Sanitation Station Wastewater Treatment Analysis_Hoeft State Park.pdf

Corporate Office 803 VerHoeks Street Grand Haven, Michigan 49417 Phone: 800.844.5050 www.LakeshoreEnvironmental.com

Grand Haven, MI Vestaburg, MI Muskegon, MI

Hoeft State Park Wastewater Analysis for

The Michigan Department of Natural Resources

January 2023

Prepared for:

The Department of Technology, Management, and Budget 3111 W. St. Joseph St., Lansing, Michigan 48917

Ms. Sheryl Ananich, AIA, Project Director Attention: Mr. Ken Dao, Hoeft State Park

Lakeshore Environmental, Inc. Project Number:

19‐611‐03A

Hoeft State Park Wastewater Analysis Page 2 of 7 Lakeshore Environmental, Inc.

Michigan Department of Natural Resources January 2023

Table of Contents

1.0 Introduction

2.0 Work Performed

2.1 Wastewater Sampling

2.2 Well Installation

2.3 Groundwater Sampling

3.0 Findings

3.1 Wastewater Analytical Results

3.2 Groundwater Analytical Results

3.2.1 Total Metals

3.2.2 Sodium and Chloride

3.2.3 Phosphorus

3.2.4 Nitrogen

4.0 Conclusions & Recommendations

5.0 Signatures

Tables Table 1 ‐ Wastewater Sampling Results

Table 2 ‐ Groundwater Sampling Results

Figures

Figure 1 ‐ Monitoring Well Location Map

Figure 2 ‐ MW‐1S Soil Boring / Well Construction Log

Hoeft State Park Wastewater Analysis Page 3 of 7 Lakeshore Environmental, Inc.

1.0 Introduction

The Michigan Department of Technology, Management, and Budget (DTMB) and the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (DNR) requested an analysis of the on‐site wastewater treatment system at Hoeft State Park (Park) in June 2022. The Park utilizes three septic tanks, a dose tank and two 12,375 square feet drain fields (per 1993 plan set, provided) to pretreat campground wastewater from the sanitation station, restroom, and campground offices. The Park currently operates in accordance with Groundwater Discharge Permit No. GW1010021 granted by the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE). Hoeft State Park is located at 5001 US Highway 23 N, Rogers City, Michigan.

Lakeshore Environmental, Inc. (LEI) completed the four proposed tasks (data collection, well installation, groundwater sampling, analysis and recommendations) in order to evaluate the existing groundwater conditions near the drain fields at the Park and provide a comprehensive analysis of the on‐site wastewater treatment methods. This approach to groundwater evaluation continues studies that are currently in progress at other state parks. It is generally understood that this wastewater quality exceeds typical residential wastewater values and therefore uses groundwater wells as an alternative monitoring point for the system. The goal of this evaluation was to determine groundwater quality and, if acceptable, provide data to incorporate monitoring wells into the groundwater discharge permit as an alternative to high‐level, upfront treatment.

The work performed, findings, and recommendations for Hoeft State Park are detailed in this report.

2.0 Work Performed

2.1 Wastewater Sampling

To evaluate wastewater generation and treatment during camping season, five wastewater samples were collected from the park prior to treatment in the drain fields. The samples were collected between August 22, 2022 and October 17, 2022 and analyzed for the following parameters:

Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD) Nitrate, Nitrite, Ammonia

Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) Total Phosphorus

Total Suspended Solids (TSS) Sulfate

Sodium, Chloride, Potassium Formaldehyde

2.2 Well Installation

LEI initially proposed the installation of two monitoring wells (MW‐1S and MW‐1D) hydraulically downgradient and within 150 feet of the drain field. LEI oversaw installation, and after encountering a confining layer of hardpan at least five feet in thickness during drilling, only MW‐ 1S was installed. This was approved by EGLE in the Hydrogeological Work Plan submitted by LEI on August 22, 2022.

Figure 1 shows the location of the drain field, MW‐1S, and the distance to Lake Huron. The well construction log for MW‐1S, including the stratigraphy encountered, is attached in Figure 2.

2.3 Groundwater Sampling

LEI sampled the groundwater in MW‐1S for four consecutive weeks during camping season.

Samples were collected on September 26, October 5, October 12, and October 17, 2022. The

Hoeft State Park Wastewater Analysis Page 4 of 7 Lakeshore Environmental, Inc.

purpose of sampling the well was to monitor drain field performance and additional that occurs treatment following discharge. Groundwater samples were analyzed for the following parameters:

Arsenic, Iron, Manganese Nitrate, Nitrite, Ammonia

Sodium, Chloride, Potassium Sulfate

Total Phosphorus

Total metals analysis was conducted for all samples, as stabilized low flow turbidity was less than 10 NTU. Stabilized measurements for pH, conductivity, oxidation‐reduction potential, dissolved oxygen, temperature, and turbidity were recorded in the field.

3.0 Findings

3.1 Wastewater Analytical Results

Table 1 summarizes wastewater analytical results for the five sampling events. Results were lower than the wastewater characteristics that have been observed at other state campgrounds.

This is likely due to the combination of restrooms and campground office along with a lower usage of the sanitation station at the Park.

When compared to the EPA On‐Site Wastewater concentrations for residential strength wastewater (EPA/625/R‐00/008; EPA value), the Park wastewater exceeded these values, as anticipated and encountered at other state parks. The EPA values are representative of influent wastewater produced by residential dwellings.

Ammonia was present and consistent in the wastewater throughout all sampling events above the EPA value of 13 mg/L. High ammonia concentrations are typical of sanitation station wastewater, and ammonia at the park was much lower than state campgrounds that have completed similar studies. Nitrate and nitrite concentrations remained below 0.15 mg/L and 0.30 mg/L throughout all five sampling events, respectively.

Total phosphorus was present in the wastewater at concentrations above the EPA value of 12 mg/L in all five samples. BOD was present above the EPA value of 286 mg/L in only one sampling event with a maximum concentration of 570 mg/L.

Formaldehyde concentrations remained below laboratory detection limits throughout all five sampling events. There is no EPA value for formaldehyde.

Sodium and chloride were present in the wastewater at peak concentrations of 120 mg/L and 140 mg/L, respectively. There was no EPA value for these constituents, but these concentrations were well below the Part 22 criteria (400 and 500 mg/L, respectively).

Prior to starting this study, it was understood that the campground wastewater was likely to exceed EPA values for typical residential wastewater due to the limited dilution in typical low‐ flow RV tank systems. The following sections outline the groundwater sampling results which represent the treatment by the soil and dilution occurring within 150 feet of the drain field area.

3.2 Groundwater Analytical Results

Table 2 summarizes the groundwater analytical results for the four sampling events and compares the results to EGLE Part 201 Groundwater‐Surface Water Interface (GSI) criteria. The GSI criteria was used for analysis because it is expected that EGLE will consider GSI criteria in their

Hoeft State Park Wastewater Analysis Page 5 of 7 Lakeshore Environmental, Inc.

decision‐making for the permit limits. As noted above, studies and discussions with EGLE are ongoing and this consideration will be closely evaluated. In general, the consideration of GSI specific criteria is an important characteristic for this compliance approach. Overall, results indicate MW‐1S is stable and all concentrations were below their applicable Part 201 criteria.

Results are discussed further below.

3.2.1 Total Metals

Total metals (iron, arsenic, and manganese) concentrations were below the laboratory detection limits throughout all four sampling events and are not a concern based on the concentrations observed in MW‐1S.

3.2.2 Sodium and Chloride

Sodium and chloride concentrations decreased compared to the wastewater samples, indicating that dilution is occurring within the aquifer to acceptable levels. Chloride remained below the GSI criteria throughout all four sampling events. Sodium does not have a GSI criteria. Neither sodium nor chloride are a direct concern based on the concentrations observed in the monitoring well and did not exceed 41 and 44 mg/L, respectively.

3.2.3 Phosphorus

Total phosphorus concentrations were below the laboratory detection limit throughout all four sampling events. Low phosphorus concentrations indicate the soil in this area can treat the peak wastewater discharge volumes the Park experiences during camping season. Phosphorus is not a direct concern based on the concentrations observed in the monitoring well.

3.2.4 Nitrogen

Ammonia was present in the groundwater at concentrations below the GSI criteria and ranged from <0.010 to 0.055 mg/L. Groundwater nitrate concentrations were higher than those observed in the effluent which indicates that significant nitrification is occurring (chemical conversion from ammonia to nitrate due to aerobic conditions) between the drain field and MW‐ 1S. Nitrate results ranged from 44 and 60 mg/L which is lower than the wastewater total inorganic nitrogen concentrations indicating that denitrification is also occurring. Nitrite did not exceed 0.28 mg/L in any sampling event. There is no GSI criteria for nitrate or nitrite.

4.0 Conclusions & Recommendations

LEI completed all four groundwater sampling events in 2022 and observed generally acceptable groundwater conditions when comparing to GSI criteria. The soils near the drain field demonstrated the ability to naturally treat the wastewater. Data from wastewater sampling and groundwater sampling showed that there was significant nitrogen cnoversion in the drain field and surrounding soils, with ammonia concentrations less than 0.1 mg/L in the groundwater.

However, the observed nitrate concentrations in MW‐1S remained much higher than values typically observed in groundwater. Based on groundwater flow direction, downstream receptors were inspected for potential impact from nitrate. Lake Huron was identified as the receptor for potentially impacted groundwater. The Park’s Type II supply well was dismissed as a recptor due to having a depth of over 300 feet and multiple layers of clay and hardpan separating the aquifers.

LEI anticipates EGLE may request the installation of a second monitoring point, within 1,000 feet of the drain field, to ensure that nitrate concentrations naturally attenuate prior to reaching Lake Huron. The proposed monitoring well should be located to also meet the criteria of an alternative

Hoeft State Park Wastewater Analysis Page 6 of 7 Lakeshore Environmental, Inc.

monitoring point under the Part 22 rules, if necessary. The installation and monitoring of a monitoring well network may be more cost effective than the installation of additional treatment to the existing system. Again, this was a primary purpose and intent of the ongoing studies and can be discussed further.

LEI recommends providing the findings to EGLE and discussing the use of GSI criteria and/or additional monitoring requirements.

Hoeft State Park Wastewater Analysis Page 7 of 7 Lakeshore Environmental, Inc.

5.0 Signatures

This report was completed by Jack Costello, EIT, reviewed by Caitlin DeVries, PE of Lakeshore Environmental, Inc. Readers of this document are encouraged to contact its authors with questions or comments.

______________ __1/30/2023_____________ Mr. Jack Costello, EIT Date Project Engineer | Environmental Engineer

__ _____________ __1/30/2023_____________ Ms. Caitlin DeVries, PE Date Project Manager | Environmental Engineer

Hoeft State Park Wastewater Analysis Lakeshore Environmental, Inc.

Tables

Table 1 ‐ Wastewater Sampling Results

Table 2 ‐ Groundwater Sampling Results

Table 1 - Wastewater Sampling Results

Rogers City, Michigan

8/22/2022* 9/26/2022 10/5/2022 10/12/2022 10/17/2022*

Metals Analysis (mg/L) Phosphorous, Total 21 28 23 25 25 Potassium, Total 44 49 51 50 59 Sodium, Total 83 99 96 110 120

Other Analysis (mg/L) Formaldehyde <5.0 <5.0 <12 <12 <5.0 Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) 480 440 850 280 870 Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD5) 570 64 <200 66 <200 Chloride 100 110 110 130 140 Nitrogen (Nitrate) <0.10 0.12 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 Nitrogen (Nitrite) <0.10 0.28 <0.10 <0.10 0.13 Ammonia as N 170 230 200 230 230 TIN (Calculated) 170 230 200 230 230 Sulfate as SO4 11 35 20 26 17 Total Suspended Solids 84 36 24 50 <20 pH (s.u.) NT 7.23 7.45 7.53 NT Conductivity (µS/cm) NT 2,490 2,345 3,160 NT ORP (mV) NT 67.67 118.7 141.4 NT Dissolved Oxygen (DO) NT 6.43 7.29 4.30 NT Temperature (°C) NT 15.83 18.37 15.44 NT

NT - Not Tested *Field readings not tested due to equipment restraints

Notes:

Bold values represent detectable concentrations of compound/constituent

Wastewater

Hoeft State ParkConstituent

Lakeshore Environmental, Inc. Page 1 of 1

Table 2 - Groundwater Sampling Results

Rogers City, Michigan

9/26/2022 10/5/2022 10/12/2022 10/17/2022

Metals Analysis (mg/L) Iron, Total NA <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 Manganese, Total 1.3 (G, X) <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 Arsenic, Total 0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Phosphorus, Total 1.0 (EE) <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 Potassium, Total NA 13 15 13 14 Sodium, Total NA 37 40 38 41 Other Analysis (mg/L) Chloride 50 (FF) 39 42 42 44 Nitrogen (Nitrate) ID 50 44 56 60 Nitrogen (Nitrite) NA <0.10 0.12 <0.10 <0.10 Ammonia as N (CC) <0.010 0.023 0.055 0.054 Ammonia as NH3 0.029 (CC) <0.0001 0.0003 0.0008 0.0008 TIN (Calculated) NA 50 44 56 61 Sulfate NA 25 22 22 22 Field Readings pH (s.u.) 6.5 to 9.0 6.87 7.44 7.26 7.17 Dissolved Oxygen (DO) (EE) 2.62 1.68 6.31 5.88

ORP NA -33.5 147.2 190.9 277.1

Conductivity (µS/cm) NA 1,112 999 1,359 1,015 Temperature (⁰C) NA 10.7 11.8 11.4 9.8 Turbidity (NTU) NA 6.59 3.11 9.38 9.85

Notes:

Bold = detectable concentrations of compound/constituent; shade = GSI criteria exceedance

(G,X) = Site specific based on water hardness of receiving water (108 mg CaCO3/L; Limit: 1.3 mg/L)

(FF) = Chloride GSI criteria is 125 mg/l when discharge is to surface waters designated as public water supply source or 50 mg/l when the discharge is to the Great Lakes or connecting waters

(EE) = Applicable generic GSI criteria as required by Section 20120e of the NREPA; (TP: 1.0 mg/L with no Lake Huron WLA; DO: must be greater than 7 mg/l only if CBOD >10 mg/l & Ammonia >2 mg/l)

(CC) = The generic GSI criteria are based on the toxicity of unionized ammonia (NH3); the criteria are 29 ug/L and 53 ug/L for cold and warm surface water, respectively. Unionized amount is estimated to be 1.4% based on temperature and pH of receiving water (Est. pH:

7.7; Temp: 53.6)

NA - Not Available ID - Insufficient data to develop criterion

MW-1S

Constituent

Groundwater Surface Water

Interface Criteria & RBSLs

Part 201 Generic Cleanup Criteria and

Screening Levels

Lakeshore Environmental, Inc. Page 1 of 1

Hoeft State Park Wastewater Analysis Lakeshore Environmental, Inc.

Figures

Figure 1 ‐ Monitoring Well Location Map

Figure 2 ‐ MW‐1S Soil Boring / Well Construction Log

© 2022 Microsoft Corporation © 2022 Maxar ©CNES (2022) Distribution Airbus DS

MW-1S

FIGURE 1

N

JANUARY 2023JOB 19-611-03

MONITORING WELL LOCATION MAP

DNR - HOEFT STATE PARK

5001 US HWY 23 N

ROGERS CITY, MICHIGAN 49779

SCALE: 1" = 500'

500' 1000'

LEGEND

DWN BY: JRC

LAKE HURON

HIGHWAY US-23

B

IR

C H

W O

O D

D R

APPROX. DRAIN

FIELDS LOCATION

(TWO 12,375 SQ FT)

MW-1S

MONITORING WELL LOCATION

3 SEPTIC TANKS

FOLLOWED BY

DOSING TANK

APPROX. SANITATION

STATION LOCATION

NOTE:

LAKE HURON IS APPROXIMATELY

2,000 FEET FROM DRAIN FIELDS.

SOIL BORING / WELL CONSTRUCTION LOG

AutoCAD SHX Text

DRILLING METHOD:

AutoCAD SHX Text

SAMPLING METHOD:

AutoCAD SHX Text

BORING NO.

AutoCAD SHX Text

SHEET

AutoCAD SHX Text

OF

AutoCAD SHX Text

START

AutoCAD SHX Text

FINISH

AutoCAD SHX Text

TIME

AutoCAD SHX Text

TIME

AutoCAD SHX Text

DATE

AutoCAD SHX Text

DATE

AutoCAD SHX Text

SURFACE CONDITIONS:

AutoCAD SHX Text

DRILL RIG:

AutoCAD SHX Text

DRILLING CONTRACTOR:

AutoCAD SHX Text

SUPERVISED BY:

AutoCAD SHX Text

DEPTH IN

AutoCAD SHX Text

FEET

AutoCAD SHX Text

SOIL

AutoCAD SHX Text

GRAPH

AutoCAD SHX Text

SITE NAME:

AutoCAD SHX Text

LOCATION:

AutoCAD SHX Text

LEI PROJECT #:

AutoCAD SHX Text

DRILLING

AutoCAD SHX Text

GROUND ELEVATION:

AutoCAD SHX Text

OPERATOR:

AutoCAD SHX Text

T.O.C. ELEVATION

AutoCAD SHX Text

GROUNDWATER ELEVATION

AutoCAD SHX Text

WATER LEVEL DURING DRILLING

AutoCAD SHX Text

STATIC GROUNDWATER LEVEL

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

MW-1S

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

ROSENDALL WELL DRILLING, INC.

AutoCAD SHX Text

DIRECT PUSH (GEOPROBE)

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

1:30 PM

AutoCAD SHX Text

4:30 PM

AutoCAD SHX Text

WELL CONSTRUCTION

AutoCAD SHX Text

INSTALLED 2.0" DIAMETER P.V.C. WELL SCREENED INTERVAL 11' TO 14'

AutoCAD SHX Text

DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL

AutoCAD SHX Text

JEFF

AutoCAD SHX Text

JRC

AutoCAD SHX Text 9/14/22

AutoCAD SHX Text

CONTINUOUS 5' CORES

AutoCAD SHX Text 19-611-03

AutoCAD SHX Text

HOEFT STATE PARK 5001 US HWY 23 N ROGERS CITY, MICHIGAN 49779

AutoCAD SHX Text ~10.5'

AutoCAD SHX Text 13.82'

AutoCAD SHX Text 9/14/22

AutoCAD SHX Text

FOREST

AutoCAD SHX Text 5'

AutoCAD SHX Text 10'

AutoCAD SHX Text 15'

AutoCAD SHX Text 20'

AutoCAD SHX Text E.O.B. at 20.0' IN HARDPAN

AutoCAD SHX Text

0.0'-1.5': DARK BROWN FINE SAND WITH GRAVEL, DRY, LOOSE, NO ODOR (TOPSOIL).

AutoCAD SHX Text

1.5'-3.5': LIGHT BROWN FINE SAND WITH GRAVEL, DRY, LOOSE, NO ODOR.

AutoCAD SHX Text

3.5'-5.0': LIGHT BROWN/WHITE SILTY FINE SAND, DRY, LOOSE, NO ODOR.

AutoCAD SHX Text

5.0'-10.0': LIGHT BROWN/WHITE SILTY FINE SAND, DRY, LOOSE, NO ODOR.

AutoCAD SHX Text

10.0'-14.0': BROWN FINE SAND, WET AT 10.5, LOOSE, NO ODOR.

AutoCAD SHX Text

14.0'-15.0': GRAY CLAY, TRACE GRAVEL, MOIST, STIFF, NO ODOR.

AutoCAD SHX Text

15.0'-20.0': GRAY CLAY, TRACE GRAVEL, DRY, VERY STIFF, NO ODOR (HARDPAN).

AutoCAD SHX Text

~3' STICK UP WITH WELL PLUG AND LOCK.

AutoCAD SHX Text

CONCRETE 0.0' TO 1.0'

AutoCAD SHX Text

BENTONITE SEAL 1.0' TO 9.0'.

AutoCAD SHX Text

FILTER PACK 9.0' TO 14.0'.