DOCSLIB.ORG

Study on Investment in Water and Wastewater Infrastructure and Economic Development

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Study on Investment in Water and Wastewater Infrastructure and Economic Development January 2014 Edward J. Collins, Jr. Center for Public Management ___________________________________________________________ McCORMACK GRADUATE SCHOOL OF POLICY AND GLOBAL S TUDIES ___________________________________________________________ THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................1 Studies on Investment in Infrastructure ............................................................................................. 11 Overview ...................................................................................................................................... 11 Answers to Key Research Questions ............................................................................................... 12 Massachusetts Case Studies .............................................................................................................. 15 Overview ...................................................................................................................................... 15 Urban Redevelopment: Seaport District, Boston, MA ...................................................................... 19 LandReuse: Myles Standish Industrial Park, Taunton, MA ............................................................... 27 Community-wide Water Moratorium: Stoughton, MA .................................................................... 35 SWMI Impacted Community: Naval Air Station South Weymouth, Weymouth, MA ........................... 41 Unrealized Opportunity: Union Square & Boynton Yards, Somerville, MA ........................................ 51 Potable Water Resources .................................................................................................................. 59 Overview ...................................................................................................................................... 59 MWRA Potable Water System........................................................................................................ 63 Non-MWRA Water Systems and Sources ........................................................................................ 67 Potable Water Systems Summary .................................................................................................. 75 Current and Future Challenges in Water Availability........................................................................ 77 Wastewater Treatment Systems ...................................................................................................... 113 Overview .................................................................................................................................... 113 MWRA Wastewater Treatment System ........................................................................................ 116 Non-MWRA Wastewater Treatment Facilities ............................................................................... 123 Current and Future Challenges in Wastewater Treatment ............................................................. 133 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................................... 155 Appendix A: Summary of Studies on Infrastructure Investment ........................................................ 159 Appendix B: How Water is Collected in Massachusetts ..................................................................... 169 Appendix C: A Guide to MetroFuture .............................................................................................. 177 Appendix D: High and Medium Stress Basins ................................................................................... 193 Appendix E: Municipal Water Use Restructions ............................................................................... 197 Appendix F: Case Studies for Framingham & Lynnfield ..................................................................... 199 Appendix G: MassWorks Funded Projects (2011-2013) .................................................................... 205 Bibliography ................................................................................................................................... 207 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Purpose & Methodology The Edward J. Collins, Jr. Center for Public Management in the John W. McCormack Graduate School of Policy and Global Studies at the University of Massachusetts Boston was tasked by the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority Advisory Board (MWRAAB) with asking and answering a very fundamental question relating to public infrastructure: “What is the relationship between investment in water and wastewater infrastructure and economic growth?” To do so, Center staff not only researched the positive results of investing in infrastructure, but also took time to consider what failing to invest in adequate water and wastewater infrastructure might mean. Additionally, the Center sought to identify some of the challenges facing Massachusetts today and in the future. The Center divided the task into four components: 1) review of academic research on the topic of infrastructure investment; 2) preparation of Massachusetts case studies illustrative of different successes and challenges; 3) documentation of the state of water and wastewater infrastructure in the Commonwealth today; and, 4) identification of challenges that presently exist and those that are not too far over the horizon. Where possible, the Center attempted to quantify the financial implications of investing or failing to invest, but it should be understood that these are only order of magnitude figures; significantly more detailed analysis would be needed to determine the true cost. One of the hoped for outcomes of this report is that it will prompt more detailed assessment at the municipal, regional, and state level into the infrastructure issues identified herein. Summary Chapter 1: Academic Research Academic research into the relationship between investment in infrastructure and economic development began in the 1980s and, over time, the earliest findings have been refined and enhanced. These studies used national level data sets to make findings applicable to the nation as a whole. After initially finding that a positive relationship exists between investment in infrastructure and economic opportunity, more recent analysis has gone so far as to attempt to quantify the return on infrastructure investment. Some studies analyzed investment in water and sewer infrastructure specifically and found a particularly positive relationship in this area. Important study findings include: A correlation exists between investment in infrastructure and increases in the Gross Domestic Product. In particular, the massive infrastructure investment that occurred after the end of World War II not only positively correlated with economic growth, it showed a relationship to worker productivity which grew dramatically at the time. Not only was infrastructure investment found to be an essential component to Study on Investment in Water and Wastewater Infrastructure and Economic Development Page 1 Edward J. Collins, Jr. Center for Public Management the "’golden age’ of the 1950s and 1960s,”1 a correlation was separately found between the decline in labor productivity of the 1970s and 1980s and the decline in the level of public investment in infrastructure at the same time.2 Government investment in infrastructure has a far greater impact on private investment decisions than any other type of government expenditure.3 Although federal investment has the greatest influence, state level investment “has a positive impact on several measures of state-level economic activity: output, investment, and employment growth.”4 Investment in water and sewer was actually found to have a greater impact on economic growth than investment in transportation. As one study found, “aggregate public capital and two of its components (highways, water and sewer) make a positive contribution to state output. Water and sewer systems have a much larger effect on state output than highways and ‘other’ public capital stock.”5 Investment in water and wastewater infrastructure can stimulate private investment, which in turn, generates municipal and state revenue. One study of rural development in particular found that “[e]very dollar spent in constructing an average water/sewer project generated almost $15 of private investment, leveraged $2 of public funds, and added $14 to the local property tax base.”6 Another study found that “a $1 investment in water and sewer would generate $2.03 in new taxes over the same period (20 years), on average, of which $0.68 is new state and local tax revenue.”7 Authors of the studies do caution that while their findings are positive, this does not mean that every investment will produce the results found in the aggregate. The effects of infrastructure investment vary by location, type, and scale, and only project-specific analysis can reveal if a positive return will be generated by a particular expenditure of public funds. One of the more prolific authors on this topic, Alicia Munnell, Senior Economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston underscored this point when she wrote, “Aggregate results, however, cannot be used to guide actual investment
Recommended publications
  • Elevation of the March–April 2010 Flood High Water in Selected River Reaches in Central and Eastern Massachusetts

    Elevation of the March–April 2010 Flood High Water in Selected River Reaches in Central and Eastern Massachusetts

    Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Federal Emergency Management Agency Elevation of the March–April 2010 Flood High Water in Selected River Reaches in Central and Eastern Massachusetts Open-File Report 2010–1315 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Elevation of the March–April 2010 Flood High Water in Selected River Reaches in Central and Eastern Massachusetts By Phillip J. Zarriello and Gardner C. Bent Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Federal Emergency Management Agency Open-File Report 2010–1315 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior KEN SALAZAR, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Marcia K. McNutt, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2011 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1-888-ASK-USGS For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report. Suggested citation: Zarriello, P.J., and Bent, G.C., 2011, Elevation of the March–April 2010 flood high water in selected river reaches in central and eastern Massachusetts: U.S.
  • Environmental Impact Report Supplemental Water Supply

    Environmental Impact Report Supplemental Water Supply

    Town of Ashland Supplemental Water EIR Environmental Impact Report Supplemental Water Supply Town of Ashland September 30, 2015 1 Town of Ashland Supplemental Water EIR TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Summary ............................................................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Brief Project Description .................................................................................................................. 4 1.1.1 Construction Summary .............................................................................................................. 5 1.2 List of Permits, licenses, certificates, variances, or approval and the current status on each: .......... 5 1.3 Summary of Alternatives to Project .................................................................................................. 5 1.4 Summary of potential environmental impacts of the project. ........................................................... 6 1.5 List of mitigation measures for the project. ...................................................................................... 6 1.5.1 Erosion control ........................................................................................................................... 6 1.5.2 Temporary Drainage .................................................................................................................. 7 1.5.3 Traffic Mitigation......................................................................................................................
  • South Coastal Watershed Action Plan

    South Coastal Watershed Action Plan

    This project was funded by: Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs South Coastal Watershed Action Plan Chapter Three Indian Head River Watersheds Prepared by: 110 Winslow Cemetery Rd. Marshfield, MA 02050 (781) 837-0982 CHAPTER THREE: INDIAN HEAD RIVER WATERSHEDS Part I. Watershed Assessment 3-2 1.0 Watershed Characteristics 3-2 2.0 Water Quality Impairments 3-3 3.0 Aquatic Habitat Impairments 3-8 4.0 Water Withdrawal and Stream Flow Impairments 3-11 Part II. Indian Head Rivers Watersheds Five Year Action Plan 3-13 List of Tables Table 3-1. Indian Head River Watershed Characteristics 3-2 Table 3-2. Water Quality Summary for Indian Head River Watersheds 3-4 Table 3-3. Percent Impervious Surface for each Indian Head River Watershed 3-6 Table 3-4. Water Withdrawal by Indian Head River Watershed 3-11 List of Maps Map 3-1. Indian Head River Water Resources Map 3-17 Map 3-2. Indian Hear River Assessment Map 3-18 Map 3-3. Indian Head River Watershed Impervious Surface Vulnerability Ma 3-19 Map 3-4. Indian Head River Watershed Action Map 3-20 Indian Head River Watershed Introduction The public process involved in creating this document included two steps,1) an assessment of the Indian Head River watersheds and 2) the development of a Five Year Action Plan. The assessment involved extensive literature review and interviews with stakeholders. Based on this process, information and a list of recommended actions were presented to the public at two public forums for additional input and priority ranking. These recommended actions are listed at the end of the discussion of each goal Based on the input and votes of those who attended the public forum, some of these recommendations were included in the Five Year Action Plan at the end of this chapter.
  • 2018 Water System Master Plan

    2018 Water System Master Plan

    MWRA BOARD OF DIRECTORS Matthew A. Beaton, Chairman John J. Carroll, Vice-Chair Christopher Cook Joseph C. Foti Kevin L. Cotter Paul E. Flanagan Andrew M. Pappastergion, Secretary Brian Peña Henry F. Vitale John J. Walsh Jennifer L. Wolowicz Prepared under the direction of Frederick A. Laskey, Executive Director David W. Coppes, Chief Operating Officer Stephen A. Estes-Smargiassi, Director, Planning and Sustainability Lisa M. Marx, Senior Program Manager, Planning Carl H. Leone, Senior Program Manager, Planning together with the participation of MWRA staff 2018 MWRA Water System Master Plan Table of Contents Executive Summary Chapter 1-Introduction 1.1 Overview of MWRA 1-1 1.2 Purpose of the Water Master Plan 1-1 1.3 Planning Approach, Assumptions and Time Frame 1-2 1.4 Organization of the Master Plan 1-3 1.5 Periodic Updates 1-3 1.6 MWRA Business Plan 1-3 1.7 Project Prioritization 1-4 Chapter 2-Planning Goals and Objectives 2.1 Planning Goals and Objectives Defining MWRA’S Water System Mission 2-1 2.2 Provide Reliable Water Delivery 2-2 2.3 Deliver High Quality Water 2-3 2.4 Assure an Adequate Supply of Water 2-4 2.5 Manage the System Efficiently and Effectively 2-5 Chapter 3-Water System History, Organization and Key Infrastructure 3.1 The Beginning – The Water System 3-1 3.2 The MWRA Water System Today 3-5 3.3 Water Infrastructure Replacement Asset Value 3-8 3.4 The Future Years 3-11 Chapter 4-Supply and Demand 4.1 Overview of the Water Supply System 4-1 4.2 System Capacity 4-4 4.3 Potential Impacts of Climate Change 4-6 4.4 Current
  • Mercury Pollution in Massachusetts' Waters

    Mercury Pollution in Massachusetts' Waters

    Photo: Supe87, Under license from Shutterstock.com from Supe87, Under license Photo: ToXIC WATERWAYS Mercury Pollution in Massachusetts’ Waters Lauren Randall Environment Massachusetts Research & Policy Center December 2011 Executive Summary Coal-fired power plants are the single larg- Human Services advises that all chil- est source of mercury pollution in the Unit- dren under twelve, pregnant women, ed States. Emissions from these plants even- women who may become pregnant, tually make their way into Massachusetts’ and nursing mothers not consume any waterways, contaminating fish and wildlife. fish from Massachusetts’ waterways. Many of Massachusetts’ waterways are un- der advisory because of mercury contami- Mercury pollution threatens public nation. Eating contaminated fish is the main health source of human exposure to mercury. • Eating contaminated fish is the main Mercury pollution poses enormous public source of human exposure to mercury. health threats. Mercury exposure during • Mercury is a potent neurotoxicant. In critical periods of brain development can the first two years of a child’s life, mer- contribute to irreversible deficits in verbal cury exposure can lead to irreversible skills, damage to attention and motor con- deficits in attention and motor control, trol, and reduced IQ. damage to verbal skills, and reduced IQ. • While adults are at lower risk of neu- In 2011, the U.S. Environmental Protection rological impairment than children, Agency (EPA) developed and proposed the evidence shows that a low-level dose first national standards limiting mercury and of mercury from fish consumption in other toxic air pollution from existing coal- adults can lead to defects similar to and oil-fired power plants.
  • Outdoor Recreation Recreation Outdoor Massachusetts the Wildlife

    Outdoor Recreation Recreation Outdoor Massachusetts the Wildlife

    Photos by MassWildlife by Photos Photo © Kindra Clineff massvacation.com mass.gov/massgrown Office of Fishing & Boating Access * = Access to coastal waters A = General Access: Boats and trailer parking B = Fisherman Access: Smaller boats and trailers C = Cartop Access: Small boats, canoes, kayaks D = River Access: Canoes and kayaks Other Massachusetts Outdoor Information Outdoor Massachusetts Other E = Sportfishing Pier: Barrier free fishing area F = Shorefishing Area: Onshore fishing access mass.gov/eea/agencies/dfg/fba/ Western Massachusetts boundaries and access points. mass.gov/dfw/pond-maps points. access and boundaries BOAT ACCESS SITE TOWN SITE ACCESS then head outdoors with your friends and family! and friends your with outdoors head then publicly accessible ponds providing approximate depths, depths, approximate providing ponds accessible publicly ID# TYPE Conservation & Recreation websites. Make a plan and and plan a Make websites. Recreation & Conservation Ashmere Lake Hinsdale 202 B Pond Maps – Suitable for printing, this is a list of maps to to maps of list a is this printing, for Suitable – Maps Pond Benedict Pond Monterey 15 B Department of Fish & Game and the Department of of Department the and Game & Fish of Department Big Pond Otis 125 B properties and recreational activities, visit the the visit activities, recreational and properties customize and print maps. mass.gov/dfw/wildlife-lands maps. print and customize Center Pond Becket 147 C For interactive maps and information on other other on information and maps interactive For Cheshire Lake Cheshire 210 B displays all MassWildlife properties and allows you to to you allows and properties MassWildlife all displays Cheshire Lake-Farnams Causeway Cheshire 273 F Wildlife Lands Maps – The MassWildlife Lands Viewer Viewer Lands MassWildlife The – Maps Lands Wildlife Cranberry Pond West Stockbridge 233 C Commonwealth’s properties and recreation activities.
  • Powering Treatment with Power from the Sun Success Stories, Challenges, and Cautionary Words

    Powering Treatment with Power from the Sun Success Stories, Challenges, and Cautionary Words

    Volume 8, Number 1 June 2012 The Newsletter of NEIWPCC — The New England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission Powering Treatment with Power from the Sun Success Stories, Challenges, and Cautionary Words BY STEPHEN HOCHBRUNN, NEIWPCC o stand amid a large, modern solar installa- tion for the first time is to be transfixed—the Tmultiple rows of panels elegantly symmetrical as they taper away like railroad tracks, colorful hues dancing on the panels’ surface, an eerie quiet as energy from the most elemental of sources is cleanly harnessed. It is impossible not to stop, stare, say whatever you say when something takes your breath All photos by NEIWPCC except where noted away. Everyone does. In Chelmsford, Mass., Todd Melanson sees such a reaction all the time as he leads visitors around the solar array at the town’s Crooked Spring Water Treatment Plant. But if Melanson is still amazed by the sight, he did not show it during a NEIWPCC visit late last summer. He was too busy explaining how everything works and why solar is working for Chelmsford. “I talk a lot,” Melanson admitted as he looked out over the array from an embankment. “I think it’s Rows of solar panels gleam under the midday sun at the Crooked Spring Water Treatment Plant in Chelmsford, Mass. because I just happen to really like my job.” In 2006, the Chelmsford Water District chose Melanson to fill a new position for the district—en- stallation at the Chelmsford drinking water treatment Resplendent on the day of our visit, the rows of vironmental compliance manager—and in the years plant is one of the largest ground-mounted solar ar- solar panels at Crooked Spring stood as a visually since, he has led important efforts to conserve and rays in New England.
  • PLYMOUTH COUNTY, MASSACHUSETTS (ALL JURISDICTIONS) Volume 1 of 4

    PLYMOUTH COUNTY, MASSACHUSETTS (ALL JURISDICTIONS) Volume 1 of 4

    PLYMOUTH COUNTY, MASSACHUSETTS (ALL JURISDICTIONS) Volume 1 of 4 COMMUNITY NAME COMMUNITY NUMBER ABINGTON, TOWN OF 250259 BRIDGEWATER, TOWN OF 250260 BROCKTON, CITY OF 250261 CARVER, TOWN OF 250262 DUXBURY, TOWN OF 250263 EAST BRIDGEWATER, TOWN OF 250264 HALIFAX, TOWN OF 250265 HANOVER, TOWN OF 250266 HANSON, TOWN OF 250267 HINGHAM, TOWN OF 250268 HULL, TOWN OF 250269 KINGSTON, TOWN OF 250270 LAKEVILLE, TOWN OF 250271 MARION, TOWN OF 255213 MARSHFIELD, TOWN OF 250273 MATTAPOISETT, TOWN OF 255214 MIDDLEBOROUGH, TOWN OF 250275 NORWELL, TOWN OF 250276 PEMBROKE, TOWN OF 250277 PLYMOUTH, TOWN OF 250278 PLYMPTON, TOWN OF 250279 ROCHESTER, TOWN OF 250280 ROCKLAND, TOWN OF 250281 SCITUATE, TOWN OF 250282 WAREHAM, TOWN OF 255223 WEST BRIDGEWATER, TOWN OF 250284 WHITMAN, TOWN OF 250285 REVISED NOVEMBER 4, 2016 Federal Emergency Management Agency FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY NUMBER 25023CV001C NOTICE TO FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY USERS Communities participating in the National Flood Insurance Program have established repositories of flood hazard data for floodplain management and flood insurance purposes. This Flood Insurance Study (FIS) may not contain all data available within the repository. It is advisable to contact the community repository for any additional data. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) may revise and republish part or all of this Preliminary FIS report at any time. In addition, FEMA may revise part of this FIS report by the Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) process, which does not involve republication or redistribution of the FIS
  • South Shore Nonpoint Source Management Plan

    South Shore Nonpoint Source Management Plan

    South Shore Nonpoint Source Management Plan The Towns of: Cohasset, Duxbury, Hanover, Hingham, Marshfield, Norwell, Rockland, Scituate, Weymouth This project was funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency through the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection under the Clean Water Act, Section 604(b), Grant #95-03. July 1998 WQ/98-01 Credits and Acknowledgements This report was prepared by the staff of the Metropolitan Area Planning Council under the supervision of the Executive Director. The Metropolitan Area Planning Council is the officially designated regional planning agency for 101 cities and towns in the Boston metropolitan area. The Council offers technical assistance to its member communities in the areas of land use, housing, environmental quality, energy, transportation, and economic development. 1998 – 1999 MAPC Officers Grace S. Shepard, President Richard C. Walker, III, Vice President Donna M. Jacobs, Secretary Richard A. Easler, Treasurer David C. Soule, Executive Director Credits Project Manager: Mary Ellen Schloss Principal Author: Mary Ellen Schloss GIS/Cartography: Paul Spina Assistant Planner: Susan Phinney Planning Interns: Caroline Ganley, Scott G. Robson Graphics: Scott G. Robson Technical Review: Martin Pillsbury Technical Assistance: Bill Clark, MassBays Program South Shore Water Resources Advisory Committee (“Project Committee”) Cohasset Conservation Commission John Bryant Water Commissioner, Water John McNabb Resources Protection Committee Duxbury Town Planner Tom Broadrick Hanover Conservation
  • Trout Stocked Waters Southeast District

    Trout Stocked Waters Southeast District

    2021 MASSACHUSETTS TROUT STOCKED WATERS SOUTHEAST DISTRICT Daily stocking updates can be viewed at Mass.gov/Trout. All listed waters are stocked in the spring. Bold waters are stocked in spring and fall. ATTLEBORO: Bungay River MANSFIELD: Canoe River BARNSTABLE: Hamblin Pond, Hathaway Pond, MARSHFIELD: Parsons Pond Lovells Pond, Shubael Pond MASHPEE: Ashumet Pond, Johns Pond, Mashpee/ BREWSTER: Cliff Pond, Flax Pond, Higgins Pond, Wakeby Ponds Little Cliff Pond, Sheep Pond MATTAPOISETT: Mattapoisett River BRIDGEWATER: Skeeter Mill Pond NORTH ATTLEBOROUGH: Falls Pond, Whiting Pond CHATHAM: Goose Pond, Schoolhouse Pond NORTON: Canoe River COHASSET: Bound Brook NORWELL: Norris Reservation Pond DENNIS: Scargo Lake OAK BLUFFS: Upper Lagoon Pond DIGHTON: Segreganset River ORLEANS: Baker Pond, Crystal Lake EAST BRIDGEWATER: Beaver Brook PLYMOUTH: Big Sandy Pond, Fearing Pond, Fresh EASTHAM: Herring Pond Pond, Little Pond, Long Pond, Lout Pond, Russell- Sawmill Ponds, Town Brook, UNT to Eel River FALMOUTH: Ashumet Pond, Deep Pond, Grews Pond, Mares Pond PLYMPTON: Winnetuxet River FREETOWN: Ledge Pond RAYNHAM: Johnson Pond HALIFAX: Winnetuxet River REHOBOTH: East Branch Palmer River, Palmer River HANOVER: Indian Head River ROCHESTER: Marys Pond, Mattapoisett River HANSON: Indian Head River SANDWICH: Peters Pond, Pimlico Pond, Scorton Creek, Spectacle Pond HINGHAM: Weir River SCITUATE: Bound Brook, Tack Factory Pond KINGSTON: Soules Pond MASS.GOV/TROUT SEEKONK: Burrs Pond, Old Grist Mill Pond WELLFLEET: Gull Pond SWANSEA: Lewin Brook Pond (Swansea Dam) WEST TISBURY: Duarte Ponds, Old Millpond, Seths Pond TAUNTON: Lake Rico YARMOUTH: Long Pond TRURO: Great Pond SOUTHEAST DISTRICT OFFICE 195 Bournedale Road, Buzzards Bay (508) 759-3406.
  • Ultraviolet Light Water Treatment at the Quabbin Disinfection Facility

    Ultraviolet Light Water Treatment at the Quabbin Disinfection Facility

    Massachusetts Water Resources Authority Ultraviolet Light Water Treatment at the Quabbin Disinfection Facility MWRA’s Chicopee Valley Aqueduct (CVA) Water System About the CVA Water System as it travels through local pipelines. Each community provides further corrosion control treatment to protect MWRA’s Chicopee Valley Aqueduct (CVA) Water the water against leaching lead from home plumbing. System provides drinking water for three communities: Wilbraham, Chicopee and South Hadley Fire District No. 1. Combined, CVA communities use an average of Ultraviolet Light Treatment to be Added approximately 7.7 million gallons of water per day. While the current water treatment process is safe and The water is supplied by the Quabbin Reservoir and effective, MWRA must add a second means of primary delivered by gravity to CVA communities through the disinfection at the Quabbin facility by October 1, Chicopee Valley Aqueduct. Along the way, it is stored 2014 in order to comply with a new Environmental in the Nash Hill Covered Storage Tank in Ludlow. Protection Agency regulation, the Long-Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule. How Water at the Quabbin Facility is Treated Based on the findings of pilot testing and other Water at the Quabbin Disinfection facility is currently research, MWRA and the CVA communities concluded treated with sodium hypochlorite (a form of chlorine) that the addition of UV light disinfection is the best for primary and residual disinfection. Primary solution for meeting the new requirements because it disinfection kills any pathogens that may be present; is cost-effective and will provide added public health residual disinfection protects the quality of the water benefits.
  • Streamflow, Ground-Water Recharge and Discharge, and Characteristics of Surficial Deposits in Buzzards Bay Basin, Southeastern Massachusetts U.S

    Streamflow, Ground-Water Recharge and Discharge, and Characteristics of Surficial Deposits in Buzzards Bay Basin, Southeastern Massachusetts U.S

    Streamflow, Ground-Water Recharge and Discharge, and Characteristics of Surficial Deposits in Buzzards Bay Basin, Southeastern Massachusetts U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 95-4234 Prepared in cooperation with MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, DIVISION OF RESOURCE CONSERVATION, OFFICE OF WATER RESOURCES Streamflow, Ground-Water Recharge and Discharge, and Characteristics of Surficial Deposits in Buzzards Bay Basin, Southeastern Massachusetts By GARDNER C. BENT U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 95-4234 Prepared in cooperation with MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, DIVISION OF RESOURCE CONSERVATION, OFFICE OF WATER RESOURCES Marlborough, Massachusetts 1995 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Gordon P. Eaton, Director For additional information write to: Copies of this report can be purchased from: Chief, Massachusetts-Rhode Island District U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Earth Science Information Center Water Resources Division Open-File Reports Section 28 Lord Road, Suite 280 Box 25286, MS 517 Marlborough, MA 01752 Denver Federal Center Denver, CO 80225 CONTENTS Abstract ................................................................................................................................................................................. 1 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................................................................