State of Vermont 2018 303(D) List of Impaired Waters
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more
Recommended publications
-
Pierce Mills Hydroelectric Generating Station (FERC No. 2396 VT) Arnold Falls Hydroelectric Generating Station (FERC No
20091208-5022 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/8/2009 1:26:23 AM Pierce Mills hydroelectric generating station (FERC No. 2396 VT) Arnold Falls hydroelectric generating station (FERC No. 2399 VT) Gage hydroelectric generating station (FERC No. 2397 VT) Passumpsic hydroelectric generating station (FERC No. 2400 VT) St. Johnsbury, Waterford and Barnet, Caledonia County, Vermont 2009 Annual CRMP Report November 30, 2009 This letter report is provided on behalf of the Central Vermont Public Service Corporation (CVPS) in fulfillment of its obligations regarding the Cultural Resource Management Plan (CRMP) for the Pierce Mills, Arnold Falls, Gage and Passumpsic hydroelectric generating stations, collectively referred to as the Project.1 Articles 408, 408, 410, and 408 of the licenses for the Pierce Mills, Arnolds Falls, Gage and Passumpsic generating stations2, respectively, require implementation of the provisions of the Programmatic Agreement (PA) executed on November 4, 1994.3 Under federal law, the FERC is required to consider the effects of hydroelectric projects that it licenses on historic properties. The PA requires the filing of an annual report on activities conducted under the CRMP on the anniversary date of issuance of the license. Monitoring Action to Protect Archaeological Historic Properties Section 3.2.3. of the CRMP describes that the Project will be monitored annually to limit or prevent bank erosion and protect historic properties in conjunction with other resources. Charity Baker, an archaeologist qualified under 36 CFR 61, and Beth Eliason, CVPS Environmental Engineer, conducted the annual monitoring of Project shorelines on October 10 and 29, 2009. The inspection was conducted via canoe to document existing conditions using a handheld Magellan GPS 320 unit, a Canon PowerShot A85 digital camera, and manual notes. -
Town of Hartford Draft Town Plan
TOWN OF HARTFORD DRAFT TOWN PLAN March 11, 2019* Prepared by the Hartford Planning Commission with the assistance from the Hartford Department of Planning and Development Services and the Town Plan Steering Committee * This Plan has been updated since the 2/22/19 Draft. The additions are highlighted in red and underlined, and deletions are highlighted in red with the slash-out feature. In some instances, these reflect relocation and not substantial changes. INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION TO TOWN PLANNING According to the book, “Essentials of Land Use Planning and Regulation” by the Vermont Land Use Education and Training Collaborative, “the municipal plan is the visionary document that assesses the current status of a community and lays out a vision for the future.” Used interchangeably with the term “Town Plan”, it is an in-depth, comprehensive, long range study that provides the framework for future decisions regarding land use, transportation, community facilities and services, utilities, natural resources, historic resources, and housing. It is a guide that establishes a strategy on how to grow while managing the community’s resources and maintaining a high quality of life. The Town Plan provides the basis for public and private investment. It also establishes an implementation program that provides a means of achieving the community vision. HARTFORD’S GEOGRAPHY Hartford, Vermont is located at the confluence of the White and Connecticut Rivers and includes a third river, the Ottauquechee. It is also at the junction of Interstate Highways 89 and 91 and the junction of U.S. Highways 4 and 5 on the eastern side of Vermont about halfway up the state. -
DRAFT Northeast Regional Mercury Total Maximum Daily Load
DRAFT Northeast Regional Mercury Total Maximum Daily Load Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection Maine Department of Environmental Protection Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation New England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission April 2007 DRAFT Contents Contents .......................................................................................................................................................ii Tables ..........................................................................................................................................................iv Figures.........................................................................................................................................................iv Acknowledgements .....................................................................................................................................v Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................vi Abbreviations ...........................................................................................................................................xiii Definition of Terms..................................................................................................................................xvi -
MMI 53 River Street Dam.Pdf
TOWN OF ACTON JUNE 7, 2019 | ACTON, MA PROPOSAL Studies Related to the Dam Located at 53 River Street June 7, 2019 Mr. John Mangiaratti, Town Manager Town of Acton Town Manager’s Office 472 Main Street Acton, MA 01720 RE: River Street Dam Removal and Fort Pond Brook Restoration Acton, Massachusetts MMI #4458-02 Dear Mr. Mangiaratti: The Milone & MacBroom team of structural engineers, bridge scour experts, geotechnical engineers, and hydraulic engineers are uniquely qualified to design the dam removal, and evaluate the potential upstream and downstream infrastructure impacts associated with the removal of the Dam at River Street to improve ecological functions of the Fort Pond Brook. When reviewing our proposal, we ask that you consider the following: Our team brings expertise and a proven track record of success in dam removal projects throughout New England. Milone & MacBroom professionals have backgrounds in hydrology and hydraulics, engineering design, fisheries expertise, and wetland biology. Our staff also includes invasive species experts, fisheries biologists, and permitting specialists. We also integrate the creative innovation of our extensive in-house team of landscape architects and frequently include passive recreational park features at our dam removal sites. We have the ability to integrate dam removal with the natural site opportunities through careful analysis and planning so that your project is technically sound, environmentally sensitive, and aesthetically pleasing. Our team of experts has performed many dam removal projects throughout New England and the Northeast. Milone and MacBroom are pioneers in the field, having completed our first dam removals in the 1990s. With over 40 constructed dam removal projects, we have completed more than any other design firm in the Northeast. -
Norton Town Plan
Norton Town Plan Adopted: July 11, 2019 Norton Selectboard Daniel Keenan Christopher Fletcher Franklin Henry Norton Planning Commission Tonilyn Fletcher Suzanne Isabelle Gina Vigneault Patricia Whitney Daniel Keenan (ex officio) Table of Contents Norton Town Plan ................................................................................................................ i I. Introduction .................................................................................................................... 1 II. Land Use ........................................................................................................................ 4 III. Employment/Economic Opportunity .......................................................................... 12 IV. Transportation ............................................................................................................. 15 V. Community Facilities & Utilities ................................................................................. 18 VI. Education .................................................................................................................... 27 VII. Natural, Scenic and Historic Resources .................................................................... 27 VIII. Energy ...................................................................................................................... 32 IX. Housing ....................................................................................................................... 34 X. Flood Resilience .......................................................................................................... -
GOLD PLACER DEPOSITS of the EASTERN TOWNSHIPS, PART E PROVINCE of QUEBEC, CANADA Department of Mines and Fisheries Honourable ONESIME GAGNON, Minister L.-A
RASM 1935-E(A) GOLD PLACER DEPOSITS OF THE EASTERN TOWNSHIPS, PART E PROVINCE OF QUEBEC, CANADA Department of Mines and Fisheries Honourable ONESIME GAGNON, Minister L.-A. RICHARD. Deputy-Minister BUREAU OF MINES A.-0. DUFRESNE, Director ANNUAL REPORT of the QUEBEC BUREAU OF MINES for the year 1935 JOHN A. DRESSER, Directing Geologist PART E Gold Placer Deposits of the Eastern Townships by H. W. McGerrigle QUEBEC REDEMPTI PARADIS PRINTER TO HIS MAJESTY THE KING 1936 PROVINCE OF QUEBEC, CANADA Department of Mines and Fisheries Honourable ONESIME GAGNON. Minister L.-A. RICHARD. Deputy-Minister BUREAU OF MINES A.-O. DUFRESNE. Director ANNUAL REPORT of the QUEBEC BUREAU OF MINES for the year 1935 JOHN A. DRESSER, Directing Geologist PART E Gold Placer Deposits of the Eastern Townships by H. W. MeGerrigle QUEBEe RÉDEMPTI PARADIS • PRINTER TO HIS MAJESTY THE KING 1936 GOLD PLACER DEPOSITS OF THE EASTERN TOWNSHIPS by H. W. McGerrigle TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION 5 Scope of report and method of work 5 Acknowledgments 6 Summary 6 Previous work . 7 Bibliography 9 DESCRIPTION OF PLACER LOCALITIES 11 Ascot township 11 Felton brook 12 Grass Island brook . 13 Auckland township. 18 Bury township .. 19 Ditton area . 20 General 20 Summary of topography and geology . 20 Table of formations 21 IIistory of development and production 21 Dudswell township . 23 Hatley township . 23 Horton township. 24 Ireland township. 25 Lamhton township . 26 Leeds township . 29 Magog township . 29 Orford township . 29 Shipton township 31 Moe and adjacent rivers 33 Moe river . 33 Victoria river 36 Stoke Mountain area . -
Hydropower Resource Assessment at Non-Powered Usace Sites
HYDROPOWER RESOURCE ASSESSMENT AT NON-POWERED USACE SITES Prepared by the Hydropower Analysis Center for USACE Headquarters July 2013 Final Report Hydropower Resource Assessment at Non-Powered USACE Sites EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is the largest owner-operator of hydropower plants in the United States, with 75 plants and an installed capability of 21,000 megawatts (MW), or about 24% of the total hydroelectric capacity. This report describes a national hydropower resource assessment study that assessed the potential and economic feasibility of adding hydroelectric power to these non- powered USACE projects over a 50-year period of analysis. Site Selection In selecting non-powered USACE projects with hydropower potential, the study employed a 2012 report by the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) that identified the hydropower potential of 54,000 non- powered dams in the United States. Among these dams, 419 were USACE non-powered dams. This number was reduced to 223 sites using the following screening, as shown on the table below. • Generate 1 MW or more of potential hydropower. • No current Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) license. • No obvious hindrances in developing hydropower. Distribution of USACE Sites with Potential Hydropower Capability FERC Preliminary or No FERC Permits Total Projects Pending Preliminary Permit Division Identified Total Percentage Total Percent Number of Total Number of Total Great Lakes & Ohio River (LRD) 71 40 56% 31 44% Mississippi Valley (MVD) 50 28 56% 22 44% Southwestern (SWD) 39 7 18% 32 82% North Atlantic (NAD) 21 2 10% 19 90% South Atlantic (SAD) 19 8 42% 11 58% Northwestern (NWD) 12 5 42% 7 58% South Pacific (SPD) 11 2 18% 9 82% USACE Total 223 92 41% 131 59% Data Collection To improve the study data, the daily hydraulic head and flow values for all 223 sites were obtained. -
The Shopper 05-02-18
56 FREE Years We’ve Acquired the Message Treat your ECRWSS PRSRT STD US Postage Mom for PAID Permit #2 North Haverhill, NH See Page 3B POSTAL CUSTOMER Our Contact Information is on Page 6A Independently Owned & Locally Operated MAY 02, 2018 | WWW.VERMONTJOURNAL.COM VOLUME 56, ISSUE 49 Apple Blossom Cotillion See Pages 8A - 10A KMA Publications Inc. Construction on Woolson acquires The Message of the Block building expected to Week start in the fall REGION – Robert Miller of 1970s. “I feel like The Message BY PATRICK ADRIAN include the Springfield Housing Au- “This is a complicated project,” KMA Publications Inc., owner and is home again, back to where it The Shopper thority, Springfield Regional Devel- Morelock told the Select Board. publisher of The Vermont Journal VermontTHE started,” he said. Miller recalled opment Corporation, Springfield on “We’ve been lucky to get partners and The Shopper, announced Fri- feeling the same way when he SPRINGFIELD, Vt. – The Wool- the Move, and several social services in this particular project. If it wasn’t day, April 27, 2018 that he has pur- purchased The Shopper back in son Block building renovation organizations. for [them] we wouldn’t be doing this chased The Message of the Week. 2009, acquiring another paper has come with hurdles, including The amendment, which the Se- project. Nobody would be doing this The sale will merge the newspa- Journal his parents had started years al- revenue shortfalls and added con- lect Board unanimously approved, project.” pers but continue to be published most 57 years ago. “I grew up in struction costs, but despite chal- changes the original loan terms from Needed architectural revisions only under The Vermont Journal & the newspaper business work- lenges developers say they expect repayment over 20 years with a one have resulted in $200,000 additional and The Shopper banners. -
Dams and Reservoirs in the Lake Champlain Richelieu River Basin
JUST THE FACTS SERIES June 2019 DAMS AND RESERVOIRS IN THE LAKE CHAMPLAIN RICHELIEU RIVER BASIN MYTH Water released from tributary dams in the United States causes flooding in Lake Champlain and the Richelieu River. FACT Water levels in Lake Champlain and the Richelieu River Generally, mass releases of water from flood control are primarily affected by precipitation from rain or dams are avoided. In addition to compromising the snowmelt. structural integrity of the dams, mass releases would also endanger the very communities that these dams are built Because of its size, Lake Champlain can store a lot of to protect. water; the flood control dams and reservoirs in the basin, which are very small in comparison to the lake, do not When conditions force the release of more water than significantly change water levels of the lake and river as hydropower plants can handle, the increase in water they release water. levels immediately below the dam will be much greater than the increase on Lake Champlain. This is true even during high water and flooding events. Consider, for instance, when Lake Champlain and the Richelieu River experienced extreme flooding between April and June 2011, the additional releases flowing from Waterbury Reservoir—the largest flood control reservoir in the Vermont portion of the basin, contributed less than 2 centimetres (¾ inch) to the elevation of Lake Champlain and the upper Richelieu River. International Lake Champlain-Richelieu River Study Board FACT FACT Dams in the US portion of the basin are built for one of Waterbury Reservoir in Vermont is the largest reservoir two purposes: flood control or hydroelectric power. -
The Vermont Management Plan for Brook, Brown and Rainbow Trout Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department January 2018
The Vermont Management Plan for Brook, Brown and Rainbow Trout Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department January 2018 Prepared by: Rich Kirn, Fisheries Program Manager Reviewed by: Brian Chipman, Will Eldridge, Jud Kratzer, Bret Ladago, Chet MacKenzie, Adam Miller, Pete McHugh, Lee Simard, Monty Walker, Lael Will ACKNOWLEDGMENT: This project was made possible by fishing license sales and matching Dingell- Johnson/Wallop-Breaux funds available through the Federal Sportfish Restoration Act. Table of Contents I. Introduction ......................................................................................... 1 II. Life History and Ecology ................................................................... 2 III. Management History ......................................................................... 7 IV. Status of Existing Fisheries ............................................................. 13 V. Management of Trout Habitat .......................................................... 17 VI. Management of Wild Trout............................................................. 34 VII. Management of Cultured Trout ..................................................... 37 VIII. Management of Angler Harvest ................................................... 66 IX. Trout Management Plan Goals, Objectives and Strategies .............. 82 X. Summary of Laws and Regulations .................................................. 87 XI. Literature Cited ............................................................................... 92 I. Introduction -
DRAFT Flood Resilience
DRAFT Flood Resilience INTRODUCTION vulnerability, and is informed by future Tropical Storm Irene projections. The devastation caused by flooding The focus of this chapter is how flood during Tropical Storm Irene in 2011 was a resilience, mitigation, and adaptation are massive disaster for the Rutland Region linked to land use, transportation, and many other areas of Vermont. It also education, economic development, as well was a turning point. Out of the recovery as many other aspects of regional and rebuilding efforts from Irene came a planning. This chapter is designed to be a new goal for the state: flood resilience. tool for town officials, non-profits, As the Vermont Climate Assessment puts developers, and individuals to help make all communities flood resilient and to it, the state has “begun to pursue public Courtesy: CBS6 Albany policy that builds resilience within all 256 guide coordination of these actions towns” (VCA, 2014). Examples of the new throughout the Region. priorities include Act 16, the flood resiliency planning statute (24 VSA §4302), as well as new rules for qualifying CURRENT CONDITIONS for state matches for Emergency Relief and Types of Flooding Assistance Fund. Flooding events are Vermont’s most The challenge for Vermont communities frequent and costly type of natural disaster. is “turning vulnerability to resiliency by There are two types of flooding that impact taking action through adaptation and communities in Vermont: inundation and mitigation,” says the Assessment. flash flooding. Inundation is when water Resilience being the ability of the Region to rises onto low lying land. Flash flooding is US Rt. -
Upper Connecticut River Paddler's Trail Strategic Assessment
VERMONT RIVER CONSERVANCY: Upper Connecticut River Paddler's Trail Strategic Assessment Prepared for The Vermont River Conservancy. 29 Main St. Suite 11 Montpelier, Vermont 05602 Prepared by Noah Pollock 55 Harrison Ave Burlington, Vermont 05401 (802) 540-0319 • [email protected] Updated May 12th, 2009 CONNECTICUT RIVER WATER TRAIL STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ...........................................................................................................................................2 Results of the Stakeholder Review and Analysis .............................................................................5 Summary of Connecticut River Paddler's Trail Planning Documents .........................................9 Campsite and Access Point Inventory and Gap Analysis .............................................................14 Conclusions and Recommendations ................................................................................................29 Appendix A: Connecticut River Primitive Campsites and Access Meeting Notes ...................32 Appendix B: Upper Valley Land Trust Campsite Monitoring Checklist ....................................35 Appendix C: Comprehensive List of Campsites and Access Points .........................................36 Appendix D: Example Stewardship Signage .................................................................................39 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Northern Forest Canoe Trail Railroad Trestle ................................................................2