jnitec States Assessrne'"-: ana V.'a'.e-sieo
Environmental Protection Proieciior DIVISION iWH-553i
Agency Wasnmgton DC
EPA 4dO'4-90-00&
August 1990
wEPA
Clean Lakes Demonstration
Program
1989 Annual Report
To Congress
-------
CLEAN LAKES DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
1989 ANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS
OFFICE OF WATER REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS
OFFICE OF WATER
US. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, DC
-------
Prepared under Contract No. 68-C8-0052 for the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. Project Officer: Frank
Lapensee, Assessment and Watershed Division, Office of
Water Washington, DC 20460. EPA Regional Clean Lakes
coordinators contributed to information for this Clean Lakes
Demonstration Program Annual Report. Roberta Wedge
compiled and produced the report, which was reviewed by
Frank Lapensee, Terri Hollingsworth, the Regional Clean
Lakes coordinators, and relevant state environmental
personnel.
-------
CONTENTS
Page
Executive Summary iv
Introduction 1
Lake Houston 3
Beaver Lake 4
Greenwood Lake 5
Deal Lake 7
Alcyon Lake 9
Gorton's Pond 11
Lake Washington 13
Lake Bomoseen 14
Sauk Lake 16
Lake Worth 17
111
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In 1972, Congress created the Clean Lakes
Program to restore and protect the Nation's lakes.
The 1987 amendments to the Clean Water Act
(section 314) reauthorized the nationally competitive
Clean Lakes Program and established the
demonstration program. The objectives of the
demonstration program are to: develop pollution
control techniques for lakes, particularly for
nonpoint sources of pollution, and evaluate regional
pollution control strategies; demonstrate
environmentally preferred techniques for removing
lake sediments and other impediments; construct
and evaluate devices to prevent the deposit of
sediment in lakes; and demonstrate the costs and
benefits of using dredged material from lakes in the
reclamation of despoiled land. The Program
provides financial and technical assistance to states
to conduct three types of projects: Phase I
Diagnostic/Feasibility Studies that require one-year
monitoring studies to determine baseline
limnological data and an analysis of the most
technologically feasible and cost-effective pollution
control strategies; Phase II Restoration/Protection
Implementation Projects that are actual in-lake
restoration efforts based on Phase I
recommendations; and Phase III Post-Restoration
Monitoring Studies conducted three to five years
after the completion of Phase II to assess the long-
term effectiveness of the pollution control and
restoration techniques.
The Act requires that the Administrator of the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency give priority
consideration to the following ten lakes for inclusion
in the demonstration program: Lake Houston,
Texas; Beaver Lake, Arkansas; Greenwood Lake,
New Jersey, Alcyon Lake, New Jersey, Deal Lake,
New Jersey, Gorton's Pond, Rhode Island; Lake
Washington, Rhode Island; Lake Bomoseen,
Vermont; Sauk Lake, Minnesota; and Lake Worth,
Texas. In FY 1989, Congress appropriated $5.0
million for the demonstration program and six of
the ten lakes named in the Act applied for financial
assistance. All of the applications were approved
and $1.7 million was distributed; however,
Vermontwas unable to accept the award for Lake
Bomoseen because of the lack of matcHng state and
local funds. EPA received recertification of the
remaining $3.3 million, which was made available in
FY1990.
The ten lakes have water quality problems that
are common to many lakes throughout the United
States and therefore may serve as models for similar
restoration projects on other lakes. Most of the
water quality problems fall into one of two
categories: excessive siltation and sediment influx,
and high levels of nutrient loading. For example, at
Deal Lake in New Jersey, excessive siltation has
gradually reduced the number of deep water areas
in the lake and restricted recreational activities such
as boating and swimming. High nutrient levels can
lead to the rampant growth of aquatic weeds. This
vegetation can also impede recreational activities,
cause hypoxia and fishkills, and lead to a decline in
the aesthetic quality of the lake. This situation has
occurred at Lake Bomoseen hi Vermont, where the
nuisance growth of the aquatic plant, Eurasian
milfoil, has curtailed full use of the lake.
There are many sources of these water quality
problems but most can be linked to the
development of the lakes' watersheds. Urbanization
can increase runoff from lawns, highways,
stormwater outfalls, and other surfaces. Shoreline
development can also result in increased nutrient
loading from the use of fertilizers on lawns and the
presence of septic systems in areas that have not
been sewered. Rural development can lead to
water quality problems as well. Farms and animal
production facilities on or near lakes use and
generate large quantities of nitrogen and
phosphorus from annual feed, fertilizers, pesticides,
and animal wastes. Runoff from these facilities or
fields can significantly increase the nutriient load of
the lake. Soil erosion that occurs during
construction or from poorly maintained commercial,
residential, or agricultural lands can cause a
significant influx of silt and sediment to a lake.
IV
-------
Some lakes may have more unusual, though not
uncommon, water quality problems. For example,
Jcyon Lake in New Jersey has toxic contaminants
i: its water. The source of these contaminants is
the toxic leachate the lake receives from an
abandoned chemical waste dump upstream. This
landfill is a designated Superfund site.
Community interest in restoring these lakes has
been a major factor both in designating the lakes
for the Demonstration Program, and in
implementing measures to improve water quality
and protect aquatic resources. For some of the
lakes, lake associations comprised of property
owners around the lakes, have been instrumental in
determining sources of pollution, initiating
prevention and control efforts, and developing
funding sources to match federal grants. Volunteer
activities, particularly monitoring water quality in
the lakes, have also been important. At Lake
Washington, the University of Rhode Island
coordinates these volunteer groups to gather useful
baseline data. States in which Phase I studies are
ongoing or have been completed agree that the
Demonstration Program has been a valuable
resource for initiating protection and restoration
activities. Where such activities have been
implemented, they have been successful in
improving the water quality of the lake and
encouraging further efforts. States agree that the
Demonstration Program provides useful models for
identifying water quality impairments in lakes,
assessing protection and restoration techniques, and
encouraging public involvement in maintaining and
improving the Nation's lakes.
-------
INTRODUCTION
In 1972, Congress created the Clean Lakes
Program in response to public demand for the
preservation and protection of the Nation's lakes.
The Clean Lakes Program has as its primary goals
the definition of the causes and extent of pollution
problems in publicly-owned lakes of each state, and
the development and implementation of effective
techniques to restore and protect lake resources.
Promulgation of the Clean Lakes Regulations in
1980 defined the program structure and outlined the
financial assistance mechanisms available to the
states for carrying out the provisions and objectives
of the Act.
The Clean Lakes Program provides financial
and technical assistance to states to conduct three
types of projects: Phase I Diagnostic/Feasibility
Studies, Phase II Restoration/Protection Imple-
mentation Projects, and Phase III Post-Restoration
Monitoring Studies.
Phase I studies are used to determine the
causes and extent of the pollution in a specific lake,
identify potential control mechanisms, and
recommend the most feasible and cost-effective
methods for restoring and maintaining lake water
quality. Phase I studies include a one-year
monitoring program to obtain current limnological
data on the trophic conditions of the lake including
physical, chemical and biological water quality data.
The diagnostic portion of the Phase I study further
requires gathering information on the limnological,
morphological, demographic, socioeconomic and
other relevant aspects of the lake and its watershed.
The feasibility portion of the study is to assess the
diagnostic data to determine the causes and extent
of the pollution to the lake, identify potential
pollution control mechanisms, and recommend the
most feasible and cost-effective methods for
restoring and maintaining the aquatic resource for
maximum public and environmental benefit.
Phase n funds are used to implement the lake
restoration and protection recommendations
identified in Phase I and may include actual in-lake
techniques as well as watershed management
practices. Phase II cooperative agreements require
comprehensive lake water quality monitoring during
restoration as well as for a minimum of one year
after the implementation of restoration and
protection measures to determine the initial
effectiveness of the project.
Phase III monitong studies are used as a long-
term follow-up to phase II activities. For
restoration/protection projects that have been
completed for at least five years, Phase III funds
may be used to determine the longevity and
effectivenesss of implemented techniques. Phase III
monitoring studies must meet several criteria: 1)
quantitative data must be available on pre-treatment
and post-treatment water quality; 2) the treatment
used in the lake should be applicable to other lakes
with similar pollution problems; 3) the treatment
and its implementation must be documented in
detail; and 4) the measure of a successful treatment
must be related to improved water quality or uses.
Since the mid 1970s, the Clean Lakes Program
has provided more than $115 million in financial
assistance to states to help fund hundreds of lake
studies and projects.
The 1987 amendments to the Clean Water Act
(section 314) reauthorized the nationally competitive
Clean Lakes Program and established the
demonstration program. The objectives of the
demonstration program are to: develop techniques
to prevent and control pollution to lakes,
particularly nonpoint sources of pollution, and
evaluate the feasibility of implementing regional
pollution control strategies; demonstrate
environmentally preferred techniques for the
removal and disposal of contaminated lake
sediments, silt, aquatic growth, and other
obstructions; construct and evaluate silt traps and
other devices to prevent the deposit of sediment in
lakes; and demonstrate the costs and benefits of
utilizing dredged material from lakes in the
reclamation of despoiled land. The Act requires
-------
that the Administrator of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) give priority consideration
to the following ten lakes for inclusion in the
demonstration program: Lake Houston, Texas;
Beaver Lake, Arkansas; Greenwood Lake, New
Jersey; Deal Lake, New Jersey; Alcyon Lake, New
Jersey, Gorton's Pond, Rhode Island; Lake
Washington, Rhode Island; Lake Bomoseen,
Vermont; Sauk Lake, Minnesota; and Lake Worth,
Texas.
The EPA policy is to carry out the newly
established demonstration program under existing
program guidance and regulations. In FY 1988, the
Clean Lakes Program did not receive an
appropriation. However, in FY 1989, Congress
appropriated $5.0 million for the demonstration
program and $7.5 million for the nationally
competitive program. Six of the ten lakes named in
the Act to be included in the demonstration
program applied and were approved for financial
assistance. However, Vermont was unable to accept
the award for Lake Bomoseen due to the lack of
matching funds. The distribution of thi; $1.7 million
in FY 1989 funds, as well as previous funding, for
each project is shown below. EPA has received
recertification of the remaining $3.3 million, which
was made available hi FY 1990.
The 1987 amendments to the Clezin Water Act
further instructed the Administrator of EPA to
submit annual reports to the Congress on work
undertaken by the demonstration program. The
report summarizes herein the current status of each
demonstration project and describes the work
undertaken by the EPA Clean Lakes Program as
well as by others involved in these projects.
Funding of Clean Lakes Demonstration Projects
FY89 DEMO
Lake. State Phase Funds ($)
Clean Lakes
Funds Prior
to FY89 ($)
State/Local
Matching
Funds ($)
Houston, TX
Beaver, AR
Greenwood, NJ
Greenwood, NY
DeaLNJ
Alcyon, NJ*
Gorton's Pond, RI
Washington, RI
Bomoseen, VT
Sauk,MN
Worth, TX
I -0- 100,000 42,857
I 100,000 -0- 42,857
I -0- 98,233 42,100
H 452,400 -0- 452,400
H 369,600 -0- 369,600
II 604,881 -0- 604,881
-0- -Q- -0-
I -0- 74,200 31,800
H -0- 143,353 143,353
I 98,413 -0- 42,176
II -0- 74,640 74,640
I 100,000 -0- 42,857
I -0- 100,000 42,857
TOTAL $1,725,294
* Has received several million dollars from the EPA Superfund Program
-------
LAKE HOUSTON
The construction of the Lake Houston Dam on
the San Jacinto River in 1954 resulted in the
formation of Lake Houston. This impoundment,
which has a surface area of 12,350 acres, serves as
a water supply and recreational lake for the City of
Houston, Texas. Originally the lake had a storage
capacity of over 160,000 acre-feet but during the
intervening 35 years the capacity of the lake has
decreased by more than 27,000 acre-feet (18%).
Studies conducted in 1980 by Rice University
indicated that the diminished capacity resulted from
constant sedimentation and aquatic plants. These
plants, primarily water hyacinths and alligator weed,
are found in inlets around the periphery of the lake.
In addition to decreasing the storage capacity of the
lake, the plants have restricted recreational uses
such as boating and fishing.
Aquatic resources also have been affected by
high turbidity and high nutrient levels in Lake
Houston. Although at one time fecal coliform
concentrations were a significant problem as a result
of point source permit violations, stringent
permitting and enforcement have eliminated this
particular problem. There are several hundred
NPDES and state discharge permits issued for Lake
Houston and the compliance rate is very good.
The current water quality problems are caused
by runoff, primarily from urbanized areas around
the lake; a significant source may be fertilizers
applied to property adjacent to the lake. The City
of Houston has long been active in monitoring the
water quality of the lake and has initiated a number
of measures designed to maintain or improve lake
quality. These have included inspection and
licensing of septic systems, inspecting and approving
oil well drilling locations near the periphery of the
lake, monitoring sewage treatment plants, collecting
water samples within the watershed, and issuing
citations for code violations. Recent federal
regulations pertaining to stormwater permitting for
communities of over 100,000 people may also have
an eventual impact on the water quality of the lake.
A number of restoration and pollution
prevention methods will be considered for Lake
Houston. These methods include shoreline
stabilization, dredging, nutrient inactivation and
precipitation, nutrient outflow acceleration, and
fertilizer management plan. In 1987, the Texas
Water Commission received $100,000 from the
Clean Lakes Program for which matching state and
local funds of $42,857 were committed. These funds
are supporting the Phase I Diagnostic/Feasibility
Study for Lake Houston which will result in a better
understanding of the factors affecting the water
quality of Lake Houston and the selection of the
best alternatives for restoring and protecting the
lake.
-------
BEAVER LAKE
Located near Fayetteville, Arkansas, an area
experiencing rapid growth, Beaver Lake is a 28,190-
acre reservoir which provides excellent recreation
facilities as well as drinking water for the
surrounding population of over 200,000 people.
Although Beaver Lake has escaped any significant
impairment to date, the Arkansas Department of
Pollution Control and Ecology is concerned that
rapid commercial, agricultural, and residential
development increases the potential for water
quality degradation in the lake.
The Beaver Lake watershed has been
extensively studied through the cooperative efforts
of several Federal agencies, including the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, the Tennessee Valley
Authority, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture's
Soil Conservation Service. The Soil Conservation
Service, recognizing that runoff from the growing
number of chicken and swine farms in the
watershed could eventually affect the quality of the
drinking water supply, was instrumental in
designating Beaver Lake for the Clean Lakes
Demonstration Program. Between 1980 and 1986,
studies conducted by the U.S. Corps of Engineers
and the U.S. Geological Survey focused on erosion,
animal wastes, nutrient transport, water quality,
aquatic species and habitats, and water quality
management. The studies indicated that water
clarity in the upper reservoir has been decreasing as
a result of siltation and algal blooms. The source of
A Beaver Lake
ARKANSAS
the siltation and algae is believed to be the
increased number of confined animd production
facilities and the spreading of the wastes from the
facilities on nearby pastures. Federal permits have
not been required for the many chicken and swine
farms located around the lake. However, the State
of Arkansas does regulate swine farms and some
state permits have been issued. The EPA and the
State of Arkansas are encouraging farmers to use
best management practices on a voluntary basis to
reduce the potential for nutrient loading to the lake.
The Corps of Engineers has spent more than
$400,000 to characterize the water quality of the
lake and to determine the impacts of the
surrounding watershed by monitoring critical
watershed areas where there are cooperative
farmers. To assess the potential impacts from
increased development within the watershed and
outline the best approach to protecting the water
quality of the lake, the state will undertake a
$142,857 Phase I Diagnostic/ Feasibility Study
($100,000 Federal Clean Lakes funds and $42,857
state funds) to characterize the limnological aspects
of the lake proper, which will not be included in the
Corps' study. Public meetings will be held to allow
all parties interested in the lake and its future to
participate in the development of the lake
protection plan.
-------
GREENWOOD LAKE
Historic Greenwood Lake is unique among the
Clean Lakes Demonstration Program lakes because
it is located in two states, New Jersey and New
York. Its use extends back to pre-Colonial days and
it remains a popular recreational area. Numerous
marinas, restaurants, homes, and other facilities are
located along the shoreline. In addition, the lake is
part of the headwaters for the Wanaque Reservoir
which is a major water source for northern New
Jersey. The lake, which has a surface area of 1,920
acres, is divided almost in half by the New
York/New Jersey state line with the northern New
York portion being deeper and having a steeper
shoreline.
Although Greenwood Lake is still a thriving
water resource, in recent years it has begun to show
signs of water quality degradation. Fishing has
changed from a game/sport fishery to pan fish.
Excessive growth of aquatic plants along the
shoreline, particularly in the shallower areas, has
seriously affected navigation, and has also resulted
in unpleasant odors and taste. The aquatic plant
growth is caused by increased nutrient loading and
the influx of sediments, which are the result of
development in the watershed, storm runoff, septic
discharges, and point source discharges into
tributaries of the lake. Of the six NPDES permits
issued for the New Jersey shoreline of the lake, all
were found to be out of compliance at some time;
of these, the three sewage treatment plants are in
the process of upgrading their facilities to comply
with their permits; of the other three permits, two
are under administrative orders to achieve
compliance and one was a single incidence of
exceeding permit discharge levels.
In 1983, a Phase I Diagnostic/Feasibility Study
was undertaken by the State of New Jersey with
$98,233 in federal funds. The study was to identify
sources of lake pollution and determine the best
possible "restoration methods. It was determined
that the hypolimnion was anoxic during the summer;
that annual total participate and sediment loadings
were over 5,000 kilograms (11,000 Ibs) and 3 million
kilograms (6.6 million Ibs), respectively; aquatic
plants had reached nuisance proportions in the
NEW JERSEY
-------
southern end of the lake and in some northern
areas, and floating stumps posed safety hazards.
The poor water quality, inaccessibility to the lake,
and safety hazards have resulted in a decline in
recreational activities such as fishing. A
restoration/management plan was developed to
provide for long-term improvements to the lake as
well as to address the immediate need for
maintaining recreational opportunities. The plan
had 10 parts:
1) upgrade the sewage treatment plant and
prohibit future sewage treatment plant
discharges to the lake;
2) develop a septic management district to
monitor existing on-site wastewater disposal
systems and improve new ones;
3) develop a comprehensive stormwater
quality management plan to treat first
runoff;
4) stabilize the tributaries to decrease erosion
and sediment transport;
5) establish a site plan review committee to
oversee all proposed development in the
lake's watershed;
6) control aquatic plant growth by periodic
lake drawdown;
7) implement an aquatic plant harvesting
program;
8) dredge specific locations where there are
navigation hazards;
10) establish a public education and
participation program.
The total costs for the plan were estimated at
$10 million. Restoration activities were to be
conducted as funds became available. Some
portions of the plan were implemented as early as
1985, specifically the lake drawdown and aquatic
plant harvesting in the northern part of the lake. In
addition, engineering drawings for a detention basin
have been prepared, sewage treatment facilities in
the area have been upgraded, stormwater control
measures have been implemented for new
developments, and runoff conveyance;; have been
maintained. At present the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers is developing a dredging plan for the lake
which includes an archaeological survey. It is
anticipated that this work by the Corps will allow
the Greenwood Lake Watershed Management
District, Incorporated to use funds from Phase II on
other aspects of the restoration project.
The State of New York and the State of New
Jersey have received Clean Lakes Program funds for
Phase II Restoration/Protection Implementation
grants to continue with portions of the restoration
plan for which equal matching state and local funds
are available. The total federal award is for
$822,000, with New York to receive £$69,600 and
New Jersey to receive $452,400. These monies will
be used primarily for weed harvesting and
watershed management to reduce the influx of
nutrients and sediment. In turn, this will ultimately
reduce or prevent the secondary effects of the
pollutants such as massive aquatic plant growth and
decreased dissolved oxygen. These secondary
effects can then be dealt with as future funding
allows.
9) apply alum or install an aeration unit to
control phosphorus recycling; and
-------
DEAL LAKE
As the largest freshwater body in Momnouth
County, New Jersey, Deal Lake has provided
neighboring communities with water recreation
opportunities since 1890. The lake was formed by
the damming of a tidal creek and consists of a
series of shallow finger-like sloughs branching from
a main basin. Community involvement with the
lake is evidenced by the planting of ornamental
plants along the lake periphery and the active
promotion of water activities such as fishing,
swimming, and boating.
The Deal Lake watershed has been subjected to
continuous development with a subsequent
degradation in lake water quality resulting from
increased nutrient and sediment inflow. By 1950,
aquatic plant growth, algal blooms, and bacteria
concentrations had became excessive and the use of
the lake for boating and swimming was impeded or
prohibited.
State and local interest in restoring Deal Lake
to its former standard of water quality culminated
in 1983 in a state-sponsored comprehensive
diagnostic/feasibility study. This study determined
the status of the lake and identified the sources of
the influx of nutrients and sediment. The primary
source of sediment was determined to be an old
landfill located upstream of the lake. This in turn,
led to a remediation plan which consisted of three
steps: 1) the development of a cooperative
agreement between the Deal Lake Commission and
neighboring local governments to develop new
ordinances and zoning requirements or upgrade
existing ones to control stormwater runoff and soil
erosion, and to maintain proper watershed/land use
management, particularly to stabilize the landfill
responsible for most of the sediment influx; 2)
identify the current or potential sources of soil
erosion, and determine sensitive habitats and
implement ordinances to correct or avoid
development of these areas; and 3) construct
sediment catch basins, detention basins and/or
vegetated retention basins (wetlands). The
restoration project was initiated by the Deal Lake
-------
Commission in 1988, using $1 million of State of
New Jersey funds. A heavily sedimented portion of
the lake, the Harvey Brook arm, was restored by
dredging, the construction of a sediment trap, the
development of a 2-acre wetland, and the
reclamation of 4 acres of surface water habitat.
Other restoration activities completed to date
include the retrofitting of the lake's flume to permit
adjustments in lake water levels for flood control
and to allow for increased drawdown for aquatic
plant control, fishery management, and sediment
removal. Of three known industrial dischargers to
the lake, one company has gone out of business,
one water treatment plant is being penalized for
noncompliance with its state discharge permit, and
the third industry is no longer discharging into the
lake.
In 1989, the Deal Lake Commission received
financial assistance ($604,881) from the Clean Lakes
Program, matched equally by the state, to complete
four other restoration and protection elements for
the lake. These elements are: 1) construction of a
wet basin and biofilter to prevent property damage
from flooding, improve stonnwater quality, and
provide new wetlands; 2) the conversion of a pool
which currently has an accumulation of sediment
and unstable sideslopes, to a functional retention
basin to decrease sediment and nutrient influx to
the main body of the lake; 3) the creation of a
biofilter and wetland on the present situ of stagnant
backwater pool; and 4) watershed and land use
management. This last project will require the
development of new ordinances, the identification of
areas under or proposed for development, and the
determination of site-specific impacts.
-------
ALCYONLAKE
Alcyon Lake is a small manmade lake
occupying approximately 18.5 acres. Located in
Pitman, New Jersey, in the county of Gloucester,
the lake has been a center of community activity
since the 1890s when Alcyon Park was built on the
lakeshore. At the turn of the century, a beach and
an amusement center were established at the Park.
In 1951, Alcyon Park was sold and essentially
abandoned, although the beach was maintained
during the 1950s.
By 1980, three sources of pollution had been
aentified for Alcyon Lake: 1) the LiPari Landfill,
an abandoned chemical waste dump, 2) urban
stormwater runoff, and 3) agricultural runoff. This
pollution had been ongoing for over 20 years. In
1980, it was determined that the major problem at
the lake was the discharge of 130 to 150 thousand
gallons of chemical wastes from the LiPari Landfill.
Forty-four of the 126 priority toxic pollutants (listed
as such by the EPA pursuant to section 307(a) of
the Clean Water Act), were found in the leachate
stream.
In 1980, the State of New Jersey Department of
Environmental Protection applied for financial
assistance under the Clean Lakes Program to begin
the study and restoration of Alcyon Lake for
recreational purposes. However, because of the
ongoing contamination of the lake from the LiPari
Landfill ~ the number one Superfund site in the
country — Alcyon Lake was declared ineligible for
Clean Lakes funds until the landfill cleanup was
completed.
In the same year, the LiPari Landfill project
applied for and received several million dollars in
Superfund monies to begin site remediation
-------
efforts. Since then, the first stage of Superfund
activities - on-site construction of a slurry wall and
membrane cap - have been completed. The second
stage of the remediation plan consists of on-site and
off-site remedial investigation/feasibility studies to
address cleanup of the contained landfill area as
well as contaminant migration from the site. In July
1988, EPA committed $21 million from the
Superfund Program for the third and final stage of
the remediation plan. This stage includes: 1)
dredge and removal of contaminated sediments
from Alcyon Lake and its associated streams and
wetlands, 2) treatment of these sediments to remove
contaminants, 3) placement of the treated sediments
over a nearby abandoned racetrack, and 4) flushing
of contaminants from the landfill. The cleanup of
Alcyon Lake is expected to be complete in the
summer of 1991; the landfill flushing is now in the
design phase.
The State of New Jersey did not submit an
application for financial assistance under the Clean
Lakes Program in FY 1989. However, the state is
presently considering the use of Clean Lakes
Demonstration Program funds for the
implementation of watershed work to prevent and
control other sources of pollution to the Lake.
Although much is known about in-lake conditions,
a feasibility study addressing watershed management
activities will be necessary. In the meanwhile, the
county of Gloucester is beginning to identify sources
of nonpoint pollution and ways to control it. The
U.S. Department of Agriculture's Soil Conservation
Service and a local community college will provide
assistance to the county for controlling soil erosion.
Community involvement with the restoration of
Alcyon Lake is a major factor in its designation as
a Clean Lake Demonstration Project.
10
-------
GORTON'S POND
Located near Warwick, Rhode Island, Gorton's
Pond has been a commercial water resource for
settlers for over 250 years, when a filling mill was
first established on its shore. Since that time,
Gorton's Pond has been the site of a cotton mill
(now a warehouse), extensive residential
development, and a major source of freshwater
fishing, swimming, boating, and hiking. The pond,
essentially a lake, covers 57 acres and has a small
dam at its outlet which is used to control its depth.
Gorton's Pond is in a heavily urbanized area of
Rhode Island, and as such has many of the pollution
problems associated with residential and commercial
development. These include surface runoff that
contains oil, grease, bacteria, and fertilizers, as well
as other wastes that enter the water from storm
drains or surface runoff. This influx of nutrients has
resulted in green and blue-green algal blooms.
Watershed development has also caused severe soil
erosion with a subsequent increase in sediment
inputs to the lake. This deposit of sediment has
resulted in shallow areas along the periphery of the
lake and encouraged the growth of aquatic
macrophytes. Nutrient loading in the lake has also
increased because of septic system discharges,
although these discharges are the result of hydraulic
continuity with subsurface waters rather than
outdated or inefficient systems. These
manifestations of declining water quality have
reduced the population of sport fisheries.
In 1980, the State of Rhode Island received
$74,200 in Clean Lakes Program funds matched by
$31,800 in state/local funds to conduct a Phase I
Diagnostic/Feasibility Study of Gorton's Pond. A
year-long monitoring study indicated that the
eutrophication of the lake was caused primarily by
land use practices in the watershed. The feasibility
study stressed that any restoration plan must deal
with the causes of the water pollution not just the
artificial aeration, nutrient inactivation,
11
-------
effects; that is, in addition to actual lake restoration
activities, the plan must include land use
management practices to control further nutrient
and sediment loading. Land use management
recommendations included: erosion and sediment
control particularly during construction and at
stormwater outfalls; stormwater treatment and/or
diversion, and elimination of point and nonpoint
source discharges such as on-site sewage disposal
systems. Although some areas around the lake have
been sewered, some septic systems are still used.
Methods proposed for lake restoration included:
dredging, drawdown, aquatic plant harvesting,
dilution/flushing and bottom sealing. It was
emphasized that more than one method would be
necessary for preventing and controlling runoff and
sedimentation.
In 1986, Rhode Island received $143,353 in
Clean Lakes Program funds, matched equally by
state/local funds, to implement the stormwater
treatment component of the restoration project.
Due to a significant increase in the initial estimated
cost of implementing the proposed plan, the state is
currently Devaluating the restoration alternatives
and considering a scaled-down approach.
12
-------
LAKE WASHINGTON
Located in upper northwest Rhode Island, near
the Connecticut border, Lake Washington is a
shallow basin covering 41 acres that was formed by
the excavation of a cranberry bog and construction
of an earthen dam over 80 years ago. The shoreline
is densely populated by homeowners who enjoy the
lake for warm water fishing and boating.
In recent years, there has been excessive growth
of aquatic vegetation, algal blooms, and
sedimentation resulting in both physical and water
quality impairment to the lake. The degradation of
the aquatic plants and algae has resulted in an
increased dissolved oxygen demand that threatens
survival of the fish population. Part of the water
quality problems stem from the fact that the lake
has a naturally low inflow of water, primarily
groundwater, compared to the size of the lake basin
and, consequently, has poor flushing. In addition,
lakeshore residents are not on sewer lines and their
septic systems were installed prior to state
standards. Many of these sewage systems are at, or
have exceeded, their useful life. The septic systems
are problematic because of the high water table in
the watershed. A further source of pollutants is
highway runoff from Route 44 which abuts the
lakeshore; this runoff has resulted in the nuisance
growth of some salt-tolerant aquatic plants.
To study these problems and eventually restore
the lake to its full range of recreational uses, the
Rhode Island Department of Environmental
Management (D.E.M.), applied to EPA's Clean
Lakes Program for FY 1989 financial assistance to
conduct a Diagnostic/Feasibility Study of Lake
Washington. Although the restoration of Lake
Washington is the ultimate goal of the project, the
D.E.M. also hopes to use the lake as a prototype
for restoration programs at other lakes in the state.
A further consideration is the existence downstream
of a large public park lake system, the George
Washington Management Area, that includes
Bowdish Reservoir. Rhode Island is anticipating
that the restoration of Lake Washington will have a
positive effect on the water quality of the reservoir
and promote the funding of other water quality
projects in the Management Area. A public
education program will also be initiated to assist
other lake associations in developing their own lake
management programs. At present, there is a
volunteer water quality monitoring program on the
lake, coordinated by the University of Rhode Island.
The diagnostic/feasibility study will determine the
current status of the lake, identify causes of water
quality degradation, sources of pollution (there are
no water quality permits issued for the lake), and
evaluate control alternatives and implementation
plans, including pressurized dosing septic systems.
The D.E.M. received federal financial assistance in
the amount of $98,413 from the Clean Lakes
Program to be matched by $42,176 in state and
local funds for the Phase I study.
13
-------
LAKE BOMOSEEN
Lake Bomoseen is the largest lake located
entirely within Vermont. It covers 2,364 acres and
has an average depth of 27 feet. As a result, the
lake is a major recreational resource and
contributes to the economy of the region. The
lakeshore is densely developed with approximately
1,000 seasonal and year-round residences. One
shore of the lake is sewered and there are no
known violations of NPDES permits or other
discharges. There are two public boat access areas,
a state park, and a town beach area, as well as
marinas and other businesses that directly or
indirectly depend on the lake for revenue.
Prior to 1982, the lake had a nuisance
population of the aquatic plant, Potamogeton
crispus, which was controlled by mechanical
harvesting. Since then, however, another aquatic
plant, the Eurasian milfoil, has spread rapidly and,
in some areas of the lake, has effectively eliminated
other aquatic vegetation. It is estimated that the
plant now occupies over 600 acres of the lake out to
a depth of 20 feet. The Eurasian milfoil coverage
is very dense and has severely restricted recreational
activities hi and on the lake. Swimming has
declined because plant congestion along the
shoreline has made access to clearwater difficult;
boat use and fishing have been impaired because
the aquatic plants become entangled in propellers
and fishing lines; other water activities such as water
skiing, canoeing and SCUBA diving in shallow areas
have been curtailed; decaying plants cause an odor
problem; and dead fish, algae and debris are caught
in the plant mats. The culmination of these effects
has been less tourism and fewer recreational and
economic opportunities.
14
-------
Since the identification of the Eurasian milfoil,
the Town of Castleton has been using mechanical
harvesters to remove the plants from the lake's
surface. However, this method has proven to be
both ineffective and uneconomical in controlling the
plant growth. As an interim measure, the Town of
Castleton has recently petitioned the Corps of
Engineers for a cooperative agreement to
mechanically harvest the weeds under the Corps'
aquatic nuisance control program. The Vermont
Department of Environmental Conservation applied
for funds from the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Clean Lakes Program to implement a Lake
Bomoseen Demonstration Program to evaluate a
variety of milfoil control methods. The state hopes
to apply the most effective method to the other 25
lakes in Vermont which also have a milfoil growth
problem. Several control technologies have been
proposed along with mechanical harvesting:
drawdown, shallow dredging, sediment manipulation
(fill), rotavating, hydro-raking, and diver-operated
dredging. Federal funds requested were $500,000,
with the state and local governments to provide an
equal amount; however, the state was unable to
accept the FY 1989 grant offer because of the
unavailability of required matching funds. Although
the State of Vermont did not receive FY 1989
Demonstration Program funds, in 1977 the Clean
Lakes Program did provide funds in the amount of
$74,640 to the state for the harvesting of aquatic
plants and the permanent removal of nutrients.
In the absence of Federal funds and in
response to community interest, the state has
proceeded with studies on controlling the aquatic
plants. In the fall of 1988, a 3.5 foot drawdown was
carried out on Lake Bomoseen. The lake was kept
at this lowered level until mid-February of 1989.
Prior to drawdown, baseline data was obtained on
the quantity and type of macrophytes and
invertebrates in the lake and a similar analysis will
be conducted when the lake is refilled. The
monitoring information will be used to determine
what effect the drawdown had on the various
communities, particularly if it was effective in
controlling the growth of the milfoil and whether
the fish and wildlife values of the extensive wetlands
associated with the lake were substantially changed.
Subsequent to the drawdown in the fall of 1988,
shallow dredging and sediment manipulation were
conducted, and their short- and long-term
effectiveness will be observed.
15
-------
SAUKLAKE
The Sauk River Headwaters Project includes
Sauk Lake and its tributaries. The lake covers 2,111
acres in central Minnesota, with the watershed
being a predominantly agricultural area
encompassing 5 counties, 49 townships and 28 cities.
In the recent past, Sauk Lake has been a major
recreation area for water activities including water
siding, swimming, fishing, sailing, and log rolling
contests. At present, such uses have seen severely
curtailed or entirely discontinued because of the
excessive growth of aquatic plants.
The eutrophication and attendant growth of the
aquatic plants, both algae and macrophytes, hi Sauk
Lake has resulted from heavy pollution, primarily
phosphorus and sediments. The suspected sources
of these pollutants are fields and feedlot runoff,
effluents from wastewater treatment plants, septic
systems, and food processing facilities. Although
Minnesota has state programs that pertain to
feedlots, the ongoing Diagnostic/Feasibility study
will examine how these programs apply to Sauk
Lake.
In order to study the water quality problems in
Sauk Lake and to develop restoration and
protection options, the State of Minnesota received
$100,000 from the Clean Lakes Program, to be
matched with $42,857 in state and local funds, to
conduct a Phase I Diagnostic/Feasibility Study.
This study will determine the sources of pollution
and select the best restoration and protection
alternatives for Sauk Lake. The U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers (COE) is providing hydrological data,
surveying lake vegetation, determining sediment
chemistry, conducting water quality monitoring,
assessing the need for and preparing a community
education brochure, and conducting a nonpoint
source pollution analysis through their Water
Resources Study authorized under Section 602 of
the 1986 Water Resources Development Act. The
Corps' study was conducted during a period of
relative drought and may not be representative of
normal lake conditions. The Clean Lakes Project
will complement the COE study through completion
of an indepth assessment of land use activities and
water quality monitoring in tributaries to assess
nonpoint sources of pollution. The Sauk River
Watershed District is finalizing a Project Work Plan
to conduct this assessment.
16
-------
LAKE WORTH
Lake Worth is the primary source of drinking
water for the City of Fort Worth, Texas. It is also
a major recreational resource and is surrounded by
almost 4,000 acres of public parks. Recreational
uses of the lake include swimming, boating, water
skiing, and fishing. Constructed in 1914, the lake
has a surface area of approximately 3,550 acres.
In recent years, however, these activities have
been impaired by siltation and the unchecked
growth of aquatic plants in the shallow areas of the
lake. Studies conducted over the last 30 years had
recommended several methods for improving the
lake. These included dredging; better wastewater
management, particularly with regard to septic
systems; improving the parklands on the perimeter
of the lake; and using effective watershed
management practices. Three NPDES permits,
including one for cooling-water blowdown, have
been issued for facilities around the lake and there
has been good compliance for discharge levels.
In FY 1987, the Texas Water Commission
applied to the Clean Lakes Program for financial
assistance in the amount of $100,000 (state/local
match of $42,857) to conduct a Phase I
Diagnostic/Feasibility Study to determine the
present condition of the lake and watershed, and to
evaluate restoration and protection alternatives.
The Diagnostic/Feasibility Study includes an one-
year water quality monitoring program and a public
participation program. The diagnostic component
of the study has been completed with the
cooperation of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
and the feasibility study is in progress. Following
completion of the study, the City of Fort Worth and
the Texas Water Commission anticipate requesting
$2 million in Clean Lakes Program Phase II funds
to help finance the implementation of the
restoration alternatives selected. This will be
matched by $2 million in city funds, indicating the
high level of community commitment to restoring
the lake. It is expected that the Corps of Engineers
will also assist the City of Fort Worth with Phase II
of the project.
17
------- |