Interstate Water Report

Volume 5, Number 1 Winter 2007– 08

Interstate Water Report T h e n e w s l e tt e r o f n e I W P C C – t h e N e w E n g l a n d I n t e r s tat e W at e r P o l l u ti o n C o n t r o l C o m m i s s i o n

Tale of a TMDL Inside NEIWPCC and States File High-Profile Plan to Reduce In Pursuit of Mercury Control: Mercury in Our Waters A Power Plant’s Story...... 3 Case for the Courts: The Battle by Susy King, NEIWPCC Over EPA’s Mercury Rule...... 8 A Promising New n October 24, after nearly two years of Stormwater Partnership...... 9 planning and preparation, NEIWPCC and Caught on Camera: NEIWPCC the Northeast states officially submitted O Marks a Milestone (or Two)...... 10 the Northeast Regional Mercury TMDL to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The TMDL, which Anglers Help Sustain a Species...... 14 stands for Total Maximum Daily Load, identifies spe- Frank Talk on Water Conservation...... 16 cific steps to be taken to reduce mercury in the region’s waters. By statute, EPA has 30 days after the submittal NEIWPCC Drinking Water and Tanks of a TMDL to either approve or disapprove it. If EPA Programs in New Hands...... 19 rejects the plan, the agency has another 30 days to develop an alternative TMDL. As this issue of IWR went to press, EPA had yet to announce its decision on the mer- ing it to be a potent neurotoxin that poses a particular cury plan, but the delay was to be expected. In the past, risk to developing fetuses. Concern increased as aware- EPA has taken longer than 30 days to consider a TMDL, ness grew of how easily mercury enters the environment particularly when the issues are complex—which is cer- and our bodies. Mercury primarily originates from air tainly the case with this submission. pollution sources such as coal-fired power plants, munic- The TMDL is a new step in the fight against an ipal waste combustors, and sewage sludge incinerators. old problem—mercury pollution in Northeast water- Once in the air, it over time falls directly into surface ways. For years, mercury contamination has led states waters or onto land, where it can be carried by runoff to issue guidelines on just how much of various types Hochbrunn/NEIWPCC S. into waterways—a phenomenon known as atmospheric of fish can be safely eaten. Throughout those years the Aiming High Dramatically reducing the mercury emitted by deposition. Once in the water, bacteria convert the metal challenge has been how to solve the mercury problem so coal plants across the country is a key goal of the Northeast to methylmercury, a form that bioaccumulates in fish consumption advisories are no longer necessary. Regional Mercury TMDL implementation plan. and other aquatic organisms. When we eat the fish, we’re The Northeast states haven’t shied away from the exposed to the mercury inside. challenge. Rather, they’ve put tremendous effort into near and far. The way the TMDL came together is a clas- With this information in mind, and a sense of successfully reducing mercury within their borders. But sic case study in what can be achieved when the states the growing threat from mercury, the Conference of the other parts of the country have been slow to follow— and NEIWPCC work together in pursuit of a common New England Governors and Eastern Canadian Premiers and that’s a problem when you consider how much of goal. (NEG-ECP) Committee on the Environment released a the mercury in the Northeast originates from sources regional Mercury Action Plan in 1998. The plan identi- outside the region. An Insidious Foe fied steps to address those aspects of the mercury prob- With the TMDL, the states are trying a powerful The Northeast states had long been aware of the problem in the region that are within the region’s control or new tactic to reel in mercury emissions from sources lems caused by mercury, due to plentiful research show- continued on page 4 Growing Concern Forum in Maine Reveals What We Know About PPCPs by Stephen Hochbrunn, NEIWPCC

o to the new Pharmaceuticals and Personal industry experts, and others to disseminate Care Products section on EPA’s website, click and evaluate the latest scientific information G on “Frequent Questions,” and you find this: on PPCPs in the water environment. “The importance of individuals adding chemicals to the “This conference is providing an environment has been largely overlooked.” That appears opportunity for an interdisciplinary approach to have changed. Judging by the number of people at the to PPCPs,” said Nicholas Anastas of the 2007 Northeast Water Science Forum and their intense Massachusetts Department of Environmental interest in the discussions, the issue of PPCPs is not being Protection, and a member of the conference overlooked anymore. planning team. “It’s bringing together a wide Rapt Audience The seats are filled as the presentations begin at the 2007 “I want to be informed about PPCPs,” said Jeanne range of people to discuss an emerging issue Northeast Water Science Forum, which focused on pharmaceuticals and Christie, executive director of the Association of State that needs attention.” personal care products. Wetland Managers, and one of more than 150 confer- Anastas, who also spoke at the conference-goers who filled an expansive room at the Holiday ence, was looking to broaden his already Inn By the Bay in Portland, Maine, for the forum on extensive knowledge of the topic. Others, such groundwater, and their effects on aquatic and human August 8 and 9. NEIWPCC took the lead role in develop- as Christie, were there to get a basic understanding. health; what we’ve discovered about how to treat and ing and coordinating the event, which carried the theme “I’m just trying to figure it all out,” she said. remove them from the waste stream; and what we “Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products: State of the Both came to the right place. Throughout the know about how to keep them out of wastewater in the Science.” It brought together scientists, regulators, water forum, the talk was about nothing but PPCPs—what first place through drug take-back programs and other and wastewater professionals, environmental advocates, we’ve learned about their presence in surface waters and continued on page 12

Page PB Page IWR, Winter 2007-08

From the Executive Director The Climate Challenge

t is impossible to go through any day, and certainly any week, and not Executive Director be exposed to discussions in every medium of communication on the Ronald Poltak Isubject of global climate change. Two themes permeate these discussions. First, global warming is unequivocal; second, global warming may Deputy Director present the greatest challenge the civilized world has ever faced. In order to Susan Sullivan meet the challenge, we must change our habits and we must develop new technologies to drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Established by an Act of Congress in 1947, the New England Interstate Water Pollution Control The majority of the scientific community has concluded that global Commission is a not-for-profit interstate agency climate warming is contributing to a myriad of serious impacts, both that utilizes a variety of strategies to meet the water- direct and indirect, on our natural resources. These include, but are not related needs of its member states—Connecticut, limited to: Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, • Increased earth surface temperatures. Rhode Island, and Vermont. NEIWPCC coordinates activities and forums that encourage cooperation • Increases in sea level. among the states, educates the public about key water issues, supports scientific research projects, trains • Decreases in sea and land ice. environmental professionals, and provides overall • Increases in extreme weather events. leadership in water management and protection. While NEIWPCC’s initial emphasis was on surface • Increases in flooding and drought. water protection, the Commission now also devotes • Population declines in native species; increases in invasive species. substantial attention and resources to such matters as wetlands restoration, nonpoint source pollution, In 2001 the New England Governors and Eastern Canadian Premiers endorsed and adopted a climate water allocation, and underground storage tanks. change action plan. It was both strong and bold in pledging a regional commitment to address the issue. The plan New England Interstate Water called for the implementation of programs to substantially reduce the levels of greenhouse gas emissions in the Pollution Control Commission region (mitigation), as well as a process to address the consequences of climate change (adaptation). While we in 116 John Street the region have been in many respects “out front” on this issue, and have as states committed significant resources Lowell, MA 01852-1124 to it over the past six years, much remains to be done. Tel: 978-323-7929 Most observers agree that damages will increase as warming continues. And many, if not most, of the Fax: 978-323-7919 change-related consequences are tied to water. For all of us who work for and care about our precious water [email protected] resources, the challenge ahead is daunting. Simply stated, we must make it a top priority to develop mitigated www.neiwpcc.org water resource management strategies with a strong adaptive emphasis. To not do so would be to ignore what is increasingly undeniable—climate change is real and unavoidable.

Sincerely,

Interstate Water Report Ronald Poltak NEIWPCC Executive Director Editor Stephen Hochbrunn, NEIWPCC

Designer Ricki Pappo, Enosis – New Relationship The Environmental Outreach Group NEIWPCC Joins Research Foundation Interstate Water Report (IWR) is published by by Marianna Vulli, NEIWPCC NEIWPCC. It is funded by a grant from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and distributed free of charge to subscribers. To subscribe, contact s part of NEIWPCC’s commitment NEIWPCC at the address above or fill out and return to the advancement of high-quality, the subscription form in this issue. POSTMASTER: applied water resources research, we Send change of address forms to IWR/NEIWPCC, Ahave joined the Water Environment Research 116 John St., Lowell, MA 01852-1124. Foundation. WERF is a national leader in The opinions and information stated in IWR are water quality research and supports millions those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect of dollars of research annually on wastewater the opinions of NEIWPCC. Articles in IWR may be treatment and collection, watersheds and eco- copied. Please give credit to NEIWPCC. systems, human health effects, and stormwater. This membership-driven, results-oriented Article submissions and questions or comments NEIWPCC feels strongly that our membership about IWR are welcome and appreciated. organization, funds peer-reviewed research to advance in WERF will promote our states’ research needs and Please send material to [email protected]. science and technology and to find solutions for priority enhance our states’ ability to make sound water resourc- wastewater and water quality issues. es policy and management decisions. All photos by NEIWPCC unless otherwise noted. In an exciting development, NEIWPCC’s Deputy For more information about WERF research, Director Susan Sullivan has been invited to serve on please visit www.werf.org. For information on WERF’s Research Council, which oversees the organi- NEIWPCC’s other research efforts, visit zation’s strategic direction and makes research funding www.neiwpcc.org/research.asp. decisions based on member priorities and environmental need. Sullivan will work to represent the Northeast Marianna Vulli ([email protected]) is the coordinator Printed on recycled paper. states’ priority research needs as part of this group. of NEIWPCC’s Regional Research Initiative.

Page IWR, Winter 2007-08

Firsthand Look How One New England Power Plant Plans to Get the Mercury Out by Stephen Hochbrunn, NEIWPCC

s a rule, people don’t visit coal-fired power plants. We know they’re out there, we occasion- Aally see them lurking heavily in the distance, but go to one? The grim, fortress-like structures seem to be telling us—stay away. Despite their central role in producing the nation’s power, we rarely even think of them. They cross our minds when there’s a problem—as on November 6, when three workers died in an explosion at the power plant in Salem, Mass. We may think of them when we hear of a mine collapse, of men dying in search of the raw material to electrify our homes, businesses, and iPods. But usu- ally, they are far from our thoughts. And nowhere in our travels. That is, unless your goal is to find out exactly how a coal-fired power plant removes mercury from its emissions. The Northeast Regional Mercury TMDL urges EPA to enact a rule requiring all such plants to control mercury emissions by 90 percent. But it doesn’t specify how this is to be achieved, other than to say cost-effective and available technologies should be used. What are these technologies? It seemed there was no better way to find out than to do the unusual—visit a coal plant. And pref- erably one well down the road to employing mercury- reducing systems. We found one right in the neighborhood. An

hour’s drive northwest of NEIWPCC’s Lowell, Mass., by Hochbrunn/NEIWPCC Photos S. headquarters, along the west bank of the Merrimack Eye-Opening Visit A trip to Merrimack Station, a coal-fired power plant in Bow, N.H., revealed much about current methods for River in Bow, N.H., sits a facility that burns through reducing a coal plant’s mercury emissions. 4,000 tons of coal a day as it generates enough power to satisfy the needs of a third of New Hampshire’s popula- Reducing mercury emissions is now a priority Merrimack Station generates 478 megawatts— tion. Public Service of New Hampshire (PSNH), the at Merrimack Station, especially after the passing of enough electricity for roughly 200,000 residential, com- state’s largest utility, owns and operates the plant, known strict legislation in New Hampshire in 2006. Of course, mercial, and industrial customers—through a process as Merrimack Station. Since it burns coal, which contains making something a priority doesn’t guarantee success. that at its core features two boilers, where coal is burned a trace amount of mercury, the plant emits mercury into But interesting, innovative mercury strategies are being around the clock at 3,500 degrees Fahrenheit. They’re the atmosphere—not a lot compared with many other pursued at the plant. It’s just going to take time. called boilers because they contain tubes filled with water plants around the country, but it doesn’t take much to that, amid the intense heat, rapidly becomes steam, which threaten the environment and public health. Close Encounter is both exceedingly hot (1,000° F) and highly pressurized Located several miles to the east of the heart of Bow, (2,400 lbs. per square inch). The searing steam screams Merrimack Station stands alone, its great mass towering through tubes to a turbine, where the blast of force is over low, barren surroundings. The sheer hulk of the powerful enough to turn the turbine’s blades at 3,600 plant and its worn, drab skin make it appear primeval, rotations a minute. It’s that rotation that creates electric- as though forged in a bygone era. In truth, the plant is ity. Connected to the plant are six high-voltage transmis- less than 50 years old. But on August 28, the day of our sion lines that carry the power to substations throughout visit, it looked from the parking lot as if it had always the state. been there—a fixed feature of the landscape, immov- It’s a remarkable process, awesome in its brute abil- able, relentless and unceasing in the creation of its ity to produce mass amounts of electricity. But you can’t elemental product. ignore the downside: a coal-fired power plant without It had been months since the initial request for emissions controls emits dangerous levels of pollutants, a visit was posed to Martin Murray, who does media including sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides, which cause relations for PSNH. Given the bashing Big Coal has acid rain and smog. taken lately in the press and in Washington, the delay At Merrimack Station, they’ve installed systems to was understandable; clearly PSNH was in no particular reduce pollution, including two selective catalytic reduc- hurry to entertain visitors at the plant, especially ones tion systems, known as SCRs, that dramatically lower from an organization they’d never heard of. But our emissions of nitrogen oxides by inducing chemical reac- request must eventually have been deemed straightfor- tions that turn the NOx into harmless water vapor and ward enough. Murray greeted us amiably, and intro- nitrogen gas. The plant also has two electrostatic precipi- duced Harold Keyes, the plant manager. tators, or ESPs, that impart a charge to the coal ash (or fly Keyes was prepared. He said he’d read the ash) in the plant’s exhaust so the potentially polluting ash Mercury TMDL the night before, and posed pointed sticks to metal plates instead of soaring out the smoke- questions to NEIWPCC’s Susy King, an author of the stack. TMDL who had come along on the visit. Her thought- For several minutes, Keyes boasted about the ful responses diffused skepticism about our intentions, progress the plant’s made on cleaning up emissions, and which were simple—to observe and to learn. Keyes you couldn’t blame him. The plant after all has received Eyeing the Output Harold Keyes, plant manager at Merrimack warmed. He began speaking proudly of his plant, which two Environmental Merit Awards from EPA as well as a Station, checks the readings on the plant’s mercury continuous stood silently, stolidly behind him, betraying none of the Governor’s Award for Pollution Prevention. emissions monitors. extreme ferocity of the process underway within. continued on page 5

Page Page IWR, Winter 2007-08

Mercury TMDL continued from page 1 influence. The long-term goal was to virtually eliminate water bodies. But the development of a Northeast lenging. To address this issue, we broke down imple- regional anthropogenic mercury emissions—that is, Regional Mercury TMDL, which involved seven states mentation of the TMDL into three phases. The first those emissions caused by human activity. To ensure and thousands of water bodies, was truly a unique case. two phases correspond with the timing and goals of the progress, short-term goals were adopted. The Mercury It would be a true test of the effectiveness of regional regional Mercury Action Plan. In Phase I, which began Action Plan originally set a target of a 50 percent reduc- collaboration. in 1998 and ended in 2003, we required reductions of tion in regional mercury emissions by 2003. In 2001, Thankfully, we had a precedent: the Minnesota 50 percent. Phase II runs from 2003 to 2010, and has a another interim goal was added: a 75 percent reduction Statewide Mercury TMDL. Although it was a state plan, reduction goal of 75 percent. Phase III begins in 2010, by 2010. not regional, the main goal was the same—to make but its final reduction goal and end date won’t be deter- Fast forward to 2005: Implementation of the reductions in the atmospheric deposition of mercury. It mined until Phase II is done, when evaluation of emis- Mercury Action Plan had resulted in reductions of also had survived the scrutiny at EPA, which approved sions, deposition, and fish tissue data could point to a it in March. Hence, throughout the devel- need to revise the original reduction goals. opment process, we used the Minnesota How will these reductions be achieved? Within TMDL as a model. For example, the the region, states will continue on the mercury reduc- TMDL process requires calculation of tion paths they have already been following to virtually an allowable wasteload allocation (load eliminate all in-region sources of mercury emissions and from wastewater sources) and load alloca- discharges. This includes implementation of legislation tion (load from nonpoint sources). As in and regulations pertaining to emissions from coal-fired Minnesota, we determined that the vast power plants, sale and disposal of mercury-containing majority of allowable mercury load was in products, and installation of dental amalgam separators. the load allocation. And since the majority As for the rest of the country, the Northeast states of that allocation originates from atmo- are asking EPA to enact a rule that would require 90 per- spheric deposition, that was where the cent mercury control from all coal-fired power plants as bulk of the reductions needed to be made. a first step. This would be an alternative to EPA’s Clean Air Mercury Rule currently in place that will result in a Down to Business 70 percent reduction when fully implemented. (Many As a means of gauging how far we’d come states, including all the Northeast states, are also involved on mercury, and how far we needed to in litigation against EPA on this issue. To learn more, see go, we used a baseline year of 1998 to “Legal Lines” on page 8.) correspond with the beginning of the Briefing Session At NEIWPCC’s Commission Meeting in May in Salem, Mass., NEG-ECP Mercury Action Plan. Data NEIWPCC’s Susy King (left), the writer of this article, and Beth Card, NEIWPCC’s were compiled from a number of sources Director of Water Quality Programs, discuss the draft version of the TMDL. The In the Northeast, over 10,000 lakes, ponds, presentation was one of many the two delivered across the region during develop- to calculate the baseline mercury deposi- and reservoirs, and over 46,000 river miles ment of the final version of the plan. tion load, wastewater load, and fish tissue concentrations. We then compared the are impaired for fish consumption due regional mercury emissions of greater than 50 percent, existing fish tissue concentration to a target fish concen- to mercury pollution. but fish tissue mercury concentrations were still high tration to calculate the necessary reduction in mercury enough to require fish consumption advisories. It wasn’t loading and to establish the ultimate mercury goal. The hard to figure out why. Scientists know that airborne determination: a minimum reduction of 87 percent mercury can travel far from its source, and that air cur- in in-region and out-of-region anthropogenic sources Rewarding Process rents often carry to the Northeast whatever’s in the air of mercury atmospheric deposition is needed to meet As the TMDL procedure requires that states release a to the west. Combine that with the fact that mercury desired fish tissue levels. draft for public comment prior to submitting a final reductions outside the Northeast had not been nearly While the Northeast states have already accom- TMDL to EPA, NEIWPCC and the Northeast states as great as those within the region, and the conclusion plished atmospheric deposition reductions of more released a draft version of the Northeast Regional was obvious: the in-region progress on mercury was than 70 percent, a reduction of 87 percent or higher is Mercury TMDL on April 11. The TMDL garnered media being offset in part by a lack thereof elsewhere. If levels still a lofty goal. When taking into consideration that attention, with articles on its release appearing in the of mercury in fish were ever to decline to safe levels, we the reductions must also be accomplished for sources New York Times, Boston Globe, and other regional and needed more aggressive out-of-region reductions. outside of the region, the task becomes even more chal- national publications. To spread word about the TMDL

Devising a Strategy In December 2005, NEIWPCC and our member Outside Influence states—Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Contributions of In-Region and Out-of-Region Sources to Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island, and Vermont— began collaborating to develop a plan that would quan- Northeast Mercury Deposition in 1998 and 2002 tify the necessary reductions from mercury sources both within and outside of the region. While we were all motivated by the desire to reduce mercury in our In-Region 19% waters, there was the added incentive of federal law. In-Region Out-of-Region Out-of-Region The Clean Water Act requires that states develop lists 43% 57% 81% of impaired waters—waters that are not meeting their water quality standards—and develop Total Maximum Daily Loads, or TMDLs, for them. A TMDL is a calculation of the maximum amount of a pollutant that a water body can receive and still meet its water quality standards. The allowable amount of the pollutant is allocated to point and nonpoint sources. In the Northeast, over 10,000 lakes, ponds, and reservoirs, and over 46,000 river miles are impaired for 1998 2002 fish consumption due to mercury pollution, so there Modeling performed in 1998 by the Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM) showed that 43 per- was no question that a TMDL was required. But how to cent of the mercury deposited in the Northeast states originated from sources within the region. In 2002, NESCAUM’s models do it? In general, states develop TMDLs for individual showed that in-region sources were responsible for only 19 percent of in-region deposition. The need for more stringent con- water bodies or a small group of water bodies. In the trols on out-of-region mercury sources was a main reason for the development of the Northeast Regional Mercury TMDL. case of Lake Champlain and Long Island Sound, two states worked together on TMDLs for large interstate

Page IWR, Winter 2007-08

Mercury TMDL continued from page 4 to the public, NEIWPCC and state staff conducted eight The complete text of the Northeast Regional of Massachusetts DEP; Gregg Comstock, Bob Estabrook, public informational meetings in five of the participat- Mercury TMDL is available at www.neiwpcc.org/mercury, and Peg Foss of New Hampshire DES; Jay Bloomfield, ing states. The public comment period lasted 59 days, where you can also access news related to this effort, such Dick Draper, Ron Entringer, and Scott Quinn of New York with NEIWPCC and the states receiving comments from as any announcement from EPA, that may have occurred State DEC; Scott Ribas and Elizabeth Scott of Rhode Island 14 different groups. since the printing of this issue. DEM; and Tim Clear and Neil Kamman of Vermont DEC. Their contributions and the strong support of NEIWPCC’s After several months of revising the draft based on Editor’s Note: Susy King ([email protected]), the writer Executive Committee were critical factors in the successful the feedback, we arrived at the final version of the plan, of this article, is a NEIWPCC Environmental Analyst. completion of this project. the one submitted to EPA on October 24. If approved She played a prominent role in the development of the and implemented, we can reasonably expect that one day Northeast Regional Mercury TMDL, as did Beth Card One final note: Among the many reporters that cov- everyone will once again be able to safely eat fish caught ([email protected]), NEIWPCC’s Director of Water ered this story was Vermont Public Radio’s John Dillon. in the waters of the Northeast. That may seem hard Quality Programs. Both served on the project’s techni- NEIWPCC’s Beth Card was among the subjects he inter- to believe, given how accustomed we’ve grown to fish cal workgroup, which also included Traci Iott and Paul viewed, and Dillon included one of Card’s comments in his consumption advisories. But it’s believable and achiev- Stacey of Connecticut DEP; Andy Fisk and Barry Mower piece that aired on October 30. It can be heard online at able—with the TMDL as our tool. of Maine DEP; Rick Dunn, Russ Isaac, and C. Mark Smith www.vpr.net/news_detail/77965/.

Merrimack Station continued from page 3 “Historically at Merrimack Station, they’ve small, it adds up in the environment—and to alarming been fairly proactive in responding to environmen- levels. tal concerns,” said Craig Wright, a permitting bureau In March 2005, the Conservation Law Foundation, administrator with the New Hampshire Department of an environmental advocacy group, went on the offensive Environmental Services’ Air Resources Division, in an against Merrimack Station, saying its mercury emissions interview before our visit to Bow. “They went way above were enough to poison 60 million pounds of fish and and beyond [environmental regulations] with their SCR threatening to sue the plant to force it to slash its mer- systems.” cury output. CLF and other likeminded groups weren’t But Keyes knows all too well that there’s a new particularly appeased five days later when EPA issued issue in town. its Clean Air Mercury Rule, which aims to achieve a 70 “Just when we thought we were turning the cor- percent reduction in total power plant mercury emissions ner environmentally,” he said, “mercury pops up.” by 2018 through a cap-and-trade approach: companies that reduce emissions can sell credits to those that don’t Evolution of a Solution reduce them. Actually, Keyes should have seen it coming, and no Environmental groups pushed for tougher doubt did. For years, environmental groups pushed for restrictions, and in early 2006, state lawmakers in New more aggressive government action on mercury emis- Hampshire upped EPA’s ante and passed legislation spe- sions by power plants. The power industry fought back, cifically targeting Merrimack Station. The law prohibits emphasizing that U.S. electric utilities contribute just PSNH from buying credits to meet mercury emissions one percent of total global mercury emissions. But there restrictions, and mandates an 80 percent drop in the is no getting around disturbing data: according to the plant’s mercury discharge by 2013. The law specifies how latest EPA figures on mercury emitted by U.S. power it’s to be done—through the installation of a wet flue gas plants, the top 50 mercury polluters sent almost 21 tons desulphurization system. As the name implies, such sys- of mercury into the environment in 2005. The worst tems were designed to reduce sulfur dioxide, which they offender, the massive Martin Lake Steam Electric Station do very well. But they can also capture mercury, and at in Texas, alone emitted more than 1,700 pounds of mer- very high levels. cury. Keyes quickly dashed our hopes of seeing signs of By comparison, Merrimack Station’s reported this system under development during our visit. “We’re Positive Sign A silo stands ready to play its part in a government- contribution of 130 pounds seems tiny—but it’s hardly far from construction,” he said. “This is a very compli- funded research project at Merrimack Station that aims to reduce insignificant. Mercury is highly bioaccumulative, mean- cated project, and the amount of engineering required to mercury by injecting activated carbon into the plant’s exhaust gases. The silo contains a sorbent that absorbs sulfur trioxide, which inhib- ing its concentration increases as it moves up the food make it happen is immense.” its mercury from being captured by the injected carbon. chain; that’s why levels in fish tissue are far higher than Keyes did come armed with a diagram (similar in the surrounding water. So while the amount of mer- to the one on this page) that explained how the system, cury in coal is minute, and the amount being emitted commonly called a wet scrubber, will work at Merrimack it’s captured very efficiently. How to accomplish the at any given moment by a power plant is exceedingly Station. A boiler’s exhaust, or flue gas, will first pass oxidation? Here, Merrimack Station gets off easy. It so through an ESP before happens that the mercury in its flue gas is already being being directed into a oxidized as it passes through the plant’s SCRs, the units large vessel (the scrub- installed to reduce nitrogen oxides. ber). There, the gas will PSNH expects to spend about $250 million on be sprayed with a mix, or designing and building the wet scrubber and various slurry, created at the plant projects related to it—a new chimney must be installed, by combining limestone and systems for handling the limestone, mixing the and water. A chemical slurry, and removing the waste products must be devel- The Way It Works reaction ensues, in which oped. A scrubber of course doesn’t eliminate mercury; This diagram, provided by PSNH, the slurry will absorb it just scrubs it, so to speak, out of a plant’s emissions. illustrates in simple terms how virtually all the sulfur Just how PSNH will deal with its scrubber waste, and the planned wet scrubber will dioxide and mercury in the the very small amount of mercury within it, is still reduce the mercury in Merrimack being determined. One option takes into account that Station’s emissions. flue gas, removing them almost entirely from the the waste produced by a limestone-based scrubber is emissions stream. actually a synthetic gypsum, the very material used in Actually, mercury the making of drywall, plaster, and other products. in its simple, elemental Although the mercury in the gypsum is a concern, state isn’t captured in a and has been the focus of research, it’s hard to find any wet scrubber. But if the definitive conclusions about potential hazards. Other mercury has been oxidized, continued on page 6 Public Service Public ofService New Hampshire

Page Page IWR, Winter 2007-08

Merrimack Station continued from page 5 plants with scrubbers successfully sell the gypsum for “If we were the only ones building a scrubber,” industrial use, and PSNH is open to that idea. But Keyes Keyes said, “we could get it done a lot quicker. We’re try- emphasized it wouldn’t be a moneymaker. ing to build in the biggest scrubber boom this country’s “We might be able to break even,” he said, “and ever had.” The wait for scrubber parts, he said, can last as cover the cost of transporting [the gypsum]. Selling it long as two years. wouldn’t save us money, but it might prevent us from Still, the New Hampshire law contains incentives spending more.” for early compliance with the mercury reduction targets. “If we can do it sooner, we will,” Murray said. A Cheaper, Challenging Fix Not long after our visit came evidence that the Any mercury reduction from a wet scrubber is a long process of building a scrubber was indeed moving along. way off—but evidence of another mercury project, On October 3, Washington Group International, a Boise, smaller in scale but already underway, couldn’t be Idaho-based firm, announced it had entered into a con- missed. A gleaming new silver silo stood out in sharp tract with PSNH to manage the scrubber project. In an contrast to the largely colorless structures elsewhere. email in early November, Murray wrote that Washington Keyes made it the first stop as we embarked on a tour of Group had already started engineering and design work the plant. for the job. Nerve Center Plant manager Harold Keyes (right) speaks with The silo, he explained, is an integral part of an operator in Merrimack Station's large, spotless control room. As for the ACI system, Murray wrote that the PSNH’s experimentation with activated carbon injection. long-term test had yet to resume, but should soon. He

In ACI, as it’s called, powdered carbon is injected into a but also a sorbent specifically for the SO3. It was that blamed the delay on the need to buy new equipment to power plant’s flue gas, and if it’s working right, the mer- sorbent that was being stored in the new silver silo that dispose of the ash collected by the second ESP, ash that cury in the flue gas is adsorbed by the carbon sorbent— we admired as Keyes told his tale—a tale which, at this will contain the injected carbon and mercury. The new that is, it collects on the surface of the carbon particles. point, got vague, intentionally. equipment, Murray wrote, will be used to moisten the The mercury-laden particles are then carried off with “We did get better results [in the second DOE ash so it can be used as a landfill cover. the rest of the flue gas into whatever system a plant test],” he said. “But if I told you what they were, I’d have is using to remove particulates, which in Merrimack to kill you.” Hyperbole of course, but not without some Promising Progress Station’s case, is an ESP. There, the carbon, along with its truth. The DOE grant stipulates that anything learned The mercury technologies being implemented at adsorbed mercury, is trapped like any other particle. from the testing must be shared freely with all interested Merrimack Station are not the only options available to ACI is a fairly well established technology; it’s parties, but that only DOE can disseminate the informa- power plants; there are others with exotic names—coro- been employed at plants across the country and more tion. na discharge, circulating fluid bed, electro-catalytic oxi- often than not achieves high mercury removal rates. But In the spring of 2007, PSNH began a long-term dation. But they’ve yet to catch on to the extent of ACI it can be tricky. There are different types of carbon sor- six-month test of the ACI system, but quickly suspended and wet scrubber systems. bents, and no guarantees about their effectiveness. the test as the plant underwent annual maintenance For now, PSNH’s actions on mercury at “A sorbent that works on one plant,” Keyes said, procedures. The test was still on hold during our visit, Merrimack Station have placated its critics. The “may not work on another. They’re site specific.” That’s but Keyes said he hoped to restart it in October. If the Conservation Law Foundation never has filed its threat- because not all coal-fired power plants are alike. The long-term test reveals acceptable mercury removal rates, ened suit against the plant, and in a November interview, boilers at Merrimack Station, for example, are cyclone PSNH plans to keep the system running—at least until Melissa Hoffer, the director of CLF’s New Hampshire boilers, which are hardly commonplace. In a cyclone the wet scrubber comes on line. Advocacy Center, said it appeared that PSNH was mov- boiler, circulating air spins the coal as fast as 100 miles ing in the right direction. per hour to maximize combustion. The plant’s SCR Learning Excursion “We’re aware they’ve been making some signifi- units also affect the chemical makeup of its flue gas—in After our stop at the ACI silo, our tour continued cant investments at Merrimack,” Hoffer said, “and we a good way for scrubbers in that they oxidize mercury, on to the rest of the plant—though from a mercury remain hopeful that the ACI and other actions they’re but in a bad way for ACIs. The SCR process creates standpoint, there was little more to see. Keyes did take taking will reduce mercury emissions.” sulfur trioxide, which interferes with the adsorption of us into the cramped area that houses the base units of With the ACI system on hold, and the wet scrub- mercury by the carbon particles. the plant’s two mercury continuous emissions moni- ber many years from completion, hopeful is about all Merrimack Station’s two ESPs are also unusu- tors, made by Waltham, Mass.-based Thermo Fisher anyone can be. As we stood in the parking lot again, our al—most plants have just one—but for an ACI system, Scientific. He called their performance a work in prog- tour complete, it was clear that despite the impressive that comes in handy. Before embarking on its first ACI ress, and said he wasn’t sure when they’d be ready for projects outlined by Keyes, no mercury reduction was test, PSNH decided to inject the carbon between the “prime time”—that is, January 1, 2009, when EPA’s being done at that moment. As much was being emitted two ESPs. To understand why, consider how the ESPs strict new requirements for mercury monitors go into by the plant’s ominous smokestack as ever had been. work together: the first one knocks out a lot of the fly effect. That didn’t seem to bother Keyes. He’s got his plans. ash in the flue gas, the second one collects what’s left. As the tour went on, the focus on mercury waned And his pride in his company’s environmental record. Put your ACI in between, and you end up with a lot amid the astonishing nature of what we were seeing and “We’ve done everything we’ve been told to do,” he less ash containing mercury and increased carbon lev- feeling: the blanketing heat as we walked in the build- said, “and often gone beyond that. Our job is to provide els than if you’d injected before the entire ESP process. ing’s bowels, near the base of a boiler; the small, thick electricity, and to provide it in a clean way.” That’s important since post-ACI ash has to be disposed window through which molten residue from the coal- Given it’s coal we’re talking about, not solar or of properly, and can’t be sold for use in concrete as can burning could be seen falling in fiery vertical streams; wind power, Keyes might have worded that differently: regular fly ash. the cleanliness in this place of epic combustion (“We can burning fossil fuels for power ever really be clean? The first test of an ACI system at Merrimack work hard to keep it that way,” Keyes said); the control The best we can hope for is to make the inherently dirty Station proved to be disappointing, with mercury emis- room where operators monitored all that occurred in process as clean as possible, to keep emissions of its haz- sions reduced by just 15 percent. So PSNH applied the vast complex, eyes fixed on screens to catch the ardous by-products such as mercury to a bare minimum. to the U.S. Department of Energy for a grant to try slightest deviation from the norm. Keyes knows this of course, and it’s hard to fault again—and got the money. In February 2006, DOE Outside the plant, we strode aside railroad him for indulging in a little PR-speak toward the end of announced a $2.5 million award for full-scale ACI field tracks, upon which twice a week rumble trains 90 cars a long interview. The line about clean power sounded testing at the plant. PSNH kicked in $1.5 million of its long, each car holding 100 tons of coal from mines in like one he’d uttered hundreds of times, in contrast to own, and ADA Environmental Solutions, the Colorado- Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and two sources in South the unrehearsed feel that had permeated our conversa- based contractor selected for the project, put up America. We looked out at a yard where mountains of tion. He deserves credit for that open exchange, just $300,000. A new round of tests began. coal lay on standby. Like any coal-fired power plant, as PSNH deserves credit for the work being done: at Again, disappointment. “We were nowhere near Merrimack Station is vulnerable to strikes in the rail- Merrimack Station, they are moving ahead with strate- the 70 to 90 percent [mercury] reduction we’d hoped road and mining industries; regulations require that it gies proven to reduce mercury. Visiting the plant made for,” Keyes said. keep 300,000 tons of coal always on hand, just in case. that perfectly clear. The problem was the sulfur trioxide from Emerging from our immersion in the plant’s oper- True, the progress may be happening a little later the SCRs. Keyes and his cohorts decided on a new ations, the talk returned quickly to mercury. Will it really than some would have liked. But it’s happening. That approach: to inject not just carbon into the flue gas, be 2013 before the wet scrubber is up and running? was good to see.

Page IWR, Winter 2007-08

Local Impact Biological The HBRF team used a new method to determine biological Mercury mercury hotspots. In this method, a biological HoTsPoTs mercury hotspot of human health concern occurs where there are 10 or more independent sites with yellow perch concentrations above 0.3 ppm within grids that average 890 square miles in size (30 minutes by Study of Mercury Hotspots Reveals Effects of In-Region Sources 30 minutes). A biological mercury hotspot of ecological concern emerges where 25 percent or more of the common loons sampled in a grid containing at least 14 samples have blood mercury levels above 3.0 ppm. by Emma Downs

S iven all the environmental issues that require relatively close to its source. It accounts for 68 percent S S 5b S 4a 4b attention, it would be helpful if new research of mercury emissions from coal-fired electric utilities in 4c S 5a

on mercury in our region revealed the prob- the Northeast, and over half the emissions from munici- 2

G pal waste incinerators nationwide. Because of its short 1a 1b 3a lem wasn’t as serious as previous studies have indicated. S 3b Unfortunately, the opposite is occurring. In early 2007, range and high rate of production in our region, RGM S S is the most abundant form of mercury pollution in the S the release of a study by a group of prominent research- Biological Mercury Hotspots ers pointed to the growing need to address the issue Northeast. Particulate mercury (PHg) can travel short S Suspected Biological Mercury Hotspots See table below for specific data collected. now, before it gets worse—and not to overlook the to moderate distances. The least common form of mer-

contributions from mercury sources within our region. cury emitted, PHg makes up 20 percent of the mercury Mercury Levels in Biological Hotspots Biological Hotspot State/Province As the Northeast Regional Mercury TMDL points out, in discharges from utility oil boilers, municipal waste Yellow Perch Common Loon Average Range 1a. Adirondack Mountains – west (ppm) Average sources outside our region are having a growing influ- incinerators, and pulp and paper production. (ppm) Range % of loons > (ppm) 1b. Adirondack Mountains – central NY (ppm) adverse 0.73 effect level 2. Upper Connecticut River NY 0.57 - 0.96 ence on the mercury in our waters. But the impact from 0.54 1.5 0.39 - 0.80 1.1 - 2.1 0% 3a. Merrimack River – middle NH, VT 2.0 0.35 0.3 - 4.1 25% 3b. Merrimack River – lower NH 0.14 - 0.58 0.78 1.1 in-region sources, while shrinking, remains a serious Conclusions and Considerations 0.05 - 5.03 0.1 - 2.9 0% 4a. Upper Androscoggin River MA, NH 2.6 0.65 0.7 - 7.1 28% 4b. Upper Kennebec River – west ME, NH 0.23 - 3.81 issue. The HBRF study proposes that mercury deposition 0.44 no data 4c. Upper Kennebec River – east ME 0.21 - 1.25 0.40 1.9 0.24 - 0.52 0.15 - 5.5 14% 5a. Kejimkujik National Park ME 3.1 Nine scientists from the Hubbard Brook Research near large emission sources can be greater than levels 0.38 0.6 - 14.2 43% 5b. Central, Nova Scotia NS 0.14 - 0.72 0.50 2.2 0.6 - 4.1 NS 0.14 - 0.85 26% Source: 0.58 5.5 Foundation (HBRF) made a new assessment of fish, previously predicted by national or regional models. Evers et al. 2007. 0.14 - 3.79 2.9 - 7.8 93% no data birds, and mammals in the Northeastern United States Using a computer model designed to capture the and Southeastern Canada and found mercury levels in impact of local emission sources, the HBRF team Graphic text, map, and table courtesy of the Hubbard Page 15 many areas higher than predicted. They identified five found that in an area near Concord, N.H., in the vicin- Brook Research Foundation confirmed biological mercury hotspots: the west and ity of the Merrimack Station coal-fired power plant central Adirondack Mountains; the Upper Connecticut (see page 3), the local deposition was four to five times greater than those observed elsewhere in the Northeast. River; the middle and lower portions of the Merrimack higher than EPA’s estimate for the region. The scientists Coincidence? Unlikely. Far more likely is that the data River; the upper portions of the Androscoggin and also used the model to generate other conclusions that analysis provides one more reason to do all we can to Kennebec Rivers; and in Canada, Kejimkujik National suggest EPA may have underestimated the impact of keep mercury out of our waters. Park and central Nova Scotia. The researchers also iden- coal-fired power plants on mercury deposition in areas tified nine suspected hotspots, seven of which are in near large emission sources. Emma Downs, a student at the University of Massachusetts NEIWPCC’s member states. The study did include some encouraging news. Amherst, wrote this article during an internship at An analysis of monitoring data suggests that as mercury NEIWPCC’s Lowell headquarters. What Makes a Hotspot Hot emissions and depositions from local sources decline, The HBRF scientists define a biological mercury hot- mercury levels in fish and wildlife decrease rapidly. For Editor’s Note: After the release of the report on the HBRF spot as a location where mercury concentrations in fish, example, between 1997 and 2002, mercury emissions study, the Electric Power Research Institute, which is birds, or mammals exceed established thresholds for upwind of the hotspot in New Hampshire declined funded by a consortium of electric power producers, issued human or ecological health compared to the surround- 45 percent. In roughly the same period, average blood a statement strongly criticizing a number of the team’s ing landscape. Mercury is deposited in a watershed by mercury concentration in loons from ten study lakes conclusions. That statement plus HBRF’s responses and outside sources and processed by specialized bacteria in the hotspot decreased 64 percent and yellow perch all other materials pertaining to the study are available at to become methyl mercury, a form that is more easily showed a 32 percent drop. These reductions were much www.hubbardbrookfoundation.org. absorbed by animals. Hotspots occur when this process happens at an accelerated rate. Several factors cause this acceleration. One is proximity to large emission sources, as we see in the lower Merrimack River. Also, some watersheds are particularly sensitive to mercury pollution due to the nature Success Stories of their landscape; acid deposition, low nutrient inputs, forest cover, shoreline wetlands, and forest clearcut- In conjunction with the development of the ting can increase mercury accumulation in an area. Northeast Regional Mercury TMDL, NEIWPCC Reservoirs with frequent fluctuations in water level are and our sister interstate agencies, the Northeast also susceptible to mercury buildup because the contin- States for Coordinated Air Use Management ual exposure and rewetting of shore land provides prime conditions for bacteria that produce methyl mercury. (NESCAUM) and the Northeast Waste There’s another key point: Because mercury is a Management Officials’ Association (NEWMOA), fundamental element, it doesn’t break down or degrade, collaborated to produce four reports that docu- so it can travel long distances. Hence, mercury was long ment the impressive results of regional mer- considered a “global” pollutant that travels far from its cury reduction programs. The report seen here, source. Its effects on its immediate environment were “Northeast States Succeed in Reducing Mercury thought to be minimal. Emerging science, however, shows that’s not the case. The reach of mercury’s effects in the Environment,” provides an overview of depends on the type of mercury that is present. the innovative and effective programs that are Elemental mercury (Hg0) is relatively inert and resulting in tangible, significant progress on thus can travel great distances, accounting for mercury’s reducing mercury from in-region sources. The often noted global effect. This species of mercury makes other three reports go into greater detail about up half the emissions of mercury from pulp and paper the accomplishments in the air, water, and waste plants and utility oil boilers, 80 percent of the emissions arenas. All four reports can be accessed at from landfills, and 30 percent of the emissions from coal-fired electric utilities. Reactive gaseous mercury NEIWPCC’s mercury web page (RGM) is more chemically reactive and thus deposits (www.neiwpcc.org/mercury).

Page Page IWR, Winter 2007-08

KatrinaLega continued froml page L 5 ines their own rules for coal-fired utilities, and none allow trading of mercury emissions. Courts to Settle Dispute Over Mercury Strategy Because of their concerns, our states and several by Beth Card, NEIWPCC others (16 in all) joined together to petition EPA’s final agency action on CAMR. In the states’ opening brief ou may have a noticed a theme in this edition of emissions control at least equivalent to the MACT dated January 11, 2007, they presented three main argu- of IWR—a lot of talk about mercury, most floor for those contaminants. Ultimately, EGUs were ments to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. of which enters the environment through added to the Section 112 list of source categories and Their arguments are summarized as follows: Y had to be regulated accordingly. atmospheric deposition. Now, you might be inclined to • EPA exceeded its statutory authority and vio- think this is an air problem, and if it is, to question why The states were, and still are, of the opinion that lated the CAA by removing EGUs from the CAA it’s a big deal for NEIWPCC. The reality is, mercury this was the way to go. EPA’s decision to change course Section 112 list without complying with the man- poses a threat to both air and water resources, and the is in part what is now being litigated. Years after releas- dated procedure. CAA Section 112 doesn’t give Northeast states have been investigating the regulatory ing the 2000 utility report, EPA drafted two proposed EPA authority to rescind its determination. tools available to address the problem. rules and in March 2005 released them for public • EPA’s action violates the CAA by exempting EGUs It turns out that both the Clean Air Act (CAA) comment. The two rules are known as the Clean Air from Section 112 based on an erroneous “new and Clean Water Act (CWA) may be able to offer rem- Mercury Rule (CAMR) and the Clean Air Interstate interpretation” of Section 112(n) and CAMR and edies. On the CWA side, the obvious tool is a TMDL, Rule (CAIR). EPA said the two rules build off each CAIR. The revised determination under Section and the Northeast Regional Mercury TMDL that was other to “significantly reduce emissions from coal-fired 112 of what is appropriate and necessary is con- submitted to EPA on October 24 focuses on mercury power plants” and said that “when fully implemented, trary to Congressional intent. There is no basis reaching our waters via atmospheric deposition and these rules will reduce utility emissions of mercury in CAIR or CAMR by which EPA can revise its notes that these contributions are primarily from out- from 48 tons per year to 15 tons, a reduction of nearly determination of “appropriate and necessary.” of-region sources (see article on page 1). With regard to 70 percent.” This sounds like the solution the Northeast • CAMR’s regulation of mercury under Section 111 the CAA, a legal challenge is underway, with the states states are looking for, but according to the calculations is contrary to the statute. The scope and require- citing a need for EPA to implement more stringent con- presented in the Regional Mercury TMDL, the reduc- ments of cap-and-trade under Section 111 is mis- trols. The legal maneuvering is the latest development in tions aren’t enough to make our fish safe to eat again. used. Section 111(d) limits this section to those a story that began long ago—17 years ago to be exact. Also, the deadline for the reductions to be implemented pollutants that are not emitted from a source is 2018, and many feel that is too long to wait. category which is regulated under Section 112. Roots of the Rules Mercury is a HAP under Section 112. In 1990, the CAA was amended to require among other States Make Their Case things that EPA study the health hazards of electric util- Of the two rules, it’s the CAMR that has been the main EPA stated its position in a reply brief on May 4, ity steam generating units (EGUs), otherwise known focus of the legal debate over controlling atmospheric 2007. One of its main points in response to the states’ as power plants, and determine whether the agency mercury. The original proposal included two options: argument about delisting EGUs from Section 112 of the deemed it appropriate and necessary to regulate the one maintained the listing of EGUs and sought to CAA was that the original 2000 finding lacked foun- emissions of hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) under regulate them under Section 112 by using MACT stan- dation, and thus the determination was wrong. EPA Section 112 of the CAA. This section of the act regulates dards or a cap-and-trade program; the other proposed further stated that the agency “reasonably determined HAPs and provides a list of all of the pollutants regu- to remove EGUs from the Section 112 list and instead that it is not appropriate to regulate power plant mer- lated under this category. regulate them through a cap-and-trade program under cury emissions under Section 112 because hazards to EPA conducted the study and in 2000 released its Section 111, which is the section that provides standards public health are not reasonably anticipated to occur report. It stated that “mercury from coal-fired utilities of performance for new stationary sources. as a result of power plant mercury emissions following is the HAP of greatest potential concern” and said it EPA ultimately chose the latter approach, lead- implementation of Act requirements.” With regard to was indeed necessary to regulate those emissions. This ing a number of parties to petition for the rules to be the cap-and-trade strategy, EPA said that “a significant determination triggered the requirement to set plant- reconsidered. While EPA did grant that reconsideration advantage of a cap-and-trade approach to regulation, specific emissions standards based on maximum achiev- on a number of issues, the agency issued a final rule in such as that established in CAMR or CAIR, is that it able control technology (MACT). To develop standards June 2006 with only a few changes. CAMR remained a limits the overall amount of emissions from the indus- using MACT for a particular source category, EPA looks rule that utilized authority under Section 111 and was try, regardless of how many new sources are built, at the best level of emissions reductions achieved on intent on implementing a cap-and-trade program. Cap- whereas a Section 112 approach would just limit emis- similar sources through clean processes, control devices, and-trade, whereby there’s a limit on total emissions but sions from particular sources and would not preclude work practices, and other methods. These emissions lev- individual plants can buy and sell pollution credits, is an overall emissions from increasing beyond a cap as new els set a baseline, often referred to as the “MACT floor,” approach that NEIWPCC’s member states unanimously sources went into operation.” for the new standard. At a minimum, a MACT standard oppose because of concerns over the increased potential for mercury and other HAPs emitted from power plants for localized mercury deposition hotspots. Our member Waiting Game would need to achieve, throughout the industry, a level states that have EGUs to regulate have all developed The list is long of areas where the states, environmental advocacy groups, industry, and EPA disagree on the best New England Interstate 116 John Water Pollution Control Low Street Commission ell, Massachusetts www.neiwpcc.org/lustline.htm 01852-1124 Bulletin 57 way to regulate air emissions and control mercury pol- November New from NEIWPCC 2007 lution. And while opening arguments in the appellate

L.U.S.T.A Report On Federal & St ate Programs To Control LINELeaking Under court should have already begun by the time you are ground Storage Tanks n November, we published the latest issue of LUSTLine, which It’s Always Something! reading this article, we will likely not see a final deci- That Element of Surprise in Analyzing for Gasoline since 1985 has been covering the issues of importance to the Compounds sion until Spring. So it’s wait-and-see again, not only on

etroleum products—gasoline, diesel fuel, heati are composed of hundreds of chemicals, some of ng oil— underground storage tanks community. (LUST stands for leaking are present in crude oil and some not. Fuel the outcome of this legal battle but also the Northeast P which various classes of compounds. The bulk of the posed of petroleum hydrocarbon constituents s contain either present in crude oil or in very simil fuel is com- produced by refining (e.g., iso-octanes). The that are ar compounds I blend these compounds into a finished product What is in these gasoline free-product samples—BTEX? Regional Mercury TMDL. The two certainly go hand in underground storage tank.) The new LUSTLine features a detailed look refineries to complex requirements derived from regu type, component abundance, and operating cha according MtBE? TBA? 1,2 DCA? TAME? DIPE? EDB? ETBE?… lation, crude-oil Additives are used for a wide variety of purpo racteristics. ethanol, and methanol can also be found in for example, are detergents required by leum products. Amendments (CAAA) of 1990. Because fuel ad ses. Some, various petro- at developments in analyzing for and monitoring various chemical the Clean Air Act As we’ve learned from New England Inters hand, as the TMDL makes statements consistent with proprietary, we know little about their properti Pollution Control Commission surveys of state ronmental behavior. ditives are tate Water es and envi- gram experiences, many states don’t analyz At the beginning of the underground storage tank compounds. (See LUST program our approach to site assessment at a fuel-r NEIWPCC’s 2006 SurveyLUSTLine of Tank Programs… e for these pro- #56, “The Results of was to look for benzene, toluene, ethylbe the ethers are used to boost octane, they have be xylenes (BTEX). This was a logical approach elease site ”) Because those made by the Attorneys General on behalf of the components in fuels that can cause environmental problems if a tank conventional gasoline. Some states that ma nzene, and reasons: benzene is a carcinogen; many gaso they didn’t have these chemicals because they en used in for three key y have thought pounds have a very low effective water solu required have been surprised. highly volatile compounds are quickly lost to th line com- were not And we’re on the verge of another surprise— phere. However, this approach began to chang bility; and e atmos- scavengers. These compounds, which were use has leaked. The coverage includes contributions by Patricia Ellis, methyl tert-butyl ether (MtBE) usage and releases became the lead states in the CAMR litigation—that is, that the neces- common in reformulated gasoline after the pa e when d until the CAAA. ■ continued on page 2 ssage of the Inside Most of us now know that MtBE was used 2 TBA, Go Away! octane booster to replace leaded additives. Alth earlier as an warnings about MtBE were raised, most peop 5 What About 1,2-DCA? ough some sary reductions are possible if MACT standards under Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, LUST program were unaware of the impend 7 Musings on the UST Challe this chemical would cause. And MtBE isn’t the o le in the nges of the Future ing problems 9 The Gospel According to additive whose use has resulted in unple Phil ethers such as nly fuel 13 Egads, Not a Test! tert-amyl methyl ether (TAME),asant di-isopropyl surprises: ether (DIPE), and to a lesser degree ethyl 14 California Field Study on A and Mark Toso, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, who reveal their (ETBE), and alcohols such as TG and LLD Systems CAA Section 112 are implemented at 90 percent. tert--butyl ether 14 Update on Bad Gas in West Vir tertiary -butyl alcohol (TBA), ginia 16 STI Online Recertification for C experiences with high levels of tert-butyl alcohol (TBA) and athodic-Protection Testers How will it all play out? Hard to say. But one 1,2-dichloroethane (1,2-DCA) at some of their LUST sites. thing’s for certain—the outcome will be an important The current issue of LUSTLine and all issues since June 2004 can be accessed in their entirety factor in determining how, and when, we see significant at www.neiwpcc.org/lustline, where you can also download the new version of the LUSTLine reductions in the mercury in our waters. Index. The index provides a comprehensive list of every article ever printed in LUSTLine and the issue in which it appeared. Archive issues unavailable on our website can be ordered by calling NEIWPCC Beth Card ([email protected]) is NEIWPCC’s Director at 978-323-7929. of Water Quality Programs and a licensed attorney in Massachusetts.

Page IWR, Winter 2007-08

Katrina continued from page 5 onstrate the effectiveness of best management practices Winning Combination (BMPs) in reducing stormwater and nonpoint source NEIWPCC Collaborating with UNH Stormwater Center pollution. That finding sparked our initial conversa- tions with Dr. Roseen, which already have borne fruit as by Laura Chan, NEIWPCC we work together to increase knowledge of stormwater management, particularly Low Impact Development t sounds like an ideal partnership: A university ative to helping the center remain focused on the most (LID) technologies. center specializing in stormwater treatment tech- critical research areas,” Dr. Roseen said. NEIWPCC and the UNH Stormwater Center nologies teams up with an interstate agency with But this relationship is not just about com- will continue to work towards the common goal of I providing watershed stakeholders with the information expertise in water quality outreach and education. And munication. Under the Assessment and Watershed so far, so good. Protection Program Grant, U.S. EPA has awarded funds required to make important environmental decisions “For stormwater research, the combination of to NEIWPCC for a project with the center to investigate related to stormwater management. We are working NEIWPCC and the University of New Hampshire the nutrient removal mechanisms of constructed gravel together to conceptualize projects and actively seek Stormwater Center is a slam-dunk,” said Dr. Robert wetlands used for stormwater control in a northern cli- funding opportunities to pursue necessary research. The Roseen. mate. NEIWPCC is managing the project and providing partnership has shown that by working collaboratively

Sharing the Knowledge Members of NEIWPCC’s Stormwater Workgroup were among those Expert Explanation During the workshop, Dr. Roseen (center) described the workings of a tree box listening as Dr. Robert Roseen (right), director of the UNH Stormwater Center, conducted a BMP filter that treats stormwater runoff from a UNH parking lot. Technology Demonstration Workshop at the center’s field site in Durham, N.H.

Dr. Roseen is the director of the UNH Stormwater input from state and federal regulators for overall proj- on stormwater research, we can accomplish more than if Center, which is located on the UNH campus in ect direction. The center is providing technical expertise each organization acted alone. Durham, N.H., and is the only facility of its kind in and oversight of the project, with its researchers utiliz- The UNH Stormwater Center is funded by the nation. Its mission: to further the research and ing the constructed gravel wetlands at the center’s field the Cooperative Institute for Coastal and Estuarine development of stormwater treatment systems and to site and directing the laboratory analysis of samples. Environmental Technology (CICEET) and the National provide resources to communities that are designing Both organizations will disseminate the results of the Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). For and implementing measures to meet federal stormwater project in the technology transfer phase. more information, visit www.unh.edu/erg/cstev/. regulations. Currently, the center is conducting side-by- As with all NEIWPCC projects, the needs side comparison tests of 15 stormwater management expressed by our member states were the driving force. Laura Chan ([email protected]) is a NEIWPCC systems, under strictly controlled conditions. A survey of state and federal stormwater and nonpoint Environmental Analyst and the coordinator of all of our Since its founding in 2004, the center has proven source coordinators conducted by NEIWPCC’s Regional NPDES and stormwater-related activities, including our itself to be an effective and valuable resource for the Research Initiative Steering Committee showed that Stormwater and NPS Workgroups and our work with the investigation and promotion of innovative stormwater among the states’ highest priorities was research to dem- UNH Stormwater Center. management strategies. But it’s a small operation, and can’t do everything. The center’s directors are now seek- sustainable life. In this inaugural “Green Corner,” we ing to increase its effectiveness at communicating its New IWR Feature! bring you a brief quiz that focuses on ways to be more research to government agencies, non-profit organiza- The by Susy King, NEIWPCC environmentally conscious in the workplace. The tions, and other stakeholders working to protect the At NEIWPCC, we have answers are on page 17. health of watersheds. That’s where NEIWPCC comes in. Green long focused on improving For years, our Stormwater and Nonpoint Source water quality in our member 1. Paper represents what percentage of office Pollution Workgroups have brought together state and Corner states, but we must admit that waste? federal regulators from the New England states and New we have not always focused on the A. 5 B. 15 York State for discussions of key issues. Through this impacts that our organization has on the environ- C. 50 D. 70 workgroup framework and our related outreach activi- ment. We are now working to correct that oversight. ties, NEIWPCC is well positioned to facilitate a dialogue Recently, we formed a sustainability committee at our 2. If one million people shut down their office com- between the UNH Stormwater Center and watershed Lowell headquarters to implement new policies and puters overnight, how many tons of carbon dioxide stakeholders. This communication is not simply a one- practices that will make our workplace more environ- emissions would be eliminated per year? way dialogue. We present our Stormwater and Nonpoint mentally friendly. Committee members are working A. 1,000 B. 20,000 Source Workgroup members with important find- on projects that will reduce waste and energy use by C. 45,000 D. 1,000,000 ings and results from the center, while collecting and encouraging paper recycling, the use of non-dispos- compiling feedback from workgroup members on the able plates and utensils, and less reliance on bottled 3. Compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs) use what needs and goals of state programs regarding stormwater water. fraction of the energy of incandescent light bulbs? research, education, training, and outreach. In addition, each issue of IWR will now include A. 1/10 B. 1/4 “Input on the current and pressing research needs a new feature that will provide tips for leading a more C. 1/2 D. 3/4 from state and federal regulators in this region is imper-

Page Page IWR, Winter 2007-08

2007: A Milestone Year Birth Record On July 31, 1947, members of the U.S. by Stephen Hochbrunn, NEIWPCC Senate and House of Representatives hroughout NEIWPCC’s history, it has never been the organization’s style to bring attention passed the legisla- to itself. What has always been important is the work, the progress toward cleaner water— tion that established not the need to bask in the spotlight. But occasionally we reach milestones that point to the NEIWPCC. Shown at T central role that NEIWPCC has played for so many years in the world of water pollution control. left is page one of the In 2007, we reached two such milestones: we marked our 60th year in existence, and held the four-page compact, 200th meeting of our Commissioners. As you might expect from a humble organization, we didn’t and as can be seen, throw a big party—we’ll save that for our 100th anniversary—and instead chose to celebrate this only Connecticut, important year in our history in more subtle ways. Our graphic designer, Cindy Barnard, designed the Massachusetts, and eye-catching logo that appears on this page and which has graced our website throughout the year. We Rhode Island had ratified it at the time resurrected and reread the compact that formed NEIWPCC in 1947 (the first page of which is repro- of passage. Shortly duced here), noting how true the organization has stayed over the years to its original mission. th thereafter, however, We also chose to fully document our 200 meeting in pictures, a number of which you see here. Vermont, Maine, New Space doesn’t permit us to include all of our favorite shots of the meeting, which took place on Hampshire, and New May 17-18 at the Hawthorne Hotel in Salem, Mass. If you’d like to see a more representative York formally joined compilation, visit our website at www.neiwpcc.org/newsroom/200thphotos. the Commission.

Partners in Progress Participants in NEIWPCC’s 200th Commission Meeting strike a pose in the lobby of the Hawthorne Hotel in Salem, Mass. Seated (left to right): Tom Groves, Becky Weidman, Beth Card, Susy King, Susan Sullivan (all NEIWPCC), Denise Springborg (formerly NEIWPCC, now MassDEP). Standing (left to right): Al Curran, Maine; Frank Thomas, N.H.; Bill Taylor, Maine; Leo Hetling, N.Y.; Nelson Thibault, N.H.; th Meeting gets underway in the Hawthorne Hotel’s elegant ballroom. Alicia Good, RI DEM; Charlie Button, Mass.; Astrid Hanzalek, Conn.; Dick Svenson, NYSDOH; Sandi Allen, The 200 NYSDEC; Ron Poltak, NEIWPCC; Jeanette Bengtson, NEIWPCC; Roger Janson, EPA; Bob Varney, EPA; Stephen Perkins, EPA; Clough Toppan, ME DHHS; Harry Stewart, NHDES; Yvonne Bolton, CT DEP; Andy Fisk, ME DEP; Les Sutton, Mass.; Don Pryor, R.I.; Mike Jennings, NEIWPCC; Al Bromberg, N.Y.

Roger Janson (second from left), Chief, Municipal NPDES Permit Program, EPA New England, leads a discussion on nutrient removal technology. At left is Tom Groves, Director of Wastewater and Onsite Programs, NEIWPCC. Susan Sullivan, Deputy Director, NEIWPCC, and Andy Fisk, Director, Harry Stewart, Director, Water Division, New Bureau of Land and Water Quality, Maine Hampshire Department of Environmental Department of Environmental Protection. Services, and NEIWPCC Chair (2006-2007).

Page 10 IWR, Winter 2007-08

As for what it was like to actually be at the meeting, we asked our Chair, Harry Stewart of the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services, to provide his thoughts. “It was a privilege to preside over the 200th Commission meeting,” Stewart said. “NEIWPCC meetings provide an outstanding opportunity to exchange ideas and approaches to water quality challenges on a regional basis. Looking back at the history, the most impressive thing about NEIWPCC is how the focus has evolved, as the regional and national issues and needs have changed. For example, in the early years, the focus was on basic pollution control in interstate waters. Sixty years later, NEIWPCC has just completed arguably the most successful specialty conference to date for state regulators on the emerging issue of the potential water quality impacts of pharmaceuticals in wastewater discharges [see article on page 1]. NEIWPCC will continue to be a leading edge organization on environmental policy issues and professional training into the future.” Thank you, Harry, for the kind words. And thank you to all of you who have played a part in NEIWPCC’s success, who have joined with us over the years in our efforts to serve and assist our member states in their pursuit of clean water. We’ve come a long way since 1947. We couldn’t have done it without you.

Ron Poltak, Executive Director, NEIWPCC.

Beth Card (left), Director of Water Quality Programs, NEIWPCC, with Alicia Good, Assistant Director, Water Resources, Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management, and incoming NEIWPCC Chair. Good will be the first female Chair in NEIWPCC’s history.

Bob Varney, Regional Administrator, EPA New England. A frequent participant in NEIWPCC Commission Meetings, Varney served as our Chair in 1995 and 1996, when he was Commissioner of the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services.

Dick Kotelly, NEIWPCC’s Treasurer, delivers the results of our Fiscal 2006 audit, in which the auditors once again gave us the highest opinion an organization can receive.

Yvonne Bolton (left), Bureau Chief, Materials Management and Compliance Assurance Bureau, Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, with Astrid Hanzalek, a NEIWPCC Commissioner since 1993 and former chair of the Connecticut River Watershed Council. One sweet celebration!

Page 10 Page 11 IWR, Winter 2007-08

KatrinaPPCP Conference continued fromcontinued page 5from page 1 “There are no benefits from triclosan for known to harm aquatic life. “But we do have a long way the average consumer,” Halden said. “Regular to go in terms of setting standards for other PPCPs.” soap works just as well as an antimicrobial, plus To set standards, EPA needs data, and the Office we know it’s benign environmentally and has of Water has embarked on several key projects, includ- been used safely for centuries.” ing a national pilot study of PPCPs in fish. Researchers are sampling for 37 PPCPs in fish tissue from five U.S. Information Source streams at locations where the effluent from a waste- The U.S. Geological Survey cosponsored the water treatment plant dominates the flow. According to Portland forum, no surprise given it’s produced Conerly, that analysis should be finished by the end of some of the finest and most influential research the year. The Office of Water is also sampling for phar- to come out on PPCPs. In 2002, USGS published maceuticals, including steroids and hormones, in the a landmark study showing that half of the 139 influent, effluent, and sludge of a number of publicly streams the agency sampled nationwide con- owned wastewater treatment plants around the country. tained seven or more organic wastewater con- Look for that study to be complete by December 2009. taminants, including antibiotics and synthetic Will we ever move from research to regulation? hormones. USGS has also conducted significant At a Congressional hearing in Washington in late 2006, research on contaminants known as endocrine lawmakers chided EPA officials, including Assistant Points of Consideration Pat Phillips of the U.S. Geological Survey, disruptors, because they can interfere with hor- Administrator for Water Ben Grumbles, for taking too a leading expert on PPCPs and their environmental impact, delivers a monal activity and disrupt functions such as long to determine if the presence in the Potomac River presentation on organic wastewater contaminants in the Lake Champlain reproduction. In January 2007, for example, the of male fish with female sexual characteristics was a sign basin. agency reported that endocrine disruptors such that PPCPs were in the water at a level that could harm as flame retardants and a initiatives. As the conference went on, one thing became banned fungicide were found clear: while there’s a lot we know about PPCPs, there’s a in Potomac River tributaries, and lot left to be learned. But to wait to do anything about that the chemicals may be to blame them until our knowledge base is complete would be a for all the male smallmouth bass in mistake. the waters that are exhibiting female As Robert Varney, EPA New England’s Regional characteristics. Administrator, said in his opening remarks, “We know In his presentation at the there are significant data gaps that need to be filled. We forum, USGS’s Edward Furlong recognize there are many unknowns. But let’s move for- didn’t touch on the January report, ward while the questions are being answered.” but did discuss several USGS studies currently underway. In Boulder Grounds for Examination Creek, Colorado, samples taken at a As a field of research, the study of PPCPs in the envi- wastewater treatment plant’s point ronment is relatively young. The term PPCP itself has of discharge showed a surge in levels only been in use since 1999, when it appeared in a of the female sex hormone estradiol review published in the journal Environmental Health in the water. “Downstream, there Perspectives. Around some basic details, there is no were still significant levels,” Furlong dispute. PPCPs, which include everything from anti- said, “and they were always above depressants to caffeine and the chemicals in your favor- the effects level.” On-Air Exposure Maine Public Broadcasting Network’s Jeanne Baron (right) inter- ite shampoo, are produced and used in large quantities. Furlong was referring to lev- viewed Dr. Rolf Halden of Johns Hopkins University (center) after his presentation at the They enter the environment when they are excreted, els that could potentially affect fish, conference. The interview aired on MPBN on August 8 and can still be heard online at flushed down the toilet, rinsed down the drain, or put but among the public, the burning www.mpbn.net/asx/070808chemicals.asx. Also pictured, NEIWPCC’s Marianna Vulli, the in the trash. Once in the environment, the chemicals question is whether people can pos- organizer of the forum and coordinator of our Regional Research Initiative. appear in very low concentrations. What researchers sibly be affected. On its website, EPA are still trying to determine is the specific risks the low emphasizes that, “to date, no evidence has been found of humans. U.S. Rep. Jim Moran, D-Va., was quoted as say- concentrations pose, to both aquatic organisms and to human health effects from PPCPs in the environment.” ing, “It seems [the EPA] looks for any excuse it can find humans. But the impact on humans is still an open question, and to delay the implementation of regulations that could One of those researchers, Dr. Rolf Halden of scientists—in the United States and elsewhere—are con- affect public health.” Grumbles acknowledged the con- Johns Hopkins University, delivered the conference’s tinually learning more about PPCPs and their effects. cerns, but emphasized that the issues were complex, that first presentation. “Most of the chemicals in your sham- Are we in the U.S. learning fast enough? For years, more information was needed about how compounds poo and other personal products,” Halden said, “have some of the best research on PPCPs has come out of interact. not been adequately tested for toxicity.” Europe—as USGS’s Pat Phillips, one of the Northeast’s EPA has also taken criticism from some corners As an example, he cited triclosan, the active ingre- top experts on the environmental impact of PPCPs, for its work with other government agencies on new dient in popular soaps labeled “antibacterial.” According pointed out during an IWR interview in November guidelines for the disposal of unused prescription drugs. to Halden, a study in Maryland found that all but 3 2005. At the Portland forum, Phillips said during an The guidelines, which were released under the banner percent of the triclosan entering a wastewater treat- interview that the amount of PPCP research in this of the White House Office of National Drug Control ment plant was removed in the treatment process, but country is improving. Policy, include a list of drugs that the government that doesn’t mean it all disappeared. He said about half “We’re starting to do better,” said Phillips, who advises users to flush down the toilet rather than throw of the triclosan in the influent ended up in the plant’s spoke at the forum and also served on the planning in the trash. The list includes notoriously abused drugs biosolids, the treated sludge destined to be applied to team. “The Europeans are progressing too, but we’re such as OxyContin; the Office of National Drug Control farmland as fertilizer. catching up.” Policy believes that by flushing them, they won’t end up “This may not be a problem, but maybe it is,” in the wrong hands. The National Association of Clean Halden said. “What is the half life of triclosan? Are there Federal Attention Water Agencies criticized the idea for its potential to earthworms ingesting it, which are then eaten by birds, The presence of EPA officials at the forum spoke to that increase the flushing of all drugs, not just those on the and the chemical makes its way up the food chain?” agency’s growing interest. In addition to Varney, Octavia list. Flushing of course puts drugs in the waste stream, Halden is seeking the answers, and like Varney, Conerly from EPA’s Office of Water in Washington deliv- where they all too easily end up in waterways. he’s urging action while the research advances. Educate ered a presentation. Her focus—the work done and yet During an interview at the forum, EPA’s Conerly people about the potential toxicity of triclosan, he said, to be done. said the agency had to go along with the flushing guide- and they may decide against paying a premium to buy “We did recently set a standard for nonylphenol,” lines. “The Food and Drug Administration wants [the products containing it—especially when they realize Conerly said, referring to EPA’s release in 2006 of the 13 drugs on the list] to be flushed,” she said. “Right now, what that premium’s buying them. safe levels in water for one particular chemical that’s we had no other choice.”

Page 12 IWR, Winter 2007-08

Katrina continued from page 5 But Conerly said EPA wants to come up with a Obviously PPCPs were moving through septic systems quickly about the room, bringing a microphone to the better solution. “We need to come up with a way that to groundwater and into ponds, with the potential for questioners. Vulli displayed the same energy she showed the public can dispose of the drugs,” she said, “maybe biological implications. What about drinking water throughout the preparations for the conference, as she through a national take-back program. That would be a wells that might pull from the same groundwater? “It’s led the effort to make it a reality. The end result was multi-agency effort.” best to locate wells as far from septic systems as pos- clearly appreciated. With multiple agencies involved, such a federal sible,” Standley said. “But that’s hard to do in high resi- “It’s great that NEIWPCC put this conference program is a long way off, if it happens at all. But take- dential density areas.” together to allow us all to share information,” said Shayne back programs on a smaller scale already exist, and At this stage in this field of study, nobody has Mitchell of New York State’s Bureau of Water Permits. were a hot topic at the forum. Ann Pistell of Maine’s all the answers—especially when there are so many Praise came from the private sector attendees as Department of Environmental Protection spoke about questions. The issue of PPCPs in biosolids, which Rolf well. “It’s good to get a background about the problem,” Maine’s pharmaceutical mail-back legislation and the Halden raised in the opening presentation, came up said Hatim Fadlalla of the environmental engineering state’s practice of holding large one-day drug collec- again on the second day as USGS’s James Gray deliv- firm, Wright-Pierce. “We are anticipating that this will tion events. Rebecca Walter of the Minnesota Pollution ered a compelling talk on his research. Gray and his be a hot issue in the years to come.” Control Agency discussed that state’s impressive research partners collected and analyzed liquid and sol- “It was a terrific two days,” said NEIWPCC’s Healthcare Hazardous Waste Initiative. Through educa- ids samples from five U.S. wastewater treatment plants Vulli. “I was thrilled by the greater than excepted turn- tional workshops and enforcement actions, Minnesota to determine how different treatment processes affected out, which tells me that we made the right decision has dramatically reduced the amount of pharmaceuti- the degradation of hormones. While the study won’t to dedicate this forum to this topic at this time. And cals and other hazardous wastes improperly disposed of be published until 2008, Gray discussed some prelimi- we couldn’t have done it without our planning team, by healthcare facilities. For example, Minnesota is now nary results. He’s found that while the plants’ biological which succeeded in developing a robust agenda that recycling the 25,000 gallons of formalin, a hazardous treatment can remove up to 90 percent of hormones brought together a terrific group of speakers. I believe fixative, that used to end up in its sewers every year. from liquids, the plants’ treated biosolids are enriched we achieved what we set out to do, which was to provide in hormones by comparison. Of course, we’re talking attendees with a foundation for understanding the issue Learning Experience about very low levels, but the levels don’t have to be of PPCPs in the water environment.” With more than 30 presentations over two days, the high to be a concern. This was the first Northeast Water Science Forum, forum provided participants with a lot of information “I wouldn’t say this issue has been overlooked,” and its success invigorated plans to make it a regular to absorb. Too much, perhaps, had it not been for the said Gray in an interview. “But we now have the ana- event. NEIWPCC is now exploring topics for the next ardent interest. Throughout the conference, the long lytical technology for measuring these compounds at edition, and as details become available, they will be rows of chairs stayed filled as speakers such as the Silent the very low levels where they are biologically relevant. posted on our website (www.neiwpcc.org). For more on Spring Institute’s Laurel Standley engaged listeners with It’s very challenging though, and we’re still refining the PPCP forum, including access to many of the pre- stories and science. the methods.” EPA is also looking closely at this issue; sentations and a directory of attendees, go to “Clearly we have a link,” Standley said, as she earlier this year, the agency added PPCPs to the con- www.neiwpcc.org/ppcpconference. described a study of contamination in ponds on Cape taminants it’s looking for in biosolids examined in its At NEIWPCC we are committed to following Cod that are fed primarily by groundwater, rather than National Sewage Sludge Survey. Contrary to Gray’s developments in the PPCP arena, and to keeping our rivers and streams. “In ponds surrounded by residen- research, however, EPA’s results are not expected any- member states informed through our website, publica- tial development serviced by septic tanks, we found time soon. tions, and Commission and workgroup meetings. As hormones and pharmaceuticals in the water, at low Spirited question-and-answer sessions followed was made clear by the experience in Portland, it’s a topic levels.” The link was so clear because few if any PPCPs each presentation, and NEIWPCC’s Marianna Vulli, the people want to know about and need to know about. were found in ponds in low residential density areas. coordinator of our Regional Research Initiative, moved Overlooked? No more. Version 3.0 Revealing Findings in Latest NEIWPCC Tanks Survey they have standards for ethanol, only a slight increase by Kara Sergeant, NEIWPCC from 2003. In states without standards, there is no requirement to look for ethanol contamination, so ow many states have standards for ethanol? remediation cost impacts, vapor-intrusion pathway, haz- potential problems may go unnoticed. You can find that information and much ardous substance USTs, heating oil tanks, out-of-service Drinking Water Impacts: The ability of a state more in the results of the third version of tanks, ethanol, and miscellany. to prevent drinking water contamination from LUSTs H State LUST managers from all 50 states responded and to prioritize cleanups is enhanced when infor- a national survey NEIWPCC first conducted in 2000. While the content of the surveys has evolved over the electronically through a password-protected website. mation is shared between a state’s drinking water/ years, the primary goal has remained the same: to get Among the findings: source water protection program and its UST/LUST a national snapshot of assessment and remediation Remediation Cost: Gasoline plumes from leak- programs. In the survey, many states said there was issues related to leaking underground storage tanks ing tanks are expensive to cleanup, but how much does some communication between these areas, but the (LUSTs) across the country. gasoline composition matter with respect to cost? MtBE responses underscored the need to do more in this The latest survey builds upon the information has traditionally been seen as a driver in remediation area. NEIWPCC will continue to explore opportuni- gained in the previous editions. In 2000, the focus costs because it is highly mobile in groundwater and ties to encourage cross-program coordination. In was on methyl tertiary-butyl ether (MtBE), while often expensive to treat. But the survey showed most recent years, we have held meetings in Massachusetts, the 2003 survey emphasized all fuel oxygenates. Our states do not feel MtBE increases a site’s cleanup costs, Illinois, and Minnesota that brought together state focus in 2007 is captured in the survey’s title: “State though the chemical continues to be a concern because UST, LUST, State Fund, and groundwater and source Experiences with Petroleum and Hazardous Substance of its well deserved reputation for being difficult to water program staff in an effort to foster greater col- Releases at LUST Sites, Heating Oil Tanks, and Out of remediate and its potential impact on drinking water laboration. Service Tanks.” Because this was our third survey, we wells and human health. These are only a few highlights from the exten- were able to compare results from the previous edi- Did the increased use of other oxygenates impact sive survey results, which will be useful to state and tions and note changes. cleanup costs? Again, the states said no. So if gasoline federal government staff as well as industry personnel NEIWPCC’s contractor on the project, Ellen composition doesn’t impact cleanup costs, what does? interested in LUST trends. For the complete results, Frye of Enosis – The Environmental Outreach Group, The survey showed the key factors are the length of the visit the survey section on our website developed the questions with Pat Ellis of Delaware’s contamination plumes and the need for monitoring. (www.neiwpcc.org/mtbe.asp), where you can also find Department of Natural Resources and Environmental The longer the plume, and the more extensive the moni- detailed information on the 2000 and 2003 surveys. Control. Several state LUST program staff reviewed toring, the higher the cost. the questions for clarity and content. The survey Ethanol: The increase in nationwide ethanol con- Kara Sergeant is a NEIWPCC Environmental Analyst, was divided into 12 areas: state standards for specific sumption is clear. According to the survey results, there and was the coordinator of the 2007 survey. For more gasoline additives/blends, fuel blend/additive analysis, are E85 (85 percent ethanol) gas stations in 34 states. information about the survey and the results, contact site assessment, drinking water impacts, remediation, Despite the increase in use, only seven states indicated her at [email protected].

Page 12 Page 13 IWR, Winter 2007-08

used, length and weight of fish caught, total number of Fishing for Data hours fished, and any additional remarks. The Hudson River Striped Bass Cooperative Angler Program Although the focus of the CAP is striped bass, anglers are asked to record all their Hudson River fish- by Kris McShane, NEIWPCC/Hudson River Estuary Program ing trips. Having all trips recorded gives biologists an estimate of how often striped bass are the target species he recovery over the last 15 years of the once from the data, fishing regulations are proposed to and how often they are caught as bycatch (fish caught decimated striped bass (Morone saxatilis) prevent overfishing and maintain the stocks of fish at when the angler is targeting a different species). T population has led to a large recreational sustainable levels. The ASMFC can also mandate that a While the information in the 2007 diaries is still fishery on the Hudson River. But to sustain a thriving state agency run a specific sampling program to gather being analyzed, the 2006 diaries have been thoroughly and healthy striped bass population in the Hudson, it important data needed to manage a particular stock of reviewed—and the findings are revealing. (2006 was is critical that the species not be overfished. To do that fish. the first year in some time that a CAP was run on requires detailed, accurate information on the fish and Such a mandate is in place for striped bass in the the Hudson due to shortfalls in budget and staffing.) the fishing. Who better to provide it than those reeling Hudson for good reason: the river has the only estuary Fifty-three of the anglers contacted agreed to become in the lines? In the Hudson estuary, some of the neces- on the coast where fishing of striped bass is allowed volunteers and were sent diaries, but only 19 diaries sary data is indeed coming from recreational anglers, when the fish are on their spawning grounds. This heavy were returned. However, those 19 anglers provided good thanks to a program that solicits them to voluntarily fishing pressure could have an effect on the stock of information on the Hudson’s spring recreational fishery. record information about their fishing trips in a log- striped bass that spawn in the Hudson and then migrate The 19 fishermen totaled 253 fishing trips, and book. along the Atlantic coast. As a result, the ASMFC requires logged information for 576 anglers who fished for a total of 3,405 angler hours. Of the trips, 248 targeted striped bass and five targeted river herring (blueback herring or alewives) to be used as bait for striped bass. All the trips occurred between mid-March and mid- June. Of the 248 fishing trips targeting striped bass, 177 (71.4 percent) were successful, meaning at least one striped bass was caught. In total, anglers caught 622 bass, of which 124 were kept and 496 released. Anglers recorded measurements of 580 individual bass. Of these, 501 (87 percent) were longer than the minimum legal size limit of 18 inches. Probably due to the one-fish-per-day regulation, many anglers practiced “catch and release” even when a legal fish was caught. Of the 501 legal stripers caught, 380 (76 percent) were released and 21 were kept. The diaries showed the majority of the striped bass fishing on the Hudson in 2006 was done from a boat and that the terminal tackle of choice was natural bait, primarily herring.

Journaling for a Cause In a project coordinated by NEIWPCC staff, anglers who fish the Hudson River use diaries to provide data on their trips. The data is part of a pool of information used by officials to set effective regulations for managing the East Coast’s stock of striped bass.

Moving Target the Hudson River Fisheries Unit of the New An angler diary program is particularly important with York State Department of Environmental striped bass because it’s an anadromous fish species, Conservation to conduct a Cooperative meaning the fish spend all or part of their adult life in Angler Program (CAP) to gather information Diarist’s Dream Brian Brockett of Otisville, N.Y., a participant in the angler salt water and return to freshwater streams and rivers to on the recreational striped bass fishing that diary program, shows off a striper caught in May 2006 near Kingston, N.Y. spawn. That makes it difficult for fisheries managers to occurs in the river each spring. The fish, which weighed more than 47 pounds, earned Brockett first place in the Annual Hudson River Striped Bass Derby. manage the population. Striped bass in the Atlantic Ocean migrate along Written Records the East Coast from North Carolina to Maine, and The CAP, also known as the angler diary program, is a spawn in the major estuaries, primarily Chesapeake Bay valuable tool used by fisheries biologists to evaluate fish Angler diary programs are utilized by states and and the Delaware and Hudson River estuaries. The long populations. It is a cost-effective way for biologists to agencies across the country to track the populations of migratory route means the species must be managed gather an important, and often difficult to collect, set of many different fish species in both inland and marine on a coastwise basis. Handling this task is the Atlantic data used when studying the dynamics of a fish popula- systems, and to gauge the fishing pressure on them. If States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC), which tion. Information from the diaries is used to estimate you fish and are willing to log your fishing trips (even consists of three members from each state on the East harvest rates, catch rates, mortality rates, and popula- those where you catch nothing), contact the fisheries Coast, from Maine to Florida. The members of a state’s tion size. It can be used for analyzing current fishing unit of your state’s conservation department. You may coalition include the director of the state’s marine fish- regulations and developing future rules. be able to help protect the fish that provide you with eries management agency, a state legislator, and an indi- The Hudson River Striped Bass CAP for the 2007 enjoyment and sustenance. vidual appointed by the governor. fishing season had more than 100 volunteer fishermen Fisheries biologists provide ASMFC members who kept records of their fishing trips on the river and Kris McShane ([email protected]) is a with summaries of species-specific fisheries data from reported the information to the fisheries unit. The diary NEIWPCC Environmental Analyst who works with the myriad of sampling programs run by state agen- entries include the date of each trip, location, start and NYSDEC’s Hudson River Fisheries Unit. His many proj- cies along the coast. Based on the information derived end time, target species, fishing method, type of hook ects include coordinating the Cooperative Angler Program.

Page 14 IWR, Winter 2007-08 From the Hill The Court Has Spoken – Now It’s Everybody Else’s Turn argue the legislation will impede development and cause permits to be required in cases where they were never by Beth Card, NEIWPCC required before. And a handful of states see the legislation as unnecessary and intrusive on state programs. n the last edition of IWR, we examined Clean Water tions. In other words, the federal government has to fig- Further concerns exist over how the legislation Act jurisdiction and the ramifications of the U.S. ure out which waters are regulated and protected under may impact NPDES permitting requirements, even Supreme Court decision in the cases of Rapanos the terms of the U.S. Supreme Court. The guidance was though the bill does include a clause that prevents any I released in June, with the comment period ending on and Carabell. Governmental agencies and interest groups change in federal authority over agricultural irrigation, across the country continue to carefully track this issue, January 21, 2008. The guidance can be downloaded at stormwater runoff at oil and gas exploration sites, and as questions surrounding significant nexus, continu- www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/guidance/CWAwaters.html. 404 requirements related to silviculture, ranching, and ous flow, adjacency and all the scenarios in the Supreme The legislative branch is also weighing in. This many other activities. Court opinions are being interpreted, twisted, turned, spring, U.S. Representatives Oberstar (D-MN), Dingell So, should we be concerned? Does this proposed and reexamined in lower courts across the country. (D-MI), and 170 cosponsors introduced the Clean legislation cast a wider net over what is covered under So much confusion exists over what the Scalia plu- Water Restoration Act; U.S. Senator Feingold (D-WI) federal jurisdiction? To answer that, I urge you to keep rality meant or didn’t mean, over whether the Kennedy introduced a similar bill in the Senate. The proposed in mind two things. First, this definition is not new. It test could also be applied, and over how these tests ought legislation would amend the Clean Water Act by striking already exists in EPA and Corps regulations. What is to work in the field that it seems no clear answer exists. the phrase “navigable waters,” which is currently defined new is the idea of putting the definition into statute, How are regulators and land owners to know when per- as waters of the United States and territorial seas, and making it part of the Clean Water Act. Second, the pur- mits are needed for development, and what waters are replace it with the phrase “waters of the U.S.” That pose of the legislation is to take the guessing game out protected or not protected? The Supreme Court’s opin- phrase would have a statutory definition based on cur- of some of these cases. Certainly there will always be ions further muddied the already murky waters on Clean rent Corps and EPA regulations. This definition is very instances where a jurisdictional determination can or Water Act jurisdiction and left more than enough room specific and contains the usual suspects such as lakes, should be challenged, but the clearer the statute, the less for further legal challenge. rivers, and streams, but goes on to include wetlands, room for argument. But remember what you learned in grade school sloughs, and prairie pot holes in the definition, just to At this juncture, much remains to be seen. We will about American government and our system of checks name a few. wait and watch whether the sponsors in the House can and balances? Since the judicial branch has spoken and Environmental groups, states, and industry acquire a simple majority (218 out of 435) to move the continues to speak, it was to be expected that the execu- are all reacting to the proposed bill—some in favor, bill to the Senate. There are many, many more steps that tive and legislative branches would also have something some unequivocally opposed. The Association of State need to happen before the Clean Water Act is amended to say. Wetlands Managers, many state agencies, and environ- and the definition of waters of the United States put From our partners in the executive branch: the mental advocacy groups support the move as a way to into place. So much could happen along the way. We’ll U.S. EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers released a ensure that sensitive water body systems such as headwa- keep you posted. guidance memorandum on how their regional and field ter streams and isolated wetlands are protected. Industry office staff should interpret and apply the Rapanos/ groups—the National Association of Homebuilders and Beth Card ([email protected]) is NEIWPCC’s Director Carabell decision in making jurisdictional determina- the American Farm Bureau Federation among them— of Water Quality Programs.

from NEIWPCC’s YEP Coordinator, Bryan Hogan. Enduring Tradition The lessons covered such topics as the water cycle, tide YEP Introduces Urban Youth to pools, water quality, water pollution and prevention, and microorganisms that live in water. Environmental Opportunities “It was great interacting with the kids, just amaz- by Stephen Hochbrunn, NEIWPCC ing,” said Hogan. “The best part of it was watching them go from not caring about wastewater treatment or even the environment to beginning to understand how important they are.” he best description of this year’s Youth and The group also went on educational field trips to the Environment program in Lowell, Mass., the Seacoast Science Center in Rye, New Hampshire; came from Fred Hamel, an engineering T the Squam Lake Natural Science Center in Holderness, technician at the Lowell Regional Wastewater Facility. New Hampshire; and the Massachusetts Water Resources During a ceremony at NEIWPCC headquarters in Authority’s Deer Island Sewage Treatment Plant. August to honor this year’s graduates, Hamel called the For more information on the Youth and the program a “win-win.” Environment Program, contact NEIWPCC’s Mike Jennings “The students got a lot of work done around the at 978-323-7929 or [email protected]. plant, and we benefited from that,” Hamel said. “But they learned a lot too—about the wastewater field and about the environment. And that’s a big benefit to them.” Since 1990, NEIWPCC, EPA, and the Lowell Regional Wastewater Utility have collaborated in conducting the Youth and the Environment summer pro- Rewarding Experience The 2007 Lowell Youth and the gram in Lowell, Mass. The program, which is part of a Environment Program students at the Seacoast Science Center in national effort by EPA, stresses hands-on work experi- Rye, N.H. Clockwise from left: Sabrina Tuy, Michael Lam, Enock ence and academic training to introduce disadvantaged Mukiibi, Esthelver de Jesus. inner-city high school students to professional opportunities in the environmental field. Emphasis is placed on ceremony. “Really, it was a great job. Thank you for the careers in the wastewater industry, which is experienc- opportunity.” ing a shortage of young people entering its workforce. During the six-week program, the students spent The participants are paid as they gain new knowledge, most of their days at the Lowell facility, working in a Productive Partnership At the graduation ceremony, learn new skills, and find out about a rewarding career variety of the wastewater plant’s operations, including NEIWPCC Youth and the Environment Program Coordinator path. pretreatment, maintenance, landscaping, and lab work. Bryan Hogan presents a plaque of appreciation to Fred Hamel, “It was a lot of fun,” said Enock Mukiibi, one of In the afternoons, they gathered to hear lessons on Lowell Regional Wastewater Facility. the students in this year’s program, at the graduation wastewater treatment and other environmental issues

Page 14 Page 15 IWR, Winter 2007-08

Talking Sprinklers, Desal, and Water Reuse A Conversation with Conservation Expert Amy Vickers by Stephen Hochbrunn, NEIWPCC

my Vickers doesn’t have anything against they are flouting necessary conservation lawns. But her vast knowledge of the way we restrictions, but if they continue to do so, Ause and misuse water in this country has led it is reasonable to shut off their irrigation her to crusade against an all too common practice— system without shutting off their water overwatering. lifeline. “Lawns aren’t the problem,” Vickers said during That being said, I think part of the a phone interview. “It is the relationship to them that is reason that watering rules aren’t always sick. And it’s getting more unhealthy every day. Sadly, in honored is that the public doesn’t under- New England, outdoor water use is the primary source stand them. When the public understands of water waste in many communities.” the reason for the rules, I think you see Based in Amherst, Mass., Vickers is an engi- higher compliance. neer, water conservation consultant, and author of the IWR: Is reducing water use and waste Handbook of Water Use and Conservation (WaterPlow sometimes not enough? In Brockton Press, 2002), which the American Water Works [Mass.], officials say they’ve done all they Speaking Sense Water conservation expert Amy Vickers talks with an attendee Association has called “the most thorough reference ever can to restrict outdoor water use and fix after her keynote address at the “Water for Rhode Island—Today and Tomorrow” published” on the topic. For decades, she has advised leaky old water pipes, but they say they still conference in Providence, R.I., on March 1, 2007. water supply systems, government agencies, businesses, need more water. They’re going to get it and other organizations on ways to better manage their by buying water from a desalination plant water. As a speaker, she is in demand. In March 2007, being built on the Taunton River. Is that IWR: Speaking of waste, how do you feel when it’s pour- Vickers delivered the keynote address at the “Water for acceptable to you? ing rain and you pass a home with its automatic sprin- Rhode Island—Today and Tomorrow” conference in Vickers: I can’t comment on Brockton specifically klers on? Providence, R.I., and her lucid comments there inspired because I don’t know all the details. What I would say is Vickers: The irrigation industry has been irresponsible our desire to hear more. We spoke with her by phone that no community in America has yet to exploit its full in promoting products that were never meant to be used over the summer. potential for water efficiency. Where we see desalina- by the average consumer. The industry needs to grow up, IWR: If everyone in New England, including those with tion in the United States I think we’re seeing a failure get with the 21st century, and design irrigation products private wells, suddenly cut back on lawn watering to just in responsible water management, i.e., not investing in in light of the reality of today’s water supply issues. once a week, would that do away with the concerns in a comprehensive water conservation program. I think I’ll mention something I’m working on in Florida, many communities about having enough water to meet there are still some water managers who are promoting which requires rain sensors [on automatic sprinklers so demand? water conservation with bumper stickers and blue bal- they don’t irrigate during and after a rainfall]. You know Vickers: It seems like a real possibility. We don’t know loons during National Water Week. what the problem is? A lot of the rain sensors don’t as much as we need to know about why 70 percent of Today the fields of water efficiency and water work out of the box. They’re made with cheap materials. the river basins in Massachusetts are flow stressed. But conservation are far more sophisticated than they were They never function right. They’re not designed for the a lot of anecdotal evidence from water managers in even five years ago. They’re a science and an art today, average consumer to install and operate properly. So, in New England, particularly in Massachusetts and Rhode and there really are no water systems in this country that Orange County, Florida, we’re working to get an amend- Island, points to one thing as being the likely culprit— have tapped every opportunity for conservation and effi- ment to require a working rain sensor. automatic irrigation systems. Certainly we need to dig ciency. System leakage is still a common problem in New IWR: Should we require rain sensors in New England? more to get hard facts rather than anecdotal evidence. England and across the country. And many systems still Vickers: Yes, working ones. Actually, I think we need to But we should be on that road [to reducing lawn water- don’t report accurately their true water losses. We need a step back on that issue. We need to be discouraging peo- ing] because if we aren’t, we are going to continue to fuller accounting of how well, or not well, water is man- ple and developers from installing automatic irrigation witness the diminishment of our fresh water here in aged before we put the seal of approval on desalination systems at all, because that is where the problem starts. A New England. And that is totally unnecessary. as our only remaining choice. person standing in their front yard with a hose is gener- IWR: Aren’t many people already fairly responsible with IWR: What about water reuse, that is, reclaiming waste- ally an efficient irrigation system. They don’t use a lot their water use? water by treating it so it can be reused for toilet flushing of water. If everyone watered like that, we would not be Vickers: The good news is that the average person tends and other nonpotable purposes? Is that a viable option where we are today. The problem is one of a misapplica- to be more efficient, not wasteful in their use of water. for easing the strain on water supplies? tion of technology. These automatic irrigation systems It is the top users that we need to focus on, those homes Vickers: We are already seeing sophisticated water are too powerful and often too poorly designed and too where per capita water use is two, three, sometimes four recycling systems in the high-tech and pharmaceuti- difficult to properly install, so they have low distribution times the average. I did a study for the city of Dallas, cal industries, so they can use water and energy more uniformity. There are overlapping sprays, overspray, the and found that the top 10 percent of users demand efficiently and to insure a reliable stream of high quality whole bit. Much of the water, at least half, is wasted. more than 400 gallons per capita per day, compared to water. In that regard industrial reuse makes a lot of sense. Remember too that healthy turf grass wants to go the average demand of 110 to 115 gallons. When we But we are also starting to see, in Florida and Texas and brown. It wants to go through a dormant phase. That’s really narrow in and focus on the problem, it is actually the Southwest, the use of reclaimed water for landscape part of a healthy plant cycle. a minority of water users who are truly the problem. irrigation. Now, if water conservation is your goal, abso- IWR: Is your message sinking in? Those are the people we need to target with a conserva- lutely it makes sense to reuse water. The problem is that Vickers: Yes. The growing public awareness about cli- tion program. in practice I think reuse has given people a license to use mate change and the limited petroleum reserves at our IWR: But as you said in your speech in Providence, more. If you look at the per capita water use in Orange disposal are making people more aware of water, food, changing the behavior of the top users isn’t easy. County, Florida—and I am doing a study on this right and other natural resources. Vickers: They tend to be affluent, and the affluent typi- now—you’ll see it has some very high use levels because The good news is America is blessed with abun- cally don’t care about the cost of water. Raising the price its reclaimed water is often underpriced. It is viewed as dant water resources. But we have a distorted view of won’t provide an incentive to cut back on use. I feel unlimited, so there is not an ethic about it. how much water we need compared with how much strongly that we need statewide rules on water restric- If we eliminated water waste and just targeted our water we’re currently using. If we cut in half the amount tion that are fair and apply equally to rich or poor. I reclaimed water for high usages, such as industry, I don’t of water we’re wasting outdoors, the stories in the media know of at least one town that has an ordinance stat- think we’d have to bear the cost of plumbing commu- that say we’re running out of water would go from the ing that if its watering limits are violated three times, nities so reclaimed water could be used for irrigation. front page to the back page. the violator’s irrigation system is shut off. I think that I would say we have enough water already, if we really This is a problem we’ve created. It’s disturbing to is reasonable. People have to be given fair warning that scale back from the waste we now see. see the damage being done, and we need to stop it.

Page 16 IWR, Winter 2007-08

We Remember Eugene L. “Gene” Dube Gene Dube was a businessman first and fore- most. But his business benefited the environment, by Stephen Hochbrunn, NEIWPCC and you could tell he felt good about that. He enjoyed sharing with others what he’d learned over the s anyone who ever met him would say: years, and he participated as an instructor in several there was nothing pretentious about NEIWPCC workshops on fats, oil, and grease. He was Gene Dube. Nothing artificial, nothing A also an instructor in many septage workshops run by forced. In an interview for IWR in the summer Maine’s Joint Environmental Training Coordinating of 2005, he spoke frankly, as to a friend, with a Committee (JETCC), which NEIWPCC has managed rough-edged, natural storytelling grace. He didn’t since 1985. try to charm or impress—there was no need to. When Dube died on April 24, his family lost a His work spoke for itself. husband and a father, and many others lost a friend As president of Pat Jackson, Inc./Tri-City and mentor. If you’re wondering, as we were, about Septic Tank Service in Belgrade, Maine, Dube was Farewell to a Friend Gene Dube, in an IWR photograph taken in his business, it remains intact, with his widow Pauline an innovator in a field where innovation can have 2005, admired the compost created by his company, PJI/Tri-City, from now in the president’s chair. In a phone conversation a major environmental impact. He was the driving septage, grease, and pine shavings. in November, PJI/Tri-City’s dispatcher Sharon Smith force behind the company’s development of a sys- said, “We’re trying to keep the company going, just tem for collecting septage and grease and turning it into compost that can be used the way it was before he passed.” Does she miss him? “I’ve got tears in my eyes right on everything from hay fields to home gardens. In doing so, he solved two problems now, sir.” faced by so many communities—what to do with the septage pumped from septic Dube’s death had that effect on people. You knew someone very real, very tanks, and how to safely dispose of the fats, oil, and grease generated by restaurants, genuine was gone. At NEIWPCC and at JETCC, we miss him too. which if poured down the drain can lead to damaging sanitary sewer overflows. What’s It Like Out There? An Intern (and Aspiring Chemist) Visits a WWTP Lab by Emma Downs

s a junior at the University of Massachusetts On the day of my visit, she was still develop- Amherst, majoring in chemistry, I am not yet ing the process. Since she had no idea what phos- sure what path my career will take. It is a time A phorus levels to expect in the effluent, she didn’t for exploring possibilities. One option I hadn’t consid- know where to set her control samples. As it turned ered was working in the wastewater treatment industry. out, the levels in the test samples ended up higher But through my internship at NEIWPCC, I’ve been than those in the control samples, so the results exposed to the wastewater field. And through a visit with were invalid. Tweaking the process to ensure valid Karen Driggers at the Greater Lawrence Sanitary District results in the future is what Driggers gets paid to do. plant in North Andover, Mass., I got a firsthand look at a Another large part of her work is indus- fascinating position in the industry. trial monitoring. Many companies in the five towns Driggers never planned on working in a wastewa- served by the GLSD—Andover, Lawrence, Methuen, ter treatment facility. Though she had always worked in and North Andover in Massachusetts, and Salem the environmental field, wastewater wasn’t a particular in New Hampshire—pretreat and discharge their interest. Then, in 1991, a friend who worked at the own processed wastewater to the plant. Driggers GLSD told her about a job opening at the plant. Close Inspection Karen Driggers checks the total phosphorus levels in and others at the GLSD sample this industrial efflu- “The doors were open for me,” Driggers said. She samples of the Greater Lawrence Sanitary District plant’s effluent. ent for pollutants such as cyanides, oil and grease, was hired as a lab technician at the GLSD and later pro- suspended solids, and heavy metals. The monitored “Every day is a different day,” she said. “There’s moted to her current position, chief lab technician and companies include makers of textiles, dairy products, always something to do.” instrumental chemist. and pharmaceuticals, as well as metal finishers, and only While my visit to the GLSD lab was very interesting, “It’s fun and exciting work,” she said. “Otherwise I rarely does the sampling process reveal any violation of I can’t say it made my career path any clearer. But it did wouldn’t have been here for 17 years.” pollutant limits. When violations do occur, the GLSD give me one more entry on my list of possibilities. About 30 percent of Driggers’s duties involve quickly informs the responsible party and works to get in-house process control, making sure all parts of the the problem resolved cooperatively. Emma Downs, a student at the University of Massachusetts plant are doing their jobs. Each day the lab tests levels of For Driggers, working in the wastewater industry Amherst, wrote this article during an internship at bacteria, residual chlorine, total suspended solids, bio- means never running out of work to be done. NEIWPCC’s Lowell headquarters. chemical oxygen demand, and pH. When the results for bacteria exceed the guidelines, the results are reported and appropriate advisories are issued for water users downstream. This happens occasionally, especially dur- Answers 2. If one million people shut down their office coming heavy rains. The by Susy King, NEIWPCC puters overnight, how many tons of carbon dioxide In addition to routine testing, Driggers sometimes emissions would be eliminated per year? gets the chance to try out and even develop new meth- Green 1. Paper represents what C. 45,000 tons odology. It’s her favorite part of the job. percentage of office waste? To further reduce energy use and carbon dioxide “I like the challenges,” she said. Corner D. 70 percent emissions during the work day, use your comput- I watched as she prepared to perform a test made Always use recycled paper. For er’s sleep function instead of a screen saver. It necessary by a new requirement in the plant’s National every ton of recycled paper used reduces electricity use by 70 percent. Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) per- instead of non-recycled stock, the electricity 3. Compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs) use what mit, which specifies everything the plant must do in saved is enough to power a three-bedroom house fraction of the energy of incandescent light bulbs? return for being allowed to discharge its treated water for an entire year. For additional waste and energy B. 1/4 into the Merrimack River. The new requirement stipu- savings, print and copy on both sides of a page Using CFLs can also reduce lighting costs by 50 lates that the plant must monitor the total phosphorus before recycling. percent. It is important to note, however, that CFLs levels in its effluent. It’s Driggers’s job to run the moni- Source: Live Earth (www.liveearth.org/crisis_solutions.php) contain mercury and must be disposed of properly. toring tests and report the results.

Page 16 Page 17 IWR, Winter 2007-08 In the Spotlight

NEIWPCC’s slate of Commissioners includes Natural Resources; John Auerbach, Commissioner, NYSDEC Commissioners, respectively. Dick Svenson a number of new additions including Laurie Burt, Massachusetts Dept. of Public Health; and Richard will continue to represent the NYSDOH Commissioner. Commissioner, Massachusetts Dept. of Environmental Daines, Commissioner, New York State Dept. of Health. In a related development, Frank Thomas, a non-agency Protection; Alexander “Pete” Grannis, Commissioner, Glenn Haas and Sandi Allen will retain their roles at NEIWPCC Commissioner from New Hampshire, is New York State Dept. of Environmental Conservation; NEIWPCC Executive Committee and Commission retiring as director of public works in Manchester, N.H., John Sayles, Deputy Secretary, Vermont Agency of meetings as representatives of the MA DEP and effective December 31.

Conference Alerts

3rd Northeast Onsite Wastewater Treatment Short Course and Equipment Exhibition March 11 – 13, Mystic Marriott Hotel and Spa, Groton, Connecticut The anticipation is building for the third edition of this event, which brings national experts to our region to lead educational sessions on the latest developments in the onsite wastewater treatment industry. Through field trips and the equipment exhibition, attendees also see firsthand the innovative technologies that are changing the way water resources are protected. The topics for the 2008 sessions are diverse, ranging from the “Benefits and Limitations of Test Center Data” to “Troubleshooting Nitrification.” Two prominent experts in the field—Richard J. Otis of Otis Environmental Consultants and George Tchobanoglous, professor emeritus at the University of California at Davis—will deliver keynote addresses. The Northeast Onsite Short Course is held every three years and, as NEIWPCC did in 2002 and 2005, we are coordinating all logistics, including developing and maintaining the conference website. For more information, including registration details, visit the site at www.neiwpcc.org/onsiteshortcourse.

20th Annual National Tanks Conference and Exposition March 17 – 19, Sheraton Atlanta Hotel, Atlanta, Georgia Produced annually by NEIWPCC in conjunction with EPA’s Office of Underground Storage Tanks and the Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials, this event provides the underground storage tanks community with a unique learning and networking experience. In 2008, our cosponsor and host is the Environmental Protection Division of the Georgia Department of Natural Resources. As usual, the conference will focus on a wide range of tanks-related issues, with the overall intent being to find new and better ways to work together to protect human health and the environment from tank releases. Three concurrent session tracks will be offered—Contamination and Cleanup, Prevention, and Policy—along with a number of outstanding workshops and visits to two impressive brownfield redevelopment projects. The Expo will feature booths from states, tribes, and federal agencies, as well as vendors displaying the latest tanks-related products and services. More information, including online registration, is available at www.neiwpcc.org/tanksconference.

19th Annual Nonpoint Source Pollution Conference May 19 – 21, Mystic Marriott Hotel and Spa, Groton, Connecticut The theme of the 2008 NPS conference is “Progress Through Partnerships: Collaborating to Protect Our Watersheds,” and it is our privilege to once again cosponsor this important annual event. Since 1990, NEIWPCC, in partnership with the NPS programs of the New England states, New York State, and EPA Regions I and II, has been coordinating the NPS Conference, which has grown into the premier forum in our region for sharing information and improving communication on NPS pollution issues and projects. The three-day conference brings together all those in New England and New York State involved in NPS pollution management, including participants from state, federal, and municipal governments, private sector, academia, and watershed organizations. The Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection is our cosponsor for this year’s conference, which will feature presentations, discussions, and field trips, as well as a full-day Stormwater Funding and Utility Development Workshop taught by Andrew Reese, PE, and Charlene Johnston of AMEC Earth and Environmental. More information is available at www.neiwpcc.org/npsconference.

17th Annual State Fund Administrators Meeting June 8 – 11, Francis Marion Hotel, Charleston, South Carolina NEIWPCC is once again playing a key role in planning this event, which we have cosponsored since 1992. The conference focuses on issues of interest to state fund administrators, who manage state funds generated by gasoline taxes earmarked for covering the costs of cleaning up leaks and spills at underground storage tank sites. Conference planning team members are meeting in January to develop the agenda and coordinate plans for the Charleston event. As more information becomes available, it will be posted on the conference website at www.neiwpcc.org/statefund.

Page 18 IWR, Winter 2007-08

In the Spotlight continued New from NEIWPCC

After serving for many years as Executive Director n November, NEIWPCC released a new and of Minnesota’s Petroleum Tank Release Cleanup Fund, Jim Pearson has joined NEIWPCC as our Director entirely revamped version of our Resource of Drinking Water and Underground Storage Tanks Catalog. It features short descriptions and Programs. This is the first time that we have placed the Iordering instructions for a vast array of publications, drinking water and tanks programs under one person, CDs, videos, and other resources available from and it’s not a light load. Pearson will plan and facilitate NEIWPCC, most of which we developed. The meetings of our various workgroups in these arenas, materials listed are diverse, ranging from complex manage multiple projects including the creation of guidance documents, and support state and federal staff operations guides to curriculum supplements. New England Interstate Water Pollut They can be used by a wide variety of audiences, 116 John Street, Lowell, MA 01852-1124 Tel: 978/3 on the development and implementation of programs ion Control Commission 23-7929 Fax: 978/323-7919 [email protected] and regulations. He’ll do everything from coordinat- including environmental professionals, government www.neiwpcc.org ing regional comments on federal policy initiatives to agencies, water and wastewater treatment overseeing preparations for such events as the National facilities, schools, and the public. Tanks Conference. We plan to produce a very limited number of hard copies Pearson should be served well by his vast expe- of the catalog, which will primarily be used as a display piece at our booth at rience in state government in Minnesota, where he established a conferences and other events. If you would like to order a hard copy, contact NEIWPCC reputation for at 978-323-7929. You may also download the catalog from the Publications and Resources successfully section of our website (www.neiwpcc.org/publications.asp) or simply browse that building consen- section itself, which is being revised to mirror the structure and content of the printed sus around tough catalog. policy issues. His achieve- ments included designing and n behalf of New Hampshire’s Department of implement- Environmental Services, NEIWPCC staff wrote ing a statewide and designed a guide that provides transient abandoned UST Onon-community water supplies (gas stations, restaurants, removal program etc.) with basic information on operating a system and that led to the meeting state and federal Safe Drinking Water Act removal of over requirements. While the guide was developed for a New 100 tanks. Pearson can be reached at 978-323-7929 ext. 233 Hampshire audience, the information can certainly be or via email at [email protected]. helpful to readers elsewhere in the region. It too can be downloaded from the Publications and Resources section of our website. NEIWPCC’s Tom Groves, our Director of NEIWPCC is currently developing a similar Wastewater and Onsite Programs, had the honor publication for regional use that will provide guidance of being invited to speak at Italy’s First National Workshop on Decentralized Systems, held in Venice specifically targeted at owners and operators of on October 3-5. The conference attracted speakers gas stations that have their own water supply. As with the NH DES guide, it will from all over the world, including Japan and Australia. explain drinking water regulations and provide instructions on how to comply with them. Groves appears sixth from left in the photo below, Publication is expected in early 2008. which was taken at the conference. He spoke about the management of decentralized systems in the United States.

New England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission IWR 116 John Street Lowell, MA 01852-1124 Phone: 978-323-7929 ❏ Please add my name to your mailing list. Fax: 978-323-7919 E-mail: [email protected] If you would like to receive our newsletter, please fill out this form and return it to us. Interstate Water Report is distributed free of charge.

For our records, please indicate your employment or organization association: ❏ Treatment Plant ❏ Library ❏ Education ❏ Industry ❏ Consultant ❏ Other

GOVERNMENT AGENCY Kerry Strout, a NEIWPCC Environmental ❏ Local ❏ State ❏ Federal Analyst and coordinator of all our wetlands programs, has been named a non-voting member of the board of ❏ Please take my name off your mailing list. the Association of State Wetland Managers. Strout is the If you would like to be removed from our mailing list, please let us know. Paper conservation is important to us. only board member representing a region rather than Fill out this form and return it to us or call 978-323-7929. a state. Also on the board are NH DES’s Collis Adams and VT DEC’s Alan Quackenbush, both of whom are Name______members of NEIWPCC’s Wetlands Workgroup, which Strout coordinates. Address______Street City/Town State Zip

Page 18 Page 19 calendar of Events

Please note that NEIWPCC workgroup meetings are designed to foster focused small-group discussions among workgroup members on specific issues. Workgroup members are drawn from state and federal regulatory agencies and NEIWPCC staff. For general information about our workgroups and their points of focus, please visit our website (www.neiwpcc.org) or call 978-323-7929.

January February March

State Fund Administrators Planning Team Meeting NYWEA 80th Annual Meeting and Exhibition ASIWPCA Mid-Year Meeting January 10 – 11 February 4 – 6 March 2 – 4 Charleston, S.C. New York, N.Y. Arlington, Va.

9th Annual Northeast Aquatic Plant Management NACWA’s 2008 Winter Conference 10th Annual State Onsite Regulators Alliance Society Conference February 5 – 8 Conference January 14 – 16 Phoenix, Ariz. March 3 – 6 West Dover, Vt. Point Clear, Ala. NEIWPCC Wetlands Workgroup Meeting NEIWPCC Drinking Water Administrators February 6 3rd Northeast Onsite Wastewater Treatment Workgroup Meeting Short Course and Equipment Exhibition January 17 Sustainable Water Sources: Conservation and March 11 – 13 Resources Planning Groton, Conn. NEIWPCC Executive Committee and Commission (AWWA Specialty Conference) Meeting February 10 – 13 2008 ASDWA Member Meeting January 17 – 18 Reno, Nev. March 12 – 14 Annapolis, Md. ASDWA Security Meeting The Utility Management Conference 2008 January 22 – 25 (WEF/AWWA Specialty Conference) NEIWPCC Executive Committee Meeting New Orleans, La. February 24 – 27 March 13 Tampa, Fla. NEIWPCC Stormwater Workgroup Meeting 20th Annual National Tanks Conference and Expo January 23 March 17 – 19 Atlanta, Ga. NEIWPCC Nonpoint Source Workgroup Meeting January 24 2008 AWRA Spring Specialty Conference: Check the NEIWPCC 24-Hour Training and GIS and Water Resources V Membrane Technology 2008 March 17 – 19 Events Hotline for the latest information on (WEF Specialty Conference) San Mateo, Calif. January 27 – 30 NEIWPCC activities, such as cancellations Atlanta, Ga. due to weather or instructor illness, Annual Conference of the New England Association of Environmental Biologists (NEAEB) and date or location changes. 2008 NEWEA Annual Conference and Exhibition March 26 – 28 January 27 – 30 Call 1-866-824-9656. Bartlett, N.H. Boston, Mass. Residuals and Biosolids 2008 (WEF Specialty Conference) March 30 – April 2 Philadelphia, Pa.

To check for additions or changes to these listings, and to access links to conference websites, see the Calendar at NEIWPCC’s website (www.neiwpcc.org/calendar.asp).

Contributions to IWR are welcome and appreciated. Please submit articles or story ideas to: Stephen Hochbrunn, IWR Editor E-mail: [email protected] ◆ Phone: 978-323-7929, ext. 235

New England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission 116 John Street Lowell, MA 01852-1124

Address service requested.