DOCSLIB.ORG

Total Maximum Daily Load Study for Bacteria Mount Hope Bay and the Kickemuit River Estuary

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Total Maximum Daily Load Study for Bacteria Mount Hope Bay and the Kickemuit River Estuary TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOAD STUDY FOR BACTERIA MOUNT HOPE BAY AND THE KICKEMUIT RIVER ESTUARY 303(d) listings addressed in this study: Kickemuit River (RI0007033E-01A) Kickemuit River (RI0007033E-01B) Kickemuit River (RI0007033E-01C) Mount Hope Bay (RI0007032E-01A) Mount Hope Bay (RI0007032E-01B) Mount Hope Bay (RI0007032E-01C) Mount Hope Bay (RI0007032E-01D) State of Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management Office of Water Resources Surface Water Protection Section Final January 2010 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS List of FIGURES ..........................................................................................................................................4 LIST OF TABLES........................................................................................................................................5 Abstract.........................................................................................................................................................6 1.0 Introduction........................................................................................................................................7 1.1 Study Area.......................................................................................................................................... 7 Waterbody Descriptions ......................................................................................................................... 9 Waterbody Segment Impairments .......................................................................................................... 9 1.2 Pollutant of Concern ........................................................................................................................ 12 1.3 Priority Ranking............................................................................................................................... 12 1.4 Applicable Water Quality Standards................................................................................................ 12 Water Use Classification ...................................................................................................................... 12 Applicable Water Quality Criteria........................................................................................................ 13 Numeric Water Quality Targets ........................................................................................................... 13 Other Applicable Standards in Shellfish Growing Areas..................................................................... 13 Antidegradation Policy......................................................................................................................... 13 2.0 Background ......................................................................................................................................14 2.1 Description of Study Area................................................................................................................ 14 Taunton River....................................................................................................................................... 14 Mount Hope Bay .................................................................................................................................. 16 Kickemuit River ................................................................................................................................... 16 2.2 Environmental Setting...................................................................................................................... 17 Mount Hope Bay .................................................................................................................................. 17 Kickemuit River ................................................................................................................................... 18 2.3 Shellfish Growing Area Management.............................................................................................. 18 3.0 Water Quality Characterization........................................................................................................23 3.1 Overview/Summary ......................................................................................................................... 23 US FDA Microbiological Survey of Mount Hope Bay (1986-1987)................................................... 23 ASA Water Quality Surveys in Mount Hope Bay (1990).................................................................... 24 RIDEM wet weather monitoring (2006) .............................................................................................. 24 3.2 Shellfish Program Annual Review of Bacteriological Data............................................................. 29 3.3 Water Quality Summary and Resource Impairments....................................................................... 30 4.0 Pollutant Source Assessment ...........................................................................................................31 4.1 Combined Sewer Overflows ............................................................................................................ 32 4.2 Stormwater Discharges from MS4s ................................................................................................. 34 Prioritized Sources in the Town of Warren.......................................................................................... 36 Prioritized Sources in the Town of Bristol ........................................................................................... 38 Prioritized Sources in the Town of Tiverton ........................................................................................ 39 4.3 Stormwater from Industrial Activities ............................................................................................. 42 4.4 Streams and Wetlands draining to Mount Hope Bay and the Kickemuit River............................... 42 4.5 Localized Estuarine Areas Characterized By High Fecal Coliform Levels..................................... 43 Mount Hope Bay .................................................................................................................................. 43 Kickemuit River ................................................................................................................................... 43 4.6 Other Potential Sources.................................................................................................................... 44 Sanitary Waste...................................................................................................................................... 44 Marine Vessel Discharges .................................................................................................................... 48 Wildlife/Waterfowl .............................................................................................................................. 48 Non-Migratory Geese and Swans......................................................................................................... 48 Kickemuit Reservoir and Upper Kickemuit River ............................................................................... 49 5.0 TMDL Analysis...............................................................................................................................50 2 5.1 Applicable Water Quality Criteria ................................................................................................... 50 5.2 Numeric Water Quality Targets....................................................................................................... 50 5.3 Water Quality and Resource Impairments ....................................................................................... 50 5.4 Critical Conditions and Seasonal Variation- Analysis..................................................................... 50 Consideration of Critical Conditions.................................................................................................... 51 Weather ................................................................................................................................................ 51 River Flow............................................................................................................................................ 51 Tide....................................................................................................................................................... 53 Consideration of Seasonal Variation.................................................................................................... 53 Critical Condition and Seasonal Variation-Summary .......................................................................... 54 5.5 Margin of Safety .............................................................................................................................. 55 5.6 Technical Analysis........................................................................................................................... 55 5.7 Establishing the Allowable Loading ................................................................................................ 55 5.8 Required Reductions........................................................................................................................ 56 5.9 Load and Waste load Allocations ...................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Tidal Flushing and Eddy Shedding in Mount Hope Bay and Narragansett Bay: an Application of FVCOM
    Tidal Flushing and Eddy Shedding in Mount Hope Bay and Narragansett Bay: An Application of FVCOM Liuzhi Zhao, Changsheng Chen and Geoff Cowles The School for Marine Science and Technology University of Massachusetts at Dartmouth 706 South Rodney French Blvd., New Bedford, MA 02744. Corresponding author: Liuzhi Zhao, E-mail: [email protected] 1 Abstract The tidal motion in Mt. Hope Bay (MHB) and Narragansett Bay (NB) is simulated using the unstructured grid, finite-volume coastal ocean model (FVCOM). With an accurate geometric representation of irregular coastlines and islands and sufficiently high horizontal resolution in narrow channels, FVCOM provides an accurate simulation of the tidal wave in the bays and also resolves the strong tidal flushing processes in the narrow channels of MHB-NB. Eddy shedding is predicted on the lee side of these channels due to current separation during both flood and ebb tides. There is a significant interaction in the tidal flushing process between MHB-NB channel and MHB-Sakonnet River (SR) channel. As a result, the phase of water transport in the MHB-SR channel leads the MHB-NB channel by 90o. The residual flow field in the MHB and NB features multiple eddies formed around headlands, convex and concave coastline regions, islands, channel exits and river mouths. The formation of these eddies are mainly due to the current separation either at the tip of the coastlines or asymmetric tidal flushing in narrow channels or passages. Process-oriented modeling experiments show that horizontal resolution plays a critical role in resolving the asymmetric tidal flushing process through narrow passages.
    [Show full text]
  • UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT of INDIANA SOUTH BEND DIVISION in Re FEDEX GROUND PACKAGE SYSTEM, INC., EMPLOYMEN
    USDC IN/ND case 3:05-md-00527-RLM-MGG document 3279 filed 03/22/19 page 1 of 354 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA SOUTH BEND DIVISION ) Case No. 3:05-MD-527 RLM In re FEDEX GROUND PACKAGE ) (MDL 1700) SYSTEM, INC., EMPLOYMENT ) PRACTICES LITIGATION ) ) ) THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO: ) ) Carlene Craig, et. al. v. FedEx Case No. 3:05-cv-530 RLM ) Ground Package Systems, Inc., ) ) PROPOSED FINAL APPROVAL ORDER This matter came before the Court for hearing on March 11, 2019, to consider final approval of the proposed ERISA Class Action Settlement reached by and between Plaintiffs Leo Rittenhouse, Jeff Bramlage, Lawrence Liable, Kent Whistler, Mike Moore, Keith Berry, Matthew Cook, Heidi Law, Sylvia O’Brien, Neal Bergkamp, and Dominic Lupo1 (collectively, “the Named Plaintiffs”), on behalf of themselves and the Certified Class, and Defendant FedEx Ground Package System, Inc. (“FXG”) (collectively, “the Parties”), the terms of which Settlement are set forth in the Class Action Settlement Agreement (the “Settlement Agreement”) attached as Exhibit A to the Joint Declaration of Co-Lead Counsel in support of Preliminary Approval of the Kansas Class Action 1 Carlene Craig withdrew as a Named Plaintiff on November 29, 2006. See MDL Doc. No. 409. Named Plaintiffs Ronald Perry and Alan Pacheco are not movants for final approval and filed an objection [MDL Doc. Nos. 3251/3261]. USDC IN/ND case 3:05-md-00527-RLM-MGG document 3279 filed 03/22/19 page 2 of 354 Settlement [MDL Doc. No. 3154-1]. Also before the Court is ERISA Plaintiffs’ Unopposed Motion for Attorney’s Fees and for Payment of Service Awards to the Named Plaintiffs, filed with the Court on October 19, 2018 [MDL Doc.
    [Show full text]
  • Integrated Wastewater and Stormwater Master Plan Was Added As a Requirement in the Latest Amendment of the Federal Court Order
    Executive Summary ES.1 Background ES.1 Background ES.2 Purpose ES.1.1 City of Fall River ES.3 Integrated Planning The City of Fall River (Fall River/City) is located in Bristol County, Approach in southeastern Massachusetts. As shown in Figure ES-1, the City ES.4 Project Issues and is located along the Taunton River and Mount Hope Bay shoreline. Goals Interstate 195 crosses through the City and provides access to Providence, Rhode Island to the west and Cape Cod to the east. ES.5 Problem Similarly, Route 24 provides access to the Boston area in the Identification and north. Several local routes (Routes 6, 79, 81 and 138) also pass Resolution Processes through the city, linking Fall River with its neighboring ES.6 Resolution Concepts communities. ES.7 Resolution Concept Fall River was founded in 1803 and incorporated as a city in Assessment 1854. The City is approximately 40.2 square miles in size, with a ES.8 Financial population of over 88,000 people. It is one of the ten largest cities Considerations in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. ES.9 Recommended Plan ES.10 Conclusions Figure ES-1: Locus Map ES-1 Executive Summary • DRAFT Fall River played an important role in the textile industry, utilizing the Quequechan River for water power and cooling water. During the 19th century, the City experienced significant economic growth with the development of numerous textile mills. Many of these mills were located along the Quequechan River. In 1876, Fall River was the largest textile producing city in the country.
    [Show full text]
  • Geological Survey
    imiF.NT OF Tim BULLETIN UN ITKI) STATKS GEOLOGICAL SURVEY No. 115 A (lECKJKAPHIC DKTIOXARY OF KHODK ISLAM; WASHINGTON GOVKRNMKNT PRINTING OFF1OK 181)4 LIBRARY CATALOGUE SLIPS. i United States. Department of the interior. (U. S. geological survey). Department of the interior | | Bulletin | of the | United States | geological survey | no. 115 | [Seal of the department] | Washington | government printing office | 1894 Second title: United States geological survey | J. W. Powell, director | | A | geographic dictionary | of | Rhode Island | by | Henry Gannett | [Vignette] | Washington | government printing office 11894 8°. 31 pp. Gannett (Henry). United States geological survey | J. W. Powell, director | | A | geographic dictionary | of | Khode Island | hy | Henry Gannett | [Vignette] Washington | government printing office | 1894 8°. 31 pp. [UNITED STATES. Department of the interior. (U. S. geological survey). Bulletin 115]. 8 United States geological survey | J. W. Powell, director | | * A | geographic dictionary | of | Ehode Island | by | Henry -| Gannett | [Vignette] | . g Washington | government printing office | 1894 JS 8°. 31pp. a* [UNITED STATES. Department of the interior. (Z7. S. geological survey). ~ . Bulletin 115]. ADVERTISEMENT. [Bulletin No. 115.] The publications of the United States Geological Survey are issued in accordance with the statute approved March 3, 1879, which declares that "The publications of the Geological Survey shall consist of the annual report of operations, geological and economic maps illustrating the resources and classification of the lands, and reports upon general and economic geology and paleontology. The annual report of operations of the Geological Survey shall accompany the annual report of the Secretary of the Interior. All special memoirs and reports of said Survey shall be issued in uniform quarto series if deemed necessary by tlie Director, but other­ wise in ordinary octavos.
    [Show full text]
  • Overlooked by Many Boaters, Mount Hope Bay Offers a Host of Attractive Spots in Which to Wile Away a Day—Or Week—On the Water
    DESTINATION MOUNT HOPE BAY The author’s boat, Friendship, at anchor in Church’s Cove. Overlooked by many boaters, Mount Hope Bay offers a host of attractive spots in which to wile away a day—or week—on the water. BY CAPTAIN DAVE BILL PHOTOGRAPHY BY CATE BROWN ount Hope Bay, shared by Massachusetts and Rhode Island, doesn’t get a lot of attention from boaters. But it should. The bay is flled with interesting places to dock, drop an anchor or explore in a small boat, so you could fll an entire week visiting a new spot every day. Every summer, I spend a signifcant amount of time on the bay aboard a 36- foot Union cutter, so I’ve gotten to know and love this body of water, which offers everything from interesting things to see and do to great dock-and-dine restaurants to scenic spots where one can drop the hook and take a dip. Here are some of my favorite places to visit, as well as some points of interest. The main gateway to Mount Hope Bay (which is named after a small hill on its western shore) is via the center span of the Mount Hope Bridge, with Hog Island Shoal to port and Musselbed Shoals to starboard. You can also enter, from the north, via the Taunton River, and from the south, via the Sakonnet River. Although the Army Corps of Engineers maintains a 35-foot-deep shipping channel through the bay up to Fall River, be mindful of navigational aids that mark obstructions such as Spar Island or Old Bay Rock.
    [Show full text]
  • A Students' Realm
    A Students’ Realm A place for students to be at Roger Williams University. submitted by ________________________________ Evan Carroll class of 2006 ________________________________ Stephen White Dean Independent Project Submitted to school of architecture art Roger Williams University,School of Architecture, and historic preservation Art and Historic Preservation in fulfillment of the requirements of ________________________________ Hasan-Uddin Khan the b.arch degree in architecture advisor distinguished professor A Students’ Realm Evan Carroll August 2006 “Community cannot long feed on itself, it can only flourish with the coming of others from beyond: their unknown and undiscovered sisters and brothers.” -Howard Thurman Committee: Patrick Charles, Assistant Professor Mete Turan, Professor Project Proposal Advisor: Julian Bonder, Professor ii Abstract “A Students’ Realm” is my exploration into my ideas about how I want to design. Much of what I discuss has ideological undertones that are a result of my current convictions about design in architecture. This project will explore and test my ideas to see if they “hold up.” The result will hopefully give me an idea of how to act in the real world. The project is the design of a student center at Roger Williams University as a reaction to the Dining Commons that is currently being constructed. The basis for design is a focus on gathering data that includes history, observations, opinions of students and precedent studies. The data must be fundamentally understood, and then the design process
    [Show full text]
  • Fall River• Waterfront
    FALL RIVER • WATERFRONT URBAN • RENEWAL • PLAN Draft February 2018 Acknowledgements City of Fall River Prepared for the Fall River Redevelopment Authority Mayor Jasiel F. Correia II William Kenney, Chairman City Council Anne E. Keane Shawn E. Cadime Joseph Oliveira Joseph D. Camara Kara O'Connell Stephen A. Camara Bradford L. Kilby FALL RIVER OFFICE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Pam Laliberte-Lebeau Kenneth Fiola, Jr., Esq., Executive Vice President Stephen R. Long Steven Souza, Economic Development Leo O. Pelletier Administrative Assistant Cliff Ponte Maria R. Doherty, Network Administrator Derek R. Viveiros Lynn M. Oliveira, Economic Development Coordinator Planning Board Michael Motta, Technical Assistance Specialist Keith Paquette, Chairman Citizens' Advisory Group Mario Lucciola Alice Fagundo Peter Cabral Charles Moniz Representative Carole A. Fiola Michael Lund Frank Marchione John McDonagh Consultant Team HARRIMAN FXM ASSOCIATES Steven G. Cecil AIA ASLA Francis X. Mahady Emily Keys Innes, AICP, LEED AP ND Dianne Tsitsos Margarita Iglesia, AICP Lily Perkins-High BONZ AND COMPANY Robert Salisbury FITZGERALD AND HALLIDAY Francisco Gomes, AICP, ASLA ii FALL RIVER REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY DRAFT FEBRUARY 2018 Table of Contents 1. Executive Summary .................................................................................................. 9 2. Characteristics .......................................................................................................... 27 3. Plan Eligibility ...........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Former Liberty Street School East Bay Community Development Corporation
    Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Former Liberty Street School 10 Liberty Street Warren, RI May 2009 317 Iron Horse Way Suite 204 Providence RI 02908 Table of Contents Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Former Liberty Street School East Bay Community Development Corporation 1 Introduction .................................................................................1 1.1 Objective......................................................................................................1 1.2 Scope of Services..........................................................................................1 2 Site Overview...............................................................................1 2.1 Site Information...........................................................................................1 2.1.1 Property Location, Size of Parcel and Site Plan...........................................1 2.1.2 Site Utilities........................................................................................................2 2.1.3 Adjoining Land Use..........................................................................................2 2.2 Physical Setting of Site ................................................................................3 2.2.1 Geologic and Physiographic Setting ..............................................................3 2.2.2 Groundwater .....................................................................................................3 2.2.3 Surface Water ....................................................................................................3
    [Show full text]
  • How Narragansett Bay Shaped Rhode Island
    How Narragansett Bay Shaped Rhode Island For the Summer 2008 issue of Rhode Island History, former director of the Naval War College Museum, Anthony S. Nicolosi, contributed the article, “Rear Admiral Stephen B. Luce, U.S.N, and the Coming of the Navy to Narragansett Bay.” While the article may prove too specialized to directly translate into your classroom, the themes and topics raised within the piece can fit easily into your lesson plans. We have created a handful of activities for your classes based on the role that Narragansett Bay has played in creating the Rhode Island in which we now live. The first activity is an easy map exercise. We have suggested a link to a user-friendly map, but if you have one that you prefer, please go ahead and use it! The goal of this activity is to get your students thinking about the geography of the state so that they can achieve a heightened visual sense of the bay—to help them understand its fundamental role in our development. The next exercise, which is more advanced, asks the students to do research into the various conflicts into which this country has entered. It then asks them, in groups, to deduce what types of ships, weapons, battles and people played a part in each of these wars, and of course, how they relate to Narragansett Bay. We hope that your students will approach the end result creatively by styling their charts after maritime signal “flags.” Exploring the Ocean State Rhode Island is the smallest state, measuring forty-eight miles from North to South and thirty-seven miles from east to west.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Pathogen TMDL for the Narragansett/Mt. Hope Bay Watershed July 2010 CN# 351.0 Report# 61 – TMDL - 2
    Final Pathogen TMDL for the Narragansett/Mt. Hope Bay Watershed July 2010 CN# 351.0 Report# 61 – TMDL - 2 Narragansett/Mt. Hope Bay Watershed Prepared as a cooperative effort by: Massachusetts DEP USEPA New England Region 1 1 Winter Street 1 Congress Street, Suite 1100 Boston, Massachusetts 02108 Boston, Massachusetts 02114 ENSR International 2 Technology Park Drive Westford, MA 01886 NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY Limited copies of this report are available at no cost by written request to: Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) Division of Watershed Management 627 Main Street Worcester, Massachusetts 01608 This report is also available from MassDEP’s home page on the World Wide Web. http://www.mass.gov/dep/water/resources/tmdls.htm - narrag A complete list of reports published since 1963 is updated annually and printed in July. This list, titled “Publications of the Massachusetts Division of Watershed Management (DWM) – Watershed Planning Program, 1963-(current year)”, is also available by writing to the DWM in Worcester. DISCLAIMER References to trade names, commercial products, manufacturers, or distributors in this report constituted neither endorsement nor recommendations by the Division of Watershed Management for use. Much of this document was prepared using text and general guidance from the previously approved Charles River Basin, Cape Cod, Buzzards Bay, Neponset River Basin and the Palmer River Basin Bacteria Total Maximum Daily Load documents. Acknowledgement This report was originally developed by ENSR through a partnership with Research Triangle Institute (RTI) contracting with the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Agency under the National Watershed Protection Program.
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX B Narragansett/Mount Hope Bay Watersheds Summary Of
    APPENDIX B Narragansett/Mount Hope Bay Watersheds Summary of North Watuppa Pond Fish Toxics Monitoring 1989 through 2007 Introduction Fish toxics monitoring is a cooperative effort between three Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) Offices/Divisions----Watershed Management (DWM), Research and Standards (ORS), and Environmental Analysis; the Massachusetts Department of Fish and Game (MA DFG); and the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (MA DPH). Fish toxics monitoring is typically conducted to assess the concentrations of toxic contaminants in freshwater fish, identify waterbodies where those concentrations may pose a risk to human health if consumed, and identify waters where toxic contaminants may impact fish and other wildlife. MassDEP conducted sampling of fish from North Watuppa Pond in June 1989 (Maietta 1990). Mercury concentrations ranged from 0.61 to 2.4 mg/kg wet weight in the five species tested which included chain pickerel (Esox niger ), white perch ( Morone americana ), yellow perch ( Perca flavescens ), largemouth bass ( Micropterus salmoides ), and smallmouth bass ( Micropterus dolomieu ) (Maietta 1990). Subsequent sampling of fish from North Watuppa Pond was conducted in 1994 (analysis of edible fillets conducted for As, Cd, Hg, Pb, Se, PCBs, organochlorine pesticides) as part of a mercury research project (MassDEP 1997), and in 2001, 2002, 2004, 2005, and 2007 as part of the MassDEP ORS Mercury Research Project (analysis of edible fillets conducted for Hg) (MassDEP 2006 and Maietta 2007). Fish were also collected from North Watuppa Pond in September 2000 and analyzed for residues for a group of target analytes (e.g., persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic pollutants (PBTs) such as mercury, dioxins, PAHs, other semivolatile organics, PCBs) as part of the National Fish Tissue Study (EPA 2002 and Tetra Tech, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Fall River Line Pier, Inc. for the Period January 1, 2016 Through December 31, 2018
    Official Audit Report – Issued June 11, 2020 Fall River Line Pier, Inc. For the period January 1, 2016 through December 31, 2018 State House Room 230 Boston, MA 02133 [email protected] www.mass.gov/auditor June 11, 2020 Mr. Gilbert C. Oliveira, President of the Board of Directors Fall River Line Pier, Inc. 1 Water Street Fall River, MA 02721 Dear Mr. Oliveira: I am pleased to provide this performance audit of Fall River Line Pier, Inc. This report details the audit objectives, scope, methodology, findings, and recommendations for the audit period, January 1, 2016 through December 31, 2018. My audit staff discussed the contents of this report with management of the agency, whose comments are reflected in this report. I would also like to express my appreciation to Fall River Line Pier, Inc. for the cooperation and assistance provided to my staff during the audit. Sincerely, Suzanne M. Bump Auditor of the Commonwealth cc: Ricks Frazier, Esq., General Counsel, MassDevelopment Zach Greene, Senior Vice President of Asset Management, MassDevelopment Audit No. 2019-0504-3A Fall River Line Pier, Inc. Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................................... 1 OVERVIEW OF AUDITED ENTITY ......................................................................................................................... 2 AUDIT OBJECTIVES, SCOPE, AND METHODOLOGY ..............................................................................................
    [Show full text]