U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
REPORT
ON
ST, LJ3UIS BAY
ST, IDUIS COUNTY, MINNESOTA,
AND
DOUGLAS COUNTY, WISCONSIN
EPA REGION V
WORKING PAPER No, 123
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
ST, LOUIS BAY
ST, LDUIS COUNTY, MINNESOTA,
AND
DOUGLAS COUNTY, WISCONSIN
EPA REGION V
WORKING PAPER No, 123
WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY
AND THE
MINNESOTA NATIONAL GUARD
MAY, 1975
-------
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 4
III. Lake Water Quality Summary 5
IV. Nutrient Loadings 8
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 [ 3O3(e)], water
quality criteria/standards review [ g303(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 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 Beltrarni
Big Stearns
Big Stone Big Stone, MN; Roberts,
Grant, SD
Birch Cass
Blackduck Beltrami
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 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
Walimark Chisago
White Bear Washington
Winona Douglas
Wolf Beltrami, Hubbard
Woodcock Kandiyohi
Zumbro Olmstead, Wabasha
-------
_s
Map Location
St. LOUIS BAY
AND
SUPERIOR BAY
® Tributary Sampling Site
X Lake Sampling Site
Sewage Treatment Facility
-------
ST. LOUIS BAY
STORET NO. 2776
I. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:
Survey data show that St. Louis Bay is eutrophic. Of the
60 Minnesota lakes sampled in the fall of 1972, when essen-
tially all were well-mixed, 52 had less mean total phosphorus,
50 had less mean dissolved phosphorus, and 55 had less mean
inorganic nitrogen. For all Minnesota data, 53 lakes had
greater Secchi disc transparency, and all but th,ee lakes had
higher mean chlorophyll a. This apparent anomaly probably is
due to the very low transparency observed in St. Louis Bay and
a resulting light inhibition of algal growth.
Survey limnologists observed floating and suspended solids,
oil films, much silting, and putrescent odors during the July
and October sampling periods with some lessening of these con-
ditions during the September sampling visit.
B. Rate—Limiting Nutrient:
Based on the results of the algal assay, primary produc-
tivity in St. Louis Bay was nitrogen limited at the time the
sample was collected. Field data indicate nitrogen limitation
during all three sampling periods (N/P ratios were 6/1 or less).
-------
2
C. Nutrient Controllability:
1. Point sources--During the sampling year, St. Louis
Bay received a total phosphorus load at a rate about 12
times that proposed by Vollenweider (in press) as “dangerous”;
i.e., a eutrophic rate (see page 13). However, Vollenweider’s
model probably is not applicable to water bodies with short
hydraulic retention times, and the mean hydraulic retention
time of St. Louis Bay is a very short six days. Nonetheless,
the existing water quality in the bay is evidence of excessive
nutrient loads.
It is calculated that the municipal point sources considered
in this study contributed a little over 49% of the total phos-
phorus input to the bay during the sampling year. Industries
and port traffic are believed to have contributed nutrients
also, but the significance of these sources was not determined
(see page 10).
The Western Lake Superior Sanitary District was organized
in 1974 and will ultimately construct a tertiary wastewater
treatment plant at the site of the existing Duluth main plant
(McGuire, 1975). The new plant will provide treatment for all
of the point sources considered in this report (page 10), as
well as a few additional small discharges, and will be required
-------
3
to meet the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s mean effluent
phosphorus limitation of 1 mg/i total phosphorus.
On the basis of measured and estimated municipal waste
treatment plant flows, it is calculated that the required
effluent phosphorus limitation will result in a 41% reduction
of the overall total phosphorus load to St. Louis Bay. This
reduction should result in marked improvement in the trophic
condition of St. Louis Bay as well as significant enhancement
of the water quality of downstream Superior Bay (see Working
Paper No. 128, “Report on Superior Bay”).
2. Non-point sources-—During the sampling year, the
phosphorus export rate of the St. Louis River was a somewhat
high 96 lbs per square mile of drainage. In part, this
probably resulted from the unmeasured minor discharges, indus-
trial wastes, and port traffic noted above.
In all, it is estimated that non-point sources contributed
nearly 51% of the total phosphorus load to St. Louis Bay.
-------
4
II. LAKE AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS
A. Lake Morphometryt:
1. Surface area: 2,419 acres.
2. Mean depth: 11.1 feet.
3. Maximum depth: 25.0 feet.
4. Volume: 26,858 acre-feet.
5. Mean hydraulic retention time: 6 days.
B. Tributary and Outlet:
(See Appendix A for flow data)
1. Tributaries —
Name Drainage area* Mean flow*
St. Louis River 3,670.0 mi 2 2,378.6 cfs
Minor tributaries & 2
immediate drainage - 16.2 ml 17.8 cfs
Totals 3,686.2 m1 2 2,396.4 cfs
2. Outlet -
St. Louis Bay - Superior Bay 2
Connection 3,692.7 mi ** 2,396.4 cfs
C. Precipitation***:
1. Year of sampling: 25.5 inches.
2. Mean annual: 25.0 inches.
t Planinietered from U.S. Geological Survey map (1954); 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 mi 2 .
** Includes area of lake.
See Working Paper No. 1, “Survey Methods, 1972”.
-------
5
III. LAKE WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
St. Louis Bay 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 one
station on the bay and from a number of depths (see map, page vi).
During each visit, a single depth-integrated (15 feet or near bottom
to surface) sample was collected for phytoplankton identification and
enumeration; and during the last visit, a single five-gallon depth-
integrated sample was collected for algal assays. Also each time, a
depth-integrated sample was taken for chlorophyll a analysis. The
maximum depth sampled was 23 feet.
The results obtained are presented in full in Appendix B, and the
data for the fall sampling period, when the bay 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.
-------
6
A. Physical and chemical characteristics:
FALL VALUES
(10/18/72)
Parameter Minimum Mean Median Maximum
Temperature (Cent.) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Dissolved oxygen (mg/l) 7.7 7.7 7.7 7.7
Conductivity (pmhos) 165 165 165 165
pH (units) 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.3
Alkalinity (mg/l) 39 41 41 42
Total P (mg/i) 0.330 0.331 0.331 0.332
Dissolved P (mg/i) 0.235 0.241 0.241 0.248
NO + NO (mg/i) 0.110 0.110 0.110 0.110
Am onia mg/l) 1.320 1.350 1.350 1.380
ALL VALUES
Secchi disc (inches) 8 17 12 32
B. Biological characteristics:
1. Phytoplankton* -
Sampling Dominant Number
Date Genera per ml
09/06/72 1 . Flagellates 85
2. Dinobryon 67
3. Cryptomonas 20
4. Chroococcus 18
5. Synedra 18
Other genera 81
Total 289
10/18/72 1. Flagellates 1,583
2. Synedra 979
3. Anabaena 930
4. Melosira 904
5. Chroococcus 377
Other genera 1 ,257
Total 6,030
* The July sample was lost in shipment.
-------
7
Maximum yield
( mg/i-dry wt. )
27.2
27.4
23.9
25.7
98.0
142.1
112.5
C. Limi
1.
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 )
07/13/72 01 9.8
09/07/72 01 0.7
10/18/72 01 3.5
ting Nutrient Study:
Autoclaved, filtered, and nutrient spiked -
Ortho P Inorganic N
Spike (ma/i) Conc. (mg/i) Conc. (mg/l ) _____________
Control 0.210 0.790
o.oio P 0.220 0.790
0.020 p 0.230 0.790
0.050 p 0.260 0.790
0.050 P + 5.0 N 0.260 5.790
0.050 P + 10.0 N 0.260 10.790
10.0 N 0.210 10.790
2. Discussion -
The control yield of the assay alga, Selenastrum capri-
cornutum , indicates that the potential primary productivity
was high at the time the sample was collected. The lack of
increase in yield when orthophosphorus was added and the
significant increase in yield when only nitrogen was added
indicate nitrogen limitation.
Field data indicate nitrogen limitation at all sampling
periods (i.e., the N/P ratios were 6/i or less, and nitrogen
limitation would be expected).
-------
8
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 each of the tribu-
tary sites indicated on the map (page vi). 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
Minnesota District Office of the U.S. Geological Survey for the tribu-
tary sites nearest the lake.
In this report, nutrient loads for sampled tributaries were deter-
mined by using a modification of a U.S. Geological Survey computer
program for calculating stream loadings*. Nutrient loadings for unsam-
pled “minor tributaries and immediate drainage” (“ZZ” of U.S.G.S.) were
estimated by using the means of the nutrient loads, in lbs/mi 2 /year, in
Bluff Creek (tributary to Superior Bay) at station E-1 and multiplying
the means by the ZZ area in mi 2 .
The operators of the Duluth and Cloquet wastewater treatment plants
provided monthly effluent samples and corresponding flow data. Nutrient
loads attributed to the Duluth West plants were estimated on the basis
of combined flows and composited samples from the Fairmont, Smithville,
and Gary-New Duluth wastewater treatment plants. However, the operators
* See Working Paper No. 1.
-------
of the Scan!an, Carl ton, Thompson Township, and Wrenshall treatment
plants did not participate in the Survey, and nutrient loads from
those sources were estimated at 2.5 Ibs P and 7.5 Ibs N/capita/year.
Nutrient loads shown for the St. Louis River are those measured
at station B-l minus the known upstream point sources.
-------
10
A. Waste Sources:
1. Known municipalt -
Pop. Mean Receiving
Name Served Treatment Flow (mgd) Water
Duluth Main 100,578 prim. 16.125 St. Louis Bay
clarifier
Cloquet 8,699 prim. 1.649 St. Louis River
clarifier
Duluth West 11,490 prim. 1.149 St. Louis Bay
plants* clarifier
Scanlan 1,132 Imhoff tank 0.l13** St. Louis River
Canton 844 prim. 0.084** St. Louis River
clarifier
Thompson 159 act. sludge 0.016** St. Louis River
Township
Wrenshall 147 stab. ponds 0.015** Silver Creek
2. Industrial - A number of industries discharge wastes either
directly to the St. Louis River or Bay or to some of the
municipal wastewater treatment plants (Anonymous, 1969a);
because of the constraints of the Survey***, nutrient
contributions from these sources were not evaluated.
Also, nutrients may be contributed by ships in port
(Miller, 1965), but the significance of these sources was
not assessed.
f7 nonymous, 1974.
* Fairmont, Smithville, and Gary-New Duluth sewage treatment plants.
** Estimated at 100 gal/capita/day.
See Working Paper No. 1.
-------
11
B. Annual Total Phosphorus Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
lbs P1 % of
Source yr total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
St. Louis River 353,320 50.3
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) — 3,780 0.5
c. Known municipal STP’s -
Duluth Main 270,400 38.5
Cloquet 45,480 6.5
Duluth West plants 23,160 3.3
Scanlan 2,830 0.4
Canton 2,110 0.3
Thompson Township 400 <0.1
Wrenshall 370 <0.1
Port traffic* - ? -
d. Septic tanks - Unknown ?
e. Industrial - Unknown ? -
f. Direct precipitation** - 380 < 0.1
Total 702,230 100.0
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - Superior Bay inlet 499,550
3. Net annual P accumulation - 202,680 pounds
* Wastes discharged from ships in port.
** 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) —
St. Louis River 6,446,420 83.6
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) — 43,380 0.6
c. Known municipal STP’s -
Duluth Main 953,580 12.3
Cloquet 136,280 1.8
Duluth West plants 91 ,510 1.2
Scanlan 8,490 0.1
Canton 6,330 0.1
Thompson Township 1 ,190 <0.1
Wrenshall 1,100 <0.1
Port traffic* - Unknown ? -
d. Septic tanks - Unknown ?
e. Industrial - Unknown ? —
f. Direct precipitation** - 23,300 0.3
Total 7,711,580 100.0
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - Superior Bay
inlet 7,645,580
3. Net annual N accumulation - 66,000 pounds
* Wastes discharged from ships in port.
** See Working Paper No. 1.
-------
13
D. Mean Annual Non-point Nutrient Export by Subdrainage Area:
Tributary lbs P/m1 2 /yr lbs N/mi 2 /yr
St. Louis River 96 1,757
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 oligotrophic if mor-
phometry permitted. A mesotrophic rate would be considered one
between “dangerous” and “permissible”.
Note that Vollenweider’s model may not be applicable to
water bodies with very short hydraulic retention times.
Total Phosphorus Total Nitrogen
Units Total Accumulated Total Accumulated
lbs/acre/yr 290.3 83.7 3,187.9 24.5
grams/m 2 /yr 32.54 9.38 357.3 2.7
Volle weider loading rates for phosphorus
(g/m /yr) based on mean depth and mean
hydraulic retention time of St. Louis Bay:
“Dangerous” (eutrophic rate) 2.70
“Permissible” (oligotrophic rate) 1.35
-------
14
V. LiTERATURE REVIEWED
Anonymous, 1969a. An appraisal of water pollution In the Lake
Superior basin. FWPCA, U.S. Dept. Interior, Great Lakes
Region, Chicago.
Anonymous, 1969b. Proceedings of the Conference in the Matter
of Pollution of the Waters of Lake Superior and its Tributary
Basin, Minnesota—Wisconsin—Michigan, vols. 1—4. FWPCA, U.S.
Dept. Interior, Wash., D.C.
Anonymous, 1974. Wastewater disposal facilities inventory. MPCA,
Minneapolis.
Kiester, C. E., S. C. Castagna, and Kenneth Mackenthun; 1961. Report
on investigation of pollution of the St. Louis River, St. Louis
Bay, and Superior Bay. MN Dept. of Health and WI State Board of
Health.
McGuire, John F., 1975. Personal communication (treatment require-
ments in the St. Louis Bay area). MPCA, Minneapolis.
Miller, R. D., 1965. Report on investigation of pollution of the
seaway Port of Duluth. MPCA, Minneapolis.
Vollenweider, Richard A., (in press). Input-output models. Schweiz.
Z. Hydrol.
-------
15
VII. APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
TRIBUTARY FLOW DATA
-------
1PI IJTA Y FLOW INF0f MATION FOP MINNESOTA
10/30/74
LAKE CODE 2776
ST LOUIS dAY
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE 3690.00
SUMMARY
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE = 3690.00
SUM OF SUB—DRAINAGE AREAS = 3690.00
TOTAL FLOW IN = 28722.36
TOTAL FLOW OUT = 28723.00
NOTE Q** TRIB 76A1=8681
MEAN MONTHLY FLOWS AND DAILY FLOWS
TRIBUTARY MONTH
YEAR MEAN FLOW
DAY
FLOW DAY
FLOW DAY
FLOW
10 72 2720.00
11 7? 3300.00
12 7? 2710.00
1 73 1800.00
2 73 1790.00
3 73 3230.00
4 73 3830.00
5 73 5690.00
6 73 2780.00
7 73 1640.00
8 73 2430.00
9 73 2430.00
10 72 2700.00
11 7? 3290.00
12 72 1405.00
1 73 1800.00
2 73 1790.30
3 73 3?30.0O
4 73 3800.00
5 73 5630.00
6 73 2740.00
7 73 1630.00
8 73 2420.60
0 73 2410.00
14 2450.00
4 4750.00
2 2760.00
4 1890.00
7 2730.00
20 9250.00
24 2180.00
25 1900.00
23 1560.00
14 2430.00
4 4740.00
2 1430.00
4 1890.00
7 2710.00
140.OO
24 2150.00
28 1320.00
25 1890.00
?3 1550.00
TRIBUTARY
2776A1
3690.00
1004.00
277681
3670.00
1002.00
27767?
20.00
1.74
SUB-DRAINAGE
NORMALIZED
FLOWS
AREA JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN
JUL
AUG SEP OCT NOV
988.00 1395.00 5656.00
987.00 1390.00 5618.00
1.11 5.35 38.40
5553.00 3873.00 2306.00 1798.00 1797.00 1785.00 1420.00 1148.00 2396.45
5493.00 3824.00 2290.00 1791.00 1783.00 1774.00 1414.00 1143.00 2378.57
60.00 48.70 16.20 7.11 14.40 11.00 5.56 3.80 17.82
DEC MEAN
2776A1
2776B 1
-------
TRIHtJTARY FLO INFORMATION FUk MINNESOTA 10/30/74
LA
-------
APPENDIX B
PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DaTE 74/10/30
OATE
FROM
To
TIME r)EPTH
OF
DAY FEET
32217
CHL PP H V L
4
kJG/L
277601
46 45 12.0 092 07 06.0
ST LOUIS BAY
27 MINNESOTA
72/07/ 13
7?/09/07
72/1 0/ I R
07 50 0000
10 30 0000
16 45 0000
9.BJ
0 • 7J
3. 5J
1 1EPALES 2111202
3 0014 FEET DEPTH
00010
00300
00077
00094
00400
00410
00630
00610
00665
00666
DATE
TIME
DEPTH
WATER
DO
TRANSP
CNDUCTVY
PH
1 ALK
N02&N03
NH3—N
PHOS—TOT
PHOS—DIS
FROM
OF
TEMP
SECCHI
FIELD
CACO3
N—TOTAL
TOTAL
To
DAY
FEET
CENT
MG/L
INCHES
MICRONHO
SI)
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L P
MG/L P
72/07/13
07 50 0000
32
170
6.40
47
0.220
0.740
0.295
0.204
07 50 0004
18.2
4.8
160
6.40
46
0.210
0.580
0.184
0.122
07 SO 0010
17.8
2.0
190
6.30
56
0.220
1.440
0.760
0.600
72/09/07
10 30 0000
12
140
7.00
32
0.110
0.620
0.199
0.144
10 30 0004
17.3
3.4
135
7.00
34
0.140
0.640
0.216
0.148
10 30 0015
17.3
3.7
140
7.00
34
0.130
0.690
0.216
0.161
10 30 0023
17.2
4.0
135
7.00
37
0.130
0.640
0.204
0.149
72/10/18
16 45 0000
8
165
7.30
39
0.110
1.320
0.332
0.248
16 45 0004
7.0
7.7
165
7.30
42
0.110
1.380
0.330
0.235
J VALUE KNOWN TO BE IN ERROR
-------
APPENDIX C
TRIBUTARY and WASTEWATER
TREATMENT PLANT DATA
-------
STDPET ETP1F’LAL ‘)AT 7 ,/ )/1
?776A1 LS2776A1
‘“S 45 00.0 09? 0 00.0
sr LUUIS AY/SUPE$ IO AY CONNT
27 iD i)ULTH/SIjPI ?jOP
U/ST LOUIS 3AY
US Si - PD(; ETW RICES PT CONNORS PT
1IEPALES 2111?04
4 0000 FEET 1)EPTr1
( O 3O ( 1(5 0)E’IU (10671 0fl 6S
DATE TIUF DEPT -1 NO?F NO3 TOT JEL •‘Jr13—N P 1OS—i11S PHOS—TOT
FPOM OF N—TOTAL N TOTAL U ?THO
TO PAY FEET M(,/L M( 5/I M(,/L M( /L ‘ MG/L
7?/10/1 1? 10 ).110 1.1” ).3i0 J. )3cS 0.115
7?/fl/04 10 00 j.0S’+ 0.0I 0.0f
7?/12/02 1(1 30 (l.115 1.’ 3 ¶i.176 0.036 0.126
73/03/02 09 30 0.i 0 0. 00 0.? lC £.040 0.075
71/05/70 08 30 0.0 46 U.1 5 u.0 3 0.113
73/06/24 11 00 0.140 3.?’)O . 1 5 0.048 0.075
71/07/28 OR 45 1. 0 “.300 0.0 2 0.145
71/QM/?5 13 00 j.?1 ) i.ioC 0.300 (,. 07 5 0.115
73 /OQ/?1 0 00 5.?f-’0 1.L ’ . 7 4Q fl•Q77 j j2’)
-------
STORFT ET 1EVAL r)ATE 7’4/1 )/iU
?77( 3 1 LS ?776’31
‘.6 43 GO.0 09? 08 30.0
SF LOUIS p IVER
27 15 SUPEPIO
I/ST LOUIS BAY
U ? ARkU F4EAD BRDG BELOW PROCTOR STP
11E ALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET OEPTI-
00630 006?5 00610 00671 0u66
DATE TIME DFPTH NO’&N03 TOT KJFL NH3-N PHOS—I)JS iOS—TOT
FROM OF N—TOTAL N TOTAL ORTHO
TO DAY FEET MG/L 1C /L G/L MG/L P M(/L P
7?/)0/14 11 00 0.0 1 I .’OO 0.250 0.010 0.O Si4
7?/H/04 10 00 0.170 1.150 0.120 0.01? 0.0 9
72/12/0? 0.100 I.I 5 ‘).16M U.00 0.042
73/04/07 1? 50 0.105 1.760 0.GOSt< 0.013
73/05/20 1? 00 0.035 1.7Sf) 0.115 0.010 0.065
73/Q6/24 12 30 0.054 l.3?O 0.330 0.026 0.055
73/07/2R 1? 30 0.176 1.540 0.380 0.060 0.120
73/05/25 10 00 ,.093 1.?00 0.290 0.034 0. O S t i
73/09/23 07 15 0.1d9 1.3 0 u.37tJ 0.052 0.115
10 10 0.270 O.°70 0. 231 0.075 0.1?5
K VALUE KNOWN Tr) r3E LESS
THAN P4DICATED
-------
STOPET ‘?ETP1 VAL DAT 74/H/SC
LS277 ,B2
42 3’ 30.1, 0’ ? 12 00.0
St LOUIS 1VE
27 15 SU?E’ IO
I/ST LOUIS AY
ST -i Y 3 DG E NEW OULUT A9V PRCTI SIP
11Er ALES 2111204
0000 FEET DEPIrI
J0 S7S ,06 10 00671 00665
1 ATE TT W flF°TH O2 O1 TOT KJEL Nt-13—N PHOS—DIS PH(JS—TOT
FPOM OF “i—TOTAL N TOTAL UkTHO
TO )AY FEFT MC,/L i /L i’/L G/L P MG/L P
72/1)/14 10 15 1.150 0.140 0.0)0 0.063
72/11/041045 0.73’) 1.1 0 0.110 0.014 0.07?
73/04/07 11 00 U.14D 0.160 0.00 5K 0.005K 0.010
71/06/24 1? 0’) 0.0” ’ 1.’70 0.3 4) 0.029 0.065
71/07/?R 13 00 0.17 ’ ) .47’) C.1 ’4’ 0.063 0.125
71/0 /25 10 0 0.0i R 1.’OO ‘ ).?96 0.015 0.0$35
71/0Q/21 LO 00 ) . 17 ’ l. 0 0.39) 0.052 0.115
K V LUr ‘c\iOw. ’J TO P L .SS
T’-fAN I JDICATF’)
-------
STORET PETRIEVAL DATE 74/10/30
?176.-i3 LS?776f43
4 , 41 30.0 39? ?M 00.0
ST LUUIS ‘ IVEP
27 7. , CLOQtJET
1/ST LOUIS RAY
ST ‘i Y 33 r P()G N CLOOUET Ar V STP
11EPAL S 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
00630 J06? 00610 00671 006e5
DATE TIME DEPTH NO ? NO3 TOT t JFL NH3N r riOS—fl!S r’Hfl TOT
FROM OF N—TOTAL N TOTAL OPTHO
TO DAY FEET MG/L MG/L MG/L MC /L P MG/L
7?/10/14 17 30 0.190 0.900 0.154 0.01? 0.054
7?/!I/12 10 00 0.18’ 1.000 3.140 0.013 0.040
73/04/OR 09 00 0.168 1. 0 i 0.046 0.014 0.050
73/04/18 OR 55 0.180 1.Ob() 3.075 0.017 0.040
73/05/20 08 30 0.087 1.000 0.03 0.009 0.040
73/05/10 08 15 0.084 1.890 0.067 0.013 0.025
73/06/09 OR 30 1.940 0.720 0.072 0.011 0.042
71/07/2? 08 30 0.011 1.100 (i.o37 0.009 0.050
71/08/19 09 00 0.150 0.920 3.052 0.017 0.05S
-------
STOPET ETPTEVAL DATE 74/10/30
LS?776H4
‘46 4 30.0 09? 25 00.0
SI LOUIS , IVEP
27 7.5 CLOUUET
1/St LOUIS AY
US AJ PDC, E SCANLON
11t-’ALES 2111204
0000 FEET DEPTH
00530 006? 00f10 071 00665
DATE TIME DEPTH ‘JO NO3 TOT KJFL N 3—N PHOS—fliS P -iOS—TOT
FP0r i OF N—TOTAL N TOTAL OPTHO
TO DA FEET H( /L lr,/L MO/L M(/L MG/L P
72/10/14 1715 0.143 0. 132 0.020 0.066
72/11/1? 09 30 (‘.1 s9 1. 40 .15% 0.015 0.050
7?/1?/17 0930 0.O l Or( 1.150 0.021 0.00 0.1 17s
71/01/21 08 30 0.147 1.0 0.018 0.012 u.070
73/0?/1R 09 00 0.015 0.03 0.010 0.060
73/03/if’ 1? 45 0.450 3.570 ‘).3 50 0.068 0.15?
71/04/0 09 05 0.05? ?.050 0.120 u.014 0.065
73/04/18 09 10 0.0?? 3. 30 0.5 0 0.0!? 0.050
73/05/20 09 00 0.014 0. ’75 0.006 0.050
73/05/30 08 35 0.010 2.100 0.110 0.011
73/06/0 OR 40 0.01? 0.PO’) t).0 13 0.009 0.047
73/07/?? OR 45 G.010 ( 1 .150 ( .07 0.016
71/08/1Q09 30 0.015 2.610 0.105 0.011 0.070
73/09/23 0.058 0.R40 3.0 0 0.030 0.055
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE LESS
TH N INDICATED
-------
STORET PETRIEVAL DATF 7 e/I / 0
1 5 27 76’ 3S
‘.6 40 00.0 09? 24 30.0
sr LOUIS LVE
27 7.5 CLOQUFT
list LOUIS r A(
ST -iwy 39 - I3C. w T -1OM5ON 1)OWSRM PESRVR
11E->ALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET )EPTH
00525 00610 00671 00665
DATE TIME DEPT,-4 N0? NO3 TOT KJEL 4H,3-N PHOS—DIS PHOS—TOT
FROM OF N—TOTAL N TOTAL O T’-1O
TO DAY FE T M6/L 1(/L MC,/L M(/L P MG/L ?
77/10/14 1700 0.0P9 1.000 0.105 0.017 0.079
77/11/1? 09 15 0.150 1.300 0.168 0.015 0.052
73/01/21 10 15 0.930 1.6 0 0.550 0.170 0.315
73/03/1F 1 15 0.420 1. SU 0.320 0.069 0.155
73/04/08 09 20 0. ?43 1.760 0.073 0.021 0.0 5
73/04/18 09 15 0.25? 1.?60 0.144 0.033 0.075
73/05/20 09 20 0.015 ?.700 0.0 8 0.007 0.055
71/05/10 09 00 0.0 10K ) .Q80 0.190 0.012 0.250
71/06/09 09 10 0.010K 2.(,00 0.097 0.023 0.072
73/07/27 09 00 0.132 1. 00 0.085 0.066 0.150
73/08/19 1”) 15 ( 1.020 1.470 0.115 0.020 0.0 1 40
71/09/23 0.087 1.050 O.07 0.032 0.00
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE LESS
THAN I’4DICATED
-------
STO2 T RETPIEVAL I)A1F 74/1 ’’ ii
2 17SC I L 2776C1
46 31 1 u.0 ‘4 23 00.0
S PA•’jC9 S1LVF C ’E .K
27 7. W FNS’-4ALL
Ticr LOUIS plAY
I G 1 ’J FNSrIALL UPSTr M C STP/P RP XING
1lE 2 4L S 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
0O63 ) 0O P5 00610 00671 0’1666
‘)AFE TIMF OF 1-4 u NO TUE KJEL N’13—N PHOS—F)!S PHOS—TOT
POM OF ‘J—TOTAL N TUTAL UPTr O
TO t)AY FEET Mr,/L Mc /L 40/L ‘ ‘c,/L P Mr,/L P
73/04/OR 09 30 ‘.017 1.470 (i.036 0.01? 0.050
71/D4/1R 10 10 O.0 Y 1.1’)O 0.0 ’6 J.0?1 i.17
73/06/0 09 40 0.035 0.’. fl 0.u lQ 0.006 (,.fl55
73/’JR/19 10 0.’OO 1.470 0.05? 0.063 0. 2 9 5
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 74/10/30
776C2 LS2776C2
46 37 30.0 092 22 30.0
S HPANCH SILVER CREEK
7.5 WPENSHALL
T/ST LOUIS BAY
B ?DG IN ST PAP ( .5 M NE BELOW WENSH SIP
1 1EPALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
00 3O 00625 00610 00671 00665
DATE TIME DEPTH NO2 .NO3 TOT KJEL NH3-N PHOS—nIS PHOS-TOT
FROM OF N-TOTAL N TOTAL ORTt-4 0
TO DA’V FEET MG/L MG/L Mfl/L M(/L P MG/L P
7?/10/14 16 30 0.960 0.100P 0.038 0.008 0.011
7?/11/12 OR 50 0.940 0.190 0.061 O.OO 0.009
7?/1?/17 1040 1.000 0.300 0.115 0.005K 0.010
73/04/08 09 00 1.060 4.000 ‘). I lS 0.008 0.0 10
73/04/18 09 35 1.100 4.501) 0.620 0.007 0.010
71/05/20 09 45 0.990 3.200 0.066 0.005K 0.010
71/05/3 ) 10 00 0.980 1.150 0.066 0.007 0.060
73/06/09 (0 15 0.910 0.540 0.?60 0.005K 0.015
71/07/22 09 30 1.O’O 0.290 0.007 0.009 0.015
73/08/19 11 15 0.540 1.600 0.024 C.035 0.430
73/09/23 0.970 0.450 0.017 0.010 0.010
K VALUE KNOWN TO ‘RE LESS
THAN INDICATED
-------
ST1’ T ETL NVL L n r /. ij )/
277 SI 277o51 P092000
4 4f 00.0 09? 07 30.0
uULU 1-I
27 IS DULUT -I
U/ST LOUIS 8AY
SF LOUIS HAY
1IEPALES 2141204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
00630
00625
00 10
00671
00665
50051
50053
DATE
TIME DEPTH
NO?F NO3
TOT KJEL
NHJ—N
PHOS-DIS
PHOS-TOT
FLO4
CONDUIT
FROM
OF
N—TOTAL
N
TOTAL
OPTHO
RATE
FLO —MC .D
TO
DAY
FEET
H(/L
MG/L
MG/L
Mr,/L P
MG/L P
INST MGD
MONTHLY
73/01/15
24 00
CP(T)—
0.150
?I. )OO
8.R00
3.700
5.500
14.100
13.M00
73/01/16
24 00
73/02/13
24 00
CP(T)—
0.?S0
2?.000
5.400
3.200
6.650
13.000
13.200
73/02/14
24 00
73/03/15
12 00
CP(T)—
1.150
10.500
.6OO
1.320
3.100
21.600
15.000
73/03/16
1 00
73/04/12
12 00
CP(T)—
0.410
17.000
5.000
2.400
5.000
16.400
18.700
73/04/12
24 00
73 O5/21
12 00
CP(T)—
0.202
20.000
5.300
3.500
7.600
16.100
17.100
73/05/21
24 00
73/06/14
12 00
CP(T)—
0.165
15.000
3.000
2.050
5.500
16.000
IR.200
73/06/14
24 00
73/07/23
I? 00
CP(T)—
0.090
17.000
4.900
2.520
5.750
15.900
13.600
73/07/24
12 00
73/08/28
12 00
CP(T)—
14.000
0.050
1.020
4.500
22.400
19.600
73/08/29
12 00
73/00/2?
12 00
CP(T)—
0.350
17.000
7.300
2.730
4.800
18.500
17.200
73/09/23
12 00
73/10/17
1? 00
CPU)—
0.690
19.000
2.730
3.200
.80O
12.800
15.500
73/10/10
1? 00
73/11/14
I? 00
CR 11)—
0.4?0
1 -..Soo
1.100
2.640
16.900
16.700
73/11/14
12 00
73/12/20
00 00
CR LF)—
4.3 )9
39•r9(
Q•7 5 4
3.5?0
.- 00
14.600
1..Y00
71/12/20
74 r o
-------
STOPET PETPTFV L DATE 74/10/30
77bS) P ?77 ’ 51 P092000
4 4 00.0 092 07 30.0
DULUTI
27 15 DLJLUT,1
0/ST LOUIS AY
ST LOUIS BAY
1 1EPALES 2141204
4 0000 FEET DEPTh
00630 0 ’ )6 ?5 00610 00671 00665 50051 50053
DATF TIMF DF TH NU7 NO3 TOT I-cJEL Nt13—N P’-$OS—DIS PHOS—TOT FLOW CONDUIT
FROM OF N-TOTAL N TOTAL OPTHO RATE FLOw-t4GD
TO DAY FEET MG/L M(,/L MG/L Mc 1 /L P MG/L P INST MGD MONTHLY
74/01/1 ’ 00 (10
CP(T)— 1.5?0 20.000 9. 00 3. 00 7.30’) 10.200 10.700
74/01/1 24 00
-------
STOPET ‘ ETP1FVAL [ )ATE 74/1U/30
277652 PR277652 P008699
46 43 30.0 092 27 00.0
CLOUUET
27 7.5 CLOQUEI
T/ST LOUIS EIAY
ST LOUIS RIVEI
1 IEPALES 2141204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
00630 00625 00610 00671 00665 50051 50053
DATE TIME DEPTH N02&N03 TOT KJEL N83—N PHOS—DIS P 1-lOS—TOT FLOW CONDUIT
FROM OF N—TOTAL N TOTAL OPTHO PATE FLOw—MGD
TO DAY FEET MG/L MG/L MG/L MG/L P MG/L P INST MGD h ONTHLY
73/01/31 11 00
CP(T)— 0.540 35.000 10.720 3.600 6.800 1.100 1.140
73/01/31 13 00
73/02/28 11 00
CP(T)— 0.980 36.000 7.700 3.600 7.350 1.090 1.080
73/02/28 13 00
73/04/02 11 00
CPU)— 1.400 28.000 5.300 3.100 9.550 1.640 1.480
73/04/02 13 00
73/04/30 11 00
CP(T)— 0.640 28.000 6.300 3.300 12.000 1.840 1.670
73/04/30 13 00
73/05/31 11 00
CPU)— 1.150 24.000 4.070 3.140 7.800 1.670 1.740
73/Q5/31 13 00
73/07/31 11 00
CP(T)— 0.260 25.000 8.200 3.200 9.600 1.340 1.360
73/07/31 13 00
73/08/31 11 00
CPU)— 20.900 2.620 3.140 7.870 2.130 2.150
73/08/31 13 00
73/09/28 ii 00
CPU)— 1.050 22.100 3.700 3.780 10.500 1.660 2.000
73/09/28 13 00
73/10/31 11 00
CP(T)— 1.3?0 75.000 4.600 3.700 8.800 1.860 2.130
73/10/31 13 00
73/12/04 11 00
CP(T)— 0.040 23.000 3.000 0.120 7.800 1.880 1.910
73/12/04 13 00
71/12/31 II 00
CP(T)— l.?40 31.COO 6.300 4.000 10.500 1.610 1.480
73/1?/31 Ii lO
-------
STORET PETPTFVAL flAT 74/fl/3D
277653 PR277653 P012000
46 45 30.0 092 07 30.0
DULUTH WEST PLANTS
27 15 DULUTH
0/ST LOUIS BAY
ST LOUIS BAY
I 1EPALES 2141204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
00630 00625 00610 00671 00665 50051 50053
DATE TIME DEPTH N02&N03 TOT KJEL NH3—N PHOS—DIS PHOS—TOT FLOW CONDUIT
FROM OF N-TOTAL N TOTAL ORTHO RATE FLOW—HGD
TO DAY FEET MG/L MG/L MG/I MG/L P MG/L P INST MGD MONTHLY
73/021)3 1) 00
CP(T)— 0.300 35.000 15.600 4.400 7.700 0.855 1.080
73/02/13 14 00
73/03/14 1) 00
CP(T)— 0.750 18.900 2.200 2.400 5.500 2.300 1.200
73/93/14 14 00
73/04/12 11 00
CP(T)— 0.470 27.000 9.100 3.600 6.500 0.312 0.344
73/04/12 14 00
73/05/21 11 00
CP(T)— 0.330 26.000 8.800 3.900 7.300 1.260 1.400
73/05/21 14 00
73/06/15 11 00
CP(T)— 0.154 25.000 4.400 4.060 6.900 1.200 1.500
73/06/15 14 00
73/07/17 11 00
CP(T)— 0.320 32.000 12.000 1.400 10.500 1.240 1.210
73/97/17 14 00
73/08/15 11 00
CP(T)— 1.540 10.500 0.P00 1.820 4.100 1.840 1.350
73/08/15 14 00
73/09/19 11 00
CP(T)— 0.330 30.000 19.000 4.700 6.900 1.320 1.390
73/09/19 14 00
73/10/17 11 00
çPT— 0.380 28.000 9.700 3.360 6.000 2.290 1.530
73/10/17 14 00
73/11/14 11 00
CP(T)— 0.240 31.500 14.000 4.100 7.700 1.500 1.280
73/11/14 14 00
73/12/28 00 00
CP(T)— 0.640 50.000 1?.FiOO 1.300 5.400 0.274 0.356
71/17/28 03 00
74/01/13 00 00
CP(T)— 0.440 23.000 16.000 4.500 6.200 0.’.00 0.320
74/01/19 03 00
------- |