Connecticut Administrative Code › Title 22a - Environmental Protection › 339d - Grants to Municipalities and Lake Associations to Improve the Water Quality of Recreational Lakes › Section 22a-339d-3 - Technical program elements

Current through July 10, 2024
(a)
Diagnostic feasibility study requirements.
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.