camp grayling joint maneuver training center

alpena combat readiness training center

final submittal | november 2018

joint land use study

camp grayling joint maneuver training center | alpena combat readiness training center

joint land use study

final submittal | november 2018

acknowledgments and key partners

Northeast Michigan Council of Governments

Michigan DNR (Gaylord)

Michigan Dept of Transportation (Gaylord)

US Forest Service

Michigan Dept of Environmental Quality (Gaylord)

US Fish & Wildlife Service (Alpena)

Headwaters Land Conservancy

USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service (Gaylord)

Huron Pines (conservation) (Gaylord)

Crawford County 

City of Grayling (Crawford Co)

Grayling Twp (Crawford Co)

Lovells Twp (Crawford Co)

Maple Forest Twp (Crawford Co)

Frederic Twp (Crawford Co)

Beaver Creek Twp (Crawford Co)

South Branch Twp (Crawford Co)

Crawford County Road Commission

Otsego County 

Chester Twp (Otsego Co)

Otsego Lake Twp (Otsego Co)

Bagley Twp (Otsego Co)

Hayes Twp (Otsego Co)

Otsego County Economic Alliance

Bear Lake Twp (Kalkaska Co)

Garfield Twp (Kalkaska Co)

Au Sable River Property Owner’s Association

Anglers of the Au Sable

Mason-Griffith Founders Chapter of Trout Unlimited

Upper Manistee River Association

Michigan Association of Timbermen

Weyerhaeuser

Arauco

AJD Forest Products

Jays Sporting Goods

Alpena Regional Airport

Alpena County

City of Alpena (Alpena Co)

Alpena Twp (Alpena Co)

Maple Ridge Twp (Alpena Co)

Wilson Twp (Alpena Co)

Green Twp (Alpena Co)

Ossineke Twp (Alpena Co)

Sanborn Twp (Alpena Co)

Long Rapids Twp (Alpena Co)

Village of Hillman

Target Alpena

Alpena Chamber of Commerce

Michigan Sea Grant/MSU Extension

Northern MI Unmanned Aerial Systems Consortium

Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary

US Coast Guard

Thunder Bay Audubon Society

NOAA

Michigan United Conservation Club – Region 4

Camp Grayling and Alpena CRTC

Michigan Economic Development Corporation

Grayling Chamber of Commerce

Michigan Works!

Briley Twp (Montmorency Co)

Roscommon County

Lyon Twp (Roscommon Co)

Posen Twp (Presque Isle Co)

Krakow Twp (Presque Isle Co)

Metz Twp (Presque Isle Co)

Higgins Twp (Roscommon Co)

Antrim County

This study was prepared under contract with the Northeast Michigan Council of 

Governments, with financial support from the Office of Economic Adjustment, 

Department of Defense. The content reflects the views of the Northeast Michigan 

Council of Governments and all of the JLUS project stakeholders and does not 

necessarily reflect the views of the Office of Economic Adjustment.

CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | TABLE OF CONTENTS i

table of contents

es executive summary

Introduction...................................................................................................................................................................... es-1

JLUS Implementation Team Action Plan ....................................................................................................................... es-1

Camp Grayling JMTC Brochure ...................................................................................................................................... es-3

Alpena CRTC Brochure.................................................................................................................................................... es-5

1 introduction

1.1 What is a Joint Land Use Study?............................................................................................................................1-1

1.1.1 JLUS Goals ..................................................................................................................................................1-1

1.2 How to Use this Study ............................................................................................................................................1-1

1.3 Study Area Overview ..............................................................................................................................................1-2

1.4 JLUS Organization and Public Process .................................................................................................................1-3

1.4.1 Committee Membership .........................................................................................................................1-4

1.5 Project Timeline ......................................................................................................................................................1-5

1.6 Next Steps: JLUS Implementation Team ..............................................................................................................1-5

2 camp grayling JMTC and community study area

2.1 Camp Grayling JMTC Study Area Overview..........................................................................................................2-1

2.1.1 How to Read this Chapter ........................................................................................................................2-1

2.1.2 How Camp Grayling JMTC and its Surrounding Area Is Unique ..........................................................2-1

2.1.3 Setting.........................................................................................................................................................2-3

2.1.4 History ........................................................................................................................................................2-3

2.1.5 Mission/Operations...................................................................................................................................2-3

2.1.6 Demographics............................................................................................................................................2-4

2.1.7 Land Use.....................................................................................................................................................2-5

2.1.8 Zoning.........................................................................................................................................................2-7

2.1.9 Incompatible Use ......................................................................................................................................2-9

2.2 Camp Grayling JMTC Public Participation ..........................................................................................................2-15

2.3 Camp Grayling JMTC Issues Overview................................................................................................................2-16

2.3.1	 Issue Definition Process .........................................................................................................................2-16

2.3.2 Camp Grayling JMTC Noise and Military Operations Issues ..............................................................2-17

2.3.3 Camp Grayling JMTC Environmental Issues.........................................................................................2-22

2.3.4 Camp Grayling JMTC Transportation and Infrastructure Issues .......................................................2-26

2.3.5 Camp Grayling JMTC Community Partnerships Issues ......................................................................2-30

2.3.6 Camp Grayling JMTC Economic Development Issues .........................................................................2-31

3 alpena CRTC and community study area

3.1 Alpena CRTC Study Area Overview.......................................................................................................................3-1

3.1.1 How to Read this Chapter ........................................................................................................................3-1

3.1.2 How Alpena CRTC and its Surrounding Area Is Unique........................................................................3-1

3.1.3 Setting.........................................................................................................................................................3-3

3.1.4 History ........................................................................................................................................................3-3

3.1.5 Mission/Operations...................................................................................................................................3-3

3.1.6 Demographics............................................................................................................................................3-4

3.1.7 Land Use.....................................................................................................................................................3-5

This version of the JLUS contains yellow highlights to indicate changes or new content that has been added since the Check 

Final version of the plan was posted for public comment. Upon approval from the technical and policy committee members, 

this JLUS will be finalized and the highlights will be removed.
ii TABLE OF CONTENTS | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

3.1.8 Zoning.........................................................................................................................................................3-6

3.1.9 Incompatible Use ......................................................................................................................................3-6

3.2 Alpena CRTC Public Participation..........................................................................................................................3-7

3.3 Alpena CRTC Issues Overview...............................................................................................................................3-8

3.3.1	 Issue Definition Process ...........................................................................................................................3-8

3.3.2 Alpena CRTC Noise and Military Operations Issues..............................................................................3-9

3.3.3 Alpena CRTC Environmental Issues ......................................................................................................3-12

3.3.4 Alpena CRTC Transportation and Infrastructure Issues.....................................................................3-14

3.3.5 Alpena CRTC Community Partnerships Issues ....................................................................................3-17

3.3.6 Alpena CRTC Economic Development Issues ......................................................................................3-18

4 implementation plan

4.1 Overview ..................................................................................................................................................................4-1

4.1.1 JLUS Implementation Team .....................................................................................................................4-1

4.2 Compatibility Tools.................................................................................................................................................4-1

4.2.1 Federal........................................................................................................................................................4-1

4.2.2 Military Installations..................................................................................................................................4-1

4.2.3 State............................................................................................................................................................4-2

4.2.4 County ........................................................................................................................................................4-2

4.2.5 Township....................................................................................................................................................4-2

4.2.6 City/Village..................................................................................................................................................4-3

4.2.7 Other Tools and References ....................................................................................................................4-3

4.3 Setting Priorities......................................................................................................................................................4-3

4.4 JLUS Implementation Team Action Plan ..............................................................................................................4-4

Camp Grayling JMTC..........................................................................................................................................................4-4

Alpena CRTC.......................................................................................................................................................................4-4

4.5.1 Create Sensible Military Overlay Zones around Camp Grayling JMTC ...............................................4-5

4.5.2 Commission a Joint MDNR and Camp Grayling JMTC Landscape Plan...............................................4-5

4.5.3 Conduct a Noise Study .............................................................................................................................4-5

4.5.4 Commission a Camp Grayling JMTC Installation Master Plan .............................................................4-5

4.5.5 Update Grayling Area Transportation Study .........................................................................................4-5

4.5 JLUS Implementation Team Action Plan Details: Camp Grayling JMTC............................................................4-5

4.5.6 Camp Grayling JMTC Community Outreach and Camp Grayling Community Council.....................4-6

4.5.7 Commission a Water Resources Plan for Northeast Michigan ...........................................................4-6

4.5.8 Fire Protection Services Agreement........................................................................................................4-6

4.5.9 Economic Impact, Tracking, and Incentives: Conduct an Economic Impact Study ...........................4-6

4.6.1 Create a Military Overlay Zone ...............................................................................................................4-7

4.6.2 Conduct a n AICUZ Study ........................................................................................................................4-7

4.6.3 Alpena CRTC Community Outreach and Alpena CRTC Community Council/Formalize Thunder Bay 

Interagency Cooperation .......................................................................................................................................4-7

4.6 JLUS Implementation Team Action Plan Details: Alpena CRTC .........................................................................4-7

4.6.4 Commission a Thunder Bay Environmental Impact Study/Commission a Joint NOAA/Alpena CRTC 

Bathymetric Survey ...............................................................................................................................................4-8

4.6.5 Economic Impact, Tracking, and Incentives: Conduct an Economic Impact Study ...........................4-8

4.6.6 Update the Alpena 

Area-wide Comprehensive Transportation Plan ................................................................................................4-8

4.7 Implementation Plan Overview and Guidelines .................................................................................................4-9

appendices

a References ............................................................................................................................................................... a-1

b Public Participation Plan ........................................................................................................................................b-1

c SWOT Results .......................................................................................................................................................... c-1

d Strategy Index .........................................................................................................................................................d-1

e Report Comments and Resources........................................................................................................................e-1

f Overlay Zone Research and Analysis ....................................................................................................................f-1
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS iii

A

AADT	 annual average daily traffic

AAF	 Army Airfield

ADNL average day/night sound level

AFB air force base

AFFF	 aqueous film forming foam

AFI Air Force Instruction

AGL above ground level

AICUZ Air Installation Compatible Use Zone

ANG Air National Guard

ANGH Air National Guard Handbook

APN Alpena County Regional Airport

APZ accident potential zone

AR Army Regulation

ARNG Army National Guard

ATCAA	 air traffic controlled assigned airspace

ATFP antiterrorism force protection

C

CAADT	 commercial annual average daily traffic

CAB combat aviation brigade

CACTF Combined Arms Collective Training Facility

CAS close air support

CEO	 chief executive officer

CTRC Combat Readiness Training Center

CZ clear zone

I

I Interstate

ICEMAP Installation Complex Encroachment 

Management Action Plans

ICRMP Integrated Cultural Resources Management 

Plan

IDP Installation Development Plan

IED improvised explosive device

IMP installation master plan

INRMP Integrated Natural Resources Management 

Plan

IRP installation restoration program

ISR intelligence, surveillance and 

reconnaissance

J

JLUS joint land use study

JMTC Joint Maneuver Training Center

JTAC joint terminal attack controller

K

K thousand

M

M Michigan state highway designation

M million

MATES Maneuver Area Training Equipment Site

mbps megabytes per second 

acronyms and abbreviations

D

DA Department of the Army

DART Dial-A-Ride Transportation

DASR digital airport surveillance radar

dB decibel

DOD Department of Defense

DRMO Defense Reauthorization and Marketing 

Office

DSL digital subscriber line

E

EA environmetnal assessment

ECP entry control point

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

F

FAA Federal Aviation Administration

FAMCAMP Air Force family campground

FCC Federal Communications Commission

FMU Forest Management Unit

FS FIghter Squadron

FY	 fiscal year

G

GIS geographic information system

GSI groundwater-surface water interface

MDARD Michigan Department of Agriculture and 

Rural Development

MDEQ Michigan Department of Environmental 

Quality

MDHHS Michigan Department of Health and 

Human Services

MDNR Michigan Department of Natural Resources

MDMVA Michigan Department of Military and 

Veterans Affairs

MDOT Michigan Department of Transportation

MEDEVAC medical evacuation

MIANG Michigan Air National Guard

MIARNG Michigan Army National Guard

MiCorps Michigan Clean Water Corps

MMRP Military Munitions Response Program

MOA military operations area

MOUT military operations on urban terrain

MSA munitions storage area

MSL mean sea level

MTR military training route

MUASC Michigan Unmanned Aerial Systems 

Consortium

N

NACo National Association of Counties

NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organization

NEMCOG Northeast Michigan Council of 

Governments

NGB National Guard Bureau

NGR National Guard Regulation
iv ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration

NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination 

System

O

OEA	 Office of Economic Adjustment

ONMS	 Office of National Marine Sanctuaries

ORV	 off-road vehicles

OSD	 Office of the Secretary of Defense

P

P3 public-private partnership

Pam pamphlet

PASER Pavement Surface Evaluation and Rating

PC policy committee

PEAS Pollution Emergency Alerting System

PFAs	 per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances

PFC	 perfluorinated compounds

PFOA	 perfluorooctanoic acid

PFOS	 perfluorooctane sulfonate

ppt part per trillion

R

RA restricted airspace

RPDP Real Property Development Plan

RPX real property exchange

RPZ runway protection zone

S

SME subject-matter expert

SOP standard operating procedure

STEM science, technology, engineering, and 

mathematics

SUA special use airspace

SWOT strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and 

threats

T

TAG The Adjutant General

TC technical committee

TMDL Total Maximum Daily Loads

U

UAS unmanned aerial systems

UFC	 Unified Facilities Criteria

UO urban operations

USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

UXO unexploded ordinance

V

VFR	 visual flight rules
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | EXECUTIVE SUMMARY es-1

Introduction

The military and residents of Northeast Michigan have coexisted for a century. Collaboration among all groups calling the region home is critical to preserve the military mission and the residents' quality of life. Camp Grayling Joint 

Maneuver Training Center (JMTC) and Alpena Combat Readiness Training Center (CRTC) are home to one of the largest military training exercises in the country, bringing thousands of military personnel to the region each summer.

A joint land use study (JLUS) is intended to look at the ways 

the civilian and military life intersect and to help ensure an 

optimal experience for both sides. Safety for residents while 

ensuring the military can train soldiers and airmen is paramount, but through the suggested strategies in this plan, 

partnerships can be forged to help all parties thrive. Incompatible development across the study area is addressed to 

resolve existing and future conflicts.

This study looks at the areas immediately surrounding the 

boundaries of Camp Grayling JMTC and Alpena CRTC. This 

area of Michigan is largely rural, with few urban centers and 

many large tracts of forest land. Natural resources, such as 

those forests and Lake Huron, are treasured and used often 

for recreation. Although there is little risk of significant land

development near the installations due to the rural setting, 

encroachment can also take other forms in the sense of 

traffic, utility capacity, physical trespassing, and natural resources. 

The JLUS process involves stakeholders from the military 

and the public from beginning to end. Public meetings identified community concerns, informed stakeholders of the

project's progress, and provided an arena for them to share 

their thoughts. The resulting information was refined into

an "action plan" of suggested strategies. This JLUS is not a 

regulatory document, and thus it can't mandate action; it 

is meant to serve as a guide for local entities as a way to 

continue the positive relationship between the military and 

the local population going forward. Success in ensuring 

compatibility into the future depends on diligent and 

ongoing efforts from stakeholders in the form of the 

JLUS implementation team. 

This plan was funded by the Office of Economic Adjustment

(OEA), part of the Department of Defense (DOD), and the 

Northeast Michigan Council of Governments (NEMCOG) is 

the sponsoring agency. This summary is intended to provide a broad overview of the study process and the local 

area for a wide variety of readers and users. 

JLUS Implementation Team Action Plan

Through the public involvement process, compatibility issues were brought forth for consideration. The JLUS project team refined a detailed set of strategies to solve those

issues, which are described in more detail in Section 4 and 

Appendix D of the document. 

In order to ensure the strategies are tracked and implemented as it is possible, it is suggested that a JLUS Implementation Team be convened, comprising members of the 

JLUS technical committee (TC), policy committee (PC), NEMCOG, local governments, other agencies, and the military.

For both installations covered by this JLUS and the surrounding communities, a series of key actions has been 

proposed as the JLUS Implementation Team Action Plan. 

Each key action in the plan satisfies a number of the strategies. Members of the Implementation Team should be able 

to roll these actions into their existing programs as funding 

and resources dictate.

es

executive 

summary

CAMP GRAYLING JMTC

Create Sensible Military Overlay 

Zones around Camp Grayling JMTC

Commission a Joint MDNR and 

Camp Grayling JMTC Landscape 

Plan

Conduct a Noise Study

Commission a Camp Grayling JMTC 

Installation Master Plan

Update Grayling Area 

Transportation Study

Camp Grayling JMTC Community 

Outreach and Camp Grayling 

Community Council 

Commission a Water Resources 

Plan for Northeast Michigan

Fire Protection Services Agreement

Economic Impact, Tracking and 

Incentives: Conduct an Economic 

Impact Study

ALPENA CRTC

Create a Military Overlay Zone

Conduct an Air Installation 

Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) 

Study

Alpena CRTC Community Outreach 

and Alpena CRTC Community 

Council

Commission a Thunder Bay 

Environmental Impact Study

Economic Impact, Tracking and 

Incentives: Conduct an Economic 

Impact Study

Commission a Joint NOAA/Alpena 

CRTC Bathymetric Survey

Formalize Thunder Bay 

Interagency Cooperation

Update the Alpena Area-wide 

Comprehensive Transportation 

Plan

JLUS

Strategies

Implementation Team 

Action Plan Items

Figure ES.1 | JLUS "Toolbox"

Table ES.1 | JLUS Implementation Team Action Plan Items

Note: Pages ES-3 through ES-6 are meant to be used as two-page standalone brochures to summarize the project status and key 

recommendations for both military installations covered by this JLUS.
es-2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

This page intentionally left blank.

Note: Pages ES-3 through ES-6 are meant to be used as two-page 

standalone brochures to summarize the project status and key 

recommendations for both military installations covered by this JLUS.
camp grayling joint maneuver training center 

alpena combat readiness training center

j o i n t l a n d 

use study

This document was funded by the Office of Economic 

Adjustment, part of the Department of Defense; the Northeast 

Michigan Council of Governments is the sponsoring agency.

final submittal | november 2018

what is the JLUS program?

The Joint Land Use Study (JLUS) process promotes and enhances civilian and military communication and collaboration, serves as a catalyst to 

sustain the military mission, and promotes public health, safety, quality 

of life, and economic viability of a region. Source: Department of Defense 

(DOD) Office of Economic Adjustment (OEA), http://oea.gov/what-we-do/

compatible-use

where are we in the process?

The JLUS and the JLUS Public Participation Plan have been completed. 

Please consult the JLUS website at http://www.discovernortheast

michigan.org/jlus.asp to view the report and associated information.

what happens next?

NEMCOG will collaborate with JLUS Implementation Team members to 

begin working on compatibility strategies. 

JLUS implementation team

This is a critical piece of the success of this JLUS. The team should include 

membership from each participating agency, the project technical committee (TC), the project policy committee (PC), and military personnel. 

The strategies developed throughout the JLUS process should allow local 

government leaders and military personnel to roll JLUS recommendations into their existing programs. 

A communications plan, zoning tools, and long-range planning are some 

cost-effective solutions that are part of the action plan presented in Section 4 of this JLUS. This is not a regulatory document and thus cannot 

mandate action, only propose solutions. Success in implementing the 

strategies described in this plan depends on dedicated efforts from the

stakeholders in the coming years.

This JLUS is meant to be a living document, so certain strategies may 

need to be revisited in the future as the local situation and applicable 

laws evolve.

contact information

NEMCOG |

Denise Cline (dmcline@nemcog.org)

Diane Rekowski (drekowski@nemcog.org)

Nico Tucker (ntucker@nemcog.org)

Camp Grayling JMTC | SFC Jeremie Mead (jeremie.a.mead.mil@mail.mil)

Alpena CRTC | Capt. Brian Blumline (brian.g.blumline.mil@mail.mil)

Tetra Tech |

Heather Mendenall (heather.mendenall@tetratech.com)

Matt Rathsack (matt.rathsack@tetratech.com)

more project information

Additional project information and the full JLUS report can be found at 

http://www.discovernortheastmichigan.org/jlus.asp

camp grayling JMTC
about camp grayling JMTC

Camp Grayling JMTC is the largest National Guard training center in the country, encompassing 147,000 acres. It supports a wide cross-section of military 

personnel, including active-duty and National Guard forces. It provides a large 

ground training area, an air-to-ground range, and a large airspace all in the same 

complex. Nonmilitary organizations as well as international partners also use the 

ranges and other facilities there.

about the surrounding area

Camp Grayling JMTC is located in the largely rural north-central portion of Michigan's Lower Peninsula. This study focuses on the installation itself and a two-mile 

buffer around the boundary. Compatible land use analysis was limited to the

study area. Though encroachment issues are few due to the low surrounding 

population, it is critical that the military and the public coexist.

top issues

Public meetings, an online survey, and one-on-one interviews were some of the 

methods used to collect public input and determine the largest positive and negative aspects of military operations in the area. The issues that repeatedly came 

up in the Camp Grayling JMTC area were:

 NOISE AND MILITARY OPERATIONS: Several residential areas are in or near 

noise contours from military operations, and most of the heart of the City of 

Grayling lies in the accident potential zone from Grayling Army Airfield.

 ROADS: Public perception links degraded roads with military activity, when 

weather, logging, and other traffic may have an impact on road condition.

 WILDFIRE DANGER: Wildfires occur frequently in this heavily wooded region.

Communication about controlled burns and fire mitigation activities by the

Michigan Department of Natural Resources doesn't always reach the public. 

JLUS implementation team action plan

Many of the JLUS strategies have actions that overlap. To capture the best use of 

plan implementation, overarching actions have been defined that will ultimately

serve more than one strategy. The JLUS Implementation Team would be charged 

with tracking these items. See Section 4 of the JLUS for more information.

of those surveyed are 

comfortable with military 

operations in their area

56% 62%

of those surveyed are 

concerned about noise 

levels

ACTION STRATEGIES

Create Sensible Military 

Overlay Zones around Camp 

Grayling JMTC

1a.4, 1a.5, 2a.1, 2a.2, 2d.1, 2d.2, 

5b.4, 6a.1

Commission a Joint MDNR 

and Camp Grayling JMTC 

Landscape Plan

1b.1, 1b.2, 1b.3, 4e.1

Conduct a Noise Study 1a.1, 1a.2, 1a.3, 2a.2, 2c.1, 2c.2, 

2c.3

Commission a Camp Grayling 

JMTC Installation Master Plan

2c.2, 2c.3, 2d.1, 2d.2, 3d.1, 3f.2, 

4a.1, 4a.2, 4c.1, 4d.1, 5b.5, 6b.4

Update Grayling Area 

Transportation Study

4d.1, 4d.2, 4d.3, 4d.4, 4e.1, 4f.1, 

4f.2, 5b.5

Camp Grayling JMTC 

Community Outreach and 

Community Council

2b.1, 2c.1, 3a.1, 3b.1, 3e.1, 3f.1, 

3f.2, 4e.1, 5a.1, 5a.2, 5a.3, 5a.4, 

5b.1, 5b.2, 5b.3, 5b.4, 5b.5, 6a.1

Commission a Water 

Resources Plan for Northeast 

Michigan

3a.1, 3b.1, 3c.1, 3c.2, 3f.1, 3f.2

Fire Protection Services 

Agreement 3e.1, 6b.1

Conduct an Economic Impact 

Study

6a.1, 6b.1, 6b.2, 6b.3, 6b.4, 6c.1, 

6c.2

Otsego County

Kalkaska County

Crawford County

Oscoda County

 ̈¦§75

 ̈¦§75

ST93

ST72

Grayling Lake

Margrethe

Guthrie

Lake

Lovells Rd

S Stephan

Bridg e Rd

Chase

Bridge Rd

N

Mcmasters Bridge Rd

N Down River

Rd W

S

Wakel ey Bri dge

R d

E North Down River Rd

Twin Lake

Rd

M-93

Old Us-27

W Miller

Rd

259

264

W Cr-612

CR-612 NE

N Down River Rd E

N Sherman Rd

E Cr-612

104 db

75

db

87 db

104 db

104 db

104 db

104 db

104 db

75 db

87 db

104 db

87 db

JLUS 2-Mile Study Area

Camp Grayling JMTC

City of Grayling

County Boundary

Noise Contours (75+ db)

Zoning

Agriculture

Commercial

Industrial

Military Operations

Natural Resources/Open Space

Residential

Water Body

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

! !! !

!!

WI

MI

MI

Lake

Huron

Lake

Michigan

Alpena

Grayling

Engadine

Bay City

Reed City

Green Bay

Traverse

City

0 Z 5

Miles
camp grayling joint maneuver training center 

alpena combat readiness training center

j o i n t l a n d 

use study

This document was funded by the Office of Economic 

Adjustment, part of the Department of Defense; the Northeast 

Michigan Council of Governments is the sponsoring agency.

what is the JLUS program?

The Joint Land Use Study (JLUS) process promotes and enhances civilian and military communication and collaboration, serves as a catalyst to 

sustain the military mission, and promotes public health, safety, quality 

of life, and economic viability of a region. Source: Department of Defense 

(DOD) Office of Economic Adjustment (OEA), http://oea.gov/what-we-do/

compatible-use

where are we in the process?

The JLUS and the JLUS Public Participation Plan have been completed. 

Please consult the JLUS website at http://www.discovernortheast

michigan.org/jlus.asp to view the report and associated information.

what happens next?

NEMCOG will collaborate with JLUS Implementation Team members to 

begin working on compatibility strategies. 

JLUS implementation team

This is a critical piece of the success of this JLUS. The team should include 

membership from each participating agency, the project technical committee (TC), the project policy committee (PC), and military personnel. 

The strategies developed throughout the JLUS process should allow local 

government leaders and military personnel to roll JLUS recommendations into their existing programs. 

A communications plan, zoning tools, and long-range planning are some 

cost-effective solutions that are part of the action plan presented in Section 4 of this JLUS. This is not a regulatory document and thus cannot 

mandate action, only propose solutions. Success in implementing the 

strategies described in this plan depends on dedicated efforts from the

stakeholders in the coming years.

This JLUS is meant to be a living document, so certain strategies may 

need to be revisited in the future as the local situation and applicable 

laws evolve.

more project information

Additional project information and the full JLUS report can be found at 

http://www.discovernortheastmichigan.org/jlus.asp

alpena CRTC

contact information

NEMCOG |

Denise Cline (dmcline@nemcog.org)

Diane Rekowski (drekowski@nemcog.org)

Nico Tucker (ntucker@nemcog.org)

Camp Grayling JMTC | SFC Jeremie Mead (jeremie.a.mead.mil@mail.mil)

Alpena CRTC | Capt. Brian Blumline (brian.g.blumline.mil@mail.mil)

Tetra Tech |

Heather Mendenall (heather.mendenall@tetratech.com)

Matt Rathsack (matt.rathsack@tetratech.com)

final submittal | november 2018
about alpena CRTC

Alpena CRTC manages the operational aspects of the joint-use airspace used by 

units training at Alpena CRTC and Camp Grayling JMTC. It is colocated with the 

Alpena County Regional Airport, sharing functional assets including two runways. 

The majority of air traffic is military related. While the installation does not have

any flying units of its own, it supports organizations from all branches of the military throughout the US and coalition partners.

about the surrounding area

Alpena CRTC is located west of the City of Alpena, which is situated on Lake Huron's Thunder Bay in the northeastern part of Michigan's Lower Peninsula. This 

study focuses on the installation itself and a two-mile buffer around the boundary. Compatible land use analysis was limited to the study area. The area directly 

surrounding the installation is largely rural.

!y

!y

!y

!y

!y

!l

QÆ

QÆ

Hubbard Lake Rd

Bolto n Rd

M-32

US-23

UV32

Long Rapids Rd

U

S-23

Werth Rd

UV23

Alpena Township

Wilson Township

Maple Ridge Township

Alpena

Thunder Bay

Thunder Bay National

Marine Sanctuary

Lake

Huron

JLUS 2-Mile Study Area

Alpena CRTC

Township Boundary

QÆ State Forest Campground

!l Fishing Access

y! Public Boating Access

PFAS (PFC) Monitoring

State Forests

Wetlands

Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary

Restricted Airspace

Lake Huron National Wildlife Refuges

Alpena County Regional Airport

Envirnomental Restoration Area

Fuel Types/FBP System

C-3, Mature Jack or Lodgepole Pine

C-4, Immature Jack or Lodgepole Pine Z

O-1a, Matted Grass; O-1b, Standing Grass 0 5

Miles

MI

MI

Lake

Huron

Lake

Michigan

Thunder Bay

National

Marine Sanctuary

Alpena

Grayling

Engadine

Bay City

Reed City

Traverse

City

of those surveyed 

are comfortable with 

military operations in 

their area

83% 74%

of those surveyed perceive 

Alpena CRTC’s relationship 

with surrounding property 

and business owners as 

positive

ACTION STRATEGIES

Create a Military Overlay Zone 1a.4, 1a.5, 1a.6, 2c.2, 

4a.2, 5a.6

Conduct an AICUZ Study 1a.4, 1a.5, 1a.6, 2c.2

Alpena CRTC Community Outreach 

and Alpena CRTC Community Council

2b.1, 2c.3, 3a.1, 3c.1, 

4b.1, 4c.1, 5a.1, 5a.2, 

5a.3, 5a.4, 5a.5, 5b.2

Commission a Thunder Bay 

Environmental Impact Study

2a.1, 2c.3, 3a.1, 3b.a, 

3b.2, 3c.1, 4e.1

Economic Impact, Tracking and 

Incentives: Conduct an Economic 

Impact Study

5a.3, 5a.4, 5b.1, 5b.2, 

6a.1, 6c.1, 6d.1, 6d.2

Commission a Joint NOAA/Alpena 

CRTC Bathymetric Survey 2a.1, 2c.1

Formalize Thunder Bay Interagency 

Cooperation

2a.1, 2c.1, 2c.3, 3b.1, 

3b.2, 4b.1, 5a.5, 5b.1, 

6b.1

Update the Alpena Area-wide 

Comprehensive Transportation Plan 4c.1, 4d.1, 4e.1

top issues

Public meetings, an online survey, and one-on-one interviews were some of the 

methods used to collect public input and determine the largest positive and negative aspects of military operations in the area. The issues that repeatedly came 

up in the Alpena CRTC area were:

 IMPACTS AND EFFECTS ON SURFACE WATER SYSTEMS, GROUNDWATER, 

AND DRINKING WATER: PFOS/PFOA substances have been detected at low 

levels in the areas surrounding Alpena CRTC. 

 TRAINING ACTIVITIES: Being one of the largest training areas in the US, the 

Alpena CRTC/Grayling JMTC complex is a national asset that easily attracts 

training events like that of the well know Northern Strike exercise. This can 

impact the community, to suddenly be inundated with thousands of visitors 

that need services, supplies, entertainment, vehicles, housing and the like. 

However, these events also bring a boost to the local economy

JLUS implementation team action plan

Many of the JLUS strategies have actions that overlap. To capture the best use of 

plan implementation, overarching actions have been defined that will ultimately

serve more than one strategy. The JLUS Implementation Team would be charged 

with tracking these items. See Section 4 of the JLUS for more information.
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | INTRODUCTION 1-1

chapter overview

A joint land use study (JLUS) is a 

collaborative effort between the military 

and surrounding local communities to 

protect both the long-term viability of the 

military mission and public health and 

safety, while also enhancing local economies 

and industries. This JLUS studies the areas 

around Camp Grayling Joint Maneuver 

Training Center (JMTC) and Alpena Combat 

Readiness Training Center (CRTC) in 

Northeast Michigan. The Northeast Michigan 

Council of Governments (NEMCOG) is the 

sponsoring agency of the study.

1.1 What is a Joint Land Use Study? ........1-1

1.1.1 JLUS Goals ..................................1-1

1.2 How to Use this Study.........................1-1

1.3 Study Area Overview ..........................1-2

1.4 JLUS Organization and Public 

Process..................................................1-3

1.4.1 Committee Membership ..........1-4

1.5 Project Timeline...................................1-5

1.6 Next Steps: JLUS Implementation 

Team .....................................................1-5

1.1 What is a Joint Land 

Use Study?

A JLUS is a collaborative planning effort between military

installations and their surrounding communities. They 

are designed to address compatibility issues and foster a 

strong working relationship among the military, local governments, and members of the community. 

This JLUS examines northeastern Michigan and the communities surrounding Camp Grayling Joint Maneuver Training 

Center (JMTC), administered by the Michigan Army National 

Guard (MIARNG), and Alpena Combat Readiness Training 

Center (CRTC), administered by the Michigan Air National 

Guard (MIANG). 

The JLUS effort is community driven and relies on strong

master planning and zoning to ensure the affected entities

can coexist in a mutually beneficial manner. Public input is

critical to ensure not only the success of the JLUS, but also 

the success of the relationship between the military and 

residents of the surrounding communities.

The Camp Grayling JMTC and Alpena CRTC JLUS is funded 

by a grant from the Office of Economic Adjustment (OEA),

Department of Defense (DOD). The local sponsor and grant 

administrator is the Northeast Michigan Council of Governments (NEMCOG), which oversees nine counties in the 

northeastern portion of Michigan's Lower Peninsula. A consultant team from Tetra Tech was contracted to complete 

the study.

1.1.1 JLUS Goals

Several goals were identified for this JLUS at the outset of

the project:

1. Promote land use compatibility between the installations and surrounding communities.

2. Seek ways to manage development that is compatible 

with military training, testing, and operational missions.

3. Encourage cooperative action among military personnel, local community officials, and citizens.

4. Maintain and strengthen regional economic engines.

1.2 How to Use this Study

The strategies presented in Chapter 4 should be implemented when possible to prevent encroachment or incompatible uses from developing, as well as to mediate any existing 

land use issues. Consider them to be part of a "toolbox" 

of planning options to ensure the relationship between the 

military and the surrounding communities remains strong 

and mutually beneficial. Each strategy is listed with key participants and suggested timelines to aid the strategy lead 

in plan implementation. It is important to understand that 

the JLUS is a recommended set of strategies and tools, not 

an adopted plan. It is recommended that NEMCOG form a 

JLUS implementation team to monitor progress and maintain momentum after the plan is published.

1

introduction

purpose

This JLUS is a collaborative planning effort

among the military, the surrounding 

communities, and stakeholders to create 

a plan to guide the future development 

of the lands around Camp Grayling JMTC 

and Alpena CRTC. It aims to enhance 

understanding of area issues, promote 

collaboration, and provide a set of tools for 

future planning.

The City of Alpena's municipal marina, which lies on Lake Huron's Thunder Bay, is owned and maintained by the city.
1-2 INTRODUCTION | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Figure 1.1 | Study Area

1.3 Study Area Overview

NEMCOG, established in 1968, is a multicounty organization formed to help municipalities in the northeastern part 

of the state with grant writing, planning, digital mapping, 

and other tasks that rural governments typically don't have 

personnel or funding to manage. It is based in Gaylord 

and covers Alcona, Alpena, Cheboygan, Crawford, Emmet, 

Montmorency, Oscoda, Otsego, and Presque Isle counties. 

NEMCOG's board of elected officials, business leaders, and

residents is drawn from throughout the nine-county region. 

The JLUS study area includes Camp Grayling JMTC, Alpena 

CRTC, and surrounding local jurisdictions within a 2-mile radius of each installation. 

 The Camp Grayling JMTC area of influence includes

Crawford County and portions of Oscoda County, 

Roscommon County, Kalkaska County, Otsego County, 

Antrim County, and Montmorency County, for a total of 

seven counties and 33 municipalities.

 The Alpena CRTC area of influence includes Alpena

County and a small portion of Presque Isle County, as 

well as 13 municipalities.

Camp Grayling JMTC, the largest National Guard training 

center in the country, is a 147,000-acre training site, spanning portions of Kalkaska, Crawford, and Otsego counties. 

The central cantonment area is located in Crawford County, 

southwest of Grayling Township, and the rest of the property is largely used as maneuver area and range land. Part 

of Camp Grayling JMTC is bounded by Lake Margrethe, a 

popular recreation spot for fishing.

Alpena CRTC is located adjacent to the Alpena County Regional Airport in Alpena, Michigan. The city of Alpena is located in the northeast part of the Lower Peninsula on the 

edge of Lake Huron on Thunder Bay. Alpena CRTC is bounded by Lake Winyah to the north, the Lower South Branch of 

the Thunder Bay River to the west, and the Alpena County 

Regional Airport terminal and Michigan State Route 32 (M32) to the south. 

Camp Grayling JMTC and Alpena CRTC are situated in the 

largest airspace complex for military training east of the 

Mississippi River. The annual joint Northern Strike training 

exercise involves more than 5,000 Army, Navy, Marine, and 

Special Forces personnel from across the nation and six coalition countries. 

The wooded, rural surrounding region is sparsely populated. Alpena is the biggest city and transportation hub. The 

area grew quickly in the mid-1800s due to extensive logging 

activities. Logs would be transported down the Thunder 

Bay River to sawmills in the city of Alpena and its port on 

Lake Huron.

The region surrounding Camp Grayling JMTC and Alpena 

CRTC is rich in natural resources, and recreational lands 

and waters are plentiful. The climate features mild summers and cold winters with a large amount of snowfall. In 

spring, the freeze-thaw cycle is hard on roadways and other 

infrastructure. Despite that, military personnel are able to 

participate in year-round training at the installations.

More detailed information on the military missions and 

background on each site can be found in chapters 2 and 3, 

which are specific to Camp Grayling JMTC and Alpena CRTC,

respectively. 

Camp Grayling JMTC

Camp Grayling JMTC

Cantonment Area

Alpena CRTC

Regional Overview
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | INTRODUCTION 1-3

council of governments

city/county planning committees

airport authority

city and county officials

base leadership

private sector leaders

state officials

local and base planners

community staff

business representatives

residents

participants

coordination

accountability

grant management

policy direction

design/oversight

budget approval

monitoring

report adoption

technical issues

alternatives

report development

recommendations

responsibilities

study 

sponsor: 

NEMCOG

policy 

committee

technical

committee

working 

groups

working 

groups

working 

groups

policy committee

The policy committee (PC) comprises city, 

township, and county officials; installation

leadership; state officials; and private sector

leaders. The PC meets on a quarterly basis 

and is charged with: 

 providing overall project leadership to 

include policy direction and oversight, 

budget approval, project monitoring, and 

report adoption

 participating in public outreach events

technical committee

The technical committee (TC) comprises 

local and Installation community planners, 

community staff, business representatives,

and residents. The TC meets on a monthly 

or quarterly basis and is responsible for:

 data collection

 identifying and studying technical issues

 recommending working groups (if 

needed) for specific issues

 evaluating alternatives

 developing recommendations for the PC

Figure 1.2 | JLUS Project Organization 1.4 JLUS Organization and Public Process

Development and subsequent implementation of this JLUS 

relies on a community-driven, collaborative, strategic planning process among the local governments, jurisdictions, 

and communities surrounding Camp Grayling JMTC and Alpena CRTC. The organization of the JLUS project reflects this

approach, as shown in Figure 1.2. NEMCOG, as the sponsoring agency coordinating the development of this JLUS, 

oversees the overall process, schedule, and grant funding. 

To support the work of the JLUS, NEMCOG convened two 

stakeholder committees: a technical committee (TC) and a 

policy committee (PC). The TC focuses on a range of technical activities, including data collection, identifying issues 

and the need for issue-specific working groups, and developing recommendations for the PC. The PC focuses on providing overall project leadership, project monitoring, final

report adoption, and participating in public outreach activities and events. Committee membership is provided on the 

following page.

Achieving the JLUS project goals requires strong public participation throughout the process. The JLUS project team 

developed and implemented a public participation plan to 

effectively engage stakeholders. The following text presents

a summary of the comprehensive JLUS public participation 

plan, which is available in Appendix B. 

The public participation plan includes five components:

1. IDENTIFYING AND CHARACTERIZING KEY STAKEHOLDERS: Understanding stakeholders’ awareness, perceptions, concerns, values, and priorities related to Camp 

Grayling JMTC and Alpena CRTC helps the JLUS project 

team develop targeted involvement opportunities and 

educational resources, as well as to understand stakeholders' communication channel preferences. Based on 

discussions with NEMCOG and the Camp Grayling JMTC 

community relations specialist, as well as other members of the PC and TC, the community residents rely on 

traditional sources of information, such as newspaper, 

radio, and word of mouth, to obtain information.

2. CREATING EFFECTIVE MESSAGES: Messaging to stakeholders evolves throughout the process. Initial messages for the discovery phase focused on raising awareness 

and promoting engagement. Highlighting stakeholder 

input on issues and concerns is important to identifying 

solutions that will benefit local communities. Messages

for the strategy and planning phase focus on reporting 

interim findings of the identified issues/conflicts and

emphasizing the need for stakeholders to determine if 

the JLUS project team accurately captured stakeholders’ 

issues and concerns. Messages for the implementation 

phase focus on presenting the final report findings and

recommendations in both the Grayling and Alpena areas, stating the need to collaboratively implement final

recommendations based on stakeholder input to benefit local communities and address priority issues.

3. IDENTIFYING AND CREATING EFFECTIVE STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT OPPORTUNITIES AND EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES: The JLUS project team selected a suite 

of stakeholder involvement opportunities, including TC 

and PC meetings, Camp Grayling JMTC and Alpena CRTC 

PC and TC member tours and issue identification sessions, community meetings and input sessions, project 

fact sheets, the JLUS project website, and project presentations. Community surveys and stakeholder interviews 

are essential involvement opportunities, providing the 

JLUS project team with insights on priority issues related to Camp Grayling JMTC and Alpena CRTC activities 

that would require effective strategies. The community

meetings and input sessions were also critical to identifying issues, both positive and negative, that drive the 

overall JLUS process. 

4. IDENTIFYING EFFECTIVE DISTRIBUTION CHANNELS 

AND MECHANISMS: Distribution of outreach relies on 

both a targeted approach to TC and PC members and 

a ripple approach that asks PC and TC members to use 

existing distribution mechanisms — such as newsletters, 

websites, email distribution lists, social media, meetings, 

and community bulletin boards — to reach their organizational members and constituents with information on 

involvement opportunities and educational materials. 

The JLUS project team also relies on local newspapers 

and radio to help reach stakeholders about the process, 

the survey, and other means of participation. 

5. ASSESSING EFFECTIVENESS: Feedback from stakeholders on involvement activities help the JLUS project team 

determine if changes are necessary to improve effectiveness. The ultimate metric of public involvement effectiveness is support for the final JLUS and implementation of its recommendations over time. 

Subsequent chapters of this report provide the outcomes 

of the public participation process including specific issues

and strategies for Camp Grayling JMTC and Alpena CRTC. 

60 stakeholder interviews conducted 195 total online survey responses

22 local cities and townships involved 65 technical and policy committee members
1-4 INTRODUCTION | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

1.4.1 Committee Membership 

Table 1.1, JLUS Policy and Technical Committee Members 

and Organizations, contains a list of JLUS TC and PC members. These individuals played a key role in developing the 

JLUS, and their continued involvement is critical to implementing it by serving as the core group of stakeholders.

Table 1.1 | JLUS Policy and Technical Committee Members and Organizations

JLUS POLICY COMMITTEE JLUS POLICY COMMITTEE, CONTINUED

Name Representing/Title Name Representing/Title

Ken Glasser (JLUS Chairman) Otsego County Board George F. Banker Bear Lake Township Supervisor

Greg Sundin (JLUS Vice Chairman) City of Alpena Chris Peterson US Forest Service

Matt Waligora (JLUS Vice Chairman Alternate) City of Alpena Mayor Scott R. Koproski US Fish & Wildlife Service

Marc Dedenbach (JLUS Secretary) Grayling Township Edward A. Nellist Lyon Township Supervisor

SGM Kent Smith Camp Grayling JMTC James Zakshesky Posen Township Supervisor

SFC Jeremie Mead Camp Grayling JMTC Michael Grohowski Krakow Township Supervisor

LTC Brian Burrell Camp Grayling JMTC Nyle Wickersham Metz Township Supervisor

Lt Col Matthew Trumble Alpena CRTC William E. Curnalia Higgins Township Supervisor

Lt Col Michael Leski Alpena CRTC Gary Neumann Lovells Township Supervisor

Capt Brian Blumline Alpena CRTC Denise Matteini Otsego Lake Township

Jonathan Edgerly Michigan Army National Guard – Environmental Margaret Black, alternate Otsego Lake Township Clerk

Kim VanNuck Beaver Creek Township Supervisor Bonny Miller Chester Township Supervisor

Brandon Schroeder Michigan State University Extension/Michigan 

Sea Grant

Scott Kruger Antrim County Commissioner

Susan Thiel MDNR Brenda Fournier Alpena County Commissioner

Jeff Gray Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary, NOAA JLUS TECHNICAL COMMITTEE

Rob Pallarito Otsego County Board Name Representing/Title

Mark Ignash MEDC Adam Poll City of Alpena Planning & Development Director

Jim Klarich Target Alpena Erich Podjaske City of Grayling Zoning/Economic Development

Scott Thayer MDOT Lisa Kruse Alpena CRTC Environmental Specialist

Dave Stephenson Crawford County Board Chair Susan Thiel MDNR

Doug Baum Grayling City Manager Julie Lowe MDEQ

Steve Smigelski Alpena Airport Manager Alayne Hansen Michigan Works!

David Persons Garfield Township Supervisor Patty O’Donnell MDOT

Cody Werth Wilson Township Board/Planning Commission Doug Baum City of Grayling

Julie Lowe MDEQ Denise Matteini Otsego Lake Township

Lisa McComb Otsego County Economic Alliance John Bailey Huron Pines

Bill Johnson Frederic Township Supervisor SMSgt Jerome Torres Alpena CRTC

 Shelly Pinkelman, alternate Frederic Township Zoning SMSgt Damian Pappas, alternate Alpena CRTC

Ken Lobert Ossineke Township Supervisor

Nathan Skibbe Alpena Township Supervisor

Dave Post Village of Hillman

 Myron McIntire, alternate Hillman Village President

Cam Habermehl Alpena County

Brian Goebel Bagley Township

 Ken Arndt, alternate Bagley Township

Jodi Valentino Roscommon County Controller

Bruno Wojick Briley Township

Howard Lumsden Long Rapids Township Supervisor

Sharcy Ray USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | INTRODUCTION 1-5

1.5 Project Timeline

Stakeholders were engaged in this JLUS from an early phase 

through a variety of methods. Tours provided an opportunity for TC and PC members to become more familiar with 

the missions and operations of Camp Grayling JMTC and Alpena CRTC. Public meetings gave local residents, not just TC 

and PC members, a chance to express their concerns and 

learn more about the JLUS process. Online surveys collected data from an even wider pool of stakeholders across the 

study area. This project is divided into three phases: 

 DISCOVERY PHASE (APRIL-SEPTEMBER 2017): During 

this phase, data collection began and the public participation plan was initiated (see Appendix B) and published in draft form. Initial public meetings were held in 

June 2017 to raise awareness of the JLUS process and 

to solicit input. A strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, 

and threats (SWOT) analysis was performed to begin the 

issues collection process. The JLUS project team began 

analyzing the results. 

 STRATEGY AND PLANNING PHASE (SEPTEMBER 2017-

MARCH 2018): During this phase, the interim findings on

the identified issues and conflicts were reported to the

stakeholders and work began on the JLUS report. The 

public participation plan was finalized and published.

 IMPLEMENTATION PHASE (APRIL-DECEMBER 2018):

During the final phase of the project, the final report

findings are presented to the TC and PC as well as the

public. The draft JLUS is published, and the public is given 

a chance to weigh in on the strategies and recommendations presented in the plan. The JLUS project team then 

refines the plan before the final version is published and

the results presented at the final public meetings. The

team will help guide local governments on how to best 

implement the strategies presented in the JLUS.

1.6 Next Steps: JLUS 

Implementation Team

The JLUS Implementation Team should include representation from each participating agency, the TC, and the PC. The 

strategies developed in the JLUS should allow local government leaders and the military to roll JLUS recommendations 

into their existing programs. A communication plan, proper 

zoning tools, and long-range planning are some of the most 

cost-effective ways to ensure compatible development in

the long term. This JLUS is meant to be a living document, 

so certain strategies may need to be revisited as the local 

situation and applicable laws evolve. For more information 

on the Implementation Team Action Plan, see Section 4. 

Figure 1.3 | Project Timeline

PUBLIC 

COMMENT 

WINDOW

PUBLIC 

COMMENT 

WINDOW

TC

PC

PUBLIC MEETING 3 

draft 

strategies

TC TC TC TC TC TC TC TC TC TC TC

PC PC PC PC

TC

PUBLIC MEETING 1

discussion 

meetings

PUBLIC MEETING 2 

issues 

identification

ONLINE 

PARTICIPATION 

present 

final JLUS

DELIVERABLE

draft public 

participation 

plan

DELIVERABLE

final public 

participation 

plan

DELIVERABLE

draft JLUS 

report

TC

DELIVERABLE

final JLUS 

report

DELIVERABLE

project

overview

PC PC

TC

TC

PC

technical committee meeting (monthly)

policy committee meeting (quarterly)

TC

PC

discovery phase strategy and planning phase implementation phase

April May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb March

2017 2018

April May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1-6 INTRODUCTION | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

This page intentionally left blank.
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA 2-1

2.1 Camp Grayling JMTC 

Study Area Overview

2.1.1 How to Read this Chapter

The following sections describe Camp Grayling JMTC and 

the areas surrounding it. The first section contains a study

area overview, which includes existing conditions information about the Camp Grayling JMTC area. A two-mile study 

area buffer was created around the Camp Grayling JMTC

boundary to establish a focus area for this land use study. 

The next section has a description of the public participation aspect of this JLUS for Camp Grayling JMTC, and finally,

the third section features a discussion of the JLUS issues 

brought up by local stakeholders and refined by the JLUS

project team.

2.1.2 How Camp Grayling JMTC 

and its Surrounding Area Is 

Unique

The region surrounding Camp Grayling JMTC is unique in 

that it provides a large training area, an air-to-ground range, 

and a large airspace for aerial training all in one complex. 

Military activity has been going on in the region for over 100 

years. Camp Grayling JMTC is used by a cross-section of the 

U.S. military, including active-duty and National Guard forces, and as a result, the equipment used to train at the camp 

2

camp grayling 

JMTC and 

community 

study area

chapter overview

2.1 Camp Grayling JMTC Overview ..........2-1

2.1.1 How to Read this Chapter .........2-1

2.1.2 How Camp Grayling JMTC and its 

 Surrounding Area Is Unique .....2-1

2.1.3 Setting..........................................2-3

2.1.4 History .........................................2-3

2.1.5 Mission/Operations ...................2-3

2.1.6 Demographics.............................2-4

2.1.7 Land Use......................................2-5

2.1.8 Zoning..........................................2-7

2.1.9 Incompatible Use .......................2-9

2.2 Camp Grayling JMTC Public 

Participation ......................................2-15

2.3 Camp Grayling JMTC Issues 

Overview.............................................2-16

2.3.1 Issue Definition Process ..........2-16

2.3.2 Camp Grayling JMTC Noise and 

 Military Operations Issues......2-17

2.3.3 Camp Grayling JMTC 

 Environmental Issues..............2-22

2.3.4 Camp Grayling JMTC 

 Transportation and Infrastructure 

 Issues.........................................2-26

2.3.5 Camp Grayling JMTC Community 

 Partnerships Issues .................2-30

2.3.6 Camp Grayling JMTC Economic

 Development Issues ................2-31

is also varied. Nonmilitary groups and agencies also use the 

ranges and other facilities, including Michigan state police, 

county sheriff departments, local clubs, and scout troops.

The training area is also used by international partners such 

as Canada, Great Britain, Australia, and Latvia and Liberia 

(part of the National Guard's State Partnership Program 

that matches states with international security partners).

The surrounding communities and townships are small, 

and the area is mostly rural and wooded, with abundant 

recreational uses. Much of the land on and around Camp 

Grayling is managed by the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) and leased to the Michigan Department of Military and Veterans Affairs (MDMVA). The original

13,000-acre installation footprint was granted to the state 

of Michigan by lumber baron Rasmus Hanson to use as 

forest game preserve and military training. No hunting is 

allowed in the Hanson land grant area, and the public is 

allowed to access much of the large Camp Grayling JMTC 

footprint except during active military training. 

Camp Grayling JMTC has a state-of-the-art Urban Operations training site, used to train soldiers to handle combat 

in urban environments. It features a mock village, including 

subterranean tunnels, to simulate wartime settings. The 

Michigan Army National Guard (MIARNG) mixes live training at the installation with virtual capabilities using state-ofthe-art simulation software.

An impact range at Camp Grayling JMTC.

The Combined Arms Collective Training Facility (CACTF) at 

Camp Grayling JMTC consists of numerous structures to 

train soldiers in Urban Operations capabilities.
2-2 CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Figure 2.1 | Camp Grayling JMTC

Grayling

Ranges 16, 18, & 19

Ranges 8 & 10

Range 30

Complex

Heavy Maneuver Area

Strafing Area

Hartwick Pines

State Park

Guthrie

Lakes

Range 40

Complex

Air-to-Ground

Range

12

Access Control Point

Cantonment

Range 13

Ranges 20 & 21

Lake

Margrethe

Fence

Camp Grayling JMTC

JLUS 2-Mile Study Area

County Boundary

0 Z 10

Miles

WI

MI

Lake

Huron

MI

Camp Grayling JMTC 

is a key piece of 

the Michigan Army 

National Guard 

arsenal, providing topof-the-line training 

land, airspace, and 

facilities. Surrounding 

communities value 

the installation for 

bringing new people 

and economic activity 

to the region, and 

most residents feel 

that the installation has 

a positive impact on 

quality of life. Some 

have concerns about 

noise levels, roads, and 

the impact of growth 

on infrastructure 

capacity.
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA 2-3

An image of Camp Grayling in 1917. (Source: Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division Online)

2.1.3 Setting

The Camp Grayling JMTC study area is located in the rural 

north-central portion of Michigan’s Lower Peninsula. The 

installation cantonment, adjacent to the City of Grayling, is 

approximately 50 miles east of Traverse City and 200 miles 

northwest of Detroit. Access to the area is generally via Interstate 75 (I-75) and Michigan Highway 72 (M-72). 

The abundance of public forest land and the locations of the 

Au Sable and Manistee rivers make the area popular with 

outdoor enthusiasts; activities include hiking, fishing, golfing,

canoeing, kayaking, skiing, snowmobiling, and biking.

Camp Grayling JMTC, the largest National Guard training 

center in the country, spans 147,000 acres in Crawford, 

Kalkaska, and Otsego counties and is split into North Camp 

and South Camp. The study area for this JLUS extends into 

Roscommon, Oscoda, and Montmorency counties.

The Camp Grayling JMTC main cantonment area, located in 

South Camp, is about 4 miles from the City of Grayling, the 

immediate area’s largest population center. Gaylord, a city 

of about 3,600, is a 35-minute drive to the north.

The Camp Grayling JMTC study area has a very short and 

highly variable growing season. Temperatures at Camp 

Grayling JMTC range from an average low of 16.7 degrees 

Fahrenheit in January to an average high of 79.6 degrees in 

July, according to the Midwestern Regional Climate Center. 

The area averages 33.61 inches of precipitation annually. 

The average snowfall is 93.1 inches. 

2.1.4 History

The forested environment surrounding Camp Grayling 

JMTC played a major role in its history, as many of the first

settlements in the area were associated with the trapping 

and lumber industries, and railroad construction in the area 

began in the late 1800s. The first schoolhouse in Grayling

opened in the 1870s, and a railroad depot was built there in 

1882. In 1911, First Mercy Hospital opened in Grayling. Two 

years later Rasmus Hanson, a local lumberman, donated 

13,000 acres of land to the state for military training, which 

later became Camp Grayling JMTC. The camp's historic Officer’s Club building was constructed in 1917. 

In 1914, Hanson founded the Grayling Fish Hatchery, partly in an unsuccessful attempt to save the Michigan Grayling 

from extinction. The hatchery is now owned and operated 

by the Grayling Recreation Authority, and its preservation is 

part of a public-private partnership (P3) with Harrietta Hills 

Trout Farm. The area also had a DuPont Chemical Plant, as 

well as the Hanson and Salling Mill; both closed in 1925. 

However, the area's military contingent was growing. Between 1918 and 1921, the acquisition of 35,000 acres allowed for the first artillery range. The Grayling airport was

developed for the National Guard Air Squadron of Detroit. 

Featuring sand runways, it opened in 1929, and the runways were paved in 1936. An exchange, control tower, fire

department, and barracks were added to the camp in 1942. 

In 1948, the land area of Camp Grayling grew dramatically when more than 53,000 acres were leased in perpetuity from the Michigan Conservation Department (now the 

MDNR). This allowed for tank training at the camp.

An additional 47,000 acres were leased from the MDNR in 

1984. Among the numerous range and facility projects at 

Camp Grayling in that part since the 1960s, including the 

development of a logistical support facility, motor pools, 

and the Maneuver Area Training Equipment Site (MATES) 

facility, which was built in 1986. More recently, the wastewater treatment facility was added in 1991 and a multipurpose range complex in Range 30 was built in 1997.

2.1.5 Mission/Operations

The Alpena CRTC and Camp Grayling JMTC are vital and 

irreplaceable components of the U.S. military. They are 

physically separated but operationally inseparable. Camp 

Grayling acts as the local garrison component of the range 

complex while Alpena CRTC oversees and controls training 

operations and management of the entire complex stretching from the eastern border with Canada to the western 

edge of the camp including the supporting special use airspace (SUA) complex. While Alpena CRTC is a Michigan Air 

National Guard installation, Camp Grayling JMTC is owned 

and operated by the MIARNG.

Camp Grayling JMTC is directly accessible from interstate 

highways and has its own railhead for equipment delivery. 

This training complex provides units from all branches of 

service under the DOD opportunities to train and qualify 

at nearly every activity necessary for national defense. It 

provides for joint, intra-service operational training, which 

is imperative in today’s asymmetrical battlefield. Its massive

footprint is among only a small few in the nation that can 

support mission command across extended distances and 

the ability to synchronize joint attack maneuvers to maximize the most effective use of the battle space while retaining freedom and flexibility of action, protecting against

fratricide, and integrating joint and multinational forces in a 

dynamic, decisive operating environment. It provides realistic and simulated environments and four-season capability 

to train for military operations in all conditions.

This includes simultaneous integration of ground forces 

(both on foot and vehicular), ground-to-air (including artillery, mortar, and small arms fire), air (including rotary wing,

fixed wing, fighters, bombers, reconnaissance, communications, and unmanned aerial systems [UAS]), air-to-ground 

(strafing, door gunnery, aerial bombing, missiles, close air

support [CAS], medical evacuation [MEDEVAC], electronic 

detection and prevention, and laser targeting), and space 

assets (including intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance [ISR], and communications satellites and receivers). 

Camp Grayling JMTC comprises a few component features:

 RANGE 30 COMPLEX: Includes 65,000-acre heavy and 

light maneuver areas, small arms firing ranges for training and qualification, sniper ranges, convoy training, improvised explosive device (IED) awareness training, military operations on urban terrain (MOUT) mock villages, 

a heavy multipurpose range complex, rocket launching 

systems training, UAS launch and recovery and flight

zone within restricted airspace (RA), and equipment 

storage and maintenance support facilities.

 RANGE 40 COMPLEX: Includes over 17,000-acres of maneuver area, 10,000 acres of live-fire area with a duded impact zone, small-arms fire capability, artillery and

mortar direct fire, mechanized live fire, combined arms

live fire, rotary-wing and fixed-wing aerial gunnery, rotary-wing door gunnery, and aerial bombing from as high 

as 23,000 feet above mean sea level (MSL) within RA.

 SOUTH CAMP GRAYLING: Includes small-arms ranges 

for training and qualification on all current firearms,

infantry squadron battle course, mortar and grenade 

ranges, light demolition range, fire movement range,

and known distance ranges.

 OPERATIONAL READINESS TRAINING COMPLEX AT 

CAMP GRAYLING: Includes 8,000 transient bed spaces, 

53 officers' quarters, 45 mess halls, seven maintenance

buildings, seven classrooms, and two distance-learning 

centers. It has over 220,000 SF of warehouse storage 

space, bulk fuel storage for aircraft and ground equipment, munitions storage facilities, and a wide variety of 

recreational support facilities.

 GRAYLING ARMY AIRFIELD (AAF): Includes an area 

large enough to support up to a combat aviation brigade 

including 60 helicopter tie-downs, housing to support 

300 troops plus an additional 300 person bivouac area, 

dining facilities, training and administrative facilities, educational and operations facilities, two paved runways 

(both 5,000 feet long by 150 feet wide) capable of landing 

a fully loaded C-17, a control tower overseeing Class-D 

controlled airspace, aircraft maintenance hangars, a 

launch and recovery runway for RQ-7B Shadow UAS, 

and Shadow UAS simulators. The airfield is owned and

operated by the Army but is open to the public. Grayling 

AAF supports slightly more overall activity than Alpena 

County Regional Airport but fewer military flights.

 SPECIAL USE AND PROTECTED AIRSPACE: One of the 

largest airspace complexes in North America, including 

approximately 18,000 square nautical miles of low-altitude (below 18,000 feet MSL) and high-altitude (above 

18,000 MSL) SUA, some extending as high as 45,000 feet 

MSL and as low as 300 feet over Lake Huron. It includes 

approximately 935 square nautical miles of protected 

airspace for dangerous activities like tactical flight maneuvering, air interdiction, aerial denial, chaff and flare

release, aerial gunnery, and bombing designed to protect nonparticipating aircraft.

The training activities at Camp Grayling JMTC bring as many 

as 250,000 personnel through the area per year. The installation supports 44 Army National Guard personnel, 54 state 

employees, and 20 contract employees with an additional 

56 temporary employees during training events. 

Downtown Grayling in 2018.
2-4 CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

2.1.6 Demographics

The Camp Grayling JMTC study area for this JLUS is set in a 

largely rural area in Michigan. As of 2017, data shows 1,820 

people reside in the City of Grayling, with 5,705 residing in 

Grayling Township. In general, northern Michigan is much 

less urban than the rest of the state, and the study area is 

primarily rural. 

Although there are only about 174 personnel housed at 

Camp Grayling JMTC annually, approximately 10,000 troops 

train there throughout the year. Camp Grayling JMTC is a 

continued source of economic activity for the local community. The federal funds that pay camp employee salaries 

are subsequently used to pay local taxes and to support 

schools, hospitals, churches, and local businesses. 

Outside of the military, property tax is the primary generator of revenue. The City of Grayling has a workforce population of 803 people. In 2017, the leading industries in Grayling were health care, social services, retail, accommodation 

and food services, and public administration.

Population Projections

Population in the area has slowly been declining since 2000. 

This could be due to the aging population of Grayling and 

high poverty rates. However, unemployment rates have decreased significantly, dropping from 15.3 percent in 2010

to 5.6 percent in 2016. Also, the cost of living is very low 

compared to other rural areas in the region. The forecasted 

population looks to increase by the year 2022 due to key 

growth potential factors. See Figure 2.2, City of Grayling 

Population Trend, 1910-2020.

Growth Potential

There are several key growth potential factors and strategies that the Camp Grayling JMTC study area has planned 

to implement. These plans are in place to help boost the 

economic and population growth potential in the area.

In an effort to attract skilled talent to the area and curb a

decreasing population, a 10-year talent plan was commissioned for the 11-county Northeast Michigan region. The 

plan focuses on long-term growth, bringing to the region 

full-time, higher-wage positions in the highest growth industries. The Northeast Michigan 10-year talent plan provides a timeline, best practices, and recommendations for 

assessing and bringing in skilled employees to the region. 

Northeast Michigan is looking to adequately plan for longterm growth by anticipating industry trends and educational needs. The vision for the future of Northeast Michigan 

is to fill 10,000 jobs in 10 years. For details, see Table 2.1,

Northeast Michigan Industry Forecast. 

Grayling will soon experience a resurgence in the forestry 

industry. A Chilean forestry company, Arauco, is opening 

a particle board factory in 2018. This is poised to bring in 

hundreds of local jobs and boost the economy significantly.

Once the factory opens, it will become the second-largest 

county employer after Grayling’s hospital, dropping Camp 

Grayling JMTC to third largest.

The City of Grayling has recently prepared a thorough economic development strategy. The strategy specifies detailed steps, responsible parties, and timelines for implementation to boost Grayling's economic growth. The steps 

focus on the key issues in the area, some of which include: 

 Child care options

 Better communication with Camp Grayling JMTC

 Transportation

 Housing options

 Cell service and internet access

 Diversity in dining options

 Appearance improvement to the downtown area

Table 2.1 | Northeastern Michigan Industry Forecast

INDUSTRY EMPLOYMENT 2012 EMPLOYMENT 2022 PERCENT CHANGE (%)

Retail Trade 10,960 10,860 -0.9

Healthcare and Social Assistance 9,560 10,212 6.8

Transportation and Warehousing 1,460 1,630 11.6

Manufacturing 5,170 5,420 4.8

Construction 2,380 2,780 16.8

Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing, and Hunting 1,790 1,850 3.4

Professional and Business Services 2,320 2,620 12.9

Accommodation and Food Services 6,410 6,860 7.0

Leisure and Hospitality 7,530 8,040 6.8

Government 6,270 6,090 -2.9

Financial Activities 2,320 2,360 1.7

Source: http://www.discovernortheastmichigan.org/downloads/rpi_10_year_talent_plan.pdf

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020

Figure 2.2 | City of Grayling Population Trend, 1910-2020

Figure 2.3 | Camp Grayling JMTC Study Area 

Figure 2.4 | Camp Grayling JMTC Study Area 

Demographics

2017 population

49.7

2017 median age

13,344

1. Esri

2. 2010 US Census

education attainment

2% < 9th grade

35% high school diploma

27% some college/no degree

11% associates degree

16% bachelor's degree

8% grad/professional degree

2017 median 

home value

$119,549 $45,400

2017 median 

household 

yearly income1

number 

of family 

households2

3,887

2011-15 ACS 

households below 

the poverty level

17.4%
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA 2-5

Otsego County

Crawford County

Roscommon County

Kalkaska County

Antrim County

Missaukee County

Ogemaw County

Crawford County

Oscoda County

Montmorency County

Old Us-27

Ingersoll Rd

Cr-F01

Salling Ave

N Higgins Lake Dr

Boardman Rd

Plum Valley Rd NE

W Federal Hwy

N Down River Rd E

Fletcher Rd

N 13 Mile Rd

Deeter Rd

Mapes Rd

W Sharon Rd SE

S Mcmasters Bridge Rd

N Sherman Rd

W Cr-612 Hayes Tower Rd

W Miller Rd

S Stephan Bridge Rd

Twin Lake Rd NE

W 4 Mile Rd

M-76

Nash Rd

CR-612 NE

Chase Bridge Rd

Mancelona Rd

Old State Rd

E Cr-612

Lovells Rd

N Red Oak Rd

M-88

 ̈¦§75

 ̈¦§75

 ̈¦§75

£¤131

£¤131

£¤127

ST93

ST66

ST72

ST72

ST32

Grayling Lake

Margrethe

Guthrie

Lake

Camp Grayling JMTC

JLUS 2-Mile Study Area

County Boundary

Existing Land Use

Residential

Commercial

Institutional/Service

Agricultural

Non-Forest Uplands

Upland Forest

Lowland Forest

Wetlands

Water

Industrial

WI

MI

MI

Lake

Huron

0 Z 4.5

Miles

Figure 2.5 | Camp Grayling JMTC Land Use 2.1.7 Land Use

The divisions of land use are categorized into natural areas 

and those created by human activity. They were organized 

in this manner to reconcile the differing land-use categories

provided by the counties within the study area. Man-made 

uses are concentrated along the roadways throughout the 

study area but primarily located in the City of Grayling. Areas of man-made uses consist of commercial, industrial, 

recreational, and residential uses; the map only indicates 

the locations of the uses, not the density of these uses.

It should be noted that land use is a portrayal of the actual use of real property and, while it informs zoning, is not 

considered to be legally enforceable. It is generally used 

for reference and various data analytics. Many of these 

land uses may be in conflict with codified land-use regulations that are governed by the townships that fall within the 

study area boundaries. Often the land use map is used as 

the template for the creation of zoning laws that are compatible with the current land uses, or in some cases to alter 

a certain use for desired future development. 

The study area for the Camp Grayling JMTC consists of over 

300,000 acres of various land uses. Included in the landuse analysis are Crawford, Kalkaska, and Missaukee counties. A vast majority, approximately 96 percent, of the area 

are natural uses. These include lowland and upland forest, 

wetlands, water, and nonforested uplands. Among the land 

uses that are man-made, residential areas consist of 2 percent and are mainly located around Lake Margrethe and in 

the City of Grayling.

Figure 2.6 | Camp Grayling JMTC Study Area 

Land Use Distribution

74% upland forest

8% lowland forest

4% wetlands

2% residential

1% water body

1% institutional/service

1% industrial

<1% commercial

<1% agriculture

9% non-forest uplands
2-6 CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Figure 2.8 | City of Grayling Land Use

WI

MI

Lake

Huron

MI

Guthrie

Lakes

Otsego County

Crawford County

Briggs Rd

Kinney Rd

Lovells Rd

The Ford Rd

E Marlette Rd

Viking Club Rd

Sand Lake Trl

Mercury Trl

Softwood Trl

Ram Net Rnch

W Babbitt Rd

Briggs Rd

N Sherman Rd

Calker Rd

Kinney Rd

Sherman Rd

Salem Rd

Kinney Rd

0 Z 1

Miles

Camp Grayling JMTC

County Boundary

Existing Land Use

Residential

Institutional/Service

Agricultural

Non-Forest Uplands

Upland Forest

Lowland Forest

Wetlands

Water

Industrial

WI

MI

Lake

Huron

MI

Grayling

Airfield

Grayling

 ̈¦§75-B

 ̈¦§75

ST72

ST93

0 Z 0.5

Miles

Camp Grayling JMTC

County Boundary

Existing Land Use

Residential

Commercial

Institutional/Service

Non-Forest Uplands

Upland Forest

Lowland Forest

Wetlands

Water

Industrial

Figure 2.7 | Guthrie Lakes Land Use
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA 2-7

Figure 2.10 | Camp Grayling JMTC Zoning 

Distribution

2.1.8 Zoning

The Camp Grayling JMTC study area includes portions of 

six counties, each with their own zoning regulations and/

or zoning controlled by the townships within. Endowed by 

the state of Michigan to enforce zoning, the townships included in the study area have created zoning for each of 

their respective jurisdictions. The zoning data analyzed for 

this section was taken from the townships and the City of 

Grayling that are within Crawford County, Kalkaska County, 

Otsego County, Oscoda County, and Roscommon County. 

Missaukee County is not zoned. 

The varying zones have been grouped into eight categories that best fit the overall description of the zone. While

the categories do not take into account the intensity of the 

zone, they lay out the legal mechanisms available within the 

study areas that control the use of property. 

Among the zoning categories, a natural resource (or open 

space type district) is the largest at 72 percent of the study 

area. This zone contains large portions of Camp Grayling 

JMTC that are inaccessible by nonmilitary personnel. Recreational areas accessible to the public at Camp Grayling 

JMTC area not included. The second-largest zoning category is residential, at varying levels of density. This category 

accounts for 16 percent of the study area. Although the 

zone category is located throughout the area, the highest 

densities are within the City of Grayling. Residentially zoned 

areas in the eastern portion of the study area are of very 

low density despite covering a large area. It should be noted that the military operations zone is a category assigned 

by only one of the townships within Crawford County and 

is not representative or inclusive of the entirety of Camp 

Grayling JMTC.

Otsego County

Crawford County

Roscommon County

Kalkaska County

Antrim County

Missaukee County

Ogemaw County

Crawford County

Oscoda County

Montmorency County

Old Us-27

Ingersoll Rd

Cr-F01

Salling Ave

N Higgins Lake Dr

Boardman Rd

Plum Valley Rd NE

W Federal Hwy

N Down River Rd E

Fletcher Rd

N 13 Mile Rd

Deeter Rd

Mapes Rd

W Sharon Rd SE

S Mcmasters Bridge Rd

N Sherman Rd

W Cr-612 Hayes Tower Rd

W Miller Rd

S Stephan Bridge Rd

Twin Lake Rd NE

W 4 Mile Rd

M-76

Nash Rd

CR-612 NE

Chase Bridge Rd

Mancelona Rd

Old State Rd

E Cr-612

Lovells Rd

N Red Oak Rd

M-88

 ̈¦§75

 ̈¦§75

 ̈¦§75

£¤131

£¤131

£¤127

ST93

ST66

ST72

ST72

ST32

Grayling

Lake

Margrethe

Guthrie

Lake

Camp Grayling JMTC

JLUS 2-Mile Study Area

City of Grayling

County Boundary

Zoning

Agriculture

Commercial

Industrial

Military Operations

Natural Resources/Open Space

Residential

Transportation

Water Body

WI

MI

MI

Lake

Huron

0 Z 4.5

Miles

Figure 2.9 | Camp Grayling JMTC Zoning 

72% natural resources

16% residential

4% military operations

3% agriculture

2% water body

1% industrial

1% commercial

<1% transportation
2-8 CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Figure 2.12 | City of Grayling Zoning

WI

MI

Lake

Huron

MI

Guthrie

Lakes

W Babbitt Rd

Calker Rd

Crawford County

Otsego County

Briggs Rd

Briggs Rd

Kinney Rd

Kinney Rd

Sand Lake Trl

Lovells Rd

The Ford Rd

Ram Net Rnch

Viking Club Rd

Mercury Trl

E Marlette Rd

Softwood Trl

Sherman Rd

Salem Rd

0 Z 1

Miles

Camp Grayling JMTC

County Boundary

Zoning

Agriculture

Military Operations

Natural Resources/Open Space

Residential

Water Body

WI

MI

Lake

Huron

MI

Grayling

Airfield

Grayling

 ̈¦§75-B

 ̈¦§75

ST72

ST93

0 Z 0.5

Miles

Camp Grayling JMTC

County Boundary

Zoning

Agriculture

Commercial

Industrial

Natural Resources/Open Space

Residential

Transportation

Water Body

Figure 2.11 | Guthrie Lakes Zoning
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA 2-9

2.1.9 Incompatible Use

Land Use in APZs

Clear zones (CZ) and accident potential zones (APZs I and II) 

occur at the ends of runways and were established based 

on crash patterns. For an Army Class A runway – designed 

for small, light aircraft – the CZ starts at the end of the runway and extends outward 3,000 feet at 1,000 feet wide. It 

has the highest accident potential of the three zones and 

has few uses that are compatible. APZ I extends from the 

CZ an additional 2,500 feet in an area of lower but still considerable accident potential, and APZ II extends out from 

APZ I an additional 2,500 feet, possessing less accident potential than APZ I but still enough to warrant land use restriction recommendations. 

The majority of the APZ for Grayling AAF falls within the 

jurisdiction of Gray ling Township and the City of Grayling. Within those areas that fall into the APZ, the majority 

is made up of natural uses at 56 percent. Residential use 

makes up 22 percent of the land within the APZs, followed 

by 17 percent industrial, 3 percent commercial, and less 

than 1 percent institutional.

Figure 2.13 | Camp Grayling JMTC Incompatible Use – Land Use in APZs

 ̈¦§75

Grayling

 ̈¦§75

 ̈¦§75

ST93

ST72

ST72

Grayling

Airfield

Shellenbarger La

Lake

Margrethe

Au Sable

River

APZ I

APZ II

CZ

CZ

CZ

CZ

APZ I

APZ I

APZ I

APZ II

APZ II

APZ II

Lake State RR

256

Old Us-27

N Down River Rd W

Camp Grayling JMTC

Grayling Airfield

City of Grayling

Air Accident Zones

APZ I

APZ II

Clear Zone (CZ)

Existing Land Use

Residential

Commercial

Institutional/Service

Non-Forest Uplands

Upland Forest

Lowland Forest

Wetlands

Water

Industrial

WI

MI

MI

Lake

Huron

0 Z 3,000

Feet

Figure 2.14 | Camp Grayling JMTC Land Use 

Distribution in APZs

45% upland forest

17% industrial

4% lowland forest

4% wetlands

3% commercial

2% non-forest uplands

1% water body

<1% institutional/service

22% residential
2-10 CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Land Use in Noise Contours

Varying uses of the land within the 75+ dB noise contours 

highlights the many opportunities for harmful human exposure to increased sound levels. A vast portion of the 

land uses within this area are classified as either a forest or

wetland and thus the likelihood of human exposure is decreased. However, 2 percent of the use is residential, which 

would have higher chances of exposure to higher sound 

levels. 

Otsego County

Kalkaska County

Crawford County

Oscoda County

 ̈¦§75

 ̈¦§75

ST93

ST72

ST72

Grayling Lake

Margrethe

Guthrie

Lake

N Sherman Rd

C

R-612

E Cr-612

N Down River Rd E

CR-612 NE

264

W Cr-612

259

Marlette Rd

W Miller

Rd

Old Us-27

M-93

Twin Lake

Rd

E North Down River Rd

S

Wakel ey

Bri dge

R d

N

Mcmaster s Bridge Rd

W Bear Lake

Rd

Chase

Bridge Rd

S Mcmasters Bridge Rd

S

Stephan

Bridge Rd

Lovells Rd

75

dB

104 dB

104 dB

104 dB

104 dB

104 dB

75 dB

104 dB

104 dB

87 dB

87 dB

87 dB

JLUS 2-Mile Study Area

Camp Grayling JMTC

City of Grayling

County Boundary

Noise Contours (75+ dB)

Existing Land Use

Residential

Commercial

Industrial

Institutional/Service

Non-Forest Uplands

Upland Forest

Lowland Forest

Wetlands

Water

WI

MI

Lake

Huron

MI

0 Z 2.5

Miles

Figure 2.15 | Camp Grayling JMTC Incompatible Use – Land Use in Noise Contours

Figure 2.16 | Camp Grayling JMTC Land Use 

Distribution in Noise Contours

66% upland forest

12% lowland forest

3% wetlands

2% institutional/service

2% residential

1% water body

<1% industrial

<1% commercial

15% non-forest uplands
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA 2-11

Figure 2.18 | Camp Grayling JMTC Cantonment/North Camp Land Use in Noise Contours

WI

MI

Lake

Huron

MI

Guthrie

Lakes

Otsego County

Crawford County

Briggs Rd

Kinney Rd

Lovells Rd

The Ford Rd

E Marlette Rd

Viking Club Rd

Sand Lake Trl

Mercury Trl

Softwood Trl

Ram Net Rnch

W Babbitt Rd

Briggs Rd

N Sherman Rd

Calker Rd

Kinney Rd

Sherman Rd

Salem Rd

Kinney Rd

87 dB

104 dB

87 dB

87 dB

104 dB

0 Z 1

Miles

Camp Grayling JMTC

County Boundary

Noise Contours (75+ dB)

Existing Land Use

Residential

Industrial

Non-Forest Uplands

Upland Forest

Lowland Forest

Wetlands

Water

WI

MI

Lake

Huron

MI

75-B  ̈¦§

 ̈¦§75

 ̈¦§75

ST72

ST72

Grayling

87 dB

104 dB

75 dB

87 dB

75 dB

Z0 1

Miles

Camp Grayling JMTC

County Boundary

Noise Contours (75+ dB)

Existing Land Use

Residential

Commercial

Industrial

Institutional/Service

Non-Forest Uplands

Upland Forest

Lowland Forest

Wetlands

Water

Figure 2.17 | Guthrie Lakes Land Use in Noise Contours
2-12 CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Grayling

 ̈¦§75

 ̈¦§75

 ̈¦§75

ST93

ST72

ST72

Grayling

Airfield

Shellenbarger La

Lake

Margrethe

Au Sable

River

APZ I

APZ II

CZ

CZ

CZ

CZ

APZ I

APZ I

APZ I

APZ II

APZ II

APZ II

Lake State RR

Camp Grayling JMTC

Grayling Airfield

City of Grayling

Air Accident Zones

APZ I

APZ II

Clear Zone (CZ)

Zoning

Commercial

Industrial

Natural Resources/Open Space

Residential

Transportation

Water Body WI

MI

Lake

Huron

MI

0 Z 3,000

Feet

Zoning in APZs Figure 2.19 | Camp Grayling JMTC Incompatible Use – Zoning in APZs

The majority of the APZ for the Grayling AAF falls within the 

jurisdiction of the Grayling Township and the City of Grayling. Within those areas that fall into the APZs, 63 percent 

are categorized as natural resource/open space, and 31 

percent are classified as some form of residential or commercial. Residential zones make up 24 percent, or approximately 175 acres. The commercial and residential zones 

that fall within the APZ and CZ areas cover the densest area 

of the City of Grayling, meaning a large number of residents 

could potentially be exposed to a potential accident scenario.

Figure 2.20 | Camp Grayling JMTC Zoning 

Distribution in APZs

63% natural resources

24% residential

7% commercial

4% water body

2% transportation
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA 2-13

Otsego County

Kalkaska County

Crawford County

Oscoda County

 ̈¦§75

 ̈¦§75

ST93

ST72

ST72

Grayling Lake

Margrethe

Guthrie

Lake

Lovells Rd

S

Stephan

Bridge Rd

S Mcmasters Bridge Rd

Chase

Bridge Rd

W Bear Lake

Rd

N

Mcmaster s Bridge Rd

S

Wakel ey

Bri dge

R d

E North Down River Rd

Twin Lake

Rd

M-93

Old Us-27

W Miller

Rd

Marlette Rd

259 W Cr-612

CR-612 NE

N Down River Rd E

E Cr-612

C

R-612

N Sherman Rd

75

dB

104 dB

104 dB

104 dB

104 dB

104 dB

75 dB

104 dB

104 dB

87 dB

87 dB

87 dB

JLUS 2-Mile Study Area

Camp Grayling JMTC

City of Grayling

County Boundary

Noise Contours (75+ dB)

Zoning

Agriculture

Commercial

Industrial

Military Operations

Natural Resources/Open Space

Residential

Water Body

WI

MI

MI

Lake

Huron

0 Z 2.5

Miles

Figure 2.21 | Camp Grayling JMTC Incompatible Use – Zoning in Noise Contours

Zoning in Noise Contours

A large majority, 86 percent, of the areas that fall within 

the 75+ dB contours are zoned as natural resources/open 

space. Because of the limited development in this zone, human exposure to unhealthy decibel levels is likewise limited. Exceptions include the residential areas surrounding 

the Guthrie Lakes, residential zones in eastern Kalkaska 

County, and portions of the City of Grayling. While these 

areas comprise only 2 percent of the 75+ dB areas, there is 

potential for the detrimental effects of the noise to be felt,

and mitigation will need to occur in these areas. 

In the worst case, residences are just 500 feet from the 

range boundary, 2,800 feet from established artillery firing

points and approximately 1 mile from the impact area. That 

is too close for sound to dissipate to a reasonable level for 

a residential area.

Figure 2.22 | Camp Grayling JMTC Zoning 

Distribution in Noise Contours

86% natural resources

12% military operations

2% residential

<1% water body

<1% commercial

The Guthrie Lakes residential area lies inside the Range 40 

noise contours.
2-14 CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Figure 2.24 | Camp Grayling JMTC Cantonment/North Camp Zoning in Noise Contours

WI

MI

Lake

Huron

MI

Guthrie

Lakes

Otsego County

Crawford County

Briggs Rd

Kinney Rd

Lovells Rd

The Ford Rd

E Marlette Rd

Viking Club Rd

Sand Lake Trl

Mercury Trl

Softwood Trl

Ram Net Rnch

W Babbitt Rd

Briggs Rd

N Sherman Rd

Calker Rd

Kinney Rd

Sherman Rd

Salem Rd

Kinney Rd

87 dB

104 dB

87 dB

87 dB

104 dB

0 Z 1

Miles

Camp Grayling JMTC

County Boundary

Noise Contours (75+ dB)

Zoning

Military Operations

Natural Resources/Open Space

Residential

Water Body

WI

MI

Lake

Huron

MI

75-B  ̈¦§

 ̈¦§75

 ̈¦§75

ST72

ST72

Grayling

87 dB

104 dB

75 dB

87 dB

75 dB

Z0 1

Miles

Camp Grayling JMTC

County Boundary

Noise Contours (75+ dB)

Zoning

Agriculture

Commercial

Industrial

Natural Resources/Open Space

Residential

Water Body

Figure 2.23 | Guthrie Lakes Zoning in Noise Contours
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA 2-15

2.2 Camp Grayling JMTC Public Participation

The public participation process for Camp Grayling JMTC 

involved a suite of TC/PC meetings, stakeholder meetings, 

community survey, working group meetings, and one-onone stakeholder interviews. The initial TC/PC meeting for 

Camp Grayling JMTC took place on April 24, 2017, at the 

University Center in Gaylord, Michigan. During this meeting, 

participants discussed expanding the TC list, approved the 

project work plan, and coordinated logistics for the tours. 

The Camp Grayling JMTC installation tour for TC/PC members took place on June 5, 2017. The purpose of the tour 

was to provide TC and PC members with a more detailed 

understanding of the Camp Grayling JMTC operations, procedures, and facilities. 

On June 6, 2017, TC and PC members met at Grayling Township Hall for a facilitated issues identification discussion.

Through this meeting, TC and PC members identified an initial list of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats 

(SWOT) related to the Camp Grayling JMTC. Community 

stakeholders met the evening of June 6, 2017, at the Kirtland Health Sciences Center to engage in a similar issues 

identification discussion using the SWOT method. The JLUS

project team advertised for this meeting in the Crawford 

County Avalanche and local radio stations. In addition, TC 

and PC members used their internal outreach mechanisms, 

such as email distribution lists and websites, to promote 

the meeting. During the meeting, the JLUS project team 

presented the JLUS process and facilitated an issues identification discussion. Section 2.3 provides more detail on this

process and the results. 

After the initial stakeholder meetings, the JLUS project team 

conducted a series of one-on-one interviews with key stakeholders. Sixty stakeholders participated in the interview 

process. In addition to interviews, the JLUS project team 

sought broader stakeholder input through a survey made 

available on the NEMCOG website for 3 months. A copy of 

the survey questions is available in Appendix B, as part of 

the Public Participation Plan. Members of the TC and PC 

used their existing outreach mechanisms, such as websites 

and newsletters, to help the JLUS project team promote 

participation in the survey. NEMCOG also provided information to the Crawford County Avalanche and local radio 

stations. Subsequent news articles and radio coverage promoted participation in the survey. Stakeholders submitted 

nearly 200 survey responses. 

The survey results for Camp Grayling JMTC are presented 

in Figure 2.25. Overall, the survey responses indicate that a 

majority of stakeholders sharing their perspective are comfortable with the operations at Camp Grayling JMTC and believe it is a significant contributor to the local economy and

has a positive impact on the quality of life of surrounding 

communities. Stakeholders responding to the survey have 

a greater concern about noise from Camp Grayling JMTC 

(62 percent) than recreational access (30 percent) or traffic

(27 percent). 

Stakeholder input from the SWOT analysis, the one-on-one 

interviews, and the survey helped the JLUS Project Team 

understand the comprehensive universe of issues and prioritize those issues for further strategy development. The 

second JLUS project stakeholder meeting for Camp Grayling JMTC took place October 10, 2017, at Camp Grayling 

JMTC. This community update and input meeting focused 

on reviewing the JLUS process steps, status, SWOT results, 

and identification of possible strategies to deal with priority

issues identified by stakeholders. Additional news articles

and radio coverage discussed this meeting and continued 

to promote participation in the online community survey.

Additional TC and PC meetings took place in November and 

December 2017 and continued through the spring of 2018. 

During these meetings, TC and PC members discussed JLUS 

project status and action items, data needs, and next steps. 

Additional stakeholder meetings and working group sessions, both in-person and via conference calls, took place 

during 2018 to address details of the recommended strategies for each of the priority issues. During these meetings, 

stakeholders provided feedback on the strategies, identifying key information that will assist with successful implementation over time. The strategies and associated recommendations and challenges identified by the JLUS project

team with input from stakeholders are described in more 

detail in Section 4.

of those surveyed are 

comfortable with military 56% operations in their area

42% of those surveyed have no 

concerns about military operations 

with regard to public health, safety, 

housing, or general welfare

40% of those surveyed believe 

Camp Grayling JMTC has no impact 

on their property value; 

50% believe it decreases the value; 

10% believe it increases the value

62% of those surveyed believe 

that Camp Grayling JMTC has a 

positive impact on the surrounding 

communities’ quality of life

66% of those surveyed perceive 

Camp Grayling JMTC’s relationship 

with surrounding property and 

business owners as positive

Figure 2.25 | Survey Highlights

79% of those surveyed believe Camp Grayling JMTC 

is a significant contributor to the local economy

30% of those surveyed 

are concerned with 

recreational access

62% of those surveyed 

are concerned about 

noise levels

27% of those surveyed 

are concerned about 

traffic

49% believe potential growth 

of Camp Grayling JMTC will 

have a significant effect on 

infrastructure capacity

61% believe renewable 

resources such as wind and 

solar are vital to the Camp 

Grayling JMTC area

48% believe that 

coordination/communication 

with Camp Grayling facilitates 

an efficient flow of traffic
2-16 CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

2.3 Camp Grayling JMTC Issues Overview

2.3.1 Issue Definition Process

The first opportunity for the public and project stakeholders to share thoughts on their proximity to Camp Grayling 

JMTC was at a series of discussion meetings on June 6, 2017. 

There, the consultant team led TC and PC members through 

an issues collection exercise to gather input. These issues 

could be positive or negative.

The issues were sorted into four categories: strengths, 

weaknesses, opportunities, and threats, and then meeting 

participants voted on which issues mattered the most to 

them. Later that same day, the consultant team led area 

residents through the same exercise at a public meeting. 

The results of that analysis can be seen in Figure 2.26, Camp 

Grayling JMTC SWOT Results. Larger font size indicates issues that received the most votes. Detailed results are 

provided in Appendix C. Additional notes and input were 

gathered during the meetings, as well as during individual 

interviews with stakeholders.

All of the input from stakeholders, the TC and PC, and the 

online survey was considered when drafting the final list of

issues. The survey was closed on November 30, 2017, with 

over 200 responses. 

Along with stakeholder feedback, a large trove of data from 

NEMCOG and other local sources was considered, including 

demographic data, existing studies, and geographic information systems (GIS) data on land use and other facets of 

the region.

Six overarching categories emerged: 

 Military Operations

 Noise

 Environmental

 Transportation and Infrastructure

 Community Partnerships

 Economic Development

All of the issues raised fell into one of those categories, 

which are described in more detail on the following pages. 

Figure 2.26 | Camp Grayling JMTC SWOT Results

Camp Grayling JMTC SWOT analysis results

S W O T

strengths weaknesses opportunities threats

PFCs

Road Conditions

Public 

Relations

Airport: Sound and View Buffer

Flight Path

Economic Impact

Sustainability/ 

Recycling

Noise: Camp 

Grayling 

Operations

Runway Expansion: Trees

Tax Burden

Internet 

Access Noise: Aircraft

Noise: Impact on 

Communities

DNR Tree Cutting

Poor Cell Phone 

Reception

MATES

Communication with 

Areas Surrounding 

Camp Grayling

Economic Monitoring

Wildfires/

Fire Control

PA288 – 

Enforce Resources

Ground Water 

Contamination

PA288

Education

Road Conditions

Wildlife: Contiguous Habitat

Community 

Cooperation

Sights/Sounds of Freedom

Positive Community Interaction

Simulated Training

Positive Members of the Community

Historic Reputation

No Land Growth

Continuing Improvement 

of Public Relations

Camp Grayling Operations: 

Noise Improvement T&E Species Habitat

Wide Name Recognition

Best Group Ever

Multi-county Collaboration

Night Operations Impact 

on Communities

Camp Grayling Operations: Low Flying

Displaced Wildlife

Clear Cutting

Emergency Response: 

Summer Peak

New Gates

Infrastructure Disrepair

Emergency Response Notification

Communication about 

Operations

Camp Grayling 5-year Expansion Plan

Future of Joint Recycling

Lake Recreation Effects

Summer Peak

Increase Tanks

Tank Trails

Double Northern Strike

In Grants

Out Grant Disposal

ASP Protection

UXO

Fuel Point Protection

AT/FP

Airfield Water Contamination

Fire Impact to Training

Vertical 

Hazards

Public Safety

In Grants and Out Grants

PA288 ORV Trail Posting

Property Damage due to Wildfires

Social Media

Silent Sports

Forest Health

Energy Efficiency

Stormwater Management

Interoperability

Facilities as a 

Community Resource

Airfield Expansion

Virtual Pipeline

Population Surge

COA 4 UAS to 

Restricted Airspace

Public Recreation

Public Access North Down River 

I-75 Road

Disaster Communications

Water Quality

Four Mile/I-75

Siltation

Infrastructure

Swimmers Itch

Shortage of 

Emergency Responders

Soil Erosion

BAPS

Fire Fighting Costs

Visitors Trail

High Season 

Problem Intersections

Traffic 

Congestion

Social Media Perception

Vegetation Removal

Logistical Trail

Freeway Interchanges

(Choke Points)

Emergency Responders Community Support

Wildlife: Partnerships

147,000-acre Facility Air Space

Wildfires Required Burns

UAS

Grayling Army Airfield

State Partnerships

Research and Development

Positive Deterrent

Wildlife: T&E 

Research

Alpena-Grayling Partnership

Restricted 

Air Space

CG MATES 

Partnership Increased Throughput

Rising Tide

DSCA

Varieties of Land Ownership

Designated Natural Rivers

NWTF Cooperative 

WL Management

Facilities

Hanson Hills 

Recreation Area

Boundary Management

Frequency 

Capacity

(Items in the smallest font size received less than 5 votes.)

(Items in the smallest font size got less than 5 votes.)

Figure 2.27 | Camp Grayling JMTC Issues Analysis Process

input

Tetra Tech solicits feedback via public 

meetings, online surveys, and 

interviews with Camp Grayling JMTC 

and Alpena CRTC JLUS stakeholders.

data analysis

Tetra Tech considers the SWOT 

analysis, survey responses, and 

previous studies, highlighting the 

most important issues.

output

Tetra Tech presents the issues to 

JLUS stakeholders, who vet them to 

make sure their interests are 

captured. Tetra Tech then creates 

strategies based on these issues.



JLUS stakeholders participate in a SWOT analysis during the June discussion meetings.
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA 2-17

2.3.2 Camp Grayling JMTC Noise 

and Military Operations 

Issues

Noise issues are generated by military operations including ground activities at the Camp Grayling JMTC ranges and 

air activities throughout the region stretching from the Canadian border to the north, the middle of Lake Huron to 

the east, and to Camp Grayling JMTC to the west. This vast 

area supports all manner of military activities necessary 

for training military personnel in preparation for combat. 

There are primarily three types of military airspace: 

 MILITARY OPERATIONS AREAS (MOAS): These lie in 

what is considered low-altitude airspace below 18,000 

feet MSL. This type of airspace does not restrict commercial or private air traffic but pilots are warned that the

area (when activated) can contain high-speed military 

aircraft conducting potentially dangerous tactical maneuvers that may endanger non-participating aircraft.

 AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLED ASSIGNED AIRSPACE (ATCAA): This is above 18,000 feet MSL. Air traffic in Class-A

airspace is controlled by regional Air Route Traffic Control Centers, preventing interaction between military 

aircraft performing potentially dangerous activities and 

non-participating aircraft.

 RESTRICTED AIRSPACE: This extends from the surface 

up through low-altitude airspace and often well into 

high-altitude airspace. Air traffic is restricted in these areas to military aircraft under the control of a military organization conducting separation services of the various 

ground-borne and air activities.

In fiscal year (FY) 2017, the MOAs were activated and used

in relatively small amounts of time. When not activated, 

they are considered open airspace for use by any and all 

commercial and private pilots. The annual hours recorded 

for those SUA are listed in Table 2.3, Airspace Use.

These hours are out of the total available hours in the year 

(24 hours per day, 365 days per year) of 8,760. Although 

military training operations must be conducted at all hours 

and in all conditions in order to properly train, these are 

considered low usage totals.

Issue 1a: Impact of Aircraft Noise on 

Communities

Low-level aircraft operations — ones that would create the 

greatest noise issues for residents — occur throughout the 

area, near launch and recovery sites like airports and airfields and along specially designated aircraft routes called

military training routes (MTRs). Proximity to these locations 

increases the level of noise and subsequent disruption including shockwave vibrations.

These activities are inherent in military training and are a 

vital component to the U.S. defense, which is why these activities are typically established in locations far separated 

from residential neighborhoods. City and county zoning 

regulations often establish buffer zones surrounding ranges and airfields not only to provide a sound barrier but also

for safety reasons.

Military ranges that have high concentrations of air activity 

and those that fire live munitions have a protected airspace

above them referred to as an RA. These are established by 

the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to protect these 

activities from non-participating aircraft and to protect 

ground activities from falling debris, wayward munitions, or 

accidental aircraft failure. The RA over Camp Grayling JMTC 

contains two sections, referred to as R-4201A and R-4201B. 

It is a condition of the establishment of these areas that 

they be over property owned by the military or the U.S. 

Government. Alternatively, small portions may be privately 

owned if a conditional use lease agreement has been established between the land owner and the government. 

The R-4201B, which overlies the impact area of the range, 

is over a large swath of land (approximately 24,000 acres) 

that is not owned by the government, including the housing 

community in Guthrie Lakes.

This has allowed for private residences to be built very close 

to the range and noise-causing military training activities; 

too close for any reasonable degree of noise dissipation 

from those activities with little terrain or vegetation in between to dampen or reduce shockwave vibration.

Being within RA allows pilots to begin operations that are 

considered potentially hazardous to the public including 

arming weapons for strafing or bombing runs, flying at altitudes very low to the ground, conducting tactical aerial maTable 2.2 | Camp Grayling JMTC Issues 

ISSUE ID DESCRIPTION SOURCE

Noise

1a Impact of Aircraft Noise on Communities SWOT

1b Tree Cutting Reduces Noise Buffer Survey

Military Operations

2a Flight Path over Homes SWOT

2b Noise and Vehicular Disruption from MATES SWOT

2c Noise and Vibration from Night Training Survey

2d Population Growth may Encroach on the Mission Survey

Environment

3a PFOS and PFOA Contamination of Groundwater SWOT

3b Impacts/Effects on Groundwater and Drinking Water SWOT

3c Impacts/Effects on Surface Water Systems SWOT

3d Base Effects on Health of Wildlife Populations SWOT

3e Wildfire Management SWOT

3f Resource Use and Sustainability SWOT

Transportation/Infrastructure

4a Effects of Growth on Utilities Survey

4b Improve Internet Access SWOT

4c Poor Cellular Reception SWOT

4d Traffic Survey

4e Recreational Access Survey

4f Poor Road Condition SWOT

Community Partnerships

5a Communications/Education SWOT

5b Public Relations/Community Involvement SWOT

Economic Development

6a Effect on Property Value Mostly Perceived as Neutral or Positive Survey

6b Significant Contributor to Local Economy SWOT

6c Economic Incentivizing and Monitoring SWOT

For a complete list of issues, see Appendix C, SWOT Results.

Table 2.3 | Airspace Use

AIRSPACE HOURS ACTIVE HOURS USED

Pike East MOA 129 104

Pike West MOA 242 189

Steelhead MOA 493 313

Lumberjack ATCAA 156 140

Garland ATCAA 211 181

Firebird ATCAA 156 140

Molson ATCAA 0 0

Steelhead ATCAA 228 193

Military personnel train on 

many different 

types of aircraft, vehicles, 

and weapons 

systems at 

Camp Grayling 

JMTC.
2-18 CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

neuvering such as aerial interdiction, dropping chaff and

flares, laser targeting, etc. Conducting these activities over

public or private land is inconsistent with FAA criteria and 

military protocol.

Guthrie Lakes resides within the noise contour 70 dB day/

night average sound level (ADNL). Housing is typically restricted to areas registering below 65 ADNL. The range and 

the impact areas are well-established, and necessary functions of the range and military training activities and are impractical to relocate. It is unclear how these incompatible 

functions came to be located in such close proximity. Yet, 

both exist and both are likely to remain. The only solution 

to reduce the impact is sound mitigation. Residents can 

improve insulation values in their homes, and more vegetative cover can be added around homes to reduce the 

shockwave effect.

Issue 1b: Tree Cutting Reduces Noise Buffer

Trees and thick vegetation are good tools to help reduce 

noise and shockwave vibrations emanating from the range. 

Mixed broadleaf plantings at least 25 feet thick can reduce 

noise levels by up to 10 dB. Conifers would be needed for 

the same effect in the winter months.

These assets are most effective when located around the

home rather than nearer the noise source, as the noise 

from a bomb blast or artillery fire does not hug the ground;

rather, it radiates up into and through the atmosphere. 

Cloud cover can even cause a perceived increase in noise 

level. To be effective, trees would need to hug the structure being protected from above as much as from the sides, 

which is not advised, as it leads to increased danger from 

fires and for roof damage.

Otsego County

Crawford County

Roscommon County

Kalkaska County

Antrim County

Missaukee County

Ogemaw County

Crawford County

Oscoda County

Montmorency County

Cantonment

Range 13

Ranges 8 & 10

Range 12

Ranges 20 & 21

Range 40 Complex

Air-to-Ground

Range 30 Complex

Heavy Maneuver Area

Wakeley Lake

Quiet Area

Hartwick Pines

State Park

Guthrie

Lakes

Ranges 16, 18, & 19

R-4202

Ranges

20 & 21

Grayling

Airfield

Grayling

Lake Margrethe

Higgins

Lake

 ̈¦§75

 ̈¦§75

 ̈¦§75

 ̈¦§75

£¤131

£¤127

£¤131

ST93

ST72

ST66

ST72

ST32

ST72

ST72

M-88

N Red Oak Rd

Lovells Rd

E Cr-612

Old State Rd

Mancelona Rd

Chase Bridge Rd

CR-612 NE

Nash Rd

M-76

W 4 Mile Rd

Twin Lake Rd NE

S Stephan Bridge Rd

W Miller Rd

Hayes Tower Rd

W Cr-612

N Sherman Rd

S Mcmasters Bridge Rd

W Sharon Rd SE

Mapes Rd

Deeter Rd

N 13 Mile Rd

Fletcher Rd

N Down River Rd E

W Federal Hwy

Plum Valley Rd NE

Boardman Rd

N Higgins Lake Dr

Salling Ave

Cr-F01

Ingersoll Rd

Old Us-27

15KM

8KM

6KM

8KM

57

62

87

75

104

70

70

87

70

70

70

87

62

70

57

62

104

70

70

70

62

104

70

104

57

62

70

70

Fence

JLUS 2-Mile Study Area

Camp Grayling JMTC

County Boundary

!

! Home Station Training Lane

APZ I

APZ II

Clear Zone

No Overflight Areas

Small Arms Range Safety Area

Heavy Demolition Area

Impact Area Non-Dudded

Impact Area Dudded

Strafing Area

Noise Contours (dB)

Range 40 Complex

Grayling Airfield Noise Zones

Measurement Method (ADNL)

Zone I (60 - 65 dB)

Zone II (65 - 75 dB)

Zone III (> 70 dB)

WI

MI

Lake

Huron

MI

0 Z 4.5

Miles

Figure 2.28 | Camp Grayling JMTC Noise

Logging activity in the area. 
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA 2-19

Figure 2.30 | City of Grayling Noise

WI

MI

Lake

Huron

MI

Steelgate

Drop

Zone

Range 40

AirtoGround

Guthrie

Lakes

FARP

Otsego County

Crawford County

15KM

70

62

87

104

57

104

70

104

0 Z 1

Miles

Camp Grayling JMTC

County Boundary

Military Range Area

No Overflight Areas

Noise Contours (dB)

Fence

!

! Home Station Training Lane

Range 40

Building

Grayling Range Noise Zones

Measurement Method (dBP)

Zone II (87 dB)

Zone III (104 dB)

Measurement Method (CDNL)

Zone II (62 dB)

Zone III (70 dB) WI

MI

Lake

Huron

MI

Grayling

Airfield

Grayling

 ̈¦§75-B

 ̈¦§75

ST72

ST93

6KM

8KM

75

65

75

0 Z 0.5

Miles

Fence

Camp Grayling JMTC

County Boundary

City of Grayling

!

! Home Station Training Lane

No Overflight Areas

Noise Contours (dB)

Air Accident Zones

APZ I

APZ II

Clear Zone

Grayling Airfield Noise Zones

Measurement Method (ADNL)

Zone I (60 - 65 dB)

Zone II (65 - 75 dB)

Zone III (> 70 dB)

Figure 2.29 | Guthrie Lakes Noise
2-20 CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Placing vegetation near the impact area is inconsistent with 

safe range management because of the high potential for 

wildfires ignited from munition blast. It also degrades the

usefulness of the range in visual targeting and scoring. Vegetation near firing points could slightly reduce sound vibration at lower levels.

Issue 2a: Flight Paths Over Homes

Most rotary-wing air traffic in the area is conducted out of

Grayling AAF. This is a necessary component of training in 

that equipment, and personnel arrive at Camp Grayling 

JMTC and are transported to and from the range for training activities. 

An unfortunate past development mishap was allowing private neighborhood housing to be built directly under the 

primary runway end of Grayling AAF (Runway 32), which is 

the primary egress point toward the range. 

This neighborhood sits within the APZ. See Figure 2.33 for a 

more detailed view. APZs are delineated areas near civilian 

and military airports that define the highest level of potential for aircraft-related accidents. Typically, these areas are 

zoned by cities to restrict use to agriculture, parking, or other non-densely populated uses. Subsequently, these areas 

also typically have the highest noise levels, here above 65 

dB ADNL. Housing is typically restricted to areas registering below 65 dB ADNL. Although the majority of traffic is

transient general aviation, the airport is military owned and 

operated. As such, CZs, APZs, and other restrictions for this 

airport are established by Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC)

3-260-01, Airfield and Heliport Planning and Design. 

Even more alarming, first responders and law enforcement

are located within the CZ. The CZ area is restricted from all 

objects fixed or mobile. If an accident occurred, it could potentially take out both the police department and the fire

department.

It is possible that flights could be redirected to the other

runway (5-23), which does not have a similar land use condition at its runway ends. However, that runway is in poor 

condition and would need to be repaved at considerable 

expense. It also lies perpendicular to the prevailing winds,-

making it more dangerous to use and potentially reducing 

its availability during certain climatic conditions. 

Alternatively, operations requiring load transfers to the 

range could be conducted from the primary runway (14-32) 

heading northwest (from Runway 14) then circling around 

toward the range. Again, this is subject to prevailing winds 

and climatic conditions and also takes a longer route, which 

requires additional time and fuel.

Cantonment

Range 13

Ranges 8 & 10

Range 12

Ranges 20 & 21

Range 40 Complex

Air-to-Ground

Range 30 Complex

Heavy Maneuver Area

Wakeley Lake

Quiet Area

Hartwick Pines

State Park

Guthrie

Lakes

Ranges 16, 18, & 19

MATES R-4201B R-4201A

R-4202

Ranges

20 & 21

Grayling

Lake Margrethe

Higgins

Lake

 ̈¦§75

 ̈¦§75

 ̈¦§75

 ̈¦§75

£¤131

£¤127

£¤131

ST93

ST72

ST66

ST72

ST32

ST72

ST72

M-88

N Red Oak Rd

Lovells Rd

E Cr-612

Old State Rd

Mancelona Rd

Chase Bridge Rd

CR-612 NE

Nash Rd

M-76

W 4 Mile Rd

Twin Lake Rd NE

W Miller Rd

Hayes Tower Rd

W Cr-612

N Sherman Rd

S Mcmasters Bridge Rd

W Sharon Rd SE

Mapes Rd

Deeter Rd

N 13 Mile Rd

Fletcher Rd

N Down River Rd E

W Federal Hwy

Plum Valley Rd NE

Boardman Rd

N Higgins Lake Dr

Salling Ave

Cr-F01

Ingersoll Rd

Old Us-27

15KM

8KM

6KM

8KM

JLUS 2-Mile Study Area

County Boundary

Fence !

! Home Station Training Lane

APZ Category I

APZ Category II

Clear Zone Land Use Control

No Overflight Areas

Small Arms Range Safety Area

Heavy Demolition Area

Impact Area Non-Dudded

Impact Area Dudded

Strafing Area

Airspace

Class D & E2

Class E4

Class E5

Restricted Airspace

WI

MI

Lake

Huron

MI

0 Z 4.5

Miles

Figure 2.31 | Camp Grayling JMTC Military Operations
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA 2-21

Figure 2.33 | City of Grayling Military Operations

WI

MI

Lake

Huron

MI

Range 40

AirtoGround

Steelgate

Drop

Zone

Guthrie

Lakes

Otsego County

Crawford County

15KM

0 Z 1

Miles

Camp Grayling JMTC

County Boundary

Military Range Area

No Overflight Areas

Restricted Airspace

Range 40

Fence

Military Training Routes (MTR)

!

! Home Station Training Lane

WI

MI

Lake

Huron

MI

Grayling

Airfield

Grayling

 ̈¦§75-B

 ̈¦§75

ST72

ST93

6KM

8KM

0 Z 0.5

Miles

Camp Grayling JMTC

County Boundary

City of Grayling

No Overflight Areas

Fence

Air Accident Zone

APZ Category I

APZ Category II

Clear Zone Land Use Control

Figure 2.32 | Guthrie Lakes Military Operations
2-22 CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Issue 2b: Noise and Vehicular Disruption from 

MATES

The MATES is an activity that naturally generates noise, although significantly less than munitions firing or aircraft

activity noise generators. Current noise contour maps do 

not have any contours associated with the area surrounding the MATES, with a minimal noise level registration of 60 

ADNL. The Range 30 complex immediately adjacent is recorded at 87 ADNL, likely associated with firing activities.

The MATES is located in the southwestern corner of the 

northeastern portion of Camp Grayling, about 3 miles northeast of the City of Grayling. The public and private property 

surrounding the MATES is sparsely populated, being primarily forested land. The closest residence is one-third of 

a mile to the west along W. North Down River Road. There 

are additional houses in increasing density as one moves 

farther to the west toward the city of Grayling. The highest 

concentration of homes is at the intersection of W. North 

Down River Road and N. Wilcox Bridge Road. There are also 

a few homes approximately 0.75 mile away to the east at 

the corner of W. North Down River Road and S. Headquarters Road. 

Vehicular activity is unavoidable in this area, as the purpose 

of the MATES is vehicle and equipment repair and storage. 

The road it resides on (W. North Down River Road) is the 

connector accessway between the facility and Camp Grayling JMTC to the southwest, where the majority of transient 

equipment comes into the area for training, either via the 

airfield or the railhead. It unfortunately runs through the

city of Grayling. No other alternative routes of travel are 

feasible.

Issue 2c: Noise and Vibration from Night 

Training

Night time operations are crucial to successfully executing 

asymmetrical warfare, consistent with that being conducted 

in the Middle East. Training for those operations is, therefore, highly important. Disruption to residents is related to 

the proximity of the residences to those activities.

Mitigation tactics for the noise caused by those activities is 

the same as described for daytime noise issues. Vegetative 

cover located close to the structure and increased insulation 

for sound attenuation are the most effective deterrents. It

could also be possible for military training schedules to be 

posted, which would give residents the opportunity to plan 

for the event, although that would not reduce the disruption.

Issue 2d: Population Growth May Encroach on 

the Mission

Encroachment is a constant and pervasive issue with military training ranges and airfields. Safety and noise buffers

should be established through property acquisition surrounding these assets. In lieu of that and because fiscal

constraints make it unlikely to occur, cities, counties, and 

townships should establish zoning regulations that prevent 

the further development (allowance) of residential properties installations. 

A safe buffer zone distance from ranges, installation, and

airfield property boundaries is one consideration addressed in this plan. This area could be used for agriculture 

or other non-populated functions. Industrial activities are a 

better choice than residential, community, institutional, or 

educational activities. As military training requirements to 

provide for large force and multi-force exercises increase, it 

should be an accepted fact that all the land area within the 

boundary could be utilized for training activities.

2.3.3 Camp Grayling JMTC 

Environmental Issues

Issue 3a: PFOS/PFOA Contamination of 

Groundwater

Contamination of groundwater and drinking water from 

wells from perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances

(PFAs, also known as PFCs), is the top environmental concern for both Camp Grayling JMTC and Alpena CRTC. The 

principal contamination source in the Camp Grayling JMTC 

area is considered to be perflourooctanoic acid (PFOA) and

perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) contamination from use

of now discontinued aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) fire

suppressants. On the national level, PFA/PFC compounds 

are emerging unregulated contaminants of concern with 

suspected but largely unknown negative human health 

effects. As of November 27, 2017, eight of 386 area wells

tested for PFOS-PFOA by the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) exceeded the Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) concentration limit of 70 parts per 

trillion (ppt). In addition, filters were provided to approximately 90 nearby homes. 

MIARNG, funded through the National Guard Bureau 

(NGB), is managing a monitoring and analysis program in 

collaboration with concurrent monitoring, control (including filters), groundwater modeling, and remediation efforts

by a number of state agencies. The MDEQ is conducting 

residential, business, school, and community water-supply 

well sampling. The MDEQ is also in the process of investigating the quality of groundwater beyond the perimeter of 

the Camp Grayling JMTC airfield by collecting groundwater

samples from borings conducted at several locations from 

a monitoring well network planned for the near future. Information about the contaminants, forms to request well 

testing, and options for homeowners whose wells have 

been found to contain the substances, may be found on the 

state web site: https://www.michigan.gov/pfasresponse. 

Public meeting feedback indicates some residents are finding it difficult to get clear and timely responses from the

MDEQ for well testing and for other services like filter distribution. The MDEQ plans to develop and publish a plume 

map once the investigation is further along to provide a 

more complete and accurate description of the situation.

Many residents do not use or have regular internet access, 

so nondigital forms of communication (mailers, hotline 

phone number) should continue to be emphasized to ensure all residents are fully informed. During public comment, several residents requested more frequent use of local radio, television, and newspapers to not only advertise 

public meetings but also to convey basic information about 

the base and issues affecting the public. The latest content

from monitoring and control programs should be updated 

for informational fliers. Concern over how wells are selected for testing was frequently raised at the public meetings. 

Governor Rick Snyder issued Executive Directive No 2017-4 

for a PFAS Action Team. In November 2017, the governor 

directed the leaders of the MDEQ, the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services (MDHHS), MDMVA, 

and the Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (MDARD) to immediately establish a Michigan 

PFAS Action Response Team. The team has been assigned 

to direct the implementation for the state’s action strategy 

to research, identify, and establish PFAS response actions 

related to the discovery, communication, and migration of 

PFAS to the extent practicable.

 U.S. Marines from Echo Company, 4th Reconnaissance Battalion, 4th Marine Division, Marines Forces Reserve, check their 

gear after conducting an exercise into Lake Margrethe at Camp Grayling JMTC. Source: Alpena CRTC Public Affairs

PFOS/PFOA Information

More information is available at https://

www.michigan.gov/pfasresponse

If any resident has additional questions 

regarding this issue, the MDEQ Environmental 

Assistance Center can be contacted at 1-800-

662-9278 or email deq-assist@michigan.gov. 

Representatives may be reached to assist 

with your questions Monday through Friday, 

8:00 AM to 4:30 PM.
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA 2-23

Issue 3b: Impacts and Effects on Groundwater 

and Drinking Water 

The aquifers that provide potable water for residents near 

Camp Grayling JMTC are vulnerable to contamination. The 

depth to groundwater in some areas is as little as 9 feet. Remediation efforts have been required to treat fuel spills and

other areas where groundwater was compromised, and a 

system to protect potable water in the cantonment area 

was put in place in 2001. In addition to fuels, oils, solvents, 

and hydraulic fluids are among the hazardous materials

generated at Camp Grayling JMTC, which are disposed by 

the Defense Reauthorization and Marketing Office (DRMO).

Environmental managers could consider providing educational materials on the newer Michigan Part 201 rules govern criteria for the groundwater-surface water interface 

(GSI) in addition to standing rules on groundwater criteria. Spills and environmental emergencies are reported to 

the MDEQ using the 24-hour Pollution Emergency Alerting 

System (PEAS) Hotline (800) 292-4706 or by contacting the 

MDEQ District Office (Alpena and Grayling area) at 989-731-

4920. The public can view spills on Michigan’s waterways 

using the Water Resources Division MiWaters Database: 

https://miwaters.deq.state.mi.us/nsite/.

Issue 3c: Impacts and Effects On Surface 

Water Systems

The negative effects of sediment and runoff on surface

water quality within Camp Grayling JMTC watersheds are a 

high priority for the installation and surrounding communities. Traffic from military operations and industries can

contribute to erosion and runoff at road/stream crossings.

Regulation 200-1 prohibits military activity within 400 feet 

of streams and water bodies, with the exception of activities 

on established roads and trails, unless there is prior authorization. An industrial stormwater permit for runoff is held

by Camp Grayling JMTC.

Public comment reveals potential for misperceptions that 

installation operations such as tank maneuvers are degrading seasonal or secondary roads when in actuality roads 

are being degraded by commercial logging vehicles. Camp 

Grayling JMTC has funded several road/stream crossing improvement projects led by Huron Pines and the Crawford 

County Road Commission to prevent excess sediment from 

entering the AuSable River watershed. Effects of erosion

and runoff can be measured through bioassessment sampling around the installation. Formal bioassessments of 

Michigan rivers and streams are conducted by the MDEQ 

through the Surface Water Assessment Section Procedure 

51 monitoring program that evaluates macroinvertebrate 

community, fish community, and habitat quality, and reports on trends in watershed health. MDEQ Procedure 51 

R-4202

Ranges

20 & 21

Grayling

Airfield

Grayling

Hartwick Pines

State Park

Lake Margrethe

Higgins

Lake

 ̈¦§75

 ̈¦§75

 ̈¦§75

 ̈¦§75

£¤131

£¤127

£¤131

ST93

ST72

ST66

ST72

ST32

ST72

ST72

M-88

N Red Oak Rd

Lovells Rd

E Cr-612

Old State Rd

Mancelona Rd

Chase Bridge Rd

CR-612 NE

Nash Rd

M-76

W 4 Mile Rd

Twin Lake Rd NE

S Stephan Bridge Rd

W Miller Rd

Hayes Tower Rd

W Cr-612

N Sherman Rd

S Mcmasters Bridge Rd

W Sharon Rd SE

Mapes Rd

Deeter Rd

N 13 Mile Rd

Fletcher Rd

N Down River Rd E

W Federal Hwy

Plum Valley Rd NE

Boardman Rd

N Higgins Lake Dr

Salling Ave

Cr-F01

Ingersoll Rd

Old Us-27

Z o n e 5 Z o n e 5 Z o n e 1 Z o n e 1

Z o n e 7 Z o n e 7

Z o n e 9 / E a s t Z o n e 9 / E a s t

Z o n e 2 Z o n e 2

Z o n e 9 / W e s t Z o n e 9 / W e s t

Z o n e 3 Z o n e 3

Fence

JLUS 2-Mile Study Area

Camp Grayling JMTC

County Boundary

QÆ State Forest Campground

QÆ State Park Campground

!lFishing Access

y! Public Boating Access

Camp Grayling Rattlesnake Study Area

Current Kirtland's Warbler Habitat

Kirtlands Warbler Management Area

PFAS (PFC) Monitoring

Wetlands

State Forests

State Parks

Commercial Forest Act Lands

Fire Zone Boundaries

Fuel Types/FBP System

C-3, Mature Jack or Lodgepole Pine

C-4, Immature Jack or Lodgepole Pine

O-1a, Matted Grass; O-1b, Standing Grass WI

MI

Lake

Huron

MI

0 Z 4.5

Miles

Figure 2.34 | Camp Grayling JMTC Environmental
2-24 CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Figure 2.36 | City of Grayling Environmental

WI

MI

Lake

Huron

MI

Range 40

AirtoGround

Steelgate

Drop

Zone

Guthrie

Lakes

Otsego County

Crawford County

0 Z 1

Miles

Fence

Camp Grayling JMTC

County Boundary

y! Public Boating Access

Wetlands

State Forests

Fire Zone Boundaries

Fuel Types/FBP System

C-3, Mature Jack or Lodgepole Pine

C-4, Immature Jack or Lodgepole Pine

O-1a, Matted Grass; O-1b, Standing Grass

WI

MI

Lake

Huron

MI

Grayling

Airfield

Grayling

 ̈¦§75-B

 ̈¦§75

ST72

ST93

0 Z 0.5

Miles

Fence

Camp Grayling JMTC

County Boundary

City of Grayling

!l Fishing Access

PFAS (PFC) Monitoring

Wetlands

State Forests

Fire Zone Boundaries

Fuel Types/FBP System

C-4, Immature Jack or Lodgepole Pine

O-1a, Matted Grass; O-1b, Standing Grass

Figure 2.35 | Guthrie Lakes Environmental
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA 2-25

data can supplement local and concentrated data generated through citizen volunteer monitoring and conservation 

organization research. 

The Michigan Clean Water Corps (MiCorps) is a network of 

volunteer water quality monitoring programs that supplement MDEQ efforts in collecting and sharing water quality

data for use in water resources management and protection programs. MiCorps is administered by the Great Lakes 

Commission under the direction of the MDEQ and in partnership with the Huron River Watershed Council, Michigan 

Lake and Stream Associations, and Michigan State University. MiCorps comprises the Volunteer Stream Monitoring 

Program and the Cooperative Lakes Monitoring Program, 

which provide training and support for quality assurance, 

reporting, and communications among member organizations. The MiCorps website has an online searchable database with monitoring data for selected waterbodies. Aquatic macroinvertebrate survey data, an indicator of stream 

ecology health, are available for select streams in study 

area watersheds such as the AuSable River. Monitoring 

data for lakes includes basic water chemistry and indicators 

of nutrient pollution that cause eutrophication and algal 

blooms. The database also contains invasive species survey 

data and several technical studies and reports available for 

download on the MiCorps website.

Organizations such as the AuSable River Restoration Committee, the Upper Manistee River Restoration Committee, 

and various Trout Unlimited Chapters, and Section 319 

funded watershed management plans conducted by Huron Pines have contributed to restoration of many erosion 

sites along area waterways. Camp Grayling JMTC maintains 

strong relationships with these and many other local groups 

to help watchdog and maintain water quality in the area.

Data on water quality and aquatic ecology in the area exist 

from many governmental and non-governmental organizations. Questions about specific topics like fish population

health, site contamination, or trends in ecological health 

can often be addressed from multiple sources. Sources of 

existing and ongoing water quality and aquatic ecology survey, assessment, and monitoring data in the area include 

MDEQ Procedure 51 biological and ecological trend monitoring; Part 201 contamination sites; MDEQ probabilistic 

water quality monitoring sites; Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) National Rivers and Streams and National 

Lakes Assessments survey sites; 303(d) Impaired Waters 

and Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL); National Pollutant 

Discharge Elimination System (NDPES) discharge permit locations; and various data from conservation organizations, 

citizen-based monitoring studies and lake associations. 

Stakeholders, developers, planners, and citizens could benefit from a clearinghouse that summarizes conditions and

provides links and references to various agencies and organizations that conduct aquatic research. A webpage hosted on the installation or collaborative organization website 

could consolidate multiple resources into a coherent story 

while providing links to further information. 

Issue 3d: Effects on the Health of Wildlife 

Populations

Maintaining habitat for wildlife is important for retaining 

the environmental quality of the area. Surveys for wildlife 

have been conducted several times at Camp Grayling JMTC, 

including 1993-1995 and 2004. Among the flora and fauna

identified, one plant and two animal species are protected by the Endangered Species Act of the State of Michigan 

(Public Act 203 of 1974 as amended) and/or the Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973. In addition, the bald eagle is 

protected by the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. 

Camp Grayling serves as the breeding habitat for the Kirtland’s warbler, an endangered bird, which nests in the jack 

pine forests in the area. Camp Grayling has a permanent 

Kirtland’s warbler management area, where suitable nesting habitat is maintained through planned rotation cuttings. 

Threatened species on the installation include Houghton’s 

goldenrod and the rarely seen Eastern Massasauga Rattlesnake, the only venomous snake in Michigan. Camp Grayling researchers have led detailed surveys of Massasauga 

populations for over 10 years. 

There is also the Red Pines Natural Area on Camp Grayling 

where military activity is prohibited. The Grayling Forest 

Management Unit (FMU) currently has two areas designated for Pine Barrens management, a rare ecosystem typically inhabited by many threatened and endangered species, 

such as the Kirtland’s Warbler. 

Maintaining unfragmented habitat is difficult because of the

requirements of operation. Research such as the Lake Margrethe watershed management plan (funded by the NGB) 

and planned cooperative research with the Michigan Natural 

Features Inventory to expand on biological survey data and 

mapping can contribute to sustainable land use planning decisions that benefitthe installation and the community. Sponsoring and pursuing future grant-funded biological surveys 

and watershed management planning in cooperation with 

conservation organizations like Huron Pines can augment 

biological data maintained by state and federal agencies and 

support Camp Grayling JMTC’s environmental stewardship.

 PAST WILDLIFE WORK:

 Radio-telemetry studies of federally listed Eastern 

Massasauga Rattlesnake movement (regular between 2002-current)

 Monitoring of Kirtland’s Warblers and their habitat at 

specific site at North Camp

 Identification and monitoring of snake fungal disease

in Eastern Massasauga Rattlesnakes

 Flora/fauna surveys in 1990s and early 2000s for 

Land Condition Trend Analysis and Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan (INRMP) updates

 Acoustic surveys for federally listed Northern Longeared Bat

 Swimmer’s Itch risk in Lake Margrethe 

 CURRENT WILDLIFE WORK:

 Mitigating military and rattlesnake interactions using 

translocation (finishing 2018)

 Snake fungal disease monitoring

 Kirtland’s Warbler surveys

 Targeted flora/fauna survey for INRMP update (finishing 2018)

 Openings enhancement: firing point plant management and food plots (multiyear)

 UPCOMING WILDLIFE WORK:

 Weeklong spring surveys to estimate abundance/size 

of Eastern Massasauga Rattlesnake population (multiyear study)

 Radio-telemetry study of Wood and Blanding’s Turtle 

habitat use (both under review for federal listing); beginning 2018

 COLLABORATIONS:

 National Wild Turkey Federation and MDNR: Collaborating with MDMVA to manage firing points; planting

of plant species for game animals provides wildlife 

food source which, mostly importantly, reduces fire

risk and improves vegetation growth management 

on military firing points

 Kirtland’s Warbler Conservation Team: monitoring 

populations and habitat of Kirtland's Warbler

 Others: MDNR, Michigan Natural Features Inventory, 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Huron Pines, DLZ Associates, Purdue University, and many other groups 

and individuals

Issue 3e: Wildfire Management

Wildfires have occurred fairly frequently within Camp Grayling JMTC boundaries and surrounding areas. According to 

the Adaptation Planning for Climate Resilience document 

published by the MIARNG in 2016, Camp Grayling JMTC averages over 100 fires annually, caused in part by the training conducted there. Environmental managers at Camp 

Grayling anticipate that coming effects of climate changes

such as higher temperatures will contribute to increased 

wildfire risk.

The devastation of forests by the emerald ash borer, oak 

wilt, and gypsy moths also adds to the risk of potentially catastrophic wildfires. The area has a large amount of jack pine

forest, which is a high-risk volatile fuel type contributing to 

a history of frequent small fires and large catastrophic fires,

such as the 1990 Stephan Bridge fire that burned almost

6,000 acres in 5 hours and caused $5.5 million in damage. A 

handful of wildfires have jumped the installation boundaries in the Range 40 area in the past 10 years.

Hiking trail in 

the Red Pines 

Natural Area on 

Camp Grayling. 

(Source: MDNR)
2-26 CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

2.3.4 Camp Grayling JMTC 

Transportation and 

Infrastructure Issues

Issue 4a: Effects of Growth on Utilities

Camp Grayling JMTC has a 5-year plan to become a self-sufficient installation, and the camp has diligently worked toward net-zero status and sustainability goals. (See Issue 3f, 

Resource Use and Sustainability.) Future growth would be 

accommodated with adaptations, as necessary, to the existing infrastructure. Wind electricity generation machines, 

also known as wind funnels, were installed starting in 2015 

and are expected to power about half the buildings on the 

installation. Water is provided through wells of the City of 

Grayling; wastewater is treated on site. 

The surrounding area is serviced by Consumer Energy and 

Great Lakes Energy as well as DTE Energy (formerly MichCon), which provides three-phase electrical service. Many 

homes in the area are serviced by private wells. Water and 

sewer utilities in the City of Grayling are managed by the 

City. In Crawford County, there is a permitting system for 

private wells and septic systems, which is regulated by the 

District Health Department. 

Construction of water and wastewater infrastructure near 4 

Mile Road is ongoing to support the construction of an Arauco North America particleboard plant, which is expected 

to begin production in late 2018. The infrastructure development is funded through a $3.1 million grant and $4.1 million in loans. In December 2017, the Beaver Creek-Grayling 

Townships Utility Authority and C2EA, Inc., received approval from the Grayling Charter Township Board of Trustees to 

partner for the planning and development of infrastructure 

in this area. 

A motion to allow for construction of a wastewater treatment facility was also passed by the board. 

The City of Grayling also recently received a $1.5 million 

grant to replace a sewer main, which was installed in the 

1970s. Work is anticipated to begin in 2018.

Efforts to fund and replace additional aging infrastructure

are ongoing.

Issue 4b: Improve Internet Access

Internet service is limited in and around Camp Grayling 

because of its rural location. Cable, digital subscriber line 

(DSL), and wired internet options are available for residents 

and businesses with speeds ranging from 5 megabytes per 

second (mbps) to 100 Mbps. Otsego County has a fiber

internet option through Winn Telecom, but the coverage 

area is small. Within the township of Grayling, the average 

download speed is only 16.53 mbps, according to data from 

broadbandnow.com. This is 66.5 percent slower than the 

average for Michigan and 156.8 percent slower than the national average. 

As a state, the Michigan 21st Century Infrastructure Commission has set the following goals for internet access:

 All residents and businesses have access to a fixed

broadband connection with a download speed of at 

least 25 mbps and an upload speed of 3 mbps by 2020 

and a download speed of at least 100 mbps by 2024. 

 All areas of the state (geographic) have access to a mobile broadband connection with a download speed of at 

least 10 mbps by 2020 and at least 25 mbps by 2024.

 Internet service has become vital as commercial, education, medical, and government activities occur more 

frequently online. 

 All community anchor institutions (such as schools and 

libraries) have access to a fixed broadband connection

with download and upload speeds that meet the minimum recommended speeds for their sector by 2024. 

In other areas of the state, Great Lakes Energy is conducting a feasibility study to deploy fiber internet service. If the

study supports it, a pilot project is planned for the Petoskey 

district that could be rolled out to other areas in Michigan.

In Alpena, the city council approved a "Wired City" fund and 

has developed a successful campaign to improve internet 

infrastructure in the city, including installation of fiber optics cables. This model could be utilized in areas like the City 

of Grayling. 

Issue 4c: Poor Cellular Reception

Cellular phone reception has increased in recent years, 

but the rural location of the Camp Grayling area poses a 

challenge. Although Federal Communications Commission 

(FCC) data shows 3G or better coverage availability by three 

providers as of 2016, users report many dead spots or weak 

signal locations throughout the area. Most recently, the 

SBA Communications Corporation constructed a cell phone 

tower on Camp Grayling in 2013. AT&T has shown interest 

in acquiring a lease for a tower in the area. 

Issue 4d: Traffic

The most recent Grayling Area Transportation Study was 

published in 2008. 

Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) data indicates small increases in annual average daily traffic (AADT)

and commercial annual average daily traffic (CAADT) numbers from 2015 to 2016 on the state and federal highways 

and interstates in the Camp Grayling area, with the exception of a large increase in AADT in one section of the I-75 

Business Loop south of the junction with M-72. That segment also had the largest AADT of 24,849. 

Summer tourist traffic is a concern for local residents, especially as popular events often overlap. Convoys related to 

training at Camp Grayling can also cause traffic issues and

may increase if the mission and number of exercises at the 

camp increase. This is exacerbated by the existing partial 

diamond interchange at I-75 and North Down River Road, 

as it forces some traffic to travel through the city of Grayling

to access the interstate.

The MDNR Grayling FMU is responsible for wildfire control

and management, including on lands leased by the NGB. A 

key forestry management tool is prescribed burns, which 

may cause concern if they are perceived as wildfires.

Each year approximately 5,000 acres in Camp Grayling are 

subject to prescribed burns. The Grayling Unit has two areas designated for Pine Barrens management. Pine Barrens 

is a rare ecosystem that is typically inhabited by threatened and endangered species within volatile stands of jack 

pine. The North Camp Grayling Pine Barrens Management 

Plan designed to restore 5,120 acres of pine barrens within Camp Grayling is awaiting approval from the NGB and 

MDNR Divisions before prescribed harvesting and burning 

practices are instituted. 

MDNR is working with Camp Grayling JMTC to develop an 

integrated wildfire management plan that should be finalized by 2020.

Facilitating public communications about management 

plans through open houses and outreach will help residents understand wildfire risk and MDNR and NGB forestry

management plans.

Issue 3f: Resource Use and Sustainability

Concepts and goals from Camp Grayling waste reduction 

strategies can be communicated to study area residents 

to convey Camp Grayling’s commitments to environmental 

stewardship and to demonstrate investments in protecting shared natural resources while maintaining energy and 

water security. Features of the U.S. Army Net Zero Initiative strategy narratives could be adapted to enhance the 

installation strategy message. A communications campaign 

facilitated through press releases posted to the installation 

website and directed to local media are facilitation options, 

along with potential broadcast news stories about the 

waste reduction program.

Sign welcoming visitors to the City of Grayling.
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA 2-27

There is also concern regarding increases in traffic congestion stemming from logging truck traffic and the estimated

250 permanent jobs created by the new particleboard plant 

off 4 Mile Road, particularly because the I-75 exit at 4 Mile

Road is considered problematic. However, improvements 

to the area that are ongoing for the industrial district development are anticipated to alleviate some of this.

In addition, legislation has recently raised speed limits on 

I-75 and US-127. Due to safety concerns, Crawford County 

officials are seeking to block the speed limit increase to 65

miles per hour on M-72 East between Grayling and Mio.

The Crawford County Transportation Authority has 16 buses and three vans for public transport. There are seven 

routes that operate on a dial-a-ride service. 

At Camp Grayling JMTC, reconfiguration of the main gate

was completed in 2017, allowing for better security and improved traffic flow. The gate is manned by a sheriff’s deputy

paid for by the MIARNG, which has been cited as an important partnership between the military and community. 

However, it was noted that the Crawford County Road Commission or the greater community is not always informed 

regarding Camp Grayling JMTC transportation projects, 

which can cause potential traffic issues.

Identified Problem intersections

In addition to the overall traffic and road conditions, several individual intersections were identified as trouble spots

for the community. Problem intersections identified include

Old US-27 and M-93, M-93 and I-75, M-72 and M-93, I-75 

and 4 Mile Road, 4 Mile Road and Military Road, and Military 

Road and I-75. See Figures 2.38-40 for locations.

R-4201B R-4201A

R-4202

Ranges

20 & 21

Grayling

Lake Margrethe

Higgins

Lake

M-88

N Red Oak Rd

Lovells Rd

E Cr-612

Old State Rd

Mancelona Rd

Chase Bridge Rd

CR-612 NE

Nash Rd

M-76

W 4 Mile Rd

Twin Lake Rd NE

S Stephan Bridge Rd

W Miller Rd

Hayes Tower Rd

W Cr-612

N Sherman Rd

S Mcmasters Bridge Rd

W Sharon Rd SE

Mapes Rd

Deeter Rd

N 13 Mile Rd

Fletcher Rd

N Down River Rd E

W Federal Hwy

Plum Valley Rd NE

Boardman Rd

N Higgins Lake Dr

Salling Ave

Cr-F01

Ingersoll Rd

Old Us-27

Bucks East & West Truck Trl

Eight Point Rd

!#

U

Access Control Point

Fence

JLUS 2-Mile Study Area

Camp Grayling JMTC

County Boundary

Restricted Use Area

2016 Traffic Volumes

Annual Avg. Daily Traffic

753 - 2,486

2,487 - 4,838

4,839 - 8,814

8,815 - 15,439

15,440 - 24,849 WI

MI

Lake

Huron

MI

0 Z 4.5

Miles

Figure 2.37 | Camp Grayling JMTC Transportation

Harsh winters and the spring freeze/thaw cycle cause wear 

and tear on local roadways.
2-28 CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Issue 4e: Recreational Access

The region is largely composed of forested land, making it 

an ideal location for outdoor recreation, including hiking, 

canoing, hunting, and fishing. Much of Camp Grayling JMTC

is open to the public for recreational purposes when not in 

use for military training. 

The MDNR maintains control of logging, mineral extraction, 

fishing, and hunting on lands leased to the military. However, there is a 14,000-acre area of Camp Grayling where 

hunting is not allowed, as the area is deemed a game refuge by the terms of the land grant. The MDVA controls recreation access in this area, which is referred to as the Hanson Reserve Lands. Hunting is also not allowed for safety 

reasons in some areas of Camp Grayling.

Public service announcements from Camp Grayling are released on a weekly basis via the Grayling Regional Chamber 

of Commerce website and other venues with information 

regarding access and military operations.

Public Act 288, which was signed by Governor Rick Snyder in 

2016, requires the inventory and mapping of all state forest 

Otsego County

Crawford County

Roscommon County

Kalkaska County

Antrim County

Missaukee County

Ogemaw County

Crawford County

Oscoda County

Montmorency County

!#

U

R-4202

Ranges

20 & 21

Grayling

Lake Margrethe

Higgins

Lake

 ̈¦§75

 ̈¦§75

 ̈¦§75

 ̈¦§75

£¤131

£¤127

£¤131

ST93

ST72

ST66

ST72

ST32

ST72

ST72

M-88

N Red Oak Rd

Lovells Rd

E Cr-612

Old State Rd

Mancelona Rd

Chase Bridge Rd

CR-612 NE

Nash Rd

M-76

W 4 Mile Rd

Twin Lake Rd NE

S Stephan Bridge Rd

W Miller Rd

Hayes Tower Rd

W Cr-612

N Sherman Rd

S Mcmasters Bridge Rd

W Sharon Rd SE

Mapes Rd

Deeter Rd

N 13 Mile Rd

Fletcher Rd

N Down River Rd E

W Federal Hwy

Plum Valley Rd NE

Boardman Rd

N Higgins Lake Dr

Salling Ave

Cr-F01

Ingersoll Rd

Old Us-27

Bucks East & West Truck Trl

Eight Point Rd I-75/W 4 Mile Rd

S Military Rd/W 4 Mile Rd

U.S. 27/N Higgins Lake Rd

I-75/I-75 Bypass

I-75/Grayling Highway

M-72/M-93

Marlette Rd

Jones Rd/Wilcox Rd

!#

U

Access Control Point

Fence

JLUS 2-Mile Study Area

Camp Grayling JMTC

County Boundary

Restricted Use Area

Problem Intersection/Road

Crawford County

PASER Rating (2017)

1 - 4 Structural Improvements

5 - 7 Capital Preventive Maintenance

8 - 10 Routine Maintenance

WI

MI

Lake

Huron

MI

0 Z 4.5

Miles

Figure 2.38 | Camp Grayling JMTC Road Conditions

Recreational pathway through the Grayling area.
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA 2-29

Figure 2.40 | Camp Grayling JMTC Road Conditions – South

WI

MI

Lake

Huron

MI

Grayling

Airfield

Guthrie

Lakes

 ̈¦§75-B

M-93

Briggs Rd

W Batterson Rd

Kinney Rd

N Thendara Rd

Post Rd

Roberts Rd

Deward Rd

Twin Peaks Rd

N Stephan Bridge Rd

N Manistee River Rd

W Jones Lake Rd

W Cr-612

N Kolka Creek Rd

N Sherman Rd

Lynn Lake Rd

Wolf Rd

Bear Lake Rd

W Townline Rd

Vista Dr

Range 39 Trl

N Roberts Rd

Owl Dr

Sand Hill Rd

E Marlette Rd

N Valley Rd

Orchard Trl

M-72

Buck Trl

Calker Rd

Parallel Trl

Army Tank Trl

Bruun Trl

Tower Trl

Hartwick Rd

N Petersen Rd

Donata

River Park Dr

Au Sable Trl

W Howes Lake Rd

Pipeline Rd

Emerson Rd

W May Lake Rd

Mastej Dr

Doe Trl

E Cr-612

Bobcat Trl

Coot Trl

Hawatha River Rd

Smore Rd

The Ford Rd

Sherman Rd

W Cameron Bridge Rd

W Babbitt Rd

Myrtle St

Almelo Rd

W House Rd

Deward Trl

Forbush Trl

N Lane Dr

Wood River Rd

Hardwood Trl

Feldhauser Rd

Geronimos Trl

Sutters Mill Rd

Hayesego Trl

Donnybrook

Pedicel Trl

Bauman Rd

Wine Sap Trl

Pheasant Trl

Airport Rd

Suttland Trl

Frederic St

N Peterson Rd

Coyote Run

E Branch Rd

Nicklaus Dr

Duck Trl

Wapok Trl

Jennifer Ln

Mueller Way

Tuck Trl

Martin Dr

Ramer Ct

Piehl Trl

N Old Us-27

Sand Hill Rd

W Cr-612

Old Us-27

N Manistee River Rd

Buck Trl

M-93

Briggs Rd

Kinney Rd

I-75

Deward Rd

Packer Pl

W Jones Lake Rd

 ̈¦§75

 ̈¦§75

Jones Rd/Wilcox Rd

I-75/Marlette Rd

I-75/I-75 Bypass

I-75/Grayling Highway

0 Z 2

Miles

Camp Grayling JMTC

County Boundary

Problem Intersection/Road

Crawford County

PASER Rating (2017)

1 - 4 Structural Improvements

5 - 7 Capital Preventive Maintenance

8 - 10 Routine Maintenance

WI

MI

Lake

Huron

MI

Ole Dam Rd

Grayling

ST72

S Military Rd

Godfrey

W 5 Mile Rd

Howe Rd

Tarn Trl

W 7 Mile Rd Alice Trl

Monty Ln

W 4 Mile Rd

Billman Rd

W Fletcher Rd

S Old Us-27

S King Rd

S Staley Lake Rd

S Down River Rd W

S Barker Lake Rd

Merrio Rd

W Dort Rd

Marney Trl

Baldwin Rd

Johnson Rd

Quigley

S Grayling Rd

Lake Rd

W Beaver Rd

11th St

Seeley

Wilderness Trl

Tapir

Hazel Trl

Annis Pit Rd

W 3 Mile Rd

E Railroad Trl

S Covell Rd

Old Lake Rd

Beasley Ave

W Federal Hwy

Mcauley Rd

Tangelo Rd

Chesley

Dollar Lake Trl

W Four Mile Rd

Grayling Rd

4th St

Tower Hill Truck Trl

N Higgins Lake Dr

Elbow Trl

S Access Rd

Puffin Rd

Wilbur Ln

Industrial St

Cemetery Xing Trl

Bayer Rd

S Thendara Dr

Old Stage Rd

Timber Trl

Lost 20 Rd

W Pinewood Dr

254

Gaberdiel Trl

Ivy Rd

E Pere Cheney Rd

Matthes Rd

N Higgins Lake Rd

Coyote Rd

Regier Rd

Kitchen Rd

Shepards Trl

Euclid Rd

Milliken Ln

Knight Rd

Birchwood Dr

Fort Rd

Ionia St

Gentry Trl Rustic Ln

Industrial Dr

Laforge Ln

Godfroy Rd

Williams Trl

Simpson Lake Rd

Autumn Way

W Pioneer

Ironwood Rd

Alma Blvd

Maurer Dr

Clough Dr Breakfast Pt Parline Dr

Merrio Rd

W 4 Mile Rd

S Military Rd

N Higgins Lake Dr

W 7 Mile Rd

Oak Rd

W Beaver Rd

S King Rd

S Grayling Rd

S King Rd

 ̈¦§75

 ̈¦§75

£¤127

ST72

ST93

I-75/W 4 Mile Rd

U.S. 27/N Higgins Lake Rd

S Military Rd/W 4 Mile Rd

M-72/M-93

0 Z 2

Miles

Camp Grayling JMTC

County Boundary

City of Grayling

!#

U

Access Control Point

Problem Intersection/Road

Crawford County

PASER Rating (2017)

1 - 4 Structural Improvements

5 - 7 Capital Preventive Maintenance

8 - 10 Routine Maintenance

Figure 2.39 | Camp Grayling JMTC Road Conditions – North 
2-30 CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Crawford County Proposed Projects 

 2018 Proposed Projects:

 4 Mile Road: from the west side of I-75, ease 1.34 

miles ($1.2 million [M])

 Wakeley Bridge Road: from Wakeley Bridge, northerly to the intersection of North Down River road, 2.35 

miles ($531,000 [K])

 South Grayling Road: from Dort Road, northerly to 

the first curve, .50 miles ($135K)

 County Road 502: from the south county line, north 

1.5 miles to Dry Lake Road ($130K)

 North Higgins Lake Drive: from Military Road to Old 

27, 2,100 feet ($55K)

 County Road 612: County Road 612 over Big Creek, 

Bridge rehabilitation ($166K)

 2019 Proposed Projects:

 Old US 27 (Hulbert Road north 3.16 miles)

 County Road 502: from Dry Lake Road, north to M-18, 

1.55 miles

 South Grayling Road: from Fletcher Road to 7 Mile 

Road, 1.0 mile

 2020 Proposed Projects:

 Old US-27 (Otsego County Line south 3.16 miles)

 2021 Proposed Projects:

 Twin Bridge Road: from County Road 612, north 4.01 

miles

 2022 Proposed Projects:

 Military Road: Fletcher Road, north to 4 Mile Road, 

3.7 miles

MDOT Proposed Projects

 Rehabilitate a 6.07-mile section of M-72 from the 

Kalkaska/Crawford County line to M-93 in 2019

Crawford County Recent Projects 

 2015

 Hartwick Pines Road from M-93 to County Road 612, 

completed with Millage Money

 North Down River Road from Stephen Bridge Road 

west 2.5 miles, completed with Millage Money

 2016

 Sherman Road from County Road 612 North, approximately 1.4 miles

 County Road 612 between Petersen Road and Sherman Road, approximately 1,800 feet

 County Road 612 from Jones Lake Road to K.P. Lake 

Road, 0.90 mile

 North Down River Road from MATES east, 1.7 miles

 2017

 Wakeley Bridge – culvert/bridge deck

 4 Mile Road (Oak Road to I-75 southbound ramp, 0.81 

miles)

 Sherman Road (Otsego County Line south 1 mile)

 Wakeley Bridge Road – culvert/bridge deck

 South Grayling Road – curves (between Fletcher Road 

and approximately Dort Road)

MDOT Recent Projects

 I-75 Business Loop bridge, 2016 

 M-72 bridge, 2016

2.3.5 Camp Grayling JMTC 

Community Partnerships 

Issues 

The JLUS process emphasizes the importance of a community-driven planning process which relies on partnerships 

among Camp Grayling JMTC, communities, and local stakeholders. The JLUS survey results indicated that 62 percent 

of those participating in the survey believe that Camp Grayling JMTC has a positive impact on the quality of life of surrounding community residents. However, the JLUS process 

did reveal that stakeholders see communications, public 

relations, and education as issues that could be improved 

and, possibly, increase the perspective that Camp Grayling 

JMTC has a positive impact on quality of life for surrounding 

community residents. 

Issue 5a. Communications/Education 

Camp Grayling JMTC has an ongoing public relations effort,

implemented by a dedicated community relations specialist. Communicating with stakeholders in surrounding communities, as well as to MIARNG leadership in Lansing and to 

other stakeholders throughout Michigan, is a critical function of this position. The community relations specialist is 

one of the principal points of contact for inquiries about 

what happens at Camp Grayling JMTC when community 

members have questions or concerns. Although the role 

of community relations specialist is critical to community 

partnerships, comprehensive documentation about standard operating procedures for this position has not historically existed. As a result, changes in staffing have affected

the efficacy of communication with community partners.

Gaps in institutional knowledge about key communication 

channels, processes, and relationships with community and 

media partners, can create challenges for new community 

relation specialists as they fill the position.

The current community relations specialist uses a variety 

of communication channels to share information with key 

stakeholders. These communication channels used to distribute information on Camp Grayling JMTC training operations and other programs include email, Camp Grayling 

JMTC Facebook page, the quarterly Camp Grayling Impact 

newsletter distributed in both electronic and print, and, to 

a limited extent, the Camp Grayling JMTC webpage on the 

MIARNG website maintained in Lansing. When conducting 

an internet search for Camp Grayling JMTC information, the 

main MIARNG website is the most official website provided. However, the information provided on this website for 

Camp Grayling is limited. The community relations specialist 

is working with Lansing to update the website information 

to include new leadership. The process for updating website information is slow as a result of coordinating changes through Lansing. Communications requirements from 

Lansing may preclude a faster process, but it is imperative 

that the existing website provide key contact information 

and a link to more regularly updated information on Camp 

Grayling JMTC, such as the dedicated Camp Grayling JMTC 

Facebook page. 

One issue stakeholders consistently raised during the oneon-one interviews and community meetings is a desire for 

improved communications with Camp Grayling JMTC. An 

important communications effort is to update surrounding

communities about the weekly range firing schedule. The

Camp Grayling JMTC community relations specialist sends 

out this weekly schedule via an email distribution list. The 

list includes homeowners and business associations, local 

elected officials, residents, and media contacts. The weekly

range firing schedule is then shared by these stakeholders

on various websites such as the Grayling Regional Chamber of Commerce, social media accounts such as the Twitter 

feed for UpNorthVoice, and email distribution lists such as 

those maintained by homeowners associations. However, 

many stakeholders are not aware that Camp Grayling JMTC 

has an email distribution list intended to distribute this information; there is no information on the Camp Grayling 

JMTC website or social media accounts on how to request 

to be added to this email list. Individual residents who don’t 

belong to a homeowners association might not know the 

email distribution list exists and might not have the information necessary to get on the distribution list. The Camp 

Grayling JMTC community relations specialist is taking steps 

to ensure more stakeholders are made aware of this email 

distribution list and have the opportunity to request to be 

added to the list.

In addition to circulating the firing range schedule via email,

Camp Grayling JMTC has cultivated strong relationships with 

local media that help distribute this information. Blarney 

Stone Broadcasting operates radio station WQON Q100.3, 

covering central northern Michigan, and is partnering with 

Camp Grayling JMTC to provide listeners with regular uproads in addition to changes in rules for off-road vehicles

(ORVs). This process was completed in the northern Lower 

Peninsula in 2017, and maps of these roads, including designations of those open and closed to ORVs, are available 

on the MDNR’s website and will be updated annually. Camp 

Grayling JMTC collaborated with the MDNR for this effort.

Among the land use objectives in the 2014 Grayling Charter 

Township Master Plan is maintaining road end access sites 

for public use on rivers and lakes. The master plan also outlines a river protection land use category.

Issue 4f: Poor road condition

Increases in traffic are expected to accelerate the deterioration of roads around Camp Grayling JMTC, and there is 

particular concern for side roads and dirt roads, which are 

susceptible to damage from heavy traffic. Maintenance for

trail roads, some of which will be newly opened to ORVs, is 

not funded. 

On Camp Grayling JMTC, among those roads noted in need 

of repair is Headquarters Road. Most major roads around 

the installation, including Military Road, the western portion of 4 Mile Road, Old US-27, portions of Federal Highway, 

M-144, and East North Down River Road, are considered in 

poor condition, with Pavement Surface Evaluation and Rating (PASER) marks of 1-4. Ratings of 1 and 2 indicate failed 

roads that require reconstruction, while ratings of 3 and 4 

indicate that structural renewal is needed. 

Traffic to and from the camp contributes to road condition

degradation. Much of the equipment brought in for training exercises is transported by rail to Camp Grayling JMTC; 

however, equipment brought in by truck impacts traffic in

and around the installation. 

Increased logging traffic is expected to contribute to road

damage, as is traffic created by new commercial development, particularly in the 4 Mile Road area. The logging industry does provide funding to the state for road maintenance, which is passed down to the counties, though the 

amount has not increased in recent years. 

Public comments collected through surveys and public 

meetings revealed a general lack of understanding of the 

amount of damage caused by military and logging traffic

through the area; a public education campaign may help. 

Funding has been identified as the primary hindrance to

road improvement projects throughout the state. The 

Crawford County Road Commission’s 2017-18 budget identifies $9,945,075 in anticipated revenues and $9,899,757 in

proposed expenditures. 
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA 2-31

dates about Camp Grayling operations. WQON recently invited the Camp Grayling community relations specialist and 

commander to provide daily updates on Northern Strike to 

listeners. The listener response to the updates was positive, 

leading WQON to suggest partnering with Camp Grayling 

JMTC to provide weekly updates throughout the year. The 

community relations specialist identified a challenge in

having local print media, such as the Crawford County Avalanche, include Camp Grayling weekly firing range schedules and other information that would be of interest to local 

readers. 

According to the community relations specialist, the job 

gets easier with improved stakeholder education. Identification and reporting of unexploded ordnance (UXO) is one 

area where Camp Grayling JMTC sees a need for development and implementation of an education program in partnership with surrounding communities. A program on UXO 

would help community members know what to do if they 

come across historic UXO on public lands to ensure public 

safety. 

Issue 5b. Public Relations and Community 

Engagement

Public relations and community engagement is another 

key component of the Camp Grayling JMTC community relations specialist’s role. This aspect of the position can be 

demanding, particularly with only one full-time community 

relations specialist. The recent groundwater contamination 

concerns have generated a need for increasing community 

relations capacity, although these positions will not be permanent. 

Camp Grayling JMTC receives a variety of requests for 

group tours and involvement in community events, such 

as local parades. Information for stakeholders on how to 

make these requests is sparse. Often the requests are in 

the form of an email to the community relations specialist. 

The community relations specialist attempts to fulfill these

requests as much as possible, although there are instances where not enough lead time is provided to fulfill the request. More comprehensive information on how to make 

these requests and the lead time necessary would possibly 

allow Camp Grayling JMTC to approve a greater number of 

requests and expedite the process. 

Despite the existing level of community engagement, stakeholders interviewed for the JLUS project often mentioned a 

desire to have the Camp Grayling JMTC facilities more accessible to the public. Camp Grayling JMTC has received inquiries about opening a visitor interpretative center on-site 

that would allow the public to experience some of Camp 

Grayling JMTC without having to request a tour. At the present time, the Crawford County Historical Society Museum in 

Grayling has a photo display of the history of Camp Grayling 

in the museum annex. 

The strategies to address the issues related to public relations, communications, education, and community involvement are available in Section 4. 

2.3.6 Camp Grayling JMTC 

Economic Development 

Issues

Issue 6a: Effect on Property Value Mostly 

Perceived as Neutral or Positive

A key economic development issue raised by stakeholders 

through the JLUS process focused on the impact of Camp 

Grayling JMTC on surrounding property values. Stakeholders participating in the survey are split on the perception 

of how Camp Grayling affects property values: 50 percent

of stakeholders participating in the survey feel that Camp 

Grayling JMTC decreases property values, 40 percent feel 

it has no effect, and 10 percent feel it increases property

value. News articles covering town halls held by MDEQ and 

Camp Grayling JMTC on groundwater contamination from 

the Camp Grayling JMTC airfield indicate residents’ concerns

about declining property values. Through the community 

meetings, stakeholders shared stories with the JLUS project team of concerns about home sales due to noise from 

training operations and real estate agents not being fully 

transparent with prospective homebuyers about impacts 

from Camp Grayling. Increased transparency on potential 

issues related to Camp Grayling JMTC operations such as 

noise and wildfire could help with managing the perception

of the impact on property values. 

Issue 6b: Significant Contributor to Local 

Economy

Improving economic development in the communities 

around Camp Grayling JMTC is a priority issue identified

by stakeholders through the JLUS project, as well as Project Rising Tide – an initiative to provide at-risk communities 

with economic development tools. Of the stakeholders that 

participated in the JLUS project survey, 82 percent feel that 

Camp Grayling JMTC is a significant contributor to the local

economy. This perception is validated by information presented in the March 2017 Economic Development Study for 

the City of Grayling prepared through Project Rising Tide. 

According to the study, Camp Grayling directly spends $16 

million annually in the City of Grayling and attracts over 

10,000 soldiers and their families for training during summer, which represents significant military tourism.

Locally contracted services represents a portion of the $16 

million spent annually in the City of Grayling. Camp Grayling JMTC entered into a contract with the Grayling Fire Department to provide fire services. Through the one-on-one

interviews during the JLUS process, stakeholders raised 

the issue that the current level of service offered through

the existing contract might not be adequate given wildfire

threats and increased population due to Camp Grayling 

JMTC training operations. If a need for increased fire protection services due to Camp Grayling JMTC can be quantified

and verified, the data would support increasing contractual services which would lead to additional jobs for Grayling 

Fire Department. 

Stakeholders participate in a JLUS issue discovery meeting in June 2017. Museum in downtown Grayling.
2-32 CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Issue 6c: Economic Incentivizing and 

Monitoring

Commitment to spending Camp Grayling JMTC funding at 

locally owned businesses varies depends on leadership. 

There are no policy requirements or spending goals for 

locally-owned businesses for goods and services that are 

not subject to federal contracting requirements. Therefore, 

these decisions are subject to the commitment of the lead-

ership at Camp Grayling JMTC, which changes on a regular 

basis. 

While it is understood that military tourism, defined as sol-

diers coming to Camp Grayling JMTC and the family mem-

bers that visit surrounding communities to accompany 

them during training, likely hasa significant positive impact

on the economy of Grayling and other surrounding com-

munities, it is challenging to quantify the extent of the eco-

nomic impact and share that information with the public. 

Through Project Rising Tide, the City of Grayling has iden-

tified creating and maintaininga relationship with Camp

Grayling JMTC as an economic imperative for the city and 

its businesses. A mechanism to track the impact of military 

tourism on the local economy would assist Grayling and 

other communities in better understanding: 1) how much 

soldiers and their families spend while training at Camp 

Grayling and 2) factors that affect trends in military tourism

annually and over time. 

One factor that influences military tourism and integration

of Camp Grayling JMTC trainees into surrounding commu-

nities is adequate transportation. Soldiers training at Camp 

Grayling JMTC do not have access to private vehicles for 

transportation into Grayling and other communities. Camp 

Grayling JMTC often invites local food trucks to set up within 

the Camp Grayling JMTC, but for soldiers to leave, they must 

rely on public transportation provided by Crawford County 

Transportation Authority (Dial-A-Ride). Stakeholders partic-

ipating in the JLUS process mentioned that the early closing 

hours for Dial-A-Ride make it difficult for soldiers training at

Camp Grayling JMTC to go into Grayling and other commu-

nities. Stakeholders also identified the challenge of the Di-

al-A-Ride schedule in the Grayling Economic Development 

Study developed through Project Rising Tide; however, the 

study offered no specific recommendations to address this

challenge. Improved public transportation is key to improv-

ing the integration of Camp Grayling JMTC into surrounding 

communities as a way to increase economic contributions 

from military tourism. 

Top: Crawford County build-

ing in Grayling.

Far Left: An overlook near 

Guthrie Lakes.

Left: Grayling City Hall and 

police department.
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | ALPENA CRTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA 3-1

3.1 Alpena CRTC Study 

Area Overview

3.1.1 How to Read this Chapter

This chapter describes Alpena CRTC and the areas sur-

rounding it. The first section containsa study area over-

view, which includes existing conditions information about 

the Alpena CRTC area.A two-mile study area buffer was

created around the Alpena CRTC boundary to establish a 

focus area for this land use study. The next section has a 

description of the public participation for Alpena CRTC, and 

then finally, the third section featuresa discussion of the

JLUS issues brought up by local stakeholders and refined by

the planning consultant team. 

3.1.2 How Alpena CRTC and its 

Surrounding Area Is Unique

Located adjacent to Lake Huron, Alpena CRTC has access 

to the largest training airspace east of the Mississippi River, 

making it an attractive destination for joint forces training. 

Although there are no assigned aircraft at the base itself, 

the parking ramp can accommodate F-15s, F-16s, A-10s, 

C-130s, C-5s, C-17s, KC-10s, KC-135s, and more. The air-

space over Lake Huron includes supersonic permissions at 

altitudes above 30,000 feet above mean seal level (MSL). 

Alpena CRTC isa certified Joint National Training Center,

one of just four installations like it in the country. It hosts 

the fourth-largest National Guard Bureau (NGB) training 

operation, known as Northern Strike. The exercise, original-

ly put on by Air National Guard (ANG), is now jointly host-

ed with Army National Guard (ARNG) and Camp Grayling 

JMTC. It brings together about 6,000 service members from 

13 states and coalition countries including Canada, Great 

Britain, Denmark, Latvia, and Poland. Also, a quarter of the 

joint terminal attack controllers (JTACs) in the Air Force are 

trained at Alpena CRTC. 

The City of Alpena draws on a rich history as a hub of trans-

portation at the intersection of the Thunder Bay River and 

Lake Huron. Forest and conservation lands surround the 

base, and recreation opportunities are plentiful. The pop-

ulation is small and aging, as many retirees live in the area. 

3

alpena CRTC 

and community 

study area

Control tower.

Thunder Bay River.

Base operations building.

Troop camp quarters.

chapter overview

3.1 Alpena CRTC Overview .......................3-1

3.1.1 How to Read this Chapter .........3-1

3.1.2 How Alpena CRTC and its 

 Surrounding Area Is Unique .....3-1

3.1.3 Setting..........................................3-3

3.1.4 History .........................................3-3

3.1.5 Mission/Operations ...................3-3

3.1.6 Demographics.............................3-4

3.1.7 Land Use......................................3-5

3.1.8 Zoning..........................................3-6

3.1.9 Incompatible Use .......................3-6

3.2 Alpena CRTC Public Participation......3-7

3.3 Alpena CRTC Issues Overview............3-8

3.3.1 Issue Definition Process ............3-8

3.3.2 Alpena CRTC Noise and 

 Military Operations Issues........3-9

3.3.3 Alpena CRTC Environmental 

 Issues.........................................3-12

3.3.4 Alpena CRTC Transportation and 

 Infrastructure Issues ...............3-14

3.3.5 Alpena CRTC Community 

 Partnerships Issues .................3-17

3.3.6 Alpena CRTC Economic

 Development Issues ................3-18
3-2 ALPENA CRTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Figure 3.1 | Alpena CRTC

MSA

Main

Base

Drop Zone

Alpena

Entry Control Point Thunder Bay River

Lake Winyah

Thunder

Bay

River

Thunder Bay

FOURMILE DAM

NORWAY POINT DAM

JLUS 2-Mile Study Area

Alpena CRTC

Township Boundary

State Forest

WI

MI

Lake

Huron

MI

0

Z

2

Miles

Alpena CRTC anchors 

the Michigan Air 

National Guard 

presence in the 

northern part of the 

state. Residents of the 

surrounding area have 

an overall positive view 

of the base, which 

is situated 7 miles 

west of downtown 

Alpena. Alpena is 

the largest city in 

region, and Alpena 

CRTC is colocated at 

the Alpena County 

Regional Airport. 

Encroachment is 

minimal and is unlikely 

to affect Alpena 

CRTC's mission in the 

foreseeable future.
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | ALPENA CRTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA 3-3

3.1.3 Setting

The Alpena CRTC study area is located in Alpena County in 

the northeast portion of Michigan’s Lower Peninsula, approximately 130 miles east northeast of Traverse City and 

250 miles north of Detroit. Alpena CRTC spans 630 acres 

leased from Alpena County; the ANG also utilizes facilities 

at the Alpena County Regional Airport. Alpena is the most 

populated city in the area and borders Thunder Bay on Lake 

Huron. Access to the area is typically via Michigan State 

Highway 32 (M-32) (east-west) and U.S. Highway 23 (US-23) 

(north-south). Interstate 75 (I-75) is the nearest interstate at 

65 miles west. 

The Grayling Air-to-Ground Range, located on Camp Grayling JMTC, is a training range for Alpena CRTC that is covered in the Camp Grayling portion of this JLUS. 

The Alpena area has mild summers, with an average daily 

temperature of 64.3 degrees, and very cold winters, with an 

average daily temperature of 19.9 degrees. The area averages 29 inches of precipitation annually, with most falling 

in June, July, and August. The average annual snowfall is 87 

inches.

3.1.4 History

Commercial fishing and associated settlement in the Alpena

area began around Thunder Bay in the 1830s, and 30 years 

later, logging began. The city of Alpena was incorporated 

in 1871, and Alpena Power, which is still in service today, 

was founded by George N. Fletcher in 1881. By 1900, the 

population of Alpena was more than 18,000, and railroad 

lines helped make the city a transportation and industry 

hub. Paper production and limestone quarrying were other 

primary economic drivers. 

Alpena CRTC began as Captain Phelps Collins Field in 1931 

and was Michigan’s first state-owned airport. The field was

built on land donated by the Alpena Power Company and 

brothers Harry and Phillip Fletcher. The first hangar was

completed in 1937, around the same time that military personnel from Selfridge Field began using the site. 

During World War II, the field was taken over by the War

Assets Administration in large part to provide air defense 

for the Soo Locks. Following the war, several facilities built 

in 1942 were sold or moved and the field was turned over

to the county. 

A joint use agreement with the National Guard was completed in 1952 and the ANG constructed 62 concrete block 

buildings in the 1950s. 

The site was renamed the Alpena CRTC in 1991. Radar approach and control training, an ANG Medical Readiness 

Training School, and Air Combat Maneuver Instrumentation 

missions were added in the early 1990s, and a fire training

site and military operations on urban terrain (MOUT) area 

in the early 2000s.

3.1.5 Mission/Operations

As mentioned in the description of the military and operational section describing Grayling JMTC, these two entities are inextricably linked around the training activities 

of the combined asset. The JMTC acts as the garrison support function of the Grayling Range, while the Alpena CRTC 

manages operational aspects of the airspace and training 

requirements of the visiting units. Additionally, the JMTC 

naturally handles more of the Army-related activities and 

Alpena CRTC handles the Air Force-related functions. 

The CRTC is collocated with the Alpena County Regional 

Airport, sharing functional assets including two runways, 

the primary being 9,000 feet long by 150 feet wide and 

the secondary crosswind recovery runway being just over 

5,000 feet long by 150 feet wide. Taxiways and air navigation equipment are also shared. The airport has a control 

tower and is owned and operated by Alpena County. It is a 

moderately busy airport with the majority of traffic being

military related.

While the installation does not have any flying units of its

own, it supports organizations from all branches of the military throughout the U.S. and coalition partners. Regional 

units supported on a regular basis by the CRTC include:

 107th Fighter Squadron (FS) out of Selfridge Air Force 

Base (AFB), Michigan, flying A-10 fighter jets.

 112th FS out of Toledo, Ohio, flying F-16 fighter jets.

 69th and 23rd Bomb Squadrons out of Minot AFB, 

North Dakota, flying B-52 bomber jet aircraft.

 171st Air Refueling Squadron out of Selfridge AFB, 

Michigan, flying KC-135 refueler jet aircraft.

Command and control of airspace activities is coordinated 

through Black Talon Scheduling located on Alpena CRTC. 

They provide separation services for all aircraft within the 

SUA of the entire complex from the RA over Lake Huron 

to the military operations area (MOA) west of the Grayling 

Range. This is done in coordination with other entities including the Alpena County Regional Airport air traffic control tower, the Grayling Range air traffic control tower,

Range Control at Grayling Range and the Minneapolis Air 

Route Traffic Control Center, which has ultimate authority

over the entire region and handles all aircraft in high-altitude airspace.

The CRTC and JMTC work in concert to promote and manage operations throughout the entire complex. This includes jointly funded projects and CRTC-funded projects 

on the range (an Army asset). Specific to Alpena CRTC are

facilities for firefighter training, munitions storage, bulk jet

fuel storage, Combat Aviation Patrol capable shelters and 

maintenance, Joint Terminal Attack Controllers to support 

range activities, a large aircraft parking apron, operations 

support facilities for transient units, aircraft maintenance 

hangars, billeting, dining, and recreational assets.

The installation employs 88 military personnel (ANG), 57 

state employees, and 62 contractors with an additional 21 

temporary employees during training events. Excluding airmen’s personal expenditures, these activities generate a 

local economic impact of well over $25 million dollars annually.

The installation plays host to many visitors throughout 

the year for individual and unit training events as well as 

annual large force exercises including Northern Strike, an 

NGB-sponsored exercise that involves 55 units from 21 

states and as many as three coalition partners from around 

the world. This event brings as many as 5,500 personnel at 

one time and flies more than 1,120 sorties out of the airfield.

Possessing the largest amount of military and restricted 

airspace east of the Mississippi River, and supported by advanced digital airport surveillance radar (DASR) and tracking systems technology, Alpena CRTC has the potential to 

become the unmanned aerial systems (UAS) destination of 

choice for the Department of Defense (DOD) and its contractors. The DASR and tracking systems are used by both 

Minneapolis and Cleveland centers to control and direct airborne craft. 

Alpena CRTC has developed a 1 square mile box of airspace 

specifically for small military UAS missions. This airspace

provides a template for a proposed 4-square-mile civilian 

UAS area of operation. When completed, this area would be 

capable of supporting conventional, maritime, hand, and 

catapult launched aerial systems. Launch and recovery support for military UAS is being actively pursued by the CRTC, 

which may eventually allow flight systems testing, mission

training, and DOD validation testing. UAS can now also be 

flown in Class D airspace when the tower is open.

Based at the Alpena County Regional Airport in Alpena, 

Northern Michigan Unmanned Aerial Systems Consortium 

(MUASC) is a UAS consortium and flight test center. MUASC

offers 11,000 square miles of airspace dedicated to research

and development, certification, qualification, and systems

testing for commercial UAS. It includes an MOA that belongs to ANG, with over 30 percent of airspace extending 

over Lake Huron. MUASC consists of UAS manufacturers, 

academia, research centers, military, government agencies, 

and private partners. 

Characterized by a low population density with wide, uninhabited expanses, the area is ideal for UAS research, testing, and development. The grant is allowing Alpena to host 

no-cost training seminars. The seminars promote travel to 

Alpena, which translates into hotel stays and business for 

local restaurants. Growing this asset will continue to be an 

economic benefit to the area.

Front entry of Alpena CRTC, which is collocated with Alpena County Regional Airport. (Source: Alpena CRTC Public 

Affairs)

Airmen listen to a mass air brief during Northern Strike, a 

large joint exercise hosted annually at Camp Grayling JMTC 

and Alpena CRTC. (Source: Alpena CRTC Public Affairs)
3-4 ALPENA CRTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

3.1.6 Demographics

The Alpena CRTC study area for this JLUS is located in Alpena County, the most populated county in Northeast Michigan. Alpena County has a population of 28,599 residents 

and functions as Northeast Michigan's commercial and cultural center. As of 2017, data shows 10,054 people living 

in the City of Alpena, while 8,835 reside in the Township of 

Alpena. 

Tourism plays an important role of the area's economy. 

Throughout the almost 9 square miles that make up the 

City of Alpena, an abundance of recreational activities are 

available for its residents and visitors to enjoy year-round. 

Alpena also has roots in industrial companies that positively 

impact Alpena’s revenue. Alpena is home to LafargeHolcim 

cement plant, Besser Company, and a drywall board manufacturing facility owned by Decorative Panels International. In addition to its industrial base, Alpena is also home to 

many other small businesses along with a community college and a regional medical center. 

Alpena CRTC is located just outside of the city, and it is a 

continued source of economic activity for the local community. Every year the operation brings over 1,000 people to 

the area. During their days off, many trainees spend money

at the local business in the Alpena area. Numerous businesses offer incentives for the troops including a military

discount. Alpena CRTC creates thousands of new customers a year for the local economy and also energizes the local 

housing market with new full-time officers/staff that live off

base. Several times a year, the base will host students for 

a training program that offers them an introduction to the

military. People involved in the program often return to the 

area to hunt, fish, and take advantage of Alpena's many recreational activities.

Population Projections

It is difficult to project population in the Alpena area due

to tourism and those living in the area seasonally. Overall population in the area has rapidly been declining since 

the 1960s. See Figure 3.2, City of Alpena Population Trend, 

1900-2010. Alpena residents are aging with few new residents moving in. The distribution is heavily weighted to 

those of retirement age. This, along with the downturn in 

the economy in 2009, may have played a role in the shift 

of the population. Poverty rates are also high in the Alpena 

area, possibly also contributing to a decline in population. A 

reliable measure of economic health is the median household income. The median household income of the Alpena 

CRTC study area is $42,883, higher than the overall Alpena 

County median income, which is $35,710. Unemployment 

rates in 2010 were 15.5 percent and have fallen significantly

to 7.4 percent in 2017. The City of Alpena is committed to 

enhancing and promoting its business-friendly climate and 

future job growth, which over the next 10 years is predicted 

to be 41.56 percent. The forecasted population of Alpena 

County looks to increase by the year 2020 from 28,599 to 

35,220 residents.

Growth Potential

In an effort to attract skilled talent to the area and curb a decreasing population, Northeast Michigan has put together a 

10-year talent plan. The plan focuses on long-term growth, 

bringing to the region full-time, higher-wage positions in the 

highest growth industries. The Northeast Michigan 10-year 

talent plan provides a timeline, best practices and recommendations for assessing and bringing in skilled employees 

to the region. Northeast Michigan is looking to adequately 

plan for long-term growth by anticipating industry trends 

and educational needs. The vision for the future of Northeast Michigan is to fill 10,000 jobs in 10 years. For details,

see Table 3.1, Northeast Michigan Industry Forecast. 

Table 3.1 | Northeast Michigan Industry Forecast

INDUSTRY EMPLOYMENT 2012 EMPLOYMENT 2022 PERCENT CHANGE (%)

Retail Trade 10,960 10,860 -0.9

Healthcare and Social Assistance 9,560 10,212 6.8

Transportation and Warehousing 1,460 1,630 11.6

Manufacturing 5,170 5,420 4.8

Construction 2,380 2,780 16.8

Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting 1,790 1,850 3.4

Professional and Business Services 2,320 2,620 12.9

Accommodation and Food Services 6,410 6,860 7.0

Leisure and Hospitality 7,530 8,040 6.8

Government 6,270 6,090 -2.9

Financial Activities 2,320 2,360 1.7

Source: http://www.discovernortheastmichigan.org/downloads/rpi_10_year_talent_plan.pdf

Figure 3.3 | Alpena CRTC Study Area 

Figure 3.4 | Alpena CRTC Study Area 

Demographics

15,000

13,000

11,000

9,000

1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Figure 3.2 | City of Alpena Population Trend, 1900-2010

2017 population

46.5

2017 median age

643

1. Esri

2. 2010 US Census

Education attainment

1% < 9th grade

31% high school diploma

32% some college/no degree

17% associates degree

12% bachelor's degree

6% grad/professional degree

2017 median 

home value

$98,171 $42,883

2017 median 

household 

yearly income1

number 

of family 

households2

194

2011-15 ACS 

households below 

the poverty level

23%
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | ALPENA CRTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA 3-5

3.1.7 Land Use

Shown in this section are the various land uses as they exist 

within and around Alpena CRTC. The divisions of use are 

categorized into natural areas and those created by a human presence. This manner of organization was used to 

reconcile the differing land-use categories provided by the

townships. Throughout the Alpena CRTC study area, manmade uses are concentrated along major roadways, and in 

unincorporated portions on the north side of Lake Winyah. 

Areas of man-made uses consist of commercial, industrial, 

recreational, and residential uses. These land-use categories do not portray the intensity of the land use in any given 

area. 

The majority of the land use around Alpena CRTC, 87 percent of the total acreage, is natural areas. Natural areas include a mix of forested uplands, lowlands, and wetlands. 

Among the man-made area, the highest percentage of 

land is the industrial, extractive, transportation and utility 

land-use category, in large part due to the Alpena airfield.

Among the other land uses, there is a concentration of the 

Commercial and Residential land uses along thoroughfares 

in the areas. Agricultural uses are the least represented in 

the study area. 

It should be noted that land use is a portrayal of the actual 

use of real property and, while it informs zoning, is not considered to be legally enforceable. 

The vast majority of the concentrated land uses of the City 

of Alpena are well to the northeast of this area.

RPZ

MSA

Main

Base Drop Zone

Live

Load/

Hangers

Thunder Bay River

Lake Winyah

Thunder

Bay

River

Long Rapids Rd

ST32

Wilson Township

Maple Ridge Township

Alpena Township

M-32

Herron Rd

Long Rapids Rd

Witt Rd

Little Rd

Haken Rd

Shannon Rd

Sandal

Lake Winyah Rd

Glennie Rd

Winyah Lake Rd

Cathro Rd

Burkholder Dr

Truckey Rd Tamrack Rd

1st Ave

Daisy Ln

King Settlement Rd

Macey Ln

2nd Ave

Geronimo Rd

Indian Reserve Rd

Villeneuve Rd

Simmons Rd

3rd Ave

S 3rd Ave

Forest Ln

Harrison Rd

Winyah Dr

Easton Dr

A St

Hayter Ln

Kline Rd

High Banks Dr

Kaiser Rd

Silver City Ln

S Black Bear Rd

Golf Course Rd

Highland Ct

Walter St

Pebble St

4 Mile Rd

Woodview Dr

Miracle Dr

Bernice Ln

Peninsula Dr

Elizabeth St

Brentwood Dr

Kemnitz Rd

Riverview Rd

Rivers Edge Dr

Oakridge Dr

JLUS 2-Mile Study Area

Township Boundary

Drop Zone

Runway Protection Zone

Existing Land Use

Residential

Commercial

Agricultural

Non-Forested Uplands

Upland Forest

Lowland Forest

Wetlands

Water

Institutional/Recreational

Industrial/Extractive/Transportation/Utility

0 Z 4,000

Feet

WI

MI

Lake

Huron

MI

Figure 3.5 | Alpena CRTC Land Use

Figure 3.6 | Alpena CRTC Land Use 

Distribution

34% lowland forest

20% wetlands

8% water body

6% industrial

4% non-forest uplands

3% residential

3% institutional/service

<1% agriculture

<1% commercial

21% upland forest
3-6 ALPENA CRTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

3.1.8 Zoning

Zoning can be enforced at the county, township, and city/village levels of government. As it applies to the Alpena study 

area, the zoning is enforced at the township level by the Maple Ridge, Wilson, and Alpena Townships respectively. Each 

township applies different names to their respective zoning

districts. In order to organize these varying descriptions, the 

zones have been grouped into seven categories that best fit

the overall description of the zone. While the categories do 

not take into account the intensity of the zone, it does lay 

out the legal mechanisms available within the Alpena study 

area that control the use of property. The largest zoned 

area within the Alpena area consists of Agricultural areas, 

totaling 62 percent of the total area. Commercial, Residential, and Industrial areas consist of 14 percent of the study 

area and notably cover more area than the identified land

use. These zones are of importance when considering noise 

and other disruptions concerning uses at the Alpena CRTC, 

as these zones will likely consist of the majority of occupied 

spaces. 

3.1.9 Incompatible Use

Noise contours were provided at the time of the finalization

of this JLUS and the FAA defines the APZs. GIS of the APZs

will need to be obtained along with the GIS for the noise 

contours. A precise analysis of incompatible land use can 

be completed during the implementation phase of the JLUS 

when GIS data layers are made available. However, since 

the bulk of the land uses surrounding the regional airport 

and Alpena CRTC are agricultural or open space in nature 

and the City of Alpena is not directly adjacent to the installation, there are fewer complaints related to military operations in the area. 

Figure 3.7 | Alpena CRTC Zoning

RPZ

MSA

Main

Base Drop Zone

Live

Load/

Hangers

Thunder Bay River

Lake Winyah

Thunder

Bay

River

Long Rapids Rd

ST32

Wilson Township

Maple Ridge Township

Alpena Township

M-32

Herron Rd

Long Rapids Rd

Witt Rd

Little Rd

Haken Rd

Shannon Rd

Sandal

Lake Winyah Rd

Glennie Rd

Winyah Lake Rd

Cathro Rd

Burkholder Dr

Truckey Rd Tamrack Rd

1st Ave

Daisy Ln

King Settlement Rd

Macey Ln

2nd Ave

Geronimo Rd

Indian Reserve Rd

Villeneuve Rd

Simmons Rd

3rd Ave

S 3rd Ave

Forest Ln

Harrison Rd

Winyah Dr

Easton Dr

A St

Hayter Ln

Kline Rd

High Banks Dr

Kaiser Rd

Silver City Ln

S Black Bear Rd

Golf Course Rd

Highland Ct

Walter St

Pebble St

4 Mile Rd

Woodview Dr

Miracle Dr

Bernice Ln

Peninsula Dr

Elizabeth St

Brentwood Dr

Kemnitz Rd

Riverview Rd

Rivers Edge Dr

Oakridge Dr

JLUS 2-Mile Study Area

Alpena CRTC

Township Boundary

Zoning

Agriculture

Airport

Commercial

Industrial

Natural Resources/Open Space

Residential

Water Body

0 Z 4,000

Feet

WI

MI

Lake

Huron

MI

Figure 3.8 | Alpena CRTC Zoning 

Distribution

62% agriculture

18% natural resources

11% residential

6% airport

2% commercial

<1% industrial

<1% water body
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | ALPENA CRTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA 3-7

3.2 Alpena CRTC Public Participation

The public participation process for Alpena CRTC involved a 

suite of TC/PC meetings, stakeholder meetings, community 

survey, and one-on-one stakeholder interviews. The initial 

TC/PC meeting for Alpena CRTC took place on April 24, 2017, 

at the University Center in Gaylord, Michigan. During this 

meeting, participants discussed expanding the TC member 

list, approved the project work plan, and coordinated logistics for the tours. 

The Alpena CRTC installation tour for TC/PC members took 

place on June 1, 2017. The purpose of the tour was to provide TC and PC members with a more detailed understanding of the Alpena CRTC operations, procedures, and facilities. 

On June 1, 2017, TC and PC members met at the Great Lakes 

Maritime Heritage Center, a visitor center for the Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary, for a facilitated issues 

identification discussion. Through this meeting, TC and PC

members identified an initial list of strengths, weaknesses,

opportunities, and threats (SWOT) related to Alpena CRTC. 

Community stakeholders met the evening of June 1, 2017, 

at the Maritime Heritage Center to engage in a similar issues identification discussion using the SWOT method. The

JLUS project team advertised for this meeting in the Alpena 

News and local radio stations. In addition, TC and PC members used their internal outreach mechanisms, such as 

email distribution lists and websites, to promote the meeting. During the meeting, the JLUS project team presented 

the JLUS process and facilitated an issues identification discussion. Section 3.3 provides more detail on this process 

and the results. 

After the initial stakeholder meetings, the JLUS project team 

conducted a series of one-on-one interviews with key stakeholders. Sixty stakeholders participated in the interview process. In addition to interviews, the JLUS project team sought 

broader stakeholder input through a survey made available 

on the NEMCOG website for 3 months. A copy of the survey 

questions is available in Appendix B as part of the Public 

Participation Plan. Members of the TC and PC used their existing outreach mechanisms, such as websites and newsletters, to help the JLUS project team promote participation in 

the survey. NEMCOG also provided information to the Alpena News and local radio stations. Subsequent news articles 

and radio coverage promoted participation in the survey. 

Stakeholders submitted a total of 137 survey responses. 

The survey results for Alpena CRTC are presented in Figure 

3.9. Overall, the survey responses indicate that a majority 

of stakeholders sharing their perspective are comfortable 

with the operations at Alpena CRTC, believe it is a significant

contributor to the local economy, and has a positive impact 

on the quality of life of surrounding communities. Stakeholders responding to the survey have a slightly greater 

concern about noise from Camp Grayling JMTC (23 percent) 

than recreational access (20 percent) or traffic (15 percent).

Stakeholder input from the SWOT analysis, the one-on-one 

interviews, and the survey helped the JLUS Project Team 

understand the comprehensive universe of issues and prioritize those issues for further strategy development. The 

second JLUS project stakeholder meeting for Alpena CRTC 

took place October 11, 2017, at the Alpena County Library. 

This Alpena community update and input meeting focused 

on reviewing the JLUS process steps, status, SWOT results, 

and identification of possible strategies to deal with priority

issues identified by stakeholders. Additional news articles

and radio coverage discussed this meeting and continued 

to promote participation in the online community survey.

Additional TC and PC meetings took place in November and 

December 2017 and continued through the spring of 2018. 

During these meetings, TC and PC members discussed JLUS 

project status and action items, data needs, and next steps. 

Additional stakeholder meetings, both in-person and via 

conference calls, took place during 2018 to address details 

of the recommended strategies for each of the priority issues. During these meetings, stakeholders provided feedback on the strategies, identifying key information that will 

assist with successful implementation over time. The strategies and associated recommendations and challenges identified by the JLUS project team with input from stakeholders

are described in more detail in Section 4.

of those surveyed are 

comfortable with military 83% operations in their area

73% of those surveyed have no 

concerns about military operations 

with regard to public health, safety, 

housing, or general welfare

64% of those surveyed believe 

Alpena CRTC has no impact on their 

property value

86% of those surveyed believe 

that Alpena CRTC has a positive 

impact on the surrounding 

communities’ quality of life

74% of those surveyed perceive 

Alpena CRTC’s relationship with 

surrounding property and business 

owners as positive; 

23% are unsure

91% of those surveyed believe Alpena CRTC

is a significant contributor to the local economy

20% of those surveyed 

are concerned with 

recreational access

23% of those surveyed 

are concerned about 

noise levels

15% of those surveyed 

are concerned about 

traffic

52% believe potential 

growth of Alpena CRTC will 

have a significant effect on 

infrastructure capacity

70% believe renewable 

resources such as wind and 

solar are vital to the Alpena 

CRTC area

76% believe that 

coordination/communication 

with Alpena CRTC facilitates an 

efficient flow of traffic

Figure 3.9 | Survey Highlights
3-8 ALPENA CRTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

3.3 Alpena CRTC Issues Overview

3.3.1 Issue Definition Process

The first opportunity for the public and project stakeholders

to share thoughts on their proximity to Alpena CRTC was at 

a series of discussion meetings on June 5, 2017. There, the 

JLUS project team led TC and PC members through an issues collection exercise to gather input. These issues could 

be positive or negative.

The issues were sorted into four categories: strengths, 

weaknesses, opportunities, and threats, and then meeting 

participants voted on which issues mattered the most to 

them. Later that same day, the JLUS project team led area 

residents through the same exercise at a public meeting. 

The results of that analysis can be seen in Figure 3.10, Alpena CRTC SWOT Results. Larger font size indicates issues 

that received the most votes. Detailed results are provided 

in Appendix C. Additional notes and input were gathered 

during the meetings, as well as during individual interviews 

with stakeholders.

All of the input from stakeholders, the TC and PC, and the 

online survey was considered when drafting the final list of

issues. The survey was closed on November 30, 2017, with 

over 200 responses. 

Along with stakeholder feedback, a large trove of data from 

NEMCOG and other local sources was considered, including 

demographic data, existing studies, and GIS data on land 

use and other facets of the region.

Six overarching categories emerged: 

 Military Operations

 Noise

 Environmental

 Transportation and Infrastructure

 Community Partnerships

 Economic Development

All of the issues raised fell into one of those categories, 

which are described in more detail on the following pages. 

Figure 3.10 | Alpena CRTC SWOT Results

Alpena CRTC SWOT analysis results

S W O T

Alpena CRTC

longevity

PFCs

Live Munition 

Impacts to 

Lake Huron

Base 

Community 

Council

Northern Strike

Sustainability

Attract Prime DOD Contractors

Increase Local 

Awareness of Alpena 

CTRC Economic Impact

Increase 

Community 

Involvement

Noise: Training/ 

Aircraft Operations 

(Too low and fast)

Northern 

Strike 

Activity

Commercial 

Partnership with the 

Sheriff’s Department

Draws New People 

to Community

Base Population 

Economic Impact

Airport Viability

STARBASE

Joint Response 

Emergency Services

Members of the Community

New Hangar

Construction: Positive 

Economic Impact

Expansion Potential

Current Sonar Scan

Surge Capacity: 

Rental Vehicles 

Surge Capacity: 

Hotels 

Delayed Budget/ 

Congressional Approval

Flight Path

Training Accidents

Infrastructure Issue: 

Roads and Matching SRM

FAA Oversight

PT SES Trigger Northern Strike

Sling Load Training

Drop Zone Accidents

Identify the Carrying 

Capacity of Alpena

PSA

Parade

Public Air Show

Impact of Munitions on 

Ground Water Quality

UXO/Dummy Ordnance in Lake Huron

Impact on the 

Marine Sanctuary

Security Breach

Civilian Intrusion

Alpena stakeholders participate in SWOT analysis

strengths weaknesses opportunities threats

(Items in the smallest font size received less than 5 votes.)

(Items in the smallest font size got less than 5 votes.)

Figure 3.11 | Alpena CRTC Issues Analysis Process

input

Tetra Tech solicits feedback via public 

meetings, online surveys, and 

interviews with Camp Grayling JMTC 

and Alpena CRTC JLUS stakeholders.

data analysis

Tetra Tech considers the SWOT 

analysis, survey responses, and 

previous studies, highlighting the 

most important issues.

output

Tetra Tech presents the issues to 

JLUS stakeholders, who vet them to 

make sure their interests are 

captured. Tetra Tech then creates 

strategies based on these issues.



JLUS stakeholders participate in a SWOT analysis during the June discussion meetings.
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | ALPENA CRTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA 3-9

3.3.2 Alpena CRTC Noise and 

Military Operations Issues

Issue 1a: Training/Aircraft Operations are too 

Low/Fast

The area surrounding the Alpena County Regional Airport 

is much better defined and controlled than that of Grayling

Army Airfield (AAF). A single small housing community off

the end of Runway 01 contains less than 60 houses. The 

clear zone (CZ) of the runway end is clearly delineated on 

the ground. 

The rest of the vast area around this airport is forested, unpopulated land. The airfield is far enough away from the developed area of town that encroachment is not an issue. Criteria establishing protection areas for this airport is Federal 

Aviation Administration (FAA) Advisory Circular 150/5300-

13 because it is a county-owned and operated airfield, even

though the majority of air traffic is military related.

Training activities involving aircraft are low and fast when 

they involve jets engaged in launch or recovery operations. 

Once departed from the airfield and at a safe distance

away, these aircraft typically ascend to above 6,000 feet 

MSL, which is the floor of the Pike West MOA located directly above this area. The majority of operations are intended 

to be conducted within these designated airspaces, including transit to and from the ranges. 

The Pike East MOA located over Lake Huron is established 

with a floor down to 300 feet above ground level (AGL). It is

possible that aircraft may transit directly from the airfield

to this airspace at a lower altitude if going there for training 

purposes. Typically, these overflights would be restricted to

flying no lower than 1,500 feet MSL until safely in the MOA.

They would also be directed to avoid overflight of populated areas for safety and noise sensitivity reasons.

It is recommended that cities and counties restrict development of residential neighborhoods within 5 miles of all 

airports, ranges, or installations.

Issue 2a: Live Munition Impacts to Lake Huron

For several decades, Lake Huron has been a well-known 

location for the release of bombs, missiles, bullets, and all 

manner of munitions. 

In more recent years this activity has been restricted in 

order to safely allow other uses of the resource. An area 

referred to as the R-4207 is restricted airspace (RA) (when 

activated) over restricted water for the purposes of military 

training. The lake-bed below is undoubtedly riddled with 

ages of shrapnel and unexploded ordnance (UXO).

In 1991, a live AIM-9B Sidewinder missile was identified on

the shore of Lake Michigan near Cheboygan. It was later 

determined that it came from similar live-fire training activities conducted in the lake, then dredged up by fishermen

and abandoned on the beach.

Table 3.2 | Alpena CRTC Issues 

ISSUE ID DESCRIPTION SOURCE

Noise

1a Training/Aircraft Operations are too Low/Fast SWOT

Military Operations

2a Live Munition Impacts to Lake Huron SWOT

2b Northern Strike Activity SWOT

2c Marine Sanctuary Interview/Survey

Environment

3a PFOS/PFOA Contamination of Groundwater SWOT

3b Surface Water Quality (Lakes, Rivers, Streams, Wetlands) Survey

3c Groundwater Quality Survey

Transportation/Infrastructure

4a Effects of Growth on Utilities Survey

4b Airport Joint Ownership/Land Use Access Interview/Survey

4c Road Funding

4d Road Condition

4e Recreational Access Survey

Community Partnerships

5a Communications/Education

5b Public Relations/Community Involvement

Economic Development

6a Significant Contributor to Local Economy and Military Tourism Survey

6b Airport Viability: UAS, Freight, Customs Border Patrol SWOT

6c Partnership with Sheriff’s Department SWOT

For a complete list of issues, see Appendix C, SWOT Results.

A MIARNG 

UH-72 Lakota 

helicopter 

takes off near 

a MIANG A-10 

Thunderbolt II 

during Operation Northern Strike at 

Alpena CRTC. 

(Source: 

Alpena CRTC 

Public Affairs)

Alpena CRTC has 

an operations 

building on Camp 

Grayling JMTC.
3-10 ALPENA CRTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Alpena CRTC training includes exercises that employ air-tosurface weapons launching into the Lake Huron Overwater Range, approximately 20 miles offshore from Alpena.

The Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary was designated in 2000 at 448 square miles and expanded in 2014 to 

4,300 square miles. When the Thunder Bay National Marine 

Sanctuary boundary expansion was underway, the 2013 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) 

Condition Report noted that a 1,300-square-mile area has 

the potential for housing UXO and military-related debris. 

NOAA’s Lake Huron chart 14860 contains a note cautioning mariners against “anchoring, dredging, or trawling in 

the area due to the possible existence of unexploded ordnance.” MDEQ has requested assistance from the U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers to evaluate the known munitions in the 

area and potentially address their findings via the Military

Munitions Response Program. Maintaining effective communication between NOAA and Alpena CRTC is key to ensure that Alpena CRTC operations co-exist with this unique 

freshwater sanctuary. 

Issue 2b: Northern Strike Activity

Because it is one of the largest training areas in the United 

States, the Alpena CRTC/Grayling JMTC complex is a national 

asset that easily attracts training events like Northern Strike 

exercise. The inundation by thousands of visitors that need 

services, supplies, entertainment, vehicles, housing, and 

the like can impact the community. However, these events 

also bring a boost to the local economy.

To balance the positive and negative aspects of training 

exercises, towns should plan and prepare for events as 

thoroughly as the military does. They should disseminate 

information about events, shared activities, services offered, and help wanted. They should prepare briefings and

informational packages for military personnel to help them 

find what they are after and educate them on how to avoid

areas that should be off-limits to military personnel.

The community-military partnership is key to a successful 

event of this magnitude. Getting the community involved 

and engaged will reduce the negative impacts while allowing residents to more directly realize the benefits.

Figure 3.12 | Alpena CRTC Military Operations

RPZ

MSA

Main

Base Drop Zone

Lower South

Branch

Thunder

Bay

Thunder

Bay

River

Long Rapids Rd

ST32

Wilson Township

Maple Ridge Township

Alpena Township

M-32

Herron Rd

Long Rapids Rd

Witt Rd

Little Rd

Haken Rd

Shannon Rd

Sandal

Lake Winyah Rd

Glennie Rd

Winyah Lake Rd

Airport Rd

Cathro Rd

Burkholder Dr

Truckey Rd

Sportsmen Dr

Tamrack Rd

1st Ave

Daisy Ln

King Settlement Rd

Macey Ln

2nd Ave

Geronimo Rd

Indian Reserve Rd

Simmons Rd

Villeneuve Rd

3rd Ave

S 3rd Ave

Forest Ln

Harrison Rd

Winyah Dr

Easton Dr

A St

Hayter Ln

Fern Ln

Kline Rd

High Banks Dr

Kaiser Rd

N Black Bear Rd

Silver City Ln

S Black Bear Rd

Golf Course Rd

Highland Ct

Walter St

Pebble St

4 Mile Rd

Neumanns Rd

Woodview Dr

Miracle Dr

Bernice Ln

Peninsula Dr

Sitting Bull Rd

Elizabeth St

Brentwood Dr

Kemnitz Rd

Mosquito Ln

Oakridge Dr

Old Mill Rd

Sportsmen Dr

JLUS 2-Mile Study Area

Alpena CRTC

Township Boundary

Building Restriction Line

Apron

Hot Cargo Pad

Runway

Taxiway

Runway End

Shoulder

Runway Protection Zone

Approach/Departure Zone

Primary Surface

7:1 Transitional Surface

Airspace/Military Aviation

Class D

Class E4

Class E5

Military Training Route (MTR)

0 Z 4,000

Feet

WI

MI

Lake

Huron

MI
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | ALPENA CRTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA 3-11

ALPENA CRTC

PIKE WEST

MOA

PIKE EAST

MOA

RESTRICTED

STEELHEAD

MOA

RESTRICTED

Thunder Bay

Sanctuary

GRAYLING JMTC

Military Training Route (MTR)

Study Area 2-mile Buffer

Thunder Bay Sanctuary

Military Operations Area (MOA)

Airspace

Class D and E2

Class E4

Class E5

Restricted Airspace

0 Z 20

Miles

Figure 3.13 | Alpena CRTC Military Operations Overview
3-12 ALPENA CRTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

RPZ

MSA

Main

Base Drop Zone

Live

Load/

Hangers Hot Cargo Pad

Munitions Holding Area

Thunder Bay River

Lake Winyah

Thunder

Bay

River

Long Rapids Rd

ST32

Wilson Township

Maple Ridge Township

Alpena Township

M-32

Herron Rd

Long Rapids Rd

Witt Rd

Little Rd

Haken Rd

Shannon Rd

Sandal

Lake Winyah Rd

Glennie Rd

Winyah Lake Rd

Airport Rd

Cathro Rd

Burkholder Dr

Truckey Rd

Sportsmen Dr

Tamrack Rd

1st Ave

Daisy Ln

King Settlement Rd

Macey Ln

2nd Ave

Geronimo Rd

Indian Reserve Rd

Simmons Rd

Villeneuve Rd

3rd Ave

S 3rd Ave

Forest Ln

Harrison Rd

Winyah Dr

Easton Dr

A St

Hayter Ln

Fern Ln

Kline Rd

High Banks Dr

Kaiser Rd

N Black Bear Rd

Silver City Ln

S Black Bear Rd

Golf Course Rd

Highland Ct

Walter St

Pebble St

4 Mile Rd

Neumanns Rd

Woodview Dr

Miracle Dr

Bernice Ln

Peninsula Dr

Sitting Bull Rd

Elizabeth St

Brentwood Dr

Kemnitz Rd

Mosquito Ln

Oakridge Dr

Old Mill Rd

Sportsmen Dr

JLUS 2-Mile Study Area

Township Boundary

Drop Zone

Building Restriction Line

Intermittent Exposure

Constant Exposure

Restrictive Easement

Apron

Hot Cargo Pad

Runway

Taxiway

Runway Protection Zone

Alpena County Regional Airport

0 Z 4,000

Feet

WI

MI

Lake

Huron

MI

Figure 3.14 | Alpena CRTC Noise

Issue 2c: Marine Sanctuary

The Pike East MOA airspace over a large portion of the Marine Sanctuary extends down to just 300 feet AGL and is 

used for high-speed, low-altitude jet fighter training. The 

sanctuary was created to protect the shipwrecks and unlike 

many other marine sanctuaries, the law for Thunder Bay 

National Marine Sanctuary does not directly protect marine 

life. There are no identifying notations on sectional charts 

limiting activities that can be potentially disruptive to marine life.

The greatest asset of the sanctuary are shipwrecks littering 

the lake bed. Low-level flight activities do not disturb those

assets or the divers investigating them. There is the potential for munitions deployment in close proximity to the eastern edge of the marine sanctuary, and aircraft traverse the 

area with live munitions departing from the Alpena Airport. 

UXO are known to exist in this area, and most have been 

identified and marked to prevent accidental contact. However, there is a possibility of otherwise unknown UXO that 

could be dangerous to divers, fishermen, or recreational

boaters.

3.3.3 Alpena CRTC Environmental 

Issues

Issue 3a: PFOS/PFOA Contamination of 

Groundwater

Contamination of groundwater and drinking water from 

wells from perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances

(PFAs, also known as PFCs), is the top environmental concern for Alpena CRTC and Camp Grayling JMTC. The principal contamination source at the Alpena CRTC is considered 

to be perflourooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane

sulfonate (PFOS) contamination from use of now discontinued aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) fire suppressants.

On the national level, PFA/PFC compounds are emerging 

Great 

Lakes 

Maritime 

Heritage 

Center, 

the visitor 

center 

for the 

marine 

sanctuary.
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | ALPENA CRTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA 3-13

PFOS/PFOA Information

More information is available at https://

www.michigan.gov/pfasresponse

If any resident has additional questions 

regarding this issue, the MDEQ Environmental 

Assistance Center can be contacted at 1-800-

662-9278 or email deq-assist@michigan.gov. 

Representatives may be reached to assist 

with your questions Monday through Friday, 

8:00 AM to 4:30 PM.

unregulated contaminants of concern with suspected but 

largely not understood negative human health effects. As of 

January 1, 2018, 80 private wells had been tested for PFOSPFOA with 17 detections all considerably below the 70 parts 

per trillion (ppt) limit. A monitoring and analysis program is 

in place in collaboration with concurrent monitoring, control), groundwater modeling, and remediation efforts by

the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ), 

Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR), Michigan Department of Health and Human Services (MDHHS), 

and the District 4 Health Department. Information about 

the contaminants, forms to request well testing, and options for homeowners whose wells have been found to 

contain the substances may be found on the state webpage 

dedicated to the PFA contamination issue: https://www.

michigan.gov/pfasresponse. Public meeting inputs indicate 

some residents are finding it difficult to get clear and timely responses from the MDEQ for well testing and for other 

agency services. Ongoing communications addressing the 

background, plume tracking, well-testing, and resident options will help residents navigate this issue and improve the 

resident-base relationship. 

Many residents do not use or have regular internet access, 

so nondigital forms of communication (mailers, hotline 

phone number) should continue to be emphasized to ensure all residents are fully informed. During public comment, several residents requested more frequent use of local radio, television, and newspapers to not only advertise 

public meetings but also to convey basic information about 

the base and issues affecting the public. The latest content

from monitoring and control programs and legacy installation restoration program (IRP) should be updated for informational fliers and public outreach materials.

Concern over how wells are selected for testing was fre-

!y

!y

!y

!y

!y

!l

QÆ

QÆ

Hubbard Lake Rd

Bolton Rd

M-32

US-23

UV32

Long Rapids Rd

U

S-23

Werth Rd

UV23

Alpena Township

Wilson Township

Maple Ridge Township

Alpena

Thunder Bay

Thunder Bay National

Marine Sanctuary

Lake

Huron

JLUS 2-Mile Study Area

Alpena CRTC

Township Boundary

QÆ State Forest Campground

!l Fishing Access

y! Public Boating Access

PFAS (PFC) Monitoring

State Forests

Wetlands

Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary

Lake Huron National Wildlife Refuges

Alpena County Regional Airport

Envirnomental Restoration Area

Fuel Types/FBP System

C-3, Mature Jack or Lodgepole Pine

C-4, Immature Jack or Lodgepole Pine

O-1a, Matted Grass; O-1b, Standing Grass

Thunder Bay

National

Marine Sanctuary

0 Z 2

Miles

WI

MI

Lake

Huron

MI

Figure 3.15 | Alpena CRTC Environmental
3-14 ALPENA CRTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

quently raised at the public meetings. Governor Rick Snyder issued Executive Directive No 2017-4 for a PFAS Action 

Team. In November 2017, the governor directed the leaders 

of the MDEQ, MDHHS, Michigan Department of Military and 

Veterans Affairs (MDMVA), and Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (MDARD) to immediately 

establish a Michigan PFAS Action Response Team. The team 

has been assigned to direct the implementation for the 

state’s action strategy to research, identify, and establish 

PFAS response actions related to the discovery, communication, and migration of PFAS to the extent practicable.

More information is available at the state web page: https://

www.michigan.gov/pfasresponse.

Issue 3b: Surface Water Quality (Lakes, Rivers, 

Streams, Wetlands)

Alpena CRTC does not routinely test surface water quality 

on or near the base, as it is public property. Data on water 

quality and aquatic ecology in the Alpena CRTC area exist 

from many governmental and non-governmental organizations. Questions about specific topics like fish population

health, site contamination, or trends in ecological health 

can often be addressed from multiple sources. Sources of 

existing and ongoing water quality and aquatic ecology survey, assessment and monitoring data in the Alpena CRTC 

area include:

 MDEQ Procedure 51 biological and ecological trend 

monitoring

 Part 201 contamination sites

 MDEQ probabilistic water quality monitoring sites

 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) National Rivers 

and Streams, National Lakes Assessments, and National 

Coastal Conditions survey sites

 303(d) Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) impaired 

waters

 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 

(NDPES) discharge permit locations (including Alpena 

County Regional Airport)

 Various data from conservation organizations, citizen-based monitoring studies, and lake associations. 

The Michigan Clean Water Corps (MiCorps) is a network of 

volunteer water quality monitoring programs that supplement MDEQ efforts in collecting and sharing water quality

data for use in water resources management and protection programs. MiCorps is administered by the Great Lakes 

Commission under the direction of the MDEQ and in partnership with the Huron River Watershed Council, Michigan 

Lake and Stream Associations, and Michigan State University. MiCorps comprises the Volunteer Stream Monitoring 

Program and the Cooperative Lakes Monitoring Program, 

which provide training and support for quality assurance, 

reporting and communications among member organizations. The MiCorps website has an online searchable database with monitoring data for selected waterbodies. Aquatic macroinvertebrate survey data, an indicator of stream 

ecology health, are available for select streams in study 

area watersheds such as the AuSable River. Monitoring 

data for lakes includes basic water chemistry and indicators 

of nutrient pollution that cause eutrophication and algal 

blooms. The database also contains invasive species survey 

data and several technical studies and reports available for 

download on the MiCorps website at micorps.net/

Issue 3c: Groundwater Quality

Residents near Alpena CRTC are concerned about contamination. Alpena CRTC monitors the water quality at the 

small-arms range. Environmental managers could consider 

providing educational materials on area contaminated sites 

(e.g. MDEQ Part 201 sites). Spills and environmental emergencies are reported to the MDEQ using the 24-hour Pollution Emergency Alerting System (PEAS) Hotline at 1-800-

292-4706 or by contacting the MDEQ District Office (Alpena

and Grayling area) at 989-731-4920. The public can view 

spills on Michigan’s waterways using the Water Resources 

Division MiWaters Database: https://miwaters.deq.state.

mi.us/.

3.3.4 Alpena CRTC Transportation 

and Infrastructure Issues

Issue 4a: Effects of Growth on Utilities

Alpena County’s population is decreasing overall, though 

some rural areas are growing and may require additional 

infrastructure. 

Water

Water and wastewater for the area, including Alpena CRTC, 

are provided by the City of Alpena, which draws water from 

Thunder Bay. 

The city’s water treatment plant has capacity of 6.0 million 

gallons per day, with a maximum daily demand of 3.04 million gallons per day. According to the City of Alpena Comprehensive Plan, the average daily demand is 1.98 million 

gallons per day. 

The 2015 Alpena CRTC Installation Development Plan (IDP) 

noted that the Alpena CRTC water system was in need of 

several upgrades, including eliminating dead ends, pursuing Military Construction Cooperative Agreement options 

with Alpena Township to address maintenance issues, and 

developing a cooperative agreement with the NGB to add 

a booster pump so water flow complies with Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC) 3-600-01, Fire Protection Engineering for 

Facilities. Additional missions at Alpena CRTC would further 

stress the water system. 

Wastewater is treated at the city’s water recycling plant, 

which has a capacity of 5.5 million gallons per day. Capacity 

to support population and military mission growth is available, as daily treatment averaged 2.3 million gallons per the 

2013 Alpena County Master Plan. However, the 2013 IDP 

noted that Alpena CRTC needed to develop secondary containment for fuels loading/unloading and correct cross-connection issues in the base’s wastewater system. 

Electric and Gas

Alpena CRTC receives electricity from the Presque Isle Electric and Gas Co-operative, while the City of Alpena is serviced 

by the Alpena Power Company, which purchases electricity 

from Consumers Energy Company. Alpena Power Company’s website states that its reliability in Northeast Michigan 

is 99.98 percent. The area receives natural gas from DTE Energy (formerly MichCon). According to the 2013 IDP, several 

elements of the on-base electrical system are nearing the 

end of their useful life and require replacement. They are 

also susceptible to the weather, which causes outages that 

can affect operations.

Natural gas usage is monitored on base via 30 individual 

building meters. Alpena CRTC also utilizes propane from 

Amerigas Propane and has implemented renewable energy 

sources into recent facility projects, including a geothermal 

system at the aircraft rescue and fire fighting station and

solar photovoltaic panels at Building 115. 

For Alpena CRTC, an energy assessment was performed in 

2009, which should be updated in the near future. In the 

surrounding area, Alpena CRTC also has a Green Procurement Program that addresses sustainability strategies. 

Issue 4b: Airport joint ownership/land use 

access

The Alpena County Regional Airport (APN) is a publicly 

owned airport located 7 miles west of the City of Alpena. 

The county has leased 647 acres to the MIANG for exclusive 

use. The lease runs through June 2039. Additionally, a 210-

acre area associated with the munitions storage area (MSA) 

is covered by a restrictive safety easement. The ANG has 

developed an IDP that details a 20-year plan for the base; 

the Airport Committee meets once per month. 

The airport has two runways. Runway 1/19 is 9,001 feet by 

150 feet and in good condition. Runway 7/25 is 5,028 feet by 

100 feet and in fair condition. 

According to the airport’s website, of the 20 aircraft based 

at the field, 12 are single-engine airplanes, six are multi-engine airplanes, one is a helicopter, and one is a military aircraft. FAA data shows 10,409 enplanements at the Alpena 

County Regional Airport in 2015. 

Delta is the only commercial airline that provides service to 

APN: 21 flights per week to and from Detroit Metropolitan

Airport and Pellston Regional Airport. Air freight service is 

provided by FedEx, UPS, and Airborne Express.

The current 

Alpena County Regional 

Airport Terminal, which will 

be replaced in 

2018-2019.
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | ALPENA CRTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA 3-15

A new $11.9 million terminal building will be constructed 

in 2018 and 2019 with a combination of federal, state, and 

local funding. The existing terminal is beyond its useful life, 

is too small, and does not comply with building or air quality 

codes. 

While the community supports expansion of the airport, 

few residents use the airport, and it is seen as demanding 

too many resources in terms of law enforcement. It should 

also be noted that APN no longer has a Homeland Security 

representative on site, which hinders the availability of international flights, as security for such a flight needs to be

arranged. 

The airport has its own master plan, which was last updated 

in 2010. 

Issue 4c: Road Funding

The Alpena County Road Commission generally shares 

costs for road projects with townships and other municipalities; however, this split has not always worked well and will 

be discussed with township officials.

While the military utilizes roads and public infrastructure, 

the military does not contribute any funds to the maintenance of these assets. Members of Alpena CRTC primarily 

use regular passenger vehicles, and use of military vehicles 

is minimal.

Issue 4d: Road condition

Poor road condition has been cited as an issue throughout 

the JLUS study area. This is due in large part to inadequate 

funding for maintenance, which is compounded by many 

roads reaching the end of their useful lives at the same 

time. 

The Alpena County Road Commission’s Approved 2017 

Budget, published in February 2017, indicates total revenue 

of $5,534,559 and total expenditures of $6,257,905. 

Alpena CRTC is accessed primarily via M-32, which is a 5 

(Fair) on the Pavement Surface Evaluation and Rating (PASER) scale from the City of Alpena to Herron Road. M-32 is 

ranked a 4 (Poor) from Herron Road east to M-65. Within 

the City of Alpena, there are several road sections ranked 4, 

including portions of 11th Avenue, 9th Avenue, 3rd Avenue, 

1st Avenue, Johnson Street, Miller Street, Wessel Road, Ford 

Avenue, Ripley Boulevard and Genschaw Road. Notably, 

several sections of US-23, a primary tourist route, are also 

ranked poorly both north and south of Alpena. 

Road projects are prioritized based on the condition of the 

!#

U

RPZ

MSA

Main

Base Drop Zone

Entry Control Point

Thunder Bay River

Lake Winyah

Thunder

Bay

River

Long Rapids Rd

ST32

Wilson Township

Maple Ridge Township

Alpena Township

M-32

Herron Rd

Long Rapids Rd

Witt Rd

Little Rd

Haken Rd

Shannon Rd

Sandal

Lake Winyah Rd

Glennie Rd

Winyah Lake Rd

Airport Rd

Cathro Rd

Burkholder Dr

Truckey Rd

Sportsmen Dr

Tamrack Rd

1st Ave

Daisy Ln

King Settlement Rd

Macey Ln

2nd Ave

Geronimo Rd

Indian Reserve Rd

Simmons Rd

Villeneuve Rd

3rd Ave

S 3rd Ave

Forest Ln

Harrison Rd

Winyah Dr

Easton Dr

A St

Hayter Ln

Fern Ln

Kline Rd

High Banks Dr

Kaiser Rd

N Black Bear Rd

Silver City Ln

S Black Bear Rd

Golf Course Rd

Highland Ct

Walter St

Pebble St

4 Mile Rd

Neumanns Rd

Woodview Dr

Miracle Dr

Bernice Ln

Peninsula Dr

Sitting Bull Rd

Elizabeth St

Brentwood Dr

Kemnitz Rd

Mosquito Ln

Oakridge Dr

Old Mill Rd

Sportsmen Dr

JLUS 2-Mile Study Area

Alpena CRTC

Township Boundary

!#

U

Entry Control Point

Drop Zone

Restrictive Easement

Runway Protection Zone

!

Trail

2016 Traffic Volumes

Annual Avg. Daily Traffic

4923

19133

WI

MI

Lake

Huron

MI

0 Z 4,000

Feet

Figure 3.16 | Alpena CRTC Transportation
3-16 ALPENA CRTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

road in question, as well as the amount of traffic.

Several road segments were identified in the 2013 Alpena

County Master Plan as needing improvements: 

 Wayne Road

 Indian Reserve Road

 Herron Road

 All gravel roads

 Long Lake Road

 Weiss Road

 Maple Grove Road

 Grant Street

 North Point Shores

 Emerald Acres subdivision

 Misery Bay Road

 El Cajon Road

 Werth Road

 Hubert Road

 Hamilton Road

 Bare Point Road

 Bean Creek Road

 Boilore Road

 Wessel Road

 Pearl Road

 Dietz Road

 Lake Street

 Beaver Lake Road

 Woodward Avenue

 Grover Road

 Dawson Street

 Gutchess Road

 Bloom Road

Improvement work has occurred or is planned for many 

of these areas. For example, a survey and project design 

project for Bloom Road was approved by the Alpena County 

Road Commission in December. The project will be completed in anticipation of future reconstruction. During 2017, 

the major road projects included Indian Road, Naylor Road, 

El Cajon Road, Gutchess Road and small portions of Gitchi 

Manitou Road, Murch Drive, and Chippewa Road.

Additional Alpena County projects include reconstruction of 

Indian Ranch Reserve Road (Werth South for 1.61 miles); 

resurfacing French Road (2.51 miles), Wolf Creek Road (Nich 

Hill south 2.1 miles), and Cathro Road (1.7 mils from Long 

Rapids to Boilore).

The Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) does 

not indicate any Alpena-area road or bridge projects in its 

2018-2022 Five-year Transportation Program. 

Access to the Alpena CRTC is via Airport Road from M-32. 

Figure 3.17 | Alpena CRTC Roads

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

!

!

!

!

! !

! !

!

!

!

!

!

! ! ! ! 

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

! ! !

!

! !

! ! !

!

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! !

! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! 

!

!

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! !

!

!

!

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

!

!

! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! !

!

!

! ! ! 

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

! !

! ! !

! !

!

!

!#

U

RPZ

MSA

Main

Base Drop Zone

Entry Control Point

Thunder Bay River

Lake Winyah

Thunder

Bay

River

Long Rapids Rd

ST32

Wilson Township

Maple Ridge Township

Alpena Township

M-32

Herron Rd

Long Rapids Rd

Witt Rd

Little Rd

Haken Rd

Shannon Rd

Sandal

Lake Winyah Rd

Glennie Rd

Winyah Lake Rd

Airport Rd

Cathro Rd

Burkholder Dr

Truckey Rd

Sportsmen Dr

Tamrack Rd

1st Ave

Daisy Ln

King Settlement Rd

Macey Ln

2nd Ave

Geronimo Rd

Indian Reserve Rd

Simmons Rd

Villeneuve Rd

3rd Ave

S 3rd Ave

Forest Ln

Harrison Rd

Winyah Dr

Easton Dr

A St

Hayter Ln

Fern Ln

Kline Rd

High Banks Dr

Kaiser Rd

N Black Bear Rd

Silver City Ln

S Black Bear Rd

Golf Course Rd

Highland Ct

Walter St

Pebble St

4 Mile Rd

Neumanns Rd

Woodview Dr

Miracle Dr

Bernice Ln

Peninsula Dr

Sitting Bull Rd

Elizabeth St

Brentwood Dr

Kemnitz Rd

Mosquito Ln

Oakridge Dr

Old Mill Rd

Sportsmen Dr

JLUS 2-Mile Study Area

Alpena CRTC

Jurisdiction

!#

U

Entry Control Point

Alpena County Regional Airport

Drop Zone

Restrictive Easement

Runway Protection Zone

!

Trail

0 Z 4,000

Feet

WI

MI

Lake

Huron

MI
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | ALPENA CRTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA 3-17

The entry control points (ECPs) do not comply with Air National Guard Handbook (ANGH) 32-1084, Facility Space 

Standards, or UFC 4-022-01, Entry Control Facilities Access 

Control Points. On base, Hangar Road needs to be resigned 

to meet design criteria and allow for safe two-way traffic.

Within the Alpena area, the Thunder Bay Transportation 

Authority operates public transportation, including a Dial-A 

-Ride Transportation (DART) system that will pick up passengers at their home. The transportation authority also 

runs a hybrid electric trolley route that provides transportation for tourists as well as locals. 

Issue 4e: Recreational access

According to the 2013 Alpena County Master Plan, among 

the top most-liked aspects of living in the county are access 

to lakes and water resources, outdoors and the environment (natural resources, wildlife, hunting/fishing, etc.), and

recreation. Maintaining and providing access to recreational resources is important to many members of the community. 

Alpena CRTC main base, located on the west side of the airport, is bordered by Lake Winyah (also called Seven Mile 

Pond) to the north and the Lower South Branch Thunder 

Bay River and Thunder Bay River State Forest to the west. 

There is no access to the lake from the south side. Public 

access is available on the north shore near Norway Dam, 

which is owned by North American Hydro. A small portion 

of the lake lies within Alpena CRTC's explosive safety quantity distance arcs. Part of the lake also lies in the airport's 

accident potential zone. 

A family campground (FAMCAMP) at the Alpena CRTC is accessible to anyone who can access the base. 

3.3.5 Alpena CRTC Community 

Partnerships Issues

The JLUS process emphasizes the importance of a community-driven planning process which relies on partnerships 

among Alpena CRTC, communities, and local stakeholders. The JLUS survey results indicated that 86 percent of 

those participating in the survey believe that Alpena CRTC 

has a positive impact on the quality of life of surrounding 

community residents. The JLUS process also revealed that 

stakeholders recognize the significance of Alpena CRTC to

surrounding communities, leading community partners to 

find ways to strengthen existing community partnerships

and, to use the words of the Alpena Area Chamber of Commerce President and chief executive officer's (CEO) words,

“create an increasingly positive image of the CRTC among 

the general community, and prepare a much stronger network of support for the CRTC in case we should ever need 

to draw on the assistance of the community to fight on behalf of this incredible asset to our region.”

Issue 5a. Communications/Education

Providing accurate and comprehensive information on Alpena CRTC services, facilities, and processes is important 

not only to potential visiting units, but also surrounding 

communities. Alpena CRTC does not have a dedicated community relations specialist responsible for coordinating 

communications and education related to Alpena CRTC activities. 

One mechanism for communicating this type of information is through the Alpena CRTC website, maintained by the 

MIANG. The Alpena CRTC website provides fact sheets on 

topics such as CRTC history, Alpena events, operations, facilities, and leadership contacts. However, many of the fact 

sheets and the news provided on the Alpena CRTC website 

have not regularly been kept up to date. The process for 

updating website information may be slow as a result of 

coordinating changes through Lansing. 

Communications requirements from Lansing may preclude 

a faster process, but it is imperative that the existing website 

provide key contact information for community members. 

More timely updates to the Alpena CRTC website are necessary to improve communications and education of surrounding residents and business owners, community partners, and potential visiting units. The Alpena CRTC website 

links to the Alpena CRTC Facebook page, a communication 

mechanism that provides more timely updates on issues 

related to Alpena CRTC operations and the surrounding 

communities. At the inception of the JLUS, the number of 

followers on the Alpena CRTC Facebook page was less than 

200. Upon completion of the JLUS, there are 1.000, which indicates that Facebook is an optimal communication mechanism to reach community members. 

Alpena CRTC has a variety of options for educating the local community through educational partners. STARBASE 

Alpena is located on Alpena CRTC and is an educational 

nonprofit funded by the DOD providing science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) programs to local fourthand fifth-grade students. According to STARBASE, the goal 

is to “expose youth to the technological environments and 

positive role models found on military bases and installations.” During these education programs, students have 

the opportunity to tour Alpena CRTC. The relationship of 

STARBASE to Alpena CRTC and the connection to students, 

schools, and community provide a unique educational opportunity. In addition to STARBASE, Alpena CRTC has had 

a strong relationship with Alpena Community College. In 

2011, Alpena CRTC established a CRTC scholarship. Announcement of the scholarship highlighted the educational 

partnerships between Alpena CRTC and Alpena Community 

College. Alpena CRTC has offered courses and has had Alpena Community College nursing program students participate in patient exercises. 

Great Lakes Maritime Heritage Trail near the waterfront. Alpena CRTC is located about 7 miles west of downtown Alpena, which is shown above.
3-18 ALPENA CRTC AND COMMUNITY STUDY AREA | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Another key educational partner in the Alpena area is the 

Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary, the only National 

Marine Sanctuary in the Great Lakes or in U.S. fresh water. The sanctuary is important to Alpena’s local economy, 

drawing tourists to the visit the shipwreck museum, take 

glass-bottomed boat tours of shallow-water shipwrecks, 

and dive to explore the shipwrecks. The sanctuary provides 

a staging area for scientists and researchers studying ecology, natural resources, and maritime archaeology. 

Issue 5b. Public Relations and Community 

Engagement

Public relations and community engagement is another key 

issue for Alpena CRTC. Without a dedicated community relations specialist, Alpena CRTC must leverage existing community partnerships to aid with public relations and community engagement-related activities. The Alpena Regional 

Chamber of Commerce has played a role in connecting Alpena CRTC with the community through the Alpena CRTC 

Community Council. Historically, this council has focused 

on planning and hosting social events to welcome visiting 

units to Alpena. In 2015, Alpena CRTC and the Alpena Regional Chamber of Commerce leadership met to discuss a 

concept of expanding the role of the Alpena CRTC Community Council beyond providing military support. Its more robust role was to include collecting and sharing Alpena CRTC 

economic value information, public relations to inform 

community residents about activities taking place at Alpena 

CRTC, and connecting military families with local support 

services. While an organizational concept for the expanded 

role of the Alpena CRTC Community Council was developed, 

implementing this more robust partnership plan has not 

yet occurred. 

While students participating in educational programs at Alpena CRTC have the opportunity to tour the facilities, requesting public tours requires coordination through the 

MIANG website and staff in Lansing. A more localized process with dedicated community relations staff could expedite this process. It is obvious that community residents are 

eager for more interaction with Alpena CRTC and that community partners, such as the Alpena Area Chamber of Commerce, are ready to collaborate to promote that interaction 

and engagement. 

The strategies to address the issues related to public relations, communications, education, and community involvement are available in Section 4 of this document. 

3.3.6 Alpena CRTC Economic 

Development Issues

Operations at Alpena CRTC influence economic development of Alpena and other surrounding communities in numerous and significant ways. This section discusses each of

these economic development issues in greater detail. 

Issue 6a: Significant contributor to local 

economy and Military Tourism

The Alpena area sits along the US-23 Heritage Route, which 

spans the length of the eastern coast of the Lower Peninsula from Standish to Mackinaw City. 

While tourism is a critical element of the local economy, it 

also creates traffic throughout the area. The Alpena Area

Convention and Visitors Bureau estimated that upwards of 

550,000 people visit the county each year.

Of the stakeholders that participated in the JLUS project 

survey, 91 percent feel that Alpena CRTC is a significant

contributor to the local economy. While it is understood 

that military tourism, defined as soldiers coming to Alpena

CRTC and the family members that visit surrounding communities to accompany them during training, likely has a 

significant positive impact on Alpena’s economy, it is challenging to quantify the extent of the economic impact. A 

need for mechanisms to quantify the economic impact of 

military tourism is an issue stakeholders raised during the 

JLUS process. A mechanism to track the impact of military 

tourism on the local economy would assist Alpena and other local communities in better understanding: 1) how much 

soldiers and their families spend while training at Alpena 

CRTC and 2) factors that affect trends in military tourism

annually and over time.

Commitment to spending Alpena CRTC funding at locally owned businesses is a priority by Alpena CRTC. Federal 

regulations are to be followed for approximately 99.9 percent of the base's purchases. Purchasing locally provides a 

positive impact to the local economy. Additionally, the local 

purchases are more likely to be serviced in the future by local business, which is preferred by Alpena CRTC personnel.

Issue 6b: Airport Viability

As a rural airport, the Alpena County Regional Airport relies 

on subsidies from the FAA based on the number of enplanements. In 2016, the Alpena County Regional Airport failed to 

meet the 10,000 enplanements needed to qualify for the 

$1 million FAA subsidy, although a change in federal rules 

allowing for 2012 enplanement data to qualify allowed the 

airport to receive the subsidy. In 2017, the Alpena County 

Regional Airport achieved 10,849 enplanements. Promoting 

the use of the Alpena County Regional Airport by military 

families traveling to the area to visit soldiers training at Alpena CRTC and Camp Grayling JMTC will assist with the viability of the airport by increasing enplanements. Plans for 

a new terminal are in progress and are expected to receive 

FAA funding for construction, anticipated in 2019. Alpena 

County Regional Airport is extremely key to the economic 

development of Alpena and surrounding communities. Ensuring the airport remains fully functioning and viable is a 

key concern. One issue affecting the local economy is the

lack of a customs agent, allowing aircraft emanating from 

outside the United States to pass through an authorized 

customs processing facility at Alpena County Regional Airport. Aircraft now must go through customs in Sault Ste. 

Marie. This results in a loss of revenue for the airport. 

Issue 6c: Partnership with Sheriff's Department

The State of Michigan, contracting with the United States 

Air Force, awards bids for the security jobs at military installations in the state. For over a decade, Alpena CRTC via the 

state has contracted with the Alpena County Sheriff’s Department for security services. This contract provides salaries and benefits for 25 employees, pays bailiffs to provide

security in the courts, and helps to pay for equipment and 

vehicles for the county, including patrol vehicles and dive 

equipment. Without this contract, Alpena County would 

struggle to afford some of this equipment and services. The

contract helps to alleviate a financial burden on the county’s general fund and local taxpayers. In addition, this contract has influenced long-term planning decisions in Alpena

County, specifically the decision to locate a new jail to be

constructed near the airport to align with the location of 

security services. As of November 2017, Alpena CRTC and 

Alpena County reached a 1-year contract extension agreement, with the expectation that a longer contract will be in 

place before the extension expires. Contract agreements 

typically last for 5 years. The state serves as a pass-through 

for the federal dollars. A new contract must go through 

county attorney review and obtain approval from the county’s finance committee and full board of commissioners.

Alpena Community College was named one of the top community college in the nation by the Aspen Institute.

Streetscape in downtown Alpena.
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 4-1

4

implementation 

plan

chapter overview

4.1 Overview...............................................4-1

4.1.1 JLUS Implementation Team......4-1

4.2 Compatibility Tools .............................4-1

4.2.1 Federal.........................................4-1

4.2.2 Military Installations..................4-1

4.2.3 State.............................................4-2

4.2.4 County .........................................4-2

4.2.5 Township.....................................4-2

4.2.6 City/Village ..................................4-3

4.2.7 Other Tools and References .....4-3

4.3 Setting Priorities..................................4-3

4.4 JLUS Implementation Team Action 

Plan .......................................................4-4

4.5 JLUS Implementation Team Action 

Plan Details: Camp Grayling JMTC.....4-5

4.6 JLUS Implementation Team Action 

Plan Details: Alpena CRTC ..................4-7

4.7 Implementation Plan Overview and 

Guidelines ............................................4-9

4.1 Overview

Elements both physical and political exist that will need to 

be overcome to achieve the most optimal results of the recommended strategies. Any changes that are undertaken 

will need to be done under the current confines of the legal

system and be in compliance with all applicable laws. Understanding these elements within the confines of the law,

the needs of the military, and the concerns of citizens enables the creation of achievable strategies. To prevent the 

strategies from conflicting and/or contradicting any given

law at any level of government, recognition of the hierarchy 

of laws that exist at various levels of government will be 

highlighted for proper implementation to occur. 

Each of the stakeholders involved in this study is governed 

by a different set of rules within the governmental hierarchy, with certain entities not subject to laws at a lower level in the hierarchy. The recommendations laid out in this 

section of the report aspire to be implemented at every 

level, regardless of subjugation, in order to have all parties 

involved be willing participants in the ultimate goal of harmonious interaction. The analysis of the various levels of 

governance will be applied to both Camp Grayling JMTC and 

Alpena CRTC. Given the unique situations present in each 

installation, this chapter will separate each of the installations and posit strategies that are unique to each site. Specifically, these strategies will include elements addressing

the following:

 Noise

 Military Operations

 Environmental

 Transportation and Infrastructure

 Community Partnerships

 Economic Development

Based on input during the public meetings, the strategies 

and recommendations outlined in this section will address 

the needs of both the communities and military installations. Putting into place the recommendations will require 

diligent consideration of land owners in areas that abut or 

are within range of the installation. Land values near the 

installations are affected by not only the missions taking

place, but the interface of the installation with the surrounding properties. 

4.1.1 JLUS Implementation Team

Implementation of the recommendations will take cooperation of land owners, local governments, and the installations 

in order to see positive physical results that will translate 

into better land value for residents and an overall operating equilibrium that will benefit all stakeholders. It is recommended that key community and military stakeholders 

convene a JLUS implementation team to ensure progress is 

being made on the strategies and recommendations. The 

team should be made up of local SMEs, members of the TC 

and PC, and members of NEMCOG. Every effort to implement 

the proposed actions should be taken so that existing and future conflicts can be resolved.

4.2 Compatibility Tools

There are many existing laws, policies, and other tools in 

place to help ensure mutually beneficial coexistence of military activities and civilian life. This chapter provides a broad 

overview of such tools used or applied in evaluating and 

addressing compatibility issues in the study area focused 

around Camp Grayling JMTC and Alpena CRTC. The tools 

listed below are broken up by level of government. This is 

intended to be a sampling of the tools that are available, 

not an all-encompassing list.

4.2.1 Federal

Federal law and policies affect many aspects of land use.

The following federal programs and policies were assessed 

to determine their applicability in this JLUS study area. 

Federal Aviation Act

FAA Regulation Title 14 Part 77, commonly known as Part 

77, defines vertical obstruction compatibility in the vicinity

of airfields. Local jurisdictions can assess height restrictions

using a formula in this regulation and adjust their local zoning regulations accordingly.

Department of the Army Pamphlet (DA Pam) 

385-63: Range Safety

This pamphlet establishes standards and procedures for 

the safe firing of ammunition, demolitions, lasers, guided

missiles, and rockets, and the delivery of bombs for training and target practice. It describes surface danger zones 

(SDZs) and the appropriate activities that can take place in 

and around them. 

National Guard Regulation (NGR) 385-63: 

Army National Guard Range Safety Program, 

Policy, and Standards

This regulation is used in conjunction with DA Pam 385-63 

and provides guidance for risk management in range operations. It also prescribes standards and procedures for 

firing ammunition, explosives, and lasers. It prohibits the

use of areas known or suspected to contain UXO from being used for recreational purposes. The ARNG Range Safety 

Program is established by The Adjutant General (TAG) at the 

state level. TAG approves SDZ placement. 

Army Regulation (AR) 405-10: Acquisition of 

Real Property and Interests Therein

This regulation outlines the federal government's ability 

to acquire property, which is only allowed when expressly 

authorized by Congress, according to U.S. Code. New land 

can only be acquired if the activity to be accommodated is 

mission critical, real property already held is insufficient to

satisfy mission requirements, and no land held by another 

military branch or federal agency can satisfy the requirement. 

Air Force Instruction (AFI) 190-2001

This document establishes the Air Force Encroachment 

Management Program with the goal of preventing or reducing encroachment issues around any Air Force installation. 

It defines responsibilities at all levels from Headquarters Air

Force down to the installation level, including the development of Installation Complex Encroachment Management 

Action Plans (ICEMAPs). 

Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) 

Program

This program works to prevent incompatible development 

around air installations by promoting compatible land use 

practices in an effort to preserve public health and safety

and protect the military mission. It encourages a collaborative approach, working with local governments to achieve 

mission-compatible land development. AICUZ guidance reflects land use recommendations for clear zones, accident

potential zones, and four noise zones. 

4.2.2 Military Installations

Camp Grayling JMTC Real Property 

Development Plan (RPDP)

The most recent version of the Michigan Army National Guard RPDP, including a chapter containing the Camp 

Grayling JMTC Site Development Plan (SDP), was published 

in 2011. The SDP describes the existing conditions of the 

installation and also proposes recommendations for future 

development. An analysis of the existing conditions and mission requirements led to the creation of a preferred plan-
4-2 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

4.2.3 State

Current statutes involving the regulation of land-use stem 

from the constitution of the state of Michigan. There have 

been four constitutions since the inception of the state in 

1837. The current and fourth Constitution was adopted 

on August 1, 1962. Article VII of the document outlines the 

powers granted to the various geographical divisions of the 

state. This portion the Constitution permits the division of 

the state into three major governmental entities: counties, 

townships, and villages/cities. Each of these entities are given their own level of power and ability to enforce such statutes they deem necessary. 

Per Article VII of the Constitution dictates that these powers "...shall be liberally construed in their favor." In Michigan, the state government is specifically restricted under

the constitution as to how it may interact with local governments and may not alter the boundaries of a local government without a vote by the affected residents.

4.2.4 County

Upon becoming a state, Michigan, like most other states, 

divided itself into county governments. Per Article VII of the 

Michigan Constitution, each county is bound by a charter 

and run by a Board of Commissioners elected by citizens in 

their respective counties. 

A county in Michigan is endowed with the power to approve 

platting, levy taxes, and adopt ordinances as deemed necessary for the benefit of the public. It is also able to work in

tandem with townships, cities, and villages in the formation 

of land-use regulations.

The nine counties affected by this study have been highlighted in the lighter blue. 

4.2.5 Township

Each county is divided into the townships that were created 

along with the counties when Michigan became a state. A 

charter township has been granted a charter, which allows 

it certain rights and responsibilities of home rule that fall 

between those of a city (a semi-autonomous jurisdiction in 

Michigan) and a village. (Unless it is a home-rule village, the 

latter falls under the authority of the township in which it is 

located.)

Townships generally are governed through rules outlined 

in Chapter 41 of Michigan Compiled Laws. Townships may 

enact and enforce ordinances for public health, safety and 

general welfare. Ordinances enacted by townships supersede those created by the county, thus allowing for more 

local issues to be addressed. 

Additionally, townships can construct any necessary infrastructure, including sound mitigation treatments and create 

improvement districts. If necessity requires, the township 

may acquire parkland and/or places of recreation trough a 

majority of voters. The 39 townships within the study area 

are shown in tan. 

ning alternative for the cantonment, airfield, and MATES.

Alpena CRTC IDP

An IDP presents a road map to guide growth and development at air installations for 20 years. The most recent 

Alpena CRTC IDP was finalized in 2016. It assists ANG leadership and base personnel in prioritizing projects, establishing proper facility siting, implementing functional land use 

patterns, and coordinating infrastructure improvements. 

The result should achieve the vision, goals, and objectives 

of the plan and align with the visions of Air Force higher 

headquarters.

Integrated Natural Resources Management 

Plan (INRMP)

An INRMP was published in 2013 for Alpena CRTC and 

serves as the primary guidance document and tool for 

managing natural resources on the installation. Alpena 

CRTC is comprised of approximately 630 acres over two 

parcels, all owned by the County of Alpena. Alpena CRTC 

contains myriad habitats and species requiring monitoring 

and management. An INRMP helps the installation serve as 

a steward for the resources they oversee while ensuring its 

capabilities to sustain its military mission. This document 

is required under the Sikes Act Improvement Act of 1997, 

along with DOD and Air Force policy. 

Integrated Cultural Resources Management 

Plan (ICRMP) 

An ICRMP covering Alpena CRTC and the Camp Grayling airto-ground range was published in 2012. It is meant to be 

updated every 5 years, depending on available funding and 

staffing on the military side. It serves as the long-term plan

to assign responsibility to manage any cultural resources 

present on the installations. An ICRMP is required by AFI 

32-7065, Cultural Resources Management Program; DOD 

Instruction (DODI) 4710.02, Interactions with Federally-Recognized Tribes; and DODI 4715.16: Cultural Resources Management. 

Note: A cultural resources survey was performed at the 

Camp Grayling range, and no items of note were identified.

The buildings under ANG jurisdiction fall within the Alpena 

CRTC ICRMP. There is a lack of cultural resources and therefore not extensively discussed in the ICRMP.

Figure 4.1 | Michigan Governmental Hierarchy

STATE

COUNTIES

TOWNSHIPS
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 4-3

4.2.7 Other Tools and References

The OEA and other public interest groups, such as the National Association of Counties (NACo), have prepared reference materials for the public about encroachment issues or 

compatibility concerns. These include: 

 ENCOURAGING COMPATIBLE LAND USE BETWEEN LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND MILITARY INSTALLATIONS:

A guide published by NACo that lists a number of best 

practices for compatibility, including communication, 

regulatory approaches, and JLUSs. 

 THE BASE NEXT DOOR: This video is available on the 

official OEA YouTube channel and describes the issue

of encroachment near military installations when urban 

development increases, as well as tools that can be used 

to encourage compatible development.

 ADDRESSING PFOS AND PFOA: This presentation, provided by the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense and 

updated in March 2018, provides background on the issue, updates on testing and sampling around the country, various initiatives that have been implemented to 

protect health and welfare, and other data. It is available 

on www.oea.gov.

 READINESS AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION INTEGRATION (REPI) PROGRAM: This is a key encroach4.2.6 City/Village

Any area of a township or county may decide to incorporate itself into either a village or a city, depending on the 

population. Both of these entities are permitted to enact 

and enforce land-use ordinances within their jurisdiction. 

These municipal entities are able to prescribe laws that can 

be customized to highly specific areas in order to achieve

certain goals. 

The Home Rule City Act resulted from the provisions of the 

1908 state constitution, which called for home rule authority to be conferred upon the various local governments in 

the state. The 1963 state constitution retained these same 

home rule provisions.

Legal tools for land use available to a village or city can have 

greater effects on new development, as often these areas

will contain the highest concentration of retail and residential amenities. The study area includes five villages and

cities, shown in red on the map above. In terms of landuse utilizations, this study primarily focuses on the cities of 

Grayling and Alpena due to their proximity to military installations. 

ment prevention tool administered by the Office of the

Secretary of Defense (OSD). 

4.3 Setting Priorities

The JLUS project team compiled the issues collected for 

each installation and drafted strategies to address each 

one. These draft strategies were then presented to the TC 

and PC. Working groups, a subset of the TC, were formed 

to study the environmental and economic development issues in detail. 

After incorporating comments from the TC and PC, the 

strategies were further refined and presented to the public in April 2018. Stakeholders were asked to vote on their 

priority strategies and provide comments and suggestions 

for anything the project team might have left out. Strategies 

were classified into high, medium, and low priority based

on the input of the TC, working groups, and the public.

Out of the high-priority strategies, the JLUS Implementation Team Action Plan was born. It is presented on the next 

page, and the individual strategies follow. The implementation team should be made up of members of the TC, PC, 

and local government and military personnel. 

25 Massachusetts Avenue, NW l Suite 500 l Washington, DC 20001

202.393.6226 l fax 202.393.2630 l www.naco.org

A Best 

Practices Guide

Encouraging

Compatible Land Use

Between Local Governments and Military Installations

Top Left: The cover of the "Encouraging Compatible Land Use 

between Local Governments and Military Installations" document published by the National Association of Counties.

Top: Stakeholders voted on the strategies at a public meeting 

held in Grayling in April 2018. Those votes helped the JLUS 

Project Team figure out which strategies were the most interesting and important to the public.

Above: The top vote-getting strategies for each installation 

were implemented into the JLUS Implementation Team Action Plan.

CITIES AND

VILLAGES
4-4 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

4.4 JLUS Implementation Team Action Plan

Camp Grayling JMTC Alpena CRTC

ACTION STRATEGIES

Create Sensible Military Overlay Zones 

around Camp Grayling JMTC

1a.4, 1a.5, 2a.1, 2a.2, 2d.1, 2d.2, 

5b.4, 6a.1

Commission a Joint MDNR and Camp 

Grayling JMTC Landscape Plan 1b.1, 1b.2, 1b.3, 4e.1

Conduct a Noise Study 1a.1, 1a.2, 1a.3, 2a.2, 2c.1, 2c.2, 

2c.3

Commission a Camp Grayling JMTC 

Installation Master Plan

2c.2, 2c.3, 2d.1, 2d.2, 3d.1, 3f.2, 

4a.1, 4a.2, 4c.1, 4d.1, 5b.5, 6b.4

Update Grayling Area Transportation 

Study

4d.1, 4d.2, 4d.3, 4d.4, 4e.1, 4f.1, 

4f.2, 5b.5

Camp Grayling JMTC Community 

Outreach and Camp Grayling 

Community Council

2b.1, 2c.1, 3a.1, 3b.1, 3e.1, 3f.1, 

3f.2, 4e.1, 5a.1, 5a.2, 5a.3, 5a.4, 

5b.1, 5b.2, 5b.3, 5b.4, 5b.5, 6a.1

Commission a Water Resources Plan for 

Northeast Michigan 3a.1, 3b.1, 3c.1, 3c.2, 3f.1, 3f.2

Fire Protection Services Agreement 3e.1, 6b.1

Economic Impact, Tracking, and 

Incentives: Conduct an Economic 

Impact Study

6a.1, 6b.1, 6b.2, 6b.3, 6b.4, 6c.1, 

6c.2

ACTION STRATEGIES

Create a Military Overlay Zone 1a.4, 1a.5, 1a.6, 2c.2, 4a.2, 5a.6

Conduct an AICUZ Study 1a.4, 1a.5, 1a.6, 2c.2

Alpena CRTC Community Outreach and 

Alpena CRTC Community Council

2b.1, 2c.3, 3a.1, 3c.1, 4b.1, 4c.1, 

5a.1, 5a.2, 5a.3, 5a.4, 5a.5, 5b.2

Commission a Thunder Bay 

Environmental Impact Study

2a.1, 2c.3, 3a.1, 3b.a, 3b.2, 3c.1, 

4e.1

Economic Impact, Tracking, and 

Incentives: Conduct an Economic 

Impact Study

5a.3, 5a.4, 5b.1, 5b.2, 6a.1, 6c.1, 

6d.1, 6d.2

Commission a Joint NOAA/Alpena CRTC 

Bathymetric Survey1 2a.1, 2c.1

Formalize Thunder Bay Interagency 

Cooperation2

2a.1, 2c.1, 2c.3, 3b.1, 3b.2, 4b.1, 

5a.5, 5b.1, 6b.1

Update the Alpena Area-wide 

Comprehensive Transportation Plan 4c.1, 4d.1, 4e.1

1. This action plan item is described jointly in the writeup for the Thunder Bay Environmental Impact Study.

2. This action plan item is described in the writeup about Alpena CRTC community outreach.

Many of the JLUS strategies have actions that overlap. To capture the best use of plan implementation, overarching actions have been 

defined that will ultimately serve more than one strategy. The JLUS Implementation Team would be charged with tracking these items.
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 4-5

4.5 JLUS Implementation Team Action Plan Details: Camp Grayling JMTC

4.5.1 Create Sensible Military 

Overlay Zones around Camp 

Grayling JMTC

The impact on communities from aircraft noise, noise and 

vibrations from training operations, and population growth 

in both recreational areas and the City of Grayling are the 

issues that drive the prioritization of this planning action. 

Overlay zones have the potential to be very effective governmental regulatory tools. Since they tailor regulations to 

specific properties, they can be more politically feasible to

implement than other measures and can help communities 

meet stated goals or address specific inequities.

For the City of Grayling, adding an overlay zone to limit development within the APZs at Grayling AAF is a challenge. 

This is because most of the area within the city limits of 

Grayling falls directly within an APZ. An overlay zone should 

be added to restrict development heights, but it is not feasible to restrict residential and commercial development 

altogether. Restricting development in APZs has a direct impact on improving safety for general public. 

For areas in townships or counties, it is recommended that 

an overlay zone be added that conforms to the noise contours created by aircraft and training activity at the camp 

and that also protects the boundaries of the installation 

from encroachment of development. Although these areas 

are relatively undeveloped, it is good planning practice to 

plan for the future, and implementing an overlay zone in 

these areas now is more feasible than when the area develops more. 

Implementing an overlay zone in these areas now will help 

avoid potential future conflicts between residential areas

and noise from Camp Grayling JMTC. A safe distance from 

ranges, installation, and airfield property boundaries is one

consideration. This area could be used for agriculture or 

other non-populated functions. Industrial activities are a 

better choice than residential, community, institutional, or 

educational activities. Language for this overlay zone should 

be drafted by a legal team specializing in land use law and 

code development. The legal team will review the zoning for 

any potential regulatory takings, which can occur when a 

government regulation restricts the use of private property 

to the point that the property no longer has any real value. 

If a taking is identified, funds for reimbursement would be

established. See Appendix F for more information.

For the Guthrie Lakes area, it is not advisable to implement 

an overlay zone because the area is already developed, 

and an overlay zone would only be implementable on the 

grounds of reduction of noise conflicts. Additional JLUS implementation actions will address the Guthrie Lakes noise 

concerns. 

4.5.2 Commission a Joint MDNR 

and Camp Grayling JMTC 

Landscape Plan

From the inception of this JLUS, noise from military operations has been the predominant concern for residents who 

live, work, and play in the areas surrounding Camp Grayling 

JMTC. The abundance of public forest land and the locations 

of the Au Sable and Manistee rivers make the area popular 

with outdoor enthusiasts, retirees, and seasonal residents. 

This recommended landscape plan should consider areas 

such as parks, beautification of fence lines, and recreation

areas. 

The MDNR is responsible for timber management and harvest on Camp Grayling JMTC leased lands, though the camp 

is consulted for compatibility with military operations. 

MDNR is also responsible for the timber management in 

the residential areas surrounding Camp Grayling JMTC. 

Camp Grayling JMTC and MDNR have worked closely for 

many years. However, a joint MDNR and Camp Grayling 

JMTC landscape plan would lay out where tree buffers could

be planted near noise-generating activities. In addition, the 

planning process would assist with better communication 

about the reasoning behind and timing of timber harvests 

near residential areas, particularly in light of demands for 

additional sound-attenuating tree cover. 

In addition to noise concerns, wildfire was one of the top

safety concerns identified by the community. A landscape

plan can provide supporting information and outreach to 

help increase public awareness of ongoing wildfire management efforts.

4.5.3 Conduct a Noise Study

Camp Grayling JMTC has existing noise contours that are 

presented in the JLUS. They were created in 2013 and have 

been updated over the years. Flight paths were not available 

at the time of this study. A formal AICUZ program would 

help achieve compatibility between air operations and the 

communities surrounding Camp Grayling JMTC. The study 

should include an analysis of major training events, such as 

Northern Strike. The study would also include flight paths,

which would help the community understand impact areas 

when air traffic increases. Additionally, an AICUZ addresses

the protection of health, safety, and the welfare of both the 

community and military personnel. 

Until an AICUZ can be completed, it is recommended that 

Camp Grayling JMTC work with existing neighbors within 

the noise contours to provide notifications of training times

(see Section 4.5.6). The installation should also look at locating training operations in more remote areas within Camp 

Grayling JMTC, away from the boundaries, in order to reduce noise conflicts and as a sign of being a good neighbor.

Results of the AICUZ could be used in an overall noise study. 

The noise issues identified by the public include range operations, not just aircraft. The final recommendations from

both studies could then be applied to local zoning. Currently, the City of Grayling has general restrictions against 

noise that disturbs the peace. Zoning regulations could be 

updated to include allowed decibel levels and restrictions 

on the time of day. A variance could be put in place to allow 

Camp Grayling JMTC to host important training events such 

as Northern Strike. 

The study should consider the collection and analysis of 

providing ADNL contours for the entire region, specifically

including areas where community members have indicated that training noise is disturbing. In addition the study 

should assess the environmental impact of noise.

4.5.4 Commission a Camp 

Grayling JMTC Installation 

Master Plan

The most recent RPDP produced for the MIARNG was published in 2011. Since then, a new UFC was published for 

DOD master planning, and the ARNG has begun to commission installation master plans (IMPs) for each of its installations. IMPs are presented in a graphic, easy-to-read format 

with maps and photos to help paint a picture of the present 

and future conditions of the site.

An updated IMP would lay out a new vision, goals, and objectives for Camp Grayling JMTC planning, along with a preferred development plan that looks 15 or more years into 

the future. It would document the existing conditions of the 

site and provide a planning framework and standards to 

help improve the installation for all who train at the site. 

Specific planning objectives about transportation, environmental considerations, surrounding land use, facility standards, and consolidation could affect how Camp Grayling

JMTC training activities impact the surrounding communities. An IMP also examines on-base circulation and all 

access control points, which could be used to better understand road condition issues identified in areas such as

Marlette Road (see Figures 2.38-40 in the JLUS).

4.5.5 Update Grayling Area 

Transportation Study

The Grayling Area Transportation Study is now 10 years old. 

The goal of the study was to improve access between I-75 

and the Grayling area to reduce travel time, reduce complexity of wayfinding, and promote economic vitality. The

study centered on Crawford and Roscommon counties. 
4-6 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Although the population has not grown significantly since

the study was created, there has been new development 

and industry in the area in recent years, and MDOT data 

indicates an increase in both civilian and commercial traffic

in the area in the past 2 years. 

Along with new industry, the stakeholders attending the 

JLUS public meetings helped identify several problem intersections (see Figures 2.38-40 for more detail). A new 

transportation study could help both Camp Grayling JMTC 

and the communities better understand the source of the 

issues and provide a path to resolution. An updated study 

should include Otsego County so all areas of concern identified by the JLUS community are addressed.

Based on this combination of factors, an update to the 

Grayling Area Transportation Study is recommended. The 

plan should consider a wide range of transportation and 

include access to community recreation areas surrounding 

Camp Grayling JMTC.

4.5.6 Camp Grayling JMTC 

Community Outreach and 

Camp Grayling Community 

Council

Camp Grayling JMTC has an active, dedicated community 

relations staff member. However, when that staff member

is not available, the flow of communication tends to drop

off, as seen during the Northern Strike exercise in 2018.

Cross training more staff members to fill in during gaps as

well as codifying and standardizing communication operating procedures could help with continuity and consistent 

communication from the camp to the surrounding communities.

A Camp Grayling Community Council should be formalized. 

This group would leverage community partnerships to support Camp Grayling JMTC with public relations, economic 

valuation, visiting unit support services, and military family 

support services. It can capitalize on the work done by Project Rising Tide in the area and use the nearby Alpena CRTC 

Community Council as an example.

Camp Grayling JMTC Community Council Goals:

 Community Education and Outreach

 Serve as a communication forum Between Camp Grayling and Communities

 Implementation of a formalized written agreement, such 

as a charter, between Camp Grayling and the surrounding communities 

 The charter should include language that a primary objectives of the Community Council is to work together to 

resolve the noise and transportation issues. 

 NEMCOG should provide a document library for all JLUS 

and Implementation files to include supporting documentation that has been collected as part of this process. 

 Develop a 5-year plan to achieve the top JLUS Implementation recommendations (to be identified by the TC/PC).

For Camp Grayling JMTC, a formalized communication plan 

should include standard operating procedures and be 

shared with the Community Council to help improve public 

outreach and access to information. Communication plan 

items include: 

 Educating and informing the public on training traffic

routes and operational needs

 Educating and informing the public on upcoming training events that could affect recreation or neighboring

communities

 Contact information regarding PFOS/PFOA groundwater 

contamination 

 Public awareness action plan that supports applicable 

planning efforts, such as the wildfire management plan,

transportation plans, Camp Grayling sustainability, etc. 

 Public education procedures, outreach mechanisms, 

and an information repository

4.5.7 Commission a Water 

Resources Plan for 

Northeast Michigan 

Water quality, impacts on surface water systems, and the 

protection of groundwater resources were ranked as high 

priority concerns by the Grayling area communities. There 

is a wide range of research describing water quality, sediment quality, and the health of aquatic environments and 

species, but it can be challenging for members of the community to identify and access appropriate and accurate information to satisfy their concerns.

Camp Grayling has a robust environmental team that works 

with MDEQ to manage and monitor groundwater contamination as well as remediation efforts. However, there are

numerous community concerns about the impacts of contamination and sediment runoff from Camp Grayling JMTC

for both residents and wildlife habitats. 

Improvements coming to the Grayling area, such as the 

new particleboard plant and a potential new wastewater 

treatment facility, could create changes in demand for the 

region’s water supply. A water resources plan for Northeast 

Michigan could ensure supply for the region into the future, 

protect and conserve water resources, encourage coordination of infrastructure needs, and create a holistic water 

management approach. A plan will also ensure aging infrastructure is replaced in a reasonable timeframe in order to 

reduce maintenance costs. The plan should include a supplemental action plan with tools for local governments to 

help implement the water plan. 

4.5.8 Fire Protection Services 

Agreement

Wildfires have occurred fairly frequently within Camp Grayling JMTC boundaries and surrounding areas. According to 

the Adaptation Planning for Climate Resilience document 

published by the MIARNG in 2016, each year Camp Grayling 

JMTC averages over 100 fires, some of which are caused by

the training conducted there. Environmental managers at 

Camp Grayling JMTC anticipate that the effects of climate

change, such as higher global temperatures, will contribute 

to increased wildfire risk.

Camp Grayling JMTC entered into a contract with the Grayling Fire Department to provide fire services, which expired

in mid-2018. Through the one-on-one interviews conducted during the JLUS process, stakeholders raised the issue 

that the current level of service offered through the expired

contract might not be adequate given wildfire threats and

increased population due to Camp Grayling JMTC training 

operations. If a need for increased fire protection services

for Camp Grayling JMTC can be quantified and verified by

this proposed study, the data would support increasing 

contractual services, which would lead to additional jobs for 

Grayling Fire Department.

The recommendation of the JLUS is that upon formalization 

of the Camp Grayling Community Council, the fire services

agreement be revisited. As part of that process, the council should review the Adaptation Planning for Climate Resilience report and implement recommendations related 

to supporting community-wide cooperative fire protection

efforts, especially in areas where wildfire risk may be exacerbated by climate change. This specifically includes working with the City of Grayling to secure funding for long-term 

structural fire protection, including personnel and equipment.

4.5.9 Economic Impact, Tracking, 

and Incentives: Conduct an 

Economic Impact Study

Project Rising Tide published an Economic Development 

Strategy for the Grayling area in 2017. It quantifies the impact of Camp Grayling JMTC on the surrounding area as 

$16 million annually, but more detail would be helpful to

create detailed plans to enhance the local partnership in a 

mutually beneficial way. An economic impact study could

also build on the economic goals presented in the strategy. 

Quantifiable economic data on how dollars flow from soldiers training at Camp Grayling JMTC into surrounding communities would help communicate the contributions Camp 

Grayling JMTC makes to the local economy. As part of the 

study, examine the potential benefit to local businesses if

surrounding tourism bureaus work to create incentives for 

soldiers’ families to extend their stay in the area before or 

after training.

With quantifiable information, local purchasing goals for

Camp Grayling JMTC could be established to help create 

an operating norm that acknowledges the importance of 

Camp Grayling JMTC on the surrounding economies regardless of changes in Camp Grayling leadership. In addition, 

the The Economic Impact Study should include an analysis 

Camp Grayling's direct and indirect costs to other interests 

in the area.
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 4-7

4.6 JLUS Implementation Team Action Plan Details: Alpena CRTC

4.6.1 Create a Military Overlay 

Zone 

Residential development around airports and military 

training areas frequently leads to conflicts between these

incompatible land uses. The Alpena area has the opportunity to plan for the future and create zoning to avoid future 

conflict. This JLUS recommends applying an overlay zone

that does not allow for new residential or commercial development in the APZ associated with the Alpena County 

Regional Airport and Alpena CRTC. 

Creation of an overlay zone will help protect the residents 

and businesses already in the area, and it will help limit the 

amount of new development that could encroach on Alpena CRTC in the next 5 to 30 years.

Language for this overlay zone should be drafted by a legal 

team specializing in land use law and code development. 

The legal team will review the zoning for any potential regulatory takings, which can occur when a government regulation restricts the use of private property to the point 

that the property no longer has any real value. If a taking is 

identified, funds for reimbursement would be established.

The overlay zone should restrict all residential and commercial development within the APZ. Further study should 

be completed to determine the intensity of uses allowed in 

the overlay zone. For example, the study should examine 

whether light industrial uses such as a personal storage facility could be allowed or if the zone should be more restrictive and only allow for agricultural uses.

4.6.2 Conduct a n AICUZ Study

Noise contours were provided at the time of the finalization

of this JLUS. GIS of the APZs will need to be obtained along 

with the GIS for the noise contours. A precise analysis of 

incompatible land use can be completed during the implementation phase of the JLUS when GIS data layers are made 

available. 

The noise analysis provided by Alpena CRTC in support of 

the JLUS is part of the Alpena CRTC 2016 IDP Environmental Assessment (EA). "NoiseMap" is the name of the model 

within the Air Force that generated the noise contours. An 

AICUZ study will need to contain noise compatibility and CZ 

analysis. The assessment from the EA provides a basis for 

assessing noise and land use impacts from noise at the airport form the IDP projects. It is not an AICUZ but is a good 

starting point for a plan. The EA noise assessment could 

be combined with an APZ assessment as shown for Camp 

Grayling. That information along with land use parcel data 

can be used to develop an AICUZ study since the data is, the 

time of publication of the final JLUS, less than 5 years old.

A formal AICUZ program would help achieve and maintain 

compatibility between air operations and the communities 

surrounding Alpena CRTC. The study should include an 

analysis of major training events, such as Northern Strike. 

The study would also include flight paths, which would help

the community understand impact areas when air traffic increases. Additionally, an AICUZ addresses the protection of 

health, safety, and the welfare of both the community and 

military personnel.

Current and accurate information with ADNL contours is 

needed to assess the impacts to surrounding community 

functions. The AICUZ study could be used to inform and direct guidance for changes to military and installation operations or to create zoning regulations to prevent encroachment. 

The study should consider the collection and analysis of 

providing ADNL contours for the entire region, specifically

including areas that have been identified as bothersome to

community members.

4.6.3 Alpena CRTC Community 

Outreach and Alpena 

CRTC Community Council/

Formalize Thunder Bay 

Interagency Cooperation

Comprehensive and timely communication with community residents and other key stakeholders is a challenge without a dedicated community relations specialist for Alpena 

CRTC. Based on the base's current mission size, a full-time 

community relations specialist position is not likely to be 

staffed.

The many community partnerships between Alpena CRTC 

and the community include close cooperation with Thunder 

Bay Marine Sanctuary personnel to maintain the integrity of 

preserved sites and the ecology within the sanctuary. However, formalizing communications to assist with achieving 

common goals is needed.

This JLUS recommends that Alpena CRTC leverage any communication standard operating procedures that are developed by Camp Grayling JMTC. In addition, the installation 

and local leaders should convene an expanded Alpena 

CRTC Community Council with the Alpena Area Chamber of 

Commerce. Goals of the Alpena CRTC Community Council 

include:

 Formalizing communications with NOAA regarding operations over Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

 Author and promote a cooperation story with Thunder 

The figure at right, 

from the 2016 

Alpena CRTC IDP 

E n v i r o n m e n t a l 

Assessment (EA), 

shows existing 

condition DNL 

contours at Alpena Regional Airport. The inset table lists the area 

within the existing 

daily-average DNL 

contours.
4-8 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Bay National Marine Sanctuary

 Strengthen the existing partnership with Alpena Com-

munity College

 Promote STARBASE as an asset connected to Alpena 

CRTC

4.6.4 Commission a Thunder 

Bay Environmental Impact 

Study/Commission a 

Joint NOAA/Alpena CRTC 

Bathymetric Survey 

In 2002, NEMCOG prepared the Thunder Bay Watershed 

Initiative. Phase II of the plan was released in 2004. Since 

that time, the Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary has 

expanded from 448 square miles to 4,300 square miles. 

When the Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary bound-

ary expansion was underway, the 2013 NOAA Condition Re-

port noted that a 1,300-square-mile area has the potential 

for housing UXO and military-related debris. This is both an 

environmental and safety concern. 

MDEQ has requested assistance from the U.S. Army Corps 

of Engineers (USACE) to evaluate the known munitions in 

the area and potentially address their findings via the Mili-

tary Munitions Response Program (MMRP); however, it re-

mains unfunded. 

The sanctuary extends down to just 300 feet AGL and is 

used for high-speed, low-altitude jet fighter training. There

are no identifying notations on sectional charts limiting ac-

tivities that can be potentially disruptive to marine life. 

The JLUS recommends that MDEQ, Alpena CRTC, USACE, 

NOAA Office of National Marine Sanctuaries (ONMS), Thun-

der Bay National Marine Sanctuary, the EPA, and the State 

of Michigan should all be stakeholders in the study.

Outcomes of the Thunder Bay Environmental Impact Study 

should address the impact of military training activities over 

and within the R-4207 range on wildlife, historic and archae-

ological preservation, recreation, commercial uses of the 

lake, and military training requirements.

In addition, Alpena CRTC, in conjunction with the U.S. Navy 

and U.S. Coast Guard, should conduct a survey of the wa-

ters in and surrounding the range to determine if any UXO 

or dangerous conditions exist. These areas at the very least 

should be identified and protected from accidental or inten-

tional intrusion with specific focus on the adjacent marine

sanctuary, where a great deal of underwater activity occurs.

4.6.5 Economic Impact, Tracking, 

and Incentives: Conduct an 

Economic Impact Study

Quantifiable economic data on how dollars flow from sol-

diers training at Alpena CRTC into surrounding communities 

would help communicate the contributions Alpena CRTC 

makes to the local economy. As part of the study, exam-

ine the potential benefit to local businesses if surrounding

tourism bureaus work to create incentives for soldiers’ fam-

ilies to extend their stay in the area before or after training.

With quantifiable information, local purchasing goals for Al-

pena CRTC could be established to help create an operating 

norm that acknowledges the importance of Alpena CRTC on 

the surrounding economies regardless of changes in Alpe-

na CRTC leadership.

4.6.6 Update the Alpena 

Area-wide Comprehensive 

Transportation Plan 

Poor road condition has been cited as an issue throughout 

the JLUS study area. Road projects are prioritized based on 

the condition of the road in question, as well as the amount 

of traffic. The Alpena Area-wide Comprehensive Transpor-

tation Plan was completed in 2003. It was prepared for Al-

pena County, the City of Alpena, Alpena Township, Alpena 

Public Schools, the Alpena County Road Commission, and 

MDOT.

There have been road improvements since that time; how-

ever, several road segments were identified in the 2013

Alpena County Master Plan as needing improvements. An 

updated transportation plan could help both Alpena CRTC 

and the surrounding community better understand the 

source of any issues and provide a path to resolution. The 

plan should consider a wide range of transportation and 

include access to community recreation areas surrounding 

Alpena CRTC.

Top: Downtown Alpena.

Bottom Left: Alpena City Hall.

Bottom Right: The shore of Lake Huron.
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 4-9

4.7 Implementation Plan Overview and Guidelines

The following pages present the proposed compatibility 

strategies for the JLUS. A summary table presenting the 

strategy information for each base is provided in Appendix 

D. The strategies are presented here in a more graphic format, which includes the following elements: 

 1. CATEGORY: This refers to the six primary categories 

that issues were sorted into: noise, military operations, 

environmental, transportation and infrastructure, community partnerships, and economic development. Each 

category is numbered and has a corresponding icon, 

which are visible along the very top of each page. The 

icon that corresponds with the category being discussed 

on that page is dark blue.

 2. PRIORITY: The letters H (high), M (medium), and L 

(low) appear here. The priorities are described in more 

detail in Section 4.3. 

 3. TIMELINE: A shaded bar indicates the suggested timeline for the strategy in years. The timeline starts at 0, for 

strategies that can be implemented right away, and ends 

at 5+, for strategies that are projected to take more time. 

 4. STRATEGY TYPE: This is another way of classifying 

the strategies to indicate the type of action that might 

be required to implement it. Choices include research, 

such as a new study; outreach, or finding new ways to

engage the public; funding, or finding new ways to pay

for improvements; partnership, or forming new groups 

and alliances; and regulatory, or changing laws or other 

rules to improve encroachment issues.

 5. STRATEGY LEAD: This is the group or groups that 

would logically spearhead each strategy. The JLUS implementation team would need to follow up periodically 

with each group on the status of their actions.

 6. STAKEHOLDERS: This list includes any entities that 

could be affected or who may help implement it.

 7. IMPLEMENTATION TEAM ACTION PLAN ITEM: This 

bar indicates which key action in the Implementation 

Team Action Plan the strategy supports.

 8. SUMMARY: This provides a broad overview of the 

strategy, the underlying issue, and why it needs to be 

implemented. 

 9. RECOMMENDATIONS: These are the concrete steps 

that will need to be taken by the strategy lead(s) to implement the strategy.

 10. CHALLENGES: Significant known roadblocks that

could affect the strategy's implementation are listed in

this section.

 11. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: This covers anything 

else that relates to the strategy in question that is important for the public and other stakeholders to know.

4-8 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Issue 1b continued:

Tree cutting reduces noise buffer

Camp Grayling JMTC key issues 1 noise

Summary

Timber harvest during DNR forest management of areas 

on/surrounding Camp Grayling may lead to temporary 

noise pollution for neighborhoods close to the cut. Cloud 

cover has more of an effect on noise projection than tree 

cover does, though the public is not always aware of this 

fact. Noise circulation is a complex phenomenon that can 

be influenced by wind, temperature, cloud cover, fog, topography, and man-made barriers such as homes and other buildings.

Recommendations 

 Although there is no evidence to suggest that tree density affects how far the noise associated with bombing 

and target practice may travel, the effect of tree removal 

on the attenuation of overall noise coming from Camp 

Grayling from vehicles and other operations and/or research to prove that tree density does not affect noise 

attenuation might be useful to support land use planning decisions and SWOT analyses. 

 Spread news of timber harvest via multiple channels, including open houses, social media, and traditional media when appropriate. 

 Educate the public about the role of tree cover in sound 

attenuation.

 Consider partnerships to help spread the message via 

more channels.

Strategy 1b.2: Assess and publicize timber harvest effects on noise 

attenuation

Challenges

 A scientifically valid noise study would require significant 

funding.

 Public opinion that trees block noise may be difficult to 

change.

 Open houses, traditionally used by the DNR to spread 

information, are not typically well attended. Other ways 

of spreading information should be explored.

Additional Information

An MDNR clearcut in the Guthrie Lakes area in 2016 sparked 

concern among residents who say the trees buffered the 

noise of military operations. 

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Outreach/

Research Camp Grayling

Residents M MDNR category priority timeframe

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Strategy 1b.3: Enhance public awareness of forestry management plans, 

operations, and impacts

Summary

MDNR management of state lands is not well understood 

by the residents surrounding the area. Harvesting plans are 

available online, but information is not reaching many citizens potentially affected. Better communication about the 

reasoning behind and timing of timber harvests near residential areas is warranted, particularly in light of demands 

for additional sound-attenuating tree cover. 

Recommendations 

 Provide web links to MDNR Grayling FMU information 

pages on unit management plans and upcoming compartment reviews.

 Consider providing an information sheet, in print and 

electronic format, explaining the management and selection process, how it is influenced by installation operations, and the range of time in which a cut may be 

completed. Provide press releases for local newspapers, 

radio, and TV stations.

 Consider publishing information in utilities publications 

such as County Lines magazine about planned cuts after 

the planning decision has been made.

 Conduct public outreach activities such as presentations 

at local educational and non-profit meetings concerned 

with sustainability and environmental stewardship.

Challenges

 Personnel time to organize information campaign, create content and coordinate meetings. Requires close coordination with MDNR staff.

Additional Information

The MDNR is responsible for timber management and harvest on Camp Grayling leased lands, though the camp is 

consulted for compatibility with military operations. In accordance with Camp Grayling Regulation 200-1, trees larger 

than 1 inch in diameter may not be cut or damaged without 

permission from the Department of Facility Engineering.

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Outreach MDNR

Camp Grayling JMTC

M Residents category priority timeframe

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

ACTION PLAN: LANDSCAPE PLAN ACTION PLAN: LANDSCAPE PLAN

1

1

1

3 5 2 4 6

8

9

11

10

Figure 4.3 | Strategy Page Legend

7

Members of the TC and PC were involved with the project from the start. See Appendix B, Public Participation Plan, for more 

information on how stakeholders were engaged throughout the JLUS process.

JLUS Implementation Team Strategies

Action Plan Items

Figure 4.2 | JLUS "Toolbox"
4-10 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Camp Grayling JMTC key issues 1 noise

M

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

NEMCOG

Camp Grayling JMTC/

Alpena CRTC

NEMCOG

Residents

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Issue 1a:

Impact of aircraft noise on communities

Outreach

Summary

For certain, high-disturbance areas where sensitive functions already exist, no-fly zones can sometimes be established on a temporary basis. Sensitive areas could include 

dense residential areas, critical wildlife habitats or areas of 

environmental interest. These no-fly zones are typically set

at 1,500 feet above ground level for a distance of approximately 1,000 feet from the subject function. This applies to 

both fixed-wing and rotary-wing aircraft.

Recommendations

 Specifically identify sensitive functions and their locations that require reduced noise vibration. Conduct 

analysis to determine the source and frequency of the 

disturbance. Evaluate other noise reduction techniques 

first to see if the disturbance can be mitigated as identified in Strategy 1a.2.

 Work with officials from Grayling JMTC and Alpena CRTC

to evaluate their operations to see if changes can be 

made that would allow for a higher floor level over the

identified location. If determined to be acceptable, work

with installations, airspace managers, and the FAA to alter navigational charts and procedures to establish the 

no-fly zones.

 If operations cannot be altered efficiently or economically, identify locations and means for relocating the function away from the disturbance.

Strategy 1a.3: Establish no-fly zones over sensitive areas

Summary

Noise at military ranges is inherent in their function, and for 

residents that live near these activities, adjustments to their 

existing environment may be the only reasonable solution. 

Sound attenuating strategies can be applied to existing 

structures and environments to help reduce sound vibrations. It should be noted, however, that the most effective

strategy to combat noise disruption is distance separation. 

Recommendations

 Provide workshops that educate the community on what 

causes sound vibrations, how they travel, how they can 

be reduced, and what levels are tolerable for different

functions. Provide visual aids depicting the noise contours measured through the activities detailed in Strategy 1a.1.

 Create information to be posted on publicly accessible 

websites providing this same information, with contact 

numbers for questions, comments, and additional information.

 Make specialists available to residents for one-on-one 

consultation or evaluation of specific structures, with

recommendations for implementation of sound attenuating systems or strategies.

Summary

Current and accurate information with ADNL contours is 

needed in order to assess the impacts to surrounding community functions. This data could be used to inform and 

direct guidance for changes to military and installation operations or to create zoning to prevent encroachment.

Recommendations

 Contract the collection and analysis of providing ADNL 

contours for the entire region, specifically including areas that have been identified as bothersome to community members.

 Use that information when making zoning regulation 

changes to prevent residential, commercial, or service 

functions from being sited within the 65 ADNL contour.

 Work with the military to alter training activities to reduce the noise impact to existing sensitive areas where 

possible. (Note: In many cases, existing ranges cannot 

be relocated or inactivated because of economic and logistical reasons.)

 AICUZ recommendations should specifically address areas where the 65 ADNL noise contours extend past the 

installation boundary.

 Provide residents already living within the 65 ADNL contour with information about how to mitigate noise (see 

Strategy 1a.2).

Strategy 1a.2: Educate the public on 

residential sound attenuation

Strategy 1a.1: Conduct a noise study 

category

M

priority strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Regulatory

NEMCOG

Residents

timeframe

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Additional Information

Certain training or operational functions may require use 

of this airspace and may not be relocatable for economic or 

logistical reasons. If this is the case, it would be more appropriate to relocate the subject function to an area that meets 

the newly established zoning criteria, placing it farther from 

the noise-generating activity as identified in Strategy 1a.4.

NEMCOG

Camp Grayling JMTC/

Alpena CRTC H

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Camp Grayling JMTC/

Alpena CRTC

NEMCOG

Community

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Research

ACTION PLAN: NOISE STUDY ACTION PLAN: NOISE STUDY

ACTION PLAN: NOISE STUDY
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 4-11

Camp Grayling JMTC key issues

noise 1

Issue 1a continued: 

Impact of aircraft noise on communities

category

M

priority strategy type

Regulatory

timeframe

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Strategy 1a.4: Conduct an analysis of property ownership under the 

restricted airspace and near the airfield.

strategy lead stakeholders

NEMCOG

Residents

Camp Grayling JMTC/

Alpena CRTC

Summary

In Grayling Township, approximately 82 percent of land is 

federal, military, and state land. Many homes, some in residential neighborhoods, are very close to airport runways, 

ranges, artillery firing positions, bombing ranges, and vehicle maintenance facilities. All of these activities, and others, 

are consistent with the training that is regularly conducted 

at Camp Grayling, the Grayling Range, and the airspace surrounding them. In one instance, portions of restricted airspace for Grayling Range resides over property that is not 

owned by the government. Subsequently, residential properties are under an area where unrestricted air activities are 

conducted, including many that are deemed hazardous to 

the public. It is current FAA and DOD policy that all property 

under restricted airspace be owned by the government or 

subject to a conditional use agreement with the land owner 

that there will be no domestic use of the property. In another instance, residential neighborhoods exist within one of 

Grayling Army Airfield's clear zones and APZs.

Recommendations – Grayling Range

 Conduct an analysis of property ownership under the 

R-4201A and B restricted airspace to determine the status of ownership or lease agreement. Provide mapping 

of boundaries and data including owner's name, location, contact information, valuation of property, and current use of property.

 Conduct an Environmental Assessment to determine 

the feasibility of proposed acquisition of the property.

 Properties that cannot be acquired should seek establishment of conditional use lease agreements with property owners.

 If large portions of property are found to be unattainable, work with the FAA to redefine restricted airspace

boundaries to exclude those areas. This may severely 

impact operational capabilities at the range.

 A noise study should also include an analysis of the environmental impact of noise. 

Recommendations – Grayling Army Airfield

 Conduct an analysis of the airfield and surrounding

properties to identify potential for displacing Runway 

32 to the northwest or creating a new runway with an 

orientation generally north-south. This would allow for 

the existing residential neighborhoods to remain without endangering residents' safety or negatively affecting

mission objectives. 

H

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Grayling

Alpena

Crawford County

NEMCOG

Community

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Regulatory

Summary

Camp Grayling should consider construction of noise barriers in areas where noise extends into local communities. Noise barriers similar to the solid obstructions built 

between the highway and neighborhoods. While, they do 

not completely block noise, the barriers can reduce overall 

noise levels. According to the Federal Highway Administration, effective noise barriers typically reduce noise levels by

5 to 10 dB.

Recommendations

 Update building codes for all applicable governing entities.

 Create incentives for existing buildings to update their 

soundproofing.

 Explore available federal funding for sound abatement.

Challenges

 Requiring increased soundproofing could cause an increase in price for new structures.

 Monetary aid for existing residents to upgrade their 

structures could be limited and may not be enough to 

cover the full costs. 

Strategy 1a.5: Noise reduction for 

buildings within 65 ADNL noise area

Issue 1b: Tree cutting 

reduces noise buffer 

H

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Regulatory Camp Grayling JMTC

MDNR

NEMCOG

Residents

U.S. Forest Service

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Summary

Selective tree planting could potentially alleviate some of 

the disruption caused by military training. It has been determined that these will have the greatest effect if near the

source or near the receiver. Most military training activities 

would not allow the existence of tree stands near those activities for operational or safety reasons. This suggests that 

the most appropriate location for adding trees to help attenuate noise would be at the receiving end, or very near 

the homes being disturbed.

Recommendations

 Work with military training proponents to determine if 

any tree buffers could be planted near noise-generating

activities and identify those locations specifically. Then,

work with the installation and the US Forest Service to 

determine the proper species and placement of tree 

stands for greatest effect.

 Establish funding streams and a volunteer work force 

from the community and the military to hold a planting 

day activity. Ensure the event and activities are well publicized.

 Work with residents to understand how best to repair 

their own environment to reduce sound vibration impact to their homes as defined in Strategy 1a.2.

Strategy 1b.1: Plant trees in areas 

where it is appropriate and allowed

ACTION PLAN: MILITARY OVERLAY ZONE

ACTION PLAN: MILITARY OVERLAY ZONE ACTION PLAN: LANDSCAPE PLAN
4-12 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Issue 1b continued:

Tree cutting reduces noise buffer

Camp Grayling JMTC key issues 1 noise

Summary

Timber harvest during DNR forest management of areas 

on/surrounding Camp Grayling may lead to temporary 

noise pollution for neighborhoods close to the cut. Cloud 

cover has more of an effect on noise projection than tree

cover does, though the public is not always aware of this 

fact. Noise circulation is a complex phenomenon that can 

be influenced by wind, temperature, cloud cover, fog, topography, and man-made barriers such as homes and other buildings.

Recommendations 

 Although there is no evidence to suggest that tree density affects how far the noise associated with bombing

and target practice may travel, the effect of tree removal

on the attenuation of overall noise coming from Camp 

Grayling from vehicles and other operations and/or research to prove that tree density does not affect noise

attenuation might be useful to support land use planning decisions and SWOT analyses. 

 Spread news of timber harvest via multiple channels, including open houses, social media, and traditional media when appropriate. 

 Educate the public about the role of tree cover in sound 

attenuation.

 Consider partnerships to help spread the message via 

more channels.

Strategy 1b.2: Assess and publicize timber harvest effects on noise 

attenuation

Challenges

 A scientifically valid noise study would require significant

funding.

 Public opinion that trees block noise may be difficult to

change.

 Open houses, traditionally used by the DNR to spread 

information, are not typically well attended. Other ways 

of spreading information should be explored.

Additional Information

An MDNR clearcut in the Guthrie Lakes area in 2016 sparked 

concern among residents who say the trees buffered the

noise of military operations. 

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Outreach/

Research Camp Grayling

Residents M MDNR

category priority timeframe

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Strategy 1b.3: Enhance public awareness of forestry management plans, 

operations, and impacts

Summary

MDNR management of state lands is not well understood 

by the residents surrounding the area. Harvesting plans are 

available online, but information is not reaching many citizens potentially affected. Better communication about the

reasoning behind and timing of timber harvests near residential areas is warranted, particularly in light of demands 

for additional sound-attenuating tree cover. 

Recommendations 

 Provide web links to MDNR Grayling FMU information 

pages on unit management plans and upcoming compartment reviews.

 Consider providing an information sheet, in print and 

electronic format, explaining the management and selection process, how it is influenced by installation operations, and the range of time in which a cut may be 

completed. Provide press releases for local newspapers, 

radio, and TV stations.

 Consider publishing information in utilities publications 

such as County Lines magazine about planned cuts after 

the planning decision has been made.

 Conduct public outreach activities such as presentations 

at local educational and non-profit meetings concerned

with sustainability and environmental stewardship.

Challenges

 Personnel time to organize information campaign, create content and coordinate meetings. Requires close coordination with MDNR staff.

Additional Information

The MDNR is responsible for timber management and harvest on Camp Grayling leased lands, though the camp is 

consulted for compatibility with military operations. In accordance with Camp Grayling Regulation 200-1, trees larger 

than 1 inch in diameter may not be cut or damaged without 

permission from the Department of Facility Engineering.

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Outreach MDNR

Camp Grayling JMTC

M Residents

category priority timeframe

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

ACTION PLAN: LANDSCAPE PLAN ACTION PLAN: LANDSCAPE PLAN
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 4-13

Camp Grayling JMTC key issues

military operations 2

Issue 2a:

Flight paths over homes

Strategy 2a.1: Create sensible military overlay zones around Camp 

Grayling JMTC

Summary

Communities and residential areas surrounding Camp 

Grayling JMTC have grown since the inception of the camp. 

This has created issues regarding noise, disruption or the 

possibility of accident. While the land use surrounding the 

camp is regulated, it does not adequately address the many 

affects of the camp on residences and businesses. It is recommended that the base work with existing neighbors 

within the noise contours to notify neighbors of training 

times. The installation should also look at locating training 

operations in more remote areas within Camp Grayling in 

order to reduce noise conflicts and as a sign of being a good

neighbor. 

For the City of Grayling, adding an overlay zone to limit development within the APZs at Grayling AAF is more difficult

to implement than in the Alpena area. This is because much 

of the limits of Grayling are directly within an APZ. An overlay zone should be added to restrict development heights, 

but it is not feasible to restrict residential and commercial 

development altogether.

For areas in townships or counties, it is recommended that 

an overlay zone be added that conforms to the noise contours and that protects the boundaries of the installation 

from encroachment of development. Although these areas 

are relatively undeveloped, it is good planning practice to 

plan for the future, and implementing an overlay zone in 

these areas now is more feasible than when the area develops more. Implementing an overlay zone in these areas 

now will help avoid any potential future conflicts between

residential areas and noise from Camp Grayling JMTC.

Recommendations 

 Language for this overlay zone should be drafted by a 

legal team specializing in land use law and code development. The legal team will review the zoning for any 

potential takings. If a taking is identified, funds for reimbursement would be established.

 Work with community leaders such as city and county planning departments to change zoning maps and 

codes to identify the areas around military installations 

and ranges as military overlay zones. Use noise contour 

mapping as defined in Strategy 1a.1, or newer noise

data as it becomes available, to define the extent of the

overlay zone following guidance for acceptable noise 

levels per function. Establish restrictions that only allow 

compatible land uses in these zones.

 Include a reference to Camp Grayling JMTC in site plan 

review standards in local zoning ordinances.

 Consider establishing similar restrictions under known 

flight paths (see Strategy 2a.2), keeping in mind that

flight paths may change to suit different types of military

training in the future.

 Establish height restriction zoning overlays for airport 

runway clear zones that extend beyond the border of 

the installation. These should restrict all development so 

as to adhere to the applicable airfield criteria.

category

H

priority strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Regulatory

NEMCOG

Planners

NEMCOG

Residents

timeframe

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

ACTION PLAN: MILITARY OVERLAY ZONE

Wakeley Lake

Quiet Area

Hartwick Pines

State Park

Guthrie

Lakes

R-4201B R-4201A

R-4202

Grayling

Lake

Margrethe

 ̈¦§75

 ̈¦§75

 ̈¦§75

ST93

ST72

ST72

Lovells Rd

E Cr-612

Old State Rd

Chase Bridge Rd

CR-612 NE

W 4 Mile Rd

S Stephan Bridge Rd

W Cr-612

N Sherman Rd

S Mcmasters Bridge Rd

N Down River Rd E

Salling Ave

Cr-F01

Old Us-27

JLUS 2-Mile Study Area

Camp Grayling JMTC

County Boundary

Height Restriction Zone

Possible Military Overlay Zone

APZ Category I

APZ Category II

Clear Zone Land Use Control

Restricted Airspace

Grayling Airfield Noise Zones

Measurement Method (ADNL)

Zone II (65 - 75 dB)

Measurement Method (dBP)

Zone II (87 dB)

Measurement Method (CDNL)

Zone II (62 dB)

WI

MI

Lake

Huron

MI

0 Z 5

Miles

Zoning

Agriculture

Commercial

Industrial

Military Operations

Natural Resources/Open Space

Residential

Transportation

Water Body

Figure 4.4 | Sample Military Overlay Zone
4-14 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Issue 2b: Noise and vehicular disruption from MATES

Strategy 2b.1: Educate the public 

on traffic routes and needs

Summary

Concerns were voiced regarding the noise and traffic disruption caused by the MATES. This facility is used to repair 

and store equipment used at the training range and installation. It is located near the range because the majority of 

traffic flows between those locations. Also, the noise and

disruption inherent in the activity is in keeping with that 

land use type. Unfortunately, logistics requires movement 

of vehicles among the arrival/departure location (Grayling 

AAF), the installations, and the MATES. The most direct route 

travels through the city of Grayling, which can at times be 

disruptive.

Recommendations 

 Community leaders should work with military leaders to 

develop educational materials that explain operational 

needs, locations of travel, times, and types of equipment being transported. These should be disseminated 

through public means such as public service announcements and local newspapers, and through community 

forums like town hall meetings, where questions can be 

asked and concerns addressed directly.

 Noise disturbance should be addressed with a military 

overlay zoning action as addressed in Strategy 2a.1.

 Consider adding an interchange at North Down River 

Road as described in Strategies 4d.1 and 4d.3.

Camp Grayling JMTC key issues 2 military operations

Strategy 2c.1: Educate and inform 

the public about night training

Summary

Because war is not a 9-5 job, training for night-time operations is as essential as daylight training. It is, however, intentionally conducted with lesser frequency for sake of adjacent communities. And yet, it inevitably causes disturbance 

to slumbering residents. Those most impacted live closest 

to the range, but the noise vibrations carry an impact for 

all in the region by comparison to daytime activities simply 

due to a lack of competing disturbances. Foreknowledge of 

the event won’t make it any less disturbing, but it may help 

the community better cope.

Recommendations

 Affected community leaders should work with military

leaders to identify and publish schedules of night-time 

training events. These should be provided to the public in a variety of delivery methods including print and 

electronic formats. They should identify locations, start 

times, and duration.

 Community and military leaders should work together 

to present information about the need for and types of 

military training conducted in the region. This should be 

presented in a town hall format, allowing citizens to ask 

questions and freely comment on their issues.

Issue 2c: Noise and vibration 

from night training

M

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

DOD, NGB

Camp Grayling JMTC/

Alpena CRTC

NEMCOG

Residents

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Outreach

ACTION PLAN: NOISE STUDY

COMMUNITY OUTREACH

category

M

priority strategy type

Outreach

timeframe (recurring)

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

strategy lead stakeholders

NEMCOG

Residents

Camp Grayling JMTC/

Alpena CRTC

NEMCOG

Summary

Well-established flight paths help the military reduce confusion between pilots and controllers, and they also streamline training activities, which improves safety, economy, and 

efficiency. The JMTC/CRTC training area encompasses a vast

airspace both horizontally and vertically, which is utilized by 

a number of entities including governmental, commercial, 

and private users. It also has an impact on land owners at 

lower altitudes. Established traffic routes for training activities are carefully delineated where they affect the lowest

number of these individuals. Yet, certain activities at certain 

times do have a negative impact on some residents. This is 

unavoidable within the requirements of the training curriculum. However, educating the public can help alleviate the 

stress caused by these occurrences. This is already occurring, but it should be encouraged and continued.

Recommendations 

 Work with military and community leaders to put together educational briefings on training activities along

established flight paths. Explain the types of activities,

altitudes, aircraft utilized, times, and purpose so the 

community understands the need and importance of 

the activity as well as where and when they will occur. 

This type of briefing should be conducted on a recurring

basis in order to maintain positive community outreach. 

It could be tailored to communities where noise is more 

of an issue, such as Guthrie Lakes, and repeated more 

often in these areas.

Strategy 2a.2: Educate the public on existing established flight paths

 Establish a website that identifies training schedules that

the public can use to educate themselves about these 

activities. Include call-in numbers or email addresses for 

them to submit comments about issues. Note: Antiterrorism force protection (ATFP) protocols may prevent 

the public release of this type of information.

 Continue to hold outreach events like air shows that 

serve to inspire, educate and inform the community 

about military training activities at the installations.

ACTION PLAN: NOISE STUDY

MILITARY OVERLAY ZONE

Issue 2a continued:

Flight paths over homes

M

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Camp Grayling JMTC

Public Affairs

NEMCOG

NEMCOG

Residents

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Outreach

ACTION PLAN: COMMUNITY OUTREACH
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 4-15

Camp Grayling JMTC key issues

military operations 2

Issue 2c continued: 

Noise and vibration from night training

Strategy 2c.2: Identify specific 

locations where night training is 

particularly disruptive and identify 

alternatives

Summary

Different types of training are conducted in different locations on the range. Identifying those locations and associating them with the various training activities can help the 

community and the military better understand how, where, 

and why certain training activities are more or less disruptive. These data points can then be used to determine if 

changes can be made to alleviate community unrest.

Recommendations 

 A study should be prepared that creates a database 

comparing night-time training activities and reports of 

disruption from citizens by location, time, level of disruption, extent of disruption, etc. This could be an ongoing exercise allowing a greater understanding of the 

impact of training activities on residents by a multitude 

of factors including but not limited to proximity, types 

of training events, attenuation efforts, and disruption

spread mapping.

Strategy 2c.3: Confine military arms 

testing and range use to areas 

adjacent to state-owned lands

Summary

Restriction of arms testing to areas adjacent to state-owned 

lands has the opportunity to bring the arms testing away 

from highly populated areas.

Recommendations 

 Create buffer zones that emanate from the adjacent

lands into Camp Grayling where arms testing will occur. 

M

category priority timeframe (recurring)

0 1 2 3 4 5 + M

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Regulatory

0 1 2 3 4 5

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Regulatory DOD

NGB

Camp Grayling JMTC/

Alpena CRTC

NEMCOG

+

 Designate buffer zones and future growth areas for the

community and military installations based on current 

and future planning documents. 

 Engage military subject matter experts (SMEs) to review 

plans for residential development that is to be located 

near installations as a condition of approval.

Strategy 2d.1:Establish zoning regulations that prevent encroachment, 

particularly near potentially dangerous and noise-generating activities

Summary

Military overlay zoning to help alleviate noise disturbances is the same action needed to help prevent dangerous 

or incompatible adjacencies. The most prominent example 

of incompatible encroachment on military activities is the 

town of Grayling residential neighborhoods lying within the 

airport runway clear zone and accident potential zones. 

Zoning regulations would identify areas for different types

of development that are in keeping with the known and 

planned activities of the community.

As towns and installations grow to meet new demands, 

these two entities will inevitably come together in unhealthy or unsafe ways. Military overlay zoning can serve to 

eliminate this type of incompatible encroachment by maintaining a buffer zone surrounding military installations. The

designation of growth areas for both the community and 

the military will also benefit both in predetermining the direction that best suits those activities.

Recommendations 

 Community leaders strive to understand the issues affecting health, safety, and livability of their communities 

and create regulating criteria that provides for compatible land use supporting both community needs as well 

as those of military operations that are integral to the 

area.

H

category priority timeframe strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Regulatory NEMCOG

NEMCOG

Residents

Camp Grayling JMTC 0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Issue 2d:

Population growth may encroach on the mission

ACTION PLAN: NOISE STUDY

INSTALLATION MASTER PLAN

DOD, NGB

Camp Grayling JMTC/

Alpena CRTC

NEMCOG

Residents

ACTION PLAN: NOISE STUDY

INSTALLATION MASTER PLAN

ACTION PLAN: NOISE STUDY

MILITARY OVERLAY ZONE
4-16 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

L

category priority timeframe (recurring)

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Outreach Camp Grayling JMTC

MDEQ

Residents

MDNR

Issue 3a:

PFOS and PFOA contamination of groundwater 

Strategy 3a.1: Improve public outreach and access to information

Summary

Residents using the breached aquifer are concerned about 

the safety of their drinking water. The health effects and

extent of contamination are still being researched and are 

not completely understood, which contributes to citizen 

concern about health and economic impacts. Continuing 

and improving ongoing communications between Camp 

Grayling/MDEQ and surrounding residents through public 

meetings, print and electronic media, and call center assistance will help provide updated information, mitigate uncertainties, ensure that those affected have access to exposure mitigation options, while enhancing public relations.

Recommendations 

 Provide easy-to-find links on the Camp Grayling JMTC

website home page to information pages on Michigan.

gov and the EPA website. Include an up-to-date summary of the MDEQ monitoring program status along with 

links. Consider adding maps, graphics, or interactive 

content to provide a clear message. 

 Increase non-web-based outreach to residents.

 Continue to hold frequent town hall public meetings.

 Increase transparency about how wells are selected for 

testing. 

 Consider providing a clearer explanation of why some 

wells are not accepted for testing, including a visual 

representing the understood risk associated with different neighborhoods around the base, including maps of 

known contamination sites, monitoring wells and any 

plume models as they become available.

Challenges

 Effort would require dedicating personnel time to update the base website content, create information 

sheets, and coordinate print campaigns. 

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Outreach

Camp Grayling JMTC

NGB

MDEQ

NEMCOG

Residents H MDNR

category priority timeframe

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Strategy 3b.1: Provide information 

to the public on groundwater 

contamination 

Summary

Groundwater contamination in the Camp Grayling area results from exposure to a wide range of toxic compounds, 

chemicals, metals, and petroleum byproducts that are introduced into soils and groundwater from industrial, manufacturing, and transportation activities. While the PFA contamination issue receives the most attention, the public is 

also concerned with groundwater contamination from other sources and how it may effect drinking water from wells

and the general environment. 

Recommendations 

 Provide a base webpage link to MDEQ information regarding groundwater contamination – this should include the link to DEQ Online Services, which includes 

their Environmental Mapper utility. 

 Provide current bulletins on spills and plume status (as 

available) for any sites on the installation in a bulleting 

format via website and as a script for public inquiries.

Challenges

 Requires personnel time to maintain bulletins and webpage.

Issue 3b: Impacts on groundwater/drinking water 

Camp Grayling JMTC key issues 2/3 military operations/environmental

ACTION PLAN: COMMUNITY OUTREACH

WATER MASTER PLAN

ACTION PLAN: COMMUNITY OUTREACH

WATER RESOURCES PLAN

Strategy 2d.2: Purchase land 

around installations to control 

growth 

Summary

As a means to combat encroachment beyond regulation, 

land purchase would ensure adequate buffer zones and secure growth areas.

Recommendations 

 Military and civic organizations should independently 

establish land purchase programs or foundations that 

define the need for land purchase, identify areas of

greatest priority, work through regulatory and entitlement issues, raise funding, and purchase or receive the 

grant of properties.

 Research real property exchange (RPX) program used by 

the Army Guard to see if something comparable can be 

done here.

L

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Regulatory NEMCOG

Camp Grayling JMTC

Landowners

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

ACTION PLAN: MILITARY OVERLAY ZONE

INSTALLATION MASTER PLAN

Issue 2d: Population growth 

and mission encroachment
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 4-17

3 Camp Grayling JMTC key issues

environmental

Issue 3c:

Impacts and effects on surface water systems: lakes, rivers and streams, and wetlands

Strategy 3c.1: Control runoff and support bioassessment surveys to 

monitor ecological and aquatic community health

Summary

Runoff of contaminants and sediment into surface waters

is an ongoing threat to water quality and aquatic community health. Best management practices such as establishing 

riparian buffer zones and ongoing monitoring and bioassessments of important water bodies like Lake Margrethe 

and reaches of the Upper Manistee and AuSable rivers will 

help mitigate and control the effects of erosion and runoff.

Recommendations 

 Review existing watershed management plans that overlay installation properties for assessment data and best 

management practices.

 Promote ongoing grant-funded watershed level research and planning concerned with non-point source 

pollution, erosion, and runoff.

 Continue to identify and assess areas at risk for nonpoint source contaminant/sediment runoff and apply

best management practices to control erosion and runoff.

 Communicate plans and progress to the public, include 

actual vs. perceived effects of installation operations on

roads and erosion sites.

Challenges

 Maintaining the survey actions from year to year may be 

difficult with a turnover of volunteers.

 Outside funding sources or volunteer expertise will be required to assess the samples taken by citizen volunteers.

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Regulatory

MDEQ M NEMCOG Residents

category priority timeframe

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Strategy 3c.2: Support water quality and aquatic ecology communications 

Summary

Public interest in water quality and aquatic ecological health 

is spurred by topics such as chemical contamination, fish advisories, nutrient pollution, sedimentation, climate change, 

habitat loss, and invasive species. There is a wide range of 

research describing water quality, sediment quality, and the 

health of aquatic environments and species, but it can be 

challenging for citizens to identify and access appropriate 

and accurate information to satisfy their concerns. Sometimes there are public misperceptions about the location 

and sources of contamination, including incorrectly attributing causes to installation operations. In its role as a key 

community stakeholder and environmental steward, Camp 

Grayling could host or sponsor development of a centralized clearinghouse of information resources that includes 

maps and narrative summarizing scientific facts.

Recommendations 

 Develop or sponsor development of a web-based clearinghouse that summarizes facts and organizes resource 

links concerning surface water quality and aquatic ecological health in Camp Grayling watersheds.

 Consider developing or sponsoring development of a 

Story Map presentation describing surface water quality, aquatic biology, and aquatic ecological health in the 

Camp Grayling area hosted on the installation website 

or collaborative organization website (i.e. Huron Pines). 

 Conduct public outreach activities such as presentations 

at local educational and non-profit meetings concerned

with sustainability and environmental stewardship.

Challenges

 Requires professional staff commitment/graduate level

expertise to organize and edit research information and 

resources. Probably would require participation of partnering conservation organization and funding.

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Outreach NEMCOG

Residents

M MDNR

category priority timeframe

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

ACTION PLAN: COMMUNITY OUTREACH

WATER RESOURCES PLAN

ACTION PLAN: COMMUNITY OUTREACH

WATER RESOURCES PLAN
4-18 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Camp Grayling JMTC key issues 3 environmental

Strategy 3d.1: Ongoing ecological assessment and community outreach 

and engagement

Summary

Many citizens are not aware that the DNR is ultimately responsible for management of the land (surface resources) 

on which Camp Grayling operates. Educating the public 

about this cooperative relationship and the commitment 

to habitat and wildlife preservation would be beneficial.

Frequent communication of wildlife surveys (e.g. fish and

benthic community health) and promoting new surveys of 

wildlife populations would increase public trust and alert 

installation and DNR staff to perceived or actual problems.

Recommendations 

 Public outreach concerning current environmental management that is done on the installation to meet DNR 

land use requirements and beyond.

 Publicize results of upcoming comprehensive species 

survey being done in conjunction with a Camp Grayling 

JMTC INRMP update.

 Expand and maintain species habitat map layers on installation property that describe connectivity and monitor habitat fragmentation trends.

 Distribute an ongoing newsletter about the environmental management and monitoring on the installation, such 

as the Lake Margrethe Watershed Management Plan.

 Organize public tours of the protected and managed areas. 

 Conduct public outreach activities such as presentations 

at local educational and non-profit meetings concerned

with sustainability and environmental stewardship.

 Use citizen volunteers as appropriate and involve them 

in species protection as possible.

Challenges

 Maintaining the survey actions from year to year may be 

difficult with turnover of volunteers.

 Outside funding sources may be required to pay for the 

official surveys.

Issue 3d:

Effects on the health of wildlife populations

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Research

Outreach

Camp Grayling M MDNR Residents

category priority timeframe

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Issue 3e:

Wildfire management

Strategy 3e.1: Increase public awareness of ongoing wildfire management 

efforts and gather public input

Summary

Wildfires within the base and surrounding areas remain an

ongoing public concern. The MDNR is responsible for wildfire control on state and leased lands, including large areas

of volatile jack pine forest. Prescribed burns are a common 

management tool that may cause alarm when perceived as 

wildfires.

Recommendations 

 Conduct open houses in conjunction with MDNR to explain wildfire management plans and cooperative practices. Invite Camp Grayling personnel to participate.

 Capture public comments and concerns for future wildfire and forestry management strategies.

 Provide information and links on the installation website 

and social media to MDNR information on MDNR open 

houses, forestry management plans, and prescribed 

burn processes, risks, and schedules.

 Set up a hotline that could inform area residents via recording on prescribed burns or other activity.

 Provide emergency response protocol education. 

Challenges

 Effort would require dedicating personnel time to update the installation and MDNR website content, create 

information sheets, and coordinate mailers.

 Consistent language across platforms and agencies is 

essential to spreading a clear message to residents.

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Outreach

Camp Grayling JMTC

MDNR

Residents

M MDNR

category priority timeframe

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

ACTION PLAN: COMMUNITY OUTREACH 

INSTALLATION MASTER PLAN

ACTION PLAN: COMMUNITY OUTREACH

FIRE PROTECTION AGREEMENT
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 4-19

3 Camp Grayling JMTC key issues

environmental

Issue 3f:

Resource use and sustainability

Strategy 3f.1: Public outreach to increase awareness of sustainability 

measures at Camp Grayling JMTC

Summary

Camp Grayling has a comprehensive waste-reduction program and is on track to become the first DOD triple-net-zero

installation, whereby the installation’s net energy use, water 

use, and waste output would effectively be zero. The camp

has also implemented renewable energy measures and a 

lead/metals/munition removal program. The base has won 

awards for its sustainability actions. Public outreach detailing these efforts should alleviate public concerns with installation impacts on local resources and environment and 

promote public perceptions of environmental stewardship.

Recommendations

 Provide detailed information on the installation website 

about the waste reduction program.

 Consider a public broadcast, newspaper article, or letter 

to the editor describing the installation waste reduction 

program. Distribute a press release to local print and 

television media. 

 Conduct public outreach activities such as presentations 

at local educational and nonprofit meetings concerned

with sustainability and environmental stewardship. 

Challenges

 Effort would require dedicating personnel time to create and update informational fliers and press releases,

update the installation website content, and coordinate 

publicity efforts with media outlets.

Strategy 3f.2: Consider the creation 

of a recycling/sorting station

Summary

In addition to communicating the installation's commitment to waste reduction, providing recycling space on or 

near the installation or contributing to the county recycling 

program would encourage municipal waste reduction and 

create interaction between the installation and residents. 

Recommendations

 Assess the feasibility of a combined use recycling dropoff/sorting/transfer station on or adjacent to the installation, utilizing the Grayling Charter Township Recycling 

Center as the endpoint.

 Consider partnering with environmental organizations 

and using volunteers to coordinate facility upkeep.

 Consider use of installation vehicles/equipment as an inkind contribution to facilitate recycling and community 

access to waste management programs.

 Organize a partnership to work on developing collaborative recycling and renewable energy programs. This 

could be lead by NEMCOG, the region's designated planning agency for solid waste management.

Challenges

 Coordinating transportation of materials to the center.

 Funding for program initiation and ongoing operation.

L

category priority timeframe strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

0 1 2 3 4 5 + Outreach Camp Grayling JMTC Residents L

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Regulatory Camp Grayling JMTC

NEMCOG

Residents

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

ACTION PLAN: INSTALLATION MASTER PLAN

ACTION PLAN: COMMUNITY OUTREACH

WATER RESOURCES PLAN
4-20 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Issue 4a:

Effects of growth on utilities

Strategy 4a.1: Continue to monitor 

capacity and community growth

L

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Regulatory Grayling Charter 

Township

Residents

MDNR

Summary

The Grayling Charter Township Master Plan requires the 

monitoring of water, sewer, septage disposal/treatment, 

and natural gas services and the need for expansion, such 

as that caused by the development of the Arauco North 

America particleboard plant, particularly as existing systems age. A feasibility study was completed in 1999 for expanding the sewer system in Crawford County.

Recommendations

 Investigate ways to share military and civilian assets or 

energy strategies.

 Explore public-private partnership opportunities for future development of water and wastewater treatment.

 Pursue state grants to fund replacement projects. 

 Update feasibility study on sewer system.

Challenges

 Energy improvements and ensuring service may be dependent on private companies in some cases. 

 Funding is inadequate to replace infrastructure.

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Strategy 4a.2: Plan for possible 

mission expansion

Summary

The utility requirements of additions to or expansion of 

training missions should be investigated and integrated 

into existing installation plans.

Recommendations

 Develop an Installation Capacity Analysis to determine 

existing capacities and requirements. 

 Align growth with existing sustainability and net-zero 

plans, which may include implementation of new sources of renewable energy.

Challenges

 Energy improvements and ensuring service may be dependent on private companies in some cases. 

 Turnover at the installation can be problematic for longterm planning efforts.

M

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Regulatory Camp Grayling City of Grayling

Residents

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Issue 4b:

Improve internet access 

Strategy 4b.1: Encourage the growth and use of high-speed internet 

services

Summary

The internet has become so widely used within modern society that a lack of high-speed internet service can be detrimental to a community, diminishing educational and career development opportunities for residents; commercial, 

healthcare, and governmental functions; and social interaction and community support. 

Recommendations 

 	Contribute to state-wide efforts to plan digital and communications growth, such as through the Building of the 

21st Century Commission and Michigan Infrastructure 

Council.

 Develop a “wired city” vision similar to that of the City of 

Alpena; consult the North East Michigan Fiber Consortium for guidance. 

 Prioritize high-speed internet for schools to enhance educational and career development opportunities. 

 Develop and conduct digital literacy and technical skills 

programs for the public. 

 Consider a financing program to allow consumers to

fund internet infrastructure.

 Collaborate with Camp Grayling to expand service north 

of the city.

Challenges

 Demand may not warrant additional infrastructure. 

 Private companies, rather than government bodies, determine service availability.

 The low density of the population means a low return on 

investment for service installation.

 	Installing communications infrastructure is difficult and

costly. 

 Set-up costs for broadband connections may be prohibitive for rural residents and small businesses. 

 Monthly rates for high-speed service or costs of new 

technology may be too expensive for residents. 

 There may be a lack of interest in, of knowledge of, various internet services and capabilities and the potential 

positive effects on quality of life.

L

category priority strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Regulatory

City of 

Grayling

Residents

County 

Military

Camp Grayling JMTC key issues 4 transportation and infrastructure

timeframe

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

ACTION PLAN: INSTALLATION MASTER PLAN ACTION PLAN: INSTALLATION MASTER PLAN
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 4-21

4 Camp Grayling JMTC key issues

transportation and infrastructure

Issue 4c:

Poor cellular reception

Strategy 4c.1: Grow cellular 

services

Summary

Developing a stronger cellular communications network 

would enhance quality of life for residents and increase the 

ability to utilize cellular service for necessary functions such 

as emergency notifications, etc.

Recommendations

 Map existing cellular towers by carrier and identify any 

areas where coverage is poor. 

 Engage service providers regarding the implementation 

of a new cell tower. 

 Lease military land for an additional cell tower. 

 Consider community-wide wifi as an alternative in areas

where that option is more cost-effective.

Challenges

 Demand may not warrant additional infrastructure. 

 	The cost-benefit ratio for investing in technology upgrades may be low for cellular service providers.

 If the number of providers is limited, there is less incentive to provide competitive pricing for consumers.

L

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Regulatory Camp Grayling JMTC

Surrounding Communities

Residents

MDNR

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Strategy 4d.1: Streamline Camp 

Grayling traffic

Summary

While recent construction to the main gate improves access 

to the installation, the transportation network within the installation boundaries requires attention. 

Recommendations

 Update the transportation plan for Camp Grayling.

 Communicate plans with the county road commissions 

and MDOT.

 Adjust the convoy schedule to avoid high-traffic times.

 Publicize the convoy schedule. 

 Work with city, county, and state law enforcement to assist military convoys to flow through the city.

 Consider joint funding for transportation projects that 

may benefit access to and from Camp Grayling, such

as a project at I-75 and North Down River Road; county road improvements; Industrial Road connection from 

Four Mile Road north to M-72. 

Challenges

 Resources for a transportation plan may be limited.

 Publishing convoy movements may pose a security risk.

 Local law enforcement may not have availability to escort convoys. 

M

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Regulatory Residents

MDNR

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Issue 4d:

Traffic and road network

Strategy 4d.2: Improve traffic flow and safety throughout the Grayling area

Summary

Inefficient traffic patterns create safety and quality of life

issues. Identifying and addressing problem areas will enhance the community for residents, businesses, visitors, 

and Camp Grayling JMTC. Growth (including the Arauco 

North America particleboard plant), ongoing and planned 

road projects, and increased speed limits on highways and 

interstates may lead to more accidents or other vehicle issues in the coming years. 

Recommendations 

 Update the Grayling Area Transportation Study, which 

was last published in 2008. 

 Focus on the major intersections identified and developing solutions to improve circulation and safety.

 Include planned and ongoing improvements to the 

industrial area around Four Mile Road. 

 Adjust timing of traffic lights within the City of Grayling for more efficient traffic flow following the results

of the traffic pattern study.

 Encourage pedestrian traffic and alternative modes of

transportation in downtown Grayling to reduce congestion, particularly during the summer tourist season.

 Develop a bike share program at Camp Grayling that 

allows soldiers and visitors to borrow bicycles, allowing them to travel downtown and within the area.

 Install bicycle racks in conjunction with the Grayling 

Trail Town Master Plan. 

 Lighting, benches, street art, and trash receptacles 

can enhance the walkability of the area. 

 Monitor proposed development or land transactions, 

such as the Kirtland Community College Health Sciences Campus and nearby business development proposed 

in the Grayling Charter Township Master Plan near the 

Four Mile Road/I-75 interchange, for potential effects on

circulation and other locations regarding Camp Grayling 

use.

 Increase the local law enforcement presence to help 

with safety and security issues arising from increases in 

traffic and speed limits.

 Continue staffing the Camp Grayling main gate.

 Monitor the identified problem intersections.

 Partner with the military and law enforcement to escort 

convoys. 

 Improve I-75/North Down River Road interchange to improve confusion and traffic congestion issues.

Challenges

 Lack of funding for road maintenance and improvement 

is a state-wide issue. 

 The rural environment does not easily support carpool, 

bus, or alternative transportation forms on a day-to-day 

basis.

 Local efforts to retain posted speed limits on M-72 within Crawford County may be unsuccessful. 

 Commercial and military growth is anticipated. 

H

category priority strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Regulatory

NEMCOG

City of Grayling

Residents

County 

Military

Camp Grayling JMTC

Surrounding Communities

timeframe

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

ACTION PLAN: INSTALLATION MASTER PLAN

TRANSPORTATION STUDY

ACTION PLAN: INSTALLATION MASTER PLAN

TRANSPORTATION STUDY
4-22 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Camp Grayling JMTC key issues 4 transportation and infrastructure

Issue 4d continued:

Traffic and road network

Strategy 4d.3: Improve the I-75/

North Down River Road interchange

Summary

The existing I-75/North Down River Road interchange causes confusion and traffic congestion issues. Improving the

intersection would create a more efficient traffic pattern,

particularly for traffic to and from Camp Grayling, as well as

create an opportunity for a commercial development. 

Recommendations

 Develop and analyze multiple courses of action to address the intersection. 

 Develop a full interchanges by adding southbound 

ramps to I-75.

 If grant opportunities are identified, solicit assistance for

grant writing to fund the project.

 Consider joint or military funding for the project. 

Challenges

 The I-75/North Down River Road issue is a community 

priority, but efforts to obtain funding for this project

have not yet been successful. The project cost was estimated at $1.64 million in 2008. This is not a state or 

federal priority.

 Private residences and the Au Sable River along the west 

side of I-75 may limit options for development. 

H

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

DevelopmentCrawford County 

Road Commission

NEMCOG

Camp Grayling

City of Grayling

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Strategy 4d.4: Create a landmark 

and a symbolic entrance to Camp 

Grayling JMTC

Summary

Create a landmark structure at the entrance to Camp Grayling.

Recommendations

 Build an iconic entrance to Camp Grayling to create a 

better sense of place and connection to the surrounding 

environs.

Challenges

 Funding for construction.

L

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Regulatory Grayling Township

City of Grayling

Camp Grayling

Grayling Township

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Issue 4e:

Recreational access 

Strategy 4e.1: Ensure appropriate 

recreational access and increase 

public outreach

Recommendations

 Maintain the joint MDNR/Camp Grayling mapping effort

instituted by Public Act 288 and publicize the results.

 Open the camp to the public for recreation on set days. 

 Consider a land swap to provide public access to rich 

recreational areas in exchange for other lands more 

suitable to military training.

 Update the City of Grayling recreation plan in order to 

support applications for MDNR recreation grants.

 Increase situation awareness at the installation boundary by adding signage, a red-flag system to denote training exercises are ongoing, etc., to mitigate safety issues. 

 Communicate public service announcements and closures via various methods, including social media or text 

updates for interested parties.

Challenges

 Ensuring safety for both military personnel and civilians is critical when the public is allowed access to areas 

where military operations take place.

 Locked gates are sometimes ignored by the public.

H

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Outreach Residents

MDNR

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Camp Grayling JMTC

Surrounding Communities

MDNR

Issue 4f:

Poor road condition

Strategy 4f.1: Improve road network

Summary

Although road planning and improvements are continually 

ongoing, overall road condition in the area needs improvement. The poor condition of roads and bridges creates safety hazards for local residents and service members as well 

as added vehicle maintenance costs. 

Recommendations

 Utilize PASER, traffic counts, and traffic crash data to prioritize projects. 

 Develop options for an alternate truck route (Four Mile 

Road to Military Road) in a coordinated effort between

Grayling Charter Township and the Crawford County 

Road Commission.

Challenges

 Funding for road improvements and maintenance is a 

state-wide and national issue.

 Military, commercial, and tourism growth support economic growth but increase road deterioration.

 Projects may not take place for several years.

M

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Regulatory Multiple Residents

Camp Grayling

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

ACTION PLAN: TRANSPORTATION STUDY ACTION PLAN: TRANSPORTATION STUDY ACTION PLAN: COMMUNITY OUTREACH

TRANSPORTATION STUDY

INSTALLATION MASTER PLAN

LANDSCAPE PLAN

ACTION PLAN: TRANSPORTATION STUDY
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 4-23

4/5 Camp Grayling JMTC key issues

transportation and infrastructure/community partnerships

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Funding Multiple

Residents H Camp Grayling

priority timeframe

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Issue 4f:

Poor road condition

Strategy 4f.2: Increase funding for road projects and maintenance

Summary

Road projects are costly, and aging roads, culverts, and 

bridges pose significant maintenance problems throughout

the area that cannot all be addressed through the current 

limited funding availability and streams. 

Recommendations

 Align road and infrastructure projects and schedules to 

save costs.

 Explore ways to monetize summer tourism for road repair projects, such as through a paid parking system in 

downtown Grayling. 

 Pursue a public-private partnership (P3), particularly for 

areas of new development.

 Investigate funding agreements with the military for 

county roadway maintenance, such as the Defense Access Road Program. 

 Investigate partnerships with major players in the logging industry and wood products industry.

Challenges

 Most of the land (82 percent) in Crawford County is state 

or federally owned, so funding is hard to come by. Each 

county receives a uniform amount of money to maintain 

dirt roads through state lands.

 Taxes or public funding sources are unpopular, and public perception of the causes of road damage may not be 

conducive to getting people to vote for increased taxes.

 The military and private companies may not be interested in partnerships. 

category

Strategy 5a.1: Document a comprehensive standard operating procedure 

(SOP) for communications/community relations at Camp Grayling JMTC

Summary

The person in the position of community relations specialist develops a significant amount of institutional knowledge

about effective communications. Changes in staffing over

time could result in a loss of that institutional knowledge 

without comprehensive documentation of communications 

and engagement processes and procedures. Creating an 

SOP for communications and community relations at Camp 

Grayling JMTC will ensure staffing changes don’t result in a

loss of knowledge or a gap in outreach activities, as well as 

documentation of the history of existing community partnerships and relationships.

Recommendations 

 Draft a comprehensive SOP for communications and 

community relations at Camp Grayling JMTC, including 

processes, procedures, key dates, lessons learned, existing community partnerships, evaluation metrics, and 

future communication goals. 

 Share portions of the SOP with important community 

partners for feedback. 

 Submit SOP to Camp Grayling JMTC leadership for review and feedback. 

 Establish schedule for regular review and update of the 

SOP. 

 Provide a regular report of communications and educational activities to Camp Grayling JMTC leadership and 

key community partners, allowing participants to provide recommendations for continuous improvement 

and expansion of successful activities.

Challenges

 Funding and time limitations to support development of 

the SOP while meeting the demands of day-to-day communication responsibilities.

 Only one dedicated community relations specialist to 

meet the communication needs of Camp Grayling JMTC. 

Issue 5a:

Communications/education

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

M Outreach Camp Grayling JMTC Residents

category priority timeframe

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

ACTION PLAN: TRANSPORTATION STUDY ACTION PLAN: COMMUNITY OUTREACH
4-24 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Strategy 5a.2: Use relationship with 

Blarney Broadcasting as a model 

for expanding media reach

Summary

Blarney Broadcasting recognized a benefit to listeners by

inviting Camp Grayling JMTC staff to provide daily updates

on Northern Strike activities and extended this invitation to 

a year-round weekly update for listeners at no cost to Camp 

Grayling JMTC. This type of community partnership with local media has the potential to serve as a model for other 

media partners by providing consumers with information. 

Recommendations

 Craft a strategy for improving Camp Grayling JMTC reach 

into local media, including coordinating one-on-one 

meetings to discuss how to improve the installation's 

reach and potential partnerships. 

 Develop a case study using the partnership with Blarney 

Broadcasting to share with other local media. 

 Connect with local freelance writers to pitch Camp Grayling JMTC stories.

Challenges

 Local media staffing and budget constraints may affect

interest and ability to craft partnerships based on the 

Blarney Broadcasting model. 

L

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Outreach Camp Grayling JMTC Residents

Local Media

0 1 2 3 4 5 + M

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Outreach Camp Grayling JMTC Residents

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Strategy 5a.3: Develop a public 

education program on UXO

Summary

Stakeholders could find historic UXO on public property adjacent to Camp Grayling JMTC from the past 100 years of 

operation. A public education program focused on identifying UXO, who to contact if it is found, and the historic operations of Camp Grayling would address public safety concerns and inform local residents about the history of Camp 

Grayling. The program could be developed and implemented in partnership with local organizations, including school 

districts, Hanson Hills Recreation Area, and businesses. 

Recommendations

 Convene a working group to discuss a public education 

program and possible delivery opportunities, including 

school, recreation, and business representatives. 

 Create educational materials based on format recommendations provided by working group.

 Conduct a pilot educational program to obtain feedback 

and make adjustments to content as necessary.

 Train key community partners on educational program. 

 Distribute materials to key community partners.

 Publicize via Facebook and other media outlets.

Challenges

 Limited time and resources for Camp Grayling JMTC 

community relations specialist to engage in program development without supplemental staff members.

Camp Grayling JMTC key issues 5 community partnerships

Strategy 5a.4: Ensure web resources include access to Camp Grayling 

contact information and resources

Summary

Updates to the Camp Grayling JMTC webpage on the Michigan Army National Guard website involve a centralized process coordinated through Lansing. This process hampers 

the ability to keep the webpage up-to-date. Adding links 

to Camp Grayling JMTC’s Facebook page, editions of Camp 

Grayling Impact newsletter, and listing the contact information for the Camp Grayling community relations specialist 

on this webpage will allow stakeholders seeking more indepth information a way to obtain those resources from 

the Michigan Army National Guard website.

Recommendations

 Provide Lansing with a request to add links to Camp 

Grayling Facebook page, as well as editions of Camp 

Grayling Impact newsletter. 

 Engage in a discussion with Michigan Army National 

Guard Public Affairs staff in Lansing for ideas on how

to keep the Camp Grayling JMTC webpage relevant with 

new educational content and expedite the process for 

webpage updates. 

 Implement strategy to ensure Michigan Army National 

Guard website reflects broader suite of Camp Grayling

JMTC educational resources, including who to contact 

with questions on specific topics.

strategy type strategy lead

L Research Camp Grayling JMTC

category priority timeframe

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Challenges

 Limited Michigan Army National Guard Public Affairs

staff in Lansing to implement changes in an expedited

manner. 

 Limitations on the type of information Michigan Army 

National Guard is able to post on existing website. 

stakeholders

Residents

Issue 5a continued:

Communications/education

ACTION PLAN: COMMUNITY OUTREACH

ACTION PLAN: COMMUNITY OUTREACH

ACTION PLAN: COMMUNITY OUTREACH
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 4-25

5 Camp Grayling JMTC key issues

community partnerships

Issue 5b:

Public relations/community involvement

strategy type strategy lead

M Research Camp Grayling JMTC

category priority timeframe

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

stakeholders

Residents

Strategy 5b.1: Inform community partners on process to request Camp 

Grayling JMTC tours and participation in community events

Summary

The process for requesting Camp Grayling JMTC group 

tours and involvement in community events is not publicly available in a clear, comprehensive manner. An effort to

make the process and criteria available electronically and in 

print would help community partners go through the proper channels for these requests and reduce the number of 

questions that the community relations specialist needs to 

answer on this topic. Also, look for more ways to let the 

public view training or arms testing from a safe distance.

Recommendations

 Develop a concise document on the availability of group 

tours, the tour timeframe and content, and the process 

for requesting, including lead time necessary to schedule a tour and the necessary request forms. 

 Develop a concise document on the availability of Camp 

Grayling JMTC to participate in community events such 

as parades and festivals. Include the criteria for events, 

options for participation (e.g., color guard, speaker, fly

over), and provide the necessary request forms. 

 Provide overview of the process on Michigan Army National Guard website, Camp Grayling Facebook page, 

and in the Camp Grayling Impact newsletter.

 Establish a process for emailing or mailing forms and responding to requests. 

 Document in an overall SOP for future reference.

Challenges

 Limited time and resources for Camp Grayling JMTC 

community relations specialist to develop materials 

without supplemental community relations staff.

 Possible need for review of processes by Michigan Army 

National Guard Public Affairs staff.

Strategy 5b.2: Expand Camp Grayling 

JMTC community relations staff

Summary

The current level of staffing for community relations activities may not be sustainable to support the need for more 

robust public relations and community engagement activities, as well as the need for additional staff to manage unexpected issues that affect the surrounding communities.

This has been demonstrated through the need to increase 

current community relations support with temporary staffing to handle public relations surrounding the groundwater 

PFAS issue at Camp Grayling JMTC. 

Recommendations

 Review community relations staffing in light of community relations needs and goals for Camp Grayling JMTC to 

identify increased staffing needs.

 Present staffing analysis to Camp Grayling JMTC leadership and Michigan Army National Guard. 

 Create alternative staffing plan that identifies how to

maximize existing resources and leverage community 

partnerships to assist in achieving community relations 

and engagement goals if additional budget is not available to increase community relations staffing levels.

Challenges

 Federal budget limitations to hire additional community 

relations specialists.

H

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Staffing Camp Grayling JMTC Residents

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Strategy 5b.3: Develop an 

interpretative visitors’ center/history 

center at Camp Grayling JMTC

Summary

Community residents and tourists have voiced an interest 

in a facility near Camp Grayling JMTC that would provide an 

educational opportunity and some access to Camp Grayling 

JMTC facilities. A visitors’ center would provide taxpayers 

with an on-site educational opportunity at a location that 

would not interfere with training operations or security protocols. 

Recommendations

 Develop a visitors’ center concept and proposal with 

Camp Grayling JMTC leadership to present to Michigan 

Army National Guard leadership for consideration. 

 Explore possibility for public-private partnerships and 

resources to fund a Camp Grayling JMTC visitors’ center 

that would serve as another local tourist attraction.

 Convene local committee to participate in design and 

development of visitors’ center if MIARNG leadership 

provides preliminary approval to pursue the project. 

 Consider involving Camp Grayling JMTC in current museum revitalization project.

Challenges

 Federal and prviate budget limitations to invest in facility 

development.

L

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Outreach Camp Grayling 

JMTC

Residents

Chambers of Commerce

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

ACTION PLAN: COMMUNITY OUTREACH

ACTION PLAN: COMMUNITY OUTREACH ACTION PLAN: COMMUNITY OUTREACH
4-26 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Camp Grayling JMTC key issues 5 community partnerships

Strategy 5b.4: Revise respective 

zoning ordinances for governmental 

entities within the APZ 

Summary

Local zoning codes should be updated to restrict height of 

new structures within the APZs. 

Recommendations

 Update zoning codes in all applicable governmental entities.

 Zoning code update will also include a site review component for new structures in the APZ.

 Codify site plan review process, including timeframes.

 Include a reference to Camp Grayling JMTC in site plan 

review standards in local zoning ordinances.

 Any new structure must undergo review to ensure compliance with new zoning codes. 

 Require new facilities to match height limits mandated by the APZ and require site plan review for any new 

structure built on a property within the APZ. 

 Create a survey and registry of any current building that 

does not meet the new requirements. 

Challenges

 Increase of regulatory requirements for residents and 

businesses.

H

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Regulatory Developers

Residents

Local Governments

0 1 2 3 4 5

Grayling Township

City of Grayling

Issue 5b continued:

Public relations/community involvement

Strategy 5b.5: Collaborate on jointuse conference/community center

Summary

Camp Grayling JMTC lacks a conference center on base. The 

City of Grayling has taken on a feasibility study to look into 

adding a 500-1,000-person center. The city plans to buy 

land near the city center and will propose it for the location 

of the new facility if the feasibility study is favorable.

Recommendations

 Increase local and regional multimodal transportation to 

allow soldiers on Camp Grayling JMTC to access the new 

center.

 Partner with Camp Grayling JMTC staff to discuss potential events to host at the center that would benefit residents on- and off-post.

Challenges

 Funding new construction may be difficult.

M

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Partnership Residents

Local Governments

0 1 2 3 4 5

Camp Grayling 

JMTC

City of Grayling

+ +

Strategy 5b.6: Convene a Camp Grayling JMTC Community Council 

Summary

Camp Grayling JMTC can assist in convening the Camp 

Grayling JMTC Community Council. This group would leverage community partnerships to support Camp Grayling 

JMTC with public relations, economic valuation, visiting unit 

support services, and military family support services. It can 

capitalize on the work already done by Project Rising Tide in 

the area and also use the nearby Alpena CRTC Community 

Council as an example. 

Recommendations 

 Discuss group membership with Camp Grayling JMTC 

leadership and key community partners.

 Create a proposal for the formation of the group. 

 Convene a planning session to develop a formal strategy 

for the Camp Grayling JMTC Community Council, including membership, goals, meeting schedule, and priority 

activities. 

 Implement the strategy and evaluate effectiveness over

time. 

 Report on Camp Grayling JMTC Community Council successes to Camp Grayling JMTC leadership and key community partners. 

Challenges

 Existing time demands on Camp Grayling JMTC community relations specialist are many. 

 Potential requirements for Michigan Army National 

Guard to review communications materials developed 

in conjunction with community partners prior to distribution.

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Outreach

Project Rising Tide

Camp Grayling JMTC

Residents

M NEMCOG

category priority timeframe

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

ACTION PLAN: COMMUNITY OUTREACH

INSTALLATION MASTER PLAN

TRANSPORTATION STUDY

ACTION PLAN: MILITARY OVERLAY ZONE

COMMUNITY OUTREACH

ACTION PLAN: COMMUNITY OUTREACH

Grayling Township offices.
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 4-27

Camp Grayling JMTC key issues

economic development 6

Issue 6a: Effect on property value mostly perceived as 

neutral or positive

Strategy 6a.1: Develop communication materials that highlight the 

potential impacts from Camp Grayling JMTC for future home buyers

Summary

Creating print and online communication materials that 

local communities and Realtors can provide to prospective 

home buyers would address stakeholders’ concerns about 

a lack of transparent information about the potential impacts from Camp Grayling JMTC that local homeowners 

might experience due to training operations. In addition to 

communicating about potential negative impacts such as 

noise and wildfire, communication materials should also

highlight the positive impacts of Camp Grayling on property 

values, such as benefits to the local economy.

Recommendations 

 The JLUS Implementation Committee (made up of 

members from Camp Grayling JMTC, property owners, 

Project Rising Tide, Gaylord and Grayling Chambers of 

Commerce) and Realtors will work together to craft information for electronic and printed formats that highlights potential impacts of living near Camp Grayling 

JMTC.

 Tailor materials to highlight impacts specific to different

communities because of the variations in effects.

 Distribute draft informational materials to local stakeholders for review and comment. 

 Distribute final informational materials to Realtors,

Chambers of Commerce, homeowners associations, libraries, and other community organizations for distribution to residents and prospective home buyers. 

 Challenges

 Implementation requires stakeholder buy-in; there may 

be differences in opinion about level of information to

provide about Camp Grayling JMTC operations in materials. 

 Distribution would be voluntary, and stakeholders may 

choose not to share information, depending on level of 

support for the project. 

category

M

priority strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Outreach

JLUS Implementation 

Committee

Rising Tide Initiative

Camp Grayling

County Econ. Dev. Lead

Local Realtors

Issue 6b:

Significant contributor to local economy

Strategy 6b.1: Fire protection services needs study 

Summary

Camp Grayling JMTC has contracted with the Grayling Fire 

Department for structural fire suppression. Local stakeholders feel there is a need to reassess the current levels 

of contracted services given the changes in Camp Grayling 

JMTC. Conducting a fire protection services needs study will

determine if the current levels of service are adequate.

Recommendations

 Review Adaptation Planning for Climate Resilience report 

and implement recommendations related to supporting 

community-wide cooperative fire protection efforts, especially in areas where wildfire risk may be exacerbated

by climate change, specifically working with the City of

Grayling to secure funding for long-term structural fire

protection, including personnel and equipment. (http://

www.resilientmichigan.org/downloads/final_report_

miang_web.pdf)

 Address additional Grayling Fire Department personnel for structural fire suppression as part of the 5-year

update to the 2014 Crawford County Hazard Mitigation 

Plan and incorporate Camp Grayling JMTC seasonal demographic information under economic impact, as well 

as include Camp Grayling JMTC as a partner in developing and implementing this plan. (http://www.discovernortheastmichigan.org/docview.asp?did=430)

 Contract for an independent fire services needs study

using local and Camp Grayling JMTC resources. 

 Seek grants to fund study via NEMCOG and/or coordinate with Camp Grayling-funded study.

 Reevaluate the current contract and, if necessary, modify the contract based on the findings of the study.

Challenges

 If Camp Grayling JMTC increases its own fire protection

services or there are budget cuts from Lansing, there 

could be a loss of fire protection jobs in Grayling Fire

Department.

category

H

priority strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Research Camp Grayling JMTC

Residents

Grayling Fire Dept

County Econ. Dev. Lead

timeframe

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

timeframe

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

ACTION PLAN: FIRE PROTECTION AGREEMENT

ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY

ACTION PLAN: MILITARY OVERLAY ZONE

COMMUNITY OUTREACH

ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY

Grayling Fire Department
4-28 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Camp Grayling JMTC key issues 6 economic development

Challenges

 Limited staffing resources at Crawford County Transportation Authority Dial-A-Ride may limit ability to expand 

schedule. 

 Limited funding resources to implement Project Rising 

Tide economic development strategy.

 Soldiers have limited free time during training.

Strategy 6b.2: Local purchasing 

goal for Camp Grayling JMTC

Summary

Local purchasing goals for Camp Grayling JMTC would help 

establish an operating norm that acknowledges the importance of Camp Grayling JMTC on the surrounding economies regardless of changes in Camp Grayling leadership. 

Recommendations

 Work with MIARNG leadership in Lansing to identify and 

set local purchasing goals for Camp Grayling JMTC for 

goods and services not subject to federal and state contracting laws to demonstrate commitment to economic 

development of surrounding communities. 

 Track and report progress toward local purchasing goal 

for goods and services that are not subject to federal 

and state contracting laws to help quantify annual impact on local economy.

 As possible, inform chambers of commerce and local 

businesses know when troops will be in the local area.

Challenges

 Federal law controls contracting requirements, which often awards contracts to the lowest bidder. 

 May be difficult due to the contracting requirements for

goods and services over a certain dollar amount.

Strategy 6b.3: Expanded public transportation from Camp Grayling JMTC 

to surrounding communities to support military tourism

Summary

Additional public transportation options, such as a partnership with Gaylord public transportation services, or an 

extended schedule for Crawford County Transportation 

Authority Dial-A-Ride could allow trainees to shop, eat, and 

use local services within communities surrounding Camp 

Grayling JMTC. This would promote military tourism and increase the economic contributions of Camp Grayling JMTC 

to local communities. 

Recommendations

 Survey Camp Grayling JMTC about public transportation 

needs and share results with Gaylord public transportation providers and Crawford County Transportation Authority Dial-A-Ride. Continue partnerships and conversations already in progress.

 Coordinate a discussion session to identify challenges 

with expanding Dial-A-Ride services and identify other 

possible options for expanding public transportation 

services from Camp Grayling JMTC to local communities. 

 Participate in larger community-wide discussions about 

expanded Dial-A-Ride and other public transportation 

services through implementation of Project Rising Tide 

economic development strategy.

 Consider a pilot program with expanded Dial-A-Ride or 

other public transportation service and track both usage 

and economic impact.

Issue 6b continued:

Significant contributor to local economy

M

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Outreach Camp Grayling 

JMTC

Grayling Business 

Owners

County Econ. Dev. Lead

0 1 2 3 4 5 + category

M

priority timeframe strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Outreach City of Grayling

Grayling Business Owners

County Econ. Dev. Lead

Gaylord

Michigan Works!

0 1 2

5+ 4 3

Strategy 6b.4: Increase public use 

of the Grayling AAF

Summary

Expand commercial and/or general aviation uses at the 

Grayling AAF. 

Recommendations

 Foster ongoing dialog with Camp Grayling JMTC airfield

manager.

 Utilize the current remediation of runways as a way to 

promote an increase in both general and commercial 

aviation use. 

 Reach out to airlines about the addition of commercial 

flights to the airfield.

Challenges

 	Convincing an airline that commercial flights are economically viable.

 Coordinating nonmilitary aviation with military operations and security issues associated with a military-owned and -operated airfield.

L

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

DevelopmentCamp Grayling 

JMTC

Grayling Township

Camp Grayling

FAA, MDOT

County Econ. Dev. Lead

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

ACTION PLAN: ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY

ACTION PLAN: TRANSPORTATION STUDY

ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY

ACTION PLAN: INSTALLATION MASTER PLAN

ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 4-29

Camp Grayling JMTC key issues

economic development 6

Issue 6c: 

Economic incentivizing and monitoring

Strategy 6c.1: Economic tracking and reporting mechanisms to quantify 

annual military tourism impact

Summary

Quantifiable economic data on how dollars flow from soldiers training at Camp Grayling JMTC into surrounding 

communities would help communicate the contributions 

Camp Grayling JMTC makes to the local economy. This type 

of information would assist in communicating the benefits

of Camp Grayling JMTC to current residents, prospective 

home buyers, and decision makers at the local, state, and 

federal levels. 

Recommendations 

 Conduct benchmarking research on other Army National Guard and training installations’ efforts to track economic impact of operations on local communities. 

 Convene a brainstorming session to share benchmarking results and identify potential economic tracking 

mechanisms to monitor the spending flow from Camp

Grayling JMTC trainees in local communities. Mechanisms discussed during the JLUS process include a survey of Camp Grayling JMTC soldiers during their stay 

with an incentive to participate or a Camp Grayling JMTC 

discount card accepted at local businesses. 

 Identify the most feasible tracking mechanisms from the 

brainstorming session and develop a monitoring plan 

and reporting schedule.

 Share information about the economic monitoring initiative with Camp Grayling JMTC soldiers and families. 

 Collect data and analyze findings.

 Report to key stakeholders participating in brainstorming session.

 Identify next steps to adapt the monitoring approach 

based on findings.

 Prepare informational materials to share findings with

media, decision makers, and other key stakeholders.

 Consider forming a group like Target Alpena Economic 

Development Corp. to handle this strategy and involve 

community partners.

Challenges

 Resource limitations to support economic monitoring 

mechanism development and implementation over 

time. 

 Potential lack of widespread participation in tracking 

that will limit the ability to comprehensively quantify military tourism spending flow.

category

M

priority strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Outreach

City of 

Grayling

Camp Grayling

County Econ. Dev. Lead

Michigan Works!

Strategy 6c.2: Economic incentives 

to generate military tourism

Summary

Soldiers at Camp Grayling JMTC often bring family members 

into the area during training exercises. Local businesses 

will benefit if surrounding tourism bureaus work to create

incentives for soldiers’ families to extend their stay in the 

area before or after training. Discounts or vacation packages could create incentives that expand military tourism 

associated with Camp Grayling JMTC. 

Recommendations

 Convene a working session among tourism bureaus and 

local business representatives to identify possible incentives for trainees and their families 

 Identify and develop most feasible incentives.

 Create marketing campaign to promote incentives in 

partnership with Camp Grayling JMTC. 

 Create an identifier for businesses that give military discounts, such as a window sticker with a logo.

 Monitor incentive effectiveness.

 Report findings to work group.

 Adapt incentives based on findings.

Challenges

 Resource limitations to support working group efforts

and campaign to market incentives. 

M

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Regulatory Camp Grayling

City of Grayling

Grayling Township

Chamber of 

Commerce

County Econ. Dev. Lead

0 1 2 3 4 5 + timeframe

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

ACTION PLAN: ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY

ACTION PLAN: ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY
4-30 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

M

category priority strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Alpena CRTC

NEMCOG

NEMCOG

Residents

timeframe

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

M

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Regulatory NEMCOG NEMCOG

Alpena Regional 

Airport

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Summary

Residential encroachment around airports and other military training areas, ensures conflict between these incompatible land uses. Establishing military and airfield overlay

zone regulations will help reduce encroachment of incompatible land uses near these activities, identified as disturbing to residents.

Recommendations

 Community leaders should review existing zoning regulations and establish or bolster military and airfield overlay zones designed to prevent conflict between incompatible land uses. These zones should restrict land use 

around airports and military installations to industrial or 

agricultural uses and strictly disallow residential, commercial, or community functions.

Additional Information

Noise contours and airfield imaginary surface maps should

be used when establishing the boundaries of these restrictive overlay zones. The 65 ADNL noise contour should establish the closest proximity that residential neighborhoods 

should be allowed near airports. Also, no residences should 

be allowed within clear zones or accident potential zones or 

within the approach departure corridors of the major runways.

Summary

Training for fighter jet aircraft is often conducted at high

speeds and low altitudes due to the necessity of pilots being able to operate under those conditions when in wartime situations that require detection avoidance for close 

air support activities. These activities, that are often considered dangerous to non-participating aircraft, are directed 

by criteria to be conducted within SUA like designated and 

activated MOAs. The MOA over Alpena and the surrounding area is called the Pike West MOA and it is established 

between a floor of 6,000 feet above MSL and a ceiling of

18,000 feet above MSL. Over Lake Huron exists the Pike 

East MOA, which is established with a floor of 300 feet

above ground level (or surface of the water) and a ceiling 

equal to the Pike West MOA. This suggests that low altitude 

training is conducted over Lake Huron or at altitudes well 

above disturbing levels.

This does not however, include the need for take-off and

landing from Alpena County Regional Airport, which by its 

nature requires low altitude flight near the airfield. These

activities are typically conducted at the slowest speeds possible. Jet traffic also occurs along what are know as MTRs,

when pilots need to transit from one place to another. 

These routes exist at 500 feet AGL for slow speed visual 

flight rules (VFR) flight and between 1,500 feet above MSL

to 18,000 feet above MSL for fast movers. That altitude is 

high enough to effectively eliminate the disruption.

Outreach

Strategy 1a.2: Discourage 

residential uses via zoning

Strategy 1a.1: Educate the public on the flight paths used for military 

aircraft

Issue 1a:

Training/aircraft operations are too low/fast

Recommendations

 Identify specific locations of stated disruption and determine the reason for those flights, what altitudes,

velocities and types of aircraft are flying. Acquiring tail

identification of the aircraft, aircraft type, date and time

of the incident will allow for more specific identification

in order to determine the purpose of those flights. This

data can then be used to evaluate the need for changes 

to operating procedures or the need for change of flight

paths.

 Completion of a noise study as described in Camp Grayling JMTC Strategy 1a.1 will also help determine trouble 

spots and potential encroachments on military training 

areas.

Alpena CRTC key issues 1 noise

M

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

NEMCOG Alpena Regional 

Airport

Alpena CRTC

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Summary

The FAA, airport air traffic controllers, and military operations personnel regularly work to define flight paths of air

traffic as a means to deconflict disturbance to citizens living near areas of operation. Input from residents on known 

disturbance areas, types of disruption, times, altitudes, etc. 

can help them better adjust to the needs of the community.

Recommendations

 Community leaders working with the controlling entities 

should hold regular townhall-style meetings to discuss 

air traffic as it relates to disturbances identified in the

community. This will give valuable data to controllers 

and give residents an opportunity to air their grievances.

 Airport noise abatement procedures (NAPs) should be 

reviewed and adjusted to reduce disturbances.

 Completion of the noise study recommended in Alpena 

CRTC Strategy 1a.6 will provide necessary information 

for decision making and evaluation of complaints.

 For specifically identified sensitive areas, work with officials from Alpena CRTC to evaluate operations to see if 

changes can be made that would allow for a higher floor

level over the identified location. If acceptable, work with

installations, airspace managers, and the FAA to alter 

navigational charts and procedures to establish no-fly

zones with a floor of 1,500 feet above MSL or higher.

Outreach

Strategy 1a.3: Work with FAA and 

Alpena Regional Airport to control 

aircraft flight paths
1 Alpena CRTC key issues

noise

Issue 1a continued:

Training/aircraft operations are too low/fast

Strategy 1a.4: Create a military overlay zone for Alpena CRTC

Summary

Given the relative distance between the City of Alpena and 

the Alpena CRTC, operational interaction between the two 

has been limited. There are, however, still areas of low-density development that surround the Alpena CRTC that could 

be affected by its operations.

Applying an overlay zone that does not allow for new residential or commercial development in the APZ associated 

with the Alpena County Regional Airport and Alpena CRTC is 

recommended. The overlay zone should restrict all residential and commercial development within the APZ. Further 

study should be completed to determine the intensity of 

uses allowed in the overlay zone. For example, the study 

should examine whether light industrial uses such as a personal storage facility could be allowed or if the zone should 

be more restrictive and only allow for agricultural uses.

Creation of an overlay zone will help protect the residents 

and business already in the area, and it will help limit the 

amount of new development that could encroach on Alpena CRTC in the next 5 to 30 years. The new Alpena overlay 

zone will be created with the following elements: 

 ACCIDENT POTENTIAL ZONES (APZS): Currently the 

APZs have minimal amounts of development, however, 

future denser development that could occur will need to 

be addressed with additional regulation that match FAA 

height restrictions.

 MUNITIONS STORAGE AREA (MSA): Given the highly 

explosive and volatile nature of munitions the overlay 

zone will include a one-mile buffer that will surround the

MSA. This portion of the overlay zone will likely include 

use restrictions due to the nature of the storage area. 

 DROP ZONE/NOISE: Operations in this area could be of 

issue and necessitate the creation of a one-mile buffer

in this area. The main issue will be noise not only in the 

drop zone area, but throughout the other parts of the 

CRTC. A noise study will need to be conducted in the 

future to help refine the boundaries of this part of the

overlay. 

Recommendations 

 Language for the overlay zone should be drafted by a 

legal team specializing in land use law and code development. The legal team will review the zoning for any 

potential takings. If a taking is identified, funds for reimbursement would be established.

 Work with community leaders such as city and county planning departments to change zoning maps and 

codes to identify the areas around military installations 

and ranges as military overlay zones. Use noise contour 

data as defined in Strategy 1a.5 and new data once noise

study is complete to define the extent of the overlay

zone following guidance for acceptable noise levels per 

function. Establish restrictions that only allow compatible land uses in these zones.

 Include a reference to Alpena CRTC in site plan review 

standards in local zoning ordinances.

 Consider establishing similar restrictions under known 

flight paths (see Strategy 1a.3), keeping in mind that

flight paths may change to suit different types of military

training in the future.

 Establish zoning overlays for airport runway clear zones 

that extend beyond the border of the installation. These 

should restrict all development so as to adhere to the 

applicable airfield criteria.

category

H

priority strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Regulatory

NEMCOG

Planners Residents

timeframe

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

ACTION PLAN: MILITARY OVERLAY ZONE

RPZ

MSA

Main

Base Drop Zone

Lower South

Branch

Thunder

Bay

Thunder

Bay

River

Long Rapids Rd

ST32

Maple Ridge Township

Alpena Township

Long Rapids Rd

Haken Rd

Sandal

Lake Winyah Rd

Glennie Rd

Winyah Lake Rd

Cathro Rd

Sportsmen Dr

1st Ave

Daisy Ln

King Settlement Rd

2nd Ave

Geronimo Rd

Indian Reserve Rd

3rd Ave

Winyah Dr

A St

Hayter Ln

Fern Ln

High Banks Dr Highland Ct

4 Mile Rd

Peninsula Dr

Sitting Bull Rd

Elizabeth St

Kemnitz Rd

Mosquito Ln

Oakridge Dr

Old Mill Rd

JLUS 2-Mile Study Area

Alpena CRTC

Township Boundary

Possible Military Overlay Zone

Runway Protection Zone

Approach/Departure Zone

Primary Surface

7:1 Transitional Surface

WI

MI

Lake

Huron

MI

0 Z 1

Miles

Zoning

Agriculture

Airport

Commercial

Industrial

Natural Resources/Open Space

Residential

Water Body

Figure 4.5 | Sample Military Overlay Zone

CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 4-31
4-32 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Research Alpena CRTC

NEMCOG H Residents

category priority timeframe

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Alpena CRTC key issues 1/2 noise/military operations

M

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Regulatory City/county Residents

Alpena CRTC

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Summary

Update local building codes so that the noise level within 

structures that exist within the 65 ADNL area can be reduced to optimal noise levels.

Recommendations

 Update building codes for applicable governing entities.

 Create incentives for existing buildings to update their 

soundproofing.

 Optimize available federal funding for sound abatement.

Challenges

 Creating increased soundproofing could cause an increase in price for new structures.

 Developers may be unwilling to build in areas where 

soundproofing is required as a response to the increase

in regulations.

 Monetary aid for existing residents to upgrade their 

structures could be limited and may not be enough to 

cover the full costs. 

Strategy 1a.5: Update building 

codes to include better sound 

proofing for buildings built within 

the 65 ADNL noise area

Issue 1a continued: 

Training/aircraft operations are too low/fast

Summary

The noise analysis provided by Alpena CRTC in support of 

the JLUS is part of the Alpena CRTC 2016 IDP EA. "NoiseMap" 

is the name of the model within the Air Force that generated the noise contours. An AICUZ study will need to contain 

noise compatibility and CZ analysis. The assessment from 

the EA provides a basis for assessing noise and land use 

impacts from noise at the airport form the IDP projects. It is 

not an AICUZ but is a good starting point for a plan. The EA 

noise assessment could be combined with an APZ assessment as shown for Camp Grayling. That information along 

with land use parcel data can be used to develop an AICUZ 

plan since the data is, the time of publication of the final

JLUS, less than 5 years old.

 This data could be used to inform and direct guidance for 

changes to military and installation operations or to create 

zoning regulations to prevent encroachment.

Recommendations

 Contract the collection and analysis of providing ADNL 

contours for the entire region, specifically including areas that have been identified as bothersome to community members.

 Use that information when making zoning regulation 

changes to eliminate residential, commercial or service 

functions from being sited within the 65 ADNL contour.

 Work with the military to alter training activities so as 

to reduce the noise impact to existing sensitive areas 

Strategy 1a.6: Conduct an AICUZ study 

Summary

For many years, possibly as early as WWI or prior, live munitions have been hurled into Lake Huron. Through the establishment of the Lake Huron Marine Sanctuary and subsequent research and investigation, many shipwrecks and 

debris from military activities have been identified. This includes recent finds of unexploded munitions on the lake

bed. The activity of firing munitions, albeit necessary for

training, will result in changes to the environment. 

Recommendations

 Work with the NOAA ONMS, Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary, the EPA, and the State of Michigan to 

contract a study of the environmental impact of military 

training activities over and within the R-4207 range on 

wildlife, historic and archaeological preservation, recreation, commercial uses of the lake, and military training 

requirements.

 The CRTC in conjunction with the US Navy and US Coast 

Guard should conduct a survey of the waters in and surrounding the range to determine if any UXO or dangerous conditions exist. These areas at the very least should 

be identified and protected from accidental or intentional intrusion with focus on the adjacent Marine Sanctuary, where a great deal of underwater activity occurs.

Strategy 2a.1: Identify impacts to 

the environment

Issue 2a: 

Live munition impacts to 

Lake Huron

ACTION PLAN: MILITARY OVERLAY ZONE

NOISE STUDY

ACTION PLAN: MILITARY OVERLAY ZONE NOISE STUDY 

where possible. Note: In many cases, existing ranges 

cannot be relocated or inactivated because of economic 

and logistical reasons.

 Provide residents already living within the 65 ADNL contour with information about how to mitigate noise (see 

Strategy 1a.2).

 GIS of the APZs will need to be obtained along with the 

GIS for the noise contours. A precise analysis of incompatible land use can be completed during the implementation phase of the JLUS when GIS data layers are made 

available

H

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Research NEMCOG Alpena CRTC

NEMCOG Community

NOAA

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

ACTION PLAN: BATHYMETRIC SURVEY 

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY INTERAGENCY COORDINATION
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 4-33

Summary

The annual Northern Strike military exercise, and others 

like it, bring large numbers of military and associated civilian personnel, equipment, aircraft, vehicles and activity to 

the region. These events bring a much-needed boost to the 

local economy and are embraced by the community.

However, the community should plan and prepare for the 

event as thoroughly as the military does. This should involve dissemination of information about events, shared 

activities, services offered and help wanted. They should

prepare briefings and informational packages for military

personnel to help them find what they are after and educate them on how to avoid areas that should be off-limits

to military personnel. The community-military partnership 

is key to a successful event of this magnitude. Getting the 

community involved and engaged will help them reduce the 

negative impacts while more directly realizing the benefits.

Recommendations

 Organize and engage community members and leadership in preparing for these events well in advance. Invest 

in making the events more profitable to the community.

 Work with all the relative factions of the military to educate them on what is available, allowed, unwanted, etc. 

about these events. And likewise, get educated by them 

on what their needs are so as best to prepare for the 

event.

 Hold a townhall style meeting with members of the community and military well in advance of these events to 

provide information about the event so as to educate all 

Strategy 2b.1: Organize and engage community members in advance

Issue 2b:

Northern Strike activity

and share ideas to make the events more successful for 

everyone involved.

 Add key community members to distribution list, including Alpena Chamber of Commerce. 

2

Issue 2c:

Marine sanctuary

Strategy 2c.1: Identify potential 

UXO on the lake bed

Summary

Because military training has been conducted over Lake 

Huron for decades, there is a potential for unexploded ordnance to exist outside the boundaries of the current training range. This possibility posses a risk to human exploration of the Marine Sanctuary and could impact its proposed 

expansion.

Recommendations

 Complete a baseline review or environmental analysis 

of the area and research historic operations in the area.

 Work with the military (Alpena CRTC, Navy and Coast 

Guard) to identify potential UXO on the lake-bed. This 

should be in conjunction with the study proposed in 

Issue 2a.1. If any evidence is found, mitigate findings

as best as possible. If anything dangerous is found at 

a depth that could threaten safety, a DOD team can be 

brought in to mitigate the UXO.

H

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Regulatory

Research

Alpena CRTC

NOAA

NEMCOG

U.S. Navy

U.S. Coast Guard

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Strategy 2c.2: Establish fixed 

boundaries so that encroachment 

into the military operations area is 

kept to a minimum

Summary

The Lake Huron Marine Sanctuary encompasses areas that 

are used by the military for bombing exercises, and the 

boundary was recently expanded. 

Recommendations 

 Create a bathymetric survey of the Marine Sanctuary 

and bombing areas.

 Identify areas in Lake Huron that will be used for bombing training and preservation.

 Update navigational/aeronautical maps of Lake Huron 

to reflect bombing areas and the Marine Sanctuary.

 Continue to fund economic analyses with a focus on the 

primary areas used for bombing. Seek alternate funding 

from other entities besides the National Guard Bureau.

 Codify SOPs regarding identifying sanctuary artifacts, 

both manmade and biological.

 Coordinate NGB/NOAA efforts and communication.

Challenges

 Surveys will be costly, time consuming, and hard to fund.

H

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Regulatory

Research

Marine Sanctuary Alpena CRTC

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Alpena CRTC key issues

military operations

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Outreach NEMCOG

Alpena CRTC

Camp Grayling M Community leaders

category priority timeframe

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

ACTION PLAN: COMMUNITY OUTREACH

ACTION PLAN: BATHYMETRIC SURVEY

INTERAGENCY COOPERATION

ACTION PLAN: MILITARY OVERLAY ZONE

NOISE STUDY
4-34 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Alpena CRTC key issues 2/3 military operations/environmental

Strategy 3a.1: Improve public outreach and access to information

Summary

Residents near the Alpena CRTC are concerned about the 

safety of their drinking water since the detection announcements in 2017. The health effects and extent of contamination are still being researched and are not completely understood, which contributes to citizen concern about health 

and economic impacts. Continuing and improving ongoing 

communications between Alpena CRTC and surrounding 

residents through public meetings, print and electronic media, and MDEQ call center assistance will help provide updated information, mitigate uncertainties, and ensure that 

those affected have access to exposure mitigation options

while enhancing public relations.

Recommendations 

 Maintain the links on the Alpena CRTC home page to 

Michigan.gov PFAs contamination information pages 

and EPA PFA/PFC information pages, and consider adding some summary status information associated with 

the link.

 Increase non web-based outreach to residents.

 Continue to hold frequent town hall public meetings 

during the monitoring project.

 Increase transparency about how wells are selected for 

testing.

 Consider staff increases at Alpena CRTC to help with outreach.

 Leverage existing water quality program and publicize 

its benefits.

Challenges

 Efforts may require dedicating additional personnel time

to update the base website content, create information 

sheets, and coordinate print campaigns.

Issue 3a:

PFOS and PFOA contamination of groundwater

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Outreach Alpena CRTC

MDEQ

M Residents

category priority timeframe

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Strategy 2c.3: Author and promote cooperation story with Thunder Bay 

National Marine Sanctuary

Summary

The DOD Alpena CRTC practice bombing range lies just east 

of the 4,300 square mile NOAA – State of Michigan Thunder 

May National Marine Sanctuary. Interagency cooperation 

has developed since the 2014 Sanctuary expansion and 

includes sharing vessels for dive platforms and other cooperative activities. The Air Force/Air National Guard work 

in close cooperation with Sanctuary personnel to maintain 

the integrity of preserved sites and the ecology within the 

Sanctuary. The public has expressed concerns about the effects of UXO on both water quality/ecological health of Lake 

Huron and the effects of practice bombing on the archaeological sites in the Sanctuary.

Recommendations 

 Create story content on interagency cooperation, including maps and anecdotes about actual activities such as 

sharing vessels for towing targets and as dive platforms. 

Also, explain safety and environmental health risks associated with munitions use in the lake to educate the 

public. 

 Provide a base webpage link to MDEQ. Distribute story via web link on base home page and have available 

script for public meetings and outreach.

 Work with MIANG public affairs to further publicize work

being doing at the sanctuary.

Challenges

 Requires personnel time to create narrative.

Additional Information

The Sanctuary works with community partners including the 

CRTC to improve public safety on and below the water. The 

Sanctuary has participated in diving and boating accident 

drills designed to test emergency responses from several 

agencies, including the U.S. Coast Guard, Alpena Combat 

Readiness Training Center, Alpena Central Dispatch, Alpena 

County Sheriff’s Department, Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Mid-Michigan Medical Center-Alpena, and 

Alpena Fire Department. NOAA personnel who can help develop the cooperative story.

NOAA also produces joint education programs and other 

activities that could be promoted more widely.

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Research

Outreach

NEMCOG

NOAA

Marine Sanctuary M MDEQ

category priority timeframe

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Issue 2c continued:

Marine sanctuary

ACTION PLAN: COMMUNITY OUTREACH

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY

INTERAGENCY COOPERATION

ACTION PLAN: COMMUNITY OUTREACH

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 4-35

3 Alpena CRTC key issues

environmental

Strategy 3b.1: Support water quality 

and aquatic ecology scientific 

communications 

Summary

Public interest in water quality and aquatic ecological 

health is spurred by topics such as chemical contamination, fish advisories, nutrient pollution, sedimentation, climate change, habitat loss, and invasive species. There is a 

wide range of research and data available describing water 

quality, sediment quality, and the health of aquatic environments and species, but it can be challenging for citizens to 

identify and access appropriate and accurate information 

to satisfy questions and concerns. Sometimes there are 

public misperceptions about the location and sources of 

contamination, including incorrectly attributing causes to 

base operations. 

Recommendations 

 Develop an information link on the base home page that 

summarizes facts and organizes resource links concerning surface water quality and aquatic ecological health in 

Alpena CRTC watersheds.

 Include a narrative on overall water quality and aquatic 

ecological health as prepared response for public meetings concerned with PFOS groundwater contamination.

 Reconvene the 2004 Thunder Bay Watershed Initiative 

to develop a Thunder Bay Regional Water Master Plan.

Issue 3b: 

Surface water quality (lakes, rivers, streams, wetlands)

Strategy 3c.1: Provide information to the public on groundwater 

contamination in the Alpena CRTC area 

Summary

Groundwater contamination in the Alpena CRTC area results from exposure to a wide range of toxic compounds, 

chemicals, metals, and petroleum byproducts that are introduced into soils and groundwater from industrial, manufacturing, and transportation activities. While the PFA contamination issue receives the most attention, public comments 

from town hall meetings have demonstrated concern with 

groundwater contamination from other sources, with specific concerns expressed about contamination from munitions. Munitions are expended at the small arms range facility at Alpena CRTC; however the primary training is done 

at the ranges at Camp Grayling JMTC and over Lake Huron.

Recommendations 

 Provide a base webpage link to MDEQ information regarding groundwater contamination – this should include the link to DEQ Online Services, which includes 

their Environmental Mapper utility. 

 Provide current bulletins on spills and plume status (as 

available) for any sites on base in a bulleted format via 

website and as a script for public inquiries. 

 Create a chart of known sites for specific pollutants, potential pollution sites, and steps the base takes to mitigate hazards.

Challenges

 Requires personnel time to maintain bulletins and webpage.

Issue 3c:

Groundwater quality

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Outreach Alpena CRTC

Residents

M MDNR

category priority timeframe

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Strategy 3b.2: Use biodegradable 

targets for lake training

Summary

Alpena CRTC operations have begun using biodegradable 

targets for munitions operations over Lake Huron. In 2017, 

they also began retrieving the targets that were not destroyed or sunk. 

Recommendations

 Continue current practices and research ways to improve.

 Consult with NOAA for more ideas on how to increase 

sustainability.

H

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Regulatory

Research

Alpena CRTC NOAA

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

ACTION PLAN: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY

INTERAGENCY COOPERATION

H

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Outreach Alpena CRTC MDEQ

Residents

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

ACTION PLAN: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY

INTERAGENCY COOPERATION

ACTION PLAN: COMMUNITY OUTREACH

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY
4-36 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Issue 4b: Airport joint 

ownership/land use access

Strategy 4b.1: Continue positive 

coordination

H

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Outreach Alpena CRTC/

Alpena Airport

N/A

Summary

A long-term lease is in place for the National Guard use of 

the Alpena Regional Airport. Collaboration between the entities ensures strong relationships and coordinated planning efforts in the future.

Recommendations

 Continue Airport Committee monthly meetings. 

 Coordinate regular updates with the military and public 

regarding the terminal construction. 

 Continue to weigh effects on military operations when

considering economic development opportunities related to the airport and nearby land uses. 

 Consider updating the airport master plan. 

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Issue 4c:

Road funding

Strategy 4c.1: Continue discussion 

between county and military 

officials

M

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Research

Outreach

Alpena CRTC Alpena City, 

Township, County

Summary

Road condition in the surrounding community affects military residents traveling to and from Alpena CRTC on M-32. 

Funding solutions that support Alpena CRTC and the community should be studied. While the military is unlikely to 

be able to fund road improvements, Alpena CRTC could 

provide publicity for the issue and potentially speak to the 

governor's office about the issue.

Recommendations

 Investigate funding options for improvements.

 Develop materials for public outreach campaign. 

 Set regular meetings with the governor's office and

MIANG personnel to discuss such issues.

 Communicate military transportation projects with local 

officials.

Challenges

 Funding for road improvements and maintenance is a 

state-wide issue.

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Alpena CRTC key issues 4 transportation and infrastructure

Issue 4a:

Effects of growth on utilities

Strategy 4a.1: Address utilities 

issues at Alpena CRTC

L

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Regulatory Alpena CRTC Alpena City, 

Township, County

Summary

In accordance with the Alpena CRTC Installation Development Plan, projects to address aging and insufficient systems in order to accommodate current and possible future 

missions should be funded and executed. 

Recommendations

 Upgrade the water distribution system and add a booster pump.

 Develop an agreement with Alpena Township to address 

maintenance issues. 

Challenges

 Energy improvements and ensuring service may be dependent on private companies in some cases. 

 Funding is inadequate to replace infrastructure.

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Strategy 4a.2: Plan for possible 

mission expansion

Summary

The utility requirements of additions to or expansion of 

training missions should be investigated and integrated 

into existing installation plans.

Recommendations

 Update the existing energy assessment. 

 Align growth with existing sustainability and net-zero 

plans, which may include implementation of new sources of renewable energy.

 Educate public on potential for mission expansion and 

share NGB vision for the future of Alpena CRTC.

Challenges

 Energy improvements and ensuring service may be dependent on private companies in some cases. 

 Turnover at the installation can be problematic for longterm planning efforts.

M

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Regulatory Alpena CRTC Alpena County

Residents

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

ACTION PLAN: MILITARY OVERLAY ZONE ACTION PLAN: COMMUNITY OUTREACH

INTERAGENCY COOPERATION

ACTION PLAN: COMMUNITY OUTREACH

TRANSPORTATION PLAN
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 4-37

Issue 4d:

Road condition

Strategy 4d.1: Increase funding for 

road projects and maintenance

Summary

Road projects are costly, and aging roads and bridges pose 

significant maintenance problems throughout the area that

cannot all be addressed through the current limited funding availability and streams. 

Recommendations

 Align road and infrastructure projects and schedules to 

save costs.

 Update the Alpena Area-Wide Transportation Plan.

 Utilize PASER, traffic counts, and historical traffic accident data to prioritize projects. 

 Pursue a public-private partnership (P3), particularly for 

areas of new development.

 Investigate funding agreements with the military for 

county roadway maintenance. 

Challenges

 Grant proposals take time and money to develop and do 

not always yield funding. 

 The military and private companies may not be interested in partnerships. 

H

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Funding County/City/

Township

Residents

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Strategy 4e.1: Determine whether 

allowing lake access is viable

Summary

Allowing public access to Lake Winyah's southern side 

would increase opportunities for local and tourist recreational activities such as kayaking and fishing.

Recommendations

 Determine whether there are any security or ATFP issues associated with allowing access near Alpena CRTC. 

 Invite public participation in the process to ensure voices are heard and all issues are communicated.

 Publicize any future access to draw tourists and base 

personnel to increased recreational opportunities.

Challenges

 Any potential development must be coordinated with 

ATFP and security officials as well as airport officials.

L

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Regulatory

Research

Alpena CRTC/

Alpena Airport

Residents

MDNR

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Issue4e:

Recreational access 

Alpena CRTC key issues

transportation/community partnerships 4/5

Issue 5a:

Communications/education

Strategy 5a.1: Hire a dedicated 

community relations specialist for 

Alpena CRTC

H

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Outreach Alpena CRTC

MIANG

Residents

Summary

Comprehensive and timely communication with community residents and other key stakeholders is a challenge 

without a dedicated community relations specialist for Alpena CRTC. Communicating controversial issues, such as 

concerns about groundwater contamination, magnifies this

challenge. A dedicated community relations specialist will 

allow Alpena CRTC to create and implement a robust communications and public relations strategy. 

Recommendations

 Review community relations and communication needs 

for Alpena CRTC. Discuss with community relations specialist at Camp Grayling JMTC for benchmarking and 

planning insight. 

 Present communications and community relations 

needs to Michigan Air National Guard in Lansing for consideration. 

 Once a specialist is in place, develop and implement a 

multifaceted communications strategy for Alpena CRTC.

Challenges

 Federal budget limitations to hire a community relations 

specialist to support more robust efforts.

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Strategy 5a.2: Improve the update 

process for Alpena CRTC website

M

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Outreach Alpena CRTC

MIANG

Residents

Summary

Updates to the Alpena CRTC website are centralized through 

the Michigan Air National Guard website and involve a centralized process coordinated through Lansing. This process 

can hamper the ability to keep the webpage up to date. Alpena CRTC staff can work with the Michigan Air National

Guard to explore ideas for expediting and streamlining the 

process for website updates. 

Recommendations

 Engage in a discussion with Michigan Air National Guard 

Public Affairs staff in Lansing for ideas on how to keep

the Alpena CRTC webpage relevant with new educational 

content and expedite the process for webpage updates. 

 Ensure the Alpena CRTC website reflects a broader suite

of informational and educational resources for a community audience, rather than just potential visiting units. 

Challenges

 Limited Michigan Air National Guard Public Affairs staff

in Lansing to implement changes in an expedited manner. 

 Michigan Air National Guard social media and website 

requirements that preclude an expedited process to update the Alpena CRTC website.

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

ACTION PLAN: TRANSPORTATION PLAN ACTION PLAN: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY

TRANSPORTATION PLAN

ACTION PLAN: COMMUNITY OUTREACH ACTION PLAN: COMMUNITY OUTREACH
4-38 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Strategy 5a.6: Revise respective 

zoning ordinances for government 

entities within the APZ 

Summary

Update local zoning codes to restrict height of new structures within the APZs. Any new structure must undergo a 

review to ensure compliance with new zoning codes. Require new facilities to match height limits mandated by the 

APZ and require site plan review for any new structure built 

on a property within the APZ. 

Recommendations

 Update zoning codes in all applicable governmental entities.

 Zoning code update will also include a site review component for new structures in the APZ.

 Create a survey and registry of any current building that 

does not meet the new requirements. 

Challenges

 Increase of regulatory requirements for residents and 

businesses.

 Restricts landowners’ use of their property.

 May dissuade economic development in affected areas.

H

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Regulatory Developers

Residents

Local Governments

0 1 2 3 4 5

Alpena Townships

NEMCOG

5 Alpena CRTC key issues

community partnerships

Issue 5a continued:

Communications/education

Strategy 5a.5: Formalize 

communications with NOAA 

regarding operations over Thunder 

Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

M

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Outreach Alpena CRTC Residents

Summary

Alpena CRTC operations take place over Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary, requiring regular communication 

with NOAA to ensure continued protection of the sanctuary. Formalizing the communication mechanisms between 

Alpena CRTC and NOAA will promote better information exchange and identify coordinated educational opportunities. 

Recommendations

 Schedule an initial discussion session between Alpena CRTC, NOAA, and other key community partners to 

identify communication needs related to Alpena CRTC 

operations and Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

protection and promotion. 

 Develop communication strategy and schedule based 

on issues raised during discussion session.

 Implement and formalize a mechanism for regular communication between NOAA and Alpena CRTC. 

Challenges

 Lack of community relations personnel at Alpena CRTC 

makes it hard for the base and NOAA to engage in communications strategy development and implementation. 

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Strategy 5a.3: Promote STARBASE 

as an asset connected to Alpena 

CRTC

M

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Outreach Alpena CRTC Residents

Summary

Students attending classes at STARBASE have the opportunity to tour Alpena CRTC facilities. Educational materials 

about Alpena CRTC appropriate for students could be distributed through STARBASE to be shared with families. This 

would help educate more community residents about the 

operations and economic benefits of Alpena CRTC. 

Recommendations

 Work with Michigan Air National Guard, Alpena CRTC 

staff, and community partners to create educational materials about Alpena CRTC that address unique functions 

and economic benefits, as well as career opportunities.

 Distribute materials to community partners, including 

local educators, for feedback.

 Revise as necessary.

 Distribute educational materials to STARBASE students 

and families.

Challenges

 Limited time and resources for Alpena CRTC to develop 

educational materials without dedicated community relations staff.

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Strategy 5a.4: Strengthen 

existing partnership with Alpena 

Community College

M

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Outreach Alpena CRTC Residents

Summary

Previous educational collaboration can serve as a foundation to reevaluate and strengthen the partnership between 

Alpena CRTC and Alpena Community College to provide 

more courses, training opportunities, and scholarships. 

Recommendations

 Convene a working group between current Alpena CRTC 

leadership and Alpena Community College to discuss 

past educational collaboration successes and brainstorm potential new partnerships. 

 Develop implementation strategy for working group recommendations, including activities, responsible parties, 

schedule, and resource needs.

 Implement priority educational collaborations. 

 Announce new opportunities to the community, leveraging community partnerships to distribute information.

 Involve Alpena Community College in military affairs

council via Chamber of Commerce. 

 Look into job shadowing opportunities.

Challenges

 Limited time and resources for Alpena CRTC to provide 

on-site training, offer courses, provide equipment, or

contribute to scholarship funds. 

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

ACTION PLAN: COMMUNITY OUTREACH

ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY

ACTION PLAN: COMMUNITY OUTREACH

ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY

ACTION PLAN: COMMUNITY OUTREACH

INTERAGENCY COOPERATION

ACTION PLAN: MILITARY OVERLAY ZONE
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 4-39

Strategy 5b.2: Inform community 

on process to request tours and 

participation in community events

M

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Outreach Alpena CRTC Residents

Summary

The process for requesting tours and involvement in events 

is not readily available to the public. Making the process and 

criteria available in several forms would help local partners. 

Recommendations

 Develop a concise document on the availability of group 

tours, the tour timeframe and content, and the process 

for requesting, including lead time necessary to schedule a tour and the necessary request forms. 

 Develop a document on the availability of Alpena CRTC 

to participate in community events. Include the criteria 

for events, options for participation (e.g., color guard, 

speaker, fly over), and provide the necessary forms.

 Provide overview of the process on Michigan Air National 

Guard website, Alpena CRTC Facebook page, and other 

tools possibly developed in near term (e.g., newsletter).

 Establish a process for responding to requests. 

 Document in an overall SOP for future reference.

Challenges

 Limited time and resources for Alpena CRTC without 

dedicated community relations specialist.

 Possible need for review of processes by MIANG public 

affairs staff.

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Issue 5b:

Public relations/community involvement

Strategy 5b.1: Convene expanded 

Alpena CRTC Community Council 

with Alpena Area Chamber of 

Commerce

Summary

Using the organizational model suggested by the Alpena 

Area Chamber of Commerce (see Appendix A), Alpena CRTC 

can assist in convening the Alpena CRTC Community Council. This group would leverage community partnerships to 

support Alpena CRTC with public relations, economic valuation, visiting unit support services, and military family support services. 

Recommendations 

 Review Alpena Area Chamber of Commerce proposal to 

expand the Alpena CRTC Community Council with Alpena CRTC leadership. 

 Convene a planning session to develop a formal strategy for the Alpena CRTC Community Council, including 

membership, goals, schedule, and priority activities. 

 Evaluate council's effectiveness over time.

 Report on Alpena CRTC Community Council successes 

to Alpena CRTC leadership and key community partners. 

Challenges

 Alpena CRTC resource limitations to participate, particularly without a dedicated community relations specialist. 

 Potential requirements for MIANG to review communications materials prior to distribution.

M

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Outreach Alpena CRTC Residents

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

5/6 Alpena CRTC key issues

community partnerships/economic development

Issue 6a: 

Significant contributor to local economy

Strategy 6a.1: Local purchasing goal for Alpena CRTC

Summary

Commitment to spending Alpena CRTC funding at locally 

owned businesses is a priority by Alpena CRTC. Local purchasing goals for Alpena CRTC would help establish an operating norm that acknowledges the importance of Alpena 

CRTC on the surrounding local economies and would be 

less likely to change with changes in Alpena CRTC leadership over time. 

MIANG has been consolidated and all but two contracting 

officers in the State are located at Selfridge ANGB. Contracting has set-aside goals for each year for HUBZone, 8a, and 

Small Business companies. 

While Alpena CRTC personnel prefer to award work to NEMI 

contractors, the decisions are made at Selfridge ANGB and 

they consistently award Alpena CRTC work to SEMI contractors. 

Recommendations

 Work with leadership in Michigan Air National Guard to 

identify and set local purchasing goals for Alpena CRTC 

for goods and services not subject to federal and state 

contracting laws to demonstrate commitment to economic development of surrounding communities. 

 Track and report progress toward local purchasing goal 

for goods and services that are not subject to federal 

and state contracting laws to help quantify annual impact on local economy.

 As possible, inform chambers of commerce and local 

ACTION PLAN: INTERAGENCY COOPERATION

ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY

ACTION PLAN: COMMUNITY OUTREACH

ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY

businesses when troops will be in the local area.

 Chamber of Commerce should work with Alpena CRTC 

Contracting Office to make sure our local contractors

are aware and understand the set-aside goals of MIANG.

 Chamber of Commerce should contact the Alpena CRTC 

Contracting Office and formally protest that the recent

set-aside contracts have consistently excluded NEMI 

contractors.

L

category priority timeframe strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Outreach

Research Alpena CRTC

Business owners

Target Alpena

ACTION PLAN: ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY

0 1 2 3 4 5 +
4-40 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Alpena CRTC key issues 6 economic development

Strategy 6c.1: Maintain relationship 

with CRTC and advocate for longerterm contract

Summary

Current contract extension will require Alpena County Sheriff’s Department to compete for longer-term contract to

provide services.

Recommendations

 Continue to provide excellent security services during 

contract extension period. 

Challenges

 State of Michigan requires competitive bid for award of 

contract to provide services 

M

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Regulatory Alpena CRTC

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

Issue 6c:

Partnership with sheriff

Strategy 6d.1: Economic incentives to generate military tourism 

Summary

Soldiers often bring family members into the area during 

training exercises. Local businesses will benefit if surrounding tourism bureaus work to create incentives for families 

to extend their stay in the area. Discounts or vacation packages could create incentives that expand military tourism 

associated with Alpena CRTC. 

Recommendations 

 Convene a working session among tourism bureaus, local business representatives, and government entities 

such as NOAA to identify possible incentives for Alpena 

CRTC trainees and their families to extend their visit and 

expand military tourism. 

 Identify and develop most feasible incentives.

 Create marketing campaign to promote incentives in 

partnership with Alpena CRTC. 

 Monitor incentive effectiveness.

 Report findings to working group.

 Adapt incentives based on findings.

Challenges

 Resource limitations to support working group efforts

and campaign to market incentives. 

ACTION PLAN: ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY

Issue 6b:

Airport viability

Strategy 6b1: Leverage 

relationships to replace customs 

agent 

Summary

Loss of the part-time local customs agent has had a negative economic impact on the Alpena County Regional Airport, requiring aircraft emanating from foreign locations to 

route to other Northern Michigan locations. Stakeholders in 

Alpena have been actively seeking viable options to replace 

the customs agent, but have had no success. 

Recommendations

 Engage Alpena CRTC and Michigan Air National Guard in 

discussions on potentially helping to publicize the issue. 

 Identify updated options that build on previous discussions with Congressional delegation. 

Challenges

 Replacement of customs agent currently an issue raised 

by Congressional delegation without results to date.

 Alpena CRTC has a customs agent on an as-needed basis 

only and cannot provide resources.

M

category priority timeframe

strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Regulatory Chamber of Commerce Alpena CRTC

Residents

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

ACTION PLAN: INTERAGENCY COOPERATION

Issue 6d:

Military tourism

category

M

priority timeframe strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Outreach

Research Alpena County

Local businesses

Tourism bureaus 

Target Alpena

ACTION PLAN: ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY

0 1 2 3 4 5 +
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 4-41

Strategy 6d.2: Economic tracking and reporting mechanisms to quantify 

annual military tourism impact

Summary

Quantifiable economic data on how dollars flow from soldiers training at Alpena CRTC into surrounding communities would help communicate the contributions Alpena 

CRTC makes to the local economy. This type of information 

would assist in communicating the benefits of Alpena CRTC

to current residents, prospective home buyers, and decision makers at the local, state, and federal levels. 

Recommendations 

 Conduct benchmarking research on other military training installations’ efforts to track economic impact of operations on local communities. 

 Convene a brainstorming session among key stakeholders to share benchmarking results and identify potential 

economic tracking mechanisms to monitor the spending 

flow from Alpena CRTC trainees in local communities.

Mechanisms discussed during the JLUS process include 

a survey of Alpena CRTC soldiers during their stay with 

an incentive to participate or an Alpena CRTC discount 

card accepted at local businesses. Consider coordinating 

with Camp Grayling JMTC for this activity.

 Identify most feasible tracking mechanisms from brainstorming session and develop a monitoring plan and reporting schedule.

 Share information about the economic monitoring initiative with Alpena CRTC soldiers and families. 

 Collect data and analyze findings.

 Report to key stakeholders participating in brainstorming session.

 Identify next steps to adapt monitoring approach based 

on findings.

 Prepare informational collateral to share findings with

media, decision makers, and other key stakeholders. 

Challenges

 Resource limitations to support economic monitoring 

mechanism development and implementation over 

time. 

 Potential lack of widespread participation in tracking 

that will limit the ability to comprehensively quantify military tourism spending flow.

Issue 6d: continued

Military tourism

category

M

priority timeframe strategy type strategy lead stakeholders

Outreach

Research

Chamber of 

Commerce

Alpena CRTC

Local businesses

Target Alpena

ACTION PLAN: ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY

0 1 2 3 4 5 +

6 Alpena CRTC key issues

economic development
4-42 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

This page intentionally left blank.
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | APPENDIX a-1

2010 US Census data

Air Force Instruction 32-7063, Air Installations Compatible Use Zones Program

Unified Facilities Criteria 3-260-01, Airfield and Heliport Planning and Design

City of Grayling Economic Development Strategy, Place and Main Advisors LLC, March 2017

Michigan Army National Guard Real Property Development Plan, May 2011

Alpena CRTC Installation Development Plan, April 2015

www.discovernortheastmichigan.com

Esri data

http://grayling.minationalguard.com/

Alpena County Master Plan, NEMCOG, 2013

http://www.alpenacrtc.ang.af.mil/

http://ns.minationalguard.com/exercise-northern-strike-2017-is-closing-in/

www.michigandnr.com

http://www.loc.gov/pictures/resource/pan.6a30457/

Anderson, B. (n.d.). DECOOK v. ROCHESTER INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT JOINT ZONING BOARD. Retrieved July 12, 2018, from https://caselaw.findlaw.com/mn-supreme-court/1597248.html

Hogan, S. H., & LaVille, J. C. (2015, March 06). Zoning and the Fifth Amendment: When do Zoning Regulations "Go Too Far"? Retrieved July 12, 2018, from https://www.fosterswift.com/

communications-Zoning-Fifth-Amendment-Regulations.html

"Penn Central Transportation Company v. New York City." Oyez, 13 Jul. 2018, www.oyez.org/cases/1977/77-444.

Property Topics and Concepts. (2018). Retrieved July 12, 2018, from https://www.planning.org/divisions/planningandlaw/propertytopics.htm

a

references
a-2 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

A.1 Alpena CRTC 

Community Council 

Background 

Information

Representatives from the Alpena Chamber of Commerce 

first met with representatives from Alpena CRTC in 2013

in the interest of convening a council that would focus and 

help foster civilian interaction with the installation. The relationship between the base and the community was recognized as positive, but all parties wanted to ensure things 

continued in that vein into the future. 

Other areas in the state with a heavy military presence (e.g., 

Battle Creek and Selfridge) already had similar programs in 

place, and they had reported positive effects.

At right, the graphic shows some details for the proposed 

council, as well as the areas it would focus on. The council 

would be part of the Chamber of Commerce if approved by 

the chamber's board. 

This JLUS recommends that the council be convened as 

described in Strategy 5b.1 for Alpena CRTC, presented on 

page 4-35 of this document.

Figure A.1 | Alpena CRTC Community Council 

alpena CRTC 

community council

The Council utilizes 

communication, events, and other 

support strategies to enhance 

support for Alpena CRTC. The 

council will meet quarterly, and 

meetings will be open to the 

general public.

support 

services

provides services or 

connects military and 

military families to 

services

economic 

value

measures/shares the 

economic impact of 

Alpena CRTC on the 

community

public 

relations

shares information 

with the community 

about upcoming 

events at Alpena 

CRTC

military 

support

hosts receptions for 

visiting units to 

Alpena CRTC
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | APPENDIX b-1

Please see the following pages. b

public 

participation 

plan
This page intentionally left blank.

b-2 INTRODUCTION | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | APPENDIX b-3

final | april 2018

camp grayling joint maneuver training center | alpena combat readiness training center

joint land use study

public participation plan
b-4 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

camp grayling joint maneuver training center | alpena combat readiness training center

joint land use study

public participation plan | final | april 2018

acknowledgments and key partners

Northeast Michigan Council of Governments

Michigan DNR (Gaylord)

Michigan Dept of Transportation (Gaylord)

US Forest Service

Michigan Dept of Environmental Quality (Gaylord)

US Fish & Wildlife Service (Alpena)

Headwaters Land Conservancy

USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service (Gaylord)

Huron Pines (conservation) (Gaylord)

Crawford County 

City of Grayling (Crawford Co)

Grayling Twp (Crawford Co)

Lovells Twp (Crawford Co)

Maple Forest Twp (Crawford Co)

Frederic Twp (Crawford Co)

Beaver Creek Twp (Crawford Co)

South Branch Twp (Crawford Co)

Crawford County Road Commission

Otsego County 

Chester Twp (Otsego Co)

Otsego Lake Twp (Otsego Co)

Bagley Twp (Otsego Co)

Hayes Twp (Otsego Co)

Otsego County Economic Alliance

Bear Lake Twp (Kalkaska Co)

Garfield Twp (Kalkaska Co)

Au Sable River Property Owner’s Association

Anglers of the Au Sable

Mason-Griffith Founders Chapter of Trout Unlimited

Upper Manistee River Association

Michigan Association of Timbermen

Weyerhaeuser

Arauco

AJD Forest Products

Jays Sporting Goods

Alpena Regional Airport

Alpena County

City of Alpena (Alpena Co)

Alpena Twp (Alpena Co)

Maple Ridge Twp (Alpena Co)

Wilson Twp (Alpena Co)

Green Twp (Alpena Co)

Ossineke Twp (Alpena Co)

Sanborn Twp (Alpena Co)

Long Rapids Twp (Alpena Co)

Village of Hillman

Target Alpena

Alpena Chamber of Commerce

Michigan Sea Grant/MSU Extension

Northern MI Unmanned Aerial Systems Consortium

Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary

US Coast Guard

Thunder Bay Audubon Society

NOAA

Michigan United Conservation Club – Region 4

Camp Grayling and Alpena CRTC

Michigan Economic Development Corporation

Grayling Chamber of Commerce

Michigan Works!

Briley Twp (Montmorency Co)

Roscommon County

Lyon Twp (Roscommon Co)

Posen Twp (Presque Isle Co)

Krakow Twp (Presque Isle Co)

Metz Twp (Presque Isle Co)

Higgins Twp (Roscommon Co)

Antrim County

This study was prepared under contract with the Northeast Michigan Council of 

Governments, with financial support from the Office of Economic Adjustment, 

Department of Defense. The content reflects the views of the Northeast Michigan 

Council of Governments and all of the JLUS project stakeholders and does not 

necessarily reflect the views of the Office of Economic Adjustment.
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | APPENDIX b-5

CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY – PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN | TABLE OF CONTENTS i

Table of Contents

1 JLUS public participation plan background 

and goals

1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................................. 1

1.2 Goals....... .................................................................................................................................................................................. 2

2 public participation plan components

2.1 PPP Component 1: Identifying and Characterizing Key Stakeholders .............................................................................. 3

2.1.1 Key Stakeholder List ................................................................................................................................................. 3

2.1.2 Committee. ................................................................................................................................................................ 4

2.1.3 Stakeholder Characterization ................................................................................................................................... 5

2.2	 PPP	Component	2:	Creating	Effective	Messages ................................................................................................................. 5

2.3	 PPP	Component	3:	Identifying	and	Creating	Effective	Stakeholder	Involvement	Opportunities	and	Educational	

Resources ................................................................................................................................................................................. 5

2.3.1	 Meetings,	Tours,	and	Surveys .................................................................................................................................. 5

2.3.2 JLUS Educational Resources ..................................................................................................................................... 6

2.4	 PPP	Component	4:	Identifying	Effective	Distribution	Channels	and	Mechanisms ......................................................... 6

2.5	 PPP	Component	5:	Assessing	Effectiveness ......................................................................................................................... 8

2.5.1	 PPP	Activities	and	Schedule ...................................................................................................................................... 8

appendix a meeting participants ................................................................................................................................................... 11

b 		surveys .......................................................................................................................................................................... 15

c project fact sheet/announcements ........................................................................................................................... 21

d 		survey	announcement ................................................................................................................................................ 23
b-6 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

ii TABLE OF CONTENTS | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY – PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN

This page intentionally left blank.
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | APPENDIX b-7

CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY – PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN | JLUS PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN BACKGROUND AND GOALS 1

1.1 Introduction

The	Joint	Land	Use	Study	(JLUS)	is	a	community	driven,	collaborative,	 strategic	 planning	 process	 among	 Camp	 Grayling	 Joint	 Maneuver	 Training	 Center	 (JMTC)	 and	 Alpena	

Combat	Readiness	Training	Center	(CRTC),	surrounding	local	governments,	jurisdictions,	and	other	key	stakeholders	

within an approximately 20 mile radius to:

1. Promote	 community	 development	 that	 is	 compatible	

with	military	training,	testing,	and	operational	missions;	

2. Seek ways to manage operational impacts on adjacent 

lands;	and

3. Optimize	the	use	of	private	and	community	involvement	

and support.

The	 Northeast	 Michigan	 Council	 of	 Governments	 (NEMCOG)	received	a	grant	from	the	U.S.	Department	of	Defense	

(DOD)	Office	of	Economic	Adjustment	(OEA)	and	is	the	sponsoring	agency	coordinating	the	development	of	this	JLUS.	

See Figure 1.1 on the following page for a map of the JLUS 

areas of interest

JLUS public 

participation 

plan 

background 

and goals

1

Above, stakeholders participate in Camp Grayling JMTC and Alpena CRTC public meetings.
b-8 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

2 JLUS PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN BACKGROUND AND GOALS | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY – PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN

1.2 Goals

The	JLUS	project	goals	are	to:

 Promote	 land	 use	 compatibility	 between	 the	 installations	and	surrounding	communities;

 Seek	 ways	 to	manage	 development	 that	 is	 compatible	

with	military	training,	testing,	and	operational	missions;

 Encourage	 cooperative	 action	 among	 military	 personnel,	local	community	officials,	and	citizens;

 Maintain	and	strengthen	regional	economic	engines;

 Convene	both	a	technical	advisory	and	policy	committee	

comprised of people drawn from the surrounding areas 

affected	by	the	two	training	centers;	

 Engage	the	public	(which	includes	the	technical	and	policy	committees)	to	identify	current	and	future	land	use	

incompatibility	issues;

 Map	 the	 identified	 compatibility	 issues	 and	 communicate	them	to	the	public;

 Solicit	input	from	stakeholders	about	potential	solutions	

to	the	identified	incompatibilities;

 Gain	 agreement	 from	 the	 various	 stakeholders	 on	 the	

recommended	future	management	actions;

 Educate the surrounding municipalities on the process 

and report to promote adoption and implementation of 

recommendations	identified	in	the	final	report.	

Achieving	 the	 JLUS	 project	 goals	 requires	 developing	 and	

implementing	a	Public	Participation	Plan	(PPP)	that	will	effectively	engage	stakeholders	in	the	JLUS	project	area.	The	

core	JLUS	Project	Team,	NEMCOG	and	Tetra	Tech,	has	developed,	implemented,	and	will	continue	to	implement	the	

stakeholder	 engagement	 activities	 described	 in	 this	 PPP	

throughout the duration of the JLUS project. 

Figure ES.1 | JLUS Areas of Interest

Grayling

Alpena

Big Creek

Lovells

Garfield

Green

Elmer

Charlton

Wilson

Albert Ossineke

Hayes Chester

Frederic

Krakow

Kalkaska

Metz

South Branch

Bear Lake

Greenwood

Oliver

Dover

Posen

Beaver Creek

Sanborn

Wellington

Orange

Bagley

Belknap

Long Rapids Maple Ridge

Pulawski

Excelsior

Presque Isle

Blue Lake

Livingston

Rapid River

Otsego Lake

Cold Springs Maple Forest

Alpena

Rogers

Gaylord

Grayling

Gaylord

Gaylord

M 32

M 72

M 33

US 131

M 68

M 66

M 65

M 18

Miller

US 23

M 88

Abbe

M 93

Park

US 31

M 75

Mount Tom

Ryno

Charlevoix

8th

Cripps

Otsego

Lake

Morenci

Federal

Baker

Weaver

Mile

State

Maple

Boyne

Cedar

M 211

Turtle Lake

Williams

Main

Dunham

Division

Spring

Corey Lake

Price

Post

Harvey

Water

Pioneer

I 75 BL

Main

M 32

M 33

M 66

M 33

M 65

State

US 23

US 131

M 33

M 65

M 75

Mount Tom

State

M 33

M 72

M 72

M 65

M 32

US 23

US 131

M 68

M 93

M 66

M 65

M 32

M 72

State

USGS The National Map: National Boundaries Dataset, National Elevation Dataset, Geographic Names Information System, National Hydrography Dataset, National Land Cover Database, National Structures Dataset, and National

Transportation Dataset; U.S. Census Bureau - TIGER/Line; HERE Road Data

Legend

Proposed Scope Areas

Townships

Cities

School districts

Counties

Camp Grayling 

Area of Interest

Alpena

Area of Interest

 ̄
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | APPENDIX b-9

CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY – PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN | PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN COMPONENTS 3

The five components of the PPP include:

1. Identifying and characterizing key stakeholders;

2. Creating effective messages;

3. Identifying and creating effective stakeholder involvement opportunities and educational resources;

4. Identifying effective distribution channels and mechanisms; and

5. Assessing effectiveness.

Each of these PPP components will be discussed in detail on 

the following pages. 

2.1 PPP Component 1: 

Identifying and 

Characterizing 

Key Stakeholders

Stakeholders include individuals, groups, organizations, 

and governmental entities interested in, affected by, or affecting the outcome of the JLUS project. The foundational 

component of the PPP activities is identifying and characterizing stakeholders, with emphasis on the characterization. 

The goals of the JLUS project include engaging, educating, 

obtaining input, and seeking agreement from stakeholders. Therefore, it is imperative to tailor the engagement 

and education messages, formats, and distribution channels based on the stakeholders’ perceptions, interests, 

and communication preferences. In addition to creating a 

comprehensive list of stakeholders for the JLUS project, it is 

important for the JLUS Project Team to document characterization information to inform the other PPP components 

and future JLUS actions. 

2.1.1 Key Stakeholder List 

Stakeholders identified for the JLUS project include individuals, groups, organizations, and governmental entities located within the JLUS project area. 

The Camp Grayling JMTC area of influence includes the 

whole of Crawford County and portions of Crawford County’s border counties: to the east, Oscoda County; to the 

south, Roscommon County; to the west, Kalkaska County 

and to the north, Otsego County. Also included in the study 

areas are the southeast portions of Antrim County and the 

southwest portion of Montmorency County for a total of 7 

counties and 33 municipalities.

The Alpena CRTC area of influence includes Alpena County 

and a small portion of Presque Isle County, as well as 13 

municipalities.

Key stakeholders within the two primary JLUS project areas 

will represent the following:

 Camp Grayling JMTC staff

 Alpena CRTC staff

 Federal agency staff

 Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary, National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

 U.S. Forest Service

 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

 U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources 

Conservation Service

 U.S. Coast Guard

 State agency staff

 Michigan Department of Environmental Quality

 Michigan Department of Natural Resources

 Michigan Department of Transportation

 Michigan Economic Development Corporation

 Michigan Sea Grant/Michigan State University Extension

 Elected officials and municipal staff

 Community residents within the project area

 Local organizations 

 HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATIONS: the AuSable River 

Property Owners’ Association, Lake Margrethe Property Owners’ Association, Enchanted Forest Property 

Owners’ Association

 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GROUPS: Grayling Regional Chamber of Commerce and the Alpena Area 

Chamber of Commerce

 LOCAL EMPLOYERS: Weyerhaeuser, AJD Forest Products, Jays Sporting Goods

 RECREATION ORGANIZATIONS: Anglers of the AuSable and Trout Unlimited 

 ENVIRONMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS: Headwaters 

Land Conservancy, Upper Manistee River Association, Thunder Bay Audubon Society, Michigan United 

Conservation Club

 ACADEMIA: Kirtland Community College and Alpena 

Community College

 Media

 The Alpena News

 Crawford County Avalanche

 WQON-FM 100.3

 WATZ-FM 99.3

Many of the key stakeholders within the JLUS Project Area 

have been asked to serve on the project’s policy committee 

(PC) and technical committee (TC). The PC is primarily compublic 

participation 

plan 

components

2

Camp Grayling Policy Committee Meeting
b-10 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

4 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN COMPONENTS | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY – PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN

posed of city, township, and county officials; military installation leadership; state officials; and private sector leaders. 

The PC meets on a quarterly basis and is charged with: 

 providing overall project leadership to include policy direction and oversight, budget approval, project monitoring, and report adoption; and 

 participating in public outreach events.

The TC comprises local and installation community planners, community staff, business representatives, and residents. The TC meets on a monthly basis and is responsible 

for: 

 data collection

 identifying and studying technical issues

 recommending working groups (if needed) for specific 

issues

 evaluating alternatives

 developing recommendations for the PC

2.1.2 Committee Membership 

Table 2.1, JLUS Policy and Technical Committee Members 

and Organizations, contains a list of JLUS TC and PC members. These individuals will play a key role in both developing and implementing the PPP by serving as the core group 

of stakeholders that help disseminate information and 

promote engagement in the JLUS process among their key 

stakeholder groups.

Table 2.1 | JLUS Policy and Technical Committee Members and Organizations

JLUS POLICY COMMITTEE JLUS POLICY COMMITTEE, CONTINUED

Name Representing/Title Name Representing/Title

Ken Glasser (JLUS Chairman) Otsego County Board George F. Banker Bear Lake Township Supervisor

Greg Sundin (JLUS Vice Chairman) City of Alpena Chris Peterson US Forest Service

Matt Waligora (JLUS Vice Chairman Alternate) City of Alpena Mayor Scott R. Koproski US Fish & Wildlife Service

Marc Dedenbach (JLUS Secretary) Grayling Township Edward A. Nellist Lyon Township Supervisor

SGM Kent Smith Camp Grayling JMTC James Zakshesky Posen Township Supervisor

SFC Jeremie Mead Camp Grayling JMTC Michael Grohowski Krakow Township Supervisor

LTC Brian Burrell Camp Grayling JMTC Nyle Wickersham Metz Township Supervisor

Lt Col Matthew Trumble Alpena CRTC William E. Curnalia Higgins Township Supervisor

Lt Col Michael Leski Alpena CRTC Gary Neumann Lovells Township Supervisor

Capt Brian Blumline Alpena CRTC Denise Matteini Otsego Lake Township

Jonathan Edgerly Michigan Army National Guard – Environmental Margaret Black, alternate Otsego Lake Township Clerk

Kim VanNuck Beaver Creek Township Supervisor Bonny Miller Chester Township Supervisor

Brandon Schroeder Michigan State University Extension/Michigan 

Sea Grant

Scott Kruger Antrim County Commissioner

Susan Thiel MDNR Brenda Fournier Alpena County Commissioner

Jeff Gray Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary, NOAA JLUS TECHNICAL COMMITTEE

Rob Pallarito Otsego County Board Name Representing/Title

Mark Ignash MEDC Adam Poll City of Alpena Planning & Development Director

Jim Klarich Target Alpena Erich Podjaske City of Grayling Zoning/Economic Development

Scott Thayer MDOT Lisa Kruse Alpena CRTC Environmental Specialist

Dave Stephenson Crawford County Board Chair Susan Thiel MDNR

Doug Baum Grayling City Manager Julie Lowe MDEQ

Steve Smigelski Alpena Airport Manager Alayne Hansen Michigan Works!

David Persons Garfield Township Supervisor Patty O’Donnell MDOT

Cody Werth Wilson Township Board/Planning Commission Doug Baum City of Grayling

Julie Lowe MDEQ Denise Mattieni Otsego Lake Township

Lisa McComb Otsego County Economic Alliance John Bailey Huron Pines

Bill Johnson Frederic Township Supervisor SMSgt Jerome Torres Alpena CRTC

 Shelly Pinkelman, alternate Frederic Township Zoning SMSgt Damian Pappas, alternate Alpena CRTC

Ken Lobert Ossineke Township Supervisor

Nathan Skibbe Alpena Township Supervisor

Dave Post Village of Hillman

 Myron McIntire, alternate Hillman Village President

Cam Habermehl Alpena County

Brian Goebel Bagley Township

 Ken Arndt, alternate Bagley Township

Jodi Valentino Roscommon County Controller

Bruno Wojick Briley Township

Howard Lumsden Long Rapids Township Supervisor

Sharcy Ray USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | APPENDIX b-11

CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY – PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN | PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN COMPONENTS 5

2.1.3 Stakeholder 

Characterization

Understanding stakeholders’ existing awareness, perceptions, concerns, values, and priorities related to Camp 

Grayling JMTC and Alpena CRTC will help the JLUS Project 

Team develop and implement involvement opportunities 

and educational resources. Characterization information 

can influence the level of detail in educational materials and 

highlight where issues might serve as potential roadblocks 

to participation or agreement on strategies. 

Compiling characterization information for each stakeholder group is an iterative process that starts with a core group 

of key stakeholders and, over the course of the project, becomes more specific. Stakeholder characterization information evolves over time and could augment approaches for 

initiating and sustaining stakeholder involvement and educating stakeholders on the JLUS project. The JLUS survey 

process, as well as public meetings, aided in characterizing 

stakeholders’ perspectives of Camp Grayling JMTC and Alpena CRTC. 

The June 2017 PC and TC discussion sessions and the public 

meetings offered early insights into stakeholders’ perspectives of and concerns about Camp Grayling and the Alpena 

CRTC. Stakeholders in the project area have a broad array 

of challenges, including noise, water quality, wildfire, traffic, 

property value, military operations, and public safety concerns, that are more prevalent and will promote increased 

levels of stakeholder participation. 

Another key aspect of stakeholder characterization is understanding communication channel preferences. Based 

on discussions with NEMCOG and the Camp Grayling community relations specialist, as well as other members of 

the PC and TC, the community residents rely on traditional sources of information, such as newspaper, radio, and 

word-of-mouth, to obtain information. Social media is more 

limited in use, particularly for the older demographic in the 

study area. 

 JLUS June 2017 Community Survey Announcement

Alpena CRTC community land use strengths identified during 

June 2017 discussion and public meetings. 

2.2 PPP Component 2: 

Creating Effective 

Messages

Raising stakeholder awareness and motivating participation 

in the JLUS process are key to achieving project goals. Doing 

so successfully requires effective messaging for educational materials and announcements for public involvement 

opportunities. Stakeholder characterization information 

on perceptions, concerns, and interests related to Camp 

Grayling JMTC and Alpena CRTC installation complexes and 

mission footprints aid in crafting effective messages for education and engagement collateral. The messages change 

with each phase of the project and as stakeholder characterization is further refined. Messages for each phase of the 

project are presented below. 

 DISCOVERY PHASE (APRIL 2017 – JULY 2017): Initial messages for the discovery phase focus on raising 

awareness and promoting engagement. Messages raise 

stakeholder awareness about the JLUS project and their 

proximity to the JLUS project area, addressing their potential curiosity and concerns about the activities taking 

place at Camp Grayling and Alpena CRTC, and promoting 

the unique opportunity to share their concerns through 

the JLUS process. Message: Your input on issues and 

concerns is important to identifying solutions that will 

benefit your community.

 STRATEGY AND PLANNING PHASE (AUGUST 2017 – 

MARCH 2018): Messages for the strategy and planning 

phase focus on reporting out the interim findings for 

the identified issues/conflicts uncovered in the discovery stage. Messages focus on validating issues identified 

in the discovery phase and providing input on potential 

solutions. Message: Please tell the JLUS Project Team if 

we accurately captured your issues and concerns and 

contribute to developing possible solutions.

 IMPLEMENTATION PHASE (APRIL 2018 – ONGOING):

Messages for the implementation phase focus on presenting the final report findings and recommendations 

in both the Grayling and Alpena areas. This phase focuses on initiating the process of local municipal adoption 

of the JLUS report in effected communities. Message: 

The JLUS Project Team heard and incorporated your 

input throughout the JLUS process, and your views are 

reflected in the final recommendations. It is now time to 

implement these recommendations, which require continuous support to help execute the necessary actions to 

benefit the community. 

A subset of the PC and TC members with experience in local communications will have the opportunity to review and 

comment on project-related messaging. This subset of PC 

and TC members will include the JLUS project officers, the 

Camp Grayling community relations specialist, NEMCOG 

staff, and local economic directors, as well as other PC and 

TC members that have an interest in providing constructive 

feedback on messaging. 

2.3 PPP Component 3: 

Identifying and 

Creating Effective 

Stakeholder 

Involvement 

Opportunities and 

Educational Resources

This component of the PPP focuses on identifying and creating effective stakeholder involvement opportunities and 

educational resources. 

2.3.1 Meetings, Tours, and 

Surveys

Stakeholder involvement opportunities include meetings, 

tours, interviews, and surveys. The JLUS Project Team selected this suite of stakeholder involvement opportunities 

to allow stakeholders a variety of options based on schedule constraints, communication preferences, and project 

needs. Each opportunity is described below in greater detail.

 TC AND PC MEETINGS: These meetings are coordinated and facilitated by NEMCOG staff throughout the 

JLUS project. They serve as working forums for these 

key stakeholders to provide input on JLUS project information and developing recommendations to address 

issues and concerns. The project website will include a 

project schedule and calendar of events for the TC and 

PC meetings. 

 CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC PC AND 

TC MEMBER TOURS AND ISSUE IDENTIFICATION SESSIONS: The tours provide an opportunity for PC and TC 

members to better understand the mission and operations of Camp Grayling JMTC and Alpena CRTC during 
b-12 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

6 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN COMPONENTS | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY – PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN

JLUS Policy and Technical Committee Members touring Camp 

Grayling JMTC and Alpena CRTC

 JLUS PROJECT FACT SHEETS/MEETING ANNOUNCEMENTS: This educational resource provides an easy-toread summary of the JLUS project, including an overview 

of the project purpose, expected outcomes, involvement 

opportunities during the process, and where to obtain 

additional information. For each of the community 

meetings described above, the JLUS Project Team uses 

the project fact sheet as a meeting announcement. The 

project fact sheet will be updated with new project information (e.g., identified issues) and updated meeting information. Appendix C provides examples of the project 

fact sheet/initial meeting announcements. 

 JLUS PROJECT SURVEY ANNOUNCEMENT: This resource announces the availability of the community survey to stakeholders in the JLUS project area and provide 

a link to the survey on the JLUS Project web page hosted 

by NEMCOG. Appendix D contains the project survey announcement.

 JLUS PRESENTATIONS: For each community meeting, 

the JLUS Project Team develops a presentation that 

provides context for the JLUS project, a review of the 

process and the current process status, as well as information related to the current phase of the project. The 

presentations are made available on the project website 

after each meeting.

 JLUS PRESS RELEASES: The JLUS Project Team develops 

press releases announcing stakeholder involvement activities related to the JLUS project. This is done in coordination with the community relations staff at Camp Grayling JMTC and Alpena CRTC to ensure a consistent JLUS 

project message. The press releases target print media 

and offer educational background on the JLUS project 

goals and process, including the link to the JLUS project 

web pages, to promote comprehensive news stories on 

the process. 

2.4 PPP Component 4: 

Identifying Effective 

Distribution Channels 

and Mechanisms 

This component of the PPP focuses on effective distribution 

channels and mechanisms in the JLUS project area. Ensuring meaningful participation in stakeholder involvement 

opportunities and effective delivery of educational resources requires that information successfully reaches targeted 

stakeholders. For purposes of the JLUS project, the JLUS 

Project Team employs both a targeted and ripple approach 

to distribute information. Both of these approaches are described below. 

Stakeholder interviews are critical to gaining an understanding of existing issues or situations that will contribute to the conflict/compatibility analysis of the JLUS 

project. Interviews also provide an opportunity to gain a 

deeper understanding pf stakeholder perceptions and 

opinions about compatibility and conflicts, as well as details on sensitive topics that stakeholders may feel uncomfortable discussing in a group setting. This information will not only feed into development of management 

strategies, but will also assist in refining stakeholder 

characterization for the PPP and future stakeholder involvement and education activities in the latter stages of 

the JLUS process. Appendix B contains the survey questions developed for the JLUS project administered both 

in-person and via telephone.

 COMMUNITY SURVEYS: The community surveys are 

another stakeholder involvement mechanism to allow a 

wider range of stakeholders in the JLUS project area to 

share their opinions. The community survey questions 

are the same as those found in Appendix B, but the responses are self-entered without assistance from JLUS 

Project Team members. Ensuring widespread participation in the community survey is a potential challenge 

that will likely require an iterative approach to make 

stakeholders aware of the survey, educate stakeholders 

on the benefits of participating in the survey, and motivate participation. As such, a multi-pronged approach 

that capitalizes on opportunities as they arise to communicate the survey with the public.

2.3.2 JLUS Educational 

Resources

Stakeholder educational resources include meeting announcements, fact sheets, presentations, project website, 

and press releases. The JLUS Project Team selected this 

suite of stakeholder educational resources to provide stakeholders with a variety of formats based on communication 

preferences and project needs. Each educational resource 

is described below in greater detail.

 JLUS PROJECT WEBSITE: NEMCOG staff created a JLUS 

project web page within the current NEMCOG website 

that provides comprehensive project information. The 

project website is available at http://www.discovernortheastmichigan.org/jlus.asp. The JLUS Project Team 

will update the project web pages throughout the JLUS 

process. It is the primary source of educational information on the JLUS project. All stakeholder involvement opportunities and educational resources will be available 

to stakeholders, including the link to the community surveys. 

the discovery phase of the JLUS project. The tours also 

provide PC and TC members with an additional opportunity to discuss the JLUS project, goals, and objectives. 

An added benefit is promoting PC and TC team building, 

communication, and cooperation to benefit the overall 

JLUS process. The tours for Camp Grayling JMTC and Alpena CRTC took place on June 1 and June 5, 2017.

 COMMUNITY MEETINGS AND INPUT SESSIONS: The 

JLUS process provides broader stakeholder involvement 

opportunities using a series of community meetings and 

input sessions at each phase. 

 ISSUE IDENTIFICATION COMMUNITY MEETINGS 

(DISCOVERY PHASE): The purpose of these meetings 

is to raise stakeholder awareness of the JLUS project 

and identify issues and concerns related to Camp 

Grayling JMTC and Alpena CRTC from local stakeholders. The initial community meetings and input sessions took place on June 1, 2017, for Alpena CRTC and 

June 6, 2017, for Camp Grayling. Appendix A contains 

agendas and a list of participants for these meetings. 

 ISSUE REPORT OUT COMMUNITY MEETINGS 

(STRATEGY AND PLANNING PHASE): During these 

meetings, the JLUS Project Team will report out the 

issues and conflicts identified during the discovery 

phase of the JLUS process. These meetings will give 

local stakeholders the opportunity to validate the 

interim findings of the discovery phase, clarify any 

issues, and identify additional issues that were not 

adequately captured during the discovery phase. The 

PC meeting is ideally held on the same day as the 

community meeting and also open to the public. 

 PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATIONS COMMUNITY 

MEETINGS (STRATEGY AND PLANNING PHASE):

These community meetings will provide stakeholders 

with the opportunity to voice their opinions and ideas 

on preliminary recommendations crafted to address 

issues and concerns. The JLUS Project Team documents stakeholder feedback on the preliminary recommendations and finalizes the recommendations, 

considering that feedback. The PC meeting is ideally 

held on the same day as the community meeting and 

also open to the public.

 FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMUNITY MEETINGS (IMPLEMENTATION 

PHASE): The purpose of these final community meetings is to present the final report findings and recommendations to stakeholders, as well as initiate 

the early stages of the implementation process. This 

could include identifying steps needed for local municipal adoption of the JLUS report in affected communities.

 STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEWS: This stakeholder involvement strategy involves conducting one-on-one interviews with key stakeholders in the JLUS project area. 
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | APPENDIX b-13

CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY – PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN | PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN COMPONENTS 7

minimal project investment. Another advantage of this approach is the familiarity local stakeholders have with these 

local organizations and elected officials; trust and familiarity with the messenger can help to increase participation. 

Each approach described above rely on specific distribution mechanisms. Each distribution mechanism will reach 

different stakeholder subgroups. The suite of distribution 

mechanisms will expand over time as the JLUS Project Team 

develops a more refined understanding of stakeholder 

communication preferences and most effective distribution channels. Key distribution mechanisms are described 

in more detail below. 

 EMAIL DISTRIBUTION LISTS: NEMCOG and the JLUS 

PC and TC email distribution lists are the primary distribution mechanisms to engage these stakeholders in 

committee activities. The JLUS Project Team asks members on this email distribution list to forward community 

information to relevant stakeholders using their email 

distribution lists.

 NEWSLETTERS: NEMCOG and many of the JLUS PC and 

TC members, as well as other stakeholder organizations, 

develop and distribute regular newsletters for both mail 

and electronic distribution. For example, the Grayling 

Regional Chamber of Commerce develops and posts a 

weekly newsletter and included information about the 

JLUS survey in the June 29 newsletter.

 WEBSITES: As discussed, the primary project information distribution channel is the JLUS project web pages 

hosted on the NEMCOG website. Using the ripple approach, the JLUS Project Team is encouraging PC and TC 

members to post links to the JLUS Project web pages on 

their own organizational websites and encourage other 

stakeholders to do the same. For example, the Enchanted Forest Property Owners’ Association posted JLUS survey information and a link to the JLUS web page on the 

association’s main website, as well as Alpena Township 

and Otsego Lake Township, as shown above. The JLUS 

Project Team will encourage PC and TC members to continually post information on their websites to help disseminate information throughout the JLUS project.

 LOCAL MEDIA: Both newspaper and radio are key distribution mechanisms in the JLUS project area. Experience 

shared by NEMCOG staff and the Camp Grayling JMTC 

community relations specialist indicate that local residents rely heavily on local newspapers (Crawford County 

Avalanche and the Alpena News). Stakeholders attending the initial community meeting for Camp Grayling 

on June 6 indicated that the primary source of meeting 

information was the Crawford County Avalanche. The 

Houghton Lake Resorter also included information on 

their website about the JLUS community survey. Radio 

is another popular distribution mechanism in the JLUS 

project area; in addition to airing news stories, radio stations often have websites that also post news. For example, WATZ aired a story about the JLUS community 

survey and posted a story on their website. The Camp 

Grayling Community Relations Specialist has an existing 

relationship with local newspapers and radio; therefore, 

promotion of the JLUS related events and surveys can 

come from Camp Grayling, particularly in conjunction 

TARGETED APPROACH: This approach ensures delivery of 

information directly to the intended targeted stakeholders. Members of the PC and the TC are key stakeholders in 

the JLUS Project. When the JLUS Project Team distributes 

stakeholder involvement opportunity information and project educational resources to the PC and TC members, key 

stakeholders directly receive that information. The targeted 

approach involves email as the primary distribution channel to PC and TC members, as well as PC and TC meetings.

RIPPLE APPROACH: This approach focuses on enlisting the 

help of NEMCOG and the JLUS PC and TC members to use 

their existing distribution mechanisms, such as newsletters, 

websites, email distribution lists, social media sites, meetings, and community bulletin boards to further disseminate information on JLUS project stakeholder involvement 

opportunities and educational resources to their organizational members and constituents. For example, the Camp 

Grayling JMTC community relations specialist distributes 

notification of range activities on a regular basis to local 

property owners’ associations and maintains a Camp Grayling JMTC Facebook page. The JLUS Project Team requested 

that the Camp Grayling JMTC community relations specialist 

post information about the community survey on the Camp 

Grayling JMTC Facebook page where this information has 

been shared. In addition, the JLUS Project Team will email information about stakeholder involvement opportunities to 

individuals who attend community meetings with a request 

to help share the information with neighbors. Given the size 

of the JLUS project area, as well as resource constraints, the 

ripple approach leverages existing stakeholder contacts for 

with media coverage related to key activities, such as 

Northern Strike, scheduled for July 29 through August 

12, 2017. 

 SOCIAL MEDIA: This distribution mechanism reaches a 

younger demographic within the JLUS project area, but 

is assumed to be less effective than newspaper and radio. Grayling Visitors Bureau posted information on the 

initial community meetings on the bureau’s Facebook 

page, resulting in 31 shares. The Camp Grayling community relations specialist updates the Camp Grayling Facebook page on a regular basis and included information 

on the JLUS community survey, which was then further 

shared. It is possible search Facebook to identify groups 

discussing Alpena CRTC and Camp Grayling issues and 

then request that they post JLUS project information. 

The JLUS Project Team found a Crawford County Wildfire group that has over 1,000 members that posts information on Camp Grayling’s controlled burns. A simple 

message request led to the posting of the survey information on the group’s Facebook page. 

 FLIER DROPS AND POSTING: Through the ripple approach, PC/TC members are encouraged to print and 

drop JLUS project fliers that announce community meetings and survey availability at local businesses, chambers 

of commerce, libraries, and other locations frequented 

by local stakeholders. The Camp Grayling community 

relations specialist uses this approach to post range activities at a local bakery, barbershop, restaurants, and 

grocery stores. NEMCOG staff members have dropped 

fliers at visitor centers. 

 DIRECT MAILINGS: This is a distribution mechanism 

Otsego Lake Township website promoting the JLUS community survey. JLUS survey news story on WATZ website.

JLUS Survey postings on Camp Grayling and Crawford County 

Wildfire Facebook pages.
b-14 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

8 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN COMPONENTS | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY – PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN

Table 2.2 | JLUS Project Public Participation Plan Activities and Effectiveness Metrics

INVOLVEMENT AND OUTREACH FORMAT TARGET AUDIENCES DISTRIBUTION 

CHANNELS AND DATES

JLUS PROJECT 

TEAM LEAD

EFFECTIVENESS METRICS

Discovery Phase: Objectives: Increase awareness of JLUS process and motivate participation in meetings and survey. Messaging: Your input on issues and concerns is important to identifying solutions that 

will benefit your community.

 JLUS Website (Status: Complete) All stakeholders in project areaLink provided on all communications; updates occur throughout projectNEMCOG (web page 

update)

Tetra Tech (content)

# of views and page visits

PC/TC Tour and Issue Identification Session invitation in 

electronic one-page PDF or hard copy flier (Status: Complete)

PC and TC members Emailed to all PC/TC members; two weeks prior to 

meeting

JLUS Project Team # of RSVPs 

PC/TC Tour and Issue Identification Session (Status: Complete)PC and TC members Alpena CRTC and Camp Grayling facilities JLUS Project Team 

Camp Grayling staff

Alpena CRTC staff

# of participants

Initial project fact sheet/community meeting announcement electronic one-page PDF or hard copy as flier (Status: 

Complete)

All stakeholders in project areaPC/TC targeted email

PC/TC ripple (email, social media, websites); two 

weeks prior to meeting

JLUS Project Team

PC/TC members

# of postings; # of meeting participants

Initial community meetings (Status: Complete) All stakeholders in project areaNOAA Maritime Heritage Center (Alpena CRTC)

Kirtland Health Sciences Center (Camp Grayling)

JLUS Project Team # of meeting participants; meeting 

evaluation responses

Community survey announcement electronic one-page 

PDF or hard copy flier (Status: Complete)

All stakeholders in project areaPC/TC targeted email

PC/TC ripple (email, social media, websites)

JLUS Project Team

PC/TC members

# of postings; # of survey participants

Community survey (Status: Ongoing) All stakeholders in project areaPC/TC targeted email

PC/TC ripple (email, social media, websites)

Specific help requested from Camp Grayling Community Relations Specialist to include in Northern 

Strike related press releases and open houses (prior 

to July 29)

JLUS Project Team 

PC/TC members

# of online search results for 

survey mentions; # of completed 

surveys

Stakeholder interviews (Status: Ongoing) Key stakeholders identified by JLUS Project 

Team

JLUS Project Team one-on-one discussions coordinated during initial meetings; follow-up phone callsJLUS Project Team # of completed interviews

JLUS project fact sheet with opportunities for participation 

(Status: In development once new PC/TC dates established)

All stakeholders JLUS website for easy downloading and printing JLUS Project Team # of fact sheets distributed; # of 

meeting participants 

Strategy and Planning Phase: Objective: Increase and sustain participation in the JLUS process and verify the issues and concerns compiled during the Discovery Phase, while seeking input on possible solutions and recommendations to generate early buy-in for implementation.

Messaging: Please tell the JLUS Project Team if we accurately captured your issues and concerns and contribute to developing possible solutions. 

JLUS Website All stakeholders in project areaLink provided on all communications; updates occur 

throughout project

NEMCOG (web page 

update)

Tetra Tech (content)

# of views and page visits

Issue report out community meeting announcements 

(electronic one-page PDF or hard copy as flier)

All stakeholders in project areaPC/TC targeted email

PC/TC ripple (email, social media, websites); two 

weeks prior to meeting

Follow up with targeted outreach to property owners’ associations, local businesses

JLUS Project Team

PC/TC members

# of meeting participants

that would reach local residents in a very direct manner. 

However, this distribution mechanism is both time-consuming and more expensive than other distribution 

mechanisms. It could, however, be useful in targeted areas within the JLUS project area where the JLUS Project 

Team feels more engagement from stakeholders is necessary. It could be beneficial to consider if online survey 

numbers remain low as the project moves out of the Discovery Phase and more data are needed to characterize 

issues and concerns.

2.5 PPP Component 5: 

Assessing 

Effectiveness

This PPP component focuses on assessing the effectiveness 

of stakeholder involvement activities and educational efforts. Feedback from stakeholders on involvement activities 

helps the JLUS Project Team determine if there are changes necessary for subsequent activities to improve effectiveness. This information can help to sustain stakeholder 

participation in the process over time. Mechanisms include 

workshop evaluation forms, interview questions, and tracking participation rates over the course of the project.

2.5.1 PPP Activities and 

Schedule

Table 2.2, JLUS Project Public Participation Plan Activities 

and Effectiveness Metrics, presents the PPP schedule. 

This schedule is likely to evolve over time, depending on 

the overall JLUS project schedule, as well as factors such 

as stakeholder availability, facility availability, and other 

planned activities scheduled at Camp Grayling JMTC and Alpena CRTC. Table 2.2 also identifies PPP roles and responsibilities for PPP activities under each component. 
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | APPENDIX b-15

CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY – PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN | PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN COMPONENTS 9

INVOLVEMENT AND OUTREACH FORMAT TARGET AUDIENCES DISTRIBUTION 

CHANNELS AND DATES

JLUS PROJECT 

TEAM LEAD

EFFECTIVENESS METRICS

Issue report out community meetings All stakeholders in project areaSelect facilities in project area; possibly varied from 

initial community meeting locations based on stakeholder feedback

JLUS Project Team # of meeting participants; meeting 

evaluation responses

Preliminary recommendation community meeting announcements (electronic one-page PDF or hard copy as 

flier)

All stakeholders in project areaPC/TC targeted email

PC/TC ripple (email, social media, websites); two 

weeks prior to meeting

Follow up with targeted outreach to property 

owners’ associations, local businesses, chambers of 

commerce

JLUS Project Team

PC/TC members

 # of participants

Preliminary recommendation community meeting All stakeholders in project areaSelect facilities in project area; possibly varied from 

initial community meeting locations based on stakeholder feedback

JLUS Project Team # of meeting participants; meeting 

evaluation responses

Implementation Phase: Objective: Solidify support for final JLUS recommendations and transform sustained participation into meaningful implementation. Messaging: The JLUS Project Team heard and incorporated your input throughout the JLUS process into the final recommendations that now require your support and action to benefit the community.

JLUS Website All stakeholders in project areaLink provided on all communications; updates occur 

throughout project

NEMCOG (web page 

update)

Tetra Tech (content)

# of views and page visits

Final recommendations and implementation community 

meetings announcements (electronic one-page PDF or 

hard copy as flier)

All stakeholders in project areaPC/TC targeted email

PC/TC ripple (email, social media, websites); two 

weeks prior to meeting

Follow up with targeted outreach to property owners’ associations, local businesses

JLUS Project Team

PC/TC members

# of meeting participants

Final recommendations and implementation community 

meetings

All stakeholders in project areaSelect facilities in project area; possibly varied from 

initial community meeting locations based on stakeholder feedback

JLUS Project Team # of meeting participants; meeting 

evaluation responses

Table 2.2 Continued | JLUS Project Public Participation Plan Activities, Audiences, Distribution Channels, Roles, and Effectiveness Metrics
b-16 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

10 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN COMPONENTS | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY – PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN

This page intentionally left blank.
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | APPENDIX b-17

CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY – PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN | APPENDIX 11

Please see the following pages.

meeting 

participants

a
b-18 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

12 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY – PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | APPENDIX b-19

CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY – PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN | APPENDIX 13
b-20 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

14 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY – PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN

b
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | APPENDIX b-21

CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY – PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN | APPENDIX 15

surveys

b Please see the following pages.
b-22 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

16 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY – PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN

Joint Land Use Study

Camp Grayling Joint Military Training Center (JMTC) and Alpena Combat Readiness Training Center (CRTC)

1 Resident Survey for Alpena Area

Resident Survey for Areas Surrounding Alpena Combat Readiness Training 

Center (CRTC) 

1. In what City, Village, or Township do you reside? ___________________________

2. Are you (Please check one):

□ On the Planning Commission for your area

□ A Municipal staff member

□ An Elected official

□ A Resident

3. What is you gender? Male Female

4. What range does your age fall into?

□ 18 an under

□ 19 - 30

□ 31 - 50

□ 51 – 64

□ 65 plus

Questions relating to your perceptions of Alpena CRTC. 

5. How familiar are you with Alpena CRTC and the military operations that take place there?

Unfamiliar Somewhat Familiar Familiar Very familiar 

6. Are you comfortable with military operations at Alpena CRTC? 

Not Comfortable Somewhat Comfortable Comfortable

Comments: ___________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________

Joint Land Use Study

Camp Grayling Joint Military Training Center (JMTC) and Alpena Combat Readiness Training Center (CRTC)

2 Resident Survey for Alpena Area

7. Do you have any concerns about military installation operations with regard to noise, traffic, or other 

issues around Alpena CRTC? Please select all that apply?

□ Noise

□ Traffic

□ Recreational Access

□ Other

Comments: ___________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________

8. Do you have concerns about military installation operations with regard to public health, safety, housing, 

or general welfare around Alpena CRTC? Please select all that apply. 

□ Public health

□ Safety, housing

□ General welfare

□ All of the above

□ None of the above

Comments: ___________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________

9. Do you believe that current or future missions of Alpena CRTC effect your property value?

□ Increases the value (>10% than if the Base wasn’t there)

□ Decreases the value (>10% than if the Base wasn’t there)

□ Has no effect on the value

Comments: ___________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________

10. Have you ever participated in a military sponsored community event? Circle one

Yes - Which one(s)? No

Comments:___________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | APPENDIX b-23

CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY – PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN | APPENDIX 17

Joint Land Use Study

Camp Grayling Joint Military Training Center (JMTC) and Alpena Combat Readiness Training Center (CRTC)

3 Resident Survey for Alpena Area

Questions relating to the local economy.

11. Do you believe that Alpena CRTC has a positive impact on the surrounding communities’ quality of life? 

□ Yes 

□ No

□ Unsure

Comments: ________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________

12. How would you rate your agreement with this statement: 

Alpena CRTC is a significant contributor to the local economy?

Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree

If you answered Strongly Disagree or Disagree, then please describe what is: 

__________________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________

13. Alpena CRTC’s significant economic contributions have been (check up to 2)

□ Jobs

□ Local Attraction

□ Construction

□ Other _______________________________________________

□ Unsure

14. What is your impression of Alpena CRTC’s relationship with surrounding property and business owners?

Negative Somewhat positive Positive Very positive Unsure

Comments: ___________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________

15. How would you rate your agreement with this statement: 

Our local businesses find it easy to conduct business with Alpena CRTC? 

Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree Unsure

Joint Land Use Study

Camp Grayling Joint Military Training Center (JMTC) and Alpena Combat Readiness Training Center (CRTC)

4 Resident Survey for Alpena Area

Questions relating to local planning.

16. Are you familiar with NEMCOG? Yes No

17. Are you familiar with any of the comprehensive plans for your area?

□ Yes 

□ No

□ Unsure

18. Our Comprehensive Plan recognizes Alpena CRTC as a significant local resource? 

Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree Unsure

19. Do you believe that future missions and potential growth of Alpena CRTC will have a significant effect on 

the following infrastructure capacity? Please check all that apply.

□ Water

□ Sewer

□ Electricity

□ All of the above

□ None of the above

Comments: ___________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________

20. Do you believe renewable resources such as wind and solar energy are vital to the area? 

□ Yes 

□ No

□ Unsure

21. Do you see current and/or future land use conflicts occurring around Alpena CRTC? 

Comments: ___________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________
b-24 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

18 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY – PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN

Joint Land Use Study

Camp Grayling Joint Military Training Center (JMTC) and Alpena Combat Readiness Training Center (CRTC)

5 Resident Survey for Alpena Area

22. There is sufficient control over development in my community.

Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree Unsure

23. The local zoning ordinances, currently in place, protect residents from adverse impacts from military 

training initiatives at the local installation. 

Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree Unsure

24. I feel it would be more helpful to have more zoning in effect.

Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree Unsure

25. I am in support of development controls.

Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree Unsure

Questions relating to transportation planning.

26. Municipal transportation plans for Alpena CRTC are reasonable? (i.e. the transportation system can 

adequately accommodate the current volume of traffic, the quality of the roads support the volume) 

Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree Unsure

Comments: ___________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________

27. How would you rate your agreement with this statement: 

Coordination/communication between Alpena CRTC and local communities facilitates an efficient flow of traffic. 

Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree Unsure

Other

Would you like to receive updates on the JLUS process? If so please leave us your name, email or address.

_____________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________

Joint Land Use Study

Camp Grayling Joint Military Training Center (JMTC) and Alpena Combat Readiness Training Center (CRTC)

1 Resident Survey for Camp Grayling Area

Resident Survey for Areas Surrounding Camp Grayling Joint Military 

Training Center (JMTC) 

1. In what City, Village, or Township do you reside? ___________________________

2. Are you (Please check one):

□ On the Planning Commission for your area

□ A Municipal staff member

□ An Elected official

□ A Resident

3. What is you gender? Male Female

4. What range does your age fall into?

□ 18 an under

□ 19 - 30

□ 31 - 50

□ 51 – 64

□ 65 plus

Questions relating to your perceptions of Camp Grayling.

5. How familiar are you with Camp Grayling and the military operations that take place there?

Unfamiliar Somewhat Familiar Familiar Very familiar 

6. Are you comfortable with military operations at Camp Grayling? 

Not Comfortable Somewhat Comfortable Comfortable

Comments: ___________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | APPENDIX b-25

CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY – PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN | APPENDIX 19

Joint Land Use Study

Camp Grayling Joint Military Training Center (JMTC) and Alpena Combat Readiness Training Center (CRTC)

2 Resident Survey for Camp Grayling Area

7. Do you have any concerns about military installation operations with regard to noise, traffic, or other 

issues around Camp Grayling? Please select all that apply?

□ Noise

□ Traffic

□ Recreational Access

□ Other

Comments: ___________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________

8. Do you have concerns about military installation operations with regard to public health, safety, housing, 

or general welfare around Camp Grayling? Please select all that apply. 

□ Public health

□ Safety, housing

□ General welfare

□ All of the above

□ None of the above

Comments: ___________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________

9. Do you believe that current or future missions of Camp Grayling effect your property value?

□ Increases the value (>10% than if the Base wasn’t there)

□ Decreases the value (>10% than if the Base wasn’t there)

□ Has no effect on the value

Comments: ___________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________

10. Have you ever participated in a military sponsored community event? Circle one

Yes - Which one(s)? No

Comments:___________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Joint Land Use Study

Camp Grayling Joint Military Training Center (JMTC) and Alpena Combat Readiness Training Center (CRTC)

3 Resident Survey for Camp Grayling Area

Questions relating to the local economy.

11. Do you believe that Camp Grayling has a positive impact on the surrounding communities’ quality of life? 

□ Yes 

□ No

□ Unsure

Comments: ________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________

12. How would you rate your agreement with this statement: 

Camp Grayling is a significant contributor to the local economy?

Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree

If you answered Strongly Disagree or Disagree, then please describe what is: 

__________________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________

13. Camp Grayling’s significant economic contributions have been (check up to 2)

□ Jobs

□ Local Attraction

□ Construction

□ Other _______________________________________________

□ Unsure

14. What is your impression of Camp Grayling’s relationship with surrounding property and business owners?

Negative Somewhat positive Positive Very positive Unsure

Comments: ___________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________

15. How would you rate your agreement with this statement: 

Our local businesses find it easy to conduct business with Camp Grayling? 

Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree Unsure
b-26 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

20 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY – PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN

c Joint Land Use Study

Camp Grayling Joint Military Training Center (JMTC) and Alpena Combat Readiness Training Center (CRTC)

4 Resident Survey for Camp Grayling Area

Questions relating to local planning.

16. Are you familiar with NEMCOG? Yes No

17. Are you familiar with any of the comprehensive plans for your area?

□ Yes 

□ No

□ Unsure

18. Our Comprehensive Plan recognizes Camp Grayling as a significant local resource? 

Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree Unsure

19. Do you believe that future missions and potential growth of Camp Grayling will have a significant effect on 

the following infrastructure capacity? Please check all that apply.

□ Water

□ Sewer

□ Electricity

□ All of the above

□ None of the above

Comments: ___________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________

20. Do you believe renewable resources such as wind and solar energy are vital to the area? 

□ Yes 

□ No

□ Unsure

21. Do you see current and/or future land use conflicts occurring around Camp Grayling? 

Comments: ___________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________

Joint Land Use Study

Camp Grayling Joint Military Training Center (JMTC) and Alpena Combat Readiness Training Center (CRTC)

5 Resident Survey for Camp Grayling Area

22. There is sufficient control over development in my community.

Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree Unsure

23. The local zoning ordinances, currently in place, protect residents from adverse impacts from military 

training initiatives at the local installation. 

Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree Unsure

24. I feel it would be more helpful to have more zoning in effect.

Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree Unsure

25. I am in support of development controls.

Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree Unsure

Questions relating to transportation planning.

26. Municipal transportation plans for Camp Grayling are reasonable? (i.e. the transportation system can 

adequately accommodate the current volume of traffic, the quality of the roads support the volume) 

Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree Unsure

Comments: ___________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________

27. How would you rate your agreement with this statement: 

Coordination/communication between Camp Grayling and local communities facilitates an efficient flow of traffic. 

Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree Unsure

Other

Would you like to receive updates on the JLUS process? If so please leave us your name, email or address.

_____________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | APPENDIX b-27

CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY – PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN | APPENDIX 21

project 

fact sheet/

announcements

c Please see the following pages.
b-28 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

22 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY – PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN

d

Working Together to Build Stronger Local Communities 

The Camp Grayling and Alpena Combat Readiness 

Training Center Joint Land Use Study (JLUS) 

Community Meetings 

Northeast Michigan Council of Governments invites you to participate in upcoming public meetings for the 

JLUS project that will address the issues related to military installations in our communities. Join staff from 

Camp Grayling and the Alpena Combat Readiness Training Center, local community officials, and other 

interested residents and business owners to hear a presentation about the military installations, learn 

about the JLUS project, and share your issues, concerns, and questions. Light snacks will be provided.

Alpena Combat Readiness Training Center Public Meeting

Thursday, June 1, 2017 | 7:00 pm – 9:00 pm 

Maritime Heritage Center (NOAA) Sanctuary Theater, 500 W. Fletcher Street, Alpena, MI

Camp Grayling Public Meeting

Tuesday, June 6, 2017 | 7:00 pm – 9:00 pm 

Kirtland Health Sciences Center, Community Room B, 4800 W. 4 Mile Road, Grayling, MI

Do you live, work, or recreate near the 

Alpena Combat Readiness Training 

Center or Camp Grayling? 

Have you wondered about the military 

installations and how they contribute to 

our economy? 

What are the issues, concerns, 

and questions you have about the 

compatibility of the military missions with 

the surrounding communities? 

Read more about the JLUS project at NEMCOG’s website http://www.discovernortheastmichigan.org/jlus.asp

The Northeast Michigan Council of Governments invites 

Joint Land Use Study (JLUS) Policy and Technical Committee members 

to participate in the 

Camp Grayling and the Alpena Combat Readiness 

Training Center JLUS Installation Tours 

and Issues Identification Discussion 

Alpena Joint Training Center Installation Tour and Issues Identification Discussion

Thursday, June 1, 2017

9:00 am – 12:00 pm Installation Tour and Lunch (details provided upon receiving RSVP)

1:30 pm–4:00 pm Issues Identification Discussion

at the Maritime Heritage Center (NOAA) Education Room, 

500 W. Fletcher Street, Alpena, MI 

(Please consider staying for the JLUS Public Meeting from 7:00 pm – 9:00 pm 

in the Maritime Heritage Center Sanctuary Theater)

Camp Grayling Joint Maneuver Training Center Installation Tour 

and Issues Identification Discussion

Monday June 5, 2017

9:00 am – 4:00 pm Installation Tour and Lunch (details provided upon receiving RSVP)

Tuesday, June 6, 2017

9:00 am–11:30 am Issues Identification Discussion

at the Grayling Township Hall, 2090 Viking Way, Grayling, MI

(Please consider attending the JLUS Public Meeting from 7:00 pm – 9:00 pm 

Kirtland Health Sciences Center, Community Room B, 4800 W. 4 Mile Road, Grayling, MI)

RSVPs are required to participate in the installation tours. 

All Policy Committee and Technical Committee members should RSVP for the installation tours to 

Denise Cline, Deputy Director/Chief Planner, Northeast Michigan Council of Governments

(734) 648-9295 (direct phone line), (989) 705-3730 (main office), (989) 705-3729 (fax) or dmcline@nemcog.org. 

RSVPs due no later than 12:00 pm Friday, May 26. Anyone who has not provided an RSVP will not appear on 

the installation security list and will not be able to participate in the tour. You will receive additional details 

about the tour logistics upon submitting your RSVP.
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | APPENDIX b-29

CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY – PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN | APPENDIX 23

surveys 

announcement

d

Working Together to Build Stronger Local Communities 

The Camp Grayling and Alpena Combat Readiness 

Training Center Joint Land Use Study (JLUS) 

COMMUNITY SURVEY

Northeast Michigan Council of Governments invites you to share your opinion and 

concerns through a community survey. Your input will help the Joint Land Use Study 

(JLUS) team identify problems and solutions.

If you would like a paper copy of the survey, please call NEMCOG at 989-705-3730 or email dmcline@nemcog.org

Do you live, work, or recreate near the 

Alpena Combat Readiness Training 

Center or Camp Grayling? 

How do you feel these military 

installations affect your quality of life 

and the local economy?

What are the issues, concerns, 

and questions you have about the 

compatibility of the military missions with 

the surrounding communities? 

Read more about the JLUS project at NEMCOG’s website http://www.discovernortheastmichigan.org/jlus.asp

Go to the NEMCOG 

Joint Land Use Study project website 

and take the survey that’s right for you. 

http://www.discovernortheastmichigan.org/jlus.asp
b-30 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

24 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY – PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN

This page intentionally left blank.
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | APPENDIX c-1

During the June 2017 public meetings for the Camp Grayling 

JMTC and Alpena CRTC JLUS, the JLUS project team conducted a SWOT analysis with project stakeholders. Stakeholders 

included members of the TC and PC as well as the public.

A SWOT analysis is a consensus-building exercise to sort 

previously identified issues into the categories of strengths,

weaknesses, opportunities, and threats so that individuals 

can vote to share their preferences.

This voting it turn leads to the creation of a weighted matrix, which reveals the issues that stakeholders consider 

most important to their daily lives. 

Some questions to consider while placing issues in the various categories include: 

 STRENGTH:

 What is working or has worked?

 What are the technologies, programs, policies, or resources to build on?

 WEAKNESS:

 What is not working and requires modification or

abandonment? 

 What has been unsuccessful in the past and why?

 OPPORTUNITY:

 What could work? 

 Are there untapped resources available?

 Are there assets, like geographic location, that are 

not being maximized?

 THREAT:

 What will work against the program if there is no 

charge? 

 What needs to be planned for now to prevent failure?

Results of the analysis performed at the NEMCOG public 

meetings is provided in the following tables and graphics. 

These weighted issues were used to develop the refined list

of issues that was later presented to the public in October 

2017.

SWOT results

C

Above: The SWOT exercise facilitator collects issues, which can be positive or negative, on sticky notes. Then, the facilitator 

encourages participants to answer "in one voice" as they sort the issues into the four categories. 

Once all the issues 

have been categorized, participants in 

Alpena (top left) and 

Grayling (below left) 

are given a number 

of stickers and instructions about how 

to use them. They 

can place their stickers as they see fit, 

selecting the issues 

that matter the most 

to them and their 

communities. 
c-2 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Table C.1 | Camp Grayling JMTC SWOT Results – TC and PC Members

STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES OPPORTUNITIES THREATS

Issue Votes Issue Votes Issue Votes Issue Votes

Economic Impact 9 Camp Grayling 

Operations: Noise

11 Airport: Sound and 

View Buffer

6 PFCs 19

Sustainability and 

Recycling

5 Tax Burden 7 MATES 6 Road Conditions 16

Community 

Cooperation

3 Internet Access 7 Communication with 

Area Surrounding 

Camp Grayling

5 Wildfires 12

Sounds and Sights of 

Freedom

3 Noise: Aircraft 7 Emergency Response 

Notification

4 Runway Expansion: 

Trees

8

Positive Community 

Interaction

3 Noise: Impact on 

Communities

6 Communication about 

Operations

3 ASP Protection 3

Simulated Training 2 DNR Tree Cutting 6 Camp Grayling 5 Year 

Expansion Plan

3 Unexploded Ordinance 2

Positive Members of 

the Community

2 Poor Cell Phone 

Reception

6 Future of Joint 

Recycling

1 Fuel Point Protection 2

Historic Reputation 2 Flight Path 5 Lake Recreation Effects 1 Anti-Terrorism/Force 

Protection

0

No Land Growth 1 Night Operations 

Impact on Communities

4 Summer Peak 1

Continuing 

Improvement with 

Public Relations

1 Camp Grayling 

Operations: Low Flying

4 Increase Tanks 1

Camp Grayling 

Operations: Noise 

Improvement

1 Displaced Wildlife 3 Tank Trails 0

Threatened and 

Endangered Species 

Habitat

1 Clear Cutting 3 Double Northern Strike 0

Wide Name Recognition 1 Emergency Response: 

Summer Peak

2 In Grants 0

Best Group EVER 1 New Gates 1 Out Grant Disposal 0

Multi-County 

Collaboration

0 Infrastructure Disrepair 0

Table C.2 | Camp Grayling JMTC SWOT Results – Public

STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES OPPORTUNITIES THREATS

Issue Votes Issue Votes Issue Votes Issue Votes

Wildlife: Contiguous 

Habitat

4 PA288 Enforce 

Resources

6 Public Relations 9 Fire Control 7

Community Support 3 Camp Grayling 

Operations: Noise

5 Economic Monitoring 7 Ground Water 

Contamination

6

Economic Impact 3 Problem Intersections 4 PA 288 5 Airfield Water

Contamination

3

Wildlife: Partnerships 3 Cell Coverage 4 Education 5 Fire Impact to Local 

Training

2

Emergency Responders 2 Road Conditions 4 Social Media 2 Vertical Hazards 2

147,000 Acre Facility 2 North Down River I-75 

Road 

3 Silent Sports 2 PFCs 2

Maintaining Protected 

Habitat

1 Disaster 

Communications

3 Forest Health 2 Public Safety 1

Air Space 1 Water Quality 3 Energy Efficiency 1 In Grants and Out 

Grants

1

Wildfires Required

Burns

1 Four Mile/I-75 2 Stormwater 

Management

1 PA288 ORV Trail 

Posting

1

UASs 1 Siltation 2 Interoperability 1 Property Damage due 

to Wildfires

0

Grayling Army Airfield 1 Infrastructure 2 Facilities as a 

Community Resource

1 UXOs 0

Wildlife: T&E Species 1 Shortage of Emergency 

Responders

1 Airfield Expansion

Opportunities

1

State Partnerships 1 Swimmers Itch 1 Virtual Pipe Line 1

Research and 

Development

1 Soil Erosion 1 Population Surge 

(Carrying Capacity)

1

Wildlife: T&E Research 1 BAPs 1 COA 4 UAS to 

Restricted Airspace

0

Positive Deterrent 0 Fire Fighting Costs 1 Public Recreation 0

Alpena-Grayling 

Partnership

0 Visitors Tail 1 Public Access 0

Restricted Air Space 0 High Season Problem 

Intersections

1

CG MATES Partnership 0 Traffic Congestion 1

Increased Throughput 0 Social Media Perception 0

Rising Tide 0 Removal of Vegetation 0

DSCA 0 Logistical Trail 0

Varieties of Land 

Ownership 

0 Freeway Interchanges 

(choke points)

0

Designated Natural 

Rivers

0

NWTF Cooperative WL 

Management 

0

Facilities 0

Hanson Hills Rec Area 0

Boundary Management 0

Frequency Capacity 0
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | APPENDIX c-3

Table C.3 | Alpena CRTC SWOT Results – TC, PC, and Public

STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES OPPORTUNITIES THREATS

Issue Votes Issue Votes Issue Votes Issue Votes

Northern Strike Activity 9 Noise: Training/Aircraft 

Operations (Too low 

and fast)

5 Base Community 

Council

9 Closing Alpena CRTC 10

Commercial 

Partnership with 

Sheriff's Department

7 Delayed Budget/

Congressional Approval

3 Northern Strike 7 Live Munition Impacts 

to Lake Huron

7

Draws New People/

Tourist to Community

6 Flight Path 2 Increase Local 

Awareness of Alpena 

CRTC Economic Impact

6 PFCs 5

Base Population 

Economic Impact

6 Training Accidents 2 Increase Community 

Involvement

6 Impact of Munitions on 

Groundwater Quality

4

Airport Viability 5 Infrastructure Issue – 

Roads and Matching 

SRM

2 Sustainability 5 Unexploded (UXO)/

Dummy Ordinance in 

Lake Huron

1

Joint Response 

Emergency Services

5 FAA Oversight 1 Attract DOD Prime 

Contractors

5 Impact on the Marine 

Sanctuary

1

Star Base 5 PT SES Trigger 

Northern Strike

0 Identify the Carrying 

Capacity of Alpena

3 Security Breach 0

Members of the 

Community

4 Sling Load Training 0 PSA 2 Civilian Intrusion 0

New Hangar 3 Drop Zone Accidents 0 Parade 1

Construction is a 

positive Economic 

Impact

3 Public Air Show 0

Expansion Potential 3

Northern Strike and 

Economic Assess

2

Current Sonar Scan 2

Surge Capacity - Rental 

Vehicle

0

Figure C.1 | Camp Grayling JMTC SWOT Results

Camp Grayling JMTC SWOT analysis results

S W O T

strengths weaknesses opportunities threats

PFCs

Road Conditions

Public 

Relations

Airport: Sound and View Buffer

Flight Path

Economic Impact

Sustainability/ 

Recycling

Noise: Camp 

Grayling 

Operations

Runway Expansion: Trees

Tax Burden

Internet 

Access Noise: Aircraft

Noise: Impact on 

Communities

DNR Tree Cutting

Poor Cell Phone 

Reception

MATES

Communication with 

Areas Surrounding 

Camp Grayling

Economic Monitoring

Wildfires/

Fire Control

PA288 – 

Enforce Resources

Ground Water 

Contamination

PA288

Education

Road Conditions

Wildlife: Contiguous Habitat

Community 

Cooperation

Sights/Sounds of Freedom

Positive Community Interaction

Simulated Training

Positive Members of the Community

Historic Reputation

No Land Growth

Continuing Improvement 

of Public Relations

Camp Grayling Operations: 

Noise Improvement T&E Species Habitat

Wide Name Recognition

Best Group Ever

Multi-county Collaboration

Night Operations Impact 

on Communities

Camp Grayling Operations: Low Flying

Displaced Wildlife

Clear Cutting

Emergency Response: 

Summer Peak

New Gates

Infrastructure Disrepair

Emergency Response Notification

Communication about 

Operations

Camp Grayling 5-year Expansion Plan

Future of Joint Recycling

Lake Recreation Effects

Summer Peak

Increase Tanks

Tank Trails

Double Northern Strike

In Grants

Out Grant Disposal

ASP Protection

UXO

Fuel Point Protection

AT/FP

Airfield Water Contamination

Fire Impact to Training

Vertical 

Hazards

Public Safety

In Grants and Out Grants

PA288 ORV Trail Posting

Property Damage due to Wildfires

Social Media

Silent Sports

Forest Health

Energy Efficiency

Stormwater Management

Interoperability

Facilities as a 

Community Resource

Airfield Expansion

Virtual Pipeline

Population Surge

COA 4 UAS to 

Restricted Airspace

Public Recreation

Public Access North Down River 

I-75 Road

Disaster Communications

Water Quality

Four Mile/I-75

Siltation

Infrastructure

Swimmers Itch

Shortage of 

Emergency Responders

Soil Erosion

BAPS

Fire Fighting Costs

Visitors Trail

High Season 

Problem Intersections

Traffic 

Congestion

Social Media Perception

Vegetation Removal

Logistical Trail

Freeway Interchanges

(Choke Points)

Emergency Responders Community Support

Wildlife: Partnerships

147,000-acre Facility Air Space

Wildfires Required Burns

UAS

Grayling Army Airfield

State Partnerships

Research and Development

Positive Deterrent

Wildlife: T&E 

Research

Alpena-Grayling Partnership

Restricted 

Air Space

CG MATES 

Partnership Increased Throughput

Rising Tide

DSCA

Varieties of Land Ownership

Designated Natural Rivers

NWTF Cooperative 

WL Management

Facilities

Hanson Hills 

Recreation Area

Boundary Management

Frequency 

Capacity

(Items in the smallest font size received less than 5 votes.)

(Items in the smallest font size got less than 5 votes.)

Figure C.2 | Alpena CRTC SWOT Results

Alpena CRTC SWOT analysis results

S W O T

Alpena CRTC

longevity

PFCs

Live Munition 

Impacts to 

Lake Huron

Base 

Community 

Council

Northern Strike

Sustainability

Attract Prime DOD Contractors

Increase Local 

Awareness of Alpena 

CTRC Economic Impact

Increase 

Community 

Involvement

Noise: Training/ 

Aircraft Operations 

(Too low and fast)

Northern 

Strike 

Activity

Commercial 

Partnership with the 

Sheriff’s Department

Draws New People 

to Community

Base Population 

Economic Impact

Airport Viability

STARBASE

Joint Response 

Emergency Services

Members of the Community

New Hangar

Construction: Positive 

Economic Impact

Expansion Potential

Current Sonar Scan

Surge Capacity: 

Rental Vehicles 

Surge Capacity: 

Hotels 

Delayed Budget/ 

Congressional Approval

Flight Path

Training Accidents

Infrastructure Issue: 

Roads and Matching SRM

FAA Oversight

PT SES Trigger Northern Strike

Sling Load Training

Drop Zone Accidents

Identify the Carrying 

Capacity of Alpena

PSA

Parade

Public Air Show

Impact of Munitions on 

Ground Water Quality

UXO/Dummy Ordnance in Lake Huron

Impact on the 

Marine Sanctuary

Security Breach

Civilian Intrusion

Alpena stakeholders participate in SWOT analysis

strengths weaknesses opportunities threats

(Items in the smallest font size received less than 5 votes.)
c-4 INTRODUCTION | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

This page intentionally left blank.
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | APPENDIX d-1

Please see the following pages.

strategy index

d
d-2 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Table D.1 | Camp Grayling JMTC Strategies

JLUS 

IMPLEMENTATION 

TEAM ACTION PLAN 

ITEMS

ID ISSUE/STRATEGY PRIORITY TIME TYPE STRATEGY LEAD STAKEHOLDERS

Category 1: Noise

Issue 1a Impact of Aircraft Noise on Communities

Noise Study 1a.1 Conduct a noise study H 0-3 Research Camp Grayling JMTC/Alpena CRTC NEMCOG, Residents

Noise Study 1a.2 Educate the public on residential sound attenuation M 0-1 Outreach NEMCOG, Camp Grayling JMTC/Alpena 

CRTC

NEMCOG, Residents

Noise Study 1a.3 Establish no-fly zones over sensitive areas M 0-4 Regulatory NEMCOG, Camp Grayling JMTC/Alpena 

CRTC

NEMCOG, Residents

Military Overlay Zone 1a.4 Conduct an analysis of property ownership under the restricted airspace and near the airfield M 0-5+ Regulatory Camp Grayling JMTC/Alpena CRTC NEMCOG, Residents

Military Overlay Zone 1a.5 Noise reduction for buildings within 65 ADNL noise area H 0-1 Regulatory Grayling, Alpena, Crawford County NEMCOG, Residents

Issue 1b Tree Cutting Reduces Noise Buffer

Landscape Plan 1b.1 Plant trees in areas where it is appropriate and allowed H 2-5+ Regulatory Camp Grayling JMTC, MDNR NEMCOG, Residents, U.S. Forest Service

Landscape Plan 1b.2 Assess timber harvest effects on noise attenuation M 2-3 Outreach Camp Grayling JMTC Residents, MDNR

Landscape Plan 1b.3 Enhance public awareness of forestry management plans, operations, and impacts M 2-3 Outreach MDNR Camp Grayling JMTC, Residents

Category 2: Military Operations

Issue 2a Flight Paths over Homes

Military Overlay Zone 2a.1 Create sensible military overlay zones around Camp Grayling JMTC H 0-4 Regulatory NEMCOG Planners NEMCOG, Residents

Noise Study

Military Overlay Zone

2a.2 Educate the public on existing established flight paths M 0-5+ Outreach Camp Grayling JMTC/Alpena CRTC, 

NEMCOG

NEMCOG, Residents

Issue 2b Noise and Vehicular Disruption from MATES

Community Relations Staff 2b.1 Educate the public on traffic routes and needs M 0-2 Outreach Camp Grayling JMTC Public Affairs,

NEMCOG

NEMCOG, Residents

Issue 2c Noise and Vibration from Night Training

Noise Study

Community Relations Staff

2c.1 Educate and inform the public on night training M 3-5 Regulatory DOD, NGB, Camp Grayling JMTC/Alpena 

CRTC

NEMCOG, Residents

Noise Study

Installation Master Plan

2c.2 Identify specific locations where night training is particularly disruptive and identify alternatives M 0-2 Regulatory DOD, NGB NEMCOG, Camp Grayling JMTC/Alpena 

CRTC

Noise Study

Installation Master Plan

2c.3 Confine military arms testing and range use to areas adjacent to state-owned lands M 0-2 Regulatory DOD, NGB, Camp Grayling JMTC/Alpena 

CRTC

NEMCOG, Residents

Issue 2d Population Growth may Encroach on the Mission

Military Overlay Zone

Installation Master Plan

2d.1 Establish zoning regulations that prevent encroachment, particularly near potentially dangerous and noisegenerating activitiesH 1-2 Regulatory NEMCOG NEMCOG, Residents, Camp Grayling 

JMTC

Military Overlay Zone

Installation Master Plan

2d.2 Purchase land around installations to control growth L 2-5+ Regulatory NEMCOG, Camp Grayling JMTC Landowners

Category 3: Environmental

Issue 3a PFOS and PFOA Contamination of Groundwater

Community Relations Staff

Water Master Plan

3a.1 Improve public outreach and access to information M 1-5+ Outreach Camp Grayling JMTC, NGB NEMCOG, Residents, MDNR

Issue 3b Impacts/Effects on Groundwater and Drinking Water

Community Relations Staff

Water Master Plan

3b.1 Provide information to the public on groundwater contamination in the Camp Grayling area M 2-3 Research Camp Grayling JMTC, MDEQ NEMCOG, Residents, MDNR
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | APPENDIX d-3

JLUS 

IMPLEMENTATION 

TEAM ACTION PLAN 

ITEMS

ID ISSUE/STRATEGY PRIORITY TIME TYPE STRATEGY LEAD STAKEHOLDERS

Issue 3c Impacts/Effects on Surface Water Systems

Community Relations Staff

Water Master Plan

3c.1 Control runoff and support bioassessment surveys to monitor ecological and aquatic community health H 2-3 Regulatory NEMCOG, MDEQ Residents

Community Relations Staff

Water Master Plan

3c.2 Support water quality and aquatic ecology communications L 2-3 Outreach NEMCOG Residents, MDNR

Issue 3d Effects on Health of Wildlife Populations

Installation Master Plan

Community Relations Staff

3d.1 Ongoing ecological assessment and community outreach and engagement M 3-5+ Research/

Outreach

Camp Grayling JMTC, MDNR Residents

Issue 3e Wildfire Management

Community Relations Staff

Fire Study

3e.1 Increase public awareness of ongoing wildfire management efforts and gather public input M 0-5+ Outreach Camp Grayling JMTC, MDNR Residents, MDNR

Issue 3f Resource Use and Sustainability

Community Relations Staff

Water Master Plan

3f.1 Public outreach to increase awareness of sustainability measures at Camp Grayling JMTC L 0-5+ Outreach Camp Grayling JMTC Public Affairs Residents

Installation Master Plan 3f.2 Consider the creation of joint recycling/sorting station L 2-3 Regulatory Camp Grayling JMTC, NEMCOG Residents

Category 4: Transportation and Infrastructure

Issue 4a Effects of Growth on Utilities

Installation Master Plan 4a.1 Continue to monitor capacity and community growth L 0-5+ Regulatory Grayling Township Residents, MDNR

Installation Master Plan 4a.2 Plan for possible mission expansion M 0-5+ Planning Camp Grayling JMTC City of Grayling, Residents

Issue 4b Improve Internet Access

4b.1 Encourage the growth and use of high-speed internet services L 0-3 Regulatory City of Grayling Residents, County, Military

Issue 4c Poor Cellular Reception

4c.1 Grow cellular services L 2-3 Regulatory Camp Grayling JMTC, Local 

Communities

Residents, MDNR

Issue 4d Traffic

Installation Master Plan

Transportation Study

4d.1 Streamline Camp Grayling JMTC traffic M 2-3 Regulatory Camp Grayling JMTC, Local 

Communities

Residents

Installation Master Plan

Transportation Study

4d.2 Improve traffic flow and safety throughout the Grayling area H 2-3 Regulatory NEMCOG/City of Grayling Residents, County, Military

Transportation Study 4d.3 Improve the I-75/North Down River Road interchange H 2-3 Development Crawford County Road Commission NEMCOG, Camp Grayling JMTC, City of 

Grayling

Transportation Study 4d.4 Create a landmark and symbolic entrance to Camp Grayling JMTC L 3-5 Regulatory Grayling Township, City of Grayling Camp Grayling JMTC, Grayling Township

Issue 4e Recreational Access

Community Relations Staff

Transportation Study

Installation Master Plan

Landscape Plan

4e.1 Ensure appropriate recreational access and increase public outreach M 2-3 Regulatory Camp Grayling JMTC, Local 

Communities, MDNR

Residents, MDNR

Issue 4f Poor Road Condition

Transportation Study 4f.1 Improve road network M 0-5+ Regulatory Multiple Residents, Camp Grayling JMTC

Transportation Study 4f.2 Increase funding for road projects and maintenance H 0-5+ Funding Multiple Residents, Camp Grayling JMTC
d-4 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

JLUS 

IMPLEMENTATION 

TEAM ACTION PLAN 

ITEMS

ID ISSUE/STRATEGY PRIORITY TIME TYPE STRATEGY LEAD STAKEHOLDERS

Category 5: Community Partnerships

Issue 5a Communications/Education

Community Relations Staff 5a.1 Document a comprehensive SOP for communications and community relations at Camp Grayling JMTC M 1-2 Outreach Camp Grayling JMTC Residents

Community Relations Staff 5a.2 Use relationship with Blarney Broadcasting as a model for expanding media reach L 1-3 Outreach Camp Grayling JMTC Residents, Local Media

Community Relations Staff 5a.3 Develop a public education program on UXO M 1-2 Outreach Camp Grayling JMTC Residents

Community Relations Staff 5a.4 Ensure web resources include access to Camp Grayling contact information and resources L 0-1 Outreach Camp Grayling JMTC Residents

Issue 5b Public Relations/Community Involvement

Community Relations Staff 5b.1 Inform community partners on process to request Camp Grayling JMTC tours and participation in community 

events

M 0-1 Outreach Camp Grayling JMTC Residents

Community Relations Staff 5b.2 Expand Camp Grayling JMTC community relations staff H 3-5 Staffing Camp Grayling JMTC Residents

Community Relations Staff 5b.3 Develop an interpretive visitors' center/history center at Camp Grayling JMTC L 3-5 Outreach Camp Grayling JMTC Residents, Chambers of Commerce

Military Overlay Zone

Community Relations Staff

5b.4 Revise respective zoning ordinances for governmental entities within the APZ H 1-2 Regulatory Grayling Township, City of Grayling Developers, Residents, Local 

Governments

Community Relations Staff

Installation Master Plan

Transportation Study

5b.5 Collaborate on joint-use conference/community center M 4-5 Partnership Camp Grayling JMTC, City of Grayling Residents, Local Governments

Community Relations Staff 5b.6 Convene a Camp Grayling JMTC Community Council M 2-3 Outreach Project Rising Tide, Camp Grayling JMTC Residents, NEMCOG

Category 6: Economic Development

Issue 6a Effect on Property Value Mostly Perceived as Neutral or Positive

Military Overlay Zone

Community Relations Staff

Economic Impact Study

6a.1 Develop communication materials that highlight the potential impacts from Camp Grayling JMTC for future 

homebuyers

M 0-1 Outreach JLUS Implementation Committee, Rising 

Tide Initiative

Camp Grayling, County Economic 

Development Leads, Local Real Estate 

Agents

Issue 6b Significant Contributor to Local Economy

Fire Study

Economic Impact Study

6b.1 Fire protection services needs study H 0-1 Research Camp Grayling JMTC Residents, Grayling Fire Department, 

County Economic Development Leads

Economic Impact Study 6b.2 Local purchasing goal for Camp Grayling JMTC M 2-3 Outreach Camp Grayling JMTC Grayling Business Owners, County 

Economic Development Leads

Transportation Study

Economic Impact Study

6b.3 Expanded public transportation from Camp Grayling JMTC to surrounding communities to support military 

tourism

M 0-1 Outreach City of Grayling Grayling Business Owners, County 

Economic Development Leads, Gaylord, 

Michigan Works!

Installation Master Plan

Economic Impact Study

6b.4 Increase public use of Grayling Airfield L 4-5 Development Camp Grayling JMTC Grayling Township, Camp Grayling, FAA, 

MDOT, County Economic Development 

Leads

Issue 6c Economic Incentivizing and Monitoring

Economic Impact Study 6c.1 Economic tracking and reporting mechanisms to quantify annual military tourism M 0-1 Outreach City of Grayling Camp Grayling JMTC, County Economic 

Development Leads, Michigan Works!

Economic Impact Study 6c.2 Economic incentives to generate military tourism M 2-3 Regulatory Camp Grayling JMTC, City of Grayling, 

Grayling Township

Chambers of Commerce, County 

Economic Development Leads
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | APPENDIX d-5

Table D.2 | Alpena CRTC Strategies

JLUS 

IMPLEMENTATION 

TEAM ACTION PLAN 

ITEMS

ID ISSUE/STRATEGY PRIORITY TIME TYPE STRATEGY LEAD STAKEHOLDERS

Category 1: Noise

Issue 1a Training/Aircraft Operations are Too Low/Fast

1a.1 Educate the public on the flight paths used for military aircraft M 0-2 Outreach Alpena CRTC, NEMCOG NEMCOG, Residents

1a.2 Discourage residential uses via zoning M 2-4 Regulatory NEMCOG NEMCOG, Alpena Regional Airport

1a.3 Work with FAA and Alpena Regional Airport to control aircraft flight paths M 0-2 Outreach NEMCOG Alpena Regional Airport, Alpena CRTC

Military Overlay Zone 1a.4 Create a Military Overlay Zone H 0-4 Regulatory NEMCOG Planners Residents

Military Overlay Zone

Noise Study

1a.5 Update building codes Alpena CRTC to include better sound proofing for buildings built within the 65 ADNL

noise area

M 1-3 Regulatory City of Alpena, Alpena County Residents, Alpena CRTC

Military Overlay Zone

Noise Study

1a.6 Conduct a noise study H 0-3 Research Camp Grayling JMTC/Alpena CRTC NEMCOG, Residents

Category 2: Military Operations

Issue 2a Live munition impacts to Lake Huron

Bathymetric Survey

Water Master Plan

Interagency Cooperation

2a.1 Identify impacts to the environment H 2-5+ Research NEMCOG, MDNR, MDEQ NEMCOG, Residents, NOAA, Alpena 

CRTC

Issue 2b Northern Strike Activity

Community Relations Staff 2b.1 Organize and engage community members in advance M 2-3 Outreach NEMCOG Alpena CRTC, Camp Grayling JMTC, 

Community Leaders

Issue 2c Marine Sanctuary

Bathymetric Survey

Interagency Cooperation

2c.1 Identify potential UXO on the lake bed H 1-5+ Regulatory/

Research

Alpena CRTC, NOAA NEMCOG, U.S. Navy, U.S. Coast Guard

Military Overlay Zone

Noise Study

2c.2 Establish fixed boundaries so that encroachment into the military operations area is kept to a minimum H 2-3 Regulatory/

Research

Thunder Bay National Marine 

Sanctuary

Alpena CRTC

Community Relations Staff

Interagency Cooperation

Water Master Plan

2c.3 Author and promote cooperation story with Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary M 2-3 Research/

Outreach

NEMCOG, NOAA Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary, 

MDEQ

Category 3: Environmental

Issue 3a PFOS and PFOA Contamination of Groundwater

Community Relations Staff

Water Master Plan

3a.1 Improve public outreach and access to information H 1-3 Outreach Alpena CRTC MDEQ, Residents

Issue 3b Surface Water Quality (Lakes, Rivers, Streams, Wetlands)

Water Master Plan

Interagency Cooperation

3b.1 Support water quality and aquatic ecology scientific communications M 2-3 Outreach Alpena CRTC MDEQ, Residents

Water Master Plan

Interagency Cooperation

3b.2 Use biodegradable targets for lake training H 2-3 Regulatory Alpena CRTC NOAA

Issue 3c Groundwater Quality

Community Relations Staff

Water Master Plan

3c.1 Provide information to the public on groundwater contamination in the Alpena CRTC area M 2-3 Outreach Alpena CRTC Residents, MDNR 
d-6 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

JLUS 

IMPLEMENTATION 

TEAM ACTION PLAN 

ITEMS

ID ISSUE/STRATEGY PRIORITY TIME TYPE STRATEGY LEAD STAKEHOLDERS

Category 4: Transportation and Infrastructure

Issue 4a Effects of Growth on Utilities

4a.1 Address utilities issues at Alpena CRTC L 1-4 Regulatory Alpena CRTC City of Alpena, Alpena County 

Townships, Alpena County

4a.2 Plan for possible mission expansion M 0-5+ Regulatory Alpena CRTC Alpena County, Residents

Issue 4b Airport Joint Ownership/Land Use Access

Interagency Cooperation

Community Relations Staff

4b.1 Continue positive coordination H 0-5+ Outreach Alpena CRTC, Alpena Regional 

Airport

Issue 4c Road Funding

Transportation Plan

Community Relations Staff

4c.1 Continue discussion between county and military officials M 0-1 Research/

Outreach

Alpena CRTC City of Alpena, Alpena County 

Townships, Alpena County

Issue 4d Road Condition

4d.1 Increase funding for road projects and maintenance H 0-5+ Funding City of Alpena, Alpena County 

Townships, Alpena County

Residents

Issue 4e Recreational Access

4e.1 Determine whether allowing lake access is viable L 0-1 Regulatory/

Research

Alpena CRTC, Alpena Regional 

Airport

Residents, MDNR

Category 5: Community Partnerships

Issue 5a Communications/Education

Community Relations Staff 5a.1 Hire a dedicated community relations specialist for Alpena CRTC H 2-3 Regulatory Alpena CRTC, MIANG Residents

Community Relations Staff 5a.2 Improve update process to Alpena CRTC website M 2-3 Outreach Alpena CRTC, MIANG Residents

Community Relations Staff

Economic Impact Study

5a.3 Promote STARBASE as an asset connected to Alpena CRTC M 2-3 Outreach Alpena CRTC Residents

Community Relations Staff

Economic Impact Study

5a.4 Strengthen existing partnership with Alpena Community College M 2-3 Partnership Alpena CRTC Residents

Interagency Cooperation

Community Relations Staff

5a.5 Formalize communications with NOAA regarding operations over Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary M 0-3 Outreach Alpena CRTC Residents

Military Overlay Zone 5a.6 Revise respective zoning ordinances for governmental entities within the APZ H 1-2 Regulatory Alpena County Townships, NEMCOG Developers, Residents, Local 

Governments

Issue 5b Public Relations/Community Involvement

Interagency Cooperation

Economic Impact Study

5b.1 Convene expanded Alpena CRTC Community Council with Alpena Area Chamber of Commerce M 2-3 Outreach Alpena CRTC, JLUS Implementation 

Committee

Residents

Community Relations Staff

Economic Impact Study

5b.2 Inform community on process to request tours and participation in community events M 2-3 Outreach Alpena CRTC Residents

Category 6: Economic Development

Issue 6a Significant Contributor to Local Economy

Economic Impact Study 6a.1 Local purchasing goal for Alpena CRTC M 2-3 Outreach/

Research

Alpena CRTC Business Owners, Target Alpena

Issue 6b Airport Viability

Interagency Cooperation 6b.1 Leverage relationships to replace customs agent M 2-3 Regulatory Alpena Regional Airport Residents
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | APPENDIX d-7

JLUS 

IMPLEMENTATION 

TEAM ACTION PLAN 

ITEMS

ID ISSUE/STRATEGY PRIORITY TIME TYPE STRATEGY LEAD STAKEHOLDERS

Issue 6c Partnership with Sheriff

Economic Impact Study 6c.1 Maintain relationship between sheriff and Alpena CRTC and advocate for longer-term contract M 2-3 Regulatory Alpena CRTC/Alpena County Sheriff

Issue 6d Military Tourism

Economic Impact Study 6d.1 Economic incentives to generate military tourism M 2-3 Outreach/

Research

Alpena County Local Businesses, Tourism Bureaus, 

Target Alpena

Economic Impact Study 6d.2 Economic tracking and reporting mechanisms M 2-3 Outreach/

Research

Chamber of Commerce Alpena CRTC, Local Businesses, Target 

Alpena
d-8 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

This page intentionally left blank.
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | APPENDIX e-1

E.1 Official Stakeholder 

Comments 

See the following pages for comments received from key 

stakeholders on the draft and check final submittals.

report 

comments

and resources

e
e-2 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Camp Grayling JMTC and Alpena CRTC JLUS Comment Matrix

Draft Submittal, May 2018

Comment 

Number Reviewer

Page 

Number

Heading 

Number Comment Contractor Response Contractor Resolution

1 Denise Cline 2-6 2.1.8 Missaukee County is unzoned (text says zoning information was unavailable) Concur Text corrected

2 Denise Cline 2-7 2.1.9 Could we include a description of what APZ I and II mean? How are they different? Concur Text adjusted

3 Denise Cline 2-13 2.3.2

Text says that small portions of the RA may be privately owned if they have a conditional use lease agreement 

between the land owner and the US Government. Does this exist at Guthrie Lakes? I'm assuming not since the text 

also says it is unclear how they came to be in such close proximity. Issue 1b talks about trees needing to hug the 

structure to be effective, but this is in conflict with wildfire prevention strategies. Concur

Additional research is 

needed to better 

understand what 

agreements were in place 

when the Guthrie Lakes 

development was 

approved. Tetra Tech will 

resolve this comment 

before the Final Submittal. 

Regarding wildfire, the 

narrative has been 

adjusted. 

4 Denise Cline 2-16 2.3.2

Issue 2.d - add "township" to zoning recommendations. "Cities, counties, and townships....". Also - report 

recommends preventing future development to limit future encroachment, etc. However, it's already been stated 

that this large amount of private property and development was allowed to exist/develop (without reallly knowing 

why). Questions that the communities will likely ask when the implementation committee starts working on this 

are: How do you limit someone's ability to use their property without it being considered a taking? Or maybe a 

taking is justified in these cases due to safety concerns? Could the property owner demand just compensation? Concur

Added "townships." See 

updated language on page 

4-9, 4-27, and Appendix F.

5 Denise Cline 2-16 2.3.3

Change the "More Information" box to include the new consolidated website: 

https://www.michigan.gov/pfasresponse Concur Text adjusted

6 Denise Cline 3-3 3.1.5 Typo - Top paragraph on right-hand column. "The installation employees 88 military personnel..." Concur Text corrected

7 Denise Cline 3-13 3.3.3

Change the "More Information" box to include the new consolidated website: 

https://www.michigan.gov/pfasresponse Concur Text adjusted

8 Denise Cline 3-14 3.3.4

3rd column - 2nd paragraph - reference for the wastewater treatment numbers were probably from the City of 

Alpena Comprehensive Plan, not the Alpena County Master Plan. Concur Text corrected

9 Denise Cline 4-12 2.d.2

No real comment here - I just wanted to say that this is a very interesting strategy. I'm very interested in learning 

more about the RPX program mentioned. Concur Thanks! No action

10 Denise Cline 4-22 5.b.4

I’m thinking that communities should be coordinating with Camp Grayling/Alpena CRTC for their site plan reviews - 

especially if there isn't a military overlay zone in place. Camp Grayling/Alpena CRTC should at least be on the list of 

potential entities that site plans are distributed to in order to obtain feedback. This comment would apply to all 

strategies concerning the military overlay zone. Should add reference to Camp Grayling/Alpena CRTC in site plan 

review standards in local zoning ordinances. Concur

Text adjusted - pages 4-9, 4-

22, 4-27

11 Denise Cline b-9 2.1.1 Add Michigan Sea Grant/Michigan State University Extension to list of stakeholders Concur Text adjusted

12 Denise Cline b-10 2.1.2

Update list of committee members (attached) - delete Mary Sanders, add Brenda Fournier. Check for other 

changes (changes within Camp Grayling as well). Concur

Text adjusted per Word 

document

Camp Grayling JMTC and Alpena CRTC Joint Land Use Study Tetra Tech | 7222 Commerce Center Drive, Suite 150 | Colorado Springs, CO 80919 719-260-1700
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | APPENDIX e-3

Comment 

Number Reviewer

Page 

Number

Heading 

Number Comment Contractor Response Contractor Resolution

13 Denise Cline

General Comment - NEMCOG should continue developing the JLUS web presence. Each issue could have a 

separate page with the recommended strategies and also other resources which address that strategy. Then, as 

new developments occur, this additional information could be added. Concur This is a great idea!

14

Steven P. Smigelski, Airport 

Manager 3-3 3.1.5 Drones can now be flown in the Class D airspace when the tower is open. Concur Text adjusted

15

G. Sundin, Alpena City 

Manager

Pg. before 

1-1

Surround 

Area CRTC located west of Alpena, not northwest Concur Corrected

16

G. Sundin, Alpena City 

Manager

Same as 

Above

Top Issues 2nd arrow - I do not believe that events like Northern Strike are a burden to the community. Where does this 

come from?

Concur - We heard from some that the 

activity is a burden while others see it as 

a boon.

Changed to "impact the 

community"

17

G. Sundin, Alpena City 

Manager

Pg. 1-2 1.3

2nd column, 2nd paragraph, 4th line - "bound" should be "bounded". Later in paragraph, does not say what it is 

bounded by to the east. Concur

Changed to "bounded." No 

major 

constraints/boundaries to 

the east except wetlands.

18

G. Sundin, Alpena City 

Manager

Pg. 3-4 3.1.6 Population projection for Alpena County is unrealistically high. Where did you get your data? Discuss

Our source is Esri 

community analyst, which 

pulls Census data. The 

population graph is for the 

city of Alpena, not the 

study area.

19

G. Sundin, Alpena City 

Manager Pg. 3-10 3.3.2 Issue 2b - I have never heard that Northern Strike and other events are a burden to the community.

Concur - We heard from some that the 

activity is a burden while others see it as 

a boon.

Changed "burden" to 

"impact" like in comment 

above.

20

G. Sundin, Alpena City 

Manager Pg. 3-17 3.3.5 3rd column, 2nd paragraph, 3rd line from bottom - Add the word "been" after "regularly". Concur Changed

21

G. Sundin, Alpena City 

Manager Pg. 3-17 3.3.5

4th column, last paragraph - need an explanationas to why visits through STARBASE are not providing information 

that can be shared with family members. This is a generic statement as currently written. Concur Removed sentence

22

G. Sundin, Alpena City 

Manager Pg. 3-18 3.3.6

Issue 6.a, 2nd column, 2nd paragraph - Statement that summer tourism adds more than 4,000 people to the area 

seems outdated. Number seems low. Check with CVB. Concur Figure revised

23

G. Sundin, Alpena City 

Manager Pg. 3-18 3.3.6 Issue 6.b., 3rd column, 15th line - change "Airfield" to "Airport". Concur Corrected

24

G. Sundin, Alpena City 

Manager Pg. 4-2

1st column, ICRMP Heading - paragraph states that last ICRMP expired in 2017. Has a new one been completed or 

is it at least planned for? Concur

Added language about the 

ICRMP update process

25

G. Sundin, Alpena City 

Manager Pg. 4-30 Issue 2c 1st column, 3rd arrow - need a period after MDEQ. Change "has" to "have". Concur Corrected

26

G. Sundin, Alpena City 

Manager Pg. 4-30 Issue 2c

2nd column under "Additional Information" - Change "Alpena Regional Medical Center" to "Mid-Michigan Medical 

Center - Alpena". Concur Corrected

27

G. Sundin, Alpena City 

Manager

Pg. 4-32 Issue 4b

3rd column, last arrow under Recommendations - Wasn't the airport master plan recently updated as part of the 

terminal project? I could be wrong. Concur

Design plans for the new 

terminal were released, 

but that's different from 

the master plan.

Camp Grayling JMTC and Alpena CRTC Joint Land Use Study Tetra Tech | 7222 Commerce Center Drive, Suite 150 | Colorado Springs, CO 80919 719-260-1700
e-4 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Comment 

Number Reviewer

Page 

Number

Heading 

Number Comment Contractor Response Contractor Resolution

28

G. Sundin, Alpena City 

Manager Pg. 4-33 Issue 4d

1st column under Recommendations - I strongly disagree with using trolley fares or possible future downtown paid 

parking to subsidize road repairs. These funds help pay trolley expenses and any future paid parking would offset 

equipment and maintenance costs. Concur Removed recommendation

29

G. Sundin, Alpena City 

Manager Pg. 4-35 Issue 5b

1st column under "Summary" - a Copy of the Chamber's organizational model should be included in the Appendix. 

If not to be included, it should not be mentioned. Concur

Will include graphic in 

references appendix (A).

30

G. Sundin, Alpena City 

Manager Pg. 4-35 Issue 6a 3rd column,last recommendation - Eliminate the word "know" in the 2nd line Concur Corrected

32

G. Sundin, Alpena City 

Manager

Throughout

When recommendations are made, such as improving direct lines of communication between the CRTC and the 

community; need for a dedicated community relations specialist; improving the CRTC's webpage; and other digital 

outreach, etc., the challenges listed seem to be ready made excuses for nothing actually being done (the 

unlikelihood of the base getting a dedicated community relations specialist, even though Camp Grayling has one; 

problems with having to have any changes to the base's website or other digital communications needing ANG 

headquarters review and approval, etc.). The report needs to be more forceful in saying certain recommendations 

need to be taken seriously and every effort made to make them happen. This is especially true of the community 

relations specialist position, which is at the center of many of the needs and recommendations. Otherwise this is 

nothing more than an academic exercise. 

Unfortunately, this is not a regulatory 

document. The most forceful we can get 

is to recommend actions.

Narrative updated in 

section 4.1.1.

33 Julie Lowe, MDEQ Throughout Incorporate metion of new PFAS website: https://www.michigan.gov/pfasresponse Concur

References adjusted - 

pages 2-16, 3-13

34

Rob Pallarito, Otsego 

County Commissioner Throughout

I like the study as presented. I do wish it included a recommendation to correct for zoning/planning mistakes from 

the past.... possibly an avenue to acquire land now occupied and creating a "buffer area". Concur

Zoning recommendations 

have been revised in 

Section 4

35 Ken Glasser Pg. 2-14 Issue 1b Trees hugging a home is a fire, roof damage issue. An insurer may cancel a policy due to the increased hazard! Concur Text ajusted

36 Ken Glasser Pg. 2-16 Issue 2d

A 5-mile setback is economically devastating to the townships and counties which rely on property taxes to 

operate. Private individuals are also detrimetnally affected. Concur

Recommendation for a 5-

mile buffer revised.

37 Ken Glasser Pg. 4-7 Same comment as above Concur

Recommendation for a 5-

mile buffer revised.

38 Ken Glasser Pg. 4-9

Building code changes create consequences of higher building cost and potential out-of-pocket expense in an 

isurance claim due to costs to retrofit home. Concur

Recommendation 

rephrased to only include 

new construction

39 Patty O'Donnell Entire The Study should be in a format that is practical to read and to print such as 8.5x11 Do not concur

The format was chosen to 

better represent the maps.

40 Patty O'Donnell Page 4-17 4d.2

Challenges: What does this bullet point mean: "Local efforts to retain posted speed limits on M-72 may be 

unsuccessful" I think I know what this means but where on M-72 or would they like it throughout the County? Discuss

Text adjusted to say within 

Crawford county

41 Patty O'Donnell Page 4-18 4d.3

Recommentations: first arrow: combine the two sub-bullits to - Develop a full interchanges by adding southbound 

ramps to I-75. Challenges: first bullet, last sentence - This is not a State or federal priority Concur Text adjusted

42 Patty O'Donnell Page 4-18 4f

Make Issue 4f Poor road condition that includes 4f.1 Improve Road network and 4f.2: Increase funding for road 

projects and maintenance, to 4e for better flow instead of after Recreational Access. Recreational access would be 

4f. Discuss

This adjustment would 

affect the layout in 

multiple locations. 

Camp Grayling JMTC and Alpena CRTC Joint Land Use Study Tetra Tech | 7222 Commerce Center Drive, Suite 150 | Colorado Springs, CO 80919 719-260-1700
Comment 

Number Reviewer

Page 

Number

Heading 

Number Comment Contractor Response Contractor Resolution

43 Patty O'Donnell Page 4-19 4f (4e)

(Please note that the State, County Road Commission, and the City of Grayling have started to receive increased 

funding from the increased gas tax and registration fees that begain January 2017) 4e.2 Recommendations: add at 

the end of the last bullet: and wood products industry. Concur Text adjusted

44

45

46

47

Camp Grayling JMTC and Alpena CRTC Joint Land Use Study Tetra Tech | 7222 Commerce Center Drive, Suite 150 | Colorado Springs, CO 80919 719-260-1700
e-6 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Camp Grayling JMTC and Alpena CRTC JLUS Comment Matrix

Ck Final Submittal, October 2018

Comment 

Number  Reviewer

Page 

Number

Heading 

Number Comment Contractor Response Contractor Resolution

1 Kruse L 3 dash 6

Incompatible 

Use

Noise study completed in IDP EA in 2016. Noise study is 

attached in email with this comment matrix please update 

language to reflect. Language has been updated.

Narrative updated: Noise contours were provided at the time 

of the finalization of this JLUS. GIS of the APZs will need to be 

obtained along with the GIS for the noise contours.  A precise 

analysis of incompatible land use can be completed during 

the implementation phase of the JLUS when GIS data layers 

are made available. 

2 Kruse L 3 dash 9 Issue 1a:

"It is recommended that cities and counties restrict 

development of residential neighborhoods within 5 miles of all 

airports, ranges, or installations." who (agency) is 

recommending that?

It is a general planning recommendation to help limit 

encroachment and/or incompatible uses around air 

bases.  No change

3 Kruse L 3 dash 9 Issue 2a: "Sheboygan" please change to  "Cheboygan" Concur Changed to Cheboygan

4 Kruse L 3 dash 12 Issue 3a:

Instead of listing the results (As of January 1, 2018, 80 private 

wells had been tested for PFOSPFOA with 17...)  I would refer 

to the MDEQ website Michigan.gov/AlpenaPFASresponse Concur Deleted the reference to January 2018 results.

5 Kruse L 3 dash 14 Issue 3b: ...remove "on or" the base, as it is public property. Concur Language removed from the JLUS

6 Kruse L 3 dash 14 Issue 4a:

IDP date should be 2016 not 2013 (noted several times 

throughout section and document) Concur updated to 2015

7 Kruse L 3 dash 14 Issue 4a:

There is a more recent energy audit than 2009 (2017). Please 

get with Capt Blumline to obtain report. See Capt Blumline comment 1 No change

8 Kruse L 3 dash 17 Issue 5a:

"With less than 200 followers...". Currently the FB pages has 

1,000 followers.  Concur

Narrative updated: At the inception of the JLUS, the number 

of followers on facebook was less than 200. Upon completion 

of the JLUS, there are 1.000, which indicates that the Alpena 

is an optimal communication mechanism to reach community 

members. 

9 Kruse L 3 dash 17 Issue 5a:

"Alpena CRTC is located near STARBASE Alpena..." consider 

reversing "STAREBASE Alpena is located on Alpena CRTC..." Concur Narrative updated 

10 Kruse L 4 dash 2

Alpence CRTC 

IDP IDP was finalized in 2016 not 2015 See Capt Blumline comment 2 NC

11 Kruse L 4 dash 2 INRMP Define INRMP in title similar to ICRMP in the following section Concur Defined

12 Kruse L 4 dash2 ICRMP

In the note it states that the Grayling Range obtained a wavier 

for ICRMP. That is not true, they fall within the Alpena CRTC 

ICRMP jurisdiction where is explains lack of cultural resources 

and therefore not extensively discussed in the plan.  Concur

Narrative updated: Note: A cultural resources survey was 

performed at the Camp Grayling range, and no items of note 

were identified. The buildings under ANG jurisdiction fall 

within the Alpena CRTC ICRMP. There is a lack of cultural 

resources and therefore not extensively discussed in the 

ICRMP.
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | APPENDIX e-7

Camp Grayling JMTC and Alpena CRTC JLUS Comment Matrix

Ck Final Submittal, October 2018

Comment 

Number  Reviewer

Page 

Number

Heading 

Number Comment Contractor Response Contractor Resolution

1 Kruse L 3 dash 6

Incompatible 

Use

Noise study completed in IDP EA in 2016. Noise study is 

attached in email with this comment matrix please update 

language to reflect. Language has been updated.

Narrative updated: Noise contours were provided at the time 

of the finalization of this JLUS. GIS of the APZs will need to be 

obtained along with the GIS for the noise contours.  A precise 

analysis of incompatible land use can be completed during 

the implementation phase of the JLUS when GIS data layers 

are made available. 

2 Kruse L 3 dash 9 Issue 1a:

"It is recommended that cities and counties restrict 

development of residential neighborhoods within 5 miles of all 

airports, ranges, or installations." who (agency) is 

recommending that?

It is a general planning recommendation to help limit 

encroachment and/or incompatible uses around air 

bases.  No change

3 Kruse L 3 dash 9 Issue 2a: "Sheboygan" please change to  "Cheboygan" Concur Changed to Cheboygan

4 Kruse L 3 dash 12 Issue 3a:

Instead of listing the results (As of January 1, 2018, 80 private 

wells had been tested for PFOSPFOA with 17...)  I would refer 

to the MDEQ website Michigan.gov/AlpenaPFASresponse Concur Deleted the reference to January 2018 results.

5 Kruse L 3 dash 14 Issue 3b: ...remove "on or" the base, as it is public property. Concur Language removed from the JLUS

6 Kruse L 3 dash 14 Issue 4a:

IDP date should be 2016 not 2013 (noted several times 

throughout section and document) Concur updated to 2015

7 Kruse L 3 dash 14 Issue 4a:

There is a more recent energy audit than 2009 (2017). Please 

get with Capt Blumline to obtain report. See Capt Blumline comment 1 No change

8 Kruse L 3 dash 17 Issue 5a:

"With less than 200 followers...". Currently the FB pages has 

1,000 followers.  Concur

Narrative updated: At the inception of the JLUS, the number 

of followers on facebook was less than 200. Upon completion 

of the JLUS, there are 1.000, which indicates that the Alpena 

is an optimal communication mechanism to reach community 

members. 

9 Kruse L 3 dash 17 Issue 5a:

"Alpena CRTC is located near STARBASE Alpena..." consider 

reversing "STAREBASE Alpena is located on Alpena CRTC..." Concur Narrative updated 

10 Kruse L 4 dash 2

Alpence CRTC 

IDP IDP was finalized in 2016 not 2015 See Capt Blumline comment 2 NC

11 Kruse L 4 dash 2 INRMP Define INRMP in title similar to ICRMP in the following section Concur Defined

12 Kruse L 4 dash2 ICRMP

In the note it states that the Grayling Range obtained a wavier 

for ICRMP. That is not true, they fall within the Alpena CRTC 

ICRMP jurisdiction where is explains lack of cultural resources 

and therefore not extensively discussed in the plan.  Concur

Narrative updated: Note: A cultural resources survey was 

performed at the Camp Grayling range, and no items of note 

were identified. The buildings under ANG jurisdiction fall 

within the Alpena CRTC ICRMP. There is a lack of cultural 

resources and therefore not extensively discussed in the 

ICRMP.
e-8 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Camp Grayling JMTC and Alpena CRTC JLUS Comment Matrix

Ck Final Submittal, October 2018

Comment 

Number  Reviewer

Page 

Number

Heading 

Number Comment Contractor Response Contractor Resolution

1 Blumline NA NA

To Lisa's comment #7, I'm not aware of the last official energy audit on base. We have a Regional Energy Manager that keeps tabs on our energy usage and 

equipment continuously. He is not from our base, but he contacts us periodically to perform small studies. Thank you. NA

2 Blumline NA NA Regarding Lisa's comment #10, use 2015 for the last IDP. Concur Updated to 2015

3 Blumline 3‐6 3.1.9

You mention (or it appears you mention) that there is no APZ? The APZ is defined by the FAA in Part 107 or 109 (the number slips my memory). I don't have 

this on a digital map, but we do have defined APZs. This also conflicts with statements on 3‐17. Concur

Narrative updated as follows: Noise contours were provided 

at the time of the finalization of this JLUS and the FAA defines 

the accident potential zones (APZs). GIS of the APZs will need 

to be obtained along with the GIS for the noise contours. A 

precise analysis of incompatible land use can be completed 

during the implementation phase of the JLUS when GIS data 

layers are made available. 

4 Blumline 3‐12 3.3.2

In terms of the NMS, the sanctuary was created to protect the shipwrecks. Unlike many other marine sanctuaries, the law for Thunder Bay NMS doesn't 

directly protect marine life.  Concur

Added the following sentence: The sanctuary was created to 

protect the shipwrecks and unlike many other marine 

sanctuaries, the law for Thunder Bay National Marine 

Sanctuary (NMS) doesn't directly protect marine life. 

5 Blumline 3‐15 3.3.4, 4c

The amount of passes of military vehicles on public roads for this base is not significant. I would make an educated guess that there are only hundreds to 

thousands of passes each year. Since roads are designed to have hundreds of thousands to hundreds of millions of passes, i don't think it is significant. Also, 

we primarily use regular passenger vehicles. Grayling is a completly differnt animal becuase of convoys and the weight of their vehicles, but we primarily 

transport heavy things through the air. I would suggest that the JLUS report suggests a study before any actions are taken. 

Concur; because this was public comment, we will need 

to keep it as an issue, however we will clarify that Alpena 

CRTC has minimal impact on roads. We also have a 

suggestion to update the Alpena Area‐wide 

Comprehensive Transportation Plan 

added the following to 3.3.4, Issue 4c:  Members of Alpena 

CRTC primarily use regular passenger vehicles and use of 

military vehicles is minimum.  

6 Blumline 3‐16 3.3.4, 4d Can you please be specific as to what is out of compliance with the 32‐1084? If it is a possible security vulnerability, we should not make that public. Concur Statement removed

7 Blumline

3‐18 and 4‐

35 3.3.6, 6a

Being a Resource Advisor, I see the majority of small purchases on base. We can purchase most things under $5,000 without going through Contracting. We 

just put those items on a credit card. I would say our people already buy local whenever possible for items that don't require Federal or State sourcing 

requirements. The Federal Aquisition Regulation requires we source through sites like GSA first. It is to the Credit Card Holder's advantage to buy locally 

becuase, GSA is very slow ‐ some simple items can take a month to receive. Whereas if there is something we can buy locally, that is preferred. Big sites like 

Amazon or Walmart are not allowed. Even on items that are in teh $5,000‐$25,000 range, we prefer buying local because the person who sells it generally 

will service it (eg buying a UTV and having a service plan with a local UTV dealer, or buying an expensive HVAC unit that has a nearby dealer that can service 

it).  Concur

Narrative updated: Commitment to spending Alpena CRTC 

funding at locally  owned businesses is a priorty by Alpena 

CRTC. Federal regulations are to be followed for 

approximately 99.9% of the base's purchases. Purchasing 

locally provides is a  positive impact to the local economy. 

Additionally, the local purchases are more likely to be serviced 

in the future by local business, which is preferred by Alpena 

CRTC personnel. 

8 Blumline

3‐18 and 4‐

35 3.3.6, 6a

Something I believe could have a MUCH greater impact involves procurement of Construction (which is the lionshare of the base's budget). Contracting in 

Michigan has been consolidated, and all but two Contracting Officers in the State are located at Selfridge ANGB. Contracting has set‐aside goals for each year 

(HUBZone, 8a, Small Biz, etc). I believe that Alpena has GREAT contractors and subcontractors. They are much better than the contractors from Southeast 

Michigan. However, because the State contracting office is located in Southeast Michigan, the majority of our contracts are given direct awards to 8a/Small 

Biz/HUBZone contractors from Southeast Michigan. Remedying this would would have to be a multi‐directional approach. First, the Chamber of Commerce 

should work with our Contracting Office to make sure our local contractors qualify for these set asides. Second, whoever does HUBZone district lines recently 

split the City of Alpena into two. I'm not sure why one half of Alpena would be a HUBZone and the other would not. I would suggest we get with whoever 

defines a HUBZone to include all of Alpena County in the HUBZone. This may require work with lawmakers? Third, (please do not attribute this one to me) If I 

were NEMCOG and/or the Chamber I would file a formal Protest to the Contracting Office citing that for 100% of our recent set‐aside contracts, NEMI 

contractors have been consistently excluded from consideration. I have begged and pleaded with Contracting to hire Alpena Contractors for the past three 

years, and I have never been given a straight answer as to why we keep getting contractors from SEMI. These contracts are also very expensive becuase they 

have to mobilize to a location 250 miles away and it is a direct‐award. I would follow this protest up with some sort of local law. A lawyer would have to do 

some research on this, but it's possible that the FAR would require Contracting officers to follow Federal, State, and Local laws. Set‐asides are NOT required ‐ 

they are goals. If there was a local law that required first consideration be given to local contractors for set‐asides, that could solve this problem. Concur Numerous changes made to page 4‐39, strategy 6a.1
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | APPENDIX e-9

E.2 Public Comments

See the following pages for comments received from the 

public during the JLUS process. 1.   Al Miller CMSGT USAF RET 

I’ve read the Joint Land Use Study and I see no where where past practices polluting ground water will 

be corrected. Before planning for the future let’s clean up the past. Recommend all future plans and 

modification to this lad be put on hold until the water contamination is fully identified and cleaned up.   

2. Don and Tammy Mullett 

Im not sure where to begin. We bought in Gutherie Lakes/Enchanted Forest Sub a year ago. Yes we 

knew there was military practice here and the box was checked off on the house purchase papers. But 

until we lived it..we had no idea. Guess we should've wondered why the house was on the market for 4 

years. We understand they need to practice and this is where its done but there needs to be balance 

with the people that live here. We are full timers. My husband drives a semi and is home every night. 

The nights that the house is shaking and you can't sleep during the night is dangerous for his job. He 

shouldn't have to call in to work because he can't sleep in his own home for a week. Maybe bombing 

with duds or a restricted time..just before or after dawn...for the dark practice...or fly to the U.P. At 

times its ridiculous. We spent hundreds of dollars on our pet too..to comfort him...crate, thunder coat, 

meds...before having to put him down. Broke my heart. Again I had no idea when I moved here what 

this new life would be. He was a family member. These troups come and go and here we..going to work 

tired...crying over my doggie, Carl! We probably wouldn't of bought here, had we really known. 

3. Jim and Lorrie Johnson 

We have just seen the Gaylord Herald‐Times article on Facebook.  We have not been made aware of any 

study regarding the impact of Camp Grayling and National Guard maneuvers, except the meetings about 

water quality.   All notices about those public meetings were about water quality only; many other 

facets of their maneuvers are affecting our family, our property value, and nature around us. We have 

seen nothing in the Avalanche about a study regarding impact of noise and other concerns. We are 

residents and property owners and would very much like to voice our concern over the major impact on 

our AuSable River area and on our family's well‐being.   If there is a survey available, may we ask to be 

included?  We would appreciate notification of activities, surveys, and meetings so that we may 

participate. Thank you. 

4. Barb Herman 

I live in Guthrie Lakes and was reading the Gaylord Herald Times where I noticed you want feedback on 

the survey results from last year. As soon as I finish writing you this message I will look at the results you 

have posted on your website, but first, I want to tell you how TERRIBLE the noise was from Range 40 the 

past couple of weeks during Northern Strike.  This was the worst noise level I have EVER experienced 

...and I thought 2017 was bad!!!  My first time visiting Guthrie Lakes located in southern Otsego County 

was when I was 28 years old.  It was 1976 and my parents were building a house just off the lake.  The 

EFPOA (Enchanted Forest Property Owners Association) was just being formed, and the earlier residents 

were already forming a committee to band with neighboring communities to open communication with 

the military.  We had a good relationship with the top brass at Camp Grayling and had rules we could 
e-10 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

live by.  The military agreed to NOT fly over our lakes.  They limited nighttime strafing and bombing to 2 

hours after dark.  They did NOT allow planes to shoot rockets from right over our lakes/houses and 

required pilots to stay at least 1500 feet from the ground.  They did not allow helicopters to hover over 

our homes just above the treetops.  And certainly, helicopters did not have nets filled with 

machinery/weapons dangling above our houses.  Today, there are no rules.  Ten days ago, I saw planes 

criss‐crossing over Guthrie Lake, I saw a rocket shot off about 3/4 of the way down the lengthwise part 

of our lake from an A‐10.  I was awakened at all hours of the night to the sound of heavy artillery.  Even 

if the sound didn’t wake me, the concussions shook my bed causing me to startle awake at 2 or 4 AM.  

Calls to the Tower or to the main Camp Grayling line resulted in some sergeants asking me to repeat my 

message because of the noise in the background.  In fact, one guy asked my husband what that loud 

noise was while my husband was trying to complain about the A‐10 planes right overhead.  When my 

husband said the noise was one of his planes, the sergeant asked him to repeat himself.  Some people 

think the residents of Guthrie Lakes are crazy for living here because the military was here first.  

However, in the years since 1976 the military has gotten closer and closer by leasing more land, has 

more sophisticated weaponry and planes, has invited other states and countries to train here, and has 

forgotten we are here.  There has been a resort here on this lake since the 1930s.  After spending a year 

or two researching the history of this lake I wrote a short book in 2008 on what was here before Guthrie 

Lakes Enchanted Forests was established in 1969.  I donated a copy to the Otsego County Library and 

one to the historical society in Gaylord.  The information goes back to the late 1800s when logging ruled 

the area.    I’m sorry I missed all the meetings you held on the JLUS this past year.  Most meetings were 

in Grayling in the evening and often during the winter/snowy months.  I would have liked giving my 2‐

cents at those meetings, but I’m not inclined to drive at night, especially in cold weather.  As soon as I 

read the results of the survey, I will let you know my thoughts.  Many people here at Guthrie Lakes do 

not use/have the internet so lots of people who would agree with me that the noise from the military is 

becoming unbearable just haven’t/won’t be heard.   

5. Denise Matteini 

I do have a comment about Northern Strike, this year has been exceptionally Bad. Why do we have to 

put up with this. Major disregard for the community when with a little common courtesy can help us all 

get though these maneuvers. I thought Camp Grayling was willing to work with us? Dropping 500lb 

bombs or larger at 4 am is unexceptionable, people have to go to work in the morning. Children are 

woken up frightened and crying not to mention pets in a panic. This needs to be addressed, this is 

affecting our quality of life. 

6. Glen A. Eberly 

Hello Denise, 

I recently learned a bout the subject study. I am a resident of Bloomfield Hills,MI and have a cottage on 

Shupac Lake in Lovells, just north east of Grayling. I will not be able to read the entire study as will be 

traveling soon. I wanted to get my comments to you before the Sept.16th deadline. 

We are not against the military and support training operations including small arms fire. We have a 

grandson who is an officer in the Guard and are proud of him! 

1. BUT, we are very much opposed to having our cottage shaken by heavy ordnance which lasts late 

into the wee hours of the morning. In discussions with MI National Guard representatives regarding 

noise complaints in the early 2000s, they stated that the Guard agreed to suspend shelling 2 hours after 

sunset. What happened to that agreement? 

2. During that meeting I asked if the heavy artillery shelling was to evaluate destruction value of the 

shells or was for accuracy training. They stated it was solely for accuracy training. I asked if they could 

use shells with low powder charges as the shell landings could be readily seen from the observation 

posts. (They could probably use flour and still check accuracy!!) This would save money and resolve the 

heavy ordnance disturbance which upsets many residents. Obviously nothing happened to my 

suggestion. The firing of heavy ordnance shells is not too bad, it is the concussion waves and noise at 

impact that shakes the house, knocks pictures off the walls, and scares grandkids and pets. 

3. There is no need of shelling after dark! The army should be fully capable of simulating dark conditions 

in which the artillery teams 

could carry out their training during daylight hours.  If the Air Force can simulate jets, you certainly 

should be able to simulate darkness!!! 

4. The National Guard is cutting "Firing Positions" all through our north woods. Enough! You don't need 

more firing positions. These woods are multipurpose forests and more firing positions are simply 

destruction of our forests. I see firing positions numbered 125! Does that mean there are at least 

another 124 firing positions? 

5. One last item. Loons nest on our lake and during the nesting period we have mitary jets flying very 

low over Shupac Lake. The loons go crazy with panic calls and alert calls. It is a federal offense to harass 

loons and they sure are harassed by the low flying jets. How do we get our lake on the "no fly zone list" 

from mid April until late June? 

We love our north woods and built up here because of the beauty of the forests, streams and lakes and 

to enjoy the peace and quiet of northern Michigan. The National Guard can change its ways to let us 

enjoy what we have when you are not shaking our house. 

Regards, 

Glen A. Eberly 
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | APPENDIX e-11

 Founded 1987 

 

ANGLERS 

OF THE 

AU SABLE 

An affiliated member of the Federation of Fly Fishers 

Organization Headquarters 

PO Box 200 

Grayling, MI 49738 

Telephone: (989) 348-8462 

Fax: (989) 348-2541 

www.AuSableAnglers.org 

September 16, 2018 

Ms. Denise Cline (via email) 

80 Livingston Blvd, Suite U-108 

PO Box 457 

Gaylord, MI 49734 

Re: Comments on Camp Grayling Joint Land Use Study 

Dear Ms. Cline: 

These are the comments on the draft Joint Land Use Study for Camp Grayling submitted 

by the Anglers of the Au Sable. We are a nonprofit organization of over 1,000 members 

whose goal is to preserve, protect and enhance the Au Sable River System for future 

generations of fly fishers. We have interacted with the National Guard in Grayling on 

several occasions. The comments below are colored by this experience as well as our 

review of the JLUS. 

The JLUS clearly anticipates substantial expansion of Camp Grayling, both 

geographically and in terms of training levels. We believe that the facility has already 

reached its limits. Thus, we oppose further expansion of Camp Grayling and any 

recommendations in the study that would accomplish such an expansion. 

Basic Assumptions 

A basic flaw in the study is a bias toward military interests, including inflated and poorly 

supported assertions regarding the economic contribution of Camp Grayling to the 

region, failure to recognize its costs, and a tendency to ignore the contributions of other 

competing interests. There is an unstated assumption that expanded military training is 

superior to other uses, and must simply be tolerated by residents and visitors to the area. 

For example, the JLUS calls for economic “tracking and reporting” of “military tourism” 

to “assist in communicating the benefits of Camp Grayling.” There is no 

recommendation, however, for a real economic study, which would assess the true costs 

and benefits of the facility. 

We refer your attention to two economic studies prepared for the Anglers of the Au 

Sable. The first is Northern Michigan Property Values: the Significance of Riverfront 

Property (Public Sector Consultants, August 2013). It shows that riverfront property in 

Crawford County, including cottages and fishing cabins, contributes much more in 

Page 2 

property values and taxes than other properties, far out of proportion to their relative land 

area. The second is Assessment of Economic Effects of Increased Production at the 

Grayling Trout Hatchery (Lupi, November 2015). It assesses the adverse economic 

effects of reduced fishing visits to the Au Sable River. Recreation is a significant 

economic driver in the region. Reduced fishing tourism – which will result from 

expanded activities at Camp Grayling – will have a significant negative effect on revenue 

from tourism and the jobs it creates. Copies of these studies are attached. 

Any study of the economic benefits of Camp Grayling should also include an assessment 

of its direct and indirect costs to other interests in the area. 

Expansion of Camp Grayling’s Boundaries 

Once again, proposals for expansion of the geographic scope of Camp Grayling are 

emerging. These include suggestions for the lease of additional lands and the purchase of 

contiguous properties. 

We dealt with a similar proposal in 2014. The Department of Military and Veteran’s 

Affairs and the Department of Natural of Natural Resources had been engaged in secret 

discussions for the purpose of leasing 54,000 additional acres of state land to Camp 

Grayling. This included more than 30,000 acres along both sides of the Manistee River 

from M-72 to CCC Bridge, large tracts on both sides of the Manistee River in Frederick 

Township near the Deward area, and a large tract near the Kellogg’s Bridge area of the 

North Branch of the Au Sable River. When this was leaked the outcry was tremendous, 

and these parcels were “taken off the table” by the administration. 

We submit that it is time to recognize that Camp Grayling has reached the limits of its 

growth, and that efforts must be made to tailor activities at the Camp to these limits. 

Military Overlay Zones 

The most “creative” proposal for expansion of the facility is for a “military overlay 

zone.” Local municipalities are asked to voluntarily “downzone” in areas near Camp 

Grayling, limiting otherwise permissible use, growth and development “in order to 

protect the boundaries of the installation from encroachment.” In essence, local zoning 

authorities are being asked to voluntarily limit their citizen’s lawful use of their land to 

serve the military’s interests. This will reduce property values and related taxes. Local 

governments will take the brunt of the criticism. And the military will achieve a de facto 

expansion of the base free of charge. 
e-12 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

Page 3 

We recognize the need to train our military. But the interest in training does not outweigh 

the interests of local residents, businesses and industry. A balance must be reached. It 

bears repeating: Camp Grayling has reached its limits of growth. 

A History of Concerns, Broken Promises and Ongoing Problems 

Complaints involving the military’s activities at Camp Grayling go back for decades. In 

the 1950’s it was agreed that all activity would be kept 1⁄2 mile north of North Down 

River Road. Less than two years later that agreement was violated. Other early 

complaints included noise, low flying aircraft, fires, land closures, road damage, trespass 

and uncontrolled expansion. 

In the 1980’s, things came to a head again. This was the result of numerous factors, 

including those mentioned above plus troop maneuvers on public roads and bridges, 

extreme bombing and canon fire (including at night), lease violations and numerous 

environmental concerns. This led to litigation and resulted in agreements that the Guard 

would improve. Among other things, heavy weapons fire was curtailed, aircraft were 

supposedly rerouted to higher altitudes, excess propellant was no longer to be burned, 

white phosphorus was banned, and an environmental office was created. 

The 2014 secret expansion proposal was discussed above. For obvious reasons, this was 

viewed as a major breach of faith. 

In the meantime, in 2012 the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, and 

presumably the Department of Military and Veterans Affairs and the US Department of 

Defense, were made aware of PFAS pollution on military bases due to the use of certain 

fire suppressants and related public health threats. For six years the public was kept in the 

dark. Now that the situation has been exposed, the military – including those handling the 

situation at Camp Grayling – have failed to exhibit the transparency necessary to fully 

inform those affected. The EPA blocked release of a health study for months because it 

would be a “public relations nightmare.” The state continues to use outdated water 

standards which do not adequately protect human health. 

This series of events has not enhanced trust, nor has it improved relations with the public, 

which have been rocky for decades. Rather than propose additional expansions, Camp 

Grayling should resolve these lingering problems and adhere to the promises it made in 

the past. 

Conclusion 

The JLUS states: “as military training requirements . . . increase it should be an accepted 

fact that all the land area within the boundary could be used for training activities.” We 

disagree. 

Page 4 

Camp Grayling has reached its limits. Increased training levels, physical expansion of 

activities within the camp, further land acquisitions, reduced buffer zones, and “military 

overlay zones” are incompatible with use of the region by others. The military’s efforts 

should be guided by this knowledge, and efforts made to live within current limits. 

We understand the need to train our nation’s military forces. And we agree there is some 

economic benefit to having Camp Grayling in Crawford County, but there are also costs 

associated with its presence. Simply saying that we need to train does not justify 

continued expansion of Camp Grayling. There is simply no further room to grow without 

significant adverse effects on other legitimate interests in the region. 

Thank you for considering our comments. 

Sincerely, 

Thomas A Baird, Chair 

Anglers of the Au Sable 

Legal and Government Affairs Committees 

c/ via email: Jeremie Mead 

 Leatha Mendenhall 
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | APPENDIX e-13

October 25, 2018

The comments listed in this document were provided by Grayling Township, Rick Harland, Lacey 

Stephan, and Marc Dedenbach, October 7, 2018. Reponses to comments are in purple text. A 

conference call to review comments and responses was held October 19, 2018. 

______________________________________________________________________________

1a.1

(ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF NOISE HAS TO BE INVESTIGATED. THIS 

SHOULD BE A TOP PRIORITY OF THE IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE.)

We will add this statement to the overall recommendation, 4.5.3 and in 1a.1

1a.4

Military owns majority of land in our township. Any buffering from military 

training should involve range land and not township land. 82%+- is federal,

military and state land so even small portion of private property in the township 

absorbed by the military make no sense. 

We will add a comment to 1a.4 about the percentage of land that is currently owned by the 

military

1a.5

Passing on costs to upgrade residential building codes vs increasing buffer at no 

cost to military is unacceptable as 82% +- is already state or military controlled 

land. Military can and should be able to add mile for buffering if not more and still 

have enough land for training our nation’s finest.

It should be noted that this recommendation and all recommendations of the JLUS are an 

option to consider, but not a requirement. This recommendation was a suggestion by 

members of the community, so I think we should leave as is knowing that it is an optional 

strategy and not required.

(SOME STATS ABOUT THE INCOME LEVELS OF THE COUNTY OR TOWNSHIP 

COULD BE HELPFUL AND ARE READILY AVAILABLE. WE ARE IN AN 

ECONOMICALLY DEPRESSED AREA IN WHICH MORE EXPENSIVE BUILDING CODES 

WOULD BE AN UNFAIR BURDEN TO OUR CITIZENS.

Page 2-4, section 2.16 does have this information for the study area. 

2a.1 

We already have airport zoning approval requirements you must turn in with 

building permit application. Cranes used 5 miles from airfield have to apply and 

pass airport zoning. Any towers erected must have airport zoning approval.

2a.2

Issue with flight paths in Grayling Township is mostly from helicopters flying from 

Camp to Airfield. Low flying over residential neighborhoods for no reason other 

than to straighten out flight path. Flying higher and over state land with no 

private property is easy and adds very little to know burden on equipment and 

pilots. Safety in case of mechanical malfunctions while flying over unoccupied 

areas should be the main reason for not flying over residential property not the 

disturbance to residents.

Please see figure 2.31. The restricted airspace is monitored by Camp Grayling, however all 

other surrounding air space is under FAA jurisdiction. The different classes of airspace have 

different flying heights regulations.

(ESTABLISH NO FLY ZONES OVER SENSITIVE AREAS SUCH AS RESIDENTIAL, 

TOURIST, AND ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS. SURELY THERE HAS TO BE 

AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL REGULATING BOTH GRAYLING AND ALPENA AIRFIELDS. 

RATHER THAN HAVE CITIZENS CALL IN A COMPLAINT – WHETHER WE CAN SEE A 

NUMBER ON THE AIRCRAFT OR NOT – THE MILITARY SHOULD TAKE 

RESPONSIBILITY FOR POLICING THEIR OWN AND ENFORCING ALL FAA 

REQUIREMENTS. THEY SHOULD DO THIS ON THEIR OWN RATHER THAN 

INSISTING THAT THE PUBLIC POLICE THE MILITARY. 

CREATE A JOINT MILITARY/CITIZENS COMMITTEE TO STUDY SOUND 

ATTENUATION TECHNIQUES. EDUCATE THE GENERAL PUBLIC ON RESIDENTIAL 

AND TOURIST AREA SOUND ATTENUATION STRATEGIES. SET UP A 

MILITARY/CITIZENS COMMITTEE TO STUDY AND IMPLEMENT SOUND 

ATTENUATION MEASURES.)

 

Establishing No Fly Zones/Restricted Airspace is a process that can take many years. An 

important first step in this process is completing the AICUZ/Noise Study. However, the JLUS 

does include a recommendation to establish no fly zones over sensitive areas, 1a.3)

A noise study to examine sound attenuation is a recommendation of the JLUS. Educating the 

public is also a recommendation of the JLUS and can be added as a standard topic for the 

Camp Grayling JMTC Community Council (5b.6)
e-14 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

2b.1

Sheriff and city police would be willing to coordinate traffic control with little 

advance notice at traffic lights on M72 and stop signs on North Down River road 

to let convoys pass without stopping and waiting for traffic. This would help our 

residents and the military cut down on congestion affecting timing arriving for 

work and military prepare schedule and saving stop and go wear and tear on their 

vehicles.

This is great discussion that should be brought up as part of the Camp Grayling Community 

Council.

(The use of existing tank trails and roads on military land could eliminate most 

of the military traffic through on paved local roads. This would save wear and 

tear on our roads and eliminate much of the traffic congestion.)

The JLUS recommends a Transportation Plan to document all traffic and make 

recommendations to lessen traffic congestion and wear and tear on roads.

(AVOIDING MAJOR TRAINING CAMPAIGNS DURING MAJOR HOLIDAYS, 

INCLUDING THE CANOE MARATHON, IS A MUST.)

Per TC/PC meeting on Oct 10, 2018: Training activities are publicized by Public Service 

Announcements; however they are looking to increase their staff and communication 

channels. The CGCC will help with coordination of training activities and important 

community events.

2c.1

Use of social media, municipal, school websites would get the word out and 

create word of mouth from local citizens to accomplish times of excessive night 

noise and disturbance from training. Social media would require 7 to 10 days’ 

notice to be affective. PFAS contamination by the military has already taught your 

environmental office where and what social media sites are viable.

Camp Grayling Public Relations is planning on expanding their use of Social Media. This 

recommendation is included in JLUS strategies in 5, Community Partnerships.

2d.1

Grayling Township has Airport zoning requirements that must be met before any 

new construction permits can be issued. Trading land in areas of concern for safe 

areas of development for both residential and commercial building would be 

advantageous to both the township and the military. Municipal leaders and 

generational resident’s input on where land could be affected would be helpful in 

deciding what land would be feasible for trade and or development. 

Consideration should lean towards the township as military already owns super 

majority of land in our township.

(ANY FURTHER AIRPORT OR CAMP EXPANSION SHOULD BE DONE ONLY AFTER 

PUBLIC NOTICE AND PUBLIC HEARING WHICH MUST TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION 

ALL PUBLIC COMMENTS.) 

The strategy doesn’t discuss land exchanges, trade, or expansion. Any zoning or land use 

changes are expected to go through the standard, required public notification process.

3e.1

Crawford County has been very active in fire wise program and is well ahead of 

the curve notifying our public. Military fire protection has historically been 

undertrained and unable to protect our land from fires. Local funding for full time 

fire department would increase level of safety significantly. Military has decided 

recently funding for local fire protection is not justified in there budget. Historical 

wildfire data shows during times of municipal funding for fire safety vs military 

providing fire protection. (Studies done by the military, support contracting fire 

protection vs building their own fire department. One of few benefits the City of 

Grayling and Grayling Township received was better fire service due to full time 

paid fire service.)

(MILITARY NEEDS TO PAY SOME “ON CALL”COSTS FOR OUR FOLKS TO BE 

AVAILABLE TO FIGHT THEIR FIRES. THEY SHOULD ALSO PAY FOR TIME AND 

MATERIALS USED IN FIGHTING THEIR FIRES.)

This was an issue identified by the public as a concern. We do have an Implementation Team 

Action to put the Fire Protection Services Agreement back in place.

The JLUS recommends that the Fire Services agreement. That process should include 

discussion to make sure that the City and Township of Grayling and Camp Grayling agree on 

all costs and services.
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | APPENDIX e-15

Regarding Military Payments, this should be part of the discussion of an updated Fire Services 

Protection Agreement.

4f.2 

Some of our county roads class rating cannot carry overweight military vehicles

use. Class of road is causing asphalt failure quicker than normal lifetime for these 

roads creating safety issues for both military and civilians. Example: Jones Lake 

Road is not designed to handle weight of vehicles regularly used by military.

(Again the use of existing tank trails and roads on military land could eliminate 

most of the military traffic through on paved local roads. This would save wear 

and tear on our roads and eliminate much of the traffic congestion.) Further 

MDOT does not have funding available for most of our residential areas. Citizens 

would agree to SAD district with some form of Military participation (40% military 

40% residents 20% municipal) to fund road replacement with upgrade to higher 

class road. Where overweight of military vehicles use primarily residential roads. 

Fire, police and ambulance service time is unnecessarily extended do to road 

degradation from overweight military vehicles.

The JLUS recommends that Camp Grayling complete an Installation Master Plan (IMP). The 

IMP should evaluate existing and future circulation on the Camp.

The completion of a transportation study should provide the necessary information to include 

in the SAD/SID definition. An Impact Analysis of all traffic would be needed. They study 

should also evaluate road weight class are allowed.

It is my understanding that the DOD does not pay taxes on the land. I am researching this; 

however it may take congressional approval to fund/have the military participate. As that 

the SID would span years, it may take ongoing congressional approval. Perhaps a discussion 

of Impact Funds based on the results of the Transportation study is a scenario more likely to 

bear fruit.

5b.4

Military and state control 82% of land in Grayling Township. Consideration for 

buffering should be encroaching on state and military land not private. Increasing 

the cost of construction is not the responsibility of our citizens when state and 

military controlled land is such a large %.

My understanding is that the City of Grayling is already updating the zoning code for height 

restrictions. 

Building within APZs and the Clear Zone is a safety issue.

5b.6

Grayling Township would welcome monthly joint meeting with camp assistant 

commander.

(THERE SHOULD BE AN ONGOING COMMUNITY COUNCIL COMPRISED OF 

MILITARY, LOCAL GOVERNMENT, AND CITIZENS GROUPS TO MONITOR 

PROGRESS, ENFORCE AGREEMENTS AND DEVELOP FUTURE STRATEGIES TO BE 

STUDIED AND IMPLEMENTED.)

Agreed. That is a recommendation of the JLUS: Camp Grayling JMTC Community Council

6a;

Military support for quality of life in our community would be welcome change. 

Until recently military was involved in many areas of our community. Recently 

military for whatever reason has isolated themselves from our community. 

6b.4

Nowhere in this study does it talk about the financial burden all local 

government has because of the excessive amount of state and federal land, 

much of it used by the military. We would like to task Camp Grayling with 

researching a way to properly compensate our community for the use of this 

land. Many of the issues with infrastructure, fire protection and quality of life 

are due to over use and lack of any kind of compensation from the military. The 

Military should expect to provide financial support in the way of payment for 

use of the vast majority of property in Crawford and surrounding Counties.) 

We do recommend an Economic Impact Study that should look at Camp Graylings direct and 

indirect costs to other interests in the area.

(OTHER ISSUES TO CONSIDER:

GET A WRITTEN AGREEMENT THAT CAN BE ENFORCED,

HAVE A CENTRAL DEPOSITORY FOR ALL DOCUMENTS (NEMCOG?),

HAVE AN ONGOING ORGANIZATION TO MONITOR COMPLIANCE OF ALL 

PARTIES,

MILITARY MUST MONITOR AND ENFORCE THEIR OWN OBLIGATIONS, IE. NOISE, 

FLIGHT ALTITUDES, FLIGHT PATHS, ETC.,

DEVELOP A 5 YEAR PLAN.)
e-16 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

These are good suggestions and can be included as Camp Grayling Community Council is 

formed. Some of these items could be included in the charter of the Council.

Camp Grayling JMTC Community Council Goals:

• Community Education and Outreach

• Communication Forum Between Camp Grayling and Communities

o Transportation

o Noise/Training Activities

• Consider and implement a formalized written agreement, such as a charter, between Camp 

Grayling and the surrounding communities as an outcome of the Community Council

• The charter should include language that a primary objective of the Community Council is to 

work together to resolve the noise issues. 

• Have NEMCOG provide a document library for all JLUS and Implementation files to include 

supporting documentation that has been collected as part of this process. 

• Develop a five-year plan to achieve the top JLUS Implementation recommendations (to be 

identified by the TC/PC). 

Glen A. Eberly 

9699 Shupac Lake Road 

Grayling, Michigan 49738 

October 15, 2018 

Ms. Denise M. Cline, NEMCOG Deputy Director 

80 Livingston Blvd., Suite U-108 

PO Box 457 

Gaylord, MI 49734 

Dear Ms Cline: 

I am responding again with public comment regarding the Camp Grayling JLUS currently being developed. 

I attended the October 10th meeting and was very disappointed by the National Guard representatives’ disregard to 

address the NOISE PROBLEM. Col. Burrell seemed pleased with the Guard’s “transparency” in notifying the public 

when heavy artillery activity will occur. Notification alone is unacceptable! 

Our Lovells Township Supervisor, Gary Neumann, properly identified day and night blast noises from large guns and 

bombing, that extend beyond camp boundaries, as the major issue concerning surrounding residents. 

The National Guard can resolve this problem! 

NOISE PROBLEM: In answer to a question at a meeting with annoyed Lovells homeowners in 2002 a Camp 

Grayling National Guard representative, I believe it was LTC Thomas F. Lamie, stated that the purpose of artillery 

and bombing training is not to evaluate the destructive force of ordnance explosions but to develop accuracy skills. It 

is not the detonation of an outgoing shell that is the problem. Its is the concussion, noise and shock waves of the 

round exploding at landing! 

Suggested Solution: The military uses blank machine gun ammunition for training to prevent harm to the soldiers on 

maneuvers. I know because, while bird hunting, I have picked up belts of such ammo left in the woods by the Guard. 

I have pictures of such abandoned training ordnance. 

I suggest that the Guard have all Camp Grayling training rounds for 105 and 155mm Howitzers and 120mm tank 

guns loaded with low charges: just enough powder to determine accuracy upon detonation. Such a reduction in 

explosive power would very likely eliminate the serious resident disturbance and make progress in returning the 

National Guard to Good Neighbor status from their present Bad Neighbor status. 

This action would even save money and reduce chemicals inload to the environment. 

Please take this suggestion seriously!!! 

Concerned citizen, 

Glen A. Eberly 
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | APPENDIX e-17

October 1, 2018

Ms. Denise Cline, (by email) 

80 Livingston BLVD, Suite U-108 

PO Box 457 

Gaylord, MI 49734

Dear Ms. Cline,

I am writing to you on behalf of the Au Sable North Branch Area Foundation (ASNBAF), to express our 

concerns and opposition to the recommendations for land expansion and increased training activities 

made in the Joint Land Use Study (JLUS) for Camp Grayling. We are a non-profit organization established 

in 1943 to preserve, protect and enhance the natural endowments of the watershed of the North 

Branch of the Au Sable River. The current JLUS indicates that Camp Grayling intends to expand its 

geographic footprint and increase training level usage. We strongly oppose any further expansion and

increased use of Camp Grayling.

At the outset let me state that we support our troops and recognize the need to train our military 

forces. But we also support the proposition that we as residents and land owners living next to the 

military training areas have a right to the quiet enjoyment of our property. So too, do the tourists who 

travel to this area seeking to enjoy the peace and quiet of the forests, trails, camp grounds, lakes and 

rivers in the greater Camp Grayling area. The noise levels that we are all now experiencing are 

unacceptable. Night time shelling is particularly disturbing. This activity appears to have increased over 

the years despite a prior agreement by Camp Grayling representatives to discontinue shelling two hours 

after sunset. 

We do not doubt that there is some economic benefit accruing to the county because of Camp Grayling. 

Although it is asserted in the JLUS that there is a compelling economic benefit to the area because of the 

military’s presence, no recommendation has been made for an independent objective study to 

determine the accurate costs and benefits of Camp Grayling. In his September 16, 2018 letter to you, 

Tom Baird of the Anglers of the Au Sable, points to two economic studies showing the economic benefit 

to our area in terms of increased property values and property taxes paid by river front property 

owners. People purchase property in the area to enjoy the quiet solitude of the outdoors. Tourists, 

those looking to enjoy their cabins and cottages and those looking to purchase property won’t come, 

won’t remain and won’t purchase properties if the activity and noise levels at Camp Grayling continue to 

increase. Reduced tourism and reduced property tax revenues most surely will have an adverse impact 

on the viability of the areas near the camp. 

It appears that the military plans include geographic expansion by leasing additional land and purchasing 

contiguous properties. In 2014 efforts by the military to expand were met with protests and the 

expansion proposals were withdrawn. People do not want further expansion. 

In closing, we oppose any further land expansion of Camp Grayling. We oppose increased usage of the 

current sites and facilities. We believe that we are at a point where the current activities are causing a 

negative impact on the rights of property owners, residents and tourists to the quiet enjoyment of their 

property and the area. We believe it is time for the military to acknowledge our rights and not pursue 

further expansion of Camp Grayling

Respectfully submitted,

Michael Inman – Chairman

Au Sable North Branch Foundation
e-18 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

E.3 Resources

See the following pages for resources and reference information received during the JLUS process.
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | APPENDIX e-19
e-20 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

This page intentionally left blank.
CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY | APPENDIX f-1

F.1 Down Zoning

How do you limit someone’s ability to use their property without 

it being considered a taking? Is a taking justified in these cases 

due to safety concerns? Could the property owner demand just 

compensation?

At the core of these questions is the question of legality as 

it relates to down zoning a property without it being considered a taking. In the situation of the JLUS, it is recommended to limit development in areas within APZs/airport 

approach areas and within noise contours near the military 

installations. Ideally, the mechanism to achieve this goal 

would be to implement a zone that limits development in 

these areas of conflict or potential conflict. Provided below

is background on case law regarding to down zoning and 

the possible repercussions.

Both the United States Constitution and the Michigan Constitution prohibit the government from taking private land 

for public use without providing just compensation to the 

landowner. A taking can be either the physical taking of a 

landowner’s property by the government or it can be a regulatory taking. A regulatory taking is when a government 

regulation restricts the use of private property to the point 

that the property no longer has any real value.

There are two situations in which a regulatory taking can 

occur: 

 when a regulation leaves the landowner with no economically viable use of the land, known as a categorical 

taking

 based on the balancing test established in Penn Central 

Transportation Co. v. New York City, 438 U.S. 104 (1978) 

For the first situation, a categorical taking only occurs when

a regulation abnegates land of all economic vitality. For example, the Supreme Court held that a law in South Carolina 

prohibiting beachfront landowners from erecting any permanent structures on their property rendered the property valueless, and therefore constituted a categorical taking 

under the Fifth Amendment. The court recognized that law 

restricted all viable economic uses of the land and rendered 

the land valueless, thus the court decided a categorical taking had occurred. With this ruling in place, the state ultimately ended up purchasing the land to enable the plans 

for the coastal area to move forward.

For the second situation, if the regulation does not deny the 

property of all economic value, courts will utilize the Penn 

Central balancing test to determine if a regulatory taking 

has occurred. Penn Central involved a challenge to New 

York City’s Landmark Preservations Law, which prevented 

the Penn Central Transportation Company from constructing a skyscraper on top of Grand Central Station. The court 

held that the application of the law did not constitute a taking based on a three-part balancing test. This test requires 

courts to consider the character of the state action, the economic impact of the regulation, and the extent to which the 

regulation has interfered with a distinct investment-backed 

expectation.

The three-part test has some weak points. For example, it 

was not established by the courts how many prongs need 

to be ruled in favor of the plaintiff (the property owner) in

order to establish a taking. Each of the three parts is explained in more detail below.

1. CHARACTER OF THE STATE ACTION: The plaintiff needs

to argue that the there is no legitimate government interest being advanced by the zoning classification. This

is difficult for the plaintiff because courts have stated

that zoning ordinances are generally permissible and 

that local governments may enact zoning restrictions to 

promote the general welfare, even if they adversely affect a landowner’s property interests.

2. ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE REGULATION: The plaintiff needs to show that the regulation deprives the land

of all economically beneficial uses. There is significant

nuance to this piece, as the splitting of property rights 

makes this potentially complicated for the plaintiff. Just

because surface rights may be limited by a regulation 

(e.g., building a house when zoned residential but not 

being allowed to in a lower intensity zone) does not 

mean that the property is diminished of its value. Subsurface, mining, or water rights, or any other property 

rights may still be viable.

3. THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE REGULATION HAS INTERFERED WITH DISTINCT INVESTMENT-BACKED EXPECTATIONS: The plaintiff needs to prove that investment-backed expectations has occurred on the property 

and that further investment is no longer legal because of 

the regulation. For example, the property owner bought 

land and planned to build 200 homes. They build and 

then sell them in increments of 25. After building 50 

homes, the property is down zoned to no longer allow 

residential development. The plaintiff in this scenario

could make the argument that the regulation interfered 

with distinct investment-backed expectations. This part 

of the test veers into the world of vested rights, as well.

Applying a zone for the sake of contributing to the health, 

safety and general welfare of the population is generally allowable. An overlay zone can be a more effective way to

achieve this than simply changing zoning. 

F.2 Overlay Zones

Information about overlay zones from the American Planning Association is presented below, followed by recommendations for this specific area.

BASICS: An overlay zone is a zoning district that is applied 

over one or more previously established zoning districts, 

establishing additional or stricter standards and criteria for 

covered properties in addition to the standards and criteria of the underlying zoning district. Communities often use 

overlay zones to protect specific features such as historic

buildings, wetlands, steep slopes, and waterfronts. Overlay 

zones can also be used to promote specific development

projects, such as mixed-used developments, waterfront developments, housing along transit corridors, or affordable

housing.

HISTORICAL AND LEGAL IMPLICATIONS: As with traditional zoning, uses that can be justified as contributing to the

health, safety, and welfare of the population are generally 

allowed to be regulated via overlay zoning. Common regulations include those for historic districts, natural resource 

protection, and economic development, though local governments are given broad authority to determine what regulation is in their community's best interest. As with zoning, 

however, communities must be careful not to violate the 

"uniformity clause" of the Standard State Zoning Enabling 

Act by ensuring that all comparable properties are treated 

similarly. For further court opinions on the legality of overlay zoning, see Jachimek v. Superior Court, 169 Ariz. 317 and 

A-S-P Associates v. City of Raleigh, 258 S.E.2d 444.

F.2.1 Discussion 

Overlay zones have the potential to be very effective governmental regulatory tools. Since they tailor regulations to 

specific properties and districts to meet specific community goals, they can be more politically feasible to implement 

and can help communities meet stated goals or address 

specific inequities. On the other hand, they can create inefficiencies and inequities by applying regulations and restrictions to some properties and not others. Moreover, 

additional regulations may increase time and expense both 

for developers and for the public bodies involved in the development approval process.

overlay zone 

research and 

analysis

f
f-2 APPENDIX | CAMP GRAYLING JMTC AND ALPENA CRTC JOINT LAND USE STUDY 

F.2.2 Recommendations

Alpena CRTC

Applying an overlay zone that does not allow for new residential or commercial development in the APZ associated 

with the Alpena County Regional Airport and Alpena CRTC 

is recommended. Language for this overlay zone should 

be drafted by a legal team specializing in land use law and 

code development. The overlay zone should restrict all residential and commercial development within the APZ. Further study should be completed to determine the intensity 

of uses allowed in the overlay zone. For example, the study 

should examine whether light industrial uses such as a personal storage facility could be allowed or if the zone should 

be more restrictive and only allow for agricultural uses.

Camp Grayling JMTC

For the City of Grayling, adding an overlay zone to limit development within the APZs at Grayling AAF is more difficult

to implement than in the Alpena area. This is because much 

of the limits of Grayling are directly within an APZ. An overlay zone should be added to restrict development heights, 

but it is not feasible to restrict residential and commercial 

development altogether.

For areas in townships or counties, it is recommended that 

an overlay zone be added that conforms to the noise contours and that protects the boundaries of the installation 

from encroachment of development. Although these areas 

are relatively undeveloped, it is good planning practice to 

plan for the future, and implementing an overlay zone in 

these areas now is more feasible than when the area develops more. Implementing an overlay zone in these areas 

now will help avoid any potential future conflicts between

residential areas and noise from Camp Grayling JMTC.

For the Guthrie Lakes area, it is not advisable to implement an overlay zone because the area is already developed, and an overlay zone would only be implementable on 

the grounds of reduction of noise conflicts. This argument

may not hold the same weight as restricting development 

in APZs because that restriction can be directly tied to improving safety for general public. Reducing noise conflict

between the general public and the installation is not as 

straightforward. It is recommended Camp Grayling JMTC 

work with existing neighbors within the noise contours to 

notify neighbors of training times. The installation should 

also look at locating training operations in more remote areas within Camp Grayling in order to reduce noise conflicts

and as a sign of being a good neighbor.

1005 River Street

Port Huron, MI 48060

810.956.9301