[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
Coastal Zone 7 information Center MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION IN THE COASTAL ZONE (LAKE SUPERIOR BASIN AND NORTH -SHORE REGION) CONTRACT REPORT FOR CONTRACT REPORT FOR U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION VIA MINNESOTA STATE PLANNING AGENCY, DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING, LAND USE SECTION COASTAL ZONE -MANAGEMENT PROGRAM OCTOBER'1975 TD 171.3 M6 E58 1975 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page List of Tables . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . List of Illustrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapter I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . II* SUMMARY . . . . ... . 2 Water Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Air-Quality . . . . . . . . .. 4 1974 Air Emission Inventory . . . . . . . 4 1974 Air.Quality Data ... . . . ... . . . . 4 Future Planning Strategies . . . . . . . 5 Noise Abatement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Solid Waste Management . . .. . . . . . . . . 6 Land-Related Comprehensive Environmental Management 6 III.A.MPCA ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION IN THE COASTAL ZONE 8 WATER-RELATED ACTIVITIES 8 Intr6duction . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . 8 Tributary Sampling . . . . . . . . . . . 9 ,.Lake Superior Sub-Basin . . . . . . . . . . St. Louis,River Sub-Basin . . . . . . . . . 12 Nemadji River Sub-Basin . . . . . . . . . . 13 Future Plans for Sanitary Districts, Individual 14 Sewage Disposal Systems and Other Activities Current Regional/Ar,ea-wide Wastew ater 14 Treatment Strategies and Sanitary Districts @Individual Sewage Disposal System . . . . 16 Vessel Wastes and@Marine Sanitation Devices 16 Water Quality and Related Development 17 .Strategies @B.AIR QUALITY RELATED ACTIVITIES IntroclAc tion 17 US DepartMent Of COMMer" NOAA Coastal Services Center LibrarY 2234 South Hobson Avenue. ston, SC 29405-2413 Charle Page 1974 Emission.Inventory 18 1974,Aiz Quality Data . . . . . . 19 Future Planning Strategies . . . 20 C. NOISE-RELATED ACTIVITIES . . . ... . . . .-22 D. SOLID WASTE RELATED ACTIVITIES . . . . 23 E. LAND-RELATED ACTIVITIES 26 Examples of Land-Related Activities 26 Comprehensive-.Environmental Resource 27 Mane gement- APPENDIX ATTACHMENT A: Pollution Control Agency Work Program Fiscal Year 76, CZM ATTACHMENT B: BIBLIOGRAPHY for Water Related Portion, Chapter III (A) ATTACHMENT C: Lake Superior Tributary Sampling Information LIST OF TABLES Table % 1-1 Total Emissions (1974 Emission Inventory) is 2 Coastal Area Emissions (1974 Emission 19 Inventory) 3 Duluth Air Quality (1974 City Limits Data) 20 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1 Lake Superior Basin Location Maps 10 (Water Quality Legend) la Municipal Wastewater Disposal Facilities 15. 1974 (Public Facility Planning Areas). 2 Lake Superior Basin Location,Map 24 (Solid Waste Legend for Dumps and Landfills) 24 CHAPTER INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION Background Purpose and Scope Approximately three man-months of effort between August and October, 1975 are represented by this report, which is in responseto the, attached contract(see appendix)and oral requests. Implications for policy formation were requested to supplement written contract provisions; and discussions on energy, resource development, comprehensive environmental man- agement and other topics are included to satisfy such oral requests. The overall approach has been to translate technical data into narrative, tabular and illustrative forms; to replace "shop talk" with understandable terms and language meaningful -to cit- izens and Coastal Zone work members; and to provide useful examples of complex situations when appropriate. The main purpose of this report is to identify major current, 'future and potential impacts of this Agency's activities on the Lake Superior Coastal Zone environment in Minnesota. The summary section in Chapter II should clarify major aspects.of these.impacts and indicate certain findings. CHAPTER.II SUMIARY SUMMARY@ As,indicated in the Introductio-n-, this Summary relates tothe conclusions and recomme Indations,and purpose and-scope in Chapters .1 and, 3, and is a concise desamiption of the major.aspects,,find- ings and substantive impacts re'lative to current, future and potential Agency impacts 'on the environment of-the Coastal Zone. The Coastal Zone should continu.,e:to be monitored for air, . water and land-related environmental components to further-refine existing pollutant information- The.quality of life.a6d the envi- ronment should be measured in.a consistent way to -assume -a rela- tively uniform,,Compa Irable and un-derstandable' assessment of the Coastal Zone environment, and -to- show -the status towards attaining non-degradation of the existing relatively. high-quality environ- ment in the North Shore of Lake Superior. A comprehensive envi- ronmental quality index could facilitate such an assessment of the Coastal Zone's environment. in terms of water, air and solid -waste, the Coastal Zone has been improving during the 1970-1975 period. Data gaps exist for moni- toring; and personnel, research and :.other limited resour.-es hinder a thorough analysis of the env- nment, relative tc MPCA's activi- ties,in the Coastal Zone. Vater Quality Overall water quality is, excellent.in the Lake Superior Basin, which includes the three sub-basins: Lake Superior, St. Louis River and Nemadj i River .(see Figure 1) Major problem areas are Duluth-Superior Harbor, Silver Bay.@ and the south shore of the lake. Monitoring and study programs to date indicate good water quality in the open waters of Lake Superior, slightly lower quality in the tributaries, lower in the NemaLdji River and poor quality in the lower portion of the St. Louis River. The high pollution level in the Duluth Harbor, referred to hereafter as the St,@ Louis 13ayl . adversely affects the extreme western end of Lake Superior., Xn. addition, analysis of shipping activitie s , open-lake dredged spoils dumping and other impacts shou.1-rd be "Undertaken. Due.to the lake's current patterns, shoreand wind characterist- ics, eddy structure and artificial elevation of the lake level, "turbidity trapping" is a process at the (Duluth-Superior) St. Louis Bay which should be revle"Yed; and. since public water intakes are concerned,. physical, chemica:1. and. biological aspects should be analyzed to. determine, existing. or -potential hazards concerned. The Nemadji RiverSub-Basin, in 1.1innesota contains no "point sources, "' but turbidity in the D-ulu-th- Super i or Bay is impacted by sedimentation caused by the.- blu-.ffs . a"rea. alongIthe south shore of the lake. Tributaries flowing tt:hrough red clay deposits possibly contribute suspended solids probilems in portions of north and south shores at the western end of the lake. The Nemadji itself is char- acterized by relatively Poor when,compared to trout streams prevalent along the North Shore:.. The Lake S uperior Sub-Basin waterquality is currently impacted ..by Reserve Mining's Silver Bay plant's taconite tailings discharge, four wastewater treatment plant discharges and potential degrada- tion from Thunder-Bay, dredging, sE!ptic.tanks, vessel wastes and @potentiAI cppper.,and nickel.-mining -- these last sources are cur- rently.notdocumented. The Reserve situation involves.selection@of 'an appropriate on-land disposal site, and the EPA and the State of Minnesota are coordinating progress. Two Harbors, Silver Bay and Grand Marais have completed treatment facility plant construction and Taconite Harborls@ existing pri- mary plant-is scheduled to be replaced by a soil absorption.field. The net counterclockwise circulation pattern of Lake Superior may be bringing Thunder Bay'.s paper-related process wastewater and domes- tic,-sewage discharges to the--Minnes.ota.portion of-Lake-'$uperior- Dredging in-Silver Bayand proposed dredging in Grand Marais might water quality similar to.Two Harbors and Duluth 'dredging activities. Surveys are-currently:underway in St. Louis. County on septic,tank discharges, and Lake and-Cook Counties will be surveyed during the next two years to determine the nature and extent of direct [email protected] Lake Superior. Although specifics are,currently unknown about copper and,nickel development,. signifi- cant potential water quality impacts may.be@realized if.such opera- tions impact sites in or near the region. Vessel wastes - includ- ing ballast, bilge-..and sewage discharges - are.currently unknown;. and increased petroleum transporting could include spillages any- @where along the shore. The St. Louis Rive*x S-ab-.B&s,in includes the upper and lower-reaches. The Lower Po'rtion of the St. Louis River is impacted by the dis- charge of municipal, industrial and natural background sources. While the upper reaches have some fecal coliform problems in local areas, these are considered insignificant; and the MDNR.has classi- fied this a state-designated wild river. The,WLSSD plant will. remove effluent from the St. Louis River by mid-1977 by regionaliz- ing five-industrial and four Duluth plants. Phasing out these dis- charges will place (a secondary level of treated discharge with phosphorus reduction) an improved effluent in the St. Louis Bay by removing current discharges to the St. Louis River. Benthic sludge deposits and historical accumulations of bottom sediments, including toxic substances, will remain a problem; and dredging would further aggravate the current dissolved oxygen situation. Area-wide, regional wastewater treatment facilities planning includes management strategies.design.ed,to satisfy environmental, economical, social-political and technological requirements regarding eligible projects for a dozen projects, asillustrated in ChapterIII, rela- tive to sanitary districts and future planning aspects. Future planning strategies would tend to direct new large-scale wastewater dischargers to areas with urban-type services. Scattered development patterns are neither efficient to managenor environmentally sound from a water resource management standpoint.: Construction of new heavy industry and associated facilities should be directed to sites within existing urban centers. -4- Air. Quality Although the 1974 data.are discussed below, the 1970 to 1975 period for Duluth has indicated major im quality due to provements in air the elimination or -reduction of pollution sources. Open burning from old city dumps has almost completely stopped. The air quality aasessment considers only the .1974 emission inventory and air quality data. No attempt to look at multi-year -data was made; trending was not felt to be within.the time frame,available for docu- mentation here. Neither were projections made-for -future air quality in the Coastal. Zozie. Future planning within newly d.ef ined. programs such as the Air Quality Maintenance Area program will identify--term projections.' 1974 Air Emission-:Inventory Table. II in Chapter III,. B shows that only 12%. of all particulates are emitted in.the St... Louis Coastal Area. (Duluth) In addition, 41%- ofall sulfur oxides, 25% of all carbon monoxide. 83% of all hydro- carbons and.25% am' all nitrogen oxides@emitted in St. Louis County are emitted in the Coa-stal Area (Duluth) . The bulk of particulate, sulfur oxide, carb@on monoxide and. nitrogen oxide emissions within St. Louis County are emitted by inland taconite processing plants. On the other hand, the bulk of hydrocarbons are emitted in Duluth, reflecting mobile and stationary source emissions. It should be noted here that emissions from Wisconsin -(Superior) and nearby Cloquet are not considered in this report, but the effect upon air quality from these additional emissions is inseparable -from the -total air quality problems. It should also be observed that the potential particulate which could be emitted in St. Louis County is 30 times greater thanthe actual .emission in St. Louis County. This fact reflects the impact of planned or.proposed taconate expansion. 1974 Air Quality Data Air quality was exceedingly good in Duluth for 1974. with only 5- air quality standards for particulate matter being exceeded. Data was taken only for total suspended particulates,:sulfur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide; however, additional assessments for,carbon monoxide and,photochemical.oxidants.,will be.made in. 1975,,since there have been indications of stan(iards-being exceeded for those two pollutants. Puture. Planning,-Strategies -From existing data,-several salient factors have surfaced relative- -to.the North,Shore,Coastal Zone: 1) particulate air,pollutants are affected by industrial processesin significant amounts zince 53% of the total particulate.air pollutants are emitted 'from such-sources; 2) it is difficult.to predict the degrde,'@to @which mining operations will.affect North Shore air quality; 3) curtailment of steel and cement operations in the region will improve air quality, but the amount that such apparent reductions will be offset.by the increaseof mining and related-operations is,,currently undeterminable. Future air quality management will have to keep inmind these considerations. The development of air quality management strategies will'include .intergovernmental coordination in addition to emission control -measures. Air quality management strategies.include air quality -standards specifically for the.Duluth city limits in addition to other limitations for specific air pollutant characteristics. 'A 1, 4. T%-L-1-hough the AQ1'*1A1 in -,1M1nnas-o.1L_-a *is still -L.-LJL the @J'ni_-'L:ial planning .stage, the*local, cou.,nty,.regional, state and federal Coastal 2on.e.Management efforts may wish to consider developmental opportunities relative to this concept. In essence, urban planning policies must begin to consider the impacts which plans and programs have o.n air quality. Noise Abatement The' most limited of current maj or Agency activities is the noise pollution abatement control program. Since 1974, the staff has concentrated on transportation-related aspects of noise controls due to.the extreme Agency resourcelimitations. In the Coastal Zone, airports, major road intersections, highways, rails, motorcycles and freight-handling trucks are major trans- portation-type sources of noise although numerous.other noise ,sources exist. State regulations are characterized by a central land management feature -- various land activity classifications grouped in .four major "noise area classification" categories. Future noise controls in the Coastal Zone require essentially.that NPC-1 and 2 standards must bemet. New developm..ents would be subject to Identical. performance requirements as existing sources of noise pollution, whInch are cat:egorized within the regulations (mentioned above) as to land use/activity types. However, non-degradati-e-n of wilderness, wildlife and other such.areas has impacts on Coastal Zone development in addition to minimum requirements; and these should be considered. 'Solmd,Naste Management The* Coastal Zane has made major.strides from, the 'old situation z:of uncontrolled open burning @dumps toward an -environmentally sound Solid Waste Manage-m-ent, Program. During'the 1-970 to 19.75 period, the region has. been in a, transition. stage from minimal activity to maxe positive actions directed toward solid wastes inventory, asseassment., demonstratilon projects and alternatives selection. Any assessmen-t of the, effect of solid waste disposal on the environment migh-t be in terms of overall program outputs such as the number of 19070 open dumps, the number closed (Figure 2 in Chapter =7L,D) ; the -.elimination of related hazards -and .nuisances (disease, odor, incineration, site destruction @ from uncontrolled avc-cess to numerous. diimps, etc.); the, number of modified landfills and sa-hitary landfill sites opened and with improved perfax-mance; recycling efforts, including the number of abandoned motor vehicles collected,and transported, the number and type of s-tudies conducted; and public awareness and manacTe- ment preferences. Solid Waste's related management strategies will continue to. eliminate disposal sites located in shoreland zones. The first ph ase of prottecting human health from disease caused by rodents and air quality degrada-tion from open burning is almost complete. A second phase is underway to continue replacement@ of numerous .scattered dumps by fewer sites, properly operated, and to introduce resource re Icovery,as a potential alternative to dis- posal. Landfill operations which have problems concerning groundwater or surface water contamination from recently required moni-toring must be improved if the water pollution potential is aonsidered -significant. . Sites will be fewer and larger landfill operations located near. current and future population concentrations, and selected operations will be eliminated or :reduced in scale due to potential future technology, legislation or environmental research.. A final phase of special wastes handli-m,.g will address hazardous wastes, sludge disposal and other such cons i derations , and their relationship to a central resource recovery site in Duluth. Land-t-Re'lated Comorehensive Environmental Management Environmental strategies in -standards and regulations are currently separated into manageable sectors of water, air and noise,. and solid waste in the MPCA.I@The Minnesota Department of Health and MPCA currently shore sta-te-,wide responsibility for the control -7-. of septic*tanks,,, and the Department of Natural Resources also has' responsibility relating to sho,rela'nd and floodplain areas management. There.is interagency coordination among federal, federal-state, -regional, and local special and general-purpose governments whIch potenti-ally impact. Coastal Zone development, resource management, And environmental protection and preser- vation, including -the National. Environmental Protection Act!' Federal Water Pollution Control Act. Amendments of 1972, Minnesota Environmental Policy Act, Coastal Zone Management Act and othe 'rs. Essentially, however, water quality @strategies call for concentrating development according to transportation patterns@. which, in turn, -allow access for development. Water,.-and sewerage.@,.., needsare integral components: here. Air quality,in 'the future has a leadership,. role, -as do circulation patterns, -water, quality strategies @and noise. Solid waste ---appears to follow development rather than,lead it in terms,of critical comprehensive resource management impacts. , Local, regional, state and federal levels of government mmas-t somehow be more effective in coordinating and implementing these strategies. Land-related elements of the Coastal Zone environment are inseparable from, air, water, solid waste and other elements in practical arnd ultimate terms. The carrying capacities of land, are likewise Insepatable . from interactions with water, air, and other densi-7ty and scale, indicators of over-saturation or over-use. - Real oestate, landscape architecture, meteorological, hydrological, urban planning, economic, academic -and professional a.-Eforts are essential to det-e--mi'n - 1--st interdi sc i linaz- e "higlie @ and best.use" of land-air-water management in addition to cur- rent engineeri-mg, legal and administrative leadership. Long- range capital Investments in addition to environmental parameters will become increasingly critical as energy, land and materials management compete with permit requirements for specific physical, ,chemical, biological case-by-case administration of air, water, noise, solid %-aste and other front-line abatement measures. specific and broad environmental policies written clearly by all Coastal Zone Management participants are essentil for comprehensive environmental management. Specific developmental planning criteria from the MEQC and State Planning Agency's Environmental Planning Section, Development Planning Division, would be desirable to provide leadership for a comprehensive .environmental resource development approach. Although guide- lines exist for initial threshold limits, refined criteria would extend initial environmental @project assessment to a compre- hensive critical area approach. An annual Environmental Quality Index would also indicate the status of attaining non-degradation of the state and @Coastal Zone environments, and appropriately identify specific critical parameters from a comprehensive approach. 'CHARTER III MPCA ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION INTHE coAsT.AL zoNE III. MPCA'ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION IN THE COASTAL ZONE WATER-RELATED ACTIVITIES Introduction The attached illustration indicates -the Coastal.Zone relative.to the -Lake, Superior Basin, including the 'three sub-basins -- Lake -Superior. St. Louis River and Nemadji -- and shows problem areas adversely -affecting water quality in the lake,. Overall water quality in the basin is excellent. Major problem areas are Duluth-Supprior Harbor, Silver Bay and the southern shore of the lake. Monitoring and study programs, including tributary sampling, near shore surveys and routine surveys, Indi-cate good water quality in the lake, slightly lower quality in the -tributaries, and lowest quality in the lower portion of the St. Louis River * Two routine monitoring stations along the North Shore (during October, 1973 to September, 1974) at the water supply plant intakes of Grand Marais and Silver Bay indicated several ammonia violations -of standards. Of 34 . param- eters monitored on the annual mid-lake sampling run composed of six stations located.along the Minnesota/Wisconsin/Michigan border in Lake Superior, no violations were found of the :State's water quality stand- ards. Under the Internatio-i-tal Joint ..Commission -study to determine constituent loads to Lake Superior from streams and ,wastewater treatment facili- ties- relative to Minnesota "'point" sources, the tributaries sampled have indicated very good quality except for the St. Louis and Nemadji Rivers. This study is discussed in the section entitled. "Tributary Sampling" and in the "Lake Superior Sub-Basin" section following. Another study in progress, the Near Shore 'Lake Superior Study, indicates @hat effects of tributary"runoff"on near shore areas in the lake are insignificant for the Gooseberry and Cascade Rivers when compared to Duluth Harbor runoff effects. This study included that the western portion of take Superior is influenced by the eutrophic Duluth Harbor, hereafter referred to as the St. Louis Bay. "The bacteriology, phyto- plankton 'and water chemical data indicate the adverse influence that the harbor outflow has on the extreme western end of Lake Superior. The effects of the harbor are reflecting higher populations of algae and zooplankton, lower secchi disc -readings, and higher levels of chlor- "a" and turbidity in Lake Superior near Duluth, compared to the ophyll 1 open lake" (from reference #3 in Bibliography) . Near shore water qual- ity, except for the-Duluth area, is close to the very high quality of the open waters of Lake Superior, as indicated by the phytoplankton, zooplankton, bacteriological, benthic and -water chemical data. An EPA and NASA study by M. Sydor, "'Turbidity in Extreme Western Lake Superior" using Earth Research Telecommunications Satellite (ERTS) infrared photographs during 1972 to 1974, examined wind, erosion and harbor activities. shore erosion is noted to be a relatively uniform .source of turbidity, such -as red clay; -however, "the effect of the harbor effluents on people and [email protected] is not known." The author urges that a full analysis of ship_pkn@g activities', open-lake dredged spoils dumping and other pertinent .,activities I impacts on water qual- ity in the.western part of Lake Sxkperior.be taken. -In, the summer of 1975, the MPCA Regional Representative, John Pegors, emphasized the process of "turbid-ity" -in the Duluth-Superior area due 'to the--,lake's current patterns, shore and winds' characteristics, eddy structure and 11-inch elevation of -'i'Lthe lake level by artificial con- trols. Since public water intakes are -,conc.erned,@ the physical, chem- ical and biological aspects must be -analyzed at some point to determine. existing or potential hazards concerned. Individual sewage disposal systems, principally septic tanks and drain- fields. are,;..a wide spread non-poirit source of water quality degradation along the en tire North Shore of Lal,-e Superior. Proper installations'. operation and maintenance are essenratial if these systems are to be used for domestic sewage disposal purposies -- especially. beyond municipal boundaries on clay or rock ledges and with current water use 'patterns. Reduced water consumption and dry waste systems are potential remedies. Surveys currently underway in St. ljouis County and Lake and Cook Coun- ties (see "Primary study area" in F-igure 1) are scheduled to be inven- toried for problems next. Satisfactory performance alternatives,, soil analysis and legislative approprialtions :.are key factors necessary for a successful program to improve wa@- r quality. Water quality problems at Thunde@ Bay include low dissolved oxygen, taste and 'odor in f ish, and high lavells of colif orms, accor -14 Cr_ to-. the International Joint Commission's 1974 information report (see reference .#6 in.Bibliography in Appendix). T-he.Minnesota,portion of Lake Supe- rior is affected by the lake's ne-t counterclockwise circulation pat- tern; and water quality- impacts from paper-related processes and domes- tic sewage wastes may be having 1mpacts on Cook, Lake-and St. Louis Counties' water. Dredging operations in Two Harbors... as.,well as the Duluth-Superior Bay, is one type of future development -Y.4.hich will have impacts on water quality in the Coastal Zone. Deposition o.fbottom dredged spoils, if returned to the lake or if not py-operly performed, could have adverse effects. In addition, dredging 1n, Silver Bay and proposed dredging in Grand Marais might affect near shore water quality along the North Shore similar to Two Harbors and Duluth Harbor dredging activities. Another type offuture development, copper and nickel and activities assoc. iated with copper and nickel develapment@in the region, could conceivably have some of the most serious wat@er quality related impacts ever known to the Coastal Zone. Precise si.tes, activities and specific problems are currently unknown; but the quality of the water and the other aspects of the Coastal. Zone envira=ent might be compromised in the future. Tributary Sampling sampling is now completed*for the luake .'Superior Tributary project; and most data is now stored in a fina-1,.,corrected form in the STORET com- puter system. Final report. prepametion is underway towards a December, CANA.DA Thunder Bay COOK U.S. (Paper ,Mills) FIGURE 1. LAKE SUPERIOR BASIN IE A COUNTY LOCATION MAP b o L A KC GRAND PORY46E C 0 UN TY ST. LOUIS c cl 0 COUNTY rn MARAIS LAKE SUPERIOR 0 BAS cV SUB I N ST. LOUIS RIVER C, SUB-BASIN 10 0 J to o 0 L A K E TACONITE HARBOR SUPERIOR lp CO IS 10@ -P 4L, Is MINNESOTA 0 -Water Ouality SILVER BAY WISCONSIN L e ge n d Reserve Mining Coastal Zone Primary Company Study Area (Septic Tank Problems) JK COASTAL ZONE PRIMARY STUDY AREA 7-1 TWO HARBORS, SUB-BASINS 7-7-77-7 (SEPTIC TANK PROBLEMS) S1. LOUIS ZF WLSSD 'D, eVle!6\ <cl V'@ DU TH B;n I C C7 elk e Cloq et o Sludge *Superior _.Deposits 0 5 10 20 CARLTON COUNTY SCALE OF MILES N.EMADJI RIVER SUB-BASIN MINN. POLLUTION CONT ROL AGENCY LOCATION .MAP DIV. OF WATER QUALI TY S E P T ., 1975 1-975- completion date. 'This work is relative to the IJC program in the'-Lake' Superior Baskin. The, appendix of this report includes detailed information on this aontract, and the following 17 streams in the Lake Superior Basin were included: .1. Baptism Rkiver 10. Manitou River 2. Beaver River 11.1 Nemadji River 3. Brule RIver 12. Pigeon River 4 Cascade.River 13. Poplar River 5: cross -Rx-ver 14. Lower.St. Louis 6. French River River/Bay 7. Gooseberz@y, River -15. Split Rock River, 8. Knife RIver 16- Sucker River 9. Lester -RIver -.17. Temperance River With some exceptions, overall..water iquality of Minnesota's North Shore, tributaries is very good. Chemical and physical quality is excellent, but bacteriological pr ob-lems exist. Specifically, most streams con- sistently violate the stringent 10 MPN/100 ml fecal coliform standard that applies. to all tributaries except the St. Louis River, which has a 200 MPN/100 ml standard. Pheno.1 values for the St. Louis River- are .,O.l mg/l, and this was 'violated approximately 50-% of the time. Most -iron and manganese valuies exceed State standards. The -St. Louis River exhibits the poorest water quality of the 17-sampled streams, with extended low dissolved oxygen periods -and frequent copper, oil and grease, and phenol violations. @The Western Lake Superior, Sanita-ry District (WLSSD)-is implementing a regional wastewater collection and treatment,system which will provide secondary treatment and phosphorus -removal at a central location for effluent from major Industries and municipalities in the Duluth area. This plant is scheduled to be. completed in 1977. Lake Superior Sub-Basku The major source of water quality degradation, in the Silver Bay area is the continuous discharge of taconite tailings from Reserve Mining Company's plant. Many years are required to discover the full impacts and to flush the majority of asbestos-li%e fibers from. the lake. The Agency and its associate plaintiffs have engaged in court proceedings and out-of -court negotiations@ for @nearly a decade. Reserve was ordered on March 14, 1975 by the U.S. Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals to reach agreement with the State of Minnesota within a reasonable time on an appropriate disposal site for on-'land disposal. An environmental impact statement concerning' the "Mile Post 7" site is being prepared prior.to further action. -Some estimate. a 2 to 5 year period before implementation occurs. EPA has the option to initiate further legal action if it determines that satisfactory progress is not being made. Another source of water pollution in the Lake Superior Sub-Basin is four wastewater treatment plants wh-ich have been discharging directly to Lake Superior -- S:L.Iver Bay, Two Harbors, Taconite Harbor and Grand Marais -- which were nagularly sampled during the tributary sampling project.. All plants except Taconite Harbor were in the process of upgrading their treatment processes. Taconite Harbor's existing pri- -12- mary plant' is. slated to be replaced by a soil absorption field. Sewage disposal to interstate waters requires a minimum of secondary treatment and must meet the following effluent requirements: 5-day BOD 25m /I Fecal Coliforms 10 MPN/10O ml Total Suspended Solids 3 mg/l Oil Essentially free of visible oil pH 6.5 - 8.5 Turbidity 5 JTU Unspecified Toxic or None at levels acutely toxic Corrosive Substances to humans or others or ani- mals or plant life, or directly damaging to real property In addition, dischargers in the Lake Basin must achieve a limitation of 1 mg/l totalphosphorus. At the Two Harbors Wastewater Treatment Plant, BOD, phosphorus and -oil exceed the above stanadards most of the time. Fifty-percent of the samples exceed suspended Solids requirement. At the Silver Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant, all oil and., phosphorus and most BOD results were in -violation of the above standards. There were scattered suspended solids infractions. At the Grand Marais Wastewater Treatment Plant, phosphorus, oil and BOD were consistently in, violation of the above standards. The majority of the sample for turbidity and 50% of suspended solids results were in violation. At the Taconite Harbor Wastewater Treatment Plant, most phosphorus were in violation of the above standards. and BOD results At the time of this report, the three plants -- Two Harbors, Silver Bay and Grand Marais -- had completed construction and were near operati Ional status. improvement influent quality should soon be achieved. Specifics of the study, `Sampling and Analysis of Minnesota Tributar- ies and Municipal Dischargers to.Lake Superior to Determine Constitu ent Loadings," relative to contract provisions, costs, parameters and effluent loadings estimated and monitored during the contract period are available. All data are considered by EPA as prelimi nary until after their review and approval after December 31, 1975. St. Louis River Sub-Basin e up In the St. Louis River Sub-Basin, the upper and lower reaches of the stream vary considerably in water quality. The Department of Natural Resources has classified the upper portion of the St. Louis River as a state-designated wild river. MPCA data indicate some fecal coli- form problems in localized areas, but not in a significant amount. -13- The lower reaches of the St. Louis River are impacted by the discharge of municipal, industrial and natural background sources. Periodical violations include excessive BODs concentrations and high fecal coliform bacterial. counts. Major contributors are Conwed Corporation-and Pot- latch Forest, Inc. in Cloquet, Minnesota Power and, Light Company U.S. Steel, Superwood, four Duluth 'sewage treatment plants, harbor traffic and Superior wastewater treatment plants. Conwed, Potlatch and Minne- sota Power.and Light Company currently discharge wastewater to the Lower St. Louis River. U.S Steel, Superwood, -four Duluth sewage. treat-, ment plants and harbor traffic (Including vessel-sewage, bilge.waste- .water, ballast wastewater and cargo spillage) affect the St. Louis'Bay. By mid-1977, nine sewage treatment plants in the.Cloquet and Duluth areas are scheduled to be phased out; and municipal and industrial dis- chargers will be diverted to -the Western Lake Superior Sanitary Dis- trict's new plant, which will provide secondary level treatment with phosphorus reduction, and the effluent discharge will go to the St. Louis Bay. The regional facility will be separate from that in Supe- rior, but effluent points will be essentially removed from the St. Louis River on the Minnesota side. Historical accumulations of wastes settling to the bottom of the river, bay and harbor reaches will. continue to limit the water quality attain- able. Such. extensive. sludge deposits are projected to require oxygen uptake for years, and dissolved -oxygen in the river is. a problem and normally borders on noncompliance during summer low-flow periods even with essentially zero discharge of pollutants upstream from the SLSSD discharge point. (The bay's problem, however, is during the winter.) Near-shore Duluth-Superior water quality is degraded by high coliforms, phosphorus, suspended solids and turbidity. Harbor dredging and ship- ping wastes discharge at irregular intervals, and varying rates impact water quality in the shipping channel. The MPCA in September, 1975 was denied a request by the EPA Administrator to petition for prohibi- tion of discharges from vessel wastes, but alternative abatement options are being studied. Increased surveillance of these activities and non- point sources' contributions are required to better define and control water quality effects on Lake Superior. A similar scale of impact, although not as land-oriented as copper-nickel mining operations, is the proposed significant increase of refined petroleum products trans- portation from the Duluth-Superior Bay through the major part of Lake Superior. Additional dredging operations to expand the channel, harbor Alterations, increased bilge and sewage disposal problems associated with the additional scale of shipping activities and hazards directly related to spilage of oil would appear to be some of the more serious water quality related aspects of such operations. Nemadji River Sub-Basis The Nemadji River Sub-Basin in Minnesota contains no "point" sources known to the MPCA currently. Turbidity in the Duluth-Superior Bay is impacted by sedimentation caused by the bluffs area along the southern shore of the lake. Tributaries flowing through the red clay deposits possibly contribute suspended solids problems in protions of north and south shores at the western end of the lake. The Nemadji itself is -14- characterized by relatively poo:r @water 'when compared to trout streams prevalent along' the North Sh(ord- Potential "non-Point". source pol lution appears most, probable due to soils., topography and land -uses, includin .g. agriculture and construction-related activities. Potential impacts of animal wastes and nutrient fertilizers, may be a cause of the fecal coliform, blochemical oxygen demand .(BOD5) and. ,nutrient levels in the streams. Future Plans fo27 Sanitary Districts, .Individual Sewage Disposal -Systems and 'Other Activities Current Regiona 1/Are a -wide Wastewater 7reatment .,StratSgies and sinitary_Districts IllustratiQ4,.,,of. the- Lake S uperior. 'Basin I's "Municipal Wastewater Disposal Facilities, 1974" (see @Figur6-.1-a) indicates the level of treatment given, the location of publicly-owned (municipal and township) f acilities and whether, or 'not I sanitary collection systems have had a discharge or no treatment as of July 1, 1974. This map does not show areas without collector sewers, areas with septic systems, verified no-discharges from sewer systems or sanitary discharges to separate storm sewers.; nor. does it indicate separate or combined sanitary and storm sewers. Industries and other non- ?ublicly-owned dischargers not d1scharging,to such systems are not indicated. The map also indicates -,current areas. considered as Itappropriate planning areas" fa-r facilities planning purposes. Since facilities planning requirements are a complicated matter and a 4.- series of planning strategies a-re involved, a summary explana@_ion is presented here. Due -to -current, federal and state 'legislation, which limits the available levels of staff and funds for construction grant projects, which assumes.a certain level of technology, including environmental assess- -ment and engineering practices.. current .strategies are focused toward, permitting major dischargers, funding eligible portions of publicly- owned construction projects with Appropriately- documented needs, and using environmentally, economic ally, socially and politically acceptable methods to attain water pollution abatement levels. "Regional-ism," or multi- j urisdl ctional cost-effectiveness, is one of the alternatives presently considered as high priority in reviewing such projects at the point of a grant application to :expand or modify a treatment system,, generation of a permit for a disposal system or a NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) permit, and during review of reports indicating inadequate ..system performance due to design, -operation or maintenance modi- fications if current growth and development indicate significant future requirements or a combinatlon -of cumulative evidence indicates a need to require such considera7t1ons As a map illustrates, app ropriate _p1anning areas indicate the Agency's current regional strategies, especially concerning the following .projects over the next 20 years (1975-1995) for multi-jurisdictional projects: the WLSSD (Western Lake ,Superior Sanitary District), Eveleth-Leonidas-Fayal Townshilo,- Hibbing-Stuntz ITownship (includes Ke'lly Lake and'two plants,:in Hibblng)', Mountain Iron (includes recently annexed Nichols Township, except Lleonidas) and Buhl-Kinney. Other areas which include ext'raterrito-mial aspects beyond single political jurisdictions consist of Babbit, Hoyt Lakes, Biwabik, Irin Junction, Meadowlands, Floodwood and Silver Bay. VNV,R6^NfZEJD TERRITORY OF WEST@COOX UNOAO^NiZE0 TERRITORY OF CAST COOK 4` Grand Marris 151 CR49;AL SAY Silver Bay Beaver Buy FIGURE I- a MONICIPAL! WASTEWATER- DISPOSAL FACILITIES 1974 @,EWER SYSTEM, NO TREATMENT SEWER' SYSTEM, PRIMARY TREATMENT SEWER SYSTEM, SECONDARY TREATMENT 4 SEWER SYSTEM, TERTIARY TREATMENT 5 SEWER SYSTEM, NODISCHARGE MAP LIMITED TO CITY AND TOWNSHIP DISPOSAL FACILITIES -Wastewater Treatment Facilities Plannini;; Areas Regional System) SCALE 30 MILES 10 0 10 20 -K PORTAGC LVDtNG Orr, UNORGANIZED TERRITORY I LAKE M. OF "Ootr"FAST ST. LOUIS BEATTY Winton FALL LAKE WILLOW VALLEY MORSE LINDEN FIELD ock GROVE BRIVITUNG OWENS All Tower SrURGEON ALANGO ANGORA MIT. KUOLER UNORGANIZED TERRITORY LA.. or BIRCH. LAKE UNORGANIZED TERRITORY OF WEST LAKE UNORGANIZED TERRITORY A@ OF SAND.LAKE SANDY PIKE WAAS Babbitt 0", UNORGANIZEgf SCAVEr TERRITORY GREAT Tl_.-R,'@`ORI 3 SAL.AN OF A34 Hoyt SCOTT WOURI 'c Pi,,,;il,ik Aurora Lakes Kin tRin '4 Lakes Iron 4 r 3 ' 11 -Y t61@, 6 @ I LISSAW Chi@holm 3 'ar vill, li-,,@ I; "toU 'I @.T@. WHITE BASSETT 4A Ifibbin i CL:NTO C*4tRRY n J,rA@A Ir nctio STUNTZ U14ORGANTZEO rEn"TORY OF !ARC OAVITT VIM FAIRBANKS HEIKKILA L^IIE COL SILVER CREEK LAVELL CLLSSURG UNORGANIZED AULT TERRITORY Or.WHITEFACE RESERVOIR A TOIVOLA KELSEY corrON ZEDA ALDEN ..LLEN fl*,If@ado Mands 1-0 ELMER @-Eb EkDov@ PAYNE LAI.IDS GNESEN HORMANNA Two Harbor@ 1VAm BUREN S Al-SORN GAAND DULUTH LAKE -3* dop CULVER INDUSTRIAL CANOSIA MICEILAKC L"AK 0 Brooksmn '010@ W. 'LAXE: L@;KES BROOK BREVATOR SOLWAY Dulut j@_-IXRLTON CO. FALLS UNORGANIZED TERRITORY Cromw 11 \OF NORTH CARLTON ColqUet _anl@n =e @@Lnn T1_ Carlton right Wrenaball 1-r_-FW vw,. ATKIN@Om LAKES FIR SILVER OOK MAHTOVVA @IAKFCO. AL.N.O N.Z, T @.-GA Two VH.,bom 4=704484 @tKALCVALA SKELTON 0LACKRC"PjWRENSHALL (Barnum T_ kARNUM -T_@T pmcK SILVER 'Aov -16- Individua 1 Sewage Disposal' Systems The MPCA is currently drafting regulations dealing with the design, const.ruction,installation, operation and.maintenance of conventional septic tank and alte., rnat-ive systems. A Citizen's Advisory Committee of Approximately.40 persons, including two from the,Arrowhead region, was organized in April, 1975 and has been working with the Division of Water Quality staff in developing these regulations, which stress local administration and enforcement., It is,estimated that a final set of draft regulations will be-available by January-1, 1976 and that the reg- ulations will be in effect..before the.1976 construction season. The A4ency:is also-attempting,@a:gain with the a-idof the Citizens Advi- sory Committee, to develop a-,state-wide program of tr.aining.and certi- fication of@people in the industry pumpersand.-manufac- ,turers of individual,systems. Also being considered is a training and certification program for local inspectors, zoning administrators And sanitarians. Both training programs would be in conjunction with the University of Minnesota'-s Agriculture-1 Extension Service. However, both programs require legislative authorization; and it is not possible to estimate when such programs would become effective. Funds have been authorized by the Legislature for the purpose .of con- ducting research in the areas.of experimental systems'and.disposal of sewage. Contracts will be awarded, and work will begin,next summer. Finally, a survey is presently being conducted along the North Shore 01- I.Jaille Super-Lor It-he St. Loais Clounlt-_y Healt-.11-J. 11Japart-ment- witC.11. funds from the S 'tate.Planning.Agency and cooperation from.Lake.and Cook County officials. The survey will attempt to correlate septic tank problems and well contamination for establishments in a.5-mile strip. along the shore. The MPCA is monitoring the progress of this survey And providing technical input if needed. Thus,- the MPCA is involved in drafting regulations, developing training and certification programs for industry and inspectors, and administer- ing research funds. A survey of individual sewage'systems and wells along the North Shore is,underway, with the results expected to yield valuable planning information. Vessel Wastes and Marine Sanitation,.Devices Under present state regulations (Minnesota Statutes .1971, Chapter 861, and 1969, Section'361.29), all watercraft must be equipped with "no- discharge" toilets after December 31, 1975. At the same time, however, in newly developed EPA and Coast Guard regulations (public Law 92-500, EPA part 140 and Coast Guard part 149), flow-through treatment devices would be allowed. Such federal regulations are designed to preempt state enforcement of state statutes from the time of installation of flow-through device. Although federal regulations will eventually. become "no-discharge" types of regulations, there will be considerable delayin reaching that goal, aswell as exceedingly liberal periods of time during which such devices may.be installed and,"grandfathered-in" for as long as the device remains operable. _17- Federal regulations allow a state to petition the Administrator of the EPA to prohibit the use.of flow-through treatment devices on "any or all" waters of.the state. On March 3, 1975., Minnesota applied for.such -a prohibition on Lake Superior.. On September 2, the application was-denied. The Agency is presently.looking at a number of option:s@to force the federal.government to declare Lake Superiofr(and other waters) as "no-discharge" areas, including appealing.the 'recent ruling, reapplying under other.sections of the law or perhaps challenging "theconcept of preemption of state statutes. In the meantime, however, it would appear that 'federal law.applie.s. Water Qudlity and Related Development.Strategies Water quality related management strategies direct new large-scale development, such as industrial.processing operations requiring heavy water consumption, to planne .d.urban areas and multi-jurisdictional, regional-type wastewater treatment management areas. Since urban- type services are considered important, an appropriate level, of services appears.essential to such developments. Scattered and "sprawl" patterns of development are neithe r efficient to manage nor environmentally sound from a water resource management stand-, point. Therefore, constructioln.of new heavy'industry, suchas power plants, ore benefication plants, steel mills, foundries, pulp and paper mills, and:associated facilities, should.be directed to sites within:existing urban centers.,such as the Duluth-Super .io.r region.. Perma:t:ti,ng 'requirements.regarding,.performance standards for new wastewater discharge sources will be applied to such new developments, and non-degradation of the water quality will be directed toward further improvement of Lake Superior and the numerous trout streams along its North Shore Smaller-scale developments, such as recreation and tourism and light industrial activities, should have similar treatment like largerurb an centers, but.on a smaller scale than Duluth. AIR QUALITY RELATED ACTIVITIES, Introduction .Although the 1974 data is discussed below, the 1970 to 1975 period for Duluth has indicated major improvements in air quality due to the elimination or reduction of pollution sources. Some industries left. Minnesota Power and Light Company switched from coal to fuel oil. U S.,Steel has greatly reduced operations, and its coke operations are scheduled to cease, by 1977. Open burning from old dumps, has..almost completely stopped. The intent of this section is to present a brief Air Quality Assess- ment for the area in Minnesota immediately adjacent to Lake Superior. This assessment includes activities within Cook, Lake and St. Louis Counties. The assessment does no.t.include inland activities such as the inland impact upon the Coastal Area (such as Reserve mining, Taconite Harbor, Two Harbors.taconite loading, etc.). The 'Air Quality Assessment considers only t he 1974 emission inventory and air quality data. No.attempt to look at multi- year data was made,;- trending was not felt to be within the time frame available for. documentation he-r-e.* 'Neither were projections made for future air quality in the Coastal Zone. Future planning within newly defined programs such. as the Air.Quality Maintenance -Area Program will identify term projections. 1974 Emission Inventory The Minnesota Air Quality Emission lnventoryawa s.reviewed to extract emission information for.Cook, Lake and St. Louis Counties. The .emission inventory.gives annual concentrations of total suspended particulates, z.-Ulfur oxides, carbon monpXide, hydrocarbons, nitrogen oxides, and potential total suspended particulates for stationary (versus mobile) sources. Table 1 gives the total county emissions for the above-named pollutants. The emission inventory generally considers only those sources of emission, in excess of 100 tons per year, so there is the possibility that small emission sources are not -tabulated. .,A reflection of the Coastal Area emissions is @given in Table II. Note that all major emissions for. each pollutant in Lake County are emitted in the Coastal Area. This information merely reflects the magnitude of the taconite processing operation at Silver Bay. Table II shows that only,12% of all particulates are emitted in the St. Louis Coastal Area (Duluth) . In addition, 41% of all sulfur oxides, 25% of all carbon. monoxide, 83% of all h Iv drocarbons and 25% of all.nitrogen oxides emitted in St. Louis County are emitted in the Coastal Area (Duluth) . The 'bulk of particulate, sulfur oxide, carbon monoxide and nitrogen oxide emissions within St. Louis County are emitted by inland taconibe processing plants. On the other hand, the bulk of hydrocarbons are temitted in Duluth, reflecting mobile and stationary source,emissions. TABLE I TOTAL EMISSIONS Actual Particulate sox Co HC NOx Potential County Tons/Year Tons/Yr. Tons/Yr. Tons/Yr. Tons/Yr. Particulate Cook 4,934 20,542 273 82 4,914 --- Lake 23,997 1, 7"0 179 88 2,208 30,247 St. Louis 38,113 @17,986 .3, 69 6 2,542 8,579 1,293,593 _19- TABLE Il COASTAL AREA EMISSIONS Actual Particulate so CO HC NOX. Potential ns/Yr. Tons/-Yr. Tons'/Yr.- i@articulate rniinf Tnng/YpAr Tnn., cook 4,934 20,542 273 82 4,9114 --- Lake 23,997 1,780 179 88 2,208 30,247 St. Louis 44,405 7,304 940 2,137 2,184 88,744 It should benoted here that.emissions from Wisconsin (Superior) and nearby Cloquet are not considered in this report, but the effect upon air quality from these additional emissions is inseparable from the total.air quality problems. It should also be observed that the potential particulate which could be emitted in St. Louis County is 30 times greater than the actual -emission in St. Louis County. This fact reflects the impact of planned or proposed taconite expansion. 1974 Air Quality,Data Air quality data taken for 1974 in the Coastal Zone exists only for Duluth proper (Superior data available from the State of Wisconsin). No data was taken by the state in the Coastal Zone for Cook or Lake Counties. Air quality was exceedingly good in Duluth for 1974j with.only air quality standards for particulate matter being exceeded. Data was taken only for total suspended particulates, sulfur dioxide and nitro- gen dioxide; however, additional.assessments for carbon monoxide and Photochemical oxidants will be made in 1975 since there have been indications of@standards being exceeded for those two pollutants. Table III gives 1974 air quality data for Duluth air monitoring sites. "Secondary"" total suspended particulate standards were exceeded at several locations. Although standards were exceeded, many locations throughout the state and nation had.secondary standards exceeded. "Secondary" refers to standards designed to protect vegetation, fish, wildlife, esthetics, etc. as opposed to "Primary" standards, which are directed to protect human health. -20- TABLE I I I ST. LOUIS COUNTY (DULUTH)@AIR.QUALITY DATA Particulate - Micrograms S02 -.parts N02 Parts. per Cubic Meter per million 1 on per mill State Annual 2nd High Annual 2nd High Annual Site No. Geom. Mean 24-hour Mean 24-haur '14ean 7501 44.8 185** _005 7502 34.6 156** ---- ----- 75-03 6 7 1.* 2,29** .007 .025 .025 7504 60. B* 195** .008 .032 .028 7505 51.1 152** 7506 17.2 67 ---- ---- 7512 48.3 163** ---- 7521. 55.4 230**.. ---- ---- Exceeds secondary annual standard of 60 micrograms per cubic meter Exceeds secondary 24-hour standard of 150 micrograms per cubic meter Future Planning-Strategies From existing data, several salent factors have.surfaced relative to the North Shore Coastal Zone: 1) particulate air pollutants are affected by industrial processes in significant amounts since 53% of the total particulate,air pollutants are emitted from such sources; 2) it is difficult to predict,the degree to which mining operations will affect North Shore air quality; 3).curtailment of steel and cement ..operations in the region will improve--air quality, but the amount that such apparent reductions-will [email protected] by the increase of mining and related operations is currently undeterminable. Future air quality management will have to keep in.mind these considerations. The development of air quality management strategies will include inter- ..governmental coordination in addition to the following emission control measures: stack height regulations! control of fugitive dust sources, improved-energy conservation,,revised "SIP'" control measures, fuel conversion, special operating conditions, combination of emission sources,, new source performance ..standards.. and phase-out or prohibition of emission sources. Local and regional area-wide land management strategip-s will include.l.the environmental assessment "SIP" means.the annual.,-State Implementation Plan. -21- ('environmerital impact statement project evaluation) process, "Indirect Source" review and,control.,-zoning and subdivision appliqation reviews, transportation controls, emission allocation procedures, emission density zoning, emission charges and transfer of emission. source location. Air quality-management strategies include air quality standards specifically for the.Duluth _city limits in addition to other limitations,for-specific air pollutant characteristics. The non- :[email protected];trate.gies.a,r-e incorporated within the-Air-Quality, Maintenance Area'I-s (AQMA's) designated Duluth boundariestor particulates. Due-to the unique meteorological conditions.in the. port area of Duluth and Superior, which share the same "air envelope";- since @Superior, ,Wis@consin@,,is,@not currently des.ignated.,,a-s:,,an AQMA; be-cause avai-,Iable methods of -calculating future air, quality,in refined terms for the buluth-Superior area are desirable but possibly invalid; since appropriate meteorologist inputs are a current problem; and because AQMA.process is in its initial planning stages, it is. not appropriate at thistime to spec,ilate,on the.specific,Duluth-. Superior metropolitan air quality non-degradation.policy. Although-the AQMA in Minnesota is still in the initial planning stage, theJocal, county, regional,state and federal,c6astal Zone Management efforts may wish to.consider developmental opportunities relative to this concept. In essence, urban planning policies must begin to consider the impacts which.plans and programs have on air quality. "A Guide for Reducing Air Pollution through Urban 4 PlarnLng"** exempli,fie-s th-is opportunity. "Because federal ambient air standards apply to all public areas of all cities, the practice of segregating.polluting industries may.have, to end. The clustering of dirty industries might spare cleaner land uses from industrial smoke, dust, fumes-and odors; but clustering can over-tax the ability of. one neighborhood's atmosphereto.dilute pollutants. Land use based control strategies in the future could be influenced by emission density zoning procedures.. "This regulatory measure assigns specific maximum allowable areal emission rates to different classes of current or potential land use."*** "'Indirect Source" means major (intermittent stationary and/or mobile air pollutant) emittors such as airports, parking lots, shop ping centers, sports arenas, recreationalareas, etc. "A Guide for Reducing Air Pollution through Urban Planning," Alan M. Vorhees & Assoc., Inc., McLean, Virginia; and Ryckman, Edgerley, Tomlinson.& Assoc., St. Louis, Missouri; Environmental Protection Agency contract, Research Triangle Park, No. Carolina, October 1973. "The Effect of Air Pollution Control Regulations on Land Use Planning, John J. Roberts, Edward J. Croke and Samuel Booras, Journal of the Air Pollution Control Assoc., Vol. 25, No. 5, p. 507, May 1975. Sources for all Air Quality section information ate from the MPCA., Di,@7ision of Air Quality, Technical Services Section, September and October 1975. -22- The permit system @(new source and indirect source) combined with the above policies could give the Agency a*more effective means of dealing .with:. am.. bient air pollution in relation to both existing and future. development in.the North Shore Coastal Zone... NOISE-RELATED ACTIVITIES one position is currently designated in the Agency to develop and admin- @is'ter state laws concerning noise pollution abatement throughout Minne- sota. Since 1974, the @staff has concentrated on transportation-related aspects of noisia controls due to the extreme Agency resource limitations. In the Coastal.Zone of Lake Superior,'such activities as airport, high- way, rail, shipping, mining, industrial -and recreational oriented noise sources appear to be major problem areas. The Duluth airport's mili- tary training activities, including low-level flights i and potential expansion of existing operations among European and interstate flights are some of the more important flight-related considerations. High- ways, both existinagand a pro posed freeway corridor through Duluth, other major thoroughfares and major congested intersection areas repre- sent surface vehicular traffic noise generators. Mining-related aspects include varying types of noise and structural damage problems, associated. with blasting,, which is not currently controlled by any stateagency. Recreational sources include boats and snowmobiles. Freight-handling activities associated with rails, shipping, -elevators -.and -ship horns are other sources of noise.. .'Industrial processes separate from, and combined with, freight-handling trucks, elevators, ships and rails are still other noise sources.. The nature of noise (in the regulations) is characterized by numero .us aspects: natural and manmade; day/night; various land activity classi- fications grouped in four major ".noise area classification" categories; decibel levels, including continuous (non-impulsive) or impulsive noise (single or multiple peaks) ; 10% per hour level of sound exceeded as measured by Agency Director approved test procedures (compared to rele- vant outdoor background comparison reference sound levels). Other .-qualifications are- included such as the August 25, 1975 motor..vehicle noise limit requirements; but staff and related resource appropriations for existing state agencies and inappropriate local requirements or enforcement seem to be the major noise pollution control program obsta- cles currently. Perhaps public officials are unaware of the potential benefits of noise regulations. A iTinneapolis Tribune article on Monday, September 16, 1974, "Area Residents 'Prefer Suburban, Country Homes," indicates that a sampling of 604 -persons throughout a 5-county area placed "a quiet neighborhood" at the top in.response to the question, "Which two or three of these co-nditions are most important to you when it comes to where you live?" For men, 34% wanted "a quiet neighborhood" first of 17 preferences -- ahead of "good schools," "being close to work," ."pri- vacy" and "a crime-free environment.". In the 65-and-over categoryt Senior Citizens also placed the preference for 11a.quiet neighborhood" -23- ,ahead of ."good bus service"by 41% and 32% responses, respectively. Similarly, for those earning less.than $5,000, the response of 49.% cited quiet neighborhoods at the top of the list.. Future noise controls@in the Coastal Zone require essentially that NPC-l-,and 2 standards must be met. New developments would be. subject to identical performance requirements as existing sources of noisepol- -lution, which are categorized within the.regulations (mentioned above) as to land use/activity types. However non-degrada.tion of wilderness,@ wildlife and other such areas has impacts on-Coastal Zone development,, .in addition to minimum requirements; and these-should be considered. SOLID @WASTE RELATED -_,ACTIVITIE S Progress has been made in.the past five years to improve solid waste management in the Coastal Zone by cooperation between the MPCA and county governments concerned. . As. the illustrations show (see Figure 2) phasing out the old open dumps and replacing them with permitted land- fills -- either full sanitary landfills or modified landfills requiring less frequent covering oFth-e refuse -- has led the Coastal Zone towards 'an improved quality of the 'North Shore. It has been unofficially estimated that between 50-75 open dumps existed between the Duluth area and Grand Portage in the Minnesota North Shore area.in 1970; and since that time, of the total of '35 known dumps that have been identified in the Coastal Zone area, 11 are pre- sumed still open, 18 are closed and verified, two are proposed landfill sites, and four have-been upgraded to permitted sanitary,landfills. All 35 are within the Coastal Zone "primary planning area" (five miles inland) from the Duluth area to Grand Portage. The Western Lake Supe- .rior Sanitary District solid waste management system includes two sani- ta'ry landfill sites in the Carlton County portion and one in .the Duluth (St. Louis County) area; one additional sanitary landfill exists in Lake County, while Cook County still .does not have a permitted sanitary landfill. Cook has three dumps verified as closed, with four still pre- sumed open. Six dumps are presumed open for Lake County, which has five others verifiedas closed. Ten of the 18 total dumps verified as closed in the Coastal Zone are within the WLSSD area. In addition, four disposal sites within the Coastal Zone Primary Study Area (within five miles of the shoreline) are currently anticipated to be developed dur- ing the next two years: WLSSD-Duluth Solid Waste Processing.Facility and Western Demolition Landfill areas in St. Loui.s County, and Maple Hill and Tofte Sanitary Landfill sites in Cook County. Advantages to the North Shore- region from the landfill permit program are: consolidating solid wastes,to limited, confined areas; better. identification of the nature, scale and@characteristics of such wastes; control of access to the sites to allow regulation of which waste mate- rials are deposited there; monitoring-of operations and potential leachates to prevent water quality d-egradation; elimination of open burning among otherwise numerous, scattered sites, thus protecting air quality; minimized (insect, rodent and @other animal) disease.7. spreading activities; and improved esthetics per visual and odor characteristics. Economic problems of sanitary- landf ills caused by distant locations,. .0 6 CANADA - -'!'- . Thunder Boy (Pope@r .,!;Ils) FIGURE 2. LAKE SUPERIOR 'BASIN- cook U. S. %e couNryl LOCATION MAP Cal GRAND L A K 9- j PORTPPE L couNry _V sr. L ouls 0 COU/V r y 00 30 0 GRAND MARAIS 0 0 0*. .0 0 0 0 LAKE SUPERIO R. 0 0 0 0 SUB - BA! 3 m SIT. LOUIS RIVER 0 SUB-BASIN 0 000 L A K E 0 00 00 A0 A0 10 0 1.. TACONITE HARBOR 0 SUPERIOR 0 0 4 0 4b ;)o 0 MINNESOTA 0 '01-- 13 <., SILVER BAY WISCONS1,14 L.e g e ri d i 03 0 Reserve Mining Coastal Zore Primary Company Stu.dy..Arao (Seolic Tahk Problem S) WLSSD COASTAL ZONE PRIMARY f, STUDY AREA - - - -BASINS o7 TWO HARIJIORS SUB (SEPTIC TANK PROBLEMS) 0 al. LOUIs WLSSD eol 0 as 0 6 0 C3 OU TH Benihic- C-190 "le 0 0 Cloq e 0 Sludge 00 uperior Sol i d W a s t e Deposits L e g e n d 0 5 to SCALE OF MILES o Presumed cpen NEMADJI RIVER A Closed, not verified 0 ---'SUB-13ASIN X Proposed s,initary landfill sites 046 MINN. POLLUTION Existing sanitary landfill CONTROL AGENCY si tes 0 66 -ified LOCATION MAP. DIV. Of: WA'TER QUALITY a Closed, ver qF PT . ICITF) -25, low-density populations, the greatly increased cost of a sanitary 1 andf i'11 in cc-mmarison to an open dump, and high tourist uses during winter and 'sumuner peak seasons -are being scrutinized mow. The Western Lake superior Sani.tary,District, w hich directs regional metropolitan wastewater and solid waste management in the Cloquet.- Duluth sarea (similar to the. Twmin Cities Metro Waste Control Commission) , has @been concerned with adequate @energy sources' availability for drying solid waste sludge @,produced .-as .,a result of @current wastewater treatment techniques. The current 'energy shortage has !emphasized *this concern. Feasibility studies have indicated the probability of a.combination of using solid waste as fuel to.. incinerate the sludge with resources energy. recovery to s.atisfy economic and environmental concerns. Besides ener 'gy problems, the solid waste source reduction approach, :including state packaging laws to reduce unnecessary environmentally .harmful or energy-wa-steful packaging, poses the problem of "resource recovery vs. source reduction" Issues :sInce the public sector has not yet guaranteed a market for recycling schemes. A stable market is the critical elemen,,,it,. For example, in the abandoned automobile recycling program -- largely a-success in the Costal Zone, counties -- fluctuat- ing local, regizonal -and inter-national salvage markets might easily place burdens on the system"s potential advantages. Similarly, 'glass, copperf pape r and other recover-ables are impacted by specific market sitpations, The Abandoned Ilotor Vehicle Program has collected approximately 5,*660 Vehicles, inclmding transportation to scrap processors, in the follow- ing North Shore counties: Cook - 1,000; St. Louis - 4,000; Carlton - 600. Lake County has taken inventory of the number-and location of junk cars although none have yet,been collected or transported tothe 'processors. Another solid waste program affecting Costal, Zone counties is 'the ani- mal/livestock feedlot-permittIng program. State-wide, feedlots are much more prolific than they are in the North Shore region; but esti- mates indicate that approximately 1,030 feedlots exist in the four counties, of which 23 are permitted.. The following relatively small number of scattered permitted feedlots exist in the Coastal Zone (esti- mates of the total number of feedlots are indicated in parentheses). St. Louis has seven permitted feedlots (500); Carlton has 16 permitted J500); Cook has none permitted (5); and Lake has none permitted (25). Only Carlton County is. participating in the state-county feedlot permit processing program, and dairy cattle are the predominant type of opera- tion permitted; however, only the northwest portion of Carlton County is within the UILSSD boundaries, which are considered part of the Coastal Zone area (,although the entire eastern part of the county is within the Lake Superior Basin). St. Louis County's permitted feedlot operations include dairy or beef cattle. Although all livestock feedlots are permitted by the Agency's Division of Solid Waste and Minnesota counties, feedlots w-Ith more than 1,000 animal units or feedlots conskidered to be significant water quality problems are conside-red "point sources" by the Division of Water Quality and must have a NPDES (N-ational Pollutant Discharge. Elimination Discharge Elimination System) permit... -2 6- The. future of Mimnesota's solid waste program will see the revision of sanitary landfill technical requirements to prevent leachate and methane gas problems:, andd the adoption of disposal standards- for special wastes such as toxic ard hazardous wastes, industrial sludges, demolition and construction wastes, -diseased trees, fly ash and foundry sand. The future will also bring -increased resource recovery activity with evalua- tion of such solid waste disposal options as incineration with energy recovery, recycling and source. reduction. Each option investigated will .involve weighing -'the relative effects on air, water, land, enerqy eco- nomics. and other resources. In summary,. the Coa-stal Zone -has made- strides from the old sit:uation of uncontrolled opesn-burhing dumps towards an environmentally,sound solid waste management- -program. During the 1970 to 1975 period, the- region has been in a transition stage from minimal activity to more positive actions directed '?toward solid wastes inventory, assessment, demonstra- tion projects atd alternatives selection. Any assessment of the effect of solid waste disposal on the environment might be in terms of overall program. outputs such -as the number of 1970 open dumps, the number closed; the e1ispniat of related -hazards and nuisances (disease, odor, incineration, site destruction from uncontrolled access to numerous dumps, etc.) ; the number of modified landfills and sanitary landf ill improved p rf sites opened, e ormance; recycling efforts, including the number of abandoned motor vehicles collected and transported; the number and type of studies conducted and public awareness and manage- ment preferences- Solid Waste's red-ated management strategies will continue to eliminate disposal sites Located in shoreland zones. The first phase of protect- ing human health- from disease from rodents and air quality. degradation from open burning is almost complete. A second phase is underway to continue replacement of numerous scattered dumps by fewer -sites, prop- erly operated, and to introduce resource recovery as a potential alter- native to disposal. Landfill operations which have problems concerning groundwater or. surface water contamination from recently required mon- itoring. must be �mproved if the water pollution potential is considered significant. Saltes will be fewer and larger landfill operations located -near current and :future population concentrations and selected opera-. tions will be eminated or. reduced in scale due to potential future technology, legislation or environmental research. A final phase of special wastes handling will address hazardous wastes, sludge disposal- and other such inconsiderations, and their relationship to a central resource. recovery site -in Duluth. ACTIVITIES examples-of 1and-Related Activities Land-related elements of the Coastal Zone environment are inseparable from air, water, solid wastes and other elements in practical and ulti- mate terms. Some examples should identify the nature of environmental pollutants which -impact various aspects of land, air, solid wastes, -27- etc. The Reserve Mining Company's Silver Bay plant has emitted up to 100 tons of to-t I suspended particulate matter to the air daily. Nearly 700 times that- amount (69,000 tons per day) of tac 1 un I on 'te tailings are discharged. in the wastewater -effluent to Lake Superior. If either of the wastes were removed from the air or the water bef ore during or -ual after discharge, the residuals would be considered -a -solid waste. If the currently proposed Mile Post Number 7 site is eventually accepted .for on-land tailings disposal, this land use would. accommodate one of "the 30 largest- structures in the world in terms of land -area for all -.the facilities- U.S. 'Steel 's 'Duluth coke plant 'daily di-scharges raw sewage, 5,000 Founds ,of,ammonia and 800 pounds of cyanide to the St. ..'Louis -River, are particate matter into the air. Land-based eletrical power plants have similar air and water-related .,.aspects. If- powered to create steam for electric generation, such .a plant could: a solid waste type of problem as. well due to -the dis- posal of the fresh residual. Nuclear power plants' potential radia- tion hazards are -still another consideration. Sludge removed from wastewater treatment facilities (lagoons and plants) is a wastewater and ,solid waste problem then at the point of. burning becomes an air quality problem. Iron removal as_a result of processes at a water supply treatment facil- ity has similar --water and solid waste implications. .Leaching, percolation or Iseeping of chemicals, poisons, and toxic or hazardous substances from city dumps or.landfills improperly operated, or a dump situated in :a low area with a high water table becomes a water quality problem after reaching underground or surface waters. An aquifer, lake, stream. or river might be contaminated unless. a properly situated and operated sanitary landfill eliminates or -minimizes such water quality degradation. Sever al proposed boat mar. ina/refuge harbor projects have potential land, ,water solid waste and other. environmental impacts in addition to gain- ful employment. and other development objectives. Public expenditures for solid waste, sewerage, dredging and access facilities, in addition to multiple impacts on the Coastal Zone I s environment and initial eco- nomic impacts* should be considered to properly evaluate comprehensive resource management impacts., Comprehensive Environmental Resource Management Environmental strategies in standards and regulations are currently sep- arated into manageable sectors of water, air and noise, and solid waste ;in the MPCA. The Minnesota Department of Health and MPCA currently share state-wide re sponsibility for the control of septic tanks, and the Department of Natural Resources also has responsibility relating to shoreland and floodplain areas management. There is inter-agency coor- dination among federal, federal-state, regional, and local special and general-purpose Governments which Potentially impact Coastal Zone development, resource management, and environmental protection and pres- ervation, including the. National Environmental Protection Act, Federal Water:Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 Minnesota Environmental Policy Act of Coastal Zone Management Act,and others. Essentially, how- ever water quality' strategies call for concentrating development accord- ing to transprotation patterns which , in turn, a1low acess of or develop- ment. Water and sewerage needs are integral -.components here. , Air quality in the -f uture has -a -leadership role, as 'do circuate on pat- terns, water quality strategies and noise. Solid waste appears to fol- low development rather than lead it in terms- of,critical, comprehensive resource management impacts. Local, regional, state and federal, levels -of government must somehow. be. more effective in coordinating and imple- -me.ntirg these strategies_ APPENDIX ATTACHMENT A POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY WORK PROGRAM FISCAL YEAR 76 1. Prepare status report on the EPA water quality monitoring study for 17 streams in the Lake Superior Basin and four Municipal sewage plants: 1. Bap ti sm Ri ver 10. Manftou River. 2. Beaver River 11. Nemadji River 3. Brule River 12. Pigeon River 4. Cascade River Popular' River 5. Crow, River Lower St. Louis River 6. French River 15. Split-Rock River 7. Gooseberry River 16. Sucker River 8. Knife River 17. Temperance River 9. Lester River Plants Sewage Treatment 1. Grand Marais 3. Duluth 4. Two Harbors -2. Silver Bay 2. Gene the water, ral assessment in narrative form, of the quality,of air, and land in the Coastal Zone and the.' impac 0f f u ture dev e 1 opmen t on these factors. 3. Provide information in draft form concerning future plans ofthe PCA a they relate to existing and. potential sanitary GiStricts and regional water treatment strategies, the design, construction, installation, was te -and operation of conventional and experimental soil absorption units, t .solid waste disposal and noise pollution abatement. 4. In narrative describe how existing PCA and federal standards and regulations affect both existing and future development in the Coastal Zone i.e., in relation to standards, where should new development occur; where not; where are e sting problem areas.- 5. Prepare final report which incorporates drafts of work elements 2q1-4. Timing and Cost of Work Elements Fiscal Year 76 a. Prepare draft narratives of the the following work elements: 1. Work element I and 2 by August 31 $2,500 2. Work element 3 by September 15 200 3. Work element 4 by September' 30 1,200 b. Prepare 30 copies of final report which incorporates drafts in work elements 1-4. by October 15. - 2q@00 ATTACHMENT B BIBLIOGRAPHY Water Related Portion, Chapter III (A) Midwest Research-Institute, "Water-Pollution Investigation: Duluth-Superior Area" (EPA Contract), October 1974. 2. MPCA Division of Water Quality, 1975 Minnesota Water Quality Inventory Report to Contress (Section 305.(b) PL 92-600), April 197 3. MPCA Division of Water Quality, "Minnesota, Lake Superior Near Shore Water Quality Study: A Survey of the Near Shore Waters in the Duluth Area and Near the Mouths of the Goseberry and Cascade Rivers," Preliminary Report, July 1975. 4. M. Sydor, "Turbidity in Extreme Western Lake Superior," NASA and EPA Contracts, March 12, 1975. 5. John Pegors, MPCA Region I Representative (Duluth), presented Ontario, I.J. C. Annual Meeting, July 29, 1975. 6. International Joint Commission, Great Lakes Water Quality Board, "Great Lakes Water Quality, 1974 Annual Report," July 1975 7. Arrowhead Regional Development Commission, Water Quality Management Plan, Lake Superior Basin, June 1974. ATTACHMENT C MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY Division of Water Quality Memorandum on Proposal for Contract with U. S. Environmental Protection Agency for Sampling of Tributaries to Lake Superior June 8, 1973 This proposed contract is to provide for monthly sampling of all major streams tributary to Lake Superior in Minnesota. Attachment A is a "Pro- curement Request/Reguisitions" with a "Statement of Work". The proposed contract will basically provide for: 1. Sampling of the 17 tributaries 15 times during a period of one year. 2. Eighteen months to complete the project, including the final report. 3. Monthly report to EPA. 4. Contract cost of $43,125. This contract, according to EPA, must be approved by both EPA and PCA be- fore June 30, 1973 or the funds will canel. In addition to forming an important part of Upper Great Lakes Study, this program will provide valuable information for our own water quality program which we would otherwise be unable to obtain. It is recommended that the Agency approve the proposed contract. John F. McGuire, Chief Section of Standards & Surveys LAKE SUPERIOR TRIBUTARIES-STATION LIST Agency Number for Tributaries 21MINN Station type 02111204 ---- --- Stream Coordinates Primary STORET Vo. Secondary STORET No. Description Nemadji (46-31-04) (92-23-21) LSNE--8 --- 17E67 NE-8 SH-23.bridge crossing near Wrenshall on upstream side St. Louis River (46-40-36) (92-12-09) 014 SL-4 S11739 bridge c,rossing at Oliver on upstream side (abandoned 12/73 in favor of 8LB-1) St. Louis Bay (46-37-00) (92-06-02) 030 SLB-1 Beneath 1-535 bridge, Superior Wisconsin Lester (46-49-45) (92-00-25) 0i5 LE-0 100' upstream of foot bridge at Lester Park, Duluth French (46-54-06) (91-53-30) 016 FR-0.1 100' above USH-6i bridge..at. French River Hatchery Sucker (46-55-22) (91-50-54) 017 SUC!--0. 2 USH-61.bridge near Palmers on downstream side, knife- (46-57-03) (91-.46-48) 018 KN-0.2 500' upstream of USH-61.bridge at Knife River Gooseberry (47-08-24) (91-27-24) 019 GR-1 100'. downstream of USH-61 bridge near Castle Danger Split Rock (47-10-52) (91-24-21) 020 SPL-0.1 500.' upstream of USH-61-bridge 1 mi. so. of Split Rock Point .Beaver (47-15-83) (91-16-66) OZ1 BV-0 1@ sw. on CSAH 3 from junc tion of CSAH 4, 131 mi. no. of Beaver Bay Baptism (47-20-00) (91-12-00) 022 BP-0 USII-61 bridge 2 mi. so. of Illegen City on upstream side Manitou (47-26-33) (91-04-12) 023 MAN-1 USH-61 bridge 3 mi. no. of Little Marais on downstream side Temperance (47-37-00) (90-56-66) 024 TEM-1 Maple Leaf Drive' (NFD) bridge off the Sawbill Trail 5 mi. no. ^f T^ft-P nn tinn-ream side LAKE SUPERIOR TRIBUTARIES STATION LIST cont. Stream Coordinates Primary STORET No. Secondary 8TORET No. Description Cross (47-32-j9) (90-53-48) 025 CRS-0.5 560' jp9tream of USH-61 bridge at Schroeder Poplar' (47-38-07) (90-42-24) 026 POP-0 U.p'per Lutsen Lodge bridge on downstream side-at Lutsen Cascade (47-40-26) (90-31-30) 027 CAS.-O USH-61 bridge 10 mi. SW of Grand M.irais on ups,tream side Bru'le (47-49-12) (90-03-03) 028 iRU-0.4 USH-61.bridge 4 mi. 'sw of Hovlafid on downstream side Pigeon ..(48-00-44) (89-36-58) 029 PIG-9is Middle Falls on the Pigeon River 2.5 miles from."tI.SH-61 International bridge on Ontario Highwa y 593 (bank aarriples above falls) WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANTS Agency Number for STP's 21MINNS Station type for STP's 2244440 Two Harbors (47-00-38) (91-39-56) 02,06 TH-STP' Two Harbors sewage tr .eatment plant, Two Harbors, Minnesota Silver Bay (47-17--)32) (91-14-58) 0,207- SB-STP Silv .er Bay sewa''g-e treatment plant, Silver.Bay, Minnesota Taconite Harbor (47-30-52) (90-56-19) 0208 TACH-STP taconite Harbor Sewage treat- ment plafit, Taconite Harbor, Minnesota Grand Marais (47-46-40) (90-19-52) 0209 GM-STP Grand Marais Sewage treatment plant, Grand Marais, Minnesota ~0 ~p~r~2p~~~URE~V~~!~~:~qRT ~RE~qQU~qET/~P~E~Q~U~I~S~IT~I~ON P A(-. ~ 4 ~~~ ~@~~~ ~V~ ~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~ 2. 1 L L L P~ 1 ON ~ ~1p~ A~~~~~~~~~T~~G ~Y~~~LS &I rlv~~~@l~ P~~mb~rton, Jr. 312~ C~ r~v~pa~i ~1~~~qk~s Coordinator 353~5098 ~9~8~X010~8 ~315505~1~1~qM~)~O~U 7. TO TAL ~E~S~-~, I ~1,~1~t~, I ~L~-~*~[~) COST ~~~~L~qT~2qT~E~@~0qT~f TO 5. DA~T~L ~R~L~Q ~LC N ~0. EPA, Region V $43,~q125~.~qC~'~qO ~1 No. Wacker Drive 8. e~R~OJECT orr~t~cE~-~1~AA~r~4A~GZ~P ~9. ~P~H~qO~H~L NO. Chicago~, ~0qM~i ~q60~q6~q0~q6 ~2. 13. 14. STOCK-OR ~U~1~4~1~T OF ~U~N~!~" ITEM NO. ~D~qjESCRIPT~I~O~N ~4qW~A~NT~ITY ~@~;~~o ~q* ~q!~T ~I~S~S~U~r AMOUNT Contract ~qf~ror A~qdditional~-Sam~qp~qlin~qg and yea $43,~q125~.0~q0 Analyses of Minnesota Tributa~qxi~@-~s Lake Superior. 255~0sampl~es-on ~q17tributaries ~q5~~2~q967~,analyses Data ~-evaluati~n and report See attached Statement of Work, (Jus~qtif ic~at-~qi~on statement also attached.) ~ ~~. S~U~I~GG~F~S~T~C~t~@ ~S~OU-~CE~S 17. ~REC~O~M~ME~N~OE~D PROCUREMENT ~MET~H~O~O ~qH~qinn~es~ata Pollution Control Agency ~2q0 C~O~N~IF~-~CTIT~IVE ~qX~4q7~, N~o~"~'~e~o~"~'~ET~IT~I~V~I~F 717 Delaware St., S.E. Is. SIGNATURE Or ~O~R~I~G~1~3A~T~OR DATE Minn~e~a~-~,~)~c~qlis~, ~q1-~q1~-~qi~qnn. 55440 Attn: ~0qC~, ran t J. ~1~-~1-~r r i 1 ~1~1 ~6qA~.~2qL7/73 19. ACCOUNTA~I~e~L~.~-~E ~P~R~3~P~ERTY NOT AVAILABLE F~1~1~C~)~M ~Z)~,C~'~-~-~'~Z~S ~q1~.~2~0. SIC OF PROP M~G OFFIC~E~R~q4~0~E~S~I~GN~EE DATE ~q0 ~2q0 ~I~N~U~NA~LS 21. AP~P~P~O~VA~LS~ A.. ~~A~I~I~L~h~/~O~f VICE DATE 0.0 CHER DATE ~qE~q. AS~qS~-~qISTA~q1~q4T A~qD~qM~qI~qI~q,~q'151 RAT OP. DATE _PATE 4 7 ~4q73 ~4qc~q) ~qc ~12qre~44qi ~4q6~q,~q: ~C. F~L~q1~q1~q,~q1~q0~q'~q, L~qT~qI~q.~q: ~qE~q:~q0 ~q1~q4 1 ~qT~qH~q-~q!4~q7 ~qA~q.~qR~qZ~q- AVAILA~qE~q1~q1-~qC I DAT~qL F 0 ~qF ~qF~ql ~qC ~qF~q- 0 F T~q! I ~qr- A I ~qN~qI ~qRA ~qT ~q0 ~qR ~q0A ~qT ~qE Arlo nc~qs~qEF~qi~qv~qe~qo F ~q0 ~qR ~q1~q, P~q(~q1~qC~q,~q!~qI~q* ~qC~qI~q!T ~8qw~q7r~qt~qc~qr ONLY ~I~!~iV~t~-~qfA~q1~qj~q0~qt~qI ~qr~q,~q0~q. ~qC~qO~qU~2qT~qRACT No. ~qT~qI~q&~qS~qL ~qF Oft ~qULL~qI~qV~qE~qRY ~q1~q' ~qF-~q:F~qI ~qf~qt ~qI~qI~qI~qC ~q1~q1~2qW~-~q!~q, C~q0~qHC~qU~qf~qa~qj~q1~qP~q4~qG ~q1~q'~q1~q1~q1~4q@~0q-~04q7~q7~4q- ~qP~qo~qiW~qr ~q$~q1~q0~q1~q' VIA No. ~qr~q1~qt~qQUL~qST TO ~qcun~ql~qac~qt) ~r~P~A ~qr~q-~q,~q- I ~8qW~q-~q8 ~6q(~q1~q0~6q4 ~q1~8q) COPY 2 ~q- ~qPr~qiop~qt~q-nyv ~qm~qA~qP~q4AG~qI~q'~4qW~qr~qf~q4~q1 0~qu~qr~q1~qC~,~qj~qL~2q:~4qi ~qO~qf~qf~qI~qC~qI~qUAL P~qk~q)~qrtC~q1~qIA~qS~qr~q. ~qF~qILC COPY 3. 1~q4r~q.T~qWF~qI~qN TO ~qO~qN~qI~qG~4qMA~q1~q0r~qi ~I~I~E~PLAcr~qs ~qF~q:~qV~qIQA ~q(~q3~q-70~q) ~q1~q5~q,r~q)[~q1~q1~q5~q0~0qU~q@T~qC~q. ~qC~qQ~qr ~qV I ~qC~qO~qI~qA~0qW ~qT~qk~qI~qt~q'~q.~q4 I ~qV~qi~qk~q. ~qE COPY ~q4~q. f~qi~qt~q.~qT~qA~qi~qN by ~qO~qr~qt~qI~qc~qt~qr~q4~q^~q1~q0~q4 STATEMENT OF WORK The purpose of this contract is to determine the constituent loadings to Lake Superior from Minnesota tributaries to satisfy the needs of the IJC Upper Lakes Pollution Study. The proposed work would include collection and analysis of samples from the following 17 north shore tributaries not now included in the state tributary monitoring program: 1. Nemadji R. 10. Baptism R. 2. St. Louis R.* 11. Manitou R. 3. Lester R. 12. Cross R. 4. French R. 13. Temperance R. 5. Sucker R. 14. Poplar R. 6. Knife R. 15. Cascade R. 7. Gooseberry R. 16. Brule R. 8. Split Rock R. 17. Pigeon R. 9. Beaver R. *The St. Louis R. is now sampled by the state. However, it will be necessary to establish an additional sampling station in a different location for the purpose of the Upper Lakes Study. It is proposed to sample these tributaries 15 times per year and analyze all samples for the parameters listed on Table 1. Flow data will be obtained for those streams where the data are not otherwise avail- able. In addition, samples will be analyzed three times a year for the parameters shown in Table 2. Tables 1 and 2 are taken from the approved Study Plan for the IJC Upper Lakes Pollution Study, and represent the minimum program agreed to by those participating in the Study. New Monitoring Stations: Additional No. of Stations X Parameters X Frequency = Analyses/year 17 18 15 4,590 17 27 3 1,377 5,967 Estimated Cost: 5,610 samples @ $2.50 14,025 357 samples @ $20.00 (radioactivity; pesticides) 7,140 Salary 14,000 Travel 3,800 Shipment of samples 3,000 Equipment 1,160 Total $43,125 STATEMENT OF WORK (Continued) The program additions described above will result in the annual collection of 255 additional samples from 17 tributaries, and the per- formance of 5,967 analyses on those samples. The resulting data will be entered into the Federal STORET system by Minnesota. In addition, the state will provide evaluation of the data, including computation of annual constituent loadings, and produce such reports as the Upper Lakes Study requires. The cost of the propsed work is $43,125.00 and the work is to be completed by December 31, 1974. This contract is for one year of sample collection and the required analyses, data evaluation and reporting. It is expected that the contract will be extended for a second year, contingent on availability of appro- priated funds. March 28, 1973 Mr. Carlysle Pomberton, JR. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region V One North Wacker Drive Chicago, Illinois 60606 Dear Mr. Pemberton: This will confirm our cost estimates for additional tributary sampling in connection with providing federal funds to assist the states in implementing tributary sampling for the Upper Great Lakes Study. These figures are based on sampling 17 north shore tributaries as follows: NE Nemadji River* BAP Baptism River SL St. Louis River S MAN Maniton River LES Lestor River CRS Cross River FR French River TEM Temperance River SKC Sucker River POP Poplar River KN Knife River CAS Cascado River GB Gooseberry River CRK Brulo River SPL Split Rock River BRK Brulo River BYR Beaver River PIG Pigaon River Nemadji River rises in Minnesota, but enters the lake in Wisconsin. We propose to sample at the Minnesota-Wisconsin line only. Analytical Costs The parameters listed in Appendix A of the Upper Great Lakes Study report are divided into two classes, i.e., monthly sampling of 19 parameters and sampling for 27 additional parameters, 3 times annually. 23, 1973 2 our analytical cost for the monthly parameters is estimated to be $2.50 per parameter; or 17 X 19 X 13 X $2.50 = $ 9,690 Our analytical costs for 20 of the tri-annual parameters is also $2.50 per parameter; or 17 X 20 X 3 X $2.50 = 2,550 Our analytical costs for gross beta, tritium, strentium, radium, posticido, cholorinated hydrocarbons and PCB's is $20.00 per parameter, or 17 X 7 X 3 X $20.00 = 8,340 Further, we estimate an additional analytical cost for sampling during high flows of $2,000 2,000 TOTAL ANALYTICAL COSTS $ 22,580 Salary Costs We propse to hire one Pollution Control Specialist II, full time and one Pollution Control Specialist I, part time. Salary and contribution for these positions are as follows: Pollution Control Specialist II (full time) $ 10,000 Pollution Control Specialist I (part time) 4,000 TOTAL SALARY COSTS $ 14,000 Expenses The following additional expenses will be necessary to support the program. Automobile 0 $ 2,000/year $ 2,000 Personal expenses 0 $ 150/month 1,000 Shipping samples 300 samples/year @ $10,000 3,000 Shipping cases with ice chest 20 @ $40.00 960 Two liter bottles 40 @ $5.00 200 TOTAL ADDITIONAL EXPENSES $ 7,960 GRAND TOTAL $ 44,540 With the exception of the last two items, i.e: shipping cases and bottles then costs represent annual costs for the program. emberton 28, 1973 3 Please advise if we can provide further information. Yours very truly, L. E. Richie, Assistant Director Division of Water Quality GJM JFM LER Pegors - Duluth MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY 1935 W County Road 82, / Roseville, Minnesota 55113 (612) 296 7256 June 10, 1974 Mr. John Holmgren Washington Contract Operations U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Room 700 Crystal Mall Building No. 2 Washington, D.C. 20460 Dear Mr. Holmgren: Enclosed is a contract Pricing Proposal and Statement of Work for additional sampling and analyses of Minnesota tributaries and municipal point sources to Lake Superior, and the preparation of a final draft report. This is a contrinuation of Contract No. 68-01-1878. Copies of this material are being sent to Dr. Robert W. Zeller, Director, Surveillance and Analysis Division, Region V, and to Mr. Clarence C. Oster, Actional Director, Minnesota-Wisconsin District Office. Please advise us if we can provide further information. Sincerely yours, Lewis C. Barbe, Director Division of Water Quality Enclosures cc: Dr. Robert W. Zeller Mr. Clarence C. Oster ~0 T ~qG~~~@~T~~~r of ~qK~n~~~~~~r~~ And ~~~~~:~~ C~qO~qNT~qRA~ P~~R~JC~1~~~1G PROPOSAL ~~~~~ ~~~~F~1~~~~~~~~.~NT~ Approval No. ~9~~R~~~~~4 ~~1-~~ ~~ ~r~cin~ date ~- ~'~~~ ~~ r~qu~r~~~ and ~~2p~880;952;36;44q,,~w~~r~~u~~~~ fur the ~~wr~ ~~ is ~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~ the co~w~~c~~n~ ~~~~~~~~. ~ OF ~~~~~~~Jt SUPPLIES AND/'-.( ~"~L~.~'~J,~C~E~S to ~a~j Determine con~s~qtit~. u -a ~qm~z~. ~~i~j~~~~_~~ot~a P~o~'luti~on Co~qn~4q"~'~a~ql ~qA~,-~en~cv load-in~qgs to ~- ~~6~~~ ~~~~~~~i A~6~~~I~l~i~s~s Lake Superior from t~-~.i~qb~U~qit~a~r~-~-~;~C3 and 35 West ~q1o~0qmty ~qF~oad 22 municipal point ~s~ouz~-~-~,~c3 in ~qt~~vil~qle~,~j ~2qM~0qL~-~,n~e~sot~- a 5 5 ~q@3 ~7 ~~;~T~~;~6~~~~i~ A~~ ~~~~,C.A~?K~3~N~,S~I W~M~!~RE WO~RI~A~L ~IS TO ~S~E ~O~f~f~I~s~g~a~a~l~o TOTAL ~A.MOU~N~T Of PROPOSAL SOLICITATION NO. ualit~-y, ~R~l~o~-~-~evil~qle is ~qC~"~qE~T~4qA~qIL ~qD~-~'~:~qS~qC~qR~qI~qPT~qI~'~qj~,~*~q4 OF COST ~qEL~qE~4qM~qE~qNT5 E~STOT~AL ~R~EFE~P~- ~-~-~Q,~F ~ES~T C~G-~5T T COST' E~NCE-~' ~U~~~~~~D PARTS Su~C~r4~~~C~T~fD ITEMS ~~~WE~~~M RAW ~A~o~AT~E~9~!~A~t ;I) ~'~1~q@~q:~R ~ST~qA~I~D~.R~1~1 CC,.,. ~f~) ~I~NT~E~RD~I~V~I~S~I~O~NA~L ~T~RA~t~4~SF~E~R~S ~qf:~f~f ~I~~A~d~1p~p~p~p~p~p~p~p~ TOTAL DIRECT ~%~1~.~4~7~^ER~1~4L ~1p~1p~~~~p~1p~~p~~p~p~p~2p~p~p~p~ ~-~-~qX~3 ESTIMATED. ~E ~S~@~1~1~1~1 I RATE/ 3. DIRECT ~A~~~ ~~S~P~-~i~qf)~F~) Ho~u HOUR Cos-, ~@~1 ~-~)~-~0 ~.~.~-~;~c~-i Control ~q3 ~6q1! 2 ~r~r~.~0q=- ~4qj ~it~qi~c~- ~qc~cnt~r~c~-~, a ~C ~0qa~0ql~qi ~3t 1 2~6q00 h~qr3 ~q@6~.47 ~2q&~qj~.~i (~1) ~C~ierk Q ~q5 ~8qAh r ~qT~P~qT~41~!~1 ~C~i~fR~E~(~"~.~*~T 4 ~B~OR ~1~qF~ ~~~~~~ ~~Z ~L~p~r~"~I~y ~U~'~p~,~p~t~u~g~"~'~s -r ~t-~d~i~s ~O.H~ RATE ~x BASE EST ~c~c~,~@~-~-~- -I- SPECIAL TESTING ~(~h~y~-~l~u~d~i~n~g Acid ~u or* ~-~t~Go, ~r~o~w-~r~v~t EST COST, ~s ~i~qwor~at~o~qry Analytical C~o~s~0qt~-~s ~~.~qj TOTAL SPECIAL TESTING 17 ~q9~q9~q2 ~_~qMC~A~ E~U~~M~E~N~T ~(~q@f ~d~j~i~f~e~l ~t~h~q"~C~C~2p~p~2p~p~p~p~p~p~p~p~ ~a~p ~F~-~,~@~w~qw A) T~~AV~L (If charge) I ~G~i~t ~e ~d~r~e~a~d~r oar d~i~f~c~A-~d ~S~h~e~d~w~f~r~) C~O~ST~7 ~/~3) 2~,~,2 ~SL~;~8SISTE~P~4~CE ~'~1~*~0~TA~1~. ~qrRA~1~q7L ~qQ~~~~TA~~~ ~j~S~qfC~O~V~;~"~i~j ~qT~qO~q-~qr It- ~qC ~q0 1 ~qU~ql~q- ~qV I 7~-~qV ~0~11~0~1~111~1~1p~p~p~p~1p~2p~~qf~qS 1, 29~4qQ ~q1~q0 ~q1~q'~q,~q1~q1. In RF~q(~qr ~qtw. r .~q4 ~8qw~q3 ~4q@~44qn~2qw~8qq~08qw in 46,~0q562 ~,~:~6qn~0~q~(A~~L ~A~N~~-~3 of -~q1~q-~2q3~q,4~q,7~q,9 ~qj~q'~- 4.656 ~q'r~qo~qT~q.4 ~q1. ~qcs~2qn ~8qw~qq~qr~qF ~0q0 ~qC ~0qW ~qr ~1~ ~-Q I 51.,21~6q8 ~I~l~i~s OR ~P~R~O~qm ~qi ~6qar it. ~qF~q@ 1~q*1 ~q1~q11A ~-~qr~qf~qf~q) ~qC~qO~qV~qU ~qI~qJR ~qP~0qw~0qm r UP ~qI~q'~q1~q0~q.~qNAI. ~qf I~qC~qJ~qR~q'~q%~q' ~qtA~qI~ 04~qC~qj~q0~qh~qC~qf I)? I FP~qR ~q1~q-~q1~q6~~q1~q0~q1~q)~q6 ~0 ~~2p~708;352;64;56q"~1p~884;304;40;100ql is ~~b~~t~~~J ~~~ ~-~~ ~~ ~d~~~ ~~~~~~~~ to ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~1p~500;928;112;88q&~1p~724;960;36;52q1 our ~~~~ r~ti~A~- ~~ ~f~1p~p~~ In ~~~~m~~~~~~ w~h ~h~ ~n~~ruc~-n~ ~~. O~~~r~w~ and ~~~ F~~w~~~~, ~~ ~~~~~e A ~ ~~'~T I~'~L ~E ~3~1~G~NATU~R~f E. ~qRichie~,~, Assistant ~6qB~2qi~qr~-~ector Division of Water Quali~ql~t~2qy ~D~A~IE Of ~S~V~S~m~I~S~S~I~O~N ~~I~i~n~esota.Pol~q: ~t ~-~-~qtion C~ont~q-~qr~qa~6ql A~r~z~e~qnc~8qy EX~qH~qH~q3~q1T A-SU~qPP~8qG~qR~qT~q;~qZ~,~.~,~'~8qG ~q(~qS~Dec~j~q@~y. If ~@~,~u~ore ~ip~ac~t is ~P~tee~ded~, ~~--~,-e re~rerse~q) ~X~T~EM DESCRIPTION ~fSe~e~qfo~ot~no~le ~5) EST COST S ~-~q5~ample ~-~S~qI~n~8qd~m~qment, ~1~q@~0q0 ~- cc ~6qRi~sceil~a~qneou~s 3~0q00. ~qC~-~1~q0 ~C~UT~I~V~E AGENCY ~C~F ~T~I~-~E ~U~N~IT~EO~S~TA~l~T~E~S ~r~-~O~v~I~E~R~N~m~E~NT P~ER~F~O~R~P~9~7~D ~A~N~Y REVIEW O~F~YOUR ACC~O~l~j~N~T~S OR ~R~I~.C~0~3~,~0~5 IN CONNECTION ~V~i~ITH ANY ~O~T~-~l~!R ~~~~~~~~~~W PRIME ~C~O~NTR~AC~I~I ~0~1 ~S~U~8~C~0~N~T~J~E~A~qC~r~qW~l~l~m~A~t~4 THE ~O~A~ST TWELVE MONTHS? YE'S NO ~(~f~qf~r~e~x ~i~d~e~w~qt~if~i below-) ~C~i~qk~: ~NU~M~BE~R~/~EXTE~N~5~10~14 I~~qW AN~~ AD~~E~SS OF ~R~E~V~IEW~i~N~G~. OFF ICE~AND ~1~m~r~n~M~O~M~&L _~qF~~ YOU REQUIRE T~h~E ~U~S~E Of A~m~T ~G~O~V~E~X~O~qm~E~r~qO ~P~R~U~O~P~I~E~R~T ~'~Y 11~4 ~T~HE ~PE~R~FO~R~m~A~N~C~E OF THIS PROPOSED CONTRACT~? YES ~q[~q@~q] NO ~e~2qf~2qf ~r~qm identify an ~r~r~v~v~r~?~wz~m~r separate Pace~) ~~. ~~~ YOU ~E~U~.~PE ~G~O~V~Z~R~N~m~E~N~T CONTRACT F~L~K~A~q@~~;~O ~P~E~RFO~A~m NIS ~P~R~O~O~OSE~O CCN~T~PA~0~7 -~E~ C~qD ~P~40 .(if ~)~,~@~qm ~A~dr~f~f~#~sf~v~.~,: ~6q0 ~^~Z~V~A~N~CE PA~-~V~iAt~NT~S ~P~R~OC~a~E~SS ~P~AYME~qW~- Olt ~GUA~R~A~NT~E ~~I~q&~ YOU NOW HOLD A~1~4Y r-~O~*~4~1~i~j~^C~T ~1~(~)~r~. ~4~d~* ~v~a~- ~i~i-~r ~a~.~r ~t~-~a~t~pe~m~a~,~.~d~y ~l~i~m-~c~ta ~i~l~l~e~&~O~i ~,~r~@~t~t~c~r~i~) FOR ~TH~E~ S~4 ~~m~i ~i~i~m~j~L~qm~t~@ w~(~D~;z~x CALLED ~F~O~R AV ~T~HiS ~4qM~K~O~P~O~S~E~D CONTRACT? ~36q3~q-~q7~q2~32qP~40qT ~00qn~36qg and A~qna~36ql~28qy3~8qi~qS of ~2qI~8ql~32qL~qn~.ne~qzota Tr~8qib~q-~q,~q-~12qf~12qt~2qz~6qz~2qie~qs to ~ql~6qly~'s Elmo ~qf~08qf~08qf~qy~q"~q. ~qi~q4~qm~qtr~8q1~q7~q.~q)~q: I~00qak~2q-~q- Superior Cortr~qa~q@t No. 6~8q2-~6q01-1~36q87~2q8 ~6qWE~SJ~H~I~S COST ~qS~qU~qM~qA~qA~qA~qY ~qC~qC~q4~q%~qm~qF~qC~q*~qm w~qit~qm THE C~q-~q-~6qM~qT ~qP~ql~qn~qP~q,4C~qJ~qP~qL~qE5 ~qSE~qT FORTH ~qN AGENCY REGULATIONS~q? ~q(~8qZ YES C] NO ~qe ~qt~0q/~q- me. ~q^~qp~ql~qa~qj~q@~qv ~qd~qw ~q'~qa~qt ~qo~qj~q@ ~qS~4qm ~qg~qe~6qm~qr~qm ~6qj~qor ~ql~qa~qx~qtr~qu~qc~qs~qi~qa~qms ~qo~qa~qd ~qF~qa~q9~qs~qm~qa~qt~qe~qs OPTIONAL. FORM ~q60 ~q11~q0-7 1 2 STATEMENT OF WORK The purpose of this contract is to determine the constituent loadings to Lake Superior from point source in Minnesota, including tributaries and wastewater treatment works, to satisfy the needs of the IJC Upper Lakes Pollution Study. This contract essentially continues the work done under Contract No. 68-01-1878 with additional sampling of wastewater treatment plant effluents. The proposed work includes collection and analyses of samles from the following 17 north shore tributaries described in the original contract: 1. Nemadji River 10. Baptism River 2. St. Louis River 11. Manitou River 3. Lester River 12. Cross River 4. French River 13. Temperance River 5. Sucker River 14. Poplar River 6. Knife River 15. Cascade River 7. Gooseberry River 16. Brule River 8. Split Rock River 17. Pigeon River 9. Beaver River Collection and analysis of samples from the following four municipal sewage plant effluents will also be included in the contract: 1. Two Harbors 3. Teconite Harbor 2. Silver Bay 4. Grand Marais It is proposed to sample the tributaries 15 times per year and analyze all samples for the parameters listed on table 1. Flow data will be obtained for those streams where the data are not otherwise available. In addition, samples will be analyzed 3 times per year for the parameters shown on table 2. It is proposed to take 24-hour composit samples of the treatment plant effluents 4 times per year and analyze the samples for the parameters listed in table 3. Effluent flow data will be obtained at these sites. In addition, grab samples of the effluents will be taken 8 times a year during the months in which composite samples are not taken. These samples will be analyzed for the parameters shown in table 4. Tables 1-4 are taken from the 1974/75 Study Plan for the IJC Upper Great Lakes Pollution Study. Monitoring Stations No. of Stations X Parameters X Frequency = Analyses/Year Tributaries 17 18 15 4,590 17 27 3 1,377 Municipal Sources 4 34 4 544 4 20 8 640 7,151 - 2 - Estimated Cost The program described above will result in the annual collection of 255 samples from 17 tributaries, and the performance of 5,967 analyses on those samples; and the collection of 16 24-hour composite samples and 32 grab samples from 4 municipal point sources and the performance of 1,184 analyses on those samples. The resulting data will be entered into the Federal STORET system by Minnesota. In additional, the state will provide evaluation of the data, including computation of constituent loadings, and produce a final draft report required by the Upper Lakes Study. The cost of the proposed work is $51,218.00. All sampling and other field work will be completed by June 30, 1975. Preparation and revision of the final draft report will be completed by December 31, 1975. This contract is for one year of sample collection and the required analyses, data evaluation, and reporting. This contract represents a continuation of work done under Contract No. 68-01-1878. Table 1 Items for routine sampling of tributaries at least monthly, and more frequently during spring runoff: Microbiological Chemical total coliform dissolved oxygen fecal coliform phenol total iron Physical total phosphorus ammonia flow total nitrogen temperature chloride pH alkalinity conductivity silica turbitidy manganese suspended solids BOD Others As needed, or described in agency programs. Table 2 Items for sampling at least 3 times per year, for background information: Radiological Metals gross beta aruenic tritiua barium strontium calcium radium chromium copper Organics lead mercury pesticides nickel oil selenium cholorinated hydrocarbons zinc total organic carbon calcium polyclorinated bipehnyls magnesium sodium potassium Others cyanide fluoride sulphates COD Table 3 Items for composite sampling of municipal sources conducted quarterly: Checmical Metals 5-day BOD copper hardness cadmium alkalinity nickel total phosphorus zinc organic nitrogen lead ammonia nitrogen mercury nitrite nitrogen chromium nitrate nitrogen iron chloride manganese phenols sulphate Physical silica arsenic total solids selenium suspended solids selenium total dissolved solids calcium turbidity sodium conductivity potassium fluoride Radiological Gross alpha Gross betz Table 4 Items for 8 grao samples per year on municipal sources: Chemical 5-day BOD hardness alkalinity total phosphorus organic nitrogen ammonia nitrogen nitrate nitrogen nitrate nitrogen Physical chlorides calcium total solids sodium suspended solids potassium total dissolved solids fluoride turbidity silica conductivity phenola NOAA COASTAL SERVICES CTR LISR 3 6668 141101E7 5