DOCSLIB.ORG

New York City Department of Environmental Protection Watershed Protection Program Summary and Assessment March 2016

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
New York City Department of Environmental Protection Watershed Protection Program Summary and Assessment March 2016 New York City Department of Environmental Protection Watershed Protection Program Summary and Assessment March 2016 Emily Lloyd, Commissioner Paul V. Rush, P.E., Deputy Commissioner Bureau of Water Supply Table of Contents Table of Contents Table of Contents ......................................................................................................................................... i List of Figures ............................................................................................................................................. xi List of Tables ............................................................................................................................................ xix List of Acronyms ...................................................................................................................................... xxi Acknowledgements ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................... 3 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 15 1.1 Purpose of this Report ................................................................................................................ 15 1.2 Water Supply System ................................................................................................................. 15 1.3 Regulatory Context ..................................................................................................................... 19 1.4 Historical Context ....................................................................................................................... 19 1.5 Report Details ............................................................................................................................. 21 2. Tropical Storm Irene and Tropical Storm Lee ................................................................................ 23 2.1 Overview .................................................................................................................................... 23 2.2 Advance Planning ....................................................................................................................... 23 2.3 Storm Event and Short-term Responses ..................................................................................... 24 2.3.1 Rainfall and Runoff .................................................................................................. 24 2.3.2 Water Quality Impacts .............................................................................................. 26 2.3.3 Water Supply Operations and Treatment .................................................................. 27 2.3.4 Gilboa Event ............................................................................................................. 28 2.3.5 Enhanced Water Quality Monitoring ........................................................................ 30 2.3.6 Modeling ................................................................................................................... 33 2.4 Response Actions ....................................................................................................................... 34 2.4.1 Watershed Repairs .................................................................................................... 34 2.4.2 Community Support.................................................................................................. 37 2.4.3 Post-Storm Review ................................................................................................... 38 2.5 Programmatic Changes ............................................................................................................... 39 2.5.1 BWS Hurricane Preparedness, Response & Recovery Actions Timeline ................ 39 2.5.2 Flood Studies, Mapping and Future Resiliency ........................................................ 40 i 2016 FAD Assessment Report 3. Water Supply Infrastructure Improvements ................................................................................... 41 3.1 Catskill/Delaware Ultraviolet Light Disinfection Facility .......................................................... 41 3.2 Croton Water Filtration Plant ..................................................................................................... 42 3.3 Catskill Aqueduct – Delaware Aqueduct Interconnection at Shaft 4 ......................................... 42 3.4 Operations Support Tool ............................................................................................................ 43 4. Watershed Management Programs .................................................................................................. 45 4.1 Institutional Alliances ................................................................................................................. 45 4.1.1 Watershed Agricultural Council ............................................................................... 45 4.1.2 Catskill Watershed Corporation ............................................................................... 46 4.1.3 Stream Management Program Partners .................................................................... 46 4.1.4 Environmental Organizations ................................................................................... 47 4.1.5 East of Hudson Partners............................................................................................ 47 4.2 Land Acquisition ........................................................................................................................ 48 4.2.1 Overview .................................................................................................................. 48 4.2.2 Solicitation ................................................................................................................ 51 4.2.3 LAP Programs .......................................................................................................... 51 4.2.4 Enhanced Land Trust Program ................................................................................. 54 4.2.5 Riparian Buffer Acquisition Program (RBAP) ......................................................... 54 4.2.6 FEMA Flood Buyout Program ................................................................................. 54 4.2.7 DEP-Funded Flood Buyout Program ........................................................................ 55 4.2.8 Riparian Buffers Protected ....................................................................................... 55 4.2.9 Wetlands Protected ................................................................................................... 56 4.3 Land Management ...................................................................................................................... 56 4.3.1 Property and Conservation Easement Monitoring .................................................... 56 4.3.2 Recreational Uses ..................................................................................................... 58 4.3.3 Agricultural Uses ...................................................................................................... 62 4.3.4 Forest Management Program Overview ................................................................... 62 4.3.5 Invasive Species Management .................................................................................. 65 4.4 Watershed Agricultural Program ................................................................................................ 68 4.5 Stream Management Program .................................................................................................... 72 4.5.1 Introduction and Highlights ...................................................................................... 72 4.5.2 Stream Management Implementation Program ........................................................ 73 ii Table of Contents 4.5.3 Partnerships and Education ....................................................................................... 74 4.5.4 Floodplain Management ........................................................................................... 75 4.5.5 Stream Projects ......................................................................................................... 78 4.6 Riparian Buffer Protection Program ........................................................................................... 85 4.6.1 Acquisition and Management of Riparian Buffers on DEP or Controlled Lands .... 85 4.6.2 Catskill Streams Buffer Initiative ............................................................................. 86 4.7 Environmental Infrastructure Programs ..................................................................................... 89 4.7.1 WWTP Regulatory and State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) Upgrade Program ...................................................................................................... 89 4.7.2 Septic System Rehabilitation and Replacement Program ......................................... 89 4.7.3 New Sewage Treatment Infrastructure Program ...................................................... 91 4.7.4 Sewer Extension Program ........................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Catskill Canister Volume 52 Number 1 January - March 2019
    The Catskill Canister Volume 52 Number 1 January - March 2019 Blackhead Range from West Kill. Photo by Stash Rusin, #2829 In this issue: President's Column Trail Mix: News and Notes from the Club Winter weekend Pitch Perfect - Three Hikes Winter Hiking with Children Beyond the list - what comes after 35? 5th Annual Lighting of the Fire Tower Event Goose in the spruce Conservation Corner Trail Maintenance Update Stewardship Update Advice for the guide? Annual dinner announcement In Memoriam Hike Schedule Member lists Editor's Notes 1 Spathe and Spadix The President’s Column by Heather Rolland As I sit down to write my penultimate President’s column, the snow is piling up. I’m preparing for craft fairs, cooking, dressing the dogs in blaze orange finery, and anticipating the dreaded holiday family get-togethers. We’ve all been there, sitting around the table with Aunt Gertie and Uncle Jasper, and someone asks you about Your Hiking Thing. After all the requisite jokes about the Bataan Death March and how the only hiking Cousin Fred is doing this year is to the fridge and back to the couch… someone asks you the why question. Why do you do it? Why a list? Why in the winter? And especially why if there is no view at the top? I have said it before: the Catskill Forest Preserve is my temple and my gym. The oft repeated John Burroughs quote rings true for me: I too go to nature to be soothed and healed, and to have my senses put in order.
    [Show full text]
  • SUNY Albany Concept Plan
    1 Schoharie Creek Trail Concept Plan 1 1 Prepared for Schoharie Area Long Term, Inc. (SALT) Prepared by University at Albany Graduate Planning Studio Spring 2016 Graduate Planning Studio Students Abdullah Alhemyari Kyle Hatch Jamie Konkoski Katie O’Sullivan Matthew Rosenbloom-Jones Schoharie Creek Trail Concept Plan 2 2 Table of Contents I. Executive Summary ................................................................................................................. 3 II. Project Context ....................................................................................................................... 5 III. Trail Benefits Analysis ............................................................................................................. 8 IV. Vision Concept ........................................................................................................................ 9 V. Next Steps ............................................................................................................................. 30 VI. Sources .................................................................................................................................. 31 VII. APPENDICES ....................................................................................................................... 33 APPENDIX A: Existing Conditions Report .................................................................................. 34 APPENDIX B: Data Sources and Analysis Methods ..................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Hiking Calendar
    President’s Message Moving Forward ow quickly man-made “structures,” David S. Marsh and Construction, and Director of Trail on which we have conditioned Maintenance. The existing position of Vice H ourselves to rely, can change. Like President of Trail Protection will assume trees in a forest after a microburst, we have responsibility for landowner relations, and watched as financial institutions and major the FLTC office will expand its corporations, flawed from mismanagement, responsibilities for data base management snapped and tumbled. A warming climate and other trail data tasks. I believe this new threatens the natural world we hold dear and organization structure will provide a more the very existence of future generations of effective Board focus on the critical task of living creatures. We are shaken to our very keeping the FLT fully operational and in roots, but out of the rubble, new growth excellent condition. We seriously need your begins to appear, and we dare to hope again. help in staffing these new positions and some These are difficult times indeed. All FLTC of the tasks that support them. You may read members and volunteers will be affected. A more about this on page 14. Please step very serious lesson has once again been forward and volunteer. The FLTC must Move learned, that greed is short sighted, our Forward! Photo by Jacqui Wensich strength is in following our fundamental The good news is that more and more people principals, and this earth, while resilient and forgiving, must be are discovering and enjoying the FLT. The bad news is that respected and protected.
    [Show full text]
  • The Lookout June - July 2019
    The Lookout June - July 2019 Adirondack Mountain Club — Schenectady Chapter Dedicated to the preservation, protection and enjoyment of the Forest Preserve http://www.adk-schenectady.org Adirondack Mountain Club — Schenectady Chapter Board ELECTED OFFICERS CHAIR: LOOKOUT EDITOR: Stan Stoklosa Mal Provost 518-383-3066 518-399-1565 [email protected] [email protected] VICE-CHAIR: MEMBERSHIP: VACANT Mary Zawacki 914-373-8733 SECRETARY: [email protected] Jacque McGinn 518-438-0557 NORTHVILLE PLACID TRAIL: [email protected] Mary MacDonald 518-371-1293 TREASURER: [email protected] Mike Brun 518-399-1021 OUTINGS: [email protected] Roy Keats 518-370-0399 DIRECTOR: [email protected] Roy Keats 603-953-8782 PRINTING/MAILING: [email protected] Mary MacDonald 518-371-1293 PROJECT COORDINATORS: [email protected] Jacque McGinn 518-438-0557 PUBLICITY: [email protected] Richard Wang 518-399-3108 Jason Waters [email protected] 518-369-5516 [email protected] TRAILS: Norm Kuchar VACANT 518-399-6243 [email protected] [email protected] APPOINTED MEMBERS WEB MASTER: Mary Zawacki CONSERVATION: 914-373-8733 Mal Provost [email protected] 518-399-1565 [email protected] WHITEWATER: Ralph Pascale INNINGS: 518-235-1614 Sally Dewes [email protected] 518-346-1761 [email protected] YOUNG MEMBERS GROUP: Dustin Wright 603-953-8782 [email protected] On the On Jay Mountain,
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Scope for the Modification of the Catalum Spdes Permit
    DRAFT SCOPE FOR THE MODIFICATION OF THE CATALUM SPDES PERMIT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Lead Agency: New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Applicant: New York City Department of Environmental Protection April 2014 Draft Scope DRAFT SCOPE FOR THE MODIFICATION OF THE CATALUM SPDES PERMIT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................. 3 1.1 PROJECT IDENTIFICATION ................................................................................................ 4 1.2 PROJECT BACKGROUND ................................................................................................... 6 1.3 WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM OPERATION .............................................................................. 7 1.4 REGULATORY BACKGROUND ......................................................................................... 10 1.5 CATALUM SPDES PERMIT ............................................................................................. 13 1.6 THE PROPOSED ACTION ................................................................................................. 14 1.7 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION .......................................................... 29 1.8 LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL PERMITS AND APPROVALS .............................................. 30 1.9 PRIOR STUDIES .............................................................................................................. 30 2.0
    [Show full text]
  • Notice for the Community in the Vicinity of Jerome Ave and Gunhill
    Vincent Sapienza Commissioner FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: December 19, 2018 CONTACT: [email protected], (845) 334-7868 No. 111 DEP TO WORK WITH U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY TO STUDY SUSPECTED LEAK FROM THE CATSKILL AQUEDUCT Multi-year study will focus on pressure tunnel that carries water deep below the Rondout Valley Historic photos of the Rondout Pressure Tunnel can be found by clicking here The New York City Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) today announced that it will work with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) on a multi-year study to examine suspected leaks from a portion of the Catskill Aqueduct that runs several hundred feet below the Rondout Creek in Ulster County. DEP has been gathering information on this portion of the aqueduct, known as the Rondout Pressure Tunnel, for several years. In 2016, experts used a remote-operate vehicle to view the inside of the pressure tunnel for the first time since it was built more than a century ago. The vehicle used high-definition video cameras, acoustic equipment and other instruments to pinpoint several leaks in the tunnel. Scientific data collected by USGS will supplement the remote-operated vehicle’s inspection of the tunnel, giving DEP a clearer picture of where water is traveling after it escapes the aqueduct. At this time, DEP knows that a significant portion of the water comes to the surface and moves overland into the Rondout Creek in High Falls. USGS will begin its work by meeting individually with landowners in High Falls over the next several months. Scientists from USGS will seek permission to install monitoring instruments in existing groundwater wells, and potentially to install new monitoring wells in that portion of the valley.
    [Show full text]
  • Croton Water Treatment Plant Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Executive Summary 1. Introduction, Background
    CROTON WATER TREATMENT PLANT DRAFT SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND AND SITING ALTERNATIVES ............................. 1 1.1. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 1 1.2. DESCRIPTION OF THE CROTON WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM .............................. 4 1.2.1. Existing Croton Water Supply Users...................................................................... 4 1.2.1.1. Upstate Users .................................................................................................. 4 1.2.1.2. New York City Users...................................................................................... 4 1.3. NEED FOR THE PROJECT .......................................................................................... 6 1.4. BACKGROUND TO THE PROJECT ......................................................................... 10 1.4.1. Consent Decree ..................................................................................................... 11 1.4.2. 1999 Croton Water Treatment Plant..................................................................... 12 1.4.3. Supplement to the Consent Decree....................................................................... 13 1.4.4. 2003 Croton WTP EIS.......................................................................................... 13 1.4.5. State Legislature’s Approval of Park Alienation.................................................. 13 1.5.
    [Show full text]
  • There Are No Long-Term Local Or Regional Economic Impacts Anticipated Due to These Relocations
    Draft Environmental Impact Statement Section IV.B There are no long-term local or regional economic impacts anticipated due to these relocations. NYSDOT Real Estate staff conducted a Conceptual Stage Relocation Plan to determine the availability of adequate replacement sites. The complete relocation plan can be found in Appendix H. Based on this analysis, sufficient available residential and commercial properties exist on the market to accommodate these relocations. There are no highway construction or other projects by any public or private agency scheduled that would affect the availability of replacement property. It is estimated that the relocations on this project can be accomplished within one year from the date of vesting. B.3. Environmental Consequences This section describes the impacts of each of the Build Alternatives on the natural environment, including water resources, wildlife habitat, parks, air quality, noise levels, cultural resources, and contaminated materials. B.3.a. Surface Waters/Wetlands This section discusses the inter-related topics of surface waters, wetlands, coastal zone resources, navigable waters, and floodplains. The descriptions of the No Build and Build Alternatives presented below are relevant to several of the environmental discussions that follow. No Build Alternative The No Build Alternative would make no physical or operational improvements to the Kosciuszko Bridge, but would continue NYSDOT’s existing maintenance program. There would be little change to existing conditions in the study area, and no fill or excavation would take place in Newtown Creek. Alternatives RA-5 and RA-6 During construction, up to six temporary pile-supported staging platforms would be constructed in Newtown Creek and remain in place until the end of the construction period.
    [Show full text]
  • New York City's Water Story
    New York City’s Water Story: From Mountain Top to Tap SCHOHARIE COUNTY Schoharie Reservoir 1,130 FEET Delaware Watershed Gilboa Catskill Watershed Stamford The water we use today is the same water that fell as C rain when dinosaurs roamed a D t Prattsville Siuslaw s DELAWARE COUNTY West Branch Delaware e k l i the earth. In its endless a l Windham l w a W r cycle, water is the only e a t W e GREENE COUNTY rs Schoharie Creek substance that naturally a h te e r d Grand Gorge sh exists as a solid, e d liquid or gas. Delhi Lenox Roxbury East Branch Delaware Hunter Tannersville Andes Walton HUNTER MOUNTAIN Water’s journey from 4,040 FEET mountain top to tap begins Margaretville Shandaken Tunnel when rain and snow fall on COLUMBIA COUNTY watersheds, the areas Massachusetts of land that catch, absorb, Downsville Phoenicia and carry water downhill to gently and swiftly Deposit Pepacton Woodstock flowing streams. Cannonsville Reservoir Reservoir 1,150 FEET 1,280 FEET Esopus Creek SLIDE MOUNTAIN Boiceville West Delaware Tunnel East Delaware Tunnel 4,180 FEET Streams provide life-cycle Neversink Frost Valley needs for fish and other RIver aquatic organisms. Oxygen is Ashokan Rondout trapped in the fresh water as Creek Reservoir Claryville Olivebridge 590 FEET Kingston it tumbles over rocks into deep pools. Overhanging tree branches keep water r C e A v cool as fresh water T i Grahamsville S K R DUTCHESS COUNTY continues its journey. IL L n Neversink A Neversink Reservoir Tunnel Q o s 1,440 FEET U s E d Liberty Rondout Reservoir d Water is naturally filtered D u u U 840 FEET U C C H H T by the soil and tree roots in T dense forests as it travels toward reservoirs.
    [Show full text]
  • 2007 Traffic Data Report for New York State
    2007 TRAFFIC DATA REPORT FOR NEW YORK STATE New York State Department of Transportation Table of Contents Page Chapter 1: Introduction.........................................................................................................1 Chapter 2: Traffic Data Collecting Program Overview........................................................2 Chapter 3: Accuracy of Traffic Data Section 3.1 Data Collection Equipment Requirements.............................................3 Section 3.2 Data Quality Control Checks.................................................................4 Chapter 4: Continuous Count Program Section 4.1 Introduction............................................................................................7 Section 4.2 Maps of Continuous Count Sites by Region..........................................8 Section 4.3 Map of High Speed Weigh-In-Motion Sites, Statewide .......................19 Section 4.4 Traffic Monitoring Site Details and Specifications ..............................20 Chapter 5: Coverage Count Program Section 5.1 Volume, Speed and Classification Counts............................................21 Section 5.2 Highway Performance Monitoring System ..........................................24 Section 5.3 Annual Traffic Monitoring Workshop..................................................24 Section 5.4 Mobile Traffic Monitoring Platforms ...................................................25 Section 5.5 County Counter Initiative .....................................................................26
    [Show full text]
  • New York City Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Water Supply
    New York City Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Water Supply Waterfowl Management Program July 31, 2012 Prepared in accordance with the Final 2007 (Waterfowl Management Program-Section 4.1) of the United States Environmental Protection Filtration Avoidance Determination A Waterfowl Management Program was developed to evaluate and mitigate pollutant impacts (fecal coliform bacteria) from migratory and resident waterbirds (waterfowl, gulls and cormorants). The purpose of the study reported here, for the period April 1, 2011 to March 31, 2012, is to evaluate further the trends observed in bird numbers and their effect on fecal coliform bacteria levels as a consequence of DEP’s Waterfowl Management Program. Prepared by: Christopher A. Nadareski, Section Chief, Wildlife Studies NYC Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Water Supply Division of Watershed Water Quality Operations TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures 3-6 List of Tables 7 Acknowledgments 8 Introduction 9-10 Methods 11-17 Results and Discussion 18-47 Conclusions 48-49 References 50-51 Appendix A (reservoir maps with bird zones and water sampling locations) 52-62 2 LIST OF FIGURES Page Number Figure 1. Kensico Reservoir waterbird totals. 18 Figure 2. Kensico Reservoir Surface Water Treatment Rule compliance (fecal coliforms 100mL-1 at DEL18 and CATLEFF). 19 Figure 3. Kensico Reservoir fecal coliforms 100mL-1 at DEL18 vs. total waterbirds (4/1/2010 to 3/31/2011). 21 Figure 4. Kensico Reservoir fecal coliforms 100mL-1 at DEL18 vs. total waterbirds (4/1/2011 to 3/31/2012). 22 Figure 5. Kensico Reservoir fecal coliforms 100mL-1 at CATLEFF vs. total waterbirds (4/1/2010 to 3/31/2011).
    [Show full text]
  • Proposed Action in Kensico Reservoir Study Area
    Kensico Reservoir Project Description 8. PROPOSED ACTION IN THE KENSICO RESERVOIR STUDY AREA 8.1 KENSICO RESERVOIR PROJECT DESCRIPTION 8.1.1 BACKGROUND As discussed in Section 1.2.3, “Emergency Authorizations for Alum Application,” NYSDEC, in coordination with NYSDOH issued several emergency authorizations to DEP, which allowed for the application of alum to water in the Catskill Aqueduct upstream of Kensico Reservoir1 to address episodic turbidity. Specifically, alum was applied to coagulate the suspended solids to improve settling and reduce turbidity in flows of water from Ashokan Reservoir.2 Following the expiration of these emergency authorizations, DEP applied for a permit and NYSDEC issued the Catalum SPDES Permit. This permit authorizes DEP to apply alum and sodium hydroxide to reduce turbidity in the Catskill Aqueduct upon NYSDEC receipt of a copy of a notice from the NYSDOH that there is a potential imminent development of a public health hazard related to the discharge of turbid water from Kensico Reservoir. The Catalum SPDES Permit issued by NYSDEC to authorize alum application included a condition that DEP dredge accumulated alum floc from the Reservoir in a manner that minimizes adverse impacts to the environment within Kensico Reservoir. In 2011, the Catalum SPDES Permit was administratively extended. In June 2012, DEP requested a modification to the NYSDEC Catalum SPDES Permit to incorporate measures to address episodic turbidity in water diverted from Ashokan Reservoir, and delay of dredging of alum floc from Kensico Reservoir until completion of RWBT repairs. Repairs to the RWBT are underway and are part of a broader program to ensure the continued reliability of the drinking water system: DEP’s Water for the Future (WFF) Program.
    [Show full text]