xvEPA
            United States
            Environmental Protection
            Agency
            Region V
            230 South Dearborn
            Chicago, Illinois 60604
                                     anber 1979
Environmental       Draft
Impact Statement

Alternative Waste
Treatment Systems
For Rural Lake Projects
Case Study Number 4
Steuben Lakes Regional
Waste District
Steuben County, Indiana

-------
                        VOLUME I


            DRAFT ENVIRCNMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT


  WASTEWATBR TREATMENT SYSTEMS FOR RURAL LAKE PROJECTS


CASE STUDY  No. 4: STEUBEN LAKES REGIONAL WASTE DISTRICT


                  STEUBEN COUNTY, INDIANA


                     Prepared by the


       UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY


                 REGION V,   CHICAGO, ILLINOIS


                           AND


                   WAPORA, INCORPORATED

                     WASHINGTON, D.C.
                                    Approved by:
                                       n McCuire
                                       ional Administrator
                                    Noveinber 1979

-------
                       DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
                            STEUBEN LAKES STUDY AREA
                             STEUBEN COUNTY, INDIANA
                                   Prepared by
                  US Environmental Protection Agency, Region V



 Comments concerning this document are invited and should be received by

     January 28,  1980   	.


 For  further  information, contact

 Ms.  Kathleen Schaub, Project Monitor
 230  South Dearborn Street
 Chicago, Illinois  60609
 312/353-2157
                                    Abstract

     A 201 Facilities Plan was prepared for the Steuben Lakes Regional Waste
District in 1975.  The Facilities Plan concluded that extensive sewering
would be required to correct malfunctioning on-site wastewater disposal sys-
tems and to protect the water quality of the District's lakes.

     Concern about the high proposed costs, of the Facilities Plan Proposed
Action prompted re-examination of the Study Area and led to preparaton of
this EIS.  This EIS concludes that complete abandonment of on-site systems is
unjustified.  Alternatives to the Facilities Plan Proposed Action have there-
fore been presented, one of which is recommended by this Agency.

-------
                                LIST OF PREPARERS

     This Environmental Impact Statement was prepared by WAPORA, Inc.  under
the guidance of Kathleen Schaub, EPA Region V Project Officer.  Key personnel
for WAPORA included:

     WAPORA, Inc.
     6900 Wisconsin Avenue
     Chevy Chase, MD  20015

         Ulric Gibson, Ph.D.      -     Project Manager
         Wu-Seng Lung, P.E.       -     Water Quality Modeler
         Gerald Peters            -     Project Director
         Michael Goldman, P.E.    -     Project Engineer

     In addition, several subcontractors and others assisted in preparation
of this document.  These, along with their areas of expertise, are listed
below:

Aerial Survey
     Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center
     Vint Hill Farms Station
     Warrenton, Virginia
         Barry Evans

Engineering
     Arthur Beard Engineers
     6900 Wisconsin Avenue
     Chevy Chase, Maryland
         David Wohlscheid, P.E.
         David Stuart

Financial
     A. T. Kearney Associates
     699 Prince Street
     Alexandria, Virginia
         Charles Saunders

Septic Leachate Analysis
     K-V Associates
     Falmouth, Massachusetts
         William Kerfoot, Ph.D.

Groundwater Quality Survey
     Tri-State University
     Engineering and Research Center'
         Peter Hippensteel, Ph.D.

-------
                                SUMMARY

CONCLUSIONS

     The vast majority of the Study Area's on-site systems are operating
satisfactorily-  Only  65  septic  tank leachate  plumes  have  been  found
entering the  lakes.   These plumes, associated mainly with  rapidly per-
meable  soils  and cut  and  fill canal  regions  of uncertain  soil  types,
represent less  than 2%  of the 3500 lakeshore homes.   Surface malfunc-
tions have  been much  fewer  with  only four being located.   The Steuben
County Health Department's dye-test  program for  locating and correcting
surface malfunctions has apparently been very effective.

     On-site  systems  do not  appear  to contribute  significantly  to the
degradation of  surface or ground  waters in the  Study  Area.   Estimated
septic  tank contributions  to  total  nutrient (phosphorus)  loadings are
less  than  7% in all  Study  Area  lakes,  except  for Lake  Gage (10%) and
Jimmerson Lake (21%).   These estimates have been  based on the assumption
used in the National Eutrophication Survey (NES)  that nutrients from all
septic  tanks  within 300 feet of lakeshores enter the  lakes  rather than
the very small  number  of plumes identified.  The estimates  are,  there-
fore,  likely  to be conservatively high.   The acidic leachate from the
extensive bogs around  Marsh Lake, non-point and stream source  plumes
have  been  identified  as the major sources of phosphorus to  the  lakes.
Removal  of  the current  septic tank nutrient loadings  would  not  change
the trophic  status  of  the  lakes significantly.   Both the bacterial and
chemical quality of  groundwater   throughout  the Study Area  have been
found  to be  of a  very high  standard  and insignificantly  affected  by
human wastes.

     Future development  in the Steuben Lakes Study Area  is  primarily a
function of how many new lots can be developed and the density of future
development.  Alternatives that rely on continued use of on-site systems
would restrict both the number of new lots and their density as compared
to extensive  sewering  around the  lake.  One effect of these limitations
would be to preserve the present character of the community.

     There  are  large  differences  in the  present  worth  and  user  costs
among the alternatives.  Both costs increase in direct proportion to the
extent  of new centralized sewers provided.  In the more expensive alter-
natives, high local user charges would result in substantial displace-
ment  pressure for  the permanent population and  pressure for  conversion
of seasonal  residences  to  permanent use.  Proportionate  improvements in
water quality would not occur.

     The recommended action  in this EIS  is the  Limited Action Alterna-
tive  (see Figure IV-16).  The alternative would provide:

     •    Site  specific   environmental   and   engineering  analysis  of
          existing on-site systems throughout uie Proposed Service  Area;

     •    Repair and renovation of on-site systems as needed;

-------
FIGURE IV-16   STEUBEN LAKES: LIMITED ACTION ALTERNATIVE

-------
     e    Management  of  the  on-site  systems by  a  Small Waste  Flows
          District; and

     •    Continued  monitoring  of  surface  water  quality  (previously
          undertaken by the Steuben County Health Department)  as well as
          groundwater quality.

Small waste  flow or  cluster  systems will be included  should  the  site-
specific  analyses  of  on-site  systems  and  cost  comparisons  of  local
alternatives indicate their need and cost-effectiveness.

     The present  worth of the recommended action  is  approximately $8.3
million or  36% of  that of the  Facilities Plan Proposed  Action ($23.2
million).   The local capital costs of the recommended action are $177,100
or approximately-1% of the $17.1 million for the Facilities Plan Proposed
Action.   The comparable annual user charges are $50 and $450 per household,
respectively.

     The recommended action would provide a satisfactory solution to the
minimal problems  of  the Study  Area.    It  would be  cost-effective  and
result  in  no significant adverse impacts upon  the  environment or  the
residents of the Study Area.

     If the  recommended action  were accepted by the  applicant  and the
State and  local  jurisdictions,   it  would be  equivalent  to  a  revised
Facilities  Plan Proposed Action.   A  small  waste  flows district  would
need to be  established for  the operation and management of the proposed
on-site and  cluster  systems.   The Steuben Lakes Regional Waste District
(SLRWD)  may  be modified  as legally necessary to function  as  the  small
waste flows  district.   As  part  of  the  Step  I  process,  the  applicant
would need to:

     •'    Certify that  the  project will be constructed and an operation
          and maintenance program established  to meet local,  State, and
          Federal  requirements  including those protecting present  or
          potential underground potable water sources.

     •    Obtain  assurance  (such  as  an easement or covenant) of  un-
          limited  access to  each individual  system at all  reasonable
          times for  such purposes as  inspection,  monitoring,  construc-
          tion, maintenance, operation, rehabilitation, and replacement.
          An option  would satisfy this requirement if it could be exer-
          cised no later than the initiation of construction.

     •    Establish  a  comprehensive program for regulation and inspec-
          tion  of  individual  systems before EPA approves  the  plans and
          specifications.  Planning for this comprehensive program would
          be  completed  as  part  of  the  facilities  plan.  The  program
          would include,  as a  minimum,  periodic testing  of  water from
          existing potable water wells in the area.  Where a substantial
          number of  on-site systems  exist, appropriate additional moni-
          toring of the aquifer(s) would be provided.
                                   iii

-------
     Following  completion of these  steps,  the Applicant  could  proceed
with  Step  II design  of facilities for the  small waste  flows  district.

HISTORY

     The Steuben  Lakes  Regional Waste District, established on February
18, 1976,  completed  a Facilities Plan for disposal  of  the Study Area's
wastewater  in August 1975.  The Facilities  Plan  proposed a centralized
collection  and  treatment system with effluent disposal by spray irriga-
tion as  its solution  to  the following problems it cited:

     •    Most  of  the  existing  septic  tank/soil  absorption  systems
           (ST/SASs)  are  very  old and were  constructed  when  few rules
           governed  their installation.  Also  very  little inspection of
           the construction of these systems  was undertaken.

     •     Some  ST/SASs  in low-lying areas are located below the highest
           groundwater table.   Effluents  from such systems  reach  the
           lakes during periods  of high precipitation.

      •     Some  lots are  too narrow  (40-foot  frontage) to  permit adequate
           separation  of  ST/SASs from shallow wells.

      •     Several areas  of lake pollution from ST/SASs have been identi-
           fied  by  dye  tests   conducted  by the  Steuben  County Health
           Department.   Many other ST/SAS  sources of pollution have not
           been  detected  by such tests.

      •     Many  of the older ST/SASs which cannot meet current standards
           continue  to be used.

 ISSUES OF THIS EIS

      The US  Environmental Protection  Agency's  review  of the Facilities
 Plan  led to  the  Agency's  issuing of a Notice of Intent on July 20, 1977
 to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement.  The  issues set forth in
 that  Notice are as  follows:

      1.    "Cost-Effectiveness.   The  cost  and benefits  of  a regional
           sewage  system should be  compared with those  of subregional
           systems serving existing  high development density area, with
           advanced  on-site treatment for low development  density area."

           The basic premise of  the Facilities Plan  is  that sewage from
           all  sources  within   the  Study Area  should be collected  and
           treated in one  regional  system.   The  resulting total capital
           cost  (excluding connection costs) of the  Facilities Plan Pro-
           posed Action  is approximately $3800 per residence.  This very
           high  cost  may be substantially  reduced  by an approach that
           uses  subregional  systems in  high density areas  such  as  the
           lakeshores   of  Crooked   Lake  and parts  of  Lake  James  and
           Jimmerson Lake  in  combination with decentralized systems for
           the lower density  rural/semi-rural areas.
                                    iv

-------
2.   "Treatment Processes.   Treatment process methods  for  regional
     and subregional plants should be compared."

     The  analysis  of  regional  and  subregional  solutions  should
     include a more comprehensive study of a wider variety of waste
     treatment processes.   Package plants of various types  ought to
     be considered  for small  flows generated in subregional areas.
     Land application by both the slow rate and rapid infiltration
     methods should be examined.   Alternative  and innovative tech-
     nologies should be considered wherever soils and other condi-
     tions make them feasible.

3.   "Sizing.   The cost-effective  capacity of  regional  and  sub-
     regional plants should be examined and compared."

     Population  projections  and per  capita wastewater  flow rates
     need to be  checked to  ensure that  the design  capacities  of
     regional and  subregional  plants  are cost-effective as defined
     in the Rules and Regulations of the US EPA Construction Grants
     Program.   The use of per capita  flows  of 100  gpcd  for both
     permanent  and seasonal  residents  was not  justified  in  the
     Facilities Plan.  As  a  result, residents might be required to
     pay for substantially larger systems than are needed.

4.   "Secondary Impact.  The  induced  growth that  may result from a
     regional  system  compared  with  a  corresponding  subregional
     system,  must  be  evaluated with respect  to  impacts  on water
     quality, wetlands, and community services."

     The availability  of sewers in a regional  system  such as pro-
     posed  in  the Facilities  Plan is often  the source of  signifi-
     cant induced growth in a community.  Such growth could lead to
     the contamination of  surface and ground waters, pressures for
     the development  of wetlands,  and  increased  demand for infra-
     structural   services.    A  trend  towards   the  development  of
     wetlands   is   already visible  on  Snow  Lake,  Lake  James,
     Jimmerson  Lake and Crooked  Lake.   It  is  therefore important
     that regional and subregional  systems be compared for their
     potential  to  create secondary impacts associated with induced
     growth.

5.   "Primary Impacts.   Those   impacts   resulting  directly  from
     project  construction  and  operation  need to  be  further eval-
     uated."

     Steep  slopes exist in many parts of the Proposed  Service area,
     particularly  in  the  east.   Construction  of  sewers and treat-
     ment plants may cause substantial erosion of these  slopes with
     consequent  deterioration  of  water  quality.   The Facilities
     Plan has also  failed to discuss the impacts of construction on
     nearby tamarack bogs which are indicated to be the  habitats of
     two  orchids   on   the  Federal  list  of  threatened   species
     (Plantanthera  flava   and  Plantanthera  leucophaea).    Primary
     impacts such as these need to be further evaluated.

-------
    6.   "Socioeconomic Impacts.  The  impact  of the high local project
         costs,  estimated  at  over  $2,000  per existing  residence,  on
         area  residents,  and its possible role in forcing a shift from
         seasonal to permanent residence must be addressed."

         Capital costs of the Facilities Plan Proposed Action have been
         estimated  at  the  very high  level  of  $3800  per  residence.
         Since it  is  also  likely  that  a  substantial  portion  of the
         costs may be ineligible for Federal  funding,  local costs may
         be  very  high.   Such high  local costs  may result in  both a
         shift from seasonal to permanent  residence and the displace-
         ment  of low, moderate or fixed income  families.  The potential
         for such  impacts needs  to be addressed.

Subsequent  project  studies to resolve these issues uncovered additional
concerns requiring  resolution  or mitigative measures.  These included:

     1.   The  large  non-point  source  phosphorus  plume  originating in
         Marsh Lake  and extending through  the two  Otter  Lakes, Snow
         Lake, and Lake  James.

     2.   The ongoing destruction of wetlands within the Study Area  and
          its  relationship  to  secondary impacts.   Linked with this is
          the  role  of  cut-and-fill  techniques in  creating shoreline
          channels  that  tend to  become sinks  for septic tank effluent
          leachate.

     3.    Location   of numerous  non-point  sources,  notably  literally
          dozens of unofficial  dumps  or landfill areas.

     4.    Management requirements for  operation  of an On-Site Wastewater
          Management District (OSWMD).
ENVIRONMENT

Soils

     Suitable soils for on-site and cluster systems exist in residential
sections throughout the  Study  Area (see Figure II-6).   Among  these  are
the  Boyer  Loamy Sand, the Fox Sandy Loam, the Oshtemo  Loamy  Sand,  and
the Riddles Sandy Loam.  Based on the results of the groundwater quality
survey  (Tri-State  University 1979),  the  area's soils have  been effec-
tively  treating  wastewaters  from  on-site  systems.   The  characteristics
of  the  Oshtemo soils  also  make them  suitable for  land application by
both spray irrigation and rapid infiltration.

Surface Water  Resources

     Crooked Creek  dominates surface  water  drainage in the Study Area
(see Figure  II-8).   One  branch of the creek  flows  south from Michigan
through Big Otter Lake, Snow Lake,  Lake James and then northwest through
Jimmerson  Lake.   Connecting streams  also drain  Seven  Sisters  Lakes,
Marsh Lake, Green Lake and Little Otter Lake through this system.
                                     vi

-------
sx   \    -^
                                                           UNSUITABLE SOILS FOR
                                                                  SEPTIC TANK
                                                                    SYSTEMS
                               r?  ,.;•.;>;
                                             \   I Source: By letter, Arthur
                               	_"° 	' 	      ^         M..~»__  C*_.f1 /^	
                                                           Mumraa, Soil Con-
                                                           servation Service,
                                                           USDA, 21 Dec.  1977
FIGURE  II-6   STEUBEN  LAKES: SOILS MAP

-------
H-
H-
                                                                                                 -ccr^u—•—-j  :\>~  Y*"""---1.-
                                                                                                 .^crSSr?'    V-X-H'^c;
                                                                                                                                                      LF.GF.NI1

                                                                                                                                               • STREAM FLOW GAGF

                                                                                                                                    I     -«	FLOW DIRECTION

                                                                                                                                         '*T .- » "I WETLAND?
                                                                                                                                                 NEW LAKES, WNPS OR
                                                                                                                                                      OTHFR WATER BOPTFS
                                                                                                                                                      NOT ON ORIGINAL
                                                                                                                                                         S HASE MAP
                                                                                                                                                      (F,riC I 070)
                                                                                                                                            fs  -  ClUUC FI'FT TF.R SFCONP
                                                                                                    ~«..1 cfs    \.^.
                                                                                                                                          Sinner:  HSCS I PfcO: FPH".  l<>7
               l''IC|lltr. I I It    STKIIl'.KN I.AKI'.S:  SUKI-'ACF. l-'A'I'l'.K IIV nKHI.IK

-------
Another branch also  flows  in a north-westerly direction through Crooked
Lake, Lake  Gage  and  Lime  Lake to  the Pigeon River.   The  Pigeon River
flows into the St.  Joseph River which discharges into Lake Michigan near
Benton Harbor.  The  area's  lakes  are very scenic  and  attract many sea-
sonal recreational users.

     Nutrient budgets  have been  prepared  for each  of the  major lakes
based upon  data  from the EPA National Eutrophication Survey (NES) 1976,
and  the  Steuben  County  Health Department  1973 to 1977.   In all cases,
tributary  inflow,  precipitation  and  run-off from  non-point  sources
accounted  for most  of  the  total  nutrient   (phosphorus)  loadings  (see
Figure  II-9).   Septic  tank  contributions  to the  total  loading  were
generally  less  than 7%,  except in  Lake  Gage (10%) and  Jimmerson Lake
(21%).  These estimates  of septic tank contributions were  based on NES
assumptions and considered conservatively high.

     The  trophic  status of  the lakes  as  determined by  Dillon's model
(Dillon 1975) is presented in Figure 11-10.  The findings are in general
agreement  with  the  State  of  Indiana's  classification  of the  lakes
(Indiana  Stream  Pollution Control Board 1978-79  305(b) Report).  Marsh
Lake, Little  Otter  Lake,  Big  Otter Lake,  Snow Lake and  Lake James are
eutrophic, while Jimmerson Lake,  Crooked Lake, Lake Gage  and Lime Lake
are mesotrophic.

     A "Septic Snooper"  survey of the lakes  (Kerfoot 1979) located only
65  septic  leachate  groundwater  plumes  and  four stream  source plumes
entering  the  lakes  (see  Figure  11-19).    This  very  small number  of
groundwater plumes  is  an indication that the NES based nutrient loading
of  the  lakes  (all  residences  within  300   feet  of  lakeshore  assumed
contributory) is very  conservatively high.

     The  frequency  of the  plumes  was  directly  related  to the  soils
classification.  The majority  of  the plumes, 41  of 69,  was associated
with moderately  rapid and  rapidly permeable  soils, or occurred in cut
and fill canal regions of uncertain soil types.

     A large  stream source plume, principally of bog-like  organic com-
position,  as  distinct  from wastewater  effluent,  was  found  entering
Little Otter Lake via  the connecting stream from Marsh Lake.  This plume
became progressively less concentrated as it  flowed through Little Otter
Lake,  Big Otter  Lake,  the  lower half  of  Snow  Lake,  finally becoming
dissipated  in the  middle basin of Lake James  (see Figure 11-20).  Asso-
ciated with this  plume was a noticeably high level  of total phosphorus
ranging from 0.096 mg/1 at the entrance to Little Otter Lake to 0.011 at
the discharge from Lake  James to Jimmerson Lake.  Old  sediment dsposits
in Marsh  Lake  from effluent discharges of the Fremont sewage treatment
plant  (east  of Marsh  Lake)  were  indicated as the likely source of the
high phosphorus  concentrations.  While  the  plant no  longer discharges
phosphorus  to  Marsh Lake,  the acidic  leachate  from the extensive bogs
around Marsh  Lake  is  thought to release  phosphorus  from its carbonate
binding in the  Marsh  Lake sediments.   Further studies were  recommended
to  confirm  this   theory.   This and the other stream source plumes were
identified  as  the major  sources  of  phosphorus  to  the lakes surveyed.

-------
3,000 r
                                                                LEGEND

                                                           POINT SOURCE

                                                           NON-POINT  SOURCE  (TRIBUTARIES)
                                                           NON-POINT  SOURCE  (IMMEDIATE
                                                                 DRAINAGE)
                                                           PRECIPITATION


                                                           SEPTIC  TANKS
             MARSH
             LAKE
SNOW
LAKE
LAKE
JAMES
LITTLE
OTTER
 LAKE
                       FIGURE II-9    COMPARISON OF PHOSPHORUS LOADINGS  BY SOURCE
                               CONTRIBUTIONS FOR THE STEUBEN LAKES STUDY AREA

-------
   1.0 C"
            EUTROPHIC
CM
 E
   O.I
   0.01
1  1  I  i  TTI


  MARSH LAKE
     O
                            0SNOW
                             LAKE
                             BIG OTTER
                               LAKE
                                O
                           LAKE JAMES
     O CROOKED LAKE


  O JIMMERSON
      LAKE
      LO                          10.0

                         MEAN DEPTH(METERS)


                  L=AREAL PHOSPHORUS INPUT (g/m2/yr)
                  R=PHOSPHORUS RETENTION COEFFICIENT
                  P= HYDRAULIC FLUSHING RATE (yr"1)
                                      100.0
           FIGURE U.-10   TROPHIC CONDITIONS OF MARSH LAKE,
               SNOW LAKE, BIG OTTER LAKES LAKE JAMES,
             LAKE GAGE, CROOKED LAKE, JIMMERSON LAKE,
                       AND LIME LAKE (1973-1974)
                               XI

-------
X
H'
H-
                                                                                                                                               LEGEND


                                                                                                                                            ERUPTING PLUME


                                                                                                                                            DORMANT PLUME


                                                                                                                                            STREAM SOURCE PLUME


                                                                                                                                            ICE COVER
                                                                                                                                    Source: Kerfoot 1979
            FIGURE 11-19   STEUBEN  LAKES:  SEPTIC LEACHATE PLUME LOCATIONS

-------
X
H-
H-
H-
                                                           EMONT EFFLUENT
                                                               10%
                                                       400         500

                                                  WAVELENGTH (nm)
                                                                                                     POKAGON  STATE  PARK      I 	
                                                                                                                                                   LEGEND


                                                                                                                                                PLUME PATH


                                                                                                                                           ," &i£ BACKGROUND WATER
                                                                                                                                         Source: Kerfoot 1979
             FIGURE II-20   STEUBEN LAKES: LARGE BOG-LIKE  PLUME PATH

-------
     The bacteriological survey of the lakes revealed  very  few  locations
with fecal contamination  shown  by the presence of fecal  coliforms.   The
recommended limit  of 200  fecal  coliform organisms/100 ml was only  ex-
ceeded at three  locations:   the  storm drain outlet on the  western shore
of Lake  Charles, the  stream  entering Big Otter Lake  in the northeast,
and a point on the north shore of the third basin of Crooked  Lake.  Four
other  elevated  concentrations  (^100  organisms/100  ml)  were  found  in
canals  on  the eastern  shore  of  Crooked  Lake and on  the stream  linking
Crooked  Lake  and Lake  Gage.   Appendix C-7 contains  the Kerfoot  study.

     A  supplementary  leachate  survey of  Crooked Lake and Jimmerson Lake
began  in August,  1979.   Thus far the  survey has  shown plume concentra-
tions comparable to or lower than those in the  late 1978  survey.   Plumes
were  concentrated  around  the  identified  channel areas.   Substantial
algal  blooms  were  noted  on Jimmerson Lake-  A'complete report  on this
study will be  initiated in the Final EIS.

Groundwater Resources

     Sand  and gravel units within the 250  to  350  feet thick unconsoli-
dated  glacial drifts  constitute  the  major groundwater  sources  in  the
Study  Area.   Water is generally plentiful and  of good quality, although
hard.   With  few  exceptions,  water table  levels  are  more than  20 feet
below  ground  surface.

     A  ground water quality survey (Tri-State University  Engineering and
Research Center  1979)  of 101 wells  throughout  the Study Area  (Figure
11-21)  showed a high  standard of  bacteriological  and chemical quality,
seemingly  insignificantly affected by more than 50 years of ST/SAS use.
Only  two samples  were positive for  both total and  fecal coliforms —
indicative  of animal  wastes  contamination.  The  fecal  strep  counts in
these  two  samples were very  small (8, 3 per 100 ml) and  the fecal coli-
form  counts  even  smaller (1, 1 per  100  ml) indicating  a  possibly non-
human  source-  Nitrate-nitrogen  levels were in all cases well below the
permissible   10   mg/1  of  US  EPA's  Interim  Primary  Drinking  Water
Standards.    The  maximum  nitrate level  was  2.6  mg/1.   Appendix  C-9
contains the  report of  this study.

Malfunctioning  Septic Tanks

     The Environmental Photographic  Interpretation Center (EPIC), using
a remote  sensing  technique  and   ground  inspection,   located  only  four
surface failures of ST/SASs throughout the Study Area (EPIC 1979).  The
EPIC  study also  provided other pertinent environmental,  geographic, and
hydrologic  data.

Population  and  Land Use

     More  than 75% of the  total  summer  population (22,400)  in 1976 was
seasonal.  The permanent  population was approximately  5,400.  The annual
rate  of growth  of  the  permanent  population  has  increased  from  2.4%
between 1940  and  1970  to  3.8% between  1970  and  1975.   This reflects
national trends  of  more  rapid growth in recreational areas.   Based on
the  projections  of  the Indiana University Bureau of Business Research,
                                 xiv

-------
                       89      88  91
                                                                                                                                LEGEND

                                                                                                                            • SAMPLED WELLS
                                                                                                                     Source: Tri-State Unlver
                                                                                                                             sity 1979
FIGURE 11-21  STEUBEN LAKES: LOCATION OF SAMPLED WELLS

-------
the Study Area's permanent population is  projected  to  increase by 81.6%,
and the seasonal population by  23% by the year 2000.   Income levels  are
moderate in the  Study  Area,  the mean family income in 1970 being  about
10% below Indiana and  National  levels.   Approximately 20% of the  Study
Area's population is 55  years  and older  — a  significant retirement  and
near retirement group.

     Existing land use  is shown in Figure 11-15.  The  Pokagon State Park
and nature  preserves,  the Steuben  County Park,  and the St. James Golf
Course are  the  main  recreational land use areas.   Public and commercial
access to the lakes are provided by 23 boat launches.   Commercial activ-
ity is  found along State Route  127  and  County Route 200 W.  No indus-
trial areas exist or  are planned.   Most  of  the Study  Area  is in  low
density land uses such as agriculture, wetlands,  and open space.

ALTERNATIVES

     Aimed  at  addressing  the  EIS issues  and  questions concerning  the
eligibility of  new  sewers for  Federal funding, 7 new  alternatives were
evaluated  along with  the  Facilities  Plan Proposed Action.  To make it
comparable  with  the  new alternatives,   the   Facilities Plan  Proposed
Action was  modified  by the use of the same design  flows and unit  costs
applied  in those  alternatives.   The  new  alternatives   incorporated
alternative collection systems   (pressure  sewers),  treatment techniques
(land  application,  individual  and  multifamily septic systems  (cluster
systems), and water conservation, (see Table IV-1).

Limited Action Alternative

     On-site  systems  throughout  the  Study Area would be repaired  and
rehabilitated  on the  basis  of  findings  of site specific  environmental
and  engineering surveys.  Cluster  systems would be  used where deemed
necessary  and  cost-effective.   A Small  Waste  Flows  District  would be
established to manage  the systems.

EIS Alternative 1

     Wastes from Snow Lake  would  be collected  and  treated  by  rapid
infiltration at  a site northeast of the lake.   Wastes  from the  lakeshore
areas  of  Crooked  Lake,  Lake  James,  Jimmerson  Lake,  Lake  Gage,  Lake
Sylvan  and  Lime Lake would be  similarly  collected  and treated  by  rapid
infiltration at a  site north of Bell Lake.  Recovery wells at  both land
application sites would recover 75% of the renovated  effluent  and dis-
charge it to Crooked Creek.  Cluster and  on-site systems would  serve  the
remainder of the Proposed Service Area (see Figure  IV-4).

EIS Alternative 2

     This  alternative  differs  from  EIS Alternative 1 only by the use of
on-site and cluster systems for lakeshore areas of  Lake Gage, Lime  Lake,
Lake  Sylvan,  Snow  Lake  and a  portion  of  western Jimmerson Lake  (see
Figure IV-6).
                                 xvi

-------
                                                  LEGEND
H-
H-
                                            RESIDENTIAL
                                            MOBILE HOME PARK
                                            GENERAL BUSINESS AMD COMMERCIAL
                                            PARK OR RECREATIONAL
                                            AGRICULTURAL OR OPEN
                                         *  BOAT LAUNCHES
                                                                                                                                            ?000     1OOO
                                                                                                                                 Source: Srhellie Assoc.  INC.
                                                                                                                                         196R; EPIC 1979
                    11-15   STEIIBEN LAKES: EXISTING  LAND  VSK

-------
                                                                                          Table IV-]

                                                                          ALTERNATIVES  -  SUMMARY OF MAJOR COMPONENTS
Alternative
Facilities
Plan
Proposed
Act ion
Limited
Action
E1S
Alternative
1
Centralized
Treatment
Aerated lagoon/land application
system serving entire Proposed
Service Area
No
Oxidation ditch/land application
systems serving:
Treatment Plant
Siting
Millgrove Township
Sections 23 4 24
No

Effluent Disposal
Land application by spray
irrigation with recovery
of renovated wastewater
and discharge to Crooked
Creek
No

On-Lot &
Cluster Systems
No
Repair and replacement of on-site systems
throughout the Proposed Service Area

Alternative
Collection Method
Use of pressure sewer/septic
tank effluent pumping (STEP)
system in steep lakeshore
areas
No

EIS
Alternative
2
                          Second
      Basins
    Lake James—Middle & Lower
      Basins
    Jimnierson Lake—Lower East,
      Southeast Shores, and
      portion of West Shore
    Lake Gage, Lake Sylvan, and
      Lime Lake

b.  Snow Lake
Oxidation ditch/land application
system serving:

    Crooked Lake—First & Second
      Basins
    Lake James—Middle & Lower
      Basins
    Jimmerson Lake—Lower East,
      Southeast Shores
                                                             Millgrove Township
                                                             Section  25
                                                         b.
                                                             Jamestown Township
                                                             Section  22
Millgrove Township
Section 25
                                                                     Land application by
                                                                     rapid  infiltration
                                                                     with recovery of
                                                                     renovated wastewater
                                                                     and discharge to Bell
                                                                     Lake Ditch
                                                                 b.  Land application by
                                                                     rapid infiltration
                                                                     with recovery of
                                                                     renovated wastewater
                                                                     and discharge to
                                                                     Crooked Creek

                                                                 Land application by rapid
                                                                 infiltration with recovery
                                                                 of renovated wastewater
                                                                 and discharge to Bell Lake
                                                                 Ditch
                                                           On-lot and cluster systems serving
                                                           remainder of Proposed Service Area
On-lot and cluster systems serving
remainder of Proposed Service Area
                                                                                                                                                                    tank effluent  pumping  (STEP)
                                                                                                                                                                    system  in steep  lakeshore
                                                                                                                                                                    areas served by  the central
                                                                                                                                                                    collection systems
Use of pressure sewer/STEP
system in steep lakeshore
areas served by the central
collection system

-------
                                                                                    Table IV-1 (Continued)
Alternative
E1S
Alternative
3
                            Centralized
                             Treatment
Contact stabilization/mixed
media filtration plant serving:
    Crooked Lake—First & Second
      Basins
    Lake James—Middle & Lower
      Basins
    .1 i minor so L\ Lake—Lower East,
      Southeast Shores
                                          Treatment Plant
                                              Siting
Jamestown Township
Section 29
                                                                                       Effluent Disposal
Discharge to Crooked Creek
                                                                           On-Lot &
                                                                        Cluster Systems
On-lot and cluster systems serving
remainder of Proposed Service Area
                                                                                          Alternative
                                                                                       Collection Method
Use of pressure sewer/STEP
system in steep lakeshore
areas served by the central
collection systems
                  Oxidation  ditch/land application
                  systems  serving:
                  a .   Jimmurson Lake--port ion  of
                        West Shore
                       Lake Gage, Lake Sylvan,  and
                        Lime Lake
                  b.   Snow Lake
                                                         b.
                                           Mil1 grove Township
                                           Section 25
                                                             Jamestown Township
                                                             Section  22
                              Land application by
                              rapid infi11 ration
                              with recovery of
                              renovated wastewater
                              and discharge to Bell
                              Lake Ditch
                              Land application by
                              rapid infiltration
                              with recovery of
                              renovated wastewater
                              and discharge to
                              Crooked Creek
E1S
Alternative
4
ELS
Alternative
5
Contact stabilization/mixed
media  filtration plant serving:
    Croo' ed Lake—First 6. Second
       Basins
    Lake Jj«ies--Middle & Lower
       Basins
    Jimmersoi! Lake—Lower East,
       Southea^ t Shores

Oxidation ditch/land application
systems serving:
a.  Lake James—Middle & Lower
       Hasina
    Jimmerson Lake—Lower East,
       Southeast Shores and
       portion of West Shore
    Lake Gage, Lake Sylvan, and
       Lime Lake
b.  Crooked Lake—First & Second
       Basins
Jamestown Township
Section 29
                                                                                   Discharge to Crooked Creek
                                                             Millgrove Township
                                                             Section 25
                                                         b.  Pleasant Township
                                                             Section 19
                              Land application by
                              rapid infiltration
                              with recovery of
                              renovated wastewater
                              and discharge to Bell
                              Lake Ditch

                              Land application by
                              rapid infiltration
                              with recovery of
                              renovated wastewater
                              and discharge to
                              Cheeseboro Lake
                                 On-lot and cluster systems serving
                                 remainder of proposed Service  Area
                                                           On-lot and cluster systems serving
                                                           remainder of Proposed Service Area
                                                Use of pressure sewer/STEP
                                                system in steep lakeshore
                                                areas served by the central
                                                collection systems
                                                                                 Use of pressure sewer/STEP
                                                                                 system in steep lakeshore
                                                                                 areas served by the central
                                                                                 collection systems

-------
                                                             Table  1V-1  (Concluded)
Alternative
E1S
Alternative
5 (Cont'd.)
EIS
Alternative
6
Central ized
Treatment
c. Snow Lake
Contact stabilization/mixed
media filtration plant serving:
Trea t men t P Ian t On-Lo t &
Siting Effluent Disposal Cluster Systems
c. Jamestown Township c. Land application by
Section 22 rapid infiltration
with recovery of
and discharge to
Crooked Creek
On-lot and cluster systems serving.
remainder of Proposed Service Area
Alternative
Collection Method

Use of pressure sewer/STEP
system in steep lakeshore
areas served by the central
  Basins
Jiiiimerson Lake—Lower East,
  Southeast Shores
Crooked Lake—First & Second
  Basins
                                   a.  Jamestown Township    a.  Discharge to Crooked
                                       Section 29                Creek
                                                                                                           collection systems
b.  Pleasant Township
    Section 9
b.  Discharge to Crooked
    Lake

-------
                   LAND APPLICATION
                         RAPID -->._..
                     INFILTRATION^
                                                                                                                                 LEGEND


                                                                                                                             LIFT STATION


                                                                                                                             PRESSURE SEWER


                                                                                                                             FORCE MAIN


                                                                                                                             GRAVITY SEWER
                                                                                                                             ON-S1TE AND CLUSTER
                                                                                                                                  SYSTEMS
FIGURE IV-4   STEUBEN LAKES:  EIS  ALTERNATIVE 1

-------
                                                                           £=^*fe3RS  '
                                                                                       F\     \ e s,-i
                                                                                       v?g
                  LAND APPLICATION

              L„ RAPID INFILTRATIOIlx;x
                                                                                                                        LEGEND




                                                                                                                     LIFT STATION




                                                                                                                     PRESSURE SEWER




                                                                                                               	FORCE MAIN




                                                                                                                     GRAVITY SEWER
                                                •   '             / /S^<-	^V—
                                                ••..1              /CftS^«5»^SS\W
l-ICURE I-V-6   -STEUBKN I^KES:  E1S ALTERNATIVE 2

-------
EIS  Alternative 3

     This  alternative  only  differs  from EIS Alternative 1 by providing
conventional contact stabilization  treatment and  a  discharge to Crooked
Creek for wastes from Crooked Lake,  Lake James  and Jimmerson  (see Figure
IV-9).

EIS  Alternative 4

     This  alternative  is  similar  to  EIS  Alternative 3,  except that
bn-site  and  cluster  systems  would  serve  those areas  designated for
central  collection followed by  rapid infiltration  (see Figure IV-11).

EIS  Alternative 5

     This  alternative  varies EIS Alternative 1 by  providing a  separate
collection and treatment (rapid infiltration) system  for Crooked  Lake.
The  new  rapid infiltration  site  for  this lake area is northeast  of
Cheesboro  Lake (see Figure  IV-13).

EIS Alternative 6

     This  alternative  is similar to EIS Alternative 4 except that  sepa-
rate systems would serve the major collection areas  around Crooked  Lake,
and  those  around Lake  James  and  Jimmerson Lake  (see  Figure IV-15),

Costs

      Project   costs  of  all  alternatives  are  summarized  in  Table  IV-2.
Based  on  total present worth,  the  Limited  Action alternative is  the
cost-effective solution.   Generally  the  costs increase with the  extent
of sewering provided in  the alternatives.  Thus, the more decentralized
alternatives  EIS Alternatives 2 and 4  are less  costly  (present  worth)
than the EIS  Alternatives  1,  3  and 5 which are in  turn less costly than
the  totally sewered Facilities  Plan  Proposed  Action.  The  exception  to
this rule is  EIS Alternative  6  which is marginally more costly than EIS
Alternative 1  despite  the greater extent of sewering in the latter.  The
service  of the major  sewered  areas  in  EIS  Alternative 6  by two systems
instead  of one is probably  the source of  the higher costs.

•Implementation

      Implementation  of  the recommended Limited Action Alternative would
require  the establishment  of a  Small  Waste  Flows  District.  The func-
tions  of such  a district are discussed  in Chapter III.

      Indiana   presently  has no  legislation which  explicitly authorizes
governmental   entities  to manage wastewater facilities other than those
connected  to   conventional  collection  systems.    However,  statutes  in
Michigan,  Minnesota,  and Wisconsin  have been interpreted as providing
counties,   townships,  villages,   cities,  and  special  purpose districts
with  sufficient  powers  to manage  decentralized  facilities  (Otis   and
Stewart  1976).  It is  thought likely that  the enabling legislation  for
the  establishment  of  the  Steuben  Lakes Regional  Waste  District, also
                                  xxiii

-------
                                                                                                        APPLICATION
                                                                                                        RAPID
                                                                                                        INFILTRATION
    —  LAND   v
•?"">   APPLICATION.
        RAPID    '*
     INFILTRATION
                                                            WASTEWATER
                                                             TREATMENT'
                                                               PLANT


                                                                                                                                      LEGEND

                                                                                                                                    LIFT STATION

                                                                                                                                    PRESSURE SEWER

                                                                                                                                    FORCE MAIN

                                                                                                                                    GRAVITY SEWER
                                                                                                                                •A^'\ ON-SITE AND CLUSTER
                                                                                                                                         SYSTEMS

KIUUKK  IV-9   STKUBEN LAKES:  E1S ALTERNA'I'IVE

-------
                                                        WASTEWATER
                                                         TREATMENT
                                                          PLANT

                                                            *
                                                                                                                               LEGEND


                                                                                                                             LIFT STATION


                                                                                                                             PRESSURE SEWER


                                                                                                                             FORCE MAIN


                                                                                                                             GRAVITY SEWER
                                                                                                                            ON-SITE  AND  CLUSTER
                                                                                                                                  SYSTEMS
FIGUKK IV-I1  STEUBEN LAKES: EIS ALTERNATIVE

-------
                                                                                                      RAPID INFILTRATION
                    LAND APPLICATION
                          RAPID
                       INFILTRATION
                                                                                       _- ^*-'Y :~1^==
                                                                                       r^rJ "^    rf ,  -
   LAND
APPLICATION
IV-13    STF.UBF.N  I.AKRR:
         AI.TKRNATIVK
                                         V)    RAPID INFILTRATION

-------
H-
                                                                         WASTEWATER
                                                                         »TREATMENT
                                                                            PLANT  '
                                                                                                                                                     LEGEND


                                                                                                                                                  LIFT STATION


                                                                                                                                                  PRESSURE SEWER


                                                                                                                                                  FORCE MAIN


                                                                                                                                                  GRAVITY SEWER
                                                                                -—  V«\-^~ j=-—*-c=r^-'r   i    Hjt^ii.10 ,  ^
                         15    STEUBliN LAKKS:  EIS  ALTERNATIVE 6

-------
                                                                            Table  IV-2

                                                              COST-EFFECTIVE ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES
                                               FACILITIES  PLAN
                                               PROPOSED  ACTION      EIS  1        EIS  2        EIS 3        EIS 4        EIS 5        EIS 6
                                                                                                LIMITED
                                                                                                ACTION
         Present  Project  Cost
           (x$l,000)
20,839.8
17,640.2     17,620.3     18,058.3     17,571.7      18.210.3      17,801.6       1,967.
H-
H-
         Future  Project Construction  Costs
           (x$1.000/yr)
                                                     125.6
                                                                      185.1
                                                                                  212.8        185.1        212.8        185.1
                                                                                     212.6
                                                                                                4,751.1
                                                                                                (1990)
        Total Present Worth
           (x$l,000)
23,166.8         19,874.4     18,951.4     21,212.4     19,663.1     20,485.3     19,999.4      8,268.7
        Average Annual Equivalent Costs
          (x$l,000)
 2,124.4
 1,822.5       1,737.8      1,945.2       1,803.1  -    1,878.5      1,833.9
                                                                                                  758.2

-------
provides this authority  (by  telephone,  Mr.  Joseph Karen,  Indiana  Stream
Pollution Control Board,  September 25,  1978).

     California  and  Illinois,  to resolve  interagency  conflicts  or to
authorize access to private properties  for inspection and  maintenance of
wastewater facilities, have  passed  legislation  specifically  intended to
facilitate  management  of  decentralized  facilities.   These  laws  are
summarized in Appendix J-2.

IMPACTS  OF THE ALTERNATIVES

     Five major  categories  of impacts  were  relevant in  the selection of
an alternative.  These categories included:   surface water; groundwater;
environmentally  sensitive areas;  population  and  land  use;  and  socio-
economics.

Surface  Water

     Implementation  of the  No  Action Alternative  would  result  in in-
creased  phosphorus  loadings  of up  to  24% in  the lakes.  The Limited
Action,  all  EIS  Alternatives and the  Facilities Plan Proposed  Action
would  generally cause relatively  small  impacts  on  phosphorus  loading,
None  of these  impacts  is expected to be large enough  to significantly
alter  the trophic  status of  any of the  lakes.   Predicted  changes in
phosphorus loadings are listed in Table V-l.

Groundwater

     No significant primary or secondary impacts on groundwater  quantity
would  result  from implementation of any of the alternatives because of
the  relatively  small quantities of water involved.   Impacts on groundT
water  quality  are also expected to be insignificant  in all  cases based
on  the effective  treatment  provided by  soils  for more  than 50  years.

Environmentally Sensitive Areas

     No  significant  impacts are expected from  any  of the alternatives,
on  floodplains,  prime  agricultural  lands  and  unique  natural  areas.
Minor  to  moderate impacts  on steep slopes by  the  Facilities Plan  Pro-
posed  Action,   and the  EIS  Alternatives  1 to 6 may be controlled by
enforcement  of  a strengthened  zoning  ordinance.   The  present  inade-
quately  controlled  channelling  and filling  of  lakeshore wetlands may
continue  at  essentially  the same  level  under all  alternatives  unless,
appropriate  legislation  is  implemented  and  enforced.  While  the No
Action and Limited Action Alternatives  would involve no  Federal  aid to
future residential development  of, filled wetlands, the sewered  alterna-
tives  could  easily provide service to such areas from  Federally  funded
facilities.   Federal  funding  of the  sewered  alternatives may  be  in
violation  of  Presidential  Executive  Order  11990  which  specifically
limits participation in projects directly or indirectly resulting  in the
destruction of wetlands.
                                 xxix

-------
                                              TABLE V-l
                          Comparison of Phosphorus Leading of Alternatives
                        In The Year 2000 With The Average Present  Conditions
Lake
Crooked
Gage
Lime
Little Otter
Big Otter
Snow*
James
Jimmerson
9%
5%
24%
^
<1"
17%
1%
2%
No
Action
increase
increase
increase
increase
increase
decrease
increase
increase
Limited
Action
1% increase
<1% increase
2% increase
No change
No change
17% decrease
No change
No change
Facility Plan
Proposed Action
7% decrease
10% decrease
3% decrease
27, decrease
4% decrease
20% decrease
5% decrease
21% decrease
EIS
1, 3, 5
7% decrease
10% decrease
3% decrease
No change
No change
20% decrease
'5% decrease
3% decrease
EIS
2, 4, 6
7% decrease
5% increase
3% decrease
No change
No change
17% decrease
5% decrease
3% decrease
*Decrease of 17% in all alternatives due to the Pokagon State Park's
 tertiary treatment plant which became operational in May 1979.

-------
Population and Land Use

     It is  estimated that the  Facilities Plan Proposed Action and EIS
Alternatives 1 to  6  would all permit a 9%  increase  in population  above
the  standard population projections  because of the planned  sewering  in
them.  No induced  growth would  be expected from the Limited Action and
No Action Alternatives.

     All  alternatives  would  result  in  the   conversion  of  relatively
insignificant  area of  land  to  residential uses  —  the  No Action  or
Limited Action  Alternatives  in  600  acres,  and each of the  sewered and
partially sewered  alternatives  in 420 acres  of conversion.  Agricul-
tural,  forests  and  cleared  lands would  be the sources  of these con-
versions.   No wetlands would  be converted.

Economic Impacts

     Annual user charges  (see Table V-4) are much higher for the sewered
and  partially  sewered alternatives ($250  to $450)  than for  the Limited
Action  Alternative ($50). The  Facilities Plan Proposed Action and the
more  centralized  EIS Alternatives 1,  3  and 5 would  place  the highest
financial burdens  and displacement pressures  on householders (see  Table
V-6).   The  more  decentralized  EIS Alternatives 2,  4 and 6  would result
in intermediary levels of impacts.  The Limited Action  Alternative  would
be a financial burden to  only 2 to 5% of the householders with displacer
ment pressures on  less than 2 percent.
                                   xxxi

-------
                                   Table V-4

                              ANNUAL USER CHARGES

ALTERNATIVE                                               ANNUAL USER CHARGE

Facilities Plan Proposed Action                                 $450

EIS Alternative #1                                              $320

ETS Alternative //2                                              $230

EIS Alternative #3                                              $340
        T ,
EIS Alternative //4                                              $240

EIS Alternative #5                                              $340

EIS Alternative #6                                              $250

Limited Action Alternative                                      $ ^Q
                                     xxxii

-------
                                   Table  V-6

                  FINANCIAL BURDEN AND DISPLACEMENT PRESSURE
  ALTERNATIVE
DISPLACEMENT
  PRESSURE
FINANCIAL
 BURDEN
 CAN
AFFORD
Facilities Plan
Proposed Action
   10-20%
 40-50%
50-60%
EIS Alternative //I
   10-20%
 20-30%
EIS AJternative #2
EIS Altf-rnativi- //3
EIS Alternative #4
EIS Alternative #5
EIS Alternative //6
5-10%
10-20%
5-10%
10-20%
5-10%
20-30%
30-40%
20-30%
30-40%
20-30%
                                           70-80%
                                           60-70%
                                           70-80%
                                          60-70%
                                          70-80%
Limited Action
Alternative
                        2-5%
                    95-98%
                                       xxxiii

-------
                            CONTENTS
Summary	•	      *•
List of Tables	'.  .  .  .    xlii
List of Figures	    xliii
Symbols and Abbreviations	    xlv

I.   INTRODUCTION	    1

     A.   Background	    1

          1.   Location	•    1
          2.   History of the Construction Grant Application  .    1
          3.   Facilities Plan	    6

               a.   Existing Wastewater Treatment
                    Facilities 	    6
               b.   Existing Problems	    8
               c.   Facilities Plan's Alternatives and
                    Proposed Action	    8

                    Design Parameters	    8
                    Alternatives 	    10
                    Facilities Plan Proposed Action	    11

     B.   Issues of This EIS	    11

          1.   Cost Effectiveness	    11
          2.   Treatment Processes 	    11
          3.   Sizing	    16
          4.   Secondary Impacts	    16
          5.   Primary Impacts	    16
          6.   Socioeconomic Impacts 	    16

     C.   National Perspective on the Rural Sewering
          Problem	    17

          1.   Socioeconomics	    17
          2.   Secondary Impacts 	    20
          3.   The Need for Management of Decentralized
               Alternative Systems 	    20
          4.   Relationship to Other EIS's Prepared by
               US EPA Region V	    21

     D.   Purpose and Approach of the EIS and Criteria
          for  Evaluation of Alternatives  	    22

          1.   Purpose	    22
          2.   Approach	    23
                                     xxxiv

-------
              a.   Review of Available Data	      23
              b.   Documentation of Need  for Action	      23
              c.   Segment Analysis	  .      24
              d.   Review of Wastewater Design Flows  ....      24
              e.   Development  of Alternatives  ....'...      24
              f.   Estimation of Costs of Alternatives  ...      24
              g.   Evaluation of Alternatives	      25

          3.   Major  Criteria for Evaluation of
              Alternatives  	      25

              a.   Cost	      25
              b.   Significant  Environmental and
                   Socioeconomic Impacts  	  ....      25
              c.   Reliability	      26
              d.   Flexibility	      26

          4.   Public Participation  	      26

              a.   Public Information and Participation
                   Meeting	      26
              b.   Newspaper Articles	      27
              c.   Steuben  County Lakes Council
                   Magazine	      27
              d.   EIS Newsletter	      27
              e.   Workshop and Citizens  Advisory
                   Committee	      27

II.   ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING	      29

     Introduction 	      29
     A.    Physical Setting	      29

          1.   Physiography	      29
          2.   Geology	      30
          3.   Soils	      35

              a.   General	      35
              b.   Suitability  for  Septic Tank
                   Absorption Fields	  .      35
              c.   Suitability  for  Land Application	      37
              d.   Prime Agricultural Lands.  ...  	      40

          4.   Atmosphere	      40

              a.   Climate	      40
              b.   Noise	      44
              c.   Odors	      44
              d.   Air Quality	      45

     B.    Water  Resources	      45

          1.   Surface Water	      45
                                    xxxv

-------
D.



2.



3.






4.
a. Surface Water Hydrology 	
b. Surface Water Quality .... 	
c. Surface Water Use and
Classification 	
Groundwater Resources 	
a. Groundwater Hydrology 	
b. Groundwater Quality 	
c. Groundwater Use 	
Water Quality Management 	
a. Clean Water Act 	
b. Federal Agency Responsibilities
for Study Area Waters 	
c. State Responsibilities in the Steuben
Lakes Study Area 	
d. Local Responsibilities 	
Flood Hazard Areas 	
Biotic Resources 	
1.


2.
3.


4.
5.




Aquatic Biology 	
a. Aquatic Vegetation 	
b. Fishes. .... 	
Shoreline Algae and Aquatic Weed Growth. . . .
Wetlands 	
a. Overview 	
b. Study Area 	
Terrestrial Biology 	
Threatened and Endangered Species 	
a. Mammals 	
b. Birds 	
c. Plants 	
d. Other 	
Population and Socioeconomics 	
1.



Population 	
a. Introduction 	
b. Existing Population ....
c. Population Projections. . . .
45
51

55
55
55
56
56
58
58

59

61
63
63
65
65
65
66
69
71
71
72
73
73
73
74
74
75
75
75
75
75
78
                             XXXVI

-------
                                                                Page

          2.    Characteristics  of  the  Population	     80

               a.    Permanent Population	,     $0
               b.    Seasonal Population  	     83

          3.    Housing	     83
          4.    Land  Use	     84

               a.    Existing Land  Use	,  .     84
               b.    Future  Land Use	     87
               c.    Growth  Management	     8,9

          5.    Fiscal  Characteristics	•	     92
          6..   Historical and Archaeological  Resources.  ...     93

     E-    Existing Systems  and  Need  for Action	     93

          1.    .Types of  Systems	     93
          2.    Status  of Systems	     93
          3.    Special Studies	     98

               a.    "Investigation of  Septic  Leachate
                    Discharges  into  Steuben Lakes,
                    Indiana"  (William  Kerfoot 1979)  .  .  ,  .  r     98
               b.    "Environmental Analysis and Resource
                    Inventory  for  Steuben Lakes,  Indiana"
                    (EPIC  1979)	    104
               c.    "Investigation of  Well Water  Quality
                    Within  the  Steuben County Regional Waste
                    District"  (Tri-State  University
                    Engineering and  Research  Center  1979)  .  .    10$

          4.    Need  for  Action	    108

               a.    Public  Health  Problems	    108
               b.    Water Quality  Problems	    109
               c.    Other Problems	    109
               d.    Conclusions	,  .  .    109

III.  DEVELOPMENT OF  ALTERNATIVES	    Ill

     A.    Introduction	    Ill

          1.    General Approach 	     Ill
          2.    Comparability of Alternatives: Design
               Population	     112
          3.    Comparability of Alternatives: Flow  and
      :         Waste Load Projections  	     112
                                   xxxvli

-------
                                                            Page

B.   Components and Options .............. ,    115

     1.   Flow and Waste Reduction ...........    115

          a.   Residential Flow Reduction Devices.  .  . .    115
          b.   Indiana Ban on Phosphorus ........    118
     2.   Collection ..................
     3.   Wastewater Treatment .............     121

          a.   Centralized Treatment—Discharge to
               Surface Water ..............     121
          b.   Centralized Treatment—Land' Disposal.  .  ,     123
          c.   Decentralized Treatment and Disposal.  .  .     125

     4.   Effluent Disposal ...............     127

          a.   Reuse ..................     127
          b.   Discharge to Surface Waters .......     127
          c.   Land Application.  ... ..... ....     128

     5.   Sludge Handling and Disposal .........     128

C.   Flexibility of Components .... ..... ,  .  .  .     129

     1.   Transmission and Conveyance ..........     129
     2.   Conventional Wastewater Treatment .......     129

          a'i   Oxidation Ditch .............     130
          b.   Contact Stabilization  ..........     130

     3'.   On-Site Septic Systems ............     130
     4.   Land Application ...............     131

D.   Reliability of Components .............     132

     1.   Sewers ....................     132
     2.   Centralized Treatment .............     133
     3.   On-Site Treatment ...............     134
     4.   Cluster Systems ................     134

E.   Implementation ................  ,         135

     1.   Centralized Districts .......  ,...,.     135

          a.   Authority ......... ,  ......     135
          b. , a Managing Agency ............  ;     135
          c.   Financing ............  r           135
          d.   User Charges .....  . .....  ....     136
                                 xxxviii

-------
                                                                 Page

          2.    Small Waste Flows Districts	     137

               a.    Authority	     137
               b.    Management	     137
               c.    Financing	,  ,	     141
               d.    User Charges	     141

IV.   ALTERNATIVES	     143

     A.   Approach	     147

     B.   Alternatives	     143

          1.    No  Action	     143
          2.    Facilities Plan Proposed Action	     147
          3.    EIS Alternative 1	     }47
          4.    EIS Alternative 2	     150
          5.    EIS Alternative 3	     150
          6.    EIS Alternative 4	     150
          7.    EIS Alternative 5	     159
          8.    EIS Alternative 6	     159
          9.    Limited Action	     159

     C.   Flexibility of Alternatives 	     166

          1.    Facilities Plan Proposed Action.  ,	     166
          2.    EIS Alternative 1	     166
          3.    EIS Alternative 2	     166
          4.    EIS Alternative 3	     166
          5.    EIS Alternative 4	     167
          6.    EIS Alternative 5	     167
          7.    EIS Alternative 6	     167
          8.    Limited Action	     167

     D.   Costs of Alternatives	f  .  .  .  .     167

V.   IMPACTS	     171

     A.   Impacts  on Surface Water Quality	     171

          1.    Primary Impacts	     171

               a.    Analysis of Eutrophication Potential,  .  .     171
               b.    Bacterial Contamination 	     173
               c.    Non-Point Source Loads	     174

          2.    Secondary Impacts. 	     174

     B.   Groundwater Impacts	     174

          1.    Groundwater Quantity Impacts	, .  .. .     174
          2.    Groundwater Quality Impacts	     175
          3.    Mitigative Measures	     178


                                     xxxix

-------
D.

Population and Land Use 	 	
1. Introduction 	
2. Population 	
3. Land Use 	
4. Changes in Community Composition and
Character 	
Encroachment on Environmentally Sensitive Areas . .
1. Floodplains 	
a. Primary Impacts 	 ' 	
b. Secondary Impacts 	
c. Mitigative Measures 	
2. Steep Slopes 	
a. Primary Impacts 	
b. Secondary Impacts 	 . 	
c. Mitigative Measures ..,...,.,..
3. Wetlands 	 , . .
a. Primary Impacts 	
b. Secondary i Impacts 	 	
c. Mitigative Measures 	
4. Prime Agricultural Lands , , . , 	
a. Primary Impacts 	
b. Secondary Impacts ..... 	
c. Mitigative Measures ... 	
5. Unique Natural Areas 	 . 	
a. Primary Impacts 	
b. Secondary Impacts 	 ...
c. Mitigative Measures 	
Economic Impacts 	
1 . Introduction 	
2. User Charges 	 ,
a. Eligibility 	
b. Calculation of User Charges . .
Page
178
178
180
181

182
'1
182
182
182
183
183
183
183
183
183
184
184
184
184
184
184
185
185
185
185
185
185
186
186
186
186
188
          Local Cost Burden.
                                                            190
                                 xl

-------
                                                                 Page

               a.   Significant Financial Burden	    190
               b.   Displacement Pressure 	    190
               c.   Conversion Pressure	    192

          4.   Mitigative Measures	    192

     F.   Narrative Matrix, 	    193

VI.  SELECTION OF THE RECOMMENDED ACTION	    197

     A.   Introduction.	    197
     B.   Selection of Recommended Alternative	    197

          1.   Selection Procedure	    197
          2.   Conclusions	    201

     C.   Recommended Alternative 	    202

          1.   Description.	    202
          2.   Implementation	,   .    202

               a.   Replacement of Septic Tanks and
                    Soil Absorption Systems 	    202
               b.   Completion of Step 1 (Facilities
                    Planning) Requirements for the Small
                    Waste Flows District	    204
               c.   Scope of Step 2 for the Small Waste
                    Flows District	    204
               d.   Compliance With State and Local
                    Standards in the Small Waste Flows
                    District	    204
               e.   Ownership of On-Site Systems Serving
                    Seasonal Residences ...........    205

VII.  ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE RECOMMENDED ACTION.   .    207

     A.   Unavoidable Adverse Impacts  	    207
     B.   Incompatibility with State and Local Codes  ....    207
     C.   Relationship Between Short-Term Use and Long-
          Term Productivity	    207

          1.   Short-Term Use of the Study Area	    207
          2.   Impacts on Long-Term Productivity. ......    208

               a.   Commitment of Non-Renewable
                    Resources	    208
               b.   Limitations on Beneficial Use of the
                    Environment ....... 	    208
                                    icli

-------
     D.    Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment
          of Resources	    208

GLOSSARY	    209

REFERENCES	    225
                                  xlii

-------
                                  Tables
T-l       Facilities Plan-Present Worth Values for Treatment
            Alternatives  	    12

II-.I      Interpretation of Soil Physical and Hydraulic Properties
            to be Considered in the Development of Land Applica-
            tion Systems	    39
IT-2      Prime Agricultural Lands of Steuben County  	    41
II-3      Climatological Summaries for the Steuben Lakes Regional
            Waste District	    A3
II-4      Air Quality Summaries for Locations in Indiana  	    46
II-5      Physical Characteristics of Marsh Lake,  Little Otter
            Lake, Big Otter Lake, Snow Lake, Lake James,
            Jimmerson Lake, Crooked Lake, Lake Gage, Lime Lake  .  F    48
II-6      Water Budgets for Marsh Lake, Crooked Lake, and
            Lake James	    50
II-7      Permanent and Seasonal Population in the Proposed
            Service Area, 1976	    77
II-8      Estimated Population of the Steuben Proposed Service
            Area, 1975, and Projected Population,  2000	    79
II-9      Per Capita Income, 1969 and 1974	    81
11-10     Employment by Industry, 1970	    82
11-11  '  .Existing and Projected Dwelling Units Within the
            Proposed Service Area, 1975 and 2000	    85
11-12     Residential Development Restrictions  	    90
11-13     Steuben Lakes Regional Waste District Average Lot Sizes ,    95
11-14     Housing Densities and Lot Sizes in Study Area	    99
11-15.     Steuben Lakes:  Distribution of Leachate Plumes 	   102
III-l     Estimated Savings With Flow Reduction Devices 	   116
III-2     Effect of Phosphorus Ban Upon Wastewater Treatment  .  .  .   119
III-3     Small Waste Flow Management Functions by Operational
            Component and by Basic and Supplemental Usage 	   139

IV-1      Alternatives — Summary of Major Components 	   144
IV-2      Cost-Effective Analysis of Alternatives 	   169
V-l       Comparison of Phosphorus Loading of Alternatives in
            the Year 200 with the Average Present Conditions ....   172
V-2       Steuben Lakes Wastewater Recharge to Groundwater in
            Year 2000	176
V-3       Effluent Quality Comparison for Land Treatment and
            AWT, Systems	*   179
V-4  ,.     Annual User Charges	187
V-5       Local Share of Capital Costs  	   189
V-6       Financial Burden and Displacement Pressure  	   191

VI-1     * Alternative Selection Matrix  	   198
                                   xliii

-------
                                  Figures

                                                                     Page

1-1       Location of Steuben Lakes  Study  Area   	  ,    2
1-2       Steuben Lakes:   Study Area  	    3
1-3       Steuben Lakes:   Proposed Service Area  	  .....    4
1-4       Steuben Lakes:   Existing Wastewater Treatment  Facilities   .    7
1-5       Steuben Lakes:   Facilities Plan  Proposed  Action  	    9
1-6       Monthly Cost of Gravity Sewers	19

II-l      Steuben Lakes:   Topography  	   31
11-2      Steuben Lakes:   Contour Lines Showing  the Thickness  of
            the Glacial Drift	32
II-3      Steuben Lakes:   Unconsolidated Surficial  Deposits  	   33
II-4.      Steuben Lakes:   Bedrock Geology  	   34
II-5      Steuben Lakes:   Bedrock Topography  	  .  	   36
II-6      Steuben Lakes:   Soils Map	38
II-7      Steuben Lakes:   Prime Agricultural Soils   	   42
II-8      Steuben Lakes:   Surface Water Hydrology 	 .  .   47
II-9      Comparison of Phosphorus Loadings by Source  Contributions
            for the Steuben Lakes Study Area	•  .   52
11-10     Trophic Conditions of Marsh Lake, Snow Lake, Big Otter
            Lake, Lake James, Lake Gage, Crooked Lake, Jimmerson
            Lake, and Lime Lake (1973-1974)	54
11-11     Elevations of the Top of Aquifers	57
11-12     Steuben Lakes:   Flood Hazard Areas  	   64
11-13     Steuben Lakes:   Aquatic Vegetation  	  T   67
11-14     Steuben Lakes:   Group Segments of the  Proposed Service
            Area	   76
11-15     Steuben Lakes:   Existing Land Use	86
11-16     Steuben Lakes:   Future Land Use	,  . . .  .   88
11-17     Steuben Lakes:   Subdivisions 	   96
11-18     Steuben Lakes:   Malfunctioning Septic  Tank Systems  ....   97
11-19     Steuben Lakes:   Septic Leachate  Plume  Locations  ...... 101
11-20     Large Bog-like Plume Path  Through the  Steuben  Lakes  .... 103
11-21     Steuben Lakes:  Location of Sampled Wells   	 106
III-l     Typical Pump Installations for Pressure Sewer  	 122
III-2     Spray Irrigation  	 124
III-3     Rapid Infiltration  	 124
IV-1      Facilities Plan Proposed Action  Treatment Processes  .... 148
IV-2      Steuben Lakes:   Facilities Plan  Proposed  Action  	 149
IV-3      EIS Alternative 1 Treatment Process 	 151
IV-4      Steuben Lakes:   EIS Alternative  1	152
IV-5      EIS Alternative 2 Treatment Processes	153
IV-6      Steuben Lakes:   EIS Alternative  2	154
IV-7      EIS Alternative 3 Treatment Processes-Surface  Discharge .  . 155
IV-8      EIS Alternative 3 Treatment Processes-Land Application  .  . 156
IV-9      Steuben Lakes:   EIS Alternative  3	;	157
IV-10     EIS Alternative 4 Treatment Processes  	 158
IV-11     Steuben Lakes:   EIS Alternative  4	160
IV-12     EIS Alternative 5 Treatment Processes  	 161
                                     xliv

-------
IV-13     Steuben Lakes:  EIS Alternative 5	162
IV-14     EIS Alternative 6 Treatment Processes	163
IV-15     Steuben Lakes:  EIS Alternative 6	164
IV-16     Limited Action Alternative	,	165

VI-1      Steuben Lakes:  Recommended Alternative ...  	  203
                                     xlv

-------
                           SYMBOLS  AND  ABBREVIATIONS
 P
 y
 v
 a
An  asterisk  following  a word  indicates  that  the term is
defined  in the  Glossary at  the  end  of this report.   Used
at  the first appearance of  the  term in  this  EIS,
less  than
greater  than
Rho
Mu, micro
Nu
Sigma
                           TECHNICAL ABBREVIATIONS
 AWT
 BOD
 cCs
 DO
 ft2
 fps
 g/m /yr
 GP
 gpcd
 gpm
 I/I
 kg/yr
 kg/cap/yr
 kg/mile
 Ib /cap /day
 mgd
 mg/1
 ml
 msl
MPN
 N
NO -N
NFS
 advanced wastewater treatment
 biochemical oxygen demand
 cubic feet per second
 dissolved oxygen
 square foot
 feet per second
 grams per square meter per year
 grinder pump
 gallons per capita per day
 gallons per minute
 infiltration/inflow
 kilograms per year
 kilograms per capita per year
 kilograms per mile
 pounds per capita per day
 million gallons per day
 milligrams per litre
 millilitre
 mean sea level—implies above msl unless otherwise indicated
 most probable number
 nitrogen
 ammonia nitrogen
nitrate nitrogen
non-point source
                                      xlvi

-------
O&M
P
pH
P°4
ppm
psi
RBC
SS
STEP
STP
ST/SAS
TKN
TP-P
yg/i
EPAECO
 operation and maintenance
 phosphorus, or "as phosphorus"
 measure of acidity or basicity; <7 is acidic; >7 is basic
 phosphate
 parts per million
 pounds per square inch
 rotating biological contactor
 suspended solids
 septic tank effluent pumping
 sewage treatment plant
 septic tank/soil absorption system
 total Kjeldahl nitrogen
 total phosphorus as phosphorus
 micrograms per liter
 name of a mathematical model
CFR
DNR
EIS
EPA
EPIC
HUD
ISPCB
NOAA

NES
NPDES
SCUD
SCS

SFMH

SLRWD
STORKT
US DA
US OS
      NON-TECHNICAL ABBREVIATIONS

Code of Federal Regulation.';
Indiana Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Impact Statement
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center  (of  EPA)
United States Department of Housing and Urban  Development
Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,  United
States Department of Commerce
National Eutrophication Survey
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
Steuben County Health Department
Soil Conservation Service, United States Department ol
Agriculture
State Fish Management Headquarters, Indiana Department of
Natural Resources
Steuben Lakes Regional Waste District
STOrage and RETreival (data base system of EPA)
United States Department of Agriculture
United States Geological Survey, Department of the Interior
                                     xlvii

-------
                               CHAPTER  I

                             INTRODUCTION


A.   BACKGROUND

1.   LOCATION

     The subject of this Environmental Impact Statement  (EIS) is Federal
funding of the  Facilities  Plan for wastewater disposal  submitted by the
Steuben Lakes  Regional Waste  District  Board.   This funding would take
place under  Section 201 of  the  Federal Water Pollution Control Act of
1972, P.L.  92-500  as   amended  by  the  Clean  Water  Act of  1977,  P.L.
95-217.   A  preliminary environmental review  of  the Facilities Plan by
the  United  States  Environmental Protection  Agency (US EPA)  Region V
in'dicated the  possibility  of significant environmental impacts and- led
to  the  Agency's determination that an EIS  is warranted.   Section I.B
discusses the  environmental  issues raised  in the US  EPA's  Notice of
Intent to prepare an EIS.

     The  EIS  Study Area  includes  the Steuben  Lakes  Regional  Waste
District and some areas northeast and south of that  District as  shown in
Figure  1-1.   It covers  38 square miles, including parts of Millgrove,
Jamestown, Jackson  and Pleasant  Townships  (see Figure  1-2).  Study Area
development  is  largely  lake-oriented and  residential  surrounding the
five  major  lakes—Lake James, Jimmerson Lake, Snow Lake, Crooked Lake,
Lake  Gage--as  well as  the smaller Lime Lake, Lake Syl-van,  Big Otter
Lake  and Little  Otter  Lake.   These residential  areas constitute the
Facilities  Plan  Proposed  Service  Area (see  Figure 1-3).   There are
several  other  small lakes in the  Study Area—Marsh  Lake,  Green Lake,
Seven Sisters  Lakes,   Failing  Lake  and Lake  Charles  in the northeast,
Bell Lake and Sally Owen Lake in the northwest, and  Round Lake  and Grass
Lake  in the  southwest.   No  cities, towns  or incorporated  areas lie
within the Study Area.

2.   HISTORY  OF THE  CONSTRUCTION GRANT  APPLICATION

     The  following  is  a  list  of  significant events  associated with
wastewater management  in  the  Study Area and  this  Environmental Impact
Statement.

September 7, 1965        Steuben  County Board of  Commissioners estab-
                         lishes  the Steuben County Planning  Commission
                         by Ordinance No. 524.

July 17, 1973            State of Indiana Stream Pollution Control  Board
                         adopts  Regulation  SPC IR-3 establishing  water
                         quality standards  for all  waters  of  the  State.

-------
      INDIANA
                       STUDY
                       AREA
                       BOUNDARY


           HH	STEUBEN LAKES
                 REGIONAL WASTEWATER
                 DISTRICT  BOUNDARY
   STEUBEN   COUNTY
(   LOCATION OK STLUU'.N LAKKS STl'DY AUKA

-------
FIGURE 1-2   STEUBEN LAKES: STUDY AREA
                          LEGEND
                                                                                                                      Source: USCS 1960

-------
                                                                                      Pokaqon Stata Park
                                                                                                                   WasUwqter Treqtment Plant
                                                                                                                for the Holiday inn and Faucher Motel
                                                                                                                                 LEGEND


                                                                                                                               PROPOSED SERVICE AREA
FIGURE 1-3    STEUBEN LAKES; PROPOSED SERVICE AREA

-------
February 18, 1975
June 23, 1975
August  1, 1975




December 22,  1975



February 5,  1976


July 9, 1976
 August  27,  1976




 September  2,  1976


 July 20,  1977


 October 1,  1977

 December  13,  1977


 May 26,  1978



 July 21,  1978
State of Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board
establishes  the Steuben  Lakes Regional  Waste
District (SLRWD) in  response  to the request of
the Steuben County Lakes Council.

Indiana  Stream  Pollution Control  Board  issues
Final  NPDES  Permit  No.   In.   0030309  to  the
Indiana  Department of  Natural Resources  with
respect to the wastewater treatment facility at
the Pokagon State Park.

SLRWD files application with the Indiana Stream
Pollution  Control  Board  (ISPCB)   for  Step  I
Grant  for  development  of wastewater  disposal
facilities plan.

Indiana    Stream   Pollution    Control   Board
certifies  application to  US  EPA Region  V for
Step I Grant.

US EPA grant funds to the SLRWD for development
of the facilities plan.

Indiana  Stream  Pollution  Contol  Board  issues
NPDES  Permit No.  In.  0053261 to  the Steuben
Lakes  Regional  Waste  District to install  a
sewer  system   throughout   the  district  with
effluent discharge to Crooked  Creek.

"Facilities  Plan for Wastewater Collection and
Treatment:    Steuben   Lakes    Regional   Waste
District"  completed for the  District  Board of
Trustees  by Mick,  Rowland &  Associates, Inc.

The  SLRWD  Board  of Trustees holds  a  Public
Hearing  on the Facilities Plan.

Notice  of  Intent  to  prepare   an EIS by US EPA
Region V.

WAPORA,  Inc. commences work on the  EIS.

First EIS  Public Information  and Participation
Meeting  held by  US EPA Region  V.

US  EPA  Region  V issues EIS  Newsletter  citing
the  alternatives for  Steuben  Lakes wastewater
collection and  treatment.

US  EPA Region  V organizes a  Citizens Advisory
Committee  and  holds  a workshop on the  alter-
natives  developed  for the  EIS.

-------
April 23, 1979           US EPA  Region V  issues  EIS Newsletter  citing
                         the  special   studies  undertaken  in  the  Study
                         Area.

3.   FACILITIES  PLAN

     Discussion in  this  section  is limited entirely to  summarizing  the
main  features of  the "Facilities  Plan for  Wastewater Collection  and
Treatment"  (August  1976)  prepared  for the Steuben Lakes Regional  Waste
District (SLRWD) by Mick, Rowland and  Associates,  Inc.   Please note that
the  conclusions  reached  in the  Facilities Plan and summarized  in this
Section are not necessarily those reached in the EIS.

a.   Existing  Wastewater Treatment  Facilities

     On-site waste disposal systems serve the Study Area with  the excep-
tion  of  two  collection  and treatment systems, one serving the  Pokagon
State  Park and the  other serving  the Holiday Inn and  Faucher's Motel.

     On-Site  Systems.  Nearly all  residences within the Study Area  are
served  by  septic  tank/soil  absorption  systems*  (ST/SASs).   There  are
also  some  summer (seasonally  used)  cottages served by  outhouses.   The
Facilities  Plan states that  many  problems have arisen from  the  use of
these  on-site  systems.    Section   I.A.S.b summarizes  these  problems.

     Pokagon  State Park Facilities.   The  Pokagon  State  Park  on  the
northeastern  shore  of Lake James is served by an  80,000 gallons  per day
(gpd)  extended aeration*  sewage treatment plant  and  a 7-day  terminal
lagoon.*   Effluent  from  the lagoon is discharged  to  Lake James via Snow
Lake  and the marsh  area  (see Figure  1-4).   The   Indiana  Department of
Natural Resources owns and operates these facilities.

     The Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board's  final NPDES  Permit No.
In.  0030309  (see Appendix C-5)  of June 23,  1975 requires the  Indiana
Department  of Natural Resources to provide flow  measurement,  advanced
waste  treatment and phosphorus removal prior to discharging to Snow Lake
by May 31,  1977.

      [EIS  note:   A  tertiary  treatment plant complying  with  the permit
was  completed and placed  in  operation  during  May 1979  (by  telephone,
Carl  North,  In.  DNR, May  7,  1979).   Hence no  further  consideration has
been  given  to the Park's facilities in this EIS.]

     Holiday  Inn/Faucher's Motel Facilities.    The  Holiday   Inn  and
Faucher's  Motel,  on  Interstate  Highway 69 east  of  Lake James,  jointly
use  a 30,000  gpd  activated  sludge* package treatment  plant  for waste-
water  disposal.   After being  fined for polluting  Lake  Charles  with the
plant's effluent, the motels  introduced a  land application system  (spray
distribution)  in 1975  using  a  site  southeast of  1-69.   Winter  flow
storage  has been provided with  overflows being  discharged  to  a large
leach  bed.   [EIS  note:  This system has been  functioning  without major
*See glossary.

-------
                                                                                   Pokagon  State Park
                                                                                         ter  Treatment  Rant
                                                                                                                 Wastewater  Treatment Plant
                                                                                                                    for the  Holiday  Inn and
                                                                                                                        Faucher Motel
                                                                                                                             2000    «000
FIGURE 1-4   STEUBEN LAKES: EXISTING WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES

-------
problems  (by  telephone,  John Satrom,  Indiana  Stream Pollution Control
Board, November 9,  1978)  and  has  been  given no  further consideration in
this EIS.]

b.   Existing Problems

     The Facilities Plan cites the following problems of existing septic
tank/soil absorption systems in the Study Area:

     •    Most of  the  systems  are very old,  constructed  when few rules
          governed  their  installation.  Also  very little inspection of
          the construction of these systems was  undertaken.

     •    Some low-lying ST/SASs are below the  seasonal high  groundwater
          table.    Effluents from  such systems' reach  the  lakes during
          periods of high precipitation.

     •    Some  lots  are  too  narrow  (40-foot  frontage)  for adequate
          separation of ST/SASs from shallow wells.

     •    Several areas of lake pollution  from  ST/SASs have been identi-
          fied  by  dye tests  conducted by  the Steuben  County Health
          Department.  Many other ST/SAS  sources  of pollution have not
          been detected by such tests.

     •    Many of the older  ST/SASs  still  in  use  cannot  meet current
          standards.

     An  analysis of these and other related problems, using the findings
of  several  special studies,  is presented in  Section II.E of this EIS.

c.   Facilities Plan's Alternatives  and Proposed Action

     The Facilities  Plan considered  18  alternative solutions  to the
Study  Area's wastewater  disposal  problem,   all based on  some  form of
centralized  collection and  treatment.  All  alternatives  provided for
service  throughout the Study Area  including the Holiday Inn, Faucher's
Motel and the Pokagon State Park.   The layout  of the  sewerage system for
the Facilities Plan's Proposed Action,  shown  in Figure  1-5, is common to
all 18 alternatives.

            Design Parameters

     The following is a  summary  of the  main  design parameters of the
Facilities Plan.

     Design Period:  The twenty year period  1976-1996.

     Population Projection:  The  Study Area's  population  was considered
in  3 main  categories,  viz.,  year-round (permanent);  summer (seasonal)
week-day;  and summer weekend and holidays.   The following design  popu-
lations  were  used:

-------
        WASTEWATER TREATMENT
                 PLANT
                   a
           SPRAY IRRIGATION SITE
                                                                                     POKAGON  STATE  PARK
                                                                                                                                 LEGEND

                                                                                                                                LIFT  STATION

                                                                                                                                PRESSURE  SEWER

                                                                                                                                FORCE MAIN

                                                                                                                                GRAVITY SEWER
FIGURE 1-5    STEUBEN LAKES: FACILITIES  PLAN  PROPOSED ACTION

-------
                                        1976      1996
               Year Around             4,767       8,058
               Summer Week-day        11,208      13,979
               Weekend & Holidays     20,268      25,123

The projections  were  based  on  US  Census data  for  Steuben County  and
represented  growth rates  over   the  design period of 32%  for  off-lake
areas and 23% for lakeshore areas.

     Waste Flows were based on the  following parameters:

          Permanent  Residences   -  3  persons each  at  100  gallons  per
                                 capita per day  (gpcd)

          Seasonal Residences -  3  persons each  on week days at 100 gpcd
                                3  additional  persons  each  on  weekends
                                at  70 gpcd
   '  The design flows thus obtained were as follows:


                                             Flow (gpd)

          Winter                              650,000
          Summer Midweek                     1,518,000
          Summer Weekends                    2,398,000
          Equalized Summer*                  2,000,000

            Alternatives

     Sewer system  alternatives  considered in the Facilities Plan were:
 (1)  conventional  gravity  system with  lift stations,  (2)  low-pressure
 sewers with  grinder  pumps,  (3)  vacuum sewers, and (4)  a  combination of
 systems  (1)  and  (2)  above.   Alternative  (4),  combined  gravity  and
 low-pressure sewers, was selected as the most viable.

     Secondary treatment*  alternatives  considered  were  (1)  oxidation
 ditches,  (2)  aerated  lagoons,  (3)  attached  growth  biological  discs
 combined  with high  rate activated  sludge  processing, and  (4)  contact
 stabilization  operated  as  conventional  activated  sludge  processing
 during winter  months.   Associated  with each of  these alternatives  was
 preliminary  treatment   consisting  of  screening  or  comminution,  grit
 removal  and aerated flow equalization as well  as chemical  phosphorous*
 precipitation and  effluent chlorination.

     Advanced waste treatment*  alternatives  considered were   (1)  land
 application  by  spray  irrigation with subsurface collector drains,  (2)
 mixed-media  filtration,   (3)   land  application  by   spray  irrigation
 preceded  by lagooning for  secondary flow equalization, and  (4)  a com-
 bination  of (1) and  (2) using  mixed-media  filtration for  winter flows
 and land application for incremental summer flows.
                                    10

-------
     Sludge disposal  alternatives  were  mainly  (1)  aerobic  digestion/
land  application,   and   (2)  anaerobic  digestion/land  application  with
options of  dewatering the  stabilized  sludge prior to  land  application
either by  air drying or mechanically, or  of providing no  dewatering.

     These  functional  alternatives were variously combined  into  the  18
complete system alternatives listed in Table 1-1 (with comparative total
present worth values).   Based  on an  evaluation  of  cost-effectiveness,
environmental  effects,   energy  use, reliability, public  acceptability,
and  implementation  considerations, alternative "R" was selected  as  the
Facilities Plan's Proposed Action.

            Facilities Plan Proposed Action

     The Facilities Plan's Proposed Action consists  of an aerated  lagoon
system  with  settling  tanks and  chemical precipitation of  phosphorus.
The  lagoons would  also  provide summer flow  equalization.*   The  lagoon
effluent  would be  disposed by spray  irrigation on agricultural  lands
followed  by  underground drainage  collection and discharge  to Crooked
Creek.   Sludge would  be  treated by  aerobic digestion and  air  drying
prior to disposal on farmlands.

     The  total project  cost  (in 1976 dollars)  was  estimated at  14.5
million dollars  of  which the cost of sewers accounted for $10.8 million
or  75%.   To convert these costs  to  1978  dollars,  they should be  multi-
plied by 1.13  in accordance with the US EPA Sewage Treatment Plant (STP)
Index.
B.   ISSUES  OF THIS EIS

     The  US Environmental Protection Agency's  review  of  the Facilities
Plan  led  to the Agency's issuing of a Notice of Intent on July 20,  1977
to  prepare  an Environmental Impact Statement.  The  issues  set  forth in
that Notice are as follows:

      1.   "Cost-Effectiveness.   The  cost  and  benefits  of a  regional
          sewage  system  should  be  compared  with those  of subregional
          systems  serving existing high  development density area,  with
          advanced on-site  treatment  for low development density area."

          The  basic  premise of the Facilities  Plan  is  that sewage  from
          all  sources  within  the  Study Area  should be  collected and
          treated  in one regional  system.  The resulting total capital
          cost (excluding connection costs)  of the  Facility  Plan  Pro-
          posed Action  is approximately $3800  per residence.  This very
          high cost  may  be substantially  reduced  by an  approach  that
          uses  subregional  systems in high  density areas  such  as the
          lakeshores  of  Crooked   Lake  and  parts  of Lake James  and
          Jimmerson  Lake  in combination  with decentralized systems for
          the  lower density  rural/semi-rural  areas.

     2.   "Treatment  Processes.  Treatment  process  methods for regional
          and  subregional plants should be  compared."
                                    11

-------
                                               Table 1-1

              FACILITIES PLAN - PRESENT WORTH VALUES3 (1976)b  FOR TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES
Alternative
Secondary Treatment       Advanced  Treatment
Sludge Disposal
                                                                                     Total  PWV
                    Oxidation
                    Ditch
                          Land Application  for
                          Advanced  Waste  Treatment
                    PWV = $3,256,000  +       PWV = $1,569,000  +
Aerobic Digestion
Followed by Land
Application
PWV = $  430,100  Option "1" = $5,255,700
                    Oxidation
                    Ditch
                          Land Application for
                          Advanced Waste Treatment
                    PWV = $3,256,000  +       PWV = $1,569,600  +
Anaerobic Digestion
Followed by Land
Application
PWV = $1,231,000
                                                                                    = $6,056,600
                    Oxidation
                    Ditch

                    PWV = $3,256,000  +
                          Mixed Media Filtration
                          for Advanced Waste
                          Treatment
                          PWV = $1,117,600  +
Aerobic Digestion
Followed by Land
Application
PWV = $  430,100
  $4,803,700
                    Oxidation
                    Ditch

                    PWV = $3,256,000 +
                          Mixed Media Filtration &
                          Land Application for
                          Advanced Waste Treatment
                          PWV = $2,219,700  +
Aerobic Digestion
Followed by Land
Application
PWV = $  430,100  Option. "I1
= $5,905,800
                    Aerated Lagoons
                          Land Application for
                          Advanced Waste Treatment
                    PWV = $3,597,800  +       PWV = $1,816,000  +
Aerobic Digestion
Followed by Land
Application
PWV = $  422,000  Option  "1" =  $5,835,800

-------
Alternatives
   FACILITIES PLAN-PRESENT WORTH VALUES  (Continued)

Secondary Treatment       Advanced Treatment            Sludge Disposal
                                                         Total PWV
                      Aerated Lagoons
                          Land Application for
                          Advanced Waste Treatment
                      PWV = $3,597,800  +       PWV = $1,816,000  +
                              Anaerobic Digestion
                              Followed by Land
                              Application
                              PWV = $1,231,000
                                                                                  =  $6,644,800
                      Aerated Lagoons
                      PWV ^ $3,597,800  +
                          Mixed Media Filtration
                          for Advanced Waste
                          Treatment
                          PWV = $1,117,600  +
                              Aerobic Digestion
                              Followed by Land
                              Application
                              PWV = $  430,100
                             $5,145,500
    H
Aerated Lagoons
                      PWV = $3,597,800  +
Mixed Media Filtration
and Land Application for
Advanced Waste Treatment
PWV = $2,219,700  +
Aerobic Digestion
Followed by Land
Application
PWV = $  430,100 Option "1"= $6,247,600
                      Attached Growth System    Land Application for
                      Followed by Conventional  Advanced Waste Treatment
                      Activated Sludge Process
                      PWV = $4,672,400  +       PWV = $1,569,600  +
                                                        Aerobic Digestion
                                                        Followed by Land
                                                        Application
                                                        PWV = $  624,400
                                                        =  $6,866,400
                      Attached Growth System    Land Application for
                      Followed by Conventional  Advanced Waste Treatment
                      Activated Sludge Process
                      PWV = $4,672,400 +        PWV = $1,569,600  +
                                                        Anaerobic Digestion
                                                        Followed by Land
                                                        Application
                                                        PWV = $1,231,000
                                                           $7,473,000
    K
Attached Growth System    Mixed Media Filtration for
Followed by Conventional  Advanced Waste Treatment '
Activated Sludge Process
PWV = $4,672,400  +       PWV « $1,117,600  +
                              Aerobic Digestion
                              Followed by Land
                              Application
                              PWV = $  675,800
                                                                                                        =  $6,465,800

-------
                         FACILITIES PLAN - PRESENT WORTH VALUES (Continued)
Alternatives
Secondary Treatment
Advanced Treatment
Sludge Disposal
Total PWV
                        Attached Growth System
                        Followed by Conventional
                        Activated Sludge Process
                        PWV = $4,672,400  +
                             Mixed Media Filtration
                             and Land Application for
                             Advanced Waste Treatment
                             PWV = $2,219,700  +
                              Aerobic Digestion
                              Followed by Land
                              Application
                              PWV = $  675,800
                          $7,567,900
    M
Contact Stabilization
Process

PWV = $3,993,200  +
Land Application for
Advanced Waste Treatment

PWV = $1,569,600  +
Aerobic Digestion
Followed by Land
Application
PWV = $  675,800
                                                                                                             $6,238,600
                        Contact Stabilization
                        Process

                        PWV = $3,993,200  +
                             Land Application for
                             Advanced Waste Treatment

                             PWV = $1,569,600  +
                              Anaerobic Digestion
                              Followed by Land
                              Application
                              PWV = $1,231,000
                       =  $6,793,800
                        Contact Stabilization
                        Process

                        PWV = $3,993,200  +
                             Mixed Media Filtration        Aerobic Digestion
                             for Advanced Waste Treatment  Followed by Land
                                                           Application
                             PWV = $1,117,600  +           PWV = $  675,800
                                                        $5,786,600
                        Contact Stabilization
                        Process

                        PWV = $3,993,200  +
                             Mixed Media Filtration and
                             Land Application for
                             Advanced Waste Treatment
                             PWV = $2,219,700  +
                              Aerobic Digestion
                              Followed by Land
                              Application
                              PWV = $  675,800
                       =  $6,888,700

-------
                         FACILITIES  PLAN - PRESENT WORTH VALUES  (Continued)
 Alternatives
Secondary Treatment
Advanced Treatment
Sludge Disposal      Total PWV
                        Oxidation
                        Ditch

                        PWV = $3,256,000  +
                              Land Application


                              PWV = $1,569,600  +
                             Aerobic Digestion
                             Followed by Land
                             Application
                             PWV = $  430,100
                       $5,255,700
                        Aerated Lagoon & Land
                        Application

                        PWV = $4,329,500
                                                           Aerobic  Digestion
                                                           Followed by Land
                                                           Application
                                                           PWV = $   422,000     =   $4,751,500
                                                               (Option "1")
a.  These do not include PWVs of the collection system nor the primary treatment

    and are therefore not total PWVs.

b.  To convert to 1978 Dollars (used in Chapter III), multiply by 1.13, the change in the STP Index.

c.  Selected Plan

-------
     The  analysis  of  regional  and  subregional  solutions  should
     include a more comprehensive study of a wider variety of waste
     treatment processes.   Package plants  of various types ought to
     be considered for small  flows  generated in subregional areas.
     Land application by both  the slow rate and rapid infiltration
     methods should be examined.  Alternative  and innovative tech-
     nologies  should  be  considered   wherever  soils  and  other
     conditions make them feasible.

3.   "Sizing.  The  cost-effective  capacity of  regional and  sub-
     regional plants should be examined and compared."
     Population projections  and per  capita wastewater  flow  rates
     need to  be  checked to  ensure  that  the design  capacities  of
     regional and subregional plants  are  cost-effective as  defined
     in the Rules and Regulations of the US EPA Construction Grants
     Program.  The  use  of per  capita  flows  of 100  gpcd for  both
     permanent  and seasonal  residents was  not  justified  in  the
     Facilities Plan.  As  a  result,  residents might be required to
     pay for substantially larger systems  than are needed.

4.   "Secondary Impact.   The induced growth that  may result from a
     regional  system  compared  with  a  corresponding  subregional
     system,  must  be evaluated  with respect  to  impacts on  water
     quality, wetlands,  and community services."

     The availability of sewers  in  a regional  system  such  as  pro-
     posed  in  the  Facilities  Plan is often  the source  of signifi-
     cant induced growth in a community.  Such growth could  lead to
     the contamination of  surface and  ground waters, pressures for
     the  development  of  wetlands, and  increased  demand  for infra-
     structural  services.    A  trend towards   the  development  of
     wetlands  is  already  visible   on  Snow  Lake,  Lake   James,
     Jimmerson Lake  and  Crooked  Lake.   It  is  therefore important
     that regional  and  subregional  systems  be compared  for their
     potential to  create secondary  impacts associated with induced
     growth.

5.   "Primary Impacts.   Those   impacts   resulting   directly  from
     project   construction   and  operation  need   to  be  further
     evaluated."

     Steep slopes exist in many parts of the Proposed Service Area,
     particularly  in  the east.  Construction of  sewers  and treat-
     ment plants may cause substantial erosion of these slopes with
     consequent  deterioration  of water  quality.   The  Facilities
     Plan has also failed to  discuss the impacts of construction on
     nearby tamarack bogs which are indicated to be the habitats of
     two  orchids  on  the  Federal  list  of  threatened  species
     (Platanthera  flava  and  Plantanthera  leucophaea).   Primary
     impacts such as these need to be further evaluated.

6.   "Socioeconomic Impacts.   The impact  of the high local project
     costs,  estimated at  over  $2,000  per  existing  residence, on
     area residents,  and its  possible role  in  forcing a  shift  from
     seasonal to permanent residence must be addressed.

                               16

-------
          Capital costs of the Facilities Plan Proposed Action  have been
          estimated  at the  very  high  level  of  $3800  per residence.
          Since  it  is  also  likely  that a  substantial  portion of the
          costs may be ineligible  for Federal funding, local  costs may
          be very  high.   Such high  local  costs may  result in both a
          shift  from  seasonal  to permanent residence and the  displace-
          ment of low, moderate or  fixed income families.  The  potential
          for such impacts needs to be addressed.

Subsequent project studies to  resolve these issues uncovered additional
concerns  requiring  resolution or mitigative measures.  These  included:

     1.   The  large  non-point  source phosphorus  plume  originating in
          Marsh  Lake   and  extending  through the  two  Otter  Lakes, Snow
          Lake, and Lake James.

     2.   The ongoing  destruction  of  wetlands  within the  Study Area and
          its  relationship  to secondary  impacts.   Linked with this is
          the  role  of cut-and-fill  techniques  in creating  shoreline
          channels that tend to become  sinks for  septic tank  effluent
          leachate.

     3.   Location  of  numerous non-point  sources,  notably  literally
          dozens of unofficial dumps or landfill areas.

     4.   Management requirements for operation of an On-Site Wastewater
          Management District (OSWMD).
C.   NATIONAL  PERSPECTIVE ON  THE RURAL SEWERING PROBLEM

     The EIS  issues  discussed above are not unique to the  proposed plan
for wastewater management in Steuben Lakes Study Area.   They are typical
of  concerns  raised by  a large number of wastewater projects for rural
and  developing  communities   that  have  been  submitted  to  US  EPA  for
funding.  The scope of  the  problem  has  grown  in the last  few years  as
controversy  has mounted  over the  high  costs  and possible impacts  of
providing conventional  sewerage  facilities to  small  communities  across
the country-

1.   SOCIOECONOMICS

     To assess  the  cost burden that many proposed wastewater collection
projects would  impose   on  small  communities and the reasons for  it,  US
EPA  studied   over   250   facilities  plans  from  49  states  for pending
projects for  communities under 50,000 population (Dearth 1977).   US  EPA
found that,  even with substantial State and Federal construction grants,
the  costs  of conventional  sewering are  sometimes  beyond  the means  of
families in rural and semi-rural  areas.   This was particularly true when
the new facilities  proposed  would result in annual user charges of more
than $200 per household.

     The Federal government has developed criteria to identify high-cost
wastewater facilities projects (The White House Rural Development
                                   17

-------
Initiatives 1978).  Projects place a financial burden on rural community
users when  annual user  charges  (debt service plus  operation and main-
tenance) would exceed:

     •    1.5% of median household incomes less than $6,000;

     •    2.0% of  median household incomes between  $6,000  and $10,000;
          or

     •    2.5% of median household incomes over $10,000.

Annual user charges exceeding these criteria would materially affect the
households' standard  of living.   Federal  agencies  involved  in funding
wastewater  facilities will  work  with  the  community  to lower project
costs through change in the project's scope or design.   If the project's
scope or  design is not changed,  the  agencies will work with the com-
munity until that community is clearly aware of the financial impacts of
undertaking the high-cost project.

     The collection system  is  chiefly responsible for  the high costs of
conventional sewerage facilities  for  small communities.  Typically, 80%
or  more of the  total capital  cost for newly  serviced rural  areas  is
spent  for  collection  systems.   Figure  1-6  indicates  that  costs  per
residence  for   gravity  sewers   increase   exponentially  as  population
density  decreases.   Primary factors  contributing to  this  relationship
were:

     •    greater  length of  sewer pipe  per dwelling  in  lower-density
          areas;

     •    more problems  with grade, resulting in more  lift stations  or
          excessively deep sewers;

     »    regulations or  criteria setting eight  inches  as  the smallest
          allowable sewer pipe diameter; and

     •    inability of  small communities to spread  capital costs among
          larger populations sewered previously.

     In addition to  the comparatively high costs  of sewers,  facilities
were sometimes found to be more expensive than necessary due to:

     o    Oversophistication in  design, with  accompanying high chemical
          usage,  large  energy requirements, and  costly maintenance and
          operator expense, when simpler methods would  do.

     •    Use  of expensive  construction  materials  such  as non-locally
          produced brick and block and terrazzo when a steel prefab and
          concrete would do.

     •    Abandonment  of  existing  treatment  works  without  economic
          justification.
                                   18

-------
                    FIGURE 1-6
  40
COST («/month)= 43e -°-l(P/o)
  30
 o

J=20

-------
2.   SECONDARY  IMPACTS

     Installation  of  centralized  collection  and  treatment  systems  in
previously  unsewered  areas  can  dramatically affect  development  and,
thus,  the  economy,  demography and  environment  of  rural communities.
These  effects  may be desirable,  or  they may substantially offset  com-
munity objectives  for water  resource  improvement,  land  use planning and
environmental protection.

     In broad  terms,  community  potential  for  recreational, residential,
industrial,  commercial  or  institutional  development is  determined  by
economic  factors  such as  land  availability,  capital,  skilled manpower
and  natural resources.   However,  fulfillment  of this potential can  be
limited  by the  lack  of facilities or  services  called infrastructural
elements,  such as water supply,  sewerage,  electric power distribution
and transportation.  If a missing element  of infrastructure is provided,
it'may induce development of one type  or another  depending upon prevail-
ing  local  economic  factors.    Such   development   is   termed  "induced
growth".

     Induced growth is  usually  unplanned  and  may conflict with existing
or  planned development.  The  effects  of  such conflicts  and incompati-
bility  are also  termed secondary  impacts, as  the  impact  of  induced
growth  on  existing  water  resources,  land  use, air quality,  cultural
resources,  aesthetic  features  and   environmentally sensitive  areas.

     Secondary impacts  of  new wastewater facilities can  be beneficial.
For  example,  diversification  of  the local  employment  base  may  be
possible  only  when  sufficient  wastewater  collection  and  treatment
capacity  is provided  for commercial  or industrial  development.  On the
other  hand, new  commercial or industrial development sometimes  may not
be  compatible with  existing  recreational  or  agricultural interests.
Residential  development accompanying  expansion  of the  employment  base
may  take  place on prime agricultural  land,  steep slopes or wetlands,  or
may  otherwise  infringe on valued natural features.

3.    THE  NEED  FOR  MANAGEMENT  OF DECENTRALIZED  ALTERNATIVE
     SYSTEMS

     One  alternative  to  expensive centralized  sewer  systems  in  rural
areas  is  a  decentralized wastewater management system.   Both  engineering
and  management are integral  parts of such  a  system,  and  "decentralized
alternatives," as used  in  this EIS,  incorporates both engineering and
management  elements.

     Briefly,  the engineering element  consists  of the use  of  existing
and  new  on-site  systems, rehabilitation or  replacement  of those  systems
where  necessary,  and  construction of  small-scale off-site systems  where
existing  on-site  systems are not acceptable.

     The  management element consists of  continuing  supervision  for the
systems'  installation, maintenance and rehabilitation and  of appropriate
monitoring  of  the  systems'  environmental impacts.


                                   20

-------
     While  other  factors  such  as   soil  characteristics,  groundwater
hydrology  and lot  configurations are  highly important,  adequate  man-
agement may be  critical to the success of decentralized alternatives in
many  communities.   Similarly,  lack  of adequate  management  undoubtably
contributed to past failures of many on-site wastewater facilities,  and,
therefore, the  lack of  trust in them by  local  public  health officials
and consulting engineers.

     Historically,  State and local health officials  were  not empowered
even  to  regulate  installation of on-site systems until  after World War
II.   They usually  acted in only  an  advisory capacity.   As  the  conse-
quences  of unregulated  use  of the septic  tank-soil  absorption systems
became apparent  in the  1950's and 1960's, health officials were granted
new authority.   Presently most health officials have authority for  per-
mitting  and  inspecting  or  denying  new  installations,  and  they  can
require  renovation and  replacement of  on-site  systems.   However, their
role  in the operation and maintenance of on-site systems remains largely
advisory.  There  is seldom either a budget  or  the  authority to inspect
or monitor a  system.

      In  the  1970's,  the  Congress  recognized  the  need  for  continuing
supervision  and monitoring  of  on-site systems, as  in the  1977 Clean
Water Act.   Now,  US EPA  regulations  implementing the Act  require that,
before a  construction  grant for on-site systems may be made, the appli-
cant  must meet a number  of requirements:

      •    Certify  that  it will be  responsible  for  properly installing,
          operating and  maintaining the funded systems;

      «    Establish  a  comprehensive program for regulation  and inspec-
          tion  of  on-site systems that will include periodic testing of
          existing  potable water wells and,  where  a  substantial number
          of  on-site   systems  exists,  more  extensive  monitoring  of
          aquifers;

      •    Obtain assurance of unlimited access to each individual system
          at  all  reasonable times for  inspection, monitoring,  construc-
          tion, maintenance,  operation, rehabilitation and replacement.

      In  some  cases,   implementation  of  these  requirements  by munici-
palities may  be hindered by lack of State enabling legislation  for small
waste flows  management districts and by lack of adequately trained man-
power.  The municipality may  have no control over the former  and be at a
disadvantage  because  of  the  latter.   Section  III.D  discusses  other
implementation  factors  over  which municipalities should  have control.

4.    RELATIONSHIP TO  OTHER  EISs  PREPARED BY  US EPA  REGION V

      US EPA  Region V is  preparing six  other Environmental Impact State-
ments,  similar  in scope  and  in  conditions to this  one.   Facilities
planning  areas  generally share  the  following  characteristics (Sutfin
1977):
                                   21

-------
     *    Lakeshore development in rural areas;

     •    Relatively low population densities;

     •    Substantial   proportions   of   seasonal  residents  generating
         sewage perhaps 1/3 of the year;

     •    High costs  for  their  proposed plant  sizes  and populations
         served;

     •    The proposed  actions  include  constructing  sewers completely
         around  lakes  that are only partially developed.

The  degrees  to which  these   characteristics  are  evident  in  the seveji
Study Areas vary, thus providing a  range of conditions to  be evaluated.
The six other facilities planning areas  for  which individual  EIS's are
being prepared are:

          Crystal Lake, Benzie County, Michigan
          Green Lake, Kandiyohi County, Minnesota
          Salem Township, Kenosha County, Wisconsin
          Crooked/Pickerel Lakes, Ernmett  County, Michigan
          Otter Tail Lake, Otter Tail County, Minnesota
          Nettle Lake,  Williams County, Ohio.

     In addition  to the seven individual  EIS's a  generic EIS will be
prepared synthesizing findings and processes developed in the individual
projects.   On the basis of  findings  and planning methodologies  developed
during  the  individual EIS's, a  systematic approach  to planning rural
lake sewerage facilities will  be  developed.  The generic EIS is intended
to  serve  as  a  guide  to wastewater facilities  planning for rural  lake
communities.  Specific  goals  of the  generic EIS will be  to:

     •    Suggest  working  criteria  for  recognition  of problematic
          sewering projects;

     •    Recommend  specific, low-cost  treatment  alternatives  to be
          examined;

     •    Recommend  items   of  information to  be  included  in  future
          facilities plans  for rural lake areas;

     •    Develop  a  comprehensive  overview  of  the  process  of  rural
          lakeshore  development  and  the  impacts  of  sewering on  it.
 D.   PURPOSE  AND APPROACH OF  THE EIS AND CRITERIA  FOR
     EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES

 1.   PURPOSE

     This  EIS  documents  US EPA's review and analysis of the application
 for  EPA Step  2  funding of the Facilities Plan  Proposed Action.  Based
                                    22

-------
upon this review, the Agency will take one of several actions:

     •    Approve the  grant application, possibly with  recommendations
          for design changes  and/or  measures to mitigate impacts  of the
          Facilities Plan Proposed Action;

     •    With  the  applicant's and State's  concurrence,  approve  Step 2
          funding  for  an  alternative to  the Facilities Plan Proposed
          Action;

     •    Return  the  application with  recommendations  for  additional
          Step  1 analysis; or

     •    Reject the grant application.

     The review and analysis focused on the issues identified in Section
I.E. and were conducted with an awareness of the more general considera-
tions  of  rural  sewering  problems  discussed  in Section  I.C.   Major
emphasis has been placed on developing and evaluating alternative  waste-
water  management approaches  to  be  compared  with  the  Facilities Plan
Proposed Action.

2.   APPROACH

     The  review and analysis reported in this  EIS included,  a series  of
tasks, undertaken in approximately the following sequence:

a.   Review of Available Data

     Facilities  Plan  data  and other  sources were  reviewed  for  appli-
cability  in development  and/or evaluation of the Proposed Action  and  of
the  new  EIS  alternatives.   The  EIS  bibliography lists these  sources.

b.   Documentation of Need  for Action

     The  need  for action had not been clearly established in the  Facil-
ities  Plan.  The  effects  of the  existing  systems  on  surface waters,
groundwater and public health had not been clearly documented.  Because
determination  of eligibility for Federal funding of  a substantial  por-
tion  of  the Facilities  Plan  Proposed  Action  will be  based   on  the
documentation  of these effects,  several  supplemental  studies were  con-
ducted:

     •    an  aerial  survey  of  septic  tank system  malfunctions  using
          low-altitude  color  and  infrared  photography  by  US   EPA's
          Environmental   Photographic   Interpretation  Center    (EPIC);

     e    an environmental  analysis  and resource inventory of the Study
          Area  using  low-altitude  color and  infrared photography  by
          EPIC;
                                   23

-------
     •    estimation  of   the  existing  nutrient  budget and  empirical
          modeling  of  the eutrophication  status  of  the  lakes  of the
          Proposed Service Area;

     •    a "Septic Snooper"*  survey to locate and sample septic tank
          leachate  plumes  entering the  lakes of the  Proposed Service
          Area from nearby on-site  systems; and

     «    a groundwater quality  survey by Tri-State University.

     The results of these  needs  documentation  studies were not available
for  consideration  during  the  initial development of EIS Alternatives.
The  results of  each study have  required continuing  modification of the
alternatives as initially  designed  and have been the basis for necessary
refinements  in  the determination  of   the  eligibility  of  sewers  for
Federal funding.

c.'  Segment Analysis

     As a  basis  for revised population  projections  and "for development
of alternatives, the Proposed Service Area was divided  into a number of
segments.    The  number of dwellings in each segment was  counted from
black  and white  aerial  photographs.  Available  information  on soils,
depth of  groundwater,  water quality  problems, environmentally sensitive
areas and  land  use  capabilities was  tabulated for each segment and the
tabulations used to make  preliminary estimates of the need for off-site
wastewater disposal.

d.   Review of Wastewater Design Flows

     Available population projections were revised  on,  the  basis of the
segment house  counts.   New US EPA  guidelines  for  estimating design
wastewater  flows  were  then used  to  revise  the wastewater  flow projec-
tions for the year 2000.

e.   Development of  Alternatives

     First, technologies  that might potentially reduce  project costs or
minimize  adverse impacts while still  solving  existing problems  were
examined.    Four categories  of  alternative  technologies -- flow reduc-
tion,  low-cost  sewers, decentralization,  and land application — were
considered  according   to  their  functions  in a  wastewater  management
system  (collection, treatment,  etc.).   Next, several specific areawide
alternatives were developed, combining the alternative technologies into
complete  wastewater management systems  that would  serve  the Proposed
Service Area.   Chapter III describes  the technologies reviewed.  Chapter
IV presents the areawide  alternatives.

f.   Estimation pf Costs of Alternatives

     To assure  cost comparability between  the Facilities Plan Proposed
Action and the EIS alternatives, all  alternatives  were designed  to  serve
a  fixe
-------
g.   Evaluation of Alternatives

     The new alternatives were  developed  with a knowledge of the local
environmental  setting   and  with  the understanding  that they  will  be
evaluated under  criteria  from  several  disciplines.   Section  I.D.3 below
lists  the  general  criteria  for evaluating  both the  Facilities  Plan
Proposed Action and the EIS alternatives.

3.   MAJOR CRITERIA  FOR  EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES

     While  the high  cost  of  sewering rural  communities  is a primary
reason  to  examine  alternative  approaches  to wastewater  management, cost
is  not  the only  criterion.  Evaluation of trade-offs between cost and
significant  impacts  is also essential.   The various criteria are dis-
cussed below.

a.'  Cost

     With  some  exceptions  for  innovative  technologies,  US EPA construc-
tion  grant regulations  allow  funding of  only the most  cost-effective
alternative.   In accordance with those  regulations,  cost-effectiveness
has  been measured here  by the net  present worth of capital costs for
facilities  needed immediately,  capital  costs  for facilities required
during  the  20-year planning period, operation and maintenance costs for
all  wastewater facilities and  the salvage value  of  facilities expected
to  be  in service at the end of  the planning period.  The interest rate
used for discounting  future costs to present worth is  that  established
by  the  Water  Resources Council at 6 5/8% for 1978.   The differentiation
between  public and private costs is not  a consideration of the cost-
effectiveness analysis.

     The  sewer district recovers operation, maintenance and local debt
retirement  costs  through  periodic  sewage  bills or residential  user
charges.   The  local  economic impact of new  wastewater  facilities would
be  felt largely through  those  user charges.   Residential user charges
included  only  publicly financed costs.   Salvage value was not  factored
into residential  user  charges.   No  assumptions were  made about  frontage
fees  or  hook-up  charges that  might be levied  by the   sewer district.

     Some  homeowners   might incur  costs  that  they  would have  to pay
directly  to  contractors.   Installation  of  gravity house  sewers  on
private  land,  and renovation  or replacement  of  privately owned on-lot
systems  for seasonally occupied dwellings are  not eligible  for Federal
funding  and  are seldom financed by municipalities.  These private  costs
are identified  for each alternative.

b.    Significant   Environmental   and   Socioeconomic  Impacts

     The  system selected for  the Proposed Service Area will impact on
environmental  and  socioeconomic  resources  within the Study  Area.   After
a  comprehensive  review  of possible  impacts  of the  Facilities Plan
Proposed  Action and  the new alternatives, several types of  impacts were
determined  to  warrant  in-depth  evaluation and  discussion in this EIS.
They are:

                                    25

-------
     •    Surface  Water Quality Impacts,

     •    Groundwater  Impacts,

     •    Population and  Land  Use  Impacts,  including  Infringement on
          Environmentally  Sensitive Areas, and

     •    Economic Impacts.

c.   Reliability

     Reliability criteria for the  alternatives  include  both ability to
remedy existing water  quality problems and prospects of protecting water
quality in the  future.  The first  criterion was applied in the analysis
of  surface  and groundwater  impacts  of  the alternatives  presented in
Chapter V.   That  analysis  assumed  that  the collection,  treatment and
disposal  units  of  each  alternative  would  operate  effectively  as
de'signed.    The   second   criterion  recognizes   that  all  structural,
mechanical and electrical facilities are subject to failure .  Types of
possible  failure  and  appropriate  remedies  and  preventive  measures were
reviewed for selected  components of the alternatives.

d.   Flexibility

     The  ability  of an  alternative to  accomodate increasing wastewater
flows  from  future development  is  referred  to  here  as its flexibility.
To  demonstrate  the  relative levels  of  investment  for different alter-
natives,  all  were designed  and costed to provide  service for the same
population -- the   design  year  population  projected  in  Chapter  II.
However,  factors  such  as  the amount of  land developable  using on-lot
systems or  its ability to  increase  the  capacity of  a treatment plant
might  significantly affect  future  Study  Area  development.  Chapter III
discusses the ability  of  the alternatives to accoraodate increased waste-
water flows.  Chapter  V predicts the  effects of the alternatives' flexi-
bility on population growth.

4.   PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

     EPA Region V  has  invited the public to  share in the decision-making
process.  Through a variety of measures the Agency has sought views and
comments  of the  public,  has  taken  the public's  expressed preferences
into account, and  has  endeavored to keep the public continually  informed
of  developments throughout the preparation  of this EIS.   These  measures
are summarized below.

a.   Public Information and Participation  Meeting

     The public was invited by notice  of  November  28, 1977 to  a Public
Information and Participation Meeting on December 13,  1977  at  7:30  pm  in
the Auditorium  of Best Hall, Tri-State University,  Angola (see copy  of
Notice  in Appendix A-l).   At this  meeting,  members of  the staff  of
WAPORA Inc., consultants  to EPA on the project, were introduced  and  it
was announced  that  preparation of  an EIS had commenced  in October  1977.
The Facilities Plan and  the  EIS process were explained.  A long  question


                                  26

-------
and answer  discussion period  served  to air  the  public opinions  (both
pros and cons) on the Facilities Plan Proposed Action and  on  the  related
environmental issues.  All  attendees  provided information on themselves
and other  interested citizens  from  which  an EIS Mailing List was pre-
pared.

b.   Newspaper Articles

     Newspaper  articles  dating back  to the year 1974 (see Appendix A-2)
furnished important  public  input to  the EIS preparation process.  Topi-
cal  articles from  the  "Steuben Republican" and  the  "Fort  Wayne News
-Sentinel"  provided  comment  as well  as  information  on major  issues.

c.   Steuben County Lakes  Council  Magazine

     "Soundings,"  the official magazine  of the  Steuben County Lakes
Council, has  been a most important source of public input (see Appendix
A-'3).   The  Council  is comprised of all  of  the  Lake Associations within
the Study Area  and was instrumental in the establishment  of  the  Steuben
Lakes  Regional  Waste District.  The  semi-annually published  "Soundings"
carries  direct  comment  on the project by the Council as well as by each
of  the Lake Associations.  It informs  readers  of  progress and develop-
ments  in the preparation of  the EIS  and  explains many  of  the  issues.

d.   EIS Newsletter

     US  EPA Region V has published and distributed the "EIS  Newsletter"
to  keep the public informed on  the  status  of the EIS.  The  first  issue
dated  May 26, 1978 cited  the EIS alternatives slated for discussion at  a
July   21, 1978  Workshop.   Subsequent   issues  reported the  results  of
special  studies  (EPIC Aerial  Survey;  "Septic  Snooper" Survey;  Ground-
water  Quality Survey, etc.) undertaken to provide additional  information
with  which  to define the need for action.   The third issue of the News-
letter dated April 23,  1979 also provided information  to  the public on
the  availability of  the Draft  EIS.   Copies of  all  issues  of the EIS
Newsletter  are  included  in Appendix A-4.

e.   Workshop  and  Citizens  Advisory Committee

     A Citizens Advisory Committee  (CAC),  organized by US EPA Region V,
held   its first meeting  in conjunction with  the  Workshop  on the EIS
Alternatives  on July 21,  1978  (see  letter  of invitation to  committee
members  and Workshop Agenda in Appendix A-5).  Following a discussion of
the goals  and functions  of the  CAC,  the Committee elected its officers
with   Dr.  Pete   Hippensteel of  Tri-State  University  as   its  Chairman.
Presentation  of the EIS alternatives by the staff of WAPORA,  Inc. led to
a  lengthy  discussion of the alternatives.  The CAC agreed to hold sub-
sequent  meetings  to  formulate  its  comments  on  the  alternatives.
Appendix A-6 contains a  summary of the CAC's  findings dated September
28,  1978,   as submitted  to  the US EPA.  Those  findings have been fully
considered  in the preparation of this Draft EIS.  A public hearing will
be held  during  the Draft  EIS comment period.
                                    27

-------
28

-------
                              CHAPTER II

                        ENVIRONMENTAL  SETTING
INTRODUCTION
     The  landscape  of  the Study  Area exhibits  a complex  mixture of
glacial  landforms.   Almost  level  glaciated  plains,  steep-sided hilly
moraines,  irregularly  shaped  valleys,   numerous   lakes   and  wetlands
combine in an exceptionally scenic  manner.

     Foremost  among  the   Study   Area's   scenic   attractions  are  its
lakes—many steeply banked and variable in color from  a pale  transparent
green  to  a dark, opaque  olive.  The  highland  forested  areas of oaks,
hickory, beech and other hardwoods  considerably  enhance the scenic value
of' steep escarpments that appear along many of the  lakes.

     Recreation  is  a  prime  economic  activity   in  the  Study  Area.
Fishing, boating, swimming,  sailing  and  water skiing  are popular on the
major  lakes.   Many species  of  game fish abound,  including  trout,  rock
bass and  walleye.   The  State Fish Management Headquarters (SFMH) main-
tains a monitoring and stocking program on the major lakes.

     The Study Area's recreational  attractions have led to  predominantly
seasonal development  of  the lakeshore area.  The Pokagon State Park on
Lake James  (see  Figure  1-2) has preserved some  of  the scenic vistas and
wilderness areas  for  the  enjoyment of both the year-round resident and
the casual visitor.

     The lakeshore residential development ranges  from densely populated
trailer parks  to  very expensive dwellings costing  hundreds of thousands
of  dollars.   Off-lake development  is  more sparse and rural in nature.

     Evaluation of  the  courses  of  action open  to  the US EPA must start
from  an analysis  of the  existing  situation.  This  Chapter offers an
inventory  of  the baseline  conditions,  divided  into  such  categories as
soils,  surface water,  groundwater,  and  biology.   Social  and economic
aspects of the human environment are discussed,  as  is  the functioning of
the existing wastewater disposal systems.

     Available data proved  inadequate  to  define problems related to the
existing  wastewater  disposal  systems  and the need for  action.   The
results of  special  studies undertaken to fill  these  data  gaps are  also
reported in this Chapter.
A.   PHYSICAL  SETTING

1.   PHYSIOGRAPHY

     Study Area  topography  varies  from the level areas of the southeast
to  the  very rugged  relief  characteristic  of  the eastern  side  of  Lake
James.  Lakes and wetlands predominate throughout the Study Area.

                                      29

-------
     Lakes, wetlands,  and rolling hills  characterize the  northwest of
the Study  Area (Jamestown Township).   Steep slopes are  found  on hills
adjacent to the western shore of Snow Lake and the eastern shore of Lake
James.  Pokagon State  Park  is characterized by hills and ridges.  Hells
Point, the highest point in the Study Area (at 1,123 feet above Mean Sea
Level  (MSL))  is in  this  park.  Between  Snow and Big Otter  Lakes,  and
others  east  of S.R.  127,  are wetlands,  some  already  Nature  Preserves.

     Pleasant  Township  forms the  southeast  section of  the Study Area.
Surface features vary  from  level farmland in the east portion to rugged
steep  hills  in the  west  section.   Hills  west of Crooked  Lake usually
exceed  1,100   feet  MSL,  compared  with the  shoreline at approximately
1,000 feet MSL.

     Jackson Township,  southwest of  the Study Area,  is characterized by
hilly  areas   and  wetlands.   Low-lying small  lakes  and wetland  areas
bordered on the east and west by steep slopes lie between Grass Lake and
Round Lake.  The  long north-south  axis of this  area is  4.5 miles long.
Depressions abound throughout this  portion.

     The  entire  Study Area  lies  in  the Fawn  River Drainage  Basin.
Drainage  is  northwesterly toward Crooked  Creek.   Crooked Creek empties
into  the  Pigeon  River,  which  flows  into   the  St.  Joseph  River  (in
Michigan), finally discharging into Lake Michigan.

     Figure II-l  shows topographic  relief of the Study  Area and iden-
tifies  hilly areas  with slopes over 12%,  often sensitive to residential
development with on-site waste disposal systems.

2.   GEOLOGY

     Wisconsin  glaciation of the Pleistocene Era  produced  the existing
surficial  geology of the  Study Area.  Bedrock is overlain by 250 to 350
feet of unconsolidated glacial deposits (see Figure II-2).  End moraines
make-up  the  glacial  drift  deposits  of   the  southeastern Study  Area.
Gravel  and sand,  deposited  mainly  in mounds  (kames) or  in long, narrow
ridges  (eskers) in  the ice-melt streams at  the  bottom of the glaciers,
are  found around the  lakes  to  the  east  and  southwest   of Lake James.
Valley  train  and outwash plain deposits  of mostly  sand  and  gravel are
found  in  the  northern portion of the area.  Northeast of Lake James are
large  ground  and end  moraine till  deposits.   Sediments like  peat and
muck  are  found around many of the lakes.  Figure II-3 shows the extent
of these deposits.

     The bedrock  immediately underly the  glacial deposits is cold-water
shale  of  the  Mississippian  Period.   Figure  II-4  shows how  this pre-
dominantly grey shale,  850  to 950 feet thick, is successively underlain
by  Sunbury  and  Ellsworth  shales  of  the  Mississipian and  Devonian
Periods,  the  Traverse  and Detroit River  limestone  and  dolomite forma-
tions  of  the  Devonian  Period,  the  Salina  Limestone  and  dolomite
formation  of the Silurian Period, and the Wabash formation of the
                                  30

-------
                    SLOPES GREATER T11AN 12%
                                                                                                                          Source:  USCS 1960
FIGURE II-l   STEUBEN LAKES: TOPOGRAPHY

-------
FIGURE II-2   STEUBEN LAKES: CONTOUR LINES
SHOWING THE THICKNESS OF THE GLACIAL DRIFT
             STEUBEN COUNTY

          12        1386°      14
    Source:  Illinois Geological Survey
        Report of Progress 7,  1955
     	 APPROXIMATE OUTLINE OF STEUBEN
               LAKES STUDY AREA
     	CONTOUR LINES (Solid lines in-
               dicate where control is abun-
               dant; dashed lines where con-
               trol is sparse.   Contour in-
               terval is 50 feet.)
                 32

-------
                                    LEGEND

                            | MUCK, PEAT, AND MARL

                             SAND AND SOME GRAVEL

                             GRAVEL, SAND, AND SILT

                      (      | GRAVEL, SAND, AND SOME SILT

                            I TILL
                                                                                                                      Source: Johnson and Keller
                                                                                                                              1972
FIGURE II-3   STEUBKN LAKES: UNCON80LIDATED SUUFK'JAl. DEPOSITS

-------
                FIGURE  II-A    STEUBEN LAKES: BEDROCK  GEOLOGY
              gll
STEUBEN LAKES   ^''f
    AREA
                                                                              FEET
                                                                               1500
                                                                               1000
                                                                               IN in
                                                                               -1000
                                                                               -1500
                                                                               -2000
                        Source:  Johnson and Keller  1972
M1SSISSIPIAN
DEVONIAN AND
MISSISSIPIAN
    DEVONIAN
    SILURIAN
                                             LEGEND

                     MARSHALL SANDSTONE  (Varicolored  micaceous sandstone)
                     COLDWATER SHALE (Mostly gray  shale.   Cuyahoga Form-
                          ation in Ohio)

                     SUNBURY AND ELLSWORTH SHALES  (Green  shale with black
                          shale in upper and lower parts.   Includes Berea
                          Sandstone and Bedford  Shale in  Ohio)

                     ANTRIM SHALE (Black shale and gray shale and limestone
                          in lower part.  Ohio Shale  and  upper part of Tra-
                          verse Group in Ohio.)
                     TRAVERSE AND  DETROIT RIVER FORMATIONS (Mostly lime-
                          stone and dolomite.  Major  part of Traverse Grou]
                          and Dundee Limestone and Detroit River Group in
                          Ohio.)

                     SALINA FORMATION (Limestone and  dolomite.  Salina
                          Group in Ohio)
                     WABASH FORMATION (Dolomite, cherty  limestone, and sow
                          shale.)
                                 34

-------
Silurian Period.  Figure  II-5  shows that the surface  elevations  of  the
coldwater shale  range  from 700 to 750  feet  above  mean sea level  in  the
Study Area.

3.   SOILS

a.   General

     Study  Area soils  are  typical  of  those  formed  in glacial  drift
deposits.   They  are  loamy (composed of  clay, silt  and sand)  and  highly
variable  in nature,  ranging  from the  poorly  drained silty  and  clayey
loams  to the  well  drained  loamy  sands and  excessively well drained
gravelly sandy loams.

b.   Suitability for Septic  Tank Absorption  Fields

     Three  main  factors  determine site  suitability for on-site disposal
systems under Indiana State Board of Health Regulation H.S.E.  25 and  the
Steuben County Health Department Ordinance No.  500.  These are:

     •    A minimum  soil  percolation rate or permeability of 1 inch  per
          hour.

     •    High  seasonal  water table  and severe wetness.   The seasonal
          water  table depth must  exceed 5  feet.   The  area must  not
          display  seasonal   wetness,   ponding   of  water  or  periodic
          flooding during  any part of the year.

     •    Land slopes less than  12%.

     Percolation rates  the Study Area  are fixed by the  clay (and silt)
content  of  the  loamy soils.  Clayey soil materials do not easily trans-
mit water,  being very fine and flat and lacking enough continuous  pores.
Percolation rates  in clay soils are usually so low that these soils  are
termed  impermeable.   Clays mixed with  the otherwise permeable sands  and
gravels  tend  to fill the  openings  between these  latter  granular  mater-
ials,  thus  restricting flow through them.   Therefore, the  more clay in
the loam, the lower  its percolation rate.  The diverse percolation rates
in the Study Area vary with  soil clay content.

     High  water  table  and  severe  wetness  have  been grouped together
because  of their   inter-relationship   in  the Study Area.   Available
information indicates  that aquifer  depth  (water  table  and artesian)
generally exceeds 20 feet  throughout the Study Area (see Section B.2.a).
However,  high water tables  may be found in clay  soils  with permeabil-
ities  so  low  that water is  trapped in them, or as perched water tables
in  thin  permeable   soils  over  impermeable  clays  and  clayey materials.
Where  these occur in  low areas  and depressions,   soils  exhibit  severe
wetness,  ponding of water and periodic flooding  making them unsuitable
for on-site disposal systems.

     The steepness of land slopes is another important factor because of
its  adverse  effects on  the depths  of  sewers,  direction and rate of
surface  drainage,  erosion and sedimentation control,  and the method of
                                    35

-------
FIGURE II-5   STEUBEN LAKES: BEDROCK TOPOGRAPHY
                STEUBEN COUNTY

            12         13 85°      14
          Source:  Burger, et.al. 1966
               APPROXIMATE. OUTLINE OF STEUBEN
                            LAKES STUDY AREA

               Note:   Surface elevations
               range  from 900-1,050 ft.msl.
              36

-------
draining  basement  fixtures.    The  steeper  the slope  the greater  the
depths to which sewers must be placed,  and  the higher the construction
costs.   Steep  slopes  produce high  surface  drainage rates with corre-
spondingly low  infiltration of precipitation.  This reduced infiltration
provides  less  water  to  dilute waste  effluents applied  to  the  land.
Increased  surface  drainage  and  run-off associated  with  steep  slopes
increases the potential  for  soil erosion and  thus the  need for sedi-
mentation control.  Also  increased will be the potential for wastewater
effluents  to emerge  at  land  surface  within  too  close  to  absorption
fields  for  adequate   treatment.   The   combination  of  adverse  effects
precludes location  of  absorption fields  on slopes exceeding of 12%.   The
US  Public Health Bulletin No.  526 suggests  plans  for absorption fields
on  slopes up  to 12%.

     Taking  all of the  above  factors  into  consideration  and  the  Soil
Conservation  Service's (SCS)  soils interpretation data, the soils map of
Figure II-6  shows areas exhibiting severe limitations for on-site waste
disposal  systems.   Figure  II-1  shows  those  areas  limited  solely  by
slopes exceeding 12%.

     All  areas  other  than the shaded  ones  of Figure  II-6  can accept
on-site  disposal systems.  Such  areas  exist  throughout the  Study Area
close  enough to residential development to permit the use of cluster or
on-site  systems.   The  soils  in these areas  are mainly  the Boyer Loamy
Sand,  the  Fox  Sandy Loam, the  Oshtemo Loamy Sand, and the Riddles Sandy
Loam.

     In  the  south of  the  Steuben Lakes  Study Area, well-drained Fox and
Boyer  soils  predominate.   These  loamy soils  are underlain by course
sands  and gravel,  and have  slight  to moderate limitations  for septic
tank  absorptions fields,  but  severe  limitations for shallow excavation
because  of caving.  The  Fox  series  exceeds the Boyer  series  for clay
content, with a permeability  of 0.6 to 2.0 inches per hour  in the top 34
inches of  soil, as compared  to the  Boyer  range of 6.0 to  20 in the top
18  inches  of  soil  and  2.0  to 6 inches  per  hour  to  the depth  of 34
inches.  Fox  soils  are also common in  the western part of the Study Area
in  the region near  Lake Gage  and Lime  Lake.

     The Riddles series and Oshtemo series appear throughout  the Steuben
Lakes Study Area.   Though the  Oshtemo  series  is  coarser  than  the Riddles
and is underlain by coarse  sand  and gravel  instead  of  loam, as is the
Riddles  series, both  are  well-drained sandy loams.   The Riddles perme-
ability  series  ranges  from 0.6 to 6  inches  per hour, while  the Oshtemo
series ranges from  2 to 20 inches per  hour (SCS 1978).

c.   Suitability  for Land  Application

     Table II-1 (EPA 1977) summarizes  the physical and hydraulic proper-
ties  of  soils  required  for  effective  land  treatment of wastewaters by
overland flow (OF), slow  rate  (SR) or  spray  irrigation,  and rapid infil-
tration  (RI).   The EIS  alternatives  include  land  application by both
spray  irrigation  and  rapid  infiltration.    The  sites  selected in all
cases contain Oshtemo  soils.
                                 37

-------
LJ
OO
                                                                                                                                    UNSUITABLE SOILS FOR
                                                                                                                                           SEPTIC TANK
                                                                                                                                             SYSTEMS
                                                                                                                            Source; By letter, Arthur
                                                                                                                                    Mumma, Soil Con-
                                                                                                                                    servation Service,
                                                                                                                              0     USDA, 21 Dec. 1977
FIGURE H-6   STEUBEN LAKES: SOILS MAP

-------
                                   Table II-l

         INTERPRETATION OF SOIL PHYSICAL AND HYDRAULIC PROPERTIES TO BE
           CONSIDERED IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF LAND APPLICATION SYSTEMS3
DEPTH OF SOIL PROFILE (ft.)
     <  1-2
     >  2-5
        5-10
Suitable for OFD
Suitable for SR and OF
Suitable for all processes
TEXTURE AND STRUCTURE
  Fine texture, poor structure
  Fine texture, well-structured
  Coarse texture, well-structured
Suitable for OF
Suitable for SR and possibly OF
Suitable for SR and RI
INFILTRATION RATE  (in./hr.)
        0.2-6
        2.0
        0.2
Suitable for SR
Suitable for RI
Suitable for OF
SUBSURFACE PERMEABILITY

  Exceeds or equals  infiltration rate
  Less than infiltration  rate
Infiltration rate limiting
May limit application rate
a   Including overland  flow  (OF),  slow rate  or  spray  irrigation  (SR), and
    rapid  infiltration  (RI)  systems.

    Suitable soil  depth must be  available  for shaping of  overland  flow
    slopes.  Slow  rate  process using  a grass crop  may also  be  suitable.

    1 ft.  = 0.305  m
    1 in.  = 2.54 cm


Source:   U.S.-EPA (1977), Process Design  Manual for  Land Treatment  of
          Municipal Wastewater.
                                       39

-------
     The Soil Conservation Service's  (SCS)  interpretation of  the  Oshtemo
series soils indicate that:

     •    Depth of soil profile to  water  table  exceeds  6  feet;

     •    The soils  are coarse, well  textured loamy and sandy  glacio-
          fluvial deposits over coarse  sand and fine  gravel;

     •    The limiting infiltration rate  in the soil  profile  ranges  from
          2.0 to 6.0 inches/hour;

     •    Subsurface  permeability  exceeds  20  inches/hour  and does  not
          limit the application rate.

     Comparison  of these properties  with  those  listed  in  Table  II-l
indicates that  the soils of  the  Oshtemo  series  are suitable for  land
application by both spray irrigation and  rapid  infiltration.

d.   Prime  Agricultural Lands

     Table  II-2  soil  types in Steuben  County classified as  prime agri-
cultural  lands  by the  Soil  Conservation  Service,  US  Department  of
Agriculture.  Those in  the Study Area  are  shown shaded  in Figure II-7.
These lands are distributed throughout  the  area with  the  major  locations
southwest of,  and  between  Crooked  Lake,  and  Jimmerson Lake and  Lake
James  They  are   generally away from  the   densely  developed  lakeshore
areas.

4.   ATMOSPHERE

a.   Climate

     The Study Area climate is a humid  continental  type  characterized by
warm  summers and  cold  winters.  Lake Michigan definitely  effects  the
area's weather and climate.   Prevailing  east and northeast winds moder-
ate the  temperature,  resulting in  warmer winter temperatures and cooler
summer temperatures than further inland.  Annual precipitation is fairly
moderate, usually exceeding 35 inches.  Climatological  data  (temperature
and precipitation) are collected in Angola, approximately 5 miles south-
east  of  the Study  Area.   This information is  presented in  Table II-3.

     Temperature.   The  average annual  temperature  of the Study  Area is
48.7°F.   The warmest  month   is July,  with  an average  temperature  of
72.4°F.  Summer temperatures  of 90°F or above are  common during July and
August.   However,  because temperatures are strongly influenced  by  Lake
Michigan, they very seldom exceeds 95°F.  The  coolest  month  is January,
with  an  average  temperature  of 23.4°F.  Minimum temperatures of 20°F or
below  are common  in  winter.   The  growing  season  is approximately 160
days.

     Precipitation.   The  average  annual  precipitation is  35.50  inches.
The wettest  month is  April when an average of  3.99 inches of precipita-
tion is recorded.  The driest month is  February when  the monthly average
                                   40

-------
                                    Table II-2

                    PRIME AGRICULTURE LANDS OF STEUBEN COUNTY
jymbol

Ad
BaA
BtA
Bz
CrA
Dr
FoA
FoB2
HaA .
Hw
MbA
MbB2
Me
Md
MhB2
Mn
MoB2
Pa
Pe
RaB2
Rb
RxA
RxB2
Se
Sh
Td
Wa
WcA
Wh
Wt
Description

Adrian muck
Blount silt loam, 0 to 3% slopes
Bretns fine sand, 0 to 2% slopes
Brookston loam
Crosier loam, 0 to 3% slopes
Del Rey silt loam, 0 to 3% slopes
Fox sandy loam, 0 to 2% slopes
Fox sandy loam, 2 to 6% slopes, eroded
Haskins loam, 0 to 3% slopes
Houghton muck
Martinsville loam, 0 to 2% slopes
Martinsville loam, 2 to 6% slopes, eroded
Martisco muck
Maumee loamy fine sand
Miami loam, 2 to 6% slopes, eroded
Milford silty clay loam
Morley silt loam, 2 to 6% slopes, eroded
Palms muck
Pewamo silty clay loam
Rawson loam, 2 to 6% slopes, eroded
Rensselaer loam
                    0 to 2% slopes
                    2 to
Riddles sandy loam
Riddles sandy loam
Sebewa loam
Shoals silt loam
Tedrow loamy sand
Wallkill silt loam
Warsaw sandy loam, 0 to 2% slopes
Washtenaw silt loam
Whitaker loam
slopes,  eroded
                                      41

-------
                                                                                                                         PRIME AGRICULTURAL
                                                                                                                          SOILS
                                                                                                                    Source: By letter, Arthur
                                                                                                                            MuBiaia, Soil Con-
                                                                                                                            servation Service,
                                                                                                                            USDA, 14 July 1978
FIGURE II-7   STEUBEN LAKES:  PRIME AGRICULTURAL SOILS

-------
                                                     Table II-3

                       CLIMATOLOGICAL SUMMARIES FOR THE STEUBEN LAKES REGIONAL WASTE DISTRICT


                           Jan.     Feb.  Mar.   Apr.   May   June   July   Aug.  Sept.   Oct.   Nov.  Dec.  Annual

Angola
  Mean Temperature         23.4     25.2  34.3   47.6   58.4  68.5   72.4   70.9  63.6    53.0   39.1  27.4  48.7
  (degree Farenhelt)

  Precipitation normals    2.02     1.85  2.72   3.99   3.61  3.76   3.40   3.28  2.98    2.87   2.80  2.22  35.50
  (inches)
  Wind Direction           west-    	  	—  south-  	  	  south-  	  	   south-
                         northwest               west                west                 west

  Wind Speed (mph)          10       66654236       6
Source:  U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA 1970; U.S. Geological Survey 1970.

-------
precipitation  is  1.85  inches.    During  summer,  precipitation  occurs
primarily  as  scattered showers  and  thunderstorms.  The  average annual
snowfall  is  approximately 32  inches,  with 1  inch or  more  of snowfall
occurring at least on 30 days.  Mean annual relative humidity is 70% and
the  mean  annual  dew point  temperature is  37°F  (US  Geological Survey
1970).

     Wind Direction and Speed.   On an annual basis, wind  speeds in the
Study  Area average  6 miles  per hour  (mph).   The windiest  months  are
January  and February  when the  average speed  is  10.0 mph.   The  least
windy month is  July when the average wind speed is 2.0 mph (USGS 1970).

     During January, February, and March,  the prevailing winds are from
the  west-northwest;  during the remainder of the year,  prevailing  winds
are  from the southwest.   Table  II-3  contains• climatological summaries
for the Study Area.

     Catastrophic Meteorological  Events.   On   the  average,  40  days  of
thunderstorms occur  during the  year in the Study Area.   The season is
May through August, although a few may occur during other months.

     The  Study  Area  is  outside the principal tornado zone of the United
States.   Therefore,  it  is not  considered a  high occurrence  area  for
tornados.

     Maximum expected winds are  the  strongest sustained one-minute wind
speeds  expected within  a certain recurrence  interval,  at  a  standard
height of 30 feet above the ground.  In the Study Area, maximum winds of
80  mph  occur   at  mean intervals  of  50  years  (US Environmental  Data
Service 1968).

b.   Noise

     Excessive noise may adversely affect people living near its source.
Therefore,  wastewater  facilities must be designed and  operated so that
noise  levels  would  not  irritate  nearby inhabitants or  harm  plant
workers.  Other than of highway or road noises and motorboat noises, the
Study Area has no known intensive noise sources.

c.   Odors

     Organic material containing sulfur and/or nitrogen, in the absence
of oxygen, undergoes incomplete oxidation,  resulting in the emissions of
smelly by-products.   The degree  of  tolerance  to  bad-smelling gases is
subjective, depending on  the  person  exposed to the odor and the concen-
tration and intensity of the odor.  Odors coming from domestic waste are
particularly objectionable to  most people.   For this reason, wastewater.
treatment  works must  be  carefully  located,  designed,  and operated!

     It  is assumed  that  no  objectionable odors  of long  duration are
present  in the  Study Area.   This assumption is primarily based on the
fact that,  to  date, no  letters  or other forms  of complaint from local
residents have  been reported.
                                  44

-------
d.   Air  Quality

     The  Air Pollution  Control Board of  Indiana samples and  analyzes
procedures for  air  pollutants  in accordance with EPA regulations  (Title
40 CFR, Part 50)  (Indiana Air Pollution Control Board 1969).   The Board
has  established  air  quality  basins  and  priority  ratings  within  the
State, as well  as primary and secondary standards.  Appendix  B contains
these standards.

     Steuben  County  has  "Basin Priority B" for total suspended particu-
lates,  indicating that  the ambient air  concentration  of  particulates
equals,  or   exceeds  the  secondary  air  quality  standard, but  not  the
primary  standard.   Table II-4  displays  the  total suspended particulate
readings  in  or near the Study Area.  Both primary  and  secondary stan-
dards  for particulates were exceeded in 1976 and in the first months of
1977.   Neither  the  primary  nor  the  secondary  standards  for  sulfur
dioxide were violated  in  1976  or 1977.

     Steuben County  has a "Basin Priority  C" rating for SC>2, CO, Oa,  and
NC>2, which means that  the ambient air concentration for these  pollutants
is less  than the secondary  standards as specified in Regulation APC  14.
B.   WATER RESOURCES

1.   SURFACE  WATER

a.   Surface  Water Hydrology

     The major  surface water features located in the Study Area are Snow
Lake,  Lake James,  Jimmerson  Lake, Crooked Lake,  Lake  Gage,  Lime Lake,
Lake  Syl-van,  Lake  Charles,  Marsh Lake,  Little  Otter Lake,  Big Otter
Lake,  and  Crooked Creek.  There are  two  general  drainage basins within
the Study  Area.   Surface water drainage in the watershed is dominated by
Crooked  Creek which  flows  south  from  Michigan  through Snow  Lake,  the
upper  and  middle basins of Lake James,  and  northwest through Jimmerson
Lake.   Another branch  also  flows in  a northwesterly direction through
Crooked Lake, Lake  Gage  and Lime Lake until it reaches the Pigeon River.
The  Pigeon River is  a  tributary to the  St. Joseph  River which in turn
discharges to Lake Michigan near  Benton  Harbor.   Follette Creek origi-
nates  in  the northeast corner of  the Study Area and flows northwesterly
through Marsh Lake, Little Otter Lake and Big Otter Lake before emptying
into  Snow  Lake.   Thus,  discharges   from Marsh Lake  can  reach beyond
Jimmerson  Lake.  Figure II-8  shows  the surface  water  systems  of the
Study Area.

     Surface water  hydrology can pinpoint the nature of Study Area lakes
and streams.  Drainage basin size, tributary flows,  lake volume,  hydrau-
lic retention time  and precipitation  directly influence the quantity and
quality  of surface  water  resources.    Table  II-5  presents the physical
characteristics  of  the  lakes.   Additional  discussions  follows  in the
next few paragraphs.
                                     45

-------
                                                        II-4
                            AIR QUALITY SUMMARIES FOR LOCATIONS IN INDIANA (ug/m)
                    Total Susp. Particulates
Sulfur Oxides (as SO,
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO,,)
Site
Ft . Wayne

Pokagon
Ft . Wayne
Pokagon
Year
1976

1976
1977
1977
No. of
Obs.
58
17
58
23
26
Geom.
Mean
64

47
83a
50
1st
Max
191b
92
262a
167b
178b
2nd
Max
156b
83
209b
156b
171b
No. of
Obs.
47
15
43
18

Arith.
Mean
25

17
31

1st
Max
95
70
71
121

2nd No. of Arith.
Max Obs. Mean
85 38
62 7
56 43 14
88

1st
Max
66
58
33


2nd
Max
65
55
33


   Exceeds primary standards




   Exceeds secondary standards




Source:  Indiana State Board of Health, Air Quality Summaries, 1966 and 1967.

-------
             :s     'cp* *•*-•««• - - ~ .* ••
             ^>     '"  -*"  %- *
                                                                                                                               LEGEND

                                                                                                                        • STREAM FLOW GAGE

                                                                                                                          FLOW DIRECTION
                                                                                                                    ^'v'*! WETLANDS
                                                                                                                          NEW LAKES, PONDS  OR
                                                                                                                               OTHER WATER  BODIES
                                                                                                                               NOT ON ORIGINAL
                                                                                                                               USCS BASE MAP
                                                                                                                               (EPIC 1979)
                                                                                                                    cfa - CUBIC FEET PER SECOND
                                                                                                                       rce:  USGS  1960;  EPIC 1979
FIGURE ll-fi   STEUBEN LAKES: SURFACE WATER HYDROLOGY

-------
                                                  Table II- 5

             PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OP MARSH LAKE, LITTLE OTTER LAKE,  BIG OTTER LAKE,  SNOW LAKE,
                      LAKE JAMES, JIMMERSON LAKE, CROOKED LAKE, LAKE GAGE, AND LIME LAKE


                      MARSH   LITTLE OTTER   BIG OTTER   SNOW   LAKE    JIMMERSON   CROOKED    LAKE    LIME
                                                                JAMES     LAKE       LAKE      GAGE    LAKE

                                                         104.1  119.7     133.6      27.6      44.8    45.3


                                                           1.7    4.2       1.1       3.3       1.3    0.22


                                                           5.8    7.3       4.4       6.1       9.2     2.4


                                                                 26.2      17.7      23.5      21.3     7.9


                                                                  1.1      0.57      0.24      0.17    0.20


                                                          0.48    1.1      0.61      0.24      0.20    0.21


                                                                 30.5       3.6      19.8      12.0    0.53


                                                           2.1   0.85      0.18       2.6       1.9   0.081
 Retention Time  (yrs)

Information compiled from the following sources:

Ecol Sciences, Inc.  1976.  Environmental Assessment for the Steuben Lakes Regional Sewer District Facility
     Plan.
USGS.  1974.  Water Resources Data for Indiana.
EPA.  1976.  National Eutrophication Survey Reports on Marsh Lake, Lake James, and Crooked Lake.
PARAMETER
Drainage Basin Area
(Square Kilometers)
Lake Surface Area
(Square Kilometers)
Lake Mean Depth
(Meters)
Maximum Depth
•> (Meters)
Inflow
Outflow
(m^/sec)
Lake Volume
(106 m3)
Mean Hydraulic
LAKE
38.3
0.23

6.1
11.6
0.36
0.36
1.4
0.12
LAKE
40.7
0.14

6.7
11.3
0.19
0.19
12.4
2.1
LAKE
55.2
0.28

7.9
11.6
0.19
0.19
16.8
2.8
LAKE
104.
1.

5.
25.
0.4
0.4
31.
2.

-------
     Size of Drainage Basins.   The  drainage basin  sizes  range  from 1.0
to 51.6  square  miles.   The larger ones act as significant catchments of
precipitation  which reaches  the lakes  as  runoff.   Ratios  of  drainage
basin-to-lake  surface   area  ratios  range  from  a  low  of 2:1  (Crooked
Lake  -  Basin #2) to a  maximum of 296:1 (Little  Otter  Lake).   The high
ratios  exhibited by  Little Otter  Lake, Lime  Lake and Big  Otter Lake
suggest  a  relatively  greater  impact  from  non-point  source  runoff
reaching these  lakes.

     Tributary  Flow.  There  are several  tributaries in  the  Study Area
(see  FigureII-8).   In addition to  Crooked  Creek  and  Follette  Creek,
other streams  include  Lake Charles Creek,  Glen  Eden Stream  and Lagoona
Park  Ditch all  tributary  to  the  Lower  Basin  of  Lake  James;  and
Palfreyman  Ditch, Carpenter Ditch and  Captain  Cabin Creek,  all inflows
to  the  first Basin of  Crooked Lake.  Stream flow data are limited since
there is only one gaging  station now monitoring  stream flow in the Study
Area.   The  US  Geological Survey  (USGS) has maintained  a continuously
recording  stream flow  gage  at Panama,  the outlet  of  Lake  Gage,  since
1969.   The  average  discharge of Crooked Creek at this station from 1969
to  1976 was 7.19 cubic feet per second  (cfs).  Monitoring records indi-
cate  that  flows as  high  as 26  cfs occur during  and after spring thaw in
March,  April and May.  Flows  as low as 0.50 cfs  have  been recorded in
August  (USGS 1975,  1976).

      Limited  historical  flow  data  is   available   for  the  Nevada  Mills
gaging  station on  Crooked Creek below  the outfall  of  Jimmerson Lake.
The  7-day,  10-year  low flow record  at  this station was  1.0 to 2.5 cfs;
the   maximum  was  222  cfs   (Ecol  Sciences  1976).   Stream  discharge
monitoring  there has now ceased  (by telephone,  Don Hoggavan,  USGS, 29
September 1978).

      Lake Hydraulic Retention  Time.    Assuming   complete  mixing,  the
retention  time  of a lake  is  the time required  for natural processes to
replace the entire volume of  its water.  For  most of  the lakes  in the
Study Area, less than  2  years  is required  for one complete change of
lake  water.  Lime Lake has  the  shortest time of only 29  days, while Big
Otter Lake, with 2.8  years,  represents  the other extreme.  Individual
lake  basins,  for example, the  Lower  Basin of Lake  James, have substan-
tially  longer  retention times.

      Precipitation.  The  average Study  Area precipitation from  1973-1974
was  reported as  43.9  inches  (111.6  cm)  by US EPA's National  Eutrophi-
cation  Survey   (NES) study.  This  is  somewhat higher than the  long-term
annual  average  of 35.5  inches  (91.3  cm)  (NES  1976).

      Hydraulic  Budget.   A generalized  hydraulic budget  for  a lake  in-
cludes  the  hydraulic inputs such  as  tributary  inflow,  precipitation and
groundwater and  the outputs  such  as tributary  outflow,  evaporation  and
groundwater.   Table II-6  summarizes  the hydraulic  budgets  of some Study
Area  Lakes.  Evaporation was  calculated  as  the difference  between  the
total input and  total  output  for each lake.   Most of  the  information
presented is derived from US EPA's  NES  studies  (1976).
                                  49

-------
                                  Table II-6
          WATER BUDGETS FOR MARSH LAKE,  CROOKED LAKE,  AND LAKE JAMES
                 (1973-74)  IN 106 M3/YR  — FROM EPA NES (1976)
                                  Marsh Lake
    Tributaries
    Immediate Drainage
    Precipitation
    Freemont STP
                          Total      11.9

2.   Outputs

    Outlet                           11.4
    Evaporation                       0.5
                          Total      11.9
                                 Crooked Lake

1.  Inputs^

    Tributaries                       5.6
    Immediate Drainage                1.8
    Precipitation                     3.6
                          Total      11.0

2.  Outputs

    Outlet (Al)                       9.1
    Evaporation                       1.9
                          Total      11.0
                                  Lake James
    Tributaries                      33.3
    Immediate Drainage                2.2
    Precipitation                     4. 7
                          Total      40.2

2.  Outputs

    Outlet                           36.9
    Evaporation                       3.3
                          Total      40.2

                                      50

-------
b.   Surface  Water Quality

     Most  information  presented  in  this  section  comes  from  studies
conducted  on  Crooked  Lake,  Lake James  and Marsh  Lake  by the  US  EPA
National  Eutrophication  Survey   in   1973  and  1974  and  studies  for
Jimmerson  Lake,  Lake  Gage,  Snow Lake, Crooked  Lake,  and Lake James by
the  Steuben County  Health  Department  (SCHD).   The  Health Department's
data are not as extensive as  US EPA's,  and the detection  limits of their
instrumentation  are rather high,  making  the  interpretation of the data
more difficult.

     The available  data appear in the  following  order:  nutrient budget,
open water quality, phosphorus loading-trophic  condition relationships,
and  bacteriological  quality.  The  discussion  is  intended to  put  the
surface  water quality into  perspective by independently presenting  the
nutrient  budget and  lake  water  quality, and  linking  them by using  the
phosphorus  loading-trophic  condition relationships.   Finally, the prob-
lems of bacterial contamination are  discussed.

     Nutrient  Budget.   Nutrient  budgets  for Crooked  Lake,  Lake James,
and  Marsh  Lake  were  derived from  the US  EPA  National Eutrophication
Survey  data  collected in 1973  and  1974.  This data  base  is the most
extensive  for  nutrient  budget analysis.   Wherever  the  US EPA surveys
were  not  available,  the  data collected  and analyzed   by  the  Steuben
County  Health Department  were used.   Because of  the  limited extent of
the  data  base, only phosphorus loadings were  established for  such lakes
as  Lake Gage,  Jimmerson  Lake and Snow Lake.   Finally,  the  simple  nu-
trient  export  model  developed  by  Omernik  (1977)  was   used  to derive
approximate  phosphorus loadings   from  the watershed  runoff  for Big Otter
Lake,  Little  Otter  Lake  and  Lime Lake.  Phosphorus  contributions  from
such  sources  as  precipitation and  septic  tank  leachates  for the  last
three  lakes were estimated  following  US EPA's guidelines (US  EPA 1972).
For  those lakes lacking measured nutrient outputs,  a  theoretical reten-
tion rate  developed by Kirchner and  Dillon  (1975)  was  derived.   Appendix
C-l presents  the  nutrient budgets by lake  and  source.  Figure  II-9 shows
the  total phosphorus  inputs  for  all the  lakes by  major  sources.  In all
lakes  tributary  inflow  contributes  the greatest amount of  nutrients,
followed  by precipitation and runoff from the  immediate drainage area.
Septic  tank systems  only supply a  small  portion of  the total  nutrient
load  into the lakes--
-------
3,000 r-
                                                                LEGEND

                                                           POINT SOURCE

                                                           NON-POINT SOURCE  (TRIBUTARIES)
                                                        l   NON-POINT SOURCE  (IMMEDIATE
                                                                 DRAINAGE)
                                                           PRECIPITATION

                                                           SEPTIC TANKS
    0
             MARSH
              LAKE
SNOW
LAKE
LAKE
JAMES
LITTLE
OTTER
 LAKE
                        FIGURE  11-9    COMPARISON  OF PHOSPHORUS  LOADINGS  BY  SOURCE
                                CONTRIBUTIONS  FOR  THE STEUBEN  LAKES  STUDY AREA

-------
dissolved oxygen saturation  level, and conductivity) as plotted over the
period  1973  to  1977.   These graphs are  to  assist in understanding the
open water conditions of the  lakes.

     This analysis  suggest no definite trend  in  water quality oh these
lakes during  those  5 years.  Water  quality  variations over this period
do  not  exceed  annual  fluctuations,  inherent  in  the system.   The water
quality  conditions  seem to  have  remained  relatively  steady during the
last few years t

     Most  of  the lakes  have moderate levels  of  phbsphorUs! arid chldro-
phyll  a.  Based on  the  values  of these  used  by US EPA for trophic
classification,  the  lakes  can be  considered as1 currently ttiesotrophic  or
eutrophic.  The Secchi  disc depth  readings  are  between 2 ffl  to  4 to or
within  the  range of mesotrophic  lakes;  high  Secchi disk readings show
good water  transparency in a healthy, fresh  lake.   Dissolved oxygen in
these lakes is usually depleted  in  the  brittoitt waters  during the summer
months,  one sign of  poor water quality.

     Survey data indicate  that  Crooked  Lake  and Lake James  are meso-
trophic  while Marsh  Lake is  eutrophic based on the  classification scheme
developed  by  EPA(NES  1976).   Note  that  in Marsh Lake the 0ecctii depth
was  only 1.22 m, total phosphorus concentration  was over than b.045 mg
P/l, and chlorophyll a level varies froril 19". 4 (Jg/1 tb 50.6 jjg/l during
the  1973 growing season  suggesting a highly eiitrophic  condition.
     Phosphorus  Loading-Trophic Condition Relationships.   This  section
examines relationships between p'hbsphofils inputs  and tilfe resulting water
quality.  Such  relationships  are  needed to predict  results of phosphorus
loadings  in  the various  wastewater management  alternatives.   App'endix
C-3  presents  a  detailed  description  of  the  procedures  required  to
examine  these relationships using Dillon's model  (1975).  Only the main
points of the  results are  included ih ttii^
     Figure  11-10 shows the  trophic  conditions  of the following lakes:
Lake James,  Crooked Lake and  Marsh Lake based on the  1973-1974 data by
US EPA;  Lake Gage, Snow Lake  and Jimmerson  Lake based  on  1977 data col-
lected  by  the  Health  Department;  and  Lime  Lake,  Big Otter  Lake and
Little  Otter Lake  estimated by  the  Omernik model  and reflecting 1975
conditions.  Dillon's model  describes Crooked  Lake,  Jimmerson Lake, Lake
Gage and Lime Lake as  mesotrophic,  and  Lake James,  Big Otter Lake, Snow
Lake and Marsh  Lake  as eutrophic.   Little  Otter  Lake is classified as
hypereutrophic .   These  results  are  consistent with  the  water quality
data in the  previous  section  except Lake JaMeS.  The*  differing conclu-
sions  on the  trophic  status  of  Lake James  are  due to  the use of two
different  classification schemes.  In fact, Lake  James in on the  lower
edge of  eutrophic lakes and  close to mesotrophic  lakes (Figure 11-10).
Marsh  Lake's  phosphorus loading  is  even higher than the eutrophic  load-
ing  associated  with  its   physical  and morphological characteristics.

     Bacterial Contamination.   Low   levels  of fecal  coliform bacteria
have been  reported by  the  Steuben County Health Department  for the five
monitored Study Area lakes.   The  225  samples taken by  the  Health Depart-
ment from  lake and nearshore  sites  (1973-1977) indicated  that  less than
1  fecal  coliform  colony/100  ml  was  detected.   However,  canals and
inflowing  steams   and   ditches  tend to  support  higher  densities  of
bacterial  organisms.   There  the  tributary  sampling  data  (1973-1977)
318 D10                             53

-------
   i.o L7
04
 E
   O.I
  0.01
            EUTROPHIC
I   1  I  I I  I I


  MARSH LAkE
     O


     «SNOW
                             BIS OTTER
                               LAKE
                                o
                           LAkE JAMES
                              O
                                "^ SAGE
     O CROOKED LAKE


  oJIMMERSON
     LAkE
      LO                          10.0

                        MEAN DEPTH (METERS)


                  LsAREAL PHOSPHORUS INPUT (g/m2/yr)
                  R=PHOSPHORUS RETENTION COEFFICIENT
                  P- HYDRAULIC FLUSHING RATE (yr"1}
                                     100.0
          FIGURE n-IO  TROPHIC CONDITIONS OF MARSH LAKE,
               SNOW LAKE, BIG OTTER LAKE, LAKE JAMES,
             LAKE GAGE, CROOKED LAKE, JIMMERSON LAKE,
                      AND LIME LAKE (1973-1974)
                                54

-------
indicates  counts  from 7  to 238 fecal coliforms colonies/ 100 ml.  The
tributaries  to Crooked  Lake  seem  to be  the  most  contaminated, with
values exceeding the Indiana water quality standard.   Possible  causes of
high bacterial concentrations include animal wastes,  agricultural  runoff
and malfunctioning septic tanks.

c.   Surface  Water  Use  and  Classification

     Surface water  in the Study Area is Used  primarily  for  recreation.
Fishing,  boating,  and wildlife observation are  among  the  opportunities
offered by Study Area lakes.  Area surface waters also assimilate  waste-
water effluent.  The Pokagon State Park maintains a wastewater  treatment
facility  discharging to Snow Lake.  Some of the surface waters  also sup-
port  various fisheries.    Lake  waters are  not used  for domestic water
supplies  (Reussow and Rohne 1975).

     The  Indiana  Stream  Pollution Control Board (ISPCB 1977) has  estab-
lished water quality standards  for all waters within Indiana.  The lakes
of  the  Study Area must meet standards for  "whole  body contact"  recrea-
tion,  while the  streams  must meet  those  for  "partial body  contact"
recreation.   Appendix C-4 contains   the  complete  set of  standards for
surface water  uses within  the Study Area.

2.   GROUNDWATER  RESOURCES

a.   Groundwater  Hydrology

      Sand and  gravel  units within   the  250   to  350  feet thick  uncon-
solidated glacial  drift  constitute the major  groundwater sources in the
Study Area.   The  aquifers are  mostly discontinuous types characteristic
of  glacial  deposits.   Aquifers   in  the  liibre  extensive,   well  sorted
materials of the  outwash plains will be bettet than in the small valley
trains.   The  ground  and  end till  moraines will  be  relatively poor
aquifers.  Very few wells  reached the bedrock  shales, normally very poor
aquifers.

     Drillers'  well  logs  (50)  supplied by  the  Indiana  Department  of
Natural Resources have indicated the  presence  of thick clay layers,  out-
cropping  in many  areas interspersed  with sand and gravel  deposits  (see
Appendix  C-5).   These  clay  layers   create confining  (artesian)  condi-
tions,  the  limits  of which are  Unknown.   The situation is  essentially
one in which artesian conditions a'ild  w'a'ter  ta'ble (uricdnfined) conditions
can be expected at unidentified intervals.

     Precipitation  averages 35.5  inches  annually, with 26 inches being
accounted for  by evapotranspiration.  Average  annual runoff  for the area
is  9.5  inches,  with approximately  80% being  derived from  groundwater
seepage  into streams.

     Recharge  of the  aquifers  by precipitation occurs  through the uncon-
fined  sections.   The extent   of  this  recharge  in  the Study  Area  is
unknown.   Reussow and Rohne (1975)   have  estimated  that  an average  of
2,020  million gallons per day from  precipitation replenish the ground
and surface  water supplies of  the  St. Joseph  River Basin.  Their
                                    55

-------
estimate  of  storage  within basin aquifers is  5,000,000  million gallons
of fresh water.

     The  elevation of  the top  of  the  aquifers  above  mean  sea  level
throughout most  of the area  is  920  to 940 feet, but  approaches  940 to
960  feet in  the Snow Lake  area and  908  to  1,000  feet just  south of
Crooked  Lake  (see  Figure  11-11).  These levels  refer  to the top of the
saturated zone,  i.e.,  the water table where the  aquifer is unconfined,
or the  lower  surface  of the  confining bed, where the  aquifer is of the
confined or artesian type (Reussow and Ratine 1975).

     Ground  surface  elevations  in the developed  areas around  the  lakes
are  generally 1,000 to  1,050 feet  above  mean sea  level  in Snow  Lake,
Lake  James,  Jimmerson Lake,  and Crooked  Lake  areas falling  to 960 to
1,000  feet  in the  Lake  Gage and  Nevada Mills ' areas  of the northwest.

     A water  table well at the junction of County Roads 300 West and 300
North,  midway between Lake James  and Crooked Lake, showed highest and
lowest  water  levels of  60.30 feet and  62.05  feet,  respectively,  below
land surface  datum (1,065 above mean sea level) during 1976 (USGS 1976).
The well logs of earlier refererice indicate that water  levels in areas
of water table conditions are generally more  than 20  feet below ground
surface, with but few exceptions.

     Well capacities  in  the  Jimmerson-Lake JameS area average less than
10 gallons per minute per foot,  while dh average of 11  to 20 gallons per
minute per foot of drawdown is found in the remainder of the Study Area.
The  minimum  available drawdown  in the area  ranges from 51  to 60  feet.

b.   Groundwater Quality

     Groundwater throughout the St. Joseph River Basin is of the calcium
magnesium bicarbonate  type,  very hard with high  iron  content exceeding
the  US Public Health Service (1962)  recommended  limit.   Otherwise, the
water is of good chemical quality for most uses.  In the city of Angola,
to the south  of  the  Study Area,  the iron content is 1.0  mg/1 and the
hardness 430 mg/1 at a depth of 100 feet (Ressow and Rohne 1975).

c.   Groundwater Use

     Groundwater  sources  provide essentially all of the domestic  water
supplies  of  the Sttldy Area1.   Present grtiilttd'vJa'tet use within the  Study
Area of  the  order of one million  gallons  per  day (1 mgd) should double
by the year 2000.

     Reussow  and Rohne  (1975) have estimated that all but 10 mgd of the
74 mgd of water used in  the  St.  Joseph River Basin in  which the Study
Area is  located)  is  groundwater.  This is a mere 10% of the groundwater
discharged to streams  throughout the basin and is likely to increase to
about 20% of that amount by the year 2020.  With an estimated  storage of
5,000,000 gallons of water within the aquifers of the basin, Reussow and
Rohne (1975) have concluded that enough groundwater exists to  supply all
the  foreseeable  demands.   Groundwater  usage  in  the  • Study Area is
negligible compared with  the  available resources; future demands should
pose no problems.

                                    56

-------
                                         srn JOSEPH
                                         RIVER BASIN
                                                  35*   S!udy
                                                      Arec
LOCATION OF ST. JOSEPH     a
     RIVER BASIN
0
                                                          Source:  Reussow
                                                          and Rohne 1975
       FIGURE  11-11    ELEVATIONS OF THE
                TOP OF AQUIFERS
                           57
    LEGEND

780-900 FEET ABOVE
    MEAN SEA LEVEL
    (Range of ele-
     vation of top
     of aquifer)
900-1040 FEET ABOVE
    MEAN SEA LEVEL
    (Range of ele-
     vation of top
     of aquifer)
40% OF TEE WELLS
    ARE COMPLETED
    IN AN AQUIFER
    MORE THAN 6C
    FEET DEEPER
    THAN THE  INDI-
    CATED TOP OF
    THE PRINCIPAL
    AQUIFER
STEUBEN LAKES
     STUDY AREA

-------
3.   WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT

     Water resource management,  is  a  complex of marly elements,  in  which
the Federal, State  and  local  governments all  have an interest.   To name
just  a  few  of  these  elements --  irrigation,  municipal  water  supply,
maintenance of  navigable  waters and  protection of  the productivity  of
the  soil   --  illustrates  the  broad  rahge  of  activities  under  this
heading.   Among  the   most   important,   however,  is   preservation  or
restoration  of  US  water  quality.   the   Clean  Water  Act  arid  Its  l'J77
amendments  outline  a  framework for  comprefieris ive  water  quality  man-
agement which  applied  to  groundwater  as  well  as  to surface  waters.

a.   Clean Water Act

     Water quality  is  the  responsibility of  the  United States  Environ-
mental  Protection Agency  (US  EPA)  in coordination with the  appropriate
State agency,  in  this  case  the Indiana  Stream Pollution Control  Hoard
(ISPCB).   However,  the  Clean  Water Act  instructed all  Federal  agencies
to  safeguard  water  quality standards  in carrying out  their  respective
missions.   As the lead  agency,  US  EPA coordinates the  national  effort,
sets  standards,  and reviews  reports  of   other  Agencies.  Certain  other
agencies  share  in  the water  pollution   control  effort:   for  example,
Federal cost-sharing is authorized  in  agricultural  projects  designed  to
improve water quality  by  controlling farm runoff.  In  some  cases,  e.g.,
the  Soil  Conservation  Service  (SCS),  these  added  responsibilities may
coincide with programs  to  reduce soil erosion.

     In  delineating  the   responsibilities   of  the  various  levels  of
government  for  water  quality,  Congress  recognized the  rights of the
States  with  regard  to  their  waters.   It  authbriked fiihdirig  for develop-
ment  of  State  plans  for  pollution control and  State  water  quality
standards  (which  may  be more  restrictive  than Federal standards), and
for  research.   If a State  meets certain criteria, it is certified by  US
EPA  as  the  entity  responsible  for administration  of the activity  in
question.    The  US  EPA may  deny  certification,  and  in all cases  it
retains power of enforcement of established  standards,  State  or Federal.
(The State of Indiana  has  been granted certification by EPA.)

     Among the goals and deadlines  set in the Clean Water  Act are these:

          "it is the national goal  thdt the  discharge of pollutants
          into the navigable waters be eliminated  by 1985...

          "an interim goal of  water  quality which provided for the
          protection and propagation of  fish, shellfish,  and wild-
          life and  provides for recreation  in and on the  water [is
          to] be achieved  by July 1,  1983".
                                     58

-------
     This  legislation  requires  publicly  owned treatment  works  dis-
charging  effluent  to surface  waters to  least  provide  secondary treat-
ment, i.e., biological oxidation of organic wastes.   Municipalities must
provide  the  "best practicable  technology" by  1983  and localities must
address both  the  control of all major  sources  of stream pollution (in-
cluding  combined  sewer  overflows  and agricultural,  street and  other
surface  runoff)  and  the  cost-effectiveness of various control measures.
The use of unconventional technologies must also be considered.

     The  key provisions  on water quality  planning stipulate  that  to
receive aid a State must provide a continuing planning process.   Part of
Section  208  of  the Clean Water Act requires the States to inventory all
the  sources  of pollution  of surface and  ground  waters  both point* and
non-point"",  and to establish priorities  for  the  correction  of  substan-
tial  water  quality  problems  within  a given area.   The 208 plans  are
intended  to  provide  an  areawide  and,  taken  together,  a  statewide
framework for  the more  local  decisions  on  treatment  facilities.   The
water  quality management plan  (Section 208  plan)  including  the Steuben
Lakes area is being prepared by the State  of Indiana.

     Section  201  of  the  Act   (under  which the  Steuben  Lakes  Regional
District  applied  for   funds)  authorizes  US  EPA  to  make  grants  to
localities  to  improve   or  construct  facilities  for treating  existing
water  quality  problems.  US  EPA  determines  whether  an Environmental
Impact  Statement is  required on a  proposed  project  (see Section I.E.),
and  even where  the State has  been certified and assumes responsibility
for  water quality, US EPA retains  authority to approve or reject appli-
cations  for  construction funds  for  treatment facilities.

     Local   political  jurisdictions,   traditionally   responsible  for
meeting  the wastewater  treatment  needs  of  the community, now  have the
benefit  of  Federal and State  assistance  in  meeting  water quality stan-
dards and goals.

b.   Federal  Agency  Responsibilities  for Study Area  Waters

     US  EPA

          Administers the  Clean Water Act
          Sets  Federal water quality standards

          US  EPA Region  V

          Administers  the grant  program described above  for the Great
          Lakes Region.

          Provides partial funding for preparation of  the Steuben Lakes
          Area  Facilities  Plan.

     US  Army Corps of Engineers

          Grants   or   denies   permits   for  dredging,   filling  and
          construction  activities  in navigable  waters,  their  100-year
          floodplains and  adjacent wetlands.
                                      59

-------
US Department of Agriculture

     Under the Rural  Clean Water Program provides cost sharing for
     soil  conservation  practices to  improve  water quality.  (This
     program will probably be  assigned to SCS; however, it has not
     yet been funded.)

     Soil Conservation Service (SCS)

     Assists farmers  and  other  land  users control  wind  and water
     erosion, to  sustain the  soil resource base and reduce deposi-
     tion  of  soil  and  related  pollutants   in  the water  system.

     Conducts  soil  surveys.  Drew  up guidelines  for  inventorying
     prime or unique agricultural lands.

     Gathers information at the  state or county  level as  part of
     program of   study  and research  to  determine new methods of
     eliminating pollutants from agricultural sources.

     In  the  Study Area,  has  completed but  not yet published  the
     soil  survey  of Steuben County, and has  identified prime agri^
     cultural land.

     Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service (ASCS)

     Carries out the Agricultural Conservation Program (ACP), which
     provides cost-sharing funds  to help farmers install conserva-
     tion  programs.   By mandate of Congress,  all  ACP  projects for
     1978  and  1979 are for erosion  control, geared  toward water
     quality (by  telephone, Mr.  Ralph Wade, ASCS, Indianapolis, 27
     June  1979).

     Farmers Home Administration

     Provides grants  and loans  to small rural communities to build
     or  improve  drinking  water  and  waste  treatment facilities.

US Department of Interior

     Fish  and Wildlife Service

     Provides  technical  assistance  in  development  of  208 plans.

     US Geological Survey

     Monitors  surface   and  ground  water   hydrology  at   several
     stations in the Study Area (see Section  II.B.I.a).
                                  60

-------
c.   State  Responsibilities  in  the  Steuben Lakes  Study  Area

     Pertinent Indiana Laws

          Stream Pollution Control Law (Chapter 214, Acts of 1943,
          amended by Chapter 132, Acts of 1945, and amended by
          Chapter 64, Acts of 1957).    Created   the   Indiana   Stream
          Pollution  Control  Board  and  empowered  it   to  protect  the
          quality of State waters froiii dischargers and to determine what
          qualities  or  properties Of  bodies  of  Water  shall  indicate  a
          polluted condition of fetich waters.

          Phosphate Detergent Law (Indiana Code 1971, 13-1-5.5;
          Public Law 174, Laws of 1971, amended Public Law 97,
          Laws of 1972, and Public Law 117, Laws of 1973).   Established
          prohibitions on the sale and use of certain detergents.

          Confined Feeding Control Law.   Authorizes  ISPCB  to  regulate
          runoff  from  feedlots  If  (a~) the feedlot handles more  than  a
          certain  number  of livestock or (b)  the  runoff constitutes  a
          water quality probleiri.

          Indiana Flood Control Act (1C 13-2-22-1).   Purposes  are  to
          limit flooding through coordination of flood control works and
          to  keep  floodways  clear  through  supervision  of  any  stream
          alteration  and  regulation  of  construction within  floodways.

          Floodplain Management Act (1C 13-2-22.5).   Amended   the  Flood
          Control  Act.   Establishes  minimum  standards  for delineation
          and  regulation  of  flood hazard areas  within the  State and
          provides means by which local Units of government can regulate
          activities  affecting  such  areas within  their jurisdictions.
          Applies to floodplains of all streams and lakes.

     Indiana  has  a series of laws authorizing the Department of Natural
Resources, or the Natural Resources Commission overseeing it,  to protect
and  maintain the  levels  of  State  lakes.   The  levels  are  set by the
courts,  and  under 1C 13-2-12 are  controlled  by DNR.   1C 13-2-11  and 1C
13-2-14  require DNR  approval for any  action affecting the shoreline of a
public  freshwater lake  or  affecting  the level of  a  lake.  There  is no
Indiana  erosion or sedimentation control  law  or program and no State law
dealing  specifically With! wetlstidS.

     State Agencies

     Indiana  State Board of Health

          The  Stream Pollution Control Board  (ISPCB)  is responsible for
          statewide  planning  for the  control of water pollution.   Sets
          criteria for designated beneficial  uses of the waters.  Estab-
          lishes  and has  injunctive  powers  to  enforce maintenance of
          surface  water  quality standards  for the State.  Conducts 208
          planning.  Regulates  land disposal  of wastewater.   Has
                                    61

-------
     authority to  issue  permits to discharge pollutants  into sur-
     face waters  under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
     System (NPDES).   Appendix  C-6  contains  details of the permits
     granted to the P6kagon  State  Park and the  Holiday Inn.  Under
     NPDES, sets  minimum requirements on all facilities  that dis-
     pose of wastewater to the land.

     The Division of Water Pollution Cbtittrol  is  the  support  staff
     for  the  ISPCB.    It  classifies   lakes  for  beneficial  uses
     according to water  quality.   It  approves community wastewater
     treatment and disposal  systems,  reviewing the  facility  plan-
     ning process, the design phase, and implementation.

     On  21  June  1979  this  Division submitted to EPA  Region  V the
     "Water Quality Management Plan for the Non-Designated Areas of
     the State," the  208 plan covering all non-designated areas of
     Indiana,   including   the  Steuben  Lakes  area.    This plan  is
     subject to review and copies are  not yet available.

     The  Division of Sanitary Engineering   reviews   and   approves
     plans  for wastewater treatment and  disposal by  private sys-
     tems, for example, campgrottrids.

Department of Natural Resources (IDNR)

     Under  the  laws  mentioned  above,  the Water  Division of  IDNR,
     through a permit system and injunctive  powers>  regulates all
     construction or excavation  within  the floodway or any Stream,
     lake  or  waterway,   and  through a permit system  regulates any
     activities (e.g., drainage  or  construction)  that would affect
     the shoreline or  a  lake,  or natural Idke levels as set by the
     courts.   INDR  controls  the levels  of  lakes,  supervises the
     alteration of any stream, and controls reservoirs.  Any activ-
     ities  by  the  Corps  of Engineers would  be  coordinated through
     the Department.

     Although the State  can  acquire wetlands by purchase, IDNR has
     authority over  activities  in  wetlands  only when an activity
     would affect lake levels.

     IDNR maintains recreation  areas,  administers the Federal Land
     and Water Conservation  Fund program within  the  state,  and is
     responsible  for  the preservation of  fish, other aquatic life
     and wildlife.

Governor's Water Resources Study Commission

     The  Commission  has been  studying problems  with the  poten-
     tiality for affecting water use over the next 20 years.
                               62

-------
d.   Local Responsibilities

     Steuben County Health Department

          Has authority to regulate individual residential on-site waste
          disposal  systems,  under  State  minimum  requirements.   Has
          monitored water  quality  of the major lakes in the Study Area.

     Michigan Area Council of Governments (MAGOG)

          Samples waters  in the St. Joseph River  Basin  to  obtain water
          quality baseline data for 208 planning.

     Steuben Lakes Regional Waste District

          Was established  to  construct,  operate and maintain a sewerage
          system in the Study Area.

          Under the Floodplain Management Act, local units of government
          are  responsible  for  delineating   flood  hazard areas  within
          their  jurisdiction  and  regulating  activities  within  those
          areas (see Section II.B.4)

     Agricultural Stabilization Conservation  County Committee (ASC)

          Accepts, on  behalf  of USDA, applications for assistance under
          the ACP and makes recommendations on priority among individual
          landowners.

4.   FLOOD HAZARD  AREAS

     The  Steuben  Lakes Study Area  includes a number of zones designated
as  special  flood  hazard areas by the US Department of Housing and Urban
Development,  Flood  Insurance  Program  (HUD   1975,   1976).  Flood  hazard
areas  are those that have  a one percent chance of flooding to the boun-
dary in any given year.  Flood hazard zones in the Proposed Service Area
include  the shores  of all the  lakes -- Lake  Gage,  Lime Lake,  Crooked
Lake,  Jimmerson Lake,  Lake James,  Snow  Lake,  and  Otter  Lake -- as well
as  many  of  the   connecting   streams  and influent  creeks  (see  Figure
11-12).

     The  Nevada  Mills Dam is in  the  northwest quadrant of  the Study
Area,  downstream  of Jimmerson Lake.  The dam was not  constructed for
flood  control purposes but  to  maintain Jimmerson Lake at its legal water
level  of  964.66 feet msl set by the  Steuben County Circuit Court on July
3,  1947 (by letter, Robert  Glazier,  Indiana DM, 19 July 1978).

     Flooding is  not a serious problem  in the Study Area.  Minor floods
sometimes occur in the spring  due to  snow melt and heavy seasonal rains.
The relatively  small watershed, high banks along streams, and large lake
outlets help  to minimize flooding  within the Study Area (by telephone,
Kent Allwood, Steuben  County Surveyor, 24 March  1978).
                                    63

-------
                                                                                                                          Sources:  HUU  1977;  USGij
                                                                                                                                         ,  1975
I'ICUKE II--12  ,  STEUBEN LAKES: FLOOD HAZARD  AUKAS

-------
     The approved  Steuben  County Master Plan (Schellie Associates,  Inc.
1970)  specifies  that  only  fences,  docks,  or  boathouses can be  built
within 15 feet of the meander, or high water line, of any stream or lake
in the  county.   Land use is  also  restricted in these areas to agricul-
ture, forestry,  public  utilities and recreation.  These uses must be in
accord with  the  Indiana Drainage Code, Chapter  305  (October 1965),  and
users  also  must  obtain an  improvement  location permit.   The  Indiana
Natural Resources  Commission has yet to approve  any  Flood  Plain zoning
ordinances  in Steuben  County pursuant to  the  provisions of  the  Flood
Plain Management Act (FPM-1) and the Flood  Control Act (IC13-2-22)  (by
letter, Robert Glazier,  19 July  1978).
C.   glOTIC RESOURCES

1,   AQUATIC  BIOLOGY

     Aquatic habitats  in the Study Area include streams and lakes.   The
flora  in  the  streams  of  the area  consist primarily of  suspended  and
attached  algal communities and relatively  small numbers' of rooted aqua-
tic  and semi-aquatic  vascular  (i.e., flowering)  plants.   The  flora of
the  area  lakes consist of  vascular plants and planktonic" algae, as  well
as benthic* algae  in the photosynthetic* zone.  The fauna of the streams
and  lakes  consist of  aquatic insects, crustaceans, nematodes, both sus-
pended  and benthic macroscopic  and  microscopic invertebrates,  and  var-
ious  amphibians,  reptiles,  and  fishes  (EcolSciences,  Inc.,  undated).

     The  lakes of  the Study Area were sampled by the  State  of Indiana
Department of  Natural  Resources, Fish Management Headquarters (SFMH) in
1972,  1975,  and 1976.   To ascertain  the  quality  of the fisheries,  fish
were  classified  according to  number taken  and  weight.   Appendix  D-l
contains  lists  of the  fishes   found in the  lakes of the Study Area.
Species  of aquatic vegetation  were  also  identified  in these samplings
and  are  listed in  Appendix D-2.

a.   Aquatic  Vegetation

     Aquatic  vegetation is  vital to the life  of  the Study Area lakes.
Free-floating  and  filamentous*   algae  provide food  for  small  animals,
which  in  turn  are eaten  by  larger  animals,  including  fish.   Vascular
plants  provide food,  surfaces  for  egg  attachment, and shelter  for an
array  of  aquatic  animals.  Diversity, however,  is a  key  factor.   The
abundance  and diversity  of  algae and  rooted aquatic  plants  depend on
water  quality, wave action and  bottom  type,  among other things, and in
general  a  high diversity (of  species)  indicates good  water quality.

     The  SFMH samplings  in  1972, 1975 and 1976  found that the aquatic
vegetation of Snow Lake was dominated  by water  milfoil.   There was a
profusion  of vascular  plants*, and the SFMH stated that control measures
would  be  required in  channels to expedite  boat traffic.   Water milfoil
can  indicate  moderate to poor  water  quality (Lind  and  Cottam 1969).
This is  consistent with lake water quality  modeling.
                                    65

-------
     The  aquatic  vegetation  of  Jimmerson Lake  was  dominated by  water
milfoil  and Richardson's  pondweed.   Channels  and  shallow areas  were
reported to be  choked  with vegetation—an indication of moderately poor
water quality.   This too is consistent with available modeling.

     The aquatic vegetation  of  Basins 1 and 2  of  Crooked Lake has been
undergoing periodic nuisance growths.   In Basin 1,  water milfoil was the
dominant vascular plant, and control  of this species  was recommended for
large  isolated  areas along  the  shores.   In Basin 2, water milfoil and
Illinois pondweed were dominant and control was recommended for isolated
patches.   In  Basin 3,  water milfoil was  again dominant,  but was con-
sidered  of neither nuisance proportions nor detrimental  to the  fishery
(EcolSciences, Inc. undated).

     Aquatic vegetation was  not  considered by the SFMH  to  be  a problem
in  Lake  James.   Both  vascular  plants and,  to a  limited extent,  algae
were observed.  The dominant vascular plant was bladderwort.

     The  Wisconsin studies by Lind  and Cottam  (1969)  and  Bumby (1977)
showed many of  the trends that have  also  been observed in the lakes of
the  Study Area,  where water milfoil  sometimes plugs  channels.   Water
milfoil  is a  relatively insignificant (3 to 5%) component  of  the flora
of  Midwest glacial  lakes except  in  those judged to be  eutrophic,  or
becoming  so  (Lind  and  Cottam 1969).   No quantitative sampling has been
done in  Study Area lakes, but available information  (see Appendix D-2)
coupled  with  the  reports  of nuisance growth of aquatic  vegetation (des-
cribed above) indicates  that the Steuben Lakes are approaching (or have
reached)  a low  level of  species  diversity and  dominance by  a single
species  just  as   Lake  Mendota  did.    The principal areas of  aquatic
vegetation are shown in Figure 11-13.

b.   Fishes

     Study Area lakes, with a range of bottom types,  sizes, and connect-
ing  streams,  provide  the  variety of breeding conditions that favors the
maintenance  of  a  diversity  of  fishes.   In the  SFMH  June 9-13,  1975
sampling   of  Snow  Lake,  720  fish,  representing  21  species,  were
collected.  Bluegill  sunfish,  yellow  perch, rock bass,  yellow bullhead,
warmouth,  longnose gar, bowfin, and brown bullhead were the most common.
Of  the  10 game  fish species p»esent, a large percentage was of harvest-
able size.   Condition  factors and growth rates of these fish were above
average  for the state, and the rock bass population was judged to be one
of  the  largest  in northern Indiana.   The  SFMH recommended that walleye
fry  be stocked during  alternate years, beginning in 1976.  Because of
its  small  size,  Snow Lake normally would not have been considered  for  a
walleye  stocking  program.   However,  Snow  Lake  is  connected  to Lake
James,  and,  because  it   does  contain  a  large  suitable   forage  base
(EcolSciences, Inc.), walleyes will probably feed there.

     Jimmerson Lake,  sampled by the  SFMH  June  16-19,  1975, yielded. 526
fishes  of  18  species.   Bluegill  sunfish,  yellow bullhead,  and  brown
bullhead  dominated the fishery  in both number and  weight.   Nine  game
species  were  taken,  a large percentage of which were harvestable  indi-
viduals,  and the  sport  fishery  was  reported  to  be in good condition
(EcolSciences, Inc.).

                                   66

-------
                                                                      A.C-4   •««'"    TA.B.C
                                                                                        POKAGOH  STATE  PAHK     I
                                                                                                                                       LEGEND

                                                                                                                               # ALGAE

                                                                                                                               B EMERGENT VEGETATION

                                                                                                                               C SUBMERGENT VEGETATION
                                                                                                                               0 WATERWAYS WITH HEAVY
                                                                                                                                      CONCENTRATION OF
                                                                                                                                      ALGAE
                                                                                                                                   ZOQO    4000

                                                                                                                             Source:  EPIC 1979
FIGURE II-13   STEUBEN LAKES: AQUATIC  VEGETATION

-------
     The  SFMH survey of  Crooked Lake,  conducted  17-21 July  1972, was
performed  at  tV  request  of area residents who were dissatisfied with
the sport fishery.  A total of 741 fishes was collected, representing 22
species.  The bluegill sunfish was most abundant, making up 58.2% of the
total,  with yellow bullhead  second.   Growth rates  and size  ranges  of
both  species  were average for the area.  Largemouth bass, yellow perch,
and red-ear sunfish populations were also reported to Be in satisfactory
condition.   Less  abundant game  fish included  smallmouth bass,  black
crappie,  both black and  brown bullheads,  and  rock  bass (EcolSciences,
Inc.).

     The  SFMH sampled  Lake  James  June  2-5,  1975 collecting  574  fish
representing  20  species.   By number,  the dominant species were bluegill
sunfish,  yellow  perch,  rock bass, and  yellow  bullhead.   The  dominant
species by  weight were  yellow bullhead, bluegill sunfish, longnose gar,
yellow  perch,  brown  bullhead, bowfin, northern pike, and black crappie.
The SFMH  classified  the  fishery as excellent, with  many desirable  game
species,  including a large  percentage of  harvestable  size.   The State
recommended that Lake James  be stocked  with walleye fry  on  alternate
years   beginning  in  1976   (EcolSciences,  Inc.),   but  according  to
Mr. William  James, Chief  of  Indiana  DNR  Fish  Division,  none  will  be
planted at  least  until 1980 (by telephone, 14 March 1979).

     The  SFMH considered Lake Gage to  be one  of the best  lakes in the
Study  Area in  terms of  fish  composition  and  general water  quality.
Composition of fish species found in that lake in an April 1976 sampling
was  significantly different  from the  other lakes  of   the Study Area.
Gar, found  in other lakes, were not reported in Lake Gage.  Furthermore,
the presence  of  brook trout,  and rainbow trout  indicated that Lake Gage
has  good  water  quality  capable of supporting  the  environmentally sen-
sitive  cold-water species as well as  warm-water species.   In contrast,
Crooked Lake,  Lake James,  Jimmerson  Lake,  and  Snow  Lake  are  of poorer
water quality  and can support only warm-water species.   Lake  James was
reported  to have a large Cisco population  in 1972,  but by 1975, it was
listed  along  with Jimmerson Lake  and Snow Lake  as having  only small
populations,  probably because  of  intermittent  stress  by poor water
quality (EcolSciences, Inc.).

     According to Mr. William James  (by  telephone,  14  March  1979), the
lakes of  the  Study Area  formerly had another top predator, the northern
pike,  Esox lucius.   This  valued  game  fish,  which  may have  attained
weights of 20 pounds or more, was lost because of the loss of seasonally
flooded wetlands, its spawning habitat.   Mr.  James reported  that the
northern  pike  has been  lost or is rapidly  declining in numbers in most
of Indiana's lakes, a situation that is not likely to be remedied by the
slow rate (200 acres per year) at which Indiana  DNR is purchasing appro-
priate  wetlands.   The decline  of  northern pike populations  is part of
the   rationale   for  considering   the  introduction   of   the  walleye
(.Stizostedion  vitreum),  a  valued  native fish  but formerly  of  limited
distribution in  Indiana.   At  present  (1979), the Division  of Fishes is
building the stock of breeding walleye to furnish the fry for such  lakes
as Lake  James  and to  a number  of  new  reservoirs  in  the  state.   The
proper range of pH values is critical to the survival of walleyes;  given
the needed  pH,  they will  breed in  those lakes with the  proper mix of
lake  bottom types, oxygen levels, and water temperatures.

                                    68

-------
     Marsh Lake, the source of the phosphorus plume that extends through
Jimmerson Lake and plays a major role in nutrient loads to the two Otter
Lakes and  Snow Lake,  is the  only major area  habitat  for the northern
pike.   Indeed  concern about  disturbances of pike-producing  wetland is
one  of  the major  objections  the  State  of  Indiana  offers to rehabili-
tation of Marsh Lake under Section 314 of the Clean Water Act.

     The  large  family of  valued game  fish  (centrarchids)* including
bass, bluegills,   and  related  fishes,  breed  in shallow waters  with a
range of bottom types.  Their larvae, produced  in large numbers, become
a  component of  the  forage or  food of  larger   fish  shortly  after  they
hatch.   The  introduction  of  the  walleye  and/or  the   resurgence  of
northern pike populations, will probably improve the  centrarchid fishery
by the  greater  growth rates that  will  result  from fewer individuals of
the prey (centrarchid) species.

     The remaining fishes,  mainly bullheads, gars, and minnows, do not,
for  the most part, require special  conditions  for successful breeding.

2.   SHORELINE ALGAE AND AQUATIC WEED  GROWTH

     As  reported  above  in  Section Il.C.l.b,  localized  growths  of  both
algae and  aquatic  vascular plants occur in  the  coves and channelways of
some Study  Area lakes.  For example, the July  1972 sampling of Crooked
Lake by the SFMH found nuisance  growth,  predominantly  of  water milfoil
in Basin I, and of water milfoil and Illinois pondweed in Basin II.   Key
findings in other studies  include the  conclusion  of US  EPA's National
Eutrophicaton Survey  (NES)  that Crooked Lake, Marsh  Lake and Lake James
are probably phosphorus-limited (US EPA Region V Working Papers Nos.  325,
331, and 333).   That is, the potential for  vegetational growth in these
lakes depends  only on the levels  of  available  phosphorus.   However,  of
these three, only Marsh Lake had high algal  cell counts (26,937 cells/ml
in  May   1973  sample  and 11,475  cells/ml in  the October  1973  sample.
Levels  of   chlorophyll a  for  these  samples were  33.4 and  50.6  M8/l>
respectively,  consistent with  the  high cell  counts in  the samples.)

     The State  of  Indiana,  in accordance with  the  "Clean  Lakes" provi-
sions of the Clean  Water  Act of  1977  (Section  314(2) (1)  of  Public  Law
95-217), is classifying publicly-owned freshwater lakes and impoundments
into four trophic  classes.

     Class  I  lakes have  the highest water quality, are the least eutro-
phic, and  do not  require  chemical  control  programs.  They rarely  have
extensive  populations  of weeds  or algae, and normal lake  uses  are  im-
paired  only  under  unusual  environmental  conditions.   In  Indiana's
1978-79  305 (b)  Report  (Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board 1979)  286
lakes were  analyzed.   The five large and recreationally  valuable lakes
in the Study Area were ranked in Class I:
                    Lake Gage           Mesotrophic
          #31       Lake James          Mesoeutrophic
          #46       Snow Lake           Eutrophic
          #51       Crooked Lake        Mesoeutrophic
          #58       Jimmerson Lake      Eutrophic
                                    69

-------
     Class III  lakes  always,  in the absence of  a  chemical control pro-
gram, have  extensive  algae/weed problems that frequently  impair one or
more lake us£3, and they are of low water quality.   Three small lakes in
the Study Area  (Marsh Lake, Big Otter Lake, and Little Otter Lake) were
placed in this category.

     Results  of  the  ISPCB  classification,  which was  based  on measure-
ments of  a  number  of parameters  for  each lake,  reinforces  the infor-
mation  that   there  generally  is  a  gradient  within  the Study  Area  of
improving water quality from east to west.  At  least  part of the heavy
nutrient  loading  for  the  small Class  III lakes is  related  to drainage
received  from the extensive  wetlands,  although effluent  received from
the wastewater treatment plants of the Village of Fremont and the nearby
toll  road  have  undoubtedly  contributed  as  well.   (Fremont has  been
upgrading its wastewater  treatment facility,  having received, according
to  ISPCB  (1979)  nearly $900,000  in current State  and Federal  Step  3
grants.)  Another indication of the heavy nutrient loading to Marsh Lake
is 'the  littoral  (shallow)  zone, which is filled entirely by Potamogeton
crispus,  the  curly-leafed  pondweed (by  telephone,  Mr. Rick Peterson,
District  Biologist,   8  June  1979).   P.   crispus  may  be of  particular
significance  in  judging  the  quality  of  lake  waters  because it often
appears  in  polluted  water  (Fassett I960)  and in  water that has  been
enriched by city wastes (McCombie and Wile 1971).

     Although growth  of vegetation is  usually proportionate to the con-
centration of nutrients,  a  continual  input of nutrients  is  not neces-
sarily  required  to maintain  such growth.  Depending  on  its size  and
shape,  a  lake can act as a  receptacle for nutrients,  and the recycling
of nutrients  within it  may produce vegetational blooms  for  a period of
years,  even without any substantial additional inflow from contributing
sources. This means that eliminating sources of nutrients (pollution)  by
upgrading a   treatment  facility may not produce benefits  immediately.
Nevertheless,   water  quality would,  predictably,  improve  steadily  from
year to year.

     Other important  factors  affecting the rate of frequency of  vegeta-
tional blooms  in  lakes  include temperature, sunlight,  shape and  size of
the  lake,  type of  bottom,  slope  of  the  drainage  basin,  rate  of  flow
through  the  lake and  ambient  water  quality  (Mackenthun 1974).   The
marl*-producing features of the Steuben Lakes may enhance their capacity
to hold and  cycle  nutrients.   Specifically,  the high concentration of
calcium carbonate in these lake waters  precipitates nutrients, eliminat-
ing them  as   stimulants  to  the growth of  vegetation.   Consequently,  it
may not be possible to predict an increased rate of growth in vegetation
in a lake, or of its progression to the eutrophic state, should nutrient
loadings increase.  At  some (threshold)  point,  the chemical composition
of a  marl  lake  may  change.   At  such  time,  vegetation  growing under
conditions of available  phosphorus and  nitrogen  nutrients  will ulti-
mately outstrip the oxygen  level in the  water,  and the vegetation, fish
and other aquatic life will die and putrefy.

     From the above review  it follows  that removal  of septic tanks and
substitution of a  centralized  wastewater treatment system would provide
                                    70

-------
no guarantee  against the occurrence of  that  noxious vegetative growths
in the Steuben Lakes.  Cycling of nutrients now present within each lake
may continue  to  produce annual vegetative blooms even without new input
of nutrients, although in time such blooms would diminish in severity or
frequency.  Furthermore,  other sources of nutrients  in  the  Study Area,
such as runoff from croplands, might easily sustain plant growth despite
the  sewering of all  lakeshores.   Further  detailed 'investigations  of
nutrient  sources  in  adjacent areas, as well  as  alternative  methods  for
their  control,  seem to  be justified.   These investigations should  ad-
dress:

          Agricultural runoff,
          Lawn fertilization,
          Stormwater runoff,
          Unidentified nutrient sources, and
          Sediment characteristics.

3.   WETLANDS

a.   Overview

     Wetlands are those areas  that are inundated by surface  or ground
water  with  a frequency  sufficient to support only  vegetation that  re-
quires or tolerates saturated soil conditions.  In their pristine state,
they  are unsuitable  for  agricultural or  urban purposes,  and include
marshes,  swamps,  bogs, and  similar areas.   Their  abundant  vegetation,
highly organic deposits,  and periodic lack of oxygen are  exactly those
conditions which  are  considered undesirable  in lakes and streams. Yet,
wetlands  serve important purposes in the ecological cycle:

     •    as  purifiers  nearby surface water  bodies  by entrapping sedi-
          ments  and  concentrating nutrients  which have  been washed  off
          the landscape;

     «    as  storage areas  for storm and flood waters.  They absorb  the
          impact  of flooding, thereby reducing erosion of adjacent land;

     •    as prime natural recharge areas, where surface and groundwater
          are directly connected;

     •    as  habitat for  a wide diversity of wildlife, where biological
          functions  such  as nesting,  breeding,  and  feeding can occur;
          and

     •    as areas productive of plant and animal biomass at all trophic
          levels.  Except  for the  comparably productive tropical rain-
          forest,  no other  terrestrial habitat is  as  rich  in usable
          plant and animal material.

     Wetlands are sensitive to environmental  changes  such as the raising
or lowering of the water table, whether natural or by damming or ditch-
ing activities,  and  to  [the] changes in the  quality  of water that might
occur when a lake becomes eutrophic.  High nutrient levels can alter the
productivity  and  composition of the wetland  community,  diminishing  the
                                      71

-------
wetland*s value  to wildlife  in  the process.  Consequently,  good water
quality  contributes  to both healthy wetlands and  wildlife  populations.

b.   Study Area

     The many  wetlands in  the  Study Area usually adjoin  [the]  streams
and lakes  (see Figure  II-8).   Most Study Area wetlands  are either mar-
shes  dominated by cattails  (Typha  sp.) or  are  forested.   Marsh vege-
tation  is  primarily broad  and  narrow  leaf  cattail,  bulrush,  bluejoint
grass,  canary  reed  grass,  and  bottom-bush.  Although  red maple,  box
elder,  and  American  elm dominate, alders, willows, and  similar  shrubby
species  are  also frequently  present  in the forested wetlands.   In the
marshes, the  rich organic  soil  produces a  large  biomass of  vegetation
and  consequently  supports  a  highly  diverse community of  plant  and
detritus* feeders.  This community potentially represents a  considerable
resource to wildlife, providing both fish spawning areas  and habitat for
a wide variety of birds and mammals.

     Many of the  low-lying  lake  shorelines in the Study  Area  have large
wetland  areas.  One  such  area along the western  shoreline  of  the Third
Basin of Crooked  Lake  (see  Figure II-8) contains  large  patches  of cat-
tails and alder and willow thickets.   Such waterfowl  as mallards,  Canada
geese,  and American  coot  and  such wading birds as blue  heron have been
observed here.  These  birds  use  wetlands and the  adjacent open water as
a place  to  nest  and/or feed.   Wetlands such as these  can also be  expec-
ted to  abound with muskrats  and  meadow voles,  both primary food for a
number of predators such as owls,  raccoons,  and  foxes.

     Along  the  banks  of  the northern section  of Jimmerson  Lake  is  a
large  cattail wetland with  considerable  standing   water  (see  Figure
II-8).  Red-winged blackbirds have  been observed  in  this area.   Patches
of cattail marshes  and shrubby  areas are also found  along the shores of
Lake James and Snow  Lake.   Snow Lake  has several  cattail islands which
are ideal nesting grounds  for many kinds of birds  and  waterfowl.   Numer-
ous ducks  have been observed in these  wetlands,  indicating that some
breeding activity may  be  occurring.   Extensive wetland  areas  are asso-
ciated with the  stream connecting Little Otter Lake and Snow  Lake, and
with Big Otter Lake.  Tamarack bogs are also part  of  the  wetlands  in the
Study Area, especially in  the low-lying area around Marsh  Lake,  and in
the Beachwood  Nature  Preserve south  of Little Otter  Lake.  Common to
boggy areas  are   tamarack,  pussy  willow, white pine,  dwarf birch,  red
osier,  and  trembling aspen (EcolSciences, Inc.  undated).   Depending on
the size and  species  of trees some of the forested wetlands undoubtedly
are  nesting habitat   for  raccoons,  wood  ducks,   woodpeckers  and  many
amphibians and reptiles.

     There is  currently no  law specifically to regulate development in
wetlands in the  State  of  Indiana.  However,  according to the  State code
sections 13-2-11,  13-2-14 and 13-2-22  concerning  lakes  and  streams, any
wetland  associated  with a  natural  lake or stream, which is  within the
shoreline of the  lake  when the lake is at a normal level,  or within the
floodplain of  a   stream, cannot  be developed (by  telephone,  Mr.  Robert
Glacier, Indiana  DNR, 10 October 1978).  Extensive complaints  and recent
lawsuits by Study Area residents  raise doubt whether the existing State
                                    72

-------
code  can  adequately  protect local  wetlands.   Sporadic  development  of
lakeshore  wetland  areas   continues  despite the  efforts  of the  lakes
council to stop  it.   Such development usually involves the placement  of
fill.  Where septic tank/soil absorbtion systems are utilized for waste-
water  treatment  the  result is  rapid  infiltration of  effluent  through
porous fill material into the lakes.

4.   TERRESTRIAL BIOLOGY

     The original primary forests of northeastern Indiana were dominated
by  oak-hickory  and  beech-maple  associations.   Repeated  clearings  for
cropland  and  lumbering  have eliminated  this  primary  forest;  however,
considerable secondary forest,  primarily  oak-hickory,  has occupied much
of  the  land  which has remained  uncultivated.  The  upland forest areas,
such as the northwest shore of Lake James and west of Lake Gage,  are the
least disturbed.   In  these areas, red oak, black oak,  and white  oak are
the  dominant  species,  but tulip  trees,  shagbark hickory,  shellbark
hickory,  pignut  hickory,  ironwood, sassafras,  and  sugar  maple are also
present  (EcolSciences,  Inc. undated).   Appendix D-3 contains a  list  of
the terrestrial vegetation of the Study Area.

     Many  parts  of the stream  and lake borders in the  Study Area have
been  developed  for  their  recreational  and aesthetic  values,  although
undisturbed vegetation exists where steep slopes or seasonal wetness has
inhibited  development.   Trees  present in  these  areas  include  weeping
willow, black willow, silver maple, red elm, trembling aspen, green ash,
and swamp white oak.

     Wildlife  in the area  provides  recreational opportunities  for the
hunter,  sightseer and naturalist.  Upland  forest areas  support  a  large
diversity  of animal species, including white-tailed deer,  mink, oppos-
sum,  raccoon,  skunk,  woodchuck,  red squirrel, fox  squirrel  and  eastern
chipmunk.  Animals  found  in lower lying lake areas are similar  to those
found  in  the  upland  areas, with  the  possible addition  of  muskrat and
beaver.   Appendixes D-4,  D-5  and D-6  contain  lists  of the  mammals,
birds, reptiles and amphibians of northeastern Indiana.

5.   THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES

a.   Mammals

     Of  the  mammals believed  to occur in  Steuben  County (see  Appendix
D-4), only the Indiana bat  (Myotis sodalis) is considered by the  US Fish
and Wildlife Service to be Threatened or Endangered (44 F.R., 17  January
1979).   In  the  northern  two-thirds  of Indiana,  the  Indiana bat  is  a
summer  resident  only.   Information  on  summer  breeding   activity  of
Indiana bats is   restricted  to  the study of Humphrey,  Richter  and Cope
(1977), conducted  in  1974 and 1975 near Webster, Wayne County  in east-
central  Indiana.   The colony,  discovered by accident  and consisting  of
females  and  their  young,  alternatively  used as  a roosting place the
loose bark of a  living  shagbark  hickory  tree and of a dead bitternut
hickory  tree.   Feeding flights  were made  well  above   ground level and
                                   73

-------
primarily along the riparian forest of nearby streams.  Humphrey and his
colleagues studied the rate at which nursery bark was lost from weather-
ing  and  concluded that  any given  roost  is habitable only  for a short
time, perhaps 6 to 8 years.  Consequently, Indiana bats probably need to
move the nursery roost every few years.

     Although the summer range of Indiana bats is reasonably well known,
there is  no  other specific information that may  be  used to predict the
possible  occurrence  of Indiana  bats  in  the  Steuben Lakes  Study Area.
Certainly Steuben County is well within the summer range of the species,
and  it  is possible  that  one  or more nursery colonies may occur there.
However, owing to the small number of Indiana bats in the United States,
and  in view  of the large amount of  summer habitat that is available to
them along the  floodplains  in the eastern US, the probability that the
bats use  any specific,  small  segment of floodplain forest is low.  Even
if  Indiana bats  were to nest along Crooked Creek or in similar riparian
habitat in the  Study Area,  the small nursery colony would not be elimi-
nated  by construction  activity.   It  might be  displaced,  however,  to
suitable  trees nearby.   The potential for any impact of construction on
this species would be reduced substantially if forested sections were to
be  cleared between 15 October and 15 April.  Apparently females return
to  the  vicinity where  they were raised,  and  occasionally  may have to
change to a  new tree when  they  select  a  nursery site about May 1.   The
possibility  of  destroying nursery colonies of Indiana bats  is greatest
from May through July, the period of late pregnancy,  birth of the young,
and the period before the young can fly.

     The  Study  Area  is  within the  range of the  badger,  Taxidea taxus,
which is  considered  by the State of Indiana to  be endangered.  Badgers
have been sighted in numerous  locations in the county (by telephone,  Mr.
Alger Vanhoey, NE District Wildlife Biologist,  Indiana DNR, 20 September
1978).  However,  because  the  best habitat -- large  grassy fields — is
uncommon in the Study Area, the badger is unlikely to be numerous there.

b.   Birds

     The  bald eagle,  (Haliaeetus leucocephalus),  a  Threatened species,
and  the Endangered peregrine  falcon,  (Falco peregrinus), have both been
frequently  sighted  in the Study  Area,   especially in  the  region  of
Pokagon State Park.   It is thought that these birds  are either visitors
to  the area  or are migrating  and are  not nesting in the area (by tele-
phone, Mr. Alger Vanhoey, NE  District Wildlife  Biologist,  Indiana  DNR,
20 September 1978).  The osprey, (Pandion haliaetus carolinensis), which
has  an  "undetermined status",  has  also  been  occasionally  seen  in  the
Study Area.

c.   Plants

Two  plant species, considered  endangered in the  State  of Indiana,  the
pale   green   orchid   (Platanthera   flava)   and  the   prairie  orchid
(Platanthera  leucophaea),  are  believed to occur within  the  Study Area.
(The Facilities  Plan  failed to mention the source of this information.)
The tamarack bog  required by  both exists in the Study Area.  Several of
the wetlands  areas  with suitable orchid habitat are owned by the State,
                                   74

-------
including the Potawatomi  Nature  Preserve in Pokagon State Park and the
Beachwood Nature Preserve, south of Little Otter Lake (see Figure  II-8).
Other bog  habitats that  may be present  in the area have not yet been
identified (by telephone, Dr. James Keith, Division of Nature  Preserves,
Indiana DNR,  10  October 1978).   However, because some unprotected habi-
tats might be disrupted by the placement of  a  sewer,  measures to mini-
mize the adverse effects of construction should be adopted.  There is no
evidence,  however, of  either orchid  species  actually  growing   in the
Study Area.

d.   Other

     No  Federally protected  species of  amphibian,  reptile,  or  inver-
tebrate animal is  known to exist within the Study Area.
D.   POPULATION AND SOCIOECONOMICS

1.   POPULATION

a.   Introduction

     This population  information  on the  Study Area comes from published
data,  primary  field  data,  and house  counts using  aerial  photographs.
Published information  from  the US Census and other sources  is available
for  Steuben  County  and for minor civil divisions (villages, cities,  and
townships)  within  the  county.   The  Study Area  includes  portions  of
Jackson, Jamestown, Millgrove, and Pleasant Townships.   It is not possi-
ble  to break down published data on socioeconomic characteristics of  the
population  below the  township level  in  order  to  describe  population
characteristics  of portions  of townships  included  in the  Study  Area.
Consequently, published socioeconomic data are presented for each of  the
townships partially within the Study Area.  These townships  are referred
to collectively as the Socioeconomic Study Area.

     Dwelling unit counts and population estimates made for the Proposed
Service  Area were  based on  aerial photographs.   For this  study,  the
Proposed  Service  Area was divided  into  the  thirteen subareas presented
in  Figure 11-14.   Field study data  presented  in the  Facilities  Plan
(Mick,  Rowland &  Associates,  Inc.  1976)  have  been  used  to  estimate
occupancy  rates and  the numbers of  seasonal and  permanent  dewllings.
Appendix  E-l  explains  the  methodology  used  to determine  population
projections.

b.   Existing  Population

     The  1976 permanent  population of  the  Proposed  Service Area  was
approximately  5,400,  the  seasonal  population  approximately  17,000,
giving  a  total summer  population of  approximately  22,400,  over 75% of
which  was seasonal  (see Table II-7).   The largest  concentrations  of
seasonal population were  in the Lake  Gage,  Jimmerson  Lake,  Lake James,
and  Crooked  Lake  (Main) subareas,  each of  which  had more  than  2,000
seasonal residents.  Four subareas  (NW Study Area and Crooked Lake East,
South,  and  North)  had  no seasonal population.  Variations  in the pro-
                                  75

-------
                                                                                                                                LEGEND


                                                                                                                             PROPOSED SERVICE AREA


                                                                                                                         14 j GROUP  SEGMENT
                                                                                                                                     \
                                                                                                                                 ZOOO    4OOO
FIGURE II-1V   STEUBEN IAKES: GROUP  SEGMENTS  OF  THE
                   PROPOSED  SERVICE  AREA

-------
                              Table II-7

                   PERMANENT AND SEASONAL POPULATION
                  IN THE PROPOSED SERVICE AREA, 1976
                                     POPULATION

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.



SUB AREA
Lake Gage
Lime Lake
Lake Syl-Van
NW Study Area
Jimmeson Lake
Lake James
Snow Lake
Otter Tail Lake
Crooked Lake (East)
Crooked Lake (South)
Crooked Lake (North)
Crooked Lake (3rd Basin)
Crooked Lake (Main)
TOTAL
Off Lake
On Lake
TOTAL
2,148
234
90
648
5,064
5,091
1,806
753
879
384
120
1,185
4,038
22,440
2,586
19,584
PERMANENT
309
33
18
648
753
981
261
141
879
384
120
333
579
5,439
2,586
2,853
SEASONAL
1,839
201
72
0
4,311
4,110
1,545
612
0
0
0
852
3,459
17,001
0
17,001
SEASONAL
86
86
80
0
85
81
86
81
0
0
0
72
86
76
0
87
See Figure 11-14
                                   77

-------
portions  of  the seasonal population indicate  considerable  diversity in
the  Proposed  Service Area.   No  specific data on  permanent or seasonal
population are  available for  the  Proposed Service Area prior to 1975.
Historical data are  available for permanent  population in  the  Socio-
economic Study Area.  These data show that the permanent population grew
from 2,679 in 1940 to 5,453 in 1970, a rate of 2.4% per year.  From 1970
to  1975,  permanent  population grew from 5,453 to  6,614, a  rate of 3.8%
per year.  The increased growth rate in the Study Area since 1970 paral-
lels national trends of more rapid growth in recreational areas.

c.   Population Projections

     Permanent,  seasonal,  and total  summer populations were  projected
for  the  year  2000  for  the Proposed  Service  Area and  each of  the  13
subareas  (see Table II-8).   The projections of permanent population have
been  developed  in  accordance with projections of  population growth for
the  four  townships of the Study Area by the Indiana University Bureau of
Business  Research.   The rate  of  growth of permanent population  in the
Proposed  Service Area  was  assumed  to be the same  as  that projected for
the  four townships.  On this  basis,  the permanent population was  pro-
jected  to increase  from 5,439  in  1975 to 9,877 in 2000, equivalent to
81.6%.

     Seasonal population within the Proposed Service Area  is  projected
to  grow by 23%  from 17,001  in  1975  to  20,910  in 2000.   This  rate of
increase was projected in the Facilities Plan.

     Total  in-summer,   permanent,  and  seasonal populations have  been
calculated separately  for  on-lake  and off-lake  segments.   For off-lake
areas it  was  assumed that  all persons are  permanent  residents and thus
that permanent  and  in-summer populations  are equal.   For on-lake areas,
the  in-summer population was calculated on the basis  of the  permanent to
seasonal  population ratio   determined  through  field  investigations  re-
ported  in the  Facilities Plan.  The ratio  of  summer  to permanent popu-
lation  in on-lake  segments  was assumed to  remain  constant  between 1975
and 2000.

     Total in-summer population in  the Proposed  Service  Area  is  pro-
jected to be 30,787 in the  year 2000,  rising 37% over the estimated 1975
population.  The average annual  growth rate for this 25 year  period is
1.3% per year, slightly higher than the rate projected by the Facilities
Plan.

     These projected rates  of population growth,  while relatively rapid,
are  consistent  not  only with local but also with  national  trends.  The
rate of  permanent  population growth forecast for  1975  to 2000 is some-
what  above the  1940 to 1970 rate, but  below  the  1970 to  1975 rate.

     The population projections presented herein reflect general national
trends in migration, age structure, income and birth rates.   Since 1970,
migration  has  been  predominantly  frora metropolitan  to nonmetropolitan
areas,  especially  to areas  with high  recreation potential.   This trend
has  tended to increase  growth in  the Service Area  above that expected
from pre-1970 trends and has been  augmented by growth of retirement age
                                    78

-------
                                                      Table II-8
                           ESTIMATED POPULATION OF THE STEUBEN PROPOSED SERVICE- AREA, 1975,
                                            AND PROJECTED POPULATION, 2000
VD
        SUBAREA
Lake Gage
Lime Lake
Lake Syl-Van
NW Study Area
Jimmerson Lake
Lake James
Snow Lake
Otter Tail Lake
Crooked Lake  (East)
Crooked Lake  (South)
Crooked Lake  (North)
Crooked Lake  (3rd Basin)
Crooked Lake  (Main)

     TOTAL

Off Lake
On Lake

PERMANENT
309
33
18
648
753
981
261
141
879
384
120
333
579
5,439
2,586
2,853
1975
SEASONAL
1,839
201
72
0
4,311
4,110
1,545
612
0
0
0
852
3,459
17,001
0
17,001

TOTAL
2,148
234
90
648
5,064
5,091
1,806
753
879
384
120
1,185
4,038
22,440
2,586
19,854

PERMANENT
380
41
30
1,596
963
1,565
321
221
2,165
946
295
642
712
9,877
6,368
3,509
2000
SEASONAL
2,262
247
88
0
5,302
5,055
1,900
754
0
0
0
1,048
4,254
20,910
0
20,910

TOTAL
2,642
288
118
1,596
6,265
6,620
2,221
975
2,165
946
295
1,690
4,966
30,787
6,368
24,416

-------
population.   Many  former  seasonal  residents  have  retired  to  become
permanent  residents.   Higher  income  levels  have  contributed  to  the
growth  of  seasonal  population  by increasing the  number  of persons who
can  afford seasonal and  second homes.  The  growth of permanent popu-
lation  has  been  reduced  somewhat  by  lower birth  rates  since 1960.
Changes  in these general  trends during the planning period would alter
population levels from those projected.

2.   CHARACTERISTICS OF  THE  POPULATION

a.   Permanent Population

     This  section presents  information  on  the income  levels, poverty,
elderly  population,  and  employment  characteristics  of the  Study Area.
These  characteristics  are useful in analyzing 'the  financial impacts of
the various wastewater treatment alternatives.

     Income  levels  in  the  Steuben Lakes Socioeconomic  Study  Area  are
moderate.   The  mean family  income  in  1970  was $9,932, about  10% below
Indiana  and National  levels.   In  1970, 51.9% of family  incomes  were
under $10,000, 44.6% from $10,000 to $25,000,  and  only 3.5% over $25,000.
More detailed information on  1970 family income is provided in Appendix
E-2.   Per  capita  income  in Study Area townships  ranged  from  $3,666 to
$5,975  in  1974.   Both  1974 per capita income and growth  of per  capita
income  from  1969 to  1974 approximate  levels  for  the State of Indiana
(see  Table II-9).   Highest  income  levels  are  in Jamestown  Township,
while  lowest  income levels are found  in Millgrove Township.   In 1970,
the most recent  year for  which family data are available, 220 families
or 7.8%  of all  Study Area families received incomes below the  federally
established poverty  level.  Also,  27.1%  of  all persons 65 years  of age
and over were below the poverty level.  This  disproportionate  amount of
poverty  level  families among  the  elderly  includes a  large  number of
persons  living  on fixed incomes from pensions and  disability  payments.
Payment of sewer assessments is likely  to be difficult  if  not impossible
for poverty  level persons.   Appendix E-2 provides more detailed  infor-
mation on  income levels.

     The Study Area contains  a significant  retirement and near retire-
ment population.   Persons 65  years  of  age and over constituted 11.2% of
total  Study Area  population while  persons  55  years of age  and  over
constituted  19.8% of  the Study Area's  population.   The   proportion of
persons 55 years of age and  over varied from 9.1%  in Jackson Township^to
31.2% in Jamestown Township.  (See Appendix  E-3 for detailed information
on population 55  years  of age and over.) Sewer service assessments are
likely to  represent  a  severe  burden on retired persons  or persons near-
ing retirement.   A total of  2,149  persons  in the Study  Area  fell  into
this age group in 1970.

     Employment  in the Study Area  in  1970  was   greatly dependent on
manufacturing and  retail trade  (see  Table  11-10).  Many Study  Area
residents work in  nearby  urban centers which are  easily  accessible via
1-80 (the  Indiana  Tollway)  and 1-69.   The nearest Standard Metropolitan
Statistical Area  is Fort Wayne, IN.   A  significant proportion (11.4%) of
Study Area employment was in  "Other Industries,"  which include agricul-
ture.

                                   80

-------
                                 Table II-9


                      PER CAPITA INCOME, 1969 and 1974
                                                               Percent Change
State of Indiana


Steuben County


Jackson Township


Jamestown Township


Millgrove Township

                 a
Pleasant Township
1969
$3,070
2,883
2,885
3,473
2,475
3,157
1974
$4,458
4,300
4,016
5,975
3,666
4,592
(1969-1974)
45.2
49.2
39.2
72.0
48.1
45.5
Note:
Figures include town of Angola which is not in the Study Area'.
Source:  U.S. Census, Population Estimates and Projections (Series P-25),
         May 1977.
                                       81

-------
                                 Table 11-10

                        EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY, 1970
Construction

Manufacturing

Transportation

Communications,
  Utilities

Trade

Finance, Insurance,
  Business, Repair

Other Services3

Educational Services

Public Administration

Other Industries

     TOTAL
State
of Indiana
Number
107,349
723,205
64,847
52,881
385,652
125,645
159,501
156,551
75,433
164,299
2,016,365
Percent
5.3
35.9
3.2
2.7
19.1
6.2
7.9
7.8
3.7
8.1

Steuben County
Number
426
2,301
233
203
1,643
325
385
798
183
1,137
7,634
Percent
5.6
30.1
3.1
2.6
21.5
4.3
5.0
10.5
2.4
14.9
100.0
Study Area
Number
199
1,223
134
151
997
186
295
543
118
495
4,341
Percent
4.6
28.2
3.1
3.5
22.9
4.3
6.8
12.5
2.7
U.4
100.0
Notes:       Other services include hospitals; health services, welfare,
             religious and non-profit membership organizations.

             Other industries include agriculture; mining; private house-
             holds; other personal services; and entertainment and
             recreation services.
Sources:  U.S. Bureau of the Census, Fifth County Summary Data,  1970.

          U.S. Bureau of the Census, General Social and Economic
          Characteristics, Indiana, 1970.
                                      82

-------
     Tourism played  a  significant role in the county's economy in 1972.
A comparison of  selected services receipts for the county and the State
indicated  that tourist  services  accounted  for  more than  77%  of  all
service  receipts   in Steuben  County,  but only  33% of all  receipts  in
Indiana.   In particular,  hotels had a major impact on the local economy
with  sales receipts  amounting  to  63.4%  of  the county's service-related
sales.   Retail trade statistics provide  another  indication  of the pre-
valence  of tourism  in  the lakes  area.   Sales  from  gasoline  service
stations accounted for approximately one  quarter of all retail trade (US
Bureau of  the  Census 1970).

b.   Seasonal Population

     The  great majority  of seasonal residents  in the Study  Area have
their  permanent  residences  within 100 miles  of  the  area.   Within this
radius,  most seasonal  residents come from areas to the south of Steuben
Lakes,  in northern  Indiana  and northwestern Ohio.   More  seasonal resi-
dents  come from  Fort Wayne  than any other area, although many also come
from  Toledo,   Ohio.  Some seasonal residents  also have their permanent
homes  in more distant  cities,  especially  Indianapolis,  Dayton OH,  and
Cincinnati  OH  (by telephone,  Mr.  Craig  Benson,  Steuben  Lakes Regional
Waste District, February  1979).

     Most  seasonal  residents  have the necessary  high incomes for sup-
porting  a  seasonal as  well  as  a permanent  residence.  An exception are
the mobile homes,  residents  generally with moderate or lower incomes (by
telephone,  Mr.  Craig  Benson,  Steuben Lakes  Regional Waste  District,
February  1979).    From  the  limited,  non-statistical  data  on seasonal
residents, it  appears that  they generally have higher total incomes than
permanent  residents  of  the area.   The higher income of  seasonal resi-
dents  must,  however, support  two  dwellings.   Increased costs  of waste-
water  disposal from  seasonal dwellings may thus  represent  a burden for
seasonal residents despite  their relatively high incomes.

3.   HOUSING

     The  Socioeconomic  Study  Area  contained  6,029  dwelling  units  in
1970.   Of these,  3,808  (63%) were occupied year  round and 2,221 (37%)
were occupied  seasonally.  More than 93%  of the permanent dwelling units
in the Study Area were owner occupied.  Much of the permanent housing is
older,  with 51% of  the  1970 housing stock built  before  1940, 34% from
1940 to  1965,  and  only 15%  after 1965 (see Appendix E-4 for more detailed
information on the permanent housing stock).

     The  median  value of owner-occupied dwellings  and median rents in
Steuben  County are  considerably  below  the  national medians.   In 1970
median  housing value  in  Steuben  County was  $11,998, compared  to  the
national  average  of $17,130;  median rents in Steuben County were $96,
compared  to national  average  of  $110.   The  lower  values  in Steuben
County undoubtedly reflect  the  rural nature of the area.

     No  1970 US  Census  information is available for  seasonal dwellings.
However,  interviews  with  knowledgeable  local  sources  do  provide clear
insight  into the current  (1979)  nature of seasonal dwellings.  The value
                                   83

-------
of  undeveloped lakefront  property in  early 1979  was  estimated  to  be
about  $200  per lakefront  foot.   Little undeveloped property  is  avail-
able, however.  Seasonal  homes  range  in price generally from $40,000 to
$60,000.  A  few  subdivisions  have seasonal homes in the  $100,000 range
and one home was recently sold for $700,000.

     Most of  the  seasonal homes are 40 to 60 years old.   Earliest sea-
sonal development  took  place  around 1900.   The  peak construction period
was  1910  to  1930.   A second peak  occurred after  World  War II.  By 1955
little undeveloped  lakefront  property  remained.   Most  seasonal homes in
the  area  are  of  modest size.   The  larger  and better  constructed dwell-
ings  have tended to  be converted  to  permanent use (by  telephone,  Mr.
Craig  Benson,  Steuben  Lakes  Regional  Waste District,  February  1979).

     Four thousand  one hundred seventy-one  dwelling units  the Proposed
Service Area were counted from 1976 aerial  photography.   It is  estimated
that  1,813  (43%)  of  these  were  occupied  all year  and  2,358  (57%)  sea-
sonally.  More than 70% of lakeshore  dwellings  were seasonal,  while all
residences in non-lakeshore areas were of permanent occupancy.   Appendix
E-l  explains  the  methodology used  in  developing  the  seasonal/permanent
occupancy.

     Estimates of  the  number  of dwellings  in the Proposed  Service  Area
in  the year  2000  were  based on  population projections and  occupancy
rates  provided  in  the  Facilities Plan.   The  existing  and  projected
numbers  of  dwelling  units by  subarea are  given  in  Table 11-11.   An
estimated 6,196  dwelling units  are projected in  the  year 2000,  3,292
(53%) being permanent  and 2,904 (47%)  seasonal.  The dominance  of  per-
manent dwellings  in 2000  represents a shift from seasonal  dominance  in
1975.

     Residences in  the  Proposed Service Area are currently highly  con-
centrated in  lakeshore  areas.   In 1976 a total  of 3,494 dwellings (84%)
of  all  dwellings  in  the  Proposed  Service  Area  were within 300  feet  of
the  shore of Crooked Lake, Lake Gage, Lake James, Jimmerson  Lake,  and
Snow Lake.

4.   LAND USE

a.   Existing Land Use

     The Study Area contains a variety of land use categories,  including
agricultural, open space,  residential,  commercial, and  recreational (see
Figure 11-15).  Factors determining the nature,  intensity, and  distribu-
tion of these land uses are proximity  to lake shore areas, accessibility
of  transportation,   and  land  characteristics  --  especially  drainage,
slope,  and   soil  characteristics  which influence the  feasibility  of
installing  septic  systems.   Residential  development  is  concentrated
around Lake Gage,  Crooked Lake,  Lake  James,  Jimmerson  Lake, Lime Lake,
Snow Lake, Big Otter Lake, and Little  Otter Lake.

     Recreational land  use is  important in  the  Proposed Service Area.
Significant recreation and park areas  include:
                                    84

-------
                                                      Table H-ll
                                         EXISTING AND PROJECTED DWELLING UNITS
                                    WITHIN THE PROPOSED SERVICE AREA, 1975 AND 2000
oo
Ul
        SUBAREA
Lake Gage
Lime Lake
Lake Syl-Van
NW Study Area
Jimmerson Lake
Lake James
Snow Lake
Otter Tail Lake
Crooked Lake  (East)
Crooked Lake  (South)
Crooked Lake  (North)
Crooked Lake  (3rd Basin)
Crooked Lake  (Main)

     TOTAL

Off Lake
On Lake
          See  Figure  II- 14
          See  Appendix E-l for method of  calculation.
1975
PERMANENT
103
11
6
216
251
327
87
47
293
128
40
111
193
1,813
862
951
SEASONAL
255
28
10
0
598
570
214
85
0
0
0
118
480
2,358
0
2,358
TOTAL
358
39
16
216
849
897
301
132
293
128
40
229
673
4,171
862
3,309
2000
PERMANENT
127
13
10
532
321
522
108
74
722
314
98
214
237
3,292
2,122
1,170
SEASONAL
314
35
12
0
737
702
262
106
0
0
0
145
591
2,904
0
2,904
TOTAL
441
48
22
532
1,058
1,224
370
180
722
314
98
359
828
6,196
2,122
4,074

-------
                                    LECEHI)
                              RESIDENTIAL
                              MOBILE HOME PARK
                              GKNEKAL BUSINESS AND COMMERCIAL
                              I'ARK OR RECREATIONAL
                              ACU[CULTURAL OR OPEN
                            » BOAT LAUNCHES
fl
                                                                                                                            0     2OOO    400O
                                                                                                                      Source: Schellte Aasuc. INC.
                                                                                                                              1968;  EPIC 1979
I'lCUKK 11-15   STEUBEN  LAKES:  EXISTING LAND USli

-------
     •    Pokagon  State Park  - on  the  northeast  shore of  Lake  James.

     •    Steuben County Park  - on  the southeast shore of Crooked Lake.
          The  County  4-H Park is adjacent  to  the Steuben  County  Park
          along the south shore of Crooked Lake.

     •    Lake James Golf Course  - south of Lake James.  This is a large
          private recreational area.

     •    Pokagon Girls  Camp  - a  private recreational area west of Snow
          Lake and north of Lake  James.

     •    Nature  Preserves - Nature  preserves  are  protected by  State
          law.  Picnicking  and camping are not allowed  in these  areas.
          Nature preserves  include  Marsh Lake (State owned), the  Beach-
          wood Nature.Preserve (south of Big Otter Lake), and the  Potawami
          Nature  Preserve   in  Pokagon State  Park.   The State hopes  to
          acquire the marsh area  around Seven Sisters Lakes as a  nature
          preserve  (by  telephone,  Mr.  John  Bacone,  Indiana DNR,  10
          October 1978).

     In  addition  to the  recreation and park areas,  23  commercial  and
public boat  launches exist  within  the  Study Area (see Figure  11-15).
The  boat launches  provide  residents  and  non-residents of  the  Steuben
Lakes area with  lake  access.   Over one-half of the area's boat launches
are along Crooked Lake  (8 launches)  and Lake James (5 launches) (US  EPA,
Environmental Photo Interpretation Complex 1979).

     Commercial activity is found along State Route 127 and County Route
200 W.   No  industrial areas exist within  the Proposed  Service Area and
no provisions  exist  for industrial  development in current zoning  plans.

     The  majority of  the   Proposed  Service  Area  is  currently  in  low
density  land  uses,  especially in  areas  removed  from  the  lake  shore
zones.   Major  low density uses include  agriculture,  wetlands,  and  open
space.

b.   Future Land Use

     Steuben  County currently has  a  Master Land Use  Plan which  was
adopted  in 1972.   Five  principal land use  categories  are  delineated by
this Plan:

          Lake residential;
          Recreational;
          Park and environmental  control;
          General business; and
          Agricultural.

     The Master Land  Use Plan anticipates major changes  in future  land
use patterns.   Figure  11-16  shows,  lake  residential  uses proposed for
expansion in  the  area  between Crooked  Lake  and Jimmerson  Lake  -  Lake
James,  and  to the  south of Lake Gage.  Recreational  areas will  remain
                                    87

-------
                                                    LEGEND
                                             LAKE RESIDENTIAL
                                      |      | RECREATIONAL
                                      [  '  •  j PARK, ENVIRONMENTAL  CONTROL
                                      ^H| CKNERAL BUSINESS
                                      |      | A(.RICULTURAL
oo
00
                                                                                                                                      Source:   Scliellie Assoc.
                                                                                                                                                    INC. 1970
            FIGURE 11-16   STEUBEN LAKES:   FUTURE LAND USE

-------
essentially  unchanged.   The  area  east of Pokagon  State  Park is desig-
nated  as  an  environmental  control  area,  as are areas  to the  west  of
Jimmerson Lake  and  southeast of Lake Gage.  A general business district
is designated  for  the area between  Crooked  and  Jimmerson Lakes.  Agri-
cultural areas  are  found primarily  in  the  southeast and  northwest por-
tions of the Study Area.

c.   Growth Management

     Steuben County's Zoning  Ordinance  establishes some land development
controls  affecting  the  shorelands  in the  Study Area.   The  State  of
Indiana  requires developers  to obtain  permits  for  shoreland  or lakebed
alterations,  but has  adopted  no  additional regulatory  measures  which
would directly  affect lakeshore development.

     The  zoning districts of major  import  to  shoreland development are
those  designated as  Lake Residence,  Single-Family  Residence,  Environ-
mental  Control, and  Local  Business.   Lake  Residence Districts are de-
fined  as  areas that adjoin extensive  bodies  of  water in the county and
are  suitable for seasonal or permanent residences.   Single-Family Resi-
dence  Districts are  low-density  areas composed  of   single-family resi-
dences  only.   Environmental Control Districts are lowland areas lacking
drainage;  areas  within  the floodplain  of  rivers, creeks,  drainage
ditches  or  backwaters  and  subject  to  inundation;  and areas  of rolling
and  rugged  topography where  conservation  of  the natural  environment  is
desirable  for  recreation  or other uses;  numerous wetland areas  are
apparently excluded  from this classification.  Local Business Districts
are  areas  close to  residential areas  and  appropriate to meeting their
shopping and service needs.

     These  districts differ  slightly  in  their  residential development
restrictions  (see Table  11-12).   Differences between Residential Dis-
tricts  and Environmental Control Districts pertain  mainly to the exclu-
sion of multi-family  residences from the latter.  The ordinance does not
include  provisions  for  discharge  of  liquid  or solid wastes  into the
lakes.   Septic tanks and absorption trenches must  be set back at least
50 feet from the shoreline.   Septic  tank sewage  disposal  systems are not
permitted in areas  that are  seasonally wet,  are subject  to ponding,  or
are  periodically flooded.

     Lake Residence  Districts (LRD) and Environmental Control Districts
(ECD)  cover  most  of the  shoreland of the Proposed  Service  Area (see
Figure  11-15).   Permitted uses in these districts are as  follows:
                                     89

-------
                                                Table 11-12

                                    RESIDENCE DEVELOPMENT RESTRICTIONS
                 Minimum Lot Size (sq. ft.)
Maximum Unit Density
  Minimum Setback
from Lakeshore (ft.)
District Single-Family Multi-Family Single-Family Multi-Family
Lake Residence
Local Business
Single-Family
Residence
Environmental
Control
10,000 20,000*
10,000 20,000*
10,000
12,000
4 6*
4 6*
4
3.5
Single-Family
20
20
20
20
Multi-Family
15
15
-

*  The figures apply for the first two dwelling units—5,000 square feet is added for each additional unit.


Source:  Steuben County Zoning Ordinance.

-------
    	Permitted  Uses	LRD	ECD

    Residential  Uses
       Single  dwellings                           x           x
       Two  family dwellings                       x
       Multifamily dwellings                     x
       Mobile  Home                                          X*
       Planned development                        x*          x*
    Agricultural Uses
       Artificial lakes                           x*          x*
       General farms                             x           x
    Industrial Uses
       Mineral extraction,  topsoil removal                  x*
    Community Facilities
       Airport                                              x*
       Churches,  Government buildings            x           x
          police  & fire  stations                 x*          x
          libraries or museums                   x*
          schools                                x           x
       Public  Park & Recreational Facilities     x           x
       Sewage  Disposal Plant                     x*          x
       Water Stations &  Plants                   x*          x
    Business  Uses
       Restaurant                                x
       Clubs,  Bowling Alleys, Hunting
          & Fishing Lodges                        x*          x*
       Commercial Recreational Facilities        x*          x*
       Private Recreational Development          x*          x*
       Hotels, Motels                            x*
       Trailer Park                                         x*
^Denotes permitted use when approved as special exception.
     As is  shown above,  there  are negligible  differences  between  uses
allowed in Lake Residence Districts and Environmental Control Districts.
These districts appear to have been established as much to sanction  uses
occurring at  the time  the  ordinance was  adopted as  to  control  future
activities.    Since  Lake Residence Districts cover over half the  shore-
land  in the  Study Area,  the  ordinance  appears  to  have  considerable
potential for conflicts of  future uses.    Many uses  can be authorized
only by the  Steuben County Planning Commission and  the  Board of County
Commissioners  as  special exceptions,  but the ordinance does not  desig-
nate  the  extent to which these  special exceptions  are  allowable along
lakeshores.    Its apparent  impact on filling of wetlands for residential
construction is negligible.

     The Steuben  County Planning Commission (SCPC) was  established on
September 7, 1965 by Ordinance No. 524 under Indiana Code 18-7-5-1.   The
stated purposes and goals are:
                                      91

-------
     "to  improve  the  present  health,  safety,  convenience,  and
     welfare  of...citizens  and to plan for  the  future development
     of...communities to the  end that highway systems be carefully
     planned, that  new community  centers  grow only  with adequate
     highway, utility,  educational,  and  recreational  facilities;
     that the needs of agriculture, industry and business be recog-
     nized in future growth; that residential areas provide healthy
     surroundings  for  family life;  and  that  the  growth of  the
     community is  commensurate with  and promotive of the efficient
     and economical use of public funds."

     The  SCPC's  powers  include  the  adoption and  implementation  of  a
master plan.  Accordingly,  a Master Plan,  developed and approved by SCPC
on December  29,  1971,  was  adopted as a zoning 'ordinance  by the Steuben
County Board of Commissioners on January 3,  1973.

     The SCPC  has been  implementing  the  Master Plan  with notable suc-
cess.  On  November 9, 1977,  the Steuben  Circuit  Court upheld  the  en-
forcement  order  of the  SCPC  preventing the continuation  of  a  used car
operation  on Lake James.   In July 1978  the SCPC's  disapproval  of the
proposed establishment of  a large  amusement park at the intersection of
State Road  #120  and  1-69 led to the  developer's  withdrawal of the pro-
posal.   The  SCPC also  rejected  a  proposal  for a 4-wheel  drive recrea-
tional park  near  Tamarack  Mountain east  of Lake James  during July 1978
(by  letter,  Mr.  Craig Benson, Steuben Lakes Regional Waste District, 25
July  1978).   The  impact  of the SCPC in controlling developmental growth
in the county has been noted by the public,  as is  evident in the feature
article  of  June  21,  1979  in the  Steuben Republican  (see  Appendix A-2).

5.   FISCAL CHARACTERISTICS

     The grant  applicant is  the Steuben  Lakes Regional  Waste  District
which  was  established under  Chapter 19-3.1.1-14  of  the  Indiana State
Code.  This  code restricts  the District's  fund raising solely to revenue
bonds payable from net revenues  of the facilities.   The  ability of the
District to  undertake  debt  is limited to  a  percentage of total assessed
valuation.   The  exact  debt  limit has not  been established because Dis-
trict  property   values  have  never  been  differentiated  from  township
assessments.  The  number  of dwellings within the Proposed Service Area
and   their   value  indicate  that   debt   limitations  would  not  limit
wastewater  facility  financing (by telephone, Mr. Craig Benson, Steuben
Lakes Regional Waste District, February 1979).

     Wastewater District expenditures will  indirectly affect other local
governments  because of the  additional tax burden they represent.  Other
taxing bodies  in  the area are  Steuben  County  and three  local  school
districts.    Townships  in  the County  share  part  of  the  County's  tax
revenues.  Neither  Steuben County nor  any  townships  in  the  Study Area
maintained any  debt  during Fiscal  Year  1977  (State  Board  of  Accounts
1978).  At present,  local  taxes  in the Proposed  Service  Area are rela-
tively low.  However,  tax  levy rates are  presently  frozen by the State
of Indiana  and  Steuben  County.   Any increases in those  levies must be
approved by the  State.
                                      92

-------
6.   HISTORICAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

     No sites  listed  with the National Historic Register or the  Indiana
Survey of Historical Sites are within the Study Area.   The only historic
site  in Steuben  County  was  reported  to  be  the County Courthouse in
Angola  (by  letter,  Indiana  Historical Bureau,  25  January  1977 --see
Appendix F-l)

     The Glenn A. Black  Laboratory of Archaeology,  Indiana  University
has indicated that no known archaeological sites exist in the  Study Area
(see Appendix  F-2).   However, it recommends that a systematic survey of
all prospective  construction  areas  (sewers and treatment facilities) be
conducted prior  to  construction since the topography of  the  Study Area
indicates  a  likelihood  for  the  existence  of  archaeological  sites.
Should  such  a survey  locate  any site(s) eligible for inclusion in the
National Register of Historic Places, a mitigation plan must be proposed.


E.   EXISTING SYSTEMS  AND NEED FOR ACTION

1.   TYPES OF SYSTEMS

     Two central collection and treatment systems exist within the Study
Area.  One serves the Pokagon State Park and,  the other,  the Holiday Inn
and Faucher's  Motel.   Both of these systems have recently been upgraded
to meet the  requirements  of NPDES permits:  the former by the installa-
tion of tertiary treatment facilities; the latter by land application of
secondary  effluent  instead of discharging to Lake Charles  (see  Section
I.A.3).  These systems have  therefore  been excluded  from  the Proposed
Service Area.

     On-site  waste  disposal  systems  serve the  remainder of the Study
Area.  Septic tank soil absorption systems are  generally  in use with the
exception  of a few  outhouses serving  seasonal  (summer)  cottages.   The
status of these systems, their problems and the need for  remedial action
are analyzed in the remaining subsections of Section II.E.

2.   STATUS OF  SYSTEMS

     The Steuben County Health Department (SCHD) is the designated local
agency with  responsibility for regulating private sewage  disposal sys-
tems in the  Study Area.  No ordinance governing private  sewage disposal
systems existed prior  to  1957.   The 1957 ordinance authorized no action
by the SCHD  except  when systems were found to  be malfunctioning.  Regu-
lation of  the  installation of ST/SASs was first undertaken in the Study
Area on May 4,  1970  when the  Commissioners  of  Steuben  County  amended
Ordinance  No. 500 to provide for "Regulating The Installation, Construc-
tion, Maintenance  and Operation  of Private Sewage Disposal  Systems in
Closely Built-Up Areas  and Providing Penalties For Violations Thereof."
The SCHD has  pursued  a vigorus regulatory program as  well as  a monitor-
ing program.   It has monitored the malfunctioning of ST/SASs by means of
dye  tests  and  called upon owners  of  such  systems  to take  corrective
                                      93

-------
action.  It has also monitored water quality in the lakes with developed
shorelines (see Section II.B.2).  The SCHD provided the following infor-
mation on the status and problems of ST/SASs in the Study Area by letter
of December 13, 1977:

     •    ST/SASs in Study Area numbered 3513.

     •    Of  430  permits  issued during  1972-1976  new ST/SASs accounted
          for 255 or 59%,  and replacement and repairs the remaining 41%.

     •    Of  the  new installations,  75% failed to meet  one  or  more of
          the State's guidelines contained in Bulletin SE 8 while 94% of
          the replacements and repairs were similarly at fault.

     •    Failures  of  the ST/SASs  were  attributed to  their  ages (many
          over  40  years);  overloading due to overcrowding  of lake cot-
          tages  and  increased  use  of  dishwashers,  automatic  washing
          machines,  etc;  and  installation on  poor  soils  and  in high
          water table areas.

     •    Table 11-13 shows  that  the average lot sizes in all but three
          of  the  16 subdivisions  in the Study Area are smaller than the
          10,000 square feet minimum recommended by the State's Bulletin
          SE  8  and  required  by the Steuben  County Sanitation Policies
          and Procedures.   Their  locations are shown  in  Figure 11-17.

     •    Figure  11-18  shows  the  locations  of malfunctioning  ST/SASs
          identified by eight dye  test  programs  of  the  Steuben County
          Health Department.  Owners  of  such  systems have been required
          to take corrective measures immediately.

     •    The Steuben  County Health Department has documented that  90%
          of the septic systems in use (December 1977) can in "no way be
          replaced or repaired under proposed new Indiana State Board of
          Health  Regulations, because  of  small   lot  size,  high  water
          table, poor soil, etc."   [New regulations HSE 25 became effec-
          tive December 15, 1977]

     The above information indicates that significant numbers of ST/SASs
have been malfunctioning,  but provides no definitive evidence of signi-
ficant adverse  impacts on surface water quality, groundwater quality or
public  health.   Also,  the  SCHD's  monitoring and  enforcement programs
have probably been  effective in reducing any likely  adverse  impacts on
surface water quality.   The  SCHD  furthermore  indicated  that no infor-
mation  was  available on  the occurrence  of wastewater  related  gastro-
enteric  diseases   or infant methemoglobinemia  in the  Study Area.   A
number  of  studies  were  therefore  undertaken  to  provide  a   basis  for
determining the  need for  action,  and eligibility for  Federal funding.
These  studies  are   described  and  their findings  assessed  in  Section
II.E.3 below.

     The SCHD information  does indicate  that a  vast majority  of  the
existing systems are not  in  compliance with State and local  regulations
                                    94

-------
                                  Table 11-13

            STEUBEN LAKES REGIONAL WASTE DISTRICT AVERAGE LOT SIZES


     Subdivision                                                    Lot Size*
                                                                    (sq. ft.)

 1.-  Lake Gage South Side Plat                                        5,140

 2.  O.P. West Colony Bay                                             5,264

 3.  Kidney Landing                                                   5,600

 4.  Folck Addition                                                   7,230

 5.  Long Beach                                                       5,600

 6.  Roby Place                                                       5,155

 7.  Potawatomi Acres                                                12,530

 8.  Red Sand Beach                                                   8,095

 9.  Glen Eyre Beach                           •                       4,910

10.  Feick's Point                                                    7,420

11.  Eagle Island                                                     4,200

12.  Sprague's Addition                                              10,986

13.  Morley's Addition                                                8,420

14.  Hickory Island                                                   4,970

15.  Ramblin Acres                                                   11,700

16.  Buena Vista                                                      4,567


*  Based on the average of seven lots within that subdivision.


Source:   Steuben County Health Department, 1977.
                                       95

-------
1. Lake Gage South Side Plat
2. 0. P. West Colony Bay
3. Kidney Landing
4. Folck Addition
5. Long Beach
6. Roby Place
7. Potawatomi Acres
8. Red Sand Beach
                          SUBDIVISION
 9. Glen Eyre Beach
10. Feick's Point
11. Eagle Island
12. Sprague's Addition
13. Horley's Addition
14. Hickory Island
IS. Rarablin Acres
16. Suena Vista
                                                                                                                      Source:  Steuben  County
                                                                                                                              Health Dept.  1977
 FIGURE 11-17 STEUBEH LAKES: SUBDIVISIONS

-------
                                                                                                                               LEGEND

                                                                                                                   . MALFUNCTIONING  SEPTIC TANKS
                                                                                                                          (STEUBEN COUNTY HEALTH
                                                                                                                           DEPARTMENT)

                                                                                                                   A MALFUNCTIONING  SEPTIC TANKS
                                                                                                                          (EPIC)
                                                                                                                              20OO    4QOO
                                                                                         :L
J Source; EPIC 1979; Steuben
        County Health Dept.
        1977.
in CURE 11-18 STEUBEN LAKES:  MALFUNCTIONING SEPTIC TANK SYSTEMS

-------
particularly because of very small lot sizes.   The density of ST/SASs  is
therefore  very high  and required  set back  distances  of ST/SASs  from
wells,  surface waters  etc.,  cannot  be met.   This  situation has  been
confirmed  by  an  examination of  large  scale  (1 in. = 250 ft.)  aerial
photographs flown in April 1976.   Estimated linear housing densities and
lot sizes  from these  photographs  are shown in Table  II-14.   Analysis  of
the data  indicates that  65%  of  the  houselots  in the Proposed  Service
Area  are  less than  1/3  acre in  size.   This  is the lot  size  generally
needed to  ensure  compliance  with  set back distances  between  ST/SASs and
wells.   The percentage  of  lots  less than  1/3 acre is  highest in the
lakeshore  areas of  Crooked  Lake  (1st and 2nd  Basins) with 85%,  followed
by the  off-lake areas  east  of Crooked Lake with  82%,  and the  lakeshore
areas of Lake Gage with 74%, and  Jimmerson Lake with  70%.   Approximately
49% of  the houselots  in the Proposed Service Area are also  less than \
acre  in  size.   The lakeshore  areas of Crooked Lake  (1st  and  2nd  Basins)
are again the highest in this respect with 79% followed by the  lakeshore
areas of Jimmerson Lake with 56%  and Lake Gage with 51%.

     The data  also  show  that  linear densities (number  of residences per
mile  of  shoreline)  are  highest around Crooked Lake  (1st  and  2nd  Basins)
at 136, followed by Lake Gage at  111,  and Jimmerson at  109.   Correspond-
ing average property  frontages are 39 ft., 48  ft.,  and  48 ft.,  respec-
tively.  These conditions, while  being conducive to groundwater  contami-
nation and degradation do not necessarily mean that such  degradation has
actually  occurred.   A  groundwater quality survey  has  been undertaken
with  a  view to determining  the  existing water quality  situation.  The
findings are reported in Section  II.E.3  below.

3.   SPECIAL  STUDIES

     This  discussion  summarizes   the  studies  recently  undertaken  to
evaluate existing  systems.  Results  of  these  studies are  also discussed
elsewhere in this  EIS (surface and groundwater quality, etc.).

a.    "Investigation    of  Septic   Leachate  Discharges   into
      Steuben Lakes,  Indiana"  (William  Kerfoot  1979)

     This  study was undertaken in December 1978 to determine the extent
to which  groundwater  plumes  from  nearby septic tanks  were emerging  in
the  lakes  and  contributing nutrients  to them.   Septic tank  leachate
plumes were  located with a  Septic Leachate Detector, commonly  referred
to as a  "Septic Snooper".   The instrument is  equipped with analyzers  to
detect both  organic and inorganic chemicals  from domestic wastewaters.
It is towed  along the shoreline  to obtain a  profile of  septic  leachate
plumes  discharging to   the  surface water.   Surface and  ground  water
sampling  for  nutrients   (nitrogen  and  phosphorus)  and  bacteria  were
coordinated with  the  septic  leachate  profile  to identify the source  of
the  leachate.   Three  different   types   of  plumes  were  encountered:
erupting  plumes   characterized  by  the  presence  of both  organic and
inorganic  residues; passive  plumes in  which  only organic residues are
present and  which are indicative  of retreating plumes  from  seasonally
used septic tanks;  and  stream source plumes,  stream  discharges  into the
lakes  of groundwater  leachates, overland  flow or  direct  pipe  discharges
into the streams.
                                   98

-------
                                                 Table 11-14
                                HOUSING DENSITIES AND LOT SIZES IN STUDY  AREA
Lakeshore Areas:
  Lake Gage
  Lime Lake
  Lake Syl-Van
  Jimmerson Lake
  Lake James
  Snow Lake
  Otter Tail Lakes
  Crooked Lake
    1st & 2nd Basin
    3rd Basin
Off Lake Areas:
  North of Lime Lake
  North of Crooked Lake
  East of Crooked Lake
  South of Crooked Lake
No. of
Residences
358
39
16
849
897
301
132
673
229
216
40
328
128
Length of
Segment
(Ft.)
17,000
5,500
3,700
41,300
57,200
19,000
15,300
26,200
20,100
27,600
10,000
22,900
19,800
No. of
Residences
Per Mile
111
37
23
109
83
84
46
136
60
41
21
76
34
Equivalent
Avg. Frontage
(Ft.)
48
143
230
48
64
63
115
39
88
129
251
69
155
No. of House
Lots Smaller Than
1/4 Acre 1/3 Acre
182
15
	
473
412
109
49
530
27
96
	
167
2
266
19
5
592
508
137
69
573
85
150
23
268
40

-------
     Continuous shoreline surveys were conducted on Charles Lake, Little
Otter Lake, Big Otter Lake, Snow Lake, Lake James, Crooked Lake and Lake
Gage.  Only Discrete  samplings  through the ice cover were undertaken on
Jimmerson Lake, the third basin of Crooked Lake and Lime Lake.

     A total  of 69 plumes were found irregularly  scattered  around the
shorelines of the lakes (see Figure 11-19).  This is a very small number
of  plumes  in  comparison  with  the  3,494 lakeshore  residences  in  the
Proposed Service  Area.  The  numbers  and types of plumes  found in each
lake are summarized in Table 11-15.  Almost all of the plumes were found
on  three  lakes:  Lake  James,  24 plumes   (35%); Crooked  Lake  (First and
Second Basins), 20 plumes  (29%); and Lake Gage, 15 plumes (22%).  Erupt-
ing plumes numbered 42,  equivalent to 61% of  the total.  There were 23
passive plumes  (33%),  and four stream source plumes (6%).

     The  frequency  of  the plumes  was  directly  related  to  the  soils
classification.  The  majority of  the plumes,  41 of  69, was  associated
with moderately rapid and  rapidly permeable soils,  or  occurred in cut
and fill canal  regions of uncertain soil  types.

     A large  stream  source plume,  principally of bog-like  organic com-
position,  as   distinct  from  wastewater  effluent,   was  found  entering
Little Otter Lake via the connecting stream from Marsh Lake.  This plume
became progressively less concentrated as it flowed through Little Otter
Lake,  Big  Otter  Lake, the  lower  half  of  Snow  Lake, finally  becoming
dissipated in  the middle basin of Lake James (see Figure 11-20).  Asso-
ciated with this plume was a noticeably  high  level  of total phosphorus
ranging from 0.096 mg/1 at the entrance to Little Otter Lake to 0.011 at
the  discharge  from Lake James to Jimmerson Lake.   Old sediment deposits
in  Marsh Lake  from  effluent discharges of the  Freemont sewage treatment
plant  (east  of Marsh  Lake)  were indicated as  the likely  source of the
high phosphorus concentrations.   While  the  plant no  longer  discharges
phosphorus to  Marsh  Lake,  the  acidic leachate from  the extensive bogs
around Marsh  Lake is  thought to  release phosphorus  from  its carbonate
binding  in the Marsh Lake sediments.  Further  studies were recommended
to  confirm this  theory.   This and the  other  stream source plumes were
identified as the major sources of phosphorus to the lakes surveyed.

     The bacteriological survey of the lakes revealed very few locations
with fecal contamination shown  by the presence of fecal  coliforms.  The
recommended limit  of   200  fecal  coliform organisms/100  ml  was  only ex-
ceeded at  three locations:  the storm drain outlet on the western shore
of  Lake  Charles,  the  stream entering Big Otter  Lake  in the  northeast,
and a point on  the north shore of the third basin of Crooked Lake.  Four
other  elevated concentrations  (§100  organisms/100  ml)  were  found  in
canals on  the  eastern  shore  of  Crooked  Lake and on  the stream linking
Crooked  Lake  and Lake  Gage.   Appendix  C-7  contains  the Kerfoot study.

     A supplementary  leachate  survey of  Crooked Lake and Jimmerson Lake
began  in  August 1979.   Thus  far the survey has  shown plume concentra-
tions comparable to or lower than those in the  late 1978 survey.  Plumes
were  concentrated around the  identified  channel  areas.   Substantial
algal  blooms  were noted  on  Jimmerson Lake.  A complete report on this
study will be included in the Final EIS.
                                  100

-------
                                                                                         POKA60N  STATE  PARK      [
                                                                                                                                     LEGEND




                                                                                                                                  ERUPTING PLUME




                                                                                                                                  DORMANT  PLUME




                                                                                                                                  STREAM SOURCE PLUME




                                                                                                                                  ICE COVER
                                                                                                                             0     2OOC    4OOO




                                                                                                                          Source: Kerfoot  1979
FIGURE 11-19'   STEUBEN LAKES;  SEPTIC LEACHATE PLUME  LOCATIONS

-------
                                   Table 11-15



                 STEUBEN LAKES:  DISTRIBUTION OF LEACHATE PLUMES
                                                Types of Plumes
     Lake                        Erupting       Passive        Stream Source




Little Otter                        -              -                 1




Big Otter                           2              -




Snow                                52




James                              18              5                 1




Crooked (1st & 2nd Basins)         16              3                 1




Gage                                1             13                 1




     TOTAL                         42             23                 4
Source:  Kerfoot 1979.
                                    102

-------
FIGURE 11-20   STEUBEN LAKES:  LARfiE BOG-LIKE FLUME PATU

-------
b.   "Environmental  Analysis and Resource Inventory for
     Steuben Lakes,  Indiana" (EPIC  1979)

     The  Environmental Photographic  Interpretation  Center (EPIC)  pre-
pared a  detailed environmental analysis  and resource inventory of  the
Study Area.   The data used  for this purpose were obtained from color,
color infrared,  and thermal infrared imagery (at a  scale  of 1:8000)  from
an aerial  photo mission  flown  on  May 2, 1978.  EPIC's  report presents
the  data  on 7  annotated  overlays  for easy  reference and  assimilation.
The  original  purpose of  the  study was  to identify and  locate malfunc-
tioning  septic  tank/soil  absorption  systems in the  Study Area.   Sub-
sequently, the  study was  expanded  to include the environmental resource
inventory.

     Location of Malfunctioning Septic Tanks.  The remote  sensing tech-
nique used  in  the  study  can only  detect those malfunctions which  are
noticeable  on  the  ground  surface.   It  does  not  detect  malfunctions
related to  sewage backing up  into  the home, nor to  too  rapid transport
through the soil to groundwater. The various "signatures"  used as photo
interpretation  keys for   identifying  malfunctions included:   1)   con-
spicuously  lush vegetation,  2) dead  vegetation (especially grass), 3)
standing water or seepage, and 4) dark soil  with accumulations of excess
organic matter.   Forty-five suspected malfunctioning  systems identified
by remote sensing were  later inspected on the ground.  Only 4 were found
to have failing absorption systems.  EPIC attributed  the  large number of
unconfirmed suspect sites  to the variability of "signatures" in different
geographical areas.  Based on  their  fundings  and the  opinions  of  the
Steuben County Sanitarians, EPIC concluded that most,  if  not all, of  the
major surface related malfunctions  were  located.

     Environmental Resource Inventory.   This  inventory contains pertinent
environmental, geographic, and hydrologic data  which have been incorpor-
ated in appropriate  sections  of Chapter II.   The major  data categories
displayed on the overlays  are:

     •    Surface water features—including ponds, streams, irrigation/
          drainage  ditches,  new water   courses  (not on existing   base
          maps).

     9    Land  use/cover  based on the  modified USGS Land Use  Classi-
          fication.

     «    Aquatic plant growth  including accumulations   of  algae, emer-
          gent  and  submergent  vegetation in  the  larger water  bodies.
          Substantial algal concentrations were noted  in  Jimmerson Lake.

     •    Point  and non-point sources of pollution such  as gravel pits,
          quarries,   landfills  and dumps,  auto  junkyards, wastewater
          treatment  facilities,  cattle   crossings  and confined  feeding
          areas.   Several dozen  apparently unauthorized  landfill  and
          dumps  were located.
                                   104

-------
     •    Wetlands—forested, non-forested,  and  mixtures of these with
          deciduous  forest  and  shrubland,  mixtures  of  ponds  and wet-
          lands .

     •    Miscellaneous — including areas of potential  erosion  and sedi-
          mentation,  fill  areas, commercial  and public boat  launches.

c.   "Investigation of  Well Water Quality Within the  Steuben
     County  Regional  Waste  District"  (Tri-State University
     Engineering and Research Center 1979)

     This  study  was undertaken  to  obtain supplementary  information on
the existing  groundwater quality in the Study Area and an indication of
the  effects  of  current wastewater  disposal  practices  on  groundwater
quality.  Appendix  C-9  contains the report of this study.  The sampling
methodology and laboratory methods (Standard Methods)  are specified, and
the results tabulated without interpretation.

     A  total  of  101 wells  were sampled for bacteriological and chemical
analyses.   Sampling  was  distributed throughout the 13 sub-areas  of the
Study Area  in proportion to  the number of residences in each sub-area
(see  Table 11-14).   Figure  11-21 shows  the  sampling locations.   Each
sample was analyzed for total coliforms, fecal coliforms,  fecal strepto-
cocci, phosphates, nitrates  as nitrogen, chlorides  and specific conduct-
ance.  The tabulated results also show depths  of  wells sampled, and full
time  (permanent)/seasonal occupancy  of the related homes.  It  was only
possible to gain  access  to  7 seasonal  residences because of the timing
of the sampling period during April/May 1979.

     Interpretation of Results.   Based  on  the  results  of the study, the
quality of  groundwater(bacteriological and  chemical) in the Study Area
is  of  a high  standard.   The effects  of  more than 50 years of septic
tank/soil  absorption systems  on water quality  are  seemingly  insigni-
ficant.

     Fecal  coliform determinations  were undertaken in order to differ-
entiate  between   contamination  by  wastes  of   warm-blooded  animals
(including  humans)  and  other  sources  of  coliform  bacteria.   Samples
showing the presence of both total and fecal coliforms are indicative of
contamination  by  wastes  of warm-blooded  animals.   Fecal streptococci
(fecal  strep) are  also  indicators  of  contamination by warm-blooded
animals.  The ratio of fecal coliforms to  fecal strep  (FC/FS) is greater
than 4  to  1  for  human wastes  and  less than  0.7 to 1 for other animal
wastes.  This ratio is therefore used to differentiate between wastes of
human  origin  and  those of  other  animals.   Its  use  is, however,  not
recommended where  fecal strep  counts  are  less than 100/100  ml (US EPA
1978b).

     The bacteriological  results show  10  samples  with  confirmed total
coliforms.  Only 2  of those (nos. 88,  89  north  of Lime  Lake) were also
positive for fecal coliforms--indicative of animal  wastes contamination.
The fecal  strep counts  (8,  3 per 100  ml,  respectively)  in those 2 sam-
ples are much  too  small for application of the  FC/FS ratio.  The fecal
                                     105

-------
                                                                                                                                LEGEND




                                                                                                                           t SAMPLED WELLS
                                                                                                              •98  I   Source:  Trt-State Untver-
FIGURE 11-21  STEUBEN LAKES: LOCATION OF SAMPLED WELLS

-------
coliform  counts  are even smaller  (1,  1  per 100 ml, respectively).  The
likely source of this contamination is animal but non-human wastes.  The
other  4  samples containing  fecal coliforms  showed total coliform most
probable  number  (MPN)  per 100 ml  of  <2--indicating that, in each case,
none of the 5 tubes of 100 ml portions was  positive  for total coliforms.

     Of  25  samples testing  positive for fecal  strep,  only 5 were also
positive  for  fecal coliforms.   This  is  unusual, since the survival time
of  fecal  strep  is  shorter than  that  of fecal coliforms  (APHA-AWWA-WPCF
1975).  A possible explanation is the  fact that all varieties of fecal
strep  are  not  restricted  to  the intestines  of  man  and  animals.   S
faecalis  var.  liquefaciens  has  been  found associated  with vegetation,
insects and  certain types of soils (APHA-AWWA-WPCF  1975).  The presence
of  fecal  strep  in the  absence  of fecal  coliforms  and confirmed total
coliforms  is  an indication  that  the source of the fecal strep may be
vegetation,  insects or  soils.   Dr.  P.  Hippensteel,  Tri-State Univer-
sity's author of  the  reported  study,  has  indicated that  the  wetlands
located  near  all  wells  showing  fecal  strep may be the  sources of. the
organism  (by telephone,  July 25,  1979).   Highest concentrations of fecal
strep  were  found  around Lake Gage,  the south  shore of Jimmerson Lake,
and the south and  east shores of  Lake James.  Crooked Lake and Lime Lake
had lesser  concentrations,  while  Snow Lake had  no  positive samples for
fecal  strep.

     In summary,  less  than 10%  of the  101  samples  were confirmed posi-
tive for  total coliforms.  Less  than  2%  of  the samples were positive for
both  total  and  fecal  coliforms.   Human wastes do  not  appear to be the
source of these coliforms.  The  bacteriological  quality  of the ground-
water  is of  a  very high  standard and  appear  to  be  uncontaminated  by
human wastes.

     Nitrate  levels  are  in all  cases well  below the permissible 10 mg/1
as  nitrogen  of  US  EPA's Interim  Primary Drinking  Water Standards.  The
values range  from  <0.03  to 2.6 mg/1.  Only 5 samples (<5% of the total)
were above 2 mg/1, and 8 samples  between 1  and 2 mg/1.  These low levels
and the  absence  of significant  increases in nitrate concentrations over
background levels  indicate that  the soils have been  efficiently treating
septic tank wastes throughout  the Study Area  for  more  than 50 years.

     Chloride levels are generally well  below  100  mg/1  with the excep-
tion  of  2 wells on  Crooked  Lake  (138,  >650 mg/1),  1  well on Jimmerson
Lake  (194 mg/1), and 1  well  on Lake Gage  (136 mg/1).   In all  4 cases,
the associated levels of nitrates  (which like chlorides are also soluble
in  water) are very low.  This  indicates  that  the main  source  of the
elevated  chlorides is  unlikely  to be  human wastes.  The  only well in
which the US EPA Interim Drinking Water  Standards'  limit of 250 mg/1 for
chlorides is  exceeded (>650  mg/1) is  #64, southeast of  Crooked Lake.
The likely source of this very high chloride concentration is the Steuben
County Highway Department's barn  (salt storage) across the road from the
well  (by  telephone,  Dr. P.  Hippensteel,  Tri-State University,  16 May
1979).

     Phosphate  levels  are  generally low throughout the  area,  only 16
samples  exceeding  0.02  mg/1.    Most  of the elevated  phosphate  levels
                                   107

-------
(max.  0.15  mg/1) are  found  in off-lake  rural areas east  and  south of
Crooked Lake, and north of Lime Lake—suggesting agricultural fertilizer
sources.  There is no drinking water standard for phosphates.

     Specific  conductance  ranges  from  345 to  2700 pmho/cm.   With  the
exception of 7 samples, all  are  less than 700 pmho/cm.  Among these 7
samples  are  the 4  with chloride concentrations greater  than  100 mg/1.
The highest  specific  conductance  of 2700 |Jmho/cm was found in the well
(#54)  southeast  of Crooked Lake  which was  also  highest in chlorides.
Higher  levels  of specific conductance  found in these  wells than those
reported in  the  "Septic Snooper"  Study (see Section E.3.a  and Appendix
C-7) may be due to:

     •    the leaching of agricultural and highway chemicals;

     •    greater extraction  of  salts from soils due to  greater depths
          of travel to wells  than to the lakes;

     •    uncertainties in the sampling of groundwater  through the lake
          beds during the "Septic Snooper Survey".

     Specific  conductance  is  not  of direct  significance   in  drinking
water and there is no established standard.

4.   NEED  FOR ACTION

     The Steuben County Health Department has  indicated that violations
of  standards  of  ST/SAS conditions are  prevalent  throughout the  Study
Area.   The   question  arises  as  to whether  these  ST/SASs   are  causing
public health and/or water quality problems and, if so,  what is the need
for  corrective action.  The  distinction should be made between  water
quality  and public  health problems  on the one hand,  and  nuisance  or
community improvement problems on the other hand.   On-site systems known
to contribute to violations of water quality standards  or changes in the
trophic  status of  water  bodies  pose  water  quality problems.   Public
health  problems  may  result  from  the ponding   of  effluent  on  the  soil
surface, and  from  well waters  with bacterial contamination  and  high
nitrate  concentrations  (>10  mg/1).   Where recreational  use  involves
direct  body contact with  lake  waters,  violation of the  fecal  coliform
standard also constitutes a public health hazard.   Community improvement
problems include  odors, restrictions on  water use and restrictions  on
building expansion.

a.   Public Health  Problems

     The EPIC  (1979) remote sensing and ground  survey of ST/SASs located
only 4  malfunctioning  septic systems in which effluent  back-up to  the
soil  surface  occurred.  This  represents an insignificant  0.1%  of  the
homes in the  Proposed Service Area.  The Steuben County  Health Depart-
ment's  (SCHD)  dye-test  program has perhaps played a significant role in
minimizing this problem.  While  failures  such   as those  located by EPIC
and also by the  SCHD's dye-test program  may   occur in  the future,  the
threat  to  public  health  seems  an  insignificant  one,   controllable  by
management.
                                     108

-------
     Data  from  the  groundwater  quality  survey  (Tri-State  University
1979) indicate  that the soils have been  efficiently screening bacteria
out  of  the groundwater.   The soils have  also been  effective in main-
taining  nitrate levels  considerably below  the  10  mg/1  (as  nitrogen)
which is  associated with infant methemoglobinemia (blue babies).   Based
on  the  available  evidence,  ST/SASs  pose no  public  health  threat  to
residents  as  a  result  of groundwater  contamination.   The SCHD  has  no
record  of public  health  problems  associated  with  wastewater disposal
practices in the Study Area.

     Both  the  SCHD monitoring program (1973-1977)  and Kerfoot  (1979)
indicate  that  fecal coliform levels in the Study Area's lakes have been
well below  the  State's  standard of 200 organisms/  100 ml  for body con-
tact  recreational   use.   Kerfoot  (1979)  confirmed the  SCHD's findings
that  elevated  levels  of  fecal  coliforms were  confined to  canals  and
streams where  only 3 samples exceeded the above standard.   Septic tanks
are  not necessarily  the  cause of these elevated  levels outside  of the
lakes since animal wastes and agricultural  run-off  may be contributory
sources.  The  Study Area's ST/SASs appear to pose no significant  public
health  threat to contact recreational use of the lakes.

b.   Water Quality Problems

     Based on the  data of  the National Eutrophication Survey, the  Steuben
County  Health  Department's monitoring  program, and the "Septic Snooper"
survey, septic  tanks are not  significantly contributing to surface water
quality degradation.   On  the very  conservative  assumption that  all
septic  tanks  within  300  feet of  the  lake  shorelines  contribute phos-
phorus  to the  lakes,  it is  estimated  that  ST/SAS  contributions  to nu-
trient  loadings are  in all  cases  less than  7%,  except for  Lake  Gage
(10%)  and  Jimmerson Lake  (21%).   The "Septic  Snooper" survey  of  the
lakes  actually  found  only  65 plumes  among more  than 3000  lakeshore
homes.   It  is  therefore likely that the actual ST/SAS contributions are
considerably  less  than  the estimates,  and very  small  compared  with
tributary inflow and the broad source plume  originating in the wetlands
around  Marsh Lake.

c.   Other Problems

     Localized  growths  of algae and aquatic weeds have created nuisance
problems, particularly  in Jimmerson Lake and Crooked Lake.  It has been
estimated  that  removal  of the current septic tank nutrient loading from
the  lakes  would  not change  the trophic  status  of the  lakes signifi-
cantly.   Also,   the aquatic  blooms  would continue  due to  the  natural
tendency  of the area's  marl lakes to  recycle nutrients  trapped  in the
sediments.

d.   Conclusions

     The  Study  Area's ST/SASs  have not been  the  source of significant
public  health  or water  quality problems.  More  than 50% of the  ST/SASs
are over 40 years  old.  Identifiable needs are:
                                      109

-------
•    Upgrading  of  old  ST/SAS  based upon  a  detailed  sanitary  and
     engineering survey;

•    Strengthened management  of ST/SASs to ensure  their  continued
     effective performance;  and

•    Strengthened  continuous   monitoring  programs  to  include  not
     only dye tests of  ST/SASs and the monitoring of surface water
     quality once undertaken  by the SCHD,  but also  the monitoring
     of groundwater quality.
                                 110

-------
                              CHAPTER  III

                    DEVELOPMENT OF ALTERNATIVES
A.   INTRODUCTION

1.   GENERAL APPROACH

     This  chapter  explains the  development  of new  alternative  systems
for  wastewater  collection and  treatment  in the Proposed  Service  Area.
Chapter IV   describes   and  compares  these   alternatives,   for   cost-
effectiveness, with the Facilities Plan Proposed Action (Mick, Rowland  &
Associates, Inc. 1976).  Chapter V assesses the environmental and  socio-
economic impacts of all these systems.

     EIS alternative development has focused on those aspects and  impli-
cations  of the  proposed  wastewater  management plan  for the Proposed
Service Area which (a) have been identified as major issues or concerns,
or (b) were not adequately addressed in the Facilities  Plan.

     Chapter  I  emphasizes that  one of the  main issues  is  the  use of
low-cost  subregional   solutions  in areas  other than  the high density
shorelines of Crooked  Lake and parts of Lake  James  and  Jimmerson Lake.
Attention was therefore centered on the possible use of advanced on-site
and  cluster  systems for  groups  of homes,  as  well  as  other  alternative
and  innovative technologies in the areas around Lake Gage,  Lime Lake  and
Lake Syl-Van, Jimmerson Lake, Snow Lake,  upper Lake James and the  rural/
semi-rural  off-lake areas  throughout the  Proposed Service  Area.   The
analysis included determinations of the prevailing housing densities  and
the  availability  of suitable  soils for effluent absorption  systems in
areas with slopes of 12% or less.

     For analysis,  the Study Area was divided into of 87 segments, con-
solidated into the 13  groups shown in Figure 11-14.   Using aerial  photo-
graphs   (Mick,   Rowland  &  Associates,  Inc.   1976),   linear housing
densities* and  lot sizes  in each segment and group were  examined  (see
Table 11-14).   Crooked Lake,  with a linear housing density of 136 resi-
dences per  mile,  was  the densest  sub-area.   Lake  Gage  (111 residences
per  mile)  and Jimmerson  Lake  (109 residences per mile) both were more
densely occupied than  Lake James and Snow Lake (84 residences per  mile.)
These  high  densities   indicated that  alternatives providing for  the
sewering  of  Lake  Gage,  Snow Lake,  and  group  area  2B  (northwest of
Jimmerson  Lake)  might be considered.  These  areas,  much smaller than
Crooked Lake  and Lake James,  are  termed  "Small Flow Systems."   Table
11-14  data  also  indicated that  approximately 65% of  the lots   in  the
Study Area are  smaller than 1/3 acre and  approximately  49%  less  than  \
acre.  The soils data  (see Figure  II-6) showed  that  soils suitable  for
on-site and cluster systems  exist near residential development in those
areas considered for  "Small  Flow Systems".   On-site and cluster  systems
were, therefore, included  in the alternatives proposed for those  areas.
                                    Ill

-------
     A second  important issue  is  the overall  need for  the  Facilities
Plan proposal.   Documenting  a clear need for new wastewater  facilities
is  sometimes  difficult, requiring  evidence directly  relating  existing
on-lot systems to water quality and public health problems.  Such a need
is shown by one or more of the following conditions:

     •    Standing pools of  septic  tank effluent or raw domestic sewage
          in yards  or  public areas where direct  contact  with residents
          is likely;

     •    Sewage  in  basements from  inoperable  or  sluggish sewage dis-
          posal systems; and

     •    Contaminated  private  wells  clearly  associated  with  sewage
          disposal systems.

     The  Proposed  Service  Area  exhibits   some  indirect  evidence  of
unsuitable  site  conditions   for  on-site  soil  disposal  systems --high
groundwater,  slowly permeable  soils,  small  lot  sizes,  proximity  to
lakeshores  and  substandard setback distances between  wells and private
wastewater  facilities.   Available  information on these factors  was,  in
fact, used early in the preparation of this  EIS  to develop decentralized
alternatives.

     Indirect evidence cannot justify Federal funding,  however.   Federal
water pollution control legislation and  regulations require  documenta-
tion of  actual water  quality or public health problems.   Section II.E
summarizes the extensive efforts mounted during  this EIS to document and
quantify  any  need  for  improved  facilities around the Steuben Lakes.

     The  dollar cost  of  the  Facilities Plan  Proposed Action  and  its
impact on area residents make cost-effectiveness as serious a  concern as
needs  documentation.    Since  the  collection system accounts for  most
(>80%) of the construction costs in the Facilities Plan Proposed Action,
the  extent  of  sewering needed and  the use  of newer  technologies  for
wastewater  collection  have  been  investigated in  detail  here,   as  have
alternative wastewater  treatment  systems.    The  technologies  assessed
were:

              WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT COMPONENTS AND OPTIONS
Functional Component

Flow and Waste Load Reduction



Collection of Wastewaters
           Options

-  household water conservation
   measures
-  ban on phosphorus

   limited service area
-  pressure sewers
   vacuum sewers
-  gravity sewers
                                  112

-------
Wastewater Treatment Processes
Effluent Disposal
Sludge Handling
Sludge Disposal
-  conventional centralized
   treatment plus  chemical
   treatment to reduce
   phosphorus concentrations
   land application
-  on-site treatment
-  cluster systems

   subsurface disposal
-  land application
   discharge to surface
   waters
   aerobic digestion
   anaerobic digestion
-  dewatering (mechanical)
   dewatering (drying
   beds)

-  land application
-  landfilling
   composting
   contract hauling
     Next, appropriate options were  selected  and  combined into alterna-
tive systems described in  Chapter  IV.   The last section of this chapter
considers  implementation,  administration  and financing of the alterna-
tives .

2.   COMPARABILITY  OF  ALTERNATIVES:   DESIGN POPULATION

     The various alternatives  for  wastewater  management in the Proposed
Service Area must  provide  equivalent or comparable  levels of service if
their designs and  costs  are to be  properly compared.   The Pokagon State
Park and the Holiday  Inn and Fauchers  Motel have  been  excluded from the
Proposed Service Area because their wastewater treatment facilities have
been upgraded to provide  the improvements  required by the NPDES permits.
The  design population   is  that projected to  reside  in  the  Proposed
Service Area (see  Figure 1-3)  in the year 2000.   The following compari-
son of alternatives assumed a design population of 30,787.

     This design population  has  been used as the  basis for all the EIS
alternatives and the  Facilities  Plan Proposed Action in the interest of
equitable  comparison.   Please  note,  however,  that  each  alternative
carries its  own constraints and that  the wastewater management system
chosen may determine  much  of the Study Area's actual population in the
year 2000.  Centralized  systems  would  have a  greater tendency to induce
growth than decentralized  systems.   Chapter  IV discusses the importance
of this factor.
3.    COMPARABILITY  OF  ALTERNATIVES:
      PROJECTIONS
       FLOW  AND  WASTE   LOAD
     Design  flows  for  centralized  treatment  facilities  and  for the
cluster systems  assumed  a flow  rate of  60  gallons per capita per day
                                  113

-------
(gpcd)  in  residential areas for both permanent  and seasonal residents.
Infiltration  and  inflow  (I/I)  to  gravity sewers was  added  to  the cal-
culated sewage flow in appropriate alternatives.

     The design flow  used in the Facilities Plan Proposed Action ranged
from  70 to  100 gpcd,  including I/I.  To  compare costs properly in this
EIS,  flows  developed for  the  EIS  alternatives  were  also used for the
Facilities Plan Proposed Action.

     The rate  of  sewage generation depends upon the mix of residential,
commercial,  and  institutional  sources  in the  area.  Studies  on resi-
dential water usage (Witt, Siegrist, and Boyle 1976; Bailey et al. 1969;
Cohen and Wallman 1974) reported individual household water consumptions
varying  widely  between  20  and  100  gpcd.   However,  average  values
reported in those studies generally ranged between 40 and 56 gpcd.  On a
community-wide basis, non-residential domestic (commercial, small indus-
trial,  and institutional)  water  use increases  per capita  flows.   The
extent of such increases are influenced by:

     «    the importance of the community as a local or regional trading
          center;

     «    the  concentration  of such water-intensive  institutions  as
          schools and hospitals; and

     »    the level of small industrial development.

For  communities  with  populations  of less  than  5,000, EPA  regulations
allow design  flows  of 60 to 70 gpcd where existing per capita flow data
are lacking.   In  larger communities,  and in communities within Standard
Metropolitan  Statistical  Areas, the maximum allowable flow ranges up to
85 gpcd.

     Water consumption  by seasonal users  varies  much more than consump-
tion  by permanent  residents.   The actual  rates of  consumption depend
upon  such  factors  as  type of  accommodations  in the  area and  type  of
recreation  areas  available.   EPA   regulations  (EPA 1978) suggest  that
seasonal population can be converted to equivalent permanent population
using the following multipliers:

          Day-use visitor          0.1 to 0.2
          Seasonal visitor         0.5 to 0.8

     A  multiplier of 1.0  was  applied to  the projected  seasonal popu-
lation  to  account for both day-use and  seasonal visitors.  Considering
the possible  error  in projecting  future  seasonal populations,  the pre-
ponderance  of  present  seasonal  visitors  using well-equipped private
dwellings and  the lack of data on day-use visitors, this multiplier was
thought generous,  i.e., it probably overestimates flows.

     The design flow rate of 60 gpcd does not reflect reductions in flow
from  water  conservation.  Residential water  conservation devices, dis-
cussed in Section III.B.I.a,  could reduce flows by 16 gpcd.   In Chapter
4, EIS Alternative 2 is redesigned and recosted to estimate savings from
a water conservation program.


                                   114

-------
B.   COMPONENTS AND OPTIONS

1.   FLOW AND  WASTE REDUCTION

     Measures reducing flow or pollutant loads can provide the following
benefits to a wastewater management program:

     •    Reduce  the  sizes   and  capital  costs  of  new collection  and
          treatment facilities;

     •    Delay the time when future expansion or replacement facilities
          will be needed;

     •    Reduce  the  operational  costs of pumping and treatment;  and

     •    Mitigate the sludge and effluent disposal impacts.

a.   Residential Flow Reduction Devices

     There are many devices to reduce water consumption and sewage flow.
Some of these are listed in Appendix G-l with data on their water saving
potential  and  costs.   Most  of  these  require no  change in  the  user's
hygienic  habits  and  are  as  maintenance-free  as  standard  fixtures.
Others,  like  compost toilets, may require  changes  in  hygiene practices
and/or increased maintenance.  The use of these devices may be justified
under certain conditions,  for instance when no other device can provide
adequate  sanitation  or when excessive flows  cause  malfunctions  of  con-
ventional on-site  septic  systems.   In most cases, however, the justifi-
cations for flow reduction are economic.

     Table  III-l  lists  proven  flow  reduction devices  and  homeowner's
savings  resulting  from  their  use.   Data  on  the devices  listed  in
Appendix  G-l  and  local  cost assumptions listed beneath the  table  were
used  to  develop these estimates.  The homeowner's  savings  include  sav-
ings  for  water  supply, water heating and wastewater treatment.   A  com-
bination  of  shower  flow  control insert device,  dual  cycle  toilet  and
lavatory  faucet flow  control device  could save approximately  $70  per
year.

     If  all  residences  in  the  Proposed Service  Area were  to  install
these  flow reduction  devices,  not all  families would  save  $1.92/1000
gallons  in wastewater treatment costs  (see  assumption  in  Table  III-l).
This  is  because a  substantial portion  of  this  charge  goes  to  pay off
capital  and  operation and maintenance costs  which  will  remain constant
even  if  flow  is reduced.   For all to benefit fully from flow reduction,
wastewater collection,  treatment and disposal facilities  would  have to
be designed with flow capacities reflecting the lower sewage flows.   Use
of the three types of devices cited above would reduce per capita sewage
flows by  approximately 16 gpcd.   To calculate the cost-effectiveness of
community-wide  flow  reduction, EIS Alternative  2  (see  Section  IV.B.4)
was redesigned and recosted using a design flow based on 44 gpcd instead
of 60 gpcd.
                                   115

-------
                                 Table III-l

                ESTIMATED SAVINGS WITH FLOW REDUCTION DEVICES
Shower flow control insert device
Dual cycle toilet3
Toilet damming device
o
Shallow trap toilet
Dual flush adapter for toilets
Spray tap faucet
Improved ballcock assembly for toilets
Faucet flow control device
Faucet aerator
First Year
Savings
(or Cost)
$45.03
19.75
15-84
14.09
11.91
(74.14)
9.73
5.96
1.23
Annual Savings
After First
Year
$47.03
39.75
19.09
19.09
15.91
13.06
12.73
8.96
3.73
 First year expenditure assumed to be difference in capital cost between
 flow-saving toilet and a standard toilet costing $75.
Assumptions

Household:
Four persons occupying dwelling 328 days per year.   One
bathroom in dwelling.
Water Cost:   Private well water supply.  Cost of water = $0.02/1000
              gallons for electricity to pump against a 100 foot hydraulic
              head.

Water Heating Electric water heater.  Water temperature increase = 100°F-
Cost:         Electricity costs $0.03/kilowatt-hour.  Cost of water heating
              = $7.50/100 gallons.

Wastewater    Assumed that water supply is metered and sewage bill is based
Cost:         on water supply at a constant rate of $1.92/1000 gallons.
              Rate is based on a 1980 Study Area sewage flow of 1.35 mgd
              and local costs of $983,300 in 1980 for Alternative 2 as
              estimated in this EIS.
                                    116

-------
     The  estimated  savings  in project  capital  cost  (1980) would  be
$318,000  and the  operation and  maintenance savings would  be approxi-
mately  $3,000  per  year.   To  achieve  these  savings,  approximately
$250,000  worth  of  flow  reduction devices  would be need  (see Appendix
G-2).   The  total  present  worth* of  savings over  the  20-year  design
period  would  be  $558,300  or  3%  of the  total  present  worth  of  EIS
Alternative  2.

     These  economic analyses  of  homeowner's saving and  total  present
worth   reduction  assume  sewering  of  all  dwellings.   However,  for
dwellings  that  still use on-site  systems the economic  benefits  of flow
reduction   devices   cannot  be  readily  estimated.   State   regulatory
agencies  generally do not allow  a  reduction in  the  design of conven-
tional  on-site  systems   based  upon proposals  to  use  flow reduction
devices.  However,  it is  likely  that reduced  flows will prolong the life
of soil absorption  systems,  thereby  saving  money in the long  run.

     With  some decentralized technologies require  substantial  reductions
in  flow  regardless of  costs.   Holding tanks,  soil  absorption systems
which  cannot be enlarged, evaporation or evapotranspiration  systems and
sand mounds are examples of technologies which  would  operate with less
risk of malfunction for minimal  sewage  flows.   Sewage flows  of 15 to 30
gpcd can be achieved by  combinations of  the following:

     *    Reduce  lavatory water  usage by  installing spray tap faucets.

     •    Replace  standard  toilets  with dual cycle  or other  low-volume
           toilets.

     •    Reduce  shower  water  use with thermostatic  mixing valves and
           flow  control  shower heads.  Use  of showers  rather than baths
           should be encouraged whenever  possible.

     •    Replace  older  clothes washing  machines with  those equipped
          with  water-level  controls  or  with  front-loading machines.

     •    Eliminate water-carried  toilet  wastes  by  use  of in-house
           composting toilets.

     •    Recycle   bath  and  laundry  wastewaters  for  toilet flushing.
          Filtering and  disinfection of  bath and laundry wastes for this
          purpose has been  shown to  be feasible  and aesthetically accept-
           able  in  pilot  studies  (Cohen  and Wallman  1974;  Mclaughlin
           1968).   This  alternative to in-house  composting toilets could
           achieve the same  level of  wastewater flow  reduction.

     •    Recycle  bath  and  laundry wastewaters for  lawn sprinkling in
           summer.   The  feasibility  of this method  would   have  to  be
          evaluated on  a trial  basis  in  the  Study  Area  because its
          general applicability  is not certain.
                                   117

-------
     •    Use  commercially  available  pressurized   toilets   and  air-
          assisted shower  heads  with a  common air compressor  of small
          horsepower  to  reduce  sewage  volume  from  these  two  largest
          household sources up to 90%.

b.   Indiana Ban on Phosphorus

     Phosphorus is often  the  nutrient  controlling algae growth  in sur-
face  waters  and  is  thus  an important  influence  on  lake  or  stream
eutrophication.  Nutrient enrichment of  the  waters encourages  the growth
of algae and other microscopic plant life; decay of the plants increases
biochemical  oxygen  demand, decreasing  dissolved  oxygen in  the  water.
Addition  of nutrients encourages higher forms of plant  life,  hastening
the  aging  process  by which  a  lake  evolves  into   a  bog  or  marsh.
Normally, eutrophication is a  natural process  taking thousands of years.
However, human activity can greatly  accelerate it.  Phosphorus and other
nutrients, contributed to surface waters by  human wastes, laundry deter-
gents  and  agricultural  runoff,  often  cause   over-fertilization,  over-
productivity  of plant matter,  and "choking" of a body of water within a
few  years.   Appendix C-8  discusses  the eutrophication  process  and its
relationship to seasonal changes  in  lake water quality.

     In  July 1973,  the  Indiana  legislature passed  a law  limiting the
amount  of  phosphorus  in  household laundry detergents to 0.5%  by weight.
Institutions  such as  hospitals  were exempted  from complying with the
law.  According to the Indiana Water Pollution Control Board, which has
been  conducting  an  extensive  wastewater  treatment  plant  monitoring
program  throughout  the  state,  a  60%  reduction  in  phosphorus   in  raw
sewage  was  achieved  by the ban.   Table III-2  shows results from the
monitoring program.

     Treatment plants  and  on-site disposal  facilities in the  Study Area
could  show  a  similar phosphorus reduction.   However,  such  character-
istics  of the Steuben  Lakes  area as the number  of  residential  laundry
facilities  may differ  from those  in  the  communities where  data were
collected.   Clearly,  the  extent of  phosphorus  reduction  can  only be
determined by survey  of Study Area characteristics.

     Reduction of phosphorus  by  control of detergents  will not achieve
the  effluent discharge limits  of 1  mg/1 (see  Appendix C-6  for Effluent
Limits.  Consequently, provision of facilities for phosphorus  removal in
treatment plant operation is required.

2.   COLLECTION

     The  collection  system in the Facilities  Plan  is estimated to  cost
$17  million -- 83% of the  total cost  of the  Proposed  Action -- and is
the  single  most  expensive portion  of  the  sewerage  facilities.    Since
only some parts of collection  systems are eligible for Federal and  State
funding,  collection  system costs would affect  the  local community  more
than  other project components.   There  is,  therefore,  considerable  in-
centive  at local, state  and   national  levels  to choose less expensive
alternatives to conventional sewer systems.
                                  118

-------
                                  Table III-2

                          EFFECT OF PHOSPHORUS BAN
                          UPON WASTEWATER TREATMENT

                                      Raw
           No. of Plants            Influent                   Effluent
Year         Monitored          (pounds/capita/day)         (pounds/capita/day)


                                     0.0146                     0.0106

                                     0.0133                     0.0098

                                     0.0067                     0.0050

                                     0.0064                     0.0039**

                                     0.0060

                                     0.0063

                                     0.0059*


*   59% reduction in phosphorus from 1971-1977—influent
**  63% reduction in phosphorus from 1971-1974—effluent
1971
1972
1973 '
1974
1975
1976
1977
37
43
50
42
88
52
54
                                      119

-------
     Alternative means of wastewater collection are:

     •    pressure  sewers  (including  grinder pumps  or  STEP  systems);
     •    vacuum sewers; and
     •    small diameter gravity sewers (Troyan and Morris 1974).

     An alternative collection system may economically sewer areas where
site  conditions  would increase the cost of  conventional  sewerage,  such
as shallow depth to bedrock,  high groundwater table, or  hilly terrain.
Housing  density also  affects the  relative  costs  of  conventional  and
alternative wastewater collection systems.

     The  alternative  most  extensively  studied  in  the  literature  is
collection by  a  pressure  sewer system.  The principles  behind the pres-
sure  system  are  just  the  opposite  to  those 'of a  water  distribution
system.  The water  system  consists of a single point of  pressurization
and a number of user outlets.   Conversely,  the pressure  sewer system has
inlet points of  pressurization and a single outlet.   Pressurized  waste-
water is generally  discharged to the treatment facility or to a gravity
sewer.

     The two major  types  of pressure sewer systems are  the grinder pump
(GP)  system  and the  septic  tank effluent pumping (STEP)  system.   They
differ  in  the  on-site equipment  and layout.   The  GP  system  employs
individual grinder  pumps to  convey raw wastewater to the  sewer.   In the
STEP system septic tank effluent from individual  households is pumped to
the pressure main.

     The advantages of pressure sewer systems are:

     •    elimination of infiltration/inflow;
     *    reduction of construction cost; and
     «    suitability  for  use in  varied site and climatic conditions.

The  disadvantages  include  relatively  high  operation  and  maintenance
cost, and the need to use individual home STEP systems or  grinder  pumps.

     Vacuum sewers  provide  similar advantages.   Their  major components
are vacuum mains, collection tanks and vacuum pumps,  and individual home
valve connection  systems.   Wastewater is transported by suction through
the  mains  rather  than by pressure.   Signficant  differences  have  been
noted  among  designs  of the  four  major types of current  vacuum sewer
systems (Cooper and Rezek 1975).

     As a  third alternative to conventional  gravity  sewers,  small dia-
meter (4-inch)  pipe can be used if septic tank effluent, rather than raw
waste, is  collected.   Such  pipe  may result in lower costs of materials,
but the systems  retain some of the disadvantages  of larger sewers.  The
need for deep  excavations  and pump stations  is not  affected.   Prelimi-
nary studies  suggest that gravity effluent sewers  become cost-preferable
at linear housing densities greater than 50 dwellings per mile.

     Analysis  of the  costs  of STEP and  grinder pump  types of low pres-
sure sewer systems indicated that the STEP system would be slightly more
                                    120

-------
cost-effective.  An  important  assumption in this analysis was that  50%
of existing septic tanks  would need to be  replaced  for  use  in the STEP
system.  Reference here is  to septic  tanks built prior to  1940  which,
due to their  age,  are likely to be in poor structural condition.  Based
on the above  finding,  STEP systems are used  in  almost all EIS alterna-
tives.  The  Facilities Plan Proposed  Action has also been  modified by
the  replacement  of   grinder  pumps with  STEP  systems.   This decision
should be  reviewed  during the  detailed  design stage  (Step II  of  the
construction grant process)  on the basis of  a detailed  field  survey of
the  existing   septic  tank systems.  Figure  III-l  illustrates the STEP
system.

3.   WASTEWATER TREATMENT

     Wastewater   treatment   options    fall   into   three   categories:
centralized treatment before surface water discharge; centralized  treat-
ment before land disposal; and decentralized treatment.

     Centralized  treatment means  the  treatment  of wastewater  collected
by a  single  system and transported to  a  central location.   Centralized
treatment  systems  may  serve  all  or  a  part  of  the  service  area.
Centrally  treated effluent may  be  discharged  to   surface  waters  or
applied to the land; the method and site  of  disposal affect the  treat-
ment process requirements.

     Decentralized   treatment  means  treatment   of   a  relatively  small
amount  of  wastewater  on--site  or off-site.    Typically,  effluent  is
disposed near  the sewage source, thus eliminating costly transmission of
sewage to distant disposal sites.

a.   Centralized Treatment—Discharge to  Surface Water

     The Facilities  Plan evaluated the use  of  wastewater  stabilization
lagoons,  disinfection  and  land disposal  of  treated effluent by spray
irrigation.   Effluent  from  the land  application  system would be col-
lected  by  a  set  of  underdrains.   Crooked Creek,  in  the  north of  the
Study  Area,  was  selected  by  the  Facilities  Plan and  this  EIS as  the
receiving stream for treated wastewater.

     In addition  to   the  options  examined by the Facilities  Plan, this
EIS also examined the use of oxidation ditches and contact stabilization
for conventional  centralized  treatment.   Renovated  wastewater recovered
by  wells  from rapid  infiltration sites  would  also  be discharged to
Crooked Creek.

     The use  of oxidation ditches to treat wastewater is relatively  new
in  the United States.   This  technique  employs  a ring-shaped channel,
approximately  3 feet deep, containing wastewater.  A brush-like aeration
device, placed across  the  channel,  provides aeration  and circulation.

     Contact   stabilization  is  a  variation of the  activated  sludge
process.  Wastewater is detained for a period of approximately 1/2 hour
in "contact"  tank, for initial reduction  of  pollutants  such as  BOD  and
suspended solids.  Sludge generated in this tank is passed to a


                                   121

-------
             fe	-]
&
N)
       EXISTING GRAVITY
       "SEWAGE  PIPING


       EXISTING  SEPTIC TANK
                                                         -CONTROL PANEL

                                                          & ALARM LIGHT
                  =n/y^7//^-q
n.
*«— *—

im
Ul
"'/•$//'$
_AiH
OVERFLOW
LEVEL !
ON OFF
CM-fclfrM-H
SENSOR
LEVEL
                                                                                -PRESSURE SEWER/
                                                                                          _    }COMMON
                                                                                               1 TRENCH
                                                                                 -FORCE MAIN   ]
                                                                    -PUMP UNIT
                                                                    STORAGE
                                                                    TANK UNIT


                                            Fieure III-1 :

                     TYPICAL  PUMP  INSTALLATION  FOR  PRESSURE  SEWER

-------
"reaeration"  tank,  in which  the  pollutants are assimilated.  Detention
time in the second tank may range from 2 to 4 hours.

b.   Centralized Treatment  -- Land Disposal

     Land  treatment  of municipal wastewater uses  vegetation and soil to
remove many constituents of wastewater.  Available processes may be used
for  a  variety of objectives  such as water  reuse,  nutrient recycling and
crop production.   The three principal types of land application systems
are  (EPA 1977):

     •     Slow rate  (spray irrigation)
     •     Rapid infiltration  (infiltration-percolation)
     •     Overland flow.

     Figure  III-2  and  III-3  show  the  techniques  of  irrigation  and
infiltration.   The  effluent  quality  required  for land  application  in
terms  of  BOD  and  suspended  solids  is  not so  high as for  stream dis-
charge.   Preliminary wastewater  treatment  is needed  to  prevent health
hazards, maintain  high soil treatment efficiency, reduce soil clogging,
and  insure reliable  operation of the distribution system.   In this  EIS
oxidation  ditches  were used to maintain dissolved oxygen in the waste-
water and  provide preliminary treatment.  The use  of oxidation ponds  was
also  examined,  but   the  ditches  were  determined  to  be  more  cost-
effective.

     A  recent memorandum  (PRM 79-3)  from  EPA explains  Federal eligi-
bility  requirements  for  pretreatment  prior  to  land  application.   To
encourage  both  land  treatment and land disposal  of wastewater,  EPA  has
indicated  that:

     "A universal minimum of  secondary treatment for direct surface
     discharge  ... will  not be accepted because it is inconsistent
     with  the basic concepts of land treatment.

     ...the costs of the additional preapplication increment needed
     to  meet  more stringent  preapplication treatment requirements
     [than necessary]  imposed at the State or local level would be
     ineligible for  Agency  funding  and thus would be paid for from
     State or local funds."   (EPA 1978)

     The  EPA  policy  has  important  ramifications  for  land  treatment
alternatives.   It  encourages their  use  by allowing  Federal funding  of
land  used  for  storage,  and  by  underwriting the risk  of  failure  for
certain land-related projects.

     Land  treatment systems require wastewater storage during periods  of
little or  no  application  caused by factors such as unfavorable weather.
In  Indiana  storage   facilities  for  the  winter  months  are necessary.

     The land  application  component of  the  alternatives   in  this  EIS
includes storage facilities  similar  to those provided by the Facilities
Plan but  rapid infiltration  is  the  final  disposal method  in  the  new
system.
                                   123

-------
                           Figure  III-2
                         SPRAY  IRRIGATION
                       EVAPOTHANSPIRATION
SPRAY
APPLICATION
  ROOT ZONE
   SUBSOIL
                                       CROP
                                                           VARIABLE
                                                           SLOPE
                                                            DEEP
                                                            PERCOLATION
                            Figure  III-3

                          RAPID INFILTRATION
                               EVAPORATION
   ZONE OF
   AND TREATMENT
£££^J£Si INF LTRATION >
NATION ^|S|S;^ • | ££ 5®
ENT  SKSSJ  ' £ &# ffi?
                                           SPRAY OR
                                           SURFACE APPLICATION
                                          .:; PERCOLATION THROUGH
                                          ' UNSATURATED ZONE
         llliili:;; lffilllMilllii:

*i
OL
^:%
^-vli
""*•!•'•••
DW
: *'J
v.'(::
H
TE
"*!•*•?'•

TABL
11


                            124

-------
c.   Decentralized  Treatment  and Disposal

     A number of  technologies  are available for decentralized  treatment
on-site or  at sites  near the  point of sewage  generation.  Disposal of
treatment wastewaters can  be  to  the  air, soil  or  surface waters and
normally  occurs  near the  treatment site.  Some of the available  tech-
nologies are:

     •    Alternative toilets

          Composting toilets

          Toilets  using  filtered  and  disinfected   bath  and  laundry
          wastewater

          Waterless toilets using oils to carry and store  wastes

          Incineration toilets

     •    On-lot treatment and disposal

          Septic tank and soil-disposal systems

          "Septic tank and dual, alternating soil-disposal  systems

          Aerobic treatment and soil-disposal system

          Septic tank or aerobic treatment and sand filter with effluent
          discharge to surface waters

          Septic tank and evapotranspiration system

          Septic tank and mechanical evaporation system

          Septic tank and elevated sand mound system

     •    Off-lot treatment and disposal

          Cluster   systems  (multiple   houses  served   by   a   common
          soil-disposal system)

          Community  septic tank  or aerobic  treatment and sand  filter
          with effluent discharge to surface water

          Small scale lagoon with seasonal effluent discharge to  surface
          waters

          Small scale lagoon with effluent discharge  at rapid  infiltra-
          tion land application site

          Small scale lagoon with  seasonal effluent   discharge  at slow
          rate land application site
                                  125

-------
          Small  scale,  preconstructed activated sludge (package) treat-
          ment plants with effluent discharge to surface waters

     Because  many  of  the  developed portions  of the  Study  Area are
located along lakeshores rather than  streams, decentralized systems with
discharges  to  surface  waters  were not  considered appropriate.  All of
the remaining technologies, used alone or in combination with each other
or with  flow reduction devices, could be useful  in specific situations
within  the  Study  Area.  If  the  decentralized approach  to wastewater
management  is  selected, technologies  selected for each dwelling will be
"tailored"  to  the  problem being remedied (or lack of them), to soil and
groundwater  site characteristics, and to expected systems use.

     Lacking  detailed  site-by-site design  to select  appropriate tech-
nologies,  this  EIS  assumes  that  the  best  known and  most  reliable
decentralized  technologies  will  be  used.   Continued  use  of on-site
septic  tanks and  soil  absorption systems  is  the technology  of  choice
where acceptable public health and environmental impacts are attainable
with them.  Where on-site systems (including alternatives to ST/SAS) are
not economically, environmentally or otherwise feasible, cluster systems
will be  used.   The assumption that only these  two technologies will be
used is  made here  to form the  basis  for cost and feasibility estimates
and is  not meant to preclude other technologies for any site(s).   Esti-
mates of  their  frequency of repair and construction are conservative to
reflect  the possibility that  other,  more  appropriate  technologies may
cost more.

     Continued  use  of  septic  tank-soil  absorption  systems  for  most
dwellings  in the Proposed EIS Service Area  would  perpetuate violations
of the Steuben County Sanitary Ordinance as discussed in Section II.E.2.
However,  the substantial amount  of  field  investigation  undertaken for
this EIS  has indicated that  most existing  systems are  operating  with
acceptable  environmental and  public  health  impacts.  More detailed site
investigations  may  indicate  that  renovation  or  replacement of  some
existing  on-site systems  is necessary.   To estimate the investment this
might require,  it  was  assumed  that  50% of on-site systems  will  be re-
placed with new  septic tanks  and 10% with  new  soil absorption systems.

     Detailed  site evaluations  may  show for  some dwellings  that  con-
tinued  use of on-site  systems  is not  feasible or  that  repairs  for  a
number  of  dwellings  is more  expensive than  joint disposal.   Cluster
systems  are  subsurface absorption   systems  similar  in  operation  and
design  to  on-site  soil  absorption  systems but  are  large  enough  to
accommodate  flows   from  a  number  of  (approximately  25)  dwellings.
Because of  the need  to collect and  transport wastes, cluster systems
include  limited  collection  facilities  using  pressure  sewers,  small
diameter  sewers  and/or  pumps  and  force   mains.   Generally,  use  of
existing  septic  tanks would continue for settling  and stabilization of
wastewater.

     As  indicated  in  Section  II.A.S.b,  suitable soils exist near enough
to residential development  throughout the  Study Area  to  permit the use
of cluster  and  on-site systems.   Further  field  surveys of  soils and
groundwater  conditions  at specific sites  selected for  cluster systems
                                    126

-------
should be undertaken prior to use for this method of disposal.   Appendix
H-l contains a discussion of soil characteristics.  The exact number and
locations of  dwellings requiring off-site  disposal  of  wastewater  would
be determined after detailed evaluation of existing systems.

     Appendix K-l  contains design assumptions  for  the  cluster  systems.
Design  criteria for  the  cluster  systems  recommended  by the  State  of
Indiana were considered in the development of the typical cluster system
design.  The cost for cluster systems were developed based on the design
of two "typical" cluster systems serving residences along the shorelines
of the  Steuben  Lakes.   The costs include 50%  septic tanks  replacement.
Presently,  there are  successfully  operating   cluster  systems  in  many
states, notably Minnesota and California.

4.   EFFLUENT  DISPOSAL

     Treated wastewater  may  be  disposed of in  one  of three  basic  ways.
Reuse, perhaps  the  most desirable,  implies recycling of the  effluent by
industry  or agriculture or  to  groundwater recharge.   Land  application
takes advantage  of  the absorptive and  renovative capacities of soil  to
improve effluent quality and reduce the quantity of wastewater requiring
disposal.   Discharge  to  surface  water  generally   implies  the use  of
streams  or  impoundments  as  the  ultimate  receiving  body   for  treated
effluent.

a.   Reuse

     Industry Reuse.   There  is  no  industrial  development in  the  Study
Area, nor  is  any planned.   Consequently industrial  reuse does  not seem
to be a feasible means of effluent disposal.

     Agricultural Irrigation.   The   use   of   treated  wastewaters  for
irrigation  is addressed in Section III.B.4.C.

     Groundwater Recharge.    Groundwater supplies  all potable  water  in
the Study Area.   The sand  and gravel deposits of the Study Area contain
ample  quantities  of water  and  are an  important  resource.   There  is  no
evidence  that  this   resource  is  being  depleted to   an  extent  requiring
supplemental recharge.   Furthermore,  the  volume of wastewater generated
is insignificant compared to the available groundwater resources.

b.   Discharge to  Surface Waters

     In  the Facilities  Plan Proposed  Action,  effluent from  the land
application site, percolating down  through the soil, would be collected
in underground  drains.  This option was provided  to avoid  raising the
water  table.   The  collected effluent  would  be discharged to Crooked
Creek.

     Similarly, treated effluent from the rapid infiltration sites would
percolate down  through  the  soil  and enter the water  table.   Recovery
wells  would collect  the  renovated  wastewater,  which would be pumped
directly to Crooked  Creek  or Bell Ditch (depending on the alternative);
approximately 75% of  the effluent would be recovered.  For conventional
                                    127

-------
treatment by contact stabilization,  treated effluent would be discharged
to Crooked Creek.

c.   Land Application

     Two  land  application methods were examined during  the  preparation
of this EIS:  spray irrigation and rapid infiltration/  percolation.   For
spray  irrigation,  as  proposed by the Facilities Plan, wastewater  would
be  sprinkled  on  a crop  such as alfalfa  at an application rate of  2
inches/week.  Alfalfa  minimizes  the losses  of  nitrogen  to  groundwater
and allows a relatively high application rate.   The  site  recommended  for
this treatment is  located between Crooked Creek  and  Bell  Lake Ditch.   It
conforms with the  requirements discussed in Chapter  II.

     In  rapid  infiltration  wastewater  is  treated  by infiltration  and
percolation  through the  soil.   Wastewater  is  applied  to  the soil  by
means  of  spreading basins.   Besides  treating  wastewater, rapid  infil-
tration may also recharge groundwater supplies.   However,  in  the Steuben
Lakes area recovery wells would be constructed in the rapid infiltration
sites  to  protect  the groundwater  from pollution  by nitrates.   After
treatment, the renovated  water would be withdrawn by the recovery wells
and discharged to  either  Crooked Creek  or Bell Lake Ditch.   The  poten-
tial  sites  for  rapid  infiltration  have  seasonally  high  groundwater
tables  deeper  than 6  feet,  and moderately to  rapidly permeable  soils.
The renovated wastewater  will meet  state NPDES  requirements  for surface
water discharges.   Facilities to  store wastewater for 12  weeks of  incle-
ment weather would be necessary, and wastewater would  be applied  to  the
land at a rate  of 12 inches per  week.   The sites identified  for use  are
located  north  of  Bell   Lake,  east  of  Snow   Lake,  and  northeast   of
Cheesboro Lake.

5.   SLUDGE HANDLING AND DISPOSAL

     Two  types of  sludge  would be generated by  the  wastewater treatment
options considered above:  chemical/biological  sludges  from conventional
treatment;  and solids  pumped  from septic  tanks.   The  residues from
treatment  by  lagoons and  land  application  are grit  and  screenings.

     Aerobic  and/or anaerobic digestion of sludges,  followed by land
application were two  sludge handling and disposal options considered in
the  Facilities  Plan.  Aerobic  digestion of sludge is  accomplished  by
aerating  the  organic sludges  in an open tank.   Anaerobic digestion of
sludge is performed  in  closed tanks that exclude oxygen.  This EIS  has
evaluated the cost-effectiveness  of  aerobic and anaerobic sludge  diges-
tion for those alternatives that produce biological/chemical  sludges  and
incorporated the results into Section IV.D.

     To remove water  from digested  sludge,  a dewatering  process  follows
digestion.  After  digestion  sludge  solid concentrations usually  range
from  4  to  6%.   Dewatering  devices such as  vacuum  filters,   filter
presses,  and drying beds  can usually increase  the  solids  content to 20
to  45%,  simplifying handling during disposal.   Sludge drying beds were
the dewatering option  selected  in the Facilities Plan.   Based on  costs,
reliability,  and   ease  of  operation  sludge   drying beds   have been
evaluated further  in this EIS.
                                   128

-------
     Sludge  disposal  would  consist  of  contract hauling  (recommended
option in  the  Facilities  Plan)  to a landfill  site  or  to farmland  sites
(by farmers  or a  contract  hauler).   Sludge application to  farmland  is
beneficial because  it  conditions  the  soil and recycles nutrients.  Both
options have been examined in this EIS.

     Alternatives  using residential  septic tanks  for  on-lot  systems,
cluster systems or STEP sewer systems must provide for periodic removal
and disposal of sludge.  For the purposes of designing  and costing  these
alternatives,  it was  assumed that the average cost of  pumping  would  be
$10 per year.   Local septage haulers  are licensed to operate in Steuben
County; farmlands are typical disposal sites.


C.   FLEXIBILITY  OF COMPONENTS

     Flexibility measures system ability to accommodate growth or future
changes in requirements.   This  section examines  the flexibility of the
components  in each alternative,   and  the  restraints  on operation and
design of  the  facilities.  These are discussed in terms of their impacts
upon choices of systems and decisions  of planning and design.

1.   TRANSMISSION AND CONVEYANCE

     For gravity and pressure sewer systems, flexibility is the ability
to handle  future increases in flow.  For flows greater  than the original
design this  is generally low; an increase in capacity  is usually expen-
sive.  Also,  the  layout of the system depends upon the location of the
treatment  facility.   Relocation  or  expansion of  a  finished  facility
requires costly redesign and addition of sewers.

     Both  gravity and pressure sewers  require minimum  flow velocities  to
prevent deposition of solids which could  cause  blockage.   The  velocity
of the  fluid in gravity sewers depends mainly upon pipe slope.   Contour
of the  ground  surface  may determine pipe slope and  depth,  and conse-
quently, construction costs.  Pressure sewers, however, can carry sewage
uphill  under  pressure,  independent  of  slope   to maintain  the   flow
velocity;  they offer the designer somewhat more flexibility than gravity
sewers.

2.   CONVENTIONAL WASTEWATER  TREATMENT

     Ability to expand a conventional wastewater treatment plant depends
largely  upon  the  process used,  facility  layout,  and  availability  of
additional land for expansion.  Compared to many systems for land appli-
cation, conventional treatment processes require little land, increasing
expansion  flexibility.   However,  unless  the the  plant  was  designed for
future additional  capacity,  expansion may be  difficult.  Establishment
of a  facility such as a sewage treatment  plant  reduces flexibility for
future planning decisions within the affected municipalities.

     Because  operators  can,  to  some  extent, vary the components  of
treatment,  most conventional processes   have  good operational  flexi-
bility.  By  altering the  amounts and types of  chemicals,  flow rates,

                                                               \
                                   129

-------
detention times, or even process  schemes,  the  required  effluent quality
can usually be obtained.

a.   Oxidation Ditch

     Oxidation  ditches  are  simple  to  operate.   They  are  similar in
theory  to   extended  aeration,  long  employed  in the  US.   Operational
flexibility of such plants  is  good because  of their  relative simplicity.

     Oxidation  ditches require  relatively  shallow  basin depths (3 to 6
feet),  another  advantage.   Less  structural  strength for  the  basin is
necessary because of the  shallow depth.  Therefore,  there is more  leeway
in  choosing  a  site,  because   soils  and  geologic  factors   are  less
important.

     There  are  several  disadvantages  to  these ditches.   The shallow
basin  limits  the quantity of wastewater  that  can  be  treated.   Design
flows  are thus  limited by  the large  tracts of  land  needed to  the range
of  0.1 to  10 mgd.  In  addition, oxidation ditches  cannot  be readily
converted  to  another process  should the  need  arise.   Similarly,  the
expansion flexibility is  low because  of the land requirements.

b.   Contact  Stabilization

     The contact stabilization process has  been examined in great  detail
by engineers.   Consequently, operational parameters  of this process  have
been well established.

     Contact  stabilization tanks  are available either  as  prefabricated
or  cast-in-place units.    Because they are  available  as  prefabricated
units,  their   flexibility  to accommodate  future  growth  is  high.  In
addition, if expansion requires  an increase in  hydraulic capacity, it is
sometimes  possible  to  convert  to  another  type  of  activated  sludge
process.

     Disadvantages include the requirement  for  a skilled treatment plant
operator.   Also,  because  contact stabilization  is a  suspended-growth
process  it  is  subject  to  operational  upsets  and  consequent loss of
effluent quality.

     Another disadvantage is  the requirement  for disposal of both  efflu-
ent  and sludge.  This limits  flexibility  for future growth since  dis-
posal  of additional effluent may exceed the assimilative capacity  of the
receiving  stream.   Similarly,  additional  sludge  disposal may  require
additional  land, which may not be available.

3.   ON-SITE  SEPTIC  SYSTEMS

     Septic systems are  flexible  in  that  they can be designed for each
user.  As long as spatial and  environmental parameters  are  met, the type
of  system   can  be  chosen  according  to  individual  requirements.   This
flexibility is  useful  in  some  rural areas where  centralized  treatment
would be neither cost-effective  nor desirable.
327 A16                            130

-------
     Existing septic systems  can be expanded by adding  tank  and drain-
field capacity,  if suitable  land is available.  Flow can  then  be  dis-
tributed to an added system with little disturbance of the existing one.

     Cluster systems  are septic  systems  treating wastewater  from  more
than one house, usually 15 to 25.  The flexibility for design and expan-
sion of  such a  system is somewhat  less  than for a standard septic sys-
tem.  Sizes of  cluster systems absorption fields range from one-quarter
to one acre, a substantial increase compared to a standard septic system
(of about  1000  square  feet).   Right-of-way requirements for piping must
be  considered  because  the  system  crosses  property boundaries  and  may
cross public property.  The location of other underground utilities such
as water, electricity, gas, and telephone must also be considered in the
design.

     An  alternative system  for  on-site  sewage  treatment,  such as  an
elevated sand mound,  is required where siting restrictions prohibit the
use  of  standard septic  system and  centralized  collection  of  sewage  is
not  available.   In  these  c$ses  future  expansion  may be  difficult  or
impossible.  Stipulations of  the health codes restrict'the potential of
the alternative system for alteration or expansion.

4.   LAND  APPLICATION

     To  be flexible,  a  land application  system  should  operate  effi-
ciently  under  changing  conditions,  and  should  be  easy  to  modify  or
expand.   These factors depend largely upon geographical location.

     The ability to  handle  changes in treatment requirements and waste-
water characteristics  is a  specific measure of flexibility  for a  land
application  facility.   Furthermore, the  level  of  treatment provided  by
the land application system will in part determine whether it can handle
possible increases in  flows  in the  future.  Wastewater  in the  Steuben
Lakes Study Area  consists primarily of domestic sewage and future chan-
ges in composition of the wastewater are not likely to occur.   If indus-
trial wastewater  were  added  in the  future, pretreatraent  at  the indus-
trial source could be required.

     Expandability  is  an important element of  flexibility.   Efficient
and  economical  land acquisition for  future  flow increases  depends  upon
the proximity  of  the facility to populated  areas,  design and layout of
the system, additional transmission requirements, and the type of appli-
cation system used.  A number of application mechanisms are available —
spray, overland flow,  or rapid infiltration.  Sites can be forest land,
cropland,  or open  fields.  Attention must be paid,  however,  to  charac-
teristics  of  the  surrounding land, and  to  possible future  changes  in
land  use.   Also,   requirements  are strict  concerning  the hydraulic and
geologic conditions  of the proposed  site.   When initially planning the
facility,  all  of  the  above mentioned  conditions  should be  taken  into
consideration  if  maximum flexibility  for future  expansion is desired.

     Land  itself  accounts  for  much  of  the  capital  cost  for  a  land
application facility,  greatly affecting the possibility of expansion or
ease  of  discontinuing  the  site.   Because  land normally appreciates in
                                    131

-------
value, the  final salvage value of the  site  may be very high  after the
expected 20-year  design life.  If  the site  is abandoned, much  of the
initial capital  cost  of the facility may be  recovered  by  reselling the
land  at  the appreciated price.   Note,  however, that the  public  may be
reluctant because of  its  former use to use  the land;  this would depend
largely upon the appearance of the land at the time of resale.

     Finally,  operational  flexibility   of   land   application  systems
depends upon climate.  When  heavy  rains saturate the  soil or flooding
occurs, treatment  efficiency  is  greatly  reduced.   Where  cold tempera-
tures  might make  land  application  unusuable,  storage facilities  are
required.   Very  cold  climates  require  up  to  6  months  of  storage
capacity-   Rapid infiltration  is the  only  land  application  technique
used  successfully in very cold temperatures.
D.   RELIABILITY OF COMPONENTS

     Reliability  measures  the  ability  of  a  system  or  component  to
operate  without failure  at the  level  of efficiency  for  which  it  was
designed.   It  is  particularly  important to have dependable operation in
situations  where  environmental  or economic harm may  result  from system
failure.  This  section  examines  the reliability of local component used
in EIS alternatives.

1,   SEWERS

     Gravity Sewers.  When  possible,  sewer systems allow  wastewater to
flow downhill  by  force  of gravity.  This type of system, known as grav-
ity  sewer,  is  highly reliable.   Designed properly, such systems require
little  maintenance.   They   consume  no  energy  and have  no  mechanical
components  to malfunction.

     Gravity  sewer  problems  include  clogged pipes,   leading  to  sewer
backups;  infiltration/inflow,  increasing the volume of  flow  beyond the
design  level;   and  broken or misaligned  pipes.   Major  contributors  to
these  problems are  improperly  jointed  pipes and  the  intrusion of tree
roots into  the  sewer, which tends to be more prevalent in older systems.

     Where  ground  slope opposes  the direction of sewage flow, it may be
necessary  to  pump  the  sewage  through  sections  of  pipe  called  force
mains.   The pumps add  a mechanical component which  increases operation
and maintenance (O&M) requirements and decreases the system reliability.
To  assure  uninterrupted  system  operation,  two  pumps   are  generally
installed,  providing a  backup  if one malfunctions.  Each  is usually can
handle  at  least   tx
-------
     Pressure Sewers.  Pressure  sewers transmit  wastewater  uphill when
ground topography  does not  allow gravity flow.  Because  the  system' is
always under  pressure, pumping  is needed to  force  the  wastewater into
the sewer.

     Grinder Pumps.  Grinder  pumps are used primarily to grind and pump
raw domestic  sewage  from an  individual house  to  the collection system,
and occasionally for small lift stations.  They are either of the semi-
positive  displacement  or the centrifugal type, depending  upon the mode
of operation.  The reliability of both types is high.

     One  problem may arise during a power failure.  Standby power for a
grinder pump  would not usually be available  at  an individual  house and
the residence would be without sewage removal.  This is a lesser problem
than  might be supposed,  for a power  failure  would  curtail  many opera-
tions that generate wastewater.

     There were  problems  in  the  operation  of the  first  generation  of
grinder pumps  when pressure  to pump wastewater or power to grind solids
was  insufficient.    Modifications  have been made  in their design and
construction,  and  the second generation  of  these  pumps is  appreciably
more  reliable.  Periodic  maintenance is  required  to clean or replace
parts of  the grinder pump.

     Septic Tank Effluent  (STEP) Pumps.   It  is  sometimes desirable  to
pump wastewater  from an existing  septic  tank  rather than directly from
the  house,  using  septic   tank  effluent  pumps*  (STEP)  rather  than  a
grinder pump.  In  this way  difficulties associated with suspended solids
are largely  avoided.   STEP pumps  are  relatively simple modifications of
conventional sump  pumps.

     The  reliability of  STEP pumps made by  experienced manufacturers is
good.  Newer entries into  the field have not yet accumulated the operat-
ing experience necessary to  demonstrate conclusively the reliability of
their products.   In the event of  failure  of a STEP system, an overflow
line  may be provided,  allowing septic tank effluent to  reach the old
drainfield for emergency disposal.

     Pipes.   Pressure  sewer  pipes are subject to  the  same  problems as
force mains,  discussed  above.   As with  force mains,  proper design can
prevent  clogging  and breaking of  pipes,  the most common cause of sewer
problems.  Because pressure  sewer piping  has no mechanical components,
the reliability is high.

2.   CENTRALIZED TREATMENT

     Conventional.  The  reliability of conventional  wastewater treatment
has been tested by  time.   Most unit  processes have been used for many
years,  and there  is consequently much information  on their design and
operation in  nearly all climates.  In general, the  larger the treatment
facility,  the  more  reliable  its operation,  because  the  large flow
volumes  require  multiple units per treatment process.   For instance,  a
large  facility will, have  several primary  clarifiers;  if one malfunc-
tions,  the  remaining  units  can  handle  the entire  load.    Therefore,
                                   133

-------
difficulties arising as a result of failure of a single unit process,  or
of severe  weather conditions such as  heavy rain or very  cold  tempera-
tures, are  less  likely  to  affect operations.   Conventional wastewater
treatment plants  can be designed to handle most problems.

     Land Application.   Land  application  of treated sewage  effluent  is
still uncommon in the United States,  but its use is  growing steadily.
Local climatic conditions such  as  heavy rains or very  low temperatures
may make the technique unsuitable in a  particular area.

     Potential problems with land application include:   groundwater con-
tamination; dispersal  of microbial mass  by airborne  transport;  odors;
surface water  contamination;  accumulation of metals in the  vegetation;
and possible  toxic effects upon local animals.  These problems  can  be
minimized with proper  design, but  there is not  yet  the extensive prac-
tical experience  required to develop advanced design  technology.

3;   ON-SITE TREATMENT

     Septic Tanks.  The design and operation of modern  septic tanks have
benefitted  from   long  experience.   Properly  designed  and  maintained,
septic  systems will provide satisfactory service with  minimum  mainten-
ance.   Care must be taken not  to  put  materials in the system  that may
clog  it.   The principal maintenance requirement is periodic pumping  of
the tank, usually every 2 or 3 years.

     Problems  of  septic  systems  include  heavy  rain  saturating the
ground,  clogged  drainfields  caused by  full  septic  tanks,  clogged  or
frozen pipes, and  broken pipes.   Current  environmental laws restricting
sites  according  to soil suitability,  depth to  groundwater and  bedrock,
and  other  factors, limit the  cases where  septic  systems can  be used.

     Sand Mounds.   Elevated  sand  mounds  4  or 5 feet above  original
ground level are an alternative drainage mechanism where siting restric-
tions  do  not allow  standard  drainfields.  Because  they  do  not  always
provide  satisfactory  service and  are  considerably more  expensive than
conventional  drainfields,  they  have not been  universally  accepted.  In
states were proper design standards are enforced such  as  Minnesota and
Wisconsin,  they do have a very good record of reliability.

4.   CLUSTER SYSTEMS

     Cluster  systems  are localized wastewater  disposal mechanisms ser-
ving several residences.  The reliability is similar to that of a septic
system, except that  a  malfunction affects not just one, but a number of
residences.   Because  a  cluster  system requires more  piping to connect
individual  houses to the treatment tank than does a series of individual
systems, there  is a greater chance for pipes to break or clog,  or for
I/I to occur during heavy rain.   If pumping is required, the reliability
of the system declines because of the mechanical nature of the pumps and
their dependence upon electricity for power.
                                  134

-------
E.   IMPLEMENTATION

     The  implementation of  a wastewater  management  plan depends upon
whether the  selected alternative  relies  primarily upon  centralized or
decentralized  components.   Since  most sanitary  districts  have in the
past heen designed around centralized wastewater  collection and treat-
ment there  is a  great  deal of information about  the  implementation of
such  systems.   Decentralized  collection  and  treatment  is,   however,
relatively new and there is little management experience.

     Whether  the  selected  alternative  is  primarily  centralized  or
decentralized,  four  aspects  of  the  implementation  program  must  be
addressed:

     »    Legal  authority  for a managing agency to exist and  financial
          authority for it to operate.

     •    Agency management  of  construction,  ownership and  operation of
          the sanitary facilities.

     •    Choice  between  the several types of  long-term  financing that
          are  generally required  to pay  for project  capital  expendi-
          tures.

     •    A  system of user  charges  to retire  capital debts,  to cover
          expenditures  for  operation and maintenance, and to provide a
          reserve  for contingencies.

     In the  following  sections,  these  requirements are  examined first
with  respect to  centralized sanitary  districts,  then with respect to
decentralized districts.

1.   CENTRALIZED DISTRICTS

a.   Authority

     The  Steuben  Lakes  Facilities  Plan  identified  the  Steuben Lakes
Regional  Waste District  as  the  legal authority  for  implementing the
Plan's Proposed Action.   The District was established in February, 1975,
under Section  19-3-1.1  of  the Indiana Code.  This  law permits  any area
in the  State to be organized as  a regional water, sewage,  and/or solid
waste district  to provide  a number  of services,  including  the  collec-
tion, treatment,  and  disposal of sewage within and outside  of  the dis-
trict.

b.   Managing  Agency

     The  role of  the managing  agency has been  well defined for cen-
tralized  sanitary districts.  In general,  the  agency constructs, main-
tains and operates the  sewerage facilities.  Although in fact different
contractual  relationships  exist between the  agencies  and their  service
areas,  for  the purposes of this document, ownership  of  the facilities
may  be  assumed  to reside  with the   agency.   For gravity  sewers, such
ownership has traditionally extended to the private property line.  For
                                  135

-------
STEP  or  grinder  pump  stations  connected  to pressure  sewers  several
options exist in all of which individual residences are treated equally:

     •    The station may be designed to agency specifications, with the
          responsibility for purchase,  maintenance  and ownership resid-
          ing with the homeowner.

     •    The station may be specified and purchased by the agency,  with
          the homeowner repurchasing and maintaining it.

     »   , The  station may  be   specified  and owned  by the agency,  but
          purchased by the homeowner.

     •    The  station  may be  specified, purchased and  owned by  the
          agency.

c.   Financing

     Appendix  1-2  discussed  in  detail various  financing methods  for
capital expenses associated with a project.   Briefly, they are:

     •    pay-as-you-go methods;
     »    special benefit assessments;
     »    reserve funds; and
     «    debt financing.

     The  Facilities  Plan  indicated  that  much  of  the  Proposed Action
would be  funded by Federal and State grants,  and demonstrated that funds
for  the  local  share which could  be available  from the  Farmers  Home
Administration  would result  in  the  lowest  annual  service  charge  per
connection.

d.   User Charges

     User  charges  are  set  at  a level adequate  to  repay long-term debt
and  cover  operating and  maintenance expenses.   In  addition,  prudent
management  agencies  often  add  an extra charge to  provide  a contingency
fund for  extraordinary expenses and replacement of equipment.

     The  implementation program proposed by the Facilities  Plan is an
example  of one method  for a Regional District  to  recover the costs of
wastewater  management  from the  users  of the  system.  Because  of the
potential  economic  impacts,  the  charges must  be  carefully allocated
among  various classes  of  users.   Recognized  classes  of users include:

     •    Permanent  residents/Seasonal residents
     »    Residential/Commercial/Industrial users
     •    Presently  sewered users/Newly sewered users
     •    Low- and fixed-income residents/Active income producers

     Each class of user imposes different requirements on  the  design and
cost of each  alternative, receives different benefits, and has different
financial capabilities.
                                  136

-------
2.   SMALL WASTE FLOWS DISTRICTS

     Regulation of on-lot  sewage  systems has evolved to the point where
most  new  facilities  are  designed,  permitted  and  inspected  by  local
health departments or other agencies.  After installation,  local govern-
ment has no  further  responsibility for these systems until malfunctions
become  evident.   In  such  cases  the  local  government may  inspect  and
issue permits  for  repair of the systems.  The sole basis for government
regulation  in this  field  has  been  its obligation  to protect  public
health.

     Rarely  have  governmental  obligations  been  interpreted  broadly
enough  to  include  monitoring  and  control  of  other effects  of  on-lot
system  use or misuse.   One of  the few  examples  of  such broader  inter-
pretation  exists  in  the  Study Area  where  the  Steuben County  Health
Department  has for  several years  been  monitoring and  controlling  the
effects  of  on-lot  systems on  the water quality of the  area's  lakes.
Unfortunately  this program has  recently been scaled  down  due  to  a lack
of funds.

     Methods  of identifying  and  dealing" with  the   adverse effects  of
on-lot  systems without  building  expensive  sewers are  being  developed
through  the  United States.   Technical methods  include  both the  waste-
water treatment and disposal alternatives discussed in Section III.B and
improved monitoring of water quality.  Appendix J-l discusses managerial
methods  already developed  and  applied  dozens  of communities  in Cali-
fornia  alone. As  with  centralized  district,  the issues  of  legal  and
fiscal authority, agency management,  project financing, and user charges
must all be  resolved by  small waste flows districts.

a.   Authority

     Indiana  presently has  no  legislation  which explicitly authorizes
governmental  entities  to manage wastewater  facilities  other than those
connected  to  conventional  collection  systems.   However,  statutes  in
Michigan,  Minnesota,  and  Wisconsin have been  interpreted  as  providing
counties,  townships,  villages,  cities,  and special  purpose  districts
with  sufficient  powers  to  manage  decentralized facilities  (Otis  and
Stewart  1976).   It  is thought  likely that  the  enabling legislation for
the  establishment of  the  Steuben  Lakes Regional Waste District,  also
provides this authority  (by telephone,  Mr.  Joseph Karen, Indiana Stream
Pollution  Control Board, September  25, 1978).

     California  and Illinois,  to  resolve   interagency  conflicts  or to
authorize  access to private properties for inspection and maintenance of
wastewater  facilities, have passed legislation specifically intended to
facilitate   management   of  decentralized  facilities.   These   laws  are
summarized in Appendix J-2.

b.   Management

     The purpose of a small waste flows  district  is to balance the costs
of management with the needs of public health and environmental quality.
                                    137

-------
Management of such  a  district implies formation of  a  management agency
and  formulation of  policies for  the agency.  The  concept of  such an
agency  is  relatively new.   Appendix  J-3  discusses   this concept in
detail.

     Table III-3 presents the range of functions a management agency may
exercise  for adequate  control  and  use  of  decentralized  technologies.
Because  the  level  of  funding  for  these  functions   could  become  an
economic  burden,  their costs and  benefits should be  considered in the
development  of  the  management agency.  Major decisions for the locality
which  have  to be made in  the development of this agency  relate to the
following questions:

     •    Should the agency provide engineering and operation functions,
          or private organizations under contract?

     •    Would off-site facilities  require  acquisition of property and
          right-of-way?

     •    Would  public  or  private  ownership  of  on-site  wastewater
          facilities be more likely to provide cost savings and improved
          control of facilities operation?

     •    Are there environmental, land use,  or economic characteristics
          of the area that would be sensitive to operation and construc-
          tion  of decentralized systems?  If so, would special planning,
          education and permitting steps be appropriate?

     Five  steps are  recommended   to  implement an efficient,  effective
program for  the management of wastewater in unsewered areas:

     »    Develop  a  site-specific environmental  and  engineering  data
          base;

     e    Design the management organization;

     »    Agency start-up;

     •    Construct and rehabilitate of facilities; and

     ®    Operate facilities.

     Site Specific Environmental and Engineering Data Base.    The   data
base  should include  groundwater  monitoring, a house-to-house investi-
gation (sanitary survey), soils and engineering studies, and a survey of
available technologies likely to be feasible in the area.  This baseline
information  will provide the framework for the systems and technologies
appropriate  to  the district.

     A program  for monitoring groundwater should  include  water  quality
sampling  of  existing wells and  possibly  additional  testing  of the
aquifer.  Such  monitoring  should  be  instituted early  enough to  provide
data  useful  in selecting  and  designing  wastewater  disposal  systems.
                                   138

-------
                                   Table  III-3

         SMALL WASTE FLOW MANAGEMENT  FUNCTIONS  BY  OPERATIONAL  COMPONENT
                        AND  BY  BASIC AND SUPPLEMENTAL  USAGE
   Component
       Basic Usage*
    Supplemental Usage*
Administrative  User charge system
                Staffing
                Enforcement
Engineering
 Operations
 Planning
Adopt design standards*
Review and approval of plans*
Evaluate Existing systems/
  design rehabilitation
  measures
Installation inspection*
On-site soils investigations*
Acceptance for public
  management of privately
  installed facilities

Routine inspection and
  maintenance
Septage collection and
  disposal
Groundwater monitoring
Grants administration
Service contracts supervision
Occupancy/operating permits
Interagency coordination
Property and right-of-way
  acquisition
Performance bonding
  requirements

Design and install facilities
  for public ownership
Contractor training
Special designs for alternative
  technologies
Pilot studies of alternative
  technologies
Implementing flow reduction
  techniques
Emergency inspection and
  maintenance
Surface water monitoring
                                Land use planning
                                Public education
                                Designate areas sensitive
                                  to soil-dependent systems
                                Establish environmental, land
                                  use  and economic criteria
                                  for  issuance  or non-issuance
                                  of permits
 * Usage normally provided by local governments at present.
                                        139

-------
     The sanitary  survey should  include  interviews with  residents and
inspections  of  existing systems.   A  trained  surveyor  should  record
information on lot size and location;  age  and use of dwelling;  location,
age, and type  of sewage disposal system;  adequacy of the  maintenance of
the existing system; water-using fixtures;  and problems with the exist-
ing system.

     Detailed site analyses may be required to evaluate operation of the
effluent disposal fields and to determine  the impacts of effluent dispo-
sal  upon  local  groundwater.   These   studies  may  include  probing  the
disposal area; borings for soil samples; and the installation of shallow
groundwater  observation shafts.  Sampling  of the  groundwater  downhill
from  leach  fields  aids  in  evaluating the  potential for  transport of
nutrients and pathogens through the soil.   Study of soil classifications
near selected leach fields may improve correlations between soil charac-
teristics  and  leach  field failures.   An examination  of the reasons for
the inadequate functioning of existing wastewater systems  may avoid such
problems with the rehabilitated or new systems.

     Design the Management Organization.  The  District's technical  and
administrative  capabilities  should  be analyzed as  outlined   in  Table
III-3,  concurrently  with development  of the environmental and engineer-
ing  data base.  The  roles  of organizations such as  the  Steuben County
Health  Department should  be examined  with  respect to avoiding inter-
agency  conflicts and duplication of effort and staffing.

     Determination of  the basic  and  supplementary  management  functions
to be provided will be influenced by the technologies appropriate to the
Study  Area.    In this  respect,  the questions raised  earlier  regarding
formulation of management policies must be resolved.

     The product of these analyses should be an organizational design in
which  staffing  requirements,  functions,  interagency  agreements,  user
charge  systems and procedural guidelines are defined.

     Agency Start-Up.   Once the  structure  and  responsibilities  of the
management agency  have been defined,  public review is advisable.  Addi-
tional  personnel required for  construction and/or  operation  should be
provided.  If necessary, contractual arrangements with private organiza-
tions should be  made.  Acquisition of property should also begin.

     Construction and Rehabilitation of Facilities.  Site data collected
for the  environmental  and engineering data base  should support selection
and  design  of  appropriate   systems  for  individual  residences.   Once
construction  and rehabilitation begin, site  conditions may be  revealed
that  suggest technology or design changes.  Since decentralized systems
generally  must be designed to operate within site limitations instead of
overcoming  them, flexibility  should  be provided.   Personnel authorized
to revise  designs in the field would provide this flexibility.

     Operation of Facilities.  The administrative planning, engineering,
and operations  functions listed in Table III-3  are primarily applicable
to this phase.   The  role of  the management agency would have been  deter-
mined  in the  organizational phase.   The  experience of agency  start-up
                                      140

-------
and project  construction may  indicate that  higher  or lower  levels  of
effort  are  necessary  to  ensure  long-term  reliability  of the  decen-
tralized facilities.

c.   Financing

     The financing of a small waste flows district is similar to that of
a  centralized  district.   Such  financing  was  discussed  in  Section
III.E.I.e.

d.   User Charges

     Although renovation and replacement costs for on-site systems owned
by  permanent residents  are  eligible  for  Federal  funding, such costs
incurred  by seasonal  residents  are  not.   A major  difference  in  the
financing  of permanent  and  seasonally  owned on-site  systems results.
With  respect to  the  Study Area  where a significant  proportion  of the
users would be  seasonal, the absence of Federal funding would transfer a
large fraction  of the project costs to  the local users.   This would be
reflected in either 1) capital outlays by the users for construction, 2)
increased  user  charges  covering increased  local  costs,  or   3)  both.

     Under  US  EPA  Program  Guidance Memorandum  79-8,  however, district
access  to on-site  systems,  even those  owned by seasonal  residents  is
considered  to be  equivalent to public ownership, and  thus eligible for
Federal  funding.   A  grant  of definite access to the  on-site  system by
easement  or covenant would  allow Federal  and State  funding of on-site
repair.

     Section  III.E.l.d  discusses user charges  and  classes.  Decentral-
ized districts  create an additional class  of users.   Since some  house-
holds of  such  districts may be in centrally  sewered areas and others in
decentralized areas,  user  charges  may differ.   As  a  result  many dif-
ferent management functions are conjoined.  For example, permanent users
on  septic  systems  may be  charged less  than those on central sewers.
Seasonal  users  on pressure sewers may have high annual costs associated
with  amortization  of  capital expenses;  permanent  users  of pressure
sewers may  be  charged less than  seasonal users, because Federal funding
reduced their share of the capital costs.  Alternatively, the management
agency may  choose to divide all  costs equally among all users.  For the
analyses  in  this EIS, public ownership of permanent and seasonal on-site
systems has been assumed.

     Problems such  as these have not  been  fully addressed by available
sources of management information.  Development of user charges by small
waste flows  districts will undoubtedly have  to overcome by  such limita-
tions.  EPA  is  preparing an analysis  of  equitable  means  for  recovering
costs from users in small waste flows  districts and combined sewer/small
waste flows districts to meet  this need.
                                        141

-------
142

-------
                              CHAPTER  IV
                          EIS ALTERNATIVES
A.   APPROACH
     The  preceding chapter  described options  for the  functional  com-
ponents of wastewater management systems for the Study Area communities.
This  chapter  examines alternative  wastewater  management plans  for the
Study Area, including a No Action Alternative.

     The  Facilities Plan  Proposed  Action  (described  earlier)  provided
for  centralized  collection and treatment  of wastewater.   Responding to
cost and needs documentation issues, EIS alternative development focused
on  decentralized  and  alternative  or innovative  technologies:   alter-
native  collection  .systems; decentralized  treatment;  and  land disposal
of  wastewaters.   The EIS  Alternatives would manage  wastewaters  in the
same  Service  Area  as  the Facilities Plan  Proposed Action, but  the EIS
Alternatives use decentralized collection and treatment to avoid some of
the costs of sewers.

     Because  of  the high  collection costs in  the Proposed Action, the
cost-effectiveness  of pressure sewers, vacuum sewers, and small-diameter
gravity  sewers were compared.   Of  these, the combination of gravity and
pressure  sewers  recommended by  the Facilities Plan  was  the  most cost-
effective.  Similarly,  the use of  a septic tank effluent pumping (STEP)
system was  analyzed as an alternative to  the  grinder pumps serving the
pressure  sewers  proposed  by the Facilities Plan.  Assuming 50% replace-
ment  of  the   septic   tanks,  the STEP system  was computed  to be  the
slightly  more  cost-effective  solution and was  used  in the EIS Alterna-
tives.   This   selection  should be  reviewed  during  the  preparation of
detailed  designs.

     Where  conditions  like soils  and topography are  favorable,  land
disposal  of wastewater  offers advantages  over conventional  biological
treatment  systems  discharging surface  waters:   the  land  is  used  as  a
natural treatment  facility; reduced operation and  maintenance may result
from the  relatively simple operation; and  savings  in  capital and operat-
ing  costs are possible.

     Analysis  of  decentralized  treatment technologies  and  site condi-
tions  showed  feasible alternatives  to sewering the entire Service Area.
It  would be  possible  to combine  multi-family filter  fields (cluster
systems) with  rehabilitated and new on-site treatment  systems.

     Appendix K-l  presents the assumptions  used in design and costing of
the alternatives.   Section IV.B lists  the  major features of the Proposed
Action, and the EIS Alternatives.

B.   ALTERNATIVES

     The  Facilities Plan Proposed  Action  has been compared with the No
Action Alternative, a Limited  Action Alternative,  and six new approaches
developed in this  EIS.  Table  IV-1  summarizes these alternatives.
                                   143

-------
                                                                                          Table IV-1

                                                                          ALTERNATIVES  -  SUMMARY OF MAJOR COMPONENTS
Alternative
Facilities
Plan
Proposed
Ac t ion
Limited
Action
EIS
Alternative
1
Centralized
Treatment
Aerated lagoon/land application
system serving entire Proposed
Service Area
No
Oxidation ditch/land application
systems serving:
f* . Trnokpd Lake — First & Second
Treatment Plant
Siting
Millgrove Township
Sections 23 & 24
No
a. Mill prove Township
Effluent Disposal
Land application by spray
irrigation with recovery
of renovated wastewater
and discharge to Crooked
Creek
No
a. Land application bv
On-Lot &
Cluster Systems
No
Repair and replacement of on-site systems
throughout the Proposed Service Area

Alternative
Collection Method
Use of pressure sewer/septic
tank effluent pumping (STEP)
system in steep lakeshore
areas
No
Use of nressure aewer/seotic
EIS
Alternative
2
                         Basins
                       Lake James—Middle & Lower
                         Basins
                       .Timmerson Lake—Lower East,
                         Southeast Shores,  and
                         portion of  West  Shore
                       Lake Gage, Lake Sylvan, and
                         Lime  Lake

                   b.   Snow Lake
Oxidation ditch/land application
system serving:
    Crooked Lake—First & Second
      Basins
    Lake James—Middle & Lower
      Basins
    Jiramerson Lake—Lower East,
      Southeast Shores
                                                              Section  25
                                                          b.
                                                              Jamestown Township
                                                              Section  22
Millgrove Township
Section 25
                                                                     rapid Infiltration
                                                                     with recovery of
                                                                     renovated wastewacer
                                                                     and discharge to Bell
                                                                     Lake Ditch
b.  Land application by
    rapid Infiltration
    with recovery of
    renovated wastewater
    and discharge to
    Crooked Creek

Land application by rapid
infiltration with recovery
of renovated wastewater
and discharge to Bell Lake
Ditch
                                                                                                                    remainder of Proposed Service Area
On-lot and cluster systems serving
remainder of Proposed Service Area
                                                                                                           tank effluent  pumping (STEP)
                                                                                                           system in steep lakeshore
                                                                                                           areas served by the central
                                                                                                           collection systems
Use of pressure sewer/STEP
system in steep lakeshore
areas served by the central
collection system

-------
                                                                                    Table IV-1 (Continued)
Alternative
                            Centralized
                             Treatment
                                          Treatment Plant
                                              Siting
                                                                                        Effluent Disposal
                                                                           On-Lot &
                                                                        Cluster Systems
                                                         Alternative
                                                      Collection Method
EIS
Alternative
3
 EIS
 Alternative
 EIS
 Alternative
 5
Contact stabilization/mixed
media filtration plant serving;

    Crooked Lake—First f> Second
      Basins
    Lake James—Middle & Lower
      Basins
    Jimmerson Lake—Lower East,
      Southeast Shores

Oxidation ditch/land application
systems serving:

a.  Jimmerson Lake—portion of
      West Shore
    Lake Cage, Lake Sylvan, and
      Lime Lake
                  b.   Snow Lake
Contact stabilization/mixed
media filtration plant serving:

    Crooked Lake—First & Second
      Basins
    Lake James—Middle & Lower
      Basins
    Jimmerson Lake—Lower East,
      Southeast Shores

Oxidation ditch/land application
systems serving:

a.  Lake James—Middle & Lower
      Basins
    Jimmerson Lake—Lower East,
      Southeast Shores and
      portion of West Shore
    Lake Gage, Lake Sylvan, and
      Lime Lake

b.  Crooked Lake—First & Second
      Basins
Jamestown Township
Section 29
                                                         b.
                                                             Millgrove Township
                                                             Section  25
                                                             Jamestown Township
                                                             Section  22
                                       Jamestown Township
                                       Section 29
                                                          b.
                                                              Millgrove  Township
                                                              Section  25
                                                              Pleasant  Township
                                                              Section  19
                          Discharge to Crooked Creek
                          a.  Land application by
                              rapid infiltration
                              with recovery of
                              renovated wastewater
                              and discharge to Bell
                              Lake Ditch

                          b.  Land application by
                              rapid infiltration
                              with recovery of
                              renovated wastewater
                              and discharge to
                              Crooked Creek

                          Discharge to Crooked Creek
                                                                     Land application by
                                                                     rapid infiltration
                                                                     with recovery of
                                                                     renovated wastewater
                                                                     and discharge to Bell
                                                                     Lake Ditch

                                                                     Land application by
                                                                     rapid infiltration
                                                                     with recovery of
                                                                     renovated wastewater
                                                                     and discharge to
                                                                     Cheeseboro Lake
On-lot and cluster systems serving
remainder of Proposed Service Area
                                                           On-lot  and  cluster systems  serving
                                                           remainder of  Proposed  Service Area
                                                                                                  On-lot and cluster systems serving
                                                                                                  remainder of Proposed Service  Area
                                                                                                                                                  Use of pressure sewer/STEP
                                                                                                                                                  system in steep lakeshore
                                                                                                                                                  areas served by the central
                                                                                                                                                  collection systems
                                                Use  of  pressure  sewer/STEP
                                                system  in  steep  lakeshore
                                                areas served by  the  central
                                                collection systems
                                                                                                          Use of pressure sewer/STEP
                                                                                                          system in steep lakeshore
                                                                                                          areas served by the central
                                                                                                          collection systems

-------
                                                             Table  IV-1  (Concluded)
Alternative
EIS
Alternative
5 (Cont'd.)
EIS
Al ternative
6
Centralized
Treatment
c . Snow Lake
Contac t stab ili zat ion /mixed
media filtration plant serving:
a . Lake James — Middle & Lower
Treatment Plant
Siting
c. Jamestown Township
Section 22
a . Jamestown Township
On-Lot &
Effluent Disposal Cluster Systems
c. Land application by
rapid infiltration
with recovery of
and discharge to
Crooked Creek
On-lot and cluster systems serving
remainder of Proposed Service Area
a. Discharge to Crooked
Alternative
Collection Method

Use of pressure sewer/STEP
system in steep lakeshore
areas served by the central
collection systems
Jimmerson Lake—Lower East,
  Southeast Shores

Crooked Lake—First 4 Second
  Basins
b.  Pleasant Township
    Section 9
b.  Discharge to Crooked
    Lake

-------
1.   NO ACTION

     The  EIS  process  must  evaluate  the  consequences  of  not  taking
action.  Under the No Action Alternative, EPA would not provide  funds to
support new construction, upgrading, or expansion of existing wastewater
collection  and  treatment  systems.   Wastewater  would  continue  to be
treated in existing plants and on-site systems, in their existing  condi-
tion.  Presumably no  action  would be taken to  correct  existing systems
that are  poorly designed  and  operated.  Nor  Would action be taken to
correct septic tank  and  field sizing and other  deficiencies  related to
state and local codes.

2.   FACILITIES PLAN PROPOSED ACTION

     The Facilities  Plan recommended construction of a regional collec-
tion  system  and centralized  treatment.   The  collection  system  would
comprise  a  combination  of  pressure sewers/grinder  pumps  and gravity
sewers with lift stations.

     The  Facilities  Plan  also  proposed treatment of  1.9 mgd of  waste-
water  by  aerated lagoons,  and land  application.   Spray irrigation was
selected with an underdrain system to collect the effluent  for discharge
to  Crooked  Creek.   Figure IV-1 sketches of the  proposed treatment pro-
cesses.  Figure  IV-2 illustrates  the Proposed Service Area and  location
of  the proposed  stabilization pond.

     In  Section IV.A.I,  STEP  systems  were  found  to be  somewhat  more
cost-effective  than  the  grinder  pumps recommended  in the  Facilities
Plan.   For  this reason,  STEP systems  were substituted  in  the  Proposed
Action  discussed in  this EIS.   The  Proposed  Action  differs  in  this
respect from that in the Facilities Plan.

3.   EIS  ALTERNATIVE  1

     EIS Alternative  1 proposes centralized collection and treatment  of
wastewaters  from Crooked  Lake,  Lake  James,  Jimmerson Lake, and Lake
Gage, Lime Lake, Lake  Syl-Van and Snow  Lake.

     The  flow  from  the Snow Lake area  (0.14 mgd) would be treated in  an
oxidation  ditch  and  applied,  by rapid  infiltration,  to the land at  a
site northeast of the  Lake.  Flows  from the remaining areas listed above
(1.3 mgd)  would be  treated  similarly,  but disposal would be at  a site
north  of  Bell Lake.   Approximately 75% of  the renovated effluent would
be  recovered  from  wells  and discharged to Crooked Creek.  The remaining
25% of  the  treated effluent would  presumably percolate  down to ground-
water.  Well  output  could, if necessary, be  increased to  100%.   In any
case,  the  renovated  effluent would  meet  Drinking Water  Standards for
nitrates, 10  mg/1  (US PHS 1962).   Sludge would be dried in drying beds
and then applied to agricultural  lands  for disposal.

     The remaining portions of the  Proposed Service Area would be served
by  a combination  of  cluster  systems  and  on-site  systems  suitable  to
local soil  conditions.  The preliminary design,  comparison,  and assess-
ment of decentralized  systems were based upon  the following assumptions:

                                   147

-------
                                                    FIGURE IV-1

                                            FACILITY PLAN PROPOSED ACTION

                                                TREATMENT PROCESSES
                                                                                                    SPRAY
                                                                                                    IRRIGATION
                                       r
~i
CO
                                                             CHLORSNAT10N

-------
        WASTEWATER TREATMENT
                PLANT
                   &
          SPRAY (HRIpATION SITE
                                                                                                                                LEGEND


                                                                                                                              [LIFT STATION

                                                                                                                               PRESSURE SEWER

                                                                                                                        	  FORCE MAIN


                                                                                                                               GRAVITY SEWER
FIGURE IV-2   STEUBEN LAKES: FACILITIES PLAN PROPOSED ACTION

-------
     Cluster Systerns.   Cluster systems would  be  used for those parts of
the Proposed Service Area  where  topography or soil limitations preclude
on-site  systems.   It  was  assumed  that those  residences  occupying  less
than one-third  of  an acre  and utilizing decentralized systems  would be
tied into  cluster  systems;  suitable  soils  exist at  the  sites  for which
these systems are proposed.

     On-lot Systems. Residences  not  served by sewers or  cluster systems
would use  on-lot  systems.   This  would include a  program  of maintenance;
malfunctioning  systems  would  be repaired  or replaced as  appropriate.

     The  specific  requirements  for  upgrading  existing   on-lot  systems
were estimated by analysis  of the data presented  in the "Septic Snooper"
investigation,  and  other environmental data.   Based upon these,  50% of
the  on-lot systems were assumed to  require  replacement  of the  septic
tank  and  10%  were assumed  to  require a  new drainfield.  Figure  IV-3
shows the  centralized treatment  process.   Figure IV-4 shows the area to
be' served  by the  system,  the treatment plant location,   and the  trans-
mission line routings.

4.   EIS  ALTERNATIVE  2

     This  alternative differs from EIS  Alternative 1 only in  that  the
shoreline  areas of  Lake  Gage, Lime Lake, Lake Syl-Van, Snow Lake, and a
portion of the west shore of Jimmerson Lake would use ST/SAS and cluster
systems, rather than centralized sewers.   As  a result, 1.0 mgd would be
treated  by rapid  infiltration.   Figure IV-5 shows  the process.   Figure
IV-6 illustrates this  alternative.

5.   EIS  ALTERNATIVE  3

     This alternative  differs from EIS Alternative 1 in offering conven-
tional  treatment  of wastewater for the central  collection  areas  around
Crooked Lake, Lake James and Jimmerson Lake.

     The treatment plant,  using the contact stabilization process, would
have a  design  hydraulic  capacity of  1 mgd  and would be located north of
Jiramerson Lake.  It would discharge effluent to Crooked Creek.

     Flows from the Snow Lake area would be treated by a 0.14  mgd rapid
infiltration  facility   located   near  the  northern  part  of  the Lake.
Similarly, 0.29 mgd from Lake Gage,  Lime Lake, Lake Syl-Van and part of
Jimmerson Lake would be  treated by rapid infiltration at  a site north of
Bell Lake.

     Figures IV-7 and  IV-8  shows  the  treatment processes.   The  locations
of  centralized  and decentralized treatment areas  for this alternative
are shown in Figure IV-9.

6.   EIS  ALTERNATIVE  4

     This alternative  resembles  EIS  Alternative  3, differing from it in
that the  areas  served by  central sewers  and rapid  infiltration would
employ  ST-SAS/cluster  systems instead.   Figure  IV-10  illustrates  the
                                  150

-------
                                            FIGURE IV-3.


                                          EIS ALTERNATIVE 1


                                        TREATMENT  PROCESSES
RAW
WASTE
WATER
PRELIMI-
   NARY

 TREAT-
   MENT
OXIDA-
  TION
DITCH
                                                     CHLORINATION
                                                                            RAPID
NFILT

RATIO!

                                                                            BASINS
                                                                                         RECOVERY
                                                                                                        TO
RECEIVING
STREAM
                                                                                           WELLS

-------
Ul
ro
                                                                                                              *|LAND
                                                                                                                APPLICATION
                                                                                                                RAPID
                                       APPLICATION
                                        RAPID
    LEGEND


LIFT STATION


PRESSURE SEWER


FORCE MAIN


GRAVITY SEWER
                                                                                                                                             ON-SITE AND CLUSTER

                                                                                                                                                  SYSTEMS
                                                                                                                                  A      0     2000    4000
              FIGURE  IV-4    STEUBEN LAKES: EIS ALTERNATIVE I

-------
                                                  FIGURE IV-5

                                               EIS ALTERNATIVE 2

                                               TREATMENT  PROCESSES
                                     r
                                              ~l
    RAW
Ln
LO
WASTE
WATER
PRELIMI-
   NARY
 TREAT-
   MENT
OXIDA-
  TION
DITCH
STORAGE
   LAGOON
                                                         CHLORINATION
                                                                                RAPID
NFILT

RATIO!

                                                                                BASINS
                                                                                            RECOVERY
                                                                                                       TO
                                                                RECEIVING
                                                                STREAM
                                                                                              WELLS

-------
                   LANO APPLICATION
                                 'i-<^-
                                                                                                                                 LEGEND


                                                                                                                              LIFT STATION


                                                                                                                              PRESSURE SEUER


                                                                                                                              FORCE MAIN


                                                                                                                              GRAVITY SEWER
                                                                                                                              ON-S1TE AND CLUSTER
                                                                                                                                   SYSTEMS
FIGURE IV-6   STEUbEN LAKES:  E1S  ALTERNATIVE 2

-------
                                                     FIGURE IV-7

                                                 EIS ALTERNATIVE  3

                                       TREATMENT PROCESSES-SURFACE  DISCHARGE
                                                                             ALUM
                                                                           ADDITION
         PUMP
          STA.
RAW
AERATED
  GRIT
CHAMBER
^ .
l^j
MIXED «E"0M


CHLORINATION


                                                                                                                TO RECEIVING
                                                                                                                  STREAM
                                                                               SLUDGE DRYING
                                                                                    BEDS

-------
                                            FIGURE IV-8
                                          EIS ALTERNATIVE 3
                                    TREATMENT PROCESSES-LAND APPLICATION
WASTE
WATER
                                                      CHLORSNATION
                                                                              RAPID
NFILT

RATIOI

                                                                              BASINS
                                                                                           RECOVERY
                                                                                                          TO
RECEIVING
STREAM
                                                                                             WELLS

-------
                                                                                                                              LEGEND

                                                                                                                            LIFT STATION

                                                                                                                            PRESSURE SEWER

                                                                                                                            FORCE MAIN

                                                                                                                            GRAVITY SEWER
                                                                                                                            ON-SITE AND CLUSTER
                                                                                                                                 SYSTEMS
FIGURE IV-9   STEUBEN LAKES:  EIS ALTERNATIVE 3

-------
                                                        FIGURE  IV-10

                                                     EIS  ALTERNATIVE 4

                                                    TREATMENT PROCESSES
                                                                                     ALUM
                                                                                   ADDITION
               PUMP
                STA.
oo
      RAW
     WATER
                                                  CONTACT
                                                  \  ZONE
                                              REAER-

                                              TI°N
AERATED
  GRIT
CHAMBER
^ .
z&/
MIXED MEDIA
FILTRATION


CMLORINATION
»-

                                                                                                                        TO  RECEIVING
                                                                                                                          STREAM
                                                                                       SLUDGE DRYING
                                                                                            BEDS

-------
treatment  processes  for  this  alternative.    Figure  IV-11  shows  the
locations of proposed collection and treatment facilities.

7.   EIS  ALTERNATIVE 5

     This  alternative  resembles  EIS  Alternative  1,  but  a  separate
collection and  treatment  system would be provided for the  Crooked Lake
areas.  The  0.43 mgd  flow would be  collected by a combined pressure-
gravity  sewer  system  and treated  by  rapid  infiltration   at  a  site
southwest  of  the  Lake.   Recovered  effluent  would be  discharged  to
Cheeseboro Lake.   The James/Jimmerson  collection  system would  handle  a
flow of 0.9 mgd and discharge to a rapid infiltration site north of Bell
Lake Ditch.   Similarly,  the  flow of 0.14 mgd Snow Lake area flows would
be treated by rapid infiltration.

     Figure IV-12 shows a  schematic representation of the treatment pro-
cesses while Figure IV-13  depicts the entire wastewater disposal system,
with the  locations  of cluster  systems, on-site disposal  areas,  and the
land application  sites.

8.   EIS  ALTERNATIVE 6

     This  alternative resembles EIS  Alternative  4,  but  the  major col-
lection  areas  around  Crooked  Lake,  and  those around Lakes James  and
Jimmerson were  treated as  two separate  systems.

     The  0.43 mgd  Crooked Lake flows  would be collected by  a  combined
pressure and gravity sewer system.  A conventional contact stabilization
treatment  plant northeast of the Lake  would  discharge  treated effluent
to  Crooked  Lake.   The  flow  from  the James/  Jimmerson area  would  be
reduced to  0.6 mgd.  Figure IV-14 represents of the treatment processes
while Figure  IV-15  depicts the  entire wastewater disposal system.

9.   LIMITED ACTION

     This  alternative in  effect proposes  the  continuance  of  ST/SASs as
the  method  of wastewater  disposal in  the  Study Area.   However, it dif-
fers from the No  Action Alternative by  providing for:

     •    Replacement  of  approximately 50% of the  existing  ST/SASs in
          the year  1980.   Such  tanks are over 40 years old and often are
          structurally unsound  and leaky.

     •    Replacement  of  approximately 10%  of the drainfields  in the
          Study Area that  are believed  to be non-functional.

     •    Development  of  a management  agency to provide routine inspec-
          tion  and  maintenance  of the systems and monitor their environ-
          mental  effects  --  especially on  groundwater and surface water
          quality.

Figure IV-16 maps this alternative.
                                   159

-------
ON
o
                                                                                                                                              LEGEND


                                                                                                                                           iLIFT STATION


                                                                                                                                           PRESSURE SEWER


                                                                                                                                           FORCE MAIN


                                                                                                                                           GRAVITY SEWER


                                                                                                                                           ON-SITE AND CLUSTER

                                                                                                                                                SYSTEMS
                                                                                                                                O      0     2000    4OOO
             FIGURE IV-11   STEUBEN LAKES: EIS ALTERNATIVE

-------
   FIGURE IV-12

 EIS ALTERNATIVE 5

TREATMENT PROCESSES
RAW
WASTE *
WATER

PRELIMI-
NARY
TREAT-
MENT




OXIDA-
TION
DITCH

I
>
1 _


STORAGE
LAGOON

i
*
]„


CHLOR1NATION
*.
.H.UII.II 	 IfeTH

1
RAPID
NFILT

RATIOI

BASINS
1
                                             RECOVERY
                                                              TO
                                                          RECEIVING
                                                          STREAM
                                                WELLS

-------
                                                                                                      LAND
                                                                                                    APPLICATION
                                                                                                 RAPID INFILTRATION
                                                                                                                                        LEGEND


                                                                                                                                  9  iLIFT STATION

                                                                                                                                     PRESSURE SEWER

                                                                                                                                     FORCE MAIN


                                                                                                                                     GRAVITY SEWER
                                                                                                                                     ON-SITE AND CLUSTER
                                                                                                                                          SYSTEMS
   LAND
APPLICATION
FIGURE IV-13   STEUBEN LAKES:
           EIS ALTERNATIVE 5
                                                 HAPID INFILTRATION

-------
                                          FIGURE IV-14

                                       EIS  ALTERNATIVE 6

                                      TREATMENT PROCESSES
                                                                       ALUM
                                                                     ADDITION
PUMP
 STA.
   \ CffNTACT
    \ ZONE
REAER-

T'°  'SEDIMEN-
     TSTION
      ZONF
             AERATED
                GRIT
             CHAMBER
CHLORINAT1ON
                                                                                                           TO RECEIVING
                                                                                                             STREAM
                                                                         SLUDGE DRYING
                                                                             BEDS

-------
                                                                                                                                 LEGEND

                                                                                                                              iLIFT STATION

                                                                                                                              PRESSURE SEWER

                                                                                                                              FORCE MAIN

                                                                                                                              GRAVITY SEWER

                                                                                                                              ON-SITE AND CLUSTER
                                                                                                                                   SYSTEMS
                                                                                                                               2000    40OO
FIGURE IV-15   STEUBEN LAKES:  EIS  ALTERNATIVE 6

-------
FIGURE IV-16   STEUBEN LAKES: LIMITED ACTION ALTERNATIVE

-------
C.   FLEXIBILITY OF ALTERNATIVES

     This section evaluates the  flexibility  of  the Proposed Action and
the EIS  Alternatives  to accommodate  future  Service Area growth, along
with their operational  flexibility over the design period.

1.   FACILITIES  PLAN  PROPOSED ACTION

     This alternative offers  good  flexibility  for  growth;   as long as
land  is   available,  aerated  lagoons  can  be  expanded  to  accommodate
increased flows relatively  easily.   Flexibility for  future growth is,
however,   reduced  somewhat  because  the entire proposed Service Area is
sewered.   Greater flexibility for future expansion  is usually available
with  alternatives  that   require   a   smaller • initial  commitment  of
resources.

2.   EIS  ALTERNATIVE  1

     By using on-lot and cluster systems, this  alternative  retains more
flexibility for future planning than  the Proposed Action.   In addition,
the use of two treatment locations could provide operational flexibility
if  interconnections between  the two  collection  systems were provided.
The EIS Alternative 1  treatment  plan provides  greater operational flexi-
bility than the aerated  lagooa.  The  expansion  flexibility  of oxidation
ditches  depends  on  land  availabile.   An  oxidation  ditch,  however,
requires much less land   than  a  stabilization  pond.

     Finally,  this  alternative  proposes  wastewater disposal  by rapid
infiltration,  rather than  spray  irrigation,  as  in the Facilities Plan.
For  expansion,  sewer  siting  restrictions make  rapid infiltration less
flexible  than spray irrigation.  However,  rapid  infiltration requires
much less land area than spray irrigation.  Also, the operational flexi-
bility of rapid infiltration  is  good  offering a wide range of possible
application rates, almost year round use, even in cold weather.

3.   EIS  ALTERNATIVE  2

     This alternative  resembles EIS  Alternative  1, but  the  Snow Lake
area  would  be  served  by  decentralized  systems.   This  increases  the
flexibility for future planning.

4.   EIS  ALTERNATIVE  3

     This alternative proposed rapid  infiltration  systems for  Snow Lake
and  for  the  Gage-Syl-Van-Lime areas.   Crooked,  James  and much  of
Jimmerson would  be served  by  a  contact  stabilization facility.  The
three  separate  treatment   facilities  could  provide  good  operational
flexibility if collection systems were interconnected.   The flexibility
for  future  planning is not as  great  as  EIS  Alternative 2, because the
decentralized areas are  smaller,  but the  flexibility for  expansion is
greater than for the previous  alternative.
                                  166

-------
5.   EIS  ALTERNATIVE 4

     This alternative  resembles EIS  Alternative  2,  but contact  stabili-
zation  treatment would  be used  instead  of  rapid infiltration.  This
increases the  flexibility  for  future growth compared  to EIS Alternative
2, because  less  land would be required if the treatment facility needed
expansion.  Contact stabilization also has less stringent siting require-
ments than rapid infiltration.

6.   EIS  ALTERNATIVE 5

     This alternative  resembles Alternative  3 providing  three  separate
collection and treatment facilities.   Comments on the  operational flexi-
bility  of  that  alternative are  applicable  to  this  one too,  but the
operational flexibility  of rapid  infiltration is lower than for contact
stabilization,  since  the   former  is  subject  to  climatic variations.
Thus,  the  operational flexibility of Alternative  5  is  somewhat  lower
than  for Alternative  2.   The  flexibilities  for  future expansion are
similar for the  two alternatives, since the same decentralized areas are
proposed  for both.  The potential for treatment expansion of is  somewhat
greater for Alternative 3  (contact stabilization) than for Alternative 5
(rapid infiltration).

7.   EIS  ALTERNATIVE 6

     This  alternative proposes  two  separate collection and treatment
systems, with much of  the  Proposed Service Area using on-lot and cluster
systems.   Interconnection  of the two  collection  systems  would  increase
operational  flexibility to  level of EIS  Alternative 1, but  not EIS
Alternatives  3  or  5.   Use of  contact   stabilization  plants increases
future  expansion  flexibility,  but  widespread  use  of  decentralized
systems completely offsets this.  Flexibility for future expansion  would
be  increased  because  of  the use  of contact  stabilization plants, but
this  is  more  than offset  by the extensive use of decentralized  systems.
The  decentralized   systems  do  increase  the  flexibility  for  future
planning.

8.   LIMITED  ACTION

     The  Limited  Action  Alternative  offers  the  most  decentralized
approach  of  all  wastewater management  plans evaluated  in  this  EIS.
Lacking  improved  collection  and  treatment facilities for present  and
future  residents  outside  currently  sewered areas,  it  is  the  least
flexibile  of  all alternatives in  terms  of accommodating future growth,
but  is the  most  flexible for future planning.
D,   COSTS OF ALTERNATIVES

     Project  costs  were  grouped  by capital  expenses,  operating  and
maintenance  expenses,  and  salvage  values  of the  equipment  for ^each
alternative.   A  contingency  fund  amounting  to  approximately 25%  of
capital  and  salvage value was included  to  provide for such expenses as
                                   167

-------
engineering and  legal fees,  acquisition  of rights-of-way,  and admini-
stration.  Appendix K-l  describes  the  assumptions used in the analyses.
Appendix K-2 presents detailed costs for each alternative.

     Table IV-2  summarizes  present  and future project costs for each of
alternatives.   It also presents  the analyses of total present worth and
annual equivalent costs of each alternative.  (Debt service on financing
the local  share  is  not included.)   Section V.E presents a discussion of
Federal and State cost sharing and  remaining local costs.
                                   168

-------
                                                                   Table IV-2

                                                     COST-EFFECTIVE ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES


                                      FACILITIES PLAN                                                                                    LIMITED
                                      PROPOSED ACTION      EIS 1        BIS 2        EIS 3        EIS 4        EIS 5        EIS 6        ACTION


Present Project Cost                     20,839.8         17.640.2     17,620.3     18,058.3     17,571.7     18,210.3     17.8GI.6      1,967.8
  (x$l,000)


Future Project Construction Costa           125.6            185.1        212.8        185.1        212.8        185.L        212.6      4,751.1
  (x$l,000/yr)                                                                                                                           (1990)


Total Present Worth                      23,166.8         19,874.4     18,951.4     21,212.4     19,663.1     20,485.37     19,9*9.4      8,268.7
  (x$l,000)


Average Annual Equivalent Costs           2,124.4          1,822.5      1,737.8      1,945.2      1,803.1"     1,878.5      1,83X9        758.2
  (x$l,000)

-------
170

-------
                               CHAPTER  V

                                IMPACTS


A.   IMPACTS ON SURFACE WATER  QUALITY

1.   PRIMARY IMPACTS

a.   Analysis  of Eutrophication Potential

     This  section  discusses  the effect  of nutrient loading associated
with  different  wastewater  management  alternatives  upon  the  trophic
status of  open  waters  in the Steuben Study Area lakes.   To  evaluate the
impact of  each  alternative,  nutrient loading levels  for  phosphorus were
calculated.  The empirical model developed by Dillon  was  used to project
future trophic  conditions associated with  different phosphorus loading
scenarios based on the EIS wastewater management alternatives.

     The major  sources of phosphorus  for lakes in the Study Area were
identified earlier in the following order of significance:

          tributary inflow
          immediate drainage around the lake
          precipitation
          septic tanks
          point sources.

Other  sources   known   to  contribute  to  nutrient  loading  such  as
groundwater,  detritus,  waterfowl,  and release  from  sediments  are less
significant  in  the Study  Area  in  terms  of the time scales considered.

     Future Phosphorus Loadings.  Changes in year  2000 phosphorus load-
ings  due to  each wastewater  management alternative  are  presented in
Table V-l  and may be  compared with the  average present loadings shown
earlier  in  Figure  II-9.   These changes reflect the percent increase or
decrease of phosphorus loading  in relation to the  present conditions.
The  impacts were  determined on the basis that septic  tanks  from all
(approximately  3,500)  residences   within  300  ft  of   the  lakeshores
contributed 7% of their total phosphorus  content to the lakes.  However,
the septic snooper survey (Kerfoot 1979)  located only 69  leachate plumes
(including 4 stream source plumes)  entering the iakes~-the equivalent of
less  than  2% of  all  septic tanks  being contributory.   The percentage
contribution of  septic  tanks to the phosphorus loading of the lakes and
the  impacts  predicted by  phosphorus models are therefore likely to be
conservatively high.

     If  the  No Action  Alternative  were implemented  in  the  Proposed
Service  Area,  the phosphorus   loadings  to all  lakes  except  Snow Lake
would increase  by  the  year 2000 from  1% to  24% above what  is^ estimated
for average present conditions.   Snow Lake would exhibit a  17% decrease
in phosphorus loading mainly because the  new tertiary treatment plant at
Pokagon  State Park went  into operation in May  1979.  This  reduction of
                                  171

-------
                                                      TABLE V-l
                                  Comparison of Phosphorus Loading of  Alternatives
                                In The Year 2000 With The Average Present  Conditions
N3
Lake
Crooked
Gage
Lime
Little Otter
Big Otter
Snow*
James
Jimmerson
No
Action
9% increase
5% increase
24% increase
<1% increase
<1% increase
17% decrease
1% increase
2% increase
Limited
Action
1% increase
<1% increase
2% increase
No change
No change
17% decrease
No change
No change
Facility Plan
Proposed Act inn
7% decrease
10% decrease
3% decrease
2% decrease
4% decrease
20% decrease
5% decrease
21% decrease
    EIS
 1. 3. 5

7% decrease

10% decrease

3% decrease

No change

No change

20% decrease

5% decrease

3% decrease
  EIS
2. 4, 6

7% decrease

5% increase

3% decrease

No change

No change

17% decrease

5% decrease

3% decrease
        *Decrease of 17% in all alternatives due to the Pokagon State Park's
         tertiary treatment plant which became operational in May 1979.

-------
phosphorus loading is expected regardless of the alternative implemented
since it is independent actions taken in the EIS alternatives.

     The  Limited  Action  Alternative  would  cause  very  insignificant
changes in phosphorus  loading.   In general, implementing any of the EIS
alternatives   or   the   Facilities  Plan  Proposed  Action  would  cause
relatively  small  effects  on phosphorus  loading.   Sewering  of  homes
around Lake  Gage  and Lime Lake (Facilities Plan Proposed Action and EIS
Alternatives  1, 3,  and 5) would decrease the phosphorus loadings by 10%
and 3%, respectively; whereas, continued reliance on septic tank systems
along lakeshores  (EIS Alternatives 2, 4, and 6) would result in a slight
increase in  phosphorus  loading to Lime Lake due to projected growth and
associated  housing  increase around  the lakeshores.   Big Otter  Lake,
Little  Otter  Lake,  James  Lake,  and  Jimmerson Lake are  only slightly
affected  by  any  of the  alternatives.  The  Facilities  Plan Proposed
Action,  however,  is expected to  remove all  the phosphorus contribution
from  septic  tanks around Jimmerson Lake.  As a result, the reduction of
phosphorus  loading  is  relatively substantial  (21%  decrease).   Crooked
Lake  is  expected  to experience a  moderate  7% reduction  of  phosphorus
loading by implementing the  various alternatives.

     Future Trophic  Conditions.  The empirical model developed by Dillon
was  used to  project the  trophic  conditions of  the  lakes by  the  year
2000.  As  described in Appendix  C-3,  the  model incorporates  phosphorus
loadings, hydraulic  residence time, phosphorus retention rate, and mean
depth to  determine the trophic conditions.  As expected, the changes in
phosphorus  loading  imposed  by  various wastewater  alternatives are not
significant  enough  to  change any of  the present trophic conditions of
the  lakes.   Even  in the  case of Snow Lake where reduction of phosphorus
loadings  are  significant  due to the  newly  operated tertiary treatment
plant  at the Pokagon  State Park,  the  model  result does  not indicate
enough  improvement  to  change the  trophic  condition from  eutrophic to
mesotrophic.   Jimmerson Lake, with its phosphorus loading to be reduced
21%  by  the  Facilities Plan  Proposed Action, will remain in its present
mesotrophic  condition.    The most  significant reduction  of  phosphorus
loading will  be expected  in  Marsh Lake  as a result of phosphorus removal
in  the  Fremont treatment plant which  is  not a part of  any  of the EIS
alternatives.   The  lake,  however, will still remain eutrophic according
to the model's prediction.   This finding concurs with the results of NES
(1976).

b.   Bacterial Contamination

     Lakes  in the  Study  Area generally meet  State standards for fecal
and total coliform bacteria.  Where human wastes have been implicated as
a contributor to  coliform counts in the  lakes, it is expected that all
the  wastewater management alternatives  should  effectively abate such a
problem.

     Land application of wastewater is  an  effective way of eliminating
or immobilizing sewage-borne pathogens  particularly if some pretreatment
(stabilization pond)  precedes  it   (Johnson  et  al.  1977).    Bacterial
pathogens undergo  rapid die-off in the soil matrix.  Studies have shown
the  summer  survival rate of fecal coliform organisms to be 0.001% after
a period of 35 days  (Miller  1973).

                                  173

-------
     With  the  centralized  alternatives,  pumping  station malfunctions
could  result  in  substantial  bacterial  lake  contamination.   Rigorous
inspection and maintenance  of pumping  stations, back-up electrical power
supplies,  standby  pumps   and   an  overflow  alarm  would minimize  the
possibility of this  happening.  Similar measures  should be taken with
pumping stations  for cluster systems.

c.   Non-Point  Source  Loads

     Primary impacts on surface water quality  related to the construc-
tion of ST/SAS  and the  replacement  of  old systems is likely to result in
increased  soil erosion.   Similarly,  installation of sewers, especially
those that pass under the many  small drainage ways  leading to the lakes,
will increase erosion.

     Compliance  with State  and local  soil  erosion control requirements
could substantially reduce  the  erosion problem and  the subsequent impact
on water quality.

2.   SECONDARY  IMPACTS

     Increasing   housing  development   along  lake  shores may  increase
nutrient and sediment  loads  into the  lake as a result of the following:

     «    increased runoff  from construction of impervious surfaces such
          as rooftops and parking areas;

     •    lawn  and  garden  fertilization  creating  unnaturally  high
          nutrient levels in the runoff; and

     »    soil  disruption by human activities  (i.e.,  housing construc-
          tion,  leveling of forested area, etc.).

Soil organic debris and dissolved materials mobilized and transported to
temporary  runoff  channels   during storms  are  settled, filtered  and
absorbed on the  land or  in pools  if  the runoff  channels are long or if
adequate  storage  areas,  such  as   wetlands, occur.   Increasing housing
density  normally  accelerates storm runoff,  thereby increasing not only
the amount of runoff but also its ability to erode  soil and to transport
contaminants.
B*   GROUNDWATER JMPACTS

     Groundwater impacts  fall  into  two categories, those affecting the
available  quantity  of the  resource,  and those  affecting its quality.

1.   GROUNDWATER QUANTITY  IMPACTS

     No significant primary or  secondary  impacts  on groundwater quantity
should  result  from  any  of  the various alternatives.   This is mainly
because all of the water  quantities  associated with the  alternatives are
relatively miniscule in comparison with the  estimated  groundwater
                                  174

-------
storage,  recharge  from  all  other  sources,  and available  grouridwater
yield.

     The  conversion from sewage disposal practices based  on individual
soil  absorption  systems  to  central  sewage  treatment systems  without
effluent  land disposal can  result in the loss  of  groundwater recharge.
The  significance  of this  loss  hinges  upon its  relationship to  the
recharge  from all other sources; these include downward infiltration and
percolation  from precipitation and  surface water bodies,  and adjacent
aquifer  inflow.   Precise definition  of  this  depends upon  an accurate
knowledge  of the  aquifer(s),  and  its hydrology  (e.g.,  precipitation,
runoff,  evapotranspiration,  discharge)   and  hydraulic  characteristics
(e.g.,    transmissivity,    and   storage   coefficients).     There   are
insufficient data  with which to undertake  such precise quantification.

     However, as  can be  seen in Table V-2,  the maximum possible waste-
water  recharge  to  the Study Area's aquifers  in  the  design year 2000 is
estimated  to average 1.87  mgd  for the No  Action Alternative.   This is
insignificant in  relation to  the estimated 670  mgd being  discharged by
the aquifers in the basin to surface waters and to the 5,000,000 million
gallons  stored   in  those aquifers.   Failure  to return the wastewater
flows  to the aquifers is  therefore not expected to  have  a significant
impact  upon  groundwater  quantity and the availability of groundwater in
the basin  in which current usage is of the order of 10% of the available
yield.

     The  short-terra  construction impacts on groundwater quantity will be
even  less discernible since  still  smaller quantities  of  water will be
involved.  Also,  in  no  case  will construction  activities  be likely to
result  in the  sealing of  enough recharge  area  to  create  a significant
adverse  effect upon  groundwater quantity.

     Increased  groundwater  demands  from Study Area induced growth, is a
possible   source    of   secondary    groundwater    quantity   impacts.
Decentralized   alternatives  should   have   a   lesser   tendency   than
centralized  sewer system alternatives to cause such impacts.  Study Area
population growth  from centralized  systems use  may be about 11% by the
year  2000.  A  corresponding  11% increase in water use would amount to
about  0.20  mgd.   This  increased  demand  is so small compared  to the
aquifer  capacity as  to create no significant impact.

2.   GROUNDWATER QUALITY IMPACTS

     No  significant  short-term  impacts  on groundwater  quality should
result  from  the  construction  of  any  of  the  alternatives.  Long-term
impacts   on  bacterial  quality,  shoreline  algal   growths   and  nitrate
concentrations are also expected to be insignificant.  These  conclusions
are discussed in more detail in the following sections.

     Construction-related soil erosion releases  sediment which may  cause
short-term impacts  on water quality.   The clayey soils found  throughout
the  area  by means  of  filtration  and adsorption provide  an  effective
barrier  against  sediments reaching the aquifers.  No  significant  impacts
of this  type are thus expected from any of the alternatives.
                                   175

-------
                          Table V-2




STEUBEN LAKES WASTEWATER RECHARGE TO GROUNDWATER IN YEAR 2000







                          Wastewater Recharge (mgd)
Alternative
1
2
. 3
4
' 5
6
No Action
Limited Action
Proposed Action (F.P.)
SAS/Cluster Systems
0.76
0.85
0.76
0.85
0.76
0.85
1.87
1.87
— _ _
Rapid Infiltration Systems
25% Flow
0.36
0.25
0.11
— --
0.36

	
	
	
Total
1.12
1.10
0.87
0.85
1.12
0.85
1.87
1.87
0
                             176

-------
     Long-term impacts on groundwater quality are mainly associated with
the following  three types  of  pollutants:   (1)  bacteria,  organics, and
suspended  solids,  (2)  phosphorus,  and  (3)  nitrogen in  the  form  of
nitrates.

     Bacteria and suspended organics are readily  removed  by filtration
and adsorption  onto soil  particles.   Five  feet  of soils  are ample to
remove  bacteria  except   in   very  coarse  grained,  highly  permeable
material.  Available  data show that bacterial well water  contamination
is not a problem in the Study Area.

     Land  application  of  treated effluent  on  soils  should  not cause
groundwater bacterial contamination.   Land application sites were chosen
for the  effectiveness of  their soils in removing bacteria  and suspended
solids.   Pretreatment  and  subsequent die-off  due to  dehydration will
greatly reduce viable bacteria.

     Phosphorus  in  groundwater  is  important  because  of  the  potential
role in  lake  eutrophication.   Jones  (1977) reviewed relevant studies on
this subject  for the Environmental  Protection Agency -concluding that:

     ...  it  is  very unlikely that under  most  circumstances, sufficient
     available   phosphate  would  be   transported  from   septic  tank
     wastewater  disposal   systems to  significantly  contribute  to  the
     excessive aquatic plant growth  problems in water courses recharged
     by these waters.

Field  studies,  they point out, have shown that  most soils, even medium
sandy  soils  typically  remove  over  95% of  phosphates  within  short
distances  from  effluent   sources.   The  review  shows  the  two  primary
factors  in the  removal  of phosphates applied to the land.   The first is
phosphorus adsorption on  small amounts of clay minerals, iron oxide and
aluminum  oxide  in  soil and aquifer materials.   The  second  is calcium
carbonate  in hard water which precipitates phosphate as hydroxyapatite.

     Jones et  al.  (1977)  have also indicated several studies in areas
similar  to the  Study Area  (loamy, clayey soils over glacial moraine and
outwash  deposits)  where  the  soil has essentially removed all  of the
phosphorus present  in  septic  tank effluents.  They  also stated that in
hard water areas the "likelihood of significant phosphate transport from
septic tank wastewater disposal system effluent to the surface waters is
greatly reduced because of the calcium carbonate present in the soil and
subsoil systems."

     Because the soils and subsoil systems throughout the Study Area are
clayey to varying degrees  and the groundwaters are also very hard  (up to
430 mg/1  as  CaCOs)  very little phosphate transport from groundwaters to
surface  waters  should take place.  This was  confirmed by  the "Septic
Snooper"  survey of  groundwater leachate plumes  entering the Study Area
lakes  (Kerfoot  1979).    Only  65  of  the approximately  3500 existing
shoreline  dwellings  showed  detectable  septic   tank  leachate  plumes.

     Groundwater  nitrates are of  concern at  high concentrations which
cause  methemoglobinemia  in infants  consuming  foods prepared  with such
                                  177

-------
waters.   The  National  Interim   Primary   Drinking  Water  Regulations
(40 CFR 141) of the Safe Drinking  Water Act P.L. 93-523 set a  limit of
10 mg/1 of  nitrates as  nitrogen (N03-N).   Chapter II  discusses  the well
water  levels  of  nitrates found in the  Study Area.  None  of the  alter-
natives is  expected  to cause  significant  increases  of  the low  levels
associated with more  than 50 years  of on-site waste disposal practice in
the Study Area.

     Cluster system soil absorption fields  are designed like septic tank
fields  to  ensure  an  adequate  areal distribution  of the  effluent  and
depth  to   groundwater  for   satisfactory   treatment.    Nitrate  levels
entering  groundwater  should  be  equivalent  to those  of  leachate  from
ST/SASs.  Locating the  soil absorption fields  of  cluster systems  at
greater distances  from  residential  developments  (500 feet  adopted  for
EIS Alternative  design)  provides  more  than ample room  for  dilution of
nitrate concentrations below drinking water limits  prior  to interception
by  wells.   Cluster  system  alternatives  should  therefore produce  no
significant grouadwater nitrate impacts.

     EPA  recognizes almost  all  types of land  treatment  alternatives  as
being  capable of  producing  final  effluent  nitrate  nitrogen  (NOs-N)
concentrations of  10  mg/1 and  less prior  to  entry into  groundwaters.
Table  V-3  shows irrigation  (spray) and overland  flow methods produce
effluents of 2.5 mg/1  of NOg-N while for infiltration  percolation  (rapid
infiltration)  10  mg/1  may  be expected  (EPA 1975).   Dilution  within
aquifers  by groundwater flow further reduces  these concentrations.   No
signficant  impacts on groundwater  quality  are therefore  expected  from
alternatives using land application techniques.   While spray irrigation
and  overland  flow techniques produce  better  quality effluents,  rapid
infiltration produces  a satisfactory one.   Selection of land application
alternatives   would  require  a  detailed   site   analysis   including a
geohydrologic  survey,  soils classification  and  soil   chemistry survey.

3.   MITIGATIVE MEASURES

     Groundwater   quality   should   be   carefully   monitored   for   all
alternatives   using  ST/SASs,  cluster   systems   and   land  application
systems.  This will verify that water quality is  not being  significantly
degraded, and  warn of malfunctions,  inadequate  treatment  and  the  need
for corrective action.
C.   POPULATION AND  LAND  USE

1.   INTRODUCTION

     This  section  evaluates  population and land use  impacts  associated
with the various alternatives.   These impacts  are summarized below.   EIS
Alternatives  1,  3,  and 5  are  the most centralized proposed,  while EIS
Alternatives  2,  4,  and 6  are  more decentralized.  The  Facilities  Plan
Proposed Action provides for complete  centralization, while the Limited
Action   and   the   No   Action   Alternatives   provide   for   complete
decentralization.   (The Facilities  Plan Proposed  Action  and the  EIS
Alternatives  1  to  6   which  include  varying  degrees  of  centralized
treatment systems are referred  to as the  system alternatives.)

                                   178

-------
                                 Table  V-3

     EFFLUENT QUALITY  COMPARISON FOR LAND  TREATMENT AND AWT SYSTEMS
Effluent quality
System
Aerated lagoon
Activated sludge
Irrigation
Overland flow
Infiltration-percolation
AWT-1
AWT- 2
AWT-3
AWT-4
BOD
35
20
1
5
5
12
15
5
5
SS
40
25
1
5
1
15
16
5
5
NH^-N
10
20
0.5
0.5
-
1
-
20
-
parameter, mg/1
NO^-N
20
10
2.5
2.5
10
29
-
10
-
Total N
30
30
3
3
10
30
3
30
3
P
8
8
0.1
5
2
8
8
0.5
0.5
Cost-Effective Comparison of Land Application and Advanced Wastewater
Treatment (EPA-430/9-75-016)-
                                     179

-------
     •    Population  in  the   Proposed   Service   Area   is   expected  to
          increase  33%  between  1975  and  2000  under all  of the  seven
          system alternatives.

     •    Adoption of the Limited Action or No Action Alternative  would
          limit area population growth to a level  of  22% of the  existing
          population during  this period.

     »    Provision of  centralized  or paTtially^centralized  facilities
          (any  of  the   seven   system alternatives)  Would  require  an
          increase in residential development of approximately 420  acres
          between 1975 and 2000.

     «    Higher degrees of centralization  of wastewater treatment will
          increase  the   density  of  residential development.    Thus,
          centralized alternatives will  require less  land to accommodate
          a given increase in population.

     9    Adoption  of  the  No  Action   Alternative  would  require  an
          increase in residential development of about 600  acres between
          1975  and 2000.  Thus,  despite the lower  rate  of  population
          growth without  centralization, more land would  be  needed for
          non-centralized alternatives because of  their  lower density of
          development.

     @    The Facilities Plan  Proposed Action or  EIS Alternatives  1, 3,
          or  5  would  speed   conversion  from  seasonal  to  year-round
          occupancy status.   These  alternatives  would  also  result  in a
          somewhat more  affluent population base through displacement of
          lower-income families.

     «    EIS   Alternatives  2,  4,  6,   the  Limited  or   No Action
          Alternatives  would   not  significantly influence community
          composition.

     ®    Differential influences upon community  character attributable
          to   alternative   service   provisions   would  be   relatively
          insignificant.

2.   POPULATION

     The  capacity  of an area  to  support  development  varies  with the
degree  to   which   wastewater   facilities  are   site-related.   On-site
wastewater treatment facilities limit development  to  areas with  suitable
soils.   Sewers  allow  development  to  be  much   more  site  independent
because  soil  character,  slope,  and  drainage   are  not  such  strong
constraining   factors.    Thus,   sewers    increase   the   inventory  of
developable  land.    Sewers  also  increase  the   possible  density  of
development.

     Significant   population   growth   differentials    are   found  in
contrasting the seven system alternatives with the Limited Action and No
Action Alternatives.  Restriction  to on-site facilities throughout the
Study  Area  would  constrain future population growth  below the   level
anticipated  with  the provision of  off-site (centralized)  wastewater

                                  180

-------
treatment.   In-summer  population  in  the  Proposed  Service  Area  is
projected  to  grow  by 33% from  1975  to  2000.   Under  the  No  Action
Alternative  the growth would  be limited to an estimated 22% above the
1975  level  (see  Appendix  E-5  for  the  derivation of  this estimate).
Under  the  No  Action Alternative,  little  growth  would  occur  around
Jimmerson  Lake,  Lake James, and Crooked  Lake,  which are already nearly
completely developed, thereby constraining population  increase  in the
Proposed Service Area.

     There are no  significant differences in  anticipated growth among
the  seven  system  alternatives.   All   alternatives  provide centralized
facilities for  the most intensively developed lakeshore areas along Lake
James, Jimmerson Lake, and  Crooked Lake.  Configuration and  capacity are
comparable for all  seven alternatives.  Those areas where development
capability  constraints   are   evident   would  be  extended   to  off-site
services   under  each   system  alternative,   thereby  eliminating  any
measurable development differential system  among alternatives.

3.   LAND USE

     Adoption  of  the Limited Action  or No Action Alternatives would
result in  conversion of 600 acres of land to residential  use, while each
of  the  seven system  alternatives would result  in conversion of approxi-
mately  420  acres.   The greater  residential  land requirement  of the
Limited  Action and  No Action Alternatives,  despite the  lower  rate of
population growth  associated with it, is  a  result of the  more scattered,
lower-density  development associated with  it.   Thus, the Limited Action
and No Action  Alternatives  are estimated  to result in the consumption of
over  40% more residential  land to  accommodate  33%  fewer people between
1975  and  2000  than  the  seven system  alternatives.    No significant
differences in land  use  patterns or intensity  are anticipated among any
of  the  seven system  alternatives.  Areas where site-related constraints
might  otherwise   influence development  are  provided   with comparable
service  under  all  alternatives,  effectively  eliminating  site-related
factors  in areas with most  intense development  pressures.

     Appendix  E-5  discusses the methodology for projecting  the land use
and  population distributions  associated  with  the  various alternatives.
The additional land  required  for residential development  was assumed, in
all  cases,  to  be  converted  from  forest, cleared,  and agricultural use
categories  in  proportion  to  the currently  observed land  distribution
among    these    categories.     Thus,    the   existing   balance  between
agricultural,  forest and  cleared acreage  was maintained.

     On  the above basis, of  the 600 acres required for  residential use
by  the Limited  Action and No Action  Alternatives, 325 acres would be
converted  from agricultural use, 151 acres from cleared lands, and 124
acres  from  forest  land.   This  represents  5% of  the total  agricultural
lands,   11%  of cleared  lands  and  6%  of  forest lands.   These are
relatively  insignificant  levels of  conversion.   No wetlands would be
converted.

     Similarly the 420 acres  required  for  residential  use  by the  seven
system  alternatives  would  be comprised  of  230 acres  of  agricultural
lands,  100  acres  of cleared  lands  and  90 acres of forest lands.  The

                                   181

-------
respective conversion levels  are  4% of  agricultural lands, 8% of cleared
lands, and 5% of  forest  lands  which is  insignificant.  No conversion of
wetlands would be  involved.

4-   CHANGES IN  COMMUNITY COMPOSITION AND  CHARACTER

     Compared to  the  Limited  Action  and  No  Action  Alternatives,  the
seven system alternatives would  support more intense development in the
areas surrounding Lake James,  Jiramerson Lake,  and Crooked Lake.  All of
the  seven  system  alternatives  would have  comparable  influence upon the
general  character  of the communities.   Increased population growth and
density under the  system  alternatives would tend  to give the area a more
urban  character.   Most  lakeshore  areas  are   already  fully developed,
however.   Increased  development  will  thus  represent  only   a  modest
increment to existing development.

     Adoption of the  Limited Action  or No Action Alternatives would be
unlikely  to  have  any  direct  effect  upon  community  character.   No
siginificant adverse  effects on  water  quality  are expected.  Therefore,
no  degradation  of the environmental and  recreational  -resource base of
the  Study Area  is  anticipated  and the  quality of life  and economic
condition of the area should  not  diminish.
D.   ENCROACHMENT ON ENVIRONMENTALLY  SENSITIVE  AREAS

     There are two principal threats  to  environmentally sensitive areas:
their  immediate  loss  or  alteration due  to  construction  or related
activities,  and  their  eventual (later)  loss or conversion attributable
to  the growth-indueing nature  of the  improvements  resulting  from the
project.  These  are called  primary and  secondary  impacts, respectively.
The Steuben County Planning Commission (SCPC) developed and approved (on
December 29,  1971)  a   Master  Plan,  which  was  adopted  as   a  zoning
ordinance   by   the   Steuben  County   Board   of   Commissioners   on
January 3, 1972.   Although no  circuit  court  injunction  forbidding  a
project has  related to an environmentally  sensitive  area, the  record to
date  indicates  that projects  capable of generating noise, eyesore, or
excessive  congestion  of  roadways are  unlikely  to  obtain  building or
other permits under the existing Master  Plan.

1.   FLOODPLAINS

a.   Primary Impacts

     The  Steuben County Master Plan  regulates  the types of structures
that  can  be  built within  15 feet  of  the high waterline of any  stream or
lake  in  the county  to  fences,  docks,  or boathouses.   Land  use is
restricted  in  these areas  to  agriculture,  forestry,  public utilities,
and  recreation.   Neither  the  Facilities Plan Proposed Action nor any
other alternative would directly  affect the floodplain of  the  lakes and
streams in  the  Study Area (see Figure 11-12 for  extent of  floodplain).
                                  182

-------
b.   Secondary Impacts

     If landowners are provided with centralized sewer  service, building
lots can be  developed as long as there is  compliance  with the set-back
provisions of the Master Plan.  Consequently,  some  growth may be induced
by implementation  of  the Facilities Plan  Proposed  Action or the other 6
system  alternatives.   However, the requirement for compliance with the
Master  Plan  would ensure  that  no residential development  occurs  on
floodplains.

c.   Mitigative Measures

     Because  none  of  the  alternatives   is  ' expected to  impact  the
floodplains no mitigations are necessary-

2.   STEEP SLOPES

a.   Primary Impacts

     Steep  slopes  exist primarily  in  the areas around Lake  James and
Jimmerson Lake  (see Figure II-l).  The difficulties of  installing on-lot
systems  on   steep  slopes   appear  to be  one of the  factors  that
historically  has limited home construction mostly to lakeshore and other
level-to-rolling sites.  However,  sewers  and  specially designed on-site
systems  can be  constructed  on steep  slopes.   Accelerated soil erosion
would   be   a  direct   effect  of  such  construction  activities.   The
accelerated  erosion  locally  increases turbidity  and  non-point source
nutrient  loads  in surface waters.   The  totally  decentralized Limited
Action  and No  Action  Alternatives  would  have no significant primary
impacts  on steep  slopes.  Minor to moderate impacts might result from
implementation  of  the Facilities Plan Proposed Action in particular, and
the EIS Alternatives.
b.   Secondary Impacts

     Sewers availability provided by the Facilities Plan Proposed Action
or  in the local sewering proposed under the EIS Alternatives,  may result
in  new  construction  due  to induced growth.   The potential exists  for
such construction of  houses and trenches to erode steep slopes resulting
in  turbidity,  sedimentation  and non-point  source nutrient loading of
surface  waters.   The  impacts  are  likely  to  be  minor  to  moderate
particularly  for  the Facilities  Plan  Proposed Action  and  to  a lesser
degree for the EIS Alternatives.

c.   Mitigative Measures

     The  Steuben  County  Planning  Commission  should  adopt  performance
standards with specific slope-density provisions.  Developers would then
have to meet  performance  standards  which require  proof  that  the sloped
areas are not a hazard to  development.  Zoning  ordinances  should  limit
growth  in  steeply sloped areas, require collection  of  surface run-off
before it enters  lake or streams, and specifically exclude  construction
methods that would promote the long-term exposure of a construction site
to  sheet erosion.

                                  183

-------
     If cluster systems or septic  tanks  are  placed in areas with steep
slopes, a  series  of drop  boxes  should be used.   With this method, no
hillside seepage will  occur  unless the  sewage  flow exceeds the design
capacity.


3.   WETLANDS

a.   Primary Impacts

     None  of the  facilities  comprising  the Facilities  Plan  Proposed
Action or  the EIS  Alternatives are expected  to  disrupt wetlands either
by their construction or by their operation.  Sewer  alignments have been
selected to avoid direct passage through wetlands.


b.   Secondary  Impacts

     Induced growth associated with sewering in the system alternatives
may  create pressures for  development of wetlands not protected by State
ownership.    Repeated instances of  the  filling  of  shoreline and hinter-
land  wetlands,  the  object of repeated  lawsuits  by the  Steuben Lakes
Association, would  continue  in the absence  of  new legislation  or  new
interpretation of  existing legislation.   Presidential  Executive Order
11990  specifically limits  Federal  participation in projects directly or
indirectly resulting in the destruction of wetlands.  Only the No Action
and  Limited  Action Alternatives would  involve no  Federal  aid to future
residential  sites  built on filled  wetlands.   The sewered alternatives
could  easily provide service to such  filled  areas.   Federal funding of
any  of the sewered  alternatives may be in violation of Executive Order
11990.


c.   Mitigative Measures

     The zoning  ordinance should  be  revised and  broadened  to provide
greater  protection  of  wetland  areas.   This  is  in recognition  of  the
value  of wetlands  in  filtering sediments  from the  run-off from adjacent
land and as  spawning  grounds  for  northern pike,  a valued game fish and
an  important top  predator in the fish  community.   With  the Limited
Action Alternative, the Small Waste Flows District  would not issue per-
mits for septic tank installations  on wetlands or  on fill areas.


4.   PRIME AGRICULTURAL LANDS


a.   Primary Impacts

     As illustrated by  Figure  II-7, the prime agricultural  soils in the
Study  Area are  fragmented and  scattered  throughout the area,  occurring
mainly in  upland areas  rather  than along  lake shores and other sections
                                    184

-------
of the  Proposed Service Area.   The  No Action  or limited Action would
result  in  the  conversion  of  approximately  ^325  acres  or  5%  of  all
agricultural  lands  to  residential  use.  The Facilities  Plan Proposed
Action and  the  6  EIS  Alternatives would each convert approximately 230
acres or  4% of agricultural  lands.   In all  cases the impacts on prime
agricultural lands are likely to be  insignificant.

b.   Secondary Impacts

     There  are  expected  to  be no effects  of induced growth on the prime
agricultural lands of  the  Study Area.  Projected  growth is concentrated
in the  lakeshore  areas of  Jimmerson Lake, Crooked Lake, and Lake James,
especially with centralized sewers.


c.   Mitigative  Measures

     Since  impacts are likely to be  insignificant  no mitigative measures
are proposed.


5.   UNIQUE NATURAL AREAS

a.   Primary  Impacts

     No  location  within the  Study  Area has  been designated by Indiana
DNR  as  a unique  natural area.   Perhaps  the  most difficult to restore
(and therefore  valued)  habitats within the  Study Area are the tamarack
bogs.   As stated in  Chapter II, tamarack bogs  provide  habitat for at
least  two  species  of orchids,  the  pale  green orchid  and  the prairie
orchid.   Neither  species   is   considered to  have  special  status  and
therefore,  to  be in  need  of  study  for  the  evaluation  of Federally
protected threatened or endangered species, nor  does either have special
status  within  the  State of Indiana.  Nevertheless,  the tamarack bog
habitat,  and the plants that may be associated with bogs,  are  considered
to  be  valuable natural resources and  worthy of protection.  Tamarack
bogs  are   located  within  larger  wetland  areas,  many  of  which  are
protected,  as  discussed  in the wetland section  above.  Therefore, it is
expected  that  habitat disruption will  be negligible.  Several wetland
areas are protected by state ownership, including the Potawatomi Nature
Preserve  in Pokagon State Park and the Beachwood Nature Preserve.


b.   Secondary Impacts

     There  are  expected to  be  no  effects   of  induced  growth  on the
tamarack  bogs of the Study Area.


c.   Mitigative Measures

     With  alternatives  involving  sewering,  measures  would  have to be
adopted to  minimize the adverse effects of such construction on tamarack
bogs.   Where  possible,  construction  would  have  to  circumvent  tamarack
bogs.
                                     185

-------
E.   ECONOMIC  IMPACTS

1.   INTRODUCTION

     This  section evaluates  the  economic  impacts   of  the  wastewater
system alternatives  proposed  for the  Steuben Lakes  Study Area.   These
impacts  include:   financial burden on system users;  financial  pressure
causing  residents  to  move   away  from  the  Study  Area  (displacement
pressure);  and financial  pressure^ to  convert  seasonal  residences  to
full-year residences (conversion pressure).
                                          I
                                          }
2.   USER CHARGES

     User charges  are  the  costs periodically billed  to customers  of the
wastewater   system.    They  consist  of  three  parts:   debt   service
(repayment of  principal  and interest),  operation and maintenance  costs,
and  an  annual   reserve fund  allocation assumed  to  equal  20% of  the
annual debt  service amount.   The  reserve  fund is a  portion  of current
revenues  invested to  finance  future  capital  improvements.   Table  V-4
presents estimated user charges  for each alternative.

a.   Eligibility

     Eligibility  refers  to that portion of wastewater facilities  costs
determined by  US  EPA to be eligible for a  Federal wastewater facilities
construction grant.   Capital  costs of wastewater  facilities  are  funded
under Section 201 of the 1972  Federal  Water Pollution Control Act  Amend-
ments  and the  Clean Water Act  of  1977.  The 1972 and 1977  Acts  enable
US  EPA  to  fund  75% of total  eligible capital costs of  conventional
systems  and  85% of the eligible capital costs of  innovative and  alter-
native systems.   Innovative  and  alternative  systems considered  in the
EIS  include land treatment, pressure sewers, cluster  systems, and  septic
tank rehabilitation  and  replacement.   The  State  of Indiana  funds  10% of
the  capital  costs  of  conventional  wastewater  systems  and  6% of  the
capital  costs of innovative/alternative systems.   The funding formula in
Indiana  thus  requires  localities to  pay  15% of  the capital  costs  of
conventional    systems    and    9%    of   the    capital     costs    of
innovative/alternative systems.   Operation  and maintenance  costs are not
funded by the  Federal government and  must  be  paid by the users  of the
facilities.

     The  percentage  of  capital costs  eligible   for  Federal and  State
funding  greatly affects  the  cost that local users must bear.  Treatment
capital  costs  were assumed to be fully eligible  for grant  funding while
collection system capital  costs  were  subject to  the terms  of Program
Requirements Memorandum (PRM)  78-9.   This  PRM  establishes  three main
conditions that must be satisfied  before  collector  sewer  costs  may be
declared eligible:

     •    Systems  in use for  disposal of wastes  from the existing popu-
          lation  are creating  a public health  problem,  contaminating
          groundwater or violating  point source  discharge  requirements.
                                  186

-------
                                   Table V-4




                              ANNUAL USER CHARGES






ALTERNATIVE                                               ANNUAL USER CHARGE






Facilities Plan Proposed Action                                 $450






EIS Alternative #1                                              $320






EIS Alternative #2                                              $230






EIS Alternative #3                                        .      $340






EIS Alternative #4                                              $240






EIS Alternative #5                                              $340






EIS Alternative #6                                              $250






Limited Action Alternative                                     $ 50
                                      187

-------
     •    Two-thirds of  the  design population  (year 2000) served by  a
          sewer must have been in residence on 18 October 1972.

     a    Sewers must  be  shown  to be  cost-effective  when compared  to
          decentralized or on-site alternatives.

     The  Facilities Planning  branch  of  EPA Region  V  evaluated  the
eligibility of  the  sewers  proposed in the Facilities Plan  and  the EIS.
Their  evaluation  concluded that  there  is no indicated need  for  sewers
and thus  no  sewer  costs  are  eligible for  Federal  funding.  On-site  and
cluster  systems  have been determined  to be  100% eligible for Federal
funding.   The  local  costs   in  Table  V-5  are  based   upon  the   EPA
determination of eligibility.

     A  final  determination of  grant eligibility  will be  prepared  by  the
Indiana  State Board  of  Health  (ISBH).   ISBK's  determination will  be
based  upon Step  2  plans  and  specifications for the alternative  selected
to' be  funded and may differ from the EPA determination.

b.   Calculation of  User  Charges

     The  user  charges  developed  for  the  Steuben  Lakes alternative
systems consist of local capital costs, operation and maintenance  costs,
and a  reserve fund charge.  The calculation of debt service was  based on
local  costs  being  paid   through  the  use  of  a 30-year  bond  at  6 7/8%
interest.  The  user  charges  in  Table  V-4 are  presented on  an  annual
charge per household basis.

     The  mainly  centralized  alternatives  (Facilities   Plan  Proposed
Action, EIS Alternatives 1, 2 and 5) are the most costly  to users  in  the
Steuben  Lakes  area.   The  annual  user  charges  for  the centralized
alternatives range from $320  to $450 per household.  The  relatively high
costs  of the centralized alternatives stem from the ineligibility  of  all
collector  sewers.    Costs  for  these  ineligible sewers  must  be   met
entirely at the local level without Federal and State assistance.

     The  partially decentralized  alternatives (EIS  Alternatives  2,  4,
and 6)  and the  totally decentralized Limited Action are  less expensive
than  the centralized  alternatives and  range from  $50  to  $250.   The
Limited  Action  ($50) is  the  least expensive  of all the  alternatives.
Overall,  the partially  and  totally decentralized alternatives  involve
the  least  amount  of  sewering  and  thus  have   the  lowest  amount  of
ineligible costs.

     In addition to  user charges, households connected to a centralized
collection system  would  have  to pay the capital  costs  ($968 for gravity
sewers) of a sewer connection.   Seasonal homeowners also  may have  to  pay
the full  price  for  the  replacement or  rehabilitation of their on-site
systems  (septic tanks  and soil absorption systems) if these systems  are
not ceded to  the   local  wastewater management  agency.    These private
costs   would  vary from  household to household due  to  differences  in the
distance  to  the gravity  collector sewer  and  the condition  of on-site
systems.  The Limited  Action Alternative  would  have  no  such private
costs,  which might amount ot  more than $3 million for the  Facilities
Plan Proposed Action.

                                   188

-------
                                   Table V-5




                         LOCAL SHARE OF CAPITAL COSTS
ALTERNATIVE
Facilities Plan Proposed Action
EIS Alternative #1
EIS Alternative #2
EIS Alternative #3
EIS Alternative #4
EIS Alternative #5
EIS Alternative #6
Limited Action Alternative
LOCAL SHARE






$17,100,900






$11,894,900






$ 8,422,300






$12,313,000






$ 8,373,700






$12,465,000






$ 8,603,600






$   177,100
                                     189

-------
3.   LOCAL COST  BURDEN

a.   Significant Financial  Burden

     High-cost wastewater  facilities  may place  an excessive financial
burden on  system users.  Such  burdens may cause  families to  alter their
spending patterns  substantially.   The Federal government has developed
criteria  to identify  high-cost  wastewater  projects  (The  White House
Rural Development Initiatives  1978).  A  project  is considered high-cost
when the annual user charges  are:

     e    1.5% of median household  incomes less than $6,000;

     •    2.0% of  median household incomes  between $6,000 and $10,000;
          and

     ®    2.5% of median household  incomes greater  than $10,000.

     The 1978 median household income for the Proposed Service Area has
been  estimated  as  $18,000   for   permanent  residents.    (No data  are
available  for  seasonal resident  income  characteristics.)  According to
the Federal  criteria,  annual user  charges should not exceed  2.5% ($450)
of  the  $18,000  median  household  income  figure.   Any alternative having
annual  user  charges  exceeding  $450  is   identified  as  a  high-cost
alternative  and  is likely to  place a financial  burden  on users of the
system.   The Facilities Plan  Proposed  Action is  the  only  alternative
classified as high-cost according to the  Federal  criteria.

     Significant financial  burden is determined by  comparing  annual user
charges with the distribution of household incomes.  Families not facing
a significant financial burden would be the  only  families able to afford
the annual  wastewater  user charges.   Table  V-6  shows  the percentage of
households  estimated to  face  a significant  financial  burden under each
of  the alternatives.   The  centralized  alternatives  imply  annual user
charges that would  place a  significant financial burden  on 20 to 50% of
the households  in the  Steuben Lakes  area.   Approximately 50 to 80% of
the households  in the  area  could  afford the annual user charges under
the  centralized  alternatives.   Significant  financial burden under the
decentralized alternatives  ranges  from 2  to 30%  of the households.  The
percentage  of  households able to  afford the  decentralized alternatives
ranges  from  70  to  98°/0.   The Limited  Action  would place  the least
financial burden (2 to  5%)  on households.

b.   Displacement Pressure

     Displacement pressure  is  the   stress placed upon families  to move
from the  service  area  as a result  of  costly user charges.  Displacement
pressure is  measured by determining the  percentage of households having
annual  user   charges   exceeding   5%   of  their   annual  income.   The
displacement pressure  induced  by each of the alternatives is listed  in
Table V-6.
                                  190

-------
                                   Table V-6

                  FINANCIAL BURDEN AND DISPLACEMENT PRESSURE
                            DISPLACEMENT          FINANCIAL            CAN
  ALTERNATIVE                 PRESSURE             BURDEN             AFFORD
Facilities Plan
Proposed Action                10-20%              40-50%             50-60%
EIS Alternative #1             10-20%              20-30%             70-80%


EIS Alternative #2              5-10%              20-30%  .           70-80%


EIS Alternative #3             10-20%              30-40%             60-70%


EIS Alternative #4              5-10%              20-30%             70-80%


EIS Alternative #5             10-20%              30-40%             60-70%


EIS Alternative #6              5-10%              20-30%             70-80%
Limited Action
Alternative                       <2%                 2-5%              95-98%
                                      191

-------
     Displacement   pressure   is   highest   under    the    centralized
alternatives:  from  10  to  20%  of  the  total  number  of  households.
Displacement pressure is less under the decentralized  alternatives:  2 to
10%.  The  Limited Action  would  place the least amount  of  displacement
pressure (less than 2%) on households.

c.   Conversion Pressure

     Wastewater  facilities  costs  are  likely  to  encourage  the  trend,
already underway,  of converting seasonal residences to  permanent  resi-
dences.   Uniform user  charges  would  impose a  relatively heavier  cost
burden on  seasonal  residences  than on permanent  ones.   These residences
would typically  be used only  three or four  months during the year  but
would be charged for capital costs throughout the  year.  This may place
a  financial  burden  on  seasonal  residents 'maintaining   a  full-time
residence  in addition  to  their  seasonal residence.   The higher  cost
burden of  centralized alternatives will exert more conversion pressure
than the cost  burden of the decentralized alternatives.  Because  of  the
apparent high  income of seasonal residents  (based on visual  inspection
of  seasonal  residences)  the  number of seasonal-to-permanent residential
conversions  as a result of the wastewater user  charges  may  be small in
any case.

4.   MITIGATIVE MEASURES

     The significant  financial burden and displacement  pressure created
by the centralized alternatives may be mitigated  by selection of a lower
cost decentralized alternative.

     The local wastewater  management  authority may also seek  a loan or
grant from  the Farmers Home Administration.  Such  a  loan would decrease
annual user charges by spreading out the payment  of the  local share over
a longer period of time with a lower interest rate.

     The impacts of the high costs to  seasonal users may be  mitigated by
not  charging  for  operation and  maintenance  during  the  months  that
seasonal residences are vacant.
                                  192

-------
F.   LMl'ACT MATRIX
Impact Category
Surface water
resources
Nutrient loading
and eutrophica-
tion potential
of lakes
                    Non-point source
                    loading to lakes
                    Shoreline Algae
                    f> Aquatic weed
                    growth
                    Bacterial con-
                    tamination of
                    streams and
                    lakes
                      Impact Type & Degree

                      Primary:   Long-Term
                                                                                                         Impact Descrjption
                                          Secondary:  Long-Term
                                          Primary:  Long-Term
                                          Primary:  Long-Term
Facilities Plan j*iropQsed Action:

Total phosphorus loadings decrease between <1 and 47% for all lakes.

Alternat ives 1-6:

Phosphorus loadings decrease between <1% and 34%, for Jiramerson Lake, Lake James  (Lower
and Middle Basins) and Crooked Lakes (Basins 1, 2,3,).  Phosphorus loadings increase
slightly (<1%) in the Upper Basin of Lake James, Big Otter Lake and Little Otter  Lake.

Alternat iyes^l, 3_r J^:

Phosphorus loadings decrease 3%-l'i% in Lake Gage and Lime Lake, respectively.

Alternatives 2, 4_,_ 6:

5%-24% increase In phosphorus loadings in Lake Gage and Lime Lake.  44% decrease in Snow
Lake due to expected ungradlng of Pikagon State Park facility.

Limited Action, No Action:

Phosphorus loadings from 
-------
 Impact  Category      Impacted  Area          Impact Type  &  Degree	Impact Description	

 Cruimdwater          Groundwater            Primary:  Short-Term        All Alternatives:
 Resources            Quantity
                                                                     Construction works would result in no significant impact on groundwater quantity and
                                                                     availability.

                                           Primary:  Long-Term         All Alternatives:

                                                                     Failure  to return wastewater flows would result in negligible loss.

                                           Secondary: Long-Term       Facilities Plan Proposed Action and Alternatives 1-6:

                                                                     Increase groundwater use due to induced growth would be negligible.

                                                                     Limited Action and No Action Alternatives:

                                                                     No induced growth and therefore no impacts.

                     Groundwater            Primary:  Short-Term        All Alternatives:
                     Quality
                                                                     Construction works would result in no significant impact on groundwater quality.

                                           Primary:  Long-Tenu         All Alternatives:

                                                                     Operation of all wastewater disposal systems would cause insignificant impacts on bac-
                                                                     terial quailty and nitrates.  Groundwater flow into lakes would cause Insignificant
                                                                     Impacts on phosphate loadings and shoreline algal growths.

                                           Secondary: Long-Term       Facilities j*lan Proposed Action and Alternatives 1-6:

                                                                     No significant impacts would result from induced growth.

                                                                     Limited Action and No Action Alternatives:

                                                                     No induced growth and therefore, no impacts.

Population           Rate of                Secondary: Long-Term       Facilities Plan Proposed Action and Alternative 1-6;
                     Growth
                                                                     Growth anticipated to increase by 9% over baseline projections.

                                                                     Limited Action and No Action Alternatives:

                                                                     No induced growth would result.

Land Use             Developable            Secondary: Long-Term       Facilities Plan Proposed Action and Alternatives 1-6:
                     Acreage; Growth
                     Patterns                                         Projected increase in residential development of 420 acres.  Residential densities  likely
                                                                     to increase with the degree of centralization, minimizing  the amount of land  required  to
                                                                     accommodate the  increased population.

                                                                     Limited Action and Mo Action Alternatives

                                                                     Increase in residential development of 600 acres.  More scattered,  lower density develop-
                                                                     ment .

-------
Impact Category

Environmentally
Sensitive Areas
Impacted Area

Flood Plains
                    Steep Slopes
                     Wetlands
                     Prime Agricul-
                     tural Lands
Impact Type & Degree

Primary: Long-Term



Secondary:  Long-Term
                                           Primary:  Long-  and
                                             Short-Term
                                                                                                            Impact; Description
                                                All Alternatives:

                                                No impacts expected.

                                                All Alternatives:

                                                No impac ts expec ted.

                                                Facilities Plan Proposed Action  and  Alternatives  jl-6:

                                                Impacts  expected  to be minor  to  moderate  due  to construction on steep slopes associated
                                                with  seuer systems,
                                                                     Limited Action and No Action Alternatives:

                                                                     No significant impacts.

                                           Secondary:  Long-Term      Facill ties Plan Proposed Action and Alternatives* 1-6:

                                                                     Impacts expected to be minor to moderate as a result of sewer related induced growth.

                                                                     Limited Action and No Action Alternatives:

                                                                     No impacts expected.

                                                                     Facilities Plan Proposed Action and Alternatives 1-6:
                                           Primary:  Long-Term
                                           Secondary: Long-Terra
                                           Primary: Long-Term
                                           Secondary: Long-Terra
                                                No wetlands would be converted to residential development.  Minimal impacts expected on
                                                wetlands  located close to the paths of sewer lines.

                                                Limited Action and No Action Alternatives:

                                                No wetlands would be converted to residential development and no impacts are expected.

                                                Facilities Plan Proposed Action and Alternatives 1-6:

                                                Impacts due co induced growth would be insignificant since most lakeshore areas are al-
                                                ready  developed and an abundance of suitable land for development (other than wetlands)
                                                exists.

                                                All Alternatives:

                                                Conversion of 4% to 5% of prime agricultural lands to residential use expected.  Impact
                                                would  be  insignificant.

                                                All Alternatives:
                                                                     No impact expected.

-------
Impact Category     Impacted Area         Impact Type & Degree	Impact Description
                    Unique Natural        Primary: Long-Term        All Alternatives:
                    Areas
                                                                    Impact on the tamarack bogs would be minimal since most bogs are in State protected areas.

                                          Secondary:  Long-Term      All Alternatives;

                                                                    No impacts expected.

Local Economy       Local Cost            Primary: Long-Term        Facilities Plan Proposed __Ag.tj.Qii:
                    Burden
                                                                    Average annual user charge would be $450.   50% to 60% of families could afford this
                                                                    system.

                                                                    Alternatives lt 3, and 5:

                                                                    User charges for these alternatives range  from $320 to $340.  60% to 80% of families
                                                                    could afford these systems.

                                                                    Alternatives 2, 4, and 6:

                                                                    User charges for these decentralized alternatives range from $230 to $250.  70% to 30%
                                                                    of families could afford these systems.

                                                                    Limited Action Alternative:

                                                                    Average annual user charge would be ?50.  95% to 98% of families could afford this system.

                    Conversion            Primary: Long-Terra        All Alternatives:
                    Pressures
                                                                    Recent trends Indicate that conversion from seasonal to permanent units will continue to
                                                                    occur under all alternatives.  Conversion  pressure will be highest under  the Facilities
                                                                    Plan Proposed Action and the 6 EIS Alternatives and lowest under the Limited Action
                                                                    Alternative.

                    Displacement          Primary: Long-Term        Facilities Plan Proposed ^Action:
                    Pressure
                                                                    Proposed Action would result in the displacement of approximately 10-20%  of the households.

                                                                    Alternatives 1, 3, and 5:

                                                                    These alternatives would result in the dispalcement of approximately 10-20% of the households.

                                                                    Alternatives 2tb_t and 6:

                                                                    The decentralized alternative would place displacement pressure on 5-10%  of the households.

                                                                    Limited Action:

                                                                    Displacement would be less than 2%.

-------
                              CHAPTER VI

                SELECTION OF THE  RECOMMENDED ACTION
A.   INTRODUCTION

     As discussed in  Section  I.D.I,  EPA has  several possible courses of
action.  It may:

     •    Approve the  original  grant application, possibly with recom-
          mendations  for  design  changes  and/or measures  to  mitigate
          impacts of the Facilities  Plan Proposed Action;

     •    With  the  applicant's  and  State's concurrence,  approve Step 2
          funding for an  alternative  to  the  Facilities  Plan Proposed
          Action;

     •    Return  the  application  with  recommendations-  for additional
          Step 1 analysis;

     •    Reject the grant application.

     The basis  for  choosing  one of  the  above options  is a comparison of
the EIS Alternatives with the Facilities Plan Proposed Action.
B.   SELECTION OF THE RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE

1.   SELECTION PROCEDURE

     Four primary  criteria were used  to selecting the EIS Recommended
Action  --  costs,  impacts, reliability,  and  flexibility.   Within each
category  several  factors  were  compared.   Cost   factors  for  example,
included present worth,  user charges,  and total  1980  private  costs.
Impacts which EPA  considers  to be  decisive  in  alternative  selection are
identified  and   considered.   The alternatives  reliability  is  measured
against centralized collection and  treatment as the standard.

     A matrix offers  a  simple way  to visualize the relationship between
alternatives and the  criteria used  to evaluate them.  By tabulating for
each alternative the factors that influence  the range of choice, one can
quickly  compare  the  effect  of  each  alternative  upon   that  factor.
Section  V.F  contain?  a matrix  relating alternatives  to   environmental
impacts.   Table VI-1  presents  a  matrix summarizing  the  relationship
between  the  alternatives and their costs,  environmental impacts,  reli-
ability, and flexibility.

     Table VI-1 also  ranks  the alternatives  according to their  total
present worth.   This ranking has two purposes:

     •    Costs  are  easily quantifiable, perhaps  the  least subjective
          measure of value.


                                  197

-------
         Table VI-1




ALTERNATIVE SELECTION MATKIX

ALTERNATIVES

Limited
Action























EIS
Alternative
2





















COSTS ($)
PRESENT
WORTH
(xl.OOO)
8,268.7
























18,951.4























ANNUAL
USER
CHARGES
50
























230























TOTAL
PRIVATE
COSTS

















































ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
SURFACE WATER
QUALITY
• Increased nutrient
loading of lakes
but minimal con-
tributions from
septic tanks;

# Non-point sources
and the wetlands
around Marsh Lake
continue to be
the most signifi-
cant sources of
nutrients for the
lakes;

• Potential septic
tank contribution
to shoreline
algal growth is
minimal .





• Reduction in
nutrient loading
of Jimmerson
Lake, Crooked
Lake, Lake James
(Lower and
Middle Basins)
and Snow Lake.
Negligible in-
crease in Big
Otter, Little
Otter and Lake
James (Upper
Basin) . Increase
in Lake Gage and
Lime Lake.

• Impacts on non-
point sources
and septic tanks
would be similar
tu the Limited
Action Alterna-
tive.
GROUNDWATER
QUALITY
• Insignificant im-
impacts on bac-
terial quality
and nitrate con-
centrations;

« Insignificant
contribution of
phosphorus to
the lakes by
ground water flow.














• Insignificant im-
pacts on all as-
pects of ground-
water quality .




















ENVIRONMENTALLY
SENSITIVE
AREAS
• Construction Im-
pacts not ex-
pected on flood
plains, and min-
imal on steep
slopes , wet lands ,
and prime agri-
cultrlal lands;

• Primary long-
term impacts
not expected on
flood plains and
wetlands; and
minimal on
steep slopes and
prime agricul-
tural lands;

• No secondary
impacts ex-
pected ;'
• Filling of wet-
lands continues
unchanged .
• Construction im-
pacts not ex-
pected on flood
plains , and min-
imal on steep
slopes , wetlands,
and prime agri-
cultural lands;

a All primary and
secondary long-
term impacts ex-
pected to be in-
significant ;

• Filling of wet-
lands continues
as in Limited
Ac t ion .





POPULATION

No population
increase
above base-
line projec-
tions.




















9% increase
in population
over baseline
projections.




















LAND
USE
Increase in
residential
development
of 600
acres re-
presents
insignifi-
cant con-
version
from forest,
cleared and
agricultural
lands.












Insignifi-
cant con-
version of
420 acres
from forest,
cleared and
a'gricultura'
lands to
residential
development














SOCIOECONOMIC
IMPACTS
FINANCIAL 1 DISPLACEMENT
BURDEN
2-5%
























20-30%























PRESSURE
<2%
























5-10%
























FLEXIBILITY

Highest for future
planning; lowest
for future expan-
sion.





















Greater flex-
ibility for future
planning than
Alternative 1;
less flexibility
for expansion.



















RELIABILITY

Lowest of these
alternatives -
continued reli-
ance upon on-
site systems.
However , least
affected by
civil, labor
or energy
disruption.















Greater than
Limited Action.
Centralized
sewers and treat
ment improve
reliability.



















-------
Tablt VI-1 (Continued)

ALTERNATIVES

EIS
Alternative
4





EIS
Alternative
1


EIS
Alternative
6







EIS
Alternative
5






EIS
Alternative
3




COSTS ($)
PRESENT
WORTH
(x 1,000)
19,663.1







19,874.4




19,999.4









20,485.3








21,212.4






ANNUAL
USER
CHARGES
240







320




250









340








340






TOTAL
PRIVATE
COSTS







































ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
SURFACE WATER
QUALITY
Same as Alternative
2






Same as Alternative
2, except for de-
creased nutrient
loading of Lake
Cage and Lime Lake.
Same as Alternative
2








Same as Alternative
1







Same ae Alternative
1





CROUNDUATER
QUALITY
Same as Alternative
2






Same as Alternative
2



Same as Alternative
2








Same as Alternative
1







Same as Alternative
1





ENVIRONMENTALLY
SENSITIVE
AREAS
Same as Alterna-
tive 2






Same as Alterna-
tive 2



Same as Alterna-
tive 2








Same as Alterna-
tive 1







Same as Alterna-
tive 1





POPULATION

Same as
Alternative 2






Same as
Alternative 2



Same as
Alternative 2








Same as
Alternative I







Same as
Alternative I





LAND
USE
Same as
Alternative
2





Same as
Alternative
2


Same as
Alternative
2







Same as
Alternative
1






Same as
Alternative
1




SOCIOECONOMIC
IMPACTS
FINANC1A1
BURDEN
20-30%







20-30%




20-30%









30-402








30-40%






DISPLACEMENT
PRESSURE
5-10%







10-20%




5-10%









10-20%








10-20%







FLEXIBILITY

Flexibility for
future growth;
than for Alterna-
tive 2.




Good operational
flexibility; high
flexibility for
expansion .

Operational flex-
ibility similar
to Alternative 1,
but less than
Alternatives 3 or
5. Flexibility
for future expan-
sion less than
for Alternatives
3 or 5.
Operational flex-
ibility lower
than for Alterna-
tive 3. Flexibil-
grouth lower than
Alternative 3.



Less flexibility
for future plann-
ing than Alterna-
tive 2. Greater
flexibility for
growth.


RELIABILITY

Slightly greater
than Alternative
ilization may be
more reliable
than rapid infil-
tration because
of absence of
weather effects.
Same as Alterna-
tive 5.



Same as Alterna-
tive 4.








Slightly less
than Alternative
3. Rapid infil-
tration may be
than contact
stabilization
because of
weather effects
on operation.
Slightly less
than Facilities
Plan Proposed
Action. May be
reduced by use of
on-lot and clustf
systems.

-------
                                                                                       Table Vl-1  (Continued)

ALTERNATIVES

Facilities
Plan
Proposed
Action









COSTS ($)
PRESENT
WOKTii
(xl.OOO)
23,166.8












ANNUAL
USER
CHARGES
450












TOTAL
PRIVATE
COSTS













ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
SURFACE WATER
QUALITY
• Decreased nutrient
loading of all
lakes;

• Impacts of non-
point sources and
wetlands around
Marsh Lake would
be similar to all
other alterna-
tives.


CROUNDUATER
QUALITY
• Similarly insig-
nificant impacts
on all aspects
of groundwater
quality as for
other alterna-
tives;

• Essentially no
groundwater con-
tribution to the
nutrient loading
of the lakes.
ENVIRONMENTALLY
SENSITIVE
AREAS
Same as Alterna-
tives 1 to 6











POPULATION

Same as
Alternatives
1 to 6










LAND
USE
Same as
Alterna-
tives 1
to 6









SOCIOECONOMIC
IMPACTS
FINANCIAL
BURDEN
40-50%












DISPLACEMENT
PRESSURE
10-20%













FLEXIBILITY

Lowest for future
planning. High-
est for future
growth.










RELIABILITY

High. Decreased
by the use of
pressure sewers.










o
o

-------
     •    EPA  Construction Grants  regulations  require  selection  of  the
          most  cost-effective  alternative:   the  alternative  meeting
          project  goals  with the least total present worth  and  accept-
          able environmental and socioeconomic impacts.

     Selection of the cost-effective alternative requires identification
of trade-offs  between costs and other criteria.  The evaluation factors
included with total present worth in Table VI-1 are those EPA has deter-
mined to  be  most important in  identifying  trade-offs for this project.

2.   CONCLUSIONS

     Most of the on-site systems in the Study Area have been functioning
well  as  evidenced  by   the  findings  of the  special  studies  (Section
II.E.3) undertaken for  this EIS.  Only 69  effluent  plumes  (including 4
stream-source  plumes) were  found  entering the  lakes  of the Proposed
Service Area  from its approximately 3500 lakeshore residences.  On-site
systems do  not appear to  be significant contributors to the eutrophica-
tion  of the  lakes nor  to any other  adverse  surface water  quality  im-
pacts.   Groundwater  quality  within the  Proposed  Service Area  is  also
very good, and insignificantly  affected by on-site systems.   This is  the
case  despite the  considerable  non-compliance of  existing  systems with
State and local  codes.

     Future  development  in  the Study Area  depends  upon  the number  and
density  of  available new  lots.   Alternatives,  like  Limited  Action,
depending  entirely  upon  the  continued  use  of on-site  systems,  would
restrict  both the  number  of new  lots and  their  density in comparison
with  alternatives based on extensive  sewering.  An  important effect of
this  limitation  is to preserve the present  character of  the community.

     There  are large differences  in  the present  worth  and  user costs
among the  alternatives.   The most  costly alternative is  the fully cen-
tralized  Facilities Plan Proposed Action while  the  least costly is  the
totally decentralized Limited Action.   Costs of the other alternatives,
all  using  mixtures  of  centralized  and decentralized  systems   lie  in
between these  extremes.  The high local user charges associated with the
more  costly alternatives  would result in  substantial pressures  for  the
displacement of  the permanent  residents as well  as for the conversion of
seasonal  residences  to  permanent  use.   Proportionate  improvements  in
water quality  to offset these  effects of higher costs  would not occur.

     The  Facilities Plan Proposed Action and EIS  Alternatives 1, 2, 3,
4, 5,  and 6 are  costly  and provide very limited water quality benefits.
They  are  not  cost-effective  and,  therefore,  not recommended.   The No
Action Alternative  is not  recommended  because it is  considered necessary
that  existing  old,  structurally  unsound  septic tanks  and  the small
number  of  non-functional  absorption  fields should be  replaced.  Also
there  is  need for  strengthened management  of on-site systems including
the monitoring of  water  quality.
                                   201

-------
     The Limited Action Alternative meets these needs and is cost-effec-
tive.   The  Recommended Alternative  of this  draft EIS is  the Limited
Action.
C.   RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE

1.   DESCRIPTION

     The  Recommended  Alternative  (see Figure  VI-1)  provides continued
used of on-site  systems  throughout  the Proposed  Service Area under the
management of a Small  Waste  Flows  District.   It includes:

     •    site specific environmental  and  engineering analysis of exist-
          ing  on-site systems  throughout  the Proposed  Service  Area;

     •    repair and renovation of on-site systems as needed;

     •    management  of  the  on-site systems  by a  Small  Waste  Flows
          District; and

     •    continued  monitoring of  surface  water quality   (previously
          undertaken by the  Steuben County Health Department) as well as
          groundwater quality.

Cluster systems  or  other off-site treatment will be included should the
site-specific analyses of on-site  systems  and  cost comparisons of local
alternatives  indicate their  need  and  cost-effectiveness.   This  will
depend  on  the   results  of  the  additional  water  quality  studies  in
progress  during  July and August  1979, as  well as  the  detailed Step II
design  work described below.   The manmade channel areas, and Jimmerson
Lake, with  its possible  21% septic tank  phosphorus  input are the areas
for  closest study.

2.   IMPLEMENTATION

     While  the additional  studies are being completed  in August timely
action  can  ensure quick processing of the Step  II  application.   It is
recommended that  a  small waste flows  district  be  established encompass-
ing  at  least the  Proposed  Service Area.    Guidance  for development of
this  district is  included  in Section  III.E.2.   Specific  aspects of
implementing  the  Draft  EIS  Recommended   Action  are  discussed  below.

a.   Replacement  of Septic  Tanks and Soil  Absorption Systems

     The  percentages  of  septic  tanks  and  soil  absorption systems to be
replaced  are  estimates  based on available records and  information  sup-
plied by  the Steuben County Health Department.  A  detailed  survey of the
existing  systems  should  be  undertaken at  the beginning  of  Step 2 of the
Construction  Grants  process to determine  precisely which ST/SAS's  need
to be replaced.
                                   202

-------
tsJ
O
         FIGURE VI-1   STUEBEN  LAKES:  RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE

-------
b.   Completion of  Step  I  (Facilities  Planning) Requirements
     For The Small Waste Flows District

     For timely  release  of  Step 2  funds  for any decentralized  Alter-
native, the applicant  would  first need to:

     •    Certify that construction of the project and the  operation and
          maintenance  program will meet local, State  and Federal  require-
          ments.   This would involve development of  variance procedures
          for upgrading and continued use of non-conforming systems not
          causing water quality problems.

     •    Obtain assurance of unlimited access to each individual system
          at  all reasonable times  for such  purposes  as  inspections,
          monitoring,   construction,   maintenance,  operations,  rehabili-
          tation and replacement.

     •    Plan for a  comprehensive program of regulation and inspection
          for individual systems.

c.    Scope  of  Step  II   For  The Small  Waste Flows  District

     A  five  step program for wastewater management in small waste flows
districts  was  suggested  in Section III.E.2.   The  first three  would
appropriately be completed  in Step II.  These are:

     •    Develop a  site-specific  environmental  and engineering  data
          base;

     •    Design the Management Organization; and

     •    Agency start-up.

     EPA will assist  the applicant  in  defining  specific objectives and
tasks for Step II work.

d.   Compliance with  State  and  Local Standards in the  Small
     Waste Flows District

     As discussed in  Section II.C many  existing  on-site systems  do not
conform to  current  design standards  for   site,  design  or  distance from
wells  or  surface waters.   For some  systems, such as those with under-
sized  septic  tanks,  non-conformance can be  remedied  relatively easily
and  inexpensively.   In  other  cases the  remedy may be disruptive and
expensive  and  should be  undertaken only  where the  need  is  clearly
identified.  Data on  the effects of  existing systems indicate that many
existing non-conforming systems, and future  repairs  that  still  may not
conform  to design  standards,  may operate  satisfactorily.   Where com-
pliance with  design standards  is  1)  unfeasible  or too  expensive and 2)
site  monitoring of   ground  and  surface  waters  shows  that  acceptable
impacts are  attainable,  then  a variance  procedure  to  allow renovation
and continued use of non-conforming  system  is recommended.   Decisions to
                                  204

-------
grant variances  should  be  based on site-specific data  or  on a substan-
tial history of similar sites in the area.

     This does not  mean that State or  local  standards  should simply be
discarded.   The  alternative  projects  a substantial  level  of  on-site
system  repair  and upgrading.  Variance  procedures  might be  appropriate
for  the  residents  of  systems  that  either  (a)  cannot be  upgraded  to
compliance  with  State  or  local standards  and  (b)  are not  causing  any
discernable water quality problems.

     Local  and  State decisions  on variance  procedures would  likely be
influenced  by  the  degree  of authority vested in the  small  waste  flows
district.   If  the  district  has the  authority  and  sufficient financial
means to  correct errors,  plus the  trained  personnel  to minimize errors
in  granting variances,  variance  procedures  m'ay be  more liberal  than
where  financial  and professional  resources are limited.  Higher  local
costs,  caused by unnecessary repairs or abandonment of systems would be
expected  to result from very  conservative or no  variance  guidelines.
Conversely,  ill-conceived  or improperly implemented variance procedures
would  cause frequent water quality problems and demands for  more expen-
sive off-site technologies.

e.   Ownership of On-Site Systems  Serving Seasonal Residences

     Construction Grants  regulations  allow Federal  funding for 1)  reno-
vation  and  replacement  of publicly owned on-site systems serving perma-
nent  or  seasonally  occupied  residences,  and  2)  of privately  owned
on-site  systems  serving permanent residences.   Privately  owned systems
serving  seasonally occupied  residences  are not eligible  for Federally
funded  renovation and replacement.

     Depending  upon the extent and costs  of  renovation and  replacement
necessary for seasonal residences, the  municipalities  or  a  small  waste
flows  district  may  elect  to accept  ownership  of  the  on-site systems.
Rehabilitation  of  these  systems  would  then be  eligible  for  Federal
assistance,  and  local costs  for seasonal residents would be dramatically
reduced.

     Under  EPA Program Requirements  Memorandum  79-8,  however, an ease-
ment giving the  District access to a  control  of on-site systems would be
considered  tantamount  to public ownership  -- without an actual transfer
of  property.
                                   205

-------
206

-------
                              CHAPTER VII

     ENVIRONMENTAL  CONSEQUENCES   OF  THE   RECOMMENDED  ACTION


A.   UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE  IMPACTS

     The implementation of the Recommended Alternative (Limited Action)
is not expected to create  any significant adverse impacts.   By replacing
existing  structurally unsound  and,  in  some  cases,  undersized  septic
tanks, the Recommended Alternative would  reduce the occurrence of  inade-
quately treated wastewater leaking from  tanks into the soil.  It would
also ensure adequate  treatment  in septic tanks prior to disposal  in the
absorption fields.  In addition,  the replacement of nonfunctional  exist-
ing fields would further ensure  against adverse impacts.   Thus, the high
quality in surface water  bodies  and in wells would be safeguarded.  The
Recommended Action would  thus be an  improvement  on the existing  situa-
tion  which in  more   than  half  a  century  has not created  significant
adverse impacts.


B.   IMCOMPATIBILITY WITH STATE AND LOCAL  CODES

     The Recommended  Alternative would have little effect on the  number
of  existing  ST/SAS's which  currently  do not  satisfy the  provisions of
State and local codes pertaining to minimum lot sizes, setback distances
from  wells,  surface  water bodies,  etc.,  and the  sizes  of some soil
absorption  fields.    The  special studies undertaken  for  this EIS have
indicated that  the noncompliance with  these provisions has not resulted
in significant adverse impacts.   The monitoring and maintenance programs
proposed under the Recommended Action  should, under these  circumstances,
prove  to  be the  cost-effective  solution to  the  existing  noncompliance
with State and local codes.
C.   RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHORT-TERM  USE AND LONG-TERM
     PRODUCTIVITY

1.   SHORT-TERM USE  OF THE STUDY AREA

     Implementation of the  Recommended  Alternative  would  result in a
minimal  loss  of terrestrial  habitat.   Wherever  cluster  systems are
required additional open space will  be provided.

     Implementation of the  Limited Action Alternative would  avoid the
problems of  erosion,  sedimentation  and  further lake deterioration which
could be expected to result from construction of central sewers proposed
in  the  Facilities Plan.  Furthermore,  disruption  of  road right-of-ways
through construction of sewers would be  avoided.
                                 207

-------
2.   IMPACTS ON  LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY

a.   Commitment  of Non-Renewable  Resources

     The Steuben Lakes Study Area has been and will continue to be used
as a  residential  and recreational area.  The  site was  initially  dis-
turbed when construction of houses first began more  than 40 years ago.

     Disturbance of  the  Study  Area  by routine residential/recreational
activities will continue.   Implementation of the Recommended Alternative
is not expected to alter  these  disturbances.

     Most of the limited  development is expected in off-lake areas where
a sufficiency of  suitable  land  (excluding terrestrial habitats) exists.
Unlike  the  Facilities  Plan Proposed Action, there is  no potential for
induced growth.

     Non-renewable  resources   associated  with the  Recommended  Action
would include concrete  for  construction.  This represents no change from
the existing situation.   Unlike the Facilities Plan Proposed Action, the
continued use  of  on-site  systems would  require  no electric power for
pumps.  If cluster systems  were to be required in certain problem areas,
electric power would be  utilized there for pumping but not to the extent
of the Facilities  Plan  Proposed Action.

b.   Limitations on Beneficial Use of  the Environment
     The Recommended Alternative would not have any significant adverse
effects on  the  beneficial  use  of the  environment.  The level of public
enjoyment of  the  lakes,  parks  and  other scenic  features  of the Study
Area  would  be enhanced.   This  alternative,  unlike the Facilities  Plan
Proposed  Action,  does  not have  a  potential  for inducing  growth  that
would result  in a  greater  density of development or change in character
or the lake areas.

D.   IRREVERSIBLE AND  IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT  OF RESOURCES

     The resources that would  be  committed during implementation of the
Recommended Alternative  include  those  associated  with  construction and
maintenance  of on-site  wastewater  systems.   These  were  discussed  in
Section VII.C.2.a.   The  financial resources  and  construction materials
employed would be  much  less than that which would have been employed in
implementation of the Facilities Plan Proposed Action.

     In  addition,  growth  expected  in the  Study  Area  would  require  a
commitment of resources  to  the  construction of new dwellings and commer-
cial establishments, construction or improvement of roads and facilities
associated  with water  sports.   Besides  construction  materials, such as
lumber, steel,  concrete  and glass,  electricity and manpower would also
be committed to new development.

     Manpower requirements  for  construction would be at existing levels.
Some  increase  of  manpower  above  existing levels  would be required for
the operation and  management of  the on-site systems and  the water  qual-
ity monitoring program.


                                 208

-------
GLOSSARY
 209

-------
                               GLOSSARY
ACTIVATED SLUDGE PROCESS.  A method of secondary wastewater treatment in
     which  a  suspended  culture  of microbial  organisms  is  maintained
     inside  an aerated  treatment basin.   The microbial organisms hasten
     the  breakdown of the  complex organic matter  in  the  wastewater to
     simpler materials.

ADVANCED  WASTE TREATMENT.   Wastewater  treatment beyond the secondary or
     biological  stage which includes  removal of nutrients such as phos-
     phorus  and nitrogen  and  a high percentage  of  suspended  solids.
     Advanced  waste  treatment,  also known as tertiary treatment, is the
     "polishing  stage"  of  wastewater  treatment  and  produces  a  high
     quality of  effluent.

AEROBIC.  Refers to life or processes that occur only in the presence of
     oxygen.

ALGAL BLOOM.   A proliferation of algae on the surface of lakes,  streams
     or  ponds.  Algal  blooms are  stimulated  by phosphate  and  nitrate
     enrichment.

ALKALINE.   Having  the qualities  of a base,  with  a pH  of  more  than 7.

ALLUVIAL.   Pertaining  to material  that  has been  carried  by  a  stream.

ALTERNATIVE  TECHNOLOGY.   Alternative  waste  treatment  processes  and
     techniques  are  proven  methods which provide for the reclaiming and
     reuse  of  water, productively  recycle  waste water  constituents or
     otherwise eliminate the discharge of pollutants, or recover  energy.
     Alternative technologies  may not be variants  of  conventional bio-
     logical or physical/ chemical treatment.

AMBIENT AIR.  The unconfined portion of the atmosphere; the outside air.

ANAEROBIC.   Refers  to life  or  processes that  occur in the  absence of
     oxygen.

AQUATIC  PLANTS.   Plants  that  grow  in  water,  either  floating  on  the
     surface, or rooted emergent or submergent.

AQUIFER.  A geologic stratum or unit,  that is  saturated with water and
     will yield  its  water  to wells and springs at a sufficient rate for
     practical use.  The water may reside in and travel through innumer-
     able spaces between  rock grains  in a sand or gravel aquifer, small
     or cavernous openings formed by solution in a limestone aquifer, or
     fissures,  cracks, and rubble in such harder rocks as shale.

ARTESIAN AQUIFER,  An aquifer that is confined between relatively  imper-
     meable  layers  above  and  below  it.   The upper  impermeable layer
     confines  Lhe water  in  the  aquifer at pressures greater than  atmos-
     pheric pressure which  cause the  water to rise above  the top  of the
     aquifer.   If  the water  pressure  is great, water  will flow  freely
     from artesian  wells.  See Aquifer.

                                    210

-------
ARTESIAN WELL.   A well which taps water  from an artesian aquifer.  See
     Artesian Aquifer.

BACTERIA.  Microscopic, single-celled, plant-like organisms which differ
     from  plants in  that  they lack  chlorophyll.   They  are  widely dis-
     tributed in soil, air, water, food  and  parts  of the body, and are
     important  to man because of  their  effects in  nitrogen fixation,
     putrefaction, fermentation and the spreading of disease.

BAR SCREEN.  In  wastewater  treatment, a screen that removes large float-
     ing and suspended solids.

BASE  FLOW.  The rate  of movement  of water  in  a  stream  channel  which
     occurs  typically during rainless periods when stream flow is main-
     tained  largely or entirely by discharges of groundwater.

BASIC USAGE.  Those  functions that small waste  flow  districts  would be
     required to perform in order to  comply with EPA Construction Grants
     regulations governing  individual on-site wastewater systems.

BEDROCK.   The solid rock beneath the  soil and subsoil.

BENTHIC.   Referring   to  organisms,   primarily  animals,  living in  the
     bottom  sediments  of lakes and rivers.

BIOCHEMICAL  OXYGEN DEMAND   (BOD).   A measure of  the amount of oxygen
     consumed in the  biological processes that decompose organic matter
     in  water.   Large  amounts of organic waste  use up large amounts of
     dissolved  oxygen; thus,  the  greater the degree  of organic pollu-
     tion, the greater the  BOD.

BIOMASS.   The  weight  of  living matter in a  specified unit  of  environ-
     ment.   Or,   an expression of the  total  mass  or  weight  of  a  given
     population  of plants or animals.

BIOTA.  The  plants and animals of an  area.

BOD,..   See  "Biochemical Oxygen  Demand."   Standard measurement  is made
     for 5 days  at 20°C.

BOG.  Wet,  spongy land; usually poorly drained, and rich in plant resi-
     due,  ultimately  producing highly acid peat.

CAPITAL  COSTS.    All  costs  associated with  installation (as opposed to
     operation)  of a  project.

CAPITAL EXPENDITURES.   See  Capital Costs.

CENTRARCHIDS.   A family of  freshwater  fishes  including  bass of several
     kinds,  bluegill,  red-ear, long-ear and other sunfishes, and several
     other kinds of fishes  sought for their sport and  food value.

CHLORINATION.  The  application of chlorine to drinking  water, sewage or
     industrial   waste for  disinfection  or  oxidation  of  undesirable
     compounds.

                                    211

-------
COARSE FISH.  See Rough Fish.

COLIFORM BACTERIA.  Members  of a large group of  bacteria  that flourish
     in  the feces and/or intestines of warm-blooded  animals,  including
     man.   Fecal coliform bacteria,  particularly Escherichia  coli (E.
     coli), enter water  mostly in fecal matter, such as sewage or feed-
     lot runoff.  Coliform bacteria do not cause human diseases, but are
     abundant  in polluted waters  and  are fairly  easy to  detect.   The
     presence  of coliform bacteria  in water, therefore, is used as an
     indicator of the likely occurrence of such disease-producing bodies
     (pathogens)  as  Salmonella,  Shigella,  and  enteric viruses.   These
     pathogens are relatively difficult to detect.

COLIFORM  ORGANISM.   Any  of  a  number of organisms common to  the intes-
     tinal  tract  of  man and animals whose presence in wastewater is an
     indicator  of  possible pollution and of  potentially  dangerous bac-
     terial contamination.

COMMINTJTOR.  A machine that breaks up wastewater solids.

CONNECTION FEE.  Fee charged by municipality to  hook up house connection
     to  lateral sewer.

CUBIC FEET PER SECOND (cfs).   The volume in cubic feet of water
     passing a given, point every second.

CULTURAL  EUTROPHICATION.  Acceleration  by  man  of  the  natural  aging
     process of bodies of water.

DECIDUOUS.  The  term  describing a plant that periodically  loses  all of
     its  leaves,  usually in  the autumn.   Most broadleaf  trees  in North
     America and a  few  conifers, such as larch  and  cypress,  are decid-
     uous .

DECOMPOSITION.   Reduction of the net energy level and change in chemical
     composition  of  organic matter  by action  of aerobic  or  anaerobic
     microorganisms.   The breakdown  of  complex  material  into simpler
     substances by chemical or biological  means.

DETENTION  TIME.   Average  time  required  for water  to  flow  through  a
     basin.  Also  called  retention time.   Or,  the   time  required for
     natural processes to  replace the  entire volume of a  lake's water,
     assuming complete mixing.

DETJSrf US.   (1.)  The heavier  mineral debris moved by natural watercourses
     (or in wastewater)  usually in bed-load form.  (2) The sand, grit,
     and other  coarse material removed by differential sedimentation in
     a relatively short period of detention.   (3) Debris from the decom-
     position of plants and animals.

DISINFECTION.   Effective killing by  chemical or  physical  processes of
     all organisms capable of  causing infectious disease.  Chlorination
     is  the  disinfection method  commonly  employed in sewage  treatment
     processes.
                                    212

-------
DISSOLVED OXYGEN  (DO).   The  oxygen gas  (0 )  dissolved  in water or waste-
     water.   Adequate oxygen  is necessary  for  maintenance of fish and
     other   aquatic   organisms.    Low  dissolved   oxygen  concentrations
     sometimes  are due to presence,  in inadequately treated wastewater,
     of high levels  of organic compounds.

DRAINAGE  BASIN.   (1) An  area  from which surface runoff is carried away
     by  a single  drainage system.   Also called catchment area, water-
     shed,  drainage  area.   (2) The  largest natural  drainage area sub-
     division of  a  continent.   The United States has been divided at one
     time  or another, for various  administrative purposes, into some 12
     to 18 drainage  basins.

EFFLUENT.  Wastewater or other  liquid,  partially or completely treated,
     or in its  natural  state,  flowing  out of  a reservoir, basin, treat-
     ment plant,  or  industrial plant, or part  thereof.

EFFLUENT  LIMITED.   Any  stream  segment  for which  it is known that water
     quality will  meet   applicable  water quality  standards  after com-
     liance  with  effluent discharge standards.

ELEVATED  MOUND.   A mound, generally  constructed of sand,  to  which set-
     tled wastewater is  applied.   Usually used in areas where the thick-
     ness of soil  and/or depth to  water table  are inadequate for conven-
     tional  on-site  treatment.

ENDANGERED  SPECIES  (FEDERAL  CLASSIFICATION).  Any  species  of animal or
     plant declared to be in  known danger of extinction throughout all
     or  a significant part  of  its  range.  Protected under  Public Law
     93-205  as  amended.

ENDECO.   Type  2100  Septic  Leachate Detector.   See  "Septic  Snooper".

ENVIRONMENT.  The  conditions  external to a particular object, but gener-
     ally limited  to those conditions which  have a  direct and measurable
     effect  on  the   object.   Usually  considered  to   be  the  conditions
     which  surround  and  influence a particular  living  organism,  popu-
     lation,  or  community.   The  physical  environment  includes light,
     heat,  moisture,  and  other  principally  abiotic  components.   The
     components of  the biotic  environment  are  other living organisms and
     their products.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT  STATEMENT.   A  document required by  the National
     Environmental  Policy Act  (PL 91-190,  1969)  when a Federal action
     would  significantly dffect  the  quality  of  the  human environment.
     Used  in the decision-making  process  to evaluate  the anticipated
     effects  (impacts)  of the  proposed action on  the human,  biological
     and physical  environment.

EPILIMINION.  The upper  layer of  generally warm,  circulating water in
     lakes.

EQUALIZED SUMMER  FLOW.   The constant rate of  flow  from the equalization
     basin  to  the  treatment  plant  during  summer  months.   Where   large
     differences  exist   between   summer midweek  wastewater   flows and

                                    213

-------
     summer  weekend  flows  due to  increases in  recreational  visitors,
     equalization basins are used  to provide storage of incoming waste-
     water and releases  at  a  constant flow rate to the treatment plant.

EROSION.  The process by which an object is eroded, or worn away, by the
     action  of  wind,  water,  glacial  ice,  or  combinations  of  these
     agents. Sometimes used to refer to results  of  chemical  actions or
     temperature  changes.   Erosion may be  accelerated by  human activ-
     ities .

EUTROPHIC.   Waters  with a  high  concentration of  nutrients and  hence a
     large production of vegetation and frequent die-offs of plants and
     animals.

EUTROPHIC  LAKES.  Shallow lakes,  weed-choked at the edges and very rich
     in  nutrients.   The water  is  characterized  by  large  quantities of
     algae,  low  water  transparency, low dissolved oxygen  and  high BOD.

EUTROPHICATION.  The normally slow aging process by which a lake evolves
     into  a  bog  or  marsh,  ultimately  assumes  a  completely terrestrial
     state  and disappears.   During  eutrophication the lake  becomes so
     rich  in nutritive  compounds,  especially nitrogen and  phosphorus,
     that  algae  and plant life become  superabundant,  thereby "choking"
     the  lake  and causing  it  eventually to  dry up.   Eutrophication may
     be  accelerated  by  human  activities.   In the process, a once oligo-
     trophic lake becomes mesotrophic and then eutrophic.

EVAPOTRANSPIRATION.    A  process  by which  water  is evaporated  and/or
     transpired from water,  soil,  and plant surfaces.

EXTENDED AERATION.  A modified form of the conventional activated sludge
     wastewater treatment process using a relatively low organic .loading
     and a long (extended)  aeration time.   The method is applicable only
     to  small  treatment plants of less than  1 mgd  and  is extensively
     used  in prefabricated package plants.   (Also see Activated Sludge).

FECAL COLIFORM BACTERIA.  See Coliform Bacteria.

FILAMENTOUS  ALGAE.   Primitive  plants (algae) that have a  linear growth
     form  (filament), arid which  grow attached to the substrate or other
     plants, usually in the  shallow zones of  lakes  and  rivers.   Under
     certain environmental conditions,  including  excessive nutrients in
     the  waters,  filamentous  algae  contribute  to  the  late  summer
     die-offs  in  eutrophic  lakes  which can  result  in large  masses of
     putrefying organisms.

FLOE.  A sheet of floating ice.

FORCE MAIN.  Pipe designed to carry wastewater under pressure.

GLACIAL DEPOSIT.   A landform of rock, soil, and earth material deposited
     by  a  melting glacier.    Such  material was originally  picked up by
     the glacier  and  carried  along its path;  it  usually  varies in  tex-
     ture  from very  fine rock flour to large boulders.  Named according
     to their location and shape.

                                    214

-------
GLACIAL DRIFT.   Material which has been  deposited by a  glacier or in
     connection  with  glacial  processes.   It  consists  of  rock  flour,
     sand,  pebbles,  cobbles,  and  boulders.  It  may occur  in  a  heter-
     ogeneous  mass  or be  more or  less well-sorted, according  to  its
     manner of deposition.

GRAVITY  SYSTEM.    A  system  of conduits  (open or  closed)  in  which no
     liquid pumping  is required.

GROUNDWATER.   Water  that  is  below the  water table  in  the  saturated
     zone of geologic  rocks.

HABITAT.   The specific  place  or  the  general kind  of  site in which  a
     plant  or animal  normally  lives  during  all  or  part  of  its  life
     cycle.   An  area  in which the  requirements  of a  specific  plant or
     animal are met.

HOLDING TANK.  Enclosed  tank,  usually of fiberglass or concrete, for  the
     storage  of  wastewater  prior  to  removal or  disposal at  another
     location.

HYPOLIMNION.  Deep,  cold and  relatively undisturbed water separated from
     the  surface   layer  in  the lakes  of temperate and  arctic  regions.

IGNEOUS.  Rock formed  by the  solidification of magma (hot molten
     material).

INFILTRATION.  The  flow of a  fluid into   a  substance  through  pores or
     small  openings.  Commonly used in hydrology to  denote  the  flow of
     water  into soil material.

INFILTRATION/INFLOW.   Total quantity of water  entering  a  sewer system.
     Infiltration  means  entry  through such sources as  defective  pipes,
     pipe joints,  connections, or manhole  walls.   Inflow signifies dis-
     charge  into  the sewer system through  service  connections from such
     sources  as  area  or foundation  drainage,  springs  and  swamps, storm
     waters, street  wash waters, or  sewers.

INNOVATIVE  TECHNOLOGIES.   Technologies  whose  use  has not  been  widely
     documented by experience.  They may not be variants of conventional
     biological  or  physical/chemical treatment  but  offer promise  as
     methods  for   conservation  of  energy or wastewater constituents, or
     contribute to the elimination of discharge of pollutants.

INTERCEPTOR  SEWERS.    Sewers  used  to  collect  the  flows  from  main  and
     trunk  sewers  and carry  them to a  central point  for  treatment  and
     discharge.   In a combined sewer system,  where street runoff from
     rains  is  allowed  to   enter  the  system  along  with  the   sewage,
     interceptor   sewers  allow  some of  the  sewage  to flow  untreated
     directly  into the  receiving  stream to prevent the treatment plant
     from being overloaded.

LAGOON.   In wastewater  treatment, a shallow pond,  usually man-made, in
     which  sunlight, algal and bacterial  action  and oxygen interact to
     restore the wastewater to  a reasonable state of purity.

                                     215

-------
LAND TREATMENT.  A method  of treatment in which  soil,  air,  vegetation,
     bacteria,  and/or  fungi are  employed  to  remove  pollutants  from
     wastewater.  In its simplest form, the method includes three steps:
     (1) pretreatment  to  screen out large solids;  (2)  secondary treat-
     ment and chlorination; and (3) application to cropland,  pasture, or
     natural  vegetation to  allow  plants  and  soil microorganisms  to
     remove  additional  pollutants.   Some  of  the  applied  wastewater
     evaporates, and  the  remainder may  be allowed  to  percolate to the
     water table, discharged through drain tiles,  or reclaimed by wells.

LEACHATE.   Solution  formed when water percolates  through  solid wastes,
     soil  or  other materials  and  extracts  soluble  or  suspendable  sub-
     stances from the material.

LIMITING FACTOR.   A factor  whose  absence,  or  excessive  concentration,
     exerts  some  restraining  influence  upon  a  population  of  plants,
     animals or humans.

LOAM.   The textural  class name for  soil having  a  moderate  amount of
     sand,  silt, and  clay.   Loam soils contain 7  to 27%  of  clay, 28 to
     50% of silt, and less than 52% of sand.

MACROPHYTE.   A large  (not  microscopic)  plant,  usually  in an aquatic
     habitat.

MELT WATER.   Water which  is formed from the melting of snow,  rime, or
     ice.

MESOTROPHIC.   Waters  with  a moderate supply of nutrients  and,  compared
     to  eutrophic  waters,  having   less  production  of  organic  matter.

MESOTROPHIC LAKE.  Lakes of  characteristics  intermediate  between oligo-
     trophic  and eutrophic, with   a  moderate   supply  of  nutrients  and
     plant life.

METHEMOGLOBINEMIA.   The presence of methemoglobin in the  blood.  Methe-
     moglobin  is  the  oxidized  form of hemoglobin  and  it is  unable to
     combine reversibly with oxygen.

MICROSTRAINER.   A  device  for  screening  suspended  solids  that  are  not
     removed by sedimentation.

MILLIGRAM  PER LITER (mg/1).   A concentration  of  1/1000 gram  of a  sub-
     stance in  1 liter of  water.  Because 1 liter of pure water weighs
     1,000  grams,  the concentration  also can  be stated as  1  ppm (part
     per million,  by weight).    Used  to measure  and report  the concen-
     trations  of most  substances   that  commonly  occur in  natural  and
     polluted waters.

MORPHOLOGICAL.  Pertaining to Morphology.

MORPHOLOGY.  The form or structure  of a plant or animal, or of a feature
     of  the  earth, such as  a   stream,  a lake, or the  land  in  general.
     Also,  the science  that is concerned with  the study of  form and

                                    216

-------
     structure  of living organisms.   Geomorphology  deals  with the form
     and structure of the earth.

NON-POINT SOURCE.  A general source of pollution.  Surface water runoff
     is an  example  as it does not originate from a single source and is
     not easily controlled.

NUTRIENT BUDGET.  The amount of nutrients entering and leaving a body of
     water  on an  annual basis.

NUTRIENTS.   Elements or  compounds  essential  as raw materials  for the
     growth and  development  of  organisms,  especially  carbon,  oxygen,
     nitrogen and phosphorus.

OLIGOTROPHIC.   Surface  waters with  good water' quality,  relatively low
     concentrations  of  nutrients, and modest  production of vegetation.

OEIGOTROPHIC  LAKES.   Lakes  with   highly  transparent  water  of  good
     quality,  high DO levels, and modest  production of aquatic vegeta-
     tion.

ORDINANCE.  A municipal or  county regulation.

OUTWASH.   Drift  carried  by  melt water  from  a glacier  and  deposited
     beyond the marginal moraine.

OUTWASH PLAIN.   A plain formed by material deposited by melt water from
     a  glacier  flowing over a more  or less  flat surface of large area.
     Deposits  of this origin  are usually distinguishable from ordinary
     river  deposits  by the fact  that  they often grade into moraines and
     their  constituents  bear  evidence of glacial  origin.   Also called
     frontal apron.

PARAMETER.   Any of a set of  physical  properties whose values determine
     characteristics  or behavior.

PERCOLATION.   The  downward movement  of water through pore  spaces  or
     larger voids in soil or  rock.

PERMEABILITY. The property  or  capacity of porous rock, sediment, or soil
     to transmit a fluid,  usually water, or air; it is a measure of the
     relative  ease  of  flow  under  unequal pressures.   Terms  used  to
     describe  the permeability  of   soil are:   slow,  less  than 0.2 inch
     per  hour;  moderately  slow,  0.2 to 0.63 inch; moderate, 0.63 to 2.0
     inches; moderately  rapid. 2.0  to 6.3  inches;  and rapid,  more than
     6.3  inches per  hour.   A very slow class and a very rapid  class also
     may  be recognized.

PHOSPHORUS  LIMITED.   Of all  the  primary nutrients necessary  to support
     algal  growth, phosphorus  is  in  the shortest supply.   Phosphorus can
     limit  additional algal growth,  or if  abundant,  can stimulate growth
     of algae.
                                     217

-------
PHYTOPLANKTON.  Floating  plants,  microsopic in size, that  supply small
     animals with food  and  give polluted water its  green  color and bad
     taste.

PHOTOSYNTHETIC.  Referring to plants  that convert solar energy to chem-
     ical energy, in  the  form of glucose  (sugar)  or some  other storage
     product.  Generally,  these plants are green,  due to the presence of
     the chlorophyll, the coloring  matter that makes the energy conver-
     sion possible.

PLANKTONIC.   Referring  to  plants  or animals, usually microscopic  in
     size,  that are  freely  floating in the waters of  lakes and rivers.

POINT SOURCE.  A stationary source of a large individual emission.  This
     is  a   general  definition;  point source  is  legally and  precisely
     defined in Federal regulations.

POVERTY  LEVEL.   An index providing a range  of poverty income cutoffs
     adjusted by such factors as family size, sex  of family head, number
     of  children under  18 years of age,  and farm  or noa-farm residence.

PREHISTORIC.   A term which  describes the  period of human development
     that  occurred  before the  advent of written  records.   More gener-
     ally,  any period in geologic time before written history.

PRESENT WORTH.  The sum of money that must be set  aside at the beginning
     of  the planning  period in  order to meet all  present and future
     costs  of the  project   throughout the planning  period at  a given
     discount  or  interest rate.  The applicable   interest  rate is that
     set by the Water Resources Council.

PRESSURE  SEWER SYSTEM.   A wastewater  collection system  in  which house-
     hold wastes are collected in the building drain and conveyed there-
     in  to  the pretreatment  and/or  pressurization facility.  The system
     consists  of  two  major elements,  the  on-site or  pressurization
     facility, and the primary conductor pressurized sewer main.

PRIMARY  PRODUCTION.   Growth  of  green plants resulting from solar energy
     being  fixed as sugar during photosynthesis.

PRIMARY  TREATMENT.   The  first  stage  in  wastewater treatment  in which
     nearly all  floating or  settleable solids  are mechanically  removed
     by  screening and sedimentation.

RAPID INFILTRATION.  A form of land treatment where wastewater  is placed
     into spreading basins and applied to the land to percolate  into the
     soil.

RAPID  INFILTRATION  BASIN.  Unlined wastewater  lagoons  designed so that
     all or part  of the wastewater percolates into the underlying soil.

RARE SPECIES.  A  species  not Endangered  or  Threatened  but  uncommon and
     deserving of further study and monitoring.  Peripheral species, not
     listed as  threatened,  may  be included  in  this  category along with
                                    21.8

-------
     those  species  that were once  "threatened"  or  "endangered"  but now
     have increasing or protected,  stable populations.  Used as official
     classification by some  states.

RECHARGE.  The process by which water is added to an aquifer.  Used also
     to  indicate  the  water  that  is added.  Natural recharge occurs when
     water from rainfall or  a stream enters the ground and percolates to
     the water table.  Artificial recharge by spreading water on absorp-
     tive ground  over an aquifer or by injecting water through wells is
     used to  store  water and to  protect  groundwater  against the intru-
     sion of  sea water.

RETENTION TIME.  See Detention Time.

ROTATING  BIOLOGICAL CONTACTOR  (RBC).   A device, consisting of plastic
     disks  that  rotate alternately through wastewater and air, used for
     secondary treatment of  wastewater.

ROUGH FISH.   Those  fish species considered to be of low sport value when
     taken  on tackle,  or  of poor  eating  quality; e.g.  gar,  suckers.
     Rough  fish  are  more  tolerant  of  widely  changing  environmental
     conditions than are game fish.  Also called coarse fish.

RUNOFF.   Surface  runoff  is  the  water  from rainfall,  melted  snow  or
     irrigation water  that  flows  over the surface of the land.  Ground-
     water  runoff,  or seepage flow from groundwater,  is  the water that
     enters the ground and reappears as surface water.  Hydraulic runoff
     is  groundwater runoff plus  the surface runoff that flows to stream
     channels, and  represents that part of the precipitation on a drain-
     age  basin  that is discharged  from the basin as streamflow.  Runoff
     can  pick up  pollutants from the air  or the land and carry them to
     the  receiving  waters.

SANITARY  SEWERS.   Sewers  that  transport only  domestic  or commercial
     sewage.  Storm water  runoff is carried in  a  separate system.  See
     sewer.

SANITARY  SURVEY.   (1)  A study of conditions  related  to the collection,
     treatment,  and  disposal  of liquid,  solid,  or airborne  wastes  to
     determine  the potential hazards contributed from these sources to
     the  environment.   (2)  A  study of  the effect of  wastewater dis-
     charges  on sources of  water  supply,  on  bathing  or  other recrea-
     tional  waters,  on  shellfish  culture,  and other  related environ-
     ments .

SECCHI DISK.  A round  plate, 30 cm  (1 foot)  in diameter, that is used to
     measure  the  transparency  of water.  The disk is lowered into the
     water  until  it no longer can  be  seen from the surface-  The  depth
     at  which the disk becomes invisible  is a  measure of transparency.

SECONDARY TREATMENT.   The  second  stage  in the treatment of wastewater in
     which  bacteria  are  utilized  to  decompose  the  organic  matter in
     sewage    This step  is  accomplished by using  such processes as  a
     trickling  filter or  activated slugde.   Effective secondary  treat-
                                    219

-------
     ment processes remove virtually  all floating solids and settleable
     solids as well as 90% of BOD and suspended solids.  Disinfection of
     the effluent by  chlorination  customarily is the  last  step  in this
     process.

SEPTIC SNOOPER.  Trademark for the ENDECO (Environmental Devices Corpor-
     ation)  Type  2100 Septic  Leachate  Detector.  This  instrument con-
     sists of  an underwater  probe,  a water  intake  system,  an analyzer
     control  unit  and  a  graphic recorder.   Water  drawn  through  the
     instrument  is  continuously analyzed for  specific fluorescence  and
     conductivity.   When  calibrated  against  typical  effluents,  the
     instrument  can  detect   and  profile  effluent-like substances  and
     thereby  locate  septic tank leachate  or  other  sources  of domestic
     sewage entering lakes and streams.

SEPTIC  TANK.   An underground  tank used for  the  collection  of domestic
     wastes.    Bacteria  in the wastes decompose the  organic  matter,  and
     the  sludge  settles   to  the  bottom.   The  effluent flows  through
     drains into the ground.   Sludge  is  pumped out at regular intervals.

SEPTIC  TANK  EFFLUENT PUMP (STEP).  Pump  designed  to  transfer  settled
     wastewater from a septic tank to a  sewer.

SEPTIC  TANK  SOIL  ABSORPTION  SYSTEM   (ST/SAS).   A system  of wastewater
     disposal  in  which  large  solids  are retained in a tank;  fine solids
     and liquids  are  dispersed into  the surrounding soil by a system of
     pipes.

SEWER,  COMBINED.  A  sewer,  or system of sewers,  that collects and con-
     ducts both sanitary sewage and storm-water runoff.  During rainless
     periods, most or all of the flow in a combined  sewer is composed of
     sanitary sewage.  During a storm, runoff increases the rate of flow
     and  may  overload  the sewage  treatment  plant  to which  the  sewer
     connects.  At such  times,  it  is common to divert some of the flow,
     without treatment,  into the receiving water.

SEWER,  INTERCEPTOR.  See Interceptor  Sewer.

SEWER, LATERAL.  A sewer designed and installed to collect sewage from a
     limited number of  individual  properties and conduct it  to  a trunk
     sewer.  Also known as a street sewer or collecting sewer.

SEWER, SANITARY.  See Sanitary Sewer.

SEWER,  STORM.   A conduit that collects  and  transports storm-water run-
     off.   In many  sewerage   systems,  storm  sewers   are  separate from
     those carrying sanitary or industrial wastewater.

SEWER,  TRUNK.  A  sewer  designed and  installed to collect  sewage from a
     number of lateral sewers and conduct it to an interceptor sewer or,
     in some cases, to a sewage treatment plant.
                                    220

-------
SINKING FUND.   A fund  established by  periodic  installments  to provide
     for the retirement of the principal of term bonds.

SLOPE.  The incline of the surface of the land.  It is usually expressed
     as a  percent (%) of  slope  that equals the number  of  feet of fall
     per 100 feet in horizontal distance.

SOIL ASSOCIATION.  General term used to describe a pattern of occurrence
     of soil types in a geographic area.

SOIL  TEXTURAL  CLASS.   The classification of  soil  material  according to
     the proportions  of sand,  silt, and  clay.   The  principal textural
     classes  in  soil,  in increasing  order of  the  amount of  silt  and
     clay,  are as follows:   sand,  loamy  sand,  sandy loam,  loam,  silt
     loam,  sandy clay  loam,  clay  loam,  silty  clay  loam,  sandy clay,
     silty  clay,  and  clay.  These class names are modified to indicate
     the  size  of the  sand  fraction or  the  presence of  gravel,  sandy
     loam,  gravelly  loam,  stony clay, and  cobbly  loam,  and are used on
     detailed  soil  maps.   These  terms apply  only  to  individual soil
     horizons  or  to the surface layer of a  soil type.

STRATIFICATION.   The  condition of a lake,  ocean,  or  other body of water
     when  the  water  column  is  divided  into a relatively  cold bottom
     layer  and a relatively  warm surface  layer,  with  a  thin boundary
     layer  (thermocline)  between them.   Stratification  generally occurs
     during the  summer and  during periods of ice cover in the winter.
     Overturns,  or  periods of mixing,  occur  in  the  spring and autumn.
     Stratification is most common in middle latitudes and is related to
     weather conditions, basin morphology,  and altitude.

SUBSTRATE.   (1) The  surface on which organisms  may live;  generally the
     soil,  the bottom of the  ocean,  of a lake,  a stream, or other body
     of water, or the face of a  rock,  piling, or other natural or man-
     made  structure.    (2)  The substances  used  by organisms  in liquid
     suspension.   (3)  The liquor  in which  activated  sludge  or other
     matter is kept in  suspension.

SUCCESSION.  A gradual sequence of  changes or phases in vegetation (or
     animals)  over  a  period  of time,  even if  the  climate remains un-
     altered;   hence  plant succession.   This will  proceed  until some
     situation of equilibrium is attained,  and  a  climax  community is
     established.

SUPPLEMENTAL USAGE.  Those functions that  small waste flow  districts are
     not  required to  perform in  order  to comply with  EPA Construction
     Grants regulations  governing  individual,  on-site  wastewater sys-
     tems.   These  functions  may,  however,  be  necessary  to  achieve
     administrative or  environmental objectives.

SUSPENDED   SOLIDS  (SS).   Undissolved  particles  that are  suspended in
     water,  wastewater  or other  liquid,  and that  contribute to  tur-
     bidity.   The examination of suspended  solids  plus  the BOD  test
     constitute the  two main  determinations  for water quality performed
     at wastewater treatment  facilities.
                                     221

-------
TERTIARY TREATMENT.  See Advanced Waste Treatment.

THREATENED SPECIES  (FEDERAL CLASSIFICATION).   Any species  of  animal or
     plant that  is likely  to  become an  Endangered  species within  the
     foreseeable  future throughout  all  or  a  significant  part  of  its
     range.  Protected under Public Law 93-205, as  amended.

TILL.   Deposits  of  glacial drift  laid  down in  place as the  glacier
     melts.  These  deposits are neither  sorted nor  stratified  and con-
     sist  of a heterogeneous  mass of rock flow, sand,  pebbles,  cobbles,
     and boulders.

TOPOGRAPHY.  The  configuration of a surface  area  including its  relief,
     or  relative  evaluations,  and  the  position  of   its  natural  and
     man-made features.

TRICKLING FILTER PROCESS.  A method of secondary wastewater treatment in
     which biological  growth is  attached to  a fixed medium, such as a
     bed of  rocks,  over which wastewater is sprayed.  The filter organ-
     isms biochemically oxidize the complex organic matter in the waste-
     water to simpler materials and energy.

TROPHIC LEVEL.  Any of  the feeding levels through which  the  passage of
     energy  through an ecosystem  proceeds.   In simplest  form,  trophic
     levels  are:   primary  producers  (green  plants) herbivores,  omni-
     vores, predators, scavengers, and decomposers.

TURBIDITY.   (1) A condition in water or  wastewater  caused  by  the pres-
     ence  of suspended  matter, resulting in  the scattering and  absorp-
     tion  of light  rays.   (2) A measure of  fine suspended matter in
     liquids.  (3)  An analytical  quantity usually  reported in arbitrary
     turbidity  units  determined  by  measurements  of light  diffraction.

VASCULAR PLANT.   In the literal sense, a plant with  vessels,  i.e., with
     structural  elements  giving   the  plant  support to  be erect.   In
     practice,  referring to  plants that produce  flowers, fruits,  and
     seeds during the reproductive cycle.

WATER QUALITY.  The relative condition of a body of water as judged by a
     comparison  between contemporary  values   and  certain more  or less
     objective standard values for biological, chemical, and/or physical
     parameters.   The  standard values  usually are  based on  a  specific
     series  of  intended uses,  and may vary as the  intended  uses vary.

WATER TABLE.  The  upper level of groundwater that  is not confined by an
     upper  impermeable  layer  and  is  under atmospheric  pressure.  The
     upper  surface  of   the substrate  that  is wholly  saturated with
     groundwater.   This  level varies  seasonally  with  the amount of
     percolation.   Where  it   intersects  the  ground surface,  springs,
     seepages, marshes or lakes may occur.  Also known as the unconfined
     groundwater level.

WATERSHED.   The  land area  drained by  a  stream,   or by an  entire river
     system.
                                    222

-------
WELL  LOG.   A  chronological  record of the  soil  and rock formations en-
     countered  in the  operation of  sinking  a well, with  either  their
     thickness  or the elevation of the top and bottom of each formation
     given.   It also usually includes statements about the character of
     the  rocks  and  water-bearing  characteristics of  each  formation,
      static and pumping water levels,  and well yield.

ZONING.  The  regulation by governmental action (invested by the State to
      cities,  townships, or counties)  of the  use of the land, the height
      of buildings,  and/or the proportion of the  land surface that can be
      covered  by structures.
                                      223

-------
224

-------
 REFERENCES
225

-------
                             BIBLIOGRAPHY
APHA, AWWA, WPCF.   1975.   Standard Methods for the Examination of Water
     and Wastewater.  14th Edition.  American Public Health Association,
     Washington, D.C.

Arthur Beard Engineers,  Inc.   1978.   Correspondence regarding:  1) unit
     prices and collector sewer construction costs;  2)  wastewater flow
     projections  for  Steuben Lakes,  and  3) "typical"  cluster systems,
     Steuben Lakes.  Chevy Chase, MD.

Bailey, J. R. ,  R. J.  Benoit, J. L.  Dodson,  J.  M.  Robb, and H. Wallman.
     1969.  A  study of  flow reduction and treatment  of wastewater from
     households.  Cincinnati, OH.  US Government Printing Office (GPO).

Bumby, M.  J.    1977.  Changes  in  submerged  macrophytes in  Green  Lake,
     Wisconsin,, from  1921  to 1971.  Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts
     and Letters, 65:120-151.

Cohen, S., and H. Wallman.  1974.  Demonstration of waste flow reduction
     from households.  Environmental Protection Agency, National Environ-
     mental Research Center, Cincinnati,  OH.

Dearth, K.  H.   1977.   Current  costs  of  conventional approaches.   Pre-
     sented at  EPA  National Conference on Less Costly Wastewater Treat-
     ment  Systems for Small Communities,  12-14  April  1977,  Reston,  VA.

EcolSciences,  Inc.    1976.   Environmental  assessment  for  the  Steuben
     Lakes  Regional  Sewer  District Facility  Plan.    South  Bend,  IN.

Environmental  Data  Service, NOAA.  June   1968.   Climatic Atlas of  the
     United States.

Environmental Data  Service,  NOAA.   1977.   Climatological data, Indiana.
     Vol.  82,  No.  8  (Aug.)  USDA National  Climatic  Center, Asheville,
     NC.

Environmental Photo Interpretation Center (EPIC),   1979.  Steuben Lakes
     septic  tank  system  analysis.   EPA  Environmental Monitoring  and
     Support Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH.

Fassett,  N.   C.   1960.   A  manual  of aquatic  plants.   University  of
     Wisconsin Press, Madison.   405 pp.

Heier,  Arnie,   and  Michael Osborne.   Undated.   Water  quality data  for
     Jimmerson  Lake.   Steuben  Lakes Regional  Waste  District Treatment
     Works  Project  C180927  01.   Steuben  County  Health  Department,
     Angola, IN.

Heier, Arnie,  and  Michaeol  Osborne.  Undated.  Water quality data for
     Crooked  Lake.    Steuben Lakes   Regional  Waste  District Treatment
     Works  Project  C180927  01.   Steuben  County  Health  Department,
     Angola, IN.
                                    226

-------
Heier,  Arnie,  and  Michael Osborne.   Undated.   Water quality  data  for
     Lake  Gage.   Steuben Lakes Regional  Waste  District  Treatment Works
     Project C180927  01.   Steuben County Health Department, Angona,  IN.

Heier,  Arnie,  and  Michael Osborne.   Undated.   Water quality  data  for
     Snow  Lake.   Steuben Lakes Regional  Waste  District  Treatment Works
     Project C180927  01.   Steuben County Health Department, Angola,  IN.

Heier, Arnie, and Michael Osborn.  Undated.  Water quality data for Lake
     James.   Steuben  Lakes  Regional  Waste District  Treatment  Works
     Project C180927  01.   Steuben County Health Department, Angola,  IN.

HUD.   1975.   Map of flood-prone  areas, Angola  West Quadrangle, Steuben
     County, Indiana.   Prepared for Federal Insurance Administration by
     US Geological  Survey.

HUD.   1976.   Map of flood-prone  areas, Angola  East Quadrangle, Steuben
     County, Indiana.   Prepared for Federal Insurance Administration by
     US Geological  Survey.

Humphrey,  S.  R. , A. R. Richter,  and J.  B.  Cope.  1977.   Summer habitat
     and ecology of the endangered Indiana bat, Myotis sodalis.  Journal
     of Mammalogy,  58:334-346.

Indiana  air  Pollution  Control  Board.   1969.   Indiana  air  pollution
     control  law,  Chapter 171, Acts of 1961, as amended by Chapter 357,
     Acts  of 1969.  Indianapolis, IN.

Indiana  Stream  Pollution Control Board.  1977.  Water quality standards
     for   all   waters  within   the   State   of  Indiana.    SPC   IR-4.
     Indianapolis,  IN.

Kerfoot,  William.   1979.   Investigation  of Septic  Leachate  Discharges
     into  Steuben   Lakes,  Indiana.   K-V Associates,  Inc.  Falmouth,  MA.

Kirchner,  W.B. and  P,J. Dillon.   February, 1975.  An Empirical Method of
     Estimating  the Retention  of Phosphorus  in Lakes.   Water Resources
     Research. Vol. 11, No.  1.

Lind,  C. T., and G. Cottam.   1969.   The submerged aquatics of University
     Bay:  A study in eutrophication.  The American Midland Naturalist,
     81:353-369.

McCombie,  A. M., and I. Wile.   1971.   Ecology of aquatic vascular plants
     in  southern Ontario  impoundments.  Weed Science, 19:225-228.

McLaughlin,  E.  R.   1968.  A  recycle system for conservation of water in
     residences.  Water  and  Sewage Works  115(4):175-176.

Mick,  Rowland  & Associates,  Inc.  1976.  Facilities plan for wastewater
     collection  and treatment,  Steuben Lakes  Regional  Waste District,
     Steuben County, Indiana.   Angola,  IN.
                                     227

-------
Omernik, J.M.   1977.   Non-point source stream nutrient  level  relation-
     ships:  A nationwide  survey.   EPA-600/3-77-105.   National Environ-
     mental Research Laboratory, Corvallis,  OR.

Reussow, J.P. ,  and P.B. Rohne,  Jr.   1975.   Water resources of  the  St.
     Joseph  River  basin  in Indiana.   Hydrologic investigations  atlas
     HA-537.  US Geological Survey,  Reston VA.

Schellie Associates,  Inc.   1970.   Master  plan report,  Steuben  County,
     Indiana.  HUD  Project No. IND-P-108.  Steuben County  Plan  Commis-
     sion,  Angola,  IN.

Siegrist, R., M. With, and W.  C. Boyle.   1976.   Characteristics of rural
     household  wastewater.  Journal  of  the  Environmental  Engineering
     Division, American Socity of Civil Engineers,  No. EES, Proceedings
     Paper 12200:533-548.

Smith,  L.R.,  W.E.  Tharp,  W.J.  Leight,  T.M. Bushnell, and  H.P.  Ulrich.
     1940.   Soil survey, Steuben County IN.   Series  1933, No. 35.  USDA,
     Bureau  of Plant  Industry, in  cooperation  with  Purdue University
     Agricultural Experiment Station.   GPO,  Washington, D.C.

State   Board   of   Accounts.    1978.    Debt  during   Fiscal   Year  1977.
     Indianapolis,  IN.

Sutfin,  Charles H.   July  11,  1977.   US EPA Region III Decision Memo  for
     the  Seven  Lakes  Project to  George  R.   Alexander, Jr. ,  Regional
     Administrator.  Chicago,  IL.

The  White  House Rural Development  Initiatives.   August 1978.   Making
     water and sewer programs  work.   Washington,  D.C.

US  Bureau  of  the  Census.   1970.   General  Social and Economic  Charac-
     teristics, Indiana.  Washington,  D.C.

USDA,  Soil  Conservation Service,  Steuben County District.  1973.  Soil,
     water,  and related  resource  data and  guidelines.   Lincoln,  NE.

US  Department  of  Commerce, NOAA,  Environmental Data  Service.   1970.
     Monthly  normals  of   temperature,  precipitation,  and   heating  and
     cooling  degree  days  1941-1970:  Indiana.  Climatography  of the US
     No. 81.  National Climatic Center,  Asheville, NC.

US EPA,  National Eutrophication Survey.  1972.   National eutrophication
     survey  methods  for lakes  sampled  in  1972.  Working Paper  No.  1.

US EPA, National Eutrophication Survey.   1976a.   Report on Crooked Lake,
     Steuben County, Indiana,  EPA Region V.   Working Paper No.  325.  GPO
     #699-440.  Corvallis ERL,  Corvallis, OR.

US EPA,  National Eutrophication Survey.  1976b.  Report on Lake James,
     Steuben County, Indiana,  EPA Region V.   Working Paper No. 331.  GPO
     #699-440.  Corvallis ERL,  Corvallis, OR.
                                    228

-------
US EPA,  National  Eutrophication Survey.   1976.   Report on Marsh Lake,
     Steuben County, Indiana, EPA Region V.  Working Paper No. 333.  GPO
     #699-440.  Corvallis ERL,  Corvallis, OR.

US EPA.   1977.   Process design manual  for land treatment of municipal
     wastewater.   EPA-625/1-77-008.   Technology  Transfer.

US  EPA.    1978a.   Grants  for  construction of  treatment  works  - Clean
     Water Act (40 CFR 35 Part  E):   Rules and  regulations.  43 FR 44022,
     27 September 1978.

US EPA.   1978b.   Microbiological methods for monitoring  the environment--
     water  and wastes.  EPA-600/8-78-017.   Environmental  Monitoring and
     Support Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH.

US Geological  Survey (USGS).   1960.   Topographic map,  7.5  minute  series.
     Department of the Interior.  Reston, VA.

USGS.   1970.    The National Atlas  of the United States.  Department  of
     the  Interior, Washington,  D.C.

USGS.    1975.    Water   resources  data  for Indiana,  water  year  1975.
     Water-data report IN-75-1.  Indianapolis, IN.

USGS.    1976.    Water   resources  data  for Illinois  water  year  1976.
     Water-data report IN-76-1.  Indianapolis, IN.

US  Public Health Service.   1962.   Drinking water standards.  US  Depart-
     ment of  Health Education,  and Welfare, Public Health Service Publi-
      cation No. 956.  Washington,  D.C.
                                          £ U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1979 652-740


                                     229

-------