United States Region VIII
Environmental Protection 1860 Lincoln St.
Agency Denver, Colorado 80295
«?EPA Environmental Draft
impact Statement
Spearfish
Sewerage Needs
Lawrence County near Spearfish, S.D.
APPENDIX
-------
I
INTRODUCTION
This volume of the Spearfish Area Environmental Impact Statement
contains supporting information and documents for the summaries, con-
clusions, and decisions presented in the main volume of the EIS.
Presented in Appendix A is the evaluation of the existing data base
for the Study Area. Appendix B is an inventory of nonpoint source con-
trol strategies for a variety of activities, including agriculture,
construction, urban development, and mining. A model floodplain ordinance
is presented in Appendix C. The model ordinance was provided by Denver
Urban Drainage, Denver, Colorado. It provides guidance for the development
of a floodplain ordinance but is not intended to be specific to the needs
of the Spearfish area. Appendix D presents the amended facilities plan
report prepared by Scott Engineering.
NOTE: Oversized maps in Appendix A and D have not been included. These
exhibits may be reviewed at the following locations:
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
1860 Lincoln Street
Denver, Colorado
City Hall of Spearfish
Spearfish, South Dakota
Scott Engineering
Spearfish, South Dakota
Engineering Science
2785 N. Speer Blvd.
Denver, Colorado
South Dakota Department of Environmental
Protection
Pierre,,South Dakota
i
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I
Because of the magnitude of the effort required to produce this
environmental impact statement, It is an Impossible task to acknowledge
all of the people and agencies who contributed to the final product.
A heart-felt thanks is extended to the individuals who have contributed
and assisted in the completion of this monumental effort. A special
thanks is offered to all of the secretaries without whose patience and
long hours the project could not have been competed.
DISCLAIMER
This report has been reviewed by the EPA, Region VIII, Water
Division and approved for publication. Mention of trade names
or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation
for use.
DOCUMENT AVAILABILITY
This document is available In limited quantities through the
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Evaluation
Branch, 1860 Lincoln St., Denver, Colorado 80295. This document
is also available to the public through the National Technical
Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
ii
-------
EXISTING DATA BASE EVALUATION
SPEARFISH, SOUTH DAKOTA
APPENDIX A
-------
APPENDIX A
EXISTING DATA BASE EVALUATION
SPEARFISH, SOUTH DAKOTA
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE NO.
INTRODUCTION 1
THE SETTING 1
CLIMATE 2
GEOLOGY 2
SOILS 4
LAND USE 12
WATER QUALITY CRITERIA AND STREAM CLASSIFICATION 14
WATER QUALITY 15
GROUNDWATER ELEVATIONS AND MOVEMENT 17
SEWAGE DISPOSAL-OUTLYING AREAS 21
BACTERIOLOGICAL MOVEMENT BELOW SEPTIC LINES 29
AERIAL IMAGERY 30
CONCLUSIONS 35
REFERENCES 120
ii
-------
LIST OF TABLES
TITLE PAGE NO.
TABLE 1 AVERAGE ANNUAL TEMPERATURE AND 40
PRECIPITATION
TABLE 2 DAILY PRECIPITATION FOR SELECTED
YEARS
41
48
TABLE 3 SOIL INTERPRETATIONS
TABLE 4 SURFACE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS 50
TABLE 5 GROUNDWATER QUALITY 53
Gallery G
TABLE 6 GROUNDWATER QUALITY
Well at Abernathy's (A) 57
TABLE 7 GROUNDWATER QUALITY
Ward Well (ww) 58
TABLE 8 GROUNDWATER QUALITY
Spring Above Ward (W,AW) 59
TABLE 9 GROUNDWATER QUALITY
Steve Peters Res. 60
TABLE 10 GROUNDWATER QUALITY
B. Abernathy Res. 61
TABLE 11 GROUNDWATER QUALITY
Don Orel Res. 62
TABLE 12 GROUNDWATER QUALITY
M. Blosmo 63
TABLE 13 GROUNDWATER QUALITY
M. Johnson 64
TABLE 14 GROUNDWATER QUALITY
M. Reed 65
TABLE 15 GROUNDWATER QUALITY
H. Laprath 66
TABLE 16 GROUNDWATER QUALITY
D. Deberg 67
TABLE 17 GROUNDWATER QUALITY
J. Witt 68
TABLE 18 GROUNDWATER QUALITY
L. Reuppel, Sr. 69
TABLE 19 GROUNDWATER QUALITY
R. Pascoe 70
TABLE 20 GROUNDWATER QUAILITY
Spring near Hwy. 14 & 85 71
iii
-------
LIST OF TABLES
TITLE
PAGE NO.
TABLE 21 GROUNDWATER QUALITY
Spring, S. of West Subd. West Side of Rd.
TABLE 22 GROUNDWATER QUALITY
Spring, S. of West Subd. East Side of Rd.
TABLE 23 GROUNDWATER QUALITY
Spring, S. of West Subd. East Side of Rd.
TABLE 24 GROUNDWATER QUALITY
STATION J
TABLE 25 GROUNDWATER QUALITY
Cundy House (CH)
TABLE 26 GROUNDWATER QUALITY
Lester
TABLE 27 GROUNDWATER QUALITY
STATION HB
TABLE 28 SURFACE WATER QUALITY
Spearfish Creek (DP)
TABLE 29 SURFACE WATER QUALITY
Spearfish Creek (UP)
TABLE 30 SURFACE WATER QUALITY
Spearfish Creek (14)
TABLE 31 SURFACE WATER QUALITY
Spearfish Creek (SW)
TABLE 32 SURFACE WATER QUALITY
Spearfish Creek (AG)
TABLE 33 SURFACE WATER QUALITY
Higgins Gulch (H)
TABLE 34 SURFACE WATER QUALITY
Higgins Gulch (HC)
TABLE 35 SURFACE WATER QUALITY
Higgins Gulch (HX)
TABLE 36 SURFACE WATER QUALITY
Higgins Gulch (I)
TABLE 37 SURFACE WATER QUALITY
Irrigation Ditch (ID)
TABLE 38 GROUNDWATER QUALITY
Cundy Drain
TABLE 39 WELL DATA-SPEARFISH
TABLE 40 SUPPLEMENTAL DATA ON SEPTIC SYSTEMS
AND WELLS
TABLE 41 SOIL PERCOLATION RATES
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
96
iv
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
TITLE PAGE NO.
FIGURE 1 STUDY AREA 98
FIGURE 2 GEOLOGY OF SPEARFISH AREA 99
FIGURE 3 GENERALIZED GEOLOGIC CROSS-SECTION 100
FIGURE 4 SOILS OF SPEARFISH AREA 101
FIGURE 5 TOTAL COLIFORM AT GALLERY 1967 102
FIGURE 6. TOTAL COLIFORM AT GALLERY 1968 103
FIGURE 7 TOTAL COLIFORM AT GALLERY 1973 104
FIGURE 8 TOTAL COLIFORM AT GALLERY 1975 105
FIGURE 9 TOTAL COLIFORM AT GALLERY 1976 106
FIGURE 10 TOTAL COLIFORM AT GALLERY 1977 107
FIGURE 11 TOTAL COLIFORM AT GALLERY 1978 108
FIGURE 12 TOTAL COLIFORM AT CUNDY DRAIN 1978 109
FIGURE 13 TOTAL COLIFORM AT ABERNATHY WELL 1978 110
FIGURE 14 TOTAL COLIFORM AT WARD WELL 1978 111
FIGURE 15 TOTAL COLIFORM AT SPRING ABOVE WARD'S 112
1978
FIGURE 16 TOTAL COLIFORM AT HIGGIN'S GULCH 1978 113
FIGURE 17 TOTAL COLIFORM AT HIGGINS GULCH (HC) 114
1978
FIGURE 18 TOTAL COLIFORM AT HIGGINS BULCH (HX) 115
1978
FIGURE 19 SEPTIC TANK VERIFICATIONS 116
FIGURE 20 SEPTIC TANK LIMITATIONS 117
-------
INTRODUCTION
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has determined that an Environ-
mental Impact Statement (EIS) should be prepared to analyze the effects of
the interceptor portions of the wastewater treatment facility plan (201) for
the City of Spearfish, South Dakota. The 201 plan developed and recommended
construction of a new sewage treatment plan with a 0.8 million gallon per day
(MGD) capacity to serve an estimated 1990 population of 10,325 persons. The
plan also recommended construction of approximately 10 miles of interceptor
sewers into presently unsewered areas.
To avoid delays in providing needed sewage treatment for Spearfish while
the EIS is being prepared, EPA, the City, and the State Department of Environ-
mental Protection have agreed to approve that portion of the proposed plan that
allows construction of a new sewage treatment plant while additional facility
planning work and environmental analyses are done.
The purpose of this task report is to present, with respect to the inter-
ceptor alternatives, the existing available data and identify the key issues
for this EIS.
THE SETTING ^1^
The City of Spearfish is situated on the northern edge of the Black Hills
of South Dakota in Lawrence County. Located on Spearfish Creek, Spearfish offers
a picturesque setting to its residents and visitors. Spearfish's proximity to
the Black Hills offers a year round focal point for recreational enthusiasts.
By virtue of its location, adjacent to the Black Hills, and growth in energy and
recreation related activities, Spearfish has and will continue to experience a
healthy growth and development pattern.
The Study Area for this EIS has been determined by Federal, State, and
City officials and is identical to the 201 Facilities plan Study Area (Figure 1).
The area is approximately 31 square miles and includes the City of Spearfish
and its surrounding environs. The EIS is specifically concerned with the areas
outside of the Spearfish city limit.
A-l
-------
CLIMATE
The Study Area has a continental climate, experiencing extreme fluctua-
tions in temperature in both summer and winter. The annual average temperature
is 46.5°F with the average high and low being 57.2°F and 35.8°F, respectively.
Winds in the area are generally from the north-northwest at an average velocity
of 10 to 12 miles per hour. Spring and summer winds frequently blow from the
south-southeast and have the highest velocities, up to 75 miles per hour.
The average annual precipitation is 20.2 inches. The highest precipitation
occurs during April, May, June, and July. A great deal of the seasonal precip-
itation occurs as short duration, high intensity thunderstorms. The average
annual temperature and precipitation data are listed in Table 1. Daily precip-
itation for selected years is listed in Table 2. Climatological data were
obtained from the Homestake Sawmill located west of Spearfish.
GEOLOGY
(2)
Within the EIS Study Area nine geologic formations have been identified.
The identified formations consist of recent alluvial deposits, old terrace
deposits, the Spearfish formation, Morrison shale, the Sundance formation, the
Minnelusa formation, Opeche shale, Minnekahta limestone and the Brule Clay.
These formations are identified on Figure 2.
The recent alluvial deposits are found in the Spearfish Creek and
Higgins Gulch bottom lands. The alluvial material consists of silt, sand,
gravel, and cobbles. These deposits have a high permeability, partially a
consequence of their unconsolidated nature and also as a result of historic
stream channels. The old stream channels meandering through the subsurface
alluvium are confined to the broad bottom lands of Spearfish Creek. It is
within the recent alluvial deposits that the City of Belle Fourche has located
their water supply infiltration gallery.
Old terrace deposits occur as isolated outcrops along the edge of the benches
of the bottom lands. These deposits are of similar material as the recent allu-
vial deposits but are older. Because of the location of these old terrace deposits
relative to the Spearfish formation it is thought that these areas may contain
perched water tables which would not be contiguous with other groundwater in the
area.
A-2
-------
The Spearfish formation underlies the alluvial deposits of the major
drainages of the Study Area. This formation is found to be the dominant for-
mation of the benches above the bottomland areas. The Spearfish formation
is predominately a red siltstone, consisting of red sandy or silty shale.
Massive gypsum beds and stringers occur throughout the formation and limestone
outcrops are also found. There are also areas of gravel and unconsolidated sand
which may be remnants of old terrace deposits. The Spearfish formation is con-
sidered to be a very impermeable material, having a low water yielding capacity.
The Morrison shale is found on the upper most areas of the Lookout Peak
area east of Spearfish. This is a shale material which has little significance
in this study because of its location.
the Sundance formation separates the Spearfish formation and the Morrison
shale in the eastern mountains of the Study Area. This is a shale which has
some sand beds within the formation.
The Minnelusa formation consists of pink and white granular sandstones
with limestone lenses and layers. Red shales, white sandstone and interbedded
limestone occur near the base. In some areas a thick permeable sand is found
at the top of the formation. This formation surfaces in the mountains south
and southwest in the Study Area. This material is permeable and where it
outcrops serves as an area for groundwater recharge. Groundwater of the
Minnelusa is significant to the area because of its good quality, its artesian
characteristics and high yield.
The Opeche formation is composed of red silty and sandy shales and may
contain streaks of gypsum. The formation is found in the western areas of
the Study Area.
The Minnekahta formation is a massive gray to pink laminated limestone.
Solution caverns or sinks may occur in the formation. This formation is found
primarily in the southwest areas of the Study Area and underlies the Spearfish
formation. This formation is more permeable than the Spearfish.
The Brule Clay is a reminant formation that is considered to be insignifi-
cant to this study. The formation occurs in the southeast corner of the Study
Area.
A-3
-------
The general dip of the geologic formations is northeast and varies from
one to three degrees. A generalized geologic cross-section is illustrated on
Figure 3. The general stratigraphy of these formations is indicated on this
Figure.
Residential development in the Study Area has occurred over various geologic
formations. In the context of water quality management and the use of absorption
fields for septic tanks, geologic considerations include the depth to bedrock,
and geologic formations which serve to recharge groundwater. The depth to bedrock
under existing developments is described under the Soils section and groundwater
recharge areas of significance are identified under the Groundwater Elevations
and Movement section.
The following developments are existing in the Study Area: Weiss-West,
Hardy, MacKaben No. 1, MacKabeii No. 2, Deer Meadows, Deberg-Fuller, Grandview
Acres, Westfield, Mountain Plains, Christensen Drive, and Old Tinton Road.
These developments have occurred over the following geologic formations:
. Weiss-West - recent alluvial deposits
. Hardy - recent alluvial deposits
. MacKaben No. 1 - recent alluvial deposits and the Spearfish formation
. MacKaben No. 2 - older terrace deposits and the Spearfish formation
. Deer Meadows - recent alluvial deposits and the Spearfish formation
. Deberg-Fuller - recent alluvial deposits and the Spearfish formation
. Grandview Acres - older terrace deposits and the Spearfish formation
. Westfield - older terrace deposits
. Mountain Plains - Minnelusa sandstone
. Christensen Drive - Spearfish formation
. Old Tinton Road - Minnekahta limestone
Of the formations on which development has occurred, the most severe limita-
tions are found on the Minnelusa sandstone. This formation serves as a groundwater
recharge area and, in the Mountain Plains area, has a shallow soil profile. Con-
ventional septic tank absorption fields should be designed to avoid contamination
of the groundwater and to insure adequate soil depth is available for filtration.
A-4
-------
SOILS
The Soil Conservation Service (SCS) has completed the survey program
(3)
necessary to map and interpret the soils of Lawrence County. Within the
EIS Study Area a total of 36 soils have been identified. The soils map and
the soils descriptions are currently unpublished. However, the unpublished
soils maps and interpretations were made available from the South Dakota State
Planning.Bureau (SDSFB). The detailed soils data contain several variables
relative to land development and use including, water management, soil and
water features (surface and groundwater), suitability for sanitary facilities,
building site development, physical and chemical properties of soil, soil use
as a construction material, crop and pasture production, recreational develop-
ment, engineering properties, windbreaks and environmental plantings, woodland
management and productivity, and wildlife habitat potentials. For the purposes
of this Study those variables pertinent to urban/suburban development and
associated wastewater disposal are evaluated and presented in Table 3. The
distribution of soils in the Study Area is shown on Figure 4.
Land development outside the City limits of Spearfish has been predominately
north and northwest, with some development west and southwest. The development
have occurred on many different types of soils, some suitable to residential use
and some having suitability constraints.
The following discussion identifies the soils on which residential devel-
opment has occurred and the limits each soil has for such development.
Weiss-West
The Weiss-West developments consist of eleven residences, which are
predominately mobile homes. These homes are located in an area which consists
of four major soils:
. Baraum silt loam
. Barnum silt loam, channeled
. Swint silt loam
. St. Onge loam
The Barnum silt loam is a deep, well drained, nearly level soilxof terraces
and bottom lands. This soil is subject to occasional flooding for brief periods.
A-5
-------
The surface layer is brown silt loam in the upper 3 inches and brown
very fine sandy loam in the lower 3 inches. The underlying material, to
a depth of 60 inches, is light reddish brown, very friable loam.
The Barnum silt loam channeled is identical in features to the Baraum
silt loam except that the soil is confined to bottom lands. Entrenched
streams meander through this soil (Spearfish Creek adjacent to the Weiss-
West subdivision).
The Swint silt loam soil is a deep, well drained, nearly level soil on
terraces and alluvial fans.
The 8 inch surface layer is dark reddish gray silt loam while the 6 inch
subsurface layer is dark reddish gray, friable silt loam. The underlying
material, to a depth of 44 inches, is light reddish brown, very friable silt
loam in the upper part and reddish brown silt loam in the lower part. Below
this the soil is light reddish brown, calcareous, very fine sandy loam.
St. Onge is a deep, well drained, nearly level soil on low terraces.
The surface layer is dark grayish brown loam about 7 inches thick. The
subsurface layers, to a depth of 17 inches, are very dark grayish brown,
friable silt loam in the upper part and dark grayish brown loam in the lower
part. The underlying material is stratified brown and light brown loam and
fine sandy loam.
The St. Onge and Swint soils contain more silt and clay, and organic
matter to a greater depth than Barnum soils. All 4 soils are susceptible
to occasional flooding and have been determined to have severe limitations for
septic tanks, sewage lagoons, and building site development.
Hardy
The Hardy development is located on the eastern edge of Section 32 and
consists of 5 residential developments. This development is situated on the
following 4 soils:
. Vale silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
. Vale silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
. Tilford silt loam, 6 to 9 percent slopes
. Nevee silt loam, 6 to 9 percent slopes
A-6
-------
The Vale silt loam on 0 to 2 percent slopes Is deep, well drained, on
terraces and uplands.
The first 6 Inches are dark brown silt loam. The subsoil, about 21
Inches thick, is dark brown, firm silty clay loam in the upper part; brown,
firm, calcareous silty clay loam in the middle part; and light brown, friable,
calcareous loam in the lower part. The underlying material is light brown,
calcareous loam.
The Vale silt loam on 2 to 6 percent slopes is identical to the Vale silt
loam on 0 to 2 percent slopes except that it occurs on steep slopes.
Tilford silt loam, on 6 to 9 percent slopes, is a deep, well drained soil
on moderately sloping terraces, and uplands.
The surface layer is brown silt loam about 6 inches thick. The 24 inches
of subsoil is friable, calcareous silt loam that is brown in the upper part and
light brown in the lower part. The underlying material is pink, calcareous
silt loam. In places, lime is leached deeper than 10 inches.
Nevee silt loam, 6 to 9 percent slopes, is a deep, well drained moderately
sloping soil on terraces and uplands.
Typically, the surface layer is reddish brown silt loam about 6 inches thick.
The underlying material to a depth of 60 inches is very friable silt loam
that is reddish yellow in the upper part, yellowish red in the middle, and red
in the lower part. In parts, lime has been leached deeper than 10 inches.
The Hardy development is located on the transition area from bottomlands
to the bench areas. The Nevee soils have low strength and may require buildings
to have foundations and footings designed to deal with potential problems to
prevent structure damage. The remaining soils are well suited for building.
Slow perculation of the Vale, and Nevee soils may require that septic tank
absorption fields be enlarged. Absorption fields in the Nevee soil may not be
feasible in places due to a shallow depth to bedrock (40 to 60 inches) which can
outcrop in this transitional area between the alluvium and the bench area.
MacKaben No. 1
The MacKaben No. 1 subdivision is located on the southside of Interstate 90
in the southeast quarter of Section 32. The subdivision is in the Higgins
Gulch drainage and Higgins Gulch crosses through the northern edge of the sub-
division. There are four soil types in the subdivision, these include:
A-7
-------
. Winetti cobbly loam
. 'Tilford silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
. Tilford silt loam, 6 to 9 percent slopes
. Vale silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
The Winetti cobbly loam in the MacKaben No. 1 subdivision is located
on the Spearfish Creek bench region. The soil is somewhat excessively drained,
gently s-loping, and-shallow to sand and gravel. This soil is subject to rate
flooding for brief periods. Many scattered cobbles commonly occur on the
surface.
Typically, the surface layer is grayish brown cobbly loam about 5 inches
thick. The underlying material to a depth of 60 inches is a pale brown, very
friable gravelly sandy loam.
The Tilford silt loam in the subdivision is located on 2 to 6 percent
slopes. It is a deep, well drained, gently sloping soil.
The surface layer is brown silt loam about 6 inches thick. The subsoil,
about 24 inches thick, is friable, calcareous silt loam that is brown in the
upper part and light brown in the lower part. The underlying material is pink,
calcareous silt loam. In places, lime has been leached deeper than 10 inches.
The Tilford silt loam on 6 to 9 percent slopes and the Vale silt loam on
2 to 6 percent slopes are described under the Hardy subdivision.
The Tilford soils found in the MacKabel subdivision are well suited for
both building sites and septic tank leach fields. The Vale soil is suited for
building but it is suggested by SCS that septic tank leach fields be enlarged
due to slow percolation rates. The Winetti soil is identified to be unsuited
for building sites and sanitary facilities because of the potential for flooding
and seepage problems.
MacKaben No. 2
The MacKaben No. 2 subdivision located in the northeast quarter of Section
31 currently has 12 residents. The subdivision is located on the bench area
of the Spearfish Creek drainage. The two principal soil types are the Tilford
silt loam on 2 to 6 percent slopes and 6 to 9 percent slopes. The characteris-
tics of both of these soils have been previously described. These soils are
well suited for building sites and septic tank leach fields.
A-8
-------
Deer Meadows
The Deer Meadows subdivision is located in the southwest quarter of
Section 5 and part of the southeast quarter of Section 6. There are 15 to 20
residential units in the subdivision. There are 6 soil types found in the
subdivision and include:
.Barnum silt loam
.Rekop-Gypnevee-Rock outcrop complex, 15 to 50 percent slopes
.Nevee-Spearfish-Rock outcrop complex, 9 to 40 percent slopes
.Swint silt loam
.Vale silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
.Nevee silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
The typical features of the Barnum, Swint, Vale, and Nevee soils have
been described above.
The Rekop-Gypnevee-Rock outcrop complex on 15 to 50 percent slopes
consist of soils that range from shallow to deep, well to somewhat excessively
drained, and moderate to very steep features. The distribution of the components
of this complex are about 35 percent Rekop soils, 25 percent Gypnevee soils,
and 25 percent Rock outcrop. Rock outcrop is on the tops and upper sides of
ridges. Rekop and Gypnevee soils and Rock outcrops are so intermingled that
it is not practical to separate them.
The Rekop soil has a surface layer of reddish br.own loam about 4 inches
thick. The underlying material to a depth of 18 inches is loam that is light
brown in the upper part and pink in the lower part. Pinkish white gypsum and
alabaster bedrock occurs at a depth of 18 inches.
The Gypnevee soil has a surface layer of reddish brown loam about 7 inches
thick. It has a transitional layer of yellowish-red friable silt loam about
6 inches thick. The underlying material, to a depth of about 60 inches, is
friable silt loam that is reddish yellow in the upper part and light red in
the lower part. In places, the bedrock is at shallower depths.
Rock outcrop consists of massive exposures of pinkish white and white
gypsum and alabaster rock.
A-9
-------
The Nevee-Spearfish-Rock outcrop complex on 9 to 40 percent slopes
consists of deep and shallow, well drained to excessively drained, strongly
sloping to steep soils and Rock outcrops that are on uplands. The Nevee soils
are in the lower parts of the terrain, Spearfish soils are in the middle and
upper parts of the landscape with the Rock outcrop on the tops and upper sides
of ridges.
The Nevee soil has a surface layer of reddish brown silt loam about 6 inches
thick. The underlying material to a depth of 60 inches is very friable silt
loam that is reddish yellow in the upper part, yellowish red in the middle, and
red in the lower part. In places, lime has been leached deeper than 10 inches.
The Spearfish soil has a reddish brown surface layer of silt loam about
2 inches thick. The transitional layer, about 5 inches thick, is reddish brown,
very friable silt loam. The underlying material to a depth of 12 inches is red,
very friable silt loam. Red silty shale is at a depth of 12 inches.
Rock outcrop consists of massive exposures of red, silty fractured shale.
The Barnum soil is generally not suited for building sites and sanitary
facilities due to the potential for occasional flooding. The shallow depth
to bedrock, low strength and presence of soluble gypsum make the Rekop-Gypnevee-
Rock outcrop complex undesirable for building sites and septic tank leach fields.
Building sites and sanitary facilities should be located on the lower slopes
of the Nevee-Spearfish-Rock outcrop complex. If buildings are constructed on
this unit proper design of foundations and footings should occur to help
prevent structure damage caused by the low strength of these soils. Septic
tank absorption fields should be located on the Nevee soils If possible. Enlarging
the filter fields helps overcome the slow percolation rate. The potential for
occasional flooding may render the Swint soil undesirable for both building sites
and septic tanks, while the Vale soil is well suited for building sites but
enlargement of septic tank leach fields may be required to overcome the slow
percolation rate. The low strength of the Nevee soil, slow percolation rate
and the depth to bedrock may limit development on the soil.
Deberg-Fuller
The Deberg-Fuller subdivision is located in the southeast quarter of
Section 5. There are 20 residences in the subdivision. The four soil types
found in the subdivision include:
A-10
-------
•Nevee-Spearfish-Rock outcrop complex, 9 to 40 percent slopes
•Tilford silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
.Tilford silt loam, 6 to 9 percent slopes
.Vale silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
The general features and characteristics of these soils are discussed
above. The Nevee-Spearfish-Rock outcrop complex is best suited for development
and septic tanks on -the lower slopes of the unit. Proper design of foundations
and footings helps prevent structure damage caused by the low strength of these
soils. Septic tank absorption fields should be located on the Nevee soils
where possible. Enlarging the filter field helps overcome the slow percolation
rate. The Tilford soils are well suited for both building sites and septic
tank absorption fields. The Vale soil is well suited for building sites but
septic tank absorption fields may require enlarging to overcome slow percolation
rates.
GrandView Acres
The GrandView Acres subdivision is located in the northwest quarter of
Section 5 and contains 12 residential units. An~unnamed intermittent creek
runs through the center of the subdivision. The principal soil types which
occur within the subdivision are:
.Nevee-Spearfish-Rock outcrop complex
•Tilford silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
.Tilford silt loam, 6 to 9 percent slopes
.Vale silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
.Vale silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
.Nevee silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
The features of these soils have been described above. Residential devel-
opment on the Nevee-Spearfish-Rock. outcrop complex should be located on the
lower slopes in this unit. Proper design of foundations and footings helps
prevent structure damage caused by low strength of these soils. Septic tank
absorption fields should be located on the Nevee soils and the fields should
be enlarged due to slow percolation rates. The Tilford soils have no constraints
for development. The Vale soils are well suited for development but for septic
tanks it is recommended that enlarged absorption fields be built to offset
slow percolation rates. Nevee soils are not well suited for building due to
the low strength of the soils, slow percolation rates, and depth to bedrock.
A-11
-------
Westfield
Located in the northeast quarter of Section 8, the Westfield development
consists of 15 units. There are three soil types in the subdivision. These
soils are:
•Winetti cobbly loam
•Tilford silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
• .Tilford silt loam, 6 to 9 percent slopes
These soils have been described previously. Their constraints for
development and septic tank systems are presented below. The Winetti soil is
not suited to building sites or septic tanks because of the potential for
flooding and seepage. However, the Tilford soils are suitable for both
building sites and septic tanks.
Mountain Plains
The Mountain Plains subdivision is located in the southern part of Section
>
22. There are about 10 residences in the development. There are three major
soil types in the area and Include the following:
.Paunsaugunt-Rock outcrop complex
.Vanocker-Citadel association
.Citadel association
The Citadel association consists of deep, well drained soils. It is
typical of smooth upland divides on the sides of mountain valleys and
drainageways.
The Citadel soil has been described under the Vanocker-Citadel association.
Steep slopes, stoniness, and shallow depth to bedrock make the Paunsaugunt-
Rock outcrop complex unsuited for building sites and septic tanks. Steep slopes,
and an associated potential for soil slippage makes the Vanocker-Citadel
association unsuited for development. The Citadel association can be built on
if measures are taken to overcome the potential for shrinking and swelling of
this soil. Enlarging the septic tank absorption field helps overcome slow
percolation. SCS suggests that if buildings and septic tanks are constructed,
they should be located in the lower part of the landscape where slopes are less
steep.
A-12
-------
Christensen Drive
There are few homes in the Christensen Drive development and two camp-
grounds. These developments have occurred on the following soils:
. Nevee-Spearfish-Rock outcrop complex
. St. Onge, loam
. Vale, silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
.. Vale, silt loam, 6 to 9 percent slopes
With the exception of the Vale, silt loam on 6 to 9 percent slopes these
soils have been described above. This soil is deep, well drained, moderately
sloping and occurs on terraces, uplands, and alluvial fans. The top four
inches is a dark brown silt loam, while subsoil, about 20 inches thick, is
dark brown, firm silty clay loam in the upper part. The middle part of the
subsoil is brown, calcareous silty clay loam and the lower part is a light brown,
friable, calcareous loam. To a depth of 60 Inches the underlying material
is light brown calcareous loam.
The soil is well suited as a site for buildings with the following pre-
cautions; septic tank absorption field may need to be enlarged to help overcome
the slow percolation rate.
Old Tinton Road
The Old Tinton Road, west of Spearfish, has undergone limited development.
There are currently 10 to 12 residential units in this area. These units are con-
structed on the following soil types:
. Vale silt loam
. Paunsaugunt-Rock outcrop
Both of these soils have been described previously. The major constraints
for development on these soils include slow percolation rate and potential shallow
depth to bedrock for septic tank absorption fields. Enlarging the size of the
absorption field helps overcome slow percolation.
LAND USE
Within the EIS Study Area existing land use has been identified by the
South Dakota State Planning Bureau in cooperation with the Sixth District Council
(4)
of Local Governments and local planning agencies.
A-13
-------
Of interest to this Study are the developed area outside of the City
limits which are unsewered. They are broken out in the following manner:
. The Spearfish Creek Alluvial Valley
. Upper Higgins Gulch
. Mountain Plains
. Christiansen Drive
The Spearfish Creek Alluvial Valley
There are two developments in the Spearfish Creek alluvial valley, the
West development and Hope Weiss development, and some scattered development.
The West-Weiss developments consist of eleven residencies which are predominately
mobile homes. Scattered development consists of single family dwellings.
With the exception of one dwelling, the Hope Weiss development is hooked
onto the City of Spearfish's sewer system via a privately owned line which
is preceded by a small package plant. The remaining developments in the area
are on individual sewage disposal systems.
Upper Higgins Gulch
Residential development in this area consists of the following subdivisions:
. MacKaben No. 1
. MacKaben No. 2
. DeBerg
. Grand View Acres
. Deer Meadows
. Westfield
. Hardy
. Fuller
. Old Tinton Road
MacKaben No. 1 and MacKaben No. 2 have 25 and 12 residences, respectively.
In the DeBerg and Fuller developments there are about 20 homes total. Grand
View Acres currently has 12 homes, Deer Meadows has 15-20 homes, and Westfield
has about 15 homes. All of these residences have on-site sewage disposal
systems.
A-14
-------
Not all of the lots in Upper Hlggins Gulch have been developed, thus
maximum density has not yet occurred. It 1s anticipated that this area will
continue to develop based on the recent filing on an additional 80 acres north
of Deer Meadows.
In the Deberg development plotted lots range in size from 1.92 acres to
0.51 acre. Of the 32 lots Identified, four are 0.78 acre, two are 0.51 acre,
and one is 0.63 acre. In the Fuller addition, 12 plotted lots are identified
ranging in size from 2.57 acres to 0.61 acre. Of these lots, four are 0.61 acre,
four are 0.62 acre, and there is one each 0.95, 0.74, and 0.70 acres.
Plotted lots in the existing Deer Meadows development and Grand View Acres
are all larger than 1.0 acres. The Westfield development has 35 plottedslots
which-vary in size.from 0.46 acre to 0.60 acre.
Data on the remaining subdivisions were not collected at this time.
Those areas which are not currently developed are used by livestock from
ranching operations and are expected to continue under this use until development
is deemed more feasible.
Mountain Plains
The Mountain Plains subdivision is adjacent to the southern border of
the City of Spearfish. There are about 10 homes in the development, all on
individual disposal systems. There are currently 62 lots in the development
and an additional filing on an additional 600 acres has been made. This area is
expected to develop into larger lots of several acres. Development is likely to
be slow due to costs of development.
Christiansen Drive
The Christensen Drive development is located southeast of the City of
Spearfish. The development consists of 28 residential units and two large
campgrounds. Sewage disposal is accomplished by individual, on-site systems.
WATER QUALITY CRITERIA AND STREAM CLASSIFICATION
The State of South Dakota has promulgated surface water quality standards
pursuant to the Clean Water Act. Numeric criteria have been established for
28 parameters/constituents which are to be applied toward achieving 12 beneficial
uses. The beneficial uses and criteria for surface waters are presented in
Table 4. Beneficial uses of all streams in South Dakota are designed for
A-15
-------
irrigation and wildlife propogation and stock watering. Within the Study Area
only Spearfish Creek and Higgins Gulch are designated for additional beneficial
uses. Spearfish Creek from the Redwater River to the Homestake Hydro-electric
Plant discharge is designated for domestic water supply, cold water permanent
fish life propogation, immersion recreation water, and limited contact recreation
waters, while above the Homestake Hydro-electric Plant to the EIS Study Area
boundary Spearfish Creek is designated for cold water marginal fish life
propogation and limited contact recreation. Higgins Gulch from its confluence
with Spearfish Creek to the EIS Study Area boundary is designated for cold
water permanent fish life propogation and limited contact recreation.
WATER QUALITY
During the process of acquiring, collating, and evaluating water quality
data, the following were identified as having water quality data for the Study
Area:
. U. S. Geological Survey-Water Resources Division
. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
. South Dakota Department of Environmental Protection
. South Dakota Department of Natural Resources
. Special Studies
These sources provided the bulk of the water quality information.
The U. S. Geological Survey (USGS) has been operating a surface water
quality monitoring station on Spearfish Creek at Spearfish. The following four
parameters have been monitored at this station: water temperature, air tempera-
ture, stream flow, and conductivity. Several samples have been collected which
were tested for these parameters since 1975. These data are available from
USGS and the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency.
EPA has collected one sample of wastewater at the Spearfish wastewater
treatment plant on April II, 1978. This sample was tested for the following
constituents: water temperature, bio-chemical oxygen demand, pH, total
dissolved solids, and ammonia.
The South Dakota Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) operates
two surface water quality stations on Spearfish Creek; Station 460900 is located
in Spearfish and has a period of record beginning in 1967. The second station,
460689, is below the City of Spearfish and has been monitored since late 1978.
A-16
-------
Station 460900 samples have been tested for 47 parameters, while Station 460689
has been monitored for 14 parameters. In addition to these monitoring stations,
DEP has conducted a special study of Spearfish Creek in 1978. For this study
additional monitoring stations were established from the City of Spearfish to
the Redwater River.
Special studies have been conducted by Drs. L. Harms, P. Rahn, and J. Gries
on the water quality and geology of Spearfish Creek and Higgins Gulch, partic-
ularly in the area of the Belle Fourche water supply infiltration gallery,
emphasizing groundwater quality (6,7,8,9,10,11). A total of eight surface
water quality monitoring stations have been established on Spearfish Creek
and six on Higgins Gulch. These surface water quality stations have been
monitored at various intervals since June of 1978. Groundwater quality in
the area of the infiltration gallery has been monitored at eight different
sites. The main parameters monitored during the various investigations are
total coliform, fecal coliform, chlorides, and sodium. The purpose of these
studies has been to identify the potential sources of coliform contamination
which has appeared in the Belle Fourche infiltration gallery.
As part of the 201/EIS program, Scott Engineers have monitored groundwater
and surface water quality at 15 sites. Parameters monitored at these sites are
total coliform, fecal coliform, nitrate, chloride, sulfate, pH, total dissolved
solids, and nitrite. This special monitoring program was developed to evaluate
whether or not areas outside of the gallery were being contaminated.
For purposes of the EIS special emphasis is placed on the following water
quality parameters: total coliform, fecal coliform, chloride, nitrate, sodium,
and total dissolved solids. Total and fecal colifonns are biological indica-
tors of pollution. By themselves they do not represent a health hazard,
however, they do serve as indicators for the presence of potentially hazardous
pathogens. Feca^ coliform constitute about 90 percent of the coliforms discharged
in fecal matter whereas total coliforms account for organisms naturally origi-
nating in soil, grain, and decaying vegetation. The presence of fecal contami-
nation is the best means of demonstrating a hazard for human consumption. A
high total coliform population is also a suspicious symptom but not a specific
indication of fecal pollution. Soils receiving septic tank effluent generally
filter or entrap coliform and viral organisms.
A-17
-------
Nitrates are a common component in wastewater. High concentrations can be
hazardous to infants or pregnant women, while animals ingesting high concen-
trates may also suffer harmful results. A primary source of nitrates entering
water is from agricultural land, both cultivated (fertilizers) and non-cultivated
(animal wastes).
The principal concern for high chloride concentrations is the objectionable
taste it produces in water supplies. Chloride is a common element in wastewater,
especially where water softeners are used, and, as such, is an indicator of
wastewater entering the ground or surface waters.
Sodium concentrations can affect people who are restricted to low sodium
diets. It is also a principal salt in water softening and like chloride can
indicate domestically used water entering surface and groundwaters.
High concentrations of TDS are toxic to fish, livestock, and to some plants.
In humans, taste and physiological effects can occur. TDS is an indication of
dissolved minerals which may be contributed to by softening of domestically used
water.
While concentrations of chloride, nitrate, sodium, and TDS are not excessive
enough to warrant a concern for water use, they do indicate that septic tank
effluents are entering the groundwater of the Study Area. This situation is
anticipated since soil absorption fields are intended to filter bacteria and
virus, not minerals.
Of the assembled water quality data, only the information collected from
the special studies and the City of Belle Fourche has sufficient spacial and
temporal distribution to be of utility for evaluation. The available data from
these sources for total coliform, fecal coliform, fecal streptococci, chloride,
nitrate, and sodium are presented in Tables 5 to 38. Selected groundwater and
surface water quality monitoring sites data are plotted on Figure 5 to 18 .
GROUNDWATER ELEVATIONS AND MOVEMENT
Groundwater depths have been surveyed by the special studies conducted at
the Belle Fourche infiltration gallery, well drillers during well construction,
and personal communications with well owners. For purposes of this study, only
the depth to the shallow aquifer is identified.
A-18
-------
Groundwater movement flows down the Higgins Gulch Into the Spearfish Creek
alluvial valley. In the area south of the infiltration gallery, the groundwater
moves in a northeasterly direction from Higgins Gulch into the gallery area.
Groundwater in the gallery area is also being recharged from surface water from
Spearfish Creek. Higgins Gulch surface drainage is also recharging the ground-
water as evidenced by surface flows disappearing into the permeable stream bed
above the gallery area.
Studies at the -gallery in the fall of 1978 indicate that the depth to the
groundwater varies from one foot to over ten feet below the surface. Because
these data were collected in the fall, it is not felt that they reflect the
seasonally high groundwater. However, it is believed to represent a reasonable
range (one to ten feet) that would consistently occur in a saturated alluvial
stream bed of high permeability. Well log data for areas outside the gallery
area indicate that the depth to the static water table range from 15 to 25 feet
below the surface. These data are presented in Table 39.
The data from the well logs appears to have been collected at the time the
well was drilled and do not necessarily indicate a seasonally high water table.
However, because some of these data are outside the stream bed alluvium and in
the Spearfish formation, it is felt that they represent an approximation of the
groundwater level. Seasonal highs are expected to be somewhat higher but because
of the low permeability of the Spearfish formation are not expected to rise
appreciably.
The deeper aquifers are found in the Minnekahta, Opeche and Minnelusa
formation in the Study Area. These aquifers are under artesian conditions. The
features of these aquifers are described in the report, "Special Report 19.
(12)
Artesian Water, Minnelusa and Pahasapa Formations, Spearfish-Belle Fourche Area."
(The Pahasapa formation underlies the Minnelusa sandstone. It does not outcrop
in the Study Area and is not considered significant to this study.) The following
description is from this report:
"In most of the Black Hills area the Minnekahta and Opeche Formations
are not considered to be aquifers; however, in the area studied, the
Minnekahta may yield large amounts of water under artesian conditions. The
producing area is rather limited and the water probably originates in lower
formations and moves upward along fissures or channels.
"Nearly all the ground water in the Minnelusa aquifer is derived from
rainfall and melting snow, which enters the outcrop and moves down-dip away
A-19
-------
from the Black Hills. It is believed that the principal area of recharge
for the area studied is the Minnelusa outcrop between Spearfish Creek in
Lawrence County and Sand Creek in Crook County, Wyoming. This area con-
tains about 54 square miles of Minnelusa outcrop of which two-thirds (34
square miles) is in South Dakota. The porosity and permeability of the
Minnelusa Sandstone is such that it absorbs about as much water from the
base of streams crossing the outcrop as the stream gains by seepage from
the valley walls above water level.
"The annual precipitation on the Minnelusa outcrop is estimated at
21 inches per year. This would result in 59,880 acre-feet of water
annually falling on the 54 square miles of Minnelusa outcrop. The per-
centage of the annual precipitation entering the Minnelusa outcrop could
not be determined. However, if as much as two inches of precipitation
entered the Minnelusa aquifer it would represent a recharge of only 5,760
acre-feet per year for the area studies (or 10 percent of the total annual
precipitation).
"No attempt was made to estimate the amount of ground water in
transient storage in the Minnelusa aquifer.
"Withdrawal from the Minnelusa artesian aquifer in the area studied
is estimated at 9,680 acre-feet per year by flowing and pumped wells, and
24,205 acre-feet per year by springs, or a total of 33,885 acre-feet.
"If the estimated Minnelusa recharge of 5,760 acre-feet is correct, then
the outcrop recharge cannot equal the total withdrawal of 33,885 acre-feet.
For this reason, it is believed that the Minnelusa aquifer is being partially
recharged in some other manner. The most logical possibility would seem to
be channeling or seepage upward from the underlying Pahasapa Formation."
A-20
-------
SEWAGE DISPOSAL-OUTLYING AREA
It has been pointed out that, with the exception of the Hope Weiss devel-
opment, all outlying areas accomplish sewage disposal by on-site systems,
primarily conventional septic tanks followed by soil absorption fields. A
conventional septic tank system consists of a tank which has a liquid capacity
of from 500 to 1500 gallons and has two compartments. Wastewater is received
in the first compartment and solids are settled out and floating matter retained.
The liquid flows into the second compartment where additional settling occurs.
The clarified effluent, which contains bacterial matter and dissolved solids
then flows out of the tank to the absorption field via pipes. The wastewater
is channeled through perforated pipe and discharged into the soil matrix. The
soil matrix provides a final filter for bacterial and viral removal. The final
effluent will then migrate to the groundwater, be absorbed into the soil and
utilized by plants, and/or evaporate depending upon site conditions.
The State of South Dakota has established minimum site requirements ^ which
must be met prior to installation of conventional septic tank systems. . These
requirements are as follows:
Disposal systems must comply with state regulations
All disposal systems designed for the reception and treatment of sewage from
premises including, but not limited to homes, commercial establishments, businesses,
and institutions, where public disposal systems are not available, constructed
after February 28, 1975, shall be constructed, added to and altered in accor-
dance with this chapter. No disposal system, regardless of when constructed,
shall cause a violation of any existing water quality standard, cause a health
hazard, or fail to meet the following requirements.
Private systems prohibited when public disposal systems cere available
The operation, construction or installation of an individual sewage disposal
system by any person is prohibited where a public disposal system is available.
A-21
-------
A public disposal system shall be deemed to be available to any premise when:
both are located within the jurisdictional boundaries of a municipality or
sanitary district; the sewers of the public disposal systems exist within
two hundred feet of the home, commercial establishment, business, or institu-
tion; and the municipality or sanitary district is willing and requests to
provide such service to the premise.
Sewage not to be discharged into unused wells or rock formations
Sewage, treated or untreated, shall not be discharged into any abandoned
or unused well, nor shall it be discharged into any crevice, sink hole or
other openings, either natural or artificial, in a rock formation. (Applicable
to Mountain Plains and areas where rock outcrops occur).
Sewage to receive primary treatment prior to discharge to absorption system
Sewage shall pass through a septic tank, other sedimentation rank, or
aerobic system prior to discharge to an absorption system.
Sewage not allowed to surface on ground
No person shall cause sewage from any individual disposal system to be
deposited upon the ground surface, nor shall any person operate any individual
disposal system which causes sewage to surface upon the ground. (Applicable
to Weiss development prior to installing private collection line.)
Systems not to be less than four feet above groundwater table
No subsurface filtration system shall be installed where the groundwater
table is within, or likely to be within, four feet of an absorption trench
bottom or any other absorption or evapotranspiration system or receptacle for
sewage in the individual disposal system. (Primarily applicable to development
in Spearfish Valley alluvium.)
Systems not to be within one hundred feet of lakes, streams or impoundments
No components of any individual sewage disposal system shall be located
within one hundred feet, measured horizontally, of the high water line of any
lake, stream or impoundment of water. (Applicable to West development.)
A-22
-------
Distance of well3 spring or cistern from seepage pit, absorption systems,
pit privies, barnyard or farm silo
No seepage pit, absorption system, pit privy, barnyard, barn gutter,
animal pens or farm silo shall be installed closer than seventy-five feet
from wells less than one hundred feet deep or from springs, or fifty feet
from cisterns or from wells which are more than one hundred feet deep.
(Applicable to Upper Higgins Gulch.)
Wells, or springs or- cisterns distance from disposal systems
No septic tank, aerobic system, vault privy, holding tank, sewer line of
tightly jointed tile or equivalent material, shall be closer than seventy-five
feet from wells less than one hundred feet deep or from springs, or fifty feet
from cisterns or from wells which are more than one hundred feet deep.
Distance of plastic or cast iron pipes from systems
Sewer lines of schedule forty plastic or cast iron with leaded or gasketed
joints shall not be closer than fifteen feet from any well or spring.
Distance of septic tank or aerobic unit from a building
No septic tank or aerobic unit shall be closer than ten feet from any
dwelling or occupied building.
Privies and absorption systems, seepage pit distance from building
No pit privy, absorption system, or seepage pit shall be closer than
twenty feet from any dwelling or occupied building.
Distance of disposal systems from property lines
Septic tanks, aerobic systems, pit privies, vault privies, absorption systems
and seepage pits shall be at least ten feet from the property line of the
owner.
Types of water-carriage systems allowed
An individual water-carriage sewage disposal system shall have at least
one of the following alternative treatment processes within the system:
(1) A septic tank with an absorption system or a holding tank.
(2) An aerobic treatment unit with an absorption system or a holding
tank; or
(3) A chemical treatment unit with a holding tank.
A-23
-------
Calculation of the minimum square feet of absorption trenail
There shall be a minimum area of absorption trench or trenches, in a
water-carriage disposal system, which utilizes an absorption system. Such an
area shall be expressed in terms of square feet, that is, the length times the
width of the trench or trenches. The square feet of such an absorption trench
or trenches shall be equal to the number derived by multiplying the gallons
per day of waste flow (Q), for which the system is designed, times the square
root of.the rate of percolation expressed in minutes per inch (t) and dividing
this product by five. This can also be expressed as A 3 (Q times square root
of t) divided by five. In no case shall the gallons per day of waste used
in this formula be less than seven hundred and fifty. The absorption trench
area calculated by such formula shall be increased by an additional twenty
percent when wastes from a garbage grinder are discharged into the disposal
system, and the area shall further be increased by an additional forty percent
when an automatic washing machine discharges into the disposal system.
Alternative methods of determining required absorption trench area
In lieu of calculating the absorption trench area required above the
following criteria may be used for a residential dwelling as an alternative
means of determining the area; provided, the absorption trench must be of an
area sufficient for at least three bedrooms. Where the percolation rate is:
(1) At least five minutes, but slower than ten minutes per inch,
the minimum absorption shall be one hundred and twenty-five square feet
per bedroom;
(2) At least ten minutes, but slower than fifteen minutes per
inch, the minimum absorption trench area shall be one hundred and sixty-
five square feet per bedroom;
A-24
-------
(3) At least fifteen minutes, but slower than thirty minutes per inch,
the minimum absorption trench area shall be two hundred square feet per
bedroom:
(4) At least thirty minutes, but slower than forty-five minutes per inch,
the minimum absorption trench area shall be two hundred and fifty square feet
per bedroom;
(5) At least forty-five minutes, but slower than fifty-five minutes per
inch, the minimum absorption trench area shall be three hundred square feet
per bedroom:
(6) At least fifty-five minutes, but slower than sixty minutes per
inch, the minimum absorption trench area shall be three hundred and fifty
square feet per bedroom.
Percolation test to be conducted before constructed
Any person who constructs or causes to be constructed or installed, a sub-
surface absorption system shall first conduct a percolation rate test, before
installation of any such system.
Manner in which percolation test 'shall be conducted
A soil percolation test shall be made with a minimum of two test holes
within five feet of where the absorption trench or shallow disposal system is
desired to be located. The holes shall be in soil representative and of
similar character as the rest of the area where the system will be placed.
(1) The horizontal dimension of the percolation test hole shall be from
six to twelve inches and the vertical sides shall be terminated at the
maximum depth of the proposed absorption trench or at a depth of at least thirty
inches, whichever depth is greater;
(2) Test holes shall be located in unfrozen soil and shall be filled at
least fifty percent full at least eight hours, but not more than sixteen hours
before making the soil percolation test; immediately prior to making the test,
each hole shall be refilled to at least fifty percent of its volume. When the
water reaches the lower twenty-five percent of the test hole, the test shall be
commenced. The percolation rate, in a test hole shall be expressed in the
number of minutes which it took the water level to drop one inch. The perco-
lation rate for the area where the subsurface infiltration system is desired
shall be the average percolation rate of all the test holes.
A-25
-------
Absorption or evapotranspiration system permitted — Exceptions
Either an absorption system or evapotranspiration system may be used
when the percolation rate is between five and sixty minutes per inch,
providing all other requirements for a disposal system are met. No subsurface
absorption system shall be installed where the percolation rate is faster than
five minutes per inch. An evapotranspiration system, but not an absorption
system, may be used when the percolation rate is slower than sixty minutes per
inch. (Applicable to development out of the Spearfish Valley alluvium.)
Minimum capacity of septic tanks
All septic tanks shall have a minimum capacity of at least one thousand
gallons of liquid before there will be an overflow into the septic tank outlet.
When a housing unit or units serviced by a septic tank contain more than three
bedrooms, each additional bedroom, in excess of three, shall require an additional
two hundred and fifty gallon increase in the capacity of the septic tank beyond
the one thousand gallons. Septic tanks serving premises other than housing
units shall have a minimum capacity to permit retention of incoming sewage for
thirty hours at one hundred and fifty percent of the average daily flow.
Requirements for an absorption trench
An absorption system shall have at least two absorption trenches of approx-
imately equal length. The length of a trench shall not exceed one hundred feet;
the width of a trench shall not exceed three feet; and a trench shall be at
least four inches below the ground surface but the depth shall not exceed
four feet. The trench shall be formed by a filler material of washed gravel,
crushed stone, slag, or clean bank run gravel ranging in size from one-half
inch to two and one-half inches in diameter. An absorption line shall be
placed within each trench and shall run along the length of the trench. The
filler material shall be at least six inches deep below the bottom of the line
and two inches deep above the top of the line. The bottom of a trench be
uniformly graded to a slope from a minimum of two inches to a maximum of four
inches per one hundred feet. Trenches shall be at least six feet apart.
Separation required
There shall be at least four feet of soil between.an absorption trench
or seepage pit bottom or any other component of a subsurface absorption system
and the high groundwater table elevation or rock formations or other impervious
soil strata. (Applicable to Mountain Plain and areas with shallow bedrock and
water table.)
A-26
-------
Minimum lot size required
A water-carriage disposal system can only be installed and operated on
a lot which is at least forty-three thousand, five hundred and sixty square
feet (one acre), when the potable water is supplied by a private water supply
system. A water-carriage disposal system can only be installed and operated
on a lot which is twenty thousand square feet or larger when the premises
are supplied by a public water supply system. The requirements of this section
do not apply where sewage is emptied into a holding tank.
Water-carriage disposal not permitted in insufficient lot area unless holding
tank installed
When a lot size is smaller than that specified or the rate is faster than
five minutes per inch, no water-carriage disposal system shall be permitted, un-
less a holding tank is installed.
Individual sewage disposal system design considerations
The design of each individual sewage disposal system must take into
consideration well locations, topography, groundwater table, elevations, soil
characteristics, available area, and maximum occupancy of the building.
Determination of type of system
The type of disposal system shall be determined on the basis of location,
soil permeability, and groundwater elevation.
Review of plans for construction not required unless deviations desired
Individual sewage disposal systems may be designed and installed in
accordance with this chapter without submission of project plans and specifi-
cations to the secretary for review and approval. Where deviation from this
chapter is desired by the owner, the proposed change or plans and specifications
and supporting information shall be submitted to the secretary for review and
approval.
Existing systems not affected by this chapter — Exceptions
Individual sewage disposal systems existing prior to February 28, 1975
are not subject to this chapter except when the systems are changed, the
groundwater becomes polluted, or sewage is surfacing. Existing abandoned
sewage disposal systems are not exempt from this chapter and shall be abandoned
as described.
A-27
-------
Existing subdivisions and developments exempted from lot size requirements —
Proviso
Housing subdivisions and housing developments platted before February 28,
1975 are exempt from the lot size requirements provided compliance with other
provisions of this chapter can be acheived.
Application of State Regulations to the Spearfish Area
These regulations define very specifically the requirements that must
be met in order for a septic tank and absorption field to be installed. The
authority of implementing these requirements is placed on the counties. Within
Lawrence County the responsible agencies are the Lawrence County Planning and
Zoning Commission which evaluate and approve subdivision plans and the Northern
Hills Sanitarian which is responsible for approving the engineering aspects
of the system and insuring that the public health is maintained.
Within the Study Area data are very limited on the types, conditions,
location, and installation of existing septic tank systems. However, some
information has been obtained by personal communications from Scott Engineering
who contacted the Deberg-Fuller, and Deer Meadows developments. This informa-
tion is presented in Table AO. From these data it appears that at least 13
septic systems are considerably deeper than the State requirement of 4 feet.
The explanation for this is that these homes have basements and in order to
provide sewage disposal for facilities in the basement the deeper system are
required. The date of construction for these units is currently not known,
thus it can not be determined whether they meet the requirement of construction
before February 28, 1975 for exemption from compliance with the State regula-
tions.
From the comments received it appears that few of the systems are failing,
some have had their leach field enlarged, and most are located in fairly tight
clay soil. These actions concur with the recommendations of SCS for the
probable need to enlarge absorption field place in the soils of this area to
overcome slow percolation rates.
The Mountain Plains area potentially will have difficulty in complying
with the requirement of not discharging into a crevice of a rock formation due
to the fractured nature of the Minnelusa outcrops in the area. Furthermore,
some areas of Mountain Plains will not have an adequate soil profile for a
conventional septic tank system.
A-28
-------
There are several alternative on-site disposal systems which are
manufactured that can be used in place of conventional septic tank systems.
Some of these require some engineering design prior to installation and
may require special maintenance considerations. These systems include:
mounds, eletro-osmosis, vaults, composting, and mechanical aeration. As
long as the discharging systems utilize the soil matrix for final dis-
posal, obtain site approval from planning and zoning and the local sanitarian,
these systems are satisfactory for installation. However, should the system
be designed for a surface discharge point, the owner/operator must obtain a
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. Such a
permit will stipulate the required discharge water quality (a minimum require-
ment is secondary treatment), monitoring requirements, etc. In reality the
issuance of such a permit to a private individual is very unlikely and the
use of these systems is discouraged by EPA.
BACTERIOLOGICAL MOVEMENT BELOW SEPTIC LINES
Much of the work which has been done relative to the health effects of
wastewater being filtered through soil is for land application systems. These
studies have investigated the ability of soil to filter bacteria and viruses
from surface-applied contaminated wastewater. However, information on the
survival and migration of viral indicators in the soil below septic lines
has been essentially non-existant. Recent studies have been conducted which
specifically address the movement of fecal coliforms and coliphages (vireses)
(13)
below septic lines. The following is the abstract of this study which
summarizes the investigation.
"A 2-year lysimetric study utilizing three undisturbed soils was
conducted to investigate the movement of fecal coliforms and coliphages
to the groundwater. Septic tank effluent was applied to each of the
three soils at appropriate design rates via subsurface septic lines.
The soils included had sand contents of 80, 41 and 7.6%. Indigenous
concentrations of fecal coliforms in the effluent were more th^n suffi-
cient to assure detectability. During the winter the levels of
indigenous coliphages decreased, and on several occasions the septic
effluent was spiked with cultured coliphages. The remainder of the
year, indigenous levels were sufficient to allow adequate detection.
A-29
-------
Leachate samples were analyzed on a continuous basis, and at
the end of the study the soils below the septic lines were dissected
and sampled on a grid pattern. They were analyzed for both fecal
collforms and coliphages.
"On only a few occasions were fecal collforms present in leachate
collected 120 cm (4 ft) below the septic lines. Subsequent samples
from the same locations did not indicate the presence of fecal collforms
so-that the few samples that were collected shortly after application
began may have been a result of contamination, or they may be indicative
of greater mobility before organic residue built up in the soil.
Soil samples taken 1 and 2 years after application began indicated
limited mobility and survival of fecal collforms in all three soils.
"Coliphages were present in the leachate only in very lowconcen-
3
trations immediately after spiking of the applied sewage with 10 times
more organisms than were applied. Soil samples also confirmed the limi-
ted mobility of coliphages. Thus 120 cm of any of the soils tested
appeared to be sufficient to minimize the possibility of groundwater
pollution by fecal coliform or coliphages from septic effluent
disposal."
AERIAL IMAGERY
An analysis was undertaken in the Spearfish Study Area to identify
and locate individual home sewage disposal systems exhibiting signs of
failure utilizing aerial imagery flown on November 1, 1978. The three
types of film used in the aerial survey included normal color (Ektachrome
2448), color infrared (Ektachrome 2443), and thermal infrared flown at a
scale of 1:8000.
Failure of septic tank systems can usually be attributed to one or
more of the following causes: 1) the soil used in the absorption field has
too slow a percolation rate to allow for adequate assimilation, filtration,
and biodegradation of sewage effluent flowing into it, 2) the septic system
is installed too close to an underlying impervious layer, 3) the septic
system may have been installed in an area where the seasonal water table
is too high for its designed use, 4) the soil used in the absorption field
A-30
-------
has too high a percolation rate for effective attenuation of sewage efflu-
ent prior to its reaching underlying groundwater, 5) mechanical malfunc-
tions, or breakage, in the septic tank, distribution box, and/or drainage
pipes has occurred, 6) caustic, toxic, or otherwise harmful substances
which could kill bacteria in the septic tank and/or absorption field, and
cause subsequent clogging, have been flushed into the system, and 7) all
or part of the system has been improperly installed. Other potential
(14)
causes for on-lot disposal system malfunctions can be found in Reference.
With respect to remote sensing of failing septic tank systems, only
those malfunctions which are noticeable on the surface can be detected via
aerial imagery. Those failures which are related to sewage backing up
into the home, or too rapid transport through the soil into the groundwater,
cannot be detected through remote sensing. In instances where the latter
is occurring, the use of a soil lysimeter, "septic snooper"» or similar
apparatus may be necessary to determine the existance and extent of a
problem. Alternatively groundwater analyses can be made to determine if
a water quality problem exists.
Based upon work undertaken to date, it has been determined that the
primary surface manifestations or signatures associated with failing
septic tanks and/or absorption fields are: 1) conspicuously lush vegetation,
2) dead vegetation (specifically grass), 3) standing wastewater or seepage,
and 4) dark soil where excess organic matter has accumulated. All of the
above are a result of the upward movement of partially treated or untreated
wastewater to the soil surface, and usually appear either directly above or
adjacent to one or more components of the septic system (i.e. septic
tank, distribution box, and/or absorption field). More often than not,
two or more of these manifestations will occur simultaneously at any given
homesite. In some cases, depending upon the soils makeup of the particular
area, the outline of the drainage line(s) of a properly functioning septic
system can be distinguished on aerial photography. This peculiarity points
up the need for tailoring "photo interpretation keys" to specific geograph-
ical areas.
Using the above signatures as aerial photo interpretation keys,
approximately sixty potential septic system malfunctions were identified and
located in the Spearfish area.
A-31
-------
In order to identify residents which would be eligible for Federal
assistance homes (both mobile and permanent) erected before and after
October 1972 and December 1977 comparisons with historical photography
was accomplished. In lieu of the limited historical aerial coverage
/
available for the Spearfish area, aerial photography dated September 1972
and October 1977 was actually used in this analysis. This analysis revealed
that there were approximately 314 homes erected between September 1972
and October 1977, and 128 homes erected between October 1977 and November
1978.
On April 9 and 10, 1979 an extensive field investigation was conducted
to verify if septic tank failures by surfacing were occurring based on
EPA's aerial photography analysis. Representatives of the following agencies
and groups participated during the field investigation:
. EPA
South Dakota Department of Environmental Protection
Lawrence County Planning and Zoning
Belle Fourche
EIS consultant
201 consultant
Citizens advisory group
Through field inspection, suspected failing septic tanks were evaluated
and categorized as follows: 1) verified septic system failures - these
systems were actually exhibiting effluent "break-outs" at the soil surface,
2) septic systems suspected of exhibiting seasonal effluent surfacing -
various surface manifestations visible during the field check suggest
that these sytems should be re-checked during periods of heavy use and/or
moderate to heavy rainfall, 3) vegetative change, disturbed earth, and/or
slight collapsing of the soil over the drainfield only - no immenent public \
health hazard is believed to be associated with these systems, and 4) false
signatures - these include free-flowing wells, drainage from roof gutters,
and other areas of excess soil moisture and lush growth not related to
failing septic tank systems.
A-32
-------
While very few surface failures were uncovered in the area, it is
believed that all of the potentially failing septic systems were inspected,
and that an accurate and thorough survey of the area was accomplished.
Due to the arid nature of this region small areas of excess soil moisture
and lush vegetative growth tend to be greatly enhanced with respect to
their surroundings. These characteristics (i.e. "signatures") are very
closely correlated with surface failures of septic systems and, conse-
quently, any homesite exhibiting these characteristics was "suspected" of
having a potentially failing system. Thus, all of the potential failures
in the study area are believed to have been field-checked and evaluated.
The interpretations/verifications of suspected septic system failures based
on the ground truthing field survey resulted in the following conclusions:
.there are two verified septic system failures which are surfacing.
.there are thirteen septic systems which are suspected of failing
seasonally.
.there are thirty-three septic systems which have visible surface
manifestations, but are not associated with a public health
hazard.
.there are twelve false signatures.
(See Figure 19).
The two verified failures are isolated systems. One, in Section 28
west of the Belle Fourche infiltration gallery appears to be a direct
piping of effluent from the septic tank to Higgins Gulch. There is no
evidence of a leach field. The other confirmed failure is west of
Spearfish in Section 16. This system is located in the Vale silt loam
soil which has a percolation rate of from 100-30 minutes per inch and
because of this is rated by SCS to have moderate limitations for septic
tank absorption fields. The underlying geology is the Minnekahta
formation.
The suspected seasonal failures are distributed throughout the study
area. Two are along Christensen Drive, three are west of Spearfish in
Section 16, one is within the Sanitation District, four are in Deberg-
Fuller, two are in Grand View acres, and one is in MacKaben No. 1. Dur-
ing the on-site field inspection these systems could not be classified as
failing. However, it was determined that when the leach field soils of
the systems become saturated, during rainfall events, there is a potential
A-33
-------
for failure through surfacing. A review of the soils in which these sys-
tems are placed indicate very slow percolation rates (100 to 30 minutes
per inch). These systems overlay a variety of geological formations,
including Minnekahta, Spearfish, old terrace deposits, and alluvium.
The remaining categories, visible surface manifestations and false
signatures, are concentrated in those areas north and northwest of the
City of Spearfish. These areas have undergone the greatest development
outside the City and have the greatest concentration of on-site wastewater
disposal systems. The surface manifestations (typically lusher vegeta-
tion than the surrounding area) indicate that these systems are function-
ing as evapotranspiration systems. This is a consequence of the tight
clay soils inhibiting wastewater percolation which creates a moister
micro-environment.
During field inspection of suspected septic failures a qualitative
investigation of Higgins Gulch was conducted. A field survey of
Higgins Gulch from Deer Meadow to Deberg-Fuller and from the access road
just north of wards to an area west of the gallery was conducted. This
survey indicated that Higgins Gulch has a very narrow, very permeable
alluvial flood plain. Upstream of the Deer Meadows development the Higgins
Gulch stream goes into the alluvium, serving to recharge the groundwater,
possible in a subterranian stream channel. Adjacent to the point where
the flow becomes subsurface is an abandoned gravel quarry. The site con-
sists of an excavated hole, twenty to thirty feet deep which contained
about five feet of standing water. The pond is filled by Higgins Gulch
during periods of high surface runoff as evidenced by the flood deposited
material on the edge of the pond. At the time of inspection there was
no indication that any recharge from groundwater was occurring.
Higgins Gulch begins to flow again in the channel east of the infil-
tration gallery. The stream channel appeared to be gaining water and
the flow was considerably greater than that observed in the Deer Meadows
development area. It is assumed that this greater flow is a consequence
of Higgins Gulch being within the Spearfish Creek alluvium and groundwater
being recharged by Spearfish Creek is reaching Higgins Gulch.
A-34
-------
CONCLUSIONS
In order to evaluate the assembled data in a meaningful manner it is
necessary to identify the issues which are pertinent to the study. As the
GIS progressed issues were identified through the public participation
process, the input of the citizens advisory group, and data manipulation.
The following issues have been identified as significant at this time:
The source of sporadic groundwater contamination at and
around the Belle Fourche infiltration gallery.
The cause of surface water contamination in Higgins Gulch
and Spearfish Creek.
Septic rank failures identified by EPA's aerial imagery photography.
Groundwater contamination in the Higgins Gulch area, Mountain
Plains area and Christensen Drive area.
The suitability of septic tanks as a means of sewage disposal in
the areas outside of Spearfish.
(NOTE: Groundwater contamination at and around the Belle Fourche infiltra-
tion gallery was also discussed in Working Paper No. 1 Water Quality Summary.)
Water quality data at the gallery are'available back to 1967. However,
the period of record is fragmented with no data available for the following
years: 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, and part of 1973. The record of data is
further complicated by an inconsistency in the parameters monitored. In
1967 and 1968 total coliforms were the major parameter monitored, then in
1973, 1974, and the first half of 1975 samples were monitored for fecal
coliform and fecal streptococci. One sample (7-16-73) was monitored for
total coliform. From 8-26-75 total coliforms were monitored only until
9-9-77. In the summer of 1978 extensive monitoring was done at and around
the gallery of both the surface water and groundwater.
The earliest date of contamination at the gallery is 8-7-67 when
total coliforms numbered 3.6/100 ml. Contamination is also noted on 11-6-67,
11-20-67, 10-7-68, and 11-4-68 when each total coliform count was 2.2/
100 ml. From 5-6-73 to 5-6-75 fecal coliform counts were mainly 2/100 ml,
on 5-6-73, and on 7-31-73 counts were 3/100 ml, and on 5-7-74 a count
of 4/100 ml was reported. On 7-16-73 a total coliform count of 16/100 ml
is reported but fecal coliform were not tested for. From 8-26-75 to
5-10-78, 14 out of 40 monitoring events indicated contamination. Consis-
tent contamination of the gallery was observed in the last half of 1978
but currently no contamination is reported.
A-35
-------
Because the most comprehensive data for both surface water and
groundwater quality are the result of the special studies conducted in
1978, and because of the inconsistencies in the historic data collected
at the gallery, the special studies data are used to evaluate the gallery
contamination problem.
Total coliform is the principal indicator of groundwater contamina-
tion. Fecal contamination occurs very sporadically at the groundwater
monitoring sites. . Surface waters in Spearfish Creek have fecal coliform
counts that are as high as 370/100 ml, while most samples are between
30/100 ml to 90/100 ml. Total coliform data in Spearfish Creek are not
adequate to evaluate. Surface water in Higgins Gulch has very high
total coliform counts by comparison. All values are above 3A0/100 ml,
with a maximum count of 15,000/100 ml reported on 7-7-78. Fecal coliform
counts have a high of 276/100 ml, with most values between 30/100 ml
and 90/100 ml.
It has been demonstrated that groundwater at the gallery is recharged
by water from both Higgins Gulch and Spearfish Creek and that groundwater
movement from the Higgins Gulch is in a northeasterly direction. This
condition is a result of the groundwater from Higgins Gulch moving through
the alluvial material in its stream bed entering the Spearfish Creek
alluvium.
Sewage disposal by septic tanks and absorption field is practiced at
the West Development and by one home in the Weiss Development which are
within a few hundred feet of the infiltration gallery. These systems are
located in the same alluvial deposits of the Spearfish Creek bottomland
that the City of Belle Fourche has their infiltration gallery. The next
closest concentration of developments using septic systems are in the
Higgins Gulch area, about three miles away from the gallery. These develop-
ments are located on the Spearfish Creek bench areas. Soils, according to
SCS, are of a clay-loam and because of their slow permeabilities not suited
for septic tank absorption fields unless they are enlarged. (Soil permea-
bilities are summarized in Table 41).
On 6-16-78 groundwater contamination was identified at the gallery,
Cundy drain, the well at Abernathy's and the Ward well. Surface water
contamination is also indicated at three sites in Higgins Gulch. During
the 24 hour period prior to the monitoring day a trace of precipitation
is recorded, and five days prior 0.15 inches of rain occurred. Contamina-
tion at the gallery, Cundy's drain, Higgins Gulch also occurred on 6-23-78.
A-36
-------
Forty-eight hours before and five days prior 0.07 inches and 0.62 inches
of rain fell, respectively. The next monitoring period, 6-29-78, high
coliform contamination at the gallery, Cundy's drain, Ward well, and the
spring above Ward's and Higgins Gulch occurred. During a 48 hour
period from 6-28-78 to 6-29-78 over 0.27 inches of rain fell in the
study area. On 7-7-78 water quality samples were collected again. A
lower coliform contamination than the previous sample is noted. Rain,
totaling 0.85 inches fell from 7-5-78 to 7-7-78. On 7-14-78 coliform
colonies have shown an increase over the previous monitored sample at
the gallery, Cundy's drain, and Ward's well, but Higgins Gulch concentra-
tions have decreased. No rain fell since the last monitoring. Coliform
colonies dropped at all stations on 7-21-78 except the Cundy drain
where they remained static and the spring above Ward's. Over 0.39 inches
of rain fell during the 24 hour period prior to monitoring.
In conclusion, there is a correlation between rainfall events and
contamination at the gallery (i.e. higher coliform concentrations follow
rain and subsequent runoff).
Storm events are carrying different concentrations of coliforms off
the land surface via runoff. These concentrations vary with land use
within the drainage and rainfall intensity. Typically a rainfall event
will initially flush the surface, delivering high concentrations to surface
waters. See Higgins Gulch data and rainfall records for 7-7-78 and 6-29-78
and Spearfish Creek 9-18-78.
The contaminated material will be generated by both developed and
undeveloped land and is commonly referred to as non-point source contamina-
tion.
As the runoff moves down the drainage surface water elevations rise.
Groundwater elevations in the gallery area will increase due to the increased
water flowing in Spearfish Creek and Higgins Gulch. As the groundwater
elevation rises the potential for short-circuiting of the septic tank
absorption field in the alluvium increases, thus contributing to the
coliform contamination that has been carried into the groundwater from
the surface water. Because of the defined movement of the groundwater the in-
filtration gallery becomes contaminated. This situation can be compounded
A-37
-------
if the storm occurs in the gallery area. A high intensity rain on permeable
soils will experience a downward flushing action as opposed to a runoff
effect more typical of tight clays. As the rainfall percolates through
alluvium it will have a flushing effect, transporting the absorption field
contaminants deeper toward the groundwater.
It is therefore concluded that the sporadic contamination of the
Belle Fourche infiltration gallery is a consequence of non-point source
originating from runoff over livestock pasturing, and confinement areas,
urban areas, and undeveloped areas. These sources are also contributing
to the surface water contamination in Higgins Gulch and Spearfish Creek.
The suspected septic system failures identified by EPA's aerial imagery
have been discussed in the Aerial Imagery Section. Two of the systems
were confirmed as actual failures and thirteen were identified as poten-
tially failing during wet periods. Because these systems are confirmed
through surface manifestations it is concluded that tight, impervious
soils are causing these problems. Therefore, these systems cannot be
creating any groundwater degradation.
With the exception of the Christensen Drive area, existing data do
not indicate that the groundwater in the vicinity of Higgins Gulch near the
Deer Meadows, Deberg-Fuller developments or the deep aquifer which is
partially recharged in the Mountain Plains area are contaminated. However,
because the available data were not collected during the period of seasonal
high groundwater additional studies will be conducted. This additional
work will evaluate the seasonal high groundwater depth and its quality
in the Spearfish and Higgins Gulch alluvium and the two perched water
table areas located in the old terrace deposits. This work will be com-
pleted by July 1, 1979. There are no plans at this time to monitor
the deep aquifer in the vicinity of Mountain Plains because of the very
low density of development. However, surface water quality in Spearfish
Creek is being monitored by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife service. This program
is a consequence of the potential for non-point source contamination
originating from Mountain Plains development interferring with the operation
of the Spearfish Fish Hatchery.
A-38
-------
A shallow well at the mouth of Christensen Drive has been abandoned for
domestic use due to coliform contamination. The source of contamination is
likely caused by development in the alluvial valley upstream of this well.
Septic tanks in this area, particularly those serving the campgrounds on
the north side of the valley, are suspected as failing seasonally, and
those in the shallow alluvium of the valley bottom are probably the contri-
buting factors along with non-point sources in contamination of this well.
The reason this shallow aquifer is contaminated by septic discharges
while the-Spearfish Valley is not, is attributable to the small confined
nature of the shallow alluvium underlain by impervious materials.
In summary, the findings to date indicate that septic tank systems are
a feasible means of sewage disposal in areas outside the City of Spearfish
and above the Spearfish alluvial valley. Because of the impermeable soils,
the absorption fields must be constructed larger than the State code
requires and the systems will potentially function as evapotransplration
systems as opposed to the conventional leach field system. There would be
no problem in extending these fields as all lots outside the city are
generally one-half acre or larger. The tighter soils and the associated
evapotransplration should afford protection of groundwater in these
developed areas.
At this time no public health hazards are identified in the Mountain
Plains area relative to septic tank systems. The Mountain Plains area does
have a high potential risk of contaminating the Minnelusa aquifer if con-
ventional septic systems are used to dispose of wastewater as development
density increases. Therefore, the approval and installation of the
systems must be monitored on an individual site basis. The ultimate suc-
cess or. failure of on-site disposal systems will be determined by the
Lawrence County Planning and Zoning Commission, and the Northern Hills
Sanitarian. Based on SCS soil interpretation, areas of septic tank limi-
tations are illustrated in Figure 20. This data along with data collected
through septic tank permitting and data presented during this project should
be utilized in future septic tank review/approval.
A-39
-------
TABLE 1
AVERAGE ANNUAL TEMPERATURE AND PRECIPITATION
SPEARFISH,
SOUTH
DAKOTA
1972-1977
1889-1977
% of
Ave.
Temperature
Ave. Precipitation
Total
of
in.
Precip.
Ave. High
Ave. Low
Ave.
January
33.6
13.9
23.7
0.62
3.1
February
40.3
20.1
30.2
0.65
3.2
March
44.8
26.0
35.4
1.26
6.2
April
54.7
36.1
45.4
2.18
10.8
May
66.8
43.5
55.1
3.14
15.6
June
63.6
53.0
58.2
3.70
18.3
July
83.7
58.1
70.9
2.94
14.6
August
82.6
55.5
69.1
1.58
7.8
September
72.0
45.2
58.6
1.49
7.4
October
60.4
35.5
48.0
1.23
6.1
November
46.3
24.3
35.3
0.77
3.8
December
37.1
18.2
27.6
0.63
3.1
57.2
35.8
46.5
20.19
100.0
A-40
-------
TABLE 2
DAILY PRECIPITATION-1967
Day
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Month
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
1
TR
0.12
0.18
0.40
2
- .
0.05
0.01
0.15
TR
3
TR
TR
0.18
TR
4
0.06
TR
5
0.05
0.10
0.08
0.06
0.22
0.09
TR
6
0.02
0.05
0.27
TR
0.03
TR
0.66
0.06
0.01
7
TR
0.16
0.06
TR
TR
8
TR
0.01
0.05
9
0.01
TR
0.12
TR
TR
10
TR
TR
0.13
11
0.2
0.89
0.12
TR
12
TR
0.01
0.18
TR
0.07
0.11
TR
TR
TR
13
TR
0.03
0.02
1.80
0.31
1.20
0.02
TR
TR
14
0.41
0.05
TR
0.25
0.04
0.03
0.60
•
15
0.02
0.16
0.52
0.13
1.18
0.07
16
0.07
TR
TR
0.06
0.40
TR
17
TR
TR
TR
TR
0.25
TR
18
0.19
0.02
0.30
0.01
19
TR
0.01
0.18
TR
TR
20
TR
TR
TR
TR
0.17
21
0.01
TR
TR
TR
22
TR
0.35
23
0.02
0.02
TR
0.46
0.05
TR
TR
24
0.12
0.15
0.02
0.05
25
0.02
0.01
0.06
0.51
0.26
26
0.03
TR
0.22
TR
0.07
27
"»
TR
TR
0.07
28
0.02
TR
TR
0.46
0.02
29
TR
TR
TR
TR
0.02
30
0.21
TR
0.03
TR
31
0.12
0.52
TR
0.22
0.08
A-41
-------
TABLE 2 (Continued)
DAILY PRECIPITATION-1968
\
Day
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Month
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
1
0.07
TR
0.20
2
- ¦
0.16
1.06
0.19
3
0.06
0.11
4
0.05
0.03
0.04
TR
0.18
0.20
0.02
5
0.13
0.05
0.26
TR
0.09
TR.
6
TR
0.18
0.03
0.01
7
0.05
TR
0.01
0.14
0.17
0.01
0.02
8
TR
TR
TR
0.05
0.85
0.12
0.03
9
0.04
TR
0.28
0.22
10
TR
0.03
0.01
0.20
0.10
11
0.18
TR
0.01
0.06
12
0.03
0.01
0.01
13
0.05
0.19
0.18
TR
14
0.1
0.11
0.45
TR
15
TR
0.02
0.25
0.39
TR
TR
0.93
0.40
TR
16
0.11
TR
TR
0.20
TR
0.05
17
0.03
0.26
0.58
0.08
TR
0.09
0.26
18
0.22
0.01
TR
19
TR
0.04
0.06
0.05
20
0.15
0.02
0.66
0.05
0.03
21
0.05
0.5
0.33
0.02
22
0.03
0.05
0.07
0.18
TR
23
TR
0.02
0.08
0.46
0.39
0.42
TR
24
0.05
0.02
0.03
1.32
TR
25
0.09
0.15
0.14
0.11
0.93
0.15
0.14
26
TR
0.01
0.16
0.02
0.23
0.06
27
0.03
0.08
0.28
TR
28
0.01
TR
29
0.03
0.02
30
TR
0.20
0.03
TR
0.05
TR
31
A-42
-------
TABLE 2 (Continued)
DAILY PRECIPITATION-1973
Day
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Month
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
1
0.11
0.09
0.06
0.06
2
0.08
_ - ¦
0.02
TR
0.69
0.75
0.05
0.08
3
0.01
0.01
0.18 s
0.08
4
0.01
TR
0.05
5
TR
0.1
0.08
0.01
6
0.05
0.10
0.19
0.12
TR
7
TR .
0.02
0.05
TR
0.06
TR
8
0.06
0.08
0.23
TR
9
0.02
0.09
1.12
10
TR
TR
TR
11
TR
0.12
TR
TR
12
0.12
0.43
0.29
13
0.06
2.25
TR
TR
14
0.04
0.15
0.29
0.34
15
TR
TR
0.06
0.03
16
0.08
0.01
0.13
17
TR
0.33
0.27
18
0.20
0.03
0.37
0.40
0.03
19
0.02
TR
1.71
0.03
0.41
0.01
0.03
20
0.47
0.05
0.30
0.28
0.12
0.02
21
0.19
0.02
0.15
22
0.13
1.10
0.11
0.06
23
TR
0.30
0.06
TR
0.32
0.18
0.06
0.32
TR
24
0.32
0-20
TR
TR
0.80
TR
25
0.02
0.51
0.07
0.02
0.02
26
0.23
TR
TR
2.15
TR
27
0.22
TR
28
0.10
0.09
0.01
0.04
29
0.20
0.02
0.03
0.01
30
0.31
TR
31
A-43
-------
TABLE 2 (Continued)
DAILY PRECIPITATION-1975
Day
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Month
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
1
TR
0.01
0.01
0.02
2
. • ¦
0.04
3
0.03
0.15
4
TR
0.06
0.05
5
0.01
TR
6
0.01
0.58
0.12
7
0.09
0.12
0.04
0.14
0.10
8
0.03
0.22
0.03
0.28
0.06
0.26
0.65
TR
9
0.31
TR
0.02
0.28
0.81
0.12
0.08
10
0.05
0.08
0.04
0.09
0.20
11
0.0
TR
0.11
0.04
TR
0.09
12
TR
0.09
TR
0.10
13
TR
TR
0.20
14
0.05
TR
0.25
0.04
15
0.20
TR
0.09
0.23
0.04
0.01
16
0.01
0.11
0.02
0.04
17
0.23
0.42
0.02
TR
0.02
18
0.41
0.16
0.14
0.04
0.10
19
0.47
TR
0.04
20
0.18
0.27
0.51
21
TR
0.17
0.0
0.20
TR
22
0.06
0.05
0.35
0.14
23
0.10
0.03
0.02
0.28
24
0.01
0.05
0.03
0.16
0.01
0.34
0.07
25
0.19
0.08
0.06
0.16
26
0.13
TR
1.06
0.05
27
0.09
0.45
0.02
0.04
28
0.22
0.56
0.02
0.06
0.05
0.21
29
0.07
0.16
0.15
30
0.02
0.01
0.14
0.12
31
0.01
0.02
0.18
0.02
0.15
A-44
-------
TABLE 2 (Continued)
DAILY PRECIPITATION-1976
Day
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
Month
May Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
1
0.08
0.09
0.02
0.04
2
TR
0.34
TR
0.04
0.10
3
0.02
0.12
0.32
4
0.03
0.03
0.28
5
0.23
0.01
0.11
0.02
0.05
0.05
6
0.03
0.01
0.01
0.95
0.02
TR
0.08
7
TR
0.31
2.00
0.19
0.27
0.02
8
0.04
0.08
0.01
0.07
TR
9
0.04
10
0.04
0.50
0.13
0.16
0.04
0.07
11
0.07
0.05
0.22
0.01
12
0.24
0.10
TR
TR
13
0.05
0.06
1.79
0.02
14
0.24
1.18
0.12
15
TR
TR
0.11
6.46
0.10
0.29
16
0.04
0.16
0.03
0.88
0.01
17
2.14
1.43
18
0.01
0.98
0.05
19
0.01
0.04
TR
0.01
0.05
20
TR
0.14
0.05
21
0.02
0.20
0.02
22
23
0.08
0.68
0.06
24
0.02
0.10
0.11
0.12
0.04
TR
25
0.10
0.01
0.05
26
TR
0.02
0.33
0.05
0.15
0.60
27
TR
0.08
0.02
0.06
0.03
28
0.16
0.12
TR x
29
0.08
0.03
0.21
0.09
0.01
0.05
30
0.38
0.07
0.02
0.02
31
TR
0.02
A-45
-------
TABLE 2 (Continued)
DAILY PRECIPITATION-1977
Day
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
Month
May Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
1
0.02
0.13
0.69
2
0.21
0.32
0.02
TR
3
.
0.14
TR
0.04
0.15
0.09
4
0.04
0.11
0.11
0.03
TR
0.10
5
0.03
0.02
0.13
0.13
0.64
0.01
0.05
6
0.08
7
0.02
0.36
0.01
TR
0.52
0.10
8
0.35
0.20
0.17
9
0.10
0.25
0.06
TR
10
0.05
0.36
11
TR
0.25
0.39
12
0.44
0.30
0.02
13
0.24
0.11
0.20
14
TR
0.03
0.31
0.89
TR
15
TR
TR
0.19
1.34
0.05
0.02
16
0.10
TR
0.05
0.35
0.02
0.08
17
0.02
0.18
0.32
18
0.12
0.02
0.23
0.02
19
TR
0.01
TR
0.37
0.33
0.16
20
0.23
TR
0.03
0.06
21
0.02
0.02
0.13
0.03
TR
0.79
0.01
22
0.02
0.04
0.25
0.01
23
0.65
0.03
0.04
24
0.20
0.10
0.88
25
0.01
0.03
0.08
0.03
0.04
0.09
26
0.03
0.02
0.03
27
0.05
0.06
0.04
0.07
0.41
0.72
28
0.09
0.04
0.04
0.46
29
0.06
1.06
30
2.63
0.08
0.05
1.15
0.28
TR
31
0.7
0.27
0.11
0.27
A-46
-------
TABLE 2 (Continued)
DAILY PRECIPITATION-1978
Day
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
Month
May Jim
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
1
0.09
0.01
0.10
1.00
TR
2
TR
0.09
0.10
3
.
0.09
0.20
4
0.02
0.69
0.02
5
0.06
0.41
0.13
6
0.48
0.20
0.01
7
0.03
0.60
0.35
0.01
8
0.10
TR
1.30
0.03
0.30
9
0.06
0.30
0.12
0.11
0.19
0.02
10
0.02
0.05
-
0.57
11
0.14
0.15
0.83
TR
0.09
0.20
12
0.21
0.14
0.01
0.05
0.10
13
0.14
0.15
0.06
0.02
14
0.09
TR
0.03
0.07
15
TR
0.01
0.46
16
TR
0.03
0.02
TR
17
TR
0.04
0.31
0.05
18
0.02
0.59
0.38
0.62
0.12
0.30
0.03
19
0.61
0.32
20
0.18
0.09
0.10
0.11
21
0.39
0.01
22
0.07
1.20
0.04
0.03
23
TR
0.11
24
0.03
TR
0.07
25
0.01
0.20
0.18
0.03
26
0.02
0.12
27
TR
0.17
28
0.06
0.14
0.08
0.13
0.04
0.01
29
0.01
1.07
0.15
TR
0.05
TR
30
TR
0.25
0.42
0.27
0.09
0.01
TR
0.01
31
0.18
0.28
A-47
-------
TABU 3
SOIL INTERPRETATIONS
SUITABILITIES AND LIMITATIONS
Soil
Name
Hap
Code
Septic Tank
Lcach Field
Frequency
FLOODING
Duration
Bed-
HIGH WATER TABLE Rock
Depth Kind Months Depth
(ft.) (In.)
Barum silt loan
Higgins silt loam
Winettl cobbly loan
Barnum silt loam channeled
Glenberg Variant
fine sandy loam
Rekop-Cypnevee
Rckop
Gypnevee
Paunsaugunt-Rock outcrop
Paunsaugunt
Canyon-Bridget Complex
Canyon
Bridget
Gypnevee-Rekop loams
Gypnevee
Rekop
Nevee-Spearfish -Rock
Outcrop
Nevee
Spearfish
Svlnt silt loan
Tilford silt loam
Tilford silt loam
Tilford silt loam
Vale silt loam
Vale silt loam
Vale silt loam
Savo silt loam
Savo silt loam
3A, 3F
4A
6
7F
13A
15
17
20
22A,22B,
41
23A
23B,137B
23C
26A
26B
26C
27A
27B
Severe:floods
Severe:floods,wetness
Moderate:floods
Severe:floods
Severe:floods
Severe:slope,bedrock
Moderate:siope
Severe:slope,bedrock
Severe:bedrock,slope
Severe:slope
Severe:slope,bedrock
Moderate:slope
Occasional
Common
Rare
Occasional
Frequent
None
None
None
None
None
None
Moderate:Perc.Rate,slope None
Severe:slope, bedrock None
Moderate:floods Rare-Occ.
Slight None
Slight None
Slight None
Moderate:Perc.Rate None
Moderate:Perc.Rate None
Moderate:Perc.Rate None
Severe:Perc.Rate None
Severe:Perc.Rate None
Very brief
to brief
Brief
Brief
May-Jul
Har-Oct
May-Jul
Apr-Aug
Apr-Oct.
>6.0
0-2.0
>6.0
>6.0
4.0-6.0
> 6.0
> 6.0
>6.0
>-6.0
>6.0
>6.0
>6.0
>6.0
>6.0
>6.0
>6.0
>6.0
>6.0
>6.0
>6.0
>6.0
>6.0
>6.0
Apparent
Apparent
>60
Oct-Jul >60
>60
>60
Apr-Jul >60
10-20
>60
10-20
> 60
>60
10-20
>60
40-60
6-20
>60
^60
>60
>60
>60
>60
>60
>60
>60
-------
TABLE 3
SOIL INTERPRETATIONS
SUITABILITIES AND LIMITATIONS (Continued)
Soil
Name
Hap
Code
Septic Tank
Leach Field
Frequency
FLOODING
Diirat Ion
Months
HIGH WATER TABLE
Depth Kind Honths
(ft.)
Bed-
Rock
Depth
(in.)
>
I
-P>
v©
Nunn clay loam
Nunn clay loam
Nunn clay loam
Midvay-Rator silt clay loam
Midway
Razor
Nevee silt loam
Nevec silt loam
Boneek silt loam
Boneek silt loam
Butche-Satanta loam
Butche
Satanta
Butche-Rock outcrop
Butche
Lakoha silt loam
Satanta loam
Nihill gravelly loam
Weber loam
Rock outcrop
Vanocker
Citadel
Vanocker
Citadel
Vanocker
Citadel
Maltland
St. Onge loam
30A
30B
27C
33
37B
37C
118B,18B
118C.18C
124
124R
125
130B
140
144A
200
221
223
225
308
Severe:Perc. Rate None
Severe:Perc. Rate None
Severe:Perc. Rate None
Severe:e1ope,bed roc k, None
Perc. Rate
Severe:Pcrc.Rate,bedrock None
Moderate:Perc.Rate None
Moderate:Perc.Rate None
Moderate:Perc.Rate None
Moderate:Perc.Rate None
Severe:slope,bedrock None
Slight None
Severe:slope,bedrock None
Severe:slope,bedrock None
Slight None
Severe:slope None
Slight None
Severe:slope, lrg.stones None
Severe:slope,Perc.Rate None
Severe:slope, 1arg.stones None
Severe:slope,Perc.Rate None
Severe:slope None
Severe:floods Common
Very Brief
Sep-Jun
>6.0
>6.0
>6.0
>6.0
>6.0
>6.0
>6.0
>6.0
>6.0
>6.0
>6.0
>6.0
>6.0
>6.0
>6.0
>6.0
>6.0
>6.0
>6.0
>6.0
>6.0
>6.0
>60
>60
>60
10-20
20-40
40-60
40-60
4O-60
40-60
7-20
> 60
7-20
40
> 60
>60
>60
>60
>60
>60
>60
>60
>60
-------
TABLE 4
SURFACE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
USE DESIGNATION
PARAMETER
Water Supply
Cold Water Fishery
Permanent Marginal
Temperature, °C
< 65
< 75
pH, units
6.0-9.0
6.6-8.6
6.5-8.8
DO, mg/1
> 6.0
> 5.0
DO spawning, mg/1
>7.0
Alkalinity CaCO^, mg/1
TDS, mg/1
1000
Suspended Solids, mg/1
30
90
BODr, mg/1
Conductivity ^mhos/cm
Nitrates NO„-N, mg/1
10
Sulfates SO,, mg/1
500
SAR
Total Coliform, ///100ml
5000/20,000
Fecal Coliform, ///lOOml
PCB
0.000001
0.000001
Chlorides, mg/1
250
100
Chlorine Residual, mg/1
0.02
0.02
Ammonia, Unionized, mg/1
0.02
0.02
Hydrogen Sulfide, undissassociated,mg/l
0.002
0.002
Cyanide, mg/1
0.02
0.02
Free CyanideLmg/1
0.005
0.005
Arsenic, mg/1
0.05
Barium, mg/1
1.0
Cadmium, mg/1
0.01
Chromium, mg/1
0.05
Lead, mg/1
0.05
Mercury, mg/1
0.002
Selenium, mg/1
0.01
A-50
-------
TABLE 4 (Contd.)
SURFACE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
PARAMETER
USE DESIGNATION
Immersion
Recreation
Limited Contact
Recreation
Wildlife &
Stock
Temperature, C
pH, units
6.5-8.3
6.0-9.0
6.0-9.5
DO. mg/1
>5.0
>5.0
DO spawning, mg/1
Alkalinity CaCO-, mg/1
750
TPS, mg/1
2500
Suspended Solids, mg/1
BOD.-, mg/1
Conductivity a10*109/""
4000
Nitrates N0--N, mg/1
50
SAR
Total Coliform. tf/100ml
Fecal Coliform, ///100ml
200
1000
PCB
Chlorides, mg/1
Chlorine Residual, mg/1
Ammonia, Unionized, mg/1
Hydrogen Sulfide, undissassociated, mg/1
Cyanide, mg/1
Free Cyanide, mg/1
Arsenic, mg/1
Barium, mg/1
Cadmium, mg/1
Chromium, mg/1
Lead, mg/1
Mercury, mg/1
Selenium, mg/1
A-51
-------
TABLE 4 (Contd.)
SURFACE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
Alkalinity CaCO^, mg/1
USE DESIGNATION
PARAMETER Irrigation Commerce & Effluent Limits To
Industry Trout Fisheries
Temperature,°C
pH, units 6.0-9.5
DO, mg/1
DO spawning, mg/1
TPS, mg/1 2000
Suspended Solids, mg/1 10
B0DPt mg/1 . 10
Conductivityy^mhos/cm 2500
Nitrates NO^-N, mg/1
SAR
Total Coliform, ///100ml
Fecal Coliform, ///100ml
PCB
Chlorides, mg/1
Chlorine Residual , mg/1
Ammonia, Unionized, mg/1
Hydrogen Sulfide, undissassociated, mg/1
Cyanide, mg/1
Free Cyanide, mg/1
Arsenic, mg/1
Barium, mg/1
Cadmium, mg/1
Chromium, mg/1
Lead, mg/1
Mercury, mg/1
Selenium, mg/1
A-52
-------
TABLE 5
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
STATION Gallery (G)
PARAMETER
Total Fecal Fecal
DATE Coliform Coliform Strep Chlorides Nitrate Sodium
MONITORED ///100 ml #/100 ml it/100 ml mg/1 mg/1 mg/1
1-3-67
<42.2
2-6-67
. <2.2
3-6-67
<2.2
4-3-67
<2.2
5-8-67
<2.2
6-5-67
<2.2
6-12-67
<2.2
7-5-67
<2.2
8-7-67
3.6
0/50 ml
0/10
9-5-67
< 2.2
10-2-67
*¦2.2
11-6-67
<2.2
11-20-67
< 2.2
1-5-68
<2.2
2-6-68
<2.2
3-18-68
<2.2
4-7-68
<2.2
5-13-68
< 2.2
6-3-68
< 2.2
7-1-68
< 2.2
8-5-68
< 2.2
9-3-68
< 2.2
10-7-68
2.2
11-4-68
2.2
11-18-68
< 2.2
5-6-73
< 3
<4
6-23-73
< 3
<5
7-16-73
16
7-31-73
< 3
<4
8-7-73
2
2
9-17-73
< 2
2
10-27-73
< 2
< 2
11-27-73
< 2
< 2
12-11-73
<2
< 2
A-53
-------
TABLE 5 (Continued)
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
STATION Gallery (G)
PARAMETER
Total Fecal Fecal
DATE Coliform Coliform Strep Chlorides Nitrate Sodium
MONITORED #/100 ml #/100 ml #/100 ml mg/1 mg/1 mg/1
1-9-74 <2 <2
2-6-74 <-2 10
3-5-74 <2 <2
4-9-74 <2 <2
5-7-74 4 <2
6-4-74 <2 <2
7-10-74 <2 <2
8-6-74 <2 * 2
9-4-74 <2 <2
11-14-74 2 4
12-10-74 <2 C2
1-8-75 <2 4
2-10-75 <2 <2
4-7-75 <2 <2
4-11-75 <2 <2
5-6-75 <2 6
8-26-75 240
9-29-75 1
10-28-75 1
10-30-75 1
11-17-75 19
12-8-75 < 1
1-19-76 4 1
2-17-76 < 1
3-22-76 < 1
3-26-76 2
5-24-76 < 1
6-28-76 < 1
7-20-76 <1
7-30-76 < 1
8-23-76 < 1
9-22-76 < 1
9-27-76 <1
A-54
-------
TABLE 5 (Continued)
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
STATION Gallery (G)
PARAMETER
DATE
MONITORED
Total
Coliform
#/100 ml
Fecal
Coliform
0/100 ml
Fecal
Strep
0/100 ml
Chlorides
mg/1
Nitrate
mg/1
Sodium
mg/1
10-19-76
2
11-15-76
* 1
11-17-76
< 1
12-6-76
2
12-13-76
2
1-11-77
< 1
2-14-77
4 1
3-9-77
4 1
3-14-77
2
5-16-77
41
6-21-77
20
7-19-77
41
8-16-77
TNTC
8-24-77
9
9-9-77
4
0
9-12-77
38
9-23-77
2.0
11-8-77
4 1
12-5-77
1
1-16-78
4. 1
2-20-78
1
3-21-78
3
4-17-78
2
5-10-78
4. 1
6-13-78
16
90
2
2.0
6-23-78
18
0
6-29-78
228
0
7-7-78
55
2
2.0
7-14-78
146
4.1
2.0
7-21-78
20
0
2.0
7-28-78
38
41
2.5
1.5
1.0
1.1
1.2
0.79
0.80
TNTC - Too Numerous To Count
A-55
-------
TABLE 5 (Continued)
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
STATION Gallery (G)
PARAMETER
Total Fecal Fecal
DATE Coliform Coliform Strep Chlorides Nitrate Sodium
MONITORED #/100 ml #/100 ml ///100 ml mg/1 mg/1 mg/1
2.5 0.97
2.0 0.95
2.5 1.2
8-4-78
26
0
8-11-78
24
C 1
8-18-78
36
0
9-5-78
16
0
9-18-78
330
0
9-11-78
12
0-
9-26-78
9-28-78
160
2
10-17-78
8
0
10-30-78
4
0
11-14-78
7
0
11-27-78
C 1
0
11-28-78
1
0
1-23-79
< 1
10-5-78
16
A-56
-------
TABLE 6
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
STATION Well at Abernathy's (A)
PARAMETER
Total
Fecal
Fecal
DATE
Coliform
Colifrom
Strep
Chlorides
Nitrate
Sodium
MONITORED
.• #/100 ml •
it/100 ml
#/100 ml
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
6-16-78
3
0
2.5
3.0
6-29-78
0
0
2.5
2.8
7-7-78
0
0
2.5
3.0
7-14-78
0
0
2.5
3.0
7-21-78
0
0
3.0
2.8
7-28-78
0
0
2.5
2.7
8-4-78
0
0
2.5
2.6
8-11-78
3
0
2.5
2.4
A-57
-------
TABLE 7
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
STATION Ward Well (ww)
PARAMETER
Total
Fecal
Fecal
DATE
Coliform
Coliform
Strep
Chlorides
Nitrate
Sodium
MONITORED
#/100 ml
#/100 ml
#/100 ml
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
6-29-78
158
0
2.0
1.7
7-7-78
0
0
2.0
1.8
7-14-78
10
0
2.5
1.8
7-21-78
1
0
2.5
1.7
7-28-78
1
0
3.0
1.8
8-4-78
0
0
3.0
2.0
8-11-78
0
0
2.0
1.9
A-58
-------
TABLE 8
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
STATION Spring Above Ward (W.AW)
PARAMETER
Total
Fecal
Fecal
DATE
Coliform
Coliform
Strep
Chlorides
Nitrate
Sodium
MONITORED
. -///100 ml
¦ #/100 ml
#/100 ml
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
6-29-78
137
1
3.5
1.7
7-7-78
120
14
3.0
1.8
7-14-78
210
3.5
2.5
2.0
7-21-78
2560
130E
2.0
1.5
7-28-78
620
2.5
2.0
1.8
8-4-78
420
2
2.5
1.9
8-11-78
1060
6
2.5
1.7
8-18-78
1500
2
2.5
1.7
9-5-78
£ 1
9-11-78
6/400 ml
9-18-78
0
10-17-78
0
10-30-78
0
11-14-78
1
11-28-78
1
E - Estimate
A-59
-------
TABLE 9
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
STATION Steve Peters Res.
PARAMETER
DATE
MONITORED
Total
Coliform
#/100 ml
Fecal
Coliform
#/100 ml
Fecal
Strep
///100 ml
Chlorides
mg/1
Nitrate
mg/1
Sodium
mg/1
2-14-79
2/28/79
3/14/79
^ 1
<1
<1
< 1/200 ml
< 1/200 ml
<1/200 ml
8.5
1.7
1.9
A-60
-------
TABLE 10
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
STATION B. Abernathy Res.
PARAMETER
DATE
MONITORED
Total
Collform
#/100 ml
Fecal
Collform
#/100 ml
Fecal
Strep
#/100 ml
Chlorides
mg/1
Nitrate
mg/1
Sodium
mg/1
2-14-79
1
<1/200 ml
2.6
2-28-79
41
<1/200 ml
3-14-79
-------
TABLE 11
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
STATION Don Orel Res.
PARAMETER
DATE
MONITORED
Total
Coliform
#/100 ml
Fecal
Coliform
#/100 ml
Fecal
Strep
#/100 ml
Chlorides
mg/1
Nitrate
mg/1
Sodium
mg/1
2-14-79
<1
< 1/200 ml
2.7
2-28-79
<1
< 1/200 ml
3/14/79
<1
< 1/200 ml
5.2
2.8
A-62
-------
TABLE 12
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
STATION M. Blosmo
PARAMETER
DATE
MONITORED
Total
- Coliform
#/100 ml
Fecal
Coliform
#/100 ml
Fecal
Strep
0/100 ml
Chlorides
mg/1
Nitrate
mg/1
Sodium
mg/1
2-14-79
<1
< 1/200 ml
1.6
2/28-79
< 1
< 1/200 ml
3-14-79
<1
<1/200 ml
8.9
1.7
A-63
-------
TABLE 13
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
STATION M. Johnson
PARAMETER
DATE
MONITORED
Total
Coliform
' ///100 ml
Fecal
Coliform
Z//100 ml
Fecal
Strep
#/100 ml
Chlorides
mg/1
Nitrate
mg/1
Sodium
mg/1
2-14-79
<.1
<1/200 ml
1.0
2-28-79
< 1
< 1/200 ml
3-14-79
<1
<1/200 ml
2.1
1.0
A-64
-------
TABLE 14
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
STATION M. Reed
I DATE
MONITORED
Total
Coliform
0/100 ml
PARAMETER
Fecal
Coliform
0/100 ml
Fecal
Strep
#/100 ml
Chlorides
mg/1
Nitrate
mg/1
Sodium
mg/1
2-14-79
2-28-79
1
< 1
1/200 ml
< 1/200 ml
1.0
A-65
-------
TABLE 15
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
STATION H.Laprath
PARAMETER
DATE
MONITORED
Total
Coliform
* #/100 ml
Fecal
Coliform
#/100 ml
Fecal
Strep
#/100 ml
Chlorides
mg/1
Nitrate
mg/1
Sodium
mg/1
2-14-79
<1
<1/200 ml
1.4
2-28-79
<1
<1/200 ml
3-14-79
<1
<1/200 ml
11.7
1.5
A-6 6
-------
TABLE 16
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
STATION D. Deberg
PARAMETER
DATE
MONITORED
Total
• Coliform
#/100 ml
Fecal
Coliform
///lOO ml
Fecal
Strep
///100 ml
Chlorides
mg/1
Nitrate
mg/1
Sodium
mg/1
2-14-79
< 1
^1/200 ml
3.5
2-28-79
< 1
< 1/200 ml
3-14-79
<1
<1/200 ml
39.0
5.5
A-67
-------
TABLE 17
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
STATION J.Witt
PARAMETER
Total
Fecal
Fecal
DATE
• Coliform
Coliform
Strep
Chlorides
Nitrate
Sodium
MONITORED
#/100 ml
#/100 ml
#/100 ml
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
2-14-79
< 1
< 1/200 ml
1.7
2-28-79
< 1
< 1/200 ml
3-14-79
< 1
< 1/200 ml
1.5
1.5
A-68
-------
TABLE 18
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
STATION L. Reuppel, Sr.
PARAMETER
DATE
MONITORED
Total
Coliform
' #/100 ml
Fecal
Coliform
• #/100 ml
Fecal
Strep
///100 ml
Chlorides
mg/1
Nitrate
mg/1
Sodium
mg/1
2-14-79
^ 1
< 1/200 ml
1.2
2-28-79
4. 1
< 1/200 ml
3-14-79
<. 1
< 1/200 ml
1.1
0.9
A-69
-------
TABLE 19
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
STATION R. Pascoe
PARAMETER
DATE
MONITORED
Total
Coliform
#/100 ml
Fecal
Coliform
#/100 ml
Fecal
Strep
#/100 ml
Chlorides
mg/1
Nitrate
mg/1
Sodium
mg/1
2-28-79
3-14-79
13
< 1
4. 1/200 ml
Cl/200 ml
58.1
5.9
6.7
A-70
-------
TABLE 20
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
STATION Spring near Hwy. 14 & 35
PARAMETER
Total
Fecal
Fecal
DATE
Coliform
Coliform
Strep
Chlorides
Nitrate
Sodium
MONITORED
' 0/100 ml
' #/100 ml
0/100 ml
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
2-14-79
66
4. 1/200 ml
3.2
2-28-79
2
1/200 ml
3-14-79
4
1
15.1
3.2
A-71
-------
TABLE 21
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
STATION Spring, S. of West Subd. West Side of Rd.
PARAMETER
Total
Fecal
Fecal
DATE
Coliform
Coliform
Strep
Chlorides
Nitrate
Sodium
MONITORED
#/100 ml '
#/100 ml
#/100 ml
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
2-14-79
56
29
0.7
2-28-79
22
8
3-14-79
4
2
2.3
0.8
A-72
-------
TABLE 22
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
STATION Spring, S. of West Subd. East Side of Rd.
PARAMETER
Total
Fecal
Fecal
DATE
Coliform
Coliform
Strep
Chlorides
Nitrate
Sodium
MONITORED
' 0/100 ml '
#/100 ml
#/100 ml
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
2-14-79
66
43
0.7
2-28-79
32
14
3-14-79
7
7
2.3
0.8
A-73
-------
TABLE 23
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
STATION Spring, S. of West Subd. East Side of Rd.
PARAMETER
Total
Fecal
Fecal
DATE
Coliform
Coliform
Strep
Chlorides
Nitrate
Sodium
MONITORED
#/100 ml
///100 ml
#/100 ml
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
2-14-79
35
< 1/200 ml
0.6
2-28-79
<. 1
< 1/200 ml
A-74
-------
TABLE 24
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
STATION J
PARAMETER
Total Fecal Fecal
DATE - Coliform Coliform Strep Chlorides Nitrate Sodium
MONITORED #/100 ml it /100 ml #/100 ml mg/1 mg/1 mg/1
11-14-78 0 0
A-75
-------
TABLE 25
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
STATION Cundy House (CH)
PARAMETER
Total Fecal Fecal
DATE Collform Collform Strep Chlorides Nitrate Sodium
MONITORED ' #/100 ml ' #/100 ml #/100 ml mg/1 mg/1 mg/1
9-28-78 4 2 <2
9-26-78 < 1
A-76
-------
TABLE 26
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
STATION Lester
PARAMETER
Total Fecal Fecal
DATE Coliform Coliform Strep Chlorides Nitrate Sodium
MONITORED " #/100 ml - #/100 ml ///100 ml mg/1 mg/1 mg/1
11-14-78 26 0
A-77
-------
TABLE 27
SURFACE WATER QUALITY
STATION HB
PARAMETER
DATE
MONITORED
Total
Coliform
0/100 ml
Fecal
Coliform
///100 ml
Fecal
Strep
///100 ml
Chlorides
mg/1
Nitrate
mg/1
Sodium
mg/1
9-11-78
9-18-78
137
5661
E - Estimate
A-78
-------
TABLE 28
SURFACE WATER QUALITY
STATION Spearfish Creek (DP)
PARAMETER
Total Fecal Fecal ,
DATE Coliform Coliform Strep Chlorides Nitrate Sodium
MONITORED 0/100 ml #/100 ml #/100 ml mg/1 mg/1 mg/1
9-5-78 39
9-11-78 90
9-18-78 62
10-17-78 122
10-30-78 20
11-14-78 6
11-28-78 5
A-79
-------
TABLE 29
SURFACE WATER QUALITY
STATION Spearfish Creek (UP)
PARAMETER
Total Fecal Fecal
DATE Coliform Coliform Strep Chlorides Nitrate Sodium
MONITORED #/100 ml ///100 ml Z//100 ml mg/1 mg/1 mg/1
9-5-78 84
9-11-78 370
9-18-78 44
10-17-78 136
10-30-78 4
11-14-78 6
11-28-78 4
A-80
-------
TABLE 30
SURFACE WATER QUALITY
STATION Spearfish Creek (14)
DATE
MONITORED
Total
Colifortn
#/100 ml
PARAMETER
Fecal
Coliform
#/100 ml
Fecal
Strep
#/100 ml
Chlorides
mg/1
Nitrate
mg/1
Sodium
mg/1
9-5-78
9-11-78
9-18-78
9-28-78
10-17-78
10-30-78
11-14-78
11-28-78
9-7-78
9-21-78
30
88
102
^ 3
10
10
2
1
3.0
1.5.
A-81
-------
TABLE 31
SURFACE WATER QUALITY
STATION Spearfish Creek (SW)
PARAMETER
Total Fecal Fecal
DATE Coliform Coliform Strep Chlorides Nitrate Sodium
MONITORED #/100 ml #/100 ml #/100 ml mg/1 mg/1 mg/1
9-5-78
77
9-18-78
92
9-11-78
96
10-17-78
76
10-30-78
12
11-14-78
2
11-28-78
6
9-7-78
2.0
9-21-78
1.75
A-82
-------
TABLE 32
SURFACE WATER QUALITY
STATION Spearflsh Creek (AG)
DATE
MONITORED
Total
Coliform
///100 ml
PARAMETER
Fecal
Coliform
it/100 ml
Fecal
Strep
#/100 ml
Chlorides
mg/1
Nitrate
mg/1
Sodium
mg/1
9-5-78
9-18-78
9-11-78
9-28-78
10-17-78
10-30-78
11-14-78
11-28-78
29
70
165
34
145
8
4
3
A-83
-------
TABLE 33
SURFACE WATER QUALITY
STATION Higgins Gulch (H)
PARAMETER
Total
Fecal
Fecal
DATE
Coliform
Coliform
Strep
Chlorides
Nitrate
Sodium
MONITORED
. - #/100 ml
#/100 ml
#/100 ml
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
6-16-78
7000
13
1.0
1.5
6-29-78
1400E
5
1.0
0.98
7-7-78
380
30
0.5
1.0
7-14-78
340
34
1.0
1.0
7-21-78
700
114
0.5
0.8
7-28-78
560
46
1.0
0.77
8-4-78
1280
68
1.0
0.80
8-11-78
440
37
0.5
0.97
8-18-78
933
22
1.0
0.97
A-84
-------
TABLE 34
SURFACE WATER QUALITY
STATION Higgins Gulch (HC)
PARAMETER
DATE
MONITORED
Total
Coliform
. - #/100 ml
Fecal
Coliform
#/100 ml
Fecal
Strep
#/100 ml
Chlorides
mg/1
Nitrate
mg/1
Sodium
mg/1
6-16-78
5600
259
1.0
1.5
6-23-78
1500E
• 29
1.0
6-29-78
4740
87
1.5
1.1
7-7-78
1000
52
1.0
1.2
7-14-78
950
276
2.5
0.79
7-21-78
633
212
1.0
0.80
7-28-78
633
8
1.0
0.97
8-4-78
2000
18
1.5
0.95
8-11-78
1000
275
1.0
1.2
8-18-78
1700
80
1.0
E - Estimate
A-85
-------
TABLE 35
SURFACE WATER QUALITY
STATION Higgins Gulch (HX)
PARAMETER
•
Total
Fecal
Fecal
DATE
Coliform
Coliform
Strep
Chlorides
Nitrate
Sodium
MONITORED
. • #/100 ml
#/100 ml
#/100 ml
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
6-29-78
2700E
118
5.5
2.1
7-7-78
15000
74
3.5
2.1
7-14-78
500
56
3.0
2.2
7-21-78
800
266
2.5
2.0
7-28-78
667
96
3.0
E - Estimate
A-86
-------
TABLE 36
SURFACE WATER QUALITY
STATION Hlgglns Gulch (I)
PARAMETER
Total Fecal Fecal
DATE Coliform Coliform Strep Chlorides Nitrate Sodium
MONITORED . - #/100 ml • #/100 ml 0/100 ml mg/1 mg/1 mg/1
9-5-78 19
9-18-78 24
9-11-78 16
9-28-78 13
10-17-78 2
10-30-78 1
11-14-78 5
11-28-78 0
A-87
-------
TABLE 37
SURFACE WATER QUALITY
STATION Irrigation Ditch (ID)
PARAMETER
DATE
MONITORED
Total
Coliform
#/100 ml
Fecal
Coliform
0/100 ml
Fecal
Strep
#/100 ml
Chlorides
mg/1
Nitrate
mg/1
Sodium
mg/1
9-5-78
9-11-78
9-18-78
9-28-78
23
40
56
20
A-88
-------
TABLE 38
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
STATION Cuadv Drain (C)
PARAMETER
Total
Fecal
Fecal
DATE
Coliform
Coliform
Strep
Chlorides
Nitrate
Sodium
MONITORED
' 0/100 ml
' #/100 ml
#/100 ml
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
6-16-78
70
1
3.0
4.0
6-23-78
25
0
6-29-78
182
0
2.5
2.1
7-7-78
20
0
2.5
2.2
7-14-78
38
0
2.2
2.3
7-21-78
35
< 1/400 ml
2.5
2.1
7-28-78
18
0
2.5
2.2
8-4-78
14
0
2.5
2.2
8-11-78
9
0
2.5
2.0
8-18-78
11
0
2.5
2.0
9-5-78
0
9-28-78
30
< 2
9-29-78
0
3
10-5-78
0
10-17-78
0
10-30-78
0
11-14-78
0
11-28-78
0
A-89
-------
TABLE 39
WELL DATA - SPEARFISH
1/4
1/4
Location
Sec.
T.
R.
Static
Water
Depth
(Ft.)
Producing
Aquifer
Depth
(Ft.)
Drilling
Date
Owner
SE
NE
4
6N
2E
16
25
7-31-73
D.
Heymeyer
SE
NE
4
6N
2E
20
40
6-08-73
T.
Meyers
SE
NE
4
6N
2E
20
35
5-08-73
L.
Ruppel
SE
NE
4
6N
2E
15
35
10-01-73
R.
Johnson
E
SW
4
6N
2E
55
50
8-10-73
G.
Ewning
SW
NW
4
6N
2E
18
30
4-24
L.
Jered
NE
NW
4
6N
2E
15
35
8-22-73
M.
Blosmo
SW
SE
5
6N
2E
25
55
3-20-73
D.
DeBerg
SE
SE
32
7N
2E
20
50
1-20-73
MacKaben Dev.
NE
SE
4
6N
2E
32
32
5-23-78
Johnson Enterp
SE
N
4
6N
2E
30
30
2-15-78
J.
Weiers
SE
SE
5
6N
2E
251"
R.
Pascoe
SE
SW
33
7N
2E
151'
Abernathy
SE
SE
33
7N
2E
351'
Campground
SE
SE
33
7N
2E
171'
M.
Johnson
SW
SW
34
7N
2E
35l.
Reed
NW
NE
4
6N
2E
151,
Peters
1. Depth estimates made by owner.
A-90
-------
TABLE 40
SUPPLEMENTAL DATA ON SEPTIC SYSTEMS AND WELLS
DEBERG-FULLER
Iden
No.
SEPTIC SYSTEM
WELL
1.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
9.
10.
11.
About 4' deep, works good, very little evap.,
tank 500 gal., steel, clay, no gravel, about
150' pipe.
Deep 8'-10', tank 500 gal., steel, large crock,
clay, extremely tight, added onto once, present-
ly plugged about 200' pipe.
About 4' deep, tank 600-700 gal., concrete,
clay, slight amount of rock, added onto twice,
about 250'-300' pipe.
About 8'-10' deep, tank 500 gal., steel, about
same as No. 3, added onto once, about 225'
pipe.
About 4' deep, tank 1,000 gal., concrete,
mostly clay, slight loam, about 180' pipe,
good system.
Same as No. 2
About 4' deep, tank 750 gal., concrete, clay,
some rock, good system, about 180' pipe.
About 4' deep, tank 1,000 gal., concrete,
clay, fairly tight, good system, about
180' pipe.
No Data
About 8'-10' deep, tank 500 gal., steel,
clay, good system, about 180' pipe.
About 3' deep, tank 500 gal., steel, clay,
loam, added onto when it looked like it was
surfacing, no apparent surfacing since,
about 220' pipe.
About 75' deep
poor, quit using,
inadequate water
About 65' deep,
hooked to No. 6
then went to about
100' deep
About 325'-350' deep,
good well, hooked
to No. 7
About 90' deep, not
enough water to water
lawn.
1.
Central system
Same as No. 2
Same as No. 3
About 98' deep,
poor quantity,
household use marginal
Central system
About 80' well,
poor quantity, aban-
doned and went^to
central system
Same as No. 10
1. Central Well (Deberg) - About 350' deep, 6" casing, 600
2. Central Well (Fuller) - About 350' deep, 6" casing, 600
gal. storage,
gal. storage.
A-91
-------
TABLE 40
SUPPLEMENTAL DATA ON SEPTIC SYSTEMS AND
WELLS
DEBERG-FULLER (continued)
Iden.
No.
SEPTIC SYSTEM
WELL
12.
About 3' deep, tank 1,000 gal., concrete, clay,
loam, good system, no apparent surfacing, about
180' pipe.
About 95' deep,
very good well
13.
About 4' deep, tank 1,000 gal., concrete, clay,
good system, about 180' pipe.
About 350' well
hooked to No. 14,
good well
14. .
About 8'-10' deep, tank 1,000 gal., concrete,
clay, small amount of rock, good system, about
180' pipe.
Same as No. 13
15.
About 41 deep, tank 1,000 gal., concrete, clay,
good system, about 180' pipe.
Central System^*
16.
About 8'-10' deep, tank 1,000 gal., concrete,
clay, some rock, good system, about 180' pipe.
Central System''"
17.
About 4' deep, tank 1,000 gal., concrete, clay,
good system, about 180' pipe.
Central System''"
18.
About 8'-10' deep, tank 1,000 gal., concrete,
clay, good system, about 180' pipe.
2.
Central System
Fuller
19.
About 10'-12' deep, tank 1,000 gal., concrete,
clay, tight, good system, about 180* pipe.
2.
Central System
Fuller
20.
About 4' deep, tank 1,000 gal., concrete, clay,
good system, about 180' pipe.
Central System''"
21.
About 8'-10' deep, tank 1,000 gal., concrete,
clay, good system, about 180' pipe.
Central System''"
22.
About 4' deep, tank 1,000 gal., concrete, clay,
good system, about 180' pipe.
Central System''"
23.
About 3' deep, tank 1,000 gal., concrete, not
surfasing soil.
2
Central System
Fuller
24.
About 8'-10' deep, tank 1,000 gal., concrete,
clay, large rock, good system, about 180' pipe.
2.
Central System
Fuller
1. Central Well (Deberg) - About 350' deep, 6" casing, 600 gal. storage.
2. Central Well (Fuller) - About 350' deep, 6" casing, 600 gal. storage.
A-92
-------
TABLE 40
SUPPLEMENTAL DATA ON SEPTIC SYSTEMS AND WELLS
DEBERG-FULLER (continued)
Iden.
No. SEPTIC SYSTEM WELL
25.
About 41 deep, tank, 1,000 gal., concrete,
clay, good system, about 180' pipe.
Central
System*"
26.
Same as No. 25.
Central
System*"
27.
Same as No. 25.
Central
System*'
00
About 4' deep, tank 1,000 gal, concrete,
clay, loam, good system, about 180' pipe.
Central
Fuller
2.
System
29.
No Data
Central
Fuller
2.
System
30.
About 4' deep, tank, 1,000 gal., concrete,
clay, loam (lighter soil), good system,
about 180' pipe.
Central
1.
System
31.
Same as No. 30.
Central
System*"
32.
Same as No. 30
Central
1-
System
33.
No data
Central
Fuller
2.
System
1. Central Well (Deberg) - About 350' deep, 6" casing, 600 gal. storage.
2. Central Well (Fuller) - About 350' deep, 6" casing, 600 gal. storage.
)
A-93
-------
TABLE 40
SUPPLEMENTAL DATA ON SEPTIC SYSTEMS AND
DEER MEADOWS
WELLS
Iden.
No.
SEPTIC SYSTEM
4.
About 4' deep, soil unknown
About 75' deep,
Hooked to No. 5.
5.
Same as No. 4
Same as No. 4
6.
About 4' deep, tank 1,000 gal., concrete,
clay, slight amount of rock, never been used,
about 180' pipe.
About 75' deep
7.
About 10' deep, tank 1,000 gal., clay, good
system, about 180' pipe.
Hooked to No. 10
8.
About 4' deep, tank 1,000 gal., concrete,
clay, never been used.
Hooked to No. 10
9.
About 7'-8' deep, tank 1,000 gal., concrete,
clay, good system, about 180' pipe.
Hooked to No. 10
10.
About 4' deep, tank 1,000 gal., concrete,
clay, some small rock, good system, about
180' pipe.
About 265' deep,
4" casing.
11.
About 4' deep, tank 1,000 gal., concrete,
clay within gravel veines, some large rock,
good syste, about 180' pipe.
Hooked to No. 13
12.
Same as No. 11 except thicker gravel veines.
Hooked to No. 13
13.
About 4' deep, tank 1,000 gal., concrete, clay,
some rock, good system, about 180' pi{>e.
About 265' deep,
4" casing
14.
Same as No. 13
Same as No. 13
15.
About 41 deep, tank 1,000 gal., concrete,
clay, some rock, good system, about 180' pipe.
About 85' deep,
6" casing.
16.
About 4' deep, tank 1,000 gal., concrete,
clay, never used, about 180' pipe.
About 85' deep,
6" casing.
23.
About 4' deep, tank 1,000 gal., concrete, clay,
loam, used two weeks, about 180' pipe.
Hooked to No. 39
24.
About 8'-10' deep, tank 1,000 gal., concrete,
clay, loam.
Own well,
depth unknown
A-94
-------
TABLE 40
SUPPLEMENTAL DATA ON SEPTIC SYSTEMS AND WELLS
DEER MEADOWS (continued)
Iden.
No.
SEPTIC SYSTEM
WELL
25. About 4' deep, tank 1,000 gal., concrete, clay,
loam, never used, 180' pipe.
26. About 4' deep, tank 1,000 gal., concrete, clay,
loam, being used, 180' pipe.
34. About 4' deep, tank 1,000 gal., concrete, clay,
loam, good system, about 180' pipe.
38. About 4' deep, tank 1,000 gal., concrete, clay,
good system, about 180' pipe.
39. About 4' deep, tank 1,000 gal., concrete, clay,
good system,about 180' pipe.
Hooked to No. 39
Hooked to No. 39
Hooked to No. 13
About 85'-90' deep
About 90'-95' deep
A-95
-------
TABLE 41
SOIL PERCOLATION RATES
Soil Name Depth Permeability
(in.)
ln/hr
ln/min
Min/in
Barum
0-3
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.033
100-30
3-60
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.033
100-30
Higgins
0-3
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.033
100-30
3-35
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.033
100-30
35-60
0.6-0.2
0.01-0.033
100-30
Winetti
0-5
2.0-6.0
0.033-0.1
30-10
5-60
2.0-6.0
0.033-0.1
30-10
Glenberg
0-7
2.0-6.0
0.033-0.1
30-10
Variant •
7-60
2.0-6.0
0.033-0.1
30-10
Rekop
0-4
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.033
100-30
4-18
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.033
100-30
18-60
Gypnevee
0-7
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.033
100-30
7-60
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.033
100-30
Paunsaugunt
0-5
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.033
100-30
5-17
2.0-6.0
0.033-0.1
30-10
17-30
Canyon
0-3
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.033
100-30
3-16
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.033
100-30
16-35
Bridget
0-10
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.033
100-30
10-60
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.033
100-30
Nevee
0-6
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.033
100-30
6-60
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.033
100-30
Spearfish
0-7
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.033
100-30
7-12
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.033
100-30
12-60
Swint
0-14
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.033
100-30
14-60
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.033
100-30
Tilford
0-6
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.033
100-30
6-20
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.033
100-30
20-60
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.033
100-30
Vale
0-6
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.033
100-30
6-19
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.033
100-30
19-60
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.033 ..
100-30
A-96
-------
TABLE 41
SOIL PERCOLATION RATES (Continued)
Soil Name
Depth
Permeability
(in.)
ln/hr
ln/min
Min/in
Savo
0-7
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.
033
100-30
7-18
0.2-2.0
0.003-0
.033
333-30
18-60
0.2-2.0
0.003-0
.033
333-30
Nunn
0-5
0.2-2.0
0.003-0
.033
333-30
5-25
0.06-0.6
0.001-0
.01
1000-100
25-60
0.2-2.0
0.003-0
.033
330-30
Midway
0-16
0.06-0.2
0.001-0
.01
1000-100
16-30 .
Razor
0-3
0.06-0.2
0.01-0.
033
1000-100
3-34
0.06-0.2
0.001-0
.01
1000-100
34-60
Nevee
0-6
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.
033
100-30
6-60
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.
033
100-30
Boneek
0-8
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.
033
100-30
8-22
0.2-0.6
0.003-0
.01
333-100
22-47
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.
033
100-30
47-60
Butche
0-3
0.6-6.0
0.01-0.
1
100-10
3-13
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.
033
100-30
13-20
Satanta
0-7
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.
033
100-30
7-60
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.
033
100-30
Lakoha
0-6
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.
033
100-30
6-30
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.
033
100-30
30-92
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.
033
100-30
Nihill
0-8
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.
033
100-30
8-60
2.0-6.0
0.033-0
.1
30-10
Weber
0-7
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.
033
100-30
7-23
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.
033
100-30
23-60
20
0.333
3.0
Vanocker
0-4
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.
033
100-30
4-60
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.
033
100-30
Citadel
0-11
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.
033
100-30
11-25
0.2-0.6
0.003-0
.01
333-100
25-60
0.2-2.0
0.003-0
.033
333-30
Maitland
0-11
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.
033
100-30
11-44
0.6-2.0
0.0.-0.
033
100-30
44-60
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.
033
100-30
St. Onge
0-24
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.
033
100-30
24-60
0.6-2.0
0.01-0.
033
100-30
A-97
-------
FIGURE 1
EIS STUDY AREA
(over size)
A-98
-------
FIGURE 2
GEOLOGY
(over size)
A-99
-------
XJ3M9 HSIJHT3dB
avou xaiivA
H3ddn
HTinO 8NI99IH
I
I i I i !
M M A M K
•T« » '1134 Ml NOI1VA311
A-100
FIGURE 3
-------
FIGURE 4
SOILS OF THE STUDY AREA
(over size)
A-101
-------
FIGURE- 5-
"WTAL~"COLIFORM.
-AT- -GALLERX-. 19 dZ.
—1 0/100 ml -
ooooo
oooo
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
A-102
-------
FIGURE--6
TOTAL COLIFORM
AT-£ALLER¥-l-968
100 ml
oooo
i ooo
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
A-103
-------
2 °0000
9 7.^*
8
7
6 ...
. ..
3
! ogoo
9. 7. _ I
8
7
6
5
77~7I7]77~ZZy.
-i- —FIGURE - 7
t:
TOTAt""COLXFORM—
_ .GALLERY. '1912L.
#/100. ml
E77.U
3
2
~HlB r/r
1 OOO
~9
8
7
6-
5
m
-.pi- r 1
¦a
4
O
o3._..
i.SQ
9
8—
7—
6. _
5
4. _
2 - -
1.9
9
8.
7
6.
U
— : 1 I
•• •
-f i-
"F^
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY
JUN JUL
A-104
AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
-------
jOOOOO
9
8
7
6
5
2
1 OOOO
9_ 11
8
7
«_
5
FlGUKE-8
TOTAL' GOL.lFOfiMT
„AI -GALLERY-J.9.751
///100-ml
¦ t^L > I
rpfri '
4
3
-i__
2
i_ooo
9
8
7
6
5
H
S 4
O
q3._..
z2--
1.00.
9
8
7
6—
5
4
m
ri
H
2. _
1.9
9
8.
7.
6.
5.
4.
3.
JJ
¦f I
-!
-j
: i
M
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY
JUN JUL AUG
A-105
SEP OCT
NOV
.
DEC
-------
2 0000(5
9
a
7 . _ . _
6
5
3
l oooo
9 r."" r
8
7
6
5
4
3
-r.r" :
T'T ' '
—;—figure-9
"TOTAL. COLIFORM '
-AT -GALrLER¥—i9 7 6-
¦4/100 ml
£-M-
5T3—1
sfefefefc-
gETf
ZZI:
~T
2
i_ooo
9
8
7
6- —
S
S*
o
©3
!2^_.
uoo.
9
8
7
6-_.
5
4
J
-4
l.o.
9
8.
7.
6.
5.
4
2.
EI
"~T
i
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN
L
JUL AUG
A-106
i..i
SEP OCT
NOV DEC
-------
J OOOOO
9
a
7
6
5
4
3_ .
1 .J
oooo
5
7
6
3
FIGURE-10-
: J
' I
¦ TOTAL. COLiFORK "
-AT GALLERX-197-7-
#/100-ml-r
r-
4
3
2
l-OOO
9
8
7
6-
5
cH
0 4
O
O 3
i . ..
o2...
( .
I • —
-t—
r ¦
- - i-
i_QQ
9
8 —
7
6--
5__
4._.
4*-
irr
3
2_ -
1.0.
9.
8.
7.
6.
5.
4
2,
-t_U
35
-
_L
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY
JUN JUL
A-10 7
AUG SEP OCT
...i
NOV
DEC
-------
1 .00000
9 . .
8 _
7 _ _
6 ...
5 . ...
3
2
i qooo
9 r _. _
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
FIGURE 11
TOTAL"COLIFORM
AT.GALLERY 1978.
#/100 ml
m
3353
\ -
r-rrr
— i*
\~QQQ
9
8
7
6
5
1- 4
i
1
o
O 3.
4
z"_ j . r
^ ::4
* 1
_i t
--f—
1 9°
v::
8
7
6
5__.
4. _ .
ilE
3...
VT r.
2... -
TT
1.0
9
8.
7
6.
5.
rri • t
1.
. !
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
A-108
-------
DEC
-------
, OOOOCJ
9 ! "
8 ... . .
7 . .
6
1 oooo
8
7
6
5
— FIGURE -13 - -
"TOtAITCDLJFORK"
///100 ml
-TT-
3
2
l-QOO
9
8
7
6
S
rH
B*
o
o3
\2
!_og
V. _.
8
7
6_ _
5. _
4
3. -
Tf
sfs±- i r
^L:-. 1
SjfafcrM I
t-:
I -
l.o
9.
8.
7
6-
5.
- t
53TT
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
A-110
-------
I ooooo
¦ - -FIGURE- 14
TOm'TOIilFOKM
WARS
WELL
- #/l«0 il
oooo
i ooo
FEB MAR APR MAY
A-lll
-------
jooooo
9 J I
8
7
5
3
2
1.0000.
91 1'.
8
7
6
5
4
3
FIGURE 15
•TOTAL COLIFORM
AT SPRING ABOVE WARD'S 1978
It/100 ml
. r
"—- 1
¦ ¦ t
2
l-OOO
•» •
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY
JUN JUL AUG
A-112
SEP OCT NOV DEC
-------
ooooo
i qooo
~9_1 IJ
8
7
6
5
4
3
U
OOP
9
8
7
6-
5
I
I 4
O
Q:
I-
l-99-
9
8
7
6
5
4 . „
3
2. . .
i.9
9
8.
7.
6.
5.
"FIGURE" 16
-• TOTAL COLIFORM ;
-AT-H-iGGINS GULCH -{Hf-1978
- - ¦¦ #/100 ml
r*
3=
„_1—
JAN FEB MAR
APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
A-113
-------
i_oooqo
9 _ ™ "J
8
7 _
6 .
5
3
2
i_oq°o
9
8
7
6
5
2
l.OOO
9
8
7
6.
5
S 4
O
o3_
o2___.
i_oo
9. _
8—
7
6—
S__
4. _
1.0
9
8.
7.
6,
5.
4.
TTT
^-FIGURE- 17
; jTOTAL COLIFORH . . :
-AT- HOGGINS - GULCH (H€>-i978*
^ U-#/ioo ml -
=y±f.: . i
^t^rrrrr
• I .
¦— \
1
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
A-114
-------
! ooooo
9""-
8
7 .....
6
5
2
! OOOO
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
—i-TTGURE 18
. TOTAL COLIFORM ..
-AT-HIGGINS" GULGH--(HX)-1978-
. : ¦ #/100 ml -
2
: i
i_PQO
9
8
7
6*.
5
rH
0 4
O
O3
z2-
!_00
9
8
7
6
5
4 _
3. --
1.0
9
8.
7.
6„
5.
2 ..
1-
-------
FIGURE 19
SEPTIC TANK VERIFICATIONS
(over size)
A-116
-------
FIGURE 20
SEPTIC TANK LIMITATIONS
(over size)
A-117
-------
REFERENCES
1. Brady Consultants, Inc. Wastewater Facilities Plan for Spearflsh, South
Dakota. July 1978
2. Darton, N.H., Page, S. Geological Atlas of the Central Black Hills Folio,
South Dakota. U.S. Geological Survey. Washington, D.C. 1925.
3. Soil Conservation Service. Unpublished Soil Survey of Lawrence County.
4. Schlesinger, J, Loveland, T, and Ripple, B. Spearfish Land Capability
Study.. South Dakota State Planning Bureau. Pierre, South Dakota. August 1978.
5. Department of Environmnetal Protection. Administrative Rules of South Dakota.
Title 34, Article 34:04 Water Pollution Control Program. Revised September
21, 1978.
6. Gries, J.P. Source, of the Belle Fourche Water Supply. July 15, 1977
7. Harms, L. A Report on the Belle Fourche Water Supply. Prepared for the
City of Belle Fourche, South Dakota. September 28, 1977.
8. Rahn, P., Gries, J.P., and Harms, L. Preliminary Report on the Ground-
Water Conditions at the Belle Fourche Water Infiltration Gallery. Prepared
for the City of Belle Fourche, South Dakota and Lawrence County Commissioners.
August 20, 1978.
9. Garcia, D., Meola, M.J., Richard, S., Rissley, R., Schunneman, U., under
the direction of Harms, L. A Water Quality Survey of the Water Sources
Surrounding the Belle Fourche Infiltration Gallery. November 9, 1978.
10. Davis, A., and Rahn, P. Progress Report on the Additonal Study of the Belle
Fourche Water Supply System. Prepared for the City of Belle Fourche,
South Dakota and the Lawrence County Commissioners. November 3, 1978.
11. Rahn, P., and Davis, A. Report on the Additional Study of the Belle Fourche
Water Supply System. December 19, 1978.
12. Cox, Earl J. Special Report 19 Artesian Water, Minnelusa and Pahasapa
Formations, Spearfish - Belle Fourche Area. South Dakota State Geological
Survey. November 1962.
13. Brown, K.W., Wolf, H.W., Donnelly, K.C., and Slowly, J.F. The Movement of
Fecal Coliforms and Coliphages below Septic Lines. Journal of Environmental
Quality. Volume 8, Number 1, 1979.
14. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Environmental Resources,
Technical Manual for Sewage Enforcement Officers, May 1975.
15. Kerfoot, William B., Septic Leachate Detection - A Technological Breakthrough
for Shoreline On-Lot System Performance Evaluation, EPA Project Report, 1978.
A-118
-------
NONPOINT SOURCE CONTROLS
APPENDIX B
-------
APPENDIX B
NONPOINT SOURCE CONTROLS
-------
0 Access Road
Definition. A road constructed as a part of a conservation plan to
provide needed access.
Scope. This standard applies to roads constructed to provide access
to farms, ranches, fields, conservation systesm, structures, and recrea-
tion areas.
/
Purpose. To provide a route for travel, for moving equipment and
• supplies, and for providing access for proper operation and management of
conservation enterpri ses.
Conditions Wh^re Practice Applies. Where roads are needed to provide
access from a township, county or state highway to the conservation enter-
prise, or to provide travelways within the planned area.
D Agricultural Waste Management System
Definition. A planned agricultural waste management system to con-
tain and manage liquid and solid wastes including runoff from concentrated
waste areas with ultimate disposal in a manner which does not degrade
air, soil, or water resources. This practice includes systems for safe
disposal of livestock wastes, municipal waste treatment plant effluents
and sludges, and agricultural processing wastes through use of soil and
plants.
Scope. This standard establishes the minimum acceptable quality
for design, installation, and operation of agricultural waste management
systems. Systems shall include those components required for complete
management of wastes under given site conditions. Such components may
include existing practices included in the National Handbook of Conserva-
tion Practices, adaptations thereof, and other measures necessary for
collection, storage, treatment, utilization, or safe disposal of wastes
including treatment and management of disposal areas. They do not include
municipal, industrial, commercial, or domestic waste treatment plants or
in-plant modifications.
The extent of technical assistance provided shall be within guide-
lines established in Environmental Memorandum-4 "Guide to SCS Soil and
Water Management Activities Affecting the Control of Agricultural Related
Pollutants."
Purpose. Agricultural waste management systems are used to manage
wastes in rural areas in a manner which prevents or minimizes degradation
of air, soil, and water resources and protects public health and safety.
Such systems are planned to preclude discharge of pollutants to surface or
ground water and, to the fullest practicable extent, recycle wastes through
soil and plants.
B-l
-------
Where Applicable. This practice applies where there is need for a
complete system to manage agricultural wastes or other wastes disposed of
through use of soil and plants in agricultural areas, reduce pollution,
minimize health hazards, and improve the environment.
All state and local laws, rules, and regulations governing waste
management, pollution abatement, health and safety shall be strictly
adhered to. The owner or operator shall be responsible for securing all
required permits and for performing in accordance with such laws and
regulations.
0 Brush Control
Definition. Killing, suppressing, or managing brush by mechanical
chemical, or biological means or by controlled burning on all areas except
cropland and woodland.
Purpose. To (1) eliminate or reduce competition of woody plants
and thereby help to establish or reestablish a cover for soil protection
. and forage for livestock; (2) improve hydrologlc conditions; (3) improve
habitat for wildlife; and (4) maintain open land.
Where Applicable. (1) On rangeland, native pasture, pastureland,
recreation land, and wildlife land where controlling invading brush or
managing desirable brush is necessary to improve or establish protective
cover; (2) on land which has the potential for native or adapted forage
B-2
-------
plants to reestablish; (3) adjusting grazing management alone will not
attain the conservation objective within a reasonable period; (4) con-
trolling woody plants (phreatophytes) is desirable to conserve moisture;
(5) where brush control or management will Improve livestock handling
and distribution; and (6) where brush management will Improve wildlife,
recreation, or natural beauty.
U Chiseling and Subsoil1ng ¦
Definition. Loosening the soil, without Inversion and with a minimum
of mixing of the surface soil, to shatter restrictive layers below normal
plow depth that Inhibit water movement or root development.
Purpose. To improve water and root penetration, and aeration.
Where applicable. On suitable soils, chiseling Is applicable on land
where restrictive soil layers occur at depths less than 16 Inches. On
suitable soils, subsoiling 1s applicable on land where the restrictive
layers occur at depths more than 16 inches.
Q Clearing and Snagging ¦ - ¦
Definition. Removing snags, drifts, or other obstructions within the
channel"!
Scope. This standard covers the clearing of trees and brush, and
the removal of sediment bars, drifts, logs, snags, boulders, piling, piers,
headwalls, debris and other obstructions from the flow area of a natural
or excavated channel.
Purpose. The purposes of this practice are: (1) to increase the
flow capacity of the channel by improving flow characteristics, (2) to
prevent bank erosion by eddies, (3) to reduce the forming af bars, and
(4) to minimize the occurrent of ice jams.
Special attention will be given to maintaining or improving habitat
for fish and wildlife where applicable.
Whefe Applicable. This practice is applicable to any channel or
floodway where the removal of trees, brush and other obstructions 1s
necessary to accomplish one or more of the purposes mentioned above.
Where such removal will result in channel erosion, either the clearing and
snagging shall not be done, or other practices, for the prevention of such
erosion, shall be installed concurrently.
B-3
-------
D Conservation Cropping System *
Definition. Growing crops in combination with needed cultural and
management measures. Cropping systems include rotations that contain
grasses and legumes as well as rotations in which the desired benefits
are achieved without the use of such crops.
Purpose. To improve or maintain good physical condition of the
soil; protect the soil during periods when erosion usually occurs; help
control weeds, insects, and diseases; and meet the need and desire of
fanners for an economic return.
Where Applicable. On all cropland and on certain recreation and
wildlife land.
(J Contour Farming
Definition. Fanning sloping cultivated land in such a way that-
plowing, preparing land, planting, and cultivating are done on the con-
tour. (This includes following established grades of terraces, diversions,
or contour stri ps.)
Purpose. To reduce erosion and control water.
Where Applicable. On sloping cropland and on recreation and wildlife
land where other cultural and management practices 1n a cropping system do
not control soil and water loss.
fl Critical Area Planting
Definition. Planting vegetation such as trees, shrubs, vines, grasses,
or legumes on critical areas. (Does not include tree planting mainly for
wood products.)
Purpose. To stabilize the soil; reduce damage from sediment and
runoff to downstream areas; improve wildlife habitat; and enhance natural
beauty.
Where applicable. On sediment-producing, highly erodlble or severly
eroded areas, such as dams, dikes, mine spoil, levees, cuts, fills,
surface-mined areas, and denuded or gullied areas where vegetation is
difficult to establish with usual seeding or planting methods.
Q Crop Residue Use
Definition. Using plant residues to protect cultivated fields during
critical erosion periods.
Purpose. To conserve moisture; increase infiltration, reduce soil
loss; and improve soil tilth.
B-4
-------
Where Applicable. On land where adequate crop residues are pro-
duced .
Q Dam, Multiple-Purpose • "
Definition. A dam, constructed across a stream or natural water
course, with designed reservoir storage capacity specifically provided
for two or more purposes such as floodwater retardation and irrigation
water supply, municipal water supply and recreation, etc. Does not In-
clude Farm Pond.
Scope. This standard applies to dams which have separate storage
allocations for two or more of the purposes listed below. (Sediment
storage is not considered a separate purpose except under practice
Code 350.)
Purpose. A multiple-purpose dam must provide distinct and specific
storage allocations for 2 or more of the following purposes: (1) flood-
water retardation, (2) irrigation, (3) fishing, hunting, boating, swimming
or other recreational use, (4) Improved environment or habitat for fish
or wildlife, (5) municipal, (6) industrial, and (7) other uses. (A farm
pond where multiple use 1s made of the same pool 1s not considered a
multiple-purpose dam.)
Where Applicable. This practice applies only to sites meeting all
the following criteria:
1. The construction and operation of the dam Is permitted by
applicable State statutes and regulations.
2. Topographic, geologic, hydrologic and soil conditions at
the proposed site are satisfactory for the development of
a feasible dam and reservoir.
3. The sediment yield from the watershed is not excessive.
4. Water is available from a single or combined source of
surface runoff, base flow, or from subsurface storage
in sufficient quantity and adequate quality to satisfy
the intended purposes.
D Debris Basin T
Definition. A barrier or dam constructed across a waterway or at
other suitable locations to form a silt or sediment basin.
Purpose. To preserve the capacity of reservoirs, ditches, canals,
diversions, waterways and streams, to prevent undesirable deposition on
bottomlands, and developed areas; to trap sediment originating from con-
struction sites; and to reduce or abate pollution by providing basins
for the deposition and storage of silt, sand, gravel, stone and other
detritus.
B-5
-------
Where Applicable. This practice applies where physical conditions or
land ownership preclude the treatment of the sediment source by the installa-
tion of erosion control measures to keep soil and other material in place,
or a debris basin offers the most practical solution to the problem.
0 Deferred Grazing
Definition. Postponing grazing or resting grazing land for a pre-
scribed period.
Purpose. To (1) promote natural revegetation by increasing the vigor
of the forage stand and permitting desirable plants to produce seed;
(2) provide a feed reserve for fall and winter grazing or emergency use;
(3) to Improve the appearance of range with inadequate cover; and (4) to
improve hydrologic conditions and reduce soil loss.
Where Applicable. On all rangeland, native pasture, grazable wood-
land, and grazed wildlife land.
0 Dike
Definition. An embankment constructed of earth or other suitable
materials to protect land against overflow from streams, lakes, and tidal
Influences; also to protect flat land areas from diffused surface waters.
Scope. This standard covers quality requirements for planning,
designing, and constructing all dikes Installed with Soil Conservation
Service assistance to provide protection for land and property and in-
cludes dikes for floodways and wildlife improvement.
Dikes are divided Into the following three classes:
Class I dikes include all dikes where one or more of the
following conditions apply:
1. Where there Is a possibility of loss of life
should failure occur.
2. Where high value land or improvements are to
be protected.
3. Where unusual or complex site conditions exist,
such as organic soils outside the limits given for
Classes II and III dikes.
4. Where the dike 1s designed to withstand more than
12 feet of water above normal ground surface, exclusive of
crossings of sloughs, old channels, or low areas.
Class II dikes include embankments built to protect agricultural
lands of medium to high capability with improvements Generally limited
to farmsteads and allied farm facilities.
B-6
i .i
-------
Class III dikes are embankments which protect agricultural lands
of relatively low capability or improvements of low value. These
dikes are limited to low heads of water.
Purpose. The purposes of dikes are to permit the improvement of land
for agricultural production by preventing overflow and better utilizing
drainage facilities, to prevent damage to land and property, and to
facilitate water storage and control in connection with wildlife and other
developments.
Where Applicable. The land to be protected must be suitable for the
intended use. Locations shall be such that practical and economical con-
struction, accessibility and maintenance can be obtained. Property lines,
soils, open water, watershed characteristics, runoff, and adequate outlets
for either gravity or pump drainage must be favorable.
Class I dikes are used to protect improved lands where Inundation,
erosion and scour, or sediment and debris may cause high property damage
or loss of life.
Criteria for Class II dikes are applicable for all dikes not 1n
Classes I or III.
Class III dikes are usually built where the spoil from excavated
drainage channels is available.
t
0 Disposal Lagoon
Definition. An impoundment made by constructing an excavated pit,
dam, embankment, dike, levee or combination of these for biological treat-
ment of organic waste. (This standard does not include holding ponds and
tanks.)
Scope. This standard establishes the minimum acceptable quality for
design construction, and maintenance of disposal lagoons located to serve
predominantly rural or agricultural areas.
Purpose. Lagoons are constructed to biologically decompose organic
waste by aerobic or anaerobic organisms.
Where Applicable. This practice applies where there is need for a
facility to process concentrated organic waste, reduce sources of pollution,
minimize health hazards and improve the local environment.
All state and local laws, rules and regulations governing use of
disposal lagoons shall be strictly adhered to. The owner or operator must
be responsible for securing necessary permits where required.
B-7
-------
D Diversion
Definition. A channel with a supporting ridge on the lower side
constructed across the slope.
Scope. This standard covers the installation of all diversions
except floodwater diversions.
Purpose. The purpose of this practice is to divert water from areas
where it is in excess to sites where it can be used or disposed of safely.
Where Applicable. This practice applies to sites where:
1. Runoff from higher lying areas is damaging cropland, pasture
land, farmsteads, or conservation practices such as terraces
or stripcropping.
2. Surface and shallow subsurface flow is damaging sloping upland.
3. Runoff is available for diversion and use on n arby sites.
These include (1) areas where diffused surface water can be
spread to increase vegetation; (2) diversions to farm ponds
or pits; and (3) groundwater recharge areas.
4. Required as a part of a pollution abatement system, or to
control erosion and runoff on urban or developing areas and
construction sites.
Diversions shall not be substituted for terraces on land requiring
terracing for erosion control.
i
Diversions are not applicable below high sediment producing areas
unless land treatment practices or structural measures, designed to pre-
vent damaging accumulations of sediment in the channels, are installed
with or before the diversions.
D Drainage Field Ditch
Definition. A graded ditch for collecting excess water within a
field" This does not include Drainage Main or Lateral, or Grassed Water-
way or Outlet.
Purpose. Drainage field ditches are installed to:
1. Drain surface depressions.
2. Collect or Intercept excess surface water such as sheet flow
from natural and graded land surfaces or channel flow from
furrows for removal to an outlet.
3. Collect or intercept excess subsurface water for removal to
an outlet.
B-8
-------
Where Applicable. Applicable sites are flat or nearly flat lands
that:
1. Have soils of low permeability or shallowness over barriers,
such as rock or clay, which hold or prevent ready percolation
of water to a deep stratum.
2. Have surface depressions or barriers which trap rainfall.
3. Have insufficient land slope for ready movement of runoff
across the surface.
4. Receive excess runoff or seepage from uplands.
5. Require removal of excess Irrigation water.
6. Require control of the groundwater table.
7. Have adequate outlets available for disposal of drainage water
by gravity flow or pumping.
8. Have soils suitable for agricultural use.
9. Can be drained within U. S. Department of Agriculture and Soil
Conservation Service policy.
D Drainage Land Grading *
Definition. Reshaping the surface of the land to be drained by
grading to planned grades. (This practice requires a detailed engineering
survey and layout. This is in contrast with Land Smoothing where detailed
engineering survey and layout are not performed. This does not include
Irrigation Land Leveling or Recreation Land Grading and Shaping.)
Purpose. The purposes of the practice include one or more of the
following: improve surface drainage, provide more effective utilization
of rainfall, improve equipment operation and efficiency, and facilitate
the installation of a more workable drainage system, and reduce the in-
cidence of mosquito infestation.
Where Applicable. This practice applies on land where depressions,
mounds, old terraces, turn rows and other surface Irregularities prevent
adequate surface drainage and where precision grading is practical. All
land to be graded shall be suitable for the planned use.
Soils shall be of sufficient depth and suitable texture so that after
the needed grading work is done an adequate root zone remains which will
Permit planned land use with the application of proper conservation mea-
sures, soil amendments and fertilizer as needed.
B-9
-------
D Drainage Main or Lateral
Definition. An open drainage ditch constructed to a designed size
and grade. Does not include Drainage Field Ditch.
Scope. This standard covers ditches for disposal of surface and
subsurface drainage water primarily collected by drainage field ditches
and subsurface drains. It also covers the minimum drainage requirements
for multiple-purpose channels which provide drainage outlets for agri-
cultural lands, but the design criteria for such channels shall be 1n
accord with the standard for Open Channel.
. - Purpose. The purpose of mains and laterals 1s to dispose of excess
surface or subsurface water, intercept groundwater, or to control ground-
water levels; to provide for leaching of saline or alkali soils; or a
combination of these objectives.
Where Applicable. This practice is applicable only to lands that can
be drained within U. S. Department of Agriculture and SCS policy.
All lands to be drained shall be suitable for agricultural use within
their land capabilities after installation of required drainage and other
conservation practices.
An outlet for the drainage system shall be available, either by
gravity flow or by pumping. The outlet shall provide for the quantity
and quality of water to be disposed of, with consideration of possible
damages above or below the point of discharge that might involve legal
acti ons.
D Emergency Tillage
Definition. Roughening the soil surface by such methods as listing,
ridging, duck-footing, or chiseling. (This practice 1s considered an
emergency conservation measure and does not provide long-term benefits.)
Purpose. To temporarily protect cultivated land against soil loss
primarily due to wind during critical erosion periods.
Where Applicable. On cropland that is in Immediate danger of being
eroded by wind because of Insufficient residues, cloddiness, or roughness;
or where other practices fail to control erosion.
Farmstead and Feedlot Windbreaks -*
Definition. A belt of trees or shrubs established next to a farm-
stead or feedlot.
Purpose. To protect soil resources; control snow deposition; prevent
wind damage to farmsteads; provide shelter for livestock; beautify an area;
or to improve an area for wildlife, and screen areas from unwanted noise
levels and unsightly views.
B-10
-------
Where Applicable. (1) Land next to farmsteads where wind damage is
likely or where the natural beauty of trees and shrubs is wanted; and
where rows of trees or shrubs will provide the needed protection or the
desired beauty or will attract wildlife. (2) Next to feedlots or grazing
areas to provide livestock shelter; to beautify an area; or to provide
wildlife shelter and food.
0 Fencing
Definition. Enclosing or dividing an area of land with a suitable
permanent structure that acts as a barrier to livestock, big game, or
people. (Does not Include electric or other temporary fences.)
Purpose. To (1) exclude livestock or big game from areas that should
be protected from grazing; (2) confine livestock or big game on an area
or prevent trespass; (3) subdivide grazing land to permit use of grazing
systems; (4) protect new seedings and plantings from grazing; and (5) regu-
late access to areas by people.
Where Applicable. On any area where livestock or big game control or
exclusion is needed, or where access to people is to be regulated. '
fl Firebreak
Definition. A strip of bare land or fire retarding vegetation.
Purpose. To protect soil, water and plant resources by reducing or
preventing damage by fire.
Where Applicable. On areas where damaging fires are likely or where
fire may be prescribed as a cultural or protective measure.
D Floodwater Diversion
Definition. A graded channel with a supporting embankment or dike on
the lower side constructed on lowland subject to flood damage. Does not
Include Floodway or Diversion.)
Purpose. This practice is to divert floodwater from lowlands by the
construction, of a graded channel on the lowlands.
Where Applicable. This practice is applicable where:
1. Flood water which originates outside the lowland area to be pro-
tected is causing damage to agricultural land, crops, or Improve-
ments. to be made in the area.
2. An adequate outlet for.the design flow is available, either by
gravity flow or by pumping. The outlet shall be suitable for the
B-ll
-------
quality and quantity of water and sediment to be disposed
of, with consideration of possible damages above or below
the point of discharge that might involve legal actions
under state law. The outlet may be a Floodway, a natural
channel, river, lake, bay, or tidal estuary.
3. Lands to be protected are suitable for agricultural use within
their capabilities after installation of required conserva-
tion practices.
4. All state laws and property rights regarding diversion or dis-
charge of floodwaters are complied with.
This practice does not include diversions constructed on uplands
which may provide benefits to bottom lands; or dams constructed to divert
floodwaters into a waterspreading system, Irrigation canal, or storage
facility for beneficial use. A Diversion Dam may discharge into a Flood-
water Diversion.
0 Floodwater Retarding Structure
Definition. A single-purpose structure providing for temporary
storage of floodwater and for its controlled release.
Scope. This standard applies to class (a) structures where the pro-
duct of the storage (in acre-feet at the elevation of the crest of the
emergency spillway) and the height of the dam (in feet as measured from
the lowest point 1n the original cross section on the centerllne to the
crest of the emergency spillway) is less than 3000. A class (a) structure
is defined as a structure located in rural or agricultural areas where
damage due to failure is limited to farm buildings, agricultural land, or
township or county roads.
Purpose. Floodwater retarding structures are installed to reduce
flood damages downstream by controlling the release rate from flood flows
of predetermined frequencies. They may also permit the use of more
economical channel improvements or stabilizing structures In the channel
downstream, and reduce environmental hazards and pollution.
Where Applicable. This practice applies only to sites meeting all
of the following conditions:
1. The construction of the structure is permitted by applicable
state statutes and regulations.
2. Topographic, geologic, and soils conditions at the proposed
site are satisfactory for the development of a feasible dam
and reservoir.
3. The sediment yield at the site 1s not excessive.
4. Special attention will be given to maintaining habitat for fish
and wildlife where applicable.
B-12
-------
0 Floodway
Definition. A channel, usually bounded by dikes, used to carry
f1ood f1ows.
Purpose. Floodways are used to carry floodwater from a side drainage
across a flood plain into the channel of a main stream. They are also
used along the course of a main stream where, by means of dikes, a portion
of the flood plain is used to carry floodwater and the balance of the flood
plain is protected.
Where Applicable. Floodways are applicable to overflow areas of
streams or rivers where existing channels are inadequate to carry the
floodwaters without flooding and damaging property, and the design storm
discharge can be confined between dikes or a combination of channel and
dikes without causing excessive erosion. A floodway is applicable to
sites where the storm runoff from side tributaries which will be ponded
outside the floodway will not cause damages in excess of the benefits less
the cost of the project.
This practice does not include Floodwater Diversions which divert
water from lowlands. A floodwater diversion may empty into a floodway.
This practice does not Include channel improvement where the spoil is
set back from the excavated areas and where no provision is made to con-
fine the floodwater to the channel side of the spoil.
An outlet for the floodway must be available which will provide for
the discharge of the quantity of water for which the floodway is to be
designed without creating stage increases in the outlet which could result
in damages above or below the point of discharge that might involve legal
actions under state law.
Classification. Since a large percentage of floodways Include dikes
as a major feature of the floodway, the same classification used for dikes
will be used for floodways. The classes are defined in the standard for
Dike.
Class I Floodways are those which:
1. Include Class I Dikes as a feature of the floodway,
or
2. Are constructed to protect areas where either of the
following conditions apply:
a. There is a possibility of loss of life.
b. High value land or improvements are to be protected.
Class II Floodways are those which:
1. Include Class II Dikes as a feature of the floodway, or
2. Are constructed to protect agricultural lands of medium
B-13
-------
to high capability with improvements generally limited to
farmsteads and allied farm facilities.
Class III Floodways are those which:
1. Include Class III Dikes as a feature of the floodway,
or
2. Are constructed to protect agricultural lands of rela-
tively low capability or improvements of low value.
Q Grade Stabilization Structure
Definition. A structure to stabilize the grade or to control head
cutting in natural or artificial channels. (Does not include structures
used In drainage and Irrigation systems primarily for water control.)
Scope. This standard applies to all types of grade stabilization
structures.
Purpose. Grade stabilization structures are installed to stabilize
the grade in natural or artificial channels, prevent the formation or
advance of gullies, and reduce environmental and pollution hazards.
Where Applicable. These structures apply where the concentration
and flow velocity of water are such that structures are required to stabi-
lize the grade in channels or to control gully erosion. Special attention
will be given to maintaining or improving habitat for fish and wildlife,
where applicable.
0 Grassed Waterway or Outlet
Definition. A natural or constructed waterway or outlet shaped or
graded and established in vegetation suitable to safely dispose of runoff
from a field, diversion, terrace, or other structure.
Purpose. To prevent excessive soil loss and formation of gullies.
Where Applicable. Where concentrated runoff must be disposed of at
safe velocities.
D Grassed Waterway or Outlet (Natural Watercourses)
Definition. A natural or constructed waterway or outlet shaped or
graded and established in suitable vegetation as needed for the safe dis-
posal of runoff from a field, diversion, terrace or other structure.
Scope. This standard covers the grading and shaping used to rehabili-
tate natural watercourses through cropland. It does not cover the vegetativ
measures which may be needed and required.
B-14
-------
Purpose. To provide for the disposal of surface water in natural
watercourses without damage by erosion.
Where Applicable. These practices apply to all natural watercourses
where a limited amount of earthwork and vegetative protection are required
to control erosion resulting from concentrated runoff. Channel slopes
should not exceed 3 percent.
0 Grasses and Legumes in Rotation
Definition. Establishing grasses and legumes or a mixture of than
and maintaining the stand for a definite number of years as a part of a
conservation cropping system.
Purpose. To produce forage for hay, silage, seed, or grazing; reduce
soil and water loss; maintain a favorable level of organic matter; and
Improve soil productivity.
Where Applicable. On cropland and certain recreation and wildlife
land where they are an essential part of a conservation cropping system or
otherwise needed by a land owner or operator.
D Grazing Land Mechanical Treatment
Definition. Renovating, contour furrowing, pitting, or chiseling
native grazing land by mechanical means.
Purpose. To Improve plant cover quickly by reducing competition of
undesirable plants, aerating the soil, retarding runoff and increasing
available moisture, reducing erosion, and protecting lower lying land or
structures from slltation.
Where Applicable. (1) On native grazing land where perennial plants
should be increased; (2) where soil and slope are suitable to each method
and type of equipment used; (3) where grazing will be managed to allow
Plants to respond to this treatment. Mechanical treatment may not be
desirable on areas to be used for recreation.
B Holding Pond
Definition. An impoundment made by constructing a dam or embankment,
ty excavation, or a combination thereof for temporary storage of live-
stock or other agricultural wastes, waste water, or polluted runoff. (Does
not include disposal lagoon.)
Scope. This standard establishes the minimum acceptable quality for
design and construction and operation of holding ponds as part of an over-
all waste management system in predominantly rural or agricultural areas.
This standard is applicable to class (a) ponds with fill heights of 10
feet or less.
B-15
-------
Purpose. Holding ponds are constructed to store liquid and solid
manure and polluted runoff from concentrated livestock or waste areas
until they can be safely utilized, evaporated or otherwise disposed of.
Where Applicable. This practice applies where there 1s need for
facilities to temporarily store agricultural wastes or polluted runoff,
reduce pollution, minimize health hazards and improve the environment.
ATI state and local Taws, water quality standards, rules and regu-
lations governing the disposal of manure or other agricultural wastes
must be strictly adhered to. The owner or operator 1s responsible for
securing any and all required permits or approvals.
D Irrigation Canal or Lateral
Definition. A permanent irrigation canal or lateral constructed to
convey water from the source of supply to one or more farms. This includes
open channels and elevated canals, but does not include Irrigation Field
Ditches.
Purpose. Canals and laterals convey irrigation water from a source
of supply to the beginning of a farm Irrigation system. The conservation
objectives are to prevent erosion or loss of water quality or damage to
land, to make possible proper water use, and to convey water efficiently
to minimize conveyance losses.
Where Applicable. All canals and laterals and related structures
shall be planned as integral parts of an irrigation water conveyance
system that has been designed to facilitate the conservation use of soil
and water resources on a farm or group of farms.
Canals and laterals shall be located where they will not be subject
to damage from side drainage flooding, or they must be protected from such
damage.
All lands served by the canals and laterals shall be suitable for
irrigation.
Water quality, supply, and delivery for the area served shall be ade-
quate to make irrigation practical for the crops to be grown and the irri-
gation water application methods to be used.
Unlined canals and laterals shall not be constructed on sites where
the soils are excessively permeable. Where an excessively permeable soil
site must be crossed, the canals and laterals shall be lined under the
standards for ditch and canal linings. .
B-16
-------
|| Irrigation Ditch and Canal Lining (Concrete and Pneumatically
Applied Mortar)
Definition. A fixed lining of impervious material installed in
existing or newly constructed irrigation field ditch or irrigation canal
or lateral. This includes shaping or reshaping of ditch and using material
such as concrete, asphalt, or other durable lining.
Scope. This standard applies to concrete linings made of Portland
cement concrete, cast in place 1n a preformed ditch or canal section, and
pneumatically applied mortar (PAM).
This standard is restricted to installations in ditches or canals that
have a bottom width not greater than 6 feet, a design capacity not greater
than 100 c.f.s., and a maximum velocity of 15 feet per second.
This standard includes design and construction criteria for the ditch
section as well as for the lining.
Purpose. The principal purposes of ditch and canal lining are to
reduce water loss, prevent waterlogging of land, prevent erosion and to
maintain water quality.
Where Applicable. Ditches and canals to be lined shall serve as
integral parts of an Irrigation water distribution or conveyance system
that has been designed to facilitate the conservation use of soil and
water resources on a farm or group of farms.
The lands served by the lined ditches or canals shall be suitable for
use as irrigated land in accordance with the work unit technical guide.
Water supplies and irrigation deliveries for the area served shall be
enough to make irrigation practical for the crops to be grown and the irri-
gation water application methods to be used.
Lined ditches and canals shall be located where they will not be
subject to damage from side drainage flooding, or they shall be protected
from such damage.
Non-reinforced concrete linings shall be installed only in well-
drained soils or on sites where subgrade drainage facilities are installed
with or before the lining. These linings shall not be installed on sites
subject to severe frost heave or on sites where experience has indicated
the sulphate salt concentration in the soil causes rapid concrete deteriora-
tion.
. D Irrigation Ditch and Canal Lining (Flexible Membrane)
Definition. A lining of impervious material installed in an existing
or newly constructed irrigation field, ditch, or irrigation canal or
lateral.
B-17
-------
Scope. This standard applies to buried membrane linings made of
flexible materials such as plastic, rubber, or asphalt. It includes de-
sign and construction criteria for the ditch section which affects the
installation of the lining as well as for the lining itself.
Purpose. The principal purposes of ditch and canal linings with
flexible membranes are to reduce water loss, and to prevent waterlogging
of land and to maintain water quality.
Where Applicable. Ditches and canals to be lined shall serve as
integral parts of an irrigation water distribution or conveyance system
that has been designed to facilitate the conservation use of soil and
water resources on a farm or group of farms.
The lands served by the lined ditches or canals shall be suitable for
use as irrigated land in accordance with the work unit technical guide.
Water supplies and irrigation deliveries for the area served shall
be enough to make irrigation practical for the crops to be grown and
the irrigation water application methods to be used.
Lined ditches and canals shall be located where they will not be
subject to damage from side drainage flooding, or they shall be protected
from such damage.
0 Irrigation Ditch and Canal Lining (Galvanized Steel)
Definition. A fixed lining of impervious material installed in
existing or newly constructed irrigation field ditch or irrigation canal
or lateral.
Scope. This standard applies to linings made of galvanized steel in-
stalled in a preformed ditch or canal section.
Linings covered by this standard are restricted to ditches having
characteristics as follows:
A. Bottom Widths Not to exceed 30 inches
B. Velocities Not to exceed 15 ft./sec.
This standard covers both the ditch section and the steel lining.
Purpose. The principal purposes of ditch and~canal lining are to
reduce water loss, prevent waterlogging of land, or to prevent erosion,
and to maintain water quality.
Where Applicable. Ditches and canals to be lined shall be located to
serve as integral parts of an irrigation water distribution or conveyance
system that has been designed to facilitate the conservation use of soil
and water resources on a farm or group of farms.
The lands served by the lined ditches or canals shall be suitable for
use as irrigated land in accordance with the work unit technical guide.
B-18
-------
Water\supplies and irrigation deliveries for the area served shall be
sufficient to make irrigation practical for the crops to be grown and the
irrigation water application methods to be used.
Lined ditches and canals shall be located where they will not be sub-
ject to damage from side drainage flooding, or they shall be protected from
such damage.
Steel linings shall not be installed in areas high 1n salt or other
chemical concentrations injurious to galvanized steel unless the liners are
protected with coatings or anodic protection specifically designed to pro-
tect the liner from these chemicals.
Q Irrigation Field Ditch -
Definition. A permanent irrigation ditch constructed to convey water
from the source of supply to a field or fields within the farm distribution
system. Includes open channels and elevated ditches. Does not Include
Irrigation Ganal or Lateral that delivers water to the farm.
Scope. This standard covers open channels of 25 cubic feet per second
or less capacity formed in and with earth materials. It does not include
canals and laterals or ditches which are constructed and removed during a
season and ditches shaped or constructed for lining Installation.
Purpose. The main conservation objectives for field ditches are to
convey the water efficiently and economically so as to minimize conveyance
losses, prevent erosion, or loss of water quality and make possible proper
irrigation water use.
Where Applicable. Field ditches shall be planned and located as
integral parts of an Irrigation water distribution system designed to
facilitate the conservation use of soil and water resources on a farm.
Water quality, supply, and delivery for the area served shall be ade-
quate to make irrigation practical for the crops to be grown and the irri-
gation water application methods to be used.
Field ditches shall be constructed in earth material that contains
enough fines to prevent excessive seepage losses, and where shrinkage cracks
will not endanger the ditch. The sealing effect of sediment carried in the
Irrigation water may be considered.
9 Irrigation Land Leveling
Definition. Reshaping the surface of land to be irrigated to planned
9*"ades. Does not include Drainage Land Grading or Land Smoothing.
Purpose. -Land leveling for irrigation 1s done to permit uniform and
effic1ent application of irrigation water without excessive erosion, loss
water quality, or damage to land by waterlogging and at the same time
Provide for adequate surface drainage.
B-19
-------
Where Applicable. All lands to be leveled shall be suitable for use
as Irrigated land and for the proposed methods of water application.
Water supplies and Irrigation deliveries to the area to be leveled
shall be sufficient to make irrigation practical for the crops to be
grown and the irrigation water application methods to be used.
Soils shall be deep enough so that, after the needed leveling work
is done, an adequate, usable root zone remains which will permit satis-
factory crop production with proper conservation measures. Limited
areas with shallower soils may be leveled to provide adequate Irrigation
grades or a better field arrangement. The finished leveling work must
not result in exposed areas of highly permeable materials that would in-
hibit proper distribution of water over the field.
All leveling work shall be planned as an Integral part of an overall
farm irrigation system to facilitate the conservation use of soil and
water resources. The boundaries, elevations, and direction of irrigation
of individual field leveling jobs shall be such that the requirements of
all adjacent areas in the farm unit can be met.
JJ Irrigation Pipeline
Definition. A pipe line and appurtenances installed In an irriga-
tion system.
Scope. This standard applies only to buried aluminum pipelines,
coated with plastic tape on the exterior and interior surfaces.
Purpose. The conservation objectives of this pipeline practice are
to prevent erosion or loss of water quality or damage to land, to make
possible proper water use, and to reduce water conveyance losses.
Where Applicable. All pipelines shall be planned and located to
serve as integral parts of an irrigation water distribution systefo that
has been designed to facilitate the conservation of water on a farm or
group of farms.
\
All lands served by the pipelines shall be suitable for use as
irrigated land.
Water supplies and irrigatin deliveries to the area shall be suffi-
cient to make irrigation practical for the crops to be grown and the
irrigation water application methods to be used.
[J Irrigation Pipeline (Asbestos-Cement)
Definition. A pipeline and appurtenances installed in an Irriga-
tion system.
Scope. This standard applies to buried asbestos-cement pipelines
with rubber gasket joints.
B-20
-------
Purpose. The conservation objectives of this pipeline practice
are to prevent erosion or loss of water quality or damage to land, to
make possible the proper management of irrigation water, and to reduce
water conveyance losses.
Where Applicable. All pipelines shall be planned and located to
serve as integral parts of an irrigation water distribution or conveyance
system that has been designed to facilitate the conservation use of soil
and water resources on a farm or group of farms.
AIT lands served by the pipelines shall be suitable for use as
irrigated land.
Water supplies and irrigation deliveries to the area shall be suf-
ficient to make Irrigation practical for the crops to be grown and the
irrigation water application methods to be used.
D Irrigation Pipeline (Non-Reinforced Concrete)
Definition. A pipeline and appurtenances Installed in an Irrigation
system.
Scope. This standard covers the installation of low or intermediate
pressure non-reinforced concrete irrigation pipelines with rubber gasket
joints, mortar joints, or cast-in-place without joints. It Includes pipe-
lines with stands and vents open to the atmosphere, and pipelines not
open to the atmosphere but provided with pressure relief valves.
Purpose. The conservation objectives of this pipeline practice are
to prevent erosion or loss of water quality or damage to the land, to make
possible the proper management of irrigation water, and to reduce water
conveyance losses.
Where Applicable. All pipelines shall be planned and located to
serve as integral parts of an irrigation water distribution or conveyance
system that has been designed to facilitate the conservation use of soil
and water resources on a farm or group of farms.
All lands served by the pipelines shall be suitable for use as
irrigated land.
Water supplies and Irrigation deliveries for the area served shall be
sufficient to make irrigation practical for the crops to be grown and the
Irrigation water application methods to be employed.
Concrete pipelines shall not be installed on sites where the sulphate
salt concentration in the soil or soil water exceeds 1.0 percent. On sites
where the sulphate concentration is more than 0.1 percent but not more than
1.0 percent, concrete pipe may be used only if the pipe 1s made with Type V
cement or Type II cement whose tricalcium aluminate content does not exceed
5.5 percent.
Cast-in-place pipe shall be used only in stable soils which are capable
of being used as the outside form for approximately the bottom half of the
conduit.
B-21
i .i
-------
|] Irrigation Pipeline (High Pressure Underground Plastic)
Definition. A pipeline and appurtenances installed in an irrigation
system.
Scope. This standard applies to underground thermoplastic pipelines
from 1/2 inch to 12 inches in diameter that are closed to the atmosphere,
and that are subject to internal pressures up to 315 pounds per square inch.
The standard includes the design criteria for irrigation pipelines,
the minimum installation requirements for plastic pipelines, and the
specifications for the thermoplastic pipe to be used.
Purpose. The conservation objectives of this pipeline practice are
to prevent erosion or loss of water quality or damage to the land, to
make possible the proper management of Irrigation water, and to reduce
water conveyance losses.
Where Applicable. All pipelines shall be planned and located to serve
as integral parts of an irrigation water distribution or conveyance system
that has been designed to facilitate the conservation use and management
of the soil and water resources on a farm or group of farms.
Water supplies and rates of Irrigation delivery for the area served
by the pipeline shall be sufficient to make irrigation practical for the
crops to be grown and the irrigation water application method to be used.
Plastic pipelines installed under this standard shall be placed only
in suitable soils where the bedding and backfill requirements can be
fully met.
fl Irrigation Pipeline (Low Head Underground Plastic)
Definition. A pipeline and appurtenances Installed in an Irrigation
system. '
Scope. This standard applies to underground thermoplastic pipelines
from 4 to 15 inches in diameter that are subject to internal working
pressures up to 50 feet head of water.
The standard includes the design criteria for these irrigation pipe-
lines, the minimum Installation requirements, and the specifications for
the thermoplastic pipe to be used. It includes pipelines with stands and
vents open to the atmosphere, and pipelines not open to the atmosphere but
provided with pressure relief valves.
Purpose. The conservation objectives of this pipeline practice are
to prevent erosion or loss of water quality or damage to the land, to make
possible the proper management of irrigation water, and to reduce water
conveyance losses'.
Where Applicable. All pipelines shall be planned and located to
serve as integral parts of an irrigation water distribution or conveyance
B-22
-------
system that has been designed to facilitate the conservation use and
management of the soil and water resources on a farm or group of farms.
Water supplies and rates of irrigation delivery for the area served
by the pipeline shall be sufficient to make irrigation practical for the
crops to be grown and the irrigation water application methods to be used.
Plastic pipelines installed under this standard shall be placed only
in suitable soils where the bedding and backfill requirements can be fully
met.
D Irrigation Pit
Definition. Small storage reservoirs constructed to regulate or
store the supply of water available to the irrigator.
Scope. This standard Includes open pits excavated below the ground
surface to intercept and store either surface water or unconfined ground-
water for irrigation. It Includes pits where a portion of the water is
impounded above natural ground provided that the depth of water above the
ground surface, as measured at the spillway crest elevation, does not exceed
three feet. It does not apply to excavated pits designed primarily for the
control or regulation of flow.
This standard establishes the minimum acceptable quality level for the
planning and functional design of irrigation pits. It does not include
detailed design criteria or construction specifications for individual pits
or components of the storage facility.
Purpose. Irrigation pits are constructed to collect and store water
until it can be used beneficially to satisfy crop irrigation requirements.
Where Applicable. This practice applies only to sites meeting all of
the following criteria and conditions:
1. The existing water supply available to the Irrigated area is
insufficient to meet conservation irrigation requirements during
part or all of the irrigation season.
2. The construction of an irrigation pit is the most practical means
of developing the needed additional supply of water.
3. An adequate supply of good quality water is available for storage
from surface runoff, streamflow, or from a subsurface source.
4. Topographic, geologic, water table, and soils conditions at the
site are satisfactory for the feasible development of the irri-
gation pit.
5. Where surface runoff enters the pit, the contributing drainage
area is or can be protected against erosion to the extent that
normal sedimentation will not materially shorten the planned life
of the pit.
6. The contemplated excavation of the pit and storage of water are
permitted by applicable state statutes and regulations.
B-23
-------
Q Regulating Reservoir ,
Definition. Small storage reservoir constructed to regulate or store
the supply of water available to the irrigator. Sometimes referred to as
overnight storage reservoir.
Scope. This standard establishes the minimum acceptable quality for
the design and construction of class (a) ponds located in predominantly
rural or agricultural areas.
This standard includes reservoirs created by impounding structures
and pits excavated below ground surface for the short-period storage of
either.diverted surface waters or waters from pumped or flowing wells.
The depth of water in regulating reservoirs created by impounding
structures shall not exceed 20 feet, measured as the vertical distance
between the lowest point along the centerline of the embankment and the
crest elevation of the emergency spillway.
The surface area of the reservoir shall not exceed 20 acres.
This standard establishes the minimum acceptable quality level for
the planning and functional design of Irrigation regulating reservoirs.
It does not include detailed design criteria or construction specifica-
tions for individual reservoirs or components of the regulating facility.
Purpose. Regulating reservoirs are constructed to store water for
relatively short periods of time (usually less than 4 days) for such
purposes as:
1. To provide for the regulation of fluctuating flows 1n streams
or canals.
2. To provide suitable (usually larger) Irrigation streams.
3. To provide for improved management of irrigation water.
4. To permit more efficient use of available labor.
5. To avoid nighttime operation.
Where Applicable. This practice applies only to sites meeting all
of the following criteria and conditions:
1. The existing available irrigation stream is of such size that
regulation is necessary to accomplish the intended purposes.
2. An adequate and dependable volume of good quality water 1s or
can be made available.
3. Topographic, geologic, and soils conditions are suitable for the
practical construction of a regulating reservoir with an adequate
storage capacity. Pervious soils encountered in the reservoir
area can be sealed to such degree that seepage losses will not be
excessive.
B-24
-------
4. Where surface runoff enters the reservoir, the contributing
drainage area is or can be protected against erosion to the extent
that normal sedimentation will not materially shorten the planned
life of the reservoir.
5. The owner will have, or be able to obtain, a valid right to use
the water.
Q Irrigation Storage Reservoir
Definition. An irrigation storage reservoir made by constructing a
dam.
Scope. This standard applies to Irrigation water storage structures
designed to be filled during the season of low Irrigation demand 1n order
to provide water needed for Irrigation during some other portion of the year,
or in some future year. It does not apply to structures designed primarily
for flow control or those designed to store water for only a few hours or
a few days.
This standard covers the planning and functional design of Irrigation
storage reservoirs. It does not include detailed design criteria or con-
struction specifications for individual structures or components of the
storage facility.
Purpose. Irrigation storage reservoirs are constructed to conserve
water by holding it in storage until it can be beneficially used to meet
crop Irrigation requirements.
Where Applicable. This practice applies only to sites meeting all of
the following criteria:
1. The water supply available to the irrigated area 1s Insufficient
to meet conservation irrigation requirements during part or all of the
conservation season.
2. Water is available for storage from surface runoff, streamflow,
or from a subsurface source during periods of low or non-irrigation use.
3. Topographic, geologic, and soils conditions are satisfactory at
some suitable site for the development of an economically feasible storage
reservoir.
4. The construction of a dam and the storage of water are permitted
by applicable state statutes and regulations.
jj Irrigation System, Drip
Definition. A planned irrigation system where all necessary facilities
have been installed for the efficient application of water directly to the
root zone of plants by means of applicators (orifices, emitters, porous
B-25
-------
tubing, perforated pipe, etc.) operated under low pressure. The appli-
cators may be placed on or below the surface of the ground.
Scope. This standard covers the planning and design of the drip
irrigation system through which water is distributed within the Irrigated
area by means of small diameter pipes and applied at or near the soil sur-
face. It includes all components of the on-farm system except for special
structures such as surface water inlets, pumping plants, and components
covered by other standards. Permanently Installed mains and laterals will
be designed and installed under the standard for Irrigation Pipelines.
Purpose. Drip irrigation systems are Installed to apply Irrigation
water efficiently directly to plant root zone 1n order to maintain soil
moisture within the range for good plant growth without excessive water
loss, erosion, reduction in water quality or salt accumulation.
Where Applicable. Drip Irrigation plans shall be based on an evalua-
tion of the site and the expected operating conditions. The soils and
topography shall be suitable for irrigation of the proposed crops.
Water supply must be sufficient in quantity and quality for the crops
to be grown.
The drip method of Irrigation 1s adapted to most orchard crops and row
crops; to steep slopes where other methods would cause excessive erosion;
to areas where application devices cause less Interference with cultural
operations and to most climatic conditions where Irrigated agriculture is
feasible. This method is also adapted for irrigation of gardens, flowers,
and shrubs in urban settings. Small flow rates of water can be utilized
efficiently.
D Irrigation System, Sprinkler
Definition. A planned irrigation system where all necessary facili-
ties have been installed for the efficient application of water for irriga-
tion by means of perforated pipes or nozzles operated under pressure.
Purpose. Sprinkler irrigation systems are installed to apply irrigation
water efficiently and uniformly in order to maintain soil moisture within
the range for optimum plant growth, without excessive water loss, erosion
or reduction in water quality.
Where Applicable. Sprinkler irrigation plans shall be based on an
evaluation of the site and the expected operating conditions. The soils
and topography shall be suitable for irrigation for the proposed crops.
Enough good quality water shall be available for the practical irri-
gation of the crops to be grown.
The sprinkler method of water application is adaptable to most crops
except rice, to most irrigable lands, and to most climatic conditions where
irrigated agriculture is feasible. It is not adapted to areas where ex-
tremely high temperatures and high wind velocities prevail.
B-26
-------
|| Irrigation System, Tailwater Recovery -
Definition. A facility to collect, store, and transport irrigation
tailwater for reuse in the farm irrigation distribution system.
Scope. This standard covers the planning and functional design of
irrigation tailwater recovery systems including pickup ditches, sumps,
pits, and pipelines. It does not include detailed design criteria or
construction specifications for individual structures or components of the
recovery system.
Purpose. Tailwater recovery systems are installed to conserve farm
irrigation water supplies and water quality by collecting the water that
runs off the surface of sloping fields and making this water available
for reuse on the farm.
Vlhere Applicable. Tailwater recovery systems are adapted for use on
sloping lands that are served by a surface irrigation system properly
designed and installed to facilitate the conservation use of soil and water
resources, and where recoverable Irrigation runoff occurs or can be anti-
cipated under the management practices used or expected to be used.
The soils at the storage site shall be Impervious enough to prevent
excessive seepage losses, or reservoir lining or sealing must be practical.
Q Irrigation Water Management
Definition. Determining and controlling the rate, amount and timing
of irrigation water application to soils to supply crop water needs in a
planned and efficient manner.
Purpose. To effectively utilize the available irrigation water
supply in managing and controlling the moisture environment of crops to
promote the desired crop response; to minimize soil erosion and loss of
plant nutrients; to control undesirable water loss; and to protect water
quality.
Where Applicable. This practice is adapted to all lands that are
suitable for irrigation and that have a water supply of suitable quality
and quantity.
An adapted conservation irrigation system must be available, either
as a portable system or a system that has been established on the land to
be irrigated.
The irrigator shall have the knowledge and capability to manage and
apply irrigation water in such a manner that the objectives mentioned above
under "Purpose" can be reasonably attained. The knowledge should include
such things as:
1. How to determine when irrigation water needs to be applied based
on crop water-use rates and stages of plant growth.
B-27
-------
2. How to measure or estimate the amount of water required for
each irrigation including the leaching needs.
3. How to compute the amount of water delivered to an area.
4. The normal time needed for the soil to absorb the required
amount of water and how to detect changes in intake rate.
5. How to adjust stream size, application rate or irrigation time
as necessary to compensate for changes 1n such factors as In-
take rate or amount of water to be applied.
6. How to recognize erosion caused by irrigation.
7. How to estimate the amount of irrigation runoff from an area.
8. How to evaluate the uniformity of water application.
0 Land Smoothing
Definition. Removing irregularities on the land surface by use of
special equipment. Ordinarily, this does not require a complete grid
survey. This includes operations ordinarily classed as rough grading.
This does not include the "floating" done as a regular maintenance prac-
tice on irrigated land or the "planing" done as the final step in Irriga-
tion Land Leveling or Drainage Land Grading.
Purpose.
1. Improve surface drainage.
2. Provide for more effective use of precipitation.
3. Obtain uniform planting depths.
4. Provide for more uniform cultivation.
5. Improve equipment operation and efficiency.
6. Improve terrace alignment.
7. Facilitate contour cultivation.
Where Applicable. This practice applies on lands where depressions,
mounds, old terraces, turn rows, and other surface irregularities interfere
with the application of needed soil and water conservation and management
practices.
It is limited to areas having adequate soil depths.
B-28
-------
jj Livestock Exclusion
Definition. Excluding livestock from an area where grazing is not
wanted.
Purpose. To protect, maintain or improve the quantity or quality of
the plant and animal resources, to maintain enough cover to protect the
soil, to maintain moisture resources and to increase natural beauty.
Where-Applicable; Where desired forest reproduction, soil hydrologic
values, existing vegetation (including trees) or other things, such as
aesthetic values or recreation are prevented or damaged by livestock. This
practice is applicable only if an owner or operator physically constructs
or maintains the barrier (fence, etc.) necessary to exclude livestock. It
is not applicable on areas where livestock are not present or are usually
confined to fenced areas such as pastures or feedlots.
Q Minimum tillage
Definition. Limiting the number of cultural operations to those that
are properly timed and essential to produce a crop and prevent soil damage.
Purpose. To retard deterioration of soil structure; reduce soil
compaction and formation of tillage pans; improve soil aeration, permea-
bility and tilth; and pollution abatement.
Where Applicable. On all cropland, and certain recreation and wild-
life land.
0 Mulching
Definition. Applying plant residues or other suitable materials not
produced on the site to the soil surface.
Purpose. To conserve moisture; prevent surface compaction or crusting;
reduce runoff and erosion; control weeds; and help establish plant cover.
Where Applicable. On soils subject to erosion on which low-residue-
producing crops, such as grapes and small fruits are grown; on critical
areas; and on soils that have a low infiltration rate.
I! Straw Mulching
Definition. Applying straw mulch not produced on the site to the soil
surface.
Purpose. To conserve moisture; prevent surface compaction or crusting;
reduce runoff and erosion; and help establish vegetative cover.
B-29
-------
Where Applicable. On all soils subject to erosion, but particularly
critical areas on the following land uses:
Commercial/Industrial
Coirenunity Services
Recreation
Residential
Transportation Services
fl Open Channel
Definition. Constructing or improving a channel, either natural or
articificial, in which water flows with a free surface.
Scope. This standard covers the construction of open channels or
improvement of existing streams or ditches having a drainage area 1n
excess of one square mile. It does not apply to Diversion, Drainage
Field Ditch, Grassed Waterway or Outlet, Irrigation Canal or Lateral, or
Irrigation Field Ditch.
Purpose. Open channels are constructed or improved and maintained to
provide discharge capacity required for flood prevention, drainage, other
authorized water management purposes, or any combination of these purposes.
Where Applicable. Provisions of this standard are applicable to all
earth channel construction or improvement which includes flood prevention
or drainage as a project purpose, alone or in combination with other pur-
poses, except as noted under "Scope" above.
Functional requirements for specific purposes such as flood prevention,
drainage, etc., are in the standards covering those purposes. Stability
requirements for all channels to which this standard is applicable, as de-
fined in "Scope" above, shall be as specified herein.
An adequate outlet for the improved channel reach must be available
for discharge by gravity flow or pumping.
Construction or other improvements of the channel must not cause signi-
ficant erosion upstream or flooding and/or sediment deposition downstream.
fl Pasture and Hayland Management
Definition. Proper treatment and use of pastureland.
Purpose. To prolong life of desirable forage species; to maintain or
improve the quality and quantity of forage; and to protect the soil, and
reduce water loss.
Where Applicable. On all pasture and hayland.
B-30
-------
0 Pasture and Hayland Planting
Definition. Establishing and re-establishing long-term stands of
adapted species of perennial, biennial, or reseeding forage plants. (In-
cludes Pasture and Hayland Renovation. Does not include Grassed Waterway
or Outlet on cropland.)
Purpose. To reduce erosion, to produce high quality forage, and to
adjust land use.
Where Applicable. On existing pasture and hayland or on land that is
converted from other uses.
0 Pipeline
Definition. Pipeline installed for the conveyance of water for live-
stock or recreational use.
Scope. This standard covers pipelines of less than 4 inches inside
diameter installed for livestock watering or for use of recreational areas.
Purpose. To convey water from source of supply to points of use.
Where Applicable. Where conveyance of water in a closed conduit 1s
desirable or necessary to conduct water from one point to another, conserve
the supply, or for reasons of sanitation.
D Planned Grazing Systems
Definition. A system in which two or more grazing units are alternately
rested from grazing in a planned sequence over a period of years, and the
rest period may be throughout the year or during the growing season of the
key plants.
Purpose. (1) To maintain or speed up improvement in plant cover while
properly using the forage on all grazing units; (2) to improve efficiency
of grazing by uniformly using all parts of each grazing unit; and (3) to
insure a supply of forage throughout the grazing season; (4) for watershed
protection; and (5) to enhance wildlife habitat.
Where Applicable. On all range!and, native pasture, grazable woodland,
and grazed wildlife land.
Planning Considerations. (1) The specific grazing system to choose
depends on size, number of grazing units, climate, range sites or other
soil grouping and conditions, kinds of grazing animals, and the operator's
objectives; (2) each system must be tailored to help meet the operator's
objectives; (3) each system must be able to be applied practically and
flexible enough to meet the needs of key plants in relation to climatic
fluctuations while providing forage throughout the grazing season;
(4) fences and watering facilities must be carefully considered in terms
of adequacy and costs in relation to the benefits expected from the total
system; and (5) special provisions for prolonged drought or other unusual
circumstances should be included.
B-31
-------
D Pond
Definition. A water impoundment made by constructing a dam or embank-
ment, or by excavating a pit or "dugout."
Ponds constructed by the first of these methods are referred to here-
inafter as "Embankment Ponds" and those constructed by the latter method
as "Excavated Ponds." Ponds resulting from both excavation and embankment
are classified as "Embankment Ponds" where the depth of water impounded
against the embankment at spillway elevation is 3 feet or more.
Scope. This standard establishes the minimum acceptable quality for
the design and construction of class (a) ponds located in predominantly
rural.or agricultural areas when:
1. Failure of the structure would not result 1n loss of life; in
damage to homes, commercial or industrial buildings, main high-
ways, or railroads; or in interruption of the use or service of
public utilities.
2. The product of the storage times the effective height of the dam
does not exceed 3,000 where the storage 1s defined as the original
volume (acre-feet) in the-teservoir at the elevation of the crest
of the emergency spillway and the effective height of the dam is
defined as the difference in elevation (feet) between the emergency
spillway crest and the lowest point 1n the cross section taken
along the centerline of the dam.
3. The vertical distance between the lowest point along the centerline
of the dam and the crest of the emergency spillway does not exceed
20 feet.
Purpose. Ponds are constructed to provide water for livestock, fish
and wildlife, recreation, fire control, crop and orchard spraying and
related uses.
Where Applicable. This practice applies only where it is determined
that additional water supply on the farm is justified. Reasonably de-
pendable livestock water ponds in a pasture bounded by fences or a natural
livestock barrier generally should not be located closer together than:
1. One-half mile in rough mountain land;
2. Three-fourths mile in foothills or rolling land; or
3. One mile in undulating prairie land.
Site conditions shall be such that the peak rate of runoff that can
be expected to occur once in 25 years can be safely passed through (1) a
natural or constructed emergency spillway, or (2) a combination of a
principal structural spillway and an emergency spillway. Livestock Water
Tanks shall meet the requirements of the State Engineer of Colorado.
Livestock Water Tanks, as defined by the State of Colorado, are permitted
only on watercourses, the channels of which are normally dry as determined
by the State Engineer of Colorado.
B-32
-------
Drainage area above the pond must be protected aqainst erosion to
the extent that expected normal sedimentation will not shorten the planned
effective life of the structure. The pond must have an expected useful
life of at least 25 years.
Q Pond Sealing or Lining (Flexible Membranes)
Definition. Installing fixed lining of impervious material or treating
the soil in a pond mechanically or chemically to impede or prevent excessive
water loss.
Scope. This standard applies to the use of flexible membrane linings
made of plastic, rubber, and similar material.
Where Applicable. This practice applies where water loss from a pond
through leakage is or will be of such proportion as to prevent the pond
from fulfilling its planned purposes, or where leakage will damage land or
crops or will cause waste of water.
Q Pond Sealing or Lining (Soil Dispersants)
Definition. Installing fixed lining of impervious material or
treating the soil in a pond mechanically or chemically to impede or pre-
vent excessive water loss.
Where Applicable. Where water loss from a pond through leakage is
or will be of such proportion as to prevent the pond from fulfilling Its
planned purpose, or where leakage will damage land or crops or will cause
waste of water.
0 Pond Sealing or Lining (Bentonite and Clay Blankets)
Definition. Installing fixed lining of impervious material or treating
the soil in a pond mechanically or chemically to impede or prevent excessive
water loss.
Scope. This standard covers the sealing of ponds with bentonite or
similar high swell clay materials.
Where Applicable. Where water loss from a pond through leakage is or
will be of such proportion as to prevent the pond from fulfilling its
planned purpose, or where leakage will damage land or crops or will cause
waste of water.
B-33
-------
0 Pond Sealing or Lining (Cationic Emulsion - Water-Borne Sealant)
Definition. Installing a fixed lining of impervious material or
treating the soil in a pond mechanically or chemically to impede or pre-
vent excessive v/ater loss.
Where Applicable. Where water loss from a pond through leakage is,
or will be, of such proportion as to prevent the pond from fulfilling its
planned purpose or where leakage will damage land or crops or will cause
waste of water, and where seepage reduction of 70 to 95 percent will ade-
quately solve the leakage problem.
0 Proper Grazing Use
Definition. Grazing at an intensity which will maintain enough cover
to protect the soil and maintain or Improve the quantity and quality of
desirable vegetation.
Purpose. To: (1) increase the vigor and reproduction of key plants;
(2) accumulate litter and mulch necessary to conserve soil and water;
(3) improve or maintain condition of the vegetation; (4) Increase forage
production; (5) maintain natural beauty; and (6) reduce the fire hazard
on forest land.
Where Applicable. On all rangeland, native pasture, grazable wood-
land ,"7ind~grazI^nTd,life land.
0 Pumping Plant for Water Control
Definition. A pumping facility installed to transfer water for a
conservation need, including removing excess surface or ground water;
filling ponds, ditches or wetlands; or for pumping from wells, ponds,
streams and other sources.
Purpose. To provide a dependable water source or disposal facility
for water management on wet lands or to provide a water supply for such
purposes as irrigation, recreation, livestock, or wildlife.
Where Applicable. Wherever water must be pumped to accomplish the
conservation objective. It is especially applicable for maintaining criti-
cal water levels in existing swamps, marshes, or open water and for pro-
viding water sources for newly constructed wetlands and ponds.
D Range Seeding
Definition. Establishing adapted plants by seeding on rangeland.
(Does not include pasture and hayland planting.)
Purpose. To (1) prevent excessive soil and water loss; (2) produce
more forage on rangeland or land converted to range from other uses; and
(3) improve the natural beauty of grazing land.
B-34
-------
Vlhere Applicable. On rangeland, native pasture, grazable woodland,
and grazed wildlife land.
Planning Considerations. (1) Land to be seeded must have soil and
climate that can support a satisfactory cover of adapted range forage
plants; and the land must not have enough of the desired species to recover
within a reasonable period through grazing management alone. (2) Manage-
ment following seeding should be able to maintain the stand.
Q Recreation Area Improvement
Definition. Establishing grasses, legumes, vines, shrubs, trees,
or other plants or selectively reducing stand density and trirroning woody
plants to improve an area for recreation.
Purpose. To increase the attractiveness and usefulness of recreation
areas and to protect the soil and plant resources.
Where Applicable. On any area planned for recreation use.
Q Recreation Area Stabilization
Definition. Stabilizing recreation areas subject to heavy use by
surfacing with suitable materials or by Installing needed structures.
Purpose. To stabilize a recreation or essential facility area for
sustained heavy use by people, animals or vehicles.
Where Applicable. On recreation areas where physical conditions at
the site, prolonged or concentrated use, or other factors make vegetative
protection impracticable.
0 Recreation Land Grading and Shaping
Definition. Altering the surface of land to meet the requirement of
recreation facilities.
Scope. This standard applies where modification of the land surface
is required to permit installation of recreation facilities.
Where Applicable. On sites where surface irregularities, slopes,
kinds of soil, obstructions or wetness interfere with planned recreational
use; or where such use requires designed land surfaces.
Seecial attention will be given to maintaining or improving habitat
for fish and wildlife where applicable.
B-35
-------
D Recreation Trail and Walkway
Definition. A pathway prepared especially for pedestrian, eques-
trian and cycle travel.
Scope. This standard applies tc walkways and trails constructed
within recreation and scenic areas.
Purpose. To provide recreation area users with travel routes for
activities such as walking, sightseeing, horseback riding, and bicycling.
Where Applicable. This practice applies to lands where prepared paths,
trails, and walkways are needed for effective and safe use of the recrea-
tion resources.
0 Regulating Water in Drainage -Systems
Definition. Controlling the removal or impoundment of surface runoff,
primarily through the operation of water control structures.
Scope. This standard is applicable to the regulation.6f surface and
subsurface water Inflow and outflow through drainage systems. This frequentlj
involves other allied reportable practices, such as are listed under Design I
Criteria for this standard.
Purpose. The purpose of the practice is to conserve surface or sub-
surface water by controlling the outflow from drainage systems to maintain
optimum water levels, flow rates and soil moisture conditions. Such con-
servation of water will make it possible to:
1. Establish and encourage the growth of desired field or forest
plants.
2. Maintain field laterals, channel banks, side slopes, and bottoms
3. Reduce subsidence and wind erosion of organic soils.
4. Provide habitat for fish and other aquatic life.
5. Hold water in channels in forest areas to act as ground-fire
breaks and provide drinking water for wildlife and a resting and feeding
place for waterfowl.
6. Improve environment for recreation use.
7. Improve water quality in streams and ponds by limiting erosion,
reducing sediment movement and controlling flow rates.
Where Applicable. This practice applies to areas needing drainage
and where it is advantageous to control the outflow or pumping rate at
other times. It is applicable especially in organic soils and in highly
B-36
-------
permeable soils of low available water holding capacity. This practice can
be used to improve habitat for fish and wildlife. It also applies to re-
creational areas.
Regulation of outflow should be undertaken only when soil water salinity
or alkalinity is not likely to be a problem.
A water supply sufficient for leaching shall be available.
0 Spring Development
Definition. Improving springs and seeps by excavating, cleaning,
capping, or providing collection and storage facilities. Does not include
Trough, Tank, or Pipeline.
Purpose. Spring developments usually are made to improve the distri-
bution or to increase the quantity of livestock water supplies, but may
be made for irrigation if water in suitable quantity and quality 1s available.
Where Applicable. Development shall be confined to springs or seepage
areas that appear able to furnish a dependable supply of suitable water
during the planned period or periods of use.
The need for, and feasibility of, protection from flooding, sedimenta-
tion, and contamination shall be considered in determining the suitability
of a site for development.
D Stock Trails and Walkways
Definition. A livestock trail or walkway constructed to improve
grazing distribution and access to forage and water.
Purpose. To (1) provide or improve aceess to forage and water;
(2) reduce livestock concentrations; (3) control livestock to permit pro-
per grazing use and planned grazing systems; and (4) improve grazing effi-
ciency.
Where Applicable. On grazing areas where free livestock movement is
hampered, such as on steep mountain slopes, across rock outcrops, through
dense timber, over rough lava beds, and on marsh range or grazing areas
subject to overflow.
Q Stream Channel Stabilization
Definition. Stabilizing the channel of a stream with suitable struc-
tures.
Scope. This standard covers the structural work done to control
aggradation or degradation in a stream channel. It does not include work
done to prevent bank cutting or meander.
B-37
-------
Where Applicable. This practice applies to stream channels under-
going damaging aggradation or degradation that cannot be feasibly con-
trolled by clearing or snagging, by the establishment of vegetative pro-
tection, or by installation of upstream water control facilities, and which
require the application of structural measures.
fl Streambank Protection
Definition. Stabilizing and protecting banks of streams, lakes,
estuaries, excavated channels against scour and erosion by vegetative and
structural means.
Scope. This standard covers the structural means used to stabilize
and protect the banks of natural streams, lakes, estuaries, and excavated
channels. It is not applicable to erosion problems on main ocean fronts
and similar areas of complexity not normally within the scope of SCS
authority or expertise.
Purpose. Streambank protection is established to stabilize or protect
streambanks for one or more of the following purposes:
1. To prevent the loss of land or damage to utilities, roads, buildings
;.or other facilities adjacent to the channel.
2. To maintain the capacity of the channel.
3. To control channel meander which would adversely affect downstream
facilities.
4. To reduce sediment loads causing downstream damages or to improve
the stream for recreational use or as a habitat for fish and wild-
life.
Where Applicable. This practice applies to natural or excavated
channels where the streambanks are subject to erosion from the action of
water, ice or debris or to damage from livestock or vehicular traffic.
D Stripcropping, Contour
Definition. Growing crops in a systematic arrangement of strips or
bands on the contour to reduce water erosion. The crops are arranged so
that a strip of grass or close-growing crop is alternated with a strip of
clean-tilled crop or fallow or a strip of grass is alternated with a close-
growi ng crop.
Purpose. To reduce erosion and control water.
Where Applicable. On sloping cropland and certain recreation and
wildlife land where the topography is uniform enough that tilling and har-
vesting can be done practically; and where it is an essential part of a
cropping system, to effectively reduce soil and water losses.
B-38
-------
(j Stripcropping, Field
Definition. Growing crops in a systematic arrangement of strips or
bands across the general slope (not on the contour) to reduce water ero-
sion. The crops are arranged so that a strip of grass or close-growing
crop is alternated with a clean-tilled crop or fallow.
Purpose. To help control erosion and runoff on sloping cropland
where contour stripcropping is not practical.
Where Applicable, On sloping cropland and certain recreation and
wildlife land.
jj Stripcropping, Wind -*
Definition. Growing wind-resisting crops in strips alternating with
row crops or fallow and arranged at angles to offset adverse wind effects.
Purpose. To reduce wind velocity at the soil surface, thereby re-
ducing soil blowing and damage to crops.
Where Applicable. On cropland subject to soil blowing and where
needed as part of a cropping system.
0 Structure for Water Control
Definition. A structure in an irrigation, drainage, or other water
management system that conveys water, controls the direction or rate of
flow, or maintains a desired water surface elevation. These structures
are also for the protection of fish and wildlife and other environmental
values, as well as for protection and management of soils and plants.
(Does not include structures for which the primary purpose is to control
head cutting and control erosion.)
Scope. This standard applies to the structures normally installed in
a well planned irrigation or drainage system, wildlife facility or other
water management system for the conveyance, flow control, or level regu-
lation of water. It covers the planning and functional design of such
water control structures but not the detailed design criteria or construc-
tion specifications for specific structures. It does not include structural
components of irrigation pipelines or subsurface drains.
Purpose. Water control structures are installed to control the stage,
discharge, distribution, delivery or direction of flow of water in open
channels, or water use areas. They may also be used for water quality con-
trol such as sediment reduction or temperature regulation.
Where Applicable. This practice applies wherever a permanent structure
is needed as an integral part of an irrigation, drainage, or other water
B-39
-------
control system to serve one or more of the following functions:
1. To conduct water from one elevation to a lower elevation within,
to, or from a ditch, channel, or canal. Typical structures: drops,
chutes, turnouts, surface water Inlets, head gates, pump boxes,
stilling basins.
2. To control the elevation of water in drainage or Irrigation ditches,
Typical structure: checks.
3. To control the division or measurement of irrigation water.
Typical structures: division boxes, water measurement devices.
4. To protect pipelines from the entry of trash, debris, or weed
seeds. Typical structure: debris screens.
5. To control direction of channel flow resulting from tides and high
water or backflow from flooding. Typical structure: tide and
drainage gates.
6. To control water table or removal of surface or subsurface water of
adjoining land; to flood land for frost protection or to manage
water levels for wildlife or recreational purposes. Typical
structures: water level control structures, pipe drop inlets,
box inlets.
7. To provide water level control for recreation or similar purposes.
8. To provide conveyance for water over, under, or along a ditch,
canal, road, railroad or other barrier. Typical structures:
bridges, culverts, flumes, inverted siphons.
9. To modify water flow to provide habitat for fish, wildlife, and
other aquatic animals. Typical structures: deflectors, chutes,
cold water release, or structures to make pools and riffles.
Q Stubble Mulching
Definition. Managing plant residues on a year-round basis in which
harvesting, tilling, planting, and cultivating operations are performed
in such a way to keep protective amounts of vegetation on the soil surface.
Purpose. To reduce soil loss from wind and water; improve water
infiltration; and improve the physical condition of the soil.
Where Applicable. On nonirrigated cropland in semi arid and subhumid
areas when wind or water erosion occurs.
B-40
-------
(J Subsurface Drain
Definition. A conduit, such as tile, pipe, or tubing, installed
beneath the ground surface and which collects and/or conveys drainage
water.
Purpose. A subsurface drain may serve one or more of the following
purposes:
1. Improve the soil environment for vegetative growth by regulating
the water table and ground water flow.
2. Intercept and prevent water movement into a wet area.
3. Relieve artesian.pressures.
4. Remove surface runoff.
5. Facilitate leaching of saline and alkali soils.
6. Serve as an outlet for other subsurface drains.
7. Provide ground water regulation and control for subirrigated
areas or waste disposal areas.
8. Collect groundwater for beneficial uses.
9. Remove water from around buildings, roads, airports, play fields,
and other physical improvements.
10. Provide water regulation to control health hazards caused by liver
fluke, flies, mosquitoes, etc.
Where Applicable. This practice is applicable only to lands that
can be drained within U. S. Department of Agriculture and Soil Conserva-
tion Service policy.
Drains are used in areas having a high water table where benefits of
lowering or controlling ground water or surface runoff justify the installa-
tion of such a system.
All lands to be drained shall be suitable for the intended use after
installation of required drainage and other conservation practices. The
soil shall have enough depth and permeability to permit installation of
an effective and economically feasible system. The drainability and
treatment of saline and alkali soils shall be considered where this is a
problem.
•
An outlet for the drainage system shall be available, either by gravity
flow or by pumping. The outlet shall be adequate for the quantity and
quality of effluent to be disposed of with consideration of possible
damages above or below the point of discharge that might involve legal
actions under state laws.
B-41
-------
D Terrace, Basin
Definition. A form of level terrace with closed ends constructed
on noncropland with permeable soils and designed to impound a given amount
of runoff from the drainage area above it.
Scope. This standard covers the planning and design of basin terraces.
It does not apply to Gradient, Level, or Parallel Terraces, or Diversions.
Purpose. Basin terraces are constructed to retain runoff from non-
cropland areas, check erosion on the lower slopes, prevent gully develop-
ment, reduce flooding, and increase infiltration opportunity, and reduce
pollution from sediment and runoff.
Where Applicable. This practice is applicable on sites where:
1. Runoff from higher lying areas will damage crop or pastureland;
conservation practices such as terraces, farm ponds, and similar
structural installations; roads, buildings, or other Cultural
features.
2. The soil is deep and capable of absorbing and storing extra water.
D Toxic Salt Reduction
Definition. Reducing or redistributing the harmful concentrations
of salt in the soil. (Sometimes referred to as "leaching.)
Purpose. To create a soil condition which permits desirable plants
to grow.
Where Applicable. On land where the accumulation of salt at or near
the surface limits the growth of desirable plants.
D Tree Planting
Definition. Planting tree seedlings or cuttings.
Purpose. To establish or reinforce a stand of trees to conserve soil
and moisture, beautify an area, protect a watershed or produce»wood crops.
Where Applicable. In open fields, in understocked woodland, beneath
less desirable tree species or in other areas suitable for producing wood
crops where erosion control or watershed protection is needed, where greater
natural beauty is wanted or where a combination of these is desired.
B-42
-------
|] Trough or Tank
Definition. A trough or tank with needed devices for water control
and waste water disposal installed to provide drinking water for livestock.
Scope. This standard covers all trough or tank installations to pro-
vide livestock watering facilities supplied from a spring, reservoir, well
or other source.
Purpose. To provide watering facilities at selected locations which
will bring about the desired protection of vegetative cover through proper
distribution of grazing or better grassland management.
Where Applicable. This practice applies where there 1s a need for
new or improved watering places to permit the desired level of grass-
land management and reduce health hazards to livestock.
Range Planning Requirements. The practice must facilitate proper
grazing use by improving distribution of grazing over all parts of the range;
meeting the water requirements of livestock with adequately distributed water
supplies where less expensive water developments are not feasible. Reason-
ably dependable stockwater facilities generally should not be located closer
together than one-half mile in rough mountain country, three-quarters mile
in foothills or rolling land, or one mile in level or undulating prairie.
D Well
Definition. A well constructed or improved to provide water for
irrigation, livestock, or recreation.
Scope. This standard covers wells for irrigation, livestock water,
wildlife, and recreation.
Where Applicable. Wells are applicable on ranges, pastures, and
wildlife and recreation areas where present facilities are inadequate, but
with an underground water supply which is adequate in quantity and quality
for the purpose to be served.
All Irrigation wells shall be planned and located to serve as a source
of water for an irrigation water distribution or conveyance system that has
been designed to facilitate the conservation use of the soil and water re-
sources on a farm or group of farms.
All lands served by the irrigation well shall be suitable for use as
irrigated land.
The water produced by irrigation wells must be of adequate quality
and sufficient quantity to make irrigation practical for the crops to be
grown and the water application methods to be used.
B-43
-------
0 Woodland Direct Seeding
Definition. Spreading tree seed by hand or by mehcanical means in
open areas or understocked woodlands to establish an adequate stand.
Purpose. To establish a stand of trees that will conserve soil and
moisture, produce wood crops, and produce related values.
Where Applicable. In open areas or understocked woodlands where
soils are suited to growing wood crops, where suitable site preparation
can be attained, and where adequate measures for the protection of seed
and seedlings can be provided.
Q Woodland Improvement
Definition. Improving woodland by removing unmerchantable or un-
wanted trees, shrubs, or vines.
Purpose. To fully use the potential of a site, to maintain plant -
cover for soil protection, to improve stand composition by leaving the
best trees spaced for best growth, to improve forage production on grazable
woodland, or to improve the natural beauty, wildlife or recreation values
of an area.
Where Applicable. In a woodland where a stand of trees is over-
stocked or where desirable trees are overtopped by less desirable trees,
shrubs or vines, where removing part of a stand will improve stand quality,
forage production or the recreation, wildlife, aesthetic or hydrologic
values of an area.
0 Woodland Pruning
Definition. Removing all pr parts of selected branches from trees.
Purpose. To improve the quality of the wood product or the appearance
of trees.
Where Applicable.
1. On land growing trees where the quality of the final product and
the potential of the site justify the cost.
2. Where removing all or parts of branches enhances the beauty of
an area.
3. On Christmas tree sites where removing all or parts of branches
increases the value of the trees.
B-44
-------
0 Woodland Site Preparation
Definition. Treating open areas or understocked woodland areas to
encourage natural seeding of desirable trees or to permit reforestation by
planting or direct seeding.
Purpose. To prepare land for the establishment of a stand of forest
trees for conservation of soil and water, watershed improvement and the pro-
duction of wood crops.
Where Applicable. On understocked areas suitable for growing wood
crops.
B-45
-------
MODEL FLOODPLAIN ORDINANCE
APPENDIX C
-------
APPENDIX C
MODEL FLOODPLAIN ORDINANCE
-------
THE URBAN DRAINAGE AND FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT
RESOLUTION 110. , SERIES OF 1979
(Amending the District's Flood Plain Regulation)
WHEREAS, authority for the Board of Directors to adopt, amend, repeal,
enforce and otherwise administer under the police power reasonable flood plain
zoning resolutions, rules, regulations and orders pertaining to properties within
the District of any public body or other person affecting the disposition of water
drainage is contained in Section 32-11-218 (1) (f) (I) • C.R.S. 1973, as ,
amended; and
IMCREAS, the uncontrolled use of the flood plains and watercourses within
the District boundaries adversely affects the public health, safety and welfare
of tlie citizens of the District; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors by Resolution No. 11, Series of 1970,
adopted a Flood Plain Regulation; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors by Resolution Ho. 26, Series of 1974,
amended the Flood Plain Regulation; and
HHEREAS, the Flood Plain Regulation has been the Subject of study, use,
and connentary since 1970; and
VIHEREAS, such study, use, and commentary have Indicated the desirability
of certain revisions of the Flood Plain Regulation; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing on the amendments proposed by the District has
been held by the Board of Directors at which any public body ovning drainage
and flood control facilities in the District or exercising powers affecting
drainage and flood control therein had an opportunity to be heard along with
other persons having an interest in the proposed regulations as required by
Section 32-11-218 (1) (0 (II) . C.R.S. 1973, as anended; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors has, with due consideration, determined
the said Flood Plain Regulation to be necessary to execute the legal duties
inposed upon the District by Its enabling legislation;
HOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of the
District does hereby adopt the following anendments to Its flood Plain Regulation:
SECTION 1.0 PURPOSES. To promote the public health, safety, and general
welfare, to minimize flood losses In areas subject to flood hazards, and to
promote wise use of the flood plain, this flood plain Reoulatlon has been
established with the following purposes Intended:
1-1 To reduce the hazards of floods to life and property by:
1.11 Prohibiting certain uses which are dangerous to life or
property In time of flood.
1.12 Restricting uses which would be hazardous to the public
health In time of flood.
1.13 Restricting uses which are particularly susceptible to
flood damage, so as to alleviate hardship and eliminate
demands for public expenditures for relief and protection.
1.14 Requiring permitted flood plain uses, including public
facilities which serve such uses, to be protected analnst
floods by providing flood proofing and general flood pro-
tection at the tine of Initial construction.
1.2 To alert flood plain occupants or potential occupants to flood
damages, which may result from their own, or other, land use
and which is or may be undertaken without full realization of the
danger by:
1.21 Regulating the manner in which structures designed for
human occupancy may be constructed so as to prevent
danger to human life within such structures.
1.22 Regulating the method of construction of water supply,
sanitation systems and other utilities, so as to prevent
disease, contamination and unsanitary conditions.
1.23 Delineating and describing areas that could be Inundated
by floods so as to protect individuals from purchasing
flood plain lands for purposes which are not In fact
suitable.
1.3 To protect the public froio the burden of avoidable financial ex-
penditures for flood control and relief by:
1.31 Regulating all uses within the flood plain areas so as to
produce a method of construction and a pattern of develop-
ment which will minimize the probability of damage to
property and loss of life or injury to the Inhabitants of
the flood hazard areas.
1.4 To protect the storage capacity of flood plains and to assure'
retention of sufficient floodway area to convey flood flows which
can reasonably be expected to occur by:
1.41 Regulating filling, dumping, dredging, and alteration of
channels by deepening, widening, or relocating.
1.42 Prohibiting unnecessary and damage-creating encroachments.
1.43 Encouraging open space uses such as agriculture and recreation.
-------
1.5 To protect the hydraulic characteristics of the small watercourses.
Including the gulches, slouohs and artificial water channels used
for conveying flood waters, which make up a portion of the urban
drainage system by:
1.51 Regulating filling, dumping and channelization so as to
maintain natural storage capacity and slow flow character-
istics.
1.52 Prohibiting encroachment Into the small watercourses to
maintain their water carrylnn capacity.
1.53 Encouraging uses such as greonbelt, open space, recreation
and riding trails.
SECTION 2.0 GEHERAL PROVISIONS.
2.1 Jurisdiction: The Jurisdiction of this section Includes all lands
adjacent to any watercourse within the Urban Drainage and Flood
Control District that would be inundated by the 100-year flood
for that watercourse as defined In the Definitions section of this
Resolution.
2.2 District Types: The Flood Regulatory District covers the 100-year
flood plain! Where deemed to be In the public Interest by the
Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, and to promote wise
use of the flood plain, the Flood Regulatory District may be sub-
divided into the Floodway District and the Flood Storage District.
n The Flood Regulatory District Is defined by computing the 100-year
I flood plain limits under existing channel and flood plain conditions.
N>
Subdivision of the Flood Regulatory Otstrlct Into the FlooAiay
District and the Flood Storane District must not cause a 100-year
flood water surface profile rise of more than one-half foot above
that for the Flood Regulatory District based on the assumption that
there will be an equal degree of encroachment extendtng for a signi-
ficant "reach" on both sides of the stream.
The subdivision of the Flood Regulatory District and accoapanylng
hydraulic studies must be based upon all of the Flood Storage
District reach being filled. Creation of the Floodway District
and Flood Storage District must be made only with the full under-
standing that such subdivision may tend to Increase flood peaks
downstream. The-Fleedway-Blstriet-and-Fleed-SteFane-Bistriet-shall
be-added-te-the-flead-plaln-jening-map-feF-the-Flead-Regulatory
Bis triet-which-is-subdivided.
2.3 Boundaries: The boundaries of the Flood Regulatory Olstrlct, the
Fleedway-Bistriet-and-the-Fleed-StOFage-DistriEt shall be as they
appear on the flood plain zoning mapS kept on file with the Execu-
tive Director, Urban Drainage and Flood Control District. The
boundary lines on the map shall be determined by the use of the
scale appearing on the map. Where there is a conflict between
the boundary lines illustrated on the map and actual field conditions,
the dispute shall be settled according to Section 7.3, "Mapping
Disputes" of this Regulation.
2.4 Interpretation: In the Flood Plain Beard-ef-ZanlHg-Adjuslnenl's
AokTTi 1ST RAT OR' S interpretation and application, the provisions
of this Regulation shall be held to he minimum requirerrents and
shall be liberally construed In favor of the governing body and
shall not be deemed a limitation or repeal of any other powers
granted by Colorado Statutes.
2.5 Warning »»>! Disclaimer of Liability. The degree of flood pro-
tection Intiiided to be provided by this section is considered
reasonable for regulatory purposes and Is based on engineering
and scientific methods of study. Larger floods may occur on
occasions or the flood height may be Increased by man-made or
natural causes, such as ice jams and bridge openings restricted
by debris. This Regulation does not Imply the areas outside flood
plain area boundaries or land uses permitted within such areas
will always be totally free.from flooding or flood damages. Nor
shall this section create a liability on the part of or a cause
of action against the UrtanOralnage and Flood Control Olstrlct or
any officer or employee thereof for any flood damages that nay
result from reliance on this Regulation.
2.6 Adoption of Official FLOOD PLAIN Haps: The location and boundaries of
"the Head-Areas-established-by-this-Pegulatien-ape-shewn-Bpen-the
-F4eed-Plain-7eHing-Maps-ef~the-Ui>baR-Bi'aina!)e-aHd-Fleed-£entre!
Bistr'ict^-wMch-are-heFeby^ineeFperated-intB-tViis-Regtriatien.
The-said-zsRlng-aiapsl-tegether-with-eveFythiRg-shawn-thereen-and
aH-asieHdi-.eHt5-thereto,-shall-be-as-mueh-a-paFt-ef-tMs-Regulaties
as-if-fully-set-ferth-aRd-deseribed-heFein. FLOOD REGULATORY DISTRICTS
ESTABLISHED Or THIS REGULATION SHALL BE AS TiltV APPEAR ON THE HAPS
AMD PROFILES CONTAINED IN ENG1NEERIIIG REPORTS ADOPTED AFTER A Pt'BLIC
HEARING BY THE BOARD OF OIRECTORS. THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS MAY
DESIGNATE FLOODWAY AfID FLOOD STORAGE DISTRICTS BY ADOPTING FLOOD-
MAY TABLES CONTAINED IN THE ABOVE |!EIITI0NE0 ENGINEERING REPORTS
AFTER A PUBLIC HEARING. Each change In the official mapS shall
be subject to the Amendment procedure as required in Section 7.3,
Happing Disputes. For the purpose of final determination of the
flood plain limits, the flood profile shall control. The desCFiptien
ef-tke ADOPTED HAPS AND flood profiles shall be an file with the
County Clerk and Recorder of the county in which the flood plain
1s located.
SECTION 3.0 NONCONFORMING USES
3.1 The existing lawful use of a structure or premises which Is not in
conformity with the provisions of this Regulation may be continued
subject to the following conditions:
3.11 No such use shall be expanded or enlarged except in
conformity with the provisions of this Regulation.
3.12 Substantial inprovement, as herein defined, to any non-
conforming structure or use must result In the permanent
change of the structure or use to a conforming use.
3.13 If such use Is discontinued for twelve (12) consecutive
months, any future use of the building and premises shall
conform to this Regulation.
3.14 Uses or adjuncts thereof which arc public nuisances shall
not be permitted to continue as nonconforming uses.
3.15 Any alteration, addition, or repair to any existing non-
conforming structure shall t>e protected, where applicable,
by flood proofing measures pursuant to Section 7.45 (1),
Flood Proofing, of this Regulation.
SECT!0(1 4.0 FLOOD REGULATORY DISTRICT
4.1 Application: The provisions for this district apply to all
"flood plains of watercourses in the Urban Oralna
-------
Description of District: The Flood Renulatory District shall In-
clude" tTie-arca3~de71ne«tc(l on the maps and profiles for the 100-year
flood plain limits for the watercourses 4R-the-UrbaR-8ra4nage-and
f 1ood-CeHl>e<-B
(4)
.4 Description of Uses
Permitted Uses: The following open uses shall be permitted within
the Flood Regulatory District to the extent that they are not pro-
hibited in a particular area by any underlying county or city
zoning ordinance or regulation.
4.41 Agricultural uses such as: general farming, pasture, truck
fanning, forestry, sod farming, and wild crop harvesting;
4.42 Industrial-couinercial uses such as: loading areas, parking
areas, airport landing strips, and storage yards for equip-
ment or machinery easily moved or not subject to flood
damage;
4.43 Public and private recreational uses not requiring "permanent
or temporary structures" designed for human habitation such
as: parks, swloning areas, golf courses, driving ranges,
picnic grounds, wildlife and nature preserves, game farms,
fish hatcheries, shooting preserves, target ranges, trap
and skeet ranges, and hunting, fish1n9 and hiking areas;
4.44 Utility facilities such as: flowage areas, transmission
lines, pipelines, water monitoring devices, roadways,
and bridges.
5 Special Exceptions: Any use enumerated In subsections 4.51 through
4.55 may be permitted only upon appl4eal40R-te-the-F4eed-P4a4n-2«Aing
A
-------
<4J--Strtiet(ires-w4ll-be-f4rwly-aHehered-te-preve«t-lhe
61 m£ldFe-ep-bb»liI4R§-fF8i»-f leal 4rij-away-and-thus
threaten4Hg-te-fdFlheF-restF4et-br4dge-epen4ngs-aHd-
ether-restr4eted-seet4ens-8f-lhe-stKeani-er-F4veri--and
(5)--Serv4ee-fae4l4t4es-sueh-as-eleetF4eal-eiiu4piMeRt-w4ll-be
at-er-abeve-the-flBed-pFeteet4en-elevlaiR-Beard-ef
2eR4ng-Adjustment-that*
{))--Sueh-stFuetuFes-shall-eemply-with-Seet4en-4rSl-{3)i-{4)-i
afid-ea-aRd-the-f4Tl-shall-exUnd-at-sneh
elevatfeR-at-least-ftfleeH-(lS)-feet-beyend-the-lisits
ef-afly-stFuetuFe-er-buildlRj-ereeted-thereen.
MQT1 - RE SI DEtJT IAL CONSTRUCTION. NEH CONSTRUCTION OR SUBSTANTIAL
TmprovemenTDf my commercial, industrial or other non-resi-
dential STRUCTURE HAY BE PERMITTED ONLY UPON A FINDING BY
THE FLOOD PLAIN ADMINISTRATOR THAT THE LOWEST FLOOR, INCLUDING
BASEMENT, IS TO BE ELEVATED TO OR ABOVE THE FLOOD PROTECTION
ELEVATION OR, TOGETHER WITH ATTENDANT IITILI1Y AND SANITARY
FACILITIES, IS TO BE FLOOD PROOFED SO THAT BELOW THE FLOOD
PROTECTION ELEVATION THE STRUCTURE IS HATER TIGHT WITH HALLS
SUBSTANTIALLY IMPERMEABLE TO THE PASSAGE OF WATER AND WITH
STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS HAVING THE CAPABILITY OF RESISTING
HYDROSTATIC AND HYDRODYHAMIC LOAOS AND EFFECTS OF BUOYANCY.
A REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER OR ARCHITECT SHALL CERTIFY
TO THE FLOOD PLAIN ADMINISTRATOR THAT THE STANDARDS OF THIS'
SUBSECTION ARE SATISFIED.
4.53 MOBILE HO)
-------
5.32 110 HOUILE HOMES SHALL BE PLACED IN THE fLOODHAY DISTRICT.
5.4 DescrlnUon of Uses: The open uses that are permitted In Section
374, Oescrlp'tlon of Uses. Flood Regulatory District of this Regu-
lation are permitted, provided that such use does not Include any
filling or deposit of materials, and the capacity of the floodway
Is left completely unlnpalred.
6.t--Special-Eweept4aBS<--Seet4an-4r81i-Struttares-Aeeessery-te-flpen-
Spate-Uses-a f-th4s-Regulatia«-iltail-apply-hereter
SECTION 6.0 FLOOD STORAGE OISTRICT
6.1 Application: Section 4.1. Application. Flood Regulatory District of
this Regulation shall apply thereto.
6.2 Description of District: The Flood Storage District shall Include
the areaS shewR-as-sueh-aR-the-maps-deser4bed-4n-SeetleR-4T2-Beserip-
tlen-ef-B4str4eti DESIGNATED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS IN ACCORDANCE
WITH SECTION 2.6, ADOPTION OF FLOOD PLAIN HAPS of this Regulation.
6.3 Special Provisions
S.ai—He-mifStrutturet-dtfuoslt-er-ether-neBd-plalH-uses-shan
be-pennitted-that-adverseiy-affeets-the-effie4eney-of-any
ehaHRe1s-er-f4eedways-ef-any-tr4butar4es-te-the-ma4n-stKea«
er-»-4veri-dralnaee-d4UheS»-er-any-ether-dra4Rage-fac4l4l4es-
er-systew9.
O
' ti32---The-f1rst-*lBer-er-basemeHt-epeHlHq-ef-any-buHd
-------
(a) A typical valley cross-section showing the
channel of tfie stream, the flood plain adjoining
each side of channel, cross-sectional area to he
occupied by the proposed development, and high
water Information.
(b) Plan (surface view) showing elevations or con-
tours' of the ground; pertinent structure, fill
or storage elevations; size, location and spatial
arrangenent of all proposed and existing structures
on the site; location and elevations of streets,
water supply, sanitary facilities, and soil types
and other pertinent Information.
(c) Profile showing the slope of the bottom of the
channel or thalweq of the streanw MID EXISTING
AND PROPOSED 100-YEAR HATER SURFACE PROFILES.
(d) Spedflcatlons for building construction and
materials, "flood proofing," filling, dredging,
grading, channel Improvement, storage of materials,
water supply, and sanitary facilities.
(£) HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS FOR ALL PROPOSED CHANNELIZATION.
The Beard ADMINISTRATOR shall render, within 30 days of
receipt of all necessary application docuncnts and material,
er-witMn-M-days-frBW-the-flnal-day-ef-a-hearlug, a written
decision granting or denying a permit application. If a
denial Is made, the decision shall set forth the Beard's
ADMINISTRATOR'S findings of fact and reasons for the denial.
Applicants shall have the right to appeal any adverse finding
or decision to any-eeMrt-ef-eempeteHt-JurlsdieUenT THE
FLOOD PLAIN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. SUCH APPEAL MUST BE HADE
WITHIN 30 DAYS.
/.43 Factors upon which the decision of the Flood Plain BeardrOf
I
-------
SIC)IOH 9.0
EMf'OUCniTHT AMD PENALTIES
9.1 Every structure, building, fill or developnL-nt placed or maintained
within my flood plain in violation of this Regulation is a public
nuisance and the creation thereof may be enjoined and maintenance
thereof may be abated by action at suit of the City, Town, or
County In which It is located or by the Urban Drainage and Flood
Control District or any citizen thereof. Any person who places
or maintains any structure, building, fill or development within
any flood plain In violation of this Regulation may be fined
not more than $50 for each offense. Each day during which such
violation exists Is a separate offense.
SEC1ION 10.0 AMENDMENTS
10.1 The Board of Directors of the Urban Drainage and Flood Control
District of Colorado may from time to tine alter, supplement or
change the district boundaries and the provisions contained In
this Regulation In the manner provided by law.
10.11 Amendments to this Regulation may be made on petition of
any interested party in accordance with the provisions of
the Colorado Revised Statutes.
10.12 The subdivisions of the Flood Regulatory District Into the
Floodway District and Flood Storage District will only be
made by action of the Board of Directors of the Urban
Drainage and Flood Control District.
0 SECTION 11.0 DEFINITIONS
Unless specifically defined below, words or phrases used in this Regulation
shall be Interpreted so as to give them the sane meaning as they have at
common law and to give this Regulation Its most reasonable application.
11.1 Channel - that area of a watercourse where water normally flows
and not that area beyond where vegetation exists.
11.2 Encroachment Lines - are limits of obstruction to flood flows.
These lines are generally parallel to the stream. The lines are
established by assumlnn that the area landward (outside) of the
encroachment lines may be ultimately developed In such a way
that It will not be available to convey flood flows. The stream
channel and adjoining flood plains between these lines will be
maintained as open space and will be adequate to convey the
100-year flood without adversely increasing flood heights, such
Increase under any condition not exceeding one-half foot.
11.3 Equal Degree of Encroachment - is established by considering the
effect of encroachments on the hydraulic efficiency of the flood
plain along a significant reach of the stream, on both sides.
11.4 Flood - a general and temporary condition of partial or complete
Inundation of normally dry land areas from (a) the overflow of
streams, rivers, or other inland water, or (b) the unusual and
rapid accumulation or runoff of surface waters from any source.
11.5 flood Plain - an area adjacent to a watercourse, which area Is
subject to flooding as the result of the occurrence of the
100-year flood and which area thus is so adverse to past, current,
or foreseeable construction or land use as to constitute a
significant hazard to public health and safety or to property.
The term includes but Is not limited to:
(a) Mainstream floodplalns;
(b) Debris-fan floodplalnsi and
(c)' Ory wash channels and dry wash floodplalns.
11.6 Flood Regulatory Districtthat portion of the flood plain subject
to inundation by the 100-year flood. The Regulatory District 4s
MAY BE subdivided into the .Flooway District and the Flood
Storage District.
11.7 Flood Storage District - the fringe portion of the Flood Regulatory
Blstrict in which flows are characteristically of shallot; depths
and low velocities.
11.8 Floodway District - that portion of the Flood Regulatory District
required for the reasonable passage or conveyance of the 100-year
flood which Is characterized by hazardous and significant depths
and velocities.
11.9 Flood Proflle - a graph or a longitudinal profile showing the
relationship of the water surface elevation of a flood event to
location along a stream or river,
11.10 Flood Proofing - a combination of structural provisions, changes,
or adjustments to properties and structures subject to flooding
primarily for the reduction or elimination of flood damages to
properties, water and sanitary facilities, structures, and contents
of buildings In a flood hazard area.
11.11 Flood Protection Elevation - an elevation one foot above the
elevation or "flood profile" of the 100-year flood under existing
channel and flood plain conditions. It is one foot above the
elevation of the flood for the Flood Regulatory District as shown
on the zen4n9~FLOOD PLAIN maps In the office of the Urban Drainaoe
and Flood Control District.
HrU--Fleed-Sta»ie—far-purposes-e f-th4s-Regulation-the-term-4s-used-te
meaR-the-hetght-er-elevatien-ef-a-fleed-as-referred-ts-seme-datuiBi
For-ether-purpesej-it-is-teawnly-used-te- refer- to- the-elevatien
at-whieh-a-stream-w4))-evertep-4ts-neraial-stase-bankST
11.132 Hundred-year Flood - is one that has a frequency of occurrence
of one hundred (100) years determined from an analysis of floods
on a particular watercourse and other watercourses in the same
general region. It has about a one percent chance of occurring
In any given year.
11. 1*3 Obstruction - sandbars formed by the natural flow of a watercourse,
temporary structures, planks, snags and debris In and along an
existing channel which cause a flood hazard.
41» 15--Ord4Hary-H1ah-Uater-Harli—-the-M9hcst-peint-en-the-bank-ef-a-
neimal-stage-channel-at-which-the-water-level-has-been-for-a-
suffieient-peried-ef-time-te-leave-a-deflRite-marli.
11.164 Reach - a hydraulic engineering term to describe longitudinal
segncnts of a stream or river. A reach will generally Include
the segment of the flood plain where flood heights are primarily
controlled by manmade or natural flood plain obstructions or
restrictions. In an urban area, the sccnent of a stream or
river between two consecutive bridge crossings would most likely
be a reach.
-------
11.15 SHADOW FLOODING AREA - Ml APCA OF SIIALLOH IHDETERI'INATE FLOODING
NOT RtLAiro TO Tilt FUOOD H'OITLE.
11.176 Storage Capacity of a Flood Plain - ttie volume of space above
an area of flood plain land that can be occupied by flood water
of a given stage at a given time, regardless of whether; the
water is roving. Storage capacity tends to reduce downstream
flood peaks.
11.187 Structure - anything constructed or erected, the use of which
requires a more or less permanent location on or In the ground.
Includes but Is not limited to objects such as buildings,
factories, sheds, and cabins.
11.198 Structure. Permanent - a structure which Is built of such materials
and In such a way that it would conuionly be expected to last
and remain useful for a substantial period of tlaie.
11.2019 Structure. Teirporarv - a structure which Is built of such materials
and In. such a way that It would conranly be expected to have a
relatively short useful life, or Is built for a purpose that
would coniMonly be expected to be relatively short-term.
11.210 Substantial Improvement - any repair, reconstruction, or (improvement
of a structure, the cost of which equals or exceeds 50 percent
of the actual cash value of the structure either (a) before
the Improvenent has started, or (b) If the structure has been
damaged and Is being restored, before the damage occurred.
Substantial inprovemcnt is started when the first alteration
of any structural part of the building commences.
11.221 Watercourse - a channel, natural depression, slough, artificial
channel, gulch, arroyo, stream, creek, pond, reservoir, or lake
In which storm runoff and flood water flows either regularly
Or infrequently. This includes major dralnageways for carrying
urban storm runoff.
11.232 Flood Plain ?BHiRq Administrator - that Individual appointed
by the Ooard oT~birectors to administer the provisions of these
Regulations.
llT243-F)eed-P)ain-Zen1ng-Adjustment---the-preeedure-undertaken-by-the-
Fleed-PlaiR-Beard-ef-Adjustment-in-the-csflslderatleni-granMng
sr-deRial-ef-vartanees-eF-speelal-exceptleR-peFmUs-te-the
RegutatieHSr
U.2S3 Flood Plain Board of Zantm Adjustment - the seven (7) - member
board appointed by the Board of Directors who determine the
issuanee-ef-special-eiieepUen-periHltSi granting of variances,
mapping-disputes and te review decisions of THE Flood Plain
2ening Administrator.
11.264 Flood Plain Zening Maps - those oups that accurately Indicate
the boundaries of the Flood Regulatory Olstricti-the-Fleodway
etstrict-and-the-Flead-Ster " 'rlet.
DATED this
day of
i.ti ,t.', 1979.
THE UPBAII DRAII_ AND
FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT
(SEAL)
ATTEST:
Secretary
-------
AMENDED FACILITY PLAN
APPENDIX
-------
AMENDED FACILITY PLAN
for
SPEARFISH, SOUTH DAKOTA
January, 1980
Prepared By:
SCOTT ENGINEERING COMPANY
SPEARFISH, SOUTH DAKOTA
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
TITLE PAGE 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS 1i
INDEX OF TABLES Hi
INDEX OF MAPS 1v
1. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, .? RECOMMENDATIONS 1
/
2. INTRODUCTION 4
2.1 Study Purpose and Scope 4
2.2 Planning Area 4
3. EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES 6
3.1 West Subdivision 6
3.2 Christensen Drive 11
3.3 Higgins Gulch Development Area 14
3.4 Mountain Plains 17
3.5 railing or Possible Seasonal Failure
of Individual Leach Fields Scattered
Throughout the Study Area 19
3.6 Amortization of Alternatives 28
4. ELIGIBILITY FOR FEDERAL FUNDING & LOCAL COSTS 31
4.1 West Subdivision 31
4.2 Christensen Drive 34
4.3 Higgins Gulch Development Area 36
4.4 Mountain Plains 36
4.5 Failing or Possible Seasonal Failure
of Individual Leach Fields Scattered
Throughout the Study Area 36
4.6 Monthly User Fee 36
5. SELECTED PLAN 36
ii
-------
INDEX OF TABLES
PAGE
TABLE I - Summary of Costs 3
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATES II-IX
TABLE II - West Subdivision, Gravity Collection,
Pressure Interceptor 9
TABLE III - West Subdivision, Small Diameter Pressure
Effluent System 10
TABLE IV - West Subdivision, Gravity Collection
to Package Plant 11
TABLE V - Christensen Drive, Gravity Interceptor
& Collection Line 13
TABLE VI - Higgins Gulch, Gravity Interceptor Line 16
/
TABLE VII - Higgins Gulch, Gravity Collection Line 16
TABLE VIII - Mountain Plains, Gravity Interceptor 17
TABLE IX - Mountain Plains, Gravity Collection 19
TABLE X - Failing or Suspected Seasonal Failures
of Leach Fields Throughout the Study Area 22-27
TABLE XI - Economic Evaluations of Alternatives 29-30
TABLE XII - Cost-Effective Analysis for 15% Preference,
West Subdivision 32
TABLE XIII - Christensen Drive Flow Estimations 35
TABLE XIV - Local Share and Monthly User Fee 37-38
TABLE XV - West Subdivision, Economic Evaluation
Holding Tanks &
Evapo-transpiration 39
TABLE XVI - Christensen Drive, Economic Evaluation
Holding Tanks &
Evapo-transpiration 40
TABLE XVII - Higgins Gulch, Economic Evaluation
Holding Tanks &
Evapo-transpiration 41
TABLE XVIII- Mountain Plains, Economic Evaluation
Holding Tanks &
Evapo-transpiration 42
i i i
-------
INDEX OF MAPS
FIGURE I - Planning Area Map
FIGURE II - West Subdivision
FIGURE III - Christensen Drive Development Area
FIGURE IV - Higgins Gulch Development Area
FIGURE V - Mountain Plains Subdivisions
FIGURE VI - Verified & Suspected Seasonal Failures
of Individual Septic Systems
iv
-------
1. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This facility plan deais only with the residential development areas
surrounding the Spearfish city limits and the Spearfish Valley Sanitary
District (SVSn). This facility plan only addresses the problem of
centrally sewering these development areas or leaving them with on-site
disposal as is presently being practiced. This facility plan will not get
involved with the type of wastewater treatment facility that is being
proposed for the City of Spearfish and the SVSD.
These subdivisions, as shown on Figure I, the planning area map, are
presently serviced by private individual septic tanks and leach fields.
They are under the jurisdiction of the Lawrence County Government.
In July of 1978, a wastewater facility plan was submitted to EPA for
the City of Spearfish by Brady Consultants. In that report it was
recommended that these subdivisions- be serviced by a sewer collection
system tied into the City of Spearfish, the basic reason being the
possibility of ground water contamination. EPA felt that further study
was necessary before a roconmendation could be made. They also decided
that an environmental impact statement was necessary. EPA hired
Engineering Sciences to wri:e the environmental impact statement. The
conclusions of this study a^e basically as follows:
1. With the exception of West Subdivision and that surrounding
area and the Christensen Drive area, septic tanks and leach
fields are a viable means of sewage disposal.
D-l
-------
2. It was found through aerial photography and surface
inspection that one leach field was failing and that
twelve others wen; suspected as possible seasonal failures.
3. The West Subdivision area is not suitable for leach fields
because of the seasonal high ground water, the close
proximity to the Kelle Fourche water infiltration gallary,
and the area suspected of being located in a flood plain.
4. There is presently a shallow well located at the beginning
of Christensen Drive that is polluted. It is suspected
that the septic tc.iks and leach fields from the 27 homes
and two campgrounds in that area are the cause of this
pollution.
After evaluating the economic, social and environmental aspects of
the alternative plans for the different areas, it is recommended that:
1. With the exception of the West Subdivision area and the
Christensen Drive urea, on-site disposal can continue
to be used if properly designed and constructed.
2. The one leach field found to be failing should be
reconstructed. The twelve others should continue to be
monitored to see if failure does occur in high ground
water conditions. If any of these are found to be
failing, action should be taken to correct the problem.
3. The West Subdivision area should be serviced by a
gravity collection system and a pressure interceptor
line.
4. The Christensen Drive area, should be serviced by a
gravity collection and interceptor system.
5. A Step II Grant should be applied for to design those
lines that are grant eligible.
In accordance with the Environmental Protection Agency's Program
Guidance Number 55, Subject: Format for Reporting Costs of Planned
Treatment Works in Step * Facility Plans, Dated July 25, 1975, Table"I
presents a summary of costs of planned treatment works scheduled by project
and category for Spearfish, South Dakota.
d-2
-------
/
TABLE I
TO BE COMPLETED IN FINAL DRAFT
SUMMARY OF COSTS OF PLANNED TREATMENT VIOnKS
SCHEDULED BY PROJECT AMD CATEGORY
MUNICIPALITY l.4pP"CJnti:
1
• SECOND
••PROJECT
• THIRD
PROJECT
• FOURTH
PROJECT
• FIFTH
PROJECT
TOTAl *•.. I
PRO.EC"- |
2.
PROJECT STEP
STEP
STEP
STEP
STEP
i
1
1
3.
ESTIMATED CALENDAR OTR/YEAR
APPLICATION WILL BE SUB-
MITTED TO EPA FOR FUNOINC.
•
1
!
I
s
S
$
S
1
S 1
1
4.
a. CATEGORY 1
Srcund.>;> Trcai.ncni and BPWTT
1
1
I
1
b. CATEGORY II
Mure Stringent Treatment
C. CATEGORY IMA
Infiltrauon/inilm" Coneclior.
f
1
d. CATEGORY 1118
Slajor Sewer Syitem Rehabilitation
I
1
e. CATEGORY IVA
N:w Coiiccisii.etc.
.
*
f. CATEGORY IV3
New Interceptor*, etc.
1
1
1
*
g. CATEGORY V
Co.-reaio.n of Combined Scwcr Over-
flow!
1
h. CATEGORY VI
Treatment and,'or Control of
Storjnwa:::*
(
i
5.
total estimated cost of
recommended projects
s
s
S
S
. 1
6.
STEP 1 PROJECT COST
Project No. C. _ni
-
s
7.
GRAND TOTAL ESTIMATED COST OF
ALL PRO.'uCTS TO BE INCLUDED IN
THE ENTIRE CHANT
5
b I cost estimates of recommended projects wtRE compute o as of _nec._197.9 and reflect THE .ATEiT
I tmonin atuj ?ea*j
I C:0\STflUCTlOM DOST IttDrX OF 3129.6 A<; Rf.p/iSii RY TrtP FWRIfiEERtNC- MEWS RECORD
SCHT.: forrr.i*; lot Uji.i to be included in tJiv far :It'iv:; pl.in.
• • * •
• liiiliiJe pinject d:i.:i|ituin in TaolKiei Pin narrative.
• ~ The lint Pmjcci u the init.al (Step I/ pn\e;t under iJiii rrtnt for the trcjlinrnt worki.
d-3
-------
2. INTRODUCTION
2.1 Study Purpose and Scope
The purpose of this study was to: (1) Determine if the existing
septic tanks and leach fields in the development areas outside the
Spearfish service area are functioning properly; (2) determine if these
areas are suitable for -he continued use of on-site disposal; (3)
determine if any of the de/elopments are causing any ground water
pollution, in particular the Belle Fourche Water Infiltration Gallery;
(4) determine ground water elevations; (5) determine what alternatives
of sewage collection and treatment are best suited for the areas; and
(6) present preliminary designs and costs for the alternatives determined
to be most suitable for the individual areas.
Normally a 201 Facility plan would get involved with the discussion
of all of the above mentioned problems plus get involved with present
land use. geography of the area, population predictions, water uses and
quality, environmental conditions, etc. This document will only cover
costs of the alternatives for the different development areas and the
eligibility of these areas for the different alternatives. The rest
of this information is covered in the Environmental Impact Statement.
This document should be studied congruently with the Environmental Impact
Statement.
2.2 Planning Area
The planning area is the same 31 square mile area designated in the
previous 201 Facility Plan dated July, 1978. This area is shown on
Figure I.
D-4
-------
FIGURE 1
Planning Area Map
(oversized)
D-5
-------
3. EVALUATION OF ALTERNATE VES
This only covers the economic evaluation of selected alternatives
for different areas. The reasons for selecting these alternatives are
discussed completely in th£; EIS.
Each area includes the individual holding tank and the individual
evapo-transpiration system alternatives. These two alternatives were
examined in the original facility plan by Brady Consultants. In that
facility plan, dated July, 1978, all the costs were calculated at an
interest rate of 6 and 5/8 percent.
In this report the capital costs and annual 0 S M costs calculated
by Brady Consultants were used, but the annual equivalent costs were
recalculated at the present discount rate of 7 and 1/8 percent. This
report also shows the costr. split between those houses that were erected
before December, 1977 and those houses built after December 1977. Those
built before December, 1977 could be eligible for 85% federal funds and
those after that date are not eligible for any funds. See Tables XV-XVIII.
3.1 West Subdivision
West Subdivision is shown on Figure II and is located in Section 28,
T7N R2E. Just to the Northeast is located the City of Belle Fourche
Water Infiltration Gallery. Just across the road to the East is located
Brookview Acres (Weiss), this is a development for mobile homes.
Brookview Acres presently is serviced with a collection system and
its own package treatment plant. From the treatment plant the effluent
is pumped through a 2" line into the City of Spearfish's interceptor
line approximately one half mile away. Brookview Acres' package plant
is sized to handle the eighteen mobile homes that the development is
d-6
-------
i U
I
I
.. I
M
i 1
BELLE FOUR CHE
¦. WATER INFILTRATION
/ WEST/ '
SUBDIVISION
GALLARY
, .. , o { !
Z^sEXrSTfNG PAGKAGE TREATMENT, ' ;
»W* ^J^^^LANT 3 LIFT STATION [ }{({,' /
^^UROOKVIEW ACRES ^' '
\ I'ivEISS SUBDIVISION) ' h.
\ i «^/s<
/."¦¦ PROPOSED v ^^OPO-^P*'^^S>£X7S7/W(
i ' .
PROPOSED \ pROPOSED-^?'^r:~Exi$TIN6> —~
COLLECTION PACKAGE LIFT\\ 2" PRESSURE'''--i ^
LINES
ST A TION
I! - • LINE
/
/
f-
. *
"t c
\
'PFiOPOSED EXISTU:GS ^ -
A" FORCE / | ,5 IK-ERGE "OR
fjAtfj Su 1 LINE
* /
/
MAIN
i
f
t
I
\
: i
i
? i*
i
Z./tf£
/
r
r
-------
platted for. The lift stetion is part of the package plant. There are
presently twelve trailers in the development. Brookview Acres was platted
in 1974 and only four mobile homes were there before December, 197,'.
West Subdivision was platted in August, 1973 and contains thirty-two
lots, varing in size from one to two and one half acres. There are presently
nine lots occupied with one lot containinq three mobile homes. Of the
eleven houses and mobile homes located there, six were there before
December, 1977. Nothing was there before October, 1972.
Prices for five alternatives were calculated for West Subdivision.
The five alternatives were: (1) a gravity collection line and a pressure
interceptor line to the City's existing interceptor line; (2) a small
diameter pressure effluent system connected to the package plant and
lift station in Brookview Acres; (3) a gravity collection system tied
to the pa&kage plant and lift station in Brookview Acres. Some type
of pressure interceptor li.ie is required from that area to the City's
interceptor line; (4) individual holding tanks; and (5) individual
evapo-transpiration system:-.
(1) Gravity Collection Line and Pressure Interceptor.
With this alternative, there would be a new lift station and
new four inch prt-ssure interceptor line. The lift station
would be sized to handle all of West Subdivision and Brookview
Acres. In doing this, Brookview Acres could continue to operate
as they are, or operate the package plant and discharge into
the new lift station, or completely discontinue operating the
package plant and hook directly into the new system. With
the rising cost of energy, the last alternative could be the
most energy efficient.
D-8
-------
TABLE II
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
Gravity Collection, Pressure Interceptor
West Subdivision
ITEM
UNTJ.
QUANTITY
UNIT
PRICE
AMOUNT
Collection Line
8" PVC
¦L.i:.
4,000
8.50
34,000.00
Manholes
Each
12
850.00
10,200.00
4" Wyes
Each
32
30.00
960.00
Miscellaneous
L.o.
1
1,000.00
Total Const. Cost
Contingency
Engineering
Legal, Admin. * Fiscal
Total Eligible Cost
46,160.00
4,600.00
6,900.00
500.00
58,160.00
Annual 0 & M
1,000.00
4" Pressure Line
Interceptor Line
L.F. 2,050
7.25
14,862.50
Package Lift Station
L.S.
1
25,000.00
25,000.00
2" fressure Line
L.F.
75
6.00
450-00
Road Gravel
Tori
200
3.50
700.00
Total Const. Cost
Contingency
Engineering
Legal, Admin. & Fiscal
Total Eligible Cost
41,012.50
4,100.00
6,100.00
500.00
51,712.50
Annual 0 S M
4,000.00
(2) Small Diameter Pressure Effluent System.
As stated previously, this system would be connected to the
package plant and lift station in Brookview Acres. This system
would only transport the effluent with each home retaining its
own septic tank. Part of the operation and maintenance cost
-------
would be the periodic pumping of the individual septic tanks.
It was estimated in these costs that the tanks would be pumped
on an averaqe of every three years. There would also be a
pumping chamber behind each septic tank and these would be
maintained by the governing body. The pumps and the holding
tank in the package plant would have to be modified to
accommodate these flows. The package plant would be purchased
from the private owners.
The pressure effluent system is considered an alternative
treatment and therefore part of this system is eligible for
85£ funding. The system is also eligible for the 152 preference
in the cost-effective analysis.
TABLE III
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
Small
Diameter Pressure Effluent
West Subdivision
System
ITEM
UNIT
QUANTITY
UNIT
PRICE
AMOUNT
lh" Pressure Line
LA.
1,600
2.00
3,200.00
3J5" Pressure Line
L.F.
4,100
3.00
12,300.00
Pumping Chamber
Each
11
1,800.00
19,800.00
Cleanouts
Eaci
4
70.00
280.00
Modify Lift Station
L.S.
5,000.00
5,000.00
Miscellaneous
L.S.
3,000.00
3,000.00
Total Const. Cost
Contingency
Engineering
Legal, Admin. & Fiscal
Total Eligible Cost
Purchase Package Plant
Total Capital Cost
43,580.00
4,300.00
6,500.00
1,000.00
5~,380.00
16,000.00
71,380.00
Annual 0 & M
9,000.00
D-10
-------
(3) Gravity Colleeticn System Connected to Package Plant.
This alternative would have the same collection system as
alternate (1) bu" then send it to the package plant for
treatment and thun to the City interceptor line. To do
this, modifications will have to be made to the package
plant and lift station to handle the increase in flows.
The package plant would be purchased from the private
owners.
TABLE IV
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
Gravity Collection to Package Plant
West Subdivision
UNIT
ITEM UNIT QUANTITY PRICE AMOUNT
Collection System Same as Before
46,160.00
Add. 8" PVC I..F.
400 8.50
3,400.00
Add. Manhole Each
1 850.00
850.00
Modify Treatment System L.S.
8,000.00
8,000.00
Total Const. Cost
Contingency
Engineering
Legal, Admin. & Fiscal
Total Eligible Cost
Purchase Package Plant
Total Capital Cost
58,410.00
5,800.00
8,800.00
1,000.00
74,010.00
16,000.00
90,010.00
Annual 0 & M
8,000.00
3.2 Christensen Drive
Christensen Drive is shown on Figure III and is located primarily
in Section 24, T6N R2E. Of all the development areas examined, this is
the oldest development arec. There are 27 residents and two campgrounds
in this area. All but eight of these residents have been here prior to
October of 1972.
D-ii
-------
ShEARFtSH
c— - r/T Y
LIM1TI^„
V-
EXISTING
SE fc ER
l inc
/
.=. lpl zz r
5 L lv E F. ""i
Llf.i
CAt'P^nOUMDS
vlfr*
::.:2
•j ••
• ::x \<
CHRISTENSEN
OR! /E
DEVELOPSLNl
^ ARLA
GREEN
ACRES
SUBC/VISION
iCf/V (
. :fl
D-12
-------
The*two.campgrounds are Chris' Campground and Mountain View
Campqround. Chris* CampgrDund has 140 total camping spots with 20 of
those having sewer and watsr services. They also have two central
restroom and shower facilities, laundry facilities and a swimming pool.
Mountain View Campground h:S 75 total camping spots with 25 of those having
sewer and water-hookups. They have one central restroom and shower
facility, laundry facility and swimming pool.
Three alternatives we'e priced for this area, a gravity interceptor
and collection line, individual holding tanks and evapo-transpiration
systems. There is a collection line about a quarter mile to the North
that the collection line alternative would be connected to.
ITEM
8" PVC
Manholes
4" Wyes
Boring
Asphalt
Miscellaneous
TABLE V
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
Gravity .interceptor and Collection Line
UNIT
L.F.
Each
Each
L.F.
S.Y.
L.S.
Christensen Drive
QUANTITY
5,300
16
28
100
400
UNIT
PRICE
8.50
850.00
30.00
75.00
4.00
Total Const. Cost
Contingency
Engineering
Legal, Admin. & Fiscal
Total Eligible Cost
Easements
Total Capital Cost
AMOUNT
45,050.00
13,600.00
840.00
7,500.00
1,600.00
1,000.00
69,590.00
6,900.00
10,400.00
500.00
87,390.00
2,000.00
89,390.00
Annual 0 R M
1,000.00
D-13
-------
There is an additional 80 acres to the South that potentially
could become a housing development. This area was taken into consid-
eration when sizing a line. An eight inch line at 2% slope will be
capable of handling all the flows.
3.3 Higgins Gulch Development Area.
This area includes Deli-erg Subdivision, Deer Meadows Subdivision,
Fuller Subdivision, Westfield, and MacKaben No. 1. All these areas are
shown on Figure TV and are located west of Spearfish and the SVSD. This
does not include Deer Meadows No. 2 which is subdivided into 3 to 5 acre
lots and through its covenants it cannot be further subdivided. None of
these subdivisions were developed before October, 1972.
This area can be serviced by gravity interceptor and~collection
lines and that is one ot three alternatives priced. The other two
are individual holding tanks and evapo-transpiration systems.
The twenty year peak design flows of 165,000 GPD, estimated in the
original 201 Facility Plan done in July, 1978, still appear valid.
Therefore, the 8 inch line at 1.3% grade that was proposed is still
functional. The existing line now extends to the south edge of Spearfish
Valley Mobile Estates.
D- 14
-------
FIGURE IV
HIGGINS GULCH DEVELOPMENT AREA
(over sized)
D-15
-------
TABLF VI
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
Gravity Interceptor Line
Higoins Gulch Development Area
UNIT
ITEM
UNIT
QUANTITY
COST
AMOUNT
8" PVC
L.r.
12,200
8.50
103,700.00
Manhole
Each
35
850.00
29,750.00
8" DIP Creek Crossing
L.F.
200
20.00
4,000.00
Miscellaneous
L.5.
4,000.00
Total Const. Cost
Contingency
Engineering
Legal, Admin. & Fiscal
Total Eligible Cost
Easements
Total Capital Cost
Annual 0 & M
141,450.00
14,000.00
21,200.00
2,000.00
178,650.00
20,000.00
1.98,650.00
2,000.00
TABLE VII
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
Gravity Collect ion'"Lines
Higgins Gulch Development Area
UNIT
ITEM
UNIT
QUANTITY
COST
AMOUNT
8" PVC
L.F.
12,700
8.50
107,950.00
Manhole
Each
38
850.00
32,300.00
4" Wyes
Each
150
30.00
4,500.00
Miscellaneous
L.S.
7,000.00
r~
L
Total Const. Cost
Contingency
Engineering
Legal, Admin. & Fiscal
Total Eligible Cost
Annual 0 & M
D-16
151,750.00
15,100.00
22,700.00
1,500.00
191,050.00
4,000.00
-------
3.4 Mountain Plains.
This consists of two subdivisions, the first, Mountain Plains No. 1,
has 54 lots all in excess of one acre. The second subdivision has 11'9
lots and these also are in excess of one acre each. They are located in
Section 22, T6N R2E, and are shown on Figure V. The first area was platted
in September, 1975 and there are presently 13 homes in this subdivision.
Two of these were built before December of 1977. There are no houses
presently in the second subdivision.
The quantities and co:ts shown in the following tables are only to
service Mountain Plains No. 1. Mountain Plains No. 2 was not figured
because zero development has occured at this time. An 8 inch line is
capable of handling all th(: estimated flows from both developments.
ITEM
8" PVC
Manhole
Miscellaneous
TABLE VIII
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
Grifvity Interceptor
Mountain Plains Subdivision
UNIT
L.F.
Eac^i
L.S.
QUANTITY
1,200
4
UNIT
PRICE
8.50
850.00
Total Const. Cost
Contingency
Engineering
Legal, Admin. & Fiscal
Total Eligible Cost
AMOUNT
10,200.00
3,400.00
5,000.00
18,500.00
1,800.00
2,500.00
200.00
23,100.00
Annual 0 & M
500.00
D-17
-------
FIGURE V
Mountain Plains Subdivision
(over sized)
D-18
-------
TABLE IX
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
Gravity Collection
Mountain Plains Subdivision No. 1
ITEM
8" PVC
8" Roek Excav.
Manholes
4" Wyes
Miscellaneous
UNjrr
L.F.
L.~.
Each
Each
L.S.
QUANTITY
2,300
10,450
40
45
UNIT
PRICE
8.50
17.00
850.00
30.00
Total Const. Cost
Contingency
Engineering
Legal, Admin. & Fiscal
Total Eligible Cost
Annual 0 & M
AMOUNT
19,550.00
177,650.00
34,000.00
1,350.no
3,000.00
235,550.00
23,500.00
35,300.00
2,300.00
296,650.00
2,000.00
3.5 Failing or Possible Seasonal Failure of Individual Leach
Fields Scattered Throughout the Study Area.
As mentioned previously, EPA had aerial photos taken of the study
area for the purpose of locitinq any leach fields in the area that may
be surface failing. After the photos were examined, a ground inspection
was done on those leach fields suspected of failing. From the photo-
graphs there were found to :oe 60 individual septic systems that were
suspected of failing. When the field inspection was completed it was
determined that there were two confirmed failures and twelve suspected
seasonal failures. The rest were false signatures. These are shown on
Figure VI.
D-19
-------
FIGURE VI
Verified and Suspected Seasonal
Failures of Individual Septic Systems
(over sized)
D-20
-------
The suspected seasoria' failures were those that were not presently
failing but appeared that ;hey could fail durinq high ground water
conditions. One of the reasons these were singled out was that the
grass was very lush above the leach field and that the leach field appeared
under sized. These system!; were then further studied and were physically
measured to attempt to determine their size. In some cases it was not
possible to determine the exact size. These were approximated as close
as possible.
No perculation tests wsre done on the individual sites to determine
if these leach fields were jndersized. The Soil Conservation Service
soils map was used as a guide line for the types of soil and their
perculation rates. In some cases there had been perculation tests done
nearby and these results were taken into consideration.
These leach fields should be continued to be monitored. If it is
found that any are failing, a perculation test should be done on the
individual site at that time. It can then be determined if the system
is undersized and exactly by how much. If the system is undersized, an
extension of the leach field may be all that is necessary to correct the
problem. If it is determined that the system is not undersized, then
a totally different solution may be necessary.
The following is a list of those verified failures and the suspected
seasonal failures. This list contains the field measurement of the leach
field, the theoretical perflation rate data, the estimated increase of each
individual leach field and the estimated cost of each extension. This data
is meant to be used only as a guide line and not as .design criteria for any
of these potential extensios.
d-21
-------
TABLE X
Palmer Pearson
Robert 01en
FAILING OR SUSPECTED SEASONAL FAILURES
OlH-EACH FIELDS THROUGHOUT THE STUDY TOA
Present Size, Theoretical Proposed Size, Estimated Cost
(VERIFIED SEPTIC FAILURES)
No Leach Field
Size of Leach Field
..2
Maximum Possible - 280 ft
Probably less, 200 to 250 ft'
Now has one built
No Perc. data 1s available for this
Immediate area. Soils 1n area
Indicated to be 30-100 min/in.
Will use 30 m1n/1n. 2
Area required about 250 ft /bedroom
2 bdrms x 250 ft^ = Sug ft'
Leach field probably needs additional 250 ft maximum or about 80 L.F.
80 L.F. x $6.00/L.F. = $480.00
Price Mound System
500 ftz * 3 = 167 L.F.
No Pump Should Be Needed
Const. Cost = $2,000.00
Robert Klumb
(SUSPECTED SEASONAL FAILURES)
Size of Leach Field
About 100 L.F. of line
ft*
Same perc. data Information as
Robert 01en
300
leach field
3 bdrms x 250 ft^ = 750 ft^
Leach field probably needs additional 450 ft2 maximum or about 150 L.F,
150 L.F. x $6.00/L.F. = $900.00
-------
0
1
ro
CO
(Table X Continued)
Jack Delaney
(SUSPECTED SEASONAL FAILURES)
Size of Leach Field
About 120' long, 20' wide
Looks to have 3 lines
¦> f+Z
Same perc. data Information as
Robert 01en
About 720 ftc Leach Field
3 bdrms x 250 ft2 ¦ 750 ft2
Leach Field is adequate, may need 10 L.F. addition
3. Bob Koskl
10 L.F. x $6.00/L.F. = $60.00
Not able to determine the exact
leach field* believed to be about
250 ft*
Same perc. data information as
Robert Oien
2 bdrms x 250 ft2 = 500 ft2
Leach field probably needs additional 250 ft** or about 80 L.F.
[4l Bob Hanson
fin i_,Fs x $6400/L.F. = £480..00
About 118 L.F. of line
354 ft2 Leach Field
Many leach fields 1n area have
540 ft . Perc. test 1n lot nearby
showed„5 m1n/1n. which would be
125 ft /bdim. Soil charts show area
should be 30-100 min/in. Will use
15 m1n/in. or 190 ft /bdrm
3 bdrms x 190 ft2 = 570 ft?
Leach field probably needs additional 210 ft or about 70 L.F.
70 L.F. x $6.00/L.F. = $420.00
f5l Melvln Seymour
About 150 L.F. of line
450 ft leach field
Same Perc. data Information as
Bob Hanson
4 bdrms x 190 ft2 =760 ft?
Leach field probably needs additional 310 ft or about 103 L.F.
103 L.F. x $6.00/L.F. = $618.00
-------
(Table X Continued)
(SUSPECTED SEASONAL FAILURES)
jjTJ R1ck Price Size of Leach Field Same perc. data information as
About 103 L.F. of line Bob Hanson
309 ft leach field
3 bdrms x 190 ft2 = 570 ft2
Leach field probably needs additional 260 ftz or about 87 L.F.
87 L.F. x $6.00/L.F. = $522.00
17] Curtis McKee Abo-Jt 110 L.F. of line Same perc. data information as
330 ft leach field Bob Hanson
3 bdrms x 190 ft2 =570 ft2
Leach field probably needs additional 240 ft2 or about 80 L.F.
80 L.F. x $6.00/L.F. = $480.00
[871. Fred Fox 110 L.E. (Could be one or two lines) Leach fields in area have 600 ft
330 ft2 to 660 ft2 leach field Data available for this general
2
area show perc rates to be 15 to 30
min/in. Soil charts show 30-100
m1n/1n9, will use 30 m1n/in. or
250 ft /bdrm.
3 bdrms x 250 ft2 = 750 ft2 2
Under worst conditions leach field might need 420 ft extension or 140 L.F.
140 L.F. x $6.00 = $840.00
u2
-------
(Table X Continued)
(SUSPECTED SEASONAL FAILURES)
10 Tom Freece
Originally undersized
Leach €ield has been extended,
600 ft
Same perc. data Information as
Fred Fox
3 bdrms x 250 ft2 =750 ft^ !
Leach field might need 150 ft^ additional or 50 L.F.
50 L.F. x $6.00 = $300.00
12, John Jeffery
106 l,E. of line
318 ft leach field
No perc. data is available for this
Immediate area. Soils charts show
perc. rates to be 30-100 min/1n.
Owner Indicated there was some gravel
1n soil and pprc. rate was definitely
not that slow. Will use 30 m1n/1n
or 250 ft /bdrm.
bdrms x 250„ft2 = 500 ft2
Leach field may need 180 ft2 addition or about 60 L.F.
60 L.F. x $6.00 = $360.00
pm Chris' Campground
#1 Leach Field
140 total sites
20 complete hookups
1 bath house - 4 showers - 7 stools
1 bath house - 4 showers - 7 stools
1 laundry
60 sites, 1 bath house
60 sites x 2 persons/site x 35 gal/person = 4,200 gal/day
Length of field approx. 660 L.F. or about 1,980 ft2
Will use 30 m1n/1n. perc. rate, same as.Jeffery
with perc. rate 30 m1n/in. « 0.9 gal/ftVday
4,200 gals ~ 0.9 gal/ft = 4,667 ft required
This drain field probably needs about 2,687 ft2 more or about 895 L.F.
895 L.F. x $4.00/L.F. = $3,580.00
-------
(Table X Continued)
(SUSPECTED SEASONAL FAILURES)
11. Chris' Campground (Continued)
#2 Leach Field 60 sites, 1 bath house = 4,200 gal/day
Length of field approx. 1,058 L.F. or about 3,174 ft^ + 1 dry well (63 ft^)
(ave. 4' d1a., V deep)
Same perc. rate data.
Need about 2,625 ft^ 9
This leach field probably needs about 1,430 ft* or about 477 L.F.
477 L.F. x $4.00 = $1,908.00
#3 Leach Field 20 sites, complete hookups
20 sites x 2 persons/site x 50 gal/person = 2,000 gal/day
Length of field approx. 130 L.F. or about 390 ft^ + 1 dry well (63 ft^)
Same perc. rate data.
2,000 gal/day ~ 0.9 gal/ft^ = 2,222 ft^
Need about 1,769 ft^ additional drain field or about 590 L.F.
590 L.F. x $4.00 = $2,360.00
H Leach Field House & Two trailers - 7 bedrooms
Same perc. rate data as John Jeffery 250 ft^/bdrm
Length of field approx. 260 L.F. or about 780 ft^ + 3 dry wells (63 ft^)
ave. 4' d1a., 5' deep)
7 bdrms x 250 ft^ e 1,750 ft^
Increase leach field about 781 ft^ or about 260 L.F.
260 L.F. x $4.00 « $1,040.00
-------
(Table X Continued)
(SUSPECTED SEASONAL FAILURES)
11. Chris' Campground (Continued)
#5 Leach Field 6 trailers - 12 bdrms
Same perc. rate data as John Jeffery
Length of field approx. 250 L.F. or about 750 ft2 + 1 dry well (63 ft2)
12 bdrms x 250 ft2 B 3,000 ft2 _
Increase leach field about 2,187 ft^ or about 729 l.F.
729 L.F. x $4.00 = $2,916.00
0
1
ro
-------
The Robert Oien system was discovered to be failing by talking
with the owner. This system is not surface failing, but is backing
up. It was very difficult to determine the exact size of the leach
*
field. What was determinec to be the leach field was undersized. This,
however, may not be the only problem because it appears that the leach
field may be fairly close bedrock. Therefore, when estimating costs
for the individual systems the cost of a mound system was also calculated
for this property.
3.6 Amortization of Alternatives.
Table XI shows the annual equivalent cost of the previously
mentioned alternatives. It does this by amortizing the costs over a
20-year period. This table does not show the annual equivalent costs for
the individual leach fields because these costs would be minor and they
most likely would not be funded over 20 years. It does show Chris'
Campground because there could be a substantial cost to get that
facility into compliance. In Table XIV, under local costs, the
comparison for Chris' Campground's monthly fee is shown.
D-28
-------
TABLE XI
ECONOMIC EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES1
ALTERNATIVES CAPITAL LIFE SALVAGE2 ANNUAL2 ANNUAL TOTAL ANNUAL
COST (YRS.) VALUE EQUIV. COST 0 & M COST EQUIV. COST
(Oc2529) (0.09532)
WEST SUBDIVISION
Gravity Collection
& Pressure Interceptor 109,870 40 13,893 9,K> 5,000 14,149
Pumps (20 yrs)
Pressure Effluent System
Connected to Brookvlew
Acre's System 71,380 20 0 6.804 9,000 15,804
Gravity Collection 50,410 40
Connected to Brookvlew 39,600 20
Acre's System 90,010 6,374 7,972 8,000 15,972
CHRISTENSEN DRIVE
Gravity Collection
& Interceptor 89,390 40 11,303 i 7,443 1,000 8,443
HIGGINS GULCH DEVELOPMENT AREA
Interceptor Line 198,650 40 25,119 16,541 2,000 18,541
Collection Line 191,050 40 24,159 15,908 4,000 19,908
-------
(Table XI Continued)
ALTERNATIVES
CAPITAL
COST
LIFE
(YRS.)
SALVAGE2
VALUE
(0.2529)
ANNUAL
EQUIV. COST
(0.09532)
ANNUAL
0 & M COST
TOTAL ANNUAL
EQUIV. COST
MOUNTAIN PLAINS
1
Interceptor
23,100
40
2S^£1
1,923
500
2,423
Collection
296,650
40
37,511
24,701
2,000
26,701
CHRIS' CAMPGROUND
Extensions on
Existing Leach Fields
11,805
20
0
1,125
500
1,725
1. Reference: Engineering Economy By E.L. Grant and W.G. Ireson,
Ronald Press, New York, 1970.
2. Interest (Discount) Rate = 7 and 1/8 percent, 20 yrs.
-------
4. ELIGIBILITY FOR FEDERAL FUNDING AND LOCAL COSTS
4.1 West Subdivision
West Subdivision was platted in Auqust, 1973 and, therefore, would
not qualify for any assistance on a standard collection system. This
requires two thirds of the houses to be in existance by October of 1972.
Any type of interceptor line extending from West Subdivision or
Brookview Acres to the City of Spearfish's interceptor line would be
eligible for 75% funding.
The gravity collection and pressure interceptor alternative would,
therefore, be eligible 'or funding as described above.
As mentioned previously, part of the pressure effluent system
alternative is eligible for 85% funding under the alternative
treatment concept. The portion that is 85% fundable is that which
extends from the house to the street. The lines in the street to the
package plant in Brookview 'Veres are considered collection lines so in this
casa, are not eligible for my funding. The cost to modify the package
plant and lift station to handle the additional flows is considered *
part of the interceptor system and, therefore, eligible for 75% funding.
Also, the additional line to get from West Subdivision to the package
plant is considered interceptor line. If the package plant and lift
station are to be used in this concept, it is necessary to purchase the
plant from the private owners. The cost of purchasing this plant is not
eligible for funding.
Any concept that is considered alternative treatment is also eligible
for 15% preference in the cost-effective analysis. Table XII shows the
present worth of the three alternatives. The 15% is then applied.
D-31
-------
TABLE XII
WEST SUBDIVISION
COST-EFFECTIVE ANALYSIS FOR 15% PREFERENCE
0
1
CO
ro
Capital Cost
Salvage
Annual 0 & M
(7 1/8% - 10.497)
Total Present Worth
GRAVITY COLLECTION -
& PRESSURE INTERCEPTOR
109,870
-13,893
($5,000 x 10.497 = $52,485)
$148,462
PRESSURE EFFLUENT
SYSTEM
71,380
0
GRAVITY COLLECTION
TO PACKAGE PLANT
90,010
-6,374
($9,000 * 10.497 = $94,473) ($8,000 x 10.497 = $83,976)
$165,853 $167,612
The pressure effluent system yets 15% preference over the gravity collection and pressure interceptor
system, ($148,462 x 115% = $170,731). With the 15% preference the pressure effluent system becomes
cost effective.
-------
One other factor need:; to be considered in determining cost-effective-
ness, energy consumption. The flow from this area could be about 17,000
gpd- Of this 17,000 gpd, about 11,000 gals, would be effluent from West
Subdivision and about 6,000 gals of raw sewage from Brookview Acres. This
is very minor compared to the over 2 mgd flows that the City of Spearfish's
treatment plant is being designed for. The difference in energy consumption
at the main treatment p*:ant would be minimal in handling 17,000 gpd of
pre-treated effluent or 17,000 gpd of raw sewage. The energy consumption
would be greater to operate the small package plant and lift station in
Brookview Acres at maximum capacity, 32 small individual effluent pumps,
and operate a truck to pump the 32 septic tanks.
In calculating the monthly user charge there are only eleven houses
that will receive the pumpng chamber and line going to the street, any
new houses will be required to install their own. The 153! local share
for that portion of the system was, therefore, divided between those
eleven connections. The collection line portion will be extended
throughout the subdivision, therefore, that cost was divided between all
32 lots. The cost of modifying the package plant and lift station and
the cost of purchasing the plant was also divided between all 32 lots
since each lot will potentially benefit.
Hope Weiss, who developed Brookview Acres and installed the package
plant system, valued the plant and lines at approximately $25,000. This
was the value used in estimiiting capital costs. Because both developments
would utilize the package p'.ant and lift station, both developments should
share in the purchasing of the plant. The formula used to determine how
much of the purchase price should be paid by West Subdivision is as follows:
D- 33
-------
Brookview Acres - 18 lots
West Subdivision - 32 lots
Total - 50 lots
$25,000 * 50 lots x 32 lots = cost to West Subdivision = $16,000.
There will have to be a monthly user fee calculated for Brookview
Acres but that will not be done in this report.
The eligibility for funding the alternative using the gravity
collection line connected to the package plant has the same perameters
as the previously mentioned alternative. The gravity collection lines
would not be eligible for any funds. The modifications on the package plant
would be considered part of the interceptor system and would be eligible
for 75% funding and the purchase of the plant would be noneligible.
4.2 Christensen Drive
Of the 27 residents and two campgrounds in this area, all but
eight residents have been in existance prior to October, 1972. This would
make this area eligible for 75% funding on both the interceptor line and
collection line.
Because the two campgrounds are in this area, a users fee must be
calculated other than simply dividing the cost by the number of residents.
The following is an estimat ion of the flows from the campgrounds and the
residents and a possible meihod for determining user fees:
D-34
-------
TABLE XIII
CHRISTENSEN DRIVE FLOW ESTIMATIONS
MT. VIEW CAMPGROUND CHRIS' CAMPGROUND
Total Camp Sites 75 • 140
Camp Sites w/Complete Hookups 25 20
Washinq Machines 2 2
Swimming Pools 11
Average Daily Flows
Complete Hookups (50 gpd x 3 persons =150 gpd/s1te)
150 gpd x 25 = 3,750 gpd
150
gpd
X
20
3,000 gpd
Regular Camp Sites (35 gpd x 3 persons = 105 gpd/site)
105 gpd x 50 = 5,250 gpd
105
gpd
X
120
12,600 gpd
1
oi Washing Machines (300 gpd/machine)
300 gpd x 2 = 600 gpd
300
gpd
X
2
600 gpd
Swimming Pools (Dumped Once a Year)
26,928 gfiy * 365 dpy = 74 gpd
23,963
gpy
*
365 dpy =
66 gpd
TOTAL 9,674 gpd 16,266 gpd
Daily Flow From Average House
(Will use 3 people because majority of houses are mobile homes)
100 gpdpc x 3.0 persons = 300 gpd
Average Yearly Flow
Resident 300 gpd x 365 days = 109,500 gal/yr
Mt. View Campground 9,674 gpd x 90 days x 60% Ave. Capacity » 522,396 gal/yr
Chris* Campground 12,266 gpd x 90 days x 60% Ave. Capacity = 878,364 gal/yr
Mt. View Campground User Charge = 4.75 times average resident charge.
Chris' Campground User Charge = 8 times average resident charge.
-------
4.3 Higgins Gulch Development Area
None of the subdivisions included in this area were established before
October of 1972. Therefor*, none of these subdivisions would be eligible
for funding on any collection lines. The interceptor lines connecting
these subdivisions would be eligible for 75% funding.
4.4 Mountain Plains.
Mountain Plains was platted in 1975 and, therefore, is not eligible
for funds on a collection line. An interceptor line leading to the
subdivision could be eligible for 75% funding.
4.5 Failing or Possible Seasonal Failure of Individual
Leach Fields Scattered Throughout the Study Area.
All of the homes found to be failing or suspected of seasonal
failures were constructed before December of 1977. These homes would,
therefore, be eligible for 85% funding on any individual on-site treatment.
4.6 Monthly User Fes.
Table XIV amoritizes the local share of each alternative over 20
years and gives what the monthly user fee will be for each alternative.
See Table XIV.
5. SELECTED PLAN
The Environmental Impact Statement must be consulted for which
alternative was selected for each area. That document gives all the
reasons for the selections.
D- 36
-------
TABLE XIV i
LOCAL SHARE AND MONTHLY USF.R FEE
ALTERNATIVES
*
FED. FUNDED
CAPITAL COST
(LOCAL SHARE)
ANNUAL
EQUIV. COST
(0.09532)
ANNUAL
0 & M
TOTAL ANNUAL
EQUIV.. COST
NO. OF
USERS
MONTHLY
COST
WEST SUBDIVISION
Gravity Collection 0%
Pressure Interceptor 75%
Pressure Effluent System
Connected to Brookview
System
(F';'yi';'i HOiisc Tu Street) 85%
Lines In Street) 0%
Mod. Brookview Syst.) 75%
Purchase Brookview Syst.) 0%
Gravity Collection
Connected to Brookview
System
(Collection Lines) 0%
(interceptor Lines) 75%
(Mod. Rrookview Syst.) 75%
(Purchase Package Plant) 0%
CHRISTENSEN DRIVE
58,160?
12,928)
4,575
17,250*)
1,908 (
16,000.;
58,490*
1,345
2,535
16,000,
6,776
436
3,351
7,470
^,000
•/ nitii
i. I OUU
7,000
8,000
11,776
• ¦ i «w
10,351
15,470
32 users
11 users
32 users
32 users
$30.67
18.45
26.96,
3577T3
40.29
Gravity Collection
& Interceptor
75%
23,847
2,273
1,000
3,273
27 res.
Chris'
Mount. View
6.85
54.98
32.70
Chris' Campground
Leach Field Extensions 85%
1,771
169
500
669
55.75
-------
(Table XIV Continued)
ALTERNATIVES
% CAPITAL COST
FED. FUNDED (LOCAL SHARE)
ANNUAL
EQUIV. COST
(0.09532)
ANNUAL
0 & M
TOTAL ANNUAL
EQUIV. COST
NO. OF
USERS
MONTHLY
COST
HIGGINS GULCH DEVELOPMENT AREA
Interceptor Line 75%
Collection Line 0%
MOUNTAIN PLAINS
Interceptor Line
Collection Line
75%
0%
64,662
191,050
5,775
296,650
6,164
13,211
550
28,277
2,000
4,000
500
2,000
8,164
22,211
1,050
?0,277
150 users
150 users
54 users
54 users
$ 4.54
12^
3i6,R?r
1.62
4JL-72c
48.34s
1. Reference: Engineering Economy by E.L. Grant and W.G. Ireson, Ronald Press, New York, 1970.
2. Interest (Discount) Rate » 7 and 1/8 percent# 20 yrs.
3. Those eleven existing houses would have a total monthly charge of $45.41. Those lots that do not have houses
on them would have to pay $26.96. When the house was built on the lot and the septic tank and pumping chamber
were Installed at the owner's expense, then there would be an additional 0 & M fee for pump maintenance,
pumping septic tank, etc.
4. The monthly fee for all the houses in the H1gg1ns Gulch Development Area would be the interceptor line
and collection line combined which 1s $16,88.
5.
The monthly fee for all the houses 1n Mountain Plains would be the Interceptor line and collection
line combined which is $48.34
-------
TABLE XV
ECONOMIC EVALUATION
West Subdivision
ALTERNATIVE
CAPITAL LIFE SALVAGE AANNUAL EQUIV, ANNUAL
COST YRS. VALUE COST 0 & M
TOTAL ANNUAL
EQUIV. COST
MONTHLY COST
PER TAP
Holding Tank
^Before 77; (6)
3After 77; (29)
Evapo-transpiration System
^Before 77; (6)
After 77; (29)
18,000
87,000
36,000
174,000
20
20
20
20
0
0
0
0
1,716
8,293
3,432
16,586
11,580
55,970
4,020
19,430
13,296
64,263
7,452
36,016
Local Share
Holding Tank
^Before 77; (6)
3After 77; (29)
Evapo-transpiration System
^Before 77; (6)
After 77; (29)
2,700
87,000
5,400
174,000
20
20
20
20
0
0
0
0
257
8,293
515
16,586
11,580
55,970
4,020
19,430
11,837
64,263
4,535
36,016
164.41
184.66
62.98
103.49
1. Interest Rate; 7 and 1/8 percent, 20 yrs.
2. Houses built before Dec. 1977 - 85% Federal Funded.
3. Houses built after Dec. 197V & Future Development - OX Federal Funded,
-------
ALTERNATIVE
CAPITAL
COST
LIFE
YRS.
Holding Tank
^Before 77; (27)
After 77: (0)
Evapo-transpiration System
-Before 77; (27)
m. f r\\
81,000
0
162,000
0
20
0
20
0
TABLE XVI
ECONOMIC EVALUATION
Christensen Drive
SALVAGE
VALUE
0
0
0
0
Annual equiv.
cost
7,721
0
15,442
0
ANNUAL
0 & M
TOTAL ANNUAL
EQUIV. COST
52,110
0
18,090
59,831
0
33,532
MONTHLY COST
PER TAP
LOCAL SHARE
Holding Tank
^Before 77; (27)
After 77; (0)
Evapo-transpiration System
^Before 77; (27)
After 77; (0)
12,150
0
24,300
0
20
0
20
0
0
0
0
0
1,158
0
2,316
0
52,110
0
18,090
0
53,268
0
20,406
0
164.41
0
62.98
0
1. Interest rate, 7 and 1/8 percent, 20 yrs.
2. Houses built before Dec. 1977 - 85% Federal Funded
3. Houses built after Dec. 1977 & Future development - 0% Federal Funded
-------
ALTERNATIVE
CAPITAL
COST
TABLE XVII
ECONOMIC EVALUATION
Hlggins Gulch Development Area
LIFE
YRS.
SALVAGE
VALUE
1ANNUAL EQUIV.
COST
ANNUAL
0 & M
TOTAL ANNUAL
.EOUIV. COST
MONTHLY COST
PER TAP
Holding Tank
^Before 77; (54)
3After 77; (96)
Evapo-transpiration System
^Before 77; (54)
-» — . f r\r\
• II bCI / / f
162,000
288,000
324,000
576,000
20
20
20
20
0
0
0
0
15,442
27,452
30,984
104,220
185,280
36,180
119,662
212,732
67,064
1
X A .7
LOCAL SHARE
Holding Tank
^Before 77; (54)
After 77; (96)
Evapo-transpiration System
before 77; (54)
3After 77; (96)
24,300
288,000
48,600
576,000
20
20
20
20
0
0
0
0
2,316
27,452
4,633
54,904
104,220
185,280
36,180
64,320
106,536
212,732
40,813
119,224
164.41
184.66
62.99
103.49
1. Interest Rate, 7 and 1/8 percent, 20 yrs.
2. Houses built before Dec. 1977 - 85% Federal Funded
3. Houses built after Dec. 1977 & future development - 0% Federal Funded
-------
ALTERNATIVE
Holding Tank
^Before 77; (2)
After 77; (52)
Evapo-transpiration
^Before 77; (2)
'After 77; (52)
TABLE XVIII
ECONOMIC EVALUATION
Mountain Plains No. 1 Subdivision
CAPITAL
COST
LIFE
YRS.
6,00n
156,000
12,000
312,000
20
20
20
20
SALVAGE
VALUE
0
0
0
0
Annual equiv. annual
cost oui
572
14,870
1,144
2!i,/4g
•total annual
equiv. cost
3,860
100,360
1.340
34,840
4,432
115,230
2.484
64,580
MONTHLY COST
PER TAP
LOCAL SHARE
Holding Tank
^Before 77; (2)
After 77; (52)
Evapo-transpiration
^Before 77; (2)
3After 77; (52)
900
156,000
1,800
312,000
20
20
20
20
0
0
0
0
86
14,870
172
29,740
3,860
100,360
1,340
34,840
3,946
115,230
1,512
64,580
164.41
184.66
63.00
103.49
1. Interest Rate, 7 and 1/8 percent, 20 yrs.
2. Houses built before Dec. 1977 - 85% Federal Funded
3. Houses built after Dec. 1977 ft future development - 0% Federal Funded
------- |