State Environmental Quality Review Act NEGATIVE DECLARATION March 2018
Notice of Determination of Non-Significance
This notice is issued pursuant to Article 8 of the New York State Environmental Conservation Law and Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining thereto.
The Suffolk County Water Authority, as lead agency, has determined that the proposed action described below will not have a significant effect on the environment and a Draft Environmental Impact Statement will not be prepared.
LEAD AGENCY: Suffolk County Water Authority P.O. Box 38 4060 Sunrise Highway Oakdale, New York 11769 (631) 563-0203 Contact: Joseph Pokorny, P.E., CEO for Operations
TITLE OF ACTION: Stephen Hands Path Wainscott public water supply well field
SEQRA STATUS: Unlisted Action
DESCRIPTION OF ACTION:
This proposed action is the construction of a public water supply well field including the construction of two (2) 20" x 14" diameter wells nos 1 and 2, each 145 feet deep and rated at 650 gpm (the Project) on approximately five (5) acres of 178 acres of property owned by Suffolk County. The Site Plan last dated October 11, 2016 illustrates the facility layout.
The Suffolk County Water Authority (the “SCWA”) has an easement agreement with Suffolk County, signed in 2010, to develop a well field on the property. The Project is in the unincorporated Hamlet of Wainscott, in the Town of East Hampton (the Project Site). The Project is proposed by the SCWA, a public benefit corporation.
LOCATION:
The Project Site is approximately five (5) acres of 178 acres of property identified as Suffolk County Tax Map Number 300-181-1-1.1. The Project Site is situated on the west side of Stephen Hands Path, 455 feet north of the Long Island Rail Road train tracks, approximately one half mile north of New York State Route 27 (Montauk Highway), in the Hamlet of Wainscott, Town of East Hampton, County of Suffolk.
1
SUFFOLK COUNTY TAX MAP NUMBER:
300-181-1-1.1
SEQRA HISTORY AND PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY PERMIT
SCWA submitted a Water Supply Application to NYSDEC on January 8, 2018 New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) issued a Notice of Complete Application and Negative Declaration on January 30, 2018 NYSDEC published a Notice of Complete Application in the official newspaper of the Town of East Hampton during the week of February 12, 2018 NYSDEC issued the Water Supply Application Permit #1-4724-2238/00001, WSA No. 12396 on March 5, 2018 SCWA sends Lead Agency Coordination materials to Suffolk County Parks Trustees on March 5 and 6, 2018 SCWA Presentation to Parks Trustees on March 22, 2018 Suffolk County Parks Trustees issues letter with no objection to SCWA assuming Lead Agency on March 22, 2018 SCWA declares Lead Agency on March 27, 2018
REASONS SUPPORTING THIS DETERMINATION:
Environmental Assessment Form Parts I, II and III were completed and reviewed by the SCWA as the Lead Agency for the Project. The Lead Agency reviewed aerial photographs, researched relevant studies, performed field inspections and took photographs.
The SCWA has determined that the Project will not have significant adverse impacts on the environment. This determination was made by comparing the impacts that are anticipated to occur by the Project’s implementation against the criteria contained in 6 New York Code Rules and Regulations Section 617.7(c).
The Project will not have a significant adverse impact on groundwater resources as determined by the NYSDEC issuance of a Water Supply Application Permit on March 5, 2018.
No adverse environmental impacts will occur to existing air quality, ground or surface water quality or quantity, traffic or noise levels. There will be no actions associated with the Project which will affect ground or surface water quality or quantity. There will be no significant adverse traffic impacts. During construction activities approximately 7-10 workers will be at the site. The existing road network will not be adversely impacted by the workers traveling to and from the site. Construction activities will occur between the hours of 8:00 am and 5:00 pm, Monday through Friday and are not anticipated to cause significant noise impacts. SCWA must approve any additional hours of construction.
No increase in solid waste production or substantial increase in potential for erosion, flooding, leaching or drainage problems will occur as a result of the Project. The Project Site contains 0- 10% slopes and drains well. Although the Project will require excavation and grading activities,
2
soil material will be reused to the greatest extent practicable on the Project Site and therefore will not increase the potential for erosion, flooding, leaching or drainage problems. No solid waste, beyond that customary to a construction project, will be produced by the Project.
A change in land use will occur from an undeveloped wooded area to a five acre public water supply well field. The change in land use will not generate traffic or other adverse environmental impacts beyond the limited clearing and development required for public water supply facilities. No substantial change in the use or intensity of use of the land will occur as a result of the Project. The Project does not involve the removal or destruction of significant quantities of vegetation or fauna, or the substantial interference with the movement of any resident or migratory fish or wildlife species, impacts on significant habitat areas, substantial adverse impacts on a threatened or endangered species of animal or plant, or the habitat of such a species, or other significant adverse impacts to natural resources. Therefore, no adverse impacts to natural resources will occur as a result of the Project.
New York Natural Heritage Program (NHP), by letter dated November 10, 2016, provided two reports, “Report on Rare Animals, Rare Plants, and Significant Natural Communities” and “Report on Historical Records of Rare Animals, Rare Plants, and Natural Communities,” to the Suffolk County Water Authority. The first report identifies a NYS listed Species of Special Concern, Coastal Barrens Buckmoth (Hemileuca maia ssp. 5) and the upland terrestrial communities pitch pine oak forest and coastal oak heath forest. The Report notes that both community types are considered significant from a statewide perspective by the NY Natural Heritage Program. The Report also lists two vascular plants, a NYS listed Threatened species, Velvety Bush-clover (Lespedeza stuevei), and a NYS listed Endangered species, Orange Fringed Orchid (Platanthera ciliaris).
Field inspections occurred on May 20 and October 12, 2016, and July 17, 2017. At the time, the Project Site and disturbance limits were not flagged or delineated, however, a draft site plan illustrating proposed well field facilities was used to determine the general boundary and locations of structures. The habitat description, flora and fauna identifications, and other observations occurred on or in immediate proximity to the Project Site.
The site is characterized as Pitch pine-oak-heath woodland (Edinger et al, 2014). Pitch pine and white oak are the most abundant trees on site, with some pitch pines larger than 12" diameter. The shrub layer is dominated by stands of scrub oak and heath species are abundant in the understory including huckleberry and blueberry. Staggerbush, another member of the heath family, was also identified. Other species existing in this ecological community that were identified on the site include common and striped wintergreen, trailing arbutus, and sweet fern, a woody native plant. Wildlife observed on or in proximity to the site included a fowler’s toad and a spring peeper. There are no NYSDEC designated or mapped wetlands on the site.
Large stands of scrub oak on the Project Site have the potential to support the habitat of the Coastal Barrens Buckmoth, however, neither individuals in flight nor eggs on twigs were directly identified. Although site inspections occurred during the fruiting and/or flowering period of the plant species identified by NHP as NYS listed Threatened and Endangered, neither species of plant was observed on the property.
3
The well field is designed to minimize clearing and disturbance to existing flora and fauna. No significant adverse environmental impacts will occur to threatened or endangered species as a result of the project. Large pitch pines will be retained in place, where feasible. Large stands of scrub oak will also remain, where feasible. The adjoining Suffolk County parkland and large natural open spaces in the immediate vicinity of the Project Site contain similar ecological communities and will continue to provide viable habitat for existing plant and wildlife. A row of white pines will be planted 8 to 10 feet on center along the eastern edge of the clearing.
The “Report on Historical Records” identified a NYS listed Endangered species of vascular plant, Coastal Goldenrod (Solidago latissimifolia). The record notes the plant was documented in 1927 in an East Hampton pine barrens swamp habitat. The project site does not presently contain a swamp habitat, therefore, this species is not expected to exist on the project site and was not observed during field observations.
The Project Site is in the Suffolk County designated Special Groundwater Protection Area (South Fork) Critical Environmental Area (CEA). However, no significant adverse impacts are expected to occur in the CEA or to the quality or quantity of the resource as a result of the Project. Therefore, no adverse impacts will occur on a CEA as a result of the Project.
The Project Site is not within the New York State mapped Coastal Area Boundary. Although not in the mapped boundary, the Project is in compliance with the Town of East Hampton Local Waterfront Revitalization Policies.
According to the New York State Historic Preservation Office, by letter dated October 21, 2016, the Project will have no impact on archaeological and/or historic resources listed in or eligible for the New York State and National Registers of Historic Places. The Project will not result in the impairment of the character or quality of important historical, archaeological, architectural or aesthetic resources or of existing community or neighborhood character. Although the Project will be visible from Stephen Hands Path, proposed facilities are setback more than 50 feet from the road, as shown in the Site Plan. The Project Site is in proximity to a developed area on the east side of Stephen Hands Path including commercial uses on Learned Hands Court, opposite the Project Site, and is consistent with non-residential developed uses in the landscape.
Portions of the Project will visible from Stephen Hands Path and most of the Project will be visible from the recreational trail through the existing trees, but the Project is configured in a manner to limit travelers on Stephen Hand Path from seeing all of the components of the Project. To further minimize the visual impacts from Stephen Hands Path will be a row of white pines planted 8 to 10 feet on center along the eastern edge of clearing. Those passing by will see a building and those on the trail will see well enclosures buildings but in most instances there will be no visible activity associated with them. And in each instance the view of the structures will be through trees.
The Project will not result in the material conflict with a community's current plans or goals as officially approved or adopted.
4
The Project is in keeping with land uses in the immediate area. The Long Island Rail Road train tracks are situated approximately 475 feet to the south of the Project Site.
No major change in the use of either the quantity or type of energy consumed on site will occur under the Project.
No adverse impacts on human health will occur as a result of the Project.
The Project Site is not in a designated agricultural district and is not used for the production of agricultural products, therefore, no impact to agricultural resources will occur.
The Project Site is on the perimeter and adjacent to the open space known as Buckskill Nature Preserve. Existing hiking trails in the Preserve will not be relocated or disturbed. Although the well field will be visible from existing trails, passive recreational uses may still continue with the Project and will not be disrupted by the Project. No change in the use of existing recreational resources will occur as a result of the Project. No adverse impacts or substantial change in the use or intensity of use of land including agricultural, open space or recreational resources, or in its capacity to support existing uses will occur under the Project.
The Project will not encourage or attract a large number of people to a place for more than a few days compared to the number of people would come to the site absent the proposed action.
No adverse impacts will result from the creation of a material demand for other actions that will result in a consequence that will affect one of the impacts previously discussed. The Project will not have a growth inducing impact. It will supply the demand for public water in the SCWA system.
No adverse cumulative impacts from two or more of the Project elements when considered together will result in a substantial adverse impact on the environment.
There are no reasonably related long-term, short-term, direct, indirect and cumulative impact included in any SCWA long-range plan of which the Project is a part, are likely to be undertaken as a result of the Project or are dependent on the Project. The Site Plan identifies areas reserved for possible future infrastructure needs. Currently, there are no other long-term plans for the Project Site.
MITIGATION MEASURES
Although no significant adverse environmental impacts are associated with the Project, the SCWA will implement measures including SCWA will limit the amount of clearing on the site, retain existing tall trees on the roadside that will serve to naturally screen the facilities from the road; other existing natural vegetation will be retained on the Project Site where it does not obstruct the installation and maintenance of public well field and water supply infrastructure and plant a row of white pines along the eastern edge of the clearing.
For Further Information:
5
Contact Person: Joseph Pokorny, P.E., Deputy CEO for Operations
Address: Suffolk County Water Authority P.O. Box 38 4060 Sunrise Highway Oakdale, New York 11769
Telephone Number: (631) 563-0203
6
Stephen Hands Path, Wainscott Public Water Supply Facility County of Monroe v. City of Rochester Analysis
Under the balancing of public interests approach adopted by the New York Court of Appeals in Matter of the County of Monroe v. City of Rochester (72 N.Y.2d 338 (1988)) if the proposed activities are consistent with SCWA’s legislative purpose and are in furtherance of SCWA’s essential governmental function of operating a public water supply system, SCWA need not receive land use approval from the Town prior to undertaking the activities.
When a public benefit corporation proposes a project the balancing of interests approach established in Monroe is utilized to determine whether the public benefit corporation must receive local land use approval for the project. “This balancing approach subjects the encroaching governmental unit in the first instance, in the absence of an expression of the contrary legislative intent, to the zoning requirements of the host governmental unit where the extraterritorial land use would be employed.” (Monroe at 343 (citations omitted)). The Monroe factors are then weighed to determine whether subjecting the encroaching governmental unit would unnecessarily restrict the encroaching unit from performing its statutory duties. If so, the land use is free of the land use oversight of the host governmental unit. The Court did not specify which entity is responsible for applying the approach. In Incorporated Vil. Of Munsey Park v. Manhassett-Lakeville Water District, the Second Department approved of a Water District’s review of the balancing approach to determine that the District’s proposed construction of a replacement elevated water tank was “immune” from a Village’s zoning regulations and review. (150 AD3d 969, 2017).
SCWA is a New York State public benefit corporation pursuant to Title 4 of Article 5 of the New York State Public Authorities Law. Moreover, pursuant to its governing legislation, SCWA and the “carrying out of its powers, purposes and duties are in all respects for the benefit of the people of the county of Suffolk and the state of New York, for the improvement of their health, welfare and prosperity and that the said purposes are public purposes and that the [SCWA] is and will be performing an essential governmental function in the exercise of the powers conferred upon it by [title 4].” PAL §1077.
To further its essential governmental function, SCWA has the power and duty to “construct, develop and operate any water supply system, water distribution system, including plants, works, instrumentalities, or parts thereof, and appurtenances thereto, . . ., pumping stations and equipment, or any other property incidental to or included in such system or part thereof within the county of Suffolk, . . . , and to own and operate, maintain, repair, improve, reconstruct, enlarge and extend, subject to the provisions of [title 4] any of its properties acquired or constructed under this title, all of which, together with the acquisition of such properties are hereby declared to be public purposes. (PAL §1078).
Suffolk County owns the property where the public water supply facility will be located. Suffolk acquired the property under its Drinking Water Protection Program. While the property is in the
Stephen Hands Path Page 1 of 6 Parks system and used for recreational purposes, it may be used for the production and distribution of public water supplies, including ancillary facilities for the people of Suffolk County under the Suffolk County Charter. To further this type of use, Suffolk granted to SCWA an easement on the entire property. The County and SCWA have agreed to modify the easement to only affect the five acreage area to be developed under the Project.
SCWA has a need for additional water supply in the vicinity of the Stephen Hands Path site and selected the Stephen Hands Path property after examining maps of the area. The site was selected because SCWA has a 16 inch water main within Stephen Hands Path. Therefore no additional offsite work will be required to incorporate the facility into SCWA distribution system. Second the Project site is relatively flat and development of a public water facility on the site will not require extensive grading operations. Lastly, SCWA already possessed an interest in the County property due to a 2010 easement so SCWA was permitted to develop a water supply facility on the site. SCWA did not identify any other sites in the immediate area possessing these same characteristics.
East Hampton defines a public utility as a “governmental or privately owned . . . water well or pump house; water tank; water ... treatment plant . . . for the distribution or supply to East Hampton residents of utility-type . . .services.” Such uses are permitted on parcels within the Park and Conservation District upon a grant of a special permit if the “public safety or convenience will be served [and] placement of the use in the Park and Conservation District is the only feasible location for the use.” (East Hampton Code §255-5-45(B)(3)).
Application of the factors identified in Monroe provides the framework for determining whether SCWA must apply to the Town for permission to undertake the Project or if so doing would be inconsistent with the exercise of the SCWA legislative responsibilities. The factors to be applied are (1) the nature and scope of the instrumentality seeking immunity, (2) the kind of land use involved, (3) the extent of the public interest to be served thereby, (4) the effect local land use regulation would have upon the enterprise concerned, (5) the impact that requiring SCWA obtain Town approval will have upon legitimate public interests, (6) SCWA’s legislative grant of authority, (7) alternative locations for the facility in less restrictive zoning areas, and (8) alternative methods of providing the facility, must be analyzed. The Court of Appeals identified two additional “important” factors to consider in applying the Monroe test which are the intergovernmental participation in the development process and the ability of the public to be heard on the Project. Lastly it noted that one factor could be more influential than another or “may be so significant as to completely overshadow” the other elements. (Monroe at 343).
Applying the factors set down by the Court indicates that SCWA need not apply to the Town for permission and the Project is “immune” from the Town’s local law for the following reasons. First, SCWA’s purpose is to develop a public water supply and distribution system for the residents of Suffolk County. The “carrying out of [the SCWA’s] powers, purposes and duties are in all respects for the benefit of the people of the county of Suffolk, and the state of New York, for the improvement of their health, welfare and prosperity and that the said purposes are public purposes and that the authority is and will be performing an essential governmental
Stephen Hands Path Page 2 of 6 function in the exercise of the powers conferred upon it by this title.” (PAL §1077(3)). SCWA engineers have determined that the SCWA’s East Hampton system requires the Project to continue to adequately serve the SCWA’s customers in East Hampton.
Second, development of the Project is permitted by special permit. In considering whether to grant a special permit the Town must specifically find and determine that: the proposed use will be in harmony and promote the general purposes of the Town’s zoning code, the lot area is sufficient, appropriate and adequate for the use, and any reasonably anticipated operation and expansion, the use will not prevent the orderly and reasonable use of the adjacent property, particularly if they are in a different district, whether the site of the proposed use is a suitable one and if the proposed use will be compatible with its surroundings and with the character of the neighborhood and of the community in general, particularly with regard to visibility, scale and overall appearance, whether the special use would be unsuitability near to a church, school, theater, recreational area or other place of public assembly, whether the use conforms to the definition of a special use in the Town Code, whether the site can adequate carry the estimated traffic associated with the use to avoid traffic congestion and entrances and exits are clearly visible and not within 75 feet of a street intersection, whether there is adequate parking for the use, that adequate buffering and screening can and will be provided to protect adjacent properties from detrimental impacts, that runoff and waste generated by the use will be properly captured and disposed of, that the use will not cause an undue disturbance or disruption of important nature features, systems or processes and without significant negative impact to ground or surface waters, the use will comply will other provisions of the Town Code and conform with the general standards for special permit uses in a particular district and provides the specific safeguards required for the use. (East Hampton Code §255-5-40).
Analysis of the special permit considerations reveals that the Project is consistent with them. First, the Project will be harmonious with and promote the general purposes of the Town’s zoning code. Public utility uses, including, water well or pump houses and water treatment plants are permitted within the Park and Conservation District if the public safety or convenience will be served. Currently, in the summer, water pressure in the area starts to sag, due to the increased summer population and its concomitant increased demand.
The Project site contains five acres and this amount is sufficient, appropriate and adequate for the use and any reasonably anticipated operation and expansion. SCWA has carefully designed the Project to minimize the amount of clearing associated with the Project. A chemical treatment building will be set back from the Stephen Hands Path, in a similar manner to the industrial buildings located across Stephen Hands Path. Both well enclosure buildings will be located behind the chemical treatment building so as to minimize their visibility from Stephen Hands Path. All of the uses area configured at angle from Stephen Hands Path to further shield there visibility from Stephen Hands Path. Five acres provides sufficient size to accommodate future expansion of the facility if expansion is necessary. SCWA’s use of the Project site will have no impact on the orderly and reasonable use of the adjacent property which is dedicated open space. Public water facility are largely passive uses and during normal operations require a single daily site visit by a SCWA worker. No public access will be permitted to the facility.
Stephen Hands Path Page 3 of 6 The recreational hiking trail located to the northwest of the Project site is outside of SCWA’s easement area and will not be impacted by the Project. SCWA use of the Project site will be compatible with its surroundings as it’s a low impact use with requiring limited activity surrounded by a road and an open space. Portions of the Project will visible from Stephen Hands Path and most of the Project will be visible from the recreational trail through the existing trees, but the Project is configured in a manner to limit travelers on Stephen Hand Path from seeing all of the components of the Project. To further minimize the visual impacts from Stephen Hands Path will be a row of white pines planted 8 to 10 feet on center along the eastern edge of clearing. Those passing by will see a building and those on the trail will see well enclosures buildings but in most instances there will be no visible activity associated with them. And in each instance the view of the structures will be through trees.
The Project site is not unsuitability near to a church, school, theater, recreational area (except for the hiking trail) or other place of public assembly. The nearest building within the industrial center, will be more than 150 feet away from the chemical treatment building. The trail is a passive low impact recreational amenity and not a place of public assembly, rather it is more likely to be used by individuals or small groups. The footpath is only several feet wide. The Project conforms to the definition a special use in the Park and Conservation District. Given the limited need to access the site during normal operations, the site can carry the estimated traffic impacts, will not create traffic congestion, has adequate parking and its entrance/exit will not be within 75 feet of a street intersection.
SCWA designed the Project to maintain, to the extent practicable, adequate buffering and screening along Stephen Hands Path. There are no adjacent uses to be screened from the facility and the Project will not create detrimental impacts, such as runoff or waste. SCWA has received a New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Public Water Supply permit for the Project. Adherence to the permit’s standards will ensure that the Project will not cause an undue disturbance or disruption of important nature features, systems or processes or significant negative impact to ground or surface waters.
Analyzing the third Monroe element, indicates that the Project will foster the public interest in several ways: first, the new water supply facility will provide added capacity to the SCWA public water distribution system that will be available for fire protection purposes, and the extra capacity will also provide the SCWA the ability to meet periods of peak demand in the East Hampton side of the South Fork Low Zone.
Fourth, given that the Project is consistent with the Town’s standards, subjecting the SCWA to the Town’s review process will have nominal effect on the enterprise concerned since it is likely that the Town would approve the Project. Subjecting the SCWA to the Town’s review processes when the SCWA proposes to undertake activities expressly related to its purpose of supplying water to the customers throughout the County, including the residents of the Town, is inconsistent with the SCWA’s “essential governmental function” and could create impediments hindering the SCWA from performing its statutory obligations. SCWA’s proposal is similar to that of the Manhasset-Lakeville Water District’s and should be similarly “immune” from the
Stephen Hands Path Page 4 of 6 Town’s local laws.
There are 10 towns and 33 villages in Suffolk County. Requiring the SCWA to obtain local land use approval for every one of its actions could unnecessarily restrict and constrain SCWA in performing its statutory duties. In this instance, such review is unwarranted because SCWA has designed the Project to comply, to the extent practicable, with the Town’s standards.
Fifth, development of the Project will have minimal impact on legitimate public interests advanced by the Code’s provisions given its consistency, to the extent practicable, with the standards in the Town Code. The public interest to be served by the Project is the provision of potable water to the residents of East Hampton served by SCWA. Subjecting the Project to Town review to determine consistency with the Town Code will not advance this public interest given that the Code expressly permits the Project by issuance of a special permit. Determining whether the Project protects and promotes the appearance and character of the community is a legitimate Town concern, but, in designing the Project, the SCWA has taken these factors into consideration and selected from a range of alternatives, the one that most efficiently achieves these goals.
Sixth, SCWA has wide ranging powers and duties to perform its essential governmental purpose. (PAL §1078). These powers and duties include, the power and duty to “construct, develop and operate any water supply system, water distribution system, including plants, works, instrumentalities, or parts thereof, and appurtenances thereto, . . ., pumping stations and equipment.” SCWA may also do “all things necessary or convenient to carry out the powers expressly given or necessarily implied” by its authorizing act. (PAL §1078). Implicit within the power to operate a water supply system is the right to develop public water supply facilities.
Monroe’s seventh factor is to determine whether the proposed use can be constructed in a less restrictive zoning area in the Town. Public utilities on lands within the Parks and Conservation District require a special permit no matter the location, as in this instance, the Monroe factor analysis indicates that the proposed activity is exempt from Town review. This location was selected by SCWA because it is in area of good groundwater quality and quantity and on property acquired for public water supply purposes.
Eighth, the SCWA considered a range of options prior to selecting the components of Project. This design was chosen because it provides the required water capacity while minimizing the impacts to the surrounding area.
The Project is subject to the Town’s Local Waterfront Revitalization Program. SCWA analyzed the Project against the Program’s 44 Policies. This analyzes demonstrates that the Project fully conforms with the Program’s provisions. The detailed analysis is provided below.
Analysis of the two additional “important” factors identified by the Court in Monroe always supports SCWA determination that the Project is immune from local review. SCWA has sought significant intergovernmental participation from local, county and state municipalities
Stephen Hands Path Page 5 of 6 and agencies. SCWA informed the East Hampton Town Supervisor by letter dated March 19, that it planned on developing the facility. This LEAF was posted on SCWA’s website between March 19 and March 27, 2018.
SCWA will appear at a meeting of the Suffolk County Park Trustees on March 22, to discuss the Project and to obtain their approval of the same. SCWA coordinated a SEQRA review of the Project with Suffolk County Department of Parks, Recreation and Conservation.
Lastly, at the state level, SCWA submitted its Public Water Supply Permit application to the Department of Environmental Conservation. The Department required SCWA to publish a public notice, which was published on February 7, 2018, stating that SCWA’s Public Water Supply Permit Application was complete and available for public review and comment. Interested members of the public were offer 16 days to submit comments to the Department on the proposed permit. After the close of the comment period, the Department issued the Permit.
In addition the public participation solicited through SCWA interaction with all levels of government, SCWA held a special meeting on December 2, 2017 to discuss the Project with members of the Wainscott Citizens Advisory Committee. Between 35 and 45 people attended the meeting. An article about the meeting was published on The East Hampton Press’s website, and it was lasted updated on December 5, 2017. The story also appeared in the December 6 print edition of the paper.
The Monroe factors indicate that the proposed Project is within the SCWA’s statutory authority for the express purpose of performing its essential governmental function. In sum, the Project does not materially conflict with the Town’s officially adopted plans or goals and is immune from the Town of East Hampton’s local laws.
Stephen Hands Path Page 6 of 6 SCWA Stephen Hands Path Wainscott Public Water Supply Well Field Town of East Hampton, Suffolk County
INTRODUCTION
A discussion of the Town of East Hampton Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP) coastal policies and how they relate to the SCWA Project at the Stephen Hands Path Wainscott public water supply well field in the Town of East Hampton is presented below. The Project is proposed by the SCWA, a public benefit corporation. The Long Environmental Assessment Form contains detailed information on the Project.
The Project is the development of a public water supply well field including the construction of two (2) 20” x 14” diameter wells numbers 1 and 2, each 145 feet deep and rated at 650 gallons per minute (gpm) on approximately five (5) acres of 178 acres of property owned by Suffolk County (the Project Site). The Site Plan last dated October 11, 2016 illustrates the facility layout.
The Project is in the unincorporated Hamlet of Wainscott, in the Town of East Hampton. The Suffolk County Water Authority (the “SCWA”) has an easement agreement with Suffolk County, signed in 2010, to develop a well field on the Project Site. The Project Site is presently undeveloped and is in the County Parkland known as the Buckskill Nature Preserve. Although the Project Site is not within the mapped Coastal Area Boundary, a review of the coastal policies was performed to ensure consistency with the Town’s LWRP.
ANALYSIS OF COASTAL POLICIES
POLICY #1 (REVITALIZATION OF DETERIORATED WATERFRONT AREAS)
RESTORE, REVITALIZE AND REDEVELOP DETERIORATED AND UNDERUTILIZED WATERFRONT AREAS FOR COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL, CULTURAL, RECREATIONAL AND OTHER COMPATIBLE USES.
Response: The Project Site is not located within the Coastal Area Boundary, and it is not on the waterfront. It will be developed with public water supply infrastructure and used by SCWA to provide water to its customers. The Project is not inconsistent with this Policy.
POLICY #1A (UNDERUTILIZED WATERFRONT SITES)
RESTORE, REVITALIZE, AND REDEVELOP THE FOLLOWING UNDERUTILIZED SITES FOR CULTURAL, RECREATIONAL, AND OTHER COMPATIBLE USES:
(1) MARINA LANE DREDGE SPOIL SITE, THREE MILE HARBOR
(2) OLD FISH FACTORY SITE, NAPEAGUE
(3) FORMER MONTAUK LANDFILL
SCWA Stephen Hands Path Wainscott115 well field1 March 2018
(4) MONTAUK HARBOR AREA
(5) CAMP HERO, MONTAUK
(6) MONTAUK BUSINESS AREA
Response: The Project Site is not located in any of the six locations identified in this Policy. Therefore, this Policy is not applicable.
POLICY #2 (WATER-DEPENDENT USES)
FACILITATE THE SITING OF WATER-DEPENDENT USES AND FACILITIES ON OR ADJACENT TO COASTAL WATERS.
POLICY #2A
WATER-DEPENDENT USES AND FACILITIES SHALL BE SITED ON OR ADJACENT TO COASTAL WATERS, PROVIDED THE PROPOSED USE IS CONSISTENT WITH PRESERVATION AND ENHANCEMENT OF OTHER COASTAL RESOURCES, INCLUDING CULTURAL OR NATURAL RESOURCES.
Responses to Policies 2 and 2A: The Project does not involve the siting of water dependent uses and facilities. This Policy is not applicable.
POLICY #3 (MAJOR PORTS)
FURTHER DEVELOP THE STATE'S MAJOR PORTS OF ALBANY, BUFFALO, NEW YORK, OGDENSBURG AND OSWEGO AS CENTERS OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY, AND ENCOURAGE THE SITING, IN THESE PORT AREAS, INCLUDING THOSE UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF STATE PUBLIC AUTHORITIES, OF LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT WHICH IS ESSENTIAL TO OR IN SUPPORT OF THE WATERBORNE TRANSPORTATION OF CARGO AND PEOPLE.
Response: The Project Site is not located within the ports of Albany, Buffalo, New York, Ogdensburg, and Oswego. East Hampton has no major port. Therefore, this Policy is not applicable.
POLICY #4 (SMALL HARBORS)
STRENGTHEN THE ECONOMIC BASE OF SMALL HARBOR AREAS BY ENCOURAGING THE DEVELOPMENT AND ENHANCEMENT OF THOSE TRADITIONAL USES AND ACTIVITIES WHICH HAVE PROVIDED SUCH AREAS WITH THEIR UNIQUE MARITIME IDENTITY.
Response: The Project Site is not within a small harbor area. The Project is not inconsistent with the objectives of this Policy. This Policy is not applicable.
SCWA Stephen Hands Path Wainscott215 well field2 March 2018
POLICY #5 (PUBLIC SERVICES)
ENCOURAGE THE LOCATION OF DEVELOPMENT IN AREAS WHERE PUBLIC SERVICES AND FACILITIES ESSENTIAL TO SUCH DEVELOPMENT ARE ADEQUATE, EXCEPT WHEN SUCH DEVELOPMENT HAS SPECIAL FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS OR OTHER CHARACTERISTICS WHICH NECESSITATES ITS LOCATION IN OTHER COASTAL AREAS.
Response: The Project Site is not within the mapped Coastal Area Boundary. Its intended use is a public water supply well field. The Project facilitates the proposed use and service. The Project is consistent with this Policy.
POLICY #6 (PERMIT PROCEDURES)
EXPEDITE PERMIT PROCEDURES IN ORDER TO FACILITATE THE SITING OF DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES AT SUITABLE LOCATIONS.
Response: The site is suitable to accommodate the Project because it is the subject of an easement agreement with the County of Suffolk for use as a public water supply facility. SCWA will obtain other applicable permits required for the Project. The Project is not inconsistent with this Policy.
POLICY #7 (SIGNIFICANT FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITATS)
SIGNIFICANT COASTAL FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITATS, AS IDENTIFIED ON THE COASTAL AREA MAP, SHALL BE PROTECTED, PRESERVED, AND, WHERE PRACTICABLE, RESTORED SO AS TO MAINTAIN THEIR VIABILITY AS HABITATS.
POLICY #7A (LOCALLY SIGNIFICANT FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITATS)
LOCALLY SIGNIFICANT COASTAL FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITATS, AS IDENTIFIED ON THE COASTAL AREA MAP SHALL BE PROTECTED, PRESERVED, AND WHERE PRACTICABLE RESTORED SO AS TO MAINTAIN THEIR VIABILITY AS HABITATS.
POLICY #7B (PROTECTION OF DIVERSITY)
PROTECT TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PRACTICABLE THE VULNERABLE PLANT AND ANIMAL SPECIES AND NATURAL COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED ON THE STATE AND FEDERAL LEVELS BY THE NEW YORK HERITAGE PROGRAM, THE NYS DEC PROTECTED NATIVE PLANT LIST (NYCRR 193.3), THE NYS DEC LIST OF ENDANGERED, THREATENED AND SPECIAL CONCERN SPECIES AND THE FEDERAL LIST OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS (50 CFR 17).
Responses to Policies 7, 7A, and 7B: The Project Site is not within the Coastal Area Boundary. No adverse impacts will occur to significant coastal fish and wildlife habitats as a result of the Project. The Project Site is not located within the boundaries of a significant habitat. Although existing natural habitat will be removed to develop the Project, existing natural areas, ecological communities, and species within the site will be retained to the maximum extent practicable in accordance with the intent of this Policy. No Federal or State listed species will be adversely impacted by the development. Therefore, the Project is consistent with this Policy.
SCWA Stephen Hands Path Wainscott315 well field3 March 2018
POLICY #8 (POLLUTANTS)
PROTECT FISH AND WILDLIFE RESOURCES IN THE COASTAL AREA FROM THE INTRODUCTION OF HAZARDOUS WASTES AND OTHER POLLUTANTS WHICH BIO- ACCUMULATE IN THE FOOD CHAIN OR WHICH CAUSE SIGNIFICANT SUBLETHAL OR LETHAL EFFECT ON THOSE RESOURCES.
Response: No hazardous wastes and pollutants will be stored as part of this Project. Therefore, the Project is consistent with this Policy.
POLICY #9 (RECREATIONAL USE OF FISH AND WILDLIFE)
EXPAND RECREATIONAL USE OF FISH AND WILDLIFE RESOURCES IN COASTAL AREAS BY INCREASING ACCESS TO EXISTING RESOURCES, SUPPLEMENTING EXISTING STOCKS, AND DEVELOPING NEW RESOURCES.
POLICY #9A (EXPANDING ACCESS TO FISH AND WILDLIFE)
RECREATIONAL USE OF FISH AND WILDLIFE RESOURCES WILL BE EXPANDED BY INCREASING PUBLIC ACCESS AND OTHER MEASURES AT SITES RECOMMENDED UNDER "OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVEMENT" AND "RECREATIONAL USES COMPATIBLE WITH NEW DEVELOPMENT" IN THE ANALYSIS NARRATIVE OF THIS REPORT AND IN “PUBLIC ACCESS AND RECREATION IMPROVEMENTS” IN PROJECTS, SECTION XIV.
Responses to Policies 9 and 9A: No expansion of recreational use of fish and wildlife resources in the mapped Coastal Area Boundary is proposed, and the Project involve changes in access to existing resources, supplementing existing stocks, or developing new resources. The Project neither expands nor restricts access to the recreational use of fish and wildlife resources in coastal areas. The Project was designed to avoid disturbance to passive recreational hiking trails adjacent to the Project Site. Although this Policy is not applicable, the Project is not inconsistent with this Policy as it relates to protecting and not restricting or obstructing existing recreational opportunities and public access and uses on existing hiking trails.
POLICY #10 (COMMERCIAL FISHING)
FURTHER DEVELOP COMMERCIAL FINFISH, SHELLFISH AND CRUSTACEAN RESOURCES IN THE COASTAL AREA BY: (i) ENCOURAGING THE CONSTRUCTION OF NEW, OR IMPROVEMENT OF EXISTING ON-SHORE COMMERCIAL FISHING FACILITIES; (ii) INCREASING MARKETING OF THE STATE'S SEAFOOD PRODUCTS;
AND (iii) MAINTAINING ADEQUATE STOCKS AND EXPANDING AQUACULTURE FACILITIES. SUCH EFFORTS SHALL BE IN A MANNER WHICH ENSURES THE PROTECTION OF SUCH RENEWABLE FISH RESOURCES AND CONSIDERS OTHER ACTIVITIES DEPENDENT ON THEM.
SCWA Stephen Hands Path Wainscott415 well field4 March 2018
POLICY #10A (AQUACULTURE/MARICULTURE)
ENCOURAGE AQUACULTURE AND MARICULTURE WHICH BENEFITS OVERALL PUBLIC STOCKS OF LIVING MARINE RESOURCES, BUT DISCOURAGE AQUACULTURE OR MARICULTURE INCONSISTENT WITH MAINTAINING HEALTHY STOCKS AND HABITATS.
Responses to Policies 10 and 10A: No fishing facilities, aquaculture, mariculture or related activities referenced in Policies 10 and 10 A are proposed in the Project. Therefore, this Policy is not applicable.
POLICY #11 (SITING OF STRUCTURES)
BUILDINGS AND OTHER STRUCTURES WILL BE SITED IN THE COASTAL AREA SO AS TO MINIMIZE DAMAGE TO PROPERTY AND THE ENDANGERING OF HUMAN LIVES CAUSED BY FLOODING AND EROSION.
Response: The Project Site is not within the designated or mapped Coastal Area Boundary. Construction activities will occur at a distance of approximately two (2) miles from the Atlantic Ocean shoreline. No damage to property caused by flooding and erosion is expected.
POLICY #12 (NATURAL EROSION PROTECTION FEATURES)
ACTIVITIES OR DEVELOPMENT IN THE COASTAL AREA WILL BE UNDERTAKEN SO AS TO MINIMIZE DAMAGE TO NATURAL RESOURCES AND PROPERTY FROM FLOODING AND EROSION BY PROTECTING NATURAL PROTECTIVE FEATURES INCLUDING BEACHES, DUNES, BARRIER ISLANDS AND BLUFFS. PRIMARY DUNES WILL BE PROTECTED FROM ALL ENCROACHMENTS THAT COULD IMPAIR THEIR NATURAL PROTECTIVE CAPACITY.
Response: The Project will not occur on a site that contains beaches, dunes, barrier islands or bluffs. Erosion control measures will be implemented during construction. The Project will occur at a distance of approximately two (2) miles north of the coastline. The Project Site is not within the mapped Coastal Area Boundary, and no damage to property caused by flooding and erosion is expected.
POLICY #13 (30-YEAR EROSION CONTROL STRUCTURES)
THE CONSTRUCTION OR RECONSTRUCTION OF EROSION PROTECTION STRUCTURES SHALL BE UNDERTAKEN ONLY IF THEY HAVE A REASONABLE PROBABILITY OF CONTROLLING EROSION FOR AT LEAST THIRTY YEARS AS DEMONSTRATED IN DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS AND/OR ASSURED MAINTENANCE OR REPLACEMENT PROGRAMS.
POLICY #13A (MAINTENANCE/MITIGATION FOR EROSION CONTROL STRUCTURES)
EROSION PROTECTION STRUCTURES MUST BE MAINTAINED BOTH WITH REGARD TO THE STRUCTURE AND TO ADJOINING NATURAL PROTECTIVE FEATURES. REQUIRED
SCWA Stephen Hands Path Wainscott515 well field5 March 2018
MAINTENANCE MAY INCLUDE BEACH NOURISHMENT AND MITIGATION OF EROSION TO NEARBY PROPERTY AND RESOURCES CAUSED BY CONSTRUCTION OR RECONSTRUCTION OF EROSION PROTECTION STRUCTURES.
Responses to Policies 13 and 13A: The Project does not involve the construction or reconstruction of erosion protection structures or beach nourishment and erosion mitigation. Therefore, these Policies are not applicable.
POLICY #14 (NO FLOODING OR EROSION INCREASES)
ACTIVITIES AND DEVELOPMENT INCLUDING THE CONSTRUCTION OR RECONSTRUCTION OF EROSION PROTECTION STRUCTURES, SHALL BE UNDERTAKEN SO THAT THERE WILL BE NO MEASURABLE INCREASE IN EROSION OR FLOODING AT THE SITE OF SUCH ACTIVITIES OR DEVELOPMENT, OR AT OTHER LOCATIONS.
POLICY #14A (MINIMIZE EROSION PROTECTION STRUCTURES IN CERTAIN REACHES)
MINIMIZE THE CONSTRUCTION OF EROSION PROTECTION STRUCTURES AND NEW DEVELOPMENT IN HAZARDOUS AREAS IN REACHES 1, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, PARTS OF REACHES 2, 3 AND 6.
Responses to Policies 14 and 14A: No measurable increase in erosion or flooding at the site of the existing SCWA well field will occur as a result of the Project nor will activity occur in the Reach Boundaries identified by the Town of East Hampton LWRP and referenced in the Policies. Therefore, this Policy is not applicable.
POLICY #15 (MINING, EXCAVATION, AND DREDGING)
MINING, EXCAVATION OR DREDGING IN COASTAL WATERS SHALL NOT SIGNIFICANTLY INTERFERE WITH THE NATURAL COASTAL PROCESSES WHICH SUPPLY BEACH MATERIALS TO LAND ADJACENT TO SUCH WATERS AND SHALL BE UNDERTAKEN IN A MANNER WHICH WILL NOT CAUSE AN INCREASE IN EROSION OF SUCH LAND.
Response: No mining, excavation, or dredging in coastal waters will occur in the Project. Therefore, this Policy is not applicable.
POLICY #16 (USE OF PUBLIC FUNDS)
PUBLIC FUNDS SHALL ONLY BE USED FOR EROSION PROTECTIVE STRUCTURES WHERE NECESSARY TO PROTECT HUMAN LIFE, AND NEW DEVELOPMENT WHICH REQUIRES A LOCATION WITHIN OR ADJACENT TO AN EROSION HAZARD AREA TO BE ABLE TO FUNCTION, OR EXISTING DEVELOPMENT; AND ONLY WHERE THE PUBLIC BENEFITS OUTWEIGH THE LONG TERM MONETARY AND OTHER COSTS INCLUDING THE POTENTIAL FOR INCREASING EROSION AND ADVERSE EFFECTS ON NATURAL PROTECTIVE FEATURES.
SCWA Stephen Hands Path Wainscott615 well field6 March 2018
Response: No public funding is involved in the Project. No erosion protective structures in an erosion hazard area are proposed in the Project. Therefore, this Policy is not applicable.
POLICY #17 (NON-STRUCTURAL CONTROL MEASURES)
WHENEVER POSSIBLE, USE NON-STRUCTURAL MEASURES TO MINIMIZE DAMAGE TO NATURAL RESOURCES AND PROPERTY FROM FLOODING AND EROSION. SUCH MEASURES SHALL INCLUDE: (I) THE SETBACK OF BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES; (II) THE PLANTING OF VEGETATION AND THE INSTALLATION OF SAND FENCING AND DRAINING; (III) THE RESHAPING OF BLUFFS; AND (IV) THE FLOOD-PROOFING OF BUILDINGS OF THEIR ELEVATION ABOVE THE BASE FLOOD LEVEL.
POLICY #17A (ONLY NON-STRUCTURAL MEASURES PERMITTED IN CERTAIN REACHES)
ALONG THE SOUTH SHORE OCEAN FACING REACHES OF THE TOWN, ONLY NON- STRUCTURAL MEASURES TO MINIMIZE FLOODING AND EROSION ARE PERMITTED.
Responses to Policies 17 and 17A: No damages to natural resources and property from flooding and erosion are expected. Erosion control structures will be installed during construction of the Project to protect adjoining properties. Construction activities will occur at a distance of approximately two miles from the Atlantic Ocean shoreline. The Project is outside of the Reach boundaries identified by the Town of East Hampton. Therefore, the Project is consistent with this Policy.
POLICY #18 (STATE VITAL INTERESTS)
TO SAFEGUARD THE VITAL ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL INTERESTS OF THE STATE AND OF ITS CITIZENS, PROPOSED MAJOR ACTIONS IN THE COASTAL AREA MUST GIVE FULL CONSIDERATION TO THOSE INTERESTS, AND TO THE SAFEGUARDS WHICH THE STATE HAS ESTABLISHED TO PROTECT VALUABLE COASTAL RESOURCE AREAS.
Response: The location of the Project is approximately two miles north of the Atlantic Ocean coastline and valuable coastal resources. The Project is not inconsistent with this Policy.
POLICY #19 (ACCESS TO PUBLIC WATER-RELATED RECREATION RESOURCES)
PROTECT, MAINTAIN AND INCREASE THE LEVEL AND TYPES OF ACCESS TO PUBLIC WATER-RELATED RECREATION RESOURCES AND FACILITIES SO THAT THESE RESOURCES AND FACILITIES MAY BE FULLY UTILIZED IN ACCORDANCE WITH REASONABLY ANTICIPATED PUBLIC RECREATION NEEDS AND THE PROTECTION OF HISTORIC AND NATURAL RESOURCES. IN PROVIDING SUCH ACCESS, PRIORITY SHALL BE GIVEN TO PUBLIC BEACHES, BOATING FACILITIES, FISHING AREAS AND WATERFRONT PARKS.
SCWA Stephen Hands Path Wainscott715 well field7 March 2018
Response: No change to existing access to public water related recreation resources and facilities will occur as a result of the Project. Therefore, the Project is consistent with this Policy.
POLICY #20 (ACCESS TO PUBLICLY-OWNED LANDS ADJACENT TO THE WATER'S EDGE)
ACCESS TO THE PUBLICLY-OWNED FORESHORE AND TO LANDS IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE FORESHORE OR THE WATER'S EDGE THAT ARE PUBLICLY-OWNED SHALL BE PROVIDED, AND IT SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN A MANNER COMPATIBLE WITH ADJOINING USES. SUCH LANDS SHALL BE RETAINED IN PUBLIC OWNERSHIP.
Response: Existing access to the water’s edge would not change as a result of the Project. Therefore, this Policy is not applicable.
POLICY #21 (WATER-RELATED RECREATION)
WATER-DEPENDENT AND WATER ENHANCED RECREATION WILL BE ENCOURAGED AND FACILITATED, AND WILL BE GIVEN PRIORITY OVER NON-WATER RELATED USES ALONG THE COAST, PROVIDED IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE PRESERVATION AND ENHANCEMENT OF OTHER COASTAL RESOURCES AND, TAKES INTO ACCOUNT DEMAND FOR SUCH FACILITIES. IN FACILITATING SUCH ACTIVITIES, PRIORITY SHALL BE GIVEN TO AREAS WHERE ACCESS TO THE RECREATION OPPORTUNITIES OF THE COAST CAN BE PROVIDED BY NEW OR EXISTING PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SERVICES AND TO THOSE AREAS WHERE THE USE OF THE SHORE IS SEVERELY RESTRICTED BY EXISTING DEVELOPMENT.
POLICY #21A (WATER-RELATED RECREATION IMPROVEMENT SITES)
WATER-DEPENDENT AND WATER-ENHANCED RECREATION WILL BE ENCOURAGED AND FACILITATED AT SITES RECOMMENDED UNDER "OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVEMENT" AND "RECREATIONAL USES COMPATIBLE WITH NEW DEVELOPMENT" IN THE ANALYSIS NARRATIVE OF THIS REPORT AND IN “PUBLIC ACCESS AND RECREATION IMPROVEMENTS” IN PROJECTS, SECTION XIV.
Responses to Policies 21 and 21A: The site is not located directly on the coastline, nor is it within the mapped Coastal Area Boundary. It is more approximately two miles from the ocean coastline. The site will not be developed with a “non-water-related use,” however, the site does not contain water dependent recreational uses or facilities or opportunities. It will provide public water to SCWA customers in the community, and the Project supports SCWA’s mandate. This Policy is not applicable.
POLICY #22 (PROVISION OF WATER-RELATED RECREATION WITHIN DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO THE SHORE)
SCWA Stephen Hands Path Wainscott815 well field8 March 2018
DEVELOPMENT, WHEN LOCATED ADJACENT TO THE SHORE, WILL PROVIDE FOR WATER- RELATED RECREATION, AS A MULTIPLE USE, WHENEVER SUCH RECREATIONAL USE IS APPROPRIATE IN LIGHT OF REASONABLY ANTICIPATED DEMAND FOR SUCH ACTIVITIES AND THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF THE DEVELOPMENT.
POLICY #22A (SITES WHERE WATER-RELATED RECREATION MAY BE INCORPORATED INTO DEVELOPMENT AS A MULTIPLE USE)
FOR SPECIFIC LOCATIONS WHICH MAY APPROPRIATELY PROVIDE WATER-RELATED RECREATION AS A MULTIPLE USE WITH DEVELOPMENT SEE RECOMMENDATIONS UNDER "OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVEMENT" AND "RECREATIONAL USES COMPATIBLE WITH NEW DEVELOPMENT" IN THE ANALYSIS NARRATIVE OF THIS REPORT AND IN “PUBLIC ACCESS AND RECREATION IMPROVEMENTS” IN PROJECTS, SECTION XIV. SEE ALSO PUBLIC ACCESS POLICIES #19-20.
Responses to Policies 22 and 22A: The current use of the site is not a water-related recreational activity nor is the site adjacent to the shoreline. Therefore, the Project does not conflict with nor is it incompatible with the demand for such activities. This Policy is not applicable.
POLICY #23 (HISTORIC RESOURCES)
PROTECT, ENHANCE AND RESTORE STRUCTURES, DISTRICTS, AREAS OR SITES THAT ARE OF SIGNIFICANCE IN THE HISTORY, ARCHITECTURE, ARCHEOLOGY OR CULTURE OF THE STATE, ITS COMMUNITIES, OR THE NATION.
Response: The Project Site does not contain significant features referenced in the Policy to be protected, enhanced, or restored. The New York State Division of Historic Preservation, in correspondence dated October 21, 2016, stated the “Action will have no impact on archaeological and/or historic resources listed in or eligible for the New York State and National Registers of Historic Places.” Therefore, the Project is consistent with this Policy.
POLICY #24 (SCENIC RESOURCES OF STATE SIGNIFICANCE)
PREVENT IMPAIRMENT OF SCENIC RESOURCES OF STATEWIDE SIGNIFICANCE, AS IDENTIFIED ON THE COASTAL AREA MAP. IMPAIRMENT SHALL INCLUDE: (i) THE IRREVERSIBLE MODIFICATION OF GEOLOGICAL FORMS, THE DESTRUCTION OR REMOVAL OF VEGETATION OR STRUCTURES ARE SIGNIFICANT TO THE SCENIC QUALITY OF AN IDENTIFIED RESOURCE; (ii) THE ADDITION OF STRUCTURES WHICH BECAUSE OF SITING OR SCALE WILL REDUCE IDENTIFIED VIEWS OR WHICH BECAUSE OF SCALE, FORM, OR MATERIALS WILL DIMINISH THE SCENIC QUALITY OF AN IDENTIFIED RESOURCE.
SCWA Stephen Hands Path Wainscott915 well field9 March 2018
Response: The Project Site is not in the boundary of the East Hampton Scenic Areas of Statewide Significance or in the mapped Coastal Area Boundary. No scenic resources of statewide significance will be adversely impacted or impaired under the Project. Therefore, the Project is consistent with this Policy.
POLICY #25 (OVERALL VISUAL QUALITY)
PROTECT, RESTORE OR ENHANCE NATURAL AND MAN-MADE RESOURCES WHICH ARE NOT IDENTIFIED AS BEING OF STATEWIDE SIGNIFICANCE BUT WHICH CONTRIBUTE TO THE OVERALL SCENIC QUALITY OF THE COASTAL AREA
Response: The Project would not significantly affect resources of statewide significance and will not adversely affect the scenic quality of the coastal area. The Project will limit clearing where it is not necessary and retain existing natural vegetation where feasible to buffer the site from the roadfront. The Project is consistent with this Policy.
POLICY #26 (IMPORTANT AGRICULTURAL LANDS)
TO CONSERVE AND PROTECT AGRICULTURAL LANDS IN THE STATE'S COASTAL AREA, AN ACTION SHALL NOT RESULT IN A LOSS, NOR IMPAIR THE PRODUCTIVITY, OF IMPORTANT AGRICULTURAL LANDS IF THAT LOSS OR IMPAIRMENT WOULD ADVERSELY AFFECT THE VIABILITY OF AGRICULTURE IN AN AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT OR, IF THERE IS NO AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT, IN THE AREA SURROUNDING SUCH LANDS.
POLICY #26A (LOCALLY IMPORTANT AGRICULTURAL LANDS)
TO CONSERVE AND PROTECT AGRICULTURAL LANDS IN EAST HAMPTON'S COASTAL AREA, AN ACTION SHALL NOT RESULT IN A LOSS, NOR IMPAIR THE PRODUCTIVITY, OF LOCALLY IMPORTANT AGRICULTURAL LANDS IF THAT LOSS OR IMPAIRMENT WOULD ADVERSELY AFFECT THE VIABILITY OF AGRICULTURE IN AN AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT OR IF THERE IS NO AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT, IN THE AREA SURROUNDING SUCH LANDS.
Responses to Policies 26 and 26A: No agricultural lands in the State’s coastal area are located in the Project Site. Therefore, this Policy is not applicable.
POLICY #27 (SITING OF MAJOR ENERGY FACILITIES)
DECISIONS ON THE SITING AND CONSTRUCTION OF MAJOR ENERGY FACILITIES IN THE COASTAL AREA WILL BE BASED ON PUBLIC ENERGY NEEDS, COMPATIBILITY OF SUCH FACILITIES WITH THE ENVIRONMENT, AND THE FACILITY'S NEED FOR A SHOREFRONT LOCATION.
SCWA Stephen Hands Path Wainscott1015 well field 10 March 2
Response: The Project Site is not within the Coastal Area Boundary and is not considered a major energy facility nor does it contain such use. The Project will occur on a site intended for the use of a public water supply well field pursuant to an agreement with SCWA and the County of Suffolk. Therefore, the Policy is not applicable.
POLICY #28 (ICE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES)
ICE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES SHALL NOT DAMAGE SIGNIFICANT FISH AND WILDLIFE AND THEIR HABITATS, INCREASE SHORELINE EROSION OR FLOODING, OR INTERFERE WITH THE PRODUCTION OF HYDROELECTRIC POWER.
Response: No ice management practices are included in the Project. Therefore, this Policy is not applicable.
POLICY #29 (DEVELOPMENT OF OFF-SHORE ENERGY RESOURCES)
ENCOURAGE THE DEVELOPMENT OF ENERGY RESOURCES ON THE OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF, IN LAKE ERIE AND IN OTHER WATER BODIES, AND ENSURE THE ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY OF SUCH ACTIVITIES.
Response: No energy resources are proposed on the Outer Continental Shelf, in Lake Erie, or in other water bodies. Therefore, this Policy is not applicable.
POLICY #30 (DISCHARGE OF POLLUTANTS INTO COASTAL WATERS)
MUNICIPAL, INDUSTRIAL, AND COMMERCIAL DISCHARGE OF POLLUTANTS INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, TOXIC AND HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES, INTO COASTAL WATERS WILL CONFORM TO STATE AND NATIONAL WATER QUALITY STANDARDS.
Response: No discharge of pollutants into coastal waters is proposed in the Project. Therefore, this Policy is not applicable.
POLICY #31 (WATER QUALITY CLASSIFICATIONS)
STATE COASTAL AREA POLICIES AND THE PURPOSES OF APPROVED LOCAL WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION PROGRAMS WILL BE CONSIDERED WHILE MODIFYING WATER QUALITY STANDARDS; HOWEVER, THOSE WATERS ALREADY OVERBURDENED WITH CONTAMINANTS WILL BE RECOGNIZED AS BEING A DEVELOPMENT CONSTRAINT.
Response: No modifications to classifications of coastal waters or water quality standards are proposed in the Project. Therefore, this Policy is not applicable.
POLICY #32 (USE OF ALTERNATIVE SANITARY WASTE SYSTEMS)
SCWA Stephen Hands Path Wainscott1115 well field 11 March 2
ENCOURAGE THE USE OF ALTERNATIVE OR INNOVATIVE SANITARY WASTE SYSTEMS IN SMALL COMMUNITIES WHERE THE COSTS OF CONVENTIONAL FACILITIES ARE UNREASONABLY HIGH, GIVEN THE SIZE OF THE EXISTING TAX BASE OF THESE COMMUNITIES.
Response: No sanitary waste systems are proposed in the Project. Therefore, this Policy is not applicable.
POLICY #33 (STORM WATER RUNOFF)
BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES WILL BE USED TO ENSURE THE CONTROL OF STORMWATER RUNOFF AND COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOWS DRAINING INTO COASTAL WATERS.
Response: The Project will not increase runoff draining into coastal waters. Therefore, the Project is consistent with this Policy.
POLICY #34 (DISCHARGE OF VESSEL WASTES)
DISCHARGE OF WASTE MATERIALS INTO COASTAL WATERS FROM VESSELS WILL BE LIMITED SO AS TO PROTECT SIGNIFICANT FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITATS, RECREATION AREAS AND WATER SUPPLY AREAS.
POLICY #34A (NO-DISCHARGE ZONES)
THE FOLLOWING HARBORS AND CREEKS OF THE TOWN SHALL BE DESIGNATED AS STATE AND FEDERAL EPA NO-DISCHARGE ZONES PER THE TOWN'S APPLICATION OF JULY, 1997:
Reach 1 Northwest Creek Reach 2 Three Mile Harbor, Hog Creek Reach 3 Accabonac Harbor Reach 4 Napeague Harbor Reach 6 Lake Montauk
Responses to Policies 34 and 34A: The Project does not involve the discharge of waste materials into coastal waters from vessels subject to State jurisdiction. The Project Site is not located within the harbors or creeks listed in Policy #34A. Therefore, this Policy is not applicable.
POLICY #35 (DREDGING AND DREDGE SPOIL DISPOSAL)
DREDGING AND DREDGE SPOIL DISPOSAL IN COASTAL WATERS WILL BE UNDERTAKEN IN A MANNER THAT MEETS EXISTING STATE DREDGING PERMIT REQUIREMENTS, AND PROTECTS SIGNIFICANT FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITATS, SCENIC RESOURCES, NATURAL PROTECTIVE FEATURES, IMPORTANT AGRICULTURAL LANDS, AND WETLANDS.
SCWA Stephen Hands Path Wainscott1215 well field 12 March 2
Response: No dredging and filling activity is proposed in the Project that may affect coastal waters. Therefore, this Policy is not applicable.
POLICY #36 (SHIPMENT AND STORAGE OF PETROLEUM AND OTHER HAZARDOUS WASTES)
ACTIVITIES RELATED TO SHIPMENT AND STORAGE OF PETROLEUM AND OTHER HAZARDOUS MATERIALS WILL BE CONDUCTED IN A MANNER THAT WILL PREVENT OR AT LEAST MINIMIZE SPILLS INTO COASTAL WATERS; ALL PRACTICAL EFFORTS WILL BE UNDERTAKEN TO EXPEDITE THE CLEANUP OF SUCH DISCHARGES; AND RESTITUTION FOR DAMAGES WILL BE REQUIRED WHEN THESE SPILLS OCCUR.
Response: No storage of petroleum or other hazardous materials will be stored as part of this Project. Therefore, the Project is consistent with this Policy.
POLICY #37 (NON-POINT DISCHARGE OF WATER POLLUTANTS)
BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES WILL BE UTILIZED TO MINIMIZE THE NON-POINT DISCHARGE OF EXCESS NUTRIENTS, ORGANICS AND ERODED SOILS INTO COASTAL WATERS.
POLICY #37A
BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES WILL BE USED TO ABATE AND ELIMINATE STORMWATER RUNOFF DRAINING INTO COASTAL WATERS.
Responses to Policies 37 and 37A: The Project does not involve the discharge of excess nutrients, organics and eroded soils on the Project Site or into coastal waters. This Policy is not applicable.
POLICY #38 (SURFACE AND GROUND WATER PROTECTION
THE QUALITY AND QUANTITY OF SURFACE WATER AND GROUNDWATER SUPPLIES, WILL BE CONSERVED AND PROTECTED, PARTICULARLY WHERE SUCH WATERS CONSTITUTE THE PRIMARY OR SOLE SOURCE OF WATER SUPPLY.
POLICY #38A
MAINTAIN WATER RESOURCES AS NEAR TO THEIR NATURAL CONDITION OF PURITY AS REASONABLY POSSIBLE TO SAFEGUARD PUBLIC HEALTH.
Responses to Policies 38 and 38A: The conservation and protection of water resources for drinking water is critical to SCWA’s mission. The Project Site is in an expansive natural area with significant capacity for water recharge. Given the nature of the Project as a public water supply well field, the Project is in compliance with the NYSDEC Water Supply Permit, and the conveyance of an easement by Suffolk County for a public water supply well field on County property, the
SCWA Stephen Hands Path Wainscott1315 well field 13 March 2
Project is consistent with water supply protection goals and regulations. The Project is consistent with this Policy.
POLICY #39 (SOLID WASTE TRANSPORT, TREATMENT, AND DISPOSAL)
THE TRANSPORT, STORAGE, TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL OF SOLID WASTES, PARTICULARLY HAZARDOUS WASTES, WITHIN COASTAL AREAS WILL BE CONDUCTED IN SUCH A MANNER SO AS TO PROTECT GROUNDWATER AND SURFACE WATER SUPPLIES, SIGNIFICANT FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITATS, RECREATION AREAS, IMPORTANT AGRICULTURAL LANDS AND SCENIC RESOURCES.
Response: None of the activities related to the storage or treatment of solid and hazardous wastes will occur in this Project. Therefore, the Project is consistent with this Policy.
POLICY #40 (EFFLUENT DISCHARGE BY MAJOR ENERGY AND INDUSTRIAL FACILITIES)
EFFLUENT DISCHARGED FROM MAJOR STEAM ELECTRIC GENERATING AND INDUSTRIAL FACILITIES INTO COASTAL WATERS WILL NOT BE UNDULY INJURIOUS TO FISH AND WILDLIFE AND SHALL CONFORM TO STATE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS.
Response: No major steam electric generating and industrial facilities are proposed in the Project. Therefore, this Policy is not applicable.
POLICY #41 (COMPLIANCE WITH AIR QUALITY STANDARDS)
LAND USE OR DEVELOPMENT IN THE COASTAL AREA WILL NOT CAUSE NATIONAL OR STATE AIR QUALITY STANDARDS TO BE VIOLATED.
Response: The Project will not cause violations of national or State air quality standards. Therefore, this Policy is not applicable.
POLICY #41A (INCLUSION IN RADIOLOGICAL EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLANS)
THE TOWN SHALL BE INCLUDED IN RADIOLOGICAL EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLANNING AND NOTIFICATION FOR THE MILLSTONE NUCLEAR ENERGY PLANTS OPERATED BY NORTHEAST UTILITIES IN WATERFORD, CT AND THE NUCLEAR REACTORS OPERATED BY THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY AT BROOKHAVEN NATIONAL LABORATORY.
Response: The Project does not involve activities related to the Millstone Nuclear Energy Plant or the nuclear reactors at Brookhaven National Laboratory. This Policy is not applicable.
POLICY #42 (RECLASSIFICATION OF AERAS PURSUANT TO CLEAN AIR ACT)
COASTAL MANAGEMENT POLICIES WILL BE CONSIDERED IF THE STATE RECLASSIFIES LAND AREAS PURSUANT TO THE PREVENTION OF SIGNIFICANT DETERIORATION REGULATIONS OF THE FEDERAL CLEAN AIR ACT.
SCWA Stephen Hands Path Wainscott1415 well field 14 March 2
Response: No reclassifications of land areas are proposed in the Project. Therefore, this Policy is not applicable.
POLICY #43 (ACID RAIN PRECURSORS)
LAND USE OR DEVELOPMENT IN THE COASTAL AREA MUST NOT CAUSE THE GENERATION OF SIGNIFICANT AMOUNTS OF THE ACID RAIN PRECURSORS: NITRATES AND SULFATES.
Response: No regulated air quality thresholds will be exceeded as a result of the Project. Therefore, the Project is consistent with this Policy.
POLICY #44 (TIDAL AND FRESHWATER WETLANDS)
PRESERVE AND PROTECT TIDAL AND FRESHWATER WETLANDS AND PRESERVE THE BENEFITS DERIVED FROM THESE AREAS.
Response: No tidal or freshwater wetlands are on or adjoining the Project Site. Therefore, this Policy is not applicable.
SCWA Stephen Hands Path Wainscott1515 well field 15 March 2
EXHIBIT A
ENGINEER'S REPORT - WATER SUPPLY APPLICATION
Proposed Construction of Wells Nos. 1 and 2 at the Stephen Hands Path Well Field Wainscott, Town of East Hampton Suffolk County, New York Implementation Agency:
Suffolk County Water Authority Oakdale, New York 11769 Timothy J. Kilcommons, P.E. Chief Engineer/Director of Research and Development
Prepared Pursuant to the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Division of Water Technical and Operational Guidance Series (86-W-54)
Prepared By:
Suffolk County Water Authority Engineering Department PO Box 38 Great River, New York
ii
I. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION ...... 1 A. PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF PROJECT ...... 1 B. GENERAL WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM DESCRIPTION ...... 1 C. SOUTH FORK LOW WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM ...... 2 1. Location of Facilities ...... 2 2. Major Water Users ...... 12 3. Population ...... 12 4. Environmental Setting ...... 13 D. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...... 14 1. Well Design ...... 14 2. Integration With Existing System Facilities ...... 14 3. Projected Service Life of Facilities ...... 14 4. Well Field Vicinity Map; Surface Contaminant Control ...... 14 E. ESTABLISHMENT OF NEED ...... 18 1. Seasonal Peak Demand ...... 18 2. Fire Flows ...... 18 3. Replacement of Lost Capacity ...... 18 4. Water Quality ...... 18 II. ENVIRONMENTAL/HYDROGEOLOGIC SETTING, POTENTIAL IMPACTS ...... 19 A. REGIONAL HYDROGEOLOGY ...... 19 B. AQUIFER CHARACTERISTICS AND EFFECTS OF PROPOSED PUMPING ...... 24 1. Cone of Depression ...... 24 C. CONTAMINATION SOURCES AND OTHER WELLS ...... 25 1. Proximity ...... 25 2. Potential Impacts & Mitigation...... 27 D. OTHER UNAVOIDABLE NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL/HYDROLOGIC IMPACTS ...... 27 E. MITIGATING MEASURES TO MINIMIZE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ...... 28 1. Monitor Well Descriptions ...... 28 2. Analyses, Sampling Frequency, Reporting Requirements ...... 28 3. Potentiometric Monitoring ...... 28 4. Action Levels ...... 28 5. Increase Storage ...... 28 III. ALTERNATIVES TO PROPOSED ACTION ...... 29 A. WATER CONSERVATION PROGRAM FOR WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM ...... 29 B. WATER IMPORTATION ...... 29 IV. GROWTH-INDUCING ASPECTS ...... 29 A. COMMERCIAL EXPANSION ...... 29 B. RESIDENTIAL EXPANSION ...... 29 C. ENHANCED FIRE PROTECTION ...... 29 D. OTHER ...... 29 V. RELATED STUDIES, REPORTS, ETC...... 30 A. WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM MASTER PLAN...... 30 B. LOCAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT ...... 30 C. USGS ...... 30 D. OTHER ...... 30 APPENDIX A WATER QUALITY RESULTS STEPHEN HANDS PATH TEST BORING ZONE 3 ...... A
APPENDIX B EDR REPORT...... B
iii
ENGINEER'S REPORT Construction of Stephen Hands Path Wells Nos. 1 and 2 Water Supply Application
I. Description of Proposed Action
A. Purpose and Scope of Project
The Suffolk County Water Authority (SCWA) proposes to construct two new production wells (nos. 1 and 2) at the Stephen Hands Path well field, located on State Route 114, W/S/O Stephen Hands Path, approximately 450 ft n/o LIRR, Wainscott, Town of East Hampton. Each well will be constructed to a depth of approximately 145 feet below land surface with 100 feet of 20-inch of casing, 40 feet of 14-inch well screen and rated at 650 GPM.
The Stephen Hands Path well field is in the South Fork Low water supply system which serves most of the South Fork extending from Shinnecock Hills to Amagansett.
This facility is necessary to, among other things, address the potential that Suffolk County Water Authority will need to provide water to several hundred new customers in the vicinity of the East Hampton Airport due to private wells impacted by PFOS/PFOA. It is anticipated that these individuals relying on private wells will seek to connect to the Suffolk County Water Authority system. Approval of this water supply permit application will help to allow the Suffolk County Water Authority to provide water to those individuals wishing to connect to receive public water.
In addition, the immediate area of the Stephen Hands Path well field continues to experience substantial permanent and seasonal population growth and the associated increase in water demand. Additionally, the hot dry weather experienced throughout the region during the recent summers especially in 2010 (system-wide peak day of 538,000 GPM) resulted in record water use throughout Suffolk County. The Southampton and East Hampton areas were particularly prone to low pressure problems, so construction of new wells to augment aging infrastructure and to increase capacity in the pressure zone is necessary to help meet the current and future water demand in the area.
During the hours of peak demand, usually 2 AM to 8 AM, there is low pressure in some areas of the distribution system. The additional capacity of the new wells will help ensure that the Authority has adequate supply of water for both demand and fire protection especially in this area of concentrated residential and season population growth.
B. General Water Supply System Description
The overall SCWA service area presently consists of over 40 individual water supply systems, most of which are interconnected. The Stephen Hands Path well field is located within the South Fork Low water supply system, which encompasses most of the South Fork. Within the South Fork Low, there are several intermediate pressure level zones that serve higher elevations as well and water from the South Fork Low is boosted to the Montauk Low water supply system during peak demand periods.
During the calendar year 2016, the Authority produced 74 billion gallons of water for 382,000 customer accounts providing water to approximately 1.3 million people in Suffolk County.
1
C. South Fork Low Water Supply System
1. Location of Facilities
The accompanying map entitled “Location of Well Field - Suffolk County Regional Map” (Figure 1) presents a generalized regional illustration of the location of the Stephen Hands Path well field. Figure 2 is a contour map made from the Light Detection and Ranging (LiDaR) Suffolk County Digital Elevation Model, and Figure 3 shows the locations of well fields within the South Fork Low service area relative to one another. The distribution system in the vicinity of the Stephen Hands Path well field is shown in Figure 4 and Table 1 lists all pertinent information for all facilities within the South Fork Low water supply system, such as well numbers, capacities, depths, and ages.
Stephen Hands Path Well Field
Figure 1 Location of Well Field - Suffolk County Regional Map
2
Stephen Hands Path Well Field
Figure 2 Light Detection and Ranging (LiDaR) Suffolk County Digital Elevation Model
3
Accabonac Rd Fresh Pond Rd Division St Oak View Hwy Cross Hwy Sag Harbor Tpke Spring Close Hwy Townline Rd Stephen Hands Path Scuttlehole Rd Bridgehampton Rd Lumber Ln. Blank Ln
Edge of Woods North Magee St. Long Springs Rd West Prospect St Tuckahoe Rd
Figure 3 SCWA Existing Facilities in the South Fork Low Water Supply
4
Stephen Hands Path Well Field
Figure 4 Distribution Map System
5
TABLE 1 - EXISTING FACILITIES: South Fork Low Water Supply System (Data as of Jan 2018)
Decision Date Authorized WELLS S# WSA# Date Dia. Depth Aq. In Service Structure Pump Cap. (GPM) Accabonac Rd 1 123717 10700 12/1/2004 20 x 14 163 G 3/22/06 Bldg. DWT 1,000 Accabonac Rd 2 123718 10700 12/01/2004 20 x 14 153 G 3/22/06 Bldg DWT 1,000 Blank Ln 1 128774 10935 8/15/2006 12 x 10 118 G 10/13/11 Bldg SUB 350 Blank Ln 2 130299 10935 8/15/2006 12 x 10 118 G 8/10/11 Bldg SUB 350 Blank Ln 3 134150 10935 8/15/2006 12 x 10 118 G 6/28/16 Bldg SUB 350 Bridgehampton Rd 2A 83707 7557 1/23/1986 12 123 G 5/10/82 Vault DWT 500 Bridgehampton Rd 3A 120485 10403 10/18/2002 20 x 14 120 G 10/3/03 Bldg. DWT 1,020 Bridgehampton Rd 4 49422 6259 5/1/1973 16 x 12 148 G 7/2/74 Vault DWT 700 Bridgehampton Rd 5A 131191 11553 1/10/2012 16 x 14 134 G 10/15/12 Bldg. DWT 1,000 Cross Highway 1 30227 6532 5/1/1975 12 151 G 5/28/05 Bldg. DWT 750 Cross Highway 2 30228 6748 5/5/1977 12 151 G 4/24/78 None Sub 350 Division St. #1A 128139 11172 7/28/2008 20 x 14 163 G 5/27/09 Bldg. DWT 500 Division St. #2A 132776 5722 2/24/2014 20 x 10 170 G 3/3/15 Bldg. DWT 1,000 Division St. #3 62855 6733 4/18/1977 20 x 10 167 G 3/13/80 Vault DWT 700 Division St. #4 96352 8253 8/1/1989 16 x 10 272 M 5/28/92 Vault DWT 700 Edge of Woods Rd. #1 69511 7017 12/28/1979 20 x 10 268 M 5/10/82 Vault DWT 1,000 Edge of Woods Rd. #2 71892 7156 8/17/1981 16 x 10 366 M 8/17/81 Vault DWT 1,000 Edge of Woods Rd. #3 120091 10342 5/11/2004 20 x 14 258 M 8/12/02 Bldg. DWT 1,000 Fresh Ponds #1 132094 11592 8/10/2012 20 x 10 123 G 6/16/14 Bldg. SUB 300 Fresh Ponds #2 132095 11592 8/10/2012 20 x 10 283 M 6/16/14 Bldg. SUB 300 Long Springs Rd. #1A 117831 10322 10/31/2002 20 x 14 100 G 3/18/02 Bldg. DWT 800 Long Springs Rd. #3B 122603 10606 4/1/2004 20 x 14 99 G 2/18/05 Bldg DWT 500 Long Springs Rd. #4B 122602 10605 4/1/2004 20 x 14 108 G 2/18/05 Bldg DWT 500 Long Springs Rd. #5B 122601 10595 4/1/2004 20 x 14 99 G 2/18/05 Bldg DWT 700 Long Springs Rd. #6 67819 6928 4/13/1979 16 x 10 284 M 6/26/80 Vault DWT 700 Long Springs Rd. #7 112293 9584 11/20/1997 16 265 M 5/19/99 Bldg. DWT 700 Lumber Lane #4A 131131 11549 10/14/2011 16 x 14 168 G 8/27/12 Bldg. DWT 500 Lumber Lane #5 78612 8767 1985 12 x 8 250 M 5/15/92 Bldg. DWT 1,000 Lumber Lane #6 123937 10712 3/17/2005 16 263 M 1/4/06 Bldg. DWT 700 Lumber Lane #7 130044 11397 10/27/2010 16 x 14 263 M 7/13/11 Bldg. DWT 1,000 N. Magee St. #1 74865 7318 8/22/1983 20 x 10 193 G 7/15/84 Vault DWT 700 N. Magee St. #2 79293 7355 8/23/1983 16 x 12 158 G 7/18/86 Vault DWT 1,000 N. Magee St. #3 115706 9967 4/5/2000 20 x 14 158 G 2000 Bldg. DWT 1,000 N. Magee St #4 133926 1178211782 6/17/15 20 x14 209 G 6/16/16 Bldg DWT 1,000
Oak View Highway 1A 99275 8621 4/16/1991 16 x 12 222 M 5/27/94 Bldg. DWT 500 Oak View Highway 2A 119865 10327 5/01/2002 20 x 10 458 M 7/23/03 Bldg. DWT 700 Oak View Highway 3 78310 7488 12/21/1984 16 x 12 303 M 8/27/86 Vault DWT 500 Oak Highway 4 133799 11779 6/2/2015 20 x 10 226 G 7/5/2016 Bldg. DWT 500 Sag Harbor Turnpike 1 102721 8789 1/19/1993 20 x 10 383 M 11/20/96 Bldg. DWT 1,300 Sag Harbor Turnpike 2 115545 9895 4/1/2000 20 x 10 293 M 1/26/01 Bldg. DWT 1,300 Scuttlehole Rd. # 1A 128458 11219 1/30/2009 20 x 10 458 M 12/1/09 Bldg. DWT 1,000 Scuttlehole Rd. #2 106977 9134 9/26/1994 20 x 10 480 M 5/1/97 Bldg. DWT 1,300
6
Scuttlehole Rd. #3 115975 9961 5/12/2000 20 x 10 453 M 7/6/02 Bldg. DWT 1,300 Spring Close Hwy 1A 118818 10213 8/1/2001 20 x 14 125 G 7/6/02 Bldg. DWT 1,000 Spring Close Hwy 2 66733 6844 8/29/1978 16 x 12 245 M 8/5/81 Vault DWT 1,000 Spring Close Hwy 3 121048 10439 1/13/2002 20 x 14 128 G 12/3/03 Bldg. DWT 1,300 Spring Close Hwy 4 134571 12207 3/28/17 20 x 10 130 G Future Bldg DWT 500 Town Line Rd 1 118737 10398 1/9/2002 20 x 14 435 M 2003 Bldg. DWT 1,000 Town Line Rd 2 120019 10398 1/9/2002 20 x 14 175 G 2003 Bldg. DWT 1,000 Town Line Rd 3 130940 11506 6/23/2011 20 x 14 173 G 6/15/12 Bldg. DWT 1,000 Tuckahoe Rd 1 25449 10218 1/15/2002 10 125 G 11/8/00 Bldg. DWT 500 Tuckahoe Rd 2 31471 10218 1/15/2002 10 125 G 7/10/01 Pitless SUB 500 W. Prospect St. #1 55028 6470 10/3/1974 10 160 G 4/30/76 Pitless SUB 350 W. Prospect St. #2A 99014 8622 3/8/1991 12 252 M 5/25/94 Bldg. DWT 350 W. Prospect St. #3 125974 10921 7/18/2006 12 x 10 158 G 8/1/07 Pitless SUB 300 W. Prospect St. #4 125975 10921 7/18/206 12 x 10 154 G 8/1/07 Pitless SUB 300 W. Prospect St. #5 128475 11212 12/04/2008 12 x 10 153 G 8/12/09 Pitless SUB 300 W. Prospect St. #6 131738 11596 7/20/2012 12 x 10 163 G 5/24/13 Pitless SUB 300
CURRENT SYSTEM CAPACITY 42,770
STORAGE FACILITIES Type Size (gal.) Date In Service
Division St. Standpipe 1,500,000 8/28/1972
Edge of Woods Rd. Reservoir 2,000,000 4/15/1986 Spring Close Highway Hydropillar 500,000 4/15/1986 W. Prospect St. Elevated 1,000,000 7/19/1990
TOTAL STORAGE CAPACITY 5,000,000
7
TABLE 2 - PAST PEAK DEMAND DATA: South Fork Low A. Peak Demand, GPM System Peak Rate (GPM) 7/14/2012 7/18/2013 8/8/2014 8/8/2015 8/12/2016 WELL FIELD PRODUCTION Accabonac Rd 1,244 1,365 1,301 1,387 1,302 Blank Ln 791 847 874 900 1229 Bridgehampton Rd 1,006 1,879 1,812 1,952 1,914 Cross Highway 544 505 520 590 547 Division St. 2,522 2,612 2,476 2,854 2,844 Edge of Woods Rd 2,685 2,664 2,556 2,646 2,562 Long Springs Rd 2,737 3,091 3,500 3,241 3,049 Lumber La 2,192 2,926 2,878 2,816 2,815 North Magee St 2,639 2,861 2,702 2,785 3,573 Oakview Highway 1,557 1,610 1,507 1,579 2,024 Sag Harbor Tpke 1,964 2,043 1,902 2,040 1,998 Scuttlehole Rd 2,840 3,038 3,014 2,975 3,102 Spring Close Highway 3,351 3,500 3,200 3,457 2,882 Town Line Rd 2,740 2,703 2,569 2,492 2,436 Tuckahoe 899 935 662 731 879 West Prospect 1,644 2,810 1,930 2,072 2,071
SUBTOTAL 31,355 35,389 33,403 34,517 35,227
CONTRIBUTION FROM STORAGE Division St Standpipe 588 1500 1206 1,206 618 Edge of Woods Reservoir 1,282 2,051 1,154 1,410 1,923 Spring Close Highway Tank 833 208 854 1146 1042 West Prospect Elevated Tank 1,292 0 1,667 1,583 1,750
SUBTOTAL 3,995 3,759 4,881 5,345 5,333
TOTAL PEAK DEMAND, GPM 35,350 39,148 38,284 39,862 40,560
8
B. Services Data 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Number of SCWA Services in the South Fork Low 20,208 20,321 20,516 20,629 21,169
Peak Demand Rate per Service 7/14/2012 7/18/2013 8/8/2014 8/8/2015 8/12/2016 (GPM/Service) 1.75 1.93 1.87 1.93 1.92
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total. Projected - SCWA Services (assuming a 1% increase per year) 21,305 21,518 21,733 21,951 22,170
Future Peak Demand Rate per Service Using Highest GPM/Service from Past 5- Years 1.93 1.93 1.93 1.93 1.93 (Table 2.B above)
TABLE 3 - Anticipated Future Peak Demand
Projected System Peak Demand Rate 41,119 41,530 41,945 42,365 42,788 Total system capacity (from Table 1) 42,770 42,770 42,770 42,770 42,770 Less fire flow 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500
Difference -151 -260 -675 -1,095 -1,518
2012- 2018 Actual Services (Suffolk County Water Authority) Other years assume 1% increase/year An Increase/Decrease in the Number of Services is Due to Adjustments Made to Adjacent Pressure Zone Boundaries
9
System Peak Demand Rate – South Fork Low
Peak DemandPeak Rate (GPM)
Figure 5
10
Figure 6 SCWA Resolution
11
2. Major Water Users
The Stephen Hands Path well field lies within the South Fork Low Pressure Zone of the Authority and the following table is a list of the South Fork Low Pressure Zone largest accounts for the period of January 1, 2017 through December 31, 2017.
SOUTH FORK LOW LARGEST ACCOUNTS Custom Name Usage (gal.)
DAVID KOCH 22,496,100.00 ST ANDREWS HOMEOWNERS SANDRA M. BUDAY-ACCTG MGR 18,845,860.00 BLUE TURTLES INC 17,819,604.00 ICKENHAM LIMITED 14,333,026.40 SOUTHAMPTON HOSPITAL 12,763,714.92 COW NECK PRESERVE LLC 9,358,976.00 MEADOWLARK HIGHLAND INC PROP 9,337,807.60 MICHEAL BASILE 7,729,832.00 ROBERT TAUBMAN 7,409,688.00 TOWN OF SOUTHAMPTON 6,809,118.80
The SCWA is actively making an effort to reduce water use during peak periods throughout the East End of Suffolk. The top 300 water users on the North and South Forks were contacted via mail, and it was recommended that they shift at least some of their discretionary water use (such as lawn irrigation) away from the peak hours of midnight to 6:00 a.m.. The goal of this effort is to reduce the peak pumpage by approximately 10% (which amounts to over 3,500 GPM), thereby lessening the need for capacity increases in the future. In addition, “odd-even” lawn watering and additional water saving incentives were suggested to all users on the East End. Similar peak water use reductions are anticipated as a result of their voluntary implementation.
3. Population
The Authority has been studying the population of its water supply systems since 1987, when the Suffolk County Department of Planning (SCDP) compiled its first report. Immediately after that study, the boundaries of some SCWA systems changed, and the population growth in Suffolk County as a whole leveled off. In January of 1996, the original study was updated using more recent data, and predictions were made to the year 2020, accounting for more recent population trends. The Suffolk County Department of Planning makes the following predictions as to the population within the South Fork Low service area:
YEAR POPULATION
1995 26,470* 2000 30,016* 2010 37,137* 2015 39,181* 2020 40,485 * Figures do not include seasonal population
These data predicts a population growth of 3,348 persons, or approximately 9%, from between 2010 to 2020. Permanent population growth alone is not the sole justification for this project. The SCDP also estimates the seasonal population at 56,225 for this area. Additionally, rural areas not currently served by public water are expected to hook up as service becomes available, resulting in an increase in overall percentage of total population supplied by public water. Table 2 shows the past peak demand pumpage for the South Fork Low water supply system, and Table 3 shows the anticipated future peak demand with the increase in net percentage accounted for.
12
4. Environmental Setting
New York Natural Heritage Program (NHP), by letter dated November 10, 2016, provided two reports, “Report on Rare Animals, Rare Plants, and Significant Natural Communities” and “Report on Historical Records of Rare Animals, Rare Plants, and Natural Communities,” to the Suffolk County Water Authority. The first report identifies a NYS listed Species of Special Concern, Coastal Barrens Buckmoth (Hemileuca maia ssp. 5) and the upland terrestrial communities pitch pine oak forest and coastal oak heath forest. The Report notes that both community types are considered significant from a statewide perspective by the NY Natural Heritage Program. The Report also lists two vascular plants, a NYS listed Threatened species, Velvety Bush-clover (Lespedeza stuevei), and a NYS listed Endangered species, Orange Fringed Orchid (Platanthera ciliaris).
Site inspections of the proposed water supply well field occurred on May 20, 2016, October 12, 2016, and July 17, 2017. At the time, the project site and disturbance limits were not flagged or delineated, however, a draft site plan illustrating proposed well field facilities was used to determine the general boundary and locations of structures. The habitat description, flora and fauna identifications, and other observations occurred on or in immediate proximity to the project site.
The site is characterized as Pitch pine-oak-heath woodland (Edinger et al, 2014). There are no Department designated wetlands on the site. Pitch pine and white oak are the most abundant trees on site, with some pitch pines larger than 12" diameter. The shrub layer is dominated by stands of scrub oak and heath species are abundant in the understory including huckleberry and blueberry. Staggerbush, another member of the heath family, was also identified. Other species existing in this ecological community that were identified on the site include common and striped wintergreen, trailing arbutus, and sweet fern, a woody native plant. Wildlife observed on or in proximity to the site included a fowler’s toad and a spring peeper.
Large stands of scrub oak on the project site have the potential to support the habitat of the Coastal Barrens Buckmoth, however, neither individuals in flight nor eggs on twigs were directly identified. Although site inspections occurred during the fruiting and/or flowering period of the plant species identified by NHP as NYS listed Threatened and Endangered, neither species of plant was observed on the property.
The well field is designed to minimize clearing and disturbance to existing flora and fauna. No significant adverse environmental impacts will occur to threatened or endangered species as a result of the project. Large pitch pines will be retained in place, where feasible. Large stands of scrub oak will also remain, where feasible. The adjoining Suffolk County parkland and large natural open spaces in the immediate vicinity of the project site contain similar ecological communities and will continue to provide viable habitat for existing plant and wildlife.
The “Report on Historical Records” identified a NYS listed Endangered species of vascular plant, Coastal Goldenrod (Solidago latissimifolia). The record notes the plant was documented in 1927 in an East Hampton pine barrens swamp habitat. The project site does not presently contain a swamp habitat, therefore, this species is not expected to exist on the project site and was not observed during field observations.
13
D. Project Description
1. Well Design
The Authority intends to construct two new production wells nos. 1 and 2 each with an authorized capacity of 650 GPM. The following table summarizes the proposed and pertinent construction details for the wells.
Wells Nos. 1 and 2 Size: 20" Casing x 14" Diameter Screen Depth: Approximately 145' Deep Screened Interval: Approximately 105' - 145'
Proposed Capacity: 650 GPM Pump: Deep Well Turbine (Electrical) Appurtenances: Appropriate Water Treatment and Flow Control Equipment, Well Head Enclosure
Location: Located on State Route 114, W/S/O Stephen Hands Path, approximately 450 ft n/o LIRR, Wainscott, Town of East Hampton
2. Integration With Existing System Facilities
The proposed wells will be provided with all necessary chlorination and pH control equipment which will be housed in the pump station building at the well field (see Figure 7 Plot Plan & General Layout). Storage facilities are listed in Table 1.
3. Projected Service Life of Facilities
Based on previous experience, the Authority makes the following estimates as to the expected longevity of its facilities.
FACILITY LOCATION North Shore South Shore
Wells 35 to 40 years 20 to 25 years Pumps 15 to 20 years 10 years Storage Tanks 75 years 75 years Water Mains 100 years 100 years
The reason for the differences in expected longevity for wells and pumps on the north shore vs. the south shore is differing water quality. Since ground water on the south shore, particularly in the Magothy aquifer, is more aggressive, wells and pumps experience a much shorter life. Water quality results from the Stephen Hands Path Test Boring Zone 3, the same screen interval as the proposed wells nos. 1 and 2, appears in this report as Appendix A.
4. Well Field Vicinity Map; Surface Contaminant Control
For information on the area surrounding the wells, see accompanying Figure 7 - Plot Plan and General Layout. 14
Well No. 2
Well No. 1
Figure 7 – Plot Plan & General Layout 15
Well No. 2
Well No. 1
Figure 7A – Plot Plan & General Layout Detail of Well Locations
16
Original Grade Elev. Approximately 20 ft. msl
Static Water Level 8 ft. Below Grade
20" Dia. Casing
100 ft. Top of Packer
105 ft. Top Slot
14" Dia. Screen
145 ft. Bottom Slot
148 ft. Bottom of Tailpipe
Figure 8 – Proposed Stephen Hands Path Wells Nos. 1 and 2 Well Sketch
17
E. Establishment of Need
1. Seasonal Peak Demand
The hot dry weather experienced throughout the region during the summer of 2010 resulted in record water use throughout Suffolk County. The East Hampton area was particularly prone to low pressure problems, so additional capacity is necessary to help meet the current and future water demand in the area. This problem is exacerbated by the huge seasonal population influx. Table 2 shows water demand for the South Fork Low water supply system from 2012 to 2016, and Table 3 provides data for future peak demand calculations. Recent authorized capacity upgrades at the Accabonac Road wells nos. 1 and 2, in addition to the new well no. 4 at the Spring Close Highway well field, and the proposed two new wells at the Deerfield well field should help the Authority meet current and near-term water demand.
2. Fire Flows
As previously mentioned, the record high water demand experienced during the summer of 2010, and the low distribution system pressure that resulted, additional water supply is needed to ensure adequate water is available to serve both domestic and fire protection needs. The proposed new wells will bring additional fire flow protection to a diverse land-use area of East Hampton. In addition to the airport, there are residential and large open space areas in the vicinity of the Stephen Hands Path well field.
3. Replacement of Lost Capacity
While no major losses in capacity have occurred to date within this water supply area, the age of some wells is cause for concern. The SCWA is actively updating the existing infrastructure. Of the 58 wells within the South Fork Low water supply system only 16 were placed in service within the last 10 years. In contrast there are 18 wells in the pressure zone that are more than 20 years old. These aging wells should not be considered as a reliable future source of water for the South Fork Low system since they are more susceptible to mechanical failure. The Authority will eventually replace all or some of these wells in addition to developing new facilities and water sources in order to maintain the stability of the South Fork Low system. However, many of these future new and replacement wells are shallow and may be susceptible to contamination by Nitrates, Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs), and Perchlorate.
4. Water Quality
Issues of water quality are a concern for all of the South Fork due to the historic agricultural land use. These by-products would be affecting the upper Glacial aquifer and have impacted several well fields within the South Fork Low water supply system. Spring Close Highway, West Prospect Street, Long Springs Road and Bridgehampton Road well fields utilize Granular Activated Carbon adsorption systems (see Figure 14). The proposed well screen interval for Stephen Hands Path wells nos. 1 and 2 will be constructed within the upper Glacial aquifer and so surface contamination is somewhat of a concern. However, the SCWA has in the experience and means to put into action a multitude of measures and technologies that can be utilized to address any water quality issues that may possibly impact the well field in the future. Appendix A is the water quality analysis from the Stephen Hands Path Test Boring Zone 3.
18
II. ENVIRONMENTAL/HYDROGEOLOGIC SETTING, POTENTIAL IMPACTS
A. Regional Hydrogeology
The Stephen Hands Path well field is located on the eastern portion of the South Fork, on the slope of the Ronkonkoma terminal moraine. Topography in the area is gently rolling to hilly, especially toward the northwest. The ground surface elevation at the well field site is approximately 20 feet above msl.
The proposed wells will be screened in the upper Glacial aquifer. Geologic and geophysical logs of the subsurface at the Stephen Hands Path well field are provided as Figures 9 and 10, respectively.
Stephen Hands Path Test Boring GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION LOG
DEPTH FORMATION 0-2 TOP SOIL, LOAM 2-60 COARSE BROWN SAND, STONES 60-75 MEDIUM BROWN SAND 75-90 FINE BROWN SAND, HARDPAN 90-115 SOLID GRAY CLAY 115-135 COARSE BROWN SAND, SMALL GRAVEL 135-180 BROWN SILTY CLAY 180-245 SILTY CLAYS, LIGNITE 245-300 DARK GRAY SAND 300-? VERY FINE GRAY SAND, LIGNITE
Borehole terminated at 500 feet deep (6/13/16)
Figure 9 – Stephen Hands Path Test Boring Geologic Description Log
19
20
Wells Nos. 1 and 2 Proposed Screen Interval 105 – 145 ft.
21
22
Figure 10 – Geophysical Log Stephen Hands Path Test Boring 23
B. Aquifer Characteristics and Effects of Proposed Pumping
1. Cone of Depression
A transient model using DYNFLOW code was utilized to simulate potential drawdowns within the screened aquifer during two days of continuous pumping wells nos. 1 and 2 each at the proposed rate of 650 GPM. The maximum drawdown of 5.5912 feet was calculated in the immediate vicinity of the screened aquifer section. The .5 foot drawdown contour for wells nos. 1 and 2 aquifer sections was calculated at a radius of approximately 1,714.29 feet from the pumping node (see Figure 11). The maximum drawdown of .0616 feet was calculated in the top level of the model.
Figure 11 - 2-Day Continuous Pumping .5 Foot Contours in the upper Glacial (Screen Interval) Wells Nos. 1 and 2 at the rate of 650 GPM
24
C. Contamination Sources and Other Wells
1. Proximity
A steady state model using DYNFLOW was used to estimate the zone of contribution for Stephen Hands Path wells nos. 1 and 2 (see Figure 12) for travel times up to 100 years. Both wells nos. 1 and 2 were pumped at an annualized rate of 217 GPM which is to simulate the wells running for 8 hours per day (1/3 proposed capacity of 650 GPM). The Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) service was used to identify government-recorded (Federal State and Local) spills within a one- (1) mile radius to encompass the center of the contribution area. Results indicate that several spills were detected within the search radius and Figure 13 shows spill locations relative to the source water contribution area. Additional spills exist within the search radius but were not mapped due to inadequate address information. Recorded spills and additional non- mapped spills are listed in the Executive Summary of the EDR report (see Appendix B). The Executive Summary is presented in this report in place of the complete report for the sake of brevity (the EDR report in its entirely is 116 pages). Environmental records database search utilized by EDR meets all requirements of ASTM Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments.
Two Shallow Zone Wells (105 – 145ft) Steady State Each Well at 1/3 Proposed Auth Capacity of 650 GPM (each 217 GPM)
Figure 12 – Source Water Assessment Stephen Hands Path Wells Nos. 1 and 2 100 Year Travel Time
25
Figure 13 – EDR (1)- Mile Radius Map –Source Water Zone of Contribution
26
Accabonac Rd Fresh Pond Rd Division St Cross Hwy Sag Harbor Tpke Oak View Hwy Spring Close Hwy Townline Rd Stephen Hands Path Scuttlehole Rd Lumber Ln Bridgehampton Rd Blank Ln
Edge of Woods North Magee St Long Springs Rd West Prospect St Tuckahoe Rd
Granular Activated Carbon Filter
Figure 14 – Map of Well Fields with Usage of Remediation/Filtration Equipment in the South Fork Low Supply System
2. Potential Impacts & Mitigation
The Authority has adopted a voluntary policy to impose limits with respect to VOC and MTBE levels which are twice as restrictive as NYS standards. If any of the wells at the Stephen Hands Path well field encounters an impact that exceeds half the NYS standard limit, a GAC adsorption unit will be installed.
D. Other Unavoidable Negative Environmental/Hydrologic Impacts
The Stephen Hands Path well field is located on an easement with Suffolk County. The construction of the proposed wells will require clearing and grading (see clearing limits on Figure 7 Plot Plan and General Layout and 7A Plot Plan and General Layout Detail of Well Locations). During construction the drilling contractors are required by SCWA to muffle construction noises to a level that does not disturb our neighbors. Drilling contractors are also required to provide safety barriers and/or constant on-site surveillance in order to reduce possible hazards caused by the well-drilling process. No such hazards will exist after completion of construction.
The normal operation of the pumping equipment will cause drawdown in the upper Glacial aquifer. In the event that a nearby well completed in the upper Glacial aquifer, and is within the cone of depression of the proposed wells nos. 1 and 2, it will likely experience drawdowns of the order of magnitude described above during periods that the proposed wells are being pumped. This drawdown will recover during periods when the pump is not operated.
Unavoidable negative impacts appear to be of a transient nature and no permanent negative impacts are foreseen.
27
E. Mitigating Measures to Minimize Environmental Impact
1. Monitor Well Descriptions
No monitoring wells are proposed for this project.
2. Analyses, Sampling Frequency, Reporting Requirements
Stephen Hands Path wells nos. 1 and 2 will be sampled quarterly, per New York State and Suffolk County requirements. In certain instances, the SCWA may sample a well more frequently (i.e. monthly). Analyses will be performed by the SCWA Laboratory located in Hauppauge, New York. This laboratory is certified and approved by the New York State Department of Health. A sample of analyses that will be routinely performed is shown in Appendix A.
3. Potentiometric Monitoring
Potentiometric monitoring of the wells will be done on at least an annual basis as part of the routine SCWA well testing program.
4. Action Levels
The action level for most contaminants is the NY State drinking water standard. In certain cases, however, the SCWA takes action at levels below the NY State drinking water standards. The Authority also adheres to self-imposed limits with respect to VOC and MTBE levels. These limits are at least twice as restrictive as NYS standards.
5. Increase Storage
The Authority already has four storage facilities serving the South Fork Low area with a total capacity of 5,000,000 gallons. Therefore, this option is not applicable. As shown on Table 2 a portion of peak demand for the water supply system is derived from storage and so well capacity needs to be increased so that more storage is available during peak demand periods and for emergencies.
28
III. ALTERNATIVES TO PROPOSED ACTION
A. Water Conservation Program for Water Supply System
The official Suffolk County Water Authority Water Conservation Program was revised in 2017 and is on file at the NYSDEC. Additional conservation efforts have been employed by the SCWA targeting East End customers. See Section I.C.2 for more specific details.
B. Water Importation
This alternative is being developed on the South Fork. Pipelines are installed that will allow the Southampton, Sag Harbor, and East Hampton systems to be interconnected. This gives the Suffolk County Water Authority a greater ability to spread out the impact of summer pumpage and to pump water from wells with the best water quality to areas most in need. The most striking example of this is in Montauk. In order to prevent overpumping of wells and resulting salt water upconing in Montauk, the SCWA has constructed a transmission main from Amagansett to Montauk. In order to realize this interconnection plan, authorized capacities of wells in the East Hampton area are being upgraded, new wells are being constructed at existing well fields, and new well fields are being developed throughout the entire South Fork.
IV. GROWTH-INDUCING ASPECTS
A. Commercial Expansion
There are some commercial properties in this area of East Hampton along with the East Hampton Airport and the Long Island Rail Road. No expansion is expected due to water supply issues alone.
B. Residential Expansion
Although the use of the wells may not directly increase development, increased public water supply may be viewed by some as a stimulant to population growth. However, lack of a sufficient public water supply is not necessarily an impediment to residential growth in Suffolk County, and significant new residential growth is already occurring in this area. Tables 2 and 3 show the predicted upward water services trend in this area. The additional capacity of new wells at the well field is an attempt by SCWA to deliver quality water to the existing population of the area and to intercede proactively to prevent any water supply emergency in the future.
C. Enhanced Fire Protection
Fire flows are generally adequate throughout the South Fork Low water supply system vicinity. The proposed new wells would provide an additional 1,300 GPM of fire flow protection to the system as a whole improving the overall protection in the vicinity.
D. Other
No other growth-inducing aspects of the project suggest themselves at present.
29
V. RELATED STUDIES, REPORTS, ETC.
A. Water Supply System Master Plan
There is at present no published master plan for the SCWA water supply systems. However, the Suffolk County Water Authority was founded with the task of providing an integrated water supply system to as many residents of Suffolk County as possible. The Authority continues to pursue this task by constantly adding and upgrading its facilities as well as by taking over private water companies that can no longer provide adequate service. The additional capacity form the new wells is an important part of this effort.
B. Local Health Department
The most recent local health department plan is the Suffolk County Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan, 1987. Suffolk County Department of Health Services Division of Environmental Health, and Dvirka & Bartilucci, and Malcolm Pirnie, Inc.
C. USGS
The SCWA Engineering Department owns or has access to the USGS Water-Supply Papers and Professional Papers dealing with Suffolk County.
D. Other
DYNFLOW Version 5, A 3-Dimensional Finite Element Groundwater Flow Model, Camp, Dresser, McKee
McClymonds, N.E., and Franke, O.L., 1972. Water Transmitting Properties of Aquifers on Long Island, New York, USGS Professional Paper 627-E, Washington, DC
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Undated. Development of a procedure for Determining the Zone of Capture of Wells Penetrating the upper Glacial Aquifer on Long Island, New York.
USEPA, 1994. Handbook: Ground Water and Wellhead Protection. Office of Research and Development, Office of Water, Washington D.C.
30
Appendix A Water Quality Results Stephen Hands Path Test Boring Zone 3
A
Suffolk County Water Authority Laboratory Engineering Final Test Well Report Page 1 of 8 Location: STEPHEN HANDS PATH (TB) S-134241 Date Range: 07/19/16 to 08/01/16
Date Generated: August 30, 2016 9:39 AM
Well: STEPHEN HANDS PATH (TB) S-134241 ZONE III Coll date: 07/26/16 Coll time:1300 Method: 200.7 (VERSION 1)
COMPONENT CONC UNIT Boron <0.100 mg/l Calcium 3.95 mg/l Hardness, calc 17.6 mg/l Iron 0.0546 mg/l Magnesium 1.87 mg/l Manganese <0.0100 mg/l Phosphorus (as t-PO4) <0.200 mg/l Potassium 0.488 mg/l Sodium 7.19 mg/l Titanium <5.00 ug/l Well: STEPHEN HANDS PATH (TB) S-134241 ZONE III Coll date: 07/26/16 Coll time:1300 Method: 200.8 (VERSION 2)
COMPONENT CONC UNIT Aluminum 0.196 mg/l Antimony <0.40 ug/l Arsenic <1.00 ug/l Barium <0.0200 mg/l Beryllium <0.30 ug/l Cadmium <0.20 ug/l Chromium 0.73 ug/l Cobalt <0.50 ug/l Copper <0.0200 mg/l Lead <1.00 ug/l Lithium 1.14 ug/l Mercury <0.20 ug/l Molybdenum <1.00 ug/l Nickel <0.50 ug/l Selenium <2.00 ug/l Silicon 8.45 mg/l Silver <2.50 ug/l Strontium 0.0233 mg/l Thallium <0.30 ug/l Tin <0.50 ug/l Uranium <1.00 ug/l Vanadium <1.00 ug/l Zinc <0.0200 mg/l Well: STEPHEN HANDS PATH (TB) S-134241 ZONE III Coll date: 07/22/16 Coll time:1300 Method: 218.7 (VERSION 1)
COMPONENT CONC UNIT Hexavalent Chromium 0.30 ug/l Well: STEPHEN HANDS PATH (TB) S-134241 ZONE III Coll date: 07/22/16 Coll time:1300 Method: 300.0 (VERSION 3)
COMPONENT CONC UNIT Bromide <0.100 mg/l Chloride 12.3 mg/l Fluoride <0.200 mg/l Nitrate <0.200 mg/l Nitrite <0.200 mg/l Sulfate 3.27 mg/l Well: STEPHEN HANDS PATH (TB) S-134241 ZONE III Coll date: 07/22/16 Coll time:1300 Method: 300.1 (VERSION 1)
COMPONENT CONC UNIT Chlorate <20.0 ug/l Well: STEPHEN HANDS PATH (TB) S-134241 ZONE III Coll date: 07/22/16 Coll time:1300 Method: 331.0 (VERSION 1)
COMPONENT CONC UNIT Perchlorate <0.10 ug/l
Engineering_Final_Test_Well_Report Suffolk County Water Authority Laboratory Engineering Final Test Well Report Page 2 of 8 Location: STEPHEN HANDS PATH (TB) S-134241 Date Range: 07/19/16 to 08/01/16
Date Generated: August 30, 2016 9:39 AM
Well: STEPHEN HANDS PATH (TB) S-134241 ZONE III Coll date: 07/22/16 Coll time:1300 Method: 505 (CHLORDANE TOTAL) (VERSION 1)
COMPONENT CONC UNIT Chlordane Total <0.20 ug/l Well: STEPHEN HANDS PATH (TB) S-134241 ZONE III Coll date: 07/22/16 Coll time:1300 Method: 505 (PCB) (VERSION 1)
COMPONENT CONC UNIT Aroclor 1016 Absence ug/l Aroclor 1221 Absence ug/l Aroclor 1232 Absence ug/l Aroclor 1242 Absence ug/l Aroclor 1248 Absence ug/l Aroclor 1254 Absence ug/l Aroclor 1260 Absence ug/l Well: STEPHEN HANDS PATH (TB) S-134241 ZONE III Coll date: 07/22/16 Coll time:1300 Method: 505 (VERSION 1)
COMPONENT CONC UNIT Toxaphene <1.00 ug/l Well: STEPHEN HANDS PATH (TB) S-134241 ZONE III Coll date: 07/22/16 Coll time:1300 Method: 515.3 (VERSION 1)
COMPONENT CONC UNIT 2,4,5-T <0.25 ug/l 2,4-D <1.00 ug/l 2,4-DB <1.00 ug/l 3,5-Dichlorobenzoic Acid <0.50 ug/l 4-Nitrophenol <1.00 ug/l Acifluorfen <0.50 ug/l Bentazon <1.00 ug/l Chloramben <0.50 ug/l DCPA Diacid <1.00 ug/l Dalapon <1.00 ug/l Dicamba <0.50 ug/l Dichlorprop <1.00 ug/l Dinoseb <1.00 ug/l Pentachlorophenol <0.10 ug/l Picloram <1.00 ug/l Silvex <0.25 ug/l Well: STEPHEN HANDS PATH (TB) S-134241 ZONE III Coll date: 07/22/16 Coll time:1300 Method: 522 (VERSION 1)
COMPONENT CONC UNIT 1,4-Dioxane <0.070 ug/l
Engineering_Final_Test_Well_Report Suffolk County Water Authority Laboratory Engineering Final Test Well Report Page 3 of 8 Location: STEPHEN HANDS PATH (TB) S-134241 Date Range: 07/19/16 to 08/01/16
Date Generated: August 30, 2016 9:39 AM
Well: STEPHEN HANDS PATH (TB) S-134241 ZONE III Coll date: 07/22/16 Coll time:1300 Method: 524.2 (VERSION 1)
COMPONENT CONC UNIT 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane <0.25 ug/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane <0.25 ug/l 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <0.25 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane <0.25 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethane <0.25 ug/l 1,1-Dichloroethane <0.25 ug/l 1,1-Dichloroethene <0.25 ug/l 1,1-Dichloropropene <0.25 ug/l 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene <0.25 ug/l 1,2,3-Trichloropropane <0.25 ug/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <0.13 ug/l 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene <0.13 ug/l 1,2-Dichlorobenzene <0.25 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane <0.25 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane <0.25 ug/l 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene <0.13 ug/l 1,3-Dichlorobenzene <0.13 ug/l 1,3-Dichloropropane <0.25 ug/l 1,4-Dichlorobenzene <0.25 ug/l 2,2-Dichloropropane <0.25 ug/l 2-Chlorotoluene <0.13 ug/l 4-Chlorotoluene <0.25 ug/l 4-Isopropyltoluene <0.25 ug/l 4-Methyl-2-Pentanone <2.50 ug/l Benzene <0.13 ug/l Bromobenzene <0.13 ug/l Bromochloromethane <0.25 ug/l Bromodichloromethane <0.25 ug/l Bromoform <0.25 ug/l Bromomethane <0.25 ug/l Carbon Tetrachloride <0.25 ug/l Chlorobenzene <0.13 ug/l Chlorodifluoromethane <0.25 ug/l Chloroethane <0.25 ug/l Chloroform 1.95 ug/l Chloromethane <0.25 ug/l Cis-1,2-Dichloroethene <0.25 ug/l Cis-1,3-Dichloropropene <0.25 ug/l Di-Isopropyl Ether <0.25 ug/l Dibromochloromethane <0.25 ug/l Dibromomethane <0.25 ug/l Dichlorodifluoromethane <0.25 ug/l Ethyl Benzene <0.13 ug/l Ethyl-Tert-Butyl Ether <0.25 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene <0.25 ug/l Isopropylbenzene <0.13 ug/l Methyl-T-Butyl Ether <0.25 ug/l Methylene Chloride <0.25 ug/l Methylethylketone <2.50 ug/l N-Butylbenzene <0.13 ug/l N-Propylbenzene <0.13 ug/l Naphthalene <0.25 ug/l Sec-Butylbenzene <0.13 ug/l Styrene <0.13 ug/l Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether <0.25 ug/l Tert-Butyl Alcohol <2.50 ug/l Tert-Butylbenzene <0.13 ug/l
Engineering_Final_Test_Well_Report Suffolk County Water Authority Laboratory Engineering Final Test Well Report Page 4 of 8 Location: STEPHEN HANDS PATH (TB) S-134241 Date Range: 07/19/16 to 08/01/16
Date Generated: August 30, 2016 9:39 AM
Well: STEPHEN HANDS PATH (TB) S-134241 ZONE III Coll date: 07/22/16 Coll time:1300 Method: 524.2 (VERSION 1)
COMPONENT CONC UNIT Tetrachloroethene <0.25 ug/l Tetrahydrofuran <2.50 ug/l Toluene <0.13 ug/l Trans-1,2-Dichloroethene <0.25 ug/l Trans-1,3-Dichloropropene <0.25 ug/l Trichloroethene <0.25 ug/l Trichlorofluoromethane <0.25 ug/l Vinyl Chloride <0.25 ug/l o-Xylene <0.13 ug/l p,m-Xylene <0.25 ug/l
Engineering_Final_Test_Well_Report Suffolk County Water Authority Laboratory Engineering Final Test Well Report Page 5 of 8 Location: STEPHEN HANDS PATH (TB) S-134241 Date Range: 07/19/16 to 08/01/16
Date Generated: August 30, 2016 9:39 AM
Well: STEPHEN HANDS PATH (TB) S-134241 ZONE III Coll date: 07/22/16 Coll time:1300 Method: 525.3 (VERSION 1)
COMPONENT CONC UNIT 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol <0.20 ug/l 2,4-Dichlorophenol <0.20 ug/l 2,4-Dinitrotoluene <0.20 ug/l 2,6-Dinitrotoluene <0.20 ug/l 4,4'-DDD <0.20 ug/l 4,4'-DDE <0.20 ug/l 4,4'-DDT <0.20 ug/l Acenaphthene <0.20 ug/l Acetochlor <0.20 ug/l Alachlor <0.20 ug/l Aldrin <0.20 ug/l Anthracene <0.20 ug/l Azobenzene <0.20 ug/l Azoxystrobin <0.20 ug/l BHC (Alpha) <0.20 ug/l BHC (Beta) <0.20 ug/l BHC (Delta) <0.20 ug/l Benz[a]anthracene <0.20 ug/l Benzo[a]pyrene <0.020 ug/l Benzophenone <0.20 ug/l Butachlor <0.20 ug/l Butylated Hydroxyanisole (BHA) <0.20 ug/l Butylated Hydroxytoluene (BHT) <0.20 ug/l Butylbenzylphthalate <1.00 ug/l Carbazole <0.20 ug/l Chlorothalonil <0.20 ug/l Chloroxylenol <0.20 ug/l Chrysene <0.20 ug/l Cis-Permethrin <0.20 ug/l DCPA <0.20 ug/l Di (2-Ethylhexyl) Adipate <1.00 ug/l Di (2-Ethylhexyl) Phthalate <1.00 ug/l Di-n-Butyl Phthalate <1.00 ug/l Diazinon <0.20 ug/l Dichlobenil <0.20 ug/l Dieldrin <0.20 ug/l Diethylphthalate <1.00 ug/l Diethyltoluamide (DEET) <0.20 ug/l Dimethylphthalate <1.00 ug/l EPTC <0.20 ug/l Endosulfan I <0.20 ug/l Endosulfan II <0.20 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate <0.20 ug/l Endrin Aldehyde <0.20 ug/l Ethofumesate <0.20 ug/l Ethoprophos <0.20 ug/l Fluorene <0.20 ug/l Fonofos <0.20 ug/l Hexazinone <0.20 ug/l Isophorone <0.20 ug/l Malathion <0.20 ug/l Metalaxyl <0.20 ug/l Metolachlor <0.20 ug/l Molinate <0.20 ug/l Napropamide <0.20 ug/l Oxyfluorfen <0.20 ug/l Phenanthrene <0.20 ug/l
Engineering_Final_Test_Well_Report Suffolk County Water Authority Laboratory Engineering Final Test Well Report Page 6 of 8 Location: STEPHEN HANDS PATH (TB) S-134241 Date Range: 07/19/16 to 08/01/16
Date Generated: August 30, 2016 9:39 AM
Well: STEPHEN HANDS PATH (TB) S-134241 ZONE III Coll date: 07/22/16 Coll time:1300 Method: 525.3 (VERSION 1)
COMPONENT CONC UNIT Profenofos <0.20 ug/l Prometon <0.20 ug/l Propachlor <0.20 ug/l Ronstar <0.20 ug/l Tebuconazole <0.20 ug/l Tebuthiuron <0.20 ug/l Terbacil <0.20 ug/l Trans-Permethrin <0.20 ug/l Tribufos <0.20 ug/l Vinclozolin <0.20 ug/l Well: STEPHEN HANDS PATH (TB) S-134241 ZONE III Coll date: 07/22/16 Coll time:1300 Method: 531.2 (VERSION 2)
COMPONENT CONC UNIT 1-Naphthol <0.50 ug/l 3-Hydroxycarbofuran <0.50 ug/l Aldicarb <0.50 ug/l Aldicarb Sulfone <0.50 ug/l Aldicarb Sulfoxide <0.50 ug/l Carbaryl <0.50 ug/l Carbofuran <0.50 ug/l Methiocarb <0.50 ug/l Methomyl <0.50 ug/l Oxamyl <0.50 ug/l Propoxur <0.50 ug/l Well: STEPHEN HANDS PATH (TB) S-134241 ZONE III Coll date: 07/22/16 Coll time:1300 Method: 535 (NEG) (VERSION 1)
COMPONENT CONC UNIT Acetochlor ESA <0.20 ug/l Acetochlor OA <0.20 ug/l Alachlor ESA <0.20 ug/l Alachlor OA <0.20 ug/l Dimethenamid ESA <0.20 ug/l Dimethenamid OA <0.20 ug/l Flufenacet ESA <0.20 ug/l Flufenacet OA <0.20 ug/l Metolachlor ESA <0.20 ug/l Metolachlor OA <0.20 ug/l Propachlor ESA <0.20 ug/l Propachlor OA <0.20 ug/l Well: STEPHEN HANDS PATH (TB) S-134241 ZONE III Coll date: 07/22/16 Coll time:1300 Method: 551.1 (VERSION 1)
COMPONENT CONC UNIT 1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane (DBCP) <0.010 ug/l 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) <0.010 ug/l Atrazine <0.50 ug/l Bromacil <0.20 ug/l Endrin <0.10 ug/l Heptachlor <0.050 ug/l Heptachlor Epoxide <0.050 ug/l Hexachlorobenzene <0.050 ug/l Hexachlorocyclopentadiene <0.20 ug/l Lindane (Gamma-BHC) <0.050 ug/l Methoxychlor <0.20 ug/l Metribuzin <0.20 ug/l Simazine <0.50 ug/l Trifluralin <0.20 ug/l
Engineering_Final_Test_Well_Report Suffolk County Water Authority Laboratory Engineering Final Test Well Report Page 7 of 8 Location: STEPHEN HANDS PATH (TB) S-134241 Date Range: 07/19/16 to 08/01/16
Date Generated: August 30, 2016 9:39 AM
Well: STEPHEN HANDS PATH (TB) S-134241 ZONE III Coll date: 07/22/16 Coll time:1300 Method: ENGINEERING (QUART)
COMPONENT CONC UNIT Alkalinity <20.0 mg/l CO2 5.30 mg/l Color <5 Color Units Specific Conductance 79 umho/cm Turbidity 2.0 NTU pH 6.80 pH Units Well: STEPHEN HANDS PATH (TB) S-134241 ZONE III Coll date: 07/22/16 Coll time:1300 Method: LACHAT 10-107-06-1-J (VERSION 1)
COMPONENT CONC UNIT Ammonia <0.0200 mg/l Well: STEPHEN HANDS PATH (TB) S-134241 ZONE III Coll date: 07/22/16 Coll time:1300 Method: OIA-1677 (FREE) (VERSION 1)
COMPONENT CONC UNIT Cyanide-Free <5.00 ug/l Well: STEPHEN HANDS PATH (TB) S-134241 ZONE III Coll date: 07/22/16 Coll time:1300 Method: PPCP (VERSION 4)
COMPONENT CONC UNIT 1,7 Dimethylxanthine <0.050 ug/l 5-(4-Hydroxyphenyl)-5-Phenylhydantoin <0.050 ug/l Acetaminophen <0.050 ug/l Albuterol <0.050 ug/l Alprazolam <0.050 ug/l Amobarbital <0.050 ug/l Atenolol <0.050 ug/l Bisphenol A <0.20 ug/l Butabarbital <0.050 ug/l Butalbital <0.050 ug/l Caffeine <0.050 ug/l Carbamazepine <0.050 ug/l Codeine <0.050 ug/l Cotinine <0.050 ug/l Cyanazine <0.050 ug/l Diazepam <0.050 ug/l Dilantin <0.050 ug/l Diltiazem <0.050 ug/l Diphenhydramine <0.050 ug/l Fluoxetine <0.050 ug/l Furosemide <0.050 ug/l Gemfibrozil <0.050 ug/l Hydrocodone <0.050 ug/l Ibuprofen <0.050 ug/l Imidacloprid <0.050 ug/l Lamotrigine <0.050 ug/l Lisinopril <0.050 ug/l Lorazepam <0.050 ug/l Meprobamate <0.050 ug/l Naproxen <0.050 ug/l Pentobarbital <0.050 ug/l Phenobarbital <0.050 ug/l Primidone <0.050 ug/l Secobarbital <0.050 ug/l Sulfamethoxazole <0.050 ug/l Triclocarban <0.10 ug/l Trimethoprim <0.050 ug/l Venlafaxine <0.050 ug/l Warfarin <0.050 ug/l
Engineering_Final_Test_Well_Report Suffolk County Water Authority Laboratory Engineering Final Test Well Report Page 8 of 8 Location: STEPHEN HANDS PATH (TB) S-134241 Date Range: 07/19/16 to 08/01/16
Date Generated: August 30, 2016 9:39 AM
Well: STEPHEN HANDS PATH (TB) S-134241 ZONE III Coll date: 07/22/16 Coll time:1300 Method: SM5540C (VERSION 1)
COMPONENT CONC UNIT MBAS <0.0400 mg/l
Engineering_Final_Test_Well_Report
Appendix B EDR Report
B
Stephen Hands Path Wells Nos. 1 & 2 Stephen Hands Path East Hampton, NY 11937
Inquiry Number: 5152136.2s January 05, 2018
The EDR Radius Map™ Report with GeoCheck®
6 Armstrong Road, 4th floor Shelton, CT 06484 Toll Free: 800.352.0050 www.edrnet.com
FORM-PBA-KKT TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
Executive Summary ES1 Overview Map 2 Detail Map 3 Map Findings Summary 4 Map Findings 8 Orphan Summary 56 Government Records Searched/Data Currency Tracking GR-1
GEOCHECK ADDENDUM
Physical Setting Source Addendum A-1 Physical Setting Source Summary A-2 Physical Setting SSURGO Soil Map A-5 Physical Setting Source Map A-9 Physical Setting Source Map Findings A-11 Physical Setting Source Records Searched PSGR-1
Thank you for your business. Please contact EDR at 1-800-352-0050 with any questions or comments.
Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resources, Inc. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. BE LIABLE TO ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE, ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. IS STRICTLY LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT. Purchaser accepts this Report "AS IS". Any analyses, estimates, ratings, environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment performed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any property. Additionally, the information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice. Copyright 2018 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission. EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners.
TC5152136.2s Page 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A search of available environmental records was conducted by Environmental Data Resources, Inc (EDR). The report was designed to assist parties seeking to meet the search requirements of EPA’s Standards and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries (40 CFR Part 312), the ASTM Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments (E 1527-13), the ASTM Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments for Forestland or Rural Property (E 2247-16), the ASTM Standard Practice for Limited Environmental Due Diligence: Transaction Screen Process (E 1528-14) or custom requirements developed for the evaluation of environmental risk associated with a parcel of real estate.
TARGET PROPERTY INFORMATION
ADDRESS
STEPHEN HANDS PATH EAST HAMPTON, NY 11937
COORDINATES
Latitude (North): 40.9643310 - 40˚ 57’ 51.59’’ Longitude (West): 72.2335500 - 72˚ 14’ 0.78’’ Universal Tranverse Mercator: Zone 18 UTM X (Meters): 732807.2 UTM Y (Meters): 4538272.0 Elevation: 39 ft. above sea level
USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP ASSOCIATED WITH TARGET PROPERTY
Target Property Map: 5939183 EAST HAMPTON, NY Version Date: 2013
Southwest Map: 5939187 SAG HARBOR, NY Version Date: 2013
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY IN THIS REPORT
Portions of Photo from: 20150507 Source: USDA
TC5152136.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 MAPPED SITES SUMMARY
Target Property Address: STEPHEN HANDS PATH EAST HAMPTON, NY 11937
Click on Map ID to see full detail.
MAP RELATIVE DIST (ft. & mi.) IDSITE NAME ADDRESS DATABASE ACRONYMS ELEVATION DIRECTION 1 KEENER’S EAST END LI 24 GOODFRIEND DR RCRA-CESQG, FINDS, ECHO, NJ MANIFEST, NY MANIFEST Higher 2707, 0.513, WNW 2 HAMPTON COUNTRY DAY 191 BUCKSKILL RD FINDS Lower 2732, 0.517, ESE 3 ROSS SCHOOL ATTN FAC 18 GOODFRIEND DR NY UST Higher 2758, 0.522, NW A4 VETERINARY CLINIC OF 3 GOOD FRIEND DR RCRA-CESQG, FINDS, ECHO, NJ MANIFEST, NY MANIFEST Higher 2945, 0.558, NW A5 VET CLINIC 3 GOODFRIEND DR FINDS Higher 2945, 0.558, NW A6 THE ROSS SCHOOL 18 GOODFRIEND DRIVE NY LTANKS Higher 2966, 0.562, NW A7 ROSS SCHOOL PROPERTY 18 GOODFRIEND DR FINDS Higher 2966, 0.562, NW 8 VETERINARY CLINIC OF FOUR GOODFRIEND DR S FINDS, ECHO Higher 3011, 0.570, NW 9 4 GOODFRIEND PARK IN 4 GOODFRIEND DR NY UST Higher 3060, 0.580, NW 10 ANIMAL RESCUE FUND O 90 DANIELS HOLE RD S FINDS Lower 3455, 0.654, SSW 11 EAST HAMPTON INDOOR 175 DANIELS HOLE RD FINDS Lower 3526, 0.668, SW 12 ANIMAL RESCUE FUND O 90 DANIELS HOLE RD NY UST Lower 3829, 0.725, SW 13 WAINSCOTT FARMS 3 INDUSTRIAL ROAD FINDS, ECHO Lower 4063, 0.770, SW 14 POND ACQUISITION COR 253 MONTAUK HWY FINDS Lower 4169, 0.790, South 15 ST RTE 27 & RTE 113 SUNRISE HWY AND STEP FINDS Lower 4214, 0.798, SSE 16 POND ACQUISITION COR 249 MONTAUK HWY FINDS Lower 4222, 0.800, SSE 17 SOUTHAMPTON BRICK & RTE 27A & DANIEL HOL NY LTANKS Lower 4289, 0.812, South B18 SHAW AERO DEVICES IN INDUSTRIAL ROAD FINDS, ECHO Lower 4419, 0.837, SW 19 POND ACQUISITION COR 291 MONTAUK HWY FINDS Lower 4471, 0.847, South B20 EAST HAMPTON AIR INDUSTRIAL RD FINDS, ECHO Lower 4512, 0.855, SW 21 TURNPIKE COMMERCIAL ROUTE 114 & PLANK RO FINDS Higher 4563, 0.864, NW 22 39 INDUSTRIAL ROAD L 39 INDUSTRIAL RD FINDS Lower 4911, 0.930, SW C23 EAST HAMPTON AIRPORT INDUSTRIAL ROAD NY LTANKS, NY Spills Lower 5125, 0.971, WSW 24 HALPERN PROPERTY 48 GEORGICA CLOSE RD FINDS Lower 5126, 0.971, SSE C25 EASTHAMPTON AIRPORT DANIEL SHORE ROAD NY LTANKS Lower 5146, 0.975, WSW 26 SOUTH FORK ANIMAL HO MONTAUK HWY RCRA-CESQG, NY MANIFEST Lower 5181, 0.981, SSE
5152136.2s Page 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TARGET PROPERTY SEARCH RESULTS
The target property was not listed in any of the databases searched by EDR.
DATABASES WITH NO MAPPED SITES No mapped sites were found in EDR’s search of available ("reasonably ascertainable ") government records either on the target property or within the search radius around the target property for the following databases:
STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Federal NPL site list NPL National Priority List Proposed NPL Proposed National Priority List Sites NPL LIENS Federal Superfund Liens
Federal Delisted NPL site list Delisted NPL National Priority List Deletions
Federal CERCLIS list FEDERAL FACILITY Federal Facility Site Information listing SEMS Superfund Enterprise Management System
Federal CERCLIS NFRAP site list SEMS-ARCHIVE Superfund Enterprise Management System Archive
Federal RCRA CORRACTS facilities list CORRACTS Corrective Action Report
Federal RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD facilities list RCRA-TSDF RCRA - Treatment, Storage and Disposal
Federal RCRA generators list RCRA-LQG RCRA - Large Quantity Generators RCRA-SQG RCRA - Small Quantity Generators
Federal institutional controls / engineering controls registries LUCIS Land Use Control Information System US ENG CONTROLS Engineering Controls Sites List US INST CONTROL Sites with Institutional Controls
TC5152136.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Federal ERNS list ERNS Emergency Response Notification System
State- and tribal - equivalent CERCLIS NY SHWS Inactive Hazardous Waste Disposal Sites in New York State
State and tribal landfill and/or solid waste disposal site lists NY SWF/LF Facility Register
State and tribal leaking storage tank lists INDIAN LUST Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land NY HIST LTANKS Listing of Leaking Storage Tanks
State and tribal registered storage tank lists FEMA UST Underground Storage Tank Listing NY CBS UST Chemical Bulk Storage Database NY MOSF UST Major Oil Storage Facilities Database NY CBS Chemical Bulk Storage Site Listing NY MOSF Major Oil Storage Facility Site Listing NY AST Petroleum Bulk Storage NY CBS AST Chemical Bulk Storage Database NY MOSF AST Major Oil Storage Facilities Database INDIAN UST Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land NY TANKS Storage Tank Faciliy Listing
State and tribal institutional control / engineering control registries NY RES DECL Restrictive Declarations Listing NY ENG CONTROLS Registry of Engineering Controls NY INST CONTROL Registry of Institutional Controls
State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites NY VCP Voluntary Cleanup Agreements INDIAN VCP Voluntary Cleanup Priority Listing
State and tribal Brownfields sites NY BROWNFIELDS Brownfields Site List NY ERP Environmental Restoration Program Listing
ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Local Brownfield lists US BROWNFIELDS A Listing of Brownfields Sites
Local Lists of Landfill / Solid Waste Disposal Sites NY SWTIRE Registered Waste Tire Storage & Facility List
TC5152136.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NY SWRCY Registered Recycling Facility List INDIAN ODI Report on the Status of Open Dumps on Indian Lands DEBRIS REGION 9 Torres Martinez Reservation Illegal Dump Site Locations ODI Open Dump Inventory IHS OPEN DUMPS Open Dumps on Indian Land
Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites US HIST CDL Delisted National Clandestine Laboratory Register NY DEL SHWS Delisted Registry Sites US CDL National Clandestine Laboratory Register
Local Lists of Registered Storage Tanks NY HIST UST Historical Petroleum Bulk Storage Database NY HIST AST Historical Petroleum Bulk Storage Database
Local Land Records NY LIENS Spill Liens Information LIENS 2 CERCLA Lien Information
Records of Emergency Release Reports HMIRS Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System NY Hist Spills SPILLS Database
Other Ascertainable Records RCRA NonGen / NLR RCRA - Non Generators / No Longer Regulated FUDS Formerly Used Defense Sites DOD Department of Defense Sites SCRD DRYCLEANERS State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners Listing US FIN ASSUR Financial Assurance Information EPA WATCH LIST EPA WATCH LIST 2020 COR ACTION 2020 Corrective Action Program List TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act TRIS Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System SSTS Section 7 Tracking Systems ROD Records Of Decision RMP Risk Management Plans RAATS RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System PRP Potentially Responsible Parties PADS PCB Activity Database System ICIS Integrated Compliance Information System FTTS FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act) MLTS Material Licensing Tracking System COAL ASH DOE Steam-Electric Plant Operation Data COAL ASH EPA Coal Combustion Residues Surface Impoundments List PCB TRANSFORMER PCB Transformer Registration Database RADINFO Radiation Information Database HIST FTTS FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Administrative Case Listing DOT OPS Incident and Accident Data CONSENT Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees
TC5152136.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
INDIAN RESERV Indian Reservations FUSRAP Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program UMTRA Uranium Mill Tailings Sites LEAD SMELTERS Lead Smelter Sites US AIRS Aerometric Information Retrieval System Facility Subsystem US MINES Mines Master Index File ABANDONED MINES Abandoned Mines UXO Unexploded Ordnance Sites DOCKET HWC Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket Listing FUELS PROGRAM EPA Fuels Program Registered Listing NY AIRS Air Emissions Data NY COAL ASH Coal Ash Disposal Site Listing NY DRYCLEANERS Registered Drycleaners NY E DESIGNATION E DESIGNATION SITE LISTING NY Financial Assurance Financial Assurance Information Listing NY HSWDS Hazardous Substance Waste Disposal Site Inventory NY SPDES State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NY VAPOR REOPENED Vapor Intrusion Legacy Site List NY UIC Underground Injection Control Wells
EDR HIGH RISK HISTORICAL RECORDS
EDR Exclusive Records EDR MGP EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plants EDR Hist Auto EDR Exclusive Historical Auto Stations EDR Hist Cleaner EDR Exclusive Historical Cleaners
EDR RECOVERED GOVERNMENT ARCHIVES
Exclusive Recovered Govt. Archives NY RGA HWS Recovered Government Archive State Hazardous Waste Facilities List NY RGA LF Recovered Government Archive Solid Waste Facilities List
SURROUNDING SITES: SEARCH RESULTS Surrounding sites were identified in the following databases.
Elevations have been determined from the USGS Digital Elevation Model and should be evaluated on a relative (not an absolute) basis. Relative elevation information between sites of close proximity should be field verified. Sites with an elevation equal to or higher than the target property have been differentiated below from sites with an elevation lower than the target property. Page numbers and map identification numbers refer to the EDR Radius Map report where detailed data on individual sites can be reviewed.
Sites listed in bold italics are in multiple databases.
Unmappable (orphan) sites are not considered in the foregoing analysis.
TC5152136.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Federal RCRA generators list RCRA-CESQG: RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Conditionally exempt small quantity generators (CESQGs) generate less than 100 kg of hazardous waste, or less than 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste per month.
A review of the RCRA-CESQG list, as provided by EDR, and dated 09/13/2017 has revealed that there are 3 RCRA-CESQG sites within approximately 1 mile of the target property.
______Equal/Higher Elevation ______Address Direction ______/ Distance Map _____ ID Page _____ KEENER’S EAST END LI 24 GOODFRIEND DR WNW 1/2 - 1 (0.513 mi.) 1 8 VETERINARY CLINIC OF 3 GOOD FRIEND DR NW 1/2 - 1 (0.558 mi.) A4 19
______Lower Elevation ______Address Direction______/ Distance Map _____ ID Page _____ SOUTH FORK ANIMAL HO MONTAUK HWY SSE 1/2 - 1 (0.981 mi.) 26 52
State and tribal leaking storage tank lists NY LTANKS: Leaking Storage Tank Incident Reports. These records contain an inventory of reported leaking storage tank incidents reported from 4/1/86 through the most recent update. They can be either leaking underground storage tanks or leaking aboveground storage tanks. The causes of the incidents are tank test failures, tank failures or tank overfills
A review of the NY LTANKS list, as provided by EDR, and dated 10/31/2017 has revealed that there are 4 NY LTANKS sites within approximately 1 mile of the target property.
______Equal/Higher Elevation ______Address Direction ______/ Distance Map _____ ID Page _____ THE ROSS SCHOOL 18 GOODFRIEND DRIVE NW 1/2 - 1 (0.562 mi.) A6 28 Date Closed: 2005-06-06 Site ID: 136827 Site ID: 136828 Site ID: 136829 Site ID: 136830 Site ID: 136831 *Additional key fields are available in the Map Findings section Program Number: 0403767 Program Number: 0405015 Program Number: 0425201 Program Number: 0425202 Program Number: 0425203 *Additional key fields are available in the Map Findings section
______Lower Elevation ______Address Direction______/ Distance Map _____ ID Page _____ SOUTHAMPTON BRICK & RTE 27A & DANIEL HOL S 1/2 - 1 (0.812 mi.) 17 45
TC5152136.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Date Closed: 1987-02-05 Site ID: 130773 Program Number: 8605122 EAST HAMPTON AIRPORT INDUSTRIAL ROAD WSW 1/2 - 1 (0.971 mi.) C23 48 Date Closed: 1997-08-14 Site ID: 302402 Program Number: 9500061 EASTHAMPTON AIRPORT DANIEL SHORE ROAD WSW 1/2 - 1 (0.975 mi.) C25 51 Date Closed: 1988-06-07 Site ID: 118587 Program Number: 8800547
State and tribal registered storage tank lists NY UST: The Underground Storage Tank database contains registered USTs. USTs are regulated under Subtitle I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The data come from the Department of Environmental Conservation’s Petroleum Bulk Storage (PBS) Database
A review of the NY UST list, as provided by EDR, has revealed that there are 3 NY UST sites within approximately 1 mile of the target property.
______Equal/Higher Elevation ______Address Direction ______/ Distance Map _____ ID Page _____ ROSS SCHOOL ATTN FAC 18 GOODFRIEND DR NW 1/2 - 1 (0.522 mi.) 3 13 Database: SUFFOLK CO. UST, Date of Government Version: 03/03/2015 Site Ref#: 06618 Facility ID: 06618 4 GOODFRIEND PARK IN 4 GOODFRIEND DR NW 1/2 - 1 (0.580 mi.) 9 37 Database: SUFFOLK CO. UST, Date of Government Version: 03/03/2015 Site Ref#: 06619 Facility ID: 06619
______Lower Elevation ______Address Direction______/ Distance Map _____ ID Page _____ ANIMAL RESCUE FUND O 90 DANIELS HOLE RD SW 1/2 - 1 (0.725 mi.) 12 42 Database: SUFFOLK CO. UST, Date of Government Version: 03/03/2015 Site Ref#: 15662 Facility ID: 15662
ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Other Ascertainable Records FINDS: The Facility Index System contains both facility information and "pointers" to other sources of information that contain more detail. These include: RCRIS; Permit Compliance System (PCS); Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS); FATES (FIFRA [Federal Insecticide Fungicide Rodenticide Act] and TSCA Enforcement System, FTTS [FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System]; CERCLIS; DOCKET (Enforcement Docket used to
TC5152136.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 8 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY manage and track information on civil judicial enforcement cases for all environmental statutes); Federal Underground Injection Control (FURS); Federal Reporting Data System (FRDS); Surface Impoundments (SIA); TSCA Chemicals in Commerce Information System (CICS); PADS; RCRA-J (medical waste transporters/disposers); TRIS; and TSCA. The source of this database is the U.S. EPA/NTIS.
A review of the FINDS list, as provided by EDR, and dated 07/23/2017 has revealed that there are 18 FINDS sites within approximately 1 mile of the target property.
______Equal/Higher Elevation ______Address Direction ______/ Distance Map _____ ID Page _____ KEENER’S EAST END LI 24 GOODFRIEND DR WNW 1/2 - 1 (0.513 mi.) 1 8 VETERINARY CLINIC OF 3 GOOD FRIEND DR NW 1/2 - 1 (0.558 mi.) A4 19 VET CLINIC 3 GOODFRIEND DR NW 1/2 - 1 (0.558 mi.) A5 28 ROSS SCHOOL PROPERTY 18 GOODFRIEND DR NW 1/2 - 1 (0.562 mi.) A7 36 VETERINARY CLINIC OF FOUR GOODFRIEND DR S NW 1/2 - 1 (0.570 mi.) 8 37 TURNPIKE COMMERCIAL ROUTE 114 & PLANK RO NW 1/2 - 1 (0.864 mi.) 21 48
______Lower Elevation ______Address Direction______/ Distance Map _____ ID Page _____ HAMPTON COUNTRY DAY 191 BUCKSKILL RD ESE 1/2 - 1 (0.517 mi.) 2 12 ANIMAL RESCUE FUND O 90 DANIELS HOLE RD S SSW 1/2 - 1 (0.654 mi.) 10 41 EAST HAMPTON INDOOR 175 DANIELS HOLE RD SW 1/2 - 1 (0.668 mi.) 11 41 WAINSCOTT FARMS 3 INDUSTRIAL ROAD SW 1/2 - 1 (0.770 mi.) 13 44 POND ACQUISITION COR 253 MONTAUK HWY S 1/2 - 1 (0.790 mi.) 14 44 ST RTE 27 & RTE 113 SUNRISE HWY AND STEP SSE 1/2 - 1 (0.798 mi.) 15 45 POND ACQUISITION COR 249 MONTAUK HWY SSE 1/2 - 1 (0.800 mi.) 16 45 SHAW AERO DEVICES IN INDUSTRIAL ROAD SW 1/2 - 1 (0.837 mi.) B18 46 POND ACQUISITION COR 291 MONTAUK HWY S 1/2 - 1 (0.847 mi.) 19 47 EAST HAMPTON AIR INDUSTRIAL RD SW 1/2 - 1 (0.855 mi.) B20 47 39 INDUSTRIAL ROAD L 39 INDUSTRIAL RD SW 1/2 - 1 (0.930 mi.) 22 48 HALPERN PROPERTY 48 GEORGICA CLOSE RD SSE 1/2 - 1 (0.971 mi.) 24 50
TC5152136.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 9 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Due to poor or inadequate address information, the following sites were not mapped. Count: 1 records.
______Site Name ______Database(s) BULL PATH LANDFILL SEMS-ARCHIVE
TC5152136.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 10 0
8
0 80 8 8 0 8 0 1 2 0
0
0 0 2 6 1 6 1 8 0 1 8 0 1 60 0 1 2
2 1 0 0
8 1
2 0 80 0
8 0 8 0
8 0
0
8
0 8
0 8 0
4 0 40
40
0 4
4 0 0 4
40
0 4
4
0
4
0 4 0 4
EDR Inc. 40
40
EDR Inc.