ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
ON A WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION GRANT
   FOR THE CENTRAL SERVICE AREA OF THE  OCEAN COUNTY
    SEWERAGE AUTHORITY IN OCEAN COUNTY, NEW JERSEY
                      VOLUME
                                         FINAL
                                    OCTOBER 1974
        U.S.  ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                      REGION  II
                  26  Federal  Plaza
              New  York,  New York  10007

-------
                                                    902174255A
                 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
      ON A WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION GRANT
FOR THE CENTRAL SERVICE AREA OF THE OCEAN COUNTY SEWERAGE AUTHORITY
                   IN OCEAN COUNTY, NEW JERSEY
                           VOLUME I
                            FINAL
                        OCTOBER  1974
                        Prepared by:
            U.S.  ENVIRONMENTAL  PROTECTION AGENCY
                         REGION  II
                     26 Federal  Plaza
                  New York, New York  10007

-------
                              TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section                             Title                                 Page

    I        SUMMARY                                                         1

   II        DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT                            11

  III        BACKGROUND                                                     14

                General Description of the Project Area	   14
                Physical Geography of Ocean County	   17
                Geology of Ocean County 	   21
                Land Use in Ocean County	   24
                Population Projections for the Central  Service Area ...   50
                Economic and Occupational Profiles of Ocean County. ...   56
                Natural Resources of Ocean County 	   64
                   Surface Waters 	   64
                   Fresh Waters	   65
                   Estuarine Waters 	   68
                   Coastal Marine Waters	   72
                   Ground Water	   76
                   Raritan and Magothy Formations 	 .   77
                   Kirkwood Formation	".   78
                   Water-Table Aquifer	'   79
                   Englishtown Formation	   80
                   Wenonah Formation and Mount Laurel Sand	   80
                   Water Supply	   84
                   Terrestrial Ecosystems 	   86
                   Air Resources	   98
                Existing Sources of Wastewater in the Central Service
                  Area	   98
                History of the Proposed Project 	  104
                Detailed Description of the Ortley Beach Sewage
                  Treatment Plant 	  108

   IV        ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT                          112

                The "No Action" Alternative 	  112
                System Alternatives 	  113
                   Collection System and Service Area 	  113
                   Wastewater Treatment System	117
                   Secondary Treatment System	. . .	118
                   Advanced Waste Treatment System	123
                   Effluent Disposal System	  123
                   Sludge Disposal System 	  128

-------
                      TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

Sectio_n_                            Title                                  Pj|_ne

    V        DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT                  135

                Collection System 	  	     136
                Treatment System  	     136
                Effluent Disposal System	     143
                Sludge Disposal System	     143
                Miscellaneous	    144

   VI        ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT                  148

               . Short-Term Impacts	     149
                   Aquatic Ecosystems 	     149
                   Ground Water   	     153
                   Terrestrial Ecosystems 	     154
                   Air, Noise, and Traffic	     156
                Long-Term Primary Impacts 	     157
                   Aquatic Ecosystems 	     157
                   Ground Water   	     166
                   Terrestrial Ecosystems 	     171
                   Air Quality	     176
                Long-Term Secondary Impacts 	     176
                   Surface and Ground Waters	     176
                   Air Quality.	     180
                   Development of the Air Quality Analysis	     186
                Results of the Air Quality Analysis	     191
                   Relationship Between the Air Quality Analysis
                     and the OCCSTP	     194

  VII        ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED         199
             SHOULD THE PROPOSED PROJECT BE IMPLEMENTED

 VIII        RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LOCAL SHORT-TERM USES OF MAN'S           201
             ENVIRONMENT AND THE MAINTENANCE AND ENHANCEMENT OF
             LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY

   IX        IRREVERSIBLE OR IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES         204
             WHICH WOULD BE INVOLVED IN THE PROPOSED PROJECT SHOULD
             IT BE IMPLEMENTED

    X        COMMENTS AND RESPONSES                                    •    206

   XI        CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS                               228

  XII        ABBREVIATIONS USED                                            235

                                      ii

-------
                       TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

Section                             Ti tl e                                 Page

 XIII        METRIC EQUIVALENTS OF ENGLISH UNITS                           237

  XIV        BIBLIOGRAPHY                                                  239

   XV        APPENDICES

                Appendix A - Selected Approved New Jersey State Water
                  Quality Classifications and Criteria .  .  .	   251
                Appendix B - Methodologies Used to Estimate Population .   260
                Appendix C - National Primary and Secondary Ambient
                  Air Quality Standards	   262
                Appendix D - Alternative Treatment Plant Sites,
                  Collection System Sewer Routings, Outfall Routings,
                  and Sludge Disposal Sites	   263
                Appendix E - U.S. Public Health Service Bacteriological
                  Standards for Drinking Water	   291
                                     iii

-------
                             LIST OF TABLES

Number                            Title                              Page

   1         Population Estimates for Municipalities in the             52
              Central Service Area.

   2        Employment Profile of Ocean County,  1964-1990.         58,  59

   3        Occupational Profile of Ocean County Residents,  1970.   62,  63

   4        Stream Flow Data, Ocean County, 1968.                       66

   5        Pumpage from Aquifers in Ocean County,  1968.                87

   6'        Air Quality Data:  Ocean County,  July 1972 -  June 1973.     99

   7        Existing Wastewater Treatment Facilities in the        101,102
              Central Service Area,  December  1973.

   8        Comparison of Costs for Alternative  Wastewater            122
              Treatment Systems:  OCSA Southern  Service Area.

   9        Proposed Lift and Pump Stations for  the OCSA  Central       138
              Service Area Sewerage Project.

  10        Major Treatment Units for the Proposed  OCCSTP.        140,141

  11         Staff Complements for Wastewater  Treatment Plants.         147

  12        Primary Long-Term Impacts of the  Proposed Project on   172,173
              Terrestrial Ecosystems.

  13        Local  Short-Term Effects on the Environmental  During       202
              Construction.

 D-l         Summary Environmental Evaluation  of  Alternative  Sites      275
              for the OCCSTP.

 D-2        Alternative Collection System Routings  for the Central     281
              Service Area.                                       282,283
                                    IV

-------
Number
   1
   2
   3
   4
   5
   6
   7
   8
   9
  10
  11
  12
  13
  14
  15
  16
  17
  18

  19
  20
  D-l
through
  D-10
                 LIST OF FIGURES
                      Title                               Page
Location Map of Central Service Area.                       15
Drainage Basins of Ocean County.                            16
Topography of Ocean County.                                 19
Geohydrologic Cross Section of Ocean County.                22
Geology of Ocean County.                                    23
Current Municipal Zoning in the Central Service Area.       25
Present and Proposed Development in Berkeley Township.      26
Present and Proposed Development in Dover Township.         27
Present and Proposed Development in Jackson Township.       28
Present and Proposed Development in Lacey Township.         29
Present and Proposed Development in Manchester Township.     30
Present and Proposed Development in Ocean Township.         31
Officially Designated Coastal Wetlands in Ocean County.      35
Officially Designated Coastal Area in Ocean County.         38
Trends in Employment in Ocean County, 1962-1972.            57
Piezometric Contours of Kirkwood Formation.                 82
Water-Tab!e Contours in Ocean County.                       83
Existing Sewage Treatment Facilities and Sewered Areas     103
  in the Central Service Area.
Proposed Sewerage Facilities for the Central Service Area.  137
Schematic Flow Diagram of the Proposed OCCSTP.             142
Sewerage System Alternatives for the Central  Service
  Area.
   264
through
   273

-------
            ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT ON A
     WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION GRANT
            FOR THE CENTRAL SERVICE AREA OF THE
              OCEAF COUNTY SEWERAGE AUTHORITY
                IN OCEAN COUNTY, NEW JERSEY

                          SUMMARY

DATE:    October 1974.

TYPE OF_ STATEMENT:

         Final.

RESPONSIBLE FEDERAL AGENCY:

         U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region II.

TYPE OF ACTION:

         Administrative.

DESCRIPTIQN_OF ACTION INDICATING STATES AND COUNTIES AFFECTED;

    Funds have been requested from the U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency  (EPA) by representatives of the Ocean

County Sewerage Authority  (OCSA) of Ocean County in the

State of New Jersey.  The funds are needed to finance the

preparation of construction drawings and specifications  for

1) a secondary sewage treatment plant for the OCSA's Central

service area, 2) interceptor sewers and force mains, and 3)

an ocean outfall to dispose of the effluent from the sewage

treatment plant.

    The proposed project affects the Atlantic Ocean in the

area east of Seaside park and Seaside Heights.  It also

-------
affects Atlantic, Cape May, Cumberland and Ocean counties.



 (See DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT).








SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTALJ5FFECTS:



    Implementation of the proposed project will 1) improve



the quality of receiving waters by providing secondary



treatment of wastewater prior to ocean discharge, 2) allow



cessation of wastewater discharge into inland streams that



have low assimilative capacities, and 3)  provide the OCSA's



Central service area with centralized sewage treatment.  The



highly treated effluent will be discharged into the Atlantic



Ocean.  Waste sludge produced at the treatment plant will be



disposed of in a State-approved sanitary  landfill.  This



will not significantly disrupt the environment.



    If the proposed project is implemented, some adverse



effects are expected: 1) reduced ground-water recharge with



associated decreases in stream flows and  increases in



saltwater encroachment, 2)  possible contamination at the



point of effluent disposal, and 3)  slight deterioration of



air quality.



 (See ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT and



ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED



SJOULD THE PROPOSED PROJECT BE IMPLEMENTED) .

-------
ALTERNATIVES_CONSIDEFED:



    Project alternatives, other than the "no action" alter-



native, have been divided into four components: collection



system and service area, wastewater treatment system,



effluent disposal system, and sludge disposal system.



Alternatives within each system have been evaluated and



proposed systems chosen.



Collection System and Service ^rea



    Past governmental decisions have narrowed the field of



alternatives to one, the proposed approach.  Ocean County



has been divided into three service areas: Northern,



Central, and Southern.



    The Central service area has been divided into two



sections, the Island Beach section and the mainland section.



Each section is to have its own treatment facility.  The



Ortley Beach sewage treatment plant is currently being



expanded and upgraded to serve the Island Beach section.



The Ocean County Central sewage treatment plant (OCCSTP),



the proposed project, is to serve the mainland section.  The



collection system for the Island Beach section is designed



to accommodate the sewage flows generated by the ultimate



saturation population of the area.  The collection system



for the mainland section is designed to accommodate the



sewage flows generated by the anticipated 2020 population of

-------
the area.  Collection system alternatives have been limited

to alternative routings; these are discussed in Appendix D.

Treatment System

    Four major alternative treatment processes have been

considered by the OCSA:

         1.   Activated sludge using air
                 complete-mix (proposed)
                 conventional
                 contact stabilization
                 step-aeration,
         2.   Activated sludge using "pure" oxygen
              (Unox process),
         3.   Trickling filters,
         U.   Physical-chemical.

Properly designed and operated,  any one of these alternative

systems can meet the Federal regulations for secondary

treatment systems.

Effluent Disposal System

    Previous actions by both the New Jersey Department of

Environmental Protection (NJDEP) and the EPA have eliminated

inland streams and coastal estuaries as possible receiving

waters for the effluent from the OCCSTP.  Only two alterna-

tive effluent disposal systems remain viable for the OCCSTP,

discharge to the Atlantic Ocean and artificial ground-water

recharge.

Sludge Disposal System

    The sludge disposal system has been divided into four

subsystems: conditioning, stabilization, dewatering, and

-------
final disposal.  The following alternatives have been

considered:

         1.   Conditioning  (thickening)
              a.  Sedimentation
              b.  Flotation
              c.  Centrifugation  (proposed),
         2.   Stabilization
              a.  Anaerobic digestion  (proposed)
              b.  Aerobic digestion
              c.  Chemical stabilization
              d.  Pyrolysis,
         3.   Dewatering
              a.  Centrifugation  (proposed)
              b.  Vacuum filtration
              c.  Filter press,
         4.   Final disposal
              a.  Incineration and landfill
              b.  Landfill  (proposed)
                  i. at private landfill
                 ii. at OCSA owned landfill
              c.  Land spreading.

(See HISTORY OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT and ALTERNATIVES TO

THE PROPOSED PROJECT).
FEDERAL., STATE, AMD LOCAL AGENCIES FROM WHICH COMMENTS

HAVE BEEN REQUESTED;

    Federal Agencies:

         Department of Agriculture

              /Agricultural Stabilization and Research service

              Agricultural Research Service

              Forest Service

              Soil Conservation Service

         Department of Commerce

-------
          National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration



          National Marine Fisheries Service



     Department of Defense



          Army corps of Engineers (Philadelphia District)



          Office of the Oceanographer of the Navy



     Department of Health, Education and Welfare



     Department of Housing and Urban Development



     Department of the Interior



     United States Senate



          Honorable Clifford P. Case



          Honorable Harrison A. Williams



     United States House of Representatives



          Honorable James J. Howard



          Honorable Edwin B. Forsythe



     United states Environmental Protection Agency



State Agencies:



     New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection



     New Jersey Department of Community Affairs



          Division of State and Regional Planning



Local Agencies:



     County



          Atlantic County



            Board of Chosen Freeholders



            Planning Board

-------
     Burlington County



       Board of Chosen Freeholders



       Planning Board



     Cape May County



       Board of Chosen Freeholders



       Planning Board



     Cumberland County



       Board of Chosen Freeholders



       Planning Board



     Monmouth County



       Board of Chosen Freeholders



       Planning Board



     Ocean County



       Board of Chosen Freeholders



       Board of Health



       Business Administrator



       Engineer



       Environmental Agency



       Extension Service



       Municipal Utilities Authorities Association



       Planning Board



       Sewerage Authority



Municipal



     Beachwood Borough

-------
  Mayor



  Sewerage Authority



Berkeley Township



  Mayor



  Planning Board



  Recreation Commission



  Sewerage Authority



Dover Township



  Mayor



  Planning Board



  Sewerage Authority



Island Heights Borough



  Mayor



  Planning Board



Jackson Township



  Conservation commission



  Mayor



  Municipal Utilities Authority



  Planning Board



Lacey Township



  Mayor



  Municipal Utilities Authority



  Planning Board



Lakehurst Borough





               8

-------
  Mayor



  Municipal Utilities Authority



  Planning Board



Lakewood



  Municipal Utilities Authority



Lavallette Borough



  Mayor



  Planning Board



Manchester Township



  Conservation Commission



  Mayor



  Municipal Utilities Authority



  Planning Board



Mantoloking Borough



  Mayor



Ocean Gate Borough



  Mayor



  Planning Board



Ocean Township



  Mayor



  Planning Board



Pine Beach Borough



  Mayor



  Planning Board

-------
     Seaside Heights Borough



       Mayor



     Seaside Park Borough



       Mayor



     South Toms River Borough



       Mayor



       Planning Board



       Sewerage Authority



     Union Township



       Mayor



Citizens Groups



     American Littoral Society



     Area Residents Environmental Association



     Citizens Conservation Council of Ocean County



     Crestwood Village Club



     Federation of Conservationists United Societies



     Holiday City Phase I Nature Club



     Holiday City Phase II Clubhouse



     Izaak Walton League of America



     Leisure Village Nature Club



     New Jersey Audubon Society



     Ocean County Citizens Against Water Pollution '



     Ocean County League of Women Voters



     The Sierra Club - South Jersey Division





                    10

-------
            DESCRIPTION QF THE PROPOSED PROJECT



C-34-372^- Ocean County Sgwerage Authority -^Central Service
Area Status - Preliminary Plans and Studies Completed

    In 1970 the OCSA was assigned the task of constructing

and operating a regional sewerage system for Ocean County.

The OCSA divided the county into three service areas:

Northern, Central, and Southern.  This environmental impact

statement deals with the sewerage facilities proposed for

the Central service area.  The need for these facilities is

attributed to the rapidly increasing population of the

Central service area.  In 1970 the population of the Central

service area was 92,000; by 1990 the population is expected

to reach 330,000  (FKSW, 1973).

    At this stage of the project development process, the

OCSA has applied to the EPA for a Step 2 grant.  A Step 2

grant is essentially a planning grant that pays part of the

cost of preparing construction drawings and specifications

for proposed facilities.  The proposed facilities for the

Central service area are 1) a 91,000 cu m/day  (24 mgd)

secondary sewage treatment plant, 2) ten pump stations and

three lift stations, 3) approximately 74 km (45 mile) of

sewer pipe, ranging in size from 35 to 183 cm  (14 to 72

in.), and 4)  a force main outfall, measuring 137 cm  (54 in.)
                             11

-------
in diameter and extending 2C20 m  (67CO ft) into the Atlantic



Ocean.



    The treatment plant will employ the complete-mix, step-



aeration, activated sludge process.  The effluent will be



chlorinated before it is discharged into the ocean.  The



sludge will undergo two-stage digestion and dewatering.



After it has been processed, the sludge will be transported



by truck to a landfill site for disposal.



    The development of Ocean County has had serious conse-



quences for the quality of area waters.  There are now many



small wastewater treatment plants that discharge their



effluents into tributaries of Barnegat Bay and Little Egg



Harbor, or directly into the Atlantic Ocean.  As a result,



the receiving waters are unfit for their designated uses



(see Appendix A).



    Water quality conditions prompted a recommendation in



the 1967 Proceedings - Conference report  (FWPCA, 1967)  that



four treatment facilities be built in Ocean County by



November 1970.  In 1972, the pre-conference report on area



waters (U.S. EPA, 1972a) noted that because the necessary



facilities had not been built, water quality standards were



being contravened.



    To rectify this situation, the EPA decided to update its



implementation plan for abating water pollution in New





                             12

-------
Jersey's Atlantic coastal area.  The EPA determined that the



Metedeconk River, the Island Beach, the Central Easin, and



the Southern regions would each require a treatment, plant



with effluent discharge to the Atlantic Ocean.  Each



regional plant ;would have to provide year-round disinfection



of wastewater and a minimum biochemical oxygen demand  (BOD)



removal of 85 percent.  The updated implementation schedule



specified that final plans be submitted to the EPA by June



1, 1974, that construction be started by December 1, 1974,



and that construction be completed by December 1, 1976.



    The NJDEP submitted preliminary plans for a 125,000 cu ,



m/day  (32 mgd)  secondary sewage treatment plant to the EPA



on June 25, 1973.  The NJDEP submitted revised plans,



including a reduction in plant capacity to the proposed



91,000 cu m/day  (24 mgd), on July 30, 1973.  The estimated



total cost of preparing construction drawings and



specifications for the proposed project is $5,708,000.  The



Federal Step 2 grant will amount to $4,281,000.  New Jersey



will contribute $856,000, and the OCSA will contribute



$571,000.
                             13

-------
                         BACKGROUND



          GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT AREA



    Ocean county, which is located in southeastern New



Jersey, is bounded on the north by Monmouth County, on the



east by the Atlantic Ocean, on the south by Atlantic County,



and on the west by Burlington County.  The geographic center



of Ocean County is approximately 80 km (50 mile) east of



Philadelphia and 97 km  (60 mile) south of New York City.



(See Figure 1) .



    The OCSA's Central service area includes the Toms River,



Forked River, and Cedar Creek drainage basins, the southern



portion of the Metedeconk River drainage basin, and the



Island Beach barrier bar drainage basin.   The limits of the



Central service area and of each municipality within the



service area are illustrated in Figure 1.  The drainage



basins are shown in Figure 2.



    Ocean County has a fairly extensive transportation net-



work.  As of 1965, there were 3325 km (2065 mile)  of roadway



within Ocean County; municipal roads constituted 60 percent



of the total road system, county roads 30 percent, and State



roads 10 percent.  U.S. Route 9 and the Garden State Parkway



are major north-south arteries that provide access to



central New Jersey and metropolitan New York.

-------
                       ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN
                          SOUTH OF LINE
                                                 NEW YORK CITY
LOCATION MAP OF CENTRAL SERVICE AREA

                  Figure 1

-------
                                         \'                 I
                                            HOWELL TOWNSHIP '   WALL TOWNSHIP
                                                          I    -v
                                                                     LAVALLETTE BORO
                                                                     SEASIDE HEIGHTS BORO
                                                                    SEASIDE PARK BORO
                                     BEACHWOOD BORO,'


                                      '
                               FORKED RIVER


                             CEDAR CREEK BASIN
                                                        IONG BEACH TOWNSHIP



                                                      SURF CITY BORO




                                                   SHIP BOTTOM BORO
TUCKERTON CREEK BASIN
 MULL1CA RIVER BASIN
                                                                          POINT PLEASANT BEACH RORO
                                                                          BAYHEAD 60RO
                                                                         MANIOLOKING HOBO
                  01234

                  KILOMETERS



           LEGEND



^MBR» NATURAL DRAINAGE BASINS • MAJOR


^^•^M NATURAL DRAINAGE BASINS - MINOR


	"	TOWNSHIP BOUNDARIES
                 if    ^ VJM" I     1  ft
                 xr   \o>v	f &

                     c<^
                    DRAINAGE BASINS  OF OCEAN COUNTY


                                       Figure 2

-------
State Route 35 connects the Island Beach barrier bar commu-



nities with areas to the north.  State Routes 70 and 72 run



east-west, connecting Ocean County with the Camden - Phila-



delphia area.



    Ocean County has six operational airports.  The airports



are located in Berkeley Township, Lakehurst, Lakewood, Mana-



hawkin, Point Pleasant, and West Creek.  Miller Airport in



Berkeley Township is owned and operated by the county.  The



Lakehurst Naval Air Station is a military installation.  The



other airports are privately owned.  None of the airports in



Ocean County offer regularly scheduled flights, but charter



services are available.



    Three railroad lines serve Ocean County.  The New York



and Long Branch Railroad provides passenger and freight



service from New York City to Point Pleasant and Bay Head in



northern Ocean County.  The Central Railroad of New Jersey



operates a freight line between Jersey City and Lakewood.



The Union Transportation Company, which leases track from



the Penn Central Railroad, provides freight service to the



western part of the county at New Egypt.



             PHYSICAL GEOGRAPHY OF OCEAN COUNTY



    The area delineated as Ocean County is part of the



Atlantic Coastal Plain province  (see Figure 1) .  The



county's topographic profile is generally flat; mean eleva-





                             17

-------
tion in the county is 15 m  (50 ft) above sea level  (See Fig-



ure 3).  Most of the land in the county has a gradient of 5



percent or less; only 1 percent of the land has a gradient



of 10 percent or more.  The flatness of the landscape has



encouraged the development of short, broad-channeled streams



bordered by wetlands.



    Within Ocean County, the entire eastern edge of the



Atlantic Coastal Plain is bounded by Barnegat Bay.  The bay



is separated from the ocean by two barrier bars, or islands,



situated approximately 5 km (3 mile) offshore of the main-



land.  These barrier bars, Island Beach and Long Beach Is-



land, shield the coastline of the mainland from the ocean



surf.



    Ocean County has a modified continental climate.  In



other words, continental winds, which blow out of the north-



west in the winter and out of the southwest in the summer,



create basic weather patterns that are modified by the



ocean.   The winter climate is affected by cold fronts that



issue from high pressure systems over central Canada and the



north-central United States.  The summer climate is affected



by Bermuda highs, systems of warm moist air that originate



over the ocean and that cause hot and humid days with



occasional thunderstorms.
                             18

-------
                  74°IO'
  £S^° ^
  ^^y>.-"\
                             POINT PLEASANT BEACH
                            MANTOLOKINO
                            NORMANDY 6EACH
                          SEASIDE HEIGHTS
                                  01234
                                   KILOMETERS

                               CONTOUR INTERVAL 50 FEET
                               DATUM IS MEAN SEA LEVEL
TOPOGRAPHY OF OCEAN COUNTY
        Figure 3

-------
    Air temperature is also affected by the ocean.  The



ocean's moderating influence is most pronounced along the



shoreline.  Coastal communities enjoy summer temperatures



that are generally 5.5 to 8.3C° (10 to 15°F) lower than



those in inland communities and winter temperatures that are



generally 5.5 to ll.lc0  (10 to 20F°) higher.  Inland, the



average annual temperature is between 10 and 12.8°C  (50 and



55°F).



    Average annual precipitation in Ocean County is 114 cm



(45 in.); about 38 percent is in the form of snow or sleet.



The west-central section of the county receives an average



of 122 cm (48 in.)  of precipitation per year, and the south-



ern tip of the county receives an average of 107 cm  (42



in.).  Rainfall is evenly distributed over the year at the



rate of 8 to 13 cm (3 to 5 in.)  per month, although the rate



may fluctuate markedly during July and August when hurri-



canes and tropical storms occur.



    Prevailing winds are out of the west or northwest during



the winter,  and out of the south during the summer.   Onshore



breezes that occur during the summer in the late morning and



early afternoon can cause the prevailing wind direction to



be south or southwest to northeast.  (Biel, 1958; EAC,



1973) .
                             20

-------
                  GEOLOGY OF OCEAN COUNTY



    About 12C million years ago, during the Cretaceous



period, the sea level rose until the eastern coastline ran



through what is now northwestern New Jersey,  when the sea



receded, it left behind a wedge of marine sediment over the



relatively flat erosional surface of the basement Precam-



brian metamorphic rock.  The wedge is thinnest at the



inland-most edge of the inner coastal plain (see Figure 1).



The thickness of the wedge increases seaward;  at Island



Beach, the wedge is approximately 1158 m (3800 ft)  thick



(see Figure 4).



    Only the upper group of the twenty-four identified



coastal plain formations appears at the surface in Ocean



County.  This is due to the gentle southeast dip of the



coastal plain sediments and to the general flatness of the



terrain.  The Cohansey formation, which is a white to yellow



sand interspersed with gravel and clay lenses, is the ex-



posed sediment over most of Ocean County.  The only notable



exceptions are the extreme western and northern sections of



the county where the Kirkwood formation, which usually



underlies the Cohansey sand, prevails.  Locally, a veneer of



the Beacon Hill gravel or of the Pennsauken, the Bridgeton,



or the Cape May formation may mantle the Cohansey or the



Kirkwood formation.  (See Figure 5) .





                             21

-------
(Q
C
                 U Undifferentiated woter-
                      lobU aquifer
                 Tkw KJrkwood Formation
                       aquifer
                 Tvr Vint.nto.rn Formation
                       aquil*r



                         aquifvr
                    aquifer undefined)
Tmq Monosquan Formation
Thr Hornentown Sand
Krb R«d Bank Sand
Km Nov.sink Formation
Kml Mariholllown Formatii
Kwb Woodbury Clay
Kmv Merchantville Formal
                                                 ES3
                                           SCALE

                                             GEOHYDROLOGIC  CROSS  SECTION  OF OCEAN  COUNTY

-------
                                      01234
                                       KILOMETERS
GEOLOGY OF OCEAN COUNTY
           Figure 5

-------
                  LAND USE IN OCEAN COUNTY



    The Ocean County Master Plan, which was approved in



1966, is being revised by E. Eugene Oross Associates (EAC,



1973).  The original plan is no longer responsive to the



needs of Ocean County, which is undergoing rapid devel-



opment.  Current municipal zoning in the Central service



area is outlined in Figure 6.



    Most of the information on population projections and



secondary effects of development in Ocean County contained



in this report was derived from studies that were recently



conducted by the Division of State and Regional Planning



(DSRP) of the New Jersey Department of Community Affairs.



The DSRP analyzed the growth rate and, to some extent, the



growth patterns in Ocean County.  Figures 7 through 12 are



copies of maps developed by the DSRP; the maps show present



land use and definitely proposed development in the munici-



palities of the Central service area.



    Residential development in Ocean County embraces a wide



range of housing types.  In the older village centers, there



are mainly large, two-story dwellings.  Beyond the village



centers, there are several large-scale housing developments



composed of single-family units.  In addition, there are



many vacation homes that are used primarily on a seasonal,
                             24

-------
                                                            JACKSON TOWNSHIP
                                         MANCHESTER
                                          TOWNSHIP
                                                                                          MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY
                                                                                          SERVICE AREA BOUNDARY
                           BERKELEY TOWNSHIP
I   I RESIDENTIAL
    RESIDENTIAL
E53 RESIDENTIAL
    RESIDENTIAL
    RESIDENTIAL
rrm COMMERCIAL
•• COMMERCIAL
    COMMERCIAL
    MANUFACTURING - INDUSTRIAL
    LIGHT INDUSTRY - COMMERCIAL
                                                         DOVER TOWNSHIP
                                                                                   STATE FOREST , PARKS 4 MILITARY BASES
                                                                                   WETLANDS
iq m

4,050
1,400
  850
  700
  450
2.80C
1,100
  70C
8,100
1,400
CURRENT  MUNICIPAL ZONING  IN  THE CENTRAL  SERVICE AREA

-------
(0
c
                                                                   SCALE
                                                                    0

                                                                   MlliS
                                                                     KILOMETERS
       LEGEND



I    | RURAL OPEN LAND



^m DEVELOPED



     TO BE DEVELOPED



^V^S| WETLANDS



     DEDICATED OPEN SPACE



— —— WETLANDS BOUNDARY
                                  PRESENT AND PROPOSED  DEVELOPMENT  IN BERKELEY TOWNSHIP

-------
(D
C
^
(D

00
                                                                        SCALE
     LEGEND


     RURAL OPEN LAND



^^^ DEVELOPED



[' '"% j TO BE DEVELOPED



KNSSvl WETLANDS
                                  PRESENT AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT  IN  DOVER TOWNSHIP

-------
(Q
C
                                                                                                                         LEGEND



                                                                                                                 |     | RURAL OPEN LAND


                                                                                                                 l^^l DEVELOPED


                                                                                                                 |  - - J TO BE DEVELOPED


                                                                                                                 Y///\ DEDICATED OPEN SPACE


                                                                                                                 |55&3 MILITARY INSTALLATION


                                                                                                                 __— SERVICE AREA BOUNDARY
                                   PRESENT  AND  PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IN  JACKSON TOWNSHIP

-------
ID
C
                                                                                                               LEGEND


                                                                                                     |    |  RURAL OPEN LAND


                                                                                                     ^^1  DEVELOPED


                                                                                                           TO BE DEVELOPED


                                                                                                           WETLANDS


                                                                                                           DEDICATED OPEN  SPACE


                                                                                                     — —  SERVICE AREA BOUNDARY
          Source: DSRP, 1973.
                                 PRESENT AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IN  LACEY TOWNSHIP

-------
CQ
C
                                                               KIIOMEURS
                                                                                                           LEGEND



                                                                                                     I    I RURAL OPEN LAND


                                                                                                     ^^| DEVELOPED


                                                                                                     [  '  ] TO BE DEVELOPED


                                                                                                     Y//A DEDICATED OPEN SPACE


                                                                                                     K%$ MILITARY RESERVATION


                                                                                                     	SERVICE AREA BOUNDARY
     Source OSBP 1973
                             PRESENT  AND PROPOSED  DEVELOPMENT IN  MANCHESTER TOWNSHIP

-------
(Q
C
^
(D


KJ
                                                               LEGEND



                                                        |    1 RURAL OPEN LAND
            Sou.!.: DSRP, 1973.
                             PRESENT AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IN OCEAN TOWNSHIP

-------
recreational basis.  The vacation homes in Ocean County



range from small cottages on lots measuring less than 7.6 by



30.5 m (25 by 100 ft) to large, rambling, frame structures.



Lagoonal developments, retirement communities, garden apart-



ments, and trailer parks are also numerous.



    Ocean County's main industrial centers are Toms River



and Forked River.  Commercial development consists of re-



gional shopping centers and the larger, local shopping areas



in Point Pleasant Beach, Seaside Heights, and Seaside Park



(EAC, 1973).



    Recreation in Ocean County generally takes the form of



water-oriented activities in and along the ocean and the



bay.  There are also commercial amusement parks; county



parks; State parks, forests, and fish and game areas; and a



national wildlife refuge.  The county. State, and Federal



governments administer a total of 18,392 ha (U5,367 acre )



of recreational land in Ocean County.



    "Ocean County has won what might be considered an unfor-



tunate distinction - that of being the fastest growing



county in the whole United States in the decade 1960-1970."



(Robichaud and Buell, 1973).  The proposed development out-



lined in Figures 7 through 12 indicates that this trend will-



continue.  However, three acts passed by the New Jersey



Legislature may slow Ocean County's growth rate by restric-





                             32

-------
ting the location of development and by promoting the



orderly implementation of acceptable development.  Brief



accounts of each of these acts follow.



    Realty Improvement Sewerage and Facilities Act (1951):



This act stipulates that before a local building permit can



be issued, the local board of health must certify that the



proposed sewerage facilities will comply with the NJDEP's



applicable standards (State of New Jersey, 1954).  The



"Regulations Governing Installation of Sewerage Facilities



in Critical Areas," which were authorized by this realty



improvement act, were updated in 1971 (NJDEP, 1971a).  The



regulations, which have application to Ocean County,  state



that without the written approval of the NJDEP, no person



shall construct or install sewerage facilities in any area



that lies between any tidal waterway and elevation 10 feet



above the mean sea level datum of 1929.   The NJDEP will not



approve the proposed sewerage facilities unless they comply



with the standards outlined in the realty improvement act.



The NJDEP also considers factors that can affect the safe



and proper operation of sewerage facilities in critical



areas, including soil conditions, water-table levels, popu-



lation density, and projected growth trends.



    Another amendment to the realty improvement act was



passed on June 7, 1972.  Known as the subdivision amendment,





                             33

-------
it requires the NJDEP to decide whether or not a subdivision
of fifty or more units can be constructed based on the ade-
quacy of the subdivision's water supply and sewerage facil-
ities  (Benintente, oral communication, 1974).
    Coastal Wetlands Act (or The Wetlands Act of 1970): with
the passage of this act, the New Jersey Legislature acknowl-
edged the estuarine zone as one of the most vital and pro-
ductive areas of the natural world.  The legislature de-
clared that it was necessary "...to preserve the ecological
balance of this area and prevent its further deterioration
and destruction by regulating the dredging, filling, .
removing or otherwise altering or polluting thereof...."
(State of New Jersey, 1970).  The wetlands act authorized
the Commissioner of the NJDEP to inventory and to map all of
New Jersey's tidal wetlands by November 5, 1972.  Figure 13
shows the general areas in Ocean County that, after public
hearings, were designated coastal wetlands.
    Coastal Area Facility Review Act (1973): This act is
intended to protect New Jersey's coastal area, which the
State legislature has characterized as an important natural
resource.  As noted in the act, portions of the coastal area
have been adversely affected by existing facility activity  "
which tends to preclude multiple uses and which is, there-
fore, disadvantageous to the people of New Jersey.   The leg-

                             34

-------
                                                                             MANTOLOKING
                                                                          SEASIDE HEIGHTS
              \  <*
               V J PASAOEN
                                                                                 INT PLEASANT BEACH
                                                                      ARNEGAT CITY
      LEGEND




    • WETLANDS MAP COVERAGE



'////, TUCKERTON TEST SITE
                                                             SURF CITY



                                                          SHIP BOTTOM-BEACH ARLINGTON
                                                      BEACH HAVEN CREST
                                                 BEACH HAVEN
                                                                           SCALE
Soutte: NJDEP, 1972.
                                                                           01234

                                                                            KILOMETERS
   OFFICIALLY  DESIGNATED  COASTAL  WETLANDS  IN OCEAN COUNTY


                                       Figure  13

-------
islature's position is, "...it is in the interest of the



people of the State that all of the coastal area should be



dedicated to those kinds of land uses which promote the pub-



lic health, safety and welfare, protect public and private



property, and are reasonably consistent and compatible with



the natural laws governing the physical, chemical and



biological environment of the coastal area." (State of New



Jersey, 1973).



    The legislature also declared, "...the coastal area and



the State will suffer continuing and ever-accelerating seri-



ous adverse economic, social and aesthetic effects unless



the State assists, in accordance with the provisions of this



act, in the assessment of impacts, stemming from the future



location and kinds of facilities within the coastal area, on



the delicately balanced environment of that area." (State of



New Jersey, 1973).  The act seeks to reconcile the



legitimate economic aspirations of people living in the



coastal area with the environmental sensitivity of the



coastal area.



    The act affects almost every industry and utility; waste



treatment plants;  road, airport, and highway construction;



new housing developments of twenty-five or more dwelling



units or equivalent; expansion of existing developments by



the addition of twenty-five or more dwelling units or equi-





                             36

-------
valent; installation of above or underground pipelines for



the transport of petroleum, natural gas, or sanitary sewage;



and marine terminal and cargo handling facilities.  The



coastal area delineated by the act is shown in Figure 14.



    Anyone who plans to construct a facility in the coastal



area must first obtain a permit from the Commissioner of the



NJDEP.  The Commissioner must base his decision to grant or



to deny the permit on the proposed facility's compliance



with both the letter and the spirit of the Coastal Area



Facility Review Act.  An applicant who is denied a permit by



the Commissioner has recourse to the Coastal Area Review



Board created by the act.  The review board is composed of



three voting members, the Commissioners of Environmental



Protection (NJDEP), Labor and Industry, and Community Af-



fairs, or their designated representatives.  The review



board may uphold, overturn, or modify the permit decisions



made by the Commissioner of the NJDEP.



    Those responsible for administering these three pieces



of legislation report that the Realty Improvement Sewerage



and Facilities Act has been effective in restraining devel-



opment in unsewered critical areas (Nerlick, oral commu-



nication, 1974; Newsom, oral communication, 1974; Schorr,



oral communication, 1974).  For example, approximately 180



requests for permits to install septic tanks were received





                             37

-------
   All LANDS EAST OF LINE ARE
  DESIGNATED AS COASTAL AREA
Sourc*: Star* ol Now J«r««y, 1973.-
     OFFICIALLY DESIGNATED COASTAL AREA IN OCEAN COUNTY

                                 Figure 14

-------
by the NJDEP between January 1972 and March 1973, but only



thirty-three permits were granted (Schorr, oral communica-



tion, 1974).  Similarly, more than half of the requests for



approval of subdivisions of fifty or more units have been



denied under the subdivision amendment of the realty im-



provement act (Benintente, oral communication, 197U).  These



statistics reflect the NJDEP's strict enforcement of the



act.  The Central Coordination and Implementation Section of



the NJDEP, which administers the permit program authorized



by the act, has issued a number of sewer connection bans in



Ocean County.  Bans have been imposed on Lavalette, Seaside



Heights, Seaside Park, Surf City, Beach Haven, part of



Jackson Township, and part of Lakewood (Simpson, written



communication, 1974) .



    It is too soon to assess the full impact of either the



Wetlands Act of 1970 or the Coastal Area Facility Review



Act.  It must be remembered that neither of these acts is



intended to stop development, but only to decrease the rate



of development and to promote the orderly implementation of



acceptable development.



    In addition to the activities of State and local agen-



cies, the activities of certain Federal agencies can have a



significant impact on land use and proposed development in



Ocean County.  This is especially true of the programs





                             39

-------
administered by the Corps of Engineers (COE), the Federal



Highway Administration (FHWA), the Atomic Energy Commission



(AEG), and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).



    The COE is responsible for several programs that can



directly or indirectly affect development.  In the former



category are the permit program for dredging and bulkheading



operations, and the permit program for the construction of



offshore facilities, such as deepwater ports, drilling rigs,



and platforms for nuclear power plants.  In the latter



category are shoreline protection and beach replenishment



activities, and navigation channel maintenance operations.



    The COE's permit program for dredging and bulkheading



operations has slightly impeded the development of coastal



wetlands.  The effects on development of the COE's permit



program for the construction of offshore facilities have not



been fully evaluated.  However, one aspect of the program,



that dealing with the construction of deepwater ports, was



the subject of a report prepared in 1973 by Arthur D.



Little, Inc. for the Council on Environmental Quality.  The



report explores the primary environmental and economic



effects of establishing a deepwater port at either of two



possible sites in the mid-Atlantic region, the Long Branch



site or the Delaware Estuary site.

-------
    The report suggests that between 75 and 85 percent of



the environmental and economic effects of port-related



development would occur in a sixteen county corridor of the



region.  The corridor would run southwest from Richmond



County in New York, through New Jersey, across the Delaware



River into Pennsylvania and northern Delaware, back across



the river into New Jersey, and south to Cape May County.



(Arthur D. Little, Inc., 1973).  Although Ocean County is



not mentioned in the report as one of the sixteen counties



that would be directly affected by a deepwater port in the



mid-Atlantic region, it is unlikely that the county would



escape the secondary effects, such as pressure to provide



housing and services.



    The FHWA's influence on development in Ocean County has



been considerable in the past and is likely to grow in the



future.  As Ocean County's population increases, it will be



necessary to improve and to expand all types of roadway



facilities.  It is not known what plans the county has to



expand its road system.  The following is the DSRP's account



of planned improvements in the State and Federal highway



systems:



    1.   The New Jersey Turnpike Authority plans to build a



         spur that will extend from the Turnpike in South



         Brunswick to Toms River.  The new road will be

-------
     called the Governor Alfred E.  Driscoll Expressway.



     Within Ocean County, the expressway will intersect



     with Interstate Route 195 (1-195),  State Poute 70,



     County Route 527, and the Garden State Parkway.



2.   By 1975, 1-195 from Trenton to State Route 3H at



     Allaire State Park in lower Monmouth County will be



     completed.  It will run through Jackson Township,



     Lakewood, and Plumsted, connecting  that section of



     Ocean County with Trenton and the Delaware valley.



3.   The dualization of U.S. Route 9, which will be



     accomplished sometime after 1980, will provide a



     less congested north-south artery within the county



     and will enable more rapid movement of traffic



     between the county and areas to the north and



     south.



U.   State Routes 70 and 72 are scheduled for dualiza-



     tion sometime after 1980.  Dualization of these



     highways will make the Camden-Philadelphia area



     much more accessible to travelers from the central



     section and from some parts of the  southern section



     of Ocean County.



5.   Improved access between Ocean County and the



     Camden-Philadelphia area is the focus of plans to



     improve the State Route 38 expressway.  The





                         U2

-------
         expressway will intersect with 1-195 in Jackson



         Township.



    6.   The New Jersey Highway Authority recently awarded a



         contract for a year-long study of the Garden State



         Parkway.  The study will determine the need for



         improvements and additional interchanges in Ocean



         County.  Suggested improvements are likely to



         include the widening of the Parkway, which is now a



         four-lane highway in this area.  (DSRP, 1973).



    Through its licensing programs, the AEC controls the



location and operation of nuclear power generating facil-



ities.  In Ocean County, the Jersey Central Power and Light



Company operates a 620 megawatt nuclear facility at Oyster



Creek in Lacey and Ocean Townships.  The Oyster Creek plant,



which began operating in 1969, occupies part of a 573.5 ha



(1416 acre) site.  (AEC, 1973).  Another nuclear facility,



the Forked River Nuclear Station Unit 1, is proposed to be



built on the same site as the Oyster Creek plant.  Site



preparation was scheduled to begin in February 1973.  All



major construction and installation of equipment is



scheduled for completion in June 1977.  The generating



capacity of the Forked River facility will be 1093 mega-



watts.  (AEC, 1972) .

-------
    In addition to these land-based facilities, the Public



Service Electric and Gas Company plans to build two floating



nuclear power stations in the Atlantic Ocean.  These float-



ing nuclear power plants will probably be located about 4.8



km (3 mile) seaward of Little Egg Inlet.  Each unit will be



able to generate 1093 megawatts of power.  Both units are



scheduled for completion in 1981.



    The Clean Air Act (CAA), the Federal Water Pollution



Control Act Amendments of 1972 (FWPCAA), and the National



Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)  give the EPA a certain



amount of control over development.  The manner in which the



EPA implements the provisions of these acts can affect both



the rate and extent of development.



    Some of the major provisions of the CAA are:



         1.   The EPA, assisted by the States, will desig-



              nate air quality control regions.



         2.   The EPA will develop air quality criteria for



              the major pollutants, and will provide the



              States and appropriate air pollution control



              agencies with information on control tech-



              nology for each of the pollutants.



         3.   The EPA will set primary and secondary



              national ambient air quality standards for



              each major air pollutant.  A standard will





                             44

-------
     establish the maximum permissible level for a



     given pollutant.   Primary standards will be



     strict enough to protect the public health;



     secondary standards will be strict enough to



     protect the public welfare.  Both sets of



     standards will apply to all control regions.



4.   Within nine months of the EPA's issuance of



     primary and secondary standards for a pollu-



     tant, each State will formulate an implemen-



     tation plan to meet, maintain and enforce



     those standards in each air quality control



     region.



5.   The EPA will also set "standards of per-



     formance" that will constitute direct emission



     limitations for all major pollutants from



     specified types of sources.  (CAA, 1970; The



     Conservation Foundation, 1972;  U.S. EPA,



     1973).



6.   Each State must identify those areas which,



     due to current air quality and/or projected



     growth rate, may have the potential to exceed



     any national standard by 1985.   The EPA must



     review the State listings and identify



     potential problem areas.  For each area





                    45

-------
              identified, the State must submit to the EPA
              by June 1975 an analysis of the potential
              impact on air quality of projected growth and
              development over the ensuing ten-year period
              and a plan to prevent violation of any
              national standard over that ten-year period.
    The provisions of the CAA were duly fulfilled.  However,
in May 1972 the U.S. District Court for the District of
Columbia, in response to a suit filed by the Sierra Club and
other groups, issued a preliminary injunction requiring the
Administrator of the EPA to disapprove, "...any portion of a
State [implementation] plan which fails to effectively
prevent significant deterioration of existing air quality."
(U.S. EPA, 1973a).  The EPA appealed the judgment and the
matter was finally brought to the attention of the U.S.
Supreme Court.  The Court was evenly divided on the matter,
in effect upholding the original judgment.  Although the
courts did not define significant^deterioration, they did
agree that wherever the air is cleaner than required by the
national standard, it should not be allowed to decline in
quality to the standard.
    "In EPA's view, there has been no definitive judicial
resolution of the issue whether the Clean Air Act requires
prevention of significant deterioration of air quality."

                             U6

-------
(U.S. EPA, 1973a).   Nevertheless, the EPA Administrator has



proposed alternative regulations that would, "...establish a



mechanism for preventing significant deterioration pursuant



to the preliminary injunction issued by the District Court."



(U.S. EPA, 1973a).   The bases for preventing significant



deterioration are the desire to protect aesthetic, scenic,



and recreational values, and the concern that some air pol-



lutants may have adverse effects that have not been docu-



mented.  "The problem of preventing significant deterio-



ration can be somewhat simplistically stated as that of



reducing emissions to the lowest practicable level, and then,



distributing those residual emissions in a manner in which



they do the least harm." (U.S. EPA, 1973a).  A specific



proposal to prevent significant air quality deterioration is



discussed in the section entitled "Environmental Impact of



the Proposed Project."



    The EPA has also proposed regulations for the review of



new or modified indirect sources of air pollution  (U.S. EPA,



1973b).  An indirect source is a facility, building, struc-



ture, or installation which causes or which may cause mobile



source activity resulting in emissions of a pollutant for



which a national standard has been established.  Indirect



sources include highways, parking facilities, airports,



industrial facilities, retail and commercial establishments,

-------
and residential complexes.  The EPA's proposed regulations



require that the potential effects of a facility on air



quality be evaluated before construction of that facility



begins.



    The provisions of the FWPCAA are the EPA's second major



source of control over land use and development patterns.



Titles II and IV of the FWPCAA have the most direct bearing



on the EPA's authority in this area.



    Title II deals with Federal grants for the construction



of treatment works.  It directs the EPA to require and to



assist in the development and implementation of waste treat-



ment management plans and practices that provide for the



application of the best practicable waste treatment tech-



nology before any discharge is made into receiving waters.



Title II gives the EPA Administrator the authority to make



grants to any State, municipality, or intermunicipal or



interstate agency for the construction of publicly-owned



treatment works.  Such treatment works must also be consis-



tent with the NEPA.



    Title IV created the National Pollutant Discharge Elim-



ination System  (NPDES)  to replace the permit program autho-



rized by the 1899 Refuse Act.  Title IV also transferred



responsibility for the permit program from the COE to the



EPA.  Under the new system, the EPA must establish national





                             48

-------
effluent limitations and performance standards for sources



of water pollution, including sewage treatment plants.



Publicly-owned sewage treatment plants must provide a mini-



mum of secondary treatment by July 1, 1977, and best prac-



ticable technology by July 1, 1983.  The NPDES makes it il-



legal for point sources, including sewage treatment plants,



to discharge any pollutant into the Nation's waters without



a permit.   (U.S. EPA, 1974a) .



    One of the major provisions of the NEPA is that an



environmental impact statement be prepared on any major



Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the



human.environment.  In accordance with the provision the EPA



has developed interim regulations for the preparation of



environmental impact statements on wastewater treatment



projects.  Among other things, the interim regulations



require that the EPA consider whether the proposed treatment



works will induce or encourage significant changes in



industrial, commercial, or residential concentrations or



distributions.  "Factors that must be considered in



determining if induced changes are significant include but



are not limited to: the land area subject to increased



development as a result of the project; the relative



increase in population which the project may induce; the



potential for overloading sewage facilities; the extent to

-------
which landowners may benefit from the areas subject to

increased development; and the nature of land use regula-

tions in the affected area and their potential effects on

the development." The interim regulation also requires that

the EPA consider whether "...the project will include or

induce development which will have a significant adverse

effect upon local ambient air quality, local ambient noise

.levels, surface or groundwater quality, fish, wildlife,

their natural habitats, or other natural elements."  (U.S.

EPA, 1973c).

    Finally, there is one project in the private sector

that, because of its nature and size, will affect land use

and development in the Central service area and beyond.

Great Adventure, Inc. has developed a drive-through animal

park, called Safari Park, and an amusement center, called

Theme Park, on a 506 ha (1250 acre) site in Jackson

Township.  The facilities are designed to accommodate a

maximum of 11,500 persons at any one time or a maximum of

20,000 persons per day.  Most of the facilities are already

open to the public.   (Great Adventure, Inc. 1973; 197U).

               POPULATION PROJECTIONS FOR THE
                    CENTRAL SERVICE APEA

    Sewerage facilities are designed to serve the population

of a given area, the service area, through a specified
                             50

-------
future date, the design year.  The accurate estimation of a

service area's future population is crucial to the design of

adequate sewerage facilities for that area.  The task of

determining the Central service area's future population is

complicated by two factors: the recent rapid development of

the area and the tremendous upsurge in population that oc-

curs each summer.

    Estimates of the Central service area's 1990 permanent

population were developed by the DSRP and by Fellows, Read &

Weber  (FR&W), engineering consultants to the OCSA, according

to the methodologies outlined in Appendix B.  In preparing

preliminary designs for the proposed sewerage facilities,

FR&W relied on its own population estimates.  Table 1 sum-

marizes the population estimates generated by E. Eugene

Gross Associates, by the DSRP and by FR&W.  A comparison of

the DSRP's and FR&W's estimates reveals disagreement in
                                           \
certain areas.  The DSRP analyzed the assumptions and

methodologies used by FR&W to estimate the 1990 population

of the Central service area, and concluded that FR&W's

estimate was conservative.  The DSRP added that its own

population estimates, although higher than those made by

FR&W, were also on the low side.  The DSRP's 1990 estimate

exceeds FR&W's estimate by almost 82,000 persons.  There are

two discernible reasons for this difference: 1) the DSRP


                             51

-------
                                                  TABLE 1
                                  POPULATION ESTIMATES FOR MUNICIPALITIES
Municipality
Berkeley
Dover
Jackson
Lacey
Manchester
Ocean
Union
Beachwood
Island Heights
Lakehurst
Lavallette
Ocean Gate
Pine Beach
Seaside Heights
Seaside Park
So. Toms River
Total
IN THE CENTRAL SERVICE AREA
E. Eugene Oross Associates DSRP
1973 Permanent Zoned 1972 Peak
(Estimated) Capacity Seasonal
17,318 195,428 18,572
56,221 122,857 59,903
19.998S/ 118, 864-/ 7,300§/
11,339 137,751 15,989
15,135 168,560 16,457
3,462 44,396 6,647
3,236 62,401 3,401
5,890
1,429
2,652
1,534 •
1,186
1,493
1,328
1,544
4,065
147,830

1990
Permanent
118,848
74,613
26,588s-7
57,964
79,082
10,637
14,699
8,900
1,600
3,000
2,400
1,550
1,950
2,000
• 2,300
5,600
411,731
FR&W
1990
Permanent
71,800
86,400
28,000
50,000
36,000
15,500
13,000
8,900
1,600
3,000
2,400
1,550
1,950
2,000
2,300
• 5,600
330,000
a/Includes entire township, but only a portion is in the Central service area.
Sources:  Asbury Park Press,  June 4, 1973; DSRP, 1973; FR&W,  1973.
                                                   52

-------
assumed an average of 3.01 persons per unit in planned

residential developments (PRO), whereas FRfcw assumed an

average of 2.U persons, and 2)  the DSRP's estimate takes

into account developments that were proposed for Berkeley

(t>249 units)  and Manchester (9950 units)  townships after

FR&W had completed its calculations.  (DSRP, 1973).

    Table 1 also presents the DSRP's estimates of zoned

capacity.  According to the DSRP: "Figures for zoned

capacity have no real use except to give parameters for

conjecture about growth.  Zoning ordinances can and will be

changed, and also it is improbable that every last square

foot of land will be built upon as zoned."  (DSRP, 1973).

    Based on the studies it has conducted, the DSRP

envisions the following "overall growth picture" for Ocean

County:
         Ocean is the fastest growing county in New Jersey
    in terms of residential development.  In both 1971 and
    1972 more than 17% of the housing units built in the
    state were built in Ocean.  Between 1960 and 1970 the
    County population just about doubled going from 108,000
    to 208,000.  It is estimated by Eugene Oross that in the
    next three years, 1970-1973 it has grown by almost
    another 100,000.  It is difficult to see how anything
    short of nuclear war or the demise of the automobile
    could put a stop to the building boom there considering
    the following growth-conducive factors:

         1.   The existence of vast amounts of flat, well
              drained land.   (Our estimates show 138,778
              acres of vacant, undeveloped land outside of
              the Wetlands for which no development has yet
                             53

-------
     been proposed).   This results in cheaper
     building costs.   Smaller lots are possible.
     There is no rock to blast through, little
     grading to be done, etc.

2.   Underground water supplies are abundant and
     many people seem to think they are limitless.

3.   No other area within a two hour commuting
     radius of New York City has such felicitous
     natural features for building.

H.   A special land-holding situation where major
     developers own enormous tracts outright which
     they bought very cheaply, quite a few years
     ago.

5.   Industry and service jobs are moving out to
     fringe areas.  So more and more jobs will
     exist close to Ocean County and thus increase
     the demand for housing.  Middlesex County, for
     instance, is New Jersey's fastest growing
     county industrially.  Also industry and
     service jobs will come to Ocean, too, as the
     work force grows.

6.   As land and building costs go up in Ocean
     County, they will be going up higher in the
     already more developed areas, so that
     relatively speaking it will still be cheaper
     to build in Ocean.

7.   The ocean and bays are an attraction in
     themselves.  Living near them means easy
     access to recreation - vacation living year
     around [sic].

8.   Accessibility.

          New roads and road improvements planned
     by the state, the Turnpike Authority, and the
     New Jersey Highway Authority which runs the
     Garden State all promise increasing accessi-
     bility for large portions of Ocean County.

9.   Regional Sewerage System.

-------
                   It seems that Ocean County would develop
              rapidly even if the regional sewer weren't
              built.  However, pollution problems are
              beginning to plague various parts of the
              County.  Developers are willing to build
              package treatment plants, but not whole
              collector systems and tertiary treatment
              plants with ocean outfalls.  The regional
              sewerage system, thus, will be another factor
              insuring continued growth, removing one of the
              few obstacles which can be seen today to rapid
              growth.  (DSRP, 1973).

    The DSRP also identified the following "patterns of

growth within the county":

         1.   Development is pushing simultaneously down the
              coast and inland, literally exploding in
              certain areas where there are especially
              helpful factors, such as favorable zoning, low
              tax rates, or accessibility to highways.

         2.   The chart of housing units approved by
              fcuildina permits indicates where the most
              rapid growth has been occurring since 1970.
              Dover, Manchester, Berkeley are the leaders,
              in that order.

         3.   Retirement population.  The over-sixty age
              group represents over 25% of the total
              resident population.  Unless court decisions
              interfere with this, retirement communities
              will continue to make up a large part of
              Ocean's growth.  These communities are being
              located in the inland areas of the County,
              most of them west of the Parkway.  (DSRP,
              1973).

    As a further indication of the way in which development

is proceeding, FPSW predicts that by 199C most of the resi-

dences in the Central service area will be year-round homes.
                             55

-------
Consequently, seasonal variations in population will be



negligible.  (FR5W, 1973).



     ECONOMIC AND OCCUPATIONAL PROFILES OF OCEAN COUNTY



    Between 1962 and 1972 the reported number of jobs in



Ocean County rose from approximately 18,000 to 35,000 (U.S.



Bureau of the Census, 1962-72).  This near-doubling of



available positions is reflected in Figure 15.  Table 2



represents the county's employment profile for the years



1964 through 1990.  The 1980 and 1990 projections do not



take into account three potential factors that would have a



stimulating effect on the county's growth rate: 1)  the



attraction of industry to the area by a large labor market,



2)  the decentralization of industry into the suburbs, 3) the



construction of offshore deepwater ports.



    Although employment figures by municipality are not



usually available, some indication of the prevailing



economic and employment trends in a municipality can be



gained through a review of local zoning.  Of all the



municipalities .in Ocean County, Jackson Township has the



greatest amount of commercially zoned land.  The bulk of



industrially zoned land is in Manchester, Jackson,  Dover,



Lakewood, Berkeley, and Little Egg Harbor townships.



    Commercial development and consequent employment oppor-



tunities in the commercial sector often parallel population





                             56

-------
                                                                                  RETAIL TRADE
                                                                                  MANUFACTURING
                                                                                  CONTRACT CONSTRUCTION
                                                                                  FINANCE, INSURANCE, REAL ESTATE
                                                                                  TRANSPORTATION, PUBLIC UTILITY
                                                                                  WHOLESALE TRADE

                                                                                  MINING
1962     1963
                1964     1965
                                1966     1967     1968     1969
                                                                1970
                                                                        1971      1972
                   TRENDS IN  EMPLOYMENT IN OCEAN  COUNTY,  1962-1972
                                                Figure 15

-------
              TABLE 2

EMPLOYMENT PROFILE OF OCEAN COUNTY
             1964-1990
Standard Industrial
Code

07
09
. .
. ,
15
16
17

20
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
39

42
44
48
49
. .
. .
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59

Category
Agriculture Service, Forestry, Fishery
Agriculture Service and Hunting
Fisheries
Mining
Contract Construction
General Building Contractors
Heavy Construction Contractors
Special Trade Contractors
Manufacturing
Food and Kindred Products
Textile Mill Products
Apparel and Other Textile Products
Lumber and Wood Products
Furniture and Fixtures
Paper and Allied Products
Printing and Publishing
Chemicals and Allied Products
Petroleum and Coal Products
Rubber and Plastics Products
Leather and Leather Products
Stone, Clay and Glass Products
Primary Metal Industries
Fabricated Metal Products
Machinery, Except Electrical
Electrical Equipment and Supplies
Transportation Equipment
Miscellaneous Manufacturing
Transportation and Other Public Utilities
Trucking and Warehousing
Water Transportation
Communication
Electric, Gas and Sanitary Services
Wholesale Trade
Retail Trade
Building Materials and Farm Equipment
General Merchandise
Food Stores
Automotive Dealers and Service Stations
Apparel and Accessory Stores
Furniture and Home Furnishing
Eating and Drinking Places
Miscellaneous Retail Stores
Finance, Insurance and Real Estate
Number of Jobs—'
1964
200
100
100
200
2,600
900
200
1,500
3,300
400
, .
600
100

0
200
1,2002.'
0
100
0
200
0
of/
of/
30QS/
300
0
1,200
200
100
. .
500
800
5,900
400
900
1,300
900
300
200
1,200
700
1,300
1972
300
200
100
100
3,500
1,000
400
2,100
4,700
200
. .
600
30 0^.'
500
0
400 ,
1,400^'
0
300
0
300
0
100
200
300
200
" 0
2,100
200
200
900
700
1,100
11,800
600
1,900
2,600
1,600
500
500
2,900
1,200
3,200
igsok/


0
200
6,100
1,600
1,300
3,500
8,400^.'
100
. .
800
400e-/
900
0
700 .
1,500^
0
500
0
500
0
300S/
500
500
100
0
2,900
100
400
900
1,100
1,300
18,100
900
2,800
4,200
2,200
100
900
4,900
1,500
4,600
19 90^/


. .
400
10,100
3,100
1,100
6,000
15,200
500

1,900
(£/
1,600
0
1,100
4,800^
0
. .
0
800
0
200
600
1,100
600
0
6,300
1,000
600
2,300
2,100
3,200
34,200
1,900
5,900
7,300
4,700

1,500
7,800
3,500
7,500

-------
                                                               TABLE 2 (Continued)
Standard Industrial
Code
60,61
63,64
65,66
. .
70
72
73
75
76
78
79
80
81
82
86
89
••

Category
Banking and Credit
Insurance
Real Estate
Services
Hotels and Other Lodging Places
Personal Services
Miscellaneous Business Services
Auto Repair, Services and Garages
Miscellaneous Repair Services
Motion Pictures
Amusement and Recreation Services
Medical and Other Health Services
Legal Services
Educational Services
Nonprofit Membership Organizations
Miscellaneous Services
Unclassified Establishments
Total
Number of Joba3/
1964
500
100
600
4,200
1,000
400
100
100
100
200

1,300
200
300
200
200
100
19 , 700
1972
1,100
400
1,600
7,900
700
500
4CO
200
200
300

3,400
400
500
800
500
400
35,100
19 SO^-'
1,500
1,100
2,200
13,000
2,000
1,000
1,000
400
300
1,600

4,200
500
1,200
2,100
900

68,900
1990^'
3,000
1,300
3,000
21,300
2,700
1,800
800
700
400
700
t t
8,300
900
1,400
1,700
1,100
300
99,800
a/Figures  have been rounded to the nearest  hundred; subcategories may not add to totals  due to  rounding errors, exclusion of the "administrative

wSo^££Mc?^                                                                              function of the proportion of county
~~ growth to State  growth and the shift in relationship between county and State employment over time.
c/1990 projections were made using the "fixed ratio of employment to population" technique.  The equation is:
                            Ocean County Employment  (1990)
County Employment  (1970)  X  [County Population (1990)1
                           [County Population (1970)J
d/The fiEure for State  employment in 1980 used in the  shift-share expression includes Ordinances  (Standard Industrial Code 19), while the figure
- for St!te employment  in1970 does not include this category.  This would not introduce any significant errorbecause the Ordinances category

.,S£ are°from the CoTed Em^t gLd^(Nl"^^"^?-Labor and Industry, n.d.)  since no data were reported in the County Business
~" Patterns (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1962-72) because of  the  disclosure problem.
f/Covered Employment Trends data for 1965 - no data were available  for 1964.
J/Includes Ordinances category.
 Source:  Zimmerman, 1974.

-------
distribution.  Conversely, industrial development is



generally unrelated to population distribution,  within



Ocean County, manufacturing enterprises are concentrated in



the Lakewood and Point Pleasant Beach areas, which are in



the OCSA's Northern service area, and in the Dover-Toms



Fiver area, which is in the OCSA's Central service area



(U.S. Bureau of the census, 1971).



    Table 2 shows that Ocean County's residential building



boom has provided many job opportunities.  Contract con-



struction accounted for almost 10 percent of total employ-



ment in the county in 1972.  Contract construction includes



site preparation, building construction, and the expansion



of public services, such as roads and utilities.  Residen-



tial construction also creates a ripple effect, stimulating



employment in industries for the manufacture of building



materials, stone and glass products, and furniture and



fabricated metals (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1970).



    Recreational equipment and related industries are also



important to the economy of Ocean County, particularly those



industries that specialize in marine facilities and equip-



ment, and in ship and boat building and repair.  Great



Adventure, Inc.'s Safari Park project in Jackson Township



will boost employment in the amusements sector and in sup-



porting industries and services.





                             60

-------
    From "the standpoint of numbers of people employed, the




chemical and allied products industry is the major manu-



facturing field in Ocean County.  The chemical industry is



dominated by the Toms River Chemical Company, which employs




about 1300 people.  On the whole, however, manufacturing is




a minor component of the Ocean County economy and is likely



to remain so in the future.  Of far more significance are



population-related endeavors, particularly retailing,



services, and finance.  (See Table 3).



    In 1970 the median income for families in Ocean County




was $9,246, which is substantially lower than the $11,407



median income for families statewide (U.S. Bureau of the



Census, 1972).  The difference can probably be attributed to



the large number of retired persons living in Ocean County.



Over the years, Ocean County has functioned as a retirement



and recreation community,  resulting in fewer employed resi-



dents by reason of age or purpose of residence.



    A comparison of the economic and occupational profiles




indicates that in 1970 there were 30,000 jobs in the county



and about 66,000 employed residents  (U.S. Bureau of the



Census, 1972).  The reason for this imbalance is the growth



of Ocean County as a commuter suburb.  In 1960, 70.3 percent



of the resident working population worked in the county; in



1970, 57.5 percent of the resident working population worked






                             61

-------
                    TABLE 3

OCCUPATIONAL PROFILE OF OCEAN COUNTY RESIDENTS
                     1970

Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
Mining
Construction
Manufacturing
Furniture, lumber and wood
Primary and fabricated metals
Machinery, except electrical
Electrical machinery
Motor vehicles and other
transportation equipment
Other durable goods
Food and kindred products
Textile mill products and
other fabric textiles
Printing, publishing
Chemical and allied products
Other non-durable goods
Transportation and other Public Utilities
Railroads and railway express service
Trucking service and warehousing
Other transportation
Communications
Utilities and sanitary service
Wholesale Trade
Retail Trade
Food, bakery and dairy stores
Eating and drinking places
General merchandise retailing
Motor vehicles retailing and
service stations
Other retail trade
Finance, Insurance and Real Estate
Banking and credit agencies
Insurance, real estate and other
finance
Number
844
176
6777
12219
573
1028
794
2131
826

1184
527
817

844
2255
1240
7463
346
970
1728
1014
1423
1982
14018
2576
2855
2286
1938

4363
3439
1148
2291

Percent
1.3
0.3
10.3
18.6
0.9
1.6
1.2
3.2
1.3

1.8
0.8
1.2

1.3
3.4
1.9
8.3
0.5
1.5
2.6
1.5
2.2
3.0
21.2
3.9
4.3
2.5
2.9
.
6.6
5.2
1.7
3.5

                      62

-------
                            TABLE 3 (Continued)

Services
Business services
Repair services
Private households
Other personal services
Entertainment and recreation
services
Hospitals
Health services, except hospitals
Education
Welfare, religious and non-profit
Legal, engineering and miscellaneous
professional
Public Administration
Total (employed persons 16 yrs +)
Number
15754
2026
-
443
1682
632

1352
1435
5315
817
2051

5151
65841
Percent
25.1
3.1
-
0.7
2.6
1.0

2.1
2.2
8.1
1.2
3.1

7.8
100.0 ..
Source:  U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1972.




                                   63

-------
in the county  (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1972).  Recent



studies confirm the existence of a large commuting popu-



lation.   (N.J. Department of the Treasury, 1973; Nieswand et



al., 1972).  But the most recent of the studies reveals a



slight reversal of this trend with more working residents



seeking jobs within the county.  The study also shows that



most residents who commute to jobs outside the county work



in Monmouth County or in the Newark-New York City metropol-



itan area.  (N.J. Department of the Treasury, 1973).



    Most of Ocean County's employed residents travel to work



by car.  The dependence of Ocean County residents on the



automobile is reflected in the fact that in 197C, 89.8



percent of all housing units in the county had at least one



automobile.  Statewide the percentage was 82.1 percent.



             NATURAL RESOURCES OF OCEAN COUNTY



                       Surface Waters



    In Ocean County, the maintenance of good surface water



quality is not only environmentally and aesthetically



desirable, it is economically essential.  Many industries,



recreation-related industries and commercial fishing chief



among them, literally depend on the quality of area waters.



In fact, water-dependent industries account for 40 percent



of Ocean County's gross income (EAC, 1973).  A review of



Ocean County's fresh, estuarine,  and marine waters reveals





                             64

-------
that although water quality is generally good,  the effects



of widespread development in the county are becoming in-



creasingly evident.



                        Fresh Waters



    The freshwater lakes, streams, and rivers of the service



area are or can be valuable assets to the communities in



which they are located.  Beyond this, the streams and rivers



are important because of their influence on the estuarine



waters into which they flow.  All freshwater streams in the



service area are classified as FW-1 or FW-2.  Appendix A




explains these classifications and lists the classification



of each stream in the central service area.



    Numerous small, shallow lakes occur in the Central



service area.  The lakes are naturally acidic:  their pH



values range from 4.3 to 6.5.  The lakes seem to have an



adequate supply of oxygen, although the dissolved oxygen



(DO)  level is some lakes may drop during the summer because



of the oxidation of naturally occurring o'rganic matter.  The



hardness of the lake waters is very low because calcium and



magnesium concentrations in the water and sediment are low.



    Streams in the service area are typically wide, short,



and slow-moving.  Stream flow is principally derived from



ground-water discharge.  Flow data for Ocean County's



streams are presented in Table H.  The streams and rivers in





                             65

-------
                                 TABLE 4
                            STREAM FLOW DATA
                              OCEAN COUNTY
                                  1968
Stream
Cedar Creek
Crosswicks Creek
(near Monmouth County line)
Forked River, North Branch
Manasquan River
Metedeconk River, North Branch
Mill Creek, Main Branch
Toms River, North Branch
Tuckerton Creek, Mill Branch
Westecunk Creek
Total
Average Flow
cu m/min.
181.9
113.9
28.9
121.4
108.1
35.7
355.3
11.2
43.0
999.4
cfs
107.0
67.0
17.0
71.4
63.6
21.0
209.0
6.6
25.3
587.9
Minimum Flow
cu m/min •
21.9
14.8
9.2
29.6
26.4
19.9
98.6
2.2
7.1
229.7
cfs
12.9
8.7
5.4
17.4
15.5
11.7
58.0
1.3
4.2
135.1
Source:  FR&W, 1969.
                                   66

-------
the area have naturally low pH values, 4.5 to 6.5.   The BOD



value is low, less than 4 mq/1; the DO ranges from 7 to 1C



mg/1.  Hardness and total dissolved solids values are low, 5



and 25 mg/1, respectively.  Phosphate-phosphorus levels are



i?. 03 mg/1 or less; nitrate-nitrogen levels are generally



less than 0.4 mg/1.  The total coliform count ranges from



low to 4000 per 100 ml.   (EAC, 1973).



    Many types of recreationally important freshwater fish



inhabit the waters of the service area: pickerel, sunfish,



largemouth bass, yellow perch, and catfish.  Certain other



fish, such as suckers, chubsuckers, darters, mudminnows, and



golden shiners, are used as bait by fishermen.  The mosquito



fish has been stocked in pnrts of Ocean County to aid in the



control of mosquitoes.  There are no endangered species in



the fresh waters of Ocean County.  However, the black-



banded, the blue-spotted, the sphagnum, and the mud



sunfishes that inhabit the naturally acidic fresh waters of



Ocean County are not common in any other part of New Jersey.



    The fresh waters of the service area are generally of



good quality, but deterioration is apparent in areas of high



population density.  Most of the ponds and lakes in the ser-



vice area are used for swimming and fishing.  The streams



and rivers are primarily used for fishing.
                             67

-------
                      Estuarine Waters
    The estuarine (tidal) waters are more biologically pro-
ductive than either the fresh or marine waters which they
adjoin.  This heightened productivity is due to the physi-
ography of the estuary which promotes the mixing of fresh
and salt waters and permits the favorable action of oscil-
lating tidal currents.  The tides transport nutrients, food,
and waste materials within the estuary.  All of the estua-
rine waters in the area are classified as TW-1.  Appendix A
explains this classification.
    The streams and rivers in the service area widen con-
siderably as they enter Earnegat Bay.  Tidal marshes abound
in the area.  The larger estuaries in the service area are
the lower reaches of Oyster Creek, Forked River, Cedar
Creek, and Toms River.  Barnegat Bay is rather shallow, 1 to
3m (3 to 10 ft).  It is bordered on the east by the Island
Beach barrier bar and on the west by the irregularly shaped
coastline of the mainland.
    Available data indicate that the waters of central
Barnegat Bay are relatively unpolluted with a BOD value of
2.0 mg/1, an average DO value of 8.5 mg/1, a total phospho-
rus concentration of 0.1 mg/1, and a nitrate-nitrogen con-
centration of 0.02 mg/1.  The average total coliform count
                             68

-------
is 5 per 100 ml; the average fecal coliform count is 4 per



100 ml.  (U.S. EPA, n.d. a).



    In contrast, the estuarine sections of the rivers and



streams in the area show signs of degradation with a higher



BOD value,  4.0 mg/1; lower DO values, 7.0 mg/1 or less; a



higher phosphorus concentration, 0.3 mg/1; and a higher



nitrate-nitrogen concentration, 0.04 mg/1.  The total and



fecal coliform counts are also higher, 900 and 400 per 100



ml, respectively.   (U.S. EPA, n.d. a).



    Several lagoonal communities are located along the bay;



septic tanks are common in these developments.  The efflu-



ents from the septic tanks seep into the water-table aqui-



fer.  The resulting mixture of septic tank effluent and



ground water is eventually discharged into the bay at the



shoreline,  adding nutrients, oxygen-demanding substances,



bacteria and viruses to the bay.  Septic tank effluents



contain greater numbers of bacteria and viruses relative to



population than do sewage treatment plant effluents.  Con-



sequently the shoreline bay waters may seem more polluted



than the deeper bay waters.



    The distribution of organisms, such as algae, in a water



body, such as Barnegat Bay, and the interaction of the two



constitute a pattern.  The algal pattern of Barnegat Bay



changes with the seasons, but overall it is one of high





                             69

-------
productivity and low species diversity  (Mountford, 1971).



This means that there are large numbers  (high productivity)



of only a few types  (low species diversity) of algae.  Low



species diversity is characteristic of physically or chemi-



cally controlled systems because physical or chemical stress



tends to restrict the kinds of organisms that can inhabit



the system (Odum, 1971).



    According to Mountford  (1971), productivity in Barnegat



Bay is greatest during July and August.  According to



Loveland et al.  (1971), species diversity is lowest during



those months.  This indicates that there is a non-biological



stress at work within the bay ecosystem.  Water quality data



and the algal pattern indicate that the bay is rich in nu-



trients and, therefore, eutrophic.



    Macroscopic algae, and the problems associated with



them, are common in Barnegat Bay.  Within limits, these



algae are valuable as food for waterfowl, but uncontrolled



algal growth creates nuisance conditions.  As the algae die



and decompose, they deplete the dissolved oxygen supply in



the water.  The result is an unsightly and foul-smelling
              "r


mass of rotting vegetation.  The problem can be complicated



by the death of fish due to the lack of oxygen or the pre-



sence of toxic algal products in the water.  During the



winter and spring, the brown algae, Petalonia facia, cover





                             70

-------
the floor of Barnegat Bay.  During the summer, the green



algae, Ulva, Codiurn and Enteromorpha, dominate.  During the



late summer and early fall, the red algae, Gracilaria



yerrucosa, dominate.  (Mountford, 1971) .



    Planktonic forms (i.e., free-floating organisms) are a



major source of food for developing clams.  Diatoms are the



dominant planktonic organisms during the winter and spring.



Nannoch_loris and the flagellates are dominant during the



summer and fall.   (Mountford, 1971).



    The organisms that live in or on the bottom of a water



body are called the benthos.  Benthic organisms, including .



the larvae of snails, worms and clams, are most abundant



during the warmest months of the year.  The clam larvae are



especially important because they are immature versions of



the clams that are harvested in the estuarine waters.  The



blue crab, another inhabitant of the estuarine waters, is of



great recreational importance.



    The estuarine waters also serve as a nursery area for



fish fry.  Species of both recreational and commercial



value, such as fluke, flounder, striped bass, blueback



herring, alewife, white perch and bluefish, use the nursery



area.  Smaller fish, such as silversides and anchovies,



provide the larger fish with a ready food supply.  The



economic backbone of the bay area is recreation; fishing,





                             71

-------
hunting, swimming and boating are the most popular
activities.
    Commercial shellfishing is another important economic
factor in Ocean County, particularly in the Barnegat Bay
area.  However, water pollution is taking its toll.  To
date, 7980 ha  (19,700 acre), or 17 percent, of the county's
shellfish beds have been closed.  Thirty-five percent of the
waters north of Great Bay have been closed to shellfishing.
In the heavily populated areas north of Ocean County, vir-
tually all of the shellfish beds have been closed.  A simi-
lar pattern exists within Ocean County where the northern,
heavily populated areas have a greater proportion of their
waters closed to shellfishing than do the southern, lightly
populated areas.
                   Coastal Marine Waters
    The mainland coast of Ocean County is protected from the
Atlantic Ocean by two sandy barrier bars, Island Beach and
Long Beach Island.  The beaches of these barrier bars are
prime resort areas.  Optimum use of these areas depends on
the quality of the coastal marine waters.  The classifica-
tions for coastal marine waters are CW-1 and CW-2.  Appendix
A explains these classifications.  The coastal marine waters'
of Ocean County are not affected by land uses, except in
areas where there are wastewater treatment plant outfalls.

                             72

-------
    In the offshore areas, a rich diversity of phytoplankton



(i.e., plankt.onic plants) serves as a food source for zoo-



plankton  (i.e., planktonic animals), such as copepods,



shellfish larvae, crabs and other benthic species.  The zoo-



plankton, in turn, become food for small fish and large



crustaceans.  The plankton populations of the coastal marine



waters follow seasonal cycles similar to those described for



the plankton populations of Barnegat Bay.  The planktonic



patterns influence the populations of larger species that



feed on plankton.  A number of finfish species, including



red hake, whiting, porgy, fluke, butterfish, bluefish,



silverside and anchovy, commonly feed in the offshore area,



as do certain shellfish species, including blue crabs and



clams.



    In recent, years red tide, the product of an overabun-



dance of certain dinoflagellates, has become a frequent



occurrence along the coast of New Jersey.  The causative



organism is not always the same.  Mountford (1971) found



that the dinoflagellate Gymnpdinium splgndens occasionally



occurred in bloom-like proportions for brief periods in July



or August.  Mahoney (1968, 1969, 1970, and 1972) reported



that several species of dinoflagellates were involved in the



red tides that occurred in New Jersey waters between 1963



and 1971.  These dinoflagellates and the years





                             73

-------
in which they appeared are as follows:



         Glenodinium sp           1967, 1968



         Gonvaulax sp             1968r 1971



         Massartia rotunda        1969, 1970



         Olisthodiscus luteus     1963, 1967, 1969, 1971



         Peridinium trochoideum   1971



         Prorpcentrum micans      1968, 1969, 1970.



    Mahoney also reported that the red tides of 1967 and



1968 produced toxic compounds.  These compounds caused some



swimmers to develop minor skin irritations.  Saltwater aero-



sols containing these toxic compounds also irritated the



eyes and respiratory tracts of some swimmers.  Gonyaulax is



the dinoflagellate species usually associated with toxic red



tides in temperate waters.  Not all red tides are toxic.



Noctiluca, another dinoflagellate, may turn the sea a red



color; Noctiluca is bioluminescent, but not toxic.



    The exact, combination of conditions that will trigger a



bloom of red-tide-producing organisms is unknown.  Many fac-



tors, including temperature, light, salinity, turbidity and



nutrient concentration, can affect the intensity of a bloom.



Duxbury (1971)  believes that red tides may be stimulated by



stable conditions in areas where previous algal blooms have •



produced and concentrated organic nutrients and growth



substances.  Odum (1968)  believes that organic pollution





                             74

-------
from natural or man-made sources can increase the frequency



and intensity of toxic blooms.



    Hutner and Mclaughlin (1958) and Ryther (1955)  have



studied the causes of red tides.  According to these



authors, the following are required for a bloom:



         1.   Diluted sea water,



         2.   Vitamin B-12,



         3.   A resident population that can survive under



              low nutrient conditions,



         U.   Conditions favorable for growth of bloom



              organisms, such as light, temperature, organic



              and inorganic nutrients.



    Recreation is a major economic factor in the coastal



area.  The coastal marine waters are primarily used for



boating, fishing, and swimming.  Therefore, the maintenance



and enhancement of water quality is especially important in



the coastal area.

-------
                       Ground Water»

    Ocean County lies entirely within the Atlantic Coastal

Plain physiographic province  (see Figure 1) .  The coastal

plain sediments dip gently seaward (southeast), increasing

in total thickness downdip from 300 to 1200 m  (1000 to 4000

ft) in Ocean County.  The effect is a series of wedges

consisting of clays, sands, and gravels.  The lithology,

thickness, and water-bearing characteristics of each of the

geologic formations in the county are shown in Figure 4.

    In Ocean County, virtually all available ground water

occurs in the pore spaces of the coastal plain sediments

that overlie consolidated crystalline bedrock.  The esti-

mated quantity of water in storage in the sediments is quite

large, 5.3 x 10*° cu m (14 x 10* billion gallons), but it is

neither desirable nor feasible to withdraw all available

water from storage.

    Precipitation is the source of all non-saline ground

water in Ocean County.  The county's highly permeable sandy

surface allows about 40 percent of the average annual rain-

fall of 114 cm (45 in.) to infiltrate to the water table.

This amounts to about 45 cm (18 in.)  of recharge annually.
]_/This section has been extracted from Anderson and Appel ,
  1969.
                             76

-------
    Seven aquifers are now utilized as water supply sources



in Ocean County.  The other formations are impermeable



acruitards or yield such small quantities of water that they



can only be utilized in selected locations for domestic



supplies.  In order of their importance as sources of public



water supplies, the seven aquifers are the Raritan and Ma go-



thy, Kirkwood, water-table, Englishtown, Wenonah formation



and Mount Laurel sand.



               Raritan and Magothy Formations



    The Raritan and Magothy formations are discussed as a



single geohydrologic unit because they have similar geologic



and hydrologic characteristics.  At least two aquifers occur



within this aquifer system, which contains the greatest



amount of ground-water in storage in the coastal plain in



Ocean County.



    The Raritan and Magothy could potentially yield 100 cu



m/day/sq km  (70,000 gpd/sq mile) of water.  However, their



180 m  (600 ft) depth makes them an impractical source of



ground water for all but the large industrial and public



water supply companies.  The present rate of withdrawal is



only 15 cu m/day/sq km (10,000 gpd/sq mile) in Ocean County.



Consequently, the Raritan and Magothy aquifer system is im-



portant to the county mainly as a future source of ground



water.  It is possible that withdrawals from the aquifer





                             77

-------
system in areas outside Ocean County will diminish the



amount of water potentially available to the county.  Fresh



water in the Raritan and Magothy formations is soft  (28 to



51 ppm hardness) and generally of good quality, except for



high iron concentrations (0.66 to 3.2 ppm).



                     Kirkwood Formation



    The Kirkwood formation is the most intensely developed



aquifer in Ocean County.  The Kirkwood supplies ground water



to all of the public water supply companies on Long Beach



Island.  In addition, it provides all of the public water



supplies as far north as Point Pleasant.



    Along the coast from Beach Haven to Point Pleasant, the



Kirkwood is tapped by forty-four public wells; their yields



range from 2.U to 71.3 I/sec (38 to 1225 gpm)  and average



26.3 I/sec (117 gpm).  If these forty-four wells were pumped



simultaneously at full capacity, the total yield would be



98,400 cu m/day (26 mgd).  Actually, the average daily



ground-water withdrawal from the Kirkwood is 19,000 cu m/day



(5 mgd) over the entire county.



    The seasonal peak demand in the summer is about seven



times greater than the winter demand.  On Long Beach Island,



the water demand ranges from 2300 cu m/day (0.6 mgd) in Feb-



ruary to more than 15,000 cu m/day  (U mgd)  in July.  This



has resulted in a depression of the static water level by





                             78

-------
more than 9.0 m (30 ft) below sea level in southern Ocean



County.  However,  no saltwater intrusion has been detected



to date.  Recharge is principally in the form of leakage



from the water-table aquifer.



    Ground water from the Kirkwood aquifer is suitable for



most uses.  The water is soft to moderately hard with a pH



range of U.O to 8.3.



                    Water-Table Aquifer



    The water-table aquifer is composed of five formations.



The Cohansey sand is the thickest and most important of the



five.  Moderate pumping occurs at Toms River and Lakehurst -



and along the mainland coast of Ocean County.  Precipitation



is the main source of recharge to the water-table aquifer.



Infiltration of stream waters or septic tank discharges can



be a local source of ground-water recharge.



    The water-table aquifer has a larger outcrop area than



any other coastal plain aquifer.  Consequently, the water-



table aquifer receives a greater amount of recharge than any



other coastal plain aquifer.  Evapotranspiration and base-



flow runoff are responsible for a 50 percent loss of poten-



tial recharge from precipitation.  Ground-water baseflow



from this aquifer in the Toms River basin is 378,500 cu



m/day  (100 mgd)  for the total basin area, or eighty times



the present daily pumpage from the aquifer in Ocean County.





                             79

-------
    The water-table aquifer and the Kirkwood formation are



the only sources of fresh water in the southern half of



Ocean County.  Since the Kirkwood is already intensely



developed, the water-table aquifer is the most important



future source of fresh water for southern Ocean County.



    The waters of the water-table aquifer are of very poor



quality.  Generally, they are acidic (pH, 4.4 to 6.7),



contain excessive iron (C.09 to 22 ppm), and may have a



hydrogen sulfide odor.



                   Englishtown Formation



    In Ocean County, the Englishtown formation is the fourth



ranked aquifer in terms of water yield.   Reported yields of



wells in this formation range from 1.2 to 32 I/sec (19 to



500 gpm).  The Englishtown formation has little potential



for further development because water levels are already far



below the altitude at which saltwater intrusion could occur.



          Wenonah Formation and Mount Laurel Sand



    Throughout most of the outcrop area and for some dis-



tance downdip, the Wenonah formation and Mount Laurel sand



are porous sands that form one aquifer.   Although it is not



now as important an aquifer as the Kirkwood or the English-



town, its potential for development is greater than that of



either the Kirkwood or the Englishtowr.   Its waters are
                             8C

-------
neutral in pH and generally soft, but may contain excessive

iron.




    To date no serious saltwater intrusion has been reported

in Ocean County.  However, static water levels in the En-

glishtown and Kirkwood formations have dropped as low as 2U

m  (80 ft)  below sea level along the coast.  Further develop-

ment of these aquifers in this area will only add to the

existing danger of saltwater encroachment.  Figure 16 shows

the altitude of the piezometric1 surface as well as the

decline in piezometric head of the Kirkwood formation since

1919.

    Along the entire coast of Ocean County, the waters of

the water-table aquifer are already saline.  Continued

pumpage of ground water from this aquifer in the coastal

area will aggravate the situation.  Figure 17 shows the

saltwater boundary in the water-table aquifer.

    There is yet another problem associated with ground-

water development.  According to Anderson and Appel  (1969):

"Streamflow in the Coastal Plain consists largely of base

flow derived from ground-water discharge.  During periods of
]_/The piezometric level is the level to which water will rise
  in a we!1 .
                             81

-------
                                   COUNTY
                                                        74°10'
40°00
                                                                                 SCALE,
                                                                                 01234
                                                                                 KILOMETERS
             PIEZOMETRIC CONTOURS OF KIRKWOOD FORMATION

                                     Figure 16

-------
                  COUNTY
                                                        2

                                                        <
                                                        UJ

                                                        U

                                                        o
                                                           01234



                                                            KILOMETERS
WATER-TABLE CONTOURS IN OCEAN COUNTY



                 Figure 17

-------
little or no precipitation, base flow accounts for virtually



all the stream flow in Ocean County." Further development of



the water-table aquifer could cause the water table to drop



below local stream levels.  If that happened, the streams



would become influent to the water table, resulting in re-



duced stream flow and, depending on the quality of the



stream water, a serious ground-water contamination problem.



                        Water Supply



    None of Ocean County's lakes are used for water supply



purposes.  There are thirty lakes of sufficient size and



dependability to be considered for future development and



use.  However, Ocean County's freshwater lakes are relative-



ly few in number and small in size: their recreational and



aesthetic value may outweigh their water supply value.  If



these lakes were used for water supply, severe water level



reduction would result.  (FR&W, 1969).



    There are nine rivers and streams in Ocean County of



sufficient size and dependability to be considered favorable



for water supply development.  Flow data for these rivers



and streams are presented in Table 4.  Gaging studies have



been conducted on some of the major rivers in the county.



Gaging studies on all of the major rivers in the county are



needed to determine the reliable yields of water that can be



withdrawn to augment water supply in the future.  (FR&W,




                             84

-------
1969) .  At present, there are no plans to develop the sur-



face waters of Ocean County for water supply purposes.



    Ocean County derives its entire potable water supply



from ground-water aquifers.  The estimated average quantity



of ground water withdrawn for public supply, that is, for



both domestic and industrial purposes, is 87,000 cu m/day



(23 mgd) .  Public water supply pumpage varies significantly



on a seasonal basis.  The average daily pumpage for a peak



month can be almost double the average daily pumpage for the



year.



    According to the 1960 census, 66 percent of Ocean



County's population rely on public and private water supply



companies.  The remaining 34 percent maintain private wells.



Based on the 1960 census, it is estimated that 19,000 cu



m/day (5 mgd) of water are withdrawn from privately-owned



wells.  In addition, the Lakehurst Naval Air Station with-



draws approximately 2500 cu m/day (0.65 mgd) of water from



wells in the water-table aquifer.



    The largest industrial consumers of water are the Toms



River Chemical Company and the Glidden Company.  The com-



bined consumption of these two companies is about 33 percent



of Ocean County's daily water pumpage.  At present, the



amount of ground water used by other industries in the coun-



ty is insignificant.  In the future, however, industrial





                             85

-------
water use may account for a larger percentage of the total

water used.

    The amount of ground water used for agricultural pur-

poses in Ocean County is not known.  However, the irrigated

land area is small and agricultural use of land is steadily

declining.  The water resources of the county are not appre-

ciably affected by withdrawals for this purpose.  Table 5

summarizes the water pumpage from each major aquifer within

the county.

                  Terrestrial Ecosystems *

    There are six terrestrial or semi-terrestrial ecosys-

tems2 in Ocean County.  Five of the ecosystems are arranged

in bands that parallel the coastline.   The sixth ecosystem,

the flood plain, cuts across the other five ecosystems.

Proceeding from the inland to the coast, the five ecosystem

bands are:

          1.   Upland - originally wooded, dry highlands

              averaging 16 km (10 mile)  in width;
]_/This section has been extracted from the applicant's
  environmental assessment statement (EAC, 1973).  Addi-
  tional information can be found in Robichaud and Buell
  (1973) and in McCormick and Jones (1973).
2/Robichaud and Buell (1973) define an ecosystem as "...a
  particular type of biological system in which plants,
  animals, and environmental factors are related to each
  other and affected by interactions."
                             86

-------
                                                       TABLE 5
                                              PUMPAGE FROM AQUIFERS IN
                                                    OCEAN COUNTY
                                                        1968
oo
Formation


Kirkwood
Cohans ey
Englishtown
Combined
Formations
r • * •- ?•
.
Total 1968 % of Total
cu m/day

6,337,914
15,963,521
3,622,487
10,562,364
Total 36,486,287
Maximum Daily Output
During 1968
mgd i cu m/day
j
1674.5 I 17.4
t
4217.6 ! 43.8
957.0 \ 9.9
2790.6 • 28.9
9639.7 . 100.0

33,667
48,118
12,437
54,980
149,204
mgd
8.9
12.7
3.3
14.5
39.4
% of Total


22.6
32.3
8.3
36.8
100.0
      Source:  EAC, 1973.

-------
         2.   Coastal swamp - originally wooded, coastal



              lowlands averaging 2.4 km  (1.5 mile) in width;



         3.   Tidal marsh - orginally grassy, tidal lowlands



              averaging 2.4 km  (1.5 mile) in width;



         4.   Marsh islands - grassy islands in the Barnegat



              Manahawkin - Little Egg Bay estuary system;



         5.   Barrier beach islands - long sandy strips



              forming a barrier between the coastal bays and



              the ocean and ranging from less than 0.8 to



              1.6 km (0.5 to 1 mile) in width.



The flood plain ecosystem crosses this banded sequence in an



east - southeast direction.  Flood plains are composed of



the sediments left on valley floors by flowing streams.



    The upland ecosystem covers approximately 1100 sq km



(420 sq mile)  in Ocean County.  This ecosystem exhibits four



subdivisions:








         1.   Upland Pitch Pine - Scrub Oak - Blackjack Oak



              Association  (Stunted Pine Association, Pitch



              Pine Association): This association occurs in



              western Ocean County, primarily on Lakewood



              soils which are very sandy, acidic, and se-



              verely leached.  The Lakewood soils support



              widely spaced, scrubby, slow growing, mixed





                             88

-------
     stands of pitch pine,  scrub oak,  and blackjack



     oak.   These stands provide little shade;  the



     lack  of shade results  in high soil-surface



     temperatures.  The ground cover consists  of a



     scattering of lichens, mosses, and dwarfed



     shrubs of the heath family.  The sparse ground



     cover is a poor source of food and shelter for



     wildlife in the area,   consequently, resident



     birds and mammals are  few in numbers and



     types.








     Human use of this unique semi-arid association



     has been limited to educational,  scientific,



     and recreational pursuits.  If utilities  were



     provided, this land would be susceptible  to



     home-site development.  Under the proposed



     project, the Union Branch, Ridgeway Branch,



     and Wrangel Brook interceptors will cut



     through this association.








2.    Upland Pine-Oak and Upland Oak-Pine Associ-



     ations: These associations occur on loamy



     soils containing more  fine sand,  silt, and



     organic matter than the Lakewood soils.  The





                    89

-------
larger oaks, white and black, dominate.  The



trees form dense canopies, shielding the



ground from direct sunlight.  The shaded soil



supports a crowded woody ground cover, which,



in turn, supports a large and diversified



animal population.  Two important game birds,



the ruffed grouse and the bobwhite quail,



inhabit the area.  White-tailed deer are also



common.








These upland areas have been used for logging



and charcoal manufacture, subsistence farming,



surface mining, and, more recently, housing



developments.  The pine-oak and oak-pine asso-



ciations will be traversed by portions of the



proposed project: the western and central



sections of the Kettle Creek, Union Branch,



Ridgeway Branch, and Wrangel Brook inter-



ceptors, and other interceptors lying west of



U.S. Route 9.







Upland Oak Forest Association: This associa-



tion usually takes the form of isolated clus-



ters of mature trees on sandy loam or loamy





               90

-------
sand soils.  These soils are well- to moder-



ately well-drained, but contain enough silt or



humus to retain the moisture and nutrients



necessary for the growth and maintenance of



large deciduous trees.  The mature forest is



characterized by a dense canopy reaching in



height to 20 m (70 ft).  The dominant oaks of



the forest canopy are the white, black,



scarlet, chestnut, and northern red.  The



ground cover consists mainly of low growing



heath, sheep laurel, and mountain laurel.  The



same types of birds and mammals that inhabit



the oak-pine forest inhabit the oak forest.








Most of the oak forest stands in Ocean county



were cut for lumber.  Attempts were made to



farm the clear-cut land.  This once-farmed



land has since been developed for housing.



The remaining oak fores-t stands have high



potential value for recreational use and for



well-planned homesites.  Most of the proposed



project's major interceptors pass through



upland oak forest at some point along their



routes.





               91

-------
         U.   Abandoned Farmland; Many of the farms in the
              area were abandoned during the depression of
              the 1920's and the 1930«s.  More recently, a
              number of poultry farms have been abandoned.
              This abandoned farmland is the most productive
              wildlife habitat in the uplands.  It supports
              a mosaic of successional vegetation, providing
              a highly diversified wildlife habitat.

    The second ecosystem band, the coastal swamp forest,
ranges in width from 0.2 to 3.2 km (0.1 to 2 mile) and
merges with the flood plains of local streams.  The coastal
swamp forest is commonly associated with sands and gravels
that are overlain with muck.  The water table is close to
the surface throughout the year and standing water is common
in spring and during periods of heavy precipitation.
    The coastal swamp forest is dominated by red maple in
association with black gum, pitch pine, willow oak, pin oak,
northern red oak, white oak, sweet gum, and Atlantic white
cedar.  The understory is composed of a vast array of shrubs
and vines.  Along the edge of the forest, the understory
generally includes cat briar, grapes, and five-leaf ivy.
    Coastal swamp forests harbor a variety of wildlife.
Song birds often nest in these areas, as do certain game

                             92

-------
species, such as mallard, wood and black ducks, ruffed

grouse, and bobwhite quail.  White-tailed deer and several

types of smaller mammals also inhabit the forest.

    Human use of the coastal swamp forest has been limited

to logging of the Atlantic white cedar and to isolated

community development.  Since legislation has essentially

prohibited the dredging and filling of tidal lands for

homesite development, the coastal swamp has become the prime

target for large-scale developments.  Portions of the pro-

posed interceptor routes cut through the coastal swamp and

four of the alternative treatment plant sites1 include some

coastal swamp land within their boundaries.

    The third type of ecosystem is the tidal marsh; 12,200

ha (30,000 acre)  of Ocean County are in tidal marsh.  Tidal

marshes are flat expanses of grassland at or near sea level

that are normally flooded twice daily at high tide.  It is

doubtful whether any of this tidal marsh acreage is still in

virgin condition.  Almost everywhere there is evidence of

mosquito control ditching and of deterioration due to

siltation, pollution, spoil deposition, and diking.
JYBerkeley Shores East, Berkeley Shores West, Sloop Creek,
  and Butler Boulevard.
                             93

-------
    Typical soils are alluvially deposited silts with high
organic content  (20 percent).  Tidal marsh vegetation has a .
high salt tolerance.  Along the low tide mark, cord grass
and marsh elder dominate.  Further inland, marsh hay and
cord grass dominate.  In the central and inland areas, there
are uninterrupted stands of marsh hay.  At the normal high
tide mark, the marsh hay gives way to stands of black gum,
red maple, and pitch pine that have been stunted by salt
spray.
    The nesting birds of the tidal marsh are ducks, rails,
and other species normally associated with wetlands.  The
nesting birds also feed in the tidal marshes and mud flats.
The marshes and mud flats are especially important as rest-
ing and feeding areas for migratory water fowl and shore
birds.  A few mammals, principally muskrats, inhabit the
tidal marsh.  Rice rats commonly reside in transitional
areas between the marsh and the upland.  Cottontail rabbits
abound in the drier areas.
    The tidal marsh is extremely important to the produc-
tivity of the estuary.  Organic debris, on the order of
several tons per hectare, is washed into the estuary by the
tides.  The organic debris serves as food for invertebrate
organisms which, in turn, serve as food for shellfish and
fin fish.

                             94

-------
    In the past, human use of the tidal marsh was limited to



harvesting of the marsh hay and cord grass for use as mulch



and as bedding for domestic animals, and to hunting, outdoor



education, and research.  In recent years, the use of bulk-



heads and lagoons has allowed the construction of housing



developments which have encroached upon and destroyed



thousands of hectares of tidal marsh.  Development has been



so extensive that it now threatens to eliminate this natural



ecosystem.  With respect to the proposed project, tidal



marsh is involved to some degree in the alternative inter-



ceptor routings, treatment plant sites, and outfall



routings.



    The fourth type of ecosystem is the marsh island.  There



are about sixty tidal marsh islands in the bays of Ocean



County.  These flat, grassy, tide-washed islands are very



similar to the tidal marshes from which they are separated



by open water.  The relative isolation of the islands offers



greater sanctuary to nesting, feeding and resting birds.



    The tidal marsh islands are also valuable in terms of



recreation, outdoor education, and research.  The sand and



mud flats associated with these islands might prove to be



valuable shellfishing areas if existing sources of pollution



were eliminated.  The alternative outfall routings for the



proposed project are very close to both undisturbed tidal





                             95

-------
marsh islands and islands that have been disturbed by dredge



spoil deposition.



    Two barrier beach islands. Island Beach and Long Beach



Island, constitute the fifth ecosystem band.  The islands



are composed of sands that have been washed off the mainland



by streams and then spread by coastal currents.  The coastal



currents tend to transport the sands northward north of



Barnegat Inlet and southward south of Barnegat Inlet.  Once



the sand has been deposited, it is driven westward into



dunes by prevailing onshore winds.  Eventually, the dunes



become stabilized by salt tolerant vegetation.



    Most of the barrier beach area has been radically



altered by development.  Both of the barrier beach islands



have been overrun by year-round and summer residences,



commercial districts, amusement parks, marinas, lagoonal



developments, landfills, and roads.  Island Beach State



Park, however, has been maintained in a relatively natural



state.  The park provides areas for intensive,recreational



use, and natural areas for scientific research and outdoor



education.  Under the proposed project, interceptors will be



installed to serve the southern Island Beach communities.



The alternative ocean outfall routings cut across Island



Beach.
                             96

-------
    The sixth type of ecosystem is the flood plain.  The

flood plains of streams cover about 130 sq km  (5C sq  mile)

of Ocean County.  Flood plain soils are characteristically

sandy and gravelly.  The soils have a high organic content,

high acidity, and low phosphate availability.  (Tedrow,

1963) .

    Vegetation along the stream banks typically includes red

maple, black gum, and speckled alder.  In the mucky depres-

sions of the primary flood plain1,Atlantic white cedar

dominates.  Along some streams, secondary flood plains,2 or

terraces, occur.  Pitch pine, red maple, sheep laurel, and.

smooth holly are characteristic of these terraces.  The

wildlife of the flood plain is similar to that of the

coastal swamp.

    The flood plains are used for cedar logging, cranberry

and blueberry production, and recreation.  Most of the

alternative west to east interceptor routings follow stream

courses.
J_/The primary flood plain is flooded annually and seasonally
2/The secondary flood plain is rarely flooded.
                             97

-------
                       Air Resources

    Ocean County is a member of the New Jersey Intrastate

Air Quality Control Region (AQCR).  The other members of

this AQCR are Atlantic, Cape May, and Cumberland counties.

In general, air quality in the AQCR is uniform and is better

than required by the national standards.  However, there are

areas within the AQCR that have less than acceptable air

quality levels.  These localized air quality problems should

be corrected by 1975; at that time, the entire AQCR would

meet all primary and secondary air quality standards.   (See

Appendix C).

    There are five air quality monitoring stations in Ocean

County.  Data obtained at these five stations are presented

in Table 6.  A comparison of these data with the national

ambient air quality standards (Appendix C)  shows that air

quality in Ocean County is better than required by the

standards.

               EXISTING SOURCES OF WASTEWATER
                IN THE CENTRAL SERVICE AREA

    In Ocean County, there has been a proliferation of small

wastewater treatment systems, each one built to,serve an

individual housing development or small community.  The net

effect of these haphazard wastewater management practices

has been the installation of about fifty treatment facili-
                             98

-------
                                                      TABLE 6
                                          AIR QUALITY DATA:  OCEAN COUNTY
                                               JULY 1972 - JUNE 1973
Monitoring
Station
Location
Toms River
Municipal Building
33 Washington Street
Jackson
Recreation Area
Ralph Place near Mark Place
Berkeley
Island Beach Bath House #2
Island Beach State Park
Waretown
Waretown Elementary School
Railroad Avenue
Tucker ton
Ocean County Park
Route 9 and Lakeside Drive
	 1
Description
of Station
Location
commercial -
suburban
playground -
residential

beach -
parking lot

playground -
residential
playground -
residential
Pollutant
Particulates
ug/raj a/
43
27

40

28
23
Sulfur dioxide ' Carbon monoxide
ppm
o.oiV °-oa£/






ppm
32 . 1-/






\o
VO
     a/Annual geometric mean,  July 1972 to June 1973.
     b_/Annual arithmetic mean, July 1972 to June 1973.
     c/Maximum one hour concentration.
     Source:  U.S.  EPA,  n.d.  b.

-------
ties in the county.  Many of these facilities have reached



or are fast approaching their design capacity.  The existing



facilities in the Central service area are listed in Table 7



and shown in Figure 18.  The sewered areas and the existing



interceptor lines are also shown in Figure 18.



    Another dubious practice has been the development of



areas using septic systems for wastewater disposal.  This



practice has led to the installation of septic systems in



lots as small as 23 by 31 m  (75 by 100 ft) in some of the



larger high-density developments along Barnegat Bay.  Septic



systems serve approximately 58 percent of Ocean County's



population.  Most of the septic systems are located in



lagoonal developments bordering the bay and in small popu-



lation centers along U.S. Route 9 (EAC, 1973).



    The county's numerous storm drainage systems are also



significant sources of pollutants.  These drainage systems  :



transport commercial fertilizers from lawns and farms, and



decaying animal and vegetable matter directly into surface



waters.  The effect of these untreated pollutants on surface



waters is especially great in the heavily populated drainage



basins in northern Ocean County (FRSW, 1966-67).



    Two other sources of surface water pollutants are boat



toilets and holding tanks.  The wastes discharged into



waterways from boat toilets and from holding tanks at





                            100

-------
                 TABLE 7
EXISTING WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES
       IN THE CENTRAL SERVICE AREA
              DECEMBER 1973
Map
No .a.'
1.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Location
t
Lavallette
Dover
Township
Seaside
Heights
Seaside
Park
Berkeley
Township
Island
Heights
Dover
Township
Manchester
Township
Lakehurst
Manchester
Township
Jackson
Township
Berkeley
Township
Owner
Municipal
Dover Sewer-
age Auth.
(Ortley Beac
Municipal
Municipal
Berkeley Twp
Sewerage Aut
Municipal
Toms River
Chem. Corp.
U.S. Navy
Municipal
Crestwood
Vil. Sewer
Co. ,Inc.
Board of
Education
Berkeley Twj
Sewerage Aul
(Berkeley
Shores)
Year
Built
1928
1965
i)
1949
1949
. 1965
h.
1933
1960
1944
1964
-
1963
>. 1964
:h.
Influ- Design Capacity
ent&.
D
D
D
D
D
D
I
D
D
D
D
D
cu m/day 1 mgd
3285.4
22.7
6434.5
3633.6
1892.5
1514.0
18925.0
1892.5
1135.5
378.5
79.5
1135.5
.868
6.0
1.7
.96
.5
.4
5.0
.5
.3
.1
.021
.3
Average Flow—'
cu m/day
3304.0
1684.0
13247.5
3406.5
6131.7
249.8
1703.0
151.4
893.0
147.6
579.0
374.7
17789.5
19682.0
991.7
1037.0
461.8
1105.2
435.3
272.5
30.3
56.8
11733.5
946.3
mgd
.873 S
.445 W
3.5 S
.9 W
1.62 S
.066 W
.45 S
.04 W
.236 S
.039 W
.153 S
.099 W
4.7 S
5.2 W
.262 S
.274 W
.122 S
.292 W
.115 S
.072 W
.008 S
.015 W
3.1 S
.25 W
Type of
Treatment
Primary
Primary
Primary
Primary
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
Primary
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
No. of
Connections
1545
11,212
3015
-
962
716
1
—
379
1211
1 School
1115
Receiving Waters
Atlantic Ocean
Atlantic Ocean
Atlantic Ocean
Atlantic Ocean
Atlantic Ocean
Dillon Creek to Toms
River
Atlantic Ocean
Ridgeway Br. of Toms
River to Barnegat Bay
Manapaqua Br. of Toms
River
Swale
Toms River to Barnegat
Bay
Lagoon to Barnegat Bay

-------
                                                                     TABLE 7 (Continued)
Map
No.S.>
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

21

22
Location
Berkeley
Township
Lacey
Township
Lacey
Township
Ocean
Township
Ocean
Township
Lacey
Township
Berkeley
Township
Manchester
Township
Manchester
Township
Ocean
Township
Owner
Year
Built
Berkeley Twp. 1965
Sewerage Auth.
New Jersey
Highway Autl
1954
i.
Forked River 1962
State Marina
Mid Jersey
Sewerage Co
Inc.
Indianola
Sewer Co.
1960
>
1965
Oyster Creek
Nuclear Station
Board of
Education
Crestwood
Vil. Sewer
Co. , Inc.
Leisure
Tech. Co.
BLT Utility
Co.
1961
1972

1972

1972
.Influ- Desien Capacity
entk/ j cu m/day
D
D
D
D
D
-
D
D

D

D
946.3
151.4
22.7
321.7
378.5
-
37.8
1135.5

1135.5

946.3
mgd
.25
.04
.006
.085
.1
-
.01
.3

.3

.25
Average FlowS/
cu m/day| mgd
94.6
193.0
128.7
34.0
-
151.4
83.3
367.0
348.0
295.2
4078.8
-
-

-

—
.025 S
.051 W
.034 S
.009 W
-
.04 S
.022 W
.097 S
.092 W
.78 S
1.08 W
-
-

-

—
Type of
Treatment
Secondary
Secondary
Primary
Secondary
Tertiary
-
Secondary
Tertiary

Tertiary

Tertiary
No. of
Connections
426
1
1
239
532
-
1
-

-

"~
Receiving Waters
Clamming Creek to Barne-
gat Bay
Cedar Creek to Barnegat
Bay
Forked River to Barnegat
Bay
Waretown Creek to Barne-
gat Bay
Lochiel Creek to Barne-
gat Bay
Oyster Creek to Barnegat
Bay
Swale
Ground Discharge

Ground Discharge

Ground Discharge •
o
ro
        a/See Figure 18.

        b/D:  domestic, I:  industrial.

        c/S:  summer, W:  winter.
        Source:  OCSA, 1973-74.

-------
                                                                           LEGEND


                                                                         SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
                                                                         SEWERED AREA
                                                                         EXISTING INTERCEPTORS AND OUTFALL
                                                                                 SCALE
                                                                                 ) I  2 3 4
                                                                                 KILOMETERS
            Source: FR4W. 1973.
EXISTING  SEWAGE TREATMENT FACILITIES  AND SEWERED AREAS IN CENTRAL SERVICE  AREA
                                            Figure 18

-------
marinas are partially responsible for the prohibition of



shellfishing in many areas.  (FR&W, 1966-67).  Wastes should



be collected in holding tanks aboard the vessels, then ,



pumped into collection tanks at marinas, and finally trans-



ferred to wastewater treatment facilities.  The enforcement



of acceptable sewage disposal practices has been considered,



but never implemented.  Under the FWPCAA  (1972) the States



were authorized to promulgate regulations prohibiting the



discharge of sewage from vessels into waterways.  The regu-



lations were to become effective when adequate facilities



for the safe and sanitary removal and treatment of the



sewage became available.  To date, no regulations have been



enacted under this enabling legislation.



    At present, the only significant source of industrial



waste is the Toms River Chemical Company.  The company



provides secondary treatment for its wastewater before dis-



charging it into the Atlantic Ocean via an 18 km (11 mile)



pipeline.  (FR&W, 1966-67).



              HISTORY OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT



    The State and Federal governments share the responsi-



bility for water quality management planning.  The purpose



of water quality management planning is "...to provide for



continuous, systematic and coordinated development of an



efficient and effective course of action to protect or





                            10U

-------
enhance the quality of the waters of a discrete area." (U.S.



EPA, 1971).  The place of the proposed project in relation



to the water quality management plan for Ocean County is



outlined below.



    The proposed project is the end product of a series of



governmental decisions that began in 1967 with the publi-



cation of the "Master Plan for Wastewater Management, Ocean



County, New Jersey" (FR&W, 1966-67).  The original master



plan delineated five natural drainage basins in the county,



each of which would constitute a service area with its own



sewage treatment system.  The concept of regional planning



for wastewater management is that drainage basin boundaries



rather than political boundaries should determine the make-



up of a service area.



    Modifications to the original plan resulted from a 1972



conference convened by the EPA in cooperation with the NJDEP



(U.S. EPA, 1972 a and b).  The objective of the conference



was to resolve the problems of deterioration and closing of



shellfishing areas off the New Jersey coast.  One recom-



mendation of the conference was that wastewaters to be dis-



charged to the inland waters and estuaries of Ocean County



receive a higher degree of treatment (95 percent BOD



removal) than wastewaters to be discharged to the Atlantic



Ocean  (85 percent BOD removal).  The thrust of this recom-





                            105

-------
mendation was to encourage the construction of secondary

treatment facilities with effluent disposal to the Atlantic

Ocean.  Another recommendation was that treatment include

year-round disinfection of wastewater.

    The conference also recommended that four regional

treatment facilities be built in Ocean County.  Two of the

regional facilities were slated for the Central service

area: one to serve Island Beach and the other to serve the

central basin.  The recommendations of the conference went

even further than the original master plan in delimiting the

scope of the proposed project.  The recommendations defined

the size and make-up of the service area, the degree of

treatment required, and the effluent receiving waters.

    The problems associated with ocean disposal of sludge

also came to the fore in 1972.  Recognizing that sludge

adversely affected the ocean floor and its productivity, the

EPA issued the following interim policy on construction of

new wastewater treatment facilities:

         No grant shall be made for the construction of any
    new treatment facilities unless:

              a.   The Administrator has been assured by the
                   applicant that no sludge from the project
                   will be disposed of to ocean waters.

              b.   Plans for the project include adequate
                   provisions for disposal of all sludge by
                   means, other than ocean disposal, which
                            106

-------
                   are acceptable to the Administrator.
                   (U.S. EPA, 1972c).

This policy further restricted the available alternatives

for the proposed project by eliminating the possibility of

employing ocean disposal of sludge.

    One other factor was important in shaping the proposed

project: the commitments made between 1970 and 1972 to

expand and upgrade the Ortley Beach sewage treatment plant

(OBSTP).  This project is underway and is scheduled for com-

pletion in January 1975.  The OBSTP is the regional facility

for the Island Beach portion of the Central service area.

    The sum of all these past governmental decisions is a

regional facility for the central basin portion of the

Central service area, providing secondary treatment (85

percent BOD removal)  with effluent discharge to the Atlantic

Ocean, and employing some means of sludge disposal other

than ocean dumping.  There are alternatives available within

this framework, but they are quite limited.  The proposed

Ocean County Central sewage treatment plant (OCCSTP)  is in

line with the prototypical project outlined by these govern-

mental decisions.  In June 1973 the NJDEP completed its

"Interim Plan for Wastewater Management/Water Pollution

Control for Ocean County." The proposed project was found to

be in confdrmance with the interim plan.
                            107

-------
          DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE ORTLEY BEACH
                   SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT

    The OBSTP is not part of the proposed project.  However,

as mentioned in the preceding section, the decision to ex-

pand and upgrade the OBSTP as one of the regional facilities

for the Central service area was important to the develop-

ment of the proposed. OCCSTP project.  For this reason, a  '

description of the OBSTP project, which is in progress, is

presented below.

    The OBSTP, which is owned and operated by the Dover

Township Sewerage Authority, has been in operation since

1964.  It is currently being expanded and upgraded from a

23,000 cu m/day (6 mgd) primary treatment plant to a 45,000

cu m/day (12 mgd)  secondary treatment plant.  The plant is

expected to be 50 percent operational by September 197U and

complete by January 1975.

    The treatment units that will be provided in the ex-

panded and upgraded OBSTP include a raw sewage pumping

station, primary settling tanks, grit removal units, aera-

tion tanks, final settling tanks, chlorination facilities

and an effluent pumping staion.  At the OESTP, sludge will

be thickened, digested anaerobically, and dewatered by

vacuum filtration.  It will then be transported by truck to
                            108

-------
a private sanitary landfill, the Ocean County Landfill Cor-



poration in Manchester Township, for disposal.



    Odor control at the OBSTP will be accomplished by cover-



ing the raw sewage pumping station wet well, the primary



settling tanks, the aeration tanks, and the sludge thick-



eners.  These units will be subject to forced ventilation



and ozone treatment of the odoriferous airstreams.  Odor



control at the OBSTP is especially important because the



treatment plant site is in a residential area.



    The OBSTP is designed to handle influent BOD and sus-



pended solids concentrations of 250 mg/1 each and to effect



BOD and suspended solids removals of 90 percent each.  At an



average flow rate of 45,000 cu m/day (12 mgd), the 90 per-



cent design removals will result in BOD and suspended solids



loadings to the Atlantic Ocean of approximately 1100 kg/day



(2500 Ib/day) each.



    The existing 61 cm  (24 in.) diameter outfall line will



be extended 730 m  (2400 ft) offshore of Island Beach by the



addition of 430 m  (140C ft) of 76 cm (30 in.) diameter con-



duit.  A 69 m  (225 ft)  diffuser section will be attached to



this outfall conduit.  The dilution ratio expected with this



outfall system is approximately 75:1 at the average design



flow of 45,000 cu m/day (12 mgd).  This should be sufficient
                            109

-------
to maintain both water quality and aesthetics even under the



most adverse conditions.



    The service area for the existing OBSTP is composed of



sections of Island Beach and sections of the mainland:



         1.   Beach service area - the Island Beach portions



              of Dover and Brick Townships, the portion of



              Berkeley Township lying on Pelican Island, and



              the portion of Lavallette lying on West Point



              Island.



         2.   Mainland service area - the mainland area of



              Dover Township and a portion of Berkeley



              Township.  (Kupper, 1971-72) .



As part of the current OBSTP project, the service area



boundaries will be redrawn.  The beach service area will be



expanded to include the Borough of Mantoloking.  In effect,



the mainland service area will be eliminated and sewage



flows from the mainland service area will be transported to



the OCCSTP for treatment and disposal.



    The average 1990 summer flow expected from the Island



Beach service area is 34,000 cu m/day (9 mgd).  To take full



advantage of the OBSTP1s 45,000 cu m/day (12 mgd)  design



capacity, provisions have been made to allow the transfer of-



up to 11,000 cu m/day  (3 mgd)  of sewage from the mainland



service area to the OBSTP.   The transfer of mainland sewage





                            110

-------
to the OBSTP would be necessary only during peak flow con-



ditions at the OCCSTP.



    In sum, the Central service area will be served by two



major sewage treatment facilities, the OCCSTP and the OBSTP,



Although there is no direct connection between the two



treatment plants, flexibility is provided so that a limited



quantity of mainland sewage can be directed to either the



OCCSTP or the OBSTP in the future.
                            111

-------
            ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT



    Alternatives to the proposed project have been strictly



limited by past governmental decisions, as discussed on



pages 10U to 107.  In fact, the only basic alternative to



the proposed project is the "no action" alternative which is



discussed below.  Within the framework outlined by past



governmental decisions, alternatives are available in the



areas of site and routing selections for the required facil-



ities, and types of systems for sewage collection, sewage



treatment, effluent disposal, and sludge disposal.  System



alternatives are discussed in this section.  Alternative



interceptor routings, treatment plant sites, outfall rout-



ings, and sludge disposal sites are discussed in Appendix D.



                THE "NO ACTION" ALTERNATIVE



    In 1970 approximately 42 percent of the homes in Ocean



County were served by wastewater treatment facilities.  The



remaining 58 percent were served by septic systems.   In the



Central service area alone, there are twenty-five wastewater



treatment facilities.  As shown in Table 7, six of the fa-



cilities discharge to the ocean, eight to estuaries, five to



inland streams, and three to land.  Such discharges have



been responsible for the closing of shellfishing areas, the



contravention of water quality standards in both the fresh-



water and estuarine regions, and the closing of bathing





                            112

-------
beaches along the ocean and the bay.  These conditions re-



present a significant adverse impact on both the environment



and the economy of the area.



    The projected rate of development for the area indicates



that existing conditions will become progressively worse



unless remedial action is taken.  In addition to degraded



surface water quality, it can be expected that the water-



table aquifer and those aquifers which recharge within the



developing area will be polluted by recharge from septic



systems.  In light of these consequences, the "no action"



alternative is unacceptable.



                    SYSTEM ALTERNATIVES



             Collection System and Service Area



    The collection facilities of a sewerage system convey



the wastewater from its source to the sewage treatment



plant.  Local collector sewers are those that initially



receive the wastewater.  These sewers empty into larger



interceptor sewers, which are usually owned and operated by



a regional sewerage authority.  Interceptors are the link



between the local collector sewers and the sewage treatment



plant.  Each collection system is tailored to its service



area.  Therefore, the size and path of the collection system



depend on many factors: land use, population density, and



sewage treatment requirements for example.  Design sizing of





                            113

-------
the sewerage system is discussed in greater detail on pages



115 and 116.



    The master plan for wastewater management that was



developed for Ocean County delineated five major drainage



basins in the county (FR&W, 1966-67).  According to the



master plan, the basins, separated by natural ridge lines



rather than political boundaries, would each be served by a



regional sewerage system.  The advantage of this type of



planning is that it allows maximum use of gravity flow



because the sewage does not have to be pumped across ridge



lines.  The original master plan was revised in 1973 for the



following reasons:



         1.   To update flow estimates so that they would



              reflect the revised population estimates made



              in the 1970 census;



         2.   To incorporate the results of feasibility and



              economic analyses dealing with the service



              area, the number and location of treatment



              plants, and the method of wastewater solids



              treatment and disposal;



         3.   To insure conformance with current require-



              ments of the NJDEP and the EPA regarding



              environmental considerations.  (FRSW, 1973).

-------
    The concept of regional planning for wastewater manage-



ment was jointly promoted in 1967 by the State of New Jersey



and the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration (a



predecessor of the EPA).   On November 1, 1967 a Federal



Enforcement Conference was convened to resolve the problems



of deterioration and closing of many shellfishing beds in



the New Jersey coastal area from Shark River to Cape May.



As discussed on pages 104 to 107, another conference was



convened in 19*72 at which both the NJDEP and the EPA re-



iterated their support of the regional planning concept



(U.S. EPA, 1972a).



    Design sizing is one of the most important first steps



in planning an adequate sewerage system.  A sewerage system



must be designed to'accommodate the anticipated range of



sewage flows from its service area.  Each component of the



system must be sized for a selected design period.   The



factors involved in determining the quantity of sewage ex-



pected for a specified design period are "...largely a



function of population served, population density,  and water



consumption...." (ASCE and WPCF, 1969).



    The sizes of the interceptors, force mains, pump sta-



tions, and lift stations for the proposed project are based



on population projections developed for the OCSA by FR&W



(1973).  These projections, along with those made by the





                            115

-------
DSRP, are shown in Table 1.  The projections made by FR&W



basically agree with those made by the DSRP, except in the



cases of Manchester and Berkeley townships.  The DSRP



projected that the 1990 population of Manchester Township



would be 79,082; FR&W projected that it would be 36,000.



The DSRP projected that the 1990 population of Berkeley



Township would be 118,848; FR&W projected that it would be



71,800.  Possible reasons for these discrepancies are dis-



cussed on pages 50 to 56.



    The Central service area's mainland sewers are sized for



a forty year design period; in other words, the sewers are



designed to accommodate the sewage flows that will be gener-



ated by the population of this area through the year 2020.



The barrier beach sewers are designed to accommodate the



sewage flows that will be generated by the ultimate satura-



tion population of the area, that is, the largest possible



population.  The 2020 population projections made by FR&W



for Manchester Township and Berkeley Township were 72,000



and 100,000, respectively.  In designing the interceptors



for these municipalities, FR&W used its own 2020 projec-



tions.  The DSRP did not feel that the 2020 population could



be accurately estimated because of the area's erratic growth



patterns.  Nevertheless, in light of the fact that the



DSRP's 1990 population projections exceed FP&W's 2020 pro-





                            116

-------
jections, the OCSA should reevaluate the design of the



interceptors for Manchester and Berkeley townships.



                Wastewater Treatment System



    The means of effluent disposal selected for a sewage



treatment plant project is the overriding factor in deter-



mining the degree of sewage treatment required.  In the case



of the proposed OCCSTP, effluent discharge to inland streams



or coastal estuaries has been ruled out by past governmental



decisions (see pp. 104 to 107).  Two effluent disposal



alternatives remain, discharge to the Atlantic Ocean and



ground-water recharge.  Effluent discharge to the' Atlantic



Ocean would require secondary treatment; any method of



ground-water recharge would require advanced waste



treatment.



    Effluent disposal alternatives are dealt with in the



next section of this environmental impact statement.  For



reasons that are explained in the next section, ground-water



recharge has been rejected as a viable means of effluent



disposal in Ocean County at this time.  Discharge to the



Atlantic Ocean is the chosen method of effluent disposal for



the OCCSTP.   Therefore, in this section, emphasis is placed



on the selection of a suitable secondary wastewater treat-



ment system.  Advanced waste treatment is dealt with in a



more cursory manner.





                            117

-------
                 Secondary Treatment System
    The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of
1972 require that effluent limitations based upon secondary
treatment be achieved, " (B) for publicly owned treatment
works in existence on July 1, 1977, or approved pursuant to
section 203 of this Act prior to June 30, 1974 (for which-
construction must be completed within four years of approv-
al)...." This means that to be eligible for EPA construction
funds, the OCCSTP must provide at least secondary wastewater
treatment.
    Federal regulations for secondary treatment systems were
published in the Federal Register on August 17, 1973 under
40 CFR Part 133 (U.S. EPA, 1973d).  The regulations require
that a system either effect minimum BOD and suspended solids
removals of 85 percent each or provide for BOD and suspended
solids concentrations in the effluent of no more than 30
mg/1 each, whichever criterion is more stringent.  In cer-
tain cases, exceptions to the regulations may be granted:
for example, where high combined sewer flows or strong
industrial wastes make the required removals unattainable.
This is not the case in Ocean county.
    There are many ways to remove BOD and suspended solids
from wastewater.  Some type of physical, chemical, biolog-
ical, or combination process is usually employed.  The

                            118

-------
different methods are discussed in most textbooks on



wastewater engineering (Metcalf & Eddy, 1972; Fair, Geyer,



and Okun, 1966; Fair, Geyer, and Okun, 1968).  There is no



one ideal method of wastewater treatment.  A suitable



treatment system is one that responds to the engineering,



economic, and environmental conditions prevailing in the



area it is intended to serve.



    The alternative treatment processes considered by the



OCSA were: 1) activated sludge using air (complete-mix,



conventional, contact stabilization, step-aeration), 2) ac-



tivated sludge using "pure" oxygen  (Unox process), 3) trick-



ling filters, and U) physical-chemical treatment.  Properly



designed and operated, any one of these systems is capable



of meeting the aforementioned Federal regulations for sec-



ondary treatment systems.



    According to FR&W (1973), preliminary decisions were



made to eliminate certain alternatives before making a



detailed cost comparison of the treatment processes:



         1.   The contact stabilization and conventional



              activated sludge processes were eliminated



              because of their complexity of operation and



              their inability to handle seasonal variations



              in flow.
                            119

-------
         2.   Trickling filters were rejected because of

              potential nuisance problems, such as flies and

              odors, and because of the inability to convert

              from a trickling filter process to a more

              efficient process in the event that effluent

              standards are upgraded.

         3.   The "Z-M"1 process, a physical-chemical

              process, was rejected because the solids

              generated by the process would not be amenable

              for use in a land reclamation system.

The remaining processes are the step-aeration, the complete-

mix, and the "Unox" modifications of the activated sludge

process, and physical-chemical treatment, excepting the "Z-

M" process.

    The OCSA is designing a regional system that requires

the construction of three new treatment plants.  In an

effort to make its approach to wastewater treatment consis-

tent throughout the county, the OCSA decided to construct

similar facilities in each of its three service areas.  This
l/FR&W (1973) explain the "Z-M" process as follows: '"Heavy
  lime dosages are used to increase the pH to 11.5 and hydro-
  lyze the organic matter.  After neutralization the process
  flow is sent to a granular media filter to remove the sus-
  pended solids and then to an activated carbon column for
  adsorption of the remaining soluble matter."
                            120

-------
decision made it possible, for the OCSA to derive one set of



cost figures for the Southern service area's treatment plant



and then to apply those cost figures to the treatment plants



for the Northern and Central service areas.  Table 8 is a



cost comparison of the alternative wastewater treatment



systems for the Southern service area facility.



    The physical-chemical systems were rejected because of



their comparatively high annual costs.  The "Unox" system,



although its cost is comparable to that of a conventional



activated sludge system, was eliminated because of the lack



of previous full-scale use.  The annual cost of the



complete-mix with diffused air system is essentially the



same as that of the mechanical aeration system.  The



complete-mix with diffused air system was chosen because of



its greater reliability and flexibility.   (FR6W, 1973) .



    In the proposed secondary treatment system, disinfection



will be achieved by chlorinating the effluent from the



secondary clarifiers.  The NJDEP's wastewater treatment



plant design standards specify that the "use of disinfec-



tants other than chlorine will not be permitted."  (NJDEP,



19*70) .  There are other methods of disinfection, but they



have not been considered by the OCSA.
                            121

-------
                                                         TABLE 8
                                     COMPARISON OF COSTS FOR ALTERNATIVE WASTEWATER

                                     TREATMENT SYSTEMS:  OCSA SOUTHERN SERVICE AREA
Treatment System
Complete-mix, diffused air
Complete-mix, mechanical air
Unox process , 90% oxygen
Physical-chemical, lime
Physical-chemical, polymer
Costs (dollars)
Capital
1974
15,270,000
15,570,000
15,370,000
15,860,000
14,480,000
Annual3./
1975
1,465,600
1,484,600
1,475,400
1,539,800
1,467,400
1980
1,591,100
1,609,700
1,600,100
1,681,900
1,623,700
1985
1,781,700
1,800,100
1,789,900
1,899,200
1,862,900
ro
ro
      ^/Includes bond debt service and operating costs.
       Source:  FR&W,  1973.

-------
              Advanced Waste Treatment System



    The type and the degree of treatment that should be



provided in a wastewater treatment plant depend on the



effluent quality needed to maintain the quality of the



receiving waters.  In the case of Ocean County, previous



regulatory actions have directed that wastewater treatment



consist of secondary treatment with effluent discharge to



the Atlantic Ocean.  Nevertheless, provisions have been made



to allow the construction of advanced waste treatment (AWT)



units if they are needed in the future.  Such AWT units



would be required if a ground-water recharge system of



effluent disposal was instituted in the future.



                  Effluent DispQsal^gY§tgm



    The effect of the effluent from a wastewater treatment



facility on the environment varies according to the type of



treatment provided.  An effluent disposal system should be



able to return treated water to the environment with minimal



adverse effects.  Previous actions by both the NJDEP and the



EPA have eliminated inland streams and coastal estuaries as



possible receiving waters for the effluent from the OCCSTP.



Only two alternative effluent disposal systems remain viable



for the OCCSTP, discharge to the Atlantic Ocean and



artificial ground-water recharge.
                            123

-------
    Ocean disposal of treated effluent is the alternative


selected for use at the OCCSTP.  Ocean disposal will allow

the cessation of effluent discharge to mainland streams and

estuaries, thereby improving the quality of these waters.

It will also aid in the restoration and protection of

shellfishing areas in the region.  The assimilative capacity

of the ocean is not infinite, but it is very great.  The


ocean is not expected to suffer any adverse effects as a

consequence of ocean disposal of secondary treatment plant

effluent (see pp. 127 to 131).

    The artificial ground-water recharge1 alternative was

not considered necessary or feasible for use in Ocean County

at this time.  However, it may become necessary in the

future not only as a means of effluent disposal, but as a

means of preventing saltwater intrusion into the ground-

water aquifers and of insuring the availability of fresh

ground-water supplies.

    Artificial ground-water recharge can be accomplished


using either surface water spreading systems or injection

wells.  Both methods depend upon the creation and mainte-

nance of a freshwater ridge paralleling the coast and



J/Todd (1964) defines artificial  ground-water recharge as
  "...augmenting the natural  replenishment of ground-water
  storage by some method of construction, spreading of
  water, or by artificially changing conditions."

-------
preventing the intrusion of sea water (U.S. EPA, 1973e).



The injection well method pumps the recharge water directly



into an aquifer.  To prevent rapid clogging of the wells,



the water to be recharged must receive advanced waste



treatment.  Water to be recharged via the injection well



method must be 1)  free of organic matter, suspended solids,



and ions that can precipitate in the ground water, 2)  chlo-



rinated to prevent the buildup of biological slime in the



area of the well head, and 3) free of oxygen to prevent the



oxidation of materials.  In addition, the wells must be



periodically cleaned and redeveloped.  
-------
the system is installed.  The soil and underlying strata



should be permeable and the land slopes should be gentle to



prevent excessive runoff and erosion.  The distance between



the soil surface and the water-table should be great enough



to allow the soil and underlying strata to filter out and



adsorb any harmful pollutants in the recharge water.



    The effect of treated effluent on ground-water quality



is a matter of concern with both the water spreading and



injection methods.  Water spreading systems partially depend



on the purification capacity of the soil to prevent contam-



ination of the ground water.  However, the actual capacity



of the soil for purification is not known; in many cases,



researchers seem to have overestimated the purification



capacity of soil.  Purification in the soil is accomplished



by filtration, sorption, ion exchange, dilution, and dis-



persion; and by biological and chemical oxidation.  Unfor-



tunately, in areas conducive to water spreading, the organic



matter-clay fraction is low and little sorption or ion



exchange occurs  (Deutsch, 1965) .  The purification capacity



of soil is not a factor with the injection well method be-



cause injection wells bypass the soil and discharge directly



into the aquifer.  For this reason, treated effluent to be



recharged via the injection method must be of superior



quality.





                            126

-------
    With minor exceptions, the chemical quality of water to



be recharged can meet the U.S. Public Health Service (USPHS)



standards for drinking water supplies (Parkhurst, n.d.).



However, care must be taken to insure that, in addition to



toxic elements and compounds containing toxic elements, the



detergent and pesticide levels are acceptable.  The USPHS



bacteriological standards for drinking water are presented



in Appendix E.  Water to be recharged should meet these



standards to insure protection of the public health.



    Clarke et al.  (1962)  computed the enteric virus density



in feces at 200 virus units per gram and the ratio of virus



density to coliform density at 1 to 65,000.  Kelly and



Sanderson (1960)  estimated that the maximum virus density in



raw sewage is 5 virus units per 100 ml in cold weather and



100 virus units per 100 ml in warm weather.  The length of



time of virus survival depends upon the media and the tem-



perature.  "Virus populations in sewage and polluted waters



are subjected to die-aways due to aging, adsorption and



sedimentation, dilution and various undetermined causes.  It



is likely, therefore, that the virus content of polluted



surface waters, wells, etc., is quite low when judged on the



basis of the coliform virus ratio...."  (USPHS, 1962).  Re-



search in California appears to support the opinion that



virus organisms are not likely to enter the aquifer.  At the





                            127

-------
Hyperion recharge wells in California, no viruses were de-



tected in observation wells located 6, 15, and 20 m  (20, 50,



and 70 ft) from the injection well.   (Bargman et al., 1962) .



    Nitrogen levels, specifically nitrate-nitrogen levels,



are of concern in the recharge of aquifers that are used for



water supply.  The USPHS drinking water standard is 45 ppm



nitrate.  Nitrogen should be removed from the recharge water



either before or during the recharge process.  Nitrogen re-



moval is necessary to prevent nitrification in the zone of



aeration and resultant increases in the nitrate level in the



aquifer.  Dilution of the recharge water with ground water



cannot be counted upon to obtain acceptable nitrate levels.



    Since Ocean County's ground-water supplies are not



seriously threatened by saltwater intrusion, ground-water



recharge of treated effluent is unnecessary at present.  The



expense, the limitations, and the possible complications of



a ground-water recharge system of effluent disposal make



this alternative impractical for the present.



                   Sludge Disposal System



    The sludge disposal system of a sewage treatment facil-



ity must collect, treat, and dispose of the solids that are



removed from the wastewater during treatment.  A complete



sludge disposal system is composed of four subsystems: con-



ditioning, stabilization, dewatering, and final disposal.





                            128

-------
The final disposal alternatives will be discussed first

because they have a direct bearing on the selection of

appropriate treatment processes for conditioning, stabili-

zation, and dewatering.

    Ocean disposal of sludge has been eliminated because it

is contrary to EPA policy for new wastewater treatment

plants  (see pp. 10U to 107).  The EPA prohibited ocean dis-

posal of sludge because of the serious adverse effects on

the ocean environment that resulted from past disposal

activities.  According to FRSW (1973), the OCSA rejected

ocean disposal of digested and partially dewatered sludge  -

for three reasons:

         1.   The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will
              not provide grants for the construction of new
              treatment facilities if ocean disposal is used
              for the ultimate disposal of wastewater
              solids.

         2.   There are no harbors in close proximity to the
              treatment plant, thereby requiring the Author-
              ity to either establish a port facility in
              Great Bay and/or Manasquan River or offshore
              loading facilities similar to those used by
              oil companies.

         3.   Extreme resistance would undoubtedly come from
              concerned citizens, legislators, Federal and
              State Agencies.

    Alternatives to ocean disposal of sludge include

incineration, landfill, and land reclamation.  The land

reclamation alternative is currently being studied under a
                            129

-------
demonstration project supported by the following organiza-

tions:

         New Jersey Division of Environmental Quality,
         New Jersey Division of Fish, Game and Shell
           Fisheries,
         New Jersey Division of Water Resources,
         Ocean County Sewerage Authority,
         Rutgers - the State University of New Jersey,
         U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and
         U.S. Geological Survey.

According to FR&W  (1973), "It is the opinion of the Author-

ity [OCSA] that the disposal of organic solids through a

program of land reclamation may prove to be the most suit-

able method in Ocean County." Land reclamation may indeed

turn out to be the most suitable sludge disposal alterna-

tive.  Thusfar, however, not enough data have been collected

to make a reliable judgment on its feasibility for use in

Ocean County.

    If they are properly designed and operated, both the

incineration and the landfill disposal alternatives are

acceptable.  An economic analysis performed by FR&W (1973)

indicates that the incineration and landfill methods are

approximately equal in cost.  In light of the possibility

that a land reclamation program will be implemented in the

future, the OCSA has selected the landfill alternative.

According to FR&W  (1973):

         ...it was decided to use standard-rate anaerobic
         digestion at each treatment plant.  After diges-


                            130

-------
         tion, the wastewater solids will be dewatered and
         trucked to an existing State approved private
         landfill site.  In the future, the solids could be
         pumped to a land reclamation area or, if the land
         reclamation pilot study indicates land reclamation
         is not desirable, the Authority will have the
         option to operate its own landfill, use a public
         landfill, or continue to use private landfills.

    Both the EAC and the NJDEP made suggestions on the

selection and operation of a suitable landfill site:

         1.   Select a site that is well above the water

              table, is removed from surface waters or

              shallow wells, and has relatively impermeable

              soil.

         2.   Install a liner and drainage system to collect

              all leachate.

         3.   Recycle the collected leachate through the

              wastewater treatment facility.

         u.   Cover the fill with a relatively impervious

              layer of material, and landscape the site to

              maximize runoff so that infiltration of

              rainfall is kept to a minimum.

         5.   Make sure that the landfill site is screened

              by a woodland buffer.  (EAC, 1973).

    At the OCCSTP, sludge will be prepared for disposal by

conditioning, stabilization and dewatering.  Conditioning

will consist of sludge thickening only.  The purpose of
                            131

-------
thickening is to decrease the volume of sludge and, thereby,



to facilitate the treatment and disposal processes.  Thick-



ening can be accomplished by sedimentation, flotation, or



centrifugation.  Disc centrifuges have been selected for use



at the OCCSTP because their annual cost ($40,700) is lower



than that of either flotation thickeners ($52,100) or grav-



ity thickeners  ($73,100).  Furthermore, centrifuges take up



less space than gravity or flotation thickeners and operate



more efficiently under conditions of fluctuating solids



loadings.



    After it has been conditioned, the sludge will undergo



stabilization.  The stabilization units may be the most



important components of a sludge handling system.  Stabi-



lization signifies that the sludge is made relatively inert



through biological, chemical, or physical processes.  Once



sludge has been stabilized, it can usually be disposed of



without creating health hazards.



    The biological processes used to stabilize sludge are



aerobic and anaerobic digestion.  In each case, a suitable



environment must be established to encourage the growth of



microorganisms that are capable of utilizing the sludge as a



food source.  The microorganisms break down the solids into



simpler organic compounds that are relatively inert.  Chem-



ical stabilization processes use highly reactive chemicals,





                            132

-------
such as chlorine, to oxidize the organic sludge.  With the

physical stabilization processes, pyrolysis for example,

heat is applied to the sludge, transforming it into a

relatively harmless slurry.

    The OCSA considered three biological stabilization

processes: 1)  standard-rate anaerobic digestion, 2)  high-

rate anaerobic digestion, and 3) aerobic digestion.   The

aerobic digestion alternative was eliminated because of its

relatively high operating costs  (FRSW, 1973).  The high-rate

anaerobic digestion alternative was rejected because:

         1.   The wastewater solids from high rate digestion
              is [sic] difficult to dewater.  This difficul-
              ty is primarily due to the continuous complete
              mixing within the primary digesters resulting
              in pockets of air forming in the secondary
              digester.

         2.   The supernatant from the high rate digestion
              process is extremely high in BOD and suspended
              solids and creates a significant organic load-
              ing on the liquid processes.

         3.   With the higher loading rate and therefore
              reduced detention time, there is a more
              delicate balance between the methane forming
              bacteria which can result in possible opera-
              tion problems.

         U.   There is a possibility that the wastewater
              solids from high rate digestion may not be
              readily adaptable to a land reclamation
              program.   (FR&W, 1973).

The OCSA chose standard-rate anaerobic digestion.  In

addition, the OCSA decided to use a two stage digestion
                            133

-------
system because of its greater efficiency.  The supernatant



from the secondary digesters will be recycled through the



treatment plant.



    Dewatering will be the final sludge processing step.



Dewatering removes the excess water from stabilized sludge



so that the sludge can be disposed of more easily.  There



are several devices available for dewatering sludge, in-



cluding centrifuges, vacuum filters, and filter presses.



Solid-bowl centrifuges were selected because their annual



cost ($97,600)  is lower than that of vacuum filters



($143,200).  The OCSA also feels that the centrifuges will



be easier to operate than the vacuum filters.  (FRSW, 1973)
                            134

-------
                DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE
                      PROPOSED PROJECT

    The proposed project involves the construction of

interceptors, force mains, pump stations, lift stations, a

secondary sewage treatment plant, and an outfall to the

Atlantic Ocean.  The new facilities will be tied in with

existing sewerage facilities in the Central service area.

The proposed project can be divided into four component

systems:



         1.   Collection System

              . interceptor and force main lines

              . pump stations and lift stations

              . connections to the existing system



         2.   Treatment System

              . secondary treatment using the complete-mix

                activated sludge process, with step-aeration

                activated sludge process backup capability



         3.   Effluent Disposal System

              . construction of an effluent pump station

                and a force main outfall line to the Atlantic

                Ocean
                            135

-------
         4.   Sludge Disposal System



              . conditioning using disc centrifuges



              . stabilization using anaerobic digesters



              . dewatering using solid-bowl centrifuges



              . final disposal by landfill.








                     COLLECTION SYSTEM



    The proposed collection system is shown in Figure 19.



The design capacities of the proposed pump stations and lift



stations are given in Table 9.  The interceptor routings are



described and evaluated in Appendix D.



                      TREATMENT SYSTEM



    A 91,000 cu m/day (24 mgd) secondary sewage treatment



plant will be constructed.  The treatment plant will employ



the complete-mix activated sludge process.  In this process,



the effluent from the primary clarifiers is mixed with the



return sludge from the secondary clarifiers; the mixture is



then fed into the activated sludge aeration tanks through a



series of inlets to insure complete mixing.  One advantage



of this system is that it can withstand shock loadings.



This feature will be especially useful at the OCCSTP where



exceptionally high influent flows are expected during summer



weekends.  (FRSW, 1973).  The system is flexible in that it
                            136

-------
                                    LEGEND
              FUTURE  PHASE I   EXISTING
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARY
MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY
EXISTING PUMP. LIFT STATION
PROPOSED PUMP, LIFT STATION

INTERCEPTOR  - GRAVITY
INTERCEPTOR  - FORCE MAIN
OCEAN OUTFAU LINE
(Q
C
^
(D
3
                                                                                                                               JACKSON TOWNSHIP
                                                                                                                                   /RIDGEWAY BRANCH I
                                                                                                                             ^    ! s INTERCEPTOR   >
                                                    MANCHESTER TOWNSHIP
                                                                                                      UNION BRANCH
                                                                                                        INTERCEPTOR
                                                        LACEY  TOWNSHIP

                                                                          WRANGLE BROOK INTERCEPTOR
                                      BERKELEY TOWNSHIP
                                DAVENPORT INTERCEPTOR
                       JAKES BRANCH INTERCEPTOR
                                                                                                                       TOMS RIVER
                                                                                                                       INTERCEPTOR
                                                          TOMS RIVER RELIEF INTERCEPTOR
                               ,-SOUTH BAYSHORE INTERCEPTOR
                                                   42"LS-3
                         OCEAN COUNTY
                        CENTRAL SEWAGE
                        TREATMENT PLANT
                                                                   DOVER TOWNSHIP
                                                                                                          TOMS RIVER CROSSING
                                                                                                               INTERCEPTOR
                                                                      . PS-9
                                                    BUTLER BLVD. INTERCEPTOR
                                                                           PS-5
                                                            MILL CREEK INTERCEPTOR
                                                                                   ./<• OCEAN GATE\
                                                                                     I INTERCEPTOR
                                                                                                            CROSS BAY
                                                                                                            INTERCEPTOR
 LS-1 WRANGLE BROOK LIFT STATION
 LS-2 VEEDER LANE LIFT STATION
 IS-3 MIDDLE BRANCH LIFT STATION
 LS-4 SEASIDE HEIGHTS LIFT STATION
 PS-I CRANMORE  PUMP STATION
 PS-2 WINSOR  PARK PUMP STATION
 PS-3 JAKES BRANCH PUMP STATION
 PS-4 CHELSEA AVENUE  PUMP STATION
 PS-5 BERKELEY.CLAMMING CREEK PUMP  STATION
 PS-6 OCEAN-INDIANOLA  PUMP STATION
 PS-7 OCEAN-BIRDSALL  ST. PUMP STATION
 PS-8 LACEY PUMP STATION
 PS-9 BERKELEY-CEDAR CREEK PUMP STATION
PS-10 SEASIDE  PARK PUMP STATION
 PS-11 LAVALLETTE  PUMP STATION
 PS-12 ISLAND HEIGHTS PUMP STATION
  SCALE
                                                       SOUTH ISLAND BEACH INTERCEPTOR
                                                           SEASIDE HEIGHTS INTERCEPTOR
                                                  ATLANTIC
                                                                                       ORTLEY BEACH-
                                                                                  SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
                                                                                             OCEAN
                                             PROPOSED SEWERAGE  FACILITIES FOR  THE CENTRAL SERVICE AREA

-------
                                                         TABLE 9
                                         PROPOSED LIFT AND PUMP  STATIONS  FOR THE

                                       OCSA  CENTRAL  SERVICE AREA SEWERAGE PROJECT
Map Designation
(See Figure 19)
LS-2
LS-3
LS-4
PS-3
PS-4
PS-5
PS-6
PS-7
PS-8
PS-9
PS-10
PS-11
PS-12
Name of Lift or Pump Station
Veeder Lane Lift Station
Middle Branch Lift Station
Seaside Heights Lift Station
Jakes Branch Pump Station
Chelsea Avenue Pump Station
Berkeley-Clamming Creek Pump Station
Ocean- Indianola Pump Station
Ocean-Birdsall Street Pump Station
Lacey Pump Station
Berkeley-Cedar Creek Pump Station
Seaside Park Pump Station
Lavallette Pump Station
Island Heights Pump Station
Design Capacity
Average Peak
cu m/day
3,800
31,000
17,000
117,000
36,000
6,800
11,000
16,000
43,000
59,000
5,700
-
800
mgd
1.0
8.2
4.4
31.0
9.4
1.8
2.9
4.3
11.3
15.6
1.5
-
0.2
cu m/day
11,000
64,000
39,000
193,000
72,000
19,000
27,000
38,000
84,000
109,000
16,000
-
2,600
mgd
3.0
17.0
10.2
51.1
19.0
4.9
7.2
10.0
22.1
28.8
4.2
-
0.7
to
oo
          Source:  OCSA,  1973-74.

-------
can be easily converted for use as a step-aeration activated



sludge system.



    The treatment facilities are designed to accommodate



influent raw sewage BOD and suspended solids concentrations



of 250 ppm each.  The treatment process is capable of



removing 90 percent of both the POD and suspended solids,



resulting in effluent BOD and suspended solids concentra-



tions of approximately 25 ppm each.  Therefore, at an



average flow rate of 91,000 cu m/day (24 mgd), the BOD and



suspended solids loadings to the Atlantic Ocean will be



approximately 2300 kg/day  (5000 Ib/day) each.



    The proposed OCCSTP's major treatment units are listed



in Table 10.  The treatment plant site is shown in Figure



19.  It was chosen from among twelve alternative sites (see



Appendix D).  Figure 20 is a schematic flow diagram of the



proposed treatment facility.  The design flows for this



facility are:



         Minimum Flow        63,000 cu m/day (16.6 mgd)



         Average Flow        91,000 cu m/day (24 mgd)



         Peak Flow          156,000 cu m/day (41.3 mgd).



The plant can be expanded in the future by the addition of



30,000 cu m/day  (8 mgd) modules.  Influent flows are ex-



pected to reach the 91,000 cu m/day (24 mgd) design capacity



in 1984.  Expansion of the plant to a 121,000 cu m/day (32





                            139

-------
                                                                  TABLE  10

                                                MAJOR TREATMENT UNITS  FOR THE PROPOSED OCCSTP
Treatment Unit
Dimensions, Capacity and/or Detention Tim&5/
                                                                                                                         Remarks
                                                          Sewage Treatment Units
Raw sewage pump station
Two Parshall flumes
Three mechanical bar screens
Four aerated grit chambers
Three primary clarifiers
Complete-mix activated sludge
  process, six aeration tanks
Six secondary clarifiers
Two chlorine contact tanks
Effluent pump station
220,000 cu m/day (58 mgd)  capacity.
1.5 m (5 ft) throat width each.
220,000 cu m/day (58 mgd)  capacity.
7.3 m x 7.3 m x 4.3 m SWD^/ (24 ft x
  24 ft x 14 ft SWD).  DT at peak flow-
  6.3 min.

33 m (108 ft) diameter x 3.0 m (10 ft)
  SWD each.  DT-2.0 hours.  Capacity
  per clarifier-30,000 cu m/day (8 mgd).
44.2 m x 15 m x 4.9 m (145 ft x 50 ft x
  16 ft) each.  DT, excluding recycle-
  5.2 hours.  Capacity per tank-15,000
  cu m/day (4 mgd).
35.7 m (117 ft) diameter x 3.7 m (12 ft)
  SWD each.  DT excluding recycle-4.3 hours.
  Capacity per clarifier-15,000 cu m/day
  (4 mgd).

13 m x 43 m x 2.4 m SWD (44 ft x 140 ft x
  8 ft SWD) each.  DT at peak flow-25.3 min.
  Capacity per tank-61,000 cu m/day (16 mgd).

156,000 cu m/day (41.3 mgd) capacity.
Three screw lift pumps-110,000 cu m/day
  (29 mgd) capacity each.  Future ca-
  pacity-330,000 cu m/day (87 mgd) by
  addition of one pump.

Range of flow measurement-3800 to
  208,000 cu m/day (1 to 55 mgd) each.

Capacity per screen-110,000 cu m/day
  (29 mgd).  Future capacity-330,000
  cu m/day (87 mgd).
Air lift pumps for grit removal.
  city per chamber-53,000 cu m/day
  (14 mgd).
Capa-
Surface settling rate at average flow-
  37 cu m/day/sq m (900 gpd/sq ft).
  Expected removals-30% BOD, 60% sus-
  pended solids.

Diffused air with wide band aeration.
  Mixed liquor suspended solids-3000
  mg/1.  Applied BOD loading-838 g/day/
  cu m (52.4 lb/day/1000 cu ft).  Capa-
  bility of using six tanks in a step
  aeration configuration.

Surface settling rate at average flow-
  20 cu m/day/sq m (500 gpd/sq ft).
                                                                                                        Additional contact time provided in ocean
                                                                                                          outfall.   Solution feed chlorinators.
Three vertical turbine pumps.  Discharge
  to 140 cm (54 in.) diameter outfall
  conduit.  Future capacity-330,000 cu
  m/day (87 mgd) by addition of one pump.

-------
                                                            TABLE 10 (Continued)
Treatment Unit
Dimensions, Capacity and/or Detention TimeS.'
                                                                                                                         Remarks
                                                           Sludge Treatment Units
Three sludge thickeners
Four primary sludge digesters
Two secondary sludge digesters
Two centrifuges
Two centrifuges-6 to 19 I/sec  (100  to  300  gpm)
  each.  One centrifuge-3 to 6 I/sec  (50 to
  100 gpm).

26 m (86 ft) diameter x 9 m (30 ft) average
  water depth.  DT-31.2 days.  Capacity per
  digester-30,000 cu m/day (8 mgd).

26 m (86 ft) diameter x 9 m (30 ft) average
  water depth.  Maximum DT-20.8 days.

Capacity per centrifuge-530 cu m/day;  6 I/sec
  (0.14 mgd; 100 gpm).
Disc centrifuge thickeners.
Standard rate digesters with gas recir-
  culation, external heat exchangers,
  floating covers.

Secondary digesters unheated and unmixed.
  Floating cover gas holders.

Solid-bowl centrifuges.
a/Detention time (DT) based on average flow unless otherwise noted.
b/Side water depth(SWD).
Source:  OCSA, 1973-74.

-------
                                                                                                                                    TO OCEAN OUTFALL
                                                        AREA RESERVED FOR FUTURE TREATMENT FACILITIES

-------
mgd) capacity could extend the design life of the plant to



1990.  Advanced waste treatment units could also be added if



needed.



                  EFFLUENT DISPOSAL SYSTEM



    A 137 cm (54 in.)  diameter outfall line will be con-



structed from the OCCSTP across Barnegat Bay and Island



Beach to the Atlantic Ocean.  The outfall will extend 1500 m



(5000 ft) offshore of Island Beach to a water depth of ap-



proximately 15 m (50 ft).  The outfall routing is shown in



Figure 19.



    A diffuser pipe will be attached to the end of the



outfall.  The effluent will be released through 8 cm  (3 in.)



diameter outlet ports atop the diffuser pipe.  The diffuser



pipe will be approximately 520 m  (1700 ft) in length.  In



the immediate vicinity of the outfall, dilution is expected



to be between 100:1 and 200:1.



    In the future, an alternative effluent disposal method



may be instituted at the OCCSTP.  In that event, the ocean



outfall would be retained as a "safety valve".



                   SLUDGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM



    The sludge disposal system will thicken, anaerobically



digest, dewater, and dispose of approximately 640 cu m/*tlay



(C. 17 mgd) of primary and secondary sludge.  The proposed



sludge handling facilities are listed in Table 10 and





                            143

-------
schematically diagrammed in Figure 20.  The OCSA has chosen



two privately-owned, State approved landfill sites for



disposal of the sludge from the OCCSTP (see Appendix D).



The landfill system of sludge disposal may ultimately be



replaced by a land reclamation program if the latter proves



to be a feasible alternative  (see pp.  128 to 13U) .



                       MISCELLANEOUS



    The probability, frequency, and severity of sewerage



system failures are matters of concern to Federal,  State and



local regulatory agencies.  The most serious type of failure



is one that endangers human health.  Other types of fail-



ures, although less critical, are unnecessary nuisances.



The OCSA will take potential sewerage system failures into



account when preparing final designs for the Central service



area's sewerage systems.



    Local collector sewers will transmit sewage to the OCSA



interceptors, pump stations and lift stations.   Both the



NJDEP (1970) and the EPA  (197Ub)  require that auxiliary



power sources be provided at the pump and lift stations to



insure operation reliability.  Pump and lift station fail-



ures will be monitored at the treatment facility so that the



malfunction can be located and corrected without delay.
                            1U4

-------
    Precautionary measures will be designed into the treat-



ment plant to mitigate the adverse impacts of system fail-



ures.  For example, the treatment plant's pumping capacity



will be great enough to handle peak flows even if the



largest pump is inoperative.  Sludge will be anaerobically



digested and dewatered before being transferred to a sani-



tary landfill for disposal.  Provisions will be made to



store undigested sludge in the event of a digester break-



down; inadequately treated sludge will never be applied to a



landfill area.



    It has been common practice to incorporate raw sewage --



overflow outlets into the design of collection systems, and



to include raw sewage bypasses in the design of treatment



systems.  The practice of discharging raw sewage into



waterways results in degraded water quality.  The OCCSTP



will not employ any raw sewage bypasses; all flows received



at the plant will be discharged into the Atlantic Ocean.



Every effort will be made to eliminate the overflow outlets



in local collection systems.



    The safeguards designed into a sewerage system can be



negated by improper construction practices.  Therefore, both



construction and environmental inspectors oversee



construction of the sewerage facilities.
                            1U5

-------
    Proper operation and maintenance of the sewerage
facilities are at least as important as structural safe-
guards in preventing system failures.  Qualified personnel
must be hired and must receive periodic retraining to main-
tain their skills at peak efficiency.  The Operation and
Maintenance Manual for the OCCSTP will conform to the
current EPA guidelines on this subject (Green et al.f 197U).
The manual will include contingency plans to insure that
adequate sewage treatment is provided even when the plant is
operating under less than ideal conditions, for example
under emergency conditions or when routine maintenance is
being performed.  An effective maintenance program will be
established and sustained.
    At this time, the exact size of the staff that will be
needed to run the sewerage facilities cannot be predicted.
However, Patterson and Banker in a study published in 1971
describe the total manpower requirements for conventional
wastewater treatment facilities.  Patterson and Banker's
manpower estimates are presented in Table 11.  The estimates
are general in nature; they are not directly applicable to
any particular sewage treatment plant.  Based on Patterson
and Banker's estimates, the staff complement for the OCCSTP
would be thirty to thirty-five persons.
                            1U6

-------
                                                  TABLE 11
                                                                             a/
                            STAFF COMPLEMENTS FOR WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANTS-
Occupation Title
Superintendent
Assistant Superintendent
Clerk Typist
Operations Supervisor
Shift Foreman
Operator II
Operator I (assists Operator II)
Automotive Equipment Operator
Maintenance Supervisor
Mechanical Maintenance Foreman
Maintenance Mechanic II
Maintenance Mechanic I
Electrician II
Electrician I
Maintenance Helper
Laborer
Painter
Storekeeper
Custodian
Chemist
Laboratory Technician
Total Staff Complement
Average Plant Capacity, cu m/day (mgd)
19,000 (5)
38,000 (10)
76,000 (20)
132,000 (35)
189,000 (50)
Estimated Number of Personnel
0.5
-
-
-
-
3
5
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
1
-
-
-
-
1
12.5
1
-
-
-
-
4
6
1
-
-
1
1
0.5
-
1
2
-
-
-
-
1.5
19
1
-
1
-
-
5
9
3
-
-
1
1
1
-
2
3
-
-
-
-
2
29
1
1
1
-
1
7
11
4
-
1
2
2
1
1
3
4
-
-
-
-
2
42
1
1
2
1
2
10
12
4
-
1
2
2
1
1
4
5
-
-
1
-
3
53
^/Plant components include:   Liquid treatment-raw wastewater pumping,  preliminary treatment,  primary sedimen-
  tation, aeration, final sedimentation,  recirculation pumping,  chlorination;  Sludge treatment-primary sludge
  pumping, sludge digestion, sludge holding tanks, vacuum filtration,  with filter cake hauled from plant site
  by plant personnel; Other plant components-yardwork, laboratory,  administration and general.
Source:  Patterson and Banker, 1971.

-------
        ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT
    The environmental effects of the proposed project can be
divided along the lines of duration, short-term or long-
term, and relationship to the project, primary or secondary.
Short-term impacts are usually primary in nature.  Long-term
impacts can be either primary or secondary in nature.
    Short-term impacts are generally associated with project
construction: for example, construction noise, loss of her-
baceous vegetation, windblown soil and debris, disturbance
of fresh water, estuarine, and marine benthic communities,
and disruption of traffic patterns.  Long-term impacts are
generally associated with operation of the completed facil-
ities changes in the quality of surface and ground waters,
changes in the quantity of ground water, changes in land use
patterns.
    Primary impacts are the immediate effects of the pro-
ject, such as removal of the vegetation along an interceptor
route.  Secondary impacts are only indirectly related to the
project and, consequently, are difficult to predict and
quantify.  For example, the installation of s"ewers in rural
areas bordering urban centers generally leads to increased
residential development in the rural areas.  The development'
itself and the needs for water, electricity, and municipal
services that accompany it are typical secondary impacts.

-------
                     SHORT-TERM IMPACTS



                     Aquatic Ecosystems



    Any construction in or near aquatic ecosystems will dam-



age those ecosystems.  The extent of the damage depends on



many factors: the proximity of construction to the waterway,



the time of the year when construction takes place, the



duration of construction activities, the construction tech-



niques used, and the physical characteristics of the con-



struction area.  The effect of construction on aquatic



ecosystems begins with the removal of vegetation and the



disturbance of soil layers along stream banks.  Once the  .-



ground cover is disturbed, the exposed surface is sus-



ceptible to erosion.  Erosion and subsequent siltation are



especially problematic during the installation of intercep-



tors along stream banks or across streams.



    In the Central service area, 2U40 m (8000 ft) of inter-



ceptor line will be installed in the flood plain of Wrangel



Brook.  Interceptors will be installed next to Lake Barne-



gat. Pine Lake, and an unnamed artificial pond.  There will



also be thirteen stream crossings, including three crossings



of Toms River and five of Wrangel Brook.  Adherence to pro-



per construction techniques and restoration of affected-



areas after construction will minimize the potentially



damaging effects of siltation on freshwater ecosystems.





                            149

-------
There will also be two estuarine water crossings in the
                   *
Central service area, one of Toms River and the other of

Barnegat Bay.

    Materials on the bottom of a water body will have to be

removed during the excavation of pipe trenches.  Non-motile

fauna and fixed flora will be removed along with the bottom

materials.  There will also be a temporary loss of habitat

for certain motile aquatic forms.  However, disruption

should be local and short-lived.  As soon as a section of

pipe is in place, it will be covered with the material being

excavated to form a trench for the next section of pipe.

This method is called backfilling.

    Trench digging will cause fine materials to become

suspended in the waters at and around the construction site.

The size of the affected area will depend on water flow and

tidal effects.  The suspended material could have several

undesirable effects:  siltation, decreased photosynthetic

activity, and loss of certain fauna for example.

    Siltation will alter the habitat around the trench.  Its

effects will be greatest in the area nearest the cut, and

will decrease as distance from the cut increases.   Since

current velocities in the project construction area are low,'

the suspension of sediments is not likely to result in wide-

spread siltation.  Turbidity in the waters of the construc-


                            150

-------
tion area will decrease light penetration; decreased light



penetration will result in reduced photosynthetic activity.



    The benthos of Barnegat Bay will be disrupted along the



route of the trench.  Worms, clams, and crabs will be



disturbed by sedimentation, but most will adjust within a



week after turbidity subsides.  They may take longer to



recover if the water is very cold because their metabolic



rates are lower at lower temperatures.  If dredging is done



during the fall when the water is still warm, benthic ani-



mals will be active and better able to adjust to the level



of sediment.  Clams will have an easier time repositioning-



themselves relative to the surface of the sediment during



the fall than they will during the spring.  Regardless of



the season, attached benthos, such as hydrozoans, bryozoans



and algae, will be buried in place.



    Since fish are capable of migrating from the area during



construction, they should not be greatly affected by dredg-



ing activities.  The fine sediment suspended in the water



may clog the gills of some fish.  Those fish that are le-



thargic or are sluggish swimmers will be most susceptible to



gill clogging.



    Recovery of the area will take two to four years during



which benthic organisms will resettle.  A pattern of suc-



cession will be established beginning with detritus and





                            151

-------
bacteria and culminating with a climax benthic community
(Phillips, 1972).  After the sediment that is suspended
during dredging settles, the larvae of worms, clams, and
other fauna will settle and establish a new benthic com-
munity similar to that in the adjacent area.  The new
community will be less diverse in age and size because its
members will have started growing at about the same time.
    Even though the backfilling method will be used, the two
estuarine crossings will produce an excess of dredged
material.  The proper disposal of this material is necessary
to avoid undue damage to deposition sites.  Depositing the
dredge spoils on the bay bottom next to the trench will harm
shellfish and other benthic organisms in the path of the
trench and in adjacent areas.  Removing the dredge spoils
and depositing them at acceptable spoils sites will minimize
disruption of the benthos in areas adjacent to the trench.
Those organisms contained in the spoil material will be
destroyed.
    The EAC (1973)  recommends that dredge spoils be
deposited in areas that have been used for this purpose in
the past.  However, the EAC cautions that these areas should
not be used if a natural population has developed since the
last deposition.  After surveying several possible disposal
                            152

-------
sites, the EAC made the following recommendations:



         1.   Clean sand spoils should be deposited on the



              ocean shoreline to replenish beach sand that



              has been eroded away.



         2.   Other spoils should be deposited on islands in



              Bamegat Bay that are rapidly disappearing due



              to erosion.



         3.   Any remaining spoils should be deposited on



              old spoil sites.



    Construction of the outfall will affect the marine



environment by disrupting benthic organisms, such as surf .



clams and mole crabs.  The area inhabited by these benthic



organisms is expected to recover in approximately one year.



Increased turbidity in the waters near the dredging site



could cause a temporary reduction in primary production due



to reduced light penetration.  Proper disposal of the



material displaced during installation of the outfall is



necessary to prevent damage to benthic organisms near the



dredging site.



                        Ground water



    In areas where the water table is close to the surface,



the trenches dug for interceptor installation will probably



fill with water.  The water must be pumped out of the



trenches.  Trench dewatering will cause local short-term





                            153

-------
depressions in the water table.  Shallow residential wells



that are very close to trenches that are being dewatered may



experience water level fluctuations and may even go dry.



Local disruption of the soil horizons during construction



will also create turbidity problems in the water-table aqui-



fer.  This impairment of ground-water quality will persist



for some time after construction.



                   Terrestrial Ecosystems



    In general, the effects of interceptor construction on



terrestrial ecosystems are the removal of vegetation and the



disturbance of soils.  The severity of the construction ef-



fects depends on the season, the types of soil and topogra-



phy encountered, the construction practices employed, and



the nature and timing of restoration.  Damage to terrestrial



ecosystems can be minimized by avoiding critical areas, such



as steep slopes and flood plains, by scheduling construction



for low-rainfall periods, and by starting restoration as



soon as possible after construction begins.



    The effects of construction on terrestrial ecosystems



can be minimized, but they cannot be eliminated.  During



construction, there will undoubtedly be times when soil



surfaces are exposed and, therefore, subject to erosion.



Piles of excavated material will be exposed to rainfall and



local drainage patterns will be disrupted.  Material eroded





                            15U

-------
from slopes may be retained at the base of the slope or it



may be washed into the nearest stream.  Broad, shallow



depressions can be formed which, when filled with water, can



become mosquito breeding areas.  Eroded material that is



retained on th.e land surface can crush and destroy herba-



ceous vegetation.  In sufficient amounts, eroded material



can even smother the roots of trees and other woody plants



and can create an anaerobic environment for the flora and



fauna of the soil.  Prolonged erosion can have a serious



long-term effect on the environment.




    Vegetation in the path of the interceptor and along the



right-of-way is always destroyed.  Access to the interceptor



lines reguires that trees and other woody species not be



allowed to reestablish themselves.  However, herbaceous



species rapidly reestablish themselves on the open ground,



forming a stabilizing ground cover.  Although the area may



never achieve its pre-construction state, it will develop a



vegetative community that is compatible with conditions at



the site.



    The impact on birds and animals in the construction area



will be minimal.  The birds and animals will vacate the



area, seeking food and shelter in another territory.  When



construction ends and vegetation reestablishes itself, the



birds and animals will return.





                            155

-------
    In addition to the generalized effects of construction



on terrestrial ecosystems, there are certain construction



effects that are specific to an ecosystem.  The lowland



ecosystems occur on soils with poor internal drainage.



Where drainage is exceptionally poor, anaerobic zones occur



in the soil.  In the coastal swamp, tidal marsh, and marsh



island ecosystems, the subsoils may contain large amounts of



organic matter.  Decomposition of this organic matter under



anaerobic conditions produces hydrogen sulfide and methane



gas.  When excavation exposes these subsoils, there will be



a significant odor problem.  When the subsoils are re-



covered, the odor problem will abate.



    Construction will interfere with recreational use of



those sections of the barrier beach island that are within



the immediate construction area.  Locally, swimming, pic-



nicking, and fishing may have to be curtailed.



                  Air, Noise, and Traffic



    During construction, a certain amount of dust will be



raised, adding to the particulate load in the air around the



site.  The release of hydrocarbons by construction machinery



will also temporarily degrade air quality.  As noted in the



previous section, construction in certain areas will cause



temporary odor problems.
                            156

-------
    The noise made by the operation of heavy construction



equipment will also be a short-term problem.



    Normal traffic patterns may be disrupted by construc-



tion.  If necessary, special provisions will be made to



maintain traffic flows on access routes to hospitals, health



service facilities, and other emergency response agencies.



                 LONG-TERM PRIMARY IMPACTS



                     Aquatic Ecosystems



    When the OCCSTP is put into operation, sewage treatment



plant effluent will no longer be discharged into the streams



in the Central service area.  As a result, the water quality



of the streams and of the estuaries into which they flow



should improve.  Another probable effect of eliminating ef-



fluent discharges into the streams will be a decrease in



stream flow.  Those streams that empty into Barnegat Bay may



experience a shift in saline conditions because reduced



stream flow will permit the salt water of the bay to flow



farther upstream.  However, this shift in saline conditions



will cause only minor variations in the normal distribution



of organisms.  The proposed project will improve estuarine



water quality by reducing the nutrients, BOD, suspended



solids and bacteria that now enter the estuaries.  A reduc-



tion in nutrients should slow the rate of eutrophication of



Barnegat Bay.





                            157

-------
    The proposed project should also help to reduce the



number of areas closed to shellfishing.  Seventeen percent



of Ocean County's waters are condemned for the purpose of



shellfish harvesting.  Both sport and commercial shellfish-



ing have been adversely affected by the closing of shellfish



beds due to pollution.  Recovery of the shellfishing areas



is a long-term proposition.  According to the EAC (1973):



"If the pollution of Barnegat Bay is ceased, the effects of



previous pollution might be expected to linger for some



years.  The clams from presently condemned areas would



continue to be unsafe to eat for some time."



    The proposed project will check the pollution of Barne-



gat Bay by sewage treatment plant effluent.  However, the



bay will continue to suffer the effects of sewage pollution



caused by discharges from boats and marinas.  This problem



is particularly acute in Ocean County because of the resort



character of the coastal area.



    The effects of the proposed project on the marine en-



vironment are especially important because two ocean out-



falls will be located in the Central service area, one to



serve the OBSTP and the other to serve the OCCSTP.  The



OBSTP will discharge 45,000 cu m/day (12 mgd) of treated



effluent into the Atlantic Ocean; the OCCSTP will discharge



91,000 cu m/day (24 mgd)  of treated effluent into the ocean.





                            158

-------
The environmental effects of discharging treated effluent

into the ocean depend on the quality and quantity of the

effluent, the design of the outfall, and the characteristics

of the ocean water.1

    At an average flow rate of 91,000 cu mi/day (24 mgd) , the

OCCSTP will release 2300 kg/day (5000 Ib/day)  of both BOD

and suspended solids into the ocean.  The discharge of

treated effluent into the ocean should not affect dissolved

oxygen levels.  However, there may be some deposition of

solids in the area of the outfall.  The nutrient levels in

the effluent are expected to be 27,000 ug/1 of nitrogen and

5800 ug/1 of phosphorus.  The predicted nitrogen level may

be understated; it is lower than that currently obtained in

practice.  A comparable system, the Bay Park treatment plant

in Nassau County, New York, produces a secondary effluent

with a nitrogen level of 35,000 ug/1 (Manganaro, Martin and

Lincoln, 1966).

    In considering the impact of discharging treated efflu-

ent into coastal waters, nutrients warrant special atten-

tion.  Nutrient concentrations, among other factors, have
l_/The discussion of the environmental effects of the OCCSTP's
  ocean outfall has been extracted from the applicant's
  environmental assessment statement (EAC, 1973), and the
  technical report for the southern service area (FR&W, 1974).
                            159

-------
been implicated in phytoplankton blooms in ocean waters.

Red tide is a particularly important instance of this

phenomenon.  Nutrients are conservative substances; they

will remain in the system indefinitely.  The nutrient data

in the following table were obtained in the open ocean off

Shark River.

        Nutrient Data - Open Ocean - Off shark River

Date            Defith            N^-           Total P^

4/21/71         Surface          176          U3.U
a/21/71         Mid              188          34.1
a/21/71         Bottom           160          3a.l
7/27/71         Surface          151          53.9
7/27/71         Mid              15C          45.9
7/27/71         Bottom           193          58.9

a/Values in ug/1.
Source:  National Sport Fisheries Marine Laboratory, n.d.

    This is one reason why the design of the outfall is so

important.  An ocean outfall should be designed to allow

dilution of the effluent nutrient concentrations to the

approximate ambient concentrations in order to minimize the

impact of the effluent discharge.  The following table shows

the estimated concentrations of nutrients after dilution at

various design dilution ratios.
                            160

-------
         Concentrations of Nitrogen and Phosphorus
               at Various Effluent Dilutions!?
Effluent
Concentration          50:1   60;1   100:1   150:1   200:1
Phosphorus
(as P)     5,800        158    132     100      83      74
Nitrogen
(as N)    27rOOO        573    479     312     22U     180

a/All averages in ug/1.
Source:  EAC, 1973.

    With a dilution factor of 50:1, the phosphorus concen-

tration is greater than the ambient value and the nitrogen

concentration is more than twice the ambient value.  With a

dilution factor of 2CO:1, the phosphorus level approaches

the normal range of fluctuation in sea water.  The nitrogen

value is only slightly above the ambient level and is still

within the range of fluctuation.

    The OCCSTP outfall is designed to effect a dilution

ratio of between 100:1 and 200:1 in the immediate vicinity

of the outfall.  The actual process of dilution is a complex

interaction of the effluent, as it is released by the

outfall, and the ocean water.

    The OCCSTP outfall will extend 1500 m (5000 ft) offshore

of Island Beach to a water depth of approximately 15 m (50

ft).   A diffuser section attached to the outfall will extend

the outfall another 520 m (1700 ft) .  The farther the

outfall extends into the ocean, the more sea water will be


                            161

-------
available to dilute the effluent.  Release of the effluent


will be controlled by pumping it into the ocean through 8 cm


(3 in.) diameter outlet ports in the diffuser pipe; gradual


release of the effluent facilitates dilution.


    Once the effluent is released into the ocean, the sea


water itself becomes the most important determinant of what


happens to the effluent.  Temperature and salinity are the


two .most important factors in determining the density of sea


water.  If the temperature and salinity are uniform through-


out a column of sea water, that is, from the surface to the


bottom, the density of the sea water will be uniform.  If


the temperature and salinity are not uniform, the density


will not be uniform.  The latter is called stratification,


or layering, and its presence or absence can affect the


movement of the effluent after it leaves the outfall.


    The effluent from a sewage treatment plant is


essentially fresh water; it is not as dense as sea water.


Consequently, when effluent is released into the ocean, it

                             t
tends to rise as a stream through the sea water toward the


surface.  As the effluent rises, it mixes with the sea


water, becoming more and more dense.  When it approximates


the density of sea water, it ceases to rise.  If the column


of sea water is unstratified, there is nothing to prevent


the effluent stream from going all the way to the surface.



                            162

-------
Once the stream reaches the surface, ocean currents and wave

action take over, further mixing the effluent with the sea

water and providing significant dilution.

    If the column of sea water is stratified, the rising

effluent stream may be trapped before it reaches the

surface.  The result is concentration and lateral movement

of the effluent at some mid-depth.  According to Hires

(1972), "The subsequent dilution of the effluent as it

spreads at mid-depth is ...difficult to determine."

         If the sources of energy for the diffusion proc-
    esses in the ocean's surface layers are compared to
    those which can furnish energy for mixing at mid-depth,
    it appears that the rate of dilution may be signifi-
    cantly less at mid-depths than at the surface.  At the
    surface, the energy for mixing can be supplied from
    tidal currents, wind-generated waves and wind driven
    currents.  At mid-depths, the sources of energy for
    mixing are reduced to just tidal currents and internal
    waves.   (Hires, 1972)

From June through September, the ocean in the vicinity of

the proposed OCCSTP outfall exhibits a vertical temperature

and salinity stratification.  This produces a restricting

density, that is, a density that can trap a rising effluent

stream, 40 to 50 percent of the time.

    The currents at mid-depth often flow in the opposite

direction of the surface waters.  An offshore current may

produce an upwelling of mid-depth waters closer to shore.

If density stratification causes a mid-depth concentration
                            163

-------
of effluent, the current patterns at that depth may carry
the effluent concentration toward the shore.  A well de-
signed outfall will provide travel time for dilution at mid-
depths so that pollutant concentrations will be reduced to
acceptable levels.
    In the immediate area of an ocean outfall, biological
productivity usually decreases.  Beyond the immediate area,
productivity gradually  returns to background conditions.
In some cases, productivity remains constant, but a shift in
kinds and numbers of organisms occurs.  A widely diversified
population can succumb to a single dominant species, which
may not support the upper levels of the food chain.  The
timing of maximum productivity can be altered to the extent
that an organism's food supply may not be available at a
critical stage in that organism's life cycle.  In still
other cases, productivity actually increases.
    As previously mentioned, a major cause of red tide is an
overabundance of nutrients in the water.  Another important
factor is the seasonal temperature profile of the ocean.
During the winter, an isothermic condition exists and the
ocean waters are well mixed.  However, during the summer,
the waters become stratified, setting the stage for a
buildup of nutrients in particular layers of water.
                            164

-------
    Nutrients tend to accumulate in the bottom layers



because of the large number of dead organisms introduced



from surface layers.  Even though nutrients are most



abundant in the deeper waters, blooms are not likely to



occur there because of the lack of sufficient light.  Warm,



nutrient-rich waters flow into the ocean from adjacent



estuaries, rivers, and bays.  These warmer waters tend to



remain at the surface.  Algal blooms are more likely to



occur under such conditions.



    It is and will continue to be difficult to pinpoint the



cause of a particular red tide.  The causative factors and



their interrelationships are extremely complex.  However,



the EAC  (1973)  maintains that if the secondary effluent



discharge from the OCCSTP is subjected to an actual dilution



of at least 100:1, the effluent will not aggravate the over-



all red tide effect on bathing waters.



    As a general policy, the State of New Jersey requires



that all ocean outfalls achieve a minimum dilution of 50:1



at the highest point of rise of the center of the effluent



stream.  A 50:1 dilution ratio is compatible with mainte-



nance of the water quality standards for coastal waters.



The water quality standards are designed to protect the-



beaches and adjacent waters for primary contact recreation.



The standards are also designed to protect the open ocean





                            165

-------
waters in the vicinity of the outfall.  A 50:1 dilution also
insures that the secondary effluent discharge from the
outfall will not be visible.
                        Ground Water
    The proposed project will affect both the quality and
quantity of ground water in Ocean County.  Basically, opera-
tion of the OCCSTP will improve ground-water quality and
decrease ground-water quantity.  The effluent disposal
system chosen for the OCCSTP, discharge to the Atlantic
Ocean, will enhance ground-water quality by eliminating
septic tank discharges and by improving water quality in
streams, including those streams that intersect with the
water table.
    The effect of the sludge disposal system chosen for the
OCCSTP, sanitary landfill, on ground-water quality are an-
other matter.  The physical characteristics of the landfill
sites will go a long way toward protecting or endangering
local ground-water quality.
    The environmental feasibility of a sanitary landfill
depends on several factors; one of the most important is
soil type.  Soil type governs the rate at which fluids move
through the ground and, to a lesser extent, the changes
which those fluids undergo in transit.  The porosity and
permeability of the soil is determined by its grain size:

                            166

-------
the larger the grain size, the more porous and permeable the



soil.   Fine soils that contain a large amount of clay or



organic matter are chemically active.  Clay and organic



matter act as exchange receptors for many pollutants.



    The soils at the two sites selected by the OCSA are com-



posed of unconsolidated sands and gravels.  The sands and



gravels are very coarse and highly permeable: their infil-



tration range is 10-2 to 10 cm/sec (3.3 x 10~* to 3.3 x 10-»



ft/sec).  At each of the sites, a large amount of sand



combined with a small amount of clay minerals and an absence



of organic matter makes the soil chemically inert,  conse-



quently, the potential for ground-water contamination from



landfill leachates is very high.



    Another factor affecting the environmental feasibility



of a sanitary landfill is the vertical distance between the



landfill and the water table.  The movement of ground water



and the infiltration of rainwater depend on the structure of



the landfill and on the hydrologic gradient in the area.



    The solution that is created by the natural leaching of



the landfill's contents  (i.e., soil, refuse, and sludge) by



rainwater percolating through the landfill is called the



leachate.  Rainwater percolates through the landfill, forms



a leachate, and then transports the leached materials down



to the water table.  The formation of leachate can be





                            167

-------
limited by placing a semi-impervious cover on the landfill.
This will increase the runoff rate and decrease the amount
of rainwater percolating through the landfill.  To control
the leachate that is formed, an impervious liner and a
drainage system can be installed to collect and reprocess
the leachate.
    In the case of a landfill that intersects with the water
table, high soil permeability and rainwater infiltration
cause the leachate that is formed to move away from the
landfill deposit.  An impervious liner will establish a
water-table mound with a ground-water gradient away from the
landfill.  The liner, which is the only source of control
over the movement of leachate, is subject to leakage as a
result of cracks, punctures, decomposition, and eventual
overflow.  A collection system can be installed to lower the
water table in the landfill and to establish an inward gra-
dient.  Although this would prevent leakage of the leachate
from the landfill, it would necessitate the collection and
reprocessing of the leachate.
    A slow ground-water flow rate coupled with a rapid
pollutant addition rate increases the danger of ground-water
contamination by leachate.  Moreover, the fact that the
ground water is contaminated may not be immediately appar-
ent.   Once the contamination becomes apparent and the source

                            168

-------
of contamination is terminated, the process of ground-water



recovery can begin.  However, the time required for



purification of the ground water will be far greater than



the time required for contamination of the ground water.



    There is one other aspect of the proposed project that



could affect ground-water quality.  Exfiltration of waste-



water from interceptors could degrade ground-water quality



in areas adjacent to the interceptors.  An exfiltration lim-



it will be established in the contract specifications for



the proposed project.  The State of New Jersey requires that



exfiltration from interceptors not exceed 100 g/in./mile/day.



Exfiltration is not likely to be a problem, however, because



most of the interceptors for the proposed project will be



placed below the water-table aquifer.  Infiltration of



ground water into the interceptors is much more likely to



occur; infiltration is a ground-water quantity problem.



    In terms of ground-water quantity, the proposed project



will be less than beneficial.  Effluent disposal to the



Atlantic Ocean will eliminate direct ground-water recharge



by septic tank discharges and indirect ground-water recharge



by wastewater discharges in streams.  This will improve



ground-water quality but will reduce the amount of ground



water available for storage by 77,000 cu m/day (20.3 mgd).



In light of the present ground-water recharge rate of





                            169

-------
2,110,000 cu in/day (557 mgd) , the loss of effluent recharge
is insignificant.  The quantitative advantages of ground-
water recharge by septic tank discharges are offset by the
danger of ground-water contamination, which is especially
high in areas where the housing density can exceed seven
units per hectare.
    The proposed project, by indirectly encouraging de-
velopment, will have an effect on ground-water supplies.  At
present, pumpage from the water-table aquifer is concentra-
ted in the Toms River and Lakehurst areas on the mainland.
Long Beach Island's water supply is derived from the
Kirkwood formation.  However, the Kirkwood is approaching
maximum development and future water supplies for Long Beach
Island will have to be drawn from the water-table aquifer on
the mainland.  Furthermore, new communities that will exert
increased demands on the water-table aquifer are already
springing up on the mainland.  Water-table depressions will
steadily worsen with development and the danger of saltwater
intrusion will increase.
    Increased water demand is not the only ground-water
problem associated with development.  Development will also
reduce the amount of recharge to the water-table aquifer.
Precipitation is the only direct source of recharge to the
water-table aquifer in Ocean County.  Development will in-

                            170

-------
crease the runoff rate by covering over large portions of

the recharge area with buildings, streets and other imper-

vious surfaces.  A reduction in the recharge area will cause

a reduction in the grounds-water recharge rate.

    Two ground-water quantity problems are associated with

the interceptors for the proposed project, conduction and

infiltration.  Bellard (written communication, 1974)

describes the conduction problem:

         With the large size of the collection pipes and the
         quantity of porous bedding material placed under
         these pipes, there may be a tendency for
         groundwater to be conducted along the pipes.  This
         piping may cause adverse effects by altering the
         natural internal drainage of areas by diverting
         water or conducting excess water to areas of lower
         elevation.

Ground water can also be lost by infiltration into

interceptor lines.  Infiltration can be controlled through

the use of special construction materials and methods.

Requirements that such materials and methods be used will be

included in the contract specifications for the proposed

project.

                   Terrestrial Ecosystems

    Construction of the proposed project could have sig-

nificant long-term effects on three of the area's six

terrestrial ecosystems.  Table 12 outlines the major long-

term impacts of construction on these three terrestrial
                            171

-------
                                                                TABLE 12

                                               PRIMARY LONG-TERM IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED
                                                   PROJECT ON TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEMS
 Terrestrial Ecosystem
    Association
	Stage of Growth
Project Phase Responsible
       for Impact
   Size of Area
Potentially Affected
      Long-Term Impact
 Upland
   Pitch pine - scrub  oak - blackjack oak
     mixed stand

   Pine-oak
     pole stand
   Oak-pine
     mature stand
   Oak forest
     pole stand

     very mature stand
   Sweet gum
     nearly mature stand
 Coastal Swamp Forest
   Red maple - black gum'
     pole stand
Interceptor segments:   L-2,
 M, 0-2, P, Q, and R-2

Interceptor segment:   S-2
OCCSTP:  Segal Street site
                                               Interceptor segments:  C-2
                                                and 0-2
Interceptor segment:   S-2
Interceptor segments:  A-3,
 C-2, E-2, and 0-2
Interceptor segments:  E-2
 and R-2
Interceptor segment:  A-3
Length:  7100 m
 (23,600 ft)

Length:  720 m
 (2,400 ft)
Area:  10 ha (25 acres)
                                    Length:   510 m (1700 ft)
Length:  600 m (2000 ft)
Length:  1700 m (5600 ft)
Length:  660 m (2000 ft)
Length:  Unknown
                                                                  An ecotone will be created.
Habitat for present animal
 population will be lost.
 Association's return to
 existing stage of develop-
 ment will take about twenty
 years.

Natural ecosystem will be ter-
 manently eliminated on devel-
 oped portion of site.

An ecotone will be created.
 Several trees that provide
 dens for tree-cavity nesting
 species will be lost.

Habitat for wildlife will be
 improved.

Aesthetically valuable areas
 will be impaired.  Trees that
 provide dens for tree-cavity
 nesting species will be lost.

Trees that provide dens for
 tree-cavity nesting species
 will be lost.
Rookery for herons and egrets
 will be lost for approximate-
 ly ten years.

-------
                                                            TABLE  12  (Continued)
 Terrestrial  Ecosystem
    Association
	Stage  of Growth
 Project  Phase Responsible
       for  Impact
   Size of Area
Potentially Affected
      Long-Term Impact
Flood Plain Forest - Primary Flood  Plain
  Ked maple - black gum
    mature stand
Interceptor segment:   R-2
Length:  1200 m (4000 ft)
  White cedar - red maple
    young sapling stand

    pole stand
  White cedar swamp
    mature stand
Interceptor segments:   D-2
 and Q

Interceptor segments:   N-2
 and 0

Interceptor segment:   D-2
Length:  600 m (2000 ft)
Length:  1200 m (4000 ft)
Length:  390 m (1300 ft)
Vegetation will be lost, caus-
 ing instability along banks
 of shifting streams.  Shift-
 ing streams normally cut steep
 banks.  Erosion of the banks
 will be aggravated by increas-
 ed runoff.  Shade trees near
 streams will be lost causing
 higher water temperatures.
 Trees that provide dens for
 tree-cavity nesting species
 will be lost.

Vegetation will be lost, caus-
 ing increased runoff and soil
 erosion.
Trees will be lost, creating
 unstable soil conditions and
 consequent siltation in adja-
 cent water courses.  Prime
 habitat for the pine barrens
 tree frog and the Rhoad's
 red-backed mouse will be lost.
 Winter shelter for game and
 song birds will be lost.
Source:  EAC, 1973; OCSA,1973-74.

-------
ecosystems.  The creation and maintenance of access routes
along interceptor lines is the one impact that is common to
all six of the area's terrestrial ecosystems.  These rela-
tively clear swaths of open herbaceous or controlled shrub
cover along the right-of-way are necessary for reasons of
inspection and maintenance of installed interceptors:
    Generally, the removal of vegetation and the digging of
pipe trenches will not exert any long-term negative impact
unless the interceptor routes threaten specimen trees or
rare or endangered plants, animals or ecosystems.  The
interceptor routings for the proposed project have been
carefully planned to avoid interference with areas of
special value.  If the required environmental protection
specifications are strictly followed during construction,
interceptor placement should have no significant long-term
adverse effects.
    In some cases, the placement of interceptor lines may
have a long-term beneficial effect.  In ecological terminol-
ogy, a community is "...a group of mutually adjusted organ-
isms maintaining themselves in an area." (Clark, 195U) .  Two
neighboring communities may form a transition zone between
them.  Organisms from both communities may inhabit this
zone, but because of physical or competitive pressures they
may fare less well than organisms dwelling within the com-

                            17U

-------
munity proper.  A transition zone that exhibits such pres-



sures is called an ecotone.  An ecotone is often inhabited



by a distinct functional community.  As a rule, the ecotone



community will be more diversified and more populous than



either of its parent communities.  This increase in species



diversity and number of organisms is usually labeled "edge



effect" or "principle of edges."



    In conjunction with the proposed project, the principle



of edges should be demonstrated in the upland forest and



coastal swamp forest ecosystems.  For example, trench



building will involve the horizontal mixing of the soil



profile.  The fine sands and clays of the subsoil will be



mixed with the coarse sands of the surface layer.  This will



improve the overall soil texture and will promote retention



of moisture and nutrients in the root zone of the soil.



Lanes of dense vegetation measuring 6.1 m (20 ft) in width



will develop in the pitch pine - scrub oak - blackjack oak



forest.  These lanes will provide exceptionally good habitat



for grouse, quail, deer, and rabbit.



                        Air Quality



    The landfill operation is the only part of the proposed



project that could have a significant long-term, primary im-



pact on air quality.  Meade and Wilkie (1972) describe the



problem:





                            175

-------
         When impervious cover material is used [at a land-
    fill], provisions must be made to allow for escape of
    gases, primarily carbon dioxide and methane, produced by
    refuse decomposition.  If an escape through the landfill
    cover is not provided, these gases will tend to migrate
    laterally through the earth adjacent to the landfill.
    In many cases, methane has collected in closed places
    and been responsible for explosions or fires.

                LONG-TERM SECONDARY IMPACTS

    The long-term secondary impacts of the proposed project

are almost exclusively related to urbanization.  The second-

ary effects of the project will be more rapid and more pro-

nounced if development is of the high-density rather than

the low-density variety.  Land use patterns and trends in

the Central service area are discussed on pages 24 to 50.

The effects of the prevailing land use patterns and trends

on surface and ground waters and on air quality are dis-

cussed below.

                 Surface and Ground Waters

    Urbanization typically has four interrelated effects on

hydrology: 1) changes in the amount of runoff, 2) changes in

the peak flow characteristics of streams, 3)  changes in

water quality, and 4)  changes in the aesthetic value of

waterways (Leopold, 1968).

    The amount of precipitation that becomes runoff is a

function of the infiltration characteristics of land: the

slope of the land, the permeability of the soil profile, and
                            176

-------
the vegetative cover.  Runoff is also affected by the amount



of land area that is covered with impervious surfaces, such



as roofs, streets, and parking lots (Leopold, 1968).  In the



early 1950's the runoff rate in the Toms River basin was 45



percent of the average annual precipitation.  By the early



1960's, the runoff rate had risen to 50 percent.  (FR5W,



1969) .



    Urbanization increases runoff; its effects on the runoff



rate are especially pronounced in areas where development



occurs on small lots.  Felton and Lull (1963) estimated that



a 0.08 ha (C.2 acre)  building lot would have 32 percent of.



its area covered with impervious surfaces, but that a 0.73



ha (1.8 acre)  building let would have only 8 percent of its



area covered with impervious surfaces.  It is apparent that



the greater the area covered with impervious surfaces, the



higher the amount of total runoff will be.



    Increased runoff will cause increases in the height of



peak flow in streams.  The result will be more frequent



flooding.  Leopold (1968) studied the effects of urbaniza-



tion on a 2.6 sq km  (1 sq mile) drainage basin.  The study



showed that if 20 percent of the basin is sewered and cover-



ed with impervious surfaces, the number of times that a-



stream will overflow its banks during the year will be al-
                            177

-------
most double that under conditions of zero urbanization.
Leopold's findings are summarized in the following table.
            Measure of Urbanization on Flooding
Percent
Sewered
0
20
40
50
80
100
Percent
Impervious
0
20
UO
50
60
60
Ratio of
Overbank
1.0
1.8
3.0
3.7
U. 7
5.7

Flows






Source:  Leopold, 1968.
    Increased runoff will decrease infiltration and, con-
sequently ground-water recharge.  In Ocean County, increased
runoff coupled with increased demands on the water-table
aquifer for potable water supplies will make stream flows of
less than 120 cu m/min. (70 cfs) a more common summer occur-
rence.  It will also make stream flows of less than 9U cu
m/min. (55 cfs)  possible during drought conditions.  On a
gently sloping coastal plain even a moderate decrease in
stream flow will permit the upstream migration of sea water.
The intrusion of salt water into formerly freshwater por-
tions of a stream can render fish and wildlife habitats un-
suitable for native populations.  It can corrode engineering
structures and reduce their life expectancy.  It can also
contaminate fresh ground-water supplies, leaving them un-
suitable for domestic purposes long after the saltwater

                            178

-------
wedge retreats.  (U.S. EPA, 1973e).   In Ocean County, the



upstream migration of sea water will cause only minor var-



iations in the normal distribution of organisms.



    Urbanization can affect the aesthetic value of a stream



in three ways.  First, increased flooding gradually enlarges



the stream channel, divesting the banks of vegetation, cre-



ating scoured or muddy channel beds, and forming unusual



accumulations of debris.  Second, certain side-effects of



urbanization, such as litter, are likely to increase.  Al-



though tires, beer cans, oil drums and the like deposited in



and along the stream do not affect the hydrologic function



of the stream, they do detract from its aesthetic value.



Third, the tremendous amount of construction that is typical



of an urban area increases turbidity in streams.  Increased



turbidity disrupts stream biota by increasing nutrient lev-



els and by decreasing oxygen levels and sunlight penetra-



tion.   (Leopold, 1968).



    Implementation of the proposed project will directly or



indirectly create all of the adverse hydrologic conditions



noted herein.  With careful planning, the problems



associated with urbanization can be controlled.  The



seriousness of these hydrologic problems will depend on' the



type, the extent, and the rate of urbanization.
                            179

-------
                        Air Quality
    The secondary air quality effects of the proposed
project are likely to be significant.  The rate and extent
of development in the Central service area have the poten-
tial to seriously degrade air quality.  The proposed project
will accommodate development; it will be "...another factor
insuring continued growth, removing one of the few obstacles
which can be seen today to rapid growth."  (DSRP, 1973).
    Since the proposed project will play a supporting role
in the development of the Central service area, the ultimate
effects of development on air quality are logically of con-
cern to the EPA.  Beyond this, the letter and spirit of the
Clean Air Act (along with the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards and the EPA's "Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans: Prevention of Significant Air Quality
Deterioration," which were developed pursuant to the Clean
Air Act)  and the National Environmental Policy Act (along
with the EPA's "Preparation of Environmental Impact State-
ments: Interim Regulation," which was developed pursuant to
the National Environmental Policy Act) require that the EPA
carefully weigh the consequences of its own actions with
respect to the proposed project (see pp. 44 to 50).
    Present and projected land use and employment patterns
indicate that residential and commercial growth will prob-

                            180

-------
ably remain the dominant forms of development in Ocean

County.  Residential and commercial growth are directly

linked to population growth (see pp. 2U to 64).   Therefore,

to assess the secondary effects of the proposed project on

air quality, it was necessary to analyze the probable impact

on air quality of the emissions increases associated with a

significant population increase in the Central service area

by 1990.

    At the outset, the EPA concentrated on two population -

related pollutants, sulfur dioxide and particulate matter.

Eventually, the EPA narrowed its analysis to particulate  -

matter.  Particulate matter was chosen as the indicator

pollutant because the five existing air quality monitoring

stations in Ocean County provided sufficient data on par-

ticulate matter, but insufficient data on sulfur dioxide.

    The other pollutants covered by the National Air Quality

Standards  (see Appendix C) were not analyzed because they

are primarily or substantially related to automotive emis-

sions.  Automotive emissions are not expected to be a long-

term problem:

         As a result of the application of EPA's emissions
    standards for new motor vehicles, total motor vehicle
    emissions are decreasing and will continue decreasing
    well into the future.  Accordingly, the purpose of
    preventing significant deterioration related to carbon
    monoxide, hydrocarbons, nitrogen oxides, and photo-
    chemical oxidants is in the Administrator's judgment,


                            181

-------
    adequately served by the proposed additional requirement
    for applying best available technology to new stationary
    sources.   (U.S. EPA, 1973a).

    In July 1973, the EPA published its "Proposed Rule Mak-

ing for the Prevention of Significant Air Quality Deterio-

ration" (also called the proposed non-degradation regula-

tions) .  The regulations listed four alternative plans for

evaluating air quality deterioration: the Air Quality

Increment Plan, the Emission Limitation Plan, the Local

Definition Plan, and the Area Classification Plan.  (U.S.

EPA, 1973a).  The EPA chose the Air Quality Increment Plan

(AQIP) and the Emission Limitation Plan (ELP) to analyze the

air quality situation in Ocean County.  The Local Definition

Plan and the Area Classification Plan were impractical be-

cause they required State determinations of areas or zones

that were not available.

    Of the two plans that were used, the AQIP proved to be

much more precise in determining the probable extent of air

quality deterioration because it required the prediction of

future ambient pollutant concentrations.  The results
                                                      _j
obtained using each of the plans were reported in the draft

environmental impact statement issued in April 1974.  Since

that time, the proposed non-degradation regulations have

been revised.
                            182

-------
    The newly proposed non-degradation regulations set forth



the following four-point strategy:



         1.   Areas will be placed in one of three classes



              depending upon the probable significance of



              air quality deterioration.  Class I will apply



              to areas in which almost any change in air



              quality would be significant.  Class II will



              apply to areas in which the deterioration that



              normally accompanies moderate, well-controlled



              growth would be insignificant.  Class III will



              apply to those few areas in which deterio-  .-



              ration of air quality to the secondary



              standard would be insignificant.



         2.   Each class will be assigned a "deterioration



              increment," that is a maximum allowable in-



              crease in the pollutant concentrations in that



              area.  The "deterioration increments" for



              particulate matter are shown in the following



              table.
                            183

-------
           Increments Measured Annually
       Geometric Mean for Partjculate Matter
                 Class I    Class_II    Class III

 Deterioration
   Increment     5 ug/m3    10 ug/m3    up to
                                        secondary
                                        standard

     The "deterioration increments" for Class I and

     Class II will be firm ceilings that cannot be

     exceeded.  However, provisions will be made to

     reclassify areas, both large and small, to

     allow the introduction of sources that are not

     compatible with the initial classification.

3.   The impact of proposed major sources on the

     "deterioration increments" will be evaluated
                                                 *
     through the conventional new source review

     procedures outlined in the Clean Air Act,  that

     is, through a pre-construction review.   Nine-

     teen major source categories will be estab-

     lished.  Any proposed facility that fits into

     one of the nineteen categories will be subject

     to a pre-construction review.  The impact of a

     proposed major source will be viewed in the

     context of the existing impact from smaller

     sources and area sources.  In other words, if
                   184

-------
              existing sources have already claimed part, of



              the "deterioration increment" for an area, the



              proposed major source will have to be compati-



              ble with what remains of the "deterioration



              increment."



         U.   The States will be authorized to designate



              areas as Class I, Class II, or Class III,



              subject to the approval of the EPA, and to



              enforce the non-degradation regulations.  If



              the States fail to enforce the regulations,



              the authority to do so will revert to the EPA.



              (U.S. EPA, 197Uc).



    The newly proposed non-degradation regulations are es-



sentially a modified version of the Area Classification Plan



outlined in the formerly proposed non-degradation regula-



tions.  The Area Classification Plan is, in turn, a



variation on the Air Quality Increment Plan that the EPA



used to analyze the air quality situation in Ocean County.



Therefore, except for the actual classification of Ocean



County, the EPA analysis is basically in conformance with



the newly proposed non-degradation regulations.



    The air quality analysis performed by the EPA is a  '



valuable predictive tool, but it is only a tool.  It simply



indicates the direction in which Ocean County's air quality





                            185

-------
is proceeding, and at what rate.  In this case, it indicates
the need for preventive measures to be taken now so that the
county is not faced with a serious air quality problem in
the future.
          Development Of The Air Quality Analysis
    The EPA decided to conduct a diffusion model study of
the county to determine the effect of projected population-
related emissions increases on the ambient air quality con-
centrations.  A diffusion model is a mathematical represen-
tation of a physical condition.  The diffusion model study
of Ocean County was directed solely at particulate air
pollution because particulate matter is the only pollutant
for which there are enough air quality monitoring stations
in the county, generating enough data, to validate the model
results.
    The type of diffusion model used was the Air Quality
Implementation Planning Program model (EPA Contract No. PH
22-68-60; APTD-06UO, 0641) .  The EPA has used this model in
the New York-New Jersey region to test air pollution control
strategies in order to determine the acceptability of the
State Air Implementation Plans required by the clean Air
Act.
    The Air Quality Implementation Planning Program model is
based on the model developed by Martin and Tikvart (in TRW

                            186

-------
Systems Grout), 1970) .  The results are reported as annual



average ambient concentrations at ground level.  Two data



bases are needed for the model: wind frequency distribution



and source inventory.



         1.   Wind Frequency Distribution: This is a



              statistical distribution of wind speed and



              direction, and atmospheric stability.  The



              distribution for Ocean County was developed



              from data collected over a five-year period at



              the Lakehurst Naval Air Station.



         2.   Source Inventory: This is a compilation of



              data on the point and area sources of air



              pollutant emissions in the county.  A point



              source is an individual stationary source of



              emissions, such as a fossil-fuel power plant.



              An area source is the combined emissions from



              all sources within a given square area.  An



              area source value is used where the emissions



              sources are too small or too numerous to



              specify on an individual point source basis.



              The total emissions for an area source are



              assumed to be evenly distributed over the '



              area.  (TRW Systems Group, 1970).  The point



              and area source data for Ocean County were





                            187

-------
              compiled from the EPA's National Emissions



              Data System  (NEDS) .



    In order to get an accurate picture of the distribution



of emissions, a grid system was superimposed on the county,



and the emissions were apportioned on the basis of popula-



tion density.  Each grid measured 3.1 x 3.1 km (2 x 2 mile).



The apportioning procedure involved two steps.



         1.   Using the NEDS inventory for the 1972 base



              year, a factor was developed for emissions per



              capita.



         2.   Based on the 1972 population of each township,



              and on the location of each grid, the emis-



              sions per grid (EPG)  were calculated according



              to the following equation:







           EPG = FACTOR x  (POP. X AREA OF GRID/AREA OF TWP.).







              This assumes that the population is evenly



              distributed over the township.  Where a grid



              covered parts of two or more townships, the



              partial emissions were calculated according to



              the equation above.  The partial emissions



              were then added together to produce an emis-



              sions value for that particular grid.  The





                            188

-------
              1990 emissions estimates were calculated in



              the same manner, using the 1990 population



              projections made by FR6W and by the DSRP.



    The NEDS lists four major categories and various sub-



categories.  The major categories are fuel combustion, in-



dustrial process, transportation, and miscellaneous.  Since



the Ocean County analysis centered around population-related



emissions, only certain NEDS categories and subcategories



were relevant.  Included in the analysis were total residen-



tial fuel use and total commercial-institutional fuel use



under the fuel combustion category, and gasoline use and  -



diesel fuel use under the transportation category.   Excluded



from the analysis were the miscellaneous category,  indus-



trial area and point sources under the industrial process



category, and aircraft emissions  (including military) and



marine diesel fuel use under the transportation category.



    The decision to include or exclude a particular emis-



sions subcategory was based on a review of the Ocean County



situation.  Present and projected land use and employment



patterns indicate that residential and commercial growth, as



opposed to industrial growth, will remain the dominant forms



of development in Ocean County.  Residential and commercial



growth are tied to population growth.  By extension, the
                            189

-------
emissions increases associated with residential and com-

mercial growth are tied to population growth.

The proportionality of emissions to population is

illustrated by the data on particulate matter in the

following table.
          Total
Counties  Emissions
Population-
Related      % of Total
Emissions    Emissions
% of Total
Population
in the
AQCR
Ocean

Atlantic

Cumber-
land
Cape May
kg/year
(tons/year)
1755 x 103
(1928)
2910 x 103
(3197)
6160 x 103
(6770)
1615 x 103
kg/year
(tons/year)
794 x 103
(875)
9UO x 103
(1033)
558 x 103
(614)
368 x 103
in the
AQCR
30

35

21

14
1970
Population
208,470

175,043

121,324

59,554
in the
AQCR
37

31

21

11
A comparison of the percentage columns shows that the emis-

sions characterized as being population-related are indeed

proportional to the population figures for the counties of

the AQCR.  Therefore, population-related emissions form the

core of the air quality analysis.

    It is possible that industry will play a more signifi-

cant role than is now predicted for it, especially if
                                            7
certain conditions favorable to industrial growth develop

(see pp. 50 to 64).  However, it is impossible to accurately

predict the types of industries that might gravitate to

Ocean County, or the types and amounts of air pollutants


                            190

-------
those industries might generate.  Therefore, industrial

emissions are held constant at the 1972 base year level in

the air quality analysis.

    Finally, three minor assumptions enter into the air

quality analysis.  First, it is assumed that the aircraft

and the marine emissions levels will remain relatively con-

stant; the EPA knows of no plans to increase activities at

the Lakehurst Naval Air Station or to turn Ocean County into

a major port.  Second, it is assumed that the ratio of fuel

oil use to population will remain constant because there are

shortages in the northeast region of the country of the two

main alternative forms of home heating, electricity and

natural gas.  Third, it is assumed that the sulfur content

of the fuel oil will remain constant, as required by the

NJDEP's regulations (N.J.A.C. 7:27-9).

            RESULTS OF THE AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS

    The Ocean County area source emissions for particulate

matter, updated to 1972, are shown in the following table.

                                       Particulate Emissions
     NEDS Subcategory                  kg/year   (tons/year)

Total Residential Fuel Use             11.1 x 10*   (122)
Total Commercial-Institutional
  Fuel Use                             36.1 x 10*   (398)
Gasoline Use                           27.2 x 10*   (300)
Diesel Fuel Use                         5.0 x 10*    (55)

                     Total             79.4 x 10*   (875)
                            191

-------
According to the assumptions used in this analysis, partic-

ulate emissions will increase in proportion to the popula-

tion.  Based on FRSW's (1973) population projections for the

area in 1990, the calculated net increase in particulate

emissions will be 1.7 x 10* kg/year (1910 tons/year).

    The table below compares existing air quality data with

the 1990 air quality projections derived from the diffusion

model study.  One set of projections reflects the population

estimates used by FR5W to determine the size of the OCCSTP.

The other set of projections reflects the population distri-

bution by town predicted by the DSRP;  the DSRP estimates are

the most recent ones for Ocean County.  Both sets of projec-

tions are based exclusively on increases in population-

related emissions.

                  Annual Geometric Mean of Particulates (ug/m3)

                                         /  Projected   Projected
                  Measured     Measured—   1990 from   1990 from
    Station       (7/72-6/73)  (7/73-6/74)  FRSW Data   DSRP Data

1.  Toms River
2.  Berkeley
3.  Waretown
4.  Jackson

a/This column is included for the sake of comparison only.  Two
  years of data are insufficient to identify a general upward
  trend in particulate emissions.  However, this column does
  show that particulate air quality levels have increased
  over the past year.
43
40
28
27
50
45
34
28
76
66
54
35
90
77
64
39
                            192

-------
    Three different numerical guidelines can be used to ana-



lyze these air quality data; the guidelines correspond to



the three different area classifications in the newly pro-



posed non-degradation regulations.  The first, and most



lenient, guideline is the 60 ug/m3 guideline specified for



achieving the short-term (24 hr) secondary air quality



standard for particulates;  this is the "deterioration



increment" for a Class III area.  According to FR&W's



population estimates, conditions at stations 1 and 2 will



exceed this guideline; according to the DSRP's population



estimates, conditions at stations 1, 2, and 3 will exceed



it.



    The second guideline is a 10 ug/m3 increase in the



existing annual geometric mean; this is the "deterioration



increment" for a Class II area.  According to FRSW's popu-



lation estimates, conditions at stations 1, 2, and 3 will



exceed this guideline; according to the DSRP's population



estimates, conditions at stations 1, 2, 3, and U will exceed



it.



    The third, and most stringent, guideline is a 5 ug/m3



increase in the existing annual geometric mean; this is the



"deterioration increment" for a Class I area.  According to



both FPSW's and the DSRP's population estimates, conditions



at stations 1, 2, 3, and 4 will exceed this guideline.





                            193

-------
    Thus, the available data indicate that whether Ocean

County is designated a Class I, Class II, or class III area,

problems will be encountered in complying with the newly

proposed non-degradation regulations.

            Relationship Between the Air Quality
                  Analysis and the OCCSTP

    The air quality analysis indicates that unless

preventive measures are taken now, there will be significant

deterioration of air quality in Ocean County.  The EPA

realizes that there is now a serious water quality problem

in Ocean County, and that the proposed project is needed to

alleviate this problem.  The EPA also realizes that unless

steps are taken to prevent it, implementation of the

proposed project will give an added impetus to the already

staggering rate of development in Ocean County, eventually

resulting in a serious air quality problem.  It is the EPA's

responsibility to consider both the immediate water quality

problem and the potential air quality problem.

    After obtaining the results of the air quality analysis,

the EPA quantified the reduction in projected emissions that

would be needed to meet the Class III "deterioration incre-

ment" guideline and the Class II "deterioration increment"

guideline.  The reduction needed to meet the Class I "de-

terioration increment" guideline was not calculated because,
                            194

-------
assuming that Ocean County is designated as a single area,



the existing and approved development in the county would



prevent it from meeting Class I specifications.  The EPA



based its calculations on FR&W's population estimates



because these were the estimates used to size the OCCSTP.  A



13 to 21 percent reduction in projected emissions would be



required to meet the Class III "deterioration increment"



guideline; a 28 to 31 percent reduction would be required to



meet the Class II "deterioration increment" guideline.



    The treatment plant design is based on a direct popula-



tion to capacity ratio.  The air quality analysis assumes a



direct population to emissions ratio.  Therefore, the re-



quired percent reduction in projected emissions will corre-



spond to the required percent reduction in sewage treatment



plant capacity.  The OCCSTP was originally designed to



accommodate sewage flows of 125,000 cu m/day (32 mgd).  It



was also designed to be built in 30,000 cu m/day (8 mgd)



modules.  By eliminating one module from the design the



plant capacity is reduced to 91,000 cu m/day (2U mgd).  This



25 percent reduction in plant capacity is within the range



of the calculated reduction in projected emissions required



to meet both the Class III and II requirements, allowing for



errors inherent in the diffusion modeling process.   There-



fore, the proposed project, a 91,COO cu m/day  (24 mgd)





                            195

-------
sewage treatment plant, should meet the intent of the newly



proposed nondegradation regulations.



    Once again it should be mentioned that these calcula-



tions deal only with population-related emissions increases.



Future increases in industrial emissions have not been in-



corporated into the air quality analysis.  A recent employ-



ment study of Ocean County indicates that construction,



retailing, and services will be the major employment fields



in the future; heavy industry, the chemical and allied pro-



ducts industry for example, will not be a major employment



field in the future (Zimmerman, 1973).  This is in line with



the current economic picture for the county.



    The small predicted employment increase in the heavy



industry sector and the fact that the EPA knows of no plans



to construct any fossil-fuel plants in the AQCR lend support



to the assumption that industrial emissions will not be a



significant factor in the air quality outlook for Ocean



County or the AQCP.  However, the EPA is aware that circum-



stances in Ocean County could change.   For example, if a



deep water oil terminal was established in the area, the



onshore development associated with it, such as refineries,



would generate emissions far in excess of the population-



related emissions.  Therefore, the potential air quality



impacts of large industrial facilities would have to be





                            196

-------
reviewed in the same manner as the present population-

related emissions analysis.  The review would determine if

and where in the AQCP such facilities could be built without

violating the National Air Quality Standards or causing

significant air quality deterioration.

    Another mechanism available to the EPA under the Clean

Air Act is the program dealing with maintenance of National

Ambient Air Quality Standards.  The EPA intends to designate

Ocean County an air quality maintenance area (AQMA), an area

that has the potential to exceed National Air Quality Stan-

dards by 1985.  An AQMA designation for Ocean County means-

that the State of New Jersey will have to submit to the EPA

by June 1975:

          (1) An analysis of the impact on air quality of
    projected growth and development over the IC-year period
    from the date of submittal.

          (2) A plan to prevent any national standards from
    being exceeded over the 10-year period from the date of
    plan submittal.  Such plan shall include, as necessary,
    control strategy revisions and/or other measures to
    insure that projected growth and development will be
    compatible with maintenance of the national standards
    throughout such 10-year period.   (U.S. EPA, 1973 ) .

The air quality maintenance plan submitted by the State will

be reevaluated every five years and, if necessary, revised.

    Finally, a permit program governing indirect sources of

air pollution, such as parking lots, shopping centers, and

roads, will have to be set up by the State.  Until the State
                            197

-------
establishes an acceptable program of its own, the EPA will



administer the permit program.  Under the permit program,



the potential effects of a facility on air quality will be



reviewed to insure that the facility will not present an



unacceptable threat to air quality.  If the facility is not



compatible with the maintenance of air quality, and cannot



be made compatible by siting or design modifications, a



construction permit will not be granted.  (U.S. EPA, 197Ub).



    The OCCSTP is expected to reach its design capacity of



91,000 cu m/day (24 mgd)  in 1984.  Whether or not the plant



can then be expanded by the addition of a 30,000 cu m/day  (8



mgd)  module will depend largely on the long-range planning



efforts that are undertaken now by the State of New Jersey



and by the responsible county and local agencies.  The air



quality analysis indicates that if positive action is not



taken now, there will be a serious air quality problem in



Ocean County when the OCCSTP comes due for expansion, pre-



venting the EPA from participating in that expansion.



However, a final decision cannot be made ten years in ad-



vance of the fact.  Air quality will be continuously mon-



itored over the next ten years.  The EPA's decision on



expansion of the OCCSTP will be based on conditions pre-



vailing in the area at that time.
                            198

-------
       ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ffHICH CANNOT BE
     AVOIDED SHOULD THE PROPOSED PROJECT BE IMPLEMENTED
    Erosion and siltation will be problems during construc-

tion of the proposed project, particularly during installa-

tion of the interceptors and the inland portions of the

ocean outfall line.  Erosion and siltation are problems that

accompany almost every type of construction project..  Con-

tractors must fce required to institute effective temporary

and permanent erosion control measures to minimize the

adverse effects.  Similarly, turbidity and sedimentation

problems will occur during stream and bay crossings.

Adverse effects can be minimized by proper construction

restraints.

    The noise associated with the operation of heavy

construction equipment will have a localized adverse impact.

Operation of heavy equipment should be restricted to hours

when it will not interfere with the normal sleeping habits

of area residents.

    During construction, dust and other particulate matter

will be released into the atmosphere, creating an air

quality problem in the vicinity of the construction site.

However, the problem will be temporary and its effects  •

insignificant.  In terms of long-range air quality,

projected population increases in the Central service area


                            199

-------
will claim a large proportion of the allowable emissions



increases for the New Jersey Intrastate Air Quality Control



Region.  Thus, the proposed project, by accommodating those



projected population increases, represents an unavoidable



degradation of present air quality.



    Implementation of the proposed project will reduce



stream flow by eliminating the discharge of sewage treatment



plant effluent into the streams in the Central service area.



Reduced stream flow will allow the upstream migration of



salt water.  The discharge of treated effluent into the



Atlantic Ocean will divert potential ground-water recharge.



This may cause ground-water levels to decline.  Declining



ground-water levels could result in 1)  decreased ground-



water inflow to streams, 2) decreased ground-water outflow



to Barnegat Bay and the Ocean, and 3)  saltwater intrusion



into the aquifers.  If monitoring reveals that ground-water



levels are declining, adequately treated sewage can be



diverted to the recharge area to counterbalance the



declining ground-water heads.
                            200

-------
       RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LOCAL SHORT-TERM USES OF
   MANIS ENVIRONMENT AND THE MAINTENANCE AND ENHANCEMENT
                 OF LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY

    During each stage of construction, one or more short-

term adverse environmental effects will be evident.  These

effects are outlined in Table 13.  The short-term adverse

environmental effects of the proposed project will be

counterbalanced by the long-term environmental benefits to

be derived from operation of the completed facilities:

         1.   Sewage that now impairs the quality of surface

              and ground waters will be conveyed to the

              CCCSTP where it will receive secondary

              treatment.  After treatment, the wastewater

              will be discharged into the Atlantic Ocean.

              The quality of surface and ground waters will

              improve as a result.

         2.   The use of septic tanks will be discontinued.

              Therefore, no further pollution of the ground

              water with septic tank discharges will occur..

              Recovery of already polluted ground water will

              be facilitated by dilution of the polluted

              water with relatively clean water from

              precipitation infiltration.  Most important,

              the quality of the water supplies withdrawn

              from the water-table aquifer will improve.


                            201

-------
                           TABLE 13




LOCAL SHORT-TERM EFFECTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT DURING CONSTRUCTION
Type of Effect
Air Pollution
Dust
Smoke
Noise

Disruption of Traffic Patterns
Increased traffic
Diverted traffic
Disruption of Existing Vegetation

Disruption of Soil Surface

Disruption of Barrier Bars

Disruption of Streams

Disruption of Bay and Ocean

Phase of Project
Interceptor
Construction
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
STP
Construction
X
X
X
X
X
X



Outfall
Construction
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

X
                           202

-------
3.   Water quality in Barnegat Bay will gradually



     improve as a result of improved ground-water



     quality and improved water quality in streams



     that discharge into the bay.  Improved bay



     water quality could lead to the re-opening of



     some of the shellfish beds that have been



     closed due to pollution.  It could also lead



     to the opening of more areas for primary and



     secondary contact recreation, i.e. swimming



     and fishing.
                   203

-------
          IRREVERSIBLE OR IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT
        OF RESOURCES WHICH WOULD BE INVOLVED IN THE
         PROPOSED PROJECT SHOULD IT BE IMPLEMENTED

    Certain essentially irreversible resource commitments

will be involved in the construction and operation by the

OCSA of sewage treatment facilities for the Central service

area.  The major resource commitments will be construction

materials and land.

    The proposed site for the OCCSTP was chosen over eleven

other possible sites as the most environmentally acceptable

location for the treatment facilities.  At the proposed

site, approximately 62 ha (25 acre) of woodland will have to

be cleared prior to construction.  Vegetation at the site is

not unusual: a mixture of oak and pitch pine trees.  There

are no rare or endangered species of plants or animals in

the area.  Several smaller parcels of land in the Central

service area will also have to be cleared prior to

construction of the necessary pump stations.

    Disposal of sludge from the OCCSTP at a landfill site

will preclude use of that land area for any other purpose

for the foreseeable future.   Furthermore, when the capacity

of the landfill site has been exhausted and the area

restored, use of the land will be restricted to parks, golf

courses, and other low load facilities.
                            204

-------
    Operation of the collection and treatment systems will



require approximately 57,000 kw hr/day of electricity.  This



is roughly equivalent to 5 percent of the average daily



residential power consumption.  (Smith, 1973).  Disinfection



of wastewater at the treatment plant will require the com-



mitment of as much as 910 kg/day (2000 Ib/day) of chlorine



for an indefinite period of time.   Some areas of the U.S.



are currently experiencing chlorine shortages.
                            205

-------
                   COMMENTS AND RESPONSES
Comment - 1
    Are the effluents from the tertiary facilities listed in
Table 7 acceptable for surface discharge?  (Citizens' Con-
servation Council of Ocean Countyt_Inc.)
Response - 1
    The terms tertiary treatment and advanced waste treat-
ment are often used interchangeably.  This practice is
erroneous.  Tertiary treatment refers to removals of
carbonaceous materials beyond those obtained by secondary
treatment.  Advanced waste treatment refers to removals of
noncarbonaceous materials such as nitrogen, phosphorus or
dissolved solids beyond those obtained by secondary
treatment.  The facilities listed in Table 7 are tertiary
according to the above definition.  The effluents from such
facilities are not acceptable for surface discharge.

Comment - 2
    Provide soils data that verifies the high organic con-
tent, high acidity and low phosphate availability in the
flood plain soils.  (U.S., Department of the Army)
Response - 2
    All the mineral soils of the coastal plain of New Jersey
are derived from acid sands.  (Tedrow, 1963).  The soils

                            206

-------
which develop on these acid sands generally have a pH of



less than 5.5.  The mineral flood plain soils are often



characterized by pockets of organic soils or deposits of



eroded organic soils.  The organic matter content of muck



soils ranges from 20 to 80 percent.  The pH of muck soils is



less than 5.5.  (SCS-Rutgers University, 1972 a, b, c, and



d).



    Phosphate availability is a function of pH.  At pHs of



less than 5.5, phosphate forms insoluble iron and aluminum



compounds.  The supply of iron in the soil and soil-water



complex is in excess of that necessary to bind all available



phosphate.








Comment - 3



    OCSA should consider requiring a two year performance



bond to "assure" the correction of environmental problems.



(NJDEP)



Comment - H



    Division of Marine Services should be consulted before



construction with respect to specific sites for the inter-



ceptor lines.   (NJDEP)



Comment - 5



    Detailed plans and specifications should be made



available before commencement of construction.  (NJDEP)





                            207

-------
Comment •«• 6
    OCSA and NJDEP should discuss dredge spoil sites prior
to completion of final EIS.   (NJDEP)
Comment - 7
    NJDEP should be consulted about any activity which it
has the responsibility to control, i.e. reparian permits,
wetlands, coastal areas, etc.   (NJDEP)
Comment - 8
    The numerous minor drainage ways in the project area
have not been considered in the planning and design of the
collection system.  (Soil Conservation^Service)
Comment - 9
    An inventory of aquatic flora and fauna should be
included for each of the areas of aquatic disturbance.
    The location of spoil sites and impacts associated with
their use should presented.   (U.S. Department of Interior)
Comment - 10
    Insufficient information is presented to assess the
alignment of the proposed outfall pipe pathline.  (UAs^
Department of Commerce)
Response to Comments 3 thru 1C
    The preceding questions or comments can not be answered
at this stage of project development.   As was indicated on
page 1 of the EIS the funds have been requested for the

                            208

-------
preparation of construction drawings and specifications.



Upon completion of these documents, the applicant submits a



request for a Step 3 - construction grant to the NJDEP.



Following review NJDEP submits the request for Step 3 funds



to EPA.  During NJDEP1s review, all NJDEP units that will



have to issue permits or make judgments regarding the



acceptability of the proposed project should conduct a



coordinated review so that the project submitted to EPA



fulfills all State requirements.



    When the request for Step 3 funds is made to EPA, EPA



will renew their continuing environmental review.  This



review will include a determination if the submitted



environmental specifications will be adequate to protect the



impacted natural floral and faunal systems.



    If COE, Coast Guard or other Federal permits are



required, public notices and permit applications will be



sent to appropriate agencies for their consideration.  If



EPA is satisfied that the plans and specifications produced



by the Step 2 grant are environmentally sound, a negative



declaration will be issued.  The negative declaration will



be submitted to public comment for a period of 15 days



before an administrative action is taken.  This procedure



should afford all individuals an opportunity for comment.
                            209

-------
Comment - 11
    The text of the environmental statement does not show
any indication that consideration has been given to cultural
resources.   (U.S. Department of Interior)
Response - 11
    The proposed project is in full compliance with Execu-
tive Order 11593.  None of the National Historic Register
properties in Ocean County are effected when the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation "Criteria of Effect" are
applied.  There are no known archeological sites in the
area.  No structures of architectural significance are to be
altered.

Comment - 12
    The statement does not mention hiking and trail use in
the area.   (U.S. Department of Interior)
Response - 12
    While there is a paucity of formally designated hiking
trails in the service area, there is an abundance of unim-
proved roads.   These roads are often used for recreation
especially by trail-bike riders.  In a conversation with Mr.
Gritzuk of the OCSA, he indicated that there was no opposi-
tion on the part of the Authority to the use of the right-
of-ways by hikers provided vandalism could be prevented and

                            210

-------
that potential legal problems could be avoided.   (Gritzuk,



oral communication, 1974).








Comment - 13



    Will herbicides be used to control vegetation along



project right-of-ways?   (U.S^ Department of Interior)



Response - 13



    No herbicides v;ill be used.   (Gritzuk, oral



communication, 197U).








Comment_-_.lU



    Discuss ground water recharge systems that could be



implemented should it prove necessary to do so.   (y«.S«_



Department of Commerce)



Response - 1U



    There is a remote possibility that local demands on the



ground water will be sufficient to permit saltwater



intrusion.  This is a very unlikely occurrence.  However,



the OCSA will monitor ground-water levels.  If the data



collected by this monitoring shows an undesirable situation



developing, the OCSA will be expected to consider ground-



water recharge of effluent.  Prior to the implementation of



such a project an environmental assessment statement would



be required.





                            211

-------
    The following comments and responses are related to the



subject of Ocean County air quality.



Comment -_1



    1970 air pollutant emission levels were used rather than



the base year of 1972.  (OCSA)



Response - 1



    The 1970 designation in the draft statement was a



mistake.  The basic emission inventory data were collected



in 1970; however, the emission inventory was updated in



1972.  Therefore the dates have been changed in the



appropriate places in the text.







Comment - 2



    The proposed air quality non-degradation regulations



state that a 25 percent reduction in background air quality



concentrations will be achieved when all pollution control



strategies are finally implemented.  Why has EPA not taken



this into account in their calculations?  (QCSA)



Response_~ 2



    The concept of a 25 percent reduction in background



concentrations is applicable to metropolitan areas where air



quality standards are being violated.  It is assumed that



with the implementation of emission control strategies,



applicable standards will be met.  This should effect a





                            212

-------
reduction in the background concentrations.  This is not the



case in Ocean County since standards are not now being



violated and strategies are not designed to roll back exist-



ing sources.  Strategies are directed towards new sources.



Therefore, the 25 percent reduction is not applicable.








Comment - 3
    Air quality in Ocean County has improved in recent years



while population has increased.  This disputes the assumption



that air pollutant emissions are proportional to population.



(OCSA)



Response - 3



    It is true that sulfur dioxide levels in the ambient air



at the Toms River monitoring station have improved somewhat



while population has increased.  This is due to New Jersey's



regulations limiting the sulfur concentration in fuel which



have required a reduction statewide, in the sulfur content



in fuel oil since the late 1960"s.  This program has had a



dramatic effect in lowering sulfur dioxide levels throughout



the state particularly in the densely populated areas, while



population has increased.  However, these regulations are



now fully implemented and no further reductions in air



quality levels can be attributed to this strategy.  This was



one of the assumptions used in EPA's analysis.  New data




                            213

-------
have been included in the air quality analysis section of
the statement dealing with proportionality of growth and air
pollutant emissions.  They are proportional as indicated.

Comment - H
    No account was taken for a possible reduction in partic-
ulate emissions from the Toms River Chemical Company and the
impact this would have on future air quality levels.  (OCSA)
Response -_H
    Analysis of the air quality model results shows that the
particulate emissions from the Toms River Chemical company
have little impact on the air quality levels for the Toms
River monitoring station.  This is because the company has a
high level source that disperses the pollution downwind.
The company does influence the other three monitoring
stations.  On checking with the State of New Jersey
(Winchester, oral communication, 1974), EPA was informed
that the particulate emissions in the inventory related to
Toms River Chemical Company represent standby coal fired
boilers which it is no longer legal to use under New Jersey
regulations.  Therefore, the impact of these emissions on
the appropriate monitoring stations has been removed from  '
the model results and the calculated levels for the Berkley,
Waretown and Jackson stations (p. 192)  have been reduced

                            21U

-------
accordingly.  The reduction in the predicted values is minor



(1-3 ug/m3) because the overwhelming portion of the partic-



ulate emissions in Ocean County comes from area sources.



This reduction in predicted ambient concentrations for



particulates at these stations does not change any of the



conclusions drawn from" the original values.







Cojmment_-_J?



    EPA is requested to comment on the advisability of using



the Local Definition Plan of the proposed non-degradation



regulations for evaluating the air quality situation in



Ocean County.  (OCSA and NJDEP)



Response - 5



    This discussion is now academic since EPA proposed new



regulations in August, 1974 for evaluating the degradation



of air quality which essentially requires the use 'of the



Area Classification Plan with some modifications.  This new



regulation is described in the environmental impact section



of the statement  (pp. 183-186).  The analysis conducted by



EPA follows the definition of significant deterioration



outlined in the regulation.
                            215

-------
Comment - 6

    EPA did not follow the non-degradation regulations

exactly in analyzing the air quality situation in Ocean

County.  Specifically, EPA (1)  used 1970 instead of 1972

emission data, (2) did not account for a decrease in
                                         i
background concentrations, (3)  assumed emissions were

proportional to population growth and  (4) did not account

for reductions in emissions at the Toms River Chemical

Company.  (OCSA)

Response - 6

    These points have been answered in the preceding com-

ments and responses.  EPA has complied with all sections of

the non-degradation regulations  (U.S. EPA, 1973a and 197Ub)

that it is possible to comply with at this time.  However,

this is not solely a non-degradation review under the Clean

Air Act but rather an environmental impact review under

NEPA.  It is felt that the analyses satisfy all the

requirements under both laws.




Comment - 7

    EPA did not account for the reduction in particulate

emissions from transportation sources that should occur when

lead is removed from gasoline.    (OCSA and NJDEP)
                            216

-------
Response -m7



    A reduction in particulate emissions from transportation



sources due to the removal of lead from gasoline was not



considered in EPA's analysis.  This is because a pilot



program conducted during the past two years in New York City



on cars equipped with catalytic converters using unleaded



gas showed that the particulate emission levels of the cars



were equal to or greater than conventional cars using leaded



gasoline.  This is due to the formation of sulfates and



other particulates as a side reaction in the catalytic



converter emission control system.  Since the auto



manufacturers have decided to use the catalytic converter as



the means of meeting the Federal automobile emission control



regulation, no adjustment in particulate emissions from



automotive sources appears justified.  (Moran, oral



communication, 1974).








Comment - 8



    The accuracy of the air quality diffusion model is



questioned: it should merely be used as a predictive tool in



evaluating the air quality situation in Ocean county and



should not be used to set the final treatment plant design



at this point in time.  Proportional modeling is another
                            217

-------
predictive tool which when used gives slightly different
results.  This should be evaluated.  (OCSA and NJDEP)
Response - 8
    Regarding the accuracy of the diffusion model, the
mathematical model itself is verifiable.  However, as with
any predictive methodology, the model results in the form of
annual average concentrations are only as good as the input
data.  The concentration of a pollutant in the ambient air
varies in both space and time.  This spatial-temporal air
quality distribution is influenced by the rate, height,
spatial distribution and temporal distribution of emissions
as well as the meteorological and topographical conditions
in the region of interest.
    The ideal model for estimating the change in future air
quality due to alternative emission control actions would
include quantitative consideration of all the factors
mentioned above, and atmospheric reaction and pollution
decay processes as well.
    No existing model can handle all of these factors
simultaneously.  The more advanced diffusion models such as
IPP allow some of these factors as inputs, and therefore are
considered more sophisticated than a simple proportional
model which uses only emissions and air quality data.  A
properly calibrated diffusion model with good input data

                            218

-------
will give more accurate results than a proportional model.

In this case, EPA used the best input data available  (a 1970

emission inventory updated to 1972, 5 years of current

meteorological data from Lakehurst Naval Air Station which

is in Ocean County) and listed all other assumptions.  We

feel that the accuracy of the model is the best obtainable

at this time.  The general magnitude of the output numbers

is supported by the proportional model analysis presented by

the State of New Jersey in their comment letter.  To get a

better handle on whether the predictions are in the range

that would occur in 199C in Ocean County, EPA looked for  .

areas in the New York - New Jersey Region which had

population densities in 1970 that approximated Ocean County

Central Service area predictions  (FR6W, 1973) in 1990.  This

was to determine the range of particulate concentrations

which exist in these areas.  The results are presented in

the following table.
                                          Range of Particulate
                      Population Density  Concentrations  (1971)
         Area         Capjta/sq mi  (1970)	_UJ3/IDl	

  Monmouth Co., N.J.          965  ,             42-75
  Morris Co., N.J.            819  '              56
  Ocean Co., N.J.            1040               36-76
    (Predicted 1990)
  Monroe Co., N.Y.           1054               41-90
  Suffolk CO., N.Y.          1210               35-74
                            219

-------
It is apparent that the existing air quality in areas with



approximately the same population density as predicted for



Ocean County in 1990 is in the same range as the air quality



predicted by the diffusion model.  This is supportive of the



modeling results.



    EPA has used the model results for no purpose other than



as a predictive tool to assist in determining the size of



the treatment facilities.  The decision recommended at this



time is a reversible one.  The decision to expand the



facility at a later time will be made based on (1)  actual



air quality data taken over the next ten years and (2) on



any regulations that are in effect at that time.   If,



however, the data obtained thru 1984 agrees with the model



predictions and the same environmental regulations are in



effect, then EPA will not participate in the expansion of



the facility which in turn would supply a further inducement



to growth.








Comment _-r_9



    Controlling the size of the treatment plant is not the



best way to control growth and reduce air quality impact in



Ocean County.  Other strategies are available such as:



         a.   Improvement in combustion equipment,



              especially domestic and commercial units.





                            220

-------
         b.   Auxiliary corvtfrols on domestic and commercial



              combustion units.



         c.   Wider use of cleaner fuels.



         d.   Substitution of remote heat and power sources



              for onsite generation.



         e.   More homogeneous population distribution.



While some of these strategies may be "advanced" for today's



climate, they cannot be ruled out when looking fifteen years



or more into the future.  (NJDEP)



Response - 9



    EPA agrees that the best way to control growth is not by



restricting any single factor which is basic if that growth



is to occur.  It is recognized that there is no substitution



for effective land use planning which is based on natural



resources as one of the controlling factors.  As a result it



is recommended that the State, County and local governments



work together to assure that growth occurs within the proper



bounds.



    We have also recognized that new and improved technology



may indeed significantly affect the impact of growth on the



natural resources of the area.  Any of the strategies



pointed out by the State plus a number of others could have



such an impact on the Ocean County situation.  This is why
                            221

-------
the site for the facility is large enough to allow for plant

expansion in the future.  See the response to Comment - 13.



Comment - 10

    Limiting the capacity of the sewage treatment plant will

lead to the extensive use of septic tanks when plant capac-

ity is reached if no further expansion of the Central

Service Area plant is allowed.  This could result in a

deterioration of ground and surface water quality.  (PCSA

and Ocean County Planning Board)

Response - 10

    This may be true if there is not a coordination of all

parties involved with approving sewage treatment systems

whether it be the regional system, small package plants, or

individual septic systems to assure that the impact of each

system is considered in the context of the overall strategy.

    The Ocean County Sewerage Authority has the broad power

to control construction of sewage treatment systems.   The

following provision of the State law has been pointed out as

a possible means of such control: C. UO:14A-29.

Construction of other disposal plants prohibited.

         "No sewage disposal plant or other facilities for •
    the collection, treatment or disposal of sewerage
    arising within a district shall be constructed unless
    the sewerage authority shall give its consent there to
    and approve the plans and specifications therefore.


                            222

-------
    Each sewerage authority is hereby empowered to give such
    consent and approval, subject, however, to the terms and
    provisions of any agreement with the holders of bonds."
    (New Jersey State Department of Health, 1969)

OCSA should explore the implementation of this provision.
Comment - 11

    The imposition of a population limitation on central

Ocean County would result in litigation if land owners are

deprived of the use of their property.

(Ocean^Cpunty Planning Board)

Response - 11

    EPA is not imposing a population limitation on the Ocean

County Central Service Area.  Rather, the Agency is carrying

out its legal mandate to assure that acceptable air quality

levels are maintained.  EPA's analysis of the Ocean County

situation from this standpoint shows population related

emissions to be the main contributor to ambient air quality.

Therefore a treatment plant will be funded at this time

which will serve the number of people comparable to that

number which the analysis show will maintain air quality.

Other Clean Air Act strategies will be used to deal with the

overall planning that is required to assure good air

quality.  (See Fecommendation 3.) These strategies will have

to deal with growth related issues.  As is indicated in the
                            223

-------
statement, it is expected that new technology will become



available that will eventually allow growth to occur with a



minimum impact on air quality.







Comment - 12



    Does the population equivalent of 250,000 people corres-



pond to a full time resident population or a combination of



permanant and seasonal residents.  (Ocean County. Planning



Board)



Response - 12



    The population figure is for the full time resident



population.







Comment - 13



    Can EPA tie the Federal Water Pollution Control Act



Ammendments to the Clean Air Act?  It is our opinion that



EPA cannot condition a water pollution control grant with



Clean Air Act requirements.  (QCSA)



Response - 13



    EPA ties the FWPCAA and CAA together, along with a host



of other environmental laws in every project that undergoes



a review pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act.



EPA is required by NEPA to do so.  The scope of the NEPA



review by EPA must consider the requirements of the Clean





                            224

-------
Air Act where the project can be shown to have a specific



effect, either directly or indirectly, on air quality.  In



the Ocean County case, it has been decided that the re-



commendation in the Draft EIS on this point need not be



implemented because EPA regulations concerning AQMA planning



make it unnecessary to condition the water pollution control



project grant in such a way.  The analysis in the impact



statement speaks for itself; it says EPA will consider



funding a specific size treatment plant which meets all



EPA's environmental objectives.  If a project of that size



is proposed, then the funding issue will proceed normally;.



if an oversized project is proposed, EPA will require a



reduction in plant size before funding is considered.  The



reasons for doing this and the recommendations for the



permit program are delineated in the impact statement; they



do not have to be put in the form of grant conditions.








Comment - l.U



    The Emissions Limitation Plan analysis indicates that



growth would be disproportionately arrested in Cape May if



Ocean county grows as projected.  This is unfair and all



four counties in the Air Quality Control Region should be



treated equally.  (Cape; May County Municipal Utilities



Authority)





                            225

-------
Response - 14



    It is agreed that the ELP does not equalize growth



related air quality impacts as well as diffusion modeling.



The ELP analysis was presented only as an example in the



draft statement to show that different methods do exist to



analyze for air quality degradation.  It was not used as a



basis for conclusions.  This presentation has been elimina-



ted from the final impact statement because new regulations



have been proposed which depend solely on ambient air



quality modeling.  This approach allows a County by County



(or larger or smaller area)  analysis depending on how the



State intends to apply the regulation.







Comment - 15



    Consideration should be given to a regional management



system for air quality control through the appointment of



representatives from each of the four counties in the AQCR



to immediately develop a basic strategy for management of



air quality.  (Cape May County Municipal Utilities



Authority)
                            226

-------
Response - 15



    Pursuant to the newly proposed regulations for dealing



with air pollution problems in areas already having air



quality better than the national standards, the State will



have the responsibility for developing strategies to deal



with future air pollution.  However, EPA thinks that the



Cape May County Municipal Utilities Authority's proposal has



merit, particularly since the four counties are environ-



mentally similar.  EPA would support this type of combined



effort and commend the initiative of the Cape May County



Municipal Utilities Authority.
                            227

-------
              CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS              ,



                        Conclusion 1



    A diffusion model study of the air quality situation in



Ocean County shows that significant air quality deteriora-



tion may result if the population of the Central service



area exceeds approximately 250,000, assuming that current



fuel use patterns, transportation modes, and industrial



patterns remain constant.  The population of the Central



service area is expected to reach 250,000 by 1984.



                      Recommendation 1



    In seeking to provide the Central service area with



adequate sewage treatment facilities, the responsible



governmental agencies should not indirectly encourage air



quality deterioration.  Therefore, the capacity of the Ocean



County Central sewage treatment plant should initially be



limited to 91,000 cu m/day (2H mgd).  A sewage treatment



plant of this size will be capable of treating the wastes



generated by a population of approximately 250,000.



                        Conclusion 2



    It is not the intent of the U.S. Environmental Protec-



tion Agency to restrict the ultimate population of the



Central service area to 250,000.  However, the U.S. Environ-



mental Protection Agency will, at this time, only consider



granting funds for a sewage treatment plant size of 91,000





                            228

-------
cu m/day (24 mgd).  Future expansions of the treatment plant



will be predicated upon:



         1.   Air quality monitoring data which shows the



              actual ambient conditions at the time expan-



              sion is considered.



         2.   Any EPA, State, and/or local regulations that



              are in effect at that time which set forth



              strategies to maintain acceptable air quality.



                      Recpmmendation 2



    Growth in the Central service area necessitating expan-



sion of the Ocean County Central sewage treatment plant



beyond 91,000 cu m/day  (24 mgd)  requires that the air



quality surveillance and monitoring system continue to be



operated in order to generate the data necessary to show



actual ambient conditions at the time expansion of the



facility is considered.  Further, local government agencies



should consider implementing controls such as revisions to



the building codes to require energy conserving features,



land use plans which require less dependence upon the



automobile, and requiring the use of new technologies as



they become available.



    Any decision made by the U.S. Environmental Protection



Agency must be consistent with the possibility that a



solution to the Central service area's potential air quality





                            229

-------
problems will be found.  Therefore, the interceptors should



be sized to accommodate the sewage flows that would be



generated by the 2020 population of the Central service



area, as projected by Fellows, Read 6 Weber, Inc., except in



the cases of Manchester and Berkeley Townships, whose popu-



lation projections may be understated.



                        Conclusion 3



    Present State and local land use legislation cannot pre-



vent urbanization of the communities in the Central service



area.  At most, existing legislation can retard the rate of



urbanization and can promote the orderly implementation of



development.  New regulations adopted pursuant to the Clean



Air Act should provide the basis for dealing with the



potential air quality problems in Ocean County.  These



regulations require the State of New Jersey, pursuant to the



designation of Ocean County as an Air Quality Maintenance



Area, to develop a plan to maintain acceptable air quality



in Ocean County.  Part of this plan should be a definition



of degradation zones in conformance with the Non-Degradation



Regulations.  New Jersey must submit to EPA by June 1975:



    1)    An analysis of the impact on air quality of pro-



jected growth and development over the 10-year period from



the date of submittal.
                            230

-------
    2)    A plan to prevent any national standards from being



exceeded over the 10-year period from the date of plan



submittal.  Such plan shall include, as necessary, control



strategy revisions to the existing Implementation Plan for



the area and/or other measures to insure that projected



growth and development will be compatible with maintenance



of the national standards throughout the 10-year period.



                      Recommendatign 3



    In developing this Air Quality Maintenance Plan, the



State should v?ork with the Ocean County Planning Board,



local governments, and the Ocean County Sewerage Authority-



to decide on effective and implementable land use and



environmental strategies that meet the requirements of the



Clean Air Act.



                        Conclusion 4



    Care has been taken to select interceptor and outfall



routings that will minimize the environmental effects of



construction.  However, damage is still likely to occur in



critical areas, such as steep slopes, barrier bar crossings,



stream and estuary crossings, and marshlands.



                      Recommendation H



    The contract specifications for the proposed project



should include the recommendations made by the Environmental



Assessment Council.  Relevant procedures outlined in the





                            231

-------
following documents should also be included in the specifi-

cations:

         Maryland Department of Water Resources, Becker,
              B.C., and Mills, T.R.  1972.  Guidelines for
              Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and
              Implementation.  U.S. EPA, Office of Research
              and Monitoring.  Washington, D.C.

         New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection.
              1972.  Environmental Guidelines for Planning,
              Designing and Constructing Interceptor Sewers.
              New Jersey Department of Environmental
              Protection.  Trenton, New Jersey.

         New Jersey State Soil Conservation Committee.
              1972.  Standards for Soil Erosion and Sediment
              Control in New Jersey.  The New'Jersey State
              Soil Conservation Committee.  Trenton, New
              Jersey.

         U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   1973.
              Processes, Procedures, and Methods to Control
              Pollution Resulting from All Construction
              Activity.  U.S. Government Printing Office.
              Washington, D.C.

    The specifications should clearly identify each problem

area and should stipulate exactly what the contractor is to

accomplish in each problem area.  During preparation of the

specifications, it may be necessary to make changes in the

proposed routings.  If, for any reason, it is necessary to

alter the proposed routings, an environmental assessment of

the new routings should be prepared.

                        Conclusion 5

    The Ocean County Sewerage Authority and its engineering

consultant have developed the framework for the proposed
                            232

-------
project, but have yet to prepare detailed plans and speci-



fications.



                      Pecommendation 5



    In preparing detailed plans and specifications for the



proposed project, the Ocean county Sewerage Authority and



its engineering consultant should follow the Federal



Guidelines for Design, Operation and Maintenance of Waste



Water Treatment Facilities (FWQA, 1970)  and the Design



Criteria for Mechanical, Electric and Fluid System and



Component Reliability (U.S. EPA, 197Uc).



                        Conclusion 6



    Increased pumpage from the water-table aquifer and



decreased ground-water recharge will reduce the ground-water



level.  A reduction in the ground-water level will induce



saltwater intrusion into the aquifers and will reduce the



base flow of streams.



                      R ecommendation 6



    Programs should be developed and implemented to monitor



the incidence and extent of the operational effects of the



Ocean County Central sewage treatment plant on the base flow



of streams, the intrusion of saltwater into aquifers, and



the piezometric head of aquifers.  If the monitoring data



indicate the potential for serious problems, a program to
                            233

-------
artificially recharge the ground water with treated effluent
should be developed.
                        Conclusion 7
    Urbanization will increase runoff which will decrease
the amount of natural ground-water recharge and increase the
amount of water and contaminants entering the waterways of
the County.  Further urbanization will require greater
consumption of ground water.  This increased pumpage may
induce saltwater intrusion into the aquifers.
    Sewage discharges from boats and marinas will also
continue to pollute the waterways.  If maximum benefit is to
be gained from the proposed STP, a plan must be developed
and implemented to control these and other forms of water
pollution.
                      Recommendation 7
    Ocean County should investigate with the State the
possibility of undertaking areawide wastewater management
planning for these and other problems as set forth in
Section 208 of the Water Pollution Control Act Amendments to
enhance and preserve the valuable streams, bays, and aqui-
fers of the county.  Studies should be initiated as soon as
practical to determine if and when artificial recharge will •
be necessary and what changes in the treatment system will
be required to accomplish the task.

                            234

-------
                           ABBREVIATIONS USED
AEC
AQCR
AQIP
AQMA
ASCE

AWT
BOD
CAA
COE
DO
DSRP

DT
EAC
ELP
EPA

EPG
FHWA
FWPCA

FWPCAA

FR&W
9
KOA
Atomic Energy Commission
Air Quality Control Region
Air Quality Increment Plan
Air Quality Maintenance Area
American Society of Civil
 Engineers
advanced waste treatment
biochemical oxygen demand
Clean Air Act
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
dissolved oxygen
Division of State and Regional
 Planning
detention time
Environmental Assessment Council
Emission Limitation Plan
U.S.  Environmental Protection
 Agency
emissions per grid
Federal Highway Administration
Federal Water Pollution Control
 Act
Federal Water Pollution "Control
 Act  Amendments
Fellows, Read & Weber,  Inc.
gram  or gallon
Kampground of America

-------
USPHS                                         U.S.  Public Health Service
ug/1                             -            millionth grams per liter
ug/m3                            -            millionth grams per cubic meter
WPCF                             -            Water Pollution Control  Federation

-------
                   METRIC EQUIVALENTS OF ENGLISH UNITS
        Metric
Centigrade (C°)
centimeter (cm))
centimeters/second (cm/sec)
cubic meters/day (cu m/day)
cubic meters/day/square
 kilometer (cu m/day/sq km)
cubic meters/day/square meter
 (cu m/day/sq-m)
cubic meters/hectare/week
 (cu m/ha/week)
cubic meters/minute (cu m/min.)
hectare (ha)
kilogram (kg)
kilograms/day  (kg/day)
ki1ograms/year/square
 kilometer (kg/year/sq km)
kilometer  (km)
liter (1)
liters/second  (I/sec)
meter (m)
milligrams/liter (mg/1 )
square meter (sq m)
square kilometer (sq km)
            English
Farenheit (F°)
inch (in.)
inches/second (in./sec)
million gallons/day (mgd)
gallons/day/square mile (gpd/sq mile)
gallons/day/square foot (gpd/sq ft)
gallons/acre/week (g/acre/week)

cubic feet/second (cfs)
acre (acre)
pound (Ib), ton (ton)
pounds/day (Ib/day), tons/day
 (tons/day)
tons/year/square mile (tons/year/sq
 mile)
foot (ft), mile (mile)
gallon (g)
gallons/minute (gpm)
foot (ft)
parts per million (ppm)
 (this is an approximate equivalent)
square foot (sq ft)
square mile (sq mile)

-------
L.S.
min.
mg/1
N
NEDS
NEPA

NJDEP

NPDES

OBSTP

OCCSTP

OCSA
P
pH

ppm
PRO
P.S.
PUD
SCS
SWD
lift station
minute
mi Hi grams/liter
nitrogen
National Emissions Data System
National Environmental Policy
 Act
New Jersey Department of
 Environmental Protection
National Pollutant Discharge
 Elimination System
Ortley Beach sewage treatment
 plant
Ocean County Central sewage
 treatment plant
Ocean County Sewerage Authority
phosphorus
negative logarithm of the
 effective hydrogen-ion
 concentration
parts per million
planned residential development
pump station
planned unit development
Soil Conservation Service
side water depth

-------
                        BIBLIOGRAPHY
American Society of Civil Engineers and Water Pollution
    Control Federation.  1969.  Design and Construction of
    Sanitary and Storm Sewers.  ASCE Manual and Report on
    Engineering Practice No. 37, WPCF Manual of Practice No.
    9.  New York, New York.  332pp.

Anderson, Henry R. and Appel, Charles A. 1969.  Special
    Report No. 29: Geology and Ground-water Resources of
    Ocean County, New Jersey.  New Jersey Department of
    Conservation and Economic Development.  Trenton, New
    Jersey.  93pp.

Arthur D. Little, Inc.  1973.  Potential Onshore Effects of
    Deepwater Oil Terminal-Related Industrial Development.
    Volume II, Part Two: "Mid-Atlantic Region." Written for
    Council on Environmental Quality.  Washington, D.c.
    182pp.

Asbury Park Press.  June 4, 1973.  "Ocean Population Growing
    Faster Than '66 Projection." Asbury Park Press.  Asbury
    Park, New Jersey.  p.l.

Atomic Energy Commission.  1972.  Draft Environmental Impact
    Statement, Forked River Nuclear Station, Unit 1, Jersey
    Central Power & Light Company.  Directorate of
    Licensing, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission.  Washington,
    D.C.

Atomic Energy Commission.  1973.  Draft Environmental Impact
    Statement, Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station,
    Jersey Central Power & Light Company.  Directorate of
    Licensing, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission.  Washington,
    D.C.

Bargman, R.D., Samples, W.R. and Bruington, A.E.  1962.
    Recharging of Confined Aquifer with Polished Activated
    Sludge Effluent.  Unpublished paper presented at WPCF
    meeting Toronto, Ontario, October 1962.
                            239

-------
Bellard, Chester F. (written communication).1 June 3, 1974.
    Letter from Chester F. Bellard, State conservationist,
    Soil Conservation Service, Somerset, New Jersey to Paul
    Arbesman, Chief, Environmental Impacts Branch, U.S. EPA,
    Region II, New York, New York.

Benintente, Joseph  (oral communication).  January 8, 1974.
    Conversation between Joseph Benintente, Environmental
    Engineer, Central Coordination and Implementation
    Section, New Jersey Department of Environmental
    Protection, Trenton, New Jersey and Barbara Metzger,
    Environmental Assessment Coordinator, Environmental
    Impacts Branch, U.S. EPA, Region II, New York, New York.

Biel, Erwin.  1958.  The Climate of New Jersey.  Reprinted
    by the New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station from
    The Economy of New Jersey, a report prepared by the
    Department of Economics, Rutgers University.  Rutgers
    University Press.   New Brunswick, New Jersey.  98pp.

Caldeira, Joseph J. (written communication).  February 25,
    1974.  Letter from Joseph J. Caldeira, Secretary-
    Treasurer, Southern Ocean County Landfill, Inc., Toms
    River, New Jersey to John R. Jimenez, Environmentalist,
    Environmental Impacts Branch, U.S. EPA, Region II, New
    York, New York.  2pp.

Clarke, George L.  1954.  Elements of Ecology.  John Wiley 6
    Sons, Inc.  New York, New York.  560pp.

Clarke, N.A., Berg, G., Kabler, P.W. and Chang, S.L.  1962.
    Human enteric viruses in water: source, survival and
    removability,  pp 523-542.  In Advances in Water
    Pollution research Volume 2.  1964.  The Macmillan
    Company.  New York, New York.

Clean Air Act.  1970.   Public Law 91-604.  91st Congress,
    December 31, 1970.

The Conservation Foundation.  1972.  A Citizen's Guide to
    Clean Air.  The Conservation Foundation.  Washington,
    D.C.  95pp.
l_/Comment on the draft environmental impact statement,
                            240

-------
Deutsch, M. 1965.  National controls involved in shallow
    aquifer contamination.  Ground Water 3(3): 37-40.

Division of State and Regional Planning.  1973.  Analysis of
    Residential Development in Ocean County in the Central
    and Southern Sewer Service Areas.  New Jersey Department
    of Community Affairs.  Trenton, New Jersey.  10 + pp.

Duxbury, A.C.  1971.  The Earth and Its Oceans.  Addison-
    Wesley Publishing Company, Inc.  Reading, Massachusetts.

Environmental Assessment Council.  1973.  Environmental
    Assessment Report on the Proposed Sewerage Facilities of
    the Ocean County Sewerage Authority.  Ocean County
    Sewerage Authority.  Toms River, New Jersey.  445 + pp.

Fair, Gordon M., Geyer, John C. and Okun, Daniel A.  1966.
    Water and Wastewater Engineering - Volume I: Water
    Supply and Wastewater Removal.  John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
    New York, New York.

Fair, Gordon M., Geyer, John C. and Okun, Daniel A.  1968.
    Water and Wastewater Engineering - Volume 2: Water
    Purification and Wastewater Treatment and Disposal.
    John Wiley & Sons, Inc.  New York, New York.

Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972.
    Public Law 92-500.  92nd Congress, S. 2770.  October 18,
    1972.

Federal Water Pollution Control Administration.  1967.
    Proceedings of the Conference on the Pollution of the
    Navigable Waters of Eastern New Jersey - Shark River to
    Cape May.  U.S. Department of the Interior.  Boston,
    Massachusetts.  345pp.

Federal Water Quality Administration.  1970.  Federal
    Guidelines Design, Operation and Maintenance of
    Wastewater Treatment Facilities.  U.S. Department of the
    Interior.  Washington, D.C.

Fellows, Read & Weber, Inc.  1966-67.  Master Plan for
    Wastewater Management Parts I and II.  Prepared for-the
    Board of Chosen Freeholders of Ocean County, New Jersey
    and the New Jersey Department of Health.  Fellows, Read
    & Weber, Inc.  Toms River, New Jersey.
                            241

-------
Fellows, Read & Weber, Inc.  1969.  Master Plan for Water
    Resource Management Ocean County, New Jersey.  Prepared
    for the Board of Chosen Freeholders of Ocean County, New
    Jersey and the U.S. Department of Agriculture - Farmers
    Home Administration.  Fellows, Read & Weber, Inc.  Toms
    Piver, New Jersey 29 * pp.

Fellows, Read & Weber, Inc.  1973.  Project Report - the
    Ocean County Sewerage Authority Regional System Phase I,
    April 1973.  The Ocean County Sewerage Authority.  Toms
    River, New Jersey.

Fellows, Read 6 Weber, Inc.  1974.  Technical Report for the
    Southern Service Area.  April 1974.. Ocean County
    Sewerage Authority.  Toms River, New Jersey.

Felton, P.N. and Lull, H.W.  1963.  Suburban hydrology can
    improve watershed conditions.  Public Works 94:93-94.

Great Adventure, Inc.  1973.  Statement on Environmental
    Protection and Public Safety - Jackson Township Animal
    Preserves.  Great Adventure, Inc.  New York, New York.
    15 + pp.

Great Adventure, Inc.  1974.  Supplemental Report on
    Environmental Protection and Public Safety.  Great
    Adventure, Inc.  New York, New York.  84pp.

Green, R.L., Page, G.L. Jr. and Johnson, W.M.  1974.
    Considerations for Preparation of Operation and. Main-
    tenance Manuals.  U.S. EPA.  Office of Water Programs
    Operations.  Washington, B.C.  239pp.

Gritzuk, Michael  (oral communication).  July 19, 1974.
    Telephone conversation between Michael Gritzuk,
    Executive Director, OCSA, Toms River, New Jersey and
    Barbara Metzger, Environmental Assessment Coordinator,
    Environmental Impacts Branch, U.S. EPA, Region II, New
    York, New York.

Grove, Fred H. Jr. (oral communication).  March 4, 1974.
    Conversation between Fred H. Grove, Jr., General
    Manager, Ocean County Landfill corporation, Lakehurst,
    New Jersey and John R. Jimenez, Environmentalist,
    Environmental Impacts Branch, EPA, Region II, New York,
    New York.
                            242

-------
Hires, Fichard I.  1972.  Mixing Zone Definition for the
    Proposed Central Plant Outfall off Island Beach State
    Park, Ocean County Sewerage Authority.  Toms River, New
    Jersey.

Hires, Richard and Henry, Charles.  1973.  Northern, Central
    and Southern Outfall Diffusion Studies.  Woodward-
    Environ Inc.

Hutner, S.H. and Laughlin J.  1958.  Poisonous tides.
    Scientific American 199 (2):92-97.

Kelly, S.M. and Sanderson, W.W.  1960.  Density of enteric
    viruses in sewage.  Jour.  WPCF 32(12): 1269-1274.

Kupper, C.J.  1971 with 1972 revisions.  Engineer's Report
    on Secondary Treatment Additions and Alterations to
    Ortley Beach Waste Water Treatment Plant in Dover
    Township, Ocean County, New Jersey.  Dover Sewerage
    Authority.  Toms River, New Jersey.

Leopold, Luna B.  1968.  Hydrology for urban land planning.
    In McKenzie, G.D. and Utgard, R.O. (eds.).  1972.  Man
    and His Physical Environment.  Burgess Publishing
    Company.  Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Loveland, E.E. et. al.  1971.   The Qualitative and
    Quantitative Analysis of Analysis of the Benthic Flora
    and Fauna of Earnegat Bay Before and After the Onset of
    Thermal Addition, Progress Report #7.  Rutgers - The
    State University of New Jersey.  New Brunswick, New
    Jersey.

Mahoney, J.  1968, 1969, 1970 and 1972.  Ecological Roles of
    Marine Microorganisms Annual Report.  Atlantic Maritime
    Game Fisheries Research Program, National Maritime
    Fisheries Service.  Sandy Hook, New Jersey.

Manganaro, Martin and Lincoln.  1966.  Nassau County Report-
    Outfall Sewer Location-Sludge DisposalDistrict No. 3.
    Manganaro, Martin and Lincoln Consulting Engineers.  New
    York, New York.  41 + pp.

McCormick, Jack and Jones, Leslie.  1973.  The Pine Barrens:
    Vegetation Geography.  New Jersey State Museum.
    Trenton, New Jersey.  VII + pp.
                            243

-------
McKee, J.E.  1971.  Potential for reuse of wastewater in
    north-central Texas.  Water Resources Bull.  7(4):740-
    749.

Meade, Berton E. and Wilkie, William G.  1972.  Bridging the
    gap - leachate prevention and control from sanitary
    landfills.  Waste Age 3 (2):8,32-39.

Metcalf S Eddy, Inc.  1972.  Wastewater Engineering:
    Collection, Treatment, Disposal.  McGraw-Hill Book
    Company.  New York, New York.  782pp.

Moran, John (oral communication).  August 5, 1974.
    Telephone conversation between John Moran, Director,
    Fuel and Fuel Additives Program, U.S. EPA, Durham, North
    Carolina and Paul Arbesman, Chief, Environmental Impacts
    Branch, U.S.  EPA, Region II, New York, New York.

Mountford, Kenneth.  1971.  Plankton Studies in Barnegat
    Bay.  Unpublished Ph.D. thesis.  Rutgers - The State
    University of New Jersey.  New Brunswick, New Jersey.

National Sport Fisheries Marine Laboratory,  n.d.  Sandy
    Hook Marine Laboratory Survey unpublished data.
    National Sport Fisheries Marine Laboratory.  Sandy Hook,
    New Jersey.

Nerlick, Russell (oral communication).  January 7, 1974.
    Conversation between Russell Nerlick, Supervisory
    Engineer,  Project Analysis and Review Section, New
    Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Trenton,
    New Jersey and Barbara Metzger, Environmental Assessment
    Coordinator, Environmental Impacts Branch, U.S. EPA,
    Region II, New York, New York.

N.J.A.C.  7:27-9.  New Jersey Administrative Code.  Title 7,
    Chapter 27, Subchapter 9: "Sulfur in Fuels." Division of
    Administrative Procedure.  New Jersey Department of
    State.  Trenton, New Jersey.

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection.  1970.
    Rules and Regulations for the Preparation and Submission
    of Plans for Sewer Systems and Wastewater Treatment
    Plants.  New Jersey Department of Environmental
    Protection.  Trenton, New Jersey.   19pp.

-------
New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection.  1971a.
    Regulations Governing Installation of Sewerage
    Facilities in Critical Areas.  New Jersey Department of
    Environmental Protection.  Trenton, New Jersey.  4pp.

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection.  1971b.
    Rules and Regulations Establishing Surface Water Quality
    Criteria.  State of New Jersey Department of
    Environmental Protection.  Trenton, New Jersey.  19pp.

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection.  1972.
    Wetlands Order - Tuckerton and Mannington Meadows Areas,
    Ocean and Salem Counties.  New Jersey Department of
    Environmental Protection.  Trenton, New Jersey.  8 + pp.

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection.  1973.
    Interim Plan for Wastewater Management/Water Pollution
    Control - Ocean County Sewerage Authority District,
    Ocean County, New Jersey.  New Jersey Department of
    Environmental Protection.  Trenton, New Jersey.  93 pp.

New Jersey Department of Health.  1969.  Water and Sewerage
    Statutes-Circular 213 3rd Edition.  New Jersey State
    Department of Health.  Trenton, New Jersey.  180pp.

New Jersey Department of Labor and Industry,  n.d.  New
    Jersey Covered Employment Trends.  Division of Planning
    and Research.  Trenton, New Jersey.

Newsom, Peter (oral communication).  January 2, 1974.
    Conversation between Peter Newsom, Chief, Marine
    Wetlands Section, New Jersey Department of Environmental
    Protection, Trenton, New Jersey and Barbara Metzger,
    Environmental Assessment Coordinator, Environmental
    Impacts Branch, U.S. EPA, Region II, New York, New York.

Nieswand, George H., Stillman, Calvin W. and Esser, Anthony
    J.  1972.  Inventory of Estuarine Site Development
    Lagoon Systems: New Jersey Shore, New Jersey Water
    Resources Research Institute.  New Brunswick, New
    Jersey.

Odum, W.E.  1968.  Mullet grazing on a dinoflagellate bloom.
    Chesapeake Science 9:202-204.
                            245

-------
Odum, Eugene P.  1971.  Fundamentals of Ecology.  3rd ed.
    W. B. Saunders Company.  Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
    574pp.

Ocean County Sewerage Authority.  1973-1974.  Additional
    Information Required to Satisfy the Implementation of
    the National Environmental Policy Act.  Ocean County
    Sewerage Authority.  Toms River, New Jersey.

Parkhurst, J.D., n.d.  A Plan for Water Re-use.  For the
    directors of the County Sanitation Districts of Los
    Angeles County, California.

Patterson, W.L. and Banker, R.F.  1971.  Estimating Costs
    and Manpower Requirements for Conventional Wastewater
    Treatment Facilities.  U.S. EPA, Office of Research and
    Monitoring.  Washington, D.C.  251 + pp.

Phillips, F.X.  1972.  The Ecology of the Benthic
    Macroinvertebrates of Barnegat Bay, New Jersey.
    Unpublished Ph.D. thesis.  Rutgers - the State
    University of New Jersey.  New Brunswick, New Jersey.

Robichaud, Beryl and Buell, Murray F.  1973.  Vegetation of
    New Jersey.  Rutgers University Press.  New Brunswick,
    New Jersey.  340pp.

Ryther, J.H.  1955.  Ecology of autotrophic marine
    dinoflagellates with reference to red water conditions.
    In The Luminescence of Biological Systems.  American
    Association for the Advancement of Science.  Washington,
    D.C.

Schorr, Paul  (oral communication).  January 7, 1974.
    Conversation between Paul Schorr, Principal Environ-
    mental Engineer, Central Coordination and Implementation
    Section, New Jersey Department of Environmental
    Protection, Trenton, New Jersey and Barbara Metzger,
    Environmental Assessment Coordinator, Environmental
    Impacts Branch, U.S.  EPA, Region II, New York, New
    York.
                            246

-------
Simpson, Lawrence (written communication).1 June 20, 1974.
    Letter from Lawrence Simpson, Chairman, Ocean County
    Sewerage Authority, Toms River, New Jersey to Gerald M.
    Hansler, Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA, Region II,
    New York, New York.

Smith, Robert.  1973.  Electrical Power Consumption for
    Municipal Wastewater Treatment.  U.S. EPA, National
    Environmental Research Center, Cincinnati, Ohio.

Soil Conservation Service in Cooperation with Rutgers
    University.  1972a.  Soil properties and soil survey
    interpretations - Alluvial Land.  Soil Conservation
    Service.  Somerset, New Jersey.

Soil Conservation Service in Cooperation with Rutgers
    University.  1972b.  Soil properties and soil survey
    interpretations - Berryland  (St.  Johns).  Soil
    Conservation Service.  Somerset, New Jersey.

Soil Conservation Service in Cooperation with Rutgers
    University.  1972c.  Soil properties and soil survey
    interpretation - Muck.  Soil Conservation Service.
    Somerset, New Jersey.

Soil Conservation Service in Cooperation with Rutgers
    University.  1972d.  Soil properties and soil survey
    interpretations - Tidal Marsh.  Soil Conservation
    Service.  Somerset, New Jersey.

State of New Jersey.  1954.  The Realty Improvement Sewerage
    and Facilities Act  (1954).

State of New Jersey.  1970.  Assembly, No. 509 Chapter 272.
    Coastal Wetlands.  Revised Statutes Cumulative
    Supplement 13:9A-lst seq.

State of New Jersey.  1973.  Assembly, No. 1429 Major
    Coastal Area Facilities Review Act.

Task Force on Land-Use Implications of Municipal Permits.
    1973.  Special Conditions to be Included in Municipal
    Permits in High-Growth Areas  (Draft, Nov. 15, 1973);
lyComment on the draft environmental impact statement.
                            247

-------
    U.S. EPA, Office of Air and water Programs.  Washington,
    D.C.  16 + pp.

Tedrow, J.C.F.  1963.  New Jersey Soils.  Circular 601.
    College of Agriculture, Rutgers - the State University.
    New Brunswick, New Jersey.  20pp.

Todd, D.K.  1964.  Ground water.  Sec. 13, pp 1-55.  In
    Chow, V.T. ed. Handbook of Applied Hydrology.  McGraw-
    Hill Book co., Inc.  New York, New York.

TRW Systems Group.  1970.  Air Quality Implementation
    Planning Program - Volume I: Operator's Manual.  Written
    for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Washington,
    D.C.

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.  1970.  Patterns of U.S.
    Economic Growth Bulletin 1672.  U.S. Government Printing
    Office.  Washington, D.C.

U.S. Bureau of the Census.  1962-1972  (excluding 1963).
    County Business Patterns, 1962, 1964-1972, New Jersey.
    U.S. Government Printing Office.  Washington, D.C.

U.S. Bureau of the Census.  1971.  Census of Manufactures:
    1967 Vol III Part 32 Nebraska - Wyoming.  U.S.
    Government Printing Office.  Washington, D.C.

U.S. Bureau of the Census.  1972.  Census of Population:
    1970, General Social and Economic Characteristics.   U.S.
    Government Printing Office.  Washington, D.C.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,  n.d. a.  STORET -
    Water Quality Control Information System.  U.S. EPA,
    Region II.  New York, New York.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,  n.d. b.  National Air
    Data Information System.  U.S. EPA.  Research Triangle
    Park, North Carolina.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  1971.  Guidelines
    Water Quality Management Planning.  U.S. EPA, Water
    Quality Office.  Washington, D.C.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  1972a.  Pre-
    conference Report for Water Quality Standards
    Setting/Revision conference New Jersey Atlantic coastal
                            248

-------
    Area.  U.S. EPA, Region II.  New York, New York.  74 +
    PP-

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  1972b.  Report on
    Recommended Revisions to water Quality Standards
    Implementation Plan New Jersey Atlantic Coastal Area.
    U.S. EPA, Region II.  New York, New York.  22 + pp.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  1972c.  Policy on
    Ocean Disposal of Sewage Sludge.  U.S. EPA, Office of
    Air and Water Programs, Engineering and Design Branch.
    Washington, D.C.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  1972e.  National
    primary and secondary ambient air quality standards.
    Federal Register 32(84) Part II: 8182-8201.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  1973a.  Proposed rule
    making for prevention of significant air quality
    deterioration.  Federal Register 38(135) Part IV: 18986-
    18999.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  1973b.  Proposed rule
    making for maintenance of national standards.  Federal
    Register 38(208): 29893-29896.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  1973c.  Interim
    regulations for the preparation of environmental impact
    statements.  Federal Register 38(11): 1696-1712.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  1973d.  Rules and
    regulations-secondary treatment information.  Federal
    Register 38(159) Part II: 22297-22299.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  1973e.
    Identification and Control of Pollution from Salt Water
    Intrusion.  U.S. EPA, Office of Air and Water Programs.
    Washington, D.C.  9Upp.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  1974a.  Toward
    Cleaner Water - The New Permit Program to Control Water
    Pollution.  U.S. EPA, Office of Public Affairs.
    Washington, D.C.  33pp

U.S. EPA.  1974b.  Air Programs; Approval and Promulgation
    of Implementation Plans: Review of Indirect Sources.
    Federal Register 39(38) Part III: 7270-7285-
                            249

-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  1974c.  Technical
    Bulletin Design Criteria for Mechanical, Electric, and
    Fluid System and Component Reliability - Supplement to
    Federal Guidelines for Design, Operation, and
    Maintenance of Waste Water Treatment Facilities.  U.S.
    EPA, Office of Water Programs Operations.  Washington,
    D.C.  54pp.

U.S. Public Health Service.  1962.  Public Health Service
    Drinking Water Standards.  U.S. Department of Health,
    Education, and Welfare.  Rockville, Maryland.  61pp.

Winchester, Robert (oral communication).  August 23, 197U.
    Telephone conversation between Robert Winchester,
    Principal Environmental Engineer, Bureau of Air
    Pollution Control, New Jersey Department of
    Environmental Protection, Trenton, New Jersey and Paul
    Arbesman, Chief,  Environmental Impacts Branch, U.S. EPA,
    Region II, New York, New York.

Zimmerman, Rae.  197U.  Economic and Occupation Profile of
    Ocean County, New Jersey.  Prepared for U.S.
    Environmental Protection Agency, Region II.  New York,
    New York.  2U + pp.
                            250

-------
                               APPENDIX A
            SELECTED APPROVED NEW JERSEY STATE WATER QUALITY
                     . CLASSIFICATIONS AND CRITERIA
                 CLASSIFICATION OF THE SURFACE WATERS OF
                        THE CENTRAL SERVICE AREA
     Pursuant to authority vested in it under the provisions of Chapter 12,
Title 58 of the Revised Statutes, the New Jersey Department of Environmental
Protection promulgated the following classifications of the surface waters of
the Central service area of the Ocean County Sewerage Authority.  Standards of
Quality to be maintained in these waters as established by New Jersey Depart-
ment of Environmental Protection follow.
Class FW-1
    A.  Cedar Creek Drainage Basin
        1.  Webbs Mill Branch and tributaries situated wholly within
            the Greenwood Forest boundaries.
        2.  Chamberlain's Branch and tributaries situated wholly
            within the Greenwood Forest boundaries upstream from
            the blueberry farm exception, also other tributaries
            to Chamberlain's Branch situated wholly within the
            Greenwood Forest Tract boundaries.
    B.  Barnegat Bay Drainage Basin
        1.  All the fresh water ponds on Island Beach State Park.
Class FW-2
    A.  All other fresh waters of the service area upstream from the head
        of tide.
.Class TW-1
     A.   All  tidal  waters  of the  service  area  downstream  from  the  head  of
         tide to  surf waters.
                                     251

-------
Class CW-1
    A.  Ocean waters within 1,500 feet from mean low tide to a depth of
        15 feet whichever is more distant from the mean low tide line.

Class CW-2

    A.  Ocean waters not included under Class CW-1 out to the "three
        mile limit."

               CRITERIA FOR WATER QUALITY CLASSIFICATIONS

               SECTION 3.1 - SURFACE WATER QUALITY CRITERIA FOR FW-1 WATERS

                     CLASS FW-1 - Fresh waters, including rivers,
                     streams, lakes, or other bodies of water, that
                     because of their clarity, color, scenic setting,
                     or other characteristic of aesthetic value or
                     unique special interest, have been designated by
                     authorized State agencies in conformance with
                     laws pertaining to the use of private lands, are
                     set aside for posterity to represent the natural
                     aquatic environment and its associated biota.

3.1.1  These waters shall be maintained as to quality in their natural state
       and shall not be subject to any man-made wastewater discharges.

               SECTION 3.2 - SURFACE WATER QUALITY CRITERIA FOR FW-2 WATERS

                     CLASS FW-2 - Fresh surface waters aporoved as
                     sources of public water supoly.  These waters
                     shall be suitable for public potable water
                     supply after such treatment as shall be
                     required by the Department.

                     These waters shall also be suitable for the
                     maintenance, migration and propagation of
                     the natural and established biota; and for
                     primary contact recreation; industrial and
                     agricultural water supply and any other
                     reasonable uses.

3.2.1  FLOATING SOLIDS. SETTLEABLE SOLIDS, OIL. GREASE.. COLOR AND TURBIDITY

       None noticeable in the water or deposited along the shore or on the"
       aquatic substrata in quantities detrimental to the natural biota.
       None which would render the waters unsuitable for the designated uses.
                                    252

-------
SECTION 3.2                                                               FW-2


3.2.2  TOXIC OR DELETERIOUS SUBSTANCES INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO MINERAL
       ACIDS. CAUSTIC ALKALI. CYANIDES. HEAVY METALS. CARBON DIOXIDE, AMMONIA
       OR AMMONIUM COMPOUNDS. CHLORINE, PHENOLS. PESTICIDES. ETC.

       None, either alone or in combination with other substances, in such
       concentrations as to affect humans or be detrimental to the natural
       aquatic biota or which would render the waters unsuitable for the
       designated uses.  None which would cause the Potable Water Standards
       of the Department for drinking water to be exceeded after appropriate
       treatment.

3.2.3  TASTE AND ODOR PRODUCING SUBSTANCES

       None offensive to humans or which would produce offensive tastes
       and/or odors in water supplies and fauna used for human consumption.
       None which would render the waters unsuitable for the designated uses.

3.2.4  £H

       Between 6.5 and 8.5.

3.2.5  DISSOLVED OXYGEN

       (a)  Trout Production Haters - Not less than 7.0 mg/1 at any time.

       (b)  Trout Maintenance Streams - Daily average not less than 6.0 mg/1.
            Not less than 5.0 mg/1 at any time.

       (c)  Trout Maintenance Lakes - Daily average not less than 6.0 mg/1.
            Not less than 5.0 mg/1 at any time.

            In eutrophic lakes when stratification is present, not less
            than 4.0 mg/1 in or above the thermocline where water tem-
            peratures are below 72°F.  At depths where the water is 72°F.
            or above, daily average not less than 6.0 mg/1 and not less
            than 5.0 mg/1 at any time.

       (d)  Nontrout Waters - Daily average not less than 5.0 mg/1.  Not
            less than 4.0 mg/1 at any time.

3.2.6  TEMPERATURE

       (a)  Trout Production Waters - Natural temperatures shall prevail
            except where properly treated wastewater effluents may be
            discharged.  Where such discharges occur, stream temperatures
            shall not be raised more than 1°F.
                                     253

-------
SECTION 3.2                                                              FW-2


       (b)  Trout Maintenance Streams - No heat may be added which would
            cause temperatures to exceed 2°F. over the natural  temperatures
            at any time or which would cause temperatures in excess of 68°F.

            Reductions in temperatures may be permitted where it can be
            shown that trout will benefit without detriment to  other des-
            ignated water uses.  The rate of temperature change in des-
            ignated mixing zones shall not cause mortality of the biota.

       (c)  Trout Maintenance Lakes - No thermal alterations except where it
            can be shown to benefit the designated uses.

       (d)  Nontrout Haters - No thermal alterations, except in designated
            mixing zones, which would cause temperatures to deviate more
            than 5°F. at any time from natural stream temperatures or more
            than 3°F. in the epilimnion of lakes and other standing waters.

            No heat may be added, except in designated mixing zones, which
            would cause temperatures to exceed 82°F. for small  mouth bass
            or yellow perch waters or 86°F. for other nontrout  waters.

            The rate of temperature change in designated mixing zones shall
            not cause mortality of the biota.

3.2.7  RADIOACTIVITY

       Current U.S. Public Health Service Drinking Water Standards shall
       apply.

3.2.8  BACTERIAL QUALITY

       Fecal coliform levels shall not exceed a geometric mean  of 200/100 ml.
       Samples shall be obtained at sufficient frequencies and  at locations
       and during periods which will permit valid interpretation of labora-
       tory analyses.

       Appropriate sanitary surveys shall also be carried out as a supple-
       ment to such sampling and laboratory analyses.
                                     254

-------
               SECTION 3.4 - SURFACE WATER QUALITY CRITERIA FOR TW-1  WATERS

                     CLASS TW-1 - Tidal waters approved as sources
                     of public potable water supply.  These waters
                     shall be suitable for public potable water
                     supply after such treatment as shall be
                     required by the Department.

                     These waters shall be suitable for shellfish
                     harvesting where permitted.

                     These waters shall also be suitable for the
                     maintenance, migration and propagation of
                     the natural and established biota; and for
                     primary contact recreation; industrial and
                     agricultural water supply and any other
                     reasonable uses.

3.4.1  FLOATING SOLIDS. SETTLEABLE SOLIDS, OIL. GREASE, COLOR AND TURBIDITY

       None noticeable in the water or deposited along the shore or on the
       aquatic substrata in quantities detrimental to the natural biota.
       None which would render the waters unsuitable for the designated "uses.

3.4.2  TOXIC OR DELETERIOUS SUBSTANCES INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO MINERAL
       ACIDS, CAUSTIC ALKALI, CYANIDES. HEAVY METALS. CARBON DIOXIDE, AMMONIA
       OR AMMONIUM COMPOUNDS. CHLORINE, PHENOLS, PESTICIDES, ETC.

       None, either alone, or in combination with other substances, in such
       concentrations as to affect humans or be detrimental to the natural
       aquatic biota or which would render the waters unsuitable for the
       designated uses.  None which would cause the Potable Water Standards
       of the Department for drinking water to be exceeded after appropriate
       treatment.

3.4.3  TASTE AND ODOR PRODUCING SUBSTANCES

       None offensive to humans or which would produce offensive tastes and/or
       odors in water supplies and biota used for human consumption.   None
       which would render the waters unsuitable for the designated uses.

3.4.4  pH_

       Between 6.5 and 8.5.

3.4.5  DISSOLVED OXYGEN

       (a)  Trout Maintenance Waters - Daily average not less than 6.0 mg/1.
            Not less than 5.0 mg/1 at any time.


                                     255

-------
SECTION 3.4                                                            TW-1


       (b)  Nontrout Waters - Daily average not less than 5.0 mg/1.  Not
            less than 4.0 mg/1 at any time.

3.4.6  TEMPERATURE

       (a)  Trout Maintenance Streams - No heat may be added which would
            cause temperatures to exceed 2°F. over the natural temperatures
            at any time or which would cause temperatures in excess of 68°F.

            Reductions in temperatures may be permitted where it can be
            shown that trout will benefit without detriment to other
            designated water uses.  The rate of temperature change in
            designated mixing zones shall not cause mortality of the biota.

       (b)  Nontrout Waters - No heat may be added except in designated
            mixing zones, which would cause temperatures to exceed 85°F.,
            or 82°F. in yellow perch waters, or which will  cause the monthly
            mean of the maximum daily temperature at any site, prior to the
            addition of any heat, to be exceeded by more than 4°F. during
            September through May, or more than 1.5°F. during June through "
            August.  The rate of temperature change in designated mixing
            zones shall not cause mortality of the biota.

3.4.7  RADIOACTIVITY

       Current U.S. Public Health Service Drinking Water Standards shall
       apply.
                                                                    of
3.4.8  BACTERIAL QUALITY

       (a)  Approved Shellfish Harvesting Waters - Where harvesting
            shellfish is permitted, requirements established by the
            National Shellfish Sanitation Program as set forth in its
            current manual  of operations shall  apply.

       (b)  All  Other Waters - Fecal  coliform levels shall  not exceed a
            geometric mean  of 200/100 ml.

            Samples shall be obtained at sufficient frequencies and at
            locations and during periods which  will permit  valid inter-
            pretation of laboratory analyses.

            Appropriate sanitary surveys shall  be carried out as a supple-
            ment to such sampling and laboratory analyses.
                                    256

-------
               SECTION 3.7 - SURFACE WATER QUALITY CRITERIA FOR CW-1  WATERS

                     CLASS CW-1 - The waters of the Atlantic Ocean
                     within 1500 feet from mean low tide shoreline
                     or to a bottom depth of 15 feet below the mean
                     low tide elevation, whichever is more distant
                     from the mean low tide shoreline.

                     These waters shall be suitable for primary
                     contact recreation; the maintenance, migration
                     and propagation of the natural and established
                     biota and any other reasonable uses.

3.7.1  FLOATING SOLIDS. SETTLEABLE SOLIDS, OIL. GREASE, COLOR AND TURBIDITY

       None noticeable in the water or deposited along the shore or on the
       aquatic substrata in quantities detrimental to the natural biota.
       None which would render the waters unsuitable for the designated uses.

3.7.2  TOXIC OR DELETERIOUS SUBSTANCES INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO MINERAL
       ATlDS. CAUSTIC ALKALI, CYANIDES, HEAVY METALS, CARBON DIOXIDE, AMRWlA
       OR AMMONIUM COMPOUNDS. CHLORINE, PHENOLS, PESTICIDES. ETC.

       None, either alone or in combination with other substances, in such
       concentrations as to affect humans or be detrimental to the natural
       aquatic biota or which would render the waters unsuitable for the
       designated uses.

3.7.3  TASTE'AND ODOR PRODUCING SUBSTANCES

       None offensive to humans or which would produce offensive tastes and
       odors in biota used for human consumption.  None which would render
       the waters unsuitable for the designated uses.

3.7.4  pJi

       Between 6.5 and 8.5.

3.7.5  DISSOLVED OXYGEN

       Not less than 5.0 mg/1 at any time.

3.7.6  TEMPERATURE

       No heat may be added directly to these waters.  As a result of any
       heat which may be added elsewhere, the temperature at any given site
       may not exceed 80°F., nor may the monthly mean of the maximum daily
       temperature, prior to the addition of any heat, be exceeded by more
       than 4°F. during September through May or more than 1.5°F. during
       June through August.


                                    257

-------
SECTION 3.7                                                             CW-1


3.7.7  RADIOACTIVITY

       Current U.S. Public Health Service Drinking Water Standards shall
       apply.

3.7.8  BACTERIAL QUALITY

       Fecal coliform levels shall not exceed a geometric mean of 50/100 ml.
       Samples shall be obtained at sufficient frequencies and at locations
       and during periods which will permit valid interpretation of labora-
       tory analyses.

       Appropriate sanitary surveys shall also be carried out as a supple-
       ment to such sampling and laboratory analyses.

               SECTION 3.8 - SURFACE WATER QUALITY CRITERIA FOR CW-2 WATERS

                     CLASS CW-2 - Atlantic Ocean waters beyond
                     those established under CW-1 to the three
                     mile limit.

                     These waters shall be suitable for secondary
                     contact recreation; the maintenance, migration
                     and propagation of the natural and established
                     biota and any other reasonable uses.

3.8.1  FLOATING SOLIDS. SETTLEABLE SOLIDS, OIL. GREASE. COLOR AND TURBIDITY

       None noticeable in the water or deposited on the aquatic substrata in
       quantities detrimental to the natural biota.  None which would render
       the waters unsuitable for the designated uses.

3.8.2  TOXIC OR DELETERIOUS SUBSTANCES INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO MINERAL
       ACIDS, CAUSTIC ALKALI, CYANIDES, HEAVY METALS. CARBON DIOXIDE. AMMONIA
       OR AMMONIUM COMPOUNDS. CHLORINE. PHENOLS. PESTICIDES. ETC.

       None, either alone or in combination with other substances, in such
       concentrations as to affect humans or be detrimental to the natural
       aquatic biota or which would render the waters unsuitable for the
       designated uses.

3.8.3  TASTE AND ODOR PRODUCING SUBSTANCES

       None offensive to humans or which would produce offensive tastes and
       odors in fauna used for human consumption.  None which would render
       the waters unsuitable for the designated uses.


                                    258

-------
SECTION 3.8                                                            CW-2


3.8.4  jjH

       Between 6.5 and 8.5.

3.8.5  DISSOLVED OXYGEN

       Not less than 5.0 mg/1 at any time.

3.8.6  TEMPERATURE

       No heat may be added, except in designated mixing zones, which would
       cause the temperature to exceed 80°F., or which would cause the monthly
       mean of the maximum daily temperature at any site, prior to the addition
       of any heat, to be exceeded by more than 4°F. during September through
       May; or more than 1.5°F. during June through August.  The rate of
       temperature change in designated mixing zones shall  not cause mortality
       of the biota.

3.8.7  RADIOACTIVITY

       Current U.S. Public Health Service Drinking Water Standards shall
       apply.

3.8.8  BACTERIAL QUALITY

       Fecal coliform levels shall not exceed a geometric mean of 200/100 ml.
       Samples shall be obtained at sufficient frequencies  and at locations
       and during periods which will permit valid interpretation of labora-
       tory analyses.

       Appropriate sanitary surveys shall also be carried out as a supplement
       to such sampling and laboratory analyses.
Source:  NJDEP, 1971b.
                                     259

-------
                                   APPENDIX B

                   METHODOLOGIES USED TO ESTIMATE POPULATION


     Both the DSRP and FR&W used the same general methodology in calculating

population projections for the Central service area.  This methodology can be

expressed as follows:



                                 1990 Estimate

            1970 census population
     plus   Seasonal housing population!/
     plus   Approved 1970. 1971, and 1972 building permits

     equals   1972 peak seasonal population



            1972 peak seasonal population
     plus   Number of units definitely proposed

     equals   1990 estimate of permanent population

     Although the DSRP and FR&W used the same general  methodology, their under-

lying assumptions differed:

                        Assumptions for 1990 Estimate

Factor                         DSRP                           FR&W
Wetlands                       not developed              developed
Incremental growth             not included               not included
Proposed growth                100% built by 1990         80% built by 1990
Persons/unit in PRDl/                    3.01                   2.4
Persons/unit in apartments             2.1                 not given
Persons/unit in retirement community   2.0                not given
Persons/unit in single family          3.5                    3.5
VU.S. Census categories:   vacant seasonal  and occasional  use,
2/Average number of persons per household.
                                    260

-------
     Only the DSRP calculated zoned capacity estimates.  The underlying
assumptions for zoned capacity estimates follow:
                  Assumptions For Zoned Capacity Estimates
Category                                  Degree of Development
Definitely proposed PUD's and PRD's       100%
Zoned single family or PRO                50% single family, 50% PRO
Zoned multi family                        25% apartments, 75% single family
Zoned industrial                          75% industrial, 25% residential
Source:  DSRP, 1973.
                                       261

-------
                                                      APPENDIX C



                            NATIONAL PRIMARY AND SECONDARY AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
Pollutant
Carbon
monoxide
Hydrocarbons
(nonmethane)

Nitrogen
dioxide
Photochemical
oxidants
Particulate
matter


Sulfur
dioxide

Type of
Standard
Primary and
secondary
Primary and
secondary

Primary and
secondary
Primary and
secondary
Primary

Secondary

Primary

Secondary
Averaging
Time
1 hour
8 hours
3 hours
(6 to 9
a.m.)
1 year

1 hour

24 hours
24 hours
24 hours
24 hours
24 hours
1 year
3 hours
Frequency
Parameter
Annual maximum^/
Annual maximum
Annual maximum


Arithmetic mean

Annual maximum

Annual maximum
Annual geometric met
'
Annual maximum
Annual geometric me£
Annual maximum
Arithmetic mean
Annual maximum
Concen
ug/mj
40,000
10,000
160^


100

160

2.60
n 75
150
n 60^-
365
80
1,300
tration
ppm
35
9
0.24^


0.05

0.08

_
-
-
—
0.14
0.03
0.5
ro
cr>
ro
      a/Not to be exceeded more than- once per year.

      b/As a guide in devising implementation plans for achieving oxidant standards.

      c/As a guide to be used in assessing implementation plans for achieving the annual maximum 24-hour standard.
      Source:  U.S. EPA, 1971e.

-------
                                  APPENDIX D
     ALTERNATIVE TREATMENT PLANT SITES. COLLECTION SYSTEM SEWER ROUTINGS.
                OUTFALL ROUTINGS. AND SLUDGE DISPOSAL SITESl/
     The criteria used in selecting proposed sites and routings were 1) that
the proposed site or routing minimize the potential for adverse environmental
effects, and 2) that the proposed site or routing be cost-effective.  Figures
D-l through D-10 illustrate the alternatives.  Since the choice of a treatment
plant site has a direct bearing on the collection system alignment, the alter-
native plant sites will be discussed first.  Alternative collection system
routes to the selected plant site will then be presented.  Discussions of al-
                                                         ^
ternative outfall alignments and sludge disposal sites complete the appendix.
                             TREATMENT PLANT SITES
     Options are available in the selection of a site for the OCCSTP because
the proposed project involves the construction of a completely new system
rather than the alteration or expansion of an existing system.  Approximately
60 ha (150 acre) of land will be required, of which 10 ha (25 acre) will be
used for construction of the treatment units and associated structures.  The
remaining 50 ha (125 acre) will be used as a buffer zone.  If the OCCSTP is
expanded in the future, which is possible sometime around 1985, 12 ha (30
acre) will be subtracted from the buffer zone for construction of the addi-
tional units.  A 38 ha (95 acre) buffer zone will be permanently maintained.
The sewage treatment facilities will not necessarily be in the exact center
l_/Much of the information contained in this appendix has been extracted from
  the applicant's environmental assessment statement (EAC, 1973).
                                     263

-------
                                                                                                                                         LAKEWOOD
                                                                                                                                          TWP.
(Q
C
O
 I
                                                                                                                          CENTRAL SERVICE
                                                                                                                          AREA BOUNDARY
                                                                                                                      EXISTING SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT

                                                                                                                      PROPOSED PUMP OR LIFT STATION


                                                                                                                      PROPOSED REGIONAL INTERCEPTOR


                                                                                                                      ALTERNATIVE REGIONAL INTERCFPTOR

                                                                                                                      PROPOSED OCEAN OUTFALL


                                                                                                                      ALTERNATIVE OCEAN OUTFALL

                                                                                                                      EXISTING SEWER LINE


                                                                                                                      DIRECTION OF SEWAGE FLOW


                                                                                                                      EXISTING PUMP, LIFT STATION
                                 SEWERAGE  SYSTEM ALTERNATIVES  FOR THE  CENTRAL  SERVICE  AREA
                                                                      KEY MAP

-------

-------

-------
                                                                 BERKELEY

                                                                   A
                                                           c     TOWNSHIP
: OCSA, 1973-74.
      SEWERAGE SYSTEM ALTERNATIVES  FOR THE CENTRAL SERVICE AREA

                                 Figure D—4

-------
                                                     FOR ADJOINING AREA SEE FIGURE 0-6
(0
c
T
(0

o
I
en
              : OCSA. 1973-74
                                                     FOR ADJOINING AREA SEE FIGURE D-10
                              SEWERAGE SYSTEM  ALTERNATIVES FOR THE CENTRAL SERVICE AREA

-------
                                                FOR ADJOINING AREA SEE FIGURE D-7
Source: OCSA, 1973-74.
                                                OR ADJOINING AREA SEE FIGURE D-S
                      SEWERAGE SYSTEM ALTERNATIVES FOR THE  CENTRAL SERVICE AREA

-------
                    FOR ADJOINING AREA SEE FIGURE 0-8

                                  UNION BRANCH -
                                                  RIOGEWAV BRANCH INTERCEPTOR
                                                                     500      1000
               FOR ADJOINING AREA SEE FIGURE D-6
SEWERAGE  SYSTEM ALTERNATIVES FOR THE  CENTRAL SERVICE AREA
                            Figure D—7

-------
                       FOR ADJOINING AREA SEE FIGURE D-7
SEWERAGE SYSTEM ALTERNATIVES FOR THE CENTRAL SERVICE AREA
                          Figure D—8

-------
                                  MANCHESTER TOWNSHIP
                      FOR ADJOINING A8(A SEE FIOU8E D-7
SEWERAGE SYSTEM  ALTERNATIVES FOR THE CENTRAL SERVICE  AREA
                          Figure D —9

-------
                                    FOR ADJOINING AREA SEE FIGURE D-5
                                                                                                  W1
                                                                                                     m
EXISTING OUTFALL
 BERKELEY TWP.
  SEW. AUTH.
L A
  '
 • j blAiiut r«K*.                      SEASIDE PAR
*1 I
  l*-\ NOTE: PROPOSED OUTFALL EXTENDS 1500 M (5000 FT)
 ^^	 OFFSHORE OF ISLAND BEACH. A 52O M (1700 fl)
^^"^     OIFFUSER PIPE WILL BE CONNECTED TO THIS OUTFALL.
";;,;;.0.™/   \\     \
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT   \ *
                                                                                                      SCALE
                                                                             EXISTING .	
                                                                           OBSTP OUTFALL
                    SEWERAGE SYSTEM ALTERNATIVES FOR .THE CENTRAL SERVICE  AREA

-------
of the selected site, but there will be a minimum buffer strip of 150 m
(500 ft) on each side of the treatment plant.
     In all, twelve alternative treatment plant sites were considered by the
OCSA.  Ten of these were evaluated by the EAC in the applicant's environmental
assessment statement (see Figures D-3 to D-6).  Subsequently, two sites west
of the Garden State Parkway were suggested to the OCSA by local citizens groups,
Table D-l summarizes the major reasons for accepting or rejecting each of the
twelve sites.  As shown in the table, a combination of environmental and eco-
nomic considerations narrowed the field of alternatives to three:  Segal
Street West, Segal Street East, and Pinewald.
                               Segal Street Area
     Segal Street West and Segal Street East are separate, but adjoining sites
in Berkeley Township (see Figures D-4 and D-6).  Abandoned sand and gravel
pits mark the center of the Segal Street West site.  The treatment units
and associated facilities would be constructed on the mined areas, leaving  a
150 m (500 ft) buffer strip of trees along the northern and eastern sides of
the site and a 150 m (500 ft) buffer strip of abandoned sand and gravel  pits
along the southern and western sides.  Vegetation at the site is common and
there are no rare or endangered species of birds or animals in the area.
     The Segal Street East site is close to areas that are undergoing resi-
dential  development.  However, the treatment facilities would be screened
from view by the 150 m (500 ft) buffer strip.  Again, vegetation at the site
is common and there are no rare or endangered species of birds or animals in
the area.
                                     274

-------
                                    FOR ADJOINING AREA SEE FIGURE D-5
  I ""	' """                        SEASIDE PA

  |*-s-  NOTE: PROPOSED OUTFALL EXTENDS 1500 M (5000 FT)
 ^^.	 OFFSHORE OF ISLAND BEACH. A 520 M (1?00 FT)
^r""^     DIFFUSES PIPE Will BE CONNECTED TO THIS OUTFALL.
                  SEWERAGE SYSTEM ALTERNATIVES FOR  THE CENTRAL  SERVICE  AREA

-------
of the selected site, but there will be a minimum buffer strip of 150 m
(500 ft) on each side of the treatment plant.
     In all, twelve alternative treatment plant sites were considered by the
OCSA.  Ten of these were evaluated by the EAC in the applicant's environmental
assessment statement (see Figures D-3 to D-6).  Subsequently, two sites west
of the Garden State Parkway were suggested to the OCSA by local citizens groups.
Table D-l summarizes the major reasons for accepting or rejecting each of the
twelve sites.  As shown in the table, a combination of environmental and eco-
nomic considerations narrowed the field of alternatives to three:  Segal
Street West, Segal Street East, and Pinewald.
                               Segal Street Area
     Segal Street West and Segal Street East are separate, but adjoining sftes
in Berkeley Township (see Figures D-4 and D-6).   Abandoned sand and gravel
pits mark the center of the Segal Street West site.  The treatment units
and associated facilities would be constructed on the mined areas, leaving a
150 m (500 ft) buffer strip of trees along the northern and eastern sides of
the site and a 150 m (500 ft) buffer strip of abandoned sand and gravel pits
along the southern and western sides.  Vegetation at the site is common and
there are no rare or endangered species of birds or animals in the area.
     The Segal Street East site is close to areas that are undergoing resi-
dential  development.  However, the treatment facilities would be screened
from view by the 150 m (500 ft) buffer strip.  Again, vegetation at the site
is common and there are no rare or endangered species of birds or animals in
the area.
                                     274

-------
                                                               TABLE D-l

                                            SUMMARY ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVE
                                                         SITES FOR THE OCCSTP
Map Designation^/
      Site
Environmental Evaluation and EAC Recommendation
      W-l

      W-2
      and
      W-3
      W-4

      W-5


      W-6



      W-7
      W-8
      and
      W-9
      W-10
Segal Street West

Berkeley Shores East
       and
Berkeley Shores West
Segal Street East

Pinewald


Forked River



Sloop Creek
Western Boulevard
        and
Cedar Creek
Butler Boulevard
                                   Double Trouble
                                        and
                                   Beachwood
                                   (sites west of  the
                                    Garden State Parkway)
Recommended as first choice.

Not recommended because trucks transporting sludge from the
treatment plant to the landfill  site would have to use local
residential streets.  This practice would create a potential
health hazard, cause odor problems, and impair the aesthetic
value of the area.

Acceptable as second choice.

Acceptable as third choice provided the outfall is realigned
to avoid Island Beach State Park.

Not recommended because the outfall line would damage part of
Barnegat Bay's estuarine ecosystem and Island Beach State
Park's sole freshwater pond.

Not recommended because the mature forest at this site is an
especially valuable wildlife habitat.  Drainage at the center
of the site is extremely poor; extensive landscaping of the
site would be required prior to construction.

Not recommended because both sites have potential value as
State or municipal parklands.  Construction of the outfall
line would damage Island Beach State Park and part of Barnegat
Bay's estuarine ecosystem.

Not recommended because site development would involve des-
truction of 18 ha (45 acres)  of wetlands and because radical
alteration of drainage patterns  would cause severe siltation
problems in Clamming Creek.

Rejected because neither site was more environmentally advan-
tageous than sites W-l through W-10 and because neither site
was cost effective ($5 to $7 million more in capital costs
and $350,000 more in annual costs than the other alternative
sites).
a/See Figures D-3 through D-6.


Source: EAC, 1973.

-------
     The advantages of building the treatment plant at one of the Segal  Street
sites are:
        1.  This is the most acceptable location from an environmental
            standpoint.
        2.  The surrounding area is still  relatively undeveloped.
        3.  Use of either site would be in conformance with the local
            land use plan:   construction would be almost entirely within
            the industrial  zone with the buffer strip in the residential
            zone.
        4.  Both sites are  accessible from low frequency commercial  roadways.
        5.  There is very little public opposition to use of either of  the
            Segal Street sites.
     The disadvantages are:
        1.  Officials of the Boroughs of Seaside Heights, Seaside Park  and
            Lavalette object to use of the Segal Street sites because  the
            outfall line would be near the boundary between Island Beach
            State Park and  South Seaside Park.  The officials contend  that
            the effluent would pollute local  beach waters.  They recommend
            that the outfall alignment be shifted southward to effect an
            8 to 10 km (5 to 6 mile)  separation between the OCCSTP outfall
            and the OBSTP outfall.   This would require the crossing of  Island
            Beach State Park.   The  MJDEP would not grant a permit for such
            a crossing.
        2.  Most of the flow to the sewage treatment plant would have to be
            pumped.  This would significantly increase the amount of power

                                      276

-------
            needed to operate the system.
        3.  Any necessary local pump stations would have to be built and paid
            for by the municipalities as part of their local collection
            systems.  The capital cost of such facilities would be about
            $900,000 and the annual  costs about $44,000.
        4.  The capital cost of either of the Segal Street sites would be
            somewhat higher than the capital cost of the Pinewald site.
                                 Pinewald Area
     The Pinewald site is also located in Berkeley Township (see Figure D-4).
Approximately half of the site is free of vegetation, an aftereffect of sand
and gravel mining operations.  The rest of the site supports mixed stands of
aged oak, aged pine, and young pine.  Trash and debris are scattered over the
site.  The site does not harbor any rare or endangered wildlife species.
Resident wildlife would be adequately provided for by the maintenance of a
150 m (500 ft) buffer.  The buffer would also screen the plant from the view
of passersby.
     The advantages of building the treatment plant at the Pinewald site 'are:
        1.  The location is acceptable from an environmental standpoint.
        2.  The surrounding area is undeveloped.
        3.  The site is accessible from U.S. Route 9, a major commercial road-
            way.
        4.  The capital cost would be approximately $921,000 less than the
            capital cost of either of the Segal Street alternatives.
     The disadvantages are:
        1.  The outfall line would cut across Island Beach State Park.  The

                                      277

-------
             NJDEP would not issue a permit for such a crossing.  The capital
             cost of routing the outfall to a location north of the State park
             would be $838,000.
         2.  The necessary local pump stations would have to be built and paid
             for by Berkeley and Lacey Townships as part of their local collec-
             tion systems.  The capital cost of such facilities would be about
             $450,000 and the annual costs about $22,000.
         3.  Most of the flow to the sewage treatment plant would have to be
             pumped.  This would significantly increase the amount of power
             needed to operate the system.
         4.  Mining operations have so altered the area and its natural drain-
             age patterns that extensive site preparation would be required
             prior to construction.
                             Final Site Selection
     After considering the recommendations made by the EAC and the NJDEP and
the comments made at public hearings held on November 1 and 2, 1972, February
14, 1973 and June 14, 1973, the OCSA chose to locate the OCCSTP in the Segal
Street area.  The proposed site is actually a compromise between the Segal
Street West and Segal Street East sites, (see Figures D-4 and D-6).
     A letter from the NJDEP to the OCSA, which was read into the record of
the June 14, 1973 public hearing, outlines the NJDEP's reasons for recommend-
ing the Segal Street site:
        We are now in a position to recommend the Segal Street site over
     the Berkeley Shores and Pinewall [sic] Sites.  This determination
     was made for the following reasons:
        1.  The Segal Street Site is more compatible with the existing

                                       278

-------
             land use patterns, the zoning plan, and future land use
             planned for Berkeley Township.

         2.  The site is nearer to the sludge disposal sites, and
             fewer problems would be encountered in connection with
             the selection of sludge trucking routes which would be
             accepted by the public.

         3.  This site maximizes the use of existing rights of way
             (the abandoned C.R.R. New Jersey Railroad Right of Way),
             reducing the main interceptor length and utilizing an
             existing corridor.

         4.  The Segal Street Site also provides for a greater future
             flexibility to accommodate land disposal of treated
             effluent since it will be closer to possible land dis-
             posal areas.

         5.  There has been demonstrated more public acceptance of
             this site since it is removed from existing recreational
             and residential areas.

         We recognize that this site will result in a slightly higher
     annual operating cost because of the necessity to utilize increased
     pumping from service areas located east of the Railroad.  However,
     the compatibility of this site with land use planning in the area
     and the preservation of flexibility for the future outweighs this
     slight differential in cost.  (OCSA, 1973-74).

     The OCSA acknowledged at the public hearing that the deciding factor in

their selection of the Segal Street site was the NJDEP's endorsement of that

alternative.  The OCSA's other reasons for choosing the Segal Street site were:

     1.  Communications from the NJDEP and the EPA indicate that the

         additional capital and operating costs of the Segal Street

         site (as compared to the Berkeley Shores site) are justifiable

         because of the disadvantages associated with the Berkeley Shores

         sites.

     2.  Segal Street is the site recommended by the EAC.

     3.  The Pinewald site is unacceptable because it requires an outfall
                                     279

-------
          crossing of Island Beach State Park.  This is prohibited by the
          NJDEP.
      4.  The Segal Street site is generally preferred by local communities
          and groups.  (OCSA, 1973-74).
                       COLLECTION SYSTEM SEWER ROUTINGS
     The service area for the OCCSTP was delineated by the natural drainage
basins of Toms River, Forked River, Cedar Creek, and the Island Beach barrier
bar.  The proper locations for interceptor sewers within the service area were
determined by such factors as present and projected population distribution,
land use patterns, and sewage treatment requirements.  Proposed routings were
selected on the basis of their ability to minimize the potential adverse en-
vironmental effects of construction and operation of the sewer line.
     A detailed environmental assessment of each alternative routing was pre-
sented to. the public by the OCSA.  The proposed routings were either recommend-
ed by or acceptable to the OCSA's environmental consultant, the EAC.  Generally,
the recommended routings are located in pavement while the acceptable routings
involve disruption of natural habitat.  In several cases, the proposed routing
passes through or very close to an environmentally critical area; these cases
are discussed below.   A summary of all the alternative interceptor routings is
presented in Table D-2.   The alternative routings are shown in Figures D-l
through D-10.
                          South Bayshore Interceptor
     Part of the proposed routing (segment A-2) pases near large shade trees
that line the 1200 m (4000 ft) paved section of Old Lower Shore Road.  These
trees should be preserved.  Another part of the proposed routing (segments
B-l, B-2, B-2A) passes near shade trees along Main Street (Old Main Shore
Road), U.S. Route 9,  and Parker Avenue.  These trees must be avoided.
                                  280

-------
               TABLE D-2
ALTERNATIVE COLLECTION SYSTEM ROUTINGS
     FOR THE CENTRAL SERVICE AREA
Interceptor or Force Main
Pipe Diameter—''
cm (in.)
Alternative
Routings by
Segment^-'
Comparative Cost—'
In Dollars
Capital
Annual
EAC Evaluation
OCSA Proposed
Alternative^/
Mainland
South Bayshore Interceptor


North Bayshore Interceptor

Ocean Gate Interceptor

41 to 69
(16 to 27)
61 to 107
(24 to 42)
91 to 107
(36 to 42)
107
(42)
137
(54)
61
(24)
61
(24)
A-l
A- 2
A-3
A-4
B-l
B-2
B-2A
B-1.B-2.B-2A
C-l
C-2
C-3
C-4
D-l
D-2
D-3
D-4
E-l
E-2
E-3
F-l
F-2
G-l
G-2
3,441,350
2,163,980
2,323,070
2,869,450
3,074,450
4,214,600
3,346,900
3,504,810
1,419,900
2,201,010
1,883,400
1,017,590 .
-
49,390
51,155
53,520
88,015
116,260
98,630
143,615
96,435
20,385
32,505
115,145
16,155
-
Recommended
Acceptable
Not Recommended
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Recommended
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Recommended
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Recommended
Acceptable
Acceptable
Recommended
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
A-2
B-1.B-2.B-2A
C-4
D-3
E-3
F-2
G-2

-------
TABLE D-2 (Continued)
Interceptor or Force Main
Wrangle Brook Interceptor

Jakes 'Branch Interceptor
Ridgeway Branch Interceptor
Union Branch Interceptor
Ridgeway Branch - Union
Branch Interceptor
Toms River Interceptor
Toms River Crossing
Interceptor (Including
Fischer Boulevard Inter-
ceptor, Section H)
Pipe Diameter-
cm (in.)
61
(24)
69
(27)
53
(21)
41 to 76
(16 to 30)
61
(24)
91
(36)
91
(36)
41 to 91
(16 to 36)
152
(60)
76 to 91
(30 to 36)
Alternative
Routings by
Segment—'
L-l
L-2
M
N-l
N-2
0-1
0-2
P-l
P-2
Q
R-l
R-2
R-2A
R-2B
R-2.R-2B
0-1, R-l
0-2,' R-2
0-2, R-2A
0-2, R-2.R-2B
S-l
S-2
T (original)
T (alternate)
Comparative Cost—'
In Dollars
Capital
777,670
558,250
287,020
1,184,790
954,960
Annual
16,230
11,605
5,730
46,520
38,680
See Ridgeway Branch -
Union Branch Interceptor
883,250
527,430
913,470
13,310
9,600
14,750
See Ridgeway Branch -
Union Branch Interceptor
2,627,060
1,846,310
2,812,510
3,295,110
2,569,500
2,726,870
2,188,510
82,290
45,890
58,620
92,380
41,270
111,395
100,805
EAC Evaluation
Recommended
Acceptable
Acceptable
Recommended
Acceptable
Recommended
, Acceptable
Recommended
Acceptable
Acceptable
Recommended
Not Recommended
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Recommended
Not Recommended
Acceptable
Acceptable
Recommended
Acceptable
Acceptable
Recommended
OCSA Proposed
Alternative^-'
L-2
M
N-2
0-2
P-2
Q
R-2.R-2B
0-2.R-2.R-2B
S-2
T (alternate)

-------
                                                        TABLE D-2  (Continued)
Interceptor or Force Main
Toms River Relief Inter-
ceptor
Butler Boulevard—''
Interceptor
Mill Creek Interceptor^/
Davenport Interceptor—'
Pipe Diameter—'
cm (in.)
137 to 183
(54 to 72)
69
(27)
91
(36)
91
(36)
Alternative
Routings by
Segment—'
Y-l *
Y-2
Y-3
-
-
-
Comparative CostS.'
In Dollars
Capital
-
-
-
-
Annual
-
-
-
-
EAC Evaluation
Acceptable
Not Recommended
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Not Evaluated
OCSA Proposed
Alternative^/
Y-3
Butler Boulevard
Mill Creek
Davenport
Island Beach
Lavallette Interceptor
Seaside Heights Interceptor
South Island Beach Inter-
ceptor
-
91
(36)
36 to 76
(14 to 30)
I
J
K
279,000
390,850
1,418,250
22,553
27,972
79,242
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
I
J
K
a/See Figure 19.
Win each case, the proposed routing is either one of the alternative routings or a combination of alternative routings.
^/Where available, approximate cost figures have been included for the sake of comparison.
d/Alternatives considered subsequent to public hearings.
Source:  EAC, 1973; OCSA, 1973-74.

-------
Siltation in Lower Barnegat Lake must also be avoided.  The final part of the
proposed routing  (segment C-4) is not expected to cause any environmental dam-
age because it lies entirely within the Central Railroad of New Jersey right-
of-way.
                          North Bayshore Interceptor
     The proposed routing for this interceptor (segments D-3 and E-3), is not
expected to cause any environmental damage because it lies in the Central
Railroad of New Jersey right-of-way.
                            Ocean Gate Interceptor
     The proposed routing (segment F-2) is acceptable because most of it lies
in existing roadway.  Part of the interceptor will pass through a severely
fire-damaged area of coastal hardwoods.  The young stands of red maple and -
black gum that have grown since the fire will be removed during construction;
the stands should reestablish themselves within a few years.
     In the vicinity of Ocean Gate Drive, the proposed routing crosses Duck
Pond.  This crossing is acceptable if the following measures are taken:   1)
pond bank stability is maintained to prevent siltation in the pond, 2) the
small cedar stands on the western side of the pond are avoided, and 3) the
pond banks are seeded immediately after construction to establish vegetative
cover and to prevent bank erosion.
                           Wrangle Brook Interceptor
     The proposed routing (segments L-2 and M) is acceptable even though seg-
ment L-2 skirts 700 m (2300 ft) of leather leaf bog.  Leather leaf bog is not
very common in the project area.   The bog area should be protected from
                                     284

-------
disturbance by construction.
                           Jakes Branch Interceptor
     Part of the Jakes Branch interceptor (segment N-2) skirts 300 m (1000 ft)
of cranberry bog.  Construction should be carefully controlled to prevent des-
truction of the bog.  In addition, siltation in Jakes Branch and its associat-
ed ponds must be avoided.
                          Ridgeway Branch Interceptor
     The proposed routing (segment 0-2) lies within the primary flood plain of
Ridgeway Branch.  It involves one stream crossing, at Cabin Brook Branch.
According to the EAC (1973):  "There are sections of the line, specifically
just east of Alligator Road, where the line comes close to the main stream
itself.  Care should be taken at these areas where the line is close to Ridge-
way Branch to avoid siltation of the stream and possible siltation of Pine
Lake into which the Ridgeway Branch empties."  If these precautions are taken
the proposed routing is acceptable.
                           Union Branch Interceptor
     The Union Branch interceptor will be near the Pine Lake Bathing Beach.
The immediate lake area has been avoided in the proposed routing (segments
R-2, and R-2B) by placing the interceptor in Beacon Street upland of the beach.
This routing, combined with proper construction techniques, should eliminate
the hazard of siltation in Pine Lake.  As a further precaution, excavated
materials must be stock-piled away from the bathing beach.  In addition, con-
struction of the interceptor along County Route 571 should be scheduled to
allow access to the KOA campgrounds near Ridgeway Branch.

                                     285

-------
                            Toms River Interceptor
     The proposed routing (segment S-2) is acceptable if the portion of the
interceptor lying east of Oak Ridge Parkway remains in the 46 m (150 ft) power
line right-of-way and does not encroach upon the wooded area between the power
line right-of-way and the Garden State Parkway.
                        Toms River Crossing Interceptor
     The proposed routing (T-alternate) is preferred because it involves a
460 m (1500 ft) crossing of Toms River as opposed to an 1800 m (6000 ft) cross-
ing for the original routing.  Adequate measures should be taken to prevent
siltation in Toms River.  The rest of the interceptor lies in existing -road-
way rights-of-way.
                         Toms River Relief Interceptor
     Since most of this interceptor lies within the Central Railroad of New
Jersey right-of-way, no adverse environmental  effects are expected.  The pro-
posed routing (segment Y-3) places the interceptor closer to the Garden State
Parkway than does alternative Y-2 and crosses Toms River at a narrower point,
avoiding the wild rice patches that would be disturbed by alternative Y-2.
Construction precautions should be taken to avoid siltation in Toms River.
                         Butler Boulevard Interceptor
     The Butler Boulevard interceptor is acceptable because it is aligned in
existing roadway.  However, construction should avoid the specimen silver
maples that line Butler Boulevard.  If the extensive root systems of these
trees are damaged, the trees may die.

                                    286

-------
                            Mill Creek Interceptor
     The proposed interceptor routing is acceptable provided the following con-
straints are implemented:  1) extension of the existing sewer easement north-
east of U.S. Route 9 is restricted to the upland areas to prevent the distur-
bance of cedar swamps located in the lowland areas, 2) trench spoils are not
stockpiled in lowland areas or in areas susceptible to erosion, 3) the con-
stuction right-of-way through the cedar swamp area southwest of U.S. Route 9
is as narrow as possible to avoid damage to swamp vegetation, and 4) erosion
and siltation in the cedar swamps and in Mill Creek are prevented.  An alter-
native routing that would avoid the cedar swamp southwest of U.S. Route 9 was
proposed by the EAC.  The OCSA is considering this alternative.
                             Davenport Interceptor
     The alignment for this interceptor has not yet been finalized.  However,
the alignment shown in Figures D-6 and D-7 lies in existing roadway.
                           Island Beach Interceptors
     The proposed Island Beach interceptor routings (segments I, J, and l()
are acceptable because they follow existing roadway rights-of-way.  However,
"Care should be taken to avoid the pumping of excavation water into Barnegat
Bay, and construction should be performed during winter months."  (EAC, 1973).
                               OUTFALL ROUTINGS
     The routing for the OCCSTP outfall mainly depends on the location of the
treatment plant.  The proposed location for the OCCSTP is the Segal Street
site.  Alternative outfall alignments for other treatment plant sites, although
considered by the OCSA and the EAC, will not be discussed.
                                   287

-------
     The outfall line is divided into the following sections: the mainland
crossing, the Barnegat Bay crossing and the Island Beach crossing.  The
mainland section follows existing roadway and is, therefore, environmentally
acceptable is proper construction methods are employed.  The Barnegat Bay and
Island Beach crossings are discussed below.  The alternative outfall routes
are shown in Figures D-5 and D-10.
                             Barnegat Bay Crossing
     As shown in Figure D-10, two alternative bay crossings were considered.
Alternative Crossing No. 1 requires that 3390 m (11,100 ft) of the outfall be
placed in Barnegat Bay and 940 m (2800 ft) be placed in Allen Road on the
mainland.  The total length of Alternative Crossing No. 1 is 1810 m (13,900
ft).  Alternative Crossing No. 2 requires that 2520 m (8250 ft) of outfall be
placed in Barnegat Bay and 2820 m (9250 ft) be placed in mainland roadways.
The total length of Alternative Crossing No. 2 is 5340 m (17,500 ft).  Alter-
native Crossing No. 2 has a higher construction cost because of its greater
length.
     Both alternatives are acceptable, but Alternative Crossing No. 2 is pre-
ferred because it involves a shorter bay crossing.  In either case, precautions
must be taken to prevent siltation in the bay waters during construction.  The
proposed construction method (immediate backfilling after pipe installation
with material being excavated for the next section) is expected to minimize
siltation.   This method eliminates the need to establish temporary storage
points for excavated material.  The suspension of bottom sediments during con-
struction should not result in wide-spread siltation because of the relatively
low current velocities in the bay (OCSA, 1973-74).
                                    288

-------
                             Island Beach Crossing
     Seven alternative Island Beach crossings were evaluated by the EAC.  Four
of the routings follow existing roadways; three traverse Island Beach State
Park.  The alternative routings and the recommendations of the EAC are:
        21st Avenue Crossing                            Acceptable
        22nd Avenue Crossing                            Acceptable
        23rd Avenue Crossing                            Acceptable
        24th Avenue Crossing                            Acceptable
        Island Beach State Park Crossing No. 1          Acceptable
        Island Beach State Park Crossing No. 2          Not recommended
        Island Beach State Park Crossing No. 3          Not recommended
The OCSA selected the 23rd Avenue Crossing as the proposed routing.
     The three Island Beach State Park crossings were rejected because 1) the
NJDEP prohibited the crossing of the State park, 2) the EPA opposed any unne-
cessary construction in the State park, and 3) the other alternative were
more environmentally acceptable.  Ease of construction was the reason for
choosing the 23rd Avenue crossing over the other alternatives.
                             SLUDGE DISPOSAL SITES
     Sludge from the OCCSTP will be conditioned, stabilized, dewatered and
disposed of in a sanitary landfill.  Four alternative sites were considered.
The OCSA has selected two landfill sites:  Southern Ocean Landfill, Inc. and
Ocean County Landfill Corporation.  (Simpson, written communication, 1974).
     Both of the selected sludge disposal sites are State-approved private
sanitary landfills.  The Southern Ocean Landfill, Inc. is located in Ocean
Township.  Operating at a maximum capacity of 750 cu m/day (1000 cu yds/day),
                                    289

-------
this 115 ha (287 acre) site has a life expectancy of approximately thirty-five
years.   The site has an average elevation of 44 m (145 ft) above sea level,
and thetwater table lies at an average depth of 14 m (45 ft) below the surface.
The only water body in the vicinity of this site is a small stream about 1.6
km (1 mile) from the site (Caldeira, written communication, 1974).
     The Ocean County Landfill Corporation is located off State Route 70 in
Lakehurst, Manchester Township.  This 180 ha (450 acre) site has a life ex-
pectancy of approximately thirty years.   The water table lies at an average
of 28 m (90 ft) below the surface.  No water bodies lie within 1.6 km (1 mile)
of the site (Grove, oral communication,  1974).
                                    290

-------
                                  APPENDIX E

             U.S. PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE BACTERIOLOGICAL STANDARDS
                              FOR DRINKING HATER

     The U.S. Public Health Service Drinking Water Standards,  dated 1962,

state:

          3.21  When 10 ml  standard portions are examined not  more
          than 10 percent in any month shall show the presence of
          the coliform group.  The presence of the coliform group
          in three or more  10 ml portions of a standard sample shall
          not be allowable  if this occurs:

             (a.)  In two consecutive samples;

             (b.)  In more  than one sample per month when less
                   than-twenty are examined per month;  or

             (c.)  In more  than 5 percent of the samples when
                   twenty or more are examined per month...etc.

          3.22  When 100 ml standard portions are examined, not more
          than 60 percent in any month shall show the presence of
          the coliform groun.  The presence of the coliform group
          in all five of the 100 ml portions of a standard sample
          shall not be allowable if this occurs:

             (a.)  In two consecutive samples;

             (b.)  In more  than one sample per month when less
                   than five are examined per month; or

             (c.)  In more  than 20 percent of the samples when
                   five or  more are examined per month...etc.

          3.23  When the membrane filter technique is used, the arithmetic
          mean colifcrm density of all standard samples examined per month
          shall not exceed  one per 100 ml.  Coliform colonies  per standard
          sample shall not  exceed 3/50 ml, 5/100 ml, 7/200 ml, or 13/500 ml

             (a.)  In two consecutive samples;

             (b.)  In more  than one sample per month when less ,
                   than twenty are examined per. month;  or

             (c.)  In more  than five percent of the samples when
                   twenty or more are examined per month...etc.

                                    291

-------

-------