U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
REPORT
ON
MADISON LAKE
BLUE EARTH COUNTY
MINNESOTA
EPA REGION V
WORKING PAPER No, 108
PACIFIC NORTHWEST ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
An Associate Laboratory of the
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER - CORVALLIS, OREGON
and
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
697.032
-------
REPORT
ON
MADISON LAKE
BLUE EARTH COUNTY
EPA REGION V
WORKING PAPER No, 108
WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY
AND THE
MINNESOTA NATIONAL GUARD
DECEMBER, 1974
-------
1
CONTENTS
Page
Foreword ii
List of Minnesota Study Lakes iv, v
Lake and Drainage Area Map vi
Sections
I. Conclusions 1
II. Lake and Drainage Basin Characteristics 3
III. Lake Water Quality Summary 4
IV. Nutrient Loadings 9
V. Literature Reviewed 14
VI. Appendices 15
-------
•11
FOREWORD
The National Eutrophication Survey was initiated in 1972 in
response to an Administration commitment to investigate the nation-
wide threat of accelerated eutrophication to fresh water 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
Survey’s 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 [ g303(e)], water
quality criteria/standards review [ 3O3(c)], clean lakes [ 3l4(a,b)],
and water quality monitoring [ lO6 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 Nation’s
fresh water 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 Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency for professional involvement and to the Minnesota National
Guard for conducting the tributary sampling phase of the Survey.
Grant J. Merritt, Director of the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency, John F. McGuire, Chief, and Joel G. Schilling, Biologist,
of the Section of Surface and Groundwater, Division of Water Quality,
provided invaluable lake documentation and counsel during the course
of the Survey; and the staff of the Sectiqn of Municipal Works, Divi-
sion of Water Quality, were most helpful in identifying point sources
and soliciting municipal participation in the Survey.
Major General Chester J. Moeglein, the Adjutant General of
Minnesota, and Project Officer Major Adrian Beltrand, who directed
the volunteer efforts of the Minnesota National Guardsmen, are also
gratefully acknowledged for their assistance to the Survey.
-------
iv
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
STUDY LAKES
STATE OF MINNESOTA
LAKE NAME COUNTY
Albert Lea Freeborn
Andrusia Beltrami
Badger Polk
Bartlett Koochiching
Bear Freeborn
Bemidji Beltrami
Big Stearns
Big Stone Big Stone, MN; Roberts,
Grant, SD
Birch Cass
Blackduck Beltrami
Blackhoof Crow Wing
Budd Martin
Buffalo Wright
Calhoun Hennepin
Caries Douglas
Carrigan Wright
Cass Beltrami, Cass
Clearwater Wright, Stearns
Cokato Wright
Cranberry Crow Wing
Darling Douglas
Elbow St. Louis
Embarass St. Louis
Fall Lake
Forest Washington
Green Kandiyohi
Gull Cass
Heron Jackson
Leech Cass
Le Homme Dieu Douglas
Lily Blue Earth
Little Grant
Lost St. Louis
-------
V
LAKE NAME COUNTY
Madison Blue Earth
Malmedal Pope
Mashkenode St. Louis
McQuade St. Louis
Minnetonka Hennepin
Minnewaska Pope
Mud Itasca
Nest Kandiyohi
Pelican St. Louis
Pepin Goodhue, Wabasha, MN;
Pierce, Pepin, WI
Rabbit Crow Wing
Sakatah Le Sueur
Shagawa St. Louis
Silver McLeod
Six Mile St. Louis
Spring Washington, Dakota
St. Croix Washington, MN; St. Croix,
Pierce, WI
St. Louis Bay St. Louis, MN; Douglas, WI
Superior Bay St. Louis, MN; Douglas, WI
Swan Itasca
Trace Todd
Trout Itasca
Wagonga Kandiyohi
Wailmark Chisago
White Bear Washington
Winona Douglas
Wolf Beltrami, Hubbard
Woodcock Kandiyohi
Zumbro Olmstead, Wabasha
-------
vi
2)
1 LAKE
— —
(
(
F
rn
C
m
C
ro
C
I
no
0•
Map Location
9348’
I
44’12’
&
MADISON LAKE
0 Tributary Sampling Site
X Lake Sampling Site
, 1 Direct Drainage Area Limits
0
-J .li.
Scale
-------
MADISON LAKE
STORET NO. 2750
I. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:
Survey data show that Madison Lake is eutrophic. Of the
60 Minnesota lakes sampled in the fall of 1972, when essentially
all were well—mixed, 25 had less mean total phosphorus, 23 had
less mean dissolved phosphorus, and 49 had less mean inorganic
nitrogen. Of the 80 Minnesota lakes sampled, 45 had less mean
chlorophyll a, and 41 had greater Secchi disc transparency.
Survey limnologists noted poor water quality conditions on
all sampling visits. Algal blooms, suspended solids, and anaero-
bic hypolimnetic conditions were observed.
B. Rate—Limiting Nutrient:
Results of the algal assay indicate that phosphorus was
the limiting nutrient at the time the sample was collected.
The lake data indicate phosphorus limitation during October
and nitrogen limitation during July and August.
C. Nutrient Controllability:
1. Point sources--During the sampling year, Madison Lake
received a total phosphorus load at a rate about 1.6 times the
rate proposed by Vollenweider (in press) as ildangerousu; i.e.,
a eutrophic rate (see page 13).
-------
2
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency has stipulated with
the Village of Madison for the construction of a wastewater
treatment plant which will discharge to the LeSueur River. When
this facility becomes operational, the phosphorus loading rate
of Madison Lake will be reduced to about 1.8 lbs/acre/yr or about
0.19 g/m 2 /yr. The reduced rate will be less than the eutrophic
rate and should result in a significant improvement in the trophic
condition of the lake.
2. Non-point sources-—It is estimated that non-point sources
contributed about 56% of the total phosphorus load to Madison Lake
during the sampling year.
-------
II. LAKE AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS
A. Lake Morphometry :
1. Surface area: 1,113 acres.
2. Mean depth: 13 feet.
3. Maximum depth: 59 feet.
4. Volume: 14,469 acre/feet.
5. Mean hydraulic retention time: 3.3 years.
B. Tributary and Outlet:
{See Appendix A for flow data)
1. Tributaries -
Drainage area* Mean flow*
No major tributaries
Minor tributaries & 2
immediate drainage - 22.1 mi 6.1 cfs
Total 22.1 mi2 6.1 cfs
2. Outlet -
Unnamed stream (A-l} 23.8 mi2** 6.1 cfs
C. Precipitation***:
1. Year of sampling: 28.7 inches.
2. Mean annual: 28.3 inches.
t DNR lake survey map (1970); mean depth by random-dot
method.
* Drainage areas are accurate within ±5%; mean daily flows are accurate
within ±10%; and ungaged flows are accurate within ±10 to 25% for
drainage areas greater than 10 mi2.
** Includes area of lake.
*** See Working Paper No. 1, "Survey Methods".
-------
4
III. LAKE WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
Madison Lake was sampled three times during the open-water season
of 1972 by means of a pontoon-equipped Huey helicopter. Each time,
samples for physical and chemical parameters were collected from two
stations on the lake and usually from two or more depths at each sta-
tion (see map, page vi). During each visit, a single depth-integrated
(15 feet or near bottom to surface) sample was composited from the
stations for phytoplankton identification and enumeration; and during
the last visit, a single five-gallon depth-integrated sample was com-
posited for algal assays. Also each time, a depth-integrated sample
was collected from each of the stations for chlorophyll a analysis.
The maximum depths sampled were 15 feet at station 1 and 31 feet at
station 2.
The results obtained are presented in full in Appendix B, and the
data for the fall sampling period, when the lake essentially was well-
mixed, are summarized below. Note, however, the Secchi disc summary
is based on all values.
For differences in the various parameters at the other sampling
times, refer to Appendix B.
-------
5
A. Physical and chemical characteristics:
FALL VALUES
(10/29/72)
Parameter Minimum Mean Median Maximum
Temperature (Cent.) 6.1 6.7 7.0 7.0
Dissolved oxygen (mg/i) 10.4 10.8 10.8 11.3
Conductivity (pnihos) 310 321 320 330
pH (units) 8.1 8.2 8.2 8.2
Alkalinity (mg/i) 131 132 131 134
Total P (mg/i) 0.036 0.047 0.045 0.058
Dissolved P (mg/i) 0.016 0.022 0.022 0.026
NO + NO (mg/i) 0.170 0.180 0.180 0.190
Am onia mg/1) 0.750 0.789 0.800 0.830
ALL VALUES
Secchi disc (inches) 27 34 32 46
-------
6
B. Biological characteristics:
1 . Phytoplankton -
Sampling Dominant Number
Date Genera per ml
07/01/72 1. Lyngbya 7,444
2. Anabaena 4,060
3. Flagellates 2,782
4. Microcystis 677
5. Raphidiopsis 602
Other genera 4,435
Total 20,000
08/30/72 1. Lyngbya 6,113
2. Dictyosphaerium 1,623
3. Merismopedia 1,358
4. Flagellates 1,207
5. Anabaena 566
Other genera 2,605
Total 13,472
10/24/72 1 . Anabaena 5,075
2. Chroococcus 1 ,357
3. Synedra 704
4. Cryptomonas 653
5. Kirchneriella 502
Other genera 2,965
Total 11,256
-------
7
2. Chlorophyll a -
(Because of instrumentation problems during the
the following values may be in error by plus or
07/01/72
08/30/72 01
02
10/29/72 01
02
Spike (mg/i )
Ortho P
Conc. (mg/i )
Inorganic N
Conc. (mg/i )
Maximum yield
( mg/i-dry wt. )
Sampling
Station
Chlorophyll
Date
Number
(pg/l)
1972 sampling,
minus 20 percent.)
01
02
a
61 .4
33 . 3
19.8
13.8
27.2
29.3
C. Limiting Nutrient Study:
1. Autoclaved, filtered, and nutrient spiked -
Control
0.005
0.010
0 .020
0.050
0.050
10.0 N
P
P
P
P
P + 10.0 N
0.020
0.750
3.8
0.025
0.750
6.4
0.030
0.750
8.0
0.040
0.750
11.7
0.070
0.750
17.6
0.070
10.750
24.0
0.020
10.750
3.1
-------
8
2. Discussion —
The control yield of the assay alga, Selenastrum capri-
cornutum , indicates that the potential primary productivity
of Madison Lake was somewhat high at the time the sample
was collected. Also, the increased yields with increased
levels of phosphorus indicate phosphorus limitation at that
time (note the addition of only nitrogen did not result in
a significantly different yield than that of the control).
However, the lake data indicate nitrogen limitation during
July and August (N/P ratios were 12/1 and 11/1, respectively,
and nitrogen limitation would be expected).
-------
9
IV. NUTRIENT LOADINGS
(See Appendix C for data)
For the determination of nutrient loadings, the Minnesota National
Guard collected monthly near-surface grab samples from the tributary
site indicated on the map (page vi). Sampling was begun in October,
1972, and was completed in August, 1973.
Through an interagency agreement, stream flow estimates for the year
of sampling and a “normalized” or average year were provided by the Minne-
sota District Office of the U.S. Geological Survey for the tributary sites
nearest the lake.
In this report, the outlet nutrient loads were determined by using a
modification of a U.S. Geological Survey computer program for calculating
stream loadings*. Nutrient loadings for unsampled “minor tributaries and
immediate drainage” (“ZZ” of U.S.G.S.) were estimated by using the nutrient
loads, in lbs/mi 2 /year, in a tributary to nearby Lily Lake at station B—i
and multiplying by the ZZ area in mi 2 .
The nutrient loads of the Village of Madison Lake were estimated at
2.5 lbs P and 7.5 lbs N/capita/year. The Madison Lake Creamery loads
were calculated on water use (20,000 gal/month; Miller, 1961) and typical
creamery wastewater nutrient concentrations (50 mg/l P and 70 mg/l N;
Boydston, 1973).
* See Working Paper No. 1.
-------
10
A. Waste Sources:
1. Known municipalt -
Pop. Mean Receiving
Name Served Treatment Flow (mgd) Water
Madison 587 none* 0.059** Madison Lake
2. Known industrial*** -
Mean Receiving
Name Product Treatment Flow (mgd) Water
Madison Lake butter none 0.001 Madison Lake
Creamery
t Anonymous, 1974.
* Partial collection system but no treatment; septic tank effluent
and raw sewage are discharged to Lake Madison.
** Estimated at 100 gal/capita/day.
*** Miller, 1961.
-------
11
B. Annual Total Phosphorus Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs —
lbsP/ %of
Source yr total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) —
None -
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 1,790 50.8
c. Known municipal STP’s -
None -
d. Septic tanks, Madison Lake - 1,470 41.6
e. Known industrial —
Madison Lake Creamery 100 2.8
f. Direct precipitation* - 170 4.8
Total 3,530 100.0
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - Unnamed Stream (A—i) 850
3. Net annual P accumulation — 2,680 pounds
* See Working Paper No. 1.
-------
12
C. Annual Total Nitrogen Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs —
lbsN/ %of
Source yr total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
None
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 95,600 86.2
c. Known municipal SIP’s -
None
d. Septic tanks, Madison Lake - 4,400 4.0
e. Known industrial -
Madison Lake Creamery 140 0.1
f. Direct precipitation* — 10,720 9.7
Total 110,860 100.0
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - Unnamed Stream (A-i) 42,670
3. Net annual N accumulation - 68,190 pounds
* See Working Paper No. 1.
-------
13
D. Yearly Loading Rates:
In the following table, the existing phosphorus loading
rates are compared to those proposed by Vollenweider (in press).
Essentially, his “dangerous” rate is the rate at which the
receiving waters would become eutrophic or remain eutrophic; his
“permissible” rate is that which would result in the receiving
water remaining oligotrophic or becoming oligotrophic if nior-
phometry permitted. A mesotrophic rate would be considered
one between “dangerous” and “permissible”.
Total Phosphorus Total Nitrogen
Units Total Accumulated Total Accumulated
lbs/acr /yr 3.2 2.4 99.6 61.3
grams/rn /yr 0.36 0.27 11.2 6.9
Volle weider loading rates for phosphorus
(g/m /yr) based on mean depth and mean
hydraulic retention time of Madison Lake:
“Dangerous” (eutrophic rate) 0.22
“Permissible” (oligotrophic rate) 0.11
-------
14
V. LITERATURE REVIEWED
Anonymous, 1974. Wastewater disposal facilities inventory. MPCA,
Minneapolis.
Boydston, James R., 1973. Personal communication (typical nutrient
concentrations in milk-processing waste waters). Waste Treatment
Branch, PNERL-EPA, Corvallis, Oregon.
Brott, Bruce W., and Edwin A. Smith, 1970. Report on proposed
wastewater treatment works for the Village of Madison Lake.
MPCA, Minneapolis.
Miller, Richard D., 1961. Report on investigation of Madison Lake,
Jamestown and LeRoy Townships, Blue Earth County. MN Dept.
of Health, Minneapolis.
Schilling, Joel, 1974. Personal communication (lake map, Madison
Lake wastewater treatment facility). MPCA, Minneapolis.
Vollenweider, Richard A., (in press). Input-output models. Schweiz
A. Hydrol.
-------
15
VII. APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
TRIBUTARY FLOW DATA
-------
TRIBUTARY FLOW INFORMATION FOR MINNESOTA 3/18/74
LAKE CODE 2750 MADISON LAKE
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE 23.R0
SUB—DRAINAGE NORMALIZED FLOWS
TRIBUTARY AREA JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MEAN
2750A1 23.80 0.29 0.56 3.53 24.10 12.00 14.70 6.47 4.08 2.33 2.54 2.03 0.72 6.11
2750ZZ 23.80 0.32 0.61 3.79 23.80 11.80 14.80 6.42 3.98 2,33 2.48 1.97 0,75 6.08
SUMMARY
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE = 23.80 TOTAL FLOW IN = 73.05
SUM OF SUB—DRAINAGE AREAS = 23.80 TOTAL FLOW OUT = 73.35
MEAN MONTHLY FLOWS AND DAILY FLOWS
TRIBUTARY MONTH YEAR MEAN FLOW DAY FLOW DAY FLOW DAY FLOW
2750A1 10 72 2.50 15 1.50
11 72 5.74 5 13.00
12 72 1.34 4 2.30
1 73 1.54 13 0.60
2 73 2.23 4 2.60
3 73 14.00 3 7.60
4 73 9.88 14 8.30
5 73 14.00 28 9.40
6 73 4.41
7 73 0.60 25 0.56
8 73 0.33 29 0.20
9 73 0.30
2750ZZ 10 72 2.45 15 1.40
11 72 5.57 5 13.00
12 72 1.40 4 2.40
1 73 1.70 12 0.60
? 73 2.43 4 2.20
3 73 15.10 3 8.20
4 73 9.76 14 8.20
5 73 13.80 28 9.20
6 73 4.44
7 73 0.64 25 0,60
8 73 0.32 89 0.22
9 73 0.30
-------
APPENDIX B
PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA
-------
ST’)P T PETPTEVAL 1)ATF 74/1 /40
?7500 1
44 11 48.0 093 48 00.0
MAI)ISON LA cE
27 MINNESOTA
F r O’i
TO
04 TE
F P O’l
T’)
TIME: OE T-1
OF
flaY FEET
0 i0 1
ATFR
IF MP
CF ‘1T
003 0 09071
no IRa ”sP
SF CC I
MG/L INCHES
00094
C NP() C T V Y
FIELI)
MICROMHO
00630
NO?&N03
N-TOTAL
MG/ L
00610
NH3-N
TOT AL
MG/L
7?/0 7/01
7?/ OM/30
7?/ 1 0/?
06 40 0000
10 10 0000
0 15 0000
61 •4J
19. 3J
27 •
T1”E flEDTr$
OF
DAY FEET
7?/07/0l 06 4Q 3000
72/09/10 10 10 0009
10 10 0004
10 10 0015
7?/10/2 Oh 15 0000
0 IS 0004
08 15 0010
2111202
0005 FEET
I 1EPALES
3
00400 00410
T AL c
CACO3
5 ( 1 MG/L
8.30 126
8.75 125
8.75 125
125
8.20 134
8.20 134
8.20 133
I 0 • 4
1.0
11.3
11.3
27 300
27 ?75
279
280
44 330
330
320
DEPTH
00665 00666
PHOS-TOT PHOS—DIS
MG/L P MC,/L P
74 • 0
77 • 9
19.?
6.2
J I 1
( 1L Pr4YL
A
(JC,/L
0.100
0.060
0 • 060
0 • 080
0 • 170
O • 170
0.190
0.080
0.080
0.080
0.520
0 • 750
0 • 750
0.760
0.102
0.041
0.0 50
0.052
0.036
0.044
0.051
0.0 25
0.0 17
0.017
0.0 20
0.017
0.0 22
0.021
J V ’LUF I’ NOv4N TO HE IN E’ W
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 74/10/30
DATE
FROM
TO
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
32217
CHLRPHYL
A
UG/L
275002
44 11 06.0 093 48 20.0
LAKE MADISON
27 MIN SOTA
7?/07f01
72/08/30
7 2/I 0/2Q
06 55 0000
10 25 0000
08 35 0000
33.3J
13.RJ
29.3J
I1EPALES 2111202
3 0021 FEET DEPTH
DATE
TIME
DEPTH
WATER
DO
TRANSP
CNDUCTVY
PH
T
ALX
NO2 .NO3
NH3—N
PHOS—TOT
PHOS—DIS
FROM
OF
TEMP
SECCHI
FIELD
CACO3
N—TOTAL
TOTAL
TO
DAY
FEET
CENT
MG/L
INCHES
MICROMHO
SU
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L P
MG/L P
72/07/01
06 55 0000
23.0
9.4
27
300
8.50
124
0.080
0.080
0.070
0.021
06 55 0020
20.0
0.3
340
7.60
139
0.150
0.280
0.058
0.017
72/08/30
10 25 0000
36
270
8.65
10 25 0004
22.2
9.8
280
8.68
10 25 0015
19.7
2.4
285
7.50
126
0.060
0.420
0.038
0.018
10 25 0022
19.1
0.6
300
7.50
129
0.060
0.700
0.039
0.017
10 25 0031
17.8
0.2
335
7.20
147
0.170
0.030
0.239
0.122
72/10/29
04 35 0000
40
320
8.20
131
0.180
0.800
0.040
0.016
04 35 0004
7.0
10.8
310
8.20
131
0.180
0.820
0.054
0.026
08 35 0015
7.0
10,4
310
8.10
131
0.190
0.830
0.058
0.026
08 35 0024
7.0
10.4
325
8.10
131
0.180
J VALUE kNOWN TO BE IN ERROR
-------
APPENDIX C
TRIBUTARY DATA
-------
STOPFT T TF VAL DAT- 74/l(’/10
2150A 1 LS2750A1
44 10 30.0 093 49 00.0
UNNAMED STPEAM
IS MANi ATO EAST
0/MADISON L4 E.
r4Ri)G 1.5 MI S OF CITY OF MADISON LAKE
I IE?ALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
u 7 5 OOe ’I O 00S7 1 00h ’5
OAIF TI W DFPTM N(i? NO3 T1 T KJEL NJH3—N PHOS—DIS PHOS—TOt
FQQM OF N—TOTAL N ToT t OPTHO
TO DAY F T MC,/L i(./ 1G/L M(/L P M&/L P
7?/I0/lS 14 5 ).1- 0 ?.v O O (.410 0.010 0.0 0
7?/I1/0S 10 flU ).‘ 1O .9Ofl “i.(’1 0.008 0.07?
7?/ 12/04 0.1-” 0.Y40 0.39? 0.020 0.037
71/ 01/I l 15 ( 0 0. F i .4flO ).755 0.005K 0.035
73/0?/04 14 00 O.33 ?.3 ’0 j.7S0 0.00 0.055
71/03/03 4.40” ?.40 0. 0 0.014 0.052
73/03/?3 (H 30 1. Ah ’) 4.q OU 1 ).005K 0.022 0.1L+0
71/04/1” 4. O0 u. 30 0. O1Y 0.09 5
71/05/? ’ (..P , 0 C .)tDfl .330 0.023 u.0 0
73/c)7/25 IR 4S 3.0 1 0K ?.‘ o ‘.C33 0.010 0.0 5
73/ ( H/2 iS 30 o.oii’ c 2•7 j 3.04R 0.U?R 0.151)
K VALUE KNO N TO E LESS
THAN INDICATED
------- |