EPA-9O8/ 5-77-OO2
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
JACKSON WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
TOWN OF JACKSON, WYOMING
MAY 1977
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, REGION VIII, DENVER, COLORADO
80203
-------
EPA - 908/5-77-002
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
JACKSON WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
TOWN OF JACKSON, WYOMING
Prepared By
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region VIII
1860 Lincoln Street
Denver, Colorado 80295
Approved by:
ional Administrator
Date: May> 1977
-------
SUMMARY SHEET
Environmental Impact Statement
Jackson Wastewater Treatment System
Town of Jackson, Wyoming
(X) Draft
( ) Final
Prepared by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Rocky Mountain Prairie
Region, Region VIII, Denver, Colorado with the assistance of James M.
Montgomery Engineers, Inc., Boise, Idaho.
A. Type of Action: (X) Administrative
( ) Legislative
B. Brief Description of the Proposal:
The Region VTII Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency intends to fund Federal matching funds for wastewater treatment
for the Town of Jackson, Wyoming, through the authority of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act (as amended, 1972). The purpose of this draft
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) required of Federal agencies under
the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA, 1969) is to notify governmental
agencies and the public of this impending project.
The problem is that the present facility does not have sufficient
capacity to treat present or future wastewater flows adequately to meet
prescribed discharge permit limitations developed under the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act. Flat Creek currently receives wastewater from the
existing plant and in-stream standards are being exceeded for bacterial con-
tamination. Dissolved oxygen is sufficient presently to protect fish life
but will not remain so if additional oxygen demanding wastes were dis-
charged to the stream.
The Town of Jackson proposes to build a stabilization lagoon system
in the State-owned South Park Elk Feedground five miles south of the
town. Because this option has major legal difficulties in acquiring the
land from the state, would adversely affect the elk herd, is located
in a flood plain, and would have substantial secondary impact (the long
sewer line, or interceptor would facilitate growth), EPA has decided
not to fund this option.
C. Alternatives Considered:
Alternative systems include lagoon systems located at three other
sites other than the Elk Feedground. Mechanical plants are evaluated
including upgrading at the existing site or building a new mechanical plant
approximately two miles west of the town. Another option of upgrading
the existing plant to meet standards but with no reserve capacity is also
considered. The No Action alternative is also evaluated as to costs
and environmental impacts.
-------
D. Environmental Impacts:
Water Quality of Plat Creek is being degraded by discharge from the
present plant. This can be improved either by moving the discharge point
to the Snake River where dilutional flow is available or by upgrading
the quality of the effluent to Flat Creek. Land development in South
Park is presently limited due to a high ground water table which limits
the closeness of septic tank systems. The alternatives differ greatly as
to the amount of land potentially developable along the central sewer and
hence the secondary growth impacts of the various alternatives is of great
importance. ^ Protecting the scenic attributes of the pastoral setting of
South Park is also an important objective and will be affected by the choice
of alternatives. Construction of an outfall line to the Snake River (neces-
sary for 5 of the 7 alternatives) is a major problem since the River is
proposed for Wild and Scenic designation and the need to keep such a
facility hidden from river users is considered necessary. Odor problems
exist with the lagoon system since these systems will have noticeable
odors especially during spring thaw.
E. Distribution:
The draft EIS is being provided to the following:
Local Agencies
Town of Jackson
Teton County 208 Planning Agency
Teton County Conservation District
Teton County Planning Conmission
Jackson Planning Commission
Teton County Public Health Office
State Agencies
State Clearing House
Department of Environmental Quality
State Water Engineer
Wyoming Gams and Fish Department
State Archeologist
University of Wyoming
Federal Agencies
U.S. Soil Conservation Service
Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service
-------
Federal Agencies (Oont'd.)
U.S. Bureau of Land Management
Bureau of Reclamation
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Pacific Northwest River Basin Commssion
U.S. Pish and Wildlife Service
U.S. Forest Service
National Park Service
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
U.S. Energy Research and Development
Federal Energy Administration
U.S. Highway Administration
U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare
Public Health Service
National Council on Environmental Quality
National Technical Information Service
Private Organizations
Wyoming Environmental Institute
The Nature Conservancy-Jackson Hole Project
Wyoming Field Institute
Jackson Hole Guide
Jackson Hole News
Sierra Club
Rocky Mountain Center on the Environment
Trout Unlimited
Colorado Open Space Council
The Wilderness Society
National Wildlife Federation
The Denver Post
The Rocky Mountain News
Livingston and Associates
James M. Montgomery Engineers
Nelson, Hayley, Patterson, and Quirk
Individuals
Jill Bamburg Bruce Dietz
Dale Kains Julie Scarlett
Garvice Roby B.C. Raynes
Jon Erickson Vera Cheney
Norman Mellor Barbara Ahr
Byron Jenkins Mary F. Moore
Mike Wardell Paul Von Gontard
Paul Brown Buf fy Hogue
Jack Griset Leslie Peterson
-------
Cyndie Griggs
Tessa Johnson
Rose Preite
Lois Lasle
Pam McCool
A.B. Wbrmald
Individuals (Cont'd.)
Pete Jorgensen
Victoria Seidner
Maggie Miller
Tom Johnson
Skip Wright-Clark
Eugene Hoffman
Jolynn Coonce
F. Acknowledgements
Many people were helpful in the preparation of this EIS and EPA
wishes to extend its appreciation to all who aided in its developinent.
We would like to give special thanks to Ed Cryer of Montgomery Engineers,
Duane Wroe and Don Stocker of the Town of Jackson, Gene Zeizel and Bob
Abondi of the 208 Planning Agency, Don Armstrong of the Wyoming Department
of Environmental Quality and the concerned citizens of Jackson and Teton
County.
G. Draft Environmental irpact Statement filed with the National Council
on Environmental Quality (CEQ) on:
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No,
I. INTRODUCTION I- 1
Location and Setting I- 1
Water Quality Management I- 2
Proposed Project by the Town of Jackson I- 4
EPA Decision and Responsibility I- 6
II. EXISTING ENVIRONMENT II- 1
Physiography II- 1
Geology II- 2
Soils II- 7
Climatology II- 8
Acoustic Conditions II- 9
Air Quality 11-10
Aesthetic and Visual Characteristics 11-11
Cultural and Historic/Archeologic
Resources 11-16
Water Quality 11-17
Teton County Water Quality 11-21
General Hydrologic Condition 11-28
Nonpoint Sources 11-32
Flood Hazards 11-34
Natural Communities 11-40
Lard Use Planning 11-44
Population 11-53
Existing Wastewater Treatment Facilities 11-60
III. PROJECT PROPOSED BY THE TOWN OF JACKSON III- 1
Design Criteria and Consideration III- 2
IV. ALTERNATIVES IV- 1
Description of Alternatives IV- 1
Economic Evaluation of Proposed Project
and Alternatives IV- 6
V. IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT V- 1
Natural Environment Impacts V- 1
Water Quality Impacts V- 2
Air Quality V- 8
Wildlife Habitat V-10
Natural Hazards V-12
Economic Impacts V-14
-------
Page No.
Socio-Cultural Impacts V-19
Land Use Impacts V-22
Secondary Impact Analysis V-25
VI. UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS AND POTENTIAL
MITIGATION MEASURES VI- 1
General VI- 1
Short Term Construction VI- 1
Long Term Construction VI- 2
Operational VI- 2
VII. IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE RESOURCE
COMMITMENTS VII- 1
VIII. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHORT-TERM USES OF
THE ENVIRONMENT AND THE MAINTENANCE OR
ENHANCEMENT OF LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY
OF THE PROPOSED ACTION AND THE
ALTERNATIVES VIII- 1
Proposed Project (South Park Elk Feedground
Stabilization Pond) VIII- 1
Alternative A-l (New Mechanical Plant at
Existing Site) VIII- 2
Alterantives A-2, A-3, and A-4 (Boyles
Hill Mechanical Plant, Boyles Hill
Stabilization Pond, Mid-South Park
Stabilization Pond) VIII- 2
Alternative A-5 (South Park Road
Stabilization Pond) VIII- 2
Alternative A-6 (Interim Upgrading of
Existing Treatment Plant) VIII- 2
Alternative A-7 (No Action) VIII- 3
IX. EVALUATION OF THE IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED
ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES IX- 1
General IX- 1
Summary Evaluation IX- 2
REFERENCES
APPENDICES
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page No.
1 Visual Absorption Capability Ratings 11-13
2 Attributes and Management Objectives of
the Three River Classifications for
Inclusion in the National Wild and
Scenic River System 11-15
3 Flat Creek Stream Profile 11-24
4 Snake River Water Quality 11-27
5 Groundwater Quality 11-31
6 Estimated Peak Discharges for the
Snake River at Wilson Bridge 11-37
7 Teton County Land Ownership and Management 11-46
8 Land Use of Private Lands 11-46
9 Projected Population 11-56
10 Town of Jackson Population Projections 11-57
11 Peak Non-Resident Population 11-60
12 Flat Creek Water Quality 11-64
13 Population and Flow Estimates III- 3
14 Cost Estimate Proposed Project -
Site A South Park Elk Feedground IV- 8
15 Cost Estimate Proposed Project -
Site B South Park Elk Feedground IV- 9
16 Cost Estimate Alternative A-l IV-11
17 Cost Estimate Alternative A-2 IV-12
18 Cost Estimate Alternative A-3a IV-13
19 Cost Estimate Alternative A-3b IV-14
20 Cost Estimate Alternative A-3c IV-15
21 Cost Estimate Alternative A-4 IV-17
-------
Table Page No.
22 Cost Estimate Alternative A-5 IV-18
23 Cost Estimate Summary of Alternatives IV-19
24 Cost Estimate Alternative A-6 IV-21
25 Calculated Instream Concentration V- 3
26 Captial Cost - Comparison of Alternatives V-16
27 Environmental Evaluation Matrix Following
IX- 3
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Following
Figure Page No.
1 General Location Map I" 1
2 Vicinity Map I~ 1
3 Probable Fault Zone Areas II- 3
4 Geomorphic Units II- 4
5 Groundwater Categories II- 5
6 Average Monthly Precipitation and
Temperature, Jackson, Wyoming II- 9
7 Landscape Units and Vegetation 11-13
8 Flood Plain 11-36
9 Flood Hazards 11-38
10 Big Game Distribution South Park 11-42
11 Land Use 11-52
12 Proposed Land Use Town of Jackson 11-52
13 Town of Jackson Resident Population Growth 11-54
14 Total Visits Grand Teton National Park 11-59
15 Existing Wastewater Treatment Plant
Town of Jackson 11-60
16 Jackson Wastewater Treatment Plant
Influent Quality 11-62
17 Jackson Wastewater Treatment Plant
Daily Flow 11-62
18 Jackson Wastewater Treatment Plant
Effluent Quality 11-63
19 State Elk Feeding Refuge Sites Proposed
Project III- 4
20 Proposed Expanded Plant Layout IV- 2
21 Boyles Hill Alternative Sites A-2 & A-3 IV- 2
22 South Park Alternative Sites A-4 & A-5 IV- 3
23 Boyles Hill Alternatives 3a, 3b, & 3c IV- 10
-------
SECTION I
-------
SNAKE RIVER FLOOD PLAIN
-------
SECTION I
INTRODUCTION
LOCATION AND SETTING
The Town of Jackson is located in Teton County, east of the
Idaho-Wyoming state line (Figures 1 & 2) in a valley generally known
since the days of the early trappers as Jackson Hole. The valley is
roughly delineated by Yellowstone Park to the north, Hoback Canyon
to the south and the Teton and Gros Ventre mountain ranges on the
west and east, respectively.
The region, as has been pointed out by numerous authors, offers
one of the most spectacular visual experiences found anywhere in
the United States. The most predominant features of the area are
the Teton Mountains, which tower over the valley in a panorama of
stark precipitous rocky forms, and a rich variety of subtle colors.
The valley of Jackson Hole is approximately eighty miles long and
fifteen miles wide offering a relatively smooth expanse of land cut
by the Snake River, numerous creeks and subdrainages. Six morain
lakes, Jackson Lake, Leigh Lake, Jenny Lake, Bradley Lake, Taggart
Lake and Phelps Lake, are the result of glacial action and lie along
the base of the mountains.
The service area for the Town of Jackson considered in this
Study constitutes those areas presently serviced by the existing
treatment facility and adjacent lands the town may wish to include
after completion of the ongoing comprehensive planning study. Several
serviceable growth areas adjacent to the town have been considered
and are discussed in Section II under Land Use Planning.
The existing sewage collection system flows by gravity to the
Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) southwest of town. (See Figure 2)
Transportation to and from Jackson is available only by highway
and air. Five general highway routes provide Jackson with a major
link to the rest of the country—State Highway 22 from Idaho, U.S. 89
South, U.S. 189-187 East, U.S. 289-28 East and U.S. 287-89 North.
One commercial airline has regularly scheduled flights to Teton
County Airport. These flights, however, are restricted to smaller
planes (approximately 50 passenger) due to the limited facilities
at the Teton County Airport. There are no rail lines to provide
bulk carrier services in the immediate area.
The economic activity of Jackson and vicinity is based primarily
on tourism (scenic experiences, skiing, hunting and fishing) and
agriculture. The two National parks in the area, Teton and Yellow-
stone, and Teton-Bridger National Forest draw visitors from all over
the nation with the Town of Jackson providing the bulk of the
necessary services. Agriculture, and ranching in particular, while
1-1
-------
ADO
'PUEBLO
GENERAL LOCATION
MAP
Figure 1
-------
'«' /
/ *M)
—*
-•* ,.—~. ' ' . ' J
Vicinity Map
SCALE I WOOO
0
'OQP_ OOC 2OQP 3000 4COO
IMLI
Figure 2
7OOOFHT
-------
-------
smaller in total economic scope, is the traditional livelihood of
the area, and in some form or other encompasses much of the privately
held land in the valley. There are no significant industrial manu-
facturers in the community- The nontourist commercial activity is
basically for support and maintenance of the resident population.
WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROBLEMS
Present System Inadequacies
The Town of Jackson, in cooperation with Teton County, is
currently in the final stages of developing their comprehensive plan
to provide guidance for growth and development. A planning period
of fifteen years (1990) was selected as a manageable time increment
for generating an economic and environmentally sound plan for direct-
ing land uses in Teton County. In considering the difficulty of
predicting growth and the pressures for development in an area such
as Jackson, it was decided by EPA to utilize two alternative waste-
water planning periods, fifteen and twenty years (1990 and 1995).
At present, only the Town of Jackson and limited areas to the
southwest are provided with municipal wastewater services. The
collection system was inspected in 1975 for inflow and infiltration,
and it was determined by EPA that it would be cost effective to
correct approximately 600,000 gal/day of the peak infiltration
rather than consider providing capacity in any new facilities.
Construction to eliminate approximately 75% of the infiltration
and inflow will begin in the summer of 1977.
The existing treatment plant (discussed in detail in Section II)
is an activated sludge extended aeration system designed for 0.8
million gallons per day (mgd) at ultimate capacity with effluent
discharged to Flat Creek. The plant was to be upgraded in stages
with sludge digestion and disinfection to be added when the system
reached the necessary capacity. These additions were never made.
A report on sewage facilities for the Town of Jackson prepared by
R. D. Connell in 1973 concluded that given the existing hydraulic
and organic capacity of the system, it was already overloaded with
a maximum day flow of 1.34 mgd and a corresponding influent BOD
of 130 mg/1. In 1976, the flow had exceeded 1.7 mgd (average day
peak month) with a raw BOD over 120 mg/1. Connell's report pointed
out a number of deficiencies in the system and suggested corrective
actions, but no significant inplant modifications have been made.
In terms of instream water quality, three major problems or
inadequacies with the present system are contributing to the de-
gradation of Flat Creek. While these are discussed in more detail
later, they include: 1) the inability to waste excess sludge from
the clarifiers, 2) carryover of solid and organic matter from the
polishing pond and 3) carryover of bacterial contamination. The
State of Wyoming has recommended to the Town that several interim
improvements be made to correct the causes of these three conditions.
These interim modifications are discussed in Section IV.
1-2
-------
Potential Problems
Teton County is undergoing growth pressures of the type seen
in other recreation oriented communities across the country. The
comprehensive plan, being prepared for the Town and County, is
dJrecting the majority of the new higher density residential growth
in an area adjacent to the Town of Jackson. (In order to develop
to the proposed densities, it will be necessary to provide centralized
wastewater services.) High groundwater conditions, prevalent in
most of the county, could create contamination and possible health
problems in areas where septic systems and domestic water wells are
in close proximity (i.e., high density nonsewered residential areas).
Any additional flow to the existing system would only aggravate an
already serious overloaded condition at the treatment facility and
further endanger the water quality of Flat Creek. Therefore signif-
icant growth and expansion in Teton County is dependent upon the
availability of new or expanded wastewater services.
Flat Creek Water Quality
Water quality information for Flat Creek has been available
on a continuing basis only since the initiation of the Teton County
208 Project in the fall of 1975. This is areawide water quality
planning funded by EPA under Section 208 of the Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Act Amendments of 1972. The State has, through their
303(e) basin planning process, classified all major streams (includ-
ing Flat Creek) in Teton County as Class 1 (suitable for a cold water
game fishery), the highest possible designation. As stated in
the Snake River Basin Water Quality Management Plan, "Flat Creek ...
is the most critical stream segment in the Snake River Basin in
terms of possible impairment of water quality." A number of poten-
tially degrading point (direct discharges) and nonpoint source
(diverse, indiscrete discharges) discharges threaten the stream
quality from the National Elk Refuge north of Town throughout its
entire length to the confluence with the Snake River along the
southern edge of South Park. It was concluded in the State's analysis
that at present the water quality of Flat Creek is quite high except
directly below the sewage treatment plant, and that water quality
throughout the immediate study area is exceptional.
The ongoing 208 project water quality monitoring activities
have shown that the in-stream standards assigned to Flat Creek are
being maintained with the exception of the coliform bacteria require-
ment which has exceeded the 1000 colonies/100 ml limitation at a
South Park sampling point immediately below the treatment plant.
Flat Creek is considered by the Wyoming Department of Game
and Fish as a stable cold water fishery. Little information is
available as to its value, carrying capacity, or fisherman use,
and since major access is limited by private land bordering the
Creek, the Department does not try to manage its fishery resources
as they would on waters open to the public.
1-3
-------
It should also be noted that while available water quality
records do not indicate any major degradation except below the
treatment plant, studies now in progress on agricultural and urban
nonpoint problems may provide evidence of sporadic increases in
pollutants from storm runoff and spring overland flow. A more
detailed discussion of Flat Creek water quality is presented in
Section II.
Snake River Water Quality
The water quality of the Snake River, according to the State's
basin management plan summary, is excellent in all streams within
the Snake River Basin and meets or exceeds Wyoming's water quality
standards. The main stem of the Snake River appears, from the
limited data, to suffer some "slight deterioration" in a downstream
direction. A combination of both natural and man oriented or at
least aggravated activities have been pointed to as being the source
of this degradation. In particular, the Water Quality Division of
the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality has recorded a
number of water quality violations of the fecal coliform require-
ment (200 colonies/100 ml) below the confluence of Flat Creek.
The overloaded condition of the Jackson wastewater treatment plant
and its nondisinfected effluent discharging into Flat Creek are
cited as the probable cause for these sporadic summer violations.
The Snake River, along its Wyoming course, has been nominated
for inclusion in the National Wild and Scenic River System (P.L.90-
542). The U.S. Forest Service, as lead agency, is initiating studies
to determine if the Snake qualifies and what, if any, designation
will be applied (i.e., wild, scenic, or recreational). If the
river were to be classified under this system, a number of require-
ments and controls would be applied, including establishment of water
quality standards that may exceed those of the State's, and re-
striction of construction projects (including municipal) that would
impact on the scenic resources. It will be necessary that any
wastewater facility (structures, outfalls, etc.), proposed by the
Town of Jackson, be carefully reviewed by the USFS in order to
determine if it would affect the potential classification and use
of the Snake River as defined by P.L. 90-542. Their study is
scheduled to be completed in 1979.
PROPOSED PROJECT BY THE TOWN OF JACKSON
The existing wastewater treatment facilities for the Town of
Jackson were constructed in 1969 for a peak design population of
5,000. Excess summer infiltration, the addition of new service
areas, and the popularity of Jackson as a vacation resort area have
all contributed in exceeding design capacity in early 1971. Aggra-
vating this situation was the lack of solids and sludge handling
units, which were proposed for the existing facility but never
completed. A 1973 report (R. D. Connell) was prepared for the
Town detailing what modifications could be made to bring the system
1-4
-------
into proper operating order for a proposed 1985 population equiv-
alent. This report recommended that the Town install aeration
equipment in the existing polishing pond, reduce infiltration, over-
haul the raw sewage pumps, install skimmers and construct sludge
beds. While several sludge bed modifications and a small mechanical
aerator were installed subsequent to these recommendations, they
really only compounded an already difficult problem. Funds were
expended by the Town, but no significant improvement to the opera-
tion or treatment efficiency of the system was realized. The sludge
beds were incapable of handling raw primary sludge at the necessary
rate and the polishing pond aeration unit was too small and ineffec-
tive to do anything but disperse the solids accumulating in the pond,
In 1974, the Town, in seeking funding assistance from the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, prepared a Facility Plan detailing
the improvements necessary for the wastewater systems. Two signif-
icant actions resulted from this study. EPA agreed to fund a study
of the inflow/infiltration problems of the collection system. This
study was completed in 1975 and resulted in a federal grant to
modify and improve the system which should eliminate up to 75% of
the known infiltration. The second major action resulting from this
report was the town council's rejection of the consulting engineers'
recommendations to revise and upgrade the existing plant, and the
preference of the council for a more capital expensive (e.g., 1975
Supplemental Report to the Facility Plan) alternative of an aerated
lagoon in the South Park Elk Feedground.
As a result of this decision by the Town and the subsequent
controversy this has created, the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency has found it necessary to prepare an Environmental Impact
Statement on the proposed project and its alternatives. The major
controversies which have arisen include:
1. Use of the South Park Elk Feedground site and the probable
impacts this may create.
2. The secondary growth that the interceptor running through
South Park may facilitate.
3. The impact the proposed project would have on the county
comprehensive planning effort now being prepared.
4. The validity of the cost of the proposed project presented
in the 1975 supplement to the facility plan and the cost
effectiveness of a lagoon at the South Park Elk Feedground.
This document examines the proposed project and the likely
and feasible alternatives in terms of their environmental, social,
cultural and economic impacts on the Jackson area. It presents
the necessary information required by the National Environmental
Policy Act through which a decision can be made as to whether the
federal government can assist in funding the proposed facility -
The Environmental Impact Statement process, and the assessment of
1-5
-------
environmental impacts must not be an end in themselves, but a logical
and reasonable step in the planning and deliberation leading to a
final decision to protect water quality and public health in the
Jackson area.
EPA DECISION AND RESPONSIBILITY
EPA and State of Wyoming Authority
EPA approval of the facility plan and this EIS will mean that
75% of all eligible costs will be made available to the Town of
Jackson under provision of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
Amendments of 1972, P.L. 92-500. The State of Wyoming Department
of Environmental Quality (WDEQ) must approve of the discharge limi-
tations and issue a permit under the National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) to assure compliance with such limitations
and with a compliance schedule for completing construction. The
Wyoming DEQ must also certify the facility plan and transmit it to
EPA for funding. Therefore, both EPA and the state DEQ will have
to concur on the decision in order to fund Jackson's sewage treatment
facility-
History of Events Regarding The Jackson Facility Plan
This section outlines the state, local, and EPA actions re-
garding this facility plan and the decision to prepare an environ-
mental impact statement.
A Step I grant to the Town of Jackson authorizing the develop-
ment of a facility plan was approved by EPA in March, 1974, in the
amount of $46,500. The firm of Nelson, Haley, Patterson and Quirk,
Inc., (NHPQ) was hired by the town to complete this function. Their
initial studies indicated the need for an extensive inflow and
infiltration (I/I) study to analyze sewer line problems. An addi-
tional $47,250 was authorized by EPA for this purpose—total Step I
funds were $87,750.
By October, 1974, the plan was completed and delivered to the
city. The plan, which only analyzed treatment needs to 1985, rec-
ommended as the most cost-effective alternative an extended aeration
treatment plant at the present plant site, approximate capital cost
of $1.5 million. The plan recommended as the second preferred option
a similar plant west of the town near Boyle's Hill, approximate
cost $2.9 million. As a third option, the plan stated a waste
stabilization lagoon could be built 4.5 miles south of town which
would allow gravity service to all of the undeveloped South Park,
approximate cost $1.8 million. This site is located in the Snake
River floodplain on the Wyoming State Elk Feedground. The plan
by NHPQ fully recognized the disadvantages of this South Park site.
Among these arc: 1) adverse impact to the elk feeding area and
the controversy of securing Wyoming Game and Fish property; and
1-6
-------
2) interceptor placement in the undeveloped, uniquely scenic South
Park, creating growth pressure.
After the city's November, 1974 hearing on the plan, the city
requested NHPQ to re-evaluate the comparative costs of the treat-
ment plant at the present site versus the South Park lagoon. NHPQ's
January 5, 1975 facility plan supplement stated the South Park site
would suffer a 17% inflation cost because it would be constructed
at a later date than other alternatives. The supplement concluded
that the total annual equivalent costs (all operation and maintenance
costs plus debt retirement) of upgrading the existing treatment
plant were less expensive than the South Park lagoon.
A letter to the city from EPA in October, 1974 indicated that
an EIS would probably be required if the decision were to use tne
South Park Elk Feedground location. The city received the January,
1975 supplement but was unable to make an immediate decision con-
cerning alternative selection.
An NPDES wastewater discharge permit was issued to the Town of
Jackson on April 30, 1974 by the Wyoming DEQ. One of the require-
ments of the permit was the submittal of a compliance schedule which
outlined steps to be taken to meet permit effluent limitations
which are the attainment of secondary treatment by July 1, 1977
as mandated by P.L. 92-500.
Jackson's compliance schedule was approved by the State of
Wyoming on March 24, 1975 as follows:
(1) Preliminary Plans - June 1975;
(2) Final Plans - September 1975;
(3) Award Contract - October 1975;
(4) Commence Construction (on/or before) - April 1976;
(5) Complete Major Construction - June 1976;
(6) Complete All Construction - August 1976; and
(7) Operational Status - September 1976.
Following delays in submittal by the city, the State of Wyoming
Department of Environmental Quality issued a Notice of Violation to
Jackson on November 4, 1975 requiring the submittal of items (1)
and (2) of the above schedule within thirty (30) days.
The Town of Jackson replied to the State-issued Notice in a
letter dated November 18, 1975. Jackson's reply indicated that the
Town Council did not agree with the Step I Facility Plan prepared
by their consulting engineer, NHPQ, and that the Town Council had
approved the South Park location on or near the State Elk Feedground.
EPA officially received the facility plan and the city's rec-
ommended alternative on January 3, 1976. EPA's Operation and Main-
tenance staff completed an inspection of the facility on January 15,
1976. On January 30, 1976, EPA's Regional Administrator, Mr. John A.
Green, gave his approval to prepare an environmental impact statement
1-7
-------
based on the expected public controversy and expected adverse en-
vironmental impacts regarding the approval of the South Park Elk
Feedground site.
In February, 1976 during consideration as to when an EIS for
the Jackson facility plan should begin, EPA was informed that a
county-wide comprehensive plan was currently under preparation.
In July, 1975 EPA authorized a grant to Teton County under Section
208 of P.L. 92-500 for the purpose of developing areawide wastewater
control plans. Since these two studies were currently underway
and a decision of new or expanded facilities partly depended upon
the results of these studies, EPA decided to delay the EIS so that
data from the 208 Study and Comprehensive Plan would be available.
Consequently, on July 23, 1976, EPA hired the firm of James M.
Montgomery Engineers of Boise, Idaho to assist the agency in pre-
paring the EIS. The total contract cost to Montgomery Engineers
for this EIS was $38,500. A "Notice of Intent to Prepare an EIS"
was issued by EPA on August 26, 1976 and mailed to all interested
individuals and agencies.
EPA and the State agreed to separate the approval of funds for
the rehabilitation of Jackson's sewers (i.e., the correction of
infiltration-inflow problems) from the EIS. This was done since
the sewer rehabilitation portion of the project was not controversial
and was necessary regardless of the final selected alternative.
Consequently, on June 9, 1976, EPA issued a negative declaration
on the sewer rehabilitation portion of the project and a Step II
grant was awarded on June 30, 1976, in the amount of $28,125.
Determination of Site Selection and Treatment Capacity
The Town of Jackson has asked EPA to approve its site selection
in the State Elk Feedground at a capacity sufficient to handle ex-
pected 1985 flows. Based on the known environmental and public
controversy associated with this site, EPA determined that an en-
vironmental impact statement was needed. This draft EIS is issued
to facilitate public views on the project, to update engineering
cost data from the out-of-date 1974 facility plan, and to include
several other site alternatives. It is the intention of EPA to
obtain a concensus decision on the treatment alternative from the
majority of the public, the city, the Wyoming Department of Environ-
mental Quality, and concerned local, state, and federal agencies.
Options Available to the Town of Jackson
A. Maintain choice of South Park Elk Feedground site but
update design capacity to either 1990 or 1995 flows and request
EPA funding.
B. Select another of the five alternative site options at
either the 1990 or 1995 flow design capacity and request EPA funding.
1-8
-------
C. Decide only on interim upgrading of the existing site to
meet 1977 permit conditions and request EPA funding.
D. Decide to build or expand a wastewater treatment plant
at their own expense.
E. Decide to take no action to expand or upgrade the facility.
Options Available to the State of Wyoming
A. Approve the Town's proposed plant site and reissue compliance
schedule and new NPDES permit.
B. Deny approval of the Town's proposed plant site based on
adverse environmental impacts or unsound engineering but still
issue new NPDES permit with new compliance schedule.
C. Approve one of the five alternatives or inter jjn upqra,d-
ing and reissue NPDES permit with new compliance schedule.
D. If the Town cannot or will not meet new NPDES permit and
compliance schedules, issue a tap ban on new construction and/or
daily fines until the Town does so comply.
Options Available to EPA
A. Approve the South Park Elk Feedground site. Approval of
this site would mean some adverse impact to the elk herd wintered
there, requiring a complicated and controversial land exchange,
require construction in the 100-year flood plain and has the second-
ary effect of facilitating growth in the scenic South Park area.
EPA does not intend to approve this site location at this time.
B. Approve another of the five alternative site options at
1990 or 1995 capacity. If there were still a significant amount
of adverse secondary impacts due to residential growth associated
with the site selection following evaluation of agreed-to mitigation
measures, EPA could suggest re-evaluation of the site. If EPA agreed
that mitigation measures were sufficient to protect from adverse
growth effects, EPA could approve the site. If EPA determined that
proposed mitigating measures by the community are insufficient,
then EPA could impose grant restrictions (such as limiting residential
taps along the interceptor) and then approve the site.
C. EPA could approve funding for population projections for
1990, 1995, or some other year. These population projections are
based on an historically very rapid rate of growth of 6% per year.
If EPA determined that the city's request was for unjustified excess
capacity, EPA could set the design year flow.
1-9
-------
D. If the preceding options were not acceptable to the Town of Jackson,
EPA could deny funding. If there were still substantial adverse impacts
following an evaluation of all agreed-to mitigation measures and none of the
preceding options were acceptable to the Town of Jackson, EPA could deny
funding of the project. Since the Wyoming DEQ is likely to pursue permit
compliance, such an action would possibly force 100% local funding. If 100%
funding were unavailable and no action were taken, the cortrnunity would not
meet water quality objectives.
If EPA is unable to achieve a concensus, EPA will make it known what
treatment options are environmentally, engineeringly, and economically
feasible. The Wyoming DEQ will then be able to reissue the notice of
schedule of compliance, and the city will have to select one of the approved
alternatives. If the city is unable to make a selection, EPA will notify
them which solution is preferable to EPA and the town will be asked to
respond. EPA would only approve the facility plan following at a minimum
of 30 days after issuance of the final EIS, provided that the city agrees to
one of the feasible alternatives. This action will allow the city to re-
quest funds to design the facility. Following EPA and State approval of
design work, the city will be authorized to let construction bids. Seventy-
five percent of costs eligible items will be paid to the city for both
design and construction of the sewage treatment facilities. If current
schedules are met, construction could start the spring of 1978 and the plant
could begin operations by late 1979 or early 1980.
1-10
-------
SECTION II
-------
FLAT CREEK
-------
SECTION II
EXISTING ENVIRONMENT
PHYSIOGRAPHY
Teton County is located in northwestern Wyoming, and is bounded
on the east by Park and Fremont Counties, on the south by Sublette
and Lincoln, on the north by Yellowstone Park, and on the west by
the State of Idaho. The County contains a land area of approximately
2,873 square miles.
The physiography or land surface of the County is the result
of geologically controlled phenomena, which continue to shape the
land even today (Love and Reed, 1968). The Teton Range which lies
on the western side of the County, is a product of four geologic
factors: a) hard granitic rocks; b) vertical uplift; c) recent
mountain-making movement; and d) the dynamic forces of wind, water
and temperature. The Range is short, narrow and jagged, forming
the western rim of Jackson Hole.
Other mountainous areas include the Yellowstone Plateau to
the north, Pinyon Peak and Mount Leidy Highlands to the northeast,
the Gros Ventre Range to the south and east, and the Hoback and Snake
River Ranges to the south.
Jackson Hole lies in the center of Teton County. Surrounded
by mountains, the basin was formed by land movements along faults
such as the Teton Fault (Love and Reed, 1968). The basin is orient-
ed in a north-south direction, sloping from 7,000 feet in the north
to 6,000 feet in the south.
Most of the valley floor in Jackson Hole, because it is sur-
rounded by mountains, was formed by deposition of gravel from alluvial
outwash. Other lands like the low terraces near Wilson and the
Snake River flood plain are relatively recent flood plains still
being modified by the Snake River.
The town of Jackson is located in the southeast corner of
Jackson Hole. Most of the population and activity of the County
are located here. The valley floor is crossed by the Snake and
Gros Ventre Rivers near Jackson. The valley also contains the larg-
est, and some of the most scenic lakes found in the state. Jackson
Lake, located just north of Jackson, is the third largest lake in
the state with a capacity of some 846,000 acre feet. Jenny Lake,
Leigh Lake, Taggart Lake and Phelps Lake, are all within Grand Teton
National Park and all are the result of glacial activity, and en-
hance the area's scenic attributes.
II-l
-------
GEOLOGY
The geologic background of the Jackson Hole area, although
relatively new, is diverse and complex. The Tetons were probably
formed between eight and ten million years ago, carved from a seg-
ment of the earth's crust that had been uplifted along the Teton
Fault. Numerous active faults traverse the Jackson Hole area, as
evidenced by frequent small earthquakes in the Teton region. These
mountains border the west side of the study area, rising to eleva-
tions in excess of 13,770 feet.
The Teton Range is composed mainly of crystalline and meta-
sedimentary rocks of Precambrian age (hard metamorphic and igneous
rocks), flanked by Palezoic and Carboniferous sedimentary rocks
including limestones, shales and sandstone (Love and Reed, 1968).
Younger Mesozoic sedimentary rocks occur in the Buffalo and Gros
Ventre River drainages which form the mountains and highlands to
the east of Jackson Hole, including the Mount Leidy Highlands and
the Gros Ventre Mountains, while the East and West Gros Ventre Buttes
are remnants of the older Teton-Gros Ventre Mountain range which
was fractured and destroyed by the faulting of the more recent Teton
Mountains.
Glaciers sculptured all sides of Jackson Hole. The glacial
features and the evidence of glacial remains are still prominent
in the area. Downfaulted Jackson Hole is floored with Cretaceous
and Tertiary rocks, which are covered at the north end by glacial
till and outwash. These glacial materials were deposited by at
least two sets of glaciers: the alpine glaciers flowing-from the
Teton Mountains and the intermontane glaciers which moved south
from the Yellowstone Plateau. The oldest glaciation was the most
widespread, and the ice in many places was 2,000 feet thick. Later
glaciations eroded or covered parts of the deposits of earlier ones.
Even today, the "Hole" continues to drop and tilt; gravel covered
surfaces that originally sloped southward are now tilting westward
toward the mountains.
Hazardous Geological Conditions
Although geologic records indicate that the origin of the
Tetons began about nine million years ago, the violent geologic pro-
cesses which shaped the physiography of the Teton Range and Jackson
Hole continue to exert their dynamic influence on the physical
character of the area. Teton Glacier, for example, moves nearly
30 feet each year, scouring the valley bottom and walls. Water pours
from melting ice near the lower end of the glacier, depositing out-
wash onto the valley floor. The Teton and other numerous faults
which break the valley floor between the Gros Ventre River and the
Town of Jackson remain active, as evidenced by frequent small earth-
quakes in the area. The Snake River west of Jackson co^ inues to
meander westwardly toward the town of Wilson. All of these processes
exemplify the continuing geologic activity in the area. These
II-2
-------
processes also present a constant reminder of the geological hazards
which confront development in the Jackson Hole area.
Physical hazards that exist in the study area are generally
of four types and include: 1) faults and associated seismic dan-
gers; 2) slope stability; 3) high ground water problems; and 4)
flooding.
Fault Zones and Seismic Risk
Seismic risk is the most difficult to evaluate of all the geo-
logic hazards. Earthquakes cannot be prevented or predicted in
terms of frequency or intensity-
The Jackson Hole area is considered among the most active
regions in the United States in terms of seismic activity. The
"Hole" was formed by land movements along faults such as the Teton
Fault, which runs south from Jackson Lake along the Snake River
flood plain. The area is also characterized by a number of active
and inactive faults which criss-cross the valley floor, including
the Flat Creek Fault which runs in a southwesterly direction along
the Flat Creek flood plain through the town of Jackson, and the
Buck Mountain Fault which lies west of the main peaks of the Teton
Range.
The Jackson area has been subjected to numerous minor quakes,
along with several major activities. These include the 1927 event
which centered near Kelly resulting in six deaths and total destruc-
tion of the town by flooding and the 1959 Yellowstone disaster
which inflicted major damage and caused 28 deaths. According to
U.S. Geological Survey data supplied by the NOAA Environmental Data
Service in Boulder, Colorado the area within a 100 mile (160 km)
radius of Jackson has been subjected to 28 earthquakes of the mag-
nitude of V or greater (Modified Mercalli Scale) in the past 70
years. Earthquakes of this magnitude, although depending on a
number of factors including distance from the epicenter and distance
to the surface, can generate ground motions sufficiently severe
to be potentially damaging to structures. For magnitudes less
than V the ground motion is unlikely to be damaging because of
very short duration and moderate acceleration.
Leopold and Twiss (1975) in compiling information for the
comprehensive land use plan have identified the major fault zones
occurring in the study area to be considered in future land use/
development decisions (Figure 3). In general, faults in the Jackson
area are usually located adjacent to slopes, as shown in the map-
ping. Zone widths of 1000 feet have been identified as areas where
damage can be expected should there be movement along an existing
fault. Expected losses along these zones include direct damage
to structures, utilities and roads, structural collapse and settle-
ment, and most importantly high danger to occupants. Although the
map is somewhat general, the information should be considered in
any planning, design and development in the Jackson Study Area.
II-3
-------
* ••^r*&-'<.-r
-
-------
PROBABLE FAULT ZONE AREAS
Source, Livingston and Associates, 1976
Figure 3
-------
For example, seismic damage can be reduced by avoiding development
on fault zones and steep slopes, and by requiring minimum materials
standards for foundations and structures as identified in the 1976
Uniform Building Code. Hospitals, schools, public utilities, fire
stations, and bulk storage facilities for liquid flammable substances
should be designed to exceed minimum standards.
Slope Stability
Slope stability is a complex function of geologic structure
and geomorphic processes. These processes can exert an influence
so great that the inherent properties of rocks are altered suf-
ficiently to cause slope failure.
Slope failures in the Jackson area, not related to earthquakes
or flooding, occur in response to internal and external factors
that can act separately or in combination with sufficient magnitude
to overcome the cohesional strength of the material. Internal
factors include the inherent strength of the rock type and volume
percent of swelling clay materials present, and degree of saturation
and consolidation of the material. External factors include effects
of erosion, amount of precipitation and infiltration, natural or
artificial over-steepening or heightening of slopes, and removal
of support at the base or toe of slopes.
Problems in the study area caused by action of these factors
include rock falls and avalanching of bedrock on slopes steeper than
30%, and massive erosion in similar areas where vegetation has been
disturbed by roads constructed without taking proper measures to
control soil erosion and localize slope failure (Haible, 1976).
These areas lie primarily west and southwest of Jackson, near Boyles
Hill and the bench east of Flat Creek. Many naturally unstable
slopes also exist along the east flank of the Snake River below
South Park and near Hoback Junction. These slopes have been iden-
tified in mapping prepared by Haible (Figure 4) and generally are
not suitable for any land use which disrupts the vegetation, soil,
or natural drainage system.
Slope failures in the Jackson area induced by earthquakes, as
previously mentioned, are commonly initiated in direct response to
earthquake shocks of an intensity of V or greater. Failures caused
by seismic activity in the study area, although potentially wide-
spread, have in general been limited to bedrock slopes greater
than 30% and Quaternary alluvial slopes which run along the bench
south of Jackson and east of Flat Creek (Haible, 1976). These
areas correspond with the fault zones delineated by Leopold and
Twiss (1975). Any development proposed for the areas should be
limited and subject to detailed site investigation prior to es-
tablishing firm design criteria.
High Groundwater
The geologic hazards occurring in the Jackson Study area that
relate to groundwater exist primarily in the form of moderate to
II-4
-------
GEOMORPHIC UNITS
1 LOW GRADIENT UPLANDS
ALLUVIAL FANS
1 HIGH TERRACES
BEDROCK SLOPES STEEPER THAN 30 PER CENT
^1 QUATERNARY SLOPES . POTENTIALLY UNSTA-
- -I BLE IF DISTURBED
QUATERNARY SLOPES , PROBABLY UNSTABLE
IN NATURAL STATE
SCALE i 240OO
0
Source, Livingston and Associates, 1976
-------
poorly drained soils in the lowland areas south of Jackson where
groundwater levels are less than five feet below the ground sur-
face. Saturated or near-saturated soil conditions in those areas
immediately adjacent to and within the Flat Creek and Snake River
flood plains have created some water quality problems due to mal-
functioning septic tanks. Individual waste disposal in those areas
serviced by conventional septic tanks with soil absorption systems
or leach fields can create two kinds of environmental problems.
First, if wastewater is added to the local groundwater at a rate
faster than the groundwater is naturally drained out of the drain-
fields by subsurface flow, the local groundwater level will rise
and prevent proper treatment of the wastewater. Second, if waste-
water disposed of in these systems is not completely treated bio-
logically and chemically before it joins the groundwater, contamina-
tion of the shallow groundwater aquifer, adjacent surface water and
possibly even the regional groundwater reservoir could result.
Haible (1976), utilizing data from the U.S. Soil Conservation
Service and the U.S. Geological Survey, has mapped the Jackson Study
area (Figure 5). He classified four categories of groundwater levels
existing at or near the surface and differentiated suitable from
unsuitable areas for septic tank operation. Much of the area des-
ignated as poorly drained lowlands with ground water levels generally
less than three feet below the surface is located in the study
area. Haible indicates that in addition to the shallow ground water
in these areas, the physical features of the region including thin,
poorly drained soils and inadequately low soil percolation rates
may preclude these areas from consideration in developing high
concentration of individual soil absorption systems. It should
also be noted that officials from the U.S. Soil Conservation Service
and the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality (WDEQ) have
indicated some concern over locating pipelines in these areas with-
out taking into consideration frost problems and potential break-
age associated with "wet zones" in these poorly drained soils.
Flooding
Floods are a natural and normal occurrence. Typically, a
stream will occupy some portion of its flood plain area about once
every two or three years, while greater floods occur on less fre-
quent intervals.
Increasing urbanization throughout the United States has con-
tinued to result in urban development being allowed to pre-empt
the natural floodways and flood plains of streams and rivers, often
without regard to flood hazards and concomitant dangers to property,
health and life. This trend is evidenced by the fact that while
over $25 billion have been spent on structural flood control measures
since 1920, national losses have continued at an increasing pace.
The Snake River dominates the western portion of the Jackson
study area. While its waters are important to the area for irri-
gation and recreation and provide an important element of the scenic
II-5
-------
-------
3o6c6c666oooooc) E>i' -, ^
lODOogeggoooood DcXxi1
(OOOOOOOOOC
JOGCrftopOOOOOOQCOOOOOOOOOC _^
:>ooTOooooooocoo6t: _^
~ pooooooocxfiuDOooooooooooooT
' JOOOOO^TTitpOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOC
foooouooj
COOOOOQf
ooooocCn
QOOOGC
3OOOOGOOOOOOC
3OOOOOOOOC
5oooooooooo\;'!i?l
Joooooooooool1 ' •'
* «t
OQQC
riOOOOOOOOTiuW&^VOOOOOOOOC
DOOOOOOOOOOOOO€g»OOOOOOOOC
7OOOOOOOOOOOOO30QOOOOOOC ,,
joocoooooooooooooooooooo*
Booooooooooooooooooooooofi i i|i i
5OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO411' 111' i' i
5oogooo5oooooooooooooooog
pGOQOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOr
" looooooooooooooj;
'•;'' '• 'l.^i^!jlGC
OOOQ((
OOOCT
8§P
. 5OOOC
. 5OOTOJ
3OOC
roooc
I 'i'
I'-
'' I
1
I'W
+'•,-
JOOOOOOOOOOS.
. _ oooooooooooc., , ,.,
?ooooooooooooooooooai i II'T
>OOOOOOOOOOC c2%T'OOOOO\ ' i I I IX
IPQC^^sapooooqjKooooooliiit'i i!i,™
'^oooc^toooooo^lVj1 ^
III
I l>
I i'llpl
:;-4
.•i '' I
JOOOOO
OOOOO
'! i1!!!'!1!'!1"!'!'
"""!!'if
TTT'I
! ii:
&
!:
IM I l'l J
}•!'!•
III!
«l<
5O66OOOC,
Pooooooog
DOOOOOOOd
Dooooooog
Doooooooq
;;f;;. ,1,1,1 1.111,111111 IT
1111111III III
, I ifl I I I I I I I I I
,
lit;
,' '!'!' r T^r I'i'i1!1!'!1!1!1!1!1
1 III I II11111111
j!1 !!i;:
>!'! 1M i
'I!!!!:: iii'L^1 :,, ,..
,
w
oo,
_
5OOOO
JOCC
JV
71 I
JD'or
''I'i'i'i'i1!1!1
.
i|iji;r''
tcc
50O04
oo«
»DOC
R!!|liti1lliiilili'iItrilil
iiiliii!'?''1'1'1^
I'll I I I
r'--''M ,-*Ł!>*!i***»i ,../:•<:•<•:,•<•'.<
^^^i^k^i^^'^ltiiS
S 4^^^^^^^
v<,-','M,^:-;-:.:,,,%^
' j • i , t
'Ml
LlAl
JOOOOO
DOOOOu _
3OOOOOOOO'
OOOOOOO'
OOOOOOOi,
""OOOOOC
5OOC
3OC
)OOC
ooa.
oooc
K '
:>oo
v
p
WELL DRAINED HILLSLOPES WITH SLIGHTLY TO
HIGHLY PERMEABLE SOILS AND WITH GROUND
WATER LEVELS GENERALLY MORE THAN FIVE
FEET BELOW THE SURFACE
WELL DRAINED LANDS UNDER 10 PER CENT
SLOPE WITH MODERATELY TO HIGHLY PERME-
ABLE SOILS, AND WITH GROUND WATER LEVELS
GENERALLY MORE THAN FIVE FEET BELOW THE
SURFACE
GROUND WATER CATEGORIES
ED
m
MODERATELY DRAINED, NEARLY LEVEL LOW-
LANDS WITH MODERATELY PERMEABLE SOILS ,
AND WITH GROUND WATER LEVELS GENERALLY
THREE TO FIVE FEET BELOW THE SURFACE
POORLY DRAINED , NEARLY LEVEL LOWLANDS
WITH LOW SOIL PERMEABILITY , AND WITH
GROUND WATER LEVELS GENERALLY LESS THAN
THREE FEET BELOW THE SURFACE
Source, Livingston and Associates, 1976
Figure 5
-------
qualities of Jackson Hole, a major portion of the land west and a
relatively wide area east of the River are subject to flooding.
Portions of Flat Creek which runs south through the Town of Jackson
are^also subject to less frequent but periodic winter flooding caused
by ice blockages. Because of the frequency and severity of flood-
ing in portions of the Jackson Study Area the flooding situation
and flood hazards will be discussed in detail later in this report.
Geohydrology
Groundwater is used in the Jackson area for irrigation, domestic
and industrial supplies. Most of the irrigated area lies east of
the Snake River and southwest of Jackson. Although most of the
Jackson area farmland is irrigated by surface waters, irrigation
water is also pumped from two irrigation wells near Jackson (Cox,
1975). Domestic water is pumped from three wells northeast of the
Town of Jackson. Rural residences divert water from springs and pump
water from wells. Water for the Jackson Fish Hatchery is pumped
from wells and piped from nearby springs.
Aquifers in the Jackson area are recharged by precipitation and
by waters from streams. Snowmelt and precipitation percolate to
the water table and during periods of high runoff recharge the
aquifer. As streamflow declines, the hydraulic gradient reverses
adjacent to gaining streams but remains toward the aquifer adjacent
to losing streams. Recharge to the groundwater systems is greatest
in late spring and summer, owing to the combination of melting snow,
rainfall and high streamflow- Recharge also occurs in the southern
portion of the Jackson study area in the form of percolation from
irrigated lands, canal and ditch leakage. Aquifers in the Jackson
area are also recharged from discharge of one aquifer to another,
particularly in faulted areas.
Groundwater movement in the Jackson area is downgradient from
areas of recharge to areas of discharge, according to Cox (1974) .
Groundwater in alluvium and glacial deposits in the Jackson Study Area
moves toward the Snake River, but parallel to or away from Cottonwood
and Fish Creeks and the Gros Ventre River. Stream gains generally
occur upstream of Jackson, gradually decreasing as surface eleva-
tions decrease and the valley floor narrows in the lower South Park
area.
Although the alluvial groundwater deposits are over several
hundred feet in many portions of Jackson Hole, as mentioned earlier
in this discussion, an important consideration relative to ground-
water as it pertains to planning and design projects is the high
groundwater levels in the poorly drained soils and lowland areas
southwest of Jackson. Shallow groundwater areas of levels less
than 3 feet near and around Jackson have been identified by Haible
(1976). Consideration of groundwater conditions is essential for
protection of water supplies and water quality in providing for
municipal wastewater disposal.
II-6
-------
SOILS
General
The Jackson Hole area is a geologically young area. Soil
types are diverse and immature. Although numerous soil types are
found in the study area, they can be grouped and studied according
to their geologic origin to assess development constraints and to
determine appropriate land uses. Soil factors which should be con-
sidered in planning have been identified from U.S. Soil Conserva-
tion Service data by Livingston and Associates (1976). These factors
include: vulnerability to erosion, suitability for septic tanks,
value for agricultural production and potential for revegetation.
The soil of the Jackson Hole floor is sand, gravel, and talus,
including glacial outwash and materials deposited by existing stream
flow. These soils range from well- to poorly-drained, depending on
elevation and groundwater conditions. Some wind swept deposits
of silt carried in from the west are also present. These soils
are common on hill slopes along the west side of Jackson Hole and
on lower butte slopes.
The predominant soil type in the area of fine loamy to loamy-
skeletal mixed soils. These soils are found on low mountains,
alluvial fans and uplands where elevations range from 6,000 to
12,000 feet, according to the Wyoming Department of Environmental
Quality (1976). Parent materials are alluvium sedimentary and
igneous rocks and volcanic material. Soils range in depth from
10 to 60 inches. Natural water tables fluctuate in depth causing
some soils to be beneficially subirrigated and others to be some-
what poorly drained.
Much of the study area is irrigated, adding to the problem
of poor drainage.
Soils and Development Considerations
Shallow soils are located on steep hillsides which form the
southeast border of the study area along U.S. Highway 189, and
the butte slopes near Boyles Hill west of Jackson. These soils
are derived from hard bedrock (i.e., granite and limestone), are
generally less than ten inches in depth and are usually sandy and
poorly consolidated. On the steeper slopes (those exceeding 30%),
vegetation is sparse and soils are easily eroded. Where slopes
have been cut for roads or building sites in these soil types, such
as along the east face of East Gros Ventre Butte, soil cuts are
eroding and revegetation is difficult. Conditions for septic tanks
in these soil types are limited, and erosion control measures should
be incorporated in development designs.
Soils on the gentle sloping hillsides south and west of South
Park and the Gros Ventre Range are fine-textured with low to high
water-holding capacities, and support a wide range of vegetation
II-7
-------
types. Septic tank conditions in these areas are generally favor-
able, and development can be accommodated if reasonable erosion
control practices are utilized. These soils, however, can erode
rapidly if vegetation is removed, particularly on steeper slopes.
Most of the cropland in the study area is found southwest of
Jackson on alluvial fans, glacial outwash plains, and floodplains
at elevations ranging from 6,000 to 6,200 feet. Soils consist of
fine to coarse loams and fine to coarse silts and mixed soils, and
are developed to depths of 60 inches. The alluvial fan areas on
the east side of Jackson Hole are generally well-drained because
of the topography, while fans in the study area are wetter because
of snowmelt and support grassland vegetation. The major limitation
to development for soils on alluvial fans is their permeability
which should be investigated prior to development. Septic tank
conditions on the glacial outwash areas of the valley floor are
generally satisfactory, but can become marginal or require relatively
large leach fields when near the head of the outwash in coarser
soils. Construction in these areas can also be hindered by coarse
rock and boulders, according to Livingston (1976) . The floodplains
around Jackson are characterized by fine-grained material lying on
top of or mixed with gravel and sand deposits. Soils are gravelly,
but valuable as pasture land and for hay production because they
also have a significant portion of clay and silt. These soils range
from poorly to well-drained, and a relatively low annual precipi-
tation (approximately 15 inches) dictates that most crops require
irrigation. The major soil problems in portions of the agriculture
area are related to water saturation in areas of high groundwater.
Poorly drained lowlands with soils of low permeability and high
groundwater have been identified by Livingston (1976). Although
these soils preclude the use of septic tank leach fields for res-
idential development, the areas are some of the most productive
ranch lands in Teton County.
CLIMATOLOGY
The climate in Teton County and the Jackson Study Area is a
combined product of latitude, elevation and topography. The area
is predominately mountainous and characterized by comparatively
harsh, long winters and cool, dry and short summers. The basin
is in the latitudes of prevailing westerlies, with a predominance
of maritime Pacific air which has generally been modified by passage
over several mountain ranges between the Pacific Ocean and the
Wyoming Snake River Basin. The Teton Range, on the western side
of the County, has perhaps the most predominant influence on Jackson
climate. Altitudes vary from 9,000 to above 13,000 feet, with Grand
Teton being the highest peak at 13,770 feet. Precipitation in the
mountainous areas of Teton County often exceeds 70 inches annually,
the Teton range causing most of this precipitation coming from
the west to fall on the western side of the basin. Winters are long
and cold, with over 60% of the annual precipitation that occurs in
II-8
-------
the region occurring as snow. On the average, it snows 80 to 120
days per year.
The elevation at Jackson is approximately 6,244 feet. The
climate is characterized by cool summers and cold winters, although
extremely cold temperatures are generally blocked by the mountains
to the north and west. The average annual temperature in Jackson
is 37.7°F. July is the warmest month of the year with temperatures
averaging 60.9°F, according to information supplied by the National
Park Service and the U.S. Department of Commerce (1975). January
is the coldest month with temperatures averaging 14.2°F. The high-
est recorded temperature of 101°F occurred in Jackson in 1934.
The record low of -48°F occurred in 1933.
Precipitation patterns throughout the region vary dramatically
with elevation and topography. Average annual precipitation in
Jackson is 15.22 inches according to data from the National Weather
Service (1976), with an average of 75 inches of snow per year account-
ing for nearly three-fourths of this precipitation. In Moose, lo-
cated 12 miles north of Jackson, annual precipitation averages 21
inches. Average monthly precipitation for Jackson is highest during
the winter months of January and February and the spring months of
May and June (Figure 6) .
Sunshine is abundant throughout the Wyoming Snake River Basin
and the Jackson Study Area, especially during the summer. It is
estimated that sunshine averages about 60% on an annual basis, rang-
ing from 40% in the winter to 80% in the summer.
Average relative humidity for Jackson ranges from 55% to 60%
annually, the highs occurring in the winter (65%-75%), and the lows
occurring during the summer months of July and August (34%-45%).
Wind patterns in the Jackson area prevail from the southwest.
Daytime winds are generally stronger than nocturnal winds. Although
strong gusts may occur during severe summer thunderstorms, damaging
winds are rare with wind speeds generally falling below 15 miles
per hour on the valley floor. Stronger winds characterize the
surrounding mountains, with gusts exceeding 100 miles per hour
recorded on numerous occasions.
ACOUSTIC CONDITIONS
The Jackson area is characterized by several small communities
and sparse development. Ambient noise levels are generally low,
but increase over natural levels along the South Park Highway (U.S.
Highway 26-89-187), State Route 22, and the Town of Jackson. Highway-
road vehicles are considered the major noise source in the study
area. The Jackson Hole Airport in Grand Teton National Park is per-
haps the most intense intermittent noise source in the study area.
II-9
-------
AVERAGE MONTHLY PRECIPITATION a TEMPERTURE, JACKSON Wyo.
1 5
c
o
|4
'o
S. 2
4>
O>
I '
•111
Average
IBB
Annual
Predpitc
t»n=l5.
22 inch
s
lumiinl
niii III
Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
PRECI PI TATION
| SOURCE : NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE RECORDS (1941-1970 AVERAGE VALUES)
100
90
80
^ 70
v>
a>
% 60
o
•- 50
h_
3
I 40
"z, ^
s
| 20
a>
z 10
a>
>
0
Average Annual Temperature = 37.7° F
Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
TEM PERATURE
FIGURE 6
-------
-------
Heavy equipment and accompanying construction activities will
undoubtedly generate the major increases in noise levels during
the construction phase of the proposed project. The impact of con-
struction noise will vary with the proposed alternatives in relation
to proximity to population centers and wildlife habitat areas.
Numerous studies indicate that where construction activities might
be carried out within 500 feet of houses or other buildings, noise
impact of protracted operations could reach unacceptable levels.
Noise impact on wildlife is probably more acute. These impacts will
be collectively evaluated in the "Environmental Impacts of Alterna-
tives" section of this report.
AIR QUALITY
Local topography and meteorological conditions have a major
influence upon air quality patterns in any region. In general,
deep valleys similar to the Jackson Hole area are characterized by
channeling wind flow along the valley axis, and development of
stable drainage winds during calm night time conditions, resulting
in higher pollutant concentrations along the valley floor.
When compared with cities having a higher population density
and emission generating industries, the Jackson area, although it
does experience substantial seasonal influxes of automobiles due
to the tourism, has relatively clear air. This statement must,
however, be tempered by the fact that monitoring data for the area
is very limited and is available only for particulate concentrations.
Information is not available for carbon monoxide (CO), the primary
constituent of incomplete combustion and carbonaceous fuels burned
in the automobile (approximately 90% of all CO emissions come from
transportation sources). There is no data available for nitrogen
oxides (NOX) or hydrocarbon (HC) concentrations. Both nitrogen
oxide and hydrocarbon levels are closely related to automobile use
and power production. Sulfur dioxides (802), a primary by-product
of the combustion of sulfur-containing fuel in stationary sources,
also has not been monitored in the Jackson area.
Existing air quality sampling and analyses for the Jackson
Study Area have been collected by the Wyoming Department of Environ-
mental Quality. Monitoring data is limited to particulate concen-
trations sampled by the WDEQ, Air Quality Section. According to
WDEQ officials, air samples were collected at the town of Kelly
located ten miles northeast of Jackson over a five month period
(8/10/75 - 12/26/75). These samples are thought to be indicative
of conditions which would be experienced in Jackson. Samples were
collected using a Hi-Vol sampler on a six day schedule. All samples
were 24-hour composites. The average values for the sampling period
(approximately 25 samples) showed a geometric mean of 11.0 mg/m3,
with a high value of 33 mg/m3 and a low of 4 mg/m3. These values
fall well below Wyoming State Standards and EPA's National Ambient
Air Quality Standards for particulate concentrations which are
60 mg per cubic meter (annual geometric mean) and 150 mg per cubic
11-10
-------
meter (maximum 24 hour concentration not to be exceeded more than
once per year).
Although information on inversion frequency was not available
through the National Climatic Center (Jackson has no upper air ob-
serving capability), personnel at the Center and the Wyoming DEQ
indicated the area is subject to frequent inversion. However,
WDEQ officials did emphasize that air quality conditions in the
area were generally good. WDEQ also stated that the main concern
for the area in terms of air quality maintenance as related to the
proposed Jackson wastewater facility would be the control of
fugitive dust caused by construction. Compliance with State
particulate standards will undoubtedly require that reasonable
precautions are taken to inhibit dust from becoming airborne
during the construction phase of any approved project.
An additional source of air pollution, is the noxious odors
that emanate from the existing wastewater facilities during the
warmer months. The polishing pond and the sludge drying beds are
the primary sources of these odors that are generated from the
decay of organic material under anaerobic conditions. While these
are somewhat confined to the areas adjacent to South Park, they
do present a definite problem in the proposed residential/commercial
growth areas.
AESTHETIC AND VISUAL CHARACTERISTICS
General
The Jackson Hole area is world reknown for its spectacular
scenic beauty- This is attested to by the vast number of people
who flock to the area each year to enjoy the relatively unspoiled
outdoor experience the region offers. While such landmarks as the
Teton Mountains, Grand Teton National Park, Jackson Lake, Snake
River excursions, and Yellowstone National Park are the primary
destinations for this yearly influx of visitors, it is the valley's
overall composition that creates the setting through which these
attributes can be experienced.
While the secondary impact of expanded wastewater facilities
can be widespread in allowing growth in numerous areas, the primary
geographic unit that may be affected by the proposed project and
solution-oriented alternative is South Park. This is because of
two main constraints: the majority of the developable private land
in the county is in South Park, and the direction of the compre-
hensive planning effort is to funnel growth into those areas that
can be serviced by Jackson's municipal facilities.
Preserving the aesthetic and visual characteristics of Jackson
is a prime concern for most of the area's residents along with
the federal and state agencies operating in the area. The ques-
tionnaire distributed through the Comprehensive Planning Study to
11-11
-------
survey desires and needs of the resident population concerning the
major land use and development issues in the County revealed that
over eighty percent of those responding felt that the preservation
of scenic values should take precedence over private development
rights. While the results of this inventory may be subject to a
great deal of rebuttal and criticism, it is basically true that
for various personal and economic reasons (tourist industry forms
a dominant portion of the area's economy), maintaining this exist-
ing refined but outdoor oriented philosophy and life style through
the area's scenic grandeur is important to the people of Jackson,
and one of the main attractions that holds and draws individuals to
the area. The results of the Comprehensive Plan questionnaire pro-
vide not only a documentation of this thesis, but a rather over-
whelming public declaration supporting it.
A number of recent planning and scenic preservation efforts
are being pursued in the immediate study area including Teton National
Park Expansion Study and Master Plan, the Scenic Corridor and Reserve
Concept of the Nature Conservacy, the Town/County Comprehensive
Plan, and the Wild and Scenic River Study on the Snake River. While
each of these is important, the two that may directly effect a
decision on the Jackson Wastewater Project are the Comprehensive
Planning Study and the Wild and Scenic River classification
investigation.
Comprehensive Planning Study
One of the outputs of the Comprehensive Planning and 208 Study
contract was the development of a Report on Visual Analysis for
Teton County. This study conducted by the U.S. Forest Service
classified the nonfederal land in the County in terms of its scenic
and visual values and proposed planning guidelines to mitigate and
reduce the visual impact of development. Figure 7, Landscape Units
and Vegetation, presents the results of the report. The study
characterizes the County into landscape units and comments on types
of introduced elements which may be appropriate and what aesthetic
impacts various types of development generally have on people. It
presents the results in terms of a unit's Visual Absorption Capability
(VAC), which is an index that results "from rating five factors
which are responsible for a landscape's ability to accept change
while remaining visually strong." The factor includes slope, di-
versity, screening, revegetation potential, and color contrast.
Based on this study, three different landscape units have been de-
scribed for the area of primary impact resulting from the waste-
water project. The unit classifications are presented in Table 1.
However, a complete description is found in Appendix K of the Teton
County Growth and Development Alternatives (Livingston and Associates,
1976). The VAC rating measures an area's ability to accept changes
in the landscape. A high VAC indicates an area can absorb change
better than one with a low VAC. Generally, with the exception of
the Boyles Hill area, South Park has an average VAC.
11-12
-------
TABLE 1
VISUAL ABSORPTION CAPABILITY RATINGS
H
H
1
M
Landscape
Unit
Number
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Slope
1
1
1
2
2
3
3
Diversity
3
1
1
1
1
2
1
Screening
2
3
1
2
2
1
1
Revegetation
Potential
2
3
1
1
1
2
2
Soil
Color
Contrast
2
2
1
1
1
2
2
Total
Index
10
10
5
7
7
10
9
Individual Items
1 = Low VAC
2 = Average VAC
3 = High VAC
Total Index
5-7 = Low VAC
8-12 = Average VAC
13-1.5 = High VAC
-------
-------
LANDSCAPE UNITS AND VEGETATION
CROPPED LAND WITH HARDWOODS ALONG
STREAMS
MOSTLY SAGE AND WILLOW WITH SOME HARD-
WOODS
Source, Livingston and Associates, 1974
i ML I
Figure 7
-------
While this may provide a useful diagnostic tool for planners,
it must be pointed out that even in areas with a high VAC, the type
and extent of the development is the major influencing factor.
Urban sprawl across the flat bottom land of South Park would have
significant scenic and visual impact for those approaching Jackson
from the south. Any treatment facility would require landscaping
and architectural mitigation in order to be unobtrusive on the
landscape.
Wild and Scenic River Study
The Wild and Scenic River Act (P.L. 90-542) of October 1968
directed the Department of the Interior to classify and preserve:
"Certain selected rivers of the nation which, with their
immediate environment, possess outstandingly remarkable
scenic, recreational, geologic, fish and wildlife, his-
toric cultural or other similar values."
The section of the Snake River flowing from Teton National
Park to Palisades Reservoir is a candidate for classification, and
is the subject of a current study with the U.S. Forest Service
acting as lead agency. The results and recommendations of the
classification investigation are not expected to be complete until
1979. In the meantime, one of the responsibilities of the lead
agency, according to the Teton Forest Supervisor, is "to assure
that during the interim of the study, and eventual determination,
that federal and federally assisted projects that could have a direct
or adverse effect on the river's special values are properly eval-
uated as required by the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act."
In regard to federally funded projects, such as the proposed
wastewater facilities, the act states that:
"No department or agency of the U.S. shall, during the
periods hereandbefore specified [Section 7(i)] , recommend
authorization of any water resources project on any such
river, or request appropriations to begin construction of
any such project, whether heretofor or hereafter authorized,
without advising the Secretary of the Interior and, where
National Forest lands are involved, the Secretary of
Agriculture, in writing of its intention so to do at least
sixty days in advance of doing so, and without specifically
reporting to the Congress in writing, at the time it makes
its recommendation or request, in what respect construction
of such project would be in conflict with the purposes of
this Act and would affect the component and the values to
be protected by it under this Act."
It therefore remains the lead agency's responsibility, as agent
for the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture, to evaluate
11-14
-------
TABLE 2
Attributes and management objectives of the three river classifications for
inclusion in the National Wild and Scenic River System
Wild
Scenic
Recreation
H
H
I
M
cn
Attributes
Management
objectives
1. Free-flowing. Low dams, diversion
works or other minor structures which
do not inundate the natural riverbank
may not bar consideration as wild.
Future construction restricted.
2. Generally inaccessible by road.
One or two inconspicuous roads to the
area may be permissible.
3. Shorelines essentially primitive.
One or two inconspicuous dwellings
and land devoted to production of hay
may be permitted. Watershed natural-
like in appearance.
4. Water quality meets minimum cri-
teria for primary contact recreation
except where such criteria would be
exceeded by natural background condi-
tions and esthetics 2/and capable of
supporting propagation of aquatic life
normally adapted to habitat of the
stream.
1. Limited motorized land travel in
area.
2. No unharrnonious or new habitations
or improvements permitted.
3. Only primitive-type public use
provided.
4. New structures and improvement
of old ones prohibited if not in keeping
with overall objectives.
5. Unobtrusive fences, gauging sta-
tions and other management facilities
maybe permitted if no significant ad-
verse effect on natural character of
area.
6. Limited range of agriculture and
other resource uses permitted.
1. Free-flowing. Low dams, diversion
works or other minor structures which
do not inundate the natural riverbank
may not bar consideration. Future
construction restricted.
2. Accessible by roads which may
occasionally bridge the river area.
Short stretches of conspicuous or
longer stretches of inconspicuous and
well-screened roads or railroads
paralleling river area may be permitted.
3. Shoreline largely primitive. Small
communitieslirnitedto short reaches
of total area. Agricultural practices
which do not adversely affect river
area may be permitted.
4. Water quality should meet minimum
criteria for desired types of recrea-
tion except where such criteria would
be exceeded by natural background
conditions and esthetics 2/and capable
of supporting propagation of aquatic
life normally adapted lo habitat of the
stream, or is capable of and is being
restored to that quality.
1. Motorized vehicles allowed on land
area.
2. No unharmonious improvements and
few habitations permitted.
3. Limited modern screened public
use facilities permitted, i. e. camp-
grounds, visitor centers, etc.
4. Some new facilities allowed, • such
as unobtrusive marinas.
5. Unobtrusive fences, gauging stations
and other management facilities may
be permitted if no significant adverse
effect on natural character of area.
6. Wide range of agriculture and
resource uses may be permitted.
1. May have undergone some impound-
ment or diversion in the past. Water
should not have characteristics of an
impoundment for any significant dis-
tance. Future construction restricted.
2. Readily accessible, with likelihood
of paralleling roads or railroads
along river banks and bridge crossings.
3. Shoreline may be extensively
developed.
4. Water quality should meet minimum
criteria for desired types of recreation
except where such criteria would be ex-
ceeded by natural background condi-
tions and esthetics 2/ and capable of
supporting propagation of aquatic life
normally adapted to habitat of the stream
or is capable of and is being restored
to that quality.
1. Optimum accessibility by motorized
vehicle.
2. May be densely settled in places.
3. Public use areas may be in close
proximity to river.
4. New structures allowed for both hab-
itation andfor intensive recreation use.
5. Management practice facilities
permitted.
other) 6. Full range of agriculture and other
resource uses may be permitted.
2/ Federal Water Pollution Control Administration's Water Quality Criteria, April 1, 1968.
For a complete explanation see Guidelines for Evaluation Wild, Scenic
and Recreational River Areas Proposed for Inclusion in the National
Wild and Scenic River System under Section 2, Public Law 90-542 (1970)
-------
what impacts a project may have on the eventual classification
for the river. The agency can then, through the Secretary recommend
what mitigation measures may be necessary or even if a project
should be allowed to proceed.
Water resource and wastewater projects have, under the condi-
tions of the Act, been shown to be compatible. This has in in-
stances required the incorporation of both design and regulatory
mitigation to offset the impacts of construction and operation of
a facility.
It would be anticipated that any proposed wastewater construc-
tion activities along the course of the Snake River would be sub-
ject to the approval of the Secretaries of the Interior and Agri-
culture. Table 2 presents a summary of the general criteria utilized
in the Wild and Scenic Classification System. These criteria would
need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis to determine their
applicability in each application, and may be altered to suit a
particular river. Regarding the proposed project and all its
practical alternatives, with the exception of maintaining the exist-
ing site, an outfall line to the Snake River would be required for
effluent disposal. The impacts this line would have during con-
struction and on long term aesthetic values and water quality would
require review in terms of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.
CULTURAL AND HISTORIC/ARCHEOLOGIC RESOURCES
Sometime around 1829, the valley of Jackson Hole was named
for the trapper, David E. Jackson. Although the fur trading business
played a major role in the eventual settling of the Jackson area,
trappers were by no means the first inhabitants of the area, accord-
ing to Haden (1969). Many years earlier, the Shoshone Indians
looking up from the valley floor on one of their annual hunting
pilgrimages had called the majestic Tetons "Teewinot", or pinnacles.
Traces of the camps made by these Indians can be found throughout
Jackson Hole, and excavations for ditches and dwellings are turn-
ing up additional information.
Permanent settlement of Jackson Hole began about 1878 as trappers
decided to settle in the area instead of trapping intermittently.
Through the 1880's a number of families came into the valley as
homesteading began to replace trapping as the main livelihood, and
in 1890 Wyoming became a state. Many remnants of these activities
can still be found throughout the area.
About 1900, cattle ranching became the chief industry. This
surge, however, was short-lived with a sudden growth in the tourist
business. Increased tourist activity remains the chief industry
for the Jackson area today.
Based on existing records and reports and correspondence with
various state agencies and groups, including the Wyoming Recreation
11-16
-------
Commission and the Wyoming State Archives and Historical Department and State
Archeologist, there are no historic sites currently enrolled in the National
Register of Historic Places or currently in nomination for such enrollment
that would be located on the proposed treatment plant sites or pipeline routes.
Similarly, no sites are affected which appear on the Wyoming Inventory of
Historic Places.
Discussions with the Wyoming Recreation Corrmission and the University
of Wyoming Department of Anthropology indicate that no known archeologic sites
would be affected by the proposed alternatives for the new wastewater treat-
ment facility for the Town of Jackson. However, it should be noted that a
number of significant archeological findings have been uncovered in the general
study area. The South Park area (west and south of Jackson) has not been
subjected to extensive archeological survey. Since a primary portion of
the proposed project will involve ditching, the State Archeologist recommends
that a field survey be initiated prior to construction, and that a member
of his staff be available during ditching, should the survey indicate potential
finds. EPA has determined that, while a pre-construction field survey will
be done, EPA does not believe that the cost of an on-site archeologist is
warranted unless the field survey shows a high potential for archeological finds.
Any newly discovered sites will be reported to the State Archeologist for fur-
ther evaluation.
WATER QUALITY
Water Quality Standards
The assessment of current water quality conditions in the study area
and the evaluation of the proposed alternatives in terms of impacts on local
water quality in the study area are dependent on the classification of specific
waters, and the development of criteria based on downstream use. This in-
formation provides a basis for the subsequent assessment of existing water
quality conditions in Flat Creek and the Snake River. The information also
provides the foundation for evaluation of the proposed Jackson Wastewater Treat-
ment Plant alternatives in terms of compliance with present and future treatment
needs, discharge requirements, and potential impacts on Flat Creek, surrounding
tributaries, and the Snake River.
Water quality standards applicable to the streams in the Jackson Study
Area are set forth by the Wyoming Department of Game and Fish and the Wyoming
Department of Environmental Quality. The standards are divided into two
main categories which include a water use classification (based on fish sup-
porting capabilities) and specific water quality parameter standards.
Chapter I of "Water Quality Standards for Wyoming" designates all Wyoming
waters as belonging to one of the following three classes:
Class I - Those waters which, based on information supplied by
the Wyoming Game and Fish Department, are determined to
11-17
-------
be presently supporting game fish or have the hydrologic and
natural quality potential to support game fish.
Class II - Those waters which, based on information supplied
by the Wyoming Game and Fish Department, are determined to
be presently supporting non-game fish, or have the hydrologic
and natural water quality potential to support non-game fish.
Class III - Those waters which, based on information supplied
by the Wyoming Game and Fish Department, are determined as
not having the hydrologic or natural water quality potential
to support fish.
The Standards also indicate that the actual classification of
specific waters will be updated every three years and presented to
the public.
All major streams in Teton County and the Jackson Study Area
have been assigned the highest quality classification (Class I)
according to information supplied by the Wyoming Game and Fish
Department. The State of Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality
has also established standards based on the type of water use,
existing water quality, and the source of pollutants for fifteen
physical, chemical, biological, radiological and general parameters.
Quality standards for Class I waters in the study area are divided
into physical, chemical, biological, radiological and general param-
eters, and are presented below, as outlined by Ablondi (1976):
Physical;
1. Settleable Solids. Waters shall be free from substances
of other than natural origin that will settle to form
sludge, bank or bottom deposits.
2. Floating Solids. Waters shall be free from floating debris,
scum and other floating materials of other than natural
origin in amounts sufficient to be unsightly.
3. Taste, odor, color. Waters shall be free from substances
of other than natural origin which produce taste, odor,
and color.
4. Turbidity- In all waters, wastes of other than natural
origin shall not cause the natural turbidity of the water
to be increased by more than ten (10) Jackson Turbidity
Units. In addition, waters designated for full body con-
tact recreation (swimming, water skiing, etc.), wastes
of other than natural origin shall not be discharged in
amounts which will increase turbidity to the extent that
a Secchi disc is not visible at a depth of one (1) meter.
5. Temperature. In all waters, wastes of other than natural
origin shall not be discharged in amounts which raise
11-18
-------
natural ambient water temperatures to levels which are
deemed to be harmful to existing aquatic life. As most
natural stream temperatures in the Jackson area do not
exceed 68OF (20°C), wastes of other than natural origin
shall not be discharged in amounts which will result in
a change of more than 2°F (l.ioc) over the maximum daily
stream temperature. No induced temperature change will
be allowed over fish spawning areas except for experi-
mental purposes.
Chemical:
1. Dissolved Oxygen. In all waters, wastes of other than
natural origin shall not be discharged in amounts which
will result in death or injury to existing aquatic life
and which will result in a dissolved oxygen content of
less than 6.0 mg/1 (ppm) at any time.
2. pH. For all waters, wastes of other than natural origin
shall not cause the pH to be less than 6.5 or greater
than 8.5.
3. Oil and Grease. In all waters, wastes of other than
natural origin shall not be discharged which will cause
the oil and grease content to exceed 10.0 mg/1, formation
of visible oil film or globules, discoloration of the
surface, or a formation of visible deposits on the bottom
or shoreline.
4. Total Gas Pressure. Discharges from impoundments or other
sources shall not cause the total dissolved gas pressure
to exceed 110 percent of existing atmospheric pressure.
5. Salinity. High salinity (Total Dissolved Solids) is
recognized as an important, water quality parameter which
may in some cases cause adverse physical and economic
impact on water users. Emphasis will be given to manage-
ment methods which improve salinity and control the accumu-
lation of dissolved solids in water. However no upper
limit of salinity exists for waters in Teton County.
Biological:
Coliform Bacteria. The following limitation applies to
still water bodies (lakes, impoundments, etc.) which lie
at an altitude of less than 7,000 feet above sea level
and the waters of the Snake River commencing at the south
boundary of Yellowstone Park downstream to the Wyoming-
Idaho state line.
During the recreation season, (May 1 through September
30), wastes of other than natural origin shall not be dis-
charged in amounts which will cause fecal coliform con-
centrations to exceed a geometric mean of 200 fecal coliform
11-19
-------
groups per 100 milliliters based on a minimum of five sam-
ples obtained during separate 24-hour periods for any 30-
day period. Ten percent of the samples shall not exceed
400 groups per 100 milliliters during any 30-day period.
The following limit applies to all other waters in the
Jackson area. During the recreation season (May 1 through
September 30), fecal coliform concentrations shall not ex-
ceed a geometric mean of 1,000 fecal coliform groups per
100 milliliters based on a minimum of five samples obtained
during separate 24-hour periods for any 30-day period.
Ten percent of the samples shall not exceed 2,000 groups
per 100 milliliters during any 30-day period.
2. Undesirable Aquatic Life. All waters shall be free from
substances and conditions which are attributable to munic-
ipal, industrial, or other discharges or agricultural prac-
tices which produce undesirable aquatic life.
Radiological:
Radioactive Material. In all waters, radioactive material
of other than natural origin shall not exceed a concentration
of 3 pCi/1* of Radium 226, 10 pCi/1 of Strontium 90 or
the limits established in the most recent Federal Drinking
Water Standards. Radiological material shall not be present
in any amount which reflects failure in any case to apply
all controls which are physically and economically feasible.
General:
1. Public Water Supply- When public water supply is a desig-
nated use, water quality will be such that after conventional
water treatment, the treated water will meet the most recent
Federal Drinking Water Standards.
2. Toxic Material. All waters shall be free from toxic,
corrosive, or other deleterious substances of other than
natural origin in concentrations or combinations which are
toxic to human, animal, plant, or aquatic life.
Monitoring Data
Water quality data for the study area has been collected by
four agencies. The U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Division,
the Wyoming Game and Fish Department, the Bridger-Teton National
Forest, and the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality maintain
96 monitoring stations located throughout Teton County. The monitoring
*pCi-picrocurie-10-12 curies where a curie is defined as 3.7xl010
disintegrations per second.
11-20
-------
network includes permanent trend stations and "problem oriented"
stations. Additional monitoring stations have also been established
by the Teton County 208 Planning Agency, in cooperation with the
WDEQ. Data from this network forms the basis for the discussion
on Flat Creek and Snake River water quality that follows.
TETON COUNTY WATER QUALITY
Teton County constitutes the major portion of land area for
the Snake River Basin of Wyoming, encompassing some 5,139 square
miles in the western portion of the State. The County ranks fourth
statewide in terms of surface water acreage, with the Snake River
and Jackson Lake Reservoir accounting for the majority of this
area. Jackson Lake Reservoir alone accounts for approximately
25,500 acres of the 43,300 surface water acres in Teton County.
Relatively high amounts of precipitation and extensive snow-
packs in the mountains, coupled with a gradual release of water
from snowmelt continuing through the summer support continuing
perennial stream flows for all the major streams within the Snake
River Basin. The Basin provides sufficient water quality for
municipal, recreational, agricultural and industrial uses, with
the average annual flow originating in the Wyoming portion of the
Basin estimated at 4,721,650 acre-feet. Although a significant
quantity of this supply is used for irrigation in the Basin
(approximately 83,700 acre feet), the Wyoming Department of En-
vironmental Quality has estimated that some 4,632,500 acre-feet
of water leaves the Wyoming Snake River Basin each year.
The major hydrologic systems, located in the immediate study
area likely to be affected by the proposed project, include the
Snake River and Flat Creek. Existing water quality conditions
for these water courses will be discussed in detail. The discussion
will form the basis for evaluating water quality impacts of the
proposed alternatives in the "Environmental Impacts of Alternatives"
section of the report. Other tributaries to the Snake for which
data are available include (by downstream order): Gros Ventre
River, Fish Creek, Cache Creek, and Hoback River. Water quality
conditions for these tributaries will also be discussed collectively
in general terms where existing information allows.
Existing data indicate that water quality for most streams in
Teton County is generally good. Exceptions are watercourses adja-
cent to higher density population centers including Flat Creek near
Jackson where the stream receives treated effluent from the Jackson
sewage treatment plant and stormwater runoff from the urbanized
area; and Fish Creek between Teton Village and Wilson where rapid
growth of homesites, gravel mining operations and occasional and
intermittent poorer quality effluent from the Teton Village sewage
treatment plant can seriously degrade water quality. The Hoback
River, which lies immediately south of the study area, also ex-
periences increases in conductivity, salinity, turbidity and pH
due primarily to natural erosion and mineral spring discharges.
11-21
-------
In general, the flow regimes for most of the streams in the
study area follow a general pattern of high flows in the spring
and early summer with increased snowmelt and releases from Jackson
Reservoir, gradually decreasing over the summer and early fall.
Total dissolved solids (TDS) range between 100 milligrams per liter
(mg/1) and 250 mg/1 for most streams, with concentrations increas-
ing downstream from Jackson Lake (Ablondi, 1976).
Water temperatures remain relatively constant for most of
the streams throughout the County, increasing slightly in a down-
stream direction with increases in ambient air temperatures and
water use, and decreases in elevation. This is important as tem-
perature is a prime regulator of natural processes within the
water environment, particularly as related to the physiological
functions of organisms.
Dissolved oxygen (D.O.) content, perhaps the most important
indicator of the water's condition, is generally high ranging from
9.0 to 13.0 mg/1 for most of the streams where data is available.
The parameter consistently exceeds the minimum standard of 6.0 mg/1
established for Class I waters.
pH values range between 6.5 and 8.5, the range for most pro-
ductive natural fresh waters. Higher values are attributed to areas
of limestone deposit in the underlying geology. Such is the case
for Cache Creek, where the mean pH is 8.3 (WDEQ, 1976).
Chloride (Cl) and sulfate (804) concentrations measured by
the U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Forest Service and the Wyoming
Game and Fish Department range between 0.0 and 21.0 mg/1, and 5.0
and 50 mg/1, respectively in most streams in Teton County. Ex-
ceptions include the Hoback River, where SO^ levels exceeding
240 mg/1 have been observed (Ablondi, 1976).
Nitrate nitrogen (NC>3) concentrations, an important limiting
factor in the growth of all plants, reached a high of 0.18 mg/1
below the Jackson treatment plant, but generally did not exceed
0.1 mg/1 according to information gathered by the 208 agency.
Total phosphate levels are also relatively low throughout Teton
County. Flat Creek phosphate values range from a high of 1.8 mg/1
(expressed as total P) below the treatment plant on Flat Creek
to less than 0.01 mg/1 above Jackson near the National Fish Hatchery
during the sampling conducted by the 208 agency in 1976.
Coliform bacteria forms the basis for indirect bacteriologic
water quality examination. The presence of coliform bacteria
indicates recent discharges from warm blooded animals. Absence irnnlies
Sct^f -1Srr^ °f ***"***• ^nitoring information SS IScal^Uform.
bacteria 1S limted for Teton County. Geometric mean concentrations for
the major watercourses, however, generally fall below 50 colonies/100 ml
11-22
-------
occur in the summer months at the peak of tourist activity imme-
diately downstream from the Jackson sewage treatment plant.
Flat Creek
Flat Creek originates in the Gros Ventre Range, flows through
the National Elk Refuge where approximately 8,000 head of elk are
wintered annually, then turns south flowing through the Town of
Jackson. Below Jackson, the river receives effluent from the
Jackson sewage treatment plant. The river is also impacted by
discharge from the Jackson National Fish Hatchery, septic tank
seepage, and urban storm and runoff from corrals. Based upon only.
one year of data the average annual flow is approximately 110 cfs, and
the low flow is approximately 50 cfs.
Flat Creek is considered a stable cold water fishery by the
Wyoming Department of Game and Fish. Little information is avail-
able as to its value, carrying capacity, or fisherman use in the
South Park Area. Since major access is limited by private land
bordering the Creek, the Department does not try to manage the
fishery as they would for waters open to the public.
Water quality information for Flat Creek has been available
on a continuing basis since the initiation of the Teton County
208 Study in the fall of 1975. As a result of information and
additional data collected under the "Snake River Basin Water
Quality Management Plan," Flat Creek has been designated "the most
critical stream segment in the Snake River Basin in terms of
possible impairment of water quality." Because of this designa-
tion, a stream segment profile was performed by the WDEQ in
November, 1975 (Table 3).
Table 3 shows Flat Creek water quality as generally good
throughout the upper portion of the study area. Dissolved oxygen
concentrations are high ranging from 11.0 to 12.4 mg/1. Turbidity
and total dissolved solids range between 1.5 and 3.4 JTU, and 130
and 187 mg/1, respectively. Nitrate nitrogen levels average about
0.5 mg/1; and total phosphate levels average 0.03 mg/1, both well
below U.S.P.H.S. recommended Drinking Water Standards, and those
levels thought to facilitate nuisance algae growths (Water Quality
Criteria, 1963). Below the sewage treatment outfall south of
Jackson, however, BOD and COD levels increase appreciably, demon-
strating the effects of the Jackson sewage treatment outfall and
nearby cattle grazing operations. Nitrate nitrogen levels double
from 0.5 to 1.0 mg/1 at this sampling station. Likewise, total
phosphate levels increase by a factor of eight, from 0.03 to
0.26 mg/1. Turbidity and total dissolved solids show a substantial
two-fold increase. These increases do not exceed State standards.
Fecal coliform numbers also show a substantial increase jumping
from a mean value of less than one (1) colony/100 ml to 120
colonies/100 ml.
11-23
-------
TABLE 3. FLAT CREEK STREAM PROFILE (November 3-7, 1975)*
issolved
Q
11
11
12
12
11
11
12
12
14
H
G
Q)
tn
X
O
.0
.8
.4
.0
.2
.3
.4
.0
.1
ecal Coliform
(#/100 ml)
tn
Q
O
PM 03
0
1
0
2
0
1
0
2
120
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
3
.7
.7
.5
.5
.5
.3
.8
.3
.5
rH
tn
J!
Q
O
O
13
13
13
12
12
11
11
11
20
D
a
0,
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
8.
8.
8.
5
2
8
8
9
9
0
4
7
emperature
EH
7.
6.
6.
6.
6.
7.
7.
7.
7.
(WC)
itrate-N
(mg/1)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.
5
5
2
5
5
5
5
5
0
otal Phosphate
(mg/1)
EH
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
urbidity
(JTU)
EH
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
26
1
2
2
3
2
3
3
3
6
.5
.4
.1
.4
.8
.6
.4
.1
.2
otal Dissolved
olids (mg/1)
EH CO
130
155
177
168
168
187
186
176
489
pecif ic
onductivity
umho/cmC 25°C)
co u ^
218
295
295
295
295
289
283
354
332
STATION
Above Fish
Hatchery Discharge
At U.S. Highway 26
Crossing, north of
Jackson
Wooden Access Bridge
behind Indep. Oil Co. 12.4
Wooden Access Bridge
near Millward St.
Wooden Access Bridge
near Gill St.
U.S. Highway 26 near
Jackson Food Market
Wooden Access Bridge
behind Virginian
U.S. Highway 26
south of Jackson
South Park Bridge
3.5 miles below
sewer discharge
*Information from Ablondi (1976)
-------
Ongoing water quality monitoring activities presently being performed
for the Teton County 208 Study further indicate that instream standards assigned
to Flat Creek are being maintained, except for coliform bacteria (recontrended
standard by the 208 Agency is 200 colonies/100 ml) which has been exceeded
immediately below the treatment plant. Samples collected above and below the
treatment plant on 7/6/76, for example, show high D.O. concentrations of
9.3 mg/1 (standard is 6.0 mg/1) . COD and BOD elevate slighly below the
treatment plant, increasing from 13.0 and 2.0 to 15.0 and 2.7 mg/1, respectively.
Ammonia nitrogen levels show a dramatic increase, jumping from 0.002 to .286 mg/1.
Although relatively low in terms of toxic unionized ammonia, this elevation is
indicative of effluent discharge from sewage treatment plants. Total phosphate
levels also demonstrate an increase from 0.05 mg/1 at Flat Creek Bridge crossing
south of Jackson above the treatment plant to 0.15 mg/1 at Flat Creek 1000 feet"
below the outfall. With ideal physical conditions (temperature, streamflow,
sunlight, etc.), algal blooms have been observed at concentrations as low
as 0.001 mg/1 (Water Quality Criteria, 1963). Fecal coliform counts showed
the most substantial elevation between the two sampling stations, increasing
from 30 colonies/100 ml above the plant to over 1800 colonies at the site below
the outfall. It should be noted that this data represents only one sampling.
Although the Wyoming Water Quality Standards applicable to Flat Creek dictate
that the geometric mean of 1000 fecal coliform groups per 100 ml based on
five (5) samples obtained during separate 24-hour periods for any 30-day period
shall not be exceeded, the sampling is indicative of degraded water quality.
In summary, Flat Creek maintains generally good water quality, except
below the outfall of the Jackson municipal wastewater treatment facility. A
number of potentially degrading point (direct discharge) and nonpoint (diverse,
indiscreet discharges) pollution sources threaten the stream quality from the
National Elk Refuge north of town to the confluence with the Snake. Studies
now in progress on the Elk Refuge and agricultural and urban nonpoint problems
will better identify the significance of these sources.
Snake River
The Snake River flows westward along the southern portion of Yellowstone
National Park, turns southward crossing the Park boundary, and enters Jackson
Lake Reservoir. Below the reservoir the river flows southerly through Jackson
Hole out of Teton County into Palisades Reservoir in southeast Idaho.
Snake River water quality in the Wyoming Snake River Basin is good, due
to relatively sparse development and the occurrence of a more natural watershed.
The main stem of the Snake does, however, appear from limited data to suffer "slight
deterioration" in a downstream direction with increasing urban development.
11-25
-------
The Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality maintains
a monitoring station on the Snake River above Flat Creek. The
purpose of the station is to provide natural background data for
the river before it receives flow from Flat Creek. As previously
mentioned, Flat Creek receives effluent from the Jackson sewage
treatment plant. Samples are obtained on a quarterly basis and
analyzed for fecal coliform, total dissolved solids, nutrients,
radiochemical constituents, and standard field determinations
including pH, dissolved oxygen, water temperature, specific
conductance and turbidity-
At this station water quality is good, with no violations
of Wyoming Water Quality Standards observed during a six-month
sampling period performed by the WDEQ (Table 4). Dissolved oxygen
values range from 8.0 to 13.2 mg/1, averaging 9.7 mg/1, (standard is
6.0 tna/l). Fecal coliform counts do not exceed 172 colonies/100 ml, below
State standards of 1000 colonies per 100 ml. Subsequent sampling performed
under the Teton County 208 Study at the same site over a six (6) month period
(3/15/76 - 9/9/76) further substantiate these findings. COD and BOD measure-
ments fall well below levels established by public health officials. Nitrate
nitrogen and total phosphate concentrations also fall below State standards, with
respective maximum values of 0.18 and 0.14 mg/1 measured on 6/1/76. Fecal
coliform counts are also consistently below State standards.
The impact of the overloaded Jackson sewage treatment facility
on Snake River water quality is apparent below the confluence of
Flat Creek and the Snake River from fecal coliform data collected
between August, 1968 and December, 1971. Approximately 38 samples
were collected and analyzed for fecal coliform by the WDEQ. During
the study period, the mean recorded value for fecal coliform was
195 colonies/100 ml. A maximum concentration of 5,420 colonies/
100 ml was recorded on 7/28/69 (WDEQ, 1976) , exceeding State VJater
Quality Standards.
Four (4) similar violations were also registered during the
period of record. It should be noted, however, that it is extremely
difficult to determine whether these violations are due to effluent
from the Jackson treatment plant, or in part to natural background
pollutants and numerous diverse, nonpoint pollution sources.
Additional information on Snake River water quality also in-
dicates that conditions continue to deteriorate slightly in a down-
stream direction, particularly in terms of increased sediment
loading. Much of this increased load is attributed to the Hoback
River which confluences with the Snake River, approximately 12 miles
below the Flat Creek/Snake River Station.
Existing water quality conditions in the main stem of the
Snake River through the study area can generally be summed up as
good. Quality slightly deteriorates in a downstream direction,
due primarily to inadequately treated effluent from the Jackson
wastewater treatment plant, agricultural activities and extreme
11-26
-------
TABLE 4
SNAKE RIVER WATER QUALITY
(November, 1973 - November, 1975)
Parameter Mean Maximum Minimum
Dissolved oxygen (mg/1) 9.70 13.20 8.00
Specific conductivity (umhos) 148.00 231.00 110.00
Turbidity (JTU) 7.70 27.00 0.40
pH (S.U.) 8.10 8.40 7.60
Fecal coliform (colonies/100 ml) 40.50 172.00 0.00
N03 (mg/1)* 0.20 0.40 0.10
P04 (mg/1)** 0.04 0.06 0.03
* 1972-1973 only
**1976
11-27
-------
sedimentation in the Hoback River. In a few isolated cases,
standards are violated. Additional monitoring conducted by the
ongoing Teton County 208 Study is specific problem-oriented. This
data will provide a more representative data base for future waste
load determinations and stream segment analyses.
An additional consideration in analyzing the overall water
quality of the Snake River is the operation and management of
Jackson Lake Dam. Since irrigation diversions often deplete the
flow of the Gros Ventre River, the releases from Jackson Lake are
essential in maintaining the environmental condition of the Snake
River. The 1976 Snake River Management Plan identified almost
200 instances when flows in the Upper Snake have been reduced to
less than 100 cfs (range 0.30 - 97 cfs) due to the dam's operation.
If the Snake River was to be considered as a potential site for
the disposal of treated effluent, the maintenance of an adequate
flow for dilution would have to be assured in order to protect
the River and the aquatic habitat. The duration of these reduced
flow periods is unknown.
Palisades Reservoir, which is fed by the Snake River, is
currently under consideration for lake restoration. The EPA's
Lake and Reservoir Assessment (1976) classifies Palisades as being
mesotrophic (in the earlier stages of the eutrophication) and as
a "lake cleanup" candidate as determined by the study- Since
phosphate concentrations and phosphorus to nitrogen ratios are
normally the limiting nutrient in Western water bodies, any increases
in point and non-point source to the Snake need to be analyzed
in terms of its eventual impact on Palisades. A preliminary survey
of nutrient loading on Palisades Reservoir conducted jointly by EPA laboratories
at Corvallis, Oregon, and las Vegas, Nevada, concludes that nonpoint sources
contributed essentially all the known phosphorus and nitrogen loading (see
Appendix 4). Jackson's current wastewater treatment plant produces less than
three percent of the total annual phosphorus and nitrogen loading on the reservoir.
GENERAL HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
In the Snake River Basin, which encompasses approximately
5,139 square miles in western Wyoming, streamflow discharge is
directly related to spring and early summer snowmelt. On unreg-
ulated streams, an excess of 50 percent of the runoff occurs during
periods of peak snowpack melt in May and June. Flows during the
remainder of the year are augmented by precipitation, inflow through
soil, and groundwater from aquifer systems.
Aquifers in alluvium and glacial deposits in the study area
are recharged by precipitation and surface water percolation.
Although precipitation is greatest in winter and spring, recharge
is greatest in spring and summer when snow is melting, precipitation
is occurring as rain, and streamflow is highest. Recharge also
occurs during this period from irrigated lands and canal and ditch
leakage. Aquifers in other than alluvium and glacial deposits are
11-28
-------
also recharged by precipitation. Recharge in these types of rock
may also occur by discharge from one aquifer to another, partic-
ularly in faulted areas. Groundwater in the study area moves from
areas of recharge to areas of discharge. The flow of surface
waters may be increased significantly where groundwater discharges
to streams (Cox, 1974).
Surface Water
The study area is drained by the Snake River system, which
heads into Teton County above Jackson Lake Reservoir, flows south
across the county through Jackson Hole just west of the Town of
Jackson and into Idaho at Alpine. Most of the streams in the
Jackson area originate in the uplands surrounding Jackson Hole
and flow to the Snake River. Major tributaries to the Snake River
in the study area in terms of discharge by downstream order include:
Pacific Creek, Buffalo Fork, Spread Creek, Cottonwood Creek, Gros
Ventre, Fish Creek, Flat Creek and Hoback River.
Streamflow characteristics for the surface waters in the
Jackson Study Area vary in a wide range because of climate, topo-
graphic and geologic features discussed in other sections of this
report. Since precipitation is relatively light in the immediate
study area (approximately 15 inches annually), these features have
great impact on streamflow. Practically all streamflow is associated
with snowmelt. In general, reaches of streams in Jackson Hole that
are topographically high lose water and those that are topographically
low gain water. Rainfall on snowpack and intense rainfall during
summer thunderstorms further contribute to stream flows. In some
streams like Mosquito and Spring Creeks, flow may be augmented
from groundwater during certain times of the year. In other streams,
such as the Gros Ventre River, flow may be dramatically reduced
in the summer by irrigation diversions.
Streamflow data has been collected by several agencies for
several streams in the study area. Although most of the data are
on larger streams, generalizations can be made on streamflow
characteristics for most of the streams in the Jackson area from
information supplied in reports by Cox (1974, 1975) and the Wyoming
Department of Environmental Quality (1976).
Approximately 4,632,500 acre-feet of surface water flow leave
the Snake River Basin annually, according to the Wyoming Department
of Environmental Quality (1976). Jackson Lake Reservoir is the key
storage reservoir. It is estimated that some 83,700 acre-feet of
surface water are consumed by irrigation, 50 acre-feet per year
by the timber industry, 700 acre-feet per year by municipal, domestic
and stock water uses, and 4,700 acre-feet per year by reservoir
evaporation.
Surface water quality in the Snake River Basin is generally
good. Surface water quality in the immediate study area is discussed
in detail in the preceeding section of this report.
11-29
-------
Groundwater
Groundwater conditions in the Snake River Basin are the result
of climate, topography, geology and the activities of man. The
primary sources of groundwater in the Jackson Study Area are pre-
cipitation and infiltration from surface streams, lakes and irrigated
lands, with depth to groundwater varying from zero in swampy areas
to nearly 200 feet along the front of the Gros Ventre Range. Depth
to groundwater in the Snake River flood plain is extremely variable,
with reported well fluctuations of from one to sixteen feet occurring
in response to changes in river stages.
Groundwater, mostly from wells in alluvium and glacial deposits,
provides water for municipal, domestic, fish-rearing, commercial
and recreation uses. Very little groundwater is pumped for irriga-
tion because surface water supplies are more economically avail-
able. Groundwater depletions for the Snake River Basin in 1970
were estimated at 1,430 acre-feet for municipal, domestic, commercial
and recreation uses, and 680 acre-feet for irrigation. Irrigated
lands were largely within Star Valley, according to the WDEQ (1976).
It is anticipated that groundwater development will continue to
grow with tourism and population growth. Although supply is gen-
erally considered adequate, some drawdown may be evidenced as the
number of wells and groundwater withdrawals increase.
Although monitoring data is limited for the deep aquifer
systems in the study area (particularly for biological parameters),
existing information indicates that groundwater quality in the
Snake River Basin is generally good. Water is of a Calcium bi-
carbonate type; moderately hard to very hard varying with geologic
and hydrologic processes. Yields of wells range from a few gallons
per minute for many private domestic wells to 2,000 gallons per
minute for three large municipal wells near Jackson. According
to permits issued by the State Engineer's office, approximately
600 wells have been drilled in Teton County (Ablondi, 1976). It
is estimated that at least this many more were drilled prior to
requiring permits.
The chemical quality of groundwater in Jackson Hole is affected
by the quality of water in nearby streams, according to Cox (1974).
In general, groundwater is of excellent quality on the west side
of the valley as is the quality of the streams flowing from the
Teton Range. On the east side of the valley near Jackson and the
Gros Ventre River, groundwater is higher in dissolved solids.
Groundwater systems near the Snake River are generally of good
quality.
Table 5 presents a comparison of selected chemical parameters
from two fairly representative sampling stations in Teton County
with recommended U.S. Public Health Service Drinking Water Stan-
dards (1962). This comparison provides a general indication of
existing groundwater quality in the study area.
11-30
-------
TABLE 5
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
A Comparison of Selected Chemical Parameters Monitored
at the Jackson Well (October 31, 1973) and Buffalo Fork
Station (November 17, 1971) with Recommended U.S. Public
Health Service Standards.*
Recommended U.S.
Public Health
Level Observed Service Standards
Constituent Buffalo Fork Jackson mg/1
Chloride (Cl) 10.000 - 250.0
Floride (F) 0.270 0.3 1.7 - 2.4
Iron (Fe) 0.019 - 0.3
Nitrate (N03) 1.000 2.4 45.0
Sulfate (S04) 25.000 55.0 250.0
Dissolved Solids 136.000 247.0 500.0
*Information from Ablondi (1976) and Cox (1974).
11-31
-------
Levels observed for all six of the selected parameters fall
well below recommended U.S. Public Health Service Standards. It
should be noted, however, that this comparison is general in nature.
Wells throughout the study area, and particularly in densely pop-
ulated shallow groundwater areas near Jackson and Wilson, have
shown the presence of coliform bacteria as the result of septic
tank contamination. Chemical and biological constituents in ground-
water samples collected throughout the study area will vary with
aquifer systems and hydrologic and geologic processes.
Relatively few known problems of well contamination have
occurred in Teton County- Contamination of domestic wells in Jackson
Hole, however, has become increasingly prevalent in the past five
years. In one study conducted by the County Sanitarian, approx-
imately 30 wells have been classified as "unsafe" and nearly 50
as "atypical." A later well sampling program conducted by the
208 agency (1976) failed to reveal contamination of domestic wells,
but these programs were conducted in different areas, at a different
time of year, utilizing modified techniques. Factors contributing
to these findings are somewhat localized and include contamination
from improperly functioning septic tank systems, poorly sealed
well casings, drilling wells into unsafe aquifers, and the fluc-
tuating level of localized aquifers.
NONPOINT SOURCES
Information on nonpoint source pollution in the Jackson Study
Area is limited, although it is anticipated that additional data
will be collected through several of the Teton County areawide
208 waste treatment management studies presently underway. These
studies include an evaluation of the effect of elk and cattle
wastes on Flat Creek and Spring Creek, an extensive investigation
of the effects of silviculture activities on the area's water
quality, and a study to determine the effects of urban runoff on
Jackson and vicinity water quality.
The "Snake River Basin Water Quality Management Plan" prepared by the
WDEQ in February 1976 identifies erosion as the most serious potential
nonpoint pollution source in the Jackson area. Although many of the ero-
sion problems in the study area are attributed to natural causes, human
activities (including land development, construction, irrigation, live-
stock grazing and recreational activities) contribute somewhat to in-
creased sedimentation of local streams.
The high natural erosion rates in the Gros Ventre River drainage
and the practice of discharging irrigation water from the Gros Ventre
11-32
-------
to Flat Creek can, during spring runoff, add substantial amounts
of sediment to Flat Creek. Levee construction and maintenance
on the^Snake River have also resulted in sporadic increases in
turbidity and sediment loading to these water courses. These ac-
tivities will undoubtedly continue to affect water quality in the
drainages until such time as existing water use and water quality
protection practices are improved.
Grazing and farming can also contribute to water degradation
in Teton County and the study area. It has been estimated by the
U.S. Soil Conservation Service that erosion losses associated with
improper application of water to farmlands in the study area may
exceed 20 tons of soil per acre per year in the Snake River Basin.
Soil erosion maps have been prepared for the basin by the S.C.S.
Highest erosion rates are found in the drainage of the upper Hoback
and Salt Rivers. Dry cropland farming is considered the most
erosive practice. Grazing, because it is better administered and
less intensive, is generally considered least erosive. Pasturing
stock along streams in meadows and irrigated grassland has been
indicated as a possible source of increased turbidity in the study
area. Runoff from corrals and grazing areas has been considered
as a source of increased nutrient loading, but no definitive evi-
dence has been developed.
Another minor nonpoint pollution source identified in the
report is the National Elk Refuge located in the Flat Creek Drainage.
The Refuge occupies approximately 24,000 acres of land adjacent
to the Town of Jackson. The Refuge feeds some 60 percent (8,000 head)
of the Jackson Hole elk herd during the winter months. As part
of the 208 agency's work plan, data on the relationship between
the winter elk herd and water quality was collected. Very little
increase in degradation was shown to be directly attributable to
the elk herd. The State of Wyoming owned South Park Elk Feedground
lies approximately eight miles south of Jackson along the north
bank of the Snake River. The site occupies 636 acres of land and
feeds approximately 800 - 1,000 elk through five months of winter.
The unit is being considered for the location of sewerage lagoons
in the Jackson Facilities Plan alternatives. Most of the unit is
situated in the flood plain of Flat Creek and the Snake River.
Along with possible elk-generated bacterial, nutrient and sediment.pollutants,
the unit is also thought to contribute, though not significantly, to the area's
water pollution problems in terms of recreational use and activities. During
the past five years, the unit has averaged 13,705 visitor days annually. The
impact of the National Elk Refuge on local water quality is undergoing ex-
tensive study under the Teton County 208 program, as mentioned earlier.
Ground and surface water contamination from individual waste
disposal systems has also been shown in the study area. Numerous
shallow wells in the densely populated Jackson area have demon-
strated coliform bacteria levels exceeding U.S. Public Health
Service Drinking Water Standards. This problem is magnified in
areas of high groundwater where a continuous aquifer receives septic
tank effluents and also supplies domestic water from wells
(Ablondi, 1976).
11-33
-------
A number of nonpoint source water quality problems exist in
the 310,443 acre Grand Teton National Park. During the past seven
years the number of visitors to the park has ranged from 2.8 -
3.3 million, according to the National Park Service (1976). This
number is expected to increase to 5.5 million by 1979, representing
a population of some sixteen times the total of Wyoming. Tourist
activities include float trips, boating, hiking, fishing and camp-
ing. All of these activities can contribute to water quality
degradation in the form of increased nutrients, coliform bacteria,
oils and grease, and sedimentation in lakes and streams. Indirect
activities including construction of additional park facilities,
roads and parking facilities, accelerated erosion from fire control,
and revegetation projects also affect water quality in the Jackson
area.
Silviculture is another important nonpoint pollution source
in the Wyoming Snake River Basin. Approximately 76 percent of
the acreage in the basin is managed by the U.S. Forest Service.
Physical processes including surface erosion, mass soil movement,
channel erosion, organic composition and stream temperature are
all affected by timber management practices. These processes in
turn affect water quality in the Jackson area in terms of additional
sediment loads and organic matter; increased levels of forest
chemicals including pesticides, fertilizers and fire retardants;
increased nutrient and pathogen levels; and temperature regime
fluctuations caused by reduction of shade by streamside vegetation
removal. The magnitude of the effects of silviculture on water
quality in the Jackson area have not been fully determined. The
Teton County 208 Program will be studying this potential impact.
FLOOD HAZARDS
Floods are a natural and recurring process. Streams and
rivers periodically overflow their banks taking possession of
some portion of their natural flood plains and floodways about
once every two or three years. Greater floods which occupy larger
portions of the flood plain occur less frequently-
Inundation of natural floodlands occurs when the amount of
water entering the stream channel is greater than the hydraulic
capacity of the channel. Floods will vary in area inundated,
suddenness, duration, and frequency with natural and certain man-
made conditions. The natural conditions include the total amount
of rainfall and snowmelt, the intensity and geographic distribution
of that rainfall and snowmelt, storm patterns, preceeding moisture
conditions, temperature and season of the year. Physical features
such as watershed configuration, topography, soils, geology and
drainage patterns also influence flood conditions. The man-made
conditions include land use changes, alteration of drainage
patterns and various other factors that affect storm-water runoff.
As urbanization has proceeded, encroachment on the flood plain
of many incompatible land uses has occurred. While many of the
original settlements were located on high ground near rivers and
11-34
-------
creeks, settlements soon spread to nearby areas including low-
lying floodlands; and urban development occurred either to take
advantage of level lands or to capitalize on close-in sites.
Flooding in the Jackson Study Area occurs annually, primarily as
the result of spring snowmelt. The extent of this flooding depends
on the quantity of snow cover and rate of melting which is directly
affected by spring temperatures. Spring snow or rainstorms can
also augment snowmelt and compound the flooding situation.
The Snake River originates in the high plateaus of Yellowstone
Park and flows south through Jackson Hole west of the Town of
Jackson. The river drains some 1,878 square miles above the mouth
of the Gros Ventre River and 2,500 square miles at the Wilson
Bridge near Wilson, Wyoming (Corps of Engineers, 1976). The mean
basic elevation upstream from the Wilson Bridge is about 6,200
feet above sea level with an average stream slope of about 19
feet per mile through the study area.
The history of flooding through the study area is well known
to local residents. Annual flood damage is sufficient to require
construction of the Jackson Hole Flood Control Project, completed
by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in 1964. The Project consists
of operating the Jackson Lake Dam and Reservoir for flood control
and irrigation and a series of levees which contain the Snake
River from river mile 974.4 (11.2 miles above the Wilson Bridge)
to river mile 959.0 about four miles below the Wilson Bridge.
In addition, the Wyoming Game and Fish Department constructed
800 feet of levees to protect the South Park Elk Feedground.
Jackson Lake was originally a natural lake. Prior to the
Jackson Hole Flood Control Project, the control structure was
operated primarily for irrigation. The Lake now contains approx-
imately 25 percent of the flood control storage for Palisades
Reservoir and will regulate the 100-Year Flood. The 100-Year
Flood is that flood which has an average frequency occurrence
of once every 100 years, or a one percent chance of occurring in
a given year. However, it is important to note that this flood
may occur more than once in 100 years, on successive years, and
more than once in a given year.
The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) has established
the 100-Year Flood as the basis for determining minimum land use
measures for new construction or substantial improvements to ex-
isting development in flood hazard areas. The NFIP requires that
communities notified of potential flood hazard and participating
in the program impose minimum land use/construction requirements
on development in the flood plain, insuring that the proposed
development is "reasonably safe" from flooding. The program also
requires purchase of flood insurance for all acquisition and new
construction in special flood hazard areas that are federally
financed. Federal financing restrictions include restrictions
on all federal programs involving building (i.e., SBA, Hill Burton
Act, EDA, EPA, etc.), housing financing (i.e., VA, BIA, etc.),
11-35
-------
mortgage insurance programs (i.e., FHA, VA, FmHA, etc.), and all
conventional lending backed by FDIC, FSLIC, etc. The Town of
Jackson is presently participating in the program, while Teton
County and Wilson are not. The implications of the NFIP are dis-
cussed in more detail in the land use section of this report.
The 100-Year Flood discharge for the Snake River is 23,300 cfs.
Boundaries of the 100- and 500-Year flood plain are shown in Figure 8.
Since 1890, there have been seven years in which major floods
(flows of 22,000 cfs or more) have occurred. The peak discharges
at the Wilson Bridge for these floods as estimated by the Corps
of Engineers are shown in Table 6.
Velocities in the river channel through the Jackson Study
Area range up to 14 feet per second. Low velocities occur in
shallow depths and in ponding areas, while higher velocities occur
in the main channel. Velocities over three feet per second combined
with flood depths of three feet or more are generally considered
potentially hazardous in terms of flood damage.
Flood duration in the reach of the Snake River flowing through
the study area is approximately 30 days, according to the Corps
of Engineers (1976). Flood stages characteristically rise and
recede slowly in the study area.
The levee portion of the project, since completion in 1964,
has provided some protection against annual flooding to the Town
of Wilson. Although originally designed to accommodate flows of the
500-Year Flood (45,000 cfs), annual maintenance and repair have
been necessary to contain flows of the 50-Year Flood. Costs for
annual maintenance of the system presently amount to approximately
$70,000 according to information supplied by the Corps of Engineers.
These costs apply to the mean annual flood flow of 13,000 cfs
(Haible, 1976). The local/federal contributions for annual main-
tenance are approximately $25,000/$45,000 respectively. These
estimates compare to an average annual loss of some $26,000 for
the portion of the Snake River flood plain from the Park to the
lower highway bridge.
Because of the concern that the levees will not contain the
50- or 100- and perhaps even the 25-Year Flood, the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers is presently preparing a "Levee System Design Deficiency
Report, Snake River, Jackson, Wyoming." Although not complete,
discussions with the Corps of Engineers indicate that the study is
considering a number of alternative actions for the levee system
ranging from present partial rehabilitation and annual maintenance
to complete rehabilitation to original design standards at an
estimated cost of some $15,000,000. High costs for total renno-
vation are escalated because of the problem of lateral erosion which
is characteristic of levees built on braided or wide, shallow
sandbed streams. In these situations, levees fail due to the
undercutting action of the shallow flows rather than from over-
topping. The problem of maintenance is also compounded by lack of,
11-36
-------
FLOOD PLAIN
500 YEAR FLOOD PLAIN'
(CORPS OF ENGINEERS
FLOOD SURVEY 1976)
Figure 8
-------
TABLE 6
ESTIMATED PEAK DISCHARGES
FOR THE SNAKE RIVER AT WILSON BRIDGE*
Year Peak Discharge (cfs)
1894 41,000
1918 32,500
1904 28,500
1909 25,900
1917 23,400
1927 22,900
1943 22,800
*Information from Special Flood Hazard Information, Snake
River, Wilson, Wyoming and Vicinity, February, 1976, U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers.
-------
and costs for maintaining access roads. The high costs are most
directly associated with the costs of providing high grade rip-rap.
As previously mentioned, the Jackson Hole area is an area
of high seismic activity. Another important consideration related
to flood hazard along the Snake River is the possibility of severe
flooding downstream from Jackson Lake Dam in the event of a severe
earthquake and dam failure. The U.S. Geological Survey has analyzed
the potential impacts of such an event in their recent report:
"Hydrologic Effects of Hypothetical Earthquake-Caused Floods Below
Jackson Lake, Northwestern Wyoming" (1976). In this report,
variations of dam and outlet structure failure were examined, peak
discharges were calculated and an inundation map prepared. Effects
of the most extensive flooding (that experienced with instantaneous
destruction of the entire dam) included extensive scour, fill
and re-position of the channel, destruction of buildings (partic-
ularly in the Town of Wilson) and flood plain vegetation, and
possible contamination of domestic wells. Areas subject to innun-
dation by flooding which would result from this catastrophic event,
similar to the 500-Year Flood, are shown on Figure 8.
The reach of Flat Creek from the Town of Jackson to South
Park Road (Figure 9) is also subject to periodic flooding during
the winter months. Flat Creek presently receives treated effluent
from the Jackson sewage treatment plant. Localized flooding caused
by ice blockage can occur, with water depths varying from ten (10)
to two (2) feet or less on the flat lands. Flooding generally
occurs between December and March, presenting hazard to livestock
and agricultural facilities in the area.
Flooding along Flat Creek, because of its nature, is not sub-
ject to the same analysis as flooding caused by runoff in stream
channels. Flat Creek is the only stream in the region known to
flood in this manner, according to Haible (1976). According to
information supplied by the Corps of Engineers, however, detailed
data does exist for a portion of Flat Creek in the form of a special
flood hazard survey performed in October, 1976. This survey includes
a portion of the creek through the Town of Jackson. A Flood Hazard
Boundary Map (revised 4/16/76) has also been prepared for the
Town of Jackson by the Department of Housing and Urban Development,
delineating the limits of the 100-Year Flood. This map is pres-
ently utilized by lenders to determine flood insurance require-
ments for new construction in Jackson.
EPA policy, as directed by Executive Order 11296, indicates
treatment facilities funded by the government will be evaluated
for flood hazard. The regulatory principle used for the evaluation
is the flood having a 100-year recurrence interval. It is therefore
likely that any alternative site for the Jackson sewage treatment
facility located in the 100-Year flood plain would be required to
incorporate flood-proofing and/or elevation provisions in design
which minimize flood hazards. (Costs associated with flood-proofing
the Jackson facility to the level of the 100-Year Flood have not
been included in cost evaluation analysis of the alternatives.)
11-38
-------
MAJOR RIVER AND STREAM CHANNELS AND
ADJACENT LOW LAND SUBJECT TO SPRING
RUNOFF FLOODING ONCE EVERY 10 YEARS
LOW TERRACE LANDS ALONG THE SNAKE RIVER
SUBJECT TO SPRING RUNOFF FLOODING ONCE
EVERY 25-50 YEARS DUE TO POSSIBLE FAIL-
URES IN THE PRESENT FLOOD CONTROL PRO-
JECT LEVEES
LANDS ALONG FLAT CREEK FREQUENTLY FLOOD
ED DURING THE WINTER DUE TO STREAMFLOW
DIVERSION AROUND ICE BLOCKAGE
Source, Livingston and Associates, 1976
..XX)
Figure 9
-------
These costs will vary considerably with location and are dependent
on elevation information presently being developed by the Corps of
Engineers.
The final EPA grant regulations concerning evaluation of flood
hazard for wastewater treatment construction grants were published
in the Federal Register on May 8, 1974 (40CRF 30.405-10), and are
also included in EPA Program Requirements Memorandum (PRM) No. 75-28.
Effective July 1, 1975 (or one year after a community's notification
as a flood-prone community, whichever is later), EPA is prohibited
by law from making any grant for acquisition or construction pur-
poses in a flood hazard area unless the community in which the
project is located is participating in the flood insurance program,
and flood insurance is purchased by the grantee. Participation
must begin with construction and continue for the entire useful
life of the project. The amount of insurance required is the
total project cost, excluding facilities which are uninsurable
under the NFIP (in the case of sewage treatment works, eligible
facilities are generally restricted to building structures, as
defined by HUD) and the cost of land; or the maximum limit of
coverage made available to the grantee under the program, which-
ever is less. The required insurance premium for the period of
construction, whether assumed by the grantee or the contractor,
is an allowable project cost. The list of communities determined
as "flood prone" is published on a monthly basis by HUD.
The maximum insurance coverage for all types of buildings
other than residential under the Emergency Program of the NFIP
is $100,000 per building, at a federally subsidized rate of
40Ł/$100 coverage per year. Once Flood Hazard Rate Maps have been
prepared and the community has entered the Regular Program of the
NFIP, maximum insurance coverage of $200,000 per building for
actuarial rates (proportionate to the flood hazard) is available.
In the case of the Jackson was.tewater treatment facility,
the Town of Jackson is participating in the Emergency Program of
the NFIP. However, flood-prone areas for Teton County have not
been identified by HUD, and the county is not participating in
the program. Although EPA regulations prohibit making any grant
for acquisition or construction in a flood hazard area unless the
community in which the project is located is participating in
the NFIP and flood insurance is purchased, these regulations would
not mandate purchase of flood insurance for the proposed Jackson
treatment facility prior to making a grant because Teton County
has not been notified by HUD of flood hazard. EPA cannot require
a community by virtue of funding regulations, as in the case of
Jackson, to enter the NFIP in order to receive a grant. If, however,
Teton County were in the program, the Town of Jackson would be
required to purchase flood insurance as a provision of grant approval
Under the Emergency Program, the Town would be required to purchase
$100,000 coverage at the subsidized rate of 40Ł/$100 and annual
cost of $400. Once Teton County entered the Regular Program,
the amount of available and required coverage would increase to
11-39
-------
$200,000. However, the actuarial rate (based on discussions with
HUD) would probably decrease to about 20
-------
predominant species in the valley floor are the big sagebrush
(Artemisia tridentata) and crested wheat grass (Ayropyron spicatum)
according to Shaw (1974). This cover type, when undisturbed, has
a moderate capacity for intercepting rainfall and decreasing sur-
face runoff and erosion.
The South Park Study Area is characterized by agricultural
cover types including grass and alfalfa hay and pasture. The
greatest percentage of these agricultural lands were once riparian,
marshland and sagebrush-grass types. This change to an agriculture
ground cover provides only a low interception capacity and a low
impedance to surface runoff.
The area is also characterized by riparian vegetative types
including cottonwoods (Populus deltoides) and dwarf maple (Acer sp.)
along the Gros Ventre and Snake Rivers and the marshland cover
types (cattails, rushes and sedges) which emerge along Flat Creek.
Aspen also occurs along the transitional slopes of the study area,
although a recent decline has been observed in the region (Lower
Valley Power and Light, Inc., 1974). Riparian vegetative types
usually provide high erosion protection and capacity for filtering
out sediment from overland flows. Maintenance of the cover is
naturally important for sediment control and streambank protection.
A conifer type cover characterizes the upper hillslopes and
steeper sloping topography which surrounds the study area. Lodge-
pole pine (Pinus contorta) and Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii)
are the predominant forest types in the area. Douglas fir may
reach an age of 400 to 600 years, with maximum diameters of four
to five feet according to Shaw (1974). Limber pine (Pinus flexilus)
are also found on these hillslopes and in the lower valley area.
Dominant understory plants in the higher elevations include pine-
grass (Calamagrostis rubescens), wild rye (Elymus glauca) and big
whortleberry (Vaccinium sp.). This cover type has a high capacity
for intercepting precipitation and retarding surface flow. In
most cases, the conifer type cover protects the ground from erosion.
However, water concentrated by construction activities may develop
enough force to destroy this protective cover.
The impact of development on the Jackson Study Area vegeta-
tion is an important consideration for the proposed project. Per-
haps the most important aspect of this consideration in terms of
the project is the loss of vegetation on the valley floor and
the increase in areas covered by impervious surfaces associated
with urban development (parking areas, rooftops, roads, etc.)
made possible by the availability of the proposed facility. This
activity can cause a decrease in the overall watershed capacity
of the watershed soils, as stated by Livingston (1976), which in
turn lead to increased flows in stream channels and increased
stream channel erosion. Increased storm runoff to stream channels
with resultant erosion and bank slippage has occurred in portions
of the study area, particularly on Mosquito, Cottonwood, and Crane
Creeks. The streams are characterized by gentle sloping and steep
sides, streambank vegetation not only stabilizing the streambank,
11-41
-------
but also providing a buffer to trap sediment washing downslope
and affording shade for game fish rearing. This potential to de-
grade water and stream channel quality should be considered in
any future development of the area.
Wildlife and Terrestrial Habitat
Within the South Park Study Area and the neighboring lands
several outstanding wildlife habitats exist. While the majority
of this region, as one looks across the flat valley bottom, has
been placed in agriculture, the fence row bordering flood plains
and forested hillsides all provide a stable and supporting environ-
ment for a number of seasonal and resident species. Two areas
of particular wildlife significance, in terms of their carrying
capacity and importance during the critical winter months, are
the Snake River flood plain and channel meanders and the State's
South Park Elk Feedground. Both areas provide a wintering area
for the predominant big game species of the region, elk, moose,
and deer (Figure 10).
In general not a great deal of information is available on
the species diversity or habitat conditions within the project
area. A number of studies and articles have been published cover-
ing the flora and fauna of Jackson Hole, but these (discussing
the area in question) pertain to the entire valley. The Wyoming
Department of Game and Fish has detailed records on the types
and numbers of game species and has classified the general ranges
of these animals and their critical and winter habitat. A habitat
analysis for the South Park Elk Feedground and adjacent South
Park lands was initiated but has not been finalized for distri-
bution at the time of this printing.
Within Jackson Hole it is possible to encounter a number of
non-game mammalian and avian species including black bear, mountain
lion, bobcat, Canadian lynx, wolverine, and beaver. Other smaller
species include otter, raccoon, marmot, chipmunk, red squirrel,
badger, weasel, ground squirrel, and skunk.
A variety of avian species migrate through the region each
year. Geese, trumpeter swan, a variety of ducks (teal, mallards,
goldeneye, etc.) and wading birds inhabit the lakes and rivers
during their yearly migrations. Raptors including osprey and
bald eagles nest and fish along the Snake River. The peregrine
falcon and other more common hawks and falcons can be observed
hunting in the area along with a number of other interesting species
including the gray jay, horned owl, magpie, tanager, and mountain
blue bird.
While all the wildlife species are important in terms of
the general environmental balance of the region, the effects that
any proposed development would have on big game of the region
are particularly significant. Historically a good portion of
the economy of the Jackson area has been dependent upon the local
11-42
-------
' »* A V *^^:%^^§^S^r^~^~^~>--^~*-~^-'' -*- -MB
111.^ \^^~^-%-^-^-^^l?Ł~^Ą^-t-^~^~-^^ -»-* .
Y»V.
BIG GAME DISTRIBUTION SOUTH PARK
[^ ^J CRITICAL MOOSE HABITAT
LfJUH CRITICAL ELK WINTERIMG
K22 HABITAT
p-Z-ij ELK WIVTERIVG HABITAT
jf|||I CRITICAL DEER WINTERING
DEER WINTERIMG HABITAT
STATE ELK FEEDING REFUGE
GAME MIGRATION ROUTE
SOURCE WOY. SAME
FISH
Figure 10
-------
residents acting as hunting guides for out-of-state hunters. It
has also been noted by several authors that the wintering elk herds
have been a special emotional tie for the local residents since
the turn of the century. The acquisition of land for the present
National Elk Refuge (not to be confused with the South Park Elk
Feedground) north of Jackson was initiated in 1911 to protect and
manage the Yellowstone elk herds. It annually winters"over 8,000-
10,000 head.
The South Park Elk Feedground was established in 1939 and,
following the acquisition of several additional land parcels, con-
tains 636 acres at the narrow end of the valley. Appendix 1 contains
a comprehensive summary and description of the site prepared for
the Wyoming Game and Fish Commission pursuant to the request by
the Town of Jackson for a long term lease.
The basic purpose of the South Park Elk Feedground is to
provide for the maintenance of approximately 800-1,000 head of elk.
Animals that would either starve during hard winters or damage
surrounding ranch property in their search for winter forage are
fed first on the natural vegetation on the unit and later on im-
ported hay as the winter snow builds up.
On the average an elk spends 149 days on the Feedground at a
cost to the State of Wyoming of $41.50 per season. The purchase
of local supplemental feed accounts for a large portion of the
$38,000 a year operating budget.
•The site serves as an ideal habitat for the animals that
inhabit the unit. The combination of open grass/meadows and the
dense stands of cottonwoods provides both food and protection.
A necessary amount of open-space is available as required as a
buffer zone between the elk and adjacent human activities. The
flood plain corridor created by the Snake River enables animals to
migrate on and off the Feedground without undue harassment.
According to the Department of Game and Fish, without feeding
grounds of this nature the elk herd would not have sufficient
winter range to survive since historical winter ranges and migration
routes have been used for other purposes or blocked by the pro-
gress of civilization.
Since most of the unit is situated in the known flood plains
of Flat Creek and the Snake River, the Department of Game and Fish
built over 800 feet of dike in 1957-1958 to keep the Snake from
flooding into Flat Creek and inundating the unit. Even though
the area is protected from human intrusion during the winter, it
provides a great deal of recreational opportunities the other
seven months of the year. Over 1,727 hunter days are sustained
as a result of management goals for the herd; between 500-1,200
fishermen used Flat Creek during 1974; and the unit has averaged
over 13,705 visitor days and 1,000 camper days per season.
In addition to the elk, other species of wildlife such as
moose, deer, raptor, water fowl, and upland game birds are also
present.
11-43
-------
Aquatic Habitat
Both Plat Creek and the Snake River are known to support an
active self-sustaining cold water fishery. The Snake River is a
trophy stream known to sportsmen throughout the country. A number
of guides and river boatmen work out of Jackson during the summer
and early fall offering scenic trips and fishing expeditions. The
Wyoming Department of Game and Fish manages the fishery of the
Snake River in terms of establishing and regulating bag limits.
Very little is known about the fishery potential of the lower
reaches of Flat Creek below the Town of Jackson. The area in
question is exclusively private with the only public access at
the South Park Elk Feedground. Fishing in town is usually limited
to children and the elderly, and fishing access to Flat Creek as
it crosses the National Elk Refuge is controlled and limited to
late summer. Within the South Park Study Area, Flat Creek is not
considered to be of particular importance as a public fish resource
due to the lack of access points and availability of other high
quality streams in the area. The discharges from the existing
wastewater treatment facility, according to recent data (see
Section on Water Quality), do not present a fishery limiting pro-
blem as a result of either oxygen depletion or ammonia toxicity.
Rare and Endangered Species
The Endangered Species Act of 1973 authorized the Secretary
of the Interior to designate threatened as well as endangered
animals and plants. The Act officially recognizes two categories:
1) Endangered Species and 2) Threatened Species. The endangered
list has been completed but no official list of threatened species
has been promulgated. According to information published by the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, both the American peregrine falcon
and the blackfoot ferret may be found as either transient or res-
ident in the South Park area. In addition, both the Canadian lynx
and wolverine, considered threatened in the Western United States
by most experts, have been seen in the study area.
No plant species have yet been declared threatened or endangered
under the terms of the 1973 Act. In 1974, the Smithsonian Institute
submitted a list of 2,099 plants in the Continental United States
for consideration as provided by the Act. No plant species on
this list or the 57 additional plants added later are known to
occur in the study area.
LAND USE PLANNING
The use of land is perhaps the most basic of all environmental
issues. Sound land use is fundamental both to preserving stable
ecosystems and to controlling pollution.
11-44
-------
As with highways, the construction of sewers can have a ma-
jor effect on local land use. Impacts represent real costs to
the community—costs that may be reduced by proper land use con-
trols and public facilities planning.
Because of the scenic grandeur and environmental sensitivity
of the Jackson area, the link between sound land use and public
facilities planning is particularly important. The environmental
impacts for the proposed Town of Jackson sewage treatment plant
will vary according to how much development occurs, the spatial
pattern and density in which it emerges, the speed at which it
progresses and the natural characteristics of the site. This
section investigates this relationship by reviewing existing land
use and the status of current land use planning in the Jackson
Study Area and analyzing the proposed "Teton County Comprehensive
Plan" and its relationships to wastewater facilities planning.
Existing Land Use
Teton County is sparsely settled. The existing population
is largely concentrated in a few areas and fluctuates seasonally.
The county contains a land area of approximately 2,873 square
miles. Land is of two general types: mountainous areas and the
central Jackson Hole valley floor. Teton County contains approx-
imately 1,838,720 acres, including some 1,795,328 acres of land
surface and about 43,392 acres of water surface. About 97 per-
cent of the land area in the county is government owned. Approx-
imately 75,000 acres are privately owned. Most of this land is
located in the Jackson Hole area. This scarcity of private land
dictates that what land is available must be used wisely. Table 7
provides a general breakdown of this ownership.
The land use of private lands in Teton County in 1968 is
shown in Table 8. In 1969 there were about 64,403 acres of farm-
land in the county, an increase of some 1,000 acres over the 1968
estimate (U.S. Census of Agriculture, 1969). As indicated from
the data, agriculture accounts for nearly 85 percent of the pri-
vate land uses in the county. About half of the agricultural
land is rangeland. The remaining agricultural lands are primarily
irrigated and cultivated farmland (Teton County Soil and Water
Conservation District, 1970).
The 1970 population of Teton County was approximately 6,000
people. This population represents a 77 percent increase (1,583
people) over the 1960 census. The 1975 population was estimated
at about 7,300. The Town of Jackson's estimated population for
1975 was 4,150 (Livingston, 1976).
The four basic categories of development in Teton County
include the relatively urbanized areas centered around the towns
of Jackson and Moose, mixed urban/agricultural areas of Alta and
Wilson, predominant agricultural and rural residential areas of
Jackson Hole, and scattered commercial uses at highway junctxons
11-45
-------
TABLE 7
TETON COUNTY LAND OWNERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT*
Ownership
U.S. Forest Service
U.S. Park Service
U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, U.S. Bureau of Land
Management and State of Wyoming
Private
*Information from Lower Valley Power and Light (1974)
TABLE 8
LAND USE OF PRIVATE LANDS (1968)
Percent
77.0
16.5
4.0
2.5
100.0
Land Use
Urban - Developed
Agriculture
Woodland
Vacant - Undeveloped
TOTAL
Acres
Percent
980
63,369
1,175
9,534
1.3
84.4
1.6
12.7
75,058
100.0
11-46
-------
and strip commercial development along highway frontages. Resi-
dential uses are generally of relatively high quality, while
commercial uses often violate sound planning concepts (Planning
and Research Associates, Inc., 1970).
Current economic information is not presently available for
Teton County- The County has, however, recently contracted with
the University of Wyoming to prepare a regional economic base
study.
Existing information indicates that tourism-recreation is
the dominant industry in the study area. This industry has been
the primary impetus to population growth. Agriculture is second
to tourism and recreation in its influence on the economy of the
area. Both of these economies have shown stabilizing increases in
both_population and personal incomes during the past five years,
despite a continuing decrease in acreage available to private
agricultural operators (Lower Valley Power and Light, Inc., 1974).
It is anticipated that much of the existing agricultural land
will be converted to other uses as development pressures increase.
Another important source of the local economy in the study area
is government employment and expenditures. In 1969, for example,
the government sector of the economy was more than $5,000,000.
This income is expected to continue to increase.
Transportation circulation in the study area is channeled
through the long valley floor by U.S. Highway 26, 89 and 187. In
1970 this major roadway averaged between 1,500 and 3,800 vehicles
per day at Hoback Junction (Master Plan for Teton County, 1970).
Counts taken outside Jackson indicate this daily average is ex-
ceeded frequently, as evidenced by congestion on Highway 26, 89
and 187. State Highway 22 has been improved in recent years and
provides major access from Jackson to Idaho cities to the west.
Internal circulation in the study area is provided by a fairly
adequate system of federal, state and county roads. The Jackson
Airport also plays a continually increasing and important role
in accommodating commercial and private air traffic.
Legal and Political Considerations
As in many parts of the western United States, the questions
of land use and land use planning are in the legal/political arena
in Teton County. Views on the benefits of land use planning for
the area appear to be polarized, with many of the larger land owners
opposing land use regulation for the land they own. However, the
results of recent public opinion surveys by Livingston & Associates,
the planning consultant working for Teton County, indicate that
a surprisingly large majority of the public in the County favor
what many would consider strong land use controls to protect the
various resources of the County. Eighty to 84 percent of the
respondents favored limiting development of private lands because
of natural hazards including areas of high water table unsuitable
for septic tanks; protecting terrain, vegetation and wildlife;
11-47
-------
and protecting scenic values. Eighty-one percent favored land
use regulations to preserve water quality even if the business or
ranching operation or lifestyle at home would be affected. Over
two-thirds favored limiting the pace of growth in the years ahead.
Results from a second questionnaire developed by Livingston &
Associates and the University of Wyoming Water Resources Institute,
"Proposed County Plan and Action Program," further substantiated
these findings (Livingston & Associates, 1977). In summary, over
80 percent of the respondents strongly supported the retention of
the "essential character" and environmental quality of the Jackson
Hole area. Strong support for protection of outstanding sensitive
environmental and scenic resources including wildlife habitats
was also expressed; with mixed support for preservation of agri-
cultural lands for ranching and providing land and supporting pub-
lic services to accommodate new residential development. In terms
of land use/water quality questions, respondents (86 percent)
favored concentrating future residential development around pres-
ently developed areas and 86 percent favored discouraging strip
commercial development along highway routes to Jackson. First
priority for scenic preservation was given to private lands in
the Snake River and Gros Ventre River flood plains. Potential
high density development area preferences included the existing
towns of Jackson and Wilson and the Skyline Ranch, Snake River-
Fish Creek, and Moose-Wilson Road suburban residential areas.
Indications from the initial survey that conventional zoning is
largely unacceptable to Teton County residents were not verified.
However, a majority of the residents responding did indicate sup-
port of enactment of environmental protection regulations.
Although the County does have a planning commission, created
in 1968 to develop a master plan, it does not currently have an
updated set of planning and zoning provisions. The County is
currently operating on a master plan developed in 1970 by Planning
and Research Associates, Inc., Salt Lake City, Utah. The plan is
considered law where specific. The County also enforces subdivision
regulation and neighborhood density guidelines. To prevent in-
appropriate development from occurring while the "Comprehensive
Plan and Implementation Program" are being prepared and adopted,
the County has also enacted interim "Development Regulations"
which require permits for most new developments. The regulations
call for positive findings to be made on 25 different factors in-
cluding environmental and visual impacts, water supply, waste
disposal, access, public services, agriculture, and nuisances
before a permit can be granted. Decisions are made on a project-
by-project basis.
Status of Current Planning
The consulting planning firm of Livingston & Associates is
currently under contract with Teton County to develop alternatives
for a county land use plan, as directed by state legislation en-
acted in 1975. This legislation requires counties to develop
11-48
-------
comprehensive plans. The legislation does not require implemen-
tation of the plans. It is anticipated that final adoption of
the Teton County plan will occur during the next eight to ten
months. It is not likely, however, that the plan will be adopted
prior to completion of the final EIS and approval by EPA of the
facilities plan for a new wastewater treatment plant.
Livingston & Associates is also developing a land use element
for_the Town of Jackson. Concurrently, Jackson is updating its
zoning ordinance. Jackson currently has jurisdiction for develop-
ment occurring within a one (1) mile radius of the corporate limits
of the town.
Under the Teton County 208 Study, the firm of Nelson, Haley,
Patterson and Quirk, Inc. (NHPQ) is evaluating alternative waste-
water treatment systems for the Jackson-Wilson-Teton Village area.
This evaluation concentrates on the concept of cost-effective
wastewater treatment systems. To date, two working papers have
been completed. The study considers individual waste disposal,
aerated lagoons, land application systems for the Jackson-Wilson-
Teton Village area and compares these systems to central wastewater
treatment facilities in terms of costs and operation. Among the
alternatives originally considered was to connect these scattered
communities to the proposed Jackson plant. A preliminary study
of the economic feasibility of centralizing these facilities is
underway through the 208 program. This study has not been con-
sidered further in this analysis.
Because the relationships between wastewater systems and
land use planning for the County and the Town of Jackson are in-
timately related, an assumption must be made that the general
theme of the proposed comprehensive plan, or something very similar,
will be adopted in the near future. However, it should be empha-
sized that this EIS primarily concerns only the proposed wastewater
systems and not the land use in general.
Proposed Comprehensive Plan
In general, the comprehensive plan presently being formulated
consists of a land use element assumed to be implemented primarily
by regulation and a scenic preservation element assumed to be
achieved primarily by purchase. Although the proposed plan could
easily be adapted to implementation by conventional zoning, the
County has directed the consultant to emphasize implementation
approaches that do not deal with this type of regulation. The
plan, as presently proposed, also does not deal with development
location or growth rate controls. Certain basic physical land
use constraints are used to determine maximum development densities.
The environmental protection element of the proposed plan would
classify all private lands in Teton County in one or more of eight
districts including: Flood Protection Districts; Watercourse
Protection Districts; Groundwater Protection Districts; Hillside
11-49
-------
Protection Districts; Suburban Development Districts; Low Density
Cluster Districts; Medium Density Cluster Districts; and Urban
Development Districts. A land parcel could fall within several
of these districts, and in this case presumably would be subject
to the most stringent regulation. Compensation to land owners
adversely affected by environmental regulation is also proposed
in the form of "development rights transfer." Development rights
transfer, or "density transfer," involves assignment by local
government of rights to landowners of land which is regulated.
Owners can then transfer these rights to other lands or sell them
to owners of land designated for more intensive development.
The scenic preservation element of the proposed plan assumes
that it will be necessary to establish preservation priorities
according to the degree of impact inharmonious development would
create. The element establishes four priority levels for the
purchase of scenic easements on the basis of environmental sen-
sitivity of the various lacations, the degree of control necessary
to achieve the aims of the program, and the best timing strategy-
Factors Considered
In summary, the comprehensive plan as presently formulated
considers the 10-Year and 25- to 50-Year flood plains, slope
stability due to vegetation and geology, and water table consider-
ations particularly as they affect septic tank utilization. Spe-
cifically, the proposed plan considers the following factors.
Geomorphic units. This category primarily deals with
the stability of various land units due to soil and
geologic considerations.
Groundwater categories. This category deals with the
permeability drainage characteristics and groundwater
levels.
Flood hazards. Primary consideration is given to the
10-Year Flood, where development is proposed to be
prohibited, and to the 25- to 50-Year flood plain where
certain residential developments are allowed, but high-
density residential commercial development prohibited.
Landscape units and vegetation maps. This category
primarily deals with the type of vegetation cover as
related to the particular type of,landscape unit
(e.g., river, terraces and flood plains).
It is also important for the purposes of this EIS to under-
stand the significance of factors not directly considered in the
proposed plan. Wildlife habitat units, migration routes and
fisheries, for example, are not directly considered in the planning
approach, but are said to be "implicit" in the plan. Although
many wildlife considerations are addressed in the protection of
steep slopes and flood plains, the Wyoming Department of Game and
Fish maintains there are certain wildlife considerations not
11-50
-------
integrated into the proposed comprehensive plan (i.e., protection
of migration routes and buffer areas).
A scenic study element of the plan was prepared by the U.S.
Forest Service. However,- this study is based on the general de-
scription of units, rather than a specific mapping of important
scenic vistas.
Although_special attention was given to prevention of bac-
terial contamination of groundwater, nonpathogenic water quality
considerations (nutrients) were not considered in the plan. Since
nitrates, for example, are not generally absorbed by the soil
media, they will move from the septic tanks with the groundwater
until they emerge in a surface water body and are eventually taken
up as part of the biomass. Such nitrates can act as biostimulants.
In some cases this might be beneficial if the population of de-
sirable forms of aquatic life including certain macroinvertebrates
and fish species are increased. However, the more common situation
is for water degrading forms such as algae to be stimulated in
the form of nuisance algal blooms.
An important factor to consider in comprehensive planning
is the economic feasibility of wastewater collection, treatment
and disposal systems; transportation systems; educational fa-
cilities; domestic water systems and police and fire protection.
Assuming various growth levels, the cost of the needed utilities
and facilities greatly depends on the location of development and
the configuration and density of the growth pattern. This aspect
is not included in the proposed plan as presently formulated.
Prohibiting development in the 10-Year flood plain is a
good, but somewhat outdated approach. Ultimately, Teton County
may decide, as the Town of Jackson, to enter the National Flood
Insurance Program. Land use and construction control measures
under this program equate to the "floodway" and the 100-Year
flood plain and prohibit construction of structures in delineated
floodways. The 100-year criteria are also consistent with the
levee studies presently being performed by the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers. It should also be noted that while the proposed
plan would prohibit locating sewage treatment facilities in the
10- and 25- to 50-Year flood plain areas, EPA policy requires
flood-proofing and/or elevation of sewage treatment plants to
the level of the 100-Year flood plain, as discussed earlier in
this report.
Finally, the proposed comprehensive plan does not include
a transportation element. Considering the potential impacts of
transportation systems on wastewater treatment planning, and
conversely the impacts of wastewater treatment facilities on
growth and transportation needs, the factor should be considered
significant.
11-51
-------
Land Use Element
The portion of the proposed "Teton County Comprehensive
Plan" for the study area is shown in Figure 11. The plan, in
effect, assumes that some form of residential, commercial- or
industrial development is possible for the entire 75,000 acres
of private land, with the exception of the 10-Year flood plain
areas.
The residential area densities proposed for the Town of Jack-
son and vicinity vary from ten units per acre to one unit per ten
acres (Figure 12). Residential dwelling types include single and
multi-family, townhouses and low rise apartments. In total, the
proposed plan shows residential areas including approximately
650 acres with a total saturation capacity of some 17,875 people.
Proposed residential densities for Teton Village located approx-
imately nine miles northwest of Jackson range up to 20 units per
acre.
Areas are also established for commercial development in both
the Teton County and Town of Jackson land use elements. These
areas occur adjacent to existing commercial development. The plans
suggest continuing existing types of commercial development along
the major highways. These businesses are highly dependent on and
related to tourism and recreation.
A limited amount of land south of Jackson is designated for
industrial growth. Industrial growth is defined as light industrial/
distribution (warehousing). In general, industrial land use is
designated adjacent to existing industrial uses and along U.S.
Highway 89-18-126 South.
Relationships to Wastewater Facilities
As previously mentioned, there are no locational controls
in the proposed comprehensive plan. Although residential develop-
ment densities are specified, almost every acre of land in the
county could conceivably be developed for residential purposes
on central wastewater treatment facilities or specially designed
individual systems.
Under these planning and control provisions, a number of
development situations can occur. Several potential situations
include:
1. The development may disperse throughout the county so
randomly that if a problem did occur (i.e., groundwater
contamination) a central collection and treatment system
would not be feasible.
2. Development may occur randomly outside the areas logically
serviceable by a given wastewater treatment plant loca-
tion. In the event a central system was determined
11-52
-------
ooooooooooooc
t*oooooooooooc
oooooooooooc
oooooooooooc
>OOOO<»f»OOOOOOOOOOOOor-jr.
oooooooooooc
'. •'.' *'•'•'+'T^f'?•*•:.'''v> •'*''•''
ooooooooooooooc
ooooooooooooooooooc
oooooooooooooooooo
OOOOOOOfiBSSOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
ooooooooooooooooo
ooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooo
oooooooooooo
oooooooooooooo
ooooooooooooooooooc
ooooooooooc
LAND USE-PROPOSED
Low gradjenr uplands, alluvial fans, and high t«rac« forested with conifers
nr com fers and hardwood*: clustered residential development at not more than
2 units per acre with package sewage treatment plant.
KJ ywr Mood irca^. sleep slopes, jnd njtu»tl) unstable slopes residential
development at 1 unit per 20 acres or more.
;.l ZV'O year flood areas, moderate slopes, potentially unstable slopes, and
' iter less than three feet below the surface not attributable
Existing developed areas, residential development at I unit per 1-2
Town of Jackson and v.cinitv residential development at 1-lOunitspei
HiŁh terraces and low terraces with ground water less than i feet below the
surface possibly attributable to irrigation residential development at not
than I unit per (i acres, or not more than I unit per 3 acres if ground wall
level drops below ^ feet uixm removal of irrigation.
below the surf ice' residential development at not more than 1 unit per 5 acres.
,"j Unforested low gradient uplands flustered residential development at n
>re than 1 unit per acre with package sewage treatment plant.
SCALE ' 24OOO
Source, Livingston and Associates, 1976
Figure 11
-------
PROPOSED LAND USE
TOWN OF JACKSON
*~^--s-~ *-J ""J
".--»- ,J
J*>VJ
lOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO'
OOOOO_OOOOOOOOOOOOO'_
•^OaOOO OTOlDQOOOQQQOgl
IS
CTQ'
to
I-- '-Ui_, ;"H;
"•-' '-s- - - T--~ -^ 14
Residential:
1 unit per 10 acres
Retail/service
commercial
Residential:
1-2 units per acre
Residential:
3-5 units per acre
j.- j Residential:
6-10 units per acre
i>r.Ł_-I Visitor commercial
DOCJ
DOOUUUO
___
oooooooooooooooooooooooq
oooopooooooooooooooooooq
•e«>®ec>ooooooooooooooooooo]
oooooooooooooooooooooooq
~ooooooooooooooooooooooc!
" ""ooooooooooooooooooq
oooooooooooooooooog
•ooooooooooooooooooq
- - ~-ŁiŁiQ^c?iQ^Łf
Source, Livingston and Associates, 1976
Light industrial/
distribution
Public utility
School, public building,
hospital, church, rodeo
grounds, cemetery
Park
Ski slope, other open space
-------
necessary (for public health or environmental reasons)
the location of this development would greatly increase
the cost of wastewater collection systems for users with-
in the facility's use area (the wastewater collection
system area).
3. Development may occur in a few pockets, but outside the
areas that could be served economically by the more
logical locations for wastewater treatment systems.
4. Development may occur adjacent to the Town in areas
designated for high density in an orderly manner and
be economically served by a properly located wastewater
treatment system.
Adding to the difficulty is the fact that with certain waste-
water treatment plant sites, it may be erroneously implied that
a certain service area upstream, or upgradient from the treatment
plant, would be economically serviceable with a sewer system.
While a system of this type might be physically possible, the
economics of such servicing depend on the density and actual amount
of development as well as the configuration of the collection
system.
Another important relationship between the wastewater facil-
ities and land use is that locating a treatment facility in certain
areas may induce development in that direction. This type of a
situation may not be compatible with other planning considerations
including the location of existing and proposed public facilities
and services, wildlife migration, or aesthetics.
POPULATION
The population of the areas to be serviced by the proposed
wastewater treatment facility may, for planning purposes, be con-
sidered as being composed of two discreet units. The resident
population, which while reasonably stable in terms of total max-
imum numbers, is in a constant state of flux due to seasonal in
and out migration, and the tourist or migrant population. While
these two elements will be considered separately in determining
the contribution of each to the wastewater flows to the Jackson
plant, they are in reality closely related to a town, such as
Jackson, with an economy as highly dependent upon providing tourist
and vacation oriented services. According to the U.S. Department
of Commerce's 1973 figures on employment in Teton County, nearly
55 percent of the total employment involved some form of trade
and service occupations, which in Jackson's case centers around
seasonal tourism. Two definite patterns of seasonal activities
have evolved in Teton County: the summer to early fall family
sightseeing or wilderness experience vacationing, followed by a
limited amount of big game hunting in late fall; and the winter
sport oriented visitors from December to early spring. This
differential is pointed out for several reasons that will become
11-53
-------
important in analyzing use factors and are critical in estimat-
ing the required size of the waste treatment facility- The summer
use of the Jackson area far exceeds that of the winter activities.
Thus, in developing and projecting a peak or maximum expected
population and consequently the wastewater generated in the Jackson
service area, the existing and potential summer tourist seasons
will be used as an indication of maximum expected flow.
Historic Population
Past resident population for the Jackson service area is
given in Figure 13. This figure indicates a steady increase in
the population of the Town between 1940 and 1976. In the last
five years, the Town's population increased at a rate of 6 per-
cent annually, from 3,196 to 4,150 people. Livingston's 1976
report listed 979 single-family units, 245 multi-family units
and 265 mobile homes within the confines of the town.
Population Projections
As stated earlier, there are two separate elements that must
be dealt with in preparing population projections in order to
determine the necessary size of wastewater facilities. The trend
established for resident population change, in most situations,
is driven by the availability of employment in communities of the
size of Jackson. The Teton County area provides several exceptions
to this assumption. The area's scenic grandeur and recreational
opportunities attract a number of people who, because of financial
independence or adoption of alternative life styles, come into
the region regardless of the opportunity for traditional employ-
ment. A second complicating factor in trying to use available
employment and economic development as a stimulating factor spur-
ring population growth is the number of seasonal and part-time
jobs the area's vacation-oriented businesses offer. This creates
a situation where high summer tourist use requires an increase
in seasonal resident employment. While much of the seasonal work
will obviously be picked up by the area's more permanent residents,
it also has the potential of drawing a large number of short-term
residents. Regardless of their employment status, these individuals
must, in the final analysis, be considered residents in terms of
generated wastewater and use of public facilities.
A detailed economic analysis of the Jackson area is not pres-
ently available. The County has recently entered into a contract
through the University of Wyoming to develop an economic study that
will investigate the effects of the various development alterna-
tives to be considered by the county Comprehensive Plan. The
results of this study are not expected until April, 1977. There
appears from our investigation to be no economic growth plan or
evaluation of the phasing of regional commercial or industrial
expansion. Livingston, in developing the county's Comprehensive
Plan, has made an employment forecast of a 5.0 - 7.5 percent
11-54
-------
TOWN OF JACKSON RESIDENT POPULATION GROWTH
18,000
Projected From
Available Information
co
2000
-------
-------
increase in county employment over the next fifteen years. The
majority of any increase would, in the opinion of the local agencies
and residents queried, be primarily in the trade and service field.
Livingston (1976) i has prepared two projections of population
growth in Teton County based upon expected impact of general national
economic prosperity (Table 9). A three percent increase assumes
a tight economy, while the five percent "would be about as high
as could reasonably be expected."
In order to determine the population increase in the Jackson
wastewater service area, it was necessary for facility planning
purposes to determine the maximum reasonable population that could
be expected in the planning period. In order to disaggregate the
Town of Jackson's resident population from the County's, several
assumptions were made based on the existing information:
The majority of the proposed development will continue
to occur in an area that could be serviced by the
proposed facility.
Without any evidence to the contrary, Jackson's waste-
water service area growth will continue at 6% and the
County at 3.1%
No major area, outside of that proposed by the Pre-
liminary Comprehensive Plan, will be included in the
system prior to 1990 (i.e., no other communities such
as Wilson-Teton Village, etc. will be serviced by
the proposed plant expansion).
Table 10 presents the disaggregation of the Town of Jackson
and Teton County resident population from 1976 to 1995. Projections
were based on the known existing populations as presented in the
Teton County Growth and Development Alternative.
The population projections in the facility plan prepared
in 1975 by Nelson, Haley, Patterson & Quirk, Inc. were based on
a substantially lower 3% growth rate based on U.S. Census data.
They projected a 1990 resident population of 4,700, based upon
what appears to be a 1970 census base (2,101). Figure 13 presents
the historic, proposed, and 1975 Facility Plan population projected
through 1990. From our evaluation of the available data, Living-
ston's (1976) information offers a more up to date base, while facil-
ity plans disagree with the growth experienced within the last five
years. For planning and cost estimating purposes this study has
adopted a 1990 population of 9,600 individuals to be serviced by
the proposed facilities. This corresponds closely to the figures
developed independently by Nelson, Haley, Patterson & Quirk, Inc.
in their analysis of the Wilson-Teton Village Alternative Waste-
water Management Systems (Working Paper No. 2, 1976). They pro-
jected a 1995 high and low population for the existing Jackson
service area (disaggregated from the County) of 11,593 and 8,045,
11-55
-------
TABLE 9
PROJECTED POPULATION
TETON COUNTY
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
@ 3% Increase
7
7
8
8
8
8
9
9
9
9
10
10
10
11
,622
,851
,086
,329
,579
,836
,101
,374
,655
,945
,243
,551
,867
,193
@ 5% Increase
7,
8,
8,
8,
9,
9,
10,
10,
11,
12,
12,
13,
13,
14,
770
159
566
995
444
917
413
933
480
054
657
289
954
651
Source: Livingston & Associates
11-56
-------
TABLE 10
TOWN OF JACKSON POPULATION PROJECTIONS
Town @ 6 % * County @ 3.1% Total
1976 4,250 3,137 7,387
1977 4,505 3,237 7,742
1978 4,775 3,341 8,116
1979 5,062 3,448 8,510
1980 5,365 3,558 8,223
1981 5,687 3,672 9,352
1982 6,028 3,790 9,818
1983 6,390 3,911 10,301
1984 6,773 4,036 10,809
1985 7,180 4,165 11,345
1986 7,610 4,299 11,909
1987 8,064 4,436 12,500
1988 8,552 4,578 13,130
1989 9,065 4,724 13,789
1990 9,608 4,876 14,484
1991 10,184 5,027 15,211
1992 10,796 5,183 15,979
1993 11,443 5,344 16,787
1994 12,129 5,510 17,639
1995 12,857 5,680 18,537
* This includes future population that would reside on the fringe
areas of Jackson (those areas slated for high density under the
proposed land use plan).
11-57
-------
respectively; based upon the availability of developable land as
presented in the preliminary land use plan.
The non-resident or migrant population trends in an area
such as Jackson are difficult to evaluate given the unstable and
somewhat tenuous position of the national economy. The 1974 fa-
cility plan analyzed the problem in terms of available overnight
accommodations, national park visitations, and traffic flow within
the town. They concluded that very little increase in seasonal
visitation could be expected and that the "increase in permanent
residents will cause a more rapid increase in P.E. demand loading
on the system than would an increase in seasonal visitors." This
was based on the decrease in tourism experienced in Grand Teton
National Park between 1969 and 1972, the probable impact of the
then highly publicized "energy crisis," the sharply increasing
cost of automobile travel, and the overall difficulty in reaching
the area by other methods of transportation. They estimate, using
data from the Wyoming Highway Department's traffic figures, that
up to 14,000 people per day were presently (1969 data) visiting
Jackson during the summer.
This study approached the problem of estimating the non-
resident population by analyzing the present contribution this
element of the population makes to the total amount of wastewater
generated. 1976 flow data showed that the peak day flow received
at the plant was in July, approximately 1.84 mgd (July 6th) over
the July 4th holiday week. To determine what portion of this load
was generated by non-residents it was necessary to subtract out
the known resident population contribution and the known amount
of infiltration.
The Sewer System Analysis and Evaluation prepared for the
town in December of 1975 documented 853,220 gpd of infiltration
during periods of high ground water (high runoff and irrigation).
The existing resident population serviced by the Jackson system
was given as 4,250. If it is assumed a per capita daily flow
of 120 gallons (Section III) this accounts for 510,000 gallons
of wastewater. Therefore:
1,840,000 gallons total peak daily flow
- 850,000 gallons documented infiltration
- 510,OOP gallons resident flow
480,000 gallons non-resident flow
The non-resident flow contributes 26 percent of the flow or 49
percent of the wastewater entering the system.
In order to convert non-resident flow to the actual number
of people, several assumptions need to be made. It is assumed
that each visitor spends the night and has at least two restaurant
meals in town. From standard USPHS statistics the total contri-
bution percapita would be approximately 50 gallons per day. This
calculates out to almost 9,600 individuals that used the facilities
11-58
-------
of Jackson on that particular peak day. While this figure does
not agree with the estimated gallons percapita provided for in
the recently completed Water Facilities Investigation (1976) for
The Town of Jackson (100 gpcd - non-resident), it provides a better
approximation of actual sewage generated for facility planning
purposes. The Jackson Chamber of Commerce estimates that the
present available hotel/motel rooms have an overnight carrying
capacity of approximately 6,000 guests while the current 450 com-
mercial trailer and camp sites could accommodate another 1,200
people. At full occupancy the town could provide a total over-
night capacity of 7,200 individuals. This figure is up 40 percent
from that estimated in the 1974 report (5,140 individuals).
Expansion of tourist services and the expected impact
on municipal facilities is difficult to predict. Both national
and regional economic factors tend to control vacation spending.
Analysis of Teton National Park gate information (Figure 14) shows
a decline in visitation over the last few years but a sharp in-
crease during the summer of 1976. The reason for the decline and
recent resurgence of interest is speculative; the waning of the
energy crisis, economic stability, the Bicentennial, any number
or combination of factors could be responsible for the increase
in area visits. The Park's Master Plan (1976) has established a
number of management initiatives including holding the level of
overnight visitor accommodations, visitor conveniences, and wil-
derness trail developments to that established in 1971.
This will, in effect, force the development of any additional
visitor oriented service elsewhere, logically a good portion of
which could locate in the Jackson service area given the proximity
of existing facilities and the transportation system.
Livingston & Associates (1976) projected a 5.0 - 7.5% increase
in employment in Teton County over the next 15 years. If the
present trends in categories of employment continue and 55 percent
(1973) of any new jobs were in those areas heavily dependent upon
tourist activity, a steady increase in tourist activity would be
expected. Based upon the available information and assuming that
employment trends continue, a 2 - 3 percent increase in tourist
and visitor activity could be forecasted. Due to the economic
uncertainties and the almost assured continued increase in the
price of gasoline, a 2 percent annual increase in summer tourism
was selected for planning purposes. While this figure may be
challenged by groups favoring or opposed to any further develop-
ment of the Jackson area, based on existing information, it rep-
resents a conservative approach for planning the necessary facil-
ities. Table 11 shows the projected increase in peak visitor or
non-resident population utilizing the Jackson wastewater facilities
could reach nearly 13,000 in 1990 and 14,000 in 1995.
It should be emphasized that these figures are based upon the
1976 contribution this segment of the population had on the total
amount of wastewater generated, and not estimates of actual people
in town. Extrapolation of future use was made on the basis of
the 1976 peak flow.
11-59
-------
TOTAL VISITS GRAND TETON NATIONAL PARK
JULY 1966-1976
IflOOjOOO
.*»
I
*
1
500,000
I
a
-------
-------
TABLE 11
PEAK NON-RESIDENT POPULATION
1976 9,600
1980 10,391
1985 11,473
1990 12,920
1995 13,985
EXISTING WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES
General
The existing wastewater treatment facility discharges un-
chlorinated effluent from an activated sludge stabilization system
into Flat Creek, south of the Town of Jackson. The present system
includes the collection lines, an 18" interceptor flowing south
out of town, the treatment plant, and the outfall line.
The existing plant (Figure 15) was constructed in 1969, but
was never completed. The extended aeration activated sludge pro-
cess includes: the headworks with a manually racked bar screen,
a triplex primary lift station, two aeration basins, two clarifiers
(operated in parallel), a sludge recycle pump, a polishing pond
to which a small surface aerator was added and a covered and heated
sludge drying bed. The original construction drawings show that
only the facilities necessary to accommodate the 0.8 mgd design
flow, according to the design engineer, were constructed in 1969.
This equates to a calculated population equivalent (P.E.) of 5,000.
Notes on the original drawing stated that to increase the capacity
of the system in order to handle a P.E. of 7,500, greater aeration
would be required and that by adding aerobic sludge digestion a
P.E. of 10,000 could be accommodated.
The present collection system is composed primarily of 6, 8,
10, 12, 15 and 18 inch vetrified clay sewer mains, manholes and
appurtenant equipment. The system services the entire Town of
Jackson including a small area southwest of the city limits.
Operation
In a report prepared for the Town of Jackson in 1973 by R.D.
Connell and Associates, Inc. the average flow to the plant was
shown to be in excess of the maximum design peak of 1.2 mgd.
11-60
-------
EXISTING WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT TOWN OF JACKSON
CLARIFIED
• INLET STRUCTURE
RETURN SLUDGE-
BOX
WET
WELL
CONTROL PUMP
STATION
AEROBIC
OfcESTER
RCAERAT&N
BASIN
AERATION
BASINS
REAERATION
BASIN
OUTLET
BOX
CHLORINE-
CONTACT
BASIN
\ /
SLUDGE
BED
/ \
\ /
SLUDGE
BED
/ \
POLISHING
POND
proposed construction in orglnal design
EFFLUENT DISCHARGE
LINE
01
-------
-------
1971 - 1972
Winter Summer
Average 0.850 mgd 1.34 mgd
Peak 0.951 mgd 1.59 mgd
Minimum 0.543 mgd 1.11 mgd
In the same report organic loading was calculated at over
2.2 times that for which it was originally designed (1000 Ib. BOD/
24 hr.). While no design or facility report was available to
verify the criteria to which the plant was constructed, it would
appear that the existing system was badly overloaded less than
three years after completion.
A major problem that has plagued the operation of the facility
in the last several years is inability of the system to adequately
process grit and sludge. A portion of sludge material (organic
and inorganic) produced by the biological unit of the plant is,
under ideal operating conditions, recycled to the incoming sewage
which increases the effectiveness of the operation. The remainder
is "wasted" and disposed of by various means. This normally entails
a digestion process which will stabilize the biologically active
element of the material in order that it can be dried and safely
disposed of as either land fill or an agricultural soil aid.
Unless the wasted sludge is digested, it is very difficult to de-
water and dry. This is particularly so, given Jackson's climate.
With the available equipment the plant operator may require as
much as two months to adequately dry the wasted sludge. Because
the dried material has not been stabilized, only dried, it still
presents a public health hazard and cannot be disposed of at land-
fill sites or on agricultural land*, At present, dried sludge is
stockpiled at the treatment plant site, which has created a number
of odor and storage problems. The local and state health author-
ities have refused to allow the Town to dispose of the material
by conventional methods. Because drying of unstabilized sludge
is so slow and difficult, the operator has not been able to waste
sludge at a rate which provides proper operation of the plant.
To compensate, sludge which builds up in the clarifier is recycled
to the headworks at a rate far beyond that normally desired. The
material that cannot be recycled is lost over the clarifier weirs
and accounts for the high suspended solids in the effluent. Clari-
fier inefficiency, due to this overloading, has resulted in heavy
silting of the polishing pond and the carryover of solids into
the Flat Creek discharge line.
In addition to the fact that the system is already serving
a larger population equivalent than it was designed for (as great
as 17 percent during the peak summer months), infiltration pro-
blems have a significant impact on the hydraulic capacity of the
system. A December 1975 sewer system evaluation prepared for the
11-61
-------
Town of Jackson, pursuant to an EPA Step II Grant, concluded,
through the use of a television inspection, that during the summer
months over 853,000 gpd enter the system as infiltration. The
majority of this infiltration is from leaking service connections,
sewer pipe joints, and manholes. The Town has received approval
of its grant application to EPA to correct approximately 600,000 gpd
of this infiltration by repairing particularly poor sections through-
out the service area. This construction will be completed in 1977.
The Town is presently forcing new connections and pipelines to
abide by more restrictive construction practices by an aggressive
construction inspection policy.
Figure 16 shows the average monthly characteristics of the
plant influent for the last three years. This indicates that the
peak summer flow in July is approximately double that received
during the spring, fall and winter months. This increase is attrib-
utable in part to the tourist influx during the summer, but also
to a great degree by the increase in infiltration promoted by
heavy irrigation coinciding with snowpack melt and runoff during
the spring and early summer growing season. The correlation between
the rise in groundwater levels and the seasonal application of
irrigation water has been well documented in the area. These
correspond to the wastewater plant operator's observation that
a marked increase in flow to the facility occurs shortly after the
beginning of the irrigation season. Figure 16 also indicates an
extremely variable influent waste strength. Characteristics varied
as much as 50 mg/1 in BOD5 and Suspended Solids in 1976. On
August 26 the treatment plant operator took a suspended solids
measurement and flow reading at about 6 a.m., the historic daily low
flow period for Jackson (Figure 17). The results of this spot
analysis showed that while the influent flow rate was 1.22 mgd,
the total suspended solids were only 15 mg/1. Later in the day
the flow increased to nearly 1.8 mgd and the solids concentration
was well over 100 mg/1.
While the summer infiltration may be helpful in the sense
that it provides some dilution, it disrupts the hydraulic flow
of the plant and increases the flushing of solids through the
system and into the effluent discharge. Figure 16 presents the
effluent discharge information compiled through the Town's self-
monitoring program. During the summer months the system is achiev-
ing total suspended solids removal rates as low as 43 percent and
BOD removal of about 75 percent. Over the last few years, the plant
is regularly operating in violation of its National Pollution
Discharge Elimination Permit. The State of Wyoming, Department
of Environmental Quality, has indicated that this situation will
not be allowed to continue. The State and EPA will require the follow-
ing discharge limits:
Total Suspended Solids 30 mg/1
BOD5 30 mg/1
Fecal Coliform 200 organisms/100 ml
11-62
-------
JACKSON WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT INFLUENT QUALITY
-100
— 50
l-j
rtl
Lo-
-1.5
— 1.0
-^0.5
-o-
/\
RcwBC
u
D
A
t *v
/ \
1
r
Raw
A
\
\
/
A
/Flew
A
i\
.A
A
\
jAS OND JFMA MJ JASONDJ FMAMJ JA
1975 1976
-------
JACKSON WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT DAILY FLOW
i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r
Q
-------
In addition, residual chlorine, ammonia and/or phosphate
requirements could be imposed if the State determines, based on
the final receiving water, that these are necessary- As seen in
Figure 18 this level of treatment will require significant modi-
fications in solids processing and improvements of the organic
stabilization efficiency. In addition, disinfection will be re-
quired in order to meet bacterial contamination requirements.
The existing treatment system is generally inadequate. The
system is unable to efficiently treat the biological or solids load
received at the plant. In addition, primary and secondary solids
generated within the process cannot, at present, be safely and
efficiently treated and disposed. The existing sludge drying bed
and polishing pond are ineffective and are a primary source of
odors, which residents have reported to be quite noticeable over
past years during the summer.
In addition to the problems endemic to the existing system
design and operation, power outages in the Jackson area can have
a disastrous impact on treatment reliability. Lower Valley Power
and Light, the power utility for the Jackson area, listed 14 power
outages totalling 16 hours and 15 minutes without service from
1972 through 1975. The Town is currently exploring measures that
will either reset the necessary electrical equipment in the event
of a power failure automatically or alert the operator at home
that the plant requires assistance. Any new EPA funded mechanical
treatment facility or pump station will require the installation
of standby power. This can be either separate line source or
onsite generating capacity.
Effect on Receiving Water
The Teton County 208 Planning Agency is currently developing
information on the water quality of Flat Creek and the impacts the
wastewater treatment plant has on the aquatic environment. In-
stream water quality standards for Flat Creek stipulate specific
criteria on five parameters:
Dissolved Oxygen - 6.0 ppm
Total Residual Chlorine - 0.002
Ammonia (Unionized) - 0.02 ppm
Bacteria - 1,000 colonies/100 ml
pH - 6.0 - 9.0
According to the information provided by the 208 agency, only fecal coliform
bacteria are presently an immediate potential problem. Suspended solids, while
not at an alarming level, are generally higher below the treatment plant as are
ammonia and nutrients.
While monitoring data for the existing plant is complete for
BOD and suspended solids, other water quality parameters, which
1) can leave a detrimental effect on water quality, 2) be controlled
11-63
-------
JACKSON WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT EFFLUENT QUALITY
a
Ł
3
i—i
00
t
Suspends 1
So/ids
Oct Nw Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sap
30
20
Aug. Sep
-------
-------
TABLE 12
FLAT CREEK WATER QUALITY
Flat Creek Instream
Above the Town of Jackson
Date
4/14/76
5/12/76
6/09/76
6/30/76
NO-3-N
0.030*
0.018
0.012
0.010
Total
0.053
0.041
0.052
0.060
P
0.022
0.006
0.008
0.007
Below Treatment Plant
4/14/76
5/12/76
6/09/76
6/30/76
0.038
0.026
0.062
0.023
0.119
0.140
0.085
0.134
0.125
0.093
0.016
0.011
*All concentrations in mg/1.
11-64
-------
by wastewater facilities, and 3) are costly to remove, must be
considered. These include the nutrients phosphorous and nitrogen
and the toxic effect of ammonia nitrogen. The only water quality
data that would provide a direct indication of what concentrations
of these materials the existing plant is generating was collected
through the efforts of the 208 agency. The 208 agency sampling
program was not designed specifically to analyze the impacts of
the plant on Flat Creek so the only sampling stations that include
the plant also include the Town of Jackson and some of the South
Park agricultural land. It is thought that a number of non-point
sources as well as some clandestine point discharges may be in-
cluded in this data (Table 12). The 208 agency collected the
only known nutrient and ammonia data on quality of the treatment
plant effluent. This data is presented below.
Effluent Discharges. Jackson WWTP
Flow p_H Temp NOg-N Total-P NH3~N
One sample 1.84 mgd 7.4 14°C 0.1 mg/1 2.8 mg/1 10 mg/1
(7/6/76)
The Snake River Water Quality Management Plan (1976) performed
limited water quality sampling on Flat Creek and determined that
the only significant nutrient degradation occured as a result of
the Treatment Plant. Flat Creek nitrate concentrations doubled
and phosphate increased 8.5 times after confluence with the plant
effluent.
As indicated, water quality between the Town and below the
plant diminishes. Nitrate concentrations increase on an average
of 250 percent, total phosphate 235 percent and ammonia nitrogen
6.20 percent. Based upon this single effluent sample, taken after
one of the highest loading period experiences (July 4th weekend),
the mass loading for nutrients and ammonia was estimated at
1.54 Ib/day, total phosphate 43.1 Ib/day and ammonia nitrogen
155 Ib/day.
Since January of 1977 the Jackson treatment plant operator
has been required to monitor ammonia nitrogen in the effluent to
Flat Creek. Results of this monitoring activity to date indicate
concentrations range from 15 to 20 mg/1. A full report will be in the final EIS.
The potential for biostimulation of aquatic plants as a result
of nutrient enriched wastewater effluent has been raised by land
owners below the plant along Flat Creek. Field observations of
the area for this study, including low level aerial flights, in-
dicate that while there was a proliferation of vascular aquatic
plants along several stretches of the Creek and at times floating
algal mats could be seen on the surface, Flat Creek would not
generally be considered a highly eutrophic watercourse. Nitrate
and phosphate (two of the most important nutrients found in water)
concentrations in Flat Creek below the treatment plant were low,
11-65
-------
ranging from 0.023 to 0.07 mg/1 for nitrate and 0.04 to 0.15 mg/1
for phosphate. These concentration levels indicate that a major
problem with algal stimulation is unlikely- Still it should be
noted that even a small increase in available nutrients (especially
phosphate in many waters) has been shown to be stimulatory.
11-66
-------
SEC ION
-------
JACKSON'S EXISTING WASTEWATER_
TREATMENT FACILITY
-------
SECTION III
PROJECT PROPOSED BY THE TOWN OF JACKSON
In 1974 the Town of Jackson retained the firm of Nelson,
Haley, Patterson and Quirk, Inc. to prepare a facility plan for
wastewater management pursuant to a federal grant for construction
of the required facilities as prescribed by the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 (P.L. 92-500) and EPA
regulations. In November of that year the results of the study
were presented to the Town Council for consideration. The engi-
neer addressed a number of alternatives including:
1. No action
2. A lagoon treatment system on the State of Wyoming South
Park Elk Feedground
3. A lagoon treatment system at the county land-fill site
4. A mechanical treatment plant on State owned school land
near Boyles Hill
5. Expansion at the existing site to provide complete sec-
ondary treatment.
Upon evaluating the considered alternatives, the engineer
recommended that the Town apply to EPA for a grant for the design
of a complete secondary biological treatment facility to be con-
structed at the site of the existing plant. The recommendation
was based upon cost, acceptability, and environmental considerations
The Town Council, after reviewing the engineer's recommenda-
tion, decided to ask the engineer to prepare a summary supplemental
report identifying and comparing in detail the cost effectiveness
of both the recommended plan and the alternative lagoon on the
South Park Elk Feedground at the southern extent of South Park.
In January of 1975 Nelson, Haley, Patterson and Quirk, Inc.
submitted to the Town a Supplemental Report to the Facilities
Plan. This report considered capital and operation and maintenance
expenses, as well as public acceptability and the potential for
delay due to conflicts involved in acquiring the South Park Elk
Feedground land. As a result of this investigation the Town Council
opted to seek a Step II design grant for the construction of a
lagoon on the South Park Elk Feedground. This decision was based
primarily on three issues.
1. The lower operation and maintenance cost for a lagoon.
2. The ultimate and unlimited service capacity of a plant
located at the South Park Elk Feedground site.
III-l
-------
3. The Council's assumption that being public lands, the
South Park Elk Feedground site would be available for
the Town's use.
As a result of this decision, EPA in compliance with the goal
of the National Environmental Policy Act and internal regulations
required this Environmental Impact Statement to be prepared on
the proposed project and alternatives before any further financial
assistance could be considered. The EIS requirement was based on
the potential for public controversy and unknown environmental
problems of disturbance of the elk and secondary effects of growth
along the five to six mile long interceptor.
DESIGN CRITERIA AND CONSIDERATION
The project proposed by the Town, as addressed by the facility
plan, envisioned a treatment facility designed to accommodate the
projected 1985 population equivalent of 15,000. The expected
flows and organic loading were based on normal domestic wastes.
Since industry of any kind is almost nonexistent, no industrial
waste contributions were anticipated. The design criteria utilized
in the preparation of the facility plan included:
Design Data
Population 15,000
Flow 1.5 mgd
BODs(Summer) 3,450 Ib/day @ 15°C
BOD5(Winter) 1,725 Ib/day @ 5°C
Peak Flow 3.0 mgd
Expected Removal 90%
Since the preparation of the facility plan, the Town and
County have initiated an update of gtheir comprehensive land use
plan. This revision and the fact that the 1985 planning period
adopted for the original facility report is now insufficient to
adequately plan for future needs prompted EPA to utilize the
EIS to update the design and cost criteria in the facility plan
for treatment design years of 1990 and 1995. Interceptor lines
were uniformly sized for the year 2000. Table 13 presents a
summary of population and flow data utilized in preparing the
necessary revisions based upon information developed subsequent
to the 1974 Facility Plan.
Organic and solids loading for 1976 (peak tourist months of
the summer), assuming 75 percent correction in known infiltration,
were estimated at approximately 180 mg/1 each. This calculates
out to a maximum day mass loading of 3,300 Ib/day in 1990 and
3,987 Ib/day in 1995. These summer loading rates reflect the large
amount of water utilized for washing and cleaning connected with
the commercial tourist business.
III-2
-------
TABLE 13
POPULATION AND FLOW ESTIMATES
*Resident
Nonresident
Total
**Resident Flow mgd (@ 120 gpc)
Nonresident Flow mgd (@ 50 gpc)
Noncorrectible Infiltration mgd
(25% existing or 50 g/c 1976)
Expected New Infiltration
(300 g/ac/d @ 380 acres total)
Total Flow mgd (maximum day)
1990
9,600
12,900
22,500
1.15
0.65
0.21
0.12
2.20
1995
12,850
14,200
27,050
1.54
0.71
0.21
0.16
2.65
2000
17,200
15,700
32,900
2.06
0.78
0.21
0.20
3.25
Peak Factor mgd
Peak Flow on Max-day mgd
1.62
3.60
1.65
4.30
1.68
5.50
*See discussion on population.
**120 g/c based upon survey of surrounding communities, N.H.P.Q.,
Inc., Personal Communication.
III-3
-------
Jackson's isolated location and the difficulty and expense
in transporting raw and manufactured goods excludes the area from
ever becoming a significant industrial center. The wastewater
flows presently experienced and those expected should not normally
contain any refractory or exotic constituents. It must be noted,
however, that because of the prevalent economic activities in
the area, certain waste problems could occur. County-wide septic
tank and sanitary vault waste pumping and private discharges of
pesticides, oils and other material may occur and should be antic-
ipated in any design.
The project proposed by the Town would entail the construction
of a 21 inch interceptor line from the existing wastewater treatment
plant running south to the site selected on the South Park Elk
Feedground. The alignment proposed in Figure 19 follows South
Park Road starting just west of the existing facility and cuts
overland southeasterly to the facility site at the lower end of
the road as it turns east. Two potential sites were identified
approximately 7,000 feet apart but both located within the South
Park Elk Feedground. A 21 inch discharge line would be provided
to the mainstream of the Snake River.
The favored treatment process, according to the facility
engineers, is a deep (10 feet) three cell stabilization pond. The
first two cells would be partial mix systems providing enough
aeration to stabilize the organic load in the upper layers, while
the lower portion would remain anaerobic facilitating solids di-
gestion in the warmer months. The third pond provides final pol-
ishing and, according to the facility engineer, algal removal.
Systems of the type envisioned typically provide 80 - 90
percent BOD^ (organic) conversion, but may without further process-
ing be sporadically high in suspended solids. Since there is little
information on the type of pond operation system proposed by the
facility consultant, EPA concludes that while the system should,
if operated properly, meet the proposed 30 mg/1 BOD standard, it
may require additional treatment in order to consistently meet
the anticipated 30 mg/1 suspended solids requirement. The decision
as to whether chlorination and possibly dechlorination would be
required for any discharge to the Snake River would need to be
determined by State water quality officials in association with
the Scenic and Wild River Study task force headed by the Forest
Service.
Several problems are anticipated during the construction phase
of the project. The entire South Park area has extremely high
groundwater. Reviewing the Soil Conservation Service's unpublished
information on groundwater levels on and near the proposed plant
site indicates that water may be expected one to three feet'below
the surface. Two major problems are anticipated as a result of
this extremely high groundwater condition. The first involves the
construction and final integrity of the interceptor line. The
second concerns the construction of a subsurface pond system at
the South Park Elk Feedground site. Trench dewatering, in the
III-4
-------
EXISTING WWTP
i
STATE ELK FEEDING REFUGE SITES
PROPOSED PROJECT
Figure 19
-------
lower reaches of the pipeline alignment could prove extremely
expensive and time consuming. It should also be remembered that
unless extreme care is taken and very tight construction inspec-
tion is employed, infiltration could become a significant problem.
The approximately 6.5 miles of pipeline, if constructed similar
to much of the existing Jackson system, could be responsible for
extremely high infiltration with the large diameter pipe anticipated.
Construction of a deep, sealed pond system at the South Park
Elk Feedground site may be impossible given the known groundwater
problems. Based on soils information available from the Jackson
office of the Soil Conservation Service and in the absence of any
onsite field data, raised (above ground) or mounded ponds may be
the only way to successfully construct and seal the proposed fa-
cilities. The close proximity of the Snake River and the porous
cobble and gravel soils in the area would make dewatering of any
open excavation very difficult and economically impractical. It
likewise could create problems in sealing or lining to assure
containment. It is likely that similar groundwater problems would
be encountered at almost any sites within the study area west of
the South Park Road. To verify this assumption would require a
detailed soil survey of the area which is outside the scope of
this investigation. The cost estimates in Section IV are, as
described, based upon normal construction practices. If it were
necessary to import fill and construct an above ground pond system,
the construction cost for the earthwork portion of the system could
be increased as much as six times, depending upon the availability
of imported fill.
In addition to the probable groundwater problems, the pro-
posed plant site may be subject to flooding during the 50- and
100-Year Floods. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers studies (Special
Flood Hazard Information Snake River, Wilson, Wyoming and Vicinity,
February 1976) show that proposed site A is out of both the 500-
and 100-Year Floods while, according to the Corps of Engineers'
information, site B is in the 50- and estimated 10-Year Flood
hazard zone. Cost estimates for flood-proofing to the 100-Year
Flood elevation have not been included because such costs are
dependent on site specific elevation information yet to be devel-
oped by the Corps of Engineers.
In addition to the physical considerations in installing
the proposed system, a number of procedural political and regu-
latory questions have arisen. The most significant of these is the
availability of the South Park Elk Feedground land. A November 24,
1976 letter (Appendix 2) to Mr. Bill Ashley, Chairman of the Teton
County Board of Commissioners from Earl M. Thomas, Director of
the Wyoming Game and Fish Department, presented the position of
the agency in regard to the lands in question:
"In view of the amount and type of information we now
have and after a careful consideration of it, the
Commission and the Department feels that decisions
must be made and time is of the essence. We must,
III-5
-------
therefore, in fairness to all concerned, conclude and
notify you that the Wyoming Game and Fish Commission
and Department does object to and will oppose fully
any attempts to place sewerage lagoons or other sewer-
age facilities on the South Park Elk Feedground."
The Department based its objection on four categorical issues;
biological and habitat impacts, the legality of any land transfer,
sociological and recreational effects, and the public controversy
that has been generated by the Town's proposal. The Wyoming Game
and Fish Department has summarized its position on these issues
in the following portion of the aforementioned letter:
"1. Biological: We have serious reservations about
placing any municipal sewerage facility on a flood plain,
particularly one on a river with the potential and con-
sequence of the Snake. The South Park Elk Feedground
was initiated in 1939 on a site selected because of
its unique and highly desirable biological features.
There are high producing g-rass meadows along Flat Creek
and on the Snake River bottoms where the elk are fed.
Immediately adjacent to these meadow areas are large
stands of mature cottonwood trees with an understory
of shrubs and herbacious plants which provide cover
and protection from weather. The elk can be fed, graze
and rest relatively free of any harassment and never
need to leave the Unit to benefit from these features.
Although every portion of the Unit is not used for the
feedground or for cover, a measurable amount of open
space is required to provide a buffer zone between the elk
and adjacent human activities. Although the Unit was
acquired originally primarily for elk, other wildlife
species inhabit the area in numbers. These species
include moose, deer, waterfowl, raptors, upland game
birds, furbearers and song birds.
2. Legal: The enclosed letters from Area Manager
Rounds, 1973; Assistant Regional Director Lane, March
and August 1976, are self-explanatory. The feedground
was purchased with Federal Aid money- The Commission
very definitely cannot declare the property surplus to
our needs and to simply transfer the land to Jackson
would constitute a "diversion of funds" and would there-
by jeopardize the Department's future and continued
eligibility to receive Federal Aid Funds.
3. Sociological: The subject property is not only
serving the original purpose for which it was primarily
purchased, but also now serves a much greater public
need. Camping, boating, dog trials, hunting, fishing
and horse backing are among the public uses which con-
stitute an average use of 13,705 visitor days for a
six month period (June through November) for the past
five years.
III-6
-------
4. Political: The report of Nelson, Haley, Patterson
and Quirk, Inc., lists several negative impacts of plac-
ing sewerage facilities at south Park. Among these
statements is found the following:
'Any attempt by the Town of Jackson, even with
County support, to take away land on the elk feed-
ing area without the consent of wildlife officials
will result in controversy. Vocal and powerful
conservation and environmental groups, both local
and national, might enter such a battle and delay
any such action.'
Our files contain many letters from interested citizens
from the Jackson area and elsewhere. Some are rather
emotional, some are very practical and some are personal;
but, without exception, they are all in opposition to
placing sewerage lagoons on the South Park Feedground.
A review of all the 'public input1 made to us leads us
to question; Who really wants or insists on the facility
being at South Park?"
III-7
-------
SI:O ION
-------
BOYLES HILL ALTERNATIVE
SITE
-------
SECTION IV
ALTERNATIVES
DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES
The alternatives which were evaluated in detail included
several developed in the original facility plan, as well as new
options not previously considered. The potential alternative
sites and process methods were discussed on several occasions
with local officials and government personnel, and six realistic
alternatives were developed. These include:
A-l Construction of a new mechanical plant at the site of
the existing wastewater treatment plant.
A-2 Construction of a mechanical plant on the Boyles Hill
school property.
A-3 A stabilization pond constructed on the royles Hill
school property-
A-4 A stabilization pond constructed at a central mid-South
Park location.
A-5 A stabilization pond constructed at a South Park location
adjacent to Lower South Park Road.
A-6 Interim upgrading of the existing site to provide
adequate waste treatment for the existing serviceable
population.
A-7 No further action on the Town's part to improve waste-
water treatment.
While these seven options will not address every possible
combination of actions or specific potential sites, they reason-
ably represent the types of solutions or actions that are engineer-
ingly, economically and environmentally feasible. Other options
such as land disposal of effluent or advanced biological and/or
chemical treatment were considered; but because of severe clima-
tological and groundwater problems encountered in the area, and
the prohibitive financial demands that would be placed upon the
community, they were not considered further as being practical in
meeting expected discharge standards for the region.
Alternative A-l
The existing treatment facility would be expanded and improved
to meet the projected demand in the year 1990 or 1995. The major
IV-1
-------
improvement (NHPQ 1974) would entail the addition of a flow equal-
ization basin conversion or the present extended aeration system
to contact stabilization, secondary clarifiers, aerobic digesters,
sludge handling facilities, disinfection and a number of electrical
pumping, piping and weather protection modifications. As shown
in Figure 20, only the existing headworks, pump structure, basins,
and ancillary equipment would be salvaged. In addition, it may be
necessary to provide stand-by power and dechlorination of the
effluent discharged to Flat Creek.
The existing aeration basins and clarifiers are of the suf-
ficient capacity to allow conversion to the contact stabilization
mode. The required retention time for both the contact and sta-
bilization phases of the operation would be in excess of those
normally required for the projected 1990 flows. It is also unlikely
that refractory industrial organic wastes, which would interfere
with the contact stabilization process, would regularly be encoun-
tered in the Jackson area.
A properly operated contact stabilization system should be
able to provide removal rates of organic contaminants of 80-90%
with a desirable degree of future flexibility. The facility con-
sultant has proposed to utilize aerobic digestion thickening and
vacuum filtration for stabilization of the approximately 40,000
gallons/day of raw sludge that would be expected at 1990 flows.
Ultimate disposal of digested and stabilized waste sludge would
be to either a solid waste site or agricultural land disposal.
The existing polishing pond would be abandoned, but the pre-
sent outfall line discharging to the west side of Flat Creek should
be repaired and maintained. It will be necessary to replace or
rebuild the existing pump's motors and drives, and a fourth stand-by
unit will be needed at ultimate capacity. The revised cost estimate
in Table 16 utilizes the existing wet well, major influent piping
and laboratory and maintenance buildup. No additional land re-
quirements are anticipated, and following construction, the site
would be graded and landscaped to conform with the land uses of
the area.
Alternative A-2
This alternative would entail the construction of an acti-
vated sludge plant located on State school land at the south end
of Boyles Hill (Figure 21) . This facility would utilize a mini-
mum of space (approximately 3 acres) and could be landscaped and
concealed to blend into the existing topography and vegetative
cover. The land has been utilized within the last year as a gravel
quarry and has undergone extensive surface disruption. Several
quarry ponds are present on site, verifying the presence of high
groundwater in the area.
This site would necessitate a transmission line from the
Town to Boyles Hill. Several alternative configurations are possible
IV-2
-------
PROPOSED
EXPANDED PLANT
ALTERNATIVE AI
Edge of Bui/ding
CONTROL BUILDING.
8 PUMP STATION
INFLUENT
FLOW
SCREENING
FLOW MEASUREMENTS
AUTOMATIC SAMPLING
EQUALIZATION
BASIN
4
SLUDGE BED DRAIN
Edge of Building/)
e .----I
<
cr
.ui
Q.
13
CO
UJ
2
5?
1
SLUDGE
DRYING
BEDS
VACUUM
FILTER
I
AEROBIC
DIGESTER
# I
I
AEROBC
DIGESTER
#2
THICKENER
LAYOUT
J
1
*
•*•
-*»
STABILIZATION
TAhJK * 1
, 1
f
STABI
TAN
JZATION
K*2
-^
•^
CONTACT
TANKfrl
CONTACT
TANK* 2
/
m-^
$
OUTLET
BOX\
FINAL
CLARIFIER
•Hf-2
FLOW MEASUREMENT
AUTOMATIC SAMPLING
CHLORINE
^CONTACT
TANK
DECHLORINATION
SOURCE-NHPQ 1975
Figure 20
-------
t
.. EXISTING WWTP
BOYLES HILL ALTERNATIVE SITES A2&A3
SCALE I Z40OO
0
•XXJOFICT
Figure 21
-------
and presented along with capital cost in Table 17. A suitable
access road is available from Highway 189 to the gravel complex
which should in its present form be adequate for both construction
and operation purposes.
Alternative A-2 will allow the plant to be built on a section
of land with sufficient expansion capabilities to meet any future
requirements with regard to water quality standards and/or growth
in Jackson (or Teton County) that may be necessary. While the
facility plan does not go into any detail on process design, it
would be anticipated that aerobic sludge digestion and land dis-
posal of stabilized material would be incorporated. The biolog-
ically active portion of the system and any open water channels
would need to be enclosed to prevent freezing and decreased
efficiency.
A gravity outfall line, approximately 7000 feet long, will
be required to the Snake River. It will be necessary to secure
an outfall right of way; but given that the line will be buried
with only access manholes on the surface, this should pose no
major environmental problems as the land can be reclaimed and
revegetated.
Alternative A-3
A stabilization pond could be constructed on the Boyles Hill
site. It has, in the absence of onsite soils and groundwater
information, been assumed that a deep lagoon will be constructed
in order to reduce land requirement. This would require surface
aerators with higher aeration efficiencies (i.e. increased H.P.
demand) than indicated in the project report. While low energy
mechanical surface aerators work well in the more temperate cli-
mates, it is doubtful that they could operate effectively during
Jackson's severe winter climate conditions. This would likely
require an injector or diffusor type apparatus to sustain treat-
ment under winter ice accumulation. The Boyles Hill site would
not be considered for facilitative or anaerobic winter operation
due to the proximity of homes in the subdivision north of Boyles
Hill and the probable odors that could be generated during the
spring and fall.
This site (Figure 22) would require an outfall to the Snake
River, disinfection and the flexibility to add additional treat-
ment processes or capacity at a latter date if effluent discharge
requirements were increased, or if the system required expansion.
The alternative interceptor lines to the plant would follow the
same alignment presented in Alternative A-2. The alternative
costs are presented in Tables 18, 19 and 20. The groundwater depth
in the Boyles Hill area is approximately 3 to 5 feet. Any deep
lagoon, for that matter any lagoon in the Jackson area, would
require a weighted liner or solid sealant to prevent infiltration
and exfiltration. The development of any structure in this area
IV-3
-------
---
-------
SOUTH PARK RD. SITE
EXISTING WWTP
' .«:
V i
JL MID SOUTH PARK SITE
Q.
X /=*••
Łn!^&7\ ,- '&
N
SOUTH PARK ALTERNATIVE SITES A4 &A5
Figure 22
-------
would require grading, landscaping and reclamation of the damage
caused by the gravel operation. This could be accomplished by
proper landscaping.
Alternative A-4
Alternative A-4 would be a stabilization pond system located
at a site midway in the South Park area. The proposed location
shown in Figure 22 was selected for planning purposes only. Ini-
tial study of this site shows, on the basis of field investiga-
tion, the necessary requirements as far as space and cover are
concerned, but many other locations could provide the same attri-
butes. This study did not investigate the availability of land
in this area, nor does it propose that this site be pursued over
other similar tracts of land. It will service the area of pro-
posed development with a much shorter pipeline than would be re-
quired to go to the Elk Feedground location. The site would be
located in an area of high groundwater, but this is a condition
common throughout South Park.
The controlling cost factor associated with this system is
the length of the interceptor line and 1*he cost of land (approx-
imately 25 acres). This study has assumed a deep mechanically
aerated lagoon system to reduce the surface area and land require-
ments. The climatic problems and restraints discussed under
Alternative A-3 will also apply to this site, as would the re-
quirements for an outfall to the Snake River.
Alternative A-5
Alternative A-5 is similar to A-4 in that it would entail the
construction of a deep aerated stabilization pond system in the
South Park area. This proposed location (Figure 22) of this al-
ternative, contingent upon available land and geologic and hydro-
geologic conditions, is along the lower end of South Park Road
west of the Jackson Polo Club. The facility would require an
outfall line running south to the main channel of the Snake River.
The siting of a plant at this location would have several con-
struction advantages in terms of available access and pipeline
alignments, and would immediately open up a substantially greater
amount of land to be serviced by gravity flow than Alternative A-4.
Alternative A-5 could service by gravity flow almost as much un-
developed land as the proposed South Park Elk Feedground site.
Alternative A-6
In order to bring the system up to a higher degree of opera-
tion, without having to rely upon the availability of federal
funding for a complete new system, the State of Wyoming, Department
of Environmental Quality, has recommended an interim upgrading of
the existing system. It would be possible under current EPA regu-
lations to break out federal funds to complete the design and con-
struction of these modifications immediately. This would require
essentially finishing the plant as it was originally designed
IV-4
-------
along with the addition of chlorination facilities, and a general
maintenance and overhaul. It has been suggested that this up-
grading be designed to handle the expected flow from the Town for
the next 5 years (1981) . This is an arbitrary time frame, but it
would allow the phasing of digester construction if the existing
treatment plant site was eventually selected.
If this option was selected it would be necessary to bypass
the polishing pond and repair the existing outfall to Flat Creek.
The WDEQ has indicated that it would probably not be necessary to
provide dechlorination for interim improvements. The addition of
the digesters along with the other mechanical improvements would
make it possible for the plant to adequately process secondary
sludge and meet secondary standards for organics and suspended solids.
These improvements could only be considered temporary. Unless the city
adopted a concerted program of growth control, the facility would require
expansion to accommodate the expected growth of the region. This latter
expansion could be quite expensive for the Town since P.L. 92-500 funds
will, in all probability, not be available and inflation will increase the
necessary capital expenditure.
Alternative A-7
Under Alternative A-7 the Town would do nothing further to
improve the condition of their wastewater system and reduce odor
problems and the water quality degradation that is occurring. In-
action in finding and developing a solution to the overall problem
of providing adequate wastewater facilities for the Town will only
complicate the existing situations as the area continues to grow
and expand. Each year's delay has and will continue to increase
the eventual cost of construction at a rate that is parallel to
the annual inflation experienced in the region. While the
national inflation rate appears to be leveling off, increases in
the construction industry have not responded as well. Between
1974 and 1976 there has been a real 17 percent increase in costs for
the projects proposed in the 1974 facility plan, and another 10-12
percent can be expected prior to any construction.
Beyond the escalation of project cost that would certainly
occur as a result of further delays, a deliberate no action stand
could put the Town of Jackson in violation of state and federal
laws and make it subject to court action. While EPA has only been
forced to resort to this type of procedure on several occasions
nationwide, the precedents have been set making flagrant violators
of the water quality laws subject to stiff fines and other penal-
ties. While a no action approach may seem to some members of the
community a safe and inexpensive method of delay with the problem
at hand, in reality, it cannot be considered an acceptable al-
ternative. The lack of a positive result oriented plan for pro-
viding the needed wastewater facilities will only lead to con-
tinued environmental problems and water quality degradation. It
is also possible that the WDEQ could institute a connection ban
restricting new development in the area. This would have the
secondary effect of creating an economic hardship in the community
due to a lack of incoming and available capital development funds.
IV-5
-------
ECONOMIC EVALUATION OF PROPOSED PROJECT AND ALTERNATIVES
Eight possible plant locations and/or pipeline alignments
were considered as to their engineering and economic feasibility.
Five specific sites were investigated, including the existing
wastewater treatment plant, the South Park Elk Feedground, two
South Park sites and a site at Boyles Hill. Treatment processes
analyzed included renovating the existing treatment plant to pro-
vide contact stabilization and improved sludge handling facilities,
and at the other sites, treatment processes analyzed were aerated
stabilization ponds and mechanical activated sludge systems.
In addition to these eight major variations of the alternative
new treatment facilities, the interim improvements necessary to
bring the existing wastewater treatment plant to an acceptable
operational level were evaluated.
Pipeline estimates for the various alternatives assume a
minimum surface cover of five feet for frost protection. Sizing
and slopes of all gravity sewers allow a minimum velocity of two
feet per second at design flow. Normal construction techniques
are assumed for pipelines in the Jackson area, except for gravity
outfall lines to the Snake River, where allowance for extreme wet
and marshy conditions was made. Sheeting, shoring and other types
of bracing methods for the pipeline trenches were also assumed in
order to comply with Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA)
and other requirements. The pipelines were designed for a peak
daily flow rate of 5.5 mgd, which is the maximum peak instantaneous
flow rate projected for the year 2000.
The wastewater treatment plant process alternatives were
investigated for summer maximum daily flow rates of 2.2 mgd in
1990 and 2.6 mgd in 1995. Adequate operation and maintenance
practice for both wastewater treatment plants and pipelines was
assumed to maximize the useful life of the facilities.
Except for Alternatives A-l and A-5, all effluent would be
discharged to the Snake River for disposal. The lower reach of
Flat Creek on the South Park Elk Feedground was initially considered
as a possible disposal point for the discharge of effluent from
the Town's proposed project. This was later dismissed from further
consideration due to the slow-moving, backwatered condition of
the stream at this point and the potential of nutrient and ammonia
toxicity problems.
Costs for the various alternatives studied were obtained from
economic curves for the Jackson area, and other data supplied by
either the facility consultant or developed by the EIS consultant
for similar construction projects. Cost data were then updated
to the date of anticipated design and the start of construction
(1978-1979) by using the Engineering News Record (ENR) method.
For the purpose of this study, the ENR value for the present (late
1976) was assumed as 2,810, and for the earliest possible con-
struction period in late 1978, the ENR was assumed to be 3,100.
IV-6
-------
Land costs for the Elk Refuge (exchange) and South Park al-
ternatives were assumed to be $7,000 per acre, and land at the
Boyles Hill site on State school land was assumed to be obtainable
by either direct purchase of an easement or a sublease agreement
with the present lease holder. The standard lease cost according
to the State Land Officer is five percent of the appraised purchase
price per year. Easement costs would be a one time payment at the
appraised market value. The cost of the Boyles Hill land was as-
sumed to be $5,000 per acre. Pipeline costs were based upon normal
construction costs for the conditions anticipated within the Jackson
area. While these costs include excavation, normal pipe bedding,
reasonable trench dewatering, sheeting and shoring, etc., they do not
take into consideration such items as cutting and replacing of pave-
ment, repair to private property, and unknown field construction pro-
blems such as unstable soils or deep rock. Pipeline rights-of-way
or easements were uniformly excluded from analysis of all the al-
ternatives. Right-of-way and easement costs, if included, would have
the effect of increasing the cost of all alternatives except the
renovation of the existing wastewater treatment plant.
A present worth analysis was performed on each of the alter-
natives using both a 15 and a 20 year period with an eight percent
compound interest factor.
Proposed Project - South Park Elk Feedground
Two locations on the South Park Elk Feedground (Section 28,
Township 40 North, Range 116 West) were investigated as alternate
treatment plant sites, as shown in Figure 20. A 21-inch gravity
sewer was routed from the existing wastewater treatment plant to
the proposed sites. The wastewater treatment process was assumed
to be aerated stabilization ponds designed for cold weather opera-
tion and utilizing a land area of approximately 25 acres in 1990.
An additional 5 acres of ponds is required to treat the anticipated
flow rate in 1995. The treated wastewater would discharge into
the Snake River via a 21-inch gravity outfall line. The estimated
cost for the South Park Elk Feedground alternative for both 1990
and 1995 is shown in Tables 14 and 15.
Alternative A-l - Construction of a New Wastewater Treatment Plant
at the Existing Site
Various major revisions and modifications at the existing
wastewater treatment plant can bring it up to the desirable level
of operation that has been envisioned for the next several years.
The cost of the revisions required to bring the facility up to
secondary standards for 1990 and 1995 flows were estimated using
several sources (i.e., 1974 Facility Plan, Cost Curves and Esti-
mating Manuals and updated to an ENR of 3,100 for late 1978).
Major revisions, as indicated in the facility plan include in-
stallation of a flow equalization basin, new or reconditioned
sewage lift pumps, modification of the secondary treatment process
to allow for contact stabilization, the construction of a secondary
IV-7
-------
TABLE 14
COST ESTIMATE
PROPOSED PROJECT - SITE A
SOUTH PARK ELK FEEDGROUND
1990
1995
Pipeline, 21"
(28,600')
W.W.T.P., Lagoons
Land
Outfall, 21"
(1,000')
Subtotal
Admin., Engr., etc.
@ 25%
Subtotal
Escalation to 1978
TOTAL
Capital
$2,216,000
836,000
175,000
86,000
3,356,000
83,900
4,195,000
419,500
Annual
0 & M
$13,150
50,000
-
1,100
64,250
-
64,250
6,425
Capital
924,000
210,000
86,000
3,436,000
859,000
4,295,000
429,500
Annual
0 & M
$2,216,000 $13,150
55,000
1,100
69,250
69,250
6,925
$4,614,500 $70,675 $4,724,500 $76,175
IV-f
-------
TABLE 15
COST ESTIMATE
PROPOSED PROJECT - SITE B
SOUTH PARK ELK FEEDGROUND
Pipeline, 21"
(35,600')
W.W.T.P-, Lagoons
Land
1990
Capital
836,000
175,000
Annual
0 & M
1995
Capital
50,000
924,000
210,000
Annual
0 & M
$2,629,000 $13,150 $2,629,000 $13,150
55,000
Outfall, 21"
(3,000')
216,000
1,100
216,000
1,100
Subtotal
3,856,000 64,250
3,979,000
69,250
Admin., Engr., etc.
@ 25%
Subtotal
964,000
995,000
4,820,000 64,250 4,974,000
69,250
Escalation to 1978
482,000
6,425
497,000
6,925
TOTAL
$5,302,000 $70,675 $5,471,000 $76,175
IV-9
-------
clarifier, aerobic digester, and other solids handling, facilities
including an air flotation thickener and vacuum filtration and
final effluent chlorination. In addition, it is quite likely that
both standby power and dechlorination would be required, which
would add approximately $50,000 to $60,000 to the capital cost.
These costs are presented in Table 16 and were modified from the
preliminary figures presented within the 1974 Facility Plan.
Alternatives A-2 and A-3 - Boyles Hill
An alternative treatment plant site at Boyles Hill (Section 36,
Township 41 North, Range 117 West) was investigated with several
subalternates.
Alternative A-2
This alternative would require construction of an activated
sludge treatment plant for 1990 or 1995 wastewater flow at the
Boyles Hill site. Wastewater was assumed to be intercepted up-
stream of the existing W.W.T.P. and transported to the site via
a 21-inch gravity sewer. Effluent from the treatment plant would
be discharged to the Snake River via a 24-inch outfall. The
estimated costs for this alternative are shown in Table 17.
Alternative A-3a
This alternative again assumes a 21-inch gravity sewer inter-
cepting the Town of Jackson trunk line upstream of the existing
wastewater treatment plant and running westerly for 10,500 feet
along a county road, as shown in Figure 21. At the site of the
existing wastewater treatment plant a small lift station would
be maintained to serve the area downstream from the intercepted
trunk line. This wastewater would be transported to the Boyles
Hill site via a four-inch force main for a distance of 11,000 feet.
At the Boyles Hill site, this alternative calls for aerated sta-
bilization ponds and a 24-inch gravity sewer outfall to the Snake
River, a distance of 7,000 feet. The estimated cost for Alter-
native A-3 is presented in Table 18.
Alternative A-3b
This alternative presents the costs for a 27-inch gravity
sewer routed from the existing wastewater treatment plant to the
Boyles Hill treatment site, a distance of 11,000 feet and shown
in Figure 21. The treatment plant process would be aerated sta-
bilization ponds for both 1990 and 1995 wastewater flows, with a
24-inch gravity sewer outfall to the Snake. A summary of these
costs is presented in Table 19.
Alternative A-3c
This alternative investigated the installation of a lift
station at the existing wastewater treatment plant site, and an
18-inch force main to the Boyles Hill site. Other conditions
are the same as for those presented above. A summary of the costs
for this alternative is presented in Table 20.
Figure 23 shows the three alignments for these interceptor alternatives.
IV-10
-------
TABLE 16
COST ESTIMATE
ALTERNATIVE A-l
EXPANSION OF EXISTING PLANT SITE
TO CONTACT STABILIZATION
1990
1995
Unit Processes
Flow Equalization Basin
By-pass and Abandon
Comminutor
Renovate Sewage Pumps
Conversion of Aeration
Tanks and Clarifiers
to Contact Stabiliza-
tion Process
Addition of Secondary
Clarifiers
Addition of Aerobic
Digesters
Plant Enclosures
Chlorination Facilities
Thickener
Vacuum Filter
Excavation, piping, etc.
Electrical
Landscaping
Contingencies,
Engineering, admin.,
legal and inspection
TOTAL
Capital
$ 580,000
19,000
71,000
58,000
233,000
137,000
226,000
72,000
58,000
122,000
393,000
129,000
19,000
$2,117,OQO
508,000
Annual
0 & M
Capital
$ 684,000
19,000
71,000
58,000
325,000
191,000
226,000
101,000
63,000
130,000
410,000
140,000
19,000
$2,457,000
516,000
Annual
O & M
$2,625,000 $143,000 $2,973,000 $155,000
IV-11
-------
TABLE 17
COST ESTIMATE
ALTERNATIVE A-2
BOYLES HILL
1990 1995
Pipeline, 21"
Lift Station
Force Main, 4"
W.W.T.P., Activated
Sludge
Land
Outfall, 24"
Subtotal
Admin., Engr., etc.
@ 25%
Subtotal
Escalation to 1978
TOTAL
Capital
$ 621,500
36,000
99,900
2,000,000
50,000
553,000
3,360,400
840,600
4,200,000
420,000
$4, 620,000
Annual
0 & M Capital
$ 3,100 $ 621,500
2,000 36,000
500 99,900
143,000 2,200,000
50,000
2,800 553,000
151,400 3,560,400
890,100
151,400 4,451,000
15,100 445,000
$166,500 $4,896,000
Annual
0 & M
$ 3,100
2,000
500
155,000
-
2,800
163,400
-
163,400
16,300
$179,700
IV-12
-------
TABLE 18
COST ESTIMATE
ALTERNATIVE A-3a
BOYLES HILL
1990
1995
Pipeline, 21"
Lift Station
(0.1 mgd)
Force Main, 4"
W.W.T.P., Lagoons
Land
Outfall, 24"
Subtotal
Admin., Engr., etc.
@ 25%
Subtotal
Escalation to 1978
TOTAL
Capital
S 621,500
36,000
99,900
836,000
125,000
553,000
Annual
0 & M
$ 3,100
2,000
500
50,000
-
2,800
Capital
$ 621,500
36,000
99,900
924,000
150,000
553,000
Annual
0 & M
$ 3,100
2,000
500
55,000
-
2,800
2,271,400 58,400 2,384,400 63,400
568,000
284,000
596,000
5,800
298,000
2,839,000 58,400 2,980,000 63,400
6,300
$3,123,000 $64,200 $3,278,000 $69,700
IV-13
-------
TABLE 19
COST ESTIMATE
ALTERNATIVE A-3b
BOYLES HILL
1990
1995
Pipeline, 27"
W.W.T.P-, Lagoons
Land
Outfall, 24"
Subtotal
Admin., Engr., etc.
@ 25%
Subtotal
Escalation to 1978
TOTAL
Capital
$ 988,000
836,000
125,000
553,000
626,000
313,000
Annual
0 & M
$10,000
50,000
2,800
Capital
$ 988,000
924,000
150,000
553,000
654,000
6,300
327,000
Annual
0 & M
$10,000
55,000
2,800
2,502,000 62,800 2,615,000 67,800
3,128,000 62,800 3,269,000 67,800
6,800
$3,441,000 $69,100 $3,596,000 $74,600
IV-14
-------
TABLE 2 0
COST ESTIMATE
ALTERNATIVE A-3c
BOYLES HILL
1990
1995
Capital
Force Main, 18"
Pump Station,
(5.5 mgd)
W.W.T.P., Lagoons
Land
Outfall, 24"
Subtotal
Admin., Engr., etc.
@ 25%
Subtotal
Escalation to 1978
TOTAL
526,000
836,000
125,000
553,000
2,463,000
616,000
308,000
Annual
0 & M
Capital
14,000
50,000
2,800
69,000
6,900
526,000
924,000
150,000
553,000
3>079,000 69,000 3,233,000
323,000
Annual
0 & M
$ 433,000 $ 2,200 $ 433,000 $ 2,200
14,000
55,000
2,800
2,586,000 74,000
647,000
74,000
7,400
$3,387,000 $75,900 $3,556,000 $81,400
IV-15
-------
Alternatives A-4 and A-5 - South Park
Two alternative sites were evaluated in the South Park area,
and results are given below.
Alternative A-4
The first alternative investigated in South Park was a treat-
ment plant located in Section 1, Township 40 North, Range 117 West
in the South Park area, as shown in Figure 22. A 21-inch pipeline
is routed from the existing wastewater treatment plant for 10,900
feet to the site, which includes stabilization ponds for both 1990
and 1995 wastewater flows. From the South Park site a 24-inch
gravity outfall line is required to run the 8,000 feet to the Snake
River. A summary of these costs is presented as Table 21.
Alternative A-5
The second South Park site evaluated is located in Section 20,
Township 40 North, Range 116 West, as shown in Figure 22. A 21-inch
gravity sewer runs 24,000 feet from the existing wastewater treat-
ment plant to the site, where treatment via stabilization ponds
is assumed. An 18-inch outfall runs for 6,000 feet in a southerly
direction to the Snake River. The estimated costs for this al-
ternative are presented in Table 22.
Summary of Alternative New Systems
The estimated cost of the eight alternatives studied at the
five potential treatment sites is summarized in Table 23. The
alternatives for 1990 wastewater flows range in capital cost from
$2.6 million to $5.3 million, with the existing wastewater treat-
ment plant (Alternative A-l) having the lowest capital cost.
Operation and maintenance costs range from $62,800 to $166,500,
with the Boyles Hill plant stabilization pond (Alternative A-3a)
lowest. The large 0 & M values shown for Alternative A-l and A-2,
as compared to the other alternatives studied, is the result of
utilizing an activated sludge process demanding higher energy
needs instead of aerated stabilization ponds.
The present worth of the alternatives ranges from $3.5 to
$6.0 million for 1990 and $5.2 to $10.4 million for the 1995 al-
ternatives. The Boyles Hill pond site (A-3a) has the lowest overall
cost. It should be noted from the present worth analysis, the
total project costs for the mid-South Park site (Alternative A-4),
the Boyles Hill site utilizing lagoons and gravity line (Alternative
A-3b), the Boyles Hill site utilizing pump station and force main
(Alternative A-3c), and the revisions to the existing plant
(Alternative A-l), all can be assumed to have essentially the same
total project cost, given the inherent uncertainties of the es-
timating process. The present worth analysis of the alternatives
shows that an activated sludge plant, at a site other than the
existing wastewater treatment plant, is probably an economically
unfeasible solution in terms of local financing of capital and
0 & M costs. Likewise a site far removed from the existing
-------
TABLE 21
COST ESTIMATE
ALTERNATIVE A-4
MID-SOUTH PARK
1990
1995
Pipeline, 21"
W.W.T.P., Lagoons
Land
Outfall, 24"
Subtotal
Admin., Engr., etc.
@ 25%
Subtotal
Escalation to 1978
TOTAL
Capital
$ 776,000
836,000
175,000
632,000
2,419,000
605,000
3,024,000
302,000
Annual
0 & M
$ 3,900
50,000
-
3,200
57,100
-
57,100
5,700
Capital
$ 776,000
924,000
210,000
632,000
2,542,000
636,000
3,178,000
318,000
Annual
O & M
$ 3,900
55,000
-
3,200
62,100
-
62,100
6,200
$3,326,000 $62,800 $3,496,000 $68,300
-------
TABLE 22
COST ESTIMATE
ALTERNATIVE A-5
SOUTH PARK ROAD
1990
1995
Pipeline, 21"
W.W.T.P., Lagoons
Land
Outfall, 18"
Subtotal
Admin., Engr., etc.
@ 25%
Subtotal
Escalation to 1978
TOTAL
Capital
$1,757,000
836,000
175,000
372,000
785,000
3,925,000
392,00,0
Annual
0 & M
$ 8,800
50,000
1,900
6,100
Capital
$1,757,000
924,000
210,000
372,000
3,140,000 60,700 3,263,000
816,000
6,700 4,079,000
408,000
Annual
0 & M
$ 8,800
55,000
1,900
65,700
65,700
6,600
$4,317,000 $66,800 $4,487,000 $72,300
IV-18
-------
TABLE 2 3
COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES
Alt. NO.
Site
1990 Treatment, thousands
Annual Present*
Capital 0 & M Worth Ranking
1995 Treatment, thousands
Annual Present*
Capital 0 & M Worth Ranking
Proposed
Project
A-l
A-2
A-3a
A-3b
A-3c
A- 4
A-5
Elk Range-A
Elk Range-B
Existing WWTP
Boyles Hill
Boyles Hill
Boyles Hill
Boyles Hill
South Park #1
South Park #2
$4,615
5,302
2,625
4, 620
3,123
3,441
3, 387
3,326
4,317
70.7
70.7
143.0
166.5
64.2
69.1
75.9
62.8
66.8
$6,
7,
6,
9,
4,
5,
5,
5,
6,
535
222
508
141
866
317
448
031
131
7
6
8
1
3
4
2
5
$4,
5,
2,
4,
3,
3,
3,
3,
4,
725
471
973
896
278
596
556
496
487
76,2
155.0
179.7
69.7
74.6
81.4
68.3
72.3
$ 8
8
10
13
6
7
6
6
8
,212
,958
,066
,119
,468
,010
,991
,622
,029
6
7
8
1
4
3
2
5
*Capital plus anticipated O & M (@ 8% annual) for the life of the project
(assume full 15 and 20 year design).
-------
treatment plant site (i.e., South Park Elk Feedground) is also
extremely expensive due to the large capital cost of the required
pipeline.
Alternative A-6 - Interim Improvements
As an alternate to the major capital projects discussed above,
or as a method for staging the major construction of a mechanical
plant at the existing site, a series of interim improvements at
the existing wastewater treatment plant were investigated. This
includes all the necessary interim improvements that would be
required to bring the system to an efficient operational level
for at least the next five years. Major items included in the
interim improvements included addition of solids handling via
aerobic digestion, and thickening/filtration, installation of
standby power, and provision for chlorination/dechlorination fa-
cilities. Facilities were designed for an average daily flow
rate of 1.5 mgd, the value estimated for 1981. A summary of the
costs and major assumptions for these interim facilities is pre-
sented in Table 24.
If the existing sludge drying beds were considered sufficient
to provide adequate solids drying for the interim period, approx-
imately $130,000 (thickening and filtration) could be reduced
from this estimated capital and $9,000 from the operation and
maintenance. This would reduce the capital outlay to approximately
$240,000 and the ai.nual operation and maintenance to about $6,500
above the existing costs. As in other agricultural areas, dried
and stabilized sludge could be sold or given to farmers and ranchers
in the area for ultimate disposal if the necessary restrictions
were developed. This material can be stockpiled until spring and
summer when it could be utilized as soil builder.
-------
TABLE 24
*COST ESTIMATE - ALTERNATIVE A-6
INTERIM (5 year) IMPROVEMENTS
Aerobic Digestion
Air Flotation Thickening
Vacuum Filtration
Standby Power
Chlorination
Subtotal
Administration and
Contingencies @ 15%
TOTAL
Capital
$118,000
64,000
68,000
30,000
45,000
$325,000
49,000
$373,000
0 & M
$ 3,500
3,400
5,600
Negligible
3,000
$15,500
$15,500
*A11 costs - ENR for early 1978 2,800
-------
SEC ION« V
-------
TETON MOUNTAIN
-------
SECTION V
IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND ALTERNATIVES
The following section analyzes the impacts of the proposed
project and the seven basic alternatives that were described in
detail in preceding sections. The impact analysis weighs both
the positive and negative characteristics inherent in each alterna-
tive, and presents these first in a narrative description, and
summarized in a later section by a matrix which compares the
attributes and weaknesses of each alternative within several basic
categories. The narrative description discusses the characteristics
of each option in terms of four impact categories which correspond
to the major topical headings in the background section of this
document (Section II) within the framework of the existing informa-
tion. These include the Natural Environment Impacts, Socio-Cultural
Impacts, Economic Impacts, and Land Use Impacts. The matrix summary
analyzes both objective and subjective impact areas utilizing a
weighting factor to distinguish between the more significant aspects
or values effected by each alternative.
The evaluation of impacts are directed to those issues which
were considered of major importance, or have become highly controver-
sial. While the document is comprehensive in terms of its analysis
of the Town's wastewater problem, it is oriented toward providing a
comparative evaluation of these critical issues.
Primary impacts are considered at the beginning of the section
followed by a summary analysis of the secondary impacts of each
alternative.
NATURAL ENVIRONMENT IMPACTS
Environmental problems selcom stem from simple causes.
Rather, they usually rise out of the interplay of many contributing
circumstances. Changes in one part of the environment inevitably
trigger changes in other parts. For this reason, the complex
interactions of environmental processes must be looked at as a
"whole system."
The following section analyzes the impacts of the proposed
action and the seven basic alternatives on the natural environment
in the Jackson study area. The discussion considers both primary
and secondary impacts in terms of short term and long term environ-
mental relationships. While the primary impacts are generally
straightforward, the secondary impacts likely to be facilitated
by implementation of an alternative are extremely difficult to
forecast. Construction of a wastewater treatment facility, for
example, can have a direct primary impact of improving water quality
V-l
-------
(groundwater or surface water) by providing better treatment
efficiency than existing individual septic tank systems in an
area. The long range secondary impacts of providing central sewer
to the area, however, may include increased air pollution generated
by the increased population serviced by that centralized system.
For this reason, the narrative discusses both the positive and
negative characteristics of the alternatives in terms of their
potential impacts on four major areas; ir quality, water quality,
wildlife habitats, and natural hazards. The no-action alternative
is included within the evaluation framework where specific impacts
are anticipated.
WATER QUALITY IMPACTS
Impacts of the Proposed Action (South Park Elk Feedground)
The primary impacts of construction of a lagoon treatment system
at the South Park Elk Feedground on Flat Creek water quality include
significant decreases in fecal coliform, ammonia, nitrate nitrogen,
total phosphate, total dissolved solids and turbidity due to removal
of the Jackson treatment plant discharge to the creek. With the
construction and operation of the proposed treatment facility
and discharge to the Snake River, increases in these water quality
parameters can be expected for the Snake River downstream from the
sewage outfall. Nutrient levels will likely demonstrate the most
significant increases because of increased flows facilitated by
additional treatment capacity and the low nutrient removal efficiency
provided by the lagoon system.
Although Flat Creek is presently classified as a Class I
stream, existing data indicates that water quality is impaired in
the segment of the creek below the Jackson treatment plant. Snake
River water quality through the Wyoming Snake River Basin is excellent.
Construction of the proposed project will involve installation
of the 21 inch interceptor, construction of a new outfall, and
discharge to the Snake River.
In the absence of a detailed analysis of the existing character-
istics of Jackson's wastewater and the alternative treatment plant
design removal efficiencies, several assumptions were prepared in
order to predict the discharge concentration expected from the
1995 flows for total phosphorus, total nitrogen and ammonia. These
were developed for both the Snake River and Flat Creek and are pre-
sented at this point in order to facilitate comparison.
Assuming a medium sewage strength, the influent characteristics
of Jackson's wastewater were assumed (Metcalf & Eddy 1972) at 1995
design flow as follows:
Total Nitrogen 40 mg/1 886 Ib/day
Total Phosphorus 10 mg/1 221 Ib/day
Ammonia Nitrogen 25 mg/1 553 Ib/day
V-2
-------
A conventional activated sludge system without nutrient removal,
ammonia removal, or a biological polishing pond and algal removal
could be expected to remove only about 40 percent of the influent
nitrogen concentration and 20 percent of the phosphate through
bacterial assimilation and sludge removal.
This will provide an estimated effluent quality of:
Total Nitrogen 24 mg/1 531 Ib/day
Total Phosphorus 8 mg/1 177 Ib/day
Ammonia Nitrogen 15 mg/1 331.8 Ib/day
A stabilization pond, as proposed by the design engineer, may
reach higher nutrient removal rates but be subject to more fluctua-
tion. Removal for some nutrients as high as 75-80 percent (EPA
Lagoon Upgrading 1973) may be experienced in the summer, but a more
conservative estimate of 60 percent for nitrogen and 20 percent
for phosphorus was used in this analysis. Utilizing a simple
effluent mass loading this would indicate effluent characteristics
as follows:
Total Nitrogen 16 mg/1 531 Ib/day
Total Phosphorus 8 mg/1 177 Ib/day
Ammonia Nitrogen 6 mg/1 132 Ib/day
In evaluating what effects these discharges would have on
either Flat Creek or the Snake River, low flows of 50 cfs on Flat
Creek and 1200 cfs (Wyoming Water Planning Program Report, No. 14,
1975, Discharge Measurements) on the Snake River were assumed.
The following nutrient and ammonia concentrations were calculated
based upon these flows.
TABLE 25
Calculated Instream Concentration
Total
Discharge Total N mg/1 Total P mg/1 Ammonia N mg/1
Flat Creek
Mechanical 1.6 0.5 1.0
Snake River
Mechanical 0.07 0.02 0.04
Stabilization Pond 0.05 0.01 0.03
V-3
-------
Toxic ammonia (unionized ammonia) concentration, based upon
the known temperature and pH characteristics at low flow were
calculated at:
Discharge Toxic NH3 (unionized)
Flat Creek
Mechanical 0.012
Snake River
Mechanical 0.0015
Stabilization Pond 0.0001
If, as indicated in the Snake River Basin Water Quality Man-
agement Plan (1976), Snake River flows below Wilson could reach as
low as 100 cfs for limited periods, when Jackson Dam releases were
suppressed, the following concentration could be expected in the
Snake River at maximum design flow:
Toxic
Total N Total P NH3-N NH3 (unionized)
Mechanical 0.80 0.25 0.50 0.016
Stabilization Pond 0.50 0.17 0.33 0.011
Water quality standards for instream nutrient concentrations
(EPA Quality Criteria for Water 1976) state that in order to prevent
the development of biological growth and eutrophocation, phosphorus
(normally considered the limiting nutrient in western waters)
concentration in any stream entering any lake should not exceed
0.05 mg/1. Since the Snake River enters Palisades Reservoir, these
extremely low flows could exceed the desired quality of the river.
A number of nonpoint sources enter the Snake River between Jackson and Palisades
Reservoir making the loading of nutrients on Palisades primarily a nonpoint
problem (see Appendix 4).
It appears from these estimates that the recommended phosphorus concentra-
tion for Flat Creek instream water quality would be exceeded by
a conventional activated sludge facility at the design flow. The
phosphorus concentration generated by either of the proposed
treatment facilities discharging to the Snake River would not exceed
either instream or impoundment protection criteria unless extreme
low flows (e.g. 100 cfs or less) were experienced.
According to the calculated concentrations it does not appear
that instream toxic ammonia levels for cold water fisheries
(0.02 mg/1 unionized NH3 Ammonia Toxicity 1976) would be reached
at either site at design flow.
V-4
-------
It should also be noted that by removing the Jackson treatment
plant effluent discharge to Flat Creek, 1995 flows will be reduced
by as much as 4.0 cfs during certain periods of the year. Flat
Creek presently has an annual average flow of approximately 100 cfs,
with low flows of 50 cfs measured during February 1976. A somewhat
less significant but important impact of the proposed action, parti-
cularly for site B in view of its close proximity to the Snake River,
is the increased sediment loadings and turbidity to the river caused
by surface disturbance and disruption during the construction phase
of the proposed project. A large area will require excavation for
construction of the lagoon system, and placement of the outfall line.
These increased concentrations can be minimized through utilization
of temporary erosion control practices during construction, and
maintenance of a permanent buffer between the lagoon area and the
Snake River.
Dewatering will be required during pipeline construction and
alignment in areas of high groundwater. This action will likely
create local turbidity problems in groundwater, and wastewater which
must be removed from the trench. Proper controls would be exercised
in disposal of this wastewater to prevent adverse effects on nearby
surface waters. Raised mounded lagoons will require sealing or
lining to insure containment and prevent groundwater contamination.
Infiltration of groundwater into the interceptor should have an
insignificant effect on the volumes of water which require treatment
if proper materials and methods are used in the construction phase
of the interceptor. Exfiltration should pose no significant problems
in terms of groundwater contamination if proper design and testing
are utilized.
Impacts of the Alternatives
Alternative A-l (New Mechanical Plant at Existing Site)
The primary impacts of construction of a new mechanical plant
at the existing treatment plant site will be to improve the Flat
Creek water quality. At present, the existing plant is hydraulicly
overloaded. Existing monitoring data indicate the facility is
contributing to the bacteria, sediment and nutrient levels of Flat
Creek, making this stream segment the most critical in Wyoming's
Snake River Basin in terms of water quality impairment. Expansion
and improvement of the Jackson plant to meet the projected waste
treatment demand for the year 1990 will reduce high fecal coliform,
turbidity and total dissolved solid concentrations presently
contributed by the plant. Nitrate, ammonia and phosphate not
removed by secondary treatment will continue to elevate with popula-
tion growth and increased flows.
Snake River water quality should also show a.^general improvement
in bacteria and sediment concentrations at the confluence with Flat
Creek as a result of improved operation of the Jackson treatment
plant. The existing interceptor is scheduled to undergo improvements
to correct the existing infiltration program under an EPA grant.
No major adverse water quality impacts are anticipated during this
project which should be completed during the summer 1977.
V-5
-------
Increased sediment levels and turbidity resulting from runoff
from the site during construction will probably be minimal due to
the small amount of land area disturbed. Proper grading and land-
scaping with a stream buffer zone following construction would
reduce on-site runoff.
Alternative A-2 (Boyles Hill Mechanical Plant)
The primary impacts of construction of a new mechanical plant
at the Boyles Hill site in the short term/long term would be signifi-
cant decreases in fecal coliform, ammonia, nitrate nitrogen, total
phosphate, total dissolved solids and turbidity water quality para-
meters for Flat Creek due to removal of the Jackson treatment plant
effluent discharge. A corresponding increase can be expected for
the Snake River downstream from the newly located outfall. These
impacts, however, will not be as acute due to the substantially
higher flows and dilution provided by the Snake River throughout the
year.
The primary impacts of this alternative during the construction
phase would be similar to those for Alternative A-l, and include
increased sedimentation to the small tributaries in the area (Spring
and Crane Creeks) caused by runoff from the site. These impacts
are short term, and are not expected to be significant. Dewatering
will be required during pipeline alignment in areas of high ground-
water. Infiltration and exfiltration problems will be similar to
those discussed for the proposed action, and will require similar
mitigation measures.
Alternative A-3 (Boyles Hill Stabilization Pond)
The primary and secondary water quality impacts involving
construction of a stabilization pond at the Boyles Hill site would
be similar to those discussed for Alternative A-2. A significant
improvement in Flat Creek water quality and a corresponding minor
decrease in Snake River water quality below the realigned sewage
outfall would be expected.
The primary short term adverse impacts on groundwater and surface
water quality could be complicated somewhat by the increased surface
area disturbance required for a lagoon treatment system. Dewatering
of the pipeline trench and raising and sealing of the lagoons to
insure containment of wastewater would be required.
Alternative A-4 (Mid-South Park Stabilization Pond)
The primary impacts on Jackson area water quality associated
with this alternative are similar to those discussed for the Boyles
Hill stabilization pond alternative. Short term surface water and
groundwater quality may be adversely effected by soil dis ^ption
during construction. Sedimentation and turbidity problems can be
minimized through the use of construction techniques which reduce
soil erosion, ditch bank slumping and control on-site runoff.
Crossing Spring Creek and Crane Creek with the interceptor alignment
may also create some short term adverse impacts. These impacts
can also be reduced through existing regulations and construction
mitigation procedures.
V-6
-------
Flat Creek water quality will undoubtedly be improved through
implementation of this alternative. Snake River water quality will
receive no beneficial impacts for reasons discussed under the other
alternatives involving effluent discharge to the river.
Alternative A-5 (South Park Road Stabilization Pond)
The primary water quality impacts of construction of a stabili-
zation pond system in lower South Park are very similar to those for
the proposed South Park Elk Feedground alternative. A general
improvement in Flat Creek water quality can be expected. Conversely,
water quality conditions in the Snake River below the sewage treat-
ment plant outfall can be expected to show some minor deterioration.
Primary short term construction impacts will also be similar
to the proposed action. Site planning which includes provisions for
effective erosion and sediment control and storm water management
will minimize these impacts during the construction phase of the
project. Proper design and testing of the interceptor will reduce
infiltration/exfiltration problems.
Alternative A-6 (Interim Upgrading of Existing Treatment Plant)
The primary short term impacts of this alternative would be
similar to those discussed for Alternative A-l, and would include
temporary correction of existing hydraulic overload at the plant
and reductions in fecal coliform, turbidity and total solid concen-
trations in Flat Creek. This improvement, howevt-, is only a short
term solution as the action does not provid^ sufficient additional
treatment capacity to serve the long term needs of the area.
Alternative A-7 (No Action Alternative)
Impacts on water quality of the "no action" alternative are
dependent on the population growth. The "no action" alternative
would create no additional primary short term adverse or beneficial
impacts on water quality beyond those currently being experienced
in the Jackson area, providing no extensions or additional hookups
were allowed on the existing system. Wyoming water quality standards
would continue to be exceeded periodically for fecal coliform in
Flat Creek below the treatment plant outfall, and the plant would
continue to exceed the proposed (July 1, 1977) discharge standards.
This could result in the Town of Jackson violating their secondary
treatment requirements and being subjected to enforcement sanctions
by the Wyoming DEQ.
If present population growth continues and the projected popula-
tion is realized, Flat Creek water quality conditions will begin to
deteriorate at an increasing rate. Violations of additional water
quality parameters including oxygen demanding waste, nutrients and
sediment will occur downstream from the sewage treatment outfall.
Increased nutrient and sediment levels are also likely to occur
further downstream at the confluence of Flat Creek and the Snake
River.
V-7
-------
AIR QUALITY
Impact of the Proposed Action (South Park Elk Feedground)
The primary impacts on air quality in the Jackson, Wyoming
study area for the proposed action would be from the actual construc-
tion and operation of the facilities. Alignment of the pipeline and
construction of the wastewater treatment plant will result in
increased particulate levels for ambient air quality- Construction
of a lagoon treatment system alternative will likely result in some
seasonal odor problems.
Limited monitoring data indicates that existing air quality in
the study area is good. Construction of the proposed project will
necessitate the removal of vegetation and disruption of soils and
ground area with resultant dust generation during excavation for
the pipeline. These effects are proportional to the interceptor
length and the land area required for construction of a lagoon
treatment system. On-site construction impacts will largely be
from fugitive dust as a result of construction equipment operation
and construction activities. Maximum particulate concentrations
will likely occur during the dry summer months. These concentrations
can be minimized but not eliminated by restricting the size of
construction easements in critical areas, through dust abatement
practices during construction, and by starting restoration as soon
as possible following construction.
The overloaded condition of the existing treatment facility
and the fact that the plant was not finished as intended, compounded
by prevailing wind patterns, has resulted in a significant odor
problem for the Town of Jackson. Although extremely difficult to
quantify, the direct impacts of the proposed system also included
a more pronounced but localized potential for seasonal odor problems
due to the operational mode of the lagoon system. Because the
proposed treatment system is located in a relatively remote and
sparsely populated area, however, major odor problems are not antici-
pated. Manholes along the proposed interceptor line could also
create periodic localized odor problems.
Impacts of the Alternatives
Alternative A-l (New Mechanical Plant at Existing Site)
A primary impact of construction of a new mechanical facility
at the existing treatment plant site will be increased particulate
levels in the immediate construction area resulting from fugitive
dust generated during construction of the plant.
Dust problems will be short term, and dependent on dust abatement
procedures implemented during the construction phase.
The most significant primary beneficial affect of the alternative
will be the long term reduction of odor problems resulting from
hydraulic overloading and inadequate sludge handling at the existing
treatment plant.
V-8
-------
Alternative A-2 (Boyles Hill Mechanical Plant)
During construction phase of the project, the primary adverse
short term impacts of the alternative would be similar to those for
Alternative A-l. This alternative will involve additional disruption
of soils and vegetation for pipeline construction (proportionate
to interceptor and outfall pipe length). The project will also
create more extensive fugitive dust which would be concentrated in
the immediate vicinity of construction at intermittent intervals.
Site location and adjacent topography will essentially eliminate
odor problems for the Town of Jackson. Suburban residential develop-
ment in close proximity to the treatment facility (particularly
the subdivision to the north Skyline Ranch Development) or along the
pipeline alignment will probably be subjected to some increase in
odors.
Alternative A-3 (Boyles Hill Stabilization Pond)
The primary impacts for the alternative involving construction
of a stabilization pond at the Boyles Hill site would be similar to
those summarized for Alternative A-2 except that the primary odor
problems from a pond system are more serious than those generated by
a mechanical facility. Additional land area requirements and corres-
ponding disruption during construction for the stabilization pond
system, however, will result in higher localized particulate concen-
trations (fugitive dust).
Alternative A-4 (Mid-South Park Stabilization Pond)
Short term primary impacts associated with this alternative are
similar to those for the Boyles Hill stabilization pond alternative
and include dust emmission created by earth moving equipment and
vehicles, and exhaust from construction equipment and motor vehicles.
An additional source of particulate concentrations for this alterna-
tive will be the clearing and construction of a necessary maintenance
road. These pollutants will probably be confined to the immediate
vicinity of the construction site, and occur during intermittent
intervals of the construction phase. Potential odor emissions will
also be similar to the Boyles Hill stabilization pond alternative,
although existing residential development in the area is more
scattered, and not located in the vicinity of the proposed site.
Prevailing wind patterns could create occasional minor odor
problems for the Town of Jackson during spring and fall. These
problems, however, should not be of major consequence.
Alternative A-5 (South Park Road Stabilization Pond)
During the construction phase, the primary short term impacts of
the project will be attributable to increased particulate concentra-
tions resulting from soils and vegetation disturbance at the site
of the stabilization pond and along the interceptor route. These
impacts will be very similar to those discussed under Alternative A-4.
Immediate odor problems resulting from operating the system are not
anticipated to be of major consequence, because of the low density
residential development in the area, but could become more significant
if residential growth were to occur in close proximity to the plant.
V-Q
-------
Alternative A-6 (Interim Upgrading of Existing Treatment Plant:)
The short term primary impacts associated with interim upgrading
of the existing treatment plant include increased localized dust
problems related to construction of additional facilities. These
impacts also include elimination of current nuisance odor problems
currently experienced by local residents. It is probable, however,
that in five years the system would be operating at an efficiency
similar to the present system, unless growth controls were adopted.
Alternative A-7 (No Action Alternative)
The "no action" alternative impacts on existing air quality in
the Jackson study area would depend on the growth policy finally
adopted by the Town of Jackson and Teton County- Assuming a policy
is adopted similar to the policy being proposed by the draft
Comprehensive Plan, it is likely that population growth will continue,
but at a somewhat slower rate because of a lack of sewer capacity
and the implications of non-compliance with the Town's NPDES permit.
No significant short term deterioration of existing air quality is
anticipated in the immediate future. Short term increases in parti-
culate concentrations resulting from removal of vegetation and
activity would not occur.
Taking no action would result in the primary impact of continu-
ing and increasing the odor problems caused by the present overload-
ing and sludge disposal problems experienced at the Jackson treatment
plant. These would be compounded as the population increased.
WILDLIFE HABITAT
Impacts of the Proposed Project (South Park Elk Feedground Stabiliza-
tion Pond)
The major primary impact that would result from construction of
aerated stabilization ponds on the Elk Feedground would be the loss
of 20 plus acres of winter wildlife habitat. Of the two Elk Feed-
ground specific sites investigated, Site B, the less expensive of
the two, is located in a large open area. The site serves as a
hay production area during the summer and a browsing habitat for
elk during the late fall and early winter. Elimination of the 20
acres would reduce the carrying capacity of the refuge and possibly
force Department of Game and Fish personnel to purchase more
supplemental winter feed.
While it is unlikely that the construction operation of
facilities themselves (ponds, aerators, fencing, etc.) would
adversely affect the condition of the wintering elk herd, the
increase in human activity (operation and maintenance personnel)
and the high probability that at some time in the future additional
land and facilities would be required, may be a significant adverse
affect on the elk, and could lead to the eventual abandonment of
the area by the herd. A stabilization pond system requires little
continuous maintenance, but if chlorination facilities and the flow
V-10
-------
recording devices were at the lagoon site, several trips a day
through the feedground would be necessary to administer the facility.
While the Wyoming Game and Fish personnel feel that the lagoon could
"totally eliminate the purpose the land was originally acquired for"
to maintain a thousand head of elk, it appears more probable that
the long term impacts, barring other secondary effects, would be to
reduce the carrying capacity of the area as the elk build up a
buffer zone between themselves and the fenced pond area. This
reduction in carrying capacity would apply to other species (deer,
small mammals, etc.) which inhabit the area during the winter.
If Site B were selected, there would not be a need to remove any
significant amount of trees. Interceptor and outfall lines would
require only limited soil disturbance, and it would be necessary to
restore and revegetate those lands impacted. Construction of the
ponds would necessitate the instillation of an improved road.
While the American peregrine falcon which is on the Rare and
Endangered Species List, has been reported as occuring in the area,
little information is available as to its frequency, use of the area,
or number. Without any information it is difficult to make an
assumption as to the impact on this species.
Impacts on the local fishery would, in the long term, be posi-
tive, regardless of the alternative selected. A facility designed
and operated to meet Wyoming Class I Water Quality Standards for
the projected 1995 flows would protect the fishery resources of the
Snake River.
Alternative A-l (New Mechanical Plant at Existing Site)
The only significant impact to the natural community resulting
from this alternative would be the improvement of water quality in
Flat Creek. This would over the year help protect and maintain the
fishery values and prevent any barrier to fish movement that may be
generated by increasing low quality"effluent discharges.
Alternative A-2 (Mechanical Plant Boyles Hill)
Alternative A-2 would eliminate a portion of the local environ-
ment surrounding Boyles Hill and displace those species dependent
upon this area. Since this is not a particularly critical area in
terms of wildlife habitat, and has in the past been subject to severe
land alteration, this impact would be minimal given the extensive
amounts of available high quality habitat.
If the system were designed and operated to meet Wyoming Class 1
Water Quality Standards as expected, no deterioration in the fishing
potential of the Snake River is expected. This alternative would
protect Flat Creek from any point source degradation.
Alternative A-3 (Stabilization Pond Boyles Hill)
The expected impact would be similar to those discussed in
Alternative A-2.
V-ll
-------
Alternative A-4 (Mid-South Park Stabilization Pond)
The impacts from Alternative A-4 would be similar to those at
the Boyles Hill or existing site in terms of its secondary growth
inducing factors. Primary impact on wildlife would be minor. With
the application of architectural finishing and landscaping utilizing
trees and other small shrubs, the available habitat for a number of
smaller species would be enhanced.
Alternative A-5 (South Park Road Stabilization Pond)
The wildlife and habitat impacts of this alternative are basically
the same as those in the Proposed Project, with the exception that
the Elk Feedgrounds are preserved intact and the elk herd would re-
main uneffected by the facilities.
Alternative A-6 (Interim Upgrading at the Existing Treatment Plant)
An increase in Flat Creek water quality and protection of the
fishery potential of the stream would be realized by the implementa-
tion of this alternative. Of course the plant would have to be
expanded to take care of additional flows due to growth, or water
quality would not be protected in the long term.
Alternative 7 (No Action)
This alternative fails to protect the long term water quality of
Flat Creek and could be expected to lead to the eventual deterioration
of the fishing resources on Flat Creek, due to the expected increase
of the pollutant loading.
NATURAL HAZARDS
Impact of the Proposed Action (South Park Elk Feedground)
The major natural hazards are related to flooding and earth-
quake hazard. According to information supplies by the Corps of
Engineers, both South Park Elk Feedground sites are located in the
100-Year Flood plain of the Snake River. Flooding at these sites
probably exceeds the 100-Year Flood in terms of frequency. Flood-
related impacts for this alternative are further complicated by the
uncertainties regarding the degree of flood protection provided by
the levee system and periodic winter flooding of Flat Creek caused
by ice blockage. The sites are not located over known fault zones.
The primary short term impacts of construction of a stabilization
pond treatment system at either of the South Park Elk Feedground sites
include the potential for periodic inundation by floodwaters from
the Snake River. During a flood episode, operation of the facility
could be impaired if flood waters overtopped a low profile lagoon
causing a subsequent backup with potential health hazards and adverse
water quality impacts. Access to the plant may also be temporarily
interrupted if the flood waters reach sufficient velocities to wash
out sections of the service road. Damage to the outfall may also
occur during flooding. A "Special Flood Hazard Information Report"
has been prepared by the Corps. This report discusses Snake River
V-12
-------
flooding problems in Teton County, and provides elevation information
for 500, 100, 50 and 10-Year Floods. Flood-proofing the proposed
facility to the level of the 100-Year Flood will largely reduce flood
damage potential. Participation in the National Flood Insurance
Program by Teton County would enable the Town of Jackson to purchase
flood insurance covering any structure damage due to flooding.
Secondary long range impacts of flooding related to the proposed
project include additional potential for flooding and damage to new
residential and other types of development in areas where develop-
ment did not exist prior to sewer availability. Teton County
presently experiences average annual flood damages in the Snake
River flood plain exceeding $26,000.
Impacts of Alternatives
Alternative A-l (New Mechanical Plant at Existing Site)
No major primary natural hazard impacts are anticipated with
construction of a new mechanical plant at the present site. The
existiig waste treatment plant is located in close proximity to a
probable earthquake fault zone which runs east across the valley
floor and south along Highway 26, 89, 187. Although information
on the exact location of the fault is limited, minimum building
materials and design standards should be utilized in planning the
facility considering the Jackson area is one of the most seismically
active regions in the United States.
Flooding and high water table conditions do not appear to be
major problems for construction of a new mechanical plant at the
site. However, adequate flood-proofing measures should be included
in design of the facility to insure protection from flooding should
Flat Creek experience abnormally high flows. These measures should
include an auxiliary generating system flood-proofed to the level of
the 100-Year Flood to reduce shut down time in the event a flood
episode did occur. Additional flows from the treatment plant will
alter the hydrologic regime of Flat Creek. Winter flooding could
be increased as a larger population is served by the facility.
Alternative A-2 (Boyles Hill Mechanical Plant)
The major primary impacts associated with implementation of
this alternative are very similar to those discussed for Alterna-
tive A-l. The proposed construction site is located adjacent to a
probable earth quake fault zone. Groundwater levels are generally
three to five feet below the surface in the area, and excavation for
pipeline alignment and treatment plant construction may create tempor-
ary turbidity problems in local groundwater aquifers (discussed in
a previous section). The project site is not subject to the 100-Year
Flood according to available information, although it is located
in the 500-Year Flood plain of the Snake River. Construction would
not require flood-proofing measures. However, placement of the out-
fall to the Snake River will need to include flood-proofing consider-
ations.
V-13
-------
Alternative A-3 (Boyles Hill Stabilization Pond)
The primary and secondary impacts associated with construction
and operation of a stabilization pond system at the Boyles Hill site
are very similar to those discussed for Alternative A-2. Additional
excavation required for construction of a lagoon system will prob-
ably have a larger short term effect on groundwater in the area.
The mounded, sealed lagoon system should be flood-proofed to maintain
operation through the 100-Year Flood.
Alternative A-4 (Mid-South Park Stabilization Pond)
The mid-South Park site is not located over any known earth-
quake fault zones. Depth to groundwater at the site generally ranges
between three and five feet. The site is located in the 100-Year
Flood plain of the Snake River according to information supplies by
the Corps of Engineers. The primary short term impacts of flooding
on this alternative are similar to those discussed for the proposed
action, and include the potential for periodic flooding and damage,
service disruption and health hazards. Flood insurance is not
presently available for the facility structures because Teton County
is not participating in the National Flood Insurance Program. Par-
ticipation would require adoption of standard resolutions which assure
the Flood Insurance Administration that applications for all new
development or substantial improvements to existing development in
the County are reviewed to insure such development is "reasonably
safe" from flooding.
Alternative A-5 (South Park Road Stabilization Pond)
The primary and secondary short term/long term impacts associated
with implementation of this alternative are similar to thos'e summariz-
ed for the South Park Elk Feedground alternative. Earthquake hazard
will probably be minimal as the site is not located over a known
fault zone. The site also is not located in the 100-Year Flood
plains of the Snake River or Flat Creek; and the facility would
not require flood-proofing.
Alternative A-6 (Interim Upgrading of Existing Treatment Plant)
No major primary natural hazard impacts are expected with
interim upgrading of the existing treatment plant, although the site
is located in close proximity to a probable earthquake zone.
Additional flow from the upgraded plant may have a minor impact on
the flooding potential for Flat Creek.
ECONOMIC IMPACTS
The economic burden or value a particular project either imposes
or indirectly bestows upon a community is one of the primary control-
ling factors that determines what direction that community may take
in solving a particular municipal problem. A significant considera-
tion in making a commitment to one alternative over another is the
immediate capital that the residents of an area will need to generate
in order to finance design and construction. The second major
expenditure is the yearly operation and maintenance costs that are
V-14
-------
necessary to maintain the facility at its designed level of efficiency,
While capital construction costs may represent a large initial invest-
ment for a community, and may require either bonded indebtedness or
commitment of accumulated municipal funds, the operation and mainte-
nance of a system may, after utilizing the assistance available
through the EPA Construction Grant Program, be a longterm and equally
significant burden on the residents of the service area.
A third factor that must be considered in evaluating the
economic impacts of any proposed project are the indirect or secon-
dary costs that are created or facilitated by that project. This
includes the cost of other municipal facilities and services that
must be supplied when a wastewater project serves to accelerate
growth and development in areas that lack or have inadequate existing
services. Such items as schools, transportation, road improvements,
police and fire protection, health services, and recreation must be
provided to new residents of an area. Since the Comprehensive Plan
being developed by the county relies heavily upon natural hazards
(i.e., high groundwater requiring widely spaced individual disposal
systems) to direct and control the density of development, removing
this hazard by providing a centralized wastewater facility may
facilitate major changes in the proposed development plan depending
upon the site and interceptor alignment selected. The EPA's Construc-
tion Grant Program will fund 75% of the eligible costs for the
design and construction of a municipal wastewater system. While
eligible costs need to be evaluated on a case by case basis, such
things as land- demolition of abandoned facilities, and providing
excess capacity and a higher degree of treatment than is necessary
are generally excluded. The direct costs that the Town of Jackson
would have to assume including both capital and operation and main-
tenance, are reflected on Table 26 for each alternative site.
It is important to note that the EPA portion of any funding is
based upon the availability of federal grant funds. While Jackson
is presently at the top of the priority funding list, if the Town
cannot decide on a system acceptable to the State and Federal
Government, then money which was designated for the Jackson project
will go to other municipalities. While the "no action" alternative
may appear economically attractive, it should be pointed out that
the Town will eventually be required to deal with its water quality
problems. The inability on the part of EPA and the Town of Jackson
to arrive at an equitable and environmentally sound solution at the
time the facility plan was prepared has increased the estimated 1978-
1979 construction cost a minimum of 25-30%, due to inflation.
If after the issuing of the final EIS a recommended project cannot
be developed, these inflation factors can be expected to continue
to increase the eventual cost of construction. This may impose
both severe economic and water quality impacts on the Jackson
area, at some future date.
In order to simplify the analysis, only the seven major alterna-
tives were evaluated. It was assumed that the least expensive
pipeline alignment and specific site (where there was a choice
V-15
-------
TABLE 26
1995 CAPITAL COST ^COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES
Alternative
South Park Elk
Feedground
(Proposed Project)
Expansion at
Existing Site
Alt. A-l
Boyles Hill
Activated Sludge
Alt. A-2
Boyles Hill
Stabilization Pond
Alt. A- 3
Mid South Park
Stabilization Pond
Alt. A-4
South Park Road Site
Stabilization Pond
Alt. A-5
Interim Improvements
(5 years) Alt. A-6
Capitol
Cost
(millions)
4.724
2.973
4.896
3.278
3.496
4.487
0.373
EPA Share
(Fundable
Under 75%
PL 92-500)
(millions)
3.386
2.230
3.620
2.304
2.465
3.208
0.280
Local Share
(Non-grant
Fundable)
(millions)
1.339
0.743
1.276
0.974
1.032
1.280
0.093
Present
Worth
0 & M
(millions)
3.487
7.093
8.223
3.190
3.126
3.542
0.091
Total
Present
Worth
Town
(millions)
4.826
7.836
9.498
4.168
4.158
4.822
0.184
Peak
Design
P.E.
**
18700
18700
18700
18700
18700
18700
10100***
Life of
Project
Cost Per
Design P.E.
( dollars )
258
419
508
223
222
258
18
Ranking
( Present
Worth to
the Town of
Jackson )
3
4
5
2
1
3
*0utright cost no debt service or later connection fee
**The lower the cost per design population equivalent (P
taxpayer. A revenue plan is currently being generated
residential costs.
***Assume no growth restrictions.
assumptions possible at this level of study
,E.), the lower the monthly cost to the
which will translate these costs into average
-------
between alternatives) would be recommended on the basis of cost
effectiveness, and these would be utilized in the evaluation of
economic impacts.
Impacts of the Proposed Project (South Park Elk Feedground)
Table 26 presents the cost information for the Proposed Project
and the alternatives for a 1995 design flow- In terms of actual
cost per Population Equivalent (P.E.)(not differentiated between
residential, commercial or tourist) in the Town of Jackson, the
least expensive of the two proposed South Park Elk Feedground
sites ranks tied for third, as the third least costly of the six
alternatives providing complete treatment. This includes $1.339
million in non-grant fundable capital costs and $3.487 million in
operation and maintenance charges over the 20 year life of the
project. These figures do not include such items as debt service
on the locally funded capital, salvage values on the existing
plant and land, and other variable costs and credits that would
need to be identified through a local revenue plan once a project
was approved for construction. Based upon the 1995 design P.E.
(over the 20 year life of the facility), $258 per P.E. would need to
be generated locally to fund and maintain the facility. It should
be re-emphasized that the $1.339 million would need to be made
available prior to or during construction, but the remaining
$3.487 million would be prorated over the design life of the
facility.
The costs associated with the tourist or seasonal portion of
the facility could be generated through the use of a local hotel/
motel or restaurant tax or the current sales tax designated for
sewage facility capital expansion, but the resident share would
still require an eventual increase in the residential service
charge.
The operation of an aerated stabilization pond is, when compared
to a mechanical plant, less expensive due to lower energy require-
ments. There is also generally less repair and preventive maintenance
associated with a pond system. The proposed gravity interceptor
line would require a certain amount of additional maintenance until
the flow to the plant was large enough to sustain a self flushing
action. In the years following any construction, and during the off
tourist season it may be necessary to occasionally flush the line
to resuspend settled material. Interceptor O & M costs are normally
considered to be one-half to one percent of the capital cost annually
depending upon the design and construction.
Under proper operation sludge disposal is not a problem in a
facultative (aerobic/anaerobic) stabilization pond. Sludge
(primarily inorganic solids, and cellular material) settles to the
anaerobic layer of the pond and the organic portion is decomposed
and stabilized. A certain amount of stabilized solids and algae
material wash through the system and may in some cases require
the addition of advanced treatment (coagulation and settling or
filters) if it must be removed.
V-17
-------
Impacts of the Alternatives
Alternative A-l (New Mechanical Plant at Existing Site)
The immediate capital that would need to be generated locally if
this alternative were implemented is approximately $750,000 (Table 26)
making it the least expensive alternative in terms of construction
and design. However, the 0 & M costs for the life of the project
are the second highest of the six complete alternatives (approximately
7 million dollars over the next 20 years) and give a combined ranking
as the fourth least expensive in terms of locally generated funds.
Alternative A-2 (Mechanical Plant at Boyles Hill)
This alternative is the most expensive of those considered, both
in terms of capital and 0 & M costs. The Boyles Hill site, while in
some ways ideal for a WWTP, would require the installation of addi-
tional sewer lines (or force mains) and an outfall to the Snake River.
The Boyles Hill State School section of land has sufficient room for
any future expansion and provides a site isolated from the Town but
capable of servicing the presently anticipated growth area by gravity
sewers and a low volume pump station and force main.
Alternative A-3 (Boyles Hill Stabilization Pond)
In terms of necessary local capital and 0 & M costs this
alternative or alternative A-5 would be the least expensive option
the Town could adopt (Table 26) . The capital cost of constructing
deep ponds at the Boyles Hill location could increase if severe
ground water problems were encountered, but it is not to be antici-
pated that they would pose the same degree of difficulty as expected
at the South Park Elk Feedground site. Detailed on-site soils and
ground water analysis would be necessary to establish the severity of
any construction problems at Boyles Hill.
Alternative A-4 (Mid-South Park Stabilization Pond)
An aerated stabilization pond at a Mid-South Park location would
be one of the two least costly in terms of local capital and operating
and maintenance expenses (Table 26). The site would be located at
the southwest peripherial edge of the anticipated higher density area
being proposed by the Comprehensive Plan, and would service this area
through a gravity collection and interceptor system.
Alternative A-5 (South Park Road Stabilization Pond)
The South Park Road site and the Elk Feedground site have
essentially the same local capital and 0 & M cost (Table 26).
While A-5 requires a significantly shorter interceptor line, its
outfall to the Snake is longer, providing a combined pipeline cost
which is approximately the same for both sites.
Alternative A-6 (Interim Upgrading of the Existing Treatment Plant)
Alternative A-6 provides only a temporary or stop gap solution
to Jackson's wastewater problems. When the excess infiltration is
corrected in Summer of 1977, the plant will still exceed its original
0.80 mgd design capacity during the peak summer tourist season.
As explained earlier, original design notes have indicated that a
V-18
-------
hydraulic loading of 1.6 mgd could be accommodated if an adequate
sludge handling system were installed. While this may be somewhat
optimistic, the system if improved as indicated should be able to
treat an expected peak summer P.E. up to approximately 10,000.
Once the hydraulic capacity of the system is reached and treatment
effectiveness declines a new facility will be required. While the
initial cost of this alternative is low (less than $18 per design
P.E.), when the ultimate capacity is reached the Town will have to
make a financial commitment to construct a new plant. A new plant
constructed 5 to 8 years from now would be significantly more expensive
because of expected inflationary trends.
When the infiltration is corrected and the plant is improved
with an efficient sludge handling system, the facility should be
capable of treating the maximum amount of waste generated by an addi-
tional P.E. of approximately 1500. This is not enough to handle
the expected growth from the proposed expansion area, or provide
for any significant increase in tourist activity- If the Town were
to impose a policy of growth control in order to maintain the capa-
city of the system, and prolong its usefulness, this may create a
number of economic problems and hardships in the local business
community.
The interim improvements suggested could, if properly planned,
be incorporated into a complete expansion of the Jackson treatment
plant. This would require that the Town make a commitment to remain
at the present location. By doing this the salvage value of the
proposed treatment units are greater and the financial impacts of
having to abandon them some time in the future is reduced. Mechan-
ical equipment of the type anticipated, if properly maintained, has
a functional life of at least 20 years.
SOCIO-CULTURAL IMPACTS
Socio-Cultural impacts are much more difficult to identify and
quantify than those in any other area. The impacts a particular
project has on the life style, aesthetic values, and the intrinsic
historic and cultural sites of a particular area will differ between
individuals or groups within the community. While any ranking or
weighing factor used to differentiate between the potential positive
or negative socio-cultural impacts will be open to controversy, it is
important to attach some relative level of significance in develop-
ing a comprehensive issue-oriented evaluation of the various options.
Three general areas were considered under this section: social
(i.e., psychological, legal and regulatory) impacts, aesthetic
impacts, and the historic-cultural impacts.
Based upon the information supplied by the State Archeologist
and Recreation Commission there appears to be little difference in
the historic-cultural impacts between any of the alternatives requir-
ing pipeline work. The present indication is that a field archeologic
V-19
-------
survey will be required once a site and pipeline alignment is select-
ed and that the construction specification must require that the
contractor notify the State Archeologist if any artifacts or items of
cultural significance are unearthed during construction. Obviously,
anytime a project entails extensive earthwork or digging there is a
potential for disturbing a cultural site. The extent of this poten-
tial, in the absence of other information, roughly is related to the
amount of necessary earthwork. In the absence of any definitive
information, it was impossible to consider historic-cultural impact
in further detail. They are not expected to be a significant deciding
factor in the final development of this project.
Impacts of the Proposed Project (South Park Elk Feedground Stabiliza-
tion Pond)
The primary Socio-Cultural impacts associated with the proposed
project would involve the aesthetic losses associated with construc-
tion. While no major disruption in or widespread hardships or incon-
venience is anticipated as a result of pipeline construction, the
loss of approximately 20 acres of Elk Feedground would have an impact
on the scenic and recreational values of the State lands. People
that have come to regard this area as a natural or reacreational area
would probably find the presence of a 20 acre fenced treatment facility
incompatible with their needs.
The position taken by the Wyoming Game and Fish Commission and
indirectly the regualtions of the U.S. Department of the Interior
(Fish and Wildlife Service) in opposing the construction of a treatment
plant on the Elk Feedground location, puts the practical availability
of these lands in question. Even if the Department of Game and Fish
(WDG&F) were to decide to relinquish control of all or part of the
Feedground it may constitute a "diversion of funds" and hence an
infraction of Federal Aid Regulations. Because there are no adjacent
exchange lands with (in the opinion of the WDG&F) the same wildlife
values, it is unlikely that the land exchange proposed by the Town
would be approved by the Fish and Wildlife Service. It is quite
probable that any attempt by the Town to secure these lands over the
objections of the WDG&F would have to be resolved by the Courts.
This would further delay the project and possibly jeopardize Jackson's
opportunity to receive Federal Grant assistance.
The scenic impacts a treatment plant at either of the proposed
Elk Feedground sites would have on the Wild and Scenic River Study
would be dependent upon the final design and placement of the system.
The outfall to the Snake is the only structure that would enter the
river corridor. While the River's final classification is dependent
upon the outcome of the Forest Service Study, the outfall structure
would require extension to the main channel and an architectural
treatment to reduce its visibility and intrusiveness.
Impacts of the Alternatives
Alternative A-l (New Mechanical Plant at Existing Site)
Alternative A-l would eliminate the majority of the noxious odor
V-20
-------
problems that have plagued plant operation in the past, but the plant
would remain in its present location adjacent to the proposed light
industrial and commercial development area. While the improvement
in the odor problem would have a positive social impact, the presence
of the treatment plant and the attached psychological stigma may
effect the communities interest in developing lands in proximity to
the facility. The present facility is unsightly, but with the proper
landscaping and architectural mitigation these impacts could be relieved
Construction activities would be expected to have only a minor
impact since residential and commercial activity in the area is limited.
Alternative A-2 (Mechanical Plant at Boyles Hill)
This alternative has impacts similar to these associated with
the expansion of the existing facility. The Boyles Hill site is more
isolated from the expected residential growth areas, but an existing
developed area on the north side of Boyles Hill would be exposed to
any odors, noise, dust generated during construction and long-term
operation. While a properly designed and operated activated sludge
plant would create only very localized impacts of this nature, the
presence of a facility at this location would be expected to generate
a certain amount of apprehension and anxiety making the local residents
more aware of any change in their environment which could be associated
with the plant.
Alternative A-3 (Stabilization Pond Boyles Hill)
The social impacts of Alternative A-3 are essentially the same
as A-2 with the exception that the potential for odors from ponds
are much greater than from an efficient mechanical system. Psycholog-
ical stress and even physical discomfort could result in those areas
subject to constant exposure to the prevailing winds. This may be
a particular problem when treatment effectiveness is lowest and
anaerobic activity may occur during the early fall and spring.
Alternative A-4 (Mid-South Park Stabilization Pond)
The only significant difference in social impacts between this
alternative and A-l through A-3 is that the location is farther
removed and not centered in the projected high density development
area. While there is almost no existing residents in this area of
South Park that could be effected by construction activity, the
operation of the pond could create problems similar to those
identified for Alternative A-3 as the area developed. The area
that could theoretically be serviced by gravity sewers generally
conforms to the high density growth areas identified in the proposed
comprehensive plan.
Alternative A-5 (South Park Road Stabilization Pond)
Alternative A-5 has almost the same social cultural impacts as
the Proposed Project. A slightly smaller (10%) area is provided
potential service, but the overall growth pattern would be practi-
cally identical. This alternative does however preserve the South
Park Elk Feedground in its entirety- The regulatory opposition,
presented by those agencies with an interest in the feedground,
should be eliminated by this alternative.
V-21
-------
Alternative A-6 (Interim Upgrading of the Existing TREATMENT PLANT
This alternative has the same general impacts as Alternative
A-l except that unless the Town takes an aggressive approach to
solving its wastewater problems, Jackson will find itself in the
same situation it is in now within the next five years. The
alternative to providing improved facilities would be to make the
necessary interim improvement and disallow any additional hookups,
in essence, adopt a no growth policy.
Alternative A-7 (No Action)
The "no action" alternative has really only two significant
socio-cultural impacts. The first is that without a new facility
the Town will remain in violation of its water quality discharge
permit. This could put the Town in jeopardy of being assessed a
fine up to $25,000 a day under State and Federal Law.
The second impact includes a variety of generally unaesthic
characteristics that would be allowed to continue and get worse if
nothing is done. These include such things as the odors emitting
from the sludge beds, and polishing ponds during the warmer months,
the insect and health problems from the accumulating mound of dried
but undigested sludge which cannot be disposed of, and the general
unsightliness of the present plant owning to the land area occupied,
and lack of landscaping and community interest in improving the
visual appearance.
LAND USE IMPACTS
Numerous studies have demonstrated that changes in land use do
occur as extensive and advanced sewerage systems replace septic
tanks or inadequate existing systems. New development may be
attracted to areas served by sewers for a number of reasons. In
the Jackson area, the primary reason is probably the increasing
environmental concern for groundwater contamination which has focused
with recent findings of possible coliform-contaminated wells. Second,
residents generally prefer houses with sewer in terms of maintenance
responsibilities. Third, communities often find themselves in a
position where they must deliberately attract new development to
new sewer service areas in order to pay construction expenses through
user charges and connection fees.
Interceptors also influence and even direct land use changes.
The amount of vacant land served by an interceptor, and the excess
capacity of the trunk sewer and treatment plant are important
determinants of the amount and pattern of development occurring in
an area.
In this respect, the Town of Jackson's decision to implement
and EPA's decision not to fund the proposed action may be viewed a
significant "land use" decision. The provision of sewers, coupled
with the lack of a well-defined growth policy can lead to land
development patterns which may, in the long term, adversely affect
environmental quality.
V-22
-------
Impacts of the Proposed Project (South Park Elk Feedground Stabiliza-
tion Pond)
In general, the most extensive impact of sewers on development
patterns throughout the country has been the trend to develop
larger areas of vacant land into single family residential housing.
The "Town of Jackson and Vicinity Land Use Element" identifies 670
acres of developable land east of Boyles Hill. This area, combined
with the presently undeveloped available land in Jackson, constitutes
a continuous urban growth area capable of accommodating up to 3,300
residential units (Livingston and Associates, 1976).
The primary short term/long term land use impact of locating
the proposed treatment facility at the South Park Elk Feedground
would be the removal of approximately 20 acres of land as a wildlife
refuge. As previously discussed in this report, the action has
drawn significant criticism from the Wyoming Game and Fish Depart-
ment, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and a number of interested
citizens. Concensus from a majority of citizens at the second
public workshop on the Jackson treatment facility reaffirmed this
criticism (Appendix 3). The legality of locating the stabilization
pond system on Elk Feedground property has not been determined. In
addition, the Game and Fish Depratment is not aware of any local
property available in the South Park area which could replace the
land lost to the treatment facility.
The proposed interceptor corridor would avoid highly developed
areas. No residential relocation is anticipated as a result of
pipeline alignment. A minimal amount of transportation disruption
and rerouting is anticipated during the construction phase of the
project. Construction impacts of the interceptor should not exceed
a four-month period.
Impacts of the Alternatives
Alternative A-l (New Mechanical Plant at Existing Site)
The primary impacts of construction of a new mechanical plant
at the existing treatment plant site probably include a continuation
of the existing land use development pattern in the study area, with
additional emphasis for infilling within the Town of Jackson sewer
service area. Construction related impacts on local land use will
be reduced by utilizing the existing interceptor right-of-way and
treatment plant location. No relocation of existing residential
development would be required. Temporary transportation disruption
or rerouting would be minimal.
No special land uses (i.e. South Park Elk Feedground) would be
affected by construction of the project. Operation and maintenance
of the facility would not significantly affect wildlife habitat.
Alternative A-2 (Boyles Hill Mechanical Plant)
This alternative would not have any significant primary effects
on land use. The primary short term impact of locating a new
V-23
-------
mechanical treatment plant at the Boyles Hill site would be restrict-
ed to temporary disruption of traffic during the construction phase
of the project. The interceptor route generally avoids highly
developed areas, minimizing the impact on residential development.
The project would not immediately affect existing agriculture or
special land uses (i.e., wildlife habitat).
Alternative A-3 (Boyles Hill Stabilization Pond)
The primary short term land use impacts involving construction
of a lagoon system at the Boyles Hill site are similar to those
discussed for Alternative A-2. The immediate impacts of construction,
however, may be increased because the total land area which will be
disturbed for the lagoon treatment system is somewhat larger
(20 plus acres). Construction activities may also result in tempor-
ary disruption of grazing patterns in the immediate locality of the
project. The site will avoid the conflict which would result from
selection of Wyoming Game and Fish Department property at the South
Park Elk Feedground. The alternative will not result in signifi-
cant damage or conflict with other native biotic communities.
Adverse visual impacts would be increased, somewhat, by the appear-
ance of a lagoon system. Proper grading and landscaping procedures
would mitigate these impacts.
Alternative A-4 (Mid-South Park Stabilization Pond)
The primary impacts on Jackson area land use associated with
construction of a stabilization pond system at the Mid-South Park
site are similar to those for Alternative A-3. The construction
phase would probably result in some disruption of grazing activity
and patterns, although these impacts should be insignificant.
Housing relocation is not anticipated. Some temporary traffic re-
routing may be required along South Park Road during interceptor
alignment. This disruption will also be minor.
Alternative A-5 (South Park ROAD STABILIZATION POND)
The primary impacts of this alternative on existing land use
are very similar to the proposed action alternative. The proposed
location and interceptor alignment for this alternative, although
not in conflict with the position of the Wyoming Game and Fish
Department discussed earlier in the report, would probably involve
other similar immediate construction-related impacts. The interceptor
corridor would avoid highly developed areas, and no residential re-
location is anticipated as a result of the project. Temporary
transportation disruption is anticipated during interceptor
alignment along portions of the South Park Road.
Alternative A-6 (Interim Upgrading of Existing Treatment Plant)
The primary land use impacts of this alternative will be short
term, and are very similar to those for Alternative A-l. The action
would not require any major disruption of the existing or special
land uses (wildlife habitats) during upgrading or operation of the
facility.
V-24
-------
Alternative A-7 (No Action Alternative)
The "No Action" alternative will have no significant primary
impacts on land use in the Jackson area. No significant short
term changes in existing land use are anticipated with implementa-
tion of this alternative. The primary impacts associated with pipe-
line alignment and treatment plant construction or upgrading includ-
ing the potential for residential relocation, transportation disrup-
tion and rerouting, and other construction-related impacts will not
occur.
SECONDARY IMPACT ANALYSIS
Secondary or indirect impacts are those impacts resulting from
or induced by a particular action independent of its construction
or capital expenditure impacts. Such items as accelerated land use
commitments, the cost of providing community services necessitated
by the growth inducement of a project, and increased runoff or
drainage into a surface water way following intensified subdivision
activity are all examples of secondary impacts that may be associated
with a municipal wastewater project.
The most significant secondary impacts associated with any of
the proposed alternative actions result from their influence on land
utilization and development. In this analysis only the major second-
ary impacts of each alternative were considered. While secondary
impacts can effect all facets of the environment, some are of such
minor or ephemeral nature as not to play a significant role in the
decision making process to which the EPA Construction Grants Program
must adhere. This section discusses the pertinent secondary impacts
and effects of the Proposed Project and alternatives in terms of
their general overall impacts and specific differences.
The Secondary Impacts of the Proposed Project (South Park Elk
Feedground Stabilization Pond)
The secondary impacts of the Proposed Project are of a greater
potential consequence than those imposed by construction of the facili-
ty. The secondary impacts on Jackson area water quality are mainly de-
pendent upon the potential population increase which in turn is
related to the amount of land area made developable by the availa-
bility of certral sewer facilities. By removing the primary growth
constraint (vvastewater disposal) , the entire South Park area would
be "opened up" and a less intensive scattered growth pattern is
likely to occur. Lower land costs and sewer capacity in the outly-
ing areas of Teton County are also likely to make sites originally
unsuitable for construction much more attractive. The existing
agricultural land uses would largely be replaced by rural residen-
tial development.
If inadequate septic systems were allowed to be installed in anticipation
of connecting to the central sewer at a later date, then groundwater quality
in South Park may be adversely affected during tnis interim period.
V-25
-------
Increased densities potentially served by the extended interceptor
and central treatment plant and the associated construction and
paving activity, will facilitate increased impervious surface
and storm water flows. This alteration in the natural topography
and drainage patterns can also effect the hydrologic regime and
flooding problems along the Snake River throughout the study area.
Secondary impacts of the proposed action on the air and acoustic
quality in the Jackson area result from the long-range effects of
increased population and resultant development patterns on ambient
environmental quality. Since sewers, like highways, can lead to
the conversion of large areas of land to residential development,
air and noise pollution will likely be aggravated by the additional
trips generated and miles traveled to the Town of Jackson employment
and commercial center as a result of widespread development acitivity.
The overall increase would be minor in terms of the general back-
ground levels in the summers, but they will be a substantial increase
over the localized levels in South Park.
The most significant secondary impacts on wildlife would involve
the gradual encroachment of residential development throughout South
Park, and it's effect on the existing habitat. While it may take a
number of years before any effects are noticed, the growth promoted
by the plant and interceptor would cause an increase in development
activity in, the area, which tends to displace wildlife and alter
migration and behavior patterns and critical habitats. It is also
possible that the additional removal of Elk Feedground land for
future expansion could, during a severe winter, force animals off
the refuge and onto private lands in search of forage.
The major secondary social-cultural impacts would be those
associated with the change in life styles and scenic values that
would be forced upon the existing South Park residents and the area
in general if the proposed interceptor line facilitated high density
development throughout the area. Extension of the interceptor could
in essence change the remaining agricultural land of the area into
a sprawling residential subdivision if economic and development
pressures were favorable.
In the absence of a detailed local economic study, a transpor-
tation plan, and other issue oriented studies, it is impossible to
attach an absolute value to the major land use related secondary cost
impacts associated with the Proposed Project. In estimating any
secondary costs it is necessary to make a number of assumptions.
In regard to the Proposed Project (and other alternatives) these
would include:
1. The removal of South Park development constraints by
constructing the interceptor line to the Elk Feedground.
This would open up essentially the entire area for
development.
2. Development in South Park would occur primarily as single
family units at medium densities (1 unit per acre).
V-26
-------
3. Cost of developing municipal services would be borne by
the South Park residents through a local agency (Town or
County).
In the publication "The Cost of Sprawl" (prepared for
the Council on Environmental Quality and the Department of Housing
and Urban Development, 1974) a detailed cost analysis was prepared
for various development patterns. It was concluded that low to
medium density sprawl type development, which has characterized
the existing development in the South Park area, and which would
be expected to continue if the interceptor line were available to
remove wastewater restraints, is one of the most expensive forms
of residential growth. Services are difficult and expensive to
supply and total consumption of resources is highest when piece
meal growth occurs. "Leap frog" development which tends to move
residents farther and farther away from necessary central facilities
is extremely costly for both the individual residents and the
community as a municipal unit.
Of the various optional sites considered, the Elk Feedground
opens up the most available land for development by providing gravity
wastewater collection and treatment facilities and therefore would
be expected to have the greatest associated secondary costs. The
actual cost per acre or per development unit would be related to
the amount, location and density to which the land was developed.
Municipal capital development cost figures for the type of low
density mixed sprawl development, which would be expected in the
South Park area if wastewater facilities were available to allow
unlimited growth, run as high as $165 million (The Cost of Sprawl,
1974) for a 10,000 unit residential development. Annual operating
expenses for such facilities and services would require from
$100,000 to $200,000 for the first 10 years. While one would not
anticipate 10,000 units developing in South Park in the foresee-
able future, sufficient land could be made available by providing
access to a centralized treatment system, which the proposed plan
would provide. If additional land is available for development
outside the areas contemplated in the Comprehensive Plan, then the
capacity of the system could be exhausted well before the design
period (similar to what occured with the existing system) and the
community would be forced into a premature expansion. Such an
expansion would be at the Town's expense and could have considerable
economic implications.
In addition to the obvious secondary economic impacts, the
utilization of 20 plus acres of Elk Feedground land would remove it
from forage and hay production, forcing the Department of Game and
Fish to either purchase more winter hay or reduce the size of the
wintering elk herd. It would also have a minor impact on the
summer recreational value of the land and may reduce, to a small
extent, the revenues brought into the community from hunting and
fishing.
V-27
-------
Secondary Impacts of the Alternatives
Alternative A-l (New Mechanical Plant at Existing Site)
Maintaining Jackson's wastewater facility at the existing site
will probably reduce the overall magnitude of its secondary impacts,
as compared to the Proposed Project, by limiting the amount of land
serviced by the new facility. The proposed land use element for
the "Jackson and Vicinity Comprehensive Plan" has identified pro-
jected population growth, and developable land within the central
sewer service area necessary to accommodate the growth. The pro-
posed "Teton County Comprehensive Plan" has also identified the
growth potential and environmental constraints for the county.
Long term secondary land use impacts of construction of a new mechan-
ical plant at the existing site will probably include more compact
growth patterns. The extent of rural residential development will
be reduced by existing environmental considerations including steep
slopes, flood plains, and high groundwater tables. By discouraging
development in these areas, additional public costs for flood
protection and other public services will also be reduced. Other
land uses including commercial and industrial will probably be
encouraged to develop within or adjacent to the Town of Jackson due
to sewer availability and customer proximity.
Existing farming and livestock operations would not be subjected
to major long term impacts. Irrigated land area and grazing patterns
probably will not be effected. Secondary impacts on elk migration
routes and existing wildlife habitats will also be minimized.
Although precise impacts on land use and ownerhsip cannot be
determined from existing information, land values within the sewer
service area are likely to increase due to the reduced amount of
land available for urban development. Values in the outlying non-
contiguous areas will probably remain essentially unchanged, but
increase as the population within the sewer service area increases
and the service area expands.
The secondary long term water quality impacts on Flat Creek
water quality are very difficult to identify because the impact of
numerous diverse nonpoint sources in the study area have not been
determined, and the Town of Jackson and Teton County have not adopted
a well^defined growth policy. Higher density growth will probably
occur in and immediately contiguous to the sewer service area through
implementation of this alternative. This type of growth pattern,
if properly phased, is likely to improve area wide surface water
quality over the long term by providing phased and cost effective
wastewater treatment. The potential for health hazards from septic
tanks will reduce as central facilities become available and these
systems are phased out. Groundwater quality will probably be
improved because of the higher treatment efficiency provided by a
central treatment system.
Although it is probable that localized urban runoff will increase
to Flat Creek with the additional population serviced by the facility,
the alternative encourages development which is more easily adapt-
able to structural and non-structural storm runoff controls. Land
V-28
-------
use measures, storm drains, special detention and treatment basins,
proper street cleaning and regulation of construction activities all
facilitated by phased growth, will reduce the potentially adverse
impacts on water quality.
Long term secondary impacts on air quality, although dependent
on the amount of growth realized, will likely create some increase in
air polutant levels. Increases in S02 concentrations will probably
be the most significant as a result of more compact growth patterns
and the concurrent increase in stationary fuel combustion sources
(i.e. residential heating systems). Particulate concentrations will
also increase with projected increases in residential and commercial
stationary sources. Increases in CO levels resulting from additional
and concentrated automobile use will probably be offset by compact
development which requires less vehicle miles traveled and is more
easily adopted to urban transit modes.
The only significant impact to the natural community resulting
from this alternative would be the improvement of water quality
in Flat Creek. Improved Flat Creek water quality would protect and
maintain the fishery values and prevent any barrier to fish move-
ment that may be generated by increasing low quality effluent dis-
charges.
The secondary economic impacts of this alternative are again
related to the amount of land serviced by the facility- Alternative
A-l could provide gravity sewer service to the high density areas
proposed by the draft Comprehensive Plan. Sewer service would not
be available to much of the area south of the plant site without
the addition of pump stations and force mains. This physical re-
straint would help to maintain and preserve the capacity of the
system for those areas of planned development and restrict any
extensive southward expansion. Implementation of this alternative
has the practical effect of eliminating the necessity of expanding
municipal services to areas outside the immediate vacinity of
Jackson, but could create the need for an entirely new facility
once the proposed growth area reaches saturation.
Alternative A-2 (Boyles Hill Mechanical Plant)
During the five year period (1970-1975) the Town of Jackson's
population increased from 3,196 to 4,150 (Livingston and Associates,
1976). Projections indicate that this rate of growth will likely
continue. The major secondary impacts of construction of a mechani-
cal plant at Boyles Hill are similar to Alternative A-l related to
the moderate increase in land area made potentially serviceable by
the facility- Land use changes are likely to occur more rapidly
in this area with sewer avialability, the population growth poten-
tially occurring at a faster rate. The most obvious long term land
use change will probably be the gradual conversion of grazing and
irrigated agriculture uses to a somewhat dispersed, rural residen-
tial-type development. Public costs associated with providing
other urban or semi-urban services will probably increase owing
to the moderately increased land area made serviceable by the
V-29
-------
interceptor extension. Local residents may also be subjected to
some change in life style due to increased urban development and
population in the proposed service area.
The long term secondary impacts on water quality of this alter-
native in the Snake River, Spring Creek and Crane Creek are primarily
related to construction activities, and increased storm runoff peak
flows associated with additional paved areas, all facilitated by
sewer availability- Secondary impacts of this alternative on local
groundwater quality are also related to accompanying land use
changes. Groundwater recharge in the area may be reduced, if the
area is subjected to extensive suburban development and paving
without consideration for necessary open space, resulting from
sewer availability. The potential for health hazards, however, will
be reduced with the replacement of individual waste disposal systems
by central sewer facilities as long as no new development is allowed
to proceed without being required to connect to a centralized waste-
water system (wetline policy).
Long term secondary impacts on air quality and noise levels
of this alternative will be similar to Alternative A-l, and include
increased concentrations for most air quality parameters, and
increases in background noise levels. This alternative will likely
promote additional growth in areas not previously serviced by central
sewers. The result will be slightly longer travel distances to
the employment and trade center.
Alternative A-2 will eliminate a portion of the natural environ-
ment surrounding Boyles Hill and displace those species dependent
upon this area. Since this is not a particularly ciritcal area in
terms of wildlife habitat, and has in the past been subject to
severe land alteration, this impact will probably be minimal, given
the extensive amounts of available high quality habitat.
If the system is designed and operated to meet Wyoming Class 1
Water Quality Standards as expected, no deterioration in the fishing
potential of the Snake River is expected. The alternative would
protect Flat Creek from any point source degradation.
Alternative A-3 (Boyles Hill Stabilization Pond)
The secondary long term land use impacts involving construction
of a lagoon system at the Boyles Hill site are similar to those
discussed for Alternative A-2. Although the overall land requirement
of this alternative is somewhat larger than the area needed for
construction of a new mechanical plant, the total area is not
that significant in terms of long range secondary impacts.
Alternative A-4 (Mid-South Park Stabiiazation Pond)
The secondary long term impacts on Jackson area land use
associated with construction of a stabilization pond system at the
Mid-South Park site are similar to but not as extensive as those
for the Proposed Project. A substantial land area north of the
treatment plant location along the Snake River flood plain will
V-30
-------
become potentially developable with the extension of a gravity
sewer system. A major portion of this area is subject to periodic
inundation by flood waters. The proposed "Teton County Comprehen-
sive Plan" does not eliminate low density development in the 25
and 50-Year Flood plains. Sewer extension to these areas could,
in effect negate the limited development constraints proposed for
the flood plain hazard areas. Flood damages in Teton County
presently amount to some $26,000 annually. Losses are likely to
increase if additional development is allowed in these areas.
Federal funding assistance for levee maintenance may also be
jeopardized by allowing development in areas subject to extensive
flood damage.
Secondary impacts resulting from implementation of this alterna-
tive are also related to the amount of vacant land area made avail-
able by providing central sewer service. In the absence of conven-
tional regulatory mechanisms (i.e., zoning), a realtively large
area of land will become available for residential development with
implementation of this alternative. Land use changes from pri-
marily agriculture-related to low density residential are likely to
occur. The demand for additional public services will follow.
Over the long term, costs for providing these facilities and services
may not be justifiable. In terms of total investment costs, for
example, numerous studies have shown that while the amount of land
used for schools and other public facilities is essentially the
same for all development densities, a higher density more compact
growth pattern uses about half as much land for transportation as
lower density sprawl-type development. From a sociological stand-
point, increased densities also generally reduce the amount of time
that family members spend traveling to work, school, etc.
Long term secondary impacts of this alternative on the study
area's surface and groundwater quality and hydrology are related
to the additional land area made serviceable through implementation
of the alternative. Impacts are similar, but of less magnitude
than those discussed for the proposed action. Increased flooding
may be experienced in the lower South Park area as new developments
and additional paved surface area occur. Peak runoffs can be
reduced by maintaining planned open space areas and providing adequate
drainage facilities for any new development. The impacts on wild-
life and habitat for Alternative A-4 are similar to those for the
Boyles Hill or existing site in terms of secondary growth inducing
factors. With the application of architectural finishing and land-
scaping utilizing trees and other small shrubs the available habitat
for a number of small species could be improved over the limited
available grassland habitat which currently characterizes the
area.
The major difference in social impacts between this alternative
and A-l through A-3 is that the location is further removed and not
centered in the projected high density development area. While
there are almost no existing residential developments in this area
of South Park which would be effected by construction activity, the
V-31
-------
operation of the pond may create minor air and noise problems
similar to those identified for Alternative A-3 as the area developed
Alternative A-5 (South Park Road Stabiliaztion Pond)
Long term secondary impacts of Alternative A-5 in the Jackson
study area are similar to those for the proposed action, and include
increased residential development, a gradual reduction in grazing
and irrigated agriculture land, and additional development in the
flood plain areas of the Snake River and Flat Creek. This type of
development is likely to result in long range environmental problems.
The secondary economic impacts of A-5 are almost identical to the
Proposed Project. The amount of private land in South Park which
is made available for higher density development is approximately
90 percent of that opened up by the Elk Feedground site. That
additional 10 percent (roughly 1000 acres) lies at the southern most
portion of South Park, boardering the Elk Feedground. Because of
its relatively isolated location and general topographic features,
this 1000 acres is least likely to be put into residential develop-
ment. The economic impacts to local agriculture and recreation
associated with the loss of Elk Feedground potential would not be
a factor if the A-5 site were selected.
The secondary wildlife and habitat inpacts of this alternative are
basically the same as those for the Proposed Project, with the exception
that the Elk Feedgrounds are preserved intact. Effects on elk migration
routes and behavior patterns can also probably be measured in terms of new
residential development facilitated by the project. Since the private polo-
grounds are close to this site, some adverse impact on this recreational
activity could also be expected due to odor or aesthetic appearance.
Alternative A-6 (Interim Upgrading of Existing Treatment Plant)
Although interim upgrading of the existing facility would initially
provide sufficient capacity to accommodate current development trends, popu-
lation growth within the Jackson sewer service area will undoubtedly continue
until such time as treatment capacities are again exceeded. When this capacity
is reached, additional development will probably have to be accommodated
outside the service area on individual waste disposal systems. The situation
is further complicated by the fact that, once the Town of Jackson has exercised
its priority in terms of EPA funding to upgrade the existing plant, it is un-
likely that additional federal funding assistance will become immediately
available to construct a new facility. Thus, additional pressures for suburban
"sprawl type" development are likely to result.
If the projected 1990 high range population of 14,700 for Teton County
is realized, the associated long range environmental and economic inpacts of
accommodating a significant amount of the population on septic tanks and pro-
viding the necessary public services and facilities will be far-reaching. There
is presently no reason to believe development in the Jackson area will not
continue. Additional sewers and services will be necessary to sustain local
population, tourist, and comnercial growth. The possibility of the
V-32
-------
.. EXISTING WWTP
I
ALTERNATIVE A-3a 21" GRAVITY
LINE 4"FM
.INE
"ALTERNATIVE A 3b 27"GRAVITY
ALTERNATIVE A 3c 18" FM
SCALE I Z40OO
0
rocoriiT
Figure 23
-------
State requiring the imposition of growth controls in order to main-
tain the plant within its capabilities may be another major secondary
impact resulting from this alternative. When the plants capacity
is again exceeded, the Town will find itself with Flat Creek water
quality problems, and will undoubtedly be forced by the State of
Wyoming to seek another solution in order to maintain instream water
quality.
Alternative A-7 (No Action)
Secondary impacts resulting from the implementation of the
"no action" alternative are dependent on the growth policy adopted
by the Town of Jackson and Teton County. While growth will undoubt-
edly continue throughout the study area, inadequate sewer capacity
within the Town of Jackson sewer service area and implications of
non-compliance with Town's NPDES permit may direct new residential
development to outlying areas of the County. It is estimated that
between 1,600 and 2,800 new housing units will be needed to meet
the projected 1980 Jackson population. This development would
occur at lower densities serviced by individual waste disposal
systems, as defined in the proposed "Teton County Comprehensive
Plan" because of environmental constraints already discussed.
This low density sprawl type development, besides increasing the
potential for ground and surface water contamination, also promotes
higher costs for the eventual servicing with public facilities and
utilities including sewer, water, schools, transportation and police
and fire protection. Although a moratorium on new construction
in the Town of Jackson is unlikely, some communities have been
forced into similar moratoria actions until additional sewer capacity
is built.
-^ -Jfer^f^t-—•
^ffrS.*^ •'-•i&yv^-
SK***'. i-^'/W-
V-33
-------
-------
SOUTH PARK
-------
SECTION VI
UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS AND
POTENTIAL MITIGATION MEASURES
GENERAL
This discussion of Unavoidable Adverse Impacts and Potential
Mitigation Measures is divided into three broad categories: Short
Term Construction, Long Term Construction and Operational. This
will provide an overview of the significant impacts and some
possible mitigation measures that could be taken to reduce the
impacts of the Proposed Project and its alternatives.
Short Term Construction refers to those impacts involving
actual construction of any facilities. Long Term Construction
includes those residual or chronic impacts that result from the
initial construction but persist after completion of construction.
Operational are impacts resulting from the operation and use of
the facilities. Since these are essentially the same for most
of the alternatives, they will be discussed under the topic cate-
gories pointing out impacts and important differences.
SHORT TERM CONSTRUCTION
The Short Term Construction impacts would be generally the
same for all of the projects considered. Such things as-dust,
noise, and increased traffic congestion from pipeline installation
and movement of construction materials would be a minor problem
connected with any alternative selected. These impacts are nor-
mally controlled through provisions in the construction specifica-
tions which delineate when and how construction will take place.
When specifications are properly written and enforced, these
impacts are held to a minimum.
The installation of an outfall line to the Snake River will
require careful coordination with both the Wyoming Department
of Game and Fish and the U.S. Forest Service. Any vegetation
disturbed or removed during the installation of either the inter-
ceptor or outfall line will require revegetation with native
shrubs and grasses. Construction should take place after the
irrigation season when flow in the Snake should be at a minimum.
It may be necessary to seek a flow alteration from the Bureau
of Reclamation to minimize the water quality impacts and bottom
disturbance from the placement and securing of a deep channel
outfall. It is inevitable that some silt and detritus will be
discharged as a result of this construction, but proper timing and
care with instream construction should help reduce its impacts.
Any instream dredging or other hydrologic modifications will re-
quire a Corps of Engineers 404 permit before work could proceed.
VI-1
-------
Any expansion of the existing facility could create some short
term water quality problems if it were necessary to interrupt ser-
vice during construction. Bypassing to the polishing pond or
directly to Flat Creek would require the prior approval of the
Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality and could only be
considered on a limited basis during interfacing of the new fa-
cilities with the old.
LONG TERM CONSTRUCTION
Long Term Construction impacts differ on a project-by-project
basis. While it is difficult to assess the overall impact a waste-
water facility has upon a community or groups within the community,
the long term visual impacts of the plant and its appurtenances
are related to its proximity and landscaping. Generally, one would
assume that the more visual a facility is and the closer it is
to a residential area, the greater the impact.
A major problem that must be resolved during the design phase
of this project will be the proper locating of any Snake River
outfall in a reliable channel. Since the river meanders during
periods of flow fluctuation, the placing of the outfall line to
receive consistently high effluent dilution will assist in main-
taining localized water quality-
The most significant specific long term construction impacts
involve the loss of land and habitat at the South Park Elk Feed-
ground, the potential impacts an outfall from any of the alterna-
tives may have on the Snake River and its potential classification
in the Wild and Scenic River System, and the secondary impacts
of facilitated growth that the two most southern South Park sites
would entail. The magnitude of any long term impacts the pro-
posed outfalls would have on the Snake River could be mitigated
greatly by the implementation of construction methods and material
conforming to the local terrain. Unfortunately, any construction
on the South Park Elk Feedground represents a loss in habitat
which cannot be readily replaced. The development of a treatment
facility and interceptor lines at either the South Park Elk Feed-
ground site or the South Park Road site will relieve the physical
growth restrictions on large areas of land outside the high density
residential areas proposed in the draft Comprehensive Plan. This
action represents a very real negative impact on the Town/County
planning process and goals developed for comprehensive land use
planning.
OPERATIONAL
While both the proposed project and each of the alternatives
have their individual operation impacts, these are generally related
to the type of treatment process and efficiency of the transmission
facilities.
VI-2
-------
The Proposed Project and the South Park Road alternative
both utilize aerated stabilization ponds and require long inter-
ceptor lines. An aerated stabilization pond has the general
characteristic of requiring little operator attention, lower
energy demands than a full mechanical plant, and is much less
expensive to operate. These are positive attributes, and where
land and sufficient buffer areas are available and climatic factors
are right, the selection of this type of system is favored. The
operation of a stabilization pond system has the disadvantages
of low winter efficiency, freezing problems, possible spring and
summer odor problems, and a wide variability in the quality of
the effluent produced depending upon loading, design and climatic
conditions. Systems that require excessively long pipelines
with initial flows much less than the ultimate design flow have
a number of operational impacts. These include the potential for
odors escaping from manholes as a result of low velocities and
corresponding long detention times, the problem of solids settling
out in the line, and the eventual need for flushing and cleaning.
As a general rule, a shorter interceptor line in an area with
Jackson's characteristics has fewer associated operating and
maintenance problems.
A complete mechanical plant, as proposed in Alternatives A-l,
A-2 and the proposed interim improvement A-6, will normally function
on a consistently higher level of efficiency- A mechanical plant,
however, has operating expenses approximately 2.5 times that of
an aerated stabilization pond. It also has a significantly high
energy demand and may generate some localized odors. While much
of the energy needed in space heating can be reduced by enclosing
and insulating the critical areas, the mechanical process is highly
energy dependent.
The availability of electrical energy has become a critical
issue in Teton County. Lower Valley Power and Light, Inc., has
stated that without additional transmission capabilities it can
no longer supply the demands of new development. The existing
treatment plant has difficulty operating reliably during the cold
winter months when residential electrical heating demand is highest.
Electrical power is reduced to a level where the mechanical equip-
ment with a high power demand (aerators and pumps) will not operate
effectively.
In order to reduce the energy demands and make the system
more energy efficient, several options should be investigated
during the design phase of the project. Such items as the proper
installation of work areas, local temperature control, and site
selection and orientation for highest solar efficiency should be
incorporated into any design as a standard feature. The EPA will
also require that consideration of other more innovative energy
solutions be considered. Energy alternatives such as solar power
for heating and future energy production may or may not be feasible
in the Jackson area at this time. But regardless of the present
technology, provision should be included in order that these can
be added if perfected at a later date. The energy alternatives
VI-3
-------
such as methane generation through anaerobic sludge digestion,
while technically feasible, cannot be considered a practical
solution from an operations and reliability of treatment efficiency
standpoint. Anaerobic digesters can be difficult to maintain
for a small community and demand precise temperature control, which
could require the addition of energy from an outside source.
The County is currently investigating alternative methods
of disposing of solid waste. One option which has been suggested
by the County's engineers is to incinerate the combustible por-
tion at a site adjacent to the wastewater treatment plant. Heat
generated during the process could be recycled for space heating
and sludge drying. This implementation of the plan would depend
upon a number of regulatory and institution agreements along with
the solution to the technical and operations problems.
If the Town of Jackson wished to pursue an aggressive energy
conservation program which employed exotic or untested technology,
the EPA may not be in a position to fund those portions of the
project under the normal P.L. 92-500 funding process. The Town
may have to seek research and development funding and present the
plant as a demonstration project. A final decision on this would
need to be developed by the EPA Regional Administrator.
f.
VI-4
-------
SECTION
-------
SOUTH PARK
-------
SECTION VII
IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE RESOURCE COMMITMENTS
There are no truly irreversible or irretrievable primary
environmental impacts or significant resource commitments generated
by either the Proposed Project or its alternatives. While the
construction of a wastewater treatment facility will utilize and
commit a certain amount of land and building material, any of
the options considered could be demolished or abandoned and returned
to their near original condition at a later date if necessary.
A buried pipeline of the type proposed utilizes negligible
land area, exerts little restriction on surface development (lo-
cated in an existing highway right-of-way), has little, if any,
effect on natural habitat, and involves no appurtenant structures
that could not be abandoned and removed should the need arise.
The secondary irreversible impacts are of more significance
and of a less definitive nature. Commercial and residential de-
velopment, other changes in existing land use and habitat structure
and secondary pollution could all be essentially irreversible and
result in long term effects within the region. The pattern and
degree of impact exerted within the area would depend upon the
impetus for Jackson's expansion. If, after the installation of
wastewater facilities, the expected growth did not occur in the
area (due to a variety of previously discussed possibilities),
then the total impact would be minor. The changes in population
density patterns and land use are the major irreversible commit-
ments that could occur as a result of any of the projects discussed.
The Proposed Project or its alternatives are of such small
scale that any material resource commitment attributable to it
would be slight. The use of steel, concrete and other construc-
tion materials may be assumed irreversible given the present
state of recycling technology. Energy commitments are significant
for the operational needs. The project would also require rela-
tively minor amounts of fuel during the construction period.
The "No Action" alternative could have an impact on the
water quality of Flat Creek if the present system were allowed to
continue with the expected population growth. The fishery in Flat
Creek could be permanently destroyed if the degradation were
allowed to continue.
VII-l
-------
SEGTION
-------
JACKSON'S EXISTING WASTEWATER.
TREATMENT FACILITY
-------
SECTION VIII
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHORT-TERM USES OF THE ENVIRONMENT
AND THE MAINTENANCE OR ENHANCEMENT OF LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY
OF THE PROPOSED ACTION AND THE ALTERNATIVES
The short term uses of the study area in relation to the long
term productivity of the region for the Proposed Project and the
alternatives are described in this section. in terms of the
general short term uses, both the Proposed Project and its al-
ternative, with the exception of the "no action" option, will
provide the necessary degree of protection to the overall future
water quality of the region, given the expected growth and de-
velopment.
The long and short term productivity within the study area
is closely related to community and tourist services and resi-
dential development. Since other land resource potentials are
not of a major importance (agriculture, timber, mining, etc.),
the uses which can be applied to the region are limited for the
most part to its recreational, agricultural and residential
holding capabilities, life styles and aesthetic values and are
evaluated under this assumption.
Basically, the availability of wastewater facilities would
increase the potential for immediate commitment to additional
residential and commercial development, while a lack or delay
in acquiring these facilities would maintain the current charac-
teristics of the area.
PROPOSED PROJECT (SOUTH PARK ELK FEEDGROUND STABILIZATION POND)
The Proposed Project will pro0vide the potential for complete
collection and interception of wastewater throughout South Park.
It will eliminate the continued reliance on individual septic tank
systems in the lower South Park area and help protect the ground
water quality of the region. The project could (if legal under
the present federal regulations) remove approximately 20 acres
of elk feedground from its original intended purpose and set a
precedent for the appropriation of additional land.
This proposal would also facilitate suburban development
and commercial growth and could alter present characteristics of
the area and future uses. As a result of this associated growth,
wastewater loads would increase, and drainage and storm water
runoff could be accelerated due to the removal of existing vege-
tation. While the project in itself would not significantly
limit the existing or potential uses of the area's resources, the
secondary consequences will allow for additional unplanned growth
within the study area, which could conceivably affect future land
resource uses within the region. Some individual hardships would
result due to the assessments required to finance the project.
VIII-1
-------
Land owners contemplating development of their property would
benefit from the availability of services. Much of this develop-
ment would not be in accord with the expected local planning goals
and objectives and would occur in areas not anticipated or des-
ignated for residential/commercial activities.
ALTERNATIVE A-l (NEW MECHANICAL PLANT AT EXISTING SITE)
The expansion of the existing facility would limit gravity
interception of wastewater to approximately those areas proposed
for higher density growth in the draft comprehensive plan. Since
this area is presently more impacted by residential and commercial
development than the rest of South Park, no significant effect on
the long term productivity of the study area is anticipated.
ALTERNATIVES A-2, A-3, AND A-4 (BOYLES HILL MECHANICAL PLANT,
BOYLES HILL STABILIZATION POND, MID-SOUTH PARK STABILIZATION POND)
These alternatives would result in essentially the same
long term productivity impacts as the expansion of the existing
system. The same general area can be serviced which corresponds
closely to the proposed residential development area. Approxi-
mately the same amount of growth can be facilitated. The existing
proposed growth pattern would be preserved and no commitment to
any additional growth be made.
ALTERNATIVE A-5 (SOUTH PARK ROAD STABILIZATION POND)
Alternative A-5 has the same type and magnitude of impacts
on long-term productivity as the Proposed Project. As discussed
in a previous section, slightly less land can be serviced by this
alternative as opposed to the Proposed Project. However, in general,
the same area would be expected to be placed into residential
or high density development. This site preserves the long term
values of the Elk Feedground and isolates the sewerable areas to
a region above the South Park Road. This alternative could remove
the development constraint imposed by individual waste disposal
systems throughout most of South Park.
ALTERNATIVE A-6 (INTERIM UPGRADING OF EXISTING TREATMENT PLANT)
Alternative A-6 would serve only in a temporary role, pro-
viding only a minimum of increase capacity after the correction
of the infiltration/inflow problem. The productivity of the study
area will not be affected by the implementation of this alterna-
tive provided that the city restricts the number of connections
until additional facilities are available.
VIII-2
-------
ALTERNATIVE A-7 (NO ACTION)
If a "No Action" alternative was adopted and the Town of
Jackson was to continue in its present pattern, the long term
values and productivity of Flat Creek would eventually be de-
stroyed. The cumulative impacts of point and nonpoint discharges
may require a number of years to become noticeable, but the exist-
ing treatment facility cannot continue to process the expected
wastewater flow at a level necessary to protect public health.
VIII-3
-------
-------
FLAT CREEK AT THE SOUTH PARK
ELK FEEDGROUNDS
-------
SECTION IX
EVALUATION OF THE IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED ACTION
AND ALTERNATIVES
GENERAL
In preparing this document, all feasible and legal options
were evaluated along with a "No Action" alternative. The deter-
mination of possible alternatives was based upon:
1. Existing studies and the existing facility plan for
the Town of Jackson.
2. Discussion with pertinent agency personnel.
3. Field review of the study area.
4. Consideration of the issues which necessitated the
writing of this EIS.
The project originally proposed by the Town and seven al-
ternatives were considered and evaluated relative to natural en-
vironmental resources, social-cultural aesthetic values and
regulations, economic requirements and land use planning. These
alternatives include:
Proposed Project - Elk Feedground Stabilization,Pond
Expansion of the existing facility (A-l)
Mechanical facility at Boyles Hill (A-2)
Stabilization Pond Boyles Hill (A-3)
Stabilization Pond Mid South Park Site (A-4)
Stabilization Pond South Park Road Site (A-5)
Interim Modification to the existing facility (A-6)
No Action (A-7)
Both the primary and secondary impacts resulting from each
alternative were considered during the preparation of this EIS.
While it provides a comprehensive evaluation of the subject, this
is an issue-oriented document intended to focus on the key pro-
blems, controversies and considerations that have arisen regarding
the proposed project. The document was not intended to be an all-
inclusive analysis of Teton County, but a succinct discussion of
the alternatives, pertinent issues, and impacts.
The primary impacts are those resulting directly from im-
plementation of one of the possible alternatives (e.g., elimina-
tion of water quality problems, construction costs, odors, etc.).
Secondary impacts are those arising or resulting from concomitant
or consequential actions (e.g., facilitation of growth in areas
outside a proposed development area, cost of community services
as a result of growth, etc.).
IX-1
-------
Since the existing wastewater facility is not capable of
meeting the proposed discharge requirements, it is considered
critical by both the EPA and Wyoming Department of Environmental
Quality that additional treatment capacity be provided. Because
of a variety of natural environmental constraints (i.e., shallow
groundwater), individual septic tanks and leach field disposal
systems cannot accommodate the type and density of development
anticipated.
The project proposed by the Town of Jackson, a South Park
Elk Feedground stabilization pond, has created a great, deal of
controversy and opposition. This opposition has arisen not only
from organizations and agencies involved in wildlife protection
and management, but from the local citizenry. It was because of
this opposition and controversy that the EPA decided to prepare
this EIS.
SUMMARY EVALUATION
A summary of the impact assessment is presented in the
following matrix. The matrix evaluation is restricted to the
consideration of significant environmental, economic, social-
cultural and land use impacts which are anticipated from each
of the alternatives. Impacts of little general importance, or
of negligible difference between the alternatives, were excluded
from this summary to avoid unnecessary confusion. The numbers
(positive and negative) on the left side of the column or above
the slash represent primary impacts. Those on the right-hand
side, below the slash, represent secondary impac' .
The relative importance of the specific assessment category
to the project area evaluated is assigned a weighting factor
from 1 to 3 and is shown in the right-hand column entitled
"Weighting Factors."
These weighting factors are explained as follows:
1. Little, if any, extraordinary significance in the project
area (e.g., no significant wilderness resource per se
exists in the project area or is effected by the pro-
posed project).
2. A significant consideration in the project area (e.g.,
the South Park Elk Feedground).
3. Of extraordinary significance in the project area (e.g.,
treated effluent discharges).
The number in the center of each rectangle is the product of the
weighting factor times the primary plus secondary impact rating.
IX-2
-------
The matrix is of greatest value in comparing the impacts of
the various alternatives on a given assessment category (e.g.,
"Wildlife") and in comparing the impacts on general-value cate-
gories (e.g., "Natural Environmental Values"). Its usefulness
is limited for measuring the total numerical impacts of an al-
ternative, and is not intended to provide a collective summary of
the overall impacts.
Several alternatives were so close in their impact that an
evaluation based solely on the numerical totals would be unjus-
tified. The differences in numerical totals are within the error
inherent in this subjective evaluation procedure. However, the
matrix is quite useful in exposing the logic and values assigned
by the assessment team, thereby encouraging a candid discussion
of the impacts. It also tends to force the individual to con-
sider all the dimensions in assessing environmental impacts.
The evaluation ratings and weighting factors are described
as follows:
Rating Assignment System for Evaluation Matrix
+5 Major long term, extensive benefit (highest possible rating).
+4 Major benefit, but characterized as either short term or of
limited extent.
+3 Significant benefit; either long term covering a limited area,
or short term covering an extensive area.
+2 Minor benefit, but of a long term or extensive nature.
+1 Minor benefit over a limited area.
0 No impact.
-1 Minor adverse effects over a limited area.
-2 Minor adverse effects, but of a long term or extensive nature.
-3 Significant adverse effects; either long term covering a
limited area, or short term covering an extensive area.
-4 Major adverse effects but characterized as either short term
or of limited extent.
-5 Major long term, extensive adverse effects (lowest possible
rating).
IX-3
-------
TABLE 27
Environmental Evaluation Matrix
Significant Assessment
Categories
NATURAL ENVIRONMENTAL VALUES
Air Quality (localized)
Water Quality (surface)
Water Quality (ground)
Wildlife
Fisheries
Vegetation and Habitat
Rare and Endangered Species
Natural Hazards
TOTAL
ECONOMIC
Local Capital Cost
0 & H Cost
Induced Development Costs
Individual Cost
UDSS of Ap . Prnrinp-hi vi t.v
SOCIAL- CULTURAL
Historic-Archaeological
Public Acceptability
Regulatory/Legal
Cultural Pattern (life style)
Aesthetics Values
Recreational Values
LAND USE PLANNING
Adherence to the Planning Proc
Growth Inducement
Growth Regulation
Proposed Project
y*A
y*A
y*A
y™A
y*A
y-*/*
y-v*
y-*A
-13
y-*/»
y-i/>
°/-Q/*
-/-*/*
°/-Z/4
22
"I/-} /
/ /z
'Y-^A
Y-*A
V-o,/*,
-y-6 /,
-y-*A
-24
X6X
Q/-s^
°/-s/*
-18
Alternative A-1
y-^A
y*A
y-2-A
y%
y*A
x°x
y%
y*/>
10
•XzX
-XeX
y-*A
-y-i/*
y%
-12
X1X
•1/-1 /n
1/4/<
y*A
YQ/^
1/1^
6
y*/*
°/6/,
y*/*
' 18
Alternative A-2
X-2X
X6X
X2X
X4X
X4X
X4X
x°x
y-2/,
0
"XeX
"XeX
y-2/,
y-*A
y-i^
-22
X1X
-y-2 /n
i/4/r
°/2/r
y*A
y^ /*
6
X4X
°/-*A
X6X
-2
Alternative A-3
X3X
X6X
X2X
X4X
X4X
X4X
X°X
X2X
3
-X4X
-l/o X
/ -2/0
°/2^
X-2^
^•2/1
-12
°/-1 Xf
X1/o
X4X
X2X
0/2 X
1/i/;
7
X4X
y~*A
y*A
-2
Alternative A-4
X3X
X6X
X2X
X4X
X4X
X4X
x°x
X-2X
3
-X4X
X2X
°/-2/4
-y-2/«
X-6 Xa
-16
X1X
1/1 <
y*/
X2X
X2X
1/1 X
9
X4X
°/4/^
y* A
-4
Alternative A-5
X-2X
X3X
X4X
X4X
x°x
X4X
XoX
X2X
-5
X4/
X2X
0/K /
/ -D/3
-1/0 /
/ -2/6
X-sX
-22
-1A/
X2X
y'-z/,
/ /-2
X4X
y~*A.
x°x
-16
X6X
/^6X
XeX
-18
Alternative A-6
x°x
X6X
x°x
x°x
X4X
x°x
x°x
XiX
9
XeX
XoX
°/oX
<^4^
y'o/^
^ -10
XoX
y~i A
X2X
x°x
y~2/o
XoX
-1
XeX
u/-1 /r
y*/2
-3
Alternative A-7
X-3X
X-6X
X4X
x°x
X6X
x°x
x°x
x°x
-19
°/fi X
/~6/X3
XoX
°/oX
X-eX
Xo/^
-12
x°x
X4X
XeX
y~2/o
-V-4 4
y~\/
-17
°^6/<
XoX
XT X
-7
Weighting Factor
1
3
2
2
2
2
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
2
?
?
1
2
2
2
-------
-------
EXAMPLE OF HOW TO READ THE H-JVIJOMENTAL EVALUATION MATRIX
Consider, for example, the differences under the category "Wildlife"
for the proposed project at the Elk Feedground site and Alternative A-l,
expansion at the existing site. Under the proposed project the number
-10 appears, while under Alternative A-l the number 0 is in the "wildlife
box." These numbers were obtained in the following manner:
The upper left hand corner (in the case of the proposed project, -3)
is an evaluation of the primary impacts. Since a facility located at the
Elk Feedground site would have a significant adverse effect on the elk herd,
a minus 3 was assigned to this impact (see previous page on rating system) .
The lower right hand corner (in this case, -2) is an evaluation of the secon-
dary impacts. Since the Elk Feedground site would facilitate induced devel-
opment upon existing wildife habitat, not just elk but other species, notably
water fowl, this category received a minus 2 indicating minor adverse im-
pacts of extensive nature. Now the total rating, the larger number in each
box, is arrived at with the following formula:
Total rating = sum of primary impacts and secondary impacts times
the weighting factor. In this case:
Total Wildlife Rating
for the proposed alternative = ±(-3) + (-2)1x2
Total Rating = -10
Also, in this example for the wildlife rating of Alternative A-l, both
primary and secondary impacts on wildlife were considered to be zero. That
is, this alternative has no effect on wildlife since expansion at the existing
site does not affect wildlife, either during construction or by "opening up"
additional land to development that could displace wildlife. Then, obviously,
the total rating for wildlife for Alternative A-l equals (0 + 0) x 2, which
equals zero.
The reader should note that both the estimate of numerical values for
the primary and secondary impacts and the weighting factors are very subjective,
and the reader is invited to reassign these numbers in order to make his or
her own evaluation. For example, it has been suggested to EPA that the follow-
ing categories should have higher weighting factors: Public Acceptability,
Cultural Pattern, Aesthetics, Recreational Values, Fisheries, and Wildlife.
If this were done, it would increase the negative values for those alternatives
with poor showings in these categories (the proposed project, South Park Road,
and no action), while increasing those with high positive values (Expansion
at the Existing Site, the Boyle's Hill alternatives, and Mid South Park).
EPA hopes the matrix is useful in summarizing the numerous impacts.
IX-4
-------
REFERENCES
-------
REFERENCES
Bridger-Teton National Forest Supervisor; October 20, 1976.
Re. Snake River Wild & Scenic River Study - Jackson Wastewater
Treatment Plant EIS. Personal Communication.
Driver, B.L.; 1975. Quantification of Outdoor Recreationists_
Preferences. In Research Camping and Environmental Education.
Univ. Park, Pa~ Penn State HPER Ser. 11, p. 508.
California State Water Resources Control Board; January 1973.
Water Quality Criteria.
Hayden, E.W.; 1969. From Trapper to Tourist in Jackson Hole.
Livingston and Associates; January 1977. Teton County Proposed
Comprehensive Plan, Implementation Alternatives, and Water
Quality Management Program.
; May 1976. Teton County Growth and Development
Alternatives (A Background Report for the Teton County Com-
prehensive Plan).
; 1976. Proposed County Plan and Action Program.
Lower Valley Power and Light, Inc.; December 1974. Environmental
Analysis Teton-Jackson 115,000-Volt Electric Transmission Line.
Love, J.D. and Reed, J.C.; 1971. Creation of the Teton Landscape,
Grand Teton Natural History Association. Moose, Wyoming 83012.
Metcalf & Eddy, Inc.; 1972. Wastewater Engineering: Collection,
Treatment, Disposal. McGraw-Hill, New York.
James M. Montgomery, Consulting Engineers, Inc.; 1976. Survey
of Nonpoint Source Pollution Programs for the State of Idaho
Department of Health and Welfare.
National Technical Advisory Committee on Water Quality; April 1967.
Water Quality Criteria.
Nelson, Haley, Patterson & Quirk, Inc.; September 1976. Working
Paper No. 2 Preliminary Analysis of Wastewater Management Systems,
; June 1976. Water Facilities Investigation for
the Town of Jackson.
; December 1975. Sewer System Analyses and Evalua-
tion, Jackson, Wyoming.
; January 1975. Supplemental Report to the Facili-
ties Plan for the Town of Jackson, Wyoming.
-------
; October 1974. Facilities Plan Jackson, Wyoming.
Real Estate Research Corporation; April 1974. The Cost of Sprawl -
Detailed Cost Analysis (Prepared for CEQ, HUD, EPA).
Teton County; July 1970. Master Plan for Teton County (prepared
by Planning and Research Associates).
U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Electrification Administration;
January 1976. Final Environmental Impact Statement Transmission
Line Teton to Jackson-115 kv. USDA-REA-ES (ADM)-75-9-5.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; February 1976. Special Flood Hazard
Information - Snake River Wilson, Wyoming and Vicinity.
U.S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration; 1973. Earthquake History of the United States.
Publication 41-1.
; 1976. Earthquake Data File Summary. Document No.5.
; 1976. Earthquake Data File-160-Km Radium Around
Jackson, Wyoming.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; 1976. Pre-publication copy
Water Quality Criteria.
; 1974. Manual for Preparation of Environmental
Impact Statement for Wastewater Treatment Works, Facilities
Plan, and 208 Areawide Waste Treatment Management Plans.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region VIII; February 1976.
Ammonia Toxicity.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region X; April 1973.
Environmental Impact Statement Guidelines.
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Federal In-
surance Administration; March 1976. Flood Hazard Boundary
Map - Town of Jackson, Wyoming (Teton Co.).
U.S. Department of the Interior; February 1970. Guidelines for
Evaluating Wild, Scenic and Recreational River Areas. Proposed
for Inclusion in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System
Under Section 2, Public Law 90-542.
U.S. Department of the Interior Geological Survey; 1976. A Plan
for Study of Water and Its Relation to Economic Development
in the Green River and Great Divide Basin in Wyoming. Open
File Report 76-349.
; June 1976. Hydrologic Effects of Hypothetical
Earthquake-Caused Floods Below Jackson Lake; Northwest Wyoming.
Open File Report 76-77.
-------
; 1975. Discharge Measurements and Chemical
Analysis of Water in Northwestern Wyoming. Report No. 14.
; August 1975. Water Resources of Northwestern
Wyoming. Open File Report 75-409.
; March 1974. Water Resources of Grand Teton
National Park, Wyoming.
Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality; 1976. Wyoming Air
Quality Standards and Regulations.
-------
APPENDIX 1
REPORT BY WYOMING GAME
AND FISH REGARDING LAND
TRANSFER TO THE TOWN
OF JACKSON
-------
The following information is contained .in .1 report dated February 24, 1976
to the Wyoming Game and Fish Commission from Webster B. Jones with reference
to proposed sewerage lagoons on the South park Feedground near Jackson, Teton
County, Wyoming.
Pursuant to a request by the Staff of the Wyoming Game and Fish Department at a.
special Staff Meeting on February 2, 1976, I have compiled this report regarding
the prop-osal of the Town of Jackson, Wyoming to construct two sewage disposal
lagoons on the Department's South Park Feedground near Jackson.
The purpose of this investigation is to evaluate the impact of the sewage instal-
lation on the South Park Unit to aid the Department in making an informed, fair
and legal decision.
To better understand the situation, a basic understanding of the Units history and
purpose is required.
The South Park Unit lies -eight miles south of Jackson along the north bank of the
Snake River. The first land purchased by the Department was 450 acres in 1939 and
the second major acquisition was 194 acres in 1941. Acquisition of additional small
tracts through purchase and exchange have occurred since that time bringing the total
to 6-36 acres. In 1965, 561 acres of federal lands administered by the Bureau of
t.,and Management were leased by the Department under the Recreation and Public Pur-
poses Act within the meander lines of the Snake River. Fee lands owned by the
Department are shown in pink on the map in Appendix A. Federal leased lands are
shown in yellow.
The purchase of this property was accomplished through the Federal Aid in Wildlife
Restoration Act. This program allows federal participation up to 75 percent of the
purchase price of lands valuable to wildlife. In order to receive these funds, the
Wyoming Game and Fish Department was required by the Act to enter into a Project
Agreement (Appendix B) stating that the State would use the acquired lands for the
wildlife purposes as outlined in the Project Statement and the Plans and Specifica-
tions. In this case the Department stated that it planned to enclose the South Park
Feeding Ground with an elk-proof fence which would conserve the pasture for early
winter feed and prevent the elk from damaging surrounding ranch property during the
winter feeding period.
Since the time of acquisition the feedground has proved to be a wise acquisition.-
At the present time, approximately 1,000 elk spend five months of the winter on the
Unit. Without feedgrounds of this nature the elk herds would not have sufficient
winter range to survive since historical winter ranges and migration routes have
been used for other purposes or blocked by the progress of civilization.
Most of the Unit is situated on the flood plain of Flat Creek and the Snake River.
In 1957-58 the Department built an 800 foot dike to keep the Snake River from
flooding into Flat Creek and thus inundating much of the Unit. As may be expected
on an area possessing a high water table, there are high producing grass meadows
along Flat Creek and on the Snake River bottoms where the elk are fed. Adjacent
to these areas are stands of cottonwood trees with an understory of shrubs and
herbaceous species which provide cover from weather and harassment without the elk
needing to leave the Unit. Although eve-ry portion of the Unit is not used for the
feeding ground or for cover, a certain amount of open-space is required to provide
a buffer zone between the elk and adjacent human activities.
-1-
-------
The elk-proof fence around the perimeter prevents game damage to adjacent private
lands. Although the Unit is primarily u.'-.'d for elk, other species of wildlife
such as moose, deer, raptors, waterfowl .-!,-.•! upland game birds are also present.
During the summer months when the elk are on their summer range at higher eleva-
tions, the Unit sustains a high degree of use for public recreation. Use by the
general public between June 6th and November 30th has averaged 13,705 visitor days
per year for the last five years. This does not include persons who walk from the
highway on to the Unit. Camps and campers average 1,000 per season.
The Boy Scouts of America use the area for ten weeks with an average of 80 boys
per week or 800 boys per season.
The Fcedground has been used for training for the National Field Dog Trials for
the past ten years.
It is the only free camping area in Jackson Hole and is used regularly by tourists,
residents and various organizations for picnics and overnight camping.
This is one of the few areas boaters can gain access from the highway to the Snake
River.
Approximately three hundred sixty two elk are harvested from this herd each year
providing 1,727 hunter days of recreation, as well as the economic contribution to
the State by these hunters. Five to ten deer are harvested from the Unit each year
and the Unit provides one of the only areas open for waterfowl hunters. During the
1975 Waterfowl Hunting Season there was an average of 5-10 hunters per day.
In 1975 there was an estimated 397 bank fishermen and 953 boat fishermen using the
Feedground as access to the Snake River during the summer months. In addition to
this an estimated 500-1,200 fishermen used Flat Creek with two thousand, nine to
sixteen inch cutthroat trout being stocked during the 1974 season.
On January 11, 1973, the Commission received a letter from Mayor Lester May (Appen-
dix C) proposing that the City of Jackson enter into a long term lease with the
Wyoming Game and Fish Department to construct two sewage lagoons on fifteen acres
of the South Park Elk Feedground.
A committee of three staff members of the Department was appointed to investigate
the proposal. They were Rex Corsi, Chief Game Warden; Cliff Bosley, Assistant
Chief Fish Warden; and Jon Ogden, Chief Engineer. Their findings (Appendix D)
were presented to the Commission on January 17, 1973 where the Commission voted to
deny the request (Appendix E). A letter (Appendix F) was sent to the City of
Jackson on February 17, 1973 which summarized the findings of the Committee and
notified them of the Commission's action.
On March 21, 1973, President Crowell advised (Appendix G) the new members of the
Commission concerning the previous action of the Commission toward the City of
Jackson proposal.
On April 11, 1973, members of the Wyoming Game and Fish Commission met with Mayor
Lester I. May and Councilman Howard Walters .(Appendix II) to clarify the reasons for
the Commission's actions so that there was no misunderstanding. At that time, it
was explained that Federal Aid Funds had been used to acquire the South Park
-------
Feedground. Mr. White was directed to m.ii-ict officials of the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service to ascertain if the Cor.;: ;ion could legally sell or lease
the property and, if so, would il be neo .iry to appraise the property.
On April 16, 1973, a letter of inquiry was written to the Area Manager of the
Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, Mr. Burton W. Rounds (Appendix I). A
reply was received on April 20, 1973 (Appendix J). The letter said that:
"We believe the proposed land transfer to the City of Jackson, Wyoming
would indeed constitute a 'diversion of funds' within the meaning of
Section 80.5 of the Federal Aid Manual, unless conditions outlined
below could be met. Such diversion would jeopardize your agency's con-
tinued eligibility to receive Federal Aid funds, as described in Sub-
section (b) of Section 80.5.
"As you are aware, it would be necessary for you to submit an amendment
to project documentation requesting permission to dispose of the land
parcel in question. Final approval would need to come from the Regional
Director, Region 6, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife. Your request
would need to be predicated on one of two precepts:
(1) the land involved is no longer serving the purpose
for which it was originally acquired;
(2) the entity proposing to acquire the parcel is prepared
to replace it 'in kind.
"Regarding the first of these alternatives, it is our understanding that the
land in question is indeed serving the purpose for which it was acquired.
We seriously doubt that our Bureau could approve of disposal as surplus
to Management Unit needs. Even if this could be established, it would be
necessary to conduct a competent land appraisal and to fully reimburse the
project at current market value. Appraisal and reimbursement costs would
need to be borne by a non-Federal interest.
"Concerning the second alternative, we doubt that suitable replacement
lands are available in the area. The burden of locating and obtaining
control of any replacement lands should properly rest with the City of
Jackson. The proposed replacement tract would need to meet your agency's
criteria for the use intended. It would, of course, be necessary to ob-
tain this Bureau's concurrence in your assessment of wildlife values for
proposed replacement lands. It would also be necessary to provide proof
of adequate legal control by you over the replacement tract itself.
"Under these circumstances, we feel the City of Jackson should be encour-
aged to seek alternative lands as a site for construction of the sewage
lagoon."
On April 30, 1973 the letter from Mr. Rounds was read to the Commission (Appendix
K) after which Commissioner Hull moved that the Commission reiterate its refusal
to the Town of Jackson to place a sewage lagoon on the South Park Feedground for
the reasons previously stated and the additional reason as expressed in the letter
from the BSFW to the effect that such a lease or grant would be contrary to the
purpose for which the lands were acquired and would constitute a jeopardy to further
P-R Funds to the State of Wyoming. Motion seconded by Commissioner Mankin and
carried.
-------
On May 4, 1973, Mr. White sent a letter i :> the Town Council advising them of
the position taken by the U.S.F.W.S. in ; ;vird to their request.
In October of 1974, Nelson, Haley, Patte;.
-------
Federal Bureau of Sport Fisheri. s and Wildlife are. the final
agencies deciding on the merit;; . any proposed change of use.
To date neither of these agenci have approved the proposed
change and do not intend to chŁm;,c their opinions on this matter.
Their reasons are as follows:
1. The request for a change in use of approximately 20 acres
of the feeding site from range to a sewage treatment plant
site would constitute a diversion of use and diversion
of funds from the original intent.
2. Any taking of such land for use as a lagoon treatment site
would require reimbursement to both the federal government
and to the Game Commission. Reimbursement would have to be
in the form of direct purchase and/or replacement in kind of
similar land lost by the diversion of use. The federal
government and the Game Commission would have to approve
any such transaction with costs of land appraisals and land
purchase borne by the Town of Jackson.
3. The present feeding ground supports up to 2,000 elk during
the winter months on approximately 636 acres of Game
Commission land and 561 acres of leased Bureau of Land Manage-
ment property. Game Commission biologists consider that
the site is already crowded and that they cannot afford the
loss of 20 acres.
4. The Game Commission knows of no local property available in
the South Park area which could replace land lost to the
treatment facility. Any such land would have to be along
established elk migration routes, and an isolated 20 acre
site would hardly appear to be a manageable size for elk
feeding purposes.
5. The Wyoming Game and Fish Commission must look at the proposed
Jackson request from the standpoint that approval of such
action would set a possible precedent for future "taking"
of their lands. This would weaken Commission control and
regulation of all of their lands within the state and compli-
cate sound, long-range management and planning for such
property
(b) Any attempt by the Town of Jackson, even with County support, to
take away land on the elk feeding area without the consent of
wildlife officials will result in controversy. Vocal and powerful
conservation and environmental groups, both local and national,
might enter such a battle and delay any such action.
In conclusion, the plan states that:
"In view of the problems which Alternate 2 (South Park Site) would pose
in terms of land use and planning for the South Park Area, it appears
that a better site should be found which will minimize some of these
problems. Many of the negative effects could be solved with proper
-5-
-------
planning and regulations, but as su.-;. action does not appear to be
soon forthcoming, a less controvert i site would be considered which
will serve the Town's needs T i alternate is the less expensive
of the two alternates using lagoons as treatment processes. Its cost
of $1,564,000 (See Exhibit M) is the second lowest and would rate con-
sideration as a viable alternate or even most desirable of all alter-
nates on strictly a cost basis. However, environmental and political
problems that would be encountered placed this alternate third in
ranking. Due to the possibility of the lagoon effluent not meeting
future effluent standards without additional equipment, this alternate
would be questionable to accomplishing contributions to future goals."
The results of the plan were presented to the Town Council on November 19, 1974
which recommended expansion of the present facility rather than the South Park
Feedground Site (Exhibit N). The Town Council, however, chose the South Park
plan over the advice of their consultants.
The proposal was discussed by the Commission again on January 19, 1976 at which
time Governor Herschler informed the Commission that a group from Jackson had
asked to meet with him that week concerning the acquisition of the South Park
Site (Exhibit 0).
At this time it is apparent that the Town of Jackson is continuing its quest to
acquire a site on the South Park Unit from the Department.
There are not too many more points that can be added to those made by Rex Corsi,
Cliff Bosley and Jon Ogden (Exhibit D); Nelson, Haley, Patterson & Quirk, Inc.,
(Exhibit L); Carvice Roby, Game Biologist (Exhibit P); or Max D. Rollefson, Area
Fisheries Biologist (Exhibit Q), however, some of their more salient points con-
cerning the impact of the sewage lagoons on the feedground as well as some of my
own observations are discussed hereinafter.
Legal Aspects
From a legal standpoint it is impossible for_the Department to sell or lease the
twenty acre site to the Town of Jackson without the Commission declaring the land
surplus to the needs of the Department, advertising it for sale for three consecu-
tive weeks in a newspaper in Teton County and then selling it to the highest bidder
over the appraised value. This is the procedure for disposing of surplus property
as outlined by an interpretation of the State Statute by the Attorney General. Ob-
viously a twenty acre tract in the middle of a 636 acre feedground cannot be declared
surplus to the Department's needs.
Closely coupled to this, is. the fact that the feedground was purchased with 75 per-
cent participation by the Federal Government through the Federal Aid to Wildlife
Restoration Act. As interpreted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Exhibit J),
a transfer of land to the Town of Jackson would constitute a "diversion of funds."
Such diversion would jeopardize the Department's continued eligibility to receive
Federal Aid Funds. Only two circumstances exist whereby a "diversion of funds"
could be avoided; (1) if the Department could prove that the land is no longer
serving the purpose for which it was originally acquired; or (2) if the Town of
Jackson would be prepared to replace it "in kind."
The first alternative is impossible to meet because there is no question that the
twenty acre site is being used for the purpose for which it was acquired and is not
surplus to the Department's needs.
-6-
-------
The second alternative is not so "clear '-MI", however, from a practical standpoint
it is impossible to find suitable replac -nt lands in an area around the perimeter
of the feedground which would have the y , utility or benefits as twenty acres in
the middle of a well "blocked up" unit. Any lands around the perimeter would tend
to project out or be isolated from the present boundary and receive little elk use
yet it would require a higher maintenance cost because of the added perimeter
fence. It would also tend to create undesirable corners and pockets to trap elk.
It should be remembered that the Department once owned two forty acre tracts on the
north and west boundaries of the present feedground. Both were traded for more
desirable lands within the present unit.
From a legal standpoint, it is my opinion that no further negotiations are required
with the Town of Jackson. Even if we wanted to sell the tract, legally we cannot.
Biological Aspects
The twenty acre tract desired by the Town of Jackson for the lagoons lies in the
middle of an old ox-bow of the Snake River. It is completely surrounded by cotton-
wood trees and other shrubs. This area, although not used for feeding, is extremely
important for cover from bad weather and harassment of all kinds. The elk are seen
frequently in this area after feeding. It is this cover that tends to create a
quiet setting, a place of refuge for the elk without requiring them to leave the
unit to seek shelter. When elk leave a Unit of this nature, a high probability ex-
ists that they may go onto private lands and damage hay stacks, etc.
The location of the lagoons in this area would not only eliminate the 20 acres from
use but would have an effect on the elk use of an additional 148 acres because of
the strange appearance, odor, noise and human activity. This essentially destroys
the use of much of the cottonwood cover.
Although it has been said that a daily visit is the only activity which will be re-
quired, this must be assumed to be under ideal conditions. What about unforeseen
breakdowns, construction and reconstruction during the winter feeding period. The
proposed pipeline not only traverses the cover area but through the feedground for
almost the full length of the Unit. What about unforeseen problems with the pipe-
line. Any one of these problems could move the elk off of the Unit and keep them
off if it occurred for a considerable length of time. It may be noted in Exhibit N
that the EPA official said, "that if the town expects funds from his agency access
to the sewer site is an absolute requirement. If it is the decision of the town to
select the South Park site we must have assurances of free undisturbed access to the
site in our report." This unrestricted access could be devastating to the South
Park elk feeding program.
Another point which is mentioned on page 46 of the Facilities Plan by Nelson, Haley,
Patterson & Quirk, Inc. reads as follows: "Additional space would also have been
available for such equipment as clarifiers, microstrainers, chorination units or
even a tertiary treatment facility if such units were needed to meet future effluent
standards."
This statement would lead me to believe that future requests for more land could be
expected and after granting the initial request how could we find justification to
refuse additional demands.
This leads into another important point. If the Department approves this request
from the Town of Jackson it would undoubtedly set a precedent for future taking of
-7-
-------
its lands. This would weaken Department, control and regulation of all of their
lands within the State and complicate son• •'• , long-range management and planning
for such property (see Exhibit R for an •• ,,iiple) .
Another observation concerning the biological impact is that if the lagoons-are
placed on the South Park Unit it will tend to encourage development of the lands^
near the Unit. This is pointed out in Exhibit L. Needless to say human activities
along the perimeter would be detrimental to the use of the feedground.
Construction of the lagoons will require considerable fill dirt and top soil. If
it is planned to remove this from the adjacent unit lands this will have an adverse
effect on forage and hay production.
There is some concern that the proposed site is located on the flood plain of the
Snake River and will be susceptible to flooding which could flood the area with
sewage making it undesirable for wildlife and human use as well as polluting Flat
Creek and the Snake River. The lagoons are definitely near the water table of the
Snake and probably below the water table of Flat Creek. If the system did not
function properly, because of Icing for example, pollution of the streams and
damage to the fisheries could occur.
Although not a primary purpose of the Unit, summer recreation is certainly one of
its principle uses. The existence of the sewage lagoons would have an effect on
this use through appearance, odors and most definitely an undesirable psychological
stigma would be attached to the location.
An Approach to Real Estate Appraisal
The following is a discussion 01 an appraisal approach based on rough unconfirmed
appraisal data and is not a real estate appraisal although it may give a rough idea
of the values involved.
The. most equitable approach due to the extensive damages to the remaining property
for elk feedground purposes would be the Before and After Appraisal Technique, the
difference between the two appraisals being the Value of the Taking and the Damages
to the Remainder.
From rough unconfirmed appraisal data it appears that the present South Park Feed-
ground is worth approximately $1,748,000.00. The value of the land requested by
the Town of Jackson is $60,000, however, the greatest part of just compensation is
the damages to the remaining land if it is to have continued use as an elk feed-
ground.
There will be a zone around the lagoons, estimated to be 500 feet wide and containing
65 acres which will have a 50 percent reduction in utility to the elk because of
appearance, odor, noise and the related human activity. This results in damages to
this zone in an estimated amount of $97,500. There is another zone estimated to be
500 feet wide and containing 83 acres around the first zone which will have an es-
timated 25 percent reduction in utility by the elk. The amount of damages to this
area is estimated to be $62,250.00.
Because of approximately 49 percent of the 150 acres of forest cover has been taken
or suffered a loss in utility an imbalance of 49 percent to the excess is evident in
the nonfores ted lands of the feedground. This excess is estimated to be worth
$552,720. Total Just Compensation to the Department is estimated to be $772,470.00.
Please refer to the following summary.
-------
Market Value Before the Taking
Lands: 526 Ac. at $3,000 $ 1,578,000.00
80 Ac. at $1,500 120,000.00
30 .Ac. at no value - 0 -
Improvements 50,000.00
Total $ 1,748,000.00
Just Compensation
Value of the Taking (20 Ac- X $3,000/Ac)$ 60,000.00
Damages to the Remainder
Zone No. 1 - 50% reduced utility by
elk in a 500 foot strip
around the lagoons
(65 Ac. X $3,000 X .50) $ 97,500.00
Zone No. 2 - reduced utility by
elk in a 500 foot strip
around Zone No. 1
(83 Ac. X $3,000 X .25)—$ 62,250.00
Reduced utility on 49% of the
forest cover creates an in-
balance of 49% of the remaining
unforested type (.49 X 376 X $3.000)—$ 552,720.00
TOTAL JUST COMPENSATION $ 772,470.00
Market Value After the Taking
Lands: 506 Ac. at $1,591.96 $ 805,530.00
80 Ac. at $1,500.00 120,000.00
30 Ac. at no value - 0 -
Improvements $ 50,000.00
Total $ 975,530.00
Although I am part of the Wyoming Game and Fish Department, I can understand, at
least in part, the problem that the Town of Jackson is facing in securing a site
for their sewage facility. However, since it is the Department's statutory
mandate to administer the wildlife of Wyoming for the people of Wyoming, there is
no reason whatsoever to comply with the Town of Jackson's request for land since
it is legally and biologically infeasible and will benefit a greater part of the
public if the present use is retained.
-9-
-------
APPENDIX 2
NOVEMBER 1976 LETTER
FROM WYOMING GAME AND
FISH REGARDING THE
SOUTH PARK ELK
FEEDGROUND SITE
-------
ED HERSCHLER, Governor
A. J. "JACK" HULL. Pres , Laramie
FLOYD CARR, Vice Pres., Sundance
CHARLES H. BROWN. Wheatland
DR. DE WITT DOMINICK. Cody
GENE BONDI, Sheridan
ROGER WEIDNER, Evanston
DAVE WHEELER, Lander
EARL M THOMAS
Direclor
W. DONALD DEXTER
Assistant Director
REX CORSI
Chief Gamo Warden
JOSEPH R WHITE
Chief Fish Warden
PETER N. TERTIPES
Chief Fiscal Officer
CHESTER C ANDERSON
Chief Research & Development
GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT
CHEYENNE 82002
November 24, 1976
Mr. Bill Ashley, Chairman
Teton County Board of Commissioners
181 King
Jackson, Wyoming 83001
Dear Mr. Ashley:
At their last meeting in Sundance on October 30th, the Game and Fish
Commission and staff gave further consideration to the proposal to
build an aerated sewer lagoon system at the South Park Elk Feedground.
The November 1976 issue of the monthly planning newsletter of the Teton
County Board of Commissioners lists the South Park site as one of five
alternatives being considered to alleviate the difficult problem of
Jackson's currently inadequate sewage disposal system. The Commission
understands that the timetable for the EIS is a completion of the
preliminary draft in January, 1977 with publication occurring shortly
thereafter. Following public hearings in -March, the final EIS is to
be published in May, 1977. After the EIS process is completed, Jackson
could be in a position to apply for and receive the "Step II" federal
grant to design a new sewerage facility and construction could possibly
commence in the spring of 1978.
The Boise, Idaho firm of James M. Montgomery, Consulting Engineers,
Inc., has been retained to prepare the necessary Environmental Impact
Statement and representatives of this firm have been in frequent con-
tact with our Department. We have furnished quantities of biological,
environmental, legal ana managerial information which we hope will
substantially assist in preparing a complete and sound assessment of
all ramifications of the several proposals. It is the South Park Elk
Feedground site (proposal) with which we are primarily concerned and
would like to address ourselves at this time.
The Commission is now in possession of complete investigation reports
and documents which have been generated as a result of the Commission
meeting of January 20, 1976 and the appearance of the Jackson delegation
which solicited our cooperation at that time. I enclose for your
-------
Mr. Bill Ashley
Page 2
November 24, 1976
review and consideration some of the more salient parts of this infor-
mation. We are also in possession of considerable public and private
comment with reference to the South Park site, much of which has
received a wide distribution by the commenters.
In view of the amount and type of information we now have and after a
careful consideration of it, the Commission and the Department feels
that decisions must be made and time is of the essence. We must,
therefore, in fairness to all concerned, conclude and notify you that
the Wyoming Game and Fish Commission and Department does object to
and will oppose fully any attempts to place sewerage lagoons or other
sewerage facilities on the South Park Elk Feedground. Our opposition
is based on four categorical considerations:
1. Biological; We have serious reservations about placing any
municipal sewerage facility on a flood plain, particularly one
on a river with the potential and consequence of the Snake.
The South Park Elk Feedground was initiated in 1939 on a site
selected because of its unique and highly desirable biological
features. There are high producing grass meadows along Flat
Creek and on the Snake River bottoms where the elk are fed.
Immediately adjacent to these meadow areas are large stands of
mature cottonwood trees with an understory of shrubs and herbacious
plants which provide cover and protection from weather. The elk
can be fed, graze and rest relatively free of any harassment and
never need to leave the Unit to benefit from these features.
Although every portion of the Unit is not used for the feedground
or for cover, a measurable amount of open space is required to
provide a buffer zone between the elk and adjacent human activi-
ties. Although the Unit was acquired originally primarily for
elk, other wildlife species inhabit the area in numbers. These
species include moose, deer, waterfowl, raptors, upland game
birds, furbearers and song birds.
2. Legal: The enclosed letters from Area Manager Rounds, 1973;
Assistant Regional Director Lane, March and August 1976, are self-
explanatory. The feedground was purchased with Federal Aid money.
The Commission very definitely cannot declare the property surplus
to our needs and to simply transfer the land to Jackson would
constitute a "diversion of funds" and would thereby jeopardize
the Department's future and continued eligibility to receive both
P.R. and D.J. Federal Aid Funds.
3- Sociological: The subject property is not only serving the
original purpose for which it was primarily purchased, but also
now serves a much greater public need. Camping, boating, dog
trials, hunting, fishing and horse backing are among the public
uses which constitute an average use of 13,705 visitor days for
a six month period (June through November) for the past five
years.
-------
Mr. Bill Ashley
Page 3
November 24, 1976
4. Political : The report of Nelson, Haley, Patterson and Quirk,
Inc., lists several negative impacts of placing sewerage facili-
ties at South Park. Among these statements is found the following
"Any attempt by the Town of Jackson, even with County support,
to take away land on the elk feeding area without the consent
of wildlife officials will result in controversy. Vocal
and powerful conservation and environmental groups, both local
and national , might enter such a battle and delay any such
action. "
Our files contain many letters from interested citizens from the
Jackson area and elsewhere. Some are rather emotional, some are
very practical and some are personal; but, without exception,
they are all in opposition to placing sewerage lagoons on the
South Park Feedground. A review of all the "public input" made
to us leads us to a question; Who really wants or insists on the
facility being at South Park?
We sincerely hope the foregoing will assist those responsible in
evaluating all planning options available and we appreciate your
consideration of our official position with reference to them.
Sincerely,
EARL M. THOMAS, DIRECTOR
WYOMING GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT
EMT:saw
Enclosures
cc; ^Governor Ed Herschler
Mr. Ralph Gill, Jackson Mayor-Elect
Jack Hull, Commission President
Darwin Creek, Game and Fish Department
bcc Edwin T. Cryer
-------
APPENDIX 3
SUMMARY OF PUBLIC
WORKSHOP
-------
\
^ UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION VIII
I860 LINCOLN STREET
DENVER. COLORADO 8O2O3
Tabulation of Public Responses
Workshop Number 2
January 11, 1977
Jackson Sewage Treatment System
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Jackson, Wyoming
Note: Numbered responses were received from individuals and lettered
responses were received from one of the eight groups that com-
pleted the questionnaire. An individual or group has the same
designation for all their responses.
-------
Jackson Wastewater Treatment System
Environmental Impact Statement
Summary of Public Workshop
On January 11, 1977, the second of two public workshops was held in
connection with preparation of the draft environmental impact state-
ment on Jackson's wastewater treatment system. Following an hour-long
presentation on the alternative sewage treatment sites and systems,
the economic costs, and environmental impacts, those attending received
a pamphlet outlining this information and a six-sheet questionnaire.
Eight groups of six to eight people were formed as those attending
randomly seated themselves at different tables. All eight groups submit-
ted a summary of their discussions. In addition, fifteen persons sub-
mitted their own individual responses to the questionnaire. This sum-
mary presents an analysis of both the groups' and individuals' responses
that were received at the workshop. A copy of all the responses is attached.
Attendance
Total attendance at the beginning of the workshop was 76 people of which
68 were community residents. 62 Teton County citizens were present during
the group discussion phase.
Content Analysis of Public Opinion
A. Group Results
Seven of eight groups participating in the workshop rejected
the South Park Elk Feedground Site from further consideration. Six of
the groups also rejected the South Park Road Site (A-5) and the Mid-South
Park Site (A-4). Reasons given were the adverse effects of development
created by extending sewers to these sites and the unavailability of land
or high costs of private land.
Six of the groups also reached a concensus regarding the pre-
ferred solution. All six groups' recommendations include expansion at
the existing Site (A-l), some in combination with Interim Improvements
(A-6). Four of the groups also wish to retain a Boyle's Hill site alterna-
tive (A-2 & A-3a) as an option. Of the two remaining groups, one split
between recommending a lagoon at Boyle's Hill (A-3a) and expansion at the
existing site (A-l); the other group split between recommending expansion
at the existing site (A-l) and selecting the Elk Feedground Site.
Six of the groups considered the question of alternative plant size
and all agreed that the 1995 design capacity was preferable to a
smaller (1990) size.
-------
A majority of the groups expressed reservations as to the acceptance
of lagoons as the method of treatment. Reasons given emphasized odor
problems, but also included amount of land required and aesthetics.
Two groups felt that the much lower annual operating costs of lagoons
justified selecting a lagoon system.
Regardless of plant location or method of treatment, a plurality of the
groups also expressed a desire for energy conservation and a reduction
if not elimination of odors.
Conclusion on group responses: The concensus of those attending is to
reject the southernmost sites (South Park Road Site and South Park Elk
Feedground Site) in favor of either Expansion at the Existing Site or
locating a plant at the Boyle's Hill Site.
B. Individual Results
Fifteen individuals submitted responses separate from their
group responses. All but one felt there was some significant problem
with the Elk Feedground Site with reasons including stimulation of
growth throughout South Park, interference with the elk, unavailability
of the land and conflict with both established use and the proposed land
use plan. Ten of eleven persons responding believed the South Park Elk
Feedground Site was not compatible with the proposed land use plan.
These individuals also felt there were problems associated
with Expansion at the Proposed Site (A-l). These problems included
high operating costs, proximity to the proposed high school and the
settled community, odor problems, and flooding and aquatic life growth
on Flat Creek. Several individuals expressed strong doubts about lagoon
systems, particularly their odor problems, and others requested energy
conservation regardless of the selected alternative. The individuals
who responded to the question on whether the estimated growth rate of
six percent per year was reasonable were split evenly, with half believing
this was accurate and the other half claiming this was too high. All
but one individual felt that having reserve capacity beyond the design
year was a good idea (that is if the rate of growth is not as rapid as
projected there would be reserve capacity beyond the design year). Only
one individual felt that the "ability to serve growth dangles as an
incentive to have growth...".
Conclusion on individual responses. The concensus of individuals submitting
questionnaires is to reject the South Park Elk Feedground Site, but they
were split as to their preferred site although a plurality preferred
Expansion at the Existing Site (A-l); others preferred a Mechanical Plant
at Boyle's Hill Site (A-2) or the Mid South Park Lagoon (A-4).
-------
Summary
Is there a concensus of opinion that certain sites should not. be
further considered? Which ones?
1 If Flat Creek empties into the river at elk feedground as an open
sewer line, it is doubtful that the proposed system would pollute
the river any more.
5. Elk refuge; South Park road site.
6. Elk refuge; South Park road site; mid South Park.
8. South Park feedground; South Park road.
9. Anything below South Park line; no lagoons.
11. All but the existing!
A. Elk refuge; South Park.
B. Elk refuge site; mid South Park site.
C. Three southernmost.
0. South Park elk refuge; South Park road site.
E. South Park elk refuge; South Park road site.
F. A-5; A-4; A-3a; proposed site.
G. Boyle's Hill; mid South Park.
H. Elk feedground {due to creating high density); mid South Park;
Boyle's Hill; polo grounds.
Summary
Do you have a group's concensus for a preferred site?
5. No; personally felt mechanical at Boyle's Hill or existing site.
6. No; personally prefer mechanical at Boyle's Hill or existing site.
8. Mid South Park.
9. A-l; mechanical plant or at Boyle's Heights; no ponds.
11. Yes; existing.
A. A-l and A-6 combined; Boyle's Hill.
B. A-l and A-6 combined; Boyle's Hill; mechanical or aerated lagoon.
C. Not quite; Boyle's Hill-mechanical; existing site-mechanical;
heavy commitment to alternative energy.
D. A-l, A-6 combined; Boyle's Hill; should be tied together instead
of treated separately.
E, No; some mechanical; some like lagoon; Boyle's Hill; existing plant
using aeration improvements followed by expansion.
F. Yes: A-2, A-l, A-6 No: A-5, A-4, A-3.
G. Seven in group: three prefer present site; three prefer elk feed-
ground; one prefers Boyle's Hill or present site.
H. A-l; expansion at existing site to 1995.
Summary
Do you have a concensus of opinion regarding the plant size? What
size does the group prefer?
8. 1995 or laraer; alternative energy.
9. 1995.
11. Stupid question to ask lay people at a meeting like this.
A. Full size as projected with flexibility to go higher with population
growth.
B. Full size, plus lots of flexibility for enlargement.
C. 1995.
0. Full size as projected and future expansion; relate sewage growth
rate to water usage; expressed interest in mechanical; alternative
energy; cooperation: city and county.
E. Not considered.
G. 1995 size.
H. As large as possible to effectively take us to the target date.
The Proposed Alternative
South Park Elk Feedqround Site
Aerated Stabilization Laqoon
What problems do you see in constructina d sewaae treatment plant
at this site?
1. Very small compared to others.
2. Stimulate growth through South Park; that we don't need hiah cost
and high water table; uncertain reliability; this is an elk refuqe--
leave it this way.
4.
Elk habitat.
5. State i nterference ; sportsmen; el k hunters ; fi sh and oame ; hi ah
H20 table.
6. Can we get the land? Interference from G & F & State; hiah water
table; opens up South Park for growth.
7. Facilitates growth in South Park, which I personally do not favor;
not good for the elk or as a precedent for future wildlife-related
value choices.
8. Scenic impact; elk disturbance; increased growth impact in South Park;
site not available; flood danger.
9. Expansion for South Park.
10. Elk; increase growth and density; Game and Fish opposed.
11. The land is not, and will not be, available.
12. Stimulation of orowth; flood plain, hiah water, etc.
13. Conflict with established use, i.e., detriment to natural wildlife;
would open South Park to high density development; high qroundwater
would require elevated lagoons and expensive liners.
D.
State, Game and Fish, National opposition; water table; raised
1aqoon.
E. State interference; Fish & Game interference; unknown cost of raised
laqoon; openina South Park area, along South Park road, to certain
development in open untried area; opposed to comprehensive plan.
F. Land acquisition/State F & G doesn't want it; preempts county planning
options/incentive to growth in South Park; high water table problems;
smell at least 9 months of year; potential problem for Scenic River
status; laqoons don't work well in Jackson Hole.
-------
The Proposed Alternative T, n . .,
K The Proposed Alternative
15. Extremely expensive and potentially disruptive to an area already What benefits?
recognized as wildlife habitat, agriculturally productive; and
scenically valuable.
1 All laaoon sights will have to have above ground treatment of
similar cost.
2. Gravity flow to plant; no sludqe removal.
4. No benefits.
5. Growth stimulation; cost; gravity flow.
6. Stimulates qrowth, if that's a benefit; cost is low for operation
and maintenance; gravity flow.
7, If development of South Park is inevitable, then a plant site
in South Park is foresighted.
8. None not available with other sites.
9. Out of sight; handle it all.
10. Maybe lower land cost.
11. None.
12. None at all, except for landowners, who'll develop South Park and
qet rich,
D. Stimulates growth; gravity flow, no pumping.
E. Gravity flow; low operational cost.
F. Outside further limits of develooable area; out of sight.
15. Far away from main population base; "out of sight, out of mind";
perhaps easier to acquire the land than lengthy condemnation pro-
cedures at other sites, but I doubt it.
The Proposed Alternative Tne ProDOSed Alternative
Do you believe this site is compatible with the proposed compre- Hhat mitigation measures might be necessary here? Such as land-
hensive land use plan? scaping, fencing, unique architecture, etc.?
K Yes' 1. Least.
5. No, not as presented by them. 2_ 20 acres of fencingp
No-
5. Fencing ; landscaping.
7. If the goal of the plan is to limit growth in South Park, no. 6 Fencing Or landscaping
If, however, the goal is simply to insure that growth does not
harm the environment (e.g. water), yes, it is compatible. ?_ Alternative energy sources.
Absolutely not.
No.
Remove the plant.
9. Little.
10. No, more development. 10_ Landscaping.
11. No, urban density is not desired except in town of Jackson -- •,•, p t anDiv
see Master Plan adopted.
12. Drop the idea.
12. Not in the slightest.
13. No.
D< No> D. Not hard to conceal.
E. Raising lagoon.
13. Fencing to keep out elk or other wildlife; should be aesthetically
pleasing to be compatible with surroundings.
E. No.
F. No.
F. No.
15. Not as I understand the overall guiding principles. 15i Unique architecture, perhaps; at best, it would still interfere
with a wildlife habitat.
-------
The Prooosed Alternative
Do you prefer this alternative? Why?
1. Serves the most people.
2. No.
4. No, Elk habitat feed grounds.
5. No. Too much population increase (high density); aesthetic value.
6. No. Allows for too much growth; "flavor" of Jackson will not be
preserved.
7. No. Encourages growth in South Park.
8. Absolutely no.
9. No.
10. No.
11. No. It is not an alternative.
12. I think it is so bad it should no longer be considered.
13. No. For the above-mentioned reasons.
D. No. Prefer lower density; reduced visual impact,
E. No. Invitation to high density development in open area; visual
impact; diminishing effect on ranching.
F. No.
15. As a last resort.
Alternative A-l
Expand at the Existing Site
Expansion of the existing mechanical plant
What problems do you see in constructing a sewage treatment plant
at this site?
1. No consideration.
2. None; just complete what was begun and left unfinished.
2. High M & 0 cost; too close to high school and settled community.
3. Problem with dumping into flat creek may be gravity feed to make
up date right away to bring sewage treatment up to date to at
least handle the problem for five years while new one is being built.
4. Costly.
5. Affluence into Flat Creek; high cost of maintenance; proximity of
town; expanding community.
6. High 0 & M cost; effluent into Flat Creek more concentrated;
handle just the town.
7. Only problem is that expansion potential is limited and service
from South Park would require energy input; however, I regard
those advantages rather than disadvantages. Also, I dislike
energy consumption of a mechanical plant.
8. Town Council; higher operating cost.
9. None.
10. Odor nearer development.
11. Only problems of effluent into Flat Creek can be handled and addi-
tional acreage, which also can be handled — even acreage for lagoon(s).
12. Is site large enough?
13. Requires discharge into Flat Creek; does not allow for a gravity
feed to the plant from South Park residents.
15. Compounds problem in Flat Creek with accelerated aquatic life growth,
flooding potential, and water quality degradation.
0. Effluents into Flat Creek, unless piped to Snake; high 0 & M; lots
of energy used; proximity to town and expanding community; proximity
to school site.
Alternative A-l
E. Empties into Flat Creek; high cost of 0 & M; next to new school site
F. Additional load to Flat Creek; maintenance high energy demand high.
Alternative A-l
What benefits?
2. Make use of the investment now there.
2. Can utilize some of existing facility.
3. Use of present pipes in old plant; would only have to build lagoons
to handle problem; could use the present pumps and pipes that are
there already; this plant was never finished; no wonder it doesn't
work now!
5. Low initial cost; no odor; effluent better treated; already own land.
6. Low initial cost; effluent better treated; no odor; already own land.
7. Makes good use of present capital investment; does not encourage.
growth, but will accomodate it.
8. Short interceptor; supportive of master plan; low capital cost.
9. Low cost.
10. Limits growth; density.
11. Stop the urbanization of the rural countryside south of this site,
and effectively contain the city in its present limits.
12. Jax owns land.
13. Conforms with established use; incorporates existing system;
mechanical system has proven reliability when properly sized.
15. Protects original and substantial investment that has already been
made; effectively limits growth into scenic South Park area (density
of development).
D. Gravity flow; no pumping (ten foot existing lift now?); short-term
option if site is kept long-term.
E. Low initial cost; better treatment; no odors; gravity flow.
F. J owns property; already there; people used to it there; K cost
cheapest; can adjust for shifts in loading (shock loading); fits
with land use plan; avoids scattered growth; minimal odor problem.
-------
Alternative A-l
Do you believe this site is compatible with the proposed comprehensive
land use plan?
Yes.
Yes.
; according to plan, this would be the most effective because
,er places would be limited by growth by the problem of sewage
Yes;
othe ,
disposal.
5. Yes, if it can be pumped.
6. Yes, if it can be pumped.
7. Yes.
8. Yes.
9. Yes.
10. Yes.
11. Yes, it is good to remember the work used is; I do not believe Teton
County will buy the plan.
12. Yes.
13. Yes.
15. It is a prior existing use and, as such, is compatible under the
"grandfather" clause.
D. Yes, would serve the expanded town.
E. Yes.
F. Yes.
Alternative A-l
What mitigation measures might be necessary here? Such as land-
scaping, fencing, unique architecture, etc.?
2. To some extent.
2. Lots of landscaping.
3. Trees and shrubs to do away with some visual destruction.
5. All, especially if school is built.
6. All, especially if school is built.
7. Alternative energy sources.
8. As much as possible.
9. Little.
10. Landscaping, odor.
11. Screening will be necessary (as in other areas of the town and county).
12. All of them — disguise it.
13. Nothing out of the usual; fencing.
15. All of the above and more.
D. In an industrial area, but also in town and in a high density area.
E. Few.
F. Taking effluent to Snake River.
Alternative A-l
Do you prefer this alternative? Why?
2. Yes, mostly because it exists already; there is * large investment
in it already.
3. Because they
4. No.
5. Yes, site located/benefits above.
6. This is an O.K. alternative; would limit growth and treat the
effluent better. Perhaps effluent pipe to Snake?
7. This or Boyle's Hill lagoon.
8. Yes.
9. Yes, mainly for land use planning.
10. Yes.
11. See benefits.
12. Vaguely.
13. Yes, the mechanical system is reliable when properly designed and
the present site has proven compatible with the community. This
alternative allows the town to incorporate the existing system.
15. While greater 0 & M costs would eradicate any capital savings between
this and other alternatives, it is preferable to pass increased
costs onto consumers as they consume. That is, users should pay as
they use; capital improvements benefit everyone and are funded by
ad valorem taxes; those who use should pay the freight when they use.
The property owner should only have to stand for a cost that is reason-
ably minimal and yet still adequate.
D.
No. High cost of maintenance; prefer flow into Snake.
E. No. High cost of 0 & M; flows into Flat Creek.
F. Yes.
Alternative A-2
Royle's Hill Site
Activated Sludqe
Mechanical PI ant
What problems rlo you see in constructing a sewaqe treatment
plant at this site?
1. No.
2. High cost Of MSO.
4. Best location.
5. High O&M costs and initial const. May be problem in getting
land. Some pumping south plant.
6. High O&M costs and initial construction; may be problem in getting
land; some pumping required.
7. Too expensive. Energy consumptive.
9. Pumping station.
10. Odor oroblem to skyline.
11. Bad (costlv) sub water problem. Should not consider this site
at all.
12. None.
13. None
D. Some pumping of south district; cost.
E. High cost of construction, O&M, some pumping from down south.
F Most costly to operate and overall; land acquisition; possible
opposition from neighboring landowners; loss of investment in present
plant; true for not all but not at present site; on road.
15. High costs for capitalization; therefore high taxes; high O&M;
therefore, high user costs.
-------
1
2.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
D.
E.
F.
15.
Alternative A-2
What benefits?
None.
Rel iable type of plant
Best location.
No odor; better dilution in Snake River; better treated effluent.
Better treated effluent; better dilution in Snake River, no odor.
No answer.
No answer.
It's above South Park; location fairly nood.
Snake River receives effluent.
None.
It's a good position for Livinaston's proposed hiqh density area.
Permits gravity to site (from most of the area); located near
anticipated hiqh density growth area. Reliable system.
Outside town; will serve expanded community; odor free.
Encourage development in an area of least environmental imnact,
no odors, or interference with wildlife.
Minimal smell; fits w. plan; site already disturbed; convenient to
town for maintenance people.
Perhaps easier to acquire land; limits growth potential to south
lai
1.
2.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
D.
E.
F.
15.
Alternative A-2
Do you believe this site is compatible with the proposed comprehensive
id use plan?
No.
Yes.
Ves.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
No answer.
Yes.
Yes.
No.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Alternative A-2
What mitigation measures might be necessary here? Such as land-
scaping, fencing, unique architecture, etc.'
1. No answer.
2. No answer.
4. No answer.
5. Well screened already...few if any.
6. Not sure.
7. Alt. energy sources,
8. No answer.
9. Cosmetics would be needed.
10. Landscaping.
11. D.N.A.
12. All of them.
13. No answer.
D. Hell screened by terrain.
E. Few or none.
F. Screening necessary.
15. All of the above, plus .
Alternative A-2
Do you prefer this alternative: Why?
3. This location is protected.
5. No, very expensive.
6. No rather expensive.
7. No because of expenses.
8. No -- but preferable to South Park feed ground.
9. I find it better than most.
10. Yes.
11. No.
12. Yes -- this, or lagoon, above all others.
13. Yes, good location for mechanical plant, good system. I prefer
expenasion at existing site but this is second favorite.
D. No -- expense; OSM.
E. No - High Costs - Best second alternative.
F. Yes, 5; No. 1
15. Conceivably, this alternative limits growth to the south, yet
its costs are high. I am ambivalent about the trade-offs.
-------
Alternative A-3a
Royle's Hill Site
Aerated Stabilization Lagoon
What problems do you see in constructing a sewaqe treatment
plant at this site?
7. Odor from laqoon in residential area, part, new proposed expansion
also.
9. Smell looks area needed.
10. Odor.
11. Bad (costly) subwater problem -- site should not even be considered.
12. Smell -- takes up a lot of space.
13. Compatibility with development (lagoons).
F. Odor - problem with surrounding landowners; land aguisition;
in flood plain? extra engineering may be needed; ponds would
need to be built up; location outfall in Snake River.
15. Large land requirements may impact area in a less than desirable
way; some concern about odor and proximity to residential develop-
ment.
Alternati ve A-3a
What benefits?
1. None.
7. location good.
9. Above So. Park (expansion).
10. Consistent with proposed density flows into Snake River.
11. None.
12. Same as A-2.
F. Fits with plan; cheap for O&M; cost effective to FPA.
15. Growth is limited to south; 0 a M is low, comparatively.
Alternative A-3a
Do you believe this site is compatible with the proposed compre-
hensive land use plan?
1. No.
7. Yes.
9. Yes.
10. Yes.
11. No.
12. Yes.
13. Yes.
F. Yes.
15. Yes, to the degree that scenic areas are preserved.
Alternative A-3a
What mitigation measures might be necessary here? Such as land-
scaping, fencing, unique architecture, etc.?
1 Conspicuous.
7. Alt. energy sources.
9. Smell alone makes this type sight poor for this sight.
10. Unsscaping.
11. D.N.A.
F. Build up and screen.
15. All of the above, plus.
-------
Alternative A-3a
Do you prefer this alternative? Why?
1 No.
7. Yes, if odor problem can be resolved.
8. No, but preferable to South Park feedqround.
9. No, would offend too many nearby residents.
10. Yes.
11. D.N.A.
12. Yes.
13. No, I don't feel it is a good location for lagoons.
F. Yes, 1. No. 5.
15. I am ambivalent about this as well.
Alternative A-4
Mid South Park Site
Aerated Stabilization Lagoon
What problems do you see in constructing a sewage treatment plant
at this site?
1 Why spend this money when latteral transfer of property is possible.
4. Land owners.
7. again, encourages growth further south.
8. Disturbing presently undeveloped areas.
9. Purchase of land.
10. Increases growth; 100-year flood plain.
11. Urbanization of rural country - should not happen.
12. Flood groundwater increase (development).
13. Groundwater?
15. Encourages and enables growth in an area better left untouched.
F. Land acquisition, probable opposition landowners. Too close to land under
sceptic easement now; would encourage scattered growth; same prob-
lems in general as elk refuge site.
Alternative A-4
What benefits?
9. Gravitational theory.
10. None.
11. None.
12. Close to high density area but not close enough.
15. None readily identifiable.
F. One of cheapest for K & OSM.
Alternative A-4
Do you believe this site is compatible with the proposed
comprehensive land use plan?
7. Probably.
8. No.
9. Semi.
10. No.
11. No.
12. Not enough to suit me.
13. Yes.
15. No.
F. Maybe or No.
-------
Alternative A-4
What mitigation measures might be necessary here? Such as land-
scaping, fencing, unique architecture, etc?
7. Alt. Energy sources.
9. Again purchase and cosmetic.
11. D.N.A.
15. All of this and more besides.
F. Not enough.
Alternative A-4
Do you prefer this alternative? Why?
4. To open.
7. Third choice.
8. No.
9. No, but could accept it.
10. No.
11. D.N.A.
12. No. Would encourage development.
13. Not particularly.
15. No.
F. Yes, 1 No. 6.
Alternative A-5
South Park Road Site
(Near the Polo Club)
Aerated Stabilization Lagoon
What problems do you see in constructing a sewage treatment plant
at this site?
1. No.
4. No.
7. Opens South Park to deer.
9. Not consistent with desired plan; very bad as far as vusual.
10. Increased development - sewer line in middle of South Park.
11. Urbanization of rural country -- should not be.
12. Encourage development.
13. Possible high groundwater table; would serve to open South Park to
high density development and requires a humongous interceptor length.
15. Encourages undesirable growth pattern.
F. Same as Elk Feed ground site and Mid-South Park. Rad scenic impact.
Alternative A-5
What benefits?
1. No.
7. Paul Von Gontard ought to like it.
9. None.
10. None.
11. None.
12. Make some landowners rich when they develop.
15. Low O&M?
F. Less of ground water problem.
-------
Alternative A-5
Do you believe this site is compatible with the proposed comprehensive
land use plan?
7. Not particularly.
9. No.
10. No.
11. No.
12. No,
13. No.
15. No.
F. No.
Alternative A-5
What mitigation measures might be necessary here?
caping, fencing, unique architecture, etc.?
Such as land-
:aping
7. Alt. energy sources.
9. Visual effect - bad!
10. Landscaping fence.
11. D.N.A.
15. All of above plus
F. Extensive landscaping.
Alternative A-5
Do you prefer this alternative? Why?
4. Too opened.
7. No. Some development problem.
8. No.
9. No bad location.
10. No.
11. No.
12. No. Development.
13. No. I do not feel the lagoon system is reliable and also the costs
presented are substantially lower than the actual costs to be incurred
with an aerated lagoon system.
15. No.
F. Yes , none, 6, No.
Alternative A-6
Interim Improvements
At the Existing Site
There is a short-term alternative of improving the existing plant
to meet water quality standards. This would have capacity for the design
year of 1980. In your opinion, would it be better to fund this inexpensive
but short-term solution?
1 Last Resort.
2. Yes in view of the investment already expended and it would clarify
matters right now.
7. Yes, it would give us more time to make the larger philosophical
decision.
9. I'd rather build up the existing, but would except this.
10. No.
11. Yes, but work towards long-term solutions to keep Jackson plant here.
12. No.
13. No.
15. No, there is so little to be gained that it would be a useless
exercise.
-------
Alternative A-6
If this option was chosen, what problems would arise when additional
treatment capacity was needed?
2. That might not happen until 1990 and the whole situation miqht
be changed.
7. Same old battle, but we miqht know more about the scenic area
proposal and the future of S. Park.
9. $$$
10, Need to build another plant. Additional cost.
11. Site expansion is possible, difficult but possible.
12. More dull meetings to qo to.
13. Commitment to present site rehash what we are doinq toniqht.
15. Simply a rehashing of problems currently being experienced,
Same indecision, same options, only more expensive.
E. Higher costs - crash program.
Alternative Flow Capacity
Do you feel the estimated rate of qrowth is reasonable? Uhy?
1 Based on present qrowth percent and advertising on 1-1 basis.
7. No -- too hiqh.
8. Yes.
9. Not entirely - fuel for cars in future miaht well decrease touristSj etc.
10. 6% too much. 3% or less is enouqh
12. I expect your fiqs. are accurate, altho like all newcomers, I'd
orefer to see it less.
13. I feel it is sliqhtly hiqh but reasonable for desiqn purposes.
15. No, there will be a level beyond which qrowth simply cannot continue
as fast.
Alternative Flow Capacity
If the rate of growth is not as rapid as projected, the plant will
have reserve capacity beyond the desiqn year. '4hat is your opinion
on this?
1. Excellent.
7. That's qreat.
9. Better more than enouqh than not enouqh.
10. Fine.
12. It's an excellent idea.
-13. Good.
15. The ability to serve growth dangles as an incentive to have qrowth
whether it is advisable or not. If the capacity exists, someone will
find an excuse to use it.
Alternative Flow Capacity
What percent increase in sewaqe plant capacity do you prefer,
275% (1990 desiqn year), 330% {1995 desiqn year) or some other percentaae?
1 330%.
7. 1995 sounds cool to me.
8. Personal preference is for a reduction in capacity from present level--
and corresponding renovation in hookups. How about a 6% evacuation rate?
9. 1995 design year.
10, 330%.
12. 1995 desiqn year.
13. 330%.
15. 20-year planninq is reasonable in terms of reliable data and financial
considerations, i.e, most municipal bonds mature on a 20-7ear cycle.
-------
APPENDIX 4
PRELIMINARY REPORT
PALISADES RESERVOIR
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION
SURVEY
-------
PRELIMINARY REPORT
ON
PALISADES RESERVOIR
BONNEVILLE COUNTY, IDAHO
AND LINCOLN COUNTY, WYOMING
EPA REGION X
NOTICE
This document is a preliminary
draft. It has not been formally
released by EPA and should not
at this stage be construed to
represent Agency policy. It is
being circulated for comment on
its technical accuracy and policy
implications.
National Eutrophication Survey
CERL, Corvallis, Ore.
EMSL, Las Vegas, Nev.
-------
PALISADES RESERVOIR
-------
PRELIMINARY REPORT ON PALISADES RESERVOIR, IDAHO
STORE! NO. 1610
I. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:*
On the basis of Survey data and field observations,
Palisades Reservoir is considered mesotrophic. Of the 13
Idaho lakes sampled in 1975, 6 had higher median total phos-
phorus (0.024 mg/1) levels, 1 had higher median inorganic
nitrogen values (0.080 mg/1) and 9 had higher median ortho-
phosphorus (0.007 mg/1) levels than Palisades Reservoir.
Chlorophyll a^ levels ranged from 0.8 pg/1 to 5.6 yg/1 with
a mean of 2.1 ug/1. Potential for primary production as
measured by algal assay control yields was generally low.
Survey limnologists did not observe any problem con-
ditions during their visits to the lake. The Idaho Depart-
ment of Water Resources, et al. (1975) reports the stretch
of the Snake River above Heise which includes Palisades
Reservoir is high quality water, and in stable condition.
*See Appendix E
-------
B. Rate-Limiting Nutrient:
The algal assay results indicate that Palisades Reservoir was
colimlted during September sampling (09/18/75) and phosphorus
limited during October (10/20/75). The reservoir data suggest
nitrogen limitation at all three sampling times.
C. Nutrient Controllability:
1. Point sources -
There were no known point sources impacting Palisades
Reservoir during the 1975 sampling year.
The calculated annual phosphorus loading of 6.25 g P/m /yr
is over three times that proposed by Vollenweider (1975) as
"eutrophic" for a lake with such volume and retention time.
If the present loading continues, increasingly undesirable
responses to enrichment are likely to occur.
2. Nonpoint sources -
Nonpoint sources contributed all of the known nutrient
loading to Palisades Reservoir during the sampling year. The
Snake River contributed 68.9% of the total phosphorus load,
the Greys River contributed 14.9%, and Salt River contributed
13.0%. Ungaged drainage areas were estimated to have con-
tributed 0.9X of the total.
The phosphorus export rates of Greys River were substan-
tially greater during the sampling year than the other tributaries
-------
to Palisades Reservoir (Section IV-D). This Inflation may be
due to unidentified point sources rather than to nonpolnt source
Inputs, but more extensive sampling 1s needed to determine the
location and significance of these possible sources.
-------
II. LAKE AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS
Lake and drainage basin characteristics are Itemized below.
Lake surface area, mean depth and volume were provided by Martin
and Hanson (1966). Tributary flow data were provided by the Idaho
District Office of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Outlet
drainage area Includes the lake surface area. Mean hydraulic
retention time was obtained by dividing the lake volume by mean
flow of the outlet. Precipitation values are estimated by methods
as outlined in NES Working Paper No. 175. A table of metric/English
conversions is included as Appendix A.
A. Lake Morphometry:
2
1. Surface area: 61.31 km.
2. Mean depth: 28.2 meters.
3. Maximum depth: ? fi ,
4. Volume: 1,732.560 x 10° nT.
5. Mean hydraulic retention time: 108 days.
-------
B. Tributary and Outlet:
(See Appendix B for flow data)
1. Tributaries -
Drainage Mean flow
Name area(km?) (mVsec)
A-2 Snake River 8,984.7 128.99
B-l Bear Creek 199.7 2.21
D-l Big Elk Creek 153.3 1.96
E-l Indian Creek 100.5 0.39
F-l McCoy Creek 279.7 2.31
6-1 Salt River 2,198.9 21.42
H-l Greys River 1,160.3 18.47
Minor tributaries and
immediate drainage - 433.4 5.30
Total 13,510.5 181.05
2. Outlet - A-l Snake River 13,571.6 185.83
C. Precipitation:
1. Year of sampling: 33.3 cm.
2. Mean annual:. 27.4 cm.
-------
III. LAKE WATER QUALITY SUWIARY
Palisades Reservoir was sampled three times during the open-water
season of 1975 by Beans of a pontoon-equipped Huey helicopter. Each
time, samples for physical and chemical parameters were collected
from five stations on the lake and from a number of depths at each
station (see map, page 1). During each visit, depth-integrated
samples were collected from each station for chlorophyll a_ analysis
and phytoplankton identification and enumeration. During September
and October sampling, 18.9-liter depth-integrated samples were
composited for al§al assays. Maximum depths sampled were 16.B meters
at Station 01, 8.5 meters at Station 02, 45.1 meters at Station 03,
and 53.3 meters at Stations 04 and 05. For a more detailed explanation
of NES methods, see NES Working Paper No. 175.
The results obtained are presented in full in Appendix C and
are summarized in III-A for waters at the surface and at the maximum
depth for each site. Results of the phytoplankton counts and-
chlorophyll ^determinations are Included in III-B. Results of the
limiting nutrient study are presented in III-C.
-------
PALISADES RESERV010
STOPET CODE 1610 PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS
( 8/ S/75 ) I 9/18/75 I < 10/20/7S I
MAX MAX MAX
S*** • 4 DEPTH S*** • 4 DEPTH S*** • 4 DEPTH
RANGE MANGE RAN6E
PARAMETER N* PANr,E MEDIAN (METERS) N* RANGE MEDIAN (METERS) N* RANGE MEDIAN (METERS)
TEMPERATURE (DEO CENT)
O.-l.S M DEPTH
MAX DEPTH**
DISSOLVED OXYGEN I«6/L>
0.-1.5 •• DEPTH
MAX DEPTH**
CONDUCTIVITY CUMHO'I
0.-1.5 M DEPTH
MAX DEPTH'*
PH (STANDARD UNITS)
O.-l.S M DEPTH
MAX DEPTH**
TOTAL ALKALINITY (MO/LI
0.-1.5 M DEPTH
HAX DEPTH**
TOTAL P (MG/L>
O.-l.S » DEPTH 8 0.011-0.082 0.018 0.0- 1.5 8 0.020-0.033 0.028 0.0- 1.5 8 0.012-0.027 0.015 0.0- l.S
MAX DEPTH** 4 0.013-0.127 0.0?0 8.2- 53.3 4 0.023-0.103 0.051 8.5- 53.3 4 0.012-0.044 0.02S 7.6- 51.8
DISSOLVED OUTHO P (MG/L)
0.-1.5 M DEPTH A 0.003-n.Ole 0.008 0.0- 1.5 8 0.002-0.010 0.003 0.0- l.S 8 0.005-0.007 0.006 0.0- 1.5
MAX DEPTH** 4 n.012-0.019 0.017 «.2- 53.3 4 0.002-0.023 0.015 8.5- 53.3 4 0.005-0.029 0.007 7.6- 51.8
ft
4
.)
B
n
4
4
I
20.2-
10.0-
5.4-
230.-
190.-
7.8-
98.-
111.-
21.1
18. «•
8.8
265.
9.7
117^
20. 4 1.030-0.060 O.mo H.2- 53.3 4 0.020-0.050 0.020 8.5- 53.3 4 0.020-0.030 0.025. 7.6- 51.8
KJEL04ML N (MG/L)
O.-l.S M PEPTH 8 0.?nO-O.JOO 0.200 0.0- 1.5 P 0.200-0.200 0.200 0.0- 1-5 8 0.200-0.zuu 0.200 0.0- l.S
MIX DEPTH** 4 n.?00-0.200 O.?n0 1.2- 53.3 4 0.200-0.200 0.200 8.5- 53.3 4 0.200-0.200 0.200 7.6- 51.8
SECCHl DISC
3 ?.l- *.fl ?.7 * 4.0- 5.5 4.6 4 4.6- 6.1
• N « NO. OF SABLES
•• MAXIMUM DEPTH SAMPLED AT EACH SITE
••• S * NO. OF SITES SAMPLED ON THIS DATE
-------
8
B. Biological Characteristics:
1. Phytoplankton - Not available at this time.
2. Chlorophyll a_ -
Sampling Station Chlorophyll a_
Date Number (yg/1)
08/05/75 01 0.8
02 3.1
03 1.4
04 1.4
05 1.0
09/18/75 01 5.6
02 2.4
03 1.7
04 2.4
05 1.6
10/20/75 01 4.2
02 2.3
03 1.3
04 0.9
05 0.9
-------
C. Limiting Nutrient Study:
1. Autoclaved, filtered, and nutrient spiked -
a. 09/18/75 Stations 01-03
Spike (mg/1)
Ortho P
Cone, (mg/1)
Inorganic N
Cone, (mg/1)
Control
0.05 P
0.05 P + 1.0 N
1.00 N
Spike (mg/1)
Control
0.05 P
0.05 P + 1.0 N
1.00 N
b. 10/20/75
Spike (mg/1)
Control
0.05 P
0.05 P + 1.0 N
1.00 N
0.015
0.065
0.065
0.015
Stations 04-05
Ortho P
Cone, (mg/1)
0.005
0.055
0.055
0.005
Stations 01-03
Ortho P
Cone, (mg/1)
0.005
0.055
0.055
0.005
0.075
0.075
1.075
1.075
Inorganic N
Cone, (mg/1)
0.050
0.050
1.050
1.050
Inorganic N
Cone, (mg/1)
0.070
0.070
1.070
1.070
Maximum Yield
(mg/1-dry wt.)
1.8
2.4
6.2
2.9
Maximum Yield
(mg/1-dry wt.)
0.3
1.0
16.8
0.2
Maximum Yield
(mg/1-dry wt.)
0.3
2.3
25.5
0.3
-------
10
2. Discussion -
The control yields of the assay alga, Selenastrum caprl-
cornutum. Indicate that the potential for primary production 1n
Palisades Reservoir was low during September for sampling
Stations 04, 05, and during October for "Stations 01-03, but high 1n
September for Stations 01-03. In the October and September
(Stations 04, 05) assays, the addition of orthophosphorus alone
produced a significant increase 1n yield over that of the control,
indicating phosphorus limitation. The addition of nitrogen alone
did not result 1n any Increase 1n yield over that of the control
in those samples. In the September (Stations 01-03) assay, a
growth increase accompanied the addition of either phosphorus or
nitrogen alone, suggesting col imitation by the two nutrients.
The mean inorganic nitrogen to orthophosphorus ratios (N/P)
in the lake data were less than 13/1 on all sampling occasions,
suggesting nitrogen limitation in the lake (a mean N/P ratio of
14/1 or greater generally reflects phosphorus limitation).
-------
11
IV. NUTRIENT LOADIHGS
(See Appendix 0 for data)
For the determination of nutrient loadings, the Idaho National
Guard collected monthly near-surface grab samples from each of the
tributary sites indicated on the map (page 1), except for the high
runoff month of June when two samples were collected. Sampling
was begun in October 1974, and was completed in September 1975.
Through an interagency agreement, stream flow estimates for the
year of sampling and a "normalized" or average year were provided
by the Idaho District Office of the USGS for the tributary sites
nearest the lake.
In this report, nutrient loads for sampled tributaries were
determined by using a modification of a USGS computer program for
calculating stream loadings. Nutrient loads indicated for tributaries
are those measured minus known point source loads, 1f any.
Nutrient loadings for unsampled "minor tributaries and immediate
drainage" ("ZZ" of USGS) were estimated by using the mean annual
2
nutrient loads, in kg/km /year, in Big Elk Creek, Indian Creek and
McCoy Creek at Stations D-l, E-l and F-l and multiplying the means
2
by the ZZ area 1n km .
-------
12
A. Waste Sources:
1. Known municipal - None
2. Known Industrial - None
B. Annual Total Phosphorus Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
% of
Source kg P/yr total
a. Tributaries (nonpoint load) -
A-2 Snake River 263,880 68.9
B-l Bear Creek 3,775 1.0
D-l Big Elk Creek 1,705 0.4
E-l Indian Creek 1,035 0.3
F-l McCoy Creek 1,180 0.3
G-l Salt River 49,860 13.0
H-l Greys River 57,260 14.9
b. Minor tributaries and immediate
drainage (nonpoint load) - 3,465 0.9
c. Known municipal STP's - None
d. Septic tanks* - 10 <0.1
e. Known industrial - None
f. Direct precipitation** - 1,075 0.3
Totals 383,245 100.0%
2. Output - A-l Snake River 125,270
3. Net annual P accumulation - 256,975
*Estimate based on 30 lakeshore residences and 2 camps.
**Est1mated (See NES Working Paper No. 175).
-------
13
C. Annual Total Nitrogen Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
X of
Source kg N/yr total
a. Tributaries (nonpolnt load) -
A-2 Snake River 2,351,245 65.5
B-l Bear Creek 24,435 0.7
D-l Big Elk Creek 26,350 0.7
E-l Indian Creek 13,160 0.4
F-l McCoy Creek 21,525 0.6
G-l Salt River 824,330 23.0
H-l Greys River 207,995 5.8
b. Minor tributaries and Immediate
drainage (nonpolnt load) - 55,040 1.5
c. Known municipal STP's - None
d. Septic tanks* - 460 <0.1
e. Known industrial - None
f. Direct precipitation** - 66,190 1.8
Totals 3,590,730 I00.OX
2. Outputs - A-l Snake River 2,920,000
3. Net annual N accumulation - 670,730
*Estimate based on 30 lakeshore residences and 2 camps.
**Estimated (See NES Working Paper No. 175).
-------
14
D. Mean Annual Nonpolnt Nutrient Export by Subdralnage Area:
Tributary kg P/km2/yr kg N/km2/yr
Snake River 29 262
Bear Creek 19 122
Big Elk Creek 11 172
Indian Creek 10 131
McCoy Creek 4 77
Salt River 23 375
Greys River 49 179
E. Msan Nutrient Concentrations in Ungaged Streams:
Mean Total P Mean Total iN
Tributary (mq/1) (mg/1)
C-l Little Elk Creek 0.020 0.259
-------
15
F. Yearly Loadings:
In the following table, the existing phosphorus loading Is
compared to the relationship proposed by Vollenweider (1975).
Essentially, his "eutrophic" loading is that at which the receiving
waters would become eutrophic or remain eutrophic; his "oligotrophic"
loading is that which would result in the receiving water remaining
oligotrophic or becoming oligotrophic if morphometry permitted. A
"mesotrophic" loading would be considered one between "eutrophic"
and "oligotrophic."
Note that Vollenwieder's model may not be applicable to water
bodies with very short retention times or in which light penetration
1s severely restricted from high concentrations of suspended solids
In the surface waters.
Total Yearly
Phosphorus Loading
(g/m2/yr)°
Estimated loading for Palisades Reservoir 6.25
Vollenweider's "eutrophic" loading 1.84
Vollenweider's "oligotrophic" loading 0.92
-------
16
1. LITERATURE REVIEWED
Idaho Department of Water Resources, Department of Health and Welfare,
Department of Fish and Game, and Department of Budget, Policy
Planning and Coordination. 1975. Idaho Environmental Review.
Boise, Idaho.
Martin, R.O.R. and Ronald L. Hanson. 1966. Reservoirs in the U.S.,
Geological Survey Water Supply Paper No. 1838. U.S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1975. National Eutrophica-
tion Survey Methods 1973-1976. Working Paper No. 175. National
Environmental Research Center, Las Vegas, Nevada, and Pacific
Northwest Environmental Research Laboratory, Corvallis, Oregon.
Vollenweider, R. A. 1975. Input-Output Models With Special,
Reference to the Phosphorus Loading Concept in Limnology.
Schweiz. Z. Hydro!. 37:53-84.
------- |