DOCSLIB.ORG

Barker's Mill Hydroelectric Project

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Barker's Mill Hydroelectric Project DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR HYDROPOWER LICENSE Barker’s Mill Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 2808-017 Maine Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Office of Energy Projects Division of Hydropower Licensing 888 First Street, NE Washington, DC 20426 September 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................... ii LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................ iv LIST OF TABLES.............................................................................................................. iv ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS.......................................................................... vii 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................ 1 1.1 APPLICATION .................................................................................................... 1 1.2 PURPOSE OF ACTION AND NEED FOR POWER ......................................... 1 1.2.1 Purpose of Action .......................................................................................... 1 1.2.2 Need for Power .............................................................................................. 3 1.3 STATUTORY AND REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS ................................. 3 1.3.1 Federal Power Act ......................................................................................... 4 1.3.2 Clean Water Act ............................................................................................ 4 1.3.3 Endangered Species Act ................................................................................ 5 1.3.4 Coastal Zone Management Act ..................................................................... 6 1.3.5 National Historic Preservation Act ............................................................... 7 1.3.6 Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act ................. 8 1.4 PUBLIC REVIEW AND COMMENT ................................................................ 8 1.4.1 Scoping .......................................................................................................... 9 1.4.2 Interventions .................................................................................................. 9 1.4.3 Comments on the Application ..................................................................... 10 2.0 PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES ............................................... 10 2.1 NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE ......................................................................... 10 2.1.1 Existing Project Facilities ............................................................................ 11 2.1.2 Project Safety .............................................................................................. 13 2.1.3 Current Project Operation ........................................................................... 13 2.2 APPLICANT’S PROPOSAL ............................................................................. 14 2.2.1 Proposed Operation and Environmental Measures ..................................... 14 2.3 STAFF ALTERNATIVE .................................................................................... 16 2.4 STAFF ALTERNATIVE WITH MANDATORY CONDITIONS ................... 18 2.5 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT ELIMINATED FROM DETAILED ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................ 23 2.5.1 Decommissioning ........................................................................................ 23 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ..................................................................... 26 3.1 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE ANDROSCOGGIN RIVER BASIN ..... 26 3.2 SCOPE OF CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ANALYSIS ........................................ 27 3.2.1 Geographic Scope ........................................................................................ 28 3.2.2 Temporal Scope ........................................................................................... 29 3.3 PROPOSED ACTION AND ACTION ALTERNATIVES ............................... 29 3.3.1 Aquatic Resources ....................................................................................... 30 3.3.2 Terrestrial Resources ................................................................................... 90 ii 3.3.3 Threatened and Endangered Species ........................................................... 96 3.3.4 Recreation and Aesthetic Resources ......................................................... 108 3.3.5 Cultural Resources .................................................................................... 120 3.4 NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE ....................................................................... 129 4.0 DEVELOPMENTAL ANALYSIS .................................................................. 129 4.1 POWER AND ECONOMIC BENEFITS OF THE PROJECT ........................ 130 4.2 COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES ........................................................... 130 4.2.1 No-Action Alternative ............................................................................... 131 4.2.2 Applicant’s Proposal ................................................................................. 132 4.2.3 Staff Alternative ........................................................................................ 132 4.2.4 Staff Alternative with Mandatory Conditions ........................................... 132 4.3 COST OF ENVIRONMENTAL MEASURES ................................................ 132 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................... 140 5.1 COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT AND RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE .............................................................................................. 140 5.1.1 Measures Proposed by KEI Power ............................................................ 140 5.1.2 Additional Measures Recommended by Staff ........................................... 141 5.1.3 Measures Not Recommended .................................................................... 153 5.1.4 Additional Measures Recommended under the Staff Alternative with Mandatory Conditions ............................................................................................. 167 5.2 UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS ....................................................... 168 5.3 SUMMARY OF SECTION 10(j) RECOMMENDATIONS ........................... 169 5.4 CONSISTENCY WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLANS ................................... 180 6.0 FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT .................................................. 182 7.0 LITERATURE CITED ..................................................................................... 183 8.0 LIST OF PREPARERS .................................................................................... 193 APPENDIX A ................................................................................................................... A1 APPENDIX B ................................................................................................................... B1 iii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Location of the Barker’s Mill Project. (Source: License application) .............. 2 Figure 2. Barker’s Mill Project. (Source: License application). ..................................... 12 Figure 3. Dams or fish passage barriers upstream and downstream of the project, on the Little Androscoggin, Androscoggin, and Sabattus Rivers or their tributaries (Source: Maine DMR and Maine DIFW, 2017, as modified by staff). ................................... 28 Figure 4. Habitat transect locations for the instream flow study. (Source: License application). ............................................................................................................... 48 Figure 5. Habitat suitability curves for target species under a range of flow releases at the Barker’s Mill Project. (Source: License application). ............................................. 49 Figure 6. Recreational sites in the project area. (Source: License application) ........... 109 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Mean, median, minimum, and maximum inflow for the project site based on prorated gage data for the period 1987-2017. (Source: Staff). ................................ 30 Table 2. Riverine habitat units in the bypassed reach downstream of the Barker’s Mill Dam. (Source: License application). ....................................................................... 36 Table 3. Bypassed reach and available generation flows under existing condition and proposed or recommended minimum flow alternatives. (Source: Staff) ................ 45 Table 4. Percent of time there is insufficient inflow for the powerhouse to operate under existing conditions and proposed and recommended minimum flows from January through December based on prorated gage data for USGS gage no. 01057000 Little Androscoggin River near South Paris, Maine (January 1, 1987 – December 31, 2017). (Source: Staff). ............................................................................................. 46 Table 5. Percent of maximum habitat suitability in the bypassed reach under each test flow. (Source: License application) ......................................................................... 49 Table 6. Percent of the bankfull width wetted for each test flow during the instream flow study. (Source: License application) ......................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • NH Trout Stocking - April 2018
    NH Trout Stocking - April 2018 Town WaterBody 3/26‐3/30 4/02‐4/06 4/9‐4/13 4/16‐4/20 4/23‐4/27 4/30‐5/04 ACWORTH COLD RIVER 111 ALBANY IONA LAKE 1 ALLENSTOWN ARCHERY POND 1 ALLENSTOWN BEAR BROOK 1 ALLENSTOWN CATAMOUNT POND 1 ALSTEAD COLD RIVER 1 ALSTEAD NEWELL POND 1 ALSTEAD WARREN LAKE 1 ALTON BEAVER BROOK 1 ALTON COFFIN BROOK 1 ALTON HURD BROOK 1 ALTON WATSON BROOK 1 ALTON WEST ALTON BROOK 1 AMHERST SOUHEGAN RIVER 11 ANDOVER BLACKWATER RIVER 11 ANDOVER HIGHLAND LAKE 11 ANDOVER HOPKINS POND 11 ANTRIM WILLARD POND 1 AUBURN MASSABESIC LAKE 1 1 1 1 BARNSTEAD SUNCOOK LAKE 1 BARRINGTON ISINGLASS RIVER 1 BARRINGTON STONEHOUSE POND 1 BARTLETT THORNE POND 1 BELMONT POUT POND 1 BELMONT TIOGA RIVER 1 BELMONT WHITCHER BROOK 1 BENNINGTON WHITTEMORE LAKE 11 BENTON OLIVERIAN POND 1 BERLIN ANDROSCOGGIN RIVER 11 BRENTWOOD EXETER RIVER 1 1 BRISTOL DANFORTH BROOK 11 BRISTOL NEWFOUND LAKE 1 BRISTOL NEWFOUND RIVER 11 BRISTOL PEMIGEWASSET RIVER 11 BRISTOL SMITH RIVER 11 BROOKFIELD CHURCHILL BROOK 1 BROOKFIELD PIKE BROOK 1 BROOKLINE NISSITISSIT RIVER 11 CAMBRIDGE ANDROSCOGGIN RIVER 1 CAMPTON BOG POND 1 CAMPTON PERCH POND 11 CANAAN CANAAN STREET LAKE 11 CANAAN INDIAN RIVER 11 NH Trout Stocking - April 2018 Town WaterBody 3/26‐3/30 4/02‐4/06 4/9‐4/13 4/16‐4/20 4/23‐4/27 4/30‐5/04 CANAAN MASCOMA RIVER, UPPER 11 CANDIA TOWER HILL POND 1 CANTERBURY SPEEDWAY POND 1 CARROLL AMMONOOSUC RIVER 1 CARROLL SACO LAKE 1 CENTER HARBOR WINONA LAKE 1 CHATHAM BASIN POND 1 CHATHAM LOWER KIMBALL POND 1 CHESTER EXETER RIVER 1 CHESTERFIELD SPOFFORD LAKE 1 CHICHESTER SANBORN BROOK
    [Show full text]
  • KENNEBEC SALMON RESTORATION: Innovation to Improve the Odds
    FALL/ WINTER 2015 THE NEWSLETTER OF MAINE RIVERS KENNEBEC SALMON RESTORATION: Innovation to Improve the Odds Walking thigh-deep into a cold stream in January in Maine? The idea takes a little getting used to, but Paul Christman doesn’t have a hard time finding volunteers to do just that to help with salmon egg planting. Christman is a scientist with Maine Department of Marine Resource. His work, patterned on similar efforts in Alaska, involves taking fertilized salmon eggs from a hatchery and planting them directly into the cold gravel of the best stream habitat throughout the Sandy River, a Kennebec tributary northwest of Waterville. Yes, egg planting takes place in the winter. For Maine Rivers board member Sam Day plants salmon eggs in a tributary of the Sandy River more than a decade Paul has brought staff and water, Paul and crews mimic what female salmon volunteers out on snowshoes and ATVs, and with do: Create a nest or “redd” in the gravel of a river waders and neoprene gloves for this remarkable or stream where she plants her eggs in the fall, undertaking. Finding stretches of open stream continued on page 2 PROGRESS TO UNDERSTAND THE HEALTH OF THE ST. JOHN RIVER The waters of the St. John River flow from their headwaters in Maine to the Bay of Fundy, and for many miles serve as the boundary between Maine and Quebec. Waters of the St. John also flow over the Mactaquac Dam, erected in 1968, which currently produces a substantial amount of power for New Brunswick. Efforts are underway now to evaluate the future of the Mactaquac Dam because its mechanical structure is expected to reach the end of its service life by 2030 due to problems with the concrete portions of the dam’s station.
    [Show full text]
  • Section 5-2 Androscoggin River (Friends of Merrymeeting Bay)
    Maine Department of Environmental Protection Androscoggin River (FOMB) 2018 Summary Data Report Section 5-2 Androscoggin River (Friends of Merrymeeting Bay) Androscoggin River The Androscoggin River is the third largest river in the state of Maine. It has a length of 177 miles and drainage area of 3,450 square miles (2,730 sq. mi. in Maine).1 The Androscoggin River’s headwaters are Umbagog Lake in Maine/New Hampshire. From there it flows into New Hampshire and then back into Maine through the towns of Gilead and Bethel. It continues flowing through the towns and cities of Rumford, Mexico, Dixfield, Jay, Livermore Falls, Lewiston, Auburn, Lisbon, Lisbon Falls, Durham, Brunswick, and Topsham where it joins the Kennebec River at Merrymeeting Bay. The Androscoggin River has a long history of industrial and municipal use over the last 200 years.1 Beginning in the early 1800s, many dams were constructed for mills, primarily in the lower part of the river. By the late 1800s, many textile and lumber mills were in operation, mostly from Lewiston to Brunswick. Pulp and paper mills that are still in operation today were established in the late 1800s in New Hampshire, Rumford, and Jay. Beginning in the late 1920s, Central Maine Power built hydroelectric dams that impounded much of the river from Lewiston to Livermore Falls. Some of these uses continue today. “Along its course to the sea, the river is repeatedly dammed. It receives discharges from industrial and municipal sources, as well as polluted runoff from a variety of sources.”2 Specific problems include mill discharges, combined sewer overflows (CSOs), dam impacts (28 dams exist), and historical sediment toxins.
    [Show full text]
  • Friends of Merrymeeting Bay P.O
    Friends of Merrymeeting Bay P.O. Box 233 Richmond, ME 04357 www.fomb.org To: Susanne Meidel, Water Quality Standards Coordinator Maine Department of Environmental Protection SHS 17 Augusta, ME 04333 207-441-3612 [email protected] From: Jennifer Brockway, Executive Director Friends of Merrymeeting Bay 207-666-1118 [email protected] E-Filed Subject: Water Re-Classification Proposal River/Sections: Androscoggin from Worumbo Dam to Merrymeeting Bay Proposed Upgrade: C to B Basis for Proposal: Actual conditions exceed those of present classification Documentation: Supporting data from FOMB monitoring program approved by Maine DEP and USEPA Data Collection Periods: DO-1999 to present; Coliform Bacteria-2006 to present Sampling Intervals: Monthly: April-October Proposal Date: November 29, 2017 Dear Ms. Meidel: Please consider this our formal upgrade proposal for the lower section of the Androscoggin River between Merrymeeting Bay at the line from Pleasant Point in Topsham to North Bath extending upriver to Worumbo Dam in Lisbon Falls. As our data show, while classified as C, this section has long been on the cusp of and now is actually meeting, Class B standards. We therefore propose it be upgraded from C to B. FOMB has the most complete set of classification data for the reaches in this proposal. We began our monitoring program in 1999 and continue to this day with over twenty sampling sites on the Androscoggin, Kennebec and around Merrymeeting Bay. FOMB joined the VRMP in 2009 to further support and substantiate water classification upgrades. Because the actual water quality of the lower Androscoggin sections described here exceeds that of their current classification, our request for a reclassification from C to B is supported by the State antidegradation policy as quoted below: 38 M.R.S.A.
    [Show full text]
  • Maine Rivers Study
    MAINE RIVERS STUDY Final Report State of Maine Department of Conservation U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Mid-Atlantic Regional Office May 1982 Electronic Edition August 2011 DEPLW-1214 i Table of Contents Study Participants i Acknowledgments iii Section I - Major Findings 1 Section II - Introduction 7 Section III - Study Method and Process 8 Step 1 Identification and Definition of Unique River Values 8 Step 2 Identification of Significant River Resource Values 8 Step 3 River Category Evaluation 9 Step 4 River Category Synthesis 9 Step 5 Comparative River Evaluation 9 Section IV - River Resource Categories 11 Unique Natural Rivers - Overview 11 A. Geologic / Hydrologic Features 11 B. River Related Critical / Ecologic Resources 14 C. Undeveloped River Areas 20 D. Scenic River Resources 22 E. Historical River Resources 26 Unique Recreational Rivers - Overview 27 A. Anadromous Fisheries 28 B. River Related Inland Fisheries 30 C. River Related Recreational Boating 32 Section V - Final List of Rivers 35 Section VI - Documentation of Significant River Related 46 (Maps to be linked to GIS) Natural and Recreational Values Key to Documentation Maps 46 Section VII – Options for Conservation of Rivers 127 River Conservation – Energy Development Coordination 127 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Consistency 127 State Agency Consistency 128 Federal Coordination Using the National Wild & Scenic Rivers Act 129 Federal Consistency on Coastal Rivers 129 Designation into National River System 130 ii State River Conservation Legislation
    [Show full text]
  • 1998 CCSWCD Royal River Water Quality Management Plan
    " . ROYAL RIV£~ WATERSHED: A W1AT£R QUALITY .'l ·MANA6£M£NT PLAN 1 I I J \ ] ( J J J J j J Cumberland County SWCD Project Staff & Report Production Forrest Bell, Project Manager Alison Kisch, Conservation Technician Linda Johnson, Research Assistant ACKNOW'LED6.MENTS The Royal River Watershed Project and this report would not have been possible without the assistance of many individuals, groups and agencies. We would like to recognize and thank the following contributors: Royal River Watershed Advisory Committee Charlie Chandler, resident, New Gloucester Bill Ecyleshymer, resident, Yarmouth Judith Ecyleshymer, resident, Yarmouth Dottie Laber, public relations advisor, Orono Edwin Springer, resident, Brunswick Ted Teidemann, resident, North Yarmouth Royal River Watershed Technical Advisory Committee and Report Review Team Deb Aja, Maine DEP Susan Beede, US EPA John Boland, ME Inland Fish & Wildlife Lenny Brooks, New Gloucester David Chiapetta, USDA NRCS Ross Cudlitz, CCSWCD Chris Curtis, Yarmouth Water District Cliff Curtis, Maine DOT Lee Doggett, Maine DEP Betty Farley, CCSWCD Melissa Gormley Florence Grosvenor, Maine DEP Katherine Groves, Casco Bay Est. Project Sherry Hanson, Casco Bay Est. Proj. Phoebe Hardesty, Andy Valley SWCD Mary Holman, Friends of Royal River Bob Houston, North Yarmouth resident John Jemison, UMaine Coop. Exten. Don Kale, Maine DEP Steve Linnell, Greater Portland COG Greg & Lisa Taylor Lord, Americorps Janet Mclaughlin, Town of Yarmouth Wayne Munroe, USDA NRCS Steve Ranney, City of Auburn Diane Switzer, US EPA Leon Tsomides, Maine DEP Peter Wagner, UMaine Coop. Extension Lois Winter, US Fish & Wildlife Serv. Don Witherill, Maine DEP Diane Yorke, US Forest Service Project sponsors/partners and their roles • Cumberland County Soil and Water Conservation District (CCSWCD) is the main sponsor of the Royal River Watershed 104(b)(3) Planning Project.
    [Show full text]
  • A Technical Characterization of Estuarine and Coastal New Hampshire New Hampshire Estuaries Project
    AR-293 University of New Hampshire University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository PREP Publications Piscataqua Region Estuaries Partnership 2000 A Technical Characterization of Estuarine and Coastal New Hampshire New Hampshire Estuaries Project Stephen H. Jones University of New Hampshire Follow this and additional works at: http://scholars.unh.edu/prep Part of the Marine Biology Commons Recommended Citation New Hampshire Estuaries Project and Jones, Stephen H., "A Technical Characterization of Estuarine and Coastal New Hampshire" (2000). PREP Publications. Paper 294. http://scholars.unh.edu/prep/294 This Report is brought to you for free and open access by the Piscataqua Region Estuaries Partnership at University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in PREP Publications by an authorized administrator of University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A Technical Characterization of Estuarine and Coastal New Hampshire Published by the New Hampshire Estuaries Project Edited by Dr. Stephen H. Jones Jackson estuarine Laboratory, university of New Hampshire Durham, NH 2000 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................i LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................vi LIST OF FIGURES.................................................................................................viii
    [Show full text]
  • Examining Recreation Potential of the Little Androscoggin River Through the FERC Relicensing of the Lower Barker Dam in Auburn, Maine Nina Doonan
    Bates College SCARAB Community Engaged Research Reports Environmental Studies Fall 12-2015 Examining Recreation Potential of the Little Androscoggin River through the FERC Relicensing of the Lower Barker Dam in Auburn, Maine Nina Doonan William Hilton Max Millslagle Sarah Stanley Follow this and additional works at: http://scarab.bates.edu/community_engaged_research Recommended Citation Doonan, Nina; Hilton, William; Millslagle, Max; and Stanley, Sarah, "Examining Recreation Potential of the Little Androscoggin River through the FERC Relicensing of the Lower Barker Dam in Auburn, Maine" (2015). Community Engaged Research Reports. 28. http://scarab.bates.edu/community_engaged_research/28 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Environmental Studies at SCARAB. It has been accepted for inclusion in Community Engaged Research Reports by an authorized administrator of SCARAB. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Examining Recreation Potential of the Little Androscoggin River through the FERC Relicensing of the Lower Barker Dam in Auburn, Maine ENVR 417 - Community Engaged Research Bates College Nina Doonan, William Hilton, Max Millslagle, Sarah Stanley Fall 2015 Acknowledgements: We would like to thank our professors Jane Costlow and Tom Wenzel for providing clear and thoughtful suggestions throughout the duration of this project. We also express our gratitude to our community partners, the Mayor of Auburn, Jonathan LaBonte and the Auburn Deputy Director of Planning and Development, Eric Cousens, for their vision and commitment to improving the community’s rivers and recreation opportunities. FERC "2 Table of Contents: I. Executive Summary..…………………………………………………………..….4 II. Summary of FERC Process.………………………………………………………5 III. Comparable Communities.……………………………………………………….7 IV. Interested Community Stakeholders.………………………………………….….9 V.
    [Show full text]
  • Fisheries & Aquatic Habitat Restoration Feasibility Study Royal River
    FISHERIES & AQUATIC HABITAT RESTORATION FEASIBILITY STUDY ROYAL RIVER RESTORATION PROJECT YARMOUTH, MAINE Prepared For: Town of Yarmouth Yarmouth Town Hall 200 Maine Street Yarmouth, Maine 04096 Prepared By: Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 30 Park Drive Topsham, Maine 04086 November 2010 Project Partners: This document shall be considered a draft version provided for the convenience of the user and shall not be considered an instrument of service of Stantec Consulting Services Inc. unless it bears the professional engineers stamp and original signature. This document may not be altered by others or used for projects or purposes other than the project for which it was prepared without the express written consent of Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Portions of this document were prepared by others. Stantec Consulting Services Inc. has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions that may be incorporated herein as a result. The copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than that authorized by Stantec Consulting Services Inc. is forbidden. Designs and drawings contained herein shall not be used for construction. Fisheries & Aquatic Habitat Restoration Feasibility Study Page i Royal River Restoration Project, Yarmouth, Maine TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • To Relicense Five Dams on the Connecticut River
    River Management Society Supporting Professionals Who Study, Protect, and Manage RMS WINTER 2013 VOLUME 26, NO. 4 North America’s Rivers Northeast Chapter Focus Prepare to Launch! ............................... 4 RMS and Public Policy ......................... 5 Restoring a Log Driven Stream, ME ..... 6 Stream Restoration in Massachusetts .. 8 TU Leads Dam Removal in ME .......... 10 Clean-Drain-Dry for Paddlers Video ....11 Paddling the Canoemobile ................. 12 New National Rivers Database........... 13 River Protection in NH ........................ 15 Successful Restoration in NH ............. 16 Restoring the Souhegan in NH ........... 18 River Town Program - A Success! ...... 20 Delaware River Basin - Publication .... 27 RMS Training in Denver 2014 ............ 28 TransCanada’s Wilder Station. 10-22-12. Photo: Norman Sims, AMC Using The Integrated Licensing Process To Relicense Five Dams On The Connecticut River America’s First Designated National Penobscot, Rapid, and Magalloway Rivers more. Sometimes states withheld “401 Blueway & Heritage River in Maine provided millions of dollars for Water Quality Certificates” for political improved fish passage, improved water purposes that dragged on project licenses by Tom Christopher quality, increased base flows and extensive for multiple decades. There is a saying that “opportunity recreational enhancements for whitewater Even so, the best part of the ‘93 only knocks once” and when state and boaters and other river users. relicensing work was the emergence of federal agencies as well as multiple non- For those of us in the relicensing negotiated “settlement agreements” on governmental organizations (NGO’s) were game who worked on the earlier ‘93 the Deerfield, Kennebec and other New notified by the Federal Energy Regulatory projects and continued on in later work, England rivers.
    [Show full text]
  • Improved Estimates of Tributary Nitrogen Load to Casco Bay, Maine
    The University of Maine DigitalCommons@UMaine Electronic Theses and Dissertations Fogler Library Summer 8-2019 Improved Estimates of Tributary Nitrogen Load to Casco Bay, Maine Whitley J. Gray University of Maine, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/etd Part of the Biogeochemistry Commons, Environmental Monitoring Commons, Fresh Water Studies Commons, Hydrology Commons, and the Water Resource Management Commons Recommended Citation Gray, Whitley J., "Improved Estimates of Tributary Nitrogen Load to Casco Bay, Maine" (2019). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 3087. https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/etd/3087 This Open-Access Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@UMaine. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@UMaine. For more information, please contact [email protected]. IMPROVED ESTIMATES OF TRIBUTARY NITROGEN LOAD TO CASCO BAY, MAINE By Whitley Gray B.S. Iowa State University, 2011 A THESIS Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science (in Marine Policy) The Graduate School The University of Maine August 2019 Advisory Committee: Damian Brady, Assistant Professor of Marine Policy and Biology, Advisor Lawrence Mayer, Professor Emeritus of Oceanography Thomas Fisher, Professor of Watershed Hydrology and Biogeochemistry IMPROVED ESTIMATES OF TRIBUTARY NITROGEN LOAD TO CASCO BAY, MAINE By Whitley Gray Thesis Advisor: Dr. Damian Brady An Abstract of the Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science (in Marine Policy) August 2019 Over the past two decades, total nitrogen (TN) concentrations have increased in Casco Bay (CBEP 2015).
    [Show full text]
  • Maine Revised Statutes 38 §467
    Presented below are water quality standards that are in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. EPA is posting these standards as a convenience to users and has made a reasonable effort to assure their accuracy. Additionally, EPA has made a reasonable effort to identify parts of the standards that are not approved, disapproved, or are otherwise not in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. Maine Revised Statutes 38 §467 Maine Revised Statutes Title 38: WATERS AND NAVIGATION Chapter 3: PROTECTION AND IMPROVEMENT OF WATERS Subchapter 1: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION BOARD Article 4-A: WATER CLASSIFICATION PROGRAM §467. Classification of major river basins All surface waters lying within the boundaries of the State that are in river basins having a drainage area greater than 100 square miles that are not classified as lakes or ponds are classified in this section. [1989, c. 764, §2 (AMD).] 1. Androscoggin River Basin. A. Androscoggin River, main stem, including all impoundments. (1) From the Maine-New Hampshire boundary to its confluence with the Ellis River - Class B. (2) From its confluence with the Ellis River to a line formed by the extension of the Bath-Brunswick boundary across Merrymeeting Bay in a northwesterly direction - Class C. [1989, c. 890, Pt. A, §40 (AFF); 1989, c. 890, Pt. B, §68 (AMD); MRSA T. 38, §467, sub-§1, ¶ A (AMD).] B. Little Androscoggin River Drainage. (1) Little Androscoggin River, main stem. (a) From the outlet of Bryant Pond to the Maine Central Railroad bridge in South Paris - Class A. (b) From the Maine Central Railroad bridge in South Paris to its confluence with the Androscoggin River - Class C.
    [Show full text]