6135
oEPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Region V
230 South Dearborn
Chicago, Illinois 60604
June 1979
Water Division
Environmental Draft
Impact Statement
Alternative Waste
Treatment Systems
for Rural Lake Projects
Case Study Number 1
Crystal Lake Area
Sewage Disposal Authority
Benzie County, Michigan
-------
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
CRYSTAL LAKE FACILITY PLANNING AREA
CRYSTAL LAKE, MICHIGAN
Prepared by
US Environmental Protection Agency, Region V
Comments concerning this document are invited and should be received by
_ AUG 20
For further information, contact
Mr. Alfred Krause, Project Monitor
230 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60609
312/353-2157
Abstract
A 201 Facility Plan was prepared for the Crystal Lake Facility
Planning Area. The Facility Plan concluded that extensive sewering
would be required to correct malfunctioning on-site wastewater disposal
systems and to protect water quality.
Concern about the high proposed costs of the Facility Plan Proposed
Action prompted re-examination of the Study Area and led to preparation
of this EIS. This EIS concludes that existing wastewater treatment
plants in the area should be replaced, but complete abandonment of
on-site systems is unjustified. An alternative to the Facility Plan
Proposed Action has therefore been presented and is recommended by this
Agency.
-------
-------
VOLUME I
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
ALTERNATIVE WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS FOR RURAL LAKE PROJECTS
CASE STUDY No. 1: CRYSTAL LAKE AREA SEWAGE DISPOSAL AUTHORITY
BENZIE COUNTY, MICHIGAN
Prepared by the
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION V, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS
AND
WAPORA, INCORPORATED
WASHINGTON, D.C.
Approved by:
fn McGuire
ional Administrator
S. Environmental Protection Agency
e, 1979
U.S. Environmental Protection i«ency
Region 5, Library (5PL-16)
230 S. Dearborn Street, Soon 1670
Chicago, IL 60604
-------
LIST OF PREPARERS
This Environmental Impact Statement was prepared by WAPORA, Inc.
under the guidance of Alfred Krause, EPA Region V Project Officer. Key
personnel for WAPORA included:
WAPORA, Inc.
6900 Wisconsin Avenue
Chevy Chase, MD 20015
Michael Goldman, P.E. - Project Manager
Winston Lung, P.E. - Water Quality Modeler
Gerald Peters - Project Director
Dennis Sebian - Project Engineer
In addition, several subcontractors and others assisted in prepara-
tion of this document. These, along with their areas of expertise, are
listed below:
Aerial Survey
Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center
Vint Hill Farms Station
Warrenton, VA
Barry Evans
Septic Leachate Analysis
K-V Associates
Falmouth, MA
William Kerfoot
Engineering
Arthur Beard Engineers
6900 Wisconsin Avenue
Chevy Chase, MD 20015
David Wohlscheid, P.E.
Financial
Kearney Associates
699 Prince Street
Alexandra, VA 22313
Charles Saunders
Soils Interpretation
Soil Conservation Service
Traverse City, MI
Richard Larson
Sanitary Survey
University of Michigan Biological Station
Pellston, MI
Mark Paddock
Water Quality Study
Crystal Lake Property Owners Association
Crystal Lake, MI
Fred Tanis
-------
SUMMARY
CONCLUSIONS
Most on-site systems around Crystal Lake and in the Village of
Benzonia are operating satisfactorily. Approximately 90 effluent plumes
entering Crystal Lake and a few surface malfunctions have been identi-
fied. Periodic backup of sewage in the systems also occurs. On-site
systems do not appear to be a significant contributor of nutrients to
Crystal Lake -- of the total input of phosphorus, 6.7% or less comes
from effluent plumes. Where plumes do emerge, however, they appear to
be supporting localized growths of Cladophora, a green alga.
The only improvement in Crystal Lake water quality likely to result
from the Facility Plan Proposed Action or any of the EIS alternatives
would be the possible reduction in number and density of localized
growths of Cladophora along the shoreline. This could occur if on-site
systems along the shoreline were abandoned and cluster systems or
centralized sewers used. No alternative is expected to affect either
adversely or beneficially the water quality of the main body of Crystal
Lake through the year 2000.
Future development in the Crystal Lake watershed is primarily a
function of how many new lots can be developed and the density of future
development. Alternatives that rely on continued use of on-site systems
would restrict both the number of new lots and their density as compared
to extensive sewering around the lake. One effect of these limitations
would be to preserve the present character of the community.
There are large differences in the present worth and user costs
among the alternatives. Both costs increase in direct proportion to the
extent of new centralized sewers provided. In the more expensive alter-
natives, high local user charges would result in substantial displace-
ment pressure for the permanent population and pressure for conversion
of seasonal residences to permanent use. Proportionate improvements in
water quality would not occur.
The recommended action in this EIS is the Limited Action Alter-
native. The alternative would provide:
o construction of new sewers and a new rotating biological
contactor (RBC) treatment plant to serve Frankfort and
Elberta;
o sewer system evaluation surveys and rehabilitation of the
existing sewers in Frankfort and Elberta;
o design and implementation of a small waste flow district for
the rest of the Study Area;
o site-specific environmental and engineering analyses of exist-
ing on-site systems in the unsewered parts of the Proposed
Service Area;
-------
o repair and replacement of on-site systems as required; and
o cluster systems or other off-site treatment for the northeast
and southeast shorelines.
The recommended action will result in an improvement in water quality
similar to any of the other alternatives. Its present worth, however,
is only about a third, and its tentative local costs one sixteenth,
those of the Facility Plan Proposed Action.
If the action recommended by the EIS were accepted at the State and
local levels, it would be equivalent to a revised Facility Plan Proposed
Action. EPA would recommend that Step II and Step III construction
grants for Frankfort and Elberta be made independently of action taken
in the remainder of the Study Area.
With respect to the rest of the Study Area, State and local con-
currence with the Recommended Alternative in the EIS would imply that
three additional steps would be taken with respect to formation of a
small waste flow district. As part of the Step I process, the applicant
would:
o certify that the project will be constructed and an operation
and maintenance program established to meet local, State, and
Federal requirements including those protecting present or
potential underground potable water sources.
o obtain assurance (such as an easement or covenant running with
the land) of unlimited access to each individual system at all
reasonable times for such purposes as inspection, monitoring,
construction, maintenance, operation, rehabilitation, and
replacement. An option would satisfy this requirement if it
could be exercised no later than the initiation of construc-
tion.
o establish a comprehensive program for regulation and inspec-
tion of individual systems before EPA approves the plans and
specifications. Planning for this comprehensive program would
be completed as part of the facility plan. The program would
include, as a minimum, periodic testing of water from existing
potable water wells in the area. Where a substantial number
of on-site systems exist, appropriate additional monitoring of
the aquifer(s) would be provided.
Following completion of these steps, the Applicant could proceed
with Step II design of facilities for the small waste flows district.
HISTORY
In November 1976, the Crystal Lake Area Sewage Disposal Authority,
consisting of Benzonia and Crystal Lake Townships, prepared a 201
Facility Plan for wastewater disposal. The Authority also represented
the City of Frankfort, the Villages of Elberta, Beulah, and Benzonia,
and Lake Township, all located in Benzie County, Michigan. At the time,
ill
-------
the City of Frankfort and the Village of Elberta had already been
sewered and were operating their own sewerage facilities. The Proposed
Service Area in the Facility Plan included all the jurisdictions above.
The Village of Beulah, although included in the Facility Plan Study
Area, was not finally incorporated into the Proposed Service Area.
With respect to wastewater treatment and collection facilities in
the Study Area the Facility Plan reached the following conclusions:
o Continued use of the existing septic tank systems would lead
to continued deterioration of water quality.
o Capacity at the Beulah treatment facility would be sufficient
through the year 1998 and that adequate treatment levels could
be attained provided:
1) excessive infiltration and inflow were removed
2) additional flood irrigation area were available, if re-
quired
o Upgrading and/or expansion of the treatment facilities at
Frankfort and Elberta was infeasible and those facilities
should be abandoned.
o Collection and centralized treatment of all wastewaters in the
Proposed Service Area would be necessary.
EIS ISSUES
Cost Effectiveness
Capital cost of the Proposed Action was estimated to be $18.4
million. In terms of total net present worth these costs were judged to
be high. In addition, since approximately 80% of the project cost would
be for collection, examination of alternatives to conventional gravity
sewers would have been desirable. The Facility Plan rejected continued
use of septic systems, particularly along the shorelines of Crystal
Lake.
Water Quality
Two earlier studies of the water quality in Crystal Lake documented
the presence of localized growth of aquatic vegetation near the shore-
line. Neither the studies nor the Facility Plan quantified the probable
impacts of sewers upon water quality.
With respect to Betsie Lake, the Facility Plan estimated that the
phosphorus load would decrease by approximately 40% if sewers were
constructed. However, the Plan did not describe the relationship
between such a reduction and eutrophication of the lake. In addition,
the new, and perhaps larger discharges of effluent that would follow
population growth were not considered.
iv
-------
Economic Impact
The estimated user charge for the Facility Plan Proposed Action was
$175 per year for each residence or residential equivalent in the new
sewer service area around Crystal Lake. This charge would amount to
1.9% of the average annual income of the permanent residents. Crystal
Lake service area homeowners would pay an initial $1500 for stub fee and
connection charge. In addition, there would be an additional homeowner
cost for installation of a house sewer connecting individual household
plumbing with the public sewer.
These sewerage costs could encourage seasonal and fixed income
residents to sell their properties or to convert from seasonal use to
permanent residency.
Induced Growth and Secondary Impacts
While the high costs of wastewater collection might force some
current residents to move, the availability of sewers in the Crystal
Lake watershed would make possible construction of new dwellings in
greater number and in higher densities than is presently feasible. The
potential for significant future development is indicated by the sub-
stantial number of undeveloped platted shoreline, second tier and sub-
division lots in the watershed.
The rate and type of development supported by a central sewer sys-
tem could have undesirable impacts. In particular, housing construction
on steep slopes could accelerate soil erosion which, in turn, would
increase inputs of nutrients to Crystal Lake or Betsie Lake. In
addition, the density and type of future development feasible with a
central sewer system could be considerably different from that presently
typical of the Crystal Lake area.
ENVIRONMENT
Soils
In general, soils on sites set back from Crystal Lake are suitable
for on-site disposal of wastewater. Steep slopes are the major limita-
tion of such soils.
Opinions differ on the suitability of soils on shoreline sites for
on-site disposal of wastewater. The Tri-County Health Department has
evaluated such sites and determined that over half the vacant lots are
suitable for septic systems. The Soil Conservation Service considers
excessive permeability to be a limitation to on-site systems. Thus,
soils acceptable to one agency may be rejected by the other. However,
the difference alone does not account for the large discrepancy between
the two sets of soils data. One explanation may be that the seasonal
high water table may not be so high as was suggested to SCS in their
surveying.
v
-------
Surface Water Resources
Crystal Lake, the centerpiece of the Study Area, occupies approxi-
mately 15 square miles; its primary tributary is Cold Creek. Betsie
Lake occupies approximately 0.4 square miles. Its primary tributary is
the Betsie River and it is itself tributary to Lake Michigan.
The hydrology of the lakes directly affects their quality. Crystal
Lake, despite a retention time greater than 60 years, is generally
clean, clear and oligotrophic. At a distance from the shoreline, the
Lake has shown little change in productivity in 10 years. Conversely,
Betsie Lake, with a retention time of 2 days, is eutrophic. For both
lakes, phosphorus has been identified as the limiting nutrient.
Groundwater Resources
Groundwater serves as the source of drinking water for Beulah,
Elberta and Frankfort. Water supplies in the remainder of the Study
Area consist of individual and small community wells. Water is
generally plentiful and of good quality, although hard. A 1969 survey
of 165 wells around Crystal Lake indicated no contamination by indicator
bacteria; nitrates were generally present at concentrations ranging from
0-2 mg/1. The concentration of nitrate in 2 wells exceeded the Drinking
Water Standard of 10 mg/1.
Additional Studies
Because of the scarcity of recent data, three additional studies
were performed in connection with this EIS.
1) An aerial survey was performed by the Environmental Photo-
graphic Interpretation Center (EPIC) during the summer of
1978. Few surface malfunctions of on-site sewage disposal
systems were found, but foliage may have hidden from view some
failing systems. The densest growths of submerged aquatic
vegetation were found along the northeastern and eastern
shores.
2) A sanitary survey was conducted by the University of Michigan
during September and October of 1978. The results indicated
that over half the lakeshore on-site systems were violating
the sanitary code. Few of the systems, however, had recurring
problems with backups or ponding. Heavy shoreline algal
growth was associated with about 10% of the sites.
3) A study of septic leachate intrusion into Crystal Lake was
performed during November 1978. Approximately 90 septic
systems were determined to be leaching into the Lake. Growth
of submerged vegetation was correlated with effluent dis-
charge.
vi
-------
An analysis of the additional data provided by these studies indi-
cates that septic tank effluents contribute to the growth of algae along
the lakeshore. Malfunctions generally consist of backups of sewage
rather than surface ponding. Groundwater data are inconclusive. Of the
problems with backups, most relate to inadequate maintenance, rather
than insufficient soil absorptive capacity. In addition, it was esti-
mated on the basis of computer models that 6.7% or less of the total
phosphorus loading to Crystal Lake was contributed by septic systems.
Existing Population and Land Use
Approximately 60% of the Proposed Service Area population consists
of seasonal residents, located primarily in the unsewered areas sur-
rounding Crystal Lake. The permanent resident population, located
throughout the Proposed Service Area, is characterized by a relatively
low income that is below the average income for all of Michigan.
Retirement age population, often consisting of persons on fixed incomes,
makes up 17% of the Service Area's population. The proportion of the
Service Area's retirement age population is more than twice the propor-
tion for the State of Michigan.
Land use in the Service Area consists of: three small urban
centers (Frankfort, Elberta, and Benzonia); permanent and seasonal
single family residences; agricultural areas devoted to row crops and
orchards; and open land consisting of woodlands, wetlands, and sand
dunes. The aesthetic appeal of the area has resulted in substantial
residential development around Crystal Lake. Most commercial areas are
located in the village centers and along major highways.
ALTERNATIVES
Based upon the high cost of conventional technology and questions
concerning the eligibility of the new sewers for Federal funding, 7 new
alternatives were evaluated in this EIS along with the Facility Plan
Proposed Action. These alternatives incorporated alternative collection
systems (pressure sewers), treatment techniques (land application),
individual and multi-family septic systems (cluster systems), and water
conservation.
Limited Action Alternative
New treatment plant serving Frankfort and Elberta, upgraded and new
sewers for Frankfort and Elberta. Cluster systems for the northeast
shore of Crystal Lake and the Benzonia Village shoreline. Repair and
rehabilitation of on-site systems throughout the remainder of the Study
Area.
EIS Alternative 1
Same as Facility Plan Proposed Action, except that pressure sewers
would be substituted for gravity sewers.
vii
-------
EIS Alternative 2
Same as EIS Alternative 1, except that land application of waste-
water would be substituted for RBC treatment.
EIS Alternative 3
Frankfort, Elberta, and the southwest shore would discharge their
wastes to a new RBC plant in Frankfort. Wastewaters from Benzonia
Township and Benzonia Village would be treated by land application.
Collection of wastewater by pressure sewers from the northeast shore and
treatment by land application. The remainder of the Study Area would be
served by a combination of cluster systems and on-site systems suitable
to local conditions.
EIS Alternative 4
Same as EIS Alternative 3, except that land application of waste-
water would be substituted for RBC treatment.
EIS Alternative 5
The same decentralized treatment as in EIS Alternative 3. Flows
from other parts of the Study Area, the northeast shore and from the
Crystalia-Pilgrim area would be treated at a new RBC plant located in
Frankfort.
EIS Alternative 6
Same as EIS Alternative 5, except that wastewater from the
Crystalia-Pilgrim area would be treated by rehabilitated on-site sys-
tems. Extensive use of cluster systems assumed to be unnecessary in
contrast to EIS Alternatives 3, 4, and 5.
Project costs were most directly related to the extent of sewering.
No cost advantage would obtain for pressure sewers.
Implementation
Local jurisdictions have the legal and financial capability to
implement small waste flow districts. Although the concept of public
management of septic systems has not been legally tested in Michigan,
present sanitary codes have been interpreted as authorizing such man-
agement by local governments. Some, but not many local jurisdictions
have experience in the organization and operation of small waste flows
districts. California and Illinois provide some specific examples.
viii
-------
IMPACTS OF THE ALTERNATIVES
Five major categories of impacts were relevant in the selection of
an alternative. These categories included: surface water; groundwater;
environmentally sensitive areas; population and land use; and socio-
economics.
Surface Water
None of the wastewater management alternatives would have signifi-
cant impact on the trophic status of Crystal Lake in terms of the open
water quality, which would continue to be good. The problem of
Cladophora growth in shoreline areas, however, would remain unless the
shoreline homes are sewered.
Betsie Lake is expected to benefit significantly from all the EIS
alternatives, as well as the Facility Plan Proposed Action, with sub-
stantially reduced phosphorus input to the lake. Total phosphorus
concentration in the lake would decrease from the present level as a
result of any of the alternatives except the No Action Alternative. The
classification of Betsie Lake as eutrophic will not change although some
reduction in aquatic plant growth is likely.
Groundvater
No significant primary or secondary impacts on groundwater quanity
are anticipated either as a result of the short-term construction activ-
ities or long-term operation of any of the various alternatives. This
is mainly because all of the water quantities associated with the alter-
native are almost miniscule in comparison with the estimated groundwater
storage, recharge from all other sources, and available groundwater
yield.
No significant short-term impacts on groundwater quality are anti-
cipated to result from the construction activities of any of the alter-
natives. Conclusions with respect to long-term groundwater quality
impacts are as follows:
o Impacts on bacterial quality are expected to be insignificant
for all alternatives.
o Continued use of septic tank/soil absorption systems (ST/SAS)
particularly on the northeastern lake shore may result in
minor impacts associated with shoreline algal growths.
o No significant impacts on nitrate concentrations are antici-
pated providing the density of ST/SASs complies with generally
accepted standards. Only the No Action Alternative is likely
to result in significant adverse impacts.
ix
-------
Environmentally Sensitive Areas
Any of the alternatives may allow development on steep slopes
around Crystal Lake. This would result in erosion, sedimentation, and
transfer of nutrients to the lake. The Facility Plan Proposed Action
and EIS Alternatives 1 and 2 might have a somewhat greater impact in
this respect than would the Limited Action or EIS Alternatives 3, 4, 5
or 6.
Population and Land Use
It is estimated that the centralized alternatives would permit a
19% increase above standard population projections for the Service Area.
The Limited and No Action Alternatives would result in population growth
7% below standard projections while EIS Alternatives 3, 4, 5, and 6
would generate population growth 4% above the standard projections.
Acreage in residential use would increase 77% (No Action Alterna-
tive) to 88% (centralized alternatives) of land available. The provi-
sion of sewers would allow the present demand for land development along
the Crystal Lake shoreline to be met. The decentralized, No Action, and
Limited Action alternatives would increase the value of existing resi-
dential property by restricting the amount of additional land that could
be developed. Centralized facilities might result in increased develop-
ment pressure. The No Action, Limited Action, and decentralized alter-
natives would tend to maintain existing community character.
Economic Impacts
Annual user charges are much higher for the centralized alter-
natives than the decentralized alternatives with respect to the
currently unsewered portion of the Study Area. User charges for the
centralized alternatives are somewhat lower in Frankfort and Elberta.
The centralized alternatives place a significant financial burden and
displacement pressure on housholds in the unsewered areas. Only the
Limited Action Alternative and EIS Alternatives 5 and 6 are not high-
cost for the unsewered area. None of the alternatives have been
identified as a high-cost project with respect to Frankfort and Elberta.
Significant financial burden and displacement pressure are much lower in
Frankfort and Elberta as compared to the remainder of the Service Area.
-------
CONTENTS
List of Preparers i
Summary • ii
List of Tables xv
List of Figures xvii
Symbols and Abbreviations xix
I - INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND AND ISSUES 1
A. Project Description and History 1
1. Location 1
2. History of the Construction Grant Application 1
3. The Crystal Lake Area Facility Plan 4
B. Issues of This EIS 15
1. Cost Effectiveness 15
2. Impacts on Water Quality 15
3. Economic Impact 16
4. Induced Growth and Secondary Impacts 16
C. National Perspective on the Rural Sewering Problem 16
1. Socioeconomics 17
2. Secondary Impacts 19
3. The Need for Management of Decentralized Alternative Systems .. 19
D. Purpose and Approach of the EIS and Criteria for Evaluation of
Alternatives 21
1. Purpose 21
2. Approach 21
3. Major Criteria for Evaluation of Alternatives 23
II - ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 25
Introduction 25
A. Physical Environment 26
1. Physiography 26
2. Geology 27
3. Soils 31
4. Atmosphere 37
xi
-------
Page
B. Water Resources 41
1. Water Quality Management 41
2. Groundwater Use 46
3. Groundwater Hydrology 47
4. Groundwater Quality 49
5. Surface Water Hydrology 52
6. Surface Water Use and Classification 56
7. Surface Water Quality 56
8. Flood Hazard Areas 64
C. Existing Systems 66
1. Summary of Data on Existing Systems 66
2. Types of Systems 68
3. Compliance with the Sanitary Code 71
4. Problems Caused by Existing On-Site Systems 72
D. Biotic Resources 78
1. Aquatic Biology 78
2. Wetlands 81
3. Terrestrial Biology 81
4. Threatened or Endangered Species 83
E. Population and Socioeconomics 84
1. Population 84
2. Characteristics of the Population: Employment and Income 87
3. Housing 88
4. Land Use 90
5. Archaeological and Historical Resources 96
III - ALTERNATIVES 97
A. Introduction 97
1. General Approach 97
2. Comparability of Alternatives: Design Population 99
3. Comparability of Alternatives: Flow and Waste Load
Projections 99
B. Components and Options 99
1. Flow and Waste Reduction 99
2. Collection 103
3. Wastewater Treatment 106
4. Flexibility 110
5. Reliability 112
6. Effluent Disposal 115
7. Sludge Handling and Disposal 116
xii
-------
C. EIS Alternatives 117
1. Introduction 117
2. Alternatives 123
3. Flexibility 133
4. Costs of Alternatives 136
5. Engineering and Economic Analysis of Flow Reduction Devices ... 137
D. Implementation 138
1. Centralized Districts 138
2. Small Waste Flow Districts 140
IV - IMPACTS 145
A. Surface Water 145
1. Primary Impacts 145
2. Secondary Impacts: Non-Point Source Nutrient Loads 152
3. Mitigative Measures 153
B. Groundwater 154
1. Groundwater Quantity Impacts 154
2. Groundwater Quality Impacts 155
3. Mitigative Measures 160
C. Population and Land Use 160
1. Introduction 161
2. Population 161
3. Land Use 161
4. Transportation 162
5. Changes in Community Composition and Character 162
D. Encroachment on Environmentally Sensitive Areas 163
1. Wetlands 163
2. Sand Dunes 164
3. Steep Slopes 164
4. Prime Agricultural Lands 165
5. Flood Hazard Areas 165
6. Critical and Unique Habitats 165
E. Economic Impacts 166
1. Introduction 166
2. User Charges 166
3. Local Cost Burden 170
4. Mitigative Measures 173
F. Impact Matrix 174
xiii
-------
Page
V - THE RECOMMENDED ACTION 179
A. Selection of the Recommended Alternative 179
1. Evaluation Results 179
2. Conclusions 182
B. Draft EIS Recommended Alternative 183
1. Description 183
2. Implementation 185
3. Impacts of the Recommended Alternative and Mitigating
Measures . . 187
VI - THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHORT-TERM USE
AND LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY 189
A. Short-Term Use of the Study Area .. 189
B. Impacts Upon Long-Term Productivity 189
1. Commitment of Non-Renewable Resources 189
2. Limitations on Beneficial Use of the Environment 189
VII - IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS
OF RESOURCES 191
VIII - PROBABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED 193
Glossary 195
Documents Cited in This Report 209
xiv
-------
TABLES
Table Page
1-1 Comparison of Proposed and Observed Effluent Parameters
for Frankfort and Elberta 9
1-2 Projected 1998 Design Flows, Crystal Lake Area Facility
Plan 11
1-3 Present Worth Comparison of EIS Alternatives, Crystal Lake
Area Facility Plan 14
II-l Soils Suitability for On-Site Systems Around Crystal Lake ... 36
II-2 Climatological Summaries for the Crystal Lake Area 40
11-3 Municipalities Using Groundwater for Prinking Supplies in
the Study Area 47
I1-4 Physical Characteristics of Betsie Lake and Crystal Lake .... 55
II-5 Non-Recreational Water Uses of Betsie Lake 57
II-6 Total Phosphorus Loads to Crystal Lake 60
II-7 Water Quality of Crystal Lake 62
II-8 Total Phosphorus Loads to Betsie Lake (1972-1973) 63
II-9 Parameters Influencing Septic Tank Performance Along
Crystal Lake Shoreline Areas 69
11-10 Permits Issued in the Proposed Service Area by GT-L-BHD
Between 1970-1977 Including Repairs and New Installations ... 71
11-11 Distribution of Cladophora Growth Along Crystal Lake
Shoreline as Percent of Sites Investigated 79
11-12 Characterization of Wetland Areas in the Crystal Lake
Study Area 82
11-13 Permanent Population Trends (1940-1975) 85
11-14 Population Projections and Average Annual Growth Rates for
Crystal Lake Proposed Sewer Service Area 86
11-15 Poverty Status - Families (1970) 87
11-16 Housing Characteristics of the Socioeconomic Study Area 89
11-17 Minimum Shoreland Ordinance Standards 94
xv
-------
Table Page
III-l Alternatives—Summary of Major Components 119
III-2 Cost-Effective Analysis of Alternatives 124
III-3 Small Waste Flow Management Functions by Operational
Component and by Basic and Supplemental Usage 142
2
IV-1 Phosphorus Loading Limits (g/m /yr) 146
IV-2 Estimates of Phosphorus Loads to Betsie Lake for the
Wastewater Treatment Alternatives 148
IV-3 Crystal Lake Phosphorus Budget 150
IV-4 Effluent Quality Comparison for Land Treatment and AWT
Systems 159
IV-5 Annual User Charges 167
IV-6 High-Cost Alternatives (Annual User Charges Exceed 2.5%
of Median Household Income) 171
IV-7 Financial Burden and Displacement Pressure 172
V-l Alternative Selection Matrix 180
xvi
-------
FIGURES
Figure Page
1-1 Location of Crystal Lake Study Area 2
1-2 Crystal Lake Study Area 3
1-3 Existing Wastewater Facilities and Boundaries of Presently
Sewered Areas 6
1-4 Facility Plan Proposed Service Area 12
1-5 Monthly Cost of Gravity Sewers 18
II-l Topography of Crystal Lake Study Area 28
II-2 Bedrock Geology of the Crystal Lake Study Area 29
II-3 Surficial Geology of the Crystal Lake Study Area 30
II-4 Major Soil Associations in the Crystal Lake Study Area 32
II-5 Soil Conservation Service Land Resource Inventory Maps for
the Crystal Lake Study Area 33
II-6 Location of Soil Borings Around Crystal Lake and the
Corresponding Limitations of the Soil Type for On-Site
Systems 35
II-7 Soil Suitability for On-Site Systems and Supply Irrigation .. 38
II-8 Prime Agricultural Lands of the Crystal Lake Study Area 39
II-9 Groundwater Flow Patterns for Crystal Lake 50
11-10 Location of High Nitrate Concentrations on the North Shore
of Crystal Lake (Selected Wells) 51
11-11 Surface Water Hydrology and Wetlands of the Crystal Lake
Study Area 53
11-12 Flow, Phosphorus Concentration and Phosphorus Loads in the
Cold Creek (1976-1977) 59
11-13 Flood Hazard Areas of the Crystal Lake Study Area 65
11-14 Plume Locations on Crystal Lake 67
11-15 Results of Aerial Shoreline Survey, EPIC 1978 70
11-16 Results of the Aerial Shoreline Survey, July 6,
September 5, 1976 75
xvii
-------
Figure Page
11-17 Existing Land Use of the Crystal Lake Study Area 91
III-l Phosphorus Loadings at Michigan Treatment Plants,
1976-1978 102
III-2 STEP-Typical Pumps Installation for Pressure Sewer 105
III-3 Land Application Sites for the Crystal Lake Study Area 108
III-4 EIS Alternative 1: Proposed Wastewater Facilities 126
III-5 EIS Alternative 2: Proposed Wastewater Facilities 128
III-6 EIS Alternative 3: Proposed Wastewater Facilities 129
III-7 EIS Alternative 4: Proposed Wastewater Facilities 131
III-8 EIS Alternative 5: Proposed Wastewater Facilities 132
III-9 EIS Alternative 6: Proposed Wastewater Facilities 134
IV-1 Trophic Status of Betsie Lake and Crystal Lake 147
V-l Limited Action Alternative 184
xviii
-------
SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS
P
y
v
a
An asterisk following a word indicates that the term is
defined in the Glossary at the end of this report. Used
at the first appearance of the term in this EIS.
less than
greater than
Rho
Mu, micro
Nu
Sigma
TECHNICAL ABBREVIATIONS
AWT
BOD
DO
ft2
fps
g/m /yr
GP
gpcd
gpm
I/I
kg/yr
kg/cap/yr
kg/mile
Ib/cap/day
mgd
mg/1
ml
msl
MPN
N
NFS
advanced wastewater treatment
biochemical oxygen demand
dissolved oxygen
square foot
feet per second
grams per square meter per year
grinder pump
gallons per capita per day
gallons per minute
infiltration/inflow
kilograms per year
kilograms per capita per year
kilograms per mile
pounds per capita per day
million gallons per day
milligrams per litre
millilitre
mean sea level—implies above msl unless otherwise indicated
most probable number
nitrogen
ammonia nitrogen
nitrate nitrogen
non-point source
xix
-------
O&M
P
PH
P°4
ppm
psi
RBC
SS
STEP
STP
ST/SAS
TKN
TP-P
EPAECO
operation and maintenance
phosphorus, or "as phosphorus"
measure of acidity or basicity; <7 is acidic; >7 is basic
phosphate
parts per million
pounds per square inch
rotating biological contactor
suspended solids
septic tank effluent pumping
sewage treatment plant
septic tank/soil absorption system
total Kjeldahl nitrogen
total phosphorus as phosphorus
micrograms per liter
name of a mathematical model
NON-TECHNICAL ABBREVIATIONS
DNR
EIS
EPA
EPIC
FWS
GT-L-BHD
HUD
NOAA
NES
NPDES
SCS
STORET
USDA
USGS
Michigan Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Impact Statement
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (of EPA)
Fish and Wildlife Service, United States Department of
the Interior
Grand Traverse-Leelanau-Benzie District Health Department
United States Department of Housing and Urban Development
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, United
States Department of Commerce
National Eutrophication Survey
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
Soil Conservation Service, United States Department of
Agriculture
STOrage and RETrieval (data base system of EPA)
United States Department of Agriculture
United States Geological Survey, Department of the Interior
xx
-------
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND AND ISSUES
A. PROJECT HISTORY AND DESCRIPTION
1. LOCATION
The subject of this Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is
requested Federal funding of proposed wastewater collection and
treatment facilities in the Crystal Lake area of Benzie County,
Michigan. The "Crystal Lake Area Facility Plan - Wastewater Collection
and Treatment" recommended construction of the facilities which will be
described later in this chapter. The new wastewater facilities would be
located in the City of Frankfort, the Villages of Beulah, Elberta and
Benzonia, and the Townships of Benzonia, Crystal Lake and Lake.
Together these communities make up the Facility Planning Area,
approximately one-fifth of the land area of Benzie County, which is
located in the northern part of the Lower Peninsula on the eastern shore
of Lake Michigan. The combined year-round population of the areas
proposed prepared for sewering (i.e., the Proposed Service Area) is
estimated to be 4,400, a figure which swells to about 8,300 in the
vacation season. Figure 1-1 shows their location within the State of
Michigan. Figure 1-2 delineates the Study Area.
2. HISTORY OF THE CONSTRUCTION GRANT APPLICATION
Water quality problems and wastewater management needs of the Study
Area have for several years been a concern of both area citizens and
governmental agencies. The following chronology lists actions that were
taken before and during the preparation of this Environmental Impact
Statement.
March, 1970 "Crystal Lake Water Quality Investigation" completed by
Dr. John J. Gannon of the School of Public Health,
University of Michigan, for the Keep Crystal Clear
Committee.
April, 1974 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
permits issued to City of Frankfort and Village of
Elberta by State of Michigan, Department of Natural
Resources (DNR).
November, 1974 NPDES permit issued to Village of Beulah by Michigan DNR.
March, 1975 "Report on Betsie Lake, Benzie County, Michigan, Working
Paper#185" published by United States Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) Region V, as part of the National
Eutrophication Survey (NES).
-------
BENZ1E COUNTY
Figure 1-1: Location of Crystal Lake Study Area
2
-------
fc,
-------
August-
November, 1975 Resolutions passed by local units of government
designating the Crystal Lake Area Sewage Disposal
Authority as the lead agency to prepare a facility plan
in application for an EPA construction grant.
December, 1975 Notice of Noncompliance with NPDES permit issued to
Village of Beulah by Michigan DNR.
October, 1976 Notice of Noncompliance and Order to Comply with NPDES
permit issued to Village of Beulah by Michigan DNR.
November, 1976 Michigan DNR proposed discharge limitations for Betsie
Lake, recommended that discharges not be made to Betsie
River or to Lake Michigan, and recommended land disposal
if possible.
December, 1976 Engineering study of wastewater treatment alternatives,
"Crystal Lake Area Facility Plan—Wastewater Collection
and Treatment," completed by Williams and Works, Inc.;
McNamee, Porter, and Seeley; and Perla Stout Associates
for the Crystal Lake Area Sewage Disposal Authority.
December, 1976 Hearing held by Crystal Lake Area Sewage Disposal
Authority on proposed Facility Plan.
June, 1977 Crystal Lake Area Sewage Disposal Authority and the
Michigan DNR formally request an EIS.
July, 1977 Declaration of Intent by EPA Region V to prepare an EIS.
October, 1977 Work begun by WAPORA, Inc., on the EIS for the Crystal
Lake area.
December, 1977 First EIS public information meeting.
February, 1978 "Final Summary Report on Crystal Lake Water Quality
Study" completed by Mr. Fred J. Tanis for the Crystal
Lake Property Owners Association.
June 15, 1978 Second EIS public information meeting.
3. THE CRYSTAL LAKE AREA FACILITY PLAN
In December 1976 the Crystal Lake Area Facility Plan was completed
and was subsequently submitted to EPA by the Benzie County Department of
Public Works, acting as the applicant for funding under the EPA
Construction Grants Program. The Plan, which proposed construction of
new wastewater collection and treatment facilities, had been developed
for the Crystal Lake Area Sewage Disposal Authority by three consulting
firms: Williams and Works, Inc., the lead consultant; McNamee, Porter,
and Seeley; and Perla Stout Associates.
-------
This section describes wastewater treatment facilities now existing
in the Study Area, summarizes the existing water quality problems
presented in the Facility Plan, and discusses the alternative solutions
and recommended course of action (the Proposed Action) developed there
in the Facility Plan. Conclusions reached in the Facility Plan and
summarized in this Section are not necessarily those reached in this
EIS.
a. Existing Wastewater Treatment Facilities
Three communities in the Study Area—the City of Frankfort, Elberta
Village, and Beulah Village—presently have some type of centralized
wastewater collection and treatment facilities. Crystal Lake Township,
Lake Township, Benzonia Township and Benzonia Village do not have
collection facilities. Wastewater in the latter areas is treated
on-site, principally by septic tank-soil absorption systems (ST/SAS).
Figure 1-3 shows the locations of existing community treatment
facilities, the boundaries of the sewer service areas, and the points of
effluent disposal.
Frankfort Primary Plant. The Frankfort primary treatment plant,
which was constructed in 1939, has a design capacity of 0.26 million
gallons per day (mgd). The plant serves almost all of the population of
Frankfort and also treats wastes from Pet, Inc., the only significant
source of industrial wastewater in the Study Area. Effluent from the
Frankfort plant is discharged into Betsie Lake. A description of the
treatment facilities at the City of Frankfort, Elberta Village and
Beulah Village and evaluation of the treatment performance are contained
in Chapter 4 of the Facility Plan.
Plant records indicate that the average daily flow to the Frankfort
plant for the period July 1974 to June 1976 was 0.27 mgd; the peak flow
reached 0.436 mgd. Treatment has provided removal of approximately 25%
of the biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) and 40% of the suspended solids
(SS). Maintenance costs have increased and some equipment, such as the
chlorination system and the comminutor*, needs repair or replacement.
Problems exist which are related to the age and condition of the
equipment and the plant cannot meet the proposed limitations on
discharge into Betsie Lake. Further, infiltration* and inflow*
hydraulically overload the plant, as documented in the Infiltration/
Inflow Analysis (I/I) conducted for the City.
Elberta Primary Plant. The Elberta primary treatment plant, built
in 1957 with an average design flow of 0.10 mgd, also discharges
effluent into Betsie Lake. This plant serves most of the population in
the Village.
From July 1974 to June 1976 average daily flow to the treatment
plant was 0.126 mgd; the peak flow reached 0.225 mgd. The plant has
averaged approximately 35% removal of BOD and 50% removal of SS. The
*See Glossary.
-------
-------
cost of maintaining the Elberta plant, like the Frankfort plant, is
increasing. The Infiltration/Inflow Analysis for the Village of Elberta
concluded that the existing sewer system is subject to significant
infiltration.
Beulah Oxidation Ponds. The Village of Beulah treatment facility
was designed to handle an average annual flow of 0.1 mgd. The system
serves the entire Village plus a mobile home park with approximately 40
trailers in the northwestern corner of the Village of Benzonia.
The facility employs four oxidation ponds and two seepage cells.*
The plant, constructed in 1971, was originally designed to dispose of
all effluent through the seepage cells, but during the last five years
it has been necessary to discharge some of the effluent into the Betsie
River when the cells become hydraulically overloaded. The NPDES permit
to discharge semi-annually to the Betsie River states that effluent may
not contain more than 30 mg/1 of BOD, 30 mg/1 of SS and 200 coliforms/
100 ml. However, stipulations in the permit that the treatment facility
be monitored and improved have not been met. Monitoring wells have been
provided to detect whether seepage from the cells pollutes the
groundwater.
The annual average flow to the Beulah treatment facility is
approximately 0.081 mgd. It has periodically been necessary to
discharge treated wastewaters from the final seepage cell to the Betsie
River because the hydraulic capacity of the seepage cells is 4,500 gpd
less than the present wastewaster flows.
Influent to the treatment system is not sampled prior to treatment.
Consequently, the present waste loadings and treatment efficiency are
not known. However, the Facility Plan estimated the average waste
loading to the plant at 70 pounds per day of both BOD and SS. The
Infiltration/Inflow Analysis for the Village of Beulah indicated that
the sewer system is subject to significant infiltration.
On-Site Treatment Systems. On-site wastewater systems, most
commonly the conventional septic tank-soil absorption system (ST/SAS),
serve all remaining parts of the Study Area. There are also a number of
systems in which wastewaters are disposed of in earth-covered,
gravel-filled pits in the ground. A few holding tanks have been
installed in the area in recent years.
The Facility Plan claims that on-site sewage disposal systems
contribute to the degradation of water quality in Crystal Lake.
b. Existing Problems with Water Quality and Wastewater
Treatment Facilities
As a preliminary step in the development of wastewater management
alternatives, the Facility Plan cites the following problems.
Betsie Lake. An analysis of Betsie Lake (National Eutrophication
Survey 1975) indicated that excessive nutrient loading is causing
eutrophic conditions. In 1972, 48% of the phosphorus load to the Lake
-------
was contributed by the two primary treatment plants serving Frankfort
and Elberta. These plants are incapable of meeting effluent standards
proposed by the State of Michigan for effluent discharges
to Betsie Lake. Table 1-1 compares the proposed effluent limitations
with effluent characteristics of the plants in 1975.
Significant infiltration was detected in the three sewer systems.
Storm sewers connected to the sanitary sewers in Frankfort are the
source of inflow in that system. The Facility Plan recommended sewer
system evaluation surveys for Frankfort and Elberta; rehabilitation of
Beulah's sewers was also recommended, but without such a survey.
Crystal Lake. During the preparation of the Facility Plan the
primary source of data on water quality in Crystal Lake was a report
titled "Crystal Lake Water Quality Investigations" by Dr. John J. Gannon
of the University of Michigan (1970). The Gannon report concluded that:
o the most important source of pollution in Crystal Lake was the
inflow from Cold Creek. Several business establishments and
houses along its north branch contribute phosphates to Cold
Creek.
o the highest coliform levels and algal concentrations existed
in the waters adjacent to the north shore toward the east end
of the lake.
o wells along the northeast shore showed significantly higher
concentrations of nitrate than did wells in other areas.
Nitrate levels in this area generally ranged from 1 to 6 mg/1
as N.* (EIS Note: of the 99 wells sampled on the northeast
shore, 45 had nitrate concentrations less than 1 mg/1 as N, 50
had concentrations between 1 and 6 mg/1 and 5 had
concentrations greater than 6 mg/1.)
o Crystal Lake is oligotrophic; dissolved oxygen concentrations
in the deep areas are 7.2 mg/1 or greater.
o the algal mass in Crystal Lake will increase three times in a
period of 7 to 10 years.
o sanitary sewage should be collected by means of a sewer system
that would encircle the lake; this sewage should then be
treated and discharged outside the basin.
A letter was included in the Facility Plan from Mr. Lyle Livasy,
R.S., staff sanitarian with the Grand Traverse-Leelanau Benzie District
Health Department, citing severe soil limitations around the lake for
on-site sewage disposal and high coliform bacteria counts at two houses
on the northeast shore.
-------
Table 1-1
COMPARISON OF PROPOSED AND OBSERVED EFFLUENT PARAMETERS
FOR FRANKFORT AND ELBERTA
Observed
Parameter (30-day average)
SS (mg/1)
Fecal Coliform (MPN/100 ml)
PH
Total P (mg/1)
Proposed
10
15
200
6.5-9.5
1.0
^
Frankfort
140
128
440
7.1
11.0
b
Elberta
119
110
N/A
N/A
N/A
(or 80% removal,
whichever is stricter)
Survey performed 8/75.
Calculated from removal efficiencies.
-------
The Crystal Lake Area Facility Plan reviewed existing data on water
quality problems in Crystal Lake and the quality of surrounding
groundwater, as well as information on site conditions such as soil
types around the lake. The "Crystal Lake Water Quality Investigation"
(Gannon 1970) and the experience of Grand Traverse-Leelanau-Benzie
District Health Department were the major sources of information on the
problem referenced in the Facility Plan. The Facility Plan concluded
that high water tables, small lots and poor soil provided sufficient
evidence to link on-site systems and subsequent water quality problems
and, therefore, to warrant sewering the Crystal Lake shoreline.
c. Proposed Solutions: Alternatives Addressed in the
Facility Plan
The Facility Plan developed four alternative wastewater management
plans for meeting effluent requirements and alleviating problems
associated with the existing collection and treatment systems in the
Facility Planning Area. Selection of the Proposed Action from among
these alternatives was based on analyses of costs, environmental impacts
and implementability of each.
Collection and treatment facilities were sized for the year 1998
and were based on discharge of 100 gallons of wastewater per capita per
day (gpcd) for permanent residents and 60 gpcd for seasonal residents.
Commercial and industrial flows were included in the estimates.
Projected flow for the City of Frankfort included 0.049 mgd from Pet,
Inc. Also included is residual infiltration/inflow based on values
determined in the I/I analyses that had been conducted previously for
the Frankfort, Elberta and Beulah collection systems (See Table 1-2).
The Facility Plan concluded that the capacity at the Beulah
treatment facility would be sufficient through 1998 and that adequate
treatment levels could be attained if (a) the I/I problem were corrected
and (b) an additional flood irrigation area were to be provided if
required. Each of the alternatives presented in the Facility Plan
assumed that wastewater from the Village of Beulah would be treated at
the local treatment plant and that I/I would be corrected. The Plan
also determined that it was not feasible to upgrade and expand the
existing primary plants at Frankfort and Elberta and recommended
abandonment of these facilities.
Finally, the Facility Plan concluded that collection and
centralized treatment of all wastewaters in the Proposed Service Area
shown in Figure 1-4 would be necessary.
In developing the alternatives presented in the Facility Plan,
several elements were considered:
o Optimum operation of existing facilities,
o Flow and waste reduction,
o Collection systems,
o Wastewater treatment and disposal, and
o Sludge disposal.
10
-------
Table 1-2
PROJECTED 1998 DESIGN FLOWS,. CRYSTAL LAKE AREA FACILITY PLAN
Community Yearly
Benzonia
Benzonia Township
Crystal Lake
Township
Elberta
Frankfort
Lake Township
average flow
0.046 mgd
0.128 mgd
0.122 mgd
0.068 mgd
0.257 mgd
0.035 mgd
Average
summer flow
0.048 mgd
0.141 mgd
0.183 mgd
0.068 mgd
0.257 mgd
0.059 mgd
Flow on
peak day
0.058 mgd
0.182 mgd
0.210 mgd
0.117 mgd
0.401 mgd
0.070 mgd
Williams & Works; McNamee, Porter and Seeley; and Perla Stout
Associates. 1976. Crystal Lake area facility plan for wastewater
collection and treatment, Benzie County, Michigan.
11
-------
12
-------
Plans for correcting I/I problems were incorporated into the
alternatives, but no other structural flow- or waste-reduction measures
were analyzed. Also recommended by the Plan was the non-structural
approach of increasing sewer use charges as a tool to encourage
conservation. The sewerage systems consisted of conventional gravity
collectors with a combination of force main and gravity interceptors;
routing of sewers varied with each alternative plan, depending on
location and number of treatment facilities. Treatment of centrally
collected wastewaters by processes such as activated sludge and
physical-chemical techniques and by land application after aeration
in lagoons were examined. Methods investigated for disposal of
sludge were: (1) digestion, with disposal of liquid sludge on land; (2)
digestion, with disposal of dewatered sludge on land; and (3) digestion
and landfilling of dewatered sludge.
The four wastewater management alternatives developed by the
Facility Plan were:
Alternative No. 1. Treatment of wastewaters from Frankfort,
Elberta, Lake Township, and Crystal Lake Township at a new rotating
biological contactor (RBC) plant located in Frankfort and discharging to
Betsie Lake. Treatment of wastewaters from Benzonia and Benzonia
Township at a new land disposal facility located in Benzonia Township.
Alternative No. 2. Treatment of all wastewaters at a new RBC plant
in Frankfort, on land previously purchased by the City, and discharge of
the effluent to Betsie Lake.
Alternative No. 3. Treatment of all wastewaters at a new land
disposal facility.
Alternative No. 4. Treatment of wastewaters from Frankfort and
Elberta at a new land disposal facility.
Table 1-3 shows the estimated project construction costs and
operation and maintenance costs and salvage values in terms of present
worth and sums the total present worth for each of the four
alternatives. An interest rate of 6-1/8% and a 20-year planning period
were used in developing the costs presented in the table.
d. The Facility Plan Proposed Action
Alternative No. 2 was selected. It included improvement of the
operation of the Beulah plant plus entirely new centralized facilities
to collect and treat wastewaters. Flow would originate not only from
Frankfort and Elberta but also from new areas--Benzonia Village,
additional areas of Benzonia Township and Crystal Lake Township and from
Lake Township. The sewer service area proposed in Figure 1-2 in the
Facility Plan is shown in Figure 1-4.
The RBC system was selected over activated sludge and physical-
chemical treatment on the bases of cost and ease of operation. The
plant would include facilities for chemical addition and microstraining
to provide advanced treatment.
13
-------
P S3
i-i H-
ro H-1
P i— >
P.
HI p
P 3
o cn
H-
i_it
rt ^
VJ O
T3 fT*
I—1 cn
p ~.
3 3
Hi O
o a
I-! p
3 ro
oi ro
cn »
rt
fl> ^d
3 o
rt rt
ro ro
i-i i-i
O p
O 3
1 — l PL
1— 1
ro co
o ro
rt ro
H- h- '
o ro
3 ^
P
3 P
PL 3
PL
rt
ro ro
P h
rt h-1
3 P
ro
3 co
rt rt
- O
e
W rt
ft>
3 ^
N CO
H- cn
ro o
o
n H-
O p
e rt
3 ro
rt cn
^
H' *JI>
D ~J
P4 ON
H- •
OQ
P
3 0
• i-i
cn
rt
P
1 — i
IT*
ro
H
o
rt 2;
P ro
1- rt
3 ^C
ro H
rt ro
cn
•d ro
i-i 3
ro rt
cn
ro £!
3 o
rt i-!
rt
C 3-
0
i-i
rt
3"
OO M
v **
kO -P-
00 C/i
4 V*
0 0
0 0
0 O
!_,
OD
4>
K3
K>
\*
O
O
o
M
OO CO
"ON "In
\O K3
h- ' ON
O O
O O
O O
to ho
M O
ON M
O O
O O
0 0
{-*
P
O co H 3
Qt p o PL
K H1 rt
< P PL
/-v pa (_i p.
IT) OQ cn
co ro *d TJ
N-X MO
< o cn
p i— j. p
M ro H
c o
ro rt HI
P
^00
IT) O H-
s3 cn H
^ rt H-
rt
M
+ i
^*-s •• — ^
M
V*
N3 O
— 1 Cn to
O VD 4>
000
000
O O O
g
.
?"
^?T
N S ^
to
ON M O
M 00 NO
I-1 K> ^-J
O O O
O O O
000
/™N /^N
-f- 1
N ' N— ^
I-1
to 1— ' -^1
OO O Co
O 0 0
o o o
o o o
M
bd
2 O co H n
ro c-> P o
rt S M rt T-)
< Oi M
•d /-s p M p
i-i *r) OQ a
rc s^ ro *d rt
cn N— - f-i
ro M to
J> h- 1 K> -P-
~J 00 O OO
I— ' >-J h- ' Ui
O O O O
O O O O
O O O O
g
•
£>
/-^\ /"N
+ 1
V_X N»X
LO hO
Ln \o h-1 -^J
ON *^j Ln -P>
O K3 00 C^
V V V* «*
0000
O O O O
o o o o
s: o
P O
cn !z, o co H I-1
rt ro (?° p O H**
ro rt s i— ' rt ro
si < P n
p 'd ^s p M rt
rt i-i IT) OQ H-
ro ro 33 ro "d o
i-t co ^-^ ^3
ro < o
rt 3 p t-j. cn
i-i rt H ro ^J
ro p; o cn
P Sl ro rt rt
rt O ro
g i-i ^~* n s
ro rt hd O
3 D" S3 cn
rt N_X rt
cn
cn
rt
ro
3
77^
* — * ^^
h-1
Co
*•
Cn
00
*-J
0
O
o
M -P-
*• •*
*«O r— i *^J
M Co H
t-0 vo f~
000
O O O
O O O
*+ T
1— >
to
Xo
Cn
M
O
O
O
h-1
I— ' N> -P-
O O VD
ON to h-1
VO ^J NO
*» ^ ^
O O O
o o o
o o o
-c/>
/+"T
v__^ s — ^
1 — '
Ln
V*
ON
Cn
O
0
O
1 — *
I—1 [Sj ""^J
i* %* V*
hO \-> M
I-1 00 to
VO ^J to
o o o
000
o o o
-c/>
/ \ x^
+ 1
N-^ ^^
1 '
to
ON
00
CO
O
O
O
1 — •
M h-1 -P-
h-4 VO Cn
O O> Cn
O OO ON
O O O
O O O
0 0 O
C?
•
|~ '
25
o
"
IS3
a
O
•
to
g
O
•
j>
hij
P
n
H-
\— *
P-
rt
v<^
>X)
s
L1!
CO
w
S
^"r:
^
0
^j
LJ
!-M
n
y
m
^t>
{ZL
H
CO
O
^
^"—1
0
rq
M
M
CAl
£l
H H
5d cr"
> ro
pa H H
Jo1 w w
H. to
0
$ n
1 i p3
p co
. ^>
1 - 1
ro "
3 C
f" S
rt o
p. L^
rc >
s
S
>5
n
M
hi
-,
^3
1
14
-------
B. ISSUES OF THIS EIS
The Environmental Protection Agency's review of the Facility Plan
Proposed Action identified the following issues as warranting the
preparation of this EIS.
I. COST EFFECTIVENESS
Capital cost for the Facility Plan Proposed Action was estimated in
the Plan to be $18.4 million. This equates to an investment of $2207
per person and $8654 per existing dwelling unit within the Proposed
Service Area. These per-person and per-household investments would be
among the highest in EPA Region V.
Eighty-one percent of the estimated capital cost would be for new
collector and interceptor sewers. Extensive use of pressure sewers as a
potentially less expensive alternative to gravity sewers was considered
by the Facility Plan consultants but at the insistence of the State of
Michigan was not evaluated in the Plan. Reliance on septic tank systems
to reduce the new areas to be sewered was briefly considered but was not
incorporated into any of the Facility Plan alternatives. Use of other
on-lot sewage disposal methods or small-scale technologies was not
considered.
2. IMPACTS ON WATER QUALITY
The likely impacts of the Facility Plan Proposed Action and
alternatives to it on water quality were not satisfactorily addressed
in the Plan. Of principal concern are eutrophication of Crystal
Lake and Betsie Lake and nearshore plant growth in Crystal Lake.
Citizen concern over growth of aquatic plants in scattered
shoreline areas of Crystal Lake resulted in local funding of two
limnological investigations of the Lake: by Gannon in 1970 and Tanis in
1978. Both studies documented the presence near some shorelines of
aquatic plants growing on the lake bottom. The earlier report by Gannon
predicted that substantial increases in plant growth would occur at
existing nutrient loading rates. The report recommended that a sanitary
sewer be built around the lake to collect sewage for treatment and
export from the Crystal Lake watershed. The conclusions and
recommendations of this report and statements of the local sanitarian
(Livasy n.d.) were cited in the Facility Plan as the basis for not
relying on septic tank systems around Crystal Lake in the future. The
later report by Tanis, showed that plant productivity had not increased
as predicted and suggested that "an alternative which addresses specific
problem areas may be more appropriate" than complete sewering of the
shoreline. Neither the Facility Plan nor the limnological reports
evaluated quantitatively the probable impacts on water quality of
sewering or not sewering the shoreline of Crystal Lake.
A 41% reduction in phosphorus load to Betsie Lake, resulting in
removal of phosphorus from Frankfort and Elberta wastewater, was
15
-------
cited in the Facility Plan. However, the Plan did not describe the
relationship between such a reduction and lake eutrophication.
Nor were calculations made of an increase in the nutrient load from new
discharges of Crystal Lake area wastewaters and from larger discharges
of effluent which would follow population growth.
3. ECONOMIC IMPACT
The estimated user charge for the Facility Plan Proposed Action was
$175 per year for each residence or residential equivalent in the new
sewer service area around Crystal Lake. This charge would amount to
1.9% of the permanent residents' average annual income. Crystal Lake
Proposed Sewer Service Area homeowners would pay an initial $1500 for
stub fee* and connection charge. In addition, the homeowner would pay
for installation of a house sewer connecting his household plumbing with
the public sewer.
The effect of these sewerage costs could be to encourage seasonal
and fixed income residents to sell their properties or to convert from
seasonal use to permanent residency.
4. INDUCED GROWTH AND SECONDARY IMPACTS
While the high costs of wastewater collection might force some
current residents to move, the availability of sewers in the Crystal
Lake watershed would make possible construction of new dwellings in
greater number and in higher densities than is presently feasible. The
potential for significant future development is indicated by the
substantial number of undeveloped platted shoreline, second tier and
subdivision lots in the watershed.
The rate and type of development supported by a central sewer
system could have undesirable impacts. In particular, housing
construction on steep slopes could accelerate soil erosion which, in
turn, would increase nutrient impacts to Crystal Lake or Betsie Lake.
In addition, the density and type of future development feasible with a
central sewer system could be considerably different from what is
presently typical of the Crystal Lake area.
C. NATIONAL PERSPECTIVE ON THE RURAL SEWERING PROBLEM
These EIS issues, that have been discussed above, are not unique to
the proposed plan for wastewater management in the Crystal Lake Study
Area but are typical of concerns raised by a large number of wastewater
projects for rural and developing communities that have been submitted
to EPA for funding. The scope of the problem has grown in the last few
years as controversy has mounted over the high costs and possible
impacts of providing conventional sewerage facilities to small com-
munities across the country.
16
-------
1. SOCIOECONOMICS
To assess the magnitude of the cost burden that many proposed
wastewater collection projects would impose on small communities and the
reasons for the high costs, EPA studied over 250 facilities plans from
49 states for pending projects for communities under 50,000 population
(Dearth 1977). EPA found that, even with substantial State and Federal
construction grants, the costs of conventional sewering are sometimes
beyond the means of families in rural and semi-rural areas. This was
particularly true for those communities where the completely new
facilities proposed would result in annual user charges of more than
$200 per household.
The Federal government has developed criteria to identify high-cost
wastewater facilities projects (The White House Rural Development
Initiatives 1978). Projects are considered to place a financial burden
on rural community users when annual user charges (debt service plus
operation and maintenance) would exceed:
o 1.5% of median household incomes less than $6,000;
o 2.0% of median household incomes between $6,000 and $10,000; or
o 2.5% of median household incomes over $10,000.
Annual user charges exceeding these criteria would materially affect the
households' standard of living. Federal agencies involved in funding
wastewater facilities will work with the community to achieve lower
project costs through a change in the project's scope or design. If the
project's scope or design is not changed, the agencies will work with
the community until they are assured that the community is aware of the
financial impacts of undertaking the high-cost project.
It is the collection system that is chiefly responsible for the
high costs of conventional sewerage facilities for small communities.
Typically, 80% or more of the total capital cost for newly serviced
rural areas is spent for collection system. Figure 1-5 indicates that
the costs per residence for gravity sewers increase exponentially at,
population density decreases. Primary factors contributing to this
cost/density relationship were found to be:
o greater length of sewer pipe per dwelling in lower-density
areas;
o more problems with grade, resulting in more lift stations or
excessively deep sewers;
o regulations or criteria which set eight inches as the smallest
allowable sewer pipe diameter; and
o inability of small communities to spread capital costs among
larger populations sewered previously.
In addition to the comparatively high costs of sewers, facilities
were sometimes found to be more expensive than necessary due to:
17
-------
Figure 1-5
40
S 30
I
£
I 20
TO
Cost (Vmonth) = 43e ~° ' (p/a'
4 6 8 10 12
Population Density, persons/acre
Monthly Cott Of Gravity Sewers
14
Dearth, K.H. 1977. In proceedings of EPA national conference on
less costly wastewater treatment systems for small communities,
April 12-14, 1977, Reston, VA.
18
-------
o oversophistication in design, with accompanying high chemical
usage, large energy requirements, and costly maintenance and
operator expense, when simpler methods would do.
o use of expensive construction materials such as non-locally
produced brick and block and terrazzo when a prefab steel and
concrete building would perform satisfactorily.
o abandonment of existing treatment works without economic
justification.
2. SECONDARY IMPACTS
Installation of centralized collection and treatment systems in
previously unsewered areas can have dramatic effects on development and,
hence, on the economy, demography and environment of rural communities.
These effects can be desirable, or they may substantially offset
community objectives for water resource improvement, land use planning
and environmental protection.
In broad terms, a community's potential for recreational, resi-
dential, industrial, commercial or institutional development is deter-
mined by economic factors such as the availability of land, capital,
skilled manpower and natural resources. However, fulfillment of the
potential can be limited by the unavailability of facilities or services
called infrastructure elements, such as water supply, sewerage, electric
power distribution and transportation. If a missing infrastructure
element is supplied, development of one type or another may take place,
depending upon prevailing local economic factors. Such development is
considered to be "induced growth" and is a secondary impact of the
provision of the essential infrastructure element.
Conflicts between induced growth and other types of existing or
potential development are also termed secondary impacts as are induced
growth's effects on existing water resources, land use, air quality,
cultural resources, aesthetic features and environmentally sensitive
areas.
Secondary impacts of new wastewater facilities may be highly
desirable. For example, diversification of the local employment base
may be possible only when sufficient wastewater collection and treatment
capacity is provided for commercial or industrial development. On the
other hand, new commercial or industrial development may not be
compatible with existing recreational or agricultural interests.
Residential development accompanying expansion of the employment base
may take place on prime agricultural land, steep slopes or wetlands, or
may otherwise infringe on valued natural features.
3. THE NEED FOR MANAGEMENT OF DECENTRALIZED ALTERNATIVE
SYSTEMS
A promising alternative to expensive centralized sewer systems in
rural areas is a decentralized wastewater management system. Both
engineering and management are integral parts of such a system, and
19
-------
"decentralized alternatives," as used in this EIS, incorporate both
engineering and management elements.
Briefly, the engineering element consists of the use of existing
and new on-site systems, rehabilitation or replacement of those systems
where necessary, and construction of small-scale off-site systems where
existing on-site systems are not acceptable.
The management element consists of continuing supervision of the
systems' installation, maintenance, rehabilitation and appropriate
monitoring of the systems' environmental impacts.
While other factors such as soil characteristics, groundwater
hydrology and lot configurations are highly important, adequate
management may be critical to the success of decentralized alternatives
in many communities. Similarly, lack of adequate management undoubtedly
contributed to past failures of many on-site wastewater facilities and,
therefore, the lack of trust in which they are held by local public
health officials and consulting engineers.
Historically, state and local health officials were not empowered
even to regulate installation of on-site systems until after World War
II. They usually acted in only an advisory capacity. As the conse-
quences of unregulated use of the septic tank-soil adsorption systems
became apparent in the 1950s and 1960s, health officials were granted
new authority. Presently most health officials have authority for per-
mitting and inspecting or denying new installations, and they can
require renovation and replacement of on-site systems. However, their
role in the operation and maintenance of on-site systems remains largely
advisory. There is seldom either a budget or the authority to inspect
or monitor a system.
In the 1970's, the Congress recognized the need for continuing
supervision and monitoring of on-site systems in the 1977 Clean Water
Act. Now, EPA regulations implementing that Act require that, before a
construction grant for on-site systems may be made, the applicant must
meet a number of requirements and must:
o Certify that it will be responsible for properly installing,
operating and maintaining the funded systems;
o Establish a comprehensive program for regulation and inspec-
tion of on-site systems that will include periodic testing of
existing potable water wells and, where a substantial number
of on-site systems exists, more extensive monitoring of
aquifers; and
o Obtain assurance of unlimited access to each individual system
at all reasonable times for inspection, monitoring, construc-
tion, maintenance, operation, rehabilitation and replacement.
In some cases, implementation of these requirements by
municipalities may be hindered by lack of state enabling legislation for
small waste flow management districts and by lack of adequately trained
20
-------
manpower. The municipality may have no control over the former and be
at a disadvantage because of the latter. Other implementation factors,
over which municipalities should have control, are discussed in Section
III.D of this EIS.
D. PURPOSE AND APPROACH OF THE EIS AND CRITERIA FOR
EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES
1. PURPOSE
This EIS documents EPA's review and analysis of the
application for EPA Step II funding of the Facility Plan Proposed Action.
Based upon this review, the Agency will take one of several actions:
o Approve the grant application, possibly with recommendations
for design changes and/or measures to mitigate impacts of the
Facility Plan Proposed Action;
o Return the application with recommendations for additional
Step I analysis;
o Reject the grant application; or
o With the applicant's and State's concurrence, approve Step II
funding for an alternative to the Facility Plan Proposed
Action, as presented in this EIS.
The review and analysis focused on the issues identified in Section
I.B and was conducted with an awareness of the more general
considerations of rural sewering problems discussed in Section I.C.
Major emphasis has been placed on developing and evaluating alternative
wastewater management approaches to be compared with the Facility Plan
Proposed Action.
2. APPROACH
The review and analysis reported in this EIS included a series of
tasks, which were undertaken in approximately the following sequence:
a. Review of Available Data
Data presented in the Facility Plan and other sources were reviewed
for applicability in development and/or evaluation of the Plan Proposed
Action and of the new alternatives developed for the EIS (EIS
Alternatives). Sources of data are listed in this Bibliography.
b. Segment Analysis
As a basis for revised population projections and for development
of alternatives the Proposed Service Area was partitioned into a number
of segments. The number of dwellings in each segment was counted from
black and white aerial photographs. Available information on soils,
depth to groundwater, water quality problems, environmentally sensitive
21
-------
areas and land use capabilities was tabulated for each segment and the
tabulations used to make preliminary estimates of the need for off-site
wastewater disposal.
c. Review of Wastewater Design Flows
Available population projections were revised on the basis of the
segment house counts. New EPA guidelines for estimating design waste-
water flows were then used to revise the year 2000 wastewater flow
projections.
d. Development of Alternatives
First, technologies that might potentially reduce project costs or
minimize adverse impacts while still solving existing problems were
examined. Four categories of alternative technologies — flow
reduction, low-cost sewers, decentralization, and land application --
were considered according to their functions in a wastewater management
system. Next, several specific areawide alternatives were developed,
combining the alternative technologies into complete wastewater
management systems that would serve the Proposed Service Area. The
technologies and the alternatives are described in Chapter III.
e. Estimation of Costs for Alternatives
In order to assure comparability of costs between the Facility Plan
Proposed Action and EIS alternatives, all alternatives were designed to
serve a fixed design year population. Total present worth and local
user charge estimates were based upon unit costs listed in a separate
engineering report (Arthur Beard Engineers, Inc. 1978)
f. Evaluation of the Alternatives
The new alternatives were developed with a knowledge of the local
environmental setting and with the understanding that they will be
evaluated under criteria from several disciplines. The general criteria
for evaluating both the Facility Plan Proposed Action and the EIS
alternatives are listed in Section I.D.3 below.
g. Needs Documentation
The need for improved treatment of Frankfort's and Elberta's waste-
water is clear and is not at issue in this EIS. However, the effects of
lakeshore on-site systems on Crystal Lake, groundwaters and public
health had not been clearly documented in the Facility Plan. Because
determination of eligibility for Federal funding of a substantial
portion of the Facility Plan Proposed Action will be based on the
documentation of these effects, several supplemental studies were
conducted:
o an aerial survey of visible septic tank system malfunctions
using low-altitude color and infrared photography by EPA's
Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center;
22
-------
o estimation of the existing Crystal Lake nutrient budget and
empirical modeling of the lake's eutrophication status;
o a sanitary survey of lakeside residences conducted by the
University of Michigan Biological Station to evaluate usage,
design and condition of on-site systems;
o a "Septic Snooper" survey to locate and sample septic tank
leachate plumes entering Crystal Lake from nearby on-site
systems; and
o evaluation by the Soil Conservation Service of soil
suitability for on-site systems.
The results of these needs documentation studies were not available
for consideration in the initial development of alternatives. The
results of each study have required continuing modification of the
alternatives as initially designed and have been the basis for necessary
refinements in the determination of the eligibility of any new sewers
around Crystal Lake for Federal funding.
3. MAJOR CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES
While the high cost of sewering rural communities is a primary
reason for examining alternative approaches to wastewater management,
cost is not the only criterion. Trade-offs between cost and other major
impacts will have to be made. The various criteria are defined below.
a. Cost
With some exceptions for innovative technologies, EPA construction
grant regulations allow funding of only the most cost-effective
alternatives. Cost effectiveness has been measured here as the total
present worth of an alternative, including capital costs for facilities
needed now, capital costs for facilities required later in the 20-year
planning period, and operation and maintenance costs for all wastewater
facilities. Salvage value for facilities expected to be in service
after 20 years has been deducted. Analyses of cost effectiveness do not
recognize differences between public and private expenditures.
The responsible municipality or sanitary district will recover
operation, maintenance and local debt retirement costs through periodic
sewage bills. The local economic impact of new wastewater facilities
will be felt largely through associated residential user charges. Only
publicly financed costs were included in residential user charges.
Salvage value was not factored into residential user charges.
No assumptions were made here about frontage fees or hook-up
charges that might be levied by the municipalities. Therefore, the user
charges reported here for the alternatives are not directly comparable
to those reported in the Facility Plan, where each newly sewered
residence would pay $1,500 in connection and stub fees.
23
-------
Some homeowners may incur costs that they would have to pay
directly to contractors. Installation of gravity house sewers on
private land and renovation or replacement if privately owned on-lot
systems for seasonally occupied dwellings are not eligible for Federal
funding and are seldom financed by municipalities. These private costs
are identified for each alternative.
b. Significant Environmental and Socioeconomic Impacts
The system selected for the Proposed Service Area will impact on
environmental and socioeconomic resources within the Study Area.
Following a comprehensive review of possible impacts of the Facility
Plan Proposed Action and the EIS alternatives, several types of impacts
were determined to warrant in-depth evaluation and discussion in this
EIS. These impacts are classified as follows:
o Surface Water Quality Impacts,
o Groundwater Impacts,
o Population and Land Use Impacts including Infringement on
Environmentally Sensitive Areas, and
o Economic Impacts.
c. Reliability
Reliability criteria for the alternatives include both ability to
remedy existing water quality problems and prospects of protecting water
quality in the future. This first criterion was applied in the analysis
of surface and groundwater impacts of the alternatives presented in
Chapter IV. That analysis assumed that the collection, treatment and
disposal units of each alternative would operate effectively as
designed. The second criterion recognizes that all structural,
mechanical and electrical facilities are subject to failure. Types of
possible failures and appropriate remedies and preventive measures were
reviewed for selected components of the alternatives.
d. Flexibility
The capability of an alternative to accommodate increasing
wastewater flows from future development in the Proposed Service Area is
referred to as its flexibility. In order to demonstrate the relative
levels of investment for different alternatives, all were designed and
costed to provide service for the same population -- the design year
population projected in Chapter II. However, factors such as the amount
of land that could be developed using on-lot systems or the ability to
increase the capacity of a treatment plant might have a significant
effect on future development in the Study Area. The capability of the
alternatives to accomodate increased wastewater flows is reviewed in
Chapter III. The effects of the alternatives' flexibility on population
growth are predicted in Chapter IV.
24
-------
CHAPTER II
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
INTRODUCTION
The abundant water resources and their many recreational opportun-
ities make the Crystal Lake Study Area a pleasant place to live and an
inviting vacation spot.
The centerpiece of the region is Crystal Lake, more than 8 miles
long, very deep and very clear. Framed by wooded morainic cliffs, it is
one of the major scenic attractions of northern Michigan. The sur-
rounding landscape ranges from sand dunes and rolling terraces to steep
hills and ridges rising 300 feet above lake level. Marshes and (wet)
woodlands are home to a variety of animal and plant life. The Lake is a
notable cold water fishery, "managed" for game fishing.
Part of the free-flowing Betsie River, which passes through the
Study Area, has merited designation by the State of Michigan as a
"natural river," and preservation of its aesthetic values is thus safe-
guarded. The link between the River and Lake Michigan is Betsie Lake,
which is not only an important recreational asset but also furnishes
harboring, docking and mooring for Great Lakes shipping.
Lake Michigan, which moderates weather and climate in the area and
brings commerce to its port, offers more recreational opportunity.
Still another outstanding resource is Round Lake and its environs,
which have been included in the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore
Park.
The original hardwood forests have long since been logged. Early
settlers cleared the land, and agriculture predominated in the region
for many years. Today there are patches of woods, and prime agricul-
tural land in row crops or orchards, but now agriculture employs only
7.2% of the permanent population. The largest single employer is Pet,
Inc., but service and retailing, oriented largely toward vacationers,
are the major occupations.
The Crystal Lake area is a well-established recreation center.
Boating, swimming, sailing and water skiing are popular, as is fishing.
The Betsie River, a year-round fishing stream, is a spawning ground for
trout and salmon and contains other game species as well. Just to the
north are a fine salmon fishery and a wilderness area, and wildlife
offers recreation to both hunter and observer. Hang gliding, other air
sports and, in the winter, nearby skiing add to the diversity of recrea-
tion available.
The Study Area also serves as a gateway and a service area for
visitors to these other recreational attractions as it lies between them
and major population centers to the south. It is a role that is likely
to grow, expecially with the planned expansion of facilities for the
Sleeping Bear Dunes Park.
25
-------
The vacation population now approaches, and may surpass the Study
Area's year-round population by the end of the century, when a total of
12,000 is projected. The only city in the area, Frankfort, had a per-
manent population of 1,822 in 1975. No income data are available on the
seasonal population, but information on Benzie County indicates that the
range of incomes of the permanent population is below the State average
while the proportion of retired or elderly persons is higher than the
State average. Throughout the area, residential structures are pri-
marily single-family dwellings.
Evaluation of the courses of action open to EPA must start from an
analysis of the existing situation. This chapter offers an inventory of
baseline conditions, divided into such categories as soils, groundwater,
surface water, and biology. Social and economic aspects of the human
environment are discussed, as is the functioning of wastewater treatment
facilities presently in operation.
Use was made of existing data, but it was necessary to undertake
additional field work in order to obtain better information and to
resolve such key issues as the need to sewer Crystal Lake's entire
shore. The new studies included: a sanitary survey; a sampling of
leachate plumes from nearby septic systems; an aerial survey of visible
septic tank malfunctions; a soils survey; estimation of nutrient loads
entering Crystal Lake; and modeling of the Lake's eutrophication status.
In general, data given in the tables are not repeated in the text, and
readers wishing more information should use the Appendixes for fuller
explanations and details.
Research has revealed striking contrasts between Crystal Lake and
Betsie Lake. The watershed acreage that drains into Crystal Lake is
only twice as large as the surface area of that lake; for Betsie Lake,
this ratio is 627:1. Similarly, it is estimated that water entering
Crystal Lake remains for 63 years, but water entering Betsie Lake flows
out within 2 days. Although its depth and water retention time make
Crystal Lake a "nutrient trap," and although there are some algal
growths near portions of the shore, its quality is excellent. Betsie
Lake, despite its heavy outflow, is eutrophic, and it may be difficult
to correct this condition.
A. PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
1. PHYSIOGRAPHY
The landscape of the Crystal Lake Area has its origin in the events
of the glacial age that shaped the entire northern part of the United
States. The major features in the Study Area that were formed by that
glaciation are the following:
o Lake Michigan -- the area's western boundary. Mean lake
elevation is 580 feet above mean sea level (msl).
o Crystal Lake -- the center of the Facility Planning Area, with
a surface area of approximately 9700 acres. It is roughly
26
-------
rectangular in shape. Its long axis is 8.14 miles, running
northwest to southeast.
o Lake-bed sands, outwash* materials, sand dunes and exposed
lake terrace -- primarily to the east and west of Crystal
Lake. Relatively narrow lake terraces are on the north and
south shores.
o Morainic hills and ridges -- north and south of Crystal Lake.
With elevations of over 900 feet above msl, the hills and
ridges are the highest points in the Study Area. Some slopes
in moraine areas exceed 30%.
o The Betsie River -- to the south of Crystal Lake. The River
widens into Betsie Lake prior to entering Lake Michigan.
Other features of the area include the broad, flat floodplains of
Round Lake, Long Lake, and Rush Lake to the north of Crystal Lake. At
one time a pond was formed in the floodplain of the Betsie River, in the
southeast corner of the Study Area, by construction of Homestead Dam,
but it disappeared when the dam was removed.
An interesting feature of the Crystal Lake shoreline is the sandy
lake terrace on the north and south, which was exposed in 1873 by the
inadvertent lowering of the water level, thereby providing a strip of
land on which roads and houses have been built.
The town of Beulah lies on the lake-bed sands and outwash plains
east of Crystal Lake; there is also agricultural use. The towns of
Frankfort and Elberta are located in relatively level areas north and
south of Betsie Lake, and the rolling topography of the dunes area
between Crystal Lake and Lake Michigan has also attracted residential
development. Benzonia, at the southeast corner of Crystal Lake, is the
only major area developed on the moraines.
The entire Study Area is drained by the Betsie River, which empties
into Lake Michigan through Betsie Lake.
Topographic relief of the Study Area is illustrated in Figure II-l;
topographic features that are sensitive to development, e.g., slopes
greater than 15%, are identified there.
2. GEOLOGY
Sediments of glacial origin, characterized by sandy, hilly
moraines, alluvial and eolian sands, and glacial outwash overlie
Devonian limestones and shales in the Study Area. The bedrock limestone
of the Traverse formation generally borders Lake Michigan and is ap-
proximately 1700 feet thick (see Figure II-2). It underlies most of the
Study Area, extending to the eastern limit of Crystal Lake. Immediately
east of the Traverse limestones and lapping over them are the black
Antrim shales which average as much as 100 feet in thickness (Martin
1957). The surficial geology of the Study Area is shown in Figure II-3-
27
-------
28
-------
29
-------
30
-------
3. SOILS
The soils in Benzie County were formed primarily from materials
deposited by glaciers. The major soil associations shown in Figure II-4
generally reflect the surficial geology carved during glacial advance
and retreat. The characteristics of these associations are as follows:
o Nester-Iosco-Emmit Association — Well to intermediately
drained shallow loams and sandy loams developed along the
Betsie River floodplain.
o Wexford-Emmit-Kalkaska Association — Well drained, deep, dry
sands on the sand moraines in the area.
o Kalkaska-Rubicon Association -- Well drained, deep, dry sands
on outwash plains to the east of Crystal Lake.
o Eastport Association -- Poorly drained, deep sands character-
ized by high water table and occasional pockets of peat accumu-
lations .
o Bridgeman Association -- Well drained, very deep dune and
lacustrine sands developed along the lake Michigan shoreline
west of Crystal Lake.
a. Soils Suitability for Septic Tank Absorption Fields
Suitability of soils for septic tank absorption fields is based
primarily on slope, permeability, depth to seasonal high water table and
hydraulic conductivity. The role of these factors in determining
whether or how well effluent can percolate through the soil is discussed
in Appendix A-2. Appendix A-3 shows ranges for these parameters which
place slight, moderate or severe limitations on soils for on-site dis-
posal systems.
The Soil Conservation Service (SCS) is currently in the process of
performing a soils survey for Benzie County. The SCS has indicated that
currently available information on soils is limited in scope and
accuracy and should be used for general planning purposes only (by
letter, Steve Utic, SCS). A discussion of the available soils data can
be found in Appendix A-l.
In order to provide a general indication of soils suitability in
the Study Area, the SCS used the existing soils data to formulate the
Land Resources Inventory Map (1972) shown in Figure II-5. The SCS
emphasized that the existing data are neither complete nor very
accurate.
The Land Resources Inventory Map shows extensive areas that are
limited in suitability by slopes (S) , wetness, (W) and slow permeability
(T). Soils designated "L" on Figure II-5 are most suitable for on-site
systems or cluster systems. Generally these soils have slopes of less
than 12% and rapid permeability, but some wet soils and steeply sloping
soils are known to be present. "L" soils appeared to be suitable for
31
-------
32
-------
33
-------
cm-site systems provided that 1) these systems were not located on steep
slopes or wet soils or 2) systems were designed to account for these
limitations. Since the extent and location of these wet and steep soils
were not known, EPA requested that SCS field check selected "L" soils to
determine their suitability for on-site systems along the shoreline and
on land with a minimum set back distance of 100 feet from shore.
Sites set back from lake. The "L" type soils included suitable
sites for cluster systems on land set back from the shore. Within the
"L" soils were found scattered areas with steep slopes, particularly to
the north of Crystal Lake. Pockets of wet soils were also found, but
they are rare and mostly limited to the area adjacent to the southeast
shore (by letter, R. Larson SCS, I December 1978). Steep slopes are the
major soils limitation for on-site systems located more than 100 feet
from the shore. These soils could be used for on-site or cluster sys-
tems provided that the systems were designed to prevent sidehill seepage
of effluent. On sloping ground, drop boxes in a serial system provided
the best method of distributing the effluent.
Shoreline Sites. Soils borings taken by the SCS in Autumn 1978 (by
letter, R. Larson, 1 December 1978) from shoreline sites showed that all
74 sites sampled were unsuitable due to a seasonal high water table,
although for some sites, a hazard to nearby water supplies or slow
permeability were the limiting factors. Figure II-6 shows the approxi-
mate location of the soil borings and the specific limitation for each
site. Table II-l summarizes the results by township.
The Health Department, however, has found that soils on over half
of the vacant lots in the Proposed Service Area evaluated between
1972-1977 were suitable for septic tanks. The distribution of suitable
sites in the lakeshore townships is also shown in Table II-l.
In general, suitability was limited by depths to the seasonal high
water table (<4 feet). Less frequently, poor permeability due to high
clay content was the limiting factor (Sections 15, 16 and 21 of Benzonia
Township and Sections 15 and 19 of Crystal Lake Township) (GT-L-BHD
December 1977)
The SCS and the Health Department use somewhat different criteria
in determining soils suitability. The Health Department does not. deny a
permit application for a septic tank on highly permeable soils. SCS,
however, considers highly permeable soils to be a severe limitation if
the systems are located near operating wells. However, this difference
alone does not account for the large discrepancy between SCS data and
the data from the Health Department. Most of the sites determined to be
unsuitable by SCS had a seasonal high groundwater table; this is an im-
portant criterion used by the Health Department, as well. The SCS indi-
cated that the seasonal high water table was difficult to determine in
many instances; since Crystal Lake was lowered some 100 years ago, a
natural soils profile has not had sufficient time to develop (by letter,
R. Larson 1978). Therefore, one explanation for the discrepancy may be
that the seasonal high water table may not be as high as was suggested
to SCS in their surveying.
34
-------
35
-------
Table II-l
SOILS SUITABILITY FOR ON-SITE SYSTEMS AROUND CRYSTAL LAKE
SCS Ratios of Selected Lakeshore Site Soils (See Figure II-6):
Township
Seasonal High Water Table Limitations for Other Sites
Benzonia
North Shore
South Shore
Crystal Lake
Lake Shore
11 out of 15 (73%)
4 out of 4 (100%)
22 out of 38 (58%)
12 out of 17 (71%)
All others pose a threat to
nearby water supplies
Steep slope, slow percolation
and hazard to nearby water
supply
All others pose a threat to
nearby water supplies
By letter, Richard L. Larson, Soil Scientist, SCS, 1 December 1978.
Grand Traverse - Leelanau - Benzie District Health Department Evaluation of
Site Suitability for On-Site Systems 1972_- 1977:
Benzonia
Suitable
Unsuitable
Total
8
22_
30
(27%)
(73%)
Crystal Lake
22
_4
26
(85%)
(15%)
Lake
9
5
14
(64%)
(36%)
Total
39 (56%)
31 (44%)
70
By phone, W. Crawford, Sanitarian, GT-L-BHD. 28 July 1978.
36
-------
Despite the extent of unsuitable soils along the lakeshore, very
few existing systems experience the problems that might be anticipated
from unsuitable soils. (See Section II.C for discussion of this point.)
b. Soils Suitability for Land Application
Major soils characteristics limiting land application include per-
meability, depth to groundwater and slope. Soils suitability varies
with the type of land application process (rapid infiltration, overland
flow or slow rate); Appendix A-4 shows suitable soil characteristics for
the major land application processes. Based on the Land Resources
Inventory Map (1972) (Figure II-5) the most suitable soils are those
designated "L", the nearly level well drained, sandy soils. SCS (by
letter, R. Larson, SCS, 1 December 1978) performed a soils survey on
potential land application sites in "L" type soils of Crystal Lake (see
Figure II-7 for site locations). The survey indicated that the soils
were sands and loamy sands, with a seasonal high groundwater table more
than 6.0 feet below the ground surface. The survey also indicated that
these soils were rapidly permeable and may be more suitable for rapid
infiltration than spray irrigation. Further on-site testing would be
required to confirm the suitability of these soils. Steep slopes
located on these sites would require extensive earthwork to be made
suitable. Therefore, application sites would be limited to level or
slightly sloping areas.
c. Prime Agricultural Lands
The Soil Conservation Service, of the United States Department of
Agriculture, has set forth general guidelines for a national program of
inventorying prime and unique farmlands (SCS 1977). Prime and unique
farmlands have been designated as those lands which can produce present
and future food and fiber supplies with the least use of energy, capital
and labor and with minimal environmental impact. Figure II-8 shows the
extent of prime agricultural lands within the Study Area.
4. ATMOSPHERE
a. Climate
Lake Michigan has a very decided effect upon the area's weather and
climate. The prevailing west and southwest winds tend to moderate the
temperature, resulting in warmer winter temperatures and cooler summer
temperatures than occur further inland. Precipitation also is moderate.
Climatological data collected in Frankfort are sparse, so data from
the nearest US weather station, in Manistee, Michigan, 30 miles south of
the Study Area, were also utilized in developing the temperature and
precipitation normals, which are given in Table II-2.
Summer temperatures often reach 90°F during July and August but
very seldom rise above it. Winter minimum temperatures are commonly
37
-------
38
-------
39
-------
*
NO H
1 1
t-{ Lo p
P O 0
0 H-
7? 3 (0
HI H- rt
O M fD
>•{ fD (D
rt CO "
**
CO g
WOP
fD P 0
0 rt H-
N cr co
H- rt
fD O fD
Hi fD
n
O rt O
p cr o
0 fD P
rt 0
• P
t-1- i-i 0"
CTO ro H-
P P OP
0 ^-^ P
0
CO O
<=: o >
3 co E>
P. . .
rt
fD M M
PL ^o vo
CO O LO
rt • <•
P
rt H M
fD Cr" vo
cn fD -J
21 •
U Pi
ro rt
X) H-
p O
rt to
3 i-1
0 >
rt M
o to
rfi CD
rt O
Hr1 Hi
m
TO rt
|3 fD
rt
ro
H-
ro
SJ 53 'Td (-3
H. H- i-t fD
0 0 fD 9
CL Cu O X)
H- fD
CO p . TJ (-^
T3 H- P
ro !-f rt
ro ro ^ p
CL n H- »-l
rt 0 ro
/~*N H* *
Q 0 ^ ^
X) 0 0
^^ ^~s
LO |SJ
Ma- M
H S3 NJ
ON Ui
M NO
• ON
Ui
00 ^j
-P- LO
O
O *-O
§ NO 4>
1 — ' ^ * O
NO g O
-P- »-J
J>- Ui
LO
ON O
K> ON
-P-
i^D Ul
00 CO 00
sj ^o •
Ui
OO
Ul *^O
LO Ul
ON
O
M Ui
1 — ' -f^"
v£) S3 00
Ul
-P~ ON
NJ LO
ON
°^ •
4> -P~
M NO
LO
"^J •
LO -P-
LO -P-
NJ 4>
• •
ON 00
o
i-i
s: s; ^
H- H- M
0 0 fD
CL CL O
H-
CO Pu X)
X) H« •
ro i-{
ro ro X-N
PL o H-
rt 0
^^ H- •
g o ^
*O 3
0^
NO
I-1 S O
NO
I-1
•
ON
-P-
H-1
Ui
-P-
S3 NO
H a
NO s; oo
i—1
NO
-J
LO
LO
O
I-1
s; K>
00 CO
NO
NO
ON
ON
LO
•
ON
ON
NO
vo S!3 *
— j
-P-
NO
•
^o
•-J
NO
•
| — '
NO
LO
O
H"
LO
h-1
^
-P-
-P-
•
LO
Ul
LO
ON
-P-
Lo
ON
ON
00
.p*
ON
I—1
•
) — 1
Ul
h- '
•
ON
LO
CO
•
\£2
NO
OO
•
LO
.p^
ON
•
ON
rt co
H- rt
O p
0 1
•—I
P
3
frj
ro
a4
s
p
•
>
xt
i-i
•
S
P
CH
C
ro
C-)
P
OQ
•
CO
ro
XI
•
o
o
rt
•
a
o
^
•
G
ro
o
•
^
0
0
P
P
I—1
n
H
t^
p^
O
r1
0
Q
1 — 1
O
r"
CO
s
a
g
po H
H p
M cr
CO H- 1
ro
O M
JS H
H NO
ffi
CRYSTAL
r1
{fj
S
s
s
^
*•**
40
-------
below 20°F. The mean date for the last freezing temperature (32°F) is
May 15, while the mean date for the first 32°F temperature is
October 10. The growing season lasts approximately 150 days.
During the summer months, precipitation occurs primarily as
scattered showers and thunderstorms. Annual snowfall averages 75
inches, with one inch or more of snowfall occurring at least 30 days
during the year, according to the US Geological Survey (USGS) (1970).
Mean annual relative humidity is 70%, and the mean annual dew point
temperature is 37°F (USGS 1970). Prevailing wind directions and speed
are shown in Table II-2.
b. Noise
Outside of highway or road noises and motorboat noises, the Study
Area has no known intensive noise sources.
c. Odors
Inasmuch as no letters from local residents complaining about odors
have been reported, it is assumed that no objectionable odors of long
duration are present in the Study Area. During the recent sanitary
survey (University of Michigan 1978) six of the 249 residents inter-
viewed mentioned odor problems of short duration associated with ST/SAS
operation during wet weather or heavy use of their systems.
d. Air Quality
The State of Michigan does not maintain monitoring sensors in
Benzie County, but data collected at nearby stations in Manistee County
and Wexford County indicate that the air in the County is of high
quality and that National Ambient Air Quality Standards (Appendix B) are
being met.
Benzie County is part of the Upper Michigan Air Quality Control
Region. Maintenance of the air quality within the County is the re-
sponsibility of the DNR's Air Quality Division, District Office No. 9,
in Cadillac.
B. WATER RESOURCES
1. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT
Water resource management is a complex of many elements, in which
the Federal government, the State and the locality all have an interest.
To name just a few of these elements -- irrigation, municipal water
supply, maintenance of navigable waters and protection of the produc-
tivity of the soil -- illustrates the broad range of activities under
this heading. Among the most important, however, is preservation or
restoration of the quality of US waters. In the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act (PL 92-500, 1972) and the Clean Water Act that amended it in
1977 (PL 95-217) Congress outlined a framework for comprehensive water
quality management which applied to groundwater as well as to surface
waters.
41
-------
a. Clean Water Act
Water quality is the responsibility of the United States Environ-
mental Protection Agency (EPA) in coordination with the appropriate
State agency, in this case the Michigan Department of Natural Resources
(DNR). However, with passage of the Clean Water Act, all Federal
agencies were instructed to safeguard water quality standards in carry-
ing out their respective missions. As the lead agency, EPA coordinates
the national effort, sets standards, and reviews the work of other
agencies, some of which are assigned responsibilities in line with their
traditional missions. For example, the Army Corps of Engineers main-
tains its jurisdiction over dredging permits in commercially navigable
waters and their adjacent wetlands and in coastal waters but now must
also consider water quality. The Coast Guard keeps its jurisdiction
over oil spill cleanup. The Act officially draws certain other agency
activities into the water pollution control effort: for example, it
authorizes Federal cost-sharing in agricultural projects designed to
improve water quality by controlling farm runoff. In the case of the
Soil Conservation Service (SCS), these new responsibilities may be in
addition to, or as the case may be, may dovetail with SCS programs to
reduce soil erosion, or to construct headwaters impoundments for flood
control.
In delineating the responsibilities of the various levels of govern-
ment for water quality, Congress recognized the rights of the States
with regard to their waters. It authorized aid to the States in funding
the development of plans for control of pollution, development of State
water quality standards (which may be more restrictive than Federal
standards), and research. When a State meets certain criteria, it is
certified by EPA as the entity responsible for administration of the
activity in question. The EPA may deny certification, and in all cases
it retains power of enforcement of established standards, State or
Federal. The State of Michigan is one of the states which has been
granted certification by EPA.
Among the goals and deadlines set in the Clean Water Act are these:
"it is the national goal that the discharge of pollutants into
the navigable waters be eliminated by 1985...
"an interim goal of water quality which provides for the pro-
tection and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife and
provides for recreation in and on the water [is to] be
achieved by July 1, 1983".
This landmark legislation requires that publicly owned treatment
works discharging effluent to surface waters must at least provide
secondary treatment, i.e., biological oxidation of organic wastes. It
directed that municipalities must provide the "best available tech-
nology" by 1983 and that in appraising their options localities must
address both the control of all major sources of stream pollution
(including combined sewer overflows and agricultural, street and other
surface runoff) and the cost effectiveness of various control measures.
The use of unconventional technologies must also be considered.
42
-------
The key provisions on water quality planning stipulate that to
receive aid a State must provide a continuing planning process. Part of
Section 208 requires the States to inventory all the sources of pollu-
tion of surface and ground waters, both point* and non-point*, and to
establish priorities for the correction of substantial water quality
problems within a given area. The 208 plans are intended to provide an
areawide and, taken together, a statewide, framework for the more local
decisions on treatment facilities.
Section 201 of the Act (under which the Crystal Lake area appli-
cation for funds was made) authorizes EPA to make grants to localities
toward the improvement or construction of facilities for treatment of
existing water quality problems. EPA may determine whether an Environ-
mental Impact Statement is required on a proposed project (see Section
I.B), and even where the State has been certified and assumes responsi-
bility for water quality, EPA retains authority to approve or reject
applications for construction funds for treatment facilities.
The local political jurisdiction has traditionally been responsible
for meeting the wastewater treatment needs of the community. Local
jurisdictions now have the benefit of Federal and State assistance in
meeting water quality standards and goals.
b. Federal Agency .Responsibilities for Study Area Waters
EPA
Administers the Clean Water Act
Sets Federal water quality standards
EPA Region V
Administers the grant program described above for the Great
Lakes Region.
Provides partial funding for preparation of the Crystal Lake
Area Facility Plan. Region V's responsibilities in the con-
struction grant program in general and specifically toward the
application made in the Facility Plan are discussed in Section
I.B.
US Army Corps of Engineers
Controls dredging and construction activities in commercially
navigable streams, their 100-year floodplains and adjacent
wetlands through a permit system.
US Department of Agriculture
Under the Rural Clean Water Program will provide cost sharing
for soil conservation practices designed to improve water
quality. (This program will probably be assigned to SCS.)
43
-------
Soil Conservation Service (SCS)
Agency's mission is to control wind and water erosion, to sus-
tain the soil resource base and to reduce deposition of soil
and related pollutants into the water system.
Conducts soil surveys. Prepared Land Resources Inventory Map.
Drew up guidelines for inventorying prime or unique agricul-
tural lands.
Works with farmers and other land users on erosion and sedi-
mentation problems
Gathers information at the county level as part of program of
study and research to determine new methods of eliminating
pollution from agricultural sources.
In the Study Area has performed some stream bank stabilization
on the Betsie River and built a sediment basin (trap) in Cold
Creek approximately 300 yards upstream from the Creek's
entrance to Crystal Lake.
Fish and Wildlife Service
Provides technical assistance in development of 208 plans.
US Geological Survey
Has in the past monitored surface water flows in the Betsie
River but does not do so in the Study Area at present.
c. State Responsibilities in the Crystal Lake Study Area
Pertinent Michigan Laws
Environmental Protection Act (P.A. 127 of 1970). Provides for
legal action by the Attorney General or any person or legal
entity for protection of the air, water, and other natural
resources and the public trust therein.
Natural Rivers Act of 1970 (P.A. 231 of (1972). Protects the
public trust in Michigan inland lakes and streams and protects
riparian rights. Is implemented at the State level. For a
discussion of pertinent provisions, see Section II.E.4.
Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control Act (P.A. 347 of 1972).
Provides for control of soil erosion and sedimentation. (See
Section II.E.4 for discussion of provisions.) Is administered
at the county level. The Soil Conservation district admini-
sters the Act in the case of agricultural activities.
44
-------
State Agencies
Department of Natural Resources (DNR)
Is responsible for establishing water quality standards for
the surface waters of the State appropriate to several classi-
fications, and for regulating discharges of waste that affect
water quality, including those from sewage treatment plants.
(See Appendix D-l for classification of Study Area streams and
lakes and Appendix D-2 for associated water quality stan-
dards . )
Has authority to issue permits to discharge pollutants into
surface waters under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimi-
nation System (NPDES). The Water Resources Commission, which
reports to DNR, sets permissible discharge levels and may
approve applications for permits. Details of permits granted
to Frankfort City and Elberta for discharge of wastewater
treatment effluent to Betsie Lake and to Beulah are contained
in Appendix D-4.
Administers Natural Rivers Act. DNR has issued zoning regu-
lations for the Betsie River Natural River (see Appendix D-3)
and has, with citizen participation, devised a management plan
for that River.
Administers Inland Lakes and Streams Act.
Northwest Michigan Regional Planning and Development Commission
Has prepared a plan for Michigan's Region X, which includes
the Crystal Lake Study Area, with guidance of EPA and DNR,
pursuant to Section 208 of the Clean Water Act.
"Clean Waters - A Water Management Plan for Northwest Michigan" has
been approved by the State, subject to conditions centering around the
need for more work. Within Benzie County, Betsie Lake was rated first
as a "plan of study area," a higher priority than assigned to Crystal
Lake because the former is eutrophic and because of the extensive work
done on the latter (including this EIS). The Commission was named as
Coordinator for Lake Management Activities in the region. It works with
lake associations and develops tools to help them assess the problems of
their lakes. The Commission plans some groundwater assessment and also
some work on non-point sources of nutrients -- agricultural, stormwater,
duck feeding, excessive lawn fertilization, and on-site systems.
Michigan Department of Public Health
Has authority to regulate on-site sewage disposal systems and
makes initial determinations on subdivisions, campgrounds,
pr*mnn£» voi a 1 rl£»\r*=»1 r»rtm£>nt~ c £*fn
commercial developments, etc.
45
-------
d. Local Agencies
Grand Traverse-Leelanau-Benzie District Health Department
(6T-L-BHD)
Has authority to regulate individual residential on-site waste
disposal systems. Has authority delegated by the State Health
Department to regulate non-residential on-site disposal sys-
tems.
See Section II.C.3 for discussion of sanitary code applicable
in the Study Area.
Frankfort City, Beulah and Elberta
Own and operate municipal wastewater treatment plants. Types,
conditions and operations of these facilities are described in
the Crystal Lake Area Facility Plan and in Sections I.A.3.a
and b, above.
Benzie County
May enforce Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control Act for
non-agricultural activities
2. GROUNDWATER USE
a. Municipal and Individual Use
The public water supplies for Frankfort City, Elberta, Beulah, and
Benzonia are obtained from wells, which tap the groundwater in the sand
deposits of the glacial moraine. The supply of water is more than
adequate to serve domestic needs through the year 2000. (Wilbur Smith
and Associates 1974). However, the County Development Plan indicates
that the existing water supply systems are inadequate with respect to
distribution capabilities and storage capacity for emergency situations
and future population demands (Wilbur Smith and Associates 1974). The
number of wells and the capacity of the holding tanks for municipalities
in the Study Area are shown in Table II-3.
46
-------
Table II-3
MUNICIPALITIES USING GROUNDWATER FOR
DRINKING SUPPLIES IN THE STUDY AREA
Depth of Wells Capacity of Holding
Municipality Number of Wells (feet) tanks (gallons)
Frankfort city 2 70 and 100 2 tanks -
60,000
and 125,000
Elberta 2 70 1 tank -
capacity
unknown
Beulah 1 150 1 tank -
50,000
Benzonia 2 125 1 tank -
35,000
By telephone, 28 July 1978, Mr. William
Crawford, Sanitarian, GT-L-BHD.
f Annual pumpage for the city of Frankfort was reported to be 102 x
10 gallons in 1976 with a daily maximum of 607,000 gpd (Huffman 1977).
Pumpage records for the other municipalities were not available.
Most of the residents around Crystal Lake have individual or group
wells. There are several community well systems along the south and
southwest shoreline and two community systems on the north side of the
lake (GT-L-BHD December 1977).
b. Industrial
Pet, Incorporated, located in Frankfort City, owns wells that tap
local groundwaters for food processing operations. During the peak food
processing months Pet, Inc. uses from 40,000 to 56,000 gallons of water
per day for processing fruit. (Williams and Works 1976).
c. Irrigation
Orchard owners and farmers in the area tap the groundwater aquifers
to irrigate their orchards and fields during drought conditions and to
provide suitable drinking water for their livestock. The amount of
groundwater used for these purposes has not been determined.
3. GROUNDWATER HYDROLOGY
Groundwater in the Study Area is found under both water table and
artesian conditions. Under water table conditions no upper impermeable
47
-------
confining layer exists above the aquifer. Precipitation and wastewater
is therefore free to percolate downwards through the soil to the
saturated zone in the aquifer, the top of which is known as the water
table. However, under artesian conditions an impermeable layer such as
clay overlies the aquifer, confining it and effectively sealing out
percolating waters immediately above it. Because artesian aquifers are
confined, top and bottom, the water in them is under pressure and will
rise in wells to levels above the top of the aquifer, sometimes above
land surface. Wastewater applications to land over aquifers therefore
pose threats to water table aquifers, but generally not to artesian
aquifers.
Water table and artesian aquifers within the Study Area are not
clearly delineated. As is customary in glacial deposits, except outwash
plains, confining clay layers are irregularly distributed in the Study
Area. These layers may be thick and extensive in some areas but thin
and of limited extent in others. No detailed studies of the local
aquifers and their characteristics have been undertaken. However, the
Health Department reports "The drinking water aquifers in Benzonia
Township, for the most part, have at least a 10-foot clay barrier. The
Crystal Lake Township and Lake Township well logs often indicate no
protective over-burden, and wells of generally less depth." (GT-L-BHD
December 1977).
Since, in most instances, drillers have not been recording pumping
rates and water levels on well logs, the specific capacities of the
wells are generally unknown. Well yields as reported by Leverett et al.
(1907) are very small, less than 10 gallons per minute (gpm) except for
a very deep well (2200 feet) in Frankfort which yielded 480 gpm.
Limited data on recent well logs supplied by the Benzie Health Depart-
ment indicate yields up to 15 gpm. The moraine deposits of the area are
probably poorly sorted angular materials varying in size from boulder
through gravel and sand to silt and clay with resulting low water
yields. The outwash deposits to the southeast of the Study Area are
likely to be better sorted with consequently higher yielding wells.
The average depth and the range of depths for the wells in the
various lakeshore areas are shown below.
Depth (ft)
Township (s) Location Range Average
Lake Northwest 20-350 81
Lake/Crystal West 20-159 67
Lake
Crystal Lake Southwest 30-313 68
Benzonia Southeast 27-160 69
Benzonia Northeast 10-166 47
(University of Michigan 1978)
48
-------
Evidence of some hydraulic continuity of the aquifer(s) with
Crystal Lake exists in the form of underwater springs in the north-
eastern part of the lake (Gannon 1970). Based upon the location of
groundwater plumes entering Crystal Lake mainly on the northeastern and,
to a lesser extent the southeastern shores, Kerfoot (1978) has suggested
the flow pattern shown in Figure II-9. He proposes that groundwater
levels to the east of the lake are higher than the lake level which is
in turn higher than groundwater levels west of the lake. The general
direction of groundwater flow is therefore into the lake at the eastern
end and out of the lake at the western end.
The depth to groundwater and the thickness and extent of confining
or protective clay layers are important factors in determining ground-
water yield and protection of groundwater quality. The hills that sur-
round Crystal Lake consist of loosely consolidated drift with irregular
beds of clay. Clay layers are thin and irregular at high elevations and
thick at lower elevations (Leverett 1907). As was indicated in Table
II-3 the municipal wells in the hillside townships are generally deep
and the water table in these morainic regions is at a low level.
4. GROUNDWATER QUALITY
The natural groundwater quality in the Study Area was investigated
by Leverett (1907). Well water is generally very hard, ranging as high
as 360 ppm (CaCO ). Maximum chloride concentraction is about 34 ppm,
and iron is generally absent from the water. The water supplied from
these wells is excellent for drinking but is not good for laundry unless
softeners are used.
More recently, studies were undertaken by Gannon (1970) and Kerfoot
(1978) to learn whether groundwater supplies were being contaminated
with leachate from septic tanks. Gannon et al. (1970) surveyed 165
wells around Crystal Lake for total and fecal coliforms and nitrates
(NO ). The final results showed that all wells tested were negative for
coliforms. Forty-three wells tested positive for nitrates; twenty-two
of these showed nitrate-nitrogen levels greater than 2 milligrams per
liter (mg/1), six showed levels greater than 4 mg/1, and one exceeded
the US Public Health Service Drinking Water Standard of 10 mg/1.
Although the samples that tested positive were evenly distributed around
Crystal Lake, "a significantly higher percentage of the north shore
samples had nitrate-nitrogen concentrations greater than 2 mg/1."
(Gannon 1970) All samples whose concentrations of nitrate-nitrogen
exceeded 4 mg/1 also came from the north shore.
A follow-up survey of the north shore wells was subsequently under-
taken. Locations whose concentrations of nitrate-nitrogen exceeded 1.0
mg/1 in the preliminary study were sampled. Figure 11-10 shows the
average and maximum concentrations for sampling points with highest
levels of nitrates. The locations of highest concentrations correspond
to areas of high population and high ST/SAS density, suggesting a cor-
relation between population density and high nitrate levels. Only two
samples, however, showed nitrate levels that equalled or exceeded
49
-------
HEAVY ARROWS INDICATE DIRECTION OF FLOW
Source: Kerfoot 1978
OVERVIEW OF GROUNOWATER FLOW
ARROWS INDICATE DIRECTION OF FLOW
.ALTERED GRADIENT
NATURAL GRADIENT
L. MICK /..Il'^^^cr - - c
V ALTERED
^ GRADIENT
VERTICAL SCHEMATIC OF GROUNDWATER FLOW
(VERTICAL SCALE EXAGGERATED)
Figure II-9: Groundwater Flow Patterns for Crystal Lake
50
-------
51
-------
the Drinking Water Standard. The generally low levels of nitrates
elsewhere indicate that groundwater contamination was not widespread.
Data showing the localized effects of septic tank leachate* on
interstitial* groundwater and surface water of the Lake were collected
during a 1978 survey of the Crystal Lake shoreline employing a Septic
Leachate Detector*, dubbed "Septic Snooper"* (Kerfoot 1978) (Appendix
C). Septic tank effluent plumes entering the Lake were located and the
interstitial groundwater associated with each leachate plume was sampled
one foot below the lake bottom. Concentrations of nitrate, ammonia and
total phosphorus were measured.
Despite the proximity of each sampling point to the ST/SAS, none of
the samples taken along the northeast, southeast and southwest shoreline
indicated violations of the Drinking Water Standard for nitrates. While
there is a possibility that the interstitial groundwater samples do not
accurately reflect true groundwater quality, the nitrate concentration
data are consistent with Gannon's findings (1970) for nitrate levels in
wells along the northwest, southeast and southwest shores. Unfortun-
ately, interstitial groundwater samples were not collected in effluent
plumes along the northeastern shore where well water nitrate levels were
found by Gannon (1970) to be the highest.
Although phosphorus levels in the groundwater plumes are low, there
may be sufficient phosphorus loading to cause localized algal blooms
along the northeast and southeast shore where groundwater inflow is
significant. These plumes may channel nutrient-rich water to the vegeta-
tion, in effect acting as a hydroponic culture. However, ST/SAS may not
be the sole source of phosphorus for the algae. Phosphorus in drinking
water is not a health hazard to humans; the only concern is excessive
loading of nutrients into the Lake. This issue is further addressed in
Section II.B.6.
5. SURFACE WATER HYDROLOGY
Cold Creek, Crystal Lake, the Betsie River and Betsie Lake are
major surface water resources located in the Study Area. Cold Creek
originates approximately five miles east of Benzonia and is the primary
tributary entering Crystal Lake. The Betsie River originates in western
Traverse County, flows southwest into Benzie County and then into
Manistee County. Upon nearing the southern end of Crystal Lake, the
River receives the overflow of that lake. Continuing westerly, the
River empties into Betsie Lake and eventually Lake Michigan via
Frankfort Harbor. The total water system drains almost the entire Study
Area, with the exception of a small area to the north of Crystal Lake
(see Figure 11-11).
Physical characteristics pertaining to the hydrology of the surface
waters serve to describe and differentiate the lakes and streams in the
Study Area. Specific hydrologic and morphologic characteristics of the
lake or stream not only form the surface water system in which chemical
and other factors operate and interact but are themselves major factors
in that interaction. Size of drainage basin, tributary flow, lake
volume and hydraulic retention time directly influence the quantity and
quality of surface water resources.
52
-------
53
-------
a. Size of Drainage Basins
Betsie Lake's drainage basin is more than six times that of Crystal
Lake (245 square miles vs. 32 square miles): the larger watershed acts
as a significant catchment of precipitation, which is transferred as
runoff to that lake. Crystal Lake occupies a larger portion of its
total watershed than does Betsie Lake: Betsie Lake's drainage basin-
to-lake surface area ratio is 627:1 while that of Crystal Lake is 2:1.
b. Tributary Flow
There are two major tributaries in the Study Area: Cold Creek and
Betsie River.
There are no continuously recording stream flow gauges in the Study
Area within the Betsie River watershed. However, because collection of
stream flow data has been intermittent at several locations on the
Betsie River, approximate hydrologic characteristics of the streams and
lakes could be derived.
Cold Creek. Cold Creek is an intermittent stream that occurs on a
plateau composed of moraine and outwash plain,. It becomes a permanent
stream with an average flow of 8.2 cfs (0.23 m /s) at Beulah. Principal
contributors to stream flow are surface water runoff or groundwater
input.
Betsie River. Fifteen measurements of stream flow were made during
the National Eutrophication Survey from October 1972 to October 1973 at
the outlet of Betsie Lake and also on the Betsie River approximately 2
miles above Betsie Lake. These data plus normalized monthly and annual
flows for the two stations were reported by EPA ./1975). The average
annual flow was determined to be 349 cfs (9.88 m /s) at the inlet of
Betsie Lake.
Outflow from Crystal Lake joins the Betsie River. Flows where they
join were measured four times a year from 1944 to 1950 by the US Geo-
logical Survey. Outlet flow was also measured during 1976 and 1977 by
Tanis (1978). His information showed that maximum outlet flows occurred
during and after the spring thaw in the months of April, May and June.
Minimum flows, including two instances of zero flow, occurred during
December and January. Minimum flow conditions may persist through
February and March, but the data were not conclusive on this point.
Analysis of 44 flow measurements by Tanis (1978) over a one-year period
indicated that the average outlet flow was 13.5 cfs (0.38 m /s).
c. Lake Hydraulic Retention Time
Assuming complete mixing, the retention time of a lake is the time
required for natural processes to replace the entire volume of its
water. Betsie Lake has a relatively short retention time of about 2
days (Knutilla 1974) while Crystal Lake has a far longer retention time
of 63.1 years (Tanis 1978). Hydrological and morphological factors --
total tributary flow and volume — account for the difference. Table
II-4 summarizes the physical characteristics of these lakes.
54
-------
Table II-4
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF BETSIE LAKE AND CRYSTAL LAKE
Parameter
Lake surface area (in acres)
Mean depth (ft. (m))
Maximum depth (ft.(m))
Volume (acre - ft.)
2 2
Drainage area (mi (km ))
Inflow (cfs (m3/s))
Retention time (years)
Betsie Lake
250
6 (1.8)
22 (6.7)
1543
245 (630)
349 (9.9)
0.006
Crystal Lake
9792
63 (19.2)
180 (54.9)
616,896
32 (82)
13.5 (0.38)
63.1
55
-------
6. SURFACE WATER USE AND CLASSIFICATION
Surface waters in the Study Area, although used primarily for
recreation, also are used to assimilate wastewater effluent, harbor
commercial ships and pleasure boats, and provide habitats for fish and
wildlife. These waters are not used for domestic water supply.
The State of Michigan has classified uses of its surface waters
(Appendix D-l) and assigned appropriate classifications to each body of
water. Water quality standards for the classifications and uses appear
in Appendix D-2. For a lake or stream classified for two or more uses,
the more restrictive standards apply.
a. Lakes
Crystal Lake and Betsie Lake are classified B-I for total body
contact recreation. In addition to swimming areas, both lakes support
valuable fisheries (see Aquatic Biology, Section II.D.I). Further,
Betsie Lake has non-recreational uses, as reported in Table II-5.
b. Streams
Some of the streams in the Study Area have been given multiple
classifications. As an example, the Betsie River has been classified
C-I, cold water fish, and that portion from the Manistee/Benzie County
line to the outlet stream of Crystal Lake, has been further proclaimed a
"natural river" under Michigan's Natural Rivers Act (Public Act 231 of
1970). Subsequent to the Act, the Michigan Department of Natural Re-
sources established zoning, effective June 11, 1977, to preserve the
values of the natural river district, protect its resources, free
flowing conditions and water quality, and to prevent ecological,
economic or flood damages. (See Appendix D-3.)
7. SURFACE WATER QUALITY
A general discussion of changes in lake water quality may be found
in Appendix E-l. In the present section the existing water quality of
Crystal Lake is discussed first, followed by a discussion of Betsie
Lake. Both discussions are presented in two main parts. The first of
these involves tributary-related considerations, e.g. concentrations and
loadings of contaminants. Contaminant loads from direct municipal and
industrial discharges and from tributary background and non-point
sources are quantified separately in this part.
The second part of the discussion involves lake-related considera-
tions, e.g. spatial, seasonal and long-term trends in lake water
quality. Those sections deal with dimensional characteristics of lake
chemistry and biology, focusing primarily on major algal growth nutrient
and phytoplankton* biomass levels, because the latter materials are
expected to change as a result of the proposed wastewater management
program.
56
-------
Table II-5
NON-RECREATIONAL WATER USES OF BETSIE LAKE
Type of Use
Wastewater
Treatment
Wastewater
Harbor
Habitat
User(s)
Frankfort City
Elberta
Viking Car Ferry
Tanker "Saturn"
Boat Marinas
Coast Guard
Fish and Wildlife
Additional Information
Primary treatment plant (Design flow -
0.26 mgd actual flow - 0.266 mgd
Residential and industrial wastewater)
Primary treatment plant (Design flow -
0.10 mgd actual flow - 0.13 mgd
Residential wastewater)
Commercial water transport boat from
Frankfort, Michigan to Kewaunee,
Wisconsin
Asphalt tanker
Jacobson's, at Frankfort; Elberta
Mooring facilities near Frankfort
Hunters, fishermen, and non-consumptive
users
Williams and Works, Crystal Lake Area Facility Plan, 1976.
By phone, S. T. Sherman (US Coast Guard, BM-2), 1978.
57
-------
An evaluation of spatial and seasonal trends in major nutrients for
phytoplankton growth is fundamental to an understanding of variation in
plankton population. In order to determine if changes in water quality
would result from the proposed sewer project, the relation of these
trends to the annual cycles in the lake must be studied. Inasmuch as
the vertical distribution of chemical and biological species is closely
related to seasonal phenomena, spatial and seasonal characteristics will
be discussed together. A brief discussion of the biological character-
istics of each lake and summaries of specialty studies (where appli-
cable) is presented.
a. Crystal Lake
Tributary-Related Considerations. The average concentrations of
some water quality parameters at the mouth of Cold Creek (the inlet of
Crystal Lake) during the summer months of 1969 were 0.07 mg P/l as total
phosphorus and 0.03 mg P/l as orthophosphate, 8.1 mg/1 dissolved oxygen,
and pH of 7.8 (Gannon 1970).
The average concentration of total phosphorus measured at the mouth
of Cold Creek in 1976-1977 (Tanis 1978) was 0.09 mg P/l, and the average
concentration of soluble orthophosphate was 0.02 mg P/l. Figure 11-12
presents the month-to-month variation in Cold Creek's phosphorus levels
from July 1976 to July 1977. According to the study, the most signifi-
cant contributions of phosphorus to Cold Creek originate from the
Village of Beulah and the surrounding area (Tanis 1978). Tanis believed
the sources of phosphorus to be:
o Beulah's storm water runoff, which is routed directly to Cold
Creek
o Sediment carried via runoff from the muck soil adjacent to
Beulah
o Possible leaks or seepage from the present wastewater disposal
systems.
The average concentration of total phosphorus measured by Tanis at
the outlet of Crystal Lake during the same period was 0.01 mg P/l, con-
siderably lower than the level at the inlet (mouth of Cold Creek). This
result indicates that a significant amount of phosphorus has been re-
tained by the Lake.
In Cold Creek, total coliforms range from 900 MPN/100 ml to 11,000
MPN/100 ml, while fecal coliforms ranged from 50 MPN/100 ml to 200 MPN/
100 ml during the summer months of 1969 (Gannon 1970).
Nutrient Loading Characteristics. Nutrient loads to Crystal Lake
originate from its tributary (Cold Creek), precipitation, septic tank
leakage and non-point source runoff. The nutrient load from Cold Creek
was calculated by multiplying monitored river concentrations by the
specific daily flow as given by Tanis (1978). The focus of the
(loading) calculations is on phosphorus because this element is believed
to be the limiting nutrient most likely to be affected by the wastewater
management project. The Cold Creek flow, phosphorus concentrations and
phosphorus loads are plotted in Figure 11-12.
58
-------
w
Ik
o
i
29
20
IS
10
0.07
0.06
•>
x 0.09
o
X
O- 0.04
~ 0.03
O
o.
0.02
0.01
o TOTAL PHOSPHORUS
A ORTHOPHOSPHATE
SI.O
>•
Q
X
(0
O
-I
CO
3 -
4 -
3 -
2 -
I -
o TOTAL PHOSPHORUS
FIGURE H-12: FLOW, PHOSPHORUS CONCENTRATION AND PHOSPHORUS
LOADS IN THE COLD CREEK (1976-1977)
59
-------
Some patterns were observed in the seasonal variation of phosphorus
loads from Cold Creek. Phosphorus loads were closely correlated with
flow. During periods of high flow, concentrations increased because
higher non-point source runoff had increased, and the associated phos-
phorus load also showed a dramatic increase. From these results, an
average total phosphorus load of 1,533 Ib P/yr (679 kg/yr) was calcu-
lated for the period from July 1976 to June 1977. The result also
indicates that non-point sources are important contributors to Cold
Creek's phosphorus load.
As mentioned earlier, precipitation is a major source of nutrients
for Crystal Lake because the lake's surface area is large in relation to
its drainage area. A combination of snow and rainfall samples collected
during the 1976-1977 study (Tanis 1978) produced a mean concentration of
0.032 mg P/l as total phosphorus. The total precipitation in the same
period amounted to 24 inches (61 cm), according to Tanis (1978). As a
result, the total phosphorus load due to precipitation during the study
period was 1,690 Ibs P/yr (767 kg/yr).
In this EIS phosphorus inputs from septic tank systems were calcu-
lated using assumptions developed by EPA (1975): 0.25 lb/capita/
year of total phosphorus will leach from soil disposal system to the
lake. In the Study Area, there are 511 homes within 300 feet of Crystal
Lake currently served by on-site systems, as indicated by aerial photo-
graphs and planning maps. Using the unit loading and the population
characteristics derived above, the phosphorus input currently contri-
buted from septic tank leakage is approximately 263 Ib/yr (120 kg/yr).
Phosphorus loads to Crystal Lake from the drainage area immediately
surrounding the lake were estimated using regression models developed by
Omernik (1977) and approximated overland runoff flows. A detailed des-
cription of the model and the methodology used in this study are in-
cluded in Appendix E-2. The total phosphorus load attributed to non-
point sources from the immediate drainage area is 465 Ib/yr (210 kg/yr).
Table II-6 summarizes the phosphorus loading levels to Crystal Lake
together with the areal loading and percentage loading for each cate-
gory.
Table II-6
TOTAL PHOSPHORUS LOADS TO CRYSTAL LAKE
(Ib/yr) (kg/yr) (g/m2/yr) %
Precipitation 1690 767 .019 42.8
Septic Tanks 263 120 .003 6.7
Cold Creek 1533 695 .017 38.8
Non-Point Source
Runoff-Immed.
Watershed 465 210 .005 11.7
Total 3951 1792 .044 100.0
60
-------
Cold Creek and precipitation have been identified as the major
nutrient sources to Crystal Lake. These two sources supply over 80% of
the total phosphorus load to the lake. The above estimated septic tank
load represents 6.7% of the total load. Recent data from Kerfoot (1978)
indicate a significantly lower phosphorus load from septic tanks (23
kg/yr) . This low level may be due to the sampling time (November 1978)
when the population was substantially lower than the annual average
population equivalents. Nevertheless, the septic tank loads in Table
II-6 can consequently be considered a conservative estimate.
Lake Water Quality. Water quality data have been collected during
two extensive studies of Crystal Lake by the University of Michigan
(Gannon 1970) and Tanis (1978), respectively. The earlier study indi-
cated that levels of some key water quality parameters such as ammonia,
nitrate, orthophosphate, and total phosphorus in the open water were
below the detection limits of the instrumentation available at that
time. The primary productivity rate (at which available inorganic
carbon is converted to organic material by phytoplankton photosynthesis)
was measured and found to range between 169 to 188 mg C/m /day. The
recent survey by Tanis shows that the water quality in the open water of
Crystal Lake is relatively good and may be considered one of the highest
in Michigan (see the key water quality parameter values tabulated in
Table II-7). Tanis (1978) also reported the primary productivity rate
in the summer of 1977 at 139 mg C/m /day, which is lower than the rate
measured by the University of Michigan in 1969. There is no indication
in any of the results that the quality of Crystal Lake water deterio-
rated significantly over the last seven or eight years and the deterio-
ration of open lake waters, if any, appears to be progressing at a
relatively slow rate.
Deterioration of the lake has only been observed along the shore-
line in localized areas where nutrient influx is a problem. Concerns
have become accentuated along portions of the north shore near Beulah
and also along the southwest shore (Tanis 1978). Growth of algae in the
forms of Cladophora attached to rocks and other hard surfaces at the
shoreline has been consistently observed during the summer months. The
results of a special dye study to determine the cause of shoreline
pollution proved to be inconclusive (University of Michigan 1970).
Recent results from Kerfoot (1978), who measured the leachate plumes
from septic tanks in Crystal Lake, indicate nutrient flux into the
shoreline waters. A high correlation existed between the location of
emergence of plumes and attached plant growth, particularly Cladophora
(Kerfoot 1978). Groundwaters obtained near the peak concentrations of
the outflow of the observed plumes contained sufficient nutrients to
support attached algae and aquatic weed growth.
In general, Crystal Lake water quality concerns have not been asso-
ciated with public health, as only a few cases of coliform bacterial
contamination have been reported by the Tri-County Department of Public
Health (GT-L-BHD) (Tanis 1978). By showing fecal coliform levels lower
than the 200 MPN/100 State Standard, Kerfoot's (1978) results concur
with previous studies. Fecal coliform counts in the surface waters
directly affected by leachate plumes were well below the 200 MPN/100 ml
allowable in total body contact recreational waters.
61
-------
NJ
3 H
PS ps
rt 3
fl> H-
l-i CO
H-
rt
CO \O
rt ~J
C 00
s
rt
§
n
f
PS
OQ O
pj p)
rt 3
H- 3
O O
3 3
CO <&
H- -J
rt O
O
i-h O
. CO
O rt
3" P
H- M
OQ
ET
0
Is
rt
> tt)
i-l i-l
O hO
H C
P
S M
ns
co
rt
H-
I-l
H-
Ln
(D C
T3 OQ
rt C
n co
g rt
(C 4>
i-l
OQ M M
CO
rt ho us
C-i
C
I
CH
K)
Ln
O
O
n>
§
H" O
I-l x-x
PS g
3 fl>
3
vo
00
ps O
3 O
US O
o
3
Q<
00
VD
§
CL
Ui
oo
-P-
ps
3
00
§
vo
I
O ON
l"( ^"S
p> g
3 (D
OQ PS
ft) 3
O
O
(D
PS
i-i
n
3J
x-s- O
•£ i-l
OQ O
IPS
g rt
g ^
OQ i-l
o t~d
a. i-i
n c H-
n g
P
MM- l-i
^ "*^
--~ H-
O. rt
pj >- to
i"l Cl*
p IT
(too
H- rt *
O rt ^
3 O OQ
t^ c/s
/•N (D (D
g -a o
•—'rtO
D* 3*
H-
x"*s ^*
g o H
OQ CO O
T3 rt
HCJ 3* ps
I—' i-l
\^s C
CO
H
M
pa
H PS
H
H
I
CO
H
M
62
-------
b. Betsie Lake
Tributary-Related Considerations. Various water quality parameters
were monitored in the Betsie River by the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA 1975). The average concentrations of water quality para-
meters for the Betsie River during the study period, the summer of 1973,
were 0.02 mg P/l total phosphorus, 0.01 mg P/l orthophosphate, 0.057 mg
N/l ammonia, 0.68 mg N/l total kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN), 0.18 mg N/l
nitrate plus nitrite. According to the NES study, non-point sources of
nutrients are responsible for significant contributions of phosphorus to
the river. For this reason, it was suggested that point source phos-
phorus inputs to the Betsie River and Betsie Lake should be minimized to
the greatest extent practicable (EPA 1975).
Nutrient loads to Betsie Lake originate from tributary (Betsie
River), precipitation, surface water runoff and municipal wastewater
treatment plants. Data collected in 1972 (EPA 1975) have been analyzed
and loadings have been summarized in Table II-8 below. Once again, only
phosphorus loadings are tabulated since phosphorus has been identified
as the limiting nutrient for algal growth (EPA 1975).
Table II-8
TOTAL PHOSPHORUS LOADS TO BETSIE LAKE (1972-73)*
(lb/yr) (kg/yr) (g/m2/yr) %
Tributaries (non-point
source) Betsie River 14,240 6,460 6.38 51.5
Minor tributaries and
immediate drainage (non-
point source)
Municipal STP's
Precipitation
Total
13
27
150
,200
40
,630
68
5,990
18
12,530
0
5
0
12
.07
.92
.02
.39
*EPA.
0.
47.
0.
100.
1975
5
8
2
0
Data from the National Eutrophication Survey (EPA 1975) in Table
II-8 indicate an average total phosphorus load of 14,240 Ibs P/yr during
the period from October 1972 to October 1973. The Betsie River exerts a
significant influence on Betsie Lake's condition. Two major point
sources --the Elberta and Frankfort municipal sewage treatment plants --
furnish another significant portion of the nutrient loadings to the
lake.
EPA (1975) estimated that 40 Ibs P/yr is contributed by direct
precipitation to Betsie Lake. This load is relatively insignificant
compared with other contributions. Other nutrient sources of Betsie
63
-------
Lake such as septic tank leakage and industrial wastewater were not
documented (EPA 1975).
EPA (1975) also estimated the total nitrogen inputs to Betsie Lake
at 701,150 Ibs/yr of which 588,590 Ibs/yr is discharged into Lake
Michigan.
Lake-Related Considerations. Betsie Lake was sampled three times
during the 1972 eutrophication study. Data were collected at one open
water station at three different depths. The average water quality can
be summarized in terms of the following physical, chemical and bio-
logical characteristics: 145 mg/1 of alkalinity; 304|Jmhos of con-
ductivity; 1.0 m of Secchi disc depth; 0.026 mg P/l of total phosphorus;
0.175 mg N/l of inorganic nitrogen; and 4.6 |Jg/l of chlorophyll a. As
indicated, the open water quality can be described as nutrient-rich,
productive and, therefore, eutrophic (EPA 1975).
EPA conducted an algal bioassay to determine the limiting nutrient
for algal growth. The results showed that Besie Lake was phosphorus-
limited at the time the assay sample was collected on September 15,
1972. The lake data indicated phosphorus limitation in June and
November of 1972 as well (EPA 1975). Based on this finding, the effort
of assessing potential eutrophication has been concentrated on phos-
phorus (see Section IV.A.I.a).
Because the lake was monitored only once, it is not possible to say
how Betsie Lake has changed since the EPA survey in 1972. However, it
is significant to note that the lake is shallow, has a short hydraulic
retention time and a large drainage basin-to-lake surface area ratio.
Should point source discharge to Betsie Lake be minimized, the trophic
status of the lake would be likely to improve slightly. If existing
discharges should continue unabated, the combined effects of lake
morphology and hydrology, non-point source nutrient and point source
nutrient loads are likely to result in the continued degradation of the
quality of Betsie Lake's water.
A list of studies of water quality of Crystal Lake is contained in
Appendix E-3.
8. Flood Hazard Areas
Figure 11-13 delineates the flood hazard areas located along the
shorelines of the Betsie River and the five lakes in the Study Area (HUD
1975, 1976). The areas delineated show the 100-year floodplain, i.e. a
flood of such magnitude can be expected to occur with a frequency of
once every 100 years. In reality such a flood could occur at any time.
The flood hazard areas along the Betsie River are protected by the
Betsie River Natural River Zoning Act. That act precludes any cutting,
filling or building on the land in the floodplain and requires a minimum
setback distance of 200 feet.
Under the existing sanitary code and zoning ordinances for the
townships around Crystal Lake, a minimum setback distance of 50 feet
64
-------
65
-------
from the lakeshore is required for any construction activities. Because
Crystal Lake is not fed by any large-volume streams and because the
ratio of its watershed area to lake surface area is only 2:1, the flood
hazard area is very narrow -- almost non-existent along parts of the
lakeshore. Consequently the 50-foot requirement is adequate to protect
flood-prone areas along the Lake.
C. EXISTING SYSTEMS
There are three centralized collection and treatment systems within
the Study Area. They serve the City of Frankfort and the Villages of
Beulah and Elberta. These systems have been discussed in the Facility
Plan and are summarized in Chapter I. Their location and the extent of
the areas they serve are shown in Figure 1-3.
The Townships of Crystal Lake, Lake and Benzonia and the Village of
Benzonia are not served by a centralized treatment system; wastewater is
treated by on-site systems. When the Facility Plan was prepared, very
little information was available on the existing on-site systems on
which to base an evaluation of their adequacy. Three studies were
undertaken during preparation of this EIS to provide information regard-
ing the type, the nature and frequency of problems, and the adequacy of
these systems in meeting the wastewater treatment needs of the Study
Area.
1. SUMMARY OF DATA ON EXISTING SYSTEMS
This discussion briefly summarizes the studies that were recently
undertaken to evaluate existing systems. Results of these studies are
discussed elsewhere in this EIS as well (surface and groundwater
quality, soils analysis).
a. "Investigation of Septic Discharges into Crystal
Lake" (William Kerfoot 1978)
This study was undertaken in November 1978 to determine whether
groundwater plumes from nearby septic tanks were emerging along the
lakeshore causing elevated concentrations of nutrients. Septic tank
leachate plumes were detected with an instrument referred to as a
"Septic Snooper." The instrument is equipped with analyzers to detect
both organics and inorganic chemicals from domestic wastewaters; it is
towed along the shoreline to obtain a profile of septic leachate plumes
discharging to the surface water. Surface and groundwater sampling for
nutrient and bacteria (surface water only) were coordinated with the
septic leachate profile to clearly identify the source of the leachate.
The "Septic Snooper" detected 90 plumes of wastewater origin enter-
ing Crystal Lake. This corresponds to approximately 18% of the 500
existing lakeside systems, i.e. those within approximately 300 feet of
the lake. The location of these plumes is shown in Figure 11-14. A
high correlation was found between the location of the plumes and the
attached algal growth. While there is sufficient breakthrough of
nutrients to the surface water to support algal growth in the immediate
66
-------
67
-------
vicinity of plume emergence, overall lake water quality has not been
significantly impacted by septic leachate plumes. Appendix C contains
the Kerfoot study.
b. "Sanitary Systems of Crystal Lake, Benzie County,
Michigan: An On-site Survey" (University of Michigan,
1978)
The sanitary survey of lakeside on-site systems in Crystal Lake,
Lake and Benzonia Townships was conducted during September and October
of 1978. This survey provided information regarding the types of on-
site systems, the nature and extent of problems with these systems, and
the nature and extent of violations of the existing sanitary code. The
technical report on the sanitary survey is included in Appendix F-l.
Table II-9 summarizes some of the significant data.
The results indicated that over 50% of the systems were violating
the sanitary code. Despite the large number of violations, very few of
the systems had recurring problems with backups or ponding. Attached
algal growth was associated with 34% of the homes surveyed, although
only about 10% of the sites had heavy algal growth. Heavy algal, growth
was most frequent on the northeast shore.
c. EPIC Survey (EPA 1978)
An aerial photographic survey was conducted by EPA's Environmental
Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC) to locate failing septic
systems throughout the Study Area and to locate patches of aquatic
vegetation along Crystal Lake. The results of this study are shown in
Figure 11-15. Very few surface failures of septic tank systems were
located in the Study Area. The failures that were detected were mainly
in and around Benzonia Village. Photographs indicated that the north-
eastern and eastern shores had the densest growth of submerged vegeta-
tion, although field verifications were not done. Very little growth
was observed on the northwestern and western shores.
The aerial photographic survey was conducted during the summer;
foliage may have prevented the detection of some malfunctioning systems.
2. TYPES OF SYSTEMS
Based on data obtained during the sanitary survey (University of
Michigan 1978), 98% of the 1,090 residences in the unsewered parts of
the Proposed Service Area are estimated to have septic tanks and some
type of subsurface absorption system (ST/SAS). The remaining 2% have
permits for holding tanks only. Fifty-eight percent of the ST/SAS em-
ployed a drainfield, 41% employed a drywell and only 1% of the systems
had no soil absorption system.
No information is available on the types of on-site systems in use
in Benzonia. There are, however, about 279 homes using on-site treat-
ment systems in the Village.
68
-------
a
td
H
e>
Z
4
i
z
~
~
in oo
/-,
-3- vD
i-H 01
r-^ 01
CN -a-
x— s
01 CN
ST vD
01 «3-
r*> vD
vc
r^
01
O
CN
VD
4J
CO
CO
01
,C
U
M
O
55
01 in
X— N
O vO
rH rH
00 O>
"-
i-l 00
1— 1 rH
01 00
CN -tf
01 r7
CN m
i— i n
/-s
CN O
/-N
in CN
i-4 O1
^d~ c*1
CM
r^- ro
.
rJ
o
HH
O
CO
g
0)
4-J
cn
>.
CO
!>>
r4
cfl
4J
•H
c
cd
CO
.
00
r~-
O
rH
.
C
ca
bO
•H
r=!
U
•H
s
in
0
PM-J
4-1 S
-H
to C
r4 0
01 4-1
f- CO
•H t-H
0 CU
P FH
cd
^
a
cd
a)
iH
o
•H
4-)
ft
0)
cn
UH
o
C
o
•H
4-J
Cfl
SO
•H
4-1
CO
0)
>
C •
M CJ
0
H
00 «
r^
-------
70
-------
3. COMPLIANCE WITH THE SANITARY CODE
In 1964, GT-L-BHD issued the first sanitary code for the townships
along the Crystal Lake shoreline. Prior to this, there were little or
no restrictions regarding the construction and use of on-site systems.
Although the Health Department began issuing permits in 1964, it was not
until 1971 that site evaluations and installation inspections were
begun. Consequently, the sanitary code was not enforced prior to 1971.
In 1972, the code was revised to incorporate more stringent measures to
ensure adequate treatment of household wastewaters. Notably, the re-
visions provided for denial of a permit if the site did not meet
criteria established for suitable soils and depth to groundwater. In
addition, the revised code increased isolation distances between septic
systems and surface water from 25 to 50 feet. The vertical distance
between the drainfield and the high water table was also increased to 4
feet. "Selections from the Sanitary Code of Minimum Standards" and the
Code are attached as Appendixes F-2 and F-3 respectively.
Since the Health Department began performing site evaluations in
1972, 44% of the sites in the Proposed Service Area have been found to
be unsuitable. A 1978 soils survey conducted by SCS indicated that 100%
of the soils examined were unsuitable. The discrepancies in these data
are discussed in Section II.A.3.a.
At sites where the soils are unsuitable because of slow perme-
ability or high groundwater table, a holding tank permit may be issued
in lieu of a septic tank permit. The various permits issued for the
lakeshore townships between 1970 and 1977 are summarized in Table 11-10.
The trend has been towards an increased issuance of permits for holding
tanks and pump systems. Drywell permits are no longer granted because
there is an increased potential for groundwater contamination with these
deeper systems.
Table 11-10
PERMITS ISSUED IN THE PROPOSED SERVICE AREA
BY GT-L-BHD BETWEEN 1970-1977 INCLUDING
REPAIRS AND NEW INSTALLATIONS
Crystal
Benzonia Lake Lake Total
Drainfields 103 79 90 272
Holding Tanks 6 6 3 15
Pump Systems 3 2 5 10
Drywells 10 10 9_ 32
125 97 107 329
Crawford 1977
71
-------
Because the 1964 sanitary code was not enforced and because the
1972 provisions are even more stringent, many of the existing systems
are in violation of the sanitary code. Of the 249 homes surveyed in the
sanitary survey, 53% did not comply with regulations. Violations fall
into one or more of the following categories:
o Septic tank less than 15.3 meters
(50 feet) to the lake 11%
o Septic tanks less than 15.3 meters
(50 feet) to the well 23%
o Septic tanks smaller than recommended
size (septic tank size was not available
for 37% of the homes) 41%
o Systems with drywells 40%
o Soil absorption systems too small
to meet regulations (30% have no
record) 39%
No information was available on violations of the sanitary code in
the Village of Benzonia.
4. PROBLEMS CAUSED BY EXISTING ON-SITE SYSTEMS
Despite the fact that more than half the systems do not comply with
existing regulations, very few are causing potential public health or
water quality problems. Where problems do occur they have generally
been associated with older systems. Many of these were poorly main-
tained before 1971 when site inspections were begun. Many backups were
associated with systems that had rarely (if ever) been pumped or that
had roots growing in the drywells. Nearly 80% of the systems that are
undersized are older than 10 years; similarly those older than 10 years
have more violations of the distance requirements from wells or the
lakeshore.
The distinction should be made between nuisance or community im-
provement problems on the one hand, and public health and water quality
problems on the other. Public health problems may result from recurrent
backups, ponding of the effluent on the soil surface, and contamination
of the groundwater supply in excess of drinking water standards. The
existing systems around Crystal Lake have been examined to determine
whether they are contributing to public health and water quality
problems.
a. Ponding
Ponding may result if percolation of effluent through the soil is
too slow, if the system was installed to close to the soil surface or if
a high groundwater table prevents percolation through the soils.
72
-------
Ponding may also result from hydraulically overloading otherwise suit-
able soils; continuous inundation of the soil may lead to clogging.
Only 3% of the systems surveyed have had problems with ponding more than
once; these problems may have resulted from poor maintenance rather than
unsuitable soils. The problems with ponding occurred with systems over
15 years old; several of these had never been pumped until 1976-1978.
EPIC, a branch of the Environmental Monitoring and Support Labora-
tory (EMSL), conducted a survey (1978) to determine surface malfunctions
by aerial imagery. Only two surface malfunctions were detected along
the lakeshore (Figure 11-15) but several failing systems were found in
and near the Village of Benzonia. Soils in the area have a relatively
high clay content, which may contribute to ponding (Leverett 1907;
Crawford 1977). Some sections of Crystal Lake Township (Figure 11-15),
distant from the lakeshore, had several surface malfunctions, suggesting
a high clay content in these soils as well.
b. Backups
Several of the systems around Crystal Lake have backed up on occa-
sion as the result of hydraulic overloading, roots growing into the
drywell, pump failures or lack of septic tank maintenance. Unsuitable
soils may cause backups as well, if the effluent cannot percolate
through the soil. Based on results of the sanitary survey, 20% of the
existing systems have had backups. Only about 6% of these backups could
not be attributed to an occasional hydraulic overload or a maintenance
problem that has since been corrected (e.g. roots in the drywell or pump
failure). The causes of recurring backups in 5% of the systems is not
clear. These systems were generally old, and information on the size of
the septic tank or soil absorption system was lacking. Most of these
systems are drywells, although this may be only coincidental. Never-
theless, the data indicate that recurring problems with backups are not
common in the Proposed Service Area.
c. Groundwater Contamination
In view of the large number of septic tanks using a drywell as the
soil absorption unit and because several septic tanks are too close to
the wells to meet regulations, there is concern about potential ground-
water contamination with nitrates. However, a study conducted by Gannon
(1970) (see Section II.B.4 for more detail) indicated that concentra-
tions of nitrates in wells along the western, northwestern and southern
shores of Crystal Lake were considerably below the drinking water stan-
dard of 10 mg/1. Only two samples, taken from adjacent wells along the
northeastern shore, showed concentrations of nitrate equal to or greater
than the standard. The source of nitrates in these wells can only be
assumed to be nearby on-site systems since no follow-up evaluation of
the wells was reported.
d. Surface Water Quality Problems
Septic tanks do not seem to be contributing significantly to water
quality deterioration. Crystal Lake receives a sufficiently low
nutrient input to maintain an oligotrophic status. Septic tanks contri-
73
-------
bute a small percentage of that input compared to non-point source
runoff (see Table II-6 and discussion in Section II.B.7.a). Kerfoot
observed that only 18% of the lakeshore homes were leaching detectable
nutrients into Crystal Lake. These data indicated that the per capita
phosphorus load (based on a population of 574 during November when the
survey was taken) was 0.036 kg/cap/yr (0.08 Ib/cap/yr). In contrast,
the National Eutrophication Survey estimated that phosphorus loads,
leaching from septic tanks into surface waters generally average 0.11
kg/cap/yr (0.25 Ib/cap/yr). Even if this higher load were realized from
all lakeshore homes, septic tank leachate would contribute a maximum of
6.7% of the total phosphorus input to Crystal Lake.
e. Other Problems
Other problems exist which do not pose a potential health threat or
the potential for water quality degradation. Odors associated with
septic tanks are considered a nuisance. However, this problem occurs
infrequently in the lakeshore townships. Only six residents or 2.5% of
those surveyed in the University of Michigan sanitary survey in 1978
complained of odor problems.
Attached algal growth (Cladophora) is also a nuisance problem. The
growth has not been found to be indicative of overall lake eutrophica-
tion; the main problem with the algae is that the growth is aestheti-
cally displeasing and may interfere with certain recreational
activities.
Available data on the extent and distribution of Cladophora vary
depending upon how the survey was conducted. Results of a study per-
formed during the sanitary survey indicate that Cladophora growth is
associated with 34% of the existing homes and septic tanks. By con-
trast, Tanis detected Cladophora growth by aerial photography along only
5% of the homes (Figure 11-16). This method can only detect relatively
dense patches of growth, while the sanitary survey located even slight
patches by visual inspection.
f. Problems in Individual Sections Around Crystal Lake
The information reviewed above suggests that even though many
systems do not comply with regulations, groundwater and surface water
quality are generally good and that problems with existing systems
could be minimized by proper maintenance. However, the various sections
of Crystal Lake are each unique, and their on-site systems should be
considered individually.
Northeast Shore. Data presented in Table II-9 (see Section
Il.C.l.b above) indicate that the northeast shore has the greatest
number of systems that do not meet regulations (62%). This area is more
prone to failure and water pollution problems than other lakeshore areas
for three reasons:
o The area has a high seasonal groundwater table (see Section
II.B.3) and many systems could not meet regulations even with
upgrading.
74
-------
75
-------
o It is the most densely populated shoreline area (38 homes per
shoreline mile).
o It has the most systems violating the regulations on distance
to lakeshore and distance to wells (Table II-9).
Despite the potential problems related to high groundwater table,
and the number of undersized systems, only 13% of the on-site systems
along the northeast shore have had recurring problems with backups and
ponding. Only 1 of 9 problem systems was less than 10 years old. Many
of the older systems are undersized and were not maintained properly
prior to 1971. There were a number of other systems that experienced
backups and ponding on one occasion; however, these problems could
clearly be attributed to poor maintenance or overuse.
Leaching of wastewater-related nutrients to lake water is most
extensive on the northeast shore. Growth of Cladophora attributed to
the leaching of nutrients from septic tanks was associated with 69% of
the homes surveyed along the northeast shore, although only 24% of the
algal growth was heavy. Kerfoot estimated that 34% of the phosphorus
leached from septic tanks came from the northeast shore (1978). Poor
soil absorption capacity, the large number of homes close to the shore
and the high groundwater table encourage the leaching of nutrients.
However, as was mentioned previously, nutrient loads are significantly
less than would be expected based on NES data.
Groundwater quality along the northeast shore is discussed in
Section II.B.4. It is unlikely that drywells alone are responsible for
the localized nitrate contamination of groundwater observed by Gannon in
1969 (Gannon 1970). (Two wells indicated nitrate concentrations greater
or equal to 10 mg/1.) Drywells make up a large percentage of the soil
treatment units along other parts of the lakeshore where nitrate con-
centrations in well water were found to be low. Several factors may
contribute to high groundwater nitrate levels; these include the loca-
tion of septic tanks close to the wells, the high groundwater table, and
the undersized systems, as well as the use of drywells.
Southeast. Soils along the southeast shore are generally well-
drained and more suitable for on-site treatment. Of the 39 systems
surveyed, only 2 had more than an occasional problem with backups or
ponding. There is no clear indication that these problems resulted from
unsuitable soils rather than improper maintenance. For 59% of the sys-
tems, failure to comply with the sanitary code results primarily from
widespread use of drywells and a large number of undersized systems.
Very few systems violate the regulations concerning distance to the
lakeshore since a privately owned greenbelt has prevented development
close to the lake.
Despite the large number of drywells and the fact that 15% of the
systems are located within 15.3 meters (50 ft.) of a well, no wells were
observed with concentrations of nitrate in excess of 4.0 mg/1 (Gannon
1970).
76
-------
Although most of the homes are set back at least 100 feet from the
shoreline, dense patches of Cladophora growth are associated with 10% of
the homes and an additional 24% of the homes have slight patches of
Cladophora growth along the adjacent shoreline. EPIC (1978) was able to
detect only a few patches of aquatic vegetation, further suggesting that
the growth along this shore is generally sparse. Kerfoot (1978) ob-
served a high concentration of septic tank effluent plumes along the
southeast shore. The nutrient load was, however, very unevenly distri-
buted (see Figure 11-16) with most of the plumes coming from a narrow
unsewered section of Beulah.
Northwest. Although 54% of the existing systems do not meet regu-
lations, recurring problems with backups were reported for only one
septic tank of the 61 surveyed during the 1978 sanitary survey. A few
additional systems backed up on one or two occasions, but these backups
were clearly associated with poor maintenance or overuse.
Although 16% of the systems surveyed were less than 50 feet from
the lake and 48% of the systems were undersized, Cladophora growth is
scarce along the northwest shore.
This area has a high seasonal population, which partly accounts for
the low nutrient influx and consequently for the low Cladophora growth
observed (Tanis 1978; EPIC 1978; University of Michigan 1978). The
northwest shore was found to contribute 24% of the wastewater-related
phosphorus load to Crystal Lake. In contrast, the northeast shore,
which has 20% less shoreline, was found to contribute 34% of the
phosphorus load (Kerfoot 1978).
The northwest shore had the fewest systems that violate the regula-
tions concerning distance from wells. Despite numerous drywells and a
high percentage of undersized systems groundwater contamination does not
appear to be a problem.
Western Shore. Of the systems along the western shore, 46% violate
the existing sanitary code. This area has the smallest percentage of
undersized systems. However, based on the sanitary survey, only 2
systems of the 24 have had recurring problems with backups. The 22
systems that experienced backups on occasions were generally poorly
maintained; roots growing in the drywells were the most prevalent causes
of occasional backups.
Available data indicate that Cladophora growth is minimal along the
western shore. Aerial photography detected only one patch of aquatic
vegetation on the western shore (EPIC 1978). The sanitary survey indi-
cated that Cladophora grew along the shoreline adjacent to 5% of the
homes on the western shore but that none of the growth was heavy. Per
capita phosphorus discharges are lowest along the western shore;
although the western shore accounts for approximately 9% of the total
residences, only about 1% of the total phosphorus from septic tank
leachate comes from this area. This can be explained by the groundwater
flow patterns, which encourage septic tank effluent from the western
shore to flow towards Lake Michigan rather than into Crystal Lake. (See
Figure II-9.)
77
-------
Contamination of groundwater with nitrates is not a problem along
the western shore despite the large number of systems that violate the
regulations concerning minimum distance to wells and/or regulations
concerning use of drywells.
Southwest Shore. The southwest shore has the fewest number of sys-
tems that are in violation of the sanitary code. This area has the
smallest percentage of drywells, although they still account for a large
number of violations. Other major violations include undersized systems
and systems located too close to wells.
While there have been occasional problems with backups because of
poor maintenance (i.e., systems that needed pumping or contained roots
in the drywell) only 3 systems of the 56 surveyed had recurring problems
with backups or ponding.
Available data indicate that Cladophora growth is prevalent along
the southwestern shore. Cladophora growth was observed along the shore-
line adjacent to 34% of the homes during the sanitary survey, and 16% of
this growth was dense (University of Michigan 1978). Aerial photography
detected several beds of aquatic vegetation (Tanis 1978; EPIC 1978).
Housing density is quite high along the southwest shore with 35 houses
per shoreline mile (lakeshore average is 16 houses per shoreline mile).
Nevertheless, phosphorus loadings monitored by Kerfoot (1978) were
significantly less than those detected along the northeast shore with a
similar housing density (2.3 kg of phosphorus per mile on the northeast
shore compared to 1.1 kg/mile on the southwest shore). Lower nutrient
loads along the southwest shore may be attributed to: a) fewer systems
close to the lake; b) presence of sandy, well-drained soils in contrast
to wet soils along the northeast; and c) a lower year-round population.
Village of Benzonia. The only data available on the performance of
septic tanks in the Village of Benzonia are those from EPIC aerial
photographs (1978). This survey detected 5 surface malfunctions in the
Village. This corresponds to approximately 2% of the existing systems.
No information is available on problems with backups. While it is pro-
bable that many of these systems do not meet regulations with respect to
sizing, ponding may be the result of poor soil absorption capacity, as
well. It is known that thick clay barriers do exist in areas of the
Village and consequently effluent may not readily percolate through the
soil.
D. BIOTIC RESOURCES
1. AQUATIC BIOLOGY
a. Crystal Lake
The low nutrient levels that characterize oligotrophic lakes such
as Crystal Lake support very little plant growth. A study of Crystal
Lake water quality conducted in 1969, showed that there were only a few
species of aquatic macrophytes* and that they were nowhere abundant
(Gannon 1970). At that time bullrush was the dominant emergent aquatic
78
-------
plant; bullrush growth was found along the southeastern shoreline and
less extensively along the southwestern and western shores. Submerged
plants included chara, water star grass and curly pondweed. In the area
where Cold Creek discharges into Crystal Lake, large beds of chara and
potamogeton (pond weed) were found (Michgan DNR, various years). Cold
Creek receives high nutrient loads from non-point source runoff and
leaks or seepage from the present sanitary systems; as a result it
supports abundant plant growth within its own bed and where it enters
Crystal Lake.
The filamentous algae, Cladophora, has been observed growing
attached to rocks in front of the cottages along the shore of Crystal
Lake. In Crystal Lake, where the nutrient supply is naturally low, the
presence of this growth is a strong indication of nutrient contamination
from localized sources (Tanis 1978; Gannon 1970; Kerfoot 1978).
Tanis (1978) conducted an aerial survey of Crystal Lake in 1976 and
found that about 5% of the existing lakeshore homes had Cladophora
growth along the adjacent shoreline. The level and frequency of the
growth were reported to be comparable to that observed in 1969. Figure
11-16 indicates that the heaviest growth occurred along the northeast
shore.
In a recent sanitary survey (University of Michigan 1978) the
extent and distribution of Cladophora growth were determined by on-site
investigations, which permitted even slight patches of Cladophora to be
detected. The study indicated that, of the sites investigated (23% of
the residences in the Proposed Service Area around Crystal Lake), 35%
na<* Cladophora growth although only about 11% of the growth was cate-
gorized as heavy. Table 11-11 shows the distribution of growth with
respect to the shoreline area.
Table 11-11
DISTRIBUTION OF CLADOPHORA GROWTH
ALONG CRYSTAL LAKE SHORELINE AS PERCENT
OF SITES INVESTIGATED
Slight Moderate Heavy
Shoreline Growth Growth Growth
Northeast 14 31 24
Northwest 15 2 7
West 05 0
Southwest 11 8 16
Southeast 24 10 10
(University of Michigan 1978)
In agreement with Tanis' study, growth was found to be heaviest
along the northeast shore. The more frequent growth reported in the
79
-------
sanitary survey as compared to Tanis1 survey may have resulted from the
different survey methods used (on-site survey versus aerial survey).
Several studies have tried to correlate the frequency of Cladophora
growth with certain variables related to septic tank performance.
Gannon (1970) observed a correlation between housing and septic tank
density and Cladophora growth. The sanitary survey (1978) found that
Cladophora growth correlated best with proximity of systems to the lake
shores, length of residence (seasonal vs. year round), and age of the
system. The systems which were installed prior to 1971 were not re-
quired to conform to a sanitary code and consequently the older systems
are frequently in violation of the existing code.
Kerfoot (1978) observed a correlation between Cladophora gro>wth and
septic tank leachate plumes, suggesting that septic tanks are the
localized nutrient sources supporting algal growth.
Studies on the macroinvertebrate* populations in Crystal Lake show
a diversity of species and a surprising abundance considering the
limited nutrient supply (Gannon 1970). Macroinvertebrates are the main
source of food for the large fish population in Crystal Lake.
Such clean water organisms as the mayfly nymph, the caddisfly
larvae and amphipods were found in the littoral zone. Benthic organisms
were very abundant; at a depth of 70 feet, the density of organisms was
100 organisms/ft. (Gannon 1970).
Crystal Lake supports a large and valuable fish population. The
Lake is particularly suited to cold water species and has been managed
for game fish since the 1920s. The lake has been stocked periodically
with rainbow trout, lake trout, brown trout, steelhead and splake. All
species were stocked as recently as 1973 and trout were stocked again in
1975-1976. Smallmouth bass, perch and largemouth bass have not been
stocked since the 1930s and 1940s (Michigan DNR 1973). These species do
not thrive as well as trout in the low water temperatures.
b. Betsie River
Betsie River supports a much more abundant and diversified vegeta-
tive population than does Crystal Lake. Detritus* from decaying grasses
and vegetation along the shoreline supply the river with nutrients for
plant growth. Dense filamentous algae and weed beds have been observed
at various stream segments (Michigan DNR 1973). "Clean water" in-
vertebrates such as caddis larvae, mayfly larvae and crustaceans are
natural food sources for the fish population as are the more population
tolerant worms (Michigan DNR 1973).
The Betsie River is a popular year-round sport fishing stream. The
river is an spawning stream for trout, chinook salmon, coho and steel-
heads (by telephone, Tom Doyle, Michigan DNR, November 1977; Michigan
DNR 1973). A 1965 stream survey (DNR) showed a diversified resident
fish population. Appendix Table G-2 shows fish species collected during
this study. The warm temperatures in the Betsie River do not favor
trout, but several species of coarse or rough fish are present.
80
-------
c. Betsie Lake
No information on the aquatic biology of Bestie Lake was available
other than the records from the Michigan Department of Conservation on
fish stocked there. Brown trout and rainbow trout were stocked in
Betsie lake in 1972.
2. WETLANDS
Wetlands are highly productive but fragile ecosystems, where flora
and fauna require saturated or seasonally saturated soils for growth and
reproduction. Figure 11-11 shows the location of wetlands in the Study
Area. Wetlands are found along the Betsie River, along the shores of
Round Lake and in an area northwest of Long Lake. No wetlands exist
along the shoreline of Crystal Lake. Wetland formation is probably
deterred here by wave action and the scouring action of ice.
The wetland types in the Study Area are mainly wooded swamps and
cattail marshes. These wetlands are characterized in Table 11-12 with
respect to flora, fauna and their location.
In natural resource production and preservation wetlands serve to
assimilate pollutants by acting as settling and/or filtering basins and
to collect sediments as a result of their shoaling* characteristics.
Wetlands also act as a natural buffer against water quality problems
associated with shore development. Furthermore, wetlands serve as flood
water retention areas and also as prime natural recharge areas for
groundwater.
Wetlands are currently afforded Federal protection under Executive
Order 11990, which mandates that no construction project granted Federal
funds may adversely affect wetlands unless reasonable alternatives do
not exist.
In the State of Michigan wetlands are under the jurisdiction of the
Department of Natural Resources. The extensive wetland areas along the
Betsie River are protected from certain types of development by the
Betsie River Natural River Zoning Act (Appendix D-3). Several Michigan
laws, including the Inland Lakes and Streams Act, and the Soil Erosion
and Sedimentation Control Act, also protect wetland areas.
3. TERRESTRIAL BIOLOGY
As a result of agricultural and residential expansion, the present
forest consists largely of second- or later-generation sugar maple, elm,
yellow birch, beech and basswood; it also contains a variable admixture
of hemlock and white pine throughout, as well as occasional stands of
aspen and birch. Stands of red pine have been planted in some open
areas and abandoned fields (Michigan DNR 1973).
Wildlife in the area provides many hours of recreation for the
hunter, sightseer and naturalist. White-tail deer, cottontail rabbits,
81
-------
n
to
rt
to
o
o
Cu
fD
r?
fD
01
•d
fD
f en
to p*
?f O
fD r(
a o
O hh
ro
CD
W a4
fD 83
rt 3
Co !*"
H- CO
ro
H-
<
fD
i-f
r1
o
o
to
rt
H-
O
era 3* cr co ro n
i-i ro c c S s4
to to K" o ro to
CO CL M S4
CD co
ro •
CO
OQ to
C to fD O
CO CO 3 rt
CO S4 rt ro
ro fD o i-t
CL CO to ^
•a •
o
n
rt I-1
U>
fD
rt
rt
I
a4 3
H-OQ
3 CL s; i-t cr
H- c s4 to. ro
H. cr to
co ro
ro
rt i-i
to rt »
rt ro
.. to cr to
%* h-1 I-1 (-"• OQ S
o . to M i-t c
n o re o co
. £/^ j?^* f^ (2 ?s*
if C CO H
w H- a. G. ro to
t^ rt C (0 • rt
04 to O
ro
OQ
M CO •
•I fg
o a
O H>
?! Cu 3
o o x1
o o •
Q* O
82
-------
ruffed grouse and woodcock are common, especially in the lowland brush
and coniferous areas along the Betsie River. Beaver, muskrat, mink, and
other small mammals have been observed along the entire length of the
Betsie River. Squirrels, chipmunks, woodchucks, and an occasional red
fox occupy the woodlands and open fields above the Betsie River. Many
species of small rodents such as mice and voles inhabit both lowlands
and uplands of the Study Area.
The many streams and lakes offer numerous stopover points for both
ducks and geese on their autumn and spring migrations. There is a resi-
dent flock of Canada geese near Elberta; mallards, black ducks, blue-
wing teal, wood ducks and coots are other common waterfowl hunted along
the entire Betsie River (Michigan DNR 1973). A list of vertebrates
whose ranges include the Study Area is provided in Appendix G-l.
4. THREATENED OR ENDANGERED SPECIES
Michigan has an active endangered and threatened species program
complementing that of the Federal government and has published lists of
animal and plant species it would classify as endangered or threatened.
Michigan Public Act 203 of 1974, provides protection for species classi-
fied Endangered* or Threatened* on the Federal list or listed and con-
firmed for protection by the State. The Act authorizes a full range of
conservation management programs for these plants and animals. The
Michigan program recognizes two other categories -- rare or scarce, and
peripheral -- but species in these categories have no legal status under
the Michigan Act (Michigan DNR 1976). A list of Endangered, Threatened
or rare species of wild flora and fauna that occur or may occur in the
Study Area is included in Appendix G-2.
No species of fish, reptiles, or amphibians known to occur in the
area has been classified by either the US Fish and Wildlife Service
(FWS) or the DNR as Endangered or Threatened (by telephone, Mr. Bernard
Ylkanen, District Fisheries Biologist, DNR, Cadillac Division, 26 June
1978).
Although no mammalian species in the area has been classified by
the State or FWS as Endangered (by letter, Mr. Robert Huff, District
Wildlife Biologist, DNR, Cadillac Division, 5 July 1978; FWS 1978), the
Study Area lies within the range of several species of mammals listed by
the State as Threatened or rare. According to Mr. Huff, some of the
smaller birds and mammals on the Michigan list may occur occasionally in
this area, but up-to-date population data are not available for these
species.
There is an active bald eagle nest on the headwaters of the Betsie
River, and an active osprey nest nearby in Grand Traverse County.
Neither nest is in the Study Area, but the birds may find prey in area
waters, which are in easy flying distance. Both species are classified
by FWS and DNR as Threatened. The area is also within the range of the
peregrine falcon, classified as Endangered, which may visit on rare
occasions.
83
-------
The Study Area lies within the range of several plant species
classified by Federal and State agencies as Threatened. They were not
identified during on-the-ground surveys conducted in 1977 and 1978.
However, local residents have identified and confirmed the existence of
three such plant species in the Study Area --ram's head lady slipper,
pitcher's thistle, and broom rape (by telephone, Mr. Rick Habert and
Mr. Arvid Tesker, Frankfort City, Michigan, 7 August 1979). Because
there is some danger in disclosing the locations of rare plants the
sites have not been publicized. However, the habitats of these rare
plants are outside any proposed construction area.
Failure to observe most of these species during the surveys does
not dispel the possibility of their presence in the Study Area. The
Michigan Endangered Species Program is presently engaged in inventorying
and mapping endangered, threatened, and rare animal and plant species in
the State. If this, or other studies should reveal the presence of a
listed species during on-the-ground investigations, the appropriate
protective provisions of Federal and State laws would come into effect.
E. POPULATION AND SOCIOECONQMICS
The existing information on population, employment, income, poverty
level, and housing has been published separately for each municipal
jurisdiction in the Study Area. Taken together, these data describe the
"Socioeconomic Study Area," an area that is somewhat larger than the
Study Area. The "Proposed Service Area," which is made up of those
areas proposed in the Facility Plan for sewering, is also smaller than
the Study Area, covering only portions of the three Townships in the
Study Area, Lake, Crystal Lake and Benzonia (see Figure 1-4). Conse-
quently, the published information cited in this section generally
describes, but cannot precisely reflect characteristics of the actual
populations of either the Study Area or the Proposed Service Area.
1. POPULATION
a. Historic Trends
Historic trends in permanent (year-round) population for the Socio-
economic Study Area and for Benzie County as a whole are presented by
decade from 1940 to 1975 in Table 11-13, which reveals that 87% of the
population growth in the County during this period took place in the
three townships of the Socioeconomic Study Area. The region approxi-
mating the Proposed Service Area had an average annual growth rate of
1.4%, with the highest absolute change in population occurring in
Benzonia Township.
More recently, between 1970 and 1975, average annual rates of
growth of the permanent population of some political units of the
Crystal Lake Study Area have been higher than 1.4%, illustrating the
increasing popularity of Crystal Lake as a year-round residential area.
The exception was Crystal Lake Township, which showed almost no net
change in permanent population in that period.
84
-------
CO
rH
[
f— t
M
CU
i— 1
fl
Cfl
H
to c
C O
Cfl "ri
& 4-> in
u rt r-J
rH CTi] O CM -*
01 3 rH r-- co <3-
4-1 CU I
3 O C
rH PH <*•
O ON
CO C rH
"^
O O rH
c. r.
CM rH
0) 0)
bQ 4-1
d cfl
r-l Pi r-
01 in
-5* ON
& rH
rH O 1
cfl M 0
0 O sj
•H CN
r-J rH rH
O C8 v_
4J rj
03 C
•H q
w a-
00 CN
PM
z en
«2 i — I
co oo > cd -H O
4J -H T3 N
C C 3 C
3 O rH CU
o NO PQ
Q_J C^ ^*i
CD CD
0) M ^ 1
-H
N
C •
•-O rH
rH rH
NS? >^p
O^v Cnv
CO CTi
^? vO
rH 0
CM r-~
O
co m
^r <±
CO vD
m CM
^sj" o
CO rH in
rH rH CO
1
~x° NP
6^2 rH in
CO O CO
o o VO rH
rH
CU
r^ 00
4-1 CO
•H rH
0 r-j -K
4-1 > -H
J-4 rC
O Cd 03
"3 cu o
CO & H
r-4 rH
fn W 01
r*+
cd
I 1 r-)
*
3
C
£3
to
cu
bO
to
0)
I>
cfl
a
cd
T3
CO
cd
CD
rJ
cd
CO
•H
H
01
>j
01 •
U V£3
•H 0
> 00
r-4 "
CU rH
OT
M-l
r-1 O
CU
> c
CU O
C/5 -rl
t3 CO
CU rH
to 3
0 Cu
a o
O Cu
PH C
0)
rC CU
4-1 bO
P
CU cfl
4-1 fC*
Cfl O
e
•H CD
X 4J
0 3
Lj i 1
W T~~1
Cu 0
Cu co
cfl ,c
CO
rH p[
0) cd
CO
0 f.
rH 4J
O -r-(
J3
O 5s?
•H CO
rC
f-f
.
o
N
cd
f\ ^^
CO
en in
a «N
CU 1
O £j
CO
t— •*
85
-------
There are no data available on the seasonal population of the Study
Area before 1972. In that year, it was estimated that the Study Area
attracted over 6,200 seasonal residents. This population grew to 8,300
in 1975 (Wilbur Smith and Associates 1973; Grand Traverse Area Data
Center 1975, 1977), reflecting an average annual growth rate of almost
10%. Of the 1975 total, 48% of the seasonal population resided within
the Proposed Service Area.
The permanent/seasonal population split varied considerably among
jurisdictions. Frankfort City, Elberta Village and Benzonia Village
were each composed almost entirely of permanent population. Lake Town-
ship and Crystal Lake Township, on the other hand, had large seasonal
populations, 89% and 82%, respectively, of their total in-summer popu-
lations, plus the highest increases in absolute numbers. These in-
creases underscore the attractiveness of the two areas for recreation
and second-home development.
b. Population Projections
The assumptions and methodology used in preparing the projections
for the Proposed Service Area are provided in Appendix H. The popula-
tion projections are based on historic housing and population character-
istics and trends. Other factors that influence actual growth, such as
aesthetics, availability of services and housing sites, changes in
housing types, and regional economics, were not incorporated.
The total in-summer population of the Proposed Service Area in the
year 2000 is projected to be approximately 12,500, a 47% increase over
the 1975 figure. The average annual growth rate for the 28-year period
from 1972 to 2000 is expected to be 1.5%, slightly higher than the his-
torical rate of 1.4%. The largest absolute increase in combined per-
manent and seasonal population is projected for Crystal Lake Township --
nearly 2,000 additional persons or 83% by 2000 -- while Benzonia
Village, Beulah Village and the City of Frankfort are expected to in-
crease by only 10-20% in that time.
Summary estimates of permanent and seasonal population and average
annual growth rates for the years 1975 to 2000 for the Proposed Service
Area are presented in Table 11-14. This information is given by minor
civil divisions in Table H-2 in Appendix H.
Table 11-14
POPULATION PROJECTIONS AND AVERAGE ANNUAL
GROWTH RATES FOR CRYSTAL LAKE PROPOSED SEWER SERVICE AREA
Population Average Annual Absolute Change
Component 1975 2000 Growth Rate (1975-2000) (1975-2000)
o Seasonal 4,098 6,742 2.0% 2,644
o Year-round 4,420 5,748 1.1% 1,328
o Total 8,518 12,490 1.5% 3,972
86
-------
Because the various communities within the Proposed Service Area
are not expected to grow at equal rates, each locality's percentage of
the total population will change slightly over this period. Also, for
the entire Proposed Service Area, the proportion of permanent population
is projected to decrease from 52% of the 1975 total in-summer population
to 46% in the year 2000.
In summary, all the communities are expected to grow during the
planning period. Population growth will be greatest in those com-
munities that are presently the most populous. However, the 1975 dis-
tribution of population within the Proposed Service Area is not
projected to change greatly by 2000, and the permanent/seasonal popula-
tion split and the relative size of the population in each community
will change only slightly.
2. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE POPULATION: EMPLOYMENT AND INCOME
a. Permanent Population
This section presents information on the income levels, poverty
population, elderly population and employment characteristics of the
Study Area. These characteristics were chosen because of their rele-
vance to the financial impacts of wastewater treatment alternatives on
households in the area.
The Crystal Lake Socioeconomic Study area is characterized by rela-
tively low income levels for the permanent population. The mean family
income was $9,163 in 1970 in the Study Area and $8,659 in Benzie County,
75% and 71% respectively, of the mean income for the State of Michigan.
In that year, the most recent for which data are available, only 37.8%
of the families in the Study Area had incomes over $10,000, as compared
to 57.1% of families in the State (US Census 1970). Despite the rela-
tively low income level in the Socioeconomic Study Area, however, a
comparatively small proportion of the population fell below Federally
established poverty levels -- 6.0% as compared to 7.3% of the State
population (Table 11-15). An important factor in the income levels of
the area is its predominantly rural character and relative remoteness
from large employment centers.
Table 11-15
POVERTY STATUS-FAMILIES 1970
Number of Families Percent of Families
Area Below Poverty Level Below Poverty Level
Michigan 160,034 7.3
Benzie County 245 11.2
Study Area 102 6.0
Benzonia Township 43 4.3
Crystal Lake Township 12 9.9
Frankfort City 42 8.9
Lake Township 5 4.9
US Census of Population and Housing, Fifth Count Summary Data, 1970.
US Census of Population - 1970, Supplementary Report issued December
1975.
87
-------
Retirement population (age 65 and over) made up 177o of the Study
Area's population in 1970, as compared to 8% of the State of Michigan
(Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis 1970). Many per-
sons in this retirement age group are living on low or fixed incomes.
Service occupations have represented a steadily increasing pro-
portion of Benzie County employment since 1950. By 1970, such vocations
formed the largest employment sector, accounting for 28.3% of all
employed persons. Increases in the service and retail trade sectors
have been the response to the growing importance of tourism in the area;
much of the total retail sales in Benzie County have been attributed to
the tourist industry. Tourist expenditures as a percentage of retail
sales grew from 26% in 1967 to 45% in 1972 (Michigan Department of
Commerce 1975). Employment in agriculture has declined since 1940 to
only 7.2% of the labor force in 1970. The only large industrial plant
in the Study Area is Pet, Inc.
b. Seasonal Population
Most seasonal residents in the Crystal Lake Area appear to come
from other parts of Michigan. A survey of summer visitors to Benzie
County by the Data Research Center (1978) indicated that 64.3% came from
southern Michigan, 10.1% came from Canada, 13.0% came from Great Lakes
states other than Michigan, and 5.8% came from other areas. The survey
also indicated that most seasonal visitors come to the area regularly
and that the aesthetic quality of the area, its location convenient to
metropolitan centers in southern Michigan, and the presence of friends
and relatives are major attractions (by telephone, Nancy Hayward, Data
Research Center, February 1979). Establishment of the Sleeping Bear
Dunes National Lakeshore Park has contributed to a large recent increase
in seasonal use of the area and is expected to bring about further in-
creases in the near future.
No direct data on the age, income, or occupational characteristics
of summer residence owners in the Study Area or Proposed Service Area
are available. The value of the seasonal homes in the area (generally
in the $50,000 to $60,000 range in 1979) indicates that most seasonal
residents are upper or upper middle income. From the limited data
available, it appears that seasonal residents generally have higher
per-family and per-capita incomes than permanent residents of the area.
3. HOUSING
In 1970, the Crystal Lake Socioeconomic Study Area contained 3,647
dwelling units. Of these units, 1,946 (53%) were occupied year round,
and 1,701 (47%) were occupied on a seasonal basis. More than 82% of the
permanent dwellings in the Study Area were owner-occupied in 1970 and
over half (55.6%) were built before 1940 (Table II-16). Median values
of permanent residences in Benzie County were considerably lower than in
the State of Michigan in 1970: $10,882 vs. $17,589. These lower values
reflect the rural nature of the area, the age of the permanent housing
stock, and the lower level of family income.
-------
Table 11-16
HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SOCIOECONOMIC STUDY AREA (1970)
Number Percent
Total Dwelling Units 3,647
Permanent 1,946 53.3
Seasonal 1,701 46.6
Of the Permanent Units:
Occupied Units 1,574 80.9
Vacant Units 372 19.1
Of the Occupied Units:
Owner-Occupied 1,304 82.8
Renter-Occupied 270 17.2
Age of Permanent Housing
Stock:
Built after 1965 184 9.5
Built between 1939 and
1964 680 34.9
Built before 1940 1,082 55.6
US Census of Housing. 1970. Summary Data.
US Census of Housing. 1970. Fifth Count Summary Data.
89
-------
Dwellings outside presently sewered areas were counted from aerial
photographs in 1976. The count revealed that there were 1,093 dwellings
in the presently unsewered parts of the Proposed Service Area and that
about 500 or 46%, of these were within 300 feet of Crystal Lake. The
study also indicated that there were about 100 vacant lots within 300
feet of the Lake which could be developed with septic tanks.
Despite continued county-wide growth, in the four years from 1974
to 1977 issuance of septic tank permits for the Crystal Lake area fell
26% from the previous four years (Health Department 1977). Reasons for
this change have not been explained but it is presumed to be due to the
more stringent permit requirements implemented in 1972.
4. LAND USE
a. Present Land Use
Current use of land in the Study Area is shown in Figure 11-17.
Major uses include the following:
o Small urban centers, including the communities of Frankfort,
Benzonia, Beulah, and Elberta with a core of residential and
commercial uses
o Single family seasonal and permanent residential areas around
Crystal Lake, Lake Michigan, Long Lake, and along major roads
o Agricultural areas devoted to row crops and orchards
o Woodlands
o Open land consisting of wet woodlands, wetlands arid sand
dunes.
The patterns of non-agricultural development in the Crystal Lake
region have been shaped by a combination of topography, aesthetic
amenities, transportation and such characteristics of the soils as
slope, drainage and permeability which determine the suitability of land
for development. Outstanding recreational opportunities and scenery —
lakes, streams, woods and hills — have stimulated considerable residen-
tial development. Although building to the north and south of Crystal
Lake is limited by steep slopes to a single tier in some locations, off
the Lake there are grid patterns of development on the rolling sand
dunes west of Crystal Lake and in the Village of Beulah at the eastern
end.
Most commercial areas are in village centers or along the main
highway, US 31. Commercial development elsewhere includes local con-
venience stores such as groceries and tourist-oriented facilities in-
cluding lodging. Industrial areas occupy a small portion of the Pro-
posed Service Area along US Route 31. The largest industrial establish-
ment in the area is Pet, Inc.
90
-------
91
-------
The greatest potential for future commercial development within the
Proposed Service Area exists along the land adjoining the access routes
between the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore Park north of Crystal
Lake and the more populous areas to the south of the Study Area. In-
creased tourism in the Lakeshore Park and expanding permanent and
seasonal populations are expected to swell the volume of traffic along
US Route 31 and Michigan Routes 22 and 115. The area also includes the
Betsie River, designated "a natural river" by the State (see Section
II.B.I, II.B.6 and Appendix D-3).
b. Growth Management Policies and Regulations
Development within the Study Area is regulated by State, county,
and local ordinances. The most important regulatory measures affecting
development in lakeshore areas are:
o The Inland Lakes and Streams Act, Michigan State Act 346
(1972);
o The Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control Act, Michigan State
Act 347 (1972);
o The Comprehensive Development Plan for Benzie County; and
o Zoning ordinances for the Townships of Benzonia, Crystal Lake
and Lake and the Village of Beulah.
The Inland Lakes and Streams Act sets general guidelines and re-
quires persons wishing to build on submerged lands, i.e., on areas lying
below the ordinary high water mark, to obtain a permit. Should it be
necessary, DNR may sue in the circuit court of the appropriate county to
enforce compliance with the terms of the permit.
Under the Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control Act, all construc-
tion activities that would disturb one or more acres of land, all con-
struction activities within 500 feet of the shore of a lake, river or
stream, and any construction activity that would cause sedimentation in
surface waters are regulated through a permit system administered by
designated county agencies, in this case the Benzie County Community
Development Department. The Act imposes limitations upon tree cutting,
removal of vegetative cover, and cut and fill operations. Mitigating
measures to control runoff from construction sites must be taken, and
designated officials may enter and inspect sites at reasonable times.
The DNR must conduct an on-going appraisal of soil erosion control
programs to ensure compliance; a permit may be revoked upon a finding of
a violation (R 323.1704 Permit Requirements, Rule 704(1), Michigan 1974
Annual Administrative Code Supplement).
The Comprehensive Development Plan for Benzie County classifies the
following types of areas as environmentally sensitive:
o Excessive slope areas
o Dune formations and major sand areas
o Areas with other soil limitations
92
-------
o Marshland areas
o Riverine areas
o Lake Michigan and inland lake shorelines.
In the Plan, these areas were combined into a "zone" that traverses
other land use boundaries. Although this special critical area designa-
tion does not dictate how land may be used, it does set restrictions
that must be considered in planning any future developments. In any en-
vironmentally sensitive areas already under development, the Plan stated
that new development must be designed to minimize impact on environ-
mental quality.
In the County's Plan, most of the land surrounding Crystal Lake was
designated as medium density residential. This category set expansion
areas of "suburban" density for major growth centers based on antici-
pated population levels for each village or area. A range of densities
from 1 unit per 3 acres to 1 unit per acre (near the major growth
centers) was established for these developmental buffer areas, which are
intended to provide adequate land for single family development of a
lower density than in villages without encouraging the spread of higher
densities into the rural areas of the County.
Most of the remaining land in the Study Area, largely rural, has
been designated rural/agricultural density residential. Densities in
this category were set still lower -- at less than 1 unit per 3 acres.
These densities are designed to discourage haphazard development of
prime agricultural lands and to encourage denser development near the
villages, which often already have public services.
Benzie County allows townships and villages to adopt local zoning
ordinances which support county zoning within their jurisdictions.
Varying ordinances are in effect in Benzonia Township, Crystal Lake
Township, Lake Township and the Village of Beulah. The only zoning
district common to all areas is the one-family residential district.
Even within this district minimum lot sizes, shoreline setbacks, and
permissible uses differ (see Table 11-17). Furthermore, Crystal Lake
Township allows only single family dwellings and accessory buildings,
but harvesting of forest products in residential areas is permitted.
Lake Township also allows churches, schools, and non-commercial re-
creational facilities in residential areas. Benzonia Township is the
least restrictive of the local jurisdictions: allowing multiple-family
dwellings, resorts and tourist homes in residential areas. The varia-
tions among township ordinances present possible problems in future
planning and provision of sewer capacity in the Crystal Lake area.
Provision of sewers might attract condominium type development to those
areas in which it is permitted.
The variations among the townships' definitions and allowances of
uses may present a problem in future planning for the Crystal Lake area.
It may be necessary for the townships to coordinate their growth manage-
ment activities in order to ensure that continuing development activity
will be consistent with established water quality objectives for Crystal
Lake.
93
-------
Table 11-17
MINIMUM SHORELAND ORDINANCE STANDARDS
Township
Benzonia
Crystal Lake
Lake
District
Residential
Agricultural-
Residential
Residential
Commercial-
Resort
Summer Camp-
Recreational
Retail
Residential
Lot Size
(Sq. Ft.)
6,000
6,000
8,500
5,000
Building Setback
from Shoreland (feet)
Front Building Line*
5
5
5
5
15,000
*Front Building Line is defined as the average distance from the lakeshore
to the front wall or portions thereof of all dwellings fronting on the same
lakeshore, which are within 100 feet of both sides of the proposed building.
-------
c. Recreation
The Crystal Lake area is a well-established recreational center
based upon diversified scenic and sports amenities. Crystal Lake itself
is a center for sailing, water skiing, fishing and swimming. Lake
Michigan is also a water sports center. Betsie Bay is a marina for Lake
Michigan craft and is the site of the historic Betsie Bay Lighthouse.
The Platte River, just to the north of the Proposed Service Area is an
outstanding salmon fishery. A variety of non-water based recreational
opportunities are also found in the area. These include facilities
based on the rolling topography of the area and manmade sightseeing
attractions. Crystal Mountain Ski Resort attracts winter visitors,
while the annual National Soaring and Gliding Festival at Frankfort
attracts summer visitors. Other tourist attractions include tours of a
paper factory and a pottery factory. Benzonia, Beulah, and Frankfort
have a total of 14 motels (Western Michigan Tourist Association 1978).
The most important factor in future recreational development and
tourist visitation to the Crystal Lake area is the Sleeping Bear Dunes
National Lakeshore, located immediately north of the Proposed Service
Area. The National Lakeshore was first proposed in 1950 and designated
by Congress in 1970. The Park was formally established in 1977. The
Park is still in its early stages of development, and much of the land
within the Park boundary is still privately held. The establishment and
development of the Park have been the subject of a great deal of con-
troversy. Many local citizens opposed establishment of the Lakeshore,
while proposals for wilderness areas (1974) and a scenic corridor and
road (1977) have also been controversial. The Platte River Wilderness,
just to the north of the Crystal Lake area, is one of six wilderness
areas proposed in the National Lakeshore. The National Park Service
favors the designation of the Platte River area as a wilderness. Such
designation would make pressure from population growth in the Crystal
Lake area especially critical. One alternative development plan for the
Park includes a scenic corridor and low speed scenic highway (comparable
to the Blue Ridge Parkway) for the Crystal Lake Highlands area (National
Park Service 1978). A study produced in 1977 defining the scenic
corridor and highway was issued in 1977 but was withdrawn by the
National Park Service as a result of local controversy and lawsuits
(League of Women Voters 1978).
Total visitation at the Sleeping Bear Dunes Lakeshore in 1978 was
estimated at 800,000 visitor days. Enough land has been purchased by
the Park Service in the last few years to permit development of more
extensive hiking and skiing trails. As a result, visitation has been
increasing by about 10% per year. Development of a visitor center,
interpretive center, and scenic corridor route are still at least 8 to
10 years away, however, because of budgetary limitations (by telephone,
Mr. Max Holden, Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore, 9 April 1979).
A study by the Upper Great Lakes Commission (1972), although somewhat
out-of-date, did classify the portion of the Crystal Lake area west of
US Route 31 as an area of "high development potential" as the result of
creation of the National Lakeshore. However, traffic generated by the
National Lakeshore in the Crystal Lake area is not believed to be a
problem in the foreseeable future.
95
-------
5. ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL RESOURCES
One site within the Study Area, the Mills Community House, has been
listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Built in 1900 as
the women's dormitory of Benzonia College, it is a two-and-a-half-story
structure located on the southeast corner of Michigan and Walker Avenues
in the Village of Benzonia. The building was remodeled in 1925 and is
now used as a library and community center (by telephone, Mrs. Sherwood,
the Historic Conservation and Recreation Service, 1 February 1979).
Four possible archaeological sites within the Study Area boundaries
have been recorded by the Great Lakes Branch of the University of
Michigan, Museum of Archaeology. Three of these, in Lake Township, may
have been early villages. The fourth, in Crystal Lake Township, may be
an Indian mound or series of mounds. According to John Halsey of the
Michigan State History Division, the actual locations and compositions
of the sites are not known, and remains may have been destroyed long
ago. Mr. Halsey has indicated that an archaeological survey will be
required by his agency prior to any construction to verify the existence
of any sites that may be impacted by the selected alternative (by tele-
phone, 24 January 1979).
96
-------
CHAPTER III
ALTERNATIVES
A. INTRODUCTION
1. GENERAL APPROACH
New alternative systems were developed for wastewater collection
and treatment in the Proposed Crystal Lake Service Area. This chapter
presents eight "EIS Alternatives". It compares designs and project
costs to those of the Proposed Action of the Crystal Lake Area Facility
Plan (Williams and Works, et al. 1976), described in Chapter I, above.
Chapter IV assesses the environmental and socioeconomic impacts of all
these systems.
The EIS alternative has focused on those aspects and implications
of the proposed wastewater management plan for the Proposed Service Area
which (a) have been identified as major issues or concerns, or (b) were
not adequately addressed in the Facility Plan.
Chapter I of this EIS, emphasized that an important issue is the
overall need for the project proposed in the Facility Plan. Documenting
a clear need for new wastewater facilities may, on occasion, be
difficult, requiring evidence that the existing on-lot systems are
directly related to water quality and public health problems. Such a
need is shown when one or more of the following conditions exist
(Illinois Environmental Protection Agency 1977):
o Standing pools of septic tank effluent or raw domestic sewage
in yards or public areas where direct contact with residents
is likely.
o Sewage in basements from inoperable or sluggish sewage
disposal systems.
o Contaminated private wells clearly associated with sewage
disposal systems.
The Proposed Service Area exhibits some indirect evidence of the
unsuitability of site conditions for on-site soil disposal systems. The
evidence includes high groundwater, slowly permeable soils, small lot
sizes, proximity to lakeshores and substandard setback distances between
wells and private wastewater facilities. Available information on these
factors were, in fact, used early in the preparation of this EIS to
develop the decentralized alternatives designated EIS Alternatives 3, 4
and 5.
97
-------
Indirect evidence is insufficient to justify Federal funding,
however. Federal water pollution control legislation and regulations
require documentation of actual water quality or public health problems.
Section II.C summarizes the extensive efforts mounted during the
preparation of this EIS to document and quantify the need for improved
facilities around Crystal Lake.
The dollar cost of the Facility Plan Proposed Action and its impact
on area residents make cost effectiveness as serious as need
documentation. Since the collection system accounts for the major share
of the construction costs in the Facility Plan Proposed Action, the
extent of sewer lines needed and the use of newer technologies for
wastewater collection have been investigated in detail here, as have
alternative wastewater treatment systems. The technologies assessed are
listed below:
WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT COMPONENTS AND OPTIONS
Functional Component
Flow and Waste Load
Reduction
Options
Collection of Wastewaters
Wastewater Treatment
Processes
Effluent Disposal
Sludge Handling
household water conserva-
tion measures
ban on phosphorus
rehabilation of existing
sewers to reduce
infiltration and inflow
limited service area
pressure sewers
vacuum sewers
gravity sewers
conventional centralized
treatment plus chemical
treatment to reduce
phosphorus concentrations
land application
on-site treatment
cluster systems
rotating biological
contactor
subsurface disposal
land application
discharge to surface
waters
greywater recycling
anaerobic digestion
dewatering
98
-------
Sludge Disposal - land application
landfilling
composting
Next, appropriate options were selected and combined into
alternative systems. Design criteria in the pertinent state and local
codes, given in Appendix F, were followed. The alternatives were then
compared. The last section of this chapter considers implementation,
administration and financing of the alternatives.
2. COMPARABILITY OF ALTERNATIVES: DESIGN POPULATION
The various alternatives for wastewater management in the Service
Area must provide equivalent or comparable levels of service if their
designs and costs are to be properly compared. In the following
comparison of alternatives the design population of 12,490 has been
assumed (see Section C.l.c below and Appendix H).
The same year 2000 design population has been used as the basis for
all the EIS alternatives and the Facility Plan Proposed Action in the
interest of equitable comparison; it must be recognized, however, that
each alternative carries its own constraints and that the wastewater
management system chosen may determine much of the Crystal Lake area's
actual population in the year 2000.
3. COMPARABILITY OF ALTERNATIVES: FLOW AND WASTE
LOAD PROJECTIONS
Design flows for centralized treatment facilities and for the
cluster systems are based on a design domestic sewage flow of 60 gpcd in
residential areas for both permanent and seasonal residents. This
figure increases to 70 gpcd for Frankfort, Benzonia Village and Elberta.
The reasons for these per capita design flows are outlined in Section
C.l.b of this chapter. Infiltration and inflow (I/I) into gravity
sewers was added to the calculated sewage flow in appropriate
alternatives.
The design flow used in the Facility Plan for the Proposed Action
was 100 gpcd, including I/I. To compare costs properly in this EIS, it
was necessary to re-calculate flows for the Proposed Action using flows
developed for the EIS alternatives; this was done.
B. COMPONENTS AND OPTIONS
1. FLOW AND WASTE REDUCTION
Methods that reduce the flow or pollutant loads can provide the
following benefits to a wastewater management program:
o Reduce the sizes and capital costs of new sewage collection
and treatment facilities;
99
-------
o Delay the time when future expansion or replacement facilities
will be needed;
o Reduce the operational costs of pumping and treatment; and
o Mitigate the sludge and effluent disposal impacts.
In the Proposed Service Area residential flow reduction devices and
a ban on phosphorus detergent are techniques that may be used to achieve
these benefits.
a. Residential Flow Reduction
Appendix I discusses a number of residential flow reduction
devices. Of these, dual-flush toilets and flow-restriction devices for
shower heads and faucets reduce flow the most for the least cost.
Proper use of these devices can reduce consumption of water by an
estimated 16 gpcd. EIS Alternative 2 (see Section III.C.2.e) was re-
designed and recosted using a design flow based on 44 gpcd to evaluate
the cost-effectiveness of widespread use of these devices. Section C.5
discusses the engineering and economic significance of flow reduction.
Briefly, use of these devices in sewered residences saves
sufficient capital costs to be cost-effective locally. Use of flow
reduction devices reduces water supply and heating costs. If these
savings are added to applicable savings in operation and maintenance
costs, the Crystal Lake homeowner could save of $112 annually. Appendix
1-1 reviews the technical basis of these savings calculations.
Flow reduction devices are also useful with on- or off-site soil
disposal systems. Such systems may last longer because hydraulic
loading is reduced. Because no long-term evaluation has been
undertaken, the increased lifespan and the resultant economic benefit
cannot now be quantified. Installation of these devices should be
attractive to residents, reducing their own water supply and hot water
heating costs as well as wastewater disposal costs.
Several other flow reduction measures providing even greater
reductions in sewage generation are available. As an example, some
residences require holding tanks because the soils are unsuited to
subsurface wastewater disposal and other methods of disposal are not
available. In such cases, wastewater flow may be reduced to 15 - 30
gpcd by the following methods:
o Reduce lavatory water usage by installing spray tap faucets.
o Replace standard toilets with dual cycle or other low volume
toilets.
o Reduce shower water use by installing thermostatic mixing
valves and flow control shower heads. Use of showers should
be encouraged rather than baths whenever possible.
100
-------
o Replace older clothes washing machines with those equipped
with water-level controls or with front-loading machines.
o Eliminate water-carried toilet wastes by use of in-house
composting toilets.
o Use recycled bath and laundry wastewaters to sprinkle lawns in
summer. The feasibility of this method would have to be
evaluated on a trial basis in the planning area because its
general applicability is not certain.
o Recycle of bath and laundry wastewaters for toilet flushing.
Filtering and disinfection of bath and laundry wastes for this
purpose has been shown to be feasible and aesthetically
acceptable in pilot studies (Cohen and Wallman 1974;
Mclaughlin 1968). This is an alternative to in-house
composting toilets that could achieve the same level of
wastewater flow reduction.
o Commercially available pressurized toilets and air-assisted
shower heads using a common air compressor of small horsepower
would reduce sewage volume from these two largest household
sources up to 90%.
b. Michigan Ban on Phosphorus
Phosphorus is frequently the nutrient controlling algae growth in
surface waters and is therefore an important influence on lake or stream
eutrophication. Enrichment of the waters with nutrients encourages the
growth of algae and other microscopic plant life; decay of the plants
increases biochemical oxygen demand, decreasing dissolved oxygen in the
water. Addition of nutrients encourages higher forms of plant life,
thereby hastening the aging process by which a lake evolves into a bog
or marsh. Normally, eutrophication is a natural process proceeding
slowly over thousands of years. However, human activity can greatly
accelerate it. Phosphorus and other nutrients, contributed to surface
waters by human wastes, laundry detergents and agricultural runoff,
often result in over-fertilization, over-productivity of plant matter,
and "choking" of a body of water within a few years. Section II.B.7 and
Appendix E-4 discuss the process and data pertinent for the Crystal Lake
Study Area.
In 1971 the Michigan legislature limited the amount of phosphorus
in laundry and cleaning supplies sold in Michigan to 8.7%
(Michigan-Public Act 226, Cleaning Agent Act). To reduce phosphorus
concentrations in wastewater further, the Michigan Department of Natural
Resources subsequently banned statewide the use and sale of domestic
laundry detergents containing more than 0.5% phosphorus. By May 1978,
according to monitoring data, influent phosphorus concentrations at 20
wastewater treatment plants had decreased from an average of 6.5 mg/1 to
4.3 mg/1 (by telephone, Mr. Mike Stiffler, DNR, Water Quality Division,
1 August 1978). These figures corresponded to a 35% reduction in
phosphorus entering the plants. Figure III-l illustrates these data.
101
-------
17
16
15
14
13
12
I10
en
§ 9
o
X
a.
g 8
i
Q_
•5
4
3
2
LEGEND
O—O ADRIAN
EAST LANSING
A—A GRAND RAPIDS
D-D MENOMINEE
A- -A GRAND HAVEN
©—© PONTIAC
AVERAGE
0
J I
I I I I 1 I I
J I
J !
I I
(->(_>
CJ O UJ
O Z Q
2 CD CC
< IU <
-3 U. 5
CC >-
0. <
< S
<
a.
LU
> O
O LU
Z Q
CD
Ijj
u.
CC
<
5
CC
O.
1976
1377
1978
Figure III-l: Phosphorus Loadings at Micldean Treatment Plants
102
-------
Treatment plants and on-site disposal facilities in the Study Area
could experience a similar reduction in phosphorus concentration.
However, such characteristics of the Crystal Lake area as the number of
residential laundry facilities may differ from those in the communities
where data were collected. Clearly, the extent of phosphorus reduction
can only be determined by a survey of the characteristics of the Study
Area. One approach to the reduction of phosphorus is to require that
household detergents be free of phosphates.
Reduction of phosphorus by control of detergents will not achieve
the effluent discharge limits of 1 mg/1 set for Betsie Lake (see
Appendix D-4 for Effluent Limits), Consequently, provision of
facilities for phosphorus removal i^v treatment plant operation is
required. The phosphorus ban would ndt affect on-site systems because
the effluent limitation only applies j to treatment plants discharging
into surface waters.
c. Rehabilitation of Existing Sowers To Reduce Infiltration
and Inflow
Infiltration/Inflow Analyses condu
the Facility Plan revealed that infiltration
sewer systems and that combined s
significant inflow. Rehabilitation of
beginning with sewer system evaluation
in the Facility Plan. The costs and
rehabilitation effort are incorporated
Action.
ted in Frankfort and Elberta for
was substantial in both
ewers in Frankfort result in
sewers in both municipalities,
surveys (SSES), were recommended
irojected flow reduction for the
n all EIS Alternatives except No
While this EIS is not evaluating
of sewage from its sewers may be one
loads and bacterial contamination in
should be investigated.
2. COLLECTION
The collection system proposed in
cost $14 million -- 76% of the total cost of the proposed action — and
is the single most expensive portion o
not all parts of collection systems ar
alternatives for Beulah, leakage
of the causes for high nutrient
Cold Creek. This possibility
he Facility Plan is estimated to
f the sewerage facilities. Since
; eligible for Federal and State
funding, the costs of the collection system impact the local community
more than other components of the project. There is, therefore,
considerable incentive at local, state and national levels to choose
less expensive alternatives to conventional sewer systems.
Alternative means of wastewater collection are:
o pressure sewers (including grinder pumps or STEP systems);
o vacuum sewers; and
o small diameter gravity sewers (Troyan and Norris 1974).
103
-------
An alternative collection system may economically sewer areas with
site conditions that increase the cost of conventional sewerage, such as
shallow depth to bedrock, high groundwater table, or hilly terrain.
Housing density also affects the relative costs of conventional and
alternative wastewater collection techniques.
The alternative most extensively studied is collection by a
pressure sewer system. The principles behind the pressure system and
the gravity flow system are opposite to each other. The water system
consists of a single point of pressurization and a number of user
outlets. Conversely, the pressure sewer system has inlet points of
pressurization and a single outlet. Pressurized wastewater is generally
discharged to the treatment facility or to a gravity sewer.
The two major types of pressure sewer systems are the grinder pump
(GP) system and the septic tank effluent pumping (STEP) system. The
differences between the two systems are in the on-site equipment and
layout. The GP system employs individual grinder pumps to convey raw
wastewater to the sewer. In the STEP system septic tank effluent from
individual households is pumped to the pressure main.
The advantages of pressure sewer systems are:
o elimination of infiltration/inflow;
o reduction of construction cost; and
o use in varied site and climatic conditions.
The disadvantages include relatively high operation and maintenance
cost, and the requirement for individual home STEP systems or grinder
pumps.
Vacuum sewers provide similar advantages. Their major components
are vacuum mains, collection tanks and vacuum pumps, and individual home
valve connection systems. A recent review of vacuum sewer technology,
however, noted significant differences among design of four major types
of current systems (Cooper and Rezek 1975).
As a third alternative to conventional gravity sewers, small
diameter (4-inch) pipe can be used if septic tank effluent, rather than
raw waste, is collected. Such pipe may result in lower costs of
materials, but the systems retain some of the disadvantages of larger
sewers. The need for deep excavations and pump stations is unaffected.
This document analyzed the reliability, site requirements, and
costs of the alternative sewer systems considered for the Crystal Lake
area. The STEP-type low-pressure sewer system was found the most
advantageous of the three alternatives. A preliminary STEP system
serving residents around Crystal Lake was, therefore, developed to
determine the differences in project costs if it were substituted for
the gravity system specified by the Facility Plan. Assumptions
regarding the design and cost of the low pressure sewer system are
listed in Appendix J-l. Figure III-2 illustrates the arrangement of the
STEP system house pump and sewer line connection.
104
-------
2 X
oo
cr
UJ
?
LJ
C/)
UJ
cr
(/)
en
UJ
cr
Q-
UJ
o
cr
o
u_
CN1
I
cr
LJ
^
Lul
CO
LU
cr
Z)
CO
CO
LJ
cr
QL
cr
O
u_
z:
o
h-
0) .
M —I
3 <
•rl h-
P" CO
z
Q.
O
Q_
>•
H
105
-------
3. WASTEWATER TREATMENT
Wastewater treatment options include three categories: centralized
treatment prior to discharge into surface water; centralized treatment
prior to disposal on land; and decentralized treatment.
Centralized treatment means the treatment at a central site of
wastewater collected by a single system and transported to a central
location. Centralized treatment systems may serve all or a part of the
service area. Centrally treated effluent may be discharged to surface
waters or applied to the land; the method and site of disposal affect
the treatment process requirements.
"Decentralized treatment" defines those systems processing a
relatively small amount of wastewater; options include "package plants",
cluster systems, and individual septic systems. This EIS will assess
the technical feasibility, relative costs, environmental impacts, and
implementability in the Crystal Lake Study Area of these approaches to
wastewater treatment.
a. Centralized Treatment —Discharge to Surface Water
The Frankfort and Elberta primary treatment plants cannot meet the
State of Michigan's effluent standards for Betsie Lake. Aside from
excessive hydraulic and organic loadings, much of the equipment, at the
two plants needs repair or replacement. In assessing the potential for
expansion and upgrading of these two plants, the Facility Plan concluded
that expansion and upgrading of the plants were not feasible,
principally because of insufficient land for remodeling or additions.
It proposed a new treatment facility, designed around rotating
biological contactors. Such a facility, complete with suitable addition
of chemicals, could meet appropriate effluent limitations.
b. Centralized Treatment — Land Disposal
Land treatment of municipal wastewater uses vegetation and soil to
remove many constitutents of wastewater. Several processes are
available that can achieve many different objectives of treatment:
water reuse, nutrient recycling and crop production. The three
principal types of land application systems are:
o Slow rate (irrigation)
o Rapid infiltration (infiltration-percolation)
o Overland flow. (EPA 1977)
The quality of effluent required for land application in terms of
BOD and suspended solids is not so high as that for stream discharge.
Preliminary wastewater treatment is needed to prevent health hazards,
maintain high treatment efficiency by the soil, reduce soil clogging,
and insure reliable operation of the distribution system. The Michigan
Department of Natural Resources (DNR) requires the equivalent of
secondary treatment prior to land disposal. (Personal communication,
Steve Eldridge, DNR, 30 March 1978).
106
-------
A recent memorandum from EPA may alter Michigan's approach to
pretreatment prior to land application. To encourage both land
treatment and land disposal of wastewater, EPA has indicated that:
"A universal minimum of secondary treatment for direct surface
discharge... will not be accepted because it is inconsistent
with the basic concepts of land treatment.
...the costs of the additional preapplication increment needed
to meet more stringent preapplication treatment requirements
[than necessary] imposed at the State or local level would be
ineligible for Agency funding and thus would be paid for from
State or local funds." (EPA 1978)
Land treatment systems require wastewater storage during periods of
little or no application caused by factors such as unfavorable weather.
In Michigan storage facilities for the winter months are necessary.
The EPA policy has important ramifications for land treatment
alternatives. By allowing Federal funding of land used for storage and
underwriting the risk of failure for certain land-related projects the
policy promotes their consideration.
The land application component of the alternatives in this EIS
includes the treatment and storage facilities provided by the Facility
Plan (see Figure III-3), but woodland spray irrigation is the method of
final disposal in the new system. Considerations in selecting the
method of land application and a potential site are discussed in Section
II.A.S.b.
c. Decentralized Treatment
Figure 1-4 shows the Facility Plan proposed centralized collection
and treatment of wastewaters for the entire Service Area. The costs for
the proposed wastewater management plan, evaluated in terms of
individual households, were high. Because most of those costs were due
to sewers, this EIS examines methods of wastewater treatment not
dependent on extensive sewer systems.
Several technologies can provide decentralized treatment at or near
the point of generation. These are:
o Alternative toilets
Composting toilets
Toilets using filtered and disinfected bath and laundry
wastewater
Waterless toilets using oils to carry and store wastes
Incineration toilets
107
-------
108
-------
o On-lot treatment and disposal
Septic tank and soil-disposal systems
Septic tank and dual, alternating soil-disposal system
Aerobic treatment and soil-disposal system
Septic tank or aerobic treatment and sand filter with
effluent discharge to surface waters
Septic tank and evapotranspiration system
Septic tank and mechanical evaporation system
Septic tank and elevated sand mound system
o Off-lot treatment and disposal
Cluster systems (multiple houses served by a common
soil-disposal system)
Community septic tank or aerobic treatment and sand
filter with effluent discharge to surface water
Small-scale lagoon with seasonal effluent discharge to
surface water
Small-scale lagoon with effluent discharge at
rapid-infiltration land application site
Small-scale lagoon with seasonal effluent discharge at
slow-rate land application site
Small-scale, fabricated activated sludge (package)
treatment plants with effluent discharge to surface
waters.
To assess decentralized alternatives first requires comparison with
centralized alternatives. The feasibility analysis, design, and
construction cost estimation of decentralized alternatives is entirely
different from the centralized systems. Most decentralized alternatives
depend to a large extent on such environmental constraints as
topography, geology, groundwater, climate, and soil conditions within
the Service Area. (Conversely, sewers are both feasible and reliable in
nearly all settings where construction is possible; environmental
factors primarily affect constructions costs.) In addition, the
selection and design of decentralized alternatives must be
site-specific, particularly with respect to existing buildings. The
feasibility analysis and design of sewers may be performed with less
site data than the decentralized alternatives because standard design
criteria are unlikely to be voided by site conditions.
109
-------
The importance of site-specific factors implies that design and
estimates of feasibility of decentralized alternatives are less certain
than for centralized alternatives. Quantitative statements will not be
available until the engineering of decentralized alternatives becomes
better established and more experience in their management and
monitoring has been gained.
4. FLEXIBILITY
Flexibility measures system ability to accommodate growth or future
changes in requirements. This section examines the flexibility of the
components within each alternative and the operational restraints on
each and design of the facilities. These are discussed in terms of
their impacts upon choices of systems and decisions of planning and
design.
a. Transmission and Conveyance
For gravity and pressure sewer systems, flexibility is the ability
to handle future increases in flow. The ability to handle flows greater
than the original design flow is generally low, and an increase in
capacity is an expensive process. Also, the layout of the system
depends upon the location of the treatment facility. Relocation or
expansion of a finished facility would require costly redesign and
addition of sewer.
Both gravity and pressure sewers require minimum sewage velocities
to prevent deposition of solids which could cause blockage. The
velocity of the fluid in gravity sewers depends mainly upon pipe slope.
Contour of the ground surface largely determines pipe slope and depth,
and consequently, construction costs. Pressure sewers, however, can
carry sewage uphill under pressure, not depending upon slope to maintain
the flow velocity; they offer the designer somewhat more flexibility
than gravity flow pipe.
b. On-Site Septic Systems
Septic systems are flexible in that they can be custom designed for
each user. As long as spatial and environmental parameters are met, the
type of system can be chosen according to individual requirements. This
flexibility is useful in some rural areas where centralized treatment
would be neither cost effective nor desirable.
Existing septic systems can be expanded by adding tank and
drainfield capacity, if suitable land is available. Flow can then be
distributed to an added system with little disturbance of the existing
one.
Cluster systems are septic systems treating wastewater from more
than one house, usually 15 to 24. The flexibility for design and
expansion of such a system is somewhat less than for a standard septic
system. Sizes of cluster systems range from one-quarter to one-half
acre, a substantial increase compared to a standard septic system (of
about 1000 square feet). Right-of-way requirements for piping must be
110
-------
considered because the system crosses property boundaries and may cross
public property. The location of other underground utilities such as
water, electricty, gas, and telephone must also be considered in the
design.
An alternative system for on-site sewage treatment, such as an
elevated sand mound, is required where siting restrictions prohibit the
use of standard septic system and centralized collection of sewage is
not available. In these cases future expansion may be difficult or
impossible. Stipulations of the health codes restrict the potential of
the alternative systems for alteration or expansion.
c. Rotating Biological Contactor (RBC)
The use of rotating biological contactors to treat wastewater is
relatively new in the United States. The RBC rotates circular discs
covered with a film of aerobic bacteria in a basin through which
wastewater flows. The disc is usually 40% submerged for aerobic
treatment.
RBCs are simple to operate. They are similar in theory to
trickling filters, used in the United States since 1908. The RBC units
do not require sludge recycling, nor maintenance of a suspended
microbial culture like by activated sludge. The relatively simple
operation, therefore, makes operational flexibility high for RBC plants.
The modular nature of RBC reactors makes expansion or upgrading of
the plant relatively easy. With proper design of other components and
proper planning of the facility layout, the cost and effort required for
expansion may be relatively small. RBCs are therefore well suited for
projects to be constructed in phases over an extended period.
RBCs require relatively shallow basin depths (6-8 feet) -- another
advantage. Less structural strength is required for the basin because
water volume per square foot of basin area is reduced. Therefore, there
is more leeway in choosing a site because structural requirements are
lower, and a greater variety of soil types and ground conditions are
available for locating the RBC units.
There are several disadvantages to the RBC reactor. The many discs
usually required limit design flows to the range of 0.1 to 20 mgd. This
limitation results from the large requirements for land. The mechanical
components have relatively low salvage value, and converting the RBC
units to another type process may be costly if these components can not
be reused or sold.
d. Land Application
To be flexible, a land application system should operate
efficiently under changing conditions, and should be easily modified or
expanded. These factors depend largely upon geographical location.
The ability to handle changes in treatment requirements and waste-
water characteristics is a specific measure of flexibility for a land
111
-------
application facility. Furthermore, the level of treatment provided by
the land application system will in part determine whether it can handle
possible increases in flows in the future. Wastewater in the Crystal
Lake Study Area consists primarily of domestic sewage and future changes
in composition of the wastewater are not likely to occur. If industrial
wastewater were added in the future, pretreatment at the industrial
source may be required.
Expandability is an important element of flexibility. Efficient
and economical land acquisition for future flow increases depends upon
the proximity of the facility to populated areas, design and layout of
the system, additional transmission requirements, and the type of
application system used. A number of application mechanisms are
available -- spray, overland flow, or rapid infiltration. Sites can be
forest land, cropland, or open fields. Attention must be paid, however,
to characteristics of the surrounding land, and to possible future
changes in land use. Also, requirements are strict concerning the
hydraulic and geologic conditions of the proposed site. When initially
planning the facility, all of the above mentioned conditions should be
taken into consideration if maximum flexibility for future expansion is
desired.
Cost of the land accounts for much of the capital cost for a land
application facility, and greatly affects the possibility of expansion
or ease of discontinuing the site. Because land normally appreciates in
value, the final salvage value of the site may be very high after the
expected 20-year design life. If the site is abandoned, much of the
initial capital cost of the facility may be recovered by reselling the
land at the appreciated price. Note, however, that the public: may be
reluctant because of its former use to use the land; this would depend
largely upon the appearance of the land at the time of resale.
Finally, operational flexibility of land application systems is
highly dependent upon climate. When heavy rains saturate the soil or
flooding occurs, treatment efficiency is greatly reduced. Where cold
temperatures might make land application unusable, storage facilities
are required. Very cold climates require up to six months of storage
capacity. Rapid infiltration is the only land application technique
used successfully in very cold temperatures.
5. RELIABILITY
a. Sewers
Gravity Sewers. When possible, sewer systems allow wastewater to
flow downhill by force of gravity. This type of system, known as
gravity sewer, is highly reliable. Designed properly, such systems
require little maintenance. They consume no energy and have no
mechanical components to malfunction.
Problems associated with gravity sewers include clogged pipes,
leading to sewer backups; infiltration/inflow, increasing the volume of
flow beyond the design level; and broken or misaligned pipes. Major
contributors to these problems are improperly jointed pipes and the
112
-------
intrusion of tree roots into the sewer, which tend to be more prevalent
in older systems.
Where ground slope is opposite to the direction of sewage flow, it
may be necessary to pump the sewage through sections of pipe called
force mains. The pumps add a mechanical component which increases
operation and maintenance (O&M) requirements and decreases the system
reliability. To assure uninterrupted operation of the system, two pumps
are generally installed, providing a backup in case one malfunctions.
Each is usually able to handle at least twice the peak flow. A standby
generator is usually provided to ensure operation of the pumps in case
of a power failure.
Because the flow through force mains is intermittent, solids may be
deposited during periods of no flow. In addition, when the pumps shut
off, the sudden cessation of flow may cause the hydraulic conditions
known as "water hammer" in the force main, a phenomenon marked by sudden
sharp surges in water pressure that may result in burst pipes. However,
both deposition of solids and water hammer may be controlled through
proper design procedures. The reliability of properly designed force
mains is comparable to that of gravity sewers.
Pressure Sewers. Pressure sewers transmit wastewater uphill when
ground topography does not allow gravity flow. Because the system is
always under pressure pumping is required to force the wastewater into
the sewer
Grinder Pumps. Grinder pumps are used primarily to grind and pump
raw domestic sewage from an individual house to the collection system
and occasionally for small lift stations. They are either of the
semi-positive displacement or the centrifugal type, depending upon the
mode of operation. The reliability of both types is high.
One problem may arise during a power failure. Standby power for a
grinder pump would not usually be available at an individual house and
the residence would be without sewage removal. This is a lesser problem
than might be supposed, for a power failure would curtail many
operations that generate wastewater.
There were problems in the operation of the first generation of
grinder pumps when pressure to pump wastewater or power to grind solids
was insufficient. Modifications have been made in their design and
construction, and the second generation of these pumps is appreciably
more reliable. Periodic maintenance is required to clean or replace
parts of the grinder pump.
STEP Pumps. It is sometimes desirable to pump wastewater from an
existing septic tank rather than directly from the house, using septic
tank effluent pumps* (STEP) rather than a grinder pump. In this way
difficulties associated with suspended solids are largely avoided. STEP
pumps are relatively simple modifications of conventional sump pumps.
The reliability of STEP pumps made by experienced manufacturers is
good. Newer entries into the field have not yet accumulated the oper-
ating experience necessary to demonstrate conclusively the reliability
113
-------
of their products. In the event of failure of a STEP system, an over-
flow line may be provided, which permits passage of the septic tank
effluent to the old drainfield for emergency disposal.
Pipes. Pressure sewer pipes are subject to the same problems as
force mains, discussed above. As with force mains, proper design can
prevent clogging and breaking of pipes, the most common cause of sewer
problems. Because pressure sewer piping has no mechanical components,
the reliability is high.
b. Centralized Treatment
Conventional. The reliability of conventional wastewater treatment
has been tested by time. Most unit processes have been used for many
years, and there is consequently much information on their design and
operation in nearly all climates. In general, the larger the treatment
facility, the more reliable its operation, because the large volumes of
flow require multiple units per treatment process. For instance, a
large facility will have several primary clarifiers, and if one
malfunctions, the remaining units can handle the entire load.
Therefore, difficulties that arise as a result of failure of a single
unit process, or of severe weather conditions such as heavy rain or very
cold temperatures, are less likely to affect operations. Conventional
wastewater treatment plants can be designed to handle most problems.
Advanced Treatment. Advanced treatment serves primarily to remove
toxic substances and nutrients that would stimulate biological activity.
The technology is relatively new; experience in design and operation of
advanced treatment processes is therefore limited. However, when
designed properly, the reliability of these processes is high.
Land Application. Application of treated sewage effluent to the
land is still infrequent in the United States, but its use is growing
steadily. Local climatic conditions such as heavy rains or very low
temperatures may make the technique unsuitable in a particular area.
Potential problems with land application include: groundwater con-
tamination; dispersal of microbial mass by airborne transport; odors;
surface water contamination; accumulation of metals in the vegetation;
and possible toxic effects upon local animals. These problems can be
minimized with proper design, but there is not yet the extensive
practical experience required to develop advanced design technology.
c. On-Site Treatment
Septic Tanks. The design and operation of modern septic tanks have
benefited from long experience. Properly designed and maintained,
septic systems will provide satisfactory service with minimum mainte-
nance. Care must be taken not to put materials in the system that may
clog it. The principal maintenance requirement is periodic pumping of
the tank, usually every two or three years.
Problems of septic systems include heavy rain saturating the
ground, clogged drainfields caused by full septic tanks, clogged or
114
-------
frozen pipes, and broken pipes. Current environmental laws
restricting sites according to soil suitability, depth to groundwater
and bedrock, and other factors -- are limiting the cases where septic
systems can be used.
Sand Mounds. Elevated sand mounds four or five feet above original
ground level are an alternative drainage mechanism where siting
restrictions do not allow the use of standard drainfields. Because they
do not always provide satisfactory service and are considerably more
expensive than conventional drainfields, they have not been universally
accepted.
d. Cluster Systems
Cluster systems are localized wastewater disposal mechanisms
servicing several residences. The reliability is similar to that of a
septic system, except that a malfunction affects not just one, but a
number of residences. Because a cluster system requires more piping to
connect individual houses to the treatment tank than does a series of
individual systems, there is a greater chance for pipes to break or
clog, or for I/I to occur during heavy rain. If pumping is required,
the reliability of the system declines because of the mechanical nature
of the pumps and their dependence upon electricity for power.
6. EFFLUENT DISPOSAL
Three approaches exist for disposal of treated wastewater. Reuse,
perhaps the most desirable of the three, implies recycling of the
effluent by industry, agriculture or groundwater recharge. Land
application takes advantage of the absorptive and renovative capacities
of soil to improve effluent quality and reduce the quantity of
wastewater requiring disposal. Discharge to surface water generally
implies the use of streams or impoundments for ultimate disposal of
treated effluent.
a. Reuse
Industry Reuse. There is limited industrial development in the
Study Area, The only industry that consumes significant quantities of
water is Pet, Inc. Located in Frankfort, Pet uses only potable water.
There are no industries in the area that use a significant amount of
non-potable water, consequently industrial reuse does not seem to be a
feasible means of effluent disposal.
Agricultural Irrigation. The use of treated wastewaters for
irrigation is addressed in Section III.6.b.
Groundwater Recharge. Groundwater supplies all of the potable
water in the Study Area. The availability of ample quantities of water
from sand and gravel deposits is a significant resource of the area.
There is no evidence that these resources are being depleted to the
extent that supplemental recharge is necessary. Wastewater reuse by
groundwater recharge has therefore not been evaluated.
115
-------
b. Land Application
Two types of land application are relevant to the Study Area, rapid
infiltration/percolation and agricultural irrigation. Rapid
infiltration/percolation is presently used for final treatment and
disposal of wastewaters for Beulah. Expansion of this facility or
construction of similar facilities on sites within the watershed
directly tributary to the Betsie River may be feasible for other parts
of the Study Area. With proper selection of sites and design of
facilities, wastewater could be renovated to a degree which would meet
or exceed the quality of effluent generated by more conventional
treatment processes. It would be necessary to collect renovated
wastewater and discharge it to the Betsie River.
The Facility Plan evaluated agricultural irrigation at a site
within Section 31 of Benzonia Township. This site, located in the
Crystal Lake watershed, is divided by Cold Creek and its stream valley.
This EIS considered two additional sites: one within the Crystal Lake
watershed, north of the proposed site in Township Sections 25 and 30;
and the other outside the Crystal Lake watershed and south of the
proposed site. Figure III-3 shows the locations of the sites. Soils at
all three sites are moderately to rapidly permeable.
Surface runoff could be controlled by a system of berms and storage
cells; renovated wastewater by recovery wells. The necessity of such
management would depend upon a careful evaluation of the site. Costs
associated with site management and silviculture of white pine in
Township Sections 25 and 30 have been incorporated in the evaluation of
land application alternatives. Detailed site investigations for the
land application alternatives should consider all three sites. All
approaches to recovery of renovated wastewater would include transport
to the Betsie River for discharge.
c. Discharge to Surface Waters
Effluent from the Frankfort and Elberta plants is now being
discharged into Betsie Lake. In the Proposed Action, a new RBC plant
would discharge to Betsie Lake from land purchased by the City of
Frankfort. It would be expected to meet DNR effluent limitations for
discharge to Betsie Lake (see Appendix D-4). The DNR has recommended
that there be no discharges to the Betsie River or to Lake Michigan (by
letter, Mr. Kenneth J. Burta, DNR, 17 November 1976).
7. SLUDGE HANDLING AND DISPOSAL
Two types of sludge would be generated by the wastewater treatment
options considered above: chemical/biological sludges from the proposed
RBC plant; and solids pumped from septic tanks. The residues from
treatment by lagoons and land application are grit and screening.
The Facility Plan evaluated several options for handling and
disposing of sludge from by the proposed RBC plant. These included:
116
-------
o Incineration and landfill of the resulting ash.
o Digestion followed by liquid disposal on land.
o Digestion and landfill of the dewatered sludge.
o Digestion and land application of the dewatered sludge.
For maximum flexibility in disposal of digested sludges, the
Facility Plan recommended structural measures accommodating disposal by
any of the above methods. Sludge drying beds would allow land
application of dewatered sludge under most conditions and would result
in reduced transportation costs. Liquid digested sludge could be
applied to land to conserve drying bed capacity. The Facility Plan also
recommended including sufficient capacity in the sludge digesters for
six months of winter storage. Sites for landfill or surface application
of digested sludge were not selected but a potential site for land
application on Graves Road in Crystal Lake Township was identified.
Alternatives using residential septic tanks for on-lot systems,
cluster systems, or STEP sewer systems must provide for periodic removal
and disposal of sludge. For the purposes of designing centralized
wastewater treatment by a RBC plant, processes for conditioning and
treatment of septage were provided. In alternatives including
centralized treatment by lagoon and land application, septage would be
applied to the land.
C. EIS ALTERNATIVES
1. INTRODUCTION
a. Approach
The preceding section described options for the functional
components of wastewater management systems for the communities in the
Study Area. This section examines alternative wastewater management
plans -- alternative courses of action for the Study Area, including a
No Action and a Limited Action Alternative.
The four alternatives developed in the Facility Plan (described
earlier) provided for centralized collection and treatment of
wastewater. In response to questions about the need for and expense of
the Proposed Action, the development of EIS alternatives emphasizes
decentralized and alternative or innovative technologies: alternative
collection systems, decentralized treatment and land disposal of
wastewaters. The EIS alternatives would manage wastewaters in the same
Service Area as the Facility Plan Proposed Action, but five of the EIS
alternatives use decentralized treatment to avoid the costs of sewers.
Because of the high cost of collection in the Proposed Action, the
cost effectiveness of pressure sewers, vacuum sewers, and small-diameter
gravity sewers was compared. Pressure sewers proved to be the most
cost-effective, alternative method for collection of wastewater. These
117
-------
sewers were, therefore, incorporated into the design of two completely
centralized systems, one calling for an RBC plant, the other for land
application.
Where site conditions such as soils and topography are favorable,
land disposal of wastewater offers advantages over conventional
biological treatment systems that discharge to surface waters: the land
is used as a natural treatment facility system; reduced operation and
maintenance may result from relatively simple operations; and savings in
capital and operating costs are possible.
Analysis of decentralized treatment technologies and site
conditions showed feasible alternatives to sewering the entire Crystal
Lake shoreline. It would be possible to combine multi-family filter
fields (cluster systems) with rehabilitated and new on-site treatment
systems to meet the wastewater treatment needs in this part of the Study
Area.
The various alternatives are compared after the discussion below of
projections of design populations and flow and waste load which are the
same for all alternatives.
Appendix J-l presents the assumptions used in design and costing of
alternatives are presented in Appendix (J-l). Table III-l lists the
major features of the Proposed Action, the Limited Action Alternative,
and the EIS Alternatives.
b. Flow and Waste Load Projections
The domestic sewage generation rate depends upon the mix of
residential, commercial, and institutional sources in the area. Studies
on residential water usage (Witt, Siegrist, and Boyle 1974; Bailey et
al. 1969; Cohen and Wallman 1976) reported individual household water
consumptions varying widely between 20 and 100 gpcd. However, averaged
values reported in those studies generally ranged between 40-56 gpcd.
On a community-wide basis, non-residential domestic (commercial, small
industrial, and institutional) water use increases per capita flows.
The extents of such increases are influenced by:
o the importance of the community as a local or regional trading
center;
o the concentration of such water-intensive institutions as
schools and hospitals; and
o the level of small industrial development.
For communities with populations of less than 5,000, EPA regulations
allow design flows in the range of 60 to 70 gpcd where existing per
capita flow data is not available. In larger communities, and in
communities within Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas, the maximum
allowable flow ranges up to 85 gpcd.
118
-------
"c
PC
QJ 4_-
> 0-
TJ s:
4~>
« c
c c
VJ f-i
d 4-1
4-J U
r-t o
< <—
r—
O
cr
e
&•
>s
w e/;
c
t— i V«
1 CU
C 4-J
o w
2
o
Disposal
Kf f lurnt
c
er
B-
oc
J-> C
C i-l
Treatme
Sit
Centralized
Treatment
c
z
4-1
C
r~
!
P
C
c
c
cu
o
TO
•H
*aj
V-
T3
QJ
3
C
4-1
C
C
o
Bets Le Lake
c
c
feC
V-
TO
"o
W
5
^
4J
•H
CJ
4J
1>I
Frankfo
00
c
11
>
i-l
OJ
CO
4-1
c
TO
C-
'O
CC
Pi
>,
*D
C 3
f-f 4-J
cn
K
E v*-
CJ O
4-1
K cn
>N J-'
X V-
TO
^ C.
CU
4_J &C
(T C
3 -r-
r-j e
CJ T-I
TO ft
"O E 0>
P O 1-
i: w <
*o
c
TO
*C
CU
o
Frankfort and
Elherta
o
21
C
^
Betsie Lake
Discharge to
>•>
o
"O
4J C
)-i TO
O i->
14-1
^ T3
C CD
CO C
1- 3
(^ 0
feC
RBC plant servin
entire proposed
sewer service
area
~
V)
U3
CU
U
a
§
r— i
U-
0
CJ
y>
s
0
•z.
Betsie Lake
Discharge to
>,
^j
u
u
^
Frankfo
00
c
'H
?
U
0<
w
iJ
c
to
T— <
a.
o
ffi
«
e "«
0) rJ
en *-*
s* re
1C •"
en
g t
•H 0
JJ
o -a
HI C
1-^ 3
^i O
° b
Cj (o
*C
C
to
T3
a<
o
entire proposed
sewer service
area
3 g 0
W OJ >J
Cff iJ
•
00^
^ iH U
14-1 fl *O
0 4! §
ri
cn o ^
3 CJ «
z
-ion by spray
.th recovery
wastewater
Land applicat
irrigation wj
of renovated
CL
n O
j: n
ifi
6 ^
3
O L^
E-4 tN
rc w
Benzoni
Sect ion
Aerated lagoon-
land applicatior
system serving
E? to Betsie
and dischargi
River
entire proposed
sewer service
area
w
E C cu
01 O C
en AJ ^H
!^ lJ 0)
tfl O ^
a o
^ j:
aj oc en
4J C
CO »H CD
3 C ^
f-^ -H CC
ai ^
C Vj CD
t»c en
JJ C >-.
O -H W
r-^ > U
C 0) UJ
O to o
Betsie Lake
Discharge to
X
-H
CJ
4J ^
U C3
O r— I
I*-)
j<: -n
c cu
to c
w 5
fe o
E
TO -m
00 U b
C l-i OC
RBC plant servi
Frankfort, Elbe
& Crystalia-Pil
area
^
tion by spra
ith recovery
wastewater
Land applica
irrigation w
of renovated
a
^
CO
g
£
CD CO
•p^ f.
Benzon:
Sectioi
1 E
TO O
i— < 4-i TO
Aerated lagoon-
application sys
serving Benzoni
14
&
>
•H
PS
CU
-H
tfi
4J
OJ
cc
discharge to
LM
C
Village area &
northeast shore
Crystal Lake
&c
c
4J
«
X
a/
K
OJ
bo
CO
T— H
•H
>
QJ
.C
4-1
c
•H
*X3
119
-------
O 2! < tn O
^ M H
Cfl • r-
rt flj
to co TO
r-> 3- ro
o
r1 rt ED
to fD ft
?r n>
rt> o to
i-t>
ft1
j_l.
e^
C~* M
. ft) to to r-1
* f( rr 00 O*
* < h*
H- O
3 3
TO
CO
ea^
fD M
o ro
0 r(
3 rr
1 01
01
3
3 rt D. >
N fD fD
O 3
* 3
M-
to
(U O
o-
Cu fD
£ 3
cn o
n <
3* to
13 rt
•t ^
30 0-
(D
«
rr 01
0 cn
rr
03 01
cn rr
H. CD
CD ^
01 t
T3 01
•0 rr
r-> CD
H- o.
1
C/l 03
T 3
rt N
1^. o
0 3
3 H-
H
O
3
cn
er
•o
H- f
rt 01
rt 3
I-- 0.
)O
01 tt>
rr ^D
-i* T3
O r->
3 I '-
n
f, 01
H- rt
rr H-
3" 0
3
rt
CD &
O VJ
O
< en
ro t3
-4 01
> f-t O
f-l
ro
01
CD O
3 3
01 rr
3 3
3 ro
-a I
01 CD
rt H-
CO 01
a
o o
^ ro
rr 3
C
a
>
rr
(D
3
91
rr
H*
ro
»
3
H)
O
rt
rr
O
3
a.
0
1
n>
CL
to
3
Co
cn
a*
0
o
0
cn
PT
to
r*
01
ro
M
01
CB
n
r-1
(U
3
rr
cn
t
H*
3
00
Tl
01
3
rt)
O
rt
n
rt
O
CO
n
3-
CJ
70
(D
rt
o
cd
O
^t
cn
r'-
ro
ID
c
en
rt
(D
en
-<
en
rt
3
cn
en
CD
rt
^.
3
30
cn
Ui >
rr
CD
3
to
rr
M-
(D
o 3 ^d to M "^1
Mi O H* ^ f& 1
rt H- fD 3 to
O ft CR M N 3
n 3* n » o ?r
^ fD H» 3 Hi
w to 3 O H- o
rr cn <-t 0» *t
to rt QJ ^ rf
h-1 ft CO < <•
cn fo rt h-»
c^ 3* to to v-1 m
flj O r-J (—» H-I
?** t (?» H- a a*
ro ro to CK CD
i a "i
rt
*
O
§
fD
CL
r— 1
3
CL
O ;n
ft) fD
n <3
>
o
3
1
C
pt
cjj
3
a-
o
r— >
£
cn
rt
03
cn
3
r* cn to n < PI
to ZJ* f) H H- H-*
^* o CD ^ r-1 a*
fD 1 to CO t-1 fD
fO » rt {U ft
O pt (— i fS M
fh H- -
3 » to
O O 1 fl W
ft t *"d fC fD
•-< rt H- to 3
to 3- H« » N
rt fD 30 O
r- ' W M- H«
rt 3 to
po w
p. 3
< Cu
(D
ft CL
CO
n
3"
a
r-\
3Q
ro
rt
0
Ed
PT
03
H-
ro
-o >
rt
rt>
n
3
01
rt
fD
cu to
fD TJ
ft T3
< f-*
3* D'
OQ 03
r"r
>*1 1-1.
ft 0
| =
M>t *-
rr
(ti
3
0)
rf
ro
f)
H fD
fD rr
to t
rt to
3 M
n> H-
3 N
rf fD
Q-
H
ro
Qi
CO rt
H- 3
rt
M. 3
3 rr
>TJ
to
rt
"n
UJ
C
3
rt
0 ri.
3 «
cr
CJ
o
3
O
cn
r-i
(
O*
rt
jj
3
n
rj
cn
rr
cn
CO
rt
3
CO
rj
C
M O
rr 3
n p~J
O
cn c^
rt
ro
3
a
o
-1 >
in -»
rt CO
o" 3
3"
O
ex
120
-------
The Facility Plan reported wastewater flows in the Crystal Lake
Facility Planning Area to be 65 gpcd for Elberta (including Ann Arbor
Railroad and Gustafson Oil Company) and 74 gpcd for Frankfort (including
commercial flows, other than Pet, Inc.)- These figures relate well to
the range of domestic flows determined by EPA to be applicable for small
communities.
For these reasons, this EIS assumes on a 70 gpcd design flow of
domestic sewage for permanent residents in Frankfort, Benzonia, and
Elberta; these municipalities have several commercial and institutional
water users. In primarily residential areas, including the presently
unsewered areas around Crystal Lake, a flow of 60 gpcd has been assumed.
Water consumption by seasonal users varies much more than
consumption by permanent residents. The actual rates of consumption
depend upon such factors as type of accommodations in the area and type
of recreation areas available. EPA regulations (EPA 1978) suggest that
seasonal population can be converted to equivalent permanent population
by using the following multipliers:
Day-use visitor 0.1 to 0.2
Seasonal visitor 0.5 to 0.8
A multiplier of 1.0 was applied to the projected seasonal
population to account for both day-use and seasonal visitors.
Considering the possible error in projecting future seasonal
populations, the preponderance of present seasonal visitors using
well-equipped private dwellings and the lack of data on day-use
visitors, this multiplier was thought generous, i.e., it probably
overestimates flows to some degree.
The two design flow figures of 70 and 60 gpcd do not reflect
reductions in flow from a program of water conservation. Residential
water conservation devices, discussed in Section III.B.I, could reduce
flows by 16 gpcd. Later in this chapter, to demonstrate probable
impacts of such reduction in flow, one of the alternatives has been
redesigned and recosted.
c. Population Projections
The design population of 12,490 is that population projected to
reside in the Proposed Service Area (Figure 1-4) in the year 2000.
(This area includes the immediate service area and a future service
area.) The methodology used to develop this estimate is presented in
Appendix H, Table H-2.
In the interests of comparability, the same population projections
have been incorporated into design and costing of all alternatives. In
fact, however, the type of sewer service provided, that is, whether it
is centralized or decentralized, may influence the actual design year
population. Chapter IV discusses the importance of this factor.
121
-------
d. Development of Decentralized Options
Although two of the alternatives offered in this EIS would extend
central sewers throughout the Study Area, four would dispose of
wastewater by decentralized options. The approach used to develop the
latter included the following:
Identification of sites where existing on-lot systems are known or
are implied to be failing. The failure of on-lot systems may be
evidenced in several ways: effluent may rise to the surface; sewage may
not drain properly into the system; or the soil may not renovate* the
wastewater. Section II.C reviews problems with the existing on-site
systems around Crystal Lake.
Identification of local environmental characteristics which would
limit the feasibility of soil-dependent effluent disposal. Sections
II.A.3 and II.C present information on soil depth to groundwater and lot
size as they affect the feasibility of soil disposal systems.
Screening of technologies for their applicability in non-sewered
portions of the Proposed Service Area. Section III.B.3 lists the
technologies capable of providing decentralized treatment of wastewater.
Those which imply direct discharge to Crystal Lake or its tributaries
have been rejected and the remainder evaluated as part of two different
schemes. Implicit in both is the assumption that on-site disposal of
wastewaters would rely upon septic systems, off-site disposal, and
cluster systems. The two schemes described below generate a range of
costs associated with application of the various technologies on a
site-by-site basis.
o Partial Sewering and Reliance on Cluster Systems. Sewers
would extend:
from Benzonia Village along Eldridge Hill Road (to serve
the northeast shore of Crystal Lake) to approximately the
Benzonia Township-Lake Township line, and
from Frankfort along Route 22 to Crystalia and Pilgrim at
the southwest corner of Crystal Lake.
It is assumed that sixteen cluster systems serving 20-25
dwellings each would serve scattered groups of residences
along the lakeshore. Other residences would continue to use
on-lot septic systems. Rehabilitation of undersized and
failing on-lot systems would be undertaken and new on-site
systems which compensate for poor soil conditions, such as
mound systems, would be constructed where necessary to replace
conventional on-site systems. A management agency, with the
authority to acquire land for cluster systems and easements
for access to on-lot systems, to monitor groundwater impacts
of the systems, and to perform routine and emergency
maintenance, would be required. Design assumptions of a
typical cluster system are presented in Appendix J-l.
122
-------
o Continued Reliance on On-lot Systems. Detailed site
investigations (sanitary survey, groundwater analyses, and
soil studies) may indicate that partial sewering and off-lot
technologies are not necessary to remedy water quality
problems. If so, only rehabilitation of failing on-lot
systems would be needed.
Selection of the most reliable technologies on the basis of
specificity to the site(s).
2. ALTERNATIVES
The action proposed by the Facility Plan has been compared with the
"do-nothing" (no action) alternative, a "limited action" alternative,
and six new approaches developed in this EIS. The alternatives,
discussed below, are summarized in Table III-l, and Table III-2 lists
the cost-effectiveness of each.
a. No Action
The EIS process must evaluate the consequences of not taking
action. This "no action" alternative implies that EPA would not provide
funds to support new construction, upgrading, or expansion of existing
wastewater collection and treatment systems. Presumably, no new
facilities would be built; wastewater would still be treated in existing
plants and on-site systems.
If this course of action were taken, additional flows to the
primary treatment plants at Frankfort and Elberta would be prohibited
because the plants are already overloaded and have difficulty meeting
effluent discharge standards. Existing on-site systems in the Study
Area would continue to be used in their present conditions.
The No Action Alternative is unlikely to be selected. It implies
that the treatment plants at Frankfort and Elberta would violate NPDES
discharge conditions when interim limitations expired. Consequently,
new facilities to adequately treat wastewaters from Frankfort and
Elberta would be needed in the near future.
b. Limited Action
The "limited action" alternative includes a new treatment facility
for treating wastewaters from Frankfort and Elberta. This consists of:
o Treatment of wastewaters from Frankfort and Elberta at a new
RBC plant in Frankfort discharging to Betsie Lake. Design
flow for the plant would be 0.33 mgd.
o Treatment of wastewaters from Beulah at the Village's existing
treatment facility.
o Decentralized collection and treatment in all other parts of
the Study Area. Where appropriate, malfunctioning on-lot
systems would be repaired or replaced. For the northeast and
123
-------
M >
C fD
M- i"!
< Pi
f» 00.
M fD
fD
3 >
rt 3
3
O Pi
CO M
rt
^_i
t*
ON
• — |
oo
•
NO
ON
OO
NJ
•
to
i~*
^J
*o
tO
M
I—1
ON
h- >
Ul
Co
^
o
^°
to
h-1
|_U
I-O
U!
Ui
h-1
Is}
VO
00
VO
O^
to
vO
H
O
52 rt
O ft)
fl M
rt
u' ^d
f-f
fD
CD
fD
3
rt
M
00
V
to
K>
O
•
Ln
-j
M
^^
^.
VO
•
NJ
h-1
VO
Ul
^j
4>-
ON
M
J^
ON
4^
O
to
to
Isi
0
hO
^
l-<
ho
M
Ni
ON
Ul
ON
to
— I
hO
-p-
O
tn
ho
•
trj
c
n rt
o c
CO l-i
rr fD
^
i-{
O
fD
n
rt
NO
if
-P-
— J
•
-P^
M
V*
0
-vj
C^
.
O
N3
^j
I — l
~~J
M
1°
--J
I-1
•~J
f— >
^
00
00
tn
O
h- >
u
OO
oo
Ul
0
M
oo
00
Ul
0
I-1
Ul
Ul
o
^3
ITJ
^
O (D
O CD
CO fD
rt 3
rt
*"d
^
o
fD%
n
rt
i— >
^vj
<«
to
O
ro
•
^
_p.
*
tn
ON
to
•
ON
i — 1
J-1
o
to
^J
00
h-1
y1
ON
to
ON
**o
i ^
i-1
to
tn
00
to
h- >
I—1
*
O
0
t/1
00
I-1
"o
00
o
VO
00
N3
ON
^
O
t-^j
p> *~i
0 O
rt X)
H. 0
O CD
3 fD
O.
> f
O H-
rt g
H- H-
0 rt
3 fD
CX
w
M
CO
M
w
1 — 1
CO
M
w
h- 1
CO
to
W
I — i
CO
£,
w
M
CO
tn
M
M
CO
ON
to
O
(-'•
M
H-
rt
Vj
!-d
»
n
0
CO
H
1
M
W
n
i^
M
3
t-1
CO
i — i
CO
o
>
w
>
>; ^
H
-------
southeast shore of Crystal Lake, detailed engineering and
environmental studies, performed during the design phase,
would indicate the most appropriate technology. It may be
that these parts of the Study Area are most suited for
continued reliance upon septic systems, or that cluster
systems may be required. Alternatively, pressure sewers may
be required to connect the northwest and southeast shoreline
areas to the existing sewerage system in Beulah. The costs
developed for this Limited Action Alternative are predicated
on the assumption that cluster systems will be required for
the northeast and southeast shorelines.
This alternative would require formation of a managing agency to
acquire rights-of-way and easements, to provide routine inspection and
maintenance, to periodically monitor groundwater, and to collect service
fees.
c. Facility Plan Proposed Action
The Facility Plan recommended treatment of all wastewaters in the
Proposed Service Area at an RBC treatment facility handling 0.89 mgd.
The plant, located in Frankfort, would discharge effluent to Betsie
Lake. The plant would use chemical addition and microstraining for
removal of nutrients. See Chapter I for a brief description of the
Proposed Action. The design of the proposed facilities was outlined in
detail in Chapter 8 of the Crystal Lake Area Facility Plan (Williams and
Works 1976).
The Proposed Service Area and location of the proposed RBC plant
are illustrated in Figure 1-4. A list of the facilities included in the
design of the plant may be found in Appendix J-2.
d. EIS Alternative 1
EIS Alternative 1 proposes centralized collection and treatment of
wastewaters as with the Facility Plan, but with pressure sewers, rather
than gravity, as the collection system around Crystal Lake. The Service
Area would be identical to that proposed by the Facility Plan.
The pressure sewer system, collecting approximately 26% of the
projected design flow, would discharge into a force main north of
Frankfort. The area to be served by the system, the treatment plant
location, and the transmission line routing are shown in Figure III-4.
e. EIS Alternative 2
EIS Alternative 2 also modifies an alternative in the Facility Plan
to use pressure sewers around Crystal Lake. In this alternative
pressure sewers have been applied to Facility Plan Alternative 3,
consisting of the centralized collection of 0.89 mgd of wastewater,
treatment in an aerated lagoon and disposal by land application.
Although the service area is the same as for EIS Alternative 1, the
125
-------
126
-------
configuration differs. In EIS Alternative 2, wastewaters are conveyed
to the eastern part of the Study Area; the previous alternative routed
wastewater to the west.
Wastewaters in the Study Area would be conveyed to Benzonia, as
shown in Figure III-5, and treated in an aerated lagoon. Treated
effluent would be applied to the land by spray irrigation. A solid-set
irrigation system for commercially farming white pine was incorporated
into the design and cost of this alternative.
Three possible locations for the land application system are
identified in Figure III-3. Design and costing assumptions used in
developing this EIS alternative are presented in Appendix J-l. Major
components of the alternative and the costs of these components are
listed in Appendix J-2.
f. EIS Alternative 3
EIS Alternative 3 is based on decentralized treatment of wastewater
in part of the Study Area. However, site conditions along the northeast
and southwest shore of Crystal Lake are assumed to be unfavorable for
septic systems, so wastewater from these areas would be collected by
pressure sewers as shown in Figure III-6.
Frankfort, Elberta, and the southwest Crystal Lake shore area would
discharge their wastes to a new RBC plant in Frankfort. Wastewaters
from Benzonia Township and Benzonia Village would be treated in lagoons
and applied to the land. The RBC plant would have a hydraulic capacity
of 0.45 mgd; the laud application system would be able to treat 0.18
mgd.
The remaining portions of the Crystal Lake shoreline would be
served by a combination of cluster systems and on-site systems suitable
to local soil conditions. These areas are shown in Figure III-6. The
preliminary design, comparison, and assessment of decentralized systems
were based upon the following assumptions:
Cluster Systems. Cluster systems would be used for those parts of
the Proposed Service Area where small lot sizes or soil limitations
preclude on-site systems. Sixteen cluster systems are assumed to be
needed; suitable soils exist at the sites for which these systems are
proposed. The costs developed were based on a "typical" cluster system
that would serve 23 residences located along the south shore of the
Lake.
On-lot Systems. Residences not served by sewers or cluster systems
would use on-lot systems. This alternative would include a program of
replacement and rehabilitation of malfunctioning systems in order to
insure compliance with local health codes.
The specific requirements for upgrading existing on-lot systems
were estimated by analysis of the data presented in the Crystal Lake
sanitary survey, the "Septic Snooper" investigation, and other environ-
mental data. Based upon these, the following upgrading assumptions (by
127
-------
5.
'.
»
» «
/•
128
-------
slfff
129
-------
shoreline area) were used in the design and costing of alternatives
involving continued use of on-site systems:
Existing Systems
Shoreline Area
NE NW W SW SE
Replace septic tanks 50% 50% 20% 60% 60%
Replace drainfields 60% 50% 30% 40% 50%
Hydrogen peroxide renovation 10% 10% 10% 10% 10%
of drainfield
Future Systems
1980-2000
Conventional septic tank and drainfield 55%
Improved performance system 20%
(e.g, dosing system)
Mound systems 257o
Hydrogen peroxide renovation 2% per year
Design and costing assumptions used in developing EIS Alternative 3
are presented in Appendix J-l. Major components of EIS Alternative 3
and their costs are listed in Appendix J-2.
g. EIS Alternative 4
The fourth EIS alternative for the Crystal Lake area includes
decentralized treatment of wastewater for the same portions of the
Crystal Lake shoreline as in EIS Alternative 3. All other centrally
collected wastewaters would be treated by a land application system.
EIS Alternative 4 is illustrated in Figure III-7.
The central land application system is similar to that described
for EIS Alternative 2 but the hydraulic capacity has been decreased to
0.65 mgd.
Design and cost assumptions used in developing this alternative are
presented in Appendix J-l. Major components of the alternative and
their costs are listed in Appendix J-2.
h. EIS Alternative 5
EIS Alternative 5 proposes the same partially decentralized
treatment of wastewater as EIS Alternative 3. Flows from other parts of
the Proposed Sewer Area, the northeast shore, and from the
Crystalia-Pilgrim area would be treated at a new RBC plant located in
Frankfort. As in Alternative 3, the plant design would include advanced
treatment for nutrient removal and discharge of plant effluent to Betsie
Lake. This alternative is illustrated in Figure III-8.
130
-------
131
-------
132
-------
The RBC facility would be designed along lines similar to those
developed in the Facilty Plan but the design flow would be 0.65 mgd.
Design and costing assumptions used in developing this alternative are
presented in Appendix J-l. Major components of the alternative and
their costs are listed in Appendix J-2.
i. EIS Alternative 6
EIS Alternative 6 proposes treatment similar to that of Alternative
3. A new RBC plant, located in Frankfort, would serve Frankfort and
Elberta. The plant would be designed to remove nutrients; 0.33 mgd of
effluent would be discharged to Betsie Lake. An aerated lagoon land
application system would serve the Benzonia Village area and the
northeast shore of Crystal Lake. Wastewater renovated by land
application would be recovered and 0.18 mgd discharged to the Betsie
River.
Cluster systems would serve groups of houses along the southeast
shore of Crystal Lake. In the remaining part of the Study Area
continuing emphasis would be placed upon restoring and rehabilitating
septic systems. This alternative is illustrated in Figure III-9. Major
components of the alternative and their costs are listed in Appendix
J-2; Appendix J-l contains the design and cost assumptions used in
developing this alternative.
3. FLEXIBILITY
a. No Action
The No Action Alternative maintains the existing conditions and
places no additional planning and design restrictions upon the treatment
of wastewater. Because no action is taken at present, the flexibility
for future planning is high compared to an alternative recommending an
extensive commitment of resources.
b. Limited Action
A new RBC plant at Frankfort to serve the Frankfort and Elberta
areas would replace existing primary treatment plants. Existing on-site
septic systems would be repaired and upgraded, and cluster systems or
other collection techniques would be employed for the northeast and
southeast shores. The main benefit of the Limited Action Alternative is
that it would meet environmental requirements, while leaving maximum
flexibility for future planning and design changes in the unsewered
sections of the Study Area.
c. Facility Plan Proposed Action
A centralized treatment facility for all wastewater flows within
the Proposed Service Area would reduce the flexibility for future
planning and design changes concerning wastewater treatment. This
alternative would relegate the entire Proposed Service Area to one
treatment scheme and involve an extensive commitment of resources.
However, the modular characteristic of the RBC plant does allow some
capacity for expansion if future demands warrant it.
133
-------
134
-------
d. EIS Alternatives I and 2
EIS Alternatives 1 and 2 both employ collection by low pressure and
gravity sewers and centralized treatment of all wastewaters within the
same proposed Service Area as in the Facility Plan Proposed Action. In
Alternative 1 wastewater is treated by an RBC plant located in
Frankfort. In Alternative 2 land application near Benzonia is used for
treatment of wastewater. As with the Facility Plan Proposed Action,
these alternatives would relegate the entire Proposed Service Area to a
single treatment scheme. The resulting commitment of resources and
reduction in future planning and design flexibility would be
significant.
e. EIS Alternative 3
EIS Alternative 3 allows for future expansion and change in
treatment technique using a combination of conventional, land, and
on-site treatment. Only those areas not suitable for on-site treatment
would be sewered, thus reducing capital costs. This alternative
provides flexibility for future expansion because of the many modes of
treatment used. Also, the decentralized nature of the alternative
allows the flexibility to base future decisions concerning land use
development upon local conditions.
f. EIS Alternatives 4 and 5
Alternatives 4 and 5 would serve the same sewered area as suggested
in Alternative 3. In Alternative 4, all sewered wastewater would be
routed to a land application site in Benzonia. With Alternative 5,
sewered wastewater would be routed to a RBC plant in Frankfort. Like
Alternative 3, Alternatives 4 and 5 would rely upon on-site systems to
treat wastewater in areas deemed suitable. The flexibility of
Alternatives 4 and 5 is slightly less than Alternative 3 because of the
reduced number of suggested treatment mechanisms and the reduced
decentralization. Future expansion would be slightly more difficult to
plan and design.
g. EIS Alternative 6
Alternative 6 calls for centralized treatment of wastewater for
Frankfort, Elberta, Benzonia, and the northeast shore of Crystal Lake.
Remaining areas around Crystal Lake would use cluster systems and
upgraded septic systems. This alternative provides a fair degree of
flexibility for future expansion because a combination of conventional
and land application facilities are recommended, making two modes of
treatment available for future expansion. Also, because the entire
Proposed Service Area is not being sewered, the immediate commitment of
resources is not as great as the Proposed Action in the Facility Plan.
This allows some ability for future expansion and changes in localized
planning. On the other hand, the absence of centralized facilities
limits the opportunities for development of additional building sites.
135
-------
4. COSTS OF ALTERNATIVES
a. Total Project Costs
Project costs were grouped by capital expenses, operating and
maintenance expenses, and salvage values of the equipment for each
alternative. A contingency fund amounting to approximately 25% of
capital and salvage value was included to provide for such expenses as
engineering and legal fees, acquisition of rights-of-way, and
administration. The methodology and assumptions used in the analyses
are described in Appendix J-l. Detailed costs for each alternative are
presented in Appendix J-2.
Table III-2 summarizes present and future project costs for each of
the alternatives. The analyses of total present worth and annual
equivalent costs of each alternative are also presented there. (Debt
service on financing the local share is not included.)
b. Federal/State Cost Sharing and Remaining Local Costs
The Proposed Rules and Interim Regulations for the Clean Water Act
of 1977 (EPA 1978) address Federal funding of wastewater collection,
treatment, and related facilities. Appendix J-3 summarizes these
proposals and regulations. The 1977 Act differs significantly from the
Water Pollution Control Act of 1972. For example, Federal funding of
facilities using innovative and alternative technologies has been
increased from 75% to 85%.
Michigan's share of the capital costs of pollution control
facilities is related to Federal eligibility requirements. In the past,
the State has funded 5% of those project costs eligible for Federal
funds. With respect to facilities eligible for 85% Federal funding, the
State has decided to maintain the same 5% funding as before.
Consequently, the remaining local costs would be 20% for conventional
facilities and 10% for alternative or innovative ones.
Some uncertainties about local costs will remain until the extent
of the collection system that would be eligible for Federal funding and
until the nature of the management system that would be instituted if
on-lot and cluster systems were part of the wastewater management plan
are known.
The RBC plant should be eligible for 75% Federal funding as the
plant represents a conventional treatment technology. Land application,
however, is an alternative technology eligible for 85% Federal funding.
Interceptor sewers connecting Frankfort and Elberta to the RBC plant,
and a collector sewer for the northeast shore were assumed eligible for
75% Federal funding.
Rehabilitation and replacement of existing on-site systems and
construction of cluster systems would be eligible for 85% Federal
funding. Under private ownership the only systems eligible for Federal
funds would be those serving permanent residents. If the systems were
publicly owned, both seasonal and permanent residents could benefit from
Federal and State funding.
136
-------
5. ENGINEERING AND ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF
FLOW REDUCTION DEVICES
Economies could be effected through use of household flow reduction
devices. A listing of devices used for reducing residential flows is
presented in Appendix 1-3. This Appendix also contains cost data,
equipment lifetimes, and indication of the potential savings of water
associated with each device.
The incremental costs of flow reduction are presented in Appendix
1-2. Implicit in this Appendix is the assumption that installation
costs would be approximately equal for conservation-oriented and
conventional devices.
Design flows for the Facility Plan Proposed Action and for EIS
Alternatives 1 and 2 could be reduced from 0.89 mgd to 0.71 mgd if dual
cycle toilets and flow control valves for shower heads and lavatory
faucets were installed in all sewered residences.
This reduction of flow would reduce capital expenses and operation
and maintenance costs for facilities. To estimate this cost savings,
Alternative 2 was re-examined on the basis of the lower design flow.
Savings in the pressure sewer system are attributable primarily to size
reductions for new force mains. The capital costs for land application
treatment processes are also reduced. The total savings associated with
flow reduction for Alternative 2 amounted to $567,000 in capital
expenditure and approximately $8,000 per year in operation and
maintenance costs. In terms of economics the present worth* of flow
reduction ($596,000) would amount to 3.4% of the total present worth of
Alternative 2.
To achieve these savings local plumbing codes would have to require
flow reduction devices in new housing and, as necessary, for replacement
of old fixtures. The approximate savings over the 20-year design period
is $410,000, equivalent to $112 per design-year dwelling unit.
Although costs of flow reduction have not been analyzed in detail
for the other alternatives, total annual homeowner savings in the range
of $100 to $125 have been estimated for dwellings in the sewered areas.
As discussed in Section IV.B.I,a, decreased water consumption and
heating costs are included in these savings for the homeowner.
In unsewered areas the savings are harder to calculate. The
parameters that determine whether or not soil disposal systems operate
properly are not well understood. Consequently, conservative, empirical
criteria for design are used. Although reduced design flows may justify
smaller soil disposal systems, most state agencies are conservative with
respect to such changes.
Flow reduction measures probably improve the operation of soil
disposal systems and, therefore, may serve as insurance against early
failures. Where rehabilitation of septic systems is necessary, flow
reduction devices such as composting and recycling toilets, which may
not be cost effective, may be required to forestall repeated failure.
137
-------
D. IMPLEMENTATION
How a wastewater management plan is to be implemented depends upon
whether the selected alternative relies primarily upon centralized or
decentralized components. Since most sanitary districts have in the
past been designed around centralized collection and treatment of
wastewater, there is a great deal of information about the
implementation of such systems. Decentralized collection and treatment
is, however, relatively new and there is little management experience on
which to draw.
Regardless of whether the selected alternative is primarily
centralized or decentralized, four aspects of the implementation program
must be addressed:
o There must be legal authority for a managing agency to exist
and financial authority for it to operate.
o The agency must manage construction, ownership and operation
of the sanitary district.
o A choice must be made between the several types of long-term
financing that are generally required in paying for capital
expenditures associated with the project.
o A system of user charges to retire capital debts, to cover
expenditures for operation and maintenance, and to provide a
reserve for contingencies must be established.
In the following sections, these requirements are examined first
with respect to centralized sanitary districts, then with respect to
decentralized districts.
1. CENTRALIZED DISTRICTS
a. Authority
The Crystal Lake Area Facility Plan identified the Benzie County
Board of Commissioners as the legal authority for implementing the
Plan's Proposed Action. The Benzie County Department of Public Works
would be the operating division which would construct, operate and
maintain the wastewater management system. Under Act 185 of the
Michigan Public Acts of 1957 as amended, the County has the authority to
implement this system and to contract with the villages, townships and
Frankfort City for services.
b. Managing Agency
The role of the managing agency has been well defined for
centralized sanitary districts. In general, the agency constructs,
maintains and operates the sewerage facilities. Although in fact
different contractual relationships exist between the agencies and their
service areas, for the purposes of this document ownership of the
138
-------
facilities may be assumed to reside with the agency. For gravity
sewers, such ownership has traditionally extended to the private
property. For STEP or grinder pump stations connected to pressure
sewers several options exist:
o The station may be designed to agency specifications, with the
responsibility for purchase, maintenance and ownership
residing with the homeowner.
o The station may be specified and purchased by the agency, with
the homeowner repurchasing and maintaining it.
o The station may be specified and owned by the agency, but
purchased by the homeowner.
o The station may be specified, purchased and owned by the
agency. Regardless, however, of the option selected, all
residences are treated equally.
c. Financing
Capital expenses associated with a project may be financed by
several techniques, which are discussed in detail in Appendix J-4.
Briefly, they are:
o
o
o
o
pay-as-you-go methods;
special benefit assessments;
reserve funds; and
debt financing.
The Facility Plan recommended debt financing in the form of 40-year
revenue bonds for the Proposed Action. As indicated in Appendix J-4,
revenue bonds generally have not been used in Michigan; General
Obligation bonds have been more widely offered.
d. User Charges
User charges are set at a level that will provide for repayment of
Long-term debt and cover operating and maintenance expenses. In
addition, prudent management agencies frequently add an extra charge to
provide a contingency fund for extraordinary expenses and replacement of
equipment.
The implementation program proposed by the Facility Plan is an
example of a scheme calling for a County to recover the costs of
wastewater management from the local municipalities. The municipalities
would, in turn, charge the users of the system. Because of the
potential economic impacts, the charges must be carefully allocated
among various classes of users. Recognized classes of users include:
o Permanent residents/Seasonal residents
139
-------
o Residential/Commercial/Industrial users
o Presently sewered users/Newly sewered users
o Low- and fixed-income residents/Active income producers
Each class of user imposes different requirements on the design and
cost of each alternative, receives different benefits, and has different
financial capabilities. To illustrate the allocation of techniques
available, three possible user-charge schemes have been examined in
Appendix J-5.
2. SMALL WASTE FLOW DISTRICTS
Regulation of on-lot sewage systems has evolved to the point where
most new facilities are designed, permitted and inspected by local
health departments or other agencies. After installation, local
government has no further responsibility for these systems until mal-
functions become evident. In such cases the local government may
inspect and issue permits for repair of the systems. The sole basis for
government regulation in this field has been its obligation to protect
public health.
Rarely have governmental obligations been interpreted more broadly
to include monitoring and control of other effects of on-lot system use
or misuse. The general absence of information concerning septic system
impacts on ground and surface water quality has been coupled with a lack
of knowledge of the operation of on-site systems.
Methods of identifying and dealing with the adverse effects of
on-lot systems without building expensive sewers are being developed.
Technical methods include both the wastewater treatment and disposal
alternatives discussed in Section III.B and improved monitoring of water
quality. Managerial methods have already been developed and are being
applied in various communities as discussed in Appendix K-l.
As with any centralized district, the issues of legal and fiscal
authority, agency management, project financing, and user charges must
all be resolved by small waste flow districts.
a. Authority
Michigan presently has no legislation which explicitly authorizes
governmental entities to manage wastewater facilities other than those
connected to conventional collection systems. However, Michigan
Statutes Sections 123.241 et seq. and 323.37 et seq. have been
interpreted as providing counties, townships, villages and cities with
sufficient powers to manage decentralized facilities (Otis and Stewart
1976).
California and Illinois, to resolve interagency conflicts or to
authorize access to private properties for inspection and maintenance of
wastewater facilities, have passed legislation specifically intended to
facilitate management of decentralized facilities. These laws are
summarized in Appendix K-2.
140
-------
b. Management
The purpose of a small waste flow district is to balance the costs
of management with the needs of public health and environmental quality.
Management of such a district implies formation of a management agency
and formulation of policies for the agency. The concept of such an
agency is relatively new. Appendix K-3 discusses this concept in
detail.
The range of functions a management agency may provide for adequate
control and use of decentralized technologies is presented in Table
III-3. Because the level of funding for these functions could become an
economic burden, their costs and benefits should be considered in the
development of the management agency. Major decisions which have to be
made in the development of this agency relate to the following
questions:
o Should engineering and operations functions be provided by the
agency or by private organizations under contract?
o Would off-site facilities require acquisition of property and
right-of-way?
o Would public or private ownership of on-site wastewater
facilities be more likely to provide cost savings and improved
control of facilities operation?
o Are there environmental, land use, or economic characteristics
of the area that would be sensitive to operation and
construction of decentralized technologies? If so, would
special planning, education and permitting steps be
appropriate?
Five steps are recommended to implement an efficient, effective
program for the management of wastewater in unsewered areas:
o Develop a site-specific environmental and engineering data
base
o Design the management organization
o Agency start-up
o Construction and rehabilitation of facilities
o Operation of facilities
Site Specific Environmental and Engineering Data Base. The data
base should include groundwater monitoring, a house-to-house investiga-
tion (sanitary survey), soils and engineering studies, and a survey of
available technologies likely to function adequately in the area. This
baseline information will provide the framework for the systems and
technologies appropriate to the district.
141
-------
Table III-3
SMALL WASTE FLOW MANAGEMENT FUNCTIONS BY OPERATIONAL COMPONENT
AND BY BASIC AND SUPPLEMENTAL USAGE
Component
Basic Usage*
Supplemental Usage*
Administrative User charge system
Staffing
Enforcement
Engineering
Operations
Planning
Adopt design standards*
Review and approval of plans*
Evaluate Existing systems/
design rehabilitation
measures
Installation inspection*
On-site soils investigations*
Acceptance for public
management of privately
installed facilities
Routine inspection and
maintenance
Septage collection and
disposal
Groundwater monitoring
Grants administration
Service contracts supervision
Occupancy/operating permits
Interagency coordination
Property and right-of-way
acquisition
Performance bonding
requirements
Design and install facilities
for public ownership
Contractor training
Special designs for alternative
technologies
Pilot studies of alternative
technologies
Implementing flow reduction
techniques
Emergency inspection and
maintenance
Surface water monitoring
Land use planning
Public education
Designate areas sensitive
to soil-dependent systems
Establish environmental, land
use and economic criteria
for issuance or non-issuance
of permits
* Usage normally provided by local governments at present.
142
-------
A program for monitoring groundwater should include sampling of
existing wells and possibly additional testing of the aquifer. Such
monitoring should be instituted early enough to provide data useful in
selecting and designing wastewater disposal systems.
The sanitary survey should include interviews with residents and
inspections of existing systems. A trained surveyor should record
information on lot size and location; age and use of dwelling; location,
age, and type of sewage disposal system; adequacy of the maintenance of
the existing system; water-using fixtures; and problems with the exist-
ing system.
Detailed site analyses may be required to evaluate operation of the
effluent disposal fields and to determine the impacts of effluent dis-
posal upon local groundwater. These studies may include probing the
disposal area; boring soil samples; and the installation of shallow
groundwater observation shafts. Sampling of the water table downhill
from leach fields aids in evaluating the potential for transport of
nutrients and pathogens through the soil. Soil classifications near
selected leach fields may improve correlations between soils and leach
field failures. An examination of the reasons for the inadequate
functioning of existing wastewater systems may avoid such problems with
the rehabilitation or construction of new systems.
Design the Management Organization. Both the Facility Plan and the
EIS have recommended Benzie County as the agency best suited to managing
wastewater facilities in both unsewered and sewered areas of the Study
Area. An analysis of the County's technical and administrative
capabilities as outlined in Table III-3, should proceed concurrently
with development of the environmental and engineering data base. The
role of organizations such as the Department of Health should be
examined with respect to avoiding interagency conflicts and duplication
of effort and staffing.
Determination of the basic and supplementary management functions
to be provided will be influenced by the technologies appropriate to the
Study Area. In this respect, the questions raised earlier regarding
formulation of management policies must be resolved.
The product of these analyses should be an organizational design in
which staffing requirements, functions, interagency agreements, user
charge systems and procedural guidelines are defined.
Agency Start-Up. Once the structure and responsibilities of the
management agency have been defined, public review is advisable. Addi-
tional personnel required for construction and/or operation should be
provided. If necessary, contractual arrangements with private organiza-
tions should be developed. Acquisition of property should also be
initiated.
Construction and Rehabilitation of Facilities. Site data collected
for the environmental and engineering data base should support selection
and design of appropriate technologies for individual residences. Once
construction and rehabilitation begin, site conditions may be revealed
143
-------
that suggest technology or design changes. Since decentralized
technologies generally must be designed to operate within site
limitations instead of overcoming them, flexibility should be provided.
Personnel authorized to revise designs in the field would provide this
flexibility.
Operation of Facilities. The administrative planning, engineering,
and operations functions listed in Table III-3 are primarily applicable
to this phase. The role of the management agency would have been
determined in the organizational phase. Experience gained during agency
start-up and facilities construction may indicate that some lower or
higher level of effort will be necessary to insure long term reliability
of the decentralized facilities.
c. Financing
The financing of a small waste flows district is similar to that of
a centralized district. Such financing was discussed in Section
II.D.I.e.
d. User Charges
Although renovation and replacement costs for on-site systems owned
by permanent residents are eligible for Federal funding, such costs
incurred by seasonal residents are not. The major difference in the
financing of the two systems arises from the question of seasonals'
ownership of on-site systems. With respect to the Study Area, where a
significant proportion of the users would be seasonal, the absence of
Federal funding would transfer a large fraction of the project costs to
the local users. This would be reflected in either 1) capital outlays
by the users for construction, 2) increased user charges covering
increased local costs or 3) both.
User charges and classes have been discussed in Section III.D.l.d.
The significance of decentralized districts lies in the creation of an
additional class of users. Since residents of such districts may be
differentiated in terms of centrally sewered areas and decentralized
areas, user charges may differ. As a result many different management
functions are conjoined. For example, permanent users on septic systems
may be charged less than those on central sewers. Seasonal users on
pressure sewers may have high annual costs associated with amortization
of capital expenses; permanent users of pressure sewers may be charged
less than seasonal users, because Federal funding reduced their share of
the capital costs. Alternatively, the management agency may choose to
divide all costs equally among all users. For the analyses in this EIS,
public ownership of permanent and seasonal on-site systems has been
assumed.
Problems such as these have not been adequately addressed by the
historical sources of management information. Development of user
charges by small waste flows districts will undoubtedly be complicated
by the absence of such historical records. EPA is preparing an analysis
of equitable means for recovering costs from users in small waste flow
districts and combined sewer/small waste flow districts.
144
-------
CHAPTER IV
IMPACTS
A. SURFACE WATER
1. PRIMARY IMPACTS
a. Eutrophication Potential Analysis
This section discusses the effect of nutrient loading associated
with different wastewater management alternatives upon the trophic
status of open waters in Betsie Lake and Crystal Lake. To evaluate the
impact of each alternative, nutrient loading levels for phosphorus were
calculated. Phosphorus is the limiting nutrient for algal growth in
most temperate zone lakes. Phosphorus is also more easily controllable
than nitrogen.
The major sources of phosphorus for Crystal Lake and Betsie Lake
were identified earlier as:
o precipitation
o septic tank leachate
o tributary
o non-point source runoff including drainage from the immediate
area around the lake
o wastewater treatment plant discharge.
Other sources known to contribute to nutrient loading including
groundwater, detritus, waterfowl, and release from sediments are less
significant in the Study Area in terms of the time scales considered.
This analysis first used simple mathematical models to establish
the existing trophic status of Betsie and Crystal Lakes in terms of
total areal phosphorus loading levels. Then future phosphorus loading
scenarios based on wastewater management alternatives were derived.
Next a Vollenweider/Dillon model projected the trophic status of the
lakes using derived phosphorus loading levels. The model used in this
analysis is detailed in Appendix E-4.
Summary of Existing Trophic Status. Given such hydrological
features of the lake as hydraulic retention time and depth, the model
generates a "permissible" phosphorus loading limit above which a lake is
considered mesotrophic and a "dangerous" phosphorus loading limit above
which the lake is considered eutrophic. The phosphorus loading
tolerance limits for Betsie Lake and Crystal Lake are summarized in
Table IV-1. Existing phosphorus loading levels derived in Chapter II
are included for purpose of comparison.
145
-------
Table IV-1
PHOSPHORUS LOADING LIMITS (g/m2/yr)
Betsie Lake Crystal Lake;
Permissible 3.23 0.064
Dangerous 6.46 0.132
Existing 12.39 0.044
Betsie Lake can assimilate greater phosphorus loads per unit area
because of its relatively high flushing rate (hydraulic retention time
of 2 days) compared with that of Crystal Lake (63 years).
The current status of eutrophication of these lakes can best be
summarized in Figure IV-1. It shows that Crystal Lake is currently in
the oligotrophic category while Betsie Lake is eutrophic.
Future Load Scenario: Betsie Lake. Table IV-2 shows estimates of
phosphorus inputs for Betsie Lake for each wastewater alternative.
Non-point source runoff was assumed to remain constant until the year
2000, because future land use was uncertain. These estimated phosphorus
inputs for the alternatives indicate that loads could be reduced by
43-48%, below existing conditions. The reduction in phosphorus loads is
similar for all wastewater management alternatives (except No Action)
because (1) over 50% of the phosphorus load is from nonpoint sources and
will not be controlled by wastewater management alternatives and (2)
effluent discharged from the treatment plant or land application is low
in phosphorus (1 mg/1 and 0.3 mg/1 respectively). Three options are
available for reducing the phosphorus to Betsie Lake.
o Elimination of wastewater discharge from the Elberta and
Frankfort plants into Betsie Lake. The land application
alternatives (2 and 4) which eliminate discharge to Betsie
Lake have the greatest potential for reducing phosphorus
loads. Reduction in phosphorus loads of about 48% are
anticipated with Alternatives 2 and 4.
o Chemical precipitation. Design for the RBC plant specifies
phosphorus removal by chemical precipitation. Phosphorus
levels in the effluent discharge with this method will be less
than 1.0 mg/1. EIS Alternative 1 and the Facility Plan
Proposed Action would treat the wastewater from the entire
Study Area and the phosphorus loading to Betsie Lake will be
only about 10% greater than if land application is used for
the entire Study Area.
o A combination of chemical precipitation of phosphorus and
reduction of wastewater flow. EIS Alternatives 3, 4, and 6
propose the use of on-site systems for various sections of the
Crystal Lake shoreline and treatment of the remaining
wastewater at the RBC plant or by land application. These
alternatives are intermediate in hydraulic and nutrient loads.
146
-------
1.0 C
CM
£
v.
o>
IT
I
O.I
0.01
i I i I i m
i r
EUTROPHIC
©.CRYSTAL LAKE
\EXISTING CONDITIONS
ALL ALTERNATIVES
O BETSIE LAKE
EXISTING
CONDITIONS
o-ALTERNATIVES 1,3,5,6; LIMITED ACTION;
/ PROPOSED" ACTION
ALTERNATIVES 2,4
OLIGOTROPHIC
I I I l I I I
JL
1.0 10.0 100.0
MEAN DEPTH(METERS)
L= AREAL PHOSPHORUS INPUT (g/m^yr)
R= PHOSPHORUS RETENTION COEFFICIENT (DIMENSIONLESS)
P- HYDRAULIC FLUSHING RATE (yr"1)
FIGURE EM TROPHIC STATUS OF BETSIE LAKE AND CRYSTAL LAKE
147
-------
Table IV-2
ESTIMATES OF PHOSPHORUS LOADS TO BETSIE LAKE
FOR THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES
ALTERNATIVES
Alternatives 2 & 4
Limited Action
Alternative 6
Alternative 3
Alternative 5
Alternative 1 and
Proposed Action
Existing Conditions
and No Action
HOSPHORUS LOAD
ffl/m2/Yr(Lb/Yr)
6.47 .
(14.4 X 10 )
6.91 -
(15.40 X 10 )
6.96 ,
(15.51 X 10 )
7.0
(15.71 X 10 )
7.1 -
(15.80 X 10 )
7.1
(16.55 X 10 )
12.39 3
(27.6 X 10 )
% ABOVE % REDUC1
DANGEROUS OVER EXIl
LIMIT CONDITK
0.2 48%
6.4 44
7.0 44
7.0 44
9.8 43
8.8 43
48
148
-------
Phosphorus loads would be reduced by 43-44% as compared to
with present conditions.
With any of the available options the phosphorus reduction is not
significant enough to change the trophic status of the lake from
eutrophic to mestrophic according to Dillon's model; in all instances
the-loads are slightly greater than Dillon's "tolerance limits" of 6.46
g/m /yr for Betsie Lake. However, the reduction in phosphorus input
(43% - 48%) provided by the wastewater treatment alternatives represents
a significant achievement in correcting the eutrophication problem in
Betsie Lake. Phosphorus concentration in the lake will be lowered as a
result of the proposed project. Unfortunately, data deficiency prevents
the prediction of the subsequent decline in algal growth at this time.
In any case, the proposed action is the first step towards restoring
Betsie Lake.
Future Load Scenario: Crystal Lake. In marked contrast to Betsie
Lake, Crystal Lake has been shown to be oligotrophic under existing
conditions. Inasmuch as total phosphorus loads shown in Figure IV-1 are
well within the "permissible" limits and because phosphorus loads from
on-site systems are but a small portion (6.7% or less) of the total,
none of the alternatives is anticipated to have a significant effect on
the quality of the open water. Localized shoreline eutrophication
resulting from septic tank leachate and non-point sources is discussed
in Section IV.A.l.b.
Table IV-3 shows estimated phosphorus loads for the existing
conditions, decentralized, and centralized alternatives. The following
assumptions were made in deriving the nutrient loads:
o Phosphorus loads from ST/SAS were assumed to be 0.25
Ib/cap/day and corrected for seasonal residency. A 14%
increase in nutrient loads from ST/SAS was anticipated for the
year 2000. This figure was based on the calculated number of
homes and ST/SAS which could be constructed on half acre lots
where soils are suitable for ST/SAS. Based upon results of
the "Septic Snooper" survey (Kerfoot 1978) the septic tank
load estimate is considered to be conservatively high.
o Phosphorus loads from Cold Creek were based upon data provided
by Tanis (1978).
o Phosphorus loads resulting from changes in land use were
estimated by using Omernik's regression model. This model,
detailed in Appendix E-2 approximates the total phosphorus
(and nitrogen) concentration in surface water runoff based
upon the influence of agricultural, residential/urban, and
forested land in the watershed.
The estimated loads readily show unchanged trophic status of
Crystal Lake regardless of the alternative. Phosphorus loadings should
remain 30-35% below the permissible limit of 0.064 g/m /yr. Because the
contribution of total nutrients from septic tanks is small, the ban on
phosphorus will not significantly reduce the total Crystal Lake
phosphorus load.
149
-------
Table IV-3
CRYSTAL LAKE PHOSPHORUS INPUT
Loading Rate
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Precipitation
Septic Tanks
Cold Creek
Non-Point Source
Runoff-Imraed. Watershed
TOTAL
1975 - WITHOUT SEPTIC
TANKS
Precipitation
Septic Tanks
Cold Creek
Non-Point Source
Runoff
TOTAL
CENTRALIZED ALTERNATIVES
Precipitation
Septic Tanks
Cold Creek
Non-Point Source
Runoff
TOTAL
YEAR 2000 DECENTRALIZED
(No Phosphorus Ban)
Precipitation
Septic Tanks
Cold Creek
Non-Point Source
Runoff
TOTAL
WITH PHOSPHORUS BAN
Precipitation
Septic Tanks
Cold Creek
Non-Point Source
Runoff
TOTAL
*Dillon's permissible load = 0.064 g/m2/yr.
Tanis 1978; Omernik 1977; EPA, NES 1975.
Areal Loading Rate Percentage
Ibs/yr)
1,690
263
1,533
465
3,951
1,690
1,533
465
3,688
1,690
0
1,533
614
3,837
1,690
176
1,533
614
4,013
1,690
88
1,533
614
3,925
(kg/yr)
767
120
695
210
1,792
767
695
210
1,672
767
0
695
279
1,741
767
80
695
279
1,821
767
40
695
279
1,781
(g/rf/yr)
.019
.003
.017
.005
.004*
.019
.018
.005
.041*
.019
0
.017
.007
.043*
.019
.002
.017
.007
.045
.019
.001
.017
.007
.044
%
42.8
6.7
38.8
11.7
100.0
45.8
41.6
12.6
100.0
44.0
40.0
16.0
100.0
42.0
4.4
38.2
15.4
100.0
43.0
2.3
39.0
15.7
100.0
150
-------
b. Lakeshore Eutrophication
The colonization of Cladophora in localized areas along the Crystal
Lake shoreline has been attributed to nutrient influx from human
activity. Cladophora requires high nutrient concentrations which are
not naturally available in nutrient poor, oligotrophic lakes such as
Crystal Lake. Several studies have been made in an effort to determine
the cause and extent of Cladophora growth along the lake shore. Under
existing conditions, correlations have been found between housing
density and shoreline vegetation (Tanis 1978 and Gannon 1970) and
between several variables associated with septic tank performance
(University of Michigan 1978) including:
o length of home occupancy
o age of septic tanks
o proximity of septic tanks to the lake shore
The data strongly suggest that Cladophora growth is at least, in
part, the result of nutrient leachate from septic tanks. Septic tank
plumes may channel nutrient rich waters to the vegetation, in effect
acting as a hydroponic culture.
The data supplied by these studies suggest that the frequency and
density of Cladophora growth may increase slightly if additional permits
for shoreline septic systems are granted. However, the availability of
nutrients for algal growth could be reduced along the southwestern,
southeastern, and northwestern shorelines if the ST/SAS were upgraded.
Many of the existing systems are undersized or are located too close to
the lakeshore. Nutrients from ST/SAS along the northeastern shore and a
small part of the southeast shore may not be reduced by upgrading
because of expected high rates of groundwater inflow to the lake.
The centralized alternatives (Facility Plan Proposed Action and EIS
Altternatives 1 and 2) are most likely to reduce the concentration of
nutrients contributing to shoreline eutrophication. Alternatives 3, 4,
5 and 6 which propose sewering the northern shore where Cladophora
growth is heaviest, may effectively reduce the major nutrient source for
growth.
There is no guarantee that sewering the Study Area will eliminate
the growth of Cladophora. With 51% of the phosphorus coming from
non-point source runoff and tributaries, it is conceivable that some
localized growth may result from these sources. This is particularly
true along the northeastern shore where groundwater flow patterns may
channel nutrients to localized areas.
c. Bacterial Contamination
Effluent discharges to Betsie from the proposed new treatment plant
in Frankfort should not result in significant bacterial contamination of
surface waters. Disinfection facilities are included in the design of
the RBC plant. However, the efficiency of disinfection is a function of
mixing, contact time and plant operation. Regular sampling to measure
151
-------
fecal coliform and residual disinfectant should provide an indication of
disinfection effectiveness. Plant malfunctions would not severely
affect Betsie Lake unless the Lake were used for water contact
recreation. Centralized treatment of wastewater by land application
will not impact surface waters; the land application sites are located
at a distance from Crystal and Betsie Lakes.
Pumping stations malfunctions could occur with centralized
Alternatives 1 and 2, resulting in contamination of surface waters.
Rigorous inspection and maintenance of pumping stations would minimize
this possibility.
Bacterial contamination of Crystal Lake surface water should not be
a problem with the decentralized alternatives. Available data suggest
that bacteria are removed even by the medium sandy soils along the
lakeshore. The results of the bacterial sampling surveys performed by
Kerfoot (1978) and Gannon (1970) are discussed in section II.B.7 and
II.C.I. Kerfoot observed that bacterial concentration did not exceed
Michigan's primary contact standards (200 organisms/100 ml) even when
the samples were collected at the site of a leaching septic tank plume.
d. Non-Point Source Nutrient Loads
Primary impacts on surface water quality related to the
construction of ST/SAS systems and the replacement of old systems is
likely to result in increased soil erosion. Similarly, installation of
sewers, especially those that pass under the many small drainage ways
leading to Crystal Lake, will accelerate erosion.
Compliance with state and local soil erosion control requirements
could substantially reduce the erosion problem and the subsequent impact
on water quality.
2. SECONDARY IMPACTS
The potential productivity of Crystal Lake and Betsie Lake is
determined to a large extent by the type of land over which the runoff
drains. Current estimates of nutrient loadings indicate that the
non-point source runoff contributes roughly 52% of the total phosphorus
to Betsie Lake and 50% of the total phosphorus to Crystal Lake.
Increased shoreline housing, a secondary impact of sewering Crystal
Lake, might increase sediment and nutrient loads. Conversion of
forested land to residential or agricultural use tends to increase
non-point source loadings significantly (Omernik 1977).
Any nutrient loading estimates for non-point sources have a low
confidence limit. (See Omernik's Model, Appendix E-2.) They cannot
account for particularly sensitive features of the Study Area or for
specific land use purposes.
For purposes of land use planning, increases in nutrient loads from
non-point source runoff must be considered. Increased loads could
result from:
152
-------
o increased runoff from construction of impervious surfaces such
as rooftops and parking areas;
o lawn and garden fertilization creating unnaturally high
nutrient levels in the runoff; and
o soil disruption by human activities, (i.e., housing
construction, leveling of forested area etc.).
Any of these could result in increased nutrient and sediment loss
especially in areas with steep slopes or in drainage ways leading to
Crystal Lake.
The topography of the Crystal Lake watershed suggests that certain
large areas may be particularly vulnerable to increased non-point source
runoff. The Cold Creek watershed lies in an upland area that slopes
towards the lake. Approximately 36% of the area is forested now.
Development of this land will increase runoff to the lake. Tanis (1978)
has demonstrated that forested areas of the Cold Creek watershed produce
runoff with fewer nutrients than runoff from land used for agricultural
or residential purposes.
The remainder of the Crystal Lake watershed consists mainly of
bluffed areas around the Lake. These areas are about 50% forested and
their runoff water is characterized by low phosphorus concentration
(0.016 mg/1). Residential development encouraged by sewering could
increase runoff phosphorus concentrations and sediment loadings. The
potential for increased development is much greater along the Crystal
Lake shoreline than that of Betsie Lake. Since Betsie Lake is already
sewered, the wastewater management alternatives are not likely to induce
growth in the Betsie Lake area.
3. MITIGATIVE MEASURES
The impact analysis has indicated that non-point source runoff
contributes a large percentage of the total Crystal Lake nutrient load.
The Benzie County Development Plan has made several recommendations to
control such runoff. These recommendations should be enforced by the
townships through zoning, performance standards and ordinances for
control of non-point sources.
Erosion and sedimentation resulting from construction of wastewater
collection systems should be minimized by adhering to the requirements
of the Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control Act of 1972. Enforcement
of this act is the responsibility of Benzie County Community Development
Department. Construction permits can be revoked for violations of the
standards set forth in this act.
The two major non-point sources have been identified as the lower
Cold Creek watershed and the lake bluffs. The use and development of
land in the lower Cold Creek watershed should be restricted to
compatible uses. Alternatives to the current practice of routing
Beulah's stormwater to Cold Creek should be investigated. Sources of
wastewater entering Cold Creek should be identified and dealt with
153
-------
appropriately. Any development on the bluffs around the lakeshore
should require individual plan approval, the developer being required to
ensure that sedimentation and erosion can be controlled and structural
failures will not occur. Although septic tanks have been shown to be a
minor source of nutrients, several mitigative measures could minimize
the nutrient load from this source. Cladophora growth along the Crystal
Lake shoreline has been attributed to localized nutrient sources.
Several measures are available which may minimize Cladophora growth.
These include upgrading the existing on-site systems, use of off-site
systems or composting toilets and minimizing the use of
phosphorus-containing fertilizers.
These improvements in septic tanks are intended to reduce nutrients
for algal growth along the shoreline. There is no guarantee that
Cladophora growth would be eliminated by these mitigative measures,
however. As a last resort Cladophora growth which does occur may be
controlled by adding copper sulfate locally. Used in properly low
concentrations, this chemical will interact with polypeptides secreted
by the algae. This will kill the algae but make the copper unavailable
for uptake (and toxicity) to other organisms.
There is some possibility that the approximately 25 dormant
effluent plumes along the western third of Crystal Lake may be
influenced by the prevailing direction of groundwater flow (see Figure
II-8), which is away from the lake and toward Lake Michigan. Should
this be the case, under conditions of peak flows, the plumes may have
hydraulic loadings sufficient to overcome the normal groundwater flow
and force a plume out into the lake. As system use declines (when
seasonal residents leave) leachate would again tend to move in the
direction of the groundwater. These unusual conditions may allow use of
flow reduction devices as mitigative measures, because reduced flow
would result in lower hydraulic loadings and fewer plume extensions into
the lake.
B. GROUNDWATER IMPACTS
Groundwater impacts fall into two categories, those affecting the
available quantity of the resource, and those affecting its quality.
1. GROUNDWATER QUANTITY IMPACTS
No significant primary or secondary impacts on groundwater quality
should come from any of the various alternatives. This is mainly
because all of the water quantities associated with the alternatives are
relatively miniscule in comparison with the estimated groundwater
storage, recharge from all other sources, and available groundwater
yield.
The conversion from sewage disposal practices based on individual
soil absorption systems to central sewered treatment systems without
effluent land disposal can result in the loss of groundwater recharge.
The significance of this loss hinges upon its relationship to the
recharge from all other sources; these include downward infiltration and
154
-------
percolation from precipitation and surface water bodies, and adjacent
aquifer inflow. Precise definition of this depends upon an accurate
knowledge of the aquifer(s), and its hydrology (e.g., precipitation,
runoff, evapotranspiration, discharge) and hydraulic characteristics
(e.g., transmissivity, and storage coefficients). There is insufficient
data with which to undertake such precise quantification.
Study Area groundwater extraction is currently very small, being
limited mainly to small wells serving individual homes, except in
municipalities. It is on an order of magnitude as the total Study Area
wastewater flows, perhaps 0.89 mgd (equivalent to approximately 620 gpm)
by the year 2000. The 500-foot thick sediments in the area, even with
allowance for their expected discontinuity and low specific yields,
should have a safe yield several orders of magnitude greater than the
total wastewater effluents available for groundwater recharge. This is
particularly true of the outwash deposits southeast of the Study Area.
Failure to return the relatively small quantities of wastewater flows as
recharge is not expected to have a significant impact upon groundwater
quantity. Because of the small water quantities involved, land effluent
disposal or soil absorption systems will show only minute impact re-
ductions over the other alternatives.
The short-term construction impacts on groundwater quantity will be
even less discernible since still smaller quantities of water will be
involved. Also, in no case will construction activities be likely to
result in the sealing of enough recharge area to create a significant
adverse effect upon groundwater quantity.
Increased groundwater demands, arising from Study Area induced
growth, may cause groundwater quantity impacts. Decentralized
alternatives should do this less than centralized sewer system
alternatives. Study Area population growth from centralized systems use
may be about 19% by the year 2000. A corresponding 19% increase in
water use would amount to about 0.17 mgd. This increased demand is so
small compared to the aquifer capacity that it will not create a
significant impact. The County Development Plan shows that available
groundwater supplies are more than adequate for demands through the year
2000 (Wilbur Smith and Associates 1974). However, existing municipal
storage and distribution facilities are inadequate for future needs.
2. GROUNDWATER QUALITY IMPACTS
No significant short-term impacts on grcundwater quality should
result from the construction of any of the alternatives. Long-term
impacts would be as follows:
o Impacts on bacterial quality are expected to be significant
for all alternatives;
o Continued use of ST/SAS particularly on the northeastern
lakeshore may result in minor impacts associated with
shoreline algal growths;
155
-------
o No significant impacts on nitrate concentrations are
anticipated providing the density of ST/SASs complies with
generally accepted standards. Only the No Action alternative
is likely to result in significant adverse impacts.
These conclusions are discussed in more detail in the sections that
follow.
Soil erosion is the chief short-term construction impact.
Compliance with the regulations of the Erosion and Sedimentation Control
Act can minimize such erosion. The clayey soils found throughout the
area are an effective barrier against sediments reaching the aquifers by
filtration and adsorption. No significant impacts are thus expected
from any of the alternatives.
Long-term impacts on groundwater quality are mainly associated with
the following three types of pollutants: (1) bacteria, organics, and
suspended solids, (2) phosphorus, and (3) nitrogen in the form of
nitrates.
Bacteria and suspended organics are readily removed by filtraztion
and adsorption onto soil particles. Five feet of soils are ample to
remove bacteria except in very coarse grained, highly permeable
material. Available data show that bacterial well water contamination
is not a problem for Crystal Lake shoreline residents. The upland soils
in Benzonia and Beulah Townships have varying degrees of clay for
adsorbing bacteria; and aquifer water levels are low, providing ample
distance for bacterial removal. The sandy and loamy-sand lakeshore
soils are effectively removing bacteria from ST/SAS despite the general
absence of soil clay (Gannon 1970; Kerfoot 1978).
Land wastewater application on upland soils should not cause
groundwater bacterial contamination. Land application site soils are
chosen for their effectiveness in removing bacteria and suspended
solids. Pretreatment and subsequent die-off due to dehydration will
greatly reduce viable bacteria.
Groundwater phosphorus is important because of the potential role
in lake eutrophication. Jones (1977) reviewed relevant studies on this
subject for the Environmental Protection Agency concluding that:
... it is very unlikely that under most circumstances, sufficient
available phosphate would be transported from septic tank
wastewater disposal systems to significantly contribute to the
excessive aquatic plant growth problems in water courses recharged
by these waters.
Field studies, they point out, have shown that most soils, even medium
sandy soils typically remove over 95% of phosphates within short
distances from effluent sources. The review shows the two primary
factors in the removal of phosphates applied to the land. The first is
phosphorus absorption on small amounts of clay minerals, iron oxide and
aluminum oxide in soil and aquifer materials. The second is hard water
calcium carbonates and precipitation of phosphate as hydroxyapatite.
156
-------
Jones et al. (1977) have also indicated several studies in areas
similar to the Study Area (loamy, clayey soils over glacial moraine and
outwash deposits) where the soil has essentially removed all of the
phosphorus present in septic tank effluents. They also stated that in
hard water areas such as those of the southern half of Michigan, the
"likelihood of significant phosphate transport from septic tank
wastewater disposal system effluent to the surface waters is greatly
reduced because of the calcium carbonate present in the soil and subsoil
systems."
Because the soils and subsoil systems throughout the Study Area are
clayey to varying degrees and the groundwaters are also very hard (up to
360 mg/1 as CaCO,..) very little phosphate transport from groundwaters to
surface waters should take place in the Study Area.
This was confirmed by the "Septic Snooper" survey of groundwater
leachate plumes entering Crystal Lake (Kerfoot 1978). Only 90 of the
1090 existing shoreline dwellings showed detectable septic tank leachate
plumes. Of the plumes sampled, an estimated 0.7% of the total
phosphorus in septic tank effluents reached the lake by way of
groundwater. This phosphorus was too small to affect Crystal Lake
surface water eutrophication (see II.B.7.a) but sufficient to stimulate
algal growth within localized plume emergence areas. Only the No Action
Alternative, relying on on-site systems along the northeast shore, could
potentially worsen the localized lakeshore eutrophication problem.
Mitigating measures such as localized chemical treatment or mechancial
algae removal might even solve this problem.
Groundwater nitrates are of concern, at high concentrations causing
methemoglobinemia in infants consuming foods prepared with such waters.
The National Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations (40 CFR 141) of
the Safe Drinking Water Act PI 93-523 set a limit of 10 mg/1 of nitrates
as nitrogen (N0~ - N). Chapter II contains a discussion on the well
water levels of nitrates around Crystal Lake.
Septic tank/soil absorption unit density is often the most
important parameter influencing groundwater levels of nitrates (Scalf et
al. 1977). However, the same source indicates that currently available
"information has not been sufficiently definitive nor quantitative to
provide a basis for density critera" (Scalf et al. 1977).
The Sanitary Code of the Grand Traverse-Leelanau-Benzie District
Health Department (GT-L-BHD) requires that septic tank systems be
located at least 50 feet from any potable water supply, well, spring,
etc. This distance usually provides ample water travel time within an
aquifer to reduce initially excessive nitrate concentrations (more than
10 mg/1 as N0« - N) to less than 2 mg/1. Minnesota field studies by
Schroepfer and Polta (1969) show a reduction from 12.6 mg/1 to 1.7 mg/1
within 30 feet at depths of less than 15 feet in a water table aquifer.
Most sanitary codes reflect the general acceptance of a 50-foot
separation of wells and septic tank systems as the best available
yardstick for assessing likely adverse impacts of ST/SASs. A minimum
lot size of 1/3 acre usually ensures the observance of the 50-foot
separation of wells and ST/SASs. The Grand Traverse-Leelanau-Benzie
157
-------
District Health Department considers that the alternatives satisfying
this density criterion, among others in the code, create no significant
groundwater nitrate impact.
Multi-tier or grid type residential development can create greater
potential groundwater nitrate impacts from ST/SAS use than can single
tier development. Depending on the direction of groundwater, flow and
pumping rates of wells, nitrate contributions from individual ST/SASs
may become cumulative in multi-tier developments. It is thus more
important to enforce existing density codes and set-back distances to
wells in such developments than in single tier ones.
The existing situation within the Service Area as established by
the sanitary survey is that 23 percent of all ST/SASs is located closer
than the required 50-feet from wells. Five (5) percent of all ST/SASs,
or nearly one-fourth of these violating the 50-foot criterion, is
located within 25 feet of wells. Gannon (1970) found focal points of
high nitrate concentrations (>4 mg/1) in wells along the northshore, and
particularly along the northeastern shore of the lake. These focal
points are located in the areas of high ST/SAS density. In two cases,
on the northeastern shore, nitrate concentrations exceeded the standard
criterion of 10 mg/1 NCL-N. In many other areas Gannon found no
nitrates, or concentrations that were less than 1 mg/1. The
implications are that while the source was not identified, high nitrate
concentrations well in excess of background levels were associated with
high density development in the Service Area.
The No Action Alternative will perpetuate and may possibly worsen
this situation with a resulting increased violation of the drinking
water standard. It is not a recommendable action.
The Limited Action alternative tentatively proposes the use of
cluster systems to overcome the problem but it would be subject to the
findings of detailed studies to be undertaken during the design phase of
the project. No significant adverse impacts on water quality are
therefore expected to result from the Limited Action Alternative.
Cluster system soil absorption fields are designed like to septic
tank fields to ensure an adequate areal distribution of the effluent and
depth to groundwater for satisfactory treatment. Nitrate levels
entering groundwater should be equivalent to those of leachate from
ST/SASs. Locating the soil absorption fields of cluster systems at
greater distances from residential developments (500 feet adopted for
EIS Alternative design) provides more than ample room for dilution of
nitrate concentrations below drinking water limits prior to interception
by wells. Cluster system alternatives should therefore produce no
significant groundwater nitrate impacts.
EPA recognizes almost all types of land treatment alternatives as
being capable of producing final effluent nitrate nitrogen (NCL - N)
concentrations of 10 mg/1 and less prior to entry into groundwaters.
Table IV-4 shows irrigation (spray) and overland flow methods produce
effluents of 2.5 mg/1 of NC- - N) while for infiltration percolation
(rapid infiltration) 10 mg/1 may be expected (EPA 1975). Dilution
158
-------
Table IV-4
EFFLUENT QUALITY COMPARISON FOR LAND TREATMENT AND AWT SYSTEMS
Effluent quality parameter, mg/1
System
Aerated lagoon
Activated sludge
Irrigation
Overland flow
Infiltration-percolation
AWT-1
AWT- 2
AWT- 3
AWT- 4
BOD
35
20
1
5
5
12
15
5
5
SS
40
25
1
5
1
15
16
5
5
Nil -N NO N Total N
10 20 30
20 10 30
0.5 2.5 3
0.5 2.5 3
10 10
1 29 30
3
20 10 30
3
P
8
8
0.
5
2
8
8
0.
0.
1
5
5
Cost-Effective Comparison of Land Application and Advanced Wastewater
Treatment (EPA-430/9-75-016).
159
-------
within aquifers by groundwater flow further reduces these
concentrations. No signficant impacts on groundwater quality are
therefore expected from alternatives using land application techniques.
While spray irrigation and overland flow techniques will produce
effluents of better quality, rapid infiltration will produce a
satisfactory one. Selection of land application alternatives would
require a detailed site analysis including a geohydrologic survey, soils
classification and soil chemistry survey.
3. MITIGATIVE MEASURES
Groundwater quality should be carefully monitored for all
alternatives involving the use of ST/SASs, cluster systems and land
application system. This will verify that water quality is not being
significantly degraded, and to warn of malfunctions, inadequate
treatment and the need for corrective action.
The proposed detailed groundwater studies scheduled for imple-
mentation during the project design phase will ensure that the
implemented alternative poses no significant adverse threat to
groundwater quality.
C. POPULATION AND LAND USE IMPACTS
Population and land use impacts associated with various system
alternatives are evaluated in this section. These impacts are
summarized below:
o Different alternatives will result in significantly different
rates of population increase. Provision of centralized
facilities would result in a 19% increase above standard
projections for the drainage basin, while reliance upon
existing on-lot systems in unsewered areas (the Limited and No
Action Alternatives) will hold population growth 7% below
standard projections. Decentralized alternatives will
generate population growth 4% above current projections.
o Residential land acreage will increase regardless of the
alternative selected. Increases will range from 77% (No
Action Alternative) to 88% (fully centralized alternatives).
o Availability of sewers would allow present demand for land
development along the shore of Crystal Lake to be met. This
would result in residential densities averaging 25% above the
No Action Alternative and possible multifamily development.
No Action, Limited Action, and decentralized alternatives will
increase values of existing residential properties around the
Lake because they will limit the amount of additional land
which may be developed.
160
-------
o Provision of centralized sewerage facilities will result in
increased development pressure. Adoption of the Limited or No
Action Alternatives will tend to maintain existing community
character. Decentralized alternatives will be nearly as
effective as the No Action Alternative in maintaining existing
community character.
1. INTRODUCTION
The capacity of an area to support development varies with the
degree to which wastewater facilities are site-related. On-lot
wastewater treatment facilities are extremely site-related because they
are limited to sites with suitable soils. Sewers allow development to
be much more independent of site characteristics because the soil
permeability, slope, and drainage are not such strong constraining
factors. Thus, sewers increase the inventory of developable land.
Sewers also increase the possible density of development. The amount of
additional growth actually occurring in the area if sewers are provided
is dependent not only upon increases in development potential but also
upon demand for additional residential development in the area. This
demand reflects the residential amenity of the area in comparison to
other areas and the reduction in the cost of residential land when the
supply of developable land is increased.
Population and land use impacts are estimated here for completely
centralized and completely decentralized (No Action) alternatives.
Impacts are also estimated for EIS Alternatives 3, 4, and 5, which
incorporate partial sewering and cluster systems. These alternatives,
while described as decentralized, are actually hybrid or intermediate
systems in terms of population and land use impacts.
2. POPULATION
If centralized facilities were provided, population in the Service
Area would be anticipated to increase 19% above baseline projections for
the year 2000. This increase in population growth above regional
baseline trends is referred to as induced growth. Completely
decentralized facilities (No Action Alternative) might limit Service
Area population growth 7% below baseline projections for the year 2000.
Centralized facilities would concentrate growth within the nearshore
segments of the Crystal Lake Proposed Service Area. With
site-dependent, decentralized facilities, nearshore areas would be
developed at a lower density or might not be developed at all, resulting
in more development in areas further from the lakeshore areas.
3. LAND USE
Significant increases in residential acreage would be likely within
the proposed Crystal Lake Service Area regardless of the treatment
alternative adopted. Residential acreage is projected to increase by
77% by the year 2000 even under the completely decentralized (No Action)
alternative. Residential acreage might increase by 88% with the
provision of centralized systems. The increase in residential acreage
with centralized facilities would not match the increase in population
because new development would be of higher density.
161
-------
The major differences in future development patterns between
centralized and decentralized alternatives relate to the amount of
nearshore development. With centralized facilities, the nearshore areas,
undevelopable with decentralized facilities because of site
restrictions, would become high-development-potential areas.
4. TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS
No population growth resulting from the proposed wastewater
treatment facilities is expected to have significant impact on the local
transportation system by requiring new road construction or other
infrastructural investment. Increased visitation to the Sleeping Bear
Dunes National Lakeshore, which is immediately north of the Proposed
Service Area, will increase through traffic, as that area lies between
the National Lakeshore and major population centers to the south. The
through traffic is not likely to have a significant impact on the
adequacy of local transportation facilities (by telephone, Mr. Max
Holden, Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore).
Traffic counts obtained from the Benzie Count Road Commission
indicate that present traffic volumes in the area are quite low. The
counts indicate no consistent pattern of increase in traffic volumes for
the years 1970 to 1978. Average daily traffic (ADT) volumes on Michigan
Routes 22 and 115 were under 1,000 cars for all recording stations from
1970 to 1978. The ADT on US Route 31 was higher -- 2,900 vehicles for
1978. Benzie County has no current plans to widen or reconstruct roads
in the area for at least the next 5 years (by letter, James R. Thompson,
Manager, Benzie County Road Commission, 11 May 1979).
5. CHANGES IN COMMUNITY COMPOSITION AND CHARACTER
Centralized facilities would moderately influence the composition
and character of the Crystal Lake community. Additional costs of
wastewater treatment would displace some lower income permanent and
seasonal residents. Provisions of centralized facilities would also
make feasible the development of higher-density forms of residences,
including townhouses and apartments. These developments would appeal:
to older persons who have had single-family summer residences in the
area in the past and want fewer maintenance responsibilities; to younger
couples without children; and to persons who want to share the use of a
summer residence. Condominium apartment developments have occurred in
some nearby areas, notably Traverse City, and some local residents have
expressed an interest in condominium development if centralized
wastewater treatment facilities are constructed. In the long run,
however, the impacts of proposed wastewater facilities on the area may
be overshadowed by national trends in gasoline availability and cost.
Rising gasoline prices or shortages in gasoline supply may probably
curtail seasonal population growth in the Crystal Lake area because of
the long auto trip from metropolitan areas. Reduction in seasonal
population growth would also depress the local economy and thus limit
permanent population growth. Growth of seasonal population is also
highly responsive to changes in disposal personal income, with any
curtailment in the growth of personel income producing a marked drop in
the number of second (seasonal) home owners.
162
-------
The rural character of the area would be diminished with the
additional land devoted to residential and uses associated with
centralized facilities and with higher density development. Change in
the character of the area could also occur with EIS Alternatives 3, 4,
and 5 because substantial population growth and land development would
take place in areas serviced by sewers and the numerous cluster systems.
Adoption of the Limited or No Action Alternatives would encourage
preservation of the area's prevailing community character and
composition. There would be very little economic displacement pressure
in the Crystal Lake area, and land-use patterns would be unlikely to
change except in the amount of residential use.
D. ENCROACHMENT ON ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS
Construction activities related to the various wastewater treatment
alternatives and secondary impacts from induced growth may be felt in
certain environmentally sensitive areas. The Benzie County Development
Plan has designated extensive areas of critical environmental concern.
The areas extend through large tracts of land which are already
undergoing development. The "critical concern" designation does not
dictate land use but recommends restrictions which should be considered
prior to further development.
1. WETLANDS
a. Primary Impacts
The wetlands located south of Round Lake and near the Crystal Lake
outlet to the Betsie River may be subject to sedimentation during
construction of a sewer collection system (Alternatives 1, 2, 4, 5, and
the Facility Plan Proposed Action). Water circulation patterns may be
modified by these activities. These construction-related impacts may be
minimized by adhering to the regulations in the Soil Erosion and
Sedimentation Control Act. This Act regulates construction activities
within 500 feet of a shore through a permit system administered by the
County.
b. Secondary Impacts
The wetland areas surrounding Round Lake are state-owned and
development will not occur in these wetlands. The wetlands associated
with the Betsie River are protected to some extent by the Betsie River
Natural River Zoning Act of 1973 (see Appendix D-3). The Act requires a
minimum setback distance of 200 feet from the River. It also designates
a Natural River District, which is a strip of land 400 feet wide on each
side of and parallel to the designated river and tributaries. This
District is not under State ownership, however, and it merely defines an
areas within which certain types of development will be controlled.
Some development may occur in these wetlands regardless of the
waste-water management alternative selected.
163
-------
c. Mitigative Measures
The County should strictly enforce the regulations provided by the
Sediment and Erosion Control Act to prevent sedimentation which would
destroy the filtering capacity of wetlands. Local zoning regulations
for Benzonia and Crystal Lake Townships should be revised to protect
wetland areas. Ideally, these areas should be zoned for open space.
Development near wetland areas should provide an adequate buffer zone.
2. SAND DUNES
a. Primary Impacts
The County Development Plan has characterized the sand dunes as
having "unique natural features worthy of protection." The Sleeping
Bear Dunes Park, north of Crystal Lake is currently protected from
development. However, the dunes west and southwest of Crystal Lake are
not afforded such protection. A sewage collection system that would
convey wastewater from the western shore to the Frankfort Plant
(Alternatives 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and the Facility Plan Proposed Action)
should be carefully located so that the dunes southwest of Crystal Lake
are not disturbed.
b. Secondary Impacts
Implementation of a decentralized wastewater management alternative
is more likely to encourage development in sand dunes since a scattered,
low-density development pattern would result from decentralization.
However, these soils are generally sandy with slopes more than 12%;
these characteristics present structural problems to development.
c. Mitigative Measures
The County should undertake a study of the ecosystems of the sand
dunes and the impact which development might have on these areas. Lake
Township should implement appropriate zoning regulations to protect
these areas.
3. STEEP SLOPES
a. Primary Impacts
The difficulties of installing on-lot systems on steep slopes
appears to be one of the factors historically limiting home construction
to lakeshore and other level to rolling sites. However, sewers and
suitably designed on-site systems may be constructed on steep slopes.
Where construction does occur, adherence to the Sediment and erosion
Control Act of 1972 should minimize the impacts of erosion.
b. Secondary Impacts
The availability of off-lot treatment systems as provided by
cluster systems or sewers, along with the apparent demand for
residential development may result in construction activity on steep
164
-------
sloped areas. Accelerated soil erosion particularly on the steep bluffs
surrounding the Lake and in the lower Cold Creek watershed can result in
additional non-point source runoff into Crystal Lake.
c. Mitigative Measures
The municipalities should adopt performance standards with specific
slope-density provisions. Developers would then have to meet the
performance standards which require proof that the sloped areas are not
a hazard to development. Zoning ordinances should limit growth in steep
sloped areas.
If cluster systems or septic tanks are placed in areas with steep
slopes, a series of drop boxes should be used. With this method, no
hillside seepage should occur unless the sewage flow exceeds the design
capacity.
4. PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL LANDS
a. Primary Impacts
"Prime and unique" farmlands are not likely to be impacted by the
construction of cluster systems or sewers, since UK se areas are not
located near the proposed location for collection ;ysj, MS.
b. Secondary Impacts
Some farmland acreage development is likely regardless of the
wastewater management alternative. A centralized treatment system would
encourage less development by concentrating growth in sewered areas
close to the lakeshore.
c. Mitigative Measures
Agricultural lands should be protected by following the
Development Plan's recommendation for favorable farm tax credits to
encourage the retention of prime farmland for agricultural purposes.
Zoning ordinances should discourage scattered development which converts
large tracts of farmland into residential lands.
5. FLOOD HAZARD AREAS
No primary impacts on flood hazard areas are anticipated with any
of the alternatives. The sanitary code and local zoning ordinances
preclude any construction within 50 feet of the Crystal Lake shoreline,
which is ample to protect the narrow flood prone areas around the lake.
The minimum setback distance of 200 feet stipulated by the Betsie River
Zoning Act of 1973 should preclude floodplain development.
6. CRITICAL AND UNIQUE HABITATS
The Michigan Department of Natural Resources is currently in the
process of identifying critical and unique habitat areas. Impacts
cannot be identified until these areas are located.
165
-------
E. ECONOMIC IMPACTS
1. INTRODUCTION
This section evaluates the economic impacts of the alternative
wastewater systems proposed for Crystal Lake. These impacts include:
financial burden on system users; financial pressure on residents to
move from the service area; financial pressure to convert seasonal
residences to full-year residences; and the net benefits of water
quality on the economy of the Crystal Lake area.
2. USER CHARGES
Users charges are the costs billed periodically to the wastewater
system customers. Total annual user charges have been estimated for the
eight alternatives. The user charge consists of three parts: debt
service (repayment of principal and interest), operation and maintenance
costs, and a reserve fund allocation assumed ^o equal 20% of the debt
service amount. Annual user charges are presented in Table IV-5. The
first column shows the user charges if all usei s in the Study Area paid
equal amounts. The second and third ccJumns show the charges if costs
were prorated between sewered (Frankfort and Elberta) and unsewered
portions of the Proposed Service Area.
a. Eligibility
Eligibility refers to that portion of wastewater facilities costs
determined by EPA to be eligible for a Federal wastewater facilities
construction grant. Capital costs of wastewater facilities are funded
under Section 201 of the 1972 Federal Water Pollution Control Act
Amendments. Section 201 enables the EPA to fund 75% of total eligible
capital costs of conventional systems and 85% of the eligible capital
costs of innovative and alternative systems. Innovative and alternative
systems considered in the EIS Alternative includes land treatment,
pressure sewers, cluster systems, and septic tank rehabilitation and
replacement. The State of Michigan funds 5% of the capital costs of
both conventional and innovative/alternative wastewater facilities. The
funding formula in Michigan thus requires localities to pay 20% of the
capital costs of conventional systems and 10% of the capital costs of
innovative/alternative systems. Operation and maintenance costs are not
funded by the Federal government and must be paid by the users of the
facilities.
The percentage of capital costs that is elegible for Federal and
State funding greatly affects the cost that, local users must. bear. The
capital costs of treatment as Crystal Lake were assumed to be fully
eligible for grant funding; the costs of construction of the collection
system were subject to the terms of Program Requirements Memorandum
(PRM) 78-9. This PRM establishes three main conditions that must be
satisfied before collector sewer costs may be declared eligible:
o Systems in use for disposal of wastes from the existing
population are creating a public health problem, contaminating
groundwater or violating point source discharge requirements.
166
-------
13
OJ
i~t
aj cd
& OJ
cu
W 4-1
co
£>
cd
H
a)
4-J
3
5
S-i
CO
•H
o
to
o
u
o
ro
posed Action
o
PH
C
Cd
t — |
PU
K*1
01
£>
•rl
4_j
cd
c
S-i
•rl
4-1
CO
C
(-1
0)
4-1
rH
•H
4J
cd
£
J-l
0)
4J
rH
"^
CO
H
W
CO
a)
j>
•H
4-J
cd
C
S-i
0)
4-J
rH
*-^
CO
H
W
•*
0)
£>
•H
4-J
cd
C
0)
4-J
rH
•H
4-J
cd
f^
J_l
0)
4-1
rH
•H
4J
cd
C
S-i
0)
4-1
rH
-------
o Two thirds of the design population (year 2000) served by a
sewer must have been in residence on October 18, 1972.
o Sewers must be shown to be cost-effective when compared to
decentralized or on-site alternatives.
The Construction Grants Management branch of EPA Region V evaluated
the eligibility of the sewers proposed by the Facility Plan and of the
EIS Alternatives. This evaluation, based upon the two-thirds criterion
of PRM 79-3, concluded that approximately 40% of the sewers proposed by
the Facility Plan would be eligible; of the collection systems proposed
in EIS Alternatives 1 and 2, approximately 33% would be eligible. Local
costs for EIS Alternative 3 through 6 assume public ownership and 100%
eligibility of upgrading on-site treatment systems. Table IV-5 presents
local costs based upon the EPA determination of eligibility.
The Michigan Department of Natural Resources will prepare the final
determination of the eligibility of project costs. This determination,
which will be based upon Step II plans and specifications for the
alternative to be funded, will differ in two respects from the EPA
determination:
o EPA did not have plans and specification upon which to base
its computation. Consequently a detailed sewer-by-sewer
determination was impossible.
o In estimating collector sewer eligibilities, EPA did not
compare the alternatives to one another in regard to
cost-effectiveness or to their probable success in satisfying
documented public health, groundwater or point source
problems. Each alternative was considered on its own merits
only, and on the ability of its collector sewers to meet the
"two-thirds" rule.
After selection of a recommended alternative (discussed in Chapter
V), that alternative will serve as a baseline for determining
cost-effectiveness and, thus, eligibility. Collection and treatment
costs of other alternatives would not be eligible to the extent that
they exceed costs for comparable facilities in the recommended
alternative. User charges for actions more expensive than the
recommended alternative would, therefore, be even higher than shown in
Table IV-5.
b. Calculation of User Charges
The user charges presented in Table IV-5 have been calculated for
two different conditions: 1) the costs of the system were divided
equally throughout the currently sewered (Frankfort and Elberta) and
unsewered areas 2) the costs were prorated between the sewered and
unsewered portions of the Service Area. It should be pointed out that
the Facility Plan does not propose to spread costs over the entire
system; such a comparison is made only for the purposes of illustration.
To be equitable, the costs for areas served by existing sewers have been
segregated from those associated with the unsewered areas. This
168
-------
prevents the situation wherein sewered areas, such as Frankfort and
Elberta, subsidize the construction and operation of sewerage facilities
in the unsewered areas.
The calculation of the user charges was based on local capital
costs being paid through the use of a 30 year bond at 6 7/8% interest.
Some communities may be eligible for a 40 year loan at 5% from the
Farmers Home Administration to reduce the annual financial burden of
local capital costs.
The centralized alternatives (Proposed Action, EIS Alternative 1,
and EIS Alternative 2) are the most costly to users in unsewered areas
(and all users if spread out over the entire system). Total annual user
charges for each household range from $350 to $440 for the entire
system, $590 to $720 for the unsewered areas, and $60 to $110 for
Frankfort and Elberta. The large variations between the sewered and
unsewered areas' costs are related to the ineligibility of much of the
collector sewers in the unsewered areas. Neither the Facility Plan nor
the data collected for preparation of this EIS, document sufficient need
for collector sewers around Crystal Lake or in the Village of Benzonia.
Costs for most collector sewers would therefore be met entirely at the
local level, should Limited Action be the alternative finally
recommended and application be made for any other.
EIS Alternatives 3, 4, and 5 combine centralized and decentralized
components and are less costly than the centralized alternatives.
Annual user charges range from $150 to $170 for the entire system, from
$90 to $110 for Frankfort and Elberta, and $180 to $240 for the
unsewered areas.
The least expensive alternatives for the entire system as well as
the unsewered areas are the two most decentralized ones: EIS
Alternative 6 and the Limited Action Alternative. Annual user charges
for the entire system are $150 for EIS Alternative 6 and $60 for the
Limited Action Alternative. Frankfort and Elberta's annual cost would
be approximately $100 for both alternatives. User charges would be $190
for the unsewered areas under EIS Alternative 6 and $50 under the
Limited Action Alternative. Clearly, the decentralized alternatives
involve the least amount of sewering and have the lowest amount of
ineligible costs.
In addition to user charges, households in newly sewered areas
would have to pay the capital costs (approximately $1,000 for each
connection) of a house sewer on their property to connect to gravity
collector sewers. Seasonal homeowners may also have to pay the full
price for the replacement or rehabilitation of their on-site systems
(septic tanks and soil absorption systems) if they do not cede these
sytems to the local wastewater management agency. Assuming, however, a
reasonably high proportion of public on-site system ownership Alter-
natives 3, 4 and 5 would offer substantial, and Alternatives 6 and
Limited Action, an almost total, reduction in private costs. Overall,
additional costs would vary from household to household due to
differences in the distance to the collection sewer and the condition of
on-site systems.
169
-------
3. LOCAL COST BURDEN
a. Significant Financial Burden
High-cost wastewater facilities may place an excessive financial
burden on users of the system. Such burdens may cause families to alter
their spending patterns substantially by diverting money from their
normal expenditure categories. The Federal government has developed
criteria to identify high-cost wastewater projects (The White House
Rural Development Initiatives 1978). A project is identified as
high-cost when the annual user charges are:
o 1.5% of median household incomes less than $6,000
o 2.0% of median household incomes between $6,000 and $10,000
o 2.5% of median household incomes greater than $10,000.
The 1978 median household income for the service area has been
estimated to be $13,000 for permanent residents. (No data are available
for seasonal resident income characteristics.) According to the Federal
criteria, annual user charges should not exceed 2.5% ($326) of the
$13,000 median household income figure. Any alternative having annual
user charges exceeding $326 is identified as a high-cost alternative and
is likely to place a financial burden on users of the system. Table
IV-6 identifies the alternatives that are classified as high-cost
according to the Federal criteria.
Significant financial burden is determined by comparing annual user
charges with the distribution of household incomes. Families not facing
a significant financial burden are the only families able to afford the
annual wastewater user charges. Table IV-7 shows the percentage of
households estimated to face a significant financial burden under each
of the alternatives. The centralized alternatives (the Facility Plan
Proposed Action, EIS Alternative 1, and EIS Alternative 2) imply annual
user charges that would place a significant financial burden on 60-85%
of the households in the entire system if costs were distributed
equally, 5-25% of the households in Frankfort and Elberta, and 85-98% of
the households in the unsewered area. EIS Alternatives 3, 4, and 5
would place a significant burden on 15-30% of the households in the
entire system (costs distributed equally), 10-25% of Frankfort and
Elberta households, and 30-40% of the households in the unsewered area.
EIS Alternative 6 would place a significant burden on 15-25% of total
system households, 15-25% of Frankfort and Elberta households, and
25-30% of the households in the unsewered area. The Limited Action
Alternative would place the least financial burden on households in the
total system (costs distributed equally) and the unsewered areas. Only
5-10% of the households in these areas would face a significant
financial burden under the Limited Action Alternative. The Limited
Action Alternative would place a significant financial burden on 15-25%
of the households in Frankfort and Elberta.
b. Displacement Pressure
Displacement pressure is the stress placed upon families to move
away from the service area as a result of costly user charges. Dis-
placement is measured by determining the percent of households having
170
-------
T3
0)
J-i
a)
&
at
CO
C
M
O
O
CO
o
o
I
f.
00
•H
EC
CO
o
o
i
•H
IS
I
H
0)
S
H
H S
O
to
o
o
I
,C
60
•H
CO
o
u
I
6C
•H
ffi
CO
o
o
i
•H
ffi
C
O
•H
4-J
O
<
T3
cu
CO
O
o
PH
s
rH
PH
4-1
•H
rH
•H
O
Cfl
C
O
•H
TJ
0)
4-J
•H
e
•H
4-1
cfl
C
*-i
01
OO
H
Pd
CM
01
•H
4-1
Cfl
C
01
4-1
Pd
rO
0)
•H
4->
cd
C/>
M
W
0)
•H
4-1
Cfl
C
0)
4-1
W
•H
4-J
Cfl
C
0)
4-1
cn
M
Pd
cfl
S-i
01
4J
cn
M
Pd
OO
171
-------
co
Ul
N>
• •
n -=j
03 H.
3 3
03
> 3
H> O
i-fi H-
O 0!
a.
0^
c
hj
O.
ro
^
• ft)
1-1
co
a
CD M
•O rt
I-1 O
Oi 1
0 3
ro 03
ro H-
rt ro
i~d o*
f-f
ro
03
CO
c
1
ro
• *
O >*J
pi j-i*
3 3
03
> 3
r-h O
O D3
rt I— -I
*i r^
ft.
G3
c
[^
D*
(t>
3
•
a
CD
M
P3
O
ro
ro
3
rt
*X)
f^
ro
co
CO
c
11
ro
M
CO
^
I-1
rt
ro
3
03
H-
<
ro
Ul
• •
o ^
03 H-
3 3
03
> 3
H» O
Hi H-
O 03
ft.
fed
C
i^
pv
ro
3
•
a
H-
en
M
03
O
(»
3
rt
|"d
H,
ro
C3
CO
C
*^
ro
w
M
CO
>
k*
rt
ro
n
3
03
<
ro
•£*
• •
C^ 'TJ
03 H-
3 3
03
> 5
Hi O
Hi H-
O 03
a.
c
a.
ro
3
•
C)
h-
o
f_j
n
ro
3
rt
>Tj
f"t
ro
CD
CO
c
f^
ro
M
CO
>
rt
ro
3
03
H-
<
ro
OJ
» t
o ^
P H*
3 3
> 3
HI n
HI H-
O 03
ft.
c
11
ft,
ro
3
•
a
H-
CO
•3
03
n
^
<^
3
rt
^TJ
11
ro
CO
a>
C
^i
ro
M
co
^>
i-1
rt
ro
3
H-
ro
ro
• •
n »ri
03 H-
3 3
03
> 3
HI o
HI H.
O 03
ft.
w
c
•1
o.
ro
3
•
o
H-
co
•o
03
o
ro
ro
3
rt
^d
r^
ro
CD
05
c
11
ro
M
CO
>
M
rt
ro
3
03
rt
^
ro
i-1
• •
0 •*!
03 H-
3 3
03
> 3
Hi O
Hi H-
O 03
ft.
w
c
11
D-
ro
3
•
^
H-
CO
T3
0)
O
ro
ro
3
rt
IT^
^
ro
en
CO
C
*\
ro
t-4
H-
H-
rt
ro
cu
r?
rr
O
3
•
O
to
3
£>
i-h
H>
O
1
rt
ro
03 3
O 03
Tl O H- rt
H. H. HJ |_i.
3 CO H- ^
03 T) rt ro
3 »-•><
O 03
H- O <-&
03 ro HJ
i — i 3 03
W 3
C rt Id
1 1
D- Td O
ro 11 "O
3 ro o
CD CD
co ro
C ft,
11
ro >
n
rt
H»
O
3
FIN
I
CO
Ul Ul
1 1
-J N3
O Ul
I I
^J CO
ui o
o
3-8
Ul Ul
I I
co ro
Ul Ui
s-a s*s
o ui ui
I I I
•«4 CO M
Ul O O
^- Ul M
O O Ut
i I !
Ul CTv S3
O C Ul
H-1 O*v N3
Ul O Ul
I I I
-C- CO CO
O Ui O
s*a s*a s-a
O Ui
I I
vO M
Ui O
S-5 5-a
Ul O O
I I I
•fr- CO S3
O Ul Ui
ro
en
CO
rt
ro
3
CIAL DU
u
c*
M
CO
r
O
M
3
ro
I
-j
Ul Ul h-1
I I t
CO NJ Ul
CO k»
ui o i-1
I 1 1
VO h-> Ui
O Ui S-S
Ul Ul H»
I t I
co ro ui
ui ui s-a
-j M
Ul Ul I-1
I I I
CO to Ul
ui ui o*a
vO
o ui
I i
ui o
CO M
Ul O r-1
I I I
vO M Ul
o ui s>a
Ul Ul M
I I I
co to ui
Ui Ui S*S
C/1 Ul f->
t I I
CO N3 Ul
Ul Ul 3-5
s-a s-a
i
03
3
HI
O
H
M
t-1
cr
ro
rt
03
w
CO
CQ
-^J t-O
o ui ui
i i i
^-j u; — •
ui O o
N; s-a >a
ON
O
1
O
s-s
Co f-1
0 0
1 1
O Ui
5-3 s-a
— 1 N3
O Ui
•^J CJ
Ui O
Ul
1
M
o
^a
o-»
o
i
~j
o
o-S
Co
o ui
1 1
-C- i-1
0 O
£-a s-a
^_i
Ui
i
J>-
0
3-5
ON £"•
O O
1 1
CD Ul
Ul O
o-S 3-S
to
1
I-1
Ul
3-a
Co Ui
Ui O
1 1
VO ON
CO O
3-a 3-a
vO
o ui
t 1
VO r-"
Ul O
3-9 3-S
CO Ul
ui o
I I
VO O\
CO O
(n
ro
ro
1
ro
a-
172
-------
annual user charges exceeding 5% of their income. The pressure induced
by each of the alternatives is listed in Table IV-7.
Displacement pressure is highest under the centralized
alternatives. In the unsewered area, 40-60% of the households will face
displacement pressure under the centralized alternatives. EIS
Alternatives 3, 4, and 5 have displacement pressures of 5-15% in the
unsewered areas. The decentralized alternatives may cause up 1-10% of
the unsewered households to be displaced. Displacement pressure is not
as severe in Frankfort and Elberta: approximately 1-5% of the
households may potentially be displaced under each of the alternatives.
When the costs are distributed equally throughout the service area,
displacement pressure ranges from 15-30% under centralized alternatives
to 1-5% under the decentralized alternatives.
c. Conversion Pressure
Wastewater facilities costs are likely to encourage the trend,
already underway, of converting seasonal residences to permanent
residences. The requirements would impose a relatively heavier cost
burden on seasonal residences of capital expenses than on permanent
ones. These residences would typically be used only three or four
months during the year but would be charged for capital costs throughout
the year. This may place a financial burden on seasonal residents who
are maintaining a full-time residence in addition to their seasonal
residence. The higher cost burden of centralized alternatives will
exert more conversion pressure than the cost burden of the decentralized
alternatives. Because of the apparent high income of seasonal residents
(based on visual inspection of seasonal residences) the number of
seasonal-to-permanent residential conversions as a result of the
wastewater user charges is likely to be small in any case.
4. MITIGATIVE MEASURES
The significant financial burden and displacement pressure on users
in the unsewered areas may be mitigated by selection of a lower cost
decentralized alternative. The local wastewater management authority
may seek to obtain a loan or grant from the Farmers Home Administration
Such a loan would decrease annual user charges by spreading out the
payment of the local share over a longer period of time with a lower
interest rate. The impacts of the high costs to seasonal users may be
mitigated by not charging for operation and maintenance during the
months that seasonal residences are vacant.
173
-------
F, IMPACT MATRIX
IMPACT CATEGORY
Surface Water
Quality
IMPACT
Nutrient loading
(Phosphorus)
Shoreline
Eutrophication;
Cladophora
growth
Non-Point Source
Runoff
IMPACT TYPE
& DEGREE
Primary:
Long Term
Primary:
Long Term
Primary:
Short term
IMPACT DESCRIPTION
All Alternatives:
None of the alternatives will have a significant im-
pact on phosphorus loading since only 77. of existing
nutrient load comes from septic tanks in contrast to
93X from non-point sources and precipitation. Lake
trophic status will not be changed.
Betsie:
All Alternatives:
All alternatives will reduce phosphorus load by
43-48% by eliminating plant discharge or by chemi-
cally removing phosphorus in the RBC plant. No change
in trophic status as predicted by model.
Crystal:
Alternatives 1, 2 and Proposed Action:
These alternatives would have the greatest potential
for eliminating lakeshore eutrophication by eliminat-
int septic tanks as a source of nutrients for
Cladophora growth.
Alternatives 3, 4, 5, 6:
Would eliminate the major sources of nutrients from
septic tanks by sewering the northeast shore. How-
ever, some on-site systems will continue to leach
nutrients for localized algal growth along the
northwest. (Alt. 3, 4, 5 +• 6) and southeast shore
(3, 4+5)
Limited Action:
On-site systems will continue to provide nutrients
for shoreline Cladophora growth.
Crystal:
Alternatives 1, 2, Proposed Action:
A temporary increase in soil erosion and sedimentation
will occur as the result of sewering
Alternative 3, 4, 5, 6:
Increased soil erosion and sedimentation will be less
than with the centralized alternatives.
Groundwater
Groundwater
Quantity
Secondary:
Long Term
Primary.
Long Term
Secondary:
Long Term
Betsie;
All Alternatives:
Construction-related impacts will be minimal.
Alternatives 1, 2, Proposed Action:
Induced growth is likely to be greatest as a result
of these alternatives and growth will be concentrated
along the shoreline. This may result in increased
non-point source runoff
Alternatives 3, 4, 5. 6, Limited Action:
Growth is consistent with baseline projections and
development is scattered. Therefore in comparison to
centralized alternatives, increased non-point source
runoff is less.
All Alternatives (except Limited Action);
Failure to return wastewater flows to groundwater
results in neglibible loss of groundwater recharge
to local aquifer(s)
All Alternatives:
Loss of aquifer recharge area as the result of develop-
ment of impervious surface cover is minimal.
174
-------
IMPACT CATEGORY
IMPACT
Groundwater
Quality
Environmentally
Sensitive Areas
Floodplain
Wetland
Steep SLopes
IMPACT TYPE
& DEGREE
Primary:
Long Term
Secondary:
Long Term
Primary:
Short or
Long Term
Secondary:
Long Term
Primary:
Short Term
Primary:
Long Term
IMPACT DESCRIPTION
Limited Action:
With the continued reliance on septic tanks, there is
the possibility of localized high groundwater nitrate
concentrations.
Phosphorus from septic tanks will continue to leach in
concentrations sufficient to support localized algal
growth.
Alternatives 3, 4, 5 and 6: '
The potential for nitrate contamination of groudwater
is minimized by sewering the northeast shore, since
this is the only lakeshore area with known localized
groundwater problems. Similarly, phosphorus availability
for localized algal growth is minimized.
Alternatives 1, 2, Proposed Action:
Sewering entire lakeshore area eliminates septic tanks
as a source of (1) nitrates for localized groundwater
contamination and (2) phosphorus as a nutrient source
for localized algal growth.
All Alternatives:
Impacts on flood hazard areas are expected to be minimal.
Alternatives 1, 2, 4, 5, and Proposed Action:
Construction-related impacts will be unavoidable.
Whether they are short- or Ions-term, depends upon the
extent to which the original configuration is restored.
All Alternatives:
Some growth may occur in wetlands adjacent to Betsie
River, regardless of the wastewater management alternative.
All Alternatives:
Some temporary increases in erosion and sedimentation
may occur as a result of construction. These impacts
would be most significant for Alternatives 1, 2, and
Proposed Action.
Alternatives 3. 4. 5, 6; Limited Action:
Impacts associated with the use of decentralized systems
on steep slopes will be minimal; only systems designed
specifically for steep slopes will be used.
Secondary:
Long Term
Prime
Agricultural
Lands
Primary:
Short Term
Secondary:
Long Te rm
Limited Action:
Development on steep slopes will be mimirxal and scattered.
Alternatives 1, 2, Proposed Action:
Possible impacts to steep slopes along shoreline may
occur with increased residential development. This may
result in increased erosion and sedimentation which
contributes to non-point source runoff.
Alternatives 3, 4, 5, 6:
Less growth and development of steeply slopes areas will
result from these alternatives as compared to 1, 2 and
Proposed Action.
All Alternatives:
Direct impacts from construction of wastewater management
alternatives will be minimal.
Limited Action:
Development of some prime agricultural land may result
since large lot scattered develop is encouraged.
Alternatives I, 2, Proposed Action:
Development of prime agricultural land is less likely
since growth is concentrated along the shore.
Alternatives 3, 4, 5, 6:
Some development of prime agricultural land may result.
175
-------
IMPACT CATEGORY
Environmentally
Sensitive Areas
IMPACT
Sand Dunes
IMPACT TYPE
5. DEGREE
Primary:
Short Term
IMPACT DESCRIPTION
All Alternatives;
Primary impacts on sand dunes will be minimal.
Secondary:
Long Term
Impacts
Population
Rate of
Growth
Secondary:
Long Term
Land Use
Developable
Acreage:
Growth
Patterns
Secondary:
Long Term
Local Economy
Local Cost
Burden
Primary:
Long Term
Alternatives 3, 4. 5, 6. Limited Action:
Some development may occur on unprotected sand dunes.
Alternatives 1, 2, Proposed Action:
Development is likely to occur close cc the shoreline as
a result of sewering. Consequently development on unpro-
tected sand dunes is less likely.
Limited Action:
Projected study area population would be 7% below design
population for the year 2000.
Alternatives 3, 4, 5, 6:
Growth anticipated to increase 4% above baseline projections.
Alternatives 1, 2, Proposed Action:
Growth anticipated to increase 19% above baseline projections.
Limited Action;
Residential acreage is anticipated to increase by 77% even
if no centralized treatment is provided. This alterna-
tive encourages scattered, low-density development.
Alternative 3, 4, 5 6:
Residential acreage would increase by about 85%. Develop-
ment would be less scattered and some high density develop-
ment would be found in sewered areas.
Alternative 1, 2, Proposed Action:
Residential acreage would increase by 88% or 630 acres.
Higher density development close to the shoreline would
result.
Limited Action:
Average annual cost per resident would be $100 for resi-
dents of Frankfort and Elberta and $50 for the residents
in unsewered areas.
Proposed Action:
Annual cost per resident would be $110 for residents of
Frankfort and Elberta; and $720 for residents of unsewered
areas. One-time household charge for hook up to the
sewer vould be approximately $l,000/household.
Alternative 1, 2:
Annual cost per resident would te $90 or $60 for resi-
dents of Frankfort and Elberta for Alternative 1 and 2
respectively; residents of currently unsewered areas
would pay $650 or $590 annually, respectively.
Alternative 3, 4, 5:
Annual cost per resident would be $110, $100, or $90 for
residents of Frankfort and Elberta fcr Alternatives 3, 4,
and 5 respectively. Residents from currently unsewered
areas would pay $220, $180, or $240 annually for Alterna-
tives 3, 4, or 5 respectively. One time household charge
for gravity sewer connection approximately would be $1,000
per household.
Alternative 6:
Annual change for residents of Frankfort and Elberta would
be $100, while the charge for residents of the currently
unsewered areas would be $190. One-time household charge
would be approximately $1,000.
176
-------
IMPACT CATEGORY
Local Economy
IMPACT
Financial
Burden;
Displacement
Pressure
IMPACT TYPE
& DEGREE
Primary:
Long Term
Community
Composition
and
Character
IMPACT DESCRIPTION
Limited Action:
Displacement pressure is lowest with the limited action
Alternative; 1-5% of the residents of Frankfort and
Elberta would be threatened with displacement while
less than 1% of residents of unsewered areas would feel
displacement pressure. A financial burder would be
experienced by about 25% of Frankfort/Elberta residents
and 10% of residents of unsewered areas.
Alternatives 1, 2, Proposed Action:
Displacement pressure (50-60%) and financial burden
(85-98%) are high for residents of currently unsewered
areas. About 1-5% of the residents of Frankfort and
Elberta would feel displacement pressure while up to
15% of the population would experience a financial bur-
den with Alternative 1 and 2 and 25% with proposed
action.
Alternatives 3, 4, 5:
Displacement pressure of 1-5% for residents of Frankfort
and Elberta and 5-15% for residents of unsewered areas.
The financial burden would be 15-25% for residents of
Frankfort and Elberta and 25-40% for residents of unsewered
areas with Alternatives 3 and 4. With Alternative 5 the
financial burden would be 10-15% for Frankfort and Elberta
and 30-40% for residents of unsewered areas.
Alternative 6:
Displacement pressure of 1-5% for residents of Frankfort
and Elberta and 5-10% for residents of unsewered areas.
Financial burden would be 15-25% for residents of Frank-
fort and Elberta and 25-30% for residents of unsewered
areas.
Limited Action:
Minimal impact on existing composition and character.
Alternative 3, 4, 5, 6:
Some loss of lower income population base due to dis-
placement pressure.
Alternative 1, 2, Proposed Action:
Significant loss of lower income population base;
potential disruption of community composition and charac-
ter.
177
-------
CHAPTER V
RECOMMENDED ACTION
As discussed in Section I.D.I, EPA has several possible choices
about the Facility Plan Proposed Action. The Agency may:
• Approve the original grant application, possibly with recom-
mendations for design changes and/or measures to mitigate
impacts of the Facility Plan Proposed Action;
e Return the application with recommendations for additional
Step I analysis;
• Reject the grant application;
• With the applicant's and State's concurrence, approve Step II
funding for an alternative to the Facility Plan Proposed
Action.
The choice of one of these options depends on how the EIS alter-
natives compare to the Facility Plan Proposed Action.
The new recommended alternative, described in this chapter, is an
approach to meeting the problem of water quality in the Study Area.
Selection of this alternative is tentative: the applicant, the public,
and State, local and Federal agencies are expected to provide input
regarding its impacts, funding and implementation.
A. SELECTION OF THE RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE
1. EVALUATION RESULTS
Four primary criteria were used in selecting the recommended alter-
native: costs, impact; reliability; and flexibility. Within each cate-
gory several factors were compared. Costs, for example, included
present worth, centralized user charges, small waste flow district user
charges, and total 1980 private costs. Impacts which EPA considers to
be decisive in alternative selection are identified and considered.
Alternative reliability is measured against centralized collection and
treatment as the standard.
A matrix provides a simple method of visualizing the relations
between alternatives and the criteria applied in evaluating them. By
tabulating each alternative and the factors that influence the range of
choices, one can quickly compare the effect of each alternative upon
that factor. Section IV.F contains a matrix relating alternatives to
environmental impacts. Table V-l presents a matrix summarizing the
relationship between the alternatives and their costs, environmental
impacts, reliability and flexibility.
179
-------
s
•B Z
5
-
§
^~
^
?_
£_ O - C c
~ C- x -i ^
^
=
-
i
^
^
^
3
rr
I
;
>
tt. Z
"z
*r
-
0
o
=
- c ' £ i
c.
2
-
P
~
?
•~
I
3.
1
p;
>
*= z
"r
-
'
I
—
c;
?«,
-ss f i
CO*-"
t.
2
_
>
s
1-
"
1
re
i
s
*z
r
-
^
o
=
C O St -i r-
C-
— C; 3 C = ?- r-
" ~ r' a" "^ V -
" c r -£
!T " a
r ^ §
t r -
- r ^
- - B
rt" r £
£ "
si 'f
£ " =
hr^
— tc
6C
3 B.
•" T
3 H
c
r
>
«e Z
"* E:
o-
-
o-
0
!-n
0
\\
r !
B
^ •
= r"
^
c
r.
C
j^
P
I
s
-*
VO
O-
s
(».
C
Ir
•t
rr
c
r
s
(r
c
c
i
a* » —
z f, u-
I
•
0
o
•^
0
s
§-, £ <
* A -
c-
c f x 11 E
I* f " t^
•- " 3 " C,
If t r^
r a o ft "-
C C- tt n C
^ r. ^ -S ;
K L rT —
" B B £
H tT fc
"™
S.Si.2
*• e =
— E- r
r? 1
B C
Oc
»f I
« c
> -
£• 2
0 ^
.-
*
§
o
r" -i in 30 sc r> •"
r ii il 5.§
t» n 3 r- r1
3 C It S- .rc *
^ -^ _ n C 3
i~ S3 •£ 6- i-
n r. i -c 3 B
: D. T; — • oe — •
•c e ^ a
r* do >- T
^ l» 5 °4
S r I si?
i s « £
c D: a
it, oc tr C
"*
—• (A c t. r> -e
g«- T C C C
g DC n 3 r*
>- fc C. C B "
>- v- M •< C
fjo (t 3 c r
"1 5 K « 3 tt
£ I X n ? ?
P [It
"i
X f. »
- O P!
I=s
S'33
0
5 H ? 5 JC
m W £ »3 ^
r. 5
; S - i
» g
fa
Is
32
S
III
g
j
9e
i
£
P
H
i— (
< H
•
™ re
pi <
180
-------
s
c
-
0- 1
.
5^ &
f systems
be compar
ive *1.
be compa
ion
lit
hou
ter
hou
F
u
a
R
a
A
•
** -o 1 »
! I E
Us
2 P " • S
•d u u u a
X tl it 3 X (0 T3
^ S S SJ! £ §
^ 7 " E
£t
—•— e o
« w •* £
;s,s
— 0 C * C #
O .C w U 9J tt «
«£: O B! u ^ B "
b 41 w 5 U V
5J 8 £ S S-S
i 5 ,
li U ^
•• o
o £
£ -
=
S 8
ENVIROMM
'IF-N.SfTlV
3 If ^
£ C 3 C «
— 1 05 Ei C 4J 6
NA
ei
181
-------
Table V-l ranks the alternatives according to their total present
worth. This is done for several reasons:
o Costs are easily quantifiable, perhaps the least subjective
measure of value.
o Non-capital costs impact other factors influencing the
decision-making process: user charges, displacement pres-
sures, and conversion pressures.
o EPA Construction Grants regulations require selection of the
most cost-effective alternative. That is, the one meeting the
project goals with the least total present worth and accept-
able environmental and socioeconomic impacts.
Selection of the cost-effective alternative requires identification
of trade-offs between costs and other relevant criteria. The evaluation
factors included with total present worth in Table V-l are those EPA
determined to be most important in identifying trade-offs.
2. CONCLUSIONS
Most of the on-site systems around Crystal Lake and in the Village
of Benzonia are working well. Approximately 90 effluent plumes entering
Crystal Lake and a few surface malfunctions have been identified.
Periodic sewage backup in some systems also occurs. On-site systems do
not appear as a significant contributor of nutrients to Crystal Lake --
of the total input of phosphorus, 6.7% or less comes from effluent
plumes. Where plumes do emerge, however, they appear to be supporting
localized growths of Cladophora.
The only surface water quality improvement in Crystal Lake likely
to result from the Facility Plan Proposed Action or any of the EIS
alternatives would be the possible reduction in number and density of
localized growths of Cladophora along the shoreline. This could occur
if on-site systems along the shoreline were abandoned and cluster sys-
tems or centralized sewers used. It also could occur for certain kinds
of on-site upgrading, such as mound systems. No alternative should
affect either adversely or beneficially the water quality of the main
body of Crystal Lake through the year 2000.
Future development in the Crystal Lake watershed depends on how
many new lots can be developed and the density of future development.
Alternatives relying on continued use of on-site systems would restrict
both the number of new lots and their density as compared to extensive
sewering around the lake. One effect of these limitations would be to
preserve the present character of the community.
There are large differences in the present worth and user cost
among the alternatives. Both costs increase with sewer centralization.
In the more expensive alternatives, high local user charges would result
in substantial displacement pressure for the permanent population and
pressure for conversion of seasonal residences to permanent use. Pro-
portionate increases in water quality would not occur.
182
-------
Because of the high costs and limited benefits to water quality
with the centralized alternatives (Facility Plan Proposed Action and EIS
Alternatives 1 and 2), they are not cost-effective and are not recom-
mended.
The No Action Alternative was unacceptable for three reasons:
o Existing treatment plants at Frankfort and Elberta do not
comply with effluent requirements and contribute substantially
to high productivity in Betsie Lake.
o There are some on-site system problems in the remainder of the
Proposed Service Area. These problems can be addressed
through monitoring, improved maintenance of the existing and
future systems, residential water conservation, and renovation
or replacement of existing systems.
o Improved surveillance and regulation of on-site systems in the
Crystal Lake watershed is justified to maintain its unique
scenic and recreational values.
Those sections of the Proposed Service Area that would be sewered
in EIS Alternative 3, 4 and 5, showed insufficient need for sewering
except for areas of high groundwater along the northeast and southeast
shorelines. For the two shoreline areas, off-site treatment by land
application (EIS Alternative 6) or by cluster systems (Limited Action
Alternative) could remedy local problems.
In addition to providing off-site treatment for the northeast and
southeast shorelines, EIS Alternative 6 would also sewer the Village of
Benzonia. The costs for sewering Benzonia are high and do not appear to
be justified by the presence of only 5 surface malfunctions. Joint land
application by Benzonia and Beulah has been discussed by officials of
the two municipalities. In the event that such an approach is proposed
by them for Federal funding, a redesigned Alternative 6 may be appro-
priate.
The Recommended Action in this draft EIS is the Limited Action
Alternative described below (see Figure V-l).
B. DRAFT EIS RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE
1. DESCRIPTION
The Recommended Alternative includes:
o a new treatment plant to serve Frankfort and Elberta and
necessary interceptor sewers;
o sewer system evaluation surveys and rehabilitation of sewer
systems in Frankfort and Elberta;
183
-------
*J
H-
CTQ
c
i-i
(t>
<
f
g'
H-
rt
(0
&
>
o
rt
H-
O
0
ri
t-l
S
&)
rt
H-
<
{D
*i"T(t
«,1
r -
t
i
t
"•"{
•-f
(
t. ..
-^» -^-, — .^,
0>
m
2
Nt
O
^
£
• — ™,^--»-^
L
184
-------
o design and implementation of a small waste flow district;
o site-specific environmental and engineering analysis of exist-
ing on-site systems in the unsewered parts of the Proposed
Service Area;
o repair and renovation of on-site systems as needed;
o cluster systems or other off-site treatment for the northeast
and southeast shorelines. Additional small scale, off-site
treatment units may be eligible for funding if warranted by
the site-specific analysis of existing on-site systems and
relevant cost-effective analysis performed during Step II;
o survey of effluent discharges to Cold Creek to detect leakage
from Beulah sewers (Kerfoot 1978; Tanis 1976), followed by
replacement or repair of leaking pipes; and
o survey of Crystal Lake groundwater flow and direction to allow
final assessment of flow reduction as an aid to treatment for
the western third of Crystal Lake.
Section III.C.2.b presents a fuller description of the Limited
Action Alternative. Discussions of its components are presented in
Section III.B.
2. IMPLEMENTATION
Design and construction of the interceptors and treatment plant for
Frankfort and Elberta would proceed according to established 201 Con-
struction Grants regulations. Step II and III funding for these facil-
ities should be applied for and granted independently from grants for
unsewered portions of the Proposed Service Area. Management of central-
ized facilities in the Crystal Lake Study Area was discussed in Section
III.D.l.b.
Management of decentralized facilities was discussed in Section
III.D.2.b and Appendix K. Several specific aspects of implementing the
Recommended Alternative are discussed below.
a. Compliance with State and Local Standards in the Small
Waste Flows District
As discussed in Section II.C. many existing on-site systems do not
conform to current design standards for eite, design or distance from
wells or surface waters. For some systems, such as those with under-
sized septic tanks, non-conformance can be remedied relatively easily
and inexpensively. In other cases the remedy may be disruptive and
expensive. Obviously, extraordinary renovation or replacement should be
undertaken only where the need is clearly identified. Data on the
effects of existing systems indicate that many nonconforming systems, as
well as future repairs that still may not conform to design standards,
may operate satisfactorily. Where compliance with design standards is
either 1) in-feasible, or too expensive or 2) site monitoring of ground
185
-------
and surface waters shows that acceptable impacts are attainable, then a
variance procedure to allow renovation and continued use is recommended.
Decisions to grant variances should be based on site-specific data or on
a substantial history of similar sites in the area.
Local and state decisions on variance procedures would likely be
influenced by the degree of authority vested in the small waste flows
district. If the district has sufficient financial backing to correct
errors, and trained personnel to minimize errors in granting variances,
variance procedures may be more liberal than if fiscal and professional
resources are limited. Higher local costs, caused by unnecessary re-
pairs or abandonment of systems is expected to result from very con-
servative variance guidelines, or none at all. Conversely, ill-
conceived or improperly implemented variance procedures would cause
frequent water quality problems and demands for more expensive off-site
technologies.
b. Ownership of On-Site Systems Serving Seasonal Residences
Construction Grants regulations allow Federal funding for renova-
tion and replacement of publicly owned on-site systems serving principal
or seasonally occupied residences and of privately owned on-site systems
serving principal residences. Privately owned systems serving
seasonally occupied residences are not eligible for Federally funded
renovation and replacement.
Depending on the extent and costs of renovation and replacement
necessary for seasonal residences, the municipalities or a small waste
flow district may elect to accept ownership of the on-site systems.
Rehabilitation of these systems would then be eligible for Federal
assistance, resulting in a drastic (90%) drop in local costs for
seasonal residents. Any decision to accept ownership on a
community-wide basis should await the conclusions of the site-specific
environmental and engineering analyses and preliminary determination of
the functions of the management agency. Ownership of seasonally used
systems may create responsibilities that the agency does not want.
c. Completion of Step I (Facilities Planning) Requirements
for the Small Waste Flow District
If the applicant, local municipalities and the State concur in the
Recommended Alternative, Construction Grants regulations for individual
systems ("Privately owned alternative wastewater treatment works...
serving one or more principal residences...") require the applicant to
take the following actions before award of a Step II grant (40 CFR
35.918):
o Certify that the project be constructed and an operation and
maintenance program established to meet local, State and
Federal requirements.
o Obtain assurance of unlimited access to each individual system
at all reasonable times for such purposes as inspections,
monitoring, construction, maintenance, operations, rehabilita-
tion and replacement.
186
-------
o Plan for comprehensive program of regulation and inspection for
individual systems.
These actions would have to be taken by the applicant prior to request-
ing Step II funds.
d. Scope of Step II for the Small Waste Flow District
A five step program for wastewater management in small waste flow
districts was suggested in Section III.D.b. The first three would appropri-
ately be completed in Step I. These are:
o Develop a site-specific environmental and engineering data base,
o Design the management organization, and
o Agency start-up
EPA will assist the applicant in defining specific objectives and tasks
for Step II work, both before and after the Step II grant.
3. IMPACTS OF THE RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE AND MITIGATING
MEASURES
Soil erosion and resulting
sedimentation and nutrient
transport during construction
of on-site and cluster systems,
Frankfort-Elberta interceptors
and STP, new housing and roads.
44% reduction in phosphorus
input to Betsie. Trophic
status may improve.
Colonization of Cladophora in
localized areas along Crystal
Lake shoreline will continue.
Increase in number and density
is possible but not predictable.
Potential for localized nitrate
standard violations in private
wells around Crystal Lake.
Potential will increase as
densities of wells and ST/SAS
increase.
Mitigating Measures
Compliance with provisions of the Soil
Erosion and Sedimentation Control Act.
Require individual plan approval for
construction on steep slopes and adopt
performance standards with specific
slope-density provisions.
Maintaining or improving on this reduc-
tion will require careful control and mon-
itoring of wastewater treatment processes.
Residential flow reductions, use of non-
phosphate detergents, control of lawn
fertilization, rehabilitation or replace-
ment of ST/SAS, off-site treatment, use
of composting toilets, local application
of copper sulfate. EPA will conduct field
studies on effluent/soil/groundwater/
Cladaphora relationships at Crystal Lake
in summer, 1979.
Detailed groundwater hydrology investiga-
tion during STEP II. Design and operate
well and aquifer monitoring system during
Step II. Develop reserve fund for future
off-site treatment facilities or community
wells.
187
-------
Potential for bacterial, organic and
nutrient contamination of Betsie Lake
from pump station or treatment plant
malfunction.
Potential for bacterial, organic and
nutrient contamination of Crystal Lake
from cluster system or pressure sewer
pump malfunctions.
Control of apparent wastewater discharges
to Cold Creek from Beulah is not included
in the Recommended Action.
Water supply demands of increasing popu-
lation in Frankfort and Elberta will
exceed capacity of existing storage
and distribution facilities.
Design year population of Proposed Ser-
vice Area will be 7% less than EIS trend
projection.
Residential land acreage will increase
perhaps 77% during the planning period.
Existing properties in Crystal Lake
watershed will appreciate due to limi-
tations on amount of developable land.
Existing community composition and
character will change less rapidly with
other alternatives.
Limitation on developable acreage result-
ing from Recommended Alternative may
shift development pressure to sand dunes
west and southwest of Crystal Lake.
Average annual user charges for residents
of Frankfort and Elberta may be $100. 20
to 25% of the residents will face finan-
cial burdens. 1 to 5% may relocate to
avoid paying increased costs.
Average annual user charges in the small
waste flow district may be $50. 5 to
10% of the residents will face financial
burdens. 1 to 5% may relocate or convert
to permanent occupancy to avoid paying
charge.
Private costs for renovations or repair
of seasonally used systems may be high
due to ineligibility for grant.
Mitigating Measures
Can be minimized by adequate oper-
ation and maintenance procedures
and funding.
Periodic inspection and maintenance
of pump systems. Emergency repair
service.
The Village should, independently
or with grant, identify and con-
trol these discharges.
Institue waste conservation plan
and/or expand facilities.
Benzie County should study the eco-
systems of the dunes and the impact
that development may have on them.
Lake Township should provide zoning
that protects the dunes.
Cede seasonally used systems to
small waste flow dis;trict.
188
-------
CHAPTER VI
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHORT-TERM USE
AND LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY
A. SHORT-TERM USE OF THE STUDY AREA
Crystal Lake has been, and will continue to be used as a resi-
dential/recreational area. The site was initially disturbed when con-
struction of houses first began.
Disturbance of the site by routine residential/recreational
activities will continue. Implementation of either the action proposed
by the Facility Plan or recommended in this EIS is not expected to alter
these disturbances.
B. IMPACTS UPON LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY
1. COMMITMENT OF NON-RENEWABLE RESOURCES
If the Facility Plan Proposed Action were implemented, the
increased potential for development might result in some loss of
terrestrial habitat. Such would be expected to a lesser extent by
implementation of the Recommended Alternative of this EIS.
Non-renewable resources associated with either action would include
concrete for construction. Consumption of electric power by pumps may
also increase. Manpower would also be committed to the construction,
operation and management of new or rehabilitated facilities.
2. LIMITATIONS ON BENEFICIAL USE OF THE ENVIRONMENT
Neither the Proposed Action nor the Recommended Action will have
any significant effect on beneficial use of the environment. Existence
of the community has predetermined the uses to which the environment can
be put.
189
-------
Chapter VII
IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES
Those resources associated with construction and maintenance of
wastewater systems would be committed. These were discussed in Section
VI.B.I.
In addition the growth expected in the Study Area would require a
commitment of resources to the construction of new dwellings and com-
mercial establishments, construction or improvement of roads, and
facilities associated with water sports. Besides construction
materials, such as lumber, steel, concrete and glass, electricity and
manpower would also be committed to new development.
Human resources would include construction personnel and, perhaps
infrastructural personnel to service the added community needs.
191
-------
Chapter VIII
PROBABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED
If the action proposed by the Facility Plan were implemented, some
destruction of terrestrial habitat would result from construction of new
dwellings. Such would be true, but to a lesser extent, if the Recom-
mended Alternative in this EIS were implemented. If the Recommended
Alternative were selected, some reduced localized growth of Cladophora
might be expected along the shoreline of Crystal Lake.
193
-------
GLOSSARY
ACTIVATED SLUDGE PROCESS. A method of secondary wastewater treatment in
which a suspended microbiological culture is maintained inside an
aerated treatment basin. The microbial organisms oxidize the com-
plex organic matter in the wastewater to carbon dioxide, water, and
energy.
ADVANCED WASTE TREATMENT. Wastewater treatment beyond the secondary or
biological stage that includes removal of nutrients such as phos-
phorus and nitrogen and a high percentage of suspended solids.
Advanced waste treatment, also known as tertiary treatment, is the
"polishing stage" of wastewater treatment and produces a high
quality of effluent.
AEROBIC. Refers to life or processes that occur only in the presence of
oxygen.
ALGAL BLOOM. A proliferation of algae on the surface of lakes, streams
or ponds. Algal blooms are stimulated by phosphate enrichment.
ALKALINE. Having the qualities of a base, with a pH of more than 7.
ALLUVIAL. Pertaining to material that has been carried by a stream.
ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGY. A technology whose use has been widely sup-
ported by experience, but is not a variant of conventional bio-
logical or physical/chemical treatment.
AMBIENT AIR. The unconfined portion of the atmosphere; the outside air.
ANAEROBIC. Refers to life or processes that occur in the absence of
oxygen.
AQUATIC PLANTS. Plants that grow in water, either floating on the
surface, or rooted emergent or submergent.
AQUIFER. A geologic stratum or unit that contains water and will allow
it to pass through. The water may reside in and travel through
innumerable spaces between rock grains in a sand or gravel aquifer,
small or cavernous openings formed by solution in a limestone
aquifer, or fissures, cracks, and rubble in such harder rocks as
shale.
ARTESIAN AQUIFER. A water-filled layer that is sufficiently compressed
between less permeable layers to cause the water to rise above the
top of the aquifer. If the water pressure is great, water will
flow freely from artesian wells.
ARTESIAN WELL. A well in which flow is sustained by the hydrostatic
pressure of the aquifer. See Artesian Aquifer.
195
-------
BACTERIA. Any of a large group of microscopic plants living in soil,
water or organic matter, important to man because of their chemical
effects as in nitrogen fixation, putrefaction, or fermentation, or
as pathogens.
BAR SCREEN. In wastewater treatment, a screen that removes large float-
ing and suspended solids.
BASE FLOW. The rate of movement of water in a stream channel which
occurs typically during rainless periods when stream flow is main-
tained largely or entirely by discharges of groundwater.
BASIC USAGE. In regard to functions of small waste flow districts,
those which would be required to comply with EPA Construction
Grants regulations governing individual on-site wastewater systems.
BEDROCK. The solid rock beneath the soil and subsoil.
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (BOD). A measure of the amount of oxygen
consumed in the biological processes that decompose organic matter
in water. Large amounts of organic waste use up large amounts of
dissolved oxygen; thus, the greater the degree of pollution, the
greater the BOD.
BIOMASS. The weight of living matter in a specified unit of environ-
ment. Or, an expression of the total mass or weight of a given
population of plants or animals.
BIOTA. The plants and animals of an area.
BOD,-. See "Biochemical Oxygen Demand." Standard measurement is made
for 5 days at 20°C.
BOG. Wet, spongy land; usually poorly drained, and rich in plant
residue, ultimately producing highly acid peat.
CAPITAL COSTS. All costs associated with installation (as opposed to
operation) of a project.
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES. See Capital Costs.
CHLORINATION. The application of chlorine to drinking water, sewage or
industrial waste for disinfection or oxidation of undesirable
compounds.
COARSE FISH. See Rough Fish.
COLIFORM BACTERIA. Members of a large group of bacteria that flourish
in the feces and/or intestines of warm-blooded animals, including
man. Fecal coliform bacterial, particularly Escherichia coli (E.
coli), enter water mostly in fecal matter, such as sewage or feed-
lot runoff. Coliform bacteria apparently do not cause serious
human diseases, but these organisms are abundant in polluted waters
and they are fairly easy to detect. The abundance of coliform
bacteria
196
-------
in water, therefore, is used as an index to the probability of the
occurrence of such diease-producing bodies (pathogens) as
Salmonella, Shigella, and enteric viruses. These pathogens are
relatively difficult to detect.
COLIFORM ORGANISM. Any of a number of organisms common to the intes-
tinal tract of man and animals whose presence in wastewater is an
indicator of pollution and of potentially dangerous bacterial
contamination.
COMMINUTOR. A machine that breaks up wastewater solids.
CONNECTION FEE. Fee charged by municipality to hook up house connection
to lateral sewer.
CUBIC FEET PER SECOND (cfs). A measure of the amount of water passing a
given point.
CULTURAL EUTROPHICATION. Acceleration by man of the natural aging
process of bodies of water.
DECIDUOUS. The term describing a plant that periodically loses all of
its leaves, usually in the autumn. Most broadleaf trees in North
America, and a few conifers, such as larch and cypress, are decid-
uous .
DECOMPOSITION. Reduction of the net energy level and change in chemical
composition of organic matter by action of aerobic or anaerobic
microorganisms. The breakdown of complex material into simpler
substances by chemical or biological means.
DETENTION TIME. Average time required to flow through a basin. Also
called retention time.
DETRITUS. (l) The heavier debris moved by natural watercourses, usually
in bed loam form. (2) The sand, grit, and other coarse material
removed by differential sedimentation in a relatively short period
of detention.
DISINFECTION. Effective killing by chemical or physical processes of
all organisms capable of causing infectious disease. Chlorination
is the disinfection method commonly employed in sewage treatment
processes.
DISSOLVED OXYGEN (DO). The oxygen gas (02) dissolved in water or
sewage. Adequate oxygen is necessary for maintenance of fish and
other aquatic organisms. Low dissolved oxygen concentrations
generally are due to presence of excessive organic solids having
high BOD in inadequately treated wastewater.
DRAINAGE BASIN. (1) An area from which surface runoff is carried away
by a single drainage system. Also called catchment area, water-
shed, drainage area. (2) The largest natural drainage area sub-
division of a continent. The United States has been divided at one
197
-------
time or another, for various administrative purposes, into some 12
to 18 drainage basins.
DRAINAGEWAYS. Man-made passageways, usually lined with grass or rock,
that carry runoff of surface water.
EFFLUENT. Wastewater or other liquid, partially or completely treated,
or in its natural state, flowing out of a reservoir, basin, treat-
ment plant, or industrial treatment plant, or part thereof.
EFFLUENT LIMITED. Any stream segment for which it is known that water
quality will meet applicable water quality standards after the
application of effluent limitations.
ELEVATED MOUND. A mound, generally constructed of sand, to which
settled wastewater is applied. Usually used in areas where con-
ventional on-site treatment is inadequate.
ENDANGERED SPECIES (FEDERAL CLASSIFICATION). Any species of animal or
plant declared to be in known danger of extinction throughout al or
a significant part of its range. Protected under Public Law 93-205
as amended.
ENDANGERED SPECIES (STATE CLASSIFICATION). Michigan's list includes
those species on the Federal list that are resident for any part of
their life cycle in Michigan, also includes indigenous species the
State believes are uncommon and in need of study.
ENDECO. Type 2100 Septic Leachate Dector. See "Septic Snooper".
ENVIRONMENT. The conditions external to a particular object, but
generally limited to those conditions which have a direct and
measurable effect on the object. Usually considered to be the
conditions which surround and influence a particular living
organism, population, or community. The physical environment
includes light, heat, moisture, and other principally abiotic
components. The components of the biotic environment are other
living organisms and their products.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT. A document required by the National
Environmental Policy Act (PL 91-190, 1969) that is used in the
decision-making process to evaluate the effects (impacts) of a
proposed action on the human, biological, and physical environment.
EPILIMINION. The upper layer of more or less uniformly warm, circu-
lating, and fairly turbulent water in lakes during the spring
heating season.
EROSION. The process by which an object is eroded, or worn away, by the
action of wind, water, glacial ice, or combinations of these
agents. Sometimes used to refer to results of chemical actions or
temperature changes. Erosion may be accelerated by human activ-
ities .
198
-------
EUTROPHIC. Waters with a relatively large concentration of nutrients
and hence a large production of organic matter, often shallow, with
periods of oxygen deficiency.
EUTROPHIC LAKES. Shallow lakes, weed-choked at the edges and very rich
in nutrients. The water is characterized by large amounts of
algae, low water transparency, low dissolved oxygen and high BOD.
EUTROPHICATION. The normally slow aging process by which a lake evolves
into a bog or marsh, ultimately assumes a completely terrestrial
state and disappears. During eutrophication the lake becomes so
rich in nutritive compounds, especially nitrogen and phosphorus,
that algae and plant life become superabundant, thereby "choking"
the lake and causing it eventually to dry up. Eutrophication may
be accelerated by human activities.
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION. A process by which water is evaporated and/or
transpired from water, soil, and plant surfaces.
FECAL COLIFORM BACTERIA. The group of organisms common to the intes-
tinal tracts of man and of animals. The presence of fecal coliform
bacteria in water is an indicator of pollution and of potentially
dangerous bacterial contamination.
FLOE. A sheet of floating ice.
FORCE MAIN. Pipe designed to carry wastewater under pressure.
GLACIAL DEPOSIT. A mass of rock, soil, and earth material deposited by
a melting glacier. Such material was originally picked up and
carried along its path by the glacier, and usually varies in
texture from very fine rock flour to large boulders. Named
according to their location and shape.
GLACIAL DRIFT. Material which has been deposited by a glacier or in
connection with glacial processes. It consists of rock flour,
sand, pebbles, cobbles, and boulders. It may occur in a heter-
ogeneous mass or be more or less well-sorted, according to its
manner of deposition.
GRAVITY SYSTEM. A system of conduits (open or closed) in which no
liquid pumping is required.
GROUNDWATER. Water that is below the water table.
GROUNDWATER RUNOFF. Groundwater that is discharged into a stream
channel as spring or seepage water.
HABITAT. The specific place or the general kind of site in which a
plant or animal normally lives during all or part of its life
cycle.
HOLDING TANK. Enclosed tank, usually of fiberglass or concrete, for the
storage of wastewater prior to removal or disposal at another
location.
199
-------
HYDROPONIC. Refers to growth of plants in a nutrient solution, perhaps
with the mechanical support of an inert medium such as sand.
HYPOLIMNION. Deep, cold and relatively undisturbed water separated from
the surface layer in lakes.
IGNEOUS. Rock formed by the solidification of magma (hot molten
material).
INDIAN MOUND SYSTEM. See Elevated Mound.
INFILTRATION. The flow of a fluid into a substance through pores or
small openings. Commonly used in hydrology to denote the flow of
water into soil material.
INFILTRATION/INFLOW. Total quantity of water entering a sewer system.
Infiltration means entry through such sources as defective pipes,
pipe joints, connections, or manhole walls. Inflow signifies dis-
charge into the sewer system through service connections from such
sources as area or foundation drainage, springs and swamps, storm
waters, street wash waters, or sewers.
INTERCEPTOR SEWERS. Sewers used to collect the flows from main and
trunk sewers and carry them to a central point for treatment and
discharge. In a combined sewer system, where street runoff from
rains is allowed to enter the system along the sewage, interceptor
sewers allow some of the sewage to flow untreated directly into the
receiving stream, to prevent the treatment plant from being over-
loaded.
INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY. A technology whose use has not been widely
documented by experience and is not a variant of conventional
biological or physical/chemical treatment.
LAGOON. In wastewater treatment, a shallow pond, usually man-made, in
which sunlight, algal and bacterial action and oxygen interact to
restore the wastewater to a reasonable state of purity.
LAND TREATMENT. A method of treatment in which the soil, air, vegeta-
tion, bacteria, and fungi are employed to remove pollutants from
wastewater. In its most simple form, the method includes three
steps: (1) pretreatment to screen out large solids; (2) secondary
treatment and chlorination; and (3) spraying over cropland, pas-
ture, or natural vegetation to allow plants and soil microorganisms
to remove additional pollutants. Much of the sprayed water evapo-
rates, and the remainder may be allowed to percolate to the water
table, discharged through drain tiles, or reclaimed by wells.
LEACHATE. Solution formed when water percolates through solid wastes,
soil or other materials and extracts soluble or suspendable sub-
stances from the material.
200
-------
LIMITING FACTOR. A factor whose absence, or excessive concentration,
exerts some restraining influence upon a population.
LOAM. The textural class name for soil having a moderate amount of
sand, silt, and clay. Loam soils contain 7 to 27% of clay, 28 to
50% of silt, and less than 52% of sand.
LOESS. Soil of wind-blown origin, predominantly silt and fine sand.
MACROPHYTE. A large (not microscopic) plant, usually in an aquatic
habitat.
MELT WATER. Water which is formed from the melting of snow, rime, or
ice.
MESOTROPHIC. Waters with a moderate supply of nutrients and no signifi-
cant production of organic matter.
MESOTROPHIC LAKE. Lakes of intermediate characteristics between oligo-
trophic and eutrophic. They contain a moderate supply of nutrients
and plant life.
METHEMOGLOBINEMIA. The presence of methemoglobin in the blood. Methe-
moglobin is the oxidized form of hemoglobin and it is unable to
combine reversibly with oxygen.
MICROSTRAINER. A device for screening suspended solids that are not
removed by sedimentation.
MILLIGRAM PER LITER (mg/1). A concentration of 1/1000 gram of a sub-
stance in 1 liter of water. Because 1 liter of pure water weighs
1,000 grams, the concentration also can be stated as 1 ppm (part
per million, by weight). Used to measure and report the concen-
trations of most substances which commonly occur in natural and
polluted waters.
MORPHOLOGICAL. Pertaining to Morphology.
MORPHOLOGY. The form or structure of a plant or animal, or of a feature
of the earth, such as a stream, a lake, or the land in general.
Also, the science that is concerned with the study of form and
structure of living organisms. Geomorphology deals with the form
and structure of the earth.
NON-POINT SOURCE. A general source of pollution not originating from a
single controllable source. Surface water runoff is an example of
a non-point source that is not easily controlled.
NUTRIENT BUDGET. The amount of nutrients entering and leaving a body of
water on an annual basis.
NUTRIENTS. Elements or compounds essential as raw materials for
organisms growth and development, e.g. carbon, oxygen, nitrogen,
and phosphorus.
201
-------
OLIGOTROPHIC. Waters with a small supply of nutrients and hence an
insignificant production of organic matter.
OLIGOTROPHIC LAKES. Deep lakes that have a low supply of nutrients and
thus contain little organic matter. Such lakes are characterized
by high water transparency and high dissolved oxygen.
ORDINANCE. A municipal or county regulation.
OUTWASH. Drift carried by melt water from a glacier and deposited
beyond the marginal moraine.
OUTWASH PLAIN. A plain formed by material deposited by melt water from
a glacier flowing over a more or less flat surface of large area.
Deposits of this origin are usually distinguishable from ordinary
river deposits by the fact that they often grade into moraines and
their constituents bear evidence of glacial origin. Also called
frontal apron.
PARAMETER. Any of a set of physical properties whose values determine
characteristics or behavior.
PERCOLATION. The downward movement of water through pore spaces or
larger voids in soil or rock.
PERMEABILITY. The property or capactiy of porous rock, sediment, or soil
to transmit a fluid, usually water or air; it is a measure of the
relative ease of flow under unequal pressures. Terms used to
describe the permeability of soil are: slow, less than 0.2 inch
per hour; moderately slow, 0.2 to 0.63 inch; moderate, 0.63 to 2.0
inches; moderately rapid. 2.0 to 6.3 inches; and rapid, more than
6.3 inches per hour. A very slow class and a very rapid class also
may be recognized.
PETROGLYPH. An ancient or prehistoric carving or inscription on a rock.
PHOSPHORUS LIMITED. Of all the primary nutrients necessary to support
algal growth, phosphorus is in the shortest supply and therefore
can limit additional algal growth.
PHYTOPLANKTON. Floating plants, microsopic in size, that both supply
small animals with food and give polluted water its green color and
bad taste.
POINT SOURCE. A stationary source of a large individual emission. This
is a general definition; point source is legally and precisely
defined in Federal regulations.
POVERTY LEVEL. An index providing a range of poverty income cutoffs
adjusted by such factors as family size, sex of family head, number
of children under 18 years of age, and farm or non-farm residence.
PREHISTORIC. A term which describes the period of human development
that occurred before the advent of written records. More generally,
any period in geologic time before written history.
202
-------
PRESENT WORTH. The sum of money that must be set aside at the beginning
of the planning period in order to amortize the costs of a project
over the planning period.
PRESSURE SEWER SYSTEM. A wastewater collection system in which house-
hold wastes are collected in the building drain and conveyed
therein to the pretreatment and/or pressurization facility. The
system consists of two major elements, the on-site or pressuri-
zation facility, and the primary conductor pressurized sewer main.
PRIMARY PRODUCTION. Growth of green plants resulting from solar energy
being fixed as sugar during photosynthesis.
PRIMARY TREATMENT. The first stage in wastewater treatment in which
substantially all floating or settleable solids are mechanically
removed by screening and sedimentation.
RAPID INFILTRATION. A form of land treatment where wastewater is placed
into spreading basins and applied to the land to undergo percola-
tion into the soil.
RARE SPECIES. A species not Endangered or Threatened but uncommon and
deserving of further study and monitoring. Peripheral species, not
listed as threatened, may be included in this category along with
those species that were once "threatened" or "endangered" but now
have increasing or protected, stable populations.
RECHARGE. The process by which water is added to an aquifer. Used also
to indicate the water that is added. Natural recharge occurs when
water from rainfall or a stream enters the ground and percolates to
the water table. Artificial recharge by spreading water on absorp-
tive ground over an aquifer or by injecting water through wells is
used to store water and to protect groundwater against the intru-
sion of sea water.
ROTATING BIOLOGICAL CONTACTOR (RBC). A device, consisting of plastic
disks that rotate alternately through wastewater and air, used for
secondary treatment of wastewater.
ROUGH FISH. Those fish species considered to be of low sport value when
taken on tackle, or of poor eating quality, e.g. gar, suckers.
Rough fish are more tolerant of widely changing environmental
conditions than are game fish. Also called coarse fish.
RUNOFF. The portion of rainfall, melted snow or irrigation water that
flows across the ground surface and eventually is returned to
streams. Runoff can pick up pollutants from the air or the land
and carry them to the receiving waters.
SANITARY SEWERS. Sewers that transport only sanitary wastewater. Storm
water runoff is carried in a separate system. See sewer.
SANITARY SURVEY. A method used to determine possible sources of water
quality and public health problems and to locate inadequately
203
-------
functioning wastewater systems by making site-specific investi-
gations of existing lots and systems.
SCENIC EASEMENT. A partial transfer of land rights to preserve the
aesthetic attractiveness of the land by restricting activities such
as the removal of trees, placement of billboards, or development
incompatible with the scenic qualities of the land. Just compensa-
tion is given to owners for rights lost. The right of legal tres-
pass is generally not included as part of this easement.
SECCHI DISK. A round plate, 30 cm (1 foot) in diameter, that is used to
measure the transparency of water. The disk is lowered into the
water until it no longer can be seen from the surface. The depth
at which the disk becomes invisible is a measure of transparency.
SECONDARY TREATMENT. Wastewater treatment in which bacteria consume the
organic parts of the wastes. This biochemical action is accom-
plished by use of trickling filters or the activated sludge pro-
cess. Effective secondary treatment may remove approximately 90%
of both BOD,, and suspended solids.
SEEPAGE CELLS. Unlined wastewater lagoons designed so that all or part
of wastewater percolates into the underlying soil.
SEPTIC SNOOPER. Trademark for the ENDECO (Environmental Devices Corpor-
ation) Type 2100 Septic Leachate Detector. This instrument con-
sists of an underwater probe, a water intake system, an analyzer
control unit and a graphic recorder. Water drawn through the
instrument is continuously analyzed for specific fluorescence and
conductivity. When calibrated against typical effluents, the
instrument can detect and profile effluent-like substances and
thereby locate septic tank leachate or other sources of domestic
sewage entering lakes and streams.
SEPTIC TANK. An underground tank used for the collection of domestic
wastes. Bacteria in the wastes decompose the organic matter, and
the sludge settles to the bottom. The effluent flows through
drains into the ground. Sludge is pumped out at regular intervals.
SEPTIC TANK EFFLUENT PUMP (STEP). Pump designed to transfer settled
wastewater from a septic tank to a sewer.
SEPTIC TANK SOIL ABSORPTION SYSTEM. A system of wastewater disposal in
which large solids are retained in a tank; fine solids and liquids
are dispersed into the surrounding soil by a system of pipes.
SEWER, COMBINED. A sewer, or system of sewers, that is used to collect
and conduct both sanitary sewage and storm-water runoff. During
rainless periods, most or all of the flow in a combined sewer is
composed of sanitary sewage. During a storm, runoff increases the
rate of flow and may overload the sewage treatment plant to which
the sewer connects. At such times, it is common to divert some of
the flow, without treatment, into the receiving water.
204
-------
SEWER, INTERCEPTOR. See Interceptor Sewer.
SEWER, LATERAL. A sewer designed and installed to collect sewage from a
limited number of individual properties and conduct it to a trunk
sewer. Also known as a street sewer or collecting sewer.
SEWER, SANITARY. See Sanitary Sewer.
SEWER, STORM. A conduit that collects and transports storm-water run-
off. In many sewerage systems, storm sewers are separate from
those carrying sanitary or industrial wastewater.
SEWER, TRUNK. A sewer designed and installed to collect sewage from a
number of lateral sewers and conduct it to an interceptor sewer or,
in some cases, to a sewage treatment plant.
SHOALING. The bottom effect that influences the height of waves moving
from deep to shallow water.
SINKING FUND. A fund established by periodic installments to provide
for the retirement of the principal of term bonds.
SLOPE. The incline of the surface of the land. It is usually expressed
as a percent (%) of slope that equals the number of feet of fall
per 100 feet in horizontal distance.
SOIL ASSOCIATION. General term used to describe taxonomic units of
soils, relative proportions, and pattern of occurrence.
SOIL TEXTURAL CLASS. The classification of soil material according to
the proportions of sand, silt, and clay. The principal textural
classes in soil, in increasing order of the amount of silt and
clay, are as follows: sand, loamy sand, sandy loam, loam, silt
loam, sandy clay loam, clay loam, silty clay loam, sandy clay,
silty clay, and clay. These class names are modified to indicate
the size of the sand fraction or the presence of gravel, sandy
loam, gravelly loam, stony clay, and cobbly loam, and are used on
detailed soil maps. These terms apply only to individual soil
horizons or to the surface layer of a soil type.
STATE EQUALIZED VALUATION (SEV). A measure employed within a State to
adjust actual assessed valuation upward to approximate true market
value. Thus it is possible to relate debt burden to the full value
of taxable property in each community within that State.
STRATIFICATION. The condition of a lake, ocean, or other body of water
when the water column is divided into a relatively cold bottom
layer and a relatively warm surface layer, with a thin boundary
layer (thermocline) between them. Stratification generally occurs
during the summer and during periods of ice cover in the winter.
Overturns, of periods of mixing, occur in the spring and autumn.
This condition is most common in middle latitudes and is related to
weather conditions, basin morphology, and altitude.
205
-------
STUB FEE. See Connection Fee.
SUCCESSION. The ecological process by which terrestrial and aquatic
environments age.
SUPPLEMENTAL USAGE. In regard to functions of small waste flow
districts, those which are not required to comply with EPA Con-
struction Grants regulations governing individual, on-site waste-
water systems. May be necessary to achieve administrative or
environmental objectives.
SUSPENDED SOLIDS (SS). Small solid particles that contribute to tur-
bidity. The examination of suspended solids and the BOD test
constitute the two main determinations for water quality performed
at wastewater treatment facilities.
TERTIARTY TREATMENT. See Advanced Waste Treatment.
THREATENED SPECIES (FEDERAL CLASSIFICATION). Any species of animal or
plant that is likely to become an endangered species within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a significant part of its
range. Protected under Public Law 93-205, as amended.
TILL. Deposits of glacial drift laid down in place as the glacier
melts. These deposits are neither sorted nor stratified and con-
sist of a heterogeneous mass of rock flow, sand, pebbles, cobbles,
and boulders.
TOPOGRAPHY. The configuration of a surface area including its relief,
or relative evaluations, and the position of its natural and man-
made features.
TRICKLING FILTER PROCESS. A method of secondary wastewater treatment in
which the biological growth is attached to a fixed medium, over
which wastewater is sprayed. The filter organisms biochemically
oxidize the complex organic matter in the wastewater to carbon
dioxide, water, and energy.
TROPHIC LEVEL. Any of the feeding levels through which the passage of
energy through an ecosystem proceeds. In simplest form, trophic
levels are: primary producers (green plants) herbivores,
omnivores, predators, scavengers, and decomposers.
WATER QUALITY. The relative condition of a body of water as judged by a
comparison between contemporary values and certain more or less
objective standard values for biological, chemical, and/or physical
parameters. The standard values usually are based on a specific
series of intended uses, and may vary as the intended uses vary.
WATER TABLE. The upper level of groundwater that is not confined by an
upper impermeable layer and is under atmospheric pressure. The
upper surface of the substrate that is wholly saturated with
groundwater.
WATERSHED. The area drained by a stream.
206
-------
WELL LOG. A chronological record of the soil and rock formations en-
countered in the operation of sinking a well, with either their
thickness or the elevation of the top and bottom of each formation
given. It also usually includes statements about the lithologic
composition and water-bearing characteristics of each formation,
static and pumping water levels, and well yield.
ZONING. The regulation by governmental action (invested by the State to
cities, townships, or counties) of the use of the land, the height
of buildings, and/or the proportion of the land surface that can be
covered by structures.
207
-------
DOCUMENTS CITED IN THIS REPORT
Arthur Beard Engineers, Inc. 1978. Correspondence regarding: 1) unit prices
and collector sewer construction costs; 2) wastewater flow projections
for Crystal Lake; and 3) "typical" cluster system, Crystal Lake. Chevy
Chase, MD.
Bailey, J.R., R.J. Benoit, J.L. Dodson, J.M. Robb, and H. Wallman. 1969. A
study of flow reduction and treatment of wastewater from households.
Cincinnati, OH. US Government Printing Office (GPO).
Calver, J.L. 1947. The glacial and post-glacial history of the Platte and
Crystal Lake depressions, Benzie County, Michigan. Michigan Geological
Survey Publication 45. Ph.D. thesis, 1942, Department of Geology,
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Clean Water Act of 1977. Public Law 95-217. (33 U.S.C. 466 et seq.)
Cohen, S., and H. Wallman. 1974. Demonstration of waste flow reduction from
households. Environmental Protection Agency, National Environmental
Research Center, Cincinnati, OH.
Cooper, I.A., and J.W. Rezek. 1977. Septage treatment and disposal. For
EPA, Technology Transfer.
Crawford, W.A. 1977. Findings in the proposed Crystal Lake sewer project
area. Contract No. C-262844-01. Grand Traverse-Leelanau-Benzie District
Health Department, Traverse City, MI.
Dearth, K.H. 1977. Current costs of conventional approaches. Presented at
EPA National Conference on Less Costly Wastewater Treatment Systems for
Small Communities, 12-14 April 1977, Reston, VA.
Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC). 1978. Crystal Lake
septic tank system analysis. EPA, Environmental Monitoring and Support
Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH.
EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1975. Cost-effective
comparison of land application and advanced wastewater treatment.
EPA-430/9-75-016.
EPA. 1975. Report on Betsie Lake, Benzie County, Michigan. National
Eutrophication Survey, Working Paper No. 185.
EPA. 1977. National interim primary drinking water regulations of the Safe
Drinking Water Act. 40 CRF 141.
EPA. 1977. Process design manual for land treatment of municipal wastewater.
EPA-625/1-77-008. Technology Transfer.
209
-------
EPA. 1978. Construction grants program requirements memorandum 78-9.
3 March 1978.
EPA. 1978. Grants for construction of treatment works - Clean Water Act
(40 CFR 35 Part E): Rules and regulations. 43 FR 44022, 27 September
1978.
EPA. 1978. Construction grants program requirements memorandum 79-3. 15
November 1978.
Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, Public Law 92-500.
Gannon, J.J., et al. 1970. Crystal Lake water quality investigation.
Contract No. 33304-1-F. School of Public Health, University of
Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Huffman, G.C. 1977. Groundwater data for Michigan, 1976. USGS, in
cooperation with Michigan DNR.
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency. 1977. Issuance of final Illinois
guidelines for the preparation of facilities plans for unsewered
communities. Memorandum, 16 September 1977.
Jones, R.A., and G.F. Lee. 1977. Septic tank disposal systems as phosphorus
sources for surface waters. EPA-600/3-77-129. Robert S. Kerr Environmental
Research Laboratory.
Kerfoot, W. 1978. Investigation of septic leachate discharges into Crystal
Lake, Michigan. K-V Associates, Inc., Falmouth, MA.
Knutilla, R.L. 1974. Compilation of miscellaneous streamflow measurements
in Michigan through September 1970. Water Information Series Report No. 5.
USGS, in cooperation with Michigan DNR. Lansing, MI.
League of Women Voters. 1978. A background summary of the planning process
and major issues identified by the League of Women Voters of the Grand
Traverse Area for the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore. Traverse
City, MI., 4 p.
Leverett, F., et al. 1907. Flowing wells and municipal water supplies in the
middle and northern portions of the southern peninsula of Michigan. Water
Supply and Irrigation Paper No. 183; Series 0, Underground Waters, 63.
USGS, Washington, DC.
Livasy, L.L. No date. Documentation for the Crystal Lake area authority for
treatment works—construction grant application. Grand Traverse-Leelanau-
Benzie District Health Department, Traverse City, MI.
210
-------
Martin, H.M. 1957. Outline of the geologic history of the Grand Traverse
region. Michigan Geological Survey (brochure), 9 p.
McLaughlin, E.R. 1968. A recycle system for conservation of water in
residences. Water and Sewage Works 115(4):175-176.
Michigan DNR (Department of National Resources). 1973. National river
report: Betsie River, Benzie and Manistee Counties. Office of
Planning Services, 10 August 1973 revision.
Michigan DNR. 1977. Betsie River natural river zoning. Division of Land
Resource Programs.
Michigan DNR. 1978. Michigan's endangered and threatened species program:
1976-1978.
Michigan DNR. Variously dated. Lake and stream management records and
biological data: Crystal Lake (unpublished reports).
Michigan DNR. Variously dated. Lake and stream management records and
biological data: Betsie Lake (unpublished reports).
Michigan DNR. Variously dated. Lake and stream management records and
biological data: Long Lake (unpublished reports).
National Park Service, Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore. 1978. Citizens
voice concerns and hopes about future of National Lakeshore. Department
of the Interior, Frankfort, MI., 14 p.
Omernik, J.M. 1977. Non-point source stream nutrient level relationships:
A nationwide survey. EPA-600/3-77-105. National Environmental Research
Laboratory, Corvalis, OR.
Otis, R.J., and D.E. Steward. 1976. Alternative wastewater facilities for
small unsewered communities in rural America. Annual report to the
Upper Great Lakes Region Commission.
Scalf, M.R., and W.J. Dunlap. 1977. Environmental effects of septic tanks.
EPA-600/3-77-096. Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory,
Ada, OK.
Schroepfer, G.J., and R.C. Polta. 1967. Travel of nitrogen compounds in
soils. Sanitary Engineering Report 166-5. Sanitary Engineering
Division, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Minnesota,
in cooperation with US Public Health Service.
SCS (Soil Conservation Service). 1972. Land resource inventory map,
Benzie County, Michigan. US Department of Agriculture, National
Cooperative Soil Survey, in cooperation with Michigan Agricultural
Experiment Station.
211
-------
SCS. 1977. Proposed rule, Prime and unique farmlands: Important farmland
inventory. 42 FR 42359, 23 August 1977.
SCS. 1978. Benzie County soil conservation district map.
Siegrist, R., M. Witt, and W.C. Boyle. 1976. Characteristics of rural
household wastewater. Journal of the Environmental Engineering Division,
American Society of Civil Engineers, No. EES, Proceedings Paper 12200:
533-548.
Tanis, F.J. 1978. Final summary report on Crystal Lake water quality study
(revised). For the Crystal Lake Property Owners Association. Ann
Arbor, MI.
The White House Rural Development Initiatives. August 1978. Making water
and sewer programs work.
Troyan, J.J., and D.P. Norris. March 1977. Cost-effectiveness analysis of
alternatives for small wastewater treatment systems. For the
Environmental Protection Agency Technology Transfer, Municipal
Design Seminar on Small Wastewater Treatment Systems, Seattle, WA.
University of Michigan. 1978. Sanitary systems for Crystal Lake, Benzie
County, Michigan: An on-site survey. Pelston, MI.
Upper Great Lakes Commission. 1972. Environmental implications of
recreation associated development of private land surrounding federal
recreation areas in the Upper Great Lakes Area - Michigan. 59 p. and
6 maps.
US Bureau of the Census. 1970. Fifth count summary data. Department of
Commerce, Census of Population and Housing, Washington, DC.
US Bureau of the Census. 1970. General social and economic characteristics.
Department of Commerce, Washington, DC.
US Bureau of the Census. 1970. Regional employment by industry: 1940-1970.
Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, Washington, DC.
US Bureau of the Census. 1970. Summary data. Department of Commerce,
Census of Population and Housing, Washington, DC.
US Bureau of the Census. 1975. Census of Population - 1970, supplementary
report. Department of Commerce, Washington, DC.
USGS (United States Geological Survey). 1956. Topographic map, 15 minute
series, Frankfort, Michigan quadrangle. Department of the Interior.
USGS. 1970. The national atlas of the United States. Department of the
Interior.
212
-------
West Michigan Tourist Association. 1978. West Michigan carefree days.
Grand Rapids, MI., 208 p.
Wilbur Smith and Associates. 1974. Comprehensive development plan, Benzie
County, Michigan. For Benzie County Planning Commission.
Williams & Works; McNamee, Porter and Seeley; and Perla Stout Associates.
1976. Crystal Lake area facility plan for wastewater collection and
treatment. Benzie County, Michigan. Contract No. C-26-2844-01,
6USGPO: 1980 — 654-261 — Vol. I
213
------- |