Diagnostic feasibility
studies consist of those necessary plans and studies which directly relate to
the development of eutrophication abatement programs. The diagnostic portion of
a study consists of lake water quality monitoring and data acquisition to
characterize trophic conditions, and watershed studies to identify sources of
nutrients and sediments contributing to eutrophication. The feasibility portion
of a study consists of an evaluation of alternative methods and procedures to
abate eutrophication by control of watershed sources of nutrients and sediments
and by management of water quality conditions within the lake.
(1) Content of diagnostic feasibility
studies.
The content of the diagnostic feasibility study shall be
determined by the Commissioner based on a pre-study conference with the
applicant and its consultant regarding the precise plan of study and resulting
scope of services to be performed. If deemed appropriate by the Commissioner, a
second conference may be held following the diagnostic portion of the study and
prior to the feasibility portion of the study. Diagnostic feasibility studies
shall address each of the following as determined appropriate by the
Commissioner:
(A) a description of the
physical characteristics of the lake including location, surface area, mean
depth, maximum depth, volume, bathymetry, major hydrologic inflows and
outflows, and outflow structures;
(B) a description of the type and amount of
public access to the lake;
(C) a
review of historical water quality data and the scopes and findings of previous
diagnostic feasibility studies;
(D)
maps and descriptions of lake watershed characteristics including bedrock
geology, soils, slopes, wetlands, land use, and existing zoning;
(E) identification of existing and potential
sources of nutrients and sediments including but not limited to residential
land, roadway drainage, streambank erosion, construction related erosion,
agricultural practices (in consultation with the County Soil and Water
Conservation District), and migratory waterfowl and gulls;
(F) lake water quality monitoring data to
characterize trophic conditions and identify problems. A quality assurance
project plan shall be prepared for proposed monitoring. At a minimum,
monitoring shall be conducted at spring overturn, early summer, and late summer
and shall include as appropriate secchi disk transparency, temperature and
dissolved oxygen structure of the water column, phytoplankton densities and
identification of dominant species, nitrogen and phosphorus structure of the
water column, mapping of areal extent and density of macrophytes, and physical
and chemical characteristics of lake sediments;
(G) field and laboratory quality assurance
and quality control documentation records;
(H) a description of the historical and
existing biological resources of the lake, particularly fish and waterbird
populations;
(I) a review of
historical recreational uses of the lake and a description of the uses that are
presently impaired by eutrophication;
(J) a review of alternative procedures and
methods for controlling watershed sources of nutrients and sediments including
technical feasibility, potential adverse environmental impacts, preliminary
design of structural elements, and estimate costs;
(K) a review of existing local watershed
management programs and a recommended program to insure implementation of best
management practices to control watershed sources of nutrients and
sediments;
(L) a review of
alternative methods and procedures for management of water quality within the
lake including technical feasibility, potential adverse environmental impacts,
preliminary design of structural elements, and estimated costs;
(M) a recommended eutrophication abatement
program identifying selected lake management alternatives and watershed
management alternatives including estimated capital costs, estimated operation
and maintenance costs, implementation schedules, and post implementation
monitoring and estimated costs;
(N)
a review of the legal, financial, institutional and managerial resources of
local authorities and a recommended management plan to insure local
implementation of the eutrophication abatement program;
(O) identification of easements and
rights-of-way necessary to implement the eutrophication abatement
program;
(P) identification of
federal, state, and local permits required to implement the eutrophication
abatement program;
(Q) a summary of
public participation in the development of the recommended eutrophication
abatement program;
(R) if the
applicant receives funding under the Federal Act, all other information
necessary to comply with 40 CFR Part 35 Subpart H, Appendix
A.