (WWTP) to the Upper Mississippi River. The effluent phosphorus
contributes to the total loading of phosphorus to the Upper Mississippi
River Chain of Lakes downstream from Bemidji. These lakes (Wolf Lake, Lake
Andrusia, and Cass Lake) are within the Leech Lake Indian Reservation and
are utilized for recreational swimming, boating, hunting, fishing, and
ricing, and are an integral part of the local economy.
The uncontrolled discharge of phosphorus to the Mississippi River
downstream from Lake Bemidji during the period from 1956 to June 1978
contributed significantly to the enrichment of these lakes with phosphorus.
The addition of this critical nutrient has been linked directly to biolo-
gically over-productive conditions in the lakes (accelerated lake eutrophi-
cation). This condition has had a detrimental effect on the quality and
sport fisheries of these lakes, and has diminished their attractiveness
for water-based recreation. This has affected adversely the areas' recre-
ation-based economy.
In 1978, the City of Bemidji was required by the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency (MPCA) Board to provide for interim control of phosphorus at
11
-------
the existing WWTP and to relocate the point of discharge from the Missis-
sippi River downstream from the Lake Bemidji outlet to the inlet of Lake
Bemidji. This order was based on the Board's decision that the eutrophica-
tion problem should be reduced to the extent possible with interim measures
until a new WWTP with advanced phosphorus removal capability or a land
treatment system could be implemented. The improvement in the quality of
the downstream lakes since these improvements were implemented in June 1978
has been significant, as evidenced by 1979 water quality data.
An exceptionally large number of wastewater system alternatives have
been investigated during the past twelve years as potential solutions to
the problem of wastewater disposal at Bemidji. Land treatment of waste-
water has been considered by many as the best solution because it would
eliminate the direct discharge of effluent to the Upper Mississippi River
system. Land treatment proposals have been considered in detail at least
four times and have been rejected each time because of public controversy,
cost, and/or si.te limitations.
Six wastewater treatment system alternatives currently are being
considered. These alternatives were determined to represent the most
feasible options available to the City and were subjected to supplemental
facilities planning by the City's engineering consultant during 1979 and
1980.
3. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
The six wastewater treatment system alternatives considered herein as
active proposals include five conventional treatment systems and one land
treatment system. For each conventional alternative, two phosphorus treat-
ment options are addressed: advanced-secondary treatment to reduce the
effluent phosphorus concentration to 1.0 mg/1 and a tertiary treatment
option that would reduce the effluent phosphorus concentration to 0.3 mg/1.
iii
-------
Alternative 1
Alternative 1 proposes the construction of a new 2.0 million gallon
per day (mgd) WWTP at a site presently owned by the City that is adjacent
to the Mississippi River east of Lake Bemidji (about 2,000 feet downstream
from the Lake Bemidji outlet). Preliminary treatment would be provided at
a pumping station at the site of the existing WWTP in Bemidji prior to
pumping via a new force main to the new plant site. Either advanced-
secondary or tertiary phosphorus control would be provided and effluent
would be discharged directly to the Mississippi River adjacent to the site.
This alternative has a capital cost of $11,374,000 for the advanced-
secondary treatment option and $14,303,000 for the tertiary option. The
respective annual O&M costs are $431,000 and $539,000. This alternative
ranks second of six alternatives in terms of lowest cost.
Alternative 2
Alternative 2 proposes the construction of a new 2.0 mgd WWTP at the
site of the existing WWTP in Bemidji. Either advanced-secondary or ter-
tiary phosphorus control would be provided. The effluent would be pumped
via a new force main to the Mississippi River immediately downstream from
the Lake Bemidji outlet for discharge. The capital cost for the advanced-
secondary option is $11,649,000, and $14,578,000 for the tertiary option.
The annual O&M costs are $437,000 and $545,000, respectively. This alter-
native ranks third in cost of the six alternatives.
Alternative 3
This alternative proposes the construction of a new 2.0 mgd WWTP at
the site of the existing WWTP in Bemidji. Either advanced-secondary or
tertiary phosphorus control would be provided prior to discharge directly
to the inlet channel to Lake Bemidji adjacent to the plant site. The
capital cost for the advanced-secondary option is $9,975,000, and is
$12,904,000 for the tertiary option. The annual O&M costs are $417,000 and
$525,000, respectively. This alternative is the lowest in cost of the six
alternatives.
iv
-------
Alternative 4
Alternative 4 proposes the construction of a new 2.0 mgd WWTP at the
site of the existing WWTP in Bemidji. Either advanced-secondary or
tertiary phosphorus control would be provided prior to pumping the effluent
via a new force main to Grass Lake, northwest of Bemidji, for discharge.
The capital cost of the advanced-secondary option for this alernative is
$13,290,000, and is $16,219,000 for the tertiary option. The respective
annual O&M costs are $492,000 and $600,000. This alternative is the fifth
most expensive of the six alternatives.
Alternative 5
Alternative 5 proposes the construction of a new 2.0 mgd WWTP at a
site adjacent to Grass Lake. Raw wastewater would be subjected to
preliminary treatment at a new pumping station at the existing WWTP site
prior to being pumped via a new force main to the new WWTP. Advanced-
secondary or tertiary control of phosphorus would be provided and the
effluent would be discharged directly to the Lake. The capital cost for
the advanced-secondary treatment option is $12,932,000, and $15,861,000 for
the tertiary option. The respective annual O&M costs for the two options
are $492,000 and $600,000. This alternative ranks fourth of the six in
terms of lowest cost.
Alternative 6
This alternative proposes that the raw wastewater would receive
preliminary treatment at a new pumping station at the site of the existing
WWTP. From there it would be pumped via a new force main to
treatment/storage ponds in Section 16 of Eckles Township northwest of
Bemidji. The multi-celled ponds would be aerated and would provide the
equivalent of secondary treatment. Pond effluent would be applied to 1,170
acres of forest land via a solid-set irrigation system and to 250 acres of
cropland with a center-pivot irrigation system. The maximum application
rate to forest lands would be 24 inches/year at the 2.0 mgd design flow;
cropland irrigation would be on an "as needed" basis. Underdrainage would
-------
be required, which would be collected and discharged into open ditches.
The ditches would be excavated to convey underdrainage to established
waterways. The capital cost for this alternative is $24,457,000, which is
significantly higher than any of the other alternatives. The projected
annual O&M cost is $612,000.
4. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
Construction Phase
Major direct impacts from the construction activities involved with
each alternative primarily would be localized to the treatment plant sites,
the land treatment site area, and along force main rights-of-way. Noise,
fugitive dust, emissions from construction equipment, destruction of
surface vegetation, disturbance/displacement of wildlife, erosion and
runoff, conversion of land use, and the interruption of traffic flow that
would be associated with construction activity would create short-term
nuisance conditions in the areas adjacent to the construction work.
Alternative 3, which proposes no new force mains, offers the minimum
affected area and thus the minimum potential construction impact.
Alternatives 1 and 2, and 4 and 5, present similar potential effects.
Alternative 6 presents the potential for the maximum direct construction
impacts because of the significant land area involved.
The advanced-secondary treatment option of Alternative 3 would
require the least commitment of public capital of the six alternatives. It
would represent the minimum expenditure of Federal, State, and local funds,
representing the least financial impact to the public. The highest cost
alternative, Alternative 6, would provide the most short-term, construction-
related employment.
Operational Phase
The most significant operational phase effects of the alternatives are
related to the level of phosphorus loading reduction attainable in the
lakes downstream from Bemidji and the relative cost for treatment system
vi
-------
operation. Alternatives 4 and 5, which propose to discharge treated efflu-
ent to Grass Lake, and Alternative 6, which proposes to apply effluent to
forest and croplands, would provide the maximum reduction of point-source
phophorus loading to the downstream lakes. Even the increased level of
phosphorus reduction provided by these alternatives, however, is not enough
to reduce the total phosphorus loading rate to Wolf Lake and to Lake
Andrusia below the projected eutrophic rate. These alternatives are
sufficiently higher in cost compared to the other three alternatives to
warrant removing them from contention as viable alternatives.
The advanced-secondary option for Alternatives 1, 2, and 3 actually
would increase the total phosphorus loadings to the downstream lakes rela-
tive to the 1979 condition with interim phosphorus control (although the
effluent phosphorus concentration would be decreased from a 1979 average of
1.28 mg/1 to 1.0 mg/1, the flow would increase from about 1.3 mgd to 2.0
mgd by the year 2000, thus increasing the total load). The tertiary option
would provide for an additional increment of reduction in phosphorus
loading compared to the advanced-secondary option and the 1979 condition
(96% removal compared to 87% and 83%, respectively). The actual increased
benefit to water quality from the difference in phosphorus reduction cap-
ability of the two treatment options (16 pounds/day of P for the advanced-
secondary option compared to 5 pounds/day of P with the tertiary option)
cannot be predicted with any degree of accuracy. In comparison, the capi-
tal cost for tertiary treatment of wastewater phosphorus is $2.9 million
higher than for advanced-secondary treatment, and the annual operation and
maintenance cost is $108,000 higher ($310,000 higher in terms of equivalent
annual cost). The typical family of four at Bemidji is projected to pay
$5/month more in user fees for the tertiary treatment option than for the
advanced-secondary option.
vii
-------
5. SELECTED ACTION
Alternative 3, construction of a new WWTP at the site of the existing
plant in Bemidji with discharge to the inlet to Lake Bemidji, is the least
cost alternative from both an economic and environmental perspective.
Design of the plant to reduce effluent phosphorus to at least 1.0 mg/1
(advanced-secondary treatment) appears to be necessary from a water quality
perspective. Considering the objective to improve water quality in the
Upper Mississippi River Chain of Lakes to the maximum extent possible, the
tertiary treatment option (0.3 mg/1 P) may be justifiable. A final deci-
sion regarding the ultimate degree of phosphorus treatment at Bemidji will
be based on the public and agency comments on this Draft EIS; the findings
of the NPDES permit process to be conducted by the MPCA and its Board,
including MPCA's justification for phosphorus limits more stringent than
1.0 mg/1; and USEPA's Advanced Secondary Treatment (AST) review process.
The Final EIS, therefore, will reflect these considerations and will
indicate the selected wastewater system, including the selected phosphorus
removal option, for construction and operation at Bemidji.
viii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
COVER SHEET i
SUMMARY ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ix
LIST OF FIGURES xiii
LIST OF TABLES xiv
1.0. PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION 1-1
1.1. Introduction and Legal Basis for Action 1-1
1.2. Project History 1-5
1.3. EIS Process 1-10
1.4. EIS Issues 1-12
2.0. DISCUSSION OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES 2-1
2.1. Existing Wastewater Conveyance and
Treatment System 2-1
2.1.1. Existing Service Area 2-1
2.1.2. Flows 2-1-
2.1.3. Existing Treatment System 2-2
2.2. No Action Alternative 2-5
2.3. Identificaton of Alternative Wastewater
Treatment Systems 2-8
2.3.1. Design Factors 2-8
2.3.2. System Components 2-10
2.3.2.1. Flow and Waste Reduction 2-11
2.3.2.2. Collection System 2-13
2.3.2.3. Wastewater Treatment Processes. . . 2-14
2.3.2.4. Effluent Disposal 2-14
2.3.2.5. Sludge Treatment and Disposal . . . 2-16
2.3.3. Previously Considered Alternatives 2-18
2.4. Potential Wastewater Treatment Alternatives 2-26
2.4.1. Alternative 1 — New WWTP at Mississippi
River Site with Effluent Discharge to the
Mississippi River 2-26
2.4.2. Alternative 2 — New WWTP at Existing
Plant Site with Effluent Discharge to the
Mississippi River 2-30
2.4.3. Alternative 3 — New WWTP at Existing
Plant Site with Effluent Discharge to
Lake Bemidji 2-31
2.4.4. Alternative 4 — New WWTP at Existing
Plant Site with Effluent Discharge to Grass
Lake 2-32
2.4.5. Alternative 5 — New WWTP at Grass
Lake Site with Effluent Discharge to
Grass Lake 2-33
-ix-
-------
2.4.6. Alternative 6 — Land Treatment of
Wastewater on Forest Lands and Croplands
in Eckles Township 2-34
2.5. Comparison of Alternatives and Selection of a
Recommended Action 2-41
2.5.1. Comparison of Federal, State, and
Local Costs 2-41
2.5.2. Summary of Comparison of Environmental
Consequences of Alternatives 2-43
2.5.3. Conclusions 2-44
3.0. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 3-1
3.1. Natural Environment 3-1
3.1.1. Atmosphere 3-1
3.1.1.1. Climate 3-1
3.1.1.2. Air Quality 3-2
3.1.1.3. Noise 3-3
3.1.2. Land 3-3
3.1.2.1. Bemidji Area 3-3
3.1.2.2. Mississippi River WWTP Site .... 3-10
3.1.2.3. Existing WWTP Site 3-12
3.1.2.4. Grass Lake Site 3-12
3.1.2.5. Eckles Township Site 3-16
3.1.2.6. Existing WWTP to Mississippi
River Force Main Route 3-22
3.1.2.7. Lake Irving to Grass Lake
Force Main Route 3-22
3.1.2.8 Force Main Route to Eckles
Township Site 3-23
3.1.3. Water 3-23
3.1.3.1. Surface Water 3-23
3.1.3.2. Groundwater 3-38
3.1.4. Endangered, Threatened, and Rare Species. . . . 3-42
3.1.4.1. Federal Designation 3-42
3.1.4.2. State Designation 3-43
3.2. Man-made Environment 3-44
3.2.1. Economics 3-44
3.2.1.1. Income 3-44
3.2.1.2. Employment 3-47
3.2.2. Demographics 3-49
3.2.2.1. Past and Present Population .... 3-49
3.2.2.2. Future Population 3-52
3.2.3. Land Use 3-55
3.2.3.1. Existing Development Patterns. . . . 3-55
3.2.3.2. Projected Development 3-57
3.2.3.3. National Wild and Scenic
Rivers System 3-59
3.2.4. Public Finance 3-60
3.2.4.1. Revenues and Expenditures 3-60
3.2.4.2. Tax Assessments 3-61
3.2.4.3. City Indebtedness 3-61
3.2.4.4. User Fees 3-62
-x-
-------
3.2.5. Archaeological, Historical, and Cultural
Resources 3-62
3.2.6. Public Sentiment 3-63
4.0. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 4-1
4.1. Construction Impacts 4-1
4.2. Operation Impacts 4-2
4.2.1. General Discussion 4-2
4.2.2. Surface Water 4-2
4.2.2.1. Discharge of Treated Effluent
to Lake Bemidji 4-10
4.2.2.2. Discharge of Treated Effluent
to the Mississippi River
Downstream from Lake Bemidji. . . . 4-15
4.2.2.3. Discharge of Treated Effluent
to Grass Lake 4-15
4.2.2.4. Summary Discussion 4-19
4.2.3. User Costs and Public Finance 4-20
4.2.3.1. User Costs 4-20
4.2.3.2. City Indebtedness 4-24
4.2.4. Land Treatment of Wastewater
at Eckles Township Site 4-26
4.2.4.1. Treatment/Storage Pond System . . . 4-26
4.2.4.2. Irrigation System 4-28
4.3. Secondary Impacts 4-42
4.4. Minimization of Adverse Impacts 4-45
4.4.1. Minimization of Construction Impacts .... 4-45
4.4.2 Mitigation of Operation Phase Impacts .... 4-50
4.4.3. Minimization of Secondary Impacts 4-53
4.5. Irretrievable and Irreversible Resource Commitments . 4-54
5.0. IMPACT ON STATE GOVERNMENT OF ANY FEDERAL CONTROLS
ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED ACTION 5-1
6.0. LITERATURE CITED 6-1
7.0. COORDINATION, LIST OF PREPARERS, AND LIST OF THOSE
SENT DRAFT EIS 7-1
7.1. Coordination 7-1
7.2. List of Preparers 7-1
7.3. List of Those Sent EIS 7-2
8.0. GLOSSARY OF TECHNICAL TERMS 8-1
9.0 INDEX 9-1
APPENDIX A. BARTON-ASCHMAN ASSOCIATES, INC., WORKING PAPER #5
APPENDIX B. ATMOSPHERE
APPENDIX C. GEOLOGY
-xi-
-------
APPENDIX D. BOTANICAL NAMES OF PLANT SPECIES CITED IN TEXT
APPENDIX E. SURFACE WATER
APPENDIX F. GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTIONS FOR LAND TREATMENT SITE AREA IN
ECKLES TOWNSHIP
APPENDIX G. LAND USE PROJECTIONS
APPENDIX H. PUBLIC FINANCE AND USER FEES
(643B&C)
-xii-
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
1-1 Bemidji area 1-2
2-1 Location of existing and potential wastewater stream
discharge points in the Bemidj area 2-15
2-2 Location of proposed land application sites
and search areas in the Bemidji area 2-20
2-3 The five potential land treatment sites located west of
Bemidji 2-23
2-4 Potential cooperative land treatment areas that
were considered by the Bemidji City Council 2-25
2-5 Alternative treatment plant sites and force main routes . . 2-27
2-6 Location of proposed force main, treatment and storage
ponds, and land treatment area in Alternative 6 2-35
2-7 Area in Eckles Township proposed for siting treatment/
storage ponds and selected by the City for land
treatment of wastewater 2-37
2-8 Conceptual illustration of forest irrigation system .... 2-39
2-9 Proposed layout for land treatment site underdrains
and drainage ditches 2-40
3-1 Soil associations in the Bemidji area 3-6
3-2 Mississippi River WWTP site and surrounding area 3-11
3-3 Existing WWTP site and surrounding area
(Alternatives 2, 3, and 4) 3-13
3-4 Grass Lake WWTP site and surrounding area
(Alternative 5) 3-14
3-5 Site soils map 3-17
3-6 Mississippi River flow regime and major surface
water in the Bemidji area 3-24
3-7 Water quality monitoring stations in the Bemidji area . . . 3-30
-xiii-
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Page
2-1 Summary of 1978 operating data for the Bemidji
wastewater treatment plant 2-6
2-2 Summary of 1979 operating data for the Bemidji
wastewater treatment plant 2-7
2-3 Chemical analysis of sludge samples collected
at the Bemidji WWTF 2-17
2-4 Summary comparison of costs for the six
wastewater treatment alternatives 2-42
3-1 Landscape types in the Bemidji area 3-7
3-2 Physical characteristics of the Mississippi Chain of Lakes . 3-25
3-3 Average yearly flows for points downstream from Bemidji. . . 3-26
3-4 Average annual total phosphorus loadings to Lake
Bemidji, Wolf Lake, Lake Andrusia, and Cass
Lake during 1973 and 1979 3-34
3-5 Physical and chemical characteristics of water in
Grass Lake, Drainage Ditch, Grant Creek, and Larson Lake . . 3-39
3-6 Endangered, threatened, and rare species that may be
present in the Bemidji area 3-45
3-7 Species of plants considered by botanists to be
endangered or threatened that occur in Minnesota 3-46
3-8 1979 income in Beltrami County, by decile,
for family of four 3-47
3-9 Major employers in the Bemidji area 3-48
3-10 Selected population data for the period 1950-1976 3-50
3-11 Projected populations for the City of Bemidji 3-54
3-12 Summary of year-2000 land requirements for urban
growth in Bemidji and surrounding townships 3-58
3-13 Common municipal debt measures 3-62
4-1 Potential major primary impacts from
construction of new wastewater facilities 4-3
4-2 Potential major primary impacts from
operation of new wastewater facilities 4-6
-xiv-
-------
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page
4-3 Phosphorus loadings for average year for Lake Bemidji,
Wolf Lake, Lake Andrusia, and Cass Lake with discharge
from Bemidji WWTP to Lake Bemidji 4-11
4-4 Phosphorus loadings for average year for Wolf Lake,
Lake Andrusia, and Cass Lake with discharge from
Bemidji WWTP to Mississippi River below Lake Bemidji .... 4-16
4-5 Estimated user costs for wastewater collection and
treatment for Alternatives 1 through 6 4-21
4-6 Comparison of user charges and debt service
costs as a percentage of median family income 4-23
4-7 Per capita debt levels associated with financing a
new WWTP at Bemidji 4-25
4-8 Quality of drain tile and drainage ditch water
at Muskegon, Michigan, land treatment site 4-43
4-9 Summary of estimated capital and operating costs
for phosphorus removal alternatives 4-40
-xv-
-------
1.0. PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION
1.1. Introduction and Legal Basis for Action
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) notified the City of
Bemidji, Minnesota, in 1968 of the need to upgrade the quality of the
effluent that was discharged from its wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) to
the Mississippi River. Twelve years later, a final solution to the problem
of reducing the phosphorus loadings to the Upper Mississippi River Chain of
Lakes downstream from Bemidji (Wolf Lake, Lake Andrusia, and Cass Lake,
within the Leech Lake Indian Reservation, Figure 1-1) still is being
sought. This Draft Environmental Impact Statement addresses the alterna-
tive wastewater treatment systems that currently are considered the most
feasible options for the City of Bemidji.
Interim treatment measures and a change in the location of the efflu-
ent discharge were implemented by the City during 1978. These actions
reduced significantly phosphorus loadings from the City's effluent to the
downstream Chain of Lakes. However, the existing treatment system is old,
deteriorated, and hydraulically overloaded; it is incapable of meeting the
effluent limitations required by the State of Minnesota to achieve improved
water quality in the Mississippi River and Chain of Lakes. A new system to
treat Bemidji's wastewater is needed.
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (FWPCA, Public Law
92-500), as amended in 1977 by the Clean Water Act (CWA, Public Law
95-217), establishes a uniform, nationwide water pollution control program
within which all water quality programs operate. The MPCA administers this
program in Minnesota, although the US Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA) retains approval and supervisory control.
Minnesota was required by the Federal law to establish water quality
standards for lakes and streams and effluent standards for discharge to
them. Federal law stipulates that, at a minimum, discharges must meet
secondary treatment requirements. In some cases even stricter effluent
1-1
-------
J
-in
•H
•n
•rl
00
1-2
-------
standards are necessary to preserve water quality. State Water Quality
standards are subject to USEPA approval and must conform to Federal guide-
lines.
Federal funding for wastewater treatment projects is provided under
Section 201 of the FWPCA. The Act provides 75% Federal funding for eli-
gible planning, design, and construction costs. Portions of projects that
are defined as innovative or alternative are eligible for 85% funding under
the CWA.
The dispersal of Federal funds is made to local applicants via the
National Municipal Wastewater Treatment Works Construction Grants Program
which is administered by USEPA. The program consists of a three-step
grant process: Step 1 includes wastewater facilities planning; Step 2
involves the development of detailed engineering plans and specifications;
and Step 3 covers construction of the pollution control system. The
Bemidji project currently is in Step 1, which involves planning for waste-
water facilities that will be serviceable for at least 20 years, or until
the year 2000.
The State of Minnesota, through the MPCA, administers the Federal
Construction Grants Program at the State level. The State also provides an
additional 15% of the costs for planning, design, and construction, except
where the Federal share is larger than 75%. In such a case, the State's
share is reduced. Because Federal grant regulations are, for the most
part, the controlling factor in determining the selected (fundable) alter-
native, they significantly influence how the State grant funds are spent.
Communities may choose to construct wastewater treatment facilities
without financial support from the USEPA/State Grants Program. In such
cases, the only requirements are that the design be technically sound and
that the MPCA is satisfied the facility will meet discharge standards.
If a community chooses to construct a wastewater treatment plant with
USEPA grant assistance, the project must meet all requirements of the
Grants Program. The CWA stresses that the most cost-effective alternative
1-3
-------
be identified and selected. USEPA defines the cost-effective alternative
as the one that will result in minimum total resource costs over the life
of the project, yet meet Federal, State, and local requirements. However,
the cost-effective alternative is not necessarily the lowest cost proposal.
The analysis for choosing the cost-effective alternative is based on both
the capital construction costs and the operation and maintenance costs for
a 20-year period, although only the capital costs are funded. Non-monetary
costs also must be considered, including social and environmental factors.
A new wastewater treatment facility also is subject to the require-
ments of Section 402 of the FWPCA, which established the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program. Under the NPDES
regulations, all wastewater discharges to surface waters require an NPDES
permit and must meet the effluent standards identified in the permit. The
USEPA has delegated authority to establish effluent standards and to issue
discharge permits to the MPCA. The USEPA, however, maintains review
authority. Any permit proposed for issuance may be subject to a State
hearing, if requested by another agency, the applicant, or other groups and
individuals. A hearing on an NPDES permit provides the public with the
opportunity to comment on a proposed discharge, including the location of
the discharge and level of treatment. Normally the hearing is before a
State Hearing Examiner. His findings and recommendations are subject to
review and approval by the MPCA Board.
The proposed project is located in the headwaters area of the Missis-
sippi River, an interstate river. Any wastewater discharge would be lo-
cated several hundred river miles from the nearest adjacent state (Wiscon-
sin). Consequently, there are no multistate impacts anticipated as a
result of this project, other than those that might be associated with the
movement of labor or materials for construction or operation of the pro-
posed facility. These are not anticipated to be significant.
The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) requires a
Federal agency to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on
"...major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human
environment ...". In addition, the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ)
1-4
-------
published regulations (40 CFR Parts 1500-1508) to guide Federal agencies in
determinations of whether Federal funds, such as those that may be com-
mitted to the Bemidji project through the Construction Grants Program, or
Federal approvals, would result in a project that would significantly
affect the environment. USEPA developed its own regulations (40 CFR Part
6) for the implementation of the EIS process. Pursuant to these regula-
tions, USEPA Region V determined that an EIS was required for the proposed
project at Bemidji before grants, or approvals, for Step 2 and Step 3 could
be made. USEPA's Notice of Intent to Prepare an EIS was issued on 30 March
1977.
The MPCA also determined that an EIS should be prepared for this
project under the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act of 1973 (6 MCAR Sec-
tion 3) prior to the approval of design and construction funds and the
finalization of an NPDES permit. This Draft EIS, therefore, serves both as
a Federal and a State document.
1.2. Project History
The following chronological list highlights the major events in the
evolution of the wastewater treatment alternatives discussed herein (based
on Stewart & Walker (1973) and supplemental information):
Time Period Event
October 1968 MPCA notified City of Bemidji that WWTP
effluent quality must be improved (reduction
of BOD from 50 to 25 mg/1 and phosphorus fror
15 to 1 mg/1)
January 1969 MPCA notified City that WWTP effluent must
comply with US Department of the Interior
(USDI) Interstate Water Quality Standards
July 1970 MPCA held public hearing to establish efflu-
ent standards
June 1971 City served with Order to Abate Pollution by
State, which established a compliance sche-
dule for construction of a new WWTP by May
1973 to meet effluent quality of 25 mg/1 BOD,
30 mg/1 suspended solids, 1.0 mg/1 phosphorus
1-5
-------
Time Period
Event
November 1971
January 1972
January 1972
June 1972
September 1972
September 1972
October 1972
November 1972
April 1973
October 1973
December 1973
March 1975
Lawsuit filed against City under Minnesota
Environmental Rights Act by Dr. Ludwig claim-
ing WWTP effluent was violating water quality
standards
MPCA sought injunction to require City to
construct a new WWTP capable of meeting
proposed effluent standards
City filed Preliminary Engineering Report
with MPCA that recommended land treatment of
wastewater
City filed grant application with MPCA and
US EPA
City filed Supplemental Engineering Report
with MPCA
MPCA held public meeting at Bemidji to dis-
cuss land treatment system and to receive
comments
FWPCA signed into law, establishing Waste-
water Treatment Works Construction Grants
Program
MPCA Board determined that proposed land
treatment was not implementable socially and
that a conventional treatment plant with
phosphorus removal would be required if a
non-controversial land treatment site could
not be found within 90 days
City ordered to construct a new conventional
WWTP
City and State stipulation settlement of
January 1972 enforcement action: Preliminary
Report due December 1973; Plans and Specifi-
cations due 1 December 1974; Construction to
commence when grant funds become available
City files Facilities Plan (Stewart & Walker
1973) with MPCA that addresses construction
of a bio-disc secondary plant with chemical
phosphorus removal
MPCA certifies Facilities Plan to USEPA that
proposed construction of a new conventional
WWTP at site adjacent to Mississippi River
downstream from Lake Bemidji outlet
1-6
-------
Time Period
Event
July 1975
December 1975
November 1976
January 1977
January 1977
March 1977
October 1977
December 1977
February 1978
February 1978
June 1978
City requests and receives authorization from
MPCA to re-evaluate land treatment alterna-
tive
City obtains deed to 73-acre site for a
conventional treatment plant adjacent to
Mississippi River downstream from Lake
Bemidji outlet
City files Facilities Plan Supplement
(Stewart & Walker and others 1976) that
proposes a land treatment alternative in
Eckles Township
MPCA recommends to USEPA the preparation of
an EIS on the project
City of Bemidji applies to MPCA for reissu-
ance of NPDES permit to discharge effluent to
Mississippi River
USEPA issues Notice of Intent to Prepare an
EIS on the project and contracts with WAPORA,
Inc., to assist in its preparation
Public hearings at Bemidji and Cass Lake
concerning reissuance of NPDES permit for
discharge by Bemidji WWTP
Publication of DEIS suspended to allow for
further detailed investigation of potential
for a land treatment alternative
Revised plan developed by USEPA for investi-
gation of additional land treatment alterna-
tives
Based on State Hearing Examiner's Report, the
Minnesota Pollution Control Board (MPCB)
determines that it will reissue City's NPDES
permit and requires that interim control of
phosphorus be implemented and that the point
of discharge be moved from Mississippi River
to inlet channel to Lake Bemidji adjacent to
WWTP site (original discharge location) by 1
June 1978
WWTP discharge is changed from Mississippi
River downstream from Lake Bemidji to Lake
inlet channel adjacent to WWTP and interim
phosphorus control facilities become opera-
tional
1-7
-------
June 1978
July-September 1978
December 1978
February 1979
June 1979
August 1979
October 1979
December 1979
March 1980
May 1980
Completion of land treatment site selection
process; site investigations delayed because
access to several sites was refused
MPCA initiates court action to obtain access
to private property for site suitability
investigations by WAPORA
Final report on field investigations at
potential land treatment sites completed
Meeting of City, its engineering consultant
(RCM), MPCA, USEPA, and WAPORA establishes
final work tasks to complete engineering and
environmental studies for the project
City officials express concerns about popula-
tion and flow projections to agency officials
and legislators in Washington DC
City Council evaluates five proposals for co-
operative, cropland wastewater application
alternatives from local farmers; City selects
"Cronemiller" site in Eckles Township
City develops optional land treatment pro-
posal involving State of Minnesota and tax
forfeited lands to supplement Cronemiller
property when other landowners withdrew
interest
Suitability assessment of site completed by
WAPORA; forest or cropland irrigation con-
sidered technically feasible
City's engineering consultant, RCM, completes
Facilities Plan Supplement outlining five
tertiary treatment alternatives and a land
treatment alternative
Preliminary Draft EIS completed.
In summary, the period of time since MPCA first notified the City of
Bemidji in 1968 to clean up its effluent has been characterized by cyclical
decisionmaking as the City, the MPCA, and USEPA have searched for a cost-
effective, environmentally suitable, and socially acceptable solution to
the wastewater discharge problem. The time span has been marked by no less
than four independent attempts (1972, 1976, 1978, and 1979) to find a land
treatment wastewater disposal alternative to eliminate all discharge to the
Upper Mississippi River. It also has seen law suits filed against the City
1-8
-------
by a private citizen (Dr. Ludwig) and by the State of Minnesota. The
Ludwig suit later was dismissed by the District Court and the State suit
resulted in a stipulation agreement whereby the City was ordered to con-
struct a new WWTP that would be capable of reducing effluent phosphorus to
1 mg/1.
The first three years lapsed while a reasonable-cost approach to
eliminate phosphorus from the discharge was being considered by the City
and while the Federal-State legislation establishing the Wastewater Con-
struction Grants Program was being finalized. By waiting until 1972 to
apply for a grant, the City qualified to receive grants totaling 90% (75%
Federal, 15% State) of the planning, design, and construction costs, as
compared to the 30% Federal funding that was available in 1969 (Stewart &
Walker 1973).
The City's proposal of 1972 to acquire 1,600 acres to operate a land
treatment system was deemed to be socially unacceptable by the MPCA Board
in April 1973. The City proceeded to have its engineer complete planning
reports for a conventional treatment plant with phosphorus removal, as
stipulated by a court settlement, during 1973.
During the time from the completion of the initial Facilities Plan in
December 1973 to 1976, the City, MPCA, USEPA, and concerned citizens pur-
sued a re-evaluation of the potential for land treatment of wastewater. A
Facilities Plan Supplement was completed in November 1976 that addressed a
land treatment alternative on publicly-controlled lands in Eckles Township.
Because of uncertainties about the environmental effects of land treatment,
doubts concerning the accuracy of population and flow projections, ques-
tions about the ability of the existing WWTP to be upgraded and project
costs, and the controversial nature of the selection of a fundable waste-
water treatment solution, USEPA and MPCA opted to prepare an EIS on the
project. The EIS process has spanned 3 years and has been the principal
mechanism through which additional alternatives have been explored, contro-
versial aspects have been resolved, and technically and socially feasible
alternatives have been identified.
1-9
-------
Because of the continued delay in implementing a new wastewater treat-
ment/disposal system, the Minnesota Pollution Control Board ordered that
the location of the WWTP discharge be moved from the Mississippi River
downstream from Lake Bemidji to the inlet channel to Lake Bemidji. Interim
phosphosus control facilities also were required. These measures were
implemented in June 1978 and have served to improve the quality of the
Chain of Lakes downstream from Lake Bemidji. This EIS presents alternative
solutions to the long-term need for a reliable wastewater treatment system,
and the relative environmental benefits and the economic and environmental
costs associated with such solutions.
1.3. EIS Process
Major work on the preparation of this Draft EIS by USEPA's EIS Con-
tractor, WAPORA, Inc., commenced in April 1977. The following identifies
the various interim reports prepared by WAPORA that were submitted for
review to the Bemidji Citizens Evaluation Committee (later referred to as
the Citizens Advisory Committee), as well as several proposals that pro-
vided rationale for changes in the scope of the EIS:
Submittal Date
15 June 1977
14 October 1977
18 October 1977
18 November 1977
(This report was never
circulated for review
because of USEPA/MPCA
decisions to pursue ad-
ditional alternatives)
10 February 1978
(Revised 24 April 1978)
Title
Existing Environmental Conditions in the
Bemidji Project Area (WAPORA 1977a)
Alternatives: Development and Screening for
the City of Bemidji Wastewater Treatment
Facilities (WAPORA 1977b)
Impacts of Component Options and System
Alternatives for the City of Bemidji Waste-
water Treatment Facilities (WAPORA 1977c)
Proposed Actions and Their Impacts
(Preliminary Draft, WAPORA 1977d)
Proposal to Complete the Environmental State-
ment on the Proposed Wastewater Treatment
Facilities at Bemidji, Minnesota (WAPORA
1978a)
1-10
-------
Submittal Date
9 June 1978
14 December 1978
22 December 1978
15 May 1979
14 December 1979
(Revised 16 January 1980)
16 May 1980
Title
Sites Exhibiting Potential Suitability for
Land Treatment of Wastewater Near the City of
Bemidji, Minnesota (Task 1.0 Report; WAPORA
1978b)
Report on Preliminary Field Investigations at
Potential Land Treatment Sites Near the City
of Bemidji, Minnesota (Task 2.0 Report;
WAPORA 1978c)
Interim Report of Costs for Alternative
Wastewater Treatment Systems at Bemidji,
Minnesota (Memorandum)
Revised Plan of Study to Complete the Envi-
ronmental Statement on the Proposed Waste-
water Treatment Facilities at Bemidji, Minne-
sota (WAPORA 1979a)
Preliminary Assessment of the Suitability of
Land Treatment of Wastewater at a Proposed
Site in Eckles Township (WAPORA 1979b)
Preliminary Draft Environmental Impact State-
ment on Proposed Wastewater Treatment Facili-
ties at Bemidji, Minnesota (WAPORA 1980)
The City of Bemidji contracted with Rieke Carrol Muller Associates,
Inc. (RCM), to prepare supplemental engineering information to interface
with the preparation of the Draft EIS. The various interim reports pre-
pared by RCM were:
18 July 1979
10 August 1979
December 1979
27 March 1980
Development of Design Flows Working Paper
(Task 1; RCM 1979a)
Evaluation of Alternate Phosphorus Removal
Methods Working Paper (Task 2; RCM 1979b)
Evaluation of Sanitary Sewer System (Task 3)
and Determination of a Lake Irving Treatment
Plant Site (Task 4) (RCM 1979c)
Preliminary Development and Cost Estimates of
Selected Wastewater Management Alternatives
(Task 5; RCM 1980)
RCM's "Task 5" Report presents the preliminary design and costs for the six
wastewater treatment alternatives addressed herein.
1-11
-------
An active public participation program has been conducted throughout
the EIS process. A 22-member Citizens Evaluation (Advisory) Committee was
established at the outset, and has continued to meet throughout the 3-year
period. Numerous public meetings have been conducted to inform the citi-
zens of the Bemidji area of progress and interim findings, and to solicit
comments and suggestions. Issues raised by the Committee, other interested
citizens, and various governmental agencies are summarized in the following
section.
1.4. EIS Issues
Issues initially identified by USEPA in the 30 March 1977 Notice of
Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement, which formed the basis
for the decision to conduct an EIS, include:
• The quantity and composition of sewage effluent and sludge
that will be generated, and the most cost-effective and
implementable treatment site, method, and/or strategy.
• Potential for, and possible impacts of, the release of pol-
lutants into water courses, lakes, and groundwater resulting
from all treatment sites, methods, and/or strategies.
• Possible danger to public health and welfare from aerosoli-
zation of pathogenic organisms and/or their accumulation on
soil and plant surfaces, and possible transmission into and
through ground and surface waters for all treatment alterna-
tives.
• The accuracy of population projections in the Facilities
Plan.
• Resource impacts, including but not limited to, financial,
construction, socioeconomic, and energy resources, created
by implementation of all alternative sites, methods, and/or
strategies.
• Secondary impacts that would result from the implementation
of all treatment alternatives.
• Other environmental impacts, including but not limited to,
rare, endangered, or unique plant and animal species or
associations; cultural, archeological, historical, and rec-
reational resources that would result from the implementa-
tion of all treatment alternatives.
1-12
-------
Other issues identified during the EIS process, including those
discussed at the 12 September 1979 Citizens Advisory Committee/
Public Meeting where concerns again were solicited, include:
• Controversy surrounding the proposed project
• Determination of the condition of the existing treatment
plant and whether it could be upgraded or otherwise utilized
for treatment of future flows
• Determination of composition of sludge and residuals gener-
ated from various treatment processes and the best methods
of treatment, transportation, disposal, and monitoring of
sludges
• Effect on the value of property of areas adjacent to a
wastewater land treatment site
• Basis for establishing effluent phosphorus standard for
Bemidji WWTP
• Elimination of WWTP effluent discharge to Lake Bemidji
• Potential for leakage from the storage lagoons to contami-
nate groundwater, precluding use of groundwater for water
supply
• Adequacy of the short summer season at Bemidji for disposing
of a year's volume of wastewater on land
• Potential production of offensive odors from storing waste-
water in lagoons prior to land application
• High cost of construction and operation of a tertiary treat-
ment plant relative to potential improvement in water
quality
• Possible use of condemnation procedures by City to obtain
land for treatment of wastewater or disposal of sludge
• Potential contamination of soil and groundwater and produc-
tion of odors from disposal of sludge on land
• Whether land treatment of wastewater really will work con-
sidering the severe northern climate at Bemidji
• Problem of locating storage ponds in an area having a high
groundwater table
• Conversion of the large amount of multiple-purpose public
land required for land treatment to single-purpose use
• Excessive time and money expended in trying to find a solu-
tion to the wastewater treatment problem at Bemidji; the
1-13
-------
additional length of time until the new system will be built
and be in operation; and the large increase in the cost of
the project because of the delay in reaching a solution
Farmers lack understanding of how a cooperative land treat-
ment system would work, what their role would be, and what
constraints they would encounter.
1-14
-------
2.0. DISCUSSION OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES
2.1. Existing Wastewater Conveyance and Treatment System
2.1.1. Existing Service Area
Approximately 90% of the population of Bemidji currently is served by
sanitary sewers, including 350 connections to the sewer system that are not
connected to the City's water system. The service area is outlined on a
map prepared by Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc.. (1978c, Appendix A). In
total, there are approximately 2,560 residential, commercial, and institu-
tional connections to the system, including 4 connections that serve
Bemidji State University. The commercial users include numerous restau-
rants and motels (505 motel rooms that can accommodate 1,362 persons) that
serve the summer-season influx of tourists, as well as residents from the
Bemidji region (Personal communication, Mr. Don Dougherty, City Manager, to
Mr. Dan Sweeney, WAPORA, 27 January 1979).
The wastewater collection system consists of approximately 38.8 miles
of gravity sewers (8-inch through 24-inch diameter), twelve lift stations,
and 7.4 miles of force main (RCM 1979c). The older gravity sewers are
vitrified clay pipe; recent extensions have utilized ABS truss pipe and PVC
plastic pipe. Most of the force mains are cast-iron pipe, with the excep-
tion of the abandoned 18-inch-diameter effluent sewer to the previously
used Mississippi River discharge site east of Lake Bemidji, which is con-
crete, low-pressure pipe. There are no known interconnections between the
collection system and the storm sewer system. The construction of the
collection system began in 1906 and expanded gradually until 1942. A major
expansion was completed in 1955.
2.1.2. Flows
The quantity of wastewater conveyed by the sanitary sewer system and
treated at the WWTP has been the subject of considerable debate during the
past several years. From 1976 through Spring 1978, the wastewater flow
metering equipment at the WWTP was gradually failing, which resulted in
much confusion about the actual flow rates. The flow meter during that
2-1
-------
period probably was underestimating the flow by 200,000 gallons per day
(gpd), and thus the flow records for that period are not reliable. A new
flow meter was installed on 16 May 1978.
The first task completed by RCM as part of the development of supple-
mentary facilities planning information during 1979 was the preparation of
a working paper on design flows (RCM 1979a). That document presents in
detail a discussion of past, present, and projected wastewater flow for the
Bemidji system. The average daily flow for the 12-month period following
the installation of the new flowmeter was 1.25 million gallons per day
(mgd). The ratio of maximum monthly flow to average monthly flow for that
period was 1.22 (RCM 1979a). A peak-day flow of 1.895 mgd occurred on 2
July 1978, the Sunday of the Fourth of July weekend (peak summer tourist
season).
Per capita flow contributions have been estimated based on a variety
of assumptions. These values range from 90 to 150 gallons per day per
capita (gpd/cap; RCM 1979a).
2.1.3. Existing Treatment System
The existing wastewater treatment plant is located in Bemidji on a
narrow strip of land that separates Lake Irving from Lake Bemidji (Figure
2-1). It was constructed in 1934. A major expansion of the plant was
completed in 1956. The remodeled plant includes grit removal equipment, a
comminutor, one primary settling tank, a high-rate trickling filter, two
secondary settling tanks, a chlorination chamber, two sludge digestors,
sludge drying beds, and a sludge lagoon. In 1978 the City added a chemical
feed system (alum and polymer) to facilitate removal of phosphorus from the
wastewater. A tank truck to haul liquid sludge to rural farmlands for land
spreading also was purchased during that year (MPCA 1978).
The treatment plant was designed to treat an average flow of 1,320,000
gpd and to reduce the influent BOD level from 225 mg/1 to 50 mg/1 in the
effluent. From 1956 until June 1978, the treated effluent was discharged
directly to the Mississippi River. The effluent was pumped through an
2-2
-------
18-inch reinforced concrete pipe around the south and east sides of Lake
Bemidji and discharged to the Mississippi River about 700 feet downstream
from the outlet of the Lake. Since June 1978 the effluent sewer has been
closed, and effluent now is discharged to Lake Bemidji via the channel
between Lake Irving and Lake Bemidji.
The WWTP was inspected during 1977 as part of the EIS process to
evaluate the physical condition and capacity of various units. The evalu-
ation was carried out to estimate the potential for and the cost of modifi-
cations to the existing plant to comply with effluent limitations (Clark,
Dietz & Associates 1977). The plant also has been inspected by MPCA per-
sonnel as part of their Compliance Monitoring Survey Program (MPCA 1977,
1978a). These surveys indicate that the facility exhibits signs of deteri-
oration and obsolescence, although some of the units could be renovated and
reused. The facility also is overloaded hydraulically.
LIFT STATION AND PRELIMINARY TREATMENT
The Plant Lift Station consists of two pumps rated at 600 gallons-per-
minute (gmp) and 900 gpm, respectively. It conveys all sewage not handled
by the Main Lift Station to the wastewater treatment plant. The raw waste-
water passes through a bar screen and comminutor before being pumped. The
existing pumps do not have the capacity to handle the projected flows. The
pump room needs to be expanded and the comminutor wiring needs to be re-
placed.
PRIMARY TREATMENT
The primary clarifier is too small and was found to be in a deteri-
orated condition. The clarifier has 900 square feet (sq ft) of surface
area. The average daily flow of 1.2 mgd results in an overflow rate of
1,330 gpd/sq ft, which exceeds the recommended standard of 1,000 gpd/sq ft.
SECONDARY TREATMENT
A high-rate, single-stage trickling filter with a surface area of
approximately 7,850 sq ft provides secondary biological treatment. The
2-3
-------
current average daily flow results in a hydraulic loading of 150 gpd/sq ft.
The filters are designed to operate with recirculation of flow; however, to
avoid overloading the secondary clarifiers, recirculation of flow no longer
is being practiced. The existing filter cannot provide adequate biological
treatment to meet the proposed effluent standards (25 mg/1 BOD and 30 mg/1
suspended solids).
FINAL CLARIFICATION AND DISINFECTION
The trickling filter underdrainage flow is discharged to two final
clarifiers. The clarifiers have total surface area of 2,125 sq ft. At the
daily average flow of 1.2 mgd, the clarifier provides an overflow rate of
565 gpd/sq ft, and a 1,080 gpd/sq ft overflow at the peak hourly flow rate
of 1,600 gpm. The effluent from the secondary clarifiers is chlorinated
and discharged to the inlet channel to Lake Bemidji.
CHEMICAL TREATMENT
Equipment to add chemicals to remove phosphorus was installed and
began operating in June 1978. This includes an alum storage tank, polymer
mixing and storage tanks, and an alum and polymer feed system. Alum is
added to the filter underdrainage flow prior to the flow being discharged
to the secondary clarifiers. Polymer is added directly to the secondary
clarifiers. Both the alum and polymer feed systems have been working well,
and the effluent phosphorus concentration has been reduced to an average of
about 1.2 mg/1 (Tables 2-1 and 2-2).
SOLIDS HANDLING
The sludge from the primary clarifier, which consists of both primary
and secondary sludge, is pumped to a digester for anaerobic digestion. Two
digesters are operated in series as primary and secondary units. Liquid
digested sludge is transported by tank truck and is spread on farmland.
2-4
-------
OPERATING DATA
The operating data for the Bemidji WWTP for the years 1978 and 1979
are summarized in Tables 2-1 and 2-2. These data represent monthly aver-
ages. Because of problems with the flow meter, the flow for January
through May 1978 is not a correct estimate of the actual condition (Section
2.1.2.). The flow data for 1979 are more representative of the actual
condition. The 1979 effluent BOD , suspended solids, fecal coliform, and
total phosphorus levels met the interim requirements of the NPDES effluent
discharge permit of 55 mg/1, 40 mg/1, 200/100 ml, and best practical
phosphorus removal, respectively.
The addition of chemicals (alum and polymer) has resulted in a signi-
ficant decrease in phosphorus concentration in the effluent (from more than
7 mg/1 to less than 2 mg/1). The chemical also appears to have improved
the overall treatment plant performance as indicated by the reduction in
concentration of BOD and suspended solids in the effluent.
2.2. No Action Alternative
As discussed in Section 1.1., the State of Minnesota has the responsi-
bility under the NPDES permit program to regulate the direct discharge of
wastewater within the State. The authority to carry out this program has
been delegated under Minnesota law to the MPCA. For Bemidji, the MPCA has
established interim stanards until a new treatment facility can be con-
structed:
BOD5 55 mg/1
Suspended solids 40 mg/1
Total phosphorus Best practical with
interim phosphorus
equipment
Fecal coliform 200/100 ml
While these standards generally are being met, the MPCA has suggested as a
basis for completing Facilities Planning final standards for a new conven-
2-5
-------
P-I
>%
^J
r^
A3
P
8
c
o
TJ
CU
CO
A3
s-x
4-1
CO
r-l
Cu
4->
(3
g
a
<0
cu
4J
M
CU
CO
Cu
P
CO
*
T1
•r-)
TJ
•rl
«
CU «
A3 /-N
4-1 <;
o
o a
4-1
A3
CO 4->
cO "5
TJ
TJ
oo cu
CS r-l
1-1 i-l
4-> <4-l
CO
t-i co
CU CO
Cu
o co
4-1
00 M
r* o
ey> ex
— 1 CU
M
4-1
O C
O
W +J
cd cd
a cu
to O
«
i— i
CM
CU
r-l
•8
H
cfl o
O *W
CU i-i
o
o
A3
0,
co
3
M
O
a
CO
A3
r-l
CO
•P
O
H
co
s
o
to
TJ
CU
a
0)
Cu
ID
3
en
I/1
Q
o
d
iH
0
o
I-H
^
1
CO
4->
JS
TJ
CO
TJ
c
CO
v-x
^^
iH
^^
M
£
PJ
CO
CO
x~\
r-l
~M
J,
^-^
r^
•x^^
w
^
^r^
rrt
a3
^^
+j
13
O
a
0 0
<>4 to
^
cu « oo
^ 0 C^N ^o
i-H *rl * «
Pd
4->
C « CM
cu X m oo
14-1
n-i
w
cy* o\
O CM
p^ P-!
P
13
cu
3 O u">
LM
Cd
ij
(3
CU
Z3 f^» C^^
r™-4 ^5 ^O
1 1 t fO ^^
fj
M
CI
0)
^ r*^ c^^
i-H ^O *-O
M-t
*W
w
^J
{3
CU
3 i-l O
g a s
CO *^
oo r^
CTi O>
0 0
£,
1 1
*^ ta
OOO I OOOOOOO I
oj f^ 1 c**j co ro *^ co r^* "^ t
,-H ^H
CO
o>
«
^^ \O 1 vO rO ON tO OO OO C^J fO
-*^ | rH-<
,0 M 0) 0) 0)
<-* 0 Q) rO ^3 OO
CJ *rt 0) ^> 3 ^J O d) 5J M
jgcxco>3'33)§'oocu:>
S<'3»Sl~3'~3
-------
PLI
§
(3
o
•d
CO
CO
cd
a
n)
fl
0)
(-1
1-1
0)
co
§
PQ
0)
l-l
O
14-4
CO ^
4J <
cO O
^3 PJ
00
C J3
fl 4J
0) 13
(X (!)
O r-1
•M
ON 14-1
r^
ON w
<-* cO
M-l CO
O 4J
M
>> O
U CX
co a)
B C
d o
en TI
4-1
co
* u
CM (1)
I cx
CM O
•a
H
CO O
O it-l
» m
r-l O r-4 fH CM *H
•* co ro co
o o o o o o i
v}- CM CO •* CM CM I
m in m m in in
vO vO vO vO vO vO 1
in ON r~ oo oo oo
^* vO vO ^^ vO vO t
o CM •-< o ON o r~»
vo oo ^* co r*^ oo r^
00 vO ^ i—l ON O CM
>-4 O O •— I O •— t "— I
CM
«
vo CM ro r-~ co —i ON
CO CM CM CM CM CO CM
ON CM in co o f~- vO
ON r*^ co r^ r^» f^^ CM
CM CM CM CM CM CM CO
i—i ON m st r^
ro CM ro co CM
CM o
CM CO
OO vO
i-H CM
CM
CM
vO
CO
CM
CM
rocOrOCMcMCM cOCMcMCOcMCMcM
I— 1
rH
•—I
CO
a
CO
1-3
ON
i— 1
i— 1
S^
3
.M
0)
tn
0
CM
r-t
•3
M
5!
CM O
CM CO
—1 •-!
rH
•rt
M >t
fN, TO
-------
tional WWTP that cannot be attained by the existing plant:
BOD 25 mg/1
Suspended solids 30 mg/1
Total phosphorus 0.3 mg/1 or less
Fecal coliform 200/100 ml
Failure to develop a permanent solution for reducing the phosphorus
loading to the Mississippi River Chain of Lakes downstream from Bemidji
through the control or elimination of wastewater phosphorus from the River
system is considered by the MPCA to be unacceptable. A new treatment
system must be developed to control the quality of the effluent. There-
fore, the "no action" alternative is not considered to be a feasible alter-
native .
2.3. Identification of Alternative Wastewater Treatment Systems
An exceptionally large number of potential solutions to the wastewater
treatment problem at Bemidji have been considered during the past twelve
years. There appears to be no one solution that will satisfy the goal of
reducing the downstream phosphorus loadings to the maximum extent possible
and, at the same time, not create some level of direct and indirect impact
to various sectors of the human and natural environment.
2.3.1. Design Factors
Planning for new wastewater treatment facilities at Bemidji during the
past twelve years has been based on a continually changing set of design
assumptions. Since 1971, an effluent phosphorus concentration of 1.0 mg/1
has been the planning objective for alternatives involving a surface water
discharge. The MPCA staff revised this goal to zero discharge of phos-
phorus, however, in January 1978 (By letter, 6 January 1978, from the MPCA
Executive Director to USEPA Regional Administrator):
Present estimates indicate that a discharge from a new or up-
graded Bemidji plant will continue to contribute significantly to
the total phosphorus load of Wolf Lake, Lake Andrusia and Allen's
Bay. This has led us to conclude that any discharge of phos-
phorus is likely to cause pollution or impairment of the affected
2-8
-------
waters by tending to increase the frequency, intensity, and
duration of nuisance algal conditions. Under these circumstances,
the most environmentally sound approach is to control phosphorus
to the fullest practicable extent and a requirement of no phos-
phorus discharge for Bemidji should be established in lieu of the
currently applicable Minnesota standard of 1 mg/1.
Because no wastewater treatment plant has been designed that can
produce an effluent entirely free of phosphorus, the MPCA and USEPA deter-
mined in February 1979 that the City's engineering consultant, RCM, should
evaluate alternative phosphorus removal methods. This activity culminated
in the production of the "Task 2 Report" (RCM 1979b). This product was
part of RCM's overall effort to develop supplemental facilities planning
information.
Subsequent to the review of RCM's Task 2 Report, MPCA and USEPA staff
concluded that an effluent phosphorus concentration of 0.3 mg/1 appeared to
be a standard that could be met by a conventional, tertiary treatment plant
at Bemidji. RCM, therefore, was directed to utilize the 0.3 mg/1 phos-
phorus standard in the development of preliminary engineering and cost
estimates for the five conventional treatment systems discussed in Section
2.4. The design effluent standard for BOD is 25 mg/1, 30 mg/1 for sus-
pended solids, and 200 MPN/100 ml for fecal coliform, as originally es-
tablished by MPCA in 1971.
The design flow for new treatment facilities also has been controver-
sial and is an issue that was resolved during the EIS preparation process.
The resolution of a design-year population estimate of 16,500 (Section
3.2.2.) and the installation of a new flow meter (Section 2.1.2.) provided
the basis for the projection of design flow.
RCM presents a thorough discussion of the basis for a design flow for
the year 2000 at Bemidji in their "Task 1 Report" (1979a). The Task 1
Report recommends the following design flow values for new wastewater
treatment facilities:
Average day flow 2.00 mgd
Average day, maximum month 2.50 mgd
Maximum day 3.40 mgd
Maximum hour 5.00 mgd
2-9
-------
RCM's Task 2 Report (1979b) includes a discussion of current waste-
water characteristics and the loading projections necessary for system
design. RCM reviewed the operating records for the existing treatment
plant and the results of a comprehensive 3-day wastewater survey conducted
in July 1979, and projected the following BOD, suspended solids, and phos-
phorus for loadings for a new treatment facility:
BOD
Annual average
Average day,
maximum month
Maximum day
Maximum 4-hour
Suspended Solids
Phosphorus
Ratio
1.0
1.2
1.8
3.0
Loading
(Ib/day)
4,000
4,800
7,200
12,000
Ratio
1.0
1.3
2.0
2.6
Loading
(Ib/day)
4,000
5,200
8,000
10,400
Ratio
1.0
1.3
2.0
2.8
Loading
(Ib/day)
175
230
350
490
2.3.2. System Components
The development of alternative wastewater management systems for
Bemidji involves consideration of five principal components:
• Flow and waste reduction
• Collection system
• Wastewater treatment processes and sites
• Effluent disposal methods and discharge locations
• Sludge handling and disposal.
Several optional technologies or programs are available for each
component. The options selected for one component, however, must be com-
patible with options considered for other components; i.e., there are
functional dependencies among the various component options. For example,
reduction of wastewater flow is highly compatible with the existing collec-
tion system and with the various proposed treatment options, but a land
treatment option is not compatible with a sludge disposal option because no
sludge would be removed from the storage lagoons. Thus, consideration of
one component option may preclude or necessitate consideration of other
options in another component.
2-10
-------
2.3.2.1. Flow and Waste Reduction
Wastewater flow and waste reduction options often can be implemented
at a cost that is relatively lower than the cost of designing additional
collection system or treatment plant capacity and treating the additional
flow and load. As discussed in Section 2.1.2., the existing wastewater
flow per capita at Bemidji is relatively high (from 90 to 150 gpd/cap,
depending on the method of calculation) as compared to an average case of
65 to 90 gpd/cap). Potentially feasible options for reducing flow at
Bemidji, which have not been explored in detail to date, include:
• Inflow reduction
• Conservation of water
• Flow equalization.
Wasteload reduction does not appear to be necessary or easily attainable at
Bemidji because of the absence of industrial flows.
INFLOW REDUCTION
Infiltration is unwanted groundwater that enters the sewer system and
service connections. Water discharged to the sewer system from roof lea-
ders, foundation drains, basement drains, cross-connections with storm
sewers, manhole covers, or similar sources is termed inflow. Investiga-
tions by Stewart & Walker (1973) indicate "no significant infiltration or
inflow problem in the Bemidji sanitary sewer." Based on a re-evaluation of
the flow information in 1979, however, RCM (1979a) concluded, "It is appar-
ent...that direct inflow enters the Bemidji sanitary sewer system." RCM
estimated the inflow rates for three different days when storms occurred at
about 500 gpm, with an average of 110,000 gallons of inflow each time. No
specific sources of inflow have been identified. Attempts should be made
by the City to locate and eliminate sources of inflow where practical.
CONSERVATION OF WATER
Water conservation as a means of reducing wastewater flows can be
difficult to attain and sometimes is only marginally effective. Traditional
2-11
-------
water conservation practices often have proven to be socially undesirable,
except in areas where water shortages exist. Furthermore, such measures
may succeed in limiting only luxury water usages such as lawn watering, car
washing, or swimming pool use which do not impose loads on sanitary sewer
systems.
Mandatory water conservation through the imposition of plumbing code
restrictions could reduce wastewater flows from households, motels, and
restaurants. Two primary targets would be toilet tanks and shower heads.
Typical plumbing code restrictions include a requirement that all new or
replacement toilets have a 3.5-gallon capacity and that new or replacement
shower heads deliver no more than 3 gpm. Such measures would reduce water
demand and sewage flow directly.
Other measures include educational campaigns on water conservation in
everyday living and the installation of pressure-reduction valves in areas
where the water pressure is excessive (greater than 40 to 60 pounds per
square inch). Educational campaigns usually take the form of spot televi-
sion and radio commercials, and the distribution of leaflets with water and
sewer bills. Water saving devices must continue to be used and maintained
for flow reduction to be effective. Pressure reduction valves can be used
where water pressure is higher than necessary, sometimes on a neighborhood
basis. However, where older pipes (especially iron pipes) are present, the
excess pressure is necessary.
The efficacy of water conservation is complex and the potential for
flow reduction is difficult to project. A comprehensive water conservation
alternative therefore is not proposed. The City should consider the imple-
mentation of water conservation measures, however, as a means of reducing
wastewater flows to reduce wastewater treatment costs. Reduction of flows
also would extend the capacity-life of the treatment system beyond the
currently projected year-2000 design.
FLOW EQUALIZATION
The proposed design of the treatment plant incorporates a peaking
factor of 2.5; i.e., the size of individual treatment units will be
2-12
-------
adequate to accommodate a maximum hour flow of 5.0 mgd (Section 2.3.1.).
Flow equalization might be incorporated into the design of the Bemidji
treatment plant to reduce the peak flows and thus the size of various
treatment units. An optimization analysis could be performed to determine
whether flow equalization would be cost-effective; however, because of the
relatively small size of the treatment plant, the potential for significant
cost savings is remote.
2.3.2.2. Collection System
The existing collection system is described briefly in Section 2.1.1.
RCM's Task 3 Report (1979c) provides a thorough discussion of the existing
sewer system. RCM (1979c) identified that nine of fifteen major components
(8 trunk sewers, 6 pump stations, 1 force main) of the sanitary sewer
system would be inadequate to accommodate the year-2000 design flows of 2
ragd average flow and 5.0 mgd maximum flow. Six of the nine potentially
deficient components were judged to be required regardless of which treat-
ment alternative is selected:
• The trunk sewer following Park, Delton, and Mississippi
Avenues, which then runs southeasterly, generally parallel-
ing the railroad, to the main pumping station (3 components)
• The Industrial lift station
• The Nymore lift station
• The 23rd Street lift station.
No cost estimates were prepared for these improvements. Therefore, the
costs presented in Section 2.4. and 2.5. do not include the cost of sewer
system improvements that also must be undertaken during the 20-year design
life.
No other collection system options appear to warrant detailed dis-
cussion. The force main routes currently being considered for the convey-
ance of wastewater from the existing WWTP site to two alternative treatment
plant sites, the new effluent sewer to the Mississippi River, and the raw
sewage force main route to Eckles Township are presented in Section 2.4.
2-13
-------
Previously, interceptor sewers were considered around the north end of Lake
Bemidji and across the Lake to the proposed Mississippi River WWTP site.
2.3.2.3. Wastewater Treatment Processes
Numerous wastewater treatment process options have been considered
during the twelve years that the treatment problem has been considered:
• Secondary processes
upgrading the existing trickling filter
- activated sludge
bio-surf (later explored under the name of rotating
biological contactors)
aerated lagoons
oxidation lagoons
- facultative lagoons
• Tertiary processes (for phosphorus removal)
chemical addition before secondary clarifier (1.0. mg/1
P)
chemical addition before secondary clarifier with
multi-media filtration (0.5 mg/1 P)
chemical addition to secondary effluent with tertiary
clarification and multi-media filtration (0.3 mg/1 P)
- lime addition to secondary effluent followed by filtra-
tion (0.1 mg/1 P)
• Land treatment systems (at a variety of sites)
infiltration/percolation
rapid infiltration
- spray irrigation (center pivot, traveling gun, fixed
set), on cropland and forest land, at both slow and
moderate application rates.
The range of treatment processes is sufficiently exhaustive to cause con-
sideration of additional processes to be extremely marginal.
2.3.2.4. Effluent Disposal
A similarly exhaustive study of various surface water effluent dis-
charge locations has been conducted in recent years. Sites include (Figure
2-1):
1) Grant Creek (Section 18, T147N, R34W)
2) Tributary of Grant Creek (Section 31, T147N, R34W)
3) Mississippi River downstream from Stump Lake (Section 10,
T146N, R32W)
2-14
-------
2-15
-------
4) Turtle River (Section 4, T147N, R34W)
5) Wetland tributary to Lake Bemidji (Section 13, T147N,
R34W)
6) Judicial Ditch (Section 11, T147N, R34W)
7) Tributary adjacent to Horseman Lake (Section 32, T148N,
R33W)
8) Mississippi River upstream from Lake Irving (Section 19,
T146N, R33W)
9) Mississippi River immediately downstream from Lake Bemidji
(Section 2, T146N, R33W)
10) Grass Lake (Section 2, T146N, R34W).
All discharge points considered would be required by the MPGA to meet
at least a 1.0 mg/1 phosphorus discharge standard, and possibly a 0.3 mg/J
standard. This requirement negates any possible advantage from a cost
perspective of removing the effluent from the Mississippi River and dis-
charging it to a receiving water where a less stringent phosphorus limita-
tion would be required.
Numerous land disposal sites also have been considered (Figures 2-2,
2-3, and 2-4). Hydraulic constraints because of low soil permeability and
high water table and/or public sentiment against land application have made
difficult the siting of a wastewater land disposal alternative. These
sites are discussed thoroughly by WAPORA (1977b; 1977c; 1978b; 1979b).
2.3.2.5. Sludge Treatment and Disposal
Sludge produced by the treatment process currently is digested anaero-
bically and liquid sludge is trucked to area farmland for disposal. In the
past, sludge drying beds located adjacent to the treatment plant were used
to dewater the digested sludge to reduce its volume prior to landfilling.
A chemical analysis of sludge samples collected during 1977 is pre-
sented in Table 2-3. The recent use of alum and polymer to reduce effluent
phosphorus levels has changed the chemical content of the sludge somewhat
(no recent chemical analyses have been conducted to enable quantification
of these constituents). The City of Bemidji has contracted with KBM of
Fargo to prepare a sludge management plan for the existing WWTP operations.
2-16
-------
Table 2-3. Chemical analysis of sludge samples collected at the Bemidji
WWTP on 8 and 15 August 1977. All values, except total solids,
represent dry weights (mg/kg).
Parameter 8 August Sample 15 August Sample
C.O.D. % 95.8 105.0
Total Phosphate as P 11,700 200,200
TOG 5.61 5.72
TKN 28,700 42,600
Nitrate 45 190
Nitrite 6.3 27.0
Ammonia 4,000 15,200
Total Solids % 46.20 8.51
Total Volatile Solids % 49.01 53.09
PCB <1.0 <1.0
MBAS (Surfactants) 21.0 21.0
Cadmium 24 25
Chromium 85 81
Copper 748 1,000
Iron 10,470 14,870
Nickel 43 46
Lead 598 572
Zinc 32 43
2-17
-------
RCM (1980) proposes that sludge produced in the new tertiary treatment
plant be digested anaerobic ally, thickened with assistance of a belt fil-
ter, then transported for disposal on land. RCM projects that 3,500 Ib/day
of digested sludge from the tertiary WWTP will require final processing and
disposal (Personal communication, 28 April 1978, Mr. Dale Watson, RCM, to
Mr. Dan Sweeney, WAPORA).
Sludge management has received little attention during the Facility
Planning and EIS processes. This aspect of the treatment process should be
subject to further study. Land disposal sites should be identified and
site investigations conducted. The recent controversy concerning land
disposal of sludge at the Hall farm and adjacent area east of Bemidji in
Frohn Township likely will make difficult the locating of additional sites.
Other alternatives include aerobic digestion, which is exceptionall}
energy intensive; incineration of thoroughly dewatered sludge, which also
is energy intensive; pyrolysis and wet oxidation, which are not practical
for the small-scale operation at Bemidji; and co-disposal, which involves
utilizing dried sludge as a supplementary fuel in boilers, which also is
not feasible at Bemidji.
2.3.3. Previously Considered Alternatives
As previously stated, numerous wastewater treatment alternatives have
been considered during the twelve years that a solution to Bemidji's WWTP
discharge problem has been actively sought. The original Facilities Plan
(Stewart & Walker 1973) discussed various measures considered between 196?
and 1973. These include:
• Consideration of pumping the effluent to a drainage system
where nutrient removal was not required
• Treatment in lagoons with disposal in seepage basins sup-
plemented by ridge and furrow irrigation at a site near
School Lake east of Bemidji (Figure 2-2)
• Remodeling the existing plant
• Construction of a new conventional WWTP
• Lagoons followed by spray disposal
• Aeration basins followed by spray disposal.
2-18
-------
The alternative recommended in the Facilities Plan was the use of
lagoons for preliminary treatment and storage followed by spray disposal on
farm land east of Bemidji (Site A, Figure 2-2). The estimated capital cost
for construction was $3,050,000 (1972 dollars). At that time it was pro-
posed that the City purchase the lagoon and disposal site, although land-
owner groups opposed this concept at each of the five sites considered.
After hearing strong objection to the proposal during meetings at Bemidji,
the MPCA Board determined that land treatment was socially infeasible. Al-
though the City protested the decision, the Board determined, instead, that
either the existing WWTP be upgraded to remove phosphorus or that a new
WWTP capable of advanced phosphorus removal be constructed.
The City purchased a 73-acre site near the Mississippi River east of
Lake Bemidji in 1975 with the expectation of building a new tertiary
treatment plant at that location. A land treatment solution continued to
be sought by the City, MPCA, USEPA, and local citizens interested in at-
taining the goal of zero discharge of phosphorus. A Facilities Plan Sup-
plement was completed during 1976 (Stewart & Walker 1976) that included
identification of 11 sites and culminated with an intensive investigation
of and recommendation for a land treatment site in Eckles Township, north-
west of Bemidji. The proposal incorporated the use of publicly-owned land
for siting aerated treatment and storage basins and for center-pivot spray
irrigation of wastewater on cropland.
In 1976 dollars, the three options available (two were presented in
the original Facilities Plan) were estimated to have the following capital
costs:
• Conventional treatment plant at Mississippi
River Site $7,407,000
• Spray irrigation at Eckles Township Site (Site C). . . $8,371,000
• Infiltration-percolation system (School Lake) $6,722,000
However, when operation and maintenance (O&M) costs and crop revenues were
figured in, Stewart & Walker (1976) indicated that the spray irrigation
alternative actually was more cost-effective.
2-19
-------
01
^
CO
•H
pq
0)
S
•H
CO
0)
0)
43
O
S-l
cfl
0)
CO
cd
0)
4J
c
O
u
•H
PH
cfl
•a
c
to
0)
CO
o
a
o
c
o
•H
4J
td
o
o
cs
0)
M
00
2-20
-------
In March 1977, the USEPA and the MPCA determined that an EIS should be
prepared on the various proposals advanced in the Facilities Plan and Plan
Supplement. Through the EIS, USPEA's EIS consultant, WAPORA, Inc., con-
sidered a total of 33 wastewater treatment alternatives (WAPORA 1977b).
These alternatives incorporated various previously considered and new
combinations of treatment, siting, conveyance, effluent disposal, and
sludge disposal options. Basically, however, they fell into five cate-
gories :
• Upgrade the existing trickling filter plant, including
addition of tertiary treatment for phosphorus removal
followed by discharge to the Mississippi River
• A new mechanical/biological/chemical treatment plant at
either the existing location or at the City's alternate
site near the Mississippi River just east of Lake Bemidji
• Spray irrigation of secondary effluent to grow one of sev-
eral marketable crops at the Eckles Township site (Site C)
• Infiltration/percolation (low rate) of secondary effluent
in Eckles Township with underdrainage discharged to Grant
Creek, or in Frohn Township (School Lake site) with dis-
charge of recovered water to the Mississippi River
• Rapid infiltration at School Lake site of either primary or
secondary effluent with discharge to the Mississippi River
or with recharge to the groundwater.
Continued use of the existing treatment plant site was considered in
six of the alternatives. Basically two methods of effluent disposal were
proposed: to the Mississippi River just east of Lake Bemidji and on land
either at the Eckles Township site (Site C) or in Frohn Township (School
Lake site). These were the same alternatives proposed by Stewart & Walker
(1976), which included spray irrigation at the Eckles Site; alternatives
for the School Lake Site included either infiltration/percolation with
drainage to the Mississippi River or rapid infiltration with groundwater
di scharge.
The City's Mississippi River site east of Lake Bemidji also was chosen
as a potential treatment plant location. Four alternatives using this site
differed only in the treatment method or means of conveyance. All of these
involved the discharge of effluent to the Mississippi River just east of
2-21
-------
the Lake. The sludge produced by these proposed treatment plants would be
disposed of by land application.
Seventeen alternatives considered land treatment at the School Lake
site in Frohn Township using various combinations of treatment and effluent
disposal. The treatment proposals included the use of oxidation lagoons,
aerated ponds, and facultative lagoons. The effluent would be disposed of
by infiltration/percolation with recovered water being discharged to the
Mississippi River (requiring 220 to 440 wetted acres), by spray irrigation
(requiring 425 to 613 wetted acres), or by rapid infiltration with eventual
groundwater discharge.
The other six alternatives considered the land treatment potential of
the Eckles Township site. Like the other land treatment alternatives, the
proposed treatment methods included oxidation lagoons, aerated ponds, or
facultative lagoons. On this site, however, the recovered renovated water
from the infiltration/percolation system (220 to 440 acres of wetted area)
would be discharged to Grant Creek. Spray irrigation (425 to 613 acres of
wetted area) also was considered as a possible effluent disposal process.
USEPA identified upgrading the existing treatment facilities to meet
the effluent limitations with continued discharge to the Mississippi River
or rapid infiltration of wastewater at the School Lake site following
primary treatment at the existing WWTP as the two alternatives for further
scrutiny (WAPORA 1977d). Because both of these alternatives were shown to
have a continued effect on the downstream Chain of Lakes, the MPCA staff
recommended that a zero phosphorus discharge goal should be pursued
(Section 2.3.1.).
During 1978, WAPORA was directed to conduct another search of the
Bemidji area for potential rapid infiltration and slow-rate irrigation
sites. This search identified 4 potential sites for moderate-rate applica-
tion and 23 potential sites for rapid infiltration within a five-mile
radius of Bemidji (WAPORA 1978b). Geotechnical investigations were to be
conducted at five most promising sites (Figure 2-3) to obtain the site-
specific information necessary to verify their suitability and to evaluate
2-22
-------
i r-rr •*> -^ r J
! H * ll * 4 •
S • S*V, «- H.'/V
. 0)
cs &
4-> 4J
o
co co
CU T(
C
C P.
CD
CD
cfl ,fi
M CO
4J
r-l CO
CU -H
pq
M
•H ^J
fl
0) 0)
•H
>4-l CO
O
0)
CO 4-1
0)
0)
•U 0)
n) C
O -H
O rH
^H
CO U
OJ Ct)
4J ^1
•H ,0
J3
00
Cd
4J
tfl tfl
(1)
4J 4-> Hi
T)
9 _ .
H S S
H -H CU
Clj i-l O
•H 4J
4J 3 t^
C O 4-1
(U d
4-1 tn 3
o -H o
A C_J
CD
0) 4-1 -H
> -H S
•H CO rtf
M-l )-i
X 4->
CU U r-l
^3 Cfl CU
H W CP
I
CN
CU
i-l
3
t>0
2-23
-------
potential impacts. The sites were identified by May, but field studies did
not commence until September because of problems in obtaining access to the
prospective sites. Court-approved access was obtained by the MPCA, the
geotechnical investigations completed, and a report was produced (WAPORA
1978c). The report indicated that none of the sites studied were suitable
because of hydraulic limitations of the site soils for the application
rates considered. USEPA and MPCA then determined that supplemental "Step
1" Facilities Planning work on conventional treatment alternatives by the
City's engineering consultant, RCM, would be required to facilitate pro-
gression from "Step 1" planning to "Step 2" design work.
During Spring 1979, the MPCA introduced the concept of a cooperative
agricultural irrigation system to Bemidji area farmers. The City joined
the effort to promote this concept and a number of informational meetings
were conducted. The City considered five site areas during August 1979
(Figure 2-4).
At a City Council meeting on 31 August 1979, the alternatives were
ranked based on the Council's preliminary investigations and on the recom-
mendations of the City's engineering consultant, RCM. In order of decreas-
ing preference, they were:
Rank Site Name Index No. (Figure 2-3)
1 John Cronemiller Area 2
2 Alaska-Nebish Area 3
3 Hagali-O'Brien Area 4
4 George Landreth Area 5
5 Jon Hall Area 1
After the City's decision to concentrate their attention on the Cronemiller
site (named after Mr. John C. Cronemiller, the participant with the largest
land area involved), all of the farmers other than Cronemiller withdrew
their original indication of interest. Most notably, the withdrawal of the
acreage farmed by Mr. Jack Kelm in Liberty Township reduced the amount of
available acres to less than that required for a feasible land treatment
system.
2-24
-------
>. - f T i-n'-w
Figure 2-4. Potential cooperative land treatment areas that were considered by the Bemidji
City Council (Base map from the Beltrami County Highway map) .
2-25
-------
During October 1979, the City developed an option that would utilize
publicly-owned forest lands in Eckles Township in conjunction with agricul-
tural irrigation at the John Cronemiller farm. The City discussed this
proposal with USEPA and MPCA at the MPCA offices at Roseville, Minnesota,
on 13 November 1979. At this meeting, the City indicated to the Agencies
their interest in utilizing the John Cronemiller farm; County-controlled
tax forfeited lands in Sections 10, 11, and 15; and State of Minnesota land
in Section 16 of Eckles Township for land treatment of the City's waste-
water (a total of 2,340 acres). The area involved is only somewhat differ-
ent than Site C proposed in 1976 by Stewart & Walker (1976).
WAPORA (1979b) completed a preliminary assessment, from a land cap-
ability perspective, of the suitability/desirability of utilizing the
proposed lands for treatment of the City's wastewater. RCM incorporated
this information into the preliminary design of a land treatment system.
This alternative is presented as Alternative 6 in the following section.
2.4. Potential Wastewater Treatment Alternatives
Six alternatives for the management of Bemidji's wastewater presently
are under consideration and are the subject of the remainder of this EIS.
Five are conventional mechanical wastewater treatment plants, which are
capable of advanced phosphorus removal, with a surface water discharge; one
is a land-treatment alternative. The preliminary design and costs of these
alternatives are presented in RCM's Task 5 Report, entitled "Preliminary
Development and Cost Estimates of Selected Wastewater Management Alterna-
tives for the City of Bemidji, Minnesota" (RCM 1980). Incremental costs
for different levels of phosphorus removal are presented in RCM's Task 2
Report (RCM 1979b), and have been inflated to 1980 price levels by WAPORA.
The six alternatives and their costs are summarized in the following sec-
tions. As discussed in Section 2.3., the preliminary design of these
alternatives is based on a year-2000 average flow of 2.0 mgd.
2.4.1. Alternative 1 — New WWTP at Mississippi River Site with Effluent
Discharge to the Mississippi River
Alternative 1 includes the construction of a new WWTP (Site 1, Figure
2-5) adjacent to the Mississippi just downstream from Lake Bemidji. This
2-26
-------
o
CO
I
co
a)
•u
o
M
0)
O
l-l
O
•a
8
CO
cu
4J
4J
§
§
fl
Cfl
0)
L_ a)
cd
a
H
cu
4J
iH
<
s-i
oo
•H
2-27
-------
73-acre site was purchased in 1975 by the City of Bemidji in anticipation
of building a new WWTP at the site.
As proposed by RCM (1980), wastewater directed via the sewer system to
the existing WWTP would be diverted to a new pumping station at the exist-
ing WWTP site. The pumping station would include preliminary treatment
processes (screening and grit removal).
After receiving preliminary treatment, the wastewater would flow to a
wetwell. From there it would be pumped via about 5 miles of force main to
the new Mississippi River WWTP site. The route of the proposed force main
from the existing WWTP to the Mississippi River site is illustrated in
Figure 2-4. It is the route of the previously-used 18-inch effluent sewer:
southeast from the WWTP site along Gemmel Avenue, crossing the railroad
tracks; then northeast along the BN tracks to 1st Street; east along 1st
Street to Lake Avenue; north along Lake Avenue; and then along County Road
12 to the Mississippi River. The old force main would be replaced, except
at locations where replacement is extremely difficult, such as tunneling
under railroad tracks. In such cases, the old force main will be sliplined
and made into a segment of the new line.
A new advanced-secondary WWTP would incorporate the following treat-
ment processes to attain an effluent BOD level of 25 mg/1, 30 mg/1 sus-
pended solids, and a phosphorus level of at least 1.0 mg/1: primary clari-
fication; activated sludge (biological) secondary treatment; alum and
polymer addition prior to secondary clarification? chlorination; and dis-
charge. To attain an effluent phosphorus level of 0.3 mg/1, further chemi-
cal addition after secondary clarification would be incorporated, followed
by tertiary clarification, granular-media filtration, chlorination, and
discharge. RCM (1980) proposed that the primary clarifiers would be on the
higher ground at the southern section of the site to facilitate gravity
(downhill) flow through the plant. Intermediate pumping is expected to be
required, however, to convey the tertiary clarifier effluent to the fil-
ters. All process units, except the activated sludge and chlorine contact
tanks, will be covered with domes or otherwise will be "indoors" to prevent
cold weather from inhibiting their operation.
2-28
-------
Sludge would be removed from the primary, secondary, and tertiary
clarifiers. Sludges would be subjected to gravity thickening, followed by
anaerobic digestion. Solids from the digestor would be stored, further
dewatered, and eventually disposed on land at State-certified sites. (A
schematic diagram of the entire treatment process is presented in Figure 1
of ROM's Task 5 Report.)
The existing WWTP would continue to treat Bemidji's wastewater until
the new plant was operational. Effluent from the new plant would be dis-
charged via an effluent sewer to the Mississippi River adjacent to the
site.
The tertiary treatment components of the proposed plant (i.e., terti-
ary clarification and filtration) that are necessary to reduce the effluent
phosphorus concentration below 1.0 mg/1 to 0.3 mg/1 also will reduce fur-
ther the BOD and suspended solids concentrations. It is conceivable that
actual average operating conditions for a tertiary plant might produce an
effluent with BOD and suspended solids concentrations of 10 mg/1 or less.
Therefore, estimated effluent loadings to the Mississippi River at the
point of discharge in 1990 and 2000 would be within the following ranges:
BOD SS P
Flow/Concentration (Ib/day) (Ib/day) (Ib/day)
Year-2000 2 mgd design 417 500 16
flow for advanced-secondary
treatment (25-30-1.0 mg/1
effluent concentration)
Year-2000 2 mgd design
flow for tertiary treatment
(10-10-0.3 mg/1
effluent concentration) 169 169 5
Estimated 1990 daily flow
of 1.6 mgd and 25-30-1.0 mg/1
effluent concentration 334 400 13
Estimated 1990 daily flow
of 1.6 mgd and 10-10-0.3 mg/1
effluent concentration 133 133 4
2-29
-------
Other constituents in the treated effluent would include nitrogen, as
either organic nitrogen, ammonia, nitrite, or nitrate; chlorides; soluble
salts (measured as alkalinity); sodium; sulfates; various metals in minute
concentrations, such as magnesium, manganese, iron, lead, chromium, copper,
nickel, zinc, cadmium, mercury, and boron; silica; fluoride; and coliform
bacteria. Effluent limitations traditionally are not established for these
parameters, because the concentrations present in domestic wastewaters
usually do not pose public health or other environmental problems in sur-
face waters. Exceptions are fecal coliform bacteria and ammonia-nitrogen.
The standard for fecal coliform bacteria is 200 MPN per 100 liters. The
proposed chlorination facilities at the new plant are designed to disinfect
the treated wastewater prior to discharge, which would control the fecal
coliform level in the effluent. There currently is no MPCA effluent limi-
tation for ammonia-nitrogen; however, MPCA is proposing a new standard for
unionized ammonia. Thus, ammonia control may be necessary at some future
time.
The total construction cost of this alternative is estimated to be
$11,374,000 for an advanced-secondary WWTP (estimated by WAPORA based on
RCM 1979b and 1980 ), and $14,303,000 for a tertiary plant. The estimated
annual operation and maintenance (O&M) cost is $431,000 for the advanced-
secondary plant (based on RCM 1979b) and $539,000 for the tertiary plant
(RCM 1980). Considering the year-2000 salvage value, the total present
worth cost of the advanced-secondary WWTP is $15,896,000, and is
$18,966,000 for the tertiary plant. The respective equivalent annual
average costs for the two options are $1,515,000 and $1,807,000 (based on a
7.125% discount rate and a 20-year analysis period ).
2.4.2. Alternative 2 — New WWTP at Existing Plant Site with Effluent Dis-
charge to the Mississippi River
Alternative 2 proposes the construction of a new WWTP at the site of
the existing Bemidji WWTP (Site 2 in Figure 2-5). A new pumping station
would be constructed at the site to replace the old plant lift station.
Costs for subsequently presented alternatives are based on these same
sources and factors.
2-30
-------
This building also would contain preliminary treatment units. Wastewater
entering the pumping station from the existing sewer system thus would
receive preliminary treatment before being pumped to the primary clarifier
units. The treatment and sludge management processes of the new WWTP would
be the same as those proposed in Alternative 1 (Section 2.4.1.).
The existing WWTP would be kept operational while the new treatment
units were being built around it. It would be demolished after the new
treatment plant was operational.
An additional pumping station would be required for this alternative
to convey the effluent from the new treatment plant via a new 20-inch
force main to the Mississippi River for discharge. The proposed route of
the force main would be the same as described for Alternative 1, as shown
in Figure 2-5.
The new WWTP would be expected to produce an effluent of the same
quality as that described for Alternative 1. The effluent loadings of
BOD , suspended solids, phosphorus, and other parameters, and the quantity
of sludge produced also would be the same as previously discussed.
The total construction cost for this alternative is $11,649,000 for
the advanced-secondary option and $14,578,000 for the tertiary plant. The
average annual O&M costs for the two options are $437,000 and $545,000,
respectively. The total present worth costs are $16,234,000 and
$19,291,000, respectively, and the equivalent annual costs for the two
options are $1,547,000 and $1,838,000.
2.4.3. Alternative 3 — New WWTP at Existing Plant Site with Effluent Dis-
charge to Lake Bemidji
Alternative 3 is basically the same as Alternative 2. Treated efflu-
ent from a new WWTP at the existing plant site, however, would be dis-
charged directly to the channel between Lake Irving and Lake Bemidji
(existing discharge site). The existing 18-inch effluent sewer would be
replaced by a 27-inch gravity outfall sewer.
2-31
-------
The effluent loadings would be the same as discussed for Alternative 1
(Section 2.4.1.). The effluent would be dispersed in the southern basin of
Lake Bemidji prior to flowing downstream eventually via the Mississippi
River lake outlet.
The total estimated construction cost for Alternative 3 for an ad-
vanced-secondary WWTP is $9,975,000. The cost for a tertiary plant for
this alternative is $12,904,000. The average annual O&M costs for the two
options are $417,000 and $525,000 respectively. The total present worth
cost is $14,350,000 for the advanced-secondary system and $17,608,000 for
the tertiary system. The equivalent average costs are $1,368,000 and
$1,678,000, respectively.
2.4.4. Alternative 4 — New WWTP at Existing Plant Site with Effluent Dis-
charge to Grass Lake
This alternative proposes the same concept as Alternative 2, except
that the treated effluent would be pumped northwest of Bemedji via a new
force main to Grass Lake for discharge, rather than to the northeast to the
Mississippi River for discharge downstream from Lake Bemidji (Figure 2-5).
The effluent quality limitations established by MPCA are expected to be
more stringent for a Grass Lake discharge than for a Lake Bemidji or Mis-
sissippi River discharge because of its limited capacity to assimilate BOD.
A 5 mg/1 effluent standard for both BOD and SS would be imposed, as com-
pared to 25 mg/1 BOD and 30 mg/1 SS for the other alternatives. There-
fore, the capability of the secondary biological treatment system would
have to be increased.
The treated effluent would flow to a new pumping station at the plant
site and would be pumped to Grass Lake for discharge via a new force main
approximately 4 miles long and 20 inches in diameter. As illustrated in
Figure 2-5, the force main would cross the Lake Irving-Lake Bemidji chan-
nel, and would follow the BN and Soo Line railroad rights-of-way to Park
Street, crossing the tracks at Park Street, and proceeding northwesterly
parallel to, and on the north side of, the railroad tracks to a point
immediately south of Grass Lake. From there it would be routed north to
2-32
-------
Grass Lake, with a tentatively proposed discharge point near Moberg's
landing strip and seaplane base.
The existing WWTP would continue to treat Bemidji's wastewater until
the new plant would be completed. Based on the 5-5-1.0 or 5-5-0.3 mg/1
BOD -SS-P discharge limitations expected for a Grass Lake discharge, total
loadings to the lake would be:
Discharge Concentration Loading
Parameter (mg/1) (Ib/day)
2 mgd design flow
BOD 5.0 83
SS 5.0 83
Total P 1.0 16
0.3 5
1.6 mgd average flow
BOD 5.0 67
SS 5.0 67
Total P 1.0 13
0.3 4
Other wastewater constituents of lesser concern also would be discharged at
the levels indicated for Alternative 1 (Section 2.4.1.).
The total estimated construction costs for this alternative are
$13,290,000 for an advanced-secondary WWTP and $16,219,000 for a tertiary
WWTP. The projected annual average O&M costs are $492,000 and $600,000,
respectively. The total present worth costs for the two options are
$18,452,000 and $21,408,000. The equivalent annual costs are $1,758,000
and $2,040,000, respectively.
2.4.5. Alternative 5 — New WWTP at Grass Lake Site with Effluent Dis-
charge to Grass Lake
Alternative 5 includes the construction of a new WWTP adjacent to
Grass Lake (Site 3, Figure 2-5). Tentatively, the proposed site would
2-33
-------
involve 15 to 20 acres in the area of Moberg's landing strip and seaplane
base, adjacent to the south-central section of the Lake.
Wastewater from the existing sewer system would enter a new pumping
station at the site of the existing WWTP. The wastewater would receive
preliminary treatment prior to being pumped via an approximately 4-mile-
long, 20-inch-diameter force main to the Grass Lake site. The force main
route, the same as described for Alternative 4 (Section 2.4.4.), is illu-
strated in Figure 2-5.
The new WWTP would involve the same treatment processes as would the
plant proposed in Alternative 4 — primary, secondary, and tertiary with
expanded secondary treatment units (relative to Alternatives 1 through 3)
to ensure that the 5-5 mg/1 BOD -SS effluent limitations can be met.
Discharge of treated effluent would be directly to Grass Lake. Total
loadings would be the same as discussed for Alternative 4.
The total estimated construction cost for Alternative 5 is $12,932,000
for an advanced-secondary WWTP and $15,861,000 for a tertiary WWTP. The
annual O&M for the two options is estimated to be $492,000 and $600,000,
respectively. Total present worth of the proposed advanced-secondary
system is $18,094,000, and is $21,057,000 for the tertiary option. The
annual equivalent costs are $1,724,000 and $2,007,000, respectively.
2.4.6. Alternative 6 — Land Treatment of Wastewater on Forest Lands and
Croplands in Eckles Township
Alternative 6 presents a considerably different treatment concept than
those presented for the other five alternatives. Wastewater from Bemidji's
collection system would be redirected to a new pumping station at the
existing plant site. The raw wastewater would pass through preliminary
treatment units at the pumping station prior to being pumped via a new
20-inch-diameter, 9.3-mile-long force main to new treatment/storage ponds
located in Section 16 of Eckles Township.
The proposed route of the force main is illustrated in Figure 2-6.
The initial segment is the same as the one described for Alternative 4.
2-34
-------
^S4M^M-jli&T->_^_^liaiii: i-^i^£-^^i225ffiW.J..'i-* - -
^r%^^%^^ ,.. - v ^'Wrrll:
-.18'; ;[•,,;«• t""">4'3j,17>. ' 'w*»h ,^/
%?«i
v*f -4^d5
ROPdS^e FQRCEMAIN
PROPOSED
DUMPING
SJAT10N
Figure 2-6. Location of proposed force main, treatment and storage ponds and land
treatment area in Alternative 6 (from RCM 1980).
2-35
-------
The route of the force main in this alternative, however, would proceed
north from the BN Railroad right-of-way prior to crossing under the new US
Route 2 Bypass in Section 6 of Bemidji Township. The route then would
follow the US Route 71 connector north between the Bypass and US Route 2,
then proceed northwest along Route 2 to the intersection of Minnesota Route
89. The force main then is proposed to be constructed along Route 89 to
the intersection of Route 89 and the section line between Sections 21 and
22 in Eckles Township. It then would run north along the section line to
the treatment/storage ponds that are proposed to be located in the south-
east quarter of Section 16.
The pond system would consist of two sets of three cells (Figure 2-7).
The force main would discharge to either one of two 15-foot-deep, aerated
basins with a combined surface area of 9 acres. The aeration process would
increase the rate of oxidation of organic constituents, providing primary
treatment and reducing the production of odors.
These two cells, as well as the other four storage cells, would be
constructed by excavating 3 to 4 feet of soil and constructing earthen
dikes. The basins would be lined with a synthetic membrane with a thick-
ness of at least 20 mills (0.02 inches) to prevent leakage through the
underlying soil material.
The second pair of cells would serve as first-stage storage cells.
Each would be 10 acres in size and 15 feet deep. The effective operating
depth would vary from 2 to 15 feet. The two second-stage storage cells
would have a combined area of 92 acres and would be operated with from 1
to 12 feet of water storage. The storage basins also would be aerated, but
less intensively than the first pair of cells. The total pond system would
have a capacity to store the equivalent of 210 days of wastewater at the
2.0 mgd design flow (1,290 acre-feet).
The treated wastewater would be pumped from the two final storage
cells during suitable weather conditions, chlorinated for disinfection
purposes, and conveyed to various parts of the proposed land treatment site
for application to the land. The proposed application area encompasses
2-36
-------
"-;'/ •*/ ( ( y
..I'--* Jfj \ ^-/
-V c^,i;':
19
Figure 2-7. Area in Eckles Townsh(from RCM 1980).
2-37
-------
lands in Sections 1, 10, 11, 12, 15, and 16 in Eckles Township (Figure
2-7). A total of 1,170 acres is proposed for wastewater application. This
land primarily is forested, except for the agricultural land in Sections 1
and 12.
Application on the forested land is proposed to be accomplished by a
solid-set sprinkler system. The maximum annual application rate on these
lands would be the equivalent of 24 inches of precipitation (year-2000
design condition).
Individual sprinklers which would be interconnected with lateral and
mainline pipes would be spaced in a 40-foot by 40-foot grid pattern. The
piping would be buried about 3 feet below the surface. The sprinklers
would be mounted atop vertical risers that would extend from the buried
pipe to several feet above the ground surface. Ten-foot-wide corridors
would be cleared through the forest for the emplacement of the piping and
to facilitate even distribution of the wastewater by the sprinklers (see
Figure 2-8). This would result in 10-foot corridors being cleared between
30-foot corridors of forest.
About 250 acres of croplands owned by the Cronemillers in Sections 1
and 12 also are proposed to be irrigated with wastewater. Center pivot and
traveling gun irrigation equipment would be utilized to distribute as much
water on the crops each year as the farm manager deemed prudent. If the
precipitation equivalent of 12 inches of wastewater were applied to the
croplands per year, the amount of wastewater to be applied to the forest
land would be reduced by 10%.
The forest land application area would be underdrained to provide
control of groundwater levels. It is proposed that drain tile lines would
be trenched in parallel, spaced 200 feet apart, at a depth of about 8 feet.
The drain lines would be trenched within the same corridors as would the
irrigation piping. The underdrainage system would discharge into open
ditches 8 to 14 feet deep. Conceptually, the ditches would be constructed
specifically to provide for the collection of underdrainage and its convey-
ance for discharge to established surface water courses (Figure 2-9).
2-38
-------
UJ
CO
a.
CO
•
r"
UJ
CO
a
LU
X
—
U_
/
\
\
O
t-
Z3
CO
f^
uu
H-
CO
a
a
UJ
aL
ZD
CQ
CO
a.
z:
^^
a.
2
O
^_
<
til
«f
QJ
a
o
•H
4-1
tfl
t>0
•H
M
CO
cu
S-l
o
fl
O
4-1
CO
aj
3
4J
P.
Q)
O
c
o
o
oo
60
•H
En
2-39
-------
i *a
^W
^
fe*___ ~- 3
*» -."^'PV^
- ' 0 "'TV-
, - r> -" " \
Ax. V ,- „
;.J
^nn=
•i «f —
X ^ C
\4:
a ?
'.;
^ 7 s ^
. ; , ^
<-!
f
Sx...
^N
s
' ^
^^.^••-.v'v.t:i
i/V'^^^ ^^? v I O\ "<•*';»• 'A.,- —'5l'ti s
tli-l^Nfc^ •«" \i /'^.\ •• i«v<,,rt.',.;,",'• '<*. ,'MV2^-'
Figure 2-9. Proposed layout f
2-40
-------
The entire application site area would be fenced to control access to
the area. Groundwater monitoring wells would be installed at the perimeter
of the site to maintain surveillance of the quality of the groundwater
migrating from the site. A minimum 100-foot-wide area would remain undis-
turbed at the perimeter of each application area to serve as a buffer
between the application area and publicly-traveled roads or private
property.
The estimated construction cost for this alternative is $24,457,000,
the most expensive of the six alternatives (RCM 1980). The estimated
average annual O&M cost is $612,000 (RCM 1980). For purposes of the analy-
sis, RCM (1980) assumed a cost for the forest land of $300 per acre. A
total site area of 1,680 acres would be purchased. The estimated year-2000
salvage value for the system is $7,823,000 (RCM 1980). Therefore the total
present worth cost is $28,903,000 and the equivalent annual average cost is
$2,754,000.
2.5. Comparison of Alternatives and Selection of a Recommended Action
2.5.1. Comparison of Federal, State, and Local Costs
A summary of the estimated costs of project alternatives, including
the relative Federal, State, and City of Bemidji share of the costs for the
two treatment options, are displayed in Table 2-4. The lowest cost alter-
native, in terras of total capital cost, total present worth, and annual
cost, is a new advanced-secondary treatment system at the existing plant
site in Bemidji with discharge to the inlet channel to Lake Bemidji (Alter-
native 3). This alternative also has the lowest cost among the six alter-
natives when the tertiary treatment option is considered for each. Alter-
native 1 has the next lowest capital, present worth, and annual cost for
both treatment options. The advanced-secondary treatment option for Alter-
native 1 is 11% more costly than for Alternative 3, and the tertiary treat-
ment option is 8% more. Alternative 2 is close to Alternative 1 in cost
for both the advanced-secondary and tertiary treatment options (both are
within $275,000, or about 2%, of each other).
2-41
-------
QJ
S
CO
0) 60
rJ C
4J -H
0)
>i &
J-i
cd ps
•rl H
4-1 4->
rJ (3
0) oo
•H (^
tH 4-1 rH
•^ ca
M C T3
6 r-l C
QJ n)
O 4-1
• i-l ,n
iH cd CTi
v_x r~
S o~>
>, d) r-i
r-l 4-1
Cd CD S
T3 !^ U
C w pi
o
O r-l C
0) 0) O
CO 4J
I ni -a
T3 S 0)
cu cu co
O 4J CTj
C co jz
CO CO v^
> £
t)
Cd * 4J
•H O
4-4 CO CO
o , 00 CU
M B T3
cd -H
3 O O
173 ^ O
i
OJ
cd
H
-3-1
xD CO 01 •
QJ 4J 5 v>
> CO
•H T3 0) H X
4J a e ^
CO « 4J 01
a »-i to oj ^
|j ^ 0) .-i 01
OI LI Jrf 4-1
4J 4J CJ 1-1
-H W CO
C CO -
i-l CO CO .C O
4-» f-( CO 4-1 4-» X
at o. h 1-1 ^
e cj s o)
LJ 3 SO'-.
OJ 01 4-1 QJ i-l 0)
4-1 e o j»i « jj
1 CO O
-3- 01 01 O
4J 1-1 tO O
> at a u — i
•H i-l i-l J= «-
4J O. 4-» 4-» O
CO CO -H 4J X
C S -H * >-'
U 01 X tV
CD a o> co oo ^-N
4-1 N** 4-1 LI 01
—4 4-1 i-t cfl j«!
•^ to co j to
U i-3
£ S
4-1 0) O
i-l j^ O
en w * a •
CO fj -H
0) Q)
> 4-1 4-1 O
•H a IH 4J x
4-1 to 01 ^
CO i-l OJ
a o. oo oo ^
u e u -H
01 S i-l CO n
4-1 QJ 4-1 ,e -o
—i a m o IH
•< •— ' IH to e
o TJ co
O -^
01 4J i-4 O
4-> O.O
CM 1-1 01 (S.O
4J CO 00-H »
0) C M 0) -4
> CO 00 CO CO
•H r-4 C .a -r4
v a -H o co x
CO 4J CO CO •-*
e S CO -H f4
1-1 QJ 1-1 TJ s ^
oi ^e x M
f-l 4J ^ >
< 4-> -H 4-1 iH
O s-.
Q. 4-1 -r4 O
-H ex IH o> ex o
*H co oo a. *
01 01 t4 i-l -H
> 01 4-1 CO CO
1-1 -H c .e co
w en to o i-l X
CO CO i-4 CO 01 ^-*
c -H a. 1-1 to
o> m E u
4-1 3 0) A QJ
r-l OJ > 4-1 01 >
4
sr m
O IT)
CM ON
m ON
r^ o
ON O
oo o
i** m
m CM
r-l
CO
4-1
u
d
0
4J
'J 0)
3 U
LI n
01 "o:
a
O 1-4
o «
•0 01
CB -O
W 01
to Cb
g
1-1
CO
u
o \o
o o>
«> »
CM CM
s£? CM
CM 0
CM in
CM CM
—1 CM
00 O
-* CM
S3
CN in
CM CM
f-- OO
xO 00
00 O
r-C CN
rH f—.
rH m
00 O
*-< CN
CM m
-* in
rH rH
*O CM
- r-
CM CM
co m
ON CO
tn r-.
ty cii
cO cO
n co
GJ ^H
*-» CO
nu o
w o
CN
3
§
O>
»^
O
o
CN
.
S
m
^
m
r")
^j
00
n
^
T— 4
CO
m
^
00
CO
00
rH
00
ON
CO
CO
ON
CO
~-<
ON
CO
0)
3
^
QJ
00
03
rH
fO
CO
3
2
«
U
CO
0
oo
CM
j —
m
o
r-7
CM
Ox
O
00
CO
0
t-T
(M
CM
m
^
00
CO
o
r^.
o
m
rH
CM
ON
CO
CN
—4
vO
ON
OO
vC
ON
00
m
rH
u
4-1
to
o
y
JH
4-1
i-l
. §
4-1
C
CJ
0>
u
Q.
,_!
0
H
^
in
CM
o
0
CM
CM
,.4
O
o
CM
03
fs^
00
^o
— H
CO
\c
00
tn
00
1-4
^
tn
^^
o
00
tn
,—<
m
—i
4^
CO
o
o
i-4
2
a
«
a
cu
.H
to
1-1
3
cr
•-I
4-1
O
H
CO
o
to-
co
CM
i— 1
vD
CM
00
o
CM
T)
CO
e
o
i— t
4J CO
C oc
01
CO O
> 0
•H ••
3 -H
tr
0) U
cu
rH O.
to
3 4J
C to
C 0
< 0
09
4->
e
0)
s
0)
O
a
Q
a
CO
M
ai
CD
CO
0)
"S
cu
c
^
o
4J
CO
o
u
rH
•H
a
CO
U
rH
CO
•H
CU
4J
O
a.
a:
"S
^_t
0
o
c
CO
01
o
Q
ctl
.-4
a
o
OJ
n
3
O
01
eo
' n
01
CO
14
0
14-1
_c
4-1
a
Q
O
tn
xO
«>
0)
4-1
n
01
a
0
•H
4-1
U
01
,_4
O
CJ
14
O
U-l
S
O
01
•a
3
O
C
1-4
4-1
O
e
01
QJ
S
JS
0
CO
h
01
01
a
•H
8*€
in
CM
u
to
CO
Ll
to
0)
o
CM
a
o
QJ
01
n
ea
CJ
2-A2
-------
Alternatives 4 and 5 are comparable to each other in cost, but are
significantly higher in cost than Alternatives 1, 2, and 3. The advanced-
secondary option for Alternative 4 is 29% more than Alternative 3» 16% more
than Alternative 1, 14% more than Alternative 2, and 2% more than Alterna-
tive 5. Considering the tertiary option, Alternative 4 is 22% more than
Alternative 3, 13% more than Alternative 1, 11% more than alternative 2,
and about 2% more than Alternative 5. The capital cost of Alternative 6 is
145% that of the advanced-secondary treatment option of Alternative 3, and
twice as much in terms of present worth. The capital cost of the tertiary
treatment option in Alternnative 3 is only 53% of the capital cost of
Alternative 1, or 61% in terms of present worth.
From a cost perspective, Alternative 3 appears to be the most advan-
tageous for both treatment options when compared to the same options for
the other four conventional treatment alternatives. Alternatives 1 and 2
are close enough to Alternative 3 to warrant further consideration. Alter-
natives 4, 5, and 6, however, are sufficiently higher in cost that further
consideration is not warranted unless the lower cost alternatives are
environmentally incompatible and these alternatives offer significant
environmental and/or social advantage.
2.5.2. Summary of Comparison of Environmental Consequences of Alternatives
The tertiary treatment options for the conventional treatment alterna-
tives would offer the greatest potential for improvement of the Mississippi
River Chain-of-Lakes in the Bemidji area (Section 4.2.2.). However, the
relative increment of improvement in downstream water quality associated
with the discharge of 16 pounds of phosphorus per day at design flow from
an advanced-secondary treatment plant compared to 5 pounds per day from a
tertiary plant is difficult to predict. Because of the contribution of
phosphorus from nonpiont sources, Wolf Lake and Lake Andrusia would con-
tinue to receive phosphorus loadings at rates higher than the rate esti-
mated to cause eutrophic conditions, even with the additional reduction of
phosphorus (to 0.3 rag/1) in the WWTP effluent. The additional increment of
phosphorus removal must be considered in light of the increased cost of
attaining the approximately 9% increase in phosphorus removal efficiency
(87% compared to 96% removal).
2-43
-------
In the case of each alternative, the tertiary treatment option adds
approximately $2.9 million to the construction cost and $108,000 per year
(in 1980 dollars) to the City's operational phase cost. The difference in
terms of equivalent annual cost is $310,000. The typical family of four in
Bemidji would pay approximately $5/month more in user charges (Section
4.2.3. and Appendix H) for tertiary treatment compared to advanced-second-
ary treatment.
The least potential disruption and environmental impact from construc-
tion of a new treatment system at Bemidji would be associated with Alterna-
tive 3 because construction would be confined to the existing plant site
(Section 4.1.). Each of the other alternatives would result in some degree
of impact along the force main routes proposed in each, or at new treat-
ment/discharge sites. Implementation of Alternative 6, the land treatment
alternative, would result in the most significant construction impacts of
the six alternatives.
2.5.3. Conclusions
The least cost alternative, from both an economic and environmental
perspective, is Alternative 3 — a new WWTP at the site of the existing
plant with discharge to the inlet channel to Lake Bemidji. Based on the
discussion in Sections 3.1.3. and 4.2.2. concerning water quality, a stan-
dard of at least 1.0 mg/1 (advanced-secondary) for the WWTP effluent phos-
phorus at Bemidji appears justified. Considering the objective to improve
water quality in the downstream lakes to the maximum extent possible, a 0.3
mg/1 effluent phosphorus level, as was considered by supplemental facili-
ties planning, may be justifiable. The relative increment of increased
benefit, however, is difficult to quantify, whereas the increased cost to
attain the added level of phosphorus removal is readily apparent. A final
decision regarding an effluent phosphorus standard will be based on the
public and agency comments on this Draft EIS, the findings and conclusions
of the NPDES permit process to be conducted by the MPCA and its Board, and
2-44
-------
USEPA's Advanced Secondary Treatment (AST) review process. The Final EIS,
therefore, will reflect the information and decisions made during these
review processes and will indicate the selected alternative wastewater
system for construction and operation at Bemidji.
LThe USEPA is required by PRM #79-7 (USEPA 1979) to conduct an exacting
review of. projects designed for treatment more stringent than secondary.
The incremental capital costs associated with treatment levels beyond
secondary must be based on a justification showing significant water
quality improvement and mitigation of health problems where they exist.
Projects also must be evaluated for their financial impact on the commun-
ity. Additionally, in justifying the construction of an AST project,
USEPA should insure that, in cases where "Best Management Practices" for
nonpoint source control are needed to achieve a desired water quality
standard, such controls are in place or are at least a part of a draft
water quality management plan that is subject to approval of USEPA.
2-45
-------
3.0. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
This section has been prepared in accordance with the US Council on
Environmental Quality's guidelines for the preparation of EIS's (40 CFR
1502). As such, the discussions of the affected environment are specific
to areas that potentially could be impacted by the implementation, con-
struction, and/or operation of the six alternative wastewater treatment
systems. In short, this section is issue specific rather than encyclo-
pedic. Additional information on the natural and man-made environs of the
Bemidji area is summarized in previous planning reports, including WAPORA
(1977a, 1977b, 1977c), Stewart & Walker (1976), and ROM (1979a, 1979b,
1979c, 1980).
3.1. Natural Environment
3.1.1. Atmosphere
Elements of the atmospheric environment that are relevant to the
consideration of the proposed wastewater treatment alternatives include
temperature, precipitation, wind, and noise levels. Other than the consi-
deration of potential odor generation by the treatment processes, air
quality is not expected to be affected significantly and, therefore, is de-
scribed briefly.
3.1.1.1. Climate
The climate of the Bemidji area is characterized by large seasonal
variations in temperature and frequent fluctuations in temperature over
short periods of time. The average annual temperature is approximately
38°F (Appendix B). January is usually the coldest month with temperatures
averaging 4.7°F, whereas July, with average temperatures of 68.2°F, is
generally the warmest. The growing season is approximately 107 days
(Appendix B). The last spring frost usually occurs between 17 May and 29
May, while the first frost in autumn usually occurs between 13 September
and 28 September (Gale Research Company 1978).
3-1
-------
The average annual precipitation, as recorded at the Bemidji Airport,
is 21.66 inches (Appendix B; Gale Research Company 1978). The maximum
annual precipitation occurred in 1975 when 31.69 inches were recorded. The
minimum was 12.47 inches in 1917.
Most of the annual precipitation falls as rain between May and Septem-
ber. Once every 2 years, on the average, the area may receive as much as
1.1 inches of rain per hour or 2.3 inches over a 24-hour period. Fifty-
year storms may result in maximum precipitation of 2.3 inches per hour or
4.7 inches over 24 hours. On the average, between 45 and 55 inches of
snowfall are recorded annually in Bemidji, accounting for approximately 30%
of the average annual precipitation. The ground is covered by 1.0 inch or
more of snow about 36% of the year.
Average annual runoff to surface water courses in the Bemidji area has
been estimated to be approximately 4 inches per year (USGS 1968) or less
than 20% of the normal annual precipitation. The remainder percolates
through the ground and replenishes the groundwater. April through June
usually are the months of largest runoff, because precipitation is aug-
mented by the melting of snow and ice that has accumulated during the
winter months.
The prevailing winds are from the northwest and southeast. Wind
rarely comes from the northeast (Appendix B). Wind speeds average less
than 9 miles per hour. Detailed meteorological data are available from the
National Climatic Center for International Falls, Minnesota, which is
situated about 100 miles to the north, and for St. Cloud, Minnesota, 140
miles to the south-southeast (Appendix B). These data indicate that Be-
midji receives almost 4.0 inches less precipitation per year than Inter-
national Falls and 4.6 inches per year less than St. Cloud.
3.1.1.2. Air Quality
Air quality in the Bemidji area is better than that proposed by the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards, or the more stringent Minnesota
3-2
-------
Ambient Air Quality Standards, for particulates and sulfur dioxide (Ap-
pendix B). Concentrations of nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, non-methane
hydrocarbons, oxidants, hydrogen sulfide, and odorous air pollutants are
not measured at Bemidji. Ambient concentrations are believed to be less
than the applicable standards.
3.1.1.3. Noise
Four stations for in-the-field noise measurements in the Bemidji
project area were established at rural sites. Data were collected on 5 and
6 May 1977.
Station 1 was located adjacent to the south bank of the Mississippi
River approximately 0.5 miles downstream from Lake Bemidji, in proximity to
the treatment plant site proposed in Alternative 1. Station 2 was adjacent
to State Highway 89, approximately 2.0 miles north of US Highway 2, in
proximity to the proposed treatment/storage lagoons at Section 16. Station
3 was adjacent to County Road 406, about 2.0 miles east of Lake Irving, and
Station 4 was adjacent to County Road 409, 6.0 miles east of Lake Bemidji.
The noise levels at the four sampling stations were well within the
State standards. At most stations the only source of noise was remote
traffic. At Station 4 there was no identifiable source of noise. Night-
time background noise levels would be from 3 to 5 dBA less than the daytime
levels.
3.1.2. Land
3.1.2.1. Bemidji Area
TOPOGRAPHY
Surface elevations in the Bemidji area range from 1,350 to 1,450 feet
above mean sea level (msl). The area generally is level to sloping, and
there is little topographic relief except for isolated areas with slopes
larger than 10% south and southwest of Bemidji.
3-3
-------
Glacial activity primarily is responsible for the area's terrain.
Most of the project area is an outwash plain formed by meltwater. This
area has minimal relief.
Ground moraines and end moraines are found to the south and east of
Beraidji. These areas of unsorted glacial deposits not subjected to melt-
water, provide most of the topographic relief in the area.
GEOLOGY
Bedrock
The bedrock of northern Minnesota consists of hard, impervious igneous
and metamorphic rocks of the Lower Precambrian Series. The Bemidji area is
underlain by granite known as Algoman, which is about 2,600 million years
old. Metasedimentary and metavolcanic rocks to the north of Bemidji are of
the same time period as the Algoman granite.
No faults have been identified in the immediate Bemidji area. Two
faults are located north and northeast of Bemidji.
Surficial Geology
Minnesota's bedrock is covered by debris left by continental glaci-
ation during the Pleistocene age. Deposits in the Bemidji area are esti-
mated to be from 400 to 500 feet thick (Morrey 1974). The composition of
these materials varies from gravel to sand depending on the method of
deposition (Appendix C).
Most of the surficial deposits in the area around Bemidji are outwash
sands. Meltwater from the glacial front deposited this fine grained ma-
terial over a wide area. Deposits of outwash gravel are found west of
Bemidji. Both the sand and gravel are very permeable, which is an impor-
tant characteristic when considering land application of wastewater.
3-4
-------
Surrounding the outwash deposits (east and north of Betnidji) are
deposits of unsorted, or undifferentiated, material ranging in size from
clay to boulders. These end moraines were formed by the glacier when it
was stationary. Ground moraines, or till plains, are located in the south-
ern part of the project area. These are deposits laid down as the glacier
receded. Moraines generally are not as permeable as the outwash deposits
and, thus, are less desirable for land application of wastewater for other
than very low-rate application.
Isolated segments in the Bemidji area (predominantly northwest and
southwest of the City of Bemidji) are covered with glacial lake peat de-
posits. These areas previously were glacial lakes that were covered by
vegetation after the retreat of the last glacier. The continual presence
of water in the lake basin inhibits the complete decay of organic material,
thus forming peat.
Soils
Soils in the Bemidji area have been formed since the retreat of the
last glacier 10,000 to 15,000 years ago. Most of the soils in Beltrami
County were formed under forest vegetation and, as a result, have low
organic content.
The US Soil Conservation Service, in cooperation with the Beltrami
County Soil and Water Conservation District, has published soils data and a
general soil association map for Beltrami County (Figure 3-1). A compre-
hensive, modern soil survey for Beltrami County was begun during the fall
of 1979.
LANDSCAPE TYPES
The Bemidji area is in a transition zone between the northern boreal
forest and the eastern deciduous forest, and the vegetation of the area
contains biotic elements typical of both forest types. There are many
lakes, marshes, and swamps in the region, particularly in the Mississippi
3-5
-------
000 0° "O O C
°o°0°° o o°0°«
MENAH6A-MARQUETTE ASSOCIATION
BELTRAMI-NEBISH-SHCOKER ASSOCIATION
NEBISH-BELTRAMI ASSOCIATION
6RYGLA- UNNAMED ASSOCIATION
Figure 3-1. Soil associations in the Bemidji area (Adapted from the USDA Soil
Conservation Service, n.d.) .
3-6
-------
Headwaters State Forest to the west of the City of Bemidji. A description
of the land use/land cover types in the area is given in WAPORA (1977a) .
Eighteen landscape types were identified, fifteen with vegetation, and
three with little or no vegetation (Table 3-1), and the characteristics of
each were discussed. A brief review of the existing land use/land cover of
the area is presented in this section, and more detailed descriptions of
the sites/corridors that are areas expected to be affected by each of the
proposed treatment alternatives are provided in the following sections.
Developed Lands
The largest community in the area is the City of Bemidji, which is
situated primarily along the western and southern shores of Lake Bemidji.
The narrow strip of land along the northwestern, eastern, and southeastern
shores of the Lake contains low-density residential development. Most of
the high-density residential development is concentrated along the western
Table 3-1. Landscape types in the Bemidji area.
VEGETATED LANDSCAPE TYPES NONVEGETATED OR SPARSE LANDSCAPED TYPES
Coniferous Forest • Water
Jack Pine • Developed Land
Jack Pine/Norway Pine Residential
Commercial
Deciduous Forest
Aspen
Paper Birch/Aspen
Bur Oak/Basswood
Green Ash/American Elm
Mixed Forest (Jack Pine/Aspen)
Pine Plantation
Advanced Oldfield
Oldfield
Pasture
Cultivated Field
Scrub (Alder/Willow)
Bog
Marsh
3-7
-------
shore, which also includes the central business district. A belt of land
on the southern side of the Lake is zoned for industrial use, and the
largely undeveloped Bemidji Industrial Park is located in that area.
Commercial growth is occurring along State Highway 2 between the City and
the Bemidji Municipal Airport, located approximately 3 miles northwest of
the central business district. A number of trailer parks also have de-
veloped to the north of the City limits, along old Highway 71.
Lake Irving, a smaller lake immediately southwest of Lake Bemidji, is
almost completely surrounded by development. The new industrial park is
located along the northeastern shore between Lake Irving and Lake Bemidji.
An extensive area of oldfield vegetation that is changing to forest is
located along the southern shore of Lake Irving. The Mississippi River
enters Lake Irving through this area, and flows out the northern part of
the lake into Lake Bemidji. Additional developed land is located along
Carpenter Avenue southeast of Lake Irving.
The town of Wilton, located approximately 4 miles west of Bemidji, is
the only multi-unit developed land in the area of the proposed land treat-
ment site. Section 3.2.3. presents a more thorough description of de-
veloped land use in the Bemidji area.
Agricultural and Pasture Lands
Most agricultural land is located to the southeast and southwest of
Lake Bemidji. A large area of cultivated land also is present between
Meadow Lake and Movil Lake to the north of Bemidji. The principal crops
cultivated in the Bemidji area are corn, wheat, sunflowers, and hay.
Bemidji is an important dairy center, and lands used as pastures are scat-
tered throughout the area, particularly to the north and west of Bemidji.
Other landscape types associated with agriculture are oldfields and
advanced oldfields. Advanced old-fields are those that have progressed
through a grass cover stage and in which trees, such as pines and aspens
(particularly quaking aspens), are becoming abundant (scientific names of
species of plants mentioned are included in Appendix D). These areas were
3-8
-------
used as cropland or pastures within the last 10 years. Small areas of
these two landscape types are scattered throughout the Bemidji area.
»
Forested Lands
Prior to settlement, the vegetation of the Bemidji area consisted
primarily of coniferous species such as white pine, Norway pine (red pine),
jack pine, balsam fir, white spruce, black spruce, and hardwoods (oaks,
sugar maple, basswood, and elm). Loggers removed most of the white pine
and Norway pine prior to 1910, and jack pine subsequently became estab-
lished throughout the region (Lago 1971). Jack pine is especially abundant
on glacial outwash deposits and is the most extensive landscape type.
Large tracts of jack pine are located in the western part of the area,
around the Bemidji Municipal Airport, Grass Lake, and the upper parts of
Grant Creek to the northwest. Smaller areas are located around the edges
of the City of Bemidji and throughout other parts of the area. Most of the
coniferous forest vegetation in the eastern and southeastern parts of the
area and along the Burlington Northern and Soo Line railroad tracks (force
main route) is a mixture of jack pine and Norway pine (red pine). These
probably represent areas that were not logged.
Large tracts of deciduous forest are located on upland areas to the
north and east of Lake Bemidji. This type of vegetation may contain
several landscape types: aspen forest, paper birch-aspen forest, bur-oak
basswood forest, and green ash-American elm forest. Quaking aspen rapidly
invades disturbed sites, such as abandoned fields and recently logged
areas, and is the most common species in many small tracts of deciduous
forest throughout the area. The paper birch-aspen forest type also is
present in the uplands along the Mississippi River to the east of Lake
Bemidji, especially around Stump Lake. The most extensive of the deciduous
forest types is the bur oak-basswood forest, which covers much of the
east-central part of the area. The green ash-American elm forest is pre-
sent primarily on lower ground along the Mississippi River in the south-
western part of the area from Fern Lake to Lake Irving.
3-9
-------
A mixed forest of jack pine and aspen is present throughout most of
the Bemidji area, usually on relatively flat areas with sandy soil. This
is one of the most common landscape types in the area.
Several pine plantations are located within the area, near Lake
Bemidji, Lake Irving, the Bemidji Municipal Airport, some of the smaller
lakes, and adjacent to cultivated fields. An extensive plantation covers
several sections in Eckles Township in the northwestern part of the area.
Wetlands
Various wetland vegetation types are present around the many lakes in
the Bemidji area and along connecting waterways that range in size from un-
maintained drainage ditches to the Mississippi River. Small areas of scrub
vegetation (alders and willows) are present near many lakes, and extensive
areas of scrub are located to the northwest of Lake Bemidji along the
drainage that flows southeast from Alice Lake to Lake Bemidji and to the
east of Lake Marquette. Marshes and wetlands are common throughout the
area, but nearly all of the bogs identified through field investigation and
examination of aerial photographs are located in the bur oak-basswood cover
type to the east of the Lake Bemidji. A few bogs are located in areas of
the mixed forest landscape type.
3.1.2.2. Mississippi River WWTP Site
The proposed 73-acre Mississippi River Site (Alternative 1), which is
owned by the City of Bemidji, is located east of Lake Bemidji (Figure 3-2).
Low-lying wetlands (elevation of 1,340 feet msl) cover the area adjacent to
the bank of the Mississippi River. Approximately 500 feet inland, however,
the land begins to rise sharply, rising 60 feet at about a 24% slope. The
southern portion of the site is level, with an elevation of 1,400 feet msl.
The soils at this site belong to the Menahga-Marquette Soil Associa-
tion. Detailed soil mapping has not been conducted for the site.
3-10
-------
o
o
o
*
CM
II
•H
4J
0)
0)
•u
0)
0)
bo
•H
O
S-i
M
3
co
13
C
0)
4-1
tu
>
•H
•H
ft
ft
•H
CO
CO
•H
CO
CO
•r-l
a
ro
3
WD
•H
3-11
-------
The Mississippi River Site includes five landscape types:
• Approximately 14 acres of marsh along the Mississippi River
on the northern border of the site
• Approximately 22 acres of a mixed forest of jack pine and
aspen on the higher ground to the south of the marsh, and an
additional 5-acre tract of this cover type in the south-
eastern part of the site
• A 3-acre advanced oldfield near the center of the site
• Approximately 15 acres of cultivated land south of the
advanced oldfield
• Approximately 10 acres of oldfield vegetation around the
cultivated land.
Depending on the layout of the new facilities, some of the vegetated areas
would be cleared and graded prior to construction of a new wastewater
treatment plant. As indicated by RCM (1980), the primary clarifiers would
be located on the higher, more level ground in the southern part of the
site. The remainder of the plant is designed so that wastewater would move
by gravity flow through the plant toward the river.
3.1.2.3. Existing WWTP Site
The existing 11-acre WWTP adjacent to Lake Irving is located in a
commercial/ industrial area (Figure 3-3). The original surface features
have been masked by the development of the site and surrounding area. No
other landscape types are present near the site. Thus, previously de-
veloped commercial/industrial land would be used for the construction of a
new WWTP at the site of the existing facilities (Alternatives 2, 3, and 4).
3.1.2.4. Grass Lake Site
The site proposed for a new treatment plant at Grass Lake (Alternative
5) is in the area of Moberg's landing strip, on the southwest shore of the
Lake (Figure 3-4). It is low-lying land with a high water table.
Grass Lake is located 2.0 miles west of Bemidji and is approximately
342 acres in extent. The average depth of the lake is 4 feet, and the
3-12
-------
o
o
o
«t
CM
II
3-13
-------
o
o
o
•»
cxi
m
0)
n)
E
cd-
0)
60
C
3
cn
(0
0)
•H
CO
CO
CO
nt
Vi
O
-------
maximum depth is 5.5 feet. Yearly fluctuations in lake level generally
range between 1 and 2 feet. The lake is fed by direct precipitation and
groundwater flow and is drained by a ditch constructed many years ago, by
evaporation, and by discharge to groundwater. The lake is bordered by
marsh vegetation, principally cattails and grasses. This vegetation is
most extensive on the southeastern and western shorelines. Aspen and mixed
jack pine/aspen forests are present on higher ground around the marshy
areas, and extends close to the lakeshore at several points on the northern
and southern sides. A large area of cultivated land lies along both sides
of the road from Highway 6 to Moberg's landing strip. Another strip of
cultivated land is located on the north side of the Soo Line railroad
tracks and extends parallel to the tracks from the entrance road to the
landing site to the road at the west end of the lake and along the east
side of that road. The area between the two cultivated strips is covered
with a mixed forest of jack pine and aspen. The northern and southern
parts of this forested tract also contain marsh vegetation. A small ditch
extends from the west end of Grass Lake through wetlands and forested areas
to Larson Lake, approximately 2.25 miles west-southwest. The ditch has not
been maintained in recent years, and sediment and vegetation have filled it
in many places.
Any discharge of wastewater into Grass Lake could affect downstream
water bodies, such as Larson Lake, Grant Creek, Grant Lake, and adjacent
wetlands (Figure 3-4). The water level in the ditch fluctuates throughout
the year, but generally is between 6 inches and 4 feet. A majority of the
lands immediately adjacent to the ditch are undeveloped wetlands. The
ditch enters Larson Lake from the southeast by flowing through an abandoned
beaver dam (observed during 1979 by WAPORA).
Larson Lake is a small, deep lake (local residents claim it is up to
90 feet deep). The lake has a narrow shelf around the shoreline, and
abundant emergent vegetation is present in this shallow-water area. Beyond
the shelf the lake depth increases rapidly, and light penetration is insuf-
ficient for plant life. Grant Creek enters Larson Lake from the north and
exits from the Lake to the southwest, toward Grant Lake. The Creek flows
through a broad area of marsh vegetation that also extends in a narrow band
around Larson Lake. The lands to the east and south of Larson Lake are
3-15
-------
covered with a mixed forest of jack pine and aspen, and the lands to the
west and southwest of the Lake are cultivated. The stretch of Grant Creek
between Larson Lake and Grant Lake generally is 2 to 5 feet deep and is
choked with dense emergent vegetation, including dense beds of wild rice.
It is bordered by a narrow band of deciduous forest of aspen and basswood
along most of the route. The adjacent lands along the upper two-thirds of
the route are cultivated. Grant Creek is joined by a small channel from
the south end of Grant Lake, and flows to the west and southwest to Rice
Lake, where it joins the Mississippi River. The soils in the area are part
of the Menahga-Marquette soils association. No detailed soil mapping has
been conducted in the site area.
3.1.2.5. Eckles Township Site
The proposed land treatment site (Alternative 6; Figures 2-5, 2-6, and
2-7) would utilize publicly-owned forest lands in conjunction with private
farmland (Cronemiller property) in Eckles Township. These are nearly level
lands, with an elevation of 1,400 feet msl. Soil mapping was conducted at
the request of the City during 1979 by the US Soil Conservation Service for
this site. Soil conditions are especially important to the analysis of the
potential for land treatment of wastewater. The soil survey identified 24
different soils in the area (Figure 3-5).
The Menahga loamy sand is the predominant soil in the mapped area.
This soil has rapid permeability and the depth to the water table is
greater than 6 feet. The soil material is fine to coarse sand with some
gravel. The natural fertility is low, and the available water-holding
capacity is low. This soil often supports coniferous forests.
The next most predominant soil is the Meehan loamy sand. This soil is
similar to the Menahga soil in texture, permeability, and water-holding
capacity, but the water table is seasonally at a 1- to 5-foot depth.
A small area near the center of Section 16 is identified as Mahtomedi
loamy sand. The soil characteristics are similar to the Menahga series,
except that the percentage of small gravel is significantly larger.
3-16
-------
3-17
-------
Figure 3-5. Site soils map legend.
Index No.
32A
32B
68H/W4
68/W5
81
83
111
116
117A
125B
158A
158B
202*
244A
244B
244C
272A
454*
458*
458B*
482
543*
547*
1053*
Name and Description
Nebish fine sandy loam, 0-2 percent slopes
Nebish fine sandy loam, 2—6 percent slopes
Grigla, depressional
Cormant, depressional
Seeleyville muck
Muck
Hangaard sandy loam
Redby loamy fine sand
Cormant loamy fine sand, 0-2 percent slopes
Beltrami fine sandy loam, 2-6 percent slopes
Menahga loamy sand, 0-2 percent slopes
Menahga loamy sand, 2-6 percent slopes
Meehan loamy sand
Marquette loamy fine sand, 0-2 percent slopes
Marquette loamy fine sand, 2-6 percent slopes
Marquette loamy fine sand, 6-12 percent slopes
Shooker, 0-2 percent slopes
Mahtomedi loamy sand
Menahga loamy sand, 0-2 percent slope
Menahga loamy sand, 2-6 percent slope
Grigla loamy fine sand
Markey muck
Deerwood muck
Marsh
These soils were mapped recently by the USDA-SCS at the request of the
City of Bemidji. A revised soil legend was utilized.
3-18
-------
Some of the depressional areas in the site area have organic soil
material overlying sand and gravel. These are mapped as Markey muck,
Deerwood muck, and marsh. The mucks are continuously wet and will be
submerged during wet seasons.
The Cronemiller property (Sections 1 and 12) has not been mapped
recently. The lands in Section 1 were mapped previously, but no equivalent
mapping is available for Section 12. The major portion of the land of
Section 1 is muck, marsh, and Meadow Lake. The northeast quarter and parts
of the northwest and southeast quarters are primarily Marquette loamy sand.
The soil material at about a 1-foot depth is gravelly, loamy fine sand.
Below that is gravel and coarse sand. The depth to the water table is
greater than 6 feet. Infiltration rates and the permeability of the soil
material to about a 1.5-foot depth are slightly less than for the Menahga
soil. Below the 1.5-foot depth the permeability is greater. Some Menahga
loamy sand also is present in Section 1.
The Hangaard sandy loam occupies depressional areas in soil material
such as the Marquette. The dark, sandy loam surface layer is much thicker
than that of the Marquette.
The Redby loamy fine sand is similar to the Marquette in soil ma-
terial, infiltration rate, and permeability. The depth to the water table,
however, ranges from 4 to 6 feet.
The Cormant loamy fine sand is similar to the Meehan in depth to the
water table, infiltration rate, and permeability. The Cormant soil con-
sists of fine sand, whereas the Meehan is formed in medium sands. The
Cormant depressional is like the Cormant except that it is formed in de-
pressional areas and has a much thicker surface layer of dark, sandy loam.
The soils previously mentioned have been formed in sands and gravels
characteristic of glacial outwash. The south-central portion of Section 1
and the northwest quarter of the section contain soil material character-
istic of clayey glacial till. This material is similar to that found in
Frohn Township, which is east of Bemidji.
3-19
-------
The Nebish loam occupies the higher positions on the site. This soil
material varies from sandy loam to clay loam, but will always have some
clay. The depth to the water table is greater than 5 feet. The perme-
ability is moderate to moderately slow, and the intake rate is medium.
Some problems with internal drainage, intake rate, and trafficability could
be expected with this soil.
The Beltrami loam is similar to the Nebish except that it occupies a
somewhat lower landscape position. The Beltrami loam has a depth to water
table of 2.5 to 6 feet.
The Shooker loam is similar to the Nebish and Beltrami in soil ma-
terial, intake rate, and permeability. It occupies a lower landscape
position than the Beltrami and would be expected to border marshes and
drainageways. The water table is seasonally at depths of from 1 to 3 feet.
The Grigla loamy fine sand consists of 20 to 30 inches of sand similar
to the Cormant soils. It overlies clayey till similar to the Nebish soil.
The sandy soil has a high intake rate and high permeability, but the under-
lying material has a moderately slow permeability. The Grigla depressional
is the same as the Grigla except for a thicker and darker surface soil.
The soils on the Cronemiller property in Section 12 are probably
primarily Menahga loamy sand formed in outwash. Some clayey till may be
present in the lower elevations of the property. A detailed soil survey
should be conducted if design were commenced for this site.
The majority of the Eckles Township Site area is owned by the State of
Minnesota or is County-controlled tax-forfeited land, covered by a mature
jack pine forest. The western section is included in the Mississippi
Headwaters State Forest. In Section 16, the trees either have been har-
vested and replanted in pines (which average 6 to 15 feet in height), or
have been cleared to control an outbreak of the jack pine budworm. The
latter areas were replanted during spring 1979. The northwest and south-
east quarters of Section 15 also contain some areas of mixed jack pine and
aspen, with some Norway pine in the northwest quarter. The land cover in
3-20
-------
Section 10 and Section 11 is comprised of both jack pine and Norway pine
with some mixed forest of jack pine and aspen in the southwest quarter of
Section 10. Two small marshes located in the southeast corner of Section
15 and the northwest corner of Section 11 have been excluded from the
proposed land treatment area because of their unsuitability for wastewater
application.
The lands included in the City's proposed land treatment system in
Section 1 and Section 12 are owned by Mr. John Cronemiller and presently
are being farmed (the 1979 crop primarily was sunflowers). The nonculti-
vated area in the central part of Section 12 is covered with a jack pine/
Norway pine forest. The western and southern parts of Section 1 around
Meadow Lake are primarily marshland, with some mixed forest vegetation on
the higher ground to the southeast, east, and north. The agricultural land
in the northeastern quarter of the section is the only part of Section 1
proposed to be irrigated. The majority of the land cover adjacent to the
proposed land treatment site is jack pine or mixed jack pine-aspen forest.
Some small areas of agricultural lands border the site in Section 2, 3, 4,
and 22 in Eckles Township and Section 6 in Northern Township.
Information was obtained from the Beltrami County Land Department
regarding the forest resources on the County-owned tax-forfeited lands in
Section 10, 11, and 15 (Personal communication, Mr. Bergstrom, Beltrami
County Land Commissioner, with Mr. Dan Sweeney, WAPORA, Inc., 12 December
1979). These lands have been dedicated by the Beltrami County Board as
Memorial Forest. The Land Department's 1975 inventory of timber resources
indicates that a total of 3,508 cords of merchantable jack pine are present
on these lands. Assuming that a cord of jack pine is worth $10, the total
estimated market value of the timber is about $35,000. An additional 40
cords of merchantable aspen also on the land is worth $140 at $3.50/cord.
The total future worth of the timber resource on these lands and on Section
16 has not been estimated. In addition, jack pines harvested during the
thinning of rapidly-growing pine plantations may be sold as Christmas
trees. Between 800 and 1,000 trees per acre of plantation are removed in
this thinning process (every fourth row). Since the County received $1.00
per tree, this represents significant additional income from these lands
3-21
-------
that generally exceeds the original planting costs for the entire planta-
tion. Other uses of the forest lands, as cited by the Land Commissioner,
include wildlife habitat (these forest lands contain "deer yards"), blue-
berry production, and an area for horseback riding, snowmobiling, and
wildlife observation.
3.1.2.6. Existing WWTP to Mississippi River Force Main Route
The route of the raw wastewater sewer from the existing WWTP site to
the proposed Mississippi River WWTP site (Alternative 1) and the effluent
sewer route from the existing WWTP site to the proposed Mississippi River
effluent discharge location (Alternative 2) are generally the same (Figure
2-5). Both routes primarily are along streets and roads through industrial
and residential areas, along the route of the previously-used effluent
sewer. The only section of the route of the raw sewage force main to the
Mississippi River WWTP site that previously was not used for this purpose
would be the eastern extension along County Road 12 for approximately 0.5
miles and the northward extension along the property line between the
Thompson and Lillie properties (Section 1) for approximately 0.25 mile into
the site (Figure 3-2). The latter part of the route would pass primarily
through cultivated land or old-fields.
3.1.2.7. Lake Irving to Grass Lake Force Main Route
The effluent and raw wastewater force main route from the Lake Irving
Site to Grass Lake (Alternative 4 and 5) would parallel the Burlington
Northern and Soo Line railroad right-of-way northwest from Lake Irving
through commercial and residential areas, across a large marsh, and through
cultivated lands to the junction with the road that leads to Moberg's
landing site (Figure 3-4). The route then would follow that road, which
also is bordered by agricultural land, northwest to Grass Lake. The north
side of the route just east of the large marsh is bordered by a mixed
forest of jack pine and aspen, and just west of the marsh is bordered by an
old-field. Other stretches between the old-field and the road to Moberg's
landing strip are bordered on both sides by a coniferous forest of jack
pine.
3-22
-------
3.1.2.8. Force Main Route to Eckles Township Site
The route of the force main that would carry raw wastewater to the
treatment/storage ponds (Alternative 6) would be identical to the route
proposed for the force main to Grass Lake from Lake Irving up to the US
Route 2 Bypass, approximately at the western edge of the marsh mentioned in
the description of that alternative (Figure 2-6). It then would extend
north along US Route 71 through forested and agricultural areas to US Route
2, northwest along Route 2 through residential areas, agricultural land,
and jack pine forest, past the Bemidji Municipal Airport, and through areas
of pasture, agricultural land, marshland and deciduous forest (aspen and
birch) to Minnesota Route 89. The route would progress northwest on Route
89 past similar areas of deciduous forest and marsh and then turn northward
along the section line between Sections 27 and 28 in Eckles Township. It
would follow the section line north through jack pine forest in these
sections, and pass by a pine plantation and cultivated land in Section 21
and jack pine forest and cultivated land in Section 22 before reaching the
southeast quarter of Section 16, where the treatment/storage ponds are to
be located.
3.1.3. Water
3.1.3.1. Surface Water
SETTING AND FLOW
The City of Bemidji is located in the extreme northwest region of the
Upper Mississippi River basin. This is an area abounding in lakes, ranging
from the size of small potholes upwards to thousands of acres, and wet-
lands. Several of the larger lakes in the region are a part of a chain-of-
lakes regime through which the Mississippi River flows. The Mississippi
River at Bemidji, some 55 meandering river-miles or 22 air-miles from its
source at Lake Itasca, is the major surface water drainageway in the Be-
midji area (Figure 3-6). Major tributaries to the Mississippi River in the
project area are Grant Creek and the Schoolcraft River. The section of the
Upper Mississippi River basin affected by the existing wastewater treatment
practices and proposed wastewater treatment system alternatives (described
3-23
-------
rt
0)
1-1
0)
PQ
0)
AJ
0)
4J
a
u
tB
u-i
l-i
CO
u
o
•g
£8
I
00
(U
t-l
§
•rl
O.
CO
CO
CO
CO
vO
3
OQ
3-24
-------
in Section 2.0.) includes the Mississippi River from the confluence of
Grant Creek (Lake Manomin or Rice Lake) upstream from Bemidji through the
Chain of Lakes downstream from Bemidji.
Grant Creek meanders in a southerly direction from its source, ap-
proximately 12.0 miles northwest of Bemidji, through the community of
Wilton to its confluence with Rice Lake (also called Lake Manomin). It has
a mainstem length of approximately 18.5 miles through which it drops 35.0
feet in elevation. It has a drainage area of approximately 75 square miles
(Appendix E).
Drainage from part of the western area of Eckles Township flows to the
southeast to Lake Bemidji via the Meadow Lake-Alice Lake drainage system.
Several drainage ditches have been established to improve drainage in this
relatively flat, wetland area. No flow or water quality data are available
for this drainage system.
At least nineteen large lakes lie within 10.0 miles of downtown Be-
midji. These include Lake Irving, Lake Marquette, Plantagenet Lake, Carr
Lake, Grace Lake, Fern Lake, Stump Lake, Little Bass Lake, Big Bass Lake,
Long Lake, Turtle Lake, Turtle River Lake, Beltrami Lake, Movil Lake,
Meadow Lake, Grass Lake, Grant Lake, Lake Marolin, and Lake Bemidji.
Physical characteristics of the lakes on the Mississippi River, which are
located downstream from the point of discharge from the existing WWTP at
Bemidji, are presented in Table 3-2. Data are not available on the storage
volumes for the lakes not included in the Table.
Table 3-2. Physical characteristics of the Mississippi tain of Lakes
(USEPA 1974a, 1974b, 1974c, 1974d). Mean hydraulic retention
time is based on average flows (Table 3-3).
Lake :
Surface Area (acres)
Mean Depth (feet)
Maximum Depth (feet)
Volume (acre-feet)
Bemidji
6,420
32
76
205,440
Wolf
1,051
28
SB
29,428
Andrusia
1,510
26
60
39,260
Cass
15,596
25
120
389,900
Mean Hydraulic
Retention Time (days) 460 61 76 487
3-25
-------
There are two dams on the Mississippi River in the project area.
Stump Lake Dam is located between Lake Bemidji and Wolf Lake, and Knutson
Dam is at the downstream end of Cass Lake. Although the elevation gradi-
ents between Lake Irving and the Stump Lake Dam and between Wolf Lake and
the Knutson Dam are relatively slight, a significant change in elevation
occurs between these two series of lakes. The total elevation change for
this 45-mile river and lake system is approximately 58 feet.
There is no permanent continuous recording streamflow measurement
gauging station on the Mississippi River or its tributaries in the Bemidji
area. The closest station is considerably downstream at the Winnebigoshish
Dam, where the contributing drainage basin is 1,442 square miles. The
entire drainage basin above Winnebigoshish Dam, including the subbasin
above Bemidji, lies within the same hydrologic region (USDOI 1976). The
average water productivity characteristics, therefore, should be quite
similar. For the period from 1884 through 1975, the average discharge was
516 cubic feet per second (cfs), or a drainage basin productivity of 0.358
cfs per sq mi. Average flows for points downstream from Bemidji, based on
this productivity and specific drainage areas, are tabulated in Table 3-3.
For the water year 1973, flow measurements were made on a monthly
basis along the Mississippi River and some tributaries as part of the USEPA
National Eutrophication Survey. Based on those measurements and informa-
tion from the US Geological Survey, "normalized," or average, yearly flows
have been estimated (Table 3-3).
Table 3-3. Average yearly flows (in cubic feet per second) for points
downstream from Bemidji.
Estimated from USEPA (1974a,
USGS (1975) 1974b, 1974c, 1974d)
Entering Lake Bemidji 208 366
Leaving Lake Bemidji 225 386
Entering Wolf Lake 238 396
Leaving Wolf Lake, entering Lake Andrusia 244 404
Leaving Lake Andrusia, entering Cass Lake 261 421
Leaving Cass Lake 403 627
Grant Creek at confluence with
Mississippi River 26
Schoolcraft River at confluence with
Mississippi River 60
3-26
-------
Considerable doubt exists as to the validity of flow data presented in
the USEPA eutrophication study, because the average flow leaving Cass Lake
is indicated to be 111 cfs larger than the average flow at Winnebigoshish
Dam downstream. Lake evaporation cannot account for such a loss. It is
believed that the estimated average annual flows based on the Winnebigosh-
ish gage data are far closer to actual conditions, although small discrep-
ancies because of variable local drainage-area characteristics are likely.
Low-flow data have been collected very intermittently since 1965 for
the Mississippi River at Highway 11 south of Bemidji (prior to its merger
with the Schoolcraft River). Because of the small number of measurements
(16) and their intermittent nature, the statistical significance is li-
mited. The average of these low-flow measurements was 66.4 cfs, with the
minimum (28 cfs) occurring in September 1976. The USGS (1968) estimated
the 7-day, 2-year minimum flow at this point to be 39 cfs, and 27 cfs for
the Schoolcraft River. Assuming that these two low-flow periods occur
simultaneously, the minimum low flow occurring for 7 consecutive days every
two years at the inlet to Lake Bemidji is approximately 66 cfs. By com-
paring proportionate low flows with drainage areas, the equivalent low flow
in Grant Creek is estimated to be approximately 8.5 cfs.
USES
Recreational pursuits, such as sport fishing, swimming, water-skiing,
boating, wildlife observation, and waterfowl hunting are the primary uses
of surface waters in the Bemidji area. Other uses include watering of
livestock and wildlife, and wastewater disposal. Withdrawal of water for
irrigation in the area is limited, and there are no known uses of surface
water for public water supply.
Industrial consumption of surface water in the Bemidji area essen-
tially is restricted to the Otter Tail Power Company. The generating
plant, located on the southeast shore of Lake Bemidji, utilizes lake water
as plant cooling water. Two pumps with a combined capacity of 6,250 gal-
lons per minute are utilized as needed for cooling purposes. Water is
returned to the Lake. Otter Tail Power Company uses the Mississippi River
3-27
-------
for hydroelectric generation at its dam approxmately 7.0 miles downstream
from Lake Bemidji. The facility utilizes two units with a combined gener-
ating capacity of 0.70 MW.
The City of Bemidji presently discharges treated domestic wastewater
from its WWTP located on Lake Irving to the channel between Lake Irving and
Lake Bemidji (Section 2.1.). The trickling filter plant is designed to
provide secondary treatment for sewage flows of approximately 1.3 million
gallons per day (mgpd). The average discharge in 1979 was approximately
1.22 mgpd, with a maximum of 1.3 mgpd. An interim phosphorus control
treatment system was added during 1978 to reduce the concentration of
phosphorus in the effluent.
Man-related uses of the waters of Grant Creek include watering wild-
life and occasionally livestock. Recreational and aesthetic values are
considered high.
The Mississippi River has been recommended for inclusion in the Na-
tional Wild and Scenic River System (USDOI 1976). The status of this
proposal is discussed in Section 3.2.3.3.
WATER QUALITY
Available information indicates that existing surface water quality
for the Mississippi River, its tributaries, and the Chain of Lakes down-
stream from Bemidji generally is good in regard to standard chemical and
biochemical parameters. Two areas of concern, however, are dissolved
oxygen depletion in the Mississippi River and nutrient (phosphorus and
nitrogen) loadings, which contribute to the eutrophication of the Chain of
Lakes.
As an Interstate Stream, the Mississippi River and Chain of Lakes are
subject to the standards of quality and purity as established by Chapter 15
(WPG 15) of the Minnesota Water Pollution Control Statutes, as amended
(Minnesota Laws 1973, Chapter 374). The waters in the Bemidji area must
conform to the standards for the classifications of Fisheries and Recre-
ation Class B and Industrial Consumption Class B. The applicable standards
are presented in Appendix E.
3-28
-------
Mississippi River
Water quality data for the Mississippi River in the Bemidji area have
been collected at nine monitoring stations (Figure 3-7). The status of the
river in terms of major parameters, or group of parameters, is summarized
below.
Dissolved Oxygen
The dissolved oxygen (DO) concentrations that were monitored at the
County Highway 12 Bridge station (SS3A), east of Lake Bemidji, between 1967
and 1979, do not indicate any violations of the State standard for DO (not
less than 6 mg/1 from 1 April through 31 May, and not less than 5 mg/1 at
other times). However, there have been occasional winter fish kills in
Stump Lake upstream from the Otter Tail Power Dam as a result of a defici-
ency of DO. The most severe kill occurred in February 1977 (Latvala 1977).
The wastewater discharges from the Bemidji treatment plant (the discharge
prior to June 1978 was directly to the Mississippi River about 700 feet
downstream from the Lake Bemidji outlet) in combination with low flows in
the river and ice coverage during the winter caused the oxygen deficit.
Biweekly sampling during 1976 showed that DO in the Mississippi River
generally was higher 1.0 mile downstream from the dam than it was upstream
from the effluent discharge. The DO sag point (minimum DO) from the Be-
midji discharge, therefore, was within Stump Lake. At the time of the
1977 fish kill, DO at the Lake Bemidji outlet was 12 mg/1 and decreased
progressively to a value of 0.4 mg/1 at the dam. Since June 1978, the
effluent from the Bemidji wastewater treatment plant has been diverted and
discharged to Lake Bemidji. Therefore, the low DO condition that was ex-
perienced previously is not expected to recur in the Mississippi River.
Nutrients
The concentration of phosphorus and nitrogen in the Upper Mississippi
River in the Bemidji area is of particular concern in relation to the Chain
of Lakes through which the River flows. The average concentration of total
phosphorus at the County Highway 12 Bridge monitoring station (Station
3-29
-------
tti
0)
T3
•H
§
rt
(3
•rl
CO
(3
O
•H
60
S
•H
•H
a
a)
3
cr
I
ro
bO
•H
3-30
-------
SS3A, Figure 3-7) for the period from 1967 to 1979 was 0.092 mg/1, with a
range from 0.018 mg/1 to 0.250 mg/1. The average concentration of total
phosphorus at the other eight monitoring stations ranged from 0.023 mg/1 to
0.082 mg/1. The average dissolved phosphorus concentrations ranged from
0.007 mg/1 to 0.041 mg/1. The phosphorus concentrations measured during
1972 were elevated in the River between Lake Bemidji and Lake Andrusia.
Provisional data for 1978 and 1979 (MPCA 1980), indicate a significant
reduction in the concentration of phosphorus. This improvement is a result
of the diversion of treated effluent from the Mississippi River to Lake
Bemidji and the reduction in the concentration of phosphorus discharged
from the treatment plant.
The maximum concentrations and, in some cases, the average concentra-
tions of total phosphorus recorded at all monitoring stations, except the
station downstream from Cass Lake, exceed the 0.05 mg/1 suggested concen-
tration for a stream entering a lake or reservoir (USEPA 1976). The aver-
age concentration of nitrate and nitrite, ammonia, and total Kjeldahl
nitrogen monitored during the period from 1967 to 1979 at Station SS3A
ranged from 0.017 mg/1 to 0.118 mg/1, 0.024 mg/1 to 0.232 mg/1, and 0.76
mg/1 to 2.36 mg/1, respectively.
Heavy Metals
Several heavy metals have been monitored in the river at the County
Highway 8 Bridge (Station SS3A, Figure 3-7). The average concentration of
cadmium and the maximum concentration of lead monitored during the period
from 1967 to 1979 are marginally in excess of the levels established by the
Minnesota Water Quality Standards. All other monitored concentrations of
heavy metals are less than the levels established by the Water Quality
Standards.
Lakes
Water quality data for the lakes that either are directly or indi-
rectly impacted by the discharge of wastewater to the Mississippi River
system are included in Appendix E. The major water quality concern in
these lakes is the potential for the acceleration of eutrophication, which
3-31
-------
is the process whereby a lake becomes increasingly over-nourished and/or
biologically over-productive. Eutrophication generally is caused by an
increase in the input of nutrients to a lake. The opposite situation to a
well-nourished, or eutrophic, lake is a poorly-nourished, or oligotrophic,
lake. Mesotrophic is a term that refers to the intermediate condition.
Most of the detrimental effects of advanced eutrophication are the
result of the larger numbers of organisms that are supported by eutrophic
lakes. In highly eutrophic lakes, the number of algal cells is often large
enough that the water has the appearance of pea soup. The problem is
particularly severe when blue-green algae dominate. This form of alga
collects in dense colonies that form floating mats on the surface of the
lake. This presents an unsightly condition that discourages swimming and
water-skiing, and often generates disagreeable odors. The biggest problem
in most eutrophic lakes is caused by the depletion of dissolved oxygen from
the die-off of large, numbers of organisms. When the plants and other
organisms in the lake die, they settle to the bottom and decay (the organic
matter is decomposed by bacteria and other microorganisms). The process of
decay requires oxygen, and the consumption of oxygen can seriously deplete
the available supply of dissolved oxygen. Fish and the other organisms
ultimately may not be able to survive in such waters.
The problem is most severe in deeper lakes that thermally stratify
during the summer. The stratification very effectively isolates the bottom
waters from the surface waters and from oxygen replenishment by the atmos-
phere. Thus the oxygen present in the bottom waters when the lake strati-
fies in the spring will not be replaced until mixing occurs during the
"overturn" of the lake in the fall. If the biological oxygen demand (BOD)
in the water at the bottom of the lake exceeds the amount of available DO,
the water will become anaerobic before the fall overturn. Similar problems
arise in lakes where the surface freezes for long periods during the winter
season and the reserves of DO are insufficient to last until the spring
thaw. The eutrophic status of the lakes in the Bemidji area and other
related water quality data are summarized in the following sections.
Lake Bemidji
Lake Bemidji was classified as eutrophic on the basis of survey data
collected during 1972 for the National Eutrophication Survey (USEPA 1974).
3-32
-------
It also was determined, based on an algal assay and other lake data, that
the lake was nitrogen limited. Unpublished algal assay results for 1979
(MPCA 1980), however, indicate that the Lake was phosphorus limited during
the various months that studies were conducted. During the 1972 sampling
year, Lake Bemidji received a total phosphorus load at a rate that was less
than the one proposed by Vollenweider (Dillon 1974) as a "dangerous," or
eutrophic, rate, but more than a "permissible," or oligotrophic, rate.
However, the loadings utilized in the Eutrophication Survey were based on
flows significantly higher than those of an expected average water-year.
Nutrient loads calculated on the basis of an average flow year indicate a
phosphorus load to the Lake that was less than the oligotrophic rate.
Since the Eutrophication Survey, the WWTP effluent discharge has been
diverted from the Mississippi River downstream from (east of) Lake Bemidji
to the upstream inlet channel to the Lake. In addition, an interim phos-
phorus control system has been installed at the treatment plant, which has
resulted in a significant reduction in the discharge of phosphorus. The
average total phosphorus concentration in the effluent during 1973 was 10.2
mg/1. It has been reduced to an average concentration of 1.3 mg/1 during
1979, a reduction of 87%. The total phosphorus load to Lake Bemidji during
1979, which was calculated on the basis of an average water-year flow and
1979 in-stream and treatment plant data, indicates that the total phos-
phorus loading, including that from the WWTP discharge, was at a rate
2
greater than Vollenweider's oligotrophic rate (0.31 gm/m /yr compared to
2
0.28 gm/m /yr) (Table 3-4 and Appendix E). The average concentration of
total phosphorus in Lake Bemidji exceeds the suggested 0.025 mg/1 level
within a lake or reservoir necessary to control accelerated eutrophication
(USEPA 1976).
Dissolved oxygen levels, which were monitored during the 1972 survey,
ranged from 7.6 mg/1 to 11.1 mg/1 in the upper 4 feet of the Lake. The
Lake was stratified during July and September 1972, and the DO at a 40-foot
depth was 0.2 mg/1 during July. The mean chlorophyll a_ concentrations for
May through August ranged from a low of 7.37 ug/1 in 1979 to a high of 9.34
ug/1 for 1978 (MPCA 1980). The mean transparency for the same period, as
measured with a Secchi disc, ranged in depth from 7.5 feet for 1978 to 7.4
feet for 1979 (MPCA 1980).
3-33
-------
•d -d
C 0
cd cd
cjj »n
•H -d
CO -rl
2 §
•d pa
G
cu cd
-^ iJ
cd
r^ O
o cfl
S cd
•H c3
•r-) O
•d -rl
•H 4->
e co
CU CJ
PQ O
i-l
CU
•^ CU
co 60
cd
O 43
4-> CJ
CO
,-N -rl
w "°
•d
C cu
$^
M-l
cd
CU
cd
•H-d
§ S
CO
cd
co y i-i
js °
ex •• 4J
co c
i—i ''^ o
cd ^ o
60 3
•S o
H 43
3 CX
•5 M
O
t—
g
M CO CU
CU CO 4->
> cd a
< O -rl
I
CO
cd
H
43
r-.
ON
i— 1
i-l C
cd -H
O cd
£-1 Q
co
rl CU
cu o
43 V-i
•M 3
o o
CO
- oo oo
ft ft ^
*st CO CO
>*n
co
r~-
r-t
IMI
iH 13
Cd -rl
o cd
f-H Q
^J
•-4 O r-4
oo > i— i
ON \O
CN CN
cd
•H -rl
•r-) CO
T) 3
•H CU M
S ,*! -d
cu cd fl
PQ >J <£
cu M-I cu
*<* ,_4 V?
cd o cd
(-4 3 i-3
O
OO
r^
CN
OO
0
vO
^
%^
CN
CN
CO
CN
»
CO
CN
00
m
co
co
CN
O
,— 1
•t
r^
^
o
OO
^
^o
r-l
CU
cd
CO
CO
cfl
o
*
co
M
C
•H
•d
cO
O
J
CO
3
Q
rj
CX
CO
o
C*
ex
U-l
o
C3
O
•.-J
*rn
co
CO
3
CJ
CO
•rl
CU
Jl
T1^
CU
rH
CX
§
O
cu
}_l
cfl
S-l
o
Cd
^
•rl
'd
C
CU
ex
£
cu
cu
CO
cd
•
/""l.
o
00
r-l
O
(X,
S
•rl
C
cu
4J
cd
CO
•H
'd'
•,-1
e
cu
PQ
43*
c^
ON
rH
00
C
•rl
i-l
3
•d
cu
a
cu
r-f
^H
o
o
cd
4->
cd
•d
r-i
cd
C
o
>r^
CO
•H
O
J_|
ex
S
o
•8
co
cd
PQ
43
3-34
-------
Wolf Lake
Wolf Lake was classified as eutrophic by the 1972 National Eutrophica-
tion Survey (USEPA 1974b). Algal assay results and lake data indicated
that the lake was nitrogen, limited throughout the year. Samples collected
during 1976 and 1977 (By letter, MPCA Executive Director to the USEPA
Region V Regional Director, January 1978) and algal assay results of 1979
(MPCA 1980) indicate that the lake was phosphorus limited during this study
period. The total phosphorus load during 1972, corrected for the average
water-year flow, indicated that Wolf Lake received a total phosphorus load
at a rate significantly in excess of Vollenweider's eutrophic rate; how-
ever, the change in the location of the effluent discharge and the reduc-
tion of phosphorus in the effluent has resulted in a significant decrease
in the phosphorus load to Wolf Lake. A new phosphorus load was calculated
on the basis of 1979 in-stream data and average water-year flow (Table
3-4). Based on these data and Vollenweider's model, the phosphorus loading
rate to the lake still is in excess of Vollenweider's eutrophic rate. The
data also indicate that during 1979 about 40% of the total phosphorus load
to Wolf Lake was added to the Mississippi River from nonpoint sources
between the Lake Bemidji outlet and the Wolf Lake inlet. A similar in-
crease in phosphorus load was reported by the National Eutrophication
Survey (USEPA 1974b). The potential source was indicated to be sedimented
phosphorus in the pool upstream from the Otter Tail Power Company dam,
which probably resolubilized because of the withdrawal of water from Stump
Lake for power generation. The average total and dissolved phosphorus
concentrations in the lake were 0.052 mg/1 and 0.013 mg/1, respectively,
during 1979. These concentrations also are less than the previous year and
could be the result of the reduction in the effluent phosphorous load
discharged from the Bemidji wastewater treatment plant.
Dissolved oxygen levels monitored during 1972 ranged from 6.7 mg/1 to
13.0 mg/1 in the upper 4 feet of the lake. The maximum value of 13.0 mg/1
was at 150% of the oxygen saturation, which is indicative of high algal
activity in the lake. The lake was stratified during July and September
1972, and an oxygen concentration of 0.4 mg/1 was monitored in July at a
depth of 27 feet. The mean chlorophyll ji concentration for May through
August ranged from 7.0 ug/1 for 1979 to 26.6 ug/1 for 1976 to 1978. The
mean transparency (Secchi disc depth) for the same period ranged from 4.8
3-35
-------
feet for 1976 to 1978 to 7.9 feet for 1979. The lower mean concentration
of chlorophyll ji and the greatest transparency was measured during 1979 in-
dicating that, in general, lake productivity has decreased and water qual-
ity has improved in Wolf Lake since the 1978 reduction in the Bemidji WWTP
effluent loadings.
Lake Andrusia
Lake Andrusia was classified as eutrophic by the 1972 National Eutro-
phication Survey (USEPA 1974c). The 1972 survey indicated that the Lake
was receiving phosphorus at a rate significantly in excess of Vollenwei-
der's eutrophic rate (Appendix E). Diversion of the WWTP discharge from
the River to Lake Bemidji and reduction of phosphorus in the effluent has
resulted in a reduction in phosphorus load to Lake Andrusia. Phosphorus
loading, calculated on the basis of 1979 in-stream data, however, still in-
dicates that the phosphorus loading rate is in excess of Vollenweider's
eutrophic rate (Table 3-4). The average total and dissolved phosphorus
concentrations in the lake during 1979 were 0.043 mg/1 and 0.012 mg/1,
respectively. Samples collected during 1976 and 1977 (By letter, MPCA
Executive Director to USEPA Regional Administrator, January 1978) and algal
assay results of 1979 (MPCA 1980) indicate that the lake was phosphorus
limited during the period studied.
Dissolved oxygen levels monitored during 1972 ranged from 8.2 mg/1 to
11.9 mg/1 in the upper 4 feet of the lake. The lake was stratified during
July and September 1972, and a minimum oxygen concentration of 0.3 mg/1 was
monitored in September at a depth of 31 feet.
The mean chlorophyll ji concentration for May through August ranged
from a low of 6.3 ug/1 for 1979 to a high of 20.24 ug/1 for 1976 to 1978.
The mean transparency (Secchi disc depth) for the same period ranged from
5.7 feet for 1976 to 1978 to 7.4 feet for 1979. The lower mean chlorophyll
concentration and greater transparency measured during 1979 indicates that
lake productivity has decreased and water quality has improved in Lake
Andrusia since the reduction in 1978 of the Bemidji WWTP effluent loadings.
Cass Lake
Cass Lake was classified as mesotrophic by the 1972 National Eutrophi-
cation Survey (USEPA 1974d). The total phosphorus load during the 1972
3-36
-------
sampling-year indicated that the lake was receiving total phosphorus at a
rate less than that proposed by Vollenweider as "dangerous," or eutrophic,
but larger than the "permissible," or oligotrophic. The 1972 loadings,
corrected for average water-year flow and the load based on 1979 in-stream
data, indicate that the total phosphorus loading to the lake is less than
Vollenweider's oligotrophic rate (Table 3-4). The average total phosphorus
ranged from 0.011 mg/1 to 0.025 mg/1 at the monitoring station close to the
Lake inlet (Aliens Bay) to 0.01 mg/1 at the monitoring station near the
outlet of the Lake.
Dissolved oxygen levels monitored during 1972 ranged from 5.9 mg/1 to
10.1 mg/1 in the upper 4 feet of the lake. The lake was stratified during
July and September 1972, and a minimum oxygen concentration of 0.04 mg/1
was monitored in September at a depth of 40 feet. The mean chlorophyll a_
concentration for May through August ranged from 8.72 ug/1 for 1972 to 15.3
ug/1 for 1978 (no 1979 data are available). The mean transparency (Secchi
disc depth) for the same period ranged from 4.9 feet for 1972 to 5.7 feet
for 1978 at the station adjacent to the inlet to Cass Lake (Aliens Bay).
Grass Lake
Grass Lake is classified as a permanent waterfowl lake by the Minne-
sota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). MDNR personnel who conducted
the Waterfowl and Muskrat Habitat Survey of 1952 (Project 24-R) reported
that the chemical quality of the water was well suited for a variety of
aquatic plants. The Secchi disc measurements indicated that the water was
clear to the bottom of the Lake.
A field survey with limited water quality monitoring was conducted by
WAPORA during June 1979 and again in September 1979. Both surveys found
that the water transparency in the Grass Lake was good, with light penetra-
tion to the bottom of the Lake. The abundance of macrophytes observed at
the bottom of the Lake during the survey was indicative of the high water
transparency of the Lake.
The chemical characteristics of water in Grass Lake, in the ditch
draining Grass Lake, and in Larson Lake, which receives the drainage from
Grass Lake, were measured on 21 June 1979 (Table 3-5). The dissolved
oxygen in Grass Lake ranged from 10.4 mg/1 to 10.8 mg/1 except near the
3-37
-------
drainage outlet where oxygen concentration was 5.4 mg/1. Total phosphorus
concentration in the lake was 0.01 to 0.012 mg/1, which is indicative of
uncontaminated lake. On the basis of limited data available, it appears
that the algal growth in Grass Lake is limited by the availability of
nutrients. The drainage ditch, Grant Creek, and Larson Lake have rela-
tively higher concentrations of total phosphorus and orthophosphates, and
total dissolved solids. The sampling results, therefore, indicate that
these downstream waters are more fertile than Grass Lake.
3.1.3.2. Groundwater
The availability of groundwater in the various surficial deposits in
the Bemidji area is well documented by WAPORA (1977a) and USDI (1970) .
Groundwater characteristics that are pertinent to the construction and
operation of a new wastewater treatment system at Bemidji include near-
surface groundwater levels and quality.
The water table in the Bemidji area does not remain stationary but
fluctuates in response to the loss or gain of groundwater. Many field
studies have been made in the Upper Mississippi River Basin and in hydro-
logically similar areas. They have shown the close relationship between
groundwater levels and precipitation (USDI 1970). The groundwater level is
highest in April or May and lowest during January or February. The fluctu-
ations, however, do not appear to be of a large magnitude at Bemidji.
At Bemidji, the water-table elevation is approximately the same as the
water level in Lake Bemidji at any given time. Records of Lake levels,
therefore, give groundwater elevations. The following fluctuations in
surface elevations have been observed for Lake Bemidji and Wolf Lake
(WAPORA 1977a):
Annual Long-Term
Fluctuation Fluctuation
Lake Bemidji +1.5 to -1.5 +2 to -2
Wolf Lake +0.5 to -0.5 +1.0 to -1.0
3-38
-------
d
0
en
r-l
cd
!_J
TJ
d
cd
»
CU
cu
VJ
CJ
£
cd
M
O
*>
rd
o
i
•rl
o
CU
60
cd
•rl
Cfl
P
r. en
s §
Id °
1 4->
^ Cfl
« £
en OT
2 M
o -S
M
d o
•H 4-1
•H
M d
CU O
+-• a
cd
I*
U-J '""^
O ON
en ^
o ^^
'£ CU
en C
^ *""3
d)
O ^
cfl
«_, *»
crt "^i
f ^
o ^
<1
rH *-^
cd 3
^>
"3 ^Q
m
r* *^
•"l Q)
^ i-H
cx
'O g
£ co
n) 03
rH CO
cd cd
o *— '
•H
co a)
^-i ,M
j- td
p_| ^
•
iO
1
CO
cu
rH
o
cd
H
N^
0) OO
1)
V*4
u
4-1
c
cd
>H
r~
CU
cd
jj
d vo
o
en
V-1
cd
rJ
xl
CJ iO
•l— )
n
CU
M
cfl
C
•H
Q
ro
Q)
^^
cd
rJ
CM
co
Cfi
cd
M
0
i— i
M
cu
4-1
cu
a
td
V-i
cd
P4
CM CM ON ON
• • • •
*o
• • • •
» * * •
m m o o
rH rH rH r^
^•^
1— 1
60
a
/"" N C
O CU
O iiO
•~* >>
CU X cu
§o cj a
td o
3 <4H 4J T3 H-l 4-1
4-1 ,-1 4-1 CU VJ 4-1
cd 3 O > 3 O
r-l 00 Cfl rH CO PQ
cu o
ex. co
a to
CU -H
H Q
CO
r^
•
O
CO
00
0
o
OO
•
o
^o
r^-
0
p^
vO
O
rH
•
O
CM
vO
O
00
r-
•
O
/— ^
rH
60
^*-s
J?5
1
rH
X!
cd
•TTj
^
Q)
.f— J
*
1— 1
cd
^J
o
H
00
O
•
0
m
0
o
vO
o
o
CM
rH
O
*sO
O
O
o
0*
^3"
o
o
m
o
o
^-^
rH
•^^.
60
^
a
cfl
•H
pj
0
P
•<
CM
•
O
CM
d
CM
•
O
CM
O
CM
O
CM
•
0
CM
•
0
CM
•
O
^-^
rH
"^
60
^a
z;
i
cu
4J
Cfl
}_l
4-1
•H
S3
-t-
cu
4-1
cd
V4
4-1
•rt
S3
r~ in
in co
O o CM
• • •
O O rH '-D
O CO
CN
r^ oo
<*O CO
O O --H
co d o r^
ON ^~
rH
r — * — i
m <3~
o c^ ON
• • •
O O CN ON
O CO
CN
CO O
CO CN
o o m
O O O fO
CM -. M
locNin ti s -31 a) 4->
1 CNCN CU-rlOr^OcO
rH r^cd5-i>icdinc
S-l Cd V-l^rHrHCM S
CU i-H TJ CU O
c a -n cu >,TJ
5-i CU V-i cfl cfl ,d i— 1
a 4-1 CU r-l -H 4-1 rH
(3 4-1 *! 4-1 Cfl CU
4-1 u-i en o o a *-•
Cn O TJ d rJ -rl Cd
cd a t* a n x -rt
^-v cu-JcuooucuoTJ
i-H J3CU TJCd4-lMCU
X-N x-\ • — . 4-l4->4-> flCXa
rH rH 60 3Ceni|cuo,g
^~^S OCUCU CJCd-r)
60 bO^-' encJ3j2,c
as o o i i i
^ ^-^ en i i i 4-1 4J
TJ -H -H CU ^ ^
PH PM -i-l CUCUCUOQJ cd cd d
4-J 4-1 cu cucocow-H-Hcndd
cd td j> TJcflcdcflcdcflr-icdcfl
rd rd i— 1 V-lr-lr-lr-lr-ltdr-lr-l
CXi Qi O 4-1 CJ CJ CJ Q Q | ~\ CJ CJ
co en en ^-* o
O O CO rH O rH CN CO ^ in ^O I — - 00
rd ^3 -rl ~-^ MH
PM P-l P 60 Idddddddd
S OOOOOOOOO
i-H O i-H v> IN -r-| -H -H -H -H -rl -rl -H
4-1 4-1 4-> Q 4-lcflCflcdCdcdCflidcd
O rJ O O <^4-14-*4-l4-l4-14-l4-l4-l
H O H CJ -KC/)C/3C/3C/3.C/3C/3l/>ca
3-39
-------
Long-term water levels have been measured on a monthly basis at USGS
observation well 147.34.35adcl on. the Clarence Hart farm since October
1970. This observation well is located in the outwash sand of southwestern
Eckles Township (Section 35) west of the airport. The maximum high water
level recorded was 6.17 feet below ground surface on 1 August 1975, and the
minimum 10.55 feet below land surface was recorded on 25 August 1977 (USGS
1979). The maximum groundwater level fluctuation was 4.4 feet. The rela-
tively slight fluctuation is confirmed further by the presence of only 1 to
2 feet of oxidized material near the present water table as reflected by an
analysis of soil boring data.
The groundwater levels in the area of Eckles Township included in the
proposed land treatment system (Alternative 6, Section 2.4.6.) were de-
scribed by WAPORA (1980). Groundwater can be found within 5 feet of the
surface on a seasonal basis over a significant part of the site area.
The areas of high water table were identified primarily as the Meehan soil,
but also include the Deerwood and Markey mucks and marsh. These soils were
identified in the following parts of the site:
• East part of the NW \ of Section 15
• South and east parts of the SE \ of Section 15
• North part of the NE % of Section 10
• Northwest corner of the NW \ of Section 11.
Essentially half of Section 1 is surface water or has a high water table.
Information from the soil-boring and the water-well logs indicates
that the depth to the water table may be as much as 25 feet in certain
parts of the site area (see geologic cross sections in Appendix F). Gener-
ally, except for "potholes," the depth to the water table is 10 to 15 feet.
The regional groundwater flow appears to be to the west, toward Grant Creek
from Minnesota Route 89. East of Route 89, flow appears to be to the east
toward the Meadow Lake - Alice Lake drainage and ultimately to Lake Be-
midji. The clayey material in Sections 21 and the western half of Section
22 on the south appear to limit groundwater flow toward Grant Creek. Some
groundwater flow to Grant Creek through Sections 15 and the east half of
Section 22 may occur. The clayey till underlying the northern part of
Section 10 similarly may influence groundwater flow patterns in that area.
3-40
-------
Site conditions indicate that the groundwater should be at greater depths;
however, the soils mapping indicates that it is within 6 feet of the
surface.
A lower aquifer may be recharged by surface infiltration in Eckles
Township. The limited deep-boring and well data appear to indicate a
static water level in a lower aquifer that slopes from the upper ground-
water table to the elevation of Grant Creek on the south.
Where the water table is located in deep sandy material, inferences
about the water table elevation and depth can be drawn from topographic
maps. The lakes, streams, and swamps indicate the general water-table
elevations. From this information, flow directions can be deduced, but
other characteristics, such as thickness of saturated sand and permeabil-
ity, must be known before flows can be determined. This information should
be developed during the design of a land treatment system.
USE
Groundwater is utilized almost exclusively as the source of domestic
water supply in the Bemidji area. The City of Bemidji has a centralized
public water supply that draws groundwater from six wells, which are lo-
cated just north of the central business district, and from a new well
field, which is located just east of the Bemidji airport. Residences
outside of Bemidji obtain water from shallow wells. There is no known use
of groundwater for industrial purposes, although the new waferboard plants
that are proposed for several rural locations in the Bemidji area would
utilize groundwater, primarily for domestic purposes. Some groundwater is
utilized in the area for crop irrigation. Groundwater is sprayed on potato
fields in Section 14 of Eckles Township, adjacent to the land treatment
site proposed in Alternative 6.
QUALITY
The most common problems of groundwater quality in the Upper Missis-
sippi Basin are excessive concentrations of dissolved solids, hardness
3-41
-------
causing ions (calcium and magnesium), and iron (USDI 1970). Various che-
mical and bacterial quality analyses have been conducted on samples of
groundwater from water wells and test wells in the Bemidji area. The
City's water is "hard" and somewhat high in iron content (WAPORA 1977a).
A number of private wells recently were sampled by the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency in Frohn Township (east of Bemidji) in proximity
to the Hall Farm where the City has been disposing of digested wastewater
sludge. Elevated nitrate levels were discovered in several of the samples
in the area, but MPCA believed they were unrelated to the sludge applica-
tion.
Ten local wells in the Eckles Township land treatment site area were
sampled in 1976 during the consideration of a land treatment alternative in
Eckles Township by Stewart & Walker (1976). Fecal coliform bacteria were
not detected in any of the wells. Two wells exhibited elevated nitrate
concentrations (20.59 mg/1 and 15.91 mg/1 (as N), respectively, as compared
to the 10.0 mg/1 (as N) drinking water standard).
WAPORA sampled the groundwater observation well established in Septem-
ber 1978 in the northeast quarter of Section 16. The nitrate concentration
of that sample was 0.2 mg/1 (as N). Twenty-seven other parameters also
were measured, excluding fecal coliform. Each value was well within the
range of "safe" drinking water (WAPORA 1978c).
3.1.4. Endangered, Threatened, and Rare Species
3.1.4.1. Federal Designation
One species classified as endangered on the Federal list of endangered
and threatened species (44 FR 3636-3654) may be present in the project
area: the American peregrine falcon. The peregrine falcon no longer
breeds in Minnesota, and is present in the project area only during migra-
tion periods.
3-42
-------
Two species classified as threatened on the Federal list inhabit the
project area: the bald eagle and the gray wolf (also called timber wolf).
More than 100 pairs of bald eagles are known to breed in the Chippewa
National Forest, which surrounds most of the Leech Lake Indian Reservation
to the east of Bemidji (Mathisen 1977). This is the largest breeding
population of bald eagles in the coterminous United States. Two bald eagle
nests reportedly are located adjacent to Lake Andrusia and one is located
along the stretch of river between Lake Bemidji and Stump Lake (Mathisen
1977).
The gray wolf is considered by Federal authorities to be endangered in
47 of the 48 coterminus states, but populations in Minnesota are suffici-
ently large so that the species has been given threatened status in the
State. A small population of approximately 30 to 50 individuals is present
in the Chippewa National Forest east of Bemidji (By telephone, Mr. John
Mathisen, Chief Biologist, Chippewa National Forest, to Ms. K. Brennan,
WAPORA), but only rare sightings have been recorded for the project area.
Because of an increase in wolf-human conflicts within wolf management zone
4, which includes Bemidji, the USFWS has determined that a population of 1
wolf per 50 square miles should be maintained, and that any excess animals
be removed by carefully regulated hunting and trapping. The US District
Court of Minnesota (Fifth District) subsequently issued a permanent injunc-
tion that prohibits USFWS personnel from trapping and killing wolves in
zones 2, 3, 4, and 5, except when there is reason to believe that the wolf
or wolves have preyed significantly on livestock lawfully present in the
area (USDI 1978).
3.1.4.2. State Designation
The State of Minnesota has no official list of endangered and threa-
tened species. Under present State law, the State list is the same as the
Federal list. A publication prepared by the MDNR (Moyle 1980) contains an
unofficial list of 5 species considered to be endangered and 6 species
considered to be threatened within the State. The list includes 8 species
not on the Federal list, but none of these other species are known to occur
within the Bemidji area. The publication also contains a list of 35 spe-
cies designated as Priority Species, which are considered to be uncommon or
3-43
-------
local within the State but are not presently threatened or endangered.
Eleven of these species have been recorded in the Bemidji area. The endan-
gered, threatened, and priority species known or likely to inhabit the
project area are listed in Table 3-6, and the explanatory symbols used in
the MDNR publication to describe the status of each species within the
State also are included. None of these species are expected to be affected
adversely by any of the proposed wastewater management alternatives.
A Natural Heritage Program began in Minnesota in 1979, and program
personnel have prepared an initial unofficial list of species of plants
that are considered to be endangered, threatened, or rare within the State.
Information on approximately 200 species has been compiled to date, but the
project will not be completed for some time (Personal communication, Mr.
Carrol L. Henderson, MDNR, to Ms. Kathleen M. Brennan, WAPORA, Inc.,
5 March 1980). A publication of the Smithsonian Institute and the World
Wildlife Fund, Inc., contained a list of species of plants that are con-
sidered by botanists to be endangered or threatened throughout their range
in the continental US (Ayensu and DeFilipps 1978). Three of the species
considered to be endangered and 10 of the species considered to be threa-
tened are known to occur in Minnesota. These species are listed in Table
3-7. It is not known if any of these species are present within the Be-
midji area. None of those plants were observed by Jones (1948) in St.
Louis County, approximately 130 miles northeast of Bemidji, and none were
located by WAPORA personnel who conducted field investigations in the
Bemidji area during 1977.
3.2. Man-made Environment
3.2.1. Economics
3.2.1.1. Income
In 1979 the median family income for Beltrami County was $12,200
(Table 3-8). Because Bemidji is the largest city in the County, County
statistics are strongly influenced by the City; thus, the income levels for
the two are not expected to differ greatly.
3-44
-------
Table 3-6. Endangered, threatened, and rare species that may be present in the
Beraidji MN area (50 CFR 17.11; MDNR 1980).
Category/Gomroon Name
Endangered Species
Peregrine falcon
Threatened Species
Bald eagle
Gray wolf
Priority Species
White pelican
Marsh hawk
Merlin
Greater prairie chicken
Greater sandhill crane
Yellow rail
Upland sandpiper
Common tern
Black-backed three-toed woodpecker
Eastern bluebird
Sharp-tailed sparrow
Scientific Name
Falco peregrinus
Classification
En, Pr, Et
Haliaeetus leucocephalus Th, Pr
Canis lupus Th, Pr
Pelicanus erythrorhyncus
Circus cyaneus
Falco columbarius
Tympanuchus cup ido
Grus canadensis tabida
Coturnicops noveboracensis
Bartramia longicauda
Sterna hirundo
Pico ides arcticus
Sialia sialis
Ammospiza caudacuta
Pr,
Pr,
Pr,
Pr,
Pr,
Pr,
Pr,
Pr,
Pr,
Pr,
Pr,
PI
Ra
Ra
Re
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
PI
Ra
PI,
Re
KEY: En - classified under Federal regulations as endangered
Et - No longer breeds in Minnesota
Pi - Has a large range in North America, but only a part of Minnesota is
included
Pr - Afforded some degree of protection under Minnesota laws
Ra - Range includes all of Minnesota, but species is rare throughtout its
range
Re - Restricted to a small range in Minnesota, but not a peripheral range
Th - Classified under Federal regulations as threatened in Minnesota
3-45
-------
rH | 13
Cfl -rl CU
•P 13 Vl
d d cu
CU i-l 13
d 1-1
•H O CO
4-> 4-1 d
d o
O 13 O
CJ CU
co co
cu 3
+-> O rH
>
d -rl r rH
Cfl
13 CU
C O
, d cu c
-° -H ^3 cfl
•s
o o
+J -H
M-l
CO
4->
cfl
i j
CO
rH
CO
•H
o
•H
O
d
w w w
CU
cfl
CU
a
cu cfl
CU Cfl -rl
r-l
•H
a
cfl
CO CU d
Q) CJ O
0 cfl S
cfl -rl CU
/-> rH rH
Cfl -rl O
cu cu cu
6 S £3
CO w CO
CU
0
CO
S3
d
Q
£j
S
u
d d d
d d d
!§ 5 £3
ri S j3
o o o
cJ o o
o o o
z; z 2;
H
cu
cfl
CU
CJ
cfl
•rl
rH
co
J_|
bC
Q
CU
co
d
•rl
O
H
CU
cfl
CU
CJ
cfl
Vi
CU
4J
[ft
d
•rl
CO
4_»
0
cfl
iH
a
on
V
0
•H
o
Q
H
O
cfl
CU
CJ
cfl
13
•H
r!
O
Vl
O
Vl
cu
a
a
•rl
rH
CO
1
CO
^
^*l
13
Cfl
rH
TJ
Cfl
Q)
&
T
co
^
S
H
CU
cfl
CU
CJ
cfl
3
r*
CJ
O
cu
a
a
•H
rH
CO
1
CO
»•
^"t
T3
Cfl
rH
CO
rH
O
Vl 4->
cfl
CO
o
•H
Cfl CJ
CU
e
25
CJ
•rl
M-l
•H
d
CU
•H
CJ
CO
*-*^
^
Vl
0
60
CU
+J
cfl
O
> • CU
vi a
CO
t*l
^3
CJ
cfl
CO
o
ft
cu
rH
cfl
N
CU
T3
CU
a
co
cu
M
d
cfl
rH
rH
3
ft
O
Vl
ft
e
3
•H
d
o
Vl
J"*
4J
>1
Vl
W
CU
r-l
cfl
4-1
(3
CU
•rl
CJ
0
O
0
3
•rl
d
Q
a)
o
Cfl _ CO
> s
3
CO
•H
rH
O
M-l
CU
3
CT
d
•H
3
cr
X
id
d
cfl
CO
iH
rH
CU
XI
o
1— I
3
ft
d
o
M
CU
oc
•H
Vl
W
d
•H
CU
•rl
CO
0
3
•rl
13
CU
ft
•H
^,
ft
^
CJ
CO
3
13
•rl
13
C
cfl
CJ
s
•H
CU
ft
•rl
^1
ft
C_J
cfl
(U
cO
4-1
cfl
•H
3
O
•rl
VJ
3
cfl
cfl
Vl
cu
4j
CO
•H
rJ
CO
X!
ft
cfl
cfl
rH
M-l
CO
•rl
Vl
cfl
d
cu
cfl
93
O
CJ
3
(U
rH
Cfl
•H
Vl
Cfl
d
cu
cfl
33
CO
•H
a
CU
•S
d
cfl
CJ
co
•H
4-1
CO
Cfl
Vl
13
^i
33
•rl
rH
O
M-l
•H
d
cu
Vl
cfl
•H
4J
d
cfl
•rl
rH
,_(
3
•
Vi
CO
cfl
3
cr
•rl
rH
o
O
CU
d
0
r-l
CU
Si
O
3-46
-------
Table 3-8. 1979 income in Beltrami County, by decile, for a family of four
(HUD 1979).
Decile
10
20
30
40
50 (median)
60
70
80
90
95
Beltrami County
(dollars)
3,187
6,052
8,287
10,340
12,200
14,948
17,570
22,154
27,797
30,279
North Central Census Region US
Total Non-SMSA (dollars)
(dollars) (dollars)
18,400
16,750 17,300
Beraidji and Beltrami County are relatively poor; median incomes lag
well behind those for the United States and the North Central Census Re-
gion, which includes Minnesota (HUD 1979). Beltrami County median family
income is 29% lower than that of the United States as a whole and 34% less
than North Central Census Region. Furthermore, the Beltrami County median
family income is 24% lower than the non-SMSA median family income in the
North Central Census Region.
Ten percent of the families in Beltrami County have incomes below
$3,187, and 20% of the families have income below $6,052. For 1979 the
threshold poverty level for non-farm families in the United States was
$7,410. At least 20% of the families in Beltrami County are below this
threshold (By phone, Ms. Roberson, Librarian, Bureau of Labor Statistics,
to Mr. Greg Lindsey, WAPORA, 12 May 1980).
3.2.1.2. Employment
Bemidji had an estimated labor force of 6,726 persons during 1979 (MN
Department of Economic Development 1979). About 5% (322 people) were
3-47
-------
employed in manufacturing occupations and 6,083 persons were employed in
non-manufacturing occupations. Ninety-five percent of the total labor
force was employed.
The largest employers are in the services sector (Table 3-9). These
employes include Bemidji State University, Bemidji Community Hospital, and
the Bemidji Public School System. Other major employers are in the manu-
facturing sector. The 10 largest employers in Bemidji together employ from
1,088 to 1,235 persons. This represents between 16% to 20% of the total
labor force.
Table 3-9. Major employers in the Bemidji area (MN Department of Economic
Development 1979).
Firm
Beraidji Public Schools
Bemidji State University
Bemidji Community Hospital
Nu-Ply Corporation
Thorson, Inc.
Dickinson Lumber
Core Craft
Corcoran Timber Company
North Central Door Company
Bemidji Woolen Mills
Product/Service
Education
Education
Medical
Hardboard
Road Construction
Pulpwood Lumber
Fiberglass Canoes & Shovels
Wood Fiber-chips
Overhead Garage Doors
Wool Processing
No. Employees
550
315-235
350
95
18-150
20-30
15-20
12
13
15
During 1979 the unemployment rate in Bemidji was 4.8% (323 persons).
The average employment rate for the United States for 1979 was 5.8% (By
phone, Ms. Toby Kuppersmith, Bureau of Labor Statistics, to Mr. Greg Lind-
sey, WAPORA, 12 May 1980). Although Bemidji residents are relatively poor,
unemployment in the City of Bemidji is not a problem.
The Bemidji area presently is experiencing some economic growth.
During 1979, 7 new businesses located in the Bemidji Industrial Park (The
Pioneer, Bemidji MN, 22 January 1980). Two major waferboard plants and one
3-48
-------
electronic plant have announced plans to locate in the Bemidji area. These
plants will create several hundred new jobs excluding the jobs created
during construction. Because of the projected increase in jobs due to the
opening of these new plants, unemployment is not expected to increase
significantly in the future.
3.2.2. Demographics
3.2.2.1. Past and Present Population
Bemidji is the largest city in Beltrami County, Minnesota. In 1976,
the population of Bemidji was estimated to be 11,415 (US Bureau of the
Census 1979), which is 75 persons less than the US Census population of
11,490 in 1970. The 1976 estimate represents 38% of the 1976 estimated
County population of 30,076. The State Demographer has estimated the 1980
Bemidji population to be 12,271. This estimate indicates an average annual
growth of only 78 persons since 1970; however, the average annual growth
since the 1976 estimate is 214 persons.
In 1970, Bemidji was one of only 47 municipalities in Minnesota with a
population within the 10,000 to 50,000 size range. The composition of the
population of Bemidji is similar to the other municipalities of this same
size range. According to 1970 data, each have predominantly white popula-
tions (98% of the Bemidji population), females outnumber males (51% of the
Bemidji population), and each exhibits a young age profile (the median age
of the population in Bemidji was 23.2 years).
Population data are presented in Table 3-10. Data are shown for the
State, the five Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas (SMSAs) in Minne-
sota, a seven-county region that includes Beltrami County, for Beltrami
County, the City of Bemidji, Bemidji State University, and the six town-
ships adjacent to Bemidji (Bemidji, Eckles, Frohn, Grant Valley, Northern,
and Turtle River Townships). Additional data are shown for an aggregate
"Bemidji urban area" that includes the City of Bemidji and the six ad-
joining townships.
3-49
-------
cti cti cd
o
r-^
ON
o
vo
ON
o
m
ON
CO
co
n
CU
«H
o
CO
CU
rl
co
p,
vO
r>
ON
m
ON
-a
o
•rl .
r) -^
CU ON
ft Px
ON
O CO
m M
cu
cfl >
4-1 -H
cfl C
C OJ
O •"
•rl CO
4-1 4-1
(0 CO
rH
3 -H
ft 1~)
O T)
ft -H
cu pq
4-1
o •*
cu a\
rH (^
cu ON
co
cu
rH
•8
H
vO
f^
r^
ON
rH
Q^
rH
ON
rH
m
ON
rH
m
-3"
•*
rH
CN
ON
A
CO
ON
vO
0
m
o
00
A
CO
«*
00
CO
rH
•^
*
co
co
00
-3-
CN
CO
ON
A
CN
cfl
4-1
O
CO
g
•H
g
o
o
0
^
m
vO
A
CN
O
rO
m
CM
r^
m
A
CN
if)
00
rH
O
CO
ON
*
rH
00
ON
CN
H
*vf
m
A
H
,0.
<
s
c/a
L
s
^
c
c
r
C
>
c
0
r
r
r
P
x
C
r
r
U
e
c
c
c
r
U
*
i
C
r
n
3-
3-
JN
SI
H
3
t
T\
0
H
H
H
^
t
ri
H
H
"1
D
r\
3
vj
H
10
1)
U
$
ET
§
0
i
N*
vO
r*^
o
o
CO
CO
l^»
CO
vO
CN
in
CN
•*
CO
CN
CN
VO
ON
^
CM
^
4_)
g
0
o
"d
cO
rl
4-1
rH
CU
pq
O
ON
m
00
rH
m
m
vO
iH
lO
m
0
CO
rH
in
rH
0
CO
rH
T3
%
CU
^*
§
J.Q
M
K^
•H
'<-)
*d
1
0)
pq
in
rH
o CN <• vo r^ oo CN
- co co
ti ft 5 1-1 ?
& -H ft 0 & 0
A -H ft H CO H
CU CO A -H Cl
4J C3 CO ,C >, 3 M
cct ? d co cu o cu
4-1 O 3 Cl rH H >
CO H O ? rH >H
H O CO d P^
•H -H H > fi
•n •!-> CO CU 01
tJ TJ a) C 4-1 jc! rH
•H -H rH & C 4J 4J
0 0 A! 0 CO M M
CU CU CJ }-i t-i o 3
pq pq W fn O a H
^-s
cO
4->
O
co
cu
§
•H
g
1
a
o w
a 1
•rl
co A
3 co
rH • C
ft co 3
cu o
Cfl -rl H
4-1 4J
O {3 rl
co 3 0)
cu o >
g- T -J
CJ *rl
jvj
•H CO
g T) CU
^ O rH
O 4J
*O IS M
33
O CU H
H A
U 4-> t3
C
. m co
4-1 O
co «
cu d
» A! C
rl CO CU
CU »J iC
4-1 4-)
co "d ^i
cu d o
fH fjt |-y
•g * *
O A A
p^ 00 ^i
d cu
« -H rH
rH 3 H
3 rH Cfl
CO O >
PM -H
f* | I
pJUi -1— '
• a d
4J O CO
CO O rl
1 « 0
CO
•H "
rH CO d
O O J3
ft CO O
Cfl CO rl
a) 4-1 PM
d M
d *
•H "CO
g T3 CU
M rH
* CO rM
*rl r> f 1
Cfl rt PT*|
CU 3
_J"^ |T^ A
CU -H
w * *^^
O rl Tj
O CU -H
g w a
1 CO CU
O i pq
00 fj
t-i cfl co
CO CU 3
PH H H
CJ ft
A
rl « -H
CO O CO i-)
CU -H CO T3
4J >-l CO -H
co cu o S
0 ft CU
4-1 CO -rl
CO 1 B MH
CU rd CO O
4-1 M
m 3 4-i t*>
f-~ rH rH 4-1
ON 3 CU vH
rH Q pq U
Cfl ,£> CJ -O
3-50
-------
Population in Minnesota shifted from rural areas to urban areas during
the period from 1950 to 1970. Population in the SMSAs grew at a much
faster rate than the State as a whole. Correspondingly, the population of
the seven county rural area that includes Beltrami County decreased. In
contrast with the seven-county area, Beltrami County lost population during
the 1950 to 1960 period, but gained population between 1960 and 1970.
The rural population (the County population excluding the Bemidji
urban area) decreased by an average of 158 persons per year (Table 3-10)
between 1950 and 1960, and continued to decrease at a lower average annual
rate of 75.2 persons between 1960 and 1970. The substantial growth of
Bemidji between 1960 and 1970 (+15.4%) accounted for the overall increase
in Beltrami County's population during that decade.
Since 1970, the trend has reversed and the 1976 US Census Estimates
indicate that the rural population is now growing at an average of 311
persons annually. During the period from 1970 to 1976, the rural area of
Beltrami County accounted for 49.4% of the population growth. The Bemidji
urban area percentage of the County population decreased from 63.5% to
61.8% during this same six-year period.
An analysis of the Bemidji urban area population data indicates that
during the period from 1950 to 1976, the population of the City and the six
adjacent townships increased by 5,575 people (Table 3-10). The rate of in-
crease grew from an average of 40 person per year between 1950 and 1960, to
310 persons per year between 1960 and 1970. A slight reduction in the rate
of increase (an average of 305 persons per year) occurred during the six
years following 1970. This was primarily the result of the significant
decline in enrollment at Bemidji State University during this period (439
students) .
The share of the growth in the Bemidji area occurring within the City
of Bemidji is declining as the adjoining townships attract new growth and
the urbanized area expands and fills in. Analysis of the 1976 US Census
Population Estimates indicates that Bemidji's population decreased by 75
persons between 1970 and 1976. If the revised 1976 population for Bemidji
3-51
-------
of 11,789 is used, then Bemidji grew at an average of only 0.4%, or 123
persons per year between 1970 and 1976 (1.8% average annual growth in the
resident population excluding BSU). Consequently, while the City of Be-
midji accounted for 76.3% of the Bemidji urban area population in 1960, it
accounted for only 68.6% by 1970, and 63.4% in 1976 (based on the revised
1976 Bemidji population estimate).
While the Bemidji urbanized area is growing at approximately the same
number of persons per year as the rural area (305 persons and 311 persons
per annum, respectively), and has accounted for over half (51.6%) of Bel-
trami County's growth between 1970 and 1976, the City is losing ground in
terms of the percentage of total County population. Furthermore, if the
current trends continue, the City of Bemidji will represent a decreasing
percentage of the total urban area of the county as a whole.
3.2.2.2. Future Population
At least seven different projections of future population have been
made for Bemidji by six different agencies, consultants, or government
entities. Most of the projections are arithmetic extrapolations based on
historical population data. These vary according to the assumptions made
by the analyst making the projections. For example, some projections are
based on historical data for the period from 1940 to 1970, while others are
based only on population trends between 1960 and 1970. Some analysts have
separated the Bemidji State University student population from the resident
population and computed separate projections for each to arrive at a com-
posite figure. Other projections have been made computing Bemidji's popu-
lation as a percentage of the total Beltrami County population or have
attempted to take into consideration more subjective factors such as pro-
posed industrial growth in the Bemidji area or national trends in popula-
tion migration between urban and rural areas. The projections also some-
times represent a median between several projections based on different
assumptions (i.e., high and low scenarios). In summary, there is no
"correct" projection methodology. All projections fall into the realm of
"reasoned judgement." While some projections can be considered better than
others on a relative scale, none can be considered accurate or precise.
3-52
-------
The population projections for Bemidji for the year 2000 range from
13,553 to 18,500 (Table 3-11) and have been the topic of considerable dis-
cussion and debate. Stewart & Walker, Inc., the original Facilities Plan-
ning engineers, recommended a year-2000 design population of 17,500
(Stewart & Walker 1976). WAPORA estimated the year-2000 population as
14,183 in 1977 and revised this number to 14,640 in 1979. In June 1979 the
Bemidji City Council passed a resolution supporting an estimate of 18,500
as the desired year-2000 population. Following passage of the resolution,
Bemidji officials met with USEPA, MPCA, and Congressional officials in
Washington DC to determine, among other things, which projection should be
used in the wastewater treatment facility design process. It then was
decided that all further studies for the treatment system would be based on
a "resident service population" of 16,500. This figure is not an exact
projection for the City of Bemidji, but rather a compromise that was ar-
rived at to allow design work to proceed. No estimates of non-resident,
transient population to be served by the wastewater treatment facility were
made. The estimate is intended to account for sewer service to Bemidji
residents, transients, and several developed areas presently outside the
sewer service area that may be served by sewers by the year 2000.
The basis for this projection, as proposed by the City of Bemidji is
(By letter of 18 July 1979 from Mr. Donald G. Dougherty, Bemidji City
Manager, to Mr. Doug Hall, Minnesota EIS Coordinator, Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency):
• Present Population 12,000
• Year 2,000 Population (1% increase per year
from 1 July 1979 to 31 December 1999 = 20.5% 2,460
• Service Area (from Stewart & Walker 1976)
1,000 population x 2% growth per year 1,060
• Addition of Hillcrest Manor (By actual count:
240 houses x 3.5 people per house in area
defined as from new Highway 71 to Lake
Bemidji, and from 30th to 38th St., and also
to include Hillcrest Manor Trailer Court) 840
TOTAL 16,360
Rounded estimate for year 2,000 16,500
3-53
-------
Table 3-11. Projected populations for the City of Bemidji (after RCM
1979a).
Year
1990
1995
2000
Population
14,600
16,600
13,553
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
14,183
16,080
16,726
17,500
18,500
16,500
Comments
Projection by Aguar Jyring Whiteman Moser
(1971) in 1971 Comprehensive Plan
Projection by Stewart & Walker (1973)
in Facilities Plan
Projection by Minnesota Analysis and
Planning System based on population
trends from 1940 to 1970 (Hoyt and
others 1973)
Projection by WAPORA (1977a) in Existing
Conditions Report
Projections by Barton-Aschman Associates (1978)
ranged from 11,490 to 22,580 depending
on the projection methodology utilized,
with 16,080 suggested as the appropriate
planning guide
Projection by Minnesota Analysis and
Planning System based on population
trends from 1960 to 1970 (Hoyt and others
1973)
Projection by Stewart & Walker (1976)
in the Facilities Plan Supplement
Bemidji City Council passed resolution
June 1979 supporting this figure
"Service Population" for City of Bemidji
agreed to at Washington, DC meeting
3-54
-------
3.2.3. Land Use
3.2.3.1. Existing Development Patterns
Working Paper #4, "Development Patterns and Opportunities," prepared
by Barton-Aschman Associates (1978b), is a component of the Growth Manage-
ment Plan commissioned by the City of Bemidji during 1978. The document is
the most recent summary of existing land use in Bemidji. The working paper
indicates that residential and commercial/industrial land uses are predomi-
nant in Bemidji, with institutional and other public and quasi-public uses
representing the majority of the remaining land area within the City of
Bemidji.
According to Barton-Aschman (1978b):
Residential development makes up the majority of Bemidji's de-
veloped area. In the 1960s approximately 560 acres were in
residential use. Most residential development is single-family
dwellings. The residential development pattern reflects the
general pattern of development in the Bemidji area. Development
has stretched along the western shore of.Lake Bemidji across the
narrow isthmus between Lake Irving and Lake Bemidji to the south
and the eastern shores of Lake Bemidji. Urban development
reaches approximately one mile back from the west and south
shores of Lake Bemidji. Virtually, the entire lakeshore of Lake
Bemidji has experienced some degree of development. Development
also has extended out along the major roads (US. 2 & T.H. 71)
serving Bemidji. Low intensity, scattered residential develop-
ment occurs throughout the Bemidji Area generally locating in
areas with access and natural amenities. The natural amenity of
the Mississippi River and Lake Irving has attracted residential
development both within Bemidji and outside of Bemidji.
Multi-family development tends to be concentrated near the down-
town area and Bemidji State University. While some apartments
have been built in other parts of the city, none are located
south of Lake Bemidji in the Nymore neighborhood. The mobile
home parks in the area are located at the edges of the city or
outside the city proper.
Commercial and industrial development occupies a lesser amount of
land than residential. The primary concentrations are located in
the Central Business District (CBD) and along U.S. 2 on the north
end of town. Other small commercial areas are located elsewhere
such as the northern end of Bemidji Avenue, and the Lake Irving-
Lake Bemidji isthmus.
3-55
-------
Industrial development has concentrated in areas served by rail.
Industrial development is located just south of the CBD, along
the south shore of Lake Bemidji and in the industrial park at the
southern tip of the City.
Barton-Aschman analyzed building permit data for the four previous
years and presented in the working paper those areas where recent develop-
ment has occurred:
Residential growth has occurred predominately on the east side of
the city, along county roads 12 and 19 and in the Nymore neigh-
borhood. Some building has also occurred on the northern edge of
Bemidji. Extensive growth has occurred outside Bemidji as ex-
hibited by population increases between 1960 and 1970 in Northern
and Bemidji townships. During that period Northern and Bemidji
Townships grew 99% and 67%, respectively. By comparison the City
of Bemidji grew 15%.
Commercial and industrial development has occurred along the
major arterial routes through the community - US 2 and US 71, and
within the CBD. Other key growth areas have been the industrial
park area and the northwest edge of Bemidji in the vicinity of US
2. The most notable growth in the area is the Paul Bunyan Mall,
the new hospital, the Minnesota State Office Building and the
Holiday Inn. Non-tourism related commercial/industrial growth
outside the City limits has been extremely limited.
Barton-Aschman Associates (1978b) also noted that the existing de-
velopment pattern in Bemidji has been formed by the numerous natural growth
barriers (the lakes and wetlands). Nearly half of Lake Bemidji and almost
all of Lake Irving are within the City boundaries. A variety of wetlands
exist within or adjacent to the City; wetlands border on the west and north
of the City.
Land available to accomodate future development does exist, both
within the existing City boundaries and in adjacent areas, according to
Barton-Aschman Associates (1978b):
Within Bemidji there is [sic] approximately 2,000 acres of vacant
land. Most of this land is at the outer edges of the city. Some
of the vacant land is in small scattered parcels. More than 500
acres of the vacant land is wetland. Of the remaining 1,500
acres approximately 200 is served by existing sewer and water.
This land represents opportunity areas for urban development.
Outside Bemidji city limits, stretching in all directions, is
extensive areas of farmland, pasture land, woodlands and open
land. This land, even though it may currently be used, repre-
sents areas where urban development could occur. Much of this
3-56
-------
land is particularly appealing because of its natural features
(proximity to water or forest character) and has experienced
development pressures.
Barton-Aschman Associates (1978b) qualified their discussion of de-
velopment opportunities in the following way:
It should be noted that Bemidji would have a difficult time, even
if desirable, to accommodate all future growth within its present
corporate boundaries. The challenge becomes how to attract and
guide desired development into those areas of the community in a
manner consistent with public resources and private needs. Since
much of anticipated developments will occur outside present
corporate limits, a partnership must be forged with other govern-
mental jurisdictions to assure orderly development in the best
long-range interest of all area residents.
They outlined basic principles that should be incorporated into the
planning for future development in Workpaper #9 (Barton-Aschman 1979).
The discussion of basic urban services available in Bemidji is pre-
sented in Barton-Aschman's Working Paper #5, "Urban Systems Summary: Exist-
ing Conditions, Principles, and Preliminary Policies" (1978c). Their
report summarizes the existing condition of public utilities (water, sani-
tary sewer, and storm sewer), the transportation system, emergency ser-
vices, and recreation opportunities. Because of the pertinence of some of
this information to understanding the importance from a growth perspective
of providing expanded and upgraded wastewater treatment facilities, the
entire working paper is reproduced in Appendix A.
The forested land and cropland in the area of Eckles Township that
would be affected if Alternative 6 were implemented is described in Section
3.1.2.5. Similarly, land cover at the undeveloped City-owned Mississippi
River site that would be affected if Alternative 1 were selected is pre-
sented in Section 3.1.2.2.
3.2.3.2. Projected Development
Barton-Aschman1s Working Paper #3, "Development Projections," (1978d)
provides estimates of the number of acres of land required to support
3-57
-------
anticipated population growth in the Bemidji area. Their projections are
based on a year-2000 population for the City of Bemidji of 16,080, which
corresponds roughly with the year-2000 wastewater treatment plant design
population within Bemidji, as selected by the City of Bemidji and the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (Section 3.3.1.2.).
As presented by Barton-Aschman Associates (1978d), 2,200 to 2,500
acres of presently vacant or agricultural land in the Bemidji area may
become urbanized by the year 2000 (Table 3-12). This land area represents
nearly as much land as currently is developed (i.e., represents a doubling
in the size of the urbanized area).
Table 3-12. Summary of year-2000 land requirement for urban growth in Be-
midji and the surrounding townships (after Barton-Aschman
1978d).
Type of
Development
Residential
Commercial
Industrial
Of fice/Gov/ Service
Recreation
Public R.O.W.a
Total Urban Growth
City of Bemidji
(acres)
438
27-44
26
24
46
213-218
773-796
Surrounding
Townships
(acres)
901
0
54
50
91
404
1501
Total for
Bemidji Area
(acres)
1,339
27-44
80
74
137
617-623
2,274-2,297
a
Estimated public rights-of-way land necessary to provide streets, utility
corridors, etc. was based on 25% of total acreage.
A breakdown of this development projection for each land-use category in
5-year increments, as presented by Barton-Aschman (1978d), is provided in
Appendix G.
As discussed in the previous section, the projected growth cannot be
accommodated within the existing city boundaries. There are only about
1,500 acres of developable land remaining within the city. Therefore, at
least 700 to 1,000 acres of the projected development will occur outside
3-58
-------
the municipal boundaries. The actual percentage of growth may be somewhat
higher than that projected because the surrounding townships are growing
more rapidly than Bemidji is, and the controls on growth are less stringent
in the townships than within Bemidji. The future growth patterns and the
degree to which growth actually occurs within the municipal boundaries
depends on Bemidji's success in implementing the recommendations in the
Growth Management Plan.
3.2.3.3. National Wild and Scenic Rivers System
The Upper Mississippi River has been recommended for inclusion in the
National Wild and Scenic River System (USDI 1976). The National Park
Service (NFS) in conjunction with the State of Minnesota is currently
developing a master plan for the River. Each stretch of the river will be
classified according to the most appropriate use. In the Bemidji area, the
following designations were recommended, pending the final report:
• The reach from Lake Itasca to County Road 7 southwest of
Bemidji would be classified "wild"
• The reach from County Road 7 to Lake Bemidji would be clas-
sified "recreational" (although stated as ending at Lake
Bemidji, it is assumed from the qualifying criteria that the
segment actually ends at the inlet to Lake Irving)
• The reach from Otter Tail Dam to Aliens Bay of Cass Lake
would be classified as "recreational."
Excluded from consideration in the system was that section including Lake
Bemidji downstream to the Otter Tail Dam, and Cass Lake, owing to their
impounded nature. In addition, approximately 200 acres of private land
will be acquired for public access and recreation facilities (The Pioneer,
Bemidji MN 15 February 1980).
Six counties, including Hubbard, Clearwater, Beltrami, Cass, Itasca,
and Aitkin, are investigating an alternative river preservation program
under which they would cooperatively manage 280 miles of the river above
3-59
-------
St. Cloud MN (The Pioneer, 15 February 1980). The plan was adopted as an
alternative to the Federal proposal to limit Federal involvement and retain
local control of the river.
3.2.4. Public Finance
A variety of community services are provided the residents of the
City of Bemidji, including education, transportation facilities, full-time
police and fire protection, library and recreation facilities, garbage
collection and disposal, wastewater collection and treatment, and water
supply. The ability to maintain or improve these services is dependent on
the continued ability of City residents to finance them.
3.2.4.1. Revenues and Expenditures
In 1979, the City of Bemidji collected revenues totaling $4,336,617.
Intergovernmental transfers (55.5%), revenues from special assessments
(17.7%), taxes (10.0%), and charges for services (4.8%) were the four
largest sources of revenue. All monies are allocated to one of the five
governmental funds (Appendix H).
The general fund and the special revenue fund together received
$3,349,028 (77.0%) of the City's 1979 revenues. These two funds provide
for most of the City's operating budget. General fund monies are used to
meet the day-to-day expenses of the City. The largest expenditures are for
public safety (42.0%), streets (19.5%), and general governmental expenses
(15.7%). Special revenue funds are used to support permanent institutions
such as the library, park, airport, and permanent public improvements.
The remaining funds, special assessments, debt service, and capital
projects, received $987,589 of the total collected revenue. These are
non-discretionary monies already allocated to specific projects or ac-
counts. As a result, these resources cannot be transferred easily to other
funds.
3-60
-------
The City of Bemidji is not responsible for the revenues and expendi-
tures of the school system. School operations are the responsibility of
the school district and, therefore, are not included in the City audit.
3.2.4.2. Tax Assessments
Bemidji property taxes were assessed at a rate of $124.251 per $1,000
assessed valuation in 1979. This included taxes levied by the county
($39.697/$l,000 valuation), the school district ($59.853/$l,000 valuation),
the City ($24.559/$l,000 valuation), and the Headwaters Regional Develop-
ment Commission ($0.142/$1,000 valuation) (Minnesota Department of Economic
Development 1979). A breakdown of the total tax rate is included in
Appendix H.
Most property in Bemidji is assessed at 43% of market value. However,
market values often are underestimated and some residents receive Homestead
Tax Credits or Mobil Homestead Tax Credits. Thus, property taxes cannot be
estimated solely on the basis of assessed valuation and mill rates.
3.2.4.3. City Indebtedness
The City of Bemidji appears to be financially sound and not over
burdened with debt. The outstanding debt of the City, payable from tax
levies, was $825,000 at the end of 1979 (By letter, Mrs. Dorothy Boe,
Acting City Manager, 28 March 1980). This debt, equivalent to $83.20/
capita, is extremely low relative to an average community. By comparison,
the latest available data (1976) show that the average non-metropolitan
Minnesota city incurred total debts equivalent to $486/capita (Minnesota
State Planning Agency 1978).
Whether a city can incur additional debt safely can be estimated by
applying two common debt measures shown in Table 3-13. (Moak and Hillhouse
1975). As illustrated by the table, Bemidji falls well below the upper
limits set by Moak and Hillhouse (1975). Thus the City should be able to
sustain additional debt, such as its share of the new wastewater treatment
facilities, without excessive strain on its financial system.
3-61
-------
Table 3-13. Common nunicipal debt measures.
Q
Parameters jit_andard_ Upper Limits Bemidji 1979
Debt/Total Assessed Valuation 10% of current market value 4.1%
Debt Service/Total Revenue 25% of total revenues 1.5/4
Input values are discussed in Appendix H.
3.2.4.4. User Fees
The City of Bemidji has established user fees for three basic City
services: wastewater collection and treatment, water supply, and refuse
collection and disposal. Rates are determined by the City Council and are
subject to periodic evaluation. New rates were established in April 1980
when the Council voted to raise the charges for sewage by 20% and the
charges for water and refuse by 17% each (The Pioneer, Bemidji MN, 22 April
1980). Thus, a Bemidji household could, at minimum, expect to pay about
$48.00/quarter, for all three services (Appendix H).
Prior to April 1980, the most recent service charge increase occurred
in July 1979. At that time the sewer fees doubled, refuse fees increased
by 28%, and water fees increased by 22% (The Pioneer, Bemidji MN, 22 April
1980).
3.2.5. Archaeological, Historical, and Cultural Resources
An inventory of known prehistoric and historic cultural resources
within a 10-mile radius of Bemidji, Minnesota, was conducted by WAPORA.
The National Register of Historic Places and the files of the Minnesota
Historical Society, Fort Snelling Branch, St. Paul, Minnesota were con-
sulted. According to Mr. Ted Lofstrom, Archaeologist (Personal communi-
cation, 27 May 1977), "No systematic surveys have been conducted to locate
either historic or archaeological resources — the chances that there are
additional significant cultural resources in your study area are very
3-62
-------
good." The exact locations of known prehistoric sites must remain confi-
dential to protect them from possible vandalism.
The majority of the known sites are outside of the area that might be
affected by the siting of the proposed wastewater treatment or conveyance
facilities (WAPORA 1977a). The historic, physical, and cultural sites,
structures, and properties that do fall within the immediate area include:
• Chief Bemidji's Statue. This impressive piece of sculpture
stands at 3rd Street and Bemidji Avenue in Bemidji, Minne-
sota
• Fur Trading Post Sites. Fur trading posts were established
at Lake Bemidji during 1785 and 1832. Remains of these
posts may exist on the south side of the Mississippi River
and in the Town of Bemidji. The 1785 post was operated by
the Northwest Company
• The Town of Bemidji. Bemidji was an important logging
center during 1894 (USDI 1976).
Prehistoric archaeological sites within the immediate area include:
• Site 21BL22. Mounds and village site in the City of Be-
midji near Lake Irving
• Site 21BL25. Colvin habitation site on Lake Irving.
The prehistory and history of Bemidji and the Headwaters Region of the
Upper Mississippi River is presented in WAPORA (1977a).
3.2.6. Public Sentiment
Residents of the area downstream from Bemidji, especially the Minne-
sota Chippewa Tribe and the Leech Lake Reservation, have been actively
concerned for a number of years about the quality of the effluent from the
Bemidji WWTP and the water quality of the Upper Mississippi River and Chain
of Lakes. A group named Mississippi Clean, Minnesota Green (MC-MG) was
organized in 1976 to oppose discharge of wastewater effluent to the Missis-
sippi Headwaters by the City of Bemidji and to advocate land treatment of
wastewater and the general preservation of the natural resources of the
area. This organization has had active support from the City of Cass Lake,
the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe, the Leech Lake Reservation, and the Cass
County Board of Commissioners. These groups remain actively involved in
water quality in the Mississippi Headwaters area.
3-63
-------
During October 1977, public hearings were conducted by the MPCA Board
in Bemidji and in Cass Lake as part of the consideration of reissuance of
Bemidji's NPDES permit. There was considerable public comment by MC-MG and
numerous citizens and groups concerning impacts from the City's wastewater
discharge on the Mississippi River and the importance of high water quality
to area residents. Numerous individuals presenting testimony at the hear-
ing indicated their perception of the importance of high water quality to
Indian and other residents, resort operators, and recreational users. The
Hearing Examiner noted that an atmosphere of "strong feeling" and "anxiety"
was exhibited at the hearing, indicating the highly emotional nature of the
proceeding. The Leech Lake Reservation Business Committee was an interven-
ing party to the hearing.
Subsequent to the hearing, the MPCA Board concurred with the recommen-
dations of the State's Hearing Examiner that Bemidji should install an
interim phosphorus removal system and change the point of discharge from
the Mississippi River downstream from Lake Bemidji to the inlet channel to
Lake Bemidji (the original location). The MPCA Board also requested to be
notified of all additional hookups to the Bemidji sewer system and directed
that Board approval be required prior to any extension of the sewer system
in Bemidji.
Landowners and residents in areas proposed for land treatment of
wastewater often have organized in opposition to the siting of a land
treatment facility in the area. They are concerned about the possible
condemnation of their property as well as the potential for groundwater
contamination, the potential health effects from wastewater aerosol, and
the potential adverse effects on property values in areas adjacent to the
wastewater facilities. In Eckles Township, the Eckles Township Environ-
mental Committee has more recently organized MN-PINE, Inc., a non-profit
organization. They have retained legal council to assist them in their
opposition to Alternative 6.
A number of Township Boards have passed resolutions against the con-
cept of land treatment in their townships, including Eckles Township, Grant
Valley Township, and Liberty Township. While it is uncertain what legal
3-64
-------
basis the Townships would have for actually prohibiting the siting of
wastewater treatment facilities, their resolutions reflect the sentiment of
many rural area residents.
The Beltrami County Board of Commissioners passed a resolution on 5
February 1980 opposing land treatment of wastewater on the Memorial Forest
lands in Eckles Township. The County Board's approval is required to
remove the Memorial Forest designation and therefore allow for alternative
use of the property.
Another group of local government officials, the Beltrami County
Association of Township Officers, passed a resolution by a 45-to-l margin
during October 1979 opposing the use of Memorial Forest for land treatment
of wastewater. This group also passed a resolution in February 1980 by a
44-to-2 margin supporting "a mechanical-chemical plant with a discharge
point at its present location, the Lake Irving Outlet."
On 22 April 1980, the Bemidji Wastewater Planning Citizens Advisory
Committee met to discuss RCM's Task 5 Report. After debating the issue,
the Committee voted, by a unanimous vote of the 18 of 22 members attending,
to support Alternative 3, the conventional, tertiary treatment plant at the
site of the existing WWTP. Their resolution also points out that the
Committee "did in fact recommend by resolution in 1977 that a wastewater
treatment (mechanical-chemical) plant be built at the present location with
discharge also at the present site..." The numerous Committee meetings
during the preparation of the EIS have served as a forum for eliciting
comments from a cross-section of local residents and for stimulating debate
of the issues.
In summary, there exists strong sentiments both in favor of land
treatment of wastewater to eliminate effluent phosphorus loadings in the
downstream Chain of Lakes, and against the concept of land treatment of
wastewater. The various individuals and groups that have been involved in
the wastewater problem during the number of years that the issue has been
debated have expended considerable amounts of personal resources and are
strongly polarized. Conflict resolution at this point is extremely diffi-
cult because the political sentiments have been molded over time.
3-65
-------
4.0. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
The potential environmental consequences of the implementation of any
of the six proposed wastewater treatment system alternatives are described
in the following sections. The "no action" alternative (Section 2.2.) is
not considered because it is not a viable solution to the need to improve
the quality of the wastewater discharge at Bemidji.
The effects of the construction (Section 4.1.) and operation (Section
4.2.) of the facilities proposed by the alternatives may be beneficial or
adverse, and may vary in duration and degree of significance. Environ-
mental effects are classified either as primary or secondary impacts:
primary impacts are those effects that would be related directly to con-
struction and operation activities (i.e., the noise produced by construc-
tion equipment); secondary impacts (Section 4.3.) are indirect or induced
effects (i.e., stimulation of population growth because of the availability
of excess wastewater collection and treatment capacity). Many of the
potentially adverse effects may be reduced or eliminated by various tech-
niques (Section 4.4.).
4.1. Construction Impacts
The construction of new treatment facilities at the Mississippi River
site (Alternative 1), the site of the existing WWTP (Alternatives 2, 3, and
4), Grass Lake (Alternative 5), or at the Eckles Township site (Alternative
6), and the construction of new raw wastewater or effluent conveyance lines
(force mains) primarily will produce short-term impacts to the local en-
vironment. Clearing, grading, and construction activities at the proposed
treatment plant sites and the excavation of trenches for the interceptor
sewers would generate fugitive dust and noise, destroy vegetation, disturb
wildlife and several wetland areas along the interceptor routes, temp-
orarily interrupt traffic flow, and impair aesthetics. The construction
project would irretrievably consume significant quantities of resources,
including public sector capital, energy, land, labor, and materials. A
number of short-term construction jobs would be created.
4-1
-------
The potential physical, biological, and socioeconomic impacts from the
construction of each of the six alternatives are presented in comparative
fashion in Table 4-1. The effects are quantified where possible. The fi-
nancial impacts of the construction of each alternative are discussed in
Section 4.2.3.
4.2. Operation Impacts
4.2.1. General Discussion
The operation of a new WWTP with advanced phosphorus control at any of
the three sites, as proposed by Alternatives 1 through 5, would create
similar, but location specific, impacts. The most significant effects
would be the result of the improvement of WWTP effluent quality and con-
sequent improvement of water quality in the Upper Mississippi River and the
Chain of Lakes downstream from Bemidji.
Primary operation phase impacts for each alternative are summarized in
Table 4-2. The effects are quantified where possible. Because of the sig-
nificance of the effects on water quality, the projected system user costs,
and the concerns about land treatment of wastewater (Alternative 6), these
aspects are discussed in more detail in the following sections.
4.2.2. Surface Water
The major water quality concern in the project area is the accelera-
tion of eutrophication in the lakes downstream from Bemidji1s wastewater
treatment plant effluent discharge. The proposed wastewater management
alternatives (Alternatives 1 through 5 — Section 2.4.) have been formu-
lated to upgrade and expand the existing wastewater treatment capability at
Bemidji to provide at least a secondary level of treatment for the conven-
tional pollutants (BOD and SS) and to add an advanced treatment process to
minimize phosphorus loadings on the downstream lakes system. Alternative 6
(land treatment) was formulated 'to eliminate entirely a direct effluent
discharge to surface waters.
4-2
-------
Table 4-1. Poten
Environ mental
C om ponent
Alternative 1 native 5
(Kev WUTP at liississippi? at Grass Lake)
with force main from ex:star
Alternative 6
(Land treatment at Eckles Township)
1) Air quality a) Nuisance fugitive dust J«tive dust woulc be
and odors generated :
• from clearing, gradiia"ng, grading, and
• along 5 miles of forces P°st of 20-30 acre site
• by vehicular traffic
cess roads. miles of force nair trenching
b) Emission of hydi. ocarbo>t»
from construction equip
sionally may be objectio
dents along force main
a) N uisance fu gitive d ust would
be generated:
• from clearing, grading, and
excavating trie 150 acre la-
goon area in Section 16
• from clearin g and grub-
bing access/application
corridors through site
forest lands (approximately
250-300 acres)
• from trenching 9.3 mile force
main to site, distribution
lines, and under drains.
b) Same as Alt. 1.
c) Excavation in wetland a
Mississippi River for co
of effluent sewer could
odors from exposure of
soils.
c) Excavation of ditcn in wetlands
in Sections 23 and 24 would re-
lease odors from exposure of
organic soils.
2) Koise
a) Noise generated at new rated at existing WWTP
along force main route nstraction of pump station,
cernible over 2,000 feet^s of force main route, and
and possibly could be h? P site would be discernible
reatjonists on Lakes Irv feet from sites. Noise at
•JTP site area would be dis-
recreation:sts on Lakes Irving
i and in downtown Eemidji,
a) Same as Alt. 5, except: force
main length is 9.3 niles, and
land treatment site work
would affect a 14 sq- ma.
area on a short-term basis.
3) Geology, soils, a) Grading of site area wot. 1.
and topography existing topography son
b) Trenching for force maa^
ter soil regime and tope
limited extent along int(
of-way (ROW).
c) Excavation in wetland a
Mississippi River for co
effluent sewer could rel
exposure of organic soi]
a") Excavating and grading 130-
acre lagoon site in Section In
would alter existing topograpnv
and soil regime. Dines around
lagoons would be 12 to 15 feet
above ground surface.
b) Same as Alt. 1, with the ad-
dition of trenching distribution
lines.
c) Excavating 8.5 miles of drainage
ditches would modify surficial
geology and soils along the ditch
routes and require disposal of ap-
proximately 100,000 cu. yds. of
spoil material, some of which would
be organic material.
Vegetation a) Agricultural and old-fie.disturbance of agricultural,
tion would be removed id marsh vegetation along
from 100-wide force mai ROW.
County Road 12 to the
b) Clearing and grading fo
would require removal o
all of the following land
types on the site:
Appro
I y p e Act
Marsh
Mixed forest
Old-field
C ultivated
c) Dewatenng of trenches
strucnon temporarily mi
local water tables and a
cent vegetation, pnmari
mareny area near the M
River.
a) Temporary disruption of
vegetation along force main
ROW, in cu ding some forest
clearing wnere ROW is not
along roads.
b) Removal of about 150 acres
of forest vegetation at treat-
ment/storage ponds site in
Section 16, and about 300
acres of forest vegetation
for sprinkler cornd ors and
access roads.
c) Same as Alt, 1, with ad-
dition of excavation of 3.9
miles of drainage ditch.
4-3
-------
Environmental
Component
Table 4-1.
Alte*ernative 5
(New WWTP a'? at Grass Lake)
with torce main
Alternative 6
(Land treatment at Eckles Township)
5) Terrestrial
Fauna
a) Noise and coj as Alt* l*
temporarily \
along the foi
in areas adja
WWTP site.
short-term o
creased com p
stress, and
mortality. T
would occur
Twp.
b) Forest and n^iduals °f some species of small
displaced perils may be displaced or killed
tion of the n1S construction of WWTP.
a) Same as Alt. for force main
route.
c) No State or
endangered c
are expected
as Alt. 1.
b) Permanent displacement of
wildlife from 150-acre treat-
ment/storage pond site and
from 300 acres cleared for
sprinkler corridors. Re-
duction in number of indi-
viduals of forest species,
and increase in number of
individuals of "edge" species.
c) Same as Alt. 1.
6) Wetlands
a) Construction as Alt. 4, along force main
the new plan1*
wetland area
the Mississip
the site. So
destroyed pe
vegetation w<
Grading and
by construct.
may alter dr;
further affec
b) Erosion and '• as Alt.
off from plans Lake.
would affect
area.
1 for area bordering
a) Same as Alt. 5, with the
addition of potential impacts
to wetland area adjacent to
US Rt. 2 and MN Rt. 89.
b) Same as Alt. 1 for marsh af-
fected by trenching drainage
areas.
7) Aquatic a) Short-term ir as Alt. 1. except no fish are
Biota in Mississipppnt in lake.
struction sit<
changes in m
plankton com
avoid area.
a )
No sig nificant effects ex-
pected .
3) Surface Water a)
If not propei as Alt. L.
runoff from
discharge of
from excavat
contribute to
sedimentation
or waterways
degradation ,
impact to aqi
Same as Alt. 1. In ad-
dition, construction of
drainage ditch through marsh
in Sections 23 and 24 would
degrade quality downstream
in Alice Lake drainage
system, and possibly in-
crease sediment load to
Lake Bemidji.
9) Groundwater a) No significant as Alt. 1.
a) Same as Alt. 1.
10) Economics and
Demographics
a) An estimated as Alt. 1, except number of
would be ere would be 160.
struction sea
b) The expendit as Alt. 1, except expenditure
for facilities .timated to be $15.9 million.
generate add
term employtr
sectors in th
the sites whe
and equipmei
c) Ho residents, as Alt. I.
construction
a) Same as Alt. 1, except number o
jobs would be 245.
b) Same as Alt. 1, except ex-
penditure is estimated to
be $24.5 million.
c) Same as Alt, 1.
11) Land Use a) Existing forcing as an airstrip would be
site would beerted to WWTP eite.
to developed
b) Route of forte of force main would be
would be dedated as public utility ROW.
ROW.
as b) in Alt. 3.
a) Multiple purpose use of about
1,700 acres of contiguous
public forest land would be con-
verted to restricted use for
irrigation of wastewater.
b) Same as Alt. 5.
c) Same as b) in Alt. 3.
4-4
-------
Table 4-2. Potential
Alternativ6
Alternative 6
Environmental (New WWTP at Mississippi ss Lake)
Component with force main Prom existing
(Land treatment at Eckles Township)
1) Air Quality
Operation of new 2.0 llt-
of new pumping static
plant site) would relei
levels of malodorous g
because most of the t;
(except the activated
be covered with dome;
"indoors," containing
b) Odors generated by t
WWTP would be elimin
Alt. 1.
l) Treatment/storage ponds would
produce low levels of malodorous
gases and vapors, even though
basins would be aerated.
b) Aerosol from sprinkler system
should be contained within
forest system, even during
high wind conditions, be-
cause of low-trajectory of
spray and forest buffer at
perimeter of site.
c) Same as b) in Alt. 1.
2) Noise
a) Ambient noise levels &!
crease somewhat in ar
to new WWTP, but bei
treatment processes w
doors", the effect woi
minimal.
b) Noise generated by
of the existing WWTP
nated.
a) Noise at treatment/storage
pond site and from waste-
water application would be
minimal and would create
littlfi change from the
natural background condition.
b) Same as Alt. 1.
3)
4)
Geology,
Soils, and
Topography
Vegetation
and Wildlife
a) An estimated 3,500 lbiu- u
yr) of digested sludg
treatment process woi
posal on land at a sui
a) No effects expected, lit. 1.
to threatened and eni
a) Organic and inorganic con-
centrations of various con-
stituents in the applied
wastewater would concen-
trate in the soil matrix,
but no significant harmful
effects are anticipated.
a) Significant effects would
occur on the 1,700 acres of
treatment process (see
Section 4.2.4.), including:
• Loss of 10 to 15 years
of forest production
• Increased rate of de-
composition of forest
litter
• Possible increased suscept-
ibility of trees or crops
to disease or pests
• Changes in species com-
position, density, chemical
content, and nutrient value
of herbaceous vegetation;
productivity would increase
but the number of species,
including palatable species
would decrease.
b) Wildlife may avoid appli-
cation area during period of
application; the number and
abundance of species that
inhabit or feed in the area may
change because of changes in
microclimate, species and nu-
trient content of vegetation,
soil properties, and invertebrate
population and species; there
may be increased use of area
by wildlife in spring and fall
because of availability of food
and cover; possible long-term
adverse effects on wildlife be-
cause of accumulation of
metals and other toxic sub-
stances in soil, vegetation,
and food chains; no en-
dangered or threatened
species would be affected.
4-6
-------
Table 4-2. (Cont
Alternative-1
Alternative 6
Environmental
C om po nent
(New WWTP at Mississip piake)
with force main f-rom existii
(Land treatment at Eckles Township)
5) Wetlands
a) Adverse effects on qi
of wetlands along Hisi
and immediately down.
fluent outfall.
a) Drainage o£ forestlands in
SE \ of Section 15 and NW \
of Section 11 would contribute
to eventual dewatering of ad-
jacent wet areas (Figure 2-8),
which may affect existing
vegetation.
b) The proposed drainage ditch
from Section 16 west to Grant
Creek would lower water level
in wetlands in west part of
Section 17 and NW^ of Section
20. Proposed ditch from
SE*t of Section 15 southeast
through Section 23 and 24
to County Ditch would lower
water levels in the wetlands
it would transect. This
would cause eventual change
in type of wetland biota.
c) Increased contribution of
water to Grant Creek and the
Meadow Lake drainage systems
may increase extent of ad-
jacent wetlands somewhat,
potentially changing biotic
communities.
6) Surface Water
and Aquatic
Biota
BOD and suspended
to Mississippi River '
a significant effect o
or aquatic biota.
b)
Ammonia in effluent '
ambient concentration
Mississippi River dow
outfall, creating pote
effects to aquatic bio
flow conditions.
a) Discharge of treatment/storage
pond effluent on land would
eliminate all potential adverse
chemical quality effects dis-
cussed for Alt. 1-5, and would
approach a zero phosphorus
discharge condition. (An in-
significant level of phosphorus
would be contributed to Lake
Bemidji from the site under-
drainage discharge to the
Meadow Lake drainage system).
The total phosphorus loadings
to Wolf Lake and Lake Andrusia
would remain above the eutrophic
rate, however, even considering
zero phosphorus discharge from
wastewater facilities at
Bemidji (Section 4.2.2.).
b) Same as e) in Alt. 1.
c)
At design flow, the a*. .
ary treatment option i
phosphorus loadings t<
lakes relative to 197'
(Section 4.2.2.2.):
Lake Z Ii
Wolf :
Andrusia :
Cass
The tertiary option w<
the loading rates:
Lake Z P'
Wolf
Andrusia
Cass
Total loadings to Wolf
Lake Andrusia would re
the eutrophic rate wit
c) Discharge of drainage ditches
from land treatment site would
increase base flow condition
in Grant Creek somewhat, and
increase flow in Meadow Lake
drainage system considerably.
Peak flows during storm events
also would increase (storm flow
retention capacity of the wet-
lands (see 5b above) would
be reduced, increasing peak
flow). Drainage system
downstream from Alice Lake
to Lake Bemidji may have to
be improved to provide capacity
for increased flow.
4-7
-------
Table 4-2. (Continued)
Alternative
Environmental (New WWTP at Mississippi River
Component with force main from existing plan
Alternative 6
(Land treatment at Eckles Township)
Surface Water
and Aquatic
Biota
d) Residual chlorine in effluei
infection process could hav
verse effect on fish and in
in River if concentration is
monitored closely.
d) Land treatment 3ystem would
provide the most reliable and
consistant treatment, thus
providing the most beneficial
chemical and biological impact
on surface water system in
Bemadji area.
e) Existing effluent loadings A*
suspended solids, phospho
monia, bacteria, etc., wou.
eliminated from Lake Bemid
phophorus loadings would
duced by 26% of 1979 level
oligotrophic rate (Table 4-
The 3 cfs average design
2000) from the new WWTP
the 32 cfs low-flow and or
of the average-flow condit
Mississippi River, which r
an insignificant increase r
the 2 cfs presently contril
the River system through
to Lake Beraidji.
g) Potential short-term opers
failures of new WWTP wou
River water quality and c
term violation, of water qu
ards, but would have min
term effects.
7) Ground water
Treatment of wastewater g
City residents and residen
crest Manor (including tra
that are not now served b
sewers would reduce conta
ings on the groundwater h
septic systems.
a) Same as Alt. 1.
b) Treatment/storage ponds would
be lined with synthetic membrane
which should prevent seepage of
wastewater to groundwater.
4-8
c) Application of wastewater to
land should be at rates com-
patible with soil's ability to
remove contaminants. Nitro-
gen as soluble nitrate likely
would be flushed through
soil matrix to groundwater.
Because nitrate concentration
in applied water would be less
than 10 mg/1, and because
evapotranspiration rate roughly
is equivalent to rainfall during
year, nitrate should not con-
centrate appreciably in ground-
water (should remain oelow
10 mg/1).
-------
4.2.2.1. Discharge of Treated Effluent to Lake Bemidji
The treatment plant proposed in Alternative 3, when operating at the 2
mgd design flow, will reduce the BOD and suspended solids loads discharged
to Lake Bemidji by about 60% and 65%, respectively, compared to the efflu-
ent loads discharged during 1979. The total nitrogen and ammonia-nitrogen
loads will not be affected by the proposed treatment processes and will
remain at about the same levels as are discharged currently to the Lake.
If the advanced-secondary (1.0 mg/1 P) treatment option is selected, the
total phosphorus load at the 2 mgd design flow will be 28% more than was
discharged during 1979 (phosphorus concentration during 1979 was higher but
flow was lower — Table 4-3). The tertiary treatment option (0.3 mg/1 P)
would result in a 62% reduction in the total effluent phosphorus load at
design flow relative to the 1979 condition.
Most of the residual BOD and ammonia in the treatment plant discharge
will be oxidized in Lake Bemidji and are not expected to have any signifi-
cant impact on the DO levels in the Lake, the Mississippi River, or the
lakes downstream from Lake Bemidji. Most of the residual suspended solids
would settle in the southern basin of Lake Bemidji, adding about 15 tons of
sediment to the lake bottom each year. When dispersed, this would repre-
sent an insignificant accumulation of sediment. Because a fraction of the
solids is biodegradable, the sediment will exert some oxygen demand. The
discharge of effluent with a total phosphorus concentration of 1.0 mg/1, as
compared to an average of 1.28 mg/1 during 1979, would increase the total
2
phosphorus load to Lake Bemidji by 6.5%, from 0.31 gm/m /yr (average 1979
2
load) to 0.33 gm/m /yr (Table 4-3). With a 0.3 mg/1 discharge concentra-
tion, the total phosphorus loading to the Lake would be reduced by 16%, to
2
0.26 gm/m /yr. The new loading rate for the tertiary treatment option
would fall within Vollenweider's oligotrophic level, indicating good water
quality. The advanced-secondary treatment option, however, would margin-
ally degrade the present high quality of Lake Bemidji, because the total
phosphorus loading rate would be high enough to fall within Vollenweider's
mesotrophic range (Table 4-3).
4-10
-------
»» •
cO '—s
•H ft
CO
3 Q)
*-" >
T3 -H
d n
f-1
CU rH
J> 5
CU rt
00
CO M
2 rt
s. s
cfl °
5-i
d ^
fl CO
!-, °°
5-1
cO
rd
CO CO
00-rl
d -a
•rl
«U
rS e
^ 0
Oi CN
__,
rrt CO
,j
rN 5-1
4-1 O
4-1
CO
cfl CU
V~' cO
CO *J
t-l CO
o co
rd CO
CX CJ
CO
O .
-d r*
Cfl
•
ft
I
-^
cu
rH
rO
Cfl
H
CU
4-1
ON CO
cu r-~ 5-1
00 ON
d r-H 00
co d
rd 0 -rl
O O T3
r-l Cfl
B^S UH O
rH
/— N
00 >>
Cfl T-l CU CSl
O cO CO ^«*.
H O M 0
rH 00
>w-/
P-i P-i
r-i 5
Cfl §
O 0 *H
H O T-)
4H <4-H T-l
O fi
CU
S-S PO
0 PH
° fc
p | IIH ^ ^_)
^
rH 00 T-l ~^
Cfl d -I-) XI
+J -H -O rH
O T3 -H ^-^
H to e
o S3
rH PQ
^ s3 ?
rH -H >,
+j "S xT
O O t-H
H rH ^^
1
1
-0
ft
0
OO
vD
^j-
tn
•«
^-i-
o
r^.
cfl
^-^
PH
rH
~oo
0
OO
rH
d
o
•rl
4->
•H
•rl d
•r-l O
T3 O
•H
0 00
PQ -rl
4J
CU CO
s^ >,H
cfl X
rJ M
^J-
•
*>o
+
ft
f)
o
o
csl
fl
OO
OO
0
vO
00
OO
f)
0
ON
rH
0°
O
r-H
4H
O
r— |
CU
>
rH
p 1
^
d
cu
,3
4H
4H
w
r~ I-H oo ON oo fi
• • • 1 • • •
ON **O LPl | -3" \O rH
| rH CSl + 1 rH
O _ O ^ o -rj 13 rrj 'rj 'rj
oo **o ft csi co r^- r*^
csl csl csl csl fi O ON
O O O CM CSl CM rH
O O O f) CM m ON
ON CM O oo csl csi r~
rH rH rH CM i— 1
^f
LO <)• CM O rH ON 00
cfl
^^-^
P-i
rH
rH rH ~-~ rH rH ^H
*^», ^-^. 00 ^--. "^-^ ' — .
00 00 0 00 00 OO
00 000
OO
LO fl CM O LT) fl
O O rH rH O O
4H 4-1 4-1 4H 4H
ooo dooou
PH O
rH i— 1 -rl rH rH rH
CU CU 4H 4-> CU CU CU
> > O -iH > > >
r-l rH CU d rH rH rH
00 O
P-I PLI 5H O P* PH PL,
cfl CU
4J4JX1 r*JOO+-1-l->4-'
ddo rtdddd
cucuco hJ-Hcucucu
3 3 -H 4-1333
rHrHT3 4HCOrHrHrH
4H 4-4 rH T-l 4-1 4H MH
4H4-IO OX4H4H4-4
WW2 SWCdWW
. o ooo
Cfl T-l -rl TH -H
4-> XI Xl J3 X!
co a, ex ex a,
TJ O OOO
M rH V-l 5-1
^. 4-1 4-1 4-1 4-1
4J 3 333
J-l .rH CU CU CU CU
• rH
X CO r-l )H 5H VJ
— i 30 o o o
1 5< 4H ii-5 >4-l 14H
rH <" CU « CU
(D "*™^ 4-1 4J
« 2 2^2
* IT - rT -
S" J^ li. -^ >> 2"
rH |J CMj -g CMj g
-1 -i
r-i "Tj _M CO _^ 4-1
O 0 -H cfl 3 cfl -rl
* P >— ^ " h-J '"^
O csl CO T) cfl
CM pq 14-1 d to 3
* . rH ^ 05 °*
1—1 *". O CO
r^ ^ CU C , *-"
4H « -^ 2
o ^ c ,3 e S
*«. C3 IS
S -H d
O CO -H CO ON
•-1 co d d r-~
lw d O CO O ON
O -rl d 'rl t— 4
O CU -H -4-i O 4J
nn 4-1 vO -rl 'rl -H d
Ctf -rl -O 4J t3 O
rH PO rO d *iH! d
(11 d d O "id O T3
> o co o a o cu
Cfl O O CO
. " 0 U 0 «
rC •" xi a rd
^^ o. •<*" o X! o* "rl
D rH O u CX i.
rsi ^ co r| o 2 oo
I-H 4H4J ^n *-" n C
0 00>§3^oO'H
r- cn'rl ''-'in ''Or-H ^
•"* 'HrH 20^j 0 O
0) 0 g rH rH
_2 S-i CD V-l 5-1 pL,
'^ -t.J O Vi O
° rH 4H 0 4H ,_,
d •
-rl ^ — -- i * rri j>» 4-1 jx» crj ^ 4-1
4-i"0l3csl KM CM 4H
cfl "~^ 0 0 0 O
'S C 00 rH _S 0 d 0 .^ 0 d
'crtCflLplt>cO(.N|^gr4 rH , r_i . rH ^ Q
rd rH rH O T-l
4-1 J""5"5003 W 05 rH
O ^--rlCO- CO- CO- C04-1
cu ^cucor^cu cu cu o
SH T-l O rH -rl d -H d -H d
cO SOCU-HcflcUOCUOCUO4-i
X! d S 4-1 -H 5 T-l S -rl > -H d
O -Hd-rl4-ld4-ld4-ld4-l-H
W 4-iCUi3dCUT-ICU-HCU-HO
rl COrHdCUrH'drH'drH'dCX
•d •HrHO4-lrHdrHdrHdd
XOOOOOOOOO O
& cflxt OT3 CU4H 00
4-11
-------
O
rt
o
a
CO
I
0)
i-H
•§
H
i-H
cd
4-1
H
P-i
rH
cd
O
H
ON cd
CU r- rJ
60 ON
C rH 60
cd C!
§*rl
rrj
M Cd
S^S M-l O
rH
60 IH
•rl 0) ^
•d 4-> CM
ert rrt F-
lu ty n
0 Pi — .
60
ft-, P-.
H
r" H u^
cd 5
O g -H
E°H O *' — >
SH *d
MH MH -H
0 0
CU
^ pa
S PU
ij Py ^_
U-l § J-4
^>
60 i-l ^
(3 T-I ,TJ
•rl *d i— H
cd 0
O CU
r-l PQ
P-i 60 /-^
d »H
r-l -H >~.
4-> « ^S"
0 O i-l
H r-l ^
1
1
a)
oo
vO
I— 1
OO
•
vO
•— 1
CM
O
OO
m
•H
cd -d
•H d
S S
M
T3 60
0) CO
v^ *rl
cd x
i-j M
CM
^«
^
CU
m
i^-
i — i
CO
•
0
CM
f*^
0
OO
^r
60
00
CM
vO
CO
CM
rH
60
0
O
rH
MH
O
CU
CU
r-l
PU.
4-)
fl
CU
3
r-l
MH
MH
W
ON
•
in
1
CU
00
m
i-H
m
•
rH
i-H
in
CO
-d-
CM
60
in
CM
rH
CM
rH
~60
0
in
o
4H
O
"cu
^
CJ
rH
PM
4-*
a
cu
-j
i-H
4H
MH
W
i — 1
CD
i-H
|
CU
i-H
in
rH
CM
•
r^
^— i
*-O
-*
rH
60
CM
OO
CM
O
CM
i-H
60
CO
O
4H
O
CU
^
(U
1— 1
PM
4_)
c
cu
3
rH
4H
MH
w
CO
r-^
rH
1
CU
CO
rH
O
O
60
CM
00
CM
00
t — 1
O
PM
MH
0
CU
60
CO
£*
U
co
•H
•d
O
o
•
+
o
•
I
m
I
o
o
,—4
I
M-l M-l
O
CM
CM
O
H M-« '
ON ON
00
,—4
O
OO OO
1
en
CO
cd
0
CM
CO
CM
CO
0
OO
CM
cd
^-N
i-H
~60
OO
CM
i-H
lition (
Existing cone
ON
CO
r-l
•o-"
60
O
OO
00
CM
i-H
~60
0
0
i — .
MH
O
i-H
CU
Effluent P 1(
o
o
CM
60
00
CM
i-H
"So
0
0
MH
O
i-H
CU
Effluent P It
CM
CM
i — l
60
OO
CM
rH
60
0
CO
0
MH
0
rH
Effluent P 1<
o
60
O
m
oo
m
CM
O
PM
MH
O
No discharge
4-12
-------
The total phosphorus loading to Wolf Lake, Lake Andrusia, and Cass
Lake would be changed by either treatment option (Table 4-3). Lake Bemidji
retains at least 20% to 35% of the total phosphorus loads entering it.
Conservatively considering that only 20% of the total WWTP effluent phos-
phorus would be retained in Lake Bemidji, the average daily phosphorus load
from the wastewater treatment plant that would reach Wolf Lake would be
about 13 pounds for the advanced-secondary option and 4 pounds for the
tertiary treatment option. The average yearly load at design flow to Wolf
2
Lake would increase by 5% to 2.33 gm/in from the average 1979 load of 2.22
2
gm/tn with the advanced-secondary option, but would be reduced to 1.97
2 1
gra/m , an 11% reduction, with the tertiary option. Because of the prox-
imity of the Wolf Lake outlet to its inlet, most of the phosphorus load
entering Wolf Lake is passed through to Lake Andrusia. The average yearly
phosphorus loading to Lake Andrusia will be increaed by 4% with the
advanced-secondary treatment option, compared to the 1979 condition, from
2 2
1.68 gm/m to 1.75 gm/m . With the tertiary treatment option, the average
2
yearly phosphorus load would be reduced to 1.51 gm/m , a 10% reduction.
The average annual loading rate to both Wolf Lake and Lake Andrusia would
remain above Vollenweider's eutrophic rate for either treatment option in
spite of the reduction in the concentration of effluent phosphorus at the
new WWTP. The phosphorus loading to Cass Lake would be relatively unaf-
fected by the reduction of phosphorus in the WWTP effluent, and would
remain lower than the oligotrophic rate. The annual loading rate of 0.20
2 2
gm/m (1979 load) would be increased to 0.21 gm/m with the advanced-
2
secondary option and would be reduced to 0.19 gm/m with the tertiary
option (Table 4-3).
This analysis indicates that the improvement in treatment plant phos-
phorus removal from the current average concentration of 1.28 mg/1 to 0.3
mg/1 reduces the average annual phosphorus loading rates to Wolf Lake and
These estimated phosphorus loading rates to Wolf Lake and Lake Andrusia
are based on the assumption of complete mixing of the flow entering the
lakes with the entire mass of water in the lakes. The outlets of both of
the lakes, however, are close to their inlets and there is "short circuit-
ing" of the incoming flow. Thus the projected eutrophic condition for
these two lakes may reflect only the localized area near the inlets and
outlets. The major portion of the lakes could have better water quality
than that projected. This qualifier applies to all further discussions
concerning these lakes.
4-13
-------
to Lake Andrusia by 11% and 10%, respectively, compared to their 1979
phosphorus levels. Reduction of effluent phosphorus concentration to 1.0
mg/1, however, would result in an actual increase in loadings once the
flows exceeded about 1.6 mgd at the new WWTP. The most significant change
in the loading rate for phosphorus, a reduction of about 52%, already has
been realized for Wolf Lake as a result of the addition of interim phos-
phorus removal measures and diversion of discharge to Lake Bemidji during
1978 (Appendix E).
The interim phosphorus removal measures have changed the relationship
of point and nonpoint sources of phosphorus discharged to these lakes.
With reduction of phosphorus load from the Bemidji WWTP, nonpoint sources
of phosphorus to Wolf Lake, Lake Andrusia, and Cass Lake have become the
major contributing sources of phosphorus to the lakes. The attainment of
reductions in phosphorus loading to Wolf Lake and Lake Andrusia to rates
below Vollenweider's eutrophic rate would require control of nonpoint
sources of phosphorus.
The reduction in phosphorus levels in the downstream lakes through the
control of phosphorus in the Bemidji WWTP effluent should reduce the detri-
mental effects of eutrophication in the lakes (Table 4-3). However, the
degree of improvement, in terms of the number of organisms or productivity,
cannot be predicted with any precision. The US Organization of Economic
Cooperation and Development Eutrophication Project results have indicated
that, in general, the water quality in lakes and impoundments can be re-
markably insensitive to small changes in phosphorus loads (Lee and others
1978).
The proposed wastewater treatment plant includes provision for disin-
fection of wastewater prior to discharge to the lake. Therefore, the
discharge is not expected to have an adverse impact on the bacteriological
quality of Lake Bemidji.
4-14
-------
4.2.2.2. Discharge of Treated Effluent to the Mississippi River Downstream
from Lake Bemidj i
The treatment plant proposed in Alternatives 1 and 2, with its ter-
tiary filtration process, would result in BOD concentrations in the dis-
charge to the Mississippi River lower than the proposed effluent limitation
of 25 mg/1. Therefore, effluent discharged directly to the Mississippi
River downstream from Lake Bemidji is not expected to have an adverse
impact on the dissolved oxygen levels in the Mississippi River, even during
low flow conditions. The proposed plant is not designed to remove ammonia
from the wastewater — ammonia control would increase the capital and O&M
costs for the five conventional treatment alternatives. The discharge of
treated wastewater with an estimated ammonia concentration of 20 mg/1,
however, could result in violation of the State ambient water quality
standard for ammonia of 1.0 mg/1 during the low flow condition (32 cfs) .
Violation of the ammonia standard could result in conditions toxic to the
aquatic biota in the River.
The discharge of treated wastewater to the Mississippi River down-
stream from Lake Bemidji will eliminate the principal source of direct
discharge of phosphorus to Lake Bemidji and reduce the 1979 average annual
2 2
loading rate from 0.31 gm/m to 0.23 gm/m , a 26% reduction. At design
flow, the advanced-secondary treatment option would increase the phosphorus
loading rate to Wolf Lake, Lake Andrusia, and Cass Lake by 10.8%, 10.1%,
and 5.0%, respectively, relative to 1979 loading rates (Table 4-4). The
tertiary treatment option, however, would reduce the total phosphorus
loadings to these lakes by 9.5%, 8.9%, and 5%, respectively, relative to
the 1979 condition (Table 4-4). The loading rates for both the advanced-
secondary and tertiary treatment options to Wolf Lake and to Lake Andrusia,
however, would remain above the eutrophic rate.
4.2.2.3. Discharge of Treated Effluent to Grass Lake
The proposed alternatives that incorporate direct discharge of ef-
fluent to Grass Lake (Alternatives 4 and 5) will eliminate the discharge of
treated wastewater directly to Lake Bemidji or the Mississippi River.
4-15
-------
0) 0)
^4 ^£
rt rt
r-J rH
0)
W £3 -M
CO Q ^ C3
ctj i-i O r*"» Vj
O iw WJOs
G r-t W)
rt 1 0 15
Jj rJ rt
• rJ s-s 4-4 o
10 to ^
to §
!•§
d ,, x-s
< ft 00 M
CD > rt -H 0) — .
*^ "rl ^J FJ-J ^.J £sg
rt o rt rt a
r4 , H O rJ -^
•H rH 0
• Cu 00
CD & N— '
^ 'H
rt to
rJ tO
•1-t
4-1 CO Cu Qj
r-l W H
o ;rj t-i "s.
!3 »S rt 3
MO) o a -H
O ,d H O 1-1
4H 4-1 JH T3
4-4 4-4 *H
IH o O 8
Co i j CP
0) s~8 pq
>> p..
H
OD ?
Co
rJ a ^
0) "^ t5 IH
> •'"> rJ 3 X-\
crj 'O pui 4H |2 M
r*"»
r- a rH 00 -iH
go) rt d T-) ja
™ PQ 4-> T-l rrj ,_4
. O 'd *H ^— '
S s H rt a
•2 | rSl
W _
oo rt
d
, i ^
'd O CM PJ 00 /-s
rt }j d rJ
O 4-1 Hd rH *H ^t
1—1 d rt T3 ~- —
ni rt *-* rt ^
^ *& 0 0 rH
PM JjrH H rH ^-^
1-H * tO
rt f i o)
^ w >
0 ." -H
^ "^ rt
W TJ S
sj> W) CL)
0 4-J
i-H
3 O ^
fVj
*rH
.-C .•—
*"^* ^ Tl
co 3
O rt
^>2 M
.
•^
1
0)
Q
H
oo vo in
I ...
1 O ro (Ti
CS ^O -d" rH
CM 0) 0) 0)
•H > > >
TJ o> o) Q) rt
d rH rH rH -H
O CO
CJ PL, PL, PH 3
0) M
rt d d d d d
4J333
4H CO rH rH rH cl)
,_( -H 4-1 4H 4-1 ^
O j* 4-1 4H 4-1 rt
JS W td Cd Cd nJ
i-H vO Q) 0) 0)
-O 0) 0) 0)
d rH rH rH
O
CjQ 4-1 4_l 4-1
d d d d
•rl fl> Q) Ci)
4-1333
tO rH rH i-H
•H 4-1 4H 4-1
•«! 4-1 4H 4-1
W W W W
O O
1 •
1 m i m
+ I 1
O rH O ON C
CM CM CM i-H
....
O O 0 O
• * • • •
I-H r*"* ^^ to r^
^H r— H £)fl
0
CM
CM
•
4-1
O
CM in f^~ CM
co i^. oo m
CM •— i u~i m
V- f> * i*
ro in CM rH
5 S S S
CO P— rH rH
r-T oC r-T o"
CM CM CM CM
rt
,— ^
PI-I
rH
-^ rH rH rH
0 00~00 00
a a a
OO
CM o in co
....
rH rH O O
s— ^
4-1 4-1 4-1
d o o o
O
•r-l rH rH I-H
4-> 0) 0) 0)
ro a) 0) 0)
d rH rH rH
O
CJ PL, PL, PL,
0)
rt d d d d
rJ -r( Q) 0) 0)
4-> 3 3 3
CO CO rH rH rH
CO vH 4H 4H 4-<
rt X 4H 4-1 4H
O W M W td
O
rH
4H
0)
00
rt
Q)
S
O^
2
"o
to
•H
CO
rt
d
o
*d
4_t
rt
3
0
rH
rt
CJ
to
rt
o
00
•H
4->
CO
•H
rt"
o o a
•H -rl -H
a. a. a,
000
^ t-> t-i
4-) 4-> 4-1
0) 0) 0)
M rJ JH
O O O
4-1 4-1 4-4
0) ^ 0)
rt 2 rt
• rt -^ »rl
t-i ti, u
_>. ~^ ^%
^0 ^0 <^a
"^*" i3 e-1
oo °° 5)
CM .
^— < ^O ^J
r- . CM
o
0 0
CO
tO -H CO
•rl -rl
rt
o) 1-1 CD
,y to ,y
rt ^ rt
rJ S-J jj
d r/>
rH ^ CO
1 <» c3
*"^ rM
C J «
•H M -H
pj
CO -H CO
d ti
O CO O
•H d -i-i
4-> O +-•
•H 'H *H
Tj 4^ '^
d 'H d
O "O O
o d o
o
0^*0
S ° Id
CX '_! Cu
o -S °
L. CU LJ
ti o t;
O _^j O
i w> 1!J
^^ ( j >^
O O
I— 1
tj VJ
O M O
4H Q 4-}
4H
0) • • 0) "
4J M 0) V-l 4-1 P
CQ r^*> T* ^» CO r^>
CN! V^*4 r^J
Q S 6
^0 "*«^^ ^\r\ """.^ ^^ """w^
r! OB -H oo z! oo
r2 *^ fl
CNJ cd -^ oo
O ^J- Q ^\J O ^-
'-| . rH . ^ •
i— I i— 1 O
co to to
"rj -H ")J -H VJ -H
a) o) o)
3 d 23 d 3 d
0) O 0) O 0) O
I TJ i t! § I«
a) -H a) -H a) -H
rH T3 rH *rj rH *&
rH d rH d rH d
OOOOOO
> CJ > O > CJ
& o -d
4-16
-------
This would provide for increased protection from any adverse impacts from
direct discharge of wastewater to Lake Bemidji and the downstream system.
The elimination of the direct discharge of phosphorus would result in a
reduction of phosphorus loadings to Lake Bemidji and the downstream system
(reflected in Table 4-3 as the "no phosphorus discharge" condition).
The discharge of effluent to Grass Lake will add a significant volume
of water and nutrients to the lake. The lake does not have a major inlet,
and the outlet channel from the lake is constricted. Thus, the proposed
discharge will affect significantly both the hydrology and water quality of
the lake.
Unknown quantities of groundwater and about 1.85 ft/yr of direct
precipitation provide inputs to the lake. Water leaves the lake via
groundwater discharges, evaporation, and runoff in the small drainage ditch
at the west end of the lake. The drainage ditch is very shallow due to
sedimentation and in several areas, the channel practically is non-
existent. Thus, the addition of a relatively large, constant flow of
effluent to the lake may result in a significant increase in the level of
the lake and the surrounding groundwater table unless the lake drainage
channel is improved.
Yearly lake level fluctuations of from 1 to 2 feet occur naturally (By
telephone, Professor Pat Trihey, Bemidji State University, to Kent Peter-
son, WAPORA, Inc.). This suggests that the increase in lake level from the
addition of treated wastewater may be significant. If no water is assumed
to leave the lake via the drainage channel, the volume of treated waste-
water discharged to the lake during a one-year period would be equivalent
to about 3.7 feet of water spread over 600 acres (the size of Grass Lake
and contiguous wetland). Although much of this volume of water would be
discharged via the drainage channel, it is likely that the wastewater
discharges would result in the following conditions:
• Increase in water levels of Grass Lake and the surrounding
wetlands
• Increase in the elevation of the water table in the vicinity
of the lake and wetlands
• An enlargement of the lake and wetland area.
4-17
-------
If the drainage ditch connecting Grass Lake with Larson Lake were upgraded
to permit outflow of the additional water, these impacts would be mini-
mized .
The chemical characteristics of the water in the lake will be affected
by treated wastewater discharges. The existing water volume in the lake is
approximately 450 million gallons (342 acres with average depth of 4 feet).
Because there are no other major direct inputs of water to the lake, a
yearly addition of 730 million gallons of effluent at a rate of 2 mgd would
gradually change the chemical characteristics of the lake. The most sig-
nificant changes would be higher concentration of total and dissolved
phosphorus, inorganic nitrogen, dissolved solids, and alkalinity. Thus the
lake would become fertile (eutrophic) quite rapidly and the higher con-
centration of nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus) could trigger alga
blooms. If alga blooms do occur, light penetration to macrophytes on the
bottom of the lake would be reduced. This would reduce the quantity of
dissolved oxygen added to the water by photosyntheses. The alga bloom also
would add organic loading to the lake and further deplete oxygen from the
water. Because no fish survive the winter freeze in Grass Lake, the efflu-
ent discharge would have no effect on fish species. Consequently, the
eutrophic conditions would reduce the suitability of the Lake for waterfowl
habitat.
The discharges of wastewater to Grass Lake also would increase nutri-
ent concentrations in the water in the drainage ditch, Larson Lake, Grant
Creek, Rice Lake, and the Mississippi River downstream. However, the
extent of this increase would depend on the retention, removal, and dilu-
tion of the nutrients in the water system downstream from Grass Lake. It
is speculated that nutrient removal through biological uptake in the
marshes along the ditch route would be relatively good during the growing
season. If the marsh vegetation is not harvested, however, nutrients would
be released during other times of the year. If the drainage channel is im-
proved to increase the flow from the Lake, potential nutrient retention ca-
pacity would be lost. Phosphorus loadings to Larson Lake and Grant Creek,
therefore, would increase by as much as 5 Ib/day (assumes no retention
in Grass Lake or drainage ditch). Larson Lake and Rice Lake could become
4-18
-------
"sinks" for phosphorus and thus could become eutrophic (up to 50% of influ-
ent phosphorus to each could be retained). Because Grant Creek flows to
the Mississippi River some distance upstream from Lake Bemidji, the back-
ground phosphorus concentration entering the Lake could be expected to
increase by an undeterminable amount because of a Grass Lake discharge.
The increased concentration of phosphorus relative to the existing back-
ground level would be lessened, however, because of the distance from Grass
Lake to Lake Bemidji via the drainage ditch, Larson Lake, Grant Creek, Rice
Lake and the Mississippi River (approximately 30 stream miles).
4.2.2.4. Summary Discussion
The discharge of treated wastewater with a phosphorus concentration of
0.3 mg/1 to either Lake Bemidji, the Mississippi River downstream from Lake
Bemidji, or Grass Lake would reduce the phosphorus loads to Wolf Lake, Lake
Audrusia, and Cass Lake. Discharge to the Mississippi River would elimi-
nate the direct BOD, suspended solids, fecal coliform, and phosphorus loads
to Lake Bemidji, thus providing better protection for the Lake. The BOD
discharge to the River would be stabilized and most of the suspended solids
would settle out in the River and would not have an adverse impact on Wolf
Lake or Lake Andrusia. The total annual phosphorus loads to Wolf Lake and
Lake Andrusia as a result of direct discharge to Mississippi River down-
stream from Lake Bemidji would be higher by 2% to 5% than the loads result-
ing from effluent discharged to Lake Bemidji for either treatment option.
The major reduction in phosphorus loads to Wolf Lake and Lake Andrusia
have been realized through the addition of interim phosphorus control
measures at the existing Bemidji wastewater treatment plant. Improvement
in the water quality of Wolf Lake and Lake Andrusia as a result of interim
phosphorus control measures is indicated by water quality data. The 1979
algal assay results also indicate that the lakes were phosphorus limited
during the periods studied and that their potential productivity increases
directly with increases in phosphorus concentration. Thus, additional
removal of phosphorous beyond the existing level of control would result in
a decrease in productivity and would improve the quality of the lakes.
However, the degree of improvement in lake productivity as a result of the
4-19
-------
removal of additional point-source phosphorus (i.e., removal of phosphorus
in the WWTP effluent to levels below 1.0 mg/1) is difficult to predict.
Discharge of treated wastewater to Grass Lake or application on land
in Eckles Township will provide the greatest protection to Lake Bemidji,
Wolf Lake, Lake Andrusia, and Cass Lake. Phosphorus loadings to these
lakes would be reduced by the amount projected to be discharged by the WWTP
in Alternatives 1 through 3. The phosphorus loading rates to Lake Beiaidji
and Cass Lake would be less than Vollenweider's oligotrophic rate. Assum-
ing complete mixing, loading rates to Wolf Lake and Lake Andrusia would
remain greater than the eutrophic rate; however, the potential for a "short
circuiting" effect, as previously discussed, may result in better water
quality than predicted.
Discharge of treated wastewater to Grass Lake will increase the phos-
phorus concentration in the lake and in the drainage from the lake. This
would increase the productivity in Grass Lake and in the downstream system.
4.2.3. User Costs and Public Finance
4.2.3.1. User Costs
The annual user cost for wastewater service has been estimated for
each of the proposed alternatives (Table 4-5). These costs range from a
low of $220/year for a family of four for the advanced-secondary treatment
option of Alternative 3, to $349/year for Alternative 6. This cost covers
the operation and maintenance of the treatment facility, the debt service
on the revenue bonds used to finance the local share of the construction
costs, and the maintenance of the wastewater collection system. The
description of how the user charges were derived is included in Appendix H.
Compared to the $78 per year cost to a family of four in Bemidji for
wastewater treatment alone, the values in Table 4-5 represent significant
During 1979, a family of four paid approximately $156.00 for the year for
wastewater collection and treatment (Appendix H). Only about 50%, or
$78.00, of this fee was used to operate the treatment plant; the remainder
was used to maintain the collection system (By telephone, Mr. Dale Page,
City Financial Planner, 12 May 1980).
4-20
-------
I
o
Vi
to
CU
4-1
cfl
cu
4->
r-l
§
CU
(-1
o
M-l
to
o
o
CU
to
•8
4-1
cfl
4-1
to
w
•s
H
*"O
C
cd
a
o
4_>
CO
o
o
r-l
CO
4-1
O
H
4J
ja
Q
T3
B
cfl
S
d£J
O
CU
0
•H
t>
CU
CO
4-1
ja
cu
0
VJ
o
M-l
4-1
03
o
o
I—I
cfl
1 i
0
H
1
cu
a
d
cfl
Tr3
•^
VJ
O
M-l
S
cu
4-1
CO
CO
d
o
•rl
4-"
O
CU
r-l
r-l
O
o
M
O
M-l
i 1
en
o
o
cu
o
•H
>
VJ
cu
CO
I
•a
cu
o
d
tfl
^
T3
Vj
0
M-l
4-1
03
O
o
o
•rl
4-1
a
o
^
VJ
cfl
•H
4-1
Vj
H
d
o
•H
4-)
a
&
^
^_i
cfl
pj
O
O
cu
en
c^ vO C^ r*^ -^ r^«
f^- I — lT» O O CM
cO co co ^d" ^" ^~
•CO- -CO-
CNI r** co oo \o
i-H t— H C^ *^ -^* I
m co -CO-
•
Vj
rj
o
M-l
M-l
o
cfl
d
o
•rl
P.
0
r**l
cfl
•rl
4->
VJ
CU
H
^
rH
•rl
d
M-l
^^ 00 *— 1 C^ *sD C7N
ON CTv OO CM CNI
cfl
d
o
•rl
4-1
a
o
cfl
d
0
o
cu
CO
>
CO
M-l
O l-l
CU
VJ 14-1
cfl cfl
cu
^1 rrj
' — cu
O en
o en
^> 03
r-l Cfl
•co-
CU
MH ^
0 0
cu
60 0)
tj *^
cfl d
CJ 4-1
d
o
VJ o
CU
en -rj
3 , i
3
average
a fee wo
s-s
S 3
VJ OT
VJ
3.'
o
C c
o 2
d
cu
cu d
03 -H
cfl cfl
CQ a
a
4-21
-------
increases in treatment costs. The lowest projected annual cost for O&M and
debt service ($220 for Alternative 3 with the advanced-secondary treatment
option) is 180% more than the existing cost. The highest projected annual
cost for O&M and debt service ($349 for Alternative 6) is 347% more than
the existing cost. Clearly the costs for any new system will have a signi-
ficant effect on the "pocketbooks" of families served by the sewer system.
The economic significance of the impact of the proposed wastewater
alteratives on users of the new system in Bemidji can be evaluated by
relating estimated user charges to several established guidelines. Na-
tional conferences during 1978 on "Shopping for Sewage Treatment: How to
Get the Best Bargain for Your Community or Home" (USEPA 1978) resulted in
suggested guidelines indicating that an "economic hardship" on a community
may result if:
• More than 2% of median family income will be spent on user
fees
• More than 1% of median family income will be spent on debt
service for the new system.
Because the user fee concept includes the annual O&M, the debt service, and
sewer system maintenance costs, it is the better indicator of the two.
Current USEPA guidance concerning funding of wastewater treatment
projects requiring treatment more stringent than secondary (PRM#79-7; USEPA
1979) indicates that:
A project shall be considered high-cost when the total average
annual cost (debt service, operation and maintenance, connection
costs) to a domestic user exceeds the following percentage of
median household incomes:
• 1.50 percent when the median income is under $6,000
• 2.00 percent when the median income is $6,000-$10,000
• 2.50 percent when the median income is over $10,000.
System users at Bemidji have an estimated median family income of
$12,200 (Section 3.2.1.1.). As indicated in Table 4-6, a typical family of
four is pojected to spend between 2.4% and 3.5% of median family income on
wastewater user fees (in current dollars). All of the alternatives surpass
4-22
-------
cu
0
d
•rl
r-l
•H
a
CO
d o
Cfl CO
•H d
T3 0
CU -H
a +j
14-1 O
o •>-.
CO
cu cu
60 >
to T-I
4-* 4-*
d co
cu d
O M
SH cu
d) 4->
CU r-l
CO
Cfl
cfl
CO
CO
o
o
CU
o
•H
Jj
cu
vO
*-*s
Sri
co
^
O-
rt
^
rt
CO
•
CO
^
oo
csj
B-S
CO
<
ex
CO
rt
&-S
Q\
•
CSJ
^rf
gs§
•^o
CU CU i-l
cfl cu a a
cu a g -H
V4 O
cfl CU
f. 06
B-S
LO
•
CN
1
B-S
CM
o
SJ
cu
3
y-4
O
d
o co
co co d
•H cfl
U CO -rl
Cfl CU T3
CU 60 CU
a ^ P
O cfl cfl
O ,£! M-l CU
o o a
O
S-l CU O
vO K
1 CU
d ^»
rH CU r-l
Cfl O -rl
O ID Cfl
H Cu<4-l
&*£
ON
CD
oo
•
O
&-S
^o
•
o
6-3
CO
•
o
•
o
S*5
\&
•
o
B-S
m
•
0
5s?
r^«-.
•
o
vO
•
O
K
»
0
B-S
LO
•
O
B^
rH
CO
cd d
cd
V -rl
CJ T)
•rl CU
> e
J-l Cfl
CU 14-1 CU
co o i
o
4-» CU CJ
JZ 60 d
CU Cfl -rl
T) <-•
d ^>
rH CU r-l
CO O -H
4J p a
O CU cfl
H CU 4-1
•
x^
ON
s
^^
• <^
o PU
0 W
CM W
e O
CM
< — 1 T3
•CO- C!
cd
^*\
cu co
O ON
O ^
d N-^
•rl
^J
^> P^
rH W
•H cyj
S ^
n3
M-t C
O
rj
td 'O
•rl CU
T3 CO
CU Cd
S rt
tO J3
&
o
cd
cu
j_.
0
U-l
d
o
4-*
cx,
o
4-1
d
cu
%
CO
cu
^J
£>
tO
•rl
+J
"
*D
4-*
CU
x
4-1
CO
•rl
H
^Q
^
d
o
•rl
•*-•
O
d
cfl
d
o
•rl
4-t
CU
o
4-1
d
0)
a
i)
CO
0)
V-i
4-1
^
?"N
cfl
•a
c
o
o
0)
CO
-a
(U
o
d
5
1$
CU
*C
4-J
CO
•H
. ID
*-C .,-f
= 4->
Cfl
C d
O H
•H CU
4-1 4-1
CUr-l
O cfl
o
4-23
-------
the 2% guideline suggested by the Conference. The advanced-secondary
treatment option of Alternative 3 is the only alternative that is below
USEPA's current measure (2.5%) of a "high cost" syteia. Debt service costs
for all of the alternatives are well below the Conference's suggested 1%
guideline comparing debt service to median family income (Table 4-6).
The local share of capital cost for the new wastewater treatment
system may be somewhat overstated because of the uncertainty about what the
actual interest cost will be during construction. For example, RCM (1980)
estimated that interest during construction for the tertiary treatment
option for Alternative 3 would cost the city $830,000, which is 41% of the
City's total local share of the $2,037,000 project capital cost. The
potential exists for significant savings in interest costs from that pro-
jected through short-term investments of capital by the City during con-
struction operations. Reduction of the interest cost would lower the
long-term debt service cost, and thus user fees,proportionately.
The $78/year per family of four estimate of cost for sewer system
maintenance also appears high relative to other cities in Minnesota. The
potential exists that this value also is overstated and that total user
fees could be reduced in proportion to decreases in the actual cost for
sewer system maintenance. In any case, user costs associated with any of
the proposed alternatives may cause hardships for many households, particu-
larly those with incomes below the median, if the local cost cannot be
reduced.
4.2.3.2. City Indebtedness
A new wastewater treatment facility also will be a burden on the
finances of the City of Bemidji. Using the criteria suggested by Moak and
Millhouse (1975) (see Section 3.2.4.), the per capita debt would rise from
the current level of $83 per year to as much as $421 per year (under Al-
ternative 6), a figure close to the $500 limit suggested for low income
areas (Table 4-7). The debt service to total revenues ratio also would rise
significantly, from the present 1.5% level to between 4.9% to 7.9%, depend-
ing on the alternative and which treatment option is considered. Both of
4-24
-------
4-1
8
O
•rl
4-1
&
O
^^.
03
a)
r>
•H
4-1
cfl
d
•rl Vl
•n a)
*CJ 4-*
•rl r-l
a <3
a)
03
4-1
cfl
Pn
FH
3
3
CJ
d
cfl
d0
•H
vO
CM *— 1 ON
-* • • rH CD Cfl 33
• a) ">
S-8 B-S Vi S CX
• C^ Q 0) -rl CU
en r-~ LO >rj CU qj 4-1
0)
B-S 6-S _2 43 4J 0 T)
^
CQ
r~ m r-i ,jj g 43
(••» • • Vi " cfl cfl
en r-4 r~ M4J3>, 4-1
<0- CM _ C! n- CU -H
.5 cd ~ ,d cx
B^S &^e H t-i M -M ^
^3
CM en o ex S o
CM • • >> § 0)
rH Vl " 03 4->
I4_4 +J W Tj 0)
5^S 6s? n ® d 'H
^J
CM r-~ O\ in <" O X
O • • .-OJrH^ 0)
CM
en ON ^D , . cfl 52 o)
03
r-H
PQ
CM -* -3" CO fi, _fl
-d~ • • T3 a) a a)
en CT* O 430)_cjT-l rcJ
•CO- rH 4-1 3 Tj
•H to a) 5
B-S B-S cfl to uj 43 a)
<
OO CM -* 4H.rlo4-l C
00 .. J X
CM \O in rHtfltO 4J4H
<0- rH rH-Cj">tOT-IO
o '-) d ". a) to
d IH O JJ to • Vi 0)
3 43 <* 03 >, o> SH
d „, D Cfl 4J > Cfl
•rl
4-1 4-1
. 43
43 0)
4-1 P
•H 4->
S d 4-1
0) O
•CJ Vl
a) Vl r-l
4-i 3 a)
efl CJ >
•H at
CJ t-J
_£ a) _ -H -H 43
•5 43 g o d a co
H ° 4-i 3 S3
0 £ g rH
rH m J? • O1 O 4-1 CJ
43 • • "^ 03 rrj 03 O Cfl O
en r-l
co 5 3 4-> cu co
-H
> rH •!-)
O 03
03 0)
01 O O 3
cfl O O d
in o a)
to •> >
r-l r-l 03
0) C
a) i i a) a) rH
rH 4J
•H
4-1 13 E
42 Vl -r-l
43 CO hJ
•0 T3
d vi
cfl cfl a)
4-> 4J Q.
•H CO O.
ex D
Vl 3 (fl
a) a> vi rH 4->
a I 3 cfl o
O O O > 4->
CJ CJ
C d 4H 4J 4H
•rl -rl O Oj O
!S T) B-S Vl B-S
O -r) O Cfl LTl
cfl
CJ
Vl
0)
PXt rrj ^^.
cj d aJa)
cd
r-» (H
1 0)
0)
oj a
rH cfl
43 Vl
MJ CTJ
H O<
cfl 13 O CJ 03
4-> rH 0) -rl .r-l CJJ
•rl (fl 03 4-> > 3
CL, 4-> 03 cfl Vl d
cd o aj 3 o) a)
O H 03 rH CO >
^-. •*-. 03 cd a)
4-1 4-1 4-> Pi
42 43 43
a) a) o)
Q P P
O CD rH rH 4H T)
*-" Vl O rH O T-l
CJ -rl a
•o« S 03 a)
ai ffl co a) 03 ••
03 4-1 aj 03 O O
3 2 T3 VI 4J -H
,- g d 3 cfl 4J
a) M 5 o ° ™
i, _j SJ 43 03 03 Vl
(rt n LJ a3 4-1
tj d Vl d C^Q
So ai d
^ Tj -*- -rl T3 -CJ -H
•rl t-1 4-> d 3 3
03 T3 '•* * "* ^ °
TJ -rt 'g 2 rH 3 <£
O *"^ «i o tfl 1^5
2 -H 0) " M fi -rl Vt 3
00 -H a> <-H a) to cj
rH > CX d OJ rH
d 43 83 CX a) O cfl
M O Vl (0 60 P CJ
CO 43 CJ
33
rH
CO
O
o
t—t
rH
cfl
03 4-1
Vi 0
33 4-1
5 ^^
0) en
03 r-»
•
"? O
0) .— i
d
Vi
0 4-1
0)
a)
to S
to a)
a) d
to
03 4H
Cfl O
d a)
O (H
•H cfl
cfl to
rH
3 rH
OH C0
0 0
• t-J
^-^
d
o
•H
t-l
cfl
rH
cfl
rH
Cfl
4-1
O
v^x
en
r-*
O
to
Vl
•5
r-\ s-^ a)
(fl 32 03
4-1
OX >
H -H 03
*"CJ Ci
d
0) •• Vl
ex o o
(fl T3
S vi a)
O O3
Vl M 03
4H d a)
•H 03
d s 03
Oj 0 (fl
Cfl rH d
4-1 O O
11 1 1
43 a) cfl
a) a) ex
ex ex o
ex ex
<1^ *^ ^
d
e a a>
S SB
Vl V 4-1
4H 4H Cfl
03
d d vi
a) a) 4J
cfl cfl x
4-1 4-> VI
(fl
d a) -H
O !H 4-1
•rl Cfl IH
4-1 a)
cfl 03 4-1
3 a)
rH C1J
Cfl CJ
> -rl
rH (H
Cfl 33
4-> 03
0
as
•CJ
* ^i
4-J
•rl
o
CiC
d d
O T-l
•H 4J
4J 01
Cfl -rl
rH X
3 a)
(X
0 +
CX
CTi to
r^ Vi
o^ o
rH 4J
o
rH 03
CO 03
4J
O rH
H rH
Cfl
0)
O
•rl
£>
Vi
03
CO
4J
a)
p
rH
(0
4-1
O
H
3 33
d 43
03 4-1
a) 03
Vi -H
rH t
cfl 03
O
d
TJ (fl
d
cfl d
o
- -rl
0) 4-1
o ex
•H O
Vl 4-1
33 d
03 03
a
4-J 4-J
^f*l C^
03 33 33
^ *^3 V4
3 4-1
d >,
01 4J >-,
> -rl Vl
a) o cfl
• 'd
rH 0) O
Cfl O CJ
4J .H 03
O > 03
EH SH 1
01 -d
03 8
O
4J d
43 (fl
a) >
"CJ 13
«
rH
(fl 03
4J 43
O 4-1
4J
03
03 -rl
IH
03 r
0) 4H
4-25
-------
these ratios have been maintained at artifically low levels primarily
because Bemidji is the recipient of large amounts of Federal and State aid
in the form of intergovernmental fund transfers and capital development
grants from agencies such as the Economic Development Administration (EDA).
The level of debt per total assessed value, however, is not affected by
external aid. The recommended level of debt to total assessed valuation is
10% of current market value. If the advanced-secondary treatment option of
Alternative 3 (the least costly alternative) is selected this ratio would
be 14.7%, which is 4.7% higher than the recommended upper limit. This
indicates that the City would incur a debt greater than the tax base easily
can support.
Consistent with the needs of a growing community, the City will incur
additional indebtedness for other capital improvement projects. As dis-
cussed in Section 2.3.2.2., significant additional capital expenditures
will be required to upgrade components of the sewer system during the same
period when the treatment plant revenue bonds are being retired. The
extent that debt retirement for additional capital improvement projects is
passed on to Bemidji residents will determine the significance of the
financial burden.
4.2.4. Land Treatment of Wastewater of Eckles Township Site
The operation of the treatment/storage ponds and the spray irrigation
system proposed in Alternative 6 would create considerably different types
of environmental effects than the conventional treatment systems proposed
in Alternatives 1 through 5. Because of the significant concern about the
land treatment concept expressed by rural residents in the Bemidji area,
the system operation is described in detail.
4.2.4.1. Treatment/Storage Pond System
The layout of the treatment/storage pond system is presented in Sec-
tion 2.4.6. The pond system would be operated so that the water would be
its lowest level at the end of the application season. This would provide
for maximum storage capacity through the winter months (potentially October
4-26
-------
through April). Aeration of the ponds would facilitate oxidation of organic
substances, minimizing the potential for odor generation.
The combination of aerated treatment and long detention time in the
storage ponds should produce a relatively clean effluent for irrigation.
The Middleville, Michigan, facultative lagoons have produced an effluent of
the following characteristics (Urie 1979):
1972 1973 1974 1975 1976
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
NH.-N
4
(N03 + Ky-"
Total Kjeldahl N
Total Phosphorus
2.1
0.4
6.8
3.9
0.6
2.0
5.1
2.4
0.7
0.1
5.6
1.8
2.2
0.1"
5.7
2.2
4.8
1.2
9.0
3.8
Total Potassium — 11.4 7.8
The nitrogen concentration apparently has increased with the age of the
system as the growth and decay of algae stabilizes. Updated data for the
Middleville facultative lagoons and the Harbor Springs, Michigan, sta-
bilization lagoons are presented below (Urie and others 1978):
Tot N NO -N TKN Tot P Potassium Boron
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
Middleville Lagoon 11.4 3.2 8.2 2.9 9.3 0.88
Harbor Springs Lagoon 4.2 0.4 3.8 2.0 7.8 0.25
4-27
-------
Burton and Hook (1978) reported that at Michigan State University
nitrogen concentrations in pond water used for irrigation varied from 8.1
iag/1 to 13.6 mg/1 when older lagoon water was used. Nitrogen and phos-
phorus levels from potential aerated lagoons and storage lagoons at Bemidji
probably will be somewhat less than that cited for the stabilization la-
goons in Michigan. For the Bemidji lagoons, expected values for nitrogen
and phosphorus are 10.0 mg/1 and 3.0 mg/1, respectively.
As discussed in Section 2.4.6., the earthen basins would be lined with
at least a 20 mil (0.5mm) thick synthetic membrane to prevent leakage
through the underlying soil to the groundwater. The operational experience
with such liners over the life of a project in cold climates is relatively
good if the liner is installed properly. The liner typically would be
covered with at least six inches of sand. Because of the potential for
damage to the earthen dikes by wave action on the larger ponds, stone
rip-rap usually is placed on top of the sand layer to further protect it
from erosion. The stones must be rounded to prevent puncture of the lin-
ing.
Deer may occasionally approach the ponds for water. While the quality
of the water would be suitable for consumption by wildlife, the hooves of
deer easily could puncture the membrane. Thus precautions, such as special
fencing, may be required to protect the liner and preserve its ability to
retain water. Frost heaving is not expected to be capable of ripping the
membrane.
4.2.4.2. Irrigation System
VEGETATION
The long-term effects of irrigation of treated wastewater on forest
ecosystems are not yet known. The majority of the studies reported in the
literature have been conducted on sites that had been irrigated for less
than five years, and the few long-terra studies have been performed pri-
marily on agricultural lands. The application rates, the types of soils
4-28
-------
and vegetation used, the local climatic conditions, the depth to ground-
water, and the topography differed considerably between the studies. In a
review of the currently available literature, Sopper and Kerr (1979a)
cautioned that most ecosystems initially have a high capacity to accept and
renovate wastewater, but that long-term application of quantities of high-
nutrient effluent ultimately would cause changes in the stability of the
ecosystem and the rate and effectiveness of the renovation processes.
These effects occur slowly and may not be apparent during the first ten
years of operation or longer. The authors indicated that forest ecosystems
may be more sensitive to rates of wastewater application than other types
of ecosystems, and may recover slowly after being overloaded. In some
studies, red pines on study sites located on sandy soil did not provide
adequate treatment of wastewater. Renovation of wastewater was most suc-
cessful in oldfields where nitrogen was taken up by herbaceous plants
during the growing season.
The major advantages of forest crops for land treatment, as opposed to
agricultural crops, are the minimal amount of time required for planting,
maintenance, and harvesting; the ability of coniferous species to transpire
water and take up nutrients during winter months; and the reduction of the
likelihood of toxic substances being introduced into food chains in which
humans are the ultimate consumers. Interruptions in the application pro-
cess also would be minimal.
The major effect on forest vegetation noted to date has been a signif-
icant increase in the amount of herbaceous vegetation in the understory and
the ground layer. The diversity of herbaceous species has been reduced,
and the increase in plant density has been due primarily to the rapid
growth of weedy species that are unpalatable to deer. However, these
species provide additional sources of food and cover for rodents and in-
sects, especially in the autumn, and adverse effects have been documented
on the growth, health, and survival of seedlings and plantings of trees and
woody shrubs because of damage by such pests (Urie and others 1978). The
types of plants that would be likely to increase, both in number of species
and in number of individual plants, would be those that are tolerant of
high soil moisture and soluble salt levels (Nutter and others 1978).
4-29
-------
Other effects that may occur include:
• Changes in leaf chemical content
• Increased rates of decomposition of leaf litter and forest
floor material
• Increased rate of mineralization
• Changes in physical and chemical properties of the soil
• Increased populations of earthworms, soil invertebrates, and
soil microorganisms (changes that favor leaching of ni-
trogen; Dindal and others 1979)
• Changes in microclimate.
Other concerns related to effects on vegetation include potential hazards
of blowdown of trees and accumulation of boron and other toxic chemicals in
foliage and other plant parts. Increased soil moisture and nutrient levels
result in the loosening of surface soil and the development of shallow root
systems that make trees susceptible to blowdown. Almost all of the trees
on a 20-year-old red pine plantation that had been irrigated for 5 years
were blown over by a combination of a heavy snow load and high winds (Nut-
ter and others 1978; Sopper and Kerr 1978). The size and number of the
maintenance corridors for the sprinkler system at the Eckles Township site
increase the potential for blowdown. Concentrations of boron at or beyond
levels known to be toxic to plants have been observed in needles of red
pine (Urie and others 1978).
Some researchers have stated that relatively mature forests may not be
desirable locations for land treatment of wastewater with more than 10 mg/1
of inorganic nitrogen because the trees are not efficient removers of
nitrogen, and the nitrogen leaches through to the groundwater (Burton and
Hook 1978; Nutter and others 1978). Higher input concentrations in a study
on sugar maple-beech forests reduced the level of nitrogen in the leachate
but increased runoff losses of nitrogen and phosphorus to unacceptable
levels. In other studies, however, leaching of nitrogen has been minimal
(Cole and Schiess 1978).
4-30
-------
The use of storage ponds at the Eckles Township site would reduce the
amount of nitrogen added to the forest ecosystem. Most of the ammonia in
the effluent would be removed during treatment in oxidation ponds, and thus
higher application rates can be used than if effluent were used directly
from the WWTP (Urie 1979). All forest systems studies have been shown to
remove phosphorus rapidly and completely (Cole and Schiess 1978; Sopper and
Kerr 1979a).
Potassium and nitrogen deficiencies have been noted in agricultural
crops on irrigated areas that have been cropped heavily, and supplementary
applications of these nutrients have been required (Keeney and Walsh 1978).
It is not likely that the growth and harvesting of forest crops on ir-
rigated lands would cause such deficiencies, because of the longer period
of cultivation of the forest crop and the relatively low uptake of such
nutrients by trees in comparison with herbaceous plants. High sodium and
chloride levels are known to inhibit plant growth, and high levels of
sodium can cause loss of soil structure and thus reduce the water pene-
tration and transmission capability of the soil. Chloride and many other
trace elements are essential plant nutrients, however, and would not be
toxic except in large quantities. Salts are not expected to concentrate in
the soil at toxic levels, thus no significant impact is expected.
In irrigated areas with high water tables, the soils may become low in
oxygen, with consequent restriction of root growth and biological activity
(Linden and others 1978). This condition is not expected to occur at the
Eckles Township site because of the relatively low application rate and the
underdrainage system.
WILDLIFE
Similarly, the effects of long-term irrigation of wastewater on animal
populations and their habitats are not known. Researchers who performed
short-term studies on relatively small test plots have indicated that
species such as deer and songbirds continue to use irrigated areas, except
during actual operation of the sprinkler system (Dressier and Wood 1976;
Snider and Wood 1975). Fewer species of songbirds may be present, but
4-31
-------
individuals of those species may be more abundant than on unirrigated areas
(Lewis 1977; Snider and Wood 1975). The additional nutrients taken up by
herbaceous plants may increase the value of forage for deer and cottontail
rabbits, although the diversity of palatable species (and thus the amount
of forage available) may be reduced (Anthony and Wood 1979; Wood and others
1973). When an abundant, weedy, unpalatable species was not included in
the data analysis in the study by Dressier and Wood (1976), the irrigated
site was significantly lower in air-day forage production, digestible dry
matter, crude fiber, and crude protein than a similar unirrigated control
site. If the forest canopy is not closed, however, and sufficient light is
available for the growth of woody and herbaceous understory species, the
feeding capacity of the site may be raised (Dressier and Wood 1976). The
corridors created for the installation and maintenance of the sprinkler and
drainage systems at the Eckles Township site would allow such light pene-
tration, and thus the "edge" effect would result in the growth of her-
baceous species, woody shrubs, and small trees in these areas. This growth
would need to be removed to maintain access to the sprinklers and to pre-
vent impairment of the distribution of water.
Populations of white-footed mice have been observed to increase in ir-
rigated areas during the autumn, when the availability of herbaceous plants
for food and cover is higher than on unirrigated areas (Anthony and others
1979). Numbers of songbirds in irrigated areas may increase in late summer,
in response to the increased moisture and food (particularly earthworms) on
those sites.
Other than loss or alteration of habitat, the greatest potential
adverse effects on wildlife mentioned in the literature are those associ-
ated with increased levels of toxic substances, such as polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs) and heavy metals (lead, cadmium, copper, zinc, arsenic,
selenium, and mercury). Different species of animals would ingest dif-
ferent metals or combinations of metals and accumulate the substances at
different rates, depending on the species and parts of plants consumed.
For example, it has been shown that lead has accumulated in the liver and
lead and cadmium in the kidneys of white-footed mice, and copper in the
kidneys of cottontail rabbits, in higher concentrations on irrigated areas
4-32
-------
(Anthony and others 1978). The mice are primarily seed-eaters; the rabbits
are plant-eaters. Other studies (Sidle and others 1976) have shown that
heavy metals did not accumulate in animals to levels hazardous to their
health. Because of the lack of industry in the Bemidji area, and the
separation of the storm and sanitary sewer systems, concentrations of heavy
metals or PCBs are not present in the treated effluent. In addition, the
storage and treatment of the effluent in the ponds allows time for some
precipitation of metals or for their uptake by aquatic plants in the ponds.
PUBLIC HEALTH
A variety of pathogenic organisms may be present in municipal waste-
water (see discussion in WAPORA 1977c). Chlorination is proposed as a
final step in the conventional treatment process proposed in Alternatives 1
through 5 to disinfect the effluent prior to discharge to surface waters.
Chlorination also is proposed prior to irrigation in Eckles Township in
Alternative 6, if needed to disinfect the storage pond effluent.
Bacterial levels in storage pond effluent at the Muskegon County,
Michigan, land treatment site were reported by Demirjian (1975) to be:
Total Coli (colonies/100 ml) 0 to 1.3 x 10
Fecal Coli (colonies/100 ml) 1 to 2,400
Fecal Strep (colonies/100 ml) 0 to 2,300
The standard for fecal coliform bacteria levels in the effluent from a con-
ventional treatment plant is 200/100 ml. Therefore, it can be expected
that some bacteria will survive in the lagoons and be present in the ir-
rigation water if disinfection is not practiced.
Potential health risks associated with spray irrigation of effluent
involves the dissemination of pathogenic aerosols, surface and subsurface
water contamination, and insect propagation. The probability of health
effects from surface and subsurface water contamination at the Eckles
Township site is very low. Because there would be little standing ef-
fluent, increased insect propagation also should not be a problem.
4-33
-------
Aerosols (particles from 0.01 to 50 micrometers that are suspended in
air) from wastewater ponds and irrigation systems can contain bacteria and
viruses in liquid droplets, attached to solid particles, or individually
airborne, if not properly disinfected. Inhalation of an aerosol containing
certain bacteria or viruses presents a risk of human infection. The extent
to which aerosols from wastewater irrigation in Eckles Township would
present a public health risk is a function of the survival and dispersion
of individual organisms. The factors of concern include the concentration
of pathogens in the water sprayed, the degree of aerosolization, the effect
of aerosol shock, the atmospheric conditions at the time of spraying, and
the biological decay of the organisms with time and distance.
Between 0.1% and 1.5% of the wastewater will be aerosolized under most
operating conditions (Sorber and others 1977). Generally, the higher the
wind speed, the greater the amount of aerosols generated. The viable
aerosol emission rate is reported to increase directly with the concentra-
tions of microorganisms and total solids in the wastewater to be sprayed
(Hickey and Reist 1975). A high initial viable aerosol decay rate occurs,
followed by a much lower decay rate. The initial impact on viable aerosol
concentrations is referred to as aerosol shock and is attributed mainly to
organism die-off from the stress of droplet evaporation (Sorber and others
1977).
Downwind concentrations of viable aerosols depend to a large extent on
the atmospheric stability of a specific area at a specific time. Atmos-
pheric stability is a function of solar radiation and wind speed. Condi-
tions can vary from highly unstable to highly stable, which results in
minimal dispersion in both the vertical and horizontal direction. Gen-
erally, stable atmospheric conditions are characterized by low wind speeds
and cloud cover or darkness. Viable aerosol recoveries are usually higher
at night than during the day (Hickey and Reist 1975). Higher relative
humidities at night also may influence recovery levels.
In addition to aerosol shock and atmospheric stability, other en-
vironmental factors such as ultra-violet radiation and temperature act to
significantly decrease viable aerosol concentrations. The vast majority of
4-34
-------
aerosolized organisms are destroyed; however, some may be more resistant to
environmental stresses. The epidemiological significance of the majority
of studies on the types and quantitites of viable aerosols downwind of
spray irrigation sites has not been determined. Numerous questions remain
as to the level of risk associated with aerosols. Evidence on the vi-
rulence of bacterial aerosols or the presence of viral aerosols generated
from spray irrigation is sparse. The concentration of particular pathogens
required to initiate infection in individuals also is unknown. Risk as-
sessment is compounded by the fact that the concentration of organisms in
the aerosol are dependent on the site characteristics, the degree of waste-
water treatment provided prior to application, and the prevailing mete-
orological conditions at the irrigation site (Sorber and Sagik 1979).
The long-term treatment and storage in the multi-celled pond system
and disinfection with chlorine prior to application present a situation
with a very low probability for bacterial aerosol-induced disease occurring
as a result of wastewater spray irrigation. The predicted average bac-
terial aerosol concentration is almost four orders of magnitude below
typical background levels. With respect to the possibility of viral disease
spreading through the atmosphere, the existing literature indicates that
there is little reason for concern; however, specific data regarding virus
concentrations are not available.
The forest "buffer" area at the perimeter of the forest irrigation
site would provide an additional measure of safety from potential bacterial
aerosol drift from spray application. Irrigation of open croplands on the
Cronemiller property would require planting of vegetation at the perimeter
or providing an unirrigated distance to the nearest receptor (such as a
public road). The existing data tend to support the conclusion that down-
wind bacterial aerosol concentrations, after the subtraction of background
levels, are approximately inversely proportional to downwind distance.
Similarly, the potential for aerosol drift to transmit pathogens from
the treatment/storage ponds is extremely small. The lack of ambient bac-
terial concentration data downwind of the lagoons makes the expected impact
4-35
-------
impossible to quantify with any reasonable expectation of accuracy; how-
ever, a subjective comparison of the ponds (as bacterial emission sources)
to spray irrigation systems, trickling filters (Goff and others 1973), and
activated sludge units (Randall and Ledbetter 1976) for which ambient
bacterial concentration data are available results in the conclusion that
no significant health hazard likely will occur.
Contamination of crops from irrigation with effluent from the treat-
ment/storage ponds would be insignificant. Pathogens would be concentrated
near the soil surface, but organisms generally are not absorbed by plants
(USEPA 1977). In addition, most plants have defense mechanisms against
microbial attack. Pathogens could be carried to above ground crops by
flies and dust, but the organisms would not survive long under summer
conditions.
The Minnesota Department of Health stated that "the use of wastewater
from a non-industrialized city such as Bemidji on the crops described (po-
tatoes and sunflowers) does not appear to present a public health problem,
and we would not anticipate a need to place restrictions on the ultimate
use of the harvested crop" (By letter, Dr. Warren R. Larson, Commissioner
of Health, to Mr. Marcus C. Hannaman, Eugene A. Hickok and Associates,
Inc., 22 October 1976). Although potatoes and sunflowers are the ref-
erenced crops, the same statement also should apply to corn.
SOIL, UNDERDRAINAGE SYSTEM, AND GROUNDWATER
The hydrogeologic and soils investigations conducted by E.A. Hickok,
Inc., during 1976 (Stewart & Walker 1976) and by WAPORA during 1978 (WAPORA
1978c), and the soils mapping conducted by the USDA Soil Conservation
Service during 1979 provide considerable information concerning soil
groundwater conditions in the Eckles Township site area (see Section
3.1.3.2.). Application of wastewater on the forest lands and croplands at
the rate proposed by WAPORA (1979b), and as incorporated in the preliminary
design of the system by RCM (1980), in conjunction with the proposed under-
drainage system should prevent hydraulic overloading of the soil and
groundwater systems and protect the groundwater from excessive loadings of
organic and inorganic constituents in the wastewater.
4-36
-------
The chemical composition and hydraulic properties of the extant soil
ultimately determines the capability of a land treatment site to renovate
wastewater. The chemical properties of soils in Section 16, which rep-
resents the predominant soils over the entire Eckles site area, are dis-
cussed in detail in WAPORA (1978c). The pH, cation exchange capacity, and
phosphorus retention capacity are adequate to insure that most constituents
in the wastewater will be removed effectively.
Organic constituents in the applied water would be oxidized by natural
biological processes within the top few inches of soil (USEPA and others
1977). At Muskegon, Michigan, the BOD of renovated water from the under-
drainage system ranged from 1.2 mg/1 to 2.2 mg/1 (Demirjian 1975). Sus-
pended solids in the applied water also are removed by the soil through
filtration. The volatile solids are biologically oxidized, and inorganic
solids become part of the soil matrix (USEPA and others 1977).
Phosphorus would be present in the storage pond effluent in an in-
organic form as orthophosphate (primarily HP02-), as polyphosphates (or
condensed phosphates), and as organic phosphate compounds. Because of the
pH of wastewater, the predominant form usually is orthophosphate (USEPA
1976). Polyphosphate is converted quickly to orthophosphate in conven-
tional wastewater treatment, in soil, or in water. Dissolved organic
phosphorus is converted more slowly (day to weeks) to orthophosphate.
When wastewater is applied to land, dissolved inorganic phosphorus
(orthophosphate) may be adsorbed by the iron, aluminum, and/or calcium
compounds, or may be precipitated through reactions with soluble iron,
aluminum, and calcium. Because of the difficulty in distinguishing between
adsorption and precipitation reactions, the term "sorption" is utilized to
refer to the removal of phosphorus by both processes (USEPA and other
1977). The degree to which wastewater phosphorus is sorbed in soil depends
on its concentration, soil pH, temperature, time, total loading, and the
concentration of other wastewater constituents that directly react with
phosphorus, or that affect soil pH and oxidation-reduction reactions (USEPA
and others 1977).
4-37
-------
The phosphorus in the adsorbed phase in soil exists in equilibrium
with the concentration of dissolved soil phosphorus (USEPA and others
1977). As an increasing amount of existing adsorptive capacity is used,
such as when wastewater enriched with phosphorus is applied, the dissolved
phosphorus concentration similarly will be increased. This may result in
an increased concentration of phosphorus in the percolate, and thus in the
groundwater or in the recovered underdrainage water.
Eventually, adsorbed phosphorus is transformed into a crystalline-
mineral state, re-establishing the adsorptive capacity of the soil. This
transformation occurs slowly, requiring from months to years. Work by
various researchers indicates that as much as 100% of the original ad-
sorptive capacity may be recovered in as little as 3 months. However, in
some instances it may take years for the adsorptive capacity to fully
recover because the active cations may become increasingly bound in the
crystalline form. The possible amount of phosphorus that could precipitate
to the crystalline form, based on a 2% to 4% iron and 5% to 7.5% aluminum
soil content, is estimated to be 250,000 pounds of phosphorus per acre-foot
of soil (Ellis and Erickson 1969) .
Dissolved organic phosphorus in applied wastewater can move quickly
through the soil and enter the groundwater. Adequate retention of the
wastewater in the unsaturated soil zone is necessary to allow enough time
for the organic phosphorus to be hydrolized by microorganisms to the or-
thophosphate form. In the orthophosphate form, it then can be adsorbed.
The ability to predict phosphorus concentrations in percolate waters
from land treatment systems has not yet been demonstrated (Enfield 1978).
Models that have been developed for this purpose have not yet been evalu-
ated under field conditions. Rough estimates of phosphorus adsorptive
capacity, which have been developed at this stage of investigation of the
feasibility of land treatment, are based on limited laboratory tests.
The existing concentration of water soluble phosphorus for each soil
sample was measured for soils in Section 16 by WAPORA (1978). This test
4-38
-------
revealed fairly low phosphorus concentrations in all but the surface hori-
zons at each site. This indicates relatively unenriched soil conditions.
A limited phosphorus sorption test also was conducted following the metho-
dology utilized by Enfield and Bledsoe (1975). The data from this 5-day
test for soil samples from Section 16 indicate a range of phosphorus ad-
sorption values of from 70 mg/kg to 200 mg/kg. The adsorptive capacity of
the soils apparently decreases with depth. This reflects the lower organic
matter content and reduced soil development with increasing depth.
The surface soil of the loamy sands sampled (up to about 4 feet) has
an average phosphorus adsorptive capacity of about 160 mg/kg. The under-
lying material below 4 feet was not extensively sampled, and no samples
were taken from below a depth of 7 feet. Assuming that soil forming pro-
cesses are less and the grain-size is larger at depths in excess of 7 feet,
a conservative estimate of 50 mg/kg for a 5-day test equivalent value
appears reasonable.
Enfield and Bledsoe (1975) determined that phosphorus adsorption after
a 4-month test period was from 1.5 to 3.0 times the 5-day adsorption value,
reflecting a more steady-state approximation. Tofflemire and Chen con-
cluded that total phosphate retention in a land treatment system would be
at least 2 to 5 times the estimate based on the 5-day test (after USEPA and
others 1977). Based on these considerations, it appears that the seasonal
application of wastewater at the rate proposed in Alternative 6 (24 inches/
year) will not exceed the phosphorus retention capability of the soil and
that excellent phosphorus retention capacity can be expected.
Nitrogen loadings in the wastewater are of greatest concern. Nitrogen
would be present in applied wastewater principally in the form of nitrates
(NO ) and organic nitrogen. When wastewater is applied to land, the na-
tural supply of soil nitrogen is increased through the addition of organic
nitrogen and nitrate. As in the natural processes, most added organic
nitrogen slowly is converted to ionized ammonia by microbial action in the
soil. This form of nitrogen, and any ionized ammonia in the storage pond
effluent, are adsorbed by soil particles. Some ammonia, or volatilized
ammonium, may escape to the atmosphere.
4-39
-------
Plants and soil microbes both utilize ammonium directly. Microbes
oxidize ammonium to nitrite (NO ) that is quickly converted to the nitrate
(NO ) form through nitrification. Nitrate is highly soluble and is uti-
lized by plants, or leached from the soil into the groundwater. Under
anaerobic conditions (in the absence of oxygen), soil nitrate can be re-
duced by soil microbes to gaseous nitrogen forms (denitrification).
Assuming a concentration of 10 mg/1 of total nitrogen in the applied
wastewater, about 61,000 pounds of nitrogen per year, or 52 Ib/acre (as-
sumes 1,170 acres for forest application) would be applied to the forest
and treatment site at the 2.0 mgd design flow. Forest crops typically can
utilize from 20 to 100 pounds of nitrogen per acre per year (Ib/ac/yr),
forage crops from 80 to 600 Ib/ac/yr, and field corps from 50 to 110
Ib/ac/yr (USEPA 1976). Predictions of the amount of the nitrogen applied
that would volatilize, remain as slowly degradable organic matter, be lost
through denitrification, or enter the groundwater or underdrainage are
difficult to develop because of the complexity and indeterminable nature of
some of the reactions and the rate at which they might occur. Although,
the forest system should be capable of utilizing all of the nitrogen ap-
plied, it conservatively should be assumed that soluble nitrates will leach
to the groundwater, much of which will be removed via the collection of
underdrainage. The nitrate concentration in the groundwater should not
exceed the 10.0 mg/1 standard for protection of drinking water, however,
because the concentration in the leached water would be considerably less
than 10.0 mg/1 and no mechanism for concentration of nitrates in the
groundwater is known (i.e., the rainfall and evapotranspiration rates are
nearly balanced indicating that no concentration effect should exist).
The water table in the application area generally would be artifici-
ally re-established at the depth of the underdrains (approximately 8 feet
below ground surface). This would result in a decrease in water levels in
those areas where the water table is above 8 feet, and an increase in the
water table due to the applied water, in areas where the depth to ground-
water is below 8 feet. This may reduce natural groundwater discharge to
wetlands and the established drainageways while increasing considerably the
discharge to Grant Creek and the Meadow Lake drainage system via the pro-
posed drainage ditches.
4-40
-------
Wetland areas in the northwestern quarter of Section 11 and the south-
ern quarter of Section 15 of Eckles Township eventually may be dewatered by
the adjacent drainage system. The drainage ditch from Sectin 16 west to
Grant Creek possibly would cause the dewatering of the wetland area in the
western part of Section 17.
The steep topography near Grant Creek indicates that the ditch from
Section 16 would have a steep gradient, which creates a potential for
significant erosion of the sandy soil. Mitigation measures, such as check
dams, would be required to reduce the erosion potential.
The ditch conducting the drainage from Section 15 southeast through
Sections 23 and 24 to the county ditch and the established drainageway from
Alice Lake is routed through wetlands. The presence of the ditch would
lower the water levels in these wetland areas, potentially causing changes
in the type of vegetation.
The amount of water to be collected by the ditch system and its qual-
ity are difficult to predict. Not all of the storage pond effluent that is
sprayed on the forest lands would be recovered; i.e., some would percolate
to the groundwater. Additionally, the underdrains will be intercepting
precipitation as it percolates through the soil and collecting groundwater
where the water table would be above 8 feet deep under natural conditions.
Once the underdrainage is placed and the initial drawdown of groundwater
has occurred (i.e., stablization of the water level at an 8 foot depth
throughout the site), a steady-state flow from the underdrainage system in
the drainage ditches could be expected during the application season.
Considering an average condition where 1 inch per week of wastewater would
be applied to the entire site, and conservatively assuming that all water
applied would be recovered by the underdrainage system, a total of 37
million gallons per week would enter the ditch system from the underdrain-
age system:
4-41
-------
Million Gallons
Ditch Acres Drained Per Week
Section 16 to Grant
Creek 460 12.5 2.8
Section 11 to Meadow
Lake drainage 650 17.7 3.9
Section 15 to County
ditch in Section 19 250 6.8 1.5
Additional flow in the ditches would be generated by additional groundwater
inflow and some stormwater runoff. Peak flows would not be expected to be
significantly higher than average flows because of the retention capacity
of the soils at the application site and the minimum amount of the overland
flow that would be expected during the rainfall events.
The quality of the drain tile and drainage ditch water at the Muske-
gon, Michigan, land treatment site serves as a good example of the poten-
tial water quality at the Eckles project site ( Table 4-8). Based on this
data for an operating system and on the extant soil types in the applica-
tion area, underdrainage water at the Eckles Site should be of good qual-
ity. It is apparent that the ditch water quality will not be influenced by
the quality of the underdrainage as much as by extended factors such as
sediment from erosion and runoff, COD from decaying organic matter, and
bacteria from wildlife, such as nesting waterfowl.
4.3 Secondary Impacts
Potential secondary impacts would include the indirect or induced
effects that would result in land use, demographic, and other socioeconomic
changes. These changes may be manifested by higher population density and
increased development made possible by the availability of excess waste-
water treatment capacity or lower rates of growth in Bemidji versus the
surrounding area because of high user charges for wastewater services. As
these changes would occur, associated impacts may be created. These in-
clude: air and water pollution; changes in the tax base; increased consump-
tion of energy and other resources; increased noise levels; demand for
4-42
-------
Table 4-8. Quality of drain tile and drainage ditch water at Muskegon,
Michigan, land treatment site (Demirjian 1975).
Parameter
BOD
DO
Temp
pH
Sp . Cond .
TS
TVS
SS
COD
TOG
N114
N°3/N°2
soj"
Cl-
Na
Ca
Mg
K
Fe
Zn
Mn
Color
Turbidity
Total Coli
Fecal Coli
Fecal Steep
Unit
mg/1
mg/1
°C
s.u.
umhos
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
s.u.
Jackson units
(#/100 ml)
(///100 ml)
(#/100 ml)
Drain Tiles
2.2
2-9
—
7
600
—
—
—
—
5
0.40
2.8
0.05
140
50
40
70
25
2.8
4.0
0.06
0.15
20-150
0.1-50
10-1,000
0-440
2-700
Ditch to
Mosquito Creek
2
9.5
1-5
7.2
750
375
160
10
30
10
0.45
1.9
0.1
80
60
40
60
20
5
0.08
0.1
0.08
130
4.5
40-1.5X104
1-1,500
7-5,500
Ditch to
Black Creek
2
1.6
12
6.8
800
700
150
30
25
10
0.5
1.4
0.05
320
18
7
110
40
2.5
0.4
0.2
0.4
—
— —
—
—
4-43
-------
expanded public infrastructure; conversion of agricultural lands, wetlands,
and environmentally sensitive areas to other uses; decreased wildlife
habitat; increased employment and business activity; change in property
values; and changes in the cost of public services.
Each of the six alternatives under consideration will provide con-
siderably expanded wastewater treatment capacity for Bemidji — capacity
for as much as 40% more population equivalents compared to present service
for the existing community of 12,000. Because other aspects of the urban
infrastructure at Bemidji are being, or recently have been, expanded (i.e.,
water system, streets, City Hall, etc.), wastewater treatment capacity can
be judged to be a limiting factor to growth within Bemidji. The proposed
expanded treatment capacity is expected to facilitate, but not stimulate,
additional growth of Bemidji.
The growth of Bemidji will produce the types of environmental effects
discussed above. Because it cannot be assumed that the level of growth for
which the wastewater system is designed to accommodate is directly depend-
ent on the provision of new wastewater treatment facilities, further dis-
cussion of the impacts of such growth is unwarranted.
A specific concern of local residents related to the secondary effects
of land treatment of wastewater at the Eckles Township site is whether land
values of surrounding property would be affected by the presence of the
system. A number of residents of the Bemidji area have contended that
odors generated by the storage lagoons and irrigation of wastewater, and
the perceived psychological effect related to the concept of applying
domestic wastewater on land would make selling adjacent property, especi-
ally for residential use, extremely difficult. The literature has not
dealt with this subject and little case study information is readily avail-
able. No evidence of differential property values is evident in the area
of Muskegon County, Michigan, where a 7,000 acre wastewater spray irriga-
tion system has been operational for several years. A new land treatment
system at Bemidji likely would have to prove itself a "good neighbor" to
ensure that neighboring property values were not affected adversely.
4-44
-------
4.4. Minimization of Adverse Impacts
There are a number of legal requirements, voluntary measures, and
other actions that can alleviate adverse impacts from the construction
and/or operation of a new wastewater treatment system at Bemidji. The
extent to which these measures are applied will determine the ultimate
impact of the selected action. The following sections discuss potential
measures for alleviating construction, operation, and secondary effects
presented in Sections 4.1 through 4.3.
4.4.1. Minimization of Construction Impacts
The construction oriented impacts presented in Section 4.1 primarily
are short-term effects resulting from construction activities at the WWTP
site or along the route of the proposed raw wastewater or effluent force
mains.
Fugitive dust at construction sites should be controlled through the
application of various corrective measures. Spoil-piles and unpaved access
roads should be wetted periodically to reduce dust generation; alterna-
tively, spoil-piles can be covered with matting, mulch, or similar material
to reduce susceptibility to wind erosion.
Street cleaning at sites where trucks and equipment gain access to
construction sites and of roads along which a force main would be con-
structed would reduce loose dirt that otherwise would generate dust, create
unsafe driving conditions, or be washed into roadside ditches or storm
drains. Trucks transporting spoil material to disposal sites should cover
their loads to eliminate the escape of dust while in transit.
Proper maintenance of construction equipment and application of emis-
sion control devices would minimize emissions of hydrocarbons and fumes.
Soil borings along the proposed force main ROWs conducted during "Step 2"
system design, would identify organic soils that have potential to release
odors when excavated. These areas could be bypassed by rerouting the force
main if, depending on the location, a significant impact might be expected.
4-45
-------
Construction noise is difficult to reduce. Construction activities
within Bemidji should be scheduled to avoid interruption of activities in
certain sensitive areas, such as "quiet hours" at hospitals, day-time work
adjacent to schools, or evening and night work in residental areas.
Spoil disposal sites should be identified during the project design
stage ("Step 2") to ensure that adequate sites are available and that
disposal site impact are minimized. Landscaping and restoration of vegeta-
tion should be conducted immediately after disposal is completed to prevent
impacts from dust generation and unsightly conditions.
Lands disturbed by trenching for force main construction should be
regraded and compacted as necessary to prevent future subsidence. However,
too much compaction will result in conditions unsuitable for vegetation.
Areas disturbed by trenching and grading at the plant site should be
revegetated as soon as possible to prevent erosion and dust generation.
Native plants and grasses should be used. This also will facilitate the
re-establishment of wildlife habit.
Direct impacts on terrestrial flora and fauna during construction of
new facilities and force mains can be reduced by:
• Scheduling construction activities at Grass Lake or at the
Eckles site to avoid periods critical to wildlife, such as
breeding and nesting periods
• Minimizing the use of heavy equipment to reduce compaction
of soil and preserve natural drainage
• Preserving as much existing vegetation as possible as a
buffer to the generation of noise and dust and to assist in
the re-establishment of new vegetation.
The force main route should avoid wetlands where feasible. Not only
would it avoid construction problems, but potential effects to wetland
vegetation from drawdown of the water table due to trench dewatering could
be avoided. If trenching and dewatering in wetlands is necessary because
feasible alternative routes are not available, the water withdrawn from the
4-46
-------
trenches should be pumped to a settling basin, and then recirculated to the
wetland. This may lessen the possibility of desiccation and plant
mortality.
While no major stream or river crossings by force mains are contem-
plated (the force main to Grass Lake or to the Eckles Township Site would
be attached to the railroad bridge to avoid significant effects on the
Mississippi River channel), several small ditches or drainageways would be
affected. Similarly, construction of drainage ditches at the Eckles sites
would affect several wetland areas. To mitigate potential construction
problems, water quality problems, destruction of wetland vegetation, and
other impacts, construction activity should be scheduled during the dry
season (usually late summer) so that minimum water levels would be encoun-
tered. Potentially erodible bank-cuts must be restabilized immediately
after construction to prevent sedimentation of the waterway during the next
storm event.
Erosion and sedimentation must be minimized at all construction sites.
USEPA's Program Requirements Memorandum 78-1 establishes requirements for
control of erosion and runoff from construction activities. Adherence to
these requirements would serve to mitigate potential problems:
• Construction site selection should consider potential occur-
rence of erosion and sediment losses
• The project plan and layout should be designed to fit the
local topography and soil conditions
• When appropriate, land grading and excavating should be kept
at a minimum to reduce the possibility of creating runoff
and erosion problems which require extensive control
measures
• Whenever possible, topsoil should be removed and stockpiled
before grading begins
• Land exposure should be minimized in terms of area and time
• Exposed areas subject to erosion should be covered as
quickly as possible by means of mulching or vegetation
• Natural vegetation should be retained whenever feasible
4-47
-------
• Appropriate structural or agronomic practices to control
runoff and sedimentation should be provided during and after
construction
• Early completion of stabilized drainage system (temporary
and permanent systems) will substantially reduce erosion
potential
• Access roadways should be paved or otherwise stabilized as
soon as feasible
• Clearing and grading should not be started until a firm
construction schedule is known and can be effectively co-
ordinated with the grading and clearing activity.
Planning of routes for heavy construction equipment and materials
should ensure that surface load restrictions are considered. In this way,
damage to streets and roadways should be avoided. Trucks hauling excava-
tion spoil to disposal sites should be routed along primary arteries to
minimize the threat to public safety and to reduce disturbance in residen-
tial environments.
Access to construction sites should be restricted to prevent acci-
dents. Traffic control may be needed where construction equipment/truck
traffic would be entering streets, roads, and highways on a frequent basis
(e.g., access to existing WWTP from US Route 2). If streets or roads are
to be closed temporarily during construction of the force main, announce-
ments should be published in The Pioneer and broadcast on the local radio
stations to alert motorists to the need to seek an alternative route.
Emergency service organizations should be alerted to prevent delays.
The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Executive Order 11593
(1971), The Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974, and the
1973 Procedures of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation require
that care must be taken early in the planning process to identify cultural
resources and minimize adverse effects on them. USEPA's final regulations
for the preparation of EISs (40 CFR 1500) also specify that compliance with
these regulation is required when a Federally funded, licensed, or per-
mitted project is undertaken. The State Historic Preservation Officer must
have an opportunity to determine that the requirements have been satisfied.
4-48
-------
To provide adequate consideration to those resources that may be
eligible for the National Register of Historic Places, a cultural resources
survey usually is conducted of the area of primary impact, from which an
inventory of historic and archaeological cultural resources is prepared.
Once an alternative is selected and design work begins, a thorough pedes-
trian archaeological survey may be required for those areas affected by the
proposed facility. The survey would include a detailed literature review,
consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer and other know-
ledgeable informants, controlled surface collection of discovered sites,
and minor subsurface testing. A similar survey would be required of his-
toric structures, sites, properties, and objects in and adjacent to the
construction areas, if they might be affected by the construction or opera-
tion of the project.
In consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer, it would
be determined which of the resources located by such surveys appear to be
eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. Subsequently, an
evaluation would be made of the probable effects of the project on these
resources and what mitigation procedures may be required. Prior to initi-
ation of the proposed Federally funded project, the Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation in Washington DC should be notified of the intended
undertaking and be provided an opportunity to comment on the proposed
project.
Project construction costs and debt retirement burdens could be les-
sened somewhat through the construction of a smaller, less costly WWTP
system. A smaller system, however, may result in a limitation on community
growth at Bemidji prior to the year 2000. More importantly, however, is
the effluent phosphorus limitation for the conventional treatment alterna-
tives; i.e., a less stringent discharge standard (1.0 mg/1 compared to the
proposed 0.3 mg/1) would allow a somewhat larger amount of phosphorus to be
discharged to the Mississippi River/Chain of Lakes system but would cost
less, as discussed in Section 2.4. and 2.5.
The cost of the land treatment alternative (Alternative 6) could be
reduced by significantly changing the conceptual design and size of the
system. WAPORA (1976b and 12 November 1979 memorandum from Dan Sweeney,
4-49
-------
WAPORA, to Charles Quinlan, USEPA) indicated that up to 36 inches per year
could be sprayed on underdrained cropland because an agricultural crop
would be better capable of removing nitrogen than would a forest system.
The forest lands could be cleared, the expensive fixed-set irrigation
system replaced primarily by center-pivot equipment, and about one-half as
many acres utilized. To reduce the pumping and piping costs, the site
would be contiguous, thus eliminating the option of utilizing the Crone-
miller property. While such a system would be less expensive than the
system proposed in Alternative 6, it still would be significantly more
expensive than the conventional alternatives (an alternative-specific
engineering estimate has not been prepared). Of more significance, how-
*
ever, is that such an alternative already has been judged to be extremely
difficult, if not impossible, to implement. It would entail a significant
change in the land use of the area and create environmental impacts. The
Beltrami County Board is on record opposing the clearing of Memorial Forest
lands, and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources also is very
concerned about such an action. Based on the history of the project, both
cost-effective and implementable irrigation sites are not available.
4.4.2. Mitigation of Operation Phase Impacts
The majority of potentially adverse operational aspects of the five
conventional treatment alternatives relate to the discharge of effluent to
surface waters and to the high cost of minimizing the discharge of phos-
phorus. For the land treatment alternative, the most significant potential
adverse effects are impacts on groundwater, high cost, and possible health
risks. Measures to minimize these and other operation phase impacts from
the six alternatives are discussed below.
As discussed in Section 1.0. and elsewhere, the discharge from a new
conventional WWTP to surface waters requires an NPDES discharge permit from
the MPCA. The terms of the permit will specify the concentrations and
loadings for various parameters and will require daily monitoring of the
effluent quality. Periodic plant inspections and compliance monitoring
*woulcf be conducted by MPCA. If the conditions of the permit were violated,
enforcement action would be taken against the City to force compliance.
Citizens also could file suit to require compliance.
4-50
-------
To guard against operational failures of the new conventional WWTP
proposed in Alternatives 1 through 5, and thus guard against short-term
degradation of water quality, the facilities should be designed to provide
the maximum reliability at all times. The WWTP should be capable of
operating during power failures, flooding, peak loads, equipment failure,
and maintenance activities. Therefore, the WWTP design ("Step 2") should
incorporate the following considerations to ensure system reliability:
• Duplicate sources of electric power
• Standby power for pumping stations and essential plant
elements
• Multiple units and equipment to provide maximum flexibility
in operation
• Replacement parts readily available
• Holding tanks or basins to provide for emergency storage of
overflow and adequate pump-back facilities
• Flexibility of piping and pumping facilities to permit
rerouting of flows under emergency conditions
• Provision for emergency storage or disposal of sludge
• Dual chlorination units
• Automatic controls to regulate and record chlorine residuals
• Automatic alarm systems to warn of high water, power fail-
ure, or equipment malfunction
• No treatment plant or sewer system by-passes
• Design of interceptor to permit emergency storage without
causing back-ups
• Enforcement of pretreatment regulations to avoid industrial
waste-induced treatment upsets
• Flood-proofing of treatment plant
• Plant Operations and Maintenance Manual to have section on
emergency operation procedures
• Utilize highly-qualified plant operators.
4-51
-------
Through the incorporation of these types of factors in the design and
operation of a conventional wastewater control system at Bemidji, the
system will be virtually "fail-safe." The land treatment alternative would
not require as much concern for backup systems because of the built-in
reliability related to the use of a lagoon system.
Reduction of costs for system operation could result from reduction of
the amount of alum and polymer that are added to facilitate the precipita-
tion of phosphorus. Through experimentation, plant operators should be
able to optimize the chemical addition requirements in conjunction with
maximizing the use of the multi-media filter and thus reduce chemical costs
somewhat. Less stringent phosphorus treatment requirements also would
contribute to a significant reduction in operating costs (Section 4.4.1.).
The effects on species of plants and animals and their habitats during
operation of either Alternatives 1 through 3 would be minimal. However,
the potential effects from the proposed Grass Lake discharges (Alternatives
4 and 5) and land treatment (Alternative 6) could be significant. Several
mitigative measures could be taken to minimize these impacts:
• If Alternative 4 or 5 (both of which involve discharge to
Grass Lake) is selected, consideration should be given to
elimination of the chlorination step and the substitution of
another disinfection process. Similarly, denitrification to
eliminate ammonia prior to discharge of the effluent into
the Lake, to avoid possible adverse effects on biota in
Grass Lake, Larson Lake, and in adjacent wetland areas,
should be considered.
• If Alternative 6, land treatment at the Eckles site, is
selected, the effects of this procedure on wildlife could be
mitigated by timing the spraying to avoid peak periods of
wildlife feeding and movement in early morning and late
afternoon. This also would take advantage of the maximum
amount of sunlight available to increase the rate of evapor-
ation from the vegetation and the soil surface.
• The abundance and activities of beaver should be monitored
in the region around Grass Lake. It is possible that in-
creased flow in the drainage ditch that leads to Larson Lake
(especially if the ditch is widened and deepened to accom-
modate a higher flow) would attract beaver, which could
construct dams that would create flow or flooding problems.
4-52
-------
The problem of aerosols generated by wind gassing over the storage
ponds can be reduced by minimizing the pond dimension that would be paral-
lel to the prevailing wind direction(s). There also exists an operational
measure that can serve to reduce ambient bacterial aerosol levels from
spray irrigation.
Because the existing data indicate that the highest bacterial concen-
trations occur at night, because of the absence of lethal solar radiation,
the curtailment of operations at night, and probably even during daytime
hours with little sunshine, may be expected to reduce the spread of viable
bacteria (Goff and others 1973). Hours of stable atmospheric dispersion
conditions (which occur on clear nights with low winds) and high humidities
(which are more common at night) are especially unfavorable from an envi-
ronmental point of view. (While operation during high wind conditions may
also be undesirable, the resulting increase in aerosolization may be coun-
teracted by the increased atmospheric dilution accompanying high winds.)
Another operational control measure could involve the creation or temporary
expansion of buffer zones by spray-irrigating only on interior site sec-
tions during unfavorable atmospheric conditions.
4.4.3. Minimization of Secondary Impacts
Secondary impacts from growth facilitated by the expansion of the
wastewater treatment capability at Bemidji largely can be reduced through
coordinated growth management planning. The City has a newly completed
Growth Management Plan which, if continually updated and followed, should
serve to facilitate growth in harmony with local environmental conditions.
The City already has a Zoning Ordinance that can serve as a primary
growth management tool. Through zoning, the City has the legal means to
regulate the general location, density, and type of growth that might
occur. The key to managed growth is to maintain centralized urban growth
to preserve the ability to deliver efficient, cost-effective public ser-
vices. Development of expanded streets and roads, public utilities,
schools, hospitals, parks, and industrial areas is difficult when encoun-
tering the problems associated with urban sprawl.
4-53
-------
4.5. Irretrievable and Irreversible Resource Commitments
The major types and amounts of resources that would be committed
through the implementation of any of the six alternatives are presented in
Sections 4.1. and 4.2. These include public capital, energy, land, labor,
and unsalvageable materials. For each alternative, there is a significant
consumption of these resources with no feasible means of recovery. Thus,
non-recoverable resources would be foregone for the provision of the pro-
posed wastewater control system.
Accidents which could occur from system construction and operation
could cause irreversible bodily damage or death, and damage or destroy
equipment and other resources. Unmitigated treatment plant failure poten-
tially could kill aquatic life in the immediate mixing zone.
The potential accidental destruction of undiscovered archaeological
sites through excavation activities is not reversible. This would repre-
sent permanent loss of the site.
Once the construction of a new WWTP system is completed with the
consequent expenditure of a large amount of public funds, future options
may be precluded. As an example, if a new conventional treatment plant
with advanced phosphorus control is constructed at the site of the existing
WWTP, a future decision (within the next 40 to 50 years, the potential
useful life of the system) to provide treatment by land application could
be made only at an exceptionally high cost, in terms of the abandonment of
the new facilities. The selection of an alternative at this time is a
decision that will not easily be reversible.
4-54
-------
5.0. IMPACT ON STATE GOVERNMENT OF ANY FEDERAL CONTROLS ASSOCIATED WITH
THE PROPOSED ACTION
This Draft EIS constitutes a State of Minnesota EIS under the Minne-
sota Environmental Policy Act of 1973 (6 MCAR Section 3) in addition to
being a Federal Draft EIS under the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969. This section of the Draft EIS specifically is required to fulfill
the requirements of 6 MCAR Section 3.030 that otherwise are not fulfilled
by the remainder of this document.
The principal Federal regulatory agency directly involved with the
proposed action is the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). The
Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (FWPCA), as amended in 1977 by
the Clean Water Act (CWA), establishes a uniform nationwide water pollu-
tion control program within which all MPCA programs operate. The MPCA
administers this program while the USEPA retains approval and supervisory
control. The following USEPA programs impact this project and State
government.
WATER QUALITY AND EFFLUENT STANDARDS
States are required to establish water quality standards for lakes and
streams and effluent standards for discharge to them. Federal law requires
that, at a minimum, discharges meet secondary treatment requirements. In
some cases even stricter effluent standards are necessary to preserve water
quality. State Water Quality Standards are subject to USEPA approval and
must conform to Federal guidelines.
CONSTRUCTION GRANTS PROGRAM
The USEPA Construction Grants Program provides 75% funding of eligible
construction costs for the construction of wastewater treatment facilities.
The State of Minnesota provides an additional 15%. Since Federal grant
regulations are, for the most part, the controlling factor in determining
the selected (fundable) alternative, they influence how the State grant
funds are spent.
5-1
-------
Communities may choose to construct wastewater treatment facilities
outside of the USEPA/State Grants Program. In such cases, the only re-
quirements are that the design be technically sound, and that the MPCA be
satisfied that the facility will meet discharge standards.
If a community chooses to construct a wastewater treatment plant with
USEPA grant assistance, the project must meet all requirements of the grant
program. The prime requirement of the program is that the proposal be cost
effective (basically, that is the alternative with the lowest cost and
least environmental impact). If the community wants to construct a facil-
ity that is not in accordance with USEPA regulations, it probably will not
receive grant assistance. Although the USEPA regulations do not strictly
control what is built, the economic impetus in most cases brings the pro-
posal within the control of grant regulations.
NATIONAL POLLUTION DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES)
All discharges to surface waters are required to obtain an NPDES
Permit and to meet the effluent standards set forth in the permit. The
USEPA has delegated authority to issue permits to the MPCA. The USEPA,
however, maintains review authority. Any permit proposed for issuance may
be subject to a hearing if requested. A hearing on an NPDES Permit pro-
vides the public with an opportunity to provide input on a propsed dis-
charge regarding, among other things, location and level of treatment.
Normally the hearing is before a State hearing examiner. His findings and
recommendations are subject to review and approval by the MPCA Board.
MULIT-STATE RESPONSIBILITIES ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED ACTION
The proposed project will occur in the headwaters of the Mississippi
River. As a result, it will be several hundred river miles from the near-
est adjacent state, Wisconsin. There are no multi-state impacts antici-
pated as a result of this project, other than those that might be associ-
ated with the movement of labor or materials for construction or operation
of the proposed facility. These are not anticipated to be significant.
5-2
-------
6.0. LITERATURE CITED
Anderson, Mikkel R. 1978. A case study of soil phosphorus and heavy
metals due to extended effluent irrigation. In; McKim, Harlan L.
(Coordinator), State of knowledge in land treatment of wastewater.
Volume 2. Proceedings of an international symposium, 20-25 August
1978, sponsored by US Army Corps of Engineers. Hanover NH, 423 p.
Anonymous. 1980. Map of Bemidji Industrial Park. The [Bemidji MN] Pio-
neer (22 January 1980), p.l.
Anthony, Robert G., Gregg R. Bierei, and Rosemarie Kozlowski. 1978. Ef-
fects of municipal wastewater irrigation on select species of mammals.
In; McKim, Harlan L. (Coordinator), State of knowledge in land treat-
ment of wastewater. Volume 2. Proceedings of an international sympo-
sium, 20-25 August 1978, sponsored by US Army Corps of Engineers.
Hanover NH, 423 p. (p. 281-287).
Anthony, Robert G. and Gene W. Wood. 1979. Effects of municipal waste-
water irrigation on wildlife and wildlife habitat. In; Sopper,
William E. and Sonja N. Kerr (Editors), Utilization of municipal
sewage effluent and sludge on forest and disturbed land. The Pennsyl-
vania State University Press, University Park PA, 537 p. (p. 213-223).
Aguar Jyring Whiteman Moser Inc. 1979. Comprehensive water and sewer plan
for Beltrami County MN. Duluth MN. variously paged.
Ayensu, Edward S. and Robert A. DeFilipps. 1978. Endangered and threatened
plants of the United States. The Smithsonian Institution and the
World Wildlife Fund, Inc., Washington DC 403 p.
Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. 1978a. Bemidji growth management plan:
population projections. Prepared for the City of Bemidji MN. Min-
neapolis MN.
Barton-Aschraan Associates, Inc. 1978b. Development patterns and oppor-
tunities, working paper #4. Prepared for the City of Bemidji MN.
Minneapolis MN.
Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. 1978c. Urban systems summary: existing
conditions, principles, and preliminary policies, working paper #5.
Prepared for the City of Bemidji MN. Minneapolis MN.
Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. 1978d. Development projections, working
paper #3. Prepared for the City of Bemidji MN. Minneapolis MN.
Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. 1979. Implementation plan, working paper
#9. Prepared for the City of Bemidji MN. Minneapolis MN.
Bierie, G.R., G.W. Wood, and R.G. Anthony. 1975. Population response and
heavy metal concentrations in cottontail rabbits and small mammals in
wastewater irrigated habitat. In; Wood, G.W. et al. (Editors),
Faunal response to spray irrigation of chlorinated sewage effluent.
Institute for Research on Land and Water Resources Research Publica-
tion 87. The Pennsylvania State University, University Park PA, pp.
1-9.
6-1
-------
Braude, George L, Ralston B. Read, Jr., and Charles F. Jelinek. Use of
wastewater on land-food chain concerns. In; McKim, Harlan L.
(Coordinator), State of knowledge in land treatment of wastewater.
Volume 1. Proceedings of an international symposium, 20-25 August
1978, sponsored by US Army Corps of Engineers. Hanover NH, p. 59-64.
Burton, Thomas M. and James E. Hook. 1978. Use of natural terrestrial
vegetation for renovation of wastewater in Michigan. In: McKim,
Harlan L. (Coordinator), State of knowledge in land treatment of
wastewater. Volume 1. Proceedings of an international symposium,
20-25 August 1978, sponsored by US Army Corps of Engineers. Hanover
NH, 423 p. (?. 199-206).
Carlson, Rebecca L. 1980. National Park Service plans hearings on Wild,
Scenic River Plan. The [Bemidji MN] Pioneer (15 February 1980) p. 1,
2.
Chang, A.C. and A.L. Page, 1978.. Toxic chemicals associated with land
treatment of wastewater. In; McKim, Harlan L. (Coordinator). State
of knowledge in land treatment of wastewater. Volume 1. Proceedings
of an international symposium, 20-25 August 1978, sponsored by US Army
Corps of Engineers. Hanover NH, p. 47-57.
Clark, Dietz & Associates. 1977. Sewage treatment plant evaluation,
Bemidji, Minnesota. In; WAPORA, Inc., Alternatives development and
screening for the City of Bemidji wastewater treatment facilities,
Appendix C (revised draft). Prepared for USEPA Region V. Chicago IL.
Cole, Dale W. and Peter Schiess. 1978. Renovation of wastewater and
response of forest ecosystems: The Park Forest Study. In: McKim,
Harlan L. (Coordinator), State of knowledge in land treatment of
wastewater. Volume 1. Proceedings of an international symposium,
20-25 August 1978, sponsored by US Army Corps of Engineers. Hanover
HH, p. 323-331.
Cooley, John H. 1979. Effects of irrigation with oxidation pond effluent
on tree establishment and growth on sandy soils. In: Sopper, William
L. and Sonja N. Kerr (Editors), Utilization of municipal sewage efflu-
ent and sludge on forest and disturbed land. The Pennsylvania State
University Press, University Park PA, 537 p. (p. 145-153).
Demirjian, Y.A., Ph.D. 1975. Design seminar for land treatment of muni-
cipal wastewater effluents. Prepared for US Environmental Protection
Agency Technology Transfer Program. Muskegon MI, 91 p.
Dewalle, David R. 1979. Microclimate and wastewater spray irrigation in
forests. In: Sopper, William L. and Sonja N. Kerr (Editors),
Utilization of municipal sewage effluent and sludge on forest and
disturbed land. The Pennsylvania State University Press, University
Park PA, 537 p. (p. 225-239).
Dillon, P.J. 1974. A critical review of Vollenweider's nutrient budget
model and other related models. Water Resources Bulletin 10: 969-989.
3-2
-------
Dindal, Daniel L., Linda Theoret Newell, and Jean-Pierre Moreau. 1979.
Municipal wastewater irrigation: effects on community ecology of soil
invertebrates. In; Sopper, William L. and Sonja N. Kerr (Editors),
Utilization of municipal sewage effluent and sludge on forest and
disturbed land. The Pennsylvania State University Press, University
Park PA, 537 p. (p. 197-205).
Dressier, Richard L. and Gene W. Wood. 1976. Deer habitat response to
irrigation with municipal wastewater. Journal of Wildlife Management
40(4): 639-644.
Fernald, Merritt L. 1950. Gray's manual of botany. Eighth edition,
corrected printing, 1970. D. Van Nostrand Co., New York NY, 1,632 p.
Gale Research Company. 1978. Climates of the states, Volume I. Detroit
MI, 596 p.
Grau, J. 1980. City council approves utility rate increases. The [Be-
midji MM] Pioneer (22 April 1980), p. 1, 2.
Hinesly, T.D., R.E. Thomas, and R.G. Stevens. 1978. Environmental changes
from long-terra land applications of municipal effluents. US Environ-
mental Protection Agency, Office of Water Program Operations. Publi-
cation No. MCD-26. Washington DC, 31 p.
Hoyt, John S. , Jr., David M. Nelson, and Scott Robbins. 1973. Minnesota
economic data: counties, and regions. Minnesota Analysis and Planning
System, Agricultural Extension Servire, Institute of Agriculture,
University of Minnesota. Population projections 1975-2000, #22.
Keeney, D.R. and L.M. Walsh. 1978. Monitoring requirements for land
treatment systems. In; McKim, Harlan L. (Coordinator), State of
knowledge in land treatment of wastewater. Volume 1. Proceedings of
an international symposium, 20-25 August 1978, sponsored by US Army
Corps of Engineers. Hanover NH, p. 365-375.
King, Darrell L. 1978. The role of ponds in land treatment of wastewater.
In; McKim, Harlan L. (Coordinator), State of knowledge in land treat-
ment of wastewater. Volume 2. Proceedings of an international sympo-
sium, 20-25 August 1978, sponsored by US Army Corps of Engineers.
Hanover NH, 423 p. (p. 191-198).
Lago, P.K. 1971. The floodplain forests of the upper Mississippi River,
Minnesota. Masters thesis (unpublished). Bemidji State University,
Bemidji MN, 71 p.
Latvala, Howard. 1977. Memo, Howard Latvala, Minnesota DNR, Area Fish-
eries Manager to Stan Daley, Regional Fisheries Manager, Division of
Fish and Wildlife, 28 February 1977, 2 p.
Lee, G. Fred, Walter Rast, and R. Anne Jones. 1978. Eutrophication of
water bodies: insights for an age-old problem. Environmental Science
and Technology 12(8):900-908.
6-3
-------
Lewis, S.J. 1977. Avian communities and habitats or natural and waste-
water irrigated vegetation. Master's thesis, Pennsylvania State
University, University Park PA.
Linden, D.R., W.E. Larson, and R.E. Larson. 1978. Agricultural practices
associated with land treatment of domestic wastewater. In; McKim,
Harlan L. (Coordinator), State of knowledge in land treatment of
wastewater. Volume 1. Proceedings of an international symposium,
20-25 August 1978, sponsored by US Army Corps of Engineers. Hanover
NH, p. 313-322.
Mathisen, John. 1977. Annual bald eagle-osprey status report. Chippewa
National Forest, Minnesota.
Minnesota Department of Conservation. 1952. Waterfowl and muskrat habitat
survey: Grass Lake, Beltrami County MN. Division of Game and Fish,
Bureau of Wildlife Development.
Minnesota Department of Economic Development. 1979. Bemidji MN community
profile. Industrial Development Division, St. Paul MN, 4 p.
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 1977. Report on compliance monitoring
survey at the Beraidji municipal wastewater treatment facility. Bemidji
MN, 15 p.
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 1978a. Report on compliance monitor-
ing survey at the Bemidji municipal wastewater treatment facility.
Bemidji MN, 15 p.
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 1978b. Minnesota code of agency
rules. Office of the State Register, Department of Administration.
St. Paul MN, variously paged.
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 1980. Water quality data collected by
Dr. Pat Trihey, Bemidji (MN) State University for MPCA, Division of
Water Quality, Surface and Groundwaters Section (unpublished).
Minnesota State Planning Agency. 1978. State-local fiscal study: report
on debt. Office of Local and Urban Affairs, St. Paul MN, 101 p.
Moak, L.L. and A.M. Hillhouse. 1975. Concepts and practices in local
government finance. Municipal Finance Officers Association of the US
and Canada, Chicago IL, 454 p.
Morrey, G.B. 1974. Minnesota geological survey map. M-24.
Moyle, John B. 1980. The uncommon ones. Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources, Bureau of Information and Education. St. Paul MN, 20 p.
Nutter, Wade L., Richard C. Schultz, and Graham H. Brister. 1978. Land
treatment of municipal wastewater or steep forest slopes in the humid
southeastern United States. In; McKim, Harlan L. (Coordinator),
State of knowledge in land treatment of wastewater. Volume 1. Pro-
ceedings of an international symposium, 20-25 August 1978, sponsored
by US Army Corps of Engineers. Hanover NH, p. 265-274.
6-4
-------
Richenderfer, James L. and William E. Sopper. 1979. Effects of spray
irrigation of treated municipal sewage effluent on the accumulation
and decomposition of the forest floor, jn; Sopper, William L. and
Sonja N. Kerr (Editors), Utilization of municipal sewage effluent and
sludge on forest and disturbed land. The Pennsylvania State Univers-
ity Press, University Park PA, p. 163-177.
Rieke Carroll Muller Associates, Inc., 1979a. Supplemental information
for the Bemidji, Minnesota Facilities Plan. Task 1: Development of
design flows working paper. Prepared for the City of Bemidji, MN.
Hopkins MN, variously paged.
Rieke Carroll Muller Associates, Inc., 1979b. Supplemental information
for the Bemidji, Minnesota facilities plan. Task 2: Evaluation of
alternative phosphorus removal methods, working paper. Prepared for
the City of Bemidji MN. Hopkins MN, variously paged.
Rieke Carroll Muller Associates, Inc., 1979c. Supplemental information
for the Bemidji, Minnesota facilities plan. Task 3: Evaluation of
sanitary sewer system and Task 4: Determination of a Lake Irving
treatment plant site. Prepared for the City of Bemidji MN. Hopkins
MN, variously paged.
Rieke Carroll Muller Associates, Inc., 1980. Supplemental information for
the Bemidji, Minnesota facilities plan. Task 5: Preliminary develop-
ment and cost estimates of selected wastewater management alterna-
tives. Prepared for the City of Bemidji MN. Hopkins MN, variously
paged.
Sidle, R.C., J.E. Hook, and L.T. Kardos. 1976. Heavy metals application
and plant uptake in a land disposal system for wastewater. Journal of
Environmental Quality. 5(1): 97-102.
Sidle, R.C. and W.E. Sopper. 1976. Cadmium distribution in forest eco-
systems irrigated with treated municipal wastewater and sludge.
Journal of Environmental Quality. 5(4): 419-422.
Snider, J.R. and G.W. Wood. 1975. The effects of wastewater irrigation on
the activities and movements of songbirds. In; Wood, G.W. et al.
(Editors), Faunal response to spray irrigation of chlorinated sewage
effluents. Institute for Research on Land and Water Resources Re-
search Publication 87, The Pennsylvania State University, pp. 20-49.
Sopper, William E. and Sonja N. Kerr. 1979a. Renovation of municipal
wastewater in eastern forest ecosystems. In; Sopper, William L. and
Sonja N. Kerr (Editors), Utilization of municipal sewage effluent and
sludge on forest and disturbed land. The Pennsylvania State Univers-
ity Press, University Park PA, 537 p. (p. 61-76).
Sopper, William E. and Sonja N. Kerr (Editors), 1979b. Utilization of
municipal sewage effluent on forest and disturbed land. The Pennsyl-
vania State University Press, University Park PA, 537 p.
6-5
-------
Sorber, Charles A. and Bernard P. Sagik. 1979. Wastewater aerosol stirs
controversy. Water & Sewage Works. February: 56-57.
Stewart & Walker, Inc. 1973. Wastewater treatment processes: a trilogy
of preliminary studies. Prepared for the City of Bemidji MN, vari-
ously paged.
Stewart & Walker, Inc.; Ellerbe, Inc.; and E.A. Hickok, Inc. 1976. Facil-
ities plan supplement: on-land wastewater management study. Prepared
for the City of Bemidji MN, variously paged.
Urie, Dean H. 1979. Nutrient recycling under forests treated with sewage
effluents and sludge in Michigan. In; Sopper, William E. and Sonja
N. Kerr (Editors), Utilization of municipal sewage effluent and
sludge on forest and disturbed land. The Pennsylvania State Univers-
ity Press, University Park PA, 537 p. (p. 7-17).
Urie, Dean H., John H. Cooley, and Alfred Ray Harris. 1978. Irrigation of
forest plantations with sewage lagoon effluents. In; McKim, Harlan
L. (Coordinator), State of knowledge in land treatment of wastewater.
Volume 2. Proceedings of an international symposium, 20-25 August
1978, sponsored by US Army Corps of Engineers. Hanover NH, 423 p. (p.
307-213).
US Bureau of the Census. 1950. General population characteristics -
Minnesota. Department of Commerce, Washington DC.
US Bureau of the Census. 1960. General population characteristics -
Minnesota. Department of Commerce, Washington DC.
US Bureau of the Census. 1970. General population characteristics -
Minnesota. Department of Commerce, Washington DC.
US Bureau of the Census. 1979. Population estimates and projections:
1976 population estimates and revised 1974 per capita income estimates
for counties, incorporated places, and selected minor civil divisions
in Minnesota. Department of Commerce, Washington DC.
US Department of Housing and Urban Development. 1979. 1969 and estimated
1979 decile distributions of family income by SMSA and non-metropoli-
tan counties. Office of Economic Affairs, Economic and Market Analy-
sis Division. Minneapolis-St. Paul MN.
US Department of the Interior. 1976. The upper Mississippi: a wild and
scenic river study (draft). Bureau of Outdoor Recreation. Ann Arbor
MI, 250 p.
US Department of the Interior. 1970. Groundwater and geology, Appendix E.
In Upper Mississippi River Basin Commission Study, Volume III. Pre-
pared for UMRCBS Coordinating Committee, St. Paul Minnesota.
US Department of the Interior. 1978. Revised wolf controlf measures
proposed by service. Endangered Species Technical Bulletin 3(8):1-3.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington DC.
6-6
-------
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1974a. National eutrophication sur-
vey, report on Lake Bemidji, Beltrami County, Minnesota, working paper
#84. Prepared by Pacific Northwest Environmental Research Laboratory.
Corvallis OR, 13 p.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1974b. national eutrophication sur-
vey, report on Wolf Lake, Beltrami and Hubbard Counties, Minnesota,
working paper #136. Prepared by Pacific Northwest Environmental
Research Laboratory. Corvallis OR, 13 p.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1974c. National eutrophication Sur-
vey, report on Lake Andrusia, Beltrami County, Minnesota, working
paper #81. Prepared by Pacific Northwest Environmental Research
Laboratory. Corvallis OR, 14 p.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1974d. National eutrophication sur-
vey, report on Cass Lake, Beltrami and Cass Counties, Minnesota, work-
ing paper #92. Prepared by Pacific Northwest Environmental Research
Laboratory. Corvallis OR, 14 p.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1976. Quality criteria for water.
Office of Water and Hazardous Materials. Washington DC. 255 p.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1978. Proceedings from national
conferences on shopping for sewage treatment: How to get the best
bargain for your community or home (draft), April 23-30, and June 4-6.
Office of Water Program Operations, Washington DC, 119 p. (p. 53).
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1979. Grant funding of projects
requiring treatment more stringent than secondary. Construction
grants program requirements memorandum PRM#79-7. From Thomas C.
Jorling, Assistant Administrator for Water and Waste Management, to
Water Division Directors, Regions I-X, 9 May 1979. Washington DC.
US Geological Survey. 1968. Water resources for Minnesota water year
1967. St. Paul, MN.
US Geological Survey. 1975. Water resources for Minnesota water year
1974. St. Paul, MN.
US Geological Survey. 1979. Water resources data for Minnesota. Vol. 2,
Upper Mississippi and Missouri River Basins. USGS water-data report
MN-78-2, water year 1978. St. Paul, MN.
US Soil Conservation Service, n.d. Beltrami County MN general soils map.
US Department of Agriculture.
WAPORA, Inc. 1977a. Existing environmental conditions in the Bemidji
project area - Beltrami County, Minnesota (preliminary draft). Pre-
pared for USEPA Region V. Chicago IL, 110 p.
WAPORA, Inc. 1977b. Alternatives: development and screening for the City
of Bemidji wastswater treatment facilities, Beltrami County, Minnesota
(revised draft). Prepared for USEPA Region V. Chicago IL, 50 p.
6-7
-------
WAPORA, Inc. 1977c. Impacts of component options and system alternatives
for the City of Bemidji wastewater treatment facilities, Beltrami
County MN (preliminary draft). Prepared for USEPA Region V. Chicago
IL, 82 p.
WAPORA, Inc. 1977d. Proposed actions and their impacts (preliminary
draft). Prepared for USEPA Region V. Chicago IL, 32 p.
WAPORA, Inc. 1978a. Proposal to complete the environmental statement on
the proposed wastewater treatment facilities at Bemidji, Minnesota.
Prepared for USEPA Region V. Chicago IL, 16 p.
WAPORA, Inc. 1978b. Sites exhibiting potential suitability for land treat-
ment of wastewater near the City of Benidji, Minnesota (Task 1.0
Report). Prepared for USEPA Region V. Chicago IL, 14 p.
WAPORA Inc. 1978c. Report on preliminary field investigations at potential
land treatment sites near the City of Bemidji, Minnesota (Task 2.0
Report). Prepared for USEPA Region V. Chicago IL, 44 p.
WAPORA, Inc. 1979a. Revised plan of study to complete the environmental
statement on the proposed wastewater treatment facilities at Bemidji,
Minnesota. Prepared for USEPA Region V. Chicago IL, 18 p.
WAPORA, Inc. 1979b. Preliminary assessment of the suitability of land
treatment of wastewater at a proposed site in Eckles Township, Bel-
trami County, Minnesota. Prepared for USEPA Region V. Chicago IL, 36
P.
WAPORA 1980. Preliminary draft environmental impact statement on proposed
wastewater treatment facilities at Bemidji, Minnesota. Prepared for
USEPA Region V. Chicago IL, variously paged.
Wood G.W. and D.W. Simpson. 1973. The effects of spray irrigation of
treated sewage effluent on wildlife. Transactions of the Northeast
Fish and Wildlife Conference 29: 84-90.
Wood, G.D., D.W. Simpson, and R.L. Dressier. 1973. Effects of spray
irrigation of forests with chlorinated sewage effluent on deer and
rabbits. In; Sopper, W.E. and L.T. Kardos (Editors), Recycling
treated municipal wastewater and sludge through forest and cropland.
The Pennsylvania State University Press, University Park PA, p.
311-323.
6-8
-------
7.0. COORDINATION, LIST OF PREPARERS, AND LIST OF THOSE SENT DRAFT EIS
7.1. Coordination
This Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) has been prepared as a
cooperative Federal government/State of Minnesota project. The USEPA and
MPCA coordinated closely in the development of this document. It is in-
tended to meet both Federal (40 CFR 1500) and State (6 MCAR Section 3)
requirements for the preparation of an EIS.
7.2. List of Preparers
The Draft Environmental Statement (DBS) was prepared by the Chicago
Regional Office of WAPORA, Inc., under contract to USEPA Region V. USEPA
approved the DES and hereby publishes it as a Draft EIS. The USEPA Project
Officers and the WAPORA staff involved in the preparation of the DES/DEIS
during the past three years include:
Name
USEPA
Charles Quinlan
Layne Lange
WAPORA. Inc.
E. Clark Boli
Daniel L. Sweeney
Kathleen M. Brennan
Richard C. McKean
Anita C. Locke
William C. McClain
James Wheeler
Jan L. Saper
Greg Lindsey
Gregg S. Larson
J.P. Singh
John Rist
Mirza Meghji
Gerald D. Lenssen
James D. Mikolaitis
Dennis Sebian
Mark J. Brandl
Calvin Hoskins
Highest Degree
M.A.
M.S.
M.F.
M.S.
M.S.
B.S.
B.S.
B.S.
M.A.
M.A.
B.A.
M.A.
M.S.
M.S.
Ph.D.
B.S.
M.S.
M.S.
B.A.
B.S.
Project Assignment
Project Officer
Project Officer (former)
Project Administrator and
Editor
Project Manager, Environmental
Engineer, and Principal Author
Biologist
Biologist
Botanist
Botanist
Aquatic Biologist
Public Finance and Editor
Public Finance and Land Use
Demographics
Sr. Environmental Engineer
Environmental Engineer
Sr. Water Quality Scientist
Agricultural Engineer
Environmental Engineer
Environmental Engineer
Chemical Technician
Chemist
7-1
-------
Name Highest Degree Project Assignment
Steven Wolf B.S. Acoustical Analyst
Robert M. Cutler M.S. Air Analyst
Gerard M. Kelly M.S. Health Scientist
Gerald 0. Peters M.S. Environmental Scientist
Kimberly Smith M.E.M. Environmental Scientist
Valerie Krejcie M.A. Graphics Specialist
Peter Woods B.L.A. Graphics Specialist
William L. Bale, Jr. — Graphics Specialist
Kent A. Peterson M.S. Hydrogeologist
Elizabeth Righter M.S. Cultural Resources Specialist
David L. Marshall M.A. Economist
David Dike M.S. Geologist
Alfred Hirsch Ph.D. Geologist
Dan Glanz Ph.D. Water Resources Specialist
Individuals associated with the MPCA that have been involved with this
project and with the preparation of the EIS include:
Name Position
Douglas A. Hall EIS Coordinator
Gordon Meyer Acting Chief, Groundwater Section
John Hensel Senior Engineer
Willis Mattison Regional Director
John Hoick Soil Scientist
7.3. List of Those Sent Copy of the Draft EIS
Federal
Senator Rudolph E. Boschwitz
Senator David Durenberger
Representative Arlan Stangeland
Council on Environmental Quality
Department of Agriculture
Department of Commerce
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Department of the Interior
US Fish & Wildlife Service
Geological Survey
Bureau of Indian Affairs
Heritage Conservation & Recreation Service
National Park Service
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
Department of Labor
Department of Transportation
US Army Corps of Engineers
US Soil Conservation Service
USEPA Regional Offices
7-2
-------
State
Senator Gerald Willet
Representative John Ainley
Office of the Governor
Office of the Lieutenant Governor
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
Minnesota Water Resources Board
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
Minnesota Department of Health
Minnesota State Planning Agency
Minnesota Environmental Quality Board
Minnesota Department of Transportation
Minnesota Energy Agency
Minnesota Department of Agriculture
Local
Mayor, City of Bemidji
City Council, City of Bemidji
Bemidji State University
Bemidji Area Chamber of Commerce
Chairman, Beltrami County Board of Commissioners
Township Clerks for Bemidji, Grant Valley, Eckles, Liberty, Northern, and
Frohn Townships
Minnesota Chippewa Tribe
Leech Lake Business Committee
City of Cass Lake
Citizens and Groups
This list is available upon request from USEPA.
7-3
-------
8.0. GLOSSARY OF TECHNICAL TERMS
Activated sludge process. A method of secondary wastewater treatment in
which a suspended microbiological culture is maintained inside an
aerated treatment basin. The niicrobial organisms oxidize the complex
organic matter in the wastewater to carbon dioxide, water, and energy.
Advanced secondary treatment. Wastewater treatment more stringent than
secondary treatment but not to advanced waste treatment levels.
Aeration. To circulate oxygen through a substance, as in wastewater treat-
ment, where it aids in purification.
Aerobic. Refers to life or processes that occur only in the presence of
oxygen.
Aerosol. A suspension of liquid or solid particles in a gas.
Algae. Simple rootless plants that grow in bodies of water in relative
proportion to the amounts of nutrients available. Algal blooms, or
sudden growth spurts, can affect water quality adversely.
Algal bloom. A proliferation of algae on the surface of lakes, streams, or
ponds. Algal blooms are stimulated by nutrient enrichment.
Ambient air. Any unconfined portion of the atmosphere: open air.
Ammonia-nitrogen. Nitrogen in the form of ammonia (NH ) that is produced
in nature when nitrogen-containing organic material is biologically
decomposed.
Anaerobic. Refers to life or processes that occur in the absence of
oxygen.
Aquifer. A geologic stratum or unit that contains water and will allow it
to pass through. The water may reside in and travel through innumer-
able spaces between rock grains in a sand or gravel aquifer, small or
cavernous openings formed by solution in a limestone aquifer, or
fissures, cracks, and rubble in harder rocks such as shale.
Bar screen. In wastewater treatment, a screen that physically removes
large floating and suspended solids.
Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD). A bioassay-type procedure in which the
weight of oxygen utilized by microorganisms to oxidize and assimilate
the organic matter present per liter of water is determined. It is
common to note the number of days during which a test was conducted as
a subscript to the abbreviated name. For example, BOD indicates that
the results are based on a five-day long (120-hour) test. The BOD
value is a relative measure of the amount (load) of living and dead
oxidizable organic matter in water. A high demand may deplete the
supply of oxygen in the water, temporarily or for a prolonged time, to
the degree that many or all kinds of aquatic organisms are killed.
Determinations of BOD are useful in the evaluation of the impact of
wastewater on receiving waters.
8-1
-------
Bio-disc. See rotating biological contactor.
Bio-surf. See rotating biological contactor.
Cation. A positively charged atom or group of atoms, or a radical which
moves to the negative pole (cathode) during electrolysis.
Cation exchange. A chemical reaction in which hydrated cations of a solid
are exchanged, equivalent for equivalent, for cations of like charge
in solution.
Chlorination. The application of chlorine to drinking water, sewage or
industrial waste for disinfection or oxidation of undesirable com-
pounds.
Chlorophyll _a. A magnesium chelate of dihyrodoporphyrin that is esterified
with phytol and has a cyclopentanone ring; occurs in all higher plants
and algae.
Clarifier. A settling tank where solids are mechanically removed from
waste water.
Coliform bacteria. Members of a large group of bacteria that flourish in
the feces and/or intestines of warm-blooded animals, including man.
Fecal coliform bacteria, particularly Escherichia coli (E. coli),
enter water mostly in fecal matter, such as sewage or feedlot runnoff.
Coliforms apparently do not cause serious human diseases, but these
organisms are abundant in polluted waters and they are fairly easy to
detect. The abundance of coliforms in water, therefore, is used as an
index to the probability of the occurrence of such disease-producing
organisms (pathogens) as Salmonella, Shigella, and enteric viruses.
The pathogens are relatively difficult to detect.
Comminutor. A machine that breaks up wastewater solids.
Cultural resources. Fragile and nonrenewable sites, districts, buildings,
structures, or objects representative of our heritage. Cultural
resources are divided into three categories: historical, architec-
tural, or archaeological. Cultural resources of especial significance
may be eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic
Places.
Decibel (dB). A unit of measurement used to express the relative intensity
of sound. For environmental assessment, it is common to use a
frequency-rated scale (A scale) on which the units (dBA) are corre-
lated with responses of the human ear. On the A scale, 0 dBA repre-
sents the average least perceptible sound (rustling leaves, gentle
breathing), and 140 dBA represents the intensity at which the eardrum
may rupture (jet engine at open throttle). Intermediate values gener-
ally are: 20 dBA, faint (whisper at 5 feet, classroom, private of-
fice); 60 dBA, loud (average restaurant or living room, playground);
80 dBA, very loud (impossible to use a telephone, noise made by food
blender or portable standing machine; hearing impairment may result
from prolonged exposure); 100 dBA, deafening noise (thunder, car horn
at 3 feet, loud motorcycle, loud power lawn mower).
8-2
-------
Desication. The drying out and death of plants and insects caused by
chemicals.
Detention time. Average time required to flow through a basin. Also
called retention time.
Digestion. In wastewater treatment a closed tank, sometimes heated to 95°F
where sludge is subjected to intensified bacterial action.
Disinfection. Effective killing by chemical or physical processes of all
organisms capable of causing infectious disease. Chlorination is the
disinfection method commonly employed in sewage treatment processes.
Dissolved oxygen (DO). Oxygen gas (0 ) in water. It is utilized in respi-
ration by fish and other aquatic organisms, and those organisms may be
injured or killed when the concentration is low. Because much oxygen
diffuses into water from the air, the concentration of DO is greater,
other conditions being equal, at sea level than at high elevations,
during periods of high atmospheric pressure than during periods of low
pressure, and when the water is turbulent (during rainfall, in rapids,
and waterfalls) rather than when it is placid. Because cool water can
absorb more oxygen than warm water, the concentration tends to be
greater at low temperatures than at high temperatures. Dissolved
oxygen is depleted by the oxidation of organic matter and of various
inorganic chemicals. Should depletion be extreme, the water may become
anaerobic and could stagnate and stink.
Effluent. Wastewater or other liquid, partially or completely treated, or
in its natural state, flowing out of a reservoir, basin, treatment
plant, or industrial treatment plant, or part thereof.
Endangered species. Any species of animal or plant that is in known danger
of extinction throughout all or a significant part of its range.
Eutrophication. The process of enrichment of a water body with nutrients.
Fauna. The total animal life of a particular geographic area or habitat.
Facultative lagoon. A lagoon in which anaerobic microorganisms can grow
under aerobic conditions.
Fecal coliform bacteria. A group of organisms found in the intestinal
tracts of people and animals. Their presence in water indicates
pollution and possible dangerous bacterial contamination.
Flow equalization. Process whereby peak flows are retained/stored and are
returned to the treatment system during periods of lower flow.
Flowmeter. A guage that indicates the amount of flow of wastewater moving
through a treatment plant.
Flora. The total plant life of a particular geographic area or habitat.
Force main. A sewer designed to convey wastewater under pressure.
8-3
-------
Gravity sewer. A sewer in which wastewater flows naturally down-gradient
by the force of gravity.
Groundwater. Subsurface fresh water.
Infiltration. The water entering a sewer system and service connections
from the ground through such means as, but not limited to, defective
pipes, pipe joints, improper connections, or manhole walls. Infiltra-
tion does not include, and is distinguished from, inflow.
Inflow. The water discharged into a wastewater collection system and
service connections from such sources as, but not limited to, roof
leaders, cellars, yard and area drains, foundation drains, cooling
water discharges, drains from springs and swampy areas, manhole
covers, cross-connections from storm sewers and combined sewers, catch
basins, storm waters, surface runoff, street wash waters or drainage.
Inflow does not include, and is distinguished from, infiltration.
Interceptor sewer. A sewer designed and installed to collect sewage from a
series of trunk sewers and to convey it to a sewage treatment plant.
Lagoon. A shallow pond where sunlight, bacterial action, and oxygen work
to purify wastewater.
\and treatment. Method of wastewater treatment whereby wastewater is
sprayed, spread, or otherwise applied to land. The soil microorgan-
isms, chemical compounds, and physical properties serve to "treat" the
wastewater.
Leachate. Liquid that filters through a mass, such as soil, and conveys
dissolved substances.
Leaching. Process by which nutrient chemicals or contamiants are dissolved
and carried away by water, or are moved into a lower layer of soil.
Lift station. A component of a sewer system, consisting of a receiving
chamber, pumping equipment, and associated drive and control devices,
that collects wastewater from a low-lying district at some convenient
point, from where it is pumped to another portion of the system that
could not be reached by gravity flow.
Loam. Soil mixture of sand, silt, clay, and humus.
Macrophytes. A macroscopic plant, especially one in an aquatic habitat.
Mesotrophic lakes. Those in an intermediate condition between oligotrophic
and eutrophic.
Milligram per liter (mg/1). A concentration of 1/1000 gram of a substance
in 1 liter of water. Because 1 liter of pure water weighs 1,000
grams, the concentration also can be stated as 1 ppm (part per mil-
lion, by weight). Used to measure and report the concentrations of
most substances that commonly occur in natural and polluted waters.
8-4
-------
Moraine. A mound, ridge, or other distinctive accumulation of sediment
deposited by a glacier.
National Register of Historic Places. Official listing of the cultural
resources of the Nation that are worthy of preservation. Listing on
the National Register makes property owners eligible to be considered
for Federal grants-in-aid for historic preservation through state
programs. Listing also provides protection through comment by the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation on the effect of Federally
financed, assisted, or licensed undertakings on historic properties.
Nitrate-nitrogen. Nitrogen in the form of nitrate (NO ) . It is the most
oxidized phase in the nitrogen cycle in nature and occurs in high
concentrations in the final stages of biological oxidation. It can
serve as a nutrient for the growth of algae and other aquatic plants,
and is highly soluble in water.
Nitrite-nitrogen. Nitrogen in the form of nitrite (NO ) . It is an in-
termediate stage in the nitrogen cycle in nature. Nitrite normally is
found in low concentrations and represents a transient stage in the
biological oxidation of organic materials.
Nonpoint source. Any area, in contrast to a pipe or other structure, from
which pollutants flow into a body of water. Common pollutants from
nonpoint sources are sediments from construction sites and fertilizers.
and sediments from agricultural soils.
Nutrients. Elements or compounds essential as raw materials for the growth
and development of an organism; e.g., carbon, oxygen, nitrogen, and
phosphorus.
Oligotrophic lakes. Deep clear lakes with low nutrient supplies. They
contain little organic matter and have a high dissolved oxygen level.
Outwash. Sand and gravel transported away from a glacier by streams of
meltwater and either deposited as a floodplain along a preexisting
valley bottom or broadcast over a preexisting plain in a form similar
to an alluvial fan.
Oxidation. Oxygen combining with other elements.
Oxidation lagoon (pond). A holding area where organic wastes are broken
down by aerobic bacteria.
Percolation. The downward movement of water through pore spaces or larger
voids in soil or rock.
pH. A measure of the acidity or alkalinity of a material, liquid or solid.
pH is represented on a scale of 0 to 14 with 7 being a neutral state;
0, most acid; and 14, most alkaline.
8-5
-------
Phosphorus. An essential food element that can contribute to the eutrophi-
cation of water bodies.
Point source. In regard to water, any pipe, ditch, channel, conduit,
tunnel, well, discrete operation, vessel or other floating craft, or
other confined and discrete conveyance from which a substance con-
sidered to be a pollutant is, or may be, discharged into a body of
water.
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). A group of organic compounds used es-
pecially in the manufacture of plastics. In the environment, PCBs
exhibit many of the same characteristics as DDT and may, therefore, be
confused with that pesticide. PCBs are highly toxic to aquatic organ-
isms, they persist in the environment for long periods of time, and
they are biologically magnified.
Primary treatment. The first stage in wastewater treatment, in which
approximately 65% of settleable solids are removed by sedimentation.
Pumping station. A facility within a sewer system that pumps sewage/
effluent against the force of gravity.
Pyrolysis. Chemical decomposition by extreme heat.
Rotating biological contactor.
Runoff. Water from rain, snow melt, or irrigation that flows over the
ground surface and returns to streams. It can collect pollutants from
air or land and carry them to the receiving waters.
Sanitary sewer. Underground pipes that carry only domestic or commercial
wastewater, not stormwater.
Screening. Use of racks of screens to remove coarse floating and suspended
solids from sewage.
Secchi disc. An opaque white disk used to measure the transparency or
clarity of water by lowering the disk into the water horizontally and
noting the greatest depth at which it can be visually detected.
Secondary treatment. The second stage in the treatment of wastewater in
which bacteria are utilized to decompose the organic matter in sewage.
This step usually is accomplished by introducing the sewage into a
trickling filter, an activated sludge process, rotating biological
contactor, or other process. Effective secondary treatment processes
remove virtually all floating solids and settleable solids, as well as
90% of the BOD and suspended solids. USEPA regulations define second-
ary treatment as 30 mg/1 BOD, 30 mg/1 suspended solids, or 85% removal
of these substances.
Seepage. Water that flows through the soil.
Settling tank. A holding area for wastewater, where heavier particles sink
to the bottom and can be siphoned off.
8-6
-------
Sludge. The accumulated solids that have been separated from liquids
such as wastewater.
Storm sewer. A system that collects and carries rain and snow runoff to a
point where it can soak back into the groundwater or flow into surface
waters.
Surface water. All bodies of water on the surface of the Earth.
Suspended solids (SS). Small solid particles that contribute to turbidity.
The examination of suspended solids and the BOD test constitute the
two main determinations for water quality that are performed at waste-
water treatment facilities.
Tertiary treatment. Advanced treatment of wastewater that goes beyond the
secondary or biological stage. It removes nutrients such as phos-
phorus and nitrogen and most suspended solids.
Threatened species. Any species of animal or plant that is likely to
become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant part of its range.
Till. Unsorted and unstratified drift, consisting of a heterogeneous
mixture of clay, sand, gravel, and boulders, that is deposited by and
underneath a glacier.
Trickling filter process. A method of secondary wastewater treatment in
which the biological growth is attached to a fixed medium, over which
wastewater is sprayed. The filter organisms biochemically oxidize the
complex organic matter in the wastewater to carbon dioxide, water, and
energy.
Wastewater. Water carrying dissolved or suspended solids from homes,
farms, businesses, and industries.
Water quality. The relative condition of a body of water, as judged by a
comparison between contemporary values and certain more or less objec-
tive standard values for biological, chemical, and/or physical para-
meters. The standard values usually are based on a specific series of
intended uses, and may vary as the intended uses vary.
Water table. The upper level of groundwater that is not confined by an
upper impermeable layer and is under atmospheric pressure. The upper
surface of the substrate that is wholly saturated with groundwater.
Wetlands. Swamps or marshes.
8-7
-------
APPENDIX A,
BARTON-ASCHMAN ASSOCIATES, INC,
WORKING PAPER #5
URBAN SYSTEMS SUMMARY:
EXISTING CONDITIONS, PRINCIPLES,
AND PRELIMINARY POLICIES
-------
MEMORANDUM TO: CITY OF BEMIDJI
FROM: BARTON-ASCHMAN ASSOCIATES, INC.
DATE: DECEMBER 21, 1978
SUBJECT: #5: URBAN SYSTEMS SUMMARY: EXISTING
CONDITIONS, PRINCIPLES, AND PRELIMINARY
POLICIES
BACKGROUND
The Bemidji Growth Management planning process is designed to be interactive
with representatives of various interests, the Planning Commission, City staff, City
Council and residents. The Growth Management Plan is designed to be
comprehensive and flexible. To achieve these objectives workshops have been
integrated into the planning process. Results of analysis and discussion will be
compiled in various working papers. This memorandum is one of a series of these
working papers.
INTRODUCTION
The needs for potable water, disposal of sewage, places to recreate, transportation,
and emergency services are common to all residents. In urban communities such as
Bemidji, where people live close enough to one another to make common efforts
toward meeting these needs feasible, urban systems have been developed. This
memo discusses the existing conditions, principles for expansion and constraints to
expansion of the major urban systems serving Bemidji. It also sets forth
recommended urban system policies.
The discussion of urban systems existing conditions serves as an atlas of Bemidji's
current public investments. This investment is a major factor influencing the
future growth opportunities in the Bemidji area. Existing urban systems suggest
where future growth could or could not be most easily and economically
accommodated.
The urban systems planning principles discussed in this memo are based on actual
experience in the field and provide guidelines for planning physical development
and expansion to serve future growth. The principles should not be viewed as
restrictive in nature, but rather are intended to reflect a desirable and efficient
development structure for Bemidji. The principles establish the framework for
A-l
-------
public decision-making and establish the basis for evaluating the impacts of
development and public investment decicions. Modification or adaption should
occur in response to specific fact situations and recognition of the impact of such
decisions. Application of the principles results in a development strategy.
Bemidji's existing urban systems, their relationship to future alternative
development patterns and the opportunities for their expansion were analyzed
within the context of sound urban system planning principles. Deficiences for
existing urban systems were also identified.
Analysis of urban systems from the context of system principles serves as a
technical counterpart to the needs perceptions expressed by the community during
the first Growth Management Workshop which focused on community goals and
issues.
The ultimate goal of analyzing a community's urban systems is to develop policies
and plans to guide the community's decision-making. For each of the urban systems
discussed in this memo, policy statements are provided to guide decision-making to
meet future needs. Physical urban development plans which mesh with these
policies will also be outlined. However, since actual physical urban system plans
are directly related to future development plans, these plans will be included in a
later memo focusing on the Bemidji Area Development Framework Plan.
The following discussion highlights existing conditions and design principles, future
system expansion constraints, and existing system needs for each of the following
urban systems:
Public Utilities (water, sanitary sewer, storm sewer)
Transportation
Emergency services (Police, Fire)
Recreation
UTILITY SYSTEMS
Existing Water Supply System
The present water supply system is illustrated in Figure 5-1. The City's water
system consists of six wells just north of the central business area, a new well field
at the airport and three elevated tanks with a total capacity of 850,000 gallons.
Most of the City is served by the water system with the exceptions of part of the
north Lake Irving neighborhood, the south side of U.S. 2 where it enters the city
from the west, and the East Shore of Lake Bemidji. The recently constructed
airport well field has strengthened the water main system considerably and h~s
provided water for establishments on the north side of U.S. 2. The public water
system has not been extended outside the City limits of Bemidji with the exception
of one block on the north end of the City.
Existing Sanitary Sewer System
The sanitary sewer system in Bemidji is currently undergoing some revisions. The
MFC A has directed the City to change the effluent discharge point from the
A-2
-------
Figure 5-1
A-3
-------
Mississippi River on the east side of Lake Bemidji to the south shore of Lake
Bemidji until a new sewage treatment facility is built. The MPCA has also limited
new connections to the sewage system for major new development until the new
sewage treatment plant is constructed. The new sewage treatment plant is
expected to be completed by 1983. This position places the Bemidji area in a
dilema. Growth and development is continuing to occur. It is desirable to locate
new development in areas which can be served by public systems. The inability to
provide these services frustrates the area's ability to achieve its development
objectives.
The current sewage treatment facilities are located on the Isthmus between Lake
Bemidji and Lake Irving. Most of the City is served by the sewage system (see
Figure 5-2.) The exceptions are the North Lake Irving neighborhood and the east
side of Lake Bemidji.
Storm Sewer System
The excellent natural drainage which exists in Bemidji because of the high porosity
of soils and the abundance of storm water discharge points has allowed Bemidji to
handle it's storm water runoff with a limited public investment in storm sewers.
Storm sewer currently serves most of the City. As new street paving occurs in the
City, additional storm sewer construction is planned to handle the increased storm
water runoff generated by the increased impervious surface area created. A report
to address this problem was prepared in 1977. Areas currently without storm sewer
are the north Lake Irving neighborhood and portions of the Nymore neighborhood.
Utility System Principles
Utility system principles deal with how water, sanitary sewer and storm sewer
systems can be most effectively designed to serve a community. The following list
of utility system principles has been prepared to assist in evaluating alternative
future development scenarios and in identifying possible constraints to utility
system expansion and community needs.
1. Contiguous extensions of existing utility systems is more desirable then "leap
frog" extensions.
2. The length of utility runs should be minimized especially for major users.
3. Compact development patterns are more efficiently served than linear or
sprawling development patterns.
4. New development in areas where excess utility system capacity exists .
Minimizes in-place investments.
5. Sewer and water extensions should occur simultaneously.
6. Water distribution systems should be looped. A closed loop system of water
mains is much more efficient in distributing water than dead end branch
mains.
A-4
-------
Limits of
Sewer Service
A-5
-------
7. Development should be close to water source to minimize need for water
towers, pumping stations.
8. Water distribution systems are more efficient if compact - square or circular
as opposed to linear.
9. Use of gravity to move water and sewage avoids lift stations and pumping
stations.
10. Septic systems typically are comparable in cost to sewer hook-ups, however
septic systems have a limited life span of 10-15 years.
11. Utility system elements should be sized to take into account future
development patterns.
12. Planned and actual utility system extensions can influence development
patterns and the developability of vacant land.
13. The basic goals behind providing public utilities (water, sanitary sewer, storm
sewer) are:
a. provide safe, clean water to all residents, efficiently
b. assure the purity of the community's water supply for drinking, and
recreation through control of sewage disposal
c. minimize potential negative effects on the community and the natural
environment due to altering natural drainage characteristics, such as:
erosion, sedimentation and flooding
Utility System Analysis
The physical features (land use patterns and natural features) of the Bemidji area
are the context within which Bemidji's utilities systems exist. They present
constraints to the future expansion of the utilities systems. The Mississippi River,
the wetlands, Lakes Bemidji and Irving present major barriers to expansion of
utility systems. These natural features encircle the main body of urban
development and accompanying urban systems located on the west shore of Lake
Bemidji. They create inpenetrable or difficult to penetrate barriers which must be
circumvented if utility extensions are to occur. This circle of natural barriers has
made the isthmus between Lakes Irving and Bemidji a congested utility corridor,
since it is the only reasonable corridor for utility lines to the Nymore, eastern and
southern portions of Bemidji. Future expansion of utility service in these areas
may be difficult to serve if additional utility lines through the Isthmus are required.
These natural barriers also make it difficult to foster compact development
patterns and correspondingly compact, closed looped utility systems.
The desirability of relying on gravity to make utility systems function properly
causes natural topography to be an improtant factor in identifying utility systems
extension constraints.
Topography constraints can be overcome but frequently not without the expense of
pumping stations and lift stations and accompanying continuing operating costs.
A-6
-------
The generally level character of the Bemidji area presents little problem for future
development.
The soil conditions in the Bemidji area create limitations to both septic and
municipal sewage disposal systems. The sandy soils on the west side of Lake
Bemidji tend to be highly porous which along with a high water table make ground
water contamination a potential problem for on-site disposal systems. Clay soils on
the east side of the lake tend to exhibit limited porosity, making septic systems
malfunction. The unstable soils and high water table in the wetland areas make
construction of sewage systems difficult. This problem exists in many areas in and
around Bemidji which may permit initial on-site system installation but, as time
passes and additional development occurs, potentially expensive corrections will
have to be made.
Manmade features also present constraints on utility system expansion. Railroad
lines and major roadways such as the new U.S. 2 and U.S. 71 bypass require special
considerations when utility lines must pass under them. Ideally the timing of
construction of utilities in such instances would allow utilities to be in place prior
to street or rail line construction.
It is difficult to estimate the extent of excess capacity in the existing segments of
the sewage trunk system. Insufficient capacity in sewage mains would limit the
desirability of sewage system extensions into areas which would require major
system upgrading while other portions of the system possess excess capacity. The
greatest capacity restraint at present is the treatment plant. Steps are being taken
to resolve this problem although the facility may be sized to accommodate only
Bemidji development. The treatment plant should be designed to consider the
future urban service area needs with changes treated accordingly. Similar capacity
questions exist for the City's water system. The construction of the new well on
the airport grounds increases the City's overall water supply and particularly
enhances the City's ability to extend water service in the north and western
portions of the City. However, it is difficult to ascertain exact capacity within the
water main system to absorb new water demands placed on it by system extensions
in specific areas. Insufficient capacity in specific water mains may limit the
desirability of their extension if other water mains do have excess capacity.
Utility System Policies
The following list of recommended utility system policies are based on the above
utility system principles and analysis. They consist of recommendations for how
Bemidji should go about expanding and improving its utility systems to meet the
needs of its current residents and future development.
Policy 1: Generally, extensions of water service should occur contiguous to the
existing system. Since the cost is directly related to retrieving water
from the source, transmitting to reservoirs and feeding from reservoir
to users, extensions should be given priority which minimizes distance
or pumping and hence cost to deliver the service.
A-7
-------
Policy 2: Generally, major urban service users should be located close to
treatment facilities to avoid major long interceptors. New residential
construction is able to cope with not being connected to the public
water system. Therefore, extentions of new mains initially does not
play a major role in determining where new residential areas will occur.
However, as development increases in areas lacking public services,
well failures are common placing defacto demand for utilities as
remedies. Sewer extensions to relieve public water pollution problems
should be provided if the area is a potential urban service area. In such
cases, private solutions must be found. Steps must be taken in areas of
no future sewer systems to assure no sewer demand.
Policy 3: Utility extensions should occur where capacity in all or most systems
exist. Sewer and water extensions should occur in areas where the
existing system has excess capacity to handle additional service
demand. Capacity of other systems such as recreation facilities should
be considered when utilities are extended.
Policy 4: Sewer and water utility extensions should occur together. Frequently
when utility extensions are carried out to overcome ground water
pollution problems, extension of only water system is seen as the
solution. This approach should not be used for the obvious reason that it
does not truely correct the problem. Water systems should not be
extended without public sewer system extensions.
Policy 5: Future service areas should be defined. Areas which are suitable for
utility service extension should be identified as such. Other areas
should be declared inservicable and appropriate steps taken to insure a
development intensity which will not require public services in these
areas occurs.
Policy 6: Surface drainage should be used as much as possible. Maintenance of
existing ponds, creeks and drainages.
Policy 7: Utilities should be required of new subdivisions.
A-8
-------
pi
ill
?>!
y £ _,
§££5
|||1
|f IS
LU i i I
ro
I
60
•H
/ *1 •-•'
"T •- = «= .
A-9
-------
3 si
ill
in
-------
<
(E
I
ui
bO
•H
ft)
pa.
i§*
OS 1
=;8S
ps i
2 <; 5 j
«
-------
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM
The Bemidji street system is illustrated in Figure 5-3. The primary streets in the
City are U.S. Highway 2, Bemidji Avenue, Irving Avenue, U.S. Highway 71, 1st
Street, County Road 12-19, Lake Avenue, Roosevelt Street, 4th Street, and 15th
Street. The near future will see dramatic changes in travel patterns in Bemidji.
Completion of the limited access U.S. 2 and 71 bypass on the west side of the City
with interchanges at existing U.S. 2, 15th Street, 5th Street, and U.S. 71, will shift
much of the existing through-town traffic to the bypass route and will increase
traffic on the east-west City streets (5th and 15th Streets primarily).
Currently, the most heavily traveled streets are Bemidji Avenue with an Average
Daily Traffic (ADT) of 13,000 to 17,000 and U.S. 2 with ADT of 10,000 to 12,000.
The U.S. 2 bypass is expected to decrease the traffic and improve the safety of
these roads. Bemidji's other streets have much less traffic. The next most heavily
traveled street in Bemidji is Irvine Avenue, with 4,000 to 8,000 A.D.T.
The primary travel attractors in Bemidji are the Central Business District, Bemidji
State University, the Industrial Park and the commercial development along U.S. 2.
Many of the existing streets on the edges of Bemidji are unpaved roads. Figure 5-4
illustrates the surface characteristics of Bemidji's streets. The areas with
concentrations of unpaved streets are North Lake Irving Neighborhood, the western
half of the Nymore neighborhood, the industrial park and the Northwestern part of
the City.
Public transportation in Bemidji is subsidized through State and City funds. One
fixed schedule bus route is provided (See Figure 5-5). Total ridership during 1976
was 49,000 persons. Peak ridership occurred in winter months when ridership was
4,500 to 5,500 passengers. Summer ridership was much lower; 3,300 to 3,700
passengers.
Transportation System Principles
Several key principles help direct the management and development of a
community street system. These principles relate to the effective use of a
community's existing street system and serve for evaluation of alternative
development scenario's. Development and transportation systems are very
intricately inter-related. Some level of street access must exist or be easy to
create for any development to occur. As development occurs, it demands more and
more accessibility and capacity. The following is a list of transportation principles
which have the overriding goal of providing adequate mobility, safety and economy.
1. The transportation plan should describe a street system and necessary traffic
control devices which provide an appropriate level of accessibility to
residential, employment, shopping, and recreational locations in the City.
That is, it should provide safe convenient movement of people and vehicles
between existing and forecasted concentrations of people, employees, parks
and other recreational areas, schools, civic areas, and other community areas
serving the City.
A-12
-------
2. The facilities described in the transportation plan should be sensitive to
homogeneous land use and activity areas. A conscious effort should be made
to remove through traffic from identifiable "neighborhoods".
3. The facilities in the transportation plan should be selected and designed to
minimize air and noise pollution. Specific streets and traffic control devices
should be established which aid in the reduction of participate and gaseous
emissions from autos, trucks, and other vehicles and which seek to reduce
street related noise levels and their impact.
4. The plan should relieve areas of existing and projected vehicular congestion.
The plan should provide capacity to satisfy the demand for the movement of
people and goods at an acceptable level of service to the year 2000.
5. The street system and traffic control devices should be established such that
they increase safety and decrease existing potential vehicular, rail, and
pedestrian conflict areas.
6. The transportation plan should recognize and coordinate street and traffic
control systems with plans of adjacent municipalities and Beltrami County.
7. The plan should recognize limitations of funds for new street and highway
construction and improvements.
8. The plan should recognize the impact of new street widening and be sensitive
to the impact of such proposals on existing development and adjacent natural
features.
9. The plan should be sensitive to current transit problems and complement the
existing and planned systems.
10. Street spacing should reflect trip and land use density.
11. Links in the system must be connected to logical termini.
12. The roadway system should be compatible with the existing geographic and
physical setting.
13. Streets and highways should be designated by an appropriate functional
classification system. Development of a hierarchy of streets allows for
efficient use of resources by allowing concentration of expensive special
facilities such as signalization, and heavy duty street construction on a few
streets rather than several or all. A hierarchy of streets also reflects the
variety of transportation needs inherent in any community.
Table 1 summarizes a street system hierarchy or functional classification
system for Bemidji. It groups streets into 3 classes, minor arterial, collector,
and local streets.
14. Arterials should provide continuous movement.
A-13
-------
S
w
fe
CO
>H
CO
*z.
ft-4
O-
Sp
3g
fcS
H&
«1
1«
<^
2 ^
<2
so
- -- frH
ABLE 1
EMIDJI GROWTH
OADWAY FUNC'
E- ««
1
3
Collector
3
CM
4)
•c
<5
t,
S
i
>>
•4-1
bj
£
3 £
fli ^*\j
ISP
•S§
S 2
o-S
£2
•N
**
cr
- a
S+;
2 8
1
§J
1
urpose
haracteristics
cu O
^
|
3
>>
t~
4)
W
to
l»4
(0
3)
'8
4)
>
•«•*
«
&
i
5
1
^>
•4-»
•^4
S'
-s
.s-
{*
•*-»
•(->
1'
CJ
tf J
spacing
i
8
>>
•& „
P Sa
in .&
es CO
•8
o ..
n CQ
ed
3
*j
I
8
•8
I
•a
4)
i
I -
09 Go
4) O
S. 'S
•-- E
So 6
4) O o
•0-g »
e M •o
1 »s
111
SO J
2
4)
^J
- i
to
oo
3
•*->
i
>>— o
•SS^
JS J= bfi
o .SP.SP«
a asiuiz;
S
2 1
O
is
o
s
§
A-14
-------
15. Collectors should be designed to collect traffic from locals and deliver traffic
to nearest arterial.
16. Local streets should provide access to property and not continuous movement.
17. Roadway structure should be designed to reflect traffic levels and vehicle
weights.
18. New roadway construction should be kept to a minimum to minimize
maintenance as well as construction costs.
Transportation System Analysis
The transportation system network forms the basic framework around which
community activities and development function occurs. The location and design of
streets is not only important to efficiently and effectively provide for travel
movement but also to guide the location of activities, protect the assets of the
community, and aid in maintaining and enhancing the community environment.
Bemidji has a unique transportation system. The natural environment has created
several barriers to travel in the Bemidji area. The lakes, river, and wetlands have
created a handful of corridors through which travel can occur. The isthmus
between Lakes Irving and Bemidji; 5th Street and 16th Street through the wetlands
on the western edge of Bemidji are the sole access routes to the south and west of
the main body of Bemidji respectively. As development increases in these
directions, traffic will increase in these portals, ultimately resulting in congestion.
The U.S. 2 bypass will hasten the increase in traffic on 5th and 15th Streets while
lessening traffic through the isthmus. The importance of coordinating development
of the Bemidji Land Use Plan with the preparation of a transportation plan is
illustrated by these potential problems. The construction of the new U.S. 2 bypass
and the potential impacts of future growth presents both an opportunity and a need
to review and update the City's transportation plan. Adoption of an appropriate
transportation plan can be useful to Bemidji in several ways:
1.
Designating and implementing a street system can assist in maintaining the
vitality of the many activities which require good and efficient access.
2. A hierarchy of streets permits traffic to be managed to be compatible with
existing land use and community objectives.
3. In the absence of a street system and the presence of the grid streets
providing coverage to the entire city, traffic would tend to filter through all
streets creating negative impacts in many areas.
4. Street construction funds are limited and a street system permits effective
utilization of resources to meet community needs.
A major deficiency in Bemidji's street system is the lack of imperious surfacing on
many of its local streets. Unpaved streets present a hazard in relatively urban
areas because of the dust, potential erosion, lack of storm water runoff control,
maintenance, safety and passibility problems which can occur. Unpaved streets are
A-15
-------
adequate in rural low density, lightly traveled streets. As these conditions change,
their acceptability diminishes progressively.
The following general transportation policies are offered:
Policy 1; The city should establish and implement a functional street system.
Policy 2; Major activity concentrations such as residential concentrations,
businesses, recreation facilities, schools, employment locations, etc.
should be served and linked by the transportation system.
Policy 3; Most of the streets in Bemidji pass through residential areas. The
right-of-way available prohibits, even if desirable, major street
widenings. Therefore the city's development policy and street
system should be developed to avoid the necessity for major arterial
street widening.
Policy 4; The city should identify clearly its street system through such
measures as traffic control devices, parking policies, striping, street
tree plantings, lighting, and graphics.
Policy 5; The city needs to consider further emphasis of its street system to
protect its residential areas from unnecessary intrusions of traffic
through:
a. Placement of traffic control devices, such as stop signs, in
appropriate locations to discourage traffic infiltration.
b. Implementing a positive program of local street disconnections
through deployment of traffic divertors, cul-de-sacs, and other
physical improvements.
Policy 6; Streets within urban service areas should be paved and have curb and
gutter.
Policy 7: Emphasis should be placed on providing for the transportation needs
of the elderly and person's without private transportation in the
operation of the transit system.
A-16
-------
EMERGENCY SERVICES
Publicly provided emergency services include police and fire protection. Both
Bemidji's police and fire stations are located in the central business district (See
Figure 5-6).
Most of Bemidji's residents live within two miles of the fire station. However,
portions of the Nymore neighborhood and the development of the East side of Lake
Bemidji are outside this distance. Man made and natural features present the city
with some emergency access problems. The wetlands west of the city have limited
the number of roads providing access from the Central Business District to 5th and
15th Streets. Similarly, the Isthmus between Lakes Irving and Bemidji is the only
access from downtown to southern, eastern and Nymore portions of the community.
Rail lines present an intermittant hazard to emergency vehicle access. At present
the North Lake Irving neighborhood's only access could be blocked by rail traffic.
Emergency Service Planning Principles
The following principles describe the desired relationship between development and
emergency services facilities.
1. The location of emergency service facilities should be capable of serving all
residents effectively.
2. It is desireable for the community to occupy a compact area.
3. It is desirable to locate fire stations at the center of the area to be served
and or close to high value areas
Emergency Service Policies
Policy 1: All areas of the city should be accessible by at least one route which
is not encumbered by at grade rail crossings or other intermittent
barriers.
A-17
-------
CO
HI
sassszii
if sl$l3a'a
SiRSsil&a
iCOE-'a •
"#o
n Z ^
§w z
OS z
_ a 5
US
A-18
-------
RECREATION
Bemidji's existing recreational facilities are located on Figure 5-6 and summarized
on Table 2. Bemidji's recreation system consists of 15 parks occupying 145 acres of
land. Nearly half of these parks (7) are less than one acre in size and over half of
the city total recreational acreage (75 acres) is located in one facility.
Recreation Planning Principles
1. Develop a system of park and recreation areas and facilities appropriate to
the needs of the community.
2. Provide neighborhood park and recreation facilities within walking distance of
their service population.
3. Provide parks of a size suitable to their function.
4. Take advantage of natural features to create recreational and aesthetic
benefits where possible.
5. Create multi-purpose facilities which take advantage of the need to provide
stormwater retention areas or other land preservation by using these areas
for recreational purposes as well.
6. Combine school and recreational facilities wherever possible to avoid
duplication of facilities such as bathrooms and playgrounds.
Recreation System Analysis
Parks and Open Space play an important role in providing for a successful
residential environment. In a community such as Bemidji where tourism is a major
component of the community's economy, recreation facilities play an important
role in the general economic welfare of the community as well. In order to
evaluate the City's park system, it is appropriate to first understand the many
purposes that it serves. The following are some of the valuable functions served by
various elements of the park system:
Provide facilities for active recreation to benefit physical and mental
health.
Enhance neighborhood environment, improve liveability of the area
therefore improving property values.
Preserve unique cultural, geographical and natural areas.
Handle storm runoff and drainage retention.
Protect steep slopes, bluffs and ravines.
Buffer conflicting land uses.
Establish neighborhood image and character.
Tie various neighborhoods together through the coordinated citywide
park system.
Serve all economic groups within the park service area.
Support the economic development objectives of the community as they
relate to recreation.
A-19
-------
oo
c-
V— »
1
CO
3
J
*•*
o
<£
fa
<5
0
w
ti
u
w
CJ
Q
SS
<
2
<
OH
fa
0
>H
Pi
O
?*
(J
CO >
£2
DESCRIPTION
1
?— t
vJ
t-H
O
XISTING FA
w
w
£
w
c
w
Pi
0
w
*£
^3
is
*-i
si
2
Q
o"
OH
>— « p-^
§£
*"*** J— ^
O til
»^
i-3
so
co a
< co
S 5 w
OH O. <
SWINGS
SEESAWS
SANDBOX
te-;
«r<
w
o
.
T-H
^ rj
^ CO
LL NEIGHBORHOOD !
DENTS IN THE AREA
< CO
t— ' frj
P^*; *^*
co ci
j
a co
C-^ >~» ^»
iiii
<3 W ^ ^
ca co co co
rH "^ r-l
C
w
s .
si
Ss
CO §
OOn
S w
a —i
t*^ r™^
r"Z C~^
FLAGPOLE
T-H
^ CO ^
*^ O fZ?
u ^ 2
CO OH S
O
^
w
U
tf
a
s
j S
< <
Pi OH
•
CO
G
1 jy S
r3 ~^ O
S C §
co ^ <
:o CT .-3
Til BEACH IS ONE OF
D SV.'IATr.IING BEACliJ
% SERVES AS A BOAT
> PARKING AREA.
^ W P M
/•*> CO *• p^
co > C <
K^< ^H
^ CO <^
< OH tj
•S^ k «M ** ^^
^ W < S r*
E J £: co p* o ^
5 c < w o :_ o «
COrH-)rH^I(MCiCO
W
J CO
^ O
O ?J
CO CH
O
in
U
W
a
P-H
£/
o
CO
•
-J
O
*
a
ci
niliORIIOOD PARK A
A RESIDENTS USE.
ro ^
HH *irf
S <
-
CO tn
.
J^
*^!
••^
/-*\ ^**
11
'•^ ^~.
UIRED AS A MiilGHU
K IN CELEBRATION (
JNTENNIAL.
O"* ^ ,
^ ^ 4** V— • '
< fa 3
^ CO
'•-' C~-
'•^ ^
t-H »^ ,
^ So J ^3 :j
S fa OH
ci
^3^
0 W
CO r-
O ^ v>
y w ^3
=-> ^ <
b a OH
*
A-20
-------
co
c--
<"
^>
1
CO
w
"
3
t—4
0
fTj
>-3
-— 1
O
<
fa
o
a
en
><
w
Cd
^_4
J— 1
W
C
w
Pi
o
a
e="
s
pi
<
cu
— (
P
w
cu
O
>•
P
s
£-
O
X
ROVED
SH
g
Z
^
^
a
cu
O
«
>•
P-)
C
*^*
t3
in
t-
S >4
§S
r™* r-i
^fc
x: C
12
e-
g3
< § R
"" >- S
J < <^
i-5 — ] t3
"5^ C-4 C3
S . in •
CO _j a 2
NEIGHBORHOOD PARK
AREA FOR BASKETBAL
EQUIPMENT DONATED
SERVICE ORGANIZATIO
JVJ
^0° ^W
< ,H P <]
C2 g W 5° S ^
^^ *O *"^ i 1 ^T"| "^ ^J |***j
CO r^ C^ f'1 CO CO C^ P i
C<1 CO
s^^
K/< • "^
•5^o
"^ """* W •
"- ££ ,, CO
S wSafc
PROPERTY ADJOINS Tl
AND LAKEFRONT PROI
AREA IS UTILIZED FOR
EVENTS AND EXIIIBITIO
-^ w
J Pi
J <
sS
cozJS
/-s H— t ^
5 wo
< S^
^ S w
rH C3
J w
2 O
» V Q^
a C-
o ID
co fa
o
*
^-<
s
fa
Pi
>* *Z fa
?S ci<
CAMERON PARK IS OPI
FOR SUMMER ACTIVITL
SKATING IN THE WINTE
SWIMMING BEACH 13 ST
^ 6
3 o
ill!
^ 1— 2 "^ Pi
-1 rH
tf
ca
r^ ^~*
^ O
y o
25 tn
^
CO
•*
^
<
c-
O
S
G
C3
rH
co
0
A-21
-------
00
t-
W
r1
O
C
Q
o ci
f»^ ^
3s1
§>
O
cu
w
f—(
J
t—I
o
<
tn
C
S
P
OT
X
w
cu
a
w
a;
o
w
S
2
K^
5
cu
U Q
w u3 5 y
S '"" -^ s
3 2 _,-g
of n jr; e-1 *2
I—i w c-J I—t r/3
< O OT O u
W ^ •<
w
i."1
^
f—i
tq
>
«
>-<
*••"*
2;
P
h— H
rii
0
,- >
^~s
AMUSEMENT PARK
8
g
^
^
cu
Vj<
l—»
PH "
*** C^
-T"1 )*• •"]
^ ST a
§D?
,„ r^ ^>
W W £;
W S ^H
PH „,
fc— l-H
5 o w
<; 3 ^3
COMMERCIAL
PERATES DUR1
LONG WITH OT
ONCESSIONS.
< O < O
|c
Ig
oS
»-3F
•--<
OT
>-^
^v
*^-
-*^
^
<
>_3
P
O
r
OT
O
W
6
CO
K
W
-»
H>^
W
H-^
t— *
OT
» >
O
t— M
s
0
S
i>i
P
*^
o
o
c-1
C
55
O
<
C
CO
i— i
CO
y
^>
• Z*4
f \
a
cs
^
y
CO
OT
.-._,
a
>T-
r-
CONCESSION STAND
£
3
'-T
^N
>— ^
CO
^••J
r-
^
d
•^
—
c
s
OT
P
20 COOKING GRILLS
0
*— H
<
KX|
^-^
pi
<
Q^
<
/•J*
<
S3
t-<
o
<
H- 1
S
P
O
»!_,
s
*^-
c^
2
c
-H
r^
J^
^ , ,
^ 5
^ ^?
cC W
K^
K •-"*
i CO
X 5-5 L^
P W I-1
< o ^
§5^
OT < CO
LAUNCHING RAMPS
50 PICNIC TABLES
BATHHOUSE
SWIMMING BEACH
9 SWINGS
i
O
g O a
^- r^CO
-H ?"3
A-22
-------
oo
col
w
O
ci
U
Q
= £
.£ O
"•M v.
C ^
o &
a
ON
DESCR
CO
w
O
c_l
CO
I—*
X
w
~l
a
a
O
K
HEAVILY WOODED AREA A
TO THE EAST SIIOIiE OF L
Q
W
PH
O
.-3
W
W
Q
2
D
Q
W
CO
CO
CO
_3
O
&
o
c-a
Q .
I—I DH
*r-« J-
e: r-1
K ci
22 W
H ^
co O
< CS
W PH
-^ £ g CO 5 < ?
O 55 < ^
i
CO
a Q
j -:
w a
>—i —H i—< — /-, -,
« u c R J=
a a ir •?• ^ p pi ^;
H
t->
m
O
S
w
a
•
m
co
c^
C5
r-\
H^
>-3
c
H-t
s
a
a
b
O
>
c-
i—i
O
w
PS
o
Pi
<:
PH
PH
Pi
c
A-23
-------
l Facilit
Remarks
Us
an
ca
at o
|§
•a a<«
S 8*°
a 3 E
b»J. .2 3
SStTi
EC
i£g
..5- •*
= E-^a
e
s
i
. js a 3 -5
>.S £ ^ -S
•- o - 4> £
a w •*-* P
•3 s s I -a
III 8.1
M W
25 ITS-S
If 1
S!
s|
ii
S Q>
3 "bO
(A C
1
°'| c
4> c 5
«•• 4) c
£-5 S
^ 6-3
ai?E.
dCQ
4)
i s|
i&iJ
lll'g
c^^vjt.
< o t: o 03
Owl)
*"* fc-
»2 "c "^
'S 3 4)
Q, bfl'p .
< C W ',
e«^al3ll!^ai
1 ao. .§ o
["^ "3 o E J?
0 3 '5 | 3 _«
11 d 111
S o
3g
W V
C 4* 4)
« V3 b
Sic
'E«2£
o £
2 co
«l-o — £
2 S"8 9-
8S&«
? S S § " 5 » 5
i-i Q. ca T3 IM Q.I-I D,
bo
S
0) 4) OT
_0 t. a)
'
iJI
•i^
E|||
m *O C *W i — ^i«
"O ,"= *•
^ «'S
tri C o)
a t- Q,
a, O co
o o o e
,8.8, -g
en CQ oa to
-------
Each of these functions falls into one or more of the parks classifications which are
summarized in Table 3.
Using accepted park classification and design standards indicated in Table 3, a brief
analysis of Bemidji's park system was undertaken. The park system was looked at
in terms of facility type, location and size and related to service population. The
system components are:
playlets
neighborhood parks
play fields
large city parks, and
special use parks.
Each park plays a slightly different role in meeting the community's recreational
needs. The variety of recreation needs can be loosely grouped into two categories.
The two categories are passive, and active recreation. The types of facilities
needed to meet these two basic needs are very different. Typical passive activities
include picnicing, strolling, and enjoying nature. Pleasant natural settings and/or
landscaped areas are the type of park setting that is needed for these activities.
At the other end on the spectrum are active recreation activities which include
playground activities and team sports such as baseball, and football. To meet the
needs of these activities, playground equipment, swimming beaches and athletic
fields are needed. Despite the marked difference in the two basic recreation
categories, the inter-relatedness of people's recreational activity requires that both
types of activities be accommodated within a single park. Parks frequently
emphasize one or the other activity but usually have elements of both. The
recreation system components described below and in Table 3 have been developed
to meet both these needs.
Playlots or Mini Parks are small sub-neighborhood facilities which are primarily
intended to serve small children in a one or two block area. Many of Bemidji's
small (less than one acre) parks would fall in this class. In communities where
single-family homes with ample backyards predominate, playlets would not be
emphasized as a major component of the park system.
Neighborhood parks are modest sized facilities (5 to 10 acres) which serve
approximately a square mile area. Neighborhood parks should be companions to
elementary schools as they focus on children of that age group and provide for
sharing of facilities between grade schools and neighborhood parks. Combining
these facilities avoids overlap and duplication. Neighborhood parks have active
areas (ball diamond, playground apparatus) as well as passive areas (shaded areas,
park benches, natural amenities). They require adequate size to accommodate
active games such as softball and touch football. Nymore park is an example of
this type of park.
Playfields are large facilities (15 to 30 acres) which emphasize organized athletic
activities and older participants. Playfields frequently serve several neighbor-
hoods.
Large City parks are one of a kind facilities for cities of Bemidji's size. These
parks serve as the site for community special events such as group picnics and
gatherings. A full range of recreational facilities should be provided within a
pleasant natural environment. Bemidji City park and Diamond Point are parks
A-25
-------
which each serve partially the function of large city parks. Diamond Point has the
environmental setting while Bemidji Park has the acreage necessary for a variety
of uses.
Special Use parks include parkways, ornamental parks, swimming beaches and other
single purpose facilities. Bemidji's South Beach and Library Park are examples of
this type of facility.
Location and size are key factors in evaluating the effectiveness of a community's
park system. The location of a community's parks affect the ability of the system
to serve community residents. Each parks service area relates to the appropriate
walking distances for each park classification (See Table 3). While the community
is generally well served by recreational opportunities, there are some areas such as
the north Lake Irving neighborhood and the residential areas on the fringe of the
C.B.D. which are under served by neighborhood parks. The location of playfield
facilities at the Bemidji Park on the Northwest edge of town means most of the
city is underserved by existing playfields.
Many of Bemidji's parks are very small - less than 2 acres. Parks of this size are of
limited use as recreation facilities. In general, the community has adequate total
acreage. Using as a standard, 10 acres of park per 1,000 residents, Bemidji's 145
acres is adequate for it's population.
The recreational opportunities which abound in the Bemidji area somewhat lessen
the need for Bemidji to provide it's residents with recreational opportunities.
Lakes and woods lie virtually at Bemidji's door step in all directions. These
amenities lessen the need for passive and less organized activity facilities,
typically met by large city parks. Bemidji's primary recreation emphasis should
most likely be directed to neighborhood scale facilities and facilities for organized
activity such as softball, baseball, etc., as demand dictates. Neighborhood parks
are an important ingredient to a vital community regardless of surrounding
recreational opportunities. They provide important recreational opportunities
within each residents reach especially those residents without the means to travel
outside their neighborhood for recreational activity, such as kids.
Regional recreation opportunities also attract and serve visitors from a large
geographic area. Provision of visitor related recreation facilities by Bemidji needs
to be coordinated with the economic development objectives of the community and
the adequacy of those facilities which already exist in the area. Bemidji's
proximity to Bemidji State Park, for example, negates the need for municipal
camping facilities. Other tourist oriented facilities, such as picnic grounds or
interpretive information facilities may be justified.
As growth occurs additional park lands will be needed. The problem of finding
suitable space need not be a problem considering the environmental quality of the
area. However, some mechanism for timely land acquisition and funding will be
needed. Developer land dedications offer one alternative for acquiring either the
needed land or funds with which to acquire land. As growth warrants expansion of
the recreation system, specific sites should be identified. In the interim Bemidji's
recreational expenditures and efforts should focus on upgrading existing facilities.
Consideration should be given to selling smaller unneeded parcels and expanding
parks in deficient areas of the city.
A-26
-------
Recreation Policy
Policy 1: Developments of future parks should be guided by the standards set
forth in Table 3.
Policy 2: Park land dedication of 10% of total subdivision acreage in land or
equivalent valued cash, should be required of future developers.
Policy 3: Future parks should be constructed in conjunction with school sites,
and/or key natural preservation areas where feasible.
Policy 4: Future park construction should emphasize neighborhood parks.
Policy 5: Establish park liaison with schools and surrounding communities.
Policy 6: Initiate detailed facility studies and site selection.
Policy 7: First priority in park expenditures should be given to acquiring basic
land area in newly developed areas and in providing basic facilities
in existing parks.
A-27
-------
APPENDIX B,
ATMOSPHERE
-------
§
M
O
&
•H
< '
s~\
•rl Cd
T-I 4J
T3 Cd
•H TJ
I
PQ §
4-1 4-1
cd cd
ri
cd -u
4-> CO
cd -H
•W d
gl
•H^
23
•H M
•s-j!
O ft
0) CO
n g
a, 0
cu ca
M
BS
cd a
M cd
a) cu
I-S
cu
4J rH
Cd
rH C
cd O
G i *
o cd
& a
I
PQ
•s
H
3
£3
&
3
•
o
cu
Q
•
>
O
la
•
4->
O
O
•
4-1
PL
0)
W
•
00
3
i
&
s
H
•H
}-i
ft
*
CM
•
m
m
r^
•
m
vO
CM
00
vO
o
•
CM
vO
-J-
CM
m
m
oo
CO
«*
o
CM
-a-
•
oo
r-»
*^"
cu
^)
3
4J
cd
c1nfa
(DO
&
Jtt
Cy
H
VO
vO
rH
CM
r-
vo
•
O
m
o
•
rH
CM
CO
•
rH
1-^
Oi
•
rH
-*
CO
•
n
o
_j
^^
en
CM
r^
•
CO
CTi
m
•
CM
O
00
•
iH
•
O
rH
m
•
o
m
vO
o
a
0
•H
4J CO
cd cu
4-> £1
•H 0
ft a
._! LJ
n r^
O
CU
*l
r*
PM
B-l
-------
Table B-2. Average freeze data for Bemidji Airport (Gale Research Company,
based on National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration data).
t)
1-1
o
J3
co
CU CU
M H
J3 3
•u 4J
rt
CU l-i
N CU
01 CU
cu a
STATION £ S
BEMIDJI 32
AIRPORT
28
24
20
16
4J CU
CO O
cd c
H CU
^
<4-4 M
0 3
O
01 O
w o
0)
T) 00
c
C -H
n) >-i
^c^
05-
29
05-
17
05-
01
04-
26
04-
17
4J
CO
n
•H CU
M-I a
C
4-1 CU
O M
^
CU 3
•U 0
«8 O
T3 O
C rH
«) rH
CU cti
S fa
09-
13
09-
28
10-
03
10-
16
10-
30
CO
>.
n)
•a co
CU
M-l 4J
O n)
13
•
o a
!Z CU
CU
c >
(0 -IJ
^^
107
134
155
173
196
•a
M
o
CJ
CU
M
m
o
00
CO 0
M -H
cfl )-(
CU P.
>H 00
24
23
23
23
23
co
CU
CJ
a
CU
t-l
(-1
3
0
a oo
o d
•H
LM M
o a
w
*
o c
!5 -H
24
23
23
23
23
•tf
M
0
O
CU
M
14-4
O
en
M r-l
(t) i-l
CU CO
>H fa
24
24
24
24
24
CO
CU
0
c
CU
M
M
3
o
CJ
o
r-l
K-l rH
o cd
fa
S5
24
24
24
24
24
B-2
-------
Table B-3. Direction and frequency of occurrence of winds at
the Bemidji Airport, Beltrami County, Minnesota
(Stewart & Walker 1976).
Direction from which Wind Blows
Frequency of Occurrence
North
North-northeast
Northeast
East-northeast
East
East-southeast
Southeast
South-southeast
South
South-southwes t
Southwest
West-southwest
West
West-northwest
Northwest
North-northwest
Calm
TOTAL
3.9%
2.2%
2.1%
1.7%
3.2%
4.9%
8.5%
5.3%
5.5%
3.9%
4.9%
5.0%
5.6%
9.2%
10.3%
5.6%
18.2%
100.0%
B-3
-------
cd
•U rH
o cd
co d
rj
cd -^
go
oi r-~
4J CTl
C rH
H I
rH
•W «*
cd CT\
TJ M
> ^ cd
•H O
4J Cd
cd -w ,C
rH O W
\O '
• 00 '
I \O I
I \O vO O
t i/t to vO
) -d- r- o
) 00 CO O
i ro r* o
> CO CO O\
cj CM «
o
CO
CM
c*
fl
VD
O
vO
CM
vO
fO
OD
oo
vocMOOin
-------
Table B-5. Ambient air quality standards for the State of Minnesota
(MPCA).
Concentration
Air Contaminant
Particulate matter
Sulfur Oxides
Nitrogen Oxides
Carbon Monoxide
ppm (vol)
-
0.02
0.10
0.25
0.05
9.00
30.00
yg/ffi3@ "C
75
260
60 (b)
150 (b)
60
260
655
100
10,000
35,000
Averaging
Time
1 year (a)
24 hours
1 year (a)
24 hours
1 year
24 hours
3 hours
1 year
8 hours
1 hour
Hydrocarbons
(non-methane)
Photochemical Oxidants
Hydrogen Sulfide
Odorous Air Pollution
0.24
0.07
0.05
0.03
160
130
70
42
3 hours (c)
1 hour
Jg hour (d)
% hour (e)
1 odor unit in areas zones residential,
recreational, institutional, retail
sales, hotel or educational
2 odor unit in areas zoned light
industrial
4 odor units in areas zoned other than
as above
(a) Geometric mean (b) Secondary standard (c) 6 to 9 am
(d) Not to be exceeded more than twice (rather than once, as
for other short-term standards) per year (e) Not to be ex-
ceeded more than twice in any five consecutive days.
B-5
-------
L
rQ
T~I
cu
3
CO
cfl
cu
0
cfl
4J
O
CO
CU
C
d
•rl
S
•H
13
CU
w
4J
CO
g
CU
4J
CO
4-1
a
8
§
3
co
cfl
SH
^*
0)
,*j
w
o
•H
H
3
iH
CO
CU
00
CO
CU
cd
S-l
2
,13
3
O
<+H
1
1
C <
cu cj
vO
1
M
CU
&
H
4-J 4-1
CO {3
CU CU
*C S **^
•rl H ft
W 3 ft
CO ^
T3 cfl
C CU
CN g
I
3
CO ^
cfl B
CU ft
JgJ ft
|~
X
cfl
S
C
o
•H
Cfl
'>
CU
^O p t
13^3
XI
C
CO
4J
C/3
H
CU
a
o
*H1 ^^
cu &
B ft
4-1
•H
H
CO
1 j
C
w-i cu
o e
• VH
0 3
S3 CO
CO
cu
S
5
cu
CTi ST <»• rH
0 O O 0
o o o o
* • • •
o o o o
o o o o
o o o o
• • • •
o o o o
cd cd
-------
•f
X—>
**^T
o
§
JD
CU
rl
3
CO
cd
1
V
tO
4-1
o
co
CU
C
rj
•rf
s
•>
•H
•H
e
CU
PQ
4-1
CO
CO
4J
C?
§
cu
M
3
CO
cd
QJ
s
cu
4-1
CO
rH
3
O
•H
4-1
M
cd
ex
cu
60
CO
J_(
CU
^
CO
rl
3
O
X!
rl
3
O
M-(
1
4J
rj
cu
5
t"l
1-^
1
cu
rH
.O
cd
H
4-1 4-1
co a
cu cu £\
oo cu S
JT* ^ 6Q
CO P-
t3 CO -~^
G CU
4-1
C
CU
g
cu
rl
CO ^
co »
cu ^^
2 cio
3.
e ^
3
e
•H
cd
a
c
o
•H
4-1
cfl
•H
^
CU
Q
T3
V-4
CO
C
4-1
CO
C
CO
cu
s
•H a
4J 00
CU 3.
S s^/
0
cu
o
CO
4-J
c
M-l CU
o e
cu
* w
0 3
2 CO
tO
O>
rH
00 ro CN O
rH O CN ON
VO rH rH rH
O 00 ON O
CN rH rH CN
r-s oo r>- vo
• • • •
00 *^~
-------
APPENDIX C,
GEOLOGY
-------
LAKE y//v.v;vv::
BEMIDJI
OUTWASH SAND
TILL PLAINS (GROUND MORAINE)
OUTWASH GRAVEL
END MORAINE
GLACIAL LAKE PEAT DEPOSITS
OPEN WATER , LAKES
N
I "n 2 miles
Figure C-L Surficial geology of the Bemidji project area (redrawn from USGS
Hydrologic Investigations Atlas HA-278 Sheet 2).
C-l
-------
APPENDIX D,
BOTANICAL NAMES OF PLANT SPECIES
CITED IN TEXT
-------
Table D-l. Scientific equivalents of common names of plants cited in the
text. Nomenclature follows that of Fernald (1970).
COMMON NAME
Alder
Ash, green
Aspen, quaking
Basswood
Birch, paper
Elm, American
Fir, balsam
Maple, sugar
Oak, bur
Pine, jack
Pine, Norway (red)
Pine, white
Spruce, black
Spruce, white
Sunflower
Wild rice
Willow
SCIENTIFIC NAME
Alnus spp.
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Populus tremuloides
Tilia americana
Betula papyrifera
Ulmus americana
Abies balsamea
Acer saccharum
Quercus macrocarpa
Pinus banksiana
Pinus resinosa
Pinus strobus
Picea mariana
Picea glauca
Helianthus spp.
Zizania spp.
Salix spp.
D-l
-------
APPENDIX E,
SURFACE WATER
-------
uospmrg
urea
o
. oo
- o
3
CO
a)
0)
CD
§
O
vO
O
in
- o
QJ
00
0)
01
•H
B
01 01
> H
•H -H
t.j 111
O
01
4J
g
VJ
l-l
ex
c
o
01
01
CO
00
CO
CO
01
P.
O
^O
n
oo
vo
ro
• CN
o
o
CO
w
0)
(1SW
00
•H
E-l
-------
o
oo
-m
. o
m
vO
cfl
O
co
(0
4->
H
CU
AJ
CO
60
cu
•H
e
cu
•u
CO
I
X
o
i-l
p-
p.
• o
vO
o
M
CO
CU
1-1
CO
60
CO
•H
CO
t-t
- m
Cb
•H
CO
to
•H
CO
CO
o
o
o
00
o
vO
00
T-
o
O
CM
o
o
in
CM
I
M
•H
E-2
-------
Table E-l. Minnesota water quality standards (MPCA 1978b).
Parameter
Fecal coliform
Turbidity
Dissolved oxygen
a
Temperature
Ammonia as nitrogen
Chromium
Copper
Cyanides
Oil
PH
Phenols
Color value
Threshold odor number
Methylene blue active substance
Arsenic
Chlorides
Carbon chloroform extract
Limit
200 MPN/100 ml
25 NTU
Not less than 6 mg/1 from 1 April
through 31 May, and not less than
5 mg/1 at other times
Shall not exceed a rise of 5° F
above natural levels, based on
monthly average of the maximum
daily temperature or in any case
the daily average temperature shall
not exceed 86° F
1 mg/1
0.05 mg/1
0.01 mg/1 or not greater than 1/10
the 96-hour mean tolerance
limit (TLM) value
0.01 mg/1
0.5 mg/1
Within the range of 6.5 to 8.5
units
0.001 mg/1 and none that could
impart odor or taste to freshwater
edible products such as crayfish,
clams, prawns and like creatures
15 units
3 units
0.5 mg/1
0.01 mg/1
100 mg/1
0.2 mg/1
E-3
-------
Table E-l. Minnesota water quality standards (continued).
Parameter
Fluorides
Iron
Manganese
Nitrates
Sulfates
Total dissolved solids
Zinc
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium (hexavalent)
Lead
Selenium
Silver
Radioactive material
Hardness
Bicarbonates
Boron
Specific conductance
Total dissolved salts
Limit
1.5 mg/1
0.3 mg/1
0.05 mg/1
45 mg/1
250 mg/1 or 10 mg/1 applicable to
waters used for production of wild
rice during periods when the rice
may be susceptible to damage by
high sulfate levels
500 mg/1
5 mg/1
1 mg/1
0.01 mg/1
0.05 mg/1
0.05 mg/1
0.01 mg/1
0.05 mg/1
Not to exceed the lowest concen-
tration permitted to be discharged
to an uncontrolled environment as
prescribed by the appropriate
authority having control over their
use
250 mg/1
5 meq/1
0.5 mg/1
1,000 umhos/cm
700 mg/1
E-4
-------
Table E-l. Minnesota water quality standards (concluded).
Parameters
Sodium
Total salinity
Hydrogen sulfide
Unspecified toxic substances
Limit
of total cations as meq/1
1,000 mg/1
0.02 mg/1
None at levels harmful either
directly or indirectly
The following temperature criteria will be applicable for the
Mississippi River from Lake Itasca to the outlet of the Metro Wastewater
Treatment Works in St. Paul in addition to or superceding the above.
The weekly average temperature shall not exceed the following temperature
during the specified months:
January
February
March
April
May
June
40° F
40° F
40° F
40° F
40° F
40° F
July
August
September
October
November
December
83° F
83° F
78° F
68° F
50° F
40° F
E-5
-------
0)
PQ
(U
en
c
O
•H
4J
CO
oo
•H
(-1
O
1
CO
3
cr
-------
s
00
•S
H
B
0)
.a
co
en
•H
co
(0
o
•H
4-1
CO
•rl
rl
O
cd
M
cu
4J
§
cd
o
3 CM
n)
y
CN
I
•3
H
f>
ON
r~.
ON
rH
fi
00
fn,^
1^
ON
rH
cd
CO
r-
ON
i
r-i
CM
l*^
ON
rH
CO
00
S
(2
c
rt
0)
a
0
60
•rl
4J
O
3
*d
c
O
O
CO
*
00
I
CO
•
1*^
o
•
00
•tf
•
00
I
•*
•
r^
rH
•
00
1
1
1
pel
P.
r^
o
•
o
I
rH
0
•
O
ON
CO
0
o
rH
VO
O
O
1
r^
i-H
o
o
rH
CO
O
O
1^-
O
O
1
CM
rH
O
O
•*
CO
0
•
o
/- N
i-H
00
0
v_/
PM
rH
cd
4-)
O
H
00
rH
•
O
1
i-H
O
•
O
V
i-H
rH
O
•
0
m
co
o
CO
i
rH
O
0
V
CTv
i-H
0
•
0
oo
rH
O
•
O
1
in
o
0
o
ON
o
o
•
o
^^
I-t
If
N«X
PH
T3
0)
>
rH
O
CO
CO
•H
Q
<•
O
•
O
1
\ft
VO
CM
0
•
O
0\
CM
O
O
H
CM
O
O
1
H
O
V
j-»
H
O
•
0
r-«.
i-H
*
0
1
rH
O
0
m
•*
0
•
0
^\
rH
I?
^^s
CO
O
^
+
CM
O
S3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
-*
m
rH
•
O
1
m
o
o
o
m
o
•
o
/— \
H
--^
%
\^-
55
T
cd
•rl
c
0
9
•<3
o
•
VO
i-H
1
oo
vO
•
O
vO
CO
*
CM
-tf
VO
rH
1
O
H
rH
00
co
•
H
O
vO
•
CM
1
00
-------
co
on
CO
co
1
M
I
0)
H
4J
§
(1)
cd
0)
to
co
•H
CO
•to
•H
a
CO
H
CU
4-1
O
2
tfl
•S
M
CU
cd
u
1
o
—
r-l
«
CD
H P-i
•°~
CTl
1^
C7\
rH
o
^oo
r^
Ch
r-l
cd
CO
r»
<7\
i— i
CN
•^
n*»
cr.
rH
(!)
60
rt
§
CU
a
CU
60
rt
c
a
0)
S
d)
00
fi
cd
rt
c
cd
0)
a
o
o
CO
1
m
CM
CM
O\
s±
CM
O
O
CO
1
CN
CM
CM
0
VO
CN
1
1
1
1
9
O
O
1
\^
£
•H
>
•H
4-1
O
3
TJ
U
r^
•
oo
I
CTi
•
r>»
CO
•
oo
vO
•
00
1
CN
•
oo
vf
•
00
1
1
1
1
w
a
>*
vO
o
•
o
1
vO
tH
O
,
O
vO
CO
o
•
o
VO
in
•
o
1
rH
O
•
o
V
CTi
CM
O
•
O
in
•
0
/"\
rH
ff
^^x
&
T
J2
cd
t)
rH
CU
•n
&4
rH
S
o
H
u
r-.
CN
§
cd
4-1
co
cd
Q
CO
as
W
co
to
4J
S
co
M
o
•H
CO
Cd
4J
CO
TJ
d)
4-1
I
a
o
o
B
cd
oi
2
a.
o
4-1
o
i-i
14-1
cd
4-1
-3
r-l
Cd
a
o
•rl
CO
•2
o
M
P-i
E-8
-------
CO
en
4J
n)
8
rt
Q
cd
H
4J
O
rl
I
(X
p.
•H
CO
co
•H
CO
co
•H
S
4-1
CO
•H
rl
CU
4-1
O
cfl
a
M
cu
4J
rt
S
cd
o
w cd
o
OJ -H
cd
ON
ON
1-1
1
PX-
VO
ON
rH
cd
ON
ON
, t
r~i
fx
ON
H
01
00
fl
£
a
a
(U
2
M
0)
4-1
0)
1
cd
(X,
0)
00
Cj
e4
pi
.
8 SP "^~- "^^ fiP
rHCd s^ rH rH^N x-vv-xs-x
00 O CO ^^^ bo x^\ bO "^^ i ^^ i I ^
8H Q) bOBrHBoO ~^ bO Cd cd 4J
*xjX I ti f% *~-j *^^ ^-^ B bO FJ" 1 1 jj Q
2 TJ ••— ' bp v-^ B N-' O o E-i
^ U }-i 8 B 8 'l-x H H
1 cd 3^30) 0) 8
•H T) 3 CO 8 CO iH 4-1 -H -H 3 -H
a§4JrHbOTj4JrHH3CQTIr-l
B fc^ O rt rt O O i^\ 3 r^ ^^ cO j.^j
^ri cj ^H rj ^j ^j Oj r^ ^/^ r-r_) <^ (^ rj
o
mrHOiH m ooo
• • CD • CD CM \j5 rx* rH
CMrHiH CMO rHvDOO
1 1
I I i I I oo i i i i
o -* o m o H in
..CM.VO* Oi — ICM
O CD C5
CM 00
**O CM ON rH ON I*1*.
OOONCMrHvOO IrHOrH
• •••••I ...
rH rH VO
CO rH
3a 3
00 O 00 ^
a -^ a o
c* nH Ccj
O *S ^*» ""**••' /*N X~N
CD 3 4J 00 H J3 rH
Q s^ rj i ) ^s bo cd bO
% ^ 'rl 8 !S B
QJO4J rHbOP-|^-''x-'^'
i-i *H cd 8
»-l rH O rH T3
OJO3 rHrHO + 'Hin
BWC 4-I4JCOCMI-IQ
CU-HOWOO-HO3O
f— i Q u p^ f^ f— i Q ^ E-H pp
ooo
o rH m
ON rH U-|
i i i
O O ON
Ift ^ _J .
U 1 t~^ *
m
0
CM -* CM
CM CM VO
CM >* H
rH ON rH
r7
B — » ~~-
v _j KH hft
g a
rH v-' v^
cd
H 4J S
O O
rl H H
& 0 cd
O
O
ro CM
1 1
O O
m
ON CO
CO vo
. .
O
CM
r7
3
,__!
"-- H
B EXJ
•^ 2
fl) fll
3 3
-rj rrj
•H -H
(S r^
rH rH
4-J 4J
0 0
o
.
o
ON
rH
1
0
d
rH
^
m
ON
^«
H"
1
^r
Q
u
CO
0)
c
0
^
1
0
en
d
rH
rH
vO
•
O
^^^
JH
bfi
i=r
s«x
iz;
•H
a
bO
rl
CO
-------
CO
CO
4J
t8
4J
co
o
rH
•rl
rl
4J
O
(1)
,0
rl
I
Pd
•rl
P.
•5-
CO
CO
•H
CO
CQ
CO
3
jj
CO
•H
CU
4J
•g
rl
(1)
4J
•U rH
g 3
.•3
s± "^
I rH
-------
•H
4J
n)
CU
X
rt
rJ
14-1
O
•3
co
CU
O
B
•H
P.
ft
•H
CO
CO
•H
CO
CO
CO
o
•H
4J
CO
CJ
td
m
B
cu
•s
CO
,0.
1-^
o\
i-H
,0.
00
r>
rH
CO
CO
r*-.
o\
rH
1
CM
rH
CU
60
PS
a
CU
a
CU
00
p§
ti
tfl
s
0)
00
1
3
a
oo
vO
to
1
o
CM
CM
O
pN»
CM
O
CM
1
CM
CM
CM
CO
m
CM
I
I
I
I
9
u
o
1
S^X
^*>
4->
*rH
•H
4-1
O
CJ
p_|
•
ON
i
oo
•
f-^
CM
•
oo
CTi
oo
1
CM
•
oo
vO
•
00
1
1
1
1
pr*
P-1
vO
vO
O
•
O
1
l-l
0
*
0
V
CO
sj-
0
*
o
CM
0
O
1
CM
rH
0
O
in
to
O
•
O
o
r-
rH
O
1
m
o
•
0
CM
00
O
0
/*n.s
rH
^«^
00
v5-
PM
-co1
4-1
O
H
SI-
CM
O
*
0
1
rH
0
•
o
V
ft
rH
O
•
0
m
o
CD
i
rH
0
0*
CM
O
•
O
CM
fSx
o
o
1
rH
0
•
O
rH
si-
O
CD
x— \
rH
00
B
PM
13
0)
rH
O
co
CO
•H
Q
p^.
O
rH
•
O
1
CM
O
CD
CO
O
•
o
1
1
1
1
CM
rH
CD
1
rH
O
•
O
CM
CO
O
CD
P
op
6
CO
o
+
CM
O
!z
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
CM
Q\
O
Q
1
m
o
0
•
o
o
o
CD
^^
rH
^*
00
o
.2
g
pj
5
<
p**.
vD
•
O^
i
m
t
o
vO
•
I-l
t--
CD
1
CM
VO
O
ON
VO
•
O
o
CT\
CD
1
00
-------
cd
•H
CO
0)
•a
§
0)
B
(U
,0
Vi
0)
•H
ft
co
CO
•H
CO
co
•rl
s
CO
U
rl
(U
4-1
cj
2
cd
•g
H
ed
cu m
jS co
• o co
vo -*-
i H d
H cd O
0 -H
CU vH 4->
H 03 Cd
,0. >, 4J
cd f co
E-i PM ^
•°_
o\
r^*
o\
T-H
,n
oo
r^
cn
i-H
cd
CO
r^
cn
rH
CN
r*^
cn
rH
CU
60
3
PC!
g
CO
•S
S
cu
60
X
9
cd
^
S
cu
60
&t
d
S
•H
4J
CJ
3
T3
d
O
CJ
cn
•
oo
I
r->
•
r-»
CO
•
i--
VO
00
1
rH
•
oo
-*
•
oo
I
I
I
EC
ft
m
oo
0
•
o
i
VO
rH
O
•
O
•J-
-*
o
•
o
i-H
VD
O
•
O
1
rH
O
d
V
r-~
CN
o
•
o
m
~*
rH
•
O
1
m
CO
o
d
rH
r^
o
•
o
^*\
rH
~eo
jjj
•*~s
PM
i-H
cd
4-1
o
H
rH
CN
O
•
O
1
rH
O
•
O
V
r-H
O
co
co
•H
O
-*
r~
o
•
0
1
CO
CN
O
•
O
rH
o-
{D
•
O
1
1
vD
r--
rH
•
0
1
rH
O
•
O
vO
t^
rH
cd
4-1
O
H
CN
CN
d
o
•rl
4-1
cd
4-1
CO
cd
4J
cd
Q
o
H
CO
PM
W
CO
CO
CO
g
•rl
4J
cd
o
o
U-l
•H
CO
(U
a
CU
4J
CO
•H
•ri
T3
1
CU
(4
CU
4-1
O
§
M
60
O
60
d
•rl
I
I
M
cd
4-1
•a
d
o
•H
CO
o
J-l
a.
E-12
-------
I
MH
O
4J
O
0)
4J
4J
cd
rl
M
co
co
rH
a)
rl
0)
co
co
•H
co
co
•H
g
a
co
CO
•H
M
cu
4->
o
cd
rl
1-1 •
CU /-^
•U vO
cd en
rH C
n) o
a -H
0) 4-1
,c en
• u ^
I rH Cd
W cd -iH
., u co
® -H 3
1-1 CO M
rO. ^,-rJ
[2 •& %
F"" pL| -^
*°ON
I"*",.
Q\
rH
,0
00
[-^
CTi
rH
cd
m
r-
.
CM
0
CM
1
LO
o
CM
p*^
,^-
CM
1
I
1
1
'B
CJ
o
•i
3
^«/
^
4J
•rf
^
•rl
4J
O
3
a
0
o
o
0\
1
r^
•
fx^
CO
oo
vO
00
1
CTi
f^
CO
•
00
1
1
1
1
re
P.
rH
vO
O
rH
cd
4-1
O
H
t~*
CM
cd
4J
en
cd
4J
cd
Q
en
w
en
vo
en
en
cd
4-1
en
O
MH
>>
ca
rl
I
0)
•u
cd
4J
CO
-------
ion
CN
CO
rJ
•rl
4J
Cd
4J
CO
T3
1
PP
•H
CO
O
•H
4J
CO
•H
M
0)
4-1
CJ
cd
CU
cd
CJ
1
cd
-H
co
cd
H
•o
ON
!**•
ON
rH
O
ON
r^
ON
rH
,0
00
f^
ON
rH
cd
CN
r*^
ON
rH
rH
'cd
h
CU
00
rt
CQ
Prf
0
cd
dj
a
cu
00
pj
cd
p^
c3
QJ
S
cu
60
eS
pj
cd
cu
S
cu
60
P^
i
£
o
^o
1 1 CO
1 1 1
vO
ON
rH
1 1 •*
1 1 1^
CN
oo
m
1 I 4->
H rH CJ
CU O 3
§* CO 0
CU -H O
m
•
oo
1
*
f*Nfc
O\
•
^
in
•
oo
1
st
•
l~»
rH
oo'
CO
•
00
•
f^N
ON
•
r^
I
.
•
iH
VO
CM
^^
co
M
CU
4-1
0
^
0
2
cd
cx
CO
£3
cd
g
CN
oo
r4
1
rH
CD
r^
00
•
0
O
CN
CM
1
CN
•
o
m
o
^
oo
oo
rH
•
00
r-.
•
co
i-l
O
•
f--*
H
•
vO
m
ON
,-^
H
^"•x.
00
^-*
cd|
rH
£
p,
O
M
0
rH
1
1
1
1
1
1
'
1
m
co
•
o
o
•
o
00
CN
CN
•
0
vO
O
O
O
O
vO
*^
^^
O
iH
s5
cd
»i_i
vO
.
p^
CN
1
m
•
o
o
•
vO
O
PM to
W 3
CO rH
O
a
Ci)
4-1
g
M-l
CO
!
CO
cu
•a
rH
a
0
m
o
I
CO
oo
ON
cd
P
0
H
CN
CO
4J
ed
4-1
CO
CJ
•H
co
cd cu
4-> >
CO -rl
T) 0
CU
cd
4-1
CO
0)
pq
-a
4-1 CU
CO 4-1
3 CJ
00 3
3 "O
< 0 •
T o ON
^v o r*^
rH 00
O O
O ft
CO
V tf
o
cu
?
O -H Cd
•H 0 3
4-1 1-3
CO 0
O V-l
» M O
Cd IW «4-l
cd
4-1
cd
ed
CJ
•H
p.^
a u
CN
co
•H
4-1
cd
4-1
co
rl
O
•H
0
0)
4-1
cd
4-1
CO
CU
pq
T)
CU
4-1
CJ
£ •
0 ON
O ON
cd -
00 CU
o ,0
00
8
.u cd
•H d
0 0
O cd
0 -o
O
M-l
Cd
Cd 4-1
0 CU
•° i
CO -H
•H rH
> O
O ft
ft
H PM
E-14
-------
co
•H
4-1
cd
4-1
co
MH
H
O
ts
co
CJ
co
•H
Vl
cu
4J
o
cd
Vi
cd
.d
CJ
Vl
cu
H
cd
CJ
I H
H cd
CU -H
H CO
cu
00
c
ON £4
f*^
ON
H
d
Q)
s
cu
00
cj 3
ON pj
r^
ON
H
pj
01
a
cu
00
GO CQ
r^ prf
ON
H
1
VO
ON
rH d
cd
cu
a
cu
cct 60
CM d
r*^ co
ON ft4
H
H
H
cd
pL4
d
cd
Q)
a
i
i
i
i
!
1
O
^^
CM
1
00
•
t"N.
00
\f\
•
LO
H
CO
•
vD
H
VO
CM
•
VO
O
0
CU
cd
u
a
&
cu
H
H vO
ON VO CO
s* CM o o in
CM • • • • CO
1 -3- 00 1 O O 1 1 CM 1 H
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
CO VO •* H H 00
rH • CM O • •
CM r>N O • O O
• o
o v
m CM CM
1 VO 1 O O 1 1 H 1 -*
1 CO ON 1 • • 1 1 • 1 •
CM r-I O O H •*
vO H H
ON CM O O CO
ON st O O H ON • •
CM • • • • • CO CO
1 -* 00 IOOOCOCM IH
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
OOVO -3" H CO in CM ON
O • CM O CM - 60 H 0 ^ H
fo 0H^-^W) cd|Hbj)
O 4J fep p [ ^-^ O rH CiO ^^
•H >> 0 d H 0
CU-H -rl CUOVi^S
H CJ -H H P. O TI iH
O 3 rH rH O ~l~ CO Vl d d
CQTj CdCdCO dOOCd
CQg ^ H
6 -H
Vl P.
P! fi-"]
CO
d
o
cd
4->
CO
•
^^
CJ
Vi
o
4-1
4-1
•rl
CO
Vl
CU
4-1
3
CO
cu
pq
-c
cu
4-1
o
5 ON o
ON
O ON
U Vl
60 CU
o *o
Vi 0
P. CU
60 0)
O M
4-> Cd
•H 3
d d
o cd
0 <-)
O O
Vl M-l
U-l
CdS
4-1 Cd
Cd 4-1
d cu
o g
co -H
•H H
> o
O P<
Vl >-,
to ffi
E-15
-------
in
co
cd
4->
CO
cd
•H
co
2
1
CO
O
•rl
4J
CO
•H
I-l
CU
4J
CJ
cd
M
J3
T)
ON
r**
ON
rH
O
ON
("X,
ON
rH
JQ
f?
ON
H
1
vO
ON
H
cd
CM
ON
i-l
rH
3
CU
00
1
£*
cQ
CU
a
0)
00
0
3
0
cd
1
CU
00
1
rt
to
CU
g
CU
00
f*<
rt
c3
Q)
S
co
sr
i i sr
i i i
ON
rH
CM
i i sr
i i oo
CM
rH
CO
i i sr
i i i
0
rH
CM
1 1 CO
1 1 r-^
i i i^
CM
CO vO
. o
sr CM co
CM rH CO
1 1 1
O CO O
• o
ON O CM
vO
rH 00
• 00 O
VO • ON
i-H r~- CM
ON
rH ST
1 rH CM
1 1 1
^ S?
O CM
rH
CM
ON • CM
• rH ST
VO iH CM
rH
g
\,^
§
°u 5 *
fl) O 4-*
H -H
4-1 CU -H
H rH O
CU 0 3
fl Cft rt
vo
•
oo
i
m
•
[•N,
O
•
CO
VD
•
co
r^
•
|*«s.
eg
00
f*s.
•
00
1
rH
•
f*^
ON
•
r^
oo
•
00
1
«
oo
CM
•
00
w
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
O
oo
rH
1
O
I-l
rH
rH
•
CM
m
rH
ON
CO
rH
1
CO
i-H
r^
CO
rH
^^
rH
60
^*
•H
•H
rH
3
r~-
0
*
o
rH
rH
O
O
VO
sr
o
0
VD
ON
O
•
?
rH
O
•
O
CO
sr
o
o
CM
CM
*
o
1
vo
CM
o
0
sr
m
o
*
0
ON
CO
o
•
o
1
CM
O
*
O
r—J
CO
O
•
o
Q
3-
PM
3
vO
O
•
O
1
rH
O
•
O
V
rH
CM
O
•
O
r-~
rH
O
•
o
o
•
o
V
CM
rH
O
0
CM
rH
*
O
1
ON
i-H
O
O
vO
in
o
•
o
oo
rH
•
O
1
2
o
•
0
sr
o
•
o
^-^
rH
N^
CU
rH
0
CO
1
1
1
1
CM
rH
H
•
?
rH
0
•
O
ON
CO
0
0
in
o
•
o
1
rH
0
•
o
in
rH
O
•
O
o
m
•
o
i
5
o
•
o
CM
*^
O
•
o
H
O
"
+
CM
1
1
1
1
rH
CO
1
•
rH
VO
rH
CM
CO
•
CM
I
CO
•
rH
CO
r^.
•
r-l
cs
in
•
rH
1
^^
•
rH
Is*.
co
•
rH
/— \
CO
i-l
0)
4-1
CU
^
0
M
ft
CO
1
vD
r-
•
CM
1
co
•
o
ON
CM
•
rH
CM
•
^f
CM
1
•
O
vO
m
^
o
•
m
-------
ctf
CO
CO
CO
CO
o
•H
r-l
01
4-1
o
rO
rl
CO
M
0)
4-1
CO
CO
a
•H
1
iH CO
H £
V
\J
f
u
c
L
O
D
•
0
1
M
•
-1
T\
n
u
0>
r-l
3
4J
CO
i-t
01
CX
_0)
o
• oo
i — 1 O>
rH CN
1 1
oo o
• oo
ON CM
vO
o oo
rH CM
/-*s
rH
~60
£5
S<— '
C
01
60
*" >,
O 4-1
•H
TJ >
0) -rH
> 4J
rH CJ
O 3
Cfl T3
CO G
•H O
Q cj
rH
en
o
00 H O
/— s
rH
•^*»
60 /~v
3 ^
60
^ 3
1) X^
•H
C PH
•H
rH H
CO cfl
^ 4-1
PC rH O
D. <3 H
V£)
rH
0
•
O
1
vO
O
O
•
O
rH
H
O
O
,-— s
rH
' — ..
60
B
v-'
PM
•a
01
^
rH
O
Cfl
co
•H
P
O
m
o
•
o
1
o
rH
o
•
O
cy*
CM
O
0
/""•N
rH
--s^
60
^^
en
o
£3
*4"
cT
&
CM
rH
•
en
1
vO
O
rH
oo
oo
H
/— s
CO
r-l
O)
4-1
cu
J,
>,
CJ
G
0>
cO
a
CO
G
cfl
r-l
H
•H rH
o jo
P£ g
t^, CN
CU O
£ CO
3 en
00 O
1
C -3-
0 0
• F-J
rt
4J G
CO O
CJ . -H
fi C CO
a. o) 4J
o o co
4_» CU *
3 CX Cfl
W 4-1 ^"N
O cfl .
rH CM Q C
cfl O
C CO H-rt
O 3 WC
•H G P4 B
4-1 -H O -H
CO B HrH
52 WO
M CX
•> O « >i
AH CO P-i
W 3 W Q)
W rH COJ3
^3 CX D 4J
cfl ,Q
E-17
-------
Table E-12. Annual total phosphorus loading to Lake Bemidji.
1973a 1979b
Ibs./yr. Ibs./yr.
1. Inputs
Source
a. Tributaries
Lake Irving Outlet
(Mississippi River)
Non-Point Load 13,139 11,198
Bemidji WWTP Load
(indirect) 0 4,754
13,139 15,952
b. Minor Tributaries
(non-point load) 562 562
c. Septic Tanks0 190 190
d. Direct Precipitation 1,000 1,000
14,891 17,704
2. Outputs
Lake Outlet —
Mississippi River 9,497 14,158
3. Net Annual P Accumulation 5,394 3,546
2.75
0.31
#/Ac/yr.
gm/m /yr.
Volenweider ' s
01 igo trophic Rate
Eu trophic Rate
2
gm/m2/yr.
gm/m /yr.
2.32
0.26
0.28
0.56
SL
1973 Loads are based on USEPA National Eutrophication Survey Loads
corrected for average year flow of 208 cfs.
1979 Loads for Mississippi River are based on flow weighted total P
concentration (1979 Data) and average year flow of 208 cfs. 1979 data
is unpublished data supplied by MPCA.
Estimated 777 persons residing on lake shore (Holt, et al. 1971).
E-18
-------
Table E-13. Annual total phosphorus loading to Wolf Lake.
1973a 1979b
Ibs./yr. Ibs./yr.
1. Inputs
Source
a. Tributaries
Mississippi River
Non-Point Load 12,284 16,556
Bemidji WWTP Load
(indirect) 29.730 3,803
42,014 20,359
b. Little Wolf Lake and Mud
Lake Outlet and Minor
Tributaries Non-Point
Load 216 216
c. Septic Tanks0 80 80
d. Direct Precipitation 160 160
42,470 20,815
2. Outputs
Lake Outlet —
Mississippi River 37,155 21,668
3. Net Annual P Accumulation 5,315 0
#/Ac/yr. 40.40 19.80
gm/m /yr.
Vollenweider's
gm/m2/yr. 4.52 2.22
2
Oligotrophic Rate gm/m_/yr. 0.71
Eutrophic Rate gm/m /yr. 1.42
1973 Loads are based on USEPA National Eutrophication Survey Loads
corrected for average year flow of 238 cfs.
1979 Loads for Mississippi River are based on flow weighted total P
concentration (1979 Data) and average year flow of 208 cfs. 1979
data is unpublished data supplied by MPCA.
Estimated 74 dwellings, 4 resorts, and 1 camp on shoreline.
£-19
-------
Table E-14, Annual total phosphorus loading to Lake Andrusia.
19733 1979b
Ibs./yr. Ibs./yr.
1. Inputs
Source
a. Tributaries
Mississippi River
Non-Point Load 10,995 17,885
Bemidji WWTP Load
(indirect) 26,160 3,803
37,155 21,688
b. Minor Tributaries
and Big Lake Outlet
Non-Point Load 616 616
c. Septic Tanks0 80 80
d. Direct Precipitation 240 240
TOTAL 38,091 22,624
2. Outputs
Lake Outlet —
Mississippi River 24,989 19,247
3. Net Annual P Accumulation 13,102 3,377
#/Ac/yr. 25.23 14.98
gm/m /yr.
Vollenweider's
gm/m2/yr. 2.82 1.68
2
Oligotrophic Rate gm/nu/yr. 0.62
Eutrophic Rate gm/m /yr. 1.24
o
1973 Loads are based on USEPA National Eutrophication Survey Loads
corrected for average year flow of 244 cfs.
1979 Loads for Mississippi River are based on flow weighted total P
concentration (1979 Data) and average year flow of 208 cfs. 1979
data is unpublished data supplied by MPCA.
Estimated 77 dwellings and 5 resorts on shoreline.
E-20
-------
Table E-15. Annual total phosphorus loading to Cass Lake.
1973a 1979b
1. Inputs Ibs./yr. Ibs./yr.
Sources
a. Tributaries
Mississippi River
Non-Point Load 8,509 16,015
Bemidji WWTP Load 16,480 3.232
(indirect) 24,989 19,247
Pike Bay and Kitchi
Lake Outlet
Non-Point Load 5,140 5,140
b. Minor Tributaries
Non-Point Load 650 650
c. Municipal Load
Cass Lake 373 373
d. Direct Precipitation 2,430 2,430
TOTAL 33,582 27,840
#/Ac/yr. 2.15 1.78
gm/m2/yr. 0.24 0.20
Vollenweider's
Oligotrophic Rate gm/m'Vyr. 0.24
Eutrophic Rate gm/m2/yr. 0.48
a!973 Loads are based on USEPA National Eutrophication Survey Loads
corrected for average year flow of 261 cfs.
1979 Loads for Mississippi River are based on flow weighted total P
concentration (1979 Data) and average year flow of 208 cfs. 1979
data is unpublished data supplied by MPCA.
E-21
-------
APPENDIX F,
GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTIONS
FOR LAND TREATMENT SITE AREA
IN ECKLES TOWNSHIP
(Note: Geologic cross sections were drawn based on the logs
of the soil borings and water-well records that were
obtainable. The letters on Figure G-l serve as indexes to the
cross sections that follow (i.e., Cross Section A corresponds
to the vertical profile of the soil and subsoil along the
east-west line that divides the row of Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,
and 6 in Eckles Township that are north of this line from the
row of Sections 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12 that are south of this
line). The perspective obtained from analyzing the geologic
cross sections aids in locating the regional water table,
estimating the direction of groundwater flow, and understanding
the nature of the glacial geology in the site area. The
geologic cross sections must be considered to be of a
preliminary nature because insufficient information was
obtained to accurately characterize the soil material. Also,
some apparent discrepancies between borings probably were due
to differences between observers. Additional information on
soils at the site should be gathered during the design phase
if the land treatment alternative is selected.)
F-l
-------
Ul
NOIIVA313
F-2
-------
§
u
u
to
0; E
_
UJ
oo
CO
CO
o
CD
O
UJ
CJD
NOILVAaiH
F-3
-------
-------
ro
to
N
csi
e:
u
C5
O
Of.
<_>
a
NG'IIVAaiH
F-5
-------
r
NOIIVA313
F-6
-------
an,
id
z
o
(_J
LlJ
CO
GO 0"
GO
CD
CD
LU
T
v
•.v
o
•a
NOIIVA313
F-7
-------
M
z
o
H
O
CO
CO
o
t_J
<_J
o
o
NOIIVA313
F-8
-------
APPENDIX G,
LAND USE PROJECTIONS
(From Working Paper #3, Development Projections,
by Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. (1978d))
-------
DEVELOPMENT PROJECTION METHODOLOGY AND ASSUMPTIONS
Projections have been made for anticipated growth in each of the six urban land use
catagories listed above. The following discussions and tables indicate anticipated
growth by 5 year increments and explain their derivation.
G-l
-------
Residential Development Projections
1. The number of new households was estimated based on State Demographer
estimates for the average size of households in Beltrami County and the
population projections previously developed.
2. The projected number of new households was split between three types of
dwelling units: single-family homes, multi-family homes and mobile homes.
The allocation was based on the current mix of housing types in Bemidji which
is 65 percent single-family homes, 28 percent multi-family units and 7
percent mobile homes.
3. Acreage for each type of residential development was estimated by assuming
average densities of: 3 dwelling units per acre for single-family development;
12 dwelling units per acre for multi-family development and 6 dwelling units
per acre for mobile home developments. These densities are based on
average densities recently experienced for new development in Bemidji.
TABLE 2
BEMIDJI GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN
RESIDENTIAL GROWTH PROJECTIONS
1980
1985
Source: UJ3. Census
Minnesota State Demographer
Barton-Aschman
1990
199S
2000
Bemidji Area
Housholds
Single-Family Devleopment (acres)
Multi-Family Development (acres)
Mobile Home Development (acres)
Total Additional Residential Acreage
City of Bemidji
Households
Single-Family Development (acres)
Multi-Family Development (acres)
Mobile Home Development (acres)
Total Additional Residential Acreage
8S2
185
20
10
215
585
127
14
7
148
1,911
414
45
22
481
865
188
21
10
219
3,019
654
70
35
.759
1,158
251
28
14
293
4,171
904
97
49
1,050
1,463
317
35
18
370
5,320
1,153
124
62
1,339
1,738
376
41
21
438
G-2
-------
Commercial Development Projections
1. Total retail sales projections for the Bemidji Area and the Bemidji market
area were based on previously developed population projections and disposable
income data from the U.S. Department of Labor. The 1975 mean family
income for Bemidji was $8,857 The U.S. Department of Labor Statistics
estimate that a typical moderate income family spends approximately 50
percent of their income on retail goods.
2. Square feet of retail space was based on a retail sales to floor area ratio of
$80 of retail trade to one square foot of retail space.
3. Estimated total acres of retail development was based on a ratio of
commercial site area to building are of 4 to 1.
TABLE 3
BEMIDJI GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN
COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT GROWTH PROJECTIONS
Bemidji Area
Total Dollar Retail Sales
Total Square Feet Retail(l)
(i
Total Additional Retail Acreage
Bemidji Market Area
Total Dollar Retail Sales
Total Square Feet Retail
Total Additional Retail Acreage
1980
$3,773,083
47,163
:) 4.33
$12,023,377
150,292
13.3
1985
$8,462,865
105,785
9.71
$19,051,407
238,142
21.87
1990
$13,369,643
167,120
15.34
$24,883,742
311,046
28.56
1995
$18,471,275
230,890
21.19
$31,796,631
397,457
36.49
2000
$23,559,622
294,494
27.02
$38,098,387
476,230
43.72
on $80/sq. ft. retail sales.
it)
Based on building to site square footage ratio ratios of 1:4.
Source: U.S. Census
U.S. Department of Labor
Barton-Aschm an
G-3
-------
Industrial Development Projections
1. U.S. Census data for Bemidji indicates approximately 1.5 persons per
household are employed. This factor was applied to the Bemidji and Bemidji
Area household projections to arrive at estimated total employment
increases.
2. Increased industrial employment was estimated by assuming future industrial
employment will represent the same proportion of total employment as in
1978. Industrial employment (including manufacturing, transportation, and
public utilities employment classifications) currently represents 10% of
Bemidji total employment.
3. Industrial acreage projections were based on a typical industrial employment
density figures. Actual employment densities vary a great deal depending on
the specific industry. For the purposes of this study a moderate
employement density of 10 employees per acre was used.
TABLE 4
BEMIDJI GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT GROWTH PROJECTION
Year
1980 1985 1990 199S 2000
Bemidji Area
Total Employment 1,278 2,887 4,529 6,257 7,980
Industrial Employment 128 287 453 626 798
Total Additional Industrial Acreage 13 29 46 63 80
City of Bemidji
Total Employment
Industrial Employment
Total Additional Industrial Acreage
877
88
9
1,297
130
13
1,737
174
17
2,194
219
22
2,604
280
26
Source: U.S. Census
Minnesota Department of Employment Services
Minnesota State Demographer
Barton-Aschman
G-4
-------
Office/Government/Service Development Projections
1. U.S. Census data for Bemidji indicates approximately 1.5 persons per
household are employed. This factor was applied to the Bemidji and Bemiiji
area household projections to arrive at estimated total employment increases.
2. Office/government/service employment was estimated based on the
proportion of total employment made up by these segments of Bemidji's total
employment in 1978. That figure was 54 percent.
3. Typical square feet of office space per employee averages are 250 square
feet per employee. This figure was used to estimate gross leaseable area.
4. Acres of office/government/service development was based on a building to
site area ratio of 1 to 3. It was assumed that building space would be
provided in two-story buildings and all parking would be provided on site.
TABLE 5
BEMIDJI GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN
OFFICE/GOVERNMENT/SERVICE INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT GROWTH PROJECTIONS
1980 198S 1990 199S 2000
Bemidji Area
Total Employment
O.G.S. Employment
Gross Leasable Area
Additional O.G.S. Acreage
Bemidji City
Total Employment
O.G.S. Employment
Gross Leasable Area
Total Additional O.G.S. Acreage
1278
690
172,649
11.9
877
474
118,355
8.1
2867
1,547
387,092
29.6
1297
700
175,036
12.0
4529
2,445
611,387
42.1
1737
938
234,416
16.1
6259
3,377
844,588
58.1
2194
1,185
296,090
20.4
7980
4,307
1,077,115
74.1
2604
1,406
351,422
24.2
Source: U.S. Census
Minnesota Department of Employment Services
Minnesota State Demographer
Barton-Aschman
G-5
-------
Recreation Land Needs Projections Process and Assumptions
1. The excepted standard for estimating land requirements for recreational
purposes is ten acres per 1,000 residents. This standard was used to estimate
additional recreational land needs to serve projected population increase in
Bemidji and the surrounding townships.
TABLE 6
BEMIDJT GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN
RECREATION LAND NEEDS PROJECTIONS
1980 1985 1990 199S 2000
Bemidji Area
Total Additional Recreational Acreage Needs 24 52 81 110 137
City of Bemidji
Total Additional Recreational Acreage Needs 17 24 33 39 46
G-6
-------
APPENDIX H,
PUBLIC FINANCE AND USER FEES
-------
g
nj
0)
0) r-»
,£ CT>
4J rH
O 0)
14-4 ,£>
co
OJ
rt
4-1
" O
•H tn
•n
01 4-1
P-. rl
p^ o
4-1 CU
0)
-a P4
3 ca
14H -
4-1
4-1 C
(3 cd
01 4J
il
a) cj
S3
60 v~/
01 <1)
3 O
0
vO
-it
^
vO
vO
P^-
CM
ON
CT\
a\
m
i-H I
cd ca
•H co co
CJ 0) 4-1
o) co fi
a, co cu
ca
rH 4-1
cd o
4-1 CU
•H i-|
cx o
ed ri
O PM
Oi
O
•H
0) 0)
Q CO
i-H 0)
ed 3
•H C
U a)
01 >
P. 01
co t6
i-H
Cd
rl
cu
CS
£
oo
en
a>
vO
vO
vO
i
•CO-
CD
oo
en
CM
•co-
en
en
i-H
«\
oo
oo
vo
n
o\
o
CM
CM
a-.
&
O-i
m
CT>
•t
en
r~
vO
o
CN
CN
00
o
CM
00
r^
O
ft
vO
CM
r~-
vD
«t
CTi
OO
LO
oo
*t
en
fO
o
CN
-d-
ON
«\
00
vo
i-i
CM
O
oo
oo
oo
en
m
VO
vO
•co-
oo
A
-*
en
en
CM
vO
o
o
A
ej\
oo
oo
*
en
oo
in
en
in
o
m
CM
vO
iH
•co-
01
X
ed
H
co
4-1
£3
C3
CO
CO
0)
CO
CO
<
rH
cd
,_J
n
u
01
a.
CO
4-1
•H
B
rl
01
PH
T3
C
ed
CO
01
co
M
01
0
•H
rJ
rH
cd
4J
C
0)
B
a
M
0)
>
o
&o
tj
r^
OI
4-1
C
M
co
o>
3
C
>
1
<&
co
0)
u
•rl
>
M
0)
CO
rl
O
<4H
co
0)
60
l-l
cd
&
0
co
cu
01
fn
•o
s
ed
co
cu
(3
•rl
fe
co
cxO
C
•H
(3
rl
cd
M
4-1
co
0)
1-1
0)
4-1
G
I-H
CO
3
O
cu
C
cd
rH
rH
01
a
ca
•H
a
CO
u
p^
w
>
u
oe!
rJ
-------
Table H-2. Uses of financial resources by the City of Bemidji, Minnesota,
for the year ending 31 December 1979 (Accountant's Report, City
of Bemidji, Minnesota, 31 December 1979).
CATEGORIES OF
EXPENDITURE
General
Current Expenditures
General Government $ 299,612
Public Safety 803,984
Streets and Highways 373,485
Health 18,647
Culture and Recreation
Unallocated 244,487
Total $1,740,215
Capital Outlay
General Government $ 10,000
Public Safety 2,797
Streets and Highways
Culture and Recreation
Unallocated
Total $ 12,797
Debt Service
Bond Retirement $
Interest and Fiscal
Agent Fees
Total $ 0
Other Uses
Transfers to Other Funds $
Decrease in Amount to be
Provided for Retirement
of Long-term Debt
Total $ 0
GOVERNMENT FOND TYPES
Special Debt Capital Special Total
Revenue Service Projects Assessment 1979
$ 163,138 $ - $ - $ $ 462,750 $
803,984
373,485
2,500 - - - 21,147
258,076 - - - 258,076
244,487
$ 423,714 $ 0 $ 0 $ Q $2,163,929 $1
$ 817,245 $ - $749,152 $ - $1,576,397 $
48,890 - 33,767 - 85,454
- - - -
80,438 - 80,438
-
$ 946,573 $ 0 $782,919 $ 0 $1,742,289 $
$ - $47,500 $ - $ - $ 47,500 $
15_,628 - 110,578 126,206
$ 0 $63,128 $ 0 $110,578 $ 173,706 $
$ 129,231 $ - $ - $680,000 $ 809,231 $
- - - 75,933 75,933
$ 129,231 $ 0 $ 0 $755,933 $ 885,164 $
1978
408,049
717,277
333,334
17,938
229,226
154,564
,860,388
95,229
21,263
73,776
11,262
9,796
211,326
42,500
137,449
179,949
155,113
155,113
Total Uses of Financial
Resources
$1,753,012 $1,499,518 $63,128 $782,919 $866,511 $1,180,282 $2,406,776
H-2
-------
Table H-3. City of Bemidji, Minnesota, tax levy (in mills) for 1979 and
1980 (By letter, Ms. Dorothy V. Boe, Acting City Manager,
City of Bemidji, to Mr. Dan Sweeney, WAPORA, Inc., 28 March
1980).
CATEGORY
General Fund
Library Fund
Park Fund
Permanent Improvement Fund
Firemen Relief Fund
Airport Fund
Bond Funds:
Armory
1968 Street Improvement
City Hall (G.O.)
Fire Hall (G.O.)
1976 Water and Sewer Refunding
Midway Drive Lighting
1979
11.6
0.4
2.5
3.0
0.2
2.5
0.1
0.2
1.5
2.4
0.1
1980
11.5
0.5
2.0
2.3
1.1
1.2
0.1
0.2
4.1
1.3
2.1
Total Mill Levy
24.5
26.4
Total Assessed Valuation of Property
in Bemidji
$20,166,823
$23,466,957
H-3
-------
Table H-4, Selected financial information related to bonding capability
for the City of Bemidji, Minnesota (Based on letter from
Ms. Dorothy V. Boe, Acting City Manager, City of Bemidji, to
Mr. Dan Sweeney, WAPORA, Inc., 28 March 1980 and Accountant's
Report, City of Bemidji, Minnesota, 31 December 1979).
1. City Indebtedness. For 1980, the legal indebtedness limit on General
Obligation Bonds for Bemidji is $1,562,899 (6 2/3% of total assessed
valuation of $23,466,957). The current level of indebtedness is
$825,000 (total is outstanding General Obligation Bonds on City Hall
and Fire Hall). Therefore, the existing debt capability for General
Obligation Bonds is $737,899.
2. City Bond Rating. The City's current bond rating is "A."
3. City Debt Service. Annual debt service in 1979 for the City of
Bemidji was $63,128. This included outlays for bond retirement,
interest, and fiscal agent fees.
4. Median Family Income. Median income for a family of four in Bemidji
is $12,200 (based on 1969 and 1979 decile distributions of family
income by SMSA and non-metropolitan counties estimated by HUD,
July 1979).
H-4
-------
Table H-5. 1979 quarterly user fees and estimated 1980 quarterly fees
established by the City of Bemidji.
Over
7,000
10,000
20,000
50,000
150,000
250,000
WATER
Up to gallons
7,000
10,000
20,000
50,000
150,000
250,000
999,999
1979
Base Amount + c/000 gal.
$ 9.15
9.15
11.70
18.50
36.50
87.50
130.50
+ .85/000 gal.
+ .68/000 gal.
+ .60/000 gal.
+ .51/000 gal.
+ .43/000 gal.
+ .34/000 gal.
1980C
$10.70
Over
9,000
10,000
20,000
50,000
150,000
250,000
SEWER
Up to gallons
9,000
10,000
20,000
50,000
150,000
250,000
999,999
Base Amount + C/000 gal.
$ 18.00
18.00 + 1.20/000 gal.
19.20 + 1.12/000 gal.
30.40 + .98/000 gal.
59.80 + .84/000 gal.
143.80 + .70/000 gal.
213.80 + .56/000 gal.
$21.60
REFUSE
Residential rates-
$4.50 per month for pick up of three $15.80
20 gallon cans ($13.50 per quarter).
$5.00 per month for pick up of three
20 gallon cans over 15 feet from
alley or street.
Additional 35 cents per can if there
are more than three cans at the residence.
Minimum charge of $11.75 per month.
Minimum charge of $2.50 for three cans or
equivalent. 35
-------
Table H-6. Current wastewater treatment user costs at Bemldji for a typical
family of four.
1. (80 gallons/capita/day) x (90 days/quarter) x (4 persons per family)
28,800 gallons/family/quarter.
2. Based on Table H-5, 1979 charges would be $30.40 + ($0.98 x 8.8)
$39.02/quarter = $156.00/year.
H-6
-------
USER CHARGE CALCULATION PROJECTION
METHODOLOGY
Potential annual residential user charges for a family of four have been
calculated for the wastewater management alternatives (Table H-7). These
estimates are based on the cost estimates presented in RCM's Task 5 Report
(1980). The share of the capital costs borne by the Federal, State, and
local governments is based on USEPA and MPCA guidelines.
For Alternatives 1 through 5 (conventional alternatives) the capital
cost distribution is:
• Federal share is 75% of grant eligible costs
• State share is 15% of grant eligible costs
• Local share is 10% of grant eligible costs,
plus grant ineligible costs.
For Alternative 6 (land treatment—an innovative alternative), the
capital cost distribution is:
• Federal share is 85% of grant eligible costs
• State share is 9% of grant eligible costs
• Local share is 6% of grant eligible costs,
plus grant ineligible costs.
The annual capital costs for each alternative are computed using the 7.125%
interest rate prescribed by the US Water Resources Council and a 20-year
analysis period.
USEPA, through the Construction Grants Program, can grant WWTP con-
struction funds only for capital costs that, according to regulations, are
grant eligible. The State share of the costs also is based on costs con-
sidered grant eligible. Grant eligible costs include most capital costs
associated with a wastewater treatment plan.
For purposes of analysis, all capital costs except the interest on money
borrowed during construction, have been considered grant eligible. The City
of Bemidjl must pay the interest costs in addition to its share of the grant
eligible costs. The City of Bemidji also is responsible for all operation
and maintenance (O&M) costs. These costs will be financed through user fees
established by the City.
H-7
-------
-si
to
I
4J
tfl
a
i-H
rt
4-1
fl
0)
4J
CO
•O
(1)
o>
o
8-
I
M-l
CO
cu
00
I
o
M
0)
co
3.
4J -H
S^1
3-a
CO CU
«,«
4J
•S01
3 M
» I
4S
4-> >>
C H
lant at ex
:h dlachirx
Lake Benl*.
d
o
i—
P
o
1C
I
§o
S
lA —
ii
O O
si
«•
o o
gl
•£
si
?s
t * -ff
§s
«
[
«n iA
§8
O O
12
s§
E
J
"1
r —
re" C
u <
Wi
^ o Si
sss
m PM o
•^ fs in
ill
£SS
g S g
HI
r-i fs »A
— . {Nd (N
S 0 ^.
§§§
K2P:
8£g
ggs
O*w*r^
O O 0
l«* lA Q
CM SC «-t
^ \O CC
OS -T ^
o o o
tr in S
O S Is
O* (N* ri
gss
O> »A r-
t
C ft£
*J 3
i *&.
— 1.1 C
— ^V^
6 ?l 1
*J -C C t. It
5 t""~ 1
oooooc dc^frff>
(N t O >-1 P^ •? (N *N <•
T^ O cs eo (N * PI
te in o «e tn ac
r*t IA rM •-< (N r~>
COO
lA r^ (Si
•* •* O -C -H fN
m r-i *N * <• n N
ON -C 80 -- -^ ^
RgS
*e •*• o -c -* r-
ON <• DC *H t^ OS
csj ^. £ _ ^ ^
SS5
O IA K S r-. <• r-* f^ac
ggg
OOOOOO fi ^' 00 O
(N^tAlAfSn -* ^^c p. -^ o IA ac
SS8SS8 S^g's;
*Si OO OD tN ON *M
g^S
OOOOOO .jino-*-
«* r^ 1-1 ^ S xC *~ rsl
X
K «
W V*
0, t;
> i>
e c it •» u
i. _ « e r
> w ' u y
I 15^1 £
tj jSlS"! 3 ^^a.
*j fi "" r £ C i-
« -^ i r i — — * t c
•- ec-c'c c 'xO
— 1 IT ft, tl 4) 4) OIIM *J ^
•S — -3 U (. t* XO K^Jfc.
C j.' K > > > r»s C £ C K /-s
fc i fr »• >- I- b^ C£ C
ec £ K a, ai c « ^- x>%Z ec
tfJ W Wj E -^ — — Ch
cisT^^t 0*^ c e *^ c '
-------
Typical residential user costs are estimated by determing the
percentage of design (year 2000) flow attributed to the residential
commercial sector of the community and the number of residents served by
the wasterwater facility. The year-2000 design flow is used to establish
present costs because the current residents will have to pay for the entire
facility immediately.
There are three major sectors contributing to the wastewater flow at
Bemidji:
• Residential/commercial sector
• Motels
• Bemidji State University.
The residential and commercial sectors are combined because separate data
are not available.
For the year 2000, the residential/commercial sector will account for
1.46 mgd (85%) of the total flow (Table H-8). The sector will be responsi-
ble for 85% of the total local costs (capital costs and operation and
maintenance costs. Infiltration and inflow contributions were not included
in the share of the cost attributed to each major contributing sector.
The estimated residential user costs for a family of four are based on
per capita costs (Table H-9). All cost estimated are based on a popultion
of 8,720 in the residential/commercial sector of the community presently
using the sewer system.
H-9
-------
Table H-8. Major contributions to year-2000 wastewater system, by sector,
at Bemidji (after RCM 1979a).
Flow
Major Sector (mgd)
Residential/Commercial 1.46 85
Motels 0.15 9
Bemidji State University 0.11 6
Subtotal 1.72 100
Infiltration/Inflow 0.28
Total 2.00
H-10
-------
Table H-9. Annual user charge estimate for the residential/commercial
sector. (Sample calculation is based on the tertiary option
for Alternative 3.)
Annual Costs:
• Total O&M = $446,250
• Per capita O&M = $446,250/8,720 - $51.20
• Total debt service = $165,040
• Per capita debt service = $165,040/8,720 = $18.90
Total annual per capita user fees » $70.10
Residential user charges
for a family of four = $70.10 x 4 • $280.40
• Monthly costs for a
family of four - $280.40/12 - $23.40
H-ll
-------
-DO
33
fl) O
o c
Ji-
ll
<0
f
o '
5T
"8 < 3.
2 £. s
- D 3 CD
O
T)
o
'"n m ~D
•0= o
!i
2.-n
Jl
n
A a.
------- |