&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Region V
230 South Dearborn
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Novonber 1979
Water Division
Environmental
Impact Statement
Draft
Appendices
Alternative Waste
Treatment Systems
For Rural Lake Projects
Case Study Number 5
Ottertail County Board
Of Commissioners
Ottertail County,
Minnesota
-------
VOLUME II
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
ALTERNATIVE WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS FOR RURAL LAKE PROJECTS
CASE STUDY No. 5: OTTER TAIL COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
OTTER TAIL COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Prepared by the
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION V, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS
AND
WAPORA, INCORPORATED
WASHINGTON, D.C.
Approved by:
n McGuire
ional Administrator
. Environmental Protection Agency
November 1979
-------
VOLUME II
APPENDIXES
A SOILS
A-l Soil Factors that Affect On-Site Wastewater Disposal
A-2 Soil Limitation Rating for Septic Tank Absorption Fields
A-3 Soil Limitations for Land Application
B ATMOSPHERE
B-l Climatological Data
B-2 Air Quality standards
C WATER QUALITY
C-l Minnesota Water Quality Standards
C-2 MPCA Sampling Data
C-3 Investigation of Septic Leachate Discharges to Otter Tail Lake
C-4 Fergus Falls Bacterial Data
C-5 Seasonal and Long Term Changes in Lake Water Quality
C-6 Effluent Standards
C-7 Lake Eutrophication Models and Omerniks Model
D SEPTIC TANK DESIGN STANDARDS
E BIOTA
E-l Fish Species
E-2 Aquatic Plants
E-3 Waterfowl
E-4 Trees
E-5 Wildlife (Mammals, Birds, Reptiles, Amphibians)
F POPULATION PROJECTION METHODOLOGY
G LETTER FROM MICHLOVIC
H FLOW REDUCTION DEVICES
H-l Incremental Capital Costs of Flow Reduction in the Otter Tail
Study Area
H-2 Flow Reduction and Cost Data for Water Saving Devices
I CLUSTER SYSTEMS
1-1 Cluster System Designs
1-2 Experience with Cluster Systems
J MANAGEMENT OF SMALL WASTE FLOWS DISTRICTS
J-l Management Concepts for Small Flow Districts
J-2 Legislation by States Authorizing Management of Small
Waste Flow Districts
-------
J-3 Some Management Agencies for Decentralized Facilities
K COST AND FINANCING
K-l Design and Cost Assumptions
K-2 Itemized and Total Costs for Each Alternative
K-3 Eligibility Requirements for Federal and State Cost Sharing
-------
APPENDIX A
SOILS
-------
APPENDIX
A-l
SOIL FACTORS THAT AFFECT ON-SITE WASTEWATER DISPOSAL
Evaluation of soil for on-site wastewater disposal requires an understand-
ing of the various components of wastewater and their interaction with soil.
Wastewater treatment involves: removing suspended solids; reducing bacteria
and viruses to an acceptable level; reducing or removing undesirable chemicals;
and disposal of the treated water. For soils to be able to treat wastewater
properly they must have certain characteristics. How well a septic system
works depends largely on the rate at which effluent moves into and through the
soil, that is, on soil permeability. But several other soil characteristics
may also affect performance. Groundwater level, depth of the soil, underlying
material, slope and proximity to streams or lakes are among the other charac-
teristics that need to be considered when determining the location and size
of an on-site wastewater disposal system.
Soil permeability - Soil permeability is that quality of the soil that
enables water and air to move through it. It is influenced by the amount of
gravel, sand, silt and clay in the soil, the kind of clay, and other factors.
Water moves faster through sandy and gravelly soils than through clayey soils.
Some clays expand very little when wet; other kinds are very plastic and
expand so much when wet that the pores of the soil swell shut. This slows
water movement and reduces the capacity of the soil to absorb septic tank
effluent.
Groundwater level - In some soils the groundwater level is but a few feet,
perhaps only one foot, below the surface the year around. In other soils the
groundwater level is high only in winter and early in spring. In still others
the water level is high during periods of prolonged rainfall. A sewage absorp-
tion field will not function properly under any of these conditions.
If the groundwater level rises to the subsurface tile or pipe, the satu-
rated soil cannot absorb effluent. The effluent remains near the surface or
rises to the surface, and the absorption field becomes a foul-smelling,
unhealthful bog.
Depth to rock, sand or gravel - At least 4 feet of soil material between
the bottom of the trenches or seepage bed and any rock formations is necessary
for absorption, filtration, and purification of septic tank effluent. In areas
where the water supply comes from wells and the underlying rock is limestone,
more than 4 feet of soil may be needed to prevent unfiltered effluent from
seeping through the cracks and crevices that are common in limestone.
Different kinds of soil - In some places the soil changes within a dis-
tance of a few feet. The presence of different kinds of soil in an absorption
field is not significant if the different soils have about the same absorption
capacity, but it may be significant if the soils differ greatly. Where this
is so, serial distrioution of effluent is recommended so that each kind of
soil can absorb and filter effluent according to its capability.
Slope - Slopes of less than 15% do not usually create serious problems
in either construction or maintenance of an absorption field provided the
soils are otherwise satisfactory.
-------
A-l
On sloping soils the trenches must be dug on the contour so that the
effluent flows slowly through the tile or pipe and disperses properly over the
absorption field. Serial distribution is advised for a trench system on
sloping ground.
On steeper slopes, trench absorption fields are more difficult to lay out
and construct, and seepage beds are not practical. Furthermore, controlling
the downhill flow of the effluent may be a serious problem. Improperly fil-
tered effluent may reach the surface at the base of the slope, and wet,
contaminated seepage spots may result.
If there is a layer of dense clay, rock or other impervious material near
the surface of a steep slope and especially if the soil above the clay or rock
is sandy, the effluent will flow above the impervious layer to the surface and
run unfiltered down the slope.
Proximity to streams or other water bodies - Local regulations generally
do not allow absorption fields within at least 50 feet of a stream, open
ditch, lake, or other watercourse into which unfiltered effluent could escape.
The floodplain of a stream should not be used for an absorption field.
Occasional flooding will impair the efficiency of the absorption field; fre-
quent flooding will destroy its effectiveness.
Soil maps show the location of streams, open ditches, lakes and ponds,
and of alluvial soils that are subject to flooding. Soil surveys usually give
the probability of flooding for alluvial soils.
Soil conditions required for proper on-site wastewater disposal are sum-
marized in the Appendix A-3.
Source: Bender, William H. 1971. Soils and Septic Tanks. Agriculture Infor-
mation Bulletin 349, SCS, USDA.
-------
APPENDIX A-2
SOIL LIMITATION RATINGS FOR SEPTIC TANK ABSORPTION FIELDS
Item affecting use
Permeability class-
Hydraulic conductivity
rate
(Uhland core method)
Percolation rate
(Auger hole method)
Depth to water table
Flooding
Slope
4/
Depth to hard rock,—
bedrock, or other
impervious materials
Stoniness class
Rockiness class
Degree of soil limitation
Slight
Rapid-^,
moderately
rapid, and
upper end
of moderate
More than ,
1 in./hr.-7
Faster than ,
45 min. /in. -
More than
72 in.
None
0-8 pet
More than
72 in.
0 and 1
0
Moderate
Lower and
of moderate
1-0.6 in./hr.
45-60 min. /in.
48-72 in.
Rare
8-15 pet
48-72 in.
2
1
Severe
Moderately
slow— and
slow
Less than
0.6 in./hr.
Slower than
60 min. /in.
Less than
48 in.
Occasional
or frequent
More than
15 pet
Less than
48 in.
3, 4, and 5
2, 3, 4,
and 5
— Class limits are the same as those suggested by the Work-Planning
Conference of the National Cooperative Soil Survey. The limitation ratings
should be related to the permeability of soil layers at and below depth of
the tile line.
2/
— Indicate by footnote where pollution is a hazard to water supplies.
— In arid or semiarid areas, soils with moderately slow permeability may
have a limitation rating of moderate.
4/
— Based on the assumption that tile is at a depth of 2 feet.
-------
COMPARISON OF SITE CHARACTERISTICS FOR LAND TREATMENT PROCESSES
Principal Processes
Characteristics
Slope
Soil Permeability
Depth to
Groundwater
Climatic
Restrictions
Slow Rate
Less than 20% on cultivated
land; less than 40% on non-
cultivated land
Moderately slow to moderately
rapid
(.06-20 in./hr.)
2 to 3 ft. (minimum)
Storage often needed for
cold weather and
precipitation
Rapid infiltration
Not critical; excessive
slopes require much
earthwork
Rapid (sands, loamy
sands)
(_>2.0 in./hr.)
10 ft. (lesser depths
are acceptable where
underdrainage is
provided)
None (possibly modify
operation in cold
weather)
1 ft. = 0.305 m
hd
-------
APPENDIX B
ATMOSPHERE
-------
Monthly Normals of Temperature and Precipitation of the Study Area.
STATION
FERGUS*
FALLS
ELEVATION
1210 Feet
Temperature
(degrees Farenheit)
Precipitation
(inches)
MONTHS
JFMAMJJASONO
8.5 13.A 26.3 43.5 56.1 65.7 71.2 69.9 59.0 48.2 29.8 15.1
0.77 0.6U 1.12 2.60 2.99 4.68 3.32 3.05 2.24 1.42 0.87 0.90
AVERAGE
42,2
24.56
WADENA* 1350 Feet Temperature 7.6 12.5 25.1 42.2 54.6 64.5 59.8 68.0 57.2 47.0 29.1 14.4
(degrees Farenheit)
Precipitation
(inches)
0.80 0.58 1.28 2.74 3.39 4.65 3.91 3.86 2.52 1.68 1.07 0.84
41.0
27.32
OTTERTAIL** 1300 Feet
(Lake Study
Area)
Temperature
(degrees Farenheit)
Precipitation
(inches)
9.6 17.5 22.4 42.0 57.0 67.6 73.5 65.3 58.8 45.9 37.7 10.9
0.78 0.59 2.20 2.67 3.19 4.67 3.66 3.45 2.38 1.55 0.97 0.87
41.5
25.94
Sources
* National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 1941-1970; Climatography of the U.S. No. 81 - Minnesota.
** Otter Tail Lake is located approximately half-way between Wadena and Fergus Falls, therefore the average readings from these
two stations were used for the Study Area.
ra
o
M
x
ta
i
-------
MINNESOTA AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
APPENDIX B-2
PoUuumt/Air
Contaminant
Concentration
Remarks
(1) Hydrogen Suinde«» 0.05 ppm by volume y. hi. average not to be ex-
(prunary standards) (70.0 micograms per cceded over 2 times per yr
cubic meter)
(2) Photochemical1"
Oxidmts (primary
and secondary
standards)
0.03 ppm by volume
(42.0 microgrami per
cubic meter)
0.07 ppm by volume
(130 micrograms per
cubic meter)
(3) Carbon Monoxide1" 9 ppm by volume
(primary and sec- (10 milligrams p«r
ond&ry standards) cubic meter)
30 ppm by volume
(35 milligrams per
cubic meter)
(4) Hydrocarbons'" 0.24 ppm by volume
(primary and sec- (160 micrograms per
ondary standards) cubic meter)
'/: hr. average not to be ex-
ceeded over 2 times in any
5 consecutive days
maximum 1 hr. concentra-
tion not to be exceeded
more than once per yr.
maximum 8 hr. concentra-
tion not to be exceeded
more than once per yr.
maximum 1 hr. concentra-
tion not to be exceeded
more than once per yr.
maximum 3 hr. concentra-
tion (6 10 9 a.m.) not to be
exceeded more than once
per yr., corrected for meth-
ane
(5) Sulfur Oudw""
(primary and sec-
ondary standards)
0.02 ppm by volume
(60 micrograms per
cubic meter)
0.1 ppm by volume
(260 microgranu per
cubic meter)
0.25 ppm by volume
(655 microgranu per
cubic meter)
(6) Paniculate1" Matter 75 micrograms
(primary standard) per cubic meter
260 microgrami
per cubic meter
Paniculate Matter 60 nucrograms
(secondary standard) per cubic meter
150 micrograms
per cubic meter
(7) Nltrogea Oxides1" 0.05 ppm
(primary and sec- (100 raicrogramj
ondary standards) per cubic meter)
maximum annual arithmetic
mean
maximum 24 hr. concentra-
tion not to be exceeded
more than once per yr.
maximum 3 hr. concentra-
lion, not to be exceeded
more than once per yr.
maximum annual geometric
mean
maximum 24 hr. concentra-
tion not to be exceeded
more than once per yr.
maximum annual geometric
mean
maximum 24 hr. concentra-
tion not to be exceeded
more than once per yr.
maximum annutl arithmetic
mean
Footnotes:
(l) All nudtrds »pply thjouiliotit tAe Stwe of MLafletou.
(b) All measurement* of ambient air quiUly are corrected to a retroncc temperature of 25* C.
and a rcfcreoca prnuure o( 760 arm of mercury.
tc) All meaujremrntf and l*iu thill be conducted by the mcUiodoloor referenced hereto, or
otfccT methodology u tb* Dtlictor ibtU her«eA«T ic-prov*.
(d) By meibylent blue, or other cocibod •pproved by Ui« Director.
(•) NctiiriUburTrred one percent pottulum Iodide colorlmctrlc detection technique, corrected
lot SOi tnd NO, interference. |U phuo cbemliiunlnacoce. or outer roeifcod jpprovcd by
tbe Director.
(f) Nondbptnlra lulrirad rpectrocMOT (N.DJ.R.), or oUur nmjod ipprond Mr Uu Olnctar.
By puvounlllne, cculoomrlc, or otitr oMhoi >ppro>ul bf ti. Director.
(1) Him flume rmihod. or othir rnrthod iponnxd by UN Director,
(]) luob>-Htichk«l»r. or oUwr tMtbod •ppremd by tie Director.
-------
APPENDIX C
WATER QUALITY
-------
APPENDIX
C-l
CHAPTER FOURTEEN: WPC 14
CRITERIA FOR THE CLASSIFICATION OF THE INTRASTATE WATEHT OF THS
STATE AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF STANDARDS OF QUALITY AND PURITY
WPC 14: The official policy and purpose of the State of Minnesota in regard
to these matters is set forth in the Minnesota Water Pollution Control Statutes
as amended by Minnesoiu Laws 1973, Chapter 374:
Sec. 115.42. It is the policy of the state to provide for the prevention, control
and abatement of pollution of all waters of the state, so far as feasible and
practical, in furtherance of conservation of such waters and protection of the
public health and in furtherance of the development of the economic welfare of
the state.
... It is the purpose of Laws 1963, Chapter 874, to safeguard the waters of
the state from pollution by: (a) preventing any new pollution; and (b) abating
pollution existing when Laws 1S63. Chapter 874, become effective, under a pro-
gram consistent vrith the declaration of policy above stated.
Sec. 115.44, Subd. 2. In order to attain the objectives of Laws 1963, Chapter
874, the Agency after proper study, and after conducting public hearing upon
due notice, shall as soon as practicable, group the designated waters of the
state into classes and adopt classifications and standards of purity and quality
therefor. Such classification shall be made in accordance with considerations
of best usage in the interest of the public and with regard to the considerations
mentioned in subdivision 3 hereof.
Sec. 115.44, Subd. 8. If the Agency finds in order to comply with the federal
water pollution control act or any other federal lav/ or rule or regulation
promulgated thereunder thiit it is impracticable to ccrnply with the requirements
of this section in classifying waters or adopting standards or in meeting any of
the requirements thereof, compliance with the requirements of such action are
waived to the extent necessary to enable the agency to comply with federal laws
and rules and regulations promulgated thereunder. The agency may classify
waters and adopt criteria and standards in such form and based upon such
evidence as it may deem necessary and sufficient for the purposes of meeting
requirements of such federal laws, notwithstanding any provisions in chapter
115 or any other state law to the contrary. In the event waters are classified
and criteria and standards are adopted to meet the requirements of federal law,
the agency shall thereafter proceed to otherwise comply with the provisions of
this section which were waived as rapidly as is practicable. This authority
shall extend to proceedings pending before the agency on May 20, 1973.
-161-
-------
C-l
. . . Wherever advisable and practicable the agency may establish standards
for effluent or disposal systems discharging into waters of the state regardless
of whether such waters are or are not classified.
Sec. 115.03, Subd. 5. Notwithstanding any other provisions prescribed in
or pursuant to chapter 115 and, with respect to the pollution of waters of
the state, in chapter 116, or otherwise, the agency shall have the authority
to perform any and all acts minimally necessary including, but not limited
to, the establishment and application of standards, procedures, regulations,
orders, variances, stipulation agreements, schedules of compliance, and
permit conditions, consistent with and, therefore, not less stringent than the
provisions of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, applicable
to the participation by the state of Minnesota in the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES). . .
In accordance with this declaration of policy and legislative intent, and under
the powers delegated to the Agency, the following intrastate water use classifi-
cations and corresponding standards of quality and purity are hereby adopted
by the Pollution Control Agency as provided by law.
(a) Introduction
(1) Scope. The following classifications, criteria and standards of water
and effluent quali:y and purity as hereby adopted and established shall apply
to all intrastate -praters of the state, notwithstanding any other intrastate water
quality or effluent regulations of general or specific application, except that
any more stringent water quality or effluent standards or prohibitions in the
other applicable regulations are preserved.
(2) Severability. All provisions of this regulation shall be severable
and the invalidity of any lettered paragraph or any subparagraph or subdivision
thereof shall not void any other lettered paragraph or subparagraph, subdivision
or any part thereof.
(3) Definitions. The terms "waters of the state" for the purposes of
this regulation shall be construed to mean intrastate waters as herein below
defined, and the terms "sewage," "industrial wastes," and "other wastes," as
well as any other terms for which definitions are given in the Water Pollution
Control Statutes, as used herein have the meanings ascribed to them in Minnesota
Statutes. Sections 115.01 and 115.41, with the exception that disposal systems
or treatment works operated under permit of the Agency shall not be construed
to be "waters of the state" as the term is used herein. Interstate waters are
defined as all rivers, lakes, and other waters that flow across or from part
of state boundaries. All of the remaining designated waters of the scate which
-162-
-------
C-l
do not meet the definition of interstate v/aters given above are to be construed
herein as constituting intrastate waters. Other terms and abbreviations used
herein which are not specifically defined in applicable federal or state law shall
be construed in conformance with th~ context, and in relation to the applicable
section of the statutes, pertaining i.o the matter at hand, and current professional
usage.
(4) Uses of the Intrastate Waters. The classifications are listed
separately in accordance with the need for intrastate water quality protection,
considerations of best use in the interest of the public and other considerations,
as indicated in Minnesota Statutes, Section 115.44. The classification should
not be construed to be an order of priority, nor considered to be exclusive
or prohibitory of other beneficial uses.
(5) Determination of Compliance. In maJking tests or analyses of the
intrastate waters of the state, sewage, industrial wastes or other wastes to
determine compliance with the standards, samples shall be collected in such
manner and place, and of such type, number and frequency as may be con-
sidered necessary by the Agency from the viewpoint of adequately reflecting
the condiiton of the intrastate waters, the composition of the effluents, and
the effects of the pollutants upon the specified uses. Reasonable allowance
will be made for dilution of the effluents, which are in compliance with Section
(c) (6) , following discharge into waters of the State. The Agency by allowing
dilution may consider the effect on all uses of the intrastate waters into which
the effluents are discharged. The extent of dilution allowed regarding any
specific discharge shall not violate the applicable water quality standards.
The samples shall be preserved and analyzed in accordance with procedures
given in the 1971 edition of Standard Methods for the Examination of Water
and Waste-Water, by the American Public Health Association, American Water
Works Association, and the Water Pollution Control Federation, and any re-
visions or amendments thereto. The Agency may accept or may develop other
methods, procedures > guidelines or criteria for measuring, analyzing and
collecting samples,
(6) Unclassified Intrastate Waters. Adoption of specific classifications
and standards for unclassified intrastate waters, and/or changes in existing
classifications and standards, will be done as soon as practicable by the
Minnesota PoUutioa Control Agency for individually designated waters after
the necessary studies and public hearings relating to the determination of
present and future quality, characteristics and uses have been completed as
required by law. In the absence of such official classifications and standards
for any given intrastate waters, it shall be the policy of the Agency to con-
sider all unclassified intrastate waters is waters of the highest quality con-
sistent with their actual or potential use, and deserving ol' the equivalent
-163-
-------
C-l
degree of protection from pollution, until the same may be affirmed or
altered by adoption of standards or other official act of the Agency; except
that where sewage, industrial wastes or other wastes are being discharged
to unclassified intrastate waters during such interim period the concentrations
of polluting substances in such separate industrial waste or other waste
effluents shall be no higher than t^e permissible concentrations of polluting
substances of a comparable nature in the effluents of municipal sewage treat-
ment v/orks which discharge into the same intrastate waters, unless specifically
exempted from this requirement by other effluent standards or the terms of a
valid waste disposal permit issued by the Agency.
(7) Natural Intrastate Water Quality. The intrastate waters may, in a
state of nature, have some characteristics or properties approaching or ex-
ceeding the limits specified in the water quality standards. The standards
shall be construed as limiting the addition of pollutants of human activity
to those of natural origin, where such be present, so that in total the speci-
fied limiting concentrations will not be exceeded in the intrastate waters by
reason of such controllable additions. Where the background level of the
natural origin is reasonably definable and normally is higher than the specified
standard the natural level may be used as the standard for controlling the
addition of pollutants of human activity which are comparable in nature and
significance with those of natural origin. The natural background level may
be used instead of the specified water quality standard as a maximum limit of
the addition of pollutants, in those instances where the natural level is lower
than the specified standard and reasonable justification exists for preserving
the quality to that found in a state of nature.
In the adoption of standards for individual intrastate waters, the Agency will
be guided by the standards set forth herein but may make reasonable modifi-
cations of the sane on the basis of evidence brought forth at a public hearing
if it is shown to be desirable and in the public interest to do so in order to
encourage the best use of the intrastate waters or the lands bordering such
intrastate waters.
(8) Non-Degradation. T,Vaters which are of quality better than the
established standards shall be maintained at high quality unless a determination
is made by the Agency that a change is justifiable as a result of necessary
economic or social development and will not preclude appropriate beneficial
present and future uses of the waters. Any project or development which
would constitute a source of pollution to waters of the state shall be required
to provide the best practicable control technology currently available not later
than July 1, 1977 and the best available technology economically achievable
not later than July 1, 1983, and any other applicable treatment standards a3
defined by and in accordance with the requirements of tha Federal Water
-184-
-------
C-l
Pollution Control Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et. scq., as amended, in order to
maintain high water quality and keep water pollution at a minimum. In im-
plementing this policy, the Administrator of th<; U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency will be provided with such information as he requires to discharge
hu> responsibilities under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended.
(9) Variance from Standards. In any case where, upon application of
the responsible person or persons, the Agency finds that by reason of ex-
cepiional circumstances the strict enforcement of any provision of these
standards \vould cause undue hardship, that disposal of the sewage, industrial
waste or other waste is necessary for the public hea.'ih, safety or welfare;
and that strict conformity with the standards would be unreasonable, im-
practical or not feasible under the circumstances; the Agency in its discretion
niay grant a variance therefrom upon such conditions as it may prescribe for
prevention, control or abatement of pollution in harmony with the general
purposes of these classifications and standards and the intent of the applicable
state and federal l?.v;s. The U.S. Environmental Protection Ageacy will be
advised of any permits which may be issued under this clause together with
information as to the need therefor.
(b) Water Use Classification - All Intrastate Waters of the State. Based on
considerations of best usage in the interest of the public and in conformance
with the requirements of the applicable statutes, the intrastate -vaters of the
state shall be grouped into one or more of the following classes:
(1) Domestic Consumption. (To include all intrastate waters which are
or may be used as a source of supply for drinking, culinary or food processing
use or other domestic purposes, and for which quality control is or may be
necessary to protect the public health, safety or welfare.)
(2) Fisheries and Recreation. (To include all intrastate waters which
are or may be used for fishing, fish culture, bathing or any other recreational
purposes, and for which quality control is or may be necessary to protect
aquatic or terrestrial life, or the public health, safety -T welfare.)
(3) Industrial Consumption. (To include all intrastate waters which
are or may be used as a source of supply for industrial process or cooling
water, or any other industrial or commercial purposes, and for which quality
control is or may be necessary to prefect the public health, safety or welfare.)
(4) Agriculture and Wildlif; (To include all intrastate waters which
are or may be used for any agricui:;.re purposes, including stock watering
and irrigation, or by waterfowl or other wildlife, and for which quality con-
trol is or may be necessary to protect terrestrial life or the public health,
safety or welfare.)
-165-
-------
C-l
(5) Navigation and Waste Disposal. (To include all intrastate waters
which are or may be used for any form of water transportation or navigation,
disposal of sewage, industrial waste or other waste effluents, or fire pre-
vention, and for which quality control is or may be necessary to protect the
public health, safety or welfare.)
(6) Other Uses. (To include intrastate \vatersi which are or may serve
the above Mated uses or any other beneficial uses not listed herein•, including
without limitation any such uses in this or any other stat^, province, or
nation of any intrastate waters flowing through or originating in this state,
and for which quality control is or may be necessary for the above declared
purposes, or to conform with the requirements of the legally constituted state
or national agencies having jurisdiction over such intrastate waters, or any
other considerations the Agency may deem proper.)
(c) General Standards Applicable to All Intrastate Waters of the State.
(1) No untreated sewage shall be discharged into any intrastate waters
of the state. No treated sewage, or industrial -waste or other wastes containing
viable pathogenic organisms, shall be discharged into intrastate waters of the
state without effective disinfection. Effective disinfection of any discharges,
including combined flows of sewage and storm water, will be required where
necessary to protect the specified uses of the intrastate waters.
(2) No sewage, industrial waste or other wastes shall be discharged
into any intrastate waters of the state so as to cause any nuisance conditions,
such as the presence of significant amounts of floating solids, scum, oil slicks,
excessive suspended solids, material discoloration, obnoxious odors, gas
ebullition, deleterious sludge deposits, undesirable slimes or fungus growths,
or other offensive or harmful effects.
(3) Existing discharges of inadequately treated sewage, industrial
waste or other wastes shall be abated, treated or controlled so as to comply
with the applicable standards. Separation of sanitary sewage from natural
run-off may be required where necessary to ensure continuous effective treat-
ment of sewage.
(4) The highest levels of v/ater quality, including, but not limited to,
dissolved oxygen, which are attainable in the intrastate waters by continuous
operation at their maximum capability of all primary and secondary units of
treatment works or their equivalent discharging effluents into the intrastate
waters shall be maintained in order to enhance conditions for the specified uses,
-166-
-------
C-l
(5) Mesns for expediting mixing and dispersion of sewage, industrial
v/flste, or other \vaste effluents in the receiving intrastate waters are to be
provided so far as practicable when deemed necessary by the Agency to main-
tain the quality of the receiving intestate v/aters in accordance with applicable
standards. Mixing zones be established by the Agency on an individual basis,
Vvith primary consideration being g'ven to the following guidelines: (a) mixing
.zones in, rivers shall permit an acceptable passageway for the movement of fish;
(b) the total mixing zone or zones at any transect of the stream shall contain
no more than 25% of the crosssectional area and/or volurr e of flow of the stream,
and should not extend over more than 50% of the width; (c) mixing zone
characteristics shall not be lethal to aquatic organisms; (d) for contaminants
other than heat, the 96 hour median tolerance limit for indigenous fish and
fish food organises should not be exceeded at any point in the mixing zone;
(e) mixing zones should be as small as possible, and not intersect spawning
or nursery areas, migratory routes, water intakes, nor mouths of rivers; and
(f) overlapping of mixing zones should be minimized and meas.ires taken to
prevent adverse synergistic effects.
(6) It is herein established that the Agency shall requrre secondary
treatment as a minimum for all municipal sewage and biodegradable industrial
or other wastes to meet the adopted water quality standards. A comparable
high degree of treatment or its equivalent also shall be requir ;d of all non-
biodegradable industrial or other wastes unless the discharger can demonstrate
to the Agency that a lesser degree of treatment or control will provide for
water quality enhancement commensurate with present and proposed future
water uses and a variance is granted under the provisions of the variance
clause. Secondary treatment facilities are defined as works which will pro-
vide effective sedimentation biochemical oxidation, and disinfection, or the
equivalent, including effluents conforming to the following:
Substance or Characteristic Limiting Concentration or Range*
5-Day biochemical oxygen demand 25 milligrams per liter
Fecal coliforzn group organisms 200 most probable number per 100 rnilliliterr-
Toxal suspended solids 30 milligrams per liter
Pathogenic organisms None
Oil Essentially free of visible oil
Phosphorus** 1 milligram per liter
Turbidity 25
pH range 6.5-8.5
Unspecified toxic or corrosive
substances None at levels acutely toxic to humans or
other animals or plant life, or directly
damaging to real property.
-167-
-------
C-l
The arithmetic mean for concentrations of 5-day biochemical oxygen demand
and total suspended solids shall not exceed the stated values in a period of 30
consecutive days and 45 milligrams per liter in a period of 7 consecutive days.
Disinfection of wastewater effluents to reduce the coliforra organisms levels is
required year around. The geometric mean for the fecal coliforn organisms
shall not exceed the stated value in a period of 30 consecutive drvs and 400
most probable number per 100 milliliters in a period of 7 consecutive days.
The application of the coliform and pathogenic organism standards ordinarily
shall be limited to sewage or other effluents containing admixtures of sewage
and shall not apply to industrial wastes except where the presence of sewage,
fecal coliform organisn.3 or viable pathogenic organisms in such wastes is known
or reasonably certain.
**Where the discharge of effluent is directly to or affects a lake or reservoir.
Removal of nutrients from all wastes shall be provided to the fullest practicable
extent wherever sources of nutrients are considered to be actually or potentially
detrimental to preservation or enhancement of the designated water uses.
In addition to providing secondary treatment as defined above, all dischargers
of sewage, industrial wastes or other wastes also shall provide the best
practicable control technology not later than July 1, 1977, and best available
technology economically achievable by July 1, 1983, and any other applicable
treatment standards as defined by and in accordance with the requirements
and schedules of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251 eq. seq.,
as amended, and applicable regulations or rules promulgated pursuant thereto
by the Administrator of the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency.
(7) Dischargers of sewage, industrial waste or other waste effluents
shall be controlled so that the water quality standards will be maintained at
all stream flows which are equal to or exceeded by 90 percent of the seven
consecutive daily average flows of record (the lowest weekly flow with a once
in ten year recurrence interval) for the critical month(s). The period of
record for determining the specific flow for the stated recurrence interval,
where records are available, shall include at least the most recent ten years
of record, including flow records obtained after establishment of flow regulation
devices, if aay. Such calculations shall not be applied to lakes and their
embayments which have no comparable flow recurrence interval. Where stream
flow records are not available, the flow may be estimated on the basis of
available information on the watershed characteristics, precipitation, run-off
and other relevant data.
Allowance shall cot be made in the design of treatment works for low stream
flow augmentation unless such flow augmentation of minimum flow is dependable
and controlled und».r applicable laws or regulations.
-168-
-------
C-l
(8) In any instance where it is evident that the minimal treatment
specified in Section (c) (6) and dispersion are not effective in preventing
pollution, or if at the applicable flows it is evident that the specified stream
flow 's inadequate to protect the specified water quality standards, the specific
stp-.oards may be interpreted as effluent standards for control purposes. In
addi'^on, the foJ.Ic\ving effluent standards may be applied without any allowance
for dilution v/here strej:m flow or other factors are such as to pravent adequate
dilution, or where it is otherwise necessary to protect the intrastate waters
for the slated uses:
Item* Limits
5-day biochemical oxygen demand 5 milligrams per liter
Total suspended solids 5 milligrams per liter
*The concentrations specified in section (c) (6) of this regulation may be used
in lieu thereof if the discharge of effluent is restricted to the spring flush or
other high runoff periods when the stream flow rate above the discharge point
is sufficiently greater than the effluent flow rate to ensure that the applicable
water quality standards are met during such discharge period. If treatment
works are designed and constructed to meet the specified limits given above
for a continuous discharge, at the discretion of the Agency the operation of
such works may allow for the effluent quality to vary between the limits specified
above and in section (c) (6) , provided the water quality standards and all
other requirements of the Agency and the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
are being met. Such variability of operation must be based on adequate
monitoring of the treatment works and the effluent and receiving waters as
specified by the Agency.
(9) In any case where, after a public hearing, the Agency finds it
necessary for conformance with Federal requirements, or conservation of the
intrastate waters of the state, or protection of the public health, or in furtherance
of the development of the economic welfare of the state, it may prohibit or
further lunit ths ci-isch— v't3 to s.*!^7 desirrr*o^er^ ^r^+^^otofo -y/^*ar>c3 <~»f £r^w sewage
industrial waste, or other waste effluents, or any component thereof, whether
such effluents are treated or untreated, or existing or new, notwithstanding
any other provisions of classifications or specific standards stated herein which
may be applicable to such designated intrastate waters.
(10) It shall be incumbent upon all persons responsible for existing
or new sources of sewage, industrial wastes or other wastes which are or
will be discharged to intrastate waters, to treat or control their wastes so as
to produce effluents having a common level or concentration of pollutants of
comparable nature or effect as may be necessary :o meet the specified standards
-169-
-------
C-l
or better, but this shall not be interpreted to prohibit the Agency after pro-
viding an opportunity for public hearing from accepting effective loss prevention
and/or water conservation measures or process changes or other waste control
measures or arrangements as being equivalent to the v/aste treatme-.t measures
required for compliance with applicable effluent and/or water qrzlity standards
or load allocations.
(11) All sources of sewage, industrial waste, or other waste which do
not at present have a valid operation and discharge permit, or an application
for the same pending before the Agency, shall apply for the same within 30
days of the adoption of this regulation, or the Agency may abate the source
forthwith. The provisions of section (c) (6) relating to effluent quality standards,
and the other provisions of this regulation, are applicable to existing sewage,
industrial waste or other waste disposal facilities and the effluent discharged
therefrom. Nothing herein shall be construed to prevent the Agency subsequently
from modifying ar.y existing permits so as to conform with federal requirements
and the requirements of this regulation.
(12) Liquid substances which are not commonly considered to be sewage
or industrial wastes but which could constitute a pollution hazard shall be
stored in accordance with Regulation WPG 4, and any revision or amendments
thereto. Other vrastes as defined by law or other substances which could con-
stitute a pollution hazard shall not be deposited in any manner such that the
same may be likely to gain entry into any intrastate waters of the state in
excess of or contrary to any of the standards herein adopted, or cause pollution
as defined by law.
(13) No sewage, industrial waste or other wastes shall be discharged
into the intrastate waters of the state in such quantity or in such manner alone
or in combination with other substances as to cause pollution thereof as defined
by law. In any case where the intrastate waters of the state into which sewage,
industrial wastes or other v/aste effluents discharge are assigned different
standards than the interstate or intrastate waters into which such receiving
intrastste \vatcrs flc~, the standards applicable to the intrastate -waters into
which such sewage, industrial waste or other wastes discharged shall be
supplemented by the following:
The quality of any waters of the state receiving sewage, industrial waste or
other waste effluents shall be such that no violation of the standards of any
interstate or intrastate waters of the state in any other class shall occur by
reason of the discharge of such sewage, industrial waste or other waste
effluents.
-170-
-------
C-l
(14) Questions concerning the permissible levels, or changes, in the
s.ame, of a substance, or combination of substances, of undefined toxicity to
fish or other Biota shall be resolved in accordance with the latest methods
recommended by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The recom-
mendations of the National Technical Advisory Committee appoint-d by the
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency sha_l be used as official gridelines
in all aspects where the recommendations may be applicable. Toxic substances
shall not exceed 1/10 of the 96 hour median tolerance limit (TLM) as a we.ter
quality standard except that other more stringent application factors shall be
used when justified on the basis of available evidence.
(15) All persons operating or responsible for sewage, industrial waste
or other waste disposal systems which are adjacent to or which discharge
effluents to these waters or to tributaries which affect the same, shall submit
regularly every month a report to the Agency on the operation of the disposal
system, the effluent flow, and the characteristics of the effluents and re-
ceiving waters. Sufficient data on measurements, observations, sampling
and analyses, and other pertinent information shall be furnished as may be
required by the Agency to adequately evaluate the condition of the disposal
system, the effluent, and the waters receiving or affected by the effluent.
Fisheries and Recreation
Class B - The quality of this class of the intrastate waters of the state shall
be such as to permit the propagation and maintenance of cool or warm water
sport or commercial fishes and be suitable for aquatic recreation of all kinds,
including bathing, for which the waters may be usable. Limiting concentrations
or ranges of substances or characteristics which should not be exceeded in the
intrastate waters are given below:
Substance or Characteristic
Dissolved oxygen
Temperature
Ammonia (N)
Chromium (Cr)
Copper (Cu)
Limit or Range
Not less than 6 milligrams per liter from
April 1 through May 31, and not less
than 5 milligrams per liter at other times.
5°F above natural in streams and 3°F above
natural in lakes, based on monthly average
of the maximum daily temperature, except
in no case shall it exceed the daily average
temperature of 86°F.
1 milligram per liter
0.05 milligram per liter
0.01 milligram per liter or not greater than
1/10 thy 96 hour TLM value.
-171-
-------
Substance or Characteristic
Cyanides (CN)
Oil
pH value
Phenols
Turbidity value
Fecal coliform organisms
Radioactive materials
C-l
Limit or Range
0.02 milligram per liter
0.5 milligram per liter
6.5 - 9.0
0.01 milligram per liter and none th.it could
impart odor or taste to fish flesh or other
freshwater edible products such a.s crayfish,
clams, prawns and like creatures. Where
it seems probable that a discharge may
result in tainting of edible aquatic
products, bioassays and taste panels will
be required to determine whether tainting
is likely or present.
25
200 most probable number per 100 milliliters
as a monthly geometric mean based on not
les than 5 samples per month, nor equal
or exceed 2000 most probable number per
100 milliliters in more than 10% of all
samples during any month.
Not to exceed the lowest concentration per-
mitted to be discharged to an uncontrolled
environment as prescribed by the appropriate
authority having control over their use.
Industrial Consumntion
Class B - The quality of this class of the intrastate waters of the state shall
be such as to permit their use for general industrial purposes, except for
food processing, with only a moderate degree of treatment. The quality shall
be generally comparable to Class D intrastate waters used for domestic con-
sumption, except the following:
Substance or Characteristic
Chlorides (Cl)
Hardness
pH value
Fecal colifonn organisms
Limit or Range
100 milligrams per liter
250 milligrams per liter
6.0 - 9.0
200 most probable number per 100 milliliters
Class C - The quality of this class of the intrastate waters of the state shall be
such as to permit their use for industrial cooling and materials transport with-
out a high degree of treatment being necessary to avoid severe fouling, corrosion,
scaling, or other unsatisfactory conditions. The following shall not be exceeded
in the intrastate waters:
-172-
-------
C-l
ce or Charac teristic
Chlorides (CD
Hardness
p.H value
Fecal coliforrn organisms
Limit or Range
250 milligrams per liter
500 milligrams per liter
6.0 - 9.0
200 nioi't probable number per 100 miUJiiters
Additional selective limits may be imposed for any specific intrastate waters
as needed.
In addition to the above listed standards, no sewage, industrial waste or other
wastes, treated or untreated, shall be discharged into or permitted by any person
to gain access to any intrastate waters classified for industrial purposes so as
to cause any material impairment of their use as a source of industrial water
supply.
Agriculture and Wildlife
Class A - The quality of this class of the intrastate waters of the state shall
be such as to permit their use for irrigation without significant damage or
adverse effects upon any crops or vegetation usually grown in the waters or
area, including truck garden crops. The following concentrations or limits
shall be used as a guide in determining the suitability of the waters for such
uses, together with the recommendations contained in Handbook 60 published
by the Salinity Laboratory of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and any
revisions, amendments or supplements thereto:
Substance or Characteristic
Bicarbonates
Boron (B)
pH value
Specific conductance
Total dissolved salts
Sodium (Na)
Fecal coliform organisms
Sulfates (SO4)
Radioactive materials
Limit or Range
5 railliequivalents per liter
0.5 milligram per liter
6.0 - 8.5
1,000 micromhos per centimeter
700 milligrams per liter
50% of total cations as millicquivalents per
liter
200 most probable number per 100 milliliters
10 milligrams per liter, applicable to waters
used for production of wild rice during
periods when the rice may be susceptible
to damage by high sulfate levels.
Not to exceed the lowest concentrations per-
mitted to be discharged to an uncontrolled
environnent as prescribed by the appropriate
authority having control over their use.
-173-
-------
C-l
Class B - The quality of this class of the intrastate v/aters of the state shall be
such as to permit their use by livestock and v;ildlife \vithout inhibition or
injurious effects. The limits or concentrations of substances or characteristics
given below shall not be exceeded ir the intrastate waters:
Substance or Characteristic
pH value
Total salinity
Fecal coliform organisms
Radioactive materials
Unspecified toxic substances
~;imit or Range
8.0 - 9.0
1,000 milligrams per liter
200 most probable number per 100 milliliters
Not to exceed the lowest concentrations per-
mitted to be discharged to an uncontrolled
environment as prescribed by the appropria
authority having control over their use.
None at levels harmful either directly or
indirectly
Additional selective limits may be imposed for any specific intrastate waters
as needed.
Navigation and V7aste Disposal
The quality of this class of the intrastate waters of the state shall be such
as to be suitable for esthetic enjoyment of scenery and to avoid any inter-
ference v.-ith navigation or damaging effects on property. The following limits
or concentrations shall not be exceeded in the intrastate waters:
Substance or Characteristic
Fecal coliform organisms
pH value
Hydrogen sulfide
Limit or Range
200 most probable number per 100 milliliters
6.0 - 9.0
0.02 milligrams per liter
Additional selective limits may be imposed for any specific intrastate waters
as needed.
Other Uses
The uses to be protected in this class may be under other jurisdictions and in
other areas to which the'intrastate waters of the state are tributary, and may
include any or all of the uses listed in the foregoing categories, plus any other
possible beneficial uses. The Agency therefore reserves the right to impose
cny standarri.s necessary for the protect"on of this class, consistent with legal
limitations.
-174-
-------
SKETCH MAP OF OTTER TAIL
RIVER WATERSHED FROM
FERGUS FALLS TO SOURCE
ix
CLEARWATER CO.
LON8 L.
OTTER TAIL CO.
!TA»CA Sow
PAMK SCHOOL
NEW YOMK
MILLS
1
I.
Scale of Miles
FIG. I
MINN. POLLUTION
CONTROL AGENCY
DIV OF WATER QUALITY
JULY, 1969
-------
SKETCH MAP OF SAMPLING LOCATIONS
OTTER TAIL RIVER SURVEY
Scale at Milts
LEGEND
OR-I,-Sampling stations
^ . »-•..- Watershed boundary
MO 2
MINN. POLLUTION
.CONTROL AGENCY
IV OF WATER QUALITY
JULY, 1969
-------
LEGEND: OL-Otter Toil Loke RL-Round Loke PB Pelican Boy
OR-OHer Toil River DL-DeerLoke LL • ' .jng La»t
BC-Bolmorol Creek ELL-Eost Lost Lake fl ''lonktsn Samples
8L-Blonche Lake Vn..-yValker Loke
Scale of Miles
FIG. 3
n
i
MINN. POLLUTION
CONTROLAGENCY
DIV OF WATER QUALITY
JUNE,1969
-------
- 23 -
C-2
MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL ASEMCY
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
Section of Standards and Surveys
TABLE I
Analytical Data of Otter Tail Rivei*
Station
OR-5
OR-6
OR-7
OE-8
OR-9
Description
Otter Tail River, Becker Co., above entrance to Many Point Lake
Otter Tail River, Becker Co., at outlet from Round Lake
Uhnamed creek, Becker Co., at outlet from Flat Lake (T141N, R39W,
S33)
Otter Tail River, Becker Co., between Rice Lake and Height of Land
Lake
Otter Tail River. Becker Co., bridge on County Highway 29 below
Hubbel Pond Wildlife Area.
Date Collected
Tine Collected
Temperature °F
Colafonn )
group ) Con. tf.p.N. per 1.00 ml.
organisms) Fecal M.P.N. per 100 ml.
Total Solids
Total Volatile Matter
Suspended Solids
Suspended Volatile Matter
Turbidity
Color
Total hardness as CaCO-s
Alkalinity as CaCO-j
pH Value *
Chloride
Dissolved Oxyger
Five-day Biochemical Oxygen DeEand
Total Phosphorus
Soluble Phosphorus
Ammonia Nitrogen
Organic Nitrogen
Nitrite Nitrogen
Nitrate Nitrogen
Metnylene Blue Active Sub. as ABS
Copper
Cadmium
Nickel
Zinc
Iron
Manganese
Spec. Cond. umhos/cm @ 25° C.
OR-5
7/15/69
il:45
746
840
80
180
140
3
3
2.7
15
150
160
7.7
2.6
OR-6 OR-7
OR-8
OR-9
7/15/69 7/15/69 7/15/69 7/15/69
12:20 1330 1415 1515
73° 76o 770 750
.3
0.05
0.04
<.02
0.12
0.05
.03
280
50
20
180
130
3
3
2.4
10
150
150
8.2
1.8
5.7
1.8
0.06
0.03
0.08
0.59
0.04
0.10
700
490
220
150
10
7
8.5
35
140
160
,7'7
^2.3
2.5
0.09
0.06
0.33
1.4
0.05
0.08
01
<20
<20
200
140
5
5
3.2
35
140
150
7.7
3.7
2.5
0.08
0.06
0.14
1.1
0.04
0.04
0.10
2?0
28C
0.25
0.07
270
1300
50
180
130
5
5
3.5
30
160
140
7.8
*6.5
2.0
0.04
0.03
0.14
0.93
0.0?
4.0C
0.10
260
* Results are in milligrams per liter as noted
MFCA 440
-------
C-2
- 24 -
TABLE I
Analytical Data of Otter Tail River (cont.)*
Station
OR-10
OH-11
OR-12
OR-13
OR-14
Description
Otter Tail River, Becker Co., on northern edge of Frazee
Otter Tail River, Becker Co., culvert under U. S. Highway 10
south of Frazee
thnamed creek, Otter Tail Co., T137N, R 4CW, 315
Itonamed creek, Otter Tail Co., culvert on State Highway 228
Otter Tail River, Otter Tail Co., bridge on County Road 60.
OR-10
OR-11 OR-12 OR-13
OR-14
Date Collected
Time Collected
Temperature °F
Coliform )
group ) Con. M.P.N. per 300 ml.
organisms) Fecal M.P.N. per 100 ml.
Total Solids
Total Volatile Matter
Suspended Solids
Suspended Volatile Matter
Turbidity
Color
Total hardness as CaC03
Alkalinity as CaCO^
pH value
Chloride
Dissolved 0:xygen
Five-day Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Total Phosphorus
Soluble Phosphorus
Anmonia Nitrogen
Organic Nitrogen
Nitrite Nitrogen
Nitrate Nitrogen
Methylene Blue Active Sub. as AB3
Copper
Cadmium
Nickel
Zinc
Iron
Manganese
Spec. Cond. umhos/cn @ 25° C.
7/15/69 7/15/69 7/15/69 7/16/69 7/16/69
1600
1100
130
200
150
8
8
4.8
25
160
170
7.6
<1
2.9
1.5
0.10
0.08
20
0.91
0.02
0.02
0.11
1625
76°
110
20
200
150
4
4
6.6
35
200
ISO
7.6
5.6
6.7
2.5
6.18
0.11
0.21
1.4
0.04
0.15
0.14
1700
72o
2200
140
230
120
3
3
1.9
70
180
180
7.3
1.8
2.3
1.3
0.09
0.07
0.17
C.92
0.05
0.08
/.I
0845
71°
330
130
160
69
1
1
2.0
15
170
180
7.7
6.0
5.7
2.5
0.03
<.01
0.15
0.69
0.02
<.02
<.l
0905
70°
no
no
160
84
2
2
2.3
25
170
170
7.7
1.2
6.5
1.8
0.07
0.03
0.18
0.78
<.02
<02
O.
290
316
330
310
* Results are in milligrams per liter as noted
MPCA 440
-------
C-2
- 25 -
TABLE I
Analytical Data of Otter Tail River (cent.)*
Station
TR-1
TR-2
OR-15
OR-16
OR-17
Description
Toad River, Otter Tail Co., at County Road 60
Toad River, Otter Tail Co., above entrance to Big Pine Lake
Unnamed creek, Otter Tail Co., above entrance to Big Pine Lake
(T137N, R38W, 333)
Unnamed creek, Otter Tail Co., above entrance to Big Pine Lake
(T137N, R38W, S33)
Unnamed creek, Otter Tail Co., above entrance to Big Pine Lake
(T136N, R3SW, 34)
Date Collected
Time Collected
Temperature °F
Coliform )
group )Con. M.P.N. per 100 ml.
organisms) Fecal M.P.N. per 100 ml.
Total Solids
Total Volatile Matter
Suspended Solids
Suspended Volatile Matter
Turbidity
Color
Total hardness as
Alkalinity as CaC03
pH value
Chloride
Dissolved Oxygen
Five-day Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Total Phosphorus
Soluble Phosphorus
Anomonia Nitrogen
Organic Nitrogen
Nitrite Nitrogen
Nitrate Nitrogen
Methylene Blue Active Sub. as AB3
Copper
Cadmium
Nickel
Zinc
Iron
Manganese
Spec. Cond. umhos/cm @ 25° C.
TR-1 TR-2 OR-15
7/16/69 7/16/69 7/16/69
0930 0950 1010
71° 70° 67°
330
SO
5.1
20
20
7900
640
OR-16
7/16/69
1030
68°
2300
1300
OR-17
7/16/69
1X)50
67°
170
170
200
100
7
6
4.6
30
160
180
7.8
6.3
8.7
3.5
0.12
0.04
0.17
1.3
0.05
0.09
4-1
230
89
8
6
1.7
100
260
260
7.6
3.7
6.2
2.5
0.25
0.25
0.28
1.5
0.04
0.05
V.I
260
150
2
2
1.9
100
250
230
7.5
5.2
7.3
3.3
0.21
0.19
0.12
1.7
0.02
^.02
4.1
270
140
21
7
160
75
250
230
7.7
4.8
7.1
2.?
0.25
0.17
0.29
1.4
0.05
O..U
'A
340
430
420
* Results are in milligrams per liter as noted.
HPCA 440
-------
C-2
-: 26 -
TABLE I
Analytical Data of Otter Tail River (cont.)*
Station
OR-18
OR-19
OR-20
OR-21
QR-2
Description^
I'hnamed,ereek^ OttervTail Co., above entrance to Big Pine Lake
Otter Tail River, Otter Tail Co., bridge on U.S. Highway 10
southeast of Perham
Unnamed creek. Otter Tail Co., culvert on County Highway 14 north
of Rush Late (T135N, R38W, SIT)
Unnamed creek, Otter Tail Co., (T135N, R39W, 328)
Otter Tail River, Otter Tail Co., bridge above entrance to Otter
Tail Lake.
Date Collected
Time Collected
Temperature °P
Coliform )
group ) Con. M.P.N. per 100 ml.
organisms) Fecal M.P.N. per 100 ml.
Total Solids
Total Volatile Matter
Suspended Solids
Suspended Volatile Matter
Turbidity
Color
Total Hardness as CaCOo
Alkalinity as CaC03
pH Value
Chloride
Dissolved Oxygen
Five-day Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Total Pncsphorus
Soluble Phosphorus
Ammonia Nitrogen
Organic Nitrogen
Nitrite Nitrogen
Nitrate Nitrogen
Methylene Blue Active Sub. as ABS
Capper
Cadmium
Nickel
Zinc
Iron
Manganese
Spec. 'Cond. umhos/cm @ 25° C.
OR-13
OR-19 OR-20 OR-21
7/16/69 7/16/69 7/16/69 7/16/69
1110 1135 1220 125§
OR-2
7/16/69
64°
720
69°
2300
270
310
100
2
2
0.3
50
290
290
7.5
2.6
4.7
2.3
0.14
0.13
0.18
0.86
<..02
£.02
130 3300
^20 3300
150 300
84 130
4 2
4 2
3-4 3.3
15 75
180 290
160 280
8.0 7.4
4.8 11
£.0 <5.6
2.5 2.3
0.05 0.15
0.05 0.14
0.20 0.07
0.90 1.2
<-02 0.02
<.02 <-02
-.,1
64C
1100
70
4.1
220
490
300
490
130
34
0.3
160
150
7.7
5.6
4.9
2.0
0.03
0.06
0.13
1.0
0.02
^.o:
<. j.
COl
<.01
-L.01
t.Ol
290
* Results are in milligrams per liter as noted.
MPCA 440
-------
C-2
- 27 -
TABU: i
Analytical Data of Otter Tail River (cent.)*
Station
OL-31
OR-22
OR-23
OR-24
OR-25
Description
Uhnamed creek, Otter Tail Co., entering Otter Tail Lake
(T133N, R40W, SI)
Otter Tail River, Otter Tail Co., bridge below outflow of East
Lost Lake
Otter Tail River, Otter Tail Co., bridge on County Highway 35,
6 miles west of Otter Tail Lake
Otter Tail River, Otter Tail Co., above Otter Tail Power Company's
diversion to Hoot Lake.
Otter Tail River, Otter Tail Co., above Otter Tail Power Hoot Lake
Plant, Fergus Falls
Date Collected
Time Collected
Temperature °F
Coliform )
group ) Con. M.P.N. per 100ml.
organisms) Fecal M.P.N. per 100 ml.
Total Solids
Total Volatile Matter
Suspended Solids
Suspended Volatile Matter
Turbidity
Color
Total hardness as CaC03
Alkalinity as CaCOo
p4 Value
Chloride
Dissolved Oxygen
Five-day Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Total Phosphorus
Soluble Phosphorus
Ammonia Nitrogen
Organic Nitrogen
Nitrite Nitrogen
Nitrate Nitrgoen
Methylene Blue Active Sub. as ABS
Copper
Cadmiun
Nickel
Zinc
Spec. Cond. umhos/cm @ 25° C.
OL-31
7/16/69
1355
70°
7900
4900
1.8
OR-22 OR-23 OR-24** OR-25**
7/16/69 7/16/69 7/17/69
1415 1440 1000
73° 76° 74°
^20
4.20
140
86
6
4
2.3
10
170
160
8.1
5.2
9.3
2.3
0.07
0.04
0.06
0.72
0.03
<.02
40
20
150
49
3
3
2.2
10
170
160
8.3
4.2
11.1
1.8
0.07
0.01
0,06
0,66
^02
^.02
Sample
broken
in
transit
4.5
7/17/69
1045
71°
230
110
8
4
2.4
15
130
190
7.9
6.8
7.2
0.07
0.06
0.03
O CC:
U.^-
<.02
0.09
320
3^ i",
*o
350
•^Results are in milligrams per liter except as noted.
**Samples left over-weekend in bus station, coliforms and 5-day BOD's not run.
MPCA 440
-------
C-2
Station
OR-26
OR-27
- 28 -
TABLE I
Analytical Data of Otter Tail River (cont.) *
Description
Otter Tail Power discharge canal in Fergus Falls
Otter Tail River, Cascade St. bridge in Fergus Falls
OR-26 OR-27
Date Collected
Time Collected
Temperature °F
Total Solids
Total Volatile Matter
Suspended Solids
Suspended Volatile Matter
Turbidity
Color
Total hardness as CaCOo
Alkalinity as CaCOo
pH Value *
Chloride
Dissolved Oxygen
Total Phosphorus
Soluble Phosphorus
Ammonia Nitrogen
Organic Nitrogen
Nitrite Nitrogen
Nitrate Nitrogen
Methylene Blue Active Sub. as ABS
Copper
Cadmium
N:.ckel
7/17/69
1115
86°
200
110
2
2
1.1
16
170
160
8.0
3.4
6.7
0.07
0.02
0.09
0.63
/ .02
0.07
7/17/69
1230
78°
210
86
8
3
3.4
10
180
170
8.0
3.4
7.1
0.06
0.02
0.13
0.55
<; .02
0.08
Spec. Cond. umhos/cm @ 25° C. 320 330
#Results are in milligrams per liter except as noted.
MPCA 440
-------
C-2
- 29 -
TABLE II
COMPARATIVE CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS
of OTTER'TAIL LAKES
June 23-27, 1969
Parameter*
Alkalinity
Hardness
Specific Con-
ductivity, umhos/cm
pH
DO
BOD
Total Phosphorus
Soluble Phosphorus
Ammonia
Nitrates
Nitrites
(K-ganic Nitrogen
Total Nitrogen
Total Solids
Suspended Solids
Turbidity units
Otter Tail Deer
Lake Lake
170
181
326
8.0
8.8
2.7
.05
.04
.16
^.02
<-.02
.54
.74
176
7
3.6
160
180
320
8.0
8.0
2.5
.035
.035
.25
<%02
^.02
.41
.70
205
3.5
1.35
East Lost Blanche
Lake Lake
170
170
320
8.0
—
2.3
.03
.03
.25
<.02
,.02
.46
.74
210
3
1.1
192
195
357
8.2
8.9
4.2
.05
.048
.27
<.02
<.02
.54
.83
223
2.7
2.1
Walker Round Lake
Lake
210
210
390
7.9
8.0
4.3
.035
.035
.24
<.02
<.02
.78
1.03
260
2.5
1.2
210
210
380
8.1
8.9
3-3
.04
.03
.29
^.02
<.02
.98
1.31
230
6
4-9
*ltoits in mg/1 unless otherwise indicated.
MPCA 440
-------
- 30-
MINKESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
Section of Standards and Surveys
TABLE III
Analytical Data of Otter Tail Lakes*
C-2
Field Town. County
Number Etc,
OL-1 Otter Tail Lake
OL-2 Otter Tail Lake
OL-3 Otter Tail Lake
OL-4 Otter Tail Lake
OL-5 Otter Tail Lake
Sampling Point and Source of Sample
50 yds. off of inflow from Walker Lake, 7 feet deep,
2 ft. sample
50 yds off shore, 5 feet deep, 2 ft. sample
30 yds. off shore from silo, 6 ft. deep, 2 ft. sample
50 yds. off shore, 6 feet deep, 2 ft. sample
100 yds. off shore, 6 feet deep, 2 ft. sample
OL-1
6/26/69
0905
L36
OL-2
OL-3
OL-4
80
20
Date Collected
Time Collected
Temperature °F
Date Received by Lab.
Coliform )
group ) Con. M.P.N. per 100 ml,
organisms) Fecal M.P.N. per 100 ml
Total Solids
Total Volatile Matter
Suspended Solids
Suspended Volatile Matter
Turbidity
Color
Total hardness as
Alkalinity as CaC03
pH value
Chloride
Pissolved Oxygen
Five-day Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Total Phosphorus
Soluble Phosphorus
Ammonia Nitrogen
Organic Nitrogen
Nitrite Nitrogen
Nitrate Nitrogen
Methylene Blue Active Sub. as ABS
Copper
Cadmium.
Nickel
Zinc
Lead
Iron
Manganese
Spec. Cond umhos/cni @ 25° C.
^Results are in milligrams per liter except as noted.
20
20
8.7
8.8
.9
.1
130
20
240
75
18
9
13
10
180
76
7.
9
8.6
2.8
0.06
0.04
0.21
0.64
C02
0.04
0.22
i.Ol
0.28
0.06
330
OL-5
6/26/69 6/26/69 6/26/69 6/26/69
0915 0930 0945 0955
62°
80
20
9.0
MPCA 440
-------
C-2
- 31-
TABLE III (cont.)
Analytical Data of Otter Tail Lakes*
Field Town. County,
Nuaber " Etc^ Sampling Point and source of Sample
OL-6 Otter Tail Lake 100 yards offshore, 5 feet deep, 2 ft. sample
O-L-7 Otter Tail Lake 75 yards offshore, 6 feet deep, 2 ft. sample
OL-8 Otter Tail Lake 50 yards offshore, 5 feet deep, 2 ft. sample
OL-8a Otter Tail Lake Directly off Barky's Resort - Waded out to I1 depth.
OL-9 Otter Tail Lake 50 yards offshore, 5 feet deep, 18" sanple
OL-6 OL-7 OL-3 OL-8a OL-9
Date Collected 6/26/69
Time Collected 1005 1015 1030 1045 1055
Temperature °F 62
Date Received by Lab. 6-27-69
Coliform )
group ) Con M.P.N. per 100 ml. <20 <20 20 270 50
organisms) Fecal M.P.N. per 100ml. <-20 <20 <20 20 20
Total Solids 200
Total Volatile Matter 70
Suspended Solids 3
Suspended Volatile Matter Most 3
Turbidity of 2.7
Color Sample 10
Total hardness as CaCO^ Lost 190
Alkalinity as CaCO-? 150
pH value 136 8.1
Chloride 10
Dissolved Oxygen 8.8 9.0 8.7 9.0
Five-day Biochemical Oxygen Demand 1.8
Total Phosphorus 0.10
Soluble Phosphorus 0.05
Ammonia Nitrogen 0.25
Organic Nitrogen 0.46
Nitrite Nitrogen ±..02
Nitrate Nitrogen 0.04
Methylene Blue Active Sub. as ABS 0.17
Copper ^.01
Cadmium <.01
Nickel s.Ol
Zinc '^01
Lead <.01
Iron 0.15
Manganese /.02
Spec. Cond. umhos/cm ©25° C. 320
* Results are in milligrams per liter except as noted.
MPCA 440
-------
C-2
Field
Number
OL-10
OL-11
OL-12
OL-13
OL-14
Town,
Etc_._
Otter Tell Lake
Otter Tail Lake
Otter Tail Lake
Otter Tail Lake
Otter Tail Lake
- 32 —
TABLE III (cont.)
Analytical Data of Otter Tail Lakes*
Sampling Point and Source of Sample
400 yds. out from Bridge over Otter Tail R. 5
feet deep, 2 ft. sample
75 yds. offshore, 6 feet of water, 18" sample
100 yds. offshore, 4 feet of water, 2 ft. sample
100 yds. offshore, 5 feet of water, 2 ft. sample
75 yds. offshore, 4 feet of water, 2 ft, sample
Date Collected
Time Collected
Temperature °F
Coliform )
group ) Con. M.P.N. per 100 ml.
organisms) Fecal M.P.N. per 100 ml.
Total Solids
Total Volatile Matter
Suspended Solids
Suspended Volatile Matter
Turbidity
Color
Total hardness as
ALcalinity as CaCOo
pH value L36
Chloride
Dissolved Oxygen
Five-day Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Total Phosphorus
Soluble Phosphorus
Anmonia Nitrogen
Organic Nitrogen
Nitrite Nitrogen
Nitrate Nitrogen
Methylene Blue Active Sub. as ABS
Copper
Cadmium
Nickel
Zinc
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Spec. Cond. umhos/cm @ 25° C.
OL-10
1105
OL-n OL-12 OL-13
200
63
4
4
2.8
10
180
180
7.9
9.3
9.0
1.5
0.04
0.03
0.27
0.46
<.02
s.02
.1
.01
.01
<
'..01
0.03
<.01
<, .02
330
1110
20
20
8.9
^Results are in milligrams per liter except ag noted.
MPCA 440
1.125
;.02
0.28
x.Ol
0.06
..01
320
1L40
63°
20
^20
210
63
3
3
2.1
15
180
180
7-4
10
8.9
1.8
0.05
0.05
0.25
0.60
<*02
20
<. 20
200
64
3
3
2.3
10
180
180
8.1
8.8
8.7
2.0
0.04
0.03
0.33
0.46
<.02
0.31
r.oi
o!o3
320
OL-U
1150
20
<20
8.8
-------
C-2
- 33 -
TABLE III (sort.)
Analytical Data of Otter Tail Lakes*
Field Town,. County.
Nunber Etc.
OL-15 Otter Tail Lake
OL-16 Otter Tail Lake
OL-17 Otter Tail Lake
OL-18 Otter Tail Lake
OL-19 Otter Tail Lake
Sampling Point and Source of Sample
100 yds. offshore, 5 feet of water, 2 ft. s
150 yds. offshore, 4 ft. of water, 18* sample
100 yds. offshore, 5 ft. of water, 18" sample
100 yds. offshore, 4 ft. of water, 18" sample
200 yds. offshore, 4 ft. of water, 18" sample
Date Collected
Time Collected
Temperature °F
Date Received by Lab.
Colifonn )
group ) Con. M.P.N. per 100 ml.
organisms) Fecal M.P.N. per 100 ml.
Total Solids
Total Volatile Matter
Suspended Solids
Suspended Volatile Matter
Turbidity
Color
Total hardness as CaC03
Alkalinity as CaC03
pH value 136
Chloride
Dissolved Oxygen
Five-day Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Total Phosphorus
Soluble Phosphorus
Ammonia Nitrogen
Organic Nitrogen
Nitrite Nitrogen
Nitrate Nitrogen
Methylene Blue Active Sub. as ABS
Copper
Cadmium
Nickel
Zinc
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Spec. Cond. umhos/cm @ 25°C.
*Resuits are in milligrams per liter
<20
'.20
OL-15
6/26/69
L200 1135
6-26-69
<:20
200
69
3
3
1.8
15
180
200
8.1
11
8.8 8.8
2.0
0.05
0.05
0.25
0.52
<.02
/ .02
6.23
. .01
.'.01
.01
s .01
0.04
< .01
'..02
330
except as noted.
OL-16 OL-17 OL-18
Ill:
61'
0.27
0.38
<.02
-, .02
c .1
'..01
0.05
•C.01
1102
616
20
20
240
72
2
2
1.6
5
180
170
8.1
9.1
8.9
2.8
0.06
Bottle
Broken
8.3
330
OL-19
1055
61°
20
<20
240
63
2
2
2.1
10
170
170
8.0
8.8
8.9
3.0
0.05
0.22
0.43
<.02
-.02
.-.01
,.01
<.01
0.03
<.01
0.02
330
MPCA 440
-------
C-2
Field Town. Countyt
Number Etc.
OL-20 Otter Tail Lake
OL-21 Otter Tail Lake
OL-22 Otter Tail Lake
OL-23 Otter Tail Lake
OL-24 Otter Tail Lake
- 34 -
TABLE III (cont.)
Analytical Data of Otter Tail Lakes*
Sampling Point and Source of Sample
300 yds offshore, 5 ft. of water, 18* sample
150 yds. offshore, 8 ft. of water, 18" sample
75 yds. out from mouth of Otter Tail River, 6
feet of water, 2 ft. sample
100 yds. offshore, 5 ft. of water, 2 ft,, sample
75 yds. offshore, It ft. of water, 2 ft. sample
Date Collected
Time Collected
Temperature °F
Date Received by Lab.
Coliform ) Con. M.P.N. per 100 ml.
group Org) Fecal M.P.N. per 100 ml.
Total Solids
Total Volatile Matter
Suspended Solids
Suspended Volatile Matter
Turbidity
Color
Total hardness as CaCOo
Alkalinity as CaCO^
pH value L36
Chloride
Dissolved Oxygen
Five-day Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Total Phosphorus
Soluble Phosphorus
Ammonia Nitrogen
Organic Nitrogen
Nitrite Nitrogen
Nitrate Nitrogen
Methylene Blue Active Sub. as ABS
Copper
Cadmium
Nickel
Zinc
Lead
Iron
Manganese
Spec. Cond. umhos/cm @ 25° C.
OL-20
1040
61°
20
250
86
3
3
2.4
10
180
170
7.8
9.9
8.2
3.3
O.C5
0.31
0.46
s .02
<.02
..- .3
' .Cl
; .01
.' .01
0.05
0.03
320
OL-21 OL-22 OL-23
OL-24
6/25/69
6-25-69
«20
;20
6/26/69 6/26/69 6/26/69
1950 1940 1935
67°
7.2
.1
.2
80
130
5
5
2
43
15
170
160
8.
9.
8.6
3.8
0.04
0.03
:.05
0.95
.,02
^.02
0.34
-.01
.01
-..01
...01
.01
0.07
<.02
310
170
50
230
50
8.8
8.8
^Results are in milligrams per liter except as noted.
MPCA 440
-------
C-2
-35 -
TABLE III (cont.)
Analytical Data of Otter Tail Lakes*
Field
Number
Town. County.
Etc.
OL-25 Otter Tail Lake
OL-26 Otter Tail Lake
OL-27 Otter Tail Lake
OL-28 Otter Tail Lake
OL-28A Otter Tail Lake
Sampling Point
75 yds. offshore of channel to Echo Ranch Riviera,
of water
50 yds. offshore, 4 feet of water, 2 ft. sample
25 yds. offshore, 5 feet of water, 2 ft. sample
2 ft. sample in 70-80 feet of water
70 ft. sample in 70-80 feet of water
5 ft.
OL-25 OL-26 OL-27 OL-28
Date Collected
Time Collected
Temperature °F
Date Received by Lab.
Coliform )
group )Con. MPN/100 ml.
organisms)Fecal MPN/100 ml.
Total Solids
Total Volatile Matter
Suspended Solids
Suspended Volatile Matter
Turbidity
Color
Total hardness as CaCO-j
Alkalinity as CaCOo
pH value L36
Chloride
Dissolved Oxygen
5-day Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Total Phosphorus
Soluble Phosphorus
Ammonia Nitrogen
Organic Nitrogen
Nitrite Nitrogen
Nitrate Nitrogen
Methylene Blue Active Sub. as ABS
Copper
Cadmium
Nickel
Zinc
Lead
Iron
Manganese
Spec. Cond. umhos/cm @ 25°C
1927
66°
110
<20
130
71
14
4
8.4
15
190
180
8.1
8.2
8.9
4.0
0.03
0.03
<-05
0.72
<.02
<.02
0.31
001
<.01
^.01
0.03
-'.02
330
1920
20
20
8.9
6/26/69 6/26/69
1915
230
50
9.0
0815
62°
6/26/69
-------
C-2
-36 -
Field
Number
OL-29
OL-29A
OL-30
OL-30A
PB-1
TABIE III (cont.)
Analytical Data of Otter Tail Lakes*
Town. County.
Otter Tail Lake
Otter Tail Lake
Otter Tail Lake
Otter Tail Lake
Otter Tail Lake
Sampling Point and Source
2 ft. sample in 100 feet of water
70 ft. sample in 100 feet of water
2 ft. sample in 65 feet of water
60 ft. sample in 65 feet of water
Pelican Bay Bridge - East side
Date Collected
Time Collected
Temperature °F
Date Received in Lab.
Coliform )
group )Con. MPN/100 ml.
organisms)Fecal MPN/100 ml.
Total Solids
Total Volatile Matter
Suspended Solids
Suspended Volatile Matter
Turbidity
Color
Total hardness as CaCO-a
Alkalinity as CaCOo
pH value L36
Chloride
Dissolved Oxygen
5-day Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Total Phosphorus
Soluble Phosphorus
Ammonia. Nitrogen
Organic Nitrogen
Nitrite Nitrogen
Nitrate Nitrogen
Methylene Blue Active Sub. as ABS
Copper
Cadmium
Nickel
Zinc
Lead
Iron
Manganese
Spec. Cond. umhos/cm ® 25°C
OL-29
0845
62°
OL-29A OL-30 OL-30A** PB-1
-------
- 37 - c~
TABLE in (cont.)
Analytical Data of Otter Tail Lakes*
Field Town, County.
Number Etc. Sampling Point and Source of Sample
BL-1 Blanche Lake 25 yards offshore - 10 ft. depth, 2 ft. sample
BL-2 Blanche Lake 30 ft. depth - 2 ft. sample
BL-2A Blanche Lake 30 ft. depth - 27 ft. sample
BL-3 Blanche Lake Mouth of small creek flowing into Blanche Lake from
Lake 'Emma
BL-4 Blanche Lake Near diving board, 10 ft. depth - 2 ft. sample
BL-1 BL-2 BL-2A BL-3 BL-4
Date Collected 6/24/69 6/24/6? 6/24/69 6/24/69 6/24/69
Time Collected 1420 1440 1435 1450 1535
Temperature °F 61° 6l° 61° 64° 61°
Date Received by Lab
Coliform )
group )Con. MFH/100 ml. 20 ^20 700 <20
organisms)Fecal MPN/100 ml. <20 <20 <20 <20
Total Solids 230 220 230
Total Volatile Matter 89 86 98
Suspended Solids 33 3
Suspended Volatile Matter 33 3
Turbidity 2.2 1.9 2.3
Color 55 5
Total hardness as CaCOo 190 190 200
Alkalinity as CaCOo 200 190 190
pfi value L36 8.4 8.2 8.2
Chloride 7.5 9.1 9-6
Dissolved Oxygen 8.7 9.0 8.5 8.7 9.2
5-day Biochemical Oxygen Deaand 4,3 3-8 4.3
Total Phosphorus 0.03 0.04 0.04
Soluble Phosphorus 0.03 0.04 0.04
Ammonia Nitrogen 0.29 0.27 0.27
Organic Nitrogen 0.46 0.59 0.53
Nitrite Uitrogen <.02 <.02 <.02
Nitrate Nitrogen <.02 <.02 <.02
Methylene Blue Active Sub. as ABS 0.19 0.17 0.18
Copper <.01 <.01 <.01
Cadmium <.01 <.01 <.01
Nickel <.0l <.01 <.01
Zinc <.0i <.01 <.01
Iron 0.06 0.06 0.04
Lead <.C1 *.0l <.01
Manganese 0.02 <.02 <.02
Spec. Cond. umhos/cm @ 25°C 350 360 360
*Results are in milligrams per liter except as noted.
MPCA 440
-------
-38 -
C-2
TABLE ni (cent.)
Analytical Data of Otter Tail Lakes *
Field
Number
BL-5
DL-1
DL-2
ELL-1
WL-1
Town. County
£&*.
Blanche Lake
Deer Lake
Deer Lake
East Lost Lake
Walker Lake
Point and Source of
Inlet from Annie Battle Lake - 2 ft, depth
100 yds. offshore Bambi Resort in 4 ft. water 18" sample
50 yds. into Deer L. from Channel between Deer and
East Lost Lake - 8 foot depth, 18" sample
At outlet of Otter Tail River - 6 ft. depth 18"
Walker L. outflow to Otter Tail Lake - west side Bridge
on HWT ?
BL-5
DL-1
DL-2 ELL-1
WL-1
aCOo
o
13
Date Collect ad
Time Collected
Temperature °F
Date Received by Lab.
Coliform )
group )Con MPN/100 ml.
organisms )Fecal KPN/100 ml.
Total Solids
Total Volatile Matter
Suspended Solids
Suspended Volatile Matter
Turbidity
Color
Total hardness as
Alkalinity as
pH value
Chloride
Dissolved Oxygen
5-day Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Total phosphorus
Soluble phosphorus
Ammonia Nitrogen
Organic Nitrogen
Nitrite Nitrogen
Nitrate Nitrogen
Methylene Blue Active Sub. as AB3
Copper
Cadmium
Nickel
Zinc
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Spec. Cond. umhos/cm @ 25 °C.
6/24/69 6/24/69 6/24/69 6/24/69 6/23/69
1520 1005 1035 1055 1600
61° 61° 61° 62°
6/24/69
80
<20
230
95
2
2
1.8
10
200
190
8.1
9.1
9.8
4-5
0.09
0.08
0.26
0.58
<.02
<.02
20
20
200
89
3
3
1-5
5
190
150
8.0
8.5
8.8
2.5
0.03
0.03
0.26
0.36
<.02
<.02
70
/20
2.10
99
4
3
1.2
5
170
170
8.0
8.8
8.9
2.5
0.04
0.04
0.25
0.46
<02
<,02
<20
<20
210
92
3
3
1.1
5
170
170
8.0
11
2-3
o.o;
0.0'
0.2
0.4<
<.0!
<.o;
0.18
0.05
0.02
360
-------
- 39 -
TABIE HI (cent.)
Analytical Data of Otter Tail Lakes*
Tovn. County
E"tc», Sampling point and Source of
WL-2 Walker Lake 250 yards offshore - 6 ft. deep - 2 ft. sample
WL-3 Walker Lake 50 yards offshore of Don's Softwater - 7 ft. deep,
2 fyet sample
WL-4 Dead River Above entrance to Walker Lake
RL-1 Round Lake End of Stafford Leitch's dock - 4 ft. depth, 2 ft. sample
LL-1 Long Lake Ditch from Long Lake into Otter Tail River. S. Side Hwy 1
WL-2 WL»3 WL-4 RL-1 LL-1
Date Collected 6/24/69 6/24/69 6/23/69 6/24/69 6/24/69
Time Collected 1720 1700 1720 1130 1635
Temperature °F 64° 61° 6lc
Date Received by Lab.
Coliform )
group )Con. MPN/100 ml. <20 <20 260 <20 1100
organisms)Fecal MPN/100 ml. <20 <20 20 <20 130
Total Solids 260 260 210 230
Total Volatile Matter 110 120 68 110
Suspended Solids 2 336
Suspended Volatile Matter 2 326
Turbidity 1.3 1.2 3-1 4-9
Color 20 15 25 10
Total hardness as CaCOo 200 220 210 210
Alkalinity as CaCOo J 210 210 210 210
pH value L36 7-9 7.9 7.8 8.1
Chloride 6.0 5.3 2.4 8.2
Dissolved Ojqygen 7-9 8.1 7-0 8.9 7.5
5-day biochemical oxygen demand 4.3 4.3 2.8 3«3
Total Phosphorus 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04
Soluble Phosphorus 0.03 0.04 0.03
Ammonia Nitrogen 0.29 0.20 0.13 0*29
Organic Nitrogen 0.72 0.84 0.91 0.98
Nitrite Nitrogen <.02 <.02
-------
C-2
- 40 -
Field
Number
OR-1
OR-2
OR-3
OR-4
BC-1
TABLE in (cont.)
Analytical Data of Otter Tail Lakes**
Town, County.
Ottertail River
Ottertail River
Ottertail River
Ottertail River
Balmoral Creek
Sampjjng Point and Sour"?
Soo line R.R. Bridge above Otter Tail Lake, S. Side
Ottertail R. Bridge - County Hwy. 1 - south side
South side bridge over Ottertail River at outlet to
Otter Tail Lake
West side bridge over Ottertail River at inlet to
Deer Lake
Culvert upstream side of Hwy 78 - 2 ft. deep, 18"
sample
OR-1
OR-2
OR-3 OR-4
BC-1
Date Collected
Time Collected
Temperature °F
Date Received by Lab.
Coliform )
group )Con. i!PN/]QO ml.
organisms)Fecal MPN/100 ml.
Total Solids
Total Volatile Matter
Suspended Solids
Suspended Volatile Matter
Turbidity
Color
Total hardnass as CaCO^
Alkalinity as CaCO^
pH value L36
Chloride
Dissolved Oxygen
5-day Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Total Phosphorus
Soluble Phosphorus
Ammonia Nitrogen
Organic Nitrogen
Nitrite Nitrogen
Nitrate Nitrogen
Methylene Blue Active Sub. as ABS
Copper
Cadmium
Nickel
Zinc
Lead
Iron
Manganese
Spec. Cond. unhos/cm ® 25 °C
6/23/69 6/23/69 6/24/69 6/24/69 6/24/69
1620 1640 C9CO 0970 1615
60° 61° 60° 61° 65°
6/24/69
80
<20
160
40
4
2
3-4
15
170
160
8.1
2.2
10.5
3.0
0.03
0.13
0.71
0.02
0.04
0.40
270
50
160
51
4
3
2.8
15
180
200
8.3
1.8
8.9
3.0
0.02
0.07
0.73
0.02
-------
c"2
TABLE III (cent.)
Analytical Data of Otter Tail Lakes*
Field Town. County
Number Etc. SamoHjig Point and Source of Sa»wle
BC-2 Balmoral Creek Dan at outlet from Blanche L. - upstream side
BC-2
Date Collected 6/24/69
Time Collected 1400
Temperature °F 61°
Date Received by Lab.
Coliform )
group )Con. MPN/100 ml. <20
organisms )Fecal MFN/100 ml. *20
Total Solids 230
Total Volatile Matter 100
Suspended Solids 3
Suspended Volatile Matter 3
Turbidity 1.1
Color 5
Total hardness as CaCOc 200
Alkalinity as CaC03 ' 190
pH value 136 6.2
Chloride 7.3
Dissolved Oxygen 9.2
5-
-------
C-2
- 42 -
TABLE IV Plankton of Otter Tail Lake
August 27, 1969
Group
Blue-Green
Diatoms
Green
Protozoa
Crustacea
Rotifer
Genera or Group
Gleotrichia
Microcystia flos aquae
Anabaena
Lyngbya
Coelosphaerium
Micrccystis aeruginosa
Fragilaria
Melosira
Tabellaria
Asterionella
Stephanodiscus
Dynobrion
Pediaatrum
Ceratium
Volvox
Stauronastrum
Vorticellids
Copepods, adult
Copepods, nauplia
Unidentified
Total number
of cells ner liter
315,789
273,684
196,631
65,263
14,210
3,421
14,736
13,736
1,368
610
10
1,731
789
578
132
30
3,947
78
105
100
Volume of
cells in c.c,
lit
.039
.017
.103
.045
.0009
.002
.215
.049
.010
.002
.0004
.008
.004
.043
.008
.001
.031
.468
.061
.030
MPCA 440
-------
C-2
- 43 -
TABIE V Plankton of Blanche Lake
August 27, 1969
Group
Blue-Green
Green
Diatom
Crustacea
Rotifer
Protozoa
jGenera or Group
Microcystis flos aquae
Meriamopedia
Gleotrichia
Ceolosphaerium
Microcystis aeruginosa
Anabaena
Pediastrum
Ceratium
Stauronastrura
Westella
Melosira
Gromphonema
Pragilaria
Qyrosigma
Tabellaria
Asterionella
Copepod, adult
Copepod, nauplia
Bosnina
Keratella
Brachionus angularis
Filinia
Trichocerca
Asplancha
Vorticellids
Volume of
Total number cells in c.c.
of cells par liter per liter
.008
.005
.072
.0009
.004
.0906
.026
.019
.005
.001
132,596
44,198
38,674
14,732
7,366
589
4,419
257
147
92
1,988
747
368
36
23
15
.00?
2.1
.005
.0001
.0001
.0001
1,031
589
147
147
73
73
7
6
73
6.186
.334
.036
.127
.058
.036
.009
.005
.0005
MPGA 440
-------
C-2
- 44 -
Group
Blue-Green
Diatom
Green
Rotifer
Protozoa
Crustacea
TABLE VI Plankton of Walker Lake
Auguct 27, 1969
Genera, or Group
Microcystis flos aquae
Microcystis aeruginosa
Aphanizomenon
Caoloaphaerium
Anabaena
Lyngbya
Chrysocapsa planctonica
Meloeira
Nitschia
Pragilaria
Synedra
Meridion
Pediastrum
Ceratiim
Stauronastruia
Unidentified groups
Keratella
Trichocerca
Aecomorpha ecaudis
Brachionub angularis
Filinia
Kellicottia
Vorticellida
Copepod, adult
Copepod, nauplia
Daphnia longispina
Bo.-amina
Total number
of cellajer l^ter
3,887,468
296,675
199,488
143,222
6,547
4,887
265
450,120
12,531
10,230
1
a
3,145
189
23
2,941
94
23
<1
-------
C-2
- 45 -
Group
Blue-Green
Green
Diatoms
Protozoa
Crustacea
Rotifer
TABIE VII Planlctoa of Deer Lake
August 27, 1969
Genera or Group
Anabaena
Microcystis flos aquae
Microcystie aeruginosa
Ceolosphaerium
Eucapsis
Oscillatoria
Merisraopedia
Nodularia
Gleocystis
Synura
Chrysocapsa planctonica
Pediast-rum
Ceratium
Chlorosarcina minor
Dynobrion
Ankistrodesmus
Stauronastrum
Melosira
Navicula
Synedra ulna
Tabellaria
Navicula
Meridion
Stephanodiscus dubiosis
Vorticellids
Copepod.; adult
Copepod, nauplia
Bosmina
Chyodorus
Daphnia pulex
Unidentified groups
Keratella
Filiaia
Ascomorpha
Trichocerea cylindrica
Total number
of cells t)§r lit^r
530,177
54,675
2,071
1,875
1,479
295
293
236
236
177
4,381
409
178
U6
31
27
<1
<1
409
165
147
67
6
4
-------
^1 i li MM i 7ri turn Htai " i" . A. * *
U-'---. :
„£*" "." "&:^9
KfiHEEKC:"8" ""
SCO. C.CSS- CEVWRCHir-Uft^
« :«<_£-£• ;
"S" ...
VR/«0 SOJRCE BIO.
INDEX
bi/08 01 45.-
"2/C7 •- *?.!,
£9/23 !c ;1._
YR/RO S0^fi'v; *:•'£ s
73/DC jjc ' '-:
VR/flC SOJRC£ SURF C£
fe:/08 c. ''V:
72/07 CH 8.fc
7H/07 2H C . C
«««:«>. :*.,T,:t
MflTER ajfl.ITY: 5.
wAKE 1C: 9oG3Ce
RREA :fiCRES; : 89-<. 1.
P. HC Tli? 133 SEC' ;:'
•5WHDEPEL.
8 I«.£T6: 0
JROwij.. SEPTIC
?,SCESS:T-;. =:
••;.'•" rZ."?
con.rttirb:
..EVE
« 0^T..ET5: i
TROPHIC QUfiLITY
SECCH! SECCH: CHLOS
DEPTH INDEX
9.G 45.1 0.0,
13. C 43. q vB.7$
S.C D.G 0.0
ruz-"v|;cs cur^"'-'NGS/wiL
£0.
n.
ROO!T!ONftL OflTO
PH flLKOL
;NG/L-»
O.H 187.5
7.8 119.0
aiS iioio
PO?SIBLiI PROQ..EW fiREO
JROOW SEPTIC
RiJNOF? TONX5
y.
NECESSI'v: Z1
'<««£: SI.VER
H&TERSHE-; t.o
CGHHEttTS:
.. EYE
» GJTLET6: 0
CROPLQNO/PflST'jRE FEEOLOT
RUNOFF RUNOFF
PRIORITY: ?
'irvrl ylGTRIC' 3 3
^iP'if ,FT:. 7 MtD
MJ.ES Or SHORELINE: 3.80
MGfT CLfiSS: CENTRflRCHIO-LflR
tt PUBLIC fiCCESS: 0
CHL03 NUTRIENT TOTAL P
INDEX INDEX (HG/Li
0.0 0.0 0.0
5:.Q 41.5 0.010
0.0 51.1 0.035
z OF SHORELINE CUEL ..NGS/LCKE
3 0.2
c u.c
COHO TOTOL M TQ- .NOR H
(N(J/Li "5/Li
• 0.0 c 0.0 2.0
200.0 0.0 C.OS
0.0 0.0 0.0
320.0 0.7 0.31
CRC?LC.p»2/PJSTLRe P'iEDLOT
R'jHQ?? fiJNOrr
PRIORITY: 7
NPCft DISTRICT I: 3
DEPTH (FTj; lb "EO
WATERSHED AREA '. flCRES i:
flLEa OF SHORELINE. H.20
NftTllfifiL V-t
PU^/FF
MPCw ^MTH c£','"tU: 7>J''-i
SOJRCE- :.
X LITTCPHL-. 67
GE«OJTH oass
HaTEfl CO. OS.
X SUO« CPP.ICOTION
PLONTS OF CJSOH
0.0 0.
o.o :.
o.o :.
CRtfl :OCR£5:
N02 + N03 N *UR3 COLOR
(MG/Li (TTVi :P*i
0.0 3.0 3.C
C.04 0.3 3.3
Ort ft n n «
.O u . M u . ^
O.OH :.33 2.:
S . NO? f
1PC9 OftTft REvIEU: 7^/2b
SOURCE: 2:
0
X i.!TTGRflL: ^ NJ
1CHT CLASS; IWLLEYE-CINTRABCHJO
1 PUBLIC ACCESS.- 1 WED COLOR:
-------
- -
NPCA DISTRICT I: 3
DEPTH (FTi: It. MAX
HiTI-RSHE!) CREft :ACRESi:
!'"uE9 OF SHORELINE: 0.0
NPC* DATA Olr.lU:
SOURCE: ::
JSE: ,5 *
PROB.E1S:
YR/HO SOURCE
?C/CC EC
YS/SO SOURCE
a o-jQ.IC fiCCESS:
IHDEX
TROPHIC QjOLITY
SECCHI SECCH! CHLOR CHLOS
1'EP'H INDEX INDEX
NUTRIENT TOTAL P X SU8«
INDEX CIG/Li PLANTS
uCKESHOfit DEVELOPfllHT
T0'C. o DUELLINGS DUELLINGS/HUE Qf SHORELINE
0.0
DUELiINGS/l.fiXE fiREA dCRES:
0.0
5uR? Cc
i. DO TO
fiLKOl
NECCSSI'Y:
COND TOTAL N
PRIORITY: 3
TO* 1NO» N
(1G/LJ
H02
?p.:co':oH
QF :.S->
-R3
*TVi
-ME 1C SbCc.
39
:3s SEC" 19
ECO. C.ASS:
o IhLE'S: e
F"C3_£»i3 -'FISH K:O^
RICE
COHHEHTS:
TR3PHJC CUOLITY
SPCS OISTRICT t: 3
Npca OA'fl RE»:E«: ""<:<>
«Ii.ES OF SMORfLINE: 3.00 X LITTORAL:
J1GHT CLASS: UATERFOUL AND/OR rjRQEARERS
t PUBLIC ACCESS: 0 UATER COLOR:
YR/*0 SOLACE
VR.-«C
\y/-«c SOUPCE
3.0 '"U"3 0.0 " "0.0 J I
"•v*^ 9 DUE:.l!INGS ^MEL-INGS/'HiLE OF SHORELINE
hm
100.
DWELLINGS/LAKE AREA (ACRESi
fa:
BM
NECeSSI'Yi £0
CONO
PRIORITY: 10
::7
n
-------
-WCE 1C: SbC3iC
Mil. ftCRES.:
H 41 TK? :3^ S
Hft'-RyHtJ
CCHHEIITS.
NPCfl DISTRICT 0. 3
DEPTH '.FT,: 29 HftX
UnTERSHED AREA (QCRESi:
NILE5 OF SHORELINE: M.30
MPCfl OflTfl HEVIEU:
SOURCE : Cl
(,3
ECCL C ASS' CENVMRCHTO-MB-
o :v_E's.
JSt. "ISMING ;.B
CRGOLE-»S:
VR/*0 SOLRCS E!OL
INDEX
fiVOS 02 51.1
71/08 Cl 51.3
YR/MO SOURCE TC'C. 8
- 2/3C 25 L*i
T* / no i ' UP
i i, / U.O w » " L
YR/SO SOURCE S'JR? 02
7;/28 Cl 9.'b
Hfl'ER 6v.'fi^:TV: 5;
uflXE !C. Sb03:5
CSZfc CCRtS:. .03.:
R HC TH? 131* SEC"" 3!
REANDEREC:
ECOL CLASS: 6AHE
8 INLETS: 1
USE: (HUNTING/ TRAPPING ;
PROO^ERa: (FISH KI^./PROH F
VB/HO SOURCE BIOL
INDEX
S8/C7 01 S3.S
YH/WO SOURCE TCTBL i
>0/CC 22 Sb
LEYt NGHT CLflSS: UaLLEYE-CEHTROPCHID
fl ODT.EY5: : o PUBLIC ACCESS: 1 M3TER COLOR:
OflTING- 'CANOEING :iUAT£RSX!!NG i (HUHTIHG/TRrtPPIHa 1
TROPHIC Q'jOLITY
SECCHI SECCH:' CM. OR CHLOR NUTRIENT TOTML P •/. suon «?PL
CEPTH INDEX INDEX INDEX (NG/Li PLANTS OF
0 (! 0.0 0.0 O.I] 51.1 0.03; 0.0
6.0 Si. 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0
LBKESHOR! DEVELOPMENT ..
DUELLINGS DWELLINGS/MILE OF SHORELINE DUELLINGS/LOXE RREO CflCRtSi
:4.9 0.1
9.3 0.1
PH~ KLKfiL COND TOTfiL H TOT INOS M N02 + N03 H TURB
(NG/L; (NG/Li (NG/Li (NG/Li (TTVi
7.9 210.0 390.0 1.0 0.28 O.OH 1.20
0.0 290.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
NECESSITY: 20 PRIORITY: 0
NfiNt BROUN R?CA DISTRICT 9: 3 M?Cfl DOTO REVIEU:
DEPTH (FTi: M n£D SOURCE: 01
UflTERSHED NO: WATERSHED ARED (ACRES) :
COMMENTS: MILES OF SHORELINE: 2.80 X LITTORAL: 100
MGMT CLASS: UATERFOUL AND/OR FURBEQRERS
« CUTLETS: i 1 PUBLIC ACCESS: 1 HATER COLOR:
ISHlNSi
TROPHIC QUALITY
SSCCH! SECCHI CHLOR CHLCS NUTRIENT TOTOL P X SUO» APPLI
DEPTH INDEX INDEX INDEX («G/Li PLANTS OF
5.0 S3. 9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
LAXESHORE DEVELOPMENT
DUELLINGS DWELLINGS/MILE OF SHORELINE DUELLINGS/LAKE AREA ;*ca£Si
9.3 O.V
:ca
c^so^
c.
COLOR
74/Cb
CaTA0rt
W^v-t
O
1
N3
k
-------
55/08 01
YR/HO SOURCE
55/09 01
HflTER GUALITY:
jj.a u.U
118. 19.9 0.0
ADDITIONAL DATA
SURF 02 PH ALKAL COND TOTAL H TOT INOR N
CNG/Li (HG/Li (NG/Li («G/L»
G.I 0.0 205.0 0.0 0.4 0.0
£9 NECESSITY: 5 PRIORITY: 0
LCXE ID: E&02MO NfiME: BLANCHE KPCQ DISTRICT 8: 3
AREA (ACRESi:
R 39 TUP 133
KEANDERED:
1352.0 DEPTH (FTl: 12 ficD
SECT Qb WATERSHED NO: WATERSHED RREA ( ACRES! :
COMMENTS: MILES OF SHORELINE: l.SO
N02 + N03 H TUR3
(NG/L> (TTVj
0.0 0.0
KPCi) DATA REVIEU:
SOURCE: 01
X LITTORAL: 74
COLOR
(PTi
0.0
74/C&
ECOL CLASS: CENTRARCHID-UALLEYE NGHT CLASS: MALLEYE-CENTRARCHIO
8 INLETS: S
USE: (FISHING
8 OUTLETS: 1 8 PUBLIC ACCESS: 1
itBOATING/CfiNCEIHG j(UflTERSXIIHG HSUIWIING i
UATER COLOR:
FRGBLER3: (ALGAE i
YR/HO SOURCE
51/07 01
72/03 01
YR/HO SOURCE
51/07 01
70/00 e2
?ii/U 01
YR/fiO SOURCE
72/03 01
MUNICIPAL
WTER QUALITY:
LAXI ID: 5bC2^
TRGPHIC CUflLITY
BIOL SECCHI SECCHI CHL03 CHLOR NUTRIENT TOTfiL P
INDEX DEPTH INDEX INDEX INDEX (RG/Li
45. 4 9.0 S5.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
50.1 b.5 50.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
LftXESHORE DEVELOPHINT
TOTfiL 8 DUELLINGS DUtLLlNGS/HlLE OF SHORELINE DUELLING3/I.CXE
60. 31. & 0.0
IDS. FS.fl n.!
ibo. fad.i U.I
CDDITIOMaL CQTC1
SURF OS PH fiLKOL COND T070L N TOT INOR N
(NG/Li (KG/LS (HG/Li (KG/Li
8.6 0.0 175.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
POSSIBLE PRCOLEH AREAS
TNOUSTRIflL UROAM SEPTIC CROPLCND/PflSTURE FF.EDLOT
RUNOFF TCMXS RUNOFF RUNOFF
X
50 NECESSITY: cO FRICRITV: 7
U MAKE: AKNIE BATTLE KFCA DISTRICT 0: 3
X SUM CPPLICOTICfl
PLCHTS OF CUS04
0.0 0.
0.0 0.
AfiZP (ACRESi
N02 i N03 N TUR3
(NG/Li (TTVj
0.0 0.0
KflTURflL
RUNOFF
NPCA DATA RIVIEU:
CCLCS
(PTj
0.0
74/04
ARIA (CCRZSi: 323.0
R 39 TK? 133 SECT 18
WATERSHED NO:
COMHENTS:
i
DEPTH (FTi:
WATERSHED AREA ( ACRES i:
"HILES OF SHORELINE: o.o
SOURCE: 01
X LITTORAL:
107
<~) ;
to
ECOL CLASS: GAflE
» INLETS:
I OUTLETS:
fIGHT CLASS: UATERFOUL AND/OR FURBEARERS
I PUBLIC flCCESS: UflTER COLOR:
-------
KREQ ;6CRES. LC>9?.''
RcGNDERE:.
ECO. CLCSt '•[•IfrfifiRCHlL-HHL
0 INLETS
LJSt:
PRCOLEHS
.
: ( ROUGH
FISH
COHHtli G-
LKYt
C CUTLL^'j
SO
NPCQ DISTRICT 0: 4
DEPTH (FTi: EO RVc
US'fERSHcO fiRZP ;fiCRZSi;
NILEG Or SHORELINE: 3.31
KPCO OflTQ SEVIEU:
SOURCE: 01
X LITTORflL: 33
74/Cb
NGHT OLHSS: UflLLEYE-C£HTRHRCH!D
C PUOLIC fiCCESS: 1
LjOTFO rO! f 3-
Pinicn L w ^w>> •
TROPHTC QUflLTTY
YR/HO
SM/07
73/CS
t3/CO
64/00
&5/OD
BtJ/OiJ
6X/CO
60/00
69/00
Yfi/KO
{ 54/07
r.'CO
YR/fiO
54/07
72/06
72/36
SOURCE
01
02
02
01
Oi
01
01
01
01
01
SOURCE
22
SOURCE
01
02
HSTER CUftLITY:
LCXE 10
34C545
6101
INDEX
E2.V
56.2
53-U
O.U
0.0
O.U
0.0
0.0
0,0
0.0
TCTBL 0
9;
£30
SURr GtJ
oTc
11.1
10.2
S3
SECClil
DEPTH,
j.i,
4,'o
G.U
U.U
'J.O
0.0
0.0
0.0
o.ti
U.U
SECCM'i
INDEX
61.3
55.'!
tl 11
0.0
O.U
o u
o'o
0.0
0.0
CHLOR
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
L8KESHORE DEVELOPMENT
DUELLINGS DUELLINGS/MIL
Hi!
(i.
o
8.
NECESSITY
TYTrSWP".
u
M
y
: 5
-------
E ID: 3HOC79
OCKESt: 5821.0
R 33 TUP 120 SECT 23
MPCfi DATO REVIEW
SOURCE: 01
NAME: GREEN
NPCA DISTRICT »: 4
DEPTH (FTi: 30 NED
WATERSHED AREA (ACRESt:
WATERSHED NO:
MEANDERED:
ECOL CLASS
t INLETfc
USE:
PROBLEMS:
COMMENTS: NILES OF SHORELINE: 11.60 X LITTORAL: 33
: r:Sh MGMT CLASS: WALLEYE-CENTRARCHIO
1 1 OUTLETS: 1 1 PUBLIC ACCESS: WATER COLOR:
TROPHIC QUALITY
H06 1
YR/NO SOURCE 8IOL SECCHI SECCHI" "CHLOR CHLOR NUTRIENT TOTAL P X SUBJ1 APPLICATION
INDEX DEPTH INDEX INDEX INDEX (WG/Li PLANTS OF CUSOH
56/08 Oi 37.9 S.4 52.8 0.0 0.0 37.9 0.014 0.0
68/07 02 56.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 56.2 0.050 0.0
68/07 32 S6.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 58.9 0.060 0.0
78/10 G4 42.4 11.5 41. S 35 42.9 37.9 0.014 0.0
73/10 04 43.4 11.0 48.5 4.0 44.2 39.8 0.016 0.0
72/fiI 04 47.7 7.5 4§.l S.5 47.3 39.8 0.016 0-0
Tf/PS 34 38.9 0.0 0.0 4.1 44.4 38.9 0.015 0.0
75/07 04 46.5 9.0 45.4 5.7 47.6 38.9 0.015 0.0
72/07 04 47.4 B.7 45.9 6.4 48.8 37.9 0.014 0.0
52/05 02 48.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 48.9 0.030 0.0
68/07 02 53.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 S3.0 0.040 0.0
Es/r?
70/05
66/09
67/09
S3 53. C 3.0 C.r 0.0 0.0 53.3 I) CV3 0.3
32 68.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 68.9 0.120 0.0
)9 41.3 12.0 41.3 0.0 Q.O 0.0 0.0 0.0
39 51.3 6.0 51.3 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0
*
0.
0.
0.
0.
c.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
3. g
0. §
o. •
0.
LAKESHORE DEVELOPMENT
YR/tig SOURCE TOTAL t DUELLINGS DWELLINGS/NILE OF SHORELINE DWELLINGS/LAKE AREA (ACRESi
70/00 22 407. 35.1 0.1
56/08 Cl 604. 52.1 0.1
ADDITIONAL DATA
YR/HO SOURCE SURF 02 PH ALKAL COND TOTAL N TOT INOfl N N05 + N03 N TUR8
(MG/Li (HG/Li (HG/Li (HG/Li (HG/Li (TTVi
56/08 01 7.5 0.0 172.% 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
M/07
A/07
• «rio
IP 10
rf/08
72/08
72/07
_72/07
TO/OS
Si/OS
68/07 I
32 8.1 8.3 170.0 0.0 0.& 0.14 0.04 .30
2 9.1 8.3 170.0 0.0 0.8 0.14 0.04 11.00
r §•!! I-3 l7i-° 8»° S-° !M3 9>10 •
14 s«fi I.H 175.0 g.g o.o o.ib o.o.. o.t
IH 7.4 7.8 163.0 Q.O O.D 6.13 0.03 O.t
34 0.6 |,§ 167.0 0.0 0.0 '0.20 0.10 Q.(
)4 10.2 7.9 16S.D O.C 0.0 0.04 0.03 0.0
34 0.0 8-3 17S.O t.O 0.0 0.05 0.04 Q.O
32 0.0 8.9 844.0 0.0 1.2 1.14 1.07 0.6
32 0.0 8.4 190.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
D2 7.0 8.4 170.0 0.0 0.7 0.16 0.04 7.00
68/07 02 7.1 BiS 170.0 0.0 0.7 0.11 0-04 8.00
70/05 02 11.0 8.5 190.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
66/03 09 0.0 8.4 153.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
67/09 09 0.0 8.4 4JJO.O 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
MUNICIPAL
POSSIBLE PROBLEM AREAS
INDUSTRIAL U880N SEPTIC , CROPLAND/PASTURE FEEDLOT NfiTURAL
RUNOFF TANKS RUNOFF RUNOFF RUNOFF
COLOR
(PTi
Q.O
5.00
.00
0.0
0.0
\'.Q
.0
.6
.0
Q.O
5. 00
5-2° o '
o.o ?
0.0
,
-------
LAKE—RUSH
COUNT*—OTltR TAIL
56 .141 (2)
SECCHI DISK TRANSPARENCY. 1« 75
JUNE
hEEK 1 2 3 4
TflANS 11.0 ll.O H.U ll'O
6
7.o
KEANOJULY-AU6) 5.5 (NEAREST .5 FT)
JULY AUGUST
7 6 9 10 11 12 13
6*5 6.Q 6.0 5.0 5.0 •£ • 0 5.0 '-
HA1ER COLCH—2
1*
5«0
StPTEHBEH
16 17 IB
—NONE
LAKE— CLITHERALL
SECCHI DISK TRA»
KEEK 1
COUNTY— OTTER TAIL
^SPARENCY,1<^75
JUNE JULY AUGUST
2 34 5 6 78 9 10 11 12 13 14
56 236
SEPTEMBER
lb 16 ' 17
(0)
18
TRANS
10. 10.5
HEAM'JULY-AuG) 10.5 »NtAHEST .5 FT)
ALGICIDE USEO—NONE
KAUR COLOR—
.LAKE— CLITHERALL
COUNTY— OTTER TAIL
I0>
SECCHI DISK „. . _ .
JUNE JULY
WEEK 12345678
TRANS 15.0 12.5 13.5 lo>5 16.5 11.0
.AUGUST SEPT£*8E(?
9 10 11 18 13 1* 15 16 17
6.0 *.0 11.0 ««0 11.0 10. 0 12.0
MEAM'JULY-AUG) 9.5 (NEAf-EST .5 FT)
ALGICIDE OSEU—NONE
WAlER COLOR— 1
LAKE— OTTERTAIL
COUNTY— OTTER TAIL
Sb 2*2 (0)
HEAM'JULY-AuC) U.S (NEA&ES1 «5 FT»
WA1ER COLOh
SECCHI DISK . „. _ . .
WEEK 1 '
-------
APPENDIX
C-3
INVESTIGATION 0? SEPTIC LSACKATS DISCHARGES
CTTERTAIL LAKE, MINNESOTA
APRIL, 1979
Prepared for
WAPORA, Inc.
Washington, D.C.
Prepared by
X-V Associates, Inc.
Falmouth, Massachusetts
May, 1979
-------
C-3
1.0 INTRODUCTION
In porous soils, groundwater inflows frequently convey
wastewaters from nearshore septic units through bottom sediments
and into lake waters, causing attached algae growth and algal
blooms. The lake shoreline is a particularly sensitive area
since: 1) the groundwater depth is shallow, encouraging soil
water saturation and anearobic conditions; 2) septic units .and
leaching fields are frequently located close to the water's
edge, allowing only a short distance for bacterial degradation
and soil adsorption of potential contaminants; and 3) the
recreational attractiveness of the lakeshore often induces
temporary overcrowding of homes leading to hydraulically
overloaded septic units. Rather than a passive release from
lakeshore bottoms, groundwater plumes from nearby en-site
treatment units actively emerge along shorelines, raising
sediment nutrient levels and creating local elevated concen-
trations of nutrients (Kerfoot and Brainard, 1973). The
contribution of nutrients from subsurface discharges of shoreline
septic units has been estimated at 30 to 60 percent of the total
nutrient load in certain New Hampshire lakes (LRPC, 1977).
Wastewater effluent contains a mixtuer of near UV fluorescent
organics derived from whiteners, surfactants and natural
degradation products which are persistent under the combined
conditions of low oxygen and limited microbial activity.
-1-
-------
C-3
SEPTIC TANK
OVERFLOW
^•GROUNDWATER
SEPTIC LEACHATE-^
Figure 1. Excessive loading of septic systems
causes the development of plumes of
poorly-treated effluent which may
1) enter nearby waterways through
surface runoff or which may 2) move
laterally with groundwater flow and
discharge near the shoreline of
nearby lakes.
-------
C-3
Figure 2 shows two samples of sand- filtered effluent from the
Otis Air Force Base sewage treatment plant. One was analyzed
immediately and the other after having sat in a darkened bottle
for six months at 20°C. Note that little change in fluorescence
was apparent, although during the aging process some narrowing
of the fluorescent region did occur. The aged effluent
percolating through sandy loam soil under anaerobic conditions
reaches a stable ratio between the organic content and chlorides
which are highly mobile anions. The stable ratio (cojoint
signal) between fluorescence and conductivity allows ready
detection of leachate olumes by their conservative tracers as
an early warning of potential nutrient breakthrough or public
health problems.
Surveys for shoreline wastewater discharges were conducted
with a modified septic leachate detector and the K-V Associates,
Inc. "Dowser" groundwater flow meter. The septic leachate
detector (SNDECO Type 2100 "Seotic Snooper") consists of the
subsurface probe, the water intake system, the analyzer control
unit, and a graphic recorder. Initially the unit is calibrated
against stepwise increases of wastewater effluent, of the type
to be detected, added to the background lake water. The probe
of the unit is then placed in the lake water along the shoreline.
Groundwater seeping through the shoreline bottom is drawn into
the subsurface intake of the probe and travels upwards to the
analyzer unit. As it cesses through the analyzer, separate
conductivity and specific fluorescence signals are generated and
-------
80-
70-
60-
ui
o
z
tu
UJ
u.
UJ
>
LU
CC
30-
20-
10-
C-3
EXCITATION SCAN
SAND FILTERED SECONDARILY-TREATED
WASTE WATER EFFLUENT
NEWLY SAND FILTERED
OTIS EFFLUENT
AGED
SAND FILTERED
EFFLUENT (6mo.)
300
FIGURE2 .
400 500
WAVELENGTH (nm)
Sand-filtered Effluent Produces a Stable
Fluorescent Signature, Here Shown Before
-------
-5-
sent to a signal processor which registers the separate signals
on a strip chart recorder as the boat moves forward. The
analyzed water is continuously discharged from the unit back
into the receiving water. A portable unit obtained from 5NDECO
was used during the field studies, but was modified to operate
under the conductance conditions encountered in the field.
1.1 Plume Types
The capillary-like structure of sandy porcus soils and
horizontal groundwater movement induces a fairly narrow plume
from malfunctioning septic units. The point of discharge along
the shoreline is often through a small area of lake bottom,
commonly forming an oval-shaped area several meters wide when
the septic unit is close to the shoreline. In denser subdivisions
containing several overloaded units the discharges may overlap,
forming a broader increase.
l.lol Groundwater Plumes
Three different types of groundwater-related wastewater
plumes are commonly encountered during a septic leachate survey:
1) erupting plumes, 2) passive plumes, and 3) stream source
plumes. As the soil becomes saturated with dissolved solids
and organics during the aging orocess of a leaching on-lot
septic system, a breakthrough of organics occurs first, followed
by inorganic penetration (principally chlorides, sodium, and
other salts). The active emerging of the combined organic and
inorganic residues into the shoreline lake water describes an
erupting plume. In seasonal dwellings where wastewater loads
-------
C-3
-6-
vary in time, a plume may be apparent during late summer when
shoreline cottages sustain heavy use, but retreat during winter
during low flow conditions. Residual organics from the waste-
water often still regain attached to soil particles in the
vicinity of the previous erupting plume, slowly releasing into
the shoreline waters. This dormant plume indicates a previous
breakthrough, but sufficient treatment of the plume exists
under current conditions so that no inorganic discharge is
apparent. Stream source plumes refer to either groundwater
leachings or nearstream septic leaching fields which enter into
streams which then empty into the lake.
1.1.2 Runoff Plumes
Traditional failures of septic systems occur in tight soil
conditions when the rate of inflow into the unit is greater than
the soil percolation can accomodate. Often leakage occurs
around the septic tank or leaching unit covers, creating standing
pools of poorly-treated effluent. If sufficient drainage is
present, the effluent may flow laterally across the surface into
nearby waterways. In addition, rainfall or snow melt may also
create an excess of surface water which can wash the standing
effluent into water courses. In either case, the noorly-treated
effluent frequently contains elevated fecal coliforia bacteria,
indicative of the presence of oathogenic bacteria and, if
sufficiently high, must be considered a threat to public health.
-------
C-3
-7-
2.0 METHODOLOGY - SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS
The septic leachate survey covered two principal study areas
in Otter Tail County, Minnesota. The first, and largest, water
body area examined was Otter Tail Lake, an 8-niile long glacial
depression coursed from northeast to southwest by the south-
flowing Otter Tail River. This lake shoreline is almost entirely
ringed by seasonal cottages interspersed with 10$ year-round
dwellings as well as a few cattle yards and cultivated croplands.
The lake is very shallow along most all of the shoreline and the
soils consist predominantly of medium sand of high porosity.
The second study area was comprised of the adjacent satellite
lakes: Blanche, Deer, Round, and Walker. These lakes were much
smaller than Otter Tail Lake and were slightly less populated.
Soils were, again, generally sandy and quite porous.
Objectives of this survey were:
1) To perform a complete shoreline scan for evidence of
septic leachate (nutrient) intrusion using tbrough-the-ice
techniques for winter conditions. Forward progress, related to
prevailing weather conditions, was expected to be at least one
shoreline mile per day.
2) To take discrete water samples for subsequent nutrient
analysis only at those locations of alleged effluent plumes
revealed by the leachate detector instrument.
-------
C-3
FIGURE 3- EXISTING LAND USE IN I;1E OTTER TAIL STUDY AREA
LECE:;J
RESIDENTIAL
i FOREST A.\;D "."ETI-.-'C.'DS
AC'R.icuLTUA.u, A:.~D O"E:T ?A^":^ZI_''.:T)
"^iiDLiJi :-L\:IAGE:IZ:;T A:^ c.'i>.~ A?.Z.\S i
L'RSZ
I
Otcer Tail Jo-ir>c~.'
Plaanir.'; Aiiviscry
ContTiission l?'3c'
C'VAPCRA, 1Q7S)
-------
-8- C-3
5) To take bacteria samples for fecal coliform analysis
from all moving surface tributaries or exceptionally high shore-
line effluent plumes.
4) To make visual observations relevant to sources of lake
water degradation.
This survey was executed during the period from 22 March
through end of April, 1979. Daytime temperatures ranged from
5 to ^5°F' Ice measured 3 feet in depth and was very solid.
Snow cover rarely exceeded 2 to 10 inches.
2.1 Procedure
Otter Tail Lake was surveyed in a continuous clockwise
direction starting and ending at the outlet of the Otter Tail
River. The survey team consisted of two men and lightweight
mobile survey gear. The basic equipment platform was a 6" x 3'
polyethylene sled (actually a collapsed portable ice house by
"Snoboat"). The septic leachate detector instrument was securely
lashed with shock cords to a large plastic ice chest, in turn
lashed to the sled. A 12 vdc snowmobile battery powered the
instrument and snail water pump. This centrifugal water pumo
lifted sub-ice water from a drilled hole and discharged it
through the instrument detector cnaraber and out a flexible plastic
tube exhaust from which retained samples could be taken.
The large ice chest held chilled water sair.Dles as well as
supplies and maintenance gear. Groundwater specimens were drawn
through a ruz^ed stainless steel veil-point sampler develooed
by K-V Associates, Inc. This 7-foot Ions;, 3/3 inch bore tube
-------
C-3
TIG'JRZ
SOIL LANDSCAPES r,I T>:Z OTTER TAIL STUDY ASS A
5 A1I2 A- 5 TOra-iUS SARD
'.Sana" over
v«il irai-e
71AT 'lOr^anl- SOtli)
; SanaT 3ver
sancv . poor IT i
•; Sandy over sanav
veil ir
Icamv .
JOllj )
Deep 5il:~ :r \zaarr,
[Source: University
of Minnesota 196 91
1978)
-------
-10-
could easily ce driven by hand up to 18 inches into the porous
bottom sediment. Groundwater samples were drawn from sandy
sediments of those holes displaying a high relative fluorescence
signal. Interstitial water was extracted via simple hand
vacuum pump and large plastic receiving chamber. All tubes were
of large bore to minimize freezing obstructions. The captured
ground water could then be readily decanted apart from entrained
sand and bottled for later analysis. Such bottom sample
accompanied a surface sample for each significant plume discovery
In nearly every case, groundwater samples were withdrawn very
easily through the loose sand bottom.
To gain access to the liquid water beneath the ice cover,
a gasoline-powered "Jiffy" ice auger equipped with 5" diameter,
3' long drill bit on a 12" shaft extension was used.
In summary, the two-man team proceeded on foot in tandem
around the lake perimeter with self-contained quipment in tow
on lightweight plastic sleds. Skis or snowshoes were used as
conditions required. The lead individual bored fresh holes on
approximate 100-foot intervals, gauging the ice thickness as
well as his free-water clearance to the sand bottom. He charted
a path which would insure 6 to 10 inches of free water which,
on Otter Tail Lake, frequently offset the team up to 100 yards
from shore. The instrument operator, trailing closely behind,
flushed his pump line in each new hole and processed a brief
but steady stream of water through the detector. Relative
fluorescence, conductivity and positional information were
-------
-11- c-3
recorded in a bound log book. A USGS lakeshore map provided
sufficient landmark detail for reasonable annotation of position
versus hole number.
2.2 Sample Handling
Both ground and surface water samoles for nutrient analysis
were retained in 250 ml clean plastic bottles, marked to correspond
with hole numbers. The samples were preserved at 35°? or colder
oending laboratory analysis at a later date.
Bacteria samples were captured in sterilized 250 ml plastic
bottles and shipoed the same day to Environmental Protection
Laboratory in St. Cloud Minnesota for fecal coliform analysis.
2.3 Calibration
Each work day began with a calibration of the septic leachate
instrument. Two solutions were required: the first, a background
sample drawn from an assumed unpolluted central portion of the
lake; the second, a 10# dilution in background water of local
New York Mills treated effluent. An initial 20 liter volume of
central lakewater lasted the entire survey as the background
standard. A liter bottle of lagoon effluent was taken from the
treatment facility in the nearby town of Mew York Mills. This
sample was filtered to remove suspended solids orior to use.
Injection of these two solutions into the leachate detector
instrument, at ambient outdoor working temoerature, allowed us
to set a reasonable ^ERO and SPAN adjustment.
-------
-12-
2.4- Satellite Lakes
Surveys of four smaller lakes followed the completion of
Otter Tail Lake. The same procedure was used, fair weather
allowing for conclusion of each lake within a day's time for
the septic scan with an additional day for bacterial sample
retrieval. The north shore of Blanche Lake and Deer Lake,
northern and eastern shores of Round Lake, and south shore of
Valker Lake were surveyed. The shoreline areas recresented
the rore populated shorefronts which are candidates for sewerage
collection facilities.
2.5 Groundwater Flow Determination
The direction and rate of inflow of groundwater was
measured at 8 locations around Otter Tail Lake and 4 locations
at each of the satellite lakes surveyed. Snow cover and unsat-
urated sand cover was removed above beach regions and a K-V
TM
Associates, Inc. "Dowser" groundwater flow meter inserted into
the saturated sand sediments. Conditions permitting, three
separate determinations of flow rate were made, often with
small-scale dye tracings of interstitial flow for confirmation.
The observed compass direction and rate of flow was comruted and
compared with the rates anticipated by the Darcy equation from
known groundwater heights.
2.6 Water Analysis
'Water samples taken in the vicinity of the peak of plumes
were analyzed by EPA Standard Methods for the following chemical
TM = Trademark
-------
C-3
-13-
constituents,:
conductivity (cond.)
o.rtiio.phosphate phosphorus (PO^-P)
total phosphorus (TP)
Over 200 small-volume (50 ml) water samples were obtained at
locations, of sample holes and 120 samples at selected plumes
and background stations for analysis. The samples were placed
in polyethylene containers, chilled, and frozen for transport
and storage. Conductivity was determined by a Sectarian (Model
RC-19) conductivity bridge, orthophosphate-phosphorus and total
phosphorus by the single reagent procedures following standard
methods (EPA, 1975)> and selected samples synchronous-scanned
for fluorescence to confirm the organic source.
-------
C-3
-14-
3.0 FLUME LOCATIONS
The Otter Tail Lakes study area included the shoreline of
Otter Tail Lake and populated portions of the surrounding water
bodies of Blanche, Deer, Round, and Walker Lakes. Based upon
the soil atlas of Otter Tail County, 9C# of the study area
contains sandy, highly permeable soils of glacial outwash
deposits. The dominant soil types are 1) sand over sandy,
well-drained soils (Salida, Sioux, and Hubbard soils), 2) loamy
over sandy, well-drained soils (Arvilla and Sstherville soils),
and sandy over sandy, poorly-drained soils (Figure ). The
outwash deposits extend downwards to decths of $0 to 100 feet,
below which is about 200 feet thickness of undifferentiated
glacial drift before bedrock (Precambrian crystalline rock) is
intercepted, forming the "oasis", a large groundwater aquifer.
Melting ice blocks caused the depressions, filled with ground-
water, which form Otter Tail and its satellite lakes.
On the basis of groundwater drainage, lakes fall into
categories of "confined lakes", "withdrawal" lakes, or a combin-
ation of both. In confined lakes, the groundwater inflow along
one side is offset by an equivalent exfiltration along
opposing shorelines, resulting in little change in net groundwater
contribution to the lake. In other cases, the lake water body
may behave as a withdrawal well, withdrawing zroundwater from
around most shorelines and discharging the net inflow of water
as stream flow from the lake.
-------
C-3
-15-
Otter Tail is a withdrawal la ice, the substantial drop in
hydraulic head from the inlet to the outlet serving to withdraw
groundwater into the lake along the entire length of scoreline.
As described i.n more detail in Section 7, "Groundwater Flow
Characteristics and Nutrient Loading/1 the satellite lakes also
induce even more racid groundwater inflow along adjacent shore-
lines of Otter Tail Lake due to gravity leveling of water in the
lakes which create abnormally high hydraulic heads nearby the
shoreline. Septic system discharges within the areas adjacent
to the lake upon entering the groundwater would be transported
uncommonly fast towards the lake.
A total of 265 sancle locations indicating olumes were
observed along the shorelines surveyed (Figures 5-8). Of these,
the vast majority (ca. 255) were found to be of groundwater
origin; the others represented surface stream drainage inflows
from lakes (ca. 30). Solid circles indicate locations of
probable groundwater leachate sources, with plumes emerging from
corous bottom sediments into the lake. Solid squares reoresent
locations of observed surface discharges into lake waters. These
may result from overflowing seotic systems or from leaching
systems along the stream shoreline as sources. A line is drawn
from each symbol to the location of the ice hole sampled where
the olume was encountered. Fluorescent spectral analysis was
used where necessary to separate the discharges from bogs from
wastewater inflows. Almost a one-to-one relationship existed
between the number of locations of groundwater plumes and the
number of year-reound (cermanent) dwellings (Teble 1).
-------
-16-
C-3
Table 1. Number of groundwater olumes compared to occupancy.
Segcent*
Number
Residential
Permanent
Occuoancy
Seasonal
Number of Groundwater
Plume Locations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
11
12
13
15
16
17
13
19
20
21
26
27
28
29
30*32
7
21
14
12
2
12
14
5
4
21
13
7
7
7
2
1
5
6
10
10
0
2
5
8
(9)
(1)
(?)
(8)
18)
23
64
37
6
37
40
12
9
29
15
15
14
6
3
12
13
49
50
0
8
22
42
(22)
(7)
(3D
(29)
21
21
9
2
9
14
2
14
16
inflow
2
1
3
6
1
0
6
19
52
2
5
5
(unnamed lake)
(Walker Lake)
(Walker Lake)
(Long Lake)
(Long Lake)
region
(Blanche Lake)
(Blanche Lake)
(exfiltration?)
*see Fieure 11
-------
-17-
Frequencies of groundwater plume locations above that
expected based on permanent occupancy occurred along shoreline
areas where adjacent lake areas induced rapid subsurface flows.
Ihe higher than expected frequency of plumes emerging along the
Otter Tail shoreline may be due to the strong inflow of Otter
Tail "capturing" plumes from the adjacent shorelines of the
satellite lakes. Rather than intruding into Blanche Lake, in all
likelihood, septic system discharges from systems serving
residences on the northern shore instead apparently flow towards
Otter Tail Lake. Few erupting plumes were found on Blanche Lake,
although segments 19, 26 along Otter Tail Lake downstream of
their rapid groundwater flow show substantial areas affected by
plumes. The same Phenomenon appears to occur with an unnamed
lake adjacent to segment 3 and Long Lake in segment 9.
An exceptionally low number of plume locations was observed
in segment 30 + 32 which may indicate the most likely shoreline
area where groundwater may come the closest to exfiltration
rather than infiltration. The frequency of plume locations on
Round Lake., in agreement with projected groundwater flow based
on water height in the lakes, further supports the cossibility
of exfiltration.
The predominance of groundwater plumes corresponds to the
observed soil conditions and conditions of septic tank soil
absorption systems. The study area contains highly permeable
sandy soil and seasonal!? high water tables where inadeauately
treated vastewater mav be reschir.a; the groundwater. In addition,
-------
C-3
a large number of seotic leaching fields are submerged in ground-
water, limiting aeration and treatment of the effluent. Couoled
with the exceptionally rapid groundwater movement, the waste
streams are entering the lake shoreline. The incidence of the
high frequency of erupting plumes does not necessarily indicate
a high transport of phosphorus to the lakewaters (section 7i
"Groundwater Flow Characteristics and Nutrient Loading")* High
frequency of plumes and noticeable phosphorus loading from ground-
water sources is apparent in shoreline segments of Otter Tail
Lake near the satellite lakes of segments 3»6,6,21, and 26.
The same is likely true for segments 9 and 11, but insufficient
water quality information was available for confirmation.
-------
-19-
C-3
Key to Symbols Used on Sampling Location i"!aps
. ice hole location
D1 bacterial sample location
O dormant groundwater plume
• erupting groundwater plume
D organic surface water plume without dissolved solids load
• organic surface water plume with dissolved solids load
-------
OTTER TAIL LAKE
inr i
\
*
Figure •?. Plume and bacterial sample locations on Otter Tail Lake.
n
OJ
-------
-21-
C-3
BL2
»••" **•»
BLANCHE LAKE
BL4
Figure 6. Sampling station, olurae, and
bacterial sample locations
on Blanche Lake.
-------
-22-
C-3
DEER LAKE
RJ
R2
ROUND LAKE .•/:
Figure 7. Samoling station, plume,
and bacterial sample
locations on Deer and
Round Lakes.
-------
-23-
C-3
W2
• W1
Figure 3. Sampling station, plume
and bacterial sam-ole
locations on Walker La^ce
-------
OTTER TAIL LAKE
10
110
130
140
15O
160
170
180
190
0
270
280
290
o fluorescence
A conductance
o
i
-------
OTTER TAIL LAKE (conI.)
1OO
610 620 630 640 65O 660 670 680 690
100
710 720 730 740 750 760 77O 780 79O
10016
81O 820 830 840 85O 86O 870 880 890
100*666
910
n
-------
BLANCHE LAKE
DEER LAKE
100
40
50
ROUND LAKE
WALKER LAKE
100
100
10
20
o fluorescense
A conductance
o
i
u>
-------
C-3
-29-
4,0 NUTRIENT ANALYSES
Completed analyses of the chemical content of 130 samples
taken along the shorelines of Otter Tail Lake and its tributaries
are presented in Table 2. The sample letters refer to the
locations given in Figures 5 through 8 and the profiles of
Figure 9. The symbol "S" refers to surface water sample and the
symbol "G" to groundwater sample. Practically all groundwater
samples represent easily flowing vacuum withdrawals from highly
permeable sandy bottom sediments.
The conductivity of the water samples as conductance
(umhos/cm) is given in the second column. The nutrient analyses
for orthophosphorus (?0^-?) and total phosphorus (TP) are
presented in the next two columns in parts-oer-million (pern - mg/1).
-------
Table 2. Analysis of surface water (S) and groundwater (G)
samples taken in the vicinity of wastewater plumes
observed on the shorelines of Otter Tail Lake and
its satellites: Blanche, Deer, Round, and Walker.
Otter Toil Lake-
Sample Number Conductivity
Center 1
Center 2
1
16
54
54
71
VI
70
79
81
81
85
85
85
H?
87
105
105
106
111
111
11}
H5
118
118
m
1<»9
166
186
186
190
190
19U
201
20?
20?
509
510
510
314
3 in
g
S
S
S
S
G
S
G
H
G
S
G
S
S
G
S
G
8
G
S
S
G
S
G
S
G
S
G
S
S
G
S
G
S
S
S
G
S
S
G
(•*
fc>
G
160
500
250
510
250
250
510
250
565
250
580
225
235
305
300
260
220
300
200
310
360
245
265
140
320
245
320
240
-
275
235
265
250
320
320
350
225
325
275
200
500
175
P04-P (ppm)
.003
.001
.001
.003
.002
.002
.001
.011
.000
.003
.001
.006
.002
.004
.008
.001
.004
.001
.002
.004
.001
.001
.001
.001
.001
.001
.000
.003
.005
.003
.005
.001
.003
.004
.002
.001
.004
.oon
.002
.002
.002
.O01
Total P (ppm) Ratio % Breakthrough
AC ATP P
.024
.010
.049
.008
.008
.082
.006
.342
.006
.112
.00?
.250
.011
.006
.221 50 .21 78*
.00?
.288
.005
.059
.007
.004
.038
.006
.004
.005
.015
.008
.054
.016
.OO7
.048
.010
.163
.004
.022
.008
.020
.009
.012
.082
.009
.053
o
I
o
I
u>
-------
Table ^. (continued)
Otter Tall Lake
Sample Number Conductivity
326
326
353
333
340
352
352
360
360
397
407
40?
432
432
443
44 *>
448
448
481
486
486
$OO
53-0
550
584
564
608
608
670
6?0
686
686
694
694
696
696
718
734
734
752
752
760
760
773
773
S
G
S
G
S
S
Q
S
G
S
S
G
S
G
S
G
S
G
S
S
G
S
3
G
S
G
S
G
S
G
o
h>
G
S
G
S
G
S
S
G
S
G
S
G
S
G
240
40O
265
250
320
-
250
250
175
290
280
250
370
275
345
3<*5
415
525
325
320
225
270
325
375
335
225
30O
352
445
280
330
215
360
550
415
28S
250
190
310
345
390
250
-
330
310
PO^-P (ppm)
.001
.002
.004
.002
.001
.005
.006
.005
.005
.002
.005
.002
.00?
.001
,001
.001
.010
.004
.002
.004
.002
.001
.001
.009
.001
.002
.002
.006
.002
.00?
.001
.00?
.002
.ooa
.001
.000
.004
.001
.001
.001
.001
.006
.002
.002
.001
Total P (ppm) Hetio *
AC ATP
.00? 150 .01
.020
.01?
.016
.007
.015
.050
.016
.006
.009
.012
.013
.013
.048 25 .04
.006
.073 95 .06
.050
.109 75 .10
.012
.008
.078
.020
.010
.074 125 .06
.00?
.163
.015
.0?8 102 .07
.015
.508
.013
.04?
.018
.140 300 .13
.022
.020
.021
.007
.010 60 .00
.010
.029 140 .02
.009
.012
.010
.009 60 .00
Breakthrough
P
1#
28*
11*
23*
8*
12*
8*
<1*
3*
<1*
n
-------
Table 2o (continued)
Otter Tail Lake
Sample Number
777
777
786
816A
816A
822
822
82?
827
8?6
836
845
845
854
854
869
869
877
877
888
8H8
Otter Hiver
fit 1 bridge
inlet
Otter hiver
2nd inlet
Otter River
outlet
Westig Canal
Westig Canal
Balmoral Creek
Walker L. Canal
Pelican Bay
Cherney's well
Acres home &.
well
Well F.N.1061
C
S
G
S
S
G
S
G
S
G
S
G
S
G
S
G
S
G
S
G
S
G
S
S
S
s
G
S
S
S
G
G
G
ionduct ivity
400
250
310
485
275
415
345
-
275
400
275
20O
345
200
200
300
215
390
280
215
250
325
325
330
335
440
380
410
175
185
275
300
PO^-P (ppm)
.001
.001
.001
.002
.005
.002
.002
.003
.001
.005
.002
.002
.003
.001
.004
.003
.001
.002
.007
.002
.001
.002
,003
.001
.008
.002
.002
.002
.001
.00?
.025
.005
Ri.tio %
Total P (ppm) AC &TP
.00?
.013
.016
.078
.151 25 .14
.019
.029 9? .02
.028
.028
.035
.063
.025
.206 95 -20
.010
.115
.031
.013
.011
.254
.012
.038
.016
.018
.011
.087
.446 190 .44
.018
.016
.013
.071
.065
.056
Breakthrough
P
98*
4#
}?*
41#
I
KX
M
n
LO
-------
-33-
C-3
Table 2. (continued)
Sample Number
Round Lake
1
1
14
14-
15
15
30
30
34
34
Valker Lake
1
1
6
6
22
22
24
24
Deer Lake
1
1
10
10
16
16
29
29
46
46
Blanche Lake
13
13
30
30
37
37
56
56
Conductivity
S
G
S
G
S
G
S
G
S
G
S
G
S
G
5
G
S
G
S
G
S
G
S
G
S
G
S
G
S
G
S
G
Q
G
S
G
215
260
250
*15
325
200
200
400
250
310
400
450
275
150
300
540
300
350
300
350
250
430
300
250
100
250
350
380
335
325
360
375
300
325
^95
450
PO^-P (ppm)
.001
.001
.001
.001
.011
.012
.001
.001
.005
.003
.001
.000
.001
.001
.001
.001
.001
.003
.001
.002
.001
.001
.002
.001
.001
.005
.003
.002
.004
.002
.002
.001
.001
.001
.002
.001
Total P (ppm)'
.017
.096
.018
.106
.115
.260
.011
.042
.026
.102
.012
.031
.017
.038
.031
.043
.024
.130
.012
.446
.009
.037
.014
.068
.016
.267
.024
.192
.025
.366
.023
.064
.012
.064
.018
.040
Background
groundwater
250
.002
.010
-------
C-3
5.0 NUTRIENT RELATIONSHIPS
Two types of wastewater discharges were observed along the
shoreline of the Salem Lakes: groundwater seepage and surface
runoff. The two sources are treated differently in evaluating
their loading contributions.
5.1 Groundwater Flumes
By the use of a few calculations, the characteristics of
the wastewater olumes can be described. Firstly, a general
groundwater background concentration for conductance and nutrients
is determined. The concentration of nutrients found in the plume
is then compared to the background and to wastewater effluent
from the lake region to determine the oercent breakthrough of
phosphorus and nitrogen to the lake water. Because the well-
point sampler does not always intercept the center of the clume,
the nutrient content of the clume is always partially diluted
by surrounding ambient background grcundwater or seeping lake-
water concentrations. To correct for the uncertainty of location
of withdrawal of the groundwater olume samcle, the nutrient
concentrations above background values found with the groundwater
plume are corrected to the assumed undiluted concentration
anticipated in local standard sand-filtered effluent (assuming
100% of conductance should uass through) and then divided by the
net nutrient content of raw effluent over municical water.
Comnutational formulae can be expressed:
-------
•55-
For the difference between background (C ) and
observed (C.) values: °
C^ - GO = &C^ conductance
TP.j_ - TPQ = ATPi total phosphorus
TN. - TN = ATN. total nitrogen (here, sum of
01 N03-N and NH^-N)
For attenuation during soil passage:
/fcC A ATP
100 x ( —x—J ==— = % breakthrough of ohosphorus
V^°i^ -"-^ef
/AC f \ATN
100 x \£g-—-/ jjj— = # breakthrough of nitrogen
1 S X
Where: C = conductance of background groundwater
(uiahos/cm)
C. = conductance of observed plume groundwater
(wmhos/cm)
&Ce£ = conductance of sand-filtered effluent
minus the background conductance of
municipal source water (umhos/cm)
TP = total Dhosphorus in background ground-
water (ppm-mg/1)
TP. = total phosphorus of observed plume
groundwater (ppm-mg/1)
TP - = total phosohorus concentration of
standard effluent
TN = total nitrogen content of background
groundwater, here calculated as
N07-N + NEL-N
s ^
TN. = total nitrogen content of observed clutne
1 grcundwater, here calculated as NC^-N -*-
NH^-N (ppm-rag/1) ^
TN f = total nitrogen content of standard
effluent
-------
-36-
C-3
5 o 2 Surface Discharge Plumes
A number of locations were found where surface inflow under
the ice entered the shoreline lake waters. The inflow was
analyzed as stream inflow carrying wastewater loads, iach
inflow carries a certain dissolved solids load possessing its
own peculiar nutrient concentration of ohoschorus (TP) and
nitrogen (TN). The percent effluent was characterized in the
surface water, based on a comparison with the New York Mills
effluent standard. The fraction of phosphorus (TP)and nitrogen
(TN) expected in a diluted sample of effluent with lake water was
then compared to the background-corrected solids load and
observed nutrient concentrations. The fraction of phospnorus
and nitrogen accounted for by the observed dilution wastewater
load is given as oercent nutrient residual. If the amount of
effluent-related nutrients is only a small percentage of the
observed loading, other sourcas must be contributing, presumably
due to road runoff, agricultural runoff, or other non-point
sources.
The computational formulae can be expressed:
F- = fluorescent units observed in water sample
Pu = fluorescent units corresponding to background lake
" surface water
?s = fluorescent units corresoondins; to 100% standard
effluent from nearby treatment riant
TT_ V
= ~~-~ ~ = fraction of effluent observed in shoreline water
ICO x &? = $3 = percentage of effluent observed in shoreline
0 water
-------
c-3
for fraction of nutrients accounted for by effluent fraction
100 x p t _p— = observed phosphorus as % of
&£ • iref expected effluent fraction in
shoreline water
/ACeA ^
100 x—^ * -p— = observed nitrogen as % of expected
^ ef effluent fraction in shoreline
water
5.3 Assumed '.yastewater Characteristics
Local samples of effluent were obtained at the New York
Hills sewage treatment plant near the study area. A conductance :
total phosphorus ratio of 950:4.0 was obtained. Subtracting
the background lake water concentration of 300 jimhos/cm gives a
G: TP ratio of 750:4.0 representing the change in concentration
to source water by household use in the Otter Tail Lake study
resrion.
-------
-38- c-3
6.0 COL IPO RM LEVELS IN SURFACE WAT5RS
A series of water samples were analyzed at each lake for
fecal coliform content to confirm the presence of surface runoff
or soil short-circuiting from malfunctioning systems. Previous
field surveys of Otter Tail Lake have shown no indication of
pollution of the lake water by fecal matter (WAPOHA, 1979).
Most previous values were at or below limits of detection (20
mpn/100 ml). With the exception of the inlet of the Otter Tail
River, virtually all samples from Otter Tail Lake and the
satellite lakes contained negligible bacterial concentrations.
A resampling of the Otter Tail bridge at the river inlet showed
no detectable fecal coliform bacteria 7 days after the first
sampling. Minnesota water quality standards specify that fecal
colifrom numbers not exceed a geometric mean of 200 organisms
per 100 ml of water based upon five samples oer month or A-CO
organisms per 100 ml of water in more than 10$ of all samples
during any month for recreational use and aquatic life.
The results of the sampling confirmed that the sandy soils
effectively filter out bacterial contamination even though certain
chemical constituents penetrate readily v/ith plume movement.
-------
-39-
C-3
Table 3. Bacterial content of shoreline samples.
Station Fecal
Number No .
Otter Tail Lake
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
17
18
19
Blanche Lake
1
2
3
4
Round Lake
1
2
3
4
Deer Lake
1
2
3
4
.-.'alker Lake
1
2
3
4
Coliform Ice Hole
/100 ml Location Number
0
0
0
0
0
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
356
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
16
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Pelican 3aj inlet
Balmoral Creek inlet
melt snot - F.N. 521
melt spot - F.N. 694-
big white barn
spring near Rearing Pond
soft snow - F-N. 747
soft snow - F.N. 7^8
Otter Tail River outlet
nursing home
house - F.N. 1060
soft soot - F.N. 1063
gas station - resort
Walker Lake outlet
Long Lake canal
soft spot - i'.N. 208
Otter Tail River - Rt. 1 bridge
Otter Tail River - 2nd sampling
Inflow: first inlet
Inflow: second inlet
Balnoral Creek outflow
house - ?.N. 066
house - F.N. 010
start of ice holes
snow melt - F.N. $4
s no w melt - F.N. 33
snow melt - F.N. 27
blue house - F.N. 7
house - F.N. 5^
house - vellow ice
house - F.N. 28
house - clear ice
house F.N. 79
house - F.N. 75
house - F.N. 59
house F.N. 53
523
716
642
773
783
788
810
811
915
79
201
203
333
343
450
481
-
-
-
—
20
37
71
1
34
33
29
10
9
10
29
^5
5
6
19
21
-------
-40- C-3
Table 3« (continued)
Station
Number
Fecal Coliform
No. 7100 nil
Location
Ice Hole
Number
Veil water
F.N. 67 0 Walker Lake well (Lien)
F.N. 68 0 Walker Lake well (Wtisher)
F.N. 888 0 Hound Lake well
-------
C-3
7.0 GROUNDVATSR FLOW CHARACTERISTICS
AND NUTRIENT LOADING
Otter Tail Lake is surrounded by very permeable surficial
deposits of glacial outwash. The aquifer deposits consist of
stratified sand and gravel with occassional lenses of silt.
The sandy deposits vary in thickness from 50 feet in the eastern
areas to about 100 feet in the western sections. The principal
water source is precipitation which directly falls onto its
surface, which then flows laterally to the central drainage
canal of the Otter Tail River basin.
While silt and clay layers restrict flow in the far south-
eastern side near the town of Otter Tail, high rates of flow
have been noticed for the sand and gravel sections of the
northern shoreline and the southwestern segments. An estimated
5,000 acre-feet of water oer year (approx. ^.5 agd) leave the
aquifer as underflow in the vicinity of the Otter Tail River at
the southwest end of Otter Tail Lake (WAPORA, 1979). The
transmissivity of the aquifer varies from 5,000 to about 200,000
gallons per day cer foot with the highest values being found in
the northeastern and southwestern sections cf the study area.
7.1 Groundwater Flow Patterns
Since the mean elevation of nearby lakes represent the
height of the groundwater levels, an approximation of inflow
cased upon Darcy's equation can be constructed for Otter Tail
Lake. The velocity of flow through porous .Tiedia (V_) is
-------
c-3
oroiDortional to the first cower of the hydraulic gradient •?=•
- -
s " dL
where ? = intrinsic oerneability of the aquifer. If an average
aquifer thickness of 100 ft exists, the permeability for a
2
200,000 gpd per foot transmissivity is T/M or 2,000 gpd/ft
for a unit square area.
Using the observed hydraulic gradients for mean groundwater
heights, the expected rates of flow were estimated for the Otter
Tail shoreline (Figure 10). The direction of flow is indicated
by the dirertion of the arrow and its rate of flow is oroportional
to length (units are in feet/day). The flow net analysis indi-
cated -chat groundwater inflows would be expected around the
entire periphery of Otter Tail Lake with the possible execution
of the wastern shoreline near Hound Lake. In general, the
elevated hydraulic head differences caused by lakes or embayments
would cause a probable doubling or tripling of groundwater inflow
flow rates in segments adjacent to satellite lakes, uarticularly
near the smaller sections of the segment 3 unnamed lake and
Pelican Bay dlus the broader shorelines adjacent to Blanche
Lake, '.valker Lake and Long Lake.
7. 2 Field Investigations
Field observations of observed groundwater flow patterns
added support to the assumed flow patterns. Groundwater flow
was evaluated at eight discrete points around the Otter Tail
Lake shoreline and at two locations on each satellite lake
-------
c-3
TM
surveyed using the K-V Associates, Inc. "Dowser" groundwater
flow meter and the acre conventional dye test.
Study sites were chosen along sandy beaches within a yard
or two of the water's edge. Under winter conditions, visual
observations of the extent of shoreline ice cover Drovided a
noticeable clue to the locations of more rapid intrusion of
warmer groundvater into the colder lake waters. Heavy snow
cover was correlated with limited groundv/ater flow while exposed
sandy beaches betrayed rapid groundwater movement.
To ir:Dlant the sensitive probe, a shallow hole was dug in
the loose sand to the depth of saturated soil. The instrument
sensor was driven 3" to 5" into the sand (groundwater table)
and the compass direction was set to due north (magnetic).
Measurement of direction and flow was accomplished within 10
minutes and was usually repeated three times at each site. The
direction of flow and approximate time of travel was noted for
each individual measurement and the mean used (Figure 10).
The observed directions of flow generally corresoonded to
that expected from the estimated groundwater gradients. The
greatest difference was noted just north of a nursing home near
the top of segment 1 (G-W-5)- A large discharge from the leaching
field may have caused a local deflection of the flow rate which
would account for the observed discrepancy. Along northern
regions of Blanche Lake, Walker Lake, and the southern shoreline
of Hound Lake, no directional movement of the nearshore ground-
water could be measured. These areas correspond to regions of
anricicsted exf iltration.
-------
C-3
Table 40 Observed Hates of zroundwater flow.
Station
GW-1
GW-2
/-» t • ~2
GW-4
GW-5
GW-6
GW-7
GW-8
Direction
300°
315°
330°
340°
75°
165°
150°
195°
Flow Hate
(ft/day)
.5-. 6
10-12
1-5
.6-. 9
11-13
15
12-14
17-19
Comments
covered with 5' of snow
melted spot with vegetation
covered with 3' of snow
softer snow
snow melt in broad area
(nursing home)
exposed beach sand off park
one foot of snow with
exposed sand
yellow snow around excosed area
-------
C-3
Figure 10. Groundwater flow patterns surrounding
Otter Tail Lake.
groundwater flow rates based on Darcy's equation
groundwater flow direction and rates measured by
the groundwater flow meter
approximate groundwater elevation
nd no direction
-------
Table 5- Calculated winter phosphorus loading per shoreline lenujth ba^ed upon observed
frequency of interceote
5
1
Estimated
Frequenc>(%)
71
100
100+
58
100
75
100
*»0
100 *
76
29
U
'•5
100 +
100
0
JOO
100 +
100 1
100,
100 +
100
13
Nutri ent
Load! ng
(Kg/.yr)
-------
OTTER TAIL LAKE
SEGMENT LOCATION
MAP
OTTEH TAIL RIVER
OTTER TAIL
\VILLAGE
35
OTTER TAIL TWP
GIRAHD TWP
l-'ICIIUi; 11. SKCMKNT LOCATIONS WITHIN Til!- OTTKR TAIL STUDY AKI'A
o
UJ
(WAPORA, 1978)
-------
c-5
Shoreline areas had irregular rates of inflow, apparent
through variations in snow thickness to even exnosed snow melt
areas of high flow. The naturally warmer groundwaters reduce
snow cover by heat transfer which is dependent upon rate of
movement. The shoreline north of Blanche Lake was laden with
melt holes and degressions. Measurements of flow at exposed
areas or melt holes revealed exceptional groundwater movement in
excess of 10 feet/day. Although melting snow along shoreline
areas probably contributed to the high rates of flow, the
permeability of deoosits of sand and gravel are sufficient to
accomodate such a raoid subsurface discharge.
7« 3 Nutrient Relationships
Although orevious investigations of groundwater-based lakes
have verified a relationship between nutrient-leaching from
nearshore septic systems and attached algae growth, especially
Cladoohora so. (K-V Associates, Inc., 1978), the interstitial
phosphorus concentrations were rarely above .Ci7 mg/1 or 2%
breakthrough. Generally, phosphorus is not normally transported
from septic tank disposal fields to surface waters by groundwater,
However, under the high groundwater inflow rates and high water
taole levels surrounding Otter Tail Lake, promoting ohosohcrus
mobility, substantial transoort acpears to occur. Frequencies of
breakthrough of ohoschorus from intercepter olumes average 26%
with regions of substantial transoort related to locations of
exceptionally high groundwater flew.
-------
-48-
The relationship of phosohorus loading to groundwater flow
is emphasized by:
1) The occurrence of erupting groundwater plumes from near-
shore septic systems around almost the entire periphery of
Otter Tail Lake, consistent with a "withdrawal" lake.
2) A statistically significant correlation between a) density
of permanent residences and number of erupting plumes, b) ground-
water phosphorus concentrations and surface water concentrations,
and c) frequency of plumes and estimated groundwater flow rates.
3) An exceptionally high groundwater flow rate sufficient
to "flush out" seasonal septic systems located within 100 feet of
the shoreline in at least a 5-month oeriod.
Groundwater nutrient loadings from septic systems become
significant for certain segments of Otter Tail Lake. An estimate
of their impact can be seen from Table 5* The method used to
estimate phosphorus loadings from the National Sutrophication
Survey (LTS3PA, 1972) assumes seven percent (0.25 Ibs/capita/year)
of a 3.5 Ibs/capita/year of total phosphorus found in raw waste-
water will reach the lake. Sampling of groundwaters where clumes
were oresent indicated a mean of 26% penetration of phosphorus,
with high groundwater flow areas showing substantially higher
leaching. Since ice holes were drilled at ICO foot intervals,
similar to the average distance between houselots, each clume
intersected should be indicative of leaching from tnat lot.
Because of the high groundwater flow, the number of ulumes was
compared with only the permanent residences. A high correlation
-------
C-3
existed between the two columns with a mean frequency of
incidence of plumes from the number of crojected permanent
residences per segment. The per capita loading for Otter Tail
Lake is 2.8 times the ^resumed national mean ohosphorus loading
of .25 Ibs/capita/year or .7 Ibs/cacita/year.
The highest shoreline ohos-chorus loadings from groundwater
sources are expected for segments 26, 3, and 0. Attached algal
growth may be anticipated for these areas. The extent of any
algal growth could not be determined during this study because of
ice cover. However, total chosphorus contents of water samples
from the different segments showed the highest mean levels in
segments 26 and 9. Of note, the lowest was observed for segment
30+32, the only segment where exfiltration is likely.
-------
-50-
C-3
8.0 CONCLUSIONS
A through-the-ice septic leachate survey was conducted
along the shoreline of Otter Tail Lake, Minnesota during Acril,
1979. The following observations were obtained from the shore-
line profiles, analyses of groundwater and surface water samples,
and evaluation of groundwater flow rates and patterns:
1) Over 200 of the 975 ice holes drilled at houselot inter-
vals along the shoreline showed evidence of erupting groundwater
plumes of septic leachate origin.
2) Zrupting plumes occurred around the entire periphery of
the lakeshore front, significantly correlated with the number of
permanent residence.
3) The highest frequency of cluices was found in lakeshore-
lines exhibiting induced high groundwater inflow due to adjacent
satellite lakes.
*O In general, the attenuation of phosphorus from nearshore
septic systems is not high, with a mean breakthrough of 26^- found
for intercepted erupting plumes. The per capita loading for
Otter Tail Lake is estimated as 2.8 times the presumed national
mean phosphorus loading of .25 Ibs/caoits/year or .7 Ibs/cacita/
year.
5) During winter, the mean concentration of total phosphorus
in the surface waters of nearshore lake segments was generally
lower (x = .015) than that of the inflow of the Otter Tail River
-------
-51-
C-3
(.016 mg/1). However, the segments admacent to Blanche Lake
(.022 mg/1) and Long Lake (.023 ng/1) show elevated levels in
regions of high anticipated groundwater phosphorus loadings.
6) No evidence of fecal bacterial contamination of surface
waters was found despite the high incidence of erupting olumes.
-------
OTTER TAIL LAKE (cent.
100
310
320 330
340 350 350 360
370
380
100
410
420
430
440
450
460 470
480
490
100
510
520
530
540 550
560
580
590
o
-------
APPENDIX
C-4
Camp Nidaros
Richville, MM 56576
July 8, 1978
Ms Jackie Russell
7/apora, Inc.
6900 Wisconsin Avenue N. IT.
Washington, D. C. 20015
Dear Jackie,
Enclosed are the data, which you asked me to obtain for you. These are
shown as coliform group colonies per 100 ml sample as determined by
tSLllipore Filtration Test on samplings of surface water from the
Otter Tail Lake outlet for the periods February 25» 1969 through
August 13, 1973, and January 7, 197L. through March 8, 1976.
If there are any data on the skipped periods, or if there are any on
samplings at the inlet to the lake, I have been unable to locate them.
I dug up the data on the large sheets in the files of our Otter Tail
Cojunty Shoreland Management oifice. me daia on the short sKeet was"
"6T>'Ea.tnsd from a copy—OTT—hand—in—thp f-j 1 f>g nf* _I£Lteig Engineers r
I don't know why these data were not available from the City of
Fergus Falls Health Department, but Arnold Ellingson told me he knew
nothing about them. However, you will find enclosed a copy of his
letter to Ulteig Engineers dated March 15, 1976. He probably mis-
interpreted my request.
As you know, we are extremely anxious to get this show on the road,
so if there is anything further we can do to expedite the completion
of your report, kindly let us know.
I know that Mark Oakman is anxious to get tromping around the area.
I shall continue to gather the data he has requested in the hope that
the air survey can—get under -way soon.
Sincerely, -- _ ,
,A^..^;>- i
Tf. "AV (BiirKRundquist
President "\ N
Otter Tail Lake Property Owners Association
-------
C-4
C/ty of Fergus Falls
FERGUS FALLS. MINNESOTA 56337
OFFICE OF:
HEALTH DEPARTMENT
ARNOLD O. ELLINGSON
CITY SANITARIAN
March 15, 1976
Ulteig Engineers
Attention:
R. D. Anderson
Box 1569
Fargo, North Dakota 58102
Dear Sirs:
The following information was requested during
our conversation on March 12, 1976. This information
includes dates of surface water samplings from the
Otter Tail Lake Outlet during the period January 1,
1974 through March 8, 1976. Results of analysis are
shown as coliform group colonies per 100 ml sample
as determined by Millipore Filtration Test.
AGE/eh
Arnold O. finings
City Sanitarian
-------
C-4
-15-74
1-22-74
1-28-74
2-4-74
2-11-74
2-19-74
2-25-74
3-5-74
3-11-74
3-18-74
3-26-74
4-1-74
4-8-74
4-15-74
4-22-74
4-30-74
5-6-74
5-13-74
5-20-74
5-28-74
6-3-74
6-10-74
6-17-74
6-24-74
7-1-74
7-8-74
7-15-74
7-22-74
7-29-74
8-6-74
8-12-74
8-19-74
8-26-74
3-3-74
9-9-74
9-16-74
9-23-74"
9-30-74
10-7-74
10-15-74
10-21-74
10-28-74
11-4-74
11-12-74
11-10-74
11-24-74
12-2-74
12-9-74
12-16-74
12-23-74
12-30-74
COLIFORM GROUP
ORGANISMS - Per
16
36
24
12
-0-
12
4
4
-0-
-0-
4
24
4
-0-
28
-0-
44
187
212 v
52
348 v
468 ;
140 '
76 7
108 ^
228 }
56 /
23 2 f-
296 V
404X
100')
80 /-
72 ^
32^
48 "1
I
120 I
>
52 (
i
16 \
)
16 J
8 -N)
16 /
4 \
B)
16 >
-O-/
-0-C
-o-3
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
100 ml DATE
1-0-75
1-13-75
1-20-75
1-27-75
2-3-75
2-10-75
3-3-75
3-10-75
3-17-75
3-31-75
4-7-75
4-14-75
4-21-75
4-49-75
5-5-75
5-12-75
5-19-75
5-27-75
6-1-75
6-9-75
6-17-75
6-26-75
6-30-75
7-7-75
7-14-75
7-21-75
7-28-75
8-4-75
8-11-75
8-17-75
8-25-75
9-2-75
9-8-75
9-15-75
9-22-75
10-6-75
10-14-75
10-20-75
10-27-75
11-3-75
11-10-75
11-17-75
H-24-75
12-1-75
12-8-75
1-5-76
1-12-76
1-19-76
1-26-76
2-3-76
2-10-76
2-17-76
COLIFORM
GROUP
-0- ')
-0- /
-0- ^
-o- i
-0-
4
-0-
-0-
-0-
4
-0-
4
-0-
_-_
4
-0-
8
16
-0-
"°~ ^
8 \,
4 ^
12
4
12
272
16
4
520
52
52
96
4
8
48
44
240
-0-
12
4
-0-
32
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
DATE
2-23-76
3-1-76
3-8-76
COL1FO
GP.OUP
"I'O-" "
-0-
-0-
-------
Bacteria Data
Otter Tail Lake Outlet
Date/Coliform Density/100 ml (MFT)
C-4
2/25/69
3/7/69
3/11/69
3/20/69
3/26/69
4/2/69
4/8/69
4/15/69
4/22/69
4/29/69
5/6/69
5/13/69
5/20/69
5/27/69
6/3/69
6/10/69
6/17/69
6/24/69
7/1/69
7/9/69
7/14/69
7/22/69
7/27/69
8/4/69
8/11/69
8/18/69
8/26/69
9/7/69
9/17/69
9/22/69
9/29/69
10/7/69
10/9/69
10/21/69
0
0
0
0
4
20
0
1
0
1
-
-
0
4
9
34
46
12
-
46
15
68
59
72
87
-
-
41
800
0
0
20
100
100
10/28/69
11/4/69
11/11/69
11/19/69
11/25/69
12/3/69
12/8/69
12/16/69
12/30/69
1/6/70
1/13/70
1/20/70
1/27/70
2/2/70
2/9/70
2/17/70
2/2/3/70
3/2/70
3/9/70
3/16/70
3/24/70
3/30/70
4/6/70
4/13/70
4/20/70
4/27/70
5/4/70
5/11/70
5/18/70
5/25/70
6/1/70
6/8/70
6/15/70
6/22/70
6
-
0
8
-
0
0
-
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
5
0
0
100
0
2
1
20
2
2
6/29/70
7/7/70
7/13/70
7/20/70
7/27/70
8/5/70
8/11/70
8/17/70
8/24/70
8/31/70
9/8/70
9/14/70
9/21/70
9/28/70
10/5/70
10/12/70
10/19/70
10/26/70
11/2/70
11/9/70
11/17/70
11/23/70
11/30/70
12/7/70
12/15/70
12/21/70
12/28/70
1/4/71
1/11/71
1/18/71
1/25/71
2/1/71
2/7/71
2/16/71
0
0
0
8
140
-
260
2
40
-
130
24
36
70
40
30
80
40
0
6
28
10
0
0
0
100
80
10
0
10
0
0
0
0
-------
Date/Coliform Density/100 ml (MFT)
C-4
2/22/70
3/2/71
3/8/71
3/15/71
3/22/71
3/29/71
4/5/71
4/12/71
4/19/71
4/26/71
5/3/71
5/10/71
5/17/71
5/25/71
6/1/71
6/7/71
6/14/71
6/21/71
6/28/71
7/6/71
7/12/71
7/19/71
7/26/71
8/2/71
8/9/71
8/16/71
8/23/71
8/31/71
9/7/71
9/13/71
9/20/71
9/27/71
10/16/71
10/26/71
11/1/71
11/8/71
11/15/71
11/22/71
11/29/71
12/6/71
12/13/71
12/20/71
0
20
0
0
0
20
0
-
30
0
240
0
10
70
20
0
0
10
30
30
40
0
60
55
20
30
170
230
80
50
40
40
20
40
30
0
220
10
60
40
10
4
12/27/71
1/3/72
1/10/72
1/18/72
1/24/72
1/31/72
2/7/72
2/14/72
2/22/72
2/28/72
3/6/72
3/13/72
3/20/72
3/27/72
4/4/72
4/10/72
4/17/72
4/24/72
5/1/72
5/8/72
5/15/72
5/22/72
5/30/72
6/5/72
6/12/72
6/19/72
6/22/72
7/5/72
7/10/72
7/17/72
7/24/72
7/31/72
8/7/72
8/14/72
8/21/22
8/28/72
9/5/72
9/11/72
9/18/72
9/25/72
10/2/72
10/10/72
10/16/72
36
4
-
900
-
4
-
24
24
0
24
0
24
0
8
0
4
4
132
64
128
48
-
130
60
88
-
TNTC
310
136
360
250
.150
TNTC
390
136
50
29
50
412
70
40
68
10/24/72
10/30/72
11/6/72
11/13/72
11/20/72
11/27/72
12/4/72
12/11/72
12/18/72
12/26/72
1/3/73
1/8/73
1/16/73
1/22/73
1/29/73
2/6/73
2/13/73
2/20/73
2/26/73
3/5/73
3/12/73
3/19/73
3/26/73
4/2/73
4/9/73
4/17/73
4/24/73
4/30/73
5/8/73
5/15/73
5/22/73
5/29/73
6/5/73
6/11/73
6/19/73
6/26/73
7/3/73
7/10/73
7/17/73
7/23/73
7/30/73
8/6/73
8/13/73
10
160
4
30
60
0
0
40
10
10
60
16
0
0
4
0
0
20
0
20
90
100
10
120
80
80
120
108
80
100
50
28
40
600
60
160
600
460
370
120
512
320
360
-------
U5
V
ts
513
IJ J)
0_j
-JU
> Ik
i£
UJ Ul
1AI
9
X
cote*/*$//**»I frcrji* falls
MODJ-.L
DATE
C-4
I
looooco -----
100000
r -
O
3
••j
*
10000
1000 fr;~r-7-
100
10
i:f.
T :"•
.[..p.
I'll
n
! i
........ --
-ti
. .1...
..!_
-4-
nn
......
1 I
TT-T • ;
i
i! !
i
• t
-:!• ;!;;
.J.,.j.
i'.i
rr
....... t
.!..4_i_4.
riTr
±j±m
j ! !
-•)"'•-*•
:.]:. -
, p
-f..i [
i i I
f '"j
*
; •)•
rr
-i
rmrr
! I I
Lf +
tttt
_L '.I u-_L4
* ' J
-4t
.).._.
33
i !
±±t
:xt|it:
._u_r_i.
'LI
rrr
J I '
„._
i-M—
,,-4-1
-U-
.1
•H-
.4.;. ..
: r
H
1
H4--
-ti:::
:i±i±
H4-H
-H-l-r
4-ri-f
i:rt:Ltr:r-tr
4_L.Lj._l_i.4..i. L-!
..4-^.|_ut.|_l4. I
Sff" :
^ i i
z
fff-H
rti
rV-l-H— -
T't
1
.. -i..|—t ;-
,.;..t:
i- t-
* 7 V V '- J S - '
fi&
-------
MOOEI.
C-4
DATH
10000:
100000
I- • - - •
|_ : •
|
i
1
\ --- •
I • ;
r
^_ - !
.
. -;-!
[:.-.:
j.
t
! ' . ; .
,_. .. .
.. ,. . . . _ i
: • r .
4
\ -
f~ i— 1
' • * r
L ' : •
' •
* ' r :
i i
I ... . ,_ . L . . ,
. 1 .
" •• r : i
•- ™ -• ; - ' ; f •' •
i - ^
Fi \
r ; " ; ; ' '
i
• i j
: : !
r - - ... - j - . -
'-" - - : - r • -
, - - - - " " "•; -r —
., i _ :. l..\. .
. , : 1 ;
rr - i r i---~
i ' • • ' :
;... . - i .:. i- :. .. ; i. .......
. 1 : , i . , ;
,' '" ; r"'"" ' •; -•;- 1 ' "
. ... _[ :..! i .:J. ._ • : .
. - r • i • • r •:••
.!.:• ;'|:! |i-
1 : : ! •
1 - ' ' •
-:-.:..-+ '-ii^— --I:-—
r-".-: [--" ' —
r •
: ' r ' T i . , . j •
T -'~T: '. I"'' • ""• ' ~'
~r: f-r: n (-- •;• -;
T" r"; r[n-- ;•; -;T
; : '^L _;
L.-4- .- l ,.._...}..-.. .. .._ -. ...
i i . : :
'.it-. 1 -' L ' . . ^ ' *
* ^^ ^^_ i ' ' '
'• ' > : i 1 ; ' ' : • :
» : ' ' 1 ' ' 1
r ._ . — [T .. .r_..-. .. -H T ._.T7- -•: -
• • j : ^ ' ' • ' ' •
• ' ' . 1 L ** '
'. 'M:| .. t
: :••*'•• i • '•; 1
:. . j_- ... :_. . .»„_!_ .
• - • | j . •
'!...:. j . .
......... .._.....,..
• ' -: : - . . ;-L f . . : . . . u
i . i ,' f
' • • • r .- •• r
1 '• ' ' : •
\ 1 i : . • •
i [ ' : i '
: .. .... , 1 . ... . ; . :
- - • -• -•- : - [1T"J
1 ' _ j :
: • : • " -!-•••; • r •• - ] r • •.
L ; . '..' . : ....: .. .:...L: :..
: ' f ' ' • ' • i !
;; • i . ::;| .:.. :n|
i. - - _-l •-. . . .L .-4-..
' ' '--''• 1 -- . ' 1
1 _ .L . J._. ;. '
' I I ' ' : r . ' : ! r • i '! •- i : T
:"" i. ..L. ILL' •_> LI : i.
'~ ; ". : • , • r : ! • !' ; ; I
1 L j. i . . . : -L_. 1..: '4. 4-..
: i ' ' j | ! ! ' ! ' ; i
; . : ' : ' . : iij
i ; i ' ' .: : : : :
r - - : • • ' . r T ' , i . T . .
•-•[:-- j ' . i , | . . • , • i
' r" •:••--•' t ; :-| • - • < i , i -
i !•[••. Ill;
t • . 1 . ! i | j
. : T. . . r " i ''''[' ] ' ' ^
• — i • • •• • ; • |. ... -...|.. ........ j- -..i_!--j .
• r H ' ' • • ; r ; r ' •
'•>T ' •-, ^T!"," ~ r : " "'trr
i.. _ '. ._; .'- — '.-'._ 1 .
•-r \- ------- -..--...{- ^-^ 4 -• ••-;-(- i •-•] — — T7"
T I ' • ' • : • i • :
- I • • ; ' i ' i . ' '• : ""! r : :
.-; -•- -|-fflr ; : • r, [ r-
. . . i , L ; :.|. : .:.! L
• .' , i ; ' j . 1 , i f
- |- • • - • | •- i •: [•• ; '
: L - . - •• ..;.,.:. r : . :...[.-
1 ' ... J-...1 : . .;...:. I.-.
I .'. V-1'1 " "" . '
• ' T— r • - •
...'j :
L:
r"" !••" "' - .' "
.-•-,-• i . • -
• * . .* . '
' , . f ; ? ! .
: ' i
i • 1
— r-j— -. - - •-
., • •• 1 i ;
. i . r j ..L.i .r. .:. j
.-' 1..I ^ 1 ; • I
; M _: I"1 ! i
• i i
• M i : .
.......:..j_L.i .. .,
. • ! I
' ' I '
.J-4-j.j. • • L
i ! ; i •
:' • , •
.';i..JL'i . i' , :
r_"": i~~ i ~"T ';"" "
;•:•'.
L ' ! : 1 7 i
. . :.._ ..p.....^ 1
:rrt ; : : •"
• ' L ' ' *
i ; i i
. • L i • i :
-- - r-i [ 'f'--- -
. .|.i. .; .. .
. : !.-: . : !. :. .
10 ;-—
i._ i
-------
APPENDIX
C-5
SEASONAL AND LONG-TERM CHANGES IN LAKE WATER QUALITY
Seasonal changes of temperature and density in lakes are best described
using as an example a lake in the temperate zone which freezes over in
winter. When ice coats the surface of a lake, cold water at 0 C lies in
contact with ice, above warmer and denser water between 0 and 4 C.
With the coming of spring, ice melts and the waters are mixed by wind.
Shortly, the lake is in full circulation, and temperatures are approximately
uniform throughout (close to 4 C). With further heating from the sun and
mixing by the wind, the typical pattern of summer stratification develops.
That is, three characteristic layers are present: (1) a surface layer of
warm water in which temperature is more or less uniform throughout; (2) an
intermediate layer in which temperature declines rapidly with depth; and
(3") a bottom layer of cold water throughout which temperature is again
more or less uniform. These three layers are termed epilimnion, metalim-
nion (or thermocline), and hypolimnion, respectively. The thermocline
usually serves as a barrier that eliminates or reduces mixing between the
surface water and the bottom water.
In late summer and early fall, as the lake cools in sympathy with its
surroundings, convection, currents of cold water formed at night sink to find
their appropriate temperature level, mixing with warmer water on their way
down. With further cooling, and turbulence created by wind, the thermocline
moves deeper and deeper. The temperature of the epilimnion gradually
approaches that of the hypolimnion. Finally, the density gradient associated
with the thermocline becomes so weak that it ceases to be an effective barrier
to downward-moving currents. The lake then becomes uniform in temperature
indicating it is again well mixed. With still further cooling, ice forms
at the surface to complete the annual cycle.
The physical phenomenon described above has significant bearing on
biological and chemical activities in lakes on a seasonal basis. In
general, growth of algae, which are plants, in the epilimnion produces
dissolved oxygen and takes up nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorus
during the summer months. Algal growth in the hypolimnion_is limited
mainly because sunlight is insufficient. As dead algae settle gradually
from the epilimnion into the hypolimnion, decomposition of dead algae
depletes a significant amount of dissolved oxygen in the bottom water. At
the same time, stratification limits oxygen supply from the surface water
to the bottom water. As a result, the hypolimnion shows a lower level of
dissolved oxygen while accumulating a large amount of nutrients by the
end of summer. Then comes the fall overturn to provide a new supply of
dissolved oxygen and to redistribute the nutrients via complete mixing.
Over each annual cycle, sedimentation builds up progressively at the
bottom of the lake. As a result, this slow process of deposition of
sediments reduces lake depth. Because major nutrients enter the lake
along with the sediments, nutrient concentrations in the lake increase
over a long period of time. This aging process is a natural phenomenon
and is measured in hundreds or thousands of years, depending on specific
lake and watershed characteristics.
-------
C-5
Human activities, however, have accelerated this schedule considerably.
By populating the shoreline, disturbing soils in the watershed, and altering
hydrologic flow patterns, man has increased the rate of nutrient and sediment
loading to lakes. As a result, many of our lakes are now characterized by
a state of eutrophication that would not have occurred under natural
conditions for many generations. This cultural eutrophication can in some
instances be beneficial, for example by increasing both the rate of growth
of individual fish and overall fishery production. In most cases, however,
the effects of this accelerated process are detrimental to the desired uses
of the lake.
The eutrophication process of lakes is classified according to a relative
scale based on parameters such as productivity, nutrient levels, dissolved
oxygen, and turbidity in the lake water. Lakes with low nutrient inputs
and low productivity are termed oligotrophic. Dissolved oxygen levels in
the hypolimmion of these lakes remain relatively high throughout the year.
Lakes with greater productivity are termed mesotrophic and generally have
larger nutrient inputs than oligotrophic lakes. Lakes with very high pro-
ductivity are termed eutrophic and usually have high nutrient inputs.
Aquatic plants and algae grow excessively in the latter lakes, and algal
blooms are common. Dissolved oxygen may be depleted in the hypolimnion of
eutrophic lakes during the summer months.
-------
APPENDIX
C-6
EFFLUENT STANDARDS
The general effluent standards for intrastate waters are included in
the provisions of paragraph (C)(6) of WPC 14 and outlined as follows:
Substance or Characteristics
5-Day Biochemical Oxygen
Demand
Fecal coliform group
organisms
Total suspended solids
Pathogenic organisms
Oil
Phosphorus**
Turbidity
pH range
Unspecified toxic or corrosive
substances
Limiting Concentration or Range*
25 milligrams per liter
200 most probable number per 100
milliliters
30 milligrams per liter
None
Essentially free of visible oil
1 milligram per liter
25
6.5-8.5
None at levels acutely toxic to
humans or other animals or
plant life, or directly damag-
ing to real property.
In addition to providing secondary treatment as defined above, all discharges
of sewage, industrial wastes or other wastes also shall provide the best
practicable control technology not later than July 1, 1977, and best available
technology economically achievable by July 1, 1983, and any other applicable
treatment standards as defined by, and in accordance with the requirements
and schedules of, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251
et. seq., as amended, and applicable regulations or rules promulgated pursuant
thereto by the Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
-------
APPENDIX
C-7
NON-POINT SOURCE MODELING - OMERNIK'S MODEL
Because so little data was available on non-point source runoff in
the Study Area, which is largely rural, empirical models or statistical
methods have been used to derive nutrient loadings from non-point
sources. A review of the literature led to the selection of the model
proposed by Omernik (1977). Omernik's regression model provides a quick
method of determining nitrogen and phosphorus concentrations and loading
based on use of the land. The relationship between land use and
nutrient load was developed from data collected during the National
Eutrophication Survey on a set of 928 non-point source watersheds.
Omernik's data indicated that the extent of agricultural and
residential/urban land vs. forested land was the most significant
parameter affecting the influx of nutrient from non-point sources. In
the US, little or no correlation was found between nutrient levels and
the percentage of land in wetlands, or range or cleared unproductive
land. This is probably due to the masking effects of agricultural and
forested land.
Use of a model which relates urban/residential and agricultural
land use to nutrient levels seems appropriate where agricultural and/or
forest make up the main land-use types.
The regression models for the eastern region of the US are as
follows:
Log P = 1.8364 + 0.00971A + op Log 1.85 (1)
Log N = 0.08557 + 0.00716A - 0.00227B + o^ Lot 1.51 (2)
where:
P = Total phosphorus concentration - mg/1 as P
N = Total nitrogen concentration - mg/1 as N
A = Percent of watershed with agricultural plus urban land use
B = Percent of watershed with forest land use
op = Total phosphorus residuals expressed in standard deviation
units from the log mean residuals of Equation (1). Determined
from Omernik (1977), Figure 25.
a,. = Total nitrogen residuals expressed in standard deviation units
from the log mean residuals of Equation (2) . Determined from
Omernik (1977), Figure 27.
1.85 = f, multiplicative standard error for Equation 1.
-------
C-7
1.51 = f, multiplicative standard error for Equation (2).
The 67% confidence interval around the estimated phosphorus or
nitrogen consideration can be calculated as shown below:
Log PL = Log P + Log 1.85 (3)
Log NL = Log N + Log 1.51 (4)
where:
P, = Upper and lower values of the 67% phosphorus confidence limit -
mg/1 as P
The 67% confidence limit around the estimated phosphorus or
nitrogen concentrations indicates that the model should be used for
purposes of gross estimations only. The model does not account for any
macro-watershed* features peculiar to the Study Area.
-------
C-7
SIMPLIFIED ANALYSIS OF LAKE EUTROPHICATION
Introduction
Two basic approaches to the analysis of lake eutrophication. have
evolved:
1) A complex lake/reservoir model which simulates the
interactions occurring within ecological systems; and
2) the more simplistic nutrient loading model which relates the
loading or concentration of phosphorus in a body of water to
its physical properties.
From a scientific standpoint, the better approach is the complex
model; with adequate data such models can be used to accurately
represent complex interactions of aquatic organisms and water quality
constituents. Practically speaking, however, the ability to represent
these complex interactions is limited because some interactions have not
been identified and some that are known cannot be readily measured.
EPAECO is an example of a complex reservoir model currently in use. A
detailed description of this model has been given by Water Resources
Engineers (1975).
In contrast to the complex reservoir models, the empirical nutrient
budget models for phosphorus can be simply derived and can be used with
a minimum of field measurement. Nutrient budget models, first derived
by Vollenweider (1968) and later expanded upon by him (1975), by Dillon
(1975a and 1975b) and by Larsen - Mercier (1975 and 1976), are based
upon the total phosphorus mass balance. There has been a proliferation
of simplistic models in eutrophication literature in recent years
(Bachmann and Jones, 1974; Reckhow, 1978). The Dillon model has been
demonstrated to work reasonably well for a broad range of lakes with
easily obtainable data. The validity of the model has been demonstrated
by comparing results with data from the National Eutrophication Survey
(1975). The models developed by Dillon and by Larsen and Mercier fit
the data developed by the NES for 23 lakes located in the northeastern
and northcentral United States (Gakstatter e_t a_l 1975) and for 66 bodies
of water in the southeastern US (Gakstatter and~Allum 1975). The Dillon
model (1975b) has been selected for estimation of eutrophication
potential for Crystal Lake and Betsie Lake in this study.
Historical Development
Vollenweider (1968) made one of the earliest efforts to relate
external nutrient loads „ to eutrophication. He plotted annual total
phosphorus loadings (g/ra /yr) against lake mean depth and empirically
determined the transition between oligotrophic, mesotrophic and
eutrophic loadings. Vollenweider later modified his simple loading mean
depth relationship to include the mean residence time of the water so
that unusually high or low flushing rates could be taken into account.
-------
C-7
Dillon (1975) further modified the model to relate mean depth to a
factor that incorporates the effect of hydraulic retention time on
nutrient retention.
The resulting equation, used to develop the model for trophic
status, relates hydraulic flushing time, the phosphorus loading, the
phosphorus retention ratio, the mean depth and the phosphorus
concentration of the water body as follows:
L (1-R) = zP
P
2
where: L = phosphorus loading (gm/m /yr.)
R = fraction of phosphorus retained
p = hydraulic flushing rate (per yr.)
z = mean depth (m)
P = phosphorus concentration (mg/1)
The graphical solution, shown in Figure E-4-a, is presented as a
log-log plot of L (1-R) versus z.
P
The Larsen-Mercier relationship incorporates the same variables as
the Dillon relationship.
In relating phosphorus loadings to the lake trophic condition,
Vollenweider (1968), Dillon and Rigler (1975) and Larsen and Mercier
(1975, 1976) examined many lakes in the United States, Canada and
Europe. They established tolerance limits of 20/ug/l phosphorus above
which a lake is considered eutrophic and 10 mg/1 phosphorus above which
a lake is considered mesotrophic.
Assumptions and Limitations
The Vollenweider-Dillon model assumes a steady state, completely
mixed system, implying that the rate of supply of phosphorus and the
flushing rate are constant with respect to time. These assumptions are
not totally true for all lakes. Some lakes are stratified in the summer
so that the water column is not mixed during that time. Complete steady
state conditions are rarely realized in lakes. Nutrient inputs are
likely to be quite different during periods when stream flow is minimal
or when non-point source runoff is minimal. In addition, incomplete
mixing of the water may result in localized eutrophication problems in
the vicinity of a discharge.
Another problem in the Vollenweider-Dillon model is the inherent
uncertainty when extrapolating a knowledge of present retention
coefficients to the study of future loading effects. That is to say,
due to chemical and biological interactions, the retention coefficient
may itself be dependent on the nutrient loading.
The Vollenweider/Dillon model or simplified plots of loading rate
versus lake geometry and flushing rates can be very useful in describing
the general trends of eutrophication in lakes during the preliminary
-------
FIGURE 1
C-7
I I II
10.0
MEAN DEPTH (METERS)
L= AREAL PHOSPHORUS INPUT (g/m^yr)
R= PHOSPHORUS RETENTION COEFFICIENT (OIMENSIONLESS)
P- HYDRAULIC FLUSHING RATE (yr"1)
100.0
-------
C-7
planning process. However, if a significant expenditure of monies for
nutrient control is. at stake, a detailed analysis to calculate the
expected phytoplankton biomass must be performed to provide a firmer
basis for decision making.
-------
APPENDIX D
SEPTIC TANK DESIGN STANDARDS
-------
OFFICE OF SIIORELAND MANAGEMENT
COUNTY OF OTTER TAIL
Fergus Falls, Minnesota 56537
Phone 218—739-2271
—MINIMUM SHORELAND ORDINANCE STANDARDS—
APPF.NDTX n
—LAKE OR STREAM CLASSIFICATION—
Land Height Above High Water Mark at
Building Site ....
Building Set Back From State Highway
Building Set Back from Roads and Streets
N E
Natural
Environment
, . . 30 000 Sq Ft .
200 Ft
200 Ft
3 Ft
50 Ft
40 Ft.
R D
Recreational
Development
40 000 Sq Ft
150 Ft
100 Ft
3 Ft
50 Ft
40 Ft.
C D
General
Development
20 000 Sq. Ft
100 Ft
75 Ft
3 Ft.
50 Ft.
40 Ft.
R S
River and
Stream
40 000 Sq Ft
200 Ft
75 Ft
3 Ft
50 Ft
40 Ft.
Side Yard Minimums for all Classes of Lakes and Rivers:
1 Ft.-59 Ft. — 10% of Building Line
60 Ft.-69 Ft. — 12% of Building Line
70 Ft.-79 Ft. — 14% of Building Line
SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS: (Also see Note A on reverse side)
SEPTIC TANK (A Sealed Tank)
Mimimum Distance from Nearest Well
Minimum Distance from Occupied Building
Minimum Distance from Lake or Stream ...
Minimum Distance from Property Line
ABSORPTION SYSTEM (Drain Field, Cesspool, etc.)
Minimum Distance from Seepage Pit to Well .
Minimum Distance from Drain Field to Well .
Minimum Distance from Lake or Stream
Minimum Distance from Occupied Building ...
Minimum Distance from Property Line
Minimum Distance from Bottom of Absorption
System to Ground Water Table (Vertical) .
80 Ft.-89 Ft. — 16% of Building Line
90 Ft.-99 Ft. — 18% of Building Line
100 Ft. or more - 20 Feet
50 Ft.
10 Ft.
150 Ft.
10 Ft.
75 Ft.
50 Ft.
150 Ft.
20 Ft.
10 Ft.
4 Ft.
50 Ft.
10 Ft.
75 Ft.
10 Ft.
75 Ft.
50 Ft.
75 Ft.
20 Ft.
10 Ft.
4 Ft.
50 Ft.
10 Ft.
50 Ft.
10 Ft.
75 Ft.
50 Ft.
50 Ft.
20 Ft.
10 Ft.
4 Ft.
50 Ft.
10 Ft.
50 Ft.
10 Ft.
75 Ft.
50 Ft.
50 Ft.
20 Ft.
10 Ft.
4 Ft.
Building and Sewage System Permits are required.
Special Use Permits are required for grading, filling,
and commercial ventures in shoreland use areas.
(See Shoreland Management Ordinance for Details).
T)
-------
NOTE A
Septic tank and soil absorption or similar r.ysteros shall not be acceptable for disposal of domestic sewage for developments
on lots adjacent to public waters under the following circumstances:
1. Low swampy areas or areas subject to recurrent flooding.
2. Areas where ground water table is within four feet of the bottom of soil absorption system.
3. Area of bedrock where conditions restrict percolation of effluent.
4. Area of critical slope conditions as follows:
Percolation Rate (minutes) Critical Slope
Less than
3
3 to 45
45 to 60
20% or more
15% or more
10% or more
ABSORPTION AREA REQUIREMENTS FOR PRIVATE RESIDENCES AND OTHER ESTABLISHMENTS
Required absorption area in square feet
standard trench and seepage pit.
Percolation Rate (time required
for water to fall 1 inch in
minutes)
1 or less
2
3
4
5
10
15 ,
30-* ,
45 -^
60
*Per Bedroom
70
85
100
115
125
165
190
250
300
330
Per gallon of
waste per day
.70
.85
1.00
1.15
1.25
1.65
1.90
2.50
3.00
3.30
*Per Bedroom column provides for Residential Garbage Grinders and Automatic Sequence Washing Machines.
1. Absorption area for standard trenches is figures as trench-bottom area.
2. Absorption area for seepage is figures as effective side-wall area beneath the inlet.
3. In every case sufficient area should be provided for at least two bedrooms.
It. Unsuitable for seepage pits? if over 30.
5. Unsuitable for absorption systems if over 60.
*For more detailed Information see Shoreland Management Ordinance, Otter Tail County, Minnesota.
MALCOLM K. LES, Administrator
-------
APPENDIX E
BIOTA
-------
INVENTORY OF FISHES FOUND
IK THE OTTER TAIL LAKE STUDY AREA
APPENDIX
E-l
Game Fish
Whitefish (Coregonus clupeaformls)
Cisco (Leucichthys artedii tullibee)
Muskelunge (Esox maBquinongy)
Northern Pike (Esox lucius)
Walleye (Stizostedion vitreum)
Pumpkinseed (Lepomls gibbosus)
Bluegill (Lepomls macrochirus)
Rock Bass (Ambloplites rupestris)
Yellow Perch (Perca flavescens)
Largemouth Bass (Micropterus salmoides)
Smallmouth Bass (Micropterus dolemieul)
Trout-Perch (Percopis omiscamaycus)
Brown Bullhead (Ictalurus nebulosus)
Black Bullhead (Ictalurus melas)
Yellow Bullhead (Icta^urus natalis)
Whitefish (Coregonus clupeaformis)
Green Sunfish (LepomiB cyanellus)
Hybrid Sunfish (Lepomis sp.)
Black Grapple (Pomoslx nigromaculatus)
Forage Fish
Northern Mimic Shiner (Notropis volucellus)
Homeyhead Chub (Hybopsis biguttata)
Western Golden Shiner (Notemigonus crysoleucas)
Common Shiner (Notropis eornutus)
Bigmouth Shiner (Notropis dorsalis)
Blackchin Shiner (Notropis heterodon)
Bluntnose Minnow (Pimephales notatus)
Northern Logperch (Percina caprodes)
Western Banded Killifish (Fundulus diaphanue)
Blackside Darter (Percina maculata)
Johnny Darter (Etheostoma nigrum)
Iowa Darter (Etheostoma exile)
Rough Fish
White Sucker (Catostomus commersoni)
Common Sucker (Catostomus commersoni)
Shorthead Redhorae (Moxostoma maerolepidotum)
Dogfish (Amia calva)
Carp (Cyprinus carpio)
Bowfin (Amia calva)
If a given species is not listed as being present in a lake during these particular
surveys, that does not necessarily mean the species does not exist in that lake.
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Fish and Wildlife Survey Unit,
1957-1975.
01
.*
a
,j
i— <
•H
to
I-
J_|
0)
4_l
o
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
l-<
f— t
^^
0
a
,J
0!
V*
ia
3
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Source:
-------
DOMINANT SPECIES OF AQUATIC VEGETATION
IN THE LAKES OF THE STUDY AREA
APPENDIX
E-2
Sago pondweed (Potomogeton pectlnatus)
Floating real pondweed (Potamogeton natans)
Flatstem pondweed (Potamogeton zosteriformis)
Clasping real pondweed (Potamogeton Richardsonii)
Bushy pondweed (Najas cf. flexilis)
Hardstern bulrush (Scirpis acutus)
Cattail (Typha latifolia)
Sedge (Cyperuss sp.)
Wild rice (Zizania sp.)
Muskgrass (Chara sp.)
White water lily (Nymphaea sp.)
Yellow water lily (Nuphar sp.)
Blatterwort (Utricularia vulgaris)
Water milfoil (MyrlophyHum sp.)
Arrowhead (Sagittaria sp.)
Bulrush (Scirpus validus)
Coontail (Ceratophyllum sp.)
Bluegreen Algae (Splrogyra)
0)
n)
to
H
0)
.e
o
c
cfl
rH
«
Q)
•s
CO
•J
S-i
(U 0)
1 1 **>,
4-J Cd
O tJ
X X
X
X X
X
X
A
X
X X
I
X
X
A
X
X
X
A
X
(U
rH
Cfl
X
X
X
A
X
X
X
A
X
X
X
X
X
X
A = Abundant
X = Present
Source: Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Fish and Wildlife
Survey Unit, 1957-1975.
-------
APPENDIX
E-3
Waterfowl Species List For Ottertai 1-i
Long-> Walker-, Blanchi Deeri and Round
Lakes and Immediate Vicinity.
SPRING SUfiriER FALL
SPECIES MIGRATION BREEDING HIGRATION
Common Loon C C C
Western Greb
-------
APPENDIX
E-4
TREES OF THE OTTER TAIL LAKE STUDY AREA
Red Oak (Quercus rubra)
White Oak (Quercus alba)
Bur Oak (Quercus macrocarpa)
Hickory (Carya sp.)
Sugar Maple (Acer saccharum)
Red Maple (Acer rubrum)
Basswood (Tilia americana)
Aspen (Populus grandidentata)
Cottonwood (Populus deltoides)
Paper Birch (Bctula papyrifera)
Black Ash (Fraxinus nigra)
Green Ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica)
Box Elder (Acer negundo)
Hackberry (Celtis occidentalis)
Black Cherry (Prunus serotina)
Ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana)
Butternut (Juglans cinerea)
American Elm (Ulmus americana)
White Pine (Pinus strobus)
Red Pine (Pinus resinosa)
Jack Pine (Pinus banksiana)
White Spruce (Picea glauca)
Black Spruce (Picea mariana)
-------
EBaOseam B0±r (flfthtfeeae
TSaaaasas&. ((paarHac
StcuntxEe: (^y ttedleq^korai, Mfe. WtflMifaBn Bsaitiit,,
-------
APPENDIX
E-5
MAMMALS AND BIRDS—OTTER TAIL LAKE REGION, OTTER TAIL COUNTY
Note: This appendix was prepared by Mr. Gary Otnes, of Fergus Falls,
Minnesota, from his personal files and observations from in-
formation provided by the West Central Bird Club, and from the
references noted below.
-------
E-5
UPLAND GAME BIRD SPECIES LIST
FOR AMOR, OTTER TAIL, EVERTS AND
GIRARD TOWNSHIPS
Ring-Necked Pheasant—Occasional
Hungarian Partridge—Occasional
Ruffed Grouse—Common
Greater Prairie Chicken—Rare
American Woodcock—Common
Common Snipe—Common
Source: Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, 1978.
-------
E-5
MAMMALS - OTTER TAIL LAKE REGION, OTTER TAIL COUNTY
Star Nosed Mole -
Masked Shrew -
Arctic Shrew -
Northern Water Shrew -
Short-tailed Shrew -
Little Brown Bat -
Silver Haired Bat -
Big Brown Bat -
Red Bat -
Hoary Bat -
Raccoon -
Ermine -
Long-tailed Weasel -
Least Weasel -
Mink -
Badger -
Striped Skunk -
Red Fox -
Gray Fox -
Woodchuck -
Thirteen-lined Ground
Squirrel -
Eastern Chipmunk -
Red Squirrel -
Gray Squirrel -
Fox Squirrel -
Southern Flying Squirrel -
Plains Pocker Gopher -
Deer Mouse -
Woodland Deer Mouse -
White Footed Mouse -
Southern Bog Lemming -
Southern Red-backed Vole -
Meadow Vole -
Muskrat -
Meadow Jumping Mouse -
White-tailed Jack-Rabbit -
Eastern Cottontail -
White-tailed Deer -
Condylura cristata
Sorex cinereus
Sorex arcticus
Sorex palustris
Blarina brevicauda
Myotis lucifugus
Lasionycteris noctivagans
Eptesicus fuscus
Lasiurus borcalis
Lasiurus cinereus
Procyon lotor
Mustela erminea
Mustela Erenata
Mustela nivalis
Mustela vison
Taxidea taxus
Mephitis mephitis
Vulpes vulpes
Urocyon cinereoargenteus (rare)
Marmota monax
Spermophilus tridecemlineatus
Tamias striatus
Tamiasciurus hudsonicus
Sciurus carolinensis
Sciurus niger
Glaucomys volans
Geomys bursarius
Peromyscus maniculatus
Subspecies of above
Peromyscus leucopus
Synaptomys cooperi
Clethrionomys gapperi
Microtus pennsylvanicus (very abundant)
Ondatra zibethicus
Zapus hudsonius
Lepus townsendii
Sylvilagus floridanus
Odocpileus virginianus
Others which could show up in the area but have not been observed include:
Bobcat, Franklin's and Richardson's Ground Squirrels, Snowshoe Hare, Spot-
ted Skunk, Keen's Myotis, Coyote, and Moose.
Source: Burt, William H. MAMMALS OF THE GREAT LAKES REGION, 1967.
Michigan; University of Michigan.
Orr, Robert T. VERTEBRATE BIOLOGY, 1967. Pennsylvania; W.B.
Saunders Company.
Jones, J.K., Jr., D.C. Carter, and H.H. Genoways. 1975. Revised
checklist of North American Mammals North of Mexico. Occasional
Paper No. 28, The Museum, Texas Tech. University, 14pp.
-------
E-5
REPTILES AND AMPHIBIANS - OTTER TAIL LAKE REGION
American Toad -
TOADS
Bufo americanus
Pickerel Frog -
Northern Leopard Frog
Green Frog -
Gray Treefrog -
Ornate Chorus Frog -
Wood Frog -
Spring Peeper -
Garter Snake -
Bullsnake -
Redbelly Snake -
Eastern Hognose Snake
Western Hognose Snake
Smooth Greer. Snake -
Kingsnake -
Tiger Salamander -
Necturus (Mud Puppy) -
Western Painted Turtle
Snapping Turtle -
FROGS
Rana palustris
Rana pipiens
Rana clamitaus
Hyla versicolor
Pseudacris ornata
Rana sylvatica
Hyla crucifer
SNAKES
Thamnophis sirtalis
Pituophis melanoleucus
Storeria occipitomaculata
Heterodon platyrhinos
Heterodon nasicus
Opheodrys vernalis (rare)
Lampropeltis doliata (rare)
SALAMANDERS
Ambystoma tigrinum
Necturus maculosus
TURTLES
Chrysemys picta
Chelydra serpentina
LIZARDS
Other reptiles and amphibians which may occur include: Shortshell Turtle,
Blanding's Turtle, Box Turtle, Spotted Turtle, Wood Turtle, Jefferson
Salamander, and various Newts.
Source: Orr, Robert T. VERTEBRATE BIOLOGY, 1967.
W.B. Saunders Company.
Pennsylvania;
Vertebrate Taxonomy Class Research Project. FAUNA OF THE ST. CLOUD
REGION, 1967. Minnesota; St. Cloud St. University.
-------
E-5
RESIDENT BIRDS FOUND YEAR ROUND - some species are migratory, with a certain
percent remaining year round i.e., Blue Jay, Common Crow
Great Blue Heron - rare in winter
Mallard
Sharp-Shinned Hawk - rare in winter
Cooper's Hawk - rare in winter
American Kestrel - lesser numbers in winter
Ruffed Grouse
Ring-Necked Pheasant
Gray Partridge
Rock Dove (common pigeon)
Screech Owl
Great Horned Owl
Barred Owl
Long-Eared Owl - rare in winter
Belted Kingfisher - rare in winter near open winter
Common Flicker - rare in winter
Pileated Woodpecker
Red-Bellied Wood-
pecker - rare in winter
Hairy Woodpecker
Downy Woodpecker
Horned Lark
Blue Jay
Common Crow
Black-Capped Chicka-
dee - less common in summer
White-Breasted Nuthatch
Brown Creeper - rare in summer
Starling
House Sparrow
Pine Siskin - erratic from season to season
American Goldfinch
Dark Eyed Junco - rare in summer
Song Sparrow
RESIDENT MIGRATORY BIRDS DURING SPRING, SUMMER, FALL - KNOWN BREEDERS
Pied-Billed Grebe
Northern Green Heron
American Bittern
Canada Goose
Gadwall
Pintail
Blue-Winged Teal
Northern Shoveler
Wood Duck
Redhead
Ruddy Duck
-------
E-5
Red-Tailed Hawk
Sora
American Coot
Killdeer
Common Snipe
Forstar's Tern
Black Tern
Mourning Dove - also rarely found in winter in sheltered areas
Black-Billed Cuckoo
Common Nighthawk
Chimney Swift
Ruby-Throated Hummingbird
Red-Headed Woodpecker
Yellow Bellied Sapsucker
Eastern Kingbird
Western Kingbird
Great-Crested Flycatcher
Eastern Phoebe
Least Flycatcher
Eastern Wood Peewee
Tree Swallow
Bank Swallow
Rough-Winged Swallow
Barn Swallow
Cliff Swallow
Purple Martin
House Wren
Long-Billed Marsh Wren
Short-Billed Marsh Wren
Gray Catbird
Brown Thrasher
American Robin
Eastern Bluebird
Red-Eyed Vireo
Warbling Vireo
Yellow Warbler
Common Yellowthroat
Bobolink
Western Meadowlark
Yellow-headed Blackbird
Red-winged Blackbird
Northern Oriole
Common Crackle
Brown-Headed Cowbird
Rose-Breasted Grosbeak
Indigo Bunting
Savannah Sparrow
Swamp Sparrow
Vesper Sparrow
Chipping Sparrow
Clay-Colored Sparrow
Grasshopper Sparrow
-------
E-5
RESIDENT MIGRATORY BIRDS - SPRING, SUMMER, FALL - BREEDING PERSONALLY UNKNOWN
IN AREA, BUT LIKELY
Red-Necked Grebe
Least Bittern
Ring -Necked Duck
Canvasback
Broad-Winged Hawk
Marsh Hawk
Virginia Rail
Spotted Sandpiper
Alder Flycatcher
Veery
Cedar Waxwing - occasionally occurs in winter also
Yellow-Throated Vireo
American Redstart
Scarlet Tanager
Field Sparrow
RESIDENT MIGRATORY BIRDS - SPRING, SUMMER, FALL - BREEDING PERSONALLY UNKNOWN
IN AREA, BUT POSSIBLE
Common Loon
Western Grebe
Green-Winged Teal
Upland Sandpiper
Franklin's Gull - breeds in colonies that' shift location annually
Yellow-Billed Cuckoo
Short-Eared Owl
Ovenbird
Orchard Oriole
Loggerhead Shrike
Brewer's Blackbird
Eared Grebe
RESIDENT MIGRATORY BIRDS - SPRING, SUMMER, FALL - BREEDING PERSONALLY UNKNOWN
IN AREA, AND UNLIKELY
American Pigeon
Lesser Scaup
Common Goldeneye - much more common in winter
Hooded Merganser
Common Tern - somewhat rare in area
-------
E-5
RESIDENT MIGRATORY BIRDS - SPRING, SUMMER, PALL -r- BREED JAR FROM ASIA OR ARE
NONBREEDERS i.e. IMMATIJRES, BIRDS NESTING IN COLONIES ELSEWHERE, ETC.
White Pelican
Double-Crested Cormorant
Great Egret
Black-Crowned Night Heron
Osprey
Herring Gull
Ring-Billed Gull
MIGRATORY BIRDS - SPRING, PALL - NOT RESIDENT TO- AREA
Horned Grebe
Whistling Swan
White-Fronted Goose
Snow Goose
Bufflehead
Common Merganser
Red-Breasted Merganser
Golden Eagle
Bald Eagle
American Golden Plover
Black-Bellied Plover
Greater Yellowlegs
Lesser Yellowlegs
Pectoral Sandpiper
Bonaparte's Gull
Yellow-Bellied Flycatcher
Winter Wren
Hermit Thrush
Swainson's Thrush
Gray-Cheeked Thrush
Golden-Crowned Kinglet
Ruby-Crowned Kinglet
Water Pipit
Solitary Vireo
Philadelphia Vireo
Black-and-White Warbler
Tennessee Warbler
Orange-Crowned Warbler
Nashville Warbler
Magnolia Warbler
Yellow-Rumped Warbler
Black-Throated Green Warbler
Blackburnian Warbler
Chestnut-Sided Warbler
Bay-Breasted Warbler
Blackpoll Warbler
-------
E-5
Palm Warbler
Northern Waterthrush
Mourning Warbler
Wilson's Warbler
Canada Warbler
Rusty Blackbird
Rufous-Sided Towhee
Harris' Sparrow
White-Crowned Sparrow
White-Throated Sparrow
Fox Sparrow
Lincoln's Sparrow
Lapland Longspur
MIBRATORY BIRDS - SPRING, FALL - NOT YET IDENTIFIED IN AREA, BUT FOUND WITHIN
TWENTY MILE RADIUS IN SIMILIAR HABITAT - CAN BE EXPECTED IN AREA
Black Duck
White Winged Scoter
Surf Scoter
Ruddy Turnstone
Semipalmated Plover
Piping Plover
American Woodcock
Solitary Sandpiper
White-Rumped Sandpiper
Baird's Sandpiper
Least Sandpiper
Dunlin
Semipalmated Sandpiper
Western Sandpiper
Sanderling
Short-Billed Dowitcher
Long-Billed Dowitcher
Stilt Sandpiper
Marbled Godwit
Hudsonian Godwit
American Avocet
Wilson's Phalarope
Northern Phalarope
Whip-Poor-Will
WINTER VISITANT BIRDS NOT RESIDENT TO AREA - SOME ARRIVE IN LATE FALL AND
REMAIN UNTIL LATE WINTER
Snowy Owl
Great Gray Owl - extremely rare
Bohemian Waxwing
-------
E-5
Northern Shrike
Evening Grosbeak
Purple Finch
Pine Grosbeak
Hoary Redpoll
Common Redpoll
Red Crossbill - rare
White-Winged Crossbill
Tree Sparrow
Snow Bunting
Source: Bull, John and John Farrand, Jr. THE AUDUBON SOCIETY FIELD GUIDE
TO NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS, EASTERN REGION, 1977. New York; Alfred A. Knopf,
Inc.
Green, Janet C. and Robert B. Janssen. MINNESOTA BIRDS, WHERE WHEN, AND HOW
MANY, 1975. Minnesota; University of Minnesota Press
Peterson, Roger Tory. A FIELD GUIDE TO EASTERN LAND AND WATER BIRDS, 1947;
A FIELD GUIDE TO WESERN LAND AND WATER BIRDS, 1961. Both, Boston; Houghton
Mlfflln.
Roberst, Thomas S. A MANUAL FOR THE IDENTIFICATION OF THE BIRDS OF MINNESOTA
AND NEIGHBORING STATES, 1955. Minnesota; University of Minnesota Press
Robbins, Chandler S. Bertel Brunn, and Herbert S. Zim. BIRDS OF NORTH AMERICA,
1966. New York; Western Publishing Company, Inc.
-------
APPENDIX F
POPULATION PROJECTION METHODOLOGY
-------
APPENDIX
F
METHODOLOGY UTILIZED BY WAPORA TO DETERMINE EXISTING AND FUTURE
POPULATION AND DWELLING UNITS FOR THE OTTER TAIL SERVICE AREA
Table 1 gives population and dwelling unit equivalents for the proposed
Service Area for 1976 and the year 2000. They are presented for the service
area as a whole, and for the segments into which it was divided. The service
area consists of 35 segments in four townships (Amor, Everts, Girard, Otter
Tail) plus Otter Tail Village. The segments were delineated to structure the
Proposed Service Area in a way that enables on-site/cluster systems to be
designed and analyzed.
1976 POPULATION ESTIMATES
The 1976 population estimate for the Otter Tail Lake Proposed Service
Area was based on an analysis of aerial photography and information from
locally knowledgeable sources. The following information was obtained from
these sources:
• Dwelling unit equivalent count by subarea and segments (see Table F-l).
• Permanent and seasonal resident percentage breakdowns.
• Permanent and seasonal dwelling unit occupancy rates (persons/household)
Table F-l presents the results of the dwelling unit equivalent count and dis-
tinguishes between permanent and seasonal residences. Dwelling unit equiva-
lents in the Proposed Service Area consisted of residences, resorts, nursing
homes, trailer parks, stores, inns and restaurants. The 1976 Lakeshore
Directory* was used to classify each of these units identified by the aerial
photo.
Mr. Rundquist2 compiled the permanent/seasonal split for residences.
Based on these dwelling unit equivalents, a permanent and seasonal popu-
lation total for 1976 was derived by multiplying the permanent and seasonal
dwelling unit totals for each segment by their respective occupancy rates.
The occupancy rates were obtained through a telephone and correspondence sur-
vey with local sources knowledgeable about the area. The results of this
survey indicated that a 3.0 permanent and 5.0 seasonal occupancy rate were
appropriate for the population estimates in all subareas except Otter Tail
Village. For Otter Tail Village, occupancy rates of 2.0 for permanent units
and 5.0 for seasonal units were utilized. The population estimates derived
are indicated in Table F-l.
2000 POPULATION PROJECTIONS
The year 2000 permanent and seasonal baseline population projections
considered the three growth factors influencing future population levels in
the Otter Tail Lake Facilities Planning Area: 1) the rate of growth or de-
cline of the permanent population; 2) the rate of growth or decline of the
*1976 Lakeshore Directory - Otter Tail, Walker, Deer, Blanche, Round, and
Long Lakes, Lakeshore Directory Service, 1976.
2President, Otter Tail Lake Property Owners Association.
-------
seasonal population; and 3) the potential conversion of seasonal to permanent
dwelling units. The best available information regarding each of these fac-
tors was utilized and resulted in the following methodology and assumptions:
• All lots in the proposed service area that were found to be develop-
able in accordance with environmental constraints and the provisions
of the Otter Tail County Shoreland Management Ordinance were pro-
jected to be "built out" by 2000. The use of this "built out" assump-
tion was based on the rapid population growth rates in the four
townships and the high levels of residential construction activity
for the area reported in the C-40 Construction Reports. The addi-
tional consideration that nearly the entire Service Area consists
of desirable lakeshore or near-lake properties further supported
this assumption.
• The only exception to the assumption that the area would be built out
is Otter Tail Village, where, based on past population trends, it
was assumed that no population growth would occur during the planning
period.
• The number of nursing homes, commercial establishments and restaurants
was assumed to remain constant.
• The population increase attributed to the growth of resort areas was
determined by a telephone survey of resort owners. These anticipated
increases in resort population were translated into dwelling unit
equivalents and subtracted from the control total.
• The remaining increase in dwelling units was distributed across the
segments according to the number of developable lots in each segment.
• A conversion rate of approximately .5% per year was applied to exist-
ing seasonal residences to reflect the conversion of seasonal to
permanent units resulting from retirement age households. This re-
sulted in 100 seasonal units converted to permanent units during the
planning period.
• Smaller occupancy rates of 2.8 for permanent and 4.0 for seasonal
residences were used to transform the dwelling unit equivalents into
population totals. The smaller occupancy rates were used to reflect
the decline in family sizes projected to occur both nationally and
in rural areas of Minnesota.
Based on these assumptions and the methodology described above, populations
and dwelling unit equivalent projections for the year 2000 were developed for
each segment and subarea (Table F-2).
COMPARISON OF WAPORA, INC. . AND FACILITIES PLAN POPULATION PROJECTIONS
The Proposed Service Area population estimates and projections prepared
in the Otter Tail Facilities Plan were not utilized in this EIS for the follow-
ing reasons:
-------
• Permanent and seasonal dwelling units were not differentiated.
• Permanent and seasonal occupancy rates were not differentiated nor
where they reduced for the 2000 projections to reflect the trend
toward smaller family sizes.
• The growth rate in dwelling units projected in the Facilities Plan
is based on an unsupported linear extrapolation of current develop-
ment rates and does not consider anticipated development pressures.
• The Facilities Plan projection of new dwelling units does not con-
sider the restrictions on development imposed by natural constraints
and the Otter Tail County Shoreland Management Ordinance.
• The Facilities Plan estimates and projections did not provide a sub-
area or segment breakdown of where population growth would occur.
Based on these differences, the WAPORA, Inc. population estimate and projec-
tion for the Proposed Service Area differs from the Facilities Plan totals.
The WAPORA 1976 estimate (6,349 people) is .9% higher than the Facilities
Plan estimate of 6,288 people. The Facilities Plan population projections
(8,668 people by 1996) is higher than the WAPORA projection of 7,555 by nearly
15%.
-------
Table F-l
POPULATION AND DWELLING UNIT EQUIVALENTS FOR THE TOTAL, PERMANENT, AND SEASONAL POPULATION
OF THE PROPOSED OTTER TAIL LAKE SERVICE AREA (1976)
DWELLING UNIT EQUIVALENTS
TOWNSHIP 4
SEGMENT (
Amor
1
2
3
4
5
6
7 (part)
7a
21 (part)
33
Everts
21 (part)
22
24 (part)
25
26
27
28
29
30 & 32
31
34
Girard
23
24 (part)
Otter Tail
7 (part)
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21 (part)
Otter Tall
Village
TOTAL
(1) Nursing homes
Source: WAPORA,
t
453
74
93
66
49
8
64
50
38
8
3
467
59
2
53
37
74
0
40
34
70
35
63
60
37
23
378
20
17
13
8
74
52
29
8
22
21
26
11
17
26
34
82
1,440
; trailer
TOTAL
£
123
33
23
15
12
2
15
10
10
0
3
74
10
2
10
8
12
0
2
6
9
6
9
16
13
3
101
6
5
4
1
23
13
8
3
7
7
2
2
5
8
76
390
parks; stores;
RESIDENCES
8
330
41
70
51
37
6
49
40
28
8
0
393
49
0
43
29
62
0
38
28
61
29
54
44
24
20
277
14
12
9
7
51
39
21
5
15
14
•lit
9
12
7
26
6
1,050
Inns and
t
356
30
85
59
49
8
49
34
31
8
3
351
59
2
39
37
60
0
10
27
50
25
42
39
30
9
306
20
17
13
8
66
42
22
7
22
21
8
4
17
19
20
82
1,134
restaurants.
E
88
7
21
14
12
2
12
8
9
0
3
65
10
2
8
8
10
0
2
5
8
6
6
13
12
1
93
6
5
A
1
21
13
7
2
7
7
2
1
5
6
6
76
335
8
268
23
64
45
37
6
37
26
22
8
0
286
49
0
31
29
50
0
8
22
42
19
36
26
18
8
213
14
12
9
7
45
29
15
5
15
14
6
3
12
13
14
6
799
£
63
21
7
7
14
7
7
63
14
14
0
7
7
21
21
7
14
42
7
7
7
7
14
189
RESORTS
E
9
3
1
1
2
]
1
9
2
2
0
1
1
3
3
1
2
6
1
1
1
1
2
27
s
54
18
6
6
12
6
6
54
12
12
0
6
6
18
18
6
12
36
6
6
6
6
12
162
t
34
23
1
1
9
53
0
30
13
10
30
1
10
1
18
117
Code:
Inc., 1978.
OTHER"''
£ 1
26 8
23 0
1 0
1 0
1 8
0 53
0 0
0 30
0 13
0 10
2 28
1 0
0 10
1 0
0 18
28 89
t - total
p « permanent
s " seasonal
t
2,019
304
419
300
221
36
290
230
170
40
9
2,187
275
6
245
169
346
0
196
158
332
163
297
268
159
109
1,688
88
75
57
38
324
234
129
34
96
91
126
51
75
116
154
182
6,344
POPULATION
369
99
69
45
36
6
45
30
30
0
9
222
30
6
30
24
36
0
6
18
27
18
27
48
39
9
303
18
15
12
3
69
39
24
9
21
21
6
6
15
21
24
1.650
205
350
255
185
30
245
200
140
40
0
1,965
245
0
215
145
310
0
190
140
305
145
270
270
120
100
1,385
70
60
45
35
255
195
105
25
75
70
120
45
60
95
130
152
1,094
10
5,250
-------
Table F-2
POPULATION AND DWELLING UNIT EQUIVALENTS FOR THE TOTAL, PERMANENT, AND SEASONAL POPULATION
OF THE PROPOSED OTTER TAIL LAKE SERVICE AREA (2000)
TOWNSHIP &
SEGMENT i
Amor
1
2
3
It
5
6
7 (part)
7a
21 (part)
33
Everts
21 (part)
22
24 (part)
25
26
27
28
29
30 & 32
31
34
Cirard
23
24 (part)
Otter Tall
DWELLING Jffl IT EQUIVALENTS
TOTAL
Source: WAPORA, Inc., 1978.
t_
674
100
142
101
75
12
97
72
58
12
5
694
91
3
82
57
115
0
45
53
102
49
97
90
55
35
562
31
26
20
12
112
74
45
12
34
32
30
17
26
40
51
82
2.102
trailer
•nf 1071
TOTAL
£
213
42
46
30
24
4
27
18
16
1
5
158
723
3
20
18
25
0
4
13
20
12
20
27
23
4
192
12
10
8
3
42
26
15
4
14
14
3
3
10
U
15
76
666
parks; stores
(
RESIDENCES
3
461
58
96
71
51
8
70
54
42
11
0
536
68
0
62
39
90
0
41
40
82
37
77
63
32
31
370
19
16
12
9
70
48
30
8
20
18
27
14
16
27
36
6
1,436
t; inns and
t
544
46
130
90
75
12
75
52
47
12
5
543
91
3
60
57
93
0
15
42
78
39
65
59
45
14
468
31
26
20
12
100
64
34
11
34
32
12
6
26
29
31
82
1,706
restaurants.
£
178
15
44
29
24
4
25
16
15
1
5
147
23
3
18
18
23
0
4
12
19
12
15
25
22
3
183
12
10
8
3
40
26
14
3
14
14
3
2
10
12
12
76
609
B
376
31
86
61
51
8
50
36
32
11
0
396
68
0
42
39
70
0
n
30
59
27
50
34
23
11
285
19
16
12
9
60
38
20
8
20
18
9
4
16
17
19
6
1,087
t
96
31
11
11
21
11
11
98
22
22
H
11
11
32
31
10
21
64
11
11
11
11
20
289
RESORTS
£
9
4
1
1
1
1
1
11
2
2
1
1
1
5
2
1
1
7
1
1
1
1
3
29
ii
87
27
0
0
20
10
10
87
20
20
10
10
10
27
29
9
20
57
10
10
10
10
17
260
t^
34
23
1
1
9
53
0
30
13
10
30
1
10
1
18
117
Code:
OTHER1"
£
26
23
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
0
1
0
28
t - totnl
p «• permanent
s
8
0
0
0
8
53
0
30
13
10
28
0
10
0
18
89
244
350
513
368
271
43
356
266
213
47
14
2,586
336
9
304
206
430
0
175
196
384
182
364
328
192
135
2,019
110
92
70
45
398
265
162
43
119
nr
117
65
92
144
186
182
7,555
POPULATION
£
597
118
129
84
67
11
76
50
45
3
14
442
64
9
56
50
70
0
H
36
5.628
34
56
75
64
11
539
34
28
22
9
118
73
42
11
39
39
9
9
28
36
42
152
1,805
s
1,844
232
384
284
204
32
280
216
168
44
0
2,144
272
0
248
156
360
0
164
160
328
148
308
252
128
124
1,480
76
64
48
36
280
192
120
32
80
72
108
56
64
108
144
30
5,750
** seasonal
-------
APPENDIX G
LETTER FROM MICHLOVIC
-------
moor head state university
moor head, mnnesola 5656C
Department of Sociology and Anthropology
June 16, 1978
Mark Oakman
Wapora
6900 Wisconsin Ave. NW
Washington, D.C. 20015
Dear Mr. Oakman:
Earlier this week you phoned me about the possible impact
certain construction activity would have on archaeological
materials in the Lake Ottertail region of Minnesota. Based
on my own experience in the archaeology of western Minnesota,
and the Ottertail Lake area specifically, I would like to
offer the following comments. I hope they are of some use in
your evaluation of the environmental impact proposed construc-
tion activity might have.
During the summer of 1977 a crew from Moorhead State University,
directed by myself, conducted salvage operations at the Dead
River site, situated at the mouth of the Dead River on the north
shore of Ottertail Lake. Although the site was heavily dis-
turbed by modern occupations, an abundance of prehistoric arti-
facts and ecofacts were recovered, most of which related to a
Blackduck component dated to A.D. 885. Middle Woodland and
Initial Middle Missouri influences were also identified at the
site. These finds were somewhat surprising since our initial
expectations at Dead River were that we would find evidence of
a Kathio (Mille Lacs) occupation. The components at Dead River
represent an unusual southward extension of Blackduck, and a
northeastward penetration of a variant of the Initial Middle
Missouri tradition. Previous work around Ottertail at the
Morrison Mounds produced a Malmo component, extruded from the
east-central Minnesota region and a site at Maplewood Park,
northwest of the Lake, yielded evidence of a Kathio occupation
(a successor to Malmo in the Mille Lacs area) . • Since, a great
deal of archaeological-work has -not been done in the Ottertail
area, and since the few excavations conducted indicate a sur-
prising range of cultural materials, ±t is difficult to predict
exactly what archaeological resources are present. In my own
an equal opportunity employer
-------
page 2
opinion, large scale land disturbance activities would
certainly endanger more than a few culturally unique sites,
and many others that belong to cultures already known from
the region but which are only partially understood. I
rnicht also mention that this particular region of Minnesota
has a certain theoretical interest to prehistorians insofar
as it abuts two major environmental zones — the prairie to
the west and forests to the east. The kinds of cultural
adaptations effected by aboriginal populations in this sort
of situation can be of tremendous scientific value.
In sum, the Ottertail Lake region is quite rich archaeolog-
ically, and excavations in that area so far have provided a
complex picture of prehistoric cultural events and processes.
Until more sites are excavated and analysed it is likely that
additional site discoveries will continue to alter our under-
standing of the prehistory of the Ottertail area.
Sincerely,
Michael G. MichJovic
Assistant Professor,
Anthropology
-------
APPENDIX H
FLOW REDUCTION DEVICES
-------
APPENDIX
H-l
Incremental Capital Costs of Flow Reduction
in the Otter Tail Study Area
Dual-cycle toilets:
$20/toilec x 2 toilets/permanent dwelling x 666 permanent
dwellings in year 2000 = $26,640
$20/toilet x 1 toilet/seasonal dwelling x 1705 seasonal
dwellings in year 2000 = 34,120
Shower flow control insert device:
$2/shower x 2 shower/permanent dwelling x 555 permanent
dwellings in year 2000 = 2,664
$2/shower x 1 shower/seasonal dwelling x 1706 seasonal
dwellings in 2000 = 3,412
Faucet flow control insert device:
$3/faucet x 3 faucets/permanent dwelling x 666 permanent
dwellings in year 2000 = 5,994
$2/faucet x 2 faucets/seasonal dwelling x 1706 seasonal
dwellings in 2000 = 6,324
Total $79,654
Note: The $20 cost for dual-cycle toilets is the difference between
its full purchase price of $95 and the price of a standard toilet, $75,
-------
Flow Reduction and Cose Data for Water Saving Devices
APPENDIX
H-2
Device
Toilet modifications
Water displacement
device—plastic
bottles, bricks, etc.
Water damming device
Dual flush adaptor
Improved ballock
assembly
Daily
Conservation
(gpd)
10
30
25
20
Daily
Conservation
(hot water)
(gpd)
Useful
Installation Life_
Cost (yrs.)
Shower flow control
insert device
Alternative shower
equipment
Flow control shower, head
Shower cutoff valve
Thermostatic niixing
valve
19
19
0
0-
0-
3.25
4.CO
3.00
14
2.00
15.00
2.00
62.00
H-0"
H-0
H-0
H-0
H-0
B-0 or
13.80
H-0
13.30
15
20
10
10
Average
Annual
O&M
Alternative toilets
Shallow trap toilet
Dual cycle coilet
Vacuun toilet
Incinerator toilet
Organic waste treatment
system
Recycle toilet
Faucet modifications
Aerator
Flow control device
Alternative faucets
Foow control faucet
Spray tap faucet
Shower modification
30
60
90
100
100
100
1
4.3
4.8
7
0- 80.00 55.20
0- 95.00 55.20
0-
0
0
0
1 1.50 H-0
2.4 3.00 H-0
2. 4 40.00 20.70
3.5 56.50 20.70
20 0
0
15 0
13 0
0
15 0
d-0 " Homeowner-ins called; cose assumed to be zero.
-------
APPENDIX I
ON-SITE SYSTEMS
-------
APPENDIX
T-l
SUGGESTED PROCEDURES AND CRITERIA FOR
DESIGNING COLLECTOR SEWAGE SYSTEMS
(For Discussion at the 1978 Home Sewage Treatment Workshops)
Roger E. Machmeier
Extension Agricultural Engineer
University of Minnesota
1. For collector systems serving more than 15 dwellings or 5,000 gallons per
day, whichever is less, an application for a permit must be submitted to
the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. If the Agency does not act within
10 days upon receipt of the application, no permit shall be required.
2. A permit likely will be required by the local unit of government and they
should be involved in preliminary discussions and design considerations.
3. Estimating sewage flows:
A. Classify each home as type I, II, III, or IV. (See table 4, Extension
Bulletin 304, "Town and Country Sewage Treatment.)
B. Determine the number of bedrooms in each home and estimate the indi-
vidual sewage flows.
C. Total the flows to determine the estimated daily sewage flow for the
collector system. Add a 3-bedroom type I home for each platted but
undeveloped lot.
D. For establishments other than residences, determine the average daily
«ew3p.e flow based on water meter readings or estimate the flow based
on data furnished by the Minnesota Department of Health or Pollution
Control Agency. See Workbook pages 1-2", 1-3 and 1-4.
Note: Always install a water meter on any establishment other than
a private residence and maintain a continuous record of the
flow of sewage.
4. Whenever possible, transport or pump septic tank effluent over long
distances rather than raw sewage.
5. Each residence should have a septic tank so that solids are separated
and effluent only flows in the collector line.
6. Size individual septic tanks according to the recommendations of WPC-40
or local ordinances.
7. If a common septic tank is used, the minimum capacity should be at least
3,000 gallons and compartmented if a single tank.
8. The diameter and grade of the collector sewer line should be based on a
flow equal to 35 percent of the flow quantities in Point 3 occurring in
a one-hour period.
9. When raw sewage flows in the collector line, the diameter and grade of
the sewer pipe must be selected to provide a mean velocity of not less
than 2 feet per second when flowing full (0.7% for 4-inch and 0.4% for
6-inch). The maximum grade on 4-inch should be no more than 1/4-inch
per foot (2%) to prevent the liquids froj flowing away from the solids.
-------
1-1
10. A gravity collector line, whether for raw sewage or sewage tank effluent,
shall not be less than 4 inches in diameter.
11. Cleanouts, brought flush with or above finished grade, shall be provided
wherever an individual sewer line joins a collector sewer line, or every
100 feet, whichever is less, unless manhole access is provided.
12. The pumping tank, which collects sewage tank effluent should have a pumpout
capacity of JLO percent of the estimated daily sewage flow plus a reserve
storage capacity equal to at least 25_ percent of the average daily sewage
flow.
13. The pumping tank should have a vent at least _2_ inches in diameter to allow
air to enter and leave the tank during filling and pumping operations.
14. The pumping tank should have manhole access for convenient service to the
puraps and control mechanisms.
15. The pumping tank must be watertight to the highest known or estimated eleva-
tion of the groundwater table. Where the highest elevation of the ground-
water table is above the cop of the pumping tank, buoyant forces shall be
determined and adequate anchorage provided to prevent tank flotation.
16. Pumps for sewage tank effluent:
A. There should be dual pumps operating on an alternating basis. The
elevation of the liquid level controls should be adjustable after
installation of the pumps in the pumping tank.
B. Each pump should be capable of pumping at least 25 percent of the
total estimated daily sewage flow in a -one-hour period at a head
adequate to overcome elevation differences and friction losses.
C. The pumps should either be cast iron or bronze fitted and have stain-
less steel screws or be of other durable and corrosion-proof construction.
D. A warning device should be installed to warn of the failure of either
pump. The warning device should actuate both an audible and visible
alarm. The alarm should continue to operate until manually turned
off. The alarm should be activated each time either pump does not
operate as programmed.
E. A pump cycle counter (cost approximately $10) should be installed
to monitor the flow of sewage. The number of pump cycles multiplied
by the gallons discharged per dose will provide an accurate measure-
ment of sewage flow.
17. Some site conditions may dictate that all or part of the sewage be pumped
as raw sewage. The following recommendations should be followed:
A. When the raw sewage is pumped from 2 or more residences or from an
establishment other than a private residence, dual sewage grinder
pumps should be used. The pumps should operate on an alternate basis
and have a visible and audible warning device which should be automatic-
ally activated in the event of the failure of either pump to operate
as programmed.
-------
1-1
B. The pumps should either be cast iron or bronze fitted and have stain-
less steel screws or be of other durable and corrosion-proof construction,
C. To minimize physical agitation of the septic tank into which the raw
sewage is pumped, a puraping quantity not in excess of 5 percent of
the initial liquid volume of the septic tank shall be delivered for
each pump cycle and a pumping rate not to exceed 25 percent of the
total estimated daily sewage flow occurring in one hour.
D. The diameter of the pressure pipe in which the raw sewage flows shall
be selected on the basis of a minimum flow velocity of 2.0 feet per
second.
E. The discharge head of the pump shall be adequate to overcome the eleva-
tion difference and all friction losses.
F. The diameter of the pressure pipe for the sewage shall be at least
as large as the size of sewage solids the pump can deliver.
18. In some cases a pressure main may be the most feasible method to collect
septic tank effluent.
A. Each residence or other establishment has a septic tank and a pumping
station.
B. The required discharge head of the pump depends upon the pressure in
the collector main. .The hydraulics of flow and friction loss must be
carefully calculated.
C. The pressure main does not need to be installed on any grade but can
follow the natural topography at a deptrh sufficient to provide protec-
tion against freezing.
D. A double checkvalve system should be used at each pumping station.
E. A corporation stop should be installed on the individual pressure
line near the connection to the main pressure line.
F. Cleanouts along the pressure main are not required.
G. Discharge the pumped septic tank effluent into a settling tank prior
to flow into the soil treatment system. The settling tank will serve
as a stilling chamber and also separate any settleable solids.
19. Sizing the soil treatment unit:
A. Make soil borings in the area proposed for the soil treatment unit at
least 3 feet deeper than the bottom of the proposed trenches. Look
for mottled soil or other evidences of seasonal high water table in
the soil.
B. Make 3 percolation tests in each representative soil present on the
site.
C. Using the percolation rate of the soil and the sewage flow estimate
from point 3, refer to table III of WPC-40 or table 4 of Extension
Bulletin 304, "Town and Country Sewage Treatment" to determine the
total required trench bottom area.
-------
1-1
20. Lay out the soil treatment unit using trenches with drop box distribu-
tion of effluent, so only that portion of the trench system which is
needed will be used. Drop boxes also provide for automatic resting of
trenches as sewage flow fluctuates or as soil absorption capacity varies
with amount of soil moisture. Trenches can extend 100 feet each way
from a drop box so that a single box can distribute effluent to 200 feet
of trench.
-------
APPENDIX
,/ 1-2 .
T \- ~ '/
COUNTY OF OTTER TAIL
Phone 21 8-739-2271
Court House
Fergus Falls, Minnesota 56537
MALCOLM K. LEE, Administrator
Octpber 18, 1978
Ms. Rhoda Granat, Librarian
Wapora, Inc.
6900 Wisconsin Ave. N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20015
Dear Ms. Granat:
Enclosed is some of the material we have available on cluster or
collector systems. Otter Tail County now has upwards of twenty
similar systems in operation at this time and we are pleased with
the results for several reasons. Our two main concerns are that
of treatment and reasonability of cost. We feel that a properly
designed, installed and maintained septic system meets both of these
criteria. Based on test results provided by Roger Machmeier, Extension
Agricultural Engineer, University of Minnesota we feel that adequate
treatment is obtained. Costs of installing a septic system are not
a huge burden on the landowner. Currently a system consisting of
a septic tank and drainfield can be installed, by a competent
contractor, for $800 - $1200. If a pump is required tfee cost
may be in the $1500 range which we feel is not unreasonable. It
has been our experience that the individual cost in a collector
system usually is equal to or less than that of having an independent
septic system. In speaking with Mike Hansel, MPCA we have also
learned that funding would be available for collector systems which
would further ease the landowner's cost burden.
Our office along with a sizeable portion of those people that would
be affected directly have some serious concerns regarding a "municipal
type" sewage system being installed and operated in the proposed area.
The first that comes to mind, is cost - it will certainly be high
and were not sure that the amount projected includes the dewatering
that would be necessary to install the gravity mains. The elevation of
a fair percentage of the district does not even have the elevation
required for a drainfield and the installation of sewer mains in this
area would certainly necessitate their being placed directly in the
ground water table, which brings up further concerns of seepage,
leekage, etc.
Another concern is that of volume. Not being a professional engineer,
it doesn't seem either feasible or reasonable that a municipal type
system designed for over 1,000 dwellings would have adequate flowage in
SHORELAND MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE -DIVISION OF EMERGENCY SERVICE -SUBDIVISION CONTROL ORDINANCE
SOLID WASTE ORDINANCE - RIGHT-OF-WAY SETBACK ORDINANCE - FUEL AND ENERGY COORDINATION
SEWAGE SYSTEM CLEANERS ORDINANCE - R6CORDER, OTTER TAIL COUNTY PLANNING ADVISORY COMMISSION
-------
Ms. Rhoda Granat, Librarian 2 October 18, 1978 I~2
the winter months for the 150 or so residents, without pumping additional
water through the system. The desirability and source of a water supply
for such a purpose might in itself be questionable since lake lavels are
a volatile issue in themselves.
It is our opinion that a number of cluster or collection systems combined
with some independent septic systems meet the needs of adequate treatment
at a reasonable cost. This opinion is also shared by the University of
Minnesota Extension Engineer and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency.
While there is evidence of a pollution problem in the project area now we
are also concerned with long range problems and feel that the "Collector
systems" are feasible for many reasons and bear detailed investigation
and study.
Sincerely,
Larry Krohn
Administrative Assistant
Land & Resource Management
1mb
cc: Arnold Hemquist
John Rist, P.E.
-------
APPENDIX J
MANAGEMENT OF SMALL WASTE FLOWS DISTRICTS
-------
APPENDIX
J-l
MANAGEMENT CONCEPTS FOR SMALL WASTE FLOW DISTRICTS
Several authors have discussed management concepts applicable to
decentralized technologies. Lenning and Hennason suggested that management
of on-site systems should provide the necessary controls throughout the
entire lifecycle of a system from site evaluations through system usage.
They stressed that all segments of the cycle should be included to ensure
proper system performance (American Society of Agricultural Engineers 1977).
Stewart stated that for on-site systems a three-phase regulatory
program would be necessary (1976). Such a program would include: 1) a
mechanism to ensure proper siting and design installation and to ensure
that the location of the system is known by establishing a filing and
retrieval system; 2) controls to ensure that each system will be period-
ically inspected and maintained; and 3) a mechanism to guarantee that
failures will be detected and necessary repair actions taken.
Winneberger and Burgel suggested a total management concept, similar
to a sewer utility, in which a centralized management entity is responsible
for design, installation, maintenance, and operation of decentralized systems
(American Society of Agricultural Engineers 1977). This responsibility
includes keeping necessary records, monitoring ground and surface water
supplies and maintaining the financial solvency of the entity.
Otis and Stewart (1976) have identified various powers and authorities
necessary to perform the functions of a management entity:
o To acquire by purchase, gift, grant, lease, or rent both real
and personal property;
o To enter into contracts, undertake debt obligations either by
borrowing and/or by issuing bonds, sue and be sued. These powers
enable a district to acquire the property, equipment, supplies
and services necessary to construct and operate small flow
systems;
o To declare and abate nuisances;
o To require correction or private systems;
o To recommend correction procedures;
o To enter onto property, correct malfunctions, and bill the owner
if he fails to repair the system;
o To raise revenue by fixing and collecting user charges and
levying special assessments and taxes;
o To plan and control how and when wastewater facilities will be
extended to those within its jurisdiction;
o To meet the eligibility requirements for loans and grants from
the State and Federal government.
-------
APPENDIX
J-2
LEGISLATION BY STATES AUTHORIZING MANAGEMENT
OF SMALL WASTE FLOW DISTRICTS
In a recent act, the California legislature noted that then-
existing California law authorized local governments to construct and maintain
sanitary sewerage systems but did not authorize them to manage small waste
flow systems. The new act, California Statutes Chapter 1125 of 1977, empowers
certain public agencies to form on-site wastewater disposal zones to collect,
treat, and dispose of wastewater without building sanitary sewers or sewage
systems. Administrators of such on-site wastewater disposal zones are to be
responsible for the achievement of water quality objectives set by regional
water quality control boards, protection of existing and future beneficial
uses, protection of public health, and abatement of nuisances.
The California act authorizes an assessment by the public agency upon
real property in the zone in addition to other charges, assessments, or taxes
levied on property in the zone. The Act assigns the following functions to
an on-site wastewater disposal zone authority:
o To collect, treat, reclaim, or dispose of wastewater without
the use of sanitary sewers or community sewage systems;
o To acquire, design, own, construct, install, operate, monitor,
inspect, and maintain on-site wastewater disposal systems in a
manner which will promote water quality, prevent the pollution,
waste, and contamination of water, and abate nuisances;
o To conduct investigations, make analyses, and monitor conditions
with regard to water quality within the zone; and
o To adopt and enforce reasonable rules and regulations necessary
to implement the purposes of the zone.
To monitor compliance with Federal, State and local requirements an
authorized representative of the zone must have the right of entry to any
premises on which a source of water pollution, waste, or contamination in-
cluding but not limited to septic tanks, is located. He may inspect the
source and take samples of discharges.
The State of Illinois recently passed a similar act. Public Act 80-1371
approved in 1978 also provides for the creation of municipal on-site waste-
water disposal zones. The authorities of any municipality (city, village, or
incorporated town) are given the power to form on-site wastewater disposal
zones to "protect the public health, to prevent and abate nuisances, and to
protect existing and further beneficial water use." Bonds may be issued to
finance the disposal system and be retired by taxation of property in the
zone.
A representative of the zone is to be authorized to enter at all reason-
able times any premise in which a source of water pollution, waste, or con-
tamination (e.g., septic tank) is located, for the purposes of inspection,
rehabilitation and maintenance, and to take samples from discharges. The
-------
J-2
municipality is to be responsible for routinely inspecting the entire system
at least once every 3 years. The municipality must also remove and dispose
of sludge, its designated representatives may enter private property and, if
necessary, respond to emergencies that present a hazard to health.
-------
APPENDIX
J-3
SOME MANAGEMENT AGENCIES FOR DECENTRALIZED FACILITIES
Central management entities that administer non-central systems with
various degrees of authority have been established in several States.
Although many of these entities are quasi-public, few of them both own and
operate each component of the facility. The list of small waste flow
management agencies that follows is not comprehensive. Rather, it presents a
sampling of what is currently being accomplished. Many of these entities
are located in California, which has been in the vanguard of the movement
away from conventional centralized systems to centrally managed decentralized
systems to serve rural areas (State of California, Office of Appropriate
Technology, 1977).
Westboro (Wisconsin Town Sanitary District)
Sanitary District No. 1 of the Town of Westboro represents the public
ownership and management of septic tanks located on private property. In
1974 the unincorporated community of Westboro was selected as a demonstra-
tion site by the Small Scale Waste Management Project (SSWMP) at the
University of Wisconsin to determine whether a cost-effective alternative
to central sewage for small communities could be developed utilizing on-site
disposal techniques. Westboro was thought to be typical of hundreds of
small rural communities in the Midwest which are~lrt need of improved
wastewater treatment and disposal facilities but are unable to afford
conventional sewerage.
From background environmental data such as soils and engineering
studies and groundwater sampling, it was determined that the most economical
alternative would be small diameter gravity sewers that would collect
effluents from individual septic tanks and transport them to a common soil
absorption field. The District assumed responsibility for all operation
and maintenance of the entire facility commencing at the inlet of the septic
tank. Easements were obtained to allow permanent legal access to properties
for purposes of installation, operation, and maintenance. Groundwater was
sampled and analy2ed during both the construction and operation phases.
Monthly charges were collected from homeowners. The system, now in operation,
will continue to be observed by the SSWMP to assess the success of its
mechanical performance and management capabilities.
Washington State
Management systems have been mandated in certain situations in the
State of Washington to assist in implementing the small waste flow manage-
ment concept. In 1974 the State's Department of Social and Health Services
established a requirement for the management of on-site systems: an
approved management system would be responsible for the maintenance of
sewage disposal systems when subdivisions have gross densities greater
than 3.5 housing units or 12 people per acre (American Society of Agricultural
Engineers 1977). It is anticipated that this concept will soon be applied
to all on-site systems.
-------
J-3
Georgetown Divide (California) Public Utility District (GDPUD)
The GDPUD employs a full-time geologist and registered sanitarian who
manage all the individual wastewater sytems in the District. Although it
does not own individual systems this district has nearly complete central
management responsibility for centralized systems. The Board of Directors
of the GDPUD passed an ordinance forming a special sewer improvement district
within the District to allow the new 1800-lot Auburn Lake Trails subdivision
to receive central management services from the GDPUD. The GDPUD performs
feasibility studies on lots within the subdivision to evaluate the potential
for the use of individual on-site systems, designs appropriate on-site
systems, monitors their construction and installation, inspects and maintains
them, and monitors water quality to determine their effects upon water leaving
the subdivision. If a septic tank needs pumping, GDPUD issues a repair order
to the homeowner. Service charges are collected annually.
Santa Cruz County (California) Septic Tank Maintenance District
This district was established in 1973 when the Board of Supervisors
adopted ordinance No. 1927, "Ordinance Amending the Santa Cruz County Code,
Chapter 8.03 Septic Tank System Maintenance District." Its primary function
is the inspection and pumping of all septic tanks within the District. To
date 104 residences in two subdivisions are in the district, which collects a
one-time set-up fee plus monthly charges. Tanks are pumped every three years
and inspected annually. The County Board of Supervisors is required to
contract for these services. In that the District does not have the authority
to own systems, does not perform soil studies on individual sites, or offer
individual designs, its powers are limited.
Bolinas Community (California) Public Utility District (BCPUD)
Bolinas, California is an older community that faced an expensive public
sewer proposal. Local residents organized to study the feasibility of
retaining many of their on-site systems, and in 1974 the BCPUD Sewage Disposal
and Drainage Ordinance was passed. The BCPUD serves 400 on-site systems and
operates conventional sewerage facilities for 160 homes. The District employs
a wastewater treatment plant operator who performs inspections and monitors
water quality. The County health administration is authorized to design and
build new septic systems.
Kern County (California) Public Works
In 1973 the Board of Supervisors of Kern County, California, passed an
ordinance amending the County Code to provide special regulations for water
quality control. County Service Area No. 40, including 800 developed lots
of a 2,900-lot subdivision, was the first Kern County Service Area (CSA) to
arrange for management of on-site disposal systems. Inspections of install-
ations are made by the County Building Department. Ongoing CSA responsibilities
are handled by the Public Works Department. System design is provided in an
Operation and Maintenance Manual.
-------
J-3
Marin County (California)
In 1971 the Marin County Board of Supervisors adopted a regulation,
"Individual Sewage Disposal Systems," creating an inspection program for
all new installations (Marin County Code Chapter 18.06). The Department
of Environmental Health is responsible for the inspection program. The
Department collects a charge from the homeowner and inspects septic tanks
twice a year. The homeowner is responsible for pumping. The Department
also inspects new installations and reviews engineered systems.
-------
APPENDIX K
COST AND FINANCING
-------
APPENDIX
K-l
DESIGN AND COSTING ASSUMPTIONS
(1) Spray Irrigation, Rapid Infiltration
• Pretreatment for spray irrigation and rapid infiltration includes
preliminary treatment units (bar screens, grit removal) and
stabilization lagoons. Storage of this pretreated wastewater
is provided by conventional (deep) lagoons.
• Chlorination of wastewater is required prior to land treatment.
• Application system capacities are based on an effective use
period of 150 days, based on the 210 day storage required by MPCA.
• Application rates are 2 in/day for spray irrigation and 12 in/week
for rapid infiltration.
• Spray irrigation application is based on using alfalfa cover crop.
• Two land application sites were examined: one about 1/3 mile
west of Otter Tail in Amor Township; the second about 2000 feet
south of Otter Tail Lake in Section 32 of Otter Tail Township.
(2) Prefabricated Contact Stabilization Plant
• Costs were based on areawide costs for similar facilities.
• Selected site for treatment plant was 1 mile west of Otter Tail
Lake, about 300 feet north of Otter Tail River.
• Alum and polymer were assumed to be added to aid in settling
and to obtain the phosphorus limitation of 1.0 mg/1.
• Dechlorination provided because of the potential requirement for
effluent limitations on residual chlorine.
• The capital cost of installing a modular design, as opposed to
a single unit plant, has been incorporated into the treatment
costs using costs for 2 prefabricated plants of 0.25 mgd each.
(3) Cluster Systems
• The design and costs for wastewater treatment utilizing cluster
systems were developed based on a "typical" system with 25 homes
per cluster.
• Design assumptions:
- flow - 60 gpcd - peak flow 45 gpm
- 3.7 persons/home - 3-bedroom home
-------
K-l
25% of existing septic tanks need to be replaced with new
1000-gallon tanks.
Collection of wastewaters is by gravity to a pump station.
750-foot transmission (2 1/2 inch force main) to absorption
field assumed.
Pump Station (30 gpm)required for transmission, 30-foot static
head assumed from pump station to distribution box.
Collection
All sewer lines are to be placed at or below 8 feet of depth to
allow for frost penetration in the Otter Tail Lake area. Gravity
lines are assumed to be placed at an average depth of 15 feet.
Shoring of gravity collection lines was determined on a segment
basis. Ten percent less shoring is required for force mains and
low pressure sewers due to their shallow average depth.
A minimum velocity of 2 fps will be maintained in all pressure
sewer lines and force mains to provide for scouring.
An even distribution of population was assumed along collection
lines for all alternatives indicated.
A peaking factor for design flows of the various systems
investigated was based on the Ten State Standards in concurrence
with the Otter Tail Lake Facility Plan.
All pressure sewer lines and force mains 8 inches in diameter or
less will be PVC SDR26, with a pressure rating of 160 psi. Those
force mains larger than 8 inches in diameter will be constructed
or ductile iron with mechanical joints.
Cleanouts in the pressure sewer system will be placed at the
beginning of each line, and one every 500 feet of pipe in line.
Cleanout value boxes will contain shut-off valves to provide for
isolation of various sections of line for maintenance and/or
repairs.
Individual pumping units for the pressure sewer system include a
2- by 8-foot basin with discharge at 6 feet, control panel,
visual alarm, mercury float level controls, valves, rail system
for removal of pump, antifloatation device, and the pump itself.
Effluent pumps are 1-1/2 and 2 HP pumps which reach a total
dynamic head of 80 and 120 feet respectively.
All flows are based on a 60 gallon per capita day (gpcd) design
flow for residential areas. Infiltration for new sewers is based
on a rate of 200 gallons per inch - mile of gravity sewer lines.
-------
K-l
• The costs presented for each alternate are comparable costs to
each other. However, the costs generated may not reflect actual
construction costs due to the degree of accuracy utilized in
preparation of these estimates.
Analysis of Cost Effectiveness
• Quoted costs are in 1978 dollars
• EPA Sewage Treatment Plant (STP) Index of 135 (rth Quarter 1977)
and Engineering News Record Index of 2693 (1 March 1978) used for
updating costs.
• i, interest rate = 6-5/8%
• Planning period = 20 years
• Life of facilities, structures - 50 years
Mechanical components - 20 years
• Straight line depreciation
• Land for land application site valued at $1000/acre.
-------
APPENDIX
K-2
PROJECT COSTS
FACILITY PLAN PROPOSED ACTION
OTTER TAIL LAKE
COST ESTIMATE
Alternative Proposed Action
Q = 0.50 mgd
Costs in $1978
x 1,000
Spray Irrigation
On West Shore
Influent pumping
Influent pipe
Preliminary treatment
Distribution pumping
Stabilization pond
Field clearing
Field leveling
Distribution (center pivot)
Admin & Lab
Monitoring wells
Roads & fences
Land (200 acres)
Crop revenue
Chlorination
Subtotal
Engr., Contg., etc.
TOTAL
Capital
Costs
77.00
159.81
29.70
79.65
412.50
60.75
31.05
66.15
56.70
11.88
63.45
200.00
28.60
$1,277.24
319.31
O&M
Costs
2.00
0.20
3.60
1.64
22.40
13.20
3.77
1.53
1.14
(-9.90)
3.00
$42.58
Salvage
Value
25.41
95.89
13.40
37.44
247.50
18.63
31.09
27.22
5.70
18.63
361.23
11.13
$ 893.27
178.65
$1,596.55
$42.58
$1,071.92
-------
K-2
PROJECT COSTS
FACILITY PLAN PROPOSED ACTION
OTTER TAIL LAKE - COLLECTION
COST ESTIMATE
Proposed Alternative
Costs in 1978 Dollars
x $1,000
SERVICE AREA
CAPITAL
COSTS
O&M
COSTS
SALVAGE
VALUE
1980
Entire Service Area
25% Engineering Contingencies
TOTAL
6,839.93
1,709.98
$8,549.91
50.66
$50.66
2,808.60
561.72
$3,370.32
1980 - 2000
Entire Service Area
25% Engineering Contingencies
TOTAL
31.17/yr.
7.79
$ 38.96/yr.
-------
Proposed Alternate
PROJECT COSTS
FACILITY FLAN PROPOSED ACTION
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVE
($1,000)
PRESENT WORTH
ALTERNATE
ITEM
CAPITAL
YEAR DOLLARS
O&M
DOLLARS
Treatment 1980 $1,596.60
Collection 1980 $8,549.90
Collection 2000 $ 39.00/yr.
SALVAGE
VALUE
,071.90
,370.30
-
CD
CAPITAL
DOLLARS
$1,596.60
$8,549.90
$ 425.50
(2)
O&M
DOLLARS
$464.80
$533.10
-
(3)
SALVAGE
VALUE
$297.10
$934.20
-
TOTAL
PRESENT
WORTH
(1+2+3)
$ 1,764.30
$ 8,168.80
$ 425.50
$10,358.60
EQUIVALENT COST
$948.80
to
-------
K-2
LIMITED ACTION ALTERNATIVE
Costs in 1978 Dollars
x $1,000
ITEM
JL2§P_
Replace Septic System
Install Mound System
Holding Tanks
HO Treatment
Grey Water (ST/SAS)
Black Water
Subtotal
25% Engr. & Contg.
TOTAL
1980 - 2000
Septic System
Mounds
Holding Tanks
Grey Water
Black Water
Subtotal
25% Engr. & Contg.
TOTAL
CAPITAL
COSTS
473.3
166.4
25.7
74.9
218.9
1,643.5
$2,602.7
650.7
$3,253.4
O&M
COSTS
15.0
1.5
14.9
6.9
112.4
$150.7
$150.7
SALVAGE
VALUE
59.6
6.0
15.4
109.9
621.9
$ 812.8
203.2
$1,016.0
39.4/yr.
6.8/yr.
1.1/yr.
48.1/yr.
87.2/yr.
$182.6/yr.
45.7
$228.3/yr.
11.5/yr. * 20 = 0.58
0.62/yr. = 0.03
6.1/yr. = 0.31
3.5/yr. = 0.18
64.2/yr. = 3.21
85.9/yr. 4.3*
$85.9/yr. 4.3*
314.8
54.3
8.5
74.6
422.4
$ 874.6
218.7
$1,093.3
.
*Gradient per year/20 years.
-------
ALTERNATE
ITEM
LIMITED ACTION ALTERNATIVE
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVE
($1,000)
K-2
CAPITAL
DOLLARS
O&M
DOLLARS
SALVAGE
VALUE
(1)
CAPITAL
DOLLARS
(2)
O&M
DOLLARS
(3)
SALVAGE
VALUE
TOTAL
PRESENT
WORTH
(1+2+3)
AVERAGE ANNUAL
EQUIVALENT COST
Collection 1980 $3,253.4 $150.7 $1,016.0 $3,253.4 $1,644.0 $281.6 $4,615.8
Collection 2000 $ 228.3/yr. $ 4.3* $1,093,3 $2,490.5 $ 349.0 $343.6 $2,536.4
$7,152.2
$655.9
^Gradient per year/20 years.
-------
TC-2
EIS ALTERNATIVE 2
RAPID INFILTRATION
OTTER TAIL LAKE
COST ESTIMATE
Alternative 2A
Q = 0.18 mgd
Costs in $1978
x 1,000
North and West Shore
Rapid Infiltration
Influent pumping
Influent pipe
Preliminary treatment
Distribution pumping
Stabilization pond
Field clearing
Field leveling
Distribution (rapid-infilt.)
Recovery wells
Admin & Lab
Monitoring wells
Roads & fences
Land (47 acres)
Crop revenue
Chlorination
Effluent pipe
Subtotal
Engr., Contg., etc.
TOTAL
Capital
Costs
26.95
98.00
13.00
64.80
110.00
4.73
19.58
8.78
52.65
2.43
15.00
47-00
O&M
Costs
1.50
0.20
2.00
0.80
10.20
— ._
2.35
0.80
2.47
0.03
0.40
Salvage
Value
8.89
58.80
5.87
30.46
66.00
9.20
4.21
25.27
1.17
5.27
146.00
$608.92
157,. 48
$761.15
0.60
$21.35
$21.35
87.60
$387.62
77.52
$465.14
-------
EIS ALTERNATIVE 2
RAPID 1NV n/TRATION
OTTER TAIL LAKE
COST ESTIMATE
K-2
Alternative 2A
Q = 0.12 mgd
Costs in $1978
x 1,000
Influent pumping
Influent pipe
Preliminary treatment
Distribution pumping
Stabilization pond
Field clearing
Field leveling
Distribution (rapid infilt.)
Recovery wells
Admin & Lab
Monitoring wells
Roads & fences
Land (37 acres)
Chlorination
Effluent pipe & outfall
Subtotal
Engr., Contg., etc.
TOTAL
Capital
Costj;
17.60
61.30
13.00
55.35
66.00
4.30
14.85
8.51
51.30
2.43
12.83
37.00
77.30
$421.77
105.44
$527.21
South Shore
Rapid Infiltration
O&M
Costs
1.40
0.10
2.00
0.41
7.20
1.85
0.55
1.99
0.03
0.41
0.30
$16.24
$16.24
Salvage
Value
5.81
36.80
5.87
26.02
39.60
6,
4,
.78
.08
24.63
1.17
2.40
66.82
46.40
$266.58
53.31
$319.90
-------
K-2
EIS ALTERNATIVE 2
RAPID INFILTRATION
OTTER TAIL LAKE - COLLECTION
COST ESTIMATE
2.2
Costs in 1978 Dollars
x $1,000
SERVICE AREA
1980
Small Flow System, S.E.
Small Flow System, W.
Cluster Systems
On-Site, ST-SAS
Subtotal
25% Engineering Contingencies
TOTAL
2000
Small Flow System, S.E.
Small Flow System, W.
Cluster Systems
On-Site, ST-SAS
Subtotal
25% Engineering Contingencies
TOTAL
CAPITAL
COSTS
1,474.52
1,974.90
2,118.72
158.40
5,726.54
1,43.1 .64
$7,158.18
O&M
COSTS
18.44
26.23
43.14
8.87
96.68
$96.68
SALVAGE
VALUE
421.57
523.94
757.00
17.23
1,719.74
343.95
$2,063.69
20.00
24.55
37.07
4.67
86.29/yr.
21.57
$ 107.86/yr.
0.32
0.37
0.80
0.19
1.68*
$ 1.68*
130.30
150.69
388.86
16.06
685.91
137.18
$ 823.09
Gradient per year over 20 years.
-------
2.3
EIS ALTERNATIVE 2
RAPID INFILTRATION
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVE
($1,000)
ALTERNATE CAPITAL
ITEM YEAR DOLLARS
Treatment 1980 $ 761.20
Treatment 1980 $ 527.20
Collection 1980 $7,158.20
Collection 2000 $ 107.90/yr.
O&M SALVAGE
DOLLARS VALUE
$21.40 $ 465.10
$16.20 $ 319.90
$96.70 $2,063.70
$ 1.70* $ 823.10
PRESENT WORTH
(1) (2) (3)
CAPITAL O&M SALVAGE
DOLLARS DOLLARS VALUE
$ 761.20 $ 233.50 $128.90
$ 527.20 $ 176.70 $ 88.70
$7,158.20 $1,054.80 $572.10
$1,177.20 $ 138.00 $228.20
TOTAL
PRESENT
WORTH
(1+2+3)
$ 825.80
$ 615.20
$ 7,640.90
$ 1.087.00
$10,168.90
AVERAGE ANNUAL
EQUIVALENT COST
$931.50
* Gradient per year over 20 years.
-------
K-2
EIS ALTERNATIVE 2
SPRAY IRRIGATION
OTTER TAIL LAKE
COST ESTIMATE
Alternative 2
Q = 0.18 mgd
Costs in $1978
x 1,000
Influent pumping
Influent pipe
Preliminary treatment
Distribution pumping
Stabilization pond
Field clearing
Field leveling
Distribution (center pivot)
Admin & Lab
Monitoring wells
Roads & fences
Land (88 acres)
Crop revenue
Chlorination
Subtotal
Engr., Contg., etc.
TOTAL
Capital
Costs
North and West Shore
Spray Irrigation
O&M
Costs
26.95
98.00
13.00
64.80
110.00
24.30
13.77
35.10
52.65
6.08
35.10
88.00
10.56
$578.31
114.58
1.50
0.20
2.00
0.80
10.20
7.42
2.47
0.08
0.76
(-3.64)
1.90
$23.69
$722.89
$23.69
Salvage
Value
8.89
58.80
5.87
30.46
66.00
8.26
16.50
25.27
2.92
11.34
158.94
4.11
$379.36
79.47
$476.83
-------
K-2
EIS ALTERNATIVE 2
SPRAY IRRIGATION
OTTER TAIL LAKE
COST ESTIMATE
Alternative 2
Q = 0.12 mgd
Costs in $1978
x 1,000
Influent pumping
Influent pipe
Preliminary treatment
Distribution pumping
Stabilization pond
Field clearing
Field leveling
Distribution (center pivot)
Admin & Lab
Monitoring wells
Roads & fences
Land (64 acres)
Crop revenue
Chlorination
Subtotal
Engr., Contg., etc.
TOTAL
Capital
Costs
17.60
61.30
13.00
55.35
66.00
16.20
19-13
27.68
51.30
6.08
28.35
64.00
7.15
$424.14
106.04
$530.18
South Shore
Spray Irrigation
O&M
Costs
1.40
0.10
2.00
0.41
7.20
4.25
1.99
0.08
0.61
(-2.34)
1.80
$17.50
$17.50
Salvage
Value
5.81
36.80
5.87
26.02
39.60
6.20
13.01
24.63
2.92
8.10
115.59
2.78
$287.15
57.43
$344.58
-------
K-2
EIS ALTERNATIVE 2
SPRAY IRRIGATION
OTTER TAIL LAKE - COLLECTION
COST ESTIMATE
2.2
Costs in 1978 Dollars
x $1,000
SERVICE AREA
1980
Small Flow System, S.E.
Small Flow System, W.
Cluster Systems
On-Site, ST-SAS
Subtotal
25% Engineering Contingencies
TOTAL
2000
Small Flow System, S.E.
Small Flow System, W.
Cluster Systems
On-Site, ST-SAS
Subtotal
25% Engineering Contingencies
TOTAL
CAPITAL
COSTS
1,474.52
1,974.90
2,118.72
158.40
5,726.54
1,431.64
$7,158.18
O&M
COSTS
18.44
26.23
43.14
8.82
96.68
$96.68
SALVAGE
VALUE
421.57
523.94
757.00
17.23
1,719.74
343.95
$2,063.69
20.00
24.55
37.07
4.67
86.29/yr.
21.57
$ 107.86/yr.
0.32
0.37
0.80
0.19
1.68*
$ 1.68*
130.30
150.69
388.86
16.06
685.91
137.18
$ 823.09
* Gradient per year over 20 years.
-------
2.3
EIS ALTERNATIVE 2
SPRAY IRRIGATION
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVE
($1,000)
ALTERNATE CAPITAL
ITEM YEAR DOLLARS
Treatment 1980 $ 722.90
Treatment 1980 $ 530.20
Collection 1980 $7,158.20
Collection 2000 $ 107.90/yr.
O&M SALVAGE
DOLLARS VALUE
$23.70 $ 476.80
$17.50 $ 344.60
$96.20 $2,063.70
$ 1.70* $ 823.10
PRESENT WORTH
CD (2) (3)
CAPITAL O&M SALVAGE
DOLLARS DOLLARS VALUE
$ 722.90 $ 258.60 $132.20
$ 530.20 $ 190.90 $ 95.52
$7,158.20 $1,054.80 $572.10
$1,177.20 $ 138.00 $228.20
TOTAL
PRESENT
WORTH
(1+2+3)
$ 849.30
$ 625.60
$ 7,640.90
$ 1.087.00
$10,202.80
AVERAGE ANNUAL
EQUIVALENT COST
$934.60
Gradient per year over 20 years.
-------
EIS ALTERNATIVE 1
RAPID INFILTRATION
OTTER TAIL LAKE
COST ESTIMATE
K-2
Alternative 1A
Q = 0.12 mgd
Costs in $1978
x 1,000
South Shore
Rapid Infiltration
Influent pumping
Influent pipe
Preliminary treatment
Distribution pumping
Stabilization pond
Field clearing
Field leveling
Distribution (rapid infilt.)
Recovery wells
Admin & Lab
Monitoring wells
Roads & fences
Land (37 acres)
Chlorination
Effluent pipe & outfall
Subtotal
Engr., Contg., etc.
TOTAL
Capital
Costs
O&M
Costs
Salvage
Value
17.60
61.30
13.00
55.35
66.00
4.30
14.85
8.51
51.30
2.43
12.83
37.00
77.30
$421.77
105.44
$527.21
1.40
0.10
2.00
0.41
7.20
1.85
0.55
1.99
0.03
0.41
0.30
$16.24
$16.24
5.81
36.80
5.87
26.02
39.60
6.78
4.08
24.63
1.17
2.40
66.82
46.40
$266.58
53.31
$319.90
-------
K-2
EIS ALTERNATIVE 1
RAPID INFILTRATION
OTTER TAIL LAKE - COLLECTION
COST ESTIMATE
1.2
Costs in 1978 Dollars
x $1,000
SERVICE AREA
1980
Small Flow System, S.E.
Cluster Systems
On-Site, ST-SAS
Subtotal
25% Engineering Contingencies
TOTAL
_2000
Small Flow System, S.E.
Cluster Systems
On-Site, ST-SAS
Subtotal
25% Engineering Contingencies
TOTAL
CAPITAL
COSTS
1,474.52
3,346.81
470.22
5,291.55
1,322.89
$6,614.44
O&M
COSTS
18.44
71.23
27.20
116.87
$116.87
SALVAGE
VALUE
421.57
1,148.51
67.04
1,637.12
327.42
$1,964.54
20.00
69.51
14.39
103.90/yr.
25.98
$ 129.88/yr.
0.32
1.46
0.57
2.35*
$ 2.35*
130.30
649.95
49.48
829-73
165.95
$ 995.68
* Gradient per year over 20 years.
-------
1.3
EIS ALTERNATIVE 1
RAPID INFILTRATION
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVE
($1,000)
PRESENT WORTH
(1) (2) (3)
ALTERNATE CAPITAL O&M SALVAGE CAPITAL O&M SALVAGE
ITEM YEAR DOLLARS DOLLARS VALUE DOLLARS DOLLARS VALUE
Treatment 1980 $ 527.20 $ 16.20 $ 319.90 $ 527.20 $ 176.70 $ 88.70
Collection 1980 $6,614.40 $116.90 $1,964.50 $6,614.40 $1,275.40 $544.60
Collection 2000 $ 129.90/yr. S 2.40* S 995.70 $1,417.20 $ 194.80 $276.00
TOTAL
PRESENT
WORTH AVERAGE ANNUAL
(1+2+3) EQUIVALENT COST
$ 615.20
$7,345.20
$1,336.00
$9,296.40 $851.60
Gradient per year over 20 years.
-------
EIS ALTERNATIVE 1
SPRAY IRRIGATION
OTTER TAIL LAKE
COST ESTIMATE
K-2
Alternative 1
Q = 0.12 mgd
Costs in $1978
x 1,000
South Shore
jjpray Irrigation
Influent pumping
Influent pipe
Preliminary treatment
Distribution pumping
Stabilization pond
Field clearing
Field leveling
Distribution (center pivot)
Admin & Lab
Monitoring wells
Roads & fences
Land (64 acres)
Crop revenue
Chlorination
Subtotal
Engr., Contg., etc.
TOTAL
Capital
Costs
17.60
61.30
13.00
55.35
66.00
16.20
19.13
27.68
51.30
6.08
28.35
64.00
7.15
$424.14
106.04
O&M
Costs
1.40
0.10
2.00
0.41
7.20
4.25
1.99
0.08
0.61
(-2.34)
1.80
$17.50
Salvage
Value
5.81
36.80
5.87
26.02
39.60
6.20
13.01
24.63
2.92
8.10
115.59
2.78
$287.15
57.43
$530.18
$17.50
$344.58
-------
K-2
EIS ALTERNATIVE 1
SPRAY IRRIGATION
OTTER TAIL LAKE - COLLECTION
COST ESTIMATE
1.2
Costs in 1978 Dollars
x $1,000
SERVICE AREA
Small Flow System, S.E.
Cluster Systems
On-Site, ST-SAS
Subtotal
25% Engineering Contingencies
TOTAL
2000
Small Flow System, S.E.
Cluster Systems
On-Site, ST-SAS
Subtotal
25% Engineering Contingencies
TOTAL
CAPITAL
COSTS
1,474.52
3,346.81
470.22
5,291.55
1,322.89
$6,614.44
O&M
COSTS
18.44
71.23
27.20
116.87
$116.87
SALVAGE
VALUE
421.57
1,148.51
67.04
1,637.12
327.42
$1,964.54
20.00
69.51
14.39
103.90/yr.
25.98
$ 129.88/yr.
0.32
1.46
0.57
2.35*
$ 2.35*
130.30
649.95
49.48
829.73
165.95
$ 995.68
* Gradient per year over 20 years.
-------
1.3
EIS ALTERNATIVE 1
SPRAY IRRIGATION
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVE
($1,000)
ALTERNATE CAPITAL
ITEM YEAR DOLLARS
O&M SALVAGE
DOLLARS VALUE
Treatment 1980 $ 530.20 $ 17.50 $ 344.60
Collection 1980 $6,614.40 $116.90 $1,964.50
Collection 2000 $ 129.90/yr. $ 2.40* $ 995.70
PRESENT WORTH
(1) (2) (3)
CAPITAL O&M SALVAGE
DOLLARS DOLLARS VALUE
$ 530.20 $ 190.90 $ 95.50
$6,614.40 $1,275.40 $544.60
$1,417.20 $ 194.80 $276.00
TOTAL
PRESENT
WORTH
(1+2+3)
$ 625.60
$7,345.20
$1,336.00
$9,306.80
AVERAGE ANNUAL
EQUIVALENT COST
$852.50
* Gradient per year over 20 years.
NJ
-------
K-2
EIS ALTERNATIVE 3
SPRAY IRRIGATION
OTTER TAIL LAKE
COST ESTIMATE
Alternative 3
Q = 0.30 ragd
Costs in $1978
x 1,000
North and West Shore
Spray Irrigation
Influent pumping
Influent pipe
Preliminary treatment
Distribution pumping
Stabilization pond
Field clearing
Field leveling
Distribution (center pivot)
Admin & Lab
Monitoring wells
Roads & fences
Land (130 acres)
Crop revenue
Chlorination
Subtotal
Engr., Contg., etc.
TOTAL
Capital
Costs
46.20
130.00
15.95
68.85
214.50
36.45
20.25
45.90
54.68
9.50
45.90
130.00
17.60
$ 835.78
208.95
$1,044.73
O&M
Costs
1.70
0.20
2.70
1.11
16.80
9.32
3.00
1.22
1.01
(-5.99)
2.30
$33.37
$33.37
Salvage
Value
15.25
78.00
7.20
32.36
128.70
12.15
21.57
26.25
4.56
13.77
234.80
6.85
$581.46
116.29
$697.75
-------
EIS ALTERNATIVE 3
SPRAY IRRIGATION
OTTER TAIL LAKE
COST ESTIMATE
K-2
Alternative 3
Q = 0.12 mgd
Costs in $1978
x 1,000
Influent pumping
Influent pipe
Preliminary treatment
Distribution pumping
Stabilization pond
Field clearing
Field leveling
Distribution (center pivot)
Admin & Lab
Monitoring wells
Roads & fences
Land (64 acres)
Crop revenue
Chlorination
Subtotal
Engr., Contg., etc.
Capital
Costs
17.60
61.30
13.00
55.35
66.00
16.20
19.13
27.68
51.30
6.08
28.35
64.00
7.15
$424.14
106.04
South Shore
Spray Irrigation
O&M
Costs
1.40
0.10
2.00
0.41
7.20
4.25
1.99
0.08
0.61
(-2.34)
1.80
$17.50
Salvage
Value
5.81
36.80
5.87
26.02
39.60
6.02
13.01
24.63
2.92
8.10
115.59
2.78
$287.15
57.43
TOTAL
$530.18
$17.50
$344.58
-------
EIS ALTERNATIVE 3
SPRAY IRRIGATION
OTTER TAIL LAKE - COLLECTION
COST ESTIMATE
K-3
3.2
Costs in 1978 Dollars
x $1,000
SERVICE AREA
1980
Small Flow System, S.E.
Small Flow System, Largest
Cluster Systems
On-Site, ST-SAS
Subtotal
25% Engineering Contingencies
TOTAL
2000
Small Flow System, S.E.
Small Flow System, Largest
Cluster Systems
On-Site, ST-SAS
Subtotal
25% Engineering Contingencies
TOTAL
CAPITAL
COSTS
1,474.52
3,740.41
626.56
120.35
5,961.84
1,490.46
$7,452.30
O&M
COSTS
18.44
46,67
14.10
6.48
85.69
$85.69
SALVAGE
VALUE
421.57
1,094.35
207.70
12.87
1,736.49
347.30
$2,083.79
20.00
38.61
6.60
3.41
68.62/yr.
17.16
$ 85.78/yr.
0.32
0.57
0.15
0.14
1.18*
$ 1.18*
130.30
234.53
59.00
11.72
435.55
87.11
$ 522.66
* Gradient per year over 20 years.
-------
CN
3.3
E.IS ALTERNATIVE 3
SPRAY IRRIGATION
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVE
($1,000)
PRESENT WORTH
ALTERNATE
ITEM
Treatment
Treatment
Collection
Collection
YEAR
1980
1980
1980
2000
CAPITAL
DOLLARS
$ 530.20
$1,044.70
$7,452.30
$ 85.80/yr.
O&M
DOLLARS
$17.50
$33.40
$85.70
$ 1.20*
$
$
$2
$
SALVAGE
VALUE
344.60
697.80
,083.80
522.70
(1)
CAPITAL
DOLLARS
$ 530.20
$1,044.70
$7,452.30
$ 936.10
(2)
O&M
DOLLARS
$190.90
$364.40
$935.00
$ 97.40
(3)
SALVAGE
VALUE
$ 95.50
$193.40
$577.60
$144.90
$
$
$
$
TOTAL
PRESENT
WORTH
(1+2+3)
625.60
1,215.70
7,809.70
888.60
$10,539.60
AVERAGE ANNUAL
EQUIVALENT COST
$965.40
Gradient per year over 20 years.
-------
K-2
EIS ALTERNATIVE 4
OTTER TAIL LAKE
COST ESTIMATE
Alternative 4
Q = 0.34 mgd
Costs in $1978
x 1,000
North and West Shore
Spray Irrigation
Influent pumping
Influent pipe
Preliminary treatment
Distribution pumping
Stabilization pond
Field clearing
Field leveling
Distribution (center pivot)
Admin & Lab
Monitoring wells
Roads & fences
Land (1A5 acres)
Crop revenue
Chlorination
Subtotal
Engr., Contg., etc.
TOTAL
Capital
Costs
51.70
130.00
18.70
71.55
225.50
43.20
24.30
51.30
55.35
9.50
51.30
145.00
18.70
$ 896.10
224.03
O&M
Costs
1.80
0.20
2.80
1.24
18.30
10.26
3.18
1.22
1.09
(-6.83)
2.40
$35.66
Salvage
Value
17.06
78.00
8.44
33.63
135.30
14.58
24.11
26.57
4.56
15.39
261.89
7.27
$626.80
125.36
$1,120.13
$35.66
$752.16
-------
EIS ALTERNATIVE 4
OTTER TAIL LAKE
COST ESTIMATE
K-2
Alternative 4
Q = 0.16 mgd
Costs in $1978
x 1,000
South Shore
Spray Irrigation
Influent pumping
Influent pipe
Preliminary treatment
Distribution pumping
Stabilization pond
Field clearing
Field leveling
Distribution (center pivot)
Admin & Lab
Monitoring wells
Roads & fences
Land (79 acres)
Crop revenue
Chlorination
Subtotal
Engr., Contg., etc.
TOTAL
Capital
Costs
O&M
Costs
Salvage
Value
24.20
6] .30
13.00
60.75
95.70
21.60
10.01
32.40
52.00
6.08
30.38
79.00
9.46
$495.88
123.97
1.40
0.10
2.00
0.69
10.20
6.36
2.21
0.08
0.53
(-3.13)
1.80
$22.24
$619.85
$22.24
7.99
36.80
5.87
28.56
57.42
6.01
15.23
24.96
2.92
10.53
142.68
3.68
$342.65
68.53
$411.18
-------
K-2
EIS ALTERNATIVE 4
OTTER TAIL LAKE - COLLECTION
COST ESTIMATE
4.2
Costs in 1978 Dollars
x $1,000
SERVICE AREA
CAPITAL
COSTS
O&M
COSTS
SALVAGE
VALUE
1980
Alt. #4 - East
Alt. #4 - West
Subtotal
25% Engineering Contingencies
TOTAL
2000
Alt. #4 - East
Alt. #4 - West
Subtotal
25% Engineering Contingencies
TOTAL
1,988.14
4,564.74
6,552.88
1,638.22
$8,191.10
25.83
56.69
82.52
$82.52
593.26
1,367.90
1,961.16
392.23
$2,353.39
$
25.41
40.74
66.15/yr.
16.54
82.69/yr.
0.40
0.58
0.98*
$ 0.98*
166.55
240.20
406.75
81.35
$ 488.10
* Gradient per year over 20 years.
-------
4.3
EIS ALTERNATIVE 4
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVE
($1,000)
PRESENT WORTH
ALTERNATE CAPITAL
ITEM YEAR DOLLARS
Treatment 1980 $ 619.90
Treatment 1980 $1,120.10
Collection 1980 $8,191.10
Collection 2000 $ 82.70/yr.
O&M
DOLLARS
$22.20
$35.70
$82.50
$ 1.00*
SALVAGE
VALUE
$ 411.20
$ 752.20
$2,353.40
$ 488.10
(1)
CAPITAL
DOLLARS
$ 619.90
$1,120.10
$8,191.10
$ 902.20
(2)
O&M
DOLLARS
$242.20
$389.50
$900.00
$ 81.20
(3)
SALVAGE
VALUE
$114.00
$208.50
$652.40
$135.30
TOTAL
PRESENT
WORTH AVERAGE ANNUAL
(1+2+3) EQUIVALENT COST
$
$ 1
$ 8
$
$11
748.10
,301.10
,438.70
848.10
,336.00 $1,038.40
* Gradient per year.
-------
K-2
EIS ALTERNATIVE 5
OTTER TAIL LAKE
COST ESTIMATE
Alternative 5
Q = 0.50 mgd
Costs in $1978
x 1,000
Influent pumping
Influent pipe
Preliminary treatment
Prefab Plant*
Chlorination
Chemical addition
Contract sludge hauling
Land (2 acres)
Administration
Lab Analysis
Yard work
Effluent pipe
Dechlorination
Subtotal
Engr., Contg., etc.
TOTAL
Capital
Costs
77.00
187.10
76.80
480.00
21.60
43.20
2.00
8.60
15.30
911.60
227.90
$1,139.50
Prefab Contact
Stabilization Plant
O&M
Costs
2.00
0.50
3.60
27.10
.40
.80
7.50
3.90
3.70
1.10
0.60
$57.20
$57.20
Salvage
Value
30.20
112.30
34.60
144.00
3.61
5.20
6.00
$335.91
67.18
$403.09
* Note: Capital Cost of Prefab Plant includes two Modular Units
rated at 0.25 mgd each.
-------
K-2
EIS ALTERNATIVE 5
OTTER TAIL LAKE - COLLECTION
COST ESTIMATE
5.2
Costs in 1978 Dollars
x $1,000
SERVICE AREA
CAPITAL
COSTS
O&M
COSTS
SALVAGE
VALUE
1980
Entire Service Area
25% Engineering Contingencies
TOTAL
6,839.93
1.709.98
$8,549.91
50.66
$50.66
2,808.60
561.72
$3,370.32
1980 - 2000
Entire Service Area
25% Engineering Contingencies
TOTAL
31.17/yr.
7.79
38.96/yr.
-------
5.3
EIS ALTERNATIVE 5
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVE
($1,000)
PRESENT WORTH
ALTERNATE
ITEM
Treatment
Collection
Collection
YEAR
1980
1980
2000
CAPITAL
DOLLARS
$1,139.50
$8,549.90
$ 39.00/yr.
O&M
DOLLARS
$57.20
$50.66
-
SALVAGE
VALUE
$ 403.09
$3,370.30
-
(1)
CAPITAL
DOLLARS
$1,139.50
$8,549.90
$ 425.50
(2)
O&M
DOLLARS
$624.00
$552.70
-
(3)
SALVAGE
VALUE
$111.70
$934.20
-
$
$
$
TOTAL
PRESENT
WORTH
(1+2+3)
1,651.80
8,168.40
425.50
AVERAGE ANNUAL
EQUIVALENT COST
$10,245.70
$938.50
NJ
-------
K-2
FACILITY PLAN PROPOSED ACTION WITH FLOW REDUCTION
OTTER TAIL LAKE
COST ESTIMATE
Alternative Flow Reduction
Q = 0.38 mgd
Costs in $1978
x 1,000
Spray Irrigation
on West Shore
Capital
Costs
O&M
Costs
Salvage
Value
Influent pumping
Influent pipe
Preliminary treatment
Distribution pumping
Stabilization pond
Field clearing
Field leveling
Distribution (center pivot)
Admin & Lab
Monitoring wells
Roads & fences
Land (160 acres)
Crop revenue
Chlorination
Subtotal
Engr., Contg., etc.
TOTAL
58.30
159.81
20.90
72.90
297.00
47.25
27.00
56.70
55.35
10.69
54.54
160.00
23.10
$1,043.54
260.89
$1,304.43
2.00
0.20
3.60
1.04
19.30
11.14
3.40
1.38
1.10
(-7.80)
2.40
$37.76
$37.76
19.24
95.89
9.41
34.26
178.20
16.20
26.65
26.57
5.13
16.36
288.98
_ 9.01
$725.90
145.18
$871.08
-------
FACILITY PLAN PROPOSED ACTION WITH FLOW REDUCTION
OTTER TAIL LAKE - COLLECTION
COST ESTIMATE
K-2
Flow Reduction
Costs in 1978 Dollars
x $1,000
SERVICE AREA
CAPITAL
COSTS
O&M
COSTS
SALVAGE
VALUE
1980
Entire Service Area
25% Engineering Contingencies
TOTAL
6,467.59
1,616.90
$8,084.49
48.33
$48.33
2,706.15
541.23
$3,247.38
1980 - 2000
Entire Service Area
25% Engineering Contingencies
TOTAL
31.17/yr.
7.79
$ 38.96/yr.
-------
Flow Reduction
FACILITY PLAN PROPOSED ACTION WITH FLOW REDUCTION
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVE
($1,000)
PRESENT WORTH
ALTERNATE
ITEM
Treatment
Collection
Collection
YEAR
1980
1980
2000
CAPITAL
DOLLARS
$1,304.40
$8,084.50
$ 39.00/yr.
O&M
DOLLARS
$37.80
$48.30
-
SALVAGE
VALUE
$ 871.10
$3,247.40
-
(1)
CAPITAL
DOLLARS
$1,304.40
$8,084.50
$ 425.50
(2)
O&M
DOLLARS
$412.40
$526.90
-
(3)
SALVAGE
VALUE
$241.50
$900.20
-
TOTAL
PRESENT
WORTH
(1+2+3)
$1,475.30
$7,711.20
$ 425.50
AVERAGE ANNUAL
EQUIVALENT COST
$9,612.00
$880.50
-------
Appendix
K-3
COST SHARING
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (Public Law 92-500,
Section 202), authorized EPA to award grants for 75% of the construction
costs of wastewater management systems. Passage of the Clean Water Act
(P. L. 95-217) authorized increased Federal participation in the costs
of wastewater management systems. The Construction Grants Regulations
(40 CFR Part 35) have been modified in accordance with the later Act.
Final Rules and Regulations for implementing this Act were published in
the Federal Register on September 27, 1978.
There follows a brief discussion of the eligibility of major
components of wastewater management systems for Federal funds.
Federal Contribution
In general, EPA will share in the costs of constructing treatment
systems and in the cost of land used as part of the treatment process.
For land application systems the Federal government will also help to
defray costs of storage and ultimate disposal of effluent. The Federal
share is 75% of the cost of conventional treatment systems and 85% of
the cost of systems using innovative or alternative technologies.
Federal funds can also be used to construct collection systems when the
requirements discussed below are met.
The increase in the Federal share to 85% when innovative or
alternative technologies are used is intended to encourage reclamation
and reuse of water, recycling of wastewater constituents, elimination of
pollutant discharges, and/or recovering of energy. Alternative
technologies are those which have been proven and used in actual
practice. These include land treatment, aquifer recharge, and direct
reuse for industrial purposes. On-site, other small waste systems, and
septage treatment facilities are also classified as alternative
technologies. Innovative technologies are those which have not been
fully proven in full scale operation.
To further encourage the adoption and use of alternative and
innovative technologies, the Cost Effectiveness Analysis Guidelines in
the new regulations give these technologies a 15% preference (in terms
of present worth) over conventional technologies. This cost preference
does not apply to privately owned, on-site or other privately owned
small waste flow systems.
States that contribute to the 25% non-Federal share of conventional
projects must contribute the same relative level of funding to the 15%
non-Federal share of innovative or alternative projects.
Individual Systems (Privately or Publicly Owned)
P.L. 95-217 authorized EPA to participate in grants for con-
structing privately owned treatment works serving small commercial
establishments or one or more principal residences inhabited on or
-------
K-3
before December 27, 1977 (Final Regulations, 40 CFR 35.918,
September 27, 1978). A public body must apply for the grant, certify
that the system will be properly operated and maintained, and collect
user charges for operation and maintenance of the system. All
commercial users must pay industrial cost recovery on the Federal share
of the system. A principal residence is defined as a voting residence
or household of the family during 51% of the year. Note: The
"principal residence" requirement does not apply to publicly owned
systems.
Individual systems, including sewers, that use alternative
technologies may be eligible for 85% Federal participation, but
privately owned individual systems are not eligible for the 115% cost
preference in the cost-effective analysis. Acquisition of land on which
a privately owned individual system would be located is not eligible for
a grant.
Publicly owned on-site and cluster systems, although subject to the
same regulations as centralized treatment plants, are also considered
alternative technologies and therefore eligible for an 85% Federal
share.
EPA policy on eligibility criteria for small waste flow systems is
still being developed. It is clear that repair, renovation or
replacement of on-site systems is eligible if they are causing
documentable public health, groundwater quality or surface water quality
problems. Both privately owned systems servicing year-round residences
(individual systems) and publicly owned year-round or seasonally used
systems are eligible where there are existing problems. Seasonally
used, privately owned systems are not eligible.
Several questions on eligibility criteria remain to be answered and
are currently being addressed by EPA:
o For systems which do not have existing problems, would
preventive measures be eligible which would delay or avoid
future problems?
o Could problems with systems other than public health,
groundwater quality or surface water quality be the basis for
eligibility of repair, renovation or replacement? Examples of
"other problems", are odors, limited hydraulic capacity, and
periodic backups.
o Is non-conformance with modern sanitary codes suitable
justification for eligibility of repair, renovation or
replacement? Can non-conformance be used as a measure of the
need for preventive measures?
o If a system is causing public health, groundwater quality or
surface water quality problems but site limitations would
prevent a new on-site system from satisfying sanitary codes,
would a non-conforming on-site replacement be eligible if it
would solve the existing problems?
-------
K-3
In this EIS estimates were made of the percent repair, renovation
or replacement of on-site systems that may be found necessary during
detailed site analyses. Those estimates are felt to be conservatively
high and would probably be appropriate for generous resolutions of the
above questions.
Collection Systems
Construction Grants Program Requirements Memorandum (PRM) 78-9,
March 3, 1978, amends EPA policy on the funding of sewage collection
systems in accordance with P.L. 95-271. Collection sewers are those
installed primarily to receive wastewaters from household service lines.
Collection sewers may be grant-eligible if they are the replacement or
major rehabilitation of an existing system. For new sewers in an
existing community to be eligible for grant funds, the following
requirements must be met:
o Substantial Human Habitation -- The bulk (generally 67%) of
the flow design capacity through the proposed sewer system
must be for wastewaters originating from homes in existence on
October 18, 1972. Substantial human habitation should be
evaluated block by block, or where blocks do not exist, by
areas of five acres or less.
o Cost-Effectiveness — New collector sewers will only be
considered cost-effective when the systems in use (e.g. septic
tanks) for disposal of wastes from existing population are
creating a public health problem, violating point source
discharge requirements of PL 92-500, or contaminating ground-
water. Documentation of the malfunctioning disposal systems
and the extent of the problem is required.
Where population density within the area to be served by the
collection system is less than 1.7 persons per acre (one
household per two acres), a severe pollution or public health
problem must be specifically documented and the collection
sewers must be less costly than on-site alternatives. Where
population density is less than 10 persons per acre, it must
be shown that new gravity collector sewer construction and
centralized treatment is more cost-effective than on-site
alternatives. The collection system may not have excess
capacity which could induce development in environmentally
sensitive areas such as wetlands, floodplains or prime
agricultural lands. The proposed system must conform with
approved Section 208 plans, air quality plans, and Executive
Orders and EPA policy on environmentally sensitive areas.
o Public Disclosure of Costs -- Estimated monthly service
charges to a typical residential customer for the system must
be disclosed to the public in order for the collection system
to be funded. A total monthly service charge must be
presented, and the portion of the charge due to operation and
maintenance, debt service, and connection to the system must
also be disclosed.
-------
K-3
Elements of the substantial human habitation and cost-effectiveness
eligibility requirements for new collector sewers are portrayed in
Figure J-3 in a decision flow diagram. These requirements would apply
for any pressure, vacuum or gravity collector sewers except those
serving on-site or small waste flow systems.
Household Service Lines
Traditionally, gravity sewer lines built on private property
connecting a house or other building with a public sewer have been built
at the expense of the owner without local, State or Federal assistance.
Therefore, in addition to other costs for hooking up to a new sewer
system, owners installing gravity household service lines will have to
pay about $1,000, more or less depending on site and soil conditions,
distance and other factors.
Pressure sewer systems, including the individual pumping units, the
pressure line and appurtenances on private property, however, are
considered as part of the community collection system. They are,
therefore, eligible for Federal and State grants which substantially
reduce the homeowner's private costs for installation of household
service lines.
it US. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1979-652-614
------- |