CLEAN LAKES PROGRAM GUIDANCE
PECEM8ER /987
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF WATER
OFFICE OF WATER REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS
WASHINGTON, DC
-------
840R87008
CLEAN LAKES PROGRAM GUIDANCE
I. Introduction
A. Background
B. New Requirements
C. Integration With Other Programs
II. Implementation Approach
A. Development of Lake Water Quality Assessment Report
B. Lake Restoration and Protection Implementation
C. Lake Restoration Guidance Manual
III. Grant Application Requirements
A. Eligibility
B. Types of Financial Assistance
C. Application Proceedures
-------
THE CLEAN LAKES PROGRAM GUIDANCE
I.
INTRODUCTION
A.
Backnound
The Clean Lakes program was started in 1976 to provide financial
assistance to the States for the restoration and protection of our
nation's lakes. Early grants were research oriented and issued
under the authority of Section 104(h) of the Clean Water Act (CWA)
and Research and Development Regulations.
The Clean Lakes program regulations were published in 1980 and have
formed the basis for defining goals, priorities and relationships
with other State and Federal Programs. EPA began a comprehensive
financial assistance program through awards of grants to assist
States in preparing classification reports to identify and classify
lakes according to trophic conditions. Using this report to establish
priorities, diagnostic/feasibility studies (Phase I grants) were
financed to determine the causes of eutrophic conditions and alternative
techniques for restoration and/or protection of the lake. EPA could
then provide additional financial assistance (Phase II grants) to
implement the selected alternative restoration and/or protection plan-
proposed, using the information provided in the Phase I grant.
For additional information on the history of the Clean Lakes program -
references should be made to EPA document 440/5-85-033, Clean Lakes
Proaram a review of the first decade.
B.
New Requirements/Direction
*
The State has the lead responsibility for administering its own Clean
Lakes program. Its desire to receive financial assistance for the
restoration and protection of its publicly owned lakes is directly
related to its efforts in meeting the requirements of the Water Quality
Act of 1987 (WQA). Reauthorization of the program has added several
important requirements including a Lake Water Quality Assessment,
which includes a revised Lake Classification report, a list of lakes
which are known not to meet water quality standards or"require controls
to maintain standards, and an assessment of the status and trend
of lake water quality. In order for the States to participate in
the Clean Lakes program they must provide EPA with their- lake water
quality assessment report including their list of threatened and
impaired lakes by April 1, 1988, as part of the 305(b) report. This
".
Note: In accordance with section 518(e) of the WQA of 1987 the
Administrator is authorized to treat certain-Indian tribes as States.
Therefore, throughout this guidance the term State shall refer to
States, -Territories and those Indian tribes designated by the Agency
under section 518(e). -
-------
-2-
reporting requirement under 30S(b) is being linked to other assessments
(nonpoiBt source, toxics) in order to facilitate developm~nt of
integrated State Clean Water Strategies.
In addition to continuation of the Clean Lakes program, EPA is directed
to establish a demonstration program and a toxics control/acid mitigation
program designed to increase our base of scientific knowledge in the causes
of lake degradation (including acidification) and alternative techniques
for restoration of our nation's lakes. We intend to incorporate the new
initiatives within the framework of the existing program guidance and
regulations.
c.
Integration With Other Programs
*
When each State develops its State Clean Water Strategy, it has the
opportunity to integrate its Clean Lakes program into its overall
water quality management efforts. The Clean Lakes program is particu-
larly conducive to a highly integrated and unified approach-to
water restoration and protection by the States. The natural linkages
between Clean Lakes management activities and other environmental
programs (those addressed by the WQA, CWA and others operating under
Agency authorities), the flexibility afforded both EPA and the States
by section 314 and cross-program and cross-agency relationships
- established in the recent past all combine to encourage an integrated
Clean Water Strategy approach.
Clean Lakes projects need to be developed and implemented on a watersh~d
basis. This geographical approach to water quality management has been.
identified as a key element to success in nonpoint source control, ground-
water protection, water quality based permitting, stormwater permitting,
estuarine protection and cleanup, and wetlands protection. Furthermore,
such a geographical approach" to lakes management closely parallels the.
general approaches taken by other natural resource management agencies
such as the Soil Conservation Service, Forest Service, Bureau of Land
Management, Fish and Wildlife Service, Corps of Engineers, and Geologi-
cal Survey and their State counterpart agencies. This watershed approach
should greatly facilitate the leveraging of their informational/data,
technical, financial and programmatic resources for water quality purposes.
Effective and efficient lakes management requires a comprehensive
resource approach because many point sources and nonpoint sources (NPS)
impact lakes. Lakes act as sinks for pollutants generated by NPS activi-
*
State Clean Water strategies are in essence a vehicle to better
integrate and coordinate State water programs, and to improve
effectiveness by targeting activities to high priority geographic areas.
For more detai1es on State Clean Water Strategies, see in particular: US
EPA, Office of Water. State Clean Water Strategies: NeetinK the
Challenges of the Future, August 1987 and US EPA, Office of Water.
Surface Water and Wetlands Protection Program Operating Guidance FY
1988, April 1987.
-------
-3-
ty as well as point source~.. For this reason, specific lake projects
-may call for NPS control activities~ The Clean Lakes program has been
used by many States as their principal NPS management tool since_1981
and is expected under the WQA to be integrated with State programs for
control of nonpoint sources.
Lakes management involves other activities under the WQA. The discharge
of point source pollution into lakes, for example, may be addressed
by surface water toxics control strategies developed under section
308. The control of NPS pollution from agricultural, silvicultural
and urban runoff can be assisted by the judicious use and protection
of wetlands to buffer and filter NPS pollutants entering lakes.
Because hydrologic research has now clearly established the fact
.. that in many areas ground water and surface water are interconnected
parts of a single water system, lakes management will be considered
in the development of ground-water protection projects.
I I. .
IMPLEMENTATION APPROACH
To implement the WQA, States should review their existing Clean Lakes
Programs and better integrate them into their overall State water quality c
protec~ion efforts i.e., estuaries, wetlands, and ground water. If a State
has not previously participated in the Clean Lakes Program or developed a
State program, it needs to take .advantage of this opportunity. Existing
water quality data [305(b)] .may be used along with existing Clean Lakes
studies.
Each State has t~e lead responsiblity and flexibility in designing and
. implementIng its Clean Lakes Program. The program can be. integrated with
it~'other ongoing activities i.e., monitoring, recreation, natural resour-
ces, etc. States need to work toward compliance of their lakes program
with other State and Federal programs. Clean Lakes projects will be
encouraged that have been identified in the State's comprehensive Clean
Water Strategy and contain innovative or cross-media approaches.
EPA will support the States' Clean Lakes efforts including technical
assistance (as resourCeS allow), ensure that related EPA programs are
coordinated and work toward compliance of other Federal programs/agencies
with State lakes programs. Information from the States will enable EPA to
represent to Congress a national program perspective and to exercise good
stewardship of Federal funds. Information requirements will be minimal and
designed to present a national summary. .
A.
Development of Lake Water Quality Assessment Report
In prior years, States completed a classification report before projects
were considered for funding. .Under the WQA, beginning April 1, 1988,
States must submit a Lake Water Quality Assessment as part of their
biennial 305(b) report. Their assessment will include a classification
. study, a list of impaired and threatened lakes, and a report on the
status and trends of lake water quality, as well as other elements
defined in section 314(a) of the WQA.- This assessment will form
the basis for determination of priority projects and the direction
of program implementation. The State Assessment Report .should
-------
.." --,. - .
'.'.... . ~ .
_..
. .
" ~ "-"..
..
-_.~ .- - u- - - " '"
.
... -" - " "... -
-4-
clearly identify publicly owned lakes for which available information
does not support a reliable assessment, and provide a strategy and time-
table for completing the assessment of these publicly owned lakes. It
is our intent, to the extent funds are appropriated, to provide limited
. financial assistance in FY 1988 and 1989 for the development of Lake
Water Quality Assessment Reports.
The biennial Lake Water Quality Assessment Report is to be based on
available information and must include the following:
(1)
Lake identification and classification sUl'Vey
Each State must submit a list of all significant publicly owned
lakes within the State using the official name and location,
including the latitude and longitude in degrees and minutes of
the approximate center of the lake. Each State should provide
EPA its definition of significant lakes, which should include
substantial public interest and use. The trophic condition of
each lake must also be indicated. A State may update and submit
the existing material from its previously prepared classification
survey report.
(2)
Lake pollution control procedures
A general discussion of the States' approach (including procedures,
. processes, and methods) for controlling pollution to their publicly'
owned lakes. This includes the technical aspects of the States
Clean Lakes program such as their permitting systems and water
quality standards development and enforcement, lake monitoring and
other applicable programs. .
(3)
Lake restoration plan
r
A general discussion of the States' plans to restore and/or protect
the quality of degraded lakes. This is the State's management plan
for its Clean Lakes program and. should focus on the cooperative
working relationships among Federal, State, Tribal, and local
agencies concerned with lake restoration.
(4)
Toac substance control/acid mitigation activities
A list of those lakes with high acidity (ph<4.5) and a general
discussion of the States' plans to mitigate the effects of high
acidity in their lakes and remove or control toxics mobilized by
high acidity. Cost ~stimates for mitigation should be included
with enough specific information to support the estimated costs.
(5)
Identification of impaired and threatened lakes
On the classification list indicate all significant lakes which do
not meet water quality standards, have impaired uses, or are threat-
ened i.e., they may not fully support uses in the future because of
anticipated sources of adverse trends of pollution. If water quality
standards have not been established for lakes, the sta~dards used
-------
-5-
to determine impairment or threatened ~tatus sh~uld be identified.
Those lakes in which water quality has deteriorated as a result of
high acidity that may reasonably be due to acid deposition, should
be specifically noted on the classification list.
To the extent data is available for each impaired or threatened lake:
Summarize the available chemical and biological data demonstrating
the current water quality; ,
Note what recreational ,values or other uses are currently impaired
or threatened and the reasons;
Generally describe the characteristics of the lake e.g., maximum
depth, mean depth, surface area, volume, presence or absence of
stratified conditions, major inflows and outflows;
Generally describe the lake watershed in. terms of area" land use
(estimated percentage of each type), topography, and major soil types;
Identify major point sources of pollution and any controls
which may be in place; and
(6)
Identify major nonpoint pollution sources and any controls in
place. Indicate whether the watershed is included as part
of the State's nonpoint source pr~gram.
Water QUouty Trend Assessment
A summary discussion of lake water quality trends incorporating the
information outlined in items 1 through 5 and including the status
of lakes which presently meet water quality standards Qr support
designated uses.
B.
Lake Restoration and Protection
The regulations (Section 40 CFR Part 35 Subpart H) under which the Clean
Lakes program has been conducted since 1980, coupled with the General
Grant regulation (40 CFR Part 30) and this guidance document reflecting
requirem~tsof the WQA of 1987, form the basis for implementation
of section 314 of the WQA.
The Lake Water Quality Demonstration Program and a Toxics Control/Acid
Mitigation'Program will also be administered under the existing Clean
Lakes Program regulations and guidance.
Projects will be considered for funding according to State priorities
consistent with EPA guidance and regulations. The States should deter-
mine their highest priority projects as reflected by their list of im-
paired and threatened lakes submitted in their Water Quality Assessment
.[305(b) report) April 1, 1988 and their clean water strategy. Project
selection should be consistent" with existing application review criteria
in the regulations and Regional guidance, including technical feasibility,
positive overall lake ecosystem changes,' fish and wildlife habitat
-------
-6-
improvement; public benefits, environmental impacts, State priority
ranking, and the operation and maintenance program (CFR 35.1640-1).
State priorities for the Clean Lakes program should reflect identified
environmental concerns associated with lake water quality. Management
of Clean Lakes projects within a State should be a part of its overall
water quality protection program. Each State has the lead responsibility
for administering its own Clean Lakes Program. COQrdination with other
State agencies or local organizations, including development of inter-
agency agreements, is a State responsibility. The Clean Lakes Program
will encourage" coordination among Federal, State, Tribal and local
programs by targeting funding to areas that are applying an integrated
program approach. A portion of the Phase I study will determine the
relationship of the proposed project to other WQA programs, other
EPA programs and other Federal agencies' programs such as those of
the Department of Housing and Urban Development, Department of
Interior, Corps of Engineers and others.
The WQA authorizes a national Lake Water Quality Demonstration
Program. Ten lakes are identified in the WQA as priority lakes to
be considered for funding. In addition, funding is authorized for
highly acidic lakes or lakes with toxic substances mobilized by
high acidity due to acid deposition or acid mine drainage. It is
our intent to administer these projects under the existing Clean
Lakes program regulations, policy, and guidance as a comprehensive
Clean Lakes program. !f.-there is a separate appropriation for the
Demonstration Program or the Toxic Substance Control/Ac~4 Mitigation
Program, the Agency will re-evaluate this aspect of implementation.
EPA will coordinate with the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers and any
other Federal agencies involved in lake restoration or the Demonstra-
tion Program to ensure lack of duplication while maintaining high
quality projects.
In accordance with the WQA, the Toxics Control/Acid Mitigation Projects
should address the risks associated with toxic metals and other toxic'
substances mobilized by high acidity.
The WQA directs EPA to prepare an annual report to Congress on the
status of the Demonstration Program and a final report upon its
completion. Project progress reports and the final reports will be
used to prepare the report to Congress on the Demonstration Program.
c.
Lake Restoration Guidance Manual
The WQA directs EPA to publish and disseminate a lake restoration
guidance manual by February 1988 and update it biennially.
EPA's Office of Research and Development (ORD) is presently preparing
an initial lake restoration guidance manual.
EPA's Office of Water (OW) will be responsible for the biennial update
of the manual.
-------
I I Ie
- .
. ... .
.". . -
-7-
GRANT APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS
A.
ElIdbDltv
States are the only eligible applicants for Clean Lakes financial
assistance. They may make funds available to subordinate agencies
through interagency agreements. After April 1, 1988, they must have
submitted their Lake Water Quality Assessment Report to be eligible
for Clean Lakes financial assistance. For a project to be eligible,
the lake can be either natural or manmade. It may be an inland
pond, reservoir, impoundment or other similar body of water but it
must have recreational value, be accessible to the public by way of
publicly owned land and exhibit no oceanic and tidal influences. It
. must also be identified in the list of impaired and threatened lakes.
B.
Types of Financial Assistance
All cooperative agreements to be funded under section 314 will be
subject to the Clean Lakes regulations (40 CFR Part 3S Subpart H),
the general grant regulations (40 CFR Part 30) and the procurement
regulations (40 CFR Part 13). All authorized funding is subject-to
the availability of appropriations.
( 1) Lake Water QUlJlity Assessment
In FY 88 and 89, financial assistance is authorized for States to
conduct Lake Water Quality Assessments as required under 'section'
- 314(a)(1),. including: classification of lakes, description of methods
to control pollution and restore the quality of lakes, methods to
mitigate effects of high acidity and remove/control toxics mobilized
by high acidity, a list of threatened and impaired lakes, and an
assessment of ~he status and trends of lake water quality. Financial
assistance is authorized with a maximum of $100,000 per State and
will be issued with a minimum non-federal match of 50%.
The intent of this financial assistance is to provide the States with
supplemental resources to conduct a comprehensive Lake Water Quality
Assessment for the 1990 305(b) Report and subsequent Reports to
Congress on the ~tatus and trends of lake water quality.
Since there is no provision in the Clean Lakes regulation specifically
for a, Lake Water Quality Assessment Grant, such grants will be issued
under General Grant regulation 40 CFR Part 30 and this guidance
document. .
-------
- _n -~...-
.... . -
-8-
(2)
PhG8e I -- Diagnostic/Feasibility Study
The Clean Lakes program will financially assist a State in conducting
a diagnostic/feasibility study to investigate the existing or potential
causes of decline in the quality of a publicly owned lake, evaluate
possible solutions to existing or anticipated pollution problems, and
recommend the most feasible alternative to restore or preserve the
quality of the lake. . Funding assistance up to 70 percent of the
cost is authorized, with a maximum of $100,000 per study.
(3)
PhG8e 11 - Implementation
A Phase II cooperative agreement is to be used for implementing
recommended methods and procedures for controlling pollution entering
the lake, and for restoring or protecting the lake. Phase II awards
-require a 50 percent nonfederal match and do not have an upper limit.
Costs for final engineering design as well as actual implementation
of pollution control and/or in-lake restoration measures are eligible.
Phase II agreements require monitoring for a minimum of one year
after construction or pollution control practices are completed
(3s.16s0-3(c)(I)(iiť. We encourage monitoring for a minimum of 2-3
years.
- -Phase II agreements follow Phase I studies or equivalent investigations.
- A section 314 funded Phase I study is not required for consideration
of a Phase II application. Nor does funding-of a Phase II project
. automatically follow a completed-section 314 funded Phase I. Each.
,'. . phase- must be applied for separately, and each application is considered
on its own merits. Phase II projects which request Federal funds in
excess of one million dollars will require additional peer reviews to
a~$ure theseiected alternative is the most-cost effective and scientifi-
cally valid procedure.
(4)
PhG8e 111 - Post-restoration Monitoring
A-Phase III cooperative agreement is to be used to advance the science
of lake restoration. Selected projects, based on criteria to be develop-
ed, will be offered the opportunity to conduct long term post-restoration
monitoring studies to verify the longevity and effectiveness of various
restoration techniques. Funding assistance up to $125,000 will be
available and will require at least a 30 percent non-federal match.
Total annual awards will not exceed 10 percent of the total annual
appropriation of the Clean Lakes Program. Since there is no provision
in the Clean Lakes regulations specifically for a Phase III grant,
such grants will be issued as modified Phase I grants. The Appendix A
requirements will need to be modified or increased to accurately define
the scope of work to validate the restoration technique(s) employed.
Phase III - Post-restoration Monitoring grants will be issued under
General Grant regulation 40 CFR Part 30 and this guidance document.
-------
-9-
c.
A~pUcatlon Procedures
For all cooperative agreements, a State applies to the EPA Regional
Office using Standard Form 5700-33. The Clean Lakes regulations
specify the required application contents (section 35.1620-2).
The application and associated work plans are to be developed in
accordance with the Administrator's Policy on Performance Based
Assistance dated Hay 31, 1985.
The EPA Regional Office makes a technical evaluation and determines
funding priorities for the Region. Applications are also reviewed at
EPA Headquarters and, if necessary, sent out for peer review. EPA
Headquarters then sends its recommendation and a commitment notice to
the Region. The Region makes the award to the State and administers
the cooperative agreement.
The application review criteria used by EPA are specified in 40 CFR
35.1640-1. In addition, the project must be compatible with program
policy, objectives, guidance, General Grant Regulation (40 CFR Part 30)
and the procurement regulations (40 CFR Part 33). .
------- |