DOCSLIB.ORG

Eliminating Adverse Impacts of Low Dissolved Oxygen in the Sound

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Eliminating Adverse Impacts of Low Dissolved Oxygen in the Sound A Partnership to Restore and Protect the Sound 2005 THE Comprehensive Conservation and LONG Management Plan ISLAND Implementation Tracking Report SOUND STUDY January — December 2005 A Partnership to Restore and Protect the Sound June 2006 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This Report is the product of the Long Island Sound Study partnership of Federal, state, local and private agencies and organizations. The diversity of the Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan for Long Island Sound increases the difficulty and complexity in obtaining the information and data for this report. We wish to thank the states of Connecticut and New York for their invaluable assistance in compiling the date for the report and in coordinating their efforts with the many other state and local agencies and organizations participating in the Study. TABLE OF CONTENTS Title Page Number Foreword.......................................................................................................................................................................1 About the 2005 Report.................................................................................................................................................2 Executive Summary.....................................................................................................................................................3 OVERVIEW, Continuing the Management Conference .............................................................................................5 M-1. Supporting Implementation..................................................................................................................................6 OVERVIEW, Eliminating Adverse Impacts of Low Dissolved Oxygen in the Sound..............................................7 H-1. Reducing Nitrogen from STPs and Other Point Sources...................................................................................10 H-2. Reducing Nitrogen Loads from Non-point Sources ...........................................................................................11 H-3. Continuing Management of Hypoxia .................................................................................................................14 H-4. Funding to Implement Hypoxia Management Plans ..........................................................................................14 H-5. Monitoring and Assessment of Hypoxia ............................................................................................................15 OVERVIEW, Controlling Major Sources of Pathogens............................................................................................17 P-1. Combined Sewer Overflows ..............................................................................................................................18 P-2. Nonpoint Sources..............................................................................................................................................20 P-3. Sewage Treatment Plants .................................................................................................................................20 P-4. Vessel Discharges.............................................................................................................................................21 P-5. Individual On-site Systems/Discharges .............................................................................................................22 P-6. Controlling Pathogen Contamination through Public Education ........................................................................22 P-7. Monitoring and Assessment of Pathogens ........................................................................................................23 OVERVIEW, Protecting the Sound from the Adverse Effects of Toxic Substances.............................................25 T-1. Toxic Contaminant Source Controls and Pollution Prevention ..........................................................................26 T-2. Addressing Sediment Contamination ................................................................................................................29 T-3. Improving Human Health Risk Management.....................................................................................................29 T-4. Monitoring and Assessment of Toxic Contaminants..........................................................................................30 T-5. Research to Investigate Toxic Contamination ...................................................................................................31 OVERVIEW, Reducing Floatable Debris in the Sound ............................................................................................32 F-1. Controlling Floatable Debris from CSOs and Storm water Sewers ...................................................................33 F-2. Increasing Floatable Debris Cleanup Efforts .....................................................................................................34 OVERVIEW, Managing and Conserving Living Resources and Their Habitats ....................................................35 L-1. Restoration and Enhancement of Aquatic and Terrestrial Habitats ...................................................................37 L-2. Habitat Protection and Acquisition.....................................................................................................................39 L-3. Inventories and Management Strategies for Aquatic and Terrestrial Habitats...................................................40 L-4. Managing Endangered and Threatened Species ..............................................................................................41 L-5. Managing Harvested Species............................................................................................................................41 L-6. Managing Exotic and Nuisance Species ...........................................................................................................43 L-7. Educating the Public about the Plants and Animals of Long Island Sound .......................................................44 L-8. Developing an Informational Database about living Resources and their Habitats ...........................................44 L-9. Sound wide and Site-specific Research and Monitoring ...................................................................................45 L-10. Living Resources and Habitat Research ...........................................................................................................46 OVERVIEW, Raising Public Awareness and Participation Through Education and Outreach............................47 E-1. Community Awareness and Stewardship..........................................................................................................49 E-2. Promoting Understanding..................................................................................................................................51 E-3. Facilitating Public Participation..........................................................................................................................51 E-4. Increase Communication and Cooperation .......................................................................................................52 E-5. Enhance Education at All Levels .......................................................................................................................52 E-6. Secure Funding .................................................................................................................................................53 Appendices A. List of CCMP Actions............................................................................................................................................ A-1 B. List of LIS Futures Fund/LIS Infrastructure Projects…………………………………………………………………….B-1 C. NY/CT STP Discharges by Management Zone…………………………………………………………………………C-1 Glossary of Acronyms ................................................................................................................................................G-1 FOREWORD his 2005 report documents the 12th year of LISS Science & Technical Advisory implementation of the Long Island Sound Committee (STAC); and TStudy (LISS) Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan (CCMP) for Long Island LISS Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC). Sound (LIS). This Report summarizes the continuing work of the LISS Management any other federal, state, municipal Conference partners in carrying out the CCMP. academic, and local public and private Morganizations contribute to implementation he LISS Management Conference is of the CCMP. Among these are the: sponsored by the U.S. Environmental TProtection Agency (EPA), the New York U.S. Department of Agriculture's Cooperative State Department of Environmental Conservation Extension Service; (NYSDEC), and the state of Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection (CTDEP). Connecticut Department of Agriculture Bureau Additional partners include: of Aquaculture (CTDOA/BA); Interstate Environmental Commission (IEC); New York and Connecticut state Departments of Health; New England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission; University of Connecticut (UConn); and U.S. Department of the Interior Fish and State University of New York (SUNY). Wildlife Service (USFWS); ogether, these Federal, state, local, U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric academic, and citizen partners combine
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Transcanada Pipelines Limited Annual Information Form
    TRANSCANADA PIPELINES LIMITED ANNUAL INFORMATION FORM February 23, 2009 TRANSCANADA PIPELINES LIMITED i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page PRESENTATION OF INFORMATION..................................................................................................................................................ii FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION..............................................................................................................................................ii TRANSCANADA PIPELINES LIMITED............................................................................................................................................... 1 Corporate Structure ............................................................................................................................................................................ 1 Intercorporate Relationships............................................................................................................................................................... 1 GENERAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE BUSINESS .............................................................................................................................. 2 Developments in the Pipelines Business............................................................................................................................................. 2 Developments in the Energy Business...............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Gas the Composition of Natural Gas Is 95% Methane, Almost
    Natural gas The composition of natural gas is 95% methane, almost 4% ethane and nitrogen, and 1% carbon dioxide and propane. It is produced by the natural transformation of organic materials over millions of years. Methane: the simplest hydrocarbon Methane gas belongs to the hydrocarbon family. A hydrocarbon is an organic composition that contains only carbon and hydrogen atoms. With just one carbon atom and four hydrogen atoms, methane (CH4) is the simplest hydrocarbon. Some other hydrocarbons are: propane (C3H8), ethane (C2H6) and butane (C4H10). Benefits of Natural Gas Natural gas is increasingly the fuel of choice in today's homes. Below are the top reasons to choose natural gas for your home. 1 | Affordability Natural gas costs less to use in your home than electricity, heating oil, propane or kerosene. On average, electricity costs almost four times more than natural gas. 2 | Convenience and reliability Natural gas is piped directly into your home. It's always there when you need it, and you never have to worry about running out of fuel or arranging for deliveries. 3 | Comfort Natural gas heat feels warmer than heat produced by an electric heat pump. 4 | Domestic supply Nearly 100% of the natural gas consumed in the U.S. is produced in North America with 90% coming directly from the U.S. 5 | Environmental impact Simply put - natural gas is the cleanest-burning energy source for your home. The combustion of natural gas emits 45% less carbon dioxide than coal. 6 | Energy efficiency Natural gas is highly efficient. About 90% of the natural gas produced is delivered to customers as useful energy.
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Record—House H6757
    June 20, 2007 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H6757 Board of Visitors to the United States I would ask the chairman if he would ADERHOLT to restore funding for the Air Force Academy: work with Mr. LIPINSKI, the gentleman ARC, Appalachian Regional Commis- Mr. DEFAZIO, Oregon from Illinois, and me to provide fund- sion, to $65 million in this bill. This Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ, California ing for the H-Prize as we move forward amendment brings the Commission’s Mr. LAMBORN, Colorado in conference with the Senate. funding up so that it’s equal to the f Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I ap- President’s request in the previous preciate the gentleman and Mr. LIPIN- year’s funding level. ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOP- SKI’s request for funding for this very The Appalachian Regional Commis- MENT AND RELATED AGENCIES worthwhile program, and certainly sion is very important to my district APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2008 look forward to working with him as and many other districts from New The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu- well as the gentleman from Illinois as York to Mississippi. The Appalachian ant to House Resolution 481 and rule we go to conference. Regional Commission is a model for XVIII, the Chair declares the House in Mr. INGLIS of South Carolina. I Federal economic development initia- the Committee of the Whole House on thank the gentleman. tives, and has been a responsible stew- the state of the Union for the further The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk ard of the Federal funds it has received consideration of the bill, H.R. 2641.
    [Show full text]
  • Transcanada Corporation Annual Information Form
    TRANSCANADA CORPORATION ANNUAL INFORMATION FORM February 23, 2009 TRANSCANADA CORPORATION i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TABLE OF CONTENTS ...........................................................................................................................................................i PRESENTATION OF INFORMATION.................................................................................................................................ii FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION.............................................................................................................................ii TRANSCANADA CORPORATION .......................................................................................................................................1 Corporate Structure .............................................................................................................................................................1 Intercorporate Relationships ...............................................................................................................................................1 GENERAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE BUSINESS .............................................................................................................2 Developments in the Pipelines Business.............................................................................................................................2 Developments in the Energy Business ................................................................................................................................5
    [Show full text]
  • New York State Pre-Filed Revised Evidentiary Hearing Exhibit
    The Proposed Broadwater LNG Import Terminal Update of Synapse Analysis Prepared by: Ezra Hausman and Kenji Takahashi, Synapse Energy Economics 22 Pearl Street, Cambridge, MA 02139 www.synapse-energy.com 617-661-3248 January 19, 2007 OAGI0000225_ 1 Background In March, 2006, Synapse Energy Economics ("Synapse") released a report entitled "The Proposed Broadwater LNG Import Terminal: An Analysis and Assessment of Alternatives"! ("Synapse Report"). The purpose of the Synapse Report, prepared at the request of Save the Sound,2 was to identify and evaluate potential alternatives to the proposed Broadwater Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) import terminal in Long Island Sound to meet the long-term energy needs of the New York and Connecticut markets. In brief, the Synapse Report concluded that: • There is no evidence that the regional market requires a base load gas supply facility capable of providing an additional one billion cubic feet per day (bcf/d) of natural gas to meet its immediate or long-term needs. More pressing may be an infrastructure or other investment to address potential supply deficiencies during peak winter heating periods. However, the studies prepared by Broadwater Energy do not substantiate even this requirement for the region; • Other, environmentally preferable approaches to resolving any anticipated peak load supply shortfall would provide economically and socially preferable alternatives to any perceived supply deficiency. Such approaches include increased development and use oflocal storage facilities; investments in natural gas and electric energy efficiency and renewable energy resources; expanded use of combined heat and power technology; and repowering of existing gas-fired power plants to increase fuel efficiency.
    [Show full text]
  • Transcanada Corporation Annual Information Form
    TRANSCANADA CORPORATION ANNUAL INFORMATION FORM February 22, 2010 TRANSCANADA CORPORATION i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TABLE OF CONTENTS ...........................................................................................................................................................i PRESENTATION OF INFORMATION.................................................................................................................................ii FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION.............................................................................................................................ii TRANSCANADA CORPORATION .......................................................................................................................................1 Corporate Structure .............................................................................................................................................................1 Intercorporate Relationships ...............................................................................................................................................1 GENERAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE BUSINESS .............................................................................................................2 Developments in the Pipelines Business.............................................................................................................................2 Developments in the Energy Business ................................................................................................................................7
    [Show full text]
  • January - December, 2005
    Norwalk Hour Index - January - December, 2005 A Students demand dignity: 'Girl’- ACCIDENTS AARP-NORWALK cott calls for end to T-shirt Lawsuit calls park negligent in Graffiti to gangs [photo]. sales [photo]. 11/10/05 pA1+ boy's death. 9/13/05 pA1+ 5/18/05 pA1+ Students right to stage ‘girlcott’ Local boy who died at Playland AARP-WESTPORT/WESTON against T-shirts [letter]. ID’d [photo]. 8/5/05 pA1+ Freitag named chairman of 11/16/05 pA12 Mother to file lawsuit over girl's AARP senior health [photo]. ABONYI, CLEMENT partially severed foot. 2/23/05 2/24/05 pC4 Titans, Packers advance pA3+ Officers inducted by AARP [photo]. 10/31/05 pA13+ Norwalk boy, 7, found dead in chapter [photo]. 7/21/05 pC3+ ABORTION-LAW AND water at Playland ride. 8/4/05 AAUW- LEGISLATION pA15 NORWALK/WESTPORT Activists fear Roe v. Wade ACCIDENTS-NORWALK Booked for the weekend [photo reversal. 7/11/05 pA1+ 2 men hit by car on way to train with caption]. 3/21/05 pA4 ‘Griswold’ case still colors station. 10/8/05 pA3+ Shays says terror fight must privacy debate. 9/26/05 pA1+ Accident victim identified as rely on detection and ABORTION-MORAL AND Stamford resident, 28. 4/9/05 prevention. 3/30/05 pA3+ ETHICAL ASPECTS pA1 ABANDONMENT OF 'Abortion' is another kind of Landscape worker dies in fall HOUSING-CONNECTICUT execution [letter]. 1/1/05 pA10 from tree [photo]. 4/8/05 pA1+ Fight over abandonment of Abortion limits future work force Man killed in S.
    [Show full text]
  • The Proposed Broadwater LNG Import Terminal Update of Synapse Analysis
    United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Official Hearing Exhibit Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. In the Matter of: NYS000090 (Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 2 and 3) ASLBP #: 07-858-03-LR-BD01 Corrected: August 15, 2012 Docket #: 05000247 | 05000286 NYS000090-00-BD01 10/15/2012 ----NYS000045 Exhibit #: Identified: Admitted: 10/15/2012 Withdrawn: Submitted: December 14, 2011 Rejected: Stricken: Other: EXCERPT • The Proposed Broadwater LNG Import Terminal Update of Synapse Analysis January 19,2007 OAGI0000225_ 1 Background In March, 2006, Synapse Energy Economics ("Synapse") released a report entitled "The Proposed Broadwater LNG Import Terminal: An Analysis and Assessment of Alternatives"! ("Synapse Report"). The purpose of the Synapse Report, prepared at the request of Save the Sound,2 was to identify and evaluate potential alternatives to the proposed Broadwater Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) import terminal in Long Island Sound to meet the long-term energy needs of the New York and Connecticut markets. In brief, the Synapse Report concluded that: • There is no evidence that the regional market requires a base load gas supply facility capable of providing an additional one billion cubic feet per day (bcf/d) of natural gas to meet its immediate or long-term needs. More pressing may be an infrastructure or other investment to address potential supply deficiencies during peak winter heating periods. However, the studies prepared by Broadwater Energy do not substantiate even this requirement for the region; • Other, environmentally preferable approaches to resolving any anticipated peak load supply shortfall would provide economically and socially preferable alternatives to any perceived supply deficiency. Such approaches include increased development and use oflocal storage facilities; investments in natural gas and electric energy efficiency and renewable energy resources; expanded use of combined heat and power technology; and repowering of existing gas-fired power plants to increase fuel efficiency.
    [Show full text]
  • Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG)
    Case Study: New LNG Supply to New York State Michael J. Scott Deputy Director, Gas Water and Safety Office of Electric, Gas and Water New York State Department of Public June 2-5, 2008 Service Zagreb, Croatia [email protected] Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) • According to the federal Energy Information Administration (EIA), US natural gas consumption is projected to increase from 22.5 TCF in 2002 to 26.2 Tcf in 2010 and 31.4 Tcf by 2025 – A large contributor to increased natural gas consumption is the electric power sector • Domestic gas production is expected to increase more slowly than consumption over the forecast period, with production in 2025 expected to be 24.0 Tcf • The difference will be made up by imports • Nearly all the increase in US natural gas imports is expected to come from LNG Case Study - LNG 2 LNG (cont.) • Numerous LNG import facilities are being proposed for the Northeast • Siting of an LNG facility is very difficult with environmental, safety and security issues being raised in the various proceedings • As a result, it is expected that only a few of the proposed and approved Northeast LNG projects will actually be built Case Study - LNG 3 Natural Gas Facility Regulatory Process FERC Pre-Filing Certification Process (Required for LNG Projects) • FERC receives applicants request for Pre-Filing • FERC formally approves process and issues a PF Docket No • Applicant holds public open house to discuss project with FERC’s participation • FERC issues Notice of Intent to prepare an EIS and opens scoping period
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 13/Friday, January 18
    3458 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 13 / Friday, January 18, 2008 / Notices j. Deadline for filing comments, only those who file a motion to Energy LLC is jointly owned by TCPL motions to intervene, and protest: intervene in accordance with the USA LNG, Inc. (a subsidiary of February 11, 2008. All documents Commission’s Rules may become a TransCanada Corporation) and Shell (original and eight copies) should be party to the proceeding. Any comments, Broadwater Holdings LLC (a subsidiary filed with: Secretary, Federal Energy protests, or motions to intervene must of Shell Oil Company). Broadwater Regulatory Commission, 888 First be received on or before the specified Pipeline LLC is owned by Broadwater Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. comment date for the report. Energy LLC. The Commission’s Rules of Practice o. Any filings must bear in all capital The proposed LNG terminal would be and Procedure require all intervenors letters the title ‘‘COMMENTS’’, located in New York State waters of filing documents with the Commission ‘‘PROTEST’’, or ‘‘MOTION TO Long Island Sound, approximately 9 to serve a copy of that document on INTERVENE’’, as applicable, and the miles from the nearest shoreline of Long each person whose name appears on the Project Number of the particular Island, and about 10 miles from the official service list for the project. application to which the filing refers. nearest shoreline in Connecticut. The Further, if an intervenor files comments p. Agency Comments: Federal, state, terminal would be a floating storage and or documents with the Commission and local agencies are invited to file regasification unit (FSRU) that would be relating to the merits of an issue that comments on the described report.
    [Show full text]
  • The Proposed Broadwater LNG Import Terminal an Analysis and Assessment of Alternatives
    The Proposed Broadwater LNG Import Terminal An Analysis and Assessment of Alternatives Prepared by: Ezra Hausman, Kenji Takahashi, David Schlissel and Bruce Biewald Synapse Energy Economics 22 Pearl Street, Cambridge, MA 02139 www.synapse-energy.com 617-661-3248 Final Report March 2, 2006 Table of Contents I. Introduction and Executive Summary .................................................................... 1 II. Broadwater project description............................................................................... 2 III. Broadwater “need” assessment is misleading......................................................... 2 Summary: Is there a natural gas supply shortfall in New York and Connecticut? 5 IV. Managing Growth in Natural Gas Demand ............................................................ 6 Summary: Can natural gas demand growth in New York and Connecticut be met with supply side management? ............................................................................... 8 V. Supply alternatives.................................................................................................. 9 Summary: Is Broadwater the only option for additional natural gas supplies in New York and Connecticut?.................................................................................. 12 VI. Is LNG an abundant and inexpensive source of natural gas? ............................... 12 Summary: Will LNG mean cheaper gas for consumers?...................................... 14 VII. Conclusions..........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • LNG: an Un-American Energy Source
    LNG: An Un-American Energy Source Liquefied Natural Gas: An Expensive, Dirty, Foreign Fossil Fuel That Threatens Our Natural Gas Energy Independence A Clean Ocean Action Report Prepared by: David Byer, Esq. Heather Saffert, Ph.D. September 2008 LNG: An Un-American Energy Source Liquefied Natural Gas: An Expensive, Dirty, Foreign Fossil Fuel That Threatens Our Natural Gas Energy Independence Prepared by: David Byer, Esq., Water Policy Attorney Heather Saffert, Ph.D., Staff Scientist A Clean Ocean Action Report 18 Hartshorne Drive Suite 2 Highlands, New Jersey 732.872.0111 CleanOceanAction.org September 2008 i David Byer received a Juris Doctor, magna cum laude, from Vermont Law School (VLS) where he received many academic and leadership awards, and is a member of the New Jersey Bar. He also received a Bachelor of Science (also magna cum laude) from University of South Carolina in Accounting, with a minor in general sciences. Before joining Clean Ocean Action, he was a Judicial Clerk in Kenai, Alaska. He also was a law clerk for Kaplan Kirsch and Rockwell in Colorado and a Research Fellow for the Sustainable Endowments Institute, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Heather Saffert received her Ph.D. in Oceanography from the University of Rhode Island. She received a Bachelor of Arts from Wesleyan University in Biology, with honors for coastal ecology research. She has worked as a marine science consultant and instrument developer. Her Ph.D. centered on coastal water quality problems and developing a new instrument with SubChem Systems in Rhode Island to measure fecal bacteria levels. Heather also took part in a survey of the Hudson River and its plume.
    [Show full text]