United States
Environmental Protection1
Agency '''.'.
Great1 Lakes, National Program Office
Chicago, Illinois' .
' EPA-905/8-88r005 V'"'
October 1988
GiNPQ Report No. ,1
Great Lakes
Demonstration
Section 108a
-------
Foreword
The ,11.5. Environmental .Protection Agency
was createdi because of increasing public and
governmental concern about the dangers' of ,
pollution to the health arid welfare of the
American people. Noxious air, fouj water, and
spoiled land are tragic testimony to,the
deterioration of our natural environment.
An important.part of the Agency's effort
involves the search for infbrrhation about
environmental problems, management
techniques, and, new technologies through
, which optimum'use of the'nation's land and ,
water resources can be assured and the threat
pollution poses tq the welfare of the American
people, can be minimized.
The Great Lakes National Program Office -
('GLNPO)'pf the United States Environmental
Protection Agency was established in Region V,
Chicago, tq provide a specific focus on the '
water quality concerns of the Great Lakes^ %
.GLNPO proyides^funding for Great Lakes
demonstration grants under Section -I08(a) aS
well as provides personnel support to 'the , .
International Joint Commission activities,
under the U.S.-Canada Great Lakes Water
Quality Agreement. The Section, 108(a)
program was implemented by GLNPO in
cooperation with other Federal, State, and
local agencies and organizations.
The experience and lessons learned from the
Section 108(a) program have h'ad important
implications With regard' to pqint and nonpoint
, source remedial program development and
implementation. The Section 108(a) program
helped prepare the foundation for the Nation's
effort in controlling nonpoint source pollution.
'Carol Finch, Director
, Great Lakes
National Program Office
Cover photo by David Kenyon,
Michigan Department of Natural Resources
-------
Background
What is section 1t)8a of the 1972
amendment to the Clean Water Act?
This.section directs the US Environmental Pro- :
tectibn Agency Administrator,, in cooperation "
With other Federal departments and agenciesj
!to enter into agreements with state,,or local
agencies to undertake projects which
demonstrate, new and innovative technologies
'for reducing, preventing, or eliminating the ;,
, movement of any pollutant material into, the1;
Great Lakes Basiri. Projects'furided by, this sec-
tion are required to, demonstrate the engineer-
ing and economic feasibilities as fyell as the
practicality of the technology, with regard to ,'
ppllutant, removal and preventjon i
What are the specific objectives of
Section 108a? t
The JI08a demonstration, projects primarily '
sought to reduce phosphorus pollution from
point and nonpoint sources in both rural and
urban settings within the Great Lakes Basim
Technologies were introduced to prevent
overflows from sewers* improve malfunctioning
septic systems, and improve phosphorus ,
removal in vyastewater -treatment facilities. In
addjtipn, several agricultural best management
practices (BMPs) primarily consisting, of conser-
vation tillage,methods were'evaluated. In some
instances, the dernonstratititi projects have
sought to stimulate public interest in Water
pollution abatement by way of experimental
education programs.
Thrfee Types of Water Pollution
Control Projects
, ' . i , > ' '
The 108a demonstration projects are conducted
to follow one of th'ree'approaches:
Projects that are designed'to
demonstrate the. effectiveness of
,a,given control technology with the, ;
purpose of encouraging its adoption;
Experimental projects that are
intended to determine the practicality
'," and the economic and engineering
' feasibility of,a given co.ntrol..
^technology; and
.- Remedial projects which are designed .,.
to'use available technologies to restore - '
. or protect a .water resource. ' '
Ideally, pertirient technical and institLttiona)
information is acquired from experimental pro-
jects, and1 demonstration projects lead to ,
enhanped acceptance of ,a particular tech-
nology. Ultimately, these effort's should
culminate in widespread remedial projects and
programs which address point and norjpoiht
source water resource problems in an efficient
manner. ' . , . >/
-------
-------
The Section 108a Program
From 1972'through ,1985, funding was
provided for thirtyrohe 108a demonstration pro-
jects ,jn the /Great Lakes Basin. Based on the'
similarity of-the'technologies which they .' ,
demonstrated, the projects can be categorized
as multi-dimensional, accelerated conservation
tillage1, combined sewer overflpw (CSO)
abatement; land application pf sewage and
Anaerobic/Qxic (A/0) treatment plant digesters,
and-septic tank alternatives. '-, - > '\
Multi-Dimensional Projects
Three,large multi-dimensional npnpoint source,'
projects were conducted in Allen County (Black
Creekh Indiana; Washington County, Wiscon-
sin; and Red Clay, located'on the south shore., '
of Lake Superior in:Minnesota arid Wisconsin,-
Whereeis most 108a-,projects addressed a single
"goaf or demonstrated a specific technology or
practice, the major objective.of the ,muTtiT
dimensional projects was to demonstrate
agricultural pollution control through
implementation ,of a 'Variety of b'est manage- .
m.ent practices, public information/education on
water quality issues, and monitoring to assess'
changes in water quality relative to changes'in/
management practices. _','' ' ,
TJie pollution abatement goals of the
Black Creek Project were focused prirriarily on
agricultural problems, and investigated ,
sociologic factors .which affected farmer par- -
ticipation'in the program. The Washington
County Project addressed pollution problems
arising from construction activities associated
With urbanization, and investigated .the, need, .for-
, erosion control ordinances in both' urban and
rural settings. The Red Clay Project addressed
stream bahks erosion3 problems and initiated' '-"
research projects to develop and assess manage-
ment practices for this widespread problem. ,*V
-------
-------
Accelerated Conservation
Tillage Projects
Conservation tillage projects to demonstrate ',. \
nojipoirit source pollutant control strategies
were'conducted in 22 counties in Ohio, six
cpunties in Indiana, fourcounties in Michigan,
and two counties in New York, Project funds
were used primarily to purchase no-till and con-
servation tillage equipment for use by area ,
farmers without charge to them or for nominal
rental rates to coyer maintenance, costs., , .
Technical assistance was a|so provided to .
farmers who participated in the program tq
ensure proper application of the new tillage
.methods. : ''....,',''. ,;
-------
Hydro brake
Combined Sewer Overflow
Abatement Projects,; ",.'.,-""-'- .
In., cities where domestic, sewage, industrial .,. ,
.wastes', and urbarr runoff .are ill routed tfirgugh
a combined sewer system,' untreated overflow
' water may be-'disch,arged "directly Intp^ adjacent
waterbddies when the capacity, of the systems '
: is exceeded. The. objectives of the CSO abate-
. me'nt projects were to increase the in-system
storage capacity, of sewer systems or to divert
rijnoff or sewag'e in order to eliminate'dr '
decrease the frequency of overflow td adjacent
. surface waters.;, ' , - - ',
'Existing CSOs.were evaluated in Rochester,
New York; Cleveland, Qfiip;,and SagjnaW,
Michigan for'.a'lterhative renovatiCiris. Vortex
control valves;with associated;storage were " ~
utilized to control flows in mcisf.,of. the studies.
In .addition,, the projects, demonstrated. _',,
.technological changes'in sewagfe treatrrient ancj
larrd treatrrient BMRs to control runoff volumes.
Swirl Concentrator
-------
Land Application of Sewage arid the
Anaerobic/Oxic (A/O) Treatment
Plant Digester Projects
"Demonstration, projects for land application of,'1.
sewage included, the ponds at Michigan State
University, an overland flow project in the
.Village of'Paw Paw, Michigan, a crop irrigation
project in. Muskegori County, Michigan, and a
sludge application project on forest land in ',
Mo'ntrnorency, County, Michigan. For most of
' these systems,' wastewater pretreatment was
accomplished by biological rnethods or iff ;
holding ponds. The holding, ponds were also
evaluated for alternative sewage treatment:
Another-demonstration project was devoted
Specifically to the A/0 pYocess, a secondary'
treatment technique, employed for phosphorus,
-, removal. '" . -", ''..'-, '-,
For each project, water-quality changes were
measured throughout the treatment process,
and, the effept-of sludge application on yegeta-,
- tion and animals wa> moriitoredi ,- '
Septic Tank Alternatives
These projects evaluated alternatives to convep-,
tional septic systems that function inadequately
in areas of poor soil drainage. Septic system
improvements were made and water usage
monitoring was conducted in Steuben County,;'
Indiana and Allen County, Ohio.
-------
' Location
Dates
Multi-Dimensional
Projects
Accelerated Conversion
Tillage Projects
Combined Sewer
Overflow Projects
Land Application of
Sewage Projects
Septic System
Alternatives Projects
A/O Treatment Plant
Digester Project
Background Water Quality
Assessment Project
Project Data Incorporated
into Basin .Water Quality
Management Plans
Black Creek, IN ;.'.-. 1972-1977
Black Greek, !N 1977-1980
Washington Co,'Wl ,...*. 1974-1978
Washington Co, Wl ,. .1979-1981
Red Clay Project, Wl, MN .....-. .1974-1978
Allen Co, OH . 1980-1985
Defiance Co, OH 19,80-1985
' LakeErie Basin,OH .'.1981-1985
Six Counties in IN ., 1981-1985
Bean Creek, Ml 1981*1985
Otter Greek, Ml : 1982-1986
Tuscola Co, Ml 1980-1983
..Oswegd Co, NY .1982-1985
Wayne Co, NY, .1982-1985
Rochester, NY .1974-1977
Rochester, NY, BMFs 1977-1982
1 Cleveland, OH '.-...' ; .1979-1983
N.E.Cleveland,OH .:... 1980-1985
Saginaw, Ml ..1979-1984
East-Lansing, Ml 1972-1975
-Muskegon,;M I , 1972-1975
Muskegon, Ml..,. ;..... 1980-1981
iMontmorencyCo, Ml ,. .1980-1985
Paw Paw, Ml 1980-1986
Great Lakes Basin, IN .,: 1980-.1984
Allen Co, OH 1980-1985
Pontiac, Ml 1983-1985
Cleveland, OH 1971-1974
S.E. Michigan 1971-1973
Erie, PA 1971-1973
Muskegon, Ml 1976-1978
Cleveland, OH 1980-1983
-------
Distribution of 108a Projects
Am o n cj G reat La kes States
^j Great Lakes Basin Drainage Boundaries
-------
M u (ti- Dimensional
Projects ":.--/-:I:-
Black Creek, Indiana ''; " v '
The BlacktCreek Project was:a landmark ,'
pjqneering effort for future watershedrlevel
."agricultural,nonpojnt source control efforts. This
demonstration 'project provided-important infor-
mation regarding'streqmbank erosion, sediment
basin effectiveness, and" water quality monitor-.
ing,requirements which-would be beneficial to
subsequent programs. In addition, it achieved
an almost unparalleled degree of public support
and-lahdowner participation, including high par-
ticipation from the historically mq're isolated
Amish community. The success of this; project
came,- in large part, from putting as "high a
priority qn public participation and input as on
technical solutions.
-Additionally, a cornputer model, Areal Nonpoint
, Source Watershed Environment Response
Simulation (ANSWERS), was developed tq
.provide a' 'method 'for estimating BMP
effectiveness. Based on the results of the
project, Ft was speculated, that if the
conservation' practices iitilfeed in the
demonstration were Implemented across tfie.
,entir,e, Maumee River Basin,,the sediment and
phosphorus loadings to Lake Erie would
decrease by'50% and 25% respectively.
-------
Washington County, Wisconsin
Washington County had the most'extensive ,
education program, which included the
development of grade school and secondary! ~
school curricula dealing with water quality and
water pollution issues. In addition, art extensive
county-wide education program targeted for a
variety of audiences demonstrably .increased ,,
public awareness of soil .conservation and water
quality;' ' , ' '< < , ',",''
Twp model seph'meftt control ordinances, one to
control agricultural sources of pollution and the
other tp control1 urban sources of sediment,
Were researched extensively and drafted./The ,'
, county passed the, subdivision ordinance aimed -,
'at construction site erosion control.-Although
the agricultural erosjqn measures were not
adopted by the county as ah ordinance,.the
Soil-and Water .Conservation, Districts passed
the standards" and, objectives as a "resolution,, ,
thus indicating a changed'attitude and a ,,
greater commitrnent to soil conservation go'als.
Water, qualjty monitoring two years after adop-
tion of several agricultural BMPs showed that
total phosphorus,, nitrogen, and sediment yield
had decreased. , ', , , ' '
-------
Red Clay, Minnesota
-and Wisconsin -'-_.'
Despite the problems associated with trie-dif-
ference? in;state artd'county jurisdictions,-five
,SoJI',and Water Conservation Districts,(SWCD)
from Minnesota-grid Wisconsin jointly managed
a'basin-wideVeseiarch and demonstration '
project. --;.,' , , .
A low cost systerri was developed for con- ,
tinuous monitoring of precipitatibri, wind, air,
and soil parameters at remote, unmanned sites.
In addition, shoreline stabilization structures
were constructed' which accomplished, short-
term erbsioh, control. It was concluded from the
extensive surveys that,the; major cause of
streambank. erosjon vj/as natural, .accelerated
because of forestation changes since the turn
of the,century, and that the red clay sediment,
although aesthetically .unpleasing,-caused little
-impairment to aquatic biota.
As a result of tha.Red-Glay Dembristration Pro-
ject, the. Wisconsin Department of Transporta-
tion was able to save millions of dollars.in
maintenance .costs by modifying1'the design of
highway roadbeds that were being
"reconstructed a|ong the southern shore of Lake
Superior!, , : ' ~ -:
-------
Accelerated
Conservation
Tillage Projects
From 1979 to- 1986, conservation tillage
demonstration projects were funded'in 34 coun-
ties in the Lake Erie Basing Michigan, Indiana,
Ohio, and New York.' The, use of conservation
tillage practices increased significantly, in those
counties. The 'results of the stijdies
demonstrated that whereas crop yields, from no-
till are comparable to these from.conservation
tillage practices, the time saving and dollar >
returns with no-till'are attractive. Erosion reduc-
tion was estimated to range between 2 to ,17 "
tons/acre-yeaj. The ridge-till practice was ,'
shown' tp be an effective .alternative in situa- '
tions where no-till was proven to be less than
optimal'or impractical. Although phosphorus
loadings were, shown to decrease with conser-
' yatidn tillage practices, careful fertilizer manage-
ment was also recommended, to ensure minimaj
phosphorus a.rid nitrogenjrunoff. '
-------
Combined Sewer
Overflow Projects
Five 108a projects to demonstrate overflow '-
abatement-were performed in Rochester, New
York;''Saginaw, IVTJchigarj; and Cleveland, >6hio.',
between 1974 and'1986,"-The ma|pr strategies,
..clemohstratdd irr alt itKree >citiei5 were controlled
sewef flow and increased sewer storage capaci-
ty, but changes in sewage treatment .Were also
demonstrated in Rochester and "SaginaW. '. .
-' . . ' ' '
Of the several sewage treatment alternatives ex-
amined in Rochester, New York for high rate
primary treatmerit'of increased sewage ,
volumes, swirl concentrators and floccula-
iion/sedimentation devices were, considered
equally cost-effective1. Computer rh'odels Were
shown to be useful for evaluating a;variety,of -';','
expensive alternatives without actually"
limplementing, thjSm: _the projects conducted irv
Rochester, New'York also demonstrated that ' '
although such labor-intensive activities
as street sjeanjrig and field'inspections- , \- ..
,of sewer systems could yield short term results,
.they. Were .expensive, for Long, term use', - /' '
-Controlling Sewef flows and: adapting .sewage
treatment plants to Handle .storm 'flows-' on(tRe_
othef hand;- were done effectively at relatively ,
lOW "COSt., ' ';'-' /" ' ,' ' _t~ , ';' ; <''r'
Installation of-hydfobrakes (vortex valves) and
swirl .concentrators in the Saginaw; Michigan
CSO incredsed-the in-line sto'rage capacity and
consequently decreased the overflow of un-J
treated''sewage into the Sagihaw River.,The
flow change resulted in decreased loads ,of !
biochemrcal oxygen demand' (BOD), suspended
.solids, and 'total phosphorus as welf.
1 -1-- .' ..'',''' ' ' - ^ ~ '
Installation of a nydrobrake in the Cleveland,,
'Ohio CSO resulted'in a ri increase in flow con-
trol and in-line storage space and >a' decrease in
the frequency, of basement flooding in. area .
- homes. - ' -'- ', " ' -, , : -' , ',,
-------
v j. , ( ' ,_ '
Land Applications of Sewage
and the Anaerobic/Oxic (A/O)
Treatment Plant Digester
>CtS ' *:':-". ; , , .".' 'v; :;..-'
,Results of the land application demonstration.
projects suggest that treatment of sewage by-
land application 'is more' cost-effective than
other common treatment methods. 'Water
quajity monitoring showed that, diverting .
sewage effluent to land application areas
improved the quality'of receiving 'lakes by
, reducing phosphorus and nitrogen loadings.
These projects have demonstrated ,, _, , ,
feasible approaches to'reducing wastewater ,
poll.utant loadings' to surfa.ce waters. These,
practices alsq appear to be" more economical ,
.than conventional treatment methods,, par-
ticularly when recpvery of sorne of the costs of.
.treatment: through the sale of forage crops is
considered. [
AS a result ~qf the ,A/P^treatment plant digester
demonstration, which involved a sequential
anaerobic arid aerobic secondary treatment, in- ,
creased phosphorous removal and ammonium
.nitrif iqa'tipn, Were 'realized. . ' ,
Overland Flow Distribution Pipe
-------
Impact of the 108a Projects
Phosphorous'loadings have.bedn identified as-
" a;key factor in the degradation of freshwater '
'' lakes including the lower Great' Lakes. '-
Specifically, phosphorus has'been identified,
as a problem in Lake. Erie, Lake Ontario,- and
Saginaw Bay in Lake Huron. A 1983 suppler
rrient to Annex 3 of the 1978 Great Lakes
Water Quality Agreement confirmed target
loads for reduction of phosphorus fn the ,
law@r lakes -needed to re'store water quality.
The phosphorus; load reduction plans
developed and implemented by the States of
Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania; and
New York relied heavily on the lessons learned
from .108a demonstration projects concerned
with controlling phosphorous. , ,
State-implemented Remedial Action1 Plans - ,, '
that clearly address-the need to reduce
phosphorus, in the Great Lakes Kave also bor-
, ' rowed from the wealth of information
generated by the 108a demonstration projects.
The 108a multi-dimerisrohal projects pioneered
many methods used iri' subsequent nonpoint
source:controrprograrns(RGWP, Special ACP, -
. , and M1PJ arid demonstrated the, importance -
of orie-on-one technical assistance Jo sustained
landowner participation Tor .creating a .,-/:' ,
-successful nonpoint source (IMPS) program.
During the Black Greek demonstration;, pro-
ject, the development of. a computer simula-
tion model to identify critical areas-and to
predict treatment effectiveness preceeded.an "
increased critical -area emphasis in subsequent
land treatment and water quality programs.'; -
' This is becoming, a standard component of
new NPS projects.
Of all available* agricultural ;best management
practices (BIVJP) for phosphorus control, con-
servation tillage and fertilized management
were found to be the most cost-effective
alternatives. - -
Land application of sewage was shown to be
highly effective fo.r reducing municipal
phosphorus loadings.
.State NPS programs have been altered or
" established as a result of lessons learned such
as the Wisconsin Nonpoint Source Abate-
ment Fund.-
The national NPS program has profited from
------- |