jnitec States       Assessrne'"-: ana V.'a'.e-sieo
Environmental Protection    Proieciior DIVISION iWH-553i
Agency          Wasnmgton DC
                                      EPA 4dO'4-90-00&
                                      August 1990
Clean Lakes Demonstration

1989  Annual  Report
To Congress



              OFFICE OF WATER

              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


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

                                  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

    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.

    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.

    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,

       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
Lake. State Phase Funds ($)
Clean Lakes
Funds Prior
to FY89 ($)
Funds ($)
        Houston, TX
        Beaver, AR
        Greenwood, NJ

        Greenwood, NY
        Alcyon, NJ*
        Gorton's Pond, RI

        Washington, RI
        Bomoseen, VT
        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

                                       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
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

    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

    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

    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
    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

    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
    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.

    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

    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

    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.

                                      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,

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

    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.

                                   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.

                                     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.

    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.

    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

    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.

                                        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.