U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
REPORT
ON
DEPUELAKE
BUREAU COUNTY
ILLINOIS
EPA REGION V
WORKING PAPER No, 303
CORVALLIS ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY - CORVALLIS, OREGON
and
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING & SUPPORT LABORATORY - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
•&G.P.O. 699-440
-------
REPORT
ON
DEPUELAKE
BUREAU COUNT/
ILLINOIS
EPA REGION V
WORKING PAPER No, 303
WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
AND THE
ILLINOIS NATIONAL GUARD
JUNE, 1975
-------
I
CONTENTS
Page
Foreword ii
List of Illinois Study Lakes iv
Lake and Drainage Area Map v
Sections
I. Introduction 1
II. Conclusions 1
III. Lake and Drainage Basin Characteristics 3
IV. Lake Water Quality Summary 4
V. Waste Sources 8
VI. Literature Reviewed 9
VII. Appendices
-------
•11
FOREWORD
The National Eutrophication Survey was Initiated in 1972 in
response to an Administration comitnient 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 [ 3O3(c)], clean lakes [ 53l4(a,b)],
and water quality monitoring [ lO6 and §305(b)] actIvities mandated
by the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972.
* Flow data could not be provided; therefore, this report primarily
will relate to the lake sampling data.
-------
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 Illinois Environmental
Protection Agency for professional Involvement and to the
Illinois National Guard for conducting the tributary sampling
phase of the Survey.
Dr. Richard H. Briceland, Director of the Illinois Environ-
mental Protection Agency; and Ronald M. Barganz, State Survey
Coordinator, and John J. Forneris, Manager of Region III, Field
Operations Section of the Division of Water Pollution Control,
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 Harold R. Patton, the Adjutant General of
Illinois, and Project Officer Colonel Daniel L. Fane, who directed
the volunteer efforts of the Illinois National Guardsmen, are also
gratefully acknowledged for their assistance to the Survey.
-------
iv
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
STUDY LAKES
STATE OF ILLINOIS
LAKE NAME COUNTY
Baldwin Randolph
Bloomington McLean
Carlyle Bond, Clinton, Fayette
Cedar Lake
Charleston Coles
Coffeen Montgomery
Crab Orchard Jackson, Williamson
Decatur Macon
DePue Bureau
East Loon Lake
Fox Lake
Grass Lake
Highland Silver Madison
Holiday LaSalle
Horseshoe Madison
Long Lake
Lou Yaeger Montgomery
Marie Lake
Old Ben Mine Franklin
Pistakee Lake, McHenry
Raccoon Marion
Rend Franklin, Jefferson
Sangchris Christian
Shelbyville Moultrie, Shelby
Slocuni Lake
Springfield Sangamon
Storey Knox
Vandalia Fayette
Vermilion Vermilion
Wee Ma Tuk Fulton
Wonder McHenry
-------
ZZZZ2
1
Ill
Map Location
.o.
a.
-
- -.
DEPUE LAKE
Tributary Sampling Site
Lake Sampling Site
Sewage Treatment Facility
11/f Km.
-------
DEPUE LAKE
STORET NO. 1752
I. INTRODUCTION
Because of the diffuse and ill—defined drainage, the U.S. Geological
Survey could not provide flow data; for this reason, it was not possible
to determine nutrient loading data for DePue Lake. Therefore, this
report primarily will relate to the lake sampling data, although all of
the data obtained during the Survey are included in the appendices.
II. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:
Survey data indicate that DePue Lake is highly eutrophic. It
ranked last in overall trophic quality when the 31 Illinois lakes
sampled in 1973 were compared using a combination of six water
quality parameters*. Twenty—seven 1ake had less median total
and dissolved phosphorus and median inorganic nitrogen, 29 had
greater mean Secchi disc transparency, and 23 had less mean chloro-
phyll a.
B. Rate-Limiting Nutrient:
There was a significant loss of phosphorus in the assay sample
between the time of collection and the beginning of the assay, and
the results are not representative of conditions in the lake at the
time the sample was taken (05/12/73). However, the lake data
* See Appendix A.
-------
2
indicate phosphorus limitation in May but nitrogen limitation
in August and October.
C. Nutrient Controllability:
The only measured nutrient load to the lake was from the
DePue wastewater treatment plant. This facility discharged
2,820 kg of total phosphorus and 6,415 kg of total nitrogen
directly to the lake during the sampling year. The phosphorus
contribution of this plant alone resulted in a loading rate of
1.33 g/m 2 /yr.
As noted above, flow data are not available, and the mean
hydraulic retention time of the lake cannot be determined, but
it would have to be a very short nine days to make the treatment
plant loading rate just equal to the rate proposed by Vollenweider
(Vol1enweider and Dillon, 1974) as a eutrophic rate. However, in
view of the existing trophic condition of the lake, it is likely
than any appreciable reduction in phosphorus inputs would result
in at least some improvement, particularly since the lake was
phosphorus limited during one of the three sampling visits.
-------
3
III. LAKE CHARACTERISTICS
A. Lake Morphometry*:
1. Surface area: 2.12 kilometers 2 .
2. Mean depth: 1.2 meters.
3. Maximum depth: >3.1 meters.
4. Volume: 2.544 x 106 m 3 .
B. Precipitation**:
1. Year of sampling: 104.1 centimeters.
2. Mean annual: 86.5 centimeters.
Lt flMW
U nvI onmon1 d ‘oiecf1cn Agenc?V’
orv Ui Environrnenk& Research Lab.
200 SW 35th Street
Corvaihe, Oregon 97330
t Table of metric conversions--Appendix B.
* Forneris, 1973.
** See Working Paper No. 175, “...Survey Methods, 1973-1976”.
-------
4
IV. LAKE WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
DePue Lake was sampled three times during the open-water season
of 1973 by means of a pontoon-equipped Huey helicopter. Each time,
samples for physical and chemical parameters were collected from one
or more depths at one station on the lake (see map, page v). During
each visit, a single depth-integrated (near bottom to surface) sample
was collected for phytoplankton identification and enumeration; and a
similar sample was taken for chlorophyll a analysis. During the May
visit, a single 18.9-liter depth-integrated sample was collected for
algal assays. The maximum depth sampled was 3.1 meters.
The lake sampling results are presented in full in Appendix C and
are summarized in the following table.
-------
A. SUMMARY OF PrIYSICAL AND
1ST SAMPLING ( S/12/73)
I SITES
CHEMICAL CiIARACTEPISTICS FOR DEPUE LAKE
STORET CODE 1752
2ND SAMPLING ( 8/ 7/73)
I .ITES
3RD SAMPLING (10/16/73)
I SITES
PAMAMCTE’
RANC .E
MEA”J
MEDIAN
RANGE
MEAN
MEDIAN
RANGE
MEAN
MEDIAN
TEMP (CI
16.7 — (6.9
16.8
(6.8
30.5 — 30.5
30.5
30.5
17.5 — 17.5
17.5
17.5
DISS O Y (MG/L)
7.8 — 8.0
7.9
7.9
7.4
— 1.4
7.4
7.4
0.0 — 0.0
0.0
0.0
CNDCTVY (MCROMO)
67S. — 700.
683.
675.
871.
- 877.
877.
877.
590. - S90.
590.
590.
PH (STAND UNITS)
7.7 — 7.9
7.8
7.9
8.3
— 8.3
8.3
8.3
8.1 — 8.1
8.1
8.1
JUT ALK (MG/LI
230. — 250.
240.
2 ’ .0.
240.
— 240.
240.
240.
(71. — 171.
171.
171.
TUE P ulG/L)
0.357 — 0.438
0.394
0.388
(.030
- 1.030
1.030
1.030
0.499 — 0.499
0.499
0.499
O. THU P (MG/LI
0.238 — 0.276
0.280
0.266
0.556
- 0.556
0.556
0.558
0.362 — 0.362
0.362
0.362
N02 .N03 (MG/LI
3.330 — 3.720
3.560
3.630
1.720
— 1.720
1.120
1.720
1.200 — 1.200
1.200
(.200
AMMONIA (MG/LI
0.520 — 0.720
0.637
0.670
0.7 0
— 0.720
0.720
0.720
0.980 — 0.980
0.980
0.980
IcJEL N (MG/LI
1.300 — 1.600
1.433
1.400
3.100
— 3.700
3.700
3.700
3.000 — 3.000
3.000
3.000
INORO N (MG/LI
4.050 — 4.300
‘..197
4.240
2.440
- 2.440
2.440
2.440
2.180 — 2.180
2.180
2.180
TOTAL N (MG/L)
4.930 — 5.120
4.993
4.930
5.420
- 5.420
5.420
5.420
‘ ..200 — 4.200
‘ ..200
4.200
CNLRPYL A (UG/L)
21.4 — 21.4
21.’.
21.’.
112.7
- 112.7
112.7
112.7
42.4 — 42.4
42.4
42.4
C .,
SECCHI (METEI S) 0.5 0.S
0.5 0.5 0.2 - 0.2 0.2 0.2
0.2 — 0. 0.2 0.2
-------
6
B. Biological characteristics:
1. Phytoplankton -
Sampling Dominant Algal units
Date Genera per ml
05/12/73 1. Flagellates 14,594
2. Cvclotella !P. 1,351
3. Djnobryon . 721
4. Stephanodiscus . 450
5. Raphidiopsis . 360
Other genera 1,713
Total 19,189
08/07/73 1. Euglena p. 3,469
2. Cyclotella !P• 1,667
3. Stephanodlscus p_. 1,429
4. Actinastrum p. 1,157
5. Phacus p. 646
Other genera 3,930
Total 12,298
10/16/73 1. Euglena .p. 3,065
2. Phacus . E• 1,008
3. Cryptomonas p. 777
4. Navicula p. 693
5. Actinastrum !2. 504
Other genera 2,644
Total 8,691
2. Chlorophyll a -
Sampling Station Chlorophyll a
Date Number ( ig/1 )
05/12/73 01 21.4
08/07/73 01 112.7
10/16/73 01 42.4
-------
7
C. Limiting Nutrient Study:
There was a 48% loss of orthophosphorus in the assay sample
between the time of collection and the beginning of the assay,
and the results are not representative of conditions in the lake
at the time the sample was taken (05/12/73). However, on the
basis of assay yields obtained in other lake samples with similar
nutrient levels, had the phosphorus loss not occurred, the
expected yield of the assay alga ( Selenastrum capricornutum )
would have been a very high 112 mg/i dry weight.
The lake data indicate phosphorus limitation in May (the mean
N/P ratio = 16/1) but nitrogen limitation in August (the mean N/P
= 4/1) and October (the mean N/P = 6/1).
-------
8
V. WASTE SOURCES
A. Known municipal*:
Pop. Mean Flow Receiving
Name Served Treatment ( ni 3 /d) Water
DePue 1,919 cont. stab. 1,918.0 DePue Lake
B. Known industrial: None
* Pirog, 1973; see Appendix D for data.
-------
9
VI. LITERATURE REVIEWED
Forneris, John J., 1973. Personal corruiwnication (lake morphometry).
IL Env. Prot. Agency, Springfield.
Pirog, Ricky (Supt.), 1973. Treatnient plant questionnaire (DePue
STP). DePue.
Vollenweider, R. A., and P. J. Dillon, 1974. The application of
the phosphorus loading concept to eutrophication research.
Nati. Res. Council of Canada Pubi. No. 13690, Canada Centre
for Inland Waters, Burlington, Ontario.
-------
VII. APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
LAKE RANKINGS
-------
LAKE DATA 70 OE USED IN RANKINGS
LAKE MEDIAN MEDIAN 500— MEAN IS- MEU IAN
CODE LAKE NAME TOTAL P INORG N MEAN SEC CHLORA ML DO OISS U Ti-, ) P
1703 LAKE ULOOU IUC,ION 0.050 5.730 464.467 26.200 14.800 0.020
1706 LAKE CARLYLE 0.0 8 . 1.270 477.â89 17.367 11.030 0.032
1708 LAKE CHARLESTON 0.160 4.680 490.467 12.000 8.400 0.065
1711 COFFEEN LAKE 0.032 0.260 454.222 1.700 14.900 0.012
1712 CRAb ORCHARD LAKE 0.082 0.200 ‘.82.222 59.867 13.800 0.013
1714 LAKE DECATUR 0.129 3.750 479.571 43.000 14.500 0.062
1725 LONG LAKE 0.704 1.190 482.667 ‘.9.333 8.800 0.39 5
1726 LAKE LOU YAEGER 0.186 1.600 489.583 10.662 11.400 0.076
1727 LAKE MARIE 0.098 0.370 467.667 39.533 14.700 0.057
1733 PISTAKEE LAKE 0.203 0.370 485.667 75.867 7.000 0.062
1735 REND LAKE 0.071 0.210 471.500 23.533 12.700 0.012
1739 LAKE SHELI3’I’VILLE 0.062 3.290 461.333 17.161 14.800 0.019
1740 S1L ER LAKE (HIGNLANO) 0.226 0.970 489.500 5.822 14.800 0.057
1742 LAKE SPRINGFIELD 0_los 3.265 483.385 13.013 10.800 0.059
1148 VERMILION LAKE 0.109 4.695 481.500 31.150 14.200 0.050
1750 wONDER LAKE 0.426 0.890 486.000 98.533 7.800 0.132
1751 LAKE STORY 0.072 2.510 459.333 17.250 14.800 0.u2l
1752 DEPUE LAKE 0.438 4.050 490.000 58.833 7.600 0.276
1753 LAKE SANGC,IWIS 0.050 1.970 475.411 19.292 14.500 0.009
115’. LAKE HOLIDAY 0.161 3.135 485.167 5 1.217 7.200 0.046
1755 FOX LAKE 0.219 0.375 486.167 63.850 8.800 0.083
1756 GRASS LAKE 0.301 0.820 481.000 83.500 5.900 0.093
1757 EAST LOON LAKE 0.076 0.120 450.000 22.300 14.900 0.U lr’
1758 SLOCUM LAKE 0.865 0.200 487.333 221.100 5.800 0.3b2
1759 CEDAR LAKE 0.029 0.170 400.333 5.767 12.800 0.013
1761 LAKE WEMATUK 0.069 1.770 466.333 7.967 16. 00 0.031
1762 RACCOON LAKE 0.l0 0.310 484.333 19.217 13.800 0.020
1763 8ALUWIN LAKE 0.044 0.140 461.167 11.133 13.200 0.007
-------
LAKE DATA TO BE (JSEt) LN RANKINGS
LAKE
MEDIAN
MEDIAN
500—
ME AN
15-
MEUIAN
CODE
LAKE
NAME
TOTAL P
INOR& N
MEAN SEC
Cr1LO A
MIN DO
OISS OMTI-’U
1764
LAKE
VANDALIA
0.116
0.480
478.111
l1.27b
14.800
0.0 3
1765
OLD
BEN MINE
ESERVOIi
0.930
0.205
‘.78.333
31.433
11.20 )
0.575
1766
HOI SESHOE LAKE
0.127
0.705
482.833
I82.2 0
6. 0O
0.O1
-------
PERCENT OF LAKES WITrI i4IGHER VALUES (NUMBER OF LAKES WITH HIGHER VALUES)
LAKE
CODE
LAKE NAME
TOTAL P
INORO
N
MEAN SEC
CHLORA
NIH
00
DISS ONTHO P
N I)
1703
LAKE 8LOOMINGTON
88 4
26)
0 4
0)
0 (
24)
47 4
14)
13 (
2)
68
4 20)
2 6
1706
1708
LAKE CARLYLE
LAKE CHARLESTON
63 (
37 4
19)
11)
40 4
7 4
12)
2)
63 4
0 4
19)
0)
63 4
77 4
19)
23)
63 4
77 4
19)
23)
53
27
( 16)
4 8)
345
22 5
1711
COFFEEN LAKE
97 C
29)
77 4
23)
93 4
28)
93 C
28)
2 C
0)
92
4 27)
454
1712
CRAB OI CHARD LAKE
67 C
20)
90 1
27)
43 C
13)
20 C
6)
42 4
12)
85
C 25)
347
1714
LAKE DECATUW
40 4
12)
13 4
4)
53 C
16)
33 C
10)
30 C
8)
32
4 9)
201
1725
LONG LAKE
7 4
2)
43 4
13)
40 C
12)
30 4
9)
72 4
21)
3
4 1)
195
1726
LAKE LOU YAEGER
30 4
9)
37 4
11)
7 4
2)
87 C
26)
57 4
17)
23
C 7)
241
1727
LAKE MARIE
60 C
18)
68 C
20)
73 C
22)
37 4
11)
23 C
7)
42
C 12)
303
1733
PESIAKEE LAKE
27 C
8)
68 (
20)
23 C
7)
13 C
4)
90 C
27)
32
C 9)
253
1735
REND LAKE
77 4
23)
80 C
24)
70 4
21)
50 4
15)
53 C
16)
92
( 27)
422
1739
LAKE SHEL8YVILLE
83 4
25)
17 C
5)
83 C
25)
70 C
21)
I) C 2)
73
C 22)
339
1740
SILVER LAKE (HIGHLAND)
20 (
6)
47 C
14)
10 C
3)
97 C
29)
13 C 2)
42
C 12)
229
1742
LAKE SPRINGFIELD
53 C
16)
20 C
6)
33 C
10)
73 C
22)
67 C 20)
37
C 11)
283
1748
VERMILION LAKE
50 4
15)
3 C
1)
47 C
14)
43 C
13)
37 C 11)
47
C 14)
227
1750
WONDER LAKE
13 C
4)
50 C
15)
20 C
6)
7 4
2)
80 C 24)
13
C 4)
183
1751
LAKE STORY
73 C
22)
27 C
8)
90 C
27)
67 4
20)
13
4 2)
63
4 19)
333
1752
DEPUE LAKE
10 C
3)
10 C
3)
3 C
1)
23 4
7)
83
C 25)
10
C 3)
139
1753
LAKE SANGCI4RIS
88 C
26)
30 4
9)
b7 C
20)
57 C
17)
30
C 8)
97
C 29)
369
1754
LAKE HOLIDAY
33 4
10)
23 C
7)
27 C
8)
27 C
8)
87
C 26)
50
4 15)
6)
247
212
1755
FOX LAKE
23 4
7)
63 C
19)
11 4
5)
17 C
5)
72
4 21)
20
1756
GRASS LAKE
Ii (
5)
53 4
16)
50 C
15)
10 4
3)
97
4 29)
17
4 5)
24’.
1757
EAST LOON LAKE
70 C
21)
100 C
30)
97 C
29)
53 C
16)
2
4 0)
77
C 23)
399
1758
SLOCUM LAKE
3 C
1)
87 C
26)
13 4
4)
0 4
0)
100
C 30)
7
C 2)
210
1759
CEDAR LAKE
100 C
30)
93 C
28)
100 C
30)
100 C
30)
50
4 15)
85
4 2)
528
1761
LAKE d(MATUK
80 (
24)
33 C
10)
77 C
23)
90 4
27)
30
C 8)
57
4 17)
367
1762
RACCOON LAKE
57 4
17)
73 4
22)
30 C
9)
60 4
18)
‘.2
C 12)
68
1 20)
330
1763 BALOWIN LAKE
93 4 28) 97 C 29) 87 C 26) 80 C 24) 47 4 1’.) 100 C 30)
-------
MEAN 15— MEDiAN INO A
CHLORA MIN DO DISS ONT,1O P NO
83 ( 25) 13 ( 2) 60 ( 18) 323
‘.0 C 12) 60 C 18) 0 C 0) 240
3 ( 1) 93 C 28) 80 ( 24) 313
PEkCENT OF
LAKES WIfl-i I-UGl iER VALUES (NUMBER OF
LAKES WITI-4 HIGl1E VALUES)
LAKE
CODE
LAKE
NAME
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
MEDIAN
INOPG
N
500—
MEAN
SEC
1764
LANE
VANDALIA
47 C 14)
60 (
18)
60
C 18)
1765
OLD
EN MINE NESERVOIR
0 ( 0)
83 C
25)
57
C 17)
1766
HORSESHOE LAKE
43 C 13)
57 C
17)
37
C 11)
-------
LAKES RANKED BY INDEX NOS.
RANK LAKE CODE LAKE NAME INDEX NO
1 1759 CEDAR LAKE 528
2 1763 BALDWIN LAKE 504
3 1711 COFFEEN LAKE 454
4 1735 REND LAKE 422
5 1757 EAST LOON LAKE 399
6 1753 LAKE SANGCHRIS 369
7 1761 LAKE WEHATUK 367
8 1712 CRAB ORCHARD LAKE 347
9 1706 LAKE CARLYLE 345
10 1739 LAKE SHELBYVILLE 339
11 1751 LAKE STORY 333
12 1762 RACCOON LAKE 330
13 1764 LAKE VANDALIA 323
14 1766 HORSESHOE LAKE 313
15 1727 LAKE MARIE 303
16 1703 LAKE BLOOMINGTON 296
17 1742 LAKE SPRINGFIELD 283
18 1733 PISTAKEE LAKE 253
19 175’. LAKE HOLIDAY 247
20 1756 GRASS LAKE 244
21 1726 LAKE LOU YAEGER 241
22 176S OLD BEN MINE RESERVOIR 240
23 1740 SILVER LAKE (HIGHLAND) 229
24 1148 VENMILION LAKE 227
2S 1708 LAKE CHARLESTON 225
26 1755 FOX LAKE 212
27 1758 SLOCUM LAKE 210
28 17)4 LAKE DECATUR 201
-------
LAKES RANKED BY INDEX NOS.
RANK LAKE CODE LAKE NAME INDEX NO
29 1725 LONG LAKE 195
30 1750 WONDER LAKE 183
31 1752 DEPUE LAKE 139
-------
APPENDIX B
CONVERS IONS FACTORS
-------
CONVERSION FACTORS
1-lectares 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
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 75/10/23
175201
41 18 38.0 089 19 09.0
DEPUE LAKE
17011 ILLINOIS
1 IEPALES 2111202
3 0013 FEET DEPTH
00010 00300 00077 00094 00400 00410 00610 00625 00630 00671
DATE TINE DEPTH WATER DO TRANSP CNDUCTVY PH T ALK NH3—N TOT KJEL N02&N03 PHOS—DIS
FROM OF TEMP SECCHI FIELD CACO3 TOTAL N N—TOTAL ORTHO
TO DAY FEET CENT NG/L INCHES MICRONHO SU MG/L MG/L MG/L MG/L M /L P
73/05/12 10 45 0000 16.8 18 700 7.70 230 0.720 1.600 3.330 0.266
10 45 0003 16.9 7.8 675 7.90 240 0.520 1.400 3.720 0. 76
10 45 0010 16.7 8.0 675 7.90 250 0.670 1.300 3.630 0.238
73/08/07 17 30 0000 30.5 7.4 6 877 8.30 240 0.720 3.700 1.720 0.556
73/10/16 17 30 0000 17.5 6 590 8.10 171 0.980 3.000 1.200 0.362
00665 32217
DATE TIME DEPTH P 1105-TOT CHLRPHYL
FROM OF A
TO DAY FEET MG/L P UG/L
73/05/12 10 45 0000 0.388 21.4
10 45 0003 0.438
10 45 0010 0.357
73/08/07 17 30 0000 1.030 112.7
73/10/16 17 30 0000 0.499 42.4
-------
APPENDIX D
TRIBUTARY and WASTEWATER
TREATMENT PLANT DATA
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL OATE 75/10/23
1 75?A 1
41 17 50.0 089 20 15.0
UNNAMED OUTLET
17095 1.5 DEPUE
0/DEPUL LAKE
bANK SAMPLE AT OUTLET TO ILLINOIS RIVEN
1 1EPALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPT 1
00630 00625 00610 00671 0066 5
DATE TIME DEPTH N02&N03 TOT KJEL Nr13-N Pt-IOS01S PHOS—TOT
FROM OF N-TOTAL N TOTAL ORTHO
TO DAY FEET MG/L MG/L MG/L MG/L P M&/L P
73/06/02 13 00 6.000 1.380 0.273 0.231 0.345
73/07/07 10 00 3.600 2.800 0.600 2.800 3.000
73/08/04 20 30 3.100 5.600 0.730 0.590 0.790
73/09/09 10 00 2.040 10.000 1.900 2.100 3.700
73/10/13 10 30 3.000 2.100 0.056 0.650 1.000
73/11/10 3.200 3.900 1.260 1.920 4.100
73/12/02 12 00 3.100 3.500 1.180 2.500 6.300
74/01/05 11 30 4.800 4.600 1.160 2.760 7.000
74/02/16 11 30 4.300 2.400 0.440 0.390 0.910
74/03/06 4.900 2.075 0.570 1.230
74/04/06 4.700 2.800 0.990 3.400 3.900
74/0b/06 11 30 3.500 4.000 2.200 6.550 11.000
-------
5TO ET RETRIEVAL DATE 75/10/ 3
175221 4S 1Th221 P001919
41 19 15.0 089 18 45.0
DEPUE S.T.P.
11011 7.5 DEPUE
1)/LAtcE DIPUE
LAKE OEPtJE
11EPALES 214120’.
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
00630 00625 00610 00671 00665 50051 50053
DATE TIME DEPTH N02 NO3 TOT KJEL Ni-13—N PHOS—DIS PIOS—TOT FLOW CONDUIT
FROM OF N-TOTAL N TOTAL ORTHO RATE FLOw—PIGD
TO DAY FEET MG/L MG/L HG#’L MG/L P MG/L P INST UGO MONTHLY
73/07/12 10 55
CP(T)— 1.100 6.600 0.062 2.200 2.600 0.J’ .0 0.375
73/07/12 15 25
73/08/01 11 00
CP(T)— 2.300 5.300 0.120 3.000 4.300 0.338 0.344
73/08/01 15 30
73/09/05 11 00
CP(T)— 0.540 9.900 4.000 0.405 0.401
73/09/05 15 00
73/10/03 11 10
CP(T)— 0.210 10.500 0.320 5.200 5.300 0.399 0.408
7j/10/03 15 30
73/11/06 11 00
CP(T)— 0.480 9.200 0.160 2.900 4.400 0.501 0.527
73/11/06 15 20
73/12/07 11 10
CP(T)— 0.780 8.200 0.060 3.200 4.600 0.624 0.450
73/12/07 15 30
74/01/04 11 00
CP(T)— 0.760 10.500 0.110 3. 0O 5.100 0.588 0.598
74/01/04 15 30
74/02/11 10 45
CP(T)— 0.480 13.000 0.085 2.000 4.800 0.750 0.590
74/02/lI 15 30
74/03/11 11 05
CP(T)— 0.120 7.500 0.065 1.850 2.800 0.730 0.657
74/03/11 15 30
74/04/02 11 00
CP(T)— u.040 8.000 0.130 1.550 2.600 0.640 0.660
74/04/02 15 30
74/06/20 11 00
CP(T)— 1.160 7.000 J.02 5 1.750 3.’. 0 O.o O O 0.601
74/06/20 15 15
74/07/09 10 30
CP(T)— 3.600 1.700 0.110 2.300 3.1( 0 0.411 0.550
7 ’ ./07/09 15 30
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL OAIE 75/10/23
11b 1 AS175221 P001919
41 19 IS.O 089 18 45.0
UEPUt S.T.P.
huh 7.b UEPUE
U/LAKE DEPUE
LAKE. UEPUE
1 1EPALES 2141204
4 0000 FEET L)EPTr$
00630 00625 00610 00671 006ô 50051 50053
DATE TIME DEPTH N02&N03 TOT KJEL NH3-N PHOS-DIS PHOS—TOT FLOW CONUU IT
FROM OF N-TOTAL N TOTAL ORTHO RATE FLOW-MG I)
TO DAY FEET MG/L MG/L MG/L MG/L P MG/L P INST M(,L) MONTHLY
74/08/05 11 00
CP(T)— 1.480 5.800 0.080 2.700 0.389 0.426
74/08/Os 15 30
------- |