-------
development. Cross Lake exhibits the largest decrease (58%) in phosphorus
loading. This is attributed to the fact that this lake is the most inten-
sively developed in the Study Area whose residents are now served by on-
site sys.tems;estimated phosphorus loadings per capita via septic tank
effluents are precluded once the shoreline becomes sewered. The phosphorus
ban will have no effect upon the lakes proposed to be served by sewer
since neither septic tanks nor the treatment plant will be discharging
effluent directly to them. Silver Lake, again, exhibits an increase in
phosphorus loading due to potential development around the lake.
Bacterial Contamination of the Lakes in Salem Utility District No. 2.
With the alternatives of centralized wastewater treatment, pumping station
malfunctions could result in substantial contamination of the lakes.
Rigorous inspection and maintenance of pumping stations, back-up electrical
power supplies, stand-by pumps, and an overflow alarm would minimize the
possibility of this happening. Similiar measures should be taken with
pumping stations for cluster systems.
Eutrophication Potential of the Fox Chain (3'Lakes. The recent
investigation on the Fox Chain O'Lakes (Kothandaraman et al 1977) indicates
that the nutrient inputs from the Fox River to the lakes are 196,910 kg/yr
of phosphorus and 1,804,090 kg/yr of nitrogen, respectively. The expected
phosphorus loading generated by the conventional activated sludge plant
evaluated in this project (based on 0.73 mgd flow and 1.0 mg/1 phosphorus
concentration) is 1,000 kg/yr which is only 0.5% of what is entering into
the lakes from the Fox River and is only 0.4% of the total phosphorus
load into the lakes. Therefore, the proposed treatment plant is not expect-
ed to have any significant impact on the eutrophication status of the
lakes.
Toxic Effect of Ammonia from the Proposed Activated Sludge Plant
Upon the Fox River. In other words, the ammonia concentration in the
Fox River at Wilmot is high enough that the proposed plant discharge
practically no additional effect on the ammonia toxicity in the Fox River.
Effects of Residential and Combined Chlorine Compounds on the Fox
River Chain O'Lakes. Concentrations of residual chlorine and combined
chlorine compounds are likely to meet EPA Water Quality Criteria Guidelines
(1976). The EPA criterion for total chlorine is 0.01 mg/1; these levels
are adequate for freshwater organisms other than salmonids (trout and
salmon), which are not present in the Fox River. At this level and below,
residual and combined chlorine species will probably have no significant
effect on aquatic life.
2. SECONDARY IMPACTS
Increasing housing development along lakeshores may increase nutrient
and sediment loads into the lake as a result of the following:
• increased runoff from construction of impervious surfaces such as
rooftops and parking areas;
-------
• lawn and garden fertilization creating unnaturally high nutrient
levels in the runoff; and
• soil disruption by human activities (i.e., housing construction,,
leveling of forested area, etc.
Groundxvrater
No significant primary or secondary impacts on groundwater quality are
anticipated either as a result of the short-term construction activities or
long-term operation of any of the various alternatives. This is mainly
because all of the water quantitites associated with the alternative are
relatively miniscule in comparison with the estimated groundwater storage,
recharge from all other sources, and available groundwater yield.
Primary Impacts
No significant short-term impacts on groundwater quality are anticipated
to result from the construction activities of any of the alternatives.
Conclusions with respect to long-term impacts are as follows:
• Impacts on bacterial quality are expected to be insignificant for
all alternatives.
• Continued use of septic tank systems may result in minor impacts
associated with shoreline algal growths.
It is possible that some nitrates from wastewater applied to land
might reach surface waters via overland runoff,,lateral interflow* in soils,
or transport in percolating groundwaters. However, application rates for
spray irrigation of effluents would be set to maximize crop uptake of
nitrogen, minimizing its concentrations in groundwater. Because of the high
application rates for rapid infiltration, recovery of rennovated effluent
by recover wells or drains may be necessary.
Environmentally Sensitive Areas
Development on steep slopes within Salem Utility District No. 2 is possible
with any of the alternatives. This would result in eros-ion, excessiye
runoff, sedimentation, and transfer of nutrients to the lakes. The
Facility Plan Proposed Action and EIS Alternatives 1 and 2, and 5 may have
a somewhat greater impact in this respect than would EIS Alternatives 3, 4,
6, 7, or 8,
Population and Land Use Impacts
The provision of centralized wastewater management facilities would
induce population growth in Salem Utility District No. 2 beyond that pro-
jected in the non-facility specific (baseline) EIS Service Area population
projections for the year 2000. The magnitude of this induced population
growth in the Utility District could be as high as 33% over the baseline
projections utilized for system design purposes. Completely centralized
xii
-------
alternatives would likely result in this maximum population increase while
alternatives consisting of combined used of centralized and decentralized
facilities would tend to induce a population increase of approximately 20%
to 25% over the baseline population projections.
The primary and secondary development generated by the provision of
centralized and/or decentralized wastewater management facilities would
increase developed acreage in Salem Utility District No. 2 approximately
900 acres (85%) by the year 2000. The majority of this developed acreage
would be residential use, which as discussed in the preceding section,
would require sewage treatment capacity beyond the design levels evaluated
in this EIS. In addition to increased urban development in the proposed
Service Area, agricultural, forest, and cleared land in areas of the Utility
District lying outside of the proposed Service Area will also convert to
urban land uses.
Economic Impacts
The average local share per residence of the total capital costs for
the Facility Plan Proposed Action is approximately $2,719. The Plan
estimates the annual user charge per resident to be $126, which includes
annual debt retirement of the amortized local share of the proiect cost and
annual operation and maintenance costs. Seasonal residents, particularly
those in smaller less expensive homes may come under considerable pressure
to sell their property.
xiii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Summary ...... ............. .............
List of Tables ............................
List of Figures ............................ xxii'i
Symbols and Abbreviations .......................
I - INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND, AND ISSUES
A. Project History and Description .................. 1
1. Background .......... , ............... 1
2. Location ........................... 1
3. History of the Construction Grant Application ......... 6
4. Salem Utility District No. 2 Facility Plan .......... 7
a. Existing Wastewater Treatment Facilities ......... 7
b. Existing Problems with Water Quality and
Wastewater Treatment Facilities .............. 8
c. Proposed Solutions: Alternatives Addressed
in the Facility Plan ................... 8
d. The Facility Plan Proposed Action ............. 8
B. Issues of this EIS ........................ 10
1. Cost Effectiveness ...................... 10
2. Water Quality Impact and Regional Controversy ......... 10
3. Economic Impact ........................ 11
4. Induced Growth and Secondary Impacts ............. 11
C. National Persepctive on the Rural Sewering Problem ........ 11
1. Socioeconomics ........................ 11
2. Secondary Impacts ......... . ............. 13
3. The Need for 'Management of Decentralized
Alternative Systems ...................... 14
D. Purpose and Approach of the EIS and Criteria for
Evaluation of Alternatives .................... 14
1. Purpose ............................ 14
2. Approach ........................... 15
a. Review of Available Data ................. 15
b. Segment Analysis ..................... 15
c. Review of Wastewater Design Flows ............. 15
d. Development of Alternatives ................ 16
e. Estimation of Costs for Alternatives ........... 16
f. Evaluation of the Alternatives .............. 16
g. Needs Documentation .................... 16
h. Public Participation ................... 17
XIV
-------
3. Major Criteria for Evaluation of Alternatives 17
a. Cost 17
b. Significant Environmental and Socioeconomic Impacts .... 18
c. Reliability 18
d. Flexibility 18
II - ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
A. Physical Environment 19
1. Physiographic and Topographic Features 19
2. Geology 19
a. Bedrock Geology 19
b. Surficial Geology 19
c. Adverse Geologic Conditions 22
3. Soils 22
a. Overview 22
b. Soil Suitability for Wastewater Disposal 24
c. Prime Agricultural Lands 28
4. Atmosphere 28
a. Climate 28
b. Air Quality 29
c. Odors 30
d. Noise 30
B. Water Resources 30
1. Water Quality Management 30
2. Groundwater Hydrology 30
3. Groundwater Quality 33
4. Groundwater Use 34
5. Surface Water Hydrology 34
a. Size of the Drainage Basins 34
b. Tributary Flow 38
c. Lake Hydraulic Retention Time 38
6. Surface Water Use and Classification 38
7. Surface Water Quality 38
a. Nutrient Loadings 39
b. Lake Water Quality 39
c. Phosphorus Loading - Trophic Condition Relationships ... 41
d. Bacterial Contamination in Shoreline Areas 41
e. Fox River 41
8. Flood Prone Areas 43
XV
-------
Page
C. Existing Systems 46
1. Summary of Existing Data 46
a. Investigation of Septic Runoff and Leachate Discharges
into Salem Lakes, Wisconsin 46
b. Environmental Photographic Interpretation
Center (EPIC) Survey 47
2. Types of Systems 47
3. Compliance with Sanitary Codes 52
4. Problems with Existing Systems 53
5. Public Health Problems 53
a. Backups/Ponding 53
b. Water Quality Problems 53
c. Groundwater Contamination 54
d. Other Problems 54
D. Biotic Resources 55
1. Aquatic Biology 55
a. Aquatic Vegetation 55
b. Fishes 57
c. Waterfowl, Shore, and Wading Birds 58
2. Terrestrial Biology 59
a. Forest Lands 59
b. Upland Areas 59
c. Wetlands 59
3. Threatened or Endangered Species 61
a. Fishes 61
b. Birds 61
c. Amphibians 61
d. Reptiles 61
e. Plants 61
E. Population and Socioeconomics 62
1. Population 62
a. Introduction 62
b. Existing Population 62
c. Population Projections 64
2. Characteristics of the Permanent Population 65
a. Income 65
b. Employment 65
c. Financial Characteristics 65
xvi
-------
Page
3. Characteristics of the Seasonal Population 68
4. Housing Characteristics 68
5. Land Use 70
a. Existing Land Use 70
b. Recreation 70
c. Future Land Use 70
d. Growth Management 70
6. Cultural Resources 76
a. Archaeological Resources 76
b. Historical Resources 76
III - DEVELOPMENT OF ALTERNATIVES
A. Introduction 77
1. General Approach 77
2. Comparability of Alternatives: Design Population 79
3. Comparability of Alternatives: Flow and Waste
Load Proj ections 79
B. Components and Options 81
1. Flow and Waste Reduction 81
a. Residential Flow Reduction Devices 81
b. Wisconsin Ban on Phosphorus 82
2. Collection 83
3. Wastewater Treatment 84
a. Centralized Treatment—Discharge to Surface Waters .... 85
b. Centralized Treatment—Land Disposal 86
c. Decentralized Treatment and Disposal 90
4. Effluent Disposal 92
a. Reuse 92
b. Discharge to Surface Water 92
c. Land Application 94
5. Sludge Handling and Disposal 97
C. Reliability of Components 98
1. Sewers 98
2. Centralized Treatment 99
3. On-Site Treatment 100
4. Cluster Systems 100
xvii
-------
Page
D. Implementation 101
1. Centralized Districts 101
a. Authority 101
b. Managing Agency 101
c. Financing 102
d. User Charges 102
2. Small Waste Flow Districts 103
a. Authority 103
b. Management 103
c. Financing 105
d. User Charges 107
IV - Alternatives
A. Introduction 108
B. Alternatives 109
1. No Action 109
2. Facility Plan Proposed Action 112
3. EIS Alternative 1 112
4. EIS Alternative 2 112
5. EIS Alternative 3 112
6. EIS Alternative 4 116
7. EIS Alternative 5 116
8. EIS Alternative 6 119
9. EIS Alternative 7 119
10. EIS Alternative 8 119
C. Flexibility of the Alternatives 122
1. Facility Plan Proposed Action 122
2. EIS Alternative 1 122
3. EIS Alternative 2 122
4. EIS Alternative 3 122
5. EIS Alternative 4 122
6. EIS Alternative 5 123
7. EIS Alternative 6 123
8. EIS Alternative 7 123
9. EIS Alternative 8 123
V - IMPACTS
A. Impacts on Surface Water Quality 125
1. Primary Impacts 125
a. Eutrophication Potential of Lakes in
Salem Utility District No. 2 125
b. Bacterial Contamination of the Lakes in
Utility District No. 2 128
xviii
-------
Page
c. Eutrophication Potential of the Fox Chain 0' Lakes .... 129
d. Toxic Effects of Ammonia from the Proposed
Activated Sludge Plant upon the Fox River 129
e. Effects of Residentail and Combined Chlorine Compounds
on the Fox River and Chain 0' Lakes 130
2. Secondary Impacts 131
B. Impacts on Groundwater 131
1. Groundwater Quantity Impacts 131
2. Groundwater Quality Impacts 132
3. Mitigative Measures 133
C. Population and Land Use Impacts 134
1. Population Impacts 133
a. Population Growth 133
b. Conversion Pressures on Seasonal Units 135
c. Changes in Community Composition and Character 136
2. Land Use Impacts . 136
a. Land Use Conversion 136
b. Land Use Pattern and Intensity Changes 137
c. Changes in Property Values ...... 138
D. Development of Environmentall Sensitive Areas 139
1. Floodplains 138
2. Wetlands 139
3. Steep Slopes 139
4. Prime Agricultural Land 140
5. Unique Natural Areas/Habitats for Rare and
Endnagered Species 142
E. Economic Impact 142
1. Introduction 142
2. User Charges 142
3. Local Cost Burden 146
4. Mitigative Measures 148
F. Impact Matrix 149
xix
-------
VI - CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Page
A. Conclusions „ . 153
B. Draft EIS Recommended Alternative 154
C. Ownership of On-Site Systems Serving Seasonal Residences. . ..155
VII - THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHORT-TERM
USE AND LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY
A. Short Term Use of the Study Area 157
B. Impacts Upon Long-Term Productivity 157
1. Commitment of Non-Renewable Resources. 157
2. Limitations on Beneficial Use of the Environment 157
VIII - IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE
COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES
A. Construction Materials 159
B. Energy „ 159
C. Operation and Maintenance Materials „ . . 159
D. Man-Hours 159
IX - PROBABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED 161
Glossary ...» 162
Bibliography , 176
xx
-------
TABLES
Table
1
II-l
II-2
II-3
II-4
II-5
II-6
II- 7
II- 8
II-9
11-10
11-11
11-12
11-13
11-14
11-15
11-16
III-l
III-2
III-3
Summary of Alternative Costs
Properties of Surficial Geologic Deposits
Major Soil Properties
Physical Properties of Aquifers
Physical Characteristics of the Study Area Lakes
Summary of Trophic Levels of the Salem Lakes
Number of Malfunctions Identified by EPIC
Fish Species and Lake Depth within the Study Area
Permanent and Seasonal Population of the Proposed EIS
Service Area
Permanent and Seasonal Population of the Proposed Salem
Service Area
Mean, -Family Income
Kenosha County Distribution of Employment by Industrial Sector
1976 Financial Characterisitcs for the Study Area
Salem Utility District No. 2 Subarea Dwelling Unit Costs (1975)
Housing Value (1970)
Recreational Ratings of Selected Lakes within Salem Utility
District No. 2
Analysis of Public Access to Selected Lakes within Salem
Utility District No. 2
Wastewater Management Components and Options
EIS Service Area Design Population and Flow (2000)
Small Waste Flow Management Function by Operational
Component
Page
X
21
25
29
37
43
52
57
62
65
65
66
67
69
69
73
74
77
80
106
xxi
-------
Table Page
IV-1 Major Features of the Proposed Action and the EIS Alternatives 110
IV-2 Cost Effectiveness of Alternatives Ill
IV-3 Resource and Implementation Parameters for Alternatives
Evaluation 124
V-l Change in Phosphorus Loading of Lakes in Salem Utility
District No. 2 Resulting from No Action, Facility Plan
Proposed Action, and EIS Alternatives 1-8 127
V-2 Summary of Unique Natural Areas in the Salem Study Area 141
V-3 Annual User Charges 143
V-4 Local Share of Capital Costs 145
V-5 Financial Burden and Displacement Pressure 147
xxii
-------
FIGURES
Figure Page
1-1 Location of Salem Utility District No. 2 2
1-2 Salem Utility District No. 2 3
1-3 Facility Plan Proposed Service Area 4
1-4 EIS Proposed Service Area 5
1-5 Monthly Cost of Gravity Sewers 13
II-l Slopes Greater than 15% Within the Study Area 20
II-2 Surf icial Hydrogeology 23
II-3 Soil Limitations for On-Site Wastewater Disposal 27
II-4 Groundwater Hydrology of Salem Utility District No. 2...31
11-5 Cross Section of the Deep and Shallow Aquifers 32
II-6 Surface Water Hydrology 35
II-7 Drainage Basins within the Study Area 36
II-8 Total Phosphorus Loading for Lakes in Salem Utility
District No. 2 40
II-9 Trophic Conditions of Lakes in Salem Utility District
No. 2 42
11-10 Flood Prone Areas 44
11-11 Reported Septic Tank System Failures in Salem Utility
District No. 2 45
11-12 Effluent Plumes in Silver Lake 48
11-13 Effluent Plumes in Center Lake and Camp Lake 49
11-14 Effluent Plumes in Benet/Shangrila Lake and Voltz Lake..50
11-15 EPIC Survey Results 51
11-16 Algae Growth in Benet/Shangrila Lake 56
11-17 Subareas of Salem Utility District No. 2 63
11-18 Existing Land Use Map 71
xxiii
-------
Figure Page
11-19 Environmentally Sensitive Areas 72
11-20 Future Land Use 75
III-l STEP System Configuration 84
III-2 Conventional Activated Sludge Process 85
III-3 Flow Diagram: Spray Irrigation 87
III-4 Rapid Infiltration Recovery Wells 88
III-5 Flow Diagram: Rapid Inf iltation 88
in>6 Flow Diagram: Overland Flow 89
III-7 Location of Overland Flow-Wetlands Treatment Site 95
III-8 Land Application Sites 96
IV-1 Upgraded Facility Plan Proposed Action 113
IV-2 EIS Alternative 1 114
IV-3 EIS Alternative 2 115
IV-4 EIS Alternative 3 117
IV-5 EIS Alternative 4,6 and 7 118
IV-6 EIS Alternative 5 120
IV-7 EIS Alternative 8 121
V-l Trophic Status of Lakes in Salem Utility District
No. 2 126
V-2 Fox Chain 0'Lakes, Lake County, Illinois 130
xxiv
-------
SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS
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
p Rho
U Mu, micro
\) Nu
a Sigma
TECHNICAL ABBREVIATIONS
AWT advanced wastewater treatment
BOD- biochemical oxygen demand (5 day)
cm centimeter
DO dissolved oxygen
2
ft square foot
fps feet per second
2
g/m /yr grams per square meter per year
GP grinder pump
gpcd gallons per capita per day
gpm gallons per minute
I/I infiltration/inflow
kg/yr kilograms per year
kg/cap/yr kilograms per capita per year
kg/mile kilograms per mile
Ib/cap/day pounds per capita per day
mgd million gallons per day
xxv
-------
mg/1 milligrams per litre
ml millilitre
mph miles per hour
msl mean sea level—implies above msl unless otherwise
indicated
MPN most probable number
N nitrogen
NH--M ammonia nitrogen
NO--N nitrate nitrogen
NPS non-point source
O&M operation and maintenance
P phosphorus, or "as phosphorus"
pH measure of acidity or basicity; <7 is acidic;
>7 is basic
PO^ phosphate
ppm parts per million
psi pounds per square inch
SS suspended solids
STEP septic tank effluent pumping
ST? sewage treatment plant
ST/SAS septic tank/soil absorption system
TKN total Kjeldahl nitrogen
TP-P total phosphorus as phosphorus
Ug/1 micrograms per liter
EPAECO name of a mathematical model
NON-TECHNICAL ABBREVIATIONS
DNR Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Impact Statement
xxvi
-------
EPA
EPIC
FWS
HDD
NOAA
NES
NPDES
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (of EPA)
Fish and Wildlife Service, United Stated Department of
the Interior
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
SCS
STORET
USDA
USGS
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
xxvii
-------
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND AND ISSUES
A. PROJECT HISTORY AND DESCRIPTION
1. BACKGROUND
Partial Federal aid in funding of municipal wastewater facilities is
authorized by Section 201 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
Amendments of 1972 (FWPCA), Public Law 92-500. Funding of projects under
Section 201 is subject to the provisions of the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), Public Law 91-190. Section 102(2)(C) of NEPA
requires the preparation of an environmental impact statement (EIS) on
major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human
environment. Guidance for preparation of this EIS is provided by the
Council of Environmental Quality's "Preparation of Environmental Impact
Statements: Guidelines" August I, 1973 (40 CFR Chapter V, Part 1500) and
the Environmental Protection Agency's "Manual for Preparation of Environ-
mental Impact Statements for Wastewater Treatment Works, Facilities Plans,
and 208 Areawide Waste Treatment Management Plans" July 1974. Individual
provisions of revised Council on Environmental Quality guidelines issued
November 29, 1978 have been followed where practicable.
Federal funding of proposed wastewater collection and treatment
facilities in the Salem Utility District No. 2 area of Kenosha County,
Wisconsin (see Figure 1-1) has been requested and is the subject of this
Environmental Impact Statement. Construction of the facilities was
recommended in the "Facility Development Plan, Salem Utility District No. 2,
Kenosha County, Wisconsin", hereafter referred to as the Facility Plan,
which will be described later in this chapter.
2. LOCATION
Located in the southern portion of Kenosha County, adjacent to the
Wisconsin-Illinois State Line, Salem Utility District No. 21 encompasses
approximately 14 square miles of rolling fields, farmlands, wetlands, and
residential/commercial lakeside development (see Figure 1-2). In addition
to the unincorporated villages of Wilmot and Trevor, the communities to be
served by new wastewater facilities include the developed shore areas of
Silver Lake (southeastern shore only), Center Lake, Camp Lake, Rock Lake,
Voltz Lake, Benet/Shangrila Lake, as well as the shore area of Cross Lake
that lies within Salem Township (see Figure 1-3). Silver Lake Park, located
immediately outside the boundary of Salem Utility District No. 2 on Silver
Lake's eastern shore, is also to be served by new wastewater management
facilities. The Facility Plan Proposed Service Area is illustrated in
Figure 1-3. The year-round population for the Proposed EIS Service Area
(see Figure 1-4) is estimated to be 5,276, swelling by approximately 40%
during the vacation season to 7,488.
1Also referred to in this EIS as "the District" or "the Study Area".
1
-------
KENOSHA
COUNTY
SALEM UTILITY
DISTRICT NO. 2
lUllltS
FIGURE 1-1 LOCATION OF SALEM UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 2
IN KENOSHA COUNTY, WISCONSIN
-------
Figure 1-2
SALEM UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 2
-------
**t
I—I
G
Tl
>
a
PI
o
en
PI
n
M
53
PI
CO
PJ
2
H
H
O
n
H
z
o
•
NJ
-------
CM
H
O
h-l
PS
H
CO
CD
PK
O
O
H
Cd
CO
CO
I
M
W
O
-------
3. HISTORY OF THE CONSTRUCTION GRANT APPLICATION
A substantial amount of consideration was devoted to the wastewater
management needs of the Study Area before the preparation of the Environ-
mental Impact Statement. A chronology of the actions taken before and
during this study is listed below:
February, 1974
May, 1975
February 20, 1976
March 4, 1976
March 8, 1976
May 26, 1976
July 22, 1976
October 26, 1976
November 11, 1976
January 19, 1977
February 16, 1977
February 18, 1977
March 4, 1977
"A Regional Sanitary Sewerage System Plan for
Southeastern Wisconsin", Planning Report No. 16
completed by the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional
Planning Commission (SEWRPC). Plan recommended
that all communities listed in Section I.A.2.
above, with the exception of Silver Lake's south-
eastern shore and Silver Lake County Park, have
wastewater treatment needs served by a central
facility in Salem Utility District No. 2.
Preliminary engineering studies performed by
Jensen and Johnson, Inc.
Application for Step 1 Grant received by Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources (DNR) from Salem
Utility District No. 2.
Step 1 Grant Application certified by DNR and
forwarded to the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region V (EPA).
Step 1 Grant Application received by EPA.
Step 1 Grant offer made by EPA.
Engineering study of wastewater management
alternatives, "Facility Development Plan, Salem
Utility District No. 2, Kenosha County, Wisconsin",
completed by Jensen and Johnson, Inc.
Public Hearing held on the proposed Facility
Development Plan, Salem Utility District No. 2.
Resolution passed by Salem Township unit of
government approving the Facility Plan.
Facility Plan received by Wisconsin DNR.
Facility Plan certified by DNR and forwarded to
EPA.
Facility Plan received by EPA.
Facility Plan submitted to Planning Branch, EPA
for review.
-------
July 20, 1977 Notice of intent issued by EPA to prepare an EIS
on proposed wastewater collection and treatment
facilities in Salem Utility District No. 2.
October 1, 1977 Preparation of EIS begins.
December 15, 1977 First EIS Public Information Meeting.
May, 1978 Preliminary site evaluation of Paasch Lake wetland
for tertiary wastewater treatment potential per-
formed by Dr. Robert Kadlec and Dr. Donald Tilton,
Wetland Ecosystem Research Group, University of
Michigan (Ann Arbor).
May, 1978 Septic System Analysis conducted by EPA -
Environmental Photographic Interpretation (EPIC)
July 12, 1978 Second EIS Public Information Meeting
February, 1979 Investigation of septic runoff and leachate
discharges into selected lakes within Salem
Utility District No. 2 conducted by Dr. William
Kerfoot, K-V Associates, Inc.
4. THE SALEM UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 2 FACILITY PLAN
The Facility Plan for Salem Utility District No. 2, which proposed
construction of new wastewater collection and treatment facilities, was
completed by the engineering firm of Jensen and Johnson, Inc. in July, 1976.
It was subsequently forwarded to EPA for funding under the EPA Construction
Grants Program.
The following section summarizes the Facility Plan's descriptions of
existing wastewater treatment facilities, water quality problems, the need
for the project, alternative solutions, and the course of action proposed.
It should be noted that conclusions reached in the Facility Plan and re-
viewed here are not necessarily those reached in this EIS.
a. Existing Wastewater Treatment Facilities
There are presently no centralized wastewater collection and treatment
facilities in Salem Utility District No. 2. Wastewater generated by resi-
dential and commercial areas is either treated on-site by private septic
tank (baffle type)-soil absorption systems or collected on-site in steel or
concrete holding tanks which have an average capacity of 2400 gallons (by
letter, Edward Schick, Building Inspector, Salem Township, December 15, 1977)
In the absence of a centralized sewage treatment system and given the wide-
spread unsuitability of soils in the project area for on-site wastewater
treatment, residents have increasingly resorted to holding tanks to serve
their wastewater management needs.
-------
b. Existing Problems with Wastewater Treatment Facilities and Water Quality
Inadequately treated wastewater from private septic tank-soil absorption
systems was stated by the Facility Plan to be a major source of surface water
and groundwater pollution in Salem Utility District No. 2. Insufficient
wastewater treatment is attributed to the low permeability and to the shallow
depth to the seasonal high water table that is typical of most soils through-
out the Facility Plan Proposed Service Area. Evaluation of problems associated
with septic tank systems, as performed in this EIS, is included in Section II.C.
The Plan cites a study of residential lakeside areas in the Fox River
watershed by the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission (SEWRPC,
1967) which recommended that bacterial contamination of surface waters by
malfunctioning on-site wastewater disposal systems would be prevented with
the development of centralized sewerage facilities. This study was based
upon the potential for bacterial contamination of the 22 largest lakes in
the Fox River watershed, including Camp Lake and Center Lake in the Study
Area. SEWRPC reported that these two lakes were found, in 1967, to have
bacterial counts in excess of those allowed by current Wisconsin water quality
standards for recreation/fish and aquatic life.
The Facility Plan also indicated that the lakes within Salem Utility
District No. 2 have become increasingly rich in nutrients (phosphorus and
nitrogen) because on-site treatment of wastewater generated in the residential
areas around these lakes in inadequate or dose not occur at all. The Plan
also implied that high phosphorus concentrations in plant tissue, and high
alkalinity and chloride concentrations as measured by the Wisconsin DNR in
several of the lakes in the Study Area were attributed to untreated waste-
water sources.
c. Proposed Solutions: Alternatives Addressed in the Facility Plan
The Facility Plan developed and evaluated five alternative regional
wastewater management plans to meet effluent requirements and to alleviate
problems associated with the existing on-site treatment systems in the Study
Area. The continued use of on-site soil absorption systems was addressed in
the Plan but was not considered a viable alternative for the following reasons:
• Poor soil conditions in most of the Study Area preclude widespread
successful use of septic tank systems;
• The potential for both groundwater and surface water contamination
by inadequate on-lot systems is very high;
• Health hazard possibilities are increased; and
• Further development of lakefront property is inhibited and property
values are apt to decrease if no alternative to on-site systems is
implemented.
-------
Four of the proposed regional alternatives evaluated were based
upon centralized collection and treatment with effluent disposal to the Fox
River. These included a conventional activated sludge plant, a rotating
biological contactor, a synthetic media filter, and a contact-stabilization
package plant. Land application of wastewater was also evaluated but rejected
because of poor soil conditions (low percolation rates), high groundwater
levels, scarcity of large singular parcels of land, and high initial capital
requirements.
A wastewater collection system, consisting of gravity sewer lines, force
mains, and lift stations, was evaluated in three different contexts for the
centralized treatment options (Jensen and Johnson, Inc., 1976): 1) an ulti-
mate collection system, based upon a density of 12 persons per developable
acre; 2) a 50-year collection system, based upon a 50-year planning period
with growth to take place in lake areas only; 3) a modified 50-year collection
system, based upon a 50-year planning period with predominant growth to
occur in lake areas, but some increased line sizing in limited access areas.
For sludge handling alternatives were evaluated for the centralized
treatment options. The handling methods evaluated included contract hauling
by licensed sanitary service operators, lagooning and land spreading, dis-
posal at an existing landfill, and incineration.
d. The Facility Plan Proposed Action
Selection of the Proposed Action in the Facility Plan was based upon an
analysis of the cost-effectiveness, environmental impacts, and implementability
of each of the alternatives. The following collection, treatment and sludge
handling components collectively constituted the Proposed Action in 1976:
• The modified 50-year (centralized) collection system
• Centralized treatment by the conventional activated sludge process
with effluent discharge to the Fox River below Wilmot
• Sludge handling via contract hauling by licensed sanitary service
operators.
The design flow for the Facility Plan Proposed Action is 1.5 million
gallons per day (mgd), based on projected wastewater flows of 100 gallons
per capita per day; this flow includes wastewater generated in residential
and commercial areas as well as a nominal allowance for infiltration/inflow.
The projected wastewater flows for the year 1997 used for the sizing and
design of the collection system and treatment plant are presented below:
-------
Year
Design
Present
(1997)
(1997)
(1976)
(1976)
Season
Peak-Summer
Off Season
Peak- Summer
Off Season
Population
Served
15
7
8
4
,000
,500
,400
,200
Projected
Flow-mgd
1
0
0
0
.5
.8
.8
.4
The Facility Plan Proposed Action is described further in Chapter IV.
B. ISSUES OF THIS EIS
The purpose of this EIS is to respond to concerns raised regarding
the Facility Plan Proposed Action identified by review agencies (especially
the EPA), local officials and the public. These concerns, involving the
possibility of significant environmental impacts, include the following:
1. COST EFFECTIVENESS
The total capital cost for the Facility Plan Proposed Action was esti-
mated in the Plan (July, 1976) to be $12.0 million. This represents an invest-
ment of approximately $1,500 per person and $5,036 per existing dwelling
unit within the Facility Plan Proposed Service Area (see Figure 1-3). The
disparity of incomes among Study Area residents means that the burden of these
costs will fall most heavily on those people least able to afford them. The
availability of alternative collection and treatment technologies offers the
potential for less expensive solutions to wastewater management problems.
It is also questionable whether total elimination of septic tanks will
have a strong positive impact on overall lake quality. An assessment must
be made of all major nutrient* sources, such as precipitation, point source*
discharges, non-point source* run-off, as well as septic tank effluents,
before it can be demonstrated that the level of commitment of resources for
proposed large-scale facilities is necessary.
2. WATER QUALITY IMPACTS AND REGIONAL CONTROVERSY
The residents of Salem Utility District No. 2 have expressed consider-
able concern about the water quality of Silver Lake, Center Lake, Camp Lake,
Rock Lake, Cross Lake, Voltz Lake, Lake Shangrila and Benet Lake. Public
concern has focused on the natural and man-induced nutrient* enrichment of
these lakes, whose combined surface area of approximately 900 acres make them
attractive to recreationists as well as potential residents. Available data
indicate that most of the lakes are rich to moderately rich in nutrients. It
needs to be determined whether sewering the entire Study Area will produce the
desirable reduction in nutrient concentrations or spur residential growth,
thereby increasing non-point source pollution loadings.
10
-------
Citizens in Lake County, Illinois have stated their concern over the
potentially adverse impacts of the Facility Plan's proposed discharge of
effluent (30 mg/1 BOD, 30 mg/1 suspended solids, and 1.0 mg/1 phosphorus)
approximately 1/3-mile above the Wisconsin-Illinois State line and about 2
miles above Chain of Lakes State Park. The citizens claim that while stan-
dards would be approved by the Wisconsin DNR, it would not represent suffi-
cient nutrient removal given the current phosphorus loads to the Fox Chain
0*Lakes were from Wisconsin. The organic and nutrient loads to these Illionis
lakes associated with any alternative involving the District's wastewater
discharge to the Fox River must be assessed along with the impacts of
additional ammonia and chlorine concentrations in the River.
3. ECONOMIC IMPACT
The average local share per residence of the total capital costs for the
Facility Plan Proposed Action is approximately $2,719. The Plan estimates
the annual user charge per resident to he $126, which includes annual debt
retirement of the amortized local share of the project cost and annual O&M
costs. Seasonal residents, particularly those in smaller less expensive
homes may come under considerable pressure to sell their property.
4. INDUCED GROWTH AND SECONDARY IMPACTS
Centralized wastewater management alternatives may lead to significantly
higher residential density in areas which are now using septic tank systems
and are limited in development capability within the District. Sewering
of the entire District may lead to:
•• Increased development of lakeside areas,
• Increased development of adjacent non-lakeside areas; and
• A shift from seasonal to permanent occupancy.
These potential secondary impacts of proposed development of wastewater
management facilities warrant careful consideration.
C. NATIONAL PERSPECTIVE ON THE RURAL SEWERING PROBLEM
The EIS issues discussed above are not unique to the proposed plan for
wastewater management in the District. They are typical of the 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 communities.
1. SOCIOECONOMICS
To assess the reasons and magnitude of -the cost burden that many proposed
wastewater collection projects would impose on small communities, EPS studied
more than 250 facilities plans for 49 states for pending projects for com-
munities under 50,000 population (Dearth 1977).
11
-------
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 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 com-
munity users when annual user charges (debt service plus operation and
maintenance) would exceed:
• 1.5% median household incomes less than $6,000;
• 2.0% of median household incomes between $6,000 and $10,000;
and
• 2.5% of median household incomes over $10,000.
Annual user charges exceeding these criteria would materially affect the
households' standard of living. Federal agencies involved in funding waste-
water facilties will work with the community to achieve lower project costs
trhough a change in the project's scope or design. If the project's scope
or design is not changed, the agencies will work with the community until they
are assured that the community is aware of the financial impacts of under-
taking the high-cost project.
It is the collection system that is chiefly responsible for the high
costs of conventional sewerage facilities or small communities. Typically,
80% or more of the total capital cost for newly serviced rural areas is spent
for the collection system. Figure I- 5 indicates that the costs per residence
for gravity sewers increase exponentially as population density decreases.
Primary factors contributing to this cost/density relationship were found to be:
• greater, length of sewer pipe per dwelling in lower-density areas;
• more problems with grade, resulting in more lift stations or
excessively deep sewers;
• regulations or criteria which set eight inches as the smallest
allowable sewer pipe diameter; and
• inability of small communities to spread capital costs among larger
populations sewered previously.
In addition to the comparatively high costs of sewers, facilities were some-
times found to be more expensive than necessary due to:
• Oversophistication in design, large energy requirements, and
costly maintenance and operator expense;
12
-------
Use of expensive construction materials such as non-locally
produced brick and block and terrazzo when a prefab steel and
concrete building would do; and
Abandonment of existing treatment works without economic justi-
fication.
FIGURE I- 5
40
•
| 30
10
COST ($/month)= 43« •°-l(">/a)
Sourer Dearth 1977
I I I i
246 3 10 12 14
POPULATION DENSITY (persons/acre)
MONTHLY COST OF GRAVITY SEWERS
2. SECONDARY IMPACTS
Installation of centralized collection and treatment systems in pre-
viously 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 environ-
mental protection.
A community's potential for recreational, residential, industrial,
commercial or institutional development is determined by economic factors
such as the availability of land, capital, skilled manpower and natural
resources. However, fulfillment of this potential can be limited by the
unavailability of facilities or services such as water supply, sewerage,
electric power distribution and transportation. If a missing community
service 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 community service element.
13
-------
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 commerical
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 engi-
neering and management are integral parts of such a system and "decentralized
alternatives," as used in this EIS, incorporate both engineering and manage-
ment 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 for the
systems' installation, maintenance and rehabilitation and of 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.
In some cases implementation of these requirements by municipalities may
be hendered by lack of state enabling legislation for small waste flow
management districts and by lack of adequately trained manpower. The
municipality may have no control over the former and be at a disadvantage
because of the latter. Other implementation factors, over which municipal-
ities should have control, are discussed in Section III.D. of this EIS.
D. PURPOSE AND APPROACH OF THIS EIS AND CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION
OF ALTERNATIVES
1. PURPOSE
This EIS documents EPA's review and analysis of the application for
EPA Step 2 funding of the Facility Plan Proposed Action. Based upon this
review, the Agency will take one of several actions:
14
-------
• Approve the grant application, possibly with recommendations for
design changes and/or measures to mitigate impacts of the
Facilities Plan Proposed Action;
• Return the application with recommendations for additional Step 1
analysis;
• With the applicant's and State's concurrence, approve Step 2
funding for an alternative to the Facility Plan Proposed Action,
as presented in this EIS; or
• Reject the grant application.
The review and analysis focused on the issues identified in Section I.E.
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 evaluations of the Facility Plan
Proposed Action and of the new alternatives developed for the EIS. Documents
consulted are listed in the bibliography at the end of this volume.
b. Segment Analysis
As a basis for revised population projections and for development of
alternatives, the EIS Proposed Service Area was partitioned into 27 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 areas andland use capa-
bilities 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 wastewater
flows were then used to revise the year 2000 wastewater flow projections.
15
-------
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 Chapters III and IV, respectively.
e. Estimation of Costs for Alternatives
In order to assure comparability of costs between the Facility Plan
Proposed Action and new alternatives, all alternatives were designed to serve
a fixed design year (2000) 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 cirteria for evaluat-
ing the Facilities Plan Proposed Action and the new alternatives are
listed in Section I.D.3 below.
g. Needs Documentation
Although indirect evidence was presented in the Facility Plan indicating
that there may be a water quality problem directly attributed to malfunction-
ing lakeshore septic systems, the relationship between deteriorating water
quality and inadequately functioning septic systems was not documented.
Because determination of eligibility for Federal funding of a substantial
portion of the Facility Plan Proposed Action will be based on the documen-
tation of these effects, 3 supplemental studies were conducted:
• an aerial survey (May, 1978) of visible septic tank system
malfunctions using low-altitude color and infrared photography
by EPA's Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC);
• estimation of the nutrient budget and empirical modeling of the
eutrophication status of all the lakes in the District (except
Peat Lake);
• a "Septic Snooper" survey (February, 1979) to locate and sample
septic tank leachate plumes entering Silver Lake, Center Lake,
Camp Lake, Voltz Lake and Benet/Shangrila Lake from nearby on-site
systems;
16
-------
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 for Federal funding of any new sewers
around the lakes in Salem Utility District No. 2.
h. Public Participation
During the preparation of this EIS, EPA conducted 2 Public Information
Meetings to discuss project scope and issues as well as preliminary EIS
Alternatives with interested citizens.
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 opera-
tion, maintenance and local debt retirement costs through periodic sewage
bills. The local economic impact of new wastewater facilities publicly
financed costs were included in residential user charges. Salvage was not
factored into residential user charges.
In addition, some homeowners may incur costs that they would directly
have to pay to contractors. Installation of gravity house sewers on private
land and renovation or replacement of privately owned on-lot systems for
seansonally occupied dwellings are not eligible for Federal funding and are
seldom financed by municipalities. These private costs are identified for
each alternative.
17
-------
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 new alternatives, several types of impacts were determined
to warrant in-depth evaluation and discussion in this EIS. These impacts
are classified as follows:
Surface Water Quality Impacts;
Groundwater Impacts;
Population and Land Use Impacts;
Economic Impacts; and
Development on Environmentally Sensitive Areas.
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 aplied inthe analysis
of surface and groundwater impacts of the alternatives presented in
Chapter IV. That analysis assumedthat the collection, treatment and dis-
posal units of each alternative would operate effectively as designed. This
second criterion recognizes that all structural, mechanical and electrical
facilities are subject to failure.
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 invest-
ment 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 District. The capability of the alternatives to accommodate increased
wastewater flows is reviewed in Chapter III. The effects of the alternatives'
flexibility on population growth are predicted in Chapter IV.
18
-------
CHAPTER II
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
A. PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
1. PHYSIOGRAPHIC AND TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES
An uneven bedrock surface and overlying glacial deposits have largely
determined land form and variations in elevation within Salem Utility
District No. 2 (Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission [SEWRPC]
1969). The retreat of the last continental glacier over 10,000 years ago
produced a gently rolling landscape, known as a ground moraine*, consisting
of lakes, marshes, and pitted glacial outwash areas which has since only
been slightly modified by erosional processes and human activity.
The land surface within the Study Area generally slopes westward about
40 feet per mile toward the Fox River. Topographic elevations range from
850 feet above mean sea level (MSL) east of Cross Lake to about 740 feet
above MSL on the Fox River shore near Wilmot. Topographic relief of Salem
Utility District No. 2, including land which is sensitive to development
(i.e., slopes greater than 15%), is illustrated in Figure II-l.
The large morainic hill (over 850 feet above MSL) located between
Silver Lake and Center Lake exemplifies the irregular topography of the
Study Area. The base of this hill comprises the southern shore of Silver
Lake and the northern shore of Center Lake.
2. GEOLOGY
a. Bedrock Geology
The bedrock* underlying Salem Utility District No. 2 is comprised of
sandstone, limestone, dolomite and shale of the Silurian, Ordovician and
Cambrian ages which gradually dip eastward toward Lake Michigan (U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, Chicago District, 1976). There are no identified out-
crops of bedrock in the Study Area (Jensen and Johnson, Inc. 1976). Water-
yielding properties of rock strata beneath the Fox River watershed (including
the Salem area) are described in Table II-l.
b. Surficial Geology
As earlier indicated, the Study Area was once subject to the erosional
and depositional processes of continental glaciation. Following the slow
northward retreat of the great ice sheets, melt water carrying sand and rock
debris partially filled the low-lying Fox River watershed. The Salem area
consequently contains broad unconsolidated layers of silt, sand, gravel, and
other ice-contact materials which are reported to vary from 100 to 300 feet
in thickness (Jensen and Johnson 1976). The properties of these unconsoli-
dated deposits in the area under study are described in Table II-2 (SEWRPC
1969) .
19
-------
§
w
en
o
fd
W
S5
w
H
Hi
H
33
C/2
H
I
20
-------
Table II-l
STRATIGRAPHY OF THE FOX RIVER WATERSHED
AND THE WATER-YIELDING CHARACTERISTICS OF THE ROCK UNITS
Unit
itlutfiu* . . • **cint
Jcl itt formation
i
tdgtwood QoioMit*
\
Galena Oolomt* ]
Plattvvill* Formation.
Formation . j
5*ndttoni
E«u CUire
Mount Simon %
S*na«ton« •
h
Thickntu Description
Ringa (ft«t)
[
I in upp«r portion.
abundant.
i 0- 1 30 '
\ , !
ilate.
insignificant: locally M,M ,,.ld -.tar fro. ,.nd.
§ to 1,500 gpfl.
Unit
and
firav.l ^
qui «rs
Dolomite
Iquifir1
Aquicl ud«
Aquifer*
,
21
-------
Table II-2
LITHOLOGY AND WATER-YIELDING CHARACTERISTICS OF THE UNCONSOLIDATED
DEPOSITS OF PLEISTOCENE AND RECENT AGES IN THE FOX RIVER WATERSHED
Uni t
Organ i c
Depos i ts
Glacial Lake
Oepos i ts
( 1 acustrtne)
and Stream
Al 1 u v i urn
Outwash
1 ce-Contact
Oepos i t s
Glacial
Ti i 1
General Oescr i pt i on
Peat and Muck
Clay, silt, sana, and marl:
sorted and stratified.
Mostly sand and gravel:
sorted and stratified.
Clay, silt, sand, gravel,
and boulders: un st ra 1 1 f i ed
to stratified and unsorted
to sorted.
Clay, silt, sand, gravel,
and boulders; unsorted and
unstratified
Maximum
ThicKness
(Feet)
50
25
ISO
100
400
Water-yi el ding Character* sti cs
lit
source of water for wells. Pits are
sometimes dug to expose ground water
for use in irrigation.
Sand may yield small quantities of*ater.
Yield small-to-large quantitiesofwater.
are most favorable for obtaining large
yields.
Yield small quantities of water. Thick
sections of sand and gravel in buried
valleys may yield moderate- to- large
quantities of water.
Permeability low to very low. Isolated
lenses of sand and gravel may yierd
small quantities of water to wells.
Sowrce; U. S. Geological Survey.
The eastern portion of the Salem area is dominated by silty-clay loam
glacial till that is poorly drained, while the western half contains mostly
organic deposits and glacial outwash (see Figure II-2). The high permeabil-
ity that is characteristic of these outwash materials is reduced in areas
where the water table is near the land surface (Hutchinson 1970).
c. Adverse Geologic Conditions
The risk of damaging earthquake activity in the Study Area is minor,
based on the fact that no damaging earthquakes (Modified Mercalli Intensity
Scale of V or higher) have been recorded within 50 miles of the Salem area.
No active faults have been identified in Kenosha County.
3. SOILS
a. Overview
Approximately 93% of the soils within the Salem Study Area are silty
clay loams derived primarily from clay, silt, sand, and boulders deposited
by glacial ice (Hutchinson 1970; Link and Demo 1970). Three soil associa-
tions are represented with the Study Area; 1) the Morley-Beecher-Ashkum
Association which is comprised of a silty clay loam, underlain by glacial
till*; 2) The Hebron-Montgomery-Aztalan Association which is comprised of
silty clay loam, underlain by loam and silty clay; and 3) the remaining 7%
of the Study Area is comprised of the Fox-Casco Association which contains
well drained soils underlain by clay loam and silty clay loam. An identifi-
cation of the major soil types, or series, in the Study Area, as well as a
description of their permeability, compaction, expansion, depth to seasonal
high groundwater, and other characteristics that are utilized in the develop-
ment of wastewater management alternatives is presented in Table II-l.
22
-------
o
z
H
O
CO
t—I
Q
H
M
>J
M
H
5H
O
O
O
O
CK!
Q
O
CO
w
OS
o
-------
The soils listed in Table II-l may also pose limitations for residential
development because of their credibility, high shrink-well potential, and
shallow depth to the water table. It is estimated from the data developed
in the Kenosha County Soil Survey (Link and Demo 1970) that approximately
40% of the soils within the Salem Study Area have such limitations. This
percentage has been considered in addressing future residential development
within the Study Area. Soils with severe limitations for such development
within the Study Area are primarily located west and south of Camp Lake,
as well as in the floodplain of the Fox River.
b. Soil Suitability for Wastewater Disposal
In Salem Utility District No. 2, soil suitability determines the extent
to which alternatives to centralized wastewater treatment-surface water dis-
charge systems may be developed. Potential options involving the use of
soil for wastewater treatment and disposal include septic tank-soil absorp-
tion systems (ST/SAS), cluster systems, and land application systems (dis-
cussed in Chapter III). Soil factors that determine the feasibility of
on-site and land disposal of wastewater, including some of those listed in
Table II-l, are discussed in Appendix A-2.
Based upon information developed in the Kenosha County Soil Survey
(Link and Demo 1970), it is estimated that approximately 65% of the soils
in Salem Utility District No. 2 have severer or very severe^ limitations for
on-site disposal of wastewater (see Figure II-3) due to shallow soil depth
over groundwater, poor internal drainage of subsoils or both. Because of
the wide distribution of unsuitable soils, developed or potentially develop-
able lots, especially around the numerous lakes, cannot be adequately served
by on-lot or near off-lot soil dependent systems.
Any further use of subsurface sewage disposal fields should be restricted
to Fox, Casco, and Miami loams. Soils of the Casco and Fox series dominate
the area between Silver Lake and Center Lake. These soils are loamy and
underlain by sand and gravel. They are moderately well suited for on-site
sewage disposal systems, although use of Fox series soils may possibly con-
taminate groundwater because the sand layer allows rapid percolation. Casco
soils have severe limitations for on-site sewage systems if the slope of the
land is greater than 12% (Link and Demo 1970) . Some low density use of the
well drained Hebron and Morley silt loams for disposal fields might be
acceptable if special design features such as dual, alternating subsurface
fields, intermittent dosing and/or flow reduction measures are required.
*A rating of severe indicates that the soil has limitations very difficult or
expensive to overcome or correct.
2A rating of very severe indicates that the soil has limitations that gener-
ally preclude its use for a given purpose.
24
-------
TABLE II-2 Summary of physical properties and
water-yielding characteristics of rock units in
Racine and Kenosha Counties, Wisconsin
Rock units
and age
Physical Thickness Hydrologic units and water-
properties (ft) yielding, characteristics
Pleistocene and
Holocene
deposits
cfl
3
o-
Unsorted mixture
of clay, silt,
sand, gravel,
and boulders;
stratified sand
and gravel; lake
silt and clay;
organic remains.
0-340
Sand and
gravel
aquifer
Small to moderate
yields can be
obtained from
large sand and
gravel aquifers.
Niagara Dolomite Dolomite, fine- to
and Alexandrian medium-crystal-
Series undiffer- line, and sandy
entiated chert nodules;
some shale near
base.
0-345
Niagara
aquifer
Yields range from
very small to
large, depending
upon size and
number of
crevices pene-
trated and de-
velopment of
wells.
Maquoketa Shale
Platteville,
Decorah, and
Galena Forma-
tions undiffer-
entiated
•H
a
•H
o St.
M
o
Peter
Sandstone
Shale, dolomitic;
fine- to medium-
crystalline
dolomite and
interbedded
shale common
near the top.
Dolomite, fine-
to medium-
crystalline,
dense, cherty;
some sandstone
and shale near
base.
Sandstone, fine-
to coarse-
grained , cher ty,
friable; sandy
dolomite and
shale common in
top; base may
contain conglo-
merate or shale.
.Prairie du
Chien Group
180-250 Aquiclude
Dolomite, sandy,
cherty.
250-345
45-200
Sandstone
aquifer
0-60
25
Sandstone
aquifer
Shale yields small
quantities of
water; requires
casing. Largest
supplies can be
obtained locally
from interbedded
dolomite.
Yields small quan-
tities of water
from crevices;
rarely used as
the only source
of supply.
Yields moderate
amounts of
water; requires
casing in some
wells.
Water yield
generally small.
-------
Summary of physical properties and
water-yielding characteristics of rock units in
Racine and Kenosha Counties, Wisconsin (Continued)
Rock units
and age
Physical
properties
Thickness Hydrologic units and water-
(f t) yielding characteristics
Trempealeau
Formation
Franconia and
Galesville
Sandstones
undifferen-
tiated
c
CO
•H
t-t
Eau Claire
Sandstone
Dolomite, crystal- 0-120
line, sandy; may
contain thin
dolomitic sand-
stone and shale.
Sandstone, fine- 60-150
to medium-grained;
fair sorting;
friable; dolomite
decreases toward
base; grain size
increases toward
base; shale, silt-
stone, and dolo-
mite common.
Sandstone, fine- 340-405
to medium-grained,
well-sorted, dolo-
mitic, compact;
dolomitic shale
and siltstone most
common in the up-
per two thirds of
formation.
Sandstone Water yield gen-
aquifer erally small, but
exceptionally
large yields are
reported from
cavities enlarged
by solution.
Sandstone Yields moderate
aquifer to large quanti-
ties from well-
sorted sandstone
near the base.
Sandstone Only small quanti-
aquifer ties of water can
be expected, but
yields probably
increase toward
the north as the
rock becomes
coarser grained.
Mount Simon
Sandstone
Sandstone, fine- to
coarse-grained,
poorly cemented,
friable; shale
and siltstone up
to 60 ft. thick
near Burlington.
637+
(Total
thickness
may be
more
than 1,500
ft.)
Yields moderate
to large amounts
of water where
the rock con-
tains only a
few beds of
fine-grained
material.
Precambrian rocks
Unknown.
Unknown.
Not water bearing.
Source: Hutchinson, 1970.
26
-------
H
CJ
H
CO
H
I—I
J
M
H
C/3
w
P3
H
H
M
hJ
I—I
PQ
H
i—I
in
CO
O
CO
ro
I
M
M
C=>
M
I*
27
-------
Soil suitability criteria for surface application (i.e., spray irrigation)
of treated wastewater are similar to those required for subsurface sewage dis-
posal. The degree of slope, soil texture, internal drainage, depth to
seasonal high groundwater, along with other factors such as proximity to
developed property and surface water bodies are considered in the selection
of potential land application sites. Suitable soils on land of sufficient
size for treatment of wastewater are located west of Wilmot. In this area,
soils of the Casco and Fox series are dominant.
c. Prime Agricultural Lands
The US Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, has
published general guidelines for a national program to inventory prime and
unique farmlands, as well as other farmlands of statewide or local importance
(Federal Register, Volume 42, August 23, 1977). The identification of prime
agricultural land in Kenosha County has been completed (Link and Demo 1970).
It is reported that nearly all of this land in Kenosha County is composed of
soils in the following two capability classes (By telephone, Mr. Klingelhoets,
April 13, 1978):
Class I: Soils with few limitations that restrict their use.
Class II: Soils with some limitations (i.e., erodability, wetness,
shallowness, etc.) that reduce the choice of plants or
require special conservation of practices.
Although there are currently no limitations regarding surface application
of treated wastewater on prime agricultural land in Kenosha County, it is
advised that soils of the following classes be considered most favorable for
this practice: Classes1 I, II, He or Us (by telephone, Mr. Klingelhoets,
April 13, 1978). Approximately 20% of the land within Salem Utility District
No. 2 has been identified as prime agricultural land.2
4. ATMOSPHERE
a. Climate
Kenosha County has a humid continental climate which is influenced to a
large extent by Lake Michigan and characterized by warm summers and cold
winters. Large high-pressure systems moving southward from Canada also have
a pronounced effect on the climate of this area, often causing distinct
changes in the weather, particularly during the winter and spring months.
•""Capability subclasses are soil groups within one class; they are designated
by a small letter which follows the Roman Numeral II. (There are no sub-
classes in Class I because these soils have few limitations). Examples are
"e" = risk of erosion is main limitation; "w" = wet soil; "s" = droughty,
shallow, or stony soil. Class I and Ile/w/s soils are the criteria upon
which prime agricultural land is identified in Kenosha County.
2Estimate based upon information in: Link, Ernest G., and Owen R. Demo. 1970.
Soil survey of Kenosha and Racine Counties, Wisconsin.
28
-------
Weather data from the nearest U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration's (U.S.D.C. - NOAA) weather stations (Antioch,
Illinois and Racine, Wisconsin) are utilized in developing temperature and
precipitation normals for Salem Utility District No. 2. This information is
presented in Appendix B-l.
The average annual temperature in the Study Area is 48°F. The warmest
month during the year is July and the coolest month is January. Summer
temperatures of 90°F or above are not unusual during July and August. Mini-
mum temperatures of 20°F or below are common during the winter months.
The average annual precipitation is approximately 33 inches. The
wettest months during the year are June and July, and the driest month is
February. Over 60% of the precipitation occurs during the growing season
(May to October). The average annual snowfall is approximately 40 inches.
Detailed information on temperature and precipitation within the Study Area
is presented in Appendix B-l.
On an annual basis, wind speeds in the Salem Area average 7 miles per
hour. The windiest time of the year is from January to April, when the
average speed is 10 mph; the summer months are the least windy of the year
with the average speed being 5 mph (U.S. Geological Survey 1970). Pre-
vailing seasonal wind direction is listed below:
Season Direction
Winter West by Northwest (WNW)
Spring East by Northeast (ENE)
Summer South by Southwest (SSW)
Autumn North by Northwest (NNW)
b. Air Quality
The State of Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) does not
maintain an air quality sampling station in Salem Utility District No. 2.
Although several stations are maintained in the City of Kenosha and Lake
Geneva, readings from those locations may not be representative of the Study
Area (by telephone, Julian Chazin, Wisconsin DNR, Air Quality Division,
November 29, 1977).
The National Ambient Air Quality Standards which are enforced by the
State of Wisconsin, are shown in Appendix B-2. Standards for suspended
particulates may be exceeded during periods of unusual weather conditions.
For example, in 1976, a severe drought in the Upper Great Plains states
resulted in unusually dry soil conditions. The passage of a cold front with
strong winds (in excess of 50 miles per hour in the Dakotas) led to both local
and long-range transport of dust. This period was also one with significant
farm field activities which contributed to the generation of airborne dust
(Michigan DNR 1976).
29
-------
c. Odors
Complaints reported by local residents of objectionable odors associated
with on-site septic system failures are common throughout the Study Area,
particularly during the summer months (Interview, Russell Hoel, Salem Town-
ship Highway Department Supervisor, December 16, 1977). These offensive odors
are produced when anaerobic* conditions in the soil do not allow for complete
oxidation* of the organic materials in sewage, which contain sulfur and/or
nitrogen.
d. Noise
The ambient noise level in the Study Area is judged to be approximately
40 decibels* (Scale A) (dBA) which is considered to be representative of quiet:
outdoor communities (U.S. Department of Transportation 1978). Aside from
higher (more than 40 dBA) sound levels associated with highways, motorboats,
or aircraft flyovers, no excessive noise sources have been identified in the
District.
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 productivity 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 ground-
water as well as to surface waters.
Important provisions of the Clean Water Act of 1977 are described in
Appendix C-l, and some relevant activities of Federal agencies in the Study
Area are listed there. Pertinent State and local laws and agencies are also
listed.
2. GROUNDWATER HYDROLOGY
Salem Utility District No. 2 lies within the extreme southeastern region
of the Rock-Fox River Basin (see Figure II-4). There are four main aquifers
found within this basin, including: the Sand and Gravel aquifer, the Niagara
aquifer; the Platteville-Galena aquifer; and the Sandstone aquifer. A summary
of the physical properties of these aquifers is shown in Table II-3. A
general cross section of the deep and shallow aquifers in the Study Area is
illustrated in Figure II-5.
30
-------
FIGURE I1-4 GROUNDWATER
HYDROLOGY OF SALEM UTILITY
DISTRICT NO. 2
Source: Cotter, et al,
1969; Wisconsin, DNR
1969
A —
B —
C —
D —
E —
r —
G —
H —
I —
LEGEND
SURFACE WATER DIVIDE
GROUNDWATER DIVIDE
DIRECTION OF GROUNDWATER
MOVEMENT (WATER-TABLE
AQUIFER)
WEST LIMIT OF MAQUOKETA
SHALE
RECHARGE AREA FOR
ARTESIAN SYSTEM
DIRECTION OF GROUNDWATER
MOVEMENT (ARTESIAN
AQUIFER)
PERCHED OR SEMI-PERCHED
LAKE
SILVER LAKE
CENTER LAKE
CAMP LAKE
PEAT LAKE
ROCK LAKE
CROSS LAKE
VOLTZ LAKE
LAKE SHANGRILA
BENET LAKE
Salem Utility District No. 2
Groundwater
fed
-------
FIGURE II-5 GENERAL CROSS SECTION OF THE DEEP AND SHALLOW
AQUIFERS IN SALEM UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 2
STREAM,LAKE
OR WETLAND
(NOT TO SCALE)
LEGEND
SANDSTONE AQUIFER
PLATTEVILLE GALENA AQUIFER
MAQUOKETA SHALE
SAND AND GRAVEL AQUIFER
NIAGARA AQUIFER
The semi-impermeable, eastward-dipping Maquoketa shale acts as a natural
barrier (aquilude*) between the shallow Sand and Gravel and Niagara aquifers
and the deeper Platteville-Galena and Sandstone aquifers. Very insignificant
quantities of water pass through the Maquoketa shale to the deeper aquifers
which are under artesian* pressures. The recharge to these deep artesian
aquifers takes place mainly at the western limit of the shale, shown in
Figure II-4. Since the Study Area is outside of this recharge zone, on-
site and other forms of land disposal of human wastes within the Study Area
will have no significant impact upon these two deep aquifers. The remaining
discussion, therefore, focuses mainly on the shallower aquifers overlying
the Maquoketa shale.
32
-------
The Sand and Gravel Aquifers are usually comprised of poorly sorted
angular material varying in size from boulders to silt and clay. Well
yields found in this type of material render this aquifer suitable for
domestic use. These deposits are under artesian conditions throughout
the Study Area due to the presence of an impermeable clay layer.
To the east of Trevor these deposits are mainly comprised of silty-clay
till which permits very little infiltration and percolation of water,
resulting in the perched lakes found throughout that area (see Figure II-4).
To the west of Trevor the sands and gravels are characterized by
localized artesian conditions. An ill-defined system of both water table*
and artesian conditions exist in these glacial deposits and nearby wells
may consequently have very different water levels. The sand and gravel
aquifers overlie the Niagara aquifer and are sometimes considered as a
single unit.
The Niagara Aquifer is the principal shallow aquifer overlying the
Maquoketa shale. In areas such as those east of Trevor where it is overlain
by confining silty-clay deposits, it is under artesian pressure. It exhibits
water table characteristics in those local areas where it is overlain by
unconfined sands and gravels. Well yields are variable but nearly all wells
produce the 10 gpm necessary for domestic use.
Recharge to aquifers in the Study Area is mainly in the form of
precipitation percolating through the glacial drift. Recharge occurs in
those areas west of Trevor where water table conditions exist. These are
also the area through which wastewater effluents may enter the aquifers.
These shallow aquifers discharge mainly to the Fox River and its
tributaries in the Study Area. Portions of the aquifers east of the ground-
water divide in the Study Area (see Figure II-4), discharge to small
tributaries of the Des Plaines River.
3. GROUNDWATER QUALITY
Groundwater in Salem Utility District No. 2 is generally of good
quality and suitable for most purposes. Most problems are related to
hardness and localized high iron concentrations.
No information is available on nitrate concentrations and bacterial
contamination of groundwater specifically within the Study Area. Cotter
et al. (1969) have indicated that nitrate concentrations in the entire
Rock-Fox Basin range from 0.1 mg/1 to 82 mg/1 with a median of 2.1 mg/1 and
that the corresponding concentrations for phosphates are 0.07 mg/1, 0.58 mg/1
and 0.11 mg/1. The Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission (1969)
has however, indicated that the Study Area is not among those limited areas
in the basin where the water table is covered by less than 20 feet of permeable
sand and gravel and constitute potential pollution and public health hazards
from septic tank effluents.
33
-------
4. GROUNDWATER USE
The shallow sand and gravel, and Niagara aquifers constitute the main
source of domestic water supplies within the Study Area. Should a change
be made in municipal water supply demands (as well as major industrial ones),
the better yielding sandstone aquifer could become important as a water
supply source in the Study Area.
5. SURFACE WATER HYDROLOGY
Silver Lake, Center Lake, Camp Lake, Rock Lake, Voltz Lake, Benet Lake
and Lake Shangrila,1 the Fox River and Trevor River are the major surface water
systems located in or adjacent to the Study Area (Figure II-6). Silver Lake
borders on the northern fringe of the Study Area and discharges into the Fox
River which continues on to the Fox River Chain 0'Lakes in Illinois. Center
Lake and Camp Lake are situated in the central portion of the Study Area.
Seasonally intermittent flow from Center Lake to Camp Lake during periods of
high rainfall provides the link between these two lakes. Voltz Lake, Cross
Lake, and Rock Lake are located in the eastern portion of the Study Area
and drain into Trevor Creek which in turn enters Lake Catherine in Illinois.
The Fox River receives over 90% of the runoff from the Study Area while the
remaining portion of the runoff is received by the Des Plaines River.
The lakes in or adjacent to Salem Utility District No. 2 are typically
of glacial origin, being formed by depressions in ground moraines and outwash
deposits. Center Lake, Cross Lake, and Voltz Lake are kettle lakes, occupying
depressions formed by melting ice blocks that were lodged in glacial debris
thousands of years ago.
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, hydraulic retention time
and precipitation directly influence the quantity and quality of surface
water resources. Table II-4 presents the physical characteristics of the lakes,
Additional discussions on these parameters follow in the next few paragraphs.
a. Size of Drainage Basins
The drainage basin sizes vary from 314 acres for Voltz Lake to 6,637
acres for Camp Lake. The larger watersheds act as significant catchments of
precipitation which is transferred as runoff to the lakes. Another important
parameter that is closely related to the size of drainage basin is the lake
surface area. In order to properly represent the combined effect of these
two factors, the ratio of drainage basin size to lake surface area is used.
A large ratio reflects the relatively significant amount of surface runoff
compared with the annual precipitation. In Salem Utility District No. 2, the
smallest ratio is 3.7 for Cross Lake while the largest ratio is 17.9 for Center
Lake. The drainage basins, or watersheds, and lakes in the District are
illustrated in Figure II-7.
Hereafter referred to as Benet/Shangrila Lake.
34
-------
-------
LEGEND
LAKE WATERSHED BOUNDARY
DIVIDE BETWEEN FOX RIVER
BASIN AND DES PLAINES
RIVER BASIN
[Source: Wisconsin DNR;
USGS 1972;
SEWRPC.j
FEET
50OO
FIGURE II-7 WATERSHEDS OF LAKES IN SALEM UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 2
36
-------
n t-
ht 93
O ^*
co ro
CO
G
f CO
03 ro
j>^*
ro to
»* ro
•a
f o
03 If
Pf rt
ro
2j
G 0
CO •
ro
*rj
pd X
N3
•
s:
H-
CO
O
O
3
CO
H-
3
a
ro
•a
03
rt
3
ro
3
rt
O
l_i
•
5^
H-
CO
n
o
3
CO
H-
3
O
ro
•a
03
rt
3
ro
3
rt
O
H
3"
ro
H>
0
i— *
H1
o
^
H-
3
OP
CO
o
c
i-t
0
ro
ca
S
ro
t-f
ro
g
ro
93
3
EC
PL.
n
03
e
i-1
H-
n
pa
ro
rt
ro
3
rt
H-
0
3
H
f
93
?r
ro
<
0
f—1
c
3
^-V,
03
O
I-t
ro
i
HI
rt
N^ '
O
c
rt
HI
O
s
/— N
O
Hi
CO
s^^
M
3
Hi
J_i
O
s:
^s
n
HI
CO
\^/
S
03
H-
3
3
a
ro
*o
rt
D*
X^s,
Ml
rr
N^/
r1
&j
ro
p*
ro
03
3
G
ro
T)
rt
0*
,~*i
Hi
rt
•^^s
r1
91
ro
en
c
f-(
Hi
93
ro
>
ro
93
y^
03
O
fr-f
ro
CO
\^^
a
93
H-
3
93
OQ
ro
td
^
co *-d
H- &3
r^ H
93
> 3
n ro
ro rt
93 ro
x— ^
91
n
&-$
ro
CO
ho
•
n f S3
H 01 H-
O ^* CO
co ro o
CO O
G 3
f CO CO
01 ro H-
?N* 3
ro to
» ro a
•a ro
f O T3
03 I-t 03
7? rt M
ro rt
G o ro
co • 3
ro rt
pa x o
ro i HI
*^3 ho
o -.j a
I-! *•• 03
rt rt
n c
a 01 >-(
0 3 91
. 13 H*
*i t-< pa
X 93 ro
i ?r co
u> ro o
LTT *• C
• (^
t-< n
03 ro
?^ co
ro •
G
CO I-1
ro vo
ON
po vo
•a
o
H, en
rt H-
H-1
a <
o ro
• H
tTj t-1
X 03
1 7?
M ro
ro •
*•
< t-1
O 93
i- ?r
rt fD
N
f CO
93 ro
t***
ro po
- ro
r* o
93 H
7!" rt
ro
G 0
CO •
ro
*xl
ro i
•0 M
O N3
f( >«•
rr
n
a ro
0 3
ro
h^ h^
^
i f
Ul JC
ro
i_i
•
g
H-
CO
f3
O
3
CO
H-
3
O
ro
•a
93
rt
3
ro
3
rt
O
Hi
a
93
rt
C
93
h™1
PO
ro
CO
0
c
•I
0
ro
CO
•
t—i
VO
^4
Ui
n
93
at
CO
H*
Hi
H-
0
03
rt
H-
O
3
O
Hi
S3
H*
CO
0
o
3
CO
LJ
p^*
3
t-1
01
ro
CO
tr
*<
H
O
•a
3*
H-
n
n
o
3
Cu
H'*
rt
f^»
o
3
H
sr
ro
HI
0
i-^
i-1
o
^
H-
3
OQ
CO
o
c
I-t
0
ro
ca
S
ro
ro
c
CO
ro
a.
rt
o
o.
ro
i-t
H-
ro
rt
3*
ro
03
O^
o
^
ro
t i
r**
3
i~h
o
l-l
3
03
rt
H-
O
3
3
ro
N3
CX3
U)
o
10
00
o
oo
N>
N3
ON
-P- U!
ON
IO H-1
N3 VO
Ul O
to
I—i vo
O O
• *
oo -j
o o
u> i-1
to
IO
00
o
IO
10
U3
Ul
oo
l-n
co
.p-
NJ
(jO
o
ON
ON
U3
ON
CO
10
*~
•-J
*-
N3
Ln
to
en
tr* H-
03 I-1
n
f ro
03 3
ro ro
91 91
!T 3
t-* pa
91 o
PT* O
r1 <
91 o
ro rt
N
r1 o
p I-t
?N* O
ro ca
CO
ro
s
ro
rt
f^ 3*
fD 93
3
OQ
i-i
n
H
91
cr
ro
37
-------
b. Tributary Flow
The major streams in the Study Area are Fox River and Trevor Creek. The
2 mile stretch of the Fox River that passes through the western portion of
Salem Utility District No. 2 is part of the 185 mile river which originates
near Waukesha, Wisconsin and flows into the Illinois River at Ottawa, Illinois.
The U.S. Geological Survey has operated a gauging station at Wilmot. The
average discharge at this station over the 27 year period is 453 cfs
(12.8 cms) (Cotter _et_ al 1969) while the 7 day, 10 year low flow is estimated
to be 51 cfs (1.44 cms).
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.
Given the fact that variation due to seasonal stratification and short-
circuiting of flow may occur in the lake, the completely-mixed assumption
provides an approximation of the lake flushing rate which is important in
assessing the lake trophic conditions. Table II-4 shows that the hydraulic
retention time varies from 0.6 years for Camp Lake to 5.1 years for Cross
Lake.
6. SURFACE WATER USE AND CLASSIFICATION
The freshwater lakes in Salem Utility District No. 2 provide recreational
opportunities for fishing, boating, hunting, trapping and wildlife observation.
Lake waters do not serve as domestic water supplies nor for wastewater
assimilation.
The stretch of the Fox River within the Study Area provides use similar
to those identified for the lakes. It is not being used for public water
supply. Although there is no direct wastewater discharges to that portion
of the river in the Study Area, there are 12 municipal and 19 industrial
wastewater discharges upstream of Wilmot (SEWRPC 1970).
All lakes within the Study Area must meet the water quality requirements
that provide protection of fish and aquatic life and support recreation. The
water quality standards for these uses for these surface water systems are
included in Appendix C-l.
7. SURFACE WATER QUALITY
This section presents the water quality of the lakes in the following
order: nutrient inputs, open water quality, phosphorus loading-trophic con-
dition relationships, bacterial contamination, and shoreline conditions. The
discussion is intended to put the surface water quality into perspective by
independently presenting the nutrient loadings and lake water quality, and
connecting these two aspects by using the simplified phosphorus loading—
trophic condition relationships. Most of the information presented is com-
piled from the data collected by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
(see Appendix C-2).
38
-------
a. Nutrient Loadings
Since the local perception of surface water quality has largely focused
on nutrient enrichment of lakes in the Study Area, it is important to address
the origin of the nutrients that are contributed to these lakes. Nutrient
loadings for Rock Lake, Center Lake, Benet/Shangrila Lake, Camp Lake, Cross
Lake, Voltz Lake, and Silver Lake have heen developed based on the assumptions
and methodologies developed by the EPA National Eutrophication Survey (1972).
Because of the limited data available for the analysis, the nutrient loadings
derived and presented is considered to be the best estimation with available
data and standard methodologies. Nutrient exports from non-point sources
(agricultural and forest) were estimated using Omernik's model (1977) and
septic tank phosphorus loadings were calculated based on EPA's assumption of
0.25 kg P/cap/yr. Nutrient contributions from direct precipitation on the
lake surface and immediate drainage runoff were also included in the loading
calculation. Other nutrient sources such as groundwater, transient waterfowl,
leaf fall, sediment release and detritus are not significant on an annual
basis and therefore, are not included in this analysis.
The total phosphorus loading for all the lakes is shown in Figure II-8
with percentage breakdown by source. As indicated, non-point source runoff
via tributaries represent the most significant phosphorus source followed by
the septic tank systems. All of the lakes with the exception of Silver Lake,
receive a relatively large portion of phosphorus (approximately 19 to 58% of
total phosphorus load) from septic tanks. For a detailed nutrient (phosphorus
and nitrogen) loading characteristics of these lakes, see Appendix C-3..
b. Lake Water Quality
Water quality data made available from the State of Wisconsin Department
of Natural Resources were analyzed to present the water quality of the open
waters in these lakes. Both physical and chemical characteristics of these
lakes are presented in Appendix C-4. Because eutrophication is the main
concern of the lake water quality, the key chemical parameters related to
eutrophication were plotted over the last 5 years and are presented in
Appendix C-4. Also shown for comparison are the parameter values developed
by the EPA National Eutrophication Survey to define the trophic conditions
of lakes. The comparison indicates that all these lakes are more or less in
the mesotrophic and eutrophic categories. Table II-5 summarizes the trophic
levels of these lakes in Salem Utility District No. 2.
The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources has reported winterkill of
fish in both Camp Lake and Benet/Shangrila Lake. This phenomenon may be attri-
buted to oxygen depletion caused by interaction of physical and biochemical
processes in these lakes with shallow depth and high fertility. It is sus-
pected that these two lakes may become anoxic* under snow and ice cover. For
a general description of lake water quality, see Appendix C-5.
39
-------
TOTAL PHOSPHORUS LOADING (KG/YR)
c
ro
m-u
mm
SO
0
i-m
>z
mm
3)
M
IS
>
f-a»
>o
m;*
r-g
n<
mN
— — PO
Ol O Ot O
> o o o o
1 1 « 1
v
-4 _
<0 « 0
3« # 3*
' '..''' '£§§§
u *
O M •"!
; •-. §
01 01 -
ro OD O
xP vP Np
3* 3- 3s ,
' : ' /• ;^ | 1
Z en
0 M
« 2 2! TJ
—.Am i i -i
3? S? S? T) M
i .. . M Z H
. . S to H >
l O oo ^l
H §
* * - MO
A A 1« > M
\ > G
i • \ Z Z
\ ^ §
*r3 p3
* 5 s 29
• v : \ HO
;'.'••' \ > n
G
5
M (
OJ <
o c
1
S 5
'•" M
i— i
O
G
W C~3 SO
MOW
Z Z
H SO M
-~- M I
CO 133 00
33 G
n o n
sa Z o
M en g
e-^j > 3 >
\ O SO
v \ tr* so M
vN s^ n o
yX M > Z
TJ O
'"3 ?0 ""^
50 Of4
M 0 > H
o w n o
M m H
h- 1 f 3> C"1
H M X cn
> C5 M 1— I T)
H P3 - f K
>-i Z < O
Z SO SO TJ
en r1 o
CO > SO
TN C^
w n o
- PI >
Z 0
O M Z
r1 so en
H oo
N r1
> OT
^. frj
?^ « CO
M O
M
40
-------
c. Phosphorus Loading-Trophic Condition Relationships
This section examines relationships between phosphorus inputs and the
resulting water quality. Such relationships are needed to assess the impact
on eutrophication which would result from phosphorus loading scenarios asso-
ciated with various wastewater management alternatives. A detailed description
of the procedures required to examine these relationships using Dillon's model
(1975) is presented in Appendix C-6. Only the results of this analysis are
included in this discussion. Figure II-9 shows the trophic conditions for
the lakes in Salem Utility District No. 2 based on the present loading levels.
Basically, the results from Dillon's model concur with the findings presented
in the previous section.
d. Bacterial Contamination in Shoreline Areas
Limited amount of information on bacterial levels can be found for Silver
Lake, Camp Lake, and Center Lake. Both Camp Lake and Center Lake were found
to have bacterial levels in excess of that allowed by current water quality
standards by the State of Wisconsin for recreation/fish and aquatic life
(SEWKPC 1969). The standards specify that fecal coliform levels not exceed
a geometric mean of 200 organisms per 100 ml of water based upon five samples
per month or 400 organisms per 100 ml of water in more than 10% of all samples
during any month for recreational use and aquatic life.
Kerfoot (1979), in a recent study, determined fecal coliform bacteria
levels in Silver Lake, Camp Lake, Center Lake, and Benet/Shangrila Lake during
the winter months of 1969. No significant bacteria levels were detected in
the lake water with the exception of outflow from canal, streams, outfall
pipes, and snowmelt riverlets which drained into the lake under the ice. On
Benet/Shangrila Lake, two sampled outfall pipe locations showed considerable
fecal coliform bacteria content. A detailed report of Kerfoot's findings is
presented in Appendix C-7.
e. Fox River
A two-mile stretch of the Fox River flows through the Study Area. In
this vicinity, the U.S. Geological Survey has maintained a gaging station
located at Wilmot, just north of a 4-foot high dam. River discharge and
water quality have been recorded at this station. The average concentrations
of some key chemical constituents are: BOD 5 of 5.0 mg/1; pH of 8.2; total
alkalinity of 246.1 CaC03 mg/1; total hardness of 328 mg/1; oxygen of 10.9
mg/1; organic nitrogen of 1.3 mg N/l; ammonia nitrogen of 0.233 mg N/l;
nitrate nitrogen of 1.04 mg N/l; total phosphorus of 0.409 mg P/l; ortho-
phosphate of 0.186 mg P/l; chloride of 30.3 mg/1. Detailed statistical
analysis of the water quality data over the period of records in presented
in Appendix C-8.
The average fecal coliform concentration over 97 samples collected from
July 1965 to November 1973 is 744 organisms/100 ml, far exceeding the state
recreational, fishing and aquatic life standards.
41
-------
BENET/
SHANGRILAX VOLTZ
LAKE / LAKE
10.0
MEAN DEPTH (METERS)
L= AREAL PHOSPHORUS INPUT (g/m^yr)
R=PHOSPHORUS RETENTION COEFFICIENT
P- HYDRAULIC FLUSHING RATE (yr"1)
FIGURE H-9 TROPHIC STATUS OF SILVER LAKE, CENTER LAKE,
CAMP LAKE, ROCK LAKE, CROSS LAKE, VOLTZ LAKE,
BENET/SHANGRILA LAKE
100.0
42
-------
Table II-5
SUMMARY OF LAKE TROPHIC CLASSIFICATION
Lake
Center
Camp
Voltz
Rock
Benet /Shangrila
Silver
Cross
Total
Phosphorus
e
e
e
m
e
m
m
Chlorophyll 'a'
e
e
e
m
e
o
o
Secchi
Disc
Depth
e
e
e
m
e
e
m
Hypo limnetic
Dissolved
Oxygen
Saturation
e
e
e
m
e
m
m
o: oligotrophic
m: mesotrophic
e: eutrophic
The Fox River carries a significant amount of nutrients into the Chain
0'Lakes in Illinois, responsible for the present trophic status of the lakes.
In fact, the Chain 0'Lakes receives 75% of its nutrients from the Fox River
(Evan 1969). Presumably, agricultural runoffs from the upper river basin
and various wastewater treatment plant discharges contribute to this signifi-
cant nutrient flux. It is calculated from the EPA National Eutrophication
Survey data (EPA 1975) that on an annual basis, the Fox river provided
193,700 kg/yr phosphorus and 3,486,500 kg/yr nitrogen to the Chain O'Lakes
during the 1973-74 study period.
8. FLOOD PRONE AREAS
Flooding of the Fox River and its tributaries is reported to be common,
particularly in the early spring as a result of snowmelt, spring rains, and
high runoff rates from the frozen land surface. River discharge records
obtained since 1940 by the U.S. Geological Survey at the Wilmot dam indicate
that summer floods within the watershed have been much less frequent and not
as severe as spring floods (SEWRPC 1969).
Flood hazard areas within the Salem Utility District No. 2 have been
delineated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the U.S. Geological Survey
(USGS), as well as the Federal Insurance Administration (FIA), U.S. Depart-
ment of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) under the National Flood Insurance
Program. These areas are shown in Figure 11-10. It is important to note that
flood prone maps indicate only areas that may.be occasionally flooded, and
provide no information on frequency, depth, and duration of flooding; larger
areas than those depicted in Figure 11-11 may be inundated by less frequent
floods (U.S. Geological Survey 1960 and 1973). It is also noteworthy that
the Corps of Engineers and USGS delineate only the floodplain adjacent to
the Fox River (100-year recurrence interval floodlands) while HUD has identi-
fied additional flood hazard zones which have a one percent chance of flooding
to the zone boundary in any given year (e.g., 100-year recurrence interval
floodlands). The degree of flood hazard shown on HUD "Flood Hazard Boundary
Maps" is critical in determining insurance rates for special properties in a
given area (FIA-HUD 1976).
43
-------
44
-------
CO
w
OS
3
I-J
H
CO
>i
CO
o
M CN
H
Pn •
« O
o a
en
« H
M H
O CO
CO M
I O
< H
H M
J
CJ M
M H
CO
W CO
H
o
(X
w
w
pi
3
o
45
-------
C. EXISTING SYSTEMS
There are no existing wastewater treatment plants within Salem Utility
District No. 2. All wastewater flows are managed either by on-site septic
systems or holding tanks which require frequent pumping.
Because much of the residential development occurred after institution
of the State Plumbing Code, H62.20, many on-site septic systems do not meet
design regulations. The abundance of soils with severe and very severe limi-
tations for on-site wastewater disposal within the Study Area would have pre-
vented many existing systems from being constructed.
Local residents have long suspected septic systems as contributing to
public health and water quality problems in Salem Utility District No. 2.
Reports of effluent ponding, surface runoff of ponded effluent, and sewage
system back-ups are common throughout the Study Area.
Records of reported private septic tank-soil absorption system failures,
requiring inspection by local health officials, are kept in the Salem Municipal
Building. The locations of these inspected properties are shown in Figure 11-11.
Salem Township officials have indicated that there are many areas in the District
that have high potential to produce on-lot system failures based upon poor soil
suitability, depth to seasonal high ground-water and small lot size. These are
shown as shaded areas in Figure 11-11. Many more malfunctions would be reported
to local officials were it not for the likelihood that inspected and confirmed
septic system failures would result in forced conversion to holding tanks. A
field survey of the Study Area during December, 1977 confirmed the presence
of malfunctioning on-site wastewater treatment systems in the District.
1. SUMMARY OF EXISTING DATA
Two studies were recently undertaken by EPA to determine the extent and
distribution of problems with on-site systems in Salem Utility District No. 2.
The results of these studies, discussed in this section, are intended to iden-
tify potential water quality or public health problems. This identified inform-
ation will be used to determine grant eligibility for collector sewers and to
provide a basis for predicting the design, costs and impacts of continued use
of on-site systems.
a. "Investigation of Septic Runoff and Leachate Discharges into the Salem
Lakes, Wisconsin" (Kerfoot, 1979)
A through-the-ice septic leachate survey was conducted along the
shorelines of Silver Lake, Center Lake, Camp Lake, Voltz Lake, and Benet/
Shangrila Lake. This study was undertaken to determine whether groundwater
plumes from nearby septic tanks are emerging along the shores of these lakes,
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 organic and inorganic
chemicals from domestic wastewaters. Surface water and groundwater sampling
for nutrient and coliform bacteria (surface water only) were coordinated with
the septic leachate profile to clearly identify the source of the leachate.
46
-------
The following conclusions have been drawn from the "Septic Snooper"
analysis:
• A substantial public health threat exists from the volume of septic
discharges entering Camp Lake and Center Lake. Inflows containing
waters as high as 6.7% effluent were observed with fecal coliform
contents as high as 520 counts/100 ml.
• A substantial portion (1/3) of the shoreline of Camp Lake was found
to contain identifiable traces of effluent. The nutrient loadings
from the runoff from the malfunctioning systems are sufficient to
encourage development of emergent vegetation and to stimulate marsh-
land development along shorelines.
• The frequent coincidence of bog and effluent discharges, often with
elevated nutrients, indicated that wastewater discharges were likely
stimulating wetlands development along numerous areas of the shore-
line of Camp Lake, Center Lake, and Benet/Shangrila Lake.
• Wastewater discharges are infrequent along the southern shoreline of
Silver Lake. The most noticeable discharge occurs in a shallow
valley region which drains a series of dense residential structures.
The intrusion probably occurs as groundwater inflow during dry
periods and is combined with runoff during wet periods.
• Outfall flows were observed at two locations along the shoreline of
Benet/Shangrila Lake. Even though some treatment of the wastewater
apparently was occurring, fecal bacteria contamination was present
and phosphorus concentrations equivalent to wastewater effluent or
laundry wastes were observed.
The locations of effluent plumes are shown in Figures 11-12 through 11-14.
Detailed results of the "Septic Snooper" study are presented in Appendix C-7.
b. "EPIC Survey" (EPA 1979)
An aerial photographic survey was conducted by EPA's Environmental
Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC) in order to detect any septic
system malfunctions that are visible on the land surface within the Study
Area. The aerial survey was made in May, 1978, and the suspected malfunc-
tions were field-checked during June of 1979. Results of the aerial survey,
which are illustrated in Figure 11-15, are tabulated in Table II-6.
2. TYPES OF SYSTEMS
Most residents within the Study Area use on-site systems to manage their
wastewater treatment needs. Because of the severe environmental limitations
against the use of conventional septic systems, holding tanks (average capa-
city of 2400 gallons) are often used as a mitigative measure. There are over
100 holding tanks within the Study Area, many installed since institution of
the State Plumbing Code which regulates design of on-site wastewater disposal
systems.
47
-------
S5 it ream inflow
A/
54
outflow stream
52
-S3
LEGEND
• ICE HOLE LOCATION
S4 BACTERIAL SAMPLE LOCATION
o DORMANT GROUNDWATER PLUME
• ERUPTING GROUNDWATER PLUME
a ORGANIC SURFACE WATER PLUME
WITHOUT DISSOLVED SOLIDS
LOAD
• ORGANIC SURFACE WATER PLUME
WITH DISSOLVED SOLIDS
LOAD
Source: Kerfoot 1979
FIGURE 11-12
SAMPLING LOCATIONS, PLUMES, AND BACTERIAL SAMPLE LOCATIONS
ON SILVER LAKE
48
-------
CE1
CE2
•^CENTER LAKE °T/
CE4
outflow into Camp Lak«
LEGEND
• ICE HOLE LOCATION
S4 BACTERIAL SAMPLE LOCATION
o DORMANT GROUNDWATER PLUME
• ERUPTING GROUNDWATER PLUME
a ORGANIC SURFACE WATER PLUME
WITHOUT DISSOLVED SOLIDS
LOAD
• ORGANIC SURFACE WATER PLUME
WITH DISSOLVED SOLIDS
LOAD
Source: Kerfoot 1979
CAS
64 •—
, " 63O—'
\> CAMP LAKE «o-'
"CA8
fish kill noted
FIGURE 11-13
SAMPLING LOCATIONS, PLUMES, AND BACTERIAL SAMPLE LOCATIONS
ON CENTER LAKE AND CAMP LAKE
49
-------
'S2 near
tavern outlall
S3
SHANGRILAJ.AKE
LAKE
LEGEND
• ICE HOLE LOCATION
S4 BACTERIAL SAMPLE LOCATION
o DORMANT GROUNDWATER PLUME
• ERUPTING GROUNDWATER PLUME
a ORGANIC SURFACE WATER PLUME
WITHOUT DISSOLVED SOLIDS
LOAD
• ORGANIC SURFACE WATER PLUME
WITH DISSOLVED SOLIDS
LOAD
Source: Kerfoot 1979
FIGURE 11-14 SAMPLING LOCATIONS, PLUMES, AND BACTERIAL SAMPLE LOCATIONS
ON VOLTZ LAKE AND SHANGRILA/BENET LAKE
50
-------
O
M
H
fn
W
CO
Cn
o
I— I
w w
CO
pa «
O Crt
z
J O
< M
M H
PS U
w z:
<
CO
H S
J W
3 H
CO CO
W >H
si co
w
a;
o
51
-------
Table II-6
NUMBER OF SEPTIC SYSTEM MALFUNCTIONS IDENTIFIED BY EPIC
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHIC SURVEY
Confirmed1 Marginal2
Location Malfunct ions Malfunctions Total
Silver Lake 0 00
Center Lake 1 45
Camp Lake 10 27 37
Rock Lake 5 16
Voltz Lake 2 13
Cross Lake 6 10 16
Shangrila Lake 9 9 18
Benet Lake 0 00
Wilmot 8 3 11
Liberty Corner 1 12
Trevor __0 1 1
TOTAL 42 57 99
•'"Malf unctions were "confirmed" if standing wastewater or seepage from septic
tanks was visible on the land surface during field inspection.
Malfunctions were "marginal" if the accumulation of excess organic matter
or the presence of dead vegetation indicated that septic tank systems had
been confirmed malfunctions in the past.
A brief description of EPIC's Salem septic system analysis is included in
Appendix C-9.
The Salvation Army's Camp Wonderland, located on Center Lake, has a
wastewater collection system consisting of 8-inch sewer lines and a pneumatic
ejector lift station (Jensen and Johnson, Inc. 1976). Wastewater is collected
in one septic tank and subsequently pumped to a large tile drainage field.
The average wastewater flow from the Camp is estimated to be 18,240 gallons
per day. This system is scheduled to be abandoned once centralized sewerage
facilities are constructed in the District (Jensen and Johnson, Inc. 1976).
3. COMPLIANCE WITH SANITARY CODES
Enforcement of the septic system design is by the Wisconsin Department
of Health and Social Services Plumbing Code, Chapters H61 and H62 (1976).
Within the Study Area, the Plumbing Code is enforced by the Salem Township
Office. Prior to enactment of these State regulations, no standards were
enforced. Under these regulations, however, newly constructed septic systems
52
-------
must comply with specific site suitability criteria relating to soil conditions,
slope percolation rates, depth to groundwater, bedrock or gravel, permeable
soils, as well as set-back distances for both septic tanks and drainfields.
These criteria are described in Appendix C-10.
Many existing systems do not comply with the Wisconsin Plumbing Code
because the development and enforcement of standards for on-site systems is
recent and because there are limitations on the enforcement of the standards
relating to site limitations. Reportedly, action against malfunctioning
septic systems is taken only when septic tank failures result in actual
complaints (by telephone, Donald Zenz, Jensen and Johnson, Inc., June, 1978).
4. PROBLEMS WITH EXISTING SYSTEMS
Numerous violations of the standards for ST/SAS conditions throughout
some parts of the Study Area have led to the question of whether existing
systems along the lakeshores are causing public health or water quality
problems. The distinction should be made between water quality and public
health problems on the one hand and nuisance or community improvement problems
on the other hand. On-site systems known to contribute to violations of water
quality standards or changes in trophic status pose water quality problems.
Public health problems may result from ponding of effluent on the soil surface
or contamination of groundwater supply in excess of drinking water standards.
Where lakes are used for contact recreation, violation of the fecal coliform
standard also constitutes a public health hazard. Community improvement
problems include odors, restrictions on water use and restrictions on building
expansion.
5. PUBLIC HEALTH PROBLEMS
a. Backups/Ponding
The EPIC Aerial Photographic Survey was flown to identify septic tank
system malfunctions that are visible at the land surface. Approximately 125
suspected malfunctions were identified by the aerial photographs, of which
99 (80%) were verified as being confirmed or marginal surface malfunctions.
These surface malfunctions identified by EPIC, along with those identified
by Salem Township officials (Figure 11-11), may result in the transport of
unrenovated septic effluent by runoff to surface waters, creating a possible
public health hazard. Confirmation of unrenovated septage in the northern
portion of Camp Lake by residents of Camp Lake Oaks Subdivision is presented
in Appendix A-l.
b. Water Quality Problems
Based upon results of the "Septic Snooper" analyses, it appears that
on-site septic systems are contributing to pollution in Center Lake, Camp
Lake, Voltz Lake, and Silver Lake. Analysis of selected inns, indicating
pollution for domestic wastes, and fecal bacterial contamination show a
potential health hazard. Septage appeared to be entering the lakes by canal
drainage, surface runoff, wetlands discharge, and outfall piping. Groundwater
inflows were very low because of the very tight soils. Even with the results
of EPIC and the "Septic Snooper", there is no documented evidence of any
immediate public health problems associated with the area's wastewater dis-
posal practices.
53
-------
c. Ground-water Contamination
There is no documented evidence of groundwater contamination or of any
public health problems associated with the area's wastewater disposal
practices. The potential exists for nitrates (soluble) to reach the Niagara
aquifer through the overlying discontinuous sand and gravel water-table
aquifers in the project area. Water-table levels in these aquifers are,
however, in excess of 20 feet below ground level.
d. Other Problems
Some residents served by on-site systems have reported localized algal
growth along lake shorelines. While localized algal growth may be considered
a nuisance since it interferes with recreational activity and is aesthetically
displeasing, it is not necessarily indicative of a water quality problem.
Residents have also complained about odor problems, and even floating effluent
upon the surface of some of the lakes within the Study Area.
54
-------
D. BIOTIC RESOURCES
A range of biotic resources exists in Salem Utility District No. 2.
Although a large proportion of the Study Area is crop land planted in corn,
oats and alfalfa, the forests and wetlands provide habitat for a variety of
wildlife, including amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals.
1. AQUATIC BIOLOGY
a. Aquatic Vegetation
The aquatic vegetation in the lakes of the Study Area consists both of
aquatic and semi-aquatic vascular plants as well as algae (Appendix D-l).
Ultimately, the profusion of plant growth is strongly influenced by water
quality as described in Section II.B.7.b. Small, shallow lakes such as
occur in the Study Area are physically well-suited for a variety of rooted
aquatic plants. Dense growths of emergent vegetation are prevalent along
the shorelines of the lakes as well.
Many of the area lakes have emergent vegetation such as bulrushes and
cattails growing in the shallow water or on the adjacent shoreline. Several
species of rooted aquatic plants, many of which have floating leaves and/or
flowers, are found in a range of substrates and depths. In lakes with moder-
ately good water quality, these aquatic plants provide a basis for a diverse
fishery. Water with high levels of nitrogen and phosphorus, however, enhances
the growth of aquatic vegetation, often with detrimental consequences. Es-
pecially in late summer when the conditions of warm water and calm days do
not promote high oxygen levels, the high biological oxygen demand (BOD)
created in part by decaying vegetation has resulted in fish kills in some
Study Area lakes. For example, Poff and Threinen (1961) reported "obnoxious"
weed growth in Benet/Shangrila Lake, a condition that had not diminished by
July 1978, when a profusion of algae and other aquatic plants (Figure 11-16)
was observed from the bridge on County Highway V. Troublesome aquatic vege-
tation required chemical treatment in the summer of 1978 in Center Lake,
Voltz Lake, and Benet/Shangrila Lake (by telephone, Don Tills, Wisconsin DNR,
September 11, 1978). With the slightly lower elevation of Camp Lake and its
connection with Center Lake, coupled with its shallow nature (40% less than
3 feet deep), it is not surprising that Camp Lake has the most frequent
(Wisconsin DNR, 1969) problems with the so-called "algal blooms" of late
summer. Although such blooms and the related fish kills cannot be attri-
buted solely to poor water quality based on failing septic systems of lake-
side cottages and homes, it is possible that these sources do contribute a
significant amount of the nutrient load to the Study Area lakes. There is
no information on the relative contributions of industrial, agricultural,
and residential sources to the nutrient composition of any lake in the Study
Area.
55
-------
FIGURE 11-16
AQUATIC WEEDS AND ALGAE OBSERVED IN LAKE SHANGRILA
56
-------
b. Fishes
The eight lakes in the Study Area support a variety of game, food, and
rough fishes (Appendix D-2). Rock Lake also has a cold-water fishery of
annually planted rainbow and brown trout, an addition made possible by the
deep nature and resulting cool summer waters. At the other extreme, Peat
Lake, a shallow lake with a mucky substrate, contains only carp; consequently,
no sport fishery exists there.
The most sought game fishes of the Study Area lakes include walleye,
northern pike, largemouth bass, bullheads and catfish, and panfishes,
including sunfishes, crappies, and yellow perch, among others. The valued
game fishes found in all, or most, Study Area lakes include largemouth bass,
grass pickerel, northern pike, yellow perch, bluegill, and pumpkinseed.
Information on the relationship between the number of species of fishes
and both lake area and lake depth is presented in Table II-7. In general,
larger and deeper lakes support more species, although water quality, a more
complex environmental variable, undoubtedly is important as well. The rela-
tively small number of species of food fishes (mostly minnows) in the lakes
of the eastern section of the Study Area, probably attributable to their
isolation and separation from the Fox River system, suggests that small game
fishes may be more important as food fishes there than elsewhere. In lakes
with populations of stunted (old but small) game fishes, such conditions may
improve the quality of the sport fishery by creating a more favorable age/
size balance within the populations.
Table II-7
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN NUMBER OF SPECIES OF FISHES,
AREA AND DEPTH FOR THE EIGHT LAKES IN THE STUDY AREA
Number of Number of Number of Lake Area Mean Lake
Lake Game Fish Food Fish Rough Fish in Acres Depth in Ft.
Rock 10 3 3 44 21
Cross 7 2 1 87 12
Camp 14 9 4 461 5
Center 15 5 4 129 9
Benet/Shangrila 11 3 1 154 4
Voltz 9 1 1 52 7
Silver 16 13 3 464 10
Peat 0 0 1 12 =2
57
-------
Camp Lake and Silver Lake, comparably large lakes, have approximately
the same number of species of fishes. The greater species diversity of
Silver Lake, although uncertain, is probably due both to better water
quality and to high productivity related to greater average depth and a
greater range of habitats. The comparably high number of game fishes in
Center Lake is probably attributable to a combination of its connection with
Camp Lake and greater average depth. Rock Lake and Benet/Shangrila Lake
have comparable fisheries but sharply different areas. Nevertheless, lake
volume, measured in acre-feet, is greater in Rock Lake. The point of these
comparisons is that a valuable fishery exists in all except Peat Lake, and
the mix of species that is present in each lake is probably due to a com-
bination of factors, including size and depth, water quality, geologic
history (period of separation), number and effectiveness of introductions,
and loss of spawning habitat by draining lakeside wetlands, among others.
Paasch Lake in nearby Bristol Township, with an estimated surface area
of 15 acres and maximum depth of 9 feet, is discussed here because it lies
adjacent to a wetland that has been considered for wastewater discharge (see
Section III.C.2.). Mr. Ronald Piening (by telephone, Wisconsin DNR, May 21,
1979) reported that the connection during spring flooding and Paasch Lake and
nearby George Lake probably insures comparable fisheries in each lake. Based
on a 1975 survey, Lake George has 1 flood, 1 rough, and 10 game fishes.
Kadlec and Tilton (May 1978), who considered the aquatic biology of Paasch
Lake in their evaluation of the wastewater treatment potential of the wetland
area west of the lake, concluded that northern pike probably spawn in the
wetland.
Although the Fox River below Waterford does support a fishery of
walleye, smallmouth bass, channel catfish, white bass, white crappie, and
lesser numbers of northern pike and bluegill, there has been a deterioration
of the quality of the fish habitat in recent years, caused by the overuse of
recreational facilities and by the pollution of surface waters resulting
from the discharge of effluents from municipal treatment plants (U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, Chicago District, 1976).
c. Waterfowl, Shore, and Wading Birds
The lakes and wetlands of Salem Utility District No. 2 provide potential
habitat for a number of species of waterfowl, and other water birds. For
example, the wet woodland west of Camp Lake is suitable for wood ducks, and
the cattail marshes of the Study Area provide excellent breeding and feeding
habitat for sandpipers, herons, and bitterns. Blue-winged teal, mallards,
and wood ducks are known to nest on the lakes, with successful pairs number-
ing in the dozens rather than thousands (by telephone, Tom Becker, DNR
district wildlife biologist, May 29, 1979). Some breeding waterfowl use the
50-acre Wildlife Management Area in the southwest corner of Camp Lake and the
Peat Lake "closed area" (by telephone, John Wetzel, Wisconsin DNR, Division
of Wildlife, May 1, 1978). Reed's (1974) detailed description of the DNR
Peat Lake Scientific Area (Appendix D-3) includes information on the value
of this area to waterfowl and wading birds. The large flocks of waterfowl
occasionally observed on Camp Lake (Wisconsin DNR 1969) are probably excep-
tional, because the Study Area is located outside the Mississippi Flyway.
58
-------
2. TERRESTRIAL BIOLOGY
The terrestrial environments in the Study Area include forests,
cultivated fields, undeveloped or disturbed upland areas, and wetlands.
Together, these environments provide habitat and other resources for wild-
life, many of which are prized for their aesthetic or recreational qualities.
Cultivated fields may be only seasonally valuable to wildlife.
a. Forest Lands
The forest that once covered Kenosha County prior to its settlement in
the 1830's was predominantly white oak-hickory. The cutover and successional
forests of this region have been the object of intensive and long-term
research (Curtis and Macintosh 1951), and their composition is well-known.
White oak, northern pin oak, scarlet oak, and shagbark hickory are the
dominant canopy trees, with sugar maple, ash, and pignut hickory usually
composing the subcanopy. Such forests have a rich flora of wild flowers
and shrubs growing through the thick leaf litter layer.
The wildlife supported by such woodlands include the eastern gray
squirrel, fox squirrel, raccoon, skunk, opossum, and chipmunk (SEWRPC 1979).
Moles, shrews, and white-footed mice are among the small mammals of the
forest. The white-tailed deer and gray fox also inhabit these forests, but
both move outside the forests during periods of feeding activity.
The diversity and density of wildlife (particularly bird) populations
in the District is increased in the transition zones between forest lands
and open lands. Birds in these areas include woodpeckers, warblers, finches,
sparrows, thrushes, owls, and numerous migratory birds. Important game birds
in the Study Area are typical of those found throughout the Fox River water-
shed and include ring-necked pheasants, Hungarian partridges, American wood-
cocks, and jack-snipes (SEWRPC 1969).
Lists of the birds and mammals of the Study Area are given in
Appendix D-4.
b. Upland Areas
Unfcrested, uncultivated uplands within Salem Utility District No. 2
vary from fallow crop lands to oldfields with varying amounts of shrubs and
small trees. Until these upland habitats become bona fide forests or are
returned to cultivation, these oldfields provide resources for a variety of
wildlife, including meadow mice, shrews, red foxes, woodchucks, skunks,
opossums, and rabbits. Other wildlife that is associated primarily with
oldfields and early successional stages includes hawks and owls, many song-
birds, many snakes, frogs and toads.
c. Wetlands
A wetland is a landscape type in which water is at or near the surface
so long or so frequently that the vegetation is largely composed of aquatic
or semi-aquatic plants. Soils in wetlands are usually high in organic con-
tent (peat or muck). Often located at the land-water interface, wetlands
serve as purifers of surface water by trapping sediments and concentrating
59
-------
nutrients that have washed off the landscape, thereby reducing the siltation
and eutrophication processes of nearby lakes and streams. Wetlands serve as
storage areas for floodwaters, and also provide essential spawning, breeding,
nesting and" feeding habitat for many valued fish and wildlife species.
Wetlands comprise approximately 1,145 acres (13%) of the Study Area
(Figure II-6), about 20% of which is potentially developable. Many of these
wetlands, as remnants of larger wetland areas, are most resistant to conver-
sion to farmland because they are adjacent to lakes and have a high water
table.
Many of the lake shorelines still have large acreages of wetlands.
Approximately 40% of the shoreline of Camp Lake is wetlands, containing a
wide range of herbaceous and woody plants including mature trees. Voltz
Lake, at high water levels, discharges into a cattail-dominated wetlands
area. Peat Lake and a number of small lakes in the District are completely
surrounded by wetlands. Because they are located near bodies of water,
these wetlands serve as habitat for a larger number of birds and mammals
than if they were located in the midst of ground moraines.. The populations
of muskrats, mink, and shore and water birds would be restricted almost
entirely to those wetlands near lakes.
Large portions of the wetlands associated with the lakes in the Study
Area are covered by herbaceous vegetation, mainly cattails (Typha sp.).
This plant community supports a variety of wildlife. Ducks and shore birds
nest here, and feed both in the wetlands and in the adjacent open water.
Blackbirds and wading birds are seasonal residents in the cattail marshes.
Among the mammals, numerous muskrats and meadow voles eat the vegetation
which permits several predators, including mink and raccoons, to use wet-
lands as a focus of their hunting activities.
Silver Lake Bog, a 20-acre, privately-owned area located east of the
lake, and the State-owned Peat Lake are classified as Wisconsin Scientific
Areas. Access is restricted there.
The stopa fen*, located in Section 31 west of the Fox River near the
Wisconsin-Illinois border, is another locality of regional scientific
importance (by telephone, Don Reed, SEWRPC, May 1, 1978). Characterized
by low shrubs and highly alkaline soils, fens are rare in Wisconsin. They
provide habitat for such rare plants as scrubby cinquefoil, orchids, and
ginseng.
Among the wetlands in the Study Area that deserve special consideration
during the construction of sewerage facilities are the large wetlands along
the west shoreline of Camp Lake, including both the wet woodland and the
Wildlife Management Area at the junction of County Trunk Highway C and the
road that leads to the Valmar residential subdivision. Although immediately
outside the Study Area, the ponds on either side of County Trunk Highway V
at the north margin of Lake Shangrila are worthy of mention as valuable
habitat for waterfowl, muskrats, and other wildlife.
60
-------
3. THREATENED OR ENDANGERED SPECIES
a. Fishes
The pugnose shiner, Notropis anogenus, recorded by the Wisconsin DNR
from Silver Lake in July, 1977 (by letter, Ronald Piening, Wisconsin DNR,
February 10, 1978), is considered to be "endangered" in the State. It is
protected by Wisconsin Statutes (Chapter 29.415) under the 1972 Endangered
Species Act. At the northern edge of its distribution in southern Wisconsin,
the pugnose shiner lives in clear, cool lakes and streams, being extremely
intolerant of turbid and polluted water (Wisconsin DNR 1975). The pugnose
shiner may be restricted to Silver Lake because, of the Study Area lakes,
only it connects directly to the Fox River.
Two fishes in the project area have been assigned "watch status"*
(Wisconsin DNR 1975). These are the lake chubsucker (Erimyzon sucetta) of
Camp, Center, Rock, Silver, and Voltz Lakes, and the pugnose minnow (Notropis
emiliae) of Camp Lake (by letter, Ronald Piening, Wisconsin DNR, February 10,
1978).
b. Birds
The upland sandpiper (Bartramia longicauda) has been recorded in the
Study Area (see Appendix D-4) and has been assigned "watch" status by the
Wisconsin DNR. It is reported to have been threatened in recent years by
the drainage of wet prairies and overpasturing (Wisconsin DNR, 1975).
c. Amphibians
The pickerel frog (Rana palustris), designated as "threatened" by
Wisconsin Statutes (Chapter 29.415), has been recorded from the stopa fen
located west of the Fox River (see Figure II-6) (by telephone, Don Reed,
SEWRPC, September 5, 1978). Its habitat is said to be threatened by
pollution and siltation (Wisconsin DNR 1975).
d. Reptiles
The Blanding's turtle (Emydoidea blandingi) has been assigned "watch
status" by the Wisconsin DNR as a result of overcollecting and marsh drainage
(Wisconsin DNR, 1975). It also has been reported from the stopa fen (by
telephone, Don Reed, SEWRPC, September 5, 1978).
e. Plants
In cooperation with the Scientific Areas Preservation Council, the
Wisconsin DNR has prepared a preliminary list of uncommon plants and plant
communities in Wisconsin (Wisconsin DNR 1973). In Salem Utility District
No. 2, rare plant communities which have had a minimum of disturbance and
have retained their original character include Silver Lake Bog and the stopa
fen in Section 31 (see Figure II-6). These areas are grass-dominated commu-
nities comprised of plants which grow primarily on wet, alkaline soils. They
are susceptible to changes in the level of seasonal high groundwater. The
white ladyslipper orchid (Cypripedium candidum) and fringed gentian (Gentiana
procera) are among the uncommon plants in these natural communities (Wisconsin
DNR 1973).
61
-------
E. POPULATION AND SOCIOECONOMICS
1. POPULATION
a. Introduction
Published information on the population characteristics of the Study
Area is available for Kenosha County and Salem Township. The areas proposed
in the Salem Facility Plan to be served cover a relatively small portion
of Salem Township. Since only limited disaggregation of socioeconomic data
is available, the published information does not precisely describe the
population characteristics for the subareas of Salem Township that will be
directly affected by wastewater management alternatives. As a result, 1975
aerial photography was analyzed to determine the existing housing stock and
population.
The Salem Facility Planning Area includes six subareas as indicated
in Figure 11-17. Together, these subareas define the Proposed EIS Service
Area.
b. Existing Population
The Proposed Service Area had a 1975 permanent population of 5,726
people and a seasonal population of 2,212 people (Table II-8). The total
summer population of 7,488 people is composed of 70% permanent population
while only 30% were seasonal residents. No data is available on either
permanent or seasonal population levels within the Proposed Service Area
prior to 1975.
Table II-8
PERMANENT AND SEASONAL POPULATION
OF THE PROPOSED EIS SERVICE AREA (1975)1
Population
Total Permanent Seasonal Percent Seasonal
Camp Lake/Center Lake 4,651 2,850 1,801
Camp Wonderland2 644 44 600
Silver Lake Park2 000
Cross Lake 1,719 1,462 257
Rock Lake 653 522 131
Wilmot 465 442 23
Salem Utility
District No.2 7,488 5,276 2,212 29.5%
1The methodology utilized to develop these population estimates is found in
Appendix E.
Population totals are included as part of the Camp Lake/Center Lake subarea
total.
62
-------
CSI
O
H
H
CO
W
CO
Cm
O
CO
I
CO
I—
I
-------
The largest concentration of population was found in the Camp Lake/Center
Lake subarea which represented 54.0%/81.4% respectively of the permanent and
seasonal populations in the Proposed Service Area. The Camp Lake/Center Lake
subarea also had the highest percentage of seasonal population with 38.7%.
This comparatively high figure is due largely to the large seasonal popula-
tion of Camp Wonderland which is included in the Camp Lake/Center Lake total.
The 1975 population estimates differ somewhat from the Facility Plan
(Jensen and Johnson 1976) and SEWRPC population estimates. As discussed in
detail in Appendix E the Facility Plan population estimate of 8,354 appears
to be high based on the fact that: it includes dwelling unit equivalents for
entities (schools and restaurants) which do not affect the population total;
it includes a Silver Lake Park population estimate even though the Park was
not in operation during 1975; and it overestimates the population of Camp
Wonderland based on a comparison of the Camp Commandant's figures. The
SEWRPC population estimate is lower than the EIS estimate due to differ-
ences in the proportion of total population accounted for by seasonal
residents.
c. Population Projections
The population projections for this EIS must consider three common
growth factors:
• The rate of growth or decline of the permanent population.
• The rate of growth or decline of the seasonal population.
• The potential conversion of seasonal to permanent dwelling units
and the resultant effect on the permanent population.
Each of these factors represents a potential growth force which may
significantly affect future total population levels and the distribution
of population between permanent and seasonal residents.
Permanent and seasonal baseline populations for the Salem Facility
Planning Area were projected for the year 2000 based on the best available
information regarding these three growth factors (see Appendix E). As
indicated in Table II-9, the total in-summer population for the Proposed
EIS Service Area is projected to be 10,925 by the year 2000. This total
population will be composed of approximately 7,913 (72%) permanent residents
and 3,012 (28%) seasonal residents. The increase in seasonal population is
due to the opening of Silver Lake Park which is projected to have an average
visitor rate of 800 people (by letter, N.E. Ladine, Kenosha County Recreation
Department, May 2, 1978). Excluding this addition from the 2000 population
projections results in a 22% seasonal population figure, a 25% decrease from
the 30% figure of 1975. This is in line with the general trends of the Study
Area which indicates a declining seasonal population.
64
-------
Table II-9
PERMANENT AND SEASONAL POPULATION
OF THE PROPOSED SALEM SERVICE AREA (2000)x
Population Percent
Total Permanent Seasonal Seasonal
Camp Lake/Center Lake 6,317 3,821 2,496 39.5%
Camp Wonderland2 644 44 600 93.2%
Silver Lake Park2 800 0 800 100.0%
Cross Lake 2,516 2,232 284 11.3%
Rock Lake 1,353 1,149 204 15.1%
Wilmot 739 711 28 3.8%
Salem Utility
District No. 2 10,925 7,913 3,012 27.6%
xThe methodology utilized to develop these population projections is found in
Appendix E.
Population totals are included as part of the Camp Lake/Center Lake subarea
totals.
All four subareas are projected to incur substantial population growth
by the year 2000, highlighted by an 35.8% increase in the Camp Lake/Center
Lake subarea and a 107.2% increase in the Rock Lake subarea. Major growth
in permanent population is apparent in all four subareas while seasonal
population growth will be of a much smaller magnitude in all subareas with
the exception of the Camp Lake/Center Lake subarea which has a much larger
seasonal population resulting from the opening of the Silver Lake Park.
2. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PERMANENT POPULATION
a. Income
The data presented in this section are for the State of Wisconsin,
Kenosha County, and the Salem Township. Characteristics were selected
because of their importance in analyzing the financial effects that various
sewerage system alternatives could have on individual households.
In 1969, the mean average family income in Salem Township was $10,540
(see Table 11-10). This figure was lower than the national, State and
County figures. Salem Township paralleled the State and nation in terms
of the proportion of families with low family incomes. Between 45% and 50%
of all families in the State, the County and the Township received less than
$10,000 in income.
65
-------
Table 11-10
MEAN AND MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME (1969)
United States
Wisconsin
Kenosha County
Township of Salem (Study Area)
Mean
$10,999
11,135
11,329
10,540
Median
$ 9,586
10,065
10,379
NA
SOURCE: U.S. Census of Population and Housing, Fifth Count Summary Tapes,
1970.
U.S. Census of Population, 1970.
Per capita income in the Salem Township was $2,923 in 1969 and $4,472 in
1974. These income levels are similar to per capita incomes reported for the
State and the County over this period. Income in Salem Township grew at a
slightly greater rate than the State and at slightly slower rate than the
County between 1969 and 1974. In 1970, 125 families in the Township (8.6%
of all families) received incomes that fell below the Federally established
poverty level. This percentage of poverty level families is higher than the
shares reported in the County (5.4%) and the State (7.4%).
b. Employment
The manufacturing and service industries were the primary employers in
both 1960 and 1970 for Kenosha County. During this period, manufacturing
employment declined by 6.6% while service industry employment grew by 6.4%.
The other major County employment sector was wholesale and retail trade
which accounted for 19% of the County's labor force in 1970 (see Table 11-11)
Table 11-11
KENOSHA COUNTY DISTRIBUTION
OF EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRIAL SECTOR 1960-1970
Agriculture and Mining
Construction
Manufacturing
Transportation and Communication
Wholesale and Retail Trade
Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate
Services
Government
Other
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Census of the
Population, 1969, 1970. 66
1960
3.3%
4.7
49.4
3.9
15.4
1.8
15.0
3.4
3.0
1970
2.2%
4.4
42.8
4.2
19.0
2.3
21.4
3.7
_
Percent
Change
-1.1%
0.3
-6.6
0.3
3.6
0.5
6.4
0.3
_
-------
Although Kenosha County is primarily a dormitory community whose residents
commute to work in nearby urban areas, the character of the County remains
predominantly rural in nature. The County attracts and supports a number of
tourist-oriented industries. In 1972, tourist related services accounted for
51% of all service industry receipts in the County compared to 34% in the
State. Of particular importance were the automotive services and amusement
industries with 18% and 24% respectively of all service receipts. Retail
trade statistics for the County and the State reinforce the assertion that
tourism is an important component of the Kenosha County economy. Sales from
gasoline service stations and eating/drinking establishments accounted for a
greater proportion of total retail trade in the County than in the State,
reflecting the use of such services by seasonal residents.
c. Financial Characteristics
Financial statistics for Kenosha County and Salem Township are presented
in Table 11-12. The information includes taxable valuations of real property,
total revenue receipts, total current expenses, total capital outlay, total
indebtedness and annual debt service. This information is helpful in evalu-
ating various alternatives available to local governments for financing
wastewater management improvements.
Table 11-12
1976 FINANCIAL CHARACTERISTICS FOR THE STUDY AREA
Salem Township Kenosha County
Taxable Valuation (1) $96,166,810 $1,662,689,360
Revenues: 650,393 26,122,727
Taxes 531,463
Utility Revenues 73,930
Expenditures: 558,358 24,053,235
General Government 469,045 23,073,246
Capital Outlay 49,736 979,989
Utility 69,577 NA
Total Indebtedness 660,000 1,510,000
Annual Debt Service: 42,807 156,975
Principal 41,519 105,000
Interest 1,288 51,975
(1) Equalized by state factors
SOURCE: By telephone, Ken Schuck, State of Wisconsin, Local Government
Finance Division, 1978.
67
-------
In Wisconsin, towns may borrow on behalf of utility districts to finance
capital improvements. Although it is intended that the debt be paid back
with revenues from the project, the debt is secured by the full faith and
credit of the town. Therefore, an analysis of current revenues, expenditures
and indebtedness of the township government is essential in formulating and
evaluating financial strategies.
Total indebtedness for the Salem Township as of March 31, 1977, amounted
to $660,000. The debt was comprised of two sewer mortgage revenue bonds.
The debt limit on general obligation bonds for the Township is $4,808,340
(5% of taxable valuations). However, no general obligation bonds are issued
at present. The current revenues of the Township exceed current expenditures
by over 16%. As a result, Salem Township appears to be in a very sound
fiscal position to finance future and wastewater management improvements.
3. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SEASONAL POPULATION
No published statistics on income, age, employment, or other socioeconomic
characteristics are available for the seasonal residents of the Study Area. It
can generally be assumed that the seasonal population has a relatively high
mean family income which allows residents to own and maintain a permanent as
well as a seasonal home. Past trends regarding seasonal populations indicate
that the majority are married couples with families. However, recent indica-
tions point toward more singles and married couples without children purchas-
ing second homes, resulting in smaller seasonal resident occupancy rates
(persons per unit).
Property ownership data for Salem Township indicates that most seasonal
residents reside in the nearby metropolitan areas of Chicago and Milwaukee
or in other portions of northern Illinois and southern Wisconsin. A small
percentage of the seasonal residents are from the southern areas of the
country. Generally, the higher income levels of the seasonal residents
allows them to be relatively mobile. As a result, it is difficult to
ascertain whether their seasonal residences would be their likely place of
retirement. However, the property tax rolls do indicate some conversion of
seasonal to permanent units, a portion of which can be attributed to the
permanent use of previously seasonal residences by retirement age people.
4. HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS
In order to develop a data base for the analysis of wastewater management
alternatives, the number of existing dwelling units within Salem Utility
District No. 2 was obtained from 1975 aerial photographs. The total number
of dwelling unit equivalents for the District in 1975 was 1,993. Of these
units, 1,635 (82%) were occupied on a year round basis, and 358 (18%) were
estimated to be occupied on a seasonal basis. None of the dwellings have
centralized sewer service. Most of the existing dwelling units can be
characterized as single family dwellings. However, some limited multi-family
developments were found in the Proposed Service Area. Appendix E provides a
detailed analysis of the existing dwelling units in the Proposed EIS Service
Area.
68
-------
Four different areas within Salem Utility District No. 2 have been
identified as requiring some form of sewerage service due to existing
levels of development (see Table 11-13)•
Table 11-13
SALEM UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 2
SUBAREA DWELLING UNIT COURTS (1975)
Permanent Seasonal
Subarea Units % Permanent Units % Seasonal Total
Wilmot 138 96 5 4 143
Camp Lake/Center Lake 877 77 267 23 1,144
Rock Lake 163 85 29 15 192
Cross Lake 457 89 57 11 514
The Facility Development Plan (Jensen and Johnson 1976) identified
fifteen subdivisions in Salem Utility District No. 2. The number of lots
per acre and the average lot size for each of the subdivisions was recorded.
Most of these subdivisions are only partially developed, but the information
gathered from them is indicative of typical lot sizes within the Proposed
EIS Service Area. The average lot size in the District is approximately
one-fifth of an acre (9,468 square feet) (see Appendix E).
Age characteristics of the permanent housing stock in Salem Township
provide an indication of structural conditions and construction trends in
the area. The distribution of housing ages shows that the housing in Salem
Utility District No. 2 was generally older than the State or County housing
stocks. Furthermore, the Proposed EIS Service Area experienced proportion-
ally less residential construction between 1965 and 1970 than either Kenosha
County or Wisconsin.
The median value in 1970 of owner-occupied units in Kenosha County was
slightly less than the national and State medians (see Table 11-14). The
small difference could be attributed to the location of the area relative to
employment opportunities or to the number of vacation homes in the area, which
generally are of lower value than year-round units.
Table 11-14
HOUSING VALUE - 1970
Median Value of Owner-Occupied Unit
United States $17,130
Wisconsin $17,311
Kenosha County $16,971
SOURCE: U.S. Bureau of the Census, County and City Data Book - 1972.
69
-------
No substantive information regarding the characteristics of seasonal
dwelling units is available. Seasonal units, by their nature as part-time
residences, are generally smaller in size, lower in value, and lack many of
the amenities of permanent units. In the Study Area, seasonal units tend to
be relatively old and in fair conditions. Nationally, newer seasonal units
have been found to be of higher quality, representing permanent units which
are used seasonally. In addition, seasonal units have increasingly been
converted to permanent units by successive owners. This has been a result
of retirement age people using their seasonal residence as a phase of retire-
ment and of other second home owners converting their seasonal home to a
permanent home in an effort to move away from metropolitan areas.
5. LAND USE
a. Existing Land Use
Salem Utility District No. 2 consists of approximately 9,000 acres
located in the southern portion of Kenosha County. The area includes
developed communities around the shores of Silver Lake (southeast shore
only), Camp Lake, Center Lake, Rock Lake, Cross Lake, Benet/Shangrila Lake,
and Voltz Lake as well as the unincorporated communities of Wilmot and
Trevor. Of the 9,000 acres of land within the District, approximately 900
acres are lakes and 1,145 acres are marsh/wetland area (see Figure 11-18).
Agriculture activities occupy nearly 2,900 acres, while urban development
consumes approximately 1,050 acres.
Urban development, mostly in the form of single family residential
land use, is primarily located around the various lake shores and the small
unincorporated communities of Wilmot and Trevor. Thee lakes which have the
greatest amount of residential development are Center Lake, Camp Lake, Rock
Lake, Cross Lake, and Lake Shangrila. Although this development is focused
along the shorelines, there are grid development patterns which extend well
behind the immediate shorelines, due partially to the extensive channeling
which has occurred in the past.
Major transportation networks into the area include Route 83, running
north-south and Routes 50 and 173 which run east-west. Rail transport is
provided by the SOO Railroad.
Environmentally sensitive areas have been identified within the Study
Area (see Figure 11-19). They consist of lakes, rivers, streams, and their
floodplains; wetlands; forests and woodlands; wildlife habitat; and gravel
pits.
These areas do not dictate land use, but provide additional restrictions
as to where development is likely to occur in the future.
b. Recreation
Recreation is a primary attraction for seasonal and permanent residents
of Salem Township. Water-oriented activities such as fishing, boating, and
swimming are important summer functions of the various lakes located in the
region. Several studies have rated the recreational potential of Voltz Lake,
70
-------
71
-------
Q
H
I
PI
Z
z
H
CO
PI
2
CO
i— i
H
PJ
>
PI
Z
CO
tr"
w
CO
12
-------
Silver Lake, Cross Lake, Center Lake, and Camp Lake (Wisconsin DNR 1968,
1969). A summary of these findings is presented in Table 11-15 and Table
11-16. More detailed information for each lake is provided in Appendix C-4.
Table 11-15
RECREATIONAL RATINGS OF SELECTED LAKES WITHIN SALEM UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 2
Parameter
• Fishing
1. High Production
2. No Problems
3. Medium Production
4. Modest Problems
• Swimming
1. Sand/Gravel (75%)
2. Clean Water
3. Mod. Algae/Weed Problems
4. Sand /Gravel (25%)
5. Frequent Algae /Weed Problems
• Boating
1. Adequate Depths
(75% of basin 5')
2. Good Water Quality
3. Adequate Depths (50-75%
of Basin 5' deep)
4. Adequate Size for Some
Boating (200-1,000 acres)
5. Some Inhibiting Factors
Such as Weedy Bays, etc.
6. Limit of Boating Challenge
& Space (200 acres)
7. Overwhelming Inhibiting
Factors Such as Weed Beds
Throughout
• Aesthetics
1. Existence of 25% or More
Wild Shore
2. Varied Landscape
3. Few Nuisances Such as
Excessive Algae, etc.
4. Less than 25% Wild Shore
5. Moderately Varied Landscape
6. Unvaried Landscape
TOTAL POINTS
*Rating scheme based on (Wisconsin
Voltz Silver Cross Center
9 9
999 9
6 6
6 6
666 6
444 4
2 2
6 6
6 6
4 4
4
4
2 22
666 6
6
666 6
4 44
55 68 61 56
DNR, 1968 and 1969)
Parameter High Med .
Fish 9 6
Swimming 6 4
Boating 6 4
Aesthetics 6 4
Camp
9
6
6
2
2
4
2
6
6
2
45
Low
3
2
2
2
73
-------
Table 11-16
ANALYSIS OF PUBLIC ACCESS TO SELECTED LAKES
WITHIN SALEM DISTRICT NO. 2
Silver Cross Center
Lake Lake Lake
• Intensive Use (beach,
boat launching) 0 270' 70' 350' 270'
• Wild Frontage 0 3,600fl 0 1,200' 4,680'
• Open Space Frontage 0 1,400'2 0 450' 355'
TOTAL 0 5,270' 70' 2,000' 5,285'
1 State land
Underdeveloped county park
SOURCE: Wisconsin DNR, 1968 and 1969.
Other major recreational areas located in or near the Study Area include
Silver Lake Park, the Fox River, Rock Lake, Benet/Shangrila Lake, and the
Wilmot Ski Area. The Wilmot Ski Area has a peak weekday usage of 1,000
people .and a peak weekend usage of approximately 3,000 people. Many of these
skiers stay in the 500 motel units available within a 15 mile radius (Fox
Lake, Antroch, Twin Lakes) of the ski area. Since the ski season runs for
4 to 4 1/2 months beginning in early December, this ski population together
with other winter recreational pursuits such as snowmobiling, ice fishing,
and cross country skiing effectively create a year-round seasonal population.
c. Future Land Use
No comprehensive land use plan has been prepared by Kenosha County.
However, a regional plan has been prepared by SEWRPC for the year 2000.
This plan indicates that a majority of land within the Study Area is to be
preserved as a primary environmental corridor (see Figure 11-20). A primary
environmental corridor has been defined as that area which contains three
or more of the environmentally sensitive elements defined in Figure 11-19
(SEWRPC 1974). Other major land uses include low density urban residential
(0.7 - 2.2 DU/net residential acres) and medium density urban residential
(2.3 - 17.9 DU/net residential acres). The residential land uses are to be
confined to areas primarily contiguous to the lakes within the Study Area.
d. Growth Management
Land development in acreage adjacent to the lakes in the Study Area is
subject to restrictions imposed by State, County, and local ordinances. The
following regulatory measures are of direct concern within the lakeshore
areas:
• Wisconsin Shoreland Management Program
• Kenosha County Zoning Ordinance
• Township of Salem Zoning Ordinance.
These are briefly described in Appendix F.
74
-------
SILVER LA
NTY PARK
FIGURE 11-20 RECOMMENDED LAND USE PLAN, YEAR 2000,
OF SALEM UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 2
FEET
10,000
Source: SEWRPC
LEGEND
PUBLIC SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL (0.2-0.6 Dwelling units
per net residential acre)
LOW DENSITY URBAN (0.7-2.2 Dwelling units
per net residential acre)
MEDIUM DENSITY URBAN (2.3-6.9 Dwelling units
per net residential acre)
PRIMARY ENVIRONMENTAL CORRIDOR
PRIME AGRICULTURAL LAND
OTHER AGRICULTURAL AND OPEN RURAL LAND
The Salem Township Land Division Ordinance and Zoning Ordinance
establishes preliminary provisions for development of the resources in the
Salem Utility District No. 2. The Wisconsin Shoreland Management Program,
and the proposed Shoreland Zoning Ordinance for Kenosha County, provide more
restrictive provisions in some areas of shoreland development. The County's
ordinance, if adopted, would establish more designations among district areas
approved as residential, commercial, and recreational. This proposed ordi-
nance would also establish provisions for land use based on soil types and
other conditions of land suitability, and would institute performance standards
for the protection of water quality in Kenosha County.
75
-------
6. CULTURAL RESOURCES
a. Archaeological Resources
The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) reports several areas
within the District contain evidence of habitation by prehistoric populations.
One such area located north of Peat Lake is not on the National Register of
Historic Places (by telephone, Rick Dexter, Wisconsin Historic Preservation
Office, May 23, 1978). Numerous burial mounds and village sites can be found
adjacent to the Study Area. The SHPO believes that there is every reason to
suspect the presence of additional sites within the Study Area.
b. Historic Resources
The State Historical Society of Wisconsin, and the Kenosha County
Historical Society have identified several buildings within the Study Area
as having local historical or architectural significance. These structures
are listed in Appendix G. No structures within the Study Area are on the
National Register of Historic Places.
76
-------
CHAPTER III
DEVELOPMENT OF ALTERNATIVES
A. INTRODUCTION
1. GENERAL APPROACH
New alternative systems for wastewater collection and treatment in the
Proposed EIS Service Area (see Figure 1-4 ) are developed in this chapter.
In Chapter IV, the alternatives are described and compared, in terms of cost-
effectiveness, with the Proposed Action in the Facility Development Plan:
Salem Utility District No. 2, Kenosha County, Wisconsin (Jensen and Johnson,
Inc. 1976). Chapter V assesses the environmental and socioeconomic impacts
of all these systems.
The development of new alternatives in this EIS focuses on those aspects
and implications of the proposed wastewater management plan for the Service
Area which either have been identified as major issues or concerns, or were
not adequately addressed in the Facility Plan. The high cost of the Facility
Plan Proposed Action and the potential economic impact on area residents make
the cost-effectiveness of proposed facilities a major concern. Since the
collection system, consisting primarily of conventional gravity sewers, ac-
counts for approximately 80% of the Proposed Action, the use of newer tech-
nologies for wastewater collection are investigated in detail along with the
extent of servicing necessary. The development of alternative treatment
facilities has also been undertaken by matching available technologies, both
conventional and alternative or innovative, to the site conditions, such as
soil characteristics and housing density in the Proposed EIS Service Area.
Wastewater management technologies that have been assessed are listed in
Table III-l.
Table III-l
WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT COMPONENTS AND OPTIONS
Functional Component
Flow and Waste Load
Reduction
Collection of Wastewaters
Options
Wastewater Treatment
Processes
household water conservation
measures
ban on phosphorus
limited service area
pressure sewers
vacuum sewers
gravity sewers
conventional centralized
treatment with chemical
addition and filtration to
reduce phosphorus
concentrations
77
-------
Table III-l
(Continued)
Functional Component Options
Wastewater Treatment - land application
Processes (Cont'd.) - freshwater wetlands treatment
- on-site treatment
- cluster systems
Effluent Disposal - subsurface disposal
- land application
- discharge to surface waters
Sludge Handling - anaerobic digestion
- dewatering
Sludge Disposal - land application
- landfilling
- composting
- contract hauling
The last section of Chapter III considers the implementation, administration,
and financing of some of these wastewater management options and components.
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 is difficult, requiring evidence that the exist-
ing 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:
1) Standing pools of septic tank effluent or raw domestic sewage in
yards or public areas where direct contact with residents is likely.
2) Sewage in basements from inoperable or sluggish sewage disposal
systems.
3) Contaminated private wells clearly associated with sewage disposal
systems.
While evidence of condition 1 is clear in selected locations in the
District (see Appendix A-l), there is insufficient documentation of need for
the proposed project, on a District-wide basis in the Facility Plan to justify
Federal funding. Federal water pollution control legislation and regulations
require documentation of actual water quality or public health problems directly
related to improperly functioning wastewater management facilities.
The Proposed EIS 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 treatment facilities. Available information on these
78
-------
factors was used early in the preparation of this EIS to develop the
decentralized alternatives designated EIS Alternatives 4 through 8.
Indirect evidence is insufficient to justify Federal funding, however,
Section II.C. summarizes the efforts undertaken during the preparation of
this EIS to document and quantify the need for improved facilities in Salem
Utility District No. 2.
2. COMPARABILITY OF ALTERNATIVES: DESIGN POPULATION
The various alternatives for wastewater management in the EIS Service
Area must provide equivalent levels of service if their designs and costs
are to be properly compared. A design population of 10,925 should be
assumed (see Section II.E.) in the following evaluation of alternatives.
The design population is that population projected to reside in the EIS
Service Area in the year 2000. The methodology used to develop this
estimate is presented in Appendix E.
The same year 2000 design population has been used as the basis for all
the EIS alternetives 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 itself be a significant determinant of the EIS Service 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 gallons per capita
per day (gpcd) in residential areas for both permanent and seasonal residents.
Infiltration and inflow* (I/I) into gravity sewers was added to the calculated
sewage flow in appropriate alternatives. These data are summarized in Table
III-2.
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, flows
developed for the EIS alternatives were used to re-calculate flows for the
Proposed Action.
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 1973; 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:
• the importance of the community as a local or regional trading
center;
• the concentration of such water-intensive institutions as schools
and hospitals; and
• the level of small industrial development.
79
-------
03
03
CO
(0
CU
O
3
H-
3
Hi
H-
^»i
rt
iS
03
rt
H-
O
3
IS
03
rt
ro
o
Hi
(S3
O
o
OQ
03
O
3
CO
-a
ro
*
H-
3
o
3*
1
3
H-
ro
0
HI
3
ro
S
00
IS
03
H-
CO
ro
ro
f-t
£
ro
CO
M
3
n
H1
C
a.
ro
CO
03
ro
IS
03
OQ
ro
a.
03
H.
M
•u
o
*T3
c
M
91
(~^>
1 T
H-
0
3
Cu
C
IS
H*
3
OQ
CO
C
§
ro
IS
co
ro
03
CQ
o
3
*
o
H
t™*
O
tf
v£5
ro
^j
S
LO
O
*-J
_P^
l-i
,
Ul
o
M
3
i-h
H-
rt
03
rt
H-
O
3
to
0
O
•-J
oo
.
o
-J
00
W
e
cr
rt
o
rt
SO
0
C^
^^
U>
,
j>
CO
S3
Cfl P5 H O S3
H- oj is ro H-
o i— i w /-s to ro co^3 M
O ^ ro ^ rt <^ ^ o rt 3
Hro 3O(T> O H'OJ'S O
IS (DMiS IS
03 wj-.tr1 o ^ f is
^ci ?i* 3* 03 o o 03 ro
03 ro 03 o JT* ?T* ro ?i* 03
»s 3 is ro 3 ro
?r OQ o en tr1 rt co
is co os ro
H- CO 5T IS
M • ro »
03
S3 h-1 Ul
V 1. I.
00 Ul OJ Ul -^J
O l-i Ul H1 W
C^ ^^ OJ """J ^^3
N3 H-i W
S3 1— i 00 -J
U» -0 N3 H1
O S3 >O l-i M
O O O O O
• • • • *
Oh-* O OJ O
-P* Ul CO OJ Ul
OO h-1 h-1 H1 N3
• • • •
M O NJ O
^^ OJ CT^ NJ Ul
•£* vO ^O ^^
>
5^
w
*^
a.
f*H f^
P H3
^" ^*
i-3 tr1
o
o
^d g
(5 H
P 2!
> H
H M
Q
%2
H
s~* J^
S C"^
8
f
0 S3
S3 M
3
x-v H
5* W
o
H
03
a1
i
NJ
80
-------
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 are not available. In larger communities, and in communities within
Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas, the maximum allowable flow ranges
up to 85 gpcd.
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 conservative, i.e., it
probably overestimates flows to some degree.
The design flow figure of 60 gpcd does not reflect reductions in flow
from a program of water conservation. Residential water conservation devices,
discussed in Section III.B.I.a., could reduce flows by 16 gpcd. Later in
this chapter, to demonstrate probable impacts of such reduction in flow, the
Facility Plan Proposed Action has been redesigned and recosted.
B. COMPONENT AND OPTIONS
1. FLOW AND WASTE REDUCTION
Economics in the construction and operation of sewage collection,
treatment and disposal facilities are in many localities achieveable by
controlling waste flows or the amounts of impurities carried in the sewage.
These economics are generally recognized in short-term monetary savings
resulting from reducing design capacities of facilities or in long-term
savings from putting off the future need for facility expansion or replace-
ment. Other savings can be achieved throughout the life of the facilities
from reduced operational costs. In addition, mitigation of some environmental
impacts may be achieveable from waste reduction measures such as reducing
phosphorus content of laundry detergents.
Methods of flow and waste reduction considered for use in the Study Area
are residential flow reduction devices and a detergent phosphorus ban.
a. Residential Flow Reduction Devices
Information on a number of residential flow reduction devices is presented
in Appendix H. Of these devices, the ones which reduce flow the greatest for
the least cost are dual-flush toilets and flow restriction devices for shower
heads and faucets. Estimated water savings with proper use of these devices
81
-------
is 16 gpcd. Revised design flow incorporating this water savings were used t:o
redesign and recost two alternatives involving centralized treatment. The
results of this analysis are discussed in Chapter IV. In summary, use of
these devices in sewered residences was shown to be cost-effective on the
basis of wastewater investment cost savings. Flow reduction devices also
yield savings in water supply and water heating costs. When these savings
are added to wastewater treatment cost savings, the homeowner can expect
annual savings of $4 to $48 for individual devices evaluated in Appendix H.
Flow reduction devices can also provide advantages when used in
conjunction with on- or off-site soil disposal systems. The useful lives
of these systems are expected to be prolonged by the reduction in hydraulic
loading rates. Long-term evaluation of this benefit has not been undertaken,
however, so the actual extension of the systems' useful life and the resul-
tant economic benefit can not presently be quantified.
b. Wisconsin Ban on Phosphorus
The Wisconsin State Legislature, on March 31, 1978 passed a bill
limiting the amount of phosphates in detergents sold after July 1, 1979.
Laundry detergents are to contain no more than 0.5% phosphorus by weight,
while the limit for dishwashing detergents is set at 8.7% by weight.
Presently, laundry detergents sold in Wisconsin commonly contain 6% phos-
phorus while dishwasher detergents generally contain 7% to 14% phosphorus
(Air and Water Pollution Report, April 10, 1978). Under an amendment added
to this bill, the phosphorus restrictions will expire June 30, 1981, unless
the Wisconsin Legislature extends them.
A similar bill was passed in Michigan in 1971 (Michigan Public Act 226,
Cleaning Agent Act) limiting phosphorus in laundry and cleaning supplies to
8.7% by weight. In October of 1978, Michigan's Department of Natural Resources
further reduced the amount of phosphorus in all laundry detergents sold in
Michigan to 0.5%. According to the latest monitoring data at 20 Michigan
wastewater treatment plants, influent phosphorus concentrations have decreased
from an average of 6.5 mg/1 prior to the ban, to 4.3 mg/1 as of May 1, 1978.
This is a 35% reduction in phosphorus entering those plants that were sampled.
A similar reduction is expected in the Study Area since the Wisconsin phos-
phorus ban will be in effect by the time new treatment facilities are
operational.
The average total phosphorus concentration in domestic wastewater is
approximately 10 mg/1 (EPA 1976). A reduction of influent phosphorus con-
centrations by 35% plus an approximate 20% additional reduction during
primary and secondary treatment is not enough to reach effluent limits which
are set at 1.0 mg/1. Construction of treatment plant components for phos-
phorus removal such as tertiary filters, will still be required at consider-
able cost. Some reduction in chemicals used to precipitate phosphorus and
in total sludge quantity could result from reduced influent phosphorus
concentrations, thus reducing operating costs somewhat.
There will be no cost savings or cost increases as a result of the
phosphorus law for on-site systems. It is possible, although not confirmed
or quantified by previous research, that a reduction in phosphorus discharged
to septic tank soil disposal systems will result in some reduction in phos-
phorus transported by groundwater from the soil disposal system.
82
-------
2. COLLECTION
The collection system proposed in the Facility Plan is estimated to
cost $9.5 million—80% of the total cost of the Proposed Action—and is the
single most expensive portion of the sewerage facilities. Since not all
parts of collection systems are eligible for Federal and State funding, the
costs of the collection system can affect 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:
• pressure sewers (including grinder pumps or STEP systems);
• vacuum sewers; and
• small diameter gravity sewers (Troyan and Norris 1974).
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 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:
• elimination of infiltration/inflow;
• reduction of construction cost; and
• 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).
83
-------
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 Salem Utility District No. 2.
The STEP-type low-pressure sewer system was found the most advantageous of
the three alternatives. Preliminary STEP systems serving residents around
portions of Silver Lake, Center Lake, Camp Lake, and Cross Lake were, there-
fore, developed to determine the differences in project costs if they were
substituted for the gravity system specified by the Facility Plan. The
arrangement of the STEP system house pump and sewer line connection is
illustrated in Figure III-l.
CONTROL PANEL
a ALARM LIGHT
,-PRESSURE SEWER/
•—4. I COMMON
\ TRENCH
FORCE MAW )
GRAV
SEWAGE PIPING
EXISTING SEPTIC TANK
TANK UNIT
TYPICAL PUMP INSTALLATION FOR PRESSURE SEWER
Figure III-l
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" refers to 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.
84
-------
"Decentralized treatment" defines those systems processing a relatively
small amount of wastewater. Decentralized treatment can be provided on-site
or off-site. Typically, effluent disposal occurs in close proximity to the
source of sewage, thus, eliminating the need for costly transmission of
sewage to distant disposal sites.
A major purpose of this EIS is to assess the technical feasibility,
relative costs, environmental impacts, and implementation problems associated
with these three approaches to wastewater treatment in the Proposed Salem EIS
Service Area.
a. Centralized Treatment—Discharge to Surface Waters
The Fox River, below Wilmot, was selected by the Facility Plan as the
point of discharge for treated wastewater. Pre-discharge treatment options
evaluated in the Plan include a conventional activated sludge process (Pro-
posed Action), a rotating biological contactor, a synthetic media filter, and
a contact stabilization package plant.
The activated sludge process designed in the Facility Plan is the selected
method of centralized treatment for those alternatives evaluated in the EIS
which involve stream discharge. Nutrient removal by the use of a phosphorus
complexing agent such as aluminum sulfate is included in the design of these
plants. In addition, the use of a mixed media filter for further reduction
of phosphorus levels is included in the design of three of the eight EIS
Alternatives described later in Chapter IV.
A schematic of the conventional activated sludge process is shown in
Figure III-2. The design flow, major components, and costs of the activated
sludge plants that are part of the regional alternatives are presented in
Appendix H.
CONVENTIONAL ACTIVATED
SLUDGE
TREATME!
LEGEND
( I USED IN EIS
ALTERNATIVES
2 AND 5
FINAL SLUOOE
SECONDARY) » DISPOSAL
BY CONTRACT
HAULING
Figure III-2
85
-------
As an alternative method of disinfection, the use of ozone has been
compared to the proposed chlorination system in the activated sludge plant.
The ozonation system investigated consists of an ozone generator, contact
chamber, monitor, and controls. It was found that the ozonation system had
significantly higher capital and operating costs than chlorination for the
size of treatment facilities under consideration. The use of chlorination
for disinfection has, therefore, been included in the preliminary design of
the activated sludge plant on the basis of cost. The impacts of chlorinated
effluent on the Fox River will be discussed in Chapter V.
This EIS also evaluates the surface discharge of wastewater to wetlands
east of the Study Area. This innovative technology is presented in an
attempt to provide a more cost-effective and environmentally preferable
wastewater disposal method. The design flow, major components, and costs
of the wetlands facility are also presented in Appendix I.
b. Centralized Treatment—Land Disposal
Land treatment of municipal wastewater involves the use of plants and
the soil to remove many wastewater constituents. A wide variety of processes
can be used to achieve many different objectives of treatment, water reuse,
nutrient recycling, and crop production. The three principal types of land
application systems are:
1. Slow rate (irrigation)
2. Rapid infiltration (infiltration-percolation)
3. Overland flow (EPA 1977).
The effluent quality required for land application in terms of organic
content (BOD and suspended solids) is not as critical as with stream discharge
options. Pretreatment of wastewaters is necessary, however, to prevent nuisance
conditions, insure a higher level of constituent removal through the soil, re-
duce soil clogging, and insure reliable operation of the distribution system.
Generally, the equivalent of secondary treatment of wastewaters is required
prior to land application (Great Lakes Upper Mississippi River Board of State
Sanitary Engineers 1971).
Storage of wastewater is necessary with land application systems for
non-operating periods and periods of reduced application rates resulting from
climatic constraints. In Wisconsin, land application systems must have
storage facilities for holding wastewaters over the winter months.
A recent memorandum from EPA may alter the requirements for 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 pre-application increment
needed to meet more stringent pre-application 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)
86
-------
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 spray irrigation method of land application was developed as a
wastewater management alternative in both the Facility Plan and this EIS.
The rapid infiltration and overland flow methods were also evaluated in the
EIS to determine if savings in capital costs may be realized. Overland flow
and rapid infiltration normally require less land than spary irrigation for
treatment. These three methods, as developed in this EIS, are described
below.
Spray irrigation. The 0.70 mgd and 0.73 mgd spray irrigation facilities
evaluated in three of the new alternatives for this EIS consists of P^^~
nary treatment (bar screen and comminutor) and a stabilization pond. The
treatment plant component would provide the equivalent of secondary treatment
prior to spray irrigation. An application rate of 1.5 inches per week was
determined after calculating the nitrogen loading rate and found that there
would be no need for under-drainage at this rate. Higher loading rates may
produce poor crop growth. Alfalfa was the cover crop chosen over corn since
alfalfa allows a higher application rate with its growing season limited
solely by climatic factors. The pond system would have a storage period o£
140 days. A flow diagram of this plant is illustrated in Figure IIX-3.
SPRAY
IRRIGATION
RAW ^
WASTE
WATER
NARY
TREAT-
MENT
LAND APPLICATION
SPRAY IRRIGATION
Figure III-3
87
-------
Rapid Infiltration. The rapid infiltration method of land treatment
is evaluated in one of the new wastewater management alternatives (0.70 mgd),
Rapid infiltration of wastewater was selected for further investigation as a
component option because it usually requires less area for operation as
compared to spray irrigation. Furthermore, as a result of reduced land
requirements, the site can usually be located closer to wastewater trans-
portation lines, thus, reducing capital, operation and maintenance costs
of interceptors and/or force mains.
After land application, the renovated wastewater will be drawn from
recovery wells (see Figure III-4) and discharged into the Fox River. Con-
sideration in selection of the method of land application and a potential
site are discussed in the section on disposal options. A flow diagram of
this plant is illustrated in Figure III-5.
RAPID INFILTRATION
I EVAPORATION
PtHCOUTIOIt
ttrORAULIC PATHVIT
RECOVERY OF REHOWED »»TE» 3T WELLS
FIGURE III-4
RAW
WASTE
WATER
PRELIMI-
NARY
TREAT-
MENT
CHLORINATION
1
RAPID
NFILT
RATIO!
BASINS
1
RECOVERY
TO FOX RIVKR
WELLS
LAND APPLICATION
RAPID INFILTRATION
Figure III-5
88
-------
Overland Flow. Overland flow is evaluated as a method of land treatment
of wastewater in one of the EIS Alternatives. In this method of treatment,
renovation is accomplished by physical, chemical, and biological means as
the wastewater flows down sloped terraces of relatively impermeable, vegetated
soils. Although collection ditches are usually required for overland flow,
this analysis uses disposal of renovated wastewater directly to a natural
wetlands area. A flow diagram of this facility is presented in Figure III-6.
RAW
WASTE
WATER
PRE-
LIMINARY
TREATMENT
1
1
STORAGE
LAGOON
_H J
OVERLAND
CHLORINAT10N
WETLANDS
DISCHARGE
FLOW
Figure III-6
89
-------
c. Decentralized Treatment and Disposal
A number of technologies are available which can provide decentralized
treatment either on-site or at sites near the point of sewage generation.
Disposal of treatment wastewaters can be to the air, soil or surface waters
and normally occurs near the treatment site. Some of the available tech-
nologies are:
• Alternative toilets:
Composting toilets
Toilets using filtered and disinfected bath and laundry
wastewater
- Waterless toilets using oils to carry and store wastes
Incineration toilets
• On-lot treatment and disposal:
Septic tank and soil absorption systems (ST/SAS)
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 sand mound system
Rejuvenation of soil disposal fields with hydrogen peroxide
(H202) treatments
• Off-lot treatment and disposal:
Holding tanks
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 waters
Small scale lagoon with seasonal effluent discharge to surface
waters
90
-------
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, preconstructed activated sludge (package)
treatment plants with effluent discharge to surface waters.
Because most of the developed portions of Salem Utility District No. 2
are tributary to lakes, decentralized technologies which discharge to surface
waters are not further considered here. All of the remaining technologies,
used alone or in combination with each other or with flow reduction devices,
could be useful in individual situations within the Study Area. It is ex-
pected that, if the decentralized approach to wastewater management is
selected, technologies selected for each dwelling will be appropriate to
the problem being remedied (or lack of problem), to the soil and groundwater
site characteristics, and to the expected use of the systems.
Lacking necessary information to select appropriate technologies on a
site-by-site basis, this EIS assumes that the best known and most reliable
decentralized technologies will be used. Continued use of on-site septic
tanks and soil absorption systems is the chosen technology where acceptable
public health and environmental impacts are attainable with them. Where
on-site systems (including alternatives to ST/SAS) are not economically,
environmentally or otherwise feasible, cluster systems are assumed to be
used. The assumption -that only these two technologies will be used is made
here to form the basis for cost and feasibility estimates and is not meant
to preclude other technologies for any site(s). Estimates of their frequency
of repair and construction are conservative to reflect the possibility that
other, more appropriate technologies may be more expensive.
An analysis of site conditions indicates that the potential for wide
use of soil dependent decentralized systems in the Proposed EIS Service Area
is limited. As noted in Chapter II, soils in approximately 65% of the Study
Area have severe or very severe limitations for these systems. Limiting
factors include saturated soil conditions and slow permeability. Seasonal
high groundwater levels in many areas are within several feet of the ground
surface or higher. In addition, development around the lakes has occurred
primarily through subdivisions which date back as far as the 1920fs. The
lot sizes in these subdivisions are approximately 1/5 to 1/4 acre, and in
some cases, even smaller.
Despite the abundance of soils in the Study Area that are unfavorable
for wastewater treatment, there are two portions of the Proposed EIS Service
Area where dencentralized soil dependent systems appear feasible. Continued
use of on-lot systems is considered a treatment option in residential areas
along and contiguous to the south shore of Silver Lake and east of Wilmot
adjacent to the Fox River. The use of a multi-family filter field or cluster
system is considered a treatment option for the residential area northeast
of Center Lake. Detailed field investigations of soil and groundwater con-
ditions at these locations would be necessary before serious consideration
is given to implementing these decentralized technologies.
91
-------
By an agreement among local government and regional planning authorities,
waste-water treatment in Silver Lake Park is to be considered in the wastewater
management plans of Salem Utility District No. 2. In all of the regional
alternatives, treatment of wastewaters in the Park is to be by ST/SAS. This
determination was made on the basis of available SCS data (Link and Demo 1970)
which indicate that soils in the Park have moderate1 limitations for on-site
wastewater disposal. Again, detailed field investigations of feasibility for
this management component is necessary before design.
Although the opportunities for use of generally lower cost decentralized
treatment systems in the Proposed EIS Service Area are limited, the continued
use of existing on-site systems and the use of other more advanced decentral-
ized technologies should be considered as an integral part of wastewater
management planning for remaining unsewered parts of the utility district.
Information on the implementation and management of decentralized systems is
presented later in this chapter.
4. 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 impound-
ments for ultimate disposal of treated effluent.
a. Reuse
Industry Reuse. As stated in the Facility Plan, there is no industrial
development in the Study Area; 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.B.4.C.
Groundwater Recharge. Groundwater supplies all of the potable water in
the EIS Service 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 supple-
mental recharge is necessary. Wastewater reuse by groundwater recharge has
therefore not been evaluated.
b. Discharge to Surface Waters
The only body of water in Salem Utility District No. 2 considered for
receiving treated wastewater effluent is the Fox River. The discharge point
considered in the Facility Plan and in this EIS is three-fourths of a mile
•"•A rating of moderate indicates that the soil has limitations for on-site
wastewater treatment that can be overcome by average management and careful
design..
92
-------
below the Wilmot Dam, 1/3-mile above the Wisconsin/Illinois State line and
about four miles above Grass Lake. An effluent pumping station, 7400 feet
of force main and 1000 feet of gravity sewer are required to transport
treatment plant effluent to this discharge point. The sizes of these units
depend on the design flow for the treatment plant which range from 0.45 to
0.73 mgd for various alternatives evaluated in this EIS.
Effluent discharge limitations set for this discharge by Wisconsin DNR
are 30 mg/1 BOD, 30 mg/1 suspended solids, and 1 mg/1 total phosphorus.
These limitations apply at the maximum and minimum flows considered here as
well as at the 1.5 mgd design flow used in the Facility Plan. In addition,
intense recreational use at the river in this stretch and applicable effluent
limitations of 200 fecal coliform per 100 ml require disinfection of the
effluent prior to discharge.
A properly designed and operated activated sludge treatment will meet
the BOD and suspended solids limitations without aid from chemical additions.
Achieving the phosphorus limitation, however, will require chemical additions
since a ban on laundry detergents containing phosphorus will not, by itself,
help the activated sludge plant to meet this standard. Alum* addition to the
aeration tank as proposed in the Facility Plan and assumed here should result
in meeting the phosphorus limitation. In addition, the alum addition should
enhance removal of both suspended and colloidal organic solids so that an
effluent of higher quality in terms of BOD and suspended solids should be
achieved. BOD of 20 mg/1 and suspended solids of 25 mg/1 or better can
reasonably be expected from this form of treatment.
It is appropriate to note that Wisconsin and Illinois have different
BOD and suspended solids effluent standards for this size plant discharging
to the Fox River. Where Wisconsin requires 30 mg/1 BOD and 30 mg/1 suspended
solids, Illinois requires 20 mg/1 and 25 mg/1. The difference in standards
should be a moot point for two reasons:
• As discussed above, to achieve the 1 mg/1 phosphorus limitation
which both states apply to discharges into the Fox River, higher
effluent quality than 30/30 will likely be achieved.
• The Fox River is not sensitive to the difference in organic loads.
The dissolved oxygen regime in the river is not presently stressed.
The dilution ratio at low river flow and maximum design flow (.73
mgd) is approximately 50 to 1. Incremental increases in river BOD
after mixing would be 0.6 mg/1 with the Wisconsin standard or 0.4
mg/1 with the Illinois standard above the present average river
BOD of 6 mg/1.
Other wastewater constituents of concern are ammonia and combined
chlorine compounds (chloramines). Average ammonia concentration in the
effluent will be approximately 15 mg/1. After mixing with the river at low
flow (present average ammonia concentration at 0.1 mg/1), the ammonia con-
centration will be approximately 0.4 mg/1 of which approximately 0.09 mg/1
would be unionized ammonia. Unionized ammonia is lethal to fish in concen-
trations from 0.2 to 2.0 mg/1 and above. The current EPA criteria for
unionized ammonia is 0.02 mg/1. Wisconsin requires a 0.5 mg/1 chlorine
93
-------
residual after 15 minutes contact time if chlorination is the chosen method
of disinfection. This chlorine residual is present primarily as chloramines
which are toxic to a wide range of aquatic organisms at concentrations as
low as 0.002 mg/1. Concentrations of 0.09 to 0.3 mg/1 are lethal to several
common warm water fish. The EPA criterion for total chlorine residual
chlorine is 0.01 mg/1 for fresh water organisms other than salmonids (trout
and salmon, which are not present in the Fox River). At low river flow,
treatment plant design flow and assuming no chlorine residual remaining
from upstream discharges, the mixed concentration of chlorine residual in
the river would just meet the EPA criterion as long as there is no chlorine
overdosing.
Surface discharge to wetlands east of the Study Area is considered in
one of the EIS Alternatives. The discharge area is located approximately
0.5 miles northeast of Lake Shangrila, in the Paasch Lake wetlands. Figure
III-7 shows the location of the facility.
Effluent discharge limitations set by Wisconsin DNR are for a weekly
and monthly basis:
Monthly Avg. Weekly Avg. Other
Parameter (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
BOD5 20 30
Suspended Solids 20 30
Dissolved Oxygen — — 4 (min.)
These effluent parameters would not be met during months of low temperature
when plant uptake and frost would limit treatment potential of the overland
flow system.
c. Land Application
Land application methods of wastewater treatment that are evaluated for
potential use near the Study Area have been briefly described in Section
III.B.3.b. The locations of land application sites west of the Fox River
that are evaluated in this EIS are shown in Figure III-8 and the overland
flow site is shown in Figure III-7.
Soil suitability for renovation of wastewater at these locations has
been determined by the SCS soil survey conducted in 1970.
The rapid infiltration site, located west of Camp Lake and the Fox
River, is characterized by a gently rolling topography. The soils at this
site are a well drained clay loam underlain by sand and gravel. The depth
to seasonal high water table is greater than three feet (USDA-SCS 1970).
The spray irrigation site, bordering the rapid infiltration site to the
southwest is characterized by a relatively flat topography. Soils within
this site are predominantly silt loam and clay loam underlain by sand and
94
-------
H
M
W
Pd
33
O
01
W
ff!
§
M
S3
O
O
I-}
95
-------
\
\
\
FEET
2000
LEGEND
'jfl RAPID INFILTRATION SITE
(ALTERNATIVE 7)
SPRAY IRRIGATION SITE "^
(ALTERNATIVES 3,4,6)
LANDING
4» APPLICATION
AREA
STRIP
^STORAGE
AREA ...
\
FIGURE III-8 POTENTIAL LAND APPLICATION SITES FOR THE EIS ALTERNATIVES 3,4,6, AND 7
96
-------
gravel. Depth to the seasonal high water table is greater than three feet
(USDA-SCS 1970). There are no streams traversing this site or the potential
rapid infiltration site.
The potential land application-wetland discharge site is located north
of Lake Shangrila. A detailed description of the soils and topography of
this site is located in Appendix J.
It is emphasized here that any serious consideration given to implementing
an EIS Alternative involving either rapid infiltration, spray irrigation, or
overland flow, must be preceded by a detailed field investigation of the exist-
ing soil and groundwater conditions. The detailed soils mapping of these sites
using the SCS soil survey during the course of this project is useful only as a
planning tool for the development of wastewater management alternatives.
5. SLUDGE HANDLING AND DISPOSAL
Two types of sludge would be generated by the wastewater treatment options
considered above: chemical/biological sludges from secondary treatment pro-
cesses; and solids pumped from septic tanks. The residues from treatment by
lagoons and land application are grit and screenings.
Treatment and disposal options in the Facility Plan for the chemical/
biological sludges generated by the proposed activated sludge plant were:
• Incineration and landfill of the resulting ash
• Anaerobic digestion followed by contract hauling to an existing
state licensed sanitary facility
• Anaerobic digestion followed by dewatering and then burial in
a landfill
• Anaerobic digestion followed by dewatering and then land surface
application at a site near the treatment plant.
The Facility Plan selected anaerobic digestion and contract hauling based
upon its low cost. Other options have not been reevaluated for this EIS.
This EIS has estimated the costs of these alternatives by assuming
that a contract hauler would be responsible for hauling and disposal of
sludge. A cost of $81 per million gallons of sewage was used, based upon
$30/1000 gallons of sludge and 2700 gallons of sludge per million gallons
of sewage. These costs have been incorporated into the cost-effectiveness
analysis presented in Chapter IV.
Alternatives using residential septic tanks for on-lot systems, cluster
systems, or STEP sewer systems must provide for periodic removal and disposal
of the accumulated solids. For the purpose of design and costing these altern-
atives, it is assumed that pumping would occur every 3 years and would cost
$45 per pumping. Local septage haulers are licensed to operate in Kenosha
County. Farmlands are typical septage disposal sites.
97
-------
C. RELIABILITY OF COMPONENTS
Reliability measures the ability of a system or component of a system
to operate without failure at the level of efficiency it was designed. It
is particularly important to have dependable operation in situations where
environmental or economic harm may result from system failure. This section
will examine the reliability of each component used in alternatives for this
EIS.
1. 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 main-
tenance. 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 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 uninter-
rupted 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 occa-
sionally 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.
98
-------
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 insuffi-
cient. 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.
Septic Tank Effluent Pumps*(STEP). It is sometimes desirable to pump
wastewater from an existing septic tank rather than directly from the house,
using 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 made by experienced manufacturers is good.
Newer entries into the field have not yet accumulated the operating exper-
ience necessary to demonstrate conclusively the reliability of their products.
In the event of failure of a STEP system, an overflow 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.
2. 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.
The activated sludge process is relatively complicated to operate.
Because of requirements for the recycling of sludge, and the susceptability
to shock loads, a treatment plant operator who is familiar with activated
sludge would be required to assure smooth operation of the facility. By
designing multiple basins, and providing the necessary backup equipment,
operational problems can be reduced to a minimum. Therefore, flexibility
for operating and repairing the facility can be maximized with proper design.
99
-------
Advanced Treatment. Advanced treatment serves primarily to remove toxic
substances and nutrients that would stimulate biological activity. The tech-
nology 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 contam-
ination; 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.
Overland flow, rapid infiltration, and spray irrigation are extremely
reliable methods of treating domestic sewage, as long as sufficient resting
periods are provided, and the sites selected for the application of waste-
water meet all the environmental restrictions.
3. 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 maintenance. 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 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.
4. CLUSTER SYSTEMS
Cluster systems are localized wastewater disposal mechanisms servicing
several (approximately 20) 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 reli-
ability of the system declines because of the mechanical nature of the pumps
and their dependence upon electricity for power.
100
-------
D. IMPLEMENTATION
The process by which a wastewater management plan is to be implemented
depends upon whether the selected alternative relies primarily upon central-
ized 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:
• There must be legal authority for a managing agency to exist and
financial authority for it to operate.
• The agency must manage construction, ownership and operation of
the sanitary district.
• A choice must be made between the several types of long-term
financing that are generally required in paying for capital
expenditures associated with the project.
• A system of user charges to retire capital debts, to cover
expenditures for operation and maintenance, and to provide a
reserve for contingencies must be established.
In the following sections, these requirements are examined first with
respect to centralized sanitary districts, then with respect to decentralized
districts.
1. CENTRALIZED DISTRICTS
a. Authority
The Salem Area Facility Plan identified the Salem Utility District No. 2
as the legal authority for implementing the Plan's Proposed Action. The
District would have the authority to implement this system and to contract
with the villages and townships 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 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:
101
-------
• The station may be designed to agency specifications, with the
responsibility for purchase, maintenance and ownership residing
with the homeowner.
• The station may be specified and purchased by the agency, with
the homeowner repurchasing and maintaining it.
• The station may be specified and owned by the agency, but
purchased by the homeowner.
• The station may be specified, purchased and owned by the agency.
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. Briefly, they are:
pay-as-you-go methods;
special benefit assessments;
reserve funds; and
debt financing.
The Facility Plan indicated that approximately 48% of the Proposed
Action would be funded by Federal and State grants, with the remainder to
be financed by other means such as special assessments and mortgage revenue
bonds.
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 manage-
ment 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:
• Permanent residents/Seasonal residents
• Residential/Commercial/Industrial users
• Presently sewered users/Newly sewered users
• 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.
102
-------
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 depart-
ments or other agencies. After installation, local government has no further
responsibility for these systems until malfunctions 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 of mis-
use. 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
Wisconsin does not presently have legislation which explicitly authorizes
governmental entities to manage wastewater facilities that are not connected
to conventional collection systems. However, Wisconsin Statutes Sections
59.07(1)(d) et se^. . 61.36 et seq., 66.076 et seq.. 62.18(1) et seq., and
60.306 et seq. have been interpreted (Otis and Stewart 1976) as providing
counties, villages, towns, cities, and special purpose districts, respectively,
with sufficient powers to manage decentralized facilities. Section 66.072,
the enabling legislation for the formation of Salem Utility District No. 2,
is also considered to provide this authority (by telephone, Mr. Lymen Wible,
S.E. Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, September 18, 1978).
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 manage-
ment of decentralized facilities. These laws are summarized in Appendix K-2.
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. Manage-
ment of such a district implies formation of a management agency and formula-
tion of policies for the agency. The concept of such an agency is relatively
new. Appendix K-3 discusses this concept in detail.
103
-------
The range of functions a management agency may provide for adequate
control and use of decentralized technologies is presented in Table III-2.
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 develop-
ment of this agency relate to the following questions:
• Should engineering and operations functions be provided by the
agency or by private organizations under contract?
• Would off-site facilities require acquisition of property and
right-of-way?
• Would public or private ownership of on-site wastewater facilities
be more likely to provide cost savings and improved control of
facilities operation?
• 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:
Develop a site-specific environmental and engineering data base;
Design the management organization;
Agency start-up;
Construction and rehabilitation of facilities; and
Operation of facilities.
Site Specific Environmental and Engineering Data Base. The data base
should include groundwater monitoring, a house-to-house investigation
(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.
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 informa-
tion 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 existing system.
Detailed site analysis may be required to evaluate operation of the
effluent disposal fields and to determine the impacts of effluent disposal
upon local groundwater. These studies may include probing the disposal
area; boring soil samples; and the installation of shallow groundwater
104
-------
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 the Salem Utilities District No. 2 as the agency best suited
to managing wastewater facilities in both unsewered and sewered areas of the
Study Area. 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 manage-
ment 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. Additional
personnel required for construction and/or operation should be provided. If
necessary, contractual arrangements with private organizations 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 construc-
tion and rehabilitation begin, site conditions may be revealed 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 flow district is similar to that of a
centralized district. Such financing was discussed in Section III.D.I.e.
105
-------
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
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
Planning
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.
106
-------
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 flow 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.
107
-------
CHAPTER IV
EIS ALTERNATIVES
A. INTRODUCTION
The preceding chapter described options for the functional components of
wastewater management systems for the communities in Salem Utility District
No. 2. This chapter examines alternative wastewater management plans, or
alternative courses of action for the District in the design year 2000 . A
No Action Alternative is also examined.
The Proposed Action developed in the Facility Plan provides for
centralized collection and treatment of wastewater generated in the area
shown in Figure I- 3 . The EIS Alternatives, including the upgraded/rede-
signed Facility Plan Proposed Action, provide for management of wastewaters
in a slightly larger Service Area (see Figure 1-4 ) than that proposed in
the Facility Plan (Jensen and Johnson, Inc., July, 1976). In this EIS, it
is assumed that extra wastewater flows are generated by users of Silver Lake
Park and by residents along the eastern shore of Lake Shangrila1. The average
attendance at the Park will be 600 to 800 persons per day during the summer
season, with 2500 to 3000 the estimated number of visitors on peak days (by
letter, N.E. Ladine, Assistant Director, Kenosha County Park Commission,
May 2, 1978).
In response to concerns about the expense of the Proposed Action, as well
as its effects upon local and regional water quality, the development of EIS
alternatives emphasized decentralized and alternative or innovative technolo-
gies including: alternative collection systems, decentralized treatment and
land disposal of wastewaters. Five of the EIS alternatives use decentralized
treatment, although to a limited extent, in order to partially avoid the costs
of sewers. Analysis of available soils and groundwater data indicates that
these are feasible alternatives to sewering the southeastern shore of Silver
Lake, areas adjacent to Center Lake, as well as Silver Lake Park. It would
be possible to combine multi-family filter fields (cluster systems) with
rehabilitated and new on-site treatment systems to meet the wastewater manage-
ment needs of these portions of the EIS Service Area.
Because the cost of collection in the Proposed Action is high, the cost-
effectiveness of pressure sewers, vacuum sewers, and small-diameter gravity
sewers was compared to conventional gravity sewers. Of these, the most cost-
effective collection system for the Proposed EIS Service Area was found to
be a combination of low pressure sewers and pumping stations/conventional
gravity sewers where topography was favorable. Development of a cost-effec-
tive collection system for each EIS alternative was based upon the use of
detailed topographic maps, with 2-foot contour intervals (Jensen and Johnson,
Inc., 1976).
Wastewater generation is assumed to begin in 1990.
108
-------
Where site conditions such as soils and topography are favorable, land
disposal of wastewater offers advantages over conventional biological treat-
ment 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.
The assumptions used in design and costing of the alternatives are
presented in Appendix J-l. The major features of the Proposed Action and
the EIS Alternatives are listed in Table IV-1.
B. ALTERNATIVES
The action proposed by the Facility Plan has been compared with the
"do-nothing" (No Action) alternative, and seven new approaches developed in
this EIS. The alternatives discussed below are summarized in Table IV-1,
and Table IV-2 lists the cost-effectiveness of each. Detailed cost data for
each alternative are provided in Appendix J-2. To facilitate the development
of wastewater management alternatives, the Proposed EIS Service Area was
divided into 27 segments; the location of these is shown in Figure 11-17 .
1. 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 of wastewater collection and treatment systems.
Presumably, no new facilities would be built; wastewater would still be
treated in private septic tank-soil absorption systems or managed by holding
tank/pump-out operations.
If this course of action were taken, existing on-site systems in the
EIS Service Area would continue to be used in their present conditions. In
the absence of a small waste flows management agency, Salem Township would
continue to issue permits to build and repair on-lot systems.
The No Action Alternative is unlikely to be selected. It implies that
existing on-lot systems would continue to pose a significant public health
threat to residents along the shorelines of Camp Lake, Center Lake and Benet/
Shangrila Lake (see Section II.C.l.). "No Action" further implies that many
residents would continue to manage wastewater disposal through the use of
holding tanks. The high costs associated with investment1 in and operation/
maintenance2 of these systems also make "No Action" an alternative that is
not likely to be implemented by Salem Utility District No. 2.
1In 1977, typical holding tank costs, including installation, were approximately
$3,000 for Study Area residents.
2In 1977, typical pump-out costs were approximately $60 per month for local
residents.
-------
H
<
o r-1
en i—i
PS H
a N$
0
M
CO
3
OT
0.
1
3
rr
cr
•<:
o
X
r1-
O-
W
rt
t-1-
O
3
m
cu
01
rr
fD
'I
3
U
2
CU
•a
f-t
ffi
(_-
c
a.
rjg
fD
0
£-
Ln
3
era
a.
<:
ro
3
rr
H-
O
3
V
to
O
rr
H-
<
01
rr
fl>
O '— *
fD O
3 •
rr Ln
H
to 3
M era
o.
to ^
ri
ro
fli
i
n
o
3
cr
•^
a
X
H-
a.
to
rr
r1*
Q
3
a.
)•*•
rr
O
=r
s:
H*
t-*
3
O
rt
1
T3
^
O
rr
f-t
ft
to
rt
g
rr
r(
&
rr
H-
O
3
O
O
3
TO
a.
rr
H
ro
[U
3
rr
a"
^1
ja
to
"3
H-
a.
N
to
rr
H-
O
3
r1
to
09
o
o
d
MI
H-
3
T3
rt
fD
rr
t-t
fl)
to
rr
i
3
rr
CT
X
W
O to
* 3
"»J fD
O fli
^1
O
rr O rr
3 C/J
t-1 D
"• 3
ftt (D
i-t
3 u
U 01
rr
M- R
< M
ru w
3 r,
S en r1
fD T3 £U
M tl 3
rr 01 a.
*•<
o >
rp, H* T3
- * ^
s: •-( t-1
H* H- H-
r-CM O
(D m
M- m
< 1-t
fD 01
« r
S '
fD rr 00 H-
3 f to O
o to o a
•-( 7T C I
rr ft» r» i—'
3* - 3*O
fD rr
M n W
>-r» to (D O QJ H
=9
o
ro O w
cu ro
OSS
-
O O i-ri O ft)
1-1 t-1 o ro
aa ro
7T r(
CD cn
p 3 H- H-
>• co
h-* (B
rr 3
- ro ro cu o
-------
cn
>
rH
j2
Ed
5J
o
CM
1 «
> W
t-t CO
0) (-3
I-H <;
CO
H
a
fn
1
H
CO
O
00
co
Cd
r^.
C/l
W
^D
e/3
pa
m
C/j
Ed
cn
Ed
CO
en
r-t
Ed
CN
cn
cd
rH
cn
r-t
Ed
C
•H O
CQ 4->
r-t O
PH <
•H CO
i-H O
•H Q.
O O
CO M
co ca x 3 m x
4) CJ *— • 4-1 O ^— '
p-t E%4
^
fO
0
-J-
00
o
r-
rH
CN
p^
r-t
vD
m
rH
CJN
m
rH
^
rH
a\
o
rH
m
CO
m
CO
r-.
Q\
r-4
CN
O
CN
rH
-*
CO O PU
0
o
rH
CN
rH
CN
O
m
CO
rH
m
o
CO
-tf
rH
r-
CN
rH
sO
CO
CN
rH
*
rH
00
CN
rH
^
CO
CN
f>
rH
0^
ro
r-.
CN
rH
a\
CN
1—t
4-1
CO
o
rH CJ
td
3 u
G CU
^ rH
CO
cu >
00 -H
CO 3 /-i.
cu Ed * — '
C
o
-r*
o
CU
CO
O
EX
O
i-4
C
nj
u
•H
1-1
•H
CJ
CO
T)
CU
60
•H
CO
TJ
aj
cu
T3
CQ
OQ
a.
<; IH
CO
(0
r-t
rH
o
TJ
CO
rH
C
•H
CO
JJ
CO
o
a
rH
<
jj
4J
IH
O
^j
C
cu
cn
OJ
iH
JJ
O
H
X-,
cu
3
tO
>
0)
00
rH
cn
i
^-^
4J
CO
o
&
o_
H>
X— v
U
CO
o
CJ
cO
-H
a.
CJ
CM
-------
2. FACILITY PLAN PROPOSED ACTION
Proposed wastewater management for Salem Utility District No. 2 as
developed in the Facility Plan provides for a regional collection system
with a centralized wastewater treatment plant. Regional wastewater collec-
tion is achieved through a system of gravity sewers, pump stations, force
mains, and a small section served by low pressure sewers.
The treatment plant will use the conventional activated sludge process
designed to handle a 0.73 mgd flow by the year 2000. Chemical addition
(Alum and polymer) is provided in order to meet the Wisconsin DNR effluent
limitations of 1.0 mg /I phosphorus as P. Plant effluent is to be discharged
to the Fox River via force main following disinfection by chlorination.
Sludge will be anaerobically digested followed by contract hauling to a
sanitary landfill. A schematic of the treatment plant design was presented
in Figure III-2.
Silver Lake Park will be served by an on-site treatment system in this
and all other wastewater management schemes evaluated in this EIS.
Detailed cost estimates are presented in Appendix J-2. A location map
of wastewater treatment components for this alternative is presented in
Figure IV-1.
3. EIS ALTERNATIVE 1
EIS Alternative 1, with a design flow of 0.73 mgd, is nearly identical
to the Facility Plan Proposed Action involving treatment by the conventional
activated sludge process. This alternative differs from the Proposed Action
only in that low pressure sewers used in conjunction with septic tank effluent
pump (STEP) systems were found to be cost-effective in residential areas near
Silver Lake, Center Lake, Camp Lake, and Cross Lake. These areas are shown
in Figure IV-2, along with other facilities included in this alternative.
4. EIS ALTERNATIVE 2
This alternative is identical to EIS Alternative 1, with an added
treatment process to improve nutrient removal prior to effluent discharge
to the Fox River. Effluent from the final clarifier is pumped through a
multimedia filter which removes nearly all remaining suspended material,
and with it most of the remaining phosphorus. Total phosphorus concentra-
tions on the order of 0.1 mg/1 can be expected in the effluent from this
unit. The average daily wastewater flow for this alternative is 0.73 mgd.
Wastewater facilities for this alternative are presented in Figure IV-3.
5. EIS ALTERNATIVE 3
The third EIS Alternative provides centralized collection and treatment
of wastewater by land application (spray irrigation). As in the previous
two EIS Alternatives, wastewater flows from the entire Study Area will be
managed by this system, with the exception of Silver Lake Park which will be
served by an on-site system.
112
-------
23
O
W
O
Oi
I
113
-------
Q
c
<3
w
M
CO
H
W
-------
CVJ
W
M
H
5
M
Ed
>-
fd
PS
3
o
-------
Wastewater (0.73 mgd) would be conveyed to a spray irrigation site west
of the Fox River about 2 miles northwest of Wilmot (see Figure III-8 )•
Following pretreatment in a stabilization pond, the wastewater is applied to
an alfalfa cover crop via spray irrigation (see Figure III-7 ) at a rate of
1.6 inches per week during the growing season (6 months per year). A 20-week
storage period is assumed, allowing for periodic harvesting of the alfalfa.
A location map of the wastewater management facilities provided by this
alternative is presented in Figure IV-4.
6. EIS ALTERNATIVE 4
This alternative is identical to EIS Alternative 3 except that the flow
from the Proposed EIS Service Area is reduced by 0.03 mgd, reflecting the
use of decentralized collection and treatment systems in the vicinities of
Silver Lake and Center Lake. As shown in Figure IV-5, these areas are sewered
by on-site systems and cluster systems respectively, with the remaining waste-
water flows (0.70 mgd) conveyed to the same spray irrigation site described in
EIS Alternative 3.
The preliminary design, comparison, and assessment of decentralized
systems in this alternative (as well as in EIS Alternative 5, 6, 7, and 8)
were based upon the following assumptions:
On-lpt Systems. Residences not served by sewers or cluster systems
would use on-lot systems. This alternative would include a program of
replacement or rehabilitation of on-lot systems where necessary to alleviate
existing malfunctions.
The specific requirements for upgrading existing on-lot systems were
estimated by analysis of the data presented in the field survey of septic
system (surface) malfunctions (EPIC), the "Septic Snooper" investigation,
and other environmental data (see Chapter II). Based upon these, 50% of the
on-lot systems were assumed to require replacement of both septic tank and
drainfield. Site evaluations and selection of appropriate replacement or
rehabilitation technologies are likely to result in variation from this
assumption in both the number of systems affected and the mix of technologies.
The assumption of 50% replacement results in cost estimates expected to be
conservatively high.
Cluster Systems. Cluster systems would be used for those parts of the
EIS Service Area where rehabilitation and continued use of on-site systems
would result in unacceptable public health or environmental impacts. 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.
7. EIS ALTERNATIVE 5
EIS Alternative 5, representing a decentralized version of EIS Alterna-
tive 2, provides for a conventional activated sludge plant designed to handle
0.70 mgd of wastewater flow by the year 2000. Again, effluent is discharged
to the Fox River following improved nutrient removal (mixed media filtration)
and disinfection by chlorination.
116
-------
n
w
M
W
cn
M
W
-------
Q
c
M
<
<
Cfl
.e-
118
-------
The location of facilities provided by this alternative, including on-
site systems and cluster systems, is shown in Figure IV-6.
8. EIS ALTERNATIVE 6
This decentralized alternative employs the same method of wastewater
treatment (spray irrigation) as EIS Alternative 4. However, there exists two
differences between EIS Alternatives 4 and 6. EIS Alternative 6 will not in-
volve purchase of land,providing instead for acquisition of suitable land
through a cooperative agreement with the current owners. This agreement will
be for use of the land for wastewater disposal through the design year (2000).
Under this scheme, potentially large savings in capital costs are realized
for this land application alternative.
Additionally, the application of wastewater to the land will be at agro-
nomic* rates instead of the 1.6 in./wk. used in EIS Alternative 4. For Kenosha
County, Wisconsin, an appropriate agronomic rate of wastewater application
would be approximately 6 inches per year. The exact amount of applied waste-
water, however, will depend upon the amount of precipitation in any one year1
and type of crop grown on the application fields. In this alternative, alfalfa
is the chosen cover crop on the irrigation field. The location of wastewater
management facilities provided by this alternative is shown in Figure IV-5.
9. EIS ALTERNATIVE 7
EIS Alternative 7 is similar to EIS Alternative 4, except that instead of
wastewater treatment by spray irrigation, rapid infiltration is the selected
method of treatment for. most of the flows (0.70 mgd) in the EIS Service Area.
Wastewater would be pretreated in a stabilization lagoon and chlorinated prior
to disposal in rapid infiltration basins at the rate of 25 inches per week.
Provision has been made for 3-month storage of wastewater during the winter
months. Renovated wastewater would be drawn from recovery wells and discharged
to the Fox River below Wilmot. A map showing the locations of serviced (central-
ized and decentralized) areas in the Study Ares is presented in Figure IV-5.
10. EIS ALTERNATIVE 8
This alternative represents the maximum decentralized approach to waste-
water management in Salem Utility District No. 2. The District will be sepa-
rated into subareas as follows: The Wilmot area will be collected for land
application (spray irrigation, 1.6 inches per week) west of the town, with an
average daily design flow of 0.05 mgd. The areas of Center Lake, Camp Lake,
Trevor and Rock Lake will be collected and treated at a 0.45 mgd conventional
activated sludge treatment plant. The area east of Rock Lake will be collected
and treated by means of overland flow (with an application rate of 4 inches
per week) and wetlands discharge. The average daily flow for this system is
0.18 mgd. The area east of Wilmot and southeast of Silver Lake will be served
by on-site systems. Cluster systems are to serve the residential area north-
east of Center Lake. The locations of these facilities are shown in Figure IV-7.
Curing dry growing seasons, this application rate may be increased to 10
inches per year without causing hydraulic overloading of the alfalfa crop
(by telephone, Richard Corey, Soil Scientist, University of Wisconsin
Agricultural Extension Office, July 20, 1979).
119
-------
O
f
M
M
CO
H
M
W
120
-------
oo
co
r--
>
Pi
< <
121
-------
C. FLEXIBILITY OF ALTERNATIVES
The flexibility of the Proposed Action and the EIS Alternatives to accom-
modate future growth in the Service Area along with their operational flexi-
bility over the design period is evaluated in this section.
1. FACILITY PLAN PROPOSED ACTION
This alternative provides good flexibility for growth since, as long as
land is available conventional activated sludge can be expanded to accommodate
increased flows relatively easily. Flexibility for future growth is, however,
reduced somewhat because the entire proposed Service Area is to be sewered.
More flexibility for future expansion is usually available for alternatives
that require a smaller initial commitment of resources.
2. EIS ALTERNATIVE 1
Except for the increased use of pressure sewers for wastewater collection,
this alternative is identical to the Facility Plan Proposed Action. Such pres-
sure sewers provide more flexibility for design than do gravity sewers since
pressure sewers do not require suitable ground contours for economical con-
struction. The flexibility for expansion is the same as for the Facility
Plan Proposed Action.
3. EIS ALTERNATIVE 2
This alternative is the same as EIS Alternative 1 except an additional
treatment step of mixed media filtration ±s added for better removal of sus-
pended solids and phosphorus. Operational flexibility of EIA Alternative 2
is slightly less than EIS Alternative 1 because the additional treatment step
makes more operator attention required. The flexibility for expanding EIS
Alternative 2 is the same as EIS Alternative 1.
4. EIS ALTERNATIVE 3
Unlike the previous alternatives that involve wastewater treatment by a
conventional sewage treatment plant (STP), EIS Alternative 3 recommends treat-
ment by spray irrigation of pre-treated effluents. Spray irrigation is sub-
ject to siting restrictions concerning land suitability, and because it requires
so much more land than a conventional STP, spray irrigation has reduced flexi-
bility for expansion. However, if suitable land is available conveniently
close to the facility, a spray irrigation site can be expanded relatively
easily. Operational flexibility is limited during times of very cold tempera-
tures .
5. EIS ALTERNATIVE 4
This alternative calls for less of the EIS Service Area to be sewered than
previous alternatives, making EIS Alternative 4 decentralized. The limited use
of decentralized systesm in this alternative (as well as EIS Alternatives 6
and 7) provides some flexibility to base future decisions concerning land use
development upon local conditions.
122
-------
6. EIS ALTERNATIVE 5
EIS Alternative 5 provides for the same areas to be sewered as EIS Altern-
ative 4, therefore the same discussion on decentralization applies here. The
use of conventional activated sludge instead of spray irrigation has advantages
concerning the flexibility of expansion, namely land and siting requirements.
7. EIS ALTERNATIVE 6
EIS Alternatives 4 and 6 are the same as far as collection and treatment
are concerned. Obtaining the land by cooperative agreement instead of outright
purchase as in EIS Alternative 4 will increase the flexibility of abandoning
the site at the end of the 20 year design period since the land will not have
to be sold. Also the agronomic rate of applying the wastewater to the land
will increase the amount of land needed for treatment over the standard spray
irrigation facility. This fact will decrease operational flexibility because
the system is heavily dependent upon the amount of natural precipitation.
Flexibility for expansion will also be reduced because much more land is re-
quired.
8. EIS ALTERNATIVE 7
EIS Alternative 7 is the same as EIS Alternative 4 except rapid infiltra-
tion instead of spray irrigation is the method of effluent disposal. Rapid
infiltration has greater siting restrictions than spray irrigation, but require
much less land area, therefore, has good flexibility for expansion. Rapid
infiltration has a wide range of application rates and can be operated in cold
weather, therefore has good operational flexibility.
9. EIS ALTERNATIVE 8
EIS Alternative 8 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 re-
ducing capital costs. This alternative provides flexibility for future expan-
sion because of the many modes of treatment used. Also, the decentralized
nature of the alternative allows the flexibility to base future decisions con-
cerning land use development upon local conditions.
123
-------
§
o
a
Oi CL cn
rr n O
ro fD 3
33 CO
rr
to ft H-
< H- TO
ro N o
• ro o
CL CL
3 cr
to re
rr 0
C 03
i^ 5
fD CO
fD
O
-r> O
rr
3* rr
ro 3*
fD
H- rh
!-»
H- rr
rr r[
^ fD
Oi
O 3
rl fD
3
i-h rr
C
c ro
-t n
ro 3*
3
t-i .Q
01 C
3 13
3 CO
H- •
3
Q. (-»
ro ro
T T"
cn
00
0
c
CL
cr
rt>
o
01
03
f&
o
rr,
rr
3*
CL
23
ro
X
cr
H.
o
-t
rh
C
c
I-t
X
T3
3
71
Q
3
S"
o
01
03
ro
o
rr
£
(D
rr
3"
(D
^
a.
fD
fD
3
p.
fD
3
rr
H. H-
rr *— *
VJ Ql
M fD
a4
ro
rr O
01
rr rr
M O
03
rq r-
J> X
i
O
o
CL
O
3
^
03
03
!_,
ro
01
3
CL
H-
cn
3
fD
X
a*
H*
rr
0
X
"2
3
CO
o
3
cn
re
3
rr
C
3
(D
01
rr
3*
ro
0,
Oi
T3
n
01
o
3
CO
fO
01
h-t
a.
ro
-o
m
3
£
ft)
X
°"
H-
co
h- '
fD
cn
cr
(D
n
c
fD
fD
01
fD
P
W
on
fD
X
n
-C)
rr
O
T)
fD
01
rt
0
3
0)
fD ft
£ n
fD H.
r| cn
(0 H«
* jjj
(D
n
01
C
cn
m
ro
CO
CO
01
ft)
01
cn
i->
rt
X
r*-
cr
rr
O
G
£
r|
ft
I— '
01
3
3
70
01
1
Ql
ra
KJ
ro
x
n
•a
rr
70
ft
fli
rr
ro
CD (D
fi O
ri cn
' 3
to
cr
ro
n
0)
c
CO
ro
fD
CO
cn
i-t
0)
H-
CO
\~t
fD
X
<3*
H-
rr
rr.
O
«t
C
C
fD
0>
3
3
3
00
01
1
01
m
I-t
LJ
ro
X
o
•a
rr
00
ro
01
rr
•?•«
ro
fD Ql
» rr
3* 0
rt 3
rt 01
• t— 1
H-»
fD
X
M.
cT
^
H>
rr
0)
•-n
ro
n
rr
ro
CL
3 3
h- ft
H-
CO H-
C rt
H- ^
rr
cr o
ft)
ft
i-1 X
3 Oi
CL 3
cn
cn o
tf
01
< H-
01 CO
M-
I—1 00
Ql 0
cr 5
•-t ro
Oi C
rr 0
3 fO
3
rr a*
ro
cn o
rr 0)
ft C
•Q cn
• fD
O
rr
3*
ro
CL
CL
ro
a.
rr
O
rtl
fD
X
cr
rr
£
£!
cr
ro
CO
t— i
30
3*
rr
01
i
01
CO
-d
o
•a
O
CO
CL
s»
pf
H-
o
3
O
1
01
3
ro
Ql
CO
-a
o
T3
O
cn
fD
CL
>
rr
O
3
01 ro
3 X
3 M-
H- a*
3 H-
00 i—1
rr
O
rtl
C
C
ro
o
n
M
ro
CL
I-t
01
rr
3
ro
3
rr
0
0)
-a
DJ
0
r-^
rr
^
53
CD
CL
e
0
ro
2
ft
x
cr
H^
0)
<
01
f->
ro
0
01
CL
CL
ft
CL
l-l
X
CO
r-
j
70 rr cn 00 rr H-
3' ro -O 3 r-> 0)
CL ro ro p cr
i-t n CL 3 H-
fD cn rr CL (-»
r- l-' CO 01 r1-
p. C 3 G. rr
01 CL O CL H- "-<
„!
rr 3 fD 3 i-t rr
X CL rr oo 3"
a 01 ft ro
CO I—i H-
T3 rr 3 CO O
ro to
rj
HTJQ
co 01 sd
M. cr 01
rr H. -3
0) 3" H
H- fD Oi
CO CO
-t CL 3*
o ro H-
-O !0 00
fD H- 3*
£•3 ^
*^J (0 (U
ft M- r{
CL rr hJ-
ro oo
0. 3
ro
i cn rr
o i-» co :
CL H- i
Oi rr i
S O* H- i
h-» W
O O rr
cn -f, ro
O O 3* f
> T3 rr H- f
n ro H. oo (
rr K < 3* t
H- 01 01 C
O rr rr n :
Ql CO ft> f
rr K-J CT
rr C H- r
-------
CHAPTER V
IMPACTS
A. IMPACTS ON SURFACE WATER QUALITY
1. PRIMARY IMPACTS
a. Eutrophication Potential of Lakes in Salem Utility District No. 2
This section discusses the effect of nutrient loading associated with
different wastewater management alternatives upon the trophic conditions of
open waters in Center Lake, Silver Lake, Camp Lake, Rock Lake, Cross Lake,
Voltz Lake, and Benet/Shangrila Lake. To evaluate the impact of each altern-
ative, nutrient loading levels for phosphorus were calculated. The empirical
model developed by Dillon was used to project future trophic conditions
associated with different phosphorus loading scenarios based on the EIS
wastewater management alternatives.
The major sources of phosphorus for the lakes in Salem Utility District
No. 2 were identified earlier in the following order of importance:
• Non-point sources (from agricultural, residential, and forested
drainage);
• Septic tank systems; and
• Precipitation on the lake surface.
The relative contributions of phosphorus to these lakes made by these sources
under present conditions are illustrated in Figure II-9. Other sources known
to contribute to nutrient loading such as groundwater, detritus, waterfowl,
and release from sediments are less significant in the Study Area in terms of
the time scales considered in the impact analysis.
Phosphorus inputs associated with various wastewater management
alternatives were derived using the same methodology described in Section
II.B.7.3. Omernik's regression model that approximates the phosphorus
export based on different land use patterns within the watershed was utilized
to determine the non-point source contributions by year 2000. Precipitation
and septic tank loadings were estimated using the methodologies developed by
the EPA National Eutrophication Survey.
The future phosphorus loading scenarios are summarized and presented in
terms of percentage change from the present conditions in Table V-l. If no
action were taken to serve the needs of the citizens of Salem Utility District
No. 2 with centralized or decentralized wastewater mangement alternatives,
phosphorus loading of the lakes would range from 0 to 19% above what is
estimated under present conditions (without a phosphorus ban). No increase
in the phosphorus loading of Voltz Lake, Cross Lake and Benet/Shangrila Lake
(see Table V-l) over existing conditions is anticipated under the assumption
125
-------
I I I I I I I I I
EUTROPHIC
o EXISTING CONDITION
• NO ACTION
ALTERNATIVES 1-8
KNET/
SHAN6RII.A
K. LAKE
OLIGOTROPHIC
i t I I I I I
10.0 100,0
MEAN DEPTH (METERS)
L= AREAL PHOSPHORUS INPUT (g/m^yr)
R= PHOSPHORUS RETENTION COEFFICIENT
^HYDRAULIC FLUSHING RATE (yf1)
FIGURE 3T-I TROPHIC STATUS OF SILVER LAKE, CENTER LAKE,
CAMP LAKE, ROCK LAKE, VOLTZ LAKE, BENET/SHANGRILA LAKE
126
-------
rH
1
^
CU
r-t
,0
CO
CN
•
o
53
H
M
pf.
£-4
Cfl
M
Q
SH
£~(
M
H"3
M
E"^
»— 3
IS
W
h"3
^4
en
B
Cfl
H
^
^j
O
O
a
M
/"^
^H
O
t-J
Cfl
Pi
O
PS
CO
O
PS
P-.
S5
M
W
o
J22
3
ffl
CJ
00
1
iH
Cfl
W
H
EH
2
s
w
H
^3
Cfl
H
W
Q
«^3
^
n
Z
5
H
H
CJ
Q
W
C/3
O
O
Pi
PU
M
2
0
M
H
CJ
O
5S
a
g
P*-l
o
!Z5
M
H
[3
Cfl
W
^
o
o
o
CN
^^
oo
1
tH
GO
W
IH
H
(21
53
w
EH
^3
en
M
W
*
z
0
M
EH
CJ
^E
Cfl
O
Pu
O
P-,
Cfl
O
H
H
M
S
O
O
a
H
EH
M
X
•
co
^
x-^
o
0
o
CN
N»-'
&
o
M
EH
a
o
c
cfl
M
co
3
Vt
Cfl O
o p-
M CO
EH 0
H .C
EE» *^^«
0 JS
CJ
O
H
EH
cfl c
M cfl
X fO
W
co
• 3
CO $-1
> 0
fi
p.
co
O
.c
Pi
4J
Jj
O
Is
rj
cfl
PQ
co
M
O
a
co
o
&
***^.
J3
c
cfl
ffl
CO
3
O
f?
p.
CO
o
4=
PU
JJ
3
O
^
00 ^N
" CO
« CN
\Q •»
« iH
in »
•* ^
^" PU
v— ' "^^
cu cu
ca ca
cfl cfl
cu cu
o o
c c
•H i-l
frS B-S
vD 00
tH
•K
x-x
00 /'-v
* co
r^*. *>
« CN
\0 #i
* iH
in «
*> -^
"*^* P^
S«/ >MI^
CU <1>
co ca
cfl cfl
cu cu
O 0
C C
•H -H
&••? 5s?
^
a
CO
II
<
cu
-H
4-1
CO
C
127
-------
that poor soils around these lakes discourage or preclude residential develop-
ment based on private soil-dependent treatment systems. With the implementa-
tion of a phosphorus ban, that would likely affect the quality of septic tank
effluents, phosphorus loadings are seen to generally decrease from 5 to 22.5%
relative to existing loading conditions. Silver Lake displays an increase in
loading under the ban assuming the soils with moderate limitations along its
southeast shoreline will allow for a limited increase in soil-dependent resi-
dential development. It is assumed that 7% of the phosphorus contained in
effluent generated within 300 feet of the Silver Lake shoreline will reach
the lake.
With the exception of Silver Lake, all lakes exhibit potential decreases
(from 16 to 58%) relative to existing conditions. Camp Lake shows the small-
est decrease (16%) in phosphorus loading, reflecting the fact that approximately
40% of its shoreline is marshland and considered unavailable to future develop-
ment. Cross Lake exhibits the largest decrease (58%) in phosphorus loading.
This is attributed to the fact that this lake is the most intensively developed
in the Study Area whose residents are now served by on-site systems; estimated
phosphorus loadings per capita via septic tank effluents are precluded once the
shoreline becomes sewered. The phosphorus ban will have no effect upon the
lakes proposed to be served by sewer since neither septic tanks nor the treat-
ment plant will be discharging effluent directly to them. Silver Lake, again,
exhibits an increase in phosphorus loading due to potential development around
the lake.
The phosphorus loading scenarios were incorporated into Dillon's model to
determine the future trophic conditions for Silver Lake, Camp Lake, Center
Lake, Rock Lake, Cross Lake, Voltz Lake, and Benet/Shangrila Lake. Figure V-l
summarizes the results from the modeling analysis with respect to various
wastewater management alternatives. In general, the modeling results indicate
that the loading changes for these lakes, will improve the water quality, to
some extent, in all lakes except Silver Lake. According to the calculation,
Camp Lake and Rock Lake will remain eutrophic despite the loading reduction
with all alternatives. Center Lake may become mesotrophic under Alternatives
1 to 8 while Benet/Shangrila Lake may improve to become oligotrophic. The
projected increase of phosphorus inputs for Silver Lake will not significantly
affect the trophic status of the lake.
It should be noted that the results of the above eutrophication analysis
can be interpreted for relative comparison only, because the modeling method-
ology (Dillon's model) is an approximation at best. Limitations of the
approach (see Appendix C-6) exist and therefore, this discussion provides a
"first-cut" at a technique that requires additional consideration and study.
b. Bacterial Contamination of the Lakes in Salem Utility District No. 2
With the alternatives of centralized wastewater treatment, pumping
station malfunctions could result in substantial contamination of the lakes.
Rigorous inspection and maintenance of pumping stations, back-up electrical
power supplies, stand-by pumps, and an overflow alarm would minimize the
possibility of this happening. Similar measures should be taken with
pumping stations for cluster systems.
128
-------
c. Eutrophication Potential of the Fox Chain 0'Lakes
The Fox River is the major tributary to the Fox Chain 0'Lakes in
Illinois. Significant amounts of nutrients are carried by the river into
Grass Lake, Lake Marie, Fox Lake, and Pistakee Lake (see the Fox River
discussion in Section II.B.7.e). The citizens around these lakes are con-
cerned about the eutrophication of these water bodies (which are already
hypereutrophic), particularly with the alternatives calling for new treat-
ment plants (under EIS Alternatives 1, 2, 5, and 7, as well as the Facility
Plan Proposed Action) which discharges effluent into the Fox River in the
Wilmot area.
In order to assess the eutrophication impact of this proposed discharge
upon the Fox Chain 0'Lakes, a simple calculation comparing the nutrient con-
tributions was made. Basically, the results show that the amount of nutrients
generated by this new plant is relatively insignificant compared with the
existing amount of nutrients carried by the Fox River. The recent investi-
gation on the Fox Chain 0'Lakes (Kothandaraman ££ _al 1977) indicates that
the nutrient inputs from the Fox River to the lakes are 196,910 kg/yr of
phosphorus and 1,804,090 kg/yr of nitrogen, respectively. The expected
phosphorus loading generated by the conventional activated sludge plant
evaluated in this project (based on 0.73 mgd flow and 1.0 mg/1 phosphorus
concentration) is 1,000 kg/yr which is only 0.5% of what is entering into
the lakes from the Fox River and is only 0.4% of the total phosphorus load
into the lakes. Therefore, the proposed treatment plant is not expected to
have any significant impact on the eutrophication status of the lakes.
d. Toxic Effect of Ammonia from the Proposed Activated Sludge Plant Upon
the Fox River
Concern of ammonia toxicity in the Fox River due to the proposed
treatment plant has been raised during the course of this study. In
general, levels of unionized ammonia in the range of 0.20 mg/1 to 2 mg/1
have been shown to be toxic to some species of freshwater aquatic life. To
provide safety for those life forms not examined, l/10th of the lower value
of this toxic effect range results in a criterion of 0.020 mg/1 of unionized
ammonia adopted by EPA.
For the Fox River, consider the maximum recorded temperature (29°C) and
pH (8.6) levels at Wilmot. The toxic limit of ammonia nitrogen necessary to
produce 0.02 mg/1 unionized ammonia is approximately 0.070 mg N/l. This
ammonia nitrogen level is below the average ammonia concentration (0.15 mg
N/l) in the Fox River. Thus, it is probable that the background concentra-
tion normally exceeds the EPA criterion for ammonia toxicity under present
conditions. Therefore, it is impractical to assess the impact of the pro-
posed activated sludge plant discharge upon ammonia toxicity in the Fox
River and the downstream Chain 0'Lakes. In other words, the ammonia concen-
tration in the Fox River at Wilmot is high enough that the proposed plant
discharge has practically no additional effect on the ammonia toxicity in
the Fox River.
129
-------
Saiem Utility
District No.2
W1SCON3N
ILLINOIS
CHAIN 0'LAKES STATE
PARK BOUNDARY
tO ( Laix
[Source: Snearley, 1977]
Figure V-2 . FOX CHAIN 0' LAKES, LAKE COUNTY, ILLINOIS
130
-------
e. Effects of Residential and Combined Chlorine Compounds on the Fox River
and Chain 0'Lakes
Concentrations of residual chlorine and combined chlorine compounds
(chloramines) generated during proposed or alternate treatment processes
are likely to meet EPA Water Quality Criteria Guidelines (1976). Aquatic
life will remain unaffected by the levels of these chemical species in the
effluent as long as overdosage of the plant influents is avoided. The EPA
criterion for total chlorine is 0.01 mg/1; these levels are adequate for
freshwater organisms other than salmonids (trout and salmon), which are not
present in the Fox River. At this level and below, residual and combined
chlorine species will probably have no significant effect on aquatic life.
2. SECONDARY IMPACTS
Increasing housing development along lakeshores may increase nutrient
and sediment loads into the lake as a result of the following:
• increased runoff from construction of impervious surfaces such
as rooftops and parking areas;
• lawn and garden fertilization creating unnaturally high nutrient
levels in the runoff; and
• soil disruption by human activities (i.e., housing construction,
leveling of forested area, etc.).
Soil organic debris and dissolved materials mobilized and transported to
temporary runoff channels during storms are settled, filtered and absorbed
on the land or in pools if the runoff channels are long or if adequate
storage areas, such as wetlands, occur. Increasing housing density
normally accelerates storm runoff thereby increasing not only the amount
of runoff but also its ability to erode soil and to transport contaminants.
B. IMPACTS ON GROUNDWATER
Groundwater impacts fall into two categories, those affecting the
available quantity of the resource, and those affecting its quality.
1. GROUNDWATER QUANTITY IMPACTS
The conversion from sewage disposal practices based on individual soil
absorption systems to centralized collection and treatment systems without
land application of effluent can result in a loss of groundwater recharge.
The significance of this loss depends upon its relationship to the recharge
from all other sources, including downward infiltration and percolation from
precipitation and surface water bodies and inflow from adjacent aquifers.
The precise quantification of this significance requires an accurate deline-
ation of the aquifer(s) plus knowledge of its hydrology (precipitation, run-
off, evapotranspiration, discharge, etc.) and hydraulic characteristics
(transmissivity , storage coefficients*, etc.). There is not enough data
to attempt such quantification for Salem Utility District No. 2.
131
-------
The maximum possible wastewater recharge to the aquifers in the
immediate vicinity of the Study Area in the design year (2000) is estimated
to average 0.73 mgd for EIS Alternative 3; recharge averages 0.70 mgd for
EIS Alternatives 4, 6, and 7. This is insignificant in relation to the
estimated 550 mgd being discharged by the aquifers in the basin to streams
and wells and to the 4 x 10^3 gallons stored in those aquifers. Failure to
return the wastewater flows to the aquifers is therefore not expected to have
a significant impact upon groundwater quantity and the availability of ground-
water in the basin. No consideration will therefore be given to groundwater
quantity impacts of the individual alternatives.
2. GROUNDWATER QUALITY IMPACTS
Human wastewater disposal can affect the quality of groundwater through
several types of pollutants. The first type includes suspended solids,
bacteria and other forms of organic matter which are normally removed by
downward movement through approximately 5 feet of soil above the water table
of aquifers. These contaminants are very unlikely to present problems near
the Study Area (see Figure III-8) since soil types are such as to provide
more than adequate barriers to their entry to groundwater, and depths to
groundwater are generally in excess of 20 feet.
Organic or bacterial contamination of the shallow aquifers by spray
irrigation or rapid infiltration of wastewaters can be avoided by using
only sites where the water table will remain deeper than 6 feet below
ground surface and where soils are fine enough to filter wastewater
efficiency. A likely cause of potential well contamination is the design
and condition of the wells themselves. Nevertheless, if continued use of
soil absorption systems is recommended, a substantial program of well
inspection and sampling should be undertaken to include location of suspect
wells; inspection of their casing, seal and grouting; identification of all
potential sources of contamination near the wells; sampling of properly
designed wells for fecal coliform bacteria, and nitrates at a minimum; and
measurement of groundwater flow direction and rate of representative areas
around the lakeshores.
Phosphorus as phosphate also falls into the category of a pollutant.
It is of interest not because of its significance in groundwater, but
because of the potential of phosphorus-containing groundwaters to contri-
bute to the excessive fertilization of lakes. Because the soils and sub-
soil systems throughout the Study Area are clayey to varying degrees and
the groundwaters are also very hard (in excess of 180 mg/1) it can there-
fore be concluded that significant phosphate transport through groundwaters
to surface waters will not take place.
Nitrogen as nitrates also fall into the category of a pollutant. It
is possible that some nitrates from wastewater applied to land might reach
surface waters via overland runoff, lateral interflow* in soils, or trans-
port in percolating groundwaters. However, application rates for spray
irrigation of effluents would be set to maximize crop uptake of nitrogen,
minimizing its concentrations in groundwater. Because of the high appli-
cation rates for rapid infiltration, recovery of renovated effluent by
wells or drains may be necessary.
132
-------
3. MITIGATIVE MEASURES
Groundwater quality should be carefully monitored for all alternatives
involving the use of ST/SAS's, cluster systems and land application systems
to check that water quality is not being significantly degraded and to
signal the existence of malfunctions, inadequate treatment or the need for
corrective action.
The potential for groundwater contamination from the sewage lagoons
required in EIS Alternatives 3, 4, ,6* 7 and 8 will be low if the lagoons are
adequately designed. Existing engineering and hydrogeologic procedures would
prohibit the construction of these systems directly in the aquifer, and would
require an adequate distance between the lagoon bottom and the groundwater.
Also, an impervious layer of soil material such as bentonite clay would be
used as a liner for the lagoons' sides and bottom to insure leakage of un-
treated wastewater does not occur. As a final protection measure, ground-
water quality monitoring wells would be used to identify any changes in
groundwater quality that may be a result of leakage from a sewage lagoon.
This would insure that corrective action could be taken before any serious
contamination develops.
C. POPULATION AND LAND USE IMPACTS
The population and land use impacts which result from the various
wastewater management alternatives evaluated in this EIS are related to
three major factors:
• System Configuration—The physical design and layout of the
proposed wastewater management system including the area to be
served and the routes of major interceptor lines.
• Site-Dependency—The type of wastewater management system proposed
whether it consists of septic tanks (site-dependent), centralized
collection and treatment (site-independent), cluster systems
(non-centralized site-independent), or a combination of these
systems.
• System Capacity—The capability of the proposed wastewater
management system in terms of the number of people it is designed
to serve, or for the No Action Alternative, the natural assimila-
tive capacity of the land.
These three system-related factors in conjunction with existing development
pressures, market trends, and existing natural development constraints, such
as soil suitability for on-site systems, determine the magnitude and types
of primary and secondary impacts associated with each proposed alternative.
The nine wastewater management plans evaluated in this EIS have been
grouped into three categories for population and land use impact analysis
purposes:
133
-------
• No Action Alternative—Continued reliance upon on-site (septic
tank and holding tank) systems.
• Facility Plan Proposed Action and EIS Alternatives 1, 2, and 3—
Completely centralized collection and treatment systems.
• EIS Alternatives 4,5,6,7, and S--Combined use of centralized,
on-site, and cluster treatment systems.
Based on these three groups of alternatives and the system-related and local
factors discussed previously, the population and land use impacts associated
with the various alternatives will be evaluated in this section and summarized
in an impact matrix in Section F.
1. POPULATION IMPACTS
Population impacts associated with the various wastewater management
alternatives are evaluated in regard to the baseline (non-facility specific)
population projections presented in Chapter II. The non-facility specific
population projections represent probable future conditions without regard
to the availability of sewage treatment capacity or to existing natural
development constraints.
a. Population Growth
The provision of centralized wastewater management facilities would
induce population growth in Salem Utility District No. 2 beyond that pro-
jected in the non-facility specific (baseline) EIS Service Area population
projections for the year 2000. The magnitude of this induced population
growth in the Utility District could be as high as 33% over the baseline
projections utilized for system design purposes (see Appendix E ) .
Completely centralized alternatives would likely result in this maximum
population increase while alternatives consisting of combined use of cen-
tralized and decentralized facilities would tend to induce a population
increase of approximately 20% to 25% over the baseline population projec-
tions. If an induced population increase of this magnitude is realized,
system capacity as developed for a basis of evaluation in this EIS would be
exhausted as much as 12 years earlier than anticipated.
The development pressures which support this observation are currently
apparent throughout the Utility District. Large parcels of agricultural,
cleared, and forested land lying outside of the Proposed Service Area, but
within the Utility District, have already been recorded as subdivisions and
plotted. Local sources, including local realtors, have indicated that the
demand for permanent dwelling units in these areas and the entire Utility
District is high. The proximity of Salem Utility District No. 2 to the
employment centers of metropolitan Chicago, Milwaukee and Kenosha, as well
as the continuing national trend of out-migration from metropolitan areas
further supports a continuation of these development pressures. Only the
soil suitability problems which have limited the use of on-site treatment
facilities have precluded new residential development. Consequently, the
provision of centralized wastewater treatment facilities would neutralize
the soils constraints for on-site systems and allow the development pressures
to materialize into new residential development and population growth through-
out the Study Area.
134
-------
Continued reliance on septic tank and holding tank systems (No Action
Alternative) would restrict population growth in the Utility District to a
level approximately 15% below the baseline population projections (see
Appendix E). The soils constraints for septic tank systems which exist
throughout the Utility District would in effect put a limit on the population
growth which could occur without use of one of the centralized alternatives.
Under this alternative, residential development and the resultant population
growth could be limited to scattered individual sites which could support the
use of on-site treatment systems. Since the non-facility specific population
projections (particularly the SEWRPC projected growth rates) inherently
assume that the required infrastructure (including sewage treatment capacity)
will be provided to accomodate population growth in the Proposed Service Area,
the baseline population projections for the year 2000 would not be attained
if the No Action Alternative is selected.
b. Conversion Pressures on Seasonal Units
The provision of centralized wastewater management facilities is likely
to accelerate the conversion rate of seasonal to permanent dwelling units,
although conversion will occur without extensive new infrastructure improve-
ments. The conversion of seasonal to permanent units can be expected to
result from: (1) retirement age households permanently relocating to their
seasonal residence; (2) local households converting a seasonal residence to
a permanent first home; and (3) previously seasonal households converting
their second home to a permanent residence in an effort to move away from
metropolitan areas while retaining the same general geographic location and
access to employment opportunities. If centralized or decentralized waste-
water treatment facilities are provided, it is anticipated that the latter
of these three conversion factors would accelerate (as seasonal homes become
more attractive for permanent use), increasing the assumed conversion rate of
the non-facility specific population projections by an estimated additional
0.57% to 0.75%. This would nearly double the number of seasonal units con-
verted during the planning period from approximately 75 to nearly 150.
Continued use of septic tank systems is also likely to accelerate the
conversion rate beyond the assumed rate of the baseline population projections.
Under this alternative, the conversion of seasonal units by local families will
increase as they attempt to satisfy their demand for permanent units through
conversion rather than new construction. As the development pressures for new
permanent units continue to increase in the Utility District and existing soils
characteristics continue to limit the amount of new residential development,
many second home owners may take advantage of the opportunity to profit from
the sale of their relatively costly (in terms of amount of use) seasonal
residences. This stronger conversion pressure could increase the conversion
rate by an additional 1.0% to 1.5% over the baseline conversion rate, adding
approximately 100 additional converted units to the baseline projections.
One currently unquantified factor which may significantly affect the
conversion rate under any selected alternative is the number of existing
seasonal units with malfunctioning septic systems and holding tanks. The
high costs of operating and maintaining septic tanks and holding tank systems
is likely to discourage the conversion of seasonal units which currently have
a holding tank or which would require one to correct an existing septic tank
problem.
135
-------
c. Changes in Community Composition and Character
Improvements in water quality, correction of existing and potential
future water quality-related health problems, and accompanying net economic
benefits attributable to the provision of an areawide sewerage system are
likely to enhance the quality of the community environment in the Salem
Study Area. This conclusion is contingent upon the assumption that growth
inducement pressures are controlled, allowing growth to proceed in an orderly
fashion. Rapid and uncontrolled development induced by the provision of
centralized treatment facilities would outstrip the community's ability to
absorb growth, resulting in unmet demands for services and undesirable
development patterns.
Continued reliance upon septic tank systems could lead to gradual
community stagnation. Failure to correct existing water quality problems
would degrade the potential attractiveness of the community and its envi-
ronment. Only the continued conversion of seasonal to permanent units
would induce any change in the community and population growth would fall
below projected baseline levels.
The conversion of seasonal residences to permanent use will, under any
selected alternative, alter the character of the community. Although
seasonal residents add diversity to the community and inject income into
the local economy, they do tend to overburden local capabilities in regard
to traffic capacity, recreational facilities, and police and fire protection.
While these short-term (3 to 4 months) problems associated with seasonal
residents will be reduced in magnitude, new concerns resulting from increased
permanent population growth will be introduced into the community as it trans-
forms from a rural to urban area. Increased demand for schools as well as
year-round demand for fire and police protection, sanitation services, and
other facilities will result.
2. LAND USE IMPACTS
a. Land Use Conversion
The primary and secondary development generated by the provision of
centralized and/or decentralized wastewater management facilities would
increase developed acreage in Salem Utility District No. 2 approximately
900 acres (85%) by the year 2000. The majority of this developed acreage
would be for residential use, which as discussed in the preceding section,
would require sewage treatment capacity beyond the design levels evaluated
in this EIS. In addition to increased urban development in the Proposed
Service Area, agricultural, forest, and cleared land in areas of the Utility
District lying outside of the Proposed Service Area will also convert to
urban land uses (see Appendix E).
Exclusive reliance upon on-site disposal systems would result in the
addition of approximately 400 acres to the existing inventory of developed
land. Existing soils constraints would limit the amount of undeveloped
land which could be converted to urban uses. Although improper development
(i.e., the installation and operation of septic systems in poor soil areas)
is not uncommon, the growth management controls available to the various
136
-------
levels ot government in the Study Area should minimize these misuses of the
land (see Chapter II, Section E.5.d.). The use of local growth management
controls will also influence the exact amount of developed acreage resulting
from any selected alternative.
b. Land Use Pattern and Intensity Changes
The pattern of future land use development will be strongly influenced
by the type of wastewater management facilities proposed, and will tend to
conform to the proposed configuration of the collection systems. With the
provision of centralized and/or decentralized treatment and collection
facilities, the Proposed Service Area is expected to have in-filling of
existing residential areas, significantly increasing the existing gross
residential densities. Residential development densities are anticipated to
be relatively uniform and intensive (1 to 2 dwelling units/acre) in compari-
son to the existing average density (.6 dwelling units/acre). The neutrali-
zation of existing soils constraints will permit these higher densities
since large lots for on-site systems will not be necessary. Some variation
in residential densities may be evident in areas along southeastern Silver
Lake, northeastern Center Lake, and east of Wilmot depending upon which
system alternative is selected. On-lot systems for Silver Lake and cluster
systems for northeast Center Lake are proposed in Alternatives 4, 5, 6,7 and
8. These cluster and on-lot systems would tend to limit residential densities
in these areas.
Areas of the Utility District lying outside of the Proposed EIS Service
Area are likely to develop around the proposed collection system and will
exhibit density characteristics somewhat less intense than the EIS Service
Area (.5 to 1.0 units/acre). Undeveloped areas bordering the Service Area
are likely locations for new residential development as are portions of the
Utility District lying near the major interceptors between the subareas.
Potential areas of secondary growth include the land between Cross Lake and
Voltz Lake and Rock Lake, the areas north and west of Rock Lake extending
through Trevor and into the southeastern and eastern segments of Camp Lake,
the area between Silver Lake and northwestern Center Lake, and the southern
and southwestern portions of Camp Lake extending to and including the area
surrounding Wilmot.
These areas would have the lowest costs involved with tying into the
proposed collection system, although additional costs would have to be
incurred to extend the collection network. It is important to note, however,
that the Proposed Service Areas could accomodate higher levels of growth than
projected which would reduce the development pressures on areas lying outside
of the Service Area. Higher residential densities and backlot development in
the Proposed Service Area would minimize development in the outlying areas of
the Utility District, reducing the costs of providing services (including
wastewater treatment) and resulting in a more orderly pattern of growth.
Major areas of high density (over 5 dwelling units per acre) residential
development are unlikely during the 20-year planning period. The market
demand currently is, and is anticipated to continue to be for single-family
units. Continued inflation of housing prices may increase the demand for
condominium, townhouse, or garden apartment type development in the District
during the planning period, but demand for these types of units is not apparent
137
-------
currently. No resort development is projected for the Utility District since
most shoreline areas are already developed. The existing campground areas in
the District are not anticipated to expand, but new camping facilities are a
possibility during the planning period.
Although the largest portion of newly developed land during the planning
period will be residential, increases in supportive infrastructure, institu-
tional, recreational, and commercial land uses can also be expected as a
result of the increased population. Potential locations for such uses are
not specifically designated in the existing land use plans and zoning ordi-
nances. However, the Wilmot subarea and the land area surrounding it is one
likely location for more intensive commercial and service development. This
is due to the large winter time concentration of people in the subarea (at
the Wilmot Ski Area) and the potential need for lodging, eating, and service
establishments to serve this population. The introduction of centralized
wastewater treatment facilities to this area as well as other portions of
the District could induce more intensive commercial and service development.
The selection of the No Action Alternative would result in significantly
different development patterns. New development would be low density in
character, scattered throughout the Utility District on large lots along the
road network. This contrasts sharply with development patterns associated
with the provision of centralized and/or decentralized systems. Whereas
new residential development under the centralized and/or decentralized
wastewater management alternatives would be more likely to encourage in-
filling of existing developed areas and subdivision development between
subareas, the No Action Alternative would result in scattered strip develop-
ment along the major roads in the District. In fact, most of the new devel-
opment anticipated with the No Action Alternative would be outside of the
Proposed EIS Service Area at locations where the soils are suitable for
septic tank systems. The resultant effect would be a less orderly pattern
of growth in the District under the No Action Alternative.
c. Changes in Property Values
Land values in Salem Utility District No. 2 are not expected to
significantly increase if centralized wastewater treatment facilities are
provided. Although a limited amount of developable land remains and there
is a high demand for dwelling units in the District, currently undevelopable
land (due to poor soil characteristics) is also high priced due to specula-
tive investments by private developers in anticipation of centralized
treatment facilities. However, if the No Action Alternative is selected,
the limited areas of developable land may increase in price.
Housing values are likely to stabilize (not including the effects of
inflation) with the introduction of centralized treatment facilities. The
currently high demand for housing units in the Utility District has inflated
housing prices. However, the neutralization of existing natural constraints
will permit new housing units to be constructed on currently undevelopable
land. This increase in the supply of housing units will serve to stabilize
housing prices.
138
-------
D. DEVELOPMENT ON ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS
Chapter II identified a number of areas that are environmentally
sensitive to building or construction activity in Salem Utility District
No. 2:
Floodplains
Wetlands
Steep slopes
Prime agricultural land
Unique natural areas/habitats for rare and endangered species
Forests and woodlands
Wastewater management alternatives evaluated in this EIS will have varying
impacts on these sensitive areas depending on the magnitude, pattern, and
intensity or urban development which results. This section discusses these
various impacts on environmentally sensitive areas which are summarized in
matrix form in Section -F.
1. FLOODPLAINS
Salem Township's zoning ordinance prohibits the construction of any
structure to be used for human habitation unless the basement floor and
septic tank filter field are more than five feet above the high water mark
of any nearby lake or stream. Consequently, large tracts of land around
the lakes and rivers in the Study Area have been restricted from develop-
ment (Figure 11-10). However, if land owners in these areas are provided
with centralized sewer service, their lots can be developed as long as the
basement floor height restrictions are met. Depending upon the centralized
and/or decentralized alternative selected, this could open several areas to
renewed development activity including the southern and southwestern portions
of Camp Lake and the Wilmot Area along the Fox River. Selection of the No
Action Alternative would have minimal impacts on flood prone areas as new
development activity without an off-site treatment system is not permitted.
2. WETLANDS
Although large tracts of wetlands exist in Salem Utility District No. 2,
particularly in the corridor between Camp Lake and Peat Lake, no significant
encroachment upon these areas is projected. The 1,145 acres of wetlands in
the Study Area (Figure II-6) are protected by the Wisconsin Wetlands Act,
the Kenosha County Shoreland Zoning Ordinance, and by the Wisconsin Department
of Natural Resources' (DNR) Scattered Wetlands Acquisition Program. The wet-
lands around Peat Lake and Camp Lake Marsh are owned by DNR; while Silver
Lake Bog is owned by a private sportsmen's club. Other wetland areas will
be protected from development by Kenosha County's Shoreland Zoning Ordinance
when an official map is adopted. In the meantime, the provisions of the
Wisconsin Wetlands Act will control development in the wetland areas.
3. STEEP SLOPES
Steep slopes exist primarily in the northwest portion of the Utility
District near Silver Lake, in the southwest corner between Peat Lake and
139
-------
Wilmot, and in segments around Benet Lake (Figure II-l). It is difficult
to predict which alternatives would have the greatest impact on these areas.
However, since off-site treatment and centralized collection facilities
alternatives are likely to induce greater urban development and would pro-
vide sanitary sewer service to several of the steep slope areas, they are
more likely to encroach upon the steep slope areas with the resultant effects;
on soil erosion. Locally increased turbidity and non-point nutrient loads
(primarily phosphorus) to surface waters would result. The No Action Alterna.-
tive is likely to have less significant impacts on steep slope areas, although
steep slope areas with lake visitors would provide desirable sites for seasonal
homes if lakeshore or near-lake areas remained undevelopable.
4. PRIME AGRICULTURAL LAND
Over 20% of Salem Utility District No. 2 has been classified as prime
agricultural land. The No Action Alternative (on-site treatment) is
anticipated to result in approximately 400 acres of forest, cleared, and
agricultural land converted to urban uses. The site-independent treatment
alternatives are expected to induce an additional 500 acres of land to be
converted to urban uses, resulting in a total consumption of 900 acres for
urban development. Although the amount of land converted to urban uses
under centralized and/or decentralized alternatives is significantly larger,
the amount of prime agricultural land consumed under any alternative is
unlikely to vary significantly. The provision of centralized sewage treat-
ment facilities will open up previously undevelopable or limited development
areas (Voltz Lake, eastern Cross Lake, the area between Camp Lake and Voltz Lake,
portions of Camp Lake, Trevor, eastern Rock Lake) by neutralizing the existing
soils constraints which prevent the use of on-site systems. A portion of this
acreage is likely to include prime farmlands. However, centralized and/or
decentralized facilities will also permit higher density development in the
more desirable lakeshore and near-lake second tier areas (western Cross Lake,
Voltz Lake, western Lake Shangrila, western Rock Lake, south and southwestern
Camp Lake) where development has also been limited due to the existing soils
constraints. Consequently, while centralized and/or decentralized treatment
facilities will open up more land to development (portions of which are
classified as prime farmlands), they will also permit higher densities in
non-prime farmland areas.
The No Action Alternative, although converting less land to urban
development, will have a scattered development pattern which will encompass
some prime farmlands. Residential densities in the lakeshore or near-lake
areas will be limited by poor soil conditions, resulting in the conversion
of some prime farmland outside of the Proposed Service Area to developed
land. The net difference in the amount of prime farmland converted should
be minimal, but the distribution of farmlands converted will vary depending
upon the alternative selected.
5. UNIQUE NATURAL AREAS/HABITATS FOR RARE AND ENDANGERED SPECIES
A summary of all unique natural habitats in the Study Area is presented
in Table V-2. A majority of the areas are protected in State ownership.
Therefore, the direct impacts created by any of the wastewater management
alternatives would be minimal. Protective status also is currently being
sought for the stopa fens habitat.
140
-------
U)
H-
ro
n
£
ro
w
o
TO
>
I-J
ro
01
o
Ml
CO
rt
03
rt
ro
CO
0
M-
ro
3
rt
H-
Ml
H-
O
M-
*O
O
11
rt
03
Q
ro
ro
o>
rt
03
ro
11
ro
03
o
Ml
CO
rt
03
rt
ro
CO
o
H-
ro
3
rt
H-
Ml
H*
O
H-
3
13
O
*1
rt
03
3
o
ro
Rock Lake
Silver Lake
Voltz Lake
Camp Lake Marsh
and Preservation
Area
i -i, ^
3 H
ro
CO 03
H-
N O
fD Mi
H
ro
TO
M-
o
3
03
M
CO
H-
ro
3
rt
|-U
Ml
H-
O
H-
3
TJ
O
rt
03
3
O
(D
Ol
0
03
0
n
ro
CO
CO
rt
03
rt
G.
CO
cr
ft
3*
ro
CO
rt
03
rt
ro
O
Ml
S!
H-
CO
O
O
3
CO
|-U
3
Center Lake
33
93
cr
H-
rt
03
rt
O
Ml
rt
3*
ro
H"*
03
ro
o
cr
ts
cr
co
C.
n
7?
ro
^J
cr
M-
o
3*
M-
CO
o
3
2
g*
(U
re
0
3*
^
O
03
.§
r
93
ro
cr 33
O 03
rt cT
cr H.
rt
O 03
3 rt
= O
s! MI
03
rt rt
0 3*
cr ro
2
h-i
CO 03
rt ?T*
03 ro
rt
c n
CD cr
c
cr cr
<-<3 03
C
C/3 O
rt ??
03 ro
rt n
fD
03
o 3
Ml CU
SI *O
H- d
O Jj
o o
3 co
co ro
S* 3
K-
3
3
0
«!
00
H-
5*
ro
n
r1
03
ro
93 '"d
0 0
o co
O CO
ti }«u
cu o*
ro H»
cu ro
= 3*
ro 03
3 a*
Cu p.
03 rt
3 03
TO rt
ro
i"l O
ro MI
Cu
3 rt
3*
co ro
rt
01 *TJ
rt C
C« TO
CO 3
O
cr co
•-< ro
S! co
H- cr
CO H-
0 3
o ro
3 M
ca
M* ^4
3 3*
H-
ryj O
rt 3*
03
rt H-
Ct CO
rt
ro
CO
•1 Si CO
ro H- H»
TO CD H-
h* O T)
O 0 13
3 3 ro
03 CO 11
t—1 H1*
3 0
CO ^-^ 11
o <•• o
H- 3*
ro 93 H-
3 h-1 Cu
rt CO
H« O 93
Ml 3
H. cr cu
O 03
CO Ml
H- i-t
3 0* H-
•a ro 3
o ro TO
n 3 ro
rt Cu
03 Cu
3 ro TO
n co ro
ro H- 3
TO rt
cr 3 H*
^ 03 03
rt 3
s: ro
co' a5
n 93 o
O co rt
3 3*
CO C13
H- i-f ;
3 ro C
03 3
a o
21 O O
• 3
Q
3
^
1
H* i^d
3 H-
TO O
CO 7?
ro
Ml 11
H 03
O M
TO
Ml
.-v M
s o
S! TO
03
rt ^*\
n =
CT rt
= 3*
co ro
rt 03
93 rt
rt ro
C 3
« ro
1 Cu
s: =
H-
Ca ca
O rt
O 03
3 rt
co C
H> CO
3 1
V UJ«
ca
^ o
3* 0
M- 3
rt 03
ro H-
^3_
93
Cu M
1 03
3
Cu
1
C/3 Cu
rt |-u
C rt
C^ LnU
• co
n
ro o
93 Ml
p. 3-
ca H*
TO
i_n 3*
03 03
O H>
H ?!*
ro oi
CO h-1
H-
H- 3
3 H-
rt
ca ^
|-u ».
N
ro rt
cr
03 ro
Cu 0
3
o ro
o
3 H->
rt o
03 n
H- 03
3 rt
03 ro
Cu
rt
3* H-
ro 3
rt
3*
fD
CO
ft
0
T3
03
ro
3
ca
rt ^
cr ro
ro 3
V) CO
93 03
1-1 ft
ro ro
n c
cr 3
93 H*
1 >J3
03 C
o ro
rt
ro 3*
ft 03
H. cr
N H>
ro rt
Cu 03
rt
cr co
^
s!
M 3*
0 H-
S! n
CO
cr 03
c ro
cr
CO 11
03
93 H
3 ro
Cu
H-
cr 3
o
TO s:
TO H>
•-< co
o
o o
0 3
3 co
1 K-
3
w
ro
co
n
11
H"
'O
rt
H*
O
3
93
3
Cu
"^
03
M
C
ro
o
Ml
^*
11
ro
03
H
O
C!
M
c!
» H
> 03
F o*
M
> ro
i
M
M
CO
H
M
CO
O
ca
3"
S
H-
CO
o
o
ca
rt
03
rt
ro
ro
Cu
co
rt
03
rt
ro
ro
Cu
C/3
rf
03
rt
ro
ro
Cu
o >
& i-t
3 ro
ro 03
CO H-
3* co
3
•a
03
rt
ro
en
rt
03
rt
C
Co
141
-------
Secondary impacts to these habitats from human encroachment and
increased water quality degradation could become a serious problem to the
maintenance of these habitats. As urban development moves closer to the
natural habitat areas, increased human activity and air, noise, and water
pollution will reduce the desirability of these habitats for many species.
6. FORESTS AND WOODLANDS
Forests and woodlands in the Utility District will be converted to
developed acreage regardless of which alternative is selected. Since site-
independent treatment facilities are anticipated to induce conversion of 500
more acres of land than site-dependent facilities, it can be expected that
more forested land will be lost under the Proposed Alternative and EIS
Alternatives 1 through 8 than with selection of the No Action Alternative.
The amount of forest land converted under any selected alternative will be
highly dependent upon the pattern of growth in the Utility District and how
well growth is controlled.
E. ECONOMIC IMPACTS
1. INTRODUCTION
The economic impacts of the proposed wastewater system alternatives
proposed for the Salem Utility District No. 2 area are evaluated in this
section. These impacts include: financial burden on system users; financial
pressure causing residents to move away from the project area (displacement
pressure); and financial pressure to convert seasonal residences to full-
year residences; (conversion pressure).
2. USER CHARGES
User charges are the costs periodically billed to customers of the waste-
water system. User charges consist of three parts: debt service (repayment
of principal and interest), operation and miantinenace costs, and a reserve
fund allocatin assumed to equal 20% of the debt service amount. The reserve
fund consists of depositing and investing a portion of current revenues to
accumulate adequate funds to finance future needed capital improvements.
Estimated user charges for each alternative are presented in Table V-3.
a. Eligibility
Eligibility refers to that portion of wastewater facilities costs deter-
mined by US-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 and the Clean Water
Act of 1977. The 1972 and 1977 Acts enable US-EPA to fund 75% of total eligi-
ble capital costs of innovative and alternative systems. Innovative and altern-
ative systems considered in the EIS include land treatment, pressure sewers,
cluster systems, and septic tank rehabilitation and replacement. The State of
Wisconsin will not fund any wastewater projects receiving funding from the
US-EPA. The funding formula in Wisconsin thus requires localities to pay 23%
of the captial costs of conventional systems and 15% of the capital costs of
innovative/alternative systems if US-EPA funding is involved. Operation and
142
-------
Table V-3
ANNUAL USER CHARGES
ALTERNATIVE USER CHARGES
Facility Plan Proposed Action $330
EIS Alternative #1 $320
EIS Alternative #2 $330
EIS Alternative #3 $310
EIS Alternative #4 $280
EIS Alternative #5 $290
EIS Alternative #6 $300
EIS Alternative #7 $200
EIS Alternative #8 $300
143
-------
maintenance costs are not funded by the Federal government and must be paid
by the users of the facilities.
The percentage of capital costs eligible for Federal and State funding
greatly affects the cost that local users must bear. Treatment capital costs
were assumed to be fully eligible for grant funding while collection system
capital costs were subject to the terms of Program Requirements Memorandum
(PRM) 78-9. This PRM establishes three main conditions that must be satisfied
beofre collector sewer costs may be declared eligible:
• 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.
• Two-thirds of the design population (year 2000) served by a sewer
must have been in residence on 18 October 1972.
• Sewers must be shown to be cost-effective when compared to decen-
tralized or on-site alternatives.
The eligibility of sewers proposed in the Facility Plan and the EIS was
evaluated by the Facilities Planning Branch of EPA Region V and the Eisconsin
Department of Natural Resources (NDR). The eligibility was determined on a
sewer by sewer basis. Collection sewer eligibility on a segment basis ranged
from 0 to 100% throughout the project area. The local costs presented in
Table V-4 are based upon the US-EPA and DNR determination of eligibility.
A final determination of grant eligibility will be prepared by the DNR.
WDNR's determination will be based upon Step 2 plans and specifications for
the alternative selected to be funded. The WDNR determination may differ from
the EPA determination in two respects:
• EPA did not have detailed pains and specifications for all alterna-
tives upon which to base its conputation. Consequently a detailed
sewer-by-sewer determination was impossible.
• 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 con-
sidered on its own merits and on its ability to meet the "two-thirds"
rule.
b. Calculation of User Charges
The user charges developed for the Salem Utility District No. 2 area
alternative systems consist of local captial costs, operation and miantenance
costs, and a reserve fund charge. The calculation of debt service was based
on local costs being paid through the use of a 30-year bond at 7 7/8% interest.
The user charges in Table V-3 are presented on an annual charge per household
basis.
Estimated annual user charges in the EIS Service Area range from $200 to
$330. The centralized alternatives (Facility Plan Proposed Action, EIS
144
-------
Table V-4
LOCAL SHARE OF CAPITAL COSTS
ALTERNATIVE
Facility Plan Proposed Action
EIS Alternative #1
EIS Alternative #2
EIS Alternative #3
EIS Alternative #4
EIS Alternative #5
EIS Alternative #6
EIS Alternative #7
EIS Alternative #8
LOCAL SHARE
$5,588,157
$5,486,770
$5,533,175
$5,373,068
$5,282,118
$4,907,762
$4,738,735
$3,311,533
$4,841,891
145
-------
Alternatives 1, 2 and 3) have annual user charges slightly higher than the
other less centralized alternatives. The Facility Plan Proposed Action and
EIS Alternative 2 would be the most expensive alternatives in terms of user
charges ($330) and EIS Alternative 7 would be the least expesnvie alternative
($200).
In addition to user charges, households connected to a gravity sewer would
have to pay the capital costs (approximately $970) of the sewer connection.
Pressure sewer connections are eligible for Federal funding and do not repre-
sent a private cost to homeowners. Seasonal homeowners also may have to pay
the full price for the replacement of rehabilitation of their on-site systems
(septic tanks and soil absorption systems) if these systems are not ceded to
the local wastewater management agency. These private costs would vary from
household to household due to differences in the distance to the graivity
collector sewer and the condition of on-site systems.
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 spend-
ing 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:
• 1.5% of median household incomes less than $6,000
• 2.0% of median household incomes between %6,000 and $10,000
• 2.5% of median household incomes greater than $10,000.
The 1978 median household income for the service area has been estimated
to be $19,000 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% ($475) of the $19,000 median household
income figure. Any alternative having annual user charges exceeding $475 is
identified as a high-cost alternative and is likely to place a financial burden
on users of the system. None of the alternatives would be classified as high-
cost according to the Federal criteria.
Significant finanical burden is determined by comparing annual user
charges with a distribution of household incomes. Families not facing a
significant financial burden would be the only families able to afford the
annual wastewater user charges. Table V-5 shows the percentage of households
estimated to face a significant financial burder under each of the alternatives.
Approximately 25-30% of the households in Salem Utility District No. 2 would
face a financial burden under the Facility Plan Proposed Action Alternative
and EIS Alternatives 1, 2, 3, 6 and 8. It is expected that 70-75% of the
area's households could afford any of these alternatives. The remaining al-
ternatives (EIS Alternatives 4, 5 and 7) would place a financial burden on
20-25% of the households. Approximately 75-80% of the area's households could
afford these less expensive alternatives.
146
-------
Table V-5
FINANCIAL BURDEN AND DISPLACEMENT PRESSURE
DISPLACEMENT
PRESSURE
10-15%
10-15%
10-15%
10-15%
5-10%
5-10%
10-15%
1-5%
FINANCIAL
BURDEN
25-30%
25-30%
25-30%
25-30%
20-25%
20-25%
25-30%
20-25%
CAN
AFFORD
70-75%
70-75%
70-75%
70-75%
75-80%
75-80%
70-75%
75-80%
ALTERNATIVE
Facility Plan
Proposed Action
EIS Alternative #1
EIS Alternative #2
EIS Alternative #3
EIS Alternative #4
EIS Alternative #5
EIS Alternative #6
EIS Alternative #7
EIS Alternative #8 10-15% 25-30% 70-75%
147
-------
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. Displacement pres-
sure is measured by determining the percentage of households having annual
user charges exceeding 5% of their annual income. The displacement pressure
induced by each of the alternatives is listed in Table V-5.
Displacement pressure is highest (.10-15%) under the Facility Plan Pro-
posed Action and EIS Alternatives 1, 2, 3, 6 and 8. Displacement pressure
would be slightly less under EIS Alternatives 4 and 5 (05-102). EIS Alterna-
tive 7 would place the least displacement pressure on households in the area
(1-5%).
c. Conversion Pressure
Wastewater facilities costs are likely to encourage the trend, already
underway, of converting seasonal residences to permanent residences. The
requirements would impost a relatively heavier cost burden on seasonal resi-
dences 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 burder of centralized
alternatives will exert more conversion pressure than the cost burder 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 decentral-
ized 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.
148
-------
SECTION
7.F
COMPARISON OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH MAJOR SYSTEM ALTERNATIVES
IMPACT CATEGORY
Surface Water
quality
RESOURCE
N'ucrienc Loading
IMPACT TYPE
S,
Primary;
Long-Tenn
Groundwater
Resources
Croundwater
Quality
Primary;
Long-Tena
Acceptable
Impacts
Croundwater
Quantity
Environmentally
Sensitive Areas
Wetlands
Primary:
Long-Tenn
Secondary;
tons-Term
IMPACT DESCRIPTION
No Action Alternative:
Silver Lake: 19% increase in cotal phosphorus load over
existing conditions. Greater eutrophication potential.
Lake trophic condition worsened.
Center, Camp, Rock Lakes: Z7. increase in total phosphorus
loads are existing conditions. Eutrophicacion potential
unchanged. Lake trophic condition maintained.
Mo Action Alternative (with phosphorus ban):
Phosphorus loading decreased in all lakes, except Silver.
Silver load increases 16%. Eutrophication potential
higher. Lake condition worsened.
Proposed Action. EIS Alternatives 1-8 (with phosphorus ban):
Cross, Benet/Shangrila, Center, Vol.Cz, and Rock Lakes:
phosphorus load decreased 582, 54%, 427., 417., and 32Z,
respectively. Eutrophication potential decreased signifi-
cantly. Trophic status improved or maintained. Camp Lake
phosphorus loading improved 16%. Eutrophicacion potential
decreased significantly. Trophic status improved or
maintained.
Silver Lake phosphorus load increased 19! with decentralized
alternatives, 8Z with proposed action and new centralized
alternatives. Eutrophication potential increased due to
poor suitability of soils for septic tanks. Trophic status
worsened.
Phosphorus ban little, if any effect on centralized and
decentralized alternatives.
Fox River and For Chain O'Lakes: Centralized and decentral-
ized alternatives do noc significantly increase the phosphorus
load (l.OZ). Eutrophication potential remains unchanged.
Trophic conditions are maintained.
All Alternatives:
Effect upon Fox Chain O'Lakes, Illinois will be insignificant
on the eutrophication status of these lakes.
So Action;
Due to septic tank leachate. Che possibility exists of local-
ized areas of high nitrate concentrations in groundwater in
densely populated parts of Study Area.
EIS Alternatives 3. 4, 6. 7, and 8:
Leachate from land application sites west of Wilmot expected
to meet drinking water quality standards Eor nitrate of 10
mg/l-N. Other significant wastewater constituents reserved
by stabilization, filtration, absorption and precipitation.
Density of on-site and cluster systems not sufficient to
cause violation of nitrate standards for groundwater. Mo
rechange of gi-oundwater expected by overland flow-wetlands
discharge site.
Proposed Action. EIS Alternatives I. 2, and 5:
No groundwater rechange except from on-site systems at
Silver Lake Park where nitrate standards in groundwater
should be net within 100' of drainfields.
Proposed Action. EIS Alternatives 1-8:
Failure Co return wastewater flows co groundwater results
in a negligible loss of groundwater from local sand and
gravel agnifers.
Alternative 6:
Discharge of affluent into Paasch Lake and associated
wetlands. Algae population will increase in lake;
possible channeling oc fence row ditches; further eucro-
phication of lake; recreation upporcunicies will decrease
in Paasch Lake.
All Alternatives:
Impacts co wetlands from urban development will be minimal
due Co protected status of wetlands from che Shoreline
Management Program. However, Impacts from human encroach-
ment, nutrient runoff from urban surfaces, sediment runoff,
could impact che future quality of wetlands.
-------
IMPACT CATEGORY
RESOURCE
rloodplains
SECTION 7.7 (Continued)
IMPACT TTPE
4 DEGREE
Steep Slopes
Prime Agricultural
Land
Unique Natural
Areas
Local Economy
Local Cose
Burden
Displacement
Pressures
IMPACT DESCRIPTION
Primary; IIS Alternatives 1, 2. 5. 6. 7. and 8:
Long-term Mould Involve location of uastewater treatment plane in or
near a 100 year floodplain. Detailed site analysis would be
required to further analyse this impact.
Mo Action. EIS Alternatives 3 and 4:
No projected impacts.
Secondary;. All Alternatives:
Long-Term Possible development of floodplain areas but this impact
will be mitigated by rigid building codes tor development
in rloodplains.
Secondary; Proposed Alternative, EIS Alternatives 1, 2. and 3
Long-Term (Off-Site Alternatives);
Possible impacts to steep slopes could occur due to
residential development. This in cum could accelerate soil
erosion thus increasing turbidity and non-point nutrients.
EIS Alternatives 4, 5.__6. 7. 8, and No Action:
Impacts would be less than mentioned above because less land
will be converted for urban use.
Primary; EIS Alternatives 3. 4. 7, and 3:
Long-Tern 100 to 300 acres of mostly prime agricultural land would be
taken out of use for land application of wastewater effluent.
EIS Alternative 6;
1,500 acres of land would be utilized for land application
of wastewater.
Secondary; Proposed Alternative, EIS Alternatives 1-8;
Long-Tern Development resulting from these alternatives is projected
to consume 430 acres of existing agricultural land. A
large percentage o£ this is expected to be prime agricultural
land.
Primary; EIS Altemativea 1. 2. 5. 6. 7, and 8;
Short-Term Construction impacts - noise, erosion from ST? construction
could impact biota at Peat Lake/Wetland, which has been
recognized as an important natural area by Wisconsin CINR.
Primary; EIS Alternatives 1. 2. 5, 6, 7, and 8:
Long-Term Noise r'roo STP operation could impact biota at Peat Lake/
Wetland. Visual effects could also impact wildlife and
natural setting of the lake.
Secondary; All Alternatives:
Long-Term Impacts to unique natural areas and habitats of rate/endan-
gered species should be minimal due to state ownership of
most areas. The Stopa Fens habitat is currently in private
ownership but has been recognized by Wisconsin as having
significant scientific status. Long-term impacts to all
habitats and unique areas could, however, be significant
due to human encroachment, noi.se, visual impacts, etc.
These impacts are difficult to quantify.
Primary; Proposed Action, EIS Alternatives 1-8:
Long-Term If collector sewers are eligible for Federal funding,
average annual residential user charges vary from 3200 to
S330 per household. Between 70 to 75Z of the year-couad
residents could afford one of the alternative project
designs. Seasonal residents will bear a disproportionate
share of costs relative to their actual use of the system
if all local costs are averaged for all users.
Mo Action Alternative:
Increasing number of residents will be forced Co Insta 11
holding tanks (approximately 33,000 depending on size and
$60 per month for pumping).
Primary; Proposed Action. SIS Alternatives 1-8:
Long-Term Between 37 and 43Z of Che area's year-round residents may
experience serious financial difficulties, and 5% are con-
sidered candidates for displacement if collector sewers must
be locally funded.
Conversion
Pressures
Mo Action Alternative:
Possible displacement due Co costs
pumping of holding tanks.
of construction and
Secondary; Proposed Action. EIS Alternatives 1-8;
Long—Term Structural conservation incentives will accelerate trend
toward conversion of seasonal to permanent dwellinzs.
Mo Action Alternative:
Conversion Crend will continue hue at a possibly lower rate.
130
-------
SECTION ?.? (Continued)
IMPACT CATEGORY
RESOURCE
Community Composition
and Character
IMPACT TYPE
Si DEGREE
Secondary;
Long-Term
Population
Rate of Growth
Secondary;
Long-Tern
Secondary;
Long-Term
Land Use
Residential,
Agricultural,
Forested, and
Open Land in
the Study Area
Secondary;
Long-Term
Secondary;
Long-Tens
Housing
Cultural Resources
New Residences
Built on
Unstable Soils
Community
Self-Esce
Secondary;
Long-Term
Primary;
Long-Term
Archaeological
Sites
Primary;
Short-Term
Historic Sites
Recreation-Lakes
within Study Area
IMPACT DESCRIPTION
Proposed Action. EIS Alternatives 1-8:
Creation of a relatively more affluent population base. The
gradual enhancement of Che quality of the community environ-
ment, if inducement pressures are controlled. Increase in
area' 3 ability and capacity Co support residential development
However, if development is rapid and uncontrolled, widespread
disruption and deterioration in the community fabric nay
talce place.
Mo Action Alternative:
Potential for community development Limited, quality of the
surrounding environment jeopardized.
Proposed Action, EIS Alternatives 1-8;
Generation of inducement pressures capable of generating a
33Z increase in study area population by year 2000 relative
to the; non-facility specific projection utilized for
design purposes. Once the constraint of sewerage service
is removed, the district's growth rate will be highly
dependent upon its attractiveness for development compared
to similar areas within the immediate region.
No Action Alternative:
Projected Study Area population in year 2000 would be 16Z
below Che year 2000 design population.
Prottosed Action, SIS Alternatives 1-8:
85Z increase in existing residential acreage between 1975
and 2000 involving che addition of approximately 900 acres
to current residential land area if population growth is
uncontrolled. Design capacities in Che EIS alternatives
would support conversion of 700 acres Co residential use.
Intensive residential patterns or 1/4 - 1/2 acre lots in
areas near new sewers. Lower densities will be achieved
in areas served by on-sice and cluster systems in alterna-
tives 4, 5, and 6.
Proposed Action, EIS Alternatives 1-8:
Development pressures near sewers may result in building
on unstable soils and consequent structural damage to
buildings.
So Action Alternative;
Future development unlikely on unstable soils.
Proposed Action. EIS Alternatives 1-8:
Residents perception of and adverse reactions Co odor,
public health and visual Impacts of malfunctioning on— site
systems will change to a more positive outlook.
No Action Alternative:
Awareness of sewage disposal problems within che community
will continue co influence comnunity self-esteem.
EIS Alternatives 3, 4, 6, 7, and 8;
Treatment /disposal sices in these alternatives have not
previously been evaluated by che State Historic Preservation
officer for their archaeological potential.
Proposed Action, EIS Alternatives 1, 2, and 5:
Sewer and treatment sites ware considered during facilities
planning. Impacts are available.
Proposed Action, EIS Alternatives 1-8;
Sewer construction will take place in che vicinity of most
historic sites. Mo blasting should be required. Sites
are of local significance only.
Proposed Action, EIS Alternatives 1-8:
Improved water quality and reductions in aquatic growth in
Study Area lakes may Improve cheir attractiveness for
passive and active recreation. No alternative increases
public access co che lakes. Limited public access, possible
overcrowding on lakes that do have access, and disturbance
of passive recreation may limit public benefits from improved
water quality. Increasing local population and associated
increase in recreation demand may exacerbate these limita-
tions and result in unsatisfied recreation demand.
Mo Action Alternative:
Public perception of lake water quality may detract from
the recreation experience. Problems of access, overcrowding
and disturbance of passive recreation would be less than for
other alternatives.
151
-------
SECTION 7.F (Concluded)
IMPACT TYPE
IMPACT CATEGORY RESOURCE S, DEGREE IMPACT DESCRIPTION
Toxic Effects Proposed Action, SIS Alternatives 1. 2. _5, 7, and 8;
on Aquatic Ozonacion: So adverse effects on aquatic life expected.
Life
Ammonia: Land application alternatives would not impact
river quality at all.
The Proposed Action, EIS Alternatives 1, 2, 5, 7, and 8
would increase ammonia in Fox River over recommended
water quality criteria.
Chlorination: Proposed Action, EIS Alternatives 1, 2, 5,
7, and 3 would generate residual chlorine at Che Wisconsin
effluent standard level. Ho severe impact expected on
Fox River or Chain 0'Lakes, unless overdosing expectai.
152
-------
CHAPTER VI
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
In this chapter, major conclusions of the EIS and the cost-effective
alternative is presented. Selection of the cost-effective alternative
as EPA's Recommended Action is tentative while input is received from the
applicant, the public as well as local, State, and Federal agencies.
A. CONCLUSIONS
Sewers account for 80 percent of the capital costs of the Facility
Plan Proposed Action. Opportunities for reducing these costs through use
of decentralized facilities are limited in this Study Area by soil condi-
tions. However, on-site facilities for the Silver Lake shoreline and small
scale off-site facilities for development east of Center Lake are feasible
and cost-effective. A small-scale wetlands discharge system for the eastern
part of the Study Area was not feasible because of potential adverse impacts
on the quality and recreational use of a small lake in the wetlands.
At present, all lakes in the District are moderately fertile to fertile,
with phosphorus load from septic tank systems estimated to be 18% (Camp Lake)
to 58% (Benet/Shangrila Lake) of total phosphorus loads to the lakes. Move-
ment of phosphorus to these lakes from septic tank systems is primarily by
surface runoff from failing soil absorption systems. With the exception of
Silver Lake, all lakes exhibit potential decreases in total phosphorus loads
due to implementation of decentralized and centralized alternatives. In the
decentralized alternatives, Silver Lake experiences an estimated 16% (with a
phosphorus ban) increase in phosphorus load due to increased use of septic
systems along the lakeshore through the design year 2000.
Eutrophication potential of the Fox Chain O'Lakes region will be
unaffected by any of the alternatives evaluated. The phosphorus discharge
to the Fox River from a conventional sewage treatment plant would represent
less than one percent of the total phosphorus load in the River, the main
source of nutrients to the Chain of Lakes. All other alternatives have
even smaller phosphorus discharges.
Other major constituents of the Facility Plan's proposed effluent
discharge would have minimal affects on water quality of the Fox River.
BOD, suspended solids, and residual chlorine compounds would be diluted to
acceptable concentrations. Under worst case conditions (high temperature
and pH, low flow), ammonia discharged from the proposed plant would cause
the Fox River to exceed EPA ammonia criterion. However, the present ammonia
concentrations already exceed the criterion. Any freshwater organisms present
in the River are probably not sensitive to ammonia at the concentrations
expected.
153
-------
While the proposed effluent discharge will not have a significant
adverse impact on the Fox River, neither will it benefit this stressed
river. Land application, as proposed in EIS Alternatives 3, 4, 6, and 8,
avoid the discharge of these small incremental pollutant loads. Land
application is also cost-effective. Spray irrigation of lagoon effluent,
including transport of raw wastes to the sites immediately west of the
Study Area, will cost 20% less (total present worth basis) than conventional
treatment.
Detailed site conditions (geology, soils and groundwater) as well as
availability of the sites would have to be determined before land applica-
tion can be considered feasible.
Development in the Study Area is presently constrained by poor soil
suitability for on-site systems and the absence of community sewerage systems,
Installation of a community sewerage system will facilitate growth that will
be more rapid than past trends would indicate. Development pressure ±s
largely a result of the Study Area's proximity to large employment and
residential centers, the Chicago and Milwaukee Standard Metropolitan
Statistical Areas.
Residential development will have its most severe impacts on prime
agricultrual lands and recreational use of lakes. Up to 450 acres of prime
agricultural land could be converted to residential use. Limited public
access to lakes, possible overcrowding on lakes that do have access, and
disturbance of passive recreational activities will become more severe as
local population and recreation demand increase.
B. DRAFT EIS RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE
The Recommended Action of this Draft EIS is represented by EIS
Alternative 4. Major elements of the Recommended Action are:
• Gravity sewers, pump stations and force mains as the major means
of wastewater collection and transport. In areas expected to
remain sparsely developed (average road frontages of 100 feet or
more), the use of pressure sewers should be investigated in detail.
* Alternative means of wastewater disposal for Silver Lake shoreline,
an area east of Center Lake and Silver Lake Park. A site-by-site
survey of existing on-site systems and renovation or replacement,
as necessary, would be appropriate for the Silver Lake shoreline.
Geohydrologic studies of subsurface disposal sites and construction
of cluster systems should be considered for Silver Lake Park and
the residential area northeast of Center Lake.
* Land application of lagoon effluent at a site or sites on the sand
and gravel deposits immediately west of the Study Area. Ponds
sufficiently sized to store winter wastewater flows will provide
adequate treatment. Soil, groundwater and geologic conditions,
site availability and site acquisition methods will be investigated.
154
-------
• Implementation of a residential flow reduction program. Flow
reduction should be governmentally encouraged by educational
programs and/or plumbing code requirements. Flow reduction will
provide additional capacity for expected rapid population increase
and will offset high sewer user charges.
C. OWNERSHIP OF ON-SITE SYSTEMS SERVING SEASONAL RESIDENCES
Construction Grants regulations allow Federal funding for renovation
and replacement of publicly owned on-site systems serving permanent or sea-
sonally occupied residences and of privately owned on-site systems serving
permanent 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 flows district
may elect to accept ownership of the on-site systems. Rehabilitation of
these systems would then be eligible for Federal assistance, and local costs
for seasonal residents would be dramatically reduced. Any decision to accept
ownership on a community-wide basis should await the conclusions of the site-
specific environmental and engineering analyses and preliminary determina-
tion of the functions of the management agency. Ownership of seasonally used
systems may create responsibilities that the agency is not equipped to dis-
charge .
155
-------
CHAPTER VII
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHORT-TERM USE
AND LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY
A, SHORT-TERM USE OF THE STUDY AREA
Salem Utility District No. 2 has been, and will continue to be used as
a residential/recreational area. The site was initially disturbed when con-
struction of homes began several decades ago.
Disturbance of the site by routine residential/recreational activity
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, an increased
potential for development may result in some loss of terrestrial habitat.
Such would be expected to a lesser extent by implementation of the EIS
Recommendation.
Non-renewable resources associated with either action would include
concrete for construction. Consumption of electric power by pumps may
increase. Manpower would also be committed to the construction, operation
and management of new or rehabilitated facilities.
2. LIMITATIONS OF THE BENEFICIAL USE OF THE ENVIRONMENT
Aquatic recreation is one of the major benefits enjoyed by people, resi-
dents and visitors alike, in Salem Utility District No. 2. Section II.E.5
discussed the high recreational value of Silver Lake, Center Lake, Camp Lake,
Cross Lake and Voltz Lake based upon fishing, boating, swimming and aesthetic
parameters. It is judged that the implementation of any centralized waste-
water management plan, such as the Proposed Action or EIS Alternatives 1,2
and 3, would significantly increase the current level of recreational activity
through induced near-shore development. This activity may become aesthetically
displeasing to current residents, many of whom come to the District during
the vacation season to leave urban crowds. The implementation of decentral-
ized EIS alternatives(4,5,6,7 and 8) would have a less significant effect on
the recreational benefits of the area, because induced growth would be less
dense and more scattered than that afforded by centralized wastewater man-
agement.
157
-------
CHAPTER VIII
IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES
Implementation of either the Facility Plan Proposed Action or one of
the EIS Alternatives would commit a number of man-made non-renewable resources
to the construction, operation, and management of new or rehabilitated facilities.
A. CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS
Construction of any of the alternatives evaluated in this EIS would
require the use of materials such as concrete, steel, wood, and petroleum
products. Most of these materials would be transported into the Study Area,
and therefore will be produced or extracted from the immediate area. The
land application of wastewater, by spray irrigation, such as used in EIS
Alternative 4, the most cost-effective alternative, requires less of these
materials than a conventional sewage treatment plant.
B. ENERGY
Energy would be expended for both construction and operation of the
selected facility. Primary sources of energy would be electricity and
petroleum; secondary source of energy would be required to produce the
chemicals and other materials needed to maintain operation of the plant.
Land application (EIS Alternative 4) typically uses less energy than con-
ventional treatment processes, as seen in Table IV-3.
C. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE (O&M) MATERIALS
Materials such as chemicals would continuously be required to keep the
facility operating at the designed level of efficiency. As seen in Table
IV-3, land application uses relatively few chemicals, with chlorine being
the only chemical required, for systems that use recovery and surface dis-
charge of treated effluent. EIS Alternative 4, involving wastewater treat-
ment by spray irrigation, requires no chlorine effluent disinfection and no
aluminum sulfate (alum) for phosphorus removal prior to disposal. These
chemicals are both required for surface water discharge of effluent.
D. MAN-HOURS
The number of man-hours required to plan, design, build, and maintain
any of the discussed alternatives in this EIS would be quite large (see
Table IV-3). Personnel would also be required to satisfy additional commun-
ity needs (schools, police, fire protection, recreation management, etc.)
that stem from the construction and maintenance of improved wastewater
management facilities in the Study Area.
159
-------
CHAPTER IX
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 any EIS Recom-
mendations were implemented.
Construction of sewage lagoons or new sewer lines would disturb the soil,
resulting in sediment runoff. This runoff would cause a temporary increase
in siltation in both streams and offshore areas. This type of runoff can also
be caused by the extensive excavation required during upgrade or renovation
of on-site septic systems and off-site cluster systems.
161
-------
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 simpler materials, and
energy.
ADVANCED WASTE TREATMENT. Wastewater treatment beyond the secondary or
biological stage which 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.
AGRONOMIC. Relating to or designed to promote the principles and proce-
dures of soil management and of field crop and special - purpose
plant improvement, management and production.
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. Alternative waste treatment processes and
techniques are proven methods which provide for the reclaiming and
reuse of water, productively recycle waste water constituents or
otherwise eliminate the discharge of pollutants, or recover energy.
Alternative technologies may not be variants 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.
AQUILUDE. (Natural barrier) a water-bearing formation of relatively low
permeability that will not yield usable quantities of water to
wells.
162
-------
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.
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. Those functions that small waste flow districts would be
required to perform in order 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.
CESSPOOL. A lined or partially lined underground pit into which raw
household wastewater is discharged and from which the liquid seeps
into the surrounding soil. Sometimes called leaching cesspool.
163
-------
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 bacteria, 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 in water, therefore, is used as an index to the proba-
bility of the occurrence of such diease-producing bodies (patho-
gens) as Salmonella, Shigella, and enteric viruses. These path-
ogens 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.
DECIBEL (db). A unit of measurement used to express the relative
intensity of sound. For environmental assessment, it is common to
use a frequency-rates scale (A scale) on which the units (dbA) are
correlated with responses of the human ear. On the A scale, 0 dbA
represents the average least perceptilble sound (rustling leaves,
gentle breathing) and 140 dbA represents the intensity at which the
eardrum may rupture (jet engine at open throttle).
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 for water to flow through a
basin. Also called retention time. Or, the time required for
164
-------
natural processes to replace the entire volume of a lake's water,
assuming complete mixing.
DETRITUS. (1) The heavier mineral debris moved by natural watercourses
(or in wastewater) usually in bed-load form. (2) The sand, grit,
and other coarse material removed by differential sedimentation in
a relatively short period of detention. (3) Debris from the decom-
position of plants and animals.
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 (0 ) dissolved in water or sew-
age. Adequate oxygen is necessary for maintenance of fish and
other aquatic organisms. Low dissolved oxygen concentrations
sometimes are due to presence, in inadequately treated wastewater,
of high levels of organic compounds.
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
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.
DRYWELL. A device for small installations, comprising one or more pits
extending into porous strata and lined with open-jointed stone,
concrete block, precast concrete or similar walls, capped, and
provided with a means of access, such as a manhole cover. It
serves to introduce into the ground, by seepage, the partly treated
effluent of a water-carriage wastewater disposal system.
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 plant, or part thereof.
EFFLUENT LIMITED. Any stream segment for which it is known that water
quality will meet applicable water quality standards after cora-
liance with effluent discharge standards.
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 all
or a significant part of its range. Protected under Public Law
93-205 as amended.
165
-------
ENDECO. Type 2100 Septic Leachate Detector. 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) when a Federal action
would significantly affect the quality of the human environment.
Used in the decision-making process to evaluate the anticipated
effects (impacts) of the proposed action on the human, biological
and physical environment.
EPILIMINION. The upper layer of generally warm, circulating water in
lakes.
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.
EUTROPHIC. Waters with a high concentration of nutrients and hence a
large production of vegetation and frequent die-offs of plants and
animals.
EUTROPHIC LAKES. Shallow lakes, weed-choked at the edges and very rich
in nutrients. The water is characterized by large quantities 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. In the process, a once oligo-
trophic lake becomes mesotrophic and then eutrophic.
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION. A process by which water is evaporated and/or
transpired from water, soil, and plant surfaces.
FECAL COLIFORM BACTERIA. See Coliform Bacteria.
FEN. A water-logged area, with pond-weeds, reeds, rushes and alders, in
which peat is accumulating, but in which the groundwater is
alkaline (usually with calcium carbonate) or neutral.
166
-------
FLOE. A sheet of floating ice.
FORCE MAIN. Pipe designed to carry wastewater under pressure.
GLACIAL DEPOSIT. A landform of rock, soil, and earth material deposited
by a melting glacier. Such material was originally picked up by
the glacier and carried along its path; it usually varies in tex-
ture 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.
GROUND MORAINE. A morain occuring at the bottom of a glacier, consist-
ing of material frozen in the bottom and pushed along over its bed.
When the glacier melts, this material is usually deposited in a
relatively thin sheet of till over the area occupied by the
glacier.
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. An area in which the requirements of a specific plant or
animal are met.
HOLDING TANK. Enclosed tank, usually of fiberglass or concrete, for the
storage of wastewater prior to removal or disposal at another
location.
HYPOLIMNION. Deep, cold and relatively undisturbed water separated from
the surface layer in the lakes of temperate and arctic regions.
IGNEOUS. Rock formed by the solidification of magma (hot molten
material).
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.
167
-------
INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES. Technologies whose use has not been widely
documented by experience. They may not be variants of conventional
biological or physical/chemical treatment but offer promise as
methods for conservation of energy or wastewater constituents, or
contribute to the elimination of discharge of pollutants.
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 with the sewage, inter-
ceptor sewers allow some of the sewage to flow untreated directly
into the receiving stream to prevent the treatment plant from being
overloaded.
INTERFLOW. That movement of water of a given density in a reservoir or
lake between layers of water of differennt density. It is usually
caused by the inflow of water either of a different temperature or
of a different sediment or salt content.
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 soil, air, vegetation,
bacteria, and/or fungi are employed to remove pollutants from
wastewater. In its simplest form, the method includes three steps:
(1) pretreatment to screen out large solids; (2) secondary treat-
ment and chlorination; and (3) application to cropland, pasture, or
natural vegetation to allow plants and soil microorganisms to
remove additional pollutants. Some of the applied wastewater
evaporates, and the remainder may be allowed to percolate to the
water table, discharged through drain tiles, or reclaimed by wells.
LEACHATE. Solution formed when water percolates through solid wastes,
soil or other materials and extracts soluble or suspendable sub-
stances from the material.
LIMITING FACTOR. A factor whose absence, or excessive concentration,
exerts some restraining influence upon a population of plants,
animals or humans.
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.
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, compared
to eutrophic waters, having less production of organic matter.
168
-------
MESOTROPHIC LAKE. Lakes of characteristics intermediate between oligo-
trophic and eutrophic, with 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 that 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. Surface water runoff
is an example as it does not originate from a single source and 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 the
growth and development of organisms, especially carbon, oxygen,
nitrogen and phosphorus.
OLIGOTROPHIC. Surface waters with good water quality, relatively low
concentrations of nutrients, and modest production of vegetation.
OLIGOTROPHIC LAKES. Lakes with highly transparent water of good
quality, high DO levels, and modest production of aquatic vegeta-
tion.
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.
169
-------
OXIDATION. A chemical reaction that increases the oxygen content of a
compount.
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 capacity 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.
PHOSPHORUS LIMITED. Of all the primary nutrients necessary to support
algal growth, phosphorus is in the shortest supply. Phosphorus can
limit additional algal growth, or if abundant, can stimulate growth
of algae.
PHYTOPLANKTON. Floating plants, microsopic in size, that 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.
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
nearly all floating or settleable solids are mechanically removed
by screening and sedimentation.
170
-------
RAPID INFILTRATION. A form of land treatment where wastewater is placed
into spreading basins and applied to the land to percolate into the
soil.
RAPID INFILTRATION BASIN. Unlined wastewater lagoons designed so that
all or part of the wastewater percolates into the underlying 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. Used as official
classification by some states.
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.
RETENTION TIME. See Detention Time.
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. Surface runoff is the water from rainfall, melted snow or
irrigation water that flows over the surface of the land. Ground-
water runoff, or seepage flow from groundwater, is the water that
enters the ground and reappears as surface water. Hydraulic runoff
is groundwater runoff plus the surface runoff that flows to stream
channels, and represents that part of the precipitation on a drain-
age basin that is discharged from the basin as streamflow. Runoff
can pick up pollutants from the air or the land and carry them to
the receiving waters.
SANITARY SEWERS. Sewers that transport only domestic or commercial
sewage. Storm water runoff is carried in a separate system. See
sewer.
SANITARY SURVEY. (1) A study of conditions related to the collection,
treatment, and disposal of liquid, solid, or airborne wastes to
determine the potential hazards contributed from these sources to
the environment. (2) A study of the effect of wastewater dis-
charges on sources of water supply, on bathing or other recrea-
tional waters, on shellfish culture, and other related environ-
ments .
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
171
-------
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. The second stage in the treatment of wastewater in
which bacteria are utilized to decompose the organic matter in
sewage. This step is accomplished by using such processes as a
trickling filter or activated slugde. Effective secondary treat-
ment processes remove virtually all floating solids and settleable
solids as well as 90% of BOD and suspended solids. Disinfection of
the effluent by chlorination customarily is the last step in this
process.
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 (ST/SAS). 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 collects and con-
ducts 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.
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.
172
-------
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 a pattern of occurrence
of soil types in a geographic area.
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 assessed valuation upward to approximate true market value.
In this way it is possible to relate debt burden to the full value
of taxable property in each community within that State.
STORAGE COEFFICIENT. For groundwater, the volume of water released from
storage in each vertical column of the aquifer having a base one
foot square when the water table or other piezometric surface falls
one foot. This is approximately equal to the specific yield in
nonartesian aquifers.
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, or periods of mixing, occur in the spring and autumn.
Stratification is most common in middle latitudes and is related to
weather conditions, basin morphology, and altitude.
173
-------
STUB FEE. See Connection Fee.
SUBSTRATE. (1) The surface on which organisms may live; generally the
soil, the bottom of the ocean, of a lake, a stream, or other body
of water, or the face of a rock, piling, or other natural or man-
made structure. (2) The substances used by organisms in liquid
suspension. (3) The liquor in which activated sludge or other
matter is kept in suspension.
SUCCESSION. A gradual sequence of changes or phases in vegetation (or
animals) over a period of time, even if the climate remains un-
altered; hence plant succession. This will proceed until some
situation of equilibrium is attained, and a climax community is
established.
SUPPLEMENTAL USAGE. Those functions that small waste flow districts are
not required to perform in order to comply with EPA Construction
Grants regulations governing individual, on-site wastewater sys-
tems. These functions may, however, be necessary to achieve
administrative or environmental objectives.
SUSPENDED SOLIDS (SS). Undissolved particles that are suspended in
water, wastewater or other liquid, and that contribute to tur-
bidity. The examination of suspended solids plus the BOD test
constitute the two main determinations for water quality performed
at wastewater treatment facilities.
TERTIARY 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.
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, omni-
vores, predators, scavengers, and decomposers.
TURBIDITY. (1) A condition in water or wastewater caused by the pres-
ence of suspended matter, resulting in the scattering and absorp-
tion of light rays. (2) A measure of fine suspended matter in
liquids. (3) An analytical quantity usually reported in arbitrary
turbidity units determined by measurements of light diffraction.
174
-------
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. This level varies seasonally with the amount of
percolation. Where it intersects the ground surface, springs,
seepages, marshes or lakes may occur. Also known as the ground-
water level.
WATERSHED. The land area drained by a stream, or by an entire river
system.
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.
175
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Arthur Beard Engineers, Inc. 1978. Report for Salem Utility District
No. 2. Chew 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.
Bouma, J., W.A. Ziebell, W.G. Walker, P.G. Olcott, E. McCoy, and F.D.
Hole. 1972. Soil absorption of septic tank effluent: A field study
of some major siols in Wisconsin. Information Circular No. 20.
University of Wisconsin-Extension, Geological and Natural History
Survey, Madison WI.
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 Environ-
mental Research Center. Cincinnati OH.
Cooper, I.A., and J.W. Rezek. 1977. Septage treatment and disposal.
For EPA, Technology Transfer.
Cotter, R.D., R.D.. Hutchinson, E.L. Skinner, and D.A. Wentz. 1969,
Water resources of Wisconsin, Rock-Fox River basin. Hydrologic
investigations atlas HA-360. US Geological Survey, Washington DC.
Council on Environmental Quality. 1973. Preparation of environmental
impact statements: Guidelines. 1 August 1973.
Dearth, K.H. 1979. 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
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). 1976. Federal Insurance
Administration (FIA) flood hazard boundary map, Kenosha County, WI,
unincorporated areas.
Dillon, P.J. 1975. The application of the phosphorus-loading concept
to eutrophication research. Scientific Series No. 46. Canada Centre
for Island Waters. Burlington, Ontario.
Drescher, William J. 1956. Ground water in Wisconsin. Information Circular
No.3. University of Wisconsin, Wisconsin Geological Survey, Madison WI.
Department of Transporation: Advisory Circular: Variously dated. 1) AC
NO: 70-2A, 10/26/76; AC NO: 70/7460-2G, 11/30/77; AC NO: 150/5300-4E,
6/24/75.
Endangered Species Act of 1973. Public Law 93-205.
EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). July 1974. Manual for pre-
paration of environmental impact statements for wastewater treatment
works, facilities plans, and 208 areawide waste treatment management
plans. July 1974.
176
-------
EPA. June 1975. Cost of wastewater treatment by land application.
EPA. 1976. Quality Criteria for Water.
EPA. June 1976. Small community wastewater treatment facilities.
EPA. October 1977. Process design mannual for land treatment for land
treatment of municipal wastewater. EPA 625/1-77-008.
EPA. January 1978a. Construction costs for municipal wastewater treat-
ment plants, 1973-1977. MCD 37.
EPA. May 1978b. Analyis of O&M costs for municipal wastwater treatment
systems. MCD 39.
EPA. May 1978c. Construction cost for municipal conveyance systems, 1973-
1977. MCD 38.
EPA-EPIC. 1979. Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center.
EPA. Region V. No date. Report on Marie Lake, Grass Lake, Fox River
and Pistakee Lake, Lake County, Illionoi. Working Paper No. 305.
Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, Public Law 92-500.
Green, J.H. and R.A. Lansing (Compilers). 1977. Wisconsin: A summary
of activities and plans of the U.S. Dept. of the Interior Geological
Survey. USGS, Reston VA/
Groszyk, Walter. 1977. Septic tank problem analysis: Impact on ground-
water. Information memorandum 77-164. USEPA, Water Planning Division,
Washington DC.
Hutchinson, Rickard D. 1970. Water resources of Racine and Kenosha
Counties, Southeastern Wisconsin. Water-supply Paper 1878. USGS.
GPO, Washington DC
Hutchinson, Rickard D. 1971. Water resources of Racine and Kenosha Counties
southeastern Wisconsin. Geological survey water-supply paper 1978.
Prepared by US Dept. of the Interior, Geological Survey, in cooperation
with the University of Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey.
GPO, Washington DC.
Illinois Pollution Control Board. 1977. Rules and regulations. Chapter
3. Water pollution. Springfield IL.
Illinois State Geological Survey, 1977. Fox Chain of Lakes. Investigation
and Water Quality Management Plan. Urbana IL.
Jensen & Johnson, Inc. 1976. Facility development plan, Salem Utility
District No. 2, Kenosha County, Wisconsin. Elkhorn WI
Jensen & Johnson, Inc. 1977. Infiltration/Inflow Analysis for the Town
of Salem Utility District No. 1. Kenosha County, Wisconsin. Elkhorn WI.
177
-------
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 Environ-
mental Research Laboratory.
Kadlec, R.H. and D.L. Tilton. 1978. Preliminary Site Evaluation: Raasch
Lake Wetland, Kenosha County, Wisconsin. Wetland Ecosystem Reserach
Group, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor MI.
Kenosha Health Department Laboratory. No date. Water analysis, Silver
Lake.
Kerfoot, W. 1979. Investigation of septic lea chate discharges into the
Salem Lakes, Wisconsin. K-V Associates, Inc., Falmouth MA.
Ketelle, Martha J. 1971. Hydrogeologic considerations in liquid waste
disposal, with a case study in southeastern Wisconsin. The Technical
Record 3(3) (entire issue). Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning
Commission, 39p.
Kothandaraman, V., R.L. Evans,- N.G. Bhowmik, J.B. Stall, D.L. Gross, J.A.
Lineback, and G.B. Dreher. Fox Chain of Lakes investigation and water
quality management plan. Cooperative Resources Report 5, Illinois
State Water Survey, State Geological Survey, Urbana IL.
Kusler, J.A. 1971. Regulations for disposal of rural domestic liquid
wastes in Wisconsin: A review.
Link, Ernest G., and Owen R. Demo. 1970. Soil survey: Kenosha and Racine
Counties, Wisconsin. USDA Soil Conservation Service, in cooperation
with University of Wisconsin, Wisconsin Geological and Natural History
Survey, Soils Department, and Wisconsin Agricultural Experiment Station.
US Government Printing Office, Washington DC.
Lueschow, Lloyd A. 1972. Swimmers' itch: What can be done about it?
Reprinted from Wisconsin Conservation Bullentin, May-June 1972.
McLaughlin, E.R. 1968. A recycle system for conservation of water in
residences. Waste and Sewage Works 115(4): 175-176.
Merrissy, Merrissy and Race. 1971. Town of Salem, Kenosha County Utility
District No. 2., Wisconsin.
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, Public Law 91-190.
National Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations. 40 CRF 141.
NOAA(National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminstration), Environmental Data
Service. 1973. Monthly normals of temperature, precipitation, and
heating and cooling degree days 1941-1970: Wisconsin. Climatography
of the U.S. No. 81. USDC National Climatic Center, Asheville NC.
178
-------
NOAA, Environmental Data Service. 1973. Monthly normals of temperature.
precipitation, and heating and cooling degree days 1941-1970: Illinois.
Climatography of the U.S. No. 81.
NOAA, Environmental "Data Service. 1975. Climatological data, Wisconsin:
Annual summary./ USDC National Climati|: Center, Asheville NC. Vol. 80,
No. 13.
NOAA, Environmental Data Service. 1976a. Climatological data, Wisconsin:
Annual summary, Vol. 81, No. 13. USDC National Climatic Center,
Asheville NC.
NOAA, Environmental Data Service. 1976b. Local Climatological data,
Milwaukee WI: Annual summary with comparative data. USDC National
Climatic Center, Asheville NC.
NOAA, Environmental Data Service. 1977. Climatological data, Wisconsin.
Vol. 82, No. 8 (Aug.). USDC National Climatic Center, Asheville-NC.
Omernik, J.M. 1977. Nonpoint source stream nutrient level relationships:
A nationwide study. EPA-600/3-77-105. National Environmental
Research Laboratory, Corvallis OR.
Poff, Ronald J., and C.W. Threinen. 1961. Surface water resources of
Kenosha County (WI). Wisconsin Conservation Department, Madison WI.
Rosendal, Hans. E. 1970. Climate of Kenosha and Racine Counties, WI.
In: 662A ER-2, pp. 108-110.
Safe Drinking Water Act. Public Law 93-523.
Salem WI Town Board. Undated. Salem zoning ordinances Chapter 7 of town
ordinances. (Mimeo).
Schten, E.V. 1977. Organizing operating, and financing sewerage systems.
Wisconsin Water Quality Program.
Seeburger, George. 1975. Fishes of Walworth County (Wisconsin). Part I
of Contributions to ichtyology, George C. Becker, Henry E. Booke, and
Charles A. Long, Eds. Reports on the Fauna and Flora of Wisconsin,
No. 10. The Museum,of Natural History, Stevens Point WI, 16p.
SEWRPC(Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission). 1969. A
comprehensive plan for the Fox River watershed. Vol. I: Inventory
findings and forecasts. Planning report No. 12. Waukesha WI.
SEWRPC. 1970. A comprehensive plan for the Fox River watershed. Vol. II:
Alternative plans and recommended plan. Planning report No. 12.
Waukesha WI.
SEWRPC. 1973. Amendment to the comprehensive plan for the Fox River water-
shed. Waukesha WI.
179
-------
SEWRPC. 1974. A regional sanitary sewerage system plan for southeastern
Wisconsin. Planning report No. 16. Waukesha WI.
SEWRPC. 1974. Scientific or natural area report on Peat Lake, Kenosha
County, WI.
SEWRPC. 1977. List of publications. Waukesha WI.
State of Wisconsin. 1973. Chapter 74. Laws of 1973. 1973 assembly bill
128. Madison WI.
State of Wisconsin. Department of Natural Resources Point source pollution
abatement state Grant program, (The Wisconsin Fund).
Studdard, Gloria J. (Compiler). 1974. Common environmental terms: A
glossary. U.S. EPA, Washington, 23.
Snearley, K.E. 1977. Environmental inventory of the Chain of Lakes and
Fox River Region of Illinois. Antioch IL.
Troyan, J.J. and D.P. Norris. March 1977. Cost-effectiveness analysis
of alternatives for small wastewater treatment systems. For EPA
Technology Transfer. Municipal Design Seminar on Small Wastewater
Treatment Systems. Seattle WA.
University of Wisconsin. 1976. Publication list of the Small Scale Waste
Management Project. Madison WI.
US Army Corps of Engineers, Chicago District. 1976. Plan of study: Fox
River and Tributaries, Illinois and Wisconsin. Chicago IL.
US Bureau of the Census. 1972. County and City Data Book.
US Census of Housing. 1970. Summary Data and Fifth Count Summary Tapes.
USDA(US Department of Agriculture). Soil Conservation Service. 1966.
Experiment Station. Soil survey laboratory data and descriptions for
some soils of Minnesota in cooperation with MN Agricultural Soil
Survey Investigations Report No. 9. 79 p.
USDA Soil Conservation Service. 1971. Soil survey interpretations. '.
Lincoln NE.
USDA Soil Conservation Service. 1977. Proposed rule, prime and unique
farmlands: Important farmland inventory. 42 F.R. 42359, 23 August
1977.
US Department of Commerce. 1972. Bureau of Census. Census of Retail Trade
1972.
US Department of Commerce. Bureau of Census. Census of Selected Services
1972.
180
-------
US Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis. 1977. Local
area personal inco 1970-1975, Vol. 5: Plains region.
U.S. Department of Interior. 1976. List of Geological Survey geological
and water-supply reports and maps for Wisconsin.
US Department of Interior. National Park Service. 1976. National register
of Historic sites. Washington DC
USGS(United States Geological Survey). 1960. Map of flood-prone areas,
Silver Lake Quandrangle WI.
USGS. 1972. Topographic maps, Silver Lake and Paddock Lake Quandrangles, WI
USGS. 1973. Map of flood-prone areas, Paddock Lake Quandrangle, WI. In
cooperation with HUD Federal Insurance Adminstration.
USGS. Water Resources Division. 1976. Water resources investigations in
Wisconsin. Madison WI.
USGS. Water Resources Division. 1978. Groundwater level hydrographs for
Kenosha County. (Unpublished reports). Madison WI.
Vollenweider, R.A. 1968. The scientific basis of lake and stream eutrophication,
with particular reference to phosphorus and nitrogen as eutrophication
factors. Technical Report OECD. DAS/CSI/68. 27:1-182. Paris, France.
White House Rural Development Initiatives. 1978.
Wisconsin Department of Health and Social Services, 1976. Plumbing Code.
Wisconsin Adminstrative Code, Chaps. H61 and H62. Madison WI.
Wisconsin DNR(Department of Natural Resources). 1968. Silver Lake,
Kenosha County. An inventory with planning recommendations. Lake
Use Report No. FX-11. Madison WI.
Wisconsin DNR. 1969. Camp Lake, Kenosha County. An inventory with planning
recommendations. Lake Use Report No. FX-12. Madison WI.
Wisconsin DNR. 1969. Center Lake, Kenosha County. An inventory with
planning recommendations. Lake Use Report No. FX-27.
Wisconsin DNR. 1969. Cross Lake, Kenosha County. An inventory with
planning recommendations. Lake Use Report No. FX-35. Madison WI.
Wisconsin DNR. 1970. Voltz Lake, Kenosha County, An inventory with planning
recommendations. Lake Use Report No. FX-45. Madison WI.
Wisconsin DNR. 1973. Endangered animals in Wisconsin. Madison WS.
Wisconsin DNR. 1974. Adminstrative code, Chapter NR 110: Sewerage systems.
Register, November 1974, No. 227. Madison WI.
181
-------
Wisconsin DNR. 1975. Administrative code, Chapter NR 113: Servicing
septic tanks, seepage pits, grease traps, or privies. Register No.
234. Madison WI.
Wisconsin DNR. 1975. Adminstrative code. Chapter NR 155: Ambient air
quality. Register No. 234.
Wisconsin DNR. 1975. Water quality management basin plan for the rivers
of southeastern Wisconsin.
Wisconsin DNR. 1975. Classification of Wisconsin lakes by trophic condition.
Wisconsin DNR. 1975. Endangered animals in Wisconsin (with supplementary
lists of threatened animals, animals with watch status, and extirpated
animals. (Mimeo). Madison WI.
Wisconsin DNR. 1975. Adminstrative code, Chapter NR 27: Endangered species
Register, Sept. 1975, No. 237. Madison WI.
Wisconsin DNR. 1976. Adminstrative code. Chapter NR 151: Solid waste
management. Register No. 246. Madison Wi.
Wisconsin DNR. 1976. Adminstrative code, Chapter NR 214: Land disposal
of liquid wastes. Register, June 1976, No. 246. Madison WI.
Wisconsin DNR. 1977. Adminstrative code, Chapter NR 102: Water quality
standards for Wisconsin surface waters.
Wisconsin DNR. 1977. Adminstrative code, Chapter NR 104: Intrastate
waters —use designated standards.
Wisconsin DNR. 1977. Adminstrative code, Chapter NR 210: Sewage treat-
ment works. Register, June 1977, No. 258. Madison WI.
Wisconsin DNR. 1977. Water analyses, Delafield WI. Water Quality Division,
Southeast District, Milwaukee WI.
Wisconsin DNR. variously dated. Water analysis charts and lake survey
forms for various counties. Milwaukee WI
Wisconsin Statutes. Undated. Town sanitary district law. Chapter 60,
Sections 60.30-60.316.
Wisconsin WRC. 1978. Bibliography and index of Wisconsin groundwater,
1851-1972: Addendum 1834-1872. Technical Report WIS WRC 78-04.
Whitt, M. , R. Siegrist, and W.C. Boyle, 1976. Characteristics of rural
household wastewater. Journal of the Environmental Engineering Division,
ASCE, No. EED, Proc. Paper 12200, pp. 533-548.
Zaporec, Alexander. 1971. Groundwater investigation index of Wisconsin.
University of Wisconsin Water Resources Center, Hydraulic and
Sanitary Laboratory, Madison WI.
182
-------