Where i = individual lake,j = decision variable, n = number of lakes, m = number of

decision variables, P = percent of total points, f = ratio of points received, W = weighting

factor, and R = rating from one to five.

 The weighting factors, ratings, percent of total points, and overall rank for lakes

ranked five and under are presented in Table 4-12. The Crescent Lake, Lake

Istokpoga 2, Lake Jessup, Lake George, and Lake Poinsett datasets were developed by

Burns and McDonnell (2004a). The Lake Istokpoga dataset was developed by Walker

and Haven (2003). Crescent Lake and Lake Istokpoga were found to be clearly the most

comparable overall to the EAASR. A sensitivity analysis was performed using a range

the weighting factors and repeatedly found Crescent Lake and Lake Istokpoga to be the

highest ranked systems. These lakes were determined to be the most comparable to

EAASR and were reviewed in further detail.

Table 4-12. Decision Rankings for Comparable Systems Ranked Five and Better
 Percent
 Surface Inflow of Total
 Decision Variable Area Depth HLR HRT TP Conc. Points Rank
 Weighting 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.35 0.35 NA NA
 Crescent Lake 4 3 4 5 5 92% 1
 Lake Istokpoga 5 5 5 3 5 86% 2
 Lake Istokpoga 2 5 5 5 3 5 86% 3
 Lake George 3 2 2 4 4 70% 4
 Lake Jessup 3 5 5 3 3 68% 5
 Lake Poinsett 2 4 1 2 5 63% 3

More detailed analysis of selected comparable

 Next, the salient attributes of Crescent Lake and Lake Istokpoga were analyzed in

more detail by looking at time series data and the extent to which the terms in the water

and TP budgets were measured. The analysis was again divided into lake

characterization, water quantity and water quality.