c/EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Region V
230 South Dearborn
Chicago; 'flinois 604
July, 1979
Water Division
Environmental
Impact Statement
Draft
Appendices
Alternative Waste
Treatment Systems
For Rural Lake Projects
Case Study Number 3
Springvale-Bear Creek
Sewage Disposal
Authority
Emmet County, Michigan
-------
VOLUME II APPENDICES
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
ALTERNATIVE WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS FOR RURAL LAKE PROJECTS
CASE STUDY No. 3: SPRINGVALE-BEAR CREEK SEWAGE DISPOSAL AUTHORITY
EMMET COUNTY, MICHIGAN
Prepared by the
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION V, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS
AND
WAPORA, INCORPORATED
WASHINGTON, D.C.
Approved by:
Jo%T McGuire"
Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
July, 1979
-------
APPENDIX
A Soils
A-l Soil Factors that Affect On-Site Wastewater Disposal
A-2 Comparison of Characteristics for Land Treatment Processes
B Water Quality
B-l Michigan Surface Water Classifications
B-2 Michigan State Water Quality Standards
B-3 Seasonal Variation of Water Quality Parameters
B-4 Limnological Features of Crooked and Pickerel Lakes,
Emmet County, Michigan
B-5 Simplified Analysis of Lake Eutrophication
B-6 Investigation of Septic Leachate Discharges into Crooked
and Pickerel Lakes, Michigan
B-7 Sanitary Systems of Crooked and Pickerel Lakes, Emmet
County, Michigan: An On-Site Survey
B-8 Emmet County Sanitary Code - Design Standards
B-9 Summary for On-Site Systems with Occasional or Recurring Problems
C Biota
C-l Submerged and Emergent Aquatic Plants
C-2 Invertebrate Indicator Organisms Found in Crooked and Pickerel Lakes
C-3 Use of Diversity Indices
C-4 Fish Species Survey of Pickerel Lakes
C-5 Fish Species of Crooked Lake
C-6 Check List of Resident Birds of Michigan (Northwestern Lower
Peninsula Michigan)
C-7 Mammals with a Habitat Range in the Study Area
C-8 Michigan's Rare and Endangered Mammals Whose Habitat Range Includes
the Study Area
C-9 Michigan's Threatened Bird Species Whose Habitat Range Includes the
Study Area
C-10 Rare and Threatened Plant Species of Michigan Found in the Study Area
D Methodology for Projecting the Proposed Crooked/Pickerel Lakes Service
Area Permanent and Seasonal Population, 1978 and 2000
E Flow Reduction
E-l Flow Reduction and Cost Data for Water Saving Devices
E-2 Consideration of Residential Flow Reduction Measures in Wastewater
Facilities Planning from the Homeowner's Perspective
E-3 Flow Reduction for EIS Alternative 4
E-4 Incremental Capital Costs of Flow Reduction in the Crooked/Pickerel
Lakes Study Area
F Financing
F-l Cost-Sharing
F-2 Alternatives for Financing the Local Share of Wastewater Treatment
Facilities in Emmet County, Michigan
i
-------
G Management of Small Wastewater Systems
G-l Some Management Agencies for Decentralized Facilities
G-2 Legislation by Stated Authorizing Management of Small Waste
Flow Districts
G-3 Management Concepts for Small Waste Flow Districts
H Engineering
H-l Crooked/Pickered Lake Environmental Impact Statement Engineering
Report
H-2 Design and Costing Assumptions
I Executive Order 11990: Protection of Wetlands
J Ambient Air Quality Summaries in Petoskey, Michigan
K Alternative Wastewater Treatment Technology to Mitigate Round Lake Water
Quality Problems
\ I
-------
APPENDIX A
SOILS
-------
APPENDIX
A-l
SOIL FACTORS THAT AFFECT ON-SITE WASTEWATER DISPOSAL
Evaluation of soil for on-site wastewater disposal requires an understand-
ing of the various components of wastewater and their interaction with soil.
Wastewater treatment involves: removing suspended solids; reducing bacteria
and viruses to an acceptable level; reducing or removing undesirable chemicals;
and disposal of the treated water. For soils to be able to treat wastewater
properly they must have certain characteristics. How well a septic system
works depends largely on the rate at which effluent moves into and through the
soil, that is, on soil permeability. But several other soil characteristics
may also affect performance. Groundwater level, depth of the soil, underlying
material, slope and proximity to streams or lakes are among the other charac-
teristics that need to be considered when determining the location and size
of an on-site wastewater disposal system.
Soil permeability - Soil permeability is that quality of the soil that
enables water and air to move through it. It is influenced by the amount of
gravel, sand, silt and clay in the soil, the kind of clay, and other factors.
Water moves faster through sandy and gravelly soils than through clayey soils.
Some clays expand very little when wet; other kinds are very plastic and
expand so much when wet that the pores of the soil swell shut. This slows
water movement and reduces the capacity of the soil to absorb septic tank
effluent.
Groundwater level - In some soils the groundwater level is but a few feet,
perhaps only one foot, below the surface the year around. In other soils the
groundwater level is high only in winter and early in spring. In still others
the water level is high during periods of prolonged rainfall. A sewage absorp-
tion field will not function properly under any of these conditions.
If the groundwater level rises to the subsurface tile or pipe, the satu-
rated soil cannot absorb effluent. The effluent remains near the surface or
rises to the surface, and the absorption field becomes a foul-smelling,
unhealthful bog.
Depth to rock, sand or gravel - At least 4 feet of soil material between
the bottom of the trenches or seepage bed and any rock formations is necessary
for absorption, filtration, and purification of septic tank effluent. In areas
where the water supply comes from wells and the underlying rock is limestone,
more than 4 feet of soil may be needed to prevent unfiltered effluent from
seeping through the cracks and crevices that are common in limestone.
Different kinds of soil - In some places the soil changes within a dis-
tance of a few feet. The presence of different kinds of soil in an absorption
field is not significant if the different soils have about the same absorption
capacity, but it may be significant if the soils differ greatly. Where this
is so, serial distribution of effluent is recommended so that each kind of
soil can absorb and filter effluent according to its capability.
Slope - Slopes of less than 15% do not usually create serious problems
in either construction or maintenance of an absorption field provided the
soils are otherwise satisfactory.
-------
A-l
On sloping soils the trenches must be dug on the contour so that the
effluent flows slowly through the tile or pipe and disperses properly over the
absorption field. Serial distribution is advised for a trench system on
sloping ground.
On steeper slopes, trench absorption fields are more difficult to lay out
and construct, and seepage beds are not practical. Furthermore, controlling
the downhill flow of the effluent may be a serious problem. Improperly fil-
tered effluent may reach the surface at the base of the slope, and wet,
contaminated seepage spots may result.
If there is a layer of dense clay, rock or other impervious material near
the surface of a steep slope and especially if the soil above the clay or rock
is sandy, the effluent will flow above the impervious layer to the surface and
run unfiltered down the slope.
Proximity to streams or other water bodies - Local regulations generally
do not allow absorption fields within at least 50 feet of a stream, open
ditch, lake, or other watercourse into which unfiltered effluent could escape.
The floodplain of a stream should not be used for an absorption field.
Occasional flooding will impair the efficiency of the absorption field; fre-
quent flooding will destroy its effectiveness.
Soil maps show the location of streams, open ditches, lakes and ponds,
and of alluvial soils that are subject to flooding. Soil surveys usually give
the probability of flooding for alluvial soils.
Soil conditions required for proper on-site wastewater disposal are sum-
marized in the Appendix A-3.
Source: Bender, William H. 1971. Soils and Septic Tanks. Agriculture Infor-
mation Bulletin 349, SCS, USDA.
-------
COMPARISON OF SITE CHARACTERISTICS FOR LAND TREATMENT PROCESSES
Characteristics
Principal processes
Other processes
Slow rate
Rapid infiltration
Overland flow Wetlands
Subsurface
Slope
Soil permeability
Less than 20% on culti-
vated land; less than
40% on noncultivated
land
Moderately slow to
moderately rapid
Not critical; excessive Finish slopes Usually less Not critical
slopes require much 2 to 8i than 51
earthwork
Rapid (sands, loamy
sands)
Slow (clays,
silts, and
soils with
impermeable
barriers)
Slow to
moderate
Slow to rapid
Depth to
groundwater
Cliratic
restrictions
2 to 3 ft (minimum)
Storage often needed
for cold weather and
precipitation
10 ft (lesser depths
are acceptable where
underdrainage is
provided)
None (possibly modify
operation in cold
weather)
Not critical
Storage often
needed for
cold weather
Not critical
Storage may
be needed
for cold
weather
Hot critical
None
1 ft - 0.305 m
Technology Transfer Program, 1977. Process
Design Manual for Land Treatment of Municipal
Wasteworks. EPA.
-------
APPENDIX B
WATER QUALITY
-------
APPENDIX
B-l
MICHIGAN SURFACE WATER CLASSIFICATIONS
Michigan has established State water quality standards to protect
public health and to preserve quality of the several bodies of water for
their designated uses. Pertinent Michigan surface water classifications
follow.
Classification Use
A-I Public and Municipal Water Supply
A-II Industrial Water Supply
3-1 " Total Body Contact Recreation
3-II Partial Body Contact Recreation
C-I Coldwater Fish (trout, salaon, etc.)
C-II Wannwater Fish (bass, pike, etc.)
D Agriculture
£ Navigation
-------
MICHIGAN STATIi WATliK QUALITY STANDARDS
Surlace Water
Class i t:i cat ions
Suspended
solids
Dissolved
solids
chlor ides
PH
Plant
nutrients
Fecal coliform
IK)
Temperatnru
A-1
A-11
II-I
II-11
C-I
C-II
I)
No unnatural turbidity, color, oil films, floating solids or deposits in quantities which
are or may become injurious to any designated use
Shall not exceed concentrations which are or may become injurious to any designated use.
< 125 ing/I
6.5 - 8.8
Nutrients shall be limited to the extent necessary to prevent stimulations of growth of
aquatic plants, fungi or bacteria which are or may become injurious to the designated use.
Phosphorus from point sources shall be controlled by utilizing best practicable waste
treatment technology. Goal is 1 mg/1 of P
< 1000/100 ml-
-j200/100 m\
< 1000/100 ml
5 mg/1 but not less than 4 mg/1 6 ing/I
5 mg/1 but not less than 4 nig/1
Temperature standards are dependent on location and type of surface water and also the
designated use of the surface water.
State of Michigan Water Quality Requirements,
Part A, undated.
fc
-------
APPENDIX
B-3
0.080'
O.CHO'
3.0
TOTAL PHOSPHOR.^ (>;5-/;-~,
r-v:-::"'•. t.- ;• © a^ 0
•' & , ,Q ,~~ - a'"5"
Ijj •* •' - ' '' . ' • *"
So --
'0 T~-~ _£._
__ — __ _-m_r71_ _ _ _ — ._ _ ...
- o. n 3 . .-j n
3
a
0
foo
•S,tCCHI
a 3
0 3
e
0 3 ©
•o-
^0 A
iio ••
50 -
_ __ ^.... __ __
606
0
ELECTSICAI. coMt>ycri viry $ a5° C,
Q0
•i'i7H ,17"
WATER QUAUITV PARAMETERS
-------
B-3
O.Q8Q-
aofco
ft£WO"
9,0
10
3 --
0
fOO
StCCHI
©
60 -•
40 -'
30 -•
EL.ECTRICAU CoKj&UCTiviTy PJ 55° c
© G
PARAMETERS
-------
na
APPENDIX
THE UMVEKSTIYCF MICHIGAN ™
Limnological Features
of Crooked and Pickerel Lakes,
Emmet County, Michigan
Parti: Water Quality and Nutrient Budget
by
JOHN E. GANNON and DANiEL J. MAZUR
Part It The Suitability of Soils for
On-Site Wastewater Disposal
by
ARTHUR GOLD and JOHN E, GANNON
Technical Report No. 8
-------
B-4
The University of Michigan Biological Station was established
in 1909 at Douglas Lake near Pellston, Michigan, as a teaching
and research facility. It occupies a "10,000-acre tract of
semi-wilderness in northern lower Michigan, surrounded by a
remarkable variety of upland and lowland deciduous and coniferous
forests, meadows, marshes, bogs, dunes, lakes and streams. The
three upper Great Lakes - Michigan, Huron and Superior - are
nearby. " As the largest and one of the most distinguished inland
biological stations in the. world, it serves as an intellectual
meeting place for biologists and students from the United States
and around the world.
The Biological Station is well-equipped for investigations of
the diverse natural environments around it. In addition to
the modern, winterized Lakeside Laboratory, which was funded
by the National Science Foundation, the Station has 140
buildings, including laboratories, classrooms, and living
quarters for up to 300 people. Special facilities include a
library, study collections of plants and animals, a large
fleet of boats, and a full array of modern laboratory and
field equipment. The Station offers tranquility and harmony
with nature - it is a place where plants and animals can be
studied as they live.
Dr. David M. Gates, Director of the Station since 1971, and
Mark W. Paddock, Assistant to the Director, have promoted
new and exciting fields of research, including problem-
oriented research to help cope with emerging environmental
problems.
The Station is currently undertaking specific investigations
in northern lower Michigan to provide information about the
land, the water, and the people in the area. Results are
made available to community leaders for use in long-term land-
use planning. In addition, many research projects are underway,
geared toward a better understanding of the structure and function
of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems.
This publication is one of a series of reports that are issued
periodically to disseminate information on research generated
at the Biological Station. For further information concerning other
publications in this series or information on the Biological
Station in general, address inquiries to: The University of
Michigan Biological Station, Pellston, Michigan 49769
616-529-8406).
-------
B-4
LIMNOLOGICAL FEATURES
of
CROOKED AND PICKEREL LAKES
EMMET COUNTY, MICHIGAN
PART I: WATER QUALITY AND NUTRIENT BUDGET1
by
John E. Gannon
and
Daniel J. Mazur
TECHNICAL REPORT NO. 8
BIOLOGICAL STATION
THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
PELLSTON, MICHIGAN 49769
April 1979
1
This report is based on research funded by the National Science
Foundation (Grant No. AEN72-0'3483). Preparation of the report
was supported by the Environmental Protection Agency as a sub-
contract to a prime contract (EPA-No. 08-01-4612) to WAPORA, Inc.
2
Present address: State University Research Center, Oswego,
New York 13126
3 _
Present address: Missouri' Department of Natural Resources,
Jefferson City, Missouri 65101
-------
B-4
CONTENTS
Page
FIGURES iij-
TABLES ^
INTRODUCTION 1
DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA 2
METHODS 6
Watershed Characteristics 6
Limnological Characteristics 6
Nutrient Loading Determinations 11
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION , 15
Water Quality: Some basic considerations 15
Watershed Characteristics 17
Limnological Characteristics 21
Morphometry 21
Fhysicochemistry: Off-shore conditions 23
Chemistry, and Bacteria: Near-shore conditions... 27
Biology 31
Trophic State 37
Nutrient Loading 42
CONCLUSIONS 51
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 52
REFERENCES CITED 53
APPENDIX A. DATA USED IN ESTIMATING NUTRIENT LOADING TO
CROOKED AND PICKEREL LAKES FROM SEPTIC SYSTEMS 56
11
-------
B-4
FIGURES
Number Pag<
1. Location of Crooked and Pickerel Lakes in north-
western lower Michigan in relation to other major
inland lakes of the Cheboygan River watershed 3
2. Depth contour (morphemetrie) map of Crooked Lake,
showing location of sampling stations. Depth con-
tours are in feet , 8
3. Depth contour (morphometric) map of Pickerel Lake,
showing location of sampling stations. Depth con-
tours are in feet 9
4. The watershed boundaries of Crooked and Pickerel
Lakes. Since Spring, Mud, Round and Pickerel Lakes
all drain into Crooked Lake, the total watershed
area of Crooked Lake includes the drainage basins
of these neighboring lakes . „ 18
S. Comparison of total phosphorus concentrations
(ug/1) between the central station and selected
near-shore locations in Crooked Lake during Summer,
1975 29
6. Comparison of inorganic nitrogen (NC^-N, NOj-N and
NH^-N) concentrations (ug/1) between the central
station and selected near-shore locations in Crooked
Lake during Summer, 1975 30
7. Fecal coliform bacteria (number of colonies/100 ml)
at selected near-shore locations in Crooked Lake
during July, 1975 32
8. Comparison of total phosphorus concentrations
(ug/1) between the central station and selected
near-shore locations in Pickerel Lake during Summer,
1975 . . 33
9. Comparison of inorganic nitrogen concentrations
(ug/1) between the central station and selected
near-shore locations in Pickerel Lake during Summer,
1975 34
10. Fecal coliform bacteria (number of colonies/100 ml)
at selected near-shore locations in Pickerel Lake
during July, 1975 35
111
-------
B-4
Number Page
11. Trophic classification of Crooked and Pickerel
Lakes based on three liranological variables and
using criteria established by EPA (1974) 39
12. Classification of lakes in Cheboygan and Emmet
Counties, Michigan, using Carlson's (1977) trophic
state index (TSI) for chlorophyll a. The positions
of Crooked and Pickerel Lakes are identified by
arrows. The divisions between oligotrophy and
eutrophy are estimations that appear to be most
suitable for the study area 41
13. Trophic classification of Crooked and Pickerel
Lakes based on the lake condition index (LCI) of
Uttormark and Wall (1975) 43
14. Positions of Crooked and Pickerel Lakes on the
Vollenweider (1975) theoretical phosphorus loading
plot based on 1975-1976 data 48
IV
-------
B-4
TABLES
Number
Page
1. Land-use types in the Crooked and Pickerel Lake
watersheds based on LANDSAT data (Rogers, 1977) 19
2. Morphometric features of Crooked and Pickerel Lakes,
Emmet County, Michigan. Definitions are according
to Hutchinson (1957) 22
3. Color, light, and dissolved oxygen (D.O.) character-
istics of Crooked and Pickerel Lakes, Emmet County,
Michigan. Data from central deep stations 25
4. Chemical and chlorophyll a features of Crooked and
Pickerel Lakes at deep central stations during Summer
and Winter 26
5. Sources and quantities of total phosphorus (P) for
Crooked and Pickerel Lakes, 1975-1976., 45
6. Sources and quantities of total nitrogen (N) for
Crooked and Pickerel Lakes, 1975-1976 46
7. Comparison of sources and quantities of total phosphorus
(P) entering Crooked Lake during- Summer, 1975 and
Summer, 1977 50
A-l. Total phosphorus and nitrogen export (kg/km /yr.)
from land cover. Values are means for the north and
northeastern United States (Omernik, 1976), and were
used in the Crooked and Pickerel Lakes nutrient loading
calculations 57
A-2. Estimated phosphorus (P) and nitrogen (N) inputs from
septic systems to Crooked Lake's north shore in 1975.
This portion of the lake has been serviced by a sever
since 1976 58
A-3. Estimated phosphorus (P) and nitrogen (N) inputs from
septic systems to the south shore of Crooked Lake,
including Oden Island, in 1975. This portion of the
lake continues to be serviced by septic systems 59
A-4. Estimated phosphorus (P) and nitrogen (N) inputs from
septic systems to Pickerel Lake in 1975 61
-------
B-4
INTRODUCTION
The University of Michigan Biological Station has been
studying 40 inland lakes in Cheboygan and Emmet Counties,
Michigan, since 1972. This research effort has been designed
to provide ecological and sociological information pertinent
to management of these lakes and their watersheds for the en-
hancement of long-term environmental quality. Preliminary
results of these investigations are available in Gannon and
Paddock (1974).. Specific information on geology, hydrology
and groundwater quality was presented in Richardson (1978).
Sociological data on evaluations, behaviors, and expectations
of residents of the study area were reported by Marans and
Wellman (1977). Instances of utilization of information gen-
erated in this project for water quality and wastewater manage-
ment purposes has been documented by Pelz (1977) and Pelz and
Gannon (1978). Furthermore, information written especially
for lake-oriented visitors and residents has been prepared in
the Biological Station's Lakeland Report Series, Lake Profile
Series, and other publications (Say et al., 1975; Foster, 1976;
O'Neil, 1977).
Crooked and Pickerel Lakes have been investigated since
the beginning of this problem-oriented research effort. The
objective of this report is to provide a summary of salient
limnological features of these two water bodies. Special
emphasis will be given to the current water quality and trophic
-------
B-4
status of Crooked and Pickerel Lakes and to an estimate of
nutrient (phosphorus and nitrogen) sources to these lakes.
Complimentary information on suitability of lakeshore soils
for on-site wastewater disposal is included as Part II of
this report (Gold and Gannon, 1979).
DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA
Crooked and Pickerel Lakes are located near Little Traverse
Bay of Lake Michigan in northwestern lower Michigan (Fig. 1).
They lie in Emmet County (T35N, R4W) and are bounded by four
townships (Bear Creek, Little Traverse, Littlefield, and Spring-
vale). Typical of most lakes in this region, they were formed
by melted ice blocks that were left by the retreating glacier
over 10,000 years ago. These lakes are the beginning of the
Inland Water Route, a series of interconnecting lakes and
rivers that eventually empty into Lake Huron through the
Cheboygan River.
Crooked and Pickerel Lakes have played an important role
in the human history of northern lower Michigan. Although
native people were primarily oriented towards the shorelines
of Lakes Michigan and Huron, the Inland Water Route was used
for passage from Lake Michigan to Lake Huron by canoe, thus
avoiding the more hazardous journey around Waugoshance Point
and through the Straits of Mackinac. The Inland Water Route
-------
AREA ENLARGED
bd
I
Fig. 1, Location of Crooked and Pickerel Lakes in northwestern lower Michigan
in relation to other major inland lakes of the Cheboygan River watershed
-------
was also used extensively for transportation by European voy-
agers and settlers. During the logging era around the turn
of the century, millions of board feet of white pine and other
timber were floated down the Inland Water Route to sawmills;
two of these mills were located on Crooked Lake at Oden and
Conway.
At the same time, the railroad was built in this area
and provided an overland transportation link to the south.
Tourism flourished as vacationers came to Crooked and Pickerel
Lakes by rail and stayed in resort hotels on the lakeshores.
Commercial steamers carried vacationers from Crooked and
Pickerel Lakes to Mullett Lake through the Inland Water Route.
Crooked and Pickerel Lakes have continued to be popular for
water-oriented recreation to the present day. To facilitate
recreational boating activities, the Crooked River has been
periodically dredged to a depth of 5 ft. since 1956. Water
levels in Crooked and Pickerel Lakes were stabilized by con-
struction of a lock and weir on the Crooked River at Alanson
in 1964.
Crooked Lake ivas the only inland water body in northern
lower Michigan with a railroad traversing a considerable dis-
tance of its shoreline. This allowed for earlier resort devel
opment on Crooked Lake than on other 1-1'-*»<: ^ P ,-u
'xeb ot th^ region. In
addition to resort hotels, cottages were built near the '
-------
B-4
along the north shore, especially at Conway and Oden. The
north shore of Crooked Lake was extensively dotted with
seasonal dwellings in the early decades of this century while
the south shore of the lake and all of Pickerel Lake's shores
remained essentially undeveloped. Building of cottages and
homes along all shorelines increased especially after World
War II.
Since the north shore of Crooked Lake was first to be
developed, it also was the first area to experience pollution
problems. Contamination of nearshore water with human sewage
was discovered along the north shore, especially near Oden,
in the late 1960fs and early 1970's. To alleviate this problem,
a sanitary sewer was constructed to divert human sewage away
from the north shore and into the Harbor Springs sewage lagoon
and spray irrigation wastewater treatment system. Although
the sewer was completed in Fall of 1975, most lakeshore residences
were not hooked up to the sewer system until 1976. Lakeshore
dwellings on the remainder of Crooked Lake's shoreline and all
of Pickerel Lake continue to be serviced by conventional septic
systems.
Human sewage was not the only source of pollution to
Crooked Lake. A state fish hatchery has existed on the lake
near Oden since 1920. The small stream emanating from the
fish hatchery was the major source of ammonia-nitrogen and
total phosphorus to Crooked Lake in 1975 (Gannon and Mazur,
1976). Further information on the fish hatchery and nutrient
-------
B-4
6
loading to Crooked Lake is presented in this report.
METHODS
Watershed Characteristics
Immediate watershed area is defined here as the area
bounded by the highest elevation which continually surrounds
a given lake without including other lakes. Total watershed
area is the immediate watershed of a given lake plus the
immediate watersheds of all other lakes that subsequently
drain into the given lake. The watershed areas for Crooked
and Pickerel Lakes were traced from U. S. Geological Survey
quadrangle maps (1:62, 500 scale) onto a blank piece of paper
and cut out with a pair of scissors. The area was determined
by passing the piece of paper delineating the watershed area
through a Hayashi Deako Automatic Area Meter, Model AAMS.
Land-use types and their areal coverage were determined from
LANDSAT satellite data (Rogers, 1977).
Limnological Characteristics
Morphometric features of Crooked and Pickerel Lakes were
determined from hydrographic maps compiled by the Institute for
Fisheries Research, Michigan Department of Natural Resources.
The methods employed basically followed Welch (1948) and are
discussed in Gannon and Paddock (1974).
-------
B-4
Physiochemical data were obtained on a quarterly basis
from Fall, 1972 through Winter, 1975 from a central deep
station in both lakes (Figs. 2 and 3). Temperature profiles
were recorded at one meter intervals, using a Whitney resistance
thermometer. Light transparency was measured with a standard
Secchi disc. Light penetration measurements were obtained with
a submarine photometer fitted with Weston cells during Summer
and Winter. Percent light transmission was calculated from the
photometer readings. Apparent color of the water was estimated
with a Hach colorimeter (pt-co units).
Water samples were obtained from three to five depth in-
tervals, depending upon temperature profile characteristics,
with a three-liter capacity Kemmerer bottle. Dissolved oxygen
was determined titriometrically with the azide modification of
the Winkler method (APHA, 1971). Alkalinity was measured
titriometrically with an indicator solution of bromocresol-green
and methyl-red (APHA, 1971). Specific conductance was determined
on an Industrial Instruments Model RC-16B2 conductivity bridge
and pH was measured potentiometrically on either a Beckman Model
N or Model H-5 pH meter. All of the above variables were analyzed
within 18 hours of collection.
Samples for remaining variables were filtered and frozen
for later analysis. These samples were quick-thawed in a water
bath to room temperature and chemical analyses were completed by
following methods. Calcium, magnesium, sodium, and potassium
-------
Crooked River
4c
Fish Hatchery
5
.3b
\
3a
\
Round Lake Ck.
CROOKED LAKE
EMMET CO.,MICH
10 Crooked-Pickerel
ChanneI
/
/
/
\
Mlnnehaha
Ck.
SCALE
FEET
0 20OO
feOJWI \mmtt~
[ S6itSiflJ B
METERS
0 600
l635^^/^*^
4000
_L_|
ssaag
1200
w- — I
Hani
Fig. 2 Depth contour (morphometric) map of Crooked Lake, showing location of
sampling stations. Depth contours are in feet.
w
i
-------
Crooked *- Pickerel
Channel
State Forest Ck
14
PICKEREL LAKE
EMMET CO., MICH.
SCALE
FEET
0 BOO
ISO
METERS
300
Cedar Ck.
600
Fig. 3 Depth contour (morphometric) map of Pickerel Lake, showing location of
sampling stations. Depth contours are in feet.
-------
B-4
10
were determined on a Perkin-Elmer Model 305 atomic absorption
spectrophotometer (EPA, 1974 a). Total phosphorus, soluble-
reactive phosphorus, nitrate-nitrogen, ammonia-nitrogen, and
silica were determined colorimetrically on a Beckman DB-GT
spectrophotometer. Total phosphorus and soluble-reactive
phosphorus were measured using a hybrid method of Gales et al.
(1966) for digestion and Schmid and Ambuhl (1965) for neutrali-
zation and color development. Nitrate-nitrogen and ammonia-
nitrogen were determined by the methods of Muller and Widemann
(1955) and Solorazano (19693, respectively. Silica was measurei
using the heteropole blue method (APHA.1971) . Chloride was
determined on the Beckman Model'H-5 pH meter fitted with a salt
bridge and chloride electrode (A'PHA,1971) .
In the Fall of 1974, the Biological Station's chemistry
laboratory was automated. A Technicon Autoanalyzer II was
used to analyze September, 1974 and all 1975 samples colori-
metrically (Technicon, 1972-73). Following the quick-thaw pro-
cedure, chemical measurements were performed by the following
methods. Ammonia-nitrogen and nitrate-nitrogen* analyses were.
performed immediately. Simultaneously, sample aliquots for
soluble and total phosphorus were poured into test tubes and
placed in a gravity drying oven for several days until the
sample evaported. Then the samples were digested with per-
sulfate (Mentzel and Corwin, 1965), refrigerated overnight and
Nitrate-nitrogen analysis also includes nitrite-nitrogen.
-------
B-4
11
analyzed the next day. Silica (reported as Si) and chloride
analyses were performed on thawed samples that sat at room
temperature for one day. Phosphorus, ammonia-nitrogen and
silica measurements were determined by automated methods
(Technicon Industrial Methods 155-7W, 154-71W, and 186-72W),
similar to the manual methods previously used. Nitrate-nitrogen
was analyzed by a copper-cadmium reduction method (Technicon
Industrial Method 158-7W). Chloride was measured with a mercuric
thiocyanate and ferric ammonium sulfate automated method (EPA, 1974a)
Collection of plankton samples was made on each survey
date from the central station in both lakes. A cylinder-cone
plankton net with No. 20 (76 urn) nylon mesh, 0.25-m diameter,
was towed from near bottom to the surface. Samples were ex-
amined qualitatively for species composition and relative
abundance.
An Ekman grab (IS x 15 cm) was used to collect bottom
samples at the central station in both lakes only in Summer,
1973. Samples were sieved with a No. 30 mesh screen and the
invertebrates were identified and enumerated in the laboratory.
Nutrient Loading Determinations
Sources and quantities of phosphorus and nitrogen to
Crooked and Pickerel Lakes were estimated from data collected
from Summer, 1975 through Spring, 1976. Nutrient chemistry
-------
B-4
12
and other limnological data*, using previously described
methods, were obtained at the central station and selected
near-shore stations in both lakes (Figs. 2 and 3). Inshore
stations were located at the mouths of inflowing streams,
at the heads of outflows, and near concentrations of human
development along the shoreline. Streams were monitored for
discharge using Price, and pygmy current meters and total phosphor^
and inorganic nitrogen samples were obtained on a quarterly
basis during the study period. An estimate of total nitrogen
was obtained by doubling the inorganic nitrogen values since
average inorganic and organic fractions were nearly equal in
other nearby waters (EPA, 1975; Tierney et al. , 1976).
Data were obtained on total phosphorus and inorganic
nitrogen contributions from precipitation. Organic nitrogen
was considered to be negligible. Precipitation records were
from the nearby Pellston Airport. Chemical analyses were
performed on precipitation samples collected at 10 sites in
Cheboygan and Emmet counties. Total loading from precipitation
of 2.5 kg/km2/yr. total phosphorus and 10.6 kg/km2/yr. total
nitrogen was determined from these analyses.
In addition to limnological data, inshore stations were
sampled for coliform bacteria in Summer, 1975. Samples
were collected in 100-ml glass containers supplied by a
county sanitarian and promptly sent to the Bureau of
Laboratories of the Michigan Department of Health for
analyses. Although data on both total and fecal coliform
bacteria were obtained, only fecal coliform results are
reported here.
-------
B-4
13
A recent study by Omernik (1976), who determined phos-
phorus and nitrogen export values from various land covers,
appears to contain data most pertinent to the watersheds of
Crooked and Pickerel Lakes. Watershed land cover data (Table 1)
and nutrient export values from the north and northeastern
forest and forage region of the United States (Table A-l) were
employed. Omernik's (1976) "mostly agriculture" category was
chosen instead of his "agriculture" category since our
"agriculture/grassland" grouping contains both active and
fallow farmland.
Nichols and Richardson (in Gannon and Paddock, 1974)
made some preliminary calculations on nutrient loading from
septic systems to lakes in Cheboygan and Emmet Counties, in-
cluding Crooked and Pickerel Lakes. Assumptions on numbers
of dwelling units, length of occupancy, and household use of
phosphate-enriched detergents were too high. Furthermore,
assumptions on nutrient movements from septic systems to the
lakes were not based on local soils data. Their nutrient
loadings from septic systems appear to be over-estimations.
Consequently, considerable effort was focused on refining
estimates of nutrient loading from septic systems in this
investigation.
Loading of phosphorus and nitrogen to Crooked and Pickerel
Lakes was calculated using information on household size,
length of occupancy, household usage of septic systems,
-------
B-4
14
number of dwelling units on each soil type, and the per-
centage of nutrients that reach the lake from each soil
type from lakeside septic systems. It was estimated from
the 1970 U. S. census that the average household size in
Emmet County was 3.25 persons per dwelling unit. The number
of households within 300 ft. (92m) of the shoreline was ob-
tained from the Emmet County Equalization Department and
year-round and seasonal occupancy was estimated during Winter
(Gold and Gannon, 1978). From a household survey conducted
on nearby Walloon Lake (Project CLEAR, 1978), it was estimated
that loading of phosphorus to septic systems from dishwater
and laundry wastewater was 0.83 kg/household/yr. Dishwashing
and laundry habits on Crooked and Pickerel Lakes were assumed
to be the same as on Walloon Lake.
Estimations of 0.5 kg/person/yr phosphorus and 5.4 kg/
person/yr nitrogen (Vollenweider, 1963) were used as the
human waste contribution to the septic system. Including the
phosphorus contribution from detergents, total loadings to the
septic system of 2.46 kg/household/yr. phosphorus and
17.55 kg/household/yr nitrogen were estimated. The number
and type of residences on specific soil types was used to
calculate the amounts of phosphorus and nitrogen reaching the
lakes. The type of residence 'was weighted (i.e., l.o for
year-round occupancy, 0.5 for possible year-round occupancy
and 0.25 for seasonal occupancy) and multiplied by the number
of residences on each soil type. The soils were identified
-------
B-4
15
and transcribed from the Emmet County Soil Survey onto the
home location map. From soil characteristics such as natural
drainage, depth to seasonal high groundwater (Alfred et al.,
1973), and phosphorus adsorption capacity [Schneider and
Erickson, 1972), estimations were made on percentage of phos-
phorus and nitrogen that would reach the lakes through each
soil type from septic systems. Then septic systems nutrient
loading was calculated from the number and type of residence
on each soil type, the total nutrient input per household
per year, and percentage of nutrients reaching the lake
(Tables A-2 through A-4).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Water quality: Some basic considerations
Although inland lakes are individualistic and exhibit
their own unique characteristics, scientists recognize a
relatively simple system of grouping and classifying lakes
into water quality types. Oligotrophic lakes are nutrient
poor and are low in plant and animal productivity. Eutrophic
lakes are high in nutrient content which stimulates high pro-
duction of plants and animals. Lakes exhibiting intermediate
characteristics are termed mesotrophic.
Lake residents normally equate good water quality with
oligotrophic lakes. These water bodies exhibit clear waters,
low turbidity from algae, low amounts of weed growths, and
firm bottom sediments. Eutrophic lakes are normally con-
-------
B-4
16
sidered poor in water quality with turbid waters high in algal
content, high amounts of undesirable weeds, and mucky bottom
sediments. Since eutrophic lakes are more productive, they
often contain higher quantities of fish than oligotrophic
lakes. Consequently, fishermen may consider water quality
in eutrophic lakes as good. However, in extreme eutrophic
conditions, desirable fish species such as walleye, yellow
perch, northern pike, and bass are replaced by less desirable
species such as carp, suckers, and bullheads. In most situations,
water quality in a water body has been determined by its geo-
logical origins and natural features within its watershed.
It is the challenge of the riparian community to understand
the current water quality status of their lake and to mini-
mize adverse changes in quality as they use and develop the
lake and its watershed.
Ideally, current water quality data should be compared
with historical records in order to establish any trends in
water quality changes. Unfortunately, historical water quality
information on Crooked and Pickerel Lakes is extremely scanty.
Temperature, alkalinity, dissolved oxygen and pH measurements
were occasionally collected by the Fish Division of the Michigan
Department of Natural Resources during the past several decades.
An examination of these records did not reveal any changes in
water quality in Crooked or Pickerel Lakes beyond normal yearly
variation. Consequently, current water quality status of these
lakes must be determined by interpreting recent physicochemical
-------
17 B-4
and biological data and by applying some simple trophic
state models that have been developed in recent years.
Watershed Characteristics
The watershed areas of Crooked and Pickerel Lakes are
relatively large, encompassing parts of three counties (Fig. 4),
and consist primarily of second growth deciduous and mixed
(deciduous and coniferous} forests (Table 1). Agriculture and
grassland comprises a larger fraction of land-use in Crooked
Lake's watershed than in Pickerel Lake's drainage basin (Table 1)
However, most agricultural activity occurs in upland areas away
from the shore of both lakes. Marshy and swampy wetlands are
an important feature and lie primarily near the north shore of
Crooked Lake and along the south and east shores of Pickerel
Lake.
Pickerel Lake's watershed is large in comparison to its
lake surface area (Table 1). The lake is fed mostly by
groundwater seepage since its inflowing streams are small.
The outflow of Pickerel Lake is to Crooked Lake through the
Crooked-Pickerel Channel, although reverse flow can sometimes
occur depending on wind and current conditions.
Crooked Lake's immediate watershed (11,190 ha) is smaller
than Pickerel Lake's drainage basin (13,660 ha). However,
Spring, Mud, Round and Pickerel Lakes all flow into Crooked
-------
18
B-4
KILOMETERS
Fig. 4 The watershed boundaries of Crooked and Pickerel Lakes.
Since Spring, Mud, Round and Pickerel Lakes all drain
into Crooked Lake, the total watershed area of Crooked
Lake includes the drainage basins of these neighboring
lakes.
-------
TABLE 1. LAND-USE TYPES IN THE CROOKED AND PICKEREL LAKE WATERSHEDS BASED ON LANDSAT
DATA (ROGERS, 1977).
Land-Use Type
CROOKED LAKE PICKEREL LAKE
Acres km^ $ Acres
2 I
Coniferous Forest *
Deciduous Forest
Mixed Forest
Sparce Forest **
TOTAL FOREST
Agriculture/Grassland ***
Urban/Bare Ground
Uncategorized
TOTAL LAND
Water
GRAND TOTAL t
1,025.3 4.1
7,579.9 30.3
4,347.4 17.4
8,045.1 52.2
20,997.7 84.0
5,468.1 21.9
236.4 1.0
330.7 1.3
27,032.9 108.2
2,060.7 8.2
3.5 2,985.0 11.9 8.9
26.0 13,406.0 53.6 39.9
15.0 6,724.6 26.9 20.0
27.7 6,698.0 26.8 19.9
72.2 29,813.6 119.2 88.7
18.8 2,880.7 11.5 8.6
0.9 73.2 0.3 0.2
1.1 160.9 0.6 0.4
93.0 32,928.4 131.6 97.9
7.0 951.0 2.8 2.1
29,093.6 116.4 100.0 33,879.4 134.4 100.0
* Includes both upland and swamp forests.
** Includes shrubby uplands and wetlands.
*** Includes grassy uplands and marshy wetlands.
t Totals from LANDSAT data differ slightly from those determined with an area meter
(see Table 2).
143
-------
B-4
20
Lake. Consequently, Crooked Lake's total watershed is much
larger (25,170 ha), encompassing its immediate watershed
and the drainage areas of these neighboring lakes (Fig. 4.).
Although groundwater seepage is undoubtedly a significant
source of Crooked Lake water, inflows from Minnehaha Creek
and other streams are important contributors. The Crooked
River is the only surface outlet for Crooked Lake.
Information is not available on the numbers of people
living in the watersheds of Crooked and Pickerel Lakes. The
region is predominantly rural and sparcely populated. Over
1,800 year-round residents were reported in adjacent Little-
field and Springvale townships*in 1970. The number of people
living on or near the lakeshores is of particular interest
for water quality considerations. About 400 dwelling units
are located within 90 m of the Crooked Lake shoreline. Most
of these dwellings are located on the north shore and are
currently serviced by the wastewater sewer line. Only 112
dwelling units are located on Crooked Lake's south shore and
on Oden Island. Pickerel Lake is more sparcely populated
with 134 dwelling units reported on or near its shoreline
(Gold and Gannon, 1979).
These townships comprise the largest land area in H,*, , * u.*
of the two lakes. n the watersheds
-------
B-4
21
Limnological Characteristics
Morpheme-try
Crooked Lake is about twice as large in surface area as
Pickerel Lake. Crooked Lake is aptly named since its shore-
line is so irregular. Its shoreline development factor is
two times higher than Pickerel Lake and its shoreline is
three times longer than Pickerel Lake (Table 2). Consequently,
the potential for over-development is considerably greater on
Crooked Lake than on Pickerel Lake. Both lakes are moderately
deep with maximum depths over 18 m. The average depth of
Pickerel Lake (3.9 m) is slightly greater than Crooked Lake
(3.0 m) . Bo-th lakes contain large expanses of shallow areas
suitable for development of weed beds that provide favorable
habitat for fishes (Fig. 2, Fig. 3, Table 2).
The current water quality is generally good in both
Crooked and Pickerel Lakes and the quantity of water flowing
in and out of them is at least partially responsible. Water
residence time is the amount of time water remains in the
lake's basin before being completely replaced by inflowing
water. Calculations of water residence times for these lakes
is somewhat complicated by the hydrology of the Crooked-Pickerel
Channel, since currents alternately flow in and out of the
channel. However, the net flow is from Pickerel to Crooked Lake.
Furthermore, because of the geographical locations of the channel
and Oden Island, it appears that water from the channel is dis-
-------
TABLE 2. MORPHOMETRIC FEATURES OF CROOKED AND PICKEREL LAKES, EMMET COUNTY, MICHIGAN.
Variabl
zm
Z
1
l>x
b
L
A0
Ad
V
Dl
n
V
AJ/A
CROOKED LAKE PICKEREL LAKE
e * Metric English Metric
18.6 m 61.0 ft. 21.3 m
3.0 m 9.8 ft. 3.9 m
5.58 km 3.5 mi 4.09 km
3.09 km 1.9 mi 1.69 km
1.69 km 1.1 mi 1.09 km
29.63 km 18.4 mi 10.57 km
959.59 ha 2,371 acres 427.06 ha
111.9 x 102ha 27,649 acres 136.6 x 102ha
29,534.7 x 103m3 1,040 x 106ft3 17,176.8 x 103m3
2.7 1.4
0.5 0.5
11.7 32.0
Engl ish
69.8 ft.
12.8 ft.
2.5 mi .
1 . 0 mi
0.7 mi
6.6 mi
1,055 acres
33,750 acres
605 x 106ft3
* Abbreviations: Zm, maximum depth; Z, meua depth ; 1, maximum length; bx, maximum width;
6, mean width; L, shoreline length; A0, lake surface area! A
NJ
of watershed area to lake surface area.
W
-------
B-4
23
charged primarily through Crooked River and does not signifi-
cantly mix with Crooked Lake water west of the island. Water
from the Crooked-Pickerel Channel comprises about 393 of the
flow of the Crooked River, while the remaining 611 represents
the outflowing waters of Crooked Lake. The water residence
times for Crooked and Pickerel Lakes have been estimated as
4.2 and 4.7 months, respectively. Although these lakes con-
tain a relatively large volume of water, they both have com-
paratively short water residence times and can flush out
pollution inputs rather quickly. In contrast, nearby Walloon
Lake has a water residence time of 3.2 years and, therefore,
is more sensitive to pollution than Crooked and Pickerel Lakes.
Physicochemistry: Off-shore conditions *
Crooked and Pickerel Lakes are basically similar in most
physicochemical characteristics. Both lakes thermally stratify
during Summer. A uniformly warm layer, the epilimnion,' gener-
ally extends from the surface to about 8m. A zone of rapid
temperature change, called the thermocline, occurs from 8 m
to 13 m. The deepest portion of the lake from 13 m to the
bottom is uniformly cold and is known as the hypolimnion.
Wind generated currents are primarily confined to the epilmnion
during Summer. Two complete circulation periods occur in
Spring and Fall when the lake is mixed from top to bottom.
Slight inverse stratification occurs during Winter under ice
cover when temperatures are slightly warmer near bottom than
they are near the surface. The onset and duration of ice cover
-------
B-4
24
varies from year to year, depending on meteorological con-
ditions. Generally, ice cover remains from mid-December to
early April. Ice disappears from Crooked Lake in Spring
earlier than most other lakes of the region, presumably because
of groundwater seepage especially along the north shore.
Crooked and Pickerel Lakes contain clear, unstained
waters that allow for excellent light penetration. Trans-
parency, as measured by the Secchi disc, was only slightly
greater in Pickerel Lake than in Crooked Lake (Table 3) .
Both lakes contain hard water with high concentrations of
alkalinity, specific conductance, and ionic constituents,
especially calcium and magnesium. The waters are alkaline
with pH generally above 8.0 throughout the photic zone.
The inorganic nutrients, phosphorus and nitrogen, average
slightly higher in Crooked Lake than in Pickerel Lake. In
contrast, silica concentrations are slightly higher in Pickerel
Lake (Tables 3 and 4).
Phosphorus is considered to be the limiting nutrient for
plant growth in both Crooked and Pickerel Lakes because soluble
and total phosphorus concentrations are extremely low relative
to nitrogen. The low amount of phosphorus in the water is at
least partially controlled by chemical interactions between
the water and bottom sediments. Both lakes contain abundant
-------
TABLE 3. COLOR, LIGHT, AND DISSOLVED OXYGEN (D.O.) CHARACTERISTICS OF CROOKED AND
PICKEREL LAKES, EMMET COUNTY, MICHIGAN. DATA FROM CENTRAL DEEP STATIONS.
Color Secchi Disc 1% T* Near Bottom D.O. Near Bottom D.O,
Lake (pt-co) Yearly Range(m) Summer(m) Summer (mg/1) Winter (mg/1)
Crooked Lake
Pickerel Lake
10
20
2.0-5.0
2.5-6.0
8.8
8.5
0
0.1
7.3
6.8
* Depth of light penetration to 14 of surface illumination
in
a
-------
TABLE 4. CHEMICAL AND CHLOROPHYLL a FEATURES OF CROOKED AND PICKEREL LAKES
AT DEEP CENTRAL STATIONS DURING SUMMER AND WINTER.*
Variable
T.A. (mg/1)
Sp . Cond. (pmhos/cm)
pH
S-P04 (pfi/1)
T-P04 (pg/1)
NO-j-N (pg/1)
NH3-N (pg/1)
Si02 (pg/1)
CI (mg/1)
Ca (mg/1)
Mg (mg/1)
K (rag/1)
Na (mg/l)
Chi. a (pg/1)
CROOKED
Summer
141.0
289.5
8.4
4.0
11.9
44.2
20.1
2,578.8
12.5**
3^.7
13.9
0.8
2.1
3.3**
LAKE
Winter
158.6
314.9
8.1
7.0
11.3
356.5
40.3
3,475.8
2.5
42.2
12.7
0.8
2.2
2.0
PICKEREL
Summer
136.4
285.0
8.4
5.9
9.8
62.1
18.0
2,665.3
10,9*»
38.4
13.4
0.7
2.2
2.8**
LAKE
Winter
163.8
326.1
8.0
4.0
18.3
320.0
44.3
3,686.8
3.7
48.9
13.1
0.9
2.5
0.7
* Data are means for the euphotic zone (> 1% light transmittance) in Summer, 1973 and 1974
and Winter,1974 and 1975 except where otherwise indicated. T.A. is total alkalinity as
CaCOj and Sp. Cond. is specific conductance corrected to 25C
-------
calcium and inorganic carbon, a situation conducive for marl
deposition. Marl is precipitated calcium carbonate (CaCOft)
«>
or lime, and forms the characteristic grayish-white, clay-like
bottom sediments and coatings on rock and other firm substrates.
Phosphorus ions in the water column adsorb on marl: particles,
settle into the bottom sediments and become unavailable to
stimulate algae and weed growths.
As long as dissolved oxygen content remains high, co-
precipitation o" phosphorus with marl is an important mechanism
in maintaining high water quality in Crooked and Pickerel Lakes.
However, under anaerobic conditions, phosphorus is released from
the sediments and becomes available for plant growth. Currently,
anaerobic conditions are confined to the near bottom waters of
*
the deepest portions of Crooked and Pickerel Lakes during the
Summer stratification period. During the Summers of 1973 and
1974, the bottom 4 m of Crooked Lake and the bottom 2 m of
Pickerel Lake contained less than II saturation of dissolved
oxygen. Consequently, dissolved oxygen depletion in the hypo-
limnion is slightly greater in Crooked Lake than in Pickerel
Lake.
Chemistry and bacteria: Near-shore conditions
Nutrient chemistry and coliform bacteria tests were con-
ducted on near-shore areas and at mouths of inflowing streams
of- Crooked and Pickerel Lakes in order to locate any "hot spots"
-------
5-4
'of human wastewater contam nation.
The highest concentration^ of total phosphorus occurred
in the stream emanating from trie Oden Fish Hatchery on
Crooked Lake during all seasons. Phosphorus below the fish
hatchery was 15 time^ higher than at the Crooked Lake central
station during sumnsr (Fig. 5). rl gh concentrations in com-
-p.ar.lson with the central station were also observed near the
village of Oden and off Oden Island's west side. Phosphorus
values below a small, private "i^h pond (Station No. 4c) did
not differ significantly from central 5ratio" values.
The jf-eams oelow both the State and private fish
culture facilities were cons s^ently high in inorganic nitrogen
during all seasons. Values at these respective locations were
iy and 2i -times higher i~haa at the central station ir. sunnsr
(Fig. 6). Otner compa-at ivel/ 'ugh inorganic nitrogen con-
centrations weirs noted near the villages of Conwav and Fon
sheivaing and at the mouth uf Minnehaha Creek (Fig. 5J
-------
N
W-<•;«-E
Crooked River 9 s
Fish Hatchery
13
\
6
14
Round Lake Ck.
CROOKED LAKE
EMMET CO..MICH.
TOTAL PHOSPHORUS (ug/l)
SUMMER,1975
\
7 Crooked-Pickerel
Channel
0
SCALE
FEET
2000
4000
METERS
0 600 1200
Minnehaha
Ck.
'TflV__ __ PiTg
Fig. 5 Comparison of total phosphorus concentrations (yg/1) between the central
station and selected near-shore locations in Crooked lake during summer, 1975.
-------
Crooked River
o
1 ,242
379
\
56
Fish Hatchery
928
Round Lake Ck.
CROOKED LAKE
EMMET CO..MICH
Crooked —Pickerel
Channel
INORGANIC NITROGEN
SUMMER, 1975
488
Minnehaha
Ck.
0
METERS
600 1200
gfa^B^^gJ
Fig. 6 Comparison of inorganic nitrogen (NO _N, N03-N and NH^-N) concentrations (Pg/1)
between the central station and selected near-shore locations in Crooked Lake?
Cd
dvnr ing summer , 1975.
-------
B-4
31
Coliform bacteria data were obtained only in Summer, 1975.
Only the station near Conway was contaminated with fecal coli-
form bacteria (1600 colonies/ml).* Low bacterial counts were
observed elsewhere along the shores of Crooked Lake (Fig. 7).
In contrast to Crooked Lake, concentrations of phosphorus
and nitrogen in the near-shore areas of Pickerel Lake were
almost identical with central station values during all seasons
although only Summer data are presented here (Figs. 8 and 9).
A relatively high concentration of inorganic nitrogen was re-
corded only once at Station No. 15 (Fig. 9). Fecal coliform
bacteria counts in Summer, 1975 were low throughout Pickerel
Lake and did not indicate any sources of human contamination
(Fig- 10).
Biology
Detailed phytoplankton data are not available for Crooked
and Pickerel Lakes. Qualitative observations indicate that
both lakes are in a healthy water quality condition. Although
filamentous blue-green algae are present in both lakes, they
rarely form a predominate component of the algal community.
* The Michigan Department of Health considers waters with
fecal coliform bacteria counts greater than 200/ml to be
polluted and unfit for bodily contact, such as swimming.
-------
Crooked River
N
W -<»W
"T
s
10
SCALE
FEET
20OO 4OOO
s*£
Round Lake Ck.
CROOKED LAKE
EMMET CO..MICH.
Crooked- P! eke re!
Channel
FECAL COLIFORM BACTERIA /100ml
30 July, 1975
METERS
600 I200
Mlnnehaha
Ck.
Fig. 7 Fecal coliform bacteria (number of colonies/100 ml) at selected near-shore
locations in Crooked Lake during July, 1975).
to
-------
Crooked -Pickerel
Channel
7
State Forest Ck.
6
PICKEREL LAKE
EMMET CO., MICH.
TOTAL PHOSPHORUS (iig/l)
SUMMER, 1975
SCALE
FEET
800
I600
6CO
Pig. 8 Comparison of total phosphorus concentrations fug/1) between the central
station and selected near-shore locations in Pickerel Lake during Summer, 1975
-------
Crooked-Pickerel
Channel
^•85
19
State Forest Ck.
1,356
419
PICKEREL LAKE
EMMET CO.. MICH.
INORGANIC NITROGEN fjjg/l)
SUMMER, 1975
SCALE
FEET
0 800 I600
METERS
0 300 600
Fig. 9 Comparison of inorganic nitrogen concentrations (yg/1) between the central
station and selected near-shore locations in Pickerel Lake during Summer, 1975
-------
Crooked-Pickerel
Channel
State Forest Ck. -_^__J
PICKEREL LAKE
EMMET CO., MICH.
FECAL COLIFORM BACTERIA / 100 ml
30 JULY 1975
SCALE
FEET
0 000 I60O
METERS
0 300 600
Fig. 10 Fecal coliform bacteria (number of colonies/100 ml) at selected near-shore
locations in Pickerel Lake during July, 1975.
-------
B-4
36
Substantial algal blooms have not been observed in Pickerel
Lake. In contrast, algal blooms, usually consisting of diatoms
and Dinobyyon, have been.noticeable in Crooked Lake.
Chlorophyll a, a measure of the quantity of algae, was
slightly higher in Crooked Lake than in Pickerel Lake (Table 4).
Although chlorophyll a averaged near 3.0 ug/1 in the photic
zone during Summer for both lakes, the maximum recorded value
was higher for Crooked Lake (8.9 yg/1 in Fall, 1974) than for
Pickerel Lake (4.2 pg/1 in Spring, 1974). Phytoplankton com-
position and chlorophyll a indicate that the waters of both
Crooked and Pickerel Lakes are oligo-mesotrophic, with Crooked
Lake slightly closer to the eutrophic side of the trophic con-
tinuum.
Species composition of zooplankton was basically similar
in Crooked and Pickerel Lakes. There was a general absence of
species indicative of extreme oligotrophic or eutrophic waters
in both lakes and, therefore, zooplankton composition was most
characteristic of mesotrophic conditions. The greater relative
abundance of the cladoceran, Chydorus spkasricus, in Crooked
Lake indicates that the waters of Crooked Lake are slightly
more eutrophic than Pickerel Lake (Bricker and Gannon, unpublishi
data). Crooked Lake contained the oligo-mesotrophic indicator
rotifers, Nofnoloa. foliacea, N. miahiganensis, and Synchaeta
asymmetrica, as well as the eutrophic indicators, Polyarthra
euryptera and Trichoceroa multiarinis. Similarly, the olieo-
-------
B-4
37
mesotrophic indicative rotifers, Conoakiloides natans, and
N. miahiganensis, as well as the eutrophic species, P. euryptsra
and T,-mult-ioTi,nis, occurred in Pickerel Lake (Stemberger, un-
published data).
Similarly, the composition of the benthic organisms in
Crooked and Pickerel Lakes were indicative of water bodies
mesotrophic in character. Both lakes contained oligotrophic
indicators such as the burrowing mayfly nymph, Bexdgenia, and
fingernail clams,Sphaerium. Likewise, eutrophic indicators such
as the oligochaete worm, Limnodrilus hoffmeisteri, and several
genera of chrionomid midge larvae were observed in both lakes.
The Shannon-Weiner species diversity index was slightly higher
in Pickerel Lake (0.57} than in Crooked Lake (0.43), and is
indicative of slightly more oligotrophic conditions in Pickerel
Lake than in Crooked Lake (Weid, unpublished data).
An examination of Michigan Department of Natural Resources
records reveals that both Crooked and Pickerel Lakes contain
fish populations indicative of healthy water quality conditions.
Desirable species, such as northern pike, walleye, black bass,
yellow perch, and bluegill are prevalent in both lakes. Growth
rates of these fishes are near state-wide averages in both
Crooked and Pickerel Lakes.
Trophic State
It is readily apparent from the preceding liranological
inventory that Crooked and Pickerel Lakes are in good water
-------
B-4
38
quality condition. Physiochemical data and biological indices
of water quality suggest that both lakes border between oligo-
trophy and mesotrophy (i.e., oligo-mesotrophic) on the trophic
continuum of lake types, with Crooked Lake somewhat more meso-
trophic than Pickerel Lake. In other words, Crooked Lake is
only slightly poorer in water quality than Pickerel Lake. Better
definition of the trophic status of these lakes can be obtained
by applying some simple criteria and indices of trophic condition,
Summer average chlorophyll a, total phosphorus, and Secchi
disc transparency have frequently been used to establish the
trophic state of lakes. Although the actual values differenti-
ating trophic levels are somewhat subjective, criteria established
by EPA (1974b)have been widely used in recent years. Using EPA
(1974b)criteria, Crooked and .Pickerel Lakes are both oligotrophic
based on chlorophyll a. Crooked Lake is mesotrophic based on
total phosphorus and Secchi disc transparency, and Pickerel Lake
is oligo-mesotrophic using these variables (Fig. 11"). Chlorophyll
and total phosphorus are probably better than transparency in
assessing the trophic condition in these lakes. Transparency
is affected by suspension of marl floe as well as by algal turbid-
ity in both lakes. Therefore, Secchi disc readings are not
sufficiently accurate for predicting trophic conditions in such
lakes. Nevertheless, all three variables indicate that Crooked
Lake is slightly closer to the eutrophic end of the trophic
continuum than Pickerel Lake.
-------
39
B-4
D>
^
«*•*
O
•
—J
>-
X
a.
o
oc
o
X
o
20,
15-
10-
5~
0
E
M
O
ou-
^ 25-
a>
*-* 2O
CO
=>
C£
o 15-
X
a,
ff\
CO
o 10-
X
a.
5-
A
E
M
i
i
j
O
i
E
O
EUTROPHIC
— MESOTROPHIC
— CLIGOTROPHIC
—- CROOKED LAKE
— PICKEREL LAKE
o
CO
X
o
o
Ul
CO
Fig. 11 Trophic classification of Crooked and Pickerel Lakes
based on three 1imnological variables and using criteria
established by EPA (1974b).
-------
B-4
40
Recognizing the relationships of chlorophyll a, total
phosphorus and Secchi disc transparency to trophic condition,
Carlson (1977) developed a trophic state index (TSI) based
on these variables. Lakes are rated on a scale of 1-100 with
higher numbers representing more eutrophic waters. Carlson's
index can be computed for the three variables independently
or a weighted combination of all three can be employed. Be-
cause Secchi disc readings can be misleading in marl lakes
and because other nutrients besides phosphorus can sometimes
become limiting to algal growth in Summer, I have chosen to use
Carlson's index based on chlorophyll a. for Crooked and Pickerel
Lakes. Both lakes are classified as oligotrophic using this
method, although Crooked Lake is closer to mesotrophy than
Pickerel Lake. In comparison with other lakes in Cheboygan
and Emmet Counties, Pickerel and Crooked Lakes rank second and
fifth highest, respectively, in water quality of 39 lakes
investigated (Fig. 12).
The above criteria concerns only the near-surface, off-
shore waters of lakes. Uttermark and Wall (1975) developed
a subjective lake condition index (LCI) that uses easily de-
tectable measures of eutrophication, many of which are observable
from the shoreline, including presence or absence of algal blooms
and excessive weed growths. Lakes are rated on a scale of 0-23,
higher values indicating poorer (more eutrophic) water quality.
Although the LCI is not strictly related to trophic states, a
-------
too
90
80
70 -
CO 60
50
40
30
TROPHIC STATE INDEX-CHLOROPHYLL-a
I i.
EUTROPHY
MESOTROPHY
S rr mm *m m»—" ^ —_ ™ —i........^m. Tin mm S iriL.....S... S... mn - nt ..S__.wiL- "H ...fiff. S? ...."TIL wnL _• Si IS ri—am... •U-.ML.JM.-,*! ••„ •!,.«* OTI •» •*....•• •• ••
1183
427
154
56
O
o
?v
03
X
-
T
a.
O
or
6.4 g
X
o
2.6
0.94
0.04
0 0
Ui O <
(TOO:
UJ
x
o
X
o
o
o
i§5
55 cc 5
o o i-
Z (t I- UJ
or ui w tc
^S^
r> uj
to
Q.
So
Fig. 12
Classification of lakes in Cheboygan and Emmet Counties, Michigan, using
Carlson's (1977) trophic state index (TSI) for chlorophyll a. The positi
of Crooked and Pickerel Lakes are identified by arrows. The divisions
between ol Lgotropiiy and cutrophy are estimations that appear to be most
suitable for the study area.
ions
-------
42 B-4
reasonable comparison between LCI and trophic classification
was obtained in Wisconsin lakes (Uttermork and Wall, 1975) .
Crooked and Pickerel Lakes were determined to have LCI values
of 7 and 5, respectively. Consequently, both lakes are
classified as mesotrophic by this method with Crooked Lake
again being closer to the eutrophic side of the trophic spectrum
than Pickerel Lake (Fig- 12).
Nutrient loading
It is important to emphasize that nutrient loading determin-
ations are relatively new to science and, therefore, they still
are largely estimations. The values presented here are con-
sidered to be the best estimations with the available data
for Crooked and Pickerel Lakes and information from the liter-
ature on nutrient loading. The greatest uncertainties are in
the nutrient contributions from land cover. The amount of
nutrients actually reaching the lakes from forest, agricultural,
and urban, areas is difficult to predict without better know-
ledge of run-off and groundwater flow patterns. Use of soils
data has improved our ability to estimate nutrient contributions
from septic systems. However, important variables such as,
direction of groundwater flow, slope of land, age and condition
of the septic system, and its distance from the lakeshore, were
not knoivn and, consequently, were not used in the nutrient
loading analysis. However, several of these variables are
-------
43
B-4
23
20
O
_J
0
E
O
— EUTROPHIC
— MESOTROPHIC
— OLIGOTROPHIC
CROOKED LAKE
— PICKEREL LAKE
Fig. 13 Trophic classification of Crooked and Pickerel Lakes
based on the lake condition index (LCI) of Uttormark
and Wall (1975).
-------
44
considered on the soil suitability maps (Gold and Gannon, 1979).
Estimates of nutrient loading from lakeside lawn fertilization
were not available for the study area, but this nutrient source
is at least partially included in the coefficient for nutrient
export from urban land cover.
Phosphorus loading was considerably higher to Crooked Lake
than to Pickerel Lake in 1975-76 (Table 5). The discharge of
nutrient-laden water from the Oden Fish Hatchery constituted
the major man-induced source of phosphorus to Crooked Lake,
representing 14.1% of total phosphorus loading. Considering
all inflowing creeks, the stream from the fish hatchery con-
tributed 69% of the phosphorus during the year and as high as
80% during Summer. Septic systems were another major human
source of phosphorus, representing 9.4% of total phosphorus
loading. In contrast, septic systems only contributed 4.0% of
total phosphorus loading to Pickerel Lake. Nutrient loading
was highest from forested lands in both lakes since the greatest
portion of land in both watersheds is wooded.
Crooked Lake also received higher quantities of nitrogen
than Pickerel Lake (Table 6). Major sources of nitrogen to
both lakes were from forests and agricultural lands. Fish
Hatchery and Minnehaha Creeks were also important, sources of
nitrogen to Crooked Lake. Because of the higher proportion of
nitrogen loading from land cover, the contribution of nitrogen
-------
TABLE 5. SOURCES AND QUANTITIES OF TOTAL PHOSPHORUS (P) FOR CROOKED AND PICKEREL
LAKES, 1975-1976
CROOKED LAKE
Sources Kg/yr. %
Creeks
Round
Conway
Crooked
Fish Hatchery
Minnehaha
Precipitation
Septic Systems
Land Cover
Forest
Agriculture
Urban
26.6
7.6
5.0
303.8
97.8
321.7
201.7
748.2
368.4
72.9
1.2
0.4
0.2
14.1
4.6
14.9
9.4
34.7
17.1
3.4
PICKEREL LAKE
Sources Kg/yr. 1
Creeks
Cedar
State Forest
Precipitation
Septic Systems
Land Cover
Forest
Agriculture
Urban
47.4
10.8
143.2
61.9
1,063.0
195.6
31.7
3.1
0.7
9.2
4.0
68.4
12.6
2.0
TOTAL
2,153.7 100.0
TOTAL
1,553.6
100.0
W
-------
TABLE 6. SOURCES AND QUANTITIES OF TOTAL NITROGEN (N) FOR CROOKED AND PICKEREL
LAKES, 1975-1976
CROOKED LAKE
Sources Kg./yr. \
Creeks
Round
Conway
Crooked
Fish Hatchery'
Minnehaha
Precipitation
Septic Systems
Land Cover
Forest
Agriculture
Urban
1,301.6
445.4
2,320.2
5,056.3
8,533.0
7,973.3
2,357.2
34,539.0
11,865.0
1,538.7
1.7
0.6
3.1
6.7
11.2
10.5
3.1
45.5
15.6
2.0
PICKEREL LAKE
Sources Kg/yr. 1
Creeks
Cedar
State Forest
Precipitation
Septic Systems
Land Cover
Forest
Agriculture
Urban
4,076.0
550.6
3,548.4
494.2
49,069.2
6,300.0
468.3
6.3
0.8
5.5
0.8
76.1
9.8
0.7
TOTAL
75,929.7
100.0
TOTAL
64,506.7
100.0
ON
-P-
-------
47 B-4
to both lakes from septic systems was relatively minor. How-
ever, nitrogen loading from septic systems was five times
higher to Crooked Lake than Pickerel Lake.
Since phosphorus is the limiting nutrient for plant growth
in Crooked and Pickerel Lakes, phosphorus loading is the most
critical factor to.the present and future water quality of
these lakes. The importance of lake morphometry, i.e. mean
depth and water residence time, to the susceptibility of lakes
to phosphorus loading has been developed into a simple model
by Vollenweider (1975). When data for Crooked and Pickerel
Lakes are placed on the Vollenweider phosphorus loading plot,
the trophic state and potential rate of eutrophication can be
assessed (Fig. 14). Crooked and Pickerel Lakes are both
classified as oligo-mesotrophic by this method, with Crooked
Lake slightly closer to the eutrophic end of the trophic con-
tinuum. This is in agreement with other methods of trophic
state determinations that were discussed previously. Both
lakes are below the "permissible" loading level as determined
by Vollenweider, i.e., water quality of both lakes should not
appreciably change given the phosphorus loading levels of
1975-1976. However, Crooked Lake is nearly exceeding the
"permissible" level and, therefore, may decline in water
quality at a slightly faster rate than Pickerel Lake (Fig.14 ).
Two events have occurred since 1975-1976 that apparently
have reduced phosphorus loading to Crooked Lake from human
-------
GO
10
eg
Qu
i
O
5
O
CO
Ee O.I
o
X
Q_
CO
o
X
Q_
0.01
Vollenwefder loading relationship
i i i 1 1 1
EUTROPH1C
\ i IT rr if i i i i i i i i r
^ EXCESSIVE
^ ^PERMISSIBLE
PICKEREL LAKE
CROOKED LAKE
OLIGOTROPH1C
i i t i i 1 1 1 i i i i M i i i i i i i 1 1 i
i i i i i i i
ai
10
100
( m/yr )
1000
Fig. 14 Positions of Crooked and Pickerel Lakes on the Vollenweider (1975)
on 1975-76 data.
w
i
-------
B-4
49
sources. Dwellings on Crooked Lake's north shore have been
serviced by a sewer and central sewage treatment system since
Fall, 1976. Consequently, nutrients from wastewater that
formerly entered the lake from septic systems have been diverted
out of the watershed. In addition, the Oden Fish Hatchery,
recognizing its pollution problems, changed its fish culture
operation to reduce nutrient loading to Crooked Lakes. The
lowermost raceways were converted to settling ponds to act
as nutrient traps and a decision was made to shift the hatchery
from fish production to brood stock maintenance.
Unfortunately, comprehensive nutrient budget data for
1977 are not available for Crooked Lake and, therefore, the
impact of these changes on water quality improvement cannot
be properly assessed. However, limited data on phosphorus
loading from the fish hatchery was obtained in Summer, 1977.
If phosphorus contributions from precipitation, other creeks,
and land cover are assumed to be the same in 1975 and 1977,
then an indication of the amount of phosphorus reduction from
elimination of north shore septic systems and changes in fish
hatchery operations can be obtained. The amount of phosphorus
discharged from the fisn hatchery was nearly three times lower
in 1977 than in 1975. Similarly, it was estimated that phos-
phorus from septic systems was reduced by a factor of three
(Table 7).
Another event in 1977 should have had a slight effect in
reducing phosphorus in Crooked and Pickerel Lakes . A ban on
-------
TABLE 7. COMPARISON OF SOURCES AND QUANTITIES OF TOTAL PHOSPHORUS (P) ENTERING
CROOKED LAKE DURING SUMMER, 1975 AND SUMMER, 1977*.
1975
Sources
Fish Hatchery Creek
Septic Systems
Other **
Precipitation
Land Cover
Other Creeks
Kg
87
50
131
297
20
•
.6
.4
.8
.4
.8
1
14
8
22
50
3
.9
.6
.4
.6
.5
Kg
33
16
131
297
20
1977
•
.3
.2
.8
.4
.3
1
6.
3.
26.
59.
4.
7
2
4
5
2
TOTAL 588.0 100.0 499.5 100.0
* Summer is a three-month period (June, July and August).
** These data were obtained only in 1975, and phosphorus contributions from these
sources were assumed to be the same in 1975 and 1977.
ut
o
w
i.
-------
B-4
51
phosphates in detergents went into effect throughout the State
of Michigan on October 1, 1977. We estimate that the phosphate
ban should reduce phosphorus loading to septic systems by about
341.
CONCLUSIONS
The present water quality of Crooked and Pickerel Lake
is good. Both lakes are classified as oligo-mesotrophic with
water quality slightly better (more oligdtrophic) in Pickerel
Lake than in Crooked Lake.
Phosphorus is the limiting nutrient to plant growth in
both lakes. Consequently, the rate of change in water quality
can largely be influenced by controlling phosphorus loading rates.
We have little or no control over nutrient inputs from natural
sources (i.e., precipitation on the lake surface, runoff and
groundwater inflow from the watershed, aquatic birds, leaves,
pollen, etc.). However, nutrient inputs from cultural sources
(i.e., runoff from residential and agricultural land, lakeshore
lawn fertilization and sewage) can be reduced. Total phosphorus
loading was within theoretical "permissible" limits for both
lakes in 1975-76. Indications are that a reduction in phosphorus
loading from north shore dwellings and the Oden Fish Hatchery
has occurred on Crooked Lake since 1975-76. The ban on phos-
phates in detergents, that took effect in Fall, 1977,
will also reduce phosphorus loading to both lakes.
-------
B-4
52
Further reductions in phosphorus loading should be en-
couraged to protect and maintain water quality in these lakes.
Reduction in lakeshore lawn fertilization and construction of
lakeshore greenbelts are recommended. Septic systems located
on soils suitable for on-site wastewater treatment should be
properly maintained. For dwellings located on soils unsuitable
for on-site sewage treatment, the ecological and economic
consequences of any wastewater management alternatives should be
carefully considered.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The entire research staff at the University of Michigan
Biological Station contributed to the field and laboratory
.^
work on Crooked and Pickerel Lakes in numerous ways . Their
assistance is gratefully acknowledged. We especially thank
Art Gold for input on the nutrient loading determinations.
Gerald Krausse performed the chemical analyses. We also
thank Marilyn Hunger for document preparation.
-------
REFERENCES CITED
B-4
Alfred, S. D., A. G. Hyde, and R. L. Larson. 1973. Soil survey
of Emmet County, Michigan. U. S. Dept. Agriculture, Soil
Conservation Serv., Washington, D. C., 99 p.
American Public Health Association. 1971. Standard methods for
the examination of water and wastewaters. 13th ed. , APHA,
N. Y., 874 p.
Carlson, R. E. 1977. A trophic state index for lakes.
Oceanogr. 22:361-369.
Limnol.
Environmental Protection Agency. 1974a. Methods for chemical
analysis of water and wastes. EPA Nat. Envir. Res. Center,
Cincinnati, OH, 312 p.
_ . 1974b. The relationships of phosphorus and nitrogen to
"the trophic state of northeast and north-central lakes and
reservoirs. Nat. Eutrophication Surv. , Working Paper No. 23,
28 p. § App.
_ . 1975. Report on Lake Charleuoizj Charlevoiz County,
Michigan. Nat. Eutrophication Surv., Working Paper No. 188,
14 p."§ App.
Foster, W. L. 1976. Profile of the land: Natural features of
the Inland Water Route region of northern lower Michigan.
Univ. Michigan Biol. Sta/, Info. Report. No. 2, 29 p.
Gales, M. , Jr., E. Julian, and R. Kroner, 1966. Method for
quantitative determination of total phosphorus in water.
/. Amer . Waterworks Assoc. 58:1363.
Gannon, J. E. and M. W. Paddock. 1974. Investigations into
ecological and sociological determinants af lane, use
decisions - A study of inland lake watersheds in northern
Michigan. Univ. Michigan Biol. Sta., Tech. Report No. 1,
314 p.
and D. J. Mazur. 1976. Sources of nutrients (phosphorus
and nitrogen) for Crooked Lake, Emmet County, Michigan.
Univ. Michigan Biol. Sta., Unpubl. Report, 14 p.
Gold, A. and J. E. Gannon. 1979. The suitability of soils for
on-site wastewater disposal, Pickerel and Crooked Lakes,
Emmet County, Michigan. Univ. Michigan Biol. Sta., Tech.
Report No. 8,' Part II, 18 p.
-------
B-4
54
Hutchinson, G. E. 1957. A treatise in limnology. Vol. I.
Geography, Physics, and Chemistry. Wiley, New York, 1015 p.
Marans, R. W. and J. D. Wellman. 1977. The quality of non-
metropolitan living: Evaluations, behaviors, and expectations
of northern Michigan residents. Univ. Michigan, Inst. Social
Res. , 428 p.
Mentzel, D. W. and N. Corwin., 1965. The measurement of total
phosphorus on seawater based on the liberation of organically
bound fraction by persulfate oxidation. Limnol. Oaeanogr.
10:280-288.
Muller, R. and 0. Widemann. 1955.
Jahrbuch V. Wasser 22:247-271.
Nitratbestimmung in Seewasser.
Omernik, J. M. 1976. The influence of land use on stream nutrient
levels. Environmental Protection Agency, Report No. EPA-
600/3-76-014, 106 p.
O'Neil, W. 1977. This land and man: An historical look at the
use of land and natural resources in the Inland Water Route
region of northern Michigan. Univ. Michigan Biol. Sta. ,
Info. Report No. 3, 21 p.
Pelz, D. C. 1977. Utilization of environmental knowledge on
northern Michigan. Univ. Michigan, Inst. Social Res., 174 p.
and J. E. Gannon. 1978. Utilization of environmental
knowledge for watershed management in northern Michigan.
Envir . Manag . 3 : in press.
Project CLEAR. 1978. Environmental features of Walloon Lake
and its ' watersheds (Emmet and Charlevoiz Counties, Michigan),
with special reference to nutrient management. Univ. Michigan
Biol. Sta., Tech. Report MO. 6, 81 p.
Richardson, C. J. 1978. Investigations into ecological and
sociological determinants of land-use decisions. Part II: ~
Influence of land-use patterns, geology, and precipitation
chemistry on nutrients in groundwater and lake water quality.
Univ. Michigan Biol. Sta., Tech. Report No. 4, 190 p.
Rogers, R. H. 1977. Application of LANDSAT to the surveillance
of lake eutrophication in the Great Lakes basin. Bendix
Aerospace Div. , Ann Arbor, MI.
-------
B-4
55
Say, E. W., M. W.- Paddock, J. E. Gannon, and W. L. Foster. 1975.
Inland lake protection in northern Michigan. Univ. Michigan
Biol. Sta., Educ. Ser., Publ. No. 1, 40 p.
it
Schmid, M. and H. Ambuhl. 1965. Die bestimmung geringster Mengen
von Gesamtphosuhor in Wasser von Binnenseen. Schweiz. Z.
Sydrol. 27:184-192.
Schneider, I. F. and A. E. Erickson. 1972. Soil limitations for
disposal of municipal wastewaters. Michigan State Univ.,
Agri. Exp. Sta., Res. Report No. 195, 54 p.
Solorzano, L. 1969. Determination of ammonia in natural waters
by the phenolhypochlorite method. Limnol. Oceanogr.
14:799-801.
Technicon. 1972-73. Industrial Methods. Technicon Instruments
Corp., Tarrytown, NY.
Tierney, D. P., R. Powers, T. Williams, and S. C. Hsu. 1976.
Actinomycete distribution in northern Green Bay and the
Great Lakes: Taste and odor relationships in eutrophication
of nearshore waters and embayments. Environmental Protection
Agency, Report No. EPA-905/9-74-Q07, 167 p.
Uttormark, P. D. and J. P. Wall. 1975. Lake slassifieation -
A trophic characterization of Wisconsin lakes. Environmental
Protection Agency, Report No. EPA-660/3-75-033, 165 p.
Vollenweider, R. A. 1968. Scientific fundamentals of the
eutrophication of lakes and flowing waters, with particular
reference to nitrogen and phosphorus as factors in eutrophi-
cation. Organization Econ. Co-op. Devel., Paris, 159 p.
§ 34 figs.
Vollenweider, R. A. 1975. Input-output models with special
reference to the phosphorus loading concept in limnology.
Schweiz. Z. Hydrol. 37:53-84.
Welch, P. S. 1948. Limnological methods. Blakiston, Philadelphia,
PA, 381 p.
-------
APPENDIX A
DATA USED IN ESTIMATING NUTRIENT LOADING
TO CROOKED AND PICKEREL LAKES FROM
SEPTIC SYSTEMS
B-4
56
-------
TABLE A-l. TOTAL PHOSPHORUS AND TOTAL NITROGEN EXPORT (kg/kra2/yr.) FROM LAND COVER.
VALUES ARE MEANS FOR THE NORTH AND NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES (OMERNIK, 1976), AND
WERE USED IN THE CROOKED AND PICKEREL LAKES NUTRIENT LOADING CALCULATIONS.
Land Cover
Forest
Agriculture (mostly)
Urban
Phosphorus
8.6
16.3
31-. 7
Nitrogen
397
525
669
-P-
-------
TABLE A-2. ESTIMATED PHOSPHORUS (P) AND NITROGEN (N) INPUTS FROM SEPTIC SYSTEMS
TO CROOKED LAKE'S NORTH SHORE. IN 1975. THIS PORTION OF THE LAKE HAS BEEN
SERVICED BY A SEWER SINCE 1976.
Soil Type
Percent Reaching Lake Number of Dwellings Amt. Reaching Lake
Y-R PY-R S P(kg/yr) N(kg/yr)
Au Gres
loamy sand
Deford fine
loamy sand
Carbondale
muck (Ca)
Kalkaska
loamy sand
(AuB)
(Df)
(KaB)
Made land (Ma)
Ros common
mucky sand
Rubicon sand
(Re)
(RuB)
Tawas muck (Ta)
Wet alluvial
land (Wt)
TOTAL
35
75
75
25
35
75
25
75
75
65
50
50
65
50
50
65
50
50 *
50
2
0
19
34
1
2
8
0
116
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
84
0
2
16
20
4
4
3
2
135
61
3
0
14
33
3
1
16
0
136
.6
.7
.9
.1
.6
.7
.9
.1
.9
.5
815
17
4
262
342
17
34
76
4
1,575
.6
.5
.4
.4
.2
.6
.2
.8
.4
.1
* Y-R is year
occupancy.
-round occupancy; PY-R is possible year-round occupancy; S is seasonal
tn
oo
w
-------
TABLE A-3. ESTIMATED PHOSPHORUS (P) AND NITROGEN (N) INPUTS FROM SEPTIC SYSTEMS
TO THE SOUTH SHORE OF CROOKED LAKE, INCLUDING ODEN ISLAND, IN 1975. THIS
PORTION OF THE LAKE CONTINUES TO BE SERVICED BY SEPTIC SYSTEMS.
Percent Reaching Lake Number
Soil Type P(|) N(%) Y-R
Au Gres
loamy sand (AuB)
Au Gres sand (ArB)
Blue Lake
loamy sand (BIB)
Blue Lake
loamy sand (B1F)
Brevort mucky
loamy sand (Br)
Bruce fine
sandy loam (fly)
Emmet sandy loam (EmB)
losco loamy
fine sand (I1B)
Johnswood
cobbly loam (JoC)
Kalkaska sand (KaB)
Kalkaska sand (KaC)
35
35
65
65
55
35
25
55
25
25
25
65
65
65
65
50
50
65
65
85
65
65
13
0
1
0
10
2
4
0
9
0
3
of Dwellings
PY-R S
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
1
0
9
3
1
4
11
0
0
1
9
7
1
Arat. Reaching Lake
P(kg/yr) N(kg/yr)
13.1
0.7
2.0
1.6
17.3
1.7
2.5
0.3
7.5
1.4
2.0
174.0
8.6
14.3
11.4
111.9
17.6
45.6
2.9
182.7
25.7
37.1
01
vo
Continued
w
-------
TABLE A-3 Cont.
Percent Reaching Lake" Number of Dwellings Amt . Reaching Lake
Soil Type
Made land (Ma)
Roscommon
mucky sand (Re)
Sandy lake
beaches (Sb)
Thomas loam (To A)
I'd)
35
75
35
35
N(l)
50
50
65
50
Y-R
2
2
5
3
PY-I
0
0
1
1
S
0
1
0
9
P(kg/yr)
1.7
4.2
4.7
4.5
N(kg/yr)
17.5
19.7
62.7
50.4
TOTAL
65.2 782.1
0\
o
W
-------
TABLE A-4. ESTIMATED PHOSPHORUS (Pj AND NITROGEN (N) INPUTS FROM SEPTIC SYSTEMS
TO PICKEREL LAKE IN 1975.
Percent Reaching Lake Number of Dwellings
Soil Type P(4) N(%) Y-R PY-R S
Au Gres
loamy sand (ArB)
Carbondale
muck (Ca)
East Lake
loamy sand (EaB)
Kalkaska
loamy sand (KaB)
Ros common
mucky sand (Re)
Saugatuck sand (ScB)
Tawas muck (Ta)
Thomas mucky
loam (Tm)
Thomas loam (To A)
Warners mucky
loam (Win)
TOTAL
35
75
25
25
75
35
75
35
35
75
65
50
65
65
50
50
50
50
65
50
0
0
1
7
5
3
1
0
0
4
21
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
2
7
4
4
20
20
18
12
4
16
9
114
Amt. Reaching Lake
P(kg/yr) N(kg/yr)
1.5
1.8
1.2
7.4
18.4
6.5
7.4
0.9
3.4
13.4
61.9
20.0
8.8
22.8
135.9
87.8
65.8
35.1
8.8
45.6
63.6
494.2
w
-------
B-4
LIMNOLOGICAL FEATURES
OF
CROOKED AND PICKEREL LAKES ,
EMMET COUNTY, MICHIGAN
PART II. THE SUITABILITY OF SOILS FOR
ON-SITE WASTEWATER DISPOSAL 1
by
Arthur Gold
and
John E. Gannon
Technical Report No. S
Biological Station
The University of Michigan
Pellston, Michigan 49769
April, 1979
1
This report is based on research funded by the National
Science Foundation (Grant No. AEN72-054S3). Preparation
of the report was supported by the Environmental Protection
Agency as a sub-contract to a prime contract (EPA-No. 08-
01-4612) to WAPORA, Inc.
2
Present address: State University Research Center. Oswego,
NY 13126.
-------
B-4
CONTENTS
Page
FIGURES ii
BACKGROUND 1
METHODS 3
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 5
Dwelling Units 5
Slope 6
Permeability 6
Depth to Seasonal High Groundwater 7.
Phosphorus Adsorption Capacity 8
CONCLUSIONS 8
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . 10
REFERENCES CITED 11
APPENDIX A. Maps of the Crooked and Pickerel Lakes area,
depicting variables that influence adequacy of soils
for on-site wastewater disposal 13
-------
B-4
FIGURES
Number
A-l Slope. Darker shading indicates more severe
limitations to on-site wastewater disposal on
Figures A-l through A-5 14
A-2 Phosphorus adsorption capacity 15
A-3 Depth to seasonal high groundwater 16
A-4 Permeability 17
A-5 A composite map of the four variables that affect
suitability of soils for on-site wastewater
disposal 18
11
-------
B-4
BACKGROUND
Septic systems rely on the soil to purify domestic waste-
water. However, soil types vary considerably in their capacity
to effectively treat wastewater. Septic systems operating in
ill-suited soils can be a threat to public health and can
have adverse effects on water quality of nearby lakes and
streams. Soil suitability for wastewater disposal is primarily
determined by slope, permeability, depth to seasonal high
groundwater level, and phosphorus adsorption capacity. Depth
to bedrock can also be a factor where overlying soils are ex-
tremely shallow. One of these variables, or more likely the
integrating influence of a combination of them, may restrict
the use of on-site waste disposal by septic systems.
Septic systems, if properly designed and carefully installed,
may function adequately on sites with slopes up to 121 (VJarshall,
1976). Slopes up to 151 grade present moderate limitations
for wastewater disposal if engineering modifications of the
drain field such as serial distribution are employed. Systems
on severe slopes may experience problems with prematurely
failing drain fields or ponding effluent. Installation of
septic systems on steep slopes will require additional expense
and attention to eliminate the potential for accelerated
erosion and sedimentation.
Permeability is the rate at which water moves through the
soil, and is a major consideration in on-site inspection for
septic system permits. Permeability usually changes with
-------
B-4
each soil horizon and various on-site disposal systems use
different horizons for vastewater treatment. Drain field
trenches are generally placed two feet below the surface,
which diminishes the importance of soil permeability above
that level. Mounds and raised drain fields developed in
Wisconsin rely on the permeability of the surface soil layers
(Converse et al., 1976).
Depth to seasonal high groundwater is a primary con-
sideration in on-site analysis for septic tank permits. The
highest levels of purification are achieved when the waste-
water passes through unsaturated soils. Effluent moves
through spaces between soil particles, increasing the contact
of the effluent with the soil and increasing the time before
the liquid reaches groundwater (Baker and Bouma, 1975). This
enhances the potential of the soil for phosphorus adsorption
and for the physical screening of bacteria (McCoy and Ziebell,
1975). Under saturated conditions, wastewater 'flows through
the largest soil spaces, minimizing contact between the effluent
and soil particles.
Phosphorus adsorption capacity differs with soil types
and is a major factor in the ability of a soil to purify
wastes. Limnological data indicates that phosphorus is the
limiting nutrient for aquatic productivity in Crooked and
Pickerel Lakes (See Part I of this report). Septic systems
are one source of phosphorus loading to the lakes.
A series of overlay maps have been prepared to provide
guidelines for future wastewater management planning on the
shorelines of Crooked and Pickerel Lakes, Emmet County,
-------
B-4
Michigan. The maps integrate information on soil suitability
and illustrate the capacity of the land near these lakes to
purify septic system effluent. An overlay map depicting
depth to bedrock was not constructed since bedrock is not
found close to the surface in the study area. When presently
existing septic systems need replacing, new septic systems or
other on-site wastewater management alternatives should be
designed to compensate for any site specific soil limitations.
Of course, the use of the overlay maps should not preclude
on-site inspection for suitability of wastewater disposal.
METHODS
Overlay maps for slope, permeability, depth to seasonal
high groundwater, and phosphorus adsorption capacity were
prepared, based on development capability criteria established
by the U. S. Soil Conservation Service (1966) and Schneider
and Erickson (1972). The classification and distribution
of soil types in the watersheds of Crooked and Pickerel Lakes
were obtained from Alfred et al. (1973).
Location of dwelling units in the study area was acquired
from Williams and Works (1976)*. On 20 February 1978 we
visually surveyed the dwellings within 300 feet of the lake-
shore to estimate the number of permanent and seasonal residences
Over three feet of snow existed on the ground at the time of
the survey. Criteria used to determine year-round occupancy
* At least eight additional dwellings were built since 1976
and were included on the man.
-------
B-4
included recently plowed drives, fresh tire tracks, trash
containers, and chimney smoke. Indications of occasional
occupancy were recorded as possible seasonal use in winter.
The phosphorus adsorption capacities depicted on the over-
lay map are as follows (Schneider and Erickson, 1972) :
Rate Class Pounds per acre in^upper three
reet ot soil
High >1,600
Medium 1,300 to 1,600
Low <1,300
Phosphorus adsorption data were unavailable for four soil types
in the study area. The following estimates were provided
by Forrest (personal communication*):
Phosphorus
Soil Series Adsorption Capacity
Dighton Series, fine subsoil variant High
Saugatuck Series High
Johnswood Series High
Blue Lake Series Low
The following characteristics of slope, depth to seasonal
high groundwater, and permeability are depicted for each
respective soil property (Alfred, et al. 1973):
Depth to Seasonal
Permeability
(inches per hour)
6.3 - 20.0
2.0 - 6.3
0.63 - 2.0
<0.63
Slope
(Percent)
0-6
6-12
12-13
High Groundwater
(feet)
>4
2-4
<4
Forest, Michael, Soil Scientist, U.S. Soil Conservation
Service, Gaylord, MI 49735.
-------
B-4
permeability values represent the lowest rate that occurs in
the upper five to six feet of soil.
Each variable is depicted on a separate transparency that
lies on two base maps, one showing location of total dwelling
units and the other indicating year-round residences. Increasing
degrees of shading are employed to indicate greater restriction
imposed by each variable on development and on-site wastewater
disposal. When all four transparencies are viewed together,
greater restrictions for wastewater disposal are indicated
by the darkest areas.*
A limited number of booklets (23" X 17") containing the
transparent overlays and base maps were prepared and deposited
at Emmet County governmental offices and at the University of
Michigan Biological Station. Prints of the overlays on the
base map of year-raund residences appear in Appendix A.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Dwelling Units
Based on our visual survey and data from Williams and Works
(1976), we estimate that 112 dwelling units are located within
300 feet of the shore on the south side of Crooked Lake and
on Oden Island and 134 on Pickerel Lake. Approximately 551
of these dwellings on Crooked Lake indicated year-round occupancy.
In contrast, 21% of the residences on Pickerel Lake appeared
Those soils exhibiting high groundwater and rapid permeability
may be more limited in their capacity to treat wastewater
than these overlays actually depict.
-------
B-4
to be year-round. Frequency of year-round dwellings was especially
low (101 j along the north shore and at botsford Landing.
Slope
Emmet County's Health Code does not specifically restrict on-
site disposal systems based on slope characteristics (Michigan
District Health Department No. 3, 1968). However, county sanitarians
consider slope in their inspection ot suitability of a site for
septic treatment.
Gently sloping terrain characterizes most of the shoreline of
Crooked and Pickerel Lakes and does not limit the functioning of
septic systems in most of the study area. The only exception is
the eastern side of Graham Point on Crooked Lake where slopes
greater than 121 are located.
Permeability
Permeability of less than 1.0 inch per hour is considered too
slow to allow for adequate treatment (Goldstein and Moberg, 1973).
The Emmet County Sanitary Code requires a permeability rate greater
than 2.0 inches per hour by the percolation test (Michigan District
Health Department No, 3, 1968). No restriction is imposed on soils
with extremely rapid permeability (i.e., greater than 10 inches
per hour). However, coarse soils with very rapid permeability
can introduce contaminants to groundwater.
Approximately one-half of the dwelling units on the south
shore of Crooked Lake are situated on Au Gres sands and Thomas
loamy sands (Alfred et al., 1973) which have permeability too
slow for adequate septic treatment. Nineteen residences southeast
of Graham Point are located on Johnswood cobbly loam.
-------
B-4
The moderately slow permeability of this soil type should be
recognized when considering on-site disposal alternatives.
Sixty homes bordering Pickerel Lake are underlain by
soils with permeability below all acceptable standards for
septic treatment (Goldstein and Moberg, 1973). Approximately
one-half of these homes, located on Ellsworth Point, are
situated on Saugatuck sands which have extremely slow per-
meability in the upper horizons. Kalkaska sands on the south-
east shore of Pickerel Lake exhibit permeability adequate for
septic treatment.
Depth to SeasonalHigh Groundwater
Sites with high groundwater levels (permanent or seasonal)
are not suitable for septic system use. The groundwater level
during the wettest season should be at least four feet below
the bottom of the trenches in a subsurface tile absorption
field and four feet below the pit floor in a field using seepage
pits (Goldstein and Moberg, 1973). Emmet County requires that
finish grade be at least six feet above the known high ground-
water level (District Health Department No. 3, 1968). The
county allows some filling to obtain this distance.*
^founds may be used for safe and effective disposal of
septic tank effluent where depth to seasonal high groundwater
level is greater than two feet from the surface (Converse et
al.t 1976). Areas with seasonal high groundwater levels less
The soils of Emmet County have been interpreted to a depth
of five feet (Alfred, et al., 1973). However, the depth to
seasonal high groundwater was not recorded if the water
table was more than four feet from the surface. Knowledge
of soil types and depth of groundwater to at least six feet
below the surface would be useful for on-site wastewater
management decisions.
-------
B-4
8
than two feet from the surface are severely limited for on-
site disposal (Goldstein and Mofaerg, 1973).
Seasonal high groundwater levels occur within two feet
of the surface in most of the lakeside soils of Crooked and
Pickerel Lakes. Consequently, adequacy of septic treatment
is severely limited during periods of high groundwater for the
majority of riparian dwelling units. Notable exceptions are
the Emmet sandy loams on Oden Island and the Kalkaska sands
underlying some of the dwelling units on Pickerel Lake's
Ellsworth Point and Botsford Landing.
Phosphorus Adsorption Capacity
The phosphorus adsorption capacity of most soils around
Crooked Lake is adequate for septic treatment. However, Blue
Lake loamy sand and Roscommon muck, underlying a few residences
on the south shore, and Emmet sands, under most dwellings on
Oden Island, have low phosphorus adsorption capacities.
Approximately 301 of the dwellings on Pickerel Lake
are on Warners mucky loam, Tawas muck, or Roscommon mucky
sands which exhibit low phospho-rus adsorption capacities.
However, adjacent inland soils near the south shore consist
of Kalkaska sands with higher phosphorus adsorption capacities.
CONCLUSIONS
Most of the dwelling units on the south shore of Crooked
Lake are located on soils with characteristics severely
limiting their capacity to treat wastewater from conventional
septic systems. High seasonal groundwater levels are the
-------
B-4
major constraint along most of the shoreline. In addition,
soils with low permeability rates underly approximately one-
half of the existing dwellings. Residences on Oden Island
are situated on soils with some limitations but on-site waste
treatment such as mounds or other innovations could be
instituted. More than 50% o£ the dwellings on the south shore
of Crooked Lake and on Oden Island are year-round. This factor
should be considered when reviewing wastewater management
alternatives.
Much of the development surrounding Pickerel Lake is on
soils not capable of effectively treating septic system wastes.
Seasonal high groundwater levels are again the major constraint,
although low permeability and phosphorus adsorption problems
also exist. Therefore, alternative on-site methods of waste-
.*
water disposal should be considered. For example, a large
tract of Kalkaska sands located south of developments at
Botsford Landing and Ellsworth Point are highly suitable for
on-site wastewater treatment. This method may not be feasible
on the north side since only small, scattered parcels of suit-
able soils are available there. Holding tanks for pump-out
disposal offer a possible on-site alternative. Only 21! of
the dwellings around Pickerel Lake are year-round residences.
This factor may influence the choice of wastewater management
methods.
The Crooked-Pickerel Channel area is one of the largest
and most important wetlands in the watershed of Crooked and
Pickerel Lakes. Soils in this area consist largely of Tawas
and Carbondale muck which exhibit serious limitations to
-------
B-4
10
development and on-site wastewater disposal. The wetland
functions as an important breeding and nursery ground for
game fish and other aquatic organisms, provides habitat for
game birds and animals, and protects the quality of surface
and groundwater resources. Retainment of the soils and
vegetation of the Crooked-Pickerel Channel area in their
natural condition is ecologically sound and worthy of con-
sideration.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We thank M. Secrest and B. Burley for assistance in
preparing the soil maps, D. Mazur for help on the visual
survey of year-round dwelling units, and M. Hunger for
typing the manuscript.
-------
B-4
11
REFERENCES CITED
Alfred, S. D., A. G. Hyde, and R. L. Larson. 1973. Soil
Survey of Emmet County, Michigan. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture,
in cooperation with Michigan Agricultural Experiment
Station, 99 p.
Baker, F. G. and J. Bouma. 1975. Measurment of soil hydraulic
conductivity and site selection for liquid waste disposal.
In: Individual on-site wastevrater systems, Proc. Nat.
Conf., National Sanitation Foundation, Ann Arbor, MI.
Converse, J.C., R. J. Otis, J. Bouma, W. Walker, J. Anderson,
and D. Stewart. 1976. Design and construction procedures
for mounds in slowly permeable soils with or without
seasonally high water tables. Univ. Wisconsin, Unpubl.
mimeo., 35 p.
Goldstein, S. N» and W. J. Moberg, Jr. 1973. Wastewater
treatment systems for small corjnunities. Commission on
Rural Water, Washington, D.C., 340 p.
McCoy, E. and W. A. Ziebell. 1975. Effects of effluents on
groundwater. In: Individual on-site wastewater systems,
Proc. Nat. Conf., National Sanitation Foundation, Ann
Arbor, MI.
Michigan District Health Department No. 3. 1968. Emmet
County Sanitary Code, Ennet County, Michigan, 4 p.
-------
B-4
12
Schneider, I. F. and A. E. Erickson. 1972. Soil limitations
for disposal of municipal wastewaters. Michigan State
University Agricultural Experiment Station, East Lansing,
in cooperation with Michigan Water Resources Commission,
Farm Science Research Report No. 195, 54 p.
U.S. Soil Conservation Service. 1966. Land-capability
classification. Dept. of Agriculture, Handbook No. 210,
21 p.
Warshall, P. 1976. Ssptic tank practices. Mesa Press,
Bolinas, CA 76 p.
Williams and Works. 1976. Little Traverse Bay Area Facility
Plan, Springvale-Bear Creek area segment for wastewater
collection and treatment. Emmet County, Michigan,
Williams and Works, Inc., Grand Rapids, Michigan.
-------
13
B-4
APPENDIX A
Maps of the Crooked and Pickerel Lakes area, depicting
variables that influence adequacy of soils for on-site
wastewater disposal.
-------
(Pf "iC- NT)
o • &
l
^—.v
[WP
/ I
I
Hi'i N i ..'V i/
t' I'
/'
.(
\ 'l^j.
\
\
\
1
...."•'
^ •"
- ~n
/w
' /I ^
y\i:i
^ \-
• u\
^
-*) - i
^ ?•
; \. .<**'
TOTAL DWELLING UNITS
Fig. A-l Slope. Darker shading indicates more severe limitations to on-site v^astewater
disposal on Figures A-l through A-5
-------
M,VJVArt SOILS i,60o,r ' i
1.300 tol.COQ (7-Z1
< 1,300 ^
^;;;;.^j|ps&
LITTLE_T AVERSE-' jjTTLEFIELD TWP
. i •-.
\ „«• I - • ;
'• "' '\ >, i_j
--•f&'A
' K r<-^
rcr"
";:"'/v^ '•*' -""': '"^r--'';-fe'J',;V.!'' rf¥'^''1'^:1t*Tf'^''^(A'i;l " / " \ t! **•*' jJ?1 -.^l^Jt"^
.g;;*-i*ft*rA-*'^^^%.^if5f'V^+^ '/ \ i' V :"'- "''? V •' .;
TOTAL DWELLING UNITS
Fig. A-2 Phosphorus adsorption capacity
tn
-------
DtPTHTO SEASONAL
HiRM WATER TABLE
litol)
> 4
—JC—.J
0-2
TOTAL DWELLING UNITS
Fig. A-3 Depth to seasonal high groundwater
-------
PERMEABILITY
(in./hour
MANMAOC SOILS
SOILS TOO VARIABE
TO MAP
2-0-6.
0.63-2.0 CT3
<0.63 6ES3 '
LITTLE TRAVERS LITTLERELO
TOTAL DWELLING UNITS
Fig. A-4 Permeability
-------
CLOPE (PERCENT)
0-6 i "
DEPTHTO SEASONAL
HIGH WATER TASLE
PHOSPHORUS ADSORPTION
per ocre in the upper
3 feat of soil)
> 1,600 f '
1,300
< 1,300 C
.v.v.;, if SOILS }
•'..J "00 VAHiAlfl E
.,'K- MAP
( r—•>
LITTLE TPAVERbE— L1T7LEFiELO 1 WH
v ^^"^
' V
to - /
TOTAL DWELLING UNITS
Fig. A-5 A composite map of the four variables that affect suitability of soils for
on-site wastewater disposal
-------
APPENDIX
B-5
SIMPLIFIED ANALYSIS OF LAKE EUTROPHICATION
Introduction
Two basic approaches to the analysis of lake eutrophication have
evolved:
1) A complex lake/reservoir model which simulates the
interactions occurring within ecological systems; and
2) the more simplistic nutrient loading model which relates the
loading or concentration of phosphorus in a body of water to
its physical properties.
From a scientific standpoint, the better approach is the complex
model; with adequate data such models can be used to accurately
represent complex interactions of aquatic organisms and water quality
constituents. Practically speaking, however, the ability to represent
these complex interactions is limited because some interactions have not
been identified and some that are known cannot be readily measured.
EPAECO is an example of a complex reservoir model currently in use. A
detailed description of this model has been given by Water Resources
Engineers (1975).
In contrast to the complex reservoir models, the empirical nutrient
budget models for phosphorus can be simply derived and can be used with
a minimum of field measurement. Nutrient budget models, first derived
by Vollenweider (1968) and later expanded upon by him (1975), by Dillon
(1975a and 1975b) and by Larsen - Mercier (1975 and 1976), are based
upon the total phosphorus mass balance. There has been a proliferation
of simplistic models in eutrophication literature in recent years
(Bachmann and Jones, 1974; Reckhow, 1978). The Dillon model has been
demonstrated to work reasonably well for a broad range of lakes with
easily obtainable data. The validity of the model has been demonstrated
by comparing results with data from the National Eutrophication Survey
(1975). The models developed by Dillon and by Larsen and Mercier fit
the data developed by the NES for 23 lakes located in the northeastern
and northcentral United States (Gakstatter et a_l 1975) and for 66 bodies
of water in the southeastern US (Gakstatter and Allum 1975). The Dillon
model (1975b) has been selected for estimation of eutrophication
potential for Crystal Lake and Betsie Lake in this study.
Historical Development
Vollenweider (1968) made one of the earliest efforts to relate
external nutrient loads 2to eutrophication. He plotted annual total
phosphorus loadings (g/m /yr) against lake mean depth and empirically
determined the transition between oligotrophic, raesotrophic and
eutrophic loadings. Vollenweider later modified his simple loading mean
depth relationship to include the mean residence time of the water so
that unusually high or low flushing rates could be taken into account.
-------
B-5
Dillon (1975) further modified the model to relate mean depth to a
factor that incorporates the effect of hydraulic retention time on
nutrient retention.
The resulting equation, used to develop the model for trophic
status, relates hydraulic flushing time, the phosphorus loading, the
phosphorus retention ratio, the mean depth and the phosphorus
concentration of the water body as follows:
2
where: L = phosphorus loading (gm/m I jr.}
R = fraction of phosphorus retained
p = hydraulic flushing rate (per yr.)
z = mean depth (m)
P = phosphorus concentration (mg/1)
The graphical solution, shown in Figure E-4-a, is presented as a
log-log plot of L (1-R) versus z.
P
The Larsen-Mercier relationship incorporates the same variables as
the Dillon relationship.
In relating phosphorus loadings to the lake trophic condition,
Vollenweider (1968), Dillon and Rigler (1975) and Larsen and Mercier
(1975, 1976) examined many lakes in the United States, Canada and
Europe. They established tolerance limits of 20/ug/l phosphorus above
which a lake is considered eutrophic and 10 mg/1 phosphorus above which
a lake is considered mesotrophic.
Assumptions and Limitations
The Vollenweider-Dillon model assumes a steady state, completely
mixed system, implying that the rate of supply of phosphorus and the
flushing rate are constant with respect to time. These assumptions are
not totally true for all lakes. Some lakes are stratified in the summer
so that the water column is not mixed during that time. Complete steady
state conditions are rarely realized in lakes. Nutrient inputs are
likely to be quite different during periods when stream flow is minimal
or when non-point source runoff is minimal. In addition, incomplete
mixing of the water may result in localized eutrophication problems in
the vicinity of a discharge.
Another problem in the Vollenweider-Dillon model is the inherent
uncertainty when extrapolating a knowledge of present retention
coefficients to the study of future loading effects. That is to say,
due to chemical and biological interactions, the retention coefficient
may itself be dependent on the nutrient loading.
The Vollenweider/Dillon model or simplified plots of loading rate
versus lake geometry and flushing rates can be very useful in describing
the general trends of eutrophication in lakes during the preliminary
-------
B-5
FIGURE E-A-a
> I I I I I I
!0.0
MEAN DEPTH (METERS)
L= AREAL PHOSPHORUS INPUT (g/m^yr)
R= PHOSPHORUS RETENTION COEFFICIENT (DIMENSIONLESS)
P= HYDRAULIC FLUSHING RATE (yr"1)
100.0
-------
B-5
planning process. However, if a significant expenditure of monies for
nutrient control is at stake, a detailed analysis to calculate the
expected phytoplankton biomass must be performed to provide a firmer
basis for decision making.
-------
B-5
NON-POINT SOURCE MODELING - OMERNIK'S MODEL
Because so little data was available on non-point source runoff in
the Study Area, which is largely rural, empirical models or statistical
methods have been used to derive nutrient loadings from non-point
sources. A review of the literature led to the selection of the model
proposed by Omernik (1977). Omernik's regression model provides a quick
method of determining nitrogen and phosphorus concentrations and loading
based on use of the land. The relationship between land use and
nutrient load was developed from data collected during the National
Eutrophication Survey on a set of 928 non-point source watersheds.
Omernik's data indicated that the extent of agricultural and
residential/urban land vs. forested land was the most significant
parameter affecting the influx of nutrient from non-point sources. In
the US, little or no correlation was found between nutrient levels and
the percentage of land in wetlands, or range or cleared unproductive
land. This is probably due to the masking effects of agricultural and
forested land.
Use of a model which relates urban/residential and agricultural
land use to nutrient levels seems appropriate where agricultural and/or
forest make up the main land-use types.
The regression models for the eastern region of the US are as
follows:
Log P = 1.8364 + 0.00971A + op Log 1.85 (1)
Log N = 0.08557 + 0.00716A - 0.00227B + CTN Lot 1.51 (2)
where:
P = Total phosphorus concentration - mg/1 as P
N = Total nitrogen concentration - mg/1 as N
A = Percent of watershed with agricultural plus urban land use
B = Percent of watershed with forest land use
Op = Total phosphorus residuals expressed in standard deviation
units from the log mean residuals of Equation (1). Determined
from Omernik (1977), Figure 25.
0N = Total nitrogen residuals expressed in standard deviation units
from the log mean residuals of Equation (2). Determined from
Omernik (1977), Figure 27.
1.85 = f, multiplicative standard error for Equation 1.
-------
B-5
1.51 = f, multiplicative standard error for Equation (2).
The 67% confidence interval around the estimated phosphorus or
nitrogen consideration can be calculated as shown below:
Log PL = Log P + Log 1.85 (3)
Log NL = Log N + Log 1.51 (4)
where:
PT = Upper and lower values of the 67% phosphorus confidence limit -
mg/1 as P
The 67% confidence limit around the estimated phosphorus or
nitrogen concentrations indicates that the model should be used for
purposes of gross estimations only. The model does not account for any
macro-watershed* features peculiar to the Study Area.
-------
APPENDIX
B-6
INVESTIGATION 0? S2PTIC LSACEA2S DISCHARGES
INTO
CEQOE3D LAX3 AND PICEER3L LASS, HIGEIGAN
November, 1978
Prepared for
WAPORA, Inc.
Washington, D. C.
Prepared by
K-V Associates, Inc.
"alsouth, Massachusetts
January, 1979
-------
B-6
TABLE 0? CONTENTS
Page
1.0 Introduction - Flume Types and. Characteristics 1
2*0 Methodology - Sampling and Analysis... 8
JeO Plume Locations .. 10
4.0 Nutrient Analyses. 14-
5»0 Nutrient Relationships. , 17
5-1 Assumed Vastewater Characteristics 18
5-2 Assumed Background Levels 19
5-5 Attenuation of Nitrogen Compounds 20
5.4 Attenuation of Phosphorus Compounds 20
6.0 Colifona Levels in Surface *,;aters 21
7.0 Relationship of Attached Plant Growth to Plumes 22
8.0 Conclusions. 26
References • 28
Appendix 29
-------
B-6
INTRODUCTION
Septic Leachate Pluses - Types and Characteristics
In porous soils, groundwatar inflows frequently convey
•-zistevaters fror: nearshcre septic units through bottom sediments
a-i ir.to lake waters, causing attached algae growth and algal
bloods. The lake shoreline is a particularly sensitive area
since: 1) the groundwater depth is shallow, encouraging soil
"water saturation and anaerobic conditions; 2) septic units and
ler-chir.g fields are frequently located close to the water's
e.ija, allowing only a short distance for bacterial degradation
cLT-d soil adsorption of potential contaminants-, and $) the
recreational attractiveness of the lakeshore often induces
temporary overcrowding of homes leading to hydraulically
overloaded septic units. Rather than a passive release from
lakeshore bottoms, groundwater plumes from nearby on-site
treatment units actively emerge along shorelines, raising
sediment nutrient levels and creating local elevated concen-
trations of nutrients (Eerfoot and Brainard, 1978). The
contribution of nutrients from subsurface discharges of shoreline
Septic units has been estimated at 30 to 60 percent of the total
nutrient load in certain New Hampshire lakes (LRPC, 1977).
Vzstevater effluent contains a mixture of near UV fluorescent
orjanics derived from whiteners, surfactants and natural
•-«gradation products which are persistent under the combined
-1-
-------
B-6
'^-SEPTIC TANK
X
SEPTIC LEACHATE
FIGUR:
Excessive Loading of Septic Systems on Porous
Soils Causes the Development of Plumes of
Poorly-treated Effluent Which Move Laterally
with Groundwater Flow and May Discharge Near
the Shoreline of Nearby Lakes.
-------
-3- B-6
i -j_tior.s of low 0x70311 and limited, rricrobial activity,
7:-u-e 2 shows two samples of sand-filtered effluent from the
C3is Air Force Ease sewage treatment plant. One was analyzed
-"-mediately and the other after having sat in a darkened bottle
for si>: months at 20°G. Kote that little change in fluorescence
v=3 ao-arent, although during the aging process some narrowing
". - "he fluorescent region, did occur. The aged effluent
percolating through sandy loan soil under anaerobic conditions
reaches a stable ratio between the organic content and chlorides
which are highly mobile anions. The stable ratio (conjoint
si.cr.al) between fluorescence and conductivity allows ready
direction of leachate plumes by their conservative tracers as
an early warning of potential nutrient breakthroughs or public
health pvobletns.
The Septic Leachate Detector (ENESCO Type 2100 "Septic
Snooper") consists of the subsurface probe, the water intake
system, the analyzer control unit, and the graphic recorder
(.Figure 3)« Initially the unit is calibrated against stepwise
increases of waste-water effluent, of the type to be detected,
s^csd to the background lake water. The probe of the unit is
tnen placed in the lake water along the shoreline. Groundwater
seeping through the shoreline bottom is drawn into the sub-
surface intake of the rrobe and travels upwards to the analyzer
unit. As it passes through the analyzer, separate conductivity
£•"-•-- specific fluorescence signals are generated and sent to
z signal processor which registers the separate signals on a
-------
B-6
7'
u
o
Z
LJ
LJ
_
UJ
G:
20H
10-
g.^in_RLl£R.Ep. SECONDARILY-TREATED
WASTE WATER.EFFLUENT
NEWLY SAND FILTERED
OTIS EFFLUENT
AGED
SAND FILTERED
EFFLUENT (6mo.)
300
FIGURE2 .
400 £00
WAVELENGTH (nm)
Sand-filtered Effluent Drcduces a Stable
Fluorescent Signature, Mere Shown Before
and After Aging.
-------
B-6
EFFLUENT
INDEX
ENDECO" SEPTIC LEACHATE DETECTOR (SEPTiC .SNOOPER1") SYSTEM DIAGRAM
-•* _-_' _"** 'j^^M^.TT'-qtv^i.SS* .r^'J^--^ ™-~-.~r
l-^S^i^^^M^^^^y^St^^l^;
>'. • •—• -'vi.iS'.r-r^Ssf-^^K*' v^^V"^-^>-<-iKVir^ Hir'• n^r1*'^-^*^
^'•^TB^iiiM^
^. ..". „ ^ , • , ".;,. .-^ piloted Alcno the Snore! me.
me bmt is Mounted in a_ooau ,n, Pn« ;o o Takefi at
Here the Probe ,s Shown^n^the -a^, n^:d Analysis.
rho rn'c<-navno nr TUP in'il.. i >-• • uGwCi " -
-------
-c- B_6
c-„,',- ci-art recorder as the boat moves forward. The analyzed
.^.-z.-,, j_s continuously discharged fron the unit back into the
receiving water.
Type 5 cf ?lu~es
The capillary-like structure of sandy porous soils and
horizontal srrounivater movement induces a fairly narrow pluae
iron malfunctioning septic units. The point of discharge along
the shoreline is often through a SID all area of lake bottom,
co~ncnly forming an oval-shaped area several meters wide when
the seo~ic unit is close to the shoreline. In denser subdivisions
containing several overloaded units the discharges may overlap,
ferr.ing a broader increase.
Three different types of groundwater-related wastewater
plumes sre commonly encountered during a septic leachate survey:
A) erupting plunes, B) passive plumes, and C) stream source
piu-es. As the soil becomes saturated with dissolved solids
and organics -during the aging process of a leaching on-lot
septic system, a breakthrough of organics occurs first, followed
by inorganic penetration (principally chlorides, sodium, and
ether salts). The active emerging of the combined organic and
inorganic residues into the shoreline lake water describes an
erupting p?,ume. In seasonal dwellings where wastewater loads
vary in tine, a plune cay be apparent during late summer-when
shoreline cottages sustain heavy use, but retreat during winter
curing low flow conditions. Residual orgp.nica from the waste-
water often still reraain attached to soil particles in the
-------
-7- B-6
vicinity of the previous erupting oluce, slowly releasing into
*v,3 q>o-8line waters. This dormant t>lume indicates a Drevious
L*j_*C.'-'—*-'~ ~ *
b"°3!cthrou§h, but sufficient treatment of the plume exists
u~ier current conditions so that no inorganic discharge is
acsarsnt. Stream source plumes refer to either groundwater
leachiugs of nearstrearn septic leaching fields or direct pipe
discharges into streams which then enpty into the lake.
-------
-8-
2.0 METHODOLOGY - SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS
Water sampling for nutrient concentrations along the
shoreline are coordinated with -che septic leachate profiling
to clearly identify the source of effluent. The shoreline of
Crocked/Pickerel Lake consists predominantly of sandy loam soils,
A profile of the shoreline for emergent plumes was obtained by
•rsnually towing the septic leachate detector along the lee side
of the shoreline in a 5 meter fiberglass rowboat. As water was
drawn through the probe and through the detector, it was scanned
for specific organics and inorganics common to septage leachate.
Whenever elevated concentrations of leachate were indicated
or. the continual chart recorder, a search was made of the area
to pinpoint the location of maximum concentration. At that time
1) a surface water sample was taken from the discharge of the
defector for later nutrient analysis, 2) an interstitial
groundvater sample was taken with a hand-driven well-point
sampler to a depth of .3 meter and 3) finally a surface water
S3.~p.le for bacterial content (total and fecal coliform) was
also taken. The combination of the triple sampling served to
:'--i:::iiy che source of effluent. If the encountered plume
originated from ground-water seepage, the concentration of
nutrients would be considerably, elevated in the well-point
sanple. If the source were surface effluent runoff, a low
nutrient -round-water content would exist with an elevated
-------
B-6
bacterial content. If a stream source occurred, an isolated
sinsle rslume would not be found during search, but instead a
broadening Dluae traced back to a surface water inlet. Ground-
water samples taken in the vicinity of the surface outflow would
also not show as high a nutrient content as the surface water
samples ,
V.ater samples taken in the vicinity of the peak of plumes
were analysed by SPA Standard Methods for the following chemical
constituents:
Conductivity (cond.)
Atnaonia-nitrogen (NE^-N)
Nitrate-nitrogen (NOj,-N)
Total phosphorus (TP?
Orthophosphate phosphorus (PQ^-P)
A total of 29 water samples were obtained at locations of selected
pluses for analysis. The samples were placed in polyethylene
containers, chilled, and frozen for transport and storage.
Conductivity was determined by a Becksan (iModel HC-19) conductiv-
ity bridge, ammonium-nitrogen by phenolate method, nitrate-
nitrogen by the brucine sulfate procedure, and orthophosphate-
phosphorus and total phosphorus by the single reagent procedures
following standard methods (EPA, 1975)
Va^er samples for bacterial analysis were placed in steri-
lized 150 ml glass containers obtained from the Emmet County
health Eepartment and mailed to the Michigan Department of
Public Health, Bureau of Laboratories at Grand Rapids for
analysis. Analyses were performed for total coliforra bacteria
and fecal coliforc by the membrane filter method.
-------
-10-
3.0 FLUME LOCATIONS
.Crooked and Pickerel Lakes are shallow recreational lakes
in the northern tip of Michigan near Little Traverse Bay on
Lske Kichigar.. Crooked Lake averages 3.05 m in depth and
Pickerel Lake Eaintains a greater mean depth of 3-96 m. The
elevation of both lakes is controlled by the locks of the inland
•waterway system. Prior to the period of the survey, November 18
to 25, the elevation of the lakes was lowered approximately one
zeter to lessen shoreline winter'ice damage. Poorly drained,
nearly level organic and sandy soils dominate the shoreline
areas of the two lakes. With the low relief of the shore, it
was not unusual to encounter only one meter depths at distances
over 50 c.eters cut from shore.
A total of >1 pluses were observed along the accessible
southern shore of Crooked Lake and the Pickerel Lake shoreline
(Figure 4). Solid circles indicate erupting pluses, open circles
are dormant plumes, and solid squares represent stream source
plunes. A line is drawn from each symbol to the location along
the shoreline where the plume was encountered. The highest
pluze concentration per shoreline length "was observed in Pickerel
Laxe in the vicinity of Ellsworth Point and Botsford Landing.
While 11 pluses are indicated in the Ellsworth Point region,
tne broader signals may represent composites of leachate from
nearby fields and not entirely individual sources. Many were
-------
-11-
r-e-^rkable by the distance from shore at which they could still
be detected. Near Botsford Landing, an individual plume was
sfill detectable 50 m from the shoreline. Cccassionally doublet
pluses were observed which may evidence double drainage fields
oriented parallel to the groundwater flow towards the lake. One
such noticeable peak occurred on the approach to Botsford
Landing.
Only 7 dormant plunes (organic signal only), often indicative
of seasonal loading, were found. Most of these (5) were found
on the north shore of Pickerel Lake.
A broaa discharge of bog leachate was emitted from an ex-
tensive region of hardwood forest on Carbondale muck soils into
Pickerel Lake (Figure 4). The outflow of water had occassional
sufficient upflow through the bottom sediments to fluidize the
sandy loaa and create "soft" spots into which a leg could easily
sink. Although fluorescent, the organic discharge was easily
characterized by its different spectral emission, its reduced
conductance of 150 nmhos, and low nutrient content.
Beginning with the Ellsworth Point region and continuing
along the remaining e:cpanse of shoreline, particularly en the
southern and eastern shores, a high ratio of plumes to housing
units was apparent. Sanitary surveys of the southern shore of
Crcorie'l Lake and periphery of Pickerel Lake have described
ssv~;?6 roil and groundwater limitations for septic tank disposal
fields within 100 meters of the shoreline. Depth to seasonal
ground.-:ater is 0 - 2 feet for all lots on Crooked Lake
-------
-12-
within the survey area east of segment 19 (Figure 5). Only 19
Iocs in Pickerel Lake were identified with depth to seasonal
grcunivater greater than 1.3 n (4 ft.). The soils are poorly
or so-ewhat poorly drained with a seasonal high ground-water table,
rsrid noderate and moderately slow permeability (U3DA, 1973).
A low density of plumes was observed around the periphery
of Oien Island despite the unsuitable soils condition. As an
island, the area nay have very low rates of groundwater flow
since recharge would be restricted to rainfall received by the
island area. The reduction of groundwater drainage rates may
reduce the breakthrough of pluses from the leaching fields.
Certain shorelines were not included in the continuous
transects due to heavy ice formation during the latter days of
the survey. Sampling through ice holes placed from 3 to 6 meters
froa shoreline along the Henry-Channel region revealed noticeable
quantities of effluent in the lakswater under the ice (Figure 7)-
Analysis of the nutrient content of all samples showed a
significant correlation between plume strength and soluble
phosphorus, clearly indicating that plunie emergence is affecting
the quality of surface water.
-------
©ERUPTING PLUME
O DORMANT PLUME
a STREAM SOURCE PLUME
%ICE COVER
:: BOG DISCHARGE
Figure 4. Plume locations on Crooked Lake and Pickerel Lake.
-------
B-6
4.0 NUTRIENT ANALYSES
Completed analyses of the chemical content of 28 samples
taken along the Crooked/Pickerel Lakes shoreline are presented
in Table 1. The sample letters refer to the locations given in
?i,rure 4-. The symbol HS" refers to surface water sample and
the symbol "G" to groundwater sample. Freezing temperatures
limited the groundwater samples to only four. Air temperatures
of 20°~25°F would freeze the .samples in the stainless steel
well-point before the sample could be transferred to a receiving
flask.
The conductivity of the water samples as conductance
(pmhos/cm) is given in the second column. The nutrient analyses
for orthophosphorus (PCL-?), total phosphorus (TP), ammonium-
nitrogen (NH.-N), and nitrate-nitrogen (NO^-N) are presented in
the next four columns in parts-per-million (ppm - mg/1).
-------
-------
1, (coni,inuod )
Samnle Cone en
Number Cond. PO^-P
t rat ion
TP
(ppin -
Break through.
mg/1) Ratio Efficiency
KO,-N G P N P N
Y S 405
32 S 469
33 S 418
34 G 411
35 S 435
Background concentrati
400
Effluent (lagoon)**
167
Local effluent
002
007
003
004
002
on (G)
121
Surface wate-r influence
Corr. coeff. (r)
cond. ao X .64
2 value at 3crz .758*. 75
significance sig.
* bog
** nnr>nrf>ntlv diluted
L hv Tni
.005
.009
.004
.005
.004
.004
1.930
.23
Insig.
nfall
.014
.021
.01G
.018
.019
.014
4.148
.05
inaig
.162
.115
.120
.124
.134-
.010
.267 £
i
+400 +8 +20
NH^-N + N07-N
-.13 .20
insig. inaig.
cr>
-------
B-6
-17-
5.0 NUTRIENT RELATIONSHIPS
By the use of a few calculations, the -characteristics of
the vastewater plunes can be described. Firstly, a general
background concentration for conductance and nutrients is
de-emined. 'The concentration of nutrients found in the plume
is then compared to the background and to wastewater effluent
frc.a the lake region to determine the percent breakthrough of
phosphorus and nitrogen to the lake water. Because the well-
point sampler does not always intercept the center of the plume,
the nutrient content of the plume is always partially diluted
by surrounding ambient background groundwater or seeping lake-
water concentrations. To correct for the uncertainty of location
cf withdrawal of the groundwater pluxe sasple, the nutrient
concentrations above background values found with the groundwater
plurze s re corrected to the assumed undiluted concentration
anticipated in standard sand-filtered effluent and then divided
by the nutrient content of raw effluent. Computational formulae
c an b 3 e >rr> r eased:
fcr the difference between background (CQ) and
observed (Cj_) values:
C^ - C = AC. conductance
T'P, - T? =. ATP- total phosphorus
Si's- - TN =«AN. total nitrogen (here sum of
0 X NOrN and NH^-N)
-------
B-6
-16-
for attenuation curing soil passage:
A?. = % breakthrough of phosphorus
a? breakthrough of nitrogen
C =• conductance of background groundwater (umhos/ca)
C- =• conductance of observed pluae groundwater
(umhos/cm)
AC f = conductance of sand-filtered effluent minus
e~ the background conductance of municipal
source water Qiahos/cni)
TP = total phosphorus in background groundwater
0 (ppra - mg/1)
TP. *= total phosphorus of observed plume ground-
1 water (ppm - mg/1)
TN " total nitrogen content of background ground-
water, here calculated as NOz-N 4- NH^-N
(ppm - Eg/1)
(pp
TN. = total nitrogen content of observed plume
groundwater, here calculated as NO,-N + NEL-K
(ppm - mg/1) ^
5-1 AssuEed Was te water Characteristics
Local samples of effluent obtained at the Benzonia County
and E""8t; County sewage treatment plants exhibited a conductance :
tc-al phosphorus : total nitrogen ratio of 700:8:20; subtracting
the background lake water concentration of 300 /mhos/cm gives a
AC:AT?:AT'N ratio of 400:3:20 representing the change in concen-
tration to source water by household use in the Crooked/Pickerel
Lakes region. Of note, the addition of total dissolved solids
(?s indicated by AC) tends to be higher than soft water regions
-------
B-6
-19-
which often show "a" AC:ATP:ATN ratio of 200:8:20 (Kerfoot and
Brainard, 1978; Kerfoot, et. al., 1976). The common use of
water softeners in the hard water areas may be a partial
contributing factor.
5.2 Assumed Background Levels
Little information exists on background groundwater con-
centrations in the Crooked/Pickerel Lake area. Generally, the
interstitial, lake bottom groundwater tended to be slightly higher
in dissolved solids and therefore conductance, than the raw lake
water. Sample V which was taken away from plume regions exhibited
a conductance of 3^5 pmhos/cm compared to 300 ;imhos/cm for
normal lake water in the Pickerel Lake region. Surface water
samples taken near ice or under ice in Crooked Lake showed a
conductance over 4-00 ^imhos/cm. All samples exhibited elevated
ammonia nitrogen levels, presumably due to water-logged soils
with organic content which promotes reducing conditions. The
total phosphorus content of sample W was low at .OQ4- mg/1, although
plume
•ill groundwaterAsamples taken had elevated phosphorus levels,
"gain indicative of lessened binding under the more acid soil
substrate and chemically reducing conditions. Nitrate-nitrogen
values were quite variable and the average background for
groundwater samples was found to be about .010 ppm.
Table 2« Background groundwater levels for chemical constituents
in interstitial water of Crooked/Pickerel Lake sediments.
Cond. Nutrient Cone, (mg/l)
Constituent (umhos/cm) TP NH^-N NO^-N
Value 400 •- .004- .014- .010
-------
B-6
-20-
5.3 Attenuation of Nitrogen Coapounds
On the basis of observed ratios of total nitrogen found in
the limited sampled groundwater plumes, breakthrough of nitrogen
content ranged from a high of 32$ to a low of 1% of that expected
from the typical effluent (Table 1). A mean of 18# penetration
was observed based upon the three samples with sufficiently high
conductance for meaningful analysis. The dominant nitrogen
species was NIL-N, consistent with water-logged, saturated soils.
5.4 Attenuation of Phosphorus Compounds
Similarly, analysis of the observed ratios of total phos-
phorus found in groundwater plumes indicated a high of 28$ and
a low of 2.% breakthrough of phosphorus content. A mean penetration
of 13$ was calculated from the observed groundwater samples.
A regression analysis was performed to indicate if any positive
correlation existed between the strength of plumes, as indicated
by absolute conductance, and the presence of nutrient species.
Correlation coefficients (r) calculated for conductance and
orthophosphorus, total phosphorus, NK^-N, NO^-N and combined
KH^-N and NO^-N were, respectively, .64-, .23, .05, -.13, and
.20. A noticeable correlation between soluble orthophosphorus
(inorganic P) and plume strength, significant at the 3tf level,
u
indicated that plume emergence was having a detectable effect
on lake surface water phosphorus concentrations.
-------
B-6
-•21-
6.0 COLIFOSM LEVELS IN SURPACE WATSHS
A series of water samples ware analysed for total and fecal
coliform content (Table 3) to determine the contribution of
septic leachate plumes to bacterial content. Crooked/Pickerel
Lake is considered a recreational lake with surface waters
classified for total body contact recreation. The Michigan
Water Resources Commission has stated that fecal coliforms shall
not exceed 200 organisms per 100 nil in five or more consecutive
samples. Although source is indicated, all are surface water samples,
Table 3, Bacterial content of plumes.
Location Type of Plume Coliform Content (#/100 ml)
Total Fecal
E
I
K
L
M
N
0
P
Q
s
T
U
V
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Surface water
(Barry Creek)
Groundwater
Surface water
(Minne Creek)
Groundwater
Groundwater
Background
100 <10
<100 <10
600 <1O
900
-------
B-6
-22-
7.0 RELATIONSHIP OF ATTACHED PLANT
GROWTH TO PLUMES
A Crooked/Pickerel Lakes sanitary survey conducted by
the University of Michigan Biological Station (UMBS, 1978)
included a visual observation of the shoreline area for Clado-
phora, a microscopic, bright green filamentous algae which often
forms dense patches of growth in the presence of high nutrients.
The Cladophora study revealed a high correlation between
Cladoohora growth and residents who use water excessively,
residents who feed waterfowl and residents who do not maintain
their septic systems by cleaning them at least every eight years.
On-site inspections and questions about performance and
history of the sewage treatment systems established that J3$ of
those on Pickerel Lake had a history of problems such as ponding
of effluent, backing up, odor, etc. (UMBS, 1973). Approximately
54# of the residences on Crooked/Pickerel Lakes which had
suitable Cladophora substrates in the beach shoreline area
had algae growth. On Pickerel Lake, 52% of lots which have
Cladophora growth are closer than the existing 50-foot separation
of distance in the Michigan State Sanitary Code. No significant
correlation existed between Cladophora. growth and whether the
•residence was year-round or seasonal.
The relationship between the nutrient loading per shoreline
area, estimated from plume emergence, and that of Cladophora
occurrence is presented in Table 4. The plume frequency is
-------
B-6
-23-
divided into different segments along the shoreline shown in
Figure 6. Plumes were observed associated with a mean of 29#
(1/3) of the shoreline housing units, a rather high percentage.
The nutrient loading per segment was computed using the mean
observed frequency of breakthrough of N and P observed for the
average plume times a per-swelling loading of 9-1 kg/yr N and
3.6 kg/yr P. In segments 3 through 6, 10 through 12, 14, and
16 where the projected phosphorus loading exceeded 2.4- kg/yr/mi,
a substantial number of lots experienced Cladophora growth. The
Cladophora patches approached carpet-like thickness in segment
16, indicative of a high rate of nutrient input. The limited
groundwater samples taken in the area showed substantially
elevated phosphorus levels with mean concentrations of .088
soluble phosphorus (PO^-P) and .210 total phosphorus (TP).
In addition, a significant correlation existed between plume
strength indicated by conductance recorded by the septic leachate
detector and soluble phosphorus in the overlying surface waier.
The poor soil conditions, aided by (a) excessive water use
which increases flow rate and reduces residence time in the soil
column and (b) the closeness of drainage fields to the shoreline
area, results in the groundwater transport via subsurface plumes
from individual septic units of sufficient nutrient loads to
sustain Cladophora growths along the shoreline where suitable
substrate exists.
-------
Table 4. Calculated phosphorus loading per shoreline length based upon observed
frequency of plumes and $ breakthrough of nutrients.
Segment
Housing
Units (H)
// of Ma,1or
Plumes (P)
Nutrient P Loading/ Recorded
Loading Approx. Shoreline Lota with
Frequency Ocg/yr) Shoreline Length Cladopjiora
(#) P N Length (mi) (kg/yr/mi) (Hl-fiTs, T975)
1
2
3
4
6
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
3
3
10
10
23
18
4
5
0
15
14
16
14
:H
3
61
3
4
37
0
2
3
3
+
1
—
—
0
3
4
4
2
9
3
11*
1
1
5
0
67
30
30
?
6
—
—
—
20
29
25
14-
26
100
18
33
25
14
0
.9
1.4
1,4
—
• 5
_
—
0
1*4
1.9
1.9
.9
4.2
1.4
5-2
• 5
• 5
2.4
1.6
3.3
4.9
4.9
_
1.6
—
-
0
4.9
6.6
6.6
3.3
15.8
4.9
18.0
1.6
1.6
8.2
.5 o
i.o .9
.3 4.7i
1.1 1.3
.9 + -
1.0 .5
.7
.4
.7 0
.6 2.3i
.8 2.4]
.6 3.2J
.5 1.8
.5 8.4
.6 2.3
.9 5-7
1.3 .4
.5 1.0
oO 3.0
1?
0
14
5
-
-
-
6
-
4
-
13
0
1?
«•
I
rvj
*some may be composite scans
w
-------
SEG. ii \;L_SEG. 12
T
0 ERUPTING PLUME
O DORMANT PLUME
K STREAM SOURCE PLUME
%ICE COVER
;: BOG DISCHARGE
SEG. 15
Figure *?. Segmentation of Crooked Lake and Pickerel Lake shorelines for
nutrient loading.
i
ro
vn
-------
-26-
8.0 CONCLUSIONS
A septic leachate survey was conducted along the south shore
of Crocked Lake and the entire shoreline of Pickerel Lake during
November, 1978. The following observations were obtained from
the shoreline profiles., analyses of groundwater and surface water
samples, evaluation of groundwater flow patterns, and comparison
of attached algae growth with plune location:
1, Over 51 groundwater plumes of wastewater origin were
observed along the accessible southern shore of Crooked Lake and
the Pickerel Lake shoreline.
2. A high mean frequency of 29^ of the residential units
surveyed exhibited shoreline plunes. The highest density of
plumes per shoreline length were found in the regions of Ellsworth
Point, Botsford Landing and Kenry-Channel pLoads.
3. A high correlation existed between the location of
emergence of plumes and attached algae growth, particularly
Cladophora. Gro.undwaters obtained near peak concentrations of
the outflow of the observed plumes contained sufficient nutrients
to support attached algae and aquatic weed growth.
4. Poor removal of phosphorus and nitrogen in the waste-
water occurs during passage through the shoreline soils. An
observed mean breakthrough of phosphorus was \J>% and nitrogen,
principally in the ammonium fors, was
-------
B-6
~2'7—
5. A noticeable correlation between soluble orthophosphorus
(inorganic P) and plume strength, significant at the Jer level,
indicated that plume emergence was having a detectable effect
on lake surface water phosphorus concentrations.
6. No bacterial samples were found in excess of State
standards for recreational use, indicating no apparent surface
overflows of shoreline sectic units.
-------
-28- B~6
R3F3HSNCE3
EPA, 1975- Methods for chemical analysis of water and wastes.
Environmental Protection Agency, NSRG, Analytical Control
Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio ^5263.
Kerfoot, *. E., B. H. Ketchum, P. Kallio, P. Bowker, A. Mann,
and C. Scolieri, 1976. Cape Cod waste v/ater renovation
end retrieval system - a study of water treatment and
conservation. Technical Report WHO1-76-5, Woods Hole
Oceanographic Institution, *>oods Hole, MA.
Kerfoot, V. B. and E. C, Brainard, 1973. Septic leachate
detection - a technological breakthrough for shoreline
on-lot system performance evaluation. In: State of
Knowledge in Land Treatment of Vastewater, H. L. McKim (ed.)
International Symposium at the Cold Eegions Research and
Engineering Laboratory, Hanover, New Hampshire.
LHPC, 1977- Discussion of nutrient retnetion coefficients,
Draft Report 6F2 from Phase II_Nonpoint Source Pollution
Control Program, Lakes Hegion Planning Commission,
Meredith, New Hampshire.
UHBS, 1978. Sanitary systems of Crooked and Pickerel Lakes,
Emmet County, Michigan: an on-site survey. Technical
report to the US3PA, Water Division ptegion V. Prepared
by the Biological Station, University of Michigan,
Pellston, Michigan.
USDA, 1973- Soil survey of Emmet County, Michigan. United
States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service
and Michigan Agrecultural Experiment Station. Soil
Conservation Service, U.S.D.A., Washington, D.C. 20250
-------
B-6
APPENDIX
-------
O ERUPTING PLUME
O DORMANT PLUME
c STREAM SOURCE PLUME
\\ICE COVER
:: BOG DISCHARGE
Figure 6. Sampling tracks.
to
-------
Track A
SegEent 16
-------
ifepvf^
M.Y-'i:-I'l.! iV*; 'frte^Wi!!'!tji
niH'^'-'iiiX^ki:'':^^
i; a;.
!M ! i:
tin
• i f
i ^ISM^MSfi?
i^*!^
bVi
! illil;!W
Ml i£ CO»i'OI?AnON
"ifitii
IT
a:
ME II COftrOHAfH^M
^fffff
v!Pv' ' ' hi' i • |'I
, f f'HJ! 'Ml* -i j •,'!. ,M :i 'if ;• j j j;: i <
iiSyililNiiiliii^ii!!
I M, NCW HAMI'SltlHC, I
||P!i||;if|||i;|;i; ;:|!:;
SAU M, t!IW MAMPSIIIRr. II -5.A. I
'i'-'Hi?TS4^
' ' ' ' ; j^Ji'j! ;!i i.;;|/7^^ii!! !.i;i||i^|jii;l^^
• j;;' j 1111 • 11 j j Y \ ', i', |!' ' *: i!
ii:iiiii.:::!.^ii^i! 'in
|!;^
iii!-
W,i//i!
Hi.i* A-r.i
Vtf?;
'f
wrr <.oufCMiAifuN
ii'ii'iii^ii!
~,i<;^ta
m
I'J'lilli
'mm
nii^fS'Atoi1
ffil
in
;;:|i:i|i:{|]||||:!!i||!|
•: '• .'i !i lii.l.'1:' |i!; nfeLkl^ i -iiyri^1'1
- '.i .!' ;'|i'i'liiif!t7iti!i;l^|,^^T^:' ••' / .^I'lXi
t'M.I.M, ni'lV IIAMITillinC, U.5.A.
IMiiffl
SsilillS
1 ' . i• i. • '(•'• • .:
mm
^
n
tA
ft
H
•jAi.rM, in «
:^t
/):JS|4:
*M:1:
¥\n
iite:-':i:i'
:>l-1.;<7.::^.
-------
Segments 9, 10, 11, 12, 1$, 14, 15
-------
Ml t. COItrOlfAtlON
,' V r~-
-------
J.M L t:OR('Of(#4!OII
£»m.i. i« «
- .-..
!
FAt: w, fn w nAMr-'.iimc ti r^ A.
UJ
t
-------
-------
.•ymm'^mm
1-:::^
:''' '
I'lilMllli'lNilil'll'illiilji!!!!;;!:!;!?^
!/J'^:ijj:;!!j^i::;|:^
, l;-.;i,:;k-i-..h:k •:!.!'' i*J';:<:!•! ilkt'-'-r:!'!'::'!--!^!
i -A ;'.!:.;i~. :^y^
CD
I
cr»
-------
-------
-------
Track C
Segments 5 and 1?
-------
, , - . ,. , ^ I . j, ,.,. I, , I • • r''
bd
I
CTi
-------
Mfem
i"'.:'P !";-!il!i,ii.iii:.!::;}i!' i,!
Ao
ta
-------
B-6
Track D
Segrnenta 1, 2, 3, 4, 18, 19
-------
iiiiiiiiiijliili^llliiiiiliiSifl'rllS
iii'ri"1!!. iili'i IHhM^'i^iJiiiliiNi'Wlilii.iriiPPniM
^-^Wfflfe
iiiiiitlltiiillifellliiililiil
-------
-------
: ;v ," • r-i'r ..'.-MI"'||:i-j;|i-!iM.|... !'>•';:>•>:•• ni!;|i|;>i'!;-:,';-y..'•1;;>"'1i'!l!IM.'!!|:"l'i|l|!"'I'.''•',[•" !'I;:|!!!;1|' •' : '• ';"rmi
' ll:- • ' .'•'' '! |'l:; 'ijii'1 i! .T '
i^iidlilllpi|^*@liiiip;
: ' M,!-;- \y\'\ .!•:::!:?•;!:•:•:•'^'"!•.';|:;;;H'' :j;i :;:|iiijv;!!'::H""^Ti!^^'RH^;P^!:-:^ht;itr?-i-
M;mMm^Mam:-Amm^
-.• •.. |;;- ,.,|; .;.,,;:;r|!i!,ui| ^^liiXj!;!!1':.!! iTjMiihiij'^i'-^ii1^]!^ ;!i;ii;Hi:hr;i!-S':iH! jliiPi;; ^ihi
... | •• ::,i; 4 -:;: ;-;^pTi^:!ii:,[,i,; ^i^piii ii!,!;.; iir^'ll^ir'V^'iir! 'r-\\ !!|i'ii'X.l!i!i!:'!i ^1^ ''•$• '|
••'•; i'':::'p!ii;!iM!!i!|ii!;i|!l'!;;:jl:iiiii!n!!OJ
ij^iM^^ \-l$$?
llil^ He!''!*
MFF. COIli'fHiAMOU
.Iji^iiilij;. !vl^|;:j,;;ii;'!i:;!!i^i!'!tii|!;iii;:;!iii
-------
|!!|1^
SliiiiliiSliSiK
ipw S-pp11:;;i!. w mm-1.!.. :i .-=i Mr pi -1
Sil'iiliiiliiiiiiiM^^
-------
B-6
EFFLUENT.
BOG INFLUENCE
SAMPLE L
BOG LEACHATE
CROOKED/PICKEREL
EFFLUENT 107, IN
DISTILLED H20
—i 1—i 1 1 ~r~
250 300 350 400 450 .500
Figure 7. Synchronous fluorescent scans of effluent, bog
leachatre and sencle 35 showing presence of effluent
leachate in surface water.
-------
APPENDIX
B-7
Sanitary Systems of. Crooked and
Pickerel Lakes, Emmet County
Michigan: An On-Site Survey
Technical Report to the
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Water Division Region V
From
The University of Michigan
Biological Station
Pellston, Michigan
November 1978
-------
B-7
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Tonic
Page
Introduction ]_
I. The Household Survey 2
A. Survey Form 2
B. Survey Process 2
II. Results 5
A. Dwelling Units 5
B. Sewage Disposal Systems 6
C. Environmental Features .... 9
1. Cladophora Study , . . 9
2. Soil Conditions 10
III. Discussion 11
A. The Survey Process , 11
B. The Survey Area 12
C. Responses 12
D. On-Site Inspections 13
E. Recommendation for Future Surveys 15
IV. Summary of Survey Results , . . . 16
A. Crooked Lake 16
B. Pickerel Lake 17
V. Suggestions for Specific Areas 17
A. Crooked Lake 17
B. Pickerel Lake , 20
VI. References Cited 23
Appendix A Survey Forms
Appendix B Maps of Lakes and Survey Areas
Appendix C Soil Maps of Survey Areas
Appendix D Press Release and "Flier"
Appendix E Table of Survey Information
-------
-1-
B-7
Introduction
A project to obtain site-specific qualitative and quantitative in-
formation by an approximately 300 home wastewater treatment systems
was conducted in and near Crooked and Pickerel Lakes, Emmet County,
northern lower Michigan. This rural wastewater planning area of
Springvale and Littlefield townships is being considered for on-site
technology as an alternative approach wastewater treatment — provided
suitable soil and ground water conditions exists. This project
also tested and evaluated the adequacy of surveys in obtaining and
recording information on sewage disposal adequacy in planning areas.
The sanitary survey compiles area wide data for on-site facility
characterists and identifies individual systems that may be creating
public health and environmental problems through malfunctioning and
that require improvement.
The actual survey took place during the period August 29-September
8, 1978 by Samuel Ehlers, Kevin Hughes, Sharon Mills and Joan Schu-
maker of the Biological Staion. Mr. Ehlers was manager of the sur-
vey teams. The project was directed by Mark Paddock.
-------
-2-
I. The Household Survey B-7
A. Survey Form:
The sanitary survey form used in the Crooked/Pickerel Lakes
planning area is modeled after the "Sanitary Survey for Construction
Grants Application" follwing the procedures and methods set forth by
Wapora, Inc. The survey form also includes parts used in other on-
site wastewater evaluations. These, surveys are the Marshall-Farns-
\vorth Septic Tank Survey of Bolinas, California and the Wastewater
Management Questionnaire used on Walloon Lakes, Emmet County by the
University of Michigan Biological Station project CLEAR in 1977.
The survey form covers six main topics:
1. Location and description of property
2. Resident occupancy. Size of household, duration of
occupancy, intended use and additions.
3. Sewage disposal system descrition
4. Service history of the systems
5. Use and description of water facilities
6. Site characteristics
7. Sketch of property and facility
A copy of the survey form is included in Appendix A.
B. Survey Process :
The location of the dwellings in the survey area were acquired
from Williams and Works' Little Traverse Bay Area-Charlevoix and
Emmet Counties-planning maps (1976) . A news release announcing the
survey work was submitted to Petoskey newspapers and local radio
stations. A "Flier", designed to leave on a front door when a
resident was absent. This flier explained who the surveyor was,
the purpose of the survey and that further attempts would be made to
-------
-3-
B-7
contact the resident. A sample flier is found in Appendix D.
Between August 20th and September 3rd surveyors conducted
resident interviews and facility inspections at dwellings on Crooked/
Pickerel Lake. Contact was attempted with each owner or resident
three times. After the first unsuccessful visit, neighbors were con-
tacted to obtain information about the absent resident. Often
neighbors would know plans of seasonal residents or could tell the
surveyor when to expect the person at home. Names were taken from
mail boxes and telephone calls were placed in the evening to schedule
visits.
Surveyors gave brief introductions similar to those written in
the "flier" (appendix B) and requested to speak with the person most
familiar with the dwelling and facility. Interviews averaged 20 to
30 minutes in length. Additional times was required to make the
on-site inspection and travel between residences. A surveyor could
expect to complete from 10-12 surveys per day.
If the residents could not answer questions (this \vas especially
true about septic system construction and history) surveyor recorded
this response as O.K. (don't know). Or information was sought from
other sources—an absent member of the household, relatives, neigh-
bors, former owners, caretakers, or professional people such as
septic system cleaners, installers, building contractors, and county
personnel. When the residents could not be contacted and no other
source was available to obtain information, it was recorded as N.A.
(not available).
The survey area encompassed approximately 50 miles of road. A
team of two surveyors per vehicle covered a given section of road,
but only one surveyor per resident was needed so the team split up
-------
-4-
B-7
once the area was reached. Four clusters of dwellings were identified.
1. Crooked Lake, south and east shore: Hency Road, Core and
Driftwood Drive, Oden Island, Oden Island Drive, Sunset
Drive, Channel Road, Stanley Court and Oden Island Drive
(mainland section)
2. Crooked Lake, northeast shore: Burley Road
3. Pickerel Lake, south shore: Ellsworth Point, Artesian Lane,
Trails End, Ellsworth Road and Rupp Road, Botsford Landing,
Botsford Road and Lane, Camp Petosega and Camp Petosega
Road.
4. Pickerel Lake, north shore: Mission Road, Felder Road, Lake-
view Road, McCarthy Road.
Two hundred and thirty four dwellings were located within the
planning area. The location and lot number of each dwelling is
mapped and the names of the owners is kept on file cards with the
University of Michigan Biological Station (See Appendix C).
Investigations of dwelling sites were conducted following the
residential interview. The purpose of the inspection is to identify
existing or potential public health problems related to sewage dis-
posal. Both the physical layout of the lot, with distances noted
between water sources, the dwelling, sewage disposal system, adja-
cent lots, and natural environmental features such as vegetation,
toppgraphy, and drainage were mapped.
The Crooked/Pickerel Lakes sanitary survey also included
visual observation of the shoreline beach or breakwater area for
locating a microscopic, bright-green, filamentous algae called
Cladophnra. This algae grows only in presence of high nutrients or
as patches near artesian well overflows, it grows only on a suitable
-------
~' B-7
rock, concrete, decayed i^ood or metal substrates in the "wash"
area of the shoreline, A study conducted by Tom Weaver, NortJwest
Michigan Regional Planning and Development Commission (Traverse
City) indicated a high correlation between "poorly maintained" or
malfunctioning sewage disposal systems, lawn fertilization, or
wildfowl feeding, and algae blooms. We incorporated a "Cladophora
Survey" into this study to determine if such correlation occurred
V
also on Crooked/Pickerel Lakes.
Data was later removed from the original survey forms and
placed on tables (appendix F). Information most pertinent to the
analysis of on-site wastewater treatment is presented in the
Results section or as tables in Appendix E.
II. Results
A. Dwelling Units :
It was determined that 234 dwellings exist within 300 feet of
Crooked/Pickerel Lakes in the survey area. Of these, 172 or 73.5?
were sampled only 62 or 26.5% were not available. Table 1. Dwelling
Occupancy:
Seasonal occupancy (SEA) if a dwelling occurs when the residents
are away continuously for a period longer than two months. Year-
round occupancy (Y.R.) is considered when the dwelling is
occupied for a period longer than ten months.
-------
26
33 . 3
88
56.8
114
49
42
53.8
15
9.7
57
24-
10
12.9
52
33.5
62
27
•** J* W V. '
78
100
155
100
344
100
-6-
Table 1
Dwelling Occupancy
Crooked Lake Seasonal Year-round Not Available Total
Number
I
Pickerel Lake
Number
%
Total Both Lakes
Number
I
As may be assumed, sumcer is the preferred period for seasonal
residents. Most of these homes were occupied for a full three or
four months, but about 251 of the population stayed on from spring
through fall. (.See Tables 2 and 3 Appendix F.)
A sizeable portion or 19.3% of the seasonal residents indicated
an interest in becoming percanent residents (See Table 4 Appendix E).
Also, 251 of the seasonal residents are considering fundamental
changes in their dwelling such as additional bedrooms and bathrooms.
These changes also would effect use of waste water systems in the
future.
B. Sewage Disposal Systems :
Sewage disposal systems on Crooked Lake are generally older than
those on Pickerel Lake: 63.2% of the systems on Crooked Lake are
over 10 years old compared to 48.51 on Pickerel Lake. (Table 6
Appendix E.) On both lakes about 16.5% of the systems are older
than 20 years of age.
-------
B-7
There is a significant difference between sewage disposal
system design on Crooked and Pickerel Lakes: nearly 87% of the
systems on Crooked Lake are gravity-fed, dosed or pumped into
adsorption fields; compared to 691 of the systems on Pickerel Lake
which are similarly designed. This means that nearly one-third of
the systems on Pickerel Lake compared to one-tenth on Crooked Lake
are either dry wells, combined septic tank and dry well, or pit
privy. (See Table 7, Appendix F.) Detailed information on sewage
disposal designs is given in Table 8, Appendix E.
From the inception of the Emmet County Sanitary Code in the
spring of 1968, all construction of dwelling requires by law a
permit issued by the County Sanitarian that approves the design
and construction of a sewage disposal system. Construction standards
for sewage disposal systems are as follows:
Minimum Capacities for Septic Tanks
Number of Bedrooms Minimum Liquid Capacity (gals,)
2 or less 750
3 or 4 1000
Each Additional
bedroom beyond 4,
additional 250
Note: the capacities in this table provide for a single family
residence including an automatic diswasher, mechanical garbage
grinder and dishwasher.
Minimum Distance in Feet
Septic Tank Tile Field Seepage Pit.
Well 50 50 50
Lake or Stream 50 50 50
Sewage disposal systems which were installed prior to this
-------
_
-------
-g.
B-7
fact that their systems were older than ten years.
On Pickerel Lake six residences in the Ellsworth Point area
had "problem" sewage disposal systems due to low soil permeability
rates. Only 2 residences, on Mission-McCarthy Roads, exhibited
heavy water use and four sewage disposal systems were found under-
sized. None of the systems on Pickerel Lake were poorly maintained.
C. Environmental Features:
1. Cladophora Study
The Cladophora study reveals a very strong correlation between
cladophera growth and residents who use water excessively, residents
who feed waterfowl and residents who do not maintain their septic
systems by cleaning them at least every eight years. (Recommended
cleaning of septic tanks is every 1-3 years depending on the type
of household, amount of water use, number of residents, etc.)
There does not appear to be any significant correlation between
cladophera growth and whether it is a year-round or seasonal dwel-
ling. Approximately 541 of the residences on Crooked/Pickerel
Lakes which had suitable Cladophora substrates in the beach/shoreline
area, had algae growth. On Crooked Lake, the algae growth appears
due to excessive water use and waterfowl feeding. On Pickerel Lake,
the algae appears to be caused by waterfowl feeding and poorly main-
tained systems. Other factors which might cause Cladophora growth
are septic systems sited too close to the lake or one undersized.
Pickerel Lake has a high percentage of systems which don't comply
with minimum separation distances. On Pickerel Lake, 521 of the
lots which have Cladophera growth are closer than the existing 50
foot separation distance in the code, and only 13% are not too close
to the lake. (Table 10, Appendix E.)
-------
-10-
B-7
2. Soil Conditions
According to Gold and'Gannon overlay maps (1978) and the
Soil Survey of Emmet County, Michigan there are severe soil and <
ground water limitations for septic tank disposal fields within
300 feet of the Crooked/Pickerel Lakes. Depth to seasonal high
ground water is 0-2 feet for all lots on Crooked Lake within the
survey area. Only 19 lots in Pickerel lake were identified with
depth to high seasonal ground water greater than 4 feet. These
were found on Ellsworth Point. (Lots 111-120) and on Botsford
Landing (Lots 144-149, 165, 166-171).
Criteria for Emmet County Sanitary Code approval specify that
construction of sewage disposal will not be approved "where the
maximum ground water level (or seasonal high ground water) is less
than 6 feet from the ground surface, or in the case of property
adjoining lakes, lagoons, rivers, or similar bodies of water, the
finish grade is less than 6 feet above the known high water mark".
All the lots within the Crooked/Pickerel Lakes survey area have a
slope of 0-6%. This means that 100 feet in a horizontal direction
will have a 6 foot rise vertically. Consequently, many of the 18
dwellings on Crooked Lake and 44 on Pickerel Lake that don't comply
with the minimum separation distance between sewage disposal systems
and the lakes, including others which are between 50' and 100' of
the lake may not have legal depth to high ground water installations
There are few exceptions to the generally severe soil limita-
tions. The soils are commonly poorly or somewhat poorly drained
with a high seasonal high ground water table, rapid moderate and
moderately slow permeability (Table 11, Appendix E). The poorly
-------
-' B-7
drained soils, with moderately slow permeability are associated with
slope and ground water factors:
Slope Depth to Seasonal Permeability
% High Ground Water (inches/hr)
0-6 0-2 < 0.63
2-4 0.63-2.0
> 4 2.0-6.3,
6.3-20.0
The "severe" limitations of the soils are either due to too
rapid permeability, or too slow permeability when combined with
high water tables. This includes the sands (AcB, KaB, ScB) ,
loamy sands (AuB, BIB, EaB) and mucky sands (Br,Rc), the loams
(Tin) and mucky and sandy loams (By, EuB, EmB, ToA, Wr), and the
mucks (Ta). Table 11, Appendix E). The soils listed with "slight"
limitations are BIB, EmB, EaB, and KaB, because the soil classifica-
tion doesn't acknowledge that these have high ground water tables.
However, the sands have rapid permeability and thus BIB, EaB, and
KaB may cause "possible continuation of shallow water supplies".
Ill. Discuss ion
A. The Survey Process:
In order to facilitate such surveys and make them more efficient
we suggest the following routine:
1) Use township, county or engineer's planning maps to record
the dwelling locations within the survey area and use road maps to
plan out the survey team's field approach.
2) Work quickly through the area initially and attempt to make
contact at every dwelling in the survey area.
3) If contact is not made initially, leave a flier expressing
the interest of the survey and some indication of how the surveyor
will try to make contact within the survey time period.
-------
-12-
B-7
4) Seek, information from neighbors as to the name, whereabouts
and plans of the absent owner. If possible, obtain a phone number
of the residence and call to set up an appointment.
5) Second and third attempts to make contact with the residence
should involve tactics such as surveying during weekends and weekday
evenings.
A technique recommended by Robert Marans, ISR, Ann Arbor, is
for the survey team to operate in pairs or groups for the first day.
One member conducts the interview and the others observe. This
technique encourages standardized approach, language, and recording
of information.
B.' The Survey Area:
The small size of the Crooked/Pickerel Lakes area and the
clusters of dwellings reduced the survey time. It was therefore
possible to visit dwelling four to five times without serious ineffi-
ciencies. In these clusters of homes, lots were only 50-75 feet
wide making door to door surveying quite rapid.
The resort communities were established in the 1940's and 'SO's...
Neighbors often knew each othere well enough to provide information
about an absent neighbor, including, at times, enough information to
actually complete the survey and lead the on-site inspection to
their neighbor's lot.
C. Responses:
Responses to the survey questions by residents were reliable
because they knew their properties, they understood the intent of
the survey, and they were cooperative. In general, it seemed resi-
dents either built their own dwelling or had lived in it more than
ten years'and knew its history. Most residents were cooperative
and the majority of these were somewhat familiar with local waste.
-------
-13-
B-7
water facility planning and water quality management-primarily
due to earlier studies on the lakes by The University of Michigan
Biological Station. We believe this awareness increases the sur-
vey's reliability.
We found that professional resources such as septic tank
clearners, installers, building contractors, county personnel were
not as informative or useful as we had earlier believed. Educated
guesses were normal, records were either incomple or non-existent.
For example, information obtained from District Health Depart-
ment No. 3 files for dwellings constructed after April 30, 1968
(the effective date, Emmet County Sanitary Code) was incomplete.
The issuance of permits didn't take full effect until the arrival
of a county sanitarian in 1970 or 1971; the records for the first
2 years are few and in the years following 1970 or 1971 a few con-
structed dwellings were "bootlegged-in" according to William Henne,
Emmet County Sanitarian. Furthermore, the permits that are
issued specify minimum septic tank and adsorption field sizes for
the planned dwelling. For small additional cost, many owners
installed larger septic tanks (not drainfields).
These changes do not show on the records. Also, permits give
inadequate descriptions of lot locations especially lacking street
addresses.
D. On-Site Inspections:
Relief of the land, soil, water, and regetative characteristics
were mapped during the on-site investigation in an attempt to identify
improper sewage treatment or public nuisances (sewage-odors). Such
problems were invariably due to insufficient protective distances
between water sources and sewage disposal systems, or undersized
-------
-14-
B-7
systems.
Unnaturally lush vegetation, called "selective fertility",
may signify that the area over or near an adsorption field re-
ceives higher nutrients fron some source such as a malfunctioning
sewage disposal system. However, this symptom may be caused by
more reasons than sewage disposal problems and therefore, wasn't
reliable. For instance, old adsorption fields may develop an
inpermeable mat from scum and suds deposits and cause the effluent
to be pocketed in the upper soil layers, thus promoting greener
growth. Heavy soils which have a high capacity for adsorbing
nutrients and exchanging them as plant food, may be causing more
lush vegetation. The true condition can be determined by inspec-
ting the soil and the stone in the adsorption field. A closer in-
spection on questionable problem sites is advisable.
Inspections for Cladophora. a bright green filamentous algae
which grows at the shoreline in the presence of high nutrients, is
being proposed as fairly reliable indicator of environmental con-
ditions. The process needs only short additional recordings such
as the presence of a suitable substrate, existence of artificially
fed waterfowl or indication of the owners' use of lawn fertilizer.
Sewage disposal systems which are not in compliance with sani-
tary codes need replacement. However, the sanitary code is only
enforced for new and recently constructed dwellings. Hence, the use
of this information is limited by the restricted powers of the code.
Often respondents didn't know the location of their septic
system. Careful observation of the dwelling may reveal septic tank
"venting" in the roof above a ground floor bathroom, exposed access
covers at ground level, "breeders", lush vegetation and local
-------
, -IS- B-7
settling or grading of the area where the adsorption field is found.
Natural vegetation on the lot or adjacent land is an indicator
of the local soil and soil moisture or ground water qualities of
the site. Without training and a practiced eye for identifying
woody or herbaceous species that typify soil conditions, the mapping
is not thorough. "Wet-loving" species such as black ash, red and
silver maple, weeping willow, white cedar, alder and ninebark indi-
cate medium to poorly drained, wet, organic or "heavy" soils.
Well drined, dry sites of sand or loamy sand and coarse textured
soil may have natural stands of red oak, red maple, red pine, stag-
horn sumac, serviceberry and bracken fern. They survey team did
not follow standard procedures for noting vegetation, so the results
are not a reliable source of data for Crooked/Pickerel Lakes,
E. Recommendations for Future Surveys :
It is recommended that a standardized survey form be established
and that methods for running the sanitary survey and ways of evalua-
ting the data be explicit and well established. The survey team
should be knowledgeable regarding the EPA's approach and position
for planning and design of rural waste water systems for the area
being surveyed. The addition of an introductory note on the survey
form explaining the procedures of the US-EPA, plus a straightforward
survey which can be answered without the aid of the surveyor, is
recommended. The survey or should expect to field questions regar-
ding current EPA policies and procedures or provide new information,
mailing addresses or forms, dates of public hearings, etc. This is
a very effective way to solicit public participation.
On-site inspections of sewage disposal is critical to the total
sanitary system evaluation and standardized training with established
-------
' B-7
methods are needed. The on-site inspection is not as thorough
enough with only observation of drainage, topography, and location
of facilities and vegetation. We recommend that the survey also
includes removal of sod froa the adsorption field to check for
"matting" due to detergents and scum and actual septic tank in-
spection from access covers to check sludge and water levels, scum
or suds buildup^, general condition and size of septic tanks. Soil
auguring to determine local soil and ground water characteristics
would also be valuable. Natural vegetation can also be very help-
ful in determining soil and ground water conditions.
IV. Summary of Survey Results
A. Crooked Lake:
1. 53.81 of the Crooked Lake dwellings were used year-round vs.
33.3% which are seasonal.
2. 8.8% of the seasonal residents plan to make their cottages
into year-round-dwellings.
3. 65% of all sewage disposal systems on the Lake are older than
10 years.
4. 55% of the sewage disposal systems on Crooked Lake do not
meet the. Emmet County Sanitary Code.
5. Problems were found on 38.2% of the septic systems.
6. Problems were caused by: excessive water use, poor mainte-
nance, unsuitable site conditions, old systems or the fact
that the systems were too small.
7. Half of the dwellings had suitable substrate for growth of
Cladophora and of these, 57% had CladopllQra present. Ex-
cessive water use and/or feeding of water fowl appeared to
be the principal causes for padophora growth in front of
dwellings.
-------
-17-
B. Pickerel Lake:
1. Only 9.71 of the dwellings were used year-round.
2. 15.5% of the seasonal residents expect to live permanently
on the lake in the future.
3. 48.5% of the sewage disposal systems are older than 10
years of age.
4. 71% of the septic systems do not meet existing sanitary
codes.
5. Only 15.6% of the dwellings exhibited problems.
6. Of the lots with substrates suitable for Cladophora growth
(44.6%) only 23% showed presence of the algae. The causes
appeared to be feeding of water fowl and poor maintenance
of septic systems.
7. Pickerel Lake had 19 lots with good depth to seasonal high
water table characteristics, i.e., greater than four feet.
V. Suggestions for Specific Areas
A. Crooked Lake:
Henry Road Area:
These 3 residences, 2 of them year-round, do not show.general
sewage disposal problems: only one-has a history of problems. How-
ever, they are located on unsuitable soils (a mucky sand).and a high
water table. Together with the 3 residences on Cove Road and Drift-
wood Drive, Henry Road residences should be hooked to a cluster
system and pumped to higher elevation and coarser sands to the south
east.
Cove Drive and Driftwood Lane:
Three year-round residences with well maintained fifteen year
old systems, that show no problems, are situated on moderately per-
-------
-18-
B-7
meable soils. One system is too close to the lake and not in com-
pliance with sanitary codes. These residences do not need to up-
grade their existing sewage disposal systems. However, it is recom-
mended that the one in non-compliance be moved and tha a mound be
used for the adsorption field. An alternative to upgrading existing
on-site systems would be to hook into a cluster system on Henry or
Channel Road.
Stanley Court, Channel Road, and Oden Island Road (mainland
section]:
This part of south Crooked Lake should be hooked on to a main
collector sewer system with a pressure or gravity main and the sew-
age transported to a treatment plant. The area has poor soils and
a history of problems with existing on-site sewage systems. The soil
permeability «0.63 in/hr) is extremely low, depth to high seasonal
ground water listed is 0-2 feet, and the soils are mucky loams and
sands. Seasonal residents comprise only half the number of year-
round residents. It is known that numerous seasonal residents as
well as the permanent residents commute to nearby Petoskey and
Harbor Springs for jobs and many seasonal residents had winter
homes in either of those two cities and will spend summers or week-
ends on Crooked Lake. There, the sewage disposal systems are used
heavily. Not surprisingly, there is high proportion of problem
systems and four of these show "ponding" of effluent. There are four
old pit privies which may be a serious problem in the high ground
water. Systems are generally older than elsewhere, many don't comply
with sanitary codes, some are poorly maintained and the density of
dwellings is the highest for Crooked Lake area.
However, a central sewer system could pose a threat to some
adjacent undeveloped areas. For instance, the east side of Channel
-------
- ±y-
B-7
Road is currently undeveloped. Much of this land is in hardwood
and cedar swamp including the sensitive and ecologically valuable
Minnehaha Creek wetlands. These wetlands are currently undeveloped
primarily due to the high water table and associated problems with
on-site waste water disposal. A large collector system may eliminate
the waste water system restrictions and encourage development.
Oden Island:
Dwellings on Oden Island are half seasonal and half year-round.
Four of the six systems which showed problems were used year-round,
so excessive water use could be the biggest factor. Lake frontages
average 190 feet, the average age of the dwellings and their sewage
disposal systems is 12 years. Most of the systems were septic tank
and adsorption field type and all complied with Emmet County Sani-
tary Codes. The only sign of problems was Cladophora. growth on
five lots. Oden Island property owners have an active Association
and good septic system maintenance records. We recommend that these
systems be upgraded on site, perhaps with adsorption fields mounded,
or a cluster system using the interior of the sandy island,
Burley Road:
Four of the five dwellings have problems with their septic sys-
tems which are created by the high ground water and wet loam. So
suitable site appears to be available for a cluster system disposal
area. Therefore, we recommend an upgrading of the existing systems.
^"e do not recommend extending a centralized sewer line from the
southeast shore of Crocked Lake across the Crooked Lake channel to
Burley Road. The adjacent lands on each side of the channel are
very sensitive with Carbondale and Warner's mucks which have severe
building limitations.
-------
-20-
H—7
B. Pickerel Lake:
Ellsworth Point, Artesian Lane, Trails End and Ellsworth Road
Good soils for parts of Ellsworth Point were identified and no
sewage disposal system exhibited problems nor was there Cladophora
growth in this area of Kalkaska sand. The only problem sewage
disposal systems were 6 that appeared to be caused by low permeabi-
lity soils. There were however, a large number of sewage disposal
systems which don't comply with existing Emmet County Sanitary
Codes for minimum septic system size (11 systems) and separation
distance from the lake (26 systems). This may be due to the fact
that a number of them were septic tank-drywell combinations (16).
Cladophora growth is due to waterfowl feeding and poorly maintained
systems found here.
Because of the close grouping of houses on the Ellsworth Point
area the average age of sewage systems (15 years old), the poor
record of maintenance among that group of dwellings, and the change
in local soil conditions, it is recommended that the dwellings in
the western half and along Ellsworth Road be connected to a cluster
systems. The density of the Trails End and Artesian Lane area is
high with the average lake frontage of 88 feet per dwelling. There
is not enough lot size remaining for upgrading existing on-site
systems. Suitable soils for an adsorption field may be found near
Pickerel Lake Road in sands at higher elevation, to the east and
west of Ellsworth Road and south of Pickerel Lake Road.
Ellsworth and Rupp Roads:
Of the 4 dwellings on Rupp Road, east of Ellsworth Road, 2
are seasonal and are coupled together with a private cluster system.
One of the sewage disposal systems show problems and only one
shows excessive water use.
-------
-21-
B-7
Although ground water is quite high and there is lotv permeabili-
ty, on-site sewage system should remain as exists on Rupp Road. The
soils in this area are Warner.-ls muck and are poor for home construc-
tion. Extension of a cluster system from Ellsworth Point or creation
of cluster system for Rupp aoad is not recommended.
Botsford Landing:
Botsford Landing is approximately 30 years old. Because of the
age of the systems about half of them comply with Emmet County
Sanitary Codes. Only two systems exhibited "problems", and there are
less severe site limitations. Several lots are located on Kalkaska
sand with depth to high seasonal ground water of more than four feet.
These soils have moderate permeability. The only indication of en-
vironmental problems is that 4 out of 5 dwellings had growth of Clad-
ophora. These were located to the east of the Landing on lots with
muck soils.
Recommendations for the Botsford Landing area are to improve
existing on-site systems or to create a cluster system and pump
effluent to the sandy soils to the south of the Landing nearer the
Pickerel Lake Road. Because the small average lot size is approxi-
mately 100 feet wide, improvements of existing on-site systems de-
pends on whether residents will be able to place adsorption fields
on back lots south of Botsford Lane (currently, 14 back lots have
been built on).
Camp Petosego:
The owners at the time of the survey had plans for a cluster
system for the 14 vacant buildings in the camp area. The adsorption
field for this was planned for suitable soils east of the camp. The
12 dwellings existing for the camp owner had a recently rebuilt
system. No improvements are required.
-------
- B-7
Mission, Lakeview, Feldman and McCarthy Roads:
There are 6 reported "problem" systems on the north shore of
Pickerel Lake, due to excessive water use and low soil permeabilities.
The soil types are loam and muck. The average age of sewage dispo-
sal systems is about 13 years and more than two thirds of the systems
don't comply with code. There is only 1 year-round resident.
Because of the small number of year-round residents, it is
recommended that the most cost effective alternative be considered.
Clustering of systems on Felder Road and of the camp-resort commun-
ity to the west of Lakevie^^r Road with disposal on suitable soils
(sands) at a higher elevation is recommended. These lots have on the
average 80-100 feet of lake frontage. The McCarthy Road lots have
an average lake frontage of 260 feet and thus improvement of exis-
ting systems is reconmended.
-------
-23-
B-7
VI. References Cited
Alfred, S. D., A. G. Hyde and R. L. Larson. 1973. Soil Survey of
Emmet County, MI. U.S. Department of Agriculture in coopera-
tion with the Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station. 99 p.
Gold, A. et al. 1978. Environmental Features of Walloon Lake'and
its Watershed (Emmet and Charlevoix Counties, MI.) with
special reference to Nutrient Management. The University of
Michigan Biological Station, Pellston, MI. An investigation
supported by the Walloon Lake Association. 81 p.
Gold, A., J. E. Gannon. 197S. The suitability of Soils for On-Site
Wastewater Disposal, Pickerel and Crooked Lakes. The Universi-
ty of Michigan Biological Station, Pellston, MI. A study
supported by the Environmental Protection Agency. 14 p.
Marans, Robert W., J. D. Wellman, S. J. Newman, J. A. Kruse. 1976.
Waterfront Living: A Report on Permanent and Seasonal Resi-
dents in Northern Michigan. Institute for Social Research,
Ann Arbor, Ml 23u p.
Michigan District Health Department No. 3. 1968. Emmet County
Sanitary Code. Hmmet County, MI 4 p.
Wapora, Inc. 1978. A Sanitary Survey Methodology for Use in
Planning Small Waste Flow Systems. An unpublished report.
Weaver, T., C. Grant. 1978. Unpublished Cladophora study on Lake
Lelanau, Leelanau County, MI.
-------
B-7
APPENDIX A
Crooked/Pickerel Lakes Septic System Survey Form
A 1
-------
B-7
OPTIONAL
Resident's Name
Owner's Name
Mailing Address of Property
Street Address of Property:
Phone Number:
-------
CROOKED-PICKEREL LAKES SEPTIC SYSTEM SURVEY
B-7
Unanswered
Residence Number: Questions
Survey or date:
Township: Littlefield/Springvale; Lake: Crooked/Pickerel
Lot Location: Graham Rd./Channel. Rd./Oden Island
Ellsworth Pt./Botsford Landing/Lakeview Rd.
County Rd./Sadler's Landing/Other
Lake frontage: yes/no
Lot size: acres (1 acre = 200x200 sq. feet)
Was additional soil used to fill your site when your home was constructed?
I. Resident/Occupancy
1. Who is the owner of this property?
(If occupant is not owner)
Can you give the name of the owner and how that person can be
located?
Can you provide any information regarding the use of this house
and the condition of the septic system? yes/no
2. Are you a year-round resident or a seasonal resident?
year-round (10 mos. or more)
seasonal (less than 10 mos.)
If year-round:
a. How many residents live here year-round?
b. Does this number change during the year? yes/no
c. At what time of year? spring/summer/fall/winter
d. For how long? 4-10 months/3-4 months/4-8 weeks/2-4 weeks/
1 week/1 weekend
e. What is the peak number of residents at any one time?
-1-
-------
If seasonal:
a. What time o£ year do you reside here? spring/summer/fall/vinter
b. For how long? 4-10 months/3-4 months/4-8 weeks/2-4 weeks/1 week/
weekends
c. What is the average number of residents residing here during
this time?
d. What is the peak number of residents at any one time?
e. Do you have plans to move here permanently? yes/no
If yes, when? 1 year/3-5 years/5-10 years/more than 10 years
3. How many bedrooms does this house have?
4. Do you/owner expect to add on or nodify your home to:
a- increase its capacity by adding on bedrooms or bathrooms? yes/no
b. extend its yearly use? yes/no (winterization)
II. Describe System
1. What is the age of your house? 0-5 yrs/5-10 yrs/10+ yrs
2. What is the age of your present septic system? 0-5 yrs/5-10 yrs/10+ yr
3. What type of system do you now have?
septic tank + drainfield/dry well/nound/other /Don't know
a. If "don't know", who would know?
b. If it is a septic tank and drainfield or mound, what type o£
drainfield is it?
pumped (to drainfield)/gravity-fed (no pumping of wastewater/
dosing (different time periods)/ distribution box (different
sides of drainfield)/ alternate drainfields
(CIRCLE ALL APPLICABLE)
c. What is the size of your septic tank or dry x^rell? gallons
d. What is the size of your drainfield(s) ? square feet
e. Do you have access covers or risers to the septic tank/drywell?
-------
B-7
4. Do you have plans to enlarge/improve your system in the next
5 years? yes/no Describe:
. Service History
1. Has the septic system ever been inspected? yes/no/don't know
If yes, when? (give dates)
2. Has the tank/dry well ever been pumped? yes/no/don't know
If yes, a) how long ago: this year/1-2 years/3-5 years/more than 5 yrs
b) how often is tank pumped: every year/1-2 years/every 3-4 year;
other
If "don't know" for 1.) and 2.)> who would know more?
(installer-pumper/caretaker/neighbor/former owner/other)
V a™ v,ic <•«•».•»• nf- what time When did it
3. Any history of: How often? of year? last happen?
Back-ups
Surfacing
effluent
Odors
Other
4. Have you repaired your system in the last 1-2 years/3-5 years/
5-10 years/10 or more years?
Describe:
-------
-4-
B-7
IV. Use
1. Number of water using fixtures: (note w.c. if designed to conser\
showers bathtubs
toilets garbage disposal
s inks
clothes washing machine
softener
dishwasher
2. Do you fertilize your lawn: yes/no
(optional)
Type of fertilizer?
How many times/year?_
3. How often do you water your lawn? 3 or more times/week
1-2 times/week
less than once/\veek
4. Drainage facilities
a. basement sump
b. footing drains
c. roof drains
d. driveway runoff
5. Water supply source
yes/no/don't know
yes/no/don't know
yes/no/don't know
yes/no/don't know
community/shared well
on-lot well
other (describe)
don't know
a. well depth
feet total/don't know
feet to drainfield/don't know
b. If "don't know" for any of the above, who would know more?
Additional Comments:
-------
J -S-
;B-7
survey continued
V. ADDITIONAL SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Slope: restricted/acceptable
Depth to seasonal high ground water: less than 2 feet
2-6 feet
greater than 6 feet
Pnosphorus retention: Poor
Moderate
Good
Permeability: Too slow
Adequate
Is home located in high density area: yes/no
VI: PROPERTY AND FACILITY SKETCH
Include: Surface Water
Signs of selective fertility
Vegetation present
Distance of tank and drainfield
from house and lake (feet*)
CLADOPHERA SURVEY
Suitable substrate present: yes/no
Cladophera present: yes/no
Describe abundance and location:
Do residents feed ducks: yes/no
-------
B-7
We are a group of four researchers from the University of
Michigan Biological Station, on Douglas Lake, in Pellston,
Michigan. You may have heard of us before, because we all
worked under a National Science Foundation grant this
sunnier, calling ourselves Project CLEAR. Now that the
Project work has ended, four of us are continuing work in
your area with funds from the Environmental Protection
Agency.
As you may already know, the EPA is in the process of
preparing an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) which
will evaluate the environmental, social, and ecomomic effects
of alternatives for sewage collection and/or treatment in
Springvale and Littlefield Townships in the Crooked and
Pickerel Lake planning area.
An information and participation meeting to describe the
alternatives, costs, and other information was scheduled
for Thursday, August 24, 1978 at the Petoskey High School.
Our vork in the next 3 weeks is to survey all the homesites
in the Crooked and Pickerel planning area so that an
assessment of the overall on-site vastewater treatment
systems (ie. septic systems) can be made. We would appreciate
your help in completing this survey.
Since we have missed you today, we'll try to return a call
or visit and schedule an appointnent time before September
10th. Or, please call us in the evening at:
-------
B-7
APPENDIX C
Soil Maps of Survey Areas
-------
..^'M^VxVUU
CO
-------
CROOKED/PICKEREL LAKES
SURVEY AREA
-------
\
PICKEREL
cd
-------
r-
I
CROOKED
Hency Rd
-------
CO
-4
-------
APPENDIX D
Press Release and "Flier"
-------
t -I?-
THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
BIOLOGICAL STATION
ANN ARBOR. MICHIGAN 481O9
(313) 763-4481
DAVID M. GATES. DIRECTOR
B-7
ADDRESS. JUNE IS TO SEPTEMBER t
PELLSTON. MICHIGAN 49769
August 23, 1978
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT: SAM EHLERS
616-539-8406
616-539-8408
or
SEPTIC SYSTEM SURVEY
BEGINS ON CROOKED-PICKEREL LAKES
(Pellston, MI) Beginning August 21st, researchers from the
University of Michigan Biological Station will be conducting a
door-to-door survey on Crooked-Pickerel Lakes.
The information gathered will be used by the Environmental
Protection Agency in the preparation of an Environmental Impact
Statement for Crooked-Pickerel Lakes. The EIS will evaluate the
environmental, social and economic effects of alternatives for
sewage collection and/or treatment in Springvale and Littlefield
Townships.
Descriptions of these alternatives, costs and other information
will be presented at a public hearing on Thursday, August 24th,
7:30 p.m. in the Cafeteria of Petoskey Senior High School on
E. Mitchell Road.
Residents' cooperation is requested to facilitate the completion
of the survey. For further information, contact the Biological
Station, Pellston, MI 49769 (616) 539-8406.
-------
B-7
We are a group of four researchers from the University of
Michigan Biological Station, on Douglas Lake, in Pellston,
Michigan. You may have heard of us before, because we all
worked under a National Science Foundation grant this
summer, calling ourselves Project CLEAR. Now that the
Project work has ended, four of us are continuing work in
your area with funds from the Environmental Protection
Agency.
As you may already know, the EPA is in the process of
preparing an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) which
will evaluate the environmental, social, and ecomomic effects
of alternatives for sewage collection and/or treatment in
Springvale and Littlefield Townships in the Crooked and
Pickerel Lake planning area.
An information and participation meeting to describe the
alternatives, costs, and other information was scheduled
for Thursday, August 24, 1978 at the Petoskey High School.
Our work in the next 3 weeks is to survey all the homesites
in the Crooked and Pickerel planning area so that an
assessment of the overall on-site wastewater treatment
systems (ie. septic systems) can be made. We would appreciate
your help in completing this survey.
Since we have missed you today, we'll try to return a call
or visit and schedule an appointment time before September
10th. Or, please call us in the evening at:
-------
B-7
APPENDIX E
Tables of Results
-------
B-7
TABLE 2
Seasonal Preferences By Part-Time Residents
irooked Lake
'ickerel Lake
TOTAL NUMBER
ercent of Total
Summer Only
12
11
59
i 52%
Two Seasons
-
_7
7
6%
Three Seasons
8
11
27
241
All Seasons
6
11
20
-------
B-7
Table 5
Duration of Occupancy Among Part-Time Residents
Weekends 2-4 wks. 4-8 wks. 5-4 mos. 4-10 mos^ N.A
Crooked Lake 9 2 7 7 i
Pickerel Lake _7 _9 2]_ 2S_ 17_ j
TOTAL NUMBER 16 9 29 32 24 4
Percent of Total 141 8% 25% 28% 211 4$
-------
B-7
TABLE 4
Future Plans of Permanent Occupancy By Part-Time Residents
Lake
Lake
MBHR
of Total
Yes
6
li
22
19%
No
18
6_7
85
75%
N.A.
2
_5_ .
7
61
-------
20-
B-7
TABLE 5
Projected Additions To Dwellings By Permanent and Seasonal Residents
Yes N£ N.A.
Crooked Lake 8 42 18
Pickerel Lake _1_8 83 _2_
TOTAL NUMBER 26 125 20
Percent of Total 15% 78% 12%
-------
B-7
TABLE 6
Ageof Sewage Disposal Systems
Crooked Lake
Hency- Chanel
Oden Island
Burley Road
TOTAL NUMBER
Percent of Total
Pickerel Lake
Ellsworth Point
Botsford-Petosego
Miss ion-Lake view
TOTAL NUMBER
Percent of Total
TOTAL BOTH LAKES 11
Percent of Total
0-5 yrs. 5-10 yrs.
I 10
- i
±
1 11
20% 16%
2 10
> 6 3
2 __5
10 18
10% 17%
11 29
6% 18%
> 10 yrs.
25
16
43
63%
20
14
1_6
50
49%
93
54%
£20 yrs.
6
7
10%
11
1
_5
17
16%
24
14%
N.A.
5
1
6
9%
5
1
_2.
8
8%
14
8%
-------
Area
TABJLt;
Design of Sewage Disposal Systems
Septic Tank or Alternatives Drain Field orAlternatives
\
pa
Crooked Lake
Hency-Channel
Oden
Burley
Pickerel Lake
HI Isworth
Botsford-
Petosega
Miss ion-
Lakcvicw
a* a^ a3 b c d
g1 g2 g3 h
k 1
m
34
16
3
23
19
20
4
5
J.
i
I
__..
1
i
1
i
1
(4)
1
i'i'!o
i
16
4
'/• <
4,1
4
0
•
1
.1.
2 '
2
1
32
3
34
21
2.1
3
14
5
I
1
1
13)
1
0
0
2,1,0
2
:3)
1
3
9
2
3
27,3,1
12
(3)
3
(3)
15,1,0
22,1,1
4
3
2
T
2,1,0
1
(3)
3
2
11
. .._
4
3
LUGIiND
al = Single Septic Tank gl
a2 = Double Septic Tank g2
;t3 = Tri.plo Septic Tank g3
b = Drywcll or Grease Trap h
c = Combination Drywcll and Septic Tank i
d = Pit' Privy - j
e = Pit Privy and Drywell k
f = Not Available 1
m
Single Drain Field
Double Drain Field
Triple Drain Field
Mounded System
Without Adsorption Field
Gravity Fed Adsorption Field
Dosed Effluent to Field
Pumped Effluent to Field
Not Available
(3) Two Dwellings Having
Separate Septic Tanks
But Common Field.
(4) A Dwelling Had 5
Drywells.
-------
-23-
B-7
TABLE 8
Sewage Disposal System Compliance With Emmet County Sanitary Code
Area
Crooked Lake
Hency-
Channel
Oden-
Burley
TOTAL NUMBER
Percent of
Total
Pickerel Lake
Ellsworth
Botsford-
Petosega
Miss ion-
Lake view
TOTAL NUMBER
Percent of
Total
TOTAL BOTH
LAKES
Percent of
Total
Based
System
Yes
20
11
31
45%
17
10
_9
36
351
67
39%
on Sewage
Size Alone
No
6
_0
6
9%
11
10
_8
29
29%
35
20%
N.A.
21
10
31
45%
20
4
13
37
36%
63
40%
Based on Minimum
Separation Distances
Yes
27
11
41
60%
19
12
11
49
48%
90
53%
No
16
~_
18
26%
26
7
ii
44
43%
62
36%
N.A.
5
_4
9
14%
3
5
.***-.
9
9%
18
11%
-------
TABLE 9
Problem Sewage Disposal Systems and
Possible Causes for Poor Performance
Lot No.
Crooked
Lake:
Hency-
Channel
3
12
15
10
18
21
22
28
32
33
35'
M
47
50
t
h
m
n
X c
X
X
X
X
X
1
X
X
\ '"*
X
X
•"" b
X "~
•
X
!"
^ f
X
j r
-;
0
n x <->•
tii h..
O 'v
(D
i-O
/ 8
>10
; >io
>10
12
5-10
5-10
5-10
12
9
>io
36
30
o"l ^
>— I
» 7
ro
r>t
CO
X
X
O/-.
C'X
X
,?x
gx
X
*r
t* Xv.
o u
CIS
jq
;t
^
(C
---t
;*• I
, ,
^r-
^w "
_,
(
r
| :_,
X
;:x
,never(
x
x
X
X
X
-x :
x
^ X'
v/J I — «
UjX"-'
x
M
13-23
<0.63
<0.63
<0.63
<0.63
<0.63
^0.63
<0.63.
<0.63
^0.63'
;
X
...
x
• /
X
1
1
_
X
X
X
\
x
-------
Problem Sewage Disposal Systems and
Possible Causes for Poor Performance
Lot No.
a
c
f
h
k
in
o
Crooked Lake
!(continued) :
Oden Island
61
62
64
68
70
73
Bur ley
231
232]
233]
234
Pickerel Lake
lillsworth Pt.
85
86
106
124
X
X
X
r
•
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
25
-------
TABLE 9 (continued)
Problem Sewage Disposal Systems and
Possible Causes for Poor Performance
Lot No.
Pickerel Lak
(continued):
Ellsworth Pt
(continued)
127
128
Botsford-
Petosego
159
171
Mission-
Lakcvicw
200
212
218
225]
226]-
227
a
d c f
h
in
n o
X
X'
X
X
V
X
X.
X
X
5-10
<1U
-------
TAB I, I! 10
Cladoplioru Study
Suitable
Solid
Substrates
(No.
Crooked Lake:
Ilency-Channel
Oden
Burley
TOTAL NUMBLR
Percent of Total
Pickerel Lake:
El 1 sworth
Hotsford Petosego
Miss ion- Lake view
TOTAL NUMUf-R
Percent of Total
of Lots)
27
7
_l
35
1004
25
5
1_6
46
1004
Presence of
Cladophora
on Lots wFth
Suitable Substrates
14 (5 extensive)
5
JL
20
574
13
4
_6
23
504
Dwellings witli
lixcessive Water-
Using Devices
+ Ratio Y.R. /Season
12 (10/2)
2 (1/1)
_! d/o)
15
754
] (1/0
0
1
2
94
Ratio of
Year -Round to
Seasonal
Residents of
Those witli
Cladophora
12/2
2/3
1/0
15/5
754/254
3/10
0/4
O/Oi
3/20
134/874
No.of ResidenceC
with Cladpphcra
which Don't
No. of Residences Comply with
Whose Septic Tanks limmet County
No. of Residences were Poorly Main- Sanitary Code
which Feed Water- tained, i.e., not Min. Size fj Sep
l;owl at the Lake Pumped in the Last
Shore ?"_i
-------
TABLE 11
Soil Classifications For Lots Within Crooked/Pickerel Survey Area
Soil Classification
Crooked Lake
Arb - Au Gres Sand
AuB - Au Gres Loamy Sand
Br - Brevort Mucky Loamy Sand
BIB - Blue Lake Loamy Sand
By - Bruce Fine Sandy Loam
EmB - Emmet Sandy Loam
Re - Roscommon Mucky Sand
Sb - Sandy Lake Beaches
Tm - Thomas Loam, Medium Wet Variant
TOA - Thomas Mucky Loam
Pickerel Lake
ArB - Au Gres Sand
EaB - East Lake Loam Sand
KaB - Kalkaska Sand
Re - Roscommon Mucky Sand
SuB - Saugatuck Sand
Ta - Tawas Muck
Tm - Thomas Loam, Medium Wet Variant
TOA - Thomas Mucky Loam
Wr - Warner's Mucky Loam
Lot Numbers
70-72
23,24,27-40
7-12,15-17,21,22,25,26.
40-43
68,69
4-6
13,14,63-67
1-3
56-62
18-20
43,45,230-235
173-187,206-209
209-215
110-118,140-155,160-167
135-140,158,159, 155-172,
215-219
74-110
204 ,205
188-195
196-200,220-229
118-132,200-203
-------
APPENDIX
B-8
APPENDIX B-8
EMMET COUNTY SANITARY CODE - DESIGN STANDARDS
SECTION V
CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS lor SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS
Tho following specifications as shown in ihe tables shall b*
the minimum design criteria and apply in determining the min-
imum SIM °l lha sewage disposal systems required for houses.
In Ihe COM al larger houses, public and semi-public buildings
such as apartments, moleis, gas stations, restaurants, etc.: plans
and spacifications shall be submitted to the Health Oliicer. 11
In his judgment the plans are adequate, a permit will be issued.
ITEM 1 SEPTIC TANKS
Design, and construction methods shall be approved
by Ihe Health Oificer prior to construction or installa-
tion. In general design specifications found in the
"Manual of Septic-Tank Practice", U.S. Public Health
Service Publication No. 526, as amended will apply
as a guido.
TABLE I
MINIMUM CAPACITIES FOR SEPTIC TANKS
Number of Bedrooms
Minimum Liquid Capacity (gals.)
2 or less 750
3 or 4 1,000
Each additional bedroom
beyond 4, add 250
Note: The capacities in this table provide lor the plumbing
fixtures and appliances usud in a single family residence
including an automatic washer, mechanical garbago
grinder and dishwasher.
TABLE U
MINIMUM DISTANCE IN FEET
All distances measured horizontally from any vertical point
below qrade.
FROM
TO
SEWERS
Absorption Cast Iron Septic Tile Seepage
Bed Soil Pipe Oth. Tank Field Pit
Wells or suction lines
Water Pressure Lines (buned)
Property Line
Foundation Wall
Drop-off
Lake or stream
50
10
10
10
20
50
10
10
2
5
10
50
10
2
5
10
50
50
10
10
5
10
50
50
10
10
10
15
50
50
10
10
20
25
50
* See Michigan Department of Health "Regulations for Certain
Water Supplies" regarding suction lines (Section 4.3).
TABLE III
Fill' AND MINIMUM SPACING FOR TILE FIELD TRENCHES
\V:c'h of Trench at Bottom Minimum Spacing1 of Trenches Center
(inches) |o Center (feet)
18 to 24
24 to 30
30 to 36
6.5
7.0
7.5—
TABLE IV
.V:.N:MUM REQUIRED TRENCH BOTTOM AREA PER BEDROOM
FOR TILE FIELDS
Perception Rale Type of Soil _ Absorption Area
Leii :han 5 rr.inutes Coars* sand & gravel 115 square feel
5 to 10 minutes Fine sand £ sandy clay lfis square lew
10 !o 15 minutes Sandy clay 190 square feet
15 to 30 minutes Clay 250 square feet
Over 30 minutes - unsuitabls
TABLE V
TILE FIELD CONSTRUCTION DETAILS
Its— s _ Maximum Minimum
N_mber ol Lateral Trenches
30 In.
6 in./lOO Jt.
Length of Trenches
Width of Trenches
D*p:h of Tile Lines (bottom)
below finuh grad*
Sizpa of Tile Lines
Depth of Aggregate
Under tile
Over tile
Under tile located within
rco: aroa of trees
Size of Aggiegate*
O;..:h cf *rjw or Hay Cover
•Standard 10 A. Ston« Spec. Acceptable
100 ft
36 In.
1H in.
18 in.
18 in.
2 in./lOO ft.
6 in.
2 in.
'2 in.
% in.
3 in.
TABLE VI
M'.Nl.VUM REQUIRED BOTTOM AREA PER BEDROOM FOR
ABSORPTION BEDS
Percolation Rate 'Type of Soil _ Absorption Area
Less than 5 cunutes Coarse Sand & Gravel 230 square feet
5 to 10 minutes Fin« Sand & sandy day 330 square feel
10 to 15 minutes Sandy Clay 380 square feet
15 to 30 minutes Clay 500 squar. (Ml
Ovt>r 30 minutes - unsuitable
TABLE VII
ABSORPTION BED CONSTRUCTION DETAILS
S
-------
SUMMARY FOR ON-SITE SYSTEMS WITH OCCASSIONAL OR RECURRING PROBLEMS
Map
Number
3
12
15
18
21
22
28
32
33
35
38
Location
llency
Road
Stanley
Court
Channel
Road
Channel
Road
Channel
Road
Channel
Road
Oden
Road
Oden
Road
Oden
Road
Oden
Road
Oden
Road
Age
(Years)
R
10
MO
MO
12
5-10
5-10
12
9
MO
MO
Type
System
ST & DF
Dosing
ST f. 1)1'
ST & DF
ST & DF
ST S, LF
ST & DF
& 1)W
2ST
f.
2DF
ST S DF
ST & DF
ST & DF
ST & DF
Probl em
Backup
Odors
Pond In R
Backup
&
Pond Ing
Backup
Backup
&
Pond ing
Pond ing
&
Odors
Pond ing
&
Odors
Ponding
&
Odors
Odors
Backup
Frequency
1x
Summer
78
In 1 In-
past
One
Season
Froquon t
before
repa ir
Slimmer
78
One
Season
77
76
66
74-75
Fvcry
year
Kvery
5 y r ,s .
or so
Svsl em
Under si 7.ed
No
No
DK
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Site
Limit at ion
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Seve re
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Ma hit onanco
None
None
None
New
Drain field
1976
None
Fnl argod
Dra infield
1977
None
F,n 1 arged
Dra Lnf ield
1966
Filled in
low area
C I enned
pipes
None
Pump in;'.
Frequency
3 u r 4 v r .
DK
None
Veai ly
3 to l\ y r s .
DK
DK
3 lo !\ yrs.
5 yrs.
Kvery yr.
5 y r s .
Lasl Time
Pumped
78
78
None
78
78
77
76
73- /r>
73-75
78
DK
vi
t>
Tl
W
•ZL.
a
M
s>
ST - Septic Tank
DF - Dratnfleld tri
DK - Don ' t know .!-,
-------
Mfip
Number
42
44
47
54
62
6H
70
73
75
86
106
T.ocnt ion
Oclen
Road
O(1<-n
Road
Channel
Road
Clinnnel
Road
Odon
1 si and
Odcn
1 si and
Odcn
Island
Oden
Island
Trails
End
Trn 1 1 s
End
Trails
End
Age
(Years)
1 1
>10
30
13
>10
>10
10
-10
15
14
>10
Type
Syst em
ST & Dosing
&
Mound
ST f. DK
ST 6, OF
ST 6, DF
ST & I)F
ST f,
Mound
ST & I)F
ST & DP
ST & DF
6, DW
ST & DF
f, 11W
ST & DF
Froh lent
Backups
S,
Pond ing
Odors
Backup
Backup
Odors
Ponding
Backups
Pond inp.
Backup
&
Ponding
Ponding
Backup
&
Ponding
Odors
&
Backups
Ponding
Frequency
Spr ing
76
Not
Aval lab It-
Wlien
1t
Rains
Every
year
Once
4 to r)
yrs.
ago
Once
per
year
Ix
1-2x
3 to 4
y rs .
3 to 5
yrs.
ago and
this
Spring
When
it
Rn Ins
SyM em
Under::! x.i'd
Ho
DK
Yes
No
OK
No
No
DK
Yes
Yes
Yos
Sil i-
Limit. it lun
Severe
Severe
f.evere
Severe
Seve re
Severe
SeveiT
Severe
Severe
Severe
Severe
Ma i n! cnnnce
Replaced
Drain Tie Id
67
None
New
Dralnrield
f.3
None
None
None
None
None
None
Added the
stones to
Drnlnf ield
None
Pnnip Ing
l''reqneney
) or 4 vi .
Inf requeue
1 to ? yr.
Isvery yr.
DK
Year I y
2 to 3 yrs.
Infrequent
Onco> more
than S yrs.
ago
Added tile
st ones to
Dra Infield
Once
Last Time
Pumped
76-77
72
7R
76-77
76-77
77
77
3-5
DK
78
73
1
-------
Map
Number
124
127
128
171
200
212
225 -
226
227
231
232 -
233
Location
Artesian
Lane
E1 iKworth
Road
Ellsworth
Road
Botsford
Lane
M 1 sson
Rond
McCarthy
Road
Lake vi ow
Road
t.akevlew
Road
Burley
Road
Burley
Road
Age
(Years)
25
DK
5-10
-10
0-5
>10
MO
>10
25
MO
Type
System
ST Si DF
ST & DF
«, DW
ST S OF
ST & DF
&
Dosing
ST & DF
ST «, 11F
I, DW
ST & l)F
& DW
ST & DF
ST 6, DF
ST & DF
P rob 1 cm
Backup
Backup
Backup
&
Pond inf;
Backup
&
Odors
Pond Inc.
&
Odors
Backup
&
Ponding
Backup
Backup
Ponding
Ponding
Frequency
Yearly
DK
Ra in ;
heavy
Use
1 X
Wll-h
II I f,h
Use
F,very
Yea r
1 to 2x
per yr.
Ix
2 yrs.
ago
DK
DK
System
Under.s I ^e
-------
APPENDIX C
BIOTA
-------
APPENDIX
C-l
SUBMERGED AND EMERGENT AQUATIC PLANTS
Common name
Waterweed
Coontail
Water milfoil
Bushy pondweed
Water lily
Yellow water lily
Large-leaf pondweed
Whitestem pondweed
Sage pondweed
Flat-stemmed pondweed
Floating-leaf pondweed
Arrowhead
Softstem bulrush
Bulrush
Common cattail
Bladderwort
Tapegrass or wild celery
Scientific name
Anaahayis eanadensis
Ceratophyllum
Myr-iophyllum
Najas flexilis
Nymphasa odorata
Nuphar advenian
Potamogeton amplifolius
P. pvaelongus
P, peatinatus
P. zosteriformus
P. natans
Sagittaria
Seirpus validis
S, (zneriaanus
Typha latifolia
Utrieular-ia purpitrea
Vall'isneic'-ia spi-ralis
SOURCE: Michigan DNR. Variously dated.
-------
APPENDIX
C-2
Common Name
INVERTEBRATE INDICATOR ORGANISMS
FOUND IN CROOKED AND PICKEREL LAKES
Scientific Name
Indication of
Lake Water Quality
Zooplanktpn_
Cladoceran
Rotifers
Benthic
Mayfly nymph
Findernail clams
Oligochaete worm
Chrionamid
Midge larvae
Chydorus spaericus
Conochiloides natans
Notholca foliacea
Northolca michiganensis
Synchaeta asymmetrica
Polyarthra euryptera
Trichochocerca
multicrinus
Hexagenia
Sphaerium
Limnodrilus hoffmeistesi
Mixed Sp.
P,C
P
C
P,C
C
P,C
P,C
P,C
P,C
P,C
P,C
Greater abundance
in Crooked Lake
indicates that
waters slightly
lower trophic
status than Pickerel
oligo-mesotrophic
indicators
Eutrophic Indicators
Oligotrophic
indicators more
common in Pickerel
Lake
Eutrophic indicators
P - Pickerel Lake
C - Crooked Lake
Source: Gannon, 1978.
-------
APPENDIX
C-3
USE OF DIVERSITY INCICES
Diversity indices are frequently used as a supplement to water
quality data to provide additional information as to whether the waters
under consideration are being degraded. The Diversity Indices are
dimensionless terms used to express the relative aboundance of selected
indicator organisms.
The rationale for utilizing the diversity index as a measure of
water quality change is based on the fact that changes in environmental
conditions lead to changes in distribution and abundance of particular
species. For an individual to be a useful indicator organism it must
have a rather narrow range of suitable environmental conditions and must
respond in a quantitative fashion to the environmental factor(s) under
consideration.
For this Crooked/Pickerel Lakes S udy performed by Gannon in 1978
the Shannon-Weiner diversity index H was calculated as follows:
3.3219
H = —— (N Log10 N - Znl Log1Q ni)
Where: N = total # of organisms collected
ni = // of individuals per species
3.3219 = is a constant used to change base 10 to base 2.
-------
FISH SPECIES SURVEY OF PICKEREL LAKE
APPENDIX
C-4
Common Name
Yellow perch
Northern pike
Rock bass
Smallmouth bass
Walleye
Largemouth bass
Brown trout
Pumpkinseed
Bluegill
Warmouth
White sucker
Yellow Bullhead
Brown bullhead
Scientific Name
Game fishes
Perea flavens
Esox luaius
Ambloplites rupestris
Miaropterus dolomieui
Stizostedion vitreum
Mieropterus Salmoides
Salmo tvutta
Lepomis megalotis
Lepomis maovoohiTus
Lepomis gulosus
Coarse fishes
Catostomus cormersoni
Ictaluvus natalis
Ictalwcus nebulosus
SOURCE: Michigan DNR, 1971
-------
C-4
Common Name
Alewife
Sand shiner
Common shiner
Bluntnose minnow
Banded Killifish
Logperch
Johnny darter
Iowa darter
Slimy sculpin
Shore minnow
Pearl dace
Longnose gar
Bowfin
Carp
Scientific Name
Forage fishes
Alosa pseudohavengus
Notropis stpa.nri.neus
Notropis oomutus
Pimephales notatus
Fundulus diaphanus
Pepoina capvodes
Etheostoma nigvum
Etheostoma exile
Cottus oognatus (Cedar Creek)
Notropi-s deliaiousus
Semotilus margarita
Other fishes
Lepisosteus osseus
Ami-a oalva
CypTenus
-------
FISH SPECIES OF CROOKED LAKE
APPENDIX
C-5
Common Name
Yellow perch
Rock bass
Bluegill
Walleye
Largemouth bass
Smallmouth bass
Northern pike
Common shiner
Bluntnose minnow
Logperch
Spottail shiner
Johnny darter
Mimic shiner
Central mudminnow
Sailfin
Suckers
Brown bullhead
Yellow Bullhead
Longnose gar
Game fishes
Scientific Name
Peraa flavens
Ambloplites rupeetris
Lepom 's maarochirus
Stizostedion vitrewn
Miaropterus salmoides
Micropterus dolemieui
Esox lueius
Forage fishes
Notropis comutus
Pimephales notatus
Percina oapvodes
Notropis hudsonius
Etheostoma migvum
No trap-is value ellus
Umbra limi
Coarse fishes^
Cat os tom-Ldae
Ictalurus nebulasus
letalurus natalis
Other fishes,
Lepisosteus osseus
SOURCE: Michigan DNR,1954
-------
APPENDIX
C-6
CHECK LIST OF RESIDENT BIRDS OF MICHIGAN (NORTHWESTERN
LOWER PENINSULA MICHIGAN) DURING HEIGHT OF BREEDING
SEASON (MID JUNE TO END OF FIRST WEEK OF JULY) WITH
SUMMER NESTING RECORDS AND SPECIES ABUNDANCE
by William and Edith Overlease, Biolity
Department, West Chester State College,
West Chester, Pa. 19380, revised July 1978
Breeding records: nest **, young traveling with adults *
Abundance records:
**
**
**
**•
**
**
**
*
J
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
*
**
»*
**
**
A - abundant,
often present
R - rare
Common Loon Q
Pisd-bllled Grebe: R
Great Slue Hsran Q
Gxesn Haran C
Least Bittern- 0
American Bittern Q
Mute Smart C
Canada Goose Q
Mallard F
Slack Duck 0
Blus—winoad Tsal 0
Uood Duck C
Hooded Merganser R
Ccrnmcn Merganser 0
Turkey Vulture C
Goshauk 0
Sharp-shinned Hauk Q
Cooper's Hsuk 0
Red-tailed Kauk 0
Red-shouldered Hayk Q
Broad-winged Hauk C
Bald Eagle D
Harsh Hauk 0
Csprsy R ~~
American Kestrel R
Ruffed Grouse F
King Rail R
Virginia Rail 0
Sera 0
Common Gallinule 0
American Ccot Q
Piping Plavsr R
Killdser F
American Uoodcock C
Camrnon Snips R
Upland Plover 0
Spatted Sandpiper C
F - frequent, C - common though
in small numbers, 0 - occasional,
Short-billed Douitcher R-
Herring Gull F
Ring-hilled Gull A-
Caspiart Tern 0.
** Black Terr; 0
** oaurning Dave C
Yellouj-trillecl Cuckoo ff
** Slack-trilled Cuckoo Q
Screech- Oral R-
n«.»r ft
Cul 0
tiihip-aaar-uiill C
** Camrnnn Nightteuk C
Chimney Suift C
** Ruby-throated Hummingbird C
** Selted Kingfisher F
** Common Flicker F
** piieated Ucodpecker C
** Red-headed Uocdpscker D
** Yellnu-aellied Sapsucker C
** Hairy Uoadpecker F
** Dowry Woodpecker F
** Eastern Kingbird. F
Western Kingbird R
** Great Crested Flycatcher F
** Eastern Fhosbe C
Yellow-bellied Flycatcher R
Train's Flycatcher C
** Least Flycatcher ?
** Eastern Ucod Psuss F
** Dlive-sidad Flycatcher D
** Horned Lark C
** Tree Suallnu F
Bank Suiallou A
Rough-uinged S
Barn Suallcu F
**
**
Purpls M§rtirr F
-------
C-6
«*Hlu2 Jay F
"»Cc"^TCn Crcus F
• •Slack-capped Chickaflae F
•Tufted Titmouse R
•Units-breasted Nuthatch C-
•Rad-breasted iMuthatch C
•Ercun Crsspsr d
*» Metise Wren C
•Jlntsr Wren C
•-Lnng-billad Marsh; Uren 0
Short-trilled Marsh Uran Ct
"Mockingbird 0
**Catbird F
**3raunr-Thrasher F
**An5rxc3n Robin A
**Uaad. Thrush F
»*Hermit Thrush C
**Su!3inscrtrs Thrush R
**l/ssry F
**£3stsrrr Bluebird C
*Ga!d3rr—crcsiinsci ninglst 0
Loggerhead Shrike R
**St3rling F
*Y"slIau-tfeaatad Uirea Q
Solitary" I/iraa R-
-*nad-2yed Uirao A
Fhilsdalphla Uiren R
LJarfaling l/irsct F
*'Slack and Uhita Uarbler F
* Goldan-uiinged 'Jarblar 0
** Nashville Uartlar C
IMartherrr Parula R
** Yeilau bJar&Ier F
Magnolia Uarbler 0
Black-throated Blue LJarblar D
Yeilauj-rumped Uartjlsr 0
** Black-throatad Grssn Warbler F
* EGLacktrurnian Warbler C
Chestnut-sided klarhler F
* Pine Uarfalsr F
** Prairie L'arfrlsr C
** Dverrbird A
Northsm Ulaterthrush- C
Louisiana Uaterthrush. R
**Mcurning LJarbler C
**YallauJt^?raat F
** Canada Idarbler C
**American Redstart A
**House Sparrou F
*Bt3bolink C
** Eastern Meadaulark F
DBS tern Meadouiark: 0
**Red-winged Blackbird A
**Baltimore Oriole (Northern: Driale) F
**3rsusr?s Blackbird R
**Camman Grackle A
**8roun-headed Caubird F
*Scar1st Tanager F
**Cardinal C
**Ross-fcrraaated Grxisbaak F
** Indigo Bunting F
Dickcisssl 0
*Furpl2 Finch C
Pins Siskin R
**American Goldfinch; F
**Red Crossbill R
*Rufcus-sidad Touhaa C
Csrasannppar aparrou C.
Henslouts 3psrrou 0
**\7espEr Sparrotii F
Dark-eyed uunco R
**Chipairrg Sp-.rrcu A
**Uhita-taroated Spsrrou F
Suarnp Sparrou. F
**5aag Sparrow A
**Clay-colored Sparrou D —_
The authors are grateful to the
fallowing cantributsrs of nesting
records far the county:. Carl Fraarnan,
Harold Gall, Oarnes Laubach, Alan
Harbla, Donald McEeathr Lyle Pratt,
Sergej Fostupalsky, Arvid Tasaker,
Heith Uestphal
Totals - 153 species ,
Breeding records fcr 111 species
-------
APPENDIX
C-7
MAMMALS
White-tail deer
Black bear
Beaver
Botcat
Red fox
Mink
Muskrat
Opossum
Weasel
River otter
Snowshoe hare
Racoon
Red squirrel
Gray squirrel
Fox squirrel
Bats
Woodchuck
Chipmunk
Coyote
Porcupine
WITH A HABITAT RANGE IN THE STUDY AREA
Dama virginianus
Ursus americanus
Castor canadensis
Lynx rufus
Vulpes fulva
mustela vison
Ondatra zibethica
Didelphis marsupialis
Mustela sp.
Lutra canadensis
Lepus americanus
Prycon lotor
Tamiasciurus hudsonicus
Sciurus carolinensis
Sciurus niger
Several species
Marmota monax
Tamias striatus
Canis latrans
Erethizon dorsatutn
Several species of small
rodents (mice, shrews,
pooles)
-------
APPENDIX
C-8
MICHIGAN'S RARE AND ENDANGERED MAMMALS
WHOSE HABITAT RANGE INCLUDES THE STUDY AREA
Classification
Threatened
Threatened
Rare
Common Name
Pine Vole
Southern bog
Lemming
Water Shrew
Scientific Name
Microtus pinetorum
Synaptomys
cooperi
Sorex palustris
Rare
Peripheral
Rare
Badger
Gray Fox
Thompson ' s
pigmy shrew
Taxidea taxus
Urocyon
cinereoargenteus
Micros or ex
thompsoni
Habitat
Grasses, borders
of woodlands
Moist grasses
Stream and swamp
edges
Grasslands
Woodland and open
open lands
Dry or moist grassy
and forested areas
SOURCE: Michigan's Endangered and Threatened Species Program. DNR. 1976.
-------
MICHIGAN'S THREATENED BIRD SPECIES
WHOSE HABITAT RANGE INCLUDES THE STUDY AREA
APPENDIX
C-9
Conmon Name
Osprey
Bald eagle
Piping plover
Loggerhead shrike
Marsh hawk
Scientific Name
Pandion haliaetus
Hlaliacetus leucophalus
Charadrius melodius
Lanius ludovicianus
Circus cyaneus
Red-shouldered hawk Buteu lineatus
Habitat
Range restricted to river
banks and lake edges
Aquatic, along river banks
and lake edges
Lake shores and wetlands
Borders of woodlands
Marshlands, grassy swales
and fields
Lowland woodlands along
rivers and creeks
SOURCE: Michigan's Endangered and Threatened Species Program.
-------
APPENDIX
C-10
RARE & THREATENED PLANT SPECIES
OF MICHIGAN FOUND IN THE STUDY AREA
Common Name
Blunt-lobed or large woodsia
Bald-rush
Calypso orchid
Ram's-head lady's-slipper
Small round-leaved orchis
Grass
Slough-grass
Grass
Wild Rice
Potamogeton pondweed
Thistle
Goldenrod
Lake Huron tansy
Pine-drops
Butterwort
Queen-of-the-prairie
Scientific Name
Woodsia obtusa
Psilocarya scirpoides
Calypso bulbosa
Cypripediwn arietinum
Orchis rotundifolia
Agropyron dasystaohym
Beakmannia szygachne
Bromus pumpellianus
Zizania aquatioa vax>s
interior and aquatiaa
Potamogeton Eillii
Cirsium Pitoneri
Solidago Eoughtonii
Taniaoetwm huronense
Pterospora andromedea
Pinguiaula vulgaris
Filipendula rubra
-------
APPENDIX D
METHODOLOGY FOR PROJECTING THE PROPOSED
CROOKED/PICKEREL LAKES SERVICE AREA
PERMANENT AND SEASONAL POPULATION, 1978 AND 2000
-------
APPENDIX D
APPENDIX D
Methodology For Projecting the Proposed
Crooked/Pickerel Lakes Service Area
Permanent and Seasonal Population, 1978 and 2000
1978 Population Estimate
The 1978 population estimate for the Crooked/Pickerel Lakes Pro-
posed Service Area was based on an analysis of 1975 aerial photography
and a review of the Springvale-Bear Creek Area Segment of the Little
Traverse Bay Area Facility Plan (Williams and Works, 1976) and the
Suitability of Soils For On-site Wastewater Disposal, Pickerel and
Crooked Lakes, Emmet County, Michigan (Gold and Gannon, 1978). The
Proposed Service Area is located within portions of two townships
(Littlefield and Springvale), both in Emmet County. The area was divided
into eighteen segments for the purpose of projecting future popula-
tion. As indicated in Figure D-l, Littlefield Township has eight seg-
ments plus part of a ninth (Segment 7) and Springvale Township has nine
segments plus part of a tenth.
The total population figure of 840 for 1978 was derived from the
following information:
• Dwelling unit count for the Proposed Service Area (Gannon and
Gold) and a dwelling unit count by segments (aerial photo-
graphs);
320 El
-------
FIGURE D-l
CROOKED/PICKEREL LAKES PROPOSED SERVICE
AREA DWELLING UNITS, 1978
1000 0 2000 4000
SCALE IN FEET
LEGEND
SEASONAL
PERMANENT
-------
• A count of permanent and seasonal dwelling units in each
segment (Gannon and Gold); and
• A permanent and seasonal occupancy rate (persons per dwelling
unit) based on 1970 Census Data.
As indicated in Table D-l, there were 212 dwelling units in the Proposed
Service Area consisting of 66 permanent units and 146 seasonal units.
Gannon and Gold, in their survey of the Proposed Service Area (see
Figure D-l), estimated the number of permanent units based on recently
plowed drives, fresh tire tracks, trash containers, and chimney smoke.
Based on this dwelling unit count and permanent/ seasonal occupancy
breakdown, an occupancy rate for permanent units (3.25 persons per unit)
and seasonal units (4.25 persons per unit) was applied to each dwelling
unit type. The final calculation resulted in an estimate of 305 people
in Littlefield Township and 535 people in Springvale Township. The
Proposed Service Area had 617 seasonal residents (73.5%) with Little-
field Township having 79.7% (243) and Springvale Township having 69.9%
(374).
Year 2000 Population Projections
A review of the Facility Plan population projections for the
Crooked/Pickerel Lakes Proposed Service Area found these projections to
be based on several assumptions which served to inflate the totals (See
next section for a discussion of the difference between the EIS and
Facility Plan population projections). Consequently, other population
320 E2
1
-------
Table D-l
EXISTING POPULATION AND DWELLING UNITS FOR THE
CROOKED/PICKEREL PROPOSED SERVICE AREA (1978)
1978
Municipality
Littlefield Township
5
7 (part)
8
9
10
11
12
13
17
Subtotal
Springvale Township
1
2
3
4
6
7 (part)
14
15
16
18
Total
53
0
20
0
55
60
60
54
3
305
11
10
31
60
89
17
128
7
182
0
Population
Permanent
36
0
7
0
0
13
0
3
3
62
7
10
10
13
59
0
13
7
42
0
Dwelling Units
Seasonal
17
0
13
0
55
47
60
51
0
243
4
0
21
47
30
17
115
0
140
0
Total
15
0
5
0
13
15
14
13
1
76
3
3
8
15
25
4
29
3
46
0
Permanent
11
0
2
0
0
4
0
1
1
19
2
3
3
4
18
0
2
2
13
0
Seasonal
4
0
3
0
13
11
14
12
0
57
1
0
5
11
7
4
27
1
33
0
Subtotal 535 161 374 136 47 89
TOTAL 840 223 617 212 66 146
-------
D
projections which encompassed the Proposed Service Area were evaluated.
However, none of these projections was made at the Proposed Service Area
level.
As a result, independent permanent and seasonal baseline population
projections were produced for the year 2000 which considered the three
growth factors influencing future population levels in the Proposed
Service Area. These factors are: (1) the rate of growth or decline of
the permanent population; (2) the rate of growth or decline of the
seasonal population; and (3) the potential conversion of seasonal to
permanent dwelling units. The best available information regarding each
of these factors was utilized and resulted in the following assumptions:
• Based on discussions with local officials (Emmet County
Planning Department, 208 Planning Agency, Williams and Works)
and an analysis of recent growth trends, (U.S. Census data,
building permit records) it appears that the Proposed Service
Area is in the initial stages of a transitional period in
which it is changing from a primarily seasonal area to an area
which will serve largely as a bedroom community for the
Petoskey area. Consequently, population projections based on
past population trends will not accurately forecast the future
population, particularly in terms of permanent and seasonal
residents.
• All of the population projections available for the Proposed
Service Area or larger geographical areas were based on an
analysis of past population growth trends. While these pro-
jections provided control totals for the rate of population
320 E3
-------
growth, the projections could not be used for the analysis of
wastewater management alternatives.
• The growth dynamics of the Proposed Service Area (i.e., the
transition from a primarily seasonal to a primarily bedroom
community area) dictated that the population projections based
on an analysis of past dwelling unit growth trends which more
accurately depicted the type of population growth occurring in
the Proposed Service Area.
• The analysis of dwelling unit growth found that between 1970
and 1978, the Facility Plan Study Area, Springvale Township,
Littlefield Township, and the Proposed Service Area all had
annual dwelling unit increases of 2.0% to 3.0%. (U.S. Census
Bureau, Emmet County Planning Department). In addition, it
was determined that permanent dwelling units in Springvale
Township were increasing by approximately 4.0% per year while
Littlefield Township was incurring a 5.5% increase in per-
manent dwelling units annually.
• Based on the past pattern of seasonal dwelling unit conver-
sions, (Emmet County tax records 1979) it was assumed that
existing seasonal dwelling units will convert at a rate of
approximately 1.0% per year (15.8% during the planning period)
while new seasonal dwelling units constructed after 1978 will
convert to permanent units at a rate of 1.0% per year (10.6%
during the planning period).
320 E4
1
-------
D
• Based on the national trend toward smaller family sizes, it
was assumed that the occupancy rate for permanent dwelling
units will decrease to 3.0 persons per unit and that the
seasonal dwelling unit occupancy rate would decrease to 4.0
persons per unit.
Based on these assumptions, the dwelling unit projections for the Pro-
posed Service Area by Township were developed using the 1978 estimates
as a base. As indicated in Table D-2, the population projections
resulted in a Proposed Service Area population of 1,263 people con-
sisting of 603 permanent residents (47.7%) and 660 seasonal residents
(52.3%). The total in-summer population for the year 2000 represents a
50.4% increase over the 1978 figure. Littlefield Township is projected
to increase by 167 people (54.8%) and Springvale Township is projected
to increase by 256 people (47.9%). These figures are in line with the
Northwest Michigan Regional Planning Commission's (208 planning agency)
projected growth for Littlefield Township (43.2%) and Springvale Town-
ship (30.4%). The permanent population in Littlefield Township will
increase by nearly 250% while Springvale Township's permanent population
is projected to increase by over 140%. The increase in seasonal popula-
•t
tion is anticipated to be of compartively smaller magnitudes with only a
5.3% increase in Littlefield Township and a 8.0% increase in Springvale
Township .
Using the Township totals for the Proposed Service Area, the new
dwelling units and the conversion of seasonal to permanent dwelling
units were dissaggregated to the eighteen segments comprising the
320 E5
-------
Table D-2
PROJECTED POPULATION AND DWELLING UNITS FOR THE
CROOKED/PICKEREL PROPOSED SERVICE AREA (2000)
2000
Population Dwelling Units
Municipality Total Permanent Seasonal Total Permanent Seasonal
Littlefield Township
5 64 48 16 20 16 4
7 (part) 00 0 0 0 0
8 37 21 16 11 7 4
9 000000
10 93 33 60 26 11 15
11 103 51 52 30 17 13
12 90 42 48 26 14 12
13 82 18 64 22 6 16
17 330110
Subtotal 472 216 256 136 72 64
Springvale Township
1 13 9 4 4 3 1
2 12 12 0 4 4 0
3 37 21 16 11 7 4
4 103 51 52 30 17 13
6 159 123 36 50 41 9
7 (part) 22 6 16 62 4
14 148 36 112 40 12 28
15 52 24 28 15 8 7
16 245 105 140 70 35 35
18 000000
Subtotal 791 387 404 230 129 101
TOTAL 1,263 603 660 366 201 165
-------
Service Area. The disaggregations were made based on the amount of
developable land available in each segment (areas containing wetlands,
poor soils, or potential flood hazard areas were not considered as
developable) the desirability of the developable land for potential
development and the availability of infrastructure. Second tier
residential development was also considered in those segments where
backlot development was already occurring. Based on these parameters
and the provisions of the relevant zoning ordinances, the disaggregation
by segment was made as indicated in Table D-2.
Areas of major dwelling unit and population growth include Segments
10, 11, 12, and 13 in Littlefield Township and Segments 4, 6, 14, 15,
and 16 in Springvale Township. These segments represent nearly the
entire shoreline around Pickerel Lake and southeastern shoreline of
Crooked Lake.
Comparison of EIS and Facility Plan Population Totals
The 1978 population estimates for the Proposed Service Area pre-
pared for this EIS are equal to the Facility Plan estimates. However,
the two estimates are based on different dwelling unit totals (259
dwelling units in the Facility Plan estimate) and different assumptions
regarding seasonal population. The EIS estimate assumed that there were
146 seasonal dwelling units while the Facility Plan used a figure of 182
seasonal dwelling units.
320 E6
-------
In addition, the Facility Plan assumed that seasonal households
would have the same occupancy rate (3.25 persons/unit) as permanent
units. The EIS estimate used a higher seasonal occupancy rate (4.25
persons/units) to reflect the findings of numerous studies which found
that seasonal units generally had significantly higher occupancy rates.
Although these different assumptions did not affect the 1978 population
estimates, they did affect the difference between the EIS and the
Facility Plan year 2000 projections.
The EIS year 2000 projection of 1,263 people is nearly 40% lower
than the Facility Plan projection of 2,080 people. The difference of
817 people is in large measure attributable to the assumption in the
Facility Plan that wastewater treatment service would be available in
the Proposed Service Area to open to development previously undevelop-
able land. Under this assumption and the higher existing dwelling unit
base, the Facility Plan projected a 147.6% increase in population in the
Service Area. The EIS projection, based solely on past growth trends in
the Service Area, projected only a 50.4% increase in population which is
more closely in line with the 208 planning agency's (Northwest Michigan
Regional Planning Commission) projected growth for Littlefield Township
(43.2%) and Springvale Township (30.4%).
It must be recognized that the forecasts of future seasonal popu-
lation growth presented here are highly tentative. This is partly the
result of assumptions which must be made concerning seasonal population
such as occupancy rate. In addition, seasonal population change is
likely to respond much more to a variety of social factors influencing
320 E7
-------
the number of second homes that Americans own. Most important among
these volatile factors are changes in disposable personal income which
influence the ability to afford second residences and changes in gaso-
line availability and prices which influence the ability of persons to
travel long distances to second homes.
320 E8
-------
APPENDIX E
FLOW REDUCTION
-------
?low Reduction and Cose Data for Water Saving Devices
APPENDIX
E-l
Device
Toilet modifications
Hater displacement
device—plastic
bottles, bricks, etc.
Hater damming device
Dual flush adaptor
Daily
Conservation
(gpd)
10
30
23
Daily
Conservation
(hot water)
Useful
Capital Installation Liie_
_Cost Cost (yrs.).
Shower flow control
insert device
Alternative shower
equipment
Flow control shower, head
Shower cutoff valve
thermostatic mixing
valve
19
19
0
0-
3.25
4.00
14
14
2.00
15.00
2.00
62.00
H-0
E-0
H-0
H-0
H-0 or
13.30
3-0
13.30
15
20
10
Average
Annual
O&M
Inaroved ballock
assembly
Alternative toilets
Shallow trap toilet
Dual cycle toilet
Vacuum toilet
Incinerator toilet
Organic waste treatment
system
Recycle toilet
Faucet modifications
Aerator
Flow control device
Alternative faucats
Foow control faucet
Spray tap faucet
Shower modification
20
30
60
90
100
100
100
1
4.3
4.3
7
0-
0-
0-
0-
0
0
0
1
2.4
2.4
3.5
3.00 H-0 10 0
30.00 53.20 20 0
95.00 55.20 • 0
1.50 H-0 15 0
3.00 H-0 15 Q
40.00 20.70 0
56.50 20.70 15 0
d-0 » Honsowner-instalied; cost assumed to be zero.
-------
APPENDIX
E-2
CONSIDERATION OF RESIDENTIAL FLOW REDUCTION MEASURES
IN WASTEWATER FACILITIES PLANNING FROM THE HOMEOWNER'S PERSPECTIVE
A wastewater management option available for all publicly owned treatment
works (POTW) is reduction of wastewater flow by installation of flow reduction
devices in private residences. The typical 201 Facilities Plan, however, gives
passing attention to this option, ignores it altogether, or finds that is it
not implementable and not cost-effective. It is true that there is little
hard data on implementation and success of municipality-wide flow reduction
programs. Facilities planners are not disposed to reduce their wastewater
flow projections on the basis of unquantifiables, and so the flow reduction
option is usually eliminated.
When domestic flow reduction is analyzed for cost-effectiveness, the same
result is obtained. The calculated costs of residential flow reduction de-
vices are compared to the cost to treat the increment of wastewater that would
be saved. Particularly in metropolitan areas, where costs to treat per unit
flow are low, this cost comparison generally favors eliminating the flow re-
duction option from further consideration. However, this type of analysis is
incomplete. The benefits of residential flow reduction also include reduced
costs for water supply, energy savings from reduced hot water requirements, and
reduced design sizes of future water supply mains, collector sewers, and
interceptors. Rigorous estimation of these cost benefits would require dis-
aggregation of relevant public utility costs to items which are not flow-
dependent (such as right-of-way easements, fixed operation and maintenance
costs, amortization of prior capitalization) and those which are flow-dependent
(peak hydraulic capacity of water and wastewater treatment plants and pumping
stations, variable operation and maintenance costs). The effort required to
prepare such an analysis could equal the effort to prepare the remainder of
the facilities plan.
As a means of providing a comprehensive cost-effective analysis without
committing disproportionate effort to it, the homeowner's perspective on the
economics of flow reduction can be assumed. Six cost estimates are included
in the analysis from the homeowner's perspective:
cost of wastewater treatment,
cost of water supply,
cost of energy for water heating,
capital cost of the device,
installation cost of the device, and
operation and maintenance cost of the device.
Annual savings in wastewater treatment, water supply, and energy costs due to
use of a device are compared to annualized capital and installation costs plus
annual operation and maintenance cost.
Calculation of savings in utility costs requires that a baseline of water
consumption characteristics be assumed. Relying on analysis by Bailey, et al.
(1969), total daily household water consumption for a family of four is
generated as shown in Table 1. Hot water usage assumptions are also listed.
Except for hot water usage by laundry and dishwashing machines, hot water
-------
E-2
Table 1. Average daily household total and hot water usage for a family of
four by sewage generating source.
Source
Bathing
Lavatory
Kitchen faucet
Utility sink
Laundry
Dishwashing
Toilet
Per capita per day
Annual household
(90% occupancy)
Cold and hot
water usage
(KPd)
80
8
12
5
35
15
1QQ
255
63.75 gpcd
83,800 gallons
Hot water
usage
(*pd)
40
4
6
2
30a
15a
—
97
24.25 gpcd
31,800 gallons
Author's assumptions. Remainder of data from Bailey,
et al. (1969).
-------
E-2
estimates are based upon Bailey's assumption that 50% of contact water is
heated. To calculate annual total and hot water consumption, a 90% occupancy
rate is assumed. The standard household, therefore, uses approximately 84,000
gallons of water per year, of which approximately 32,000 gallons are heated.
In regard to the capital, installation, and O&M costs of water conserva-
tion devices, two cases are considered:
Case I — Installation in new homes or as a necessary replacement.
Case II — Retrofitting or replacement of old equipment or installation
where there is no equivalent standard equipment.
To formulate the flow reduction analysis, the general equation is:
A = C - C,
o d
where:
A = annual homeowner savings due to a flow reduction device
C = annual costs without device
o
C. - annual costs with the device.
d
Annual costs without the device are further defined as:
Case I: Installation in new homes or as necessary replacement
C , = 84 x W
ol
+ 32 x P
+ 84 x WW
+ (Capital + Installation )(A/P,i,n)
s s
+ (O&M )
s
where:
W = $/l,000 gallons for water supply
P = $/l,000 gallons for heating water to 140°F
WW = $/l,000 gallons for wastewater treatment
Capital = cost of standard device
Installation = installation cost of standard device
s
O&M = average annual operation and maintenance cost
s:
(A/P, i, n) = capital recovery factor at i percent interest for useful
life of the standard device, n.
-------
Case II: Retrofitting or no equivalent standard equipment
C TT = 84W + 32P + 84WW
oil
Annual costs with the device are further defined as:
E-2
84 -
328 x T
1,000
W
84 -
[328 x Hi
[ 1,000 j
328 x T
1,000
ww
4- (Capital + Installation^ (A/P,i,n)
+ (O&M,)
d
where: W, P, WW as above
T = Total daily household water saving for a flow reduction
device
H = Hot water daily household water savings for a flow
reduction device
Capital, = Cost of flow reduction device
Q
Installation, = Installation cost of flow reduction system
O&M, = Average annual operation and maintenance device
Substituting these cost factors into the generalized equation and can-
celling, the annual homeowner savings due to a flow reduction device, A, for
the two cases can be calculated as:
Case I:
A = (Capital + Installation )(A/P,i,n)
s s
+ (O&M )
5
-------
E-2
+ .328 (T-W + H«P + T«WW)
- (Capitald + Installation )(A/P,i,n)
- (0&Md)
""CaseTl:
A = .328 (T«W + H'P + T-WW)
- Capital, + Installation,(A/P,i,n)
a a
- (O&M,)
a
All of the terms in these last two equations except W, P, and WW, are
specific to the flow reduction device under consideration, or, in Case I,
to standard devices having similar functions. Values found in the literature
for the device-specific terms typically show a wide range. Typical values
for these terms are presented in Table 2 for a number of flow reduction
devices. No installation cost is assumed where a device can be easily in-
stalled by the homeowner. A labor cost of $13.80 per hour is assumed in
fable 2 for devices which would require installation by a licensed plumber.
The terms W, P, and WW are costs which would be based on local data.
Appropriate methods for calculating these costs are described in Table 3.
If the annual homeowner's savings, A, as calculated by this method, is
positive, then a device can be assumed to be cost-effective on its own merits.
Other factors must be taken into consideration prior to revising waste flow
projections in facilities planning. The most significant factors are method
of implementation and effectiveness of a planning area-wide flow reduction
campaign. For some devices, public acceptance may also be a significant factor.
For purposes of facilities planning, it is generally not necessary to
design a method of implementation which will yield short-term water savings.
The important design factor is per capita flow in the design year. In most
planning areas, this allows 20 years for the flow reduction measures to be
successfully implemented. At the least, phasing of wastewater facilities
would allow 5 years to achieve the design per capita flow.
-------
E-2
Table 3. Water supply, power, and wastewater treatment costs for cost-effective
analysis of residential flow reduction devices
Cost of Water Supply - W
• Municipal, Metered Water — Use water billing rate per 1,000 gallons for
an 80,000 gallons per year user
• Municipal, Fixed Rate — Divide annual billing rate for 84,000 gallon per
year user by 80.
• Well Supply — Assume that well installation and repair costs are not
variable according to expected flow reductions. Flow variable cost is
only the cost of electricity for pumping from well to storage by the
equation:
Total head in feet x c/KWH _ .. . . ,, Ann ,,
— TT-.—:—* _ . og = Cost in c/1,000 gallons
Overall pump efficiency x 3.185
' *
.60 x 3.185
Cost of Heating Water - P
• Electric Water Heater — Water heated by 100°F requires 1.0 KWH per
4 gallons heated. At 3C/KWH, cost is .750 per gallon or 750C per 1,000
gallons.
• Natural Gas Water Heater — Not determined.
• IP Gas Water Heater — Not determined.
(NOTE: Cost savings for devices which reduce flow in lavatories,
showers, and kitchen faucets will be very sensitive to
assumptions about water heating costs. More work is
required in this area.)
Cost of Wastewater Treatment —- WW
* For Alternatives Analysis in Facilities Planning — Determination of the
appropriate cost is at the analyst's discretion. To maintain the home-
owner's perspective, the average annual local cost for transport, treat-
ment, and disposal of wastewaters for the various alternatives would be
reduced by the amortized worth of anticipated footage or connection
charges, and then divided by the design year, service area flow (without
residential flow reduction) in mgd and multiply by 0.365. A simpler
effort with a result that will increase the calculated annual homeowner's
saving would be to divide the average annual cost of the alternative by
the design year service area flow and multiply by 0.365.
• Centralized Sewer System, Metered Water Supply — Use sewerage billing
rate per 1,000 gallons for an 80,000 gallons per year user.
-------
E-2
Table 3. Water supply, power, and wastewater treatment costs for cost-effective
analysis of residential flow reduction devices (Concluded).
• On-Lot, Soil-Dependent System — Assume that the useful life of drain field,
seepage pit, or Indian mound is dependent on flow. Divide the estimated
cost of soil system rehabilitation or replacement by its estimated useful
life in years times 80:
6 /-, nr,A i , Cost of replacement or rehabilitation
$/l,000 gallons - Useful life x 80
• Holding Tank — Use cost for transport and treatment per 1,000 gallons.
7
-------
APPENDIX
E-3
FLOW REDUCTION FOR EIS ALTERNATIVE 4
a) Alt. Item
Treatment
Collection
Collection
Year
1980
1980
1980-
2000
Capital
761.
2012.
87.
5
85
09
O&M Sal.
15.7
18.61
320,
814.
1.17* 807.
*Gradient
Val.
,5
,16
,95
Capital
PW
761.
2012.
950.
.5
.85
.1
O&M
PW
171.3
203.0
95.0
Sol. Total
Vol. P.W. PW
88.
225.
224.
9
7
0
3724.4 469.3
538.5
Savings in T.P.W. = 3775.6 = (Beard Alt. 4) - 3655.2
= 120.4
3655.2
-Costs of Devices
(see Appendix E-3) - 20.2
100,200/301 houses = S333/house in P.W. of wastewater savings
b) 20-year homeowner savings, including water and heating bills.
Assume family of 4.
Then total water consumption = 83,800 gallon/yr.
Then hot water consumption = 31,800 gallons/yr.
W, = Pumped water costs (125 ft) = 125' x S.03 c m/,nnn n
0% eff x 3.185 = S -O2/1000 8allons
P = Heated water costs (100°F/$.03/KWH = $7.50/1000 gallons
WW = Wastewater treatment cost (assume 50% of eligibility of gravity sewage)
= 0.365 x 230.3 (see p 2/3)
0.13
= 648.0
Device
dual-cycle
toilet
Shower control
Lavatory faucet
control valve
Total
T(total daily saving)
25
valve 19
4.8
48.8
H(hot water saving) Capital S
0 95
14 15
2.4 40
16.4 150
Installation
55.20
13.80
20.70
89.70
Annual savings = 0.328 (T.W + H.P + T. WW) - Capital + Instl. - O&M (« 0 in all cases)
= 0.328 (48.8.0.02 + 7.5.16.4 = 48.8.648.0) - 239.70
= 09412.8 - 239.7
= 10173
savings/ user = 10173/301
= 33.8
Treatment (100% eligible) - 827.3
(incl. contingency)
Collection pressure
hookups = 70.4
pumps = 313.3
pipe = 338.1
cleanouts =39.3
valves = 6.4
~767.5+'>5% contg. = 191.9
= 959.4 (100% eligible
Collection-gravity
pipe = 324.6
force main 313.9
ARV 8.1
Tee 3.2
pump stations 84.0
hookups 95.8
833.6+25% contg. - 208.4
1042.0 (50% eligible)
at gravity 50% eligibility, treatment + collection = 2307.7 (74% of all coll. eligible)
Analyzed Local cost = CRF (10% of project cost + Avg. O&M)
= 0.0917 (230.8 + 87.3) + 39.1 + 1.2
= 29-. 2 + 40.3
- 69.5
Annual Cost/yser = 69,500
301
= 230.8 = WW
-------
APPENDIX
E-4
Incremental Capital Costs of Flow Reduction
in the Crooked/Pickerel Lake Study Area
Dual cycle toilets:
$20/toilet x 2 toilets/permanent dwelling x 301 permanent
dwellings in year 2000 = $12,040
$20/toilet x 1 toilet/seasonal dwelling x 165 seasonal
dwellings in year 2000 = 3,300
Shower flow control insert device:
$2/shower x 2 shower/permanent dwelling x 301 permanent
dwellings in year 2000 = 1,204
$2/shower x 1 shower/seasonal dwelling x 165 seasonal
dwellings in year 2000 = 330
Faucet flow control insert device:
$3/faucet x 3 faucets/permanent dwelling x 301 permanent
dwellings in year 2000 = 2,709
$2/faucet x 2 faucets/seasonal dewlling x 165 seasonal
dwellings in year 2000 = 660
Total = $20,243
Note: The $20 cost for dual cycle toilets is the difference between its
full purchase price of $95 and the price of a standard toilet, $75.
-------
APPENDIX F
FINANCING
-------
Appendix
F-1
COST SHARING
The Federal Water Pollution Coatrol Act of 1972 (Public Law 92-500
Section 202), authorized EPA to award grants for 75% of the construction
costs of wastewater management systems. Passage of the Clean Water Act
(P. L. 95-217) authorized increased Federal participation in the costs
of wastewater management systems. The Construction Grants Regulations
(40 CFR Part 35) have been modified in accordance with the later Act.
Final Rules and Regulations for implementing this Act were published in
the Federal Register on September 27, 1978.
There follows a brief discussion of the eligibility of major
components of wastewater management systems for Federal funds.
Federal Contribution
In general, EPA will share in the costs of constructing treatment
systems and in the cost of land used as part of the treatment process.
For land application systems the Federal government will also help to
defray costs of storage and ultimate disposal of effluent. The Federal
share is 75% of the cost of conventional treatment systems and 85% of
the cost of systems using innovative or alternative technologies.
Federal funds can also be used to construct collection systems when the
requirements discussed below are met.
The increase in the Federal share to 85% when innovative or
alternative technologies are used is intended to encourage reclamation
and reuse of water, recycling of wastewater constituents, elimination of
pollutant discharges, and/or recovering of energy. Alternative
technologies are those which have been proven and used in actual
practice. These include land treatment, aquifer recharge, and direct
reuse for industrial purposes. On-site, other small waste systems, and
septage treatment facilities are also classified as alternative
technologies. Innovative technologies are those which have not been
fully proven in full scale operation.
To further encourage the adoption and use of alternative and
innovative technologies, the Cost Effectiveness Analysis Guidelines in
the new regulations give these technologies a 15% preference (in terms
of present worth) over conventional technologies. This cost preference
does not apply to privately owned, on-site or other privately owned
small waste flow systems.
States that contribute to the 25% non-Federal share of conventional
projects must contribute the same relative level of funding to the 15%
non-Federal share of innovative or alternative projects.
Individual Systems (Privately or Publicly Owned)
P.L. 95-217 authorized EPA to participate in grants for con-
structing privately owned treatment works serving small commercial
establishments or one or more principal residences inhabited on or
-------
F-l
before December 27, 1977 (Final Regulatioas, 40 CFR 35.918,
September 27, 1978). A public body must apply for the grant, certify
that the system will be properly operated and maintained, and collect
user charges for operation and maintenance of the system. All
commercial users must pay industrial cost recovery on the Federal share
of the system. A principal residence is defined as a voting residence
or household of the family during 51% of the year. Note: The
"principal residence" requirement does not apply to publicly owned
systems.
Individual systems, including sewers, that use alternative
technologies may be eligible for 85% Federal participation, but
privately owned individual systems are not eligible for the 115% cost
preference in the cost-effective analysis. Acquisition of land on which
a privately owned individual system would be located is not eligible for
a grant.
Publicly owned on-site and cluster systems, although subject to the
same regulations as centralized treatment plants, are also considered
alternative technologies and therefore eligible for an 85% Federal
share.
EPA policy on eligibility criteria for small waste flow systems is
still being developed. It is clear that repair, renovation or
replacement of on-site systems is eligible if they are causing
documentable public health, groundwater quality or surface water quality
problems. Both privately owned systems servicing year-round residences
(individual systems) and publicly owned year-round or seasonally used
systems are eligible where there are existing problems. Seasonally
used, privately owned systems are not eligible.
Several questions on eligibility criteria remain to be answered and
are currently being addressed by EPA:
• For systems which do not have existing problems, would
preventive measures be eligible which would delay or avoid
future problems?
0 Could problems with systems other than public health,
groundwater quality or surface water quality be the basis for
eligibility of repair, renovation or replacement? Examples of
"other problems", are odors, limited hydraulic capacity, and
periodic backups.
* Is non-conformance with modern sanitary codes suitable
justification for eligibility of repair, renovation or
replacement? Can non-conformance be used as a measure of the
need for preventive measures?
• If a system is causing public health, groundwater quality or
surface water quality problems but site limitations would
prevent a new on-site system from satisfying sanitary codes,
would a non-conforming on-site replacement be eligible if it
would solve the existing problems?
-------
F-l
In this EIS estimates were made of the percent repair, renovation
or replacement of on-site systems that may be found necessary during
detailed site analyses. Those estimates are felt to he conservatively
high and would prohably be appropriate for generous resolutions of the
above questions.
Collection Systems
Construction Grants Program Requirements Memorandum (PRM) 78-9,
March 3, 1978, amends EPA policy on the funding of sewage collection
systems in accordance with P.L. 95-271. Collection sewers are those
installed primarily to receive wastewaters from household service lines.
Collection sewers may be grant-eligible if they are the replacement or
major rehabilitation of an existing system. For new sewers in an
existing community to be eligible for grant funds, the following
requirements must be met:
o Substantial Human Habitation — The bulk (generally 67%) of
the flow design capacity through the proposed sewer system
must be for wastewaters originating from homes in existence on
October 18, 1972. Substantial human habitation should be
evaluated block by block, or where blocks do not exist, by
areas of five acres or less.
o Cost-Effectiveness -- New collector sewers will only be
considered cost-effective when the systems in use (e.g. septic
tanks) for disposal of wastes from existing population are
creating a public health problem, violating point source
discharge requirements of PL 92-500, or contaminating ground-
water. Documentation of the malfunctioning disposal systems
and the extent of the problem is required.
Where population density within the area to be served by the
collection system is less than 1.7 persons per acre (one
household per two acres), a severe pollution or public health
problem must be specifically documented and the collection
sewers must be less costly than on-site alternatives. Where
population density is less than 10 persons per acre, it must
be shown that new gravity collector sewer construction and
centralized treatment is more cost-effective than on-site
alternatives. The collection system may not have excess
capacity which could induce development in environmentally
sensitive areas such as wetlands, floodplains or prime
agricultural lands. The proposed system must conform with
approved Section 208 plans, air quality plans, and Executive
Orders and EPA policy on environmentally sensitive areas.
o Public Disclosure of Costs -- Estimated monthly service
charges to a typical residential customer for the system must
be disclosed to the public in order for the collection system
to be funded. A total monthly service charge must be
presented, and the portion of the charge due to operation and
maintenance, debt service, and connection to the system must
also be disclosed.
-------
F-l
Elements of the substantial human habitation and cost-effectiveness
eligibility requirements for new collector sewers are portrayed in
Figure 1 in a decision flow diagram. These requirements would apply
for any pressure, vacuum or gravity collector sewers except those
serving on-site or small waste flow systems.
Household Service Lines
Traditionally, gravity sewer lines built on private property
connecting a house or other building with a public sewer have been built
at the expense of the owner without local, State or Federal assistance.
Therefore, in addition to other costs for hooking up to a new sewer
system, owners installing gravity household service lines will have to
pay about $1,000, more or less depending on site and soil conditions,
distance and other factors.
Pressure sewer systems, including the individual pumping units, the
pressure line and appurtenances on private property, however, are
considered as part of the community collection system. They are,
therefore, eligible for Federal and State grants which substantially
reduce the homeowner's private costs for installation of household
service lines.
-------
FIGURE J-3-a
Collector Sewer Eligibility - Decision Flow Diagram
Based on PRM 78-9
1 ,
Sanitary Survey
and Croundwater *
Analysis v"
Sewers
Not
1T1 In -Ilil n /. **"
t-iigiDiev
at 75%
Block 1
of Sub
Habit a
•Js
Documented Groundwater Contamination, Sewers Not
Indeterminate Public Health Hazard or Point Source No s Elleible
Pop. Density
Greater than
10/acre
V
\ j
Community 20-year
Population Incraas
Less than 50% oVer
1972 Population?
Yes
\ '
by Block Determination
atantial Human
tion in 1972
1 No Habitation
Sewers
Not
Eligible
Violation
Yes
No Alternat
(Document Sewers F
Reasons)
*
| Sewer ing
(Cost
,. Sewers j^.
e * Cheaper [cost
E
1972
Habitation ^ E
, , . x
Yes Pop. Density less
,V than 10/ar.ra
ive to
ea sible 7
Yes
*
Alternative's
Cost
1
Comparison]
Alternative s
Cheaper
\/
Sewers
Not
ligible
Sewers
ligible
v,
fstate Priority, Certification!
(and Funding I
it
I
j Build Sewers |
-------
APPENDIX
F-2
ALTERNATIVES FOR FINANCING THE LOCAL SHARE OF
WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES IN EMMET COUNTY, MICHIGAN
320 Cl
-------
F-2
ALTERNATIVES FOR FINANCING THE LOCAL SHARE OF
WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES IN EMMET COUNTY, MICHIGAN
The financing of wastewater facilities requires a viable strategy.
In exercising the authority delegated to them by the state to finance
local activities, local governments need not only expertise in budgeting
and debt administration but also a general knowledge of the costs and
benefits of various complex financial tools and alternative investment
strategies.
This section reviews several possible ways to fund the Proposed
Action or alternative wastewater management systems in Emmet County,
Michigan. It will:
• Describe options available for financing both the capital and
the operating costs of the wastewater facilities; and
• Discuss institutional arrangements for financing and examine
the probable effects of various organizational arrangements on
the marketability of the bond.
FINANCING CAPITAL COSTS: OPTIONS
The several methods of financing capital improvements include: (1)
pay-as-you-go methods; (2) special benefit assessments; 3) reserve
funds; and (4) debt financing.
The pay-as-you-go method requires that payments for capital facili-
ties be made from current revenues. This approach is more suitable for
recurring expenses such as street paving than for one-time long-term
investments. As the demand for public services grows, it becomes in-
creasingly difficult for local governments to finance capital improve-
ments on a pay-as-you-go basis.
In situations where the benefits to individual properties from
capital improvements can be assessed, special benefit assessments in the
form of direct fees or taxes may be used to apportion costs.
Sometimes reserve funds are established to finance capital improve-
ments. A part of current revenues is placed in a special fund each year
and invested in order to accumulate adequate funds to finance needed
capital improvements. Although this method avoids the expense of
borrowing, it requires foresight on the part of the local government.
Debt financing of capital facilities may take several forms. Local
governments may issue short-term notes or float one of several types of
bonds. Bonds are generally classified by both their guarantee of
security and method of redemption.
320 C2
-------
¥-2
GUARANTEE OF SECURITY
General Obligation (G.O. Bonds)
Debt obligations secured by the full faith and credit of the
municipality are classified as general obligation bonds. The borrower
is pledging the financial and economic resources of the community to
support the debt. Because of the advantages of this approach to debt
financing, general obligation bonds have funded over 95% of the water
and sewer projects in the State of Michigan. Following are some of the
advantages:
• Interest rates on the debt are usually lower than on revenue
or special assessment bonds. With lower annual debt service
charges, the cash flow position of the jurisdiction is im-
proved.
• G.O. bonds for sewerage offer financial flexibility to the
municipality since funds to retire them can be obtained
through property taxes, user charges or combinations of both.
• When G.O. bonds are financed by ad valorem property taxes,
households have the advantage of a deduction from their
Federal income taxes.
• G.O. bonds offer a highly marketable financial investment
since they provide a tax-free and relatively low-risk invest-
ment venture for the lender.
• In the State of Michigan, a municipality may issue G.O. bonds
without the consent of the electorate. However, there is a
bill in the legislature that would require all bonds to be
subjected to a referendum.
A disadvantage to a general obligation approach is the State con-
stitutional restriction on the total amount of debt outstanding.
Michigan law requires that a municipality's total indebtedness not
exceed 10% of its assessed valuation. This restriction may lead small
rural areas like Crooked/Pickerel Lakes to seek alternative regional
institutional arrangements for financing the capital costs of
wastewater/treatment systems.
Revenue Bonds
Revenue bonds differ from G.O. bonds in that they are not backed by
a pledge of full faith and credit from the municipality and therefore
require a higher interest rate. The interest is usually paid, and the
bonds eventually retired, by earnings from the enterprise.
A major advantage of revenue bonds over general obligation bonds is
that municipalities can circumvent constitutional restrictions on
borrowing. Although revenue bonds have become a popular financial
alternative to G.O. bonds in financing wastewater facilities, they have
traditionally been avoided as a financing mechanism in Michigan for
several reasons.
320 C3 0
-------
F-2
• High Interest Rates. Since the bonds are payable only from
the earnings of the enterprise and are not supported by the
full faith and credit of the jurisdictions, the risk of de-
fault is greater than on a general obligation issue.
• Margin of Risk". The bond market requires earnings to be some
multiple of total debt service charges in order to protect
investors from possible default. The current risk margin for
Michigan revenue bonds is 50%. For the Study Area this high
margin requirement may provide two scenarios. First, since
60% of the households in the Study Area have incomes under
$10,000, investors might consider the returns on the invest-
ment to be less than the risks of possible default; should
this be the case, the bonds would be unmarketable. Alter-
natively, if the bond be marketable, then the additional
margin requirements* would be charged to households, thereby
increasing the cost burden imposed by debt service obliga-
tions.
• Administrative Costs. Issuance of a revenue bond obligates
the municipality to provide separate funding and accounting
procedures to distinguish the sewer charges from general
revenue accounts.
Special Assessment Bond
A special assessment bond is payable only from the collection of
special assessments, not from general property taxes. This type of
obligation is useful when direct benefits are easily identified.
Assessments are often based on front footage or area of the benefited
property. This type of assessment may be very costly to individual
property owners, especially in rural areas. Agricultural lands may
require long sewer extensions and thus impose a very high assessment on
one user. Furthermore, not only is the individual cost high, but the
presence of sewer lines places development pressures on the rural land
and often portends the transition of land from agriculture to
residential/commercial use. Because the degree of security is lower
than with G.O. bonds, special assessment bonds represent a greater
investment risk and therefore carry a higher interest rate.
METHODS OF REDEMPTION
Two types of bonds are classified according to their method of
retirement -- (1) serial bonds and (2) term bonds. Serial bonds mature
in annual installments while term bonds mature at a fixed point in time.
Serial Bonds
Serial bonds provide a number of advantages for financing sewerage
facilities. First, they provide a straightforward retirement method by
maturing in annual installments. Secondly, since some bonds are retired
each year, this method avoids the use of sinking funds." Third, serial
bonds are attractive to the investor and offer wide flexibility in
marketing and arranging the debt structure of the community. Serial
320 C4
-------
F-2
bonds fall into two categories (1) straight serials and (2) serial
annuities.
Straight Serial Bonds provide equal annual payments of principal
for the duration of the bond issue. Consequently, interest charges are
higher in the early years and decline over the life of the bond. This
has the advantage of 'freeing up' surplus revenues for future invest-
ment. The municipality has the option of charging these excess revenues
to a sinking or reserve fund or of lowering the sewer rates imposed on
households.
Serial Annuities provide equal annual installment payments of
principal and interest. Total debt service charges in the early years
of the bond issue are thus equal to the charges in later years. The
advantage to this method of debt retirement is that the total costs of
the projects are averaged across the entire life of the bond. Thus,
peak installment payments in the early years are avoided, and costs are
more equitably distributed than with straight serial bonds.
Although straight and annuity serials are the most common types of
debt retirement bonds, methods of repayment may vary. Such "irregular"
serial bonds may result in:
• Gradually increasing annual debt service charges over the life
of the issue;
• Fluctuating annual installments producing combinations of
rising then declining debt service; or
• Large installments due on the last years of the issue. These
are called "ballooning" maturity bonds.
Statutory limitations restrict the use of irregular serial bonds in
the State of Michigan. According to the Revenue Bond Act, "all bonds
shall not mature at one time, they shall mature in annual series
beginning not more than two years from such probable date of beginning
of operation and ending as provided herein above for the maturity of
bonds maturing at one time, and the sum of the principal and interest to
fall due in each year shall be as nearly equal as is practicable."
Term Bonds
Term bonds differ from serial issues in that term bonds mature at a
fixed point in time. The issuing entity makes periodic payments (in-
cluding interest earned on investments) to a sinking fund which will be
used to retire the debt at maturity. The major disadvantage to this
approach to financing is management of the sinking fund -- a complex
operation requiring expertise in national and regional monetary markets
to insure maximum return on investment. Mismanagement of the fund could
lead to default on the bond.
Until recently, term bonds requiring a sinking fund were illegal in
the State of Michigan. In 1977, the Michigan legislature passed a
resolution allowing the use of term bonds by requiring annual payments
320 C5 J
-------
F-2
to a sinking fund for use in purchasing or redeeming bonds to retire the
debt. There is an advantage to this method of debt retirement, particu-
larly for revenue-producing wastewater treatment facilities. If
revenues or user charges from the facilities are estimated to vary
widely from year to year, then the community has the option of retiring
a greater or lesser portion of the debt in any given year.
OPERATING COSTS
In most cases, operating costs are financed through service
charges. Service charges are generally constructed to reflect the
physical use of the system. For example, charges may be based on one or
a combination of the following factors:
• Volume of wastewater
• Pollutional load of wastewater
• Number or size of connections
• Type of property serviced (residential, commercial,
industrial).
Volume and pollutional load are two of the primary methods for
determining service charges. Basing service charges on volume of waste-
water requires some method for measuring or estimating volume. Because
metering of wastewater flows is expensive and impractical, many communi-
ties utilize existing water supply meters and, often, fix wastewater
volume at a percentage of water flows. When metering is not used, a
flat rate system may be employed, charging a fixed rate for each connec-
tion based on user type.
INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS
The townships and municipalities within the Study Area have avail-
able a number of organizational arrangements in financing wastewater
facilities. This section discusses these arrangements and reviews the
financial effects of various institutional structures on the market-
ability of the bond.
Organization Structure
Michigan Public Act (P.A.) 129 of 1943, (Michigan Compiled Laws
1970, Section 123.231-236 and subsequent amendments) provides for the
following institutional arrangements to administer and finance waste-
water facilities.
1. Municipal Ownership. Ownership, operation and administration
are conducted by a single community as a service to its residents.
320 C6
-------
F-2
2. Joint Ownership. Two or more communities jointly construct,
operate and own the facilities. Each government entity retains title to
the facilities in proportion to its share of capital expenditures. The
political subdivisions may borrow money and issue joint revenue or
general obligation bonds in the name of the participating jurisdictions.
3. Contracting for Service. One entity provides sewer services
to an area outside its boundaries on the basis of a contractual agree-
ment. P.A. 129 of 1943, Section 2 states that "any such contracts shall
be authorized by the legislative body of each contracting political
subdivision and shall be effective for such term as shall be prescribed
therein not exceeding 50 years."
4. Special Purpose District (Sanitary Districts). A number of
local governments cooperate. This arrangement differs from joint owner-
ship in that a separate governing body is established and embodied with
the power to administer the financing and operation of the project.
Debt is issued in the name of the district authority, but repayment
obligations are the responsibility of all communities in the district.
5. Multi-Purpose Districts. These are similar to the special
purpose district, but, in contrast, multi-purpose districts have more
than one function. For example, a multi-purpose district may provide
water services, sewer services, irrigation and flood control for a
specified area. In Michigan, P.A. 40 of 1956, states that a county may,
upon petition, establish a drainage board, whose composition it
specifies, which is then authorized to create a drainage district for
draingage, water and sewer facilities.
FINANCIAL EFFECTS OF INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS
FOR THE CROOKED/PICKEREL LAKES STUDY AREA
Water quality problems and proposed solutions in the Crooked/
Pickerel Lakes area extend beyond municipal boundaries. Of the five
arrangements listed above, joint contracts, special purpose districts,
and contractual agreements would be the most suitable for the Study
Area. The organization arrangement that is selected to administer,
finance and implement the project will affect (1) the marketability of
the bond, and (2) the administrative costs of the project. These alter-
native institutional arrangements are discussed below.
Joint Ownership and Special Purpose Districts
Both the joint ownership and special district arrangements provide
a means for each participating township to share in the costs and
benefits provided by the wastewater management system but would be
acceptable only if the combined entities can devise a financial struc-
ture that will insure the marketability of the bond at a desirable
interest rate. For the Study Area, there are some disadvantages in the
use of these institutional arrangements.
320 C7
-------
F-2
Previous bond issues for Littlefield Township and Springvale Township
have been for small improvements in water systems, streets, and
highways—too small for Moody's Bond Record and Standard and Poor's to
rate. Therefore, an investor's ability to evaluate the community's re-
sources to meet periodic principal and interest payments is impaired.
In the Socioeconomic Study Area a large proportion of the population
with incomes below the poverty level are elderly or retired with limited
or fixed incomes. In 1970, the date of the latest available statistics,
approximately 20 per of all persons in the Study Area were 55 years or
older. These characteristics will tend to reduce the ability of the
community to meet debt service charges under adverse economic condi-
tions .
CONCLUSIONS
Alternatives for financing a wastewater management system in the
Study Area and a range of investment strategies for policymakers to
employ at the local level were outlined above. This section summarizes
these options and recommends a strategy for financing the Crooked/
Pickerel Lakes system.
Institutional Arrangement
Municipal ownership, joint ownership, and special purpose districts
should be avoided as an organizational approach to financing the pro-
posed facilities in the Study Area. The best solution would enable the
county to issue the bond, operate the system and charge the partici-
pating political subdivision for wastewater services. The major advan-
tage of this approach is that the county can issue debt pledging the
full faith and credit of its economic resources to support the issue.
Such an arrangement would both make possible a lower interest rate and
would most improve the marketability of the bond.
Capital Costs
The alternative sewerage systems considered in this EIS are expen-
sive and per capita costs are high. Pay-as-you-go financing strategies
would clearly be inappropriate to finance the start-up costs for the
facilities. (However, pay-as-you-go techniques might be used in the
future to finance capital improvements. The future state of the
economy, the cash flow position of the County and the nature of antici-
pated expenditures will be critical variables in determining whether
capital improvements can be financed from current revenues.)
Reserve funds are usually intended to finance capital improvements
at some future date. Still, a combination of capital reserve and pay-
as-you-goapproaches could finance construction of new low-cost
facilities. However, unless Emmet County has a reserve fund earmarked
for sewer and water expenditures, this method of financing current
capital costs is presently not feasible for the Study Area.
Special benefit assessments would provide a viable way to finance
improvements to those households that would benefit most directly from
sewerage facilities. Or, the County could finance the collection com-
ponent of these facilities with a special assessment tax and fund the
remaining capital costs through a series of user charges.
320 C8
-------
F-2
The County should use general obligation bonds to finance the local
share of system capital costs. This method will provide the lowest
interest rate among alternative forms of debt financing. In addition, a
serial bond should be tied to the general obligation bond to gain
greater flexibility in marketing and arranging the County's debt struc-
ture.
320 C9
-------
F-2
Table I
FINANCIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
IN THE CROOKED/PICKEREL LAKES STUDY AREA
Emmet1-4-''
County
$202,942,911
4,310,588
4,020,529
3,926,993
93,536
-0-
Littlefieldv '
Township
$10,850,481
449,869
411,628
N/A
N/A
110,000
Springvale^
Township
$6,766,800
240,397
244,834
N/A
N/A
N/A
State Equalized
Valuations
Total Revenues
Total Expenditures
Current Expense
Capital Outlay
Total Long-Term Debt
Notes: (1) State of Michigan, Department of Treasury, Michigan County
Government Financial Report, for the year ended December 31, 1974.
(2) Hill, Woodcock and Distel, Certified Public Accounts, Audited
Financial^Statements - Littlefield Township, March 23, 1976.
(3) Hill, Woodcock and Distel, Certified Public Accountants, Audited
Statements of Cash Receipts and Disbursements, Springvale Township,
March 22, 1977.
-------
APPENDIX G
MANAGEMENT OF SMALL WASTEWATER SYSTEMS
-------
APPENDIX
G-l
SOME MANAGEMENT AGENCIES FOR DECENTRALIZED FACILITIES
Central management entities that administer non-central systems with
various degrees of authority have been established in several States.
Although many of these entities are quasi-public, few of them both own and
operate each component of the facility. The list of small waste flow
management agencies that follows is not comprehensive. Rather, it presents a
sampling of what is currently being accomplished. Many of these entities
are located in California, which has been in the vanguard of the movement
away from conventional centralized systems to centrally managed decentralized
systems to serve rural areas (State of California, Office of Appropriate
Technology, 1977).
Westboro (Wisconsin Town Sanitary District)
Sanitary District No. 1 of the Town of Westboro represents the public
ownership and management of septic tanks located on private property. In
1974 the unincorporated community of Westboro was selected as a demonstra-
tion site by the Small Scale Waste Management Project (SSWMP) at the
University of Wisconsin to determine whether a cost-effective alternative
to central sewage for small communities could be developed utilizing on-site
disposal techniques. Westboro was thought to be typical of hundreds of
small rural communities in the Midwest which are~iir need of improved
wastewater treatment and disposal facilities but are unable to afford
conventional sewerage.
From background environmental data such as soils and engineering
studies and groundwater sampling, it was determined that the most economical
alternative would be small diameter gravity sewers that would collect
effluents from individual septic tanks and transport them to a common soil
absorption field. The District assumed responsibility for all operation
and maintenance of the entire facility commencing at the inlet of the septic
tank. Easements were obtained to allow permanent legal access to properties
for purposes of installation, operation, and maintenance. Groundwater was
sampled and analyzed during both the construction and operation phases.
Monthly charges were collected from homeowners. The system, now in operation,
will continue to be observed by the SSWMP to assess the success of its
mechanical performance and management capabilities.
Washington State
Management systems have been mandated in certain situations in the
State of Washington to assist in implementing the small waste flow manage-
ment concept. In 1974 the State's Department of Social and Health Services
established a requirement for the management of on-site systems: an
approved management system would be responsible for the maintenance of
sewage disposal systems when subdivisions have gross densities greater
than 3.5 housing units or 12 people per acre (American Society of Agricultural
Engineers 1977). It is anticipated that this concept will soon be applied
to all on-site systems.
-------
G-l
Georgetown Divide (California) Public Utility District (GDPUD)
The GDPUD employs a full-time geologist and registered sanitarian who
manage all the individual wastewater sytems in the District. Although it
does not own individual systems this district has nearly complete central
management responsibility for centralized systems. The Board of Directors
of the GDPUD passed an ordinance forming a special sewer improvement district
within the District to allow the new 1800-lot Auburn Lake Trails subdivision
to receive central management services from the GDPUD. The GDPUD performs
feasibility studies on lots within the subdivision to evaluate the potential
for the use of individual on-site systems, designs appropriate on-site
systems, monitors their construction and installation, inspects and maintains
them, and monitors water quality to determine their effects upon water leaving
the subdivision. If a septic tank needs pumping, GDPUD issues a repair order
to the homeowner. Service charges are collected annually.
Santa Cruz County (California) Septic Tank Maintenance District
This district was established in 1973 when the Board of Supervisors
adopted ordinance No. 1927, "Ordinance Amending the Santa Cruz County Code,
Chapter 8.03 Septic Tank System Maintenance District." Its primary function
is the inspection and pumping of all septic tanks within the District. To
date 104 residences in two subdivisions are in the district, which collects a
one-time set-up fee plus monthly charges. Tanks are pumped every three years
and inspected annually. The County Board of Supervisors is required to
contract for these services. In that the District does not have the authority
to own systems, does not perform soil studies on individual sites, or offer
individual designs, its powers are limited.
Bolinas Community (California) Public Utility District (BCPUD)
Bolinas, California is an older community that faced an expensive public
sewer proposal. Local residents organized to study the feasibility of
retaining many of their on-site systems, and in 1974 the BCPUD Sewage Disposal
and Drainage Ordinance was passed. The BCPUD serves 400 on-site systems and
operates conventional sewerage facilities for 160 homes. The District employs
a wastewater treatment plant operator who performs inspections and monitors
water quality. The County health administration is authorized to design and
build new septic systems.
Kern County (California) Public Works
In 1973 the Board of Supervisors of Kern County, California, passed an
ordinance amending the County Code to provide special regulations for water
quality control. County Service Area No. 40, including 800 developed lots
of a 2,900-lot subdivision, was the first Kern County Service Area (CSA) to
arrange for management of on-site disposal systems. Inspections of install-
ations are made by the County Building Department. Ongoing CSA responsibilities
are handled by the Public Works Department. System design is provided in an
Operation and Maintenance Manual.
-------
Marin County (California)
In 1971 the Marin County Board of Supervisors adopted a regulation,
"Individual Sewage Disposal Systems," creating an inspection program for
all new installations (Marin County Code Chapter 18.06). The Department
of Environmental Health is responsible for the inspection program. The
Department collects a charge from the homeowner and inspects septic tanks
twice a year. The homeowner is responsible for pumping. The Department
also inspects new installations and reviews engineered systems.
-------
APPENDIX
G-2
LEGISLATION BY STATES AUTHORIZING MANAGEMENT
OF SMALL WASTE FLOW DISTRICTS
In a recent act, the California legislature noted that then-
existing California law authorized local governments to construct and maintain
sanitary sewerage systems but did not authorize them to manage small waste
flow systems. The new act, California Statutes Chapter 1125 of 1977, empowers
certain public agencies to form on-site wastewater disposal zones to collect,
treat, and dispose of wastewater without building sanitary sewers or sewage
systems. Administrators of such on-site wastewater disposal zones are to be
responsible for the achievement of water quality objectives set by regional
water quality control boards, protection of existing and future beneficial
uses, protection of public health, and abatement of nuisances.
The California act authorizes an assessment by the public agency upon
real property in the zone in addition to other- charges, assessments, or taxes
levied on property in the zone. The Act assigns the following functions to
an on-site wastewater disposal zone authority:
o
To collect, treat, reclaim, or dispose of wastewater without
the use of sanitary sewers or community sewage systems;
o To acquire, design, own, construct, install, operate, monitor,
inspect, and maintain on-site wastewater disposal systems in a
manner which will promote water quality, prevent the pollution,
waste, and contamination of water, and abate nuisances;
o To conduct investigations, make analyses, and monitor conditions
with regard to water quality within the zone; and
o To adopt and enforce reasonable rules and regulations necessary
to implement the purposes of the zone.
To monitor compliance with Federal, State and local requirements an
authorized representative of the zone must have the right of entry to any
premises on which a source of water pollution, waste, or contamination in-
cluding but not limited to septic tanks, is located. He may inspect the
source and take samples of discharges.
The State of Illinois recently passed a similar act. Public Act 80-1371
approved in 1978 also provides for the creation of municipal on-site waste-
water disposal zones. The authorities of any municipality (city, village, or
incorporated town) are given the power to form on-site wastewater disposal
zones to "protect the public health, to prevent and abate nuisances, and to
protect existing and further beneficial water use." Bonds may be issued to
finance the disposal system and be retired by taxation of property in the
zone.
A representative of the zone is to be authorized to enter at all reason-
able times any premise in which a source of water pollution, waste, or con-
tamination (e.g., septic tank) is located, for the purposes of inspection,
rehabilitation and maintenance, and to take samples from discharges. The
-------
G-2
municipality is to be responsible for routinely inspecting the entire system
at least once every 3 years. The municipality must also remove and dispose
of sludge, its designated representatives may enter private property and, if
necessary, respond to emergencies that present a hazard to health.
-------
APPENDIX
G-3
MANAGEMENT CONCEPTS FOR SMALL WASTE FLOW DISTRICTS
Several authors have discussed management concepts applicable to
decentralized technologies. Lenning and Hermason suggested that management
of on-site systems should provide the necessary controls throughout the
entire lifecycle of a system from site evaluations through system usage.
They stressed that all segments of the cycle should be included to ensure
proper system performance (American Society of Agricultural Engineers 1977).
Stewart stated that for on-site systems a three-phase regulatory
program would be necessary (1976). Such a program would include: 1) a
mechanism to ensure proper siting and design installation and to ensure
that the location of the system is known by establishing a filing and
retrieval system; 2) controls to ensure that each system will be period-
ically inspected and maintained; and 3) a mechanism to guarantee that
failures will be detected and necessary repair actions taken.
Winneberger and Burgel suggested a total management concept, similar
to a sewer utility, in which a centralized management entity is responsible
for design, installation, maintenance, and operation of decentralized systems
(American Society of Agricultural Engineers 1977). This responsibility
includes keeping necessary records, monitoring ground and surface water
supplies and maintaining the financial solvency of the entity.
Otis and Stewart (1976) have identified various powers and authorities
necessary to perform the functions of a management entity:
• To acquire by purchase, gift, grant, lease, or rent both real
and personal property;
0 To enter into contracts, undertake debt obligations either by
borrowing and/or by issuing bonds, sue and be sued. These powers
enable a district to acquire the property, equipment, supplies
and services necessary to construct and operate small flow
systems;
• To declare and abate nuisances;
• To require correction or private systems;
• To recommend correction procedures;
• To enter onto property, correct malfunctions, and bill the owner
if he fails to repair the system;
• To raise revenue by fixing and collecting user charges and
levying special assessments and taxes;
• To plan and control how and when wastewater facilities will be
extended to those within its jurisdiction;
• To meet the eligibility requirements for loans and grants from
the State and Federal government.
-------
APPENDIX H
CROOKED/PICKEREL LAKE' ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
ENGINEERING REPORT
-------
APPENDIX
H-l
CROOKED/PICKEREL LAKE
ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT STATEMENT
ENGINEERING REPORT
nrfhur beard engineers, Inc.
rONSJLTING ENGINfcEKS
Revised
JUNE 1979
-------
H-l
arthur beard engineers, Inc.
6900 WISCONSIN AVE, CHEVY CHASE, MD. 20015 - 301/657-3460
June 18, 1979
WAPORA, Inc.
6900 Wisconsin Avenue
Chevy Chase, MD 20015
Attention: Mr. Ross Pilling
Project Manager
Reference: Task Order No.l
Contract No.68-01-4612, DOW #4
Gentlemen:
This will transmit three copies of the revised report
for the Crooked/Pickerel Lake area of Michigan. These modified
costs reflect changes in population numbers and distribution as
received from WAPORA, Inc. on June 4, 1979. No problems nor
difficulties were encountered during the preparation of this
report.
If you have any questions regarding the information
contained in this report, do not hesitate to contact us.
Very truly yours,
ARTHUR BEARD ENGINEERS, INC.
\
David C. Wohlscheid, P.E.
Project Manager
DCW:net
Enclosure
•o-
-------
H-l
arthur beard engineers, Inc.
6900 WISCONSIN AVE, CHEVY CHASE, MD. 20015 - 301/657-3660
June 18, 1979
WAPORA, Inc.
6900 Wisconsin Avenue
Chevy Chase, MD 20015
Attention: Mr. Ross Pilling
Project Manager
Reference: Seven Lakes Project
EPA-Contract No.68-01-4612, DOW #4
Task Order No.l
Gentlemen:
This letter will transmit for your review and approval
our analysis of the Springvale/Littlefield area.
This package is composed of eight specific alternates
followed by the general Appendix sections. Each alternate is sub-
divided in the following manner: (1) a narrative description with
graphics; and (2) a cost estimate summary sheet for both treatment
and collection.
The Appendices includes information used for all the
alternatives investigated, including: (1) general assumptions and
details; (2) unit cost data; (3) the analysis of the various col-
lection system investigated; (4) cost backup for each alternate;
and (5) treatment system cost and backup information.
The General Assumption section includes population pro-
jections, and assumptions used in the various treatment processes.
The Collection System backup information includes all information
on the proposed collection system, as well as backup data on the
alternate systems investigated (e.g., cluster systems).
For your information the following table compares the up-
graded proposed alternates with the six alternates on a total 1980
capital cost basis as well as 0§M and Salvage Values. This table is
useful as a summary for the information presented in this submittal:
-------
H-l
WAPORA, Inc.
PAGE TWO
June 18, 1979
TABLE I
SPRINGVALE/LITTLEFIELD
Costs x $1,000
1980 1980
Alternate Capital 0$M Salvage Value
Facility Plan Proposed
Old Population $3,938.98 $17.99 $1,919.69
New Population 3,776.75 17.13 1,888.58
Alternate 1 1,791.94 27.08 727.87
Alternate 2 2,632.15 36.40 1,069.92
Alternate 3 2,662.64 29.97 1,146.48
Alternate 4 2,866.39 34.11 1,193.05
Alternate 5 1,955.68 30.80 806.30
Alternate 6 858.50 14.93 397.71
To accurately compare alternative costs an economic
analysis should be performed to obtain the total life cycle cost
of each alternate.
The facility plan proposed system and WAPORA alternate
number 3 have no costs for treatment since the collected wastewater
will be treated at the existing treatment plant located in Petoskey.
An extra cost has been included for a gravity interceptor sewer,
17,700 feet in length, required for transmission of the wastewater
to the Petoskey Plant.
The costs presented in this report have been upgraded to
current dollar figures using an EPA SCCT Index of 145 and an ENR
figure of 3000.
If you have any questions regarding this material do not
hesitate to contact us.
Very truly yours,
ARTHUR BEARD ENGINEERS, INC.
David C. Wohlscheid, P.E.
Project Manager
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
rr -
SECTION 1 DISCUSSION
A. Cover Letter
B. Description of Alternatives
1. Facility Plan Proposed System
2. Alternative 1
3. Alternative 2
4. Alternative 3
5. Alternative 4
6. Alternative 5
1, Alternative 6
8. Flow Reduction
9. Seasonal Variation
PAGE NO.
1 - 4
5 - 7
8 - 9
10 - 12
13 - 14
15 - 16
17 - 18
19 - 21
22 - 25
26 - 27
SECTION II
APPENDICES
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Appendix D
Appendix E
Costs of Each Alternative
General Assumptions
Unit Costs
Collection System Backup Information
Treatment System Backup Information
r
-------
H-l
The following sections are narrative descriptions of
each alternative analyzed. Summarized costs for each alternative
are presented in Appendix A. Each alternate is broken down further
and itemized in Appendices D and E. The following diagram illus-
trates how the study area was broken down into eighteen segments
to aid in population projections and collection systems design.
The next two figures are the flow diagrams for wastewater treatment
using land application. The Northern site flow scheme shows
chlorination being required, this is due to the close proximity
of surrounding population.
-1-
-------
LAND APPLICATION
SPRAY IRRIGATION
NORTHERN SITE
SPRAY
IRRIGATION
RAW
WASTE
WATER
FACULTATIVE
a
STORAGE .
LAGOON
CHLORINATION
-------
LAND APPLICATION
SPRAY IRRIGATION
SOUTHERN SITE
SPRAY
IRRIGATION
RAW
WASTE
WATER
PRELIMI-
NARY
TREAT-
MENT
FACULTATIVE
a
STORAGE
LAGOON
en
i
-------
SEGMENT INDEX
MAP
1000 0 gOOO 4000
SCALE IN FEET
-------
H-l
FACILITY PLAN PROPOSED ALTERNATE
-------
H-l
NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION
The proposed alternate in the existing Facility Plan
for the Springvale/Littlefield service area is a regional collec-
tion system with centralized treatment. Regional collection is
accomplished through a system of gravity sewers and pump stations
with 29 of the serviced homes being connected to the system by low
pressure sewers.
The collection system begins on the south side of
Pickerel Lake and runs east around the lake. Each area is collected
by gravity to a central lift station where it is lifted and trans-
ported to the next central area. Each area is connected in series
by the lift stations which transport the waste around Pickerel
Lake to the south shore of Crooked Lake. The last lift station
pumps the waste to the gravity interceptor leading to the existing
Petoskey Wastewater Treatment Plant.
Populations for the facility Plan Area have been separated
nto 18 segments supplied by WAPORA and as shown on the Segment Index
Map. Each segment has a present and future population projection as
shown in Tables E-l and E-2 in the General Assumptions of Appendix B.
The Proposed Alternate graphic illustrates the conveyance
system proposed for this alternate. The conveyance design is based
on a 20-year growth period for sizing of the system. The 20-year
design figures presented by WAPORA along with a decrease in the per
capita flow, from 100 gallons per capita per day (gpcd) to 60 gpcd,
has resulted in some line size changes.
The low pressure sewer system used for costing this
alternate has been changed slightly in order to maintain assumptions
and unit costs used in the other alternates. The original design
called for low pressure sewers utilizing grinder pumps. This system
has been altered to a septic tank effluent pump (STEP) system. Both
-5-
-------
H-l
systems work equally well and are very cost competitive, however,
to insure that all alternates are cost comparable the STEP system
was used. It should be emphasized that both systems should be
considered in the final design phase.
Components of the proposed system will remain similar in
process, however, sizes and unit costs utilized will be those based
on ABE calculations for both the upgraded facility plan as well as
for the new alternates proposed by WAPORA.
Two cost estimates have been performed for the proposed
alternate, one using population projections supplied to Arthur
Beard Engineers by WAPORA for the first Crooked/Pickerel Report
of July 1978, the second using the new population projections that
will be used throughout this report. The change in population
projections are:
TOTAL POPULATION TOTAL DWELLINGS
Present Future Present Future
1978 Report 840 2,080 259 642
1979 Report 840 1,263 212 366
The total 1980 capital costs, annual operation and main-
tenance costs, and the salvage value for the Proposed Alternate are
summarized below:
Annual
Capital Costs 0§M Costs Salvage Value
Old Population $3,938,980 $17,990 $1,919,690
New Population 3,776,750 17,130 1,888,580
Detailed cost information for the Proposed Alternate may
be found in Appendix A and Appendix D.
-6-
-------
LEGEND
'.- PRESSURE SEWER
• FORCE MAIN
-GRAVITY SEWER
• ON SITE & CLUSTER SYSTEMS
• PUMP STATION
NOTE'.
ALL GRAVITY LINES ARE
. 8" DIA. UNLESS NOTED.
1000 0 ZOOO 4000
"I '" 1
SCALE IN FEET
-------
H-l
ALTERNATE 1
-------
H-l
NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION
The first new alternate for the Springvale/Littlefield
area investigates the feasibility of serving the entire study area
by group cluster systems. Due to poor soils and a high seasonal
ground water table around the lakes there is no economically feasi-
ble method for individual on-site systems, therefore this alternate
represents a decentralized treatment option.
Figure 1-1 presents the eleven cluster systems used in
the Crooked/Pickerel Lake area and their locations.
Each cluster system includes an eight inch gravity line
which conveys each home's sewage to a central pump station. The
pump station then lifts the sewage and transports it to land outside
the cluster area where soils are more suitable for a drainage field
system.
Each cluster system has been designed for the year 2000
with the present portion of this cost being based primarily on a
ratio of the present population to the future population.
The next section indicates the cost estimate for collection
and treatment of the eleven cluster systems.
Costs include land for the drainage field as well as a
duplicate piece of land which would be used as a standby area in
case the first drainage field becomes overloaded or slugged up.
The estimate does not include the costs for materials and labor to
construct the backup system.
The total 1980 capital costs, annual operation and main-
tenance costs, and the salvage value for Alternate 1 are summarized
below:
Annual
Capital Costs 0£M Costs Salvage Value
$1,791,940 $27,080 $727,870
Detailed information for Alternate 1 may be found in
Appendices A and D.
-8-
-------
.LEGEND
PRESSURE SEWER
"FORCE MAIN
• GRAVITY SEWER
== • DRAIN FIELDS
0 - PUMP STATION
NOTE!
ALL GRAVITY LINES ARE
8" DIA. UNLESS NOTED.
1000 0 JOOO 4000
SCALE IN FEET
P
I
-------
H-l
ALTERNATE 2
-------
H-l
NARRATIVE DESCRIFFION
The second alternate for the Springvale/Littlefield
area combines two central collection systems with remaining
segments to be incorporated as cluster systems.
The Crooked Lake area is comprised of segments 18, 1,
2, 3, 4 and 6. A combination of pressure, using the STEP system,
and gravity sewers will service the area. Treatment will be land
application utilizing a spray irrigation system. The service
area and treatment site are indicated on Figure 2-1. In order to
secure soils suitable for this method of treatment and remain a
suitable distance from existing developments, it was necessary to
utilize lands within the Hardwood State Forest boundaries.
Discussion with State representatives has not eliminated the
feasibility of the alternative and would therefore necessitate
further investigation should this prove to be a cost effective
method for collection and treatment.
The Pickerel Lake area is comprised of segments 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15 and 16. A combination of pressure and gravity sewers
will collect the area for land treatment utilizing spray irrigation.
The service area and treatment site are indicated in Figure 2-1.
The remaining segments are treated through means of
various cluster systems. Poor soils and high seasonal ground
water rule out on-site treatments as septic tank-soil absorption
field systems. Instead effluent wastewater from the septic tanks
are collected within each cluster system and pumped to absorption
fields where suitable soils exist.
The total 1980 capital costs, annual operation and main-
tenance costs, and the salvage value for Alternate 2 are summarized
below:
-10-
-------
H-l
Annual
Capital Costs 0§M Costs Salvage Value
$2,632,150 $36,400 $1,069,920
Detailed cost infoimation for Alternate 2 may be found in
Appendices A, D and E.
-11-
-------
J.EGEND
PRESSURE SEWER
-FORCE MAIN
• GRAVITY SEWER
= - DRAIN FIELDS
• • PUMP STATION
NOTE 1
ALL GRAVITY LINES ARE
8" OIA. UNLESS NOTED.
1000 0 gOOO 4000
SCALE IS' FEET
TO LAND
APPLICATION
-------
H-l
ALTERNATE 3
-------
H-l
NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION
The third alternate for the Springvale/Littlefield
area investigates the possibility of reducing the total collection
sewer service area by utilizing cluster systems for those segments
located around Pickerel Lake. The remaining area of Crooked Lake
and Oden Island shall be collected for treatment at the Petoskey
Plant. The service area is indicated on Figure 2-1.
A combination of gravity and pressure sewers using the
STEP system will be utilized to accomplish collection in the Crooked
Lake area.
Soils adjacent to both Pickerel Lakes are found unsuit-
able for on-site treatment due to high seasonal ground water.
Therefore, it is necessary to employ cluster systems for the areas
where collection is not the chosen alternate. These systems
collect effluent from individual septic tanks and convey it by
gravity to a pump station. It is necessary to pump the effluent
several thousand feet to soils suitable for on-site disposal
away from the lakes. The cluster systems vary in size and have
been based on segment groupings.
The total 1980 capital costs, annual operation and main-
tenance costs, and the salvage value for Alternate 3 are summarized
below:
Annual
Capital Costs 0§M Costs Salvage Value
$2,662,640 $29,970 $1,146,480
Detailed cost information for Alternate 3 may be found in
Appendices A and D.
-13-
-------
.LEGEND
PRESSURE SEWER
-FORCE MAIN
• GRAVITY SEWER
= - DRAIN FIELDS
• • PUMP STATION
NOTE!
• ALL GRAVITY LINES ARE
8" DIA. UNLESS NOTED.
1000 0 2000 4000
=1
SCALE IN FEET
^ I
TO PETOSKEY
4"
-------
H-i
ALTERNATE 4
-------
H-l
NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION
The fourth alternate for the Springvale/Littlefield
area considers collection for the entire service area with a
central }and application site located jus£ north pf Pickerel Lake
as indicated in Figure 4-lf
A combination of pressure using the STEP system, and
gravity sewers will be utilized in collection. Treatment is to
be accomplished through spray irrigation. Surface discharge as
an alternate method of treatment was discarded due tq stringent
state requirements necessitating a sophisticated level of treat-
ment to be obtained if the availability of land for land treatment
was limited, or non-existent.
The total 1980 capital costs, annual operation and main-
tenance costs, and the salvage value for Alternate 4 are summarized
below:
Annual
Capital Costs 05M Costs Salvage Value
$2,866,390 $34,110 $1,193,050
Detailed cost information for Alternate 4 may be found in
Appendices A, D and E.
-15-
-------
LEGEND
PRESSURE SEWER
-FORCE MAIN
——- • GRAVITY SEWER
V77X ' ON SITE & CLUSTER SYSTEMS
• • PUMP STATION
NOTE!
ALL GRAVITY LINES ARE
" . 8" DIA. UNLESS NOTED.
1000 0 2000 4000
2 .
SCALE IN FEET
TO LAND APPLICATION
ID
o
ad
i
-------
H-l
ALTERNATE 5
-------
H-l
NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION
The fifth alternate for the Springvale/Littlefield
area considers collection for the Crooked Lake area, excluding
Oden Island. Oden Island and the remaining areas around Pickerel
Lake are to be on cluster systems.
..... ; Collection is to be accomplished through a combination
of pressure, using the STEP system, and gravity sewers. Land
application.utilizing a spray irrigation system will serve those
areas to be collected. The service area and land application site
are indicated on Figure 5-1. In order to secure soils suitable
for this method of treatment and remain a suitable distance from
existing developments, it was -necessary to utilize lands within
the Hardwood State Forest boundaries. Discussion with State
representatives has not eliminated the feasibility of the
alternative and would therefore necessitate further investigation
should this prove to be a cost effective alternate for both
collection and treatment.
The total 1980 capital costs, annual operation and main-
tenance costs, and the salvage value for Alternate 5 are summarized
below:
Annual
Capital Costs 0§M Costs Salvage Value
$1,955,680 $30,800 $806,300
Detailed cost information for Alternate 5 may be found
in Appendix A and Appendix D.
-17-
-------
. LEGEND
PRESSURE SEWER
• FORCE MAIN
—- • GRAVITY SEWER
== • DRAIN FIELDS
• - PUMP STATION
NOTE!
• ALL GRAVITY LINES ARE
8" DIA, UNLESS NOTED.
1000 0 3000 4000
9CAUE I'M FEET
TO LAND
APPLICATION
p
en
i
-------
H-l
ALTERNATE 6
-------
H-l
NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION
The sixth alternate for the Springvale/Littlefield area
is the "limited action" alternate. For this alternate all units
remain with some form of on-site systems and no central collection
or central treatment system is proposed.
Populations for the Facility Plan area have been separated
into 18 segments supplied by WAPORA and as shown on the Segment
Index Map. Each segment has a present and future population pro-
jection as shown in Tables E-l and E-2 in the General Assumptions
of Appendix B.
Two of the segments for this alternate incorporate cluster
systems and are shown on Figure 6-1. These systems incorporate
portions of segments 14 and 16 and include a total of 57 homes.
These were chosen by WAPORA for several reasons including: (1)
septic snooper studies found active flumes within the area; (2)
housing density is high; and (3) there is an unusually thick amount
of eucaryotic algae within the area indicating additional nutrient
input.
The remainder of the study area remains with on-site
systems with the exception of four homes which are placed on hold-
ing tanks. It was assumed for these homes that waste conservation
devices would be installed reducing the daily flow to 44 gpcd.
Of the remaining home systems, 77 would require replace-
ment of drainfields, 42 would need new septic tanks (note that some
homes will have both septic tank and drainfields replaced), 25
would require mound drainfields, and 21 will require drainfield
renovation using a hydrogen peroxide treatment.
The total 1980 capital costs, annual operation and
maintenance costs, and the salvage value for Alternate 6 are
summarized below:
-19-
-------
H-l
ANNUAL
CAPITAL COSTS 0§M COSTS SALVAGE VALUE
$858,500 $14,930 $397,710
Detailed cost information for Alternate 6 may be found
in Appendix A and Appendix C.
-20-
-------
LEGEND
FORCE MAIN
GRAVITY SEWER
ON SITE 8 CLUSTER SYSTEMS
PUMP STATION
NOTE:
ALL GRAVITY LINES ARE
8" DIA. UNLESS NOTED.
-------
FLOW REDUCTION
-------
H-l
The effect of using conservative devices in each home
was analyzed on the basis of flow reduction and the monetary savings
that could be realized in the collectJon and treatment of this
reduced flow. The flow reduction figure obtained from WAPORA
amounted to 16 gpcd for both commercial and residential areas.
To determine the capital and operation and maintenance
cost savings for flow reduction an analysis was conducted on an alter-
native which involved centralized treatment and collection. The
altemtive, alternate 4, collects the entire service area of Springvale
and Littlefield Townships for land application via spray irrigation
to a site located north of Pickerel Lake. This alternate was
chosen because centralized collection and treatment is more sensitive
to a per capita flow reduction than a decentralized system.
Treatment capital costs for both alternates were analyzed
utilizing the new design flow which was reduced from 0.13 MGD to
0.10 MGD. The following analysis of these alternates is divided in
areas relating to both treatment and collection and is summarized
with an economic analysis comparing flow reduction versus non-flow
reduction for these alternates.
COLLECTION
The collection system can be broken down into three parts:
(1) the home pump station (STEP, or grinder); (2) the collection
piping (pressure or gravity); (3) the lift stations and force mains.
Each of these will be analyzed separately below.
The home pump system, whether STEP or grinder, will not
alter in design due to flow reduction. These are package units which
only alter in the horsepower available. The cycle time will change
but this would have no measurable effect on operational maintenance
expenses of the units.
-22-
-------
H-l
COLLECTION (Contd.)
The low pressure piping system is based on probabilities
of homes operating their pumping systems at the same time, thus
resulting in a peak flow contribution. Flow reduction on a per
capita basis with the same pump system does not alter piping sizes
until a large number of homes are on that system (approximately
100 homes). This does not occur for our alternates and therefore
no savings can be accomplished within the low pressure piping
system using flow reduction.
For the gravity sewers, flow reduction will only effect
the interceptor sewers and their capital costs. All other collection
lines for this project are eight inches in diameter, which is the
minimum line size allowed and cannot be reduced. There has been
some speculation that the reduced flow may cause an increase in the
required maintenance for the gravity collection! system due to
deposition resulting from low velocities in the lines. However,
this cost is impractical to calculate if indeed there is an extra
cost.
Lift stations, force mains and gravity interceptor sewers
are sensitive to flow variations since they are associated primarily
with large numbers of dwellings. The more service connections per
pump station or interceptor sewer the greater the effect flow
reduction will have.
For Springvale and Littlefield Townships the only change
was found in the reduction in size of one pump station, with a
capital cost savings of $12,000. This is a minimal savings and is
negligible for an economic analysis. This is not to say that water
conservative devices are not cost effective when energy and home
owners expenses are considered.
-23-
-------
TREATMENT
The treatment process being considered is central land
treatment via spray irrigation. The capital, 0§M, and Salvage
Costs were calculated with the new flows. Table 1 summarizes
these costs.
-24-
-------
TABLE 1
CROOKED/PICKEREL
COST ESTIMATE
LAND TREATMENT - SPRAY IRRIGATION
Alternate - Flow Reduction
Costs in 1979 Dollars
x $1,000
EPA SCCT INDEX = 145
PROCESS
Influent Pump Station
Influent Pipe
Preliminary Treatment
Storage Lagoon
Qnsite Pipe
Land: 50 Acres
Application - Spray
Crop Revenue
TOTAL
CAPITAL COST
22.50
104.60
24.00
71.25
54.00
62.50
240.00
-
$601.90
• 0§M COSTS
1.05
0.10
1.20
0.10
0.10
-
8.10
(-2.15)
$8.55
SALVAGE VALUE
6.75
62.76
10.80
42.75
32.40
112.88
36.00
-
$304.31
251 Engr. Contingencies included within process costs
-25-
-------
H-l
SEASONAL VARIATION
-------
H-l
The Springvale and Littiefield Townships study area has an
average 591 seasonal population which for each alternate results in
a given seasonal variation in flow. The largest fluctuations in
seasonal population are located around the northern and eastern
shores of Pickerel Lake. These areas have a variation in population
of up-to 88%. More permanent areas are spread throughout the two
lake shore regions and on Oden Island.
Cluster systems, when employed around the lake areas, will
see a positive effect resulting from the seasonal variation in flows.
For this type of system the seasonal variation will enhance treatment
by allowing the distribution field to rest and drain.
For alternates utilizing a comprehensive collection system
with centralized treatment at Petoskey, the effective percent seasonal
variation in flow is decreased. The variation in flow amounts to a
reduction of 55% of the total seasonal flow. However, this total
represents only five percent of the design flow for the Petoskey
Plant. This reduction will therefore have little or no effect on
plant operation.
For collection systems, the seasonal flows will have a
minimal effect on cost. A decrease in flow of 881 for one pump station
will mean an increase in detention time in the wet well. To avoid
this problem the lift stations should be designed for easy adjustment
of the water and level controls in the wet well. It would then be a
simple operation for the maintenance crew to calibrate the controls
for the two seasonal flows.
For alternatives employing land treatment, spray irrigation
is used. The seasonal variation is ideal for land treatment as the
low flows reduce the capacity needed for winter storage and thus the
capital costs. This factor has been incorporated in the cost estimates
for this item.
-26-
-------
H-l
Seasonal flow will affect the Individual effluent or grinder
systems. Manufacturers recommend these units be removed during winter
months if use is not anticipated on a periodic basis. Therefore, a
maintenance program should be established to remove these units from
home systems that would not be occupied during the winter season.
This would also be an ideal time to perform any service that may be
required to the pumps or any other elements contained in the pump
basin. The costs involved in removing these units would be offset
by the increased operating life experienced by the pumps.
The conclusion of this evaluation is that by designing
the collection and treatment systems with seasonal variations in
mind, in conjunction with a well planned operation and maintenance
program, no difficulties should arise from seasonal variations in
flow.
-27-
-------
H-l
APPENDIX A
-------
H-l
CROOKED/PICKEREL - COLLECTION
COST ESTIMATE
ALTERNATE -
Proposed
Old Population
Costs in 1979 Dollars
x $1,000
ENR INDEX = 3000
SERVICE AREA
CAPITAL COST 0$M COSTS
SALVAGE VALUE
1980
Central
Gravity
251 Engr.
Collection
Interceptor
and Cont.
2,403.
747.
3,151.
787.
89
29
18
80
16
1
17
.65
.34
.99
-
1,151.
448.
1,599.
@ 20% 319.
36
38
74
95
TOTAL
3,938.98
17.99
1,919.69
1980-2000
Central Collection
25% Engr. and Cont.
21.52
5.38
26.90
Al
-------
H-l
CROOKED/PICKEREL - COLLECTION
COST ESTIMATE
ALTERNATE - Proposed
New Population
Costs in 1979 Dollars
x $1,000
ENR INDEX = 3000
SERVICE AREA
CAPITAL COST 0$M COSTS
SALVAGE VALUE
1980
Central Collection
Gravity Interceptor
25% Engr. and Cont.
TOTAL
2,274.11
747.29
3,021.40
755.35
3,776.75
15.79
1.34
17.13
17.13
1,125.44
448.38
1,573.82
201 314.76
1,888.58
1980-2000
Central Collection
251 Engr. and Cont.
8.65
2.16
10.81
A2
-------
H-l
ALTERNATE - 1
CROOKED/PICKEREL - COLLECTION
COST ESTIMATE
Costs in 1979 Dollars
x $1,000
ENR INDEX = 3000
SERVICE AREA
CAPITAL COST 0§M COSTS
SALVAGE VALUE
1980
Cluster Systems
251 Engr. and Cont.
Total
1,433.55
358.39
1,791.94
27.08
27.08
606.56
20% 121.31
727.87
1980-2000
Cluster Systems
25% Engr. and Cont.
52.88*
15.22
66.10
0.53/yr*
0.53/yr*
405.67
@ 20% 81.14
486.81
*gradient per year over 20-year period
A3
-------
CROOKED/PICKEREL - COLLECTION
COST ESTIMATE
ALTERNATE - 2
Costs in 1979 Dollars
x $1,000
ENR INDEX = 3000
SERVICE AREA
CAPITAL COST 0§M COSTS
SALVAGE VALUE
1980 - Crooked Lake Area
Segments 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 398.76
Pickerel Lake Area
Segments 10-16
Cluster Systems 3, 5, 11
Segments 5, 7, 8, 9, 17
25% Engr.
TOTAL 1,825.25
5.63
845.43
216.01
1,460.20
365.05
10.31
8.76
24.70
24.70
140.61
310.72
96.77
548.10
20% 109.62
657.72
1980-2000
Collection
Cluster
251 Engr.
TOTAL
23.74/yr*
5 . 39/yr
29.13/yr
7 . 28/yr
36.41/yr
0.44/yr*
0.17/yr
0.61/yr
0.61/yr
114.71
43.86
158.57
@ 201 31.71
190.28
*gradient per year over a 20-year period
A4
-------
H-l
CROOKED/PICKEREL
COST ESTD-1ATE
LAND TREATMENT - SPRAY IRRIGATION
CROOKED LAKE AREA
Alternate - 2
Q = 0.023 MGD
Costs in 1979 Dollars
x $1,000
EPA SCCT INDEX = 145
PROCESS
Influent Pump Station
Influent Pipe
Preliminary Treatment
Storage Lagoon (1.73 MG)
Onsite Pipe
Land: 26 Acres
Application - Spray
Crop Revenue
TOTALS
CAPITAL COST
5.62
71.88
22.50
37.50
19.40
32.50
80.80
-
$270.20
' 0§M COSTS
0.95
0.10
0.35
0.10
0.10
-
2.50
(*0.80)
$3.30
SALVAGE VALUE
1.70
43.13
10.12
22.50
11.64
58.70
12.12
-
$141.30
. 25% Engr. Contingnecies included within process costs
A5
-------
H-l
ALTERNATE - 2
Q = 0.059 MGD
CROOKED/PICKEREL
COST ESTIMATE
LAND TREATMENT - SPRAY IRRIGATION
PICKEREL LAKE AREA
Costs in 1979 Dollars
x $1,000
ENR INDEX = 3000
SERVICE AREA
Influent Pump Station
Influent Pipe
Preliminary Treatment
Chlorination
Storage Lagoon (4.83 MG)
Ons ite Pipe
Land @ 40 Acres
Application: Spray
Crop Revenue
TOTALS
CAPITAL COST
45.00
104.60
23.25
17.00
58.75
35.60
50.00
202.50
-
$536.70
OSM COSTS
2.10
0.10
1.00
0.90
0.10
0.20
-
6.00
(1.99)
$8.40
SALVAGE VALUE
13.50
62.76
10.46
6.80
35.25
21.40
90.30
30.40
-
$270.90
251 Engr. Contingencies included within process costs
A6
-------
H-l
CROOKED/PICKEREL - COLLECTION
COST ESTIMATE
ALTERNATE - 3
Costs in 1979 Dollars
x $1,000
ENR INDEX = 3000
SERVICE .AREA
1980 - Crooked Lake Area
Segments 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 ,
6, 17, 18
Clusters 3, 4, 6-10
and Holding Tanks
Segments 7-16
Gravity Interceptor
251 Engr. and Cont.
TOTAL
1980-2000
Crooked Lake
Clusters
251 Engr. and Cont.
TOTAL
CAPITAL COST
570.04
785.78
774.29
2,130.11
532.53
2,662.64
8.36/yr*
33.42/yr
41.78/yr
10.44/yr
52.22/yr
OSM COSTS
8.74
•19.89
1.34
29.97
-
29.97
0 . 24/yr*
0.40/yr
0.64/yr
-
0,64/yr*
SALVAGE VALUE
198.36
308.66
448.38
955.40
@ 201 191.08
1,146.48
41.85
247.42
289.27
6 201 57.85
347.12
*gradient per year over a 20-year period
A7
-------
CROOKED/PICKEREL - COLLECTION
COST ESTIMATE
ALTERNATE - 4
TOTAL
Costs in 1979 Dollars
x $1,000
ENR INDEX = 3000
SERVICE AREA
1980
Central Collection
251 Engr. and Cont.
CAPITAL COST 0$M COSTS SALVAGE VALUE
1,809.11 24.36 710.67
452.28 - 6 201 142.13
2,261.39
24.36
852.80
1980-2000
Central Collection
251 Engr. and Cont.
TOTAL
21.20/yr*
5.50/yr
26.50/yr
0.51/yr*
0.51/yr
188.71
201 37.74
226.45
^gradient per year over a 20-year period
A8
-------
H-l
CROOKED/PICKEREL
COST ESTD4ATE
LAND TREATMENT - SPRAY IRRIGATION
Alternate - 4
Q = 0.084 MGD
Costs in 1979 Dollars
x $1,000
EPA SCOT INDEX = 145
PROCESS
Influent Pump Station
Influent Pipe
Preliminary Treatment
Storage Lagoon (8.24 MG)
Ons ite Pipe
Land @ 60 Acres
Application: Spray
Crop Revenue
TOTALS
CAPITAL COST
22.50
111.75
25.50
85.00
57.40
75.00
227.85
-
605.00
• 0$M COSTS
1.05
0.10
1.50
0.70
0.20
-
9.00
(-2.80)
9.75
SALVAGE VALUE
6.75
67.00
11.50
51.00
34.40
135.45
34.18
340.25
25% Engr. Contingencies included within process costs
A9
-------
H-l
CROOKED/PICKEREL - COLLECTION
COST ESTIMATE
ALTERNATE - 5
Costs in 1979 Dollars
x $1,000
ENR INDEX = 3000
SERVICE AREA
CAPITAL COST 0§M COSTS
SALVAGE VALUE
1980
Crooked Lake
Area - Segments 1, 2,
3, 4, 6
Cluster Systems 3-10
25% Engr. and Cont,
TOTAL
398.76
949.62
1,348.38
337.10
5.63
21.87
27.50
-
140.61
376.53
517.14
@ 20% 129.29
1,685.48
27.50
646.43
1980-2000
Crooked Lake
Cluster Systems
25% Engr. and Cont.
TOTAL
7.52/yr*
35.98/yr
43.50/yr
10.88/yr
54.38/yr
0.21/yr*
0.41/yr
0.62/yr
0 . 62/yr
75.15
267.92
343.12
@ 201 68.62
411.74
*gradient per year over a 20-year period
A10
-------
H-l
CROOKED/PICKEREL
COST ESTB4ATE
LAND TREATMENT - SPRAY IRRIGATION
CROOKED LAKE AREA
Alternate - 5
Q = 0.023 MGD
Costs in 1979 Dollars
x $1,000
EPA SCCT INDEX = 145
PROCESS
Influent Pump Station
Influent Pipe
Preliminary Treatment
Storage Lagoon (1.73 MG)
Ons ite Pipe
Land: 26 Acres
Application: Spray
Crop Revenue
TOTAL
CAPITAL COST
5.62
71.88
22.50
37.50
19.40
32.50
80.80
-
270.20
• 0§M COSTS
0.95
0.10
0.35
0.10
0.10
-
2.50
(-0.80)
3.30
SALVAGE VALUE
1.70
43.13
10.12
22.50
11.64
58.70
12.12
-
159.87
251 Engr. Contingencies included within process costs
All
-------
H-l
CROOKED/PICKEREL
COST ESTIMATE
Alternate: 6
Limited Action Alternate
1980
ITEM
Replace Septic Tank
Replace Drain field
Mound Drain field*
Holding Tank
H?0? Renov.
Cluster System
251 Engr. and Cont.
TOTAL
CAPITAL COST
18.9
92.4
218.4
8.4
9.4
339.3
171.7
858.5
0§M COST
1.89
-0-
2.56
5.44
-0-
5.04
_
14.93
DALVAUD
VALUE
11.3
55.4
131.0
5.0
-0-
115.5.-.
79.54
397.71
* Without Septic Tank
1980-2000
Conv. Septic System 8.42/yr 0.23/yr 134.6
Mound System 13.0/yr 0.15/yr 208.8
Cluster 5.4/yr 0.05/yr 40.1
251 Engr. and Cont. 6.71 - 76.7
TOTAL 33.53/yr 0.43/yr 460.2
A12
-------
H-l
APPENDIX B
-------
H-l
SPRINGVALE/LITTLEFIELD
General Assumptions Made by ABE for
All New Alternatives
This section will expand and/or list certain general
assumptions used for all new alternatives investigated during this
phase of the project. Basic assumptions were broken down into Wo
main categories, treatment and collection. Each of these categories
will now be addressed separately:
COLLECTION
1. All sewer lines are to be placed at or below
6 feet of depth, due to frost penetration in the
Springvale/Littlefield area. Gravity lines are
assumed to be placed at an average depth of 12
feet.
2. Thirty percent shoring was used for all gravity
lines. Ten percent less shoring is required for
force mains and low pressure sewers due to their
shallower average depth.
3. All pressure sewer lines and force mains 8
inches in diameter or less will be PVC SDR26, with
a pressure rating of 160 psi. Those force mains
larger than 8 inches in diameter will be constructed
of ductile iron with mechanical joints.
4. A minimum velocity of 2 fps will be maintained
in all pressure sewer lines and force mains to
provide for scouring.
5. Cleanouts in the pressure sewer system will be
placed at the beginning of each line, and one
every 500 feet of pipe in line. Cleanout valve
boxes will contain shut-off valves to provide for
isolation of various sections of line for maintenance
and/or repairs.
.Bl
-------
H-]
COLLECTION (Contd.)
Page Two
6. The pumping units investigated for the pressure
sewer system utilized effluent and grinder pumps.
Both units include a 2 by 8 foot basin with dis-
charge at 6 feet, control panel, visual alarm,
mercury float level controls, valves, rail system
for removal of pump, antifloatation device, and
the pump itself. The grinder pump is a 2 hp pump
with a total dynamic head of 90 feet. The effluent
pump is manufactured in a 1, 1^ or 2 hp pump. For
the Springvale/Littlefield area the 1 hp pump proved
to be impractical as its total dynamic head is only
60 feet, and insufficient for long runs of pressure
lines. The 1% and 2 hp pumps reach a total dynamic
head of 80 and 120 feet respectively.
7. On-site and effluent pumping units (STEP)
require the use of septic tanks. Due to undersize
and faulty units, a 50 percent replacement of all
septic tanks was assumed. All units are to be
1,000 gallon concrete septic tanks.
8. An even distribution of population was primarily
assumed along collection lines for all alternatives
indicated.
9. A peaking factor for design flows of the various
systems investigated was based on the Ten State
Standards in concurrence with the Springvale/Littlefield
Facility Plan.
10. All flows are based on a 60 gallon per capital
day (gpcd) design flow for residential areas. In-
filtration for new sewers is based on a rate of
200 gallons per inch - mile of gravity sewer lines.
B2
-------
H-l
COLLECTION (Contd.)
Page Three
11. The costs presented for each alternate are
comparable costs to each other. However, the
costs generated may not reflect actual construction
costs due to the degree of accuracy utilized in
preparation of these estimates.
TREATMENT
ligll^^PPliSgii0? > Spray I rrigati on
1. Several sites for land application were sug-
gested by WAPORA. The two sites chosen by ABE
were determined to offer the best soil conditions
with enough area to accommodate the treatment
system.
2. The application technique is spray irrigation
for crop production. Spray irrigation is the only
treatment technique strongly endorsed by the State
for lake areas. With this type of application
there is an added benefit of income from crop
revenues which defrays part of the yearly operation
and maintenance expense.
3. An application rate of 1.6 "/wk was determined
after calculating the nitrogen loading rate limit
and noting that there would be no need for under-
drainage at this rate. Higher loading rates may
produce poor crop growth.
4. Alfalfa was the chosen crop since alfalfa allows
a higher application rate and because it is a per-
ennial crop with its growing season limited solely
by climatic factors. In addition, alfalfa has a
high nitrogen uptake which is a most desirable
characteristic.
B3
-------
H-l
TREATMENT
Page Four
5. The storage period is based primarily on basic
guidelines provided by the Michigan Department of
Natural Resources. The State recommends 6 months
storage in the northern half of the state which
would include the Springvale/Littlefield area.
B4
-------
H-l
Task Order No. 1
Contract No. 68-01-4612, DOW #4
The following analysis shall be performed by Arthur Beard Engineers, Inc.
(ABE) on the Crooked/Pickerel Lakes portion of the Springvale-Bear Creek Area
Segment Facility Plan. Items one (1) through five (5) will be submitted to
WAPORA, Inc. within 15 calendar days from notice to proceed on this Task Order,
1. Recalculate the proposed facility plan collection and treatment
alternative upgrade using the new (EIS) population and flow pro-
jections and distributions to be supplied by WAPORA, Inc.
2. Recalculate the proposed facility plan collection and treatment
alternatives using the population and flow figures presented in
the ABE Engineering Report of the Springvale/Littlefield area
dated July 19, 1978 in conjunction with the unit costs and
methodology as developed by ABE.
3. Recalculate EIS alternatives one through five as presented in
the previously submitted report using the revised population and
flow projections and distributions.
4. Recalculate one alternative (EIS alternative #4) using flow
reduction methodology with actual flow reduction figures
determined by WAPORA.
5. Recalculate EIS alternative #6 (the "limited action" alternative)
upon receipt of pertinent design data from WAPORA.
Using the new population data, will recalculate collection systems
sizings and costs for all alternatives. In addition, treatment alternatives
will also be recalculated based on revised flow data. Land application al-
ternatives will be revised to reflect a lesser degree of pretreatment prior
to application on the land to conform to EPA PRM 79-3, dated 15 November
1978. Decentralized alternatives for segment 7 will be revised to include
the use of holding tanks.
All information specified above will be submitted to WAPORA in report
form using a format similar to that used for the Aurora, Illinois report
prepared by ABE.
All costs will be upgraded to June 1979 costs using an ENR construction
cost figure of 3000, or an EPA SCCT Index of 145, (estimated from third quar-
ter '78 of 140).
B5
-------
H-l
Estimated person hours for performance of this task are:
Engineering and Drafting 160 person/hours
Secretarial and Clerical Support 16 person/hours
Labor Category Effort Cost
Engineering and Drafting 160 person/hours $4,148.80
Secretarial and Clerical
Support 16 person/hours $ 252.64
TOTAL TASK ORDER $4,401.44
WAPORA, Inc. will supply ABE with all maps, regulations, population
information and flow projections.
William A. King ) Gerald 0. Peters J/ £oss Pilling,/H
orate Secretar^r Director of Research Project Manager
B6
-------
,^1L
X
,^»°--V^ (^^ WAPORA. In
H-1 /JX/V^/
•f ?•<*• I f
I/(///{ / "V,/'_!''•«
-.OF
PREPARED BY
Envfronm»ntal/En*rgy/Economic Studiaa
DATE
/
CHECKED BY
DATE.
r
(Z.
. 00223.
1 5Z ?/ 1&5 - 006/3
o
.0055?
if 5t 51 A? 3
n ^ ^x f^7
'? ^^ "
^ //Z
. oojrt
16 IHO /o$ ^ -0^y
I? O 3 3 v -^!
I/ C/ -^ B7 - \ — "—^~r*^^r
-------
Table E-l
EXISTING POPULATION AND DWELLING UNITS FOR THE
CROOKED/PICKEREL PROPOSED SERVICE AREA (1978)
H-l
1978
Population
Municipality
Littlefield Township
5
7 (part)
8
9
10
11
12
13
17
Subtotal
Springvale Township
1
2
3
4
6
7 (part)
14
15
16
18
Total
53
0
20
0
55
60
60
54
3
305
11
10
31
60
89
17
128
7
182
0
Permanent
36
0
7
0
0
13
0
3
3
62
7
10
10
13
59
0
13
7
42
0
Seasonal
17
0
13
0
55
47
60
51
0
243
4
0
21
47
30
17
115
0
140
0
Dwelling Units
Total Permanent Seasonal
Subtotal
535
161
374
15
0
5
b
13
15
14
13
1
76
3
3
8
15
25
4
29
3
46
0
136
11
0
2
0
0
4
0
1
1
19
2
3
3
4
18
0
2
2
13
0
47
4
0
3
0
13
11
14
12
0
57
1
0
5
11
7
4
27
1
33
0
89
TOTAL
840
223
617
212
66
146
B8
-------
Table E-2
PROJECTED POPULATION AND DWELLING UNITS FOR THE
CROOKED/PICKEREL PROPOSED SERVICE AREA (2000)
2000
Population
Dwelling Units
Municipality Total Permanent Seasonal
Total Permanent
Seasonal
Littlefield Township
5
7 (part)
8
9
10
11
12
13
17
64
0
37
0
93
103
90
82
3
48 /
0
21
0
33
51
42
18
3
16
0
16
0
60
52
48
64
0
20
0
11
0
26
30
26.
22
1
16
0
7
0
11
17
14
6
1
4
0
4
0
15
13
12
16
0
Subtotal
472
216
256
136
72
64
Springvale Township
1
2
3
A
6
7 (part)
14
15
16
18
Subtotal
13
12
37
103
159
22
148
52
245
0
9
12
21
51
123
6
36
24
105
0
4
0
16
52
36
16
112
28
140
0
4
4
11
30
50
6
40
15
70
0
3
4
7
17
41
2
12
8
35
0
1
0
4
13
9
4
28
7
35
0
791
387
404
230
129
101
TOTAL
1,263
603
660
366
201
165
B9
-------
H-l
Table 11-10
PERMANENT AND SEASONAL POPULATION OF THE
PROPOSED CROOKED' PICKEREL LAKES SERVICE AREA (1978)*
egment
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1,1,
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Total
11
10
31
60
53
89
17 '
20
0
55
60
60
54
128
7
182
3
0
Pennanent
7
10
10
13
36
59
0
7
0
0
13
0
3
13
7
42
3
0
/
Seasonal
4
0
21
47
17
30
17
13
0
55
47
60
51
115
0
140
0
0
Percent
Permanent
63.6
100.0
32.3
21.7
67.9
66.3
0.0
35-0
0.0-
0.0
21.7
0.0
5.6
10.2
100.0
23.1
100.0
0.0
Percent
Seasonal
36.4
0.0
67.7
78.3
32.1
33.7
100.0
65.0
0.0
100.0
78.3
100.0
94.4
89.8
0.0
76.9
0.0
0.0
TOTAL 840 223 617 26.5 73.5
*The methodology utilized to develop these population estimates is found
in Appendix D.
BIO
-------
H-l
Table II-ll
PERMANENT AND SEASONAL POPULATION OF THE
PROPOSED CROOKED-PICKEREL LAKES SERVICE AREA (2000)
Segment
1
2
3
A
5
6
7
8
• 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Total
13
12
37
103
64
159
22
37
0
93
103
90
82
148
52
245
3
0
Persianent
9
12
21
51
48
123
6
21
0
33
51
42
18
36
24
105
3
0
Seasonal
4
/ 0
16
52
16
36
16
16
0
60
52
48
64
112
28
140
0
0
Percent
Permanent
69.2
100.0
56.8
49.5
75.0
77.4
27.3
56.8
0.0
35.5
49.5
46.7
22.0
24.3
46.2
42.9
100.0
0.0
Percent
Seasonal
30.8
0.0
43.2
50.5
25.0
22.6
72.7
43.2
0.0
64.5
50.5
53.3
78.0
75.7
53.8
57.1
0.0
0.0
TOTAL 1,263 603 660 47.7 52.3
The methodology utilized to develop these projections is found in
Appendix D.
Bll
-------
H-l
APPENDIX C
-------
6"
u
ID
IX
it"
7."
6"
(o"
0-50
Sto
u
IS.K
(6-S1
6.co "
6.so "
10 00 "
(l.oo "
IS 'o
7-67
6, is
^,00
lo, IX
c-l
-------
l
Q
c,
f/ccx
4-"
4"
/ceo
- /we
ax
(/\/cv)
iss
[.So
o.so
Lf-
e»4
Zee
I
0 i
a 10
-------
H-l
/no
/ay?
5
Hp
/co. co
1,9
-------
H-
PROJECT.
SUBJECT.
n
COMP BY
O ? ( f
DATE
r
O
P Kl
ouj =
I r
x
/( * -27.0 = 3
rrs
ineers
'
-------
•ROJECT
H-l
- CO j-f C
n
PROJ NO. ,
CLIENT _
COMP BY
CKDBY
DATE
SHEET.
-2-
— /O//OGO Q
F^-- 1^ d K
| £
arthur beard enaineers. Inc.
-------
H-l
SUBJECT.
0
PROJ NO.
CLIENT
COMP
DATE
£//vf?
CKD BY
SHEET.
7~1/P /-VoK£<= —
L
•7,s'~
D
3
tSf
4-
LONG
P € -
/S~00 FT-
( Fo?. S£ir' T)t^G- )
enaineers, Inc.
-------
H-l
PROJECT
Con,,.
— ' TV-*"
S
PROJ NO.
CLIENT
COMP BY
DATE
KD BY
DATE
SHEET.
ry
L
sTR(
/7«
6r 9 T /C
v
/ £-/
V
po 1
300°°-
C
5 9,30
?, 5S-
o o
S 00,00
/ S'S", /#
Fc> R N dT
c-i
^.rfknr h^nrrl finnineers. 1 nC.
-------
H-l
PROJECT.
- £ n O 1C. (-
SUBJECT
fxS'TV:
PROJ NO,
CLIENT _
-^ ^ V- P-
DATE
rKDBY
"ATE
SHEET
OF.
R ' F •
l_ — I —
4sx i , L
i ir^—h
<-i
^^
PCK^ N
PUC
FV
/^7
/
-jr
\/ -
arthur beard enaineers, Inc
-------
PROJECT v. t P"-) «-_
SUBJECT
fV" ^' • r
. r-. r
PROJ NO.
>• o, ./•»
^ > -'
H-l
CLIENT ^ . y *">
COMP BY l-'^-l DATE
C/s,
CKD BY DATE
SHEET.
W'A\A MTfT'x ^-'*CCS
// //
//? P^C -
IF. H/C ;
COS
?'vT< ry
c/
f/
HVC- P
I 230,00
02..OO
\/
arthur beard engineers, Inc.
-------
H-
nnnirrT r^Or^r-,-^ ^(crfP-ft-
ppniprr V^ y.t/ic't- 2 : — ; —
<>>/ l/^iC/^ (JtfLuE^,
SUBJtC f >. 1 r — Vi— - — i£-±t '-^
PRO.I MO ^H-'7~cf rr
.M^T (VcJPdRp
COMPBY'2^rl_DATE ^/^£cKDBY DATE SHEET _
A_o,_
1
c-io
arthur beard ennineers.
-------
PROJECT
/ i ' - •- •- ' '-
-LJ.-LL^tLjr.
< >• , /"
PRO.- i,c..._ _.x..rL' —:
DATE
D
/*-
L.-T
X
I
PMC
! «t-.
|
is, i
I ChiHCT . Oi
— • •
/v.
r i
-------
H-l
d£
roKf td
•^Cr£,'i>4
/tt
rtftf.
/ (rr-,t^
l^_DATE ^
Z
ppni MO JTTV™)
....„ VlAft,^
71 CKDBY "ATP SHEET OF
1
r
(V
( i
6"
"neers. In
-------
H-l
APPENDIX D
-------
H-l
The analysis of the collection system for the Springvale/
Littlefield area was based on a cost effective study of three systems;
the combination gravity/pressure system used in the proposed system of
the facility plan, the combination gravity-pressure system used by ABE,
and cluster systems. The systems were analyzed on an area basis
utilizing comparable costs for each. Included in the analysis were
capital costs for collection, hook-up expenses and salvage values.
The first system analyzed was the facility plan proposed
alternate. This system combines a conventional gravity/force main
system with a low pressure sewer system. The low pressure sewer
system utilized grinder pumps and was used for servicing those homes
that were below the elevation of the gravity system. In the facility
plan, the low pressure sewer lines were connected directly to the
pump station force mains of the gravity/force main system causing some
concern as to its feasibility as this would be an innovative and as
yet untried system. In upgrading of the proposed plan however, ABE
decided to cost out the plan as shown assuming no problems would
be encountered. However, for all the other alternatives a more
conservative design was developed. This system will utilize a dual
piping system with the low pressure system not pumping directly into
the force main. ABE recognizes the potential for cost savings if
the single line low pressure system is feasible and suggests more
detail be given this consideration during the Step II, or design
phase of this project. When comparing this to a system with additional
pressure collection, ABE replaced the grinder pumps with effluent
pumps, utilizing a STEP pressure system for both alternatives.
The decision to utilize a STEP system as opposed to a
pressure system sewer utilizing grinder pumps is based solely on an
assumption of a 501 replacement of septic tanks within the service
area. On this basis, the STEP system was found more cost effective
by a very slight margin. The cost between employing STEP systems
versus grinder pumps are extremely competitive. ABE recommends that
both of these systems be reviewed by the design engineer when employing
-------
-2-
pressure sewer systems for a specific service area. In this way, the
existing conditions of the service area, the availability of the units,
and the quantity of the units to be provided, will produce an accurate
cost evaluation of both systems.
The third system analyzed was the use of several cluster
systems each serving small groups of homes. Each home is connected
to a gravity line which conveys the wastewater to a pump station.
From here it is pumped to the nearest available land which is suitable
for on-site treatment using a distribution field.
A comparison of cluster systems versus collection to a
central land treatment site was conducted for the area around
Pickerel Lake, and the cluster system proved to be more cost effective.
This area was therefore served by cluster systems for all alternatives.
P-x
-------
PROJECT
SUBJECT ,
_LIC Kfj
PROJ NO..
H-l
COMPBY
DATE
1HEET
rr-
5
n
fs/C
IT MI i
'
-u
Coie.b
k
pr
- 0
M
4,500
l6,oco
i (
fo
arthur beard engineers, Inc.
-------
PROJECT.
SUBJECT.
(t
H-l
PRO i
7?6/T
rnMPRV
DA"
7}
CKDBY
SHFFT OF
J
0-50
50'
P-1
600
C
OST
•heH.
/Bo/mi/* ,
!<>50
in?
X o-i
tf O-
X fi-i
150
l;o6oDlS
/, 151,35$
"D-
arthur beard engineers,
-------
H-I
PROJECT L.
SUBJECT.
^jq /
PROJ
COMPBY
DVN
DATE
ij
DATP
SHFPT
r
fc" F
^C
- 5
o- 50
v<\
h
31,500
•"" O "
2>
-°-
4l-
eo
IS.I5
ll-oo
^m/ (csr
~°~
'/oo
- o —
n 1
arthur beard engineers, Inc.
-------
PROJECT
SUBJECT
H-
COMP BY
DATE
m
J> II CKDPY
"ATP
SHEET OP
5epfio
^7^0
S
|
fc
Ni\fil
T'/o
{050
Ml?
toj^/t
2,076
lib
/(05e>
5,66?
Col/Eel/
[fcfc>6t>D
0.3
nrthurtaeard enaineers. In
-------
H-l
PROJECT
SUBJECT
PROJ NO. .
CLIENT
COMP BY
DATE
CKD BY
DATE
SHEET OF.
X
irthur beard enaineers, Inc.
-------
H-
PROJECT.
SUBJECT.
PROJ NO. .
CLIENT
COMP BY
Pvfe
DATE
CKD BY
DATE
SHEET.
.OF.
1
5
1
to
fcPu
llo
fcl
134.
/o
f"
1 5
«tSCO.
nrthur beard enaineers. n
-------
-------
PROJECT.
SUBJECT.
\i
H-l
PROJ NO. .
CLIENT
DViS
COMP BY l^ry J . DATE
CKDBY
DATE
SHEET OF.
HfU
T
C4 n\
^
M
MM6-.
o
f
/\
-t
-^ \O
-------
H-l
CROOKED/PICKEREL - COLLECTION
COST ESTIMATE
ALTERNATE: I
PRESENT
Costs in 1979 Dollars
ENR INDEX = 3000
FUTURE
Cluster Segments
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9 ..
10
11
251
1, 2 5 18
3, 4 § 6
8
10
5 ••§ 17
11
12
13 § 14
15
16
7
Engr. § Const.
Capital
170,196
313,728
43,765
51,259
163,840
125,370
79,632
207,564
36,618
233,174
8,400
1,433,546
358,387
1,791,933
OSM
1,584
3,630
1,339
1,725
1,981
1,885
1,777
3,110
1,253
3,360
5,440
27,084
.
27,084
Salvage
89,152
134,877
17,847
26,852
73,878
56,035
29,000
68,100
19,258
.86,524
5,040 •
606,563
121,312
727,875
Capital
56,732
281,048
52,518
51,259
51,200
125,370
68,256
98,840
146,472
121,656
4,200
1,057,551
264,388
1,321,939
pm
178
2,215
316
625
294
835
593
970
732
1,180
2,720
10,658
-
10,658
Salvage
28,906
108,801
18,395
22,433
22,105
51,073
20,938
28,019
64,410
37,233
3,360
405,673 ,
81,135
486,808
-------
CROOKED/PICKEREL
CLUSTER SYSTEMS
H-i
ARTHUR BEARD ENGINEERS, INC.
JOB 448
CLUSTER NO. 1
ITEM
8 in. gravity
Force main
Pump Station
Septic tanks
Trench
4" perforated pipe
Backfill
Gravel fill
Distribution box
4" gravity pipe
Land
Hydrogeologic survey
Monitoring well
Sub-Total
Cost/Home
Homeowners Hook-up Cost
TOTAL
Monitoring wells
Pump Station
Gravity line
Force main
Septic tanks
TOTAL
Collection
Septic tanks
Pump stations
TOTAL
SEGMENTS 1, 2 §18
CAPITAL COST
PRESENT HOMES: 6
FUTURE HOMES: 8
QUANTITY
4,665 LF
100 LF
1 ea.
2
1,520 LF
1,520 LF
1,520 LF
169 CY
1 ea.
120 LF
.6 Ac.
L.S.
L.S.
8 ea.
UNIT COST
41.00
8.43
4,500
300
1.74
1.69
0.56
9.67
210
5.17
1,000
9,554
3,035
1,000
TOTAL COST
191,265
843
4,500
600
2,645
2,569
851
1,634
210
620
600
9,554
3,035
$218,926
27,366
8,000
$226, 926
1 set
1 ea.
0.88 mi.
-
8
SALVAGE
192,108
600
4,500'
100/yr.
950/yr.
400/mi/yr.
100/mi/yr.
10/yr.
x 0.6
x 0.6
x 0.3
100
950
352
0
80
$1,482
115,265
360
1,350
$116,974
-------
CROOKED/PICKEREL
CLUSTER SYSTEMS
H-l
ARTHUR BEARD ENGINEERS, INC.
JOB 448
CLUSTER NO. 2
ITEM
8 in. gravity
Force main
Pump Station
Septic tanks
Trench
4" perforated pipe
Backfill
Gravel fill
Distribution box
4" gravity pipe
Land
Hydrogeologic survey
Monitoring well
Sub-Total
Cost/Home
Homeowners Hook-up Cost
TOTAL
Monitoring wells
Pump Station
Gravity line
Force main
Septic tanks
TOTAL
Collection
Septic tanks
Pump stations
TOTAL
SEGMENTS: 3, 4
CAPITAL COST
6 PRESENT HOMES: 48
FUTURE HOMES: 91
QUANTITY
8,200 LF
4,000 LF
1 ea.
53 ea.
17,290 LF
17,290 LF
17,290 LF
1,921 CY
1
1,365
6 Ac.
L.S.
L.S.
91
UNIT COST
41.00
8.43
4,500
300
1.74
1.69
0.56
9.67
210
5.17
1,000
9,554
3,035
7
1.000
TOTAL COST
336,200
33,720
4,500
15,900
30,085
29,220
9,682
18,576
210
7,057
6,000
9,554
3,035
$503,739
5,536
91,000
$594,739
1
I
1.55 mi.
0.8 mi.
91
SALVAGE
369,920
15,900
A Qnn'
100/yr.
950/yr.
400/mi/yr.
100/mi/yr.
10/yr.
x 0.6
x 0.6
x 0.3
100
950
620
80
910
$2,660
221,952
9,540
1,350
$232,842
-------
CROOKED/PICKEPEL
CLUSTER SYSTEMS
ARTHUR BEARD ENGINEERS, INC.
JOB 448
CLUSTER NO.3
SEGMENTS: 8
CAPITAL COST
PRESENT HCMES: 5
FUTURE HOMES: 11
ITEM
8 in. gravity
Force main
Pump Station
Septic tanks
Trench
4" perforated pipe
Backfill
Gravel fill
Distribution box
4" gravity pipe
Land
Hydrogeologic survey
Monitoring well
Sub-Total
Cost/Home
Homeowners Hook-up Cost
TOTAL
Monitoring wells
Pump Station
Gravity line
Force main
Septic tanks
TOTAL
Collection
Septic tanks
Pump stations
TOTAL
QUANTITY
1,000 LF
1,500 LF
1 ea.
7 ea.
2,090 LF
2,090 LF
2,090 LF
232 CY
1 ea.
165 LF
0.8 Ac.
L.S.
L.S.
11
1 set
1 ea.
0.2 mi.
0.3 mi.
11
SALVAGE
53,645
2,100
4,500
UNIT COST
41.00
8.43
4,500
300
1.74
1.69
0.56
9.67
210
5.17
1,000
9,554
3,035
1,000
100/yr.
950/yr.
400/mi/yr.
100/mi/yr.
10/yr.
x 0.6
x 0.6
x 0.3
TOTAL COST
41,000
12,645
4,500
2,100
3,637
3,532
1,170
2,243
210
853
800
9,554
3,035
$85,279
7,753
11,000
$96,279
100
950
80
30
110
$1,270
32,187
1,260
1,350
$34,797
-------
CROOKED/PICKEREL
CLUSTER SYSTEMS
H-l
ARTHUR BEARD ENGINEERS, INC.
JOB 448
CLUSTER NO. 4
SEGMENTS: 10
CAPITAL COST
PRESENT HOMES: 13
FUTURE HOMES: 26
ITEM
8 in. gravity
Force main
Pump Station
Septic tanks
Trench
4" perforated pipe
Backfill
Gravel fill
Distribution box
4" gravity pipe
Land
Hydrogeologic survey
Monitoring well
Sub-Total
. Cost/Home
Homeowners Hook-up Cost
TOTAL
Monitoring wells
Pump Station
Gravity line
Force main
Septic tanks
TOTAL
Collection
Septic tanks
Pump stations
TOTAL
QUANTITY
1,200 LF
2,500 LF
1 ea.
15 ea.
4,940 LF
4,940 LF
4,940 LF
549 CY
1 ea.
390
1.7 Ac.
L.S.
L.S.
26
om
1 set
1 ea.
0.2 mi.
• 0.5 mi.
26 ea.
SALVAGE
70,275
4,500
4,500"
UNIT COST
41.00
8.43
4,500
300
1.74
1.69
0.56
9.67
210
5.17
1,000
9,554
3,035
1,000
100/yr.
950/yr.
400/mi/yr.
100/mi/yr.
10/yr.
x 0.6
x 0.6
x 0.3
TOTAL COST
49,200
21,075
4,500
4,500
8,596
8,349
2,766
5,309
210
2,016
1,700
9,554
3,035
$76,530
2,943
26,000
$103,473
100
950
80
50
260
$1,440
42,165
2,700
1,350
$46,215
-------
CROOKED/PICKEREL
CLUSTER SYSTEMS
B-l
ARTHUR BEARD ENGINEERS, INC.
JOB 448
CLUSTER NO. 5
ITEM
8 in. gravity
Force main
Pump Station
Septic tanks
Trench
4" perforated pipe
Backfill
Gravel fill
Distribution box
4" gravity pipe
Land
Hydrogeologic survey
Monitoring well
Sub-Total
"' Cost/Home
Homeowners Hook-up Cost
TOTAL
Monitoring wells
Pump Station
Gravity line
Force main
Septic tanks
TOTAL
Collection
Septic tanks
Pump stations
TOTAL
SEGMENTS: 5 § 17
CAPITAL COST
PRESENT HOMES: 16
FUTURE HOMES: 21
JANTITY
3,665 LF
100 LF
1 ea.
8 ea.
3,990 LF
3,990 LF
3,990 LF
443 CY
1 ea.
315 LF
1.4 Ac.
L.S.
L.S.
•71
UNIT COST
41.00
8.43
4,500
300
1.74
1.69
0.56
9.67
210
5.17
1,000
9,554
3,035
TOTAL COST
150,265
843
4,500
2,400
6,943
6,743
2,234
4,284
210
1,629
1,400
9,554
3,035
$194,040
9,240
21,000
1,000
$215,040
1 set
1 ea.
0.7 mi.
-
21
SALVAGE
151,108
2,400
4,500
100/yr.
950/yr.
400/mi/yr.
100/mi/yr.
10/yr.
x 0.6
x 0.6
x 0.3
100
950
280
0
210
$1,540
90,665
1,440
1,350
$93,455
-------
CROOKED/PICKEREL
CLUSTER SYSTEMS
H-l
ARTHUR BEARD ENGINEERS, INC.
JOB 448
CLUSTER NO.6
ITEM
8 in. gravity
Force main
Pump Station
Septic tanks
Trench
4" perforated pipe
Backfill
Gravel fill
Distribution box
4" gravity pipe
Land
Hydrogeologic survey
Monitoring well
Sub-Total
"• Cost/Home
Homeowners Hook-up Cost
TOTAL
Monitoring wells
Pump Station
Gravity line
Force main
Septic tanks
TOTAL
Collection
Septic tanks
Pump stations
TOTAL
SEGMENTS : 11
CAPITAL COST
PRESENT HOMES: 15
FUTURE HOMES: 30
JANTITY
4,000 LF
100 LF
1 ea.
18 ea.
5,700 LF
5,700 LF
5,700 LF
633 CY
1 ea.
450 LF
2 AC
L.S
L.S
30
UNIT COST
41.00
8.43
4,500
300
1.74
1.69
0.56
9.67
210
5.17
1,000
9,554
3,035
1.000
TOTAL COST
164,000
843
4,500
5,400
9,918
9,633
3,192
6,121
210
2,327
2,000
9,554
3,035
$220,733
7,358
30,000
$250,733
1 set
1 ea.
0.8 mi.
-
30
SALVAGE
164,843
5,400
4,500
100/yr.
950/yr.
400/mi/yr.
100/mi/yr.
10/yr.
• /
x 0.6
x 0.6
x 0.3
100
950
320
0
300
$1,670
98,906
3,240
1,350
$103^496
-------
CROOKED/PICKEREL
CLUSTER SYSTEMS
ARTJ-flJR BEARD ENGINEERS, INC.
JOB 448
CLUSTER NO. 7
SEGMENTS 12
CAPITAL COST
ITEM
8 in. gravity
Force main
Pump Station
Septic tanks
Trench
4" perforated pipe
Backfill
Gravel fill
Distribution box
4" gravity pipe
Land
Hydrogeologic survey
Monitoring well
Sub-Total
Cost/Home
Homeowners Hook-up Cost
TOTAL
Monitoring wells
Pump Station
Gravity line
Force main
Septic tanks
TOTAL
Collection
Septic tanks
Pump stations
TOTAL
QUANTITY
1,500 LF
1,170 LF
1 ea.
15 ea
4,940 LF
4,940 LF
4,940 LF
549 CY
1 ea.
390 LF
1.7 AC
L.S
L.S
26
1 set
1 ea.
.3
.3
26
SALVAGE
71,363
4,500
4,500
UNIT COST
41.00
8.43
4,500
300
1.74
1.69
0.56
9.67
210
5.17
1,000
9,554
3,035
1,000
100/yr.
950/yr.
400/mi/yr,
100/mi/yr.
10/yx.
x 0.6 .
x 0.6
x 0.3
PRESENT HCMES: 14
FUTURE HOMES: 26
TOTAL COST
61,500
9,863
4,500
4,500
8,596
8,349
2,766
5,309
210
2,016
1,700
9,554
3,035
$121,898
4,688
26,000
$147,898
100
950
120
30
260
$1,460
42,818
2,700
1,550
$46,868
-------
CROOKED/PICKEREL
CLUSTER SYSTEMS
ARTHUR BEARD ENGINEERS, INC.
JOB 448
H-l
CLUSTER NO. 8
SEGMENTS 13 § 14
CAPITAL COST
ITEM
8 in. gravity
Force main
Pump Station
Septic tanks
Trench
4" perforated pipe
Backfill
Gravel fill
Distribution box
4" gravity pipe
Land
Hydrogeologic survey
Monitoring well
Sub-Total
"•Cost/Home
Homeowners Hook-up Cost
TOTAL
Monitoring wells
Pump Station
Gravity line
Force main
Septic tanks
TOTAL
Collection
Septic tanks
Pump stations
TOTAL
QUANTITY
3,333
100
1 ea.
28 ea.
11,780 LF
11,780 LF
11,780 LF
2,618 CY
1 ea.
930 LF
4.1 AC
1
1
62
05M
1 set
1
0.6 mi.
.
62
SALVAGE
137,496
8,400
4,500
UNIT COST
41.00
8.43
4,500
300
1.74
1.69
0.56
9.67
210
5.17
1,000
9,554
3,035
1,000
100/yr.
950/yr.
400/mi/yr
lOO/mi/yr
10/yr.
x 0.6
x 0.6
x 0.3
PRESENT HOMES: 42
FUTURE HOMES: 62
TOTAL COST
136,653
843
4,500
8,400
20,497
19,908
6,597
25,316
210
4,808
4,100
9,554
3,035
$244,421
3,942
62,000
$306.421
100
950
240
0
620
$1,910
82,498
5,040
1,550
$88,888
-------
CROOKED/PICKEREL
CLUSTER SYSTEMS
ARTHUR BEARD ENGINEERS, INC.
JOB 448 '
H-
CLUSTER NO. 9
SEGMENTS 15
PRESENT HOMES: 3
FUTURE HOMES: 15
CAPITAL COST
ITEM
8 in. gravity
Force main
Pump Station
Septic tanks
Trench
4" perforated pipe
Backfill
Gravel fill
Distribution box
4" gravity pipe
Land
Hydrogeologic survey
Monitoring well
Sub-Total
Cost/Home
Homeowners Hook-up Cost
TOTAL
Monitoring wells
Pump Station
Gravity line
Force main
Septic tanks
TOTAL
Collection
Septic tanks
Pump stations
TOTAL
QUANTITY
3,000 LF
900 LF
1 ea.
12 ea.
2,850 LF
2,850 LF
2,850 LF
317 CY
1 ea.
225 LF
1 Ac.
L.S
L.S
15
1 set
1 ea.
0.6 mi.
0.2 mi.
15
SALVAGE
130,587
3,600
2,500
UNIT COST
41.00
8.43
4,500
300
1.74
1.69
0.56
9.67
210
5.17
1,000
9,554
3,035
1,000
100/yr.
950/yr.
400/mi/yr.
100/mi/yr.
10/yr.
x 0.6
x 0.6
x 0.3
TOTAL COST
123,000
7,587
4,500
3,600
4,959
4,817
1,596
3,065
210
1,163
1,000
9,554
3,035
$168,086
11,206
15,000
$183,086
100
950
240
20
150
$1,460
78,352
2,160
1,350
$81,862
-------
CROOKED/PICKEREL
CLUSTER SYSTEMS
H-l
ARTHUR BEARD ENGINEERS, INC.
JOB 448
CLUSTER NO. 10
SEGMENTS 16
CAPITAL COST
ITEM
8 5jn. gravity
Force main
Pump Station
Septic tanks
Trench
4" perforated pipe
Backfill
Gravel fill
Distribution box
4" gravity pipe
Land
Hydrogeologic survey
Monitoring well
Sub-Total
"'- Cost/Home
Homeowners Hook-up Cost
TOTAL
Monitoring wells
Pump Station
Gravity line
Force main
Septic tanks
TOTAL
Collection
Septic tanks
Pump stations
TOTAL
QUANTITY
4,150 LF
1,200 LF
1 ea.
33 ea.
13,300 LF
13,300 LF
13,300 LF
1,478 CY
1 ea.
1,050 LF
4.6 Ac.
L.S
L.S
70
1 set
1 ea
0.8
0.2
70
SALVAGE
180,266
9,900
4,500
UNIT COST
41.00
8.43
4,500
300
1.74
1.69
0.56
9.67
210
5.17
1,000
9,554
3,035
1,000
100/yr.
950/yr.
400/mi/yx
100/mi/yr
10/yr.
x 0.6
x 0.6
x 0.3
PRESENT HOMES: 46
FUTURE HOMES: 70
TOTAL COST
170,150
10,116
4,500
9,900
23,142
22,477
7,448
14,292
210
5,428
4,600
9,554
5,035
284,852
4,069
70,000
$354,852
100
950
320
20
700
$2,090
108,159
5,940
_1,350
$115,449
"D-;x\
-------
PROJECT.
SUBJECT.
NO.
CLIENT
COMP BY
DATE
CKD BY
DATE
SHE ET ___J_ QF_
- f
C
nrthur beard ennineers.
-------
PROJECT.
SUBJECT.
PROJ NO. .
CLIENT
H-l
COMP BY
DATE
CKD BY
DATE
SHEET.
.OF.
fo
16
"u
LUs
3
3
6
IS
Will
H
5o
So
o
arthur beard engineers, Inc.
-------
PROJECT.
Erfc-KC J 1
I I I
PROJ NO.
CLIENT _
H-l
BY
kws DATE um
CKD BY
HATF
SHEET OF.
Pvc
IXpoo UF
£>.ooo Lf
U-4b
a.^o
Aw,-U
£:>" 1
Vc
Cofb
i
000 LF
IO
|2..
-------
PROJECT
SUBJECT
/
H-l
PROJ NO. .
*/#>*
COMPBY
DATE
7
CKD BY DATE
SHEET nc
Colled M
•Fo T^
CO
Uf
n
jotPvl C
OST
1,35.0
/•/(? fc/X
arthur beard enaineers. Inc.
-------
H-
PROJECT A^y-T> N'rr ' '/? ^>*
D^T Q. -—
SUBJECT.
CLIENT
COMP BY
DATE
CKD BY
DATE
SHEET i OF
rf
; 7 /?• C_
nrthnr hftnrH enninfiRrs. I
-------
PROJECT.
C £(• •-KF di /
\ I I i T
H-l
SUBJECT.
A&
(t
PROJ NO.
CLIENT _
COMP BY
DATE
CKDBY
DATE
SHEET.
.OF.
,f
lo
Ib
«4
is
ib
IS
(4
/*>
7.4=
^
(O
arthur beard engineers. Inc.
-------
PROJECT
SUBJECT.
^ — f
2 '
PROJ N(
CLIENT
H-
COMP BY
M6
DATE
CKD BY
SHEET
. OF.
rM 6"
ll"
m.
AW
a"
B"
iVv
•^,800
7,500
4
17
17
\S
77
UMM u&
T
H.oo
ll-fio
45
CXSO
3V_55
arthur beard engineers, li
-------
H-l
PROJECT I fRcoK (****>
TI
1,000
X o.t,
X o.fe
y: o.b
ST
770
arthur beard engineers, Inc.
-------
PROJECT
SUBJECT
C
t} \ r-4 . f-
f-oWjL (fillfcJM
H-
COMP BY
DWS DATE tfllrfi
CKDHV
n^TF
SHEET flF
IS
£-0, 1 bo
So, | bo
41,
So.
o
o
ST7S-
8,771
6(0
610
COO
1 SfeO
bO
arthur beard engineers, In
-------
H-l
PROJECT.
SUBJECT.
Ke
3
PROJ NO. .
CLIENT
COMP BY
DWS
DATE
CKD BY
DATE
SHEET.
. OF.
I
2.
\1
id
.1976
3
/s
I?
7o
/I
30
2LO
SO
arthur beard engineers, Inc.
-------
PROJECT.
SUBJECT-
Al-kr^
Pnn..Nn
H-l
A
COMP BY
DATE 0//2J7? CKDBY _ DATE
f I J '• ;
SHF.ET flP
CAP/
pvc
F-M
AW
6'
f"
ih
ri
^
4s CD
LP
i/ 03,
fco cu\
10 dA
bo
10
bO
V
ll.oo
767
54
711
"""El/si
070
/VIS
^700
3^,000
too
* 57o;c.il
arthur beard engineers, Inc
-------
PROJECT.
SUBJECT.
H-l
PROJ NO.
CLIENT _
DWS
COMP BY tsyv-s DATE ^//-^ f .1. CKD BY DATE
SHEET Of.
fc
e*U
foo
OOO
M Ujr Tom/
X o.
r
5,2.10
arthur beard engineers, Inc.
-------
H-l
PROJECT.
SUBJECT.
if: *'T- ,/
PROJ NO.
CLIENT _
COMP BY
CKDBY
DATE
SHEET.
J-OF-j.
Sccf (^kH^A/T" ~/7
^ f
7 /4 c
4 =
arthur beard ertnineers. In
-------
PROJECT.
SUBJECT.
H-l
A ll£C*/At
EJ
PROJ NO. .
CLIENT
COMP BY
DATE
lL
_Lj
CKDBY
PATF
SHEET
np
4
6
(o
n
16
i
&
I!
I?
60, Ifeo
, ^0
o
o
Is-*,
ns
£3(0
IT-jfcoo
^•2-00
^1 . 000
o
SLOli
arthur beard engineers, Inc.
-------
PROJECT - ^- f '~~
/a..^
SUBJECT.
AU
H-l
COMPBY
lT)V>I.->
DATE
(5
7j
r-KDRY
OATF
SHEET
OF
oCq yteM
5"
(o
7
5
t
ID
o
12.
15"
1(3
17
(6
O
e>
&
e>
o
o
o
o
II
6
b
3
o
o
O
D
11-
O
Ci
3.5
6
O
3
o
o
fz.
lib
arthur beard engineers, In
-------
PROJECT
_UfcoK£d
SUBJECT
_A (-fa
f
H-l
COMPBY
OWS
DATP
/JJT?
J1
CKDBV
DATF
np
fVC t'i"
2."
2-k"
6'
2."
3"
6"
ARV
£00 ~~ Soo
'VitS
cJ
5 ,000
(OjSoo
5000
50
M
M
/I
u
IS. IS"
7^7
2 zoo
3oo
<\us
arthur beard engineers, Inc.
-------
/
1 / Rcf-FHf
H-l
A
MO
/ TO r\
DVlS
COMPBY DATP
CKDBY _ DATE
SHEET OP
So -
foo
/o
IT?
"CrbS
frjfc-
,r
i>5b\
arthur beard engineers, l»
-------
H-l
PROJECT.
SUBJECT.
T~W
PROI wn
V'T' O/T
COMP BY
£ti& n.TF fe/Wtf"
CKDBY
DATE
RHFET OF
,-f
7
b
1
lo
U
a
e>
4
is
It
i7
(6
IbO
, V-72-
to
sT5
153
£>
o
I
-------
H-l
PRO iFr:T V-^r^Cj^
Arf-f
rriMP BY -I 'W.J>
PATF ^1 ^1 lO> CKDBY
/
ppn.i wn ' '(j r\
TMFNT WAPO^?\
r>ATF SHEET OF
1
!o
u
f -L
1—AK-jf^ "+°
ib
j 54=4
fe\l_
^
3-//
S7S
enaineers, In
-------
H-l
PROJECT.
SUBJECT.
PROJ NO..
CLIENT
COMP BY
CKD BY
DATE
SHEET
"PC{ ^
To 7 /«?-
arthur beard enaineers. Inc.
-------
PROJECT
SUBJECT.
7
5
PROJ NO. .
CLIENT
H-l,
COMP BY
DATE
CKD BY
DATE
SHEET.
.OF.
3
f
b
7
6
1
(«
n
50, (bo
£)2>.
u
S(
ib,
611
Cs
o
no
ub
IS,
foS"
orthur beard engineers, Inc
-------
ELLSWORTH POINT
-------
CROOKED/PICKEREL
CLUSTER SYSTEMS
H-l
ARTHUR BEARD ENGINEERS, INC.
JOB 448
ALTERNATE - 6
SEGMENTS: 16
CAPITAL COST
PRESENT HOMES: 39
FUTURE HOMES: 45
ITEM
8 in. gravity
Force main
Pump Station
Septic tanks
Trench
4" perforated pipe
Backfill
Gravel fill
Distribution box
4" gravity pipe
Land
Hydrogeologic survey
Monitoring well
Sub-Total
' Cost/Home
Homeowners Hook-up Cost
TOTAL
Monitoring wells
Pump Station
Gravity line
Force main
Septic tanks
TOTAL
Collection
Septic tanks
Pump stations
TOTAL
QUANTITY
4,414 LF
0
1 ea.
14 ea.
8,550 LF
8,550 LF
8,550 LF
950 CY
1 ea.
675 LF
3 Ac.
1 ea.
1 ea.
0§M
1 set
1 ea.
.84
0
45
SALVAGE
180,974
4,200
4,500
UNIT COST
4,100
0
4,500
300
1.74
1.69
0.56
9.67
210
5.17
1,000
9,554
3,035
100/yr
950/yr
400/mi/yr
0
10/yr
x 0.6
x 0.6
x 0.3
TOTAL COST
180,974
0
4,500
4,200
14,877
14,450
4,788
9,187
210
3,490
3,000
9,554
3,035
$252,265
5,606
45,000
$297,265
100
950
336
0
450
$1,836
108,584
2,520
1,350
$112,454
-------
H-l .-
-C^J
c
<^.
^Jr /
^_ :
T'*t
-------
CROOKED/PICKEREL
CLUSTER SYSTEMS
ARTHUR. BEARD ENGINEERS, INC.
JOB 448
H-
ALTERNATE - 6
SEGMENTS: 14
CAPITAL COST
ITEM
8 in. gravity
Force main
Pump Station
Septic tanks
Trench
4" perforated pipe
Backfill
Gravel fill
Distribution box
4" gravity pipe
Land
Hydrogeologic survey
>5onitoring well
Sub-Total
''.Cost/Home
Homeowners Hoolc-up Cost
TOTAL
Monitoring wells
Pump Station
Gravity line
Force main
Septic tanks
TOTAL
Collection
Septic tanks
Pump stations
TOTAL
QUANTITY
1,300 LF
500 LF
1 ea.
18 ea.
6,270 LF
6,270 LF
6,270 LF
697 CY
1 ea.
495 LF
2.2 Ac
1
1
1
1
.25
1
35
SALVAGE
57,515
5,400
4,500
UNIT COST
41.00
8.43
4,500
300
1.74
1.69
0.56
9.67
210
5.17
1,000
9,554
3,035
1,000
100/yr.
950/yr.
400/mi/yr
100/mi/yr.
10/yr.
x 0.6 .
x 0.6
x 0.3
PRESENT HOMES: 18
FUTURE HONES: 33
TOTAL COST
53,300
4,215
4,500
5,400
10.910
10,596
3,511
6,740
210
2,560
2,200
9,554
3,055
$116,731
3,537
33,000
$149,731
100
950
100
10
530
$1,490
34,509
5,240
1,550
$39*099
-------
H-l
PROJECT.
SUBJECT.
COMP BY
DATE
PROJ NO.
CLIENT _
CKDBY
DATE
SHEET ' OF.
-0
T 2,
nv
33
2.1.450
arthur beard engineers, Inc.
-------
H-l
PROJECT.
SUBJECT-
r.11PNT
COMP BY
DWS DATP bf?-/7?
CKDpv DATE
SHEET -2- np
r 3
BS*
I
Ifco
5*
Vorrvp
-S"
^J
0
rtWp
.3 i 6
7, iso
arthur beard engineers, Inc.
-------
H-l
PROJFCT
SUBJECT /"j..^
PROJ NO. .
V%5A
COMPBY
b
DATE n CKDBY
HATP
SHFFT 3 ne
tjfi /C "W/\
*nrr*
if I ',15
7
-0
a
rthur beard engineers, Inc.
-------
SUBJECT.
44-
H-l
COMP BY
j>6 DATE (Mi
"• •l.l.-S.-MIII*.. I. I f I—.—
CKDBY DATE
SHPPT 7 OF
7 OF C?
7
/o
c t,
'
H
50 (
-------
H-l
PROJECT.
SUBJECT.
PROJ
J>1
COMP BY DATE
CKD BY DATE
SHPFT
V,
9
5>oo
arthur beard engineers, Inc.
-------
PROJECT.
SUBJECT-
/' feKW./
H-l
Ppn, Nn
COMP BY
7W3 DATE ik/ij
CKD BY
SHFFT V OF
S bc-o
2,0 ^
4T?fo
17. (to
Corb
1,060
^jj '7k-
_ __
foobo
n
o
16
b^nrd ^nnineers, Inc.
-------
H-l
APPENDIX E
-------
H-l
0
tooo
MM NO,
i
I
3
4
?
b
?
g
1
10
li
\l
I?
U
!5
Ib
I?
-Jl
SUB
i/i
TOTAL
TDfti. pof.
13
II
3?-
1 03
64
151
2r
M
-0-
^
\o^
^0
&t
•. w
51
1&
3
- 0-
1163
PBiJMAug*T
Wiwieft P&P
^
12
2/
5S
^
123
6
21
-0 -
33
51
4z
IS
%.
24
105
3
- 0-
^3
f
1I7TAL ax*)
O.ODD^g?
0. 0^?o ^2
0. 00221
0,00<°12>
O'OOtyfy
0qs^
0,03 \12
O'Ot^ll
0
0>0t>55%
(2'00b.l&
o>oo^
®,oo^c\^
0.00&Z&
OtiO^\1
0,0(41
O,QOO\$
0
0.0151%
0.0023
OiO^o'b
PSd«*iuEMT
Vyi^TEC. FU?w
O^oo^
®>ooo-\^
0>0& \"Lk
(9-00306
o-ooz.bg
O-OOHZ
0,000 36
£7, 0012^
0
0,oo K]g
OiOO^Qb
&, 00251
O.ooiob
0,0o2.\b
0,0$\44r
0 , 00 (,$
0 • ooo \ &
0
0,nb2~
o,uo&z>
O'O^^g-
' FtoW £ttfvcf>od*#>
TftJAt.
o, 0005^1
OiUOo^L
0 >OO \h1
0,00^3
O.oOZ<£>(
O-OQ^\
0 > 00 0<\b
O.oo Ih2
O
0,004-cq
O.ooq^Z
(?>oo S1fc
O-oo 36^
0-0065]
V.ooZlZ
O>o\OT-%
Otooo i5
O
0.065k
0. oO !>3
O'Ob^
UM^
0.00 05oozii
0.^0541
0,0002(?
0,000^2
O
0, 00 i^
0,002 t4-
otoo\34&
10
44
-------
H-I
j
/
M&n4l
u
4
ft
0,044s-
1 » 3 ^ x fd?, ^45 AWO) - 6 . ?4
4-21
-------
t j >
D r ^ui
1 \ ^
N Ctfv^C£-
5 -j s ^.'^ •> t IVTCVL J p
r
- 5
\v»tft
H-l '
/
u
-------
FIGURE 3-2
POTENTIAL EVAPOTRANBPIRATION VERSUS MEAN ANNUAL PRECIPITATION [1]
Inches
1 in.- 2.54 cm
4-50
-5
-(- POTENTIAL EVAPOTRANSPIRATION MORE TH/UI
MEAN ANNUAL PRECIPITATION
- POTENTIAL EYAPOTRANSPIRATION LESS THAN
MEAN ANNUAL PRECIPITATION
-------
D"
H-I
Lw r 540+ 0,1
mfr
^jOi /l^^1^^ s 4-^^/-C
PRM - ^-3
w
Lfti
u
-------
231
from domestic usage, from the addition of highly mineralized water
from private wells and ground water, and from industrial usage.
Domestic and industrial water softeners also contribute to the observed
mineral pickup; in some areas, they may represent the major source
of mineral pickup. Occasionally, water added from private wells and
ground water infiltration will, because of its high quality, serve to
dilute the mineral concentration in the wastewater.
TABLE 7-3 TYPICAL COMPOSITION OF DOMESTIC SEWAGE
(All values except setlleable solids are expressed in mg/liter)
Concentration
Constituent
Strong Medium Weak
Solids, total
Dissolved, total
Fixed
Volatile
Suspended, total
Fixed
Volatile
Settleable soMds, (ml/liter)
Biochemical oxygen demand. 5-day, 20°C (BODi-ZO")
Total organic carbon (TOC)
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
Nitrogen, (total as N)
Organic
Free ammonia
Nitrites
Nitrates
Phosphorus (total as P)
Organic
Inorganic
Chlorides*
Alkalinity (as CaCOj)*
Grease
1,200
850
525
325
350
75
275
20
300
300
1.000
85
35
50
0
0
20
5
15
100
200
150
700
500
300
200
200
50
150
10
200
200
500
| 40 j
15
25
0
0
10
3
7
50
100
100
350
250
145
105
100
30
70
5
100
100
250
20
8
12
0
0
6
2
4
30
50
50
•Values should be increased by amount in carriage water.
Data on the chemical composition of a typical water supply and
the resultant wastewater effluent composition after treatment are
shown in Table 7-4. In this case, the effect of the use of some local well
water and the intensive use of water softeners on.the total mineral
pickup can be assessed by comparing the local incremental pickup
values reported in col. 2 to the national average range given in col. 3.
5/
Wastewater Characteristics
-------
i 0,4-5' U
. 4-
-5)|Q
w
3,4?
3.4-
* **tC—
u
2-6%
-------
Q=
F =: 2 ? . 1 f
v~<>
rt
-------
H-l
/r*»
2?
* 1st?
2,7,
-------
V
H-l
L/WO
5,T,8,1jo,ll,/Z, 15,14-, is,
J
0,003
==? 1*3 ,
-------
ih /
H-l
41
@
*
, 1/4*'
45
-------
/I
I /
/ H-,
Q *•
1 , 2, 3 , 4, lo ,
*• 0,
=7^
-------
|J,5I
12.03
4
l (J)
' (J
-------
H-l
*4-
4.U
a
4-^2. -' 2?-
5"°
a
-------
H-l
7
53.
-------
APPENDIX
H-2
DESIGN AND COSTING ASSUMPTIONS
Treatment
(1) Land Application
• Facilities for treatment and storage of wastewaters prior to land
application are based on EPA design parameters (EPA, 1977).
• Two possible land application sites were identified (see Figure III-3),
Alternative costs were developed based on conveying wastewater to
both sites.
• Design assumptions -
storage period - 6 weeks per year
application rate - 1.6 inches per week
application technique - spray irrigation, alfalfa.
(2) Cluster Systems
• Clusters costed and designed separately.
• Design assumptions -
flow - 60 gpcd - peak flow 45 gpm
3.5 persons/home - 3-bedroom home
20% of existing septic tanks need to be replaced with new
1000-gallon tanks
• Collection of wastewaters is by a gravity sewer to one pump station
which lifts effluent to the cluster field.
• Cluster system includes the following requirements of the State of
Michigan.
monitoring wells
hydrogeological survey be performed for the potential area
• Pump Station (50 gpm) required for transmission, 60-foot static
head assumed from pump station to distribution box.
Collection
• All sewer lines are to be placed at or below 6 feet of depth to
allow for frost penetration in the Springvale/Littlefield area.
Gravity lines are assumed to be placed at an average depth of
12 feet.
• Thirty percent shoring of all gravity collection lines is required,
due to prevalent high groundwater as well as unsuitable soils.
-------
H-2
A minimum velocity of 2 fps will be maintained in all pressure sewer
lines and force mains to provide for scouring.
Peaking factor used for design flows was based on the Ten States
Standards in concurrence with the Facility Plan.
All pressure sewer lines and force mains 8 inches in diameter or
less will be PVC SDR26, with a pressure rating of 160 psi. Those
force mains larger than 8 inches in diameter will be constructed
of ductile iron with mechanical joints.
When possible, force mains and pressure sewer collectors will be
placed in a common trench.
Cleanouts in the pressure sewer system will be placed at the
beginning of each line, with one every 500 feet of pipe in line.
Cleanout valve boxes will contain shut-off valves to provide for
isolation of various sections of line for maintenance and/or repairs.
Individual pumping units for the pressure sewer system include a
2- by 8-foot basin with discharge at 6 feet, control panel, visual
alarm, mercury float level controls, valves, rail system for removal
of pump, antif lotation device, and the pump itself (see Figure III-2) ,
Effluent pumps are 1-1/2 and 2 HP pumps which reach a total dynamic
head of 80 and 120 feet respectively.
Ef_f _ecj:ienes_s
Quoted costs are in 1979 dollars
EPA Sewage Treatment Plant (STP) Index of 145 (2nd Quarter 1979)
and Engineering News Record Index of 3000 (July 1979) used for
updating costs.
i, interest rate = 6-5/8%
Planning period = 20 years
Life of facilities, structures - 50 years
Mechanical components - 20 years
Straight line depreciation
Land for land application site valued at $1000/acre
Land surrounding Crooked/Pickerel Lakes for locating cluster
systems valued at $1000/acre.
-------
APPENDIX I
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11990:
PROTECTION OF WETLANDS
-------
APPENDIX
I
THE P
Executive Order 11990
PROTECTION 0? KZTLAMDS
- May 24, 1977
By virtue of the authority vested in -me by the
Constitution and statutes of the United States of
America, and as President of the United States of
America, in furtherance. -of- the National Environmental
/
Policy Act of 1969, as amended (42 O.S.C.. 4321 e t seq . ) ,
in ordex to avoid to the extent possible the. long and •
short.- terra adverse- inpacts associated with., the destruction
S ' _
'or modification of. wetlands- and to avoid direct or indirect
support of -new construction in- wetlands wherever there is
a practicable alternative, it is hereby ordered as follows:
..; - Section l._ (a). Each agency shall provide leadership •
and shall . take action to minimize the destruction , loss or
'* S . I " * " .- . "~
degradation of. wetlands, and to preserve and enhance the
natural. an<2 beneficial values of wetlands in carrying out
"the agency's responsibilities- for (1) acguiring, , managing,
and disposing of federal lands and facilities; and (2}
providing Federally undertaken, financed, or assisted
construction and improvements; .and (3) conducting Federal
activities and programs affecting land use, including but
not limited to water -and related land resources planning,
regulating, and licensing activities.
-(b) This Order does not apply to the issuance by
Federal agencies of permits , licenses , or allocations
to private parties for activities involving wetlands on
non-Federal property.
Sec. 2.' (a) In furtherance of Section 101 (b) (3) of . ;
the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C.
4331 (b}( 3)) to improve and coordinate Federal* plans ,
26&61
KBWAl BRSISTER, VOL «, NO. 101-WK>NBDAV, MAY 23, 1977
-------
26962. THE PRS51D6NT-
functions, programs and resources to the end that the
Nation may attain tha widest range of beneficial uses-of
the environment without degradation_ and risk to health
or safety, each agency, to .the extent permitted by law,
shall avoid undertaking or providing assistance for new
construction located in wetlands unless the head of the
agency finds (1) that there is no practicable alternative
to such construction, and (2} that the proposed action
includes all practicable measures to minimize harm to
wetlands which may result from such use. In making this
finding the head of the agency may take onto, account
economic, environmental and other pertinent factors.
(b) Each agency shall also provide opportunity for
early public review of any plans or proposals for new
construction in wetlands, in accordance with Section 2 (b)
of Executive Order No. 11514, as amended7 including the
development of procedures to accomplish this objective
for Federal actions whose impact is not.significant, enough
to require the preparation of an environmental impact - '•-
statement under Section 102(2)(CJ of .the National Environ-
mental Policy Act of 1969, as amended.
Sec. 3. Any requests for new authorizations or
appropriations transmitted to the Office.of Management,, •
and Budget shall indicate, if an action to be proposed
will be" located in wetlands, whether the proposed action
is in accord with this Order. :'~- ^
Sec. 4. When Federally-owned wetlands or portions
of- wetlands are proposed for lease, easement, right-
of-way or disposal to non-Federal public or private
parties, the Federal agency shall (a) reference in the
conveyance those uses that are restricted under identified
Federal, State or local wetlands regulations; and (b) attach
FEDERAL REGISTER, "VOL 42, HO. 101—WEDNESDAY, MAY 25, 1977
-------
THE PRESIDENT 26S63-
<• - - --,-•-... I
other appropriate restrictions to ' the uses" o'f properties "
by the grantee or purchaser and any successor, except
where prohibited by law; or (c) withhold such properties
from" disposal.
Sec. 5. in carrying out the activities described in
Section 1 of this Order, each agency shall consider factors
relevant to a proposal's effect on the survival and quality
of the wetlands. ^ Among, these factors are:
(a) public health, safety, and welfare, including
water supply, quality, rechaxga and discharge; pollution j
flood an'd stors hazards? and sediment and erosion?
(b) maintenance of natural systems, including
conservation and long term productivity of existing
flora and fauna, species and habitat diversity and
stability, hydrologic utility, fish, wildlife, timber,
and food -and fiber resources j and
' . (c) other uses of wetlands in the public interest,
including recreational, scientific, and cultural uses.
Sec. 6. As allowed by law, -agencies shall issue or
amend their existing procedures in order to comply with.
this Order. To the extent possible, existing processes,
such as those of the Council on Environmental Quality and
the Water Resources^ Council, shall be utilized to fulfill
the requirements of this Order.
Sec. 7- As used in this Order: .---•. -
(a) The term "agency" shall have the same meaning
as the term "Executive agency" in Section 105 of Title 5
of the United States Code and shall include 'the military
departments; the directives contained in this Order,
however, are meant to apply only to. those agencies which
perform the activities described in Section 1 which, are
located in or affecting wetlands.
HDOAL
VOL «. HO. 101-WiDNSSDAY. MAY M, 1*77
-------
THE PRESIDENT
(b) .The terra "new construction" shall include
draining, dredging, channelizing, filling, diking, im-
pounding, and related activities and any structures or
facilities begun or authorized after the effective date
of this Order.
(c) The tera "watlands" means those areas that are
inundated by surface or ground water with a frequency
sufficient to support and under normal circusstances does
or would support, a prevalence of vegetative -or aquatic
life that requires saturated or seasonally saturated .soil
conditions for growth and reproduction. Watlands generally
include., swamps f saxshes ,.. bogs , and siailar areas such as
sloughs , po tholes , wet .meadows,, river overflows,' wad flats,
and natural ponds » -' . . ... .. " .
Sec, 8. This Order does not -apply to projects presently
under construction, or to projects for which all of the
funds have been appropriated through Fiscal Year 1977, or
to projects and programs for which a draft or final
environmental impact statement will be filed prior to
October 1, 1977. The provisions of Section 2 of this
.- Order:.; shall. .be -iEplesnentedr by each, agency not., .later:
-j?.. Nothing:, in. thi's Ordsr- shall . apply' to- '- ;
.. assistance -provided fat. einergency woi3cr essential to
save lives and protect property and. public healtli -and.
-safety, perfornsd- pursuant: to Sections 305 and 306 of
the Disaster Relief Act of 1974 (88 Stat. 148, 42
D.S.C. 5145 and 5146). '
Sec. 10. To the extent the provisions of Sections
2 and 5 of this Order are applicable to projects covered
, YOU 42, NO. 101—WEDNESDAY, MAY 25, 1977
-------
THE PXSSIDINT T 26965
by Section 104 (h) of the Housing ana Cozsiunity Development
Act of 1974, as amended (88 Stat. 640, 42 U.S.C. 5304 (h)) ,
the responsibilities tnder those provisions may be assuned
by the appropriate applicant, if the applicant has also
assumed, with respect to such projects, all of the
responsibilities for environmental review, decisionnaking,
and action pursuant to the National Environmental Policy
•»
Act of 1969, as amended.
.THE WHITE HOUSE,
May 24, 1977 _
IFR Doc.77-15123 FSkd 5-24-77;! :44 p«]
f
42, NO. ,0,-WIDNBSDAr, MAT «,
-------
APPENDIX J
AMBIENT AIR QUALITY SUMMARIES
IN PETOSKEY, MICHIGAN
-------
AMBIENT AIR QUALITY SUMMARIES IN PETOSKEY, MICHIGAN
Site Location
Suspended Particulate Summary (pg/m' )
Standards Exceeded
County, City,
Address
Emmet, Petoskey
Emmet Co. Bldg.
Emmet, Petoskey
Scorrer Home
Year
1975
1976
1975
1976
No . mo .
Sampled
12
12
12
12
No. of
Samples
54
55
55
56
Max.
24-hr.
109
345
181
413
Sulfur Dioxide Summary
Emmet, Petoskey
Emmet Co. Bldg.
Emmet, Petoskey
Scorrer Home
Emmet , P eto skey
Emmet Co. Bldg.
Emmet, Petoskey
Scorrer Home
1975
1976
1975
1976
1975
1976
1975
1976
12
12
12
12
12
5
12
5
55
18
55
21
Nitrogen
55
22
56
20
50
40
40
30
Dixoide Summary
50
40
30
30
2nd High
24-hr.
97
229
156
178
(ug/m )
40
20
30
20
(ug/m )
—
—
Annual
Mean
32G
32G
46G
65G
OA
10A
IDA
IDA
Primar^
y
Ann. 24-hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
i
0
i
0
0
0
0
Standards
Primary and
20*A
20*A
10*A
10 *A
0
0
0
0
Secondary
24-hr .
0
2
2
4
0
0
0
0
Exceeded ,
Secondary
*The air quality standard was not violated unless the specified 24-hour concentration was exceeded at least two times.
G = Geometric Mean
A = Arithmetic Mean
Source: Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Air Quality Division. Air quality reports, 1975 and 1976.
fc
X
-------
APPENDIX K
ALTERNATIVE WASTEWATER TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
TO MITIGATE ROUND LAKE WATER QUALITY PROBLEMS
-------
APPENDIX K
When the Springvale-Littlefield portion (Crooked & Pickerel Lake) of i-h*
springvale-Bear Creek segment became the subject of an Environmental Impact
^atement, the grant application for the adjoining Bear Creek interceptor
continued with little interruption. The removal of Crooked and Pickerel
in larea Illation from its design sizing, however, caused some changes
rLni? r?U^ng *"? S1zmg. Among those areas losing sewer service as a
r°5 changes were the twelve dwellings on the eastern shore of
Lake, on either side of Hendricks Road.
a™M telePh°ne conversations with Round Lake residents (Mrs.
J. Ann Hazel, Mr. Keith Hall, and others July 1979) suggest the presence
of some definite public health problems on individual septic tanks and
niter fields. Among the problems reported were surface ponding and back-
ups, particularly in the spring, and high water tables. At least some
residents were described as having badly deteriorated septic tanks, and
doubt was expressed as to the existence of filter fields on some other
systems. At least six of the twelve families affected indicated interest
in possible improvement of their wastewater treatment facilities.
Should the Springvale-Bear Creek Sewage Disposal Authority wish to do so,
the twelve Round Lake dwellings could easily be made the subject of the
same kind of detailed Step 2 design work as on Crooked and Pickerel Lakes.
This would require the acquisition of the easements required by 40 CFR
35. 918-1 (h), if there is to be any Federal funding. Once the easements
were obtained, design work could proceed as an amendment to either the
Bear Creek Interceptor or the Springvale-Littlefield grant application.
Should the Step 2 work indicate definite need, repair or replacement of
problem systems could proceed with 90 percent State and Federal funding of
the costs. Possible responses to the identified problems include actual
repair of existing on-site systems (including a new septic tank or filter
field) or installation of such systems where absent.
Where groundwater nitrate contamination problems exist, the combination
of an ultra- low flow toilet (the "Microphor" type using compressed air
for a two-quart flush) with a holding tank for human wastes only could be
effective. Human wastes account for 90 percent of the nitrates in waste-
water, and between 40 and 70 percent of the phosphorus. The existing
system, if adequate, could be used for the treatment of the "greywater"
from shower, sink and laundry.
Any service to the Round Lake area by off-site system such as clusters or
sewers should be carefully weighed by the Sewage Disposal Authority. At
least two Round Lake residents have substantial real estate holdings near
the lake. Provision of off-site service could trigger large-scale growth
in the vicinity of Round Lake. The Authority might wish to discuss the
long-term future of Round Lake with local zoning and other officials before
deciding what action to take.
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1979 652-243
------- |