U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY WORKING PAPER SERIES REPORT ON ENEMY SWIM LAKE mv COUNTY SdTl-l EAKPTA EPA REGION VIII WDRKING PAPER No, 608 CORVALLIS ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY - CORVALLIS, OREGON and ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING & SUPPORT LABORATORY - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA 699-440 ------- REPORT ON ENEMY SWIM LAKE MY OMY SOUTH DAMHTA EPA REGION VIII WORKING PAPER No, 608 WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE SOOTH DAKOTA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND THE SOUTH DAKOTA NATIONAL GUARD JANUARY, 1977 ------- 1 CONTENTS Page Foreward ii List of South Dakota Study Lakes iv Lake and Drainage Area Map v Sections I. Conclusions 1 II. Lake and Drainage Basin Characteristics 1 III. Lake Water Quality Surrniary 2 IV. Nutrient Loadings 3 V. Literature Reviewed 7 VI. Appendices 8 ------- 11 FOREWORD The National Eutrophication Survey was initiated in 1972 in response to an Administration comitment to investigate the nation- wide threat of accelerated eutrophication to freshwater lakes and reservoirs. OBJECTIVES The Survey was designed to develop, in conjunction with state environmental agencies, information on nutrient sources, concentrations, and impact on selected freshwater lakes as a basis for formulating comprehensive and coordinated national, regional, and state management practices relating to point-source discharge reduction and non-point source pollution abatement in lake watersheds. ANALYTIC APPROACH The mathematical and statistical procedures selected for the Surveys eutrophication analysis are based on related concepts that: a. A generalized representation or model relating sources, concentrations, and impacts can be constructed. b. By applying measurements of relevant parameters associated with lake degradation, the generalized model can be transformed into an operational representation of a lake, its drainage basin, and related nutrients. c. With such a transformation, an assessment of the potential for eutrophication control can be made. LAKE ANALYSIS In this report, the first stage of evaluation of lake and water- shed data collected from the study lake and its drainage basin is documented. The report is formatted to provide state environmental agencies with specific information for basin planning [ 3O3(e)], water quality criteria/standards review [ 3O3(c)], clean lakes { 314(a,b)], and water quality monitoring [ 5106 and §305(b)] activities mandated by the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972. ------- 111 Beyond the single lake analysis, broader based correlations between nutrient concentrations (and loading) and trophic condi- . tion are being made to advance the rationale and data base for refinement of nutrient water quality criteria for the Nations freshwater lakes. Likewise, multivariate evaluations for the relationships between land use, nutrient export, and trophic condition, by lake class or use, are being developed to assist in the formulation of planning guidelines and policies by EPA and to augment plans implementation by the states. ACKNOWLEDGMENT The staff of the National Eutrophication Survey (Office of Research & Development, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency) expresses sincere appreciation to the South Dakota Departments of Environmental Protection and Game, Fish and Parks for professional involvement, to the South Dakota National Guard for conducting the tributary sampling phase of the Survey, and to those wastewater treatment plant operators who voluntarily provided effluent samples. Allyn Lockner, Secretary, and Blame Barker and Duane Murphy, Department of Environmental Quality; Douglas Hansen, Department of Game, Fish and Parks; and James Hayden, Director, State Lakes Preservation Conrnittee provided invaluable lake documentation and counsel during the Survey, reviewed the preliminary reports, and provided critiques most useful in the preparation of this Working Paper series. Major General Duane L. Corning, the Adjutant General of South Dakota, and Project Officer Colonel Robert D. Chalberg, who directed the volunteer efforts of the South Dakota National Guardsmen, are also gratefully acknowledged for their assistance to the Survey. ------- iv NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY STUDY LAKES STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA LAKE NAME COUNTY Albert Kingsbury Alvin Lincoln Angostura Fall River Brant Lake Byron Beadle Clear Marshall Clear Minnehaha Cochrane Deuel Cottonwood Spink Deerfield Pennington Enemy Swim Day Herman Lake John Hamlin Kampeska Codington Madison Lake Mitchell Davidson Norden Hamlin East Oakwood Brookings West Oakwood Brookings Pactola Pennington Pickerel Day Poinsett Brookings, Lake Red Iron South Marshall Richmond Brown Roy Marshall Sand Brown Sheridan Pennington Stockdale Custer East Vermillion McCook Wall Minnehaha Waubay Day ------- 4527 4526 9718 9716 1 C I Map Location ENEMY SWIM LAKE x Lake Sampling Site ? I I ?Km. 0 4 Mi. Scale / 4&25 I I I ------- ENEMY SWIM LAKE STORET NO. 4611 I. INTRODUCTiON Enemy Swim Lake was included in the National Eutrophication Survey as a water body of interest to the South Dakota Departments of Environ- mental Protection and Game, Fish, and Parks. Tributaries and nutrient sources were not sampled, and this report relates only to the lake sampling data. II. CONCLUSIONS A. Trophic Condition: Survey data indicate that Enemy Swim Lake is eutrophic. It ranked fourth in overall trophic quality when the 31 South Dakota lakes sampled in 1974 were compared using a combination of six parameters*. Four lakes had less and one had the same median total phosphorus, eight had less median dissolved orthophosphorus, five had less and one had the same median inorganic nitrogen, seven had less mean chlorophyll a, and 12 had greater mean Secchi disc transparency. Survey limnologists noted a light algal bloom in July and macrophytes in some of the shallow areas in September. B. RateLimiting Nutrient: The algal assay results are not considered representative of conditions in the lake at the time the sample was collected (04/25/74). However, the lake data indicate nitrogen limitation at all sampling stations and times. * See Appeiidix A ------- 2 III. LAKE AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICSt A. Lake Morphometry tm : 1. Surface area: 8.68 kilometers 2 . 2. Mean depth: 3.0 meters. 3. Maximum depth: 7.9 meters. 4. Volume: 26.040 x 106 m 3 . B. Precipitation*: 1. Year of sampling: 31.3 centimeters. 2. Mean annual: 51.0 centimeters. -I- Table of metric equivalents__Appendix B. ft Murphey, 1974. * See Working Paper No. 175, ...Survey Methods, 1973-l976 . ------- 3 IV. LAKE WATER QUALITY SUMMARY Enemy Swim Lake was sampled three times durinq the open-water season of 1974 by means of a pontoon-equipped Huey helicopter. The first time, samples for physical and chemical parameters were collected from several depths at one station on the lake. On succeeding visits, samples were collected from two stations on the lake and from two or more depths at each of the stations (see map, page v). During each visit, a single depth-integrated (4.6 m or near bottom to surface) sample was composited from the station(s) sampled for phytoplankton identification and enumer- ation; and during the first visit, a single 18.9-liter depth-integrated sample was collected for algal assays. Also each tine, a depthintegrated sample was collected from each station sampled for chlorophyll a analysis. The maximum depths sampled were 6.1 meters at station 1 and 4.3 meters at station 2. The sampling results are presented in full in Appendix C and are sumarized in the following table. ------- 1 SITES A. SUMMARY OF P 1ySlC4L AND CHEMICAL CHA iACTE ..IS1ICS FUp LNEM SwIM LA cE STOP ET COt)E 4611 1ST SAMPLING ( 4/25/7.) 2N0 SAMPLING ( 7/11/74) 2 SITES 3rW SAM LtNG ( 9/19/74) 2 SITES PARAMETER RANGE MEAN MEDIAN AN6E MEAN MEDIAN P ANGE MEAN MEDiAN TEMP (C) 7.0 8.2 7.5 7.3 23.9 24.2 24.1 24.0 15.0 15.. 15.2 15.2 DISS OXS (M( /L) 10.a 11.2 11.0 11.2 6.8 7.2 7.0 7.0 8.6 9.o 9.4 9.6 CNDCTVY (MCROMO) 300. 310. 30.. 302. 544. 546. 545. 545. 367. 375. 371. 370. PH (STAND UNITS) *** O* ******O*o******o oe 8.8 8.9 8.9 8.9 8.7 8.8 8.7 r4.7 TO1 ALK (MG/L) 224. 240. 231. 230. 248. 270. 259. 259. 38S. 430. 405. 403. TOT P (MG/L) 0.022 0.032 0.026 0.025 0.037 0.040 0.039 0.039 0.029 0.380 0.119 0.03. ORTHO P (HG/L) 0.007 0.009 0.008 0.008 0.013 0.028 0.017 0.016 0.008 0.014 0.011 0.012 N02.N03 (MG/L) 0.040 0.100 (1.060 0.050 o.o .o 0.090 0.065 0.065 0. Od O o.o u 0.020 O.0 0 AMMONIA (MG/L) 0.030 0.050 0.037 0.035 0.030 0.060 0.047 0.050 0.020 0.040 0.030 0.030 rcJEL N (UG/L) 0.800 1.000 0.900 0.900 0.900 1.000 0.933 0.900 1.100 3.900 1.875 1.250 INO G N (MG/L) 0.070 0.150 0.097 0.08S 0.080 0.150 0.112 0.115 0.040 (1.060 0.050 0.050 TOTAL N (MG/L) 0.850 1.100 0.960 0.945 0.960 1.090 0.998 0.970 1.120 3.920 1.895 1.2 0 CHLRPYL A (UG/L) 23.9 23.9 23.9 23.9 12.2 13.4 12.8 12.8 10.7 10.8 10.7 10.7 SECC-41 (METEPS) 2. 2.2 2.2 2.2 1.2 1.5 1.4 1.4 1.1 ------- 5 B. Biological characteristics: 1. Phytoplankton - Sampling Dominant Algal Units Date Genera p r ml 04/25/74 1. Chroomonas p. 3,573 2. Asterjonella 2,349 3. Flagellates 1,026 4. Fragilaria . 992 5. Dinobryon . 529 Other genera 596 Total 9,065 07/11/74 1. Aphanothece p. 1,576 2. Chroomorias 649 3. Oocystis p. 417 4. Melosira p. 278 5. Fragilaria p. 232 Other genera 371 Total 3,523 09/19/74 1. Fragilaria . 1,863 2. Coelosphaerium . 1,139 3. Aphanothece . 362 4. Oocystis . a 311 5. hanizonienon .a 207 Other genera 569 Total 4,451 2. Chlorophyll a - Sampling Station Chlorophyll a Date Number ( jig/i ) 04/25/74 1 23.9 2 - 07/11/74 1 12.2 2 13.4 09/19/74 1 10.7 2 10.8 ------- 6 C. Limiting Nutrient Study: A significant loss of nutrients occurred in the assay sample between the time of collection and the beginninq of the assay, and the results are not indicative of conditions in the lake at the time the sample was taken (04/25/74). The lake data indicate nitrogen limitation at all sampling stations and times; i.e., all of the mean inoroanic nitrogen! orthophosphorus ratios were 12/1 or less, and nitrogen limi- tation would be expected. ------- 7 V. LITERATURE REVIEWED Murphey, Duane G., 1974. Personal communication (lake morphometry). SD Dept. of Env. Prot., Pierre. Petri, Lester R., and L. Rodney Larson, 1966(?). Quality of water in selected lakes of eastern South Dakota. Rept. of mv. #1, SD Water Res. Comm., Pierre. Schmidt, Artwin E., 1967. Limnology of selected South Dakota lakes. MS thesis, SD St. U., Brookings. ------- 8 Vi. APPENDICES APPENDIX A LAKE RANKINGS ------- DATA TO BE USED IN RANKINGS LAcE LacE CODE LAKE NAME MEDIAN TOTAL P MEDIAN IN0 G N 500 MEAN SEC MEAN CPILORA is MIN DO DISS ORTHO 4601 LAKE ALBE . T 0.321 0.170 489.111 106.289 9.200 0.O 9 4602 ALVIN LAKE 0.067 0.973 44d.833 4.700 .400 0.017 4603 ANGOSTURA RESERVOIR 0.019 0.160 423.333 3.717 13.000 0.005 4604 AMT LAKE 0.194 0.130 432.833 34.150 11.800 0.113 605 LAKE. BYRON 0.443 0.370 488.333 149.350 9.000 0.146 4606 CLEAR LAKE 0.027 u.075 430.167 11.983 8.800 0.009 4607 CLEAR LAKE 1.400 0.270 495.333 691.000 7.000 0.468 4608 COCHRAP.E LAKE 0.037 0.150 446.000 15.683 15.000 0.008 4609 COTTO WOO0 LAKE 0.685 0.265 490.333 112.017 8.600 0.417 4610 DEERFIELD RESERVOIR 0.033 0.080 303.333 3.650 15.000 0.022 .611 ENEMY SWIM LAKE 0.037 0.085 442.600 14.200 8.200 0.013 4612 LAKE HERMAN 0.340 0.155 485.000 58.733 8.600 0.174 4613 ST JOHN LAKE 0.34 l 0.080 489.400 1 0.880 9.800 0.025 4614 LAKE KAMPESKA 0.220 0.105 468.889 20.567 8.200 0.128 4615 MADISON LAKE 0.253 0.090 445.555 22.578 14.000 0.107 4616 LAKE MITCHELL 0.099 0.085 465.833 14.883 13.800 0.015 .617 LAKE NOQOEN 0.256 0.165 488.667 46.800 10.000 0.050 4618 OAKWOOI) LAKE EAST 0.146 0.175 487.000 113.600 10.000 0.009 4619 OAK OOO LAKE WEST 0.181 0.135 485.833 159.667 9.600 0.021 .620 PACTOLA RESERVOIR 0.011 0.070 248.444 1.478 11.000 0.006 4621 PICKEREL LAKE 0.049 0.095 39.833 15.833 9.600 0.009 4622 LAKE POINSETT 0.115 0.315 468.444 40.211 10.000 0.023 4623 LAKE PEO IRON SOUTH 0.042 0.110 430.333 6.883 7.600 0.010 462 RICHMOND LAKE 0.187 0.150 410.000 18.467 10.000 0.144 4625 POY LAKE 0.03. 0.070 .31.000 13.333 11.000 0.010 4626 SAND LAKE 0.489 0.110 471.800 65.790 12.800 0.288 4627 SHERIDAN LAKE 0.053 0.105 394.000 15.433 15.000 0.016 4628 STOCKADE LAKE 0.233 0.150 432.000 25.400 15.000 0.109 ------- LAKE DATA TO BE USED IN RANKINGS LAKE CODE 4629 630 463L LAKE NAME LAKE VERMILLION WALL LAKE WAUt3AY LAKE NORT 1 MEDIAN TOTAL P MEDIAN ZNORG N 500 MEAN SEC MEAN CHLO A 15 MIN DO MEDIAN DISS O THO I 0.211 0.300 472.833 100.800 9.200 0.092 0.194 0.160 441.667 55.267 7.400 0.076 0.09 0.345 469.555 127.033 11.400 0.023 ------- PERCENT OF LAKES WIT i HIGHER VALUES (NUMBER OF LAKES WITH MIGHEP VALUES) LAKE MEDIAN MEDIAN 500 MEAN 15 MEDIAN INDEX CODE LAKE NAME TOTAL P INORG N MEAN SEC C 1LO A MIN DO 0155 ORTriO P NO 4631 LAKE ALBEPT 20 C 6) 20 ( 6) 10 C 3) 23 ( 7) 68 C 20) 60 C 18) 201 4602 ALVIN LAKE 67 C 20) 0 C 0) 57 ( 17) 90 C 27) 63 ( 19) 63 C P ) 3 .O 4603 AP iGOSTURA RE5E VOIP 97 ( 29) 30 C 9) 87 C 26) 93 C 28) 20 C 6) 100 30) 427 4604 BRANT LAKE 40 C 12) 53 C 16) 70 ( 21) 47 ( 14) 27 C 8) 23 ( 7) 260 4605 LAKE BYRON 10 ( 3) 3 C 1) 17 C 5) 7 C 2) 73 C 22) 13 C 4) 123 4606 CLEAR LAKE 93 ( 28) 93 ( 28) 83 C 25) 83 C 25) 77 C 23) 90 1 27) S1 4607 CLEAR LAKE 0 ( 0) 10 1 3 0 C 0) 0 C 0) 100 C 30) 0 C 0) 110 4638 COCr1RANE LAKE 83 ( 25) 40 ( 11) 50 C 15) 67 C 20) 5 C 0) 93 C 28) 338 4609 COTTONwOOD LAKE 3 C 1) 13 C 4) 3 C 1) 20 C 6) 82 C 24) 3 ( 1) 124 4610 DEERFIELD RESERVO1 90 C 27) 88 C 26) 97 C 29) 97 C 29) 5 C 0) 53 C 16) 430 4611 ENEMY SWIM LAKE 80 C 24) 82 ( 24) 60 C 18) 77 C 23) 88 ( 26) 73 C 22) 460 4612 LAKE HERMAN 17 C 5) 33 ( 10) 27 C 8) 33 C 10) 82 1 24) 10 C 3) 202 461 i ST JOHN LAKE 13 C 4) 88 C 26) 7 ( 2) 13 C 4) 53 1 16) 43 1 13) 217 4614 LAKE KAMPESKA 33 C 10) aS C 19) 40 C 12) 57 ( 17) 88 C 26) 20 C 6) 303 615 MADISON LAKE 27 C 8) 77 C 23) 53 C 16) 53 C 16) 13 C 4) 30 C 9) 253 4616 LAKE MITCI4ELL 60 C 18) 82 C 24) 47 C 14) 73 C 22) 17 C 5) 70 C 21) 349 4617 LAKE NORDEN 23 C 7) 23 C 7) 13 C 4) 40 C 12) 45 C 12) 40 1 12) 184 4618 OAica000 LAKE EAST 53 ( 16) 17 ( 5) 20 C 6) 17 C 5) 45 C 12) 85 1 25) 237 4619 OAKW000 LAKE WEST 50 C 15) 50 C 15) 23 C 7) 3 C 1) 58 C 17) 57 C 17) 241 4620 PACTOLA PESERVOIR 100 C 30) 98 C 29 100 C 30) 100 C 30) 35 C 10) 97 C 29) 530 4621 PICKEREL LAKE 73 C 22) 73 C 22) 67 C 20) 63 C 19) 58 C 17) 85 1 25) 419 4622 LAKE POINSETT 57 ( 17) 7 C 2) 43 1 13) 43 ( 13) 45 C 12) 47 ( 14) 242 4623 LAKE RED IRON SOUTH 77 23) 58 C 17) 80 C 24) 87 ( 2b) 93 C 28) 78 C 23) 413 6624 RICHMOND LAKE 47 C 14) 40 1 11) 90 C 27) 60 C 18) 45 C 12) 11 C 5) 299 4625 ROY LAKE 87 C 26) 98 C 29) 77 C 23) 80 1 24) 35 1 10) 78 C 23) 455 4626 SAND LAKE 7 C 2) 58 1 17) 33 C 10) 30 ( 9) 23 C 7) 7 C 2) 158 4627 S iERIDAN LAKE 70 C 21) 65 C 19) 93 C 28) 70 1 21) 5 C 0) 67 C 20) 370 4628 STOCKADE LAKE 30 C 9) 40 C 11) 73 C 22) 50 C 15) 5 1 0) 27 L. 8) 225 ------- LAKE NAME LAKE VEPHILLION WALL LAKE WAUBAY LAKE NORTP4 37 ( 11) 43 ( 13) 63 C 19) 70 C 21) 27 C 8) 47 C 14) 15- MEDIAN P IIN 00 DISS ORTriO P 33 ( 10) 37 C 11) 50 ( 15) INDEX NO 265 304 237 PERCENT OF LAKES WITH HIGHER VALUES NUU8EP OF LAKES wITH HIGHEIC VALUES) LAKE MEDIAN MEDIAN 500 CODE TOTAL P It OPG N MEAN SEC 4629 4b 30 4631 30 C 9) 63 C 19) 37 ( 11) r4EAPd CMLO A 27 C 8) 37 C 11) 10 C 3) 68 C 20) 97 C 29) 30 C 9) ------- LAKES RANKED BY INDEX NOS. RANK LAKE CODE LAKE NAME INDEX NO 1 4620 PACTOLA RESERVOIR 530 2 6606 CLEAR LAKE 519 4623 LAKE RED IRON SOUTH 473 4 4611 ENEMY SWIM LAKE 460 5 4625 ROY LAKE 6 4610 DEERFIELO RESERVOIR 430 7 4603 ANGOSTURA RESERVOIR 427 8 4621 PICKEREL LAKE 419 9 4627 SHERIDAN LAKE 370 10 4616 LAKE MITCHELL 349 11 4602 ALVIN LAKE 340 12 4608 COCHRANE LAKE 338 13 4630 WALL LAKE 304 14 4614 LAKE KAMP(SKA 303 15 4624 RICHMOND LAKE 299 16 4629 LAKE VERMILLION 265 17 4604 BRANT LAKE 260 18 4615 MADISON LAKE 253 19 4622 LAKE POINSETT 242 20 4619 OAKW000 LAKE WEST 241 21 4631 WAUBAY LAKE NORTH 237 22 4618 OAK OO() LAKE EAST 237 23 4628 STOCKADE LAKE 225 24 4513 ST JOHN LAKE 217 25 4512 LAKE HERMAN 202 26 4601 LAKE ALBERT 201 27 4617 LArcE NOROEN 1e4 28 4626 SAND LeAKE 153 ------- LAcES RANKED BY INDEX MOS. RANK LAKE CODE LAr E NANE INDEX NO 29 4609 COTTUNW000 LAKE 124 30 4605 LAKE bYRON 123 31 4607 CLEAR LAKE 110 ------- APPENDIX B CONVERSION FACTORS ------- CONVERSION FA(;TORS Hectares x 2.471 acres Kilometers x 0.6214 = miles Meters x 3.281 = feet Cubic meters x 8.107 x 10 = acre/feet Square kilometers x 0.3861 = square miles Cubic meters/sec x 35.315 = cubic feet/sec Centimeters x 0.3937 = inches Kilograms x 2.205 = pounds Kilograms/square kilometer x 5.711 = lbs/square mile ------- APPENDIX C PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA ------- T) ET .j 1E 7 /1i/ 45110 1 .5 2b 3C.0 096 16 15.0 EJ 9T IM LAKE -.5j31 ,ujr-i JT A 1 P- LES l 11202 0024 FEET 1)E- T-i 74/04/25 15 (iS 3000 15 05 O0S 15 05 001 1 05 (,020 74/ 07/Il 00 j0 0 15 f uOC3 15 00 C0d 74/uS (/ IM 13 i5 J000 13 OOCiS 13 55 .j013 13 5 jOEJ 32217 pr- 1 0ST0T LriL- (- YL A MG/L ? UG/L ..022 C .02. i .032 t .0. ) u 0 i) C .0 L) INC.)T LT lE4NING )ATE ri; DEPT-i OF TO (JAY FLET 7./,j /2S 15 flS (00) IS uS 0 i0 15 05 i 015 IS 05 0020 7 /C7/1I t-5 0 0000 IS 00 000-i oOdo 7./ji/l 13 cc u000 13 55 0020 DAT TIME )LPTH F J )F TO OuY t.ET 0010 003L 0)077 00094 00400 00 .10 O Os l O 00a25 00s30 . TFi DO T. arS - CNOUCT .Y T ALK iir,3i TOT r JEL O2 .i 03 Pr-IOSόIS TEi SECC-l FLELO CACO3 TOTAL N lTUTAL O TPIO CtNI 1G/L 1NC- E M1C OMhU M(,/L MG/L MG/L MG/L MG/L P 310 224 0.0 0 1.000 0.100 0.008 7.5 11.2 303 230 0.030 0.900 0.040 0.007 7.1 11.2 301 230 0.030 0.800 0.050 0.008 7.0 10.6 300 240 0.040 0.900 0.050 0.009 ? ..t, 7.u 545 d.90 268 0.060 1.000 0.090 0.O1 2 ...j 7.0 544 8.90 248 0.050 0.900 0.070 0.013 3., 6. 544 8.90 248 0.050 0.900 0.070 0.016 15.1 9 d 3b9 8.75 .30 0.030 1.400 0.020k 0.010 15.i - .8 3b7 8.77 385 0.030 1.100 0.020K 0.014 23.9 17.2 1 o 7 50.0 5.0 1.0 K VALUE KNOWN TO 8E LESS THAN INDICAT O ------- )- T ET IEIAL iD/l1/ ) 4 1 102 45 4+ iS.0 (.97 is 00.0 .1EM S 1M LAKE 6 UiJTri L)Ar (J1A I IEP Lt.S 2111202 0016 F 1ET 0E, Tr- 74/07/11 14 35 0000 1 . 35 COOS 14 35 ,014 74/09/1 14 12 0000 1 12 (I0 1. 12 0012 14 12 0014 14 12 u016 0(665 32217 PriOS-TOT C1L. Pr-IYL A U.3/L .037 1.03 0 3 030 0 320 u 303 1 INCUT LI MJ1NG P r CLjT . 1L TI ;- j ;- Ta DAY FLET 7-./07/11 14 S 1 35 14 35 aOU( OCsuS 0014 7 /09/19 14 12 1 I? 0000 CO!- QATE TIME DE. TrI F -OM OF T U Y FL T 0 3)13 J03 c, C 377 U.J + 00400 00410 O Ob lO 00625 00630 00671 O T- .NS CNOUCIV( i r ALIS N-$3 TuT KJEL NOd NO3 PriOSUlS TEi -) SECCrI FIELIJ CACJJ TOTAL N dTOTUL ORTr-10 Ct ii ML -/L I Cr4LS MICPUM- 0 So lG/L M(,/L Mu/L MG/L MG/L P 2 . 7.2 546 8. 0 270 0.040 1.000 0.040 0.014 24.2 b. 546 8. O 262 0.050 0.900 0.060 0.016 24.u 7.0 545 8.60 256 0.030 0.900 0.060 0.028 15.4 g.6 +3 375 8.73 395 0.020 1.100 0.020 K 0.008 15.2 3.6 371 8.73 +10 0.0.0 3.900 0.020K 0.01. 13.4 10.4 2.0 K VALUE KNOWN TO BE LESS THAN INOIC TED ------- |