A polluted King’s Beach is a century-old problem, but in the last few years, a collaborative approach has resulted in remarkable progress toward a solution. The communities of Lynn and Swampscott – along with their elected officials, state and federal agency leaders, activists, scientists, and engineers – have energetically explored options that would achieve two objectives: Fix the problem and open the beach.
You would think one would follow the other, but the issue is complicated by the realities of aging municipal infrastructure and the subterranean waterway known as Stacey’s Brook that flows under our streets and onto King’s Beach. Instead, Lynn and Swampscott are pursuing a tandem process of source elimination – fixing the pipes – and a complementary solution that would allow for greater beach access on dry-weather days.
Finding the right complementary solution – one that is effective, safe, expeditious, and financially reasonable — is the challenge for both communities. Following is an update on the process and options.
The problem, in brief
More than a century ago, East Lynn and Swampscott culverted Stacey’s Brook by channeling it into a clay pipe carrying both sewer and stormwater onto King’s Beach and into the ocean.
In the early 2000s, the Lynn Water and Sewer Commission separated the sewer system, leaving Stacey’s Brook as a stormwater-only system. This improved water quality overall, but continued contamination from groundwater, cracked sewer pipes, and sewer laterals (“dry weather flow”) led to closing the beach more than half the time, a violation of the Clean Water Act.
Consequently, Lynn and Swampscott were placed under consent decrees – a legally binding plan for improvement – by the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to comply with the Clean Water Act and eliminate pollution from the stormwater system and King’s Beach.
In Lynn, high bacteria levels are likely due to contaminated groundwater seepage and illicit connections that were missed during the East Lynn Sewer separation project. In Swampscott, the original clay pipes have started to fail and sewerage leaks into the stormwater pipes.
The Strategy
To comply with the EPA consent decrees, both Lynn and Swampscott have developed phased plans for source elimination, officially called Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination (IDDE) – fixing the pipes. IDDE is the primary method for cleaning a waterway.
There is no end date to this project. The age and condition of many of the pipes below our streets demand ongoing inspection and updating to identify leaks, cracks, tree roots, and illicit connections.
The good news is that as of 2024, both Lynn and Swampscott have advanced aggressive source elimination efforts, appropriating millions of dollars to fund this work over the next several years. This is the result of continued IDDE work and phased plans for future inspections and updating.
The issue that Lynn and Swampscott are working to fix is one of ongoing contamination at King’s Beach during dry weather, when the beach should be open to swimmers. Due to the extent of groundwater contamination – everything from lawn fertilizer to motor oil to trash to pet, bird, and wildlife excrement – the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) believes fixing the pipes alone will not open the beach even during dry weather. In other words, source elimination alone is insufficient and a complementary solution is needed.
Over the past three years, seven possible options have been explored by both communities and the King’s Beach Steering Committee, which is comprised of federal, state, and local officials, engineers, and advocates. The list was narrowed to three based on data and literature reviews, bench scale tests and expert interviews. Each begs a series of questions, challenges, and opportunities:
Effectiveness. Does this solution improve the bacterial count and water quality on King’s Beach?
Health and Safety. Can this solution achieve the goals without otherwise harming environmental or human health? Can it be permitted under the Clean Water Act?
Cost and Time. Can this solution be accomplished at a fair cost in a reasonable time frame?
The answers to these questions will impact federal and state permitting, as well as funding opportunities.
Potential Complementary Solutions
Ultraviolet Disinfection
Commonly used in sewage treatment, but less common in stormwater cases, ultraviolet disinfection (UV) has shown potential to lower the bacteria count to acceptable levels on dry-weather/low-flow days, offering a path to opening King’s Beach. As it is a light source that does not add anything to the water column, UV does not otherwise harm human or environmental health, or violate the Clean Water Act. The sampling results we have received thus far have all been promising.
Currently, Lynn and Swampscott are exploring the installation of a temporary, seasonal pilot UV system that could be installed as early as next summer. If effective in treating dry-weather conditions, an extension of the pilot system or a permanent facility on the Swampscott/Lynn border could be explored. Early estimates project about a $25 million cost and 3–4-year design and construction timeline – although finding a suitable location in an already densely built area could be an obstacle.
Advanced Oxidation
This emerging technology using ozone “nanobubbles” is unsurprisingly effective at treating bacterial contamination (ozone is a known bacteria killer). A vendor’s yet to be verified estimates project less than a $10 million price tag and a relatively quick installation timeline. It is actively used in lakes and ponds in Ohio and Florida where it was studied by researchers at Ohio State University (OSU) and the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and permitted in EPA Regions 4 and 5.
The primary concern and outstanding questions related to this technology include whether it has a detrimental impact on macroinvertebrates and vertebrates. That is to say, can we kill the bacteria without killing plankton, fish and other sea life? OSU and NOAA have provided testing data on the safety of the technology in the ecosystem to the Steering Committee and DEP, which is being reviewed. The data on zooplankton survival has satisfied initial concerns, and data on brine shrimp and red drum is currently under review.
Outfall Extension
The third complementary solution is extending Stacey’s Brook approximately 4500 feet into Nahant Bay. While this does not change the bacteria count, it does have the clear potential to improve water quality on the beach by moving the contamination nearly a mile offshore and relying on dilution.
An outfall extension does not violate the Clean Water Act, as it does not increase nor decrease overall contamination into the ecosystem. Similar projects (albeit shorter in length at 1500 feet) are being built in South Carolina and Florida at a cost of $21 million. Early projections for the Stacey’s Brook outfall pipe estimate approximately a $50 million price tag and 6-8 year permitting, design, and construction timeline.
Advancing this solution will require study on possible environmental impacts, including mapping eelgrass beds and modeling the currents to ensure there is no adverse impact to Nahant Beach or other areas of the coastline.
Currently, the City of Lynn and Save the Harbor/Save the Bay are applying for a Community Change Grant from the EPA with the core strategy of increasing funding for source elimination efforts in both Lynn and Swampscott. In addition, the grant will look to fund complementary pollution reduction strategies, including a UV pilot, outfall extension study, and testing with ozone disinfection.
Citizen Action
The enormity of the problem doesn’t mean there isn’t a role to play for citizens concerned about cleaning up King’s Beach. For starters, voluntarily have your sewer lateral (the pipe that runs from your house to the street) inspected for cracks and necessary repairs.
Be aware that pet excrement ends up in stormwater and on the beach. Remain vigilant about picking up and remind your neighbors to do so. Chemicals from lawn fertilizer contaminate the beach too. Choose wisely.
And of course, stay in touch with your elected officials. They and the rest of the King’s Beach Steering Committee (https://www.savekingsbeach.com/stakeholders/the-steering-committee) present frequently in public forums – select board and city council meetings, the Lynn Water & Sewer Commission, Friends of Lynn and Nahant Beach meetings, and conservation commission meetings. Notes from each King’s Beach Steering Committee meeting at https://www.kingsbeachma.com/news.
Thank you,
Jared C. Nicholson
Mayor of Lynn
Sean Fitzgerald
Town Administrator of Swampscott
Brendan Crighton
State Senator
Jennifer Armini
State Representative
Daniel Cahill
State Representative
Chris Mancini
Executive Director of Save the Harbor/Save the Bay
Dan O’Neill
Director of Lynn Water &
Sewer Commission
