United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Region 5
230 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Water
c/EPA
Environmental
Impact Statement
Draft
Moose Lake-Windemere
Sanitary District
Wastewater Treatment System
Pine and Carlton Counties,
Minnesota
-------
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
on the
PROPOSED WASTEWATER
TREATMENT SYSTEM
for the
MOOSE LAKE-WINDEMERE SANITARY DISTRICT
PINE and CARLTON COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
Prepared by the
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Region V
Chicago, Illinois
and
WAPORA, Inc.
Chicago, Illinois
March 1983
Valdas y. Adamkus
Regional Administrator
-------
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
on the
Proposed Wastewater Treatment System
for the
Moose Lake-Windemere Sanitary District
Pine and Carlton Counties, Minnesota
Prepared by US Environmental Protection Agency, Region V
For further information contact:
Charles Quinlan III, Project Officer
USEPA Region V
230 S. Dearborn Street
Chicago, IL 60604
312/886-0244
ABSTRACT
The Moose Lake-Windemere Sanitary District (MLWSD) has proposed con-
structing collection sewers around Island and Sturgeon Lakes, Windemere
Township, Pine County, Minnesota. The wastewater would be treated in the
Moose Lake wastewater treatment plant. Both lakes currently have surround-
ing residential development served by on on-site treatment systems. The US
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) determined that an Environmental
Impact Statement was needed for the proposed project because of the poten-
tial environmental impacts associated with the construction of collection
sewers, the possible financial burden resulting from the proposed project
on low and fixed-income residents, and the possibility for the proposed
wastewater collection systems to induce growth. The operation of existing
on-site systems was investigated. Of the 151 on-site systems in use around
Island Lake, 45 were classified as either "definitely" or "probably" fail-
ing. For Sturgeon Lake, 13 of the 1^3 total systems were classified as
probably failing. Two lake sampling programs were conducted to investigate
the relationship between lake water qualty and nutrient inputs from failing
or inadequately operating on-site systems. Surface water, groundwater, and
lake sediment core samples were obtained and analysed. Phytoplankton
species composition and abundance was documented. Historical land use
characteristics within the lake watersheds also were investigated. Anal-
ysis of the data indicated that the nutrient contributions of on-site
systems to the lakes were insignificant compared to other non-wastewater
sources. Seven wastewater treatment alternatives, including a no-action
alternative were evaluated for cost-effectiveness and environmental impact.
Each action alternative consisted of various combinations of design com-
ponents including on-site systems upgrades, collection system options, and
treatment plant options. The most cost-effective EIS alternative was the
full on-site system upgrade alternative which had an estimated present
worth cost of $1.01 million. In comparison, the EIS alternative of con-
structing collection sewers around Island and Sturgeon Lakes with treatment
provided at an upgraded Moose Lake treatment plant had a present worth cost
of $4.61 million.
-------
SUMMARY OF THE EIS
1.0. PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION
The project area encompasses an area surrounding Island Lake, Sturgeon
Lake, Rush Lake, and Passenger Lake in Windemere Township, Pine County, and
in Moose Lake Township, Carlton County, Minnesota. This project area is
located within a larger planning area that includes tbe City of Moose Lake
and the City of Barnum.
toastewater collection and treatment within the planning area is pro-
vided by the two cities and by the Moose Lake-Windemere Sanitary District
(MLWSD). The Sanitary District's boundaries include the unincorporated
portion of Moose Lake Township and Winderaere Township (Figure 1-1). The
project area addressed in this report is within the MLWSD's boundaries.
The residential development around the four lakes within the project area
(Island, Sturgeon, Rush, and Passenger) now relies exclusively on on-site
systems for wastewater treatment. Residential growth around these project
area lakes, particularly Island and Sturgeon Lakes, has led to increased
recreational use of the lakes and, consequently, increased concern over
lake water quality. Specifically, area residents have indicated a concern
over water quality degradation and blue-green algae blooms as a result of
ori-site systems around the lakeshores.
In 1979, the MLWSD contracted with Consoer, Townsend & Associates LTD.
to prepare a "201 Step 1" Facilities Plan for overall wastewater collection
and treatment facilities within the District. Funding for this planning
effort was shared 75% by the Federal government (through USEPA), 15% by the
State of Minnesota (through the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency [MPCA]),
and 10% by the District. Among the wastewater management component options
considered were the construction of collection sewers around Island and
Sturgeon Lake; interceptor sewers and pump stations to bring Island Lake
and Sturgeon Lake into the Moose Lake sewer system; a new pump station; a
wet weather overflow pond; and expansion of the existing City of Moose Lake
wastewater treatment facility.
-------
In 1980, the City of Barnum contracted with Howard A. Kuusisto Con-
sulting Engineers to prepare a "201 Step 1" Facilities Plan for the City.
The City of Barnum contributed 10% of the total cost of the Facilities Plan
and the remainder was shared by USEPA and MPCA in the same proportions as
for the MLWSD. The Barnum Facilities Plan evaluated seven alternatives and
recommended construction of a stabilization pond with controlled discharge
to GilLespie Brook west of the City of Barnum.
USEPA reviewed the MLWSD Facilities Plan in accordance with Federal
regulations (40 CFR, Part 6) and determined that the preparation of an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was warranted because of the:
• Possible impact of the project on water quality
• Potential adverse socioeconomic impacts
• Potential for centralized collection and treatment systems
to induce growth with attendant secondary impacts.
These issues were identified in the 11 July 1980 Notice of Intent to
prepare an EIS. Specifically, USEPA determined that an EIS is needed
because there was inadequate documentation in the Facilities Plan support-
ing the need to provide sewers around Island Lake and Sturgeon Lake and the
high probability that the project proposed in the Facility Plan could have
significant adverse socioeconomic impacts because of the number of families
in the service area with fixed or low incomes.
In order to expedite the EIS process, USEPA determined that the prepa-
ration of the EIS would be in two phases. Phase I culminated in March 1981
with the publication of two reports: A Current Situation Report and a
Regional Alternatives Analysis. The Regional Alternatives Analysis Report
examined the alternatives presented in the MLWSD and Barnum Facilities
Plans and evaluated the cost effectiveness of including the City of Barnum
and the corridor between the Cities of Moose Lake and Barnum as a component
of a regional collection and treatment alternative. The Current Situation
Report described those aspects of the natural and man-made environment
likely to be affected by the various facilities planning alternatives
proposed in the MLWSD and Barnum Plans.
-------
Following the completion of Phase I of the EIS Process, a Citizens
Advisory Committee (CAC) meeting and a public information meeting were held
to review the two reports. Area residents expressed concern with the
quality of the published data used to develop the reports, as well as other
issues which they felt were not adequately supported or addressed in the
Phase I reports.
Phase II (completion of the EIS) addresses these public concerns and
data deficiencies which were identified in the review of the Phase I re-
ports. Phase II includes the preparation of Draft and Final Environmental
Impact Statements (DEIS and FEIS) on the proposed wastewater management
alternatives for the area of most critical need within the Moose Lake-
Windemere Sanitary District.
2.0. EXISTING CONDITIONS
Natural^ Enyironment^
The EIS includes very detailed information on the surface water re-
sources and aquatic biota of the project area. During EIS preparation, a
sampling program was conducted to provide additional data on water quality
in the four lakes and to provide information for evaluating alternative
wastewater management proposals. Water quality was measured in Island,
Sturgeon, Rush, and Passenger Lakes.
The water quality sampling data from the summer and fall of 1982 and
winter of 1982 were used to evaluate the existing fertility and trophic
status of the lakes and to determine the cause of observed blue-green algae
blooms. Sediment sampling data were used to evaluate the historic fer-
tility and trophic status of the lakes and to evaluate whether there is a
historical correlation between shoreline development and the algae bloom
problems in Island Lake. The following conclusions were drawn concerning
the water quality and trophic status of Island Lake, Sturgeon Lake, Rush
Lake and Passenger Lake:
• Island Lake and Sturgeon Lake both are eutrophic and may be
in need of management to improve or to protect existing
-------
water quality. Rush and Passenger Lakes are mesotrophic and
do not require management to maintain or improve water
quality.
• The significant sources of phosphorus to the four lakes are
not associated with on-site wastewater systems. The amount
of phosphorus moving into any of the four lakes from failing
septic systems is probably only a small fraction of what is
being delivered to those failing systems by domestic waste-
water .
• During the summer, Island Lake was found to have signifi-
cantly higher phytoplankton productivity, more severe blue-
green algae blooms, and lower hypolimnetic dissolved oxygen
than Sturgeon Lake. It was concluded that these conditions
in Island Lake were due to a large nutrient load originating
from non-wastewater sources in the watershed, and that these
problems are amplified by the Lake's shallowness and vari-
able wind fetch. Biotic interactions resulting from changes
in the population of plankton eating fish in Island Lake
also may have contributed to algal bloom problems.
Because of public concerns about blue-green algae blooms in the lakes,
and the possibility of algal toxicity, a special report on phytoplankton
populations was included in the Phase I study. Topics covered included
phytoplankton ecology in late summer and early fall, the presence of toxi-
city producing blue-green algal species, a description of the location of
beds of aquatic macrophytes, and a summary of MDNR fish management survey
data for Island and Sturgeon Lakes.
Based on phytoplankton sampling data collected during the lake samp-
ling, and a review of existing public health data, the following conclu-
sions were made:
• Island Lake has a potential health hazard associated with
blooms of blue-green algae. However, the dominant blue-
green algae in Island Lake at the time of sampling was
Anabaena macrospora, which a review of the literature indi-
cates is not directly associated with toxicity.
• Blue-green algae do not appear to pose a potential threat to
public health in Sturgeon, Passenger, or Rush Lakes. These
lakes were found to support lower concentrations of blue-
-------
green algae and did not experience blue-green growth to
bloom proportions.
• Island Lake had the highest algae density of the four lakes
and also had the poorest water clarity. In August non-blue-
green algae was dominant. In early September, the concen-
trations of non-blue-green algae species declined while two
species of blue-green algae increased in number and achieved
total dominance.
• Sturgeon Lake had better water clarity than Island Lake,
primarily because blue-green algae were much less abundant.
However, blue-green algae were the dominant phytoplankton
group in Sturgeon Lake throughout September.
• Passenger Lake had relatively low volumes of algae and, in
particular, very low volumes of blue-green algae compared to
both Island and Sturgeon Lakes. The relatively low clarity
of Passenger Lake was attributed to other factors such as
dissolved and suspended organic matter.
• Rush Lake had the lowest abundance of phytoplankton of the
four lakes tested and had the greatest water clarity.
• Local citizens have not reported problems with swimmers itch
in Sturgeon, Rush or Passenger Lakes. One instance was
reported on Island Lake in 1981. Health officers, physic-
ians, and veterinarians contacted reported no public health
problems related to swimming in or drinking from the project
area lakes.
Man-made Evironment
The EIS presents information on the man-made environment in the proj-
ect area including population, land use, economics, public finance, trans-
portation, energy, recreation and tourism, and cultural resources. The
major element of the man-made environment that will affect decisions con-
cerning wastewater management is the existing and future population for the
project area.
Existing (1980) and historic population and housing data was obtained
from US Bureau of the Census. Prior to 1960, population growth in Winde-
mere Township and in Moose Lake Township was erratic. Since 1960, however,
the number of housing units in the two townships increased steadily, often
at a greater rate than population growth. For example, between 1960 and
1970 the number of housing units in Windemere Township increased by 89.2%
-------
while the population increased by only 36.6%. The substantial increase in
the number of housing units is indicative of the high local demand for
recreational homes because of the amenities associated with the lakefront
property in the Township. Between 1970 and 1980, the number of housing
units in Windemere Township increased by 59.3% while the population in-
creased by 79.1%. This reversal of the preceeding decade's trend (1960 to
1970) appears to be indicative of the recent national trend of net migra-
tion from urban to rural areas. Rural areas were attractive during the
1970s for a variety of reasons that have been widely documented, including
lower land values, the amenities of "country life," and an absence of
"urban" problems. This current trend of population increase is expected to
continue in the project area, at similar or somewhat reduced rates for the
reasons cited, and because of the area's perceived quality among retired
people.
The population projections for the project area were made based on
1960, 1970, and 1980 census data and were developed from projections of the
number of additional housing units that will be built in the project area
by the year 2000. A housing unit projection methodology was used because
the available data on housing units are of a similar quality as the avail-
able data on populations and because fewer extrapolations are required to
estimate the future seasonal population than with a population projection
methodology. The available census data on population within the Townships
is for year-round residents only. Thus, estimates of the peak population
(seasonal plus year-round) were derived by assigning an average household
size of seasonal dwellings to the number of seasonal dwellings and combin-
ing the result with the projected number of year-round residents. The
existing (1980) and year 2000 projected populations are presented in Table
1.
The individual Island Lake and Sturgeon Lake area population project-
ions are significantly lower than the population estimates which are pre-
sented in the Draft MLWSD Facilities Plan. The "population equivalents"
for the year 1995 that are presented in the Facilities Plan are 931.0 for
the Island Lake vicinity and 1,382.5 for the Sturgeon Lake vicinity. The
year 2000 population projections used in this report are 579 for the Island
-------
Table 1. Seasonal and permanent population projections within Census Enu-
meration District 504-Windemere Township, 1980 to 2000
1980 2000
Island Lake
Sturgeon Lake
Outlying Areas
Total ED 504
3
An additional
Permanent
153
100
76
329
120 seasonal
Seasonal
261
465a
51
111
residents
Total Permanent
414
565
127
1,106
are projected
200
131
98
429
for the
Seasonal
333
615a
63
1,017
YMCA Boys
Total
579
802
174
1,555
Camp.
Lake area and 922 for the Sturgeon Lake area (including the YMCA Boys Camp
summer population). The sources of the discrepancies between the Facili-
ties Plan and these projections are thought to be:
• The year 2000 projections used in this EIS are based on
detailed 1980 census data for the local area not available
at the time the MLWSD Facilities Plan was prepared.
• The assumptions used to develop the projections in the EIS
reflect a direct assessment of vacant, buildable lots in the
lakeshore areas and interviews with local real estate sales
offices.
3.0. WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES
Needs Documentation
Wastewater treatment within the EIS project area currently is handled
exclusively by on-site systems. Information on existing systems was gath-
ered by a review of public tax rolls, USGS topographic maps and aerial
photographs; by reference to information in the MLWSD Facilities Plan; and
by two property owner surveys. Within the project area there are approxi-
mately 400 existing on-site systems. Septic tanks with soil absorption
systems are the most common type of system in use (80%), followed by pri-
vies (10%), holding tanks (5%), and combination or "hybridized" systems
(2%) .
-------
On-site systems that fail to function properly can cause backups in
household plumbing, ponding of effluent on the ground surface, groundwater
contamination, that may affect water supplies, and excessive nutrients and
coliform levels in surface water. USEPA Guidance requires that documented
pollution problems be identified and traced back to the causal factors.
Projects may receive USEPA grants only where a significant proportion of
residences can be documented as having or causing problems. Eligibility
for USEPA grants is limited to those systems for which there is direct
evidence that indicates they are causing pollution or those systems that
are virtually identical in environmental constraints and in usage patterns
to documented failing systems.
USEPA determined from the Phase I reports and from review comments
made by MPCA and the Citizens Advisory Committee that additional informa-
tion was required prior to assessment of on-site waste treatment systems.
The sources of information used in Phase II for evaluation of on-site
systems include:
• A soil survey of the EIS project area.
• Information provided in the MLWSD Facilities Plan and by the
MLWSD.
• Mailed questionnaire responses from property owners.
• A field survey of septic leachate sources to the lakes.
• A tabulation of Minnesota Department of Public Health well
water quality data for critical lakeshore areas.
• Two color-infrared aerial photographic surveys of lakeshore
areas designed to locate obvious septic leachate break
throughs.
• Data contained in the permit files of the Pine County Sani-
tarian on recent on-site system construction and main-
tenance.
• A follow up survey to answer questions unanswered by the
other surveys, including telephone interviews with property
owners aud site visits to assess current land use and devel-
opment patterns.
-------
Analysis of this information resulted in the classification of each
existing on-site system into one of three categories:
• "Obvious problem"-Direct evidence of failure including such
problems as backups, ponding, or ground or surface water
contamination.
• "Potential problem"-Indirect evidence indicating that future
failure is probable including high water table and tight
soils where failures of older systems are documented.
• "No problem."
A thorough analysis of the available information indicated that cer-
tain shoreline areas around the lakes had a commonality of conditions which
resulted in concentrations of systems with problems. In general, such
areas were characterized by a high water table, tight soil, on-site system
backups or ponding, groundwater moving toward the lake, and permit records
documenting frequent system replacements. The number of existing onsite
systems exhibiting obvious or potential problems is summarized below:
Area
Island Lake
Sturgeon Lake
Rush and Passenger
Lakes
Wild Acres and
Hogans Acres
1980
Residences
151
198
19
48
Obvious
Problem
18
0
0
0
Potential
Problem
27
13
0
0
No
Problem
106
185
19
48
Wastewater Management Alternatives
Feasible and compatible sets of collection and treatment options were
developed into project alternatives for the proposed EIS project area. The
project alternatives represent combinations of on-site system options,
centralized collection system options, and effluent treatment and disposal
options. Seven project alternatives were developed and evaluated for
technical feasibility, cost-effectiveness, and environmental concerns.
These alternatives also include a No-Action Alternative (Alternative 1) .
Project Alternatives 2 through 7 are consecutively less comprehensive in
providing major on-site system upgrades and consecutively more comprehen-
sive in providing hookups of residences to centralized collection systems.
-------
The EIS process must evaluate the consequences of not taking action.
The No-Action Alternative implies that neither USEPA or MPCA would provide
funds to build, upgrade, or expand existing wastewater treatment systems.
If the No-Action Alternative is "implemented", existing on-site systems in
the project area would continue to be used in their present conditions.
Any changes or improvements in malfunctioning systems would be at the
initiative and expense of either the property owner or a local government.
Under the No-Action Alternative, additional holding tanks would be used on
lots with site limitations, and existing problems would continue.
Alternatives 2 through 7 each consist of one or more component options
including on-site system upgrades, cluster drainfields and centralized
collection and treatment. Alternative 2 consists solely of upgrading
on-site systems for the entire service area, Alternatives 3 through 6
include progressively fewer on-site upgrades and Alternative 7 includes
very few on-site upgrades. Alternative 7 is almost exclusively a centra-
lized wastewater management alternative.
The appropriate technology for upgrading existing on-site systems with
obvious and potential problems was selected based on the best available
information on soil characteristics, depth to groundwater, landscape slope,
and lot size. The preferred major upgrade, where conditions permit, is the
septic tank-soil absorption system with a serial-parallel trench system.
Depending on lot limitations, the appropriate alternative on-site system
would be selected. Alternative on-site systems include septic tank seepage
beds, septic tank mound systems, and wastewater segregation. Where waste-
water segregation was recommended, the graywater would continue to be
treated with an existing or upgraded septic tank and soil absorption sys-
tem. The blackwater treatment components would include a new low-flow
toilet and a holding tank.
Alternatives 3 through 6 include cluster drainfields for limited
lakeshore areas. These were designed based on soil conditions and on
documented on-site system problems. Each cluster collection system would
employ septic tank effluent pumps and pressure and/or gravity sewers for
collection. Each cluster treatment system would consist of a dosing tank
10
-------
or pump station, and three drain fields to allow two of the fields to be
used during the year while the third field was being rested.
Alternatives 4 through 7 include centralized collection and off-site
treatment for: a portion of the Island Lake shoreline (Alternatives 4 and
5); the entire shoreline of Island Lake (Alternative 6); and the entire
shoreline of both Island Lake and Sturgeon Lake (Alternative 7).
Conventional gravity, septic tank effluent gravity and septic tank
effluent pressure collection systems were evaluated, and the most cost-ef-
fective selected for each alternative. Septic tank effluent gravity sewers
were the most cost-effective for Alternatives 4 and 7, and septic tank
pressure sewers were the cost-effective for other alternatives (Alterna-
tives 5 and 6). Conventional gravity sewers were not cost-effective for
any alternative.
The MLWSD Facility Plan evaluated three centralized treatment alterna-
tives: upgrading the existing City of Moose Lake WWTP; construction of a
new activated sludge WWTP; and construction of a new oxidation ditch WWTP.
The MLWSD Facility Plan concluded that upgrading the existing Moose Lake
WWTP was the most cost-effective alternative. The existing Moose Lake WWTP
consists of seven facultative lagoons: 6 primary lagoons (43 acres total)
and one secondary lagoon (15.2 acres). The existing permitted design
capacity of the lagoon system is 444,000 gpd. However, because the centra-
lized treatment proposed in the EIS alternatives would add significant
flows to the system, MPCA has indicated that the maximum calculated capa-
city of the lagoon system would have to be reduced to 316,100 gpd to meet
updated requirements (By telephone, Mr. Zdon, MPCA, to WAPORA, Inc., 15
July 1982). Costs for the EIS alternatives are based on the revised design
criteria. There is adequate additional land adjacent to the site for a
major expansion of the lagoon system.
Off-site wastewater treatment options considered in the EIS alterna-
tives include upgrading the existing Moose Lake WWTP (Alternatives 4, 6,
and 7), and a bog treatment system (Alternative 5).
11
-------
The treatment of wastewater by a bog or peatland system is similar in
approach to treatment by a cluster drainfield in that solids are retained
in a septic tank and primary effluent is taken off-site and treated by a
"soil" absorption system. In this case, peat is used rather than soil for
treatment. Extensive areas of peatland are present in the project area.
Some of these areas are in an unaltered or relatively "natural" state and
others have been partially drained in an attempt to move water off sur-
rounding lands. The peat bog area considered in Alternative 5 has pre-
viously been channelized for other drainage purposes to a depth of 1 to 2
feet.
The estimated total present worth costs for the build alternatives are
presented in Table 2. Alternative 2, upgraded on-site systems, is the
least cost alternative.
4.0. ENVIRONMENTAL AND FINANCIAL IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
The No-Action Alternative would entail almost no construction impacts.
The significant environmental impacts of the six action alternatives would
primarily be short-term impacts on the local environment due to construc-
tion.
The implementation of the on-site system component of Alternatives 3,
4, 5, 6, and 7 or the full on-site upgrade alternative (Alternative 2),
would have direct impacts on those lots where upgraded on-site systems are
necessary. Disruption of backyard vegetation and vacation schedules would
be the primary concern.
Cluster drainfield and cluster mounds (Alternatives 3, 4, 5, and 6)
would involve construction on the drainfield sites of a similar nature to
that of the onsite upgrades.
The construction of centralized collection facilities (Alternatives 3,
4, 5, 6, and 7) would have considerable impacts on the right-of-way where
the sewers are located. Dewatering for deep sewer excavations and pump
stations could affect wells in the vicinity. WWTP construction (Alterna-
12
-------
Table 2 Summary of the estimated costs for Project Alternatives 1 through 7
ia March 1982 dollars.
Total Present Worth
On-Site Cluster . Centralized Centralized Sub , Average Annual Cost
Alternative Number and Name Upgrade Drainfield Collection Treatment Total Administrative Total Equivalent Costs Ranking
1 No-Action in EIS service area -- ___ __ -NA
2 Upgrade on-site systems with-
in EIS service area 726,100 - 726,100 286,790 1,012,890 100,300 1
3 Cluster drainfield for lim-
ited areas and on-site sys-
tem upgrading elsewhere in
EIS service area 575,000 985,220 - - 1,560,220 286,790 1.847,010 182,900 2
4B Island Lake-limited area
collection by STE gravity
sewers and treatment at up-
graded Moose Lake WWTP; Stur-
geon Lake-cluster drainfield
for limited area; on-site
system upgrading elsewhere
in EIS service area 400,880 498,370 815,300 268,340 1,982,890 286,790 2,269,680 224,760 3
5B Island Lake-limited area col-
lection by STE pressure sewers
and peat bog treatment; Stur-
geon Lake - cluster drainfield
for limited area; on-site sys-
tem upgrading elsewhere in
EIS service area • 400,880 498,370 815,940 327,170 2,042,360 286,790 2,329,150 230,650 4
6C Island Lake entire shore-
line STE pressure collec-
tion and treatment at up-
graded Moose Lake WWTP;
Sturgeon Lake - cluster
drainfield for limited
area; on-site system up-
grading elsewhere in EIS
service area 271,010 498,370 1,475,590 394,100 2,639,070 286,790 2,925,860 289,740 5
7B Island Lake and Sturgeon
Lake shorelines STE gravity
collection and treatment
at upgraded Moose Lake
WWTP; on-site system up-
grading elsewhere in
EIS service area. 89,710 - 3,616,080* 625,080 4,330,870 286,790 4,617,660 457,270 6
Includes costs for on-site or off-site treatment of wastewater from existing and future residences In the EIS project area to the year 2000.
See Appendix E for a description of cost development methodology.
b
Includes STE pressure and gravity collection system
Includes upgrading of existing lift station to Moose Lake WWTP
For comparison, the estimated present worth cost of conventional gravity collection is $1,705,950 ($2,866,430 subtotal, $3,153,220 total, $312,250
Equ iv. Ann.).
For comparison, the estimated present worth cost of conventional gravity collection is $3,846,980 ($4,561,770 subtotal, $4,848,560 total, $480,140
EquIv. Ann.).
Includes annual personnel and overhead costs for administration and billing.
-------
lives 4, 6, and 7) would irretrievably convert prime agricultural lands to
treatment plant use. Construction of a bog treatment system (Alternative 5)
would have significant adverse construction and operational impacts on the
biota of the site.
Discharges from the expanded Moose Lake WWTP to the Moose Horn River
would be required to meet the effluent requirements established by MPCA.
Water quality would be altered, but not seriously degraded.
The centralized collection, treatment and disposal facilities, and the
on-site upgrades would have a limited positive effect on groundwater qual-
ity by eliminating existing failing on-site systems. On-site upgrades and
the continuing proper management of on-site systems would replace failing
on-site systems with appropriate new systems or holding tanks through the
20 year design period.
Project Alternative 7 is a high cost system that could pose a signi-
ficant financial burden on users even if State and Federal grants are
available. Project Alternative 2 is the only alternative that would not
pose a significant financial burden on users if no grants are available.
Project Alternatives 3 through 7 could have a significant secondary
impact on low income familities with residences on the shorelines of Island
and Sturgeon Lakes. These families may be displaced from the project area
if they are unable to afford user charges.
Based on a review of historical population trends and current and
historical land use patterns, induced growth is not anticipated to be a
significant trend with any of the project alternatives.
THE SELECTED PROJECT ALTERNATIVE
All the action alternatives will eliminate any existing impact on
groundwater or the lakes by eliminating failing on-site systems. However,
evaluation of the existing data on the natural and man-made environment in
the project area indicates that water quality impacts due to on-site sys-
14
-------
terns are inconsequential in comparison with other manageable and unmanage-
able nutrient sources which influence the lakes. Thus, it is concluded
that none of the action alternatives will significantly benefit the quality
of the lakes or the groundwater.
The least cost alternative from both an economic and environmental
perspective is Alternative 2 - on-site system upgrades for the entire
project area. The beneficial environmental impacts of Alternative 2 in-
clude elimination of any phosphorus loads to the lakes that might be coming
from failing on-site systems, and elimination of any possible nitrate
contribution to the groundwater from the same possible cause. Compared
with the alternatives that include centralized collection and treatment,
Alternative 2 is expected to have fewer construction impacts because exten-
sive construction within road right-of-ways is not required. Alternative 2
is not expected to have impacts on the groundwater or lakes that are sig-
nificantly different than the other action alternatives. Adverse construc-
tion impacts that might result in disturbance and erosion on individual
lots can be mitigated with proper construction management practices.
Alternative 2 is recommended as the selected project alternative because it
the least costly means of achieving the benefits cited. Alternative 2 has
an estimated total present worth cost of $1,012,890.
The MLWSD Facilities Plan recommended gravity sewers be constructed
around Island Lake and Sturgeon Lake with treatment at the Moose Lake WWTP
upgraded to meet the additional demand. This recommendation is equivalent
to EIS project option 7A (not an EIS project alternative). Option 7A was
estimated on an EIS population served basis to have a total present worth
cost of $4.8 million.
Another alternative under discussion by MLWSD is a gravity collection
system for Island Lake only with treatment at the Moose Lake WWTP upgraded
to meet the additional demand. This is equivalent to project option 6A
(also not an EIS project alternative). Option 6A has an estimated total
present worth cost of $3.2 million to serve the EIS population equivalent
for that area only and provide adequate treatment at the Moose Lake WWTP.
15
-------
Table of Contents for the Draft Environmental Impact Statement
TABLE OF CONTENTS i
LIST OF TABLES v
LIST OF FIGURES viii
LIST OF APPENDICES xi
1.0. PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION 1-1
1.1. Project Background 1-1
1.2. Legal Basis for Action and Project Need 1-5
1.3. Study Process and Public Participation 1-9
1.4. Issues 1-12
2.0. WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES 2-1
2.1. Description of the Existing Wastewater Collection and
Treatment Facilities 2-1
2.1.1. Existing Centralized Treatment System
Discharge Characteristics 2-4
2.1.2. Operation and Maintenance of Existing
Facilities 2-7
2.1.3. Problems Caused by Centralized Treatment
Plant Discharges 2-7
2.1.4. Existing Wastewater Management 2-7
2.1.5. Wastewater Management Planning 2-10
2.2. Description of Existing On-site Waste Treatment Systems . 2-11
2.2.1. Data pertinent to the Assessment of On-Site
Waste Treatment Systems 2-13
2.2.1.1. Soil Survey of a Portion of
Windemere Township 2-14
2.2.1.2. Information Contained in the Moose Lake-
Windemere Sanitary District Facility
Plan 2-17
2.2.1.3. Mailed Questionnaire Survey 2-18
2.2.1.4. EMSL Aerial Survey 2-24
2.2.1.5. Septic Leachate Survey 2-26
2.2.1.6. Private Water Well Information .... 2-38
2.2.1.7. Local Permit File Data 2-44
2.2.1.8. Follow-up Survey 2-44
2.2.2. Problems Caused by Existing On-site Systems . . . 2-47
2.2.2.1. Backups 2-48
2.2.2.2. Ponding or Surface Failure 2-49
2.2.2.3. Groundwater Contamination 2-49
2.2.2.4. Surface Water Contamination 2-50
2.2.2.5. Indirect Evidence of Problems 2-61
-------
Page
2.2.3. Identification of Problems in Specific Areas . . 2-62
2.2.3.1. Island Lake Segments I, II & III. . . . 2-63
2.2.3.2. Sturgeon Lake Segments 2-68
2.2.3.3. Rush and Passenger Lakes 2-71
2.2.3.4. Hogan's and Wild Acres Subdivisions . . 2-72
2.2.4. Septage Disposal Practices 2-72
2.3. Identification of Wastewater Management System Options . . 2-74
2.3.1. Design Factors 2-74
2.3.2. System Components 2-74
2.3.2.1. Centralized Wastewater Management. . . . 2-74
2.3.2.2. Decentralized Wastewater Management. . . 2-74
2.3.2.2.1. On-site Wastewater Treatment . . 2-74
2.3.2.2.2. Cluster System Wastewater
Treatment 2-77
2.3.2.2.3. Bog Treatment 2-79
2.3.2.2.4. Septage Disposal Methods .... 2-81
2.3.3. Centralized Collection System Component Options. . 2-81
2.3.4. Centralized Treatment Component Options 2-82
2.4. Project Alternatives 2-88
2.4.1. Alternative #1; No-Action 2-88
2.4.2. Alternative #2; On-site System Upgrades for the En-
tire Service Area 2-88
2.4.3. Alternative #3; Cluster Drainfields for Limited Areas
and On-Site System Upgrades Elsewhere 2-91
2.4.4. Alternative 4; Island Lake: Limited Centralized
Collection and Treatment at Moose Lake WWTP, Stur-
geon Lake: Cluster Drainfield for Limited Area,
On-Site System Upgrades Elsewhere 2-93
2.4.5. Alternative 5; Island Lake: Limited Centralized
Collection and Bog Treatment, Sturgeon Lake: Clus-
ter Drainfield for Limited Areas, On-Site System Up-
grades Elsewhere 2-96
2.4.5. Alternative 6; Island Lake; Centralized Collection and
Treatment at Moose Lake WWTP, Sturgeon Lake; Cluster
Drainfield for limited service area, On-site system
Upgrades Elsewhere 2-98
2.4.7. Alternative 7; Complete Centralized Collection for
the Shorelines of Island Lake and of Sturgeon Lake,
On-site Systems Upgrades Elsewhere 2-101
2.5. Flexibility and Reliability of the Project Alternatives. 2-104
2.6. Comparison of Project Alternatives and Selection of
the Recommended Action 2-109
2.6.1. Comparison of Alternatives 2-110
2.6.1.1. Project Costs 2-110
-------
Page
2.6.1.2. Environmental Impacts 2-112
2.6.1.3. Implementability 2-114
2.6.2. The Recommended Project Alternative 2-120
3.0. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 3-1
3.1. Natural Environment 3-1
3.1.1. Atmosphere 3-1
3.1.2. Land 3-3
3.1.2.1. Geology 3-3
3.1.2.2. Soils 3-3
3.1.3. Water Resources 3-4
3.1.3.1. Surface Water Resources 3-4
3.1.3.2. Water Quality of Project Area Lakes . . 3-6
3.1.3.3. Nutrient Loads to and Trophic
Status of Project Area Lakes 3-20
3.1.3.4. Trophic History of Island and
Sturgeon Lakes 3-31
3.1.4. Aquatic Biota 3-37
3.1.4.1. Phytoplankton 3-38
3.1.4.2. Macrophytes 3-40
3.1.4.3. Fish 3-41
3.1.5. Terrestrial Biota 3-43
3.2. Man-Made Environment 3-43
3.2.1. Demographics 3-43
3.2.1.1. Historic and Current Population Trends 3-44
3.2.1.2. Household Size and Resident Age .... 3-47
3.2.1.3. Housing Stock Characteristics 3-50
3.2.1.4. Population Projections 3-50
3.2.2. Land Use 3-56
3.2.2.1. Historic Land Use Trends in Pine and
Carlto Counties 3-57
3.2.2.2. Project Area Land Use Trends 3-62
3.2.2.3. Prime Farmlands 3-65
3.2.2.4. Development Potential 3-67
3.2.3. Economics 3-72
3.2.4. Public Finance 3-75
3.2.5. Transportation 3-78
3.2.6. Energy 3-79
3.2.7. Recreation and Tourism 3-81
3.2.8. Cultural Resources 3-82
4.0. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 4-1
4.1. Primary Impacts of the Seven Project Alternatives .... 4-3
4.1.1. Construction Impacts 4-3
4.1.1.1. Atmosphere 4-3
4.1.1.2. Soil 4-3
4.1.1.3. Surface Water 4-4
4.1.1.4. Groundwater 4-4
iii
-------
4.1.1.5. Biota 4-4
4.1.1.6. Demographics 4-5
4.1.1.7. Land Use 4-6
4.1.1.8. Economics 4-8
4.1.1.9. Transportation 4-8
4.1.1.10. Energy 4-9
4.1.1.11. Recreation and Tourism 4-9
4.1.1.12. Cultural Resources 4-9
4.1.2. Operational Impacts 4-9
4.1.2.1. Atmosphere 4-10
4.1.2.2. Soils 4-11
4.1.2.3. Surface Water 4-11
4.1.2.4. Groundwater 4-14
4.1.2.5. Biota 4-17
4.1.2.6. Demographics 4-17
4.1.2.7. Land Use 4-17
4.1.2.8. Economics 4-18
4.1.2.9. Transportation 4-18
4.1.2.10. Energy 4-18
4.1.2.11. Recreation and Tourism 4-19
4.1.3. Public Finance 4-19
4.2. Secondary Impacts 4-25
4.2.1. Surface Water 4-26
4.2.2. Demographics 4-26
4.2.3. Land Use 4-27
4.2.4. Economics 4-28
4.2.5. Recreation and Tourism 4-29
4.3. Mitigation of Adverse Impacts 4-29
4.4. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts 4-33
4.5. Irretrievable and Irreversible Resource
Commitments 4-34
5.0. LITERATURE CITED
6.0. GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS, AND ABBREVIATIONS
7.0. CONSULTATION, COORDINATION, AND LIST OF PREPARERS
8.0. LIST OF AGENCIES, ORGANIZATIONS, AND PERSONS TO WHOM
COPIES OF THE STATEMENT WERE SENT
iv
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Page
2-1 NPDES effluent limitations for the City of Moose Lake
wastewater lagoon system 2-6
2-2 Water quality in the secondary treatment lagoon of the
City of Moose Lake wastewater treatment facility 2-8
2-3 Influent wastewater quality to the City of Moose Lake
wastewater treatment facility 2-8
2-4 Summary of MLWSD lot-by-lot survey findings 2-17
2-5 Groundwater flow velocities and directions as measured
at "flow stations" established on the shorelines of
Island, Sturgeon, Rush, and Passenger Lakes 2-31
2-6 Information on well depth in the portions of the service
area having permeable, sandy soils 2-42
2-7 Summary of county permit file data for the period February
1974 through February 1982 (File of the Zoning Administrator,
Pine County, Pine City, MN.) 2-45
2-8 Summary of the analysis of problems with on-site waste
treatment systems in the EIS project area 2-64
2-9 Correspondence of on-site system problem classifications
with soil types 2-65
2-9a Existing capacity and revised capacity at the existing
Moose Lake WWTP 2-84
2-10 Estimated population in the Moose Lake WWTP service area
Year 2000 (PRC-Consoer Townsend, 1980) 2-85
2-11 Estimated inflow/infiltration in the Moose Lake WWTP
service area 2-85
2-12 Estimated excess capacity existing Moose Lake WWTP Year 2000 2-86
2-13 Year 1980 residences served by proposed alternatives 2-89
2-14 Summary of estimated costs for Alternatives 1 through 7 2-111
-------
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
3-1 Average chlorophyll a_ concentrations of Island,
Sturgeon, Rush and Passenger Lakes 3-9
3-2 Average Secchi disk, surface chlorophyll _a, and surface
biovolume values on Island, Sturgeon, and Rush Lakes 3-12
3-3 A comparison of predicted and observed depth of the
thermoclines in Island and Sturgeon Lakes, Pine County MN 3-14
3-4 Total phosphorus concentrations in the waters of Island,
Little Island, and Sturgeon Lakes 3-19
3-5 Analyses of surficial lake sediment grab samples 3-21
3-6 Phosphorus export coefficients and land use in hectares
within the watersheds of the project area lakes 3-24
3-7 Estimated phosphorus loading to the project area lakes 3-25
3-8 Lake parameters of comparative interest 3-27
3-9 Historic population growth in the jurisdictions within
and surrounding the project area 3-45
3-10 Percent change in the population in the jurisdictions
within and surrounding the project area : .. 3-46
3-11 Selected population characteristics in the juridsictions
within and surrounding the project area in 1980 3-48
3-12 Project area housing summary for 1980 3-52
3-13 Changes in the population and housing stock in
Windemere and Moose Lake Townships, 1960 to 1980 3-53
3-14 Percentage of Pine and Carlton County population
residing in Windemere and Moose Lake Townships 3-54
3-15 Permanent population projections within Windemere
Township, 1980 to 2000 3-54
3-16 Seasonal population projections within Windemere
Township, 1980 to 2000 3-55
3-17 Combined seasonal and permanent population projections
within Windemere Township, 1980 to 2000 3-55
3-18 Estimated percent agricultural land use in county
versus watershed delineations 3-63
3-19 Per capita income estimates for selected jurisdictions 3-73
vi
-------
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
3-20 Estimated 1981 median family income for selected
jurisdictions 3-73
3-21 Selected financial characteristics of the project area
jurisdiction in 1980 3-76
3-22 Values for Moose Lake-Windemere Sanitary District full-
faith and credit debt analyses during 1980 3-77
3-23 Criteria for local government full-faith and credit debt
analysis 3-77
3-24 Average cost for residential energy during the period
from April 1980 to March 1981 3-80
4-1 A summary of significant environmental impacts of Project
Alternatives 4-2
4-2 Land use conversions for "action" alternatives 4-6
4-3 Estimated average annual residential user costs 4-21
4-4 Average annual user costs expressed as a percentage of
1980 median household income for Windemere Township 4-23
4-5 Impact of new debt requirements on total debt per capita
in the Moose Lake-Windemere Sanitary District 4-24
vii
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
1-1 Planning area and project area boundaries 1-2
2-1 Sewered and developed areas in the MLWSD 2-2
2-2 Plan view of existing wastewater treatment lagoons for the
City of Moose Lake treatment plant 2-5
2-3 Facilities planning area for the MLWSD 2-9
2-4 The EIS project area 2-12
2-5 Soil survey boundaries and major soil associations 2-15
2-6 Location of groundwater flow monitoring stations, suspected
septic leachate plumes, stations where groundwater quality
samples were taken, and stations where overland runoff
(streams) were detected and sampled in Island Lake 2-32
2-7 Locations of groundwater flow monitoring stations, suspected
septic leachate plums, stations where groundwater quality
samples were taken, and stations where overland runoff
(streams) were detected and sampled in Sturgeon Lake 2-33
2-8 Locations of groundwater flow monitoring stations, suspected
septic leachate plumes, stations where groundwater quality
samples were gathered, and locations of stations where overland
runoff (streams) were detected in Rush Lake 2-34
2-9 Location of groundwater flow monitoring stations, suspected
septic leachate plumes, stations where groundwater quality
samples were gathered in Passenger Lake 2-35
2-10 Island Lake segments and locations of on-site systems with
obvious and potential problems 2-66
2-11 Sturgeon Lake segments and locations of on-site systems with
obvious and potential problems 2-69
2-12 Layout of septic tank with raised drainf ield bed 2-76
2-13 Layout of proposed peatland "bog" wastewater treatment
system 2-80
2-14 Number of soil absorption fields that will receive major
upgrades over the 20-year design period 2-90
2-15 Wastewater collection and treatment facilities for
Alternative 3 2-92
2-16 Wastewater collection and treatment facilities for
Alternative 4 2-95
viii
-------
LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)
2-17 Wastewater collection and treatment facilities for
Alternative 5 2-97
2-18 Wastewater collection and treatment facilities for
Alternative 6 2-100
2-19 Wastewater collection and treatment facilities for
Alternative 7 2-103
3-1 Average Secchi disk values with time 3-10
3-2 Average phytoplankton biovolume values with time 3-11
3-3 Stations established for sampling of water column total
phosphorus, surficial sediment characteristics, and intact
sediment cores 3-17
3-4 Precentage contribution to the phosphours load by aggregate
category: (A) uncontrollable sources, (B) on-site systems,
and (C) other manageable sources 3-25
3-5 Graphical representation of the modeling of trophic status,
with and without the "worst case" phosphorus load assumed for
on-site waste management systems 3-29
3-6 Graphical representation of the need to control phosphorus
sources affecting lakes 3-30
3-7 Dated stratigraphic profiles of Island Lake sediments 3-34
3-8 Dated stratigraphic profiles of Little Island Lake
sediments 3-35
3-9 Dated stratigraphic profiles of Sturgeon Lake
sediments 3-36
3-10 Gillnet and trapnet capture rates with time for
gamefish and panfish in Island and Sturgeon Lakes,
Pine County, MN 3-42
3-11 Enumeration districts for census 3-49
3-12 Pine County, MN: trends in agriculture from 1920 to 1978 3-59
3-13 Carlton County, MN: trends in agriculture from 1920 to 1978 3-60
3-14 A chronology of 20th century events and trends in Windemere
Township, Pine County, MN 3-61
3-15 Generalized watershed areas for Island, Sturgeon, Rush and
Passenger Lakes 3-64
ix
-------
LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)
3-16 Rates of residential development on the shorelines of
Island and Sturgeon Lakes 3-66
3-17 Prime farmlands in portions of Pine and Carlton Counties 3-68
-------
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A Notice of Intent
Appendix B Soils Survey and Mapping
Appendix C Leachate Survey and Well Quality Sampling Data
Appendix D Design Criteria and Component Options for Centralized
Wastewater Management Systems
Appendix E Cost Effectiveness Analysis
Appendix F Analysis of Grant Eligibility
Appendix G Impacts of On-Site Systems on Soils
Appendix H Report on Algae (Summary)
Appendix I Methodology for Population Projections
Appendix J Water Quality Tables and Figures
Appendix K Letter to Citizens' Advisory Committee
Appendix L Paleolimnological Investigation
Appendix M Transportation Data
Appendix N Energy Data
-------
1.0. PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION
1.1. Project Background
The planning area for this EIS involves three adjacent townships in
northeastern Minnesota: Windemere Township in Pine County, and Moose Lake
and Barnum Townships in Carlton County (Figure 1-1). The City of Moose
Lake (population 1490) is situated centrally in Moose Lake Township. The
City of Barnum (population 493) is situated to the northeast of Moose Lake
Township. Windemere Township, on the south end of the planning area, has
no incorporated villages or cities but encompasses the greater portion of
the area's surface water resources. The Moose River and the Willow River
flow through the planning area, carrying surface water to the southwest
where confluence is made with the Kettle River. Thirteen lakes of greater
than 100 acres in size lie within the area and the majority of the resi-
dential development outside the Cities of Moose Lake and Barnum is concen-
trated around several of these lakes. Sewer service currently is provided
to the residents of the Cities of Moose Lake and Barnum and to residents
living around Moosehead Lake, Coffee Lake, and Sand Lake. On-site waste-
water treatment systems are utilized by the remainder of the population.
The City of Barnum was included in the planning area in order to
consider regional alternatives that could increase the overall cost-effec-
tiveness of wastewater treatment in the cities of Barnum and Moose Lake.
Consideration of regional collection and treatment alternatives for Barnum
and Moose Lake area residents was made initially in the facilities plan
completed in 1979 by the Moose Lake-Windemere Sanitary District (MLWSD).
This EIS has built upon that initial review of regional alternatives by
evaluating all parts of the planning area where sanitary service improve-
ments may be needed and then developing a wide range of alternatives for
serving the identified needs. This was done in two phases (identified as
'Phase I' and 'Phase II').
The studies conducted in Phase I resulted in the determination that
the wastewater management alternative most appropriate for Barnum was the
one that had already been ifentified in that city's facilities plan. A
1-1
-------
Figure 1-1. Planning area and project area boundaries,
1-2
-------
report on Phase I was submitted to EPA as a separate document, as detailed
in Section 1.3. below. The present volume documents Phase II, in which
wastewater management alternatives were examined for a limited "project
area" inside the MLWSD. This project area encompasses Island Lake, Stur-
geon Lake, Rush Lake, and Passenger Lake in Windemere Township. The unin-
corporated parts of the planning area that are concentrated around these
four lakes have recently experienced the greatest population growth in
Windemere Township. This area also is the area defined in the MWLSD facil-
ities plan as having the greatest need for improved sanitary service.
Background information on the facilities planning efforts for both the
MLWSD and the City of Barnum, and further discussion of how this EIS 'pro-
ject area' (Figure 1—1) was selected, are presented in the following para-
graphs .
The existing sewage collection and treatment system in the City of
Moose Lake was completed in 1965. After completion of that project, signi-
ficant residential growth took place on unsewered lakeshore lots in Winde-
mere and Moose Lake Townships. Increased growth in this unsewered lake-
shore community led to public concern with restrictions in water use where
on-site systems are located in tight soils. Public concern also centered
on the presence of blue-green algae blooms in the lakes. The perceived
need to deal with these problems gave rise to the belief that improved
means of wastewater management were needed around the lakes. This resulted
in the formation in 1975 of a special purpose unit of local government to
plan for improved wastewater treatment. This unit of government, the
MLWSD, raised funds for the planning and design of collection sewers in
portions of the lakeshore community within the District through the levy of
special tax assessments. As a result of the efforts of the MLWSD, sewers
were constructed around Coffee Lake in 1976 (1.5 miles southwest of the
City of Moose Lake), and by 1979 sewers also were constructed around Sand
Lake (approximately 0.5 miles south of Coffee Lake). Construction of these
lakeshore area sewers, as well as of the sewers constructed from the City
of Moose Lake to Interstate Highway 35 during 1979, was supported in part
by Federal loans obtained from the Farmers Home Administration (FMHA).
Treatment ot the wastewater from these outlying service areas is provided
at the City of Moose Lake treatment plant through a service agreement
between the City and the MLWSD.
1-3
-------
In 1979, the MLWSD contracted with Consoer, Townsend & Associates Ltd.
(now PRC-Consoer Townsend, Inc.), consulting engineers of Duluth, Minne-
sota, to prepare a "201 Step 1" Facility Plan for overall wastewater col-
lection and treatment facilities within the District. Funding for this
planning effort was shared 75% by the Federal government (through USEPA),
by the State of Minnesota (through the Minnesota Pollution Control
Li'iro«.j,/, aud iU>; by cue District. The Facility Plan was prepared to
serve as the basis for selecting a specific wastewater management project
from among various alternatives for detailed design and construction. The
cost of detailed design ("Step 2") and construction ("Step 3") also may be
shared among USEPA, MPCA, and the District. Because of the financial and
regulatory involvement by the federal government, USEPA is charged with the
responsibility to determine whether an Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS), in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969,
should be prepared.
The purpose or tht Listrict's Facility Han, dated March 1980, was to:
• Examine the adequacy of existing wastewater treatment and
collection facilities.
• Assess existing water quality conditions and wastewater
system needs.
• Recommend tuture action to protect the District's diverse
water resources.
The Facility Planning Area (FPA) had included the Moose Lake-Windernere
Sanitary District, the Cities of Barnum and Moose Lake, and the corridor
along County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 61 between the Cities of Barnum and
Moose Lake, encompassing approximately 60 square miles. Among the alter-
natives considered were the construction of collection sewers around Island
and Sturgeon Lakes, interceptor sewers and pump stations to bring Island
and Sturgeon Lakes into the Moose Lake sewer system, a new pump station, a
wet-weather overflow pond, and expansion of the existing wastewater treat-
ment facility.
An infiltration/inflow (I/I) analysis was conducted in the City of
Moose Lake in the autumn of 1979 by Consoer, Townsend and Associates as
1-4
-------
part of the Facility Plan. The cost-effectiveness analysis in the Facility
Plan recommended correction of the excess I/I originating in the collection
system of the City ol Moose Lake. The sewers in the Coffee Lake and Sand
Lake areas were not included because they had recently passed infiltration
tests during construction. In order to define the construction required to
correct the I/I, a Sewer System Evaluation Study (SSES) was authorized.
PRC-Consoer Townsend, Inc. currently is performing this task. Initial
monitoring was performed in the autumn of 1981. An interim report was
issued in March 1982 identifying areas of the system requiring cleaning,
televising, and smoke testing. The final SSES is expected in August 1982.
The City of Barnum contracted with Howard A. Kuusisto Consulting
Engineers to prepare a "201 Step 1" Facility Plan for the wastewater system
in Barnum. The City of Barnum contributed 10% of the total cost of the
Facility Plan and the remainder was shared by USEPA and MPCA in the same
proportions as for the MLWSD. The Barnum Facility Plan, completed in May
1980, evaluated seven alternatives and recommended construction of a stabi-
lization pond with controlled discharge to Gillespie Brook, west of the
City of Barnum.
A public hearing was held on the MLWSD Facility Plan in March 1980, at
which time public support was expressed for the recommended alternative and
testimony was presented showing widespread belief that improved wastewater
treatment around Island Lake would result in substantial improvements in
water quality.
1.2. Legal Basis for Action and Project Need
The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) requires a Fe-
deral agency to prepare an EIS on "...major Federal actions significantly
affecting the quality of the human environment ..." In addition, the Coun-
cil on Environmental Quality (CEQ) has established regulations (40 CFR Part
1500-1508) to guide Federal agencies in determinations of whether Federal
funds or Federal approvals would result in a project that would signifi-
cantly affect the environment. USEPA has developed its own regulations (40
1-5
-------
CFR Part 6) for the Implementation of the EIS process. As noted above,
USEPA Region V determined that pursuant to these regulations, an EIS was
required for the MLWSD Facility Plan, and should include consideration of
the City of Barnum Facility Plan. Specific issues were identified in the
11 July 1980 Notice of Intent to prepare an EIS (Section 1.3).
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (FWPCA, Public Law
92-500), as amended in 1977 by the Clean Water Act (CWA, Public Law 95-
217), and as amended in 1981 by the MWW Construction Grants Amendments (PL
97-117) establishes a uniform, nationwide water pollution control program
according to which all state water quality programs must operate. MPCA has
been delegated the responsibility and authority to administer this program
in Minnesota, subject to the approval of USEPA.
Federal funding for wastewater treatment projects is provided under
Section 201 of the FWPCA. For projects initiated prior to the 1981 FWPCA
Amendments, USEPA will fund 75% of the grant-eligible costs for conven-
tional sewers and treatment. For alternative collection systems and
treatment systems (e.g., pressure sewers, septic tank effluent sewers,
septic tanks, and soil absorption systems), the funding level increases to
85% of the eligible costs. The costs for conventional sewers that USEPA
will not assist in funding are land and easement costs, sewers for which
less than two-thirds of the planned flow originated before 28 October 1972,
pipes in the street or easements for house connections, and the building of
sewers for connection to the system. The costs for alternative systems
that the USEPA will not assist in funding are easement costs and the build-
ing of sewers for connection to septic tanks. The grant eligibility of the
on-site portions of alternative systems varies depending on their ownership
and management. Publicly- and privately-owned systems constructed after 27
December 1977 are not eligible for Federal grants. Presently, MPCA can
provide grants of 60% of the funds required in excess of the Federal share
for both conventional sewers and for alternative collection and treatment
systems.
The dispersal of Federal funds to local applicants is made via the
Municipal Wastewater Treatment Works Construction Grants Program adminis-
1-6
-------
tered by USEPA. Prior to the amendments of 1981, the program consisted of
a three-step process: Step 1 included wastewater facilities planning; Step
2 involved the preparation of detailed engineering plans and specifica-
tions; and Step 3 covered construction of the pollution control system.
The Municipal Wastewater Treatment Construction Grants Amendments of
1981 became law (PL 97-217) on 29 December 1981, and significantly changed
the procedural and administrative aspects of the municipal construction
grants program. The changes reflected in these amendments have been incor-
porated into Construction Grants-1982 (CG-82) Municipal Wastewater Treat-
ment (Draft), (USEPA, March 1982); and an interim final rule implementing
the 1981 Amendments was issued by USEPA on 12 May 1982 (Federal Register
(4792). Under the 1981 Amendments, separate Federal grants are no longer
provided for facilities planning and design of projects. However, the
previous designation of these activities as Step 1, facilities planning,
and Step 2, design, are retained in the CG-82. The term "Step 3, grant"
refers to the project for which grant assistance will be awarded. The Step
3 grant assistance is comprehensive and will include an allowance for the
planning (Step 1) and design (Step 2) activities.
The CG-82 states that projects which received Step 1 and/or Step 2
grants prior to the enactment of the 1981 Amendments should be completed in
accordance with the terms and conditions of their grant agreements. Step 3
grant assistance will include an allowance for design of those projects
which received Step 1 grants prior to 29 December 1981. A municipality may
be eligible, however, to receive an advance of the allowance for planning
and/or design if the population of the community is under 25,000, and the
state reviewing agency (MPCA) determines that the municipality otherwise
would be unable to complete the facilities planning and design to qualify
for grant assistance. The MLWSD and the City of Barnum currently are in
Step 1.
Communities also may choose to construct wastewater treatment faci-
lities without financial support from the state or Federal governments. In
such cases, the only requirements are that the design be technically sound
1-7
-------
and that the MPCA is satisfied that the facility will meet discharge stan-
dards.
If a community chooses to construct a wastewater collection and treat-
ment system with USEPA grant assistance, the project must meet all require-
ments of the Grants Program. The CWA stresses that the most cost-effective
alternative be identified and selected. USEPA defines the cost-effective
alternative as the one that will be environmentally sound and result in
minimum total resource costs over the life of the project, as well as meet
Federal, state, and local requirements. However, the cost-effective alter-
native is not necessarily the lowest cost proposal. The analysis for
choosing the cost-effective alternative is based on both the capital costs
and the operation and maintenance costs for a 20-year period, although only
the capital costs are eligible for funding. Non-monetary costs also must
be considered, including social and environmental factors.
Minnesota was required by the Federal Clean Water Act (PL 92-500) to
establish water quality standards for lakes and streams, and effluent stan-
dards for discharge to them. Federal law stipulates that, at a minimum,
discharges must meet secondary treatment requirements. In some cases, even
stricter effluent standards are subject to USEPA approval and must conform
to Federal guidelines.
Wastewater treatment facilities also are subject to the requirements
of Section 402 of the FWPCA, which established the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program. Under the NPDES
regulations, all wastewater discharges to surface waters require an NPDES
permit and must meet the effluent standards identified in the permit.
USEPA has delegated the authority to establish effluent standards and to
issue discharge permits to the MPCA. USEPA, however, maintains review
authority. Any permit proposed for issuance is subject to a state hearing
if requested by another agency, the applicant, or other groups and individ-
uals. A hearing on an NPDES permit provides the public with the oppor-
tunity to comment on a proposed discharge, including the location of the
discharge and the level of treatment.
1-8
-------
1.3. Study Process and Public Participation
Participants in wastewater management planning for the project area
during the past four years have included: US Environmental Protection
Agency, Region V; Minnesota Pollution Control Agency; WAPORA, Inc. (EIS
consultant); PRC-Consoer Townsend, Inc. and Howard A. Kuuisisto Consulting
Engineers (facility planners); Moose Lake-Windemere Sanitary District; the
City of Moose Lake, the City of Barnum; and other Federal, State and local
agencies and organizations.
As previously mentioned, USEPA reviewed the MLWSD Facility Plan in
accordance with the criteria established under 40 CFR, Part 6, and deter-
mined that the preparation of an EIS was warranted because of the project's
impacts in the following areas:
• Water quality (40 CFR 6.506
(a) (7)).
• Socioeconomic factors (40 CFR 6.506 (a) (4)).
• Secondary impacts and induced growth (40 CFR 6.506
(a) (1)).
These issues were highlighted in the 11 July 1980 Notice of Intent (NOI) to
prepare an EIS (Appendix A). Specifically, USEPA determined that an EIS
was needed because the Facility Plan did not adequately document the need
to provide sewers around Island and Sturgeon Lakes, and that additional
documentation was needed to determine that the deterioration of the quality
of the lakes was related to inadequate on-site treatment systems. USEPA1s
decision to require an EIS also was based on its finding that there is a
high probability that the proposed project could have significant adverse
socioeconomic impacts on a number of families in the service area who have
fixed or low incomes. In the NOI, USEPA indicated the need to determine
the probable induced growth and the changes in land use which would be
caused by the project and the resultant effects on future demand for public
services.
In order to expedite the EIS process, USEPA determined that the pre-
paration of the EIS would be in two phases. The initial phase involved
reviewing published and unpublished information to determine its adequacy
1-9
-------
in addressing the identified facility planning issues (Section 1.4.).
Additionally, the initial phase of EIS preparation involved consideration
of regionalized collection and treatment alternatives which would include
service areas outside the MLWSD: specifically, the City of Barnum and the
adjacent Hanging Horn Lakes area. A Citizen's Advisory Committee was
founded during the initial phase of EIS preparation (July 1980) to keep
local citizens informed and to obtain the benefit of their critical review.
Additionally, public meetings were held on 10 September 1980 and 21 January
1981 to evaluate public concerns in regard to the facility planning.
Phase I culminated in March 1981 with the publishing of two reports:
a Current Situation Report and a Regional Alternatives Analysis. The
Current Situation Report described aspects of the natural and man-made
environment likely to be affected by the various Facility Planning alter-
natives proposed in the MLWSD and Barnum Plans. The report also initiated
an analysis of need for additional wastewater treatment facilities in the
planning area and presented a brief discussion of the question of whether
the need for sewers around Island Lake was so great that immediate sewering
of the lake was justified. The Regional Alternatives Analysis Report
examined the alternatives presented in the MLWSD and Barnum facilities
plans, and presented altered costs to determine whether it was cost-effec-
tive to include the City of Barnura and the corridor between the Cities of
Moose Lake and Barnum as components of a regional collection and treatment
alternative. The report also addressed the possibility of including the
Hanging Horn Lakes area adjacent to Barnum in the alternatives.
The Phase I Environmental Report (USEPA 1981) concluded that:
• Available information was unreliable and insufficient to
address the issues identified in the 11 July 1980 NOI and
therefore the second phase, completion of the full EIS, was
recommended.
• Separate consideration of the proposed sewering of Island
Lake would not be made in this EIS, since decentralized
alternatives were to be evaluated. A determination of the
cost-effectiveness of implementing Island Lake sewers alone
could be made later if the centralized collection and treat-
ment alternative was found, on completion of the EIS, to be
the most cost-effective approach for the planning area.
1-10
-------
• Barnum should be excluded from further study in the EIS
since the regional alternative does not provide a cost
advantage over the separate treatment plant alternative for
Barnum.
• The Hanging Horn Lake area would not be studied further in
the EIS. The preliminary analysis revealed no categorical
need for improved sewage treatment in the Hanging Horn Lake
area. This area was included only for the purpose of eval-
uating a regional alternative, and did not affect the recom-
mendation for Barnum.
Following the completion of Phase I of the EIS process, a Citizens'
Advisory Committee (CAC) meeting was held on 10 April 1981 and a public
information meeting was held on 24 April 1981 to review the two reports.
These meetings were the culmination of the public participation program
conducted throughout Phase I. At the CAC meeting and at the public meet-
ing, area residents expressed concern about the quality of published data
and other issues which they felt were not adequately supported or addressed
in the Phase I reports. Their major concerns were:
• Detailed soil surveys should be made that include the lake-
shore community and the entire development corridor around
the lakes.
• More accurate assessment of land use in the lakeshore com-
munity and development corridor should be made.
• The contribution of septic tank effluent to lake pollution
should be quantified.
• Public health risks associated with whole-body contact
recreation should be studied.
• The trophic conditions of the lakes should be further
studied.
• Public participation during the second phase of EIS pre-
paration should include a Citizens' Advisory Committee,
which would provide comments on preliminary and draft re-
ports.
Complete investigation of the public health concerns and the trophic
conditions of the lakes is beyond the scope of most rural lakes EISs.
However, in response to public expectations expressed in the meetings,
these investigations were performed.
1-11
-------
Phase II (completion of the EIS) addresses public concerns, as above,
and describes the data gaps and deficiencies which were identified in
reviewing the Phase I reports. Phase II includes the preparation of Draft
and Final Environmental Impact Statements (DEIS and FEIS) on the proposed
wastewater management alternatives for the area of most critical need
within the Moose Lake-Windemere Sanitary District.
1.4. Issues
Based on a review of USEPA's Notice of Intent to prepare an EIS, the
conclusions of the Phase I Reports, and the MLWSD Facility Plan, the fol-
lowing issues have been determined to be significant and are addressed in
this Environmental Impact Statement:
• Additional documentation is required to evaluate the need
for sewers around Island and Sturgeon Lakes, as proposed in
the Facility Plan.
• An evaluation of the relationship between documented fail-
ures of septic sypteras and water quality in the lakes was
not made in the MLWSD Facility Plan, and is needed, as is an
evaluation of the causes and effects of blue-green algal
blooms.
• An evaluation of the need for improved wastewater treatment
for residences in the Rush and Passenger Lakes area was not
presented in the Facility Plan. Additional needs documen-
tation is required for those areas.
• The recommended facilities planning alternative (the instal-
lation of sewers around Island Lake), if implemented, could
have significant adverse socioeconomic impacts on a number
of households in the service area which have low or fixed
incomes.
• The MLWSD facilities planning alternative could induce
additional development.
• The existing wastewater treatment facility of the City of
Moose Lake currently has a limited capacity to accept addi-
tional wastewater flows.
1-12
-------
2.0. WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES
2.1. Description of Existing Wastewater Collection and Treatment Facili-
ties
The City of Moose Lake owns and operates the facilities which treat
the wastewater collected by the Moose Lake city sewer system and by the
Moose Lake-Windemere Sanitary District (MLWSD) sewer system. Wastewater is
conveyed from the City and Sanitary District systems to a pumping station
located immediately northwest of the County Highway 61 bridge over the
Moose River. From this point, the wastewater is pumped via a force main
8,730 feet southwest to a lagoon treatment system located in Section 30 of
Moose Lake Township. The lagoon system provides secondary treatment and
effluent from the lagoon is discharged via a small channel to the Moose
River.
Sewage Collection System
The areas served by the wastewater collection system described above
are shown in Figure 2-1. The collection system in the City of Moose Lake
consists of vitrified clay pipes sized as follows:
Diameter Length
24" diameter 2,450'
21" 1,350'
15" 4,700' (State hospital sewer)
12" 200'
10" 2,070' (State hospital sewer)
8" 21,560'
6" 3,670'
The oldest sewers were constructed in 1916 and are located in the
downtown business district and in the southeast portion of the town along
Moose Lake.
A substantial amount of extraneous groundwater infiltration and storm-
water inflow (commonly referred to as infiltration and inflow, or I/I)
enters this wastewater collection system. This situation necessitates
frequent bypassing of wastewater at the main pumping station into the Moose
Horn River.
2-1
-------
Developed
Unsewered
Figure 2-1. Sewered and developed areas in the MLWSD.
2-2.
-------
The Facility Plan (PRC Consoer Townsend and Associates Ltd 1980) reports
that the peak monthly wastewater flow in the period from January 1977 to
November 1979 occurred during August 1978, when the daily average flow was
877,000 gallons per day (gpd) (including a 210,000 gpd base flow). The
amount of wastewater bypassed into the Moose Horn River is included as part
of the 877,000 gpd, because flow was determined from wastewater pumping
records. The facility planners have estimated that 1,330,000 gallons of
wastewater were bypassed over a 3-day period during August 1978. Further-
more, the facility planners note that there are other bypasses reported in
the monthly reports to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), and
express the suspicion that other bypasses occurred which were reported.
Because of the excessive I/I, the existing Moose Lake system is incapable
of accepting additional wastewater flow.
Wastewater Pumping Station
The Moose Lake wastewater pumping station and lagoon system were built
in 1965. Wastewater entering the station first passes through manually
cleaned bar screens, then enters a wet well. Screened wastewater is pumped
from the well by three alternating 585 gallons per minute (gpm) capacity
pumps. The station was originally equipped with flow measuring equipment
and recorders. This monitoring equipment is no longer operable. Flows
through the station currently are estimated by reading the elapsed-time
meters on the pumps. The pumps appear to be in good working order. How-
ever, peak wastewater flows exceed the current capacity of the pumping
station and force main. During periods of peak flow, wastewater is by-
passed directly to the Moose Horn River from the station.
There are three bypasses at the main pumping station as described
below:
• A bypass is located outside the pumping station in a man-
hole. It has a manually operated shear gate which is opened
when the interceptor sewer is sufficiently surcharged.
• The second bypass, located in the pumping station, is always
open. There is no evidence that bypassing has occurred
here, because the bypass is located 7 feet above the inter-
ceptor.
2-3
-------
• The third bypass also is located outside the pumping sta-
tion, in the manhole serving the forceraain to the lagoons.
This bypass is utilized when the pumping station cannot
accommodate the wastewater flow even when the first bypass
is opened.
Wastewater Treatment Lagoons
A plan view of the existing lagoon system is presented in Figure 2-2.
Except for repair work done to one of the lagoon dikes in 1981, the system
has remained essentially unchanged since its construction in 1965, when it
replaced a treatment plant which had been built in 1935.
The 10-inch diameter force main from which the pumping station dis-
charges, exits into a distribution hub that regulates the flow into each of
the six primary treatment lagoons, which total 43 acres. Effluent from the
primary lagoons flows to a 15.2-acre secondary treatment lagoon, from which
it is discharged semi-annually to the Moose River. All seven of these
lagoons are facultative (containing both aerobic and anaerobic zones) and
no mechanical aeration is provided. The existing permitted design capacity
of the lagoon system is 444,000 gpd, with a detention time of 196 days.
However, MPCA has indicated that if significant new flows are connected to
the system, there will be a requirement that the lagoons be upgraded to
meet newer restrictive design criteria (By telephone, Mr. Larry Zdon, MPCA,
to WAPORA, Inc. 15 July 1982). Based on the new design criteria, MPCA
calculates the capacity of the lagoon system at 316,100 gpd, with a deten-
tion time of 180 days, based on an active storage depth of 3 feet and a
sludge storage depth of 2 feet (Section 2.3.4). There is adequate addi-
tional land adjacent to the site for a major expansion of the lagoon sys-
tem.
2.1.1. Existing Centralized Treatment System Discharge Characteristics
The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for
the City of Moose Lake lagoon system was issued on 27 February 1980. The
effluent limitations listed in NPDES permit (MN0020699) are shown in Table
2-1.
2-4
-------
Q
cr
TOWER
RD.
CO
cr
o
u.
u
EXISTING SYSTEM
— ™» INLET FORCE MAIN
8 FLOW TO PONDS
» FLOW FROM PONDS
8 OUTLET
F) POND NUMBERS
1-6 PRIMARY
7 SECONDARY
2l POND BOTTOM ELEVATIONS
Figure 2-2. Plan view of existing wastewater treatment lagoons for
the City of Moose Lake treatment plant.
2-5
-------
Table 2-1. NPDES effluent limitations for the City of Moose Lake wastewater lagoon system.
The discharge is limited as specified below using a maximum drawdown rate of 6 inches per day from
the secondary cell for calculating pounds and kilograms:
EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS CONTROLLED DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS
Average During
Discharge Period * Notes
5-day biochemical oxygen demand (BOD ) 25 mg/1 513 Ibs/day, 233 kg/day (1) (3)
Total suspended solids (TSS) 30 mg/1 615 Ibs/day, 279 kg/day (1)
Fecal coliform bacteria 200 MPN/100 ml (2)
Turbidity 25 NTU (1)
The pH shall not be less than 6.5 nor greater than 8.5. These upper and lower limitations are not subject to
averaging and shall be met at all times.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
The discharge shall not contain oil or other substances in amounts sufficient to create a visible color film
on the surface of the receiving waters.
* In addition, the seven consecutive day average shall not exceed 45 mg/1 BOD , (923 Ibs day, 419 kg/day),
45 mg/1 TSS, (923 Ibs/day, 419 kg/day), and 400 MPN/100 ml fecal coliform bactsria.
Notes: (1) Arithmetic mean (2) Geometric mean (3) For the average during the discharge period, the effluent
concentration shall not exceed the stated value or 15% of the arithmetic mean of the average value
for influent samples collected during the related treatment period (most restrictive value).
-------
2.1.2. Operation and Maintenance of Existing Facilities
Under dry weather conditions, the existing lagoon treatment system is
capable of adequately treating all the wastewater it receives. The water
quality of representative samples taken from the secondary treatment lagoon
is presented in Table 2-2. This information was obtained from the City of
Moose Lake's operating records. No records exist for the quality of the
effluent when it was being discharged into the Moose River. In accordance
with the NPDES permit, the operation of the pond system, insofar as is
practical, is to avoid effluent discharge to the Moose Horn River during
low stream flow periods. Furthermore, prior approval of any discharge is
required by MPCA. The effluent discharge velocity is limited to avoid
shock loads and to avoid disturbing bottom sediments of the Moose Horn
River. The maximum drawdown of secondary cells is 6 inches per day.
However, past inspections by the MPCA (Compliance Monitoring Surveys)
have found that unauthorized discharges were occurring and that system
maintenance was inadequate (excessive vegetation was observed on dikes, in
addition to apparent seepage through one of the dikes of the secondary
cells). The MPCA has issued a Citation for Violation. The limited in-
fluent wastewater quality data that are available are listed in Table 2-31
2.1.3. Problems Caused By Centralized Treatment Plant Discharges
Water quality in the secondary treatment lagoon exceeded NPDES limits
on 29 April 1980, probably as a result of operational problems. The most
recent water quality data (autumn, 1981) indicates that the plant was
capable of achieving 5-day biochemical oxygen demand (BOD ) and suspended
solids (SS) treatment which brings effluent quality below limits in the
NPDES permit for the facility. A compliance schedule directs that the
bypasses/overflows be eliminated or controlled.
2.1.4. Existing Wastewater Management
The MLWSD includes Moose Lake Township in Carlton County and Windemere
Township in Pine County (Figure 2-3). Although the MLWSD geo-
2-7
-------
Table 2-2. Water quality in the secondary treatment lagoon of the City of
Moose Lake wastewater treatment facility.
Date
29 April 1980
17 May 1980
15 May 1980
20 May 1980
22 May 1980
08 Sept. 1980
30 Sept. 1980
02 Oct. 1980
06 Oct. 1980
09 Oct. 1980
10 July 1981
29 July 1981
14 Sept. 1981
02 Oct. 1981
09 Oct. 1981
NPDES Limits
BOD,. (mg/1)
J
27
11
24
5
15
17
14
7
5
3
4
7
5
4
6
25
Suspended
Solids (mg/1)
70
18
22
25
4
7
5
4
7
2
3
9
2
3
2
30
Turbidity
(NTU)
17
7
7
8
5
8
6
6
6
6
6
6
3
3
4
25
Table 2-3. Influent wastewater quality to the City of Moose Lake waste-
water treatment facility
Date
07-15-81
10-23-80
04-01-80
BOD
mg/1
95
107
93
SS
mg/1
92
216
102
£S.
6.8
7.7
7.5
2-8
-------
MLWSD Facilities Planning Area
Figure 2-3. Facilities planning area for the MLWSD.
2-9
-------
graphical boundaries include the City of Moose Lake, the City is a separate
political jurisdiction. The MLWSD has sewered the areas around Coffee Lake
and Sand Lake. The wastewater from these lakeshore areas is treated at the
City of Moose Lake wastewater treatment lagoon system. Two areas within
the MLWSD that have significant populations are the areas around Island and
Sturgeon Lakes. These areas both utilize on-site wastewater management
systems.
2.1.5. Wastewater Management Planning
A separate wastewater Treatment Facility Plan has been prepared for
the MLWSD. This wastewater management planning study was funded under the
201 Construction Grants Program. The Federal government (through USEPA)
provided 75% of the funding; the State government (through the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency [MPCA]) contributed 15%; and each local jurisdic-
tion paid for 10%. The Facility Plan recommends specific actions for
design and construction to remedy existing problems and to provide adequate
wastewater management for the next 20 years. However, before USEPA commits
additional funds to implement these measures, it must ensure that the
recommended actions are cost-effective, environmentally sound, and imple-
mentable. USEPA's decision to prepare an EIS for the MLWSD reflects these
concerns.
Consoer, Townsend & Associates Ltd. prepared the Facility Plan for the
MLWSD. The plan recommended the following major actions:
• Construction of collection sewers around Island and Sturgeon
Lakes.
• Construction of interceptor sewers and wastewater pumping
stations to convey wastewater from the Island Lake and
Sturgeon Lake areas to the existing Moose Lake wastewater
collection system.
• Modifications to the existing Moose Lake interceptor sewers.
• Removal of some extraneous flows (infiltration/inflow [I/I]
corrections to the Moose Lake wastewater collection system
in accordance with the recommendations of a Sewer System
Evaluation Survey [SSES]).
2-10
-------
• Construction of an overflow pond for short-term storage
(i.e., storm events) of the extraneous flows (I/I) that
cannot be removed economically from the wastewater convey-
ance system.
• Renovation or construction of a new main wastewater pumping
station.
• Modification and expansion of the existing Moose Lake lagoon
wastewater treatment system.
2.2. Description of Existing On-site Waste Treatment Systems
Information on the number of on-site waste treatment systems, the
types of systems in use, and problems with their design and performance has
been obtained from eight area-specific sources. The necessary literature
reviews, file searches, and original data gathering efforts were made
between August 1981 and May 1982. This research reflects current published
and unpublished information and was done to provide the background infor-
mation on on-site systems introduced in the following section (2.2.1.).
Determination of need for waste treatment alternatives will be based on
this information.
Enumeration of the on-site systems in the project area was accomp-
lished by the review of public tax rolls, USGS topographic maps (1979), and
aerial photographs (USEPA 1981); by reference to information in the MLWSD
Facility Plan (Consoer Townsend Associates Ltd. 1980); and by direct inves-
tigation through the use of two property owner survey techniques. These
information sources also were utilized to determine the types of systems in
use and problems with those systems.
An overview of this combined data base, as identified in the following
eight sections, reveals that currently there are approximately 400 on-site
waste treatment systems in the area surrounding Island, Sturgeon, Rush, and
Passenger Lakes. The boundary of this land area, hereafter referred to as
the "project area", is presented in Figure 2-4. Available data indicate
that within the service area septic tanks are the most common type of
system in use (80%), followed by privies (10%), holding tanks (5%), and
combination or "hybridized" systems (2%). Existing information also in-
2-11
-------
Figure 2-4. The EIS project area. Boundary of the project area is delineated
by hatched line. Windemere Townships, the larger area, is
delineated by the solid line.
2-12
-------
dicates that most on-site waste treatment systems in use are functioning
properly. The types of problems currently being encountered and the fre-
quency and severity of those problems, are discussed in detail in Sections
2.2.2. and 2.2.3. Additional data on the distribution of developed lots
within the service area are presented in Section 3.2.1.
2.2.1. Data Pertinent to the Assessment of On-site Waste Treatment
Systems
USEPA determined from the the report on Phase I of this EIS, and from
review comments made by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and the
Citizens Advisory Committee that additional information was required for
preparation of the balance of the EIS. Much of the requisite effort in-
volved gathering new data pertinent to the assessment of on-site waste
treatment systems. The new sources of information were:
• A soil survey of a portion of Pine County inclusive of the
land adjacent to Island, Sturgeon, Rush, and Passenger
Lake s.
• Information in the MLWSD Facility Plan and related data pro-
vided by the MLWSD.
• Mailed questionnaire responses from property owners within
the service area.
• A field survey of septic leachate sources to the lakes.
• A tabulation of well water quality data for critical lake-
shore areas, based on the well-log files of the Minnesota
Department of Public Health.
• Two color-infared aerial photographic surveys of lakeshore
areas designed to locate obvious septic leachate break-
throughs.
• The data contained in the permit files of the Pine County
Sanitarian on recent on-site system construction and mainte-
nance.
• A follow up survey to answer questions unanswered by the
other surveys, including telephone interviews with property
owners and site visits to assess current land use and devel-
opment patterns.
2-13
-------
Each source of information will be referred to in the analysis of the
need for wastewater management alternatives. A complete description of the
available data is provided in the following sections.
2.2.1.1. Soil Survey of a Portion of Windemere Township
Accurate soil data are necessary to assess on-site system performance
and to assess the design prerequisites for sewage collection and treatment
facilities. In preparation of this EIS, soil properties in areas with
significant amounts of unsewered residential development were determined by
making a comprehensive soil survey of a portion of Windemere Township, and
by analyzing the particle size distribution of representative soils. The
soil survey encompassed approximately 7,000 acres of land around Island,
Sturgeon, Rush, and Passenger Lakes, and was conducted during the period of
14 September to 6 November 1981. As a result of the soil survey, soils
were identified and classified, a soils map was prepared, and interpreta-
tions of the limitations of the soils were made in regard to on-site waste-
water treatment.
Development of the Soil Survey
Prior to preparation of this EIS, a modern comprehensive soil survey
had not been developed for Pine County, which includes the surveyed Winde-
mere Township area. To obtain the needed soils data, soil mapping and
sample collection were done by a certified professional Soil Scientist with
previous field experience in the region. USDA Soil Conservation Service
(SCS) classifications and terminology were used in the development of the
project area soil survey. The boundaries of the survey were semi-rectan-
gular in shape and were entirely within Windemere Township. The surveyed
area (Figure 2-5) was bounded by Carlton County to the north, Interstate
Highway 35 on the west, and non-linear boundaries approximately 0.5 miles
to the east and south of the four lakes. These boundaries were selected to
include all platted lakeshore properties and contiguous, unplatted areas
within the drainage basins of the four project area lakes. Access to
private property was not obtained on one parcel adjacent to the northeast
shore of Sturgeon Lake.
2-14
-------
K5
I
Area dominated by soils with
loamy subsoil or substratum
(Duluth-Dusler Association)
Area dominated by sandy soils
and loamy soils with gravelly-sand
or sandy substratum
(Omega-NemadJI Association)
Soil survey boundary
Figure 2-5.Soil survey boundaries and major soil associations. Derived from the soil survey
results (Finney 1981) and from the Pine County General Soil Map (SCS 1975).
-------
The soil survey findings are presented in detail in Appendix B of this
EIS. The map produced as a result of the field survey was prepared at a
scale of approximately 6 inches to the mile. This original soil map was
re-photographed at approximately the same scale, in a series of 12 over-
lapping plates, and also is included in Appendix B. A copy of the original
soils map is held by USEPA, Region V.
General Soil Associations
The surveyed area includes two distinct soil associations which are
adjacent to each other. The soils surrounding Island Lake and the northern
and eastern parts of Sturgeon Lake (Figure 2-5), were formed in glacial
till and contain relatively high proportions of silt and clay (e.g., Duluth
series). The soils surrounding Rush and Passenger Lakes and the southern
shores of Sturgeon Lake were formed in glacial outwash and are primarily
sandy in texture (e.g., Omega series). These zones are characterized as
soil associations: the Duluth-Dusler association to the north, and the
Omega-Nemadji association to the south (USDA, General Soil Map, Pine Coun-
ty, 1978).
The soil associations of the surveyed area can be characterized super-
ficially by two types of associated vegetation. The soils of the Omega-
Nemadji association, which were formed in glacial outwash sands, are some-
what acidic as a result of the processes of weathering and leaching. Field
observations of the surveyed area and inspection of aerial photographs
indicate that coniferous forests dominate on the sandy, more acid soils of
the southern association while deciduous forests dominate the more clayey
soils of the northern association. The transition zone between the two
soil associations has no distinct vegetative type that is apparent by
visual inspection. However, the soil survey provided additional infor-
mation on the transition zone between these two major soil associations. A
previously unclassified, intermediate soil series was identified in this
transition zone and was named Duluth Variant. It is characterized by a
substratum of loamy soils similar to the Duluth series, overlain by a
mantle of sandy soils similar to the Omega series.
2-16
-------
2.2.1.2. Information Contained in the Moose Lake-Windemere Sanitary Dis-
trict Facility Plan
During preparation of the Facility Plan, the MLWSD conducted a lot-by-
lot survey around Island and Sturgeon Lakes to determine the problems with
existing on-site systems. This survey was conducted in 1980 by MLWSD staff
and commission members with the help of interested local residents. The
methodology used and the results obtained from this survey were discussed
in detail in the Phase I Environmental Report (USEPA 1981). A summary of
the information contained in the Facility Plan which characterized problems
with on-site systems is presented in Table 2-4.
Table 2-4. Summary of MLWSD lot-by-lot survey findings.
Number of Lots With Problems
Type of Problem Island Lake Sturgeon Lake
Total lots surveyed 156 173
Surface failures 42 6
Sewer back-up 0 5
Tight soil 154 90
Groundwater table 71 82
Distance from the lake (75 feet) 54 51
Lot size 11 21
Restricted water use 10 4
Lot floods 6 0
Well isolation 35 101
Frequent rehabilitation 2 ND
Holding tanks 15 17
Privies 40 39
ND - not determined.
The MLWSD survey of on-site problems did not encompass lots in the vicinity
of Rush and Passenger Lakes or in the Wild Acres and Hogan's Acres subdi-
visions. The types of problems enumerated in the Facility Plan are catego-
rically not identical to those used by the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency and the US Environmental Protection Agency to evaluate the need for
2-17
-------
improved waste management in an area. The two problem categories evaluated
by the MLWSD which are most directly comparable to state and federal needs
documentation guidelines and to the questionnaire results cited in Section
2.2.1.3 are:
• Ponding or surface failures associated with the leachate
field and
• Sewer backups within the residence.
The lots cited as having these types of problems during the 1980 MLWSD
survey were also surveyed through the questionnaire and followup surveys in
1982. Comparisons between these data sources are made in Section 2.2.3.
2.2.1.3. Mailed Questionnaire Survey
To obtain current information on existing on-site systems, a question-
naire was mailed to each property owner in Windemere Township. The objec-
tive of the questionnaire was to determine the types of on-site systems
that are in use in the project area, the kinds of problems or malfunctions
that residents have experienced with those systems, and the frequency of
system maintenance. The questionnaire was not designed to provide detailed
information on the design and functioning of every aspect of the on-site
systems. The survey results were evaluated in conjunction with information
derived from Sanitary District records and from field investigations to
identify problems associated with on-site systems in specific segments of
the Sanitary District.
Methodology
In October 1981, a four-page questionnaire and a cover letter were
mailed to all property owners in Windemere Township. The first mailing
went to property owners with land on or near the four project area lakes,
and a subsequent mailing was sent to property owners in subdivisions and
outlying areas. The mailing list was developed from County property tax
records for Windemere Township, and contained a total of 587 names. To
facilitate responses, a self-addressed, stamped envelope was included with
each questionnaire.
2-18
-------
facilitate response. The cover letter stressed that all responses would be
confidential and would be combined with other responses for the purposes of
analysis.
Although the tax records documented 587 property owners within the
township, 31 of the questionnaires sent to tax record addresses were re-
turned as undeliverable. In addition, not all of the properties listed on
the tax rolls are developed. A building count based on parallel review of
1974 USGS maps and November 1980 USEPA Environmental Monitoring Systems
Laboratory (EMSL) remote imagery indicated a total of 475 housing units
within Windemere Township (USEPA 1981). Accordingly, this figure can be
used as a basis for determining the Township response rate to the question-
naire. A total of 249 valid questionnaires were received out of a possible
475, for an overall response rate of approximately 52%. A copy of the
questionnaire and cover letter are included in Appendix C.
Results of the Questionnaire by Individual Lake or Subdivision
Island Lake
There are an estimated 151 housing units on the platted land area
surrounding around Island Lake. A total of 89 questionnaires were received
from property owners in this area. Eight of those respondents indicated
that their land currently is not developed. The remaining 81 respondents
reported developed lots with homes or cabins and on-site systems. Of the
151 housing units around Island Lake, 64 are estimated to be used on a
year-round (permanent) basis and 87 are used seasonally. Responses to the
questionnaire were received from 58% of the permanent households (37 re-
sponses) and 51% of the seasonal households (44 responses).
Most of the Island Lake area respondents reported septic systems as
the primary method of on-site treatment. Of the 81 systems for which
questionnaire responses were received, 54 are septic tanks, 15 are privies,
and 12 are holding tanks. Six of the respondents using septic systems also
indicated that secondary treatment or "backup" systems also are used.
2-19
-------
These included two holding tanks and four cess pools used in conjunction
with septic systems.
Most of the on-site systems described by Island Lake area respondents
discharge to a seepage field (41; 66%). Two respondents have systems that
discharge to a seepage field plus surface discharge, 4 respondents have
systems that discharge through a tile line, and 15 respondents reported
that discharge is by other means. (There were 62 responses to this ques-
tion.)
Based on the questionnaire responses, the on-site systems in use
around Island Lake range in age from 2 years to more than 20 years. Al-
though 27 of the 71 responses to this question (38%) reported systems less
than 10 years old, there were 31 responses (44%) indicating systems greater
than 15 years old. The remaining 13 systems (18%) are between 10 and 14
years old.
Problems with septic systems were reported by 32 of the 54 septic
system owners. None of the property owners using privies reported prob-
lems, but 4 of the 12 property owners using holding tanks reported prob-
lems. The problems reported by septic system owners included backup of
wastes into the house (11), odorous water surfacing at the tile field (3),
backup of wastes and odorous water (15), and 3 other responses that do not
encompass any of these problems. Most of the reported problems were solved
by pumping the septic tank, by fixing a broken pipe, or by allowing a
frozen drainfield to thaw. Few of the responses indicated chronic problems
requiring frequent maintenance. Of the 75 responses pertaining to the
questions on system maintenance, 25 reported that regular maintenance was
performed on the system, 26 reported that the system was maintained only
when a problem occurred, and 14 reported that maintenance has never been
undertaken with the on-site system.
Sturgeon Lake
There are an estimated 197 housing units around Sturgeon Lake. A total
of 98 questionnaires were received from property owners with lots near or
2-20
-------
adjacent to Sturgeon Lake. Ten of the property owners indicated that their
land currently is not developed or used. Two property owners provided no
information other than that their property is used during the year. Five
property owners indicated that they do not have houses on their property,
but that the land is used during the year and on-site systems, primarily
privies, are present. The remaining 81 respondents (41%) reported deve-
loped lots with homes or cabins and on-site systems. Of the 197 housing
units around Sturgeon Lake, 42 are estimated to be used on a year-round
basis and 155 are used seasonally. Responses to the questionnaire were
received from 57% of the permanent households (24 responses) and from 37%
of the seasonal households (57 responses). The property owners who do not
have houses on their property, but do have on-site systems, accounted for
five responses. Questionnaire response rate for the Sturgeon Lake area
property owners was much less than for the Island Lake area in the seasonal
use category (37% versus 51%, respectively).
Septic systems used alone are the predominant on-site system used by
Sturgeon Lake area residents; 42 of the 86 systems (49%) identified by
Sturgeon Lake respondents are septic systems. Combination systems also are
used; 18 of the respondents (21%) indicated that a combination of on-site
systems are used to treat their wastewater. Among the combinations re-
ported by the respondents are septic tank-cess pool combinations (8),
septic system-privy combinations (2), septic tank-holding tank combinations
(1), and other combinations of holding tanks, privies, and cess pools. The
remaining systems in use are privies (13; 15%), holding tanks (9;11%), and
cesspools (4; 5%).
With few exceptions, the on-site systems of the Sturgeon Lake area
survey respondents discharge to a seepage field only. One respondent
indicated that the system utilizes a seepage field plus surface discharge
and four respondents indicated that surface discharge through a tile line
is used.
The on-site systems in use around Sturgeon Lake were reported to range
in age from less than 1 year to more than 20 years. Sixteen of the 80
responses (20%) listed their systems as less than 5 years old, 39 (49%)
2-21
-------
indicated systems between 5 and 10 years old and 25 (31%) indicated that
their systems are greater than 15 years.
Problems were reported by 25 of the respondents who used septic sys-
tems. The problems indicated by septic system owners included: the backup
of wastes into the house (15), odorous water surfacing at the tile field
(2), backups and odorous water surfacing (4), and other problems (4). In
general these problems were solved by either pumping the septic tank, by
fixing a broken pipe, or by allowing a frozen drainfield to thaw. There
were few responses that indicated chronic problems requiring frequent
maintenance. In many reported cases (43%), maintenance of on-site systems
was undertaken only after a problem developed.
Rush and Passenger Lakes
A total of 24 questionnaires were received from property owners with
lots within the land area immediately surrounding Rush and Passenger lakes.
Nine of the respondents indicated that their property is not developed or
used. The remaining 15 respondents have developed lots with homes or
cabins and on-site systems. Of these 15 respondents, 13 indicated that
their property is used on a seasonal basis and 2 indicated that they are
permanent residents.
Privies and septic systems were reported as the predominant on-site
systems used by the Rush and Passenger lakes respondents; 6 of the 15 sys-
tems identified are privies and are 5 septic tanks. The remaining systems
reported are either cess pools (3) or cess pool-holding tank combinations
(1). The septic tanks and cess pools all discharge to a seepage field (7)
or to a tile line (1).
Most of the respondents indicated that systems in use around Rush and
Passenger Lakes are less than 10 years old (6 of the systems are between 5
and 10 years old). Four respondents, though, reported systems greater than
20 years old, including one privy reported as 52 years old and another
reported as 45 years old.
2-22
-------
All of the respondents reported that they had never had problems with
their on-site systems, although 4 of the respondents reported that main-
tenance is done on the system "after a problem develops." Most of the
systems are maintained on a regular basis (8 of 14 responses). Two re-
spondents indicated that their systems are never maintained.
Wild Acres and Hogan's Subdivisions
A total of 36 questionnaires were received from property owners in two
adjacent subdivisions just northeast of Rush and Passenger Lakes. Fifteen
property owners indicated that their lots currently are undeveloped. The
remaining 21 respondents reported having developed lots where on-site
systems are present. All but 3 of these 21 property owners indicated that
they are seasonal residents.
The on-site systems reported include 9 septic systems, 6 privies, 3
holding tanks and 1 cess pool. Two combination systems also were repor-
ted, both septic tank-cess pool combinations. All but 3 of the systems
(excluding the privies and holding tanks) discharge to seepage fields. The
other 3 discharge to tile lines.
Because these are relatively new residential subdivisions, most of the
systems are less than 5 years in age. Two respondents indicated that their
systems are between 5 and 10 years in age.
None of the respondents reported having problems with their on-site
systems. Most of the responses also indicated that the systems are regu-
larly maintained; 7 of the 16 responses to this question reported regular
maintenance and 6 reported that maintenance has never been performed. One
respondent indicated that maintenance was performed after a problem devel-
ops and 2 reported other maintenance arrangements.
Outlying Properties
Within the service area there are a number of residences not having
riparian access and not located in the Hogan's or Wild Acres subdivisions.
2-23
-------
These rural residences are principally farm houses or other permanent local
dwellings located on main roads. There are approximately 50 outlying
residences within the service area. Two questionnaire responses were re-
ceived from these outlying residences, indicating no problems with on-site
systems.
2.2.1.4. EMSL Aerial Survey
The USEPA Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory acquired remote
sensing imagery of the project area in late 1980. False-color infrared
aerial photography and multispectral scanner imagery were collected on 21
October 1980. Additional color aerial photography was collected over the
project area on 10 November 1980. The color and false-color infrared
aerial photography were stereoscopically examined for evidence of apparent
on-site septic system malfunctions, for indications of algal blooms on area
lakes, and for land use/land cover data in the project area (USEPA 1981).
Multispectral scanner imagery was computer-analyzed to determine relative
surface water temperature differences near the shorelines of the project
area lakes. The temperature differences were evaluated as a possible
indication of the entrance of warm wastewater or septic tank effluent into
a lake.
The analyses of on-site septic leachate field malfunctions with remote
sensing imagery requires detection of variations in color tones of vegeta-
tion which may result from septic effluent rising to or near the soil
surface. With the use of color infrared photography, vegetation appears in
varying red tones which may represent different plant species and growth
stages as well as plant vigor. The October fly-over should have captured
remnants of vegetative growth that may have resulted from drainfield sur-
face failures.
Results of the analyses described above identified only seven on-lot
septic tank-drainfield systems that appeared to have vegetative "signa-
tures" which indicated a surface failing on-lot system. A subsequent field
trip to the area for ground truth verification was not conducted due to
snow cover. The photo interpretation indicated that three systems around
2-24
-------
Island Lake and four systems around Sturgeon Lake were potential failures,
with no indicated failures around Passenger or Rush lakes. The accuracy of
associating an aerially detected system failure with ground-truth verified
problems has been marginally successful in other studies (Rural Lake Pro-
jects 1-6, USEPA 1978-1981).
For Island Lake, the EMSL remote sensing data indicated three probable
system failures along the northwest shore where, coincidentally, problems
were also described by the lot-by-lot survey and by the septic leachate
survey. The aerial photography did not indicate any probable system fail-
ures along the north shore of Island Lake, a problem area as determined by
other sources.
For one isolated segment of Sturgeon Lake (Sturgeon Island) there was
a general concurrence of information on probable failing systems from the
lot-by-lot survey, the septic leachate survey, and the remote sensing
imagery analysis. The two problems detected by the analysis of the aerial
photography of the Sturgeon Island segment of Sturgeon Lake were not as-
sociated with specific problem lots defined by the other surveys, but were
in the general area of other identified problem lots. The other two cases
of aerially detected probable failures on Sturgeon Lake were not at all
corroborated by other information.
Analysis of the Passenger and Rush Lake aerial surveys indicated no
probable system failures. This is consistent with other collected infor-
mation indicating few, if any, problems with on-site systems for these two
lakes.
The discrepancy between the larger number of problems indicated from
ground based surveys and the relatively few problems indicated from the
combined methods of aerial survey could be attributed to one or several of
the following factors:
• Portions of lots where the septic system is located were ob-
structed by shadows and could not be stereoscopically ana-
lyzed.
2-25
-------
• Some seasonal residences may not have been in use for seve-
ral months prior to the time of the fly over, allowing the
drainfield to recuperate, lowering the groundwater level,
and resulting in a loss of vegetative vigor.
• The drainfields of some residences were obscured by brush or
other small woody bushes and some residences have gardens
planted over the drainfields. These gardens could mask
potential drainfield failures.
Imagery information collected from this aerial survey was used in
other sections of this EIS. For example, the multi-spectral scanner ima-
gery gave evidence for general groundwater flow directions into the lakes,
and was utilized to help resolve differences found in the highly specific
groundwater flows measured during the septic leachate survey. Imagery used
to formulate lakeshore area land use maps in the EMSL survey also was used
in conjunction with other data sources to map land uses in the watershed of
each lake. These maps were used as the basis for projecting nutrient
export values from the land. No algal blooms were indicated on the four
lakes by the false color infrared or by the color photography.
2.2.1.5. Septic Leachate Survey of Island, Sturgeon, Rush, and Passenger
Lakes
Interviews with lakeshore residents, visual inspections, and remote
sensing imagery can detect obvious backups and surface malfunctions of
on-site wastewater treatment systems. However, these techniques do not
detect poorly treated effluents that may enter lakes or streams via soil
infiltration and groundwater transport. Because of the highly variable
nature of the slopes and soils around the surveyed lakes, the location of
such below ground effluent sources would be difficult to predict based on
conventional sanitary survey techniques. In the septic leachate survey,
on-site waste treatment system effluent plumes were located and monitored
directly utilizing instrumentation designed specifically for that purpose.
Potential effluent plumes entering Island, Sturgeon, Rush, and Pas-
senger lakes were located with an ENDECO Type 2100 Septic Leachate Detector
System. Baseline or "ambient" water quality of the lakes was first mea-
sured in mid-lake to calibrate the response of the instrument to natural
2-26
-------
conductivity (a reflection of ionized mineral salts) and to dissolved
organic matter (fluorescence). Shorelines were then surveyed to locate
areas with relatively high conductivity and fluoresence, these being areas
where inadequately treated wastewater may be emerging. Small areas of the
lake bed where elevated amounts of organic matter and conductivity are
found to be emerging into the water are termed "suspected effluent plumes".
The 9 suspected wastewater or effluent plumes which appeared to be the
strongest of the 39 such plumes detected were sampled as they emerged.
These samples were then analyzed in a laboratory for the water quality
parameters of interest. In addition, at the nine plumes where instrument
signals of relatively high amplitude were recorded, groundwater was sampled
at close intervals in a shoreline transect made perpendicular to the esti-
mated direction of plume movement. These groundwater samples were tested
with the leachate detector to locate the approximate plume centers through
which leachate moved from the failing system toward the lake. The ground-
water was then sampled at the plume center for subsequent laboratory anal-
ysis.
Sources other than septic tank effluent also can produce strong leach-
ate detector responses which can either mask or falsely indicate the detec-
tion of septic leachate plumes where evaluated amounts of natural organic
substances are present. Seven water quality samples were collected where
runoff water or intermittent streams entered the lakes to identify such
potential interference problems.
A discussion of the methods employed and the results of the septic
leachate survey are presented in Appendix C of this report.
Conclusions and Observations Based on the Leachate Survey
The more important conclusions and observations made based on the
septic leachate survey of Island Lake are that:
• The septic leachate survey of this lake was performed under
ideal conditions of calm weather and insignificant wave
activity.
2-27
-------
• Fifteen suspected wastewater plumes were identified. All of
them were found on the northwest shoreline between flow sta-
tions 1 and 13 (Figures 2-6 through 2-9). The influx of the
nutrients from the four suspected septic plumes sampled for
phosphorus and nitrates was very low as indicated by the low
levels measured at the point of plume emergence into the
lake.
• Background fluorescence and conductivity values are signifi-
cantly higher in the northern basin than in the southern
basin. This may be associated with the fact that sizeable
tributary streams enter the northern basin only.
• Six distinct stream plumes were located, and four of these
were in the northern basin. Moderate levels of fecal coli-
fonn bacteria were detected in five of the streams and
non-human sources are indicated by them.
• No potential public health problems associated with septic
sources of fecal coliform organisms in the surface waters of
Island Lake were indicated.
• Both surface water and groundwater were found to be recharg-
ing the northern basin and discharging from the southern
basin.
The more important conclusions and observations made based on the
septic leachate survey of Sturgeon Lake are that:
• The survey of Sturgeon Lake was performed under less than
ideal conditions due to the prevailing wind and wave action
along the downwind shores. This may have resulted in an
underestimation of the pollutional significance of on-site
systems at seasonally used residences.
• Groundwater was found to be discharging from Sturgeon Lake
along the southern shoreline between flow stations 35 and
39, accounting for the absence of septic leachate plumes
along this lake segment.
• Groundwater recharges Sturgeon Lake along the segment be-
tween flow stations 28 and 34. Six emergent plumes were
detected in this segment, indicating an area of possible
concern with regard to small waste flows management. Homes
along this segment were observed to be closer generally to
the shoreline than at other areas around the lake. However,
the water quality samples taken in the two suspected ef-
fluent plumes on this shoreline do not indicate a signifi-
cant influx of nutrients to the lake. Additionally, no high
concentrations of fecal coliform organisms were found.
2-28
-------
• Homes along the shoreline segment between stations 24
through 26 are located very close to the lake. No septic
plumes could be identified there, however, possibly because
of high ambient interference levels caused by two adjacent
runoff sources.
The more important conclusions and observations made based on the
septic leachate surveys of Rush and Passenger Lakes are that:
* Both Rush and Passenger Lakes are surrounded by highly per-
meable, sandy soils. These soils are ideal for the perco-
lation of septic tank effluent from the standpoint of waste-
water movement, but would also exhibit the passage of ef-
fluent plumes.
• Most of the homes near Rush Lake are built on a sand ridge
located between flow stations 48 and 51. Another sand ridge
extends from stations 44 to 46. The northeast corner of
this lake is swampland underlain by a mucky peat layer about
five feet thick.
* A total of three suspected plumes were located on Rush Lake,
and a total of four suspected plumes located on Passenger
Lake. In spite of the high soil permeability associated
with the sandy soils of this area no significant nutrient
influx was detected at emerging plumes and no elevated fecal
coliform levels were detected.
During the periods of 11-25 September 1981 and 2-9 October 1981,
groundwater flow velocity and direction were measured at points along the
shorelines of Sturgeon Lake, Island Lake, Passenger Lake, and Rush Lake.
The objective of these measurements was to support the analysis of the lea-
chate survey by characterizing shoreline segments in terms of groundwater
flow patterns. By identifying subsurface flow vectors, it is possible to
estimate the direction of groundwater effluent plume movement and to iden-
tify those shoreline areas where failing septic systems can cause the
greatest impacts on lake water quality.
A Groundwater Flowmeter System (Model 20) was used to evaluate the
direction and velocity of groundwater flow at selected locations on the
shorelines of the four project area lakes. The Flowmeter has a cylindrical
probe with radially projecting thermistor "spikes." Flow measurements were
obtained by inserting the probe in saturated soil at or slightly below the
water table surface. Access to the water table was achieved by digging
2-29
-------
shallow holes with a narrow-nosed shovel, 3-10 feet inland from the lake
shorelines. Prior to measurement of flow a minimum of 30 minutes was
allotted to permit the water table and thermistor array to achieve equi-
librium.
A standardizing method was used to improve the correlation between
laboratory instrument calibration and collected field data. A large sample
of sand was collected from a beach area on Island Lake. This sand was
thoroughly mixed and placed in a laminar flow tube of known cross-section
and flow. In this way the probe was calibrated to local soil having speci-
fic average pore size and permeability. Enough sand was collected to
backfill the holes dug at each flow station. Thus, all flow measurements
were made in soil matrices having uniform properties.
The groundwater flow vector data collected for the stations around the
shoreline of each lake are presented in Table 2-5. Locations of the ground-
water flow measurement stations are presented in Figures 2-6, 2-7, and 2-8
and 2-9.
During the initial survey in September 1981, groundwater flow measure-
ments around the four lakes were made during a period of little or no
precipitation; there had been no significant rainfall in the area for 1
month preceeding the study. Therefore, the measured groundwater flow data
are probably representative of low to average water table conditions in the
unconfined water table aquifer. Nine flow measurement stations were estab-
lished at the estimated plume centers during a subsequent period (early
October). The subsequent measurements were made after several days of
rainfall and provide information about groundwater flow when the water
table is at or above average height. Flow conditions in the confined
aquifer systems (below the unconfined water table) were not measured.
Conclusions and Observations Based on the Groundwater Flow Data
Groundwater apparently discharges from Island Lake along the shore-
line, west of a hypothetical line drawn through flow stations 15 and 9
(Figure 2-6). The anomalously high flow velocity recorded at Station 10
2-30
-------
Table 2-5. Groundwater flow velocities and directions as measured at "flow stations" established on the
shorelines of Island, Sturgeon, Rush, and Passenger Lakes.
Island Lake
Station
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18 1
19
20
21
22
23
23a
Apparent
Velocity
(ft. /day)
1.2
4.1
4.7
1.6
1.5
2.0
2.0
1.5
3.0
39.4
2.0
2.0
7.4
2.0
6.7
2.0
0.7
0.7
2.0
4.5
1.2
0.7
1.8
2.4
Azimuth
Direction
(degreea)
321
200
250
270
184
254
300
345
188
177
035
249
315
350
009
221
067
230
160
185
218
254
237
231
Sturgeon Lake
Station
1
24
25
26
27
281
29
30
31
32l
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
Apparent
Velocty
(ft. /day)
1.4
3.2
1.4
1.6
8.0
1.9
1.7
1.2
2.4
2.3
3.2
3.7
6.4
1.8
2.4
2.2
2.8
2.7
1.9
2.3
Azimuth
Direction
(degrees
260
212
170
122
220
355
151
185
233
329
324
173
196
272
230
222
341
248
028
273
Rush Lake
Station
*
44
45 1
45a
46
47
48
49
50
51
Station
t
52
53
54
55
57
581
59
Apparent
Velocity
(ft. /day)
1.2
2.3
3.1
7.6
3.0
1.2
2.0
U.I
2.4
Passenger Lake
Apparent
Velocity
(ft. /day)
1.9
1.8
2.2
2.2
1.4
3.8
3.5
Azimuth
Direction
(degrees)
235
015
317
147
228
256
147
012
210
Azimuth
Direction
(degrees)
179
140
223
320
350
145
289
Measured during period of above average precipitation (2-9 October, 1981).
(11-25 September, 1981).
All other measurements taken during period of low precipitation
-------
goose
farm
N
N3
U>
Locations of: groundwater flow monitoring stations,
suspected septic leachate plumes, stations where
groundwater quality samples were taken, and stations
where overland runoff (streams) were detected and
sampled in Island Lake.
-------
Figure 2-7. Locations of: groundwater flow monitoring
stations, suspected septic leachate plumes,
stations where groundwater quality samples
were taken, and stations where overland
runoff (streams) were detected and sampled
in Sturgeon Lake.
to
I
U)
u>
manure
* pile/cattle
farm on lake
-------
49
FLOW RATE FT/DAY
ill I i i
012345
Groundwater
Flow Station
NO SCALE
\0 Plume
<§ Stream
Figure 2-8.
Locations of: groundwater flow monitoring stations, suspected septic leachate
plumes, stations where groundwater quality samples were gathered, and locations
of stations where overland runoff(streams) were detected in Rush Lake.
-------
FLOW RATE FT/DAY
I
0
I
2
I
3
N
NO SCALE
Groundwater
Flow Station
Plume
52
54
Figure 2-9. Locations of: groundwater flow monitoring stations, suspected septic
leachate plumes, stations where groundwater quality samples were
gathered.
2-35
-------
(40 feet per day [ft/day]) was confirmed by additional measurements on
successive days. This high outflow from Island Lake occurs through a sand
and cobble zone at the base of a steep slope which overlooks the beach
area.
Based on the flow vectors measured in September 1981, groundwater re-
charges Island Lake along the shoreline between flow stations 8 and 2.
Between flow stations 15 and 1, the groundwater vectors displayed no con-
sistent trends. This latter segment contains the highest concentration of
lakefront homes and it is possible that under average water table condi-
tions, volumes of water percolating from on-site systems may be sufficient
to affect the overall flow pattern of groundwater movement due to localized
artificial recharge of the water table by domestic wastewater.
Based upon the association and distribution of soils in the region, it
appears that the southern and southwestern shores of Sturgeon Lake are
underlain by a glacial till which is veneered with a thick deposit of
outwash sands. These sands comprise a highly permeable, unconfined aquifer
underlain by the glacial till aquitard. The slopes along the southern
shoreline of Sturgeon Lake also are much less than on the till-covered
landscape surrounding the rest of the Lake. Geologic and topographic
characteristics result in complete groundwater discharge from Sturgeon Lake
along the shoreline between stations 35 and 40.
Groundwater flows into Sturgeon Lake along the beach area between sta-
tions 31 and 33. Numerous homes have been built around this embayment in
close proximity to the beach. The lakeward groundwater flow conditions ob-
served would contribute to the emergence of septic plumes there.
The highest flow velocity measurement recorded on Sturgeon Lake was at
station 28 (8 ft/day). This flow station is located at the juncture of an
inland swale with the shoreline. A surface water flow does not normally
exit from the swale, but surface waters may be discharging intermittently
during storm events. The significance of this depression is that it drains
an area presently in use as a dairy farm and groups of cows were seen
standing in the water. The shoreline segment between flow stations 40 and
2-36
-------
43 is characterized by narrow beach areas at the base of relatively steep
till slopes. Groundwater flow patterns along this segment appeared dif-
fuse. Distinct landward flow was not indicated.
The topography of the land surrounding Rush Lake indicates that it was
considerably larger in recent geologic history and may have been part of
Sturgeon Lake. Large swamplands demarcated by relict shorelines occur
northeast and south of Rush Lake, and are probably the result of eutro—
phication processes in parts of the former lake.
Surface water flowing from a broad swampland enters Rush Lake along
its northeastern and eastern shorelines. Surface water is discharged from
Rush Lake through a single small culvert to another broad swampland to the
south. Under base flow conditions, groundwater recharges Rush Lake along
its northern and eastern shores. Groundwater is discharged along the
southwest shoreline in a direction analogous to surface flows.
Flow stations 45 and 50 were established during the septic leachate
survey which followed a period of rainy weather (October 1981). The in-
creased flow rate at station 45a reflects this. Normally, increased preci-
pitation can be expected to increase groundwater flow toward a lake. Rush
Lake might not display this property because the relatively large watershed
area on the northeast may, under rainy conditions, introduce more water
than can be carried away by the single culvert. Rising lake levels would
then induce groundwater discharge along much of the remaining shoreline,
which would account for the outward flow recorded at station 50 and the
deflected flow direction at station 45a, relative to earlier flow data at
these stations (September 1981).
Surface water discharges from Passenger Lake into Big Slough Lake via
a small creek, the inlet of which lies approximately 100 feet south of
station 54. No sources of surface water influx to Passenger Lake were
observed. Passenger Lake is apparently recharged by groundwater along its
northern and southern shores. The flows observed at station 53 indicate
that subsurface flow toward Big Slough Lake to the southeast may occur
along the eastern shore of Passenger Lake. The measured easterly flow
2-37
-------
vector is analogous to this surface water flow trend. Flow station 59 was
established during the high water table conditions in October 1981. The
measured landward flow is probably a result of rising lake levels caused by
rapid groundwater influx to Passenger Lake along other shoreline segments.
The data from station 52 indicate that under average water table conditions
the groundwater vector in the vicinity of station 59 probably is lakeward.
The overall regional groundwater flow direction in the project area is
southerly. The effect of this southerly flux is to enhance the emergence
of septic leachate plumes on the northern shores of the lakes and inhibit
emergence on the southern lake shores (Septic Leachate Survey, Section
2.2.1.5.) There are isolated exceptions to this overall southerly direc-
tion of groundwater flux, expecially during periods of high precipitation.
Of the four lakes that were investigated, only Sturgeon and Rush Lakes
were shown to exhibit distinct groundwater interconnections. Lake water is
discharged to the outwash sands along the southern shore of Sturgeon Lake,
and some of this water eventually reaches Rush Lake by means of a marsh.
Surface water and groundwater discharged from the southwest shoreline of
Rush Lake flow in a south westerly direction, and ultimately drain into the
Willow River.
Groundwater entering Passenger Lake from the north, west, and south
ultimately flows east via a small creek to Big Slough Lake and then on to
the Willow River. Of the four lakes studied, Passenger Lake has the smal-
lest watershed area and is the most isolated in terms of regional ground-
water flow patterns.
2.2.1.6. Private Water Well Information
The leachate survey described in the previous section (2.2.1.5) de-
veloped a limited amount of water quality data to characterize the water
table aquifer in the vicinity of nine lakeshore residences. The results,
labeled as "background samples" of groundwater in the data tables prepared
for the leachate survey, indicate no extraordinary amounts of nitrate or
fecal coliforms (Appendix C). However, these limited groundwater data are
insufficient for the purpose of determining whether private wells in lake-
2-38
-------
shore homes are currently being contaminated with pollutants originating
from on-site waste treatment systems. To determine if well contamination
is a serious problem and that as a result improved wastewater management is
necessary, a series of questions should be addressed such as:
• How deep are the wells?
• How permeable are the soils around the wells?
• Does groundwater at the aquifers being tapped move from the
leachate field toward wells?
• Are naturally dissolved groundwater constituents already at
levels which constitute a potential public health problem?
• Is there documentation of private well contamination from
wastewater?
• Can fertilizer or animal waste in feedlots be a source of
groundwater contamination?
Using the information presented in this report, a number of deductions
can be made, a priori, to focus on lakeshore segments where private water
well contamination is most likely to be occurring. The aforementioned
questions can then be addressed for private wells in identified critical
lakeshore segments to determine if further investigation is warranted. For
example, it is assumed that tight soils which may preclude satisfactory
performance of septic systems also generally preclude the recharge of
groundwater with septic leachate (USEPA 1978, pc-60). This assumption
applies in much of the northern portion of the service area, where Duluth
Series soils predominate.
The predominance of Duluth soils around most of Island Lake and also
around the northern half of Sturgeon Lake was discussed in the Soil Survey
prepared as a portion of this EIS. The testing of soil particle size
distributions as documented in the Soil Survey, indicates that the Duluth
soils found around Island and Sturgeon Lakes are especially clayey and
that their clay content tends to increase with depth. This situation
results in very low rates of downward permeability for leachate and makes
contamination of groundwater to a depth greater than 20 feet extremely un-
likely.
2-39
-------
The inverse situation is found in an isolated area of sandy soils
located adjacent to the northwest shoreline of Island Lake and in the
remainder of the service area wherever sandy soils predominate. Shallow
domestic water wells located in sandy soils are the wells most likely to be
contaminated by septic leachate recharging the water table aquifer (USEPA,
1978, pc-69). The shallow "sand point" wells which are sometimes used to
tap the water table or "glacial drift" aquifer often are associated with
older or seasonal residences. A concentration of residences with shallow
wells located on lakeshore segments with sandy soils should be examined
critically for the potential of well contamination.
The Omega sandy loam soil series and Lake Beach soils of the project
area can practicably support seasonal development because of the incidental
ease with which well water may be withdrawn from shallow wells, and also
because of the ease with which septic leachate percolates through drain
fields. This coincidence of favorable leachate percolation characteristics
and water table aquifer accessibility may be associated with many of the
older lakeshore residences in the area. Where water use has been dras-
tically increased by year round residence in dwellings which still rely on
the original "sand point" well, this may increase the potential of well
contamination by septic leachate. However, a broad determination of the
need for better wastewater management in such situations must be made with
caution. Older wells may also be experiencing contamination by non-waste-
water sources such as surface water intrusion due to improper well vent
protection or due to cracked well casings, or other design faults. Ad-
ditionally, rapid development of a small land area where many shallow wells
are being used could induce upward movement of groundwater of objectionable
quality. In the final analysis, the discovery of objectionable well water
quality or even of the potential of septic leachate contamination in a few
isolated cases may more properly constitute a need for new, deeper wells
than for another means of waste treatment.
The mailed questionnaire responses, as described in Section 2.2.1.3.,
provide information on well depth for one third to one half of the resi-
dences within the service area (depending on locale). This information
allows an analysis to be made of the depths of wells at lakeshore res-
2-40
-------
idences in areas with Omega sandy loam soils or sandy Lake Beach soils.
Table 2-6 presents the well depth information taken from questionnaire
responses received from homeowners living in these sandy-soil areas.
Based on the questionnaire responses on well depth for the portions of
the service area defined in Table 2-6 as having sandy soils, the following
observations are made:
• Most residences located on the sandy soils along the north-
west shore of Island Lake have well depths in excess of 40
feet. This is perhaps because the accessible groundwater is
at or just above the 40-foot level.
• A large proportion of wells located on the sandy Lake Beach
soils near the neck of Sturgeon Island are less than 30 feet
in depth. This indicates the need to further investigate
the potential for well contamination by septic leachate.
• Shallow wells are uncommon in the sandy Omega series soils
along the south shore of Sturgeon Lake.
• A large proportion of the residences located on the sandy
Omega series soils surrounding Rush and Passenger Lakes have
wells less than 30 feet in depth. This indicates the need
for further investigation of the potential for well contami-
nation by septic leachate.
• Few private water wells in the Hogan's and Wild Acres deve-
lopments are less than 30 feet in depth. The median well
depth in this area is 40 feet, perhaps because the acces-
sible groundwater is at or just above this level.
Based on these observations, it appears that the potential for well
contamination by septic leachate is greatest in the land area just south of
the neck of Sturgeon Island and in the land area immediately surrounding
Rush and Passenger Lakes. Questionnaires received from property owners in
these two critical areas were re-examined and a total of 14 residences with
wells of less than the median depth were identified as suitable for study
in a follow-up well sampling program. Of the 14 residences thus identi-
fied, only one was in use as a permanent dwelling, and the other 13 sea-
sonal-use dwellings were owned by persons not living in the project area.
Since the summer season was over when this analysis was performed, it was
assumed that additional well sampling would not be feasible until the
2-41
-------
Table 2-6. Information on well depth in the portions of the service area
having permeable, sandy soils.
Number of
Que s t ionna ire
Respondents Number of
Reporting on Wells >30 ft. Median Range of
Area Depth of Well in Depth Well Depth Depths Reported
Northwest
Shoreline of
Island Lake
(Omega series soils) 8 0 45 ft. 40-60 ft.
Neck of Sturgeon
Island on Southeast
Shore of Sturgeon
Lake (Lake beach soil) 9 4 32 ft. 20-199 ft.
Southern Shore
of Sturgeon Lake
(Omega series soils) 19 4 57 ft. 7-190 ft.
Rush and Passenger
Lakes Area
(Omega series soils) 13 9 28 ft. 8-175 ft.
Hogan's and Wild
Acres Area
(Omega series soils) 17 3 40 ft. 20-70 ft.
2-42
-------
summer of 1983, when the seasonal dwellings were occupied and their wells
functioning.
Further evaluation of the potential for well contamination in these
areas was attempted based on review of Minnesota Department of Public
Health well sampling data. In Minnesota, well water samples are collected
and analyzed after a new well has been drilled. Data from the Health
Department were obtained for 60 recently drilled wells (1979-1981) in Pine
and Carlton Counties (presented in Appendix C). Eleven of the 60 tested
wells are in Windemere Township, Pine County. Based on the 60 well sam-
ples, the groundwater quality in the project area appears to be very good.
Most of the reported cases of coliform contamination in these samples are
thought to be due to inadequate disinfection following well completion
(written communication to WAPORA, Inc. by Mr. Michael Convery, 1982). Most
of the tested wells were greater than 50 feet in depth, with the deepest
listed at 538 feet. The tested wells are finished in either sand/gravel
deposits or sandstone (Minnesota Dept. of Health Well Records 1979-1981).
Based on the available well sampling data, it appears that the deeper
wells of the project area have no water quality problems. However, data
from the recently tested wells in the project area were insufficient for
the purpose of analyzing the potential of water table aquifer contamination
by septic leachate. Too few shallow wells were sampled and none in the
critical sandy-sand areas were sampled.
Woodward and others (1961; as cited in USEPA 1978p. C-60) reported on
an extensive survey of over 63,000 private water supply wells in 39 com-
munities which were served by individual septic tank systems. Eleven
percent of the wells tested had total nitrate concentrations which were
greater than the drinking water quality standard of 10 mg/l-N. The results
were attributed to differences in soil characteristics, well depth, popu-
lation density, and hydrogeology. Because sufficient groundwater quality
sampling data for shallow wells were not available in the project area, the
water table aquifer quality in critical lakeshore areas cannot be fully
evaluated at this time. The above referenced study does, however, point
out the possibility that shallow aquifer nitrate contamination can occur
2-43
-------
under comparable circumstances. Groundwater quality is influenced by
numerous independent variables and a full scale study to outline problems
and trace their causes would be cost prohibitive even if sufficient time
were available. Because documented well contamination problems associated
with septic systems are not common in the area, according to the State
Department of Health, it is presumed that no broad degree of need for
improved waste treatment exists as a result of well water contamination.
2.2.1.7. Local Permit File Information
The County Sanitary Codes of Minnesota require that permits be ob-
tained by individual property owners for replacement or for new installa-
tion of on-site waste treatment systems. The Pine County Zoning Adminis-
trator maintains a file of the permit applications made in Pine County each
year. The file was reviewed for this EIS to determine which portions of
the project area were being developed with on-site systems and to locate
any recent on-site system upgrades. In addition, federal grant eligibility
for sewers and for on-site system upgrades can be determined according to
the date of on-site system installation. A summary of the information
obtained from the local permit file is presented in Table 2-7.
Records of on-site system upgrades in the Island Lake area were avail-
able for the period of 1974 - 1982. These upgrades are discussed in more
detail in Section 2.2.3.1. For the period of 1980 - February 1982, the
most common type of new system permitted around Island Lake was the holding
tank (5 installed) followed by the the privy (3 installed). No septic
systems were installed around Island Lake after February 1980. The Zoning
Administrator has stated that septic tanks are sometimes recommended by his
office for persons planning to construct new homes in the Island Lake
vicinity, but that people have usually elected to apply for holding tanks
instead (Personal communication to WAPORA, Inc. by Mr. Wayne Golly, 1982).
2.2.1.8. Follow-up Survey
The information described in the preceding sections, when initially
reviewed, revealed data gaps which required that a follow-up survey be
2-44
-------
Table 2-7. Summary of County permit file data for the period February 1974
through February 1982 (File of the Zoning Administrator, Pine
County, Pine City, MN.)
Permit Applications
1974 through 1980
Rush/
Island Sturgeon Passenger
New septic tanks
with soil absorp-
tion systems
New holding tanks
New Privies
Upgrades of soil
absorption systems
Sub-area totals
Project area totals
14
17
6
6
14
26
9
0
7
1
6
0
43
49
14
Permit Applications
1981 through 1982
Rush/
Island Sturgeon Passenger
0
5
3
0
3
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
106
14
2-45
-------
made. The follow-up survey, conducted in March-April 1982, consisted of
telephone contacts with property owners and a field reconnaissance to
inventory existing structures in the Wild and Hogan's Acres subdivisions.
The telephone survey was conducted to obtain additional original
information from property owners or to clarify discrepancies found in the
existing information. For example, on-site systems which had been reported
to have problems in the mailed questionnaires or lots which had been quali-
tatively described as having serious site limitations or failing systems in
the Facility Plan were re-evaluated through this telephone survey of own-
ers. In the approximately 35 telephone contacts made, specific questions
were asked about the cause of and seriousness of any problems cited.
Through the direct telephone conversations with property owners, it
was determined that many of the problems previously reported with septic
systems had been maintenance-related instead of design or site limitation
related. Normal maintenance had, in most instances, already solved the
problems. In several cases the problems were ongoing and appeared to
require a more permanent and extensive solution. The details of what was
learned from the follow-up telephone survey are presented in Table 2-10
(Section 2.2.3.) where problems in specific lakeshore or subdivision areas
are identified.
A field visit was made to the Wild and Hogan's Acres subdivisions
during February 1982. The purpose of this visit was to determine the
number of lots with residences or trailers on-site. It was assumed that
mobile units on-site at that time of the year were present year round.
Summer and early fall use of the lots in these subdivisions had previously
been observed to include hard-top and tent camper trailers which are sea-
sonally moved on and off-site. (Late fall use includes residence in the
area through the hunting season according to several of the questionnaire
respondents). During the February visit, 74 lots with structures inplace
were counted. The majority of these structures were mobile homes. The
total number of privately owned lots in the two subdivisions may exceed
155, based on tax records, but the actual trailer occupancy rate in the
warm season is unknown. It is assumed, however, that a large proportion
2-46
-------
of the trailers are not connected to on-site systems because their waste
holding facilities are self contained. The telephone follow-up survey did
not cover all owners of lots in these subdivisions because of the afore-
mentioned uses of the lots and because no on-site system problems were
reported for them in the questionnaire responses, in the public well water
records, or in the Zoning Administrator's file. Additionally, local sept-
age haulers reported no excessive septic tank pumping taking place at homes
within those subdivisions (personal communication to WAPORA, Inc. by Mr.
Dale Heaton, April 1982).
2.2.2. Problems Caused by Existing On-Site Systems
On-site waste treatment systems may fail to function properly for a
variety of reasons, including improper design and installation, failure of
the owner to perform proper maintenance or unsuitable site characteristics.
The symptoms of on-site treatment system failure may include:
• Backups of wastewater in household plumbing;
• Ponding of effluent on the ground surface (surface fail-
ures) ;
• Groundwater contamination; and
• Surface water contamination.
In this section, some of the information presented in Section 2.2.1 is
used to define and quantify the extent of several symptoms of system fail-
ures found in the project area. Additionally, an overview is provided of
the existing scientific literature and of locally gathered data regarding
the potential impact of such failing on-site systems on public health and
on water quality. Indirect evidence to be utilized for anticipation of
future problems with on-site systems is also defined in this section.
Where the perspective of this section is on the entire project area and on
each lake's set of problems, the perspective of the subsequent section
(2.2.3.) is on the problems in particular lakeshore segments or subdivis-
ions. This latter perspective provides a basis for the development of
project alternatives which serve the real needs of the people owning pro-
perty within the project area.
2-47
-------
Published Federal guidance directs that on-site system pollution
problems affecting groundwater or surface water be identified and traced to
the causal factors. Facility planning projects will only receive federal
funding where a significant proportion of residences are so documented as
causing problems. The Federal documents being utilized for the analysis of
causal factors and for quantifying and categorizing failures include:
• USEPA Region V; Guidance on Site Specific Needs Determina-
tion and Alternative Planning for Unsewered Areas.
• USEPA Region V, Guidance and Program Requirements Memoranda
78-9 and 79-8.
• Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Site Specific Needs
Determination and Alternative Planning for Unsewered Areas.
Additionally, the USEPA Region V staff have interpreted the regula-
tions to mean that eligibility for USEPA grants be limited to providing
improved waste treatment only for those on-site system which have been
demonstrated with direct evidence to be polluting and to those systems
which have site characteristics and usage patterns identical to those
associated with the polluting systems.
2.2.2.1 Backups
Backup of sewage in household plumbing constitutes direct evidence of
need if it is caused by a design problem such as an undersized drainfield
or by site limitations such as extremely tight, clayey soil or a high
groundwater table which results in the filling of the leachate field with
groundwater. Pipes or drain tiles that are clogged or broken or septic
tanks which are filled with solids due to a lack of normal maintenance
pumping are not considered evidence of direct need for a system upgrade or
replacement.
The number of septic systems in the project area which have backup
problems was determined by review of the MLWSD survey, of the responses
from the mailed questionnaire survey, and of the follow-up telephone survey
results. Initially, this information indicated that fewer than 20 res-
idences had experienced problems with backup of sewage into the household.
2-48
-------
Contacts with homeowners made during the follow-up survey documented that 7
of the 20 backup problems reported were chronic and attributable to design
problems or site characteristics.
2.2.2.2. Ponding or Surface Failure
The ponding of septic tank effluent at and around a soil absorption
"system constitutes direct evidence of need for improved waste treatment.
The impacts of ponding may include objectionable odors and public health
risk to the property owner and to the neighbors. If runoff carries ponded
septic tank effluent into a lake or stream the pollutional impact of asso-
ciated pathogenic organisms and of nutrients may be significant. Soft or
wet soil above the leachate field also provides direct evidence of need if
it occurs regularly.
The number of septic systems which demonstrated direct evidence of
surface failures was determined by a review of the MLWSD survey, of the
mailed questionnaire survey, of the EMSL aerial survey, and by the follow-
up telephone survey. The follow-up survey was utilized to contact all
owners reporting ponding problems in order to determine whether the drain-
field was consistently wet or had standing water over it. Cumulatively,
fewer than 30 chronic ponding problems were identified in the project area.
These chronic problems were associated principally with systems located on
tight, clayey soils around Island Lake.
Chronic problems with ponding may be completely exclusive of problems
reported with sewage backups in the home. The exception is in the case
where both occur simultaneously due to natural flooding of the system.
2.2.2.3. Groundwater Contamination
This section presents a summary of the information regarding the
impact of septic leachate on the groundwater aquifers being pumped by
private water wells within the project area. Section 2.2.2.6. addresses
the impact of nutrients originating from on-site waste treatment systems
moving with the groundwater and discharging into surface waters.
2-49
-------
Contamination of groundwater with septic leachate, resulting in ele-
vated levels of nitrite and nitrate (in excess of 10 mg. per liter) or in
elevated levels of fecal coliform organisms (in excess of 100 organisms per
milliliter) in private water wells constitutes direct evidence of the need
for improved waste management.
Lakeshore segments where sandy soils predominate and where shallow
aquifers are commonly tapped for drinking water supplies were identified in
Section 2.2.1.6. Also in that section, well sampling and testing records
maintained by the Minnesota Department of Public Health were reviewed to
determine the quality of groundwater being tapped by the wells in such
areas. No problems with well contamination by fecal coliform organisms or
nitrates were documented for any of the wells in areas having a high
potential for water well contamination.
Well drilling records for recent drillings in the project area indi-
cate that a hydraulically limiting horizon or "aquitard" is generally
present within 20 feet of depth from the land surface. This relatively
impermeable layer would protect most of the area's wells of greater than 20
foot depth from bacterial intrusion via the groundwater. In addition,
environmental reports on similar rural lake facility plans have addressed
groundwater contamination potential through broadly scoped well sampling
programs. In comparable settings, septic leachate intrusion into wells via
the groundwater was not found to be a significant problem (USEPA 1978,
1979, 1979, 1980,).
2.2.2.4. Surface Water Contamination
Surface water quality problems directly attributable to on-site sys-
tems can be serious enough to warrant system rehabilitation or replacement.
The two categories of problems for surface waters which qualify as direct
evidence of need are high fecal coliform counts, which may imply a public
health risk and high nutrient inputs which may be detrimental to water
quality.
2-50
-------
The septic leachate survey was the primary data source used to deter-
mine if there was direct surface water contamination by fecal coliform
organisms originating from septic tank effluent. Surface water "contam-
ination" is an accurate description of wastewater impact when used to
indicate a substantial public health risk posed by disease causing (patho-
genic) organisms originating from human fecal matter. Such contamination
should be a matter of concern for the riparian property owner and consti-
tutes a need for improved waste treatment. However, demonstration of the
degree of health risk being posed by a failing on-site system is, unfort-
unately, not straight forward.
The conventional laboratory test used to estimate the density of fecal
coliform organisms in water can be used to indicate the probability of
actual disease causing bacteria and viruses being present. However, the
fecal coliform test can only be construed to indicate a probability of
pathogenic contamination if it is also established that the organisms being
counted are indeed of human origin (USEPA 1980, Goldreich 1965). This is
difficult to do in on-site system field studies because wild animals, pets,
and domestic stock also can produce large numbers of fecal coliforms in
excreta. Domestic pets and waterfowl can easily obscure the meaning of a
coliform count by introducing non-human fecal material to surface water or
groundwater. The result is that the probability of human pathogens being
present is indicated only when a series of coliform counts are made over a
period of time, under controlled conditions, and in situations where direct
discharge of septic effluent is being made and where soil/leachate contact
is minimal. In other words, the fecal coliform test alone can scienti-
fically prove that pathogenic contamination exists only where this is
already obvious to the public or to public health officials making a sani-
tary survey. With the above as background, it is noted that during the
Septic Leachate Survey no overland flows or direct discharges of septic
tank effluent were observed on the shorelines of any of the lakes being
surveyed.
Based on all the available information sources listed in Section
2.2.1. it was estimated that fewer than 30 soil absorption systems may
currently be experiencing surface failure problems out of an an estimated
2-51
-------
total of 260 soil absorption systems in use within the project area (Sec-
tion 2.2.2.2.)- Based on this, the potential of surface water contami-
nation with disease causing pathogens does not appear to be widespread or
serious. However, under future conditions, with additional development
taking place on less suitable lots and with increases in water use attend-
ant to further conversions of seasonal to permanent residences, the contam-
ination problem caused by surface failures could become more serious.
A more positive assessment of the potential for contamination of the
surface water of Island, Sturgeon, Rush, and Passenger Lakes may be gained
from examination of the counts of fecal coliform made in suspected ground-
water plumes versus counts made at the point of groundwater emergence into
the lake (Section 2.2.1.5.). Based on the groundwater sampling data for
situations where fecal coliform numbers in the groundwater plumes were
high, no emergence of fecal coliforms through sub-surface groundwater
plumes was found. Thus, it appears that adequate treatment of pathogens is
taking place in sub-surface effluent plumes, even where certain other
dissolved and colloidally suspended effluent constituents may be entering
the lakes. This is supported by the published literature on fecal coli-
form-groundwater transport which suggests that because most bacteria are
quite large compared to the colloidal organic substances that are located
by the Septic Leachate Detector, that they (the coliform bacteria) are
easily filtered out of the leachate by soils (Jones and Lee 1977).
Domestic wastewater may in some instances contribute a large load of
nutrients to a lake or stream. The impact on water quality of this kind of
nutrient enrichment may range from favorable to seriously adverse, depend-
ing on chemical and biological factors in each water body. For example, a
trout stream can become far more productive and have a more viable fishery
with the introduction of moderate levels of nutrient enrichment from sewage
treatment plant effluent (WDNR 1975). On the other hand, lakes and streams
can become over-enriched by nutrients from wastewater and can, as a result,
show symptoms of environmental degradation ranging from partial or complete
loss of dissolved oxygen in deep water to becoming choked with weeds and
covered with mats of blue-green algae. Where a scientific assessment can
support the notion that abatement of nutrient loads from on-site systems
2-52
-------
will actually limit or reverse the process of nutrient enrichment in a
seriously degraded lake or stream, there is a demonstrated need to provide
some kind of improved wastewater management.
The assessment of need based on nutrient enrichment or "eutrophica-
tion" is still more difficult and costly to make than the assessment of
contamination by pathogenic organisms. The reason for this is that for
each lake's eutrophication problem there is no generic assessment of cause.
No two lakes are exactly the same and very few in a given region will be
quite similar in terms of such factors as volume, shape, types of nutrient
loads, flushing rate and so on. As a corollary to this, no single nutrient
abatement step is universally prescribed to improve problem lakes. Thus,
each lake's management needs must be individually assessed to determine if
significant benefit will accrue from an expenditure of public money for
better management of failing on-site systems. Island, Sturgeon, Rush, and
Passenger Lakes each have unique physical and biological characteristics
and illustrate this point well. The information used to determine the
appropriate management strategies for these lakes and establish the need
for improved wastewater management will draw largely on data gathered
during preparation of the Environmental Report.
Phosphorus loads to Island, Sturgeon, Rush and Passenger Lakes were
evaluated based on watershed land use and appropriate export rates selected
from the literature. The impact of the estimated phosphorus nutrient loads
on lake trophic status was then modeled in two steps (Section 3.1.3.3.).
It was concluded, beginning with an assumed worst-case (total failure of
all existing, on-site systems) for residential wastewater sources along the
lakeshores that:
• Island Lake and Sturgeon Lake are both eutrophic and may be
in need of management to improve water quality. Rush and
Passenger Lakes are mesotrophic and do not require manage-
ment to maintain or improve water quality.
• On-site systems at their assumed worst-case failure rate
constitute a small proportion (less than 11%) of the annual
phosphorus load to Island Lake and to Sturgeon Lake.
• On-site systems at their assumed worst-case failure rate
constitute a sizable proportion of the annual phosphorus
2-53
-------
load to both Rush and to Passenger Lakes (30% and 23%,
respectively).
• The modeling of trophic status, assuming no phosphorus loads
from on-site systems, projected no substantial improvement
in the trophic status of Island and Sturgeon Lakes over the
trophic status modeled with the assumed "worst case" on-site
system loads.
The reason for the "no gain" situation portrayed by the two-step
evaluation of the trophic status of Island and Sturgeon Lakes is related to
the historic and existing use of the land in their watersheds as described
in Section 3.2.2. Based on the land use data, agricultural and other
non-septic system related phosphorus sources were estimated to provide the
dominant historic and contemporary inputs of phosphorus to Island and
Sturgeon Lakes Section 3.1.3.4.). In terms of model sensitivity then, the
reason that sizeable improvements were not projected for Island and Stur-
geon Lake trophic status by removal of the on-site system load is the
relative insignificance of the phosphorus load from on-site systems even at
the assumed "worst-case" failure rate. The two-step modeling of trophic
status for Rush and Passenger Lakes indicated a shift toward improved
trophic state assuming elimination of failing systems at their worst-case
phosphorus contribution. However, existing information indicates that
on-site systems around Rush and Passenger Lakes are already performing
quite satisfactorily (Section 2.2.3.3.). In fact, for all four lakes, the
assumed worst case failure rate for on-site systems results in a serious
over estimatation of phosphorus loads. This assumption must therefore be
modified to develop realistic classifications of trophic status. A realis-
tic estimate of on-site system failure rates, and the implications of this
estimate for classification of trophic status are discussed in the follow-
ing paragraphs.
As indicated by the number of reported absorption field surface fail-
ures (less than 30) combined with the number of suspected subsurface
groundwater plumes (less than 10), it was estimated that fewer than 40
septic systems out of the estimated 260 in operation currently have the
potential to adversely affect the surface waters of the project area (Sec-
tion 2.2.1.). This is an estimated overall maximum numerical failure rate
of about 15% for combined surface and subsurface failures. The potential
2-54
-------
water quality impact of the 15% overall numerical failure rate is much less
than the assumed "worst-case" (100%) failure rate. However, the impli-
cation of this estimated failure rate for classification of trophic state
may be very different for each lake depending on circumstantial factors.
The water quality impact of failed on-site systems will in each case depend
on the actual number and nature of shoreline lot on-site system failures,
but also on lake shape and volume and on the proportion of other nutrient
loads as are related to land use, agricultural practices, and soils in the
watershed. These combined factors were determined to affect the trophic
state of each lake in the following ways:
• The amount of phosphorus moving into any of the four lakes
from failing septic systems is probably only a small frac-
tion of the phosphorus being delivered to those failing
systems by domestic wastewater.
• Rush and Passenger Lake area residences have on-site systems
which all appear to be adequately treating wastes. These
two lakes do not have serious water quality problems prin-
cipally because agricultural use of the land is so rare in
their respective watershed areas.
• Under summer conditions, Island Lake was documented as
having significantly higher phytoplankton productivity, more
severe blue-green algae blooms and lower hypolimnetic dis-
solved oxygen than Sturgeon Lake. It was concluded that
Island Lake's problems were due to a large nutrient load
originating from non-wastewater sources in the watershed and
that these problems are amplified by the Lake's shallowness
and variable wind fetch. Biotic interactions stemming from
changes in the plankton eating fish populations of Island
Lake are also thought to have contributed to algal bloom
problems.
• Total phosphorus concentrations in Island and Sturgeon Lake
waters were found to be similar under winter conditions.
• The concentration of non-apatite phosphorus (NAI-P) was
measured in 16 surficial sediment samples taken from Island,
Little Island, and Sturgeon Lakes. The highest concen-
tration of NAI-P was found in Little Island Lake, a shallow
water body contiguous to Island Lake but having no shoreline
residential development. This finding emphasized the signi-
ficance of non-wastewater phosphorus sources.
Supporting information for the aforementioned conclusions are discus-
sed and cited in the following paragraphs.
2-55
-------
Support for the assertion that little phosphorus moves out of ground-
water plumes from failing on-site systems and into the surface waters of
these lakes is provided in the literature. In other studies, phosphorus
inputs into lakes from septic systems have been found to represent a low
percentage of the total annual phosphorus load, typically less than 15%
(USEPA Rural Lake Projects 1-6, 1978-1981; Kerfoot and Skinner 1981).
Jones and Lee (1977) found that most phosphorus associated with septic
leachate is removed from the leachate by soils within a short distance from
the drainfield. There is a general consensus among researchers that soils
having even a small percent of clay with iron and aluminum present will
remove most of the phosphorus from groundwater (Viraghavan and Warnock
1976, Tofflemire and others 1977, Reneam and Pettry 1975). These findings
are important because numerous researchers have established that phosphorus
is the key to controlling eutrophication (USEPA 1980).
The results of the nutrient analyses of groundwater plumes found to be
entering the lake (Section 2.2.1.5) indicated no elevated nutrient concen-
trations were emerging. One explanation of this finding is that when
groundwater plumes enter a lake the high nutrient levels rapidly become
diluted and thus undetectable but examination of groundwater and plume
samples, collected onshore and upgradient of where nutrients might enter
the lake, also showed instances where background phosphorus levels in
groundwater were just as high as plume levels. The explanation for high
phosphorus levels in both plume and background groundwater samples is
perhaps related to land use. Agricultural practices, application of lawn
fertilizer, or the presence of nearby bog areas may contribute elevated
levels of nutrients to groundwater moving toward a lake. For example, in
the Rush and Passenger Lake vicinity, dissolved organics originating from
surrounding bog areas appeared to be contributing to the overall high
fluorescence detected in those lakes by the septic leachate detector.
Sturgeon Lake appeared to have a pattern of emergent ground plumes along
the northwest shore originating from bogs in the immediate drainage area
just north of the shoreline. Thus, the field studies indicate that organic
material and nutrients moving with groundwater toward lakes may be associ-
ated with sources other than on-site systems and that such sources reduce
the significance of suspected effluent plumes in the context of the total
amount of nutrients moving lakeward with groundwater.
2-56
-------
During March 1982, a water quality sampling visit was made to Island
and Sturgeon Lakes to determine the total phosphorus levels present in the
lakes under winter conditions when no runoff was carrying nutrients from
the respective watersheds. Under the ice cover conditions and with more
than 56 inches of snow cover present, it was anticipated that light pene-
tration would be reduced and hence that biological productivity would be
low in both lakes. Therefore it is assumed that, to some degree, total
phosphorus in the water column could reflect a singularly large number of
on-site system failures on one lake versus the other. Analysis of the data
under this assumption would not address subtle differences in levels of
enrichment but can be expected to reflect any massive amounts of septic
leachate as would be associated with large scale failures of on-site sys-
tems on one of the lakes. Considering the detection limit assigned to the
laboratory method used for total phosphorus analysis (0.01 milligrams per
liter), the average total phosphorus concentration in Island Lake (0.04
milligrams P per liter) was similar to the average concentration in Stur-
geon Lake (0.02 milligrams P per liter). A greater number of on-site
systems failures have been reported around Island Lake than around Sturgeon
Lake (Section 2.2.3.), but the in-lake phosphorus data gathered in March
1982 provide no evidence that in-lake concentrations were strongly influ-
enced by on-site system failures. This was corroborated by the results of
additional sampling in February 1982 of NAI-P phosphorus in the surficial
littoral zone sediments of Island and Sturgeon Lakes (Section 3.1.3.2.).
NAI-P levels in littoral zone sediments varied widely in concentration in
both Island and Sturgeon Lakes but showed no positive correlation with the
nature and degree of residential development on the shorelines.
Water quality and biotic conditions for the four lakes also were
observed under warm season conditions. Explanations for the differences in
water quality and biological characteristics found between all four project
area lakes, as observed in the summer and fall of 1981, are given in detail
in Sections 3.1.3. and 3.1.4. and in "The Report on Algae" prepared as a
technical support document for this EIS (Appendix H). A compendium of the
warm season biotic and water quality characteristics observed for these
lakes is given in the following paragraphs.
2-57
-------
Based on the literature review and data gathering conducted in prepa-
ration of the Report on Algae, it was concluded that the three genera of
blue-green algae most often associated with mammalian toxicity were found
in bloom proportions in Island Lake. However, the dominant blue-green
species found in Island Lake, Anabaena macrospora, while belonging to one
of the toxicity-producing genera, is a species that has not been associated
with toxic effects. Therefore, while there is a potential public health
problem associated with blue-green algae in Island Lake, there is no direct
evidence that toxic species of blue-green algae were present; hence, there
appears to be no imminent threat to swimmers or other recreational users.
Sturgeon, Rush and Passenger Lakes were not found to be supporting blue-
green algae growth to bloom proportions, nor were the genera of blue-greens
associated with toxicity dominant in them. As with Island Lake, toxicity
producing blue-green algae species were not found in Sturgeon, Rush, or
Passenger Lakes. Additionally, State of Minnesota and local health of-
ficers, physicians, and veterinarians who were contacted reported that no
health related or toxicological problems were known to have developed due
to swimming in or drinking from any of the project area lakes. Based on
this information, it was concluded that existing blue-green algal popula-
tions in the 4 service area lakes do not constitute evidence of need for
improved waste management in terms of a documented public health problem.
Overall water clarity, as indicated by a series of Secchi disk mea-
surements, was found to be poorest in Island Lake and best in Rush Lake.
The water clarity measurements for both Sturgeon and Passenger Lakes were
greater than for Island Lake, with Sturgeon Lake having somewhat greater
clarity than Passenger Lake (Section 3.1.3.2.).
Mats of floating blue-green algae were observed on Island Lake in the
late summer and early fall of 1981. The wind blown accumulations of blue-
green algae observed during a September sampling visit were greatest along
Island Lake's south-facing shorelines under the prevailing southerly winds.
These accumulations would pose aesthetic problems to riparian owners and
recreational users of Island Lake (Section 3.1.4.1.).
2-58
-------
No accumulations of algae or of emergent or submergent rooted aquatic
plants were found to be strongly associated with areas having suspected
leachate plumes.
In the context of the aforementioned findings on the biological char-
acteristics of the four project area lakes, it was concluded that no im-
mediate danger to public health nor unusually severe nuisance conditions
are being caused by nutrient enrichment of any of the four lakes. The
algae blooms in evidence on Island Lake may be regarded, however, as a
factor contributing to the degradation of Island Lake's fishery, and a
nuisance problem that reduces the recreational quality of the lake's wa-
ters. The nature of the degradation and nuisance problem is discussed in
the following paragraphs.
Water quality surveys conducted in mid-September 1981, and historic
data from water quality surveys conducted by the Minnesota Department of
Natural Resources (1938, 1954, 1955, 1967, 1969, 1970, 1975 unpublished)
indicate that the portion of the water column of Island Lake in excess of
20-foot depth periodically experiences severe oxygen depletion (Section
3.1.3.2.). Absence of oxygen in the deeper (hypolimnetic) waters of Island
Lake is thought to be a transitory condition that occurs in periods of
sunny, calm and warm weather when density stratification takes place and
algae blooms are severe. Based on the series of oxygen and temperature
profiles made from the data obtained in late summer of 1981, and based on
calculations of wind induced mixing characteristics, Island Lake was clas-
sified as "polymictic" (Section 3.1.3.2.). This means that the water
column goes through cycles of mixing (stratification and destratification)
more than twice a year, perhaps several times each summer as the weather
changes repeatedly from warm and calm to cool and windy. A lack of dis-
solved oxygen at depth when chemical (oxygen) stratification is prolonged
reduces biological productivity and places fish under stress because of the
reduction in available fish habitat that results. A periodic lack of
hypolimnetic oxygen may also mobilize phosphorus into the upper water
column after destratification takes place.
2-59
-------
Based on a comparable water quality data base, Sturgeon Lake appears
to remain well mixed and to maintain adequate oxygen levels throughout the
water column in summer. Oxygen levels in its deeper waters therefore
remain adequate for fish and aquatic life and phosphorus is probably not
mobilized from the sediment of Sturgeon Lake. Rush and Passenger Lakes
stratify thermally and experience oxygen depletion below the 20-foot depth
levels but are dimictic, remaining stratified through the summer. Phos-
phorus cycling to surface layers from the sediments and from hypolimnetic
waters does not take place during summer conditions in Rush and Passenger
Lakes (Section 3.1.3.2.).
Documentation of Need for Improved Wastewater Management
Based on the above referenced information, it was concluded that of
the four lakes, Island Lake alone exhibits symptoms of advanced eutrophi-
cation and that these symptoms have degraded its quality as a recreational
lake. These symptoms seem to indicate a need for management of controll-
able phosphorus sources to Island Lake. However, as discussed above and in
Sections 3.1.3.3. and 3.1.3.4., the shift of Island Lake from a mesotrophic
to a eutrophic state is thought to have begun in the 1930's, well before
the development of a significant lakeshore residential community. Island
Lake's current problems are primarily due to a large nutrient load stemming
from non-wastewater sources within the watershed. The fertility of Island
Lake waters is further enhanced by phosphorus cycling from sediments and
low-lying waters to the upper water layers where algal blooms take place
(Section 3.1.3.2.). The observed late-summer dominance of blue-green algae
in Island Lake may also be partly the result of recent dominance of zoo-
plankton-eating fish such as perch and bluegill in the fish community
(Section 3.1.4.3.).
Also based on the above referenced information, it was concluded that
Sturgeon, Rush, and Passenger Lakes do not have water quality problems or
trophic conditions which indicate a serious need for improved wastewater
management or for other means of nutrient control in their respective
watersheds. Although the paleo-limnological investigation (Section
3.1.3.4.) did indicate that the phosphorus load to Sturgeon Lake had in-
2-60
-------
creased substantially since 1945, no parallel increase in the rate of
eutrophication was indicated by other parameters. Sturgeon Lake appears to
have remained essentially unchanged in trophic status over the last century
and no evidence was found which indicates that serious eutrophication
problems are imminent for Sturgeon Lake.
Management Opportunities for Island Lake
Island Lake is a shallow and fertile (nutrient rich) water body giving, in
accordance to its elongate shape, changing opportunity for the wind to mix
and aerate (Section 3.1.3.2.). The factors of Island Lake's shallowness
and variable wind mixing characteristics make the hypolimnion subject to
periodic anoxia during summer. This enhances the bio-availability of
phosphorus. Increased availability of phosphorus during the summer months
will continue to aggravate Island Lake's blue-green algae bloom problem for
as long as present levels of fertility are sustained. Based on the annual
watershed phosphorus loading regime (Section 3.1.3.3.) and on evidence that
relatively high fertility and productivity levels have existed in Island
Lake for over a century (Section 3.1.3.4.), it appears that blue-green
algae blooms will continue to occur as long as current land use character-
istics and management practices in the watershed are sustained. Abatement
of phosphorus from a single, small source category such as on-site systems
is not likely to result in improved water quality for Island Lake. Man-
agement of the game fish populations of Island Lake may also be a prere-
quisite to reduction of blue-green algal blooms, regardless of the degree
of phosphorus abatement that could be achieved with a comprehensive water-
shed management program (Section 3.1.4.3.).
2.2.2.5. Indirect Evidence of Problems
Indirect evidence that correlates with known failures can be used as
an initial screening device for locating areas where failures are probable.
Site limitations that infer failures are:
• Seasonal or permanent high water table;
2-61
-------
• Lack of sufficient isolation distance for water wells (de-
pending on well depth and presence or absence of hydrau-
lically limiting layers);
• Documented groundwater flow from a soil absorption system to
a water well;
• Slowly permeable soils with percolation rates greater than
60 minutes per inch;
• Bedrock proximity (within three feet of soil absorption
system where bedrock is permeable);
• Rapidly permeable soil with percolation rates less than 0.1
minutes per inch;
• Presence of holding tanks as evidence that site limitations
prevent installation of soil absorption systems;
• On-site treatment systems that do not conform to accepted
practices or current sanitary codes including, but not
limited to, cesspools, the "55 gallon drum" septic tank, and
other inadequately sized components; and
• On-site systems in an area where local data indicate exces-
sive failure rates or excessive maintenance costs.
All eight sources of information discussed in Section 2.2.1 were used
to assess the indirect evidence for problems. The final classification of
on-site performance status used a combination of direct and indirect evi-
dence. This classification is given in the next section.
2.2.3. Identification of Problems in Specific Areas
One of the principal purposes of collecting information in the project
area was to classify on-site systems into one of three categories: "obvious
problem," "potential problem," or "no problem." In this EIS, an on-site
system is classified as an "obvious problem" if at least one criterion of
direct evidence of need is satisfied. Examples of direct evidence (given
in Sections 2.2.2.1. to 2.2.2.4) include problems such as backups, or
ponding, or of ground or surface water contamination. "Potential problem"
systems are those systems which do not yet exhibit direct evidence of
failure but which can reasonably be expected to fail in the future. Justi-
fication of expected future failures relies on detailed analysis of the
causes for failure of similar systems in the project area. The "no prob-
2-62
-------
lain" category consists of lots where there is no direct evidence of need
indicating that the present system is inadequate or malfunctioning. Sites
may be categorized as "no problem" if older systems operating in identical
soil or groundwater conditions are functioning properly (USEPA 1981).
The analysis of the available information indicated that in certain
shoreline areas around the lakes the problems encountered shared similar
characteristics. In general, such areas were characterized by a high water
table, tight soil, on-site system backups or ponding, groundwater moving
toward the lake, and system upgrading. The number of systems per lake and
the number of sites exhibiting direct evidence of need are summarized in
Table 2-8. The onsite systems are classified into one of the three groups,
obvious problem, potential problem, or no problem. The correlation of
on-site problems with various soil types is presented in Table 2-9. Speci-
fic lakeshore or subdivision areas are addressed in further detail in the
following sections.
2.2.3.1. Island Lake Segments I., II., and III.
The information gathered for Island Lake area on-site systems indi-
cates some problems are present. Currently, 151 lots with on-site systems
are estimated to be around Island Lake. Of the total number of systems,
12% (18 systems) were classified as having obvious problems, and 17% (27
systems) were classified as potential problems. To facilitate a discussion
of the data for on-site systems, the Island Lake shoreline was divided into
three segments. The segments were delineated based on natural breaks in
shoreline development patterns or on changes in shoreline configuration.
Obvious or potential problems with on-site systems in each of the Island
Lake segments are presented in Figure 2-10.
Segment I., Island Lake
Segment I includes the island Lake shoreline perimeter extending
around the northern end of Island Lake, then southward along the north-
2-63
-------
Table 2-8. Summary of the analysis of problems with on-site waste treatment systems in the project area.
Number of
Analysis of Problems According to
Specific USEPA Criteria for Needs Documentation
Classification According to
Existing Residences
with On-Site
Island Lake
Segment I
Segment II
Segment III
NJ
1 Sub-total
Sturgeon Lake
Segment I
Segment II
Segment III
Sub-total
Rush and
Passenger Lakes
Wild Acres and
Hogan's Acres
Seas.
27
38
11
87
45
55
55
155
17
40
Perm.
16
30
JL8
64
10
20
j.2
42
2
8
Systems
Total
(43)
(68)
(AO)
(151)
(56)
(74)
(67)
(197)
(19)
(48)
Existing On-Site
Septic
tanks
23
51
14.
98
36
52
li
143
b
8
10C
Holding
tanks
7
3
i.
19
7
10
_9
26
b
1
3C
Systems
Privies
13
15
II
41
15
16
_3
34
b
6
7°
Number of
Reported
Backups
Lot-by-lot Quest.
0
0
£
0
1
1
1
5
ND
ND
5
12
_7
24
0
4
1
9
0
0
Surface Malfunctions
Lot-by-lot Quest.
10
26
IP.
46
0
3
1
6
ND
ND
8
7
_3
18
1
3
A
8
0
0
Surface Water
Contamination
On-Site System Problem Categories
Obvious
EMSL Aerial Nutrients Coliforms Problem
0
2
1.
3
0
1
1
4
0
0
0
12
_0
12
11
0
-1
17
7
ND
0
2
_0
2
0
0
£
0
0
ND
6
8
_4
18
0
0
0
0
0
0
Potential
Problem
5
13
_9
27
3
2
_8
13
0
0
No
Problem
32
47
12.
106
53
72
59
185
19
48
Some lots have more than one system
Based on 15 questionnaire responses
Based on 21 questionnaire responses
ND - No data, information not collected
-------
Table 2-9. Correspondence of on-site system problem classifications with
soil types. Soil types for lots with problem systems were
determined from the soil survey (Section 2.2.1).
Island Lake Number of Systems Number of Systems
Shoreline Lot Soils With Obvious Problems With Potential Problems
Duluth loam 12 17
Duluth Variant 4 4
Blackhoof muck 0 3
Omega sandy loam 2 3
Sturgeon Lake
Shoreline Lot Soils
Duluth loam 0 8
Duluth variant 0 3
Omega sandy loam 0 1
Altered soil (fill) 0 1
Rush and Passenger Lakes
Shoreline Lot Soils
Omega sandy loam 0 0
Lake Beach soil 0 0
Hogan's and Wild Acres
Subdivision Soils
Omega sandy loam 0 0
Lake Beach soil 0 0
eastern side of the lake to Swanson's Point (Figure 2-10). Out of 43 lots
in this segment, 6 lots were classified as having obvious problems and 5
lots were classified as having potential problems. The northern end of the
lake was the area where most of the segment's on-site problems were concen-
trated. Although the groundwater flow direction throughout the segment is
estimated to be toward the lake, no groundwater septic leachate plumes were
detected during the septic leachate survey. Ponding was the problem re-
ported most frequently, especially during wet weather.
Permit records from the Pine County Zoning Administrator's Office
indicate that 13 lots in Segment I have had new systems installed or have
had repairs made since 1973. Five of these permits were issued to upgrade
2-65
-------
SEG. KM)
SEG.'
SEG. KE)
Legend
o Potential Problems
•X- Obvious Problems
SEG. Ill
Figure 2-10. Island Lake segments and locations of on-site systems with
obvious and potential problems.
2-66
-------
existing septic tank system. All 5 upgrades concerned systems installed
prior to 1974. Of the 8 new systems installed, 1 was a ST-SAS and 7 were
holding tanks. Installation of all but 2 of the new systems was initiated
prior to 1977.
Segment II. , Island Lake
Segment II. includes the shoreline area from the southern end of the
Sunrise Bay subdivision northward to the northernmost tip of Island Lake
(Figure 2-10). Including all forms of survey information, Segment II had
the highest proportion of reported problems for the number of residences of
all Segments. The reported problems were associated with a variety of
factors, including high groundwater, lot flooding caused by temporarily
high lake levels, small lot size, and tight soils. Out of a total of 68
lots in Segment II., 8 obvious and 13 potential problem classifications
were made. Most of the problems were concentrated in three shoreline
sections of Segment II. Portions at the north end of Segment II were
problem-free, possibly because of sandy soils present.
Groundwater in Segment II. generally flows toward the lake, although
along the northerly extent the flow directon is indeterminate or variable.
Of the 12 suspected septic leachate plumes located around Island Lake the
only 2 groundwater plumes with fecal coliform counts above background
levels were found in this segment.
Permit records from the Pine County Zoning Administrator's Office
indicate that 17 lots in Segment II have had new on-site treatment systems
installed or have had repairs made since the latter part of 1973. One of
the permits was issued to upgrade (replace) an existing septic tank system.
In this case, the original ST-SAS, installed in 1975, was replaced by a new
system in 1976. Of the new systems installed in Segment II., 1 is a mound
system, 9 are ST-SAS, 3 are holding tanks, and 4 are privies. Installation
of all but 4 of these systems was initiated prior to 1977.
2-67
-------
Segment III. , Island Lake
Segment III includes the northeast shoreline section from just below
Swanson's Point south to the outlet at the southwestern tip of Island Lake
(Figure 2-10). Segment III had several areas where problems appeared to be
concentrated. Four obvious and 9 potential problem classifications were
made out of a total of 40 on-site systems in the segment. The general
groundwater flow direction in Segment III is out of the lake, which may
partially explain why no groundwater plumes were found entering the lake.
Although tight soils are prevalent in this segment, most problems associ-
ated with maintenance problems described by the mailed questionnaire re-
sponses or by the results of the MLWSD lot-by-lot survey had been solved by
fixing broken pipes or by pumping out full septic tanks.
Permit records from the Pine County Zoning Office indicate that a
number of lots in Segment III have had new systems installed or repaired
since the latter part of 1973. One permit was issued to upgrade an exist-
ing septic tank-soil absorption system (ST-SAS). Of the 12 new systems
installed, 4 are ST-SAS, 7 are holding tanks, and 1 is a privy. Installa-
tion of all but 3 of these systems was initiated prior to 1977.
2.2.3.2. Sturgeon Lake Segments I., II., and III.
The information for Sturgeon Lake indicates few problems with on-site
systems other than those associated with the Sturgeon Island area (Segment
I.). A total of 197 lots with on-site systems were identified around
Sturgeon Lake. Of the total number of systems, 6% (13 systems) were clas-
sified as having potential problems, and no systems were classified as
having obvious problems (Table 2-9). Problem locations within Sturgeon
Lake segments are presented in Figure 2-11.
Segment I., Sturgeon Lake
Segment I encompasses most of the northern portion of the Sturgeon
Lake shoreline, from the YMCA camp on the west shore, north to the public
boat launch site and southward to a point just above Sturgeon Island on the
2-68
-------
SEG. I
SEG
HI
Legend
o Potential Problems
•3f Obvious Problems
SEG. II
Figure 2-11. Sturgeon Lake segments and locations of on-site systems with
obvious and potential problems.
2-69
-------
east shore (Figure 2-11). Segment I contains 56 lots with on-site systems,
3 of which were classified as having potential problems. Two of these lots
with problems were located on the northern shoreline on soils mapped as
Duluth loam, a very tight clayey soil.
No other on-site systems in Segment I were classified as having prob-
lems, in spite of the location of 11 suspected plumes along the northwest
shore of the lake during the septic leachate survey. These suspected
plumes (11) where characterized by high fluorescence and not by high con-
ductivity, indicating that other (non-human) biogenic sources of fluores-
cence were involved. It is thought that dissolved organics leaching out of
the large peat bog area located immediately behind the shoreline ridge are
the source of the fluorescence. No corroborating evidence of septic leach-
ate movement toward the lake was provided by the water quality sampling or
by other survey information for homes in the vicinity of these suspected
plumes. Therefore, it was assumed that the plumes located along the north-
west shore do not represent direct evidence of the entrance of septic
leachate into Sturgeon Lake.
Permits obtained from the Pine County Zoning Administrator's file
records indicate that 15 lots in Segment I have had new on-site systems
installed since 1973. No upgrades of ST-SAS were reported in the permit
file for this period. Of the 15 new systems installed, 3 are mound sys-
tems, 8 are holding tanks, and 4 are privies. No ST-SAS have been in-
stalled since 1973. Installation of 5 out of 15 systems was initiated
prior to 1977.
Segment II., Sturgeon Lake
Segment II. includes approximately the southern half of Sturgeon Lake
(Figure 2-11). Relatively few problems were found in Segment II. Out of
an estimated 74 lots, only 2 lots were classified as having potential
problems. The relatively sandy soils probably are the main reason for few
backup or ponding problems in this segment. In addition, the groundwater
flow is out of the lake in this area, which may explain why no suspected
groundwater plumes were located.
2-70
-------
Permit records from the Pine County Zoning Administrator's Office
records indicate that 24 lots have had new systems installed since 1973.
No upgrades of ST-SAS were made in this period. Of the 24 new systems
installed, 11 are ST-SAS, 7 are holding tanks, and 6 are privies. Instal-
lation of 10 out of 24 systems was initiated prior to 1977.
Segment III, Sturgeon Lake
Segment III, which includes Sturgeon Island, has 67 lots with on-site
systems. A total of 8 of those systems were classified as having potential
problems. The majority of these problems occur at the neck of Sturgeon
Island and south of the point where the access road connects to the main-
land. This region is low-lying with tight soils and a high groundwater
table, and portions are susceptible to temporary flooding. The EMSL aerial
survey located 3 of the 4 probable failing systems in this segment. The
septic leachate survey located six suspected groundwater plumes in this
segment. Saturated soils in drainfields are probably the most significant
factor in causing this area's problems.
Permit records from the Pine County Zoning Administrator's Office
indicate that 13 parcels have had new on-site systems installed since 1974.
No ST-SAS systems were reported as being upgraded since 1973 although some
privies were replaced with holding tanks. Of the 13 new on-site systems
installed, 1 is an ST-SAS, 10 are holding tanks, 1 is a privy over a hold-
ing tank, and 1 is a chem-toilet. Installation of 2 out of the 13 new
systems was initiated prior to 1977.
2.2.3.3. Rush and Passenger Lakes
The residences surrounding Rush and Passenger Lakes are few and there-
fore are being considered together. Problems associated with on-site
systems around both lakes are minimal. No obvious or potential problem
classifications were made for the 19 on-site systems located around Rush or
Passenger Lakes. All 15 questionnaire responses indicated no problems.
The soil survey found that the soils were predominantly Omega sands with
some organic soils in wet areas. Permit records indicate no repairs or
2-71
-------
upgrades have been needed since 1974. Local septage haulers indicated that
only routine service calls have been made in the area. The EMSL aerial
survey detected no surface failures.
The septic leachate survey detected 3 potential leachate plumes en-
tering Rush Lake and 4 potential groundwater plumes in Passenger Lake. The
exact source of the elevated fluorescence measured in these plumes, whether
from septic tanks or from wetlands, was not determined, although the water
quality sampling indicated negligible movement of nutrients lakeward from
these plumes.
2.2.3.4. Hogan's and Wild Acres Subdivisions
These adjacent subdivisions are located immediately east of Rush Lake
and south of Sturgeon Lake. Lot owners have access to a launch site on
Rush Lake, but there are no waterfront lakeshore lots. No problems have
been reported for the Hogan's or Wild Acres subdivisions. Approximately 74
lots currently have some form of existing structures, typically mobile
homes, many of which may have built-in holding tanks, with waste disposal
undertaken by the owners. The number of functioning on-site systems is
uncertain. Based on a review of available information it was assumed that
there are 48 existing on-site systems. Review of permit records, inter-
views with local septage haulers, and mailed questionnaire responses indi-
cate there are few problems, if any, in the area. The soil survey shows
the area to be dominated by the Omega sandy loam soils. The Zoning Admin-
istrator for Pine County stated that there have been few problems with
installation of on-site systems in the area under his jurisdiction (by
telephone, W. Golley to WAPORA, May 4, 1982).
2.2.4. Septage Disposal Practices
Septage is the residual solids generated in septic tanks. Septic
tanks are pumped when homeowners contract with a septage hauler for ser-
vice. Holding tanks containing raw sewage are also pumped by private
haulers. The haulers dispose of septage at sewage treatment plants or on
land disposal areas. For the Moose Lake area, the septage is introduced to
2-72
-------
the Moose Lake Treatment system via a manhole (by telephone, Beaton's Sewer
Service, April 14, 1982). In the busiest time of the year (spring and
fall), up to 4500 gallons per day of septage and holding tank wastes are
introduced to the Moose Lake System. Wastes are collected from a 40-mile
radius of the City of Moose Lake, and depending on seasonal pumping re-
quirements Island and Sturgeon Lake area wastes can make up a large per-
centage of the load.
2-73
-------
2.3. Identification of Wastewater Management System Options
2.3.1. Design Factors
Three categories of factors must be considered in the design of a
wastewater treatment system: the present and projected wastewater flows in
the study area, the effluent requirements established by Federal and State
authorities, and economic cost criteria (duration of the planning period,
interest rate, service factor, and service life of facilities and equip-
ment). Each of these factors is discussed in Appendix D.
2.3.2. System Components
2.3.2.1. Centralized Wastewater Management
The overall design of a wastewater management system [e.g., a "project
alternative"] must take into account methods for reduction of the flow and
waste generation rates at residences. Other important considerations
include methods for providing collection of wastewater for transport to
centralized off-site treatment, methods of treatment, effluent disposal,
and sludge treatment and disposal. The design options for the centralized
collection and treatment alternatives are presented in Appendix D.
2.3.2.2. Decentralized Wastewater Management
Design of decentralized alternatives must consider methods of provid-
ing on-site wastewater treatment, cluster system collection and treatment
methods for small outlying areas, and septage disposal methods. These
options for development of decentralized wastewater management alternatives
are presented in the following discussion.
2.3.2.2.1. On-site Wastewater Treatment
The on-site systems (septic tank/soil absorption systems [ST/SAS] and
ST/mound systems) presently being installed in the area are considered
2-74
-------
adequate both in terms of construction and capacity. Septic tanks should
have an exposed manhole or inspection port to monitor the contents of the
tank. If, during pumpouts and inspections, certain septic tanks are found
to be faulty or seriously undersized, these tanks would then be repaired or
replaced.
The drain beds and drainfields currently being installed in the area
could have a greater than 20-year design life, if they are installed ac-
cording to Code and maintained properly. The 400 square feet of drain bed
should be adequate for most residences, unless the soil material contains
greater than normal quantities of silt and clay. In these soil materials,
the drain bed must be larger or the finer-textured soil material must be
removed and replaced with sand. Similarly, in coarse-textured soils
(coarse sand and gravel), the drain bed should be over-excavated and re-
placed with 18 inches of fine sand. Without the sand lining, the potential
for groundwater pollution is high because of inadequate treatment.
Mound systems (Figure 2-12) are constructed according to detailed
design standards to overcome soil permeability or shallow bedrock limi-
tations. The design for raised drain beds is essentially that of the
standard drain bed elevated by fill to achieve the appropriate depth to
groundwater. Thus, the elevation of the raised bed can be highly variable,
from 6 inches to 3 feet. Some mound systems utilize gravity distribution
systems while others use pumps and pressure distribution systems. In areas
where the soils are peat and marl, the natural ground is first excavated
and replaced with sand. Water-using appliances are usually kept to a
minimum with these systems in order to keep the volume of sand fill needed
to a minimum. It is noted that the use of proper materials and correct
construction techniques is essential for these systems to operate satisfac-
torily.
Based on design criteria, no new soil absorption systems should be
permitted on soils that have a water table within 1 foot of the ground
surface or that are formed in organic material. This would include the
Blackhoof and Newson soils. These soils have high water tables due to
natural groundwater levels and could only be drained with extensive mea-
sures that lower the groundwater level of the area. The soils that have
2-75
-------
NJ
I
Bill Iding
sewer
Perforated
TopsoiI
High water alarm switch
Pump
— Perforated pipe
SEPTIC TANK
PUMPING CHAMBER
Plan
RAISED DRAIN BED
Figure 2-12. Layout of septic tank with raised drainfield bed.
-------
a water table within 1 to 3 feet of the ground surface can have raised
drain beds constructed on them. These soils are Busier and Nemadji. Drain
beds and drain fields are appropriate for the other soils where slopes
allow construction activities (Section 2.2.1.1.).
Soils that have permeabilities slower than 1 inch/hour require special
consideration. Soils mapped in the service area that are in this category
include Duluth, Duluth Variant, Busier, and Blackhoof. The size of the
seepage bed or trench drainfields in these soils will have to be designed
for a larger surface area for wastewater infiltration compared to drain-
fields in more permeable soils. Alternatively, mound systems may be em-
ployed which partially treat the wastewater in the mound and then disperse
the effluent over a large basal area. For lots with size limitations,
wastewater separation with blackwater holding tanks may be appropriate.
Blackwater holding tanks do not strictly constitute on-site treatment
because the treatment of the toilet wastes must occur away from the site.
Components of the system include a low-flow toilet (2.5 gallons per flush
or less), the holding tank for toilet wastes only, and the usual septic
tank-soil absorption system for the remainder of the wastewater. When the
toilet wastes are diverted from the septic tank-soil absorption system, the
absorption system has an opportunity to function properly and minimal
pollution of groundwater and surface water occur. Significant reductions
of organic loads and 20 to 40% reductions in phosphorus loadings to the
septic tank and soil absorption system occur when toilet wastes are ex-
cluded. The blackwater holding tank would have a 1,000 gallon capacity and
be equipped with a high-level alarm. Nearly all residences that would
require holding tanks are seasonally occupied, requiring approximately
three pumpings annually.
2.3.2.2.2. Cluster System Wastewater Treatment
The cluster system employs collection facilities for a group of resi-
dences and a common soil absorption system for wastewater treatment. The
common soil absorption system is used because the individual lots are
unsuitable for on-site soil absorption systems. An area of soils suitable
2-77
-------
for the common soil absorption system must be available within a reasonable
distance in order to consider this option.
It is assumed that all existing septic tanks, with some replacements,
would be adequate in their present condition for inclusion in a cluster
system. Septic tank effluent could be conveyed by small-diameter gravity
sewers or pressure sewers to the common soil absorption field. A cost-ef-
fectiveness analysis would be done to determine which collection system to
use for a particular area. A "dosing" system is typically required on
cluster drain fields in order to achieve good distribution. Where the
collection system uses pressure sewers, a separate accumulator tank and
lift station is required. The wet well and lift station on the septic tank
effluent gravity sewers can perform that function.
Cluster drain fields are usually designed with three contiguous drain
fields. Two of these would be dosed on a daily basis, and the third would
be rested for period of one year. Design criteria require that 400 square
feet of trench bottom per residence is required for each drain field.
Although the present soils information and topography indicate that
cluster drain fields may be feasible in certain areas, further field inves-
tigations would be needed before final designs could be made. The depth of
permeable material must be determined in order to show that excessive
groundwater mounding beneath the drainfield would not occur.
The operation and maintenance requirements of cluster systems are
minimal. Periodic inspections of the lift stations and the drain fields
are essentially all that would be necessary. The septic tanks and the lift
station wet wells would require regular pumping. Maintenance of the col-
lection piping is expected to be minimal (Otis 1979). Once a year the
rested drain field would be rotated back into use, and another one would be
rested. Blockages of the collection systems should occur only rarely,
since clear effluent would be used. Lift stations are entirely dependent
on a reliable power supply; thus, power outages will affect operation of
the system. Since wastewater generation is also dependent on power for
pumping well water, the potential for serious environmental effects is
somewhat mitigated.
2-78
-------
2.3.2.2.3. Peatland Bog System for Wastewater Treatment
The treatment of wastewater by a peatland system is similar in ap-
proach to treatment by a cluster drainfield in that solids are retained in
a septic tank and primary effluent is taken off-site and treated by a
"soil" absorption system. In this case peat is used rather than soil for
treatment. Extensive areas of peatland are present in the project area.
Some of these areas are in an unaltered or relatively "natural" state and
others have been partially drained in an attempt to move water off sur-
rounding lands.
The bog treatment system proposed for this project is modeled after
the ditch treatment systems that have been in use in Finland for more than
30 years. Undecomposed peats, usually found in surface or near-surface
horizons, have large pores which permit very rapid water flow. Nutrient
removal and sterilization processes which take place in peat materials may
be advanced over those of most other soils as a result of the highly re-
ductive chemical environment of peat, although control of the water table
and of the oxic condition are required to maintain these processes. In
Finland, peatland disposal areas have been drained to lower the water
levels and force waste material through the more decomposed peats at lower
levels to achieve better treatment (Surakka 1971, Kamppi 1971, and Surakka
and Kamppi 1971). Based on a review of published and unpublished litera-
ture there is no comparable system operating in the United States.
The proposed ditch system for the Moose Lake area uses a shallow
feeder ditch to apply septic tank effluent to a peat bog. The deeper
collector ditches, spaced approximately 40 meters apart, draw the effluent
applied to the shallow feeder ditches through the peat and into a receiving
pond. The peat bog area being considered for this design, shown in Figure
2-13, has previously been channelized for other drainage purposes to a
depth of 1 to 2 feet.
2-79
-------
Curtain Drain
Septic Tank Effluent
From Island Lake -
Distribution Piping
Feeder
^Trenches
Collection
Trenches
I
To Othe
Bog Fiel
Cross Section
A
A'
Feeder
Trench
Collection
Trench
Figure 2-13. Layout of proposed peatland "bog" wastewater treatment system.
2-80
-------
2.3.2.2.4. Septage Disposal Methods
The use of a septic system requires periodic maintenance (3 to 5
years) that includes pumping out the accumulated scum and sludge, which is
called se.ptage. Approximately 65 to 70 gallons per capita per year of
septage could accumulate in a properly functioning septic system used by
permanent residents (USEPA 1977). Septage is a highly variable anaerobic
slurry that contains large quantities of grit and grease and a highly
offensive odor and has: the ability to foam; poor settling and dewatering
characteristics; high solids and organic content and; a minor accumulation
of heavy metals. The general methods of septage disposal are:
• Biological and physical treatment,
• Land disposal,
• Treatment in a wastewater treatment plant.
Septage in the Moose Lake area is treated by biological and physical meth-
ods in anaerobic lagoons. Advantages of anaerobic treatment systems are
that the waste undergoes stabilization of organic solids and lagoons have
relatively low operation and maintenance costs. A disadvantage of anaero-
bic treatment is the high BOD of the effluent and the potential for odor
nuisance.
A detailed cost-effectiveness analysis for septage and holding tank
wastes treatment and disposal was not performed for this study. It is
assumed that the septage would continue to be pumped by commercial haulers
and would be disposed of in a manner consistent with present disposal
practices (Section 2.2.4.). The cost of disposal is included in the opera-
tion and maintenance costs of the septic and holding tanks.
2.3.3. Centralized Collection System Component Options
Three centralized collection system component options are considered
in this document. They are:
• Alternative A: conventional gravity sewers, pumping sta-
tions, and force main collection system
2-81
-------
• Alternative B: septic tank effluent and small-diameter
gravity sewer system.
• Alternative C: septic tank effluent pumps and pressure
sewers, coupled with a gravity sewer system.
Seven project alternatives have been developed for wastewater manage-
ment in the EIS project area (Section 2.4). No centralized collection
systems are included in the first three alternatives (Alternatives 1, 2,
and 3), a limited collection system is proposed for Island Lake in two
others (Alternatives 4 and 5), and a full collection system is proposed for
Island Lake in Alternative 6. A collection system is proposed to surround
both Island Lake and Sturgeon Lake in Alternative 7. The location of the
proposed treatment facilities varies with the project alternative, and is
discussed for each in Section 2.4. The costs associated with the collec-
tion systems, as proposed for each alternative, also are presented in
Section 2.4.
2.3.4. Centralized Wastewater Treatment Component Options
The following centralized wastewater treatment component options were
evaluated in the MLWSD Facilities Plan:
• Upgrading existing waste stabilization lagoons operated by
the City of Moose Lake;
• Construction of a new activated sludge wastewater treatment
plant, land disposal of sludge, and land application or
outfall discharge of effluent;
• Construction of a new oxidation ditch wastewater treatment
plant, land disposal of sludge, and land application or
outfall discharge of effluent.
The cost analysis presented in the MLWSD Facility Plan concluded that
upgrading the existing Moose Lake lagoons was the most cost-effective ap-
proach for the regional alternatives considered as well as for the sub-
regional alternatives that did not include the Barnum service area. Based
on the Facility Plan conclusion, upgrading the Moose Lake lagoons is the
major treatment alternative considered for all of the EIS alternatives
which require centralized treatment. For limited service areas around
2-82
-------
Island Lake and Sturgeon Lake, the use of cluster drain fields and a bog
treatment system are also considered.
The existing City of Moose Lake lagoon system is described in Section
2.1. The permitted capacity of the existing lagoon system is 444,000 gpd.
The sufficiency of that capacity must be re-evaluated because the central-
ized treatment proposed in the EIS alternatives would add significant flows
to the system and MPCA has indicated it will be required that the maximum
calculated capacity of the lagoon system be reduced to 316,100 gpd to meet
updated requirements (By telephone Mr. Zdon, MPCA to WAPORA, Inc. 15 July
1982). The existing and revised design critera and design capacities are
compared in Table 2-94-,
The year 2000 loading from the existing WWTP service area to the
lagoons has been estimated based on population projections and on corrected
infiltration/inflow estimates from the Facilities Plan and on an allowance
for septage generation. The estimated year 2000 population equivalent for
the existing WWTP service area is presented in Table 2-10. The estimated,
corrected infiltration/inflow is presented in Table 2-11.
The estimated excess capacity available in the existing lagoons is
presented in Table 2-12. If the existing design criteria are used in the
evaluation there is an excess capacity of 89,400 gpd available for base
flow and infiltration/inflow from new connections. However, if the revised
MPCA design criteria are used in the evaluation, there is a capacity defi-
ciency of 16,000 gpd for the existing system, and no excess capacity to
serve new connections.
The adequacy of the interceptor sewers and lift stations in the exist-
ing WWTP service area to handle the existing flow (after I/1 corrections)
and to accommodate additional flows from Island Lake and Sturgeon Lake was
evaluated in the MLWSD Facility Plan. The analysis presented in the Facil-
ity Plan was re-evaluated for this report based on the revised (updated)
year 2000 population assumptions (Section 3.2.1.3.). The conclusion made
based on this re-evaluation was that the existing sewer lines and pumping
stations through Sand Lake to the main lift station in Moose Lake are
adequate to accommodate the total year 2000 EIS population from the Island
2-83
-------
Table 2-9a.. Existing capacity and revised capacity existing Moose Lake
WWTP.
Existing Revised
Design MPCA Design
Capacity Design Criteria Capacity
Pond Area
Primary (Ac)
Secondary (Ac)
Total (Ac)
Seconda ry / To t al
Pond Depth
Bottom Storage (ft)
Active (ft)
Total (ft)
Total Active Vol (MG)
Active Storage (days)
Capacity (Gal /day) 421
Primary Pond Area (Ac)
BOD Loading (lb/day-1000
SF)
BOD Capacity (Ib/day)
43
15.2
58.2
1/3.8
1
4
5
75.863
180
,500
43
973
43
15.2
58.2
1/3 1/3.8
2 2
3-4 3
5-6 5
56.690
180 180
316,100
38.8°
0.5 0.5
845
MPCA, Recommended Design Criteria for Sewage Stabilization Ponds, 1980
Required by MPCA if significant additional connections made to system
(Mr. Zdon, MPCA, to WAPORA, Inc. 15 July 1982)
•»
"Based on MPCA requirement of Secondary Pond Area/total Pond Area = 1/3
2-84
-------
Table 2-10. Estimated population in the Moose Lake WWTP service area
Year 2000 (PRC-Consoer Townsend, 1980)
Area
Population Equivilant (PE)
Year 2000
Moose Lake
State Hospital
Mercy Hospital
Coffee Lake
Sand Lake
1,876
1,780
210
240
729
Total
3,835
Note: The Facility Plan reported a 1978 base wastewater flow of 210,000.
The 1978 population is not known, but the 1980 equivalent popula-
for the above area totaled 3,768. Therefore, the approximate ADBF
is 210,000/3,768 = 56 gpcd/60 gpcd is used in this EIS.
Table 2-11. Estimated inflow/infiltration in the Moose Lake WWTP service
area
Infiltration
Inflow
Total I/I
Before Rehabilitation
Av Flow gpd 111,000
Peak flow gpd 772,000
Estimated Correction 25%
72,000
610,000
75%
183,000
1,382,000
45%
After Rehabilitation
Av Flow gpd 83,000
Peak flow gpda 579,000
18,000
153,000
101,000
732,000
Calculated assuming Average/Peak ratio is the same before and after rehabil-
itation.
2-85
-------
Table 2-12. Estimated excess capacity existing Moose Lake WWTP Year 2000.
Flow Basis
Capacity (gpd)
Flow from existing service area
ADBF-(3835 PE x 60 gpcd) (gpd)
£
Uncorrected infiltration/inflow
(gpd)
Septage gpd
Total
Excess capacity available (gpd)
Influent Loading Basis
Loading (Ib/day)
Loading from existing service area
Existing
Design
Capacity
421,500
230,100
937
Revised
Design
a
Capacity
316,100
230,100
101,000
1,000
332,100
89,400
101,000
1,000
332,100
-16,000
854
3835 PE x 0.17 Ib/cd (Ib/day)
Septage (Ib/day)
Total
Excess capacity available (Ib/day)
652
42
694
243
652
42
694
160
Revised capacity based on MPCA Design Criteria (See Table 2-9). Total
pond area: 58.2 Ac, active storage volume: 3 ft, storage period: 180 days.
Year 2000 population equivalent for existing Moose Lake WWTP service
area (Facility Plan) (Table 2-10)
"Source: Facility Plan, SSES in progress. (Table 2-11)
Septage volume based on 365 septic tanks pumped per year which is 26.5% of
the total year 2000 housing units in Windemere Township (Table 3.16)
:»
"Septage BOD = 5,000 mg/1 (USEPA 1980 a).
2-86
-------
Lake and Sturgeon Lake areas. The only part of the existing collection
system that will require additional capacity is the main lift station
(pumping to the WWTP) which is presently undersized and cannot handle the
existing or corrected I/I flow from the existing system.
Based on the above analysis of the existing Moose Lake WWTP and of the
existing collection system, the following criteria were used as the basis
for development centralized treatment in the project alternatives:
• The design capacity of the existing lagoons, and lagoon
expansions developed for any alternative were based on the
MPCA revised design criteria.
• All alternatives that include expansion of the existing
lagoons include costs for additional pond area to accommo-
date the existing 16,000 gpd deficit in lagoon capacity.
• Alternatives that do not include expansion of the existing
lagoons do not include costs to eliminate the 16,000 gpd
capacity deficit. (The 16,000 gpd deficit can be accommo-
dated by operating the ponds with an active storage depth of
3.5 feet instead of 3.0 feet.)
• Lagoon expansions were designed to increase the secondary
pond area because the existing ratio of secondary to total
capacity does not meet MPCA revised criteria. However, if
the additional pond area required would not be sufficient to
meet the criteria, the existing configuration would not be
rearranged to do so.
• It was assumed that I/1 corrections will be made to the
collection system and to the main pumping station. Costs
for I/I corrections were not included in any alternatives.
(The 16,000 &pd deficit can be accommodated by operating the
ponds with an active storage depth of 3.5 feet instead of
3-0 feet.) (These costs are being identified in an on-going
SSES.)
• It was assumed that the additional design capacity required
for the main lift station to adequately serve additional
population will be identified prior to the I/I corrections.
• The construction cost and O&M cost for the additional pump-
ing capacity is an incremental cost.
2-87
-------
2.4. Project Alternatives
Feasible and compatible sets of collection and treatment options were
developed into project alternatives for the project area. The project
alternatives developed represent combinations of on-site options, centra-
lized collection system options, and effluent treatment and disposal op-
tions. A total of seven potential project alternatives were developed and
evaluated for technical feasibility, cost-effectiveness, and environmental
concerns. These alternatives include a no—action alternative (Alternative
1). Project Alternatives 2 through 6 are consecutively less comprehensive
in providing major on-site soil absorption system upgrades over the 20-year
design period (Figure 2-14). Conversely, Alternatives 2 through 6 provide
consecutively more hookups of residences to centralized collection systems
(Table 2-13). Costs associated with each of these alternatives are des-
cribed in the following sections. All cost data are based on March 1982
price levels and are comprehensive of direct, operational, maintenence, and
administrative costs.
2.4.1. Alternative 1 - No-Action
The EIS process must evaluate the consequences of not taking action.
The "No-Action" Alternative implies that neither USEPA, MPCA, or FHA would
provide funds to build, upgrade, or expand existing wastewater treatment
systems. If the No-Action Alternative is "implemented", existing on-site
systems in the project area would continue to be used in their present
conditions and no new facilities would be built. Any changes or improve-
ments in malfunctioning systems would be at the initiative and expense of
either property owners or a local government. With the No-Action Alter-
native, additional numbers of holding tanks would be built on lots with
site limitations and documented problems would continue to exist.
2.4.2. Alternative 2 - On-Site System Upgrades for the Entire Service Area
This alternative consists of selectively upgrading the existing on-
site systems and future on-site systems. All other residences within the
service area would continue to rely on their current on-site system. All
2-88
-------
Table 2-13. Year 1980 residences served by proposed alternatives.
Alternative
Component 2 3 4 5 6 7
b
On-site upgrade
Island Lake 103 87 37 37 -
Sturgeon Lake 141 122 122 122 122
Other3 42 42 42 42 42 42
Total 286 251 201 201 164 ~4T
Cluster system
Island Lake - 30 - - - -
Sturgeon Lake - 20 20 20 20 -
Total - 50 20 20 20
Centralized system
Island Lake - - 88 88 151 151
Sturgeon Lake - - - - - 197
Total - - 88 88 151 348
Total residences served 286 301 309 309 335 390
Residences served by exist-
ing systems without upgrades
Island Lake 48 34 26 26 -
Sturgeon Lake 56 55 55 55 55
Other3 25 25 25 25 25 25
Total 129 TT4" 106 106 80 25
Total project area residences 415 415 415 415 415 415
*a
Includes remainder of EIS project area (Rush Lake, Passenger Lake, Hogans
Acres, Wild Acres).
Includes major upgrades (to correct obvious and potential problems) plus
minor upgrades (addition of observation port to existing septic tanks in
good operating condition).
2-89
-------
150
125
111
"
a o w
v_ •=. 0)
o to Q
M 2
•° ;=
< 0) CO
^ > CD
100 •
75
O
CD
_ CD
50-
25 •
Numbered Project Alternatives
Figure 2-14.
Number of soil absorbtion fields that will receive major
upgrades over the 20-year design period. Alternative 2 is
the full-upgrade or most decentralized alternative.
Alternative 7 is the most centralized alternative.
2-90
-------
septic tanks in the service area would be fitted with observation ports to
facilitate manual inspection. The installation of an observation port is
referred to as a minor upgrade. Some major upgrades also may be required
under this alternative. The preferred major upgrade, where conditions
permit, is the ST/SAS with a serial-parallel trench system (described in
Section 2.3.2.6.)- Depending on lot limitations, the appropriate alter-
native on-site system would be selected. Alternative on-site systems
include ST-seepage beds, ST-mound systems, and wastewater segregation. The
criteria used for determination of the appropriate on-site system at each
lot requiring a major upgrade were soil characteristics, depth to ground-
water table, landscape slope, and lot size.
For instance, where wastewater segregation was recommended, the gray-
water would continue to be treated with the existing septic tank and soil
absorption system (which may be upgraded). The blackwater components would
include a new low-flow toilet and a holding tank. Quantities and types of
systems to receive major upgrades are presented in Appendix C. The number
and types of upgraded systems are subject to redefinition after final site
evaluation is completed. The total present worth cost for this alternative
was estimated to be $1,012,890, including administrative costs. The de-
tailed cost estimates made for the various components of this alternative
are presented in Appendix E.
2.4.3. Alternative 3 - Cluster Drainfields for Limited Areas and On-site
System Upgrades Elsewhere
Alternative 3 consists of centralized collection of septic tank efflu-
ent from three areas with pressure and gravity sewers (Figure 2-15).
Treatment and disposal are provided in two cluster drainfields in each
case. Two of the areas are along the western shoreline of Island Lake, and
the third is on the eastern shore of Sturgeon Lake. All other residences
in the project area would continue to rely on their current form of on-site
system or be upgraded as described in the previous alternative (Alternative
2).
2-91
-------
LEGEND
Proposed
* Lift Station
Cluster DralnfMd
--_ EIS
Area Boundary
Existing
—^— Gravity Sewer
• • • Force Main
• Lift Station
Propoeed
S*ptic Tank Effluent
Gravity S«wer
i ii i Force Main
'". -' lk^_^r -:-- Li--'-
"
Figure 2-15. Wastewater collection and treatment facilities for Alternative 3
-------
The three areas identified as needing off-site treatment were selected
based on soil conditions and on the documented on-site system problems de-
scribed in Section 2.2.3. The number of residences served by the cluster
systems, and the numbers and types of upgraded on-site systems required
under Alternative 3, are presented in Appendix E.
Each cluster collection system would employ septic tank effluent pumps
and pressure and/or gravity sewers for collection. Each cluster treatment
system would consist of a dosing tank or pump station, and three drain
fields to allow for phased or "staggered" use at the site. With this
management regime, two of the fields would be in use during the year, while
the third field was being rested.
Alternative 3 has an estimated present worth cost of $575,020 for the
upgrading of existing on-site systems and for future upgrades and an addi-
tional $985,220 for the three cluster drainfields (including the collection
system). The total present worth for Alternative 3 totals $1,847,010,
including administrative costs. Detailed cost estimates for the components
of this alternative are presented in Appendix E.
2.4.4. Alternative 4 - Island Lake: Limited Centralized Collection and
Treatment at Moose Lake WWTP
- Sturgeon Lake: Cluster Drainfield for Limited Area
- On-Site System Upgrades Elsewhere.
Alternative 4 considers three component options for centralized col-
lection (4A, conventional gravity; 4B, septic tank effluent gravity; and
4C, septic tank effluent pressure, as described in Section 2.3.3.). Cen-
tralized collection would be provided along the north and west shoreline
of Island Lake (all of Segment II and part of Segment I) with off-site
treatment provided at the Moose Lake WWTP. On the eastern shore of Stur-
geon Lake, a centralized collection of septic tank effluent with cluster
drainfield treatment is proposed. All other residences in the project area
would continue to rely on their current form of on-site system or be up-
graded as described in Alternative 2. Criteria for selection of the lake-
shore area needing collection for off-site treatment were based on soil
conditions, existing septic tank conditions, and the predominance of per-
2-93
-------
manent versus seasonal residences. The number of housing units included in
the collection systems for the cluster, and the number and type of upgraded
on-site systems are presented in Appendix X.
The layout for Alternative 4A with conventional gravity sewer col-
lection for the limited Island Lake area is presented in Figure 2-16. The
layout for Alternative 4B with septic tank effluent gravity sewers is
identical to 4A. The lay out for Alternative 4C with pressure sewers also
is identical to 4A except that the pressure sewers discharge to a manhole
at the top of the hill on Warlow Road near Route 51 and flow by gravity to
the existing sewers around Sand Lake.
Comparison of the costs (see Appendix E) associated with the three
optional collection system components indicated that the septic tank ef-
fluent gravity sewer option (Alternative 4B) would be the most cost-effec-
tive, with an estimated total present worth of $815,300 versus $894,080 for
conventional gravity sewers (Alternative 4A), and $815,300 for septic tank
effluent gravity sewers (Alternative 4C). Based on this cost comparison,
Alternatives 4A and 4C were eliminated from further consideration for
selection of a project alternative.
Alternative 4B would add an estimated year 2000 population of 310
(seasonal and permanent) to the Moose Lake WWTP, resulting in an additional
flow of 21,700 gpd and a additional BOD loading of 20 Ib/day. As discussed
in Section 2.3.4, the treatment plant would be expanded to accommodate this
additional flow, plus the 16,000 gpd deficiency for a total of 37,700 gpd
capacity. Based on the new (1980) MPCA design criteria, the additional
lagoon area required under Alternative 4B would be 5.20 acres of secondary
pond with a volume of 6.79 mg. The total pond area after construction
would be 43 acres of primary pond and 20.4 acres of secondary pond for a
total of 63.4 acres.
Alternative 4B also would require that the existing main lift station
from Moose Lake to the WWTP be upgraded to accommodate the additional flow.
As discussed in Section 2.3.4, costs are included for the incremental
capacity required to be added during the expected upgrading of the pumping
station for infiltration/inflow correction under other contracts.
2-94
-------
vi-
LEGEND
___ EIS
Propoaad
A Ckiatar DrakiflaU
,£? 6 E*is«nfl
,if -CT*.<&' , QravHy Sewer /\ Waatawatar
/ ^ \F —Force Main VT'
* lift Station
PropoMd
Gravity 3«w«r
Fores Main
mtmwrt Lagoon
* Upgraded Maki
LNt Station
STE Saptte Tank ENkMM
Qravlty Sawar
- Praaaura Sawar al plpaa ara 8" unlaaa
otharwlaa apaclHad
Figure 2-lb. Wastewater collection and treatment facilities for Alternative 4
Note: Sewer layout shown is for Project Option 4A (conventional
gravity), similar for Project Option 7B (STE gravity) and
Project Option 7C (STE pressure).
-------
The cluster drainfield proposed to serve the area on Sturgeon Lake
under Alternative 4B consists of septic tank effluent gravity and pressure
sewers, and community drainfields with a dosing pump station (as described
in Alternative 3).
Alternative 4B has estimated total present worth costs of $815,300 for
the centralized collection system, $498,300 for the cluster drainfield
(including collection system), $268,340 for the centralized treatment
system (including the upgrade of the existing lift station), and $400,880
for the upgrading of on-site treatment systems. The total present worth of
Alternative 4C was estimated to be $2,269,680, including administrative
costs. Detailed cost estimates for each of the components are presented in
Appendix E.
2.4.5. Alternative 5 - Island Lake: Limited Centralized Collection and Bog
Treatment
- Sturgeon Lake: Cluster Drainfield for Limited Areas
- On-Site System Upgrades Elsewhere.
Alternative 5 considers two component options for centralized col-
lection of septic tank effluent (5A, gravity sewers; 5B, pressure sewers).
Centralized collection would be provided along the north and west shore-
lines of Island Lake, with treatment provided by a "spaghnum" or peat bog
system (described in Section 2.3), located just south of Island Lake.
Centralized collection and cluster drainfield treatment also would be
provided for the Island on the eastern shore of Sturgeon Lake. All other
residences in the EIS service area would continue to rely on their current
form of on-site system, or be upgraded as described in Alternative 2.
The developed areas considered for service with centralized collection
and off-site treatment in Alternative 5 are the same as those in Alterna-
tive 4. However, Alternative 5 utilizes the bog treatment of septic tank
effluent, whereas Alternative 4 proposes centralized treatment at the Moose
Lake WWTP.
The layout for Alternative 5A, with septic tank effluent gravity
sewer collection for the limited Island Lake area is shown in Figure 2-17.
2-96
-------
LEGEND
___ EIS
Area Boundary
ftV « E*Mmg
f /%0 b^ ' Gravity Sewe
^P V —-> Force Mam
• Lift Station
Proposed
Septic Tank Effluent
Gravity Sewer
Force Main
Pressure Sewer
Proposed
• Lilt station
A Cluster Drakilleld
r~i Boa Treatment
"-1 Site
al pipes are 4" unless
otherwise specified
jHSfc*- v,^ fr?-Sj/> * u
.-•••«> z
Figure 2-17. Wastewater collection and treatment facilities for Alternative 5
Note: Sewer layout shown is for Project Option 5A (STE gravity),
similar for Project Option 5B (STE pressure).
-------
The layout of Alternative 5B, with pressure sewers, is identical to 5A
except that there is only one lift station located at a point along the
west lakeshore.
Comparison of the costs (see Appendix) associated with the collection
systems considered indicated that septic tank effluent pressure sewers
(Alternative 5B) are the most cost-effective for the limited Island Lake
service area, with an estimated total present worth of $815,940 versus
$871,070 for septic tank effluent gravity sewers (Alternative 5A). Based
on this cost comparison, Alternative 5A was eliminated from further consid-
eration for selection of a project alternative.
The cluster drainfield consists of septic tank effluent gravity and/or
pressure sewers and three drainfields with one dosing pump station, as
described in Alternative 3.
Alternative 5B has estimated total present worth costs of $815,940 for
the centralized collection system, $498,370 for the cluster drainfield
(including collection system), $327,170 for the bog treatment system, and
$400,880 in the remainder of the service area for the upgrading of on-site
treatment systems. The total present worth was estimated to be $2,329,150,
including administrative costs. Detailed cost estimates for each component
are presented in Appendix E.
2.4.5. Alternative 6 - Island Lake; Centralized Collection and Treatment
at Moose Lake WWTP
- Sturgeon Lake; Cluster Drainfield for limited ser-
vice area
- On-Site system Upgrades Elsewhere.
Alternative 6 considers three component options for provision of
centralized collection (6A, conventional gravity; 6B, STE gravity; 6C, STE
pressure as described in Section 2.3.). Centralized collection would be
provided for the entire shoreline of Island Lake, with treatment provided
at the Moose Lake WWTP. Centralized collection also would be provided for
a limited area of the eastern shore of Sturgeon Lake with treatment pro-
vided at a cluster drainfield system. All other residences in the EIS
project area would continue to rely on their current form of on-site system
or be upgraded as described in Alternative 2.
2-98
-------
Alternative 6 serves the entire shoreline of Island Lake with a cen-
tralized collection system. The service area population for this area is
limited to the year 2000 projection (Section 3.2.1.3.). The collection
system layout generally follows the June 1980 plans developed to serve
Island Lake (Howard A. Kuusisto 1980) except that the pipe and pumping
stations have been sized to serve the EIS population projection.
The layout for Alternative 6A with conventional gravity sewer col-
lection for the Island Lake area is shown in Figure 2-18. The layout for
Alternative 6B with septic tank effluent gravity sewers would be identical
to 6A. The layout for Alternative 6C with pressure sewers also would be
identical to 6A, except that the pressure sewers would discharge to an
manhole at the top of the hill on Warlow Road near Route 51 and flow by
gravity to the existing sewers around Sand Lake.
Comparison of the costs associated with the collection systems consi-
dered indicated that septic tank effluent pressure sewers (Alternative 6C)
would be the most cost-effective, with an estimated total present worth of
$1,475,590 versus $1,205,950 for conventional gravity sewers (Alternative
6A) and $1,589,360 for septic tank effluent gravity sewers (Alternative
6B) . Based on the cost comparison, Alternatives 6A and 6B have been eli-
minated from further consideration for the selection of a project alter-
native.
Alternative 6C would add an estimated year 2000 population of 579
(seasonal and permanent) to the Moose Lake WWTP, resulting in an additional
flow of 40,530 gpd and an additional BOD loading of 34.5 Ib/day. As dis-
cussed in Section 2.3.4, the Moose Lake treatment plant would be expanded
to accommodate the additional flow plus the 16,000 gpd deficiency for a
total of 56,530 gpd. Based on the new (1980) MPCA design criteria, the
additional lagoon area required would be 7.8 acres of secondary pond with a
volume of 10.18 MG. The new total pond area would be 43 acres of primary
pond and 23 acres of secondary pond for a total of 66 acres.
Alternative 6C also would require that the existing main lift station
from Moose Lake to the treatment plant be upgraded to accommodate the
2-99
-------
LEGEND
___ EIS
Area Boundary
Existing
Gravity Sewer
Force Main
• Lift Station
Propoaed
Proposed
• Lift Station
A Cluster DraMMd
Wastewater
Treatment Lagoon
0
j. Upgraded Main
* Lift Station
STE Septic Tank Effluent
Gravity Sewer
al pipes are a" unleas
^ otfierwiae specified
Figure Z-18. Wastewater collection and treatment facilities for Alternative 6
Note: Sewer layout shown is for Project Option 6A (conventional
gravity), similar for Project Option 6B (STE gravity) and
Project Option 6C (STE pressure).
-------
additional flow. As discussed in Section 2.3.4, costs are included for the
incremental capacity required to be added during the expected upgrading of
the pumping station for infiltration/inflow correction under other MLWSD
contracts.
The cluster drainfield proposed with Alternative 6C to serve the
limited area on the east shore of Sturgeon Lake consists of septic tank
effluent gravity and pressure sewers, and three drainfields with dosing
pump stations, as described in Alternative 3.
Alternative 6C has estimated total present worth costs of $1,475,590
for the centralized collection system, $498,370 for the cluster drainfield
(including collection system), $394,100 for the centralized treatment
system (including the upgrading of the existing lift station), and $271,010
for the upgrading of on-site treatment systems in the remainder of the ser-
vice area. The total present worth was estimated to be $2,925,860, includ-
ing administrative costs. Detailed cost estimates for each component are
presented in Appendix E.
2.4.7. Alternative 7 - Complete Centralized Collection for the Shorelines
of Island Lake and of Sturgeon Lake
- On-site System Upgrades Elsewhere.
Alternative 7 considers three component options for centralized col-
lection (7A, conventional gravity; 7B, septic tank effluent gravity, STE
pressure, as described in Section 2.3) along the shorelines of both Island
Lake and Sturgeon Lake, with treatment provided at the Moose Lake WWTP.
All other residences in the EIS service area would continue to rely on
their current form of on-site system with upgrades as described in Alter-
native 2.
Alternative 7 serves the entire shoreline of Island Lake and most of
the shoreline of Sturgeon Lake with a centralized collection system. The
total service area population of Alternative 7 is limited to the year 2000
EIS projection (Section 3.2.1.3.). The collection system for Island Lake
generally follows the June 1980 plans presented by the MLWSD to serve that
2-101
-------
area, and the collection system for Sturgeon Lake generally follows the
layout proposed in the Facility Plan. However, the pipe sizes and pumping
station capacities have been limited to serve the projected year 2000
population only, at maximum flow.
The layout proposed in Alternative 7A, with conventional gravity sewer
collection for Island Lake and Sturgeon Lake is shown in Figure 2-19. The
layout for Alternative 7B with septic tank effluent gravity sewers would be
identical to 7A. The layout for Alternative 7C with pressure sewers also
would be identical to 7A, except that a lift station would be required in
the area of the YMCA camp to convey a portion of the Sturgeon Lake sewage
to the Island Lake collection system, and a main lift station at the south-
ern end of Island Lake would convey all of the sewage from Sturgeon Lake
and a major portion of Island Lake to the existing sewers around Sand Lake.
The remainder of the sewage collected from Island Lake would discharge from
the pressure sewers at a manhole at the top of the hill on Warlow Road near
Route 51 and flow by gravity to the existing Sand Lake sewers. In ad-
dition, the island on the eastern shore of Sturgeon Lake would be partially
served by septic tank effluent gravity sewers and a pump station provided
to connect this area to the pressure sewer main.
Comparison of the costs associated with the collection systems consid-
ered indicates that septic tank effluent gravity sewers (Alternative 7B)
would be the most cost-effective, with an total estimated present worth of
$3,616,080 versus $3,846,980 for conventional gravity sewers (Alternative
7A) and $3,641,590 for septic tank effluent pressure sewers (Alternative 7
C) . Based on the cost comparison, Alternatives 7A and 7C have been elimi-
nated from further consideration for the selection of a project alter-
native.
Alternative 7B would add an estimated year 2000 population (seasonal
and permanent) to the Moose Lake WWTP as follows: Island Lake 579; Stur-
geon Lake 802; YMCA camp 120, for a total of 1,501. This would result in
an additional flow of 105,070 gpd and an additional BOD loading of 41.6
Ib/day to the plant. As discussed in Section 2.3.4, the treatment plant
would be expanded to accommodate the additional flow plus the 16,000 gpd
2-102
-------
LEGEND
___ EIS
Area Boundary
Existing
Gravity Sewer
Propoacd
A Clutter DraMMd
OWaitewater
Treatment Lagoon
Upgraded Ma In
Lin Station
al ptpe» are 8" untoaa
otherwise apacMcd
Force Mam
• Lift Station
Proposed
^— Qravity Svwor
i • Force Main
• LIN Station
" ' '
fa ^,>^^i
Figure 2-19. Wastewater collection and treatment facilities for Alternative 7
Note: Sewer layout shown for Project Option 7A (conventional
gravity), similar for Project Option 7B (STE gravity) and
Project Option 7C (STE pressure).
-------
deficiency, for a total of 121,100 gpd. Based on the new (1980) MPCA
design criteria, the additional lagoon area required would be 16.7 acres of
secondary pond, with a volume of 21.79 mg. The new total pond area would
be 43 acres of primary pond and 31.9 acres of secondary pond, for a total
of 74.9 acres.
Alternative 7B also would require that the existing main lift station
from Moose Lake to the plant be upgraded to accommodate the additional
flow. As discussed in Section 2.3.4, costs are included for the incre-
mental capacity required to be added during the expected upgrading of the
pumping station for infiltration/inflow correction under other contracts.
Alternative 7B has estimated total present worth costs of $3,616,080
for the centralized collection system, $625,080 for the centralized treat-
ment system (including the upgrading of the existing lift station), and
$89,710 for the upgrading of on-site treatment systems. The total present
worth of Alternative 7B was estimated to be $4,617,660, including adminis-
trative costs. Detailed cost estimates for each component are presented in
Appendix E.
2.5. Flexibility and Reliability of the Project Alternatives
2.5.1. Flexibility
Flexibility measures the ability of a system to accommodate future
growth and depends on the ease with which an existing system can be up-
graded or modified. Six of the seven project alternatives considered in
this EIS include such components as: centralized collection sewer systems,
upgrades of the existing Moose Lake waste stabilization lagoons, a cluster
system, and various levels of upgrades for project area on-site systems.
The components are found in a majority of the alternatives, and the follow-
ing evaluation is generally applicable to most of the alternatives unless
otherwise stated in the discussion. The proposed bog treatment system is
discussed separately due to considerations of management straints and the
lack of demonstrated technical feasibility .
2-104
-------
For both gravity and pressure sewer systems, the flexibility to handle
future increases in flows greater than the original design flow generally
is low. However, interceptor sewers generally are designed for capacity
beyond that which is projected as a result of population growth to the end
of the planning period. A subsequent increase in capacity of collector
sewers would be a somewhat expensive process. Also, the layout of the
system depends upon the location of the treatment facility. The expansion
of a sewer system is generally easy with the addition of new sewers, hut is
expensive.
The existing Moose Lake waste stabilization lagoons can be expanded
relatively easily. With proper design of the pond expansion the costs and
effort required for expansion would be relatively small.
On-site systems are flexible in that they are generally designed for
the constraints of each user. As long as spatial and environmental para-
meters are met, the type of systems can be chosen according to individual
requirements. Existing septic systems can be expanded by adding tank and
drain field capacity, if suitable land is available. Flow can usually be
distributed to an added system with little disturbance of the existing one.
In the case of mound systems, future expansion may be difficult or impos-
sible. Cluster systems treat wastewater from more than one house. The
flexibility for design and expansion of such a system is somewhat less than
for a standard septic system.
No data are available on the variation in bog treatment system perfor-
mance as a function of wastewater load increases. The performance which
would be associated with moderate expansions in wastewater load above that
resulting from the year 2000 design population cannot be estimated. There-
fore, in the bog treatment systems, the flexibility to handle future in-
creases in flow is highly dependent on the availability of additional bog
area, contiguous to the proposed treatment site. With proper original
design, the cost of any needed expansion may be relatively small.
Based on the above discussions, it is concluded that the majority of
the alternatives considered in this report generally have similar flexi-
bility for future growth and/or planning.
2-105
-------
2.5.2. Reliability
Reliability measures the ability of a system or of system components
to operate without failure at the designed level of efficiency. It is
particularly important to have dependable operation in situations where
adverse environmental or economic impacts may result from failure of the
system.
The gravity sewer is highly reliable when designed properly. Such
systems require little maintenance, consume no energy, and have no moving
parts subject to malfunction. Gravity sewer problems can include clogged
pipes that result in sewer backups; infiltration/inflow which increases the
volume of flow beyond the design level; and broken or misaligned pipes.
Major contributors to these problems are improperly jointed pipes and
damage to manholes, especially where these are not located in paved roads.
Where large sewers are used in order to achieve lower pipe slopes, problems
with solids deposition can mean that frequent flushing with large volumes
of water will be necessary.
Pump stations and force mains increase operation and maintenance
requirements and decrease system reliability. Backup pumps are installed
in order to provide service in case the pump fails. A backup power source
is usually provided by means of either dual power lines or stationary or
portable emergency generators. Force mains are generally reliable; exces-
sive solids deposition and burst pipes occur rarely. Leaking joints occur
more frequently and can cause adverse impacts to the environment.
Septic tank effluent pumps and pressure sewers generally are reliable
means of conveying effluent to a treatment plant. Because the solids have
been removed in the septic tank, problems associated with solids deposition
are avoided. The pump units themselves have been shown to be reliable;
when failures or power outages do occur, storage of approximately 1.5 day's
sewage volume in the pump chamber and septic tank permits replacements to
be made before backups occur. The pressure sewers themselves should be
even more reliable than force mains because the pumped liquid is clear.
2-106
-------
Federal Guidelines for Design, Operation, and Maintenance of Waste-
water Treatment Facilities (Federal Water Quality Administration 1970)
require that:
All water pollution control facilities should be planned and
designed so as to provide for maximum reliability at all times.
The facilities should be capable of operating satisfactorily
during power failures, flooding, peak loads, equipment failure,
and maintenance shutdowns.
The wastewater control system design for the project area will con-
sider the following types of factors to ensure system reliability:
• Duplicate sources of electric power
• Standby power for essential plant elements
• Multiple units and equipment to provide maximum flexibility
in operation
• Readily available replacement parts
• Holding tanks or basins to provide for emergency storage of
overflow and adequate pump-back facilities
• Flexibility of piping and pumping facilities to permit re-
routing of flows under emergency conditions
• Provision for emergency storage or disposal of sludge
• Dual chlorination units
• Automatic controls to regulate and record chlorine residuals
• Automatic alarm systems to warn of high water, power fail-
ure, or equipment malfunction
• No treatment plant bypasses or upstream bypasses
• Design of interceptor sewers to permit emergency storage
without causing backups
• Enforcement of pretreatment regulations to avoid industrial
waste-induced treatment upsets
• Flood proofing of treatment plant
• Plant Operations and Maintenance Manual to have a section on
emergency operation procedures
2-107
-------
• Use of qualified plant operators.
The upgraded Moose Lake WWTP would be highly reliable if these meas-
ures were incorporated. The reliability of the proposed bog treatment
system under local wastewater load characteristics is not known. The
collection systems have reduced reliability because so many pump stations
are required. If dual power lines from separate substations can be ex-
tended to every pump station (an expensive proposition), a reasonable level
of reliability can be attained. Supplying permanent auxiliary power units
for each pump station is not feasible. A failure of a pump station would
likely result in raw sewage or septic tank effluent being discharged into
one of the lakes. Because as many as eleven pump stations must operate in
series, a failure of one would likely result in spillage into a lake.
The on-site systems are generally a reliable means of treating and
disposing of wastewater. Except with certain systems, they operate with no
power inputs and little attention. When failures do occur, the impact to
the environment is small and diffuse. Total failures very rarely occur in
which no treatment at all takes place.
Septic tanks provide reliable treatment when they are properly design-
ed and maintained. The principal maintenance requirement is periodic
pumping of the tank, usually every 3 to 5 years. The treatment process can
be harmed if large quantities of strong chemicals are flushed into the
tank.
Soil absorption systems generally provide excellent treatment if the
design and installation are accomplished properly and the soil conditions
are suitable. Other key factors in the successful operation of soil ab-
sorption systems are: proper functioning of the septic tank or other treat-
ment unit and observance of reasonable water conservation practices con-
sistent with the design flows. Soil absorption systems can malfunction
when extended wet weather results in total saturation of the soil, when
solids carryover plugs the drain bed, and when compaction of the soil
surface results in restricted permeability. Mound systems can be more
reliable than drain bed systems where water tables are high because
2-108
-------
potential groundwater problems are minimized. Mound systems do require an
effluent pump, though, and thus rely on a dependable power supply. The
septic tank and pump chamber generally can hold approximately 1.5 days of
storage, which is probably longer than the average power outage. A mal-
functioning pump can be replaced readily if the units are standardized.
The cost of a mound system is about three times that of a drain bed system;
thus, it would be utilized only where a drain bed system has failed or has
little chance of operating properly. The average design life of soil
absorption systems is greater than 20 years; some could be expected to fail
earlier. Some soil absorption systems could be expected to last indefi-
nitely, as long as the system is not overloaded with water or solids.
Cluster systems serve a group of houses with a set of components that
are similar to those used in individual septic tank soil absorption sys-
tems. The individual septic tanks would operate at similar levels of
reliability. The septic tank effluent sewers are exposed to hazards of
breakage and to plugging due to cleanout failure similar to gravity sewers.
Sewage solid accumulations in the sewers does not occur when the septic
tanks are maintained properly. The soil absorption system should be sited
on permeable soils that have a water table always greater than 6-foot
depth. The operation of the drain field has the potential to be more
reliable than an individual on-site soil absorption system because of
pressure distribution by dosing and because of the ability to site the
drainfields in an optimum location, but there have been few long-term
studies to evaluate the drainfield reliability.
2.6. Comparison of Alternatives and Selection of the Recommended Action
The selection of the most cost-effective, environmentally acceptable,
and implementable alternative(s) through the EIS process involved the
consideration of technical feasibility, reliability, costs, environmental
effects, public desirability, and the ability to comply with the applicable
design and effluent discharge standards for the State of Minnesota. Selec-
tion of the most cost-effective alternative also required identification of
trade-offs between costs and other relevant criteria.
2-109
-------
2.6.1. Comparison of Alternatives
2.6.1.1. Project Costs
Project costs were categorized into capital expenses, operation and
maintenance (O&M) expenses, administrative expenses, and salvage values for
the equipment and structures for each alternative. The costs for the
collection, conveyance, and treatment systems for each alternative were
separately estimated. A summary of the estimated costs of Alternatives 1-7
are displayed in Table 2-14. Appendix E contains a description of the
methodology and assumptions used in the analyses as well as the detailed
costs for each alternative.
The capital cost for the selected alternative would be shared by the
Federal government through the Federal Construction Grants Program, by
state grants administered by MPCA, and by local participants. Until 1984,
funding levels for conventional systems would be 75% Federal, and 15% State
for a total of 90% of eligible construction costs. Funding for innovative
and alternative wastewater collection and treatment systems would be 85%
Federal and 9% State for a total of 93%. For construction started after 30
September 1984 the Federal share will be 55% for conventional systems and
75% for innovative and alternative systems (Federal Register, Vol 47, N092,
May 12, 1982; changes in regulations governing construction grants for
treatment works). The state share after 30 September 1982 is not known at
this time. Eligibility of construction costs for Federal and state grants
is discussed in Section 4.1.3. Annual O&M costs would be financed entirely
by the local users of the system.
Based on total estimated present worth cost, upgraded on-site systems
throughout the project area (Alternative 2) is the lowest cost alternative.
Alternatives 3, 4C, and 5B, which include upgraded on-site systems and
service of certain critical lakeshore areas with cluster drain fields
and/or centralized collection and treatment, are ranked second through
fourth, respectively. Alternative 6C, which includes centralized col-
lection and treatment for all of Island Lake, is ranked fifth based on
cost. Based on total present worth cost, Alternative 7B, which is similar
2-110
-------
Table 2-14. Summary of the estimated costs for Project Alternatives 1 through 7
in. March 1982 dollars.
Alternative Number and Name
No-Action In EIS service area
Total Present Worth
On-Site
Upgrade
Cluster ,
Drainfield
Centralized
Collection
Centralized
Treatment
Sub
Total
Administrative
Total
Average Annual Cost
Equlvalant Costs Ranking
NA
NJ
I
2 Upgrade on-site systems with-
in EIS service area 726,100
3 Cluster dralnfleld for lim-
ited areas and on-site sys-
tem upgrading elsewhere in
EIS service area
575,000
4B Island Lake-limited area
collection by STE gravity
sewers and treatment at up-
graded Moose Lake WWTP; Stur-
geon Lake-cluster drainfield
for limited area; on-site
system upgrading elsewhere
in EIS service area
400,880
5B Island Lake-limited area col-
lection by STE pressure sewers
and peat bog treatment; Stur-
geon Lake - cluster drainfield
for limited area; on-site sys-
tem upgrading elsewhere in
EIS service area • 400,880
6C Island Lake entire shore-
line STE pressure collec-
tion and treatment at up-
graded Moose Lake WVTP;
Sturgeon Lake - cluster
drainfield for limited
area; on-site system up-
grading elsewhere in EIS
service area
271,010
7B Island Lake and Sturgeon
Lake shorelines STE gravity
collection and treatment
at upgraded Moose Lake
WWTP; on-site system up-
grading elsewhere in
EIS service area.
89,710
985,220
498,370
498,370
498,370
815,300
815,940
1,475,590
3,616,080
726,100
1,560,220
268,340 1,982,890
327,170 2,042,360
394,100 2,639,070
625,080 4,330,870
286,790
286,790
286,790
286,790
286,790
286,790
1,012,890
1,847,010
2,269,680
2,329,150
2,925,860
4,617,660
100,300
182,900
224,760
230,650
289,740
457,270
Includes costs for on-site or off-site treatment of wastewater from existing and future residences In the EIS project area to the year 2000.
See Appendix E for a description of cost development methodology.
b
Includes STE pressure and gravity collection system
Includes upgrading of existing lift station to Moose Lake WWTP
d
For comparison, the estimated present worth cost of conventional gravity collection is $1,705,950 ($2,866,430 subtotal, $3,153,220 total, $312,250
Equiv. Ann.).
For comparison, the estimated present worth cost of conventional gravity collection is $3,846,980 ($4,561,770 subtotal, $4,848,560 total, $480,140
Equiv. Ann.).
Includes annual personnel and overhead costs for administration and billing.
-------
to the recommended alternative of the MLWSD Facility Plan that includes
centralized collection and treatment for Island Lake and Sturgeon Lake, is
the most expensive alternative, and ranks seventh. The estimated total
present worth cost ranges from $985,220 for Alternative 2 to $4.6 million
tor Alternative 7B.
2.6.1.2 Environmental and Financial Impacts
The No-Action Alternative would entail almost no construction impacts.
The significant environmental impacts of the six action alternatives would
primarily be short-term impacts on the local environment due to construc-
tion (Section 4.1.1.).
The implementation of the onsite systems component of Alternatives 3,
4, 5, 6 and 7 or the full onsite upgrade alternative (Alternative 2), would
have direct impacts on those lots where upgraded onsite systems are neces-
sary.
Cluster drainfield and cluster mounds (Alternatives 3, 4, 5, and 6)
would involve construction on the drainfield sites of a similar nature to
that of the onsite upgrades.
The construction of centralized collection facilities (Alternatives 3,
4, 5, 6 and 7) would have considerable impacts on the right-of-way where
the sewers are located. Bewatering for deep sewer excavations and pump
stations could affect wells in the vicinity. Construction of additional
treatment capacity of the Moose Lake WWTP (Alternatives 4, 6 and 7) would
have a significant effect at the site of treatment. The proposed lagoon
expansion sites are prime agricultural land that would be irretrievably
converted to treatment plant use.
Construction of a bog treatment system (Alternative 5) would have
significant adverse impacts on the biota of the site.
The expanded Moose Lake WWTP discharging to the Moose Horn River would
be required to meet the effluent requirements established by MPCA. Water
quality would be altered, but not seriously degraded. Spills of septic
2-112
-------
tank effluent or of raw sewage at pump stations could occur if a malfunc-
tion or power failure were to occur. The nutrient load from one pump
station spill could easily equal the average annual nutrient load from
existing on-site systems. Proper maintenance of the pumps, and backup
powers sources for all the pump stations, would reduce the potential for
such impacts.
The centralized collection, treatment and disposal facilities, and the
onsite upgrading would have a positive effect on groundwater quality by
eliminating existing failing onsite systems. Onsite upgrades and manage-
ment of onsite systems would replace failing onsite systems with appropri-
ate new systems or holding tanks.
In general, there is no significant difference in long-term impact on
the natural environment between any of the project alternatives.
The financial impact on the system users will depend on the avail-
ability of Federal and State grants (Section 4.3.). Estimated annual
residential user charges (Table 4-3) range from $104 for Alternative 2 with
Federal and State grants to $1,259 for Alternative 7A with no grants. The
equivalent annual user charge for Coffee Lake and Sand Lake are $120 and
$145 respectively (based on assessed connection charge and user fee, Sec-
tion 3.2.4.).
Based on USEPA guidelines (Section 4.3.) the average annual user
charges for Alternatives 6A and 7A are considered "expensive" for users
even with Federal and State Grants (Table 4-4). Without grants, Alterna-
tive 2 is the only alternative that is not considered expensive.
The increase in per capita debt within the Sanitary District will
exceed standard limits (Section 4.3.) for Project Alternative 7, the most
comprehensive sewering proposal, if no grants are available (Table 4-5).
None of the project alternatives exceed the excess debt criteria if Federal
and State grants are available.
2-113
-------
2.6.1.3. Implementability
The Moose Lake-Windemere Sanitary District is the management agency
which would be responsible for implementing the wastewater management plan.
As described in Section 2.1., the District presently manages collection and
transmission sewers only. Transmission to the treatment plant is provided
by the City of Moose Lake.
The proposed Project Alternatives all require some level of management
of combinations of "centralized" and "decentralized" components. The
centralized components of Alternatives 3 through 7 include collection
systems and centralized treatment. The decentralized components of Alter-
natives 3 through 6 include cluster drainfields and on-site systems.
Because most sanitary districts have, in the past, been formed around
the concept of centralized collection and treatment of wastewater, there is
a great deal of information about the implementation of such systems.
Decentralized collection and treatment, however, is relatively uncommon and
there is little comparable management experience on which to draw conclu-
sions regarding implementability.
The value of decentralized, small waste flows systems began to be
recognized in the 1970s as being important as long-term rather than short-
term alternatives to centralized collection and treatment. As a result,
communities preparing facilities plans after 30 September 1978 were re-
quired to provide an analysis of the use of innovative and alternative
wastewater processes and techniques that could solve a community's waste-
water needs (PRM 78-9; USEPA 1978a). Included as alternative processes are
individual and other on-site treatment systems with subsurface disposal
units (drain fields).
The 1977 Clean Water Act amendments recognized the need for continual
supervision of the operation and maintenance of decentralized on-site sys-
tems. USEPA Construction Grants Regulations (USEPA 1978a and 1979b) which
implement the Act require an applicant to meet a number of preconditions
2-114
-------
before a construction grant for private wastewater systems may be made.
The preconditions to be met include:
• Certifying that a public body will be responsible for the
proper installation, operation, and maintenance of the
funded systems;
• Establishing a comprehensive program for the regulation and
inspection of on-site systems that will include periodic
testing of existing potable water wells and, where a sub-
stantial number of on-site systems exists, more extensive
monitoring of aquifers;
• Obtaining assurance of unlimited access to each individual
system at all reasonable times for inspection, monitoring,
construction, maintenance, rehabilitation, and replacement.
PKM 79-8 extends these requirements to grants for publicly owned systems.
Regardless of whether the selected alternative is primarily central-
ized or decentralized, four aspects of the implementation program must be
addressed:
• There must be legal authority for the managing agency to
exist and financial authority for it to operate;
• The agency must manage construction, ownership, and opera-
tion of the facilities;
• A choice must be made between the several types of long-term
financing that are generally required in paying for capital
expenditures associated with the project;
• A system of user charges to retire capital debts, to cover
expenditures for operation and maintenance, and to provide a
reserve for contingencies must be established.
In the following sections, these requirements are examined first with
respect to centralized systems and then with respect to decentralized
systems.
Centralized Systems
The Moose Lake-Windernere Sanitary District was formed in accordance
with Minnesota Statutes Chapter 116A. This chapter enables a County Board
or District Court to create a sewer district for the purposes of construct-
2-115
-------
ing, operating, and maintaining wastewater collection and treatment faci-
lities. Additional powers include the power to make contracts, to incur
indebtedness, and ro levy user charges, special assessments, and taxation
(Otis and Steward 1976) .
The District would construct, maintain, and operate the centralized
collection and treatment facilities proposed in Alternatives 3 through 7,
except those parts of Alternatives 4, 6, and 7 that propose utilizing the
WWTP operated and maintained by the City of Moose Lake. These alternatives
require revisions of the agreement with the city to facilitate the up-
grading of the lift station and lagoons and provision for distribution of
operation and maintenance costs.
The managerial capacity of the District can be readily expanded to
provide for additional centralized collection systems proposed for Alter-
natives 3-7. There are several options for septic tank effluent pumps that
are connected to pressure sewers:
• The station may be designed to agency specifications, with
the responsibility for purchase, maintenance, and ownership
residing with the homeowner;
• The station may be specified and purchased by the agency,
with the homeowner repurchasing and maintaining it;
• The station may be specified and owned by the agency, but
purchased by the homeowner;
• The station may be specified, purchased, and owned by the
agency.
Alternative 5 proposes a centralized peat bog treatment system to
treat wastewater from homes along a limited segment of the Island Lake
shoreline. This would require expansion of the managerial capacity of the
District into the operation and maintenance of a treatment facility, which
is beyond its present scope, but within its authority and capability. The
implementability of Alternative 5 faces serious questions in the context of
approvals that would be required from Federal and State of Minnesota grant-
ing and permiting agencies. Specifically, the peat bog system design has
had no technical feasibility assessment made prior to this level of the
2-116
-------
planning. As a result, the time that may be required to determine the
feasibility of bog treatment for the secondary effluent and the time re-
quired to gain granting and reviewing agency approval of this alternative,
may eliminate any present cost advantage by postponing construction until
the federal funding level for alternative and innovative treatment systems
falls from the 85% level to 75% of the total cost.
Capital expenses associated with a centralized project component may
be financed by several techniques which are discussed in detail in Section
4.1.3. User charges are set at a level that will provide for repayment of
long-term debt and cover operation and maintenance expenses. The user
charges for the different alternatives are discussed in Section 4.1.3. In
addition, prudent management agencies frequently add an extra charge to
provide a contingency fund for extraordinary expenses and for equipment re-
placement.
Decentralized Systems
The local agency presently responsible for approval and regulation of
on-site systems in the project area is the office of the Pine County Zoning
Administrator.
In general, regulation of on-site wastewater treatment systems has
evolved to the point where most new facilities are designed, permitted, and
inspected by local health departments or other agencies. After installa-
tion, the local agency has no further responsibility for these systems
until malfunctions become evident. In such cases the local agency may
inspect and issue permits for repair of the systems. The sole basis for
governmental regulation in this field has been its obligation to protect
public health. Rarely have governmental obligations been interpreted more
broadly to include monitoring and control of other effects of on-site
system use or misuse. The general absence of quantitative information
concerning septic system impacts on groundwater and surface water quality
/
has been coupled with a lack of knowledge of the operation of on-site
systems. The State of Minnesota does not presently have legislation which
explicitly authorizes governmental entities to manage wastewater facilities
2-117
-------
that are not connected to conventional collection system. However, Min-
nesota Statutes Sec. 444.085, Sec. 444.065, Sec. 444.075 and Chapter 116A
have been interpreted as providing cities, villages, counties, and special
purpose sewer and water districts, respectively, with sufficient powers to
manage decentralized facilities (Otis and Steward 1976).
The purpose of managing a decentralized system through the sanitary
district would be to balance the costs of management with the needs of
public health and environmental quality. Management by the sanitary dis-
trict for this new purpose implies formation of a new agency charter and
formulation of new policies. A discussion of community obligations for
management of private wastewater systems and six community management
models can be found in the Draft-Generic Rural Lake Projects EIS (USEPA
1981).
The cluster systems proposed in Project Alternatives 3, 4, 5, and 6
could be managed by one of several agencies. The MLWSD probably is best
equipped at this point to assume responsibility for these systems. While
the technologies involved may be unsual for the District, no components are
involved that are especially difficult to manage. Other possible manage-
ment agencies include different authorization for the County Zoning Depart-
ment, a township board, another division of county government, another,
special district, or a public utility commission (USEPA 1979). The system
itself should be simple to manage. The residential pumping units use
electrical power; thus, power interruptions may result in operational or
environmental problems. Maintenance and repair activities are more cri-
tical for this system than for gravity sewers. Regular cleaning of the
septic tanks is essential for the system to operate properly. The opera-
tion of the cluster drain field must be carefully monitored so that the
treatment aspect of the soil is not abrogated. The billing of the user
charge could be similar to the charge system set up for the conventional
gravity sewer and treatment plant.
The management of on-site systems (Alternatives 2-7) can be accom-
plished in many ways (USEPA 1979 and 1979). The management structure will
depend primarily on state law and local preference. The USEPA requires a
public agency to serve as grantee and to provide assurances that the sys-
2-118
-------
terns be constructed properly and that maintenance be performed to ensure
that environmental laws are not violated. In other locations around the
nation many different agencies are presently responsible for on-site sys-
tems: health departments, sanitary districts, homeowners' associations,
on-site management districts, private companies, and county government.
Management responsibilities range from a detailed permit process to com-
plete ownership of all facilities. There are certain advantages with each
type of management and ownership option. Complete control by the agency
comes closest to guaranteeing that the systems will be operating at optimal
levels, but represents the most costly approach. The least costly approach
would be to keep the homeowner responsible for all maintenance activities
and costs. The homeowner then would be more inclined to utilize water-sav-
ing measures and other methods to minimize maintenance costs. However,
environmental protection may suffer when the homeowner is responsible for
maintenance, but appropriate maintenance is neglected. Other factors also
should be considered. Systems for residences constructed after 27 December
1977 are not eligible for Federal grants. Having the homeowner pay for
installation constitutes a considerable expense for new residences. This
funding requirement would discourage future on-site systems and cause
residential growth in the area. Additionally, the USEPA requires the
grantee to certify that public ownership is not implementable, a demon-
stration that may be difficult to make.
The agency in the planning area with the most experience with on-site.
systems is the Pine County Zoning Department. However, the Zoning Depart-
ment has no experience in writing and implementing contracts, because their
primary role is issuing permits and ispecting construction. The MLWSD has
the necessary experience with contracts and management of maintenance
activities, although it does not have management experience with on-site
systems. Experience with on-site systems is crucial for the personnel
responsible for the design, construction, and inspection of these systems.
Thus it is anticipated that the most cost-effective managerial arrangement
would be for the Zoning Administrator to maintain authority over the in-
stallation and management of on-site systems, and for the District to
perform the functions of contracting, billing, administration, and main-
tenance. The local costs for the construction of new systems and reha-
2-119
-------
bilitation of existing systems can be assessed equally to each user by a
variety of means, or can be assigned to the respective homeowners. Opera-
tion and maintenance costs also can be handled in the same way, based on
public or private ownership. The billing system could be similar to that
used in the centralized waste water management system.
2.6.2 The Recommended Project Alternative
The least cost alternative from both an economic and environmental
perspective is Alternative 2 - on-site system upgrades for the entire
service area. The beneficial environmental impacts of Alternative 2 in-
clude elimination of any phosphorus load to the lakes that might be due to
failing on-site systems, and elimination of the possibility of nitrate
contamination of the groundwater. For these reasons, Alternative 2 is
recommended to be the selected project.
Alternative 2 has an estimated total present worth cost of $1,012,890.
The MLWSD Facility Plan recommended alternative was for conventional gra-
vity sewer installation around Island Lake and Sturgeon Lake, with treat-
ment at the Moose Lake WWTP upgraded to meet the additional demand. This
is equivalent to Project Option 7A, presented herein, which has an esti-
mated total present worth of $4.8 million. Another alternative under
discussion by the MLWSD is provision of a conventional gravity collection
system for Island Lake only, with treatment at the Moose Lake WWTP upgraded
to meet the demand. This is equivalent to Project Option 6A which has an
estimated total present worth of $3.2 million.
Compared with alternatives that include centralized collection and
treatment, Alternative 2 is expected to have fewer construction impacts
because extensive construction within road right-of-ways is not required.
Adverse construction impacts that might result in disturbance and erosion
on individual lots can be mitigated with good construction management
practices. Alternative 2 is not expected to have impacts on the ground-
water or lakes that are significantly different than any other action
alternative.
2-120
-------
AIL the action alternatives will eliminate any existing adverse impact
of on-site systems to groundwater the lakes by eliminating the failing
onsite systems. However, evaluation of the existing data on the natural
and man-made environment in the project area indicates that water quality
impacts due to onsite systems are inconsequential in the context of other
manageable and unmanageable nutrient sources, and that none of the action
alternatives will significantly improve the quality of the lakes or the
groundwater.
The on-site upgrades for Alternative 2 were designed on a lot-by-lot
basis to correct the obvious and potential problems identified in Section
2.2.3. A summary of the total on-site systems to be upgraded and the
components included is presented in Table 2-13. The appropriate on-site
upgrades were determined based on soil characteristics, depth to ground-
water, landscape slope, and lot size. In addition, all septic tanks would
be facilitated with an observation port to permit inspection.
For the entire project area a total of 58 residences would have one or
more major components upgraded to correct obvious and potential problems,
and an additional 228 residences spread over 415 existing lakeshore lots
would receive some type of upgrade in the future (20 year design period) .
The number and types of upgrades are projected subject to revision after
site inspection during final design.
The future management objectives for residences with on-site systems
can be met in a number of ways (Section 2.6.1.3.). It is anticipated that
the most cost-effective managerial system would be for the County Zoning
Administrator to maintain authority over the installation and management of
the on-site systems (as is presently the case) and that the MLWSD would
perform the contracting, billing, administration and maintenance functions.
If these on-site system management functions were delegated and accepted by
the respective local units of government, Alternative 2 - on-site system
upgrades for the entire project area would eliminate problems with on-site
systems in the most cost effective manner, with a minimum of adverse envi-
ronmental and financial impacts.
2-121
-------
3.0. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
Elements of the natural and man-made environments of the planning area
are described in this chapter. The contents of this chapter are based upon
a compendium of new information gathered during the preparation of this
Phase II Report (the EIS) and updated and corrected information from the
Existing Conditions chapter of the Phase I Environmental Report (USEPA
1981). Corrections and supplements to portions of the Phase I Report were
made by USEPA based on public comments on that document made at the 24
April 1981 public meeting and based on comments received from the MPCA, the
MLWSD, and the CAC.
3.1. Natural Environment
3.1.1. Atmosphere
The significant elements of the atmospheric environment are: climate,
air quality, and noise. A summary of the characteristics of these elements
follows.
3.1.1.1. Climate
Minnesota has a continental climate. Seasonal average temperatures at
Moose Lake range from the high 60s (degrees fahrenheit [°F]) in the summer
to below freezing in the winter, with an annual average temperature of
approximately 40 °F. Precipitation averages 28.16 inches annually and is
heaviest from April through September (National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration [NOAA] 1979a). Recorded wind data from Duluth, Minnesota,
located approximately 35 miles northeast of the study area, indicate that
winds predominantly blow out of the west-northwest, except in May, June,
and August, when they originate from the east (NOAA 1979b).
Field investigations were conducted in the project area in 1981 during
the periods of 24-27 August; 7-15 September; 28-30 September; and 1-5
October. During these sampling periods, prevailing wind directions were
3-1
-------
easterly; westerly changing to southerly and then back to northwesterly;
easterly; and widely variable, respectively.
Peak daily air temperatures recorded at the Duluth International
Airport over the periods of field sampling are presented in Appendix J.
The strong 5-day warming trend indicated by increased peak daily tempera-
tures between 9 September and 13 September preceeded the blue-green algae
bloom observed in Island Lake on 14 September 1981 (Section 3.1.3.2.).
3.1.1.2. Air Quality
Moose Lake is located in the Duluth-Superior Interstate Air Quality
Control Region (AQCR) #129. Air quality parameters for both Carlton and
Pine counties are below the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).
Concentrations of total suspended particulates (TSP), sulfur dioxide (S0_),
and ozone (0_) in Carlton County are better than the NAAQS. Carbon mon-
oxide (CO) levels cannot be classified, but are thought to be below the
NAAQS. In Pine County, TSP, SO , 0 , and CO concentrations are all better
than the NAAQS. The entire State of Minnesota either cannot be classified
or is better than the national standard for nitrogen dioxide (By telephone,
Mr. Jay Bortzer, USEPA to WAPORA, Inc., 16 January 1981).
There are no significant odor problems in the area. One minor odor
problem is associated with the stabilization pond at the Moose Lake waste-
water treatment plant (WWTP). The spring thaw and normal break-up of the
pond produces a short-term odor problem (By telephone, Mr. Pat Mader, MPCA
to WAPORA, Inc., 23 March 1981). Another odor problem is reported by
homeowners with property adjacent to Island Lake associated with algal
bloom accumulations along the shoreline (Section 3.1.4.1.). This problem,
which results from wind blowing floating blue-green algae shoreward, is
reported to occur in Island Lake periodically throughout the summer months,
but primarily in August and September (Personal communication, Citizens
Advisory Committee to WAPORA, Inc. October 1981).
3-2
-------
3.1.1.3. Noise
The only major source of noise in the planning area is the heavy
trucks utilizing Interstate 35, the major link between Duluth and the Twin
Cities. There are no other significant noise sources located in this pre-
dominantly rural area (By telephone, Mr. Al Perez, MPCA to WAPORA, Inc., 20
February 1981).
3.1.2. Land
3.1.2.1. Geology
The Phase I Environmental Report (USEPA 1981) provided detailed dis-
cussions of topography, surficial glacial geology, and bedrock geology for
the project area. An important geological consideration to wastewater
management is that depth to bedrock in the project area is usually in
excess of 50 feet. This means that septic leachate will not generally have
access to fractured bedrock or to solution channels in bedrock and thus,
the potential for well contamination is reduced.
3.1.2.2. Soils
The Phase I Environmental Report (USEPA 1981) also provided discus-
sions of general soil associations and soil suitability for wastewater
treatment in the project area. However, a detailed soil survey was not
available for Pine County and the generalized data presented in the Phase I
Report were insufficient for the purposes of evaluating wastewater treat-
ment systems in terms of the soil characteristics of individual lots in
Windemere Township. Therefore, a detailed soil survey of the portion of
Windemere Township (Pine County) immediately surrounding Island, Sturgeon,
Rush, and Passenger Lakes was conducted. The results of this survey are
summarized and evaluated in Section 2.2.1.1. of this report. A copy of the
original soil survey report and soil unit map is presented in Appendix B.
3-3
-------
3.1.3. Water Resources
The Phase I Environmental Report (USEPA 1981) provided a synopsis of
baseline information on the water resources of the planning area. The
topics covered included hydrology, water uses, water quality and effluent
discharge standards, and published water quality data on the surface water
of Pine and Carlton Counties. Groundwater quality and uses were also
covered.
This EIS focuses on a more limited geographic setting, covering new
information gathered on the Windemere Township lakes and streams. Aspects
of the new information utilized for assessing the need for improved waste-
water treatment are presented in the following sections.
3.1.3.1. Surface Water Resources
The residents of Windemere Township regard the project area lakes as a
most valuable recreational resource. The special attractions of Island and
Sturgeon Lakes, in particular, are attested to by the concentration of the
Township's recent residential growth along their shorelines (Section
3.2.1.).
The Windemere Township lakes encompassed by the proposed project area
(Figure 2-4) are:
• Island Lake, 582 acres; mean depth, 11 feet
• Sturgeon Lake, 1,456 acres; mean depth, 22.5 feet
• Rush Lake, 88 acres; mean depth, 5.6 feet
• Passenger Lake, 75 acres; mean depth, 7.1 feet.
Also in the Township, but outside the project area, are Sand Lake, Lake
Eleven, Lake Twelve, Dago Lake, and Big Slough Lake. Sand Lake, already
sewered by the MLWSD, is 575 acres in size with an average depth of 13.9
feet. The other four outlying lakes are small (less than 100 acres) and
less accessible to Interstate Highway 35 than are Sand Lake or the project
area lakes. Of the four service area »lakes, only Passenger Lake does not
3-4
-------
have a public access available for boat launching. The launch site on Rush
Lake, while not strictly private, is not immediately accessible via County
highway, and appears to be used principally by nearby property owners.
Surface Water Movement
Two small, continuously flowing lake outlet streams are found in the
project area portion of Windemere Township. One is the outlet of Island
Lake, which drains to the Moose River via Sand and Coffee Lakes. The other
is the outlet of Passenger Lake which drains to the Moose River via the
Willow River. Rush and Sturgeon Lakes are "seepage lakes" with no defined
inflow streams and no continuously flowing surface outlets. Island Lake,
according to the USGS topographic sheet (1979), has two unnamed, inter-
mittent tributary streams entering on the north shore and two additional
unnamed, discontinuous inlets entering its northwest basin via Little
Island Lake. Information on surface water discharge from the lakes via
groundwater flow is presented in Section 2.2.1.5.
Water Levels
Water level fluctuations in Island Lake have been an important local
issue (Personal communication, Mr. Harold Westholm, MLWSD to WAPORA, Inc.).
A few developed lots on Island Lake are reported to experience standing
water due to excessive lake levels for up to one month each year. These
problems are related to seasonal events such as spring runoff or summer
storms which can result in 0.5- to 1.0-foot water level increases in a
short period of time (MDNR records, unpublished). These flooding problems
probably are aggravated by a long-term trend in increasing water levels due
to climatic changes affecting all of the lakes in the project area. All of
the lakes in the region reached their contemporary low levels during the
draught years of the 1930s, prior to any extensive lakeshore residential
development. Since that time, lake levels have increased. According to
MDNR records (unpublished), the annual maximum water level in Island Lake
has increased approximately 2.6 feet since 1941, and the annual maximum
level in Sturgeon Lake has increased approximately 0.7 feet since 1945.
The difference between these rates of increase may be attributable, in
3-5
-------
part, to differences in the soils of the watersheds of these lakes and in
watershed size. The Island Lake watershed is more than two and a half
times greater in size than the Sturgeon Lake watershed and also has less
permeable soils, thus contributing to increased runoff under conditions of
increased precipitation. In addition, a number of other factors may have
combined to accelerate the increases in the annual maximum water levels in
Island Lake. Recent siltation of the outlet of Island Lake may have de-
creased it's stormwater outflow capacity. A general siltation of clayey
soil materials in the lake due to recent shoreline development may also
have reduced the lake's overall groundwater outflow capacity. Also, the
groundwater table level in the area has increased since the 1930's and may
be contributing to higher lake levels (Personal communication, David Ford,
MDNR hydrologist to WAPORA, Inc., 2 February 1982). Increases in the
acreage of impervious surfaces, including roof tops, roads, parking lots,
and hard packed soils in the Island Lake watershed, coupled with modern
agricultural drainage practices in the area, also may have contributed to
increased watershed runoff intensity during wet-weather periods. A permit
to place an additional culvert at the Island Lake outlet in order to in-
crease the stream outflow capacity has been applied for (Personal com-
munication, Mr. Harold Westholm, MLWSD to WAPORA, Inc.). It is anticipated
that an increase in lake outflow capacity will reduce the duration of
flooding problems.
3.1.3.2. Water Quality of the Project Area Lakes
Representatives of the MLWSD have seen the water quality problems of
Island Lake as a primary impetus for facility planning in Windemere Town-
ship. The plan to provide sewage collection and treatment around Island
Lake as a means of improving water quality and providing a convenience for
residential users has been discussed frequently at public meetings, re-
ported on in local newspapers, and cited in formal communications (Section
1.1.). Although the MLWSD Facility Plan also proposes the sewering of most
of the Sturgeon Lake shoreline, reference is not made to the water quality
improvements that could result from sewering Sturgeon Lake. Sturgeon Lake
is not cited in the Facility Plan as having severe algal blooms or poor
water clarity. Rush and Passenger Lakes, likewise, have not been described
3-6
-------
as degraded. The proximity of Island Lake to the existing sewage col-
lection network and the local perception that failing on-site systems are
largely responsible for it's blue-green algae blooms and poor water clarity
reinforce the emphasis on serving Island Lake with sewers.
One objective of this EIS is to provide an up-to-date and quantitative
framework in which to portray the water quality of all four service area
lakes. Future residential growth has been projected on platted lots around
all four lakes (Section 3.2.1.) and thus, protection of the quality of
Sturgeon, Rush, and Passenger Lakes is as important to consider as improv-
ing the quality of Island Lake.
Water quality parameters measured in the lake waters during 1981 and
1982 field studies included:
• Dissolved oxygen concentrations and temperature with depth
to describe lake stratification.
• Chlorophyll a_ concentration as an indication of overall phy-
toplankton productivity.
• Secchi disk depth and phytoplankton biovolume as measures
of water clarity and blue-green algae abundance.
• Phosphorus concentration as an indication of lake
fertility.
Sampling Stations and Schedule
The sampling stations visited and the sampling program and schedule
carried out in the late summer and fall of 1981 also are described in
Appendix J. Supplemental sampling took place in February 1982 which in-
cluded the collection of lake water phosphorus samples and surficial lake-
bed sediment samples. The complete field survey program and schedule is
summarized in Appendix J. Little Island Lake, a sub-basin of Island Lake,
was included in the February 1982 sampling for comparative purposes because
the land use in its watershed does not include shoreline residential devel-
opment.
3-7
-------
Field Conditions During Sampling
The sampling dates included both warm and cold weather conditions. A
blue-green algae bloom, which produced floating accumulations of algae over
the surface of Island Lake and algal "mats" on its downwind shores, was
observed during the mid-September sampling period. Weather antecedent to
the mid-September sampling was unseasonably warm and sunny (Appendix J),
which resulted in elevated lake temperatures. Weather during subsequent
sampling was in transition to cooler fall weather. Significant heat loss
from the lakes and complete water column mixing had taken place by the 30
September 1981 sampling.
Results of the Surface Water Sampling
Historic dissolved oxygen and temperature profile data were obtained
from the MDNR to supplement the 1981/1982 data. Summary tables and figures
for contemporary and historic data are discussed below.
Of the four lakes sampled, Island Lake had the highest average chlo-
rophyll ji concentrations on both 9 and 15 September, (Table 3-1.) (Island
Lake chlorophyll a_ was lowest in the samples taken just above the sediment
surface and significantly higher at the mid-depth and surface levels [Ap-
pendix B].) Average chlorophyll a^ concentrations in Sturgeon Lake were
roughly one-third of the average Island Lake concentration on both Sep-
tember sampling dates. Rush Lake's average chlorophyll _a concentration was
comparable to Sturgeon Lake's concentration, while chlorophyll ji levels in
Passenger Lake were higher due to a bloom of non-blue-green phytoplankton.
Phytoplankton biovolume calculations were made based on plankton cell
size measuresment and counts for water samples taken from all three depth
levels. These data describe the overall productivity and give insight into
phytoplankton ecology in late summer. The methodology and results of the
phytoplankton analyses were explained in the Report on Algae (Appendix B).
In order to quantify trophic status and relate phytoplankton growth to
water clarity, graphical presentations of average Secchi disk depth and
average phytoplankton biovolume in the surface samples were made (Figures
3-8
-------
Table 3-1. Average chlorophyll a_ concentrations for Island, Sturgeon,
Rush and Passenger Lakes. Mathematical averages of analy-
tical results from surface, mid-depth, and off-bottom samples
at 6, 4, 1, and 1, stations respectively.
Lake No of Stations 10 September 1981 15 September 1981
Island
Sturgeon
Rush
Passenger
6
4
1
1
27 ug/liter
09 ug/liter
11 ug/liter
15 ug/liter
26 ug/liter
09 ug/liter
11 ug/liter
23 ug/liter
3-1 and 3-2). In these figures biovolume was plotted inversely, on the
y-axis, to more conveniently show the cause-and-effeet relationship of
plankton abundance (as biovolume) to water clarity (as Secchi disk depth).
Comparison of these two parameters indicates a continuing direct relation-
ship over the sampling period between plankton abundance and water clarity
for Island, Sturgeon, and Rush Lakes. The anomalously poor water clarity
of Passenger Lake, with respect to the relatively low phytoplankton bio-
volume observed, is attributable to non-living organic matter present in
the surface waters, probably originating from the marshlands surrounding
the lake.
Although chlorophyll ji data were not taken on all 1981 sampling dates,
the general levels of chlorophyll and all other parameters interrelate in a
logical fashion for one simultaneous sampling of the lakes (excepting the
anomalous Passenger Lake). The relationship of water clarity and biovolume
of phytoplankton (especially of blue-green algae) with chlorophyll a_ is
illustrated by the data from the sampling period of 14 and 15 September
1981 (Table 3-2). On these dates, a severe blue-green algae bloom was in
progress in Island Lake. Blue-green algae also were found to dominate the
phtoplankton populations in Sturgeon and Rush Lakes on these dates, but not
to "bloom" proportions. Passenger Lake had only a small portion of its
phytoplankton population made up of blue-green algae (Table 3-2) .
3-9
-------
I
I—"
o
3.80
3.70
3.60
3.50
3.40
3.30
3.20
3.10
I 3"°°
"JJ 2.90
" 2.80
o
" 2.70
o 2.60
s 2<5°
« 2.40
B 2.30
° 2.20
f 2.10
a
•° 2.00
"M 1.90
o 1.70
I 1.60 -|
1.50
1.40
1.30 •
RUSH LAKE
I
26 August
1 September
9 September 15 September
30 1 Oct. 5 Oct.
Sept.
Figure 3-1. Average Secchi disk values with time. Data are from 1981 field surveys of
Island, Sturgeon, Rush, and Passenger Lakes, Pine County, MN.
-------
30
40
50
60
70
80
100 -
150 —
•3 20°
>
i
o
300 H
B
O
u
1 400
»-*
S 500
£ 600
800
1000
1500
2000
26 August
1 September
9 September 15 September
I
30
Sept,
1 Oct.
\
5 Oct.
Figure 3-2. Average phytoplankton biovolume values with time. Data are from 1981 field surveys
of Island, Sturgeon, Rush, and Passenger Lakes, Pine County, MN. Plotted values
are numerical averages of surface samples only and are plotted inversely to correl-
ate with Secchi disk values.
-------
Table 3-2. Average Secchi disk, surface chlorophyll _a, and surface bio-
volume values on Island, Sturgeon, and Rush Lakes 14-15 Sep-
tember 1981.
Parameter
Secchi disk
depth in meters
Phytoplankton bio
volume at the surface,
in urn /l water
Chlorophyll a at the
surface in ugl/1
Island
1.29
(lowest)
1851
(highest)
25
(highest)
Lake
Sturgeon
2.58
(intermediate)
163
(intermediate)
9
(intermediate)
Rush
3.63
(highest)
71
(lowest)
5
(lowest)
All three lakes cited had blue-green algae comprising in excess of 70%
of the biovolume estimated in the surface samples; Passenger Lake,
not represented in the table, had less than 25% of the phytoplankton
counted as blue-green in the surface samples.
Based on the data presented in Table 3-2, it was concluded that blue-
green dominance at the lake surface had an effect on water clarity propor-
tional to both total phytoplankton biovolume and chlorophyll ji concentra-
tion of the surface in Island, Sturgeon, and Rush Lakes. Island Lake had
the lowest water clarity and the most severe blue-green algae bloom prob-
lems. Sturgeon and Rush Lakes had less blue-green algae at the surface and
much better water clarity (Table 3-2). The relatively low clarity found on
3
15 September in Passenger Lake (1.80 meters, Secchi disk; 112 urn /liter
biovolume at the surface; 5 ug/1 chlorophyll a_ at the surface) was not due
to blue-green algae abundance. The dominant species found in Passenger
Lake were golden brown and green algae (Appendix H).
Stratification and destratification of the lakes are of interest
because the stability of the water column may affect the amount of phos-
phorus which may be mobilized from lake sediments and low-lying waters to
induce blue-green algal bloom problems. Thermal and chemical lake strati-
3-12
-------
fications are quantified, respectively, by gradations in temperature and
dissolved oxygen concentration with depth in the lake. A temperature and
oxygen concentration plot can be used to locate the depth range over which
the gradations are greatest. In instances where the epilimnion (surface
layer) of a lake is considerably warmer and more oxygen rich than the
underlying hypolimnion, the zone of most rapid gradation is termed "thermo-
cline" for temperature and "chemocline" for oxygen gradation. The depth
ranges for these zones of rapid gradation in the project area lakes are
well defined in some of the profiles presented in Appendix J.
Just as the productivity and clarity of each of the project area lakes
is unique (Table 3-2), the dissolved oxygen/temperature profile charac-
teristics are highly individual (Appendix J). The forces which most
strongly shape the summer dissolved oxygen and temperature profiles are
lake shape and volume, rate of solar energy influx, and the degree of wind
mixing (circulation). Ragotzkie (1978) has developed an empirical formula
which expresses the effect of wind mixing on thermocline depth as a func-
tion of lake "wind fetch" (the distance over the lake on which the wind
blows in an uninterrupted path). This predictive equation states that: in
temperate climates, the average depth of the summer thermocline (in meters)
is estimated by four times the square root of the wind fetch (in kilo-
meters) for lakes with a fetch between 1 and 20 kilometers. Using this
formula for the project area lakes, where applicable, the average summer
thermocline depths were estimated. These estimates were compared with the
observed thermocline depth ranges (Table 3-3). Observed thermocline depth
ranges were estimated based on the profiles in Appendix J. The thermocline
depth prediction for Island Lake's greatest fetch is generally in good
agreement with the observed thermocline ranges and especially good for the
14 September 1981 sampling date when the gradations of temperature and
oxygen were strong. The estimated thermocline depth for Sturgeon Lake (25
feet maximum) does not compare well with the profiles.
The reason that no thermocline has been observed in Sturgeon Lake
profiles (Appendix J) may stem from the fact that little protective topo-
graphic relief exists on the south and west shores, increasing the potent-
ial for wind mixing, and from the strong role of groundwater in the flow
3-13
-------
Table 3-3. A comparison of predicted and observed depth of the thermo-
clines in Island and Sturgeon Lakes, Pine County MN. Pre-
dicted depth of thermocline based on the equation of Ragotz-
kie (1978).
Greatest Predicted Least
Lake Fetch Thermocline Fetch
Island 1.50 mi.
20 ft. 0.30 mi
Sturgeon 2.28 mi.
25 ft. 1.00 mi.
Predicted Observed
Thermocline Thermoclines
NA (Aug. 1967) 20'-25'
(Aug. 1979) 15'-20f
(Aug. 1979) 15'-20'
(Sept. 1981) 19'-20'
17 ft. No thermocline ob-
served. Complete
mixing is assumed.
NA: Calculation not appropriate for fetch less tha 1 Km (0.62 miles).
regime of the lake. Sturgeon Lake is principally a "seepage lake" and
significant groundwater influx may be occurring in spring and early summer
which could prevent the formation of a strong thermocline. The tendency of
Sturgeon Lake to remain homeothermal is illustrated by the profiles made
from the 4 August 1955 sampling of Sturgeon Lake (MDNR, unpublished) when
the warmest surface water temperatures ever recorded did not result in a
thermal stratification (Appendix J.).
Based on the information presented above, the potential for phosphorus
cycling from the hypolimnions of the project area lakes may be evaluated as
follows:
* Island Lake is classed as "polymictic", meaning that it
mixes completely more than twice each year. It has an
elongate shape and, depending on prevailing wind direction,
the depth of the summer thermocline may vary from that
associated with the greatest fetch. It is likely that
thermal stratification and/or development of an anoxic hypo-
limnion is followed by complete mixing of this water body,
periodically, during the summer. This reasoning is supported
by the progressive phases of Island Lake's stratification
and destratification observed to be associated with weather
changes in September 1981 (Appendix J).
3-14
-------
• Sturgeon Lake appears to remain thermally unstratified
throughout most of the summer (Appendix J.). Although
observations are limited to five warm season profiles, the
existing data indicate that Sturgeon Lake is also "poly-
mictic" but that oxygen is generally greater than 1.0 mg/1
throughout the water column.
• Rush and Passenger Lakes are probably both "dimictic",
meaning that circulation is complete only in spring and fall
when water temperatures are low. Oxygen was deficient in
the hypolimnions of both lakes during September 1981.
For each lake, important phosphorus cycling inferences may be made
from the lake mixing classifications (above) and from chemical strati-
fication profiles. Phosphorus availability to phytoplankton of the project
area lakes is influenced by many physiochemical factors, but can be gen-
erally represented with the statement that the solubility and bioavail-
ability of sedimentary phosphorus are advanced by conditions which result
from very low levels of dissolved oxygen and retarded under the chemical
environment provided by more oxic conditions. A periodic re-circulation of
low lying (hypolimnetic) waters that have become anoxic may cycle biolog-
ically available phosphorus to the productive upper water layers and thus
can aggravate the symptoms of eutrophication.
Based on the analysis made in this EIS, the blue-green algae bloom
problems observed in Island Lake each summer appear to be aggravated by
phosphorus being periodically cycled to the epilimnion from the sediments
and hypolimnetic waters.
Sturgeon Lake's hypolimnion appears to be a phosphorus "sink" through-
out most of the summer. Only on one occasion out of five warm season field
surveys was low dissolved oxygen found in Sturgeon Lake (4 August 1955) and
on that sampling date very low oxygen was found only below 35 feet of
depth. It can be concluded that the waters of Sturgeon Lake probably
remain generally well oxygenated throughout most summers if it is assumed
that, as observed, water circulation usually extends to the 35-foot depth
level.
Although the water quality data base for Rush and Passenger Lakes is
limited, the existing information suggests that their hypolimnions are
3-15
-------
generally summer phosphorus sinks which preclude phosphorus cycling to
surface (epilimnetic) waters.
Supplemental Total Phosphorus Sampling and Sedimentary Studies
An additional sampling visit was made to Island and Sturgeon Lakes
during the period of 3-5 February 1982 to determine the levels of total
phosphorus (P ) in the water column and to measure the chemical character-
istics of surficial lake-bed sediments. The objective of gathering the
supplemental data was to improve the analysis of needs documentation by
determining if there were high levels of phosphorus enrichment attributable
to on-site system failures.
Island and Sturgeon Lakes and Little Island Lake were studied. Little
Island Lake has a large watershed area relative to its surface area and the
surface water outflow from it is via road bed culvert which discharges
directly to Island Lake. There is only one dwelling unit in the Little
Island Lake watershed and no shoreline development (Figure 3-3). No blue-
green algal bloom problems have been documented in Little Island Lake.
It was thought that if, as presented by the MLWSD (Section 2.3.1.2.),
a disproportionately large number of septic system surface failures existed
on the shoreline lots of Island Lake, a conservative parameter such as
phosphorus may reflect this in the water column or in near-shore lake
sediments. Little Island Lake was studied for comparative purposes because
it should be influenced only by non-wastewater phosphorus inputs from its
watershed. The sampling stations visited for water column and sediment
grab sampling in these supplemental studies are presented in Figure 3-3.
The 15- and 25-foot depth contours are included in Figure 3-3 to illustrate
that the majority of the surficial sediment grab samples taken were above
or slightly below the 15-foot depth contour.
Over the long term, the processes of sediment delivery, settling, and
resuspension are expected to "focus" light organic materials and clay
particles into the deeper (profundal) zones of these lakes, resulting in
3-16
-------
Surficial sediment
grab sample
* Intact 60 centimeter
sediment core
Figure 3-3. Stations established for sampling of water column total
phosphorus, surficial sediment characteristics, and intact
sediment cores. All samples taken in February and March
of 1982.
3-17
-------
continued sediment deposition in areas of more than 25-foot depth. These
processes scour unvegetated littoral sediments so that surficially deposi-
ted silt within the 10- to 20-foot depth contours would be expected to be
most strongly reflective of any ongoing pollution from nearby land uses.
Little Island Lake is largely a littoral environment where sediment "focus-
ing" into the profundal zone is not as significant. Sturgeon Lake has an
extensive profundal zone and Island Lake is intermediate in the proportion
of the bottom area defined as profundal. Sediment focusing processes are
more significant in Island and Sturgeon Lakes.
Results of the analysis of sediment grab samples are presented in
Table 3-5. A special phosphorus form, non-apatitic or inorganic phos-
phorus, which is "biologically available" was tested in the sediment sam-
ples by the method of Williams and others (1976). This phosphorus form was
tested because it best reflects the presence of phosphorus which originates
from human waste and fertilizer sources. The non-apatitic phosphorus
testing also compliments the methodology utilized in the intact sediment
core analyses as described in Section 2.1.3.4. (a study of the trophic
history of Island and Sturgeon Lakes).
The water column samples, also taken on 3 and 5 February 1982, were
tested for P concentrations only. The P water samples were taken at
stations 2 and 9 in Island Lake, stations 12 and 13 in Little Island Lake,
and stations 14 and 18 in Sturgeon Lake (Figure 3-3). Only a large scale
failure rate of on-site wastewater treatment systems around Island Lake or
Sturgeon Lake would be reflected in these water column P concentrations
because dispersion rates o£ nearshore waters would probably be low under
ice cover conditions. At the time of sampling, more than 56 inches of snow
cover was reported to be on the ground, ice cover on the lakes exceeded 24
inches, and water clarity in all three lakes appeared to be high. Complete
oxygen depletion was not observed in the lakes (Table 3-5). In both Island
and Sturgeon Lakes, water was sampled both below the ice and just above the
bottom. The resultant water column P values are presented in Table 3-4.
The laboratory detection limit for the reported P values is 0.01 rag/liter.
3-18
-------
Table 3-4. Total phosphorus concentrations in the waters of Island, Lit-
tle Island, and Sturgeon Lakes, 3-5 February 1982 (USEPA
Method 365.3).
Lake
Island
Island
Island
Island
Little Island
Little Island
Sturgeon
Sturgeon
Sturgeon
Sturgeon
Station
Number
09;
09;
02;
02;
12;
13;
14;
14;
18;
18;
surface
bottom
surface
bottom
surface
bottom
surface
bottom
surface
bottom
Pt (mg/ liter)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.01
.07
.05a
.03a
.02
.03
.03
.01
.03
.01
Water Column Average
P^ (mg/ liter)
0
0
0
0
0
.04
.04
.03
.02
.02
*J
Value is an average of two replicates.
Conclusions Based on the Supplemental Studies
No significant differences appear to exist in the average water column
P values between the three lakes. Little Island Lake, which has no on-
site systems located on its shoreline, had an average P concentration
similar to Island Lake (Table 3-4). Plankton growth under the ice is not
likely to have made a large contribution to the reported P concentrations
owing to the reduced light penetration caused by the heavy snow and ice
cover. The positive difference in average water column [P ] between Island
Lake and Sturgeon Lake (0.02 mg/1) probably can be attributed to additional
abiotic phosphorus sources of phosphorus and to a slightly higher produc-
tivity in Island Lake. Nonetheless, this differential in the amount of
phosphorus is small considering that Island Lake has a smaller volume of
water and far more permanent residences around its shoreline than does
Sturgeon Lake (Section 2.2.1.3).
3-19
-------
The number of lake sediment samples tested are insufficient for esti-
mation of lake-wide sediment characteristic averages, primarily because
there are two few profundal zone samples. The limited observations made
based on the sediment sampling data are:
• Wide textural variations were found in the samples within
each lake, but the shallow samples, taken where sediment
scouring was probably greatest, were classified into cate-
gories similar to soil textural classifications on the
adjacent shoreline (Section 2.2.1.1.). Sample #7 from
Island Lake was classified as sandy loam - near clay loam,
reflecting the adjacent natural sandy soils isolated on the
upland area of the northwest shore of Island Lake (Appendix
B).
• The concentration of non-apatitic phosphorus measured in
Little Island Lake sediment, station #13 (11 feet deep),
exceeded that of all other stations. This reflects the
potential significance of non-wastewater nutrient sources to
Little Island Lake and to Island Lake.
• The second highest concentration of non-apatitic phosphorus
was found in Sturgeon Lake, station #15 (10 feet deep)
located offshore from a steep, terraced slope previously in
use as a pasture for dairy cattle.
3.1.3.3. Nutrient Inputs and Lake Trophic Status
The major water quality concern for the four service area lakes is
eutrophication. The luxuriant plant growth associated with advanced eutro-
phication is generally caused by an excessive input of nutrients to a lake.
The importance of phosphorus as the primary nutrient stimulating plant
growth in lakes is widely accepted in the scientific community (Smith and
Shapiro 1981a, Vollenweider 1979, and Dillon and Rigler 1975). By con-
trolling phosphorus inputs, excessive algal growth can be halted or slowed
if the morphometry and flushing rate of a lake are favorable. Although the
degree to which algal growth will respond to phosphorus inputs has been
controversial (Lorenzen 1981, Rast and Lee 1981, Smith and Shapiro 1981b),
work published by Vollenweider (1979), Schindler (1977), and others suggest
that the appropriate phosphorus load reductions will definitely result in
less eutrophic conditions in certain types of lakes. The pathways and
magnitudes of phosphorus inputs into the project area lakes and the po-
3-20
-------
Table 3-5. Analyses of surficlal lake sediment grab samples. All sampling done 3 through 5 February 1982.
OJ
I
N3
Sample
No.
I.
2.
4.
5.
7.
V
9.
11.
1.2.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
mg/l
Dissolved
Oxygen
at Bottom
5.8 mg/1
6.0
6.8
4.8
4.0
10.2
1.8
5.6
2.8
0.9
12.8
-
1.6
3.0
9.0
5.6
Depth
24 ft
24 ft
20 ft
16 ft
10 ft
6 ft
28 ft
7 ft
3 ft
11 ft
14 ft
10 ft
5 ft
15 ft
14 ft
28 ft
Lake
Island
Island
Island
Island
Island
Island
Island
Island
Little Island
Little Island
Sturgeon
Sturgeon
Sturgeon
Sturgeon
Sturgeon
Sturgeon
pH
5.7
6.0
5.8
5.7
5.8
5.8
5.8
5.6
5.7
5.8
5.8
5.8
5.8
6.0
6.1
5.9
Mg. NAI-P^kg
(dry wt)
44.1
54.9
18.8
13.6
18.2
45.4
14.8
21.1
76.4
230.0
55.1
103.0
32.5
22.3
25.5
65.4
Volatile Solld.8
(Z Organlcs)
19.0
19.2
22.2
20.0
34.7
35.7
23.9
11.8
38.1
32.8
17.7
25.4
26.0
10. 0
11. 1
24.9
Z Clay
24.0
38.8
15.0
22.1
8.0
28.9
ND
5.8
ND
ND
14.5
40.5
18.0
7.4
5.8
23.9
Z Silt
51.0
60.8
45.0
31.0
43.9
32.3
ND
55.0
ND
ND
68.7
48.1
35.5
20.4
2.4
76.1
Z Sand
25.0
I
40.0
46.9
48.1
38.8
ND
39.2
ND
ND
16.8
11.4
46.5
72.7
91.8
I
Textural -
Classification
Silt loam-near clay loam
Sllty clay loam
Loam
Loam
Sandy loam-near loam
Clay loam-near loam
Silt loam
Silt loam
Sllty clay
Loam
Sandy loam
Sand
Silt loam
1 Non-apatite phosphorus on a dry weight basis.
2 Volatile solids calculated by subtracting percent ash (dry weight basis) from 100; the result Is Intended to portray the
organic fraction.
3 Classifications based on textural triangle (USDA 1962)
Station just offshore from domestic goose farm.
Station just offshore from dairy farm/ manure pile.
ND - No data due to Insufficient sample size for distribution testing.
-------
tential for successful management of the trophic status of these lakes are
discussed in the following two sections.
Estimation of Phosphorus Loads
One of the water quality benefits typically associated with improved
wastewater treatment systems is the elimination of a source of phosphorus.
In assessing the need for new wastewater management systems, USEPA requires
that the projected improvements in lake water quality which would be at-
tributable to the proposed systems be documented explicitly. It is there-
fore important to look at all sources of phosphorus that may be affecting
the service area lakes and to estimate the significance of the phosphorus
resulting from existing on-site treatment systems in relation to the other
phosphorus sources. It is possible that the removal of a single phosphorus
source (e.g., septic tank effluent) would not appreciably change the water
quality of these lakes and that the control of multiple sources would be
needed to reduce eutrophy. Other sources which may be controlled include
lawn fertilizers, construction erosion, cropland erosion, and livestock
waste. Some phosphorus sources such as dustfall, forest land runoff, and
oldfield runoff are unmanageable.
Phosphorus may enter a lake by a number of quantifiable pathways
including municipal treatment plant effluent, atmospheric fallout, overland
runoff, groundwater, resuspension from the lake sediments, or septic tank
leachate. The most precise method for estimating such phosphorus inputs
would be to directly measure the contributions of each source in a waster-
shed. A comprehensive data base of direct measurements would be too costly
for most lakes and was not developed for the service area lakes. Instead,
a phosphorus loading was calculated using a compendium of published lit-
erature values for annual contributions from nonpoint runoff sources, from
precipitation (USEPA 1980), and from a "worst case" estimate of the phos-
phorus load from on-site waste system leachate.
Numerous methods have been reported by researchers (Dillon and Rigler
1975, Dillon and Kirchner 1975, Omernik 1977, and USEPA 1980) for es-
timating the theoretical nutrient export rates from watersheds. For the
3-22
-------
project area lakes, export coefficients from a recently published lit-
erature review (USEPA 1980) were used to calculate annual phosphorus in-
puts. Representative phosphorus export coefficients were selected from the
referenced study based on the regional location, land use, soil type, and
rainfall. The phosphorus export coefficients selected for the service area.
and the land use acreages within the watersheds of the four project area
lakes are listed in Table 3-6. The land use classifications were deter-
mined by inspecting aerial photographs and ISPA landsat photographs, from
personal communications with a soil scientist who surveyed the area, and by
field checks by project personnel. The number of hectares associated with
each land use was measured by planimeter after the land uses had been
plotted on a base map.
The phosphorus loading associated with on-site waste treatment systems
was calculated with an occupancy rate of 2.8 persons per dwelling (US
Census Bureau 1980), the number of seasonal or permanent residences, and
the assumption that the per capita phosphorus contribution was 0.8 kg/yr,
with the soil absorption system retaining 25% of the phosphorus (USEPA
1980). Additionally, it was assumed that permanent residents have on-site
systems that fail continuously and that seasonal residents have systems
that fail throughout the summer. Based on the information presented in
Section 2.2.3., this assumption results in a serious over-estimate of the
pollutional significance of on-site systems. The resultant phosphorus load
estimate attributed to on-site systems is also very high because soil
absorption systems usually attenuate much more than 25% of the phosphorus
in septic tank effluent (Section 2.2.2.4). The estimated annual phosphorus
load of each source was determined for nine separate source categories
within the watershed of each lake. The individual source load estimates
were then aggregated into three categories according to manageability
potential for phosphorus control (Table 3-7).
Based on the estimated nutrient loading regime (Table 3-7), it was
concluded that the annual phosphorus load to Island and Sturgeon Lakes is
dominated by manageable sources of phosphorus which include combined inputs
from agriculture, lawns, livestock, and on-site systems. These two lakes
both have relatively small direct drainage areas, but the agricultural
3-23
-------
Table 3-6. Phosphorus export coefficients (USEPA 1980) and land use in
hectares within the watersheds of the project area lakes.
Land Runoff
Phosphorus Export
Coefficients Land Use Within Watershed(ha)
Land Use
Forest
We t lands
Indirect Drain-
age
Cultivated Land
Pasture
Lawns
TOTAL
(kg/ha/yr)
0.28
0.157
0.08
14.0
3.8,a 0.64b
2.7
Island
32
24
1,189
16
156
51
1,468
Sturgeon
214
34
88
77
106
36
555
Rush
L75
40
0
0
0
0
222
Passenger
84
5
0
0
0
5
94
Additional phosphorus coefficients:
Atmosphere 0.31 kg/ha/yr (applied to lake surface area only)
Livestock 0.031 kg/day/1,000 Ibs
Poultry 0.28 kg/day/100 Ibs
Septic tanks 0.8 kg/cap/yr
a
Export coefficient used for Island Lake. Predominantly clay soils re-
sults in high overland runoff.
b
Export coefficient used for Sturgeon Lake. Sandy soils results in re-
latively low overland runoff.
3-24
-------
Table 3-7. Estimated phosphorus loading to the project area lakes,
in kilograms per year. Pie diagrams below represent the per-
cent contribution from the three aggregate categories: uncon-
trollable sources, on-site systems, and other manageable
sources
Estimated
Phosphorus Loading (kg/yr)
Phosphorus
Source
Atmosphere
Wetlands & forests
Indirect tributary drainage
Island
Lake
65
13
95
Sturgeon
Lake
213
65
6
Rush
Lake
10
55
0
Passenger
Lake_
8
25
0
On-site waste treatment
systems
Agricultural runoff
Lawn runoff
Livestock or poultry
Areal phosphorus loading rate
in grams per square meter of
lake surface per year
141
817
138
46
Total annual phosphorus load 1315
0.62
179
1146
97
228
1934
0.28
39
27
0
0
131
0.21
14
0
14
0
61
0.09
Figure 3-4. Percentage contribution to the phosphorus load by aggregate
category: (A) uncontrollable sources, (B) on-site systems, and
(C) other manageable sources.
Island Lake
Sturgeon Lake
Rush Lake
Passenger Lake
3-25
-------
lands (pasture, grass, and crops) and homes with lawns within the direct
drainage areas are located either on high ground just away from the. lakes
or immediately adjacent to them on clayey soils with generally steep slop-
es. As a result, manageable phosphorus sources contribute at least 76% of
the phosphorus load to both Island Lake and Sturgeon Lake (Figure 3-4).
The worst-case estimated on-site system phosphorus load comprises about 11%
and 9% respectively of the total annual load to Island Lake and Sturgeon
Lakes (Figure 3-4).
Although Sturgeon Lake was estimated to have a greater mass of phos-
phorus entering it than Island Lake, it has a lower areal phosphorus load-
2
ing rate (grams per meter per year) than Island Lake because of its great-
er surface area. Lake size and other parameters of comparative interest
for the service area lakes are presented in Table 3-8. Rush and Passenger
Lakes receive smaller areal phosphorus loads than do Island or Sturgeon
Lakes (Table 3-4). Rush and Passenger Lakes both have relatively small
areal loading rates because their watersheds are dominated by wetlands and
forest cover with little agricultural or residential land use. Although
with 'worst-case1 estimates the phosphorus loads to Rush and Passenger
Lakes from on-site systems were estimated to contribute a high percentage
of the total phosphorus input compared to Island or Sturgeon Lakes, the
total estimated phosphorus mass presently entering Rush and Passenger Lakes
is actually very small.
Modeling of Trophic Status
A classification of the trophic status of the four project area lakes
was made based on the estimated total annual phosphorus loading and on an
empirical model developed by Dillon (1975). This model predicts in-lake
concentrations of phosphorus and classifies the trophic status of a lake by
relating mean depth to a mathematical equation that includes the estimated
total annual phosphorus loading, a phosphorus retention coefficient, and
the estimated hydraulic flushing rate. The calculated trophic condition or
"classification" of the four lakes based on the Dillon model, using the
3-26
-------
Table 3-8. Lake parameters of comparative interest.
Lakes in the Service Area
Parameter Island Sturgeon Rush Passenger
Lake surface area (ha) 211.0 686.0 35.6 30.4
Mean depth (meters) 3.4 5.9 1.7 2.2
3 4
Lake volume (m x 10 ) 717.0 4,066.0 60.5 66.9
Q_ Hydraulic budget
3 5 a
(m /yr x 10 ) 26.0 8.4 4.0 2.0
Hydraulic detention time
b
(yrs)
Length of shoreline
(km)
3.1
10.1
49.0
12.9
1.5
2.4
3.3
2.3
a
Calculation based on rainfall and runoff estimates (USEPA 1980).
b
Calculation of time required to displace, all water in a lake based
on the hydraulic budget and on lake volume.
estimated annual phosphorus loads (Table 3-7), is presented in Figure 3-5.
The initial calculation classified both Island Lake and Sturgeon Lakes as
eutrophic. Rush Lake was classified as being on the borderline between
eutrophic and mesotrophic, and Passenger Lake was classified as being
mesotrophic. When the model calculations were redone without the "worst
case" phosphorus input assumed to be associated with on-site systems in the
first calculation, the trophic status classifications of Island and Stur-
geon Lakes did not change significantly. However, Rush Lake changed toward
improved trophic status, moving into the mesotrophic class. Passenger Lake
moved into the oligotrophic class (Figure 3-5).
When trophic status data for the lakes (Section 3.1.3.2.) and the
estimated annual phosphorus loads (Table 3-7) were applied to an arbitrary
scale (after Uttormark and Wall 1979) that indicates the potential need for
3-27
-------
phosphorus management (Figure 3-6) , Island and Sturgeon Lakes appeared to
need other extensive phosphorus load reductions in addition to the control
of on-site waste treatment systems in order to curtail eutrophication. On
the same scale, Rush and Passenger Lakes did not appear to need extensive
phosphorus management measures to protect water quality. It must be noted
that the existing water quality of Sturgeon, Rush, and Passenger Lakes
appears to be satisfactory based on water quality data collected for this
project (Section 2.2.2.4.). Conversely, Island Lake was shown to have
serious water quality problems associated with nutrient enrichment. Blue-
green algae blooms in Island Lake, were documented as being associated with
its existing eutrophic condition and reflected the availability of luxu-
riant amounts of phosphorus. This documentation is discussed in detail in
Section 3.1.3.2.
Conclusions Based on Phosphorus Loading Estimates and on Trophic Status
Modeling
On-site waste treatment systems must be considered a relatively minor
source of phosphorus to both Island Lake and Sturgeon Lake. The pros-
pective benefits of curtailing on-site system phosphorus loads appear small
in light of this. Additionally, a paradoxical situation could result from
curtailing just on-site system phosphorus loads to Island and Sturgeon
Lakes because on-site waste management systems are estimated to contribute
a relatively minor fraction of the combined load from all manageable
sources (Figure 3-4). Important sources of phosphorus in the direct drain-
ages of Island and Sturgeon Lakes also include lawn runoff and generalized
erosion from cleared land (Table 3-7). The paradox would exist should a
waste management alternative such as sewer service be implemented and
promote enough new residential growth around the lakes to substantially
increase the runoff of nutrient from the land. The resultant load of
phosphorus from this runoff could conceivably equal or exceed the phos-
phorus load originating from failing septic systems prior to the con-
struction of sewers.
3-28
-------
100
MEAN DEPTH (METERS)
100.0
L=AREAL PHOSPHORUS INPUT (g/m^yr)
R=PHOSPHORUS RETENTION COEFFICIENT
P* HYDRAULIC FLUSHING RATE (yf1)
• POSITION WITH WORST CASE ON-SITE SYSTEM LOAD
O NO ON-SITE SYSTEM LOAD
Figure 3-5. Graphical representation of the modeling of trophic status,
with and without the "worst case" phosphorus load assumed for
on-site waste management systems. Derived from Dillon (1975).
3-29
-------
Eutrophic 100
X
til
Q
Z
lil
co
o
X
Q.
O
cc
eo
z
O
CO
o
Ollgotrophic
SO .
60 .
40 .
20 .
c
D indicates management
of phosphorus is desire-
able and that long term
benefits may be acheived
without extensive phos-
phorus control.
F
PASSENGER^
A indicates no present
danger of eutrophication
USH
•
1
ST
"C" indicates that C
management is needed
because serious degra-
dation is imminent.
ISLAND
•
JRGEON
"D" indicates that Q
there may be problems
but the management
needs are uncertain.
Renovation desireable
but lasting improve-
ment may require
extensive nutrient
control .
o
d
CM
o
o
d
CO
o
CO
o
CM TJ- <£>
»•• ^ T~
d d d
o
CM
01
d
CO
CM
CM
o
CO
CO
Low
phosphorus loading
AREAL PHOSPHORUS LOADING
High
phosphorus loading
TOTAL PHOSPHORUS
(Biochemically Active)
(g/m2-yr)
Figure 3-6. Graphical representation of the need to control phosphorus sources
affecting lakes. Based on an arbitrary scale of phosphorus loading
and on a trophic status index, as presented in Uttormark and
Wall (1979).
3-30
-------
The modeling of trophic status provided no indication that the abate-
ment of an assumed "worst case" on-site system phosphorus load would im-
prove the trophic status of Island Lake. The modeling results and the
apparent natural fertility of Island Lake indicate that success in re-
versing Island Lake's eutrophication by abating a single phosphorus source
is unlikely.
The model calculations presented in this EIS are not capable of pro-
viding insight into whether specific waste management alternatives can slow
the eutrophication of Sturgeon Lake. The modeling did indicate initially
that abatement of "worst case" on-site system loads would moderately im-
prove the trophic status of Rush and Passenger Lakes (Figure 3-5) . Because
the initially assumed on-site system load was "worst case" and because that
assumption is a serious over estimate (Section 2.2.2.4.), the classifi-
cation of Rush and Passenger Lakes made without any on-site system phos-
phorus load (Figure 3-5) is probably a more realistic depiction of present
quality. Considering the more realistic estimate of on-site system phos-
phorus loads, the abatement of on-site system loads with any type of im-
proved wastewater management around Rush and Passenger Lakes would be of
minimal benefit.
3.1.3.4. Trophic History of Island Lake and Sturgeon Lake
Background
Island Lake and Sturgeon Lake are currently surrounded by shoreline
residential development. The lakeshore community represented by this level
of development began in the decade of the 1950?s, experienced its greatest
rate of growth in the 1970's, and now is comprised of approximately 350
households (Section 3.2.1.). A primary concern of many of the residents of
this community has been the notion that the blue-green algae blooms cur-
rently experienced in Island Lake are a recent problem linked to the ex-
istence of a large number of failing on-site wastewater treatment systems.
However, one long-time resident of the area has reported that the blue-
green algal blooms in Island Lake represent a problem of much longer stand-
ing, predating any significant amount of lakeshore development, (Letter of
Mr. Walter Johnson to Mr. Gregory Evenson, Appendix K.).
3-31
-------
Information contained in the MLWSD Facility Plan (Section 2.2.1.2.)
indicates that a large proportion of the lakeshore community's permanent
population is concentrated around Island Lake and that the residences
around Island Lake experience a greater rate of surface failure with on-
site systems than do the Sturgeon Lake residences. In the context of the
popular conception which holds that failing septic systems are the cause of
Island Lake's problems, a logical concern for the residents of the Sturgeon
Lake area is that extensive conversion of dwellings to permanent use status
will potentially result in problems comparable to those being experienced
with Island Lake.
Empirical observations which associate symptoms of advanced eutrophi-
cation only with increasing population levels in the lakeshore community
may ignore other important historic events in a lake's watershed. USEPA
determined that a scientific investigation of the course of eutrophication
in Island and Sturgeon Lakes was needed to provide a more comprehensive
understanding of events that have influenced the their quality. The ob-
jective of the investigation was to determine the historic trends of the
eutrophication of these lakes.
The Investigation of Trophic History
To complete the investigation of trophic history, special supplemental
data were gathered in the late winter and early spring of 1982. A chrono-
logy of population growth and historical events was first constructed to
document the course of events which could have an impact on phosphorus
loads to the lakes (Section 3.2.2.2.); and, a supporting paleolimnological
investigation was conducted by examining the characteristics of lake sedi-
ment with depth. A complete report on the paleolimnological investigation
is presented in Appendix L. A summary discussion of the methods and find-
ings of this investigation is presented below.
Intact 60-centimeter long sediment cores were taken from the profundal
sediments of Island, Little Island, and Sturgeon Lakes (Figure 3-3).
3-32
-------
Little Island Lake, a shallow water body contiguous to Island Lake, was
studied for comparative purposes due to its lack of lakeshore development.
Each sediment core was sectioned at even intervals as it was removed from
the coring device. The sections were subsequently analyzed for the list of
parameters discussed below.
In each core section:
• Chlorophyll break-down products were analyzed on a concen-
tration basis for phytoplankton productivity trend analysis.
• Calcium carbonate was analyzed on a concentration basis to
allow calculation of the percent by weight of the sediment
made up of CaCO . This parameter can, in particular situ-
ations, be a reflection of overall plant productivity,
including both phytoplankton and aquatic macrophytes.
• The dry weight composition of the sediments in terms of both
organic and clastic matter was analyzed to allow presen-
tation of these parameters on a percentile basis. These
data allow analysis of changes in overall watershed sediment
transport phenomena and lake productivity.
• The activity of Cesium (Cs) 137 isotope was measured to
allow a calculation of annual sedimentation rates. The
presence of Cs 137 is associated with the atmospheric test-
ing of atomic weapons and provides a "dateline" for sedi-
mentation studies.
* Three phosphorus forms were measured on a concentration
basis to make a trend analyses of lake fertility. The
changes in ratio of organic phosphorus to non-apatitic
phosphorus were to be examined to determine where strong
changes in the phosphorus loading regime to the lakes had
taken place (if any) .
Plots were made of these parameters to characterize sediment strati-
graphy of the lakes. (The core segments were "dated" according to the
sedimentation rate estimates.) Example plots of some of the parameters
with depth/ date information for Island Lake, Little Island Lake, and
Sturgeon Lake are presented in Figures 3-7 through 3-9.
The important conclusions made as a result of the paleolimnologic in-
vestigation are that:
• Island Lake has been approximately twice as productive as
3-33
-------
Figure 3-7. Dated stratigraphic profiles of Island Lake sediments.
Island Lake
U)
OJ
CaCO- (percent)
024
Organic Matter (percent)
0 10 20 30 40
Chlorophyll a (SPDU/g org. matt.)
20 40 80 80 100 120
,_l i i i I i
Total Phosphorus (mg/g dry wt.)
Depth
(cm)
35-
SO-
65
60-1
1.1 1-3 1.5 1,7
1848
60-1
-------
Figure 3-8. Dated stratigraphic profiles of Little Island Lake sediments.
Little Island Lake
CaCO-j (percent)
Organic Matter (percent)
0 10 20 30 40
10
15
UJ
U) 20'
Ui
25-
Depth x.
(cm)
35-
40-
45-
50-
55-
•1977
1965 s.
-1947 «•
•1930 u
-1913 zo
•1896 »
-1878 so
35-
40-
45-
50-
55
60-1
Chlorophyll a (SPDU/g org. matt.)
20 40 60 80 100 120
Total Phosphorus (mg/g dry wt.)
0.5 0.7 0.8 1.1 1,3 1.5 1.7
35
40-
45-
50-
55-
60-1
-------
Figure 3-9. Dated stratigraphic profiles of Sturgeon Lake sediments.
Sturgeon Lake
CaCO-j (percent)
024
U>
I
OJ
10-
1B-
20-
Depth 2S-
(cm)
30-
35-
4O-
45-
50-
55-
eo-i
Organic Matter (percent)
0 10 20 30 40
1978
•1970
-1960 10-
-1943 "'
-1933 20-
•1921 z
•1909 30-
1894
35-
40-
1872 45-
50-
•1848
Chlorophyll a (SPDU/g org. matt.)
0 40 to to 100 120
1978
1970 *•
•1960 10.
•1943 *
1933 20-
-1921 25-
-1909 30-
-1894
35-
40-
•1872 45-
50-
-1848
eo-i
Total Phosphorus (mg/g dry wt.)
0..7 0* 1.1 1.3 1-5 1.7
1978
1970 »-
1960 10-
1943
1933 20-
1921 2*-
1909 30-
1894
35-
40-
-1872 45-
so-
1848 -
so-1
1872
1848
-------
Sturgeon Lake for as far back in the sedimentary record as
the depth of cores allowed estimation.
• Significant change in the diatom community indicating a
change in status from mesotrophic to eutrophic for Island
Lake was found to be occurring following approximately 1930,
12 years after the Moose Lake fire and coincident with the
onset of the development of a dairy-based agricultural
economy. This trend in the diatom community did not appear
to further accelerate coincident with the development of a
lakeshore residential community after 1950.
• The phosphorus levels in the sediments of Little Island Lake
were found to be significantly higher than in Island Lake
throughout the dated sedimentary record, demonstrating the
overall significance of non-wastewater sources of phosphorus
in the absence of any lakeshore development.
• Sturgeon Lake was found to have remained almost unchanged in
terms of phytoplankton productivity until 1975. Increases
found in the concentration of phosphorus deposited after
1945 did not result in concommitant increases in phytoplank-
ton productivity. The origins of the increased amounts of
phosphous found near the sediment surface could include
wastewater sources. However, agriculture and increased use
of lawn fertilizer may also be significant phosphorus
sources to Sturgeon Lake. It is emphasized that regardless
of increased phosphous in recently deposited sediments, no
significant acceleration in the rate of eutrophication of
Sturgeon Lake was indicated by the other parameters.
3.1.4. Aquatic Biota
The Phase I Environmental Report (USEPA 1981) contained a broad over-
view description of the aquatic biota of the planning area's lakes. This
section focuses on the aquatic biota of the project area lakes only, with
an emphasis on data useful in evaluating the need for improved wastewater
treatment. Topics covered include phytoplankton ecology in late summer and
early fall, a special report on the presence of toxicity producing blue-
green algal species, a description of the location of beds of aquatic
macrophytes and a summary oE some MDNR fish management survey data for
Island and Sturgeon Lakes.
3-37
-------
3.1.4.1. Phytoplankton Ecology and the Presence of Toxicity Producing
Blue-Green Algae
Concerns have been expressed in public meetings held in the Moose
Lake, Minnesota about possible health risks associated with blooms of
blue-green algae in the area's lakes (Section 1.3.). These concerns re-
flect a widespread perception that blue-green algae blooms pose a health
hazard to swimmers and pets and that pollution from lakeshore septic tanks
was a major factor in the development of these blooms. Because of these
concerns, a Report on Algae was prepared by USEPA to investiage the factors
leading to the development of blue-green algae blooms, to examine docu-
mented episodes of algal toxicity, and to assess the potential health risks
associated with blue-green algae blooms in the lakes within the proposed
service area. The Report also describes the information on phytoplankton
populations and water quality obtained from sampling Rush, Passenger,
Sturgeon, and Island Lakes during August, September, and October 1981. A
detailed summary of the Report on Algae is presented in Appendix H. Gen-
eral findings of that report are presented in the following paragraphs.
There are approximately 1,500 known species of blue-green algae in
both soil and aquatic habitats. Blue-green algae are often considered to
be an aquatic "nuisance species" though, because of their ability to remain
in position at the surface and because the larger cell colonies are visible
to the naked eye. Their bouyancy can also result in the formation of
floating mats of dead and living blue-green algae which accumulate on the
downwind side of a water body. As the algae decompose, unpleasant odors
and colors are produced. Decomposition of blue-green algae can adversely
affect the taste of water.
Under favorable environmental conditions, algae reproduce at extremely
rapid rates and form "blooms" in which they are present in very high con-
centrations. Excessive growth or blooms of phytoplankton may include one or
several kinds of algae. The growth-limit ing factors affecting algae abun-
dance in Lakes are nutrients (primarily phosphorus and nitrogen), tem-
perature, and light. Seasonal variability in these factors are collec-
tively responsible for the occasional rapid growth and resulting dominance
3-38
-------
of blue-green algae over other algae in freshwater lakes. Often more than
one factor is responsible for inducing a severe bloom, Tn eutrophic lakes
(i.e., waterbodies with high nutrient content and the highest algal grow-
th), blue-green algae typically become dominant in late summer because of a
general depletion of dissolved nitrogen and silica which excludes the
growth of other phytoplankton. Blue-green algae alone are able to fix
atmospheric nitrogen into a useful nutrient and are thus able to achieve
greater growth than other phytoplankton in late summer.
In addition to the nuisance characteristics commonly associated with
blue-green algal blooms, three genera of freshwater blue-green algae oc-
casionally produce substances that can cause a variety of toxic effects,
and in some cases, have caused death in wildlife and livestock. The only
way for toxic blue-green algae to cause death in animals is from drinking
algae-laden water. There are documented episodes of toxic blue-green algae
blooms in southern Minnesota which resulted in livestock mortality. There
are no documented or reported cases of human mortality associated with
toxic strains of fresh-water blue-green algae. However, symptoms associ-
ated with ingestion in humans such as itching, nausea, and diarrhea have
been commonly reported.
The development of toxic blooms is unpredictable and usually occurs in
short-lived pulses. They usually reoccur in the same body of water in 2 or
3 year cycles. The fact that bloom toxicity is so varied and unpredictable
make any blue-green algae bloom potentially dangerous and suspect at all
times, even though the majority are actually non-toxic.
To investigate the potential for blue-green algal toxicity in the four
project area lakes, phytoplankton, water quality and public health surveys
were conducted in Pine County from late August to early October 1981.
Although the health officers, physicians, and veterinarians contacted
reported no health related or toxicological problems with swimming or in
drinking from the four lakes, Island Lake was found to have a potential
health hazard associated with blooms of blue-green algae. This potential
is based on the presence of algae belonging to the three genera which have
been shown to be associated with toxicity incidents with domestic animals
3-39
-------
and with humans in other Minnesota lakes. The potential health problem
with Island Lake must not be exaggerated, however, because the dominant
blue-green algae in Island Lake was found to be Anabaena macrospora, which
was not found to be associated with toxicity in a review of literature.
The other three project area lakes were found to support lower concen-
trations of blue-green algae and did not experience blue-green growth to
bloom proportions. Because of this, blue-green algae do not appear to pose
a potential threat to public health in Sturgeon, Passenger, or Rush Lakes.
The survey found that Island Lake had the highest algae density of the
four lakes and also had the poorest water clarity. In a pattern common for
eutrophic lakes, Island Lake was found to be dominated in late August by
non-blue-green algae. Subsequently, in early September, the concentrations
of non-blue-green algae species declined in Island Lake while two species
of blue-green algae increased in number to achieve total dominance. Blue-
green algae increased from 16% to 95% of the total phytoplankton community
from 26 August to 9 September.
Although phytoplankton were much less abundant in Sturgeon Lake than
in Island Lake, blue-green algae remained the dominant phytoplankton group
in Sturgeon Lake throughout September. Sturgeon Lake had better water
clarity than Island Lake primarily because blue-green algae were much less
abundant.
Passenger Lake had relatively low amounts of algae and, in particular,
very low volumes of blue-green algae compared to both Island and Sturgeon
Lakes. On each of the three sampling dates in September and October,
non-blue-green algae were dominant in Passenger Lake. The relatively low
clarity of Passenger Lake was attributed to other factors such as dissolved
and suspended organic matter. Rush Lake had the lowest abundance of phyto-
plankton of the four lakes tested and had the greatest water clarity.
3.1.4.2. Aquatic Macrophytes
Emergent and submergent aquatic plants encountered in significant
stands during the 1981 field surveys were noted. The objective of locating
3-40
-------
areas of Luxuriant aquatic plant growth was to evaluate their potential
association with any failing on-site systems detected through the septic
leachate survey (Section 2.2.1.5.)- It was anticipated that confined
embayments or shallow areas protected from the waves by a point or shoal
could be experiencing luxuriant plant growth if adjacent residences were
contributing significant amounts of septic leachate. No such conditions
were documented by the field crew; e.g., the potential septic leachate
plumes that were located were not found to be emerging in isolated mac-
rophyte beds.
In Sturgeon Lake, the observation was made that some shallow, sandy
areas along the south and southwest shore appeared to have been cleared of
native emergent plants, presumably to provide a more attractive swimming
beach for the property owners. Thus, the potential association of aquatic
plant growth and residential development was obscured due to "beach clear-
ing" practices.
3.1.4.3. Fish
The fisheries resources of the project area lakes are relatively good,
according to MDNR records dating to 1979. Gill net and trap net catches
made in Island and Sturgeon Lakes were reported to be above the state
average for walleye, northern pike, perch, and sunfish.
Some game fish and panfish are found with neascus (blackspots on the
fish's epidermis caused by a cyst of a snail). This condition has been
documented in MDNR fishery records since the mid-1950s. The. regional fish
manager has reported that this condition is typical for many lakes in this
part of tiie state (Personal communication to WAPORA, Inc.).
Recently, a strong increase WHS reported in the population of yellow
perch and sunfish in Island and Sturgeon Lakes (MDNR, unpublished files).
A summary of the fishery daf.^ indicating recent increases in the panfish
populations of Island and Sturgeon Lakes is presented in Figure 3-10. The
exact cause of the reported increases in the number of yellow perch and
blue-gill sunfLsh captured in these lakes is not known, although it may be
3-41
-------
H
W
CO
w
PM
Q
H
PM
U
CO
M
Pn
Pn
0
W
a
100-
90-
80-
70-
60-
50-
40-
30-
20-
10-
0
ISLAND LAKE
|
ij
9
S
9
a
J
5
^
& K
^ 2
13
IT
% 2
i 2
* \ !• ! li 13 ffli i ffli ^
1954 1967 1970 1975 1979
| Walleye
| Northern Pike
| Yellow Perch
J Bluegill Sunfish
40-
30-
20-
10-
0
STURGEON LAKE
I
I
1\ ij l\
M ni n!; 111!
1955 1967 1975 1979
Figure 3-10. Gillnet and trapnet capture rates with time for gamefish and
panfish in Island and Sturgeon Lakes, Pine County, MN. Data
are from fish management survey records (MDNR, unpublished).
3-42
-------
speculated that increased fishing pressure on predator fish, following
extensive residential development of the area in early 1970's, may have
played a role in shaping the fish community. Removal of a portion of the
walleye or northern pike population due to increased fishing pressure could
have resulted in concomraitant increases in the prey species (such as yellow
perch and sunfish). Because perch and sunfish are predators on zooplankton,
an increase in these smaller panfish species may have resulted in a signi-
ficant decrease of the zooplankton population. A decrease in the zoo-
plankton population would lower the grazing pressure on phytoplankton,
especially green algae. As a result, the reduced zooplankton grazing can
be expected to have stimulated an increase in the phytoplankton population,
increasing the biological turbidity in Island and Sturgeon Lakes. In other
Minnesota lakes, an increase in phytoplankton has occurred when the zoo-
plankton population decreased (Shapiro 1979). An overall increase in
phytoplankton in the context of late summer successional patterns may favor
the growth of blue-green algae.
3.1.5. Terrestrial Biota
The Phase I Environmental Report (USEPA 1981) contained an extensive
overview discussion of the terrestrial biota of Pine and Carlton counties.
Topics covered in that discussion included land cover, significant natural
areas, wetlands, floodplains, and wildlife.
Additional information on the extent of wetland soils within the
project area may be deduced from the soil survey conducted in a portion of
Windemere Township for preparation of this Environmental Impact Statement
(Section 2.2.1.1.). Further discussion of forest and agricultural land
cover extent in the watershed areas of Island and Sturgeon Lakes is pre-
sented in Section 3.2.2.2.
3.2 Man-Made Environment
3.2.1. Demographics
3-43
-------
3.2.L.L. Historic and Current Population Trends
Two distinct trends are reflected by the population data for the
jurisdictions within and surrounding the project area (Windemere and Moose
Lake Townships, the City of Moose Lake, and Pine and Carlton Counties).
The first trend, one of erratic growth and decline, is evident in the
population data for the 40-year period from 1930 to 1970 (Tables 3-9 and
3-10). During this period Windemere Township and Pine County both experi-
enced population decline. Moose Lake Township, the City of Moose Lake, and
Carlton County each experienced population growth during this period,
however, the rate of growth varied widely. This population trend reflects
both national trends and local aberrations and also reflects, to a great
extent, changes in the economy of the area. The historic growth of the
local region was based on the development of the forestry industry and
agricultural expansion. After 1940, however, increased mechanization in
agricultural operations and a general decline in the forestry industry
ushered in a period of erratic growth and population decline. The popula-
tion trend experienced by the jurisdictions within the project area between
1940 and 1970 was indicative of the national rural-to-urban migratory
pattern that resulted, at least partially, from a shrinkage in employment
opportunities In rural areas with natural resource-based economies.
The second population trend apparent in the project area, and espec-
ially in Windemere Township, is the rapid population growth that has oc-
curred since 1970. The construction of seasonal homes around Island and
Sturgeon Lakes, a trend that began in the 1950s, appears to have created
mucli of the impetus for the population gains. The number of housing units
in Windemere Township increased by 56% from 1950 to 1960 while the year-
round population of the Township decreased by 4.6% (US Bureau of the Census
1952, 1963). Although the natural resource segment of the local economy
continued to decline between 1960 and 1980, the growth of the seasonal
population around the lakes apparently stimulated an increase in the ser-
vice sector of the economy which resulted in an increase in the permanent
population. Between 1960 and 1980, the number of housing units in Winde-
mere Township increased by 200% while the population increased by only 145%
(US Bureau of the Census 1963, 1973, 1982). The increases that took place
3-44
-------
Table 3-9. Historic population growth in the jurisdictions within and surrounding the project area (US
Bureau of the Census 1952, 1963, 1973, 1982).
Jurisd ic t Ion
Windemere Township
Moo«e Lake Township
City of Moose Lake
Pine County
CarLton County
Minnesota
1930
528
548
742
20,264
21,232
2,253,953
1940
489
1,063
1,432
21,478
24,212
2,792,300
1950
392
1,206
1,603
18,223
24,584
2,982,483
1960
374
1,577
1,514
17,004
27,932
3,413,864
1970
511
1,170
1,400
16,821
28,072
3,805,069
1980
915
1,237
1,408
19,871
29,936
4,077,148
-------
Table 3-10. Percent change in the population in the jurisdictions within and surrounding
the project area from 1930 to 1980 (US Bureau of Census 1952, 1963, 1973, 1982)
Jurisdict ioji
Windejiere Township
Mooae Lake Township
City of Moose Lake
Piae County
Carlton County
Minnesota
1930-1940
-7.4
94.0
93.0
6.0
14.0
8.9
1940-1950
-19.8
13.5
11.9
-15.2
1.5
6.8
1950-1960
-4.6
30.8
-5.6
-6.7
13.6
14.5
1960-1970
36.6
-25.8
-7.5
-1.1
0.5
11.5
1970-1980
79.1
5.7
0.6
18.1
6.6
7.1
-------
State and national trn.ids. Many urban area populations have declined since
1970, whereas rural "amenity" areas similar to Uindemere Township have
grown.
Thr recent trend toward increased development and population growth in
certain areas of the upper Midwest, as epitomized by the rural lake com-
munity oC the project area, is well documented. Gustafson (1973) found
that rural, non-farm populations experienced an overall, increase between
1960 and 1970 and that the rural, non-farm areas that experienced the
greatest demand for new housing were in: (1) counties adjacent to Minne-
apolis-St. Paul; (2) in lake areas of central Minnesota; and (3) in north-
ern and central Wisconsin.
3.2.1.2. Household Size and Resident Age
Household sizes in the project area did not change to any significant
extent between 1970 and 1980 (US Bureau of the Census 1973, 1982). The
maintenance of household sizes at their 1970 levels is somewhat incon-
sistent with the nationwide trend toward increased numbers of one- and
two-person households and a consequent decrease in average household size.
The average number of persons per household in Windemere Township in 1970
was 2.66 (US Bureau of the Census 1973). According to the 1980 census, the
average household size in the Island Lake and Sturgeon Lake portions of
Windemere Township (ED 504; Figure 3-1.1) was 2.65 and in the remaining
portion of the Township (ED 503; Figure 3-11) the average household size
was 2.74. These household sizes are slightly lower than the household size
in Pine County (Table 3-11), which is one indication of a greater number of
households made up of retired individuals.
Median age is an index of the overall age structure of the population
being studied. The 1980 median age in the census enumeration district
surrounding Island and Sturgeon Lakes in Windemere Township was 37.9. This
is significantly higher than the median age in Pine County and in the State
(Table 3-11) and is attributed to the growing number of retired residents
who are attracted by the recreational and scenic amenities of the project
area.
3-47
-------
Table 3-11. Selected population characteristics in the jurisdictions within and surrounding the project area in 1980
(US Bureau of the Census 1952, 1963, 1973, 1982).
Jurisdiction
a
Windemere Township
ED 504
ED 503
Moose Lake Township
City of Moose Lake
Pine County
Carlton County
Minnesota
Permanent
Population
329
586
934
1,408
19,871
29,936
4,077,148
Year-round
Housing Units
138
269
353
571
10,299
11,782
1,613,343
Median Number of
Persons per Occupied
Housing Unit
2.65
2.74
3.04
2.17
2.80
2.87
2.74
Median
Age
37.9
34.0
29.7
43.1
31.1
30.5
29.2
Percent
Under
18 Years
23.7
29.7
33.0
19.4
NA
NA
NA
Percent
Over
65 Years
12.5
L5.0
10.9
27.2
NA
NA
NA
See Figure a for the boundaries of the two EDs within Windemere Township.
Does not include Moose Lake State Hospital.
NA - Not Applicable.
-------
u>
I
Figure 3-11. Enumeration districts for census.
-------
3.2.1.3. Housing Stock Characteristics
The housing stock in the project area comprises both year-round and
seasonal dwellings. According to the 1980 census, there are 919 housing
units in Windemere Township; 512 of these are used on a seasonal basis and
407 are occupied year-round or are vacant (Table 3-12). The percentage of
seasonal units in Moose Lake Township is significantly less; only 50 of the
403 total housing units are used on a seasonal basis (Table 3-12). Because
Moose Lake Township is a predominantly rural area with less riparian de-
velopment and related amenities than Windemere Township, its lower per-
centage of seasonal housing does not appear to be unusual.
3.2.1.4. Population Projections
Background
The accuracy of population projections is highly dependent on two
factors: the size of the base population and the period of time for which
the projections are made. The estimation of population growth generally is
less accurate for small populations than for larger populations when made
over long periods of time. This is because attitudinal or technological
changes can significantly affect small communities, whereas large com-
munities can better absorb such changes.
The effect of these limitations can be minimized if population pro-
jections are based on observations derived from a thorough analysis of
historical trends. Two observations regarding population trends in the
project area must be considered in forecasting future population trends:
Prior to 1960, population growth in Windemere and Moose Lake
Townships was erratic. Since 1960, however, the number of
housing units in the two townships increased steadily, often
at a greater rate than population growth. For example,
between 1960 and 1970 the number of housing units in Winde-
mere Township increased by 89.2% while the population in-
creased by only 36.6% (Table 3-13). The substantial in-
crease in the number of housing units is indicative of the
high local demand for recreational homes because of the
amenities associated with the Township's lakefront property.
3-50
-------
Between 1970 and 1980, the number of housing units in Winde-
mere Township increased by 59.3% while the population in-
creased by 79.1% (Table 3-13). This reversal of the pre-
ceeding decade's trend (1960 to 1970) appears to be indi-
cative of the recent national trend of net migration from
urban to rural areas. Rural areas were attractive during the
1970s for a variety of reasons that have been widely docu-
mented, including lower land values, the amenities of "coun-
try life," and an absence of "urban" problems. This current
trend of population increase is expected to continue in the
project area, at similar or somewhat reduced rates for
identical reasons and because of the area's perceived qua-
lity among retired people.
• The relationship between population change in the two pro-
ject area Counties and the population change in the two
project area Townships has not been stable over the period
from 1950 to 1980 (Table 3-14). The increasing percentage
contribution of the Windemere Township population to the
Pine County population is indicative of the area's historic
growth potential as a result of development around the
Township's lakes. The decreasing contribution of the Moose
Lake Township population to the Carlton County population is
indicative of the lesser development potential of Moose Lake
Township (Table 3-14). Because of the variations between
these two adjacent Townships it does not appear that for
either Pine or Carlton County there is a strong correlation
between County and Township growth trends.
Other factors also will have some impact on future population growth.
Higher fuel costs, further declines in employment opportunities, and/or a
stagnant regional economy might directly and indirectly affect population
growth. The growth attitudes of existing residents, local governments, and
commercial interests also could affect future population levels.
Methodology
The population projections for the project area are based on 1960,
1970 and 1980 data and were developed from projections of the number of
additional housing units that will be built in the project area by the year
2000. A housing unit projection methodology was used because the available
data on housing units are of a similar quality as the available data on
populations and because fewer extrapolations are required to estimate the
future seasonal population (Appendix I).
3-51
-------
Table 3-12. Project area housing summary for 1980 (US Bureau of the Census 1982)
Year-round
Jurisdiction Vacant Units
Windemere Township
ED 504
ED 503
Q
Moose Lake Township
City of Moose Lake
69
14
55
46
46
Year-round
Occupied
Units
338
124
214
307
525
Total Year-
round Units
407
138
269
353
571
Seasonal
Units
512
259
253
50
16
Total
Units
919
397
522
403
587
Does not include Moose Lake State Hospital.
3-52
-------
Table 3-13.
Changes in the population and housing stock in Windemere and Moose Lake Townships, 1960 to 1980 (US Bureau of the
Census 1963, 1973, 1982).
1960 1970 1980
Percent Change ~~" Percent Change
Jurisdiction Population Housing Units Population Housing Units 1960-1970 Population Housing Units 1970-1980
Windemere 374 511 36.6 915 79.1
Township 305 577 89.2 919 59.3
Moose Lake 1,577 1,170 -25.8 1,237 5.7
Township 224 287 28.1 403 40.4
-------
Table 3-14. Percentage of Pine and Carlton County population residing in
Windemere and Moose Lake Townships in 1950, 1960, 1970 and
1980 (US Bureau of the Census 1952, 1963, 1973, 1982).
Jurisdiction 1950 I960 1970 1980
Windemere Township 2.2 2.2 3.0 4.6
(Pine County)
Moose Lake Township 4.9 5.6 4.2 4.1
(Carlton County)
Permanent and seasonal population projections for Windemere Township
were developed based on the housing unit projections (Tables 3-15 and
3-16). The total population for the year 2000 is estimated to be 3,621
which includes 1,503 (41.5%) permanent residents and 2,118 (58.4%) seasonal
residents (Table 3-17). The projected increase in total population over
the planning period is 47.7%. The permanent population is projected to
increase by 64.3% while the seasonal population is projected to increase by
37.9%. The population around Island Lake is projected to increase by 39.9%
and the population around Sturgeon Lake is projected to increase by 41.9%.
The greater amount of developable lakefront property around the other
Township lakes is indicated by the projected population increase in ED 503
of 53.6%.
Table 3-15. Permanent population projections within Windemere Township, 1980
to 2000.
Location 1980 1990 2000
ED 504a 329 429 532
Island Lake 153 200 246
Sturgeon Lake 100 131 172
Outlying Areas 76 98 114
ED 503 586 764 971
Windemere Township 915 1,193 1,503
a
Population projections for 1990 and 2000 are based on 2.384 persons per
household as derived from 1980 census data and include a vacancy factor.
Population projections for 1980 and 2000 are based on 2.178 persons per house-
hold as derived from 1980 census data and include a vacancy factor.
3-54
-------
Table 3-16. Seasonal population projections within Windemere Township,
1980 to 2000a.
Location 1980 1990 2000
ED 504
Island Lake
Sturgeon Lake
Outlying Areas
ED 503
Windemere Township
777
261
465
51
759
1,536
1,017
339
615
63
993
2,010
1,023
333
630
60
1,095
2,118
*3
Population projections for 1990 and 2000 are based on 3.0 persons per
household.
Table 3-17. Combined seasonal and permanent population projections within
Windemere Township, 1980 to 2000 .
1980 1990 2000
ED 504 1,106 1,446 1,555
Island Lake 414 539 579
Sturgeon Lake 565 746 802
Outlying Areas 127 161 174
ED 503 1,345 1,757 2,066
Windemere Township 2,451 3,203 3,621
a
An additional 120 seasonal residents are projected for the YMCA Boys Camp
on Sturgeon Lake. This projection will remain constant to the year 2000.
3-55
-------
The individual Island Lake and Sturgeon Lake area population pro-
jections (Table 3-17) are significantly lower than the population estimates
which were presented in the Draft MLWSD Facility Plan (P.R.C.-Consoer
Townsend 1980). The "population equivalents" for the year 1955 were esti-
mated in the Facility Plan to be 931.0 for the Island Lake vicinity and
1,382.5 for the Sturgeon Lake vicinity. These numbers are in contrast with
the year 2000 population projections made in this report of 579 for the
Island Lake area (62% of the MLWSD projection) and 802 for the Sturgeon
Lake area (58% of the MLWSD projection). [An additional 120 residents must
be added to the Sturgeon Lake projections to cover the YMCA Boys Camp
summer population if sewers are being designed.] The sources of the dis-
crepancies between the Facility Plan and these projections are thought to
be:
• the year 2000 projections that are being used in this Envi-
ronmental Report are based on detailed 1980 census data for
the local area that was not available at the time the MLWSD
Facility Plan was prepared;
• the assumptions used to develop the projections reflect a
direct assessment of available lots in the lakeshore areas
and interviews with local real estate sales offices (Section
3.2.2.5).
3.2.2. Land Use
The Phase I Report on existing conditions presented a regional over-
view of land use characteristics. In that report, land use data were pre-
sented only on the basis of political units such as by town and county
area.
The descriptions presented in this section of historic land use trends
in Pine and Carlton counties and of the land use within specific lake
drainage areas or "watersheds" are intended to provide a quantitative
framework for estimating the origin and significance of eutrophying nu-
trients exported into the area's lakes. Historic land use indicators such
as population figures, cropland production statistics, and logging, forest
fire and settlement dates were used to indicate the variations over time in
active uses of the land. The existing land use in individual lake water-
sheds was determined by planimetric measurement to provide a basis for cal-
3-56
-------
culation of annual phosphorus loads to each lake. Both historic and con-
temporary land use information provide a basis for assessing the conse-
quences of specific waste management alternatives.
3.2.2.1. Historic Land Use Trends in Pine and Carlton Counties
The settlement of northeastern Minnesota in the nineteenth century was
directly related to the area's rich timber resources. "The story of the
lumbering days is the main theme of every community of the county in the
pioneer days" (Miller 1949). By 1860, the logging era was well underway,
with the timber industry providing the necessary economic foundation for
the development of railroads and roads, and towns were founded as the
population grew. This basic infrastructure later provided the basis for the
development of the region's second historical economy, dairying, by provid-
ing a source of capital and transport linkages to the metropolitan areas.
Most of the communities in Pine and Carlton counties originated in the
1860s and 1870s. The first road connecting St. Paul and Duluth-Superior
was completed in 1857 and was followed by the Lake Superior-Mississippi
railroad in 1870 and the Great Northern railroad in 1887. The timber
industry reached its peak in the region between approximately 1870 and 1894
and numerous mills were built throughout the area to process the logs. In
1890, Minnesota ranked first in the country in lumber production.
"In 1870 a dam was built across the Grindstone River by W. H.
Grant, Sr., who had arrived the year before from St. Paul with a
portable sawmill. In the fall McKane Bros, built a larger mill
and obtained power from the river. This mill was enlarged from
time to time until in 1894 it employed 400 men. In 15 years this
mill cut 300,000,000 feet of lumber." (Miller 1949).
Although the white pine forests were once regarded as inexhaustable,
by 1900 the timber industry in this area of Minnesota was essentially
finished. The transition from logging to farming began in much of Pine
County virtually overnight as a result of the event of September 1894 when
the great Hinckley fire devastated much of the central portion of Pine
County. Although the timber industry was already on the decline at the
3-57
-------
time of the Hinckley fire (and forest slash left from logging operations
probably contributed greatly to the spread of the fire), Pine County was
never to have a timber industry of the scale that had previously been
present. "After this catastrophe, the Paul Bunyan aspect of the county
changed, and a great movement was started by the railroads and the govern-
ment to bring in the real settlers, the farmers" (Miller 1949).
The northern part of Pine County (where the service area is located)
and the southern part of Carlton County (including part of the Island Lake
watershed) were not burned over in the Hinckley fire and, thus, logging
continued there into the early 1900s. As the stands of white pine and
hardwoods were depleted, though, settlers began to move into the area to
drain and clear the land for farming. Many of the settlers were recruited
from neighboring states as well as from Europe, with promises of cheap land
and good growing conditions. The conversion of land from forest to farm in
this area was greatly increased by the "Moose Lake fire" of 1918. This
fire burned throughout much of Windemere Township and definitely burned
most of the remaining stand of timber in the watershed of Little Island
Lake (US Forest Service Map, unpublished).
By 1920, farming was the predominant land use in these watershed
areas. The number of dairy cows being milked in Pine and Carlton counties
continued to increase until approximately 1935 (Figures 3-12 and 3-13).
From 1935 to 1950, the number of dairy cows in the two counties declined
somewhat, but from 1950 to 1955, a recovery in the number of dairy cows was
recorded. Since 1955, the number of dairy cows in the two counties has
steadily declined, to the point where there are now fewer dairy cows in
Pine and Carlton counties than there were in 1920 (US Department of Com-
merce 1929, 1934, 1939, 1949, 1969, 1978). The amount of land in crop
production in the two counties has exhibited a similar trend; peak acreages
occurred between 1935 and 1945 followed by steady declines (Figures 3-12
and 3-13). A chronology of some of the more important events and trends in
Pine County and Windemere Township during the 20th Century is presented in
Figure 3-14.
3-58
-------
4.0 _
3.5 _
3.0 _
o
o
o
o"
o
o
o
^ o
x ° 2.5
0)
5 x
f? «
O 0
>• O
"5 ^
•S ° 2.0
"•* flj
i- ^3
1.5 _
1.0 _
Total Acres in Farmland
V
Total Number of Dairy Cows Being Milked
>•
-------
2.5 _
2.0 _
o
o
o
o"
o
o 1.5
x 2
o
o
m
v xx
**
1920
I
1930
I
1940
I
1950
I
1960
I
1970
I
1980
Figure 3-13.
Carlton County, MM: trends in agriculture from 1920
to 1978. Data are from the U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Census of Agriculture.
3-60
-------
Figure 3-14
A chronology of 20th century events and fends in Windemere
Township, Pine County, MN.
Chronology
Year
Number of Residents
Increase in the number of
permanent residences around
Island and Sturgeon Lakes.
Construction of seasonal
residences intensifies around
Island and Sturgeon Lakes.
Onset of steady decline in the
agricultural economy.
Period of peak agricultural
activity in Pine County
State Hospital Developed in
Moose Lake.
Beginning of organized dairy
economy; first creameries are
established in the area.
Moose Lake forest fire (1918) }
End of the first-cut logging
era and increase begins In the
development of agriculture.
Hinckley forest fire (1894)
1890
3-61
-------
In a study of the forest cover of Pine and Carlton counties conducted
by the US Forest Service in the period of 1974 to 1978 (Spencer and Ostrum
1979 and Vasilevsky and Hackett 1980) it was reported that 61% of Carlton
County and 53% of Pine County was forested. Carlton County also was
reported to have 87.4 thousand hectares of non-forested land, 51% of which
was combined cropland, pastureland, and idle farmland. Pine County's 173.0
thousand hectares of non-forested land had 67% of the acreage in farm
related uses. If the combined land use categories of cropland, pasture-
land, and idle farmland, as reported by the US Forest Service, are taken to
define the total agricultural land use, Carlton County had approximately
44.6 thousand hectares of agricultural land and Pine County had 115.9
thousand hectares of agricultural land. Based on these figures, it is
estimated that in 1978 a maximum of 19.7% of Carlton County and 31.3% of
Pine County was being used for agricultural purposes. These percentages
are compared with watershed agricultural land use percentages in the fol-
lowing section.
3.2.2.2. Project Area Land Use Trends
An examination of the trends in land use within the "watersheds" of
the project area lakes is useful in assessing the past and present causes
of lake eutrophication. The generalized watershed areas of Island, Stur-
geon, Rush, and Passenger Lakes are presented in Figure 3-21. The gene-
ralized watershed areas were determined by contour interpolation of USGS
topographic maps (1979). Field checks were made to confirm the watershed
boundaries where alterations to the landscape have been made through high-
way and other construction activities.
The land uses within each watershed area were determined separately
for direct drainage areas and for indirect tributary drainages using the
topographic maps and aerial photographs (USGS 1974) along with review of
color-infared remote sensing imagery (EMSL 1980) and field checks in the
lakeshore vicinities. The aerial extent of each land use in a watershed's
sub-area was estimated by planimetry for forest, wetland, cultivated land,
pasture, lawn, and open water categories (excluding the surface areas of
the lakes themselves). These watershed land use tabulations, summarized in
Section 3.1.3.3. are referenced in Table 3-18 for comparison to county
agricultural land use percentages. „ ,„
-------
Although the methodologies were not identical for estimating county
and watershed land use, the differences found between the county and water-
shed percentages are great enough to indicate a significant divergence of
the local (watershed) from the regional (county) land use pattern.
Table 3-18. Estimated percent agricultural land use in county versus
watershed delineations.
County Agricultural Watershed Agricultural
Watershed County Land Use Percentage Land Use Percentage
Island Lake Carlton/Pine 20%/31% 42%
Sturgeon Lake Pine 31% 34%
Rush Lake Pine 31% 3%
Passenger Lake Pine 31% 0%
«a
Derivation of County percent agricultural land is explained in Section
3.2.2.1. Original data are from the US Forest Service (Spencer and Ostrum
1979 and Vasilevsky and Hackett 1980).
b
By direct estimation from topographic maps and aerial photograph.
The most striking aspect of the information contained in Table 3-18 is
the apparent predominance of agricultural land use in the Island Lake
watershed. Island Lake has the largest total watershed area of any of the
four lakes, and the percentage of agricultural land in its watershed is
also the highest of the four. Additionally, the Island Lake watershed,
which is bisected by the boundary between Carlton and Pine counties on the
northern tip of the lake (Figure 3-15), has a much greater estimated agri-
cultural land use percentage (42%) than either of the counties (20% Pine
County; 31% Carlton County). Conversely, Rush Lake and Passenger Lake
watersheds have little or no land in agricultural use.
The modern prevalence of agricultural land use that is apparent in the
Island Lake watershed (Table 3-18) may have been preceded by an equal or
even greater intensity of agricultural use in that area when dairying was a
much more important segment of the local economy (Section 3.2.2.1). For
example, there were 116 producing farms in Windemere Township in 1930 which
accounted for 13,055 acres of land, 3,395 acres of which were in crop
3-63
-------
mmmmm^
:'• -."• •'. • '.'• '.'• -.'• T- •'••'•• CO 'W- • '• • '•'• '•'• 1
^•••••••••••:--:---s
WATERSHED LAND AREA
IN HECTARES
Figure 3-15.
Generalized watershed areas for Island, Sturgeon, Rush, and
Passenger Lakes. Values shown are exclusive of surface waters,
3-64
-------
production. (US Department of Commerce 1929). This represents the level of
agricultural development in the Township which initiated the period of peak
dairying activities in the region as reflected by the number of dairy cows
being milked in Pine and Carlton counties between 1935 and 1940 (Figures
3-13 and 3-14). These data suggest that the Island Lake watershed his-
torically supported a much larger dairy animal population than it now does.
Much of the agricultural economy of the Windemere and Moose Lake Townships
area appears to be concentrated in and around the watershed area of Island
Lake and the northern portion of the Sturgeon lake watershed. This may be
due to the concentration of prime agricultural land in these respective
areas (Section 3.2.2.3). Long-time residents of the area have noted a
concentration of productive farms in the direct drainage area of Island
Lake and also have described the previous existence of several barnyards
which gave domestic stock direct access to its waters (by letter, Mr.
Walter C. Johnson to Mr. Gregory Dean Evenson, March 1980) [Appendix K] .
Another significant land use trend pertinent to the assessment of the
causes of lake eutrophication is the rate of development of lakeshore
properties for residential use. In 1954, there were an estimated 35 houses
located adjacent to Island Lake but, by 1967, 110 houses were counted
around Island Lake (MDNR n.d. Fish and Wildlife Division, lake survey data
sheets, unpublished). Sturgeon Lake also has experienced an increased rate
of residential development since the 1950s. The rates of shoreline devel-
opment around Island and Sturgeon Lakes since 1954 are depicted in Figure
3-16.
3.2.2.3. Prime Farmlands
One of the increasing concerns in the nation is the reduction in the
finite supply of prime farmland. Prime farmland is that land best suited
for producing food, feed, forage, fiber, and oilseed crops, and is avail-
able for these uses. According to the most recent Council on Environmental
Quality directive (11 August 1980), prime and unique farmland is cropland,
pastureland, rangeland, forest land, or other land (excluding built-up
urban land) which is capable of being used as prime and unique farmland
3-65
-------
200-
eo
u
CO
O
150-
100-
50-
ISLAND LAKE
shoreline house counts 1954-1980
I
1940
1950 1960 1970
1980
250-
200-
co 150H
u
co
O
I
100-
50-
STURGEON LAKE
shoreline house counts 1955-1982
1940
I I I I
1950 1960 1970 1980
Figure 3-16. Rates of residential development on the shorelines of
of Island and Sturgeon Lakes.
3-66
-------
as defined by the specific criteria established by the USDA. The primary
criterion used to characterize prime farmland is the capability class and
subclass assigned to soils and which show, in a general way, the suit-
ability of soil capability classes I and II. Class I soils have few limi-
tations that restrict their use and Class II soils have only moderate
limitations that reduce the choice of crops or that require moderate con-
servation practices. There are no Class I soils in Carlton County or in
the Island and Sturgeon Lakes area of Pine County (SCS 1978, Finney 1981).
Capability subclasses are soil groups within one soil class that
characterize more specific limitations such as erosion, wetness, shallow-
ness, or climatic limitations (e.g., too dry, too cold, etc.). The only
soil in the project area that can be characterized as prime farmland is the
Duluth very fine silt loam with 0 to 6% slopes (SCS 1978). This soil has
been assigned a capability rating of IIc-1. This classification indicates
that the main limitations of the soils are the cool climate and short
growing season.
Although a detailed soil survey of Pine County has not been prepared,
the soils in the Pine County portion of the service area were mapped by a
registered soil scientist in support of the preparation of this Envi-
ronmental Report (Appendix B). This soils mapping indicated that much of
the service area, including Island Lake's direct drainage basin as well as
much of the northeastern half of the Sturgeon Lake watershed, contain
Duluth very fine silt loam with less than 4% slopes (Figure 3-17). (The
Duluth very fine silt loams in Pine County were delineated either as having
slopes less than or greater than 4%. Therefore, the area in Pine County
depicted in Figure 3-17 slightly understates the amount of prime farmland
because it does not indicate those unmappable areas of Duluth very fine
silt loams with 4 to 6% slopes which can be characterized as prime farm-
land.)
3.2.2.4. Development Potential
3-67
-------
OJ
I
a^
00
Additional Farmland
of Statewide
Importance
Approximate Limits
of Urban Growth
Figure 3-17. Prime farmlands in portions of Pine and Carlton Counties,
Derived from soil unit maps(SCS 1978, Finney 1981).
-------
Development Controls
Windemere Township does not have an overall zoning ordinance in effect
to control development. However, Pine County has adopted zoning regula-
tions as required by the Minnesota Shoreland Management Act of 1969. The
Act affects all land within 1,000 feet of a lake, pond, or flowage and
within 300 feet of a river or stream. In rural area, the Act applies to
all lakes over 10 hectares (25 acres) in area and to rivers and streams
with drainage areas in excess of 518 hectares (1,280 acres).
The purpose of the Act and the accompanying local regulations is to
control development alongside lakes, rivers, and streams so that the na-
tural resource values of the water body are maintained to the greatest
extent possible. Public waters are classified according to the Act in one
of three categories - Natural Environment, Recreational Development, or
General Development. The different classifications control the kind of
intensity of development by regulating uses, building and sewer setbacks,
and minimum lot sizes. Island, Sturgeon, Rush, and Passenger Lakes are all
classified as Recreational Development lakes (By telephone, Mr. Steve
Preston, MDNR to WAPORA, Inc., 26 February 1981). The minimum development
standards for unincorporated, unsewered areas around recreational develop-
ment lakes are:
Lot area: 40,000 ft
Water frontage and
lot width: 150 ft
Building setback
from ordinary high water
mark: 100 ft
Building setback from
roads and highways: 30-50 ft
The minimum development standards for sewered areas of municipalities
that are within the shoreland zone of recreational development lakes are
less stringent. The required minimum lot sizes for such areas are 20,000
Building elevation above high-
est known water level: 3 ft
On-site waste treatment system
setback from ordinary high
water mark: 75 ft
Septic absorption system
elevation above groundwater
or bedrock: 4 ft
3-69
-------
2 2
ft for riparian lots and 15,000 ft for other lots within the shoreland
zone. In addition, the water frontage and lot width requirement is 75 feet
and the minimum building setback from the ordinary high water mark also is
75 feet. MDNR has indicated that the less rigorous minimum development
standards applied within municipalities may also be applied to sewered,
non-municipal (i.e., unincorporated) lakes (By telephone, Mr. Steve Pres-
tin, MDNR to WAPORA, Inc., 26 February 1981).
Future Development Potential
Although water-related recreation and similar amenities continue to
attract new residents, the focus of the demand generated by the natural
resource values of the project area lakes appears to be shifting. Ac-
cording to the 1980 census, the population growth rate exceeded the growth
rate for new housing units during the 1970. This means that some seasonal
homes were converted to year-round residences and that more homes were
built for permanent use than for seasonal, recreational use. This most
recent trend apparently is a result of retired people moving to the area on
a permanent basis, and the desire of some people to live in a high amenity,
rural area and commute long distances to work. Continued growth of the
non-retired permanent population will be significantly influenced by se-
veral external factors including the regional economy, the price of gaso-
line, and long-distance commuting costs.
Much of the lakeshore development activity within the service area
over the last 30 years has been concentrated around Island and Sturgeon
Lakes. As a result, there now is a limited supply of vacant lakefront lots
around these two lakes. Based on a house count and examination of plat
maps and tax records, it is estimated that there are approximately 50
vacant lakefront lots around Island Lake and approximately 105 vacant
lakefront lots around Sturgeon Lake. This estimate does not reflect de-
velopment constraints such as wet soils, steep slopes, lack of road access,
or other natural features. If current growth rates are maintained, both of
these lakes will become "built-out" during the planning period. After this
occurs, it is possible that some housing demand will continue in this area
3-70
-------
and will translate into development around the smaller lakes in the service
area (e.g., Rush and Passenger Lakes), in the second-tier or back lots, or
around other small, less desirable lakes in outlying areas.
Whether the high growth trends of the 1970's will continue through the
next 20 years is uncertain. One local realtor that was contacted felt that
the Island-Sturgeon Lake area still has a lot of growth potential and that
second-tier lots or homes are in demand, particularly to retirees and young
couples, because of their lower cost (By telephone, Ms. Ann Brown, Century
21 Real Estate to WAPORA, Inc., 12 April 1982). One subdivision develop-
ment that exemplifies the basis of this opinion is the Wild Acres - Hogan
Acres projects located to the southeast of Sturgeon Lake and east of Rush
Lake. All of the 92 lots platted in the Hogan Acres have been sold and
more than 100 of the 136 platted lots in Wild Acres have been sold. Al-
though most of the lots have been sold, many of the buyers apparently do
not intend to develop their parcels immediately. There are an estimated 75
structures permanently inplace in the two subdivisions, including standard
homes, manufactured homes, and campers. Many of the other lot owners leave
campers on the property only during the summer and then spend weekends in
the area for recreation. The developer intentionally structured the de-
velopment in this way and uses this aspect of the project as a marketing
device. One of the developer's brochures states: "It is not necessary to
build on the lots. The use of mobile homes, travel trailers, campers,
motor homes, and tents is allowed."
Other realtors are less optimistic about the development potental of
the area. The most common reasons cited are the generally soft local and
regional economies and the absence of employment opportunities, parti-
cularly for young people (By telephone, Mr. Bud Fuller, Ken Brown Realty to
WAPORA, Inc., 12 April 1982). Although all of the realtors contacted
indicated that demand for lakefront lots or homes continues to be strong,
they also noted that most of the prime lakefront areas are already de-
veloped. In spite of the good sales history at Wild Acres - Hogan Acres,
other realtors have not had good success in selling homes or lots in the
second tier or in outlying areas. For this reason, they are are less opti-
mistic about the development potential of the area (by telephone, Mr.
Clarence Schoen, Clarence Schoen Realty to WAPORA, Inc., 12 April 1982).
3-71
-------
3.2.3. Economics
3.2.3.1. Income
Current data on median family income are available from the US De-
partment of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Office of Economic Affairs
(Data from the 1980 Census are not yet available) . These data are avail-
able at the county level only and were derived from statistical adjustments
of previous census data. Although the county estimates are reasonably ac-
curate, the use of the data for jurisdictions within a county is tentative
and their applicability will depend on the relative wealth or poverty of
the area as compared to the county.
The level of income in the project area and Pine and Carlton counties
as indicated by per capita and median family income data, is relatively low
(Table 3-19 and Table 3-20). In 1981 the estimated median family incomes
of $17,000 for Pine County and $21,100 for Carlton County both were below
the estimated median family incomes of Non-Standard Metropolitan Statis-
tical Area (SMSA) counties ($22,850), the North Central Census Region
($25,600), and the US ($24,400) (By telephone HUD). The relatively low
level of income characteristic of the project area and Pine and Carlton
counties reflects the concentration of employment in the relatively low-
paying trade, government, and service industries and the high level of
unemployment (Section 3.2.3.2. Employment).
The income distribution within the project area varies widely. The
estimated median family income ranges from $16,275 in Moose Lake Township
to $26,356 for the City of Moose Lake. The estimated median family income
for Windemere Township is $21,132. This is 24% greater than the estimates
for Non-SMSA counties, the North Central Census Region and the US. The
estimated median family income in the City of Moose Lake is greater than
the estimates for all of the jurisdictions for which data were analyzed.
This probably reflects the economic function of the City of Moose Lake as a
primary trade center (Section 3.2.3.2. Employment).
3-72
-------
Table 3-19. Per capita income estimates for selected jurisdictions (US
Bureau of the Census 1972, 1980).
Percent Change Estimated 1981
Jurisdiction 1969 ($) 1977 ($) 1969-1977 Income ($)
Pine County
Windemere Township
Carlton County
Moose Lake Township
City of Moose Lake
State of Minnesota
2,183
2,657
2,513
1,705
3,147
3,038
4,054
5,004
4,731
3,457
5,909
5,778
86%
88%
88%
103%
88%
90%
5,797
7,206
6,813
5,255
8,510
8,378
Table 3-20. Estimated 1981 median family income for selected jurisdic-
tions.
Jurisdiction Median Income Estimates ($)
Pine County $17,000
Windemere Township 21,100
Carlton County 21,100
Moose Lake Township 16,275
City of Moose Lake 26,356
3.2.3.2. Employment
The economic structure of the project area and surrounding region
(Northeastern Minnesota: Aitkin, Carlton, Cook, Itasca, Koochiching, Lake,
and St. Louis counties [Region 7] and Pine County) contrasts with the
economic structure of Minnesota and the US in some very important ways.
First, the dominant industry in northeastern Minnesota is trade (concen-
trated in the Moose Lake and Duluth-Superior areas), whereas at the State
and National level, manufacturing is the dominant industry (Northeastern
Minnesota Labor Market Information Center 1980). In 1978, manufacturing
employment in northeastern Minnesota accounted for 13.9% of the wage and
salary workers as compared to the statewide percentage of 22.1. This is
particularily important because overall the trade industry traditionally
has been associated wth low wages (especially retail trade) and is very
sensitive to cyclical variations in the economy (e.i., when "spending
3-73
-------
money" becomes tight many of the goods and services available through the
trade industry are not consumed, thus levels of employment decrease).
Second, in 1978 the mining industry was the largest industry in north-
eastern Minnesota in terms of wages paid, but ranked fifth in total employ-
ment. This is not characteristic of the State and National employment
structures where the manufacturing industry is the largest industry in
terms of both employment and total wages paid (Peterson and Gronseth 1980).
This also is important because any changes in the level of employment in
the mining industry would quickly affect other sectors of the economy,
especially port activity (concentrated in the Duluth-Superior area), which
also plays an important role in the economy of the region. In 1979, the
value of income generated by port activities from wages paid and the pur-
chase of goods and services amounted to $239 million (Northeastern Min-
nesota Labor Market Review 1980).
In April 1982, Pine County had an estimated labor force of 9,549 and
an unemployment rate of 10.3% (By telephone, Patrick Connelly, East Central
Region Development Commission, to WAPORA, Inc., 12 July 1982). During the
same month, Carlton County had an estimated labor force of 11,900 and an
unemployment rate of 11.4%. The unemployment rates for the two counties
compares to an unemployment rate 9.8% for Region 7, 13.6% for Region 3,
7.0% for the State and 9.2% for the US. The comparatively high unemploy-
ment rate for Region 3 is a result of the weakness of those national indus-
tries that are most directly tied to the regional economy. In April 1982,
less than one-half of the steel industry's potential capacity was being
utilized and this had a direct impact on the need for taconite produced on
the Minnesota Iron Range and hence on local employment levels (Minnesota
Department of Economic Security 1982).
The local economy in Windemere Township differs somewhat from that of
Pine County or the region in that agriculture and forestry are the pre-
dominant industries. Not including agriculture, an employment survey
counted 54 people employed in Windemere Township (Pine County Area Re-
development Organization 1979). The greatest potential for economic de-
velopment in Pine County probably is in the tourism-recreation industry.
3-74
-------
Only 3.5% of the County's total gross sales are from the tourist-traveler,
and Pine County currently ranks 53rd out of 87 counties in Minnesota in
tourist-travel income. The relatively modest contribution of tourism-rec-
reation to the county economy probably is not indicative of the contri-
butions that tourism-recreation make to the more local economy of Windemere
Township (Pine County Area Redevelopment Organization 1979).
At present there are approximately 127 business establishments in the
Moose Lake area (Moose Lake Planning Commission 1980). Fifty-three of the
businesses (42%) are categorized as retail and wholesale sales establish-
ments. This category includes grocery stores, clothing stores, and whole-
sale distributors. In 1977, there were $10,146,312 in retail sales in
Moose Lake, and it is estimated that this could increase to $12,000,000
annually by 1985. Moose Lake is considered the primary retail trade center
for a fairly large area. The trade zone of Moose Lake includes the cities
of Moose Lake, Barnum, Kettle River, Sturgeon Lake, Denham, and Kerrick,
and the Townships of Moose Lake, Barnum, Silver, Split Rock, Birch Creek,
Kerrizk, Sturgeon Lake, and Windemere.
3.2.4. Public Finance
A variety of community services are provided for the residents of
Moose Lake and Windemere Townships. Among them are health and welfare
services, transportation facilities, police and fire protection and, within
the city of Moose Lake, wastewater collection and treatment. The ability
of the townships to maintain and improve these services is dependent on the
continued ability of township residents to finance them. Income and em-
ployment levels are one measure of a community's ability to support com-
munity services. Additionally, the assessed valuation of property directly
affects tax revenues collected by local governments, and consequently their
financial capabilities. The amount of outstanding indebtedness and annual
debt service borne by a community also affects the communits capability to
finance public works projects. The 1980 assessed valuation, property tax,
total revenue, outstanding indebtedness, and debt service for the juris-
dictions within the project area are presented in Table 3-21.
3-75
-------
Table 3-21. Selected financial characteristics of the project area jurisdictions in 1980 (Carlson 1982a,
1982b; by telephone, Minnesota Department of Revenue to Wapora, Inc., 4 June 1982; by letter,
Mr. Harold Westholm, Moose Lake-Windemere Sanitary District to WAPORA, Inc., 2 April 1982).
Jurisdiction
Windemere Township
Moose Lake Township
Moose Lake-Windemere
Sanitary District
Pine County
Carlton County
Moose Lake
School District
City of Moose Lake
Assessed
Valuation ($)
3,310,539
1,701,968
4,552,404
46,876,244
88,981,157
10,529,509
2,608,374
Full Markgt
Value ($)
11,377,679
5,812,784
17,190,463
-
-
-
-
Debt ($)°
-0-
-0-
1,295,551
120,000
750,000
245,000
540,000
Debt d
Service ($)
-0-
-0-
82,100
20,000
-
78,807
22,000
Property
Tax ($)
32,925
50,037
23,982
2,523,087
3,714,732
545,043
52,305
Total f
Revenue ($)
56,362
27,300
1,381,989
9,699,480
11,332,481
-
363,138
a
The value of all taxable general property as determined by the municipal assessor.
The value of all taxable general property as determined by the Minnesota Department of Revenue. This
value is determined independently of the assessed value and reflects actual market value.
c
General obligation bonds, long-term notes, revenue bonds, and installment contracts.
d
Debt payment = principal + interest.
e
State, County, local, and school property tax levies.
f
Total revenues for general operations.
-------
Criteria for prudent fiscal management have been developed by several
authors, and an adaptation of these criteria is presented in Table 3-21.
These recommended standards can be compared with relationships developed
from the previously discussed municipal data (Table 3-22) to assess local
financial conditions. Based on these criteria, the financial condition of
the MLWSD in 1980 appears to be sound. All of the values for the MLWSD
fall below the limits given in Table 3-23. However, the indicators con-
cerning debt to full market value and debt to personal income are close to
the standard upper limits. This appears to be the result of the relatively
large debts that the MLWSD has incurred for the Sand Lake and Coffee Lake
improvement projects. If additional large debts are undertaken in the near
future, it is possible that some of the standard upper limits would be
exceeded. This would depend, though, on the retirement schedule for out-
standing debts and the amount of capital needed for improvement projects.
Table 3-22. Values for Moose Lake-Windernere Sanitary District full-faith
and credit debt analyses during 1980.
1980
Population
3,817
Debt Per
Capita ($)
394
Debt to
Full Value (%)
8.7
Debt Service
to Revenue (%)
5.9
Debt to
Income (%)'
6.0
Debt includes school and county debt apportioned on the basis of the Sani-
tary District's percentage of the assessed valuations of the school dis-
trict and counties.
Table 3-23. Criteria for local government full-faith and credit debt
analysis (Adapted from Moak and Hillhouse 1975 and Aron-
son and Schwartz 1975) .
Debt Ratio
Debt per Capita
Low Income
Middle Income
High Income
Debt to Market Value
Property
Debt Service to Revenue
Debt to Personal Income
Standard Upper Limit for Debt
$ 500
1,000
5,000
10% of current market value
25% of the local government's
total budget
7%
3-77
-------
Households in the MLWSD pay a user fee of $4.00 per month. This
represents an annual user fee of $48. The monthly fee includes $3.25/month
for operation and maintenance, $0.50/month for use of the City of Moose
Lake's waste treatment plant, and $0.25/month for District administrative
costs. In addition to the user fee, users are assessed a connection charge
payable over a 30-year period. Users around Coffee Lake are assessed
$2,150 for connecting to the system. The assessment is $2,900 for users
around Sand Lake. Assuming that a user presently is paying the annual user
fee and the assessment, the typical total annual charge to users around
Coffee Lake and Sand Lake is $120 and $145, respectively.
3.2.5. Transportation
The private automobile is the primary mode of transportation in the
project area. County Highway CH10 and CH46 are the major, paved thorough-
fares in the project area. Interstate 35 (1-35), which is located just
west of the proposed service area, is a limited access highway and facili-
tates accessibility north to Duluth (approximately 45 miles) and south to
Minneapolis-St. Paul and beyond. There is a full traffic interchange on
1-35 at CH 46. Although most of the other roads in the project area are
either sand or gravel surfaced, the annual average daily traffic (adt) is
equal to or greater than the adt on other roads for which data were avail-
able in most of northwestern Pine County (Minnesota Department of Transpor-
tation [MNDOT] 1979); Appendix M. The adt on 1-35 within Pine County
increases from north to south indicating heavier traffic away from Duluth.
On State Highway 61, the main thoroughfare to Moose Lake, the adt increases
from south to north indicating heavier traffic toward Moose Lake.
The closest automatic traffic recorder (atr) station to the project
area is located 1.5 miles east of County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 21, south
of the project area near Sandstone MN. Seasonally adjusted monthly adt
indicate that adt peaks in November (MNDOT 1981; Appendix M). Data on the
total daily volume indicate that the highest adt occurs on Saturday. These
phenomena reflect the autumn season, hunting-generated traffic which is
greater than the summer season, recreation-generated traffic.
3-78
-------
The other modes of transportation available in or in close proximity
to the project area are: Senior citizen bus service, railroad, and air-
plane. The Pine County Committee on Aging operates an 11-passenger bus
five times a month for medical services and provides transportation ser-
vices to 12 Senior Citizen Centers located throughout Pine County (By
telephone, Ms. Pearl Oleson, President, Pine County Committee on Aging to
WAPORA, Inc., 12 July 1982). The nearest commercial airport is located at
Duluth. Numerous intermediate airports are located in the vicinity of the
project area. Burlington Northern, Inc. and Soo Line own and operate rail
facilities in the vicinity of the project area.
3.2.6. Energy
There are four types of energy available for space heating and ap-
pliance use in the project area: fuel oil, liquid propane gas (Ip gas),
wood, and electricity. Natural gas is not available in the service area,
but is available in the City of Moose Lake. There are no published data
available on consumption patterns in the area and local opinion varies.
Wood, Ip gas, and fuel oil are most commonly used for space heating (By
telephone Mr. J. Sanders, Carlton-Aitkin-Pine Cooperative Oil Association;
Mr. C. Chmielewski, Chmielewski Oil Company; and Roger Davidson, Carlton
County Cooperative Power Association to WAPORA, Inc. 14 June 1982). Elec-
tricity is not a popular choice for space heating unless it is used at an
off-peak reduced rate as a back-up for wood (Mr. Roger Davidson, Carlton
County Cooperative Power Association to WAPORA, Inc., 14 June 1982). The
use of wood for space heating has increased in recent years. A back-up
system which requires either Ip gas, fuel oil, or electricity is necessary.
Electricity, followed by Ip gas and fuel oil is most commonly used for
appliances. There are no major commercial, industrial, or retail energy
consumers in either the project area or the City of Moose Lake. The state
hospital in Moose Lake is the biggest consumer in the area (By telephone,
Mr. L. Johnson Moose Lake Municipal Power Plant to WAPORA, Inc., 11 June
1982).
Pine County is located in State Planning Region 7E and Carlton County
is located in State Planning Region 3. In terms of the cost for residen-
3-79
-------
tial energy these two regions ranked approximately seventh and fourth,
respectively, out of the thirteen state planning regions (Table 3-24.).
The differences in total cost reflect both differences in unit cost and in
degree heating days. The unit cost for the various forms of energy is
higher in Region 3 (Carlton County) than in Minnesota as a whole. This
also is true in Pine County, except for natural gas which is less expensive
than the state-wide average (Appendix N.).
Table 3-24. Average cost for residential energy during the period from April
1980 to March 1981 (Minnesota Energy Agency 1981).
Fuel Type
Region Use Natural Gas Electricity Fuel Oil LP Gas
3 (Carlton County) Space heating $703 $ 978 $1,281 $1,107
Total energy 988 1,562 1,865 1,640
7E (Pine County) Space heating 490 994 1,101 1,064
Total energy 849 1,585 1,692 1,616
a
Data are not available for wood. A full cord of wood is estimated to cost
approximately $50 (By telephone, Mr. C. Chmielewski, Chmielewski Oil Company
to WAPORA, Inc. 14 June 1982).
There are no restrictions foreseen on natural gas hook-ups in the
Moose Lake area at this time (By telephone, Intercity Gas Limited to WA-
PORA, Inc., 11 June 1982). Electrical energy in the service area is sup-
plied by the Carlton County Cooperative Power Association. The Moose Lake
Municipal Power Plant supplies electricity to the City of Moose Lake. Both
of these suppliers purchase electricity from United Power Association (UPA)
of Elk River, Minnesota. UPA owns a 2-year old generating station in North
Dakota which currently is operating at 50% of its capacity. There are
currently no foreseen shortages of either Ip gas or fuel oil.
3-80
-------
3.2.7. Recreation and Tourism
The tourism-travel industry is not considered a major industry in Pine
County (East Central Regional Development Commission [ECRDC] 1981). How-
ever, there are indicators that the industry is growing as energy costs
inhibit long-distance travel and Twin Cities vacationers seek recreational
opportunities closer to home. The 1979 gross sales for the tourism-travel
industry in Pine County was $1,880,000 (By telephone, Mr. Igmar Sollin,
Minnesota Department of Tourism to WAPORA, Inc., 14 June 1982). The es-
timated cost breakdown is shown below:
$376,000 lodging
470,000 transportation
507,000 food and beverage
414,000 retail and other services
113,000 amusements and other miscellaneous
The gross sales in the tourism-travel industry accounted for 3.5% of
the total gross sales in Pine County during 1979 (By telephone, Mr. Patrick
Connelly, ECRDC to WAPORA, Inc. 14 July 1982). This figure can be consi-
dered significant to Pine County where trade is the largest employment
sector. In comparison to tourism-travel sales statewide, however, Pine
County sales are less significant, accounting for only 0.10% of the state-
wide sales during 1979 (By telephone, Mr. Igmar Sollin, Minnesota Depart-
ment of Tourism to WAPORA, Inc., 14 June 1982).
The tourism-travel industry in the project area primarily consists of
private development. There is a public access area on each of the four
lakes. There are two resorts in the project area, both of which are on
Sturgeon Lake. The Eidelweiss Campground has six cabins and 60 campsites
(By telephone, Ms. Sheldine Ion, Eidelweiss Campground to WAPORA, Inc., 14
July 1982). Ray and Marges Resort has cabins and a bar. Both resorts rent
small fishing boats.
Fishing is the major recreational activity on the service area lakes,
although pleasure boating is a major recreational activity on Sturgeon Lake
3-81
-------
and Island Lake. There are private piers and swimming beaches only. There
are no public parks or marinas in the project area (By telephone, Mr. Don
Clausen, Moose Lake Village Clerk to WAPORA, Inc., 14 July 1982).
3.2.8. Cultural Resources
Both the National Register of Historic Places and the Minnesota State
Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) were consulted concerning the arch-
aeological and historic resources within the MLWSD (Appendix ). There are
currently no known resources within the project area that are listed in or
considered eligible for inclusion to the National Register of Historic
Places.
3.2.8.1. Historic Sites
The following sites have been identified by the SHPO as being located
within the boundaries of the EIS project area:
• 21 PN 6 - A group of 14 mounds located near Sturgeon Lake.
Section 20, T45 R19, Pine County
• 21 PN 18 - Two mounds located near Eidelweiss Resort on
Sturgeon Lake. Section 20, T45 R19, Pine County
• 21 PN 19 - Historic archaeological site (Charcoal Kilns) lo-
cated in Section 20, T45 R19, Pine County
• Unnumbered site located in Sections 16 and 21, T45 R19, Pine
County.
The SHPO has stated that Pine Cunty has been surveyed recently for
historic, standing structures. While no structures were determined to be
eligible for the National Register of Historic Places, one site of local
historic interest was identified within the proposed service area. This
site is the original YMCA Boys Camp containing the original Camp Miller Log
Cabin structure, located in the southern half of Section 17, Township 45N
Range 19 W (southwest shore of Sturgeon Lake). This structure was con-
structed prior to 1920 and is listed as being in good condition according
to the records of the SHPO.
3-82
-------
3.2.8.2. Archaeological Sites
While few archaeological sites have been recorded within the boun-
daries of the project area, it is the opinion of the SHPO that this absence
is related to a lack of systematic surveys for the area rather than an
actual absence of resources. The SHPO has stated that an archaeological
survey may be necessary for the service area. Final recommendations on the
necessity of a survey will be withheld pending review of the final project
alternative.
3-83
-------
4.0. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
The potential environmental consequences of the project alternatives
described in Section 2.4. are discussed in the following sections. The
impacts resulting from the construction and operation of the alternatives
may be beneficial or adverse, and may vary in duration and significance. A
summary of the significant impacts of project alternatives is presented in
Table 4-1.
Environmental effects are classified as either primary or secondary
impacts. Primary impacts result directly from the construction and/or
operation of the proposed facilities. Short—term primary impacts generally
occur during construction. Long-term primary impacts result from the
operation of the proposed project.
Secondary impacts are indirect effects of the project, such as changes
in demographic and other socioeconomic characteristics. As these changes
occur, other impacts which may result include: air or water pollution,
increased noise levels, increased energy consumption, increased development
pressure, diminished wildlife habitats, increased employment or business
activity, and increased property values. Secondary impacts also may be
either short-term or long-term. An example of a short-term secondary
impact is the disruption of the environment that occurs during the con-
struction of secondary development. Long-term secondary impacts can re-
sult, for example, from urban runoff that occurs for an indefinite period
after development of agricultural land or undeveloped areas.
Measures to control or mitigate adverse impacts are also discussed in
this chapter. These measures include planning activities and construction
techniques that can reduce the severity of both primary and secondary
adverse impacts. The use of appropriate mitigative measures should be
stipulated as an integral part of all project plans and specifications
developed by the Sanitary District.
4-1
-------
Table 4-1. A summary of significant environmental impacts of Project Alternatives.
ADVERSE IMPACTS
BENEFICIAL IMPACTS
t
o
(X
o
0)
o
o
o
o
2
Q.
O
o
a
O
Project Alternatives 4 through 7 could
cause short-term water quality degrada-
tion during construction of centralized
collection and treatment facilities.
See Section 4,1.1.3.
Project Alternatives 2 through 7 would
have short-term impacts on backyard
vegetation and on vegetation and wild-
life in sewer corridors and at treat-
ment sites. Alternative 5 would have
significant short-term impacts on
wildlife due to construction of exclu-
sionary fence. See Section 4.1.1.5.
Project Alternative 5 could have long-
term impacts on the groundwater and
biota at the site of treatment. See
Sections 4.1.2.2. and 4.1.2.5.
Project Alternative 5 could have long-
term impacts on the peat soils at the
treatment site. See Section 4.1.2^2.
Project Alternative 7 is a high cost
system that could pose a significant
financial burden on users even if State
and Federal grants are available.
Project Alternative 2 is the only
alternative that would not pose a
significant financial burden on users
if no grants are available. See
Section 4.1.3. for details.
Project Alternatives 2 through 7 may
have a significant secondary impact
on low income families with residences
on the shorelines of Island and Sturgeon
Lakes. These families may be displaced
from the project area if they are unable
to afford user charges. See Section
4.2.2. and Table 4-4 of Section 4.1.3.
4-2
-------
4.1. Primary Impacts of the Seven Project Alternatives
4.1.1. Construction Impacts
Each of the alternatives involves some construction initially, in-
cluding the No-Action Alternative, which incorporates some construction of
new systems and upgraded systems in the course of the 20-year design
period. Evaluation of the impacts associated with the No-Action Alterna-
tive is discussed with operational impacts in Section 4.1.2. Construction
impacts for Alternatives 2 through 7 (the "action" alternatives) are ad-
dressed in the following subsections for each of the major elements of the
natural and man-made environments.
4.1.1.1. Atmosphere
Construction activities for Alternatives 2 through 7 will produce
short-term adverse impacts to local air quality. Cleaning, grading, exca-
vating, backfilling, and other related construction activities will gener-
ate fugitive dust, noise, and odors. Emissions of fumes and noise from
construction equipment will be a temporary nuisance to residents living
near the sewer pipe construction corridor and near the treatment facil-
ities.
4.1.1.2. Soils
Soils exposed during construction will be subjected to accelerated
erosion until the soil surface is protected by revegetation or other means.
Most of the force mains will be laid within road rights-of-way where runoff
tends to concentrate in roadside drainageways, but some sewers will be laid
through residential yards.
Major storms could cause considerable erosion in some drainageways or
on lots on steep slopes. The alternatives that involve the construction of
considerable lengths of sewers and force mains can be expected to result in
the greatest amount of erosion and subsequent sedimentation. Adverse
consequences due to increased sedimentation include additional phosphorus
inputs to lakes and streams, clogging of road culverts, localized flooding
4-3
-------
where drainageways are filled with sediment, and localized filling of the
lake bed so that a substrate for aquatic plant growth is provided.
4.1.1.3. Surface Water
Wastewater collection system and treatment plant construction activi-
ties (Alternatives 4 through 7) could produce discharges of turbid waters
pumped from excavations and trenches, and turbid surface runoff from dis-
turbed areas, resulting in increased turbidity and sedimentation in ad-
jacent wetlands or lakes. This sediment transport could result in water
quality degradation, and has the potential to result in adverse impacts to
aquatic biota. Upgrading on-site systems (Alternatives 2 through 7) and
construction of collection systems for cluster drainfields (Alternatives 3
through 6) also would contribute turbid runoff to lakes or waterways, but
to a lesser extent compared to the construction of the centralized col-
lection and treatment alternatives.
4.1.1.4. Groundwater
Groundwater may be impacted by construction activities in localized
areas. Construction dewatering may cause some shallow wells to fail, es-
pecially where pump stations are to be constructed. A potential change in
water quality would likely occur where organic soils are disturbed either
directly or by altering the water table. Organics may leach out of these
areas and affect the taste of water in nearby wells. Spilled fuel and
other construction materials could quickly pass through the sandy soils to
contaminate the groundwater.
4.1.1.5. Biota
Construction activities associated with various components of the pro-
posed alternatives would result in impacts to wildlife and vegetation to
various degrees. Collection sewers (Alternatives 4 through 7) and upgraded
systems (Alternatives 2 through 7) would be placed on residential lots;
temporary loss of grassed areas and the removal or death of trees would
result from construction of these facilities. Disruption of backyard
4-4
-------
gardens, shrubs, and lawns, and the presence of construction equipment and
noises, would cause temporary displacement of most vertebrate species and
mortality of a few (probably small mammal) species, but replacement of
vegetation and cessation of construction activities would allow re-estab-
lishment of the animals to the areas. .More likely the animals commonly
associated with human habitation (e.g., cottontail rabbits, house sparrows,
European starlings) that would be displaced would move to suitable neigh-
boring habitats but would not induce density-related stress upon those
habitats.
A bog treatment system (Alternative 5), cluster drainfields (Alter-
natives 3 through 6), and an upgraded lagoon (Alternatives 4, 6, and 7,)
would adversely affect vegetation and wildlife during construction, de-
pending upon the proposed sites. Establishment of exclusionary fences
around the bog treatment site would disrupt feeding and migration habits of
whitetail deer and other large mammals. Placement of cluster drainfields
would be somewhat removed from residential areas, and little disruption of
vegetation or wildlife would be expected by their construction. The im-
pacts on terrestrial biota that would result from upgrading the existing
on-site systems would be insignificant because a relatively small total
amount of construction on developed land would be required to complete the
project.
4.1.1.6. Demographics
Temporary jobs created by the construction of wastewater collection
and treatment facilities are not likely to attract any new permanent resi-
dents to the project area. These positions would most likely be filled by
workers from the immediate and surrounding areas. Some permanent residents
may reduce the time spent in their homes while construction of on-site or
sewer systems occurs on their property. Because many residents utilize
their lakeshore property for vacation purposes, vacation schedules may be
disrupted by the construction activities. No significant demographic
impacts will occur during reconstruction of wastewater treatment facil-
ities.
4-5
-------
4.1.1.7. Land Use
Construction activities associated with the implementation of Alter-
natives 3 through 7 would require some conversions of land use in the
project area. Under Alternatives 3 through 7, residential, agricultural,
forest, and wetland areas would be affected to varying degrees. The con-
struction of the lagoon expansion at the existing Moose Lake WWTP, the bog
treatment system, and the cluster drainfields will require permanent land
conversion, as shown in Table 4-2. Under any of the Project Alternatives,
less than 0.1% of the farmland in Pine County would be converted to treat-
ment sites.
Table 4-2. Land use conversions for "action" alternatives.
Project
Alternative
#2
#3
#4
#5
#6
Treatment System
On-site
Cluster drainfield
Lagoon upgrade a
Cluster drainfield
Bog treatment
Cluster drainfield
•a
Lagoon upgrade
Cluster drainfield
Acres
Converted
None
16
14
5
20
5
22
5
Existing Land
Use
Residential
Farm,
_ b
Farm
Farm
Wetland
Farm
b
Farm
Farm
#7
Lagoon upgradee
48
Farm
.Upgrade lagoons at existing Moose Lake WWTP
Pr ime fa rmlan d
The construction of sewers under Alternatives 3 through 7 would occur
primarily in residential areas. However, certain environmentally sensitive
areas would be affected. Agricultural, wetland, and forest areas will be
traversed by connector sewers under these alternatives. Following con-
struction of the sewer systems, a 30- to 40-foot easement may be enforced
to ensure access to the sewer system for repairs and maintenance. The
magnitude of these impacts is not anticipated to be significant because
most of the sewer system would follow existing rights-of-way, such as those
along roadways.
4-6
-------
Wetlands may be subject to sedimentation during construction of the
sewer collection system. As a result, water circulation patterns within
these wetlands may be permanently modified. Excavation, clearing, grading,
and backfilling may temporarily affect the productivity and aesthetic value
of wetlands, agricultural, orchard, and forest lands during construction of
conveyance lines.
The construction of on-site systems under Alternatives 2 through 6
would occur primarily on lots which are already developed for residential
use. Cluster systems would be built on agricultural land, but an in-
significant amount of the total agricultural area would be necessary for
their construction. The amount of prime agricultural farmland affected by
construction activities is dependent upon the actual location of the waste-
water treatment facilities. The prime farmland within the project area is
discussed in Section 3.2.2.3.
The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) has issued a memorandum
(CEQ 1976) to all Federal agencies requesting that efforts be made to
insure that prime and unique farmlands (as designated by SCS) are not
irreversibly converted to other uses unless other national interests over-
ride the Importance of or benefits derived from their protection.
The USEPA has a policy of not allowing the construction of a treatment
plant or the placement of interceptor sewers funded through the Construc-
tion Grants Program in prime agricultural lands unless it is necessary to
eliminate existing point discharges and or to accommodate flows that vio-
late the requirements of the Clean Water Act (USEPA 1981b). The policy of
USEPA is to protect prime agricultural land from being adversely affected
by both primary and secondary impacts. It is considered to be a signi-
ficant impact if 40 or more acres of prime agricultural land are diverted
from production.
Less than 40 acres of prime agricultural land are likely to be di-
rectly affected under any of the project alternatives except Alternative 7,
which requires 48 acres for upgrading the existing lagoons (Table 4-2).
These lands would be taken out of production and used as lagoons, treatment
4-7
-------
facilities, buffer zones, or access roads. The actual total amount of
acres of prime agricultural land which may ultimately be taken out of
production for each project alternative is dependent upon the precise
location and placement of the treatment sites and interceptor routes, as
will be determined in completion of the facility planning for the MLWSD.
4.1.1.8. Economics
The construction of wastewater treatment facilities under any of the
project alternatives would create a limited number of short-term con-
struction jobs. Masons, pipefitters, heavy equipment operators, electri-
cians, truck drivers, plumbers, roofers, painters, and carpenters would be
among the tradesmen necessary to complete construction of the proposed
facilities. Most jobs would be filled by persons living within the project
area or within commuting distance of the project area.
The purchase of construction materials from project area merchants
would benefit the local economy. However, few firms offering materials
required for the construction of wastewater facilities are established
within the project area. Purchases made by construction workers within the
project area also would benefit the local economy. These purchases would
likely be for fuel, food, and clothing. Patronage may be reduced for some
businesses along sewer lines when road closings and disruptions occur. No
significant economic impacts are anticipated to occur during the construc-
tion of wastewater facilities under any of the alternatives.
4.1.1.9. Transportation
Increased truck and grading equipment traffic during the construction
of wastewater treatment components would increase road congestion. Vehi-
cular traffic would be inconvenienced by excavating, grading, backfilling,
and temporary road closures during construction of conveyance lines along
roadways under Alternatives 4 through 7. The inconvenience experienced
during these periods is not anticipated to be significant.
4-8
-------
4.1.1.10. Energy Resources
Residential, commerical, and industrial energy requirements are not
likely to be affected during the construction of wastewater facilities
under any of the alternatives. Active competition for specific energy
sources would become apparent if there were a recurrence of a national fuel
crisis such as the one precipitated by the oil embargo of 1977. Trucks and
construction equipment used during the construction of wastewater treatment
facilities would increase demand for local supplies of gasoline and diesel
fuel. There is ample power generation to meet the electrical needs of any
of the construction phase activities.
4.1.1.11. Recreation and Tourism
Many recreational activities in the project area are concentrated on
or along the perimeter of lakes. No significant air, water, noise, or
traffic impacts are expected to occur near the lakes which would seriously
interfere with tourism and recreation activities. Construction activities
may curtail some recreation and tourist activities by interupting access to
recreational facilities. However, these impacts are not anticipated to be
significant.
4.1.1.12. Cultural Resources
Final routings of conveyance lines should be presented to the SHPO for
assessment before construction activities begin. If construction excava-
tions uncover significant cultural resources, the SHPO should be notified
immediately. To provide adequate consideration of impacts affecting his-
toric sites, a survey of the Miller cabin on the YMCA property should be
conducted preceding implementation of any alternative which involves con-
veyance of wastewater to the City of Moose Lake treatment plant.
4.1.2. Operational Impacts
Each of the alternatives, including the No-Action Alternative, in-
volves operations that will continue through the project period. Included
4-9
-------
in the definition of operations are construction of new septic tank systems
for new structures and upgrading on-site systems that fail. Impacts are
addressed for each of the major elements of the natural and man-made envi-
ronments.
4.1.2.1. Atmosphere
Potential emissions from the operation of the centralized wastewater
treatment components include aerosols, hazardous gases, and odors. The
emissions could pose a health risk or be a public nuisance.
Organic material that contains sulfur or nitrogen may be partially
oxidized anaerobically and result in the emission of byproducts that may be
malodorous. Common emissions, such as hydrogen sulfide and ammonia, are
often referred to as sewer gases, and have odors reminiscent of rotten eggs
and concentrated urine, respectively. Some organic acids, aldehydes,
mercaptans, skatoles, indoles, and amines also may be odorous, either
individually or in combination with other sewage compounds. Sources of
wastewater related odors include:
o Untreated or incompletely treated wastewater.
o Screenings, grit, or skimmings containing septic or putre-
scible matter.
o Oil, grease, fats, and soaps from food-handling enterprises,
homes, and surface runoff.
o Gaseous emissions from treatment processes, manholes, wet
wells, pumping stations, leaking containers, turbulent flow
areas, and outfall areas.
o Raw or incompletely stabilized sludge or septage.
Wastewater stabilization lagoons typically emit considerable odors when the
ice cover melts in the spring. These odors are likely to be noticeable at
least one-half mile in the downwind direction. Odors from septic tank ef-
fluent sewers may escape from lift stations where turbulent flow occurs
unless proper design steps are taken to minimize odors. Sewage may become
septic and odorous in the lengthy force mains that are part of some alter-
natives especially during the low-flow winter season. The occasional
4-10
-------
failure of an on-site system may release some odors. Septage haulers using
inadequate or improperly maintained equipment may create odor nuisances.
None of the Project Alternatives are anticipated to cause significant
public health or nuisance impacts if proper mitigative measures are em-
ployed. For example, restrictive zoning for residential development around
the lagoon systems should be implemented.
4.1.2.2. Soils
The operation of the bog treatment system and cluster drainfields for
wastewater treatment would alter the soils of these sites over the life of
the project. The potential changes depend on the existing soil chemical
and hydraulic properties and on the chemical characteristics and appli-
cation rate of the septic tank effluent. In general the phosphorus and
nitrogen content of the soils will be affected. Chemical and physical
properties of the soils of the area are discussed in Section 2.2.1.1.
Impacts to the peat soil under the bog treatment alternative (Alternative
5) are of some concern due to the treatment requirement that the water
table be artificially maintained at a steady and low level. Deleterious
impacts to the soils in the cluster systems and onsite upgrades (Alterna-
tives 2 through 7) are expected to be minimal. The general nature of
potential impacts of all project alternatives on soil is described in
Appendix G.
4.1.2.3. Surface Water
Operational Impacts that could affect surface water quality through
the 20-year design period concern the following types of wastewater pollu-
tants: coliform bacteria, dissolved organics, suspended solids, and exces-
sive nutrients. Other wastewater pollutants such as trace metals or chlor-
inated organics are not expected to significantly affect any surface water
uses.
Measurements of fecal coliform (bacterial contamination) made in the
project area lakes are inconclusive because bacterial sampling efforts
usually involved one sample per station for a single date. USEPA regula-
4-11
-------
tions require that conclusions as to the violation of standards be based on
the geometric mean of a minimum of five samples.
Continued reliance on existing systems (No-Action Alternative) in
areas with a high water table increases the potential for bacterial contam-
ination of surface water. For the other alternatives, the wastewater
management system proposed should effectively preclude these problems,
although bacterial contamination is still a possibility with centralized
alternatives in cases of pumping station malfunctions, or with upgraded
on-site systems in cases of surface ponding of the effluent.
Treatment of wastewater by soil absorption systems is an effective way
of eliminating or immobilizing sewage-borne pathogens. In fine-textured
soil, bacteria can be filtered out by 1 to 2 meters of soil. Soils con-
taining clay remove most organisms through adsorption. Sandy soil removes
them through filtration (Lance 1978).
On-site systems should effectively remove suspended solids from the
septic tank effluent and most dissolved organic substances should be re-
moved by soil adsorption. The septic leachate survey, which is indicative
of dissolved organics or dissolved salts as components of suspected leach-
ate plumes, detected a very limited number of such plumes in each of the
lakes. Dissolved organics will exert a BOD resulting in the consumption of
dissolved oxygen within a lake. Within a properly maintained on-site
system, BOD movement to lake waters should be insignificant.
Centralized collection and treatment alternatives that use the Moose
Horn River as a receiving stream for discharge of treated wastewater ef-
fluents from the treatment lagoons (Alternatives 4, 6, and 7) are operated
with the discharge timed for release during the spring runoff period. The
waste stabilization lagoons are designed to meet State and Federal dis-
charge standards. Suspended solids and dissolved organics are expected to
exert a BOD in the receiving stream that could depress dissolved oxygen
levels. Most of the residual BOD and ammonia should be oxidized within the
Moose River or Kettle River and not affect the downstream St. Croix River.
4-12
-------
The input of excessive nutrients to lakes within the project area is a
signficant concern. Previous discussions presented in Chapter 2 (Section
2.2.2.4.) and Chapter 3 (Section 3.1.3) address in detail the potential
water quality impacts of proposed wastewater treatment alternatives. These
are summarized in the following paragraphs.
If the No-Action Alternative were selected, the phosphorus loading to
all lakes is likely to increase in comparison with present conditions. This
projected increase is based on future population estimates around the
project area lakes, and would stem from the generalized nutrient transport
to the lakes associated with residential development. For example, an
increased population would use additional on-site systems, possibly re-
sulting in some additional phosphorus loads to the lakes.
Centralized collection systems would eliminate the phosphorus loads
associated with failing on-site systems. Upgrading existing ori-site sys-
tems and placing certain residences in critical areas on a cluster col-
lection system also could result in decreased phosphorus loads to the lakes
compared to present conditions. However, the additional residential de-
velopment that would ultimately be served by the centralized collection
systems proposed in any of the project alternatives also would generate new
sources of phosphorus to the lakes. These phosphorus loads would stem from
the generalized phosphorus movement associated with erosion and lawn fer-
tilization in residential land use. Additional phosphorus loads to the
lakes may stem from sewer exfiltration. These impacts are secondary in
nature, as discussed in Section 4.2.3., but the result is that gains a-
chieved in abatement of on-site system phosphorus loads through centralized
collection and treatment is of reduced long-term significance.
The principal water quality benefit that might be anticipated through
provision of improved wastewater management for the lakeshore community is
an improvement in lake trophic condition whereby algae blooms would be re-
duced. This would be a long-term benefit the results of which would not be
seen for many years if the hydraulic residence time of a lake was great or
if other sources of phosphorus predominated. Based on evaluations of water
quality, nutrient loading regimes, trophic histories, and the aquatic biota
4-13
-------
of the project area lakes it is concluded that no significant beneficial
impact on trophic status will result from any of the seven project alter-
natives. The eutrophic condition of Island Lake would not be changed, and
blue-green algae blooms would not be lessened in frequency or severity.
The existing good water quality of Sturgeon, Rush, and Passenger Lakes
would not be protected to any greater degree as a result of implementing
any of the proposed project alternatives.
The fact that none of the proposed project alternatives offers a pros-
pect of beneficial water quality impacts is a consequence of the local
environment, rather than of the design of the alternatives. All existing
data on the natural and man-made environment of the project area indicate
that impacts of domestic wastewater on lakes are inconsequential in the
context of other manageable and unmanageable nutrient sources.
An additional concern of implementing an alternative which calls for
collection sewers is the effect of such an alternative on lake water le-
vels. Lake water levels may decline slightly with the centralized col-
lection alternatives because water that formerly went to soil adsorption
systems would be exported from the basin. The groundwater inflow and
outflow of the lakes are an important component in their hydrologic budgets
and export of groundwater introduced to sewers through wastewater disposal
and through general infiltration could lower the lakes' flushing rates.
Assuming no long-term change in average surface water inflows and outflows,
a water volume equivalent to between 1 and 2 inches of lake surface would
be exported from Island or Sturgeon Lake during the summer through the
collection sewers exposed under Alternatives 6 and 7. Potential impacts of
lowered lake levels include a decrease in hydraulic residence time for the
lakes and concomitant changes in phosphorus levels and algae growth.
4.1.2.4. Groundwater
Operational impacts that could affect groundwater in the 20-year
design period concern the following types of pollutants: coliform bac-
teria, dissolved organics, and excessive nutrients. Movement to ground-
water of other wastewater constituents or of soil chemicals would continue
4-14
-------
to occur under the alternatives employing on-site systems, but are not
expected to significantly affect any of the uses of the groundwater within
the service area.
Bacteria and dissolved organics are readily removed by filtration and
adsorption onto soil particles. Two meters of soil material is generally
adequate for bacterial removal (Wilson and others 1982), except in very
coarse-grained, highly permeable soil material. Contamination of drinking
water wells or surface water with bacteria and dissolved organics in the
service area is unlikely under any of the project alternatives.
High phosphorus concentrations in groundwater which discharges to
lakes can contribute to excessive eutrophication. Section 4.1.2.2. con-
tains a discussion of phosphorus movement in groundwater, and indicates
that phosphorus inputs to the lakes will not be significantly different
under any of the Alternatives. Field studies have shown that most soils,
even medium sands, typically remove in excess of 95% of phosphates in
relatively short distances from effluent sources (Jones and Lee 1977).
However, soil absorption systems can be a potential source of phosphorus
input to lakes when located very close to the lakeshore and may stimulate
algal growth in localized areas where effluent plumes emerge; but their
contribution to lake eutrophication is not considered to be a primary
factor in the project area. The largest contribution of groundwater phos-
phorus to the lakes would come from the No-Action Alternative. The lowest
groundwater phosphorus contributions to lakes would originate from alter-
natives that incorporate increased centralized wastewater collection.
The wastewater stabilization lagoons which are components of the cen-
tralized alternatives, (Alternatives 4, 6, and 7), may contribute phos-
phorus to the groundwater if seepage from the lagoons is considerable. A
study of Minnesota wastewater stabilization lagoons (E.A. Hickok and As-
sociates 1978) concluded that none of the ponds (all had natural soil
liners) were capable of meeting the designed and specified seepage rates.
Most of the ponds studied removed phosphorus effectively, although some had
seepage rates considerably higher than the maximum allowable.
4-15
-------
Nitrates in groundwater are of concern at concentrations greater than
10 mg/1 as nitrogen because they may in some circumstances cause methemo-
globinemia in infants who ingest liquids prepared with such waters. This
limit was set in the National Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations
(40 CFR 141) of the Safe Drinking Water Act (PL 93-523).
The density of soil absorption systems is said to be the most import-
ant parameter influencing pollution levels of nitrates in groundwater
(Scalf and Dunlop 1977). The potential for high nitrate concentrations in
groundwater is greater in areas of multi-tier or grid types of residential
developments than in single tier developments. Depending on the ground-
water flow direction and pumping rates of wells, nitrate contributions from
soil absorption systems may become cumulative in multi-tier developments.
Because extensive areas of multi-tier development are not projected in the
project area through the 20-year design period (Section 3.2.2.4.), nitrate
contamination of wells is considered to have a low risk potential. If
wells were found to have high nitrate concentrations they may need to be
made deeper so that a hydraulically limiting layer is penetrated (Section
2.2.2.3.).
Cluster drainfields are designed with criteria similar to individual
drainfields except that they are applied on a large scale. Nitrate concen-
trations in the groundwater below a cluster drainfield are anticipated to
be no higher than those below an individual soil absorption system. How-
ever, insufficient experimentation has been conducted to enable designing
for nitrogen removals from cluster drainfields. Therefore, a wise pre-
caution would be to locate the cluster drainfield as far from wells as is
feasible. This is one reason why cluster drainfields under Alternatives 3
through 6 have been designed to be sited away from residential areas in
this project.
Seepage from the wastewater stabilization lagoons could result in ele-
vated nitrate levels in the groundwater below the lagoons. Clay liners are
not impermeable, and plastic liners can be punctured and can deteriorate.
Field studies (EA Hickok and Associates 1978) have shown that a seepage
rate of no more than 500 gallons per acre per day is very difficult to
4-16
-------
maintain even on in-place, fine-textured soils. Nitrate contamination of
groundwater by seepage from the Moose Lake sewage lagoons is not antici-
pated to be a problem over the operational period of this project because
groundwater use for potable supplies is not common near the lagoon, and
because groundwater discharge from the vicinity is probably to the nearby
stream course.
4.1.2.5. Biota
No significant adverse long-term effects on the biota of the project
area are expected to occur as a result of the operation of Project Alterna-
tives 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 7. Alternative 5 may have significant adverse
impacts on plants and animals currently using the peat bog area to fill
principal habitat requirements.
4.1.2.6. Demographics
The operation and maintenance of wastewater facilities proposed under
the project alternatives will not have a significant impact on the demo-
graphy of the project area. A limited number of long-term jobs created by
the operation and maintenance of these facilities are likely to be filled
by persons living within the project area or within commuting distance. No
new residents are expected to be attracted to the project area to fill
these positions.
4.1.2.7. Land Use Impacts
The land use conversion discussed in Section 4.1.1.7. would remain in
effect for the operation of the proposed wastewater treatment facilities
under the project alternatives. Land use under the easement of sewage
conveyance lines would be intermittently affected when maintenance or
repairs were performed on sections of the lines. Periodic excavating and
filling would disturb vegetation and soil along conveyance lines. The
release of low level odors and aerosols from WWTPs may affect land use
adjacent to the plants. Improper maintenance of cluster and on-site sys-
tems may create malodorous conditions which would adversely affect adjacent
land use s.
4-17
-------
4.1.2.8. Economics
The operation of centralized wastewater treatment facilities under Al-
ternatives 4 through 7 would create a few long-term jobs. The few posi-
tions required could be filled by persons residing in the project area.
The existing staff at the MLWSD is expected to assume any additional re-
sponsibilities as a result of implementing any of the alternatives.
Existing contractors are expected to satisfy local demand for con-
struction and maintenance service of on-site systems. Contractors and
tradesmen involved in the construction and maintenance of on-site systems
would suffer a loss of work opportunities within the project area under
Alternative 1 and Alternatives 4 through 7. These contractors and trades-
men are likely to compete for work opportunities in neighboring areas. No
significant economic impacts will occur during the operation of wastewater
treatment facilities under any of the alternatives.
4.1.2.9. Transportation
Impacts arising during the construction of conveyance lines (Section
4.1.1.) would reoccur when maintenance or repairs are made on those lines.
Occasionally some roads may be closed temporarily. Truck traffic to and
from the Moose Lake treatment plant under Alternatives 1 through 7 will be
associated with supply deliveries. Truck traffic associated with repairs
and sludge hauling also will occur periodically under Alternatives 1
through 7.
4.1.2.10 Energy
The operation of wastewater treatment facilities and pump stations
under Alternatives 3 through 7 require the use of electricity and fossil
fuels. Alternative 7 would require the greatest amount of these energy
sources, while Alternative 3 would require the least. No significant
demands would be placed on local energy supplies under any of the alter-
natives.
4-18
-------
4.1.2.11. Recreation and Tourism
The operation of wastewater facilities under any of the alternatives
could affect tourist and recreational activities in the project area if a
malfunction of those facilities occurred. A failure in the system compon-
ents of the WWTPs under alternatives 4, 5, 6, and 7 could cause untreated
or partially treated waste to be discharged into project area surface
waters. This would result in short-term and long-term water quality de-
gradation and a reduction in the recreational use of that body of water.
Odors emanating from malfunctioning on-site systems may locally curtail
outdoor recreational activities. With proper operational and maintenance
procedures no significant adverse impacts are anticipated for any of the
Project Alternatives.
4.1.3. Public Finance
The total project capital costs will be apportioned between the USEPA,
the State, and the local residents. The apportionment is made based on
what capital costs are eligible to be funded by the USEPA and the state.
The estimated initial capital costs and the capital costs eligible for
funding for each action alternative are presented in Appendix F. The local
construction costs (capital costs not eligible for funding) and the entire
cost of systems operation and maintenance will be borne entirely by the
system users.
Federal funding through the National Municipal Wastewater Treatment
Works Construction Grants Program will provide funds to cover 75% of the
eligible planning, design, and construction costs of conventional waste-
water treatment facilities. State grants administered by MPCA will provide
an additional 15% of the project cost for a total of 90% funding. "Innova-
tive/alternative" components of the proposed treatment systems, such as
pressure sewers, septic tank effluent sewers, septic tanks, soil absorption
systems, other on-site upgrades, cluster drainfields and bog treatment
systems are eligible for 85% Federal funding and 9% State funding for a
total of 94%.
4-19
-------
The estimated average annual residential user costs for project op-
tions are presented in Table 4-3. Detailed average annual residential user
costs with and without Federal and State grant monies are presented in
Appendix F. Average annual users costs range from $152 per residence
served for Alternative 2 with Federal and State Grants to $1,406 for Alter-
native 7A with no grants. The equivalent annual user charges for nearby
Coffee Lake and Sand Lake (already sewered) are $120 and $145, respectively
(based on assessed connection charge and user fee, Section 3.2.4).
The average annual user costs presented in Table 4-3 represent the
cost of all system components included in the alternative. When user
charges are calculated for the constructed system, each connection will
have to pay its fair share of the treatment system it uses: on-site up-
grade, cluster system, or centralized collection and treatment. For ex-
ample, typical annual user costs for the on-site systems component of
Alternatives 2 through 7 would be on the order of $150 with Federal and
State grants and $240 without grants (from Alternative 2). Typical annual
user costs for the centralized collection and treatment component of alter-
natives 4 through 7 would be on the order of $670 for gravity collection
with Federal and State grants ($1,400 without grants), and $300 for STE
pressure or gravity sewers with Federal and State grants ($1,300 without
grants for Alternative 7).
Wastewater treatment facilities can create significant financial
impacts for communities and users who will pay the capital, operational,
maintenance, and debt costs associated with sewage treatment facilities.
The USEPA guideline for determining the magnitude of the financial impacts
is based on the ratio of the average annual user cost to median household
income (USEPA 1981b). The USEPA considers projects to be expensive and to
have adverse impacts on the finances of users when average annual user
costs are:
• 1.0% of 1980 median household incomes less than $10,000
• 1.5% of 1980 median household incomes between $10,000 and
$17,000
4-20
-------
ej
Table 4-3. Estimated average annual residential user costs ($ per year)
Project
Options
2_
_3
4A
4B_
4C
5A
5B
6A
6B
6£
7A
Zi
7C
Federal and
State Grant
151.68
177.48
372.00
212.64
208.56
220.56
214.92
522.00
234.48
221.76
666.60
297.96
296.76
Federal Grant
Only
160.32
213.24
422.52
266.04
261.00
270.48
262.32
586.80
306.48
288.60
789.60
404.04
398.16
Without
Grants
242.04
551.28
751.68
714.36
702.49
743.04
710.28
976.92
921.36
855.00
1,405.56
1,309.08
1,257.72
a
Operation and maintenance costs plus local share of initial capital costs
amortized for 20 years at 8 3/8% (see Appendix F) Existing equivalent
annual user charges for Coffee Lake and Sand Lake are $120 and $145, re-
spectively (Section 3.2.4).
Underlined Project Options constitute Project Alternatives that were
identified on the basis of net present worth and not on the basis of
having the lowest user cost. Other project options are presented for
purposes of comparison. (Option 7A is most comparable to the MLWSD Facility
Plan, representing conventional gravity sewers around Island and Sturgeon
Lakes, with treatment at Moose Lake.)
4-21
-------
• 1.75% of 1980 median household incomes greater than $17,000.
Estimated 1980 median household incomes for Pine County, Windemere
Township, and Carlton County are $12,252, $15,606, and $16,420, respect-
ively (1980 Census-preliminary tape data, by telephone, K. Hoefer, U.S.
Bureau of The Census, Data Users Division, Kansas City, to WAPORA, Inc., 7
December 1982). The majority of the project area is in Windemere Township,
with a small portion in Carlton County.
Average annual user costs for project options are expressed as a
percentage of 1980 median household income in Table 4-4. The user fee for
Project Options 4A, 6A, 7A, 7B, and 7C surpass the suggested upper limit
user fee even with Federal and State grants. Without grants, Alternative 2
is the only one that does not surpass the suggested limit. Alternative 2
offers the lowest user cost for system users. With the exception of Pro-
ject Options 4A, 6A, 7A, 7B, and 7C if Federal and State grants are avail-
able, none of the other options surpass the suggested upper limit user
costs as a percentage of median household income, indicating that none of
them would be a "high cost" system that would pose a significant financial
burden on system users.
The impact of the new debt requirements on the total debt per capita
in the Moose Lake Windemere Sanitary District is presented in Table 4-5.
The 1980 debt per capita of $394 was developed in Section 3.2.4. Alter-
native 2 offers the lowest additional debt per capita increase and Alter-
native 7 the greatest increase. None of the project options exceed the
standard upper limit for the debt per capita for middle income communities
($1,000 Table 3-28) if Federal and State grants are available. If no
grants are available, the total debt per capita will exceed the limit under
6A, 6B, 7A, 7B, and 7C.
It should be noted that the financial stress on low income families
and the local share of capital cost for the proposed wastewater system,
under any of the action alternatives, will be affected by the interest rate
available at the time of financing. The debt service portion of the annual
4-22
-------
Table 4-4. Average annual user costs expressed as a percentage of 1980 median
household income for Windemere Township
Project Funding
Project
Options
_2
_3
4A
_4B
4C
5A
5!
6A
6B
6C
7A
_7_B
7C
Federal and
State Grant
0.97%
1.14
b
2.38
1.35
1.34
1.41
1.38
b
3.34
1.50
1.42
b
4.27
b
1.91
b
1.90
Federal Grant
Only
1.03%
1.37
b
2.71
1.70
1.67
1.73
1.68
b
3.76
b
1.96
b
1.85
b
5.06
b
2.59
b
2.55
Without
Grants
1.55
b
3.53
b
4.82
4.59b
b
4.50
4.76b
b
4.55
b
6.25
b
5.90
b
5.49
b
9.01
b
8.39
b
8.06
Q
Estimated 1980 median household income for Windemere Township is $15,606
(Portion of the project area is in Carlton County, which has an
estimated 1980 median household income of $16,420. (1980 median household
income from 1980 census preliminary tape data, by telephone, K. Hoefer,
U.S. Bureau of the Census, Data Users Division, Kansas City, to WAPORA, Inc.,
7 December 1982). The USEPA considers a project expensive when average
annual user charges exceed 1.75% of median household income greater than
$17,000.
b
The costs residents would pay under these alternatives would be considered
expensive according to USEPA guidelines.
c
Underlined Project Options constitute Project Alternatives that were iden-
tified on the basis of net present worth estimates and not on the basis of
the percent of 1980 median household income that would be consumed by user
costs.
4-23
-------
Table 4-5. Impact of new debt requirements on total debt per capita in the
Moose Lake-Windemere Sanitary District.
Debt per capita ($)'
b
Project
Options
_2
_3
4A
4B
4C
5A
5B
6A
6B
j>£
7A
7B
7C
Federal and
State Grant
New
12
22
166
42
42
30
28
302
60
57
472
110
106
Total
406
416
560
436
436
424
422
696
454
451
866
504
500
Federal
Only
New
18
49
206
84
83
68
65
357
121
113
592
213
205
Grant
Total
412
443
599
478
477
462
459
751
515
507
986
607
599
No
New
76
304
460
430
424
434
411
684
636
588
1,193
1,096
1,044
Grant
Total
470
698
854
824
818
828
805
1,078
1,030
982
1,587
1,490
1,438
New debt per capita is local share of construction costs divided by total
1980 population of Moose Lake-Windemere Sanitary District (3,817, Table
3-27). Existing 1980 debt per capita = $394 (Table 3-27).
Underlined Project Options constitute Project Alternatives identified on
the basis of net present worth estimates and not on the basis of new debt
requirements.
4-24
-------
user charge has been calculated based on a 8 3/8% interest rate over 20
years (based on the current FmHA intermediate rate discussed below).
The Fanners Home Administration (FmHA) was contacted to determine the
eligibility of the project for special financing (By telephone, Mr. John
Melbo, FmHA Regional Office, St. Paul MN, to WAPORA, Inc., 25 August 1982).
The FmHA will provide loans to fund the local share of the capital costs
for USEPA-approved projects if funding is not available from other sources
at interest rates determined as "affordable" for the community, based on
median family income. The poverty rate is available to communities where
the median family income is less than $9,000 and there is a sanitary and
health problem (no area in Minnesota qualifies for the poverty rate at this
time). The intermediate rate is available to communities with median
family income less than 85% of the non-SMSA median family income for the
state. For other communities the market rate is available. In August 1982
the poverty rate was 5%, the intermediate rate was approximately 8 3/8%,
and the market rate (based on the Bond Buyers Index) was 11 5/8%.
The 1981 non-SMSA median family income for the State of Minnesota is
$22,850 (Section 3.21). The estimated median family income is $21,100 for
Windemere Township and Carlton County, $17,000 for Pine County, and $16,275
for Moose Lake Township (Section 3.2.1. Table 3-25). The median family
income is less than 85% of $22,850 ($19,420) in Pine County and Moose Lake
Township, and greater in Windemere Township and Carlton County. Therefore,
if affordable funding is not available elsewhere, the District might qua-
lify for an intermediate interest rate from FmHA. If not, the market rate
would apply.
4.2. Secondary Impacts
Each of the alternatives, including the No-Action Alternative, will
have effects that extend beyond primary or direct impacts. These secondary
impacts would occur, for example, in the form of induced growth or unanti-
cipated changes in lake water quality. The categories of the natural and
man-made environment that may experience significant secondary impacts are
described in the following sections.
4-25
-------
4.2.1. Surface Water
Increased housing developed along the lake shore may increase nutrient
and sediment loads into the lakes as a result of the following processes:
o Construction of impervious surfaces such as rooftops, park-
ing areas, paved roads, and hard-packed soils may increase
not only the amount of surface runoff, but also its ability
to erode soil and to transport pollutants.
o Lawn and garden fertilization may create relatively high
nutrient levels in runoff.
o The Conventional practice of placing lawn clippings and leaf
litter in drainageways may speed the process of nutrient
transport to the lakes.
Population growth will neither be hindered or induced significantly
under any of the action alternatives (2 through 7). Lakeshore area popu-
lation growth and housing stock growth will proceed at comparable rates
regardless of whether improved on-site systems or centralized collection
and treatment are provided. No extraordinarily high levels of erosion-
borne nutrient loads are anticipated to be generated under any single
project alternative. Population growth will take place and erosion and
runoff will increase with the No-Action Alternative just as in the other
alternatives. Over the long term, no single alternative offers an advan-
tage of reduced secondary water quality impacts in terms of decreasing the
rate of eutrophication.
4.2.2. Demographics
Wastewater management facilities historically have been major factors
in determining the capacity of an area to support population growth and
development. On-site wastewater treatment facilities, although theore-
tically available to ' any potential user, limit development to areas with
suitable soil and site characteristics. Sewer systems remove these site
constraints and allow development virtually anywhere within hookup distance
of the system. Consequently, the construction of sewers usually causes an
initial increase in the inventory of developable land and subsequent in-
creases in the density of development. This may allow development on lots
4-26
-------
that otherwise would be considered undesirable or too small for permanent
use.
The inducement of growth through sewer service already provided around
nearby Sand Lake is not evident nor is it anticipated to occur with any of
the project alternatives. Economic factors apparently outweigh any incen-
tive for growth which wastewater facilities might otherwise provide.
Long-term population growth trends in the project area are not likely
to be changed by any of the project alternatives. The sewers encompassing
portions of Island Lake proposed under Alternatives 4 through 7 would
provide service to a corridor which is already heavily developed and where
few other lakeshore lots are available for development. Parallel popula-
tion increases would occur in the Sturgeon Lake lakeshore corridor with all
of the Project Alternatives. However, the cost for users on both lakes
under Alternatives 2 through 7 may create a financial burden for families
with low incomes. This may result in displacement of these families from
the project area because they could not afford user charges.
The selection of any one of Alternatives 4 through 7 would allow for
the development of a very limited number of lots which otherwise would not
be developed due to existing size constraints for on-site systems. How-
ever, no significant housing stock or population increase is anticipated to
occur as a result of allowing development of those lots.
Under any of the Project Alternatives, net population growth in the
service area would occur to a parallel degree as discussed in Section
3.2.1. The rate of conversion of seasonal dwellings to permanent homes
would be unaffected. Population increases will be dependent solely upon
the carrying capacity of the land and aesthetic factors influencing de-
velopment choices (Section 3.2.4.).
4.2.3. Land Use
Economic factors and the availability of aesthetically desirable lake-
shore lots (Section 3.2.3.) will have a greater influence than the pro-
4-27
-------
vision of wastewater facilities (Section 4.2.) in determining land use for
the study area during the planning period. The location of wastewater
treatment facilities and sewer systems proposed under Alternatives 4
through 7 will not significantly direct patterns of future development.
Residential development will be concentrated along lakeshore areas regard-
less of the wastewater management techniques implemented. Because of this
and because additional growth will not be induced in the lakeshore corri-
dor, no significant land use impacts will occur.
Under Alternatives 1 through 3, future development within the project
area would be most limited by the carrying capacity of the land and by
aesthetic considerations. Increased potential for nuisances attributable
to failing on-site systems in lakeshore residential areas could make infill
development of vacant lots less desirable. As a result, new development on
back-tier lots may be increased at the expense of vacant lake-contiguous
lots which may remain undeveloped. This is not expected to be a signifi-
cant trend, however, because relatively few nuisance causing conditions are
projected for the lakeshore community (Section 2.2.3).
Little prime agricultural farmland is likely to be taken out of pro-
duction to accommodate wastewater treatment facilities (Table 4-2). This
will result in a minimal net loss of food and fibre production.
4.2.4. Economics
The additional wastewater treatment capacity required under Alterna-
tives 4 through 7 will not stimulate any increased population, development,
or economic growth (Section 3.2.3.). Under Alternatives 1 through 3,
economic development also would proceed as discussed in Section 3.2.3.
Continuing nuisances created by failing on-site systems under the No-Action
Alternative could further detract from the area's economic development
potential. However, the existing perception by the public that Island Lake
already has poor water quality will detract to an even greater degree from
the economic development stimulus of water-based recreation. Under Alter-
natives 2 through 7, no significant improvement of Island Lakes quality is
anticipated. Therefore, no significant secondary impact on economics would
occur under any of the Project Alternatives.
4-28
-------
4.2.5. Recreation and Tourism
Increased and continuing nuisances created by failing on-site systems
under the No-Action Alternative could detract from the project area's repu-
tation as a desirable recreational area. If there were obvious algal
blooms in Sturgeon Lake, permanent and seasonal residents of the project
area would likely decrease their recreational activities. However, an
increased fertility marked by blue-green algae blooms also can mean better
fishing becaused of increases in overall lake productivity. Whether the
impact is then considered in the balance to be favorable or adverse is a
value judgement to be made by recreational users. No evidence exists which
suggests that Alternatives 2 through 7 would preclude the development of
blue-green algal blooms in Sturgeon, Rush, or Passenger Lakes. Addition-
ally, no evidence exists which suggests Island Lake will be improved by any
of the action alternatives. Therefore, no significant secondary impacts on
recreation and tourism are anticipated.
4.3. Mitigation of Adverse Impacts
As previously discussed, various adverse impacts would be associated
with the proposed alternatives. Many of these adverse impacts could be
reduced significantly by the application of mitigative measures. These
mitigative measures consist of implementing legal requirements, planning
measures, and design practices. The extent to which these measures are
applied will determine the ultimate impact of the selected action. Poten-
tial measures for alleviating primary (construction & operation) and
secondary impacts are presented in the following sections.
4.3.1. Mitigation of Construction Impacts
The construction oriented impacts presented in Section 4.1. primarily
are short-term effects resulting from construction activities at WWTP sites
or along the route of proposed sewer systems. Proper design should mini-
mize the potential impacts, and project plans and specifications should
incorporate mitigative measures consistent with the following discussion.
4-29
-------
Fugitive dust from excavation and backfilling operations for the force
mains and treatment plants can be minimized by various techniques. Frequent
street sweeping of dirt from construction activities can reduce the major
source of dust. Prompt repaving of roads disturbed by construction also
could reduce dust effectively. Construction sites, spoil piles, and un-
paved access roads should be wetted periodically to minimize dust. Soil
stockpiles and backfilled trenches should be seeded with a temporary or
permanent seeding, or covered with mulch to reduce susceptibility to wind
erosion.
Street cleaning operations where trucks and equipment gain access to
construction sites, and on roads along which a force main would be con-
structed, will reduce loose dirt that otherwise would generate dust, create
unsafe driving conditions, or be washed into roadside ditches or storm
drains. Trucks transporting spoil material to disposal sites should cover
their loads to eliminate the escape of dust while in transit.
Exhaust emissions and noise from construction equipment can be mini-
mized by proper equipment maintenance. The resident engineer should have,
and should exercise, the authority to ban from the site all poorly main-
tained equipment. Soil borings along the proposed force main rights-of-way
conducted during system design would identify organic soils that have the
potential to release odors when excavated. These areas could be bypassed
by rerouting the force main if a significant impact might be expected at a
particular location.
Spoil disposal sites should be identified during the project design
stage to ensure that adequate sites are available and that disposal site
impacts are minimized. Landscaping and restoration of vegetation should be
conducted immediately after disposal is completed to prevent impacts from
dust generation and to avoid unsightly conditions.
Lands disturbed by trenching for force main construction should be re-
graded and compacted as necessary to prevent future subsidence. However,
too much compaction will result in conditions unsuitable for vegetation.
4-30
-------
Areas disturbed by trenching and grading at the treatment plant site
should be revegetated as soon as possible to prevent erosion and dust
generation. Native plants and grasses should be used. This also will
facilitate the re-establishment of wildlife habitat.
Construction-related disruption in the community can be minimized
through considerate scheduling by the contractor and by appropriate public
announcements. The State and County highway departments have regulations
concerning roadway disruptions, which should be rigorously applied. Spec-
ial care should be taken to minimize disruption of access to frequently
visited establishments.
Announcements should be published in local newspapers and broadcast on
local radio stations to alert drivers of temporary traffic disruptions on
primary routes. Street closings should be announced by flyers delivered to
each affected household.
Planning of routes for heavy construction equipment and materials
should ensure that surface load restrictions are considered. In this way,
damage to streets and roadways would be avoided. Trucks hauling excavation
spoil to disposal sites or fill material to the WWTP sites should be routed
along primary arteries to minimize the threat to public safety and to
reduce disturbance to residential environments.
Erosion and sedimentation must be minimized at all construction sites.
USEPA Program Requirements Memorandum 78-1 establishes the following re-
quirements for control of erosion and runoff from construction activities.
Adherence to these requirements would mitigate potential problems.
• Construction site selection should consider potential occur-
ence of erosion and sediment losses.
• The project plan and layout should be designed to fit the
local topography and soil conditions.
• When appropriate, land grading and excavating should be kept
to a minimum to reduce the possibility of creating runoff
and erosion problems which require extensive control mea-
sures.
4-31
-------
• Whenever possible, topsoil should be removed and stockpiled
before grading begins.
• Land exposure should be minimized in terms of area and time.
• Exposed areas subject to erosion should be covered as quick-
ly as possible by means of mulching or vegetation.
• Natural vegetation should be retained whenever feasible.
• Appropriate structural or agronomic practices to control
runoff and sedimentation should be provided during and after
construction.
• Early completion of stabilized temporary and permanent
drainage systems will substantially reduce erosion poten-
tial.
• Access roadways should be paved or otherwise stabilized as
soon as feasible.
• Clearing and grading should not be started until a firm
construction schedule is known and can be effectively coor-
dinated with the grading and clearing activities.
The Natural Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Executive Order 11593
(1971), the Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974, and the
1973 Procedures of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation require
that care be taken early in the planning process to identify cultural
resources and minimize adverse effects on them. USEPA's final regulations
for the preparation of EISs (40 CFR 1500) also specify that compliance with
these regulations is required when a Federally funded, licensed, or per-
mitted project is undertaken. The State Historic Preservation Officer must
have an opportunity to determine that these requirements have been satis-
fied.
4.3.2. Mitigation of Operation Impacts
The majority of potentially adverse operational impacts of the WWTP
alternatives are related to the discharge of effluent to surface waters.
For the bog treatment and cluster treatment designs the most significant
potential adverse effects are impacts on groundwater and possible health
risks. Adverse impacts associated with the operation of cluster and on-
site systems are primarily related to malodorous conditions which may
4-32
-------
affect outdoor recreational activities. Measures to minimize these and
other operation phase impacts of all the alternatives are discussed below.
Adverse impacts related to the operation of the proposed sewer systems
and treatment facilities would be minimal if the facilities are designed,
operated, and maintained properly. Gaseous emissions and odors from the
various treatment processes can be controlled to a large extent. Above-
ground pumps should be enclosed and installed to minimize sound impacts.
Concentrations of the effluent constituents discharged from the City of
Moose Lake treatment plant are regulated by the conditions of the NPDES
permits. The effluent quality is specified by the State of Minnesota and
must be monitored. Proper and regular maintenance of cluster and on-site
systems also would maximize the efficiency of these systems and minimize
the amount of odors released.
In the document Federal Guidelines for Design, Operation, and Main-
tenance of^Wajstjiwater Treatment Facilities (Federal Water Quality Adminis-
tration 1970), it is required that:
All water pollution control facilities should be planned and de-
signed so as to provide for maximum reliability at all times.
The facilities should be capable of operating satisfactorily
during power failures, flooding, peak loads, equipment failure,
and maintenance shutdowns.
4.3.3. Mitigation of Secondary Impacts
As discussed in Section 4.2., few secondary impacts are expected to
occur during the operation of any of the six action alternatives. Adequate
zoning, health, and water quality regulation and enforcement would minimize
these impacts. Local growth management planning would assist in the regu-
lation of general location, density, and type of growth that might occur.
4.4. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts
Some impacts associated with the implementation of any of the action
alternatives cannot be avoided. The centralized collection and treatment
components of Alternatives 4 through 7 would have the following adverse im-
pacts:
4-33
-------
• Considerable short-term construction dust, noise, and traf-
fic nuisance.
• Alteration of vegetation and wildlife habitat along the
sewer and force main corridors and at the WWTP site.
* Considerable erosion and siltation during construction.
• Significant odors during spring turnover of waste stabili-
zation lagoons.
• User costs for wastewater treatment services for the resi-
dents within the proposed sewer service areas.
The alternatives that include significant reliance on continued use of
existing and upgraded on-site systems and either cluster systems or black-
water holding tanks for critical areas would have the following adverse
impacts:
• Some short-term construction dust, noise, and traffic nui-
sance .
• Limited amounts of erosion and siltation during construc-
tion.
• Discharge of percolate with elevated levels of nitrates and
chlorides from soil absorption systems to the groundwater.
• Occasional ephemeral odors associated with pumping septic
tanks and holding tanks and trucking these wastes to dis-
posal sites.
• User costs for management and operation of wastewater treat-
ment services for the residents within the proposed service
areas.
4.5. Irretrievable and Irreversible Resource Commitments
The major types and amounts of resources that would be committed
through the implementation of any of the six action alternatives are pre-
sented in Section 4.1. and 4.2. Each of the action alternatives would
include some or all of the following resource commitments:
• Fossil fuel, electrical energy, and human labor for facili-
ties construction and operation.
4-34
-------
• Chemicals, especially chlorine, for the City of Moose Lake
WWTP operation.
• Tax dollars for construction and operation.
• Some unsalvageable construction materials.
For each alternative involving a WWTP (Alternatives 4, 5, 6 and 7),
there would be significant consumption of these resources with no feasible
means of recovery. Thus, more non-recoverable resources would be foregone
for the provision of the proposed wastewater control system for these
alternatives than for alternatives 2 and 3. However, the total quantities
involved for any of the alternatives is small.
Accidents, which could occur from system construction and operation of
any alternative, could cause irreversible bodily damage or death, and
damage or destroy equipment and other resources. For alternatives 4, 6 and
7, unmitigated WWTP failure and by-passing potentially could kill aquatic
life in the mixing zone in the Moose Horn River.
None of the alternatives would have an impact on archaeological sites
known at this time. However, the potential accidential destruction of
undiscovered archaeological sites through excavation activities for any
alternative would not be reversible. This would represent permanent loss
of such a site.
4-35
-------
5.0. LITERATURE CITED
Aronson, R. , and E. Schwartz (Editors). 1975. Management policies in
local government finance. International City Managers Association,
Washington DC.
Carlson, A.H. 1980a. Report of the State Auditor of Minnesota on the
revenues, expenditures, and debt of the local governments in Minne-
sota. St. Paul MN, 127 p.
Carlson, A.H. 1980b. Report of the State Auditor of Minnesota on the reve-
nues, expenditures, and debt of the towns in Minnesota. St. Paul MN,
100 p.
Dillon, P.J. and W.B. Kirchner. 1975. The effects of geology and land use
on the export of phosphorus from watersheds. Water Research 9:
135-148.
Dillon, P.J. and F. H. Rigler. 1975. A simple method for predicting the
capacity of a lake for development based on lake trophic status.
Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada. 32:1,519-1,531.
East Central Regional Development Commission. 1981. Overall economic
development program annual update. Mora MN, p. 1-7 plus attachments.
Federal Water Quality Administration. 1970. Federal guidelines for de-
sign, operation, and maintenance of wastewater treatment facilities.
US Department of the Interior, Washington DC, 29 p.
Finney, H.R. 1981. Soil survey of part of Windemere Township, Pine Coun-
ty, Minnesota. Completed under contract to WAPORA, Inc. St. Paul MN,
28 p. plus soil map plates.
Gustatson, N.C. 1973. Recent trends, future prospects, a look at upper
midwest population changes. Federal Reserve Bank, Upper Midwest
Council, Minneapolis MN.
Goldreich, E.E. 1965. Detection and significance of fecal coliform bac-
teria in stream pollution studies. Journal Water Pollution Control
Federation 37:1722
Howard A. Kuusisto. 1980. Moose Lake-Windemere Sanitary Sewer District,
Unit No. 3, "Island Lake". Consulting Engineers, St. Paul MN, Plans
19 sheets, specifications
Jones, R.A., and G. F. Lee. 1977. Septic tank disposal systems as phos-
phorus sources for surface waters. EPA 600/3-77-129. Robert S. Kerr
Environmental Research Laboratory, Ada OK.
Kamppi A. 1971. Studies of water disposal on peatland forest basin infil-
tration systems which were in effect in Findland in 1970. Report A4
National Board of Water, Helsinki, Finland. (English Summary).
5-1
-------
Lorenzen, M.W. 1981. Correspondence. Environmental Science & Technology
15:1508-1509.
Miller, J.P. (ed). 1949. One hundred years in Pine County. Pine County
Historical Society, reprint 1979. American Publishing Co., Askov.
Minnesota.
Minnesota Department of Economic Security. 1982. Northeastern Minnesota
labor market review, June 1982. Regional Labor Market Information
Center, Duluth MN 8 p.
Minnesota Department of Energy, Planning, and Development. 1982. Fact
Sheet: BTU contents of fuel. St. Paul MN, 1 sheet.
Minnesota Department of Transportation. 1979. 1979 Traffic map. St.
Paul MN, 1 sheet.
Minnesota Department of Transportation. 1981. Minnesota automatic traffic
recorder data summary. St. Paul MN, 591 p.
Minnesota Energy Agency. 1981. Residential energy prices in Minnesota.
Forecasting Division, St. Paul MN, 39 p.
Moak, L.L., and A.M. Hillhouse. 1975. Concepts and practices in local
government finance. Municipal Finance Officers Association of the US
and Canda, Chicago IL, 454 p.
Moose Lake Planning Commission. 1981. City of Moose Lake, land use down-
town development strategies. Moose Lake MN, 62 p.
MPCA. 1980. Recommended design criteria for stabilization ponds (aerated
and non-aerated, 34 p.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administation. 1979a. Climatological
data annual summary, Minnesota. National Climatic Center, Asheville
NC, 16 p.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 1979b. Local climatolo-
gical data, annual summary with comparative data, Duluth, Minnesota.
National climatic Center, Asheville NC, 4 p.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 1981. National weather
service surface weather observations. Duluth MN.
Northerneastern Minnesota Labor Market Review. 1980. Labor market data
summary for fiscal year 1981, Northeastern Minnesota - Region 3.
Minnesota Department of Economic Security, Duluth MN, 43 p.
Omernik, J.M. 1977. Non-point source stream nutrient level relation-
ships: a nationwide survey. EPA 600/3-77-105. National Environ-
mental Research Laboratory, Corvalis OR.
5-2
-------
Otis R.J., and D. E. Stewart. 1976. Alternative wastewater facilities
for small unsewered communities in rural America. Annual report to
the Upper Great Lakes Region Commission.
Otis, R.J. 1979. Alternative wastewater facilities for small communi-
ties - a case study. In; Proceedings of a workshop on alternative
wastewater treatment systems. UILU-WRC-79-0010. Water Resources
Center and Cooperative Extensive Service, University of Illinois -
Urbana, Urbana IL, p. 44-40.
Peterson, J.M., and G.O. Gronseth. 1980. Selected economic data for
Duluth and Northeastern Minnesota through 1979. University of Minne-
sota, Duluth, Duluth MN, 68 p.
Pine County Area Redevelopment Organization. 1979. Pine County overall
economic development plan. Pine City MN, 61 p.
Pound, C.E., and R.W. Crites. 1973. Wastewater treatment and reuse by
land application, Volume I, summary. USEPA Office of Research and
Development, Washington DC, 80 p.
PRC Consoer, Townsend and Associates LTD. 1980. Moose Lake-Windererne
Sanitary Sewer District facility plan for wastewater collection and
treatment. Duluth MN.
Ragotzkie, R.A. 1978. Heat budgets of lakes. Chapter I IN; Lakes;
chemistry, geology, and physics. Pub Springer and Verlag, New York,
NY 3,062 p.
Rast, W. and G. F. Lee. 1981. Correspondence. Environmental Science and
Technology 15:1509-1510
Reneau, R. B. Jr., and D. E. Pettry. 1975. Movement of coliform bacteria
from septic tank effluent through selected coastal plain soils of
Virginia. Journal of Environmental Quality 4:41-44
Schindler, D.W. 1977. Evaluation of phosphorus limitation in lakes. Sci-
ence 195:260-262
Seigrist, R. L., T. Woltanski, and C.E. Walforf. Water conservation and
wastewater disposal. In; Proceedings of the second national home
sewage treatment symposium (ASAE Publication 5-77). American Society
of Agricultural Engineers, St. Joseph MI, p. 121-136.
Shapiro, J. 1979. The need for more biology in lake restoration, in Lake
Restoration EPA 440/5-79-001 Washington, D.C. pp. 161-167
Simmons, J.D., and J.O. Newman. 1979. On-site liquefaction and variable
gradient transport lines for rural sewage disposal. Paper No. SER
79-047. American Society of Agricultural Engineers, St. Joseph MI, 16
P-
5-3
-------
Smith, V.H. and J. Shapiro. 1981. Chlorophyll phosphorus relations in
individual lakes. Their importance to lake restoration strategies.
Environmental science and technology 15:444-451.
Soil Conservation Service. 1978. Soil survey of Carlton County, Minne-
sota. US Department of Agriculture. In cooperation with the Minne-
sota Agricultural Experiment Station. 77 p. plus map sheets.
Spencer, J.S., Jr., and A.J. Ostrom. 1979. Timber resources of Minne-
sota's aspen-birch unit, 1977. Resource Bulletin NC-43, US Department
of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment Sta-
tion, St. Paul MN, 52 p.
Surakka, S. 1971. Some observations on the possibilities to infiltrate
wastewater in peatlands according to results obtained in Kesalahden
Town, Finland (English Summary). Vesitalous 8:26-31.
Surakka, S. and A. Kamppi. 1971. Infiltration of wastewater into peat
soil (English Summary). SMO. 22:51:58
Tofflemire, T.J. and M. Chien. 1977. Phosphate removal by sands and
soils. Groundwater 15:377.
US Bureau of the Census. 1952. US Census of population: 1950. Volume
II, characteristics of the population, part 23, Minnesota. Department
of Commerce, US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 220 p.
US Bureau of the Census. 1963. US census of population: 1960, Volume I,
Chacteristics of the population, part 25, Minnesota. Department of
Commerce, US Government Printing Office, Washington DC.
US Bureau of the Census. 1973. General social and economic characteris-
tic, Minnesota. Department of Commerce, US Government Priting Office,
Washington DC, 495 p. plus appendixes.
US Bureau of the Census. 1980. 1978 population estimates and 1977 and
revised 1976 per capita income estimates for counties, incorporated
places, and selected minor civil divisions — Minnesota. Department
of Commerce, Washington DC.
US Bureau of the Census. 1982. Advance reports: Minnesota general pop-
ulation characteristics. Department of Commerce, Washington DC.
US Department of Agriculture. 1962. Soil survey manual. Handbook No. 18.
Agricultural Research Administration, p. 209.
US Department of Commerce. 1929. State and county data, Minnesota census
of agriculture. Washington DC.
US Department of Commerce. 1934. State and county data, Minnesota census
of agriculture. Washington DC.
5-4
-------
US Department of Commerce. 1939. State and county data, Minnesota census
of agriculture. Washington DC.
US Department of Commerce. 1949. State and county data, Minnesota census
of agriculture. Washington DC.
US Department of Commerce. 1969. State and county data, Minnesota census
of Agriculture. Washington DC.
US Department of Commerce. 1978. State and county data, Minnesota census
of Agriculture. Washington DC.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1976. Quality criteria for water.
Office of Water and Hazardous Materials. Washington DC, 255 p.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1977. Alternatives for small waste-
water treatment systems, on-site disposal/septage treatment and dis-
posal. EPA 625/4-77-011. Technology Transfer, Washington DC, 90 p.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1978. Funding of sewage collection
system projects. Program Requirements Memorandum (PRM 78-9). Office
of Water and Hazardous Materials, Washington DC.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1978. Management of small waste
flows. USEPA-600/2-78-173. Municipal Environmental Research Labora-
tory. Cincinnati OH.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1979. Construction grants program
requirements memorandum 79-7. Washington DC, 2 p.
US Environmental Protection Agency 1979. Management of on-site and alter-
native wastewater systems (Draft). Prepared for USEPA Environmental
Research Information Center, by Roy F. Weston, Inc., Cincinnati, OH,
111 p.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1979. Planning wastewater management
facilities for small communities (Draft). Prepared for USEPA Munici-
pal Environmental Research Laboratory, by Urban Systems Research
Engineering, Inc., Cincinnati, OH, 141 p.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1979. Region V, Water Division,
Chicago, IL Draft environmental impact statement. Alternative waste
treatment systems for rural lake projects. Case study number 1,
Crystal Lake area sewage disposal authority, Benzie County, Michigan.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1979. Region V, Water Division,
Chicago, IL Draft environmental impact statement alternative waste
treatment systems for rural lake projects. Case study number 2, Green
Lake sanitary sewer and waster district, Kandiyohi County, Minnesota.
5-5
-------
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1979. Region V, Water Division,
Chicago, IL Draft environmental impact statement. Alternative waste
treatment systems for rural lake projects. Case study number 3,
Springvale-Bear Creek sewage disposal authority, Emmet County, Mic-
higan.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1979. Region V, Water Division,
Chicago, IL Draft environmental impact statement. Alternative waste
treatment systems for rural lake projects. Case study number 4 Steuben
Lakes Regional Waste District, Steuben County, Indiana.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1979. Region V, Water Divisions,
Chicago, IL Draft environmental impact statement. Alternative waste
treatment systems for rural lake projects. Case study number 5,
Ottertail County Board of Commissioners Ottertail County, Minnesota
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1980. Design manual. On-site waste-
water treatment and disposal systems. Office of Research and Develop-
ment, Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH 391
P-
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1980. Modeing phosphorus loading and
lake response under uncertainty: a manual and compilation of export
coefficients. EPA 440/5-80-011. Clean Lake Section USEPA, Washing-
ton, DC.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1981. Alternative waste treatment
system for rural lake projects. Draft generic environmental impact
statement. USEPA Region V, Water Division, Chicago IL, 133 plus
appendixes.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1981. Facilities Planning 1981.
Municipal wastewater treatment. EPA 430/9-81-002 office of Water
Program Operations, Washington DC, 116 p.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1981. Resource inventory and septic
system survey. Moose Lake - Windemere Sewer District, Minnesota.
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory, Las Vegas NV.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1981. Region V, Water Division,
Chicago, IL Draft environmental impact statement. Alternative treat-
ment systems for rural lake projects. Case study number 6, Williams
County Commissioners, Nettle Lake area, Williams County, Ohio.
US Geological Survey. 1979. Bruno and Moose Lake quadrangles Minnesota.
15 minute series (topographic). Department of Interior, Washington
DC, 2 sheets (1:62,500).
Uttormark, P.O., and J.P. Wall. 1975. Lake classification for water
quality management. University of Wisconsin Water Resources Center.
Vasilevski, A. and R.L. Hackett. 1980. Timber resource of Minnesota's
central hardwood unit, 1977. US Department of Agriculture Forest
Service Resource Bulletin NC-46. North Central Forest Experiment
Station, St. Paul MN, 65 p.
5-6
-------
Viraraghavan, T., and R. G. Warnock., 1976. Groundwater quality adjacent
to a septic tank system. Journal of the American Water Works Associ-
ation 68:611-614.
Vollenweider, R.A. 1975. Input - output models with special reference
to the phosphorus loading concept in limnology. Schweiz. Z. Hydrol
37:53-83.
Williams, J.D.H. J-M Jaquet, and R. L. Thomas. 1976. Forms of phosphorus
in the surficial sediments of Lake Erie. Journal Fish Res. Board
Can - 33:413-429.
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Technical Bulletin #81, Influ-
ence of organic pollution on the density and production of trout in a
Wisconsin stream 1975.
5-7
-------
6.0. GLOSSARY OF TECHNICAL TERMS
Activated sludge process. A method of secondary wastewater treatment in
which a suspended microbiological culture is maintained inside an
aerated treatment basin. The microbial organisms oxidize the complex
organic matter in the wastewater to carbon dioxide, water, and energy.
Advanced secondary treatment. Wastewater treatment more stringent than
secondary treatment but not to advanced waste treatment levels.
Advanced waste treatment. Wastewater treatment to treatment levels that
provide for maximum monthly average BOD and SS concentrations less
than 10 mg/1 and/or total nitrogen removal of greater than 50% (total
nitrogen removal = TKN + nitrite and nitrate).
Aeration. To circulate oxygen through a substance, as in wastewater treat-
ment, where it aids in purification.
Aerobic. Refers to life or processes that occur only in the presence of
oxygen.
Aerosol. A suspension of liquid or solid particles in a gas.
Algae. Simple rootless plants that grow in bodies of water in relative
proportion to the amounts of nutrients available. Algal blooms, or
sudden growth spurts, can affect water quality adversely.
Algal bloom. A proliferation of one species of algae in lakes, streams or
ponds to the exclusion of other algal species.
Alluvial. Pertaining to material that has been carried by a stream.
Ambient air. Any unconfined portion of the atmosphere: open air.
Ammonia-nitrogen. Nitrogen in the form of ammonia (NH_) that is produced
in nature when nitrogen-containing organic material is biologically
decomposed.
Anaerobic. Refers to life or processes that occur in the absence of oxygen.
Anoxia. Condition where oxygen is deficient or absent.
Apatite. Calcium phosphate with chloride, fluoride or hydroxyl Ca(Cl, F,
OH) Ca (PO ) ; forms hexagonal crystals; earlier was often confused
with fluorrte5.
Aquifer. A geologic stratum or unit that contains water and will allow it
to pass through. The water may reside in and travel through innumera-
ble spaces between rock grains in a sand or gravel aquifer, small or
cavernous openings formed by solution in a limestone aquifer, or
fissures, cracks, and rubble in harder rocks such as shale.
Artesian (adj.). Refers to groundwater that is under sufficient pressure
to flow to the surface without being pumped.
6-1
-------
Artesian well. A well that normally gives a continuous flow because of
hydrostatic pressure, created when the outlet of the well is below the
level of the water source.
Bar screen. In wastewater treatment, a screen that removes large float-
ing and suspended solids.
Base flow. The rate of movement of water in a stream channel that occurs
typically during rainless periods, when stream flow is maintained
largely or entirely by discharges of groundwater.
Bed Rock. The solid rock beneath the soil and subsoil.
Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD). A bioassay-type procedure in which the
weight of oxygen utilized by microorganisms to oxidize and assimilate
the organic matter present per liter of water is determined. It is
common to note the number of days during which a test was conducted as
a subscript to the abbreviated name. For example, BOD indicates that
the results are based on a five-day long (120-hour)5 test. The BOD
value is a relative measure of the amount (load) of living and dead
oxidizable organic matter in water. A high demand may deplete the
supply of oxygen in the water, temporarily or for a prolonged time, to
the degree that many or all kinds of aquatic organisms are killed.
Determinations of BOD are useful in the evaluation of the impact of
wastewater on receiving waters.
Biota. The plants and animals of an area.
Chemocline. A stratum of stronger concentration gradient of dissolved
substances.
Chlorination. The application of chlorine to drinking water, sewage or
industrial waste for disinfection or oxidation of undesirable com-
pounds .
Circulation period. The interval of time in which the density stratifica-
tion of a lake is destroyed by the equalization of temperature, as a
result of which the entire water mass becomes mixed.
Clay. The smallest mineral particles in soil, less than .004 mm in diame-
ter; soil that contains at least 40% clay particles, less than 45%
sand, and less than 40% silt.
Coliform bacteria. Members of a large group of bacteria that flourish in
the feces and/or intestines of warm-blooded animals, including man.
Fecal coliform bacteria, particularly Escherichia coli (E. coli),
enter water mostly in fecal matter, such as sewage or feedlot runnoff.
Coliforms apparently do not cause serious human diseases, but these
organisms are abundant in polluted waters and they are fairly easy to
detect. The abundance of coliforms in water, therefore, is used as an
index to the probability of the occurrence of such disease-producing
organisms (pathogens) as Salmonella, Shigella, and enteric viruses
which are otherwise relatively difficult to detect.
6-2
-------
Community. The plants and animals in a particular area that are closely
related through food chains and other interactions.
Cultural resources. Fragile and nonrenewable sites, districts, buildings,
structures, or objects representative of our heritage. Cultural
resources are divided into three categories: historical, architec-
tural, or archaeological. Cultural resources of special significance
may be eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic
Places.
Decibel (dB). A unit of measurement used to express the relative intensity
of sound. For environmental assessment, it is common to use a fre-
quency-rated scale (A scale) on which the units (dBA) are correlated
with responses of the human ear. On the A scale, 0 dBA represents the
average least perceptible sound (rustling leaves, gentle breathing),
and 140 dBA represents the intensity at which the eardrum may rupture
(jet engine at open throttle) . Intermediate values generally are: 20
dBA, faint (whisper at 5 feet, classroom, private office); 60 dBA,
loud (average restaurant or living room, playground); 80 DBA, very
loud (impossible to use a telephone, noise made by food blender or
portable standing machine; hearing impairment may result from pro-
longed exposure); 100 dBA, deafening noise (thunder, car horn at 3
feet, loud motorcycle, loud power lawn mower).
Demographic. Pertaining to the science of vital and special statistics,
especially with regard to population density and capacity for expan-
sion or decline.
Detention time. Average time required to flow through a basin. Also
called retention time.
Digestion. In wastewater treatment a closed tank, sometimes heated to 95°F
where sludge is subjected to intensified bacterial action.
Disinfection. Effective killing by chemical or physical processes of all
organisms capable of causing infectious disease. Chlorination is the
disinfection method commonly employed in sewage treatment processes.
Dissolved oxygen (DO). Oxygen gas (0 ) in water. It is utilized in res-
piration by fish and other aquatic organisms, and those organisms may
be injured or killed when the concentration is low. Because much
oxygen diffuses into water from the air, the concentration of DO is
greater, other conditions being equal, at sea level than at high
elevations, during periods of high atmospheric pressure than during
periods of low pressure, and when the water is turbulent (during
rainfall, in rapids, and waterfalls) rather than when it is placid.
Because cool water can absorb more oxygen than warm water, the con-
centration tends to be greater at low temperatures than at high tem-
peratures. Dissolved oxygen is depleted by the oxidation of organic
matter and of various inorganic chemicals. Should depletion be ex-
treme, the water may become anaerobic and could stagnate and stink.
Drainage Basin. A geographical area or region which is so sloped and
contoured that surface runoff from streams and other natural water-
6-3
-------
courses is carried away by a single drainage system by gravity to a
common outlet or outlets; also referred to as a watershed or drainage
area.
Drift. Rock material picked up and transported by a glacier and deposited
elsewhere.
Effluent. Wastewater or other liquid, partially or completely treated, or
in its natural state, flowing out of a reservoir, basin, treatment
plant, or industrial treatment plant, or part thereof.
Endangered species. Any species of animal or plant that is in known danger
of extinction throughout all or a significant part of its range.
Epilimnion. The turbulent superficial layer of a lake lying above the
metalimnion which does not have a permanent thermal stratification.
Eutrophication. The progressive enrichment of surface waters particularly
non-flowing bodies of water such as lakes and ponds, with dissolved
nutrients, such as phosphorous and nitrogen compounds, which accele-
rate the growth of algae and higher forms of plant life and result in
the utilization of the useable oxygen content of the waters at the
expense of other aquatic life forms.
Fauna. The total animal life of a particular geographic area or habitat.
Fecal coliform bacteria. See coliform bacteria.
Floodway. The portion of the floodplain which carries moving water during
a flood event.
Flood fringe. The part of the floodplain which serves as a storage area
during a flood event.
Flora. The total plant life of a particular geographic area or habitat.
Flowmeter. A guage that indicates the amount of flow of wastewater moving
through a treatment plant.
Force main. A pipe designed to carry wastewater under pressure.
Gravity system. A system of conduits (open or closed) in which no liquid
pumping is required.
Gravity sewer. A sewer in which wastewater flows naturally down-gradient
by the force of gravity.
Groundwater. All subsurface water, especially that part in the zone of
saturation.
Holding Tank. Enclosed tank, usually of fiberglass, steel or concrete, for
the storage of wastewater prior to removal or disposal at another
location.
6-4
-------
Hypolimnion. The deep layer of a lake lying below the epilimnion and the
metalimnion and removed from surface influences.
Infiltration. The water entering a sewer system and service connections
from the ground through such means as, but not limited to, defective
pipes, pipe joints, improper connections, or manhole walls. Infiltra-
tion does not include, and is distinguished from, inflow.
Inflow. The water discharged into a wastewater collection system and
service connections from such sources as, but not limited to, roof
leaders, cellars, yard and area drains, foundation drains, cooling
water discharges, drains from springs and swampy areas, manhole co-
vers, cross-connections from storm sewers and combined sewers, catch
basins, storm waters, surface runoff, street wash waters or drainage.
Inflow does not include, and is distinguished from, infiltration.
Influent. Water, wastewater, or other liquid flowing into a reservoir,
basin, or treatment facility, or any unit thereof.
Interceptor sewer. A sewer designed and installed to collect sewage from a
series of trunk sewers and to convey it to a sewage treatment plant.
Innovative Technology. A technology whose use has not been widely docu-
mented by experience and is not a variant of conventional biological
or physical/chemical treatment.
Lagoon. In wastewater treatment, a shallow pond, usually man-made, in
which sunlight, algal and bacterial action and oxygen interact to
restore the wastewater to a reasonable state of purity.
Land Treatment. A method of treatment in which the soil, air, vegetation,
bacteria, and fungi are employed to remove pollutants from wastewater.
In its most simple form, the method includes three steps: (1) pre-
treatment to screen out large solids; (2) secondary treatment and
chlorination; and (3) spraying over cropland, pasture, or natural
vegetation to allow plants and soil microorganisms to remove addi-
tional pollutants. Much of the sprayed water evaporates, and the
remainder may be allowed to percolate to the water table, discharged
through drain tiles, or reclaimed by wells.
Leachate. Solution formed when water percolates through solid wastes, soil
or other materials and extracts soluble or suspendable substances from
material.
Lift station. A facility in a collector sewer system, consisting of a
receiving chamber, pumping equipment, and associated drive and control
devices, that collects wastewater from a low-lying district at some
convenient point, from which it is lifted to another portion of the
collector system.
Littoral. The shoreward region of a body of water.
Loam. The textural class name for soil having a moderate amount of sand,
silt, and clay. Loam soils contain 7 to 27% of clay, 28 to 50% of
silt, and less than 52% of sand.
6-5
-------
Macroinvertebrates. Invertebrates that are visible to the unaided eye
(those retained by a standard No. 30 sieve, which has 28 meshes per
inch or 0.595 mm openings); generally connotates bottom-dwelling
aquatic animals (benthos) .
Macrophyte. A large (not microscopic) plant, usually in an aquatic habi-
tat.
Mesotrophic. Waters with a moderate supply of nutrients and no significant
production of organic matter.
Metalimnion. The layer of water in a lake between the epilimnion and
hypolimnion in which the temperature exhibits the greatest difference
in a vertical direction.
Milligram per liter (mg/1). A concentration of 1/1000 gram of a substance
in 1 liter of water. Because 1 liter of pure water weighs 1,000
grams, the concentration also can be stated as 1 ppm (part per mil-
lion, by weight). Used to measure and report the concentrations of
most substances that commonly occur in natural and polluted waters.
Moraine. A mound, ridge, or other distinctive accumulation of sediment
deposited by a glacier.
National Register of Historic Places. Official listing of the cultural
resources of the Nation that are worthy of preservation. Listing on
the National Register makes property owners eligible to be considered
for Federal grants-in-aid for historic preservation through state
programs. Listing also provides protection through comment by the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation on the effect of Federally
financed, assisted, or licensed undertakings on historic properties.
Nitrate-nitrogen. Nitrogen in the form of nitrate (NO ). It is the most
oxidized phase in the nitrogen cycle in nature and occurs in high
concentrations in the final stages of biological oxidation. It can
serve as a nutrient for the growth of algae and other aquatic plants.
Nitrite-nitrogen. Nitrogen in the form of nitrite (NO ). It is an in-
termediate stage in the nitrogen cycle in nature. Nitrite normally is
found in low concentrations and represents a transient stage in the
biological oxidation of organic materials.
Nonpoint source. Any area, in contrast to a pipe or other structure, from
which pollutants flow into a body of water. Common pollutants from
nonpoint sources are sediments from construction sites and fertilizers
and sediments from agricultural soils.
Nutrients. Elements or compounds essential as raw materials for the growth
and development of an organism; e.g., carbon, oxygen, nitrogen, and
phosphorus.
Outwash. Sand and gravel transported away from a glacier by streams of
meltwater and either deposited as a floodplain along a preexisting
valley bottom or broadcast over a preexisting plain in a form similar
to an alluvial fan.
6-6
-------
Oligotrophic. Waters with a small supply of nutrients and hence an insig-
nificant production of organic matter.
Ordinance. A municipal or county regulation.
Outwash. Drift carried by melt water from a glacier and deposited beyond
the marginal moraine.
Outwash Plain. A plain formed by material deposited by melt water from a
glacier flowing over a more or less flat surface of large area.
Deposits of this origin are usually distinguishable from odinary river
deposits by the fact that they often grade into moraines and their
constituents bear evidence of glacial origin. Also called frontal
apron.
Oxidation lagoon (pond). A holding area where organic wastes are broken
down by aerobic bacteria.
Percolation. The downward movement of water through pore spaces or larger
voids in soil or rock.
pH. A measure of the acidity or alkalinity of a material, liquid or solid.
pH is represented on a scale of 0 to 14 with 7 being a neutral state;
0, most acid; and 14, most alkaline.
Piezometric level. An imaginary point that represents the static head of
groundwater and is defined by the level to which water will rise.
Plankton. Minute plants (phytoplankton) and animals (zooplankton) that
float or swim weakly in rivers, ponds, lakes, estuaries, or seas.
Point source. In regard to water, any pipe, ditch, channel, conduit,
tunnel, well, discrete operation, vessel or other floating craft, or
other confined and discrete conveyance from which a substance con-
sidered to be a pollutant is, or may be, discharged into a body of
water.
Pressure sewer system. A wastewater collection system in which household
wastes are collected in the building drain and conveyed therein to the
pretreatment and/or pressurization facility. The system consists of
two major elements, the on-site or pressurization facility, and the
primary conductor pressurized sewer main.
Primary treatment. The first stage in wastewater treatment, in which
substantially all floating or settleable solids are mechanically
removed by screening and sedimentation.
Prime farmland. Agricultural lands, designated Class I or Class II, having
little or no limitations to profitable crop production.
Pumping station. A facility within a sewer system that pumps sewage/
effluent against the force of gravity.
6-7
-------
Runoff. Water from rain, snow melt, or irrigation that flows over the
ground surface and returns to streams. It can collect pollutants from
air or land and carry them to the receiving waters.
Sanitary sewer. Underground pipes that carry only domestic or commercial
wastewater, not stormwater.
Screening. Use of racks of screens to remove coarse floating and suspended
solids from sewage.
Secchi Disk. A disk, painted in four quadrants of alternating black and
white, which is lowered into a body of water. The measured depth at
which the disk is no longer visible from the surface is a measure of
relative transparency.
Secondary treatment. The second stage in the treatment of wastewater in
which bacteria are utilized to decompose the organic matter in sewage.
This step is accomplished by introducing the sewage into a trickling
filter or an activated sludge process. Effective secondary treatment
processes remove virtually all floating solids and settleable solids,
as well as 90% of the BOD and suspended solids. USEPA regulations
define secondary treatment as 30 mg/1 BOD, 30 mg/1 SS, or 85% removal
of these substances.
Sedimentation. The process of subsidence and deposition of suspended
matter carried by water, sewage, or other liquids, by gravity. It is
usually accomplished by reducing the velocity of the liquid below the
point where it can transport the suspended material.
Seepage. Water that flows through the soil.
Seepage cells. Unlined wastewater lagoons designed so that all or part of
wastewater percolates into the underlying soil.
Septic snooper. Trademark for .the ENDECO (Environmental Devices Corpora-
tion) Type 2100 Septic Leachate Detector. This instrument consists of
an underwater probe, a water intake system, an analyzer control unit
and a graphic recorder. Water drawn through the instrument is con-
tinuously analyzed for specific fluorescence and conductivity. When
calibrated against typical effluents, the instrument can detect and
profile effluent-like substances and thereby locate septic tank lea-
chate or other sources of domestic sewage entering lakes and streams.
Septic tank. An underground tank used for the collection of domestic
wastes. Bacteria in the wastes decompose the organic matter, and the
sludge settles to the bottom. The effluent flows through drains into
the ground. Sludge is pumped out at regular intervals.
Septic tank effluent pump (STEP). Pump designed to transfer settled waste-
water from a septic tank to a sewer.
Septic tank soil absorption system (STAS). A system of wastewater disposal
in which large solids are retained in a tank; fine solids and liquids
are dispersed into the surrounding soil by a system of pipes.
6-8
-------
Settling tank. A holding area for wastewater, where heavier particles sink
to the bottom and can be siphoned off.
Sewer, Interceptor. See Interceptor Sewer.
Sewer, lateral. A sewer designed and installed to collect sewage from a
limited number of individual properties and conduct it to a trunk
sewer. Also known as a street sewer or collecting sewer.
Sewer, sanitary. See Sanitary Sewer.
Sewer, storm. A conduit that collects and transports storm-water runoff.
In many sewerage systems, storm sewers are separate from those carry-
ing sanitary or industrial wastewater.
Sewer, trunk. A sewer designed and installed to collect sewage from a
number of lateral sewers and conduct it to an interceptor sewer or, in
some cases, to a sewage treatment plant.
Sinking fund. A fund established by periodic installments to provide for
the retirement of the principal of term bonds.
Slope. The incline of the surface of the land. It is usually expressed as
a percent (%) of slope that equals the number of feet of fall per 100
feet in horizontal distance.
Sludge. The accumulated solids that have been separated from liquids such
as as wastewater.
Soil association. General term used to describe taxonomic units of soils,
relative proportions, and pattern of occurrence.
Soil textural class. The classification of soil material according to the
proportions of sand, silt, and clay. The principal textural classes
in soil, in increasing order of the amount of silt and clay, are as
follows: sand, loamy sand, sandy loam, loam, silt loam, sandy clay
loam, clay loam, silty clay loam, sandy clay, silty clay, and clay.
These class names are modified to indicate the size of the sand frac-
tion or the presence of gravel, sandy loam, gravelly loam, stony clay,
and cobbly loam, and are used on detailed soil maps. These terms
apply only to individual soil horizons or to the surface layer of a
soil type.
State equalized valuation (SEV). A measure employed within a State to
adjust actual assessed valuation upward to approximate true market
value. Thus it is possible to relate debt burden to the full value of
taxable property in each community within that State.
Stratification. The condition of a body of water when the water is divided
into layers of differing density. Climatic changes over the course of
the seasons cause a lake to divide into a bottom layer and surface
layer, with a boundary layer (thermocline) between them. Stratifica-
tion generally occurs during the summer and again during periods of
ice cover in the winter. Overturns, or periods of mixing, generally
6-9
-------
occur once in the spring and once in the autumn. This "dimictic"
condition is most common in lakes located in middle latitudes. A lake
which stratifies and mixes more than twice per year is defined as
"polymictic".
Threatened species. Any species of animal or plant that is likely to
become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant part of its range.
Till. Unsorted and unstratified drift, consisting of a heterogeneous
mixture of clay, sand, gravel, and boulders, that is deposited by and
underneath a glacier.
Trickling filter process. A method of secondary wastewater treatment in
which the biological growth is attached to a fixed medium, over which
wastewater is sprayed. The filter organisms biochemically oxidize the
complex organic matter in the wastewater to carbon dioxide, water, and
energy.
Topography. The configuration of a surface area including its relief, or
relative evaluations, and the position of its natural and manmade
features.
Unique farmland. Land, which is unsuitable for crop production in its
natural state, that has been made productive by drainage, irriga-
tion, or fertilization practices.
Wastewater. Water carrying dissolved or suspended solids from homes,
farms, businesses, and industries.
Water quality. The relative condition of a body of water, as judged by
a comparison between contemporary values and certain more or less
objective standard values for biological, chemical, and/or physical
parameters. The standard values usually are based on a specific
series of intended uses, and may vary as the intended uses vary.
Watershed. The region drained by or contributing water to a stream, lake,
or other body of water.
Water table. The upper level of groundwater that is not confined by an
upper impermeable layer and is under atmospheric pressure. The upper
surface of the substrate that is wholly saturated with groundwater.
Wetlands. Those areas that are inundated by surface or ground water with a
frequency sufficient to support and under normal circumstances does or
would support a prevalence of vegetative or aquatic life that requires
saturated or seasonally saturated soil conditions for growth and
reproduction.
6-10
-------
8.0. LIST OF PREPARERS
The Draft Environmental Statement (DES) was prepared by the Chicago
Regional Office of WAPORA, Inc., under contract to USEPA, Region V. USEPA
approved the DES and hereby publishes it as a Draft EIS. The USEPA Project
Officers and the WAPORA staff involved in the preparation of the DES/DEIS
during the past two years include:
USEPA
Charles Quinlan III
James Novak
WAPORA, Inc.
Robert France
Lawrence Olinger
J. P. Singh
John Laumer
Steven Me Comas
Ross Sweeney
Gerald Lenssen
Andrew Freeman
Rhoda Grant
Peter Woods
Richard Gill
Thomas Davis
Neil Coleman
Kenneth Dobbs
Richard Kubb
Greg Lindsey
Ellen Renzas
Jan Saper
Delores Jackson-Hope
Project Officer
Project Officer (former)
Project Administrator
Project Administrator
Project Administrator and Senior Engineer
Project Manager and Principal Author
Environmental Scientist, Engineeer, and
Principal Author
Civil Engineer and Principal Author
Agricultural Engineer
Demographer
Editor
Graphic Specialist
Biologist
Chemist
Geologist
Economist
Biologist
Land Use Planner
Socio-Enconomist
Socio-Economist
Production Specialist
7-1
-------
In addition, several subcontractors and others assisted in the prepa-
ration of this document. These, along with their areas of expertise, are
listed below:
o Aerial Survey
Office of Research and Development
USEPA
Las Vegas, Nevada
o Soil Survey and Mapping
Mr. HarIan R. Finney
Professional Soil Scientists
1828 Draper Drive
St. Paul, MN 55113
o Paleolimnological and Lake Management Studies
Lake Management Consultants, Inc.
166 Dixon Street
Madison, Wise. 53704
o Field Survey Arrangements and Data Development
Moose Lake-Windemere Sanitary District
Moose Lake, MN 55767
7-2
-------
9.0. LIST OF THOSE SENT COPY OF THE DRAFT EIS
Federal
Senator Rudolph E. Boschwitz
Senator David Durenberger
Representative James Oberstar
Council on Environmental Quality
Department of Agriculture
Department of Commerce
Department of Health, and Human Services
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Department of the Interior
US Fish & Wildlife Service
Geological Survey
Heritage Conservation & Recreation Service
National Park Service
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
Department of Labor
Department of Transportation
US Army Corps of Engineers
US Soil Conservation Service
USEPA Regional Offices
State
Senator Florian Chmielewski
Representative Doug Carlson
Office of the Governor
Office of the Lieutenant Governor
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
Minnesota Water Resources Board
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
Minnesota Department of Health
Minnesota State Planning Agency
Minnesota Environmental Quality Board
Minnesota Department of Transportation
Minnesota Energy Agency
Minnesota Department of Agriculture
Local
Mayor, City of Moose Lake
Mayor, City of Barnum
Moose Lake-Windemere Sanitary District Board
Township Clerk for Moose Lake Township
Township Clerk for Windemere Township
Chairman, Pine County Board of Commissioners
Chairman, Carlton County Board of Commissioners
Citizens and Groups
This list is available upon request from USEPA.
8-1
------- |