U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
REPORT
ON
NEST LAKE
MNDIYOHI COUNTY
MINNESOTA
EPA REGION V
WORKING PAPER No, 117
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-O3Z
-------
REPORT
ON
NEST LAKE
KWIYOHI COMFY
MINNESOTA
EPA REGION V
WORKING PAPER No, 117
WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY
AND THE
MINNESOTA NATIONAL GUARD
NOVEMBER, 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 g
V. Literature Reviewed 14
VI. Appendices 15
-------
11
FOREWORD
The National Eutrophication Survey was initiated in 1972 in
response to an Administration conimitrnent 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 assessr ent 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)J, water
quality criteria/standards review [ g303(c)], clean lakes [ g314(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. F4cGuire, 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 Section 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 Beltranii
Blackhoof Crow Wing
Budd Martin
Buffalo Wright
Calhoun Hennepin
Carlos 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 Home 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 0 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
Wallmark Chisago
White Bear Washington
Winona Douglas
Wolf Beltrami, Hubbard
Woodcock Kandiyohi
Zumbro Olmstead, Wabasha
-------
vi
ing Site No. Cl
—
NEST LAKE
) Tributary Sampling Site
X Lake Sampling Site
Sewage Treatment Facility
Direct Drainage Area Limits
Scale
Map Location
1>
(
/
0
Lf’
-------
NEST LAKE
STORET NO. 27B3
I. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:
Survey data show that Nest Lake is eutrophic. Of the 60
Minnesota lakes sampled in the fall when essentially all were
well-mixed, 25 had less mean total phosphorus, and 16 had less
mean inorganic nitrogen. For all 80 lakes sampled, 46% had
greater transparency, and 59% had less mean chlorophyll a.
Depression and near depletion of dissolved oxygen with depth
occurred in early August and late August of 1972.
Survey limnologists observed an algal bloom in progress in
August; and, reportedly, Nest Lake has been chemically treated
for control of both algae and rooted aquatic vegetation (Bonnema
and Johnson, 1972).
B. Rate-Limiting Nutrient:
Algal assay results show that Nest Lake was nitrogen limited
at the time the assay sample was collected. Lake data show
nitrogen limitation at the other sampling times as well (N/P
ratios were less than loll).
C. Nutrient Controllability:
1. Point sources--During the sampling year, Nest Lake
received a total phosphorus load at a rate in excess of that
-------
2
proposed by Vollenweider (in press) as “dangerous 11 ; i.e., a
eutrophic rate (see page 13). Of this load, it is estimated
that the communities of Belgrade and New London, collectively,
contributed about 57% (it is assumed that all of the P load
from Belgrade reached Nest Lake, although a sizable nutrient
trap--Mud Lake near New London--lies between the STP and Nest
Lake).
It is calculated that 80% phosphorus removal at the two point
sources would reduce the loading rate to 0.43 g/m 2 /yr or less than
a ‘ 1 dangerous” rate, and it is concluded that phosphorus control
at Belgrade and New London would result In improvement of the
trophic condition of Nest Lake as well as the condition of down-
stream Green Lake.
2. Non-point sources (see page 13)--The phosphorus export
of the Middle Fork of the Crow River during the sampling year
(23 lbs/mi 2 /yr) was very similar to the mean phosphorus export
of four unimpacted streams tributary to nearby Big Stone Lake
(19 lbs/mi 2 /yr).
Ir ’ all, non-point sources are estimated to have contributed
about 42% of the total phosphorus load to Nest Lake during the
sampling year.
-------
II. LAKE AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS
A. Lake Morphometry :
1. Surface area: 945 acres.
2. Mean depth: 15 feet.
3. Maximum depth: 40 feet.
4. Volume: 14,175 acre/feet.
5. Mean hydraulic retention time: 190 days.
B. Tributary and Outlet:
(See Appendix A for flow data)
1. Tributaries -
Name Drainage Area* Mean flow*
Middle Fork, Crow River 115.0 mi2 35.1 cfs
Minor tributaries & 2
immediate drainage - 6.7 mi 2.5 cfs
2
Totals 121.7 mi 37.6 cfs
2. Outlet -
Green Lake inlet 123.0 mi2** 37.6 cfs
C. Precipitation***:
1. Year of sampling: 28.1 inches.
2. Mean annual: 24.5 inches.
t DNR survey map (1970); mean depth by planimetry.
* 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 mi^.
** Includes area of lake.
*** See Working Paper No. 1, "Survey Methods1'
-------
4
III. LAKE WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
Nest 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 from two or more depths at each station
(see map, page vi). During each visit, a single depth-integrated
(15 feet 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 composited
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 24 feet at station 1 and 20 feet at sta-
tion 2.
The results obtained are presented in full in Appendix B, and the
data for the fall sampling period, when the lake was essentially 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
(10/25/72)
Parameter Minimum Mean Median Maximum
Temperature (Cent.) 6.4 6.6 6.6 6.8
Dissolved oxygen (mg/i) 9.4 10.2 10.0 11.8
Conductivity ( .imhos) 345 354 355 360
pH (units) 8.3 8.4 8.4 8.5
Alkalinity (mg/l) 188 191 191 192
Total P (mg/i) 0.035 0.044 0.042 0.057
Dissolved P (mg/i) 0.021 0.025 0.025 0.029
NO + NO (mg/l) 0.020 0.070 0.030 0.360
AJonia mg/i) 0.060 0.126 0.085 0.450
ALL VALUES
Secchi disc (inches) 36 54 48 78
-------
6
B. Biological characteristics:
1. Phytoplankton —
Sampling Dominant Number
Date Genera per ml
07/02/72 1. Microcystis 1,609
2. Dinobryon 560
3. Anabaena 506
4. Flagellates 307
5. Melosira 235
Other genera 609
Total 3,725
08/31/72 1. Microcystis 3,454
2. Ceratium 778
3. Lyngbya 488
4. Anabaena 470
5. Dinobryon 416
Other genera 1,410
Total 7,016
10/25/72 1. Flagellates 2,940
2. Dinobryon 729
3. Melosira 427
4. Oscillatoria 201
5. Chroococcus 151
Other genera 1,130
Total 5,578
-------
7
2. Chlorophyll a -
(Because of instrumentation problems during the 1972 sampling,
the following values may be in error by plus or minus 20
percent.)
Sampling Station Chlorophyll a
Date Number ( pg/i )
07/02/72 01 5.0
02 3.9
08/31/72 01 31.1
02 39.5
10/25/72 01 26.2
02 22.9
C. Limiting Nutrient Study:
1. Autoclaved, filtered, and nutrient spiked -
Ortho P Inorganic N Maximum yield
Spike (mg/l) Conc. (mg/l) Conc. (rng/l) ( mg/i-dry wt. )
Control 0.021 0.090 3.8
0.005 P 0.026 0.090 3.7
0.010 P 0.031 0.090 3.8
0.020 P 0.041 0.090 3.6
0.050 P 0.071 0.090 3.7
0.050 P + 10.0 N 0.071 10.090 28.9
10.0 N 0.021 10.090 7.2
2. Discussion -
The control yield of the assay alga, Selenastrum capri-
cornutum , indicates that the potential primary productivity
of Nest Lake was moderately high at the time the sample was
collected. Also, the lack of significant change in yields
with increased levels of orthophosphorus, until nitrogen was
also added, indicates that the lake was nitrogen limited
-------
8
when sampled. Note that the addition of only nitrogen
resulted in a yield significantly larger than the control
yield.
Nitrogen limitation is also indicated by the lake data
each sampling time; i.e., all nitrogen to phosphorus ratios
were less than 10 to 1.
-------
9
IV. NUTRIENT LOADINGS
(See Appendix C for all data)
For the determination of nutrient loadings, the Minnesota National
Guard collected monthly near-surface grab samples from each of the tribu-
tary sites indicated on the map (page vi), except for the high runoff month
of May when two samples were collected, and the colder months when one or
more samples were omitted at three stations because of low flows. Sampling
was begun in October, 1972, and was completed in September, 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, nutrient loads for sampled tributaries were determined
by using a modification of a U.S. Geological Survey computer program for
calculating stream loadingsk. Nutrient loadings for unsampled “minor tribu-
taries & immediate drainage” (“ZZ” of U.S.G.S.) were estimated by using
the means of the nutrient loads, in ibs/mi 2 /year, in streams tributary to
nearby Big Stone Lake at stations 2709D-l, E-l, F-i, and G-l and multi-
plying the means by the Nest Lake ZZ area in mi 2 .
The operator of the Belgrade wastewater treatment plant provided
monthly effluent samples and corresponding flow data; however, the Village
of New London declined participation in the Survey, and loads were esti-
mated at 2.5 lbs P and 7.5 lbs N/capita/year.
Nutrient loads attributed to tributaries are those measured minus
point-source loads, if any.
* See Working Paper No. 1.
-------
10
A. Waste Sources:
1. Known municipal -
Treatment
act. sludge
prim.
clarifier
Receiving
Water
Middle Fork,
Crow River
Middle Fork,
Crow River
2. Known industrial** -
Name
New London
Creamery Assoc.
Gordhariimer ‘s
Food Mkt.
Farmer’s
Coop. Assoc.
Engwall Bros.
Locker, Spicer
Treatment
New London SIP
Belgrade SIP
Belgrade STP
septic tank &
soil absorb.
Mean
Flow (mgd )
7
2
7
7
Receiving
Water
(Crow River)
(Crow River)
(Crow River)
no discharge
* 1970 Census.
** Beaton & McGuire, 1969.
Name
Bel grade
New London
Pop.
Served*
713
736
Mean
Flow (mgdj
0.131
0.129**
-------
11
B. Annual Total Phosphorus Loading - Average Year:
1 . Inputs -
lbs P/ % of
Source yr total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
Middle Fork, Crow River 2,590 38.5
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non—point load) - 130 1.9
c. Known municipal -
Belgrade 2,020 30.1
New London 1 ,840 27.4
d. Septic tanks - Unknown -
e. Known Industrial — (to municipal SIP’s) —
f. Direct precipitation* - 140 2.1
Total 6,720 100.0
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - to Green Lake 2,930
3. Net annual P accumulation - 3,790 pounds
* See Working Paper No. 1.
-------
12
C. Annual Total Nitrogen Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
lbs N/ % of
Source yr total
a. Tributaries (non—point load) —
Middle Fork, Crow River 116,410 84.1
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 2,470 1.8
c. Known municipal —
Belgrade 4,910 3.5
New London 5,520 4.0
d. Septic tanks - Unknown —
e. Known industrial — (to municipal SIP’s)
f. Direct precipitation* - 9,100 6.6
Total 138,410 100.0
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - to Green Lake 116,470
3. Net annual N accumulation - 21,940 pounds
* See Working Paper No. 1.
-------
13
0. Mean Annual Non-point Nutrient Export by Subdrainage Area:
Tributary lbs P/mi 2 /yr lbs N/mi 2 /yr
Middle Fork, Crow River 23 1,012
E. 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 oligo-
trophic if morphometry permitted. A mesotrophic rate would
be considered one between “dangerous” and “permissible”.
Total Phosphorus Total Nitrogen
Units Total Accumulated Total Accumulated
lbs/acr /yr 7.1 4.0 146.5 23.2
grams/rn /yr 0.80 0.45 16.4 2.6
Volle weider loading rates for phosphorus
(g/m’/yr) based on mean depth and mean
hydraulic retention time of Nest Lake:
“Danqerous” (eutrophic rate) 0.58
“Permissible” (oligotrophic rate) 0.29
-------
14
V. LITERATURE REVIEWED
Anonymous, 1973. Wastewater disposal facilities inventory. MPCA,
Minneapolis.
Beaton, Perry 1., and John F. McGuire, 1969. Report memorandum on
water quality of Green Lake, Kandiyohi County. MPCA, Minneapolis.
Bonnema, Kenneth, and William G. Johnson, 1972. Control of aquatic
vegetation, algae, leeches, and swimmer’s itch. MN Dept. Nat.
Resources, Minneapolis.
Schilling, Joel, 1974. Personal communication (lake map). MPCA,
Minneapolis.
Vollenweider, Richard A., (in press). Input-output models. Schweiz.
A. Hydrol.
-------
15
VII. APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
TRIBUTARY FLOW DATA
-------
TQId J1ARY FLOW !NFOPMAT ION F0I MINNESOTA 10/30/74
LA(F CODE ?7 33 • EST 1A3c0
TOTAL ORA!tJAc,F AREA OV LAKE 123.00
su, 3-oQAl8ac,E NORMALIZED FLOWS
TP18JTANY AREA JAl F IR MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AU(, SEP OCT NOV DEC MEAN
27 81A 1 123.30 13.F0 I’.40 25.00 64.40 86.70 80.50 56.60 33.90 26.00 18.30 15.10 15.80 37.63
278181 115.00 13.00 13.60 23.50 59.90 80.80 75.00 52.80 31.60 24.20 16.90 14.00 14.90 35.10
?78377 8.19 0.87 1.27 3.94 6.1! 6.70 4.12 1.79 1.89 1.33 0.96 0.83 2.53
SUMMARY
TOTAL DPAINAOE AREA OF LAKE = 123.00 TOTAL FLOW IN = 450.45
SUN U I SUB-r) ”AINAGE AREAS = 123.19 TOTAL FLOW OUT = 450.40
MEAN MONINLY FLOWS 081) UAILY FLOWS
TRTBUTAUY MOP4TN YFAP MEAN FLOW flAY FLOW DAY FLOW DAY FLOW
?733A1 10 7? 49.10 15 46.00
I I 7? (.4.80 3 61.00
17 7’ 45.60 9 51.00
I 73 40.50 6 50.00
2 73 ‘Q.SO 4 42.00
3 73 98.40 10 59.00
4 7) 114.00 14 115.00
5 73 95.’ 0 6 93.00 18 87.00
6 73 5/.I0 10 66.00
7 73 16.40 14 19.00
4 73 ?6.D0 II 23.10
9 71 13.N0 6 22.80
278181 10 7’ ‘5. 0 15 43.00
II 72 60.10 3 57.00
I’ 7? 43.00 9 48.00
I 73 ‘.6.90 4 47.00
2 1 37.30 1 . 40.00
1 71 9?.A0 10 58.00
4 73 106.00 14 107.00
5 71 88.90 6 87.00 10 82.00
4 73 4M . 3) 10 62.00
7 73 15.10 14 17.70
8 73 2 ’..3O II 21.60
9 73 12.50 6 21.30
10 7? 3.61 15 3.40
II 7? 4.1! 3 3.90
12 72 2.14 9 2.70
I 7) 2.4? 6 2.40
2 73 1.75 4 1.90
3 73 5.02 10 3.00
4 7] 5.97 14 7.00
c 71 6.7’ 6 6.40 19 .20
6 71 4.36 10 5.50
7 71 1.19 14 1.38
73 l.1R II I.? )
9 73 0.91 6 1.65
-------
APPENDIX B
PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 74/10/30
278301
45 15 36.0 094 57 35.0
NEST LAKE
27 MINNESOTA
1 IEPALES 2111202
3 0022 FEET DEPTH
00010 00300 00077 00094 00400 00410 00630 00610 00665 00666
DATE TIME DEPTH WATER DO TRANSP CNDIJCTVY PH 1 ALK NO2&N03 NM3—N PHOS—TOT PHOS—DIS
FROM OF TEMP SECCHI FIELD CACO3 N—TOTAL TOTAL
TO DAY FEET CENT MG/I INCHES MICRONHO SO MG/L MG/L MG/I MG/i P MG/L P
72/07/02 17 40 0000 ?3.0 10.6 48 330 8.30 200 0.030 0.050 0.034 0.012
17 40 0020 18.1 2.0 395 7.70 216 0.030 0.100 0.029 0.011
7/08/31 14 55 0000 39 328 8.30 168 0.090 0.260 0.033 0.023
14 55 0004 ‘0.8 7.6 325 8.3? 169 0.110 0.130 0.034 0.024
14 55 0015 20.7 8.4 380 8.30 172 0.060 0.300 0.039 0.032
14 55 00?4 18.? 0.8 440 7.30 192 0.120 0.880 0.253 0.130
721 )0/25 15 00 0000 78 360 8.50 190 0.360 0.090 0.040 0.029
15 00 0004 6.B 10.0 345 8.50 190 0.030 0.060 0.049 0.021
15 00 0015 6.7 10.0 345 8.40 192 0.020 0.040 0.042 0.022
15 00 0019 6.7 10.4 350 8.40 192 0.030 0.050 0.040 0.021
3?21 1
DATE TIME DEPTH CHLRPHYL
FROM OF A
TO DAY FEET UG/L
72/07/02 17 40 0000 5. OJ
72/08/31 j4 5S 0000 31.1J
72/10/25 iS 00 0000 26. ’J
J VALUE KNOWN TO 8E IN ER Or
-------
STORET . ETR [ EVAL DATE 74/10/30
27R30?
45 15 20.0 094 58 40.0
NEST LAKE
27 MINNESOTA
1IEPALES 2111202
3 0024 FEET DEPTH
00010 00300 00077 00094 00400 00410 00630 00610 00665 00666
DATE T!M flFPT- wATEP no TPANSP CND’JCTVY Ph 1 ALK NO? N03 NH3—N PHOS—TOT PHOS—DIS
FROM OF TEMP SECCHI FIELD CACO3 N—TOTAL TOTAL
TO Day FEET CENT MCj/L INCHES MICI OMHO SU HG/L HG/L MG/L HG/L P HG/L P
7?/07/O? 18 30 0000 9.2 4P 320 8.20 ‘30 0.040 0.060 0.022 0.011
18 10 0020 1.4 380 7.70 170 0.040 0.020 0.033 0.013
7?/0R/31 13 15 0000 36 328 8.10 171 0.100 0.120 0.040 0.024
11 15 0004 20.2 6.2 338 8.10 172 0.040 0.060 0.061 0.017
13 15 0015 70.2 6.8 335 8.10 174 0.040 0.060 0.043 0.017
13 15 0020 19.8 4.8 335 7.88 174 0.080 0.160 0.029 0.019
7?/10/2S 15 15 0000 72 350 8.30 188 0.030 0.050 0.042 0.021
15 iS 000’. 6.5 9.4 160 8.40 191 0.040 0.060 0.035 0.023
15 15 0015 6.5 9.6 360 8.40 190 0.020 0.040 0.044 0.027
15 IS 0020 6.4 11.8 360 8.40 192 0.030 0.060 0.057 0.029
122! 7
DATE TIME OEPT - C IL ?DHYL
FPOM OF A
TO DAY FEET UG/L
7?/07/0? 19 10 3000 3•9j
7?/0 /31 Ii iS 0000
72/10/?c 15 15 0000 ?2. J
J VALUE KNOWN TO HE IN ERROR
-------
APPENDIX C
TRIBUTARY and WASTEWATER
TREATMENT PLANT DATA
-------
ST RFT PE TRrEVA( DATE 74/10/30
?7 43A 1
45 16 00.0 1)Q’e 56 00.0
NEST LK/G EEN LK CONNECTION
7.5 NFW LONI)ON
Uf’JrST LAKE
CU Y 3’) X 1NG NNF OF SPTCE
1IE ALFS 2111204
0000 FEET DEPT ’I
00 ’30 006?5 00610 00671 00665
OATE TIME DEPTH NO?? .NO3 TOT IcJFL Nr13-N PHOS—flIS PHOS—Tor
FROM OF N—TOTAL N TOTAL ORTHO
TO DAY FEET M0/L M /L MG/I M /L P MG/L P
72/10/15 11 31) 0.093 1.6F 0 0.120 0.03
72/11/01 11 55 0.020 0.P4 0 0.054 0.007 0.032
72/12/09 10 ?0 0.07F 0.950 0.072 0.010 0.021
71/01/06 11 45 0.056 1.150 0.110 0.019 0.0?5
71/02/04 11 15 0.126 0.?20 0.017 0.045
71/03/10 13 00 0.231) 0.900 C.0?3 0.013 0.037
71/04/14 09 30 0.0 ’S 2.100 0.005K 0.006 0.030
73/05/06 10 30 0.046 1. 0 ) 0.026 0.007 0.035
71/05/19 0 25 0.015 0.760 0.019 0.014 0.045
73/1)6/10 10 30 0.070 1.uO O u.012 0.007 0.03-
73/07/14 11 00 3. 00 0.1 O 0.020 0.070
71/ aM/il 11 15 0.010 1.200 0.033 0.017 0.045
73/09/06 20 05 0.027 4.000 0.170 0.017
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE LESS
Tr-IAN INDICATED
-------
ST L T T [ EVeu ‘ \T 1’ /1 )/ 10
-, 7- 3r )
I 7-RI
7 j0 .i 7 f j
r [ I) )L’ Fe r :—( 4 i v
1• E E L’) iU)’,4
‘7
1/ LAr 1
II , • 75 M J Tt O M F O 1 LA SE
1II - L S 21112’34
3000 FEET
1)EPTrI
‘‘ 3
(‘6 )L
3Y-1u
( fl 7
d
TF
T TMF
r,F T
JO ? ()
I ()T J L
‘ r 3—
HOS—,)1S
-i I 31
FPOM
OF
I—TflTAL
N
lOYAL
(J THO
TO
)AY
FEET
M( /L
C-/L
4e,/I
MG/L P
7?/I0/1
“.17 ’
1.- 0(
1.)1’
0.010
u.O5 7
7?/ 1 I /O
11
• 110
1 . —N
• (QP
0 • 07!
•
73/o?/O’ .
ii
o
).1
L.lj ’
.2 (’
&.U1
73/01/lJ
11
0
‘ .1 -’
1.’ 3O
‘.?2
0.O 7
0.07
71/0’/l .
U9
40
J.u5-
2.l(’C
).1O
).O13
O.cjlO
7 /0 /O’-
1 )
45
). 0 2 u
0.’- ’j
i.O t
O. 05rc
, .0 5
71/uS/1
Or
IC
‘.013
o. ’ 0 1
j.O0 ic
O.O?R
u.C -
71/UF /1O
10
7
1.1 ’)
‘.o’+4
0.0’.0
‘.O75
71/07/1L
10
30
3.t Q I
).I0
O.O i7
73/U /1 I
10
5’)
). 3( O
I .‘-O
IJ.044
0.0 ?
U. 1 1
7 /0 ’ /0A
?1
1 )
i.33
2 .t’ 10
u. 7 30
U.)M9
‘j., 4 ’J
1< VALtJF KNOWN TO L’
PlAN I’JDIC TEIi
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 74/10/30
2 ’i3’12 LS27F 13f32
‘-. 5 17 30.0 094 58 00.0
MIODLE FO Ic CROW PIVE
7.5 NE LO\iDON
I/NFST LAKE
Co HwY 40 XING I MI W OF NEW LONDON
11E ALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTh
00630 006?5 00610 O0f 71 0i 66
DATE TIME DEPTH NO?F NO3 TOT KJFL NH3-N P1-405-DIS PHOS—T(jT
FROM OF N—TOTAL N TOTAL üPT-10
TO DAY FEET MG/L MG/L MC,/L MG/L P MC,/L P
72/10/15 10 55 0.098 1.300 0.087 0.007 u.046
72/11/03 1330 0.091 1.100 0.126 0.019 0.046
7?/12/09 09 55 0.096 1.400 0.105 0.007 u.025
71/02/04 10 50 0.115 1.200 0.240 0.011 0.035
73/03/10 14 00 0.105 1.300 0.260 0.042 0.095
73/04/14 09 50 0.036 1.540 0.033 0.009 0.025
73/05/06 10 00 0.031 2.100 0.046 0.007 0.040
73/05/19 07 40 0.042 0.019 0.O? o.0 0
73/06/10 10 00 0.040 i. 0O 3.07? 0.02’, 0.070
73/07/14 10 15 3.06? 2.500 0.330 0.OS O 0.105
73/0 /11 10 35 0.140 )e6 00 0.210 0.140 0.250
73/09/06 21 45 0.110 5.750 1.890 0.?20 0.400
-------
STDPE.T RET IFVAL DATE 7 ’./1(’,i
7f 3 .j3 L 5 7 ?’33A3
+c 1 00.0 G 4 Sb 30.0
M1i)1)L FOPi< C O 1 /E
1.5 Nr L0’iDON
I/ iF:Sr LAKE
ST HWY 9 t)(, IN NEW LONDONABOV SIP
I1EPALES 211120’.
‘ -I 0000 FEET DEPTH
00630 00625 00610 00671 0Obt’E
DATE TIME DEPTN NO’&N03 TOT KJFL NH3—N P,-IOS—OIS PHOS—TOT
FPOM O N—TOTAL N TOTAL (PTHn
TO DAY FEET MG,’L 1G/L MG/I F. G/L P MG/L
7?/10/15 10 35 0.0 O 1.300 0.093 0.00 5 0.033
7?/1l/03 13 70 0.072 1.050 0.147 0.006
7?/I2/0Q 09 45 0.030 1.)00 0.096 ).00 K 0.U1 +
73/0?/04 10 40 O.0 ? 1.4 4C 0.336 0.005 < 0.0?)
73/03/10 13 45 0.0 3 1.150 0.251 0.0 7 0.045
73/04/14 10 00 0.017 0.67i) 0.005K 0. O OA e.o7cj
71/0S/0 10 25 U.01f J.)S0 0. O IR 0.00 t < 0.0 5
71/05/IQ 07 ‘ 0 0.010K 0.960 0.021 u. O lu U.040
73/OA/lO 10 15 0.01 1.?6C 0.015 0.007 0.030
73/07/1 ’ 09 55 0.0j0’c 1. 30 0.062 0.019 0.035
73/OR/il 10 15 C. O1OK 1.120 0.034 0.020
73/09/0 71 00 0.023 ?.400 0. 273 0.031 0.0 0
K VALUE KNOWN TO r3E LESS
THAN INDICATED
-------
STOPET ETP1EVAL DATE 74/10/30
?7r 3Cj LS27tI3C I
45 25 30.0 094 59 30.0
S1 M FLO ’1IN(, SE To MiD FORK CkOW
7.5 GEORC’EVILLE
I/NEST LA cE
SSE OF HELGkADE BELO SIP
1LEP4LES 2111204
4 1 )000 FEET DEPTH
00630 006?5 00610 00671 00665
DATE TIME DEPTH NO?F.N03 TOT KJEL NH3-N PHOS—DIS ‘ HO5—T )T
FPOM O N-TOTAL N TOTAL UPTHO
TO DAY FEET MG/L MG/L MG/L MG/L P M /L P
72/10/1510 15 1.040 1.000 0.189 0.017 0.1 0
72/11/03 13 00 0.99H 1.100 0.1 0 0.0?2 0. 00
72/12/09 09 70 1.?0(j 1.260 0.336 0.032 0.1H )
73/01/06 10 50 1.620 1.150 0.?52 0.032
73/02/04 10 15 1.?40 2.400 0.320 0.043 0. 5 )
71/03/10 13 00 1.220 1.’90 3.270 0.115 0,345
71/04/14 10 20 0.570 1.300 0.215 0.037 0.190
71/05/Oh 09 50 0.570 2.730 3.190 0.0?2 0.170
73/Ř5/ 07 ‘0 0.730 O. 90 0.115 0.038 u.2 ’40
71/06/10 09 40 0.990 1.050 ‘ ).?70 0.028 0.220
73/07/14 09 45 1.720 2.50’) 0.380 0.036 0.180
73/08/11 09 30 1.520 0.900 3.?40 0.030 0.140
73/09/06 21 51 1.300 1.P00 0.250 0.029 0.240
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 74/10/30
?7H351 AS27B351 P000713
45 )5 30.0 094 59 30.0
L &-? A ! E
77 7.5 GEORGEVILLE
TI N SI
UNNAME’) ST FAM
1 IEPALtS 2141204
0000 FEE:T DEPTH
00630
006’5
00610
00671
00665
50051
50053
OATE
TIME:
DEPTH
NO? .NO3
TOT KJEL
NH3—N
Pi-40S—DIS
iOS—TOT
FLOW
CONDUIT
FROM
OF
N—TOTAL
N
TOTAL
ORTHO
RATE:
FLOW—MGI)
TO
DAY
FEET
MG/L
‘ lG/L
MG/L
MG/L P
MG/L P
INST MGO
MONTHLY
71/01/18
ii 00
CP(T)—
5.100
5.?00
0.130
5.400
0.104
0.110
71/0h/IR
13 00
73/0?/?7
12 00
1.050
11.500
0.010
5.900
7.600
0.173
0.173
71/01/30
11 00
3.100
18.000
0.00 5K
4.750
7.700
0.175
0.170
71/04/30
11 00
0.850
13. 00
4.700
7.400
0.130
0.130
71/05/10
11 00
1.83’
2.900
0.160
4.100
‘ .700
0.110
0.120
71/06/70
11 20
0.056
3.150
0.042
0.170
2.200
0.100
0.140
71/07/25
09 00
0.190
1.300
0.290
2.400
3.7,0
0.120
0.120
71/08/29
13 10
8.700
0.730
3.920
L..600
0.137
0.120
71/09/26
09 00
0.210
8.680
0.240
3.600
6.250
0.112
0.117
71/10/24
11 00
0.070
11.000
1.200
1.890
2.400
0.126
0.130
71/11/29
0900
0.160
1.00O
8.900
3.400
5.700
u.101
0.110
71/17/11
10 00
3.840
9.100
0.320
0.120
0.960
0.120
0.120
74/01/10
0 00
0.080
14.000
3.400
1.800
2.31)0
0.1?0
0.120
K VALUE KNOWN To BE LESS
THAN INDICATED
------- |