DOCSLIB.ORG

Risk Characterization of Contaminants in Passaic River Sediments, New Jersey

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Risk Characterization of Contaminants in Passaic River Sediments, New Jersey Middle States Geographer, 2006, 39:13-25 RISK CHARACTERIZATION OF CONTAMINANTS IN PASSAIC RIVER SEDIMENTS, NEW JERSEY Victor Onwueme and Huan Feng* Department of Earth and Environmental Studies Montclair State University Montclair, New Jersey 07043 ABSTRACT: Sediment data from the Passaic River collected in 1991, 1993, 1995, and 1999 were analyzed for selected metals (Cr, Pb, Hg, Ni, and Zn) and organic contaminants (TCDDs and total DDTs). In this study, we compared the concentrations of these selected contaminants with different sediment quality benchmark below which adverse effects are unlikely, to determine the hazard quotients (HQ) of the chemicals of concern. It was found that the contribution of TCDDs to the potential toxic risk in the Passaic River was over 99% in all the years and average concentrations ranging from 0.007 to 0.02 µg g-1. For all the metals, Pb and Hg posses the highest risk, with HQ > 268 for Pb and HQ > 58 for Hg based on the sample analysis from the 1995 sampling. The degree and spatial extent of contaminant “hot spots” in this study is correlated well with proximity to anthropogenic sources, suggesting localized point source inputs. In this study, Harrison Reach is identified as the river segment posing the greatest potential risk for all chemicals analyzed while TCDDs and Hg are identified as the primary drivers of potential risk in all reaches along the lower Passaic River. Although a variety of chemicals of concern contaminated the Passaic River, we found good spatial correlations of TCDDs contamination with other chemical contaminations. Therefore, remediation of TCDDs contaminated sediments could address the issue to a great extent. Information derived from this study in identifying “hot spots” and localized areas of contamination are important for environmental remediation and restoration. Keywords: Contaminated sediments, Passaic River INTRODUCTION industrial expansion in Newark, which accompanied both World War I and World War II, led to the rapid growth of many industries, including chemicals, paint The Passaic River System is part of the New and pigment, metal refining, ship building, textiles and York-New Jersey Harbor Estuary System. The lower leather, rubber, rope, paper products, plastics, reach of the Passaic River consists of a 10 km (6 mile) perfumes, wood treatment, petroleum transport, and stretch primarily located in Newark, New Jersey. The more recently, hazardous waste handling. These area has five navigational reaches, as defined by the continue to operate in the region (Myers, 1945; United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Cunningham, 1954, 1966; Halle, 1984; MacRae’s, including (upriver from mouth) Point No Point Reach, 1986). The attendant urbanization and industrial Harrison Reach, Newark Reach, Kearny Reach, and development has drastically altered the shorelines of Arlington Reach. The Passaic River was once a great the Passaic River. The river has narrowed river with numerous ecological systems, supporting considerably due to shoreline development to create enormous biological diversity, and providing the additional land for industrial sites. Bulkheading and native people with critical environmental and riprapping the riverbank and wetland reclamation human-use services. But like many urban rivers in the have caused a drastic change in the natural, land-shore world’s civilization history, urban expansion and interface (Iannuzzi et al., 2002). Along the lower 10 industrial development have adversely impacted the km of the Passaic River, at least 90% of the original Passaic River since the early nineteenth century wetland habitat no longer exists, and it has been (Cunningham, 1954; Brydon, 1974). Water quality replaced by landfills, bulkheads, and shoreline riprap. deteriorated throughout the nineteenth century as raw These wetlands were reclaimed with as much as 4 m sewage and industrial chemicals were discharged of fill materials on the original marsh surface directly into the river through sewers, industrial (Iannuzzi et al., 2002; Squires, 1992). Waste disposal, outfalls, and surface run-off (Cunningham, 1966; atmospheric deposition, industrial sewage, and toxic Brydon, 1974; Galishoff, 1988). In 1894, as much as chemicals spills have greatly contaminated the Passaic one-third of the total flow of the Passaic River was River aquatic system including water and sediments. estimated to be raw sewage (Brydon, 1974). The In 1970, the United States Environmental Protection 13 Risk Characterization of Contaminants Agency (USEPA) declared the Passaic River the downstream of the 10 kilometer (6 mile) study “second most polluted river in America”. boundary (Figure 1). The dataset compiled for this Previous studies carried out to characterize research includes sediment surface data from the 1995 and assess chemical contaminants in the Passaic River remedial investigation sampling program and other and Newark Bay have shown that sediments in the sediment sampling data collected by government Passaic River contain elevated concentrations of agencies, Tierra Solutions Inc., industries and numerous toxic substances including, but not limited academia and compiled by Tierra Solutions Inc. from to, arsenic (As), cadmium (Cd), chromium (Cr), 1990-2000. There are 21 sampling events occurring copper (Cu), lead (Pb), mercury (Hg), nickel (Ni), zinc between 1990 and 2000 with approximately 3,000 (Zn), dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT), samples. The sampling dataset is stored as a petroleum hydrocarbons, TCDDs/PCDFs, and non-relational database (i.e. all data in one table) in pesticides (Bonnevie et al., 1992, 1993, 1994; Gillis et Microsoft® Access, where it can be queried to extract al., 1993, 1995; Gunster et al., 1993; Huntley et al., specific sets of data to be analyzed and used. Data for 1993, 1995, 1997; Iannuzzi et al., 1995, 1997; some chemicals of concern (Cr, Pb, Hg, Zn, TCDDs, Iannuzzi and Wenning, 1995; Wenning et al., 1993a, and Total DDTs), which historically have been 1993b, 1994). The present study is part of the discharged into the Passaic River and are known to be ongoing effort to characterize, assess, and remediate toxic, were queried and analyzed for this study. chemical contaminants in Passaic River. In this paper, we focus on the risk assessment of persistent chemical contaminants in the lower Passaic River using Geographic Information System (GIS). In 1991, the USEPA developed a guide for risk assessors, site engineers, and others in using risk information at Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) sites to both evaluate remedial alternatives during the feasibility study and to evaluate ecological and human health risk associated with the selected remedial alternative during and after its implementation (USEPA, 1991). Also, deciding on the best management alternatives for dredged contaminated sediments is challenging for managers, as they must evaluate the human and ecological risks associated with the remediation project. This study will provide an understanding of the temporal and spatial variation, to a certain extent, of the potential risk posed by multiple chemical contaminants in the lower Passaic River, which is imperative in the establishment of preliminary remediation goals and alternatives for the Passaic River. MATERIALS AND METHODS Figure 1. Map showing the study area in the lower Passaic River and locations of some associated industrial facilities along the Passaic River. Our study area is within the 10 km section of the lower Passaic River in New Jersey, which was A variety of different types of sediment under USEPA intensive investigation from 1990 to guidelines from multiple sources (e.g., Environment 2000 (Figure 1). For example, the USEPA conducted Canada, 1995; Ingersoll et al., 1996) were used in this a remedial investigation of the lower Passaic River in study and are presented in Table 1. The Ingersoll et al. 1995 to determine the horizontal and vertical (1996) guidelines identify four levels of protection. distributions and concentrations of chemical These guidelines provide sediment concentrations contaminants in the river sediment. The study where there is a low likelihood of effects (Effects included taking 78 sediment core borings comprising Range Low [ERL] and Threshold Effect Levels of three borings taken along 26 equally spaced [TEL]) as well as concentrations where effects are transects about 360 meters (1200 ft) apart, extending more likely to occur (Effects Range Median [ERM] 14 Middle States Geographer, 2006, 39:13-25 and Probable Effect Levels [PEL]). When a sediment 1991 and 1993 data sets had fewer and unevenly concentration falls below ERL and TEL values, spread-sampling locations but also included the effects are rarely observed. In contrast, the probability collection of core samples. None of the sediment data of effects is more frequent (generally greater than from these different studies were combined in the 50%) when concentrations exceed ERM and PEL effect characterization, since they were temporally values (Ingersoll et al., 1996; Long et al., 1998a). It and spatially different (i.e., collected at different times should be noted that an exceedance of any one of these and from a variety of different depths). In this study, sediment guidelines does not necessarily mean that we defined that sediment composited over a depth of aquatic or human life are at risk. This is because the 0-15 cm was considered as upper layer sediment, sediment guidelines are not site-specific,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Passaic River Navigation Update Outline
    LOWER PASSAIC RIVER COMMERCIAL NAVIGATION ANALYSIS United States Army Corps of Engineers New York District Original: March, 2007 Revision 1: December, 2008 Revision 2: July, 2010 ® US Army Corps of Engineers LOWER PASSAIC RIVER RESTORATION PROJECT COMMERCIAL NAVIGATION ANALYSIS TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Study Background and Authority…………………………………………………1 2.0 Study Purpose……………..………………………………………………………1 3.0 Location and Study Area Description……………………………………………..4 4.0 Navigation & Maintenance Dredging History…………………………………….5 5.0 Physical Constraints including Bridges…………………………………………...9 6.0 Operational Information………………………………………………………….11 6.1 Summary Data for Commodity Flow, Trips and Drafts (1980-2006)…..12 6.2 Berth-by-Berth Analysis (1997-2006)…………………………………...13 7.0 Conclusions………………………………………………………………………26 8.0 References………………………………………………………………………..29 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Dredging History………………………………………………………………...6 Table 2. Bridges on the Lower Passaic River……………………………………………..9 Table 3. Channel Reaches and Active Berths of the Lower Passaic River………………18 Table 4: Most Active Berths, by Volume (tons) Transported on Lower Passaic River 1997-2006………………………………………………………………………..19 Table 5: Summary of Berth-by-Berth Analysis, below RM 2.0, 1997-2006.....................27 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1a. Federal Navigation Channel (RMs 0.0 – 8.0)………………………………….2 Figure 1b. Federal Navigation Channel (RMs 8.0 – 15.4)………………………………...3 Figure 2. Downstream View of Jackson Street Bridge and the City of Newark, May 2007………………………………………………………………………………..5 Figure 3. View Upstream to the Lincoln Highway Bridge and the Pulaski Skyway, May 2007………………………………………………………………………………..8 Figure 4. View Upstream to the Point-No-Point Conrail Bridge and the NJ Turnpike Bridge, May 2007……………………………………………………………......10 Figure 5. Commodities Transported, Lower Passaic River, 1997-2006…………………12 Figure 6.
    [Show full text]
  • Passaic River Basin Re-Evaluation Study
    History of Passaic Flooding Collaboration is Key Flooding has long been a problem in the In the past, the Corps of Engineers has Passaic River Basin. Since colonial times, partnered with the state of New Jersey m floods have claimed lives and damaged to study chronic flooding issues in the US Army Corps property. The growth of residential and Passaic River Basin but those studies of Engineers ® industrial development in recent years has have not resulted in construction of a multiplied the threat of serious damages comprehensive flood risk management and loss of life from flooding. More than solution. There have been many reasons 2.5 million people live in the basin (2000 for this, from discord between various census), and about 20,000 homes and governing bodies to real estate issues to places of business lie in the Passaic River environmental issues to cost concerns, floodplain. but the end result is always the same - a stalled project resulting in no solution. The most severe flood , the "flood of record ," occurred in 1903, and more recent floods We need a collaborative effort with in 1968, 1971 , 1972, 1973, two in 1975, complete support from local , state and 1984, 1992, 1999, 2005, 2007, 2010 and federal stakeholders.That means towns 2011 were sufficiently devastating to warrant within the basin that may have competing Federal Disaster declarations. interests must work together as partners. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has Public officials must understand the proposed flood risk management projects process, especially if a project is in the basin several times over the years, authorized for construction , is a long one including in 1939, 1948, 1962, 1969, 1972, and that as my colleague New Jersey 1973 and following the completion of the Department of Environmental Protection Corps' most recent study in the 1980s.
    [Show full text]
  • 126 Passaic River Basin 01387811 Ramapo River at Lenape Lane, at Oakland, Nj
    126 PASSAIC RIVER BASIN 01387811 RAMAPO RIVER AT LENAPE LANE, AT OAKLAND, NJ LOCATION.--Lat 41°02'12", long 74°14'29", Bergen County, Hydrologic Unit 02030103, at bridge on Lenape Lane, 500 ft northwest of Crystal Lake, 0.7 mi north of Oakland, and 0.9 mi east of Ramapo Lake. DRAINAGE AREA.--135 mi2. PERIOD OF RECORD.--October 2004 to August 2005. REMARKS.--Total nitrogen (00600) equals the sum of dissolved ammonia plus organic nitrogen (00623), dissolved nitrite plus nitrate nitrogen (00631), and total particulate nitrogen (49570). COOPERATION.--Field data and samples for laboratory analyses were provided by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. Concentrations of ammonia in samples collected during November to December and August to September; orthophosphate in every sampling period except February to March; and nitrite, biochemical oxygen demand, total suspended residue, fecal coliform, E. coli, and enterococcus bacteria were determined by the New Jersey Department of Health and Senior Services, Public Health and Environmental Laboratories, Environmental and Chemical Laboratory Services. COOPERATIVE NETWORK SITE DESCRIPTOR.--Statewide Status, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Watershed Management Area 3. WATER-QUALITY DATA, WATER YEAR OCTOBER 2004 TO SEPTEMBER 2005 Turbdty UV UV white absorb- absorb- Dis- pH, Specif. light, ance, ance, Baro- solved water, conduc- Hard- det ang 254 nm, 280 nm, metric Dis- oxygen, unfltrd tance, Temper- Temper- ness, Calcium 90+/-30 wat flt wat flt pres- solved percent field, wat unf ature, ature, water, water, corrctd units units sure, oxygen, of sat- std uS/cm air, water, mg/L as fltrd, Date Time NTRU /cm /cm mm Hg mg/L uration units 25 degC deg C deg C CaCO3 mg/L (63676) (50624) (61726) (00025) (00300) (00301) (00400) (00095) (00020) (00010) (00900) (00915) OCT 28..
    [Show full text]
  • The Paterson Great Falls
    The Paterson Great Falls - A National Historic Park: Fast Facts From natural wonder to the birthplace of the American industrial revolution, the Great Falls remains a jewel of New Jersey and the nation. The Passaic River flows in a highly circuitous route, meandering through northern parts of New Jersey. In Paterson, it drops over the Great Falls. The Great Falls are 77 feet high and 260 feet wide. More than 2 billion gallons of water rush over it daily. It is the 2nd largest waterfall, by volume, east of the Mississippi River, behind only Niagara Falls. The Great Falls were carved by glaciers that receded 13,000 years ago at the end of the last Ice Age. The immediate vicinity surrounding the Great Falls was first inhabited by the Lenape Indians and later Dutch Settlers. During the American Revolution, Alexander Hamilton visited the falls with George Washington. Hamilton returned in 1791 to plan America’s first industrial city — Paterson. In the next 200-plus years, the falls powered manufacturing plants in Paterson and played a major role in the industrial development of New Jersey. The Great Falls was designated a National Historic Landmark in 1976. President Gerald Ford attended the ceremony. In 2009, the falls were designated a National Historic Park. In 2016, more than 177,000 people visited the falls. Since its creation in 1998, PVSC’s award-winning River Restoration Program has been charged with preserving and protecting over 100 miles of area waterways. The signature effort consists of at least two cleanups per year of the Great Falls.
    [Show full text]
  • New Jersey's Central Passaic Basin
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service New Jersey’s Central Passaic Basin Prehistoric Glacial Lake, Present-Day Wetland Treasure Prehistoric Glacial Lake Passaic “During the flood of 1903 the water fell so quickly all over this basin, and was collected so rapidly by the small tributaries, that a lake was formed at once which served as a cushion against which the raging torrent of the highland tributaries spent itself without doing extraordinary damage in that immediate region. The conditions here outlined illustrate the rapidity with which flood waters are discharged from the Pompton drainage area, and the deterring effect of Great Piece Meadows upon the flood.” Marshall Ora Leighton, U.S. Geologic Survey, 1904 Panoramic view of Troy Meadows, Morris County, New Jersey. Photo: Wendy Walsh / USFWS Origins Drinking Water During the last ice age, the massive About 40 percent of New Jersey’s Wisconsin glacier encountered a large Highlands, renowned for clean water, drain oval basin in northern New Jersey. About to the Central Passaic Basin through the 30 miles long and 5 to 10 miles wide, this Ramapo, Pompton, Pequannock, Rockaway, distinctive basin dates back about 180 and Whippany Rivers. The Basin’s five million years and consists of a sedimentary reservoirs provide drinking water to people Photo: Dave Menke / USFWS Piedmont plain enclosed by hard volcanic as far as Jersey City. A prolific glacial Wood duck (Aix sponsa) rocks—the Watchung Mountains to the aquifer beneath the Central Passaic is east and the ancient Highlands ridges to tapped by over 100 wells that supply water the west. Ice and debris from the glacier to most of the Basin’s half-million local blocked gaps in the Watchung Mountains, residents.
    [Show full text]
  • Lower Passaic River EPA’S Plan to Clean up the Lower Eight Miles | March 2016
    Cleaning Up the Lower Passaic River EPA’s Plan to Clean Up the Lower Eight Miles | March 2016 The Plan to Clean the Passaic River What is included in the cleanup plan? A century of industrialization throughout the Passaic River • The entire lower eight miles of the river will be watershed has left behind toxic muck on the bottom and capped bank-to-bank. With the cap in place, the banks of the river. Many chemical products, including the contamination in the sediment will be prevented herbicide Agent Orange, were manufactured in facilities from entering the food chain, thereby decreasing located adjacent to the Passaic River. Approximately health risks to people who eat fish and crab from the 90 percent of the volume of contaminated sediments is lower eight miles of the river. The cap will isolate the located in the river’s lower eight miles. Concentrations contaminated sediment, effectively eliminating the of contaminants have declined minimally in the last 20 movement of a major source of contamination to the years. No one should eat fish or crab caught from the rest of the river and Newark Bay. Lower Passaic River. • Before the cap is placed, On April 11, 2014, the EPA proposed a cleanup plan for 3.5 million cubic yards of the lower eight miles of the river. The proposed plan was contaminated sediment released for public review and a four-month comment will be removed, bank- period. EPA received and reviewed more than a thousand to-bank, by dredging the comments from a diverse cross section of the public.
    [Show full text]
  • Community Involvement Plan for the Lower Passaic River for the Diamond
    COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT PLAN for the LOWER PASSAIC RIVER JULY 2017 COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT PLAN for the LOWER PASSAIC RIVER JULY 2017 Prepared by: LOUIS BERGER 412 MOUNT KEMBLE AVENUE MORRISTOWN, NJ 07962-1946 +1.973.407.1000 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ........... .IV COMMUNITY FEEDBACK ......... 20 INTRODUCTION ................ .2 3.1 Highlights of Community Involvement to Date .................20 OVERVIEW 4 3.2 Timeline of Major Community 1.1 Purpose of the Community Involvement Activities ................21 Involvement Plan ....................4 3.3 Overview of 2016 Community 1.2 Scope of the Community Interview Process ...................22 Involvement Plan ....................5 3.4 Key Community Concerns . .22 1.3 Agency Partnerships and 3.4.1 Superfund Cleanup Activity Concerns 22 Legal Authorities.....................6 3.4.2 Redevelopment and River Access Concerns 23 PROJECT BACKGROUND......... 8 3.4.3 Health and Quality of Life Concerns 23 3.4.4 Outreach Concerns and Suggestions 23 2.1 History of Contamination ..............8 2.2 Description of Project Area.............10 2.3 Project Activities.....................12 COMMUNITY PROFILE ........... 24 2.4 The Cleanup Plan for the Lower 8.3 Miles 14 4.1 Land Use Characteristics and 2.5 Next Steps .........................15 Infrastructure .......................24 4.1.1 Redevelopment 25 2.6 Remedial Design (RD) and Remedial Action (RA) .................16 4.1.2 Transportation Infrastructure 25 2.7 Long-term Monitoring and Maintenance ..18 4.1.3 Drinking Water, Sewers and Power 25 4.1.4 Flood Control 26 2.8 Local Workforce Participation During Construction ......19 4.1.5 Recreation 26 4.2 Population and Demographics..........26 4.2.1 Population 27 4.2.2 Age 27 4.2.3 Household Income 27 4.2.4 Race and Ethnicity 28 4.2.5 Immigrant and Minority Population and Linguistic Trends 28 4.2.6 Environmental Justice 29 4.2.7 Education 29 IV COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT PLAN FOR THE LOWER PASSAIC RIVER COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT 5.2.14 Public Meetings and ACTION PLAN.................
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Resource Inventory
    Environmental Resource Inventory City of Summit Union County, New Jersey Reeves-Reed Arboretum A Collaborative Effort by City of Summit and Passaic River Coalition 2011 Acknowledgements City of Summit City Hall, 512 Springfield Avenue, Summit, NJ 07901 Phone: 908-273-6400, Website: www.cityofsummit.org Jordan Glatt, Mayor Common Council Dave A. Bomgaars, President Ellen K. Dickson Nuris Portunodo Thomas Getzendanner Michael J. Vernotico Richard J. Madden Stephen P. Murphy Environmental Commission Marian G. Glenn, Chair Ervin Bales Marjorie Fox Amy Cairns Harrison John Kilby Christine Lijoi Judith Mandelbaum David Naidu Beth Kinney, Director, Department of Community Services Jin Blades, Administrative Manager, Department of Community Services Passaic River Coalition A nonprofit watershed association created in 1969 to serve as an advisor to the citizens, governments, and businesses of the Passaic River Basin on land and water resource management and public health. www.passaicriver.org Ella F. Filippone, Executive Director Anne L. Kruger, Ph.D., Senior Scientist Allyson Salisbury, Environmental Specialist Jason Chen, Summer Intern Alicja Trzopek, Summer Intern Environmental Resource Inventory City of Summit, Union County, New Jersey 2011 Table of Contents Section Page Preface i Accomplishments of the Summit Environmental Commission ii I. Introduction to Summit, New Jersey 1 II. Geology 4 III. Geography 8 IV. Water Resources 12 Surface Water 12 Ground Water 15 Recharge Areas 17 Flood Plains 19 Riparian Buffers 19 Water Supplies 21 Water Quality 22 Preservation of Water Resources in Summit 27 V. Wetlands 30 Wetlands in Summit 31 VI. Climate and Weather 34 VII. Soils 37 Importance of Soil 37 Soil Characteristics and Properties 37 Soil Erosion 38 Soil Types in Summit 40 VIII.
    [Show full text]
  • The Passaic Flood of 1902
    Glass r_A^ Book.— Water-Supply and Irrigation Paper .No. 88 Series M, General Hydrographic Investigations, 6 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CHARLES D. WALCOTT, Director THE PASSAIC FLOOD OF 1902 BY GEORGE BUELL HOLLISTER AND MARSHALL ORA LEIGHTON WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1903 ) 8 PUBLICATIONS 0? UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY. The publication*.. f the United states Geological Survey consist of (I) Annual Reports: (2) Monographs; (8) Professiona] Papers; » 4 * Bulletins; (5) Mineral Resources; (6) Water-Supply and Irrigation Papers; (7) Topographic At!:is ..t' the United States, folios and separate iilmulu then agio Atlas of United states, folios thereof. The classes numbered 8, 7, and are Bold at c..*t of publication: the othei Suted free. A circular giving complete lists may Yx> liad on application. The Bulletins, Professional Papers, and "Water-Supply Papers treat of a variety of subjects, and the total number Issued is large. They have therefore been classified into the following -: A, Economic geology; B, Descriptive geology; C, Systematic geology and paleontology; D, Petrography and mineralogy: K, Chemistry and physics; F, Geography; G, Miscellaneous; H. Forestry; I. Irrigation: J.Waterstorage; K, Pumping water; L, Quality of water: M, General hydrographio investigations: X. Water power; O, Underground waters; P, Hydrographie progress reports. Complete lists of series I to P follow. t.WS=Water-Supply Paper; B— Bulle- tin; PP^ Professional Paper. SERIES T IRRIGATION. WS _*. Irrigation near Thoenix, Ariz.. by A. P. Davis. 1897; 98 pp.. ."?1 pis. and maps. W8 •">. Irrigation practice on the Great Plains, by K. B. Cowgill. 1S'»7.
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 Water Quality Report Issued May 2020 Este Informe Contiene Informacion Muy Importante Sobre Su Agua Beber
    Page 2 Page 3 Page 5/4/20 7:02 AM AM 7:02 7:02 5/4/20 5/4/20 1 1 v3.indd v3.indd 17x22 17x22 2020 2020 pvwc pvwc dm8386 dm8386 SOURCE WATER UNCOVERED DRINKING WATER STORAGE RESERVOIRS PVWC withdraws water from the Passaic River in Totowa, New Jersey and treats it at the Little Falls WTP. In the event of water quality issues PVWC operates three open drinking water reservoirs in Woodland Park and Paterson to provide storage capacity (the Great Notch Reservoir, in the Passaic River, PVWC can also withdraw water from either the Pompton River or the Point View Reservoir (which is filled from the Pompton New Street Reservoir, and Stanley Levine Reservoir). The treated water from the Little Falls WTP is pumped to these reservoirs, and that water River). A water quality monitoring station is operated by the U.S. Geological Survey on the Passaic River shortly upstream of the Little Falls is then withdrawn for distribution to PVWC’s customers. Unfortunately, since these reservoirs are uncovered, they are subject to bacteriological WTP intake and just downstream of the Passaic River’s confluence with the Pompton River. This monitoring station provides continuous data and chemical contamination from wildlife and other natural and man-made causes, and thus the high quality of this already-treated water from for important water quality parameters, and helps provide advance warning of adverse changes in water quality. PVWC also conducts a surface water monitoring program at various stream and river locations throughout the Passaic River watershed.
    [Show full text]
  • Community Involvement Plan
    LowerLower PassaicPassaic RiverRiver RestorationRestoration ProjectProject andand NewarkNewark BayBay StudyStudy Community Involvement Plan June 2006 PREPARED BY: Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. 104 Corporate Park Drive White Plains, NY 10602 FOR: US Environmental Protection Agency Region 2 US Army Corps of Engineers Kansas City District Contract No. DACW41-02-D-0003 Community Involvement Plan Lower Passaic River Restoration Project / Newark Bay Study Community Involvement Plan (CIP) Preface We are pleased to release this Community Involvement Plan (CIP) for the Lower Passaic River Restoration Project / Newark Bay Study. The partner agencies are committed to active and open public involvement throughout the life of this project. This CIP provides a toolbox of options for keeping the public informed and for soliciting input. Each respective agency has its own set of guidance with regard to public involvement. This CIP does not attempt to capture every possible outreach initiative among all six partner agencies or fit one specific CIP template. This CIP is divided into two parts to enable the reader to go directly to the sections of greatest interest, and also contains charts and graphics to enable the reader to see at a glance project activities and opportunities for public involvement. Part One includes the following: 1.1 Overview: discusses the purpose and scope of the CIP, as well as legal authorities. 1.2 Project Background: outlines the problems being addressed by the project and describes the project areas and the unique federal-state partnership that is supporting the Lower Passaic River Restoration Project. 1.3 Project Activities: describes the various cleanup and restoration activities that have taken place or will take place as part of both the Lower Passaic River Restoration Project and the Newark Bay Study.
    [Show full text]
  • Dundee Canal: Headgates, Guardlock, and Uppermost Sections 250 Feet
    Dundee Canal: Headgates, Guardlock, and HAER No. NJ-45 Uppermost Sections 250 feet northeast of Randolph Avenue, opposite and in line with East Clifton Avenue Clifton Passaic County New Jersey PHOTOGRAPHS WRITTEN HISTORICAL AND DESCRIPTIVE DATA HISTORIC AMERICAN ENGINEERING RECORD MID-ATLANTIC REGION, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA 19106 llAEI!. N:r; HISTORIC AMERICAN ENGINEERING RECORD Ito-CL I G 5- Dundee Canal: Headgates, Guardlock, and Uppermost Section HAER No. NJ-45 Location: 250 feet northeast of Randolph Avenue, opposite and in line with East Clifton Avenue Clifton, Passaic County, New Jersey UTM: 18.573550.4525870 Quad: Paterson, New Jersey Date of Construction: c. 1833 (part of canal prism only, c. 1858-60 Modified inc. 1870, c. 1899-1903, c. 1903-36, 1974-78 Engineer: Joseph W. Allen Original Builder: Joseph Scott Present Owners: (each with half interest) United Water Resources, Inc. 200 Old Hook Road Harrington Park, New Jersey 07640 North Jersey District Water Supply Commission 1 F. A. Orechio Drive Wanaque, New Jersey 07465 Present Occupant: Under management of the Hackensack Water Company, until just prior to field documentation Present Use: Vacant Significance: The Dundee Manufacturing Company built the present Dundee Dam and the 1.8-mile Dundee Canal between 1858 and 1861, culminating at least three decades of attempts made to harness Passaic River water power at the dam site, and over six decades of planning for navigation between the Great Falls at Paterson and tidewater at Passaic. Paterson's older but analogous Society for Establishing Useful Manufactures was an apparent parent of the Dundee venture and corporation.
    [Show full text]