v>EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Region I
Water Quality Branch September 1980
J.F.Kennedy Federal Building
Boston. MA 02203
Water Quality
Management
For The Future
A New England Success
-------
WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT
FOR THE FUTURE:
A New England Success
The Success of Section 208 Water Quality Management
Planning in New England
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Water Quality Branch
Region I
JFK Federal Building
Boston, MA 02203
December, 1980
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This compendium of Section 208 Water Quality Planning Success Stories
in New England was compiled and published by the EPA, Region I, Water Quality
Branch. The primary effort in preparing this compendium was supplied by
Melanie Donohue on a Work Study Program from Boston University. Valuable
clerical support was provided by Sharon Moore. Publication and printing
assistance was provided by Elizabeth Strock and Gene Parker. The overall
project was under the direction of William Nuzzo.
Photo Credits:
Gene Parker EPA - Cover, pgs. 4,6,8,11,12
Martha's Vineyard Commission - pg. 15
New England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission - pg. 13
EPA DOCUMERICA - Cornelius Keyes - pg. 10
-------
WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR THE FUTURE: A NEW ENGLAND SUCCESS
When Congress passed the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments
of 1972, it recognized that some of the .water quality problems in the United
States are so complex or severe that they cannot be solved by technology
alone. As the point sources of water pollution are brought under control
through the Municipal Construction Grants Program and the NPDES Permit Pro-
gram, the significance of the impact of nonpoint source pollution becomes
increasingly evident.
Section 208 of the Clean Water Act* authorizes the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency (EPA) to administer an areawide waste treatment management plan-
ning program designed specifically to deal with nonpoint sources of water
pollution. The so-called "208" planning programs are designed to control
complex water quality problems including urban runoff, agricultural and
silvicultural runoff, septage and sludge management, lake eutrophication,
and groundwater protection.
The 208 program stresses planning by local governments and the implemen-
tation of the cost effective water quality management programs developed.
Specifically, Section 208 calls upon local governments in a particular plan-
ning area to work together to find and implement solutions to their common
water quality management problems.
Water Quality Management Planning in New England
As of May, 1980, more than $21 million in 208 grants have been made to
the sixteen designated areawide planning agencies and to the six New England
States to prepare these "208 Water Quality Management Plans". Most of the
*NOTE: The Federal Water Pollution Control Act (P.L. 92-500) was amended by
the Clean Water Act of 1977 (P.L. 95-217).
-------
initial areawide 208 plans have undergone final review and have been certified
by the appropriate State Governors and approved by EPA. Several of the 208
agencies in New England have already been successful in achieving implementa-
tion of strategies identified by 208 plans which are now resulting in actual
water quality improvements. EPA will channel future 208 funds to these areas
where real progress is being made toward solving serious state and local
water pollution problems.
Successful Implementation of Water Quality Management Planning in New England
The 208 Water Quality Management Planning Program in New England has con-
tinually stressed the importance of solving specific water quality problems
and implementing strong cost-effective, action-oriented environmental programs.
This publication presents a compendium of some of the recent 208 implementation
successes in New England. Earlier examples of successful 208 implementation
efforts have been published in the EPA Region I Environment News and the
Region I Regional Administrator's Annual Report 1979.
The compendium of recent 208 implementation successes will be presented
under the following general topic areas:
CONTENTS
A. Lake Preservation and Restoration
- Restoring Lakes in Berkshire County
B. Groundwater Protection
- Aquifer Protection Implemented in Southeastern Connecticut
- Cape Cod Towns Act on Gasoline Storage Problems
C. Proper Hazardous Waste Disposal
- Connecticut Hazardous Waste Disposal Progress
- 208 Funds and Hazardous Waste Efforts in New Hampshire
-------
D. WQM and the Agricultural and Silvicultural Conunanities
- Best Management Practices in Connecticut, Maine and New Hampshire
- Vermont 208 in Cooperation with Timber Industry Establishes Logging
Erosion Control Process
E. Septic System Maintenance and Septage Disposal
- Recylcing Septage as Fertilizer in Western Massachusetts
- Development of Massachusetts Septage Disposal Policy
- Development of a Septic System Inspection/Maintenance Program
on Martha's Vineyard
These stories demonstrate how state and local governments are working
through Section 208 of the Clean Water Act to implement programs that will
preserve and protect the quality of New England's waterways. If you would
like more information on the Section 208 Water Quality Management Program in
your area, contact the State or Regional Planning Agency in your region (see
appendix for names and addresses) or contact the EPA Region I, Water Quality
Branch, JFK Federal Building, Boston, MA 02203, 617-223-5130.
-------
RESTORING LAKES
IN BERKSHIRE COUNTY, MASSACHUSETTS
Berkshire County in western Massachusetts has long
been known for its prime recreational lakes.
Recently, the accelerated aging of the lakes
(eutrophication) has resulted in prolific weed
growth, nuisance algal bloom, reduced water
quality, and increased sediment deposition. These
problems in turn reduce the recreational value by
interfering with boating, swimming, fishing, and
aesthetics. The process of eutrophication is
accelerated by increased amounts of sediment and
nutrients entering the lake. The relationship
between human activity and accelerated aging is
widely documented and is due to land uses that
accelerate the avenues and rate of nutrient
transport from the land bo the lake water.
Having recognized the importance of their lakes,
Berkshire County residents are becoming increasing-
ly active in organizing lake management programs.
One of their most important sources of both
inspiration and information has been the Berkshire
County Regional Planning Cortmission (BCRCP). BCRPC
is the Areawide Waste Treatment Planning Agency
designated under Section 208 of the Clean Water
Act. Section 208 calls for the development of
areawide water quality management plans designed to
control complex water quality problems. Since lake
preservation and restoration were the primary
concerns of Berkshire County residents, the BCRPC
208 plan concentrated on developing management
practices for the area lakes.
BCRPC has provided technical assistance and public
information programs in order to stimulate citizen
interest in developing a lake management program.
As a result of BCRPC assistance, several county
towns have had considerable success in obtaining
funds to begin to control eutrophication, with both
restorative and preventive measures.
The principal role of BCRPC has been to provide and
organize the data necessary for the towns to apply
for funding through the Massachusetts Aquatic
Vegetation Control Program (MAVCP). fc»is program
is administered by the Division of Waterways, under
the Massachusetts Department of Environmental
Quality Engineering (DEQE). Since 1953, the
program has funded short-term solutions for
improving lakes, primarily through hervicide
application. Within the past several years, under
the direction of Mario Boschetti of DEQE, the
program has moved to long-term controls, such as
removal of available nutrients, drawdown of lakes,
and watershed control. Grants awarded under this
program equal seventy-five percent of the total
funds needed to implement the lake management
plans. The remaining twenty-five percent has to be
provided by the local coitmunities.
Several municipalities in Berkshire County assisted
by BCRPC, have applied for and received MAVCP
monies and are currently implementing their
programs. The Cheshire Lake Study Comnission for
example, used data developed by the BCRPC 208 plan
in its application for MAVCP funding for Cheshire
Reservoir. This information included land use
practices, soils analysis, and delineation of the
watershed. The BCRPC staff also provided an
overview of lake management techniques, reviewed
the technical data, assisted in the preparation of
maps and commented on the draft applications. As a
result, the Commission received a $9,000 grant for
herbicide treatment and is currently implementing
the program.
The Town of Stockbridge also made extensive use of
the lake management section of BCRPC1s 208 plan.
Town officials used BCRPC calculations of nitrogen
and phosphorus loads, nutrient budgets, impact on
lake quality of nutrient loads, land use, soils,
vegetation, and watershed boundary data to compare
control measures and costs and eventually apply for
a MAVCP grant. The town received $10,000 for a
harvesting program which began in the sunnier of
1979 and is continuing.
Laurel Lake has also received money from the
Massachusetts Aquatic Vegetation Control Program.
The $13,650 awarded was to implement a comprehensive
lake program including: drawdown, sediment impound-
ments to reduce nutrient and sediment loading, weed
harvesting, stream diversions, and monitoring. The
application for the grant was made possible by
BCRPC 208 lakes management studies. To date, some
harvesting has been successfully completed and the
siphon is being installed for the drawdown which
will begin in the fall of 1980. The initiation of
the Laurel Lake project was accelerated as a result
of a field demonstration of harvesting equipment
arranged by BCRPC.
BCRPC assisted in the preparation of a fourth
regional application for MAVCP grant. Pontoosuc
Lake received $40,500 in state funds for drawdown,
sediment removal, retention basins, harvesting,
herbicide treatment and lake monitoring. In 1979,
the public beach area was treated with herbicides
and a local contractor removed vegetation with a
weed rake: the lake was drawn down in the fall of
1979. The other projects will be implemented
during 1980. Shoreline residents have responded
favorably by contributing the matching funds
according to their shoreline frontage.
The BCRPC 208 program has effectively assisted the
towns of Berkshire County in receiving over $75,000
in state funds for lake restoration and protection.
All of the towns concerned with lake management
have been willing to provide local funds to
-------
implement the BCRPC 208 lake recommendations; this
is particularly significant in this time of tight
municipal budgets. Four out of the eight
Massachusetts lakes receiving money under the
Massachusetts Aquatic Vegetation Control Program
were assisted by the 208 Agency. The result of
BCRPC's work has been a significant improvement in
lake quality and the recognition of the need to
determine appropriate long-range strategies with
emphasis on a comprehensive lake management
approach. For further information on the BCRPC 208
Lakes Restoration Procram contact:
Bob Spencer
Berkshire County Regional Planning Commission
10 Fenn Street
Pittsfield, MA 01201
PHONE: (413)442-1521
From ENVIRONMENT NEWS 5/80
AQUIFER PROTECTION IMPLEMENTED
IN SOUTHEASTERN CONNECTICUT
The Connecticut towns of East Lyme, Waterford.
Stoningten, and Mcntville have revised or are
currently revising their Plans of Development to
include the protection of the stratified-drift
aquifer within each town. A stratified-drift
aquifer is a large underground sand and gravel
deposit of at least ten feet in saturated
thickness. Such an aquifer can supply 50 to
10,000 gallons of water per minute, when pumped.
This is a suitable volume for a municipal water
supply.
These activities are a result of the realization
of the need to develop additional sources of water
supply in the towns and to protect those currently
in use. The implementation of this environmental
program is a result of the aquifer protection
efforts funded by Section 208 of the Clean Water
Act which is assisting_state and local agencies in
the development of such regulatory programs.
In Connecticut, groundwater protection was identified
as a priority issue to be included in the 208
Water Quality Management Planning Program. This
is due primarily to the fact that very little
additional surface water supply can be developed
within the state of Connecticut. Another
important factor is that many of the existing
surface water supplies will not meet the stringent
requirements recently set by the federal Safe
Drinking Water Act. As a result, an increasing
number of communities find it necessary to
seriously consider groundwater as either a
supplement to the existing surface water supply or
as a cheap alternative to constructing the
expensive filtration facilities necessary for
those surface water supplies which do not meet
federal standards.
The Section 208 water quality management planning
already completed has identified and defined the
groundwater problems present in Connecticut. In
cooperation with the United States Geological
Survey, an outline and map of the major aquifers
have been compiled. The 208 plan reports on the
sources of contamination relevant to each aquifer.
By publishing maps of potential pollution sources,
the 208 Program has helped to convince state and
local officials that there is, indeed, a problem.
Maps have also been published by the 208 Program
which identify aquifers which currently supply
water and those which are potential public water
supplies. The recharge areas for all major
stratified-drift aquifers (both underflow and
artificial recharge) have also been mapped.
Armed with the necessary background information
and technical assistance, both provided by the 208
Program the individual towns of Connecticut are
now able to incorporate aquifer protection into
their Plans of Development.
East Lyme is completely dependent upon groundwater
for its water supply. Realizing this, the Town
has moved to protect these groundwater supplies
and has re zoned the area around its prime aquifer
from one to two-acre zones and has changed an
industrial zoned area to a non-industrial zone.
In addition, the Four Mile River aquifer has been
transferred to state and local ownership as part
of a land parcel recognized for its important
resource value.
The Town of Waterford, in reviewing and amending
its zoning regulations, will consider aquifer
protection. Special attention will be paid to
industrial zoning and necessary changes will be
made to ensure protection of aquifers.
The Town of Stonington has combined its need for
aquifer protection with the need to protect flood
plains and wetland areas from development. As a
result, a move has been made to decrease
population density over aquifers by rezoning these
areas to three-acre residential lots. The Town
has also abolished an industrial zone that was
closer than recommended to an aquifer area.
Mcntville has also updated and amended its zoning
regulations; its prime intention will be to better
protect its stratified-drift aquifers.
Such local interest actions point out the success
of the Connecticut 208 Program in implementing the
strong environmental protection programs recommended
by the Section 208 water quality management plan.
The four examples, along with the regulations
currently being drafted in Sou thington and Durham,
Connecticut, represent the viability of 208 and
the goals of national water quality management.
For further information on the groundwater
protection program of the Connecticut 208 Program
contact: Mark PoSsidento, Administrator
Connecticut 208 Program
P.O. Box 1088
Middletown, CT 06457
PHONE: (203)347-3700
From ENVIRONMENT NEWS 2/80
-------
CAPE OOP TOWNS ACT ON GASOLINE STORAGE PROBLEMS
Nine Cape Cod towns have taken steps to prevent
contamination of their groundwater resources by
acting on recommendations of the Cape Cod 208 plan
to adopt special health regulations to control
subsurface storage of gasoline and other fuels.
Gasoline leakage is identified in the "208" Water
Quality Management Plan for Cape Cod, prepared by
the Cape Cod Planning and Economic Development
Coimission (CCPEDC), as a major potential water
quality problem on the Cape, since the area is
totally dependent upon groundwater for its water
supply.
CCPEDC is the water quality management planning
agency for the Cape Cod area designated under
Section 208 of the Clean Water Act. The Clean
Water Act provides a series of programs intended
to protect and improve the quality of the Nation's
water. Section 208 specifically calls for the
development of areawide water quality management
plans designed to control complex water quality
problems. Development of such plans is the
responsibility of the designated 208 agencies.
The magnitude of the fuel storage problems is
evidenced by the six major spills that have been
reported on Cape Cod within the last three years
involving a total of more than 5,000 gallons of
gasoline. Ihe principal water supply well for one
town, Provincetown, has been closed for more than
three years because of a leak at a gas station 500
feet away from the well. Costs of cleanup and
emergency supply well construction due to this
spill has totaled over $500,000 to date. The 208
plan concludes that existing state and local fire
prevention regulations are inadequate to control
these problems and recoranends action by local
boards of health to ensure water supply
protection.
After identifying the priority of the problem in
the 208 plan, the Cape Cod Planning and Economic
Development Commission was awarded an additional
208 continuing planning grant in October, 1979,
for groundwater protection activities including
developing a model regulation for adoption by
local boards of health to control gasoline
storage.
The model regulation developed by CCPEDC includes:
registration of tanks over 900 gallons capacity
with the Board of Health; testing the tanks to
check for leaks; protecting the tanks from
corrosion; reporting of leaks, and removal of
those tanks not deemed product tight.
Five towns have enacted the regulations: Mashpee,
Barnstable, Dennis, Brewster, and Harwich. Draft
regulations have been prepared and public meetings
are planned in Yarmouth, Eastham, and Chatham.
One town. Bourne, has chosen to enact a town-wide
general by-law incorporating these recommendations.
The by-law has been placed on the warrant for its
annual town meeting.
It is anticipated that this program will prevent
water supply contamination, by identifying and
immediately removing aging and leaking tanks, and
will prevent future leaks by requiring corrosion
resistant tank construction. It is the goal of
the 208 agency to have such regulations in place
by all towns by the end of 1980.
For further information about the 208 program to
protect Cape Cod towns from petroleum storage
problems, please contact:
Paula Magnuson, 208 Project Director
Cape Cod Planning & Economic Development Conmission
1st District Court House
Barnstable, MA 02630
PHONE: (617) 362-2511 X477
From ENVIRONMENT NEWS 6/80
These reconmendations were developed in conjunction
with industry representatives including the
American Petroleum Institute, the National Fire
Prevention Association, Ownes Coming Co., and
Bethlehem Steel. Backup data was provided to
boards of health through menbers of the 208
regional advisory committee, the Cape Cod Water
Resources Council. Town boards of health have
worked with their fire chiefs, water comoissioners,
and CCPEDC staff in drafting regulations appropriate
for their towns, and the regulations have been
promulgated after public hearings as required by
the Massachusetts General Laws.
Evalua'
Hazardous Waste Sites; Connecticut
Makes Positive Strides
in March of 1979, ABC News televised the
documentary "The Killing Ground" which graphically
depicted the horrors of improper disposal of
hazardous wastes across the country. At its
conclusion, there was a list of communities deemed
to be among the worst locations of environmental
degradation caused by hazardous waste disposal.
The inclusion of Southington, Connecticut on this
list along with the infamous Love Canal and the
consequent reaction of citizens of Connecticut was
-------
the impetus for accelerating the strengthening of
the hazardous waste management program in
Connecticut. Although subsequent investigation
proved that Southington's pollution problem did
not approach the magnitude of other locations
listed in the documentary, this presentation did
serve to emphasize the need for proper State and
local cooperation and pronpted the development of
the 208 Hazardous Waste Site Investigation Manual.
For the two years previous to the Southington
incident, the Connecticut 208 Program had been
steadily working on the problem of hazardous waste
disposal in the State, especially in regard to its
effect on water pollution, the Connecticut 208
program, or as it is officially titled, the
"Connecticut Areawide Waste Treatment Management
Planning Board", is authorized and funded under
Section 208 of the Federal Clean Water Act.
Section 208 established a Water Quality Management
program designed specifically to control the most
complex water quality problems including the
pollution of ground and surface water by improper
disposal of hazardous wastes. The preliminary
Connecticut 208 studies had confirmed everyone's
worst suspicions; enormous quantities of poten-
tially hazardous wastes were being generated and
disposed of with inadequate control or regulation
in Connecticut, as elsewhere in the Nation.
In July of 1979, four months after the ABC
documentary, the Connecticut General Assembly
passed Public Act 79-605. Section 13 of the Act
mandated that "the Commissioner of Department
Environmental Protection (DEP) shall compile an
inventory of any sites in this state which have
been used for toxic or hazardous waste disposal,
and the types and amounts of such wastes disposed
of at any such sites and shall submit such
inventory to the general assembly not later than
January 15, 1980". Such an undertaking was a
complex project and, in the sunnier of 1979, the
staff of the Connecticut Department of Environmental
Protection began to compile "The Inventory", as it
came to be known, utilizing some 14 different
sources of information including information
gathered from the earlier 208 Program efforts
related to industrial waste disposal. Together,
these sources would serve to provide a comprehensive
picture of hazardous waste generation and disposal
in Connecticut.
As the summer of 1979 drew to a close, the media
had begun to pay closer attention to the 208
Program in general, the hazardous waste study, in
particular. In August the first 208 hazardous
waste study output was published, the Industrial
Waste Generation and Disposal Alternatives
Inventory?Local reaction was generated by the
report's conclusion that almost 100,000,000
gallons of hazardous, industrial wastes were
being generated annually in Connecticut. These
wastes fall into the following categories: 10.8
million gallons of waste oil (non-automotive),
5.3 million gallons of solvents, 70.1 million
gallons of sludge, and 8.0 million gallons of
chemicals.
The disposal practices associated with the
materials differed by category. Virtually all of
the waste oils and solvents were reported to be
reclaimed or burned as fuel supplements.
Approximately 84% of the chemicals were reported
to be taken to private treatment facilities. Of
the waste sludges, 78% were reported to be stored
or disposed of on-site at the place of generation
with an additional 19% being taken to municipal
landfills.
The "Pre-Inventory Checklist", which is the first
step in the compilation of the "inventory",
developed by DEP for the General Assembly,
contained a listing of several thousand potential
hazardous waste disposal sites located in
virtually every single town in Connecticut. With
the horrors of love Canal still fresh in
everyone's mind, the Connecticut 208 program
recognized the need for a massive public
information program to present the potentially
explosive information in understandable and
reasonable light.
What was needed was a screening device to
separate out the real problem sites from that
very large percentage of locations that in all
probability would pose no threat to health or
safety. It was determined that an uncomplicated
manual could be developed which could be applied
at the local level by town health officials. The
manual, entitled the "Hazardous Waste Site
Evaluation Manual", would provide an overview of
the project and a step-by-step procedure for site
evaluation.
The 208 staff also conducted training seminars
around the State to serve the dual purpose of
briefing local officials on their role in
handling the hazardous waste problem, and
allowing local citizenry, and the media, to
understand exactly what the "Pre-Inventory
Checklist" entailed.
In order to reach the widest possible audience,
seven seminars were planned across the State.
The locations were selected representing major
industrial areas, as these areas would probably
contain scores of the sites on the "Checklist"
and also represented a major labor market
centers. Carrying this message across the State
also emphasized that this was a Damon, local
problem.
DEP sent copies of the "Checklist" to local
officials on Monday, February 11, 1980. The
first 208 workshop was held on Thursday, February
14. Nearly 100 members of the press, public, and
local and State officials listened as DEP
Commissioner Stanley Pac and 6th District Congress-
man Toby Moffett kicked off the opening session.
A majority of local elected officials and health
officials in the State of Connecticut attended
the training workshops. Press coverage of the
DEP Checklist and the 208 training sessions was
better than anyone had hoped. As a result, the
public reacted calmly and reasonably to the
listing of sites.
As far as the 208 Program and DEP were concerned,
the entire effort was an outstanding success.
There had been none of the fear, chaos, and panic
that had marked the Southington episode. The
major achievement of the workshops and Manual lay
-------
in the fact that a negative situation had been
turned into a positive one.
Instead of an adverse reaction from the public
and especially the local officials, an overwhelming
sense of cooperation in solving a common problem
began to develop. The manual and training
sessions provided the techniques and the lines
of communication necessary to carry out an
orderly and efficient site review.
In May, 1980, the Connecticut General Assembly
passed an Act Concerning Hazardous Waste
Facilities. This Act, which had been drafted by
the 208 program, constitutes landmark legislation
in that it provides the mechanism for siting a
hazardous waste treatment and disposal facility
in the State of Connecticut.
While the General Assembly considered the
recently passed siting legislation, support was
engendered from both industrialists and environ-
mentalists. Here was a coalition of traditional
opponents, working to solve a common problem.
The Connecticut 208 Program is proud to have
served as a facilitator to such an alliance.
This is ultimately the success achieved in
Connecticut.
The problem, though, is still not solved. Until
facilities are constructed to properly treat and
dispose of Connecticut's hazardous, industrial
wastes, the threat of a potential environmental
problem is still a very real possibility.
In May of 1980, William R. Adams, Regional
Administrator of EPA, commended the Connecticut
208 Program for the excellent progress made in
the area of hazardous waste disposal planning.
Mr. Adams wrote "The critical issue of proper
disposal of hazardous waste is of priority
concern not only to Connecticut, and the New
England Region, but to the entire nation. The
Connecticut 208 program has provided ^ssential
and timely hazardous waste planning and{analysis
for the State of Connecticut; in mapy cases,
Connecticut's innovative approaches in hazardous
waste disposal planning will be providing the
leadership to the New England Region."
For further information on the Connecticut 208
Program dealing with hazardous waste disposal
and groundwater protection contact:
Mark Possidento, Administrator
Connecticut 208 Program
Box 1088
Middletown, Conn.
203-347-3700
From ENVIRONMENT NEWS 9/80
208 FUNDS AID HAZARDOUS HASTE EFFORTS
IN NEW HAMPSHIRE
Water quality management planning provided by the
New Hampshire 208 Program will aid in the process
of safely securing two potentially dangerous
hazardous waste dump sites. The two disposal
sites, in Nashua and Raymond, were found to
contain several thousand barrels of hazardous
wastes which had been disposed of improperly.
Both sites could pose serious threats to public
health.
The Nashua site is a seven-acre sand and gravel pit
containing discarded refuse, demolition material,
and approximately one thousand 55-gallon drums of
hazardous wastes. An additional one thousand
barrels may be buried with the demolition debris.
Some of these hazardous materials are polluting
nearby groundwater.
The Raymond disposal site is only one-quarter acre,
but it may contain as many as fifteen hundred 55-
gallon drums of hazardous materials, most of them
buried and possibly crushed on the site. These
materials are polluting both the groundwater and
surface water, and could potentially impact the
drinking water supply of a nearby town.
Both sites are located near residential areas which
would have to be evacuated in the event of a fire
on site.
The real and immediate public health dangers which
these sites posed made quick action imperative, and
the Governor and Attorney General asked the New
Hampshire Hater Supply and Pollution Control
Commission (NHWSPCC) to immediately begin a
monitoring program at the sites to provide the data
necessary for legal and corrective action.
The Commission was already involved in groundwater
quality in its 208 water quality management
planning program, and was able, with EPA
concurrence, to utilize some of those 208 funds to
quickly install test wells at a site. The test
wells were installed to determine the extent of the
groundwater needed by State officials to determine
the strategy for the pollution control efforts.
-------
The New Hampshire 208 Water Quality Management
Program is funded under Section 208 of the Federal
Clean Water Act. The 208 process gives the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the States,
and local governments a potential means of solving
some of the complex water quality problems where
simply applying standard waste treatment technology
might not do the job. The 208 process helps states
and local governments find integrated solutions
that deal with both environmental and developmental
matters.
Data from the test wells installed through the 208
program confirmed the public health threat, and the
State was then able to proceed with further legal
action.
The next step was an assessment of the best interim
and final methods to clean up and close the sites.
Again, the State 208 program, in cooperation with
EPA, reacted quickly and developed the mechanisms
for assembling the funds necessary for the study.
The final funding package consisted fo $10,000 in
208 funds, §20,000 in Safe Drinking Water Act funds
and a $120,000 emergency appropriation of State
funds. More recently, EPA provided additional
funds through section 104 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA) to expand the data information base of the
stdy. The study is now underway, and final
recommendations are expected by the end of 1980.
State officials anticipate that clean-up at the
Nashua site will involve complete removal of the
surficial hazardous materials and closure of the
site. Data from test wells at Raymond and
additional surface water sampling by EPA resulted
in EPA initiating clean-up action under Section 311
of the CWA. Hydrological investigations at the
Raymond site in concert with the 311 action will
determine the best method of closure.
State officials concede that without 208 funds they
would not have been able to react as quickly as the
situations required, and may not have been able to
put together the final funding package to clean up
the sites.
Further, the New Hampshire officials stated, the
experience gained in dealing with the two hazardous
waste disposal sites will enable State agencies to
deal much more quickly, efficiently, and economically
with similar situations in the future. Those
savings, they say, will more than equal the 208
funds expended. For further information on the 208
hazardous waste efforts in New Hampshire, please
contact:
Robert Cruess, Assistant Chief Engineer
New Hampshire 208 Program
New Hampshire Water Supply
and Pollution Control Commission
P.O. Box 95
Hazen Drive
Concord, NH 03301
PHONE: 603-271-3504
FTS: 8-842-3540
208 FACILITATES AGRICULTURAL
BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
As a result of 208 water quality management
planning, additional programs and funds have been
directed to New England rural communities. The
areawide and statewide water quality management
planning programs are conducted under Section 208
of the Clean Water Act and are intended to protect
and improve the quality of the nation's waters.
Specific areas where agricultural nonpoint source
pollution causes water quality problems have been
identified by the 208 process.
For many years prior to the passage of the Clean
Water Act, the U.S. Department of Agriculture ran
several cost-sharing programs available to farmers
to implement conservation practices on farms. The
Agricultural Conservation Program (ACP), was one of
the principal programs available to the farmers.
The 1979 amendments to the Clean Water Act called
on the Secretary of Agriculture to establish and
administer another program, the Rural Clean Water
Program (RCWP). This program is a federal cost-
sharing program with individual farm owners and
operators for the implementation of best management
practices (BMP's) which are in accordance with a 208
Water Quality Plan. Unlike the ACP, only those
farmers within the specific areas identified as
having an agricultural nonpoint source pollution
problem would be eligible to participate in the
cost-sharing program.
Best management practices or BMP's are those
practices geared to the control of nonpoint sources
of water pollution. They are formulated primarily
for the improvement and protection of water
quality, and secondarily for the optimization of
farm productivity.
Recently, several agricultural interests in New
England have benefited from the efforts of the 208
Program. State 208 planners identified watersheds
in Maine, New Hampshire, and Connecticut as areas
of high priority for water quality improvements.
These areas applied for funding through the Rural
Clean Water Program. Because of funding uncertain-
ties of the RCWP, the applications were submitted
under the ACP Program. After federal review these
areas were selected from a nationwide competition
as ACP Special Project areas and were granted
additional money from the ACP National Reserve
Fund.
Aroostook County, Maine, received an additional
$300,000 from ACP to investigate and eliminate
nonpoint source pollution due to agricultural
erosion and sedimentation. The Little River
Watershed in Connecticut has received an additional
$80,000 from the National Reserve Fund and Cheshire
County, New Hampshire has received $25,000. Water
quality management plans in both Cheshire County
and the Little River Watershed are being prepared
to reduce water quality problems resulting from
animal wastes.
The implementation of best management practices
will benefit the farmer, his customers, and the
environment. The plans being developed will be
more cost effective and environmentally sound as
-------
••
they are directed toward water quality improvements.
The programs in Connecticut and New Hampshire will
enable the farmer to manage application of manure
in order to maximize the amount of nutrients
retained on the farmland and minimize the pollution
of local waters. Implementing the BMP's developed
by the Maine program will reduce soil erosion and
sedimentation from agricultural lands thus pre-
venting fertilizers and pesticides from entering
nearby waters.
The successful implementation of these necessary
practices can be attributed to the assistance of
the 208 planning process and its role in
identJLflying such nonpoint source pollution problems.
For further information on these 208 activities,
please contact:
Mark Possidento, Administrator
208 Program
P.O. Box 1088
Middletown, CT 06457
Phone: 203-347-5407
Robert Cruess, Planning Director
New Hampshire 208 Program
Hazen Drive
Concord, NH 03301
Phone: 602-271-5303
James Barresi, Executive Director
Northern Maine Regional Planning Commission
McElwain House
Caribou, ME 04736
Phone: 271-498-8736
From ENVIRONMENT HEWS 3/80
VEBMONT 208 PBDGRftH Bgpmr.THHRS LOGGING
EROSION CONTROL PROCESS WITH TIMBER INDUSTRY
Due to the rising demands for both timber products
and firewood, Vermont's forests ace coming under
increasing pressure. Soil erosion and the
resulting degradation of water quality are serious
adverse impacts that can result from careless
timber harvesting practices. Since approximately
75% of Vermont's land area is considered ccnmercial
forest land, minimizing erosion from silvicultural
practices is essential to the State water
protection program.
In developing Vermont's Hater Quality Management
Plan, State 208 Hater Quality Planners identified
silvicultural runoff as a priority problem to be
addressed in the planning process. Die aim of the
water quality management planning is to identify
the sources and the extent of water pollution and
to identify the methods of controlling nonpoint
source pollution resulting from silvicultural
activities in Vermont.
In a unique effort to control erosion from logging
jobs, the Vermont 208 Program worked out an
educational program and self-policing agreement
between the Vermont logging industry and the State
Agency of Environmental Conservation. The 208
Hater Quality Management Planning Program is a
result of the Federal Clean Hater Act (CWA) of
1972. The CHA provides a series of programs
intended to protect and improve the quality of the
nation's waters. Specifically, Section 208 of the
Act calls for the development of areawide water
quality management plans designed to control
complex water quality problems. Designated 208
planning areas within each state work with the
state water quality management agency and the EPA
to develop areawide plans which delineate a course
of implementation and management .of water quality
programs.
In 1977, the Secretary of the Vermont Agency of
Environmental Conservation appointed the 208
Forestry Runoff Committee and made them responsible
for developing a silvicultural nonpoint source
plan. The Committee was to identify the problems,
examine the research data, review the adequacy of
existing laws and regulations, and recommend
implementable solutions for controlling nonpoint
source foresty runoff. The recommendations de-
veloped by this study were the basis of the Vermont
208 Forestry Plan. The Vermont 208 Forestry Plan
was then certified by the Governor and approved by
EPA in 1979.
Under the State Hater Quality Plan for Controlling
Silivicultural Non-Point Source Pollution, the
Vermont Timber Truckers and Producers Association
(VTTPA) divided the state into three sections and
elected a three-man committee in each section. All
complaints concerning a logging related water
quality problem are referred to the Chief Water
Resource Investigator at the Agency of Environmental
Conservation. If the problem is sufficiently
serious, the Vermont Timber Truckers and Producers
Association is notified and the three-man VTEPA
committee visits the logger responsible for the
complaint to encourage him to resolve the problem
with appropriate erosion control practices. Within
four days of receiving the initial complaint the
-------
canmittee chairman notifies the Chief Water
Resource Investigator and describes the results of
the meeting with the logger. The State Hater
Resource Investigator only becomes involved in
onsite visits to loggers when the logging
industry's self-policing effort is unsuccessful in
bringing about a solution. This self-policing
program began immediately after the Governor signed
the State Water Quality Plan for Controlling
Silvicultural Nonpoint Source Pollution on July 5,
1979. Since then committees have met with loggers
on many occasions and satisfactorily resolved water
quality problems by encouraging the use of best
management practices.
Although the program has not been in effect long
encough to judge its overall effectiveness, state
water resource investigators have reported a new
attitude and higher level of responsibility on the
part of loggers who have been contacted. Problems
encountered have been resolved quickly and
efficiently.
A second part of the Silvicultural Plan calls for a
vigorous educational and informational approach.
There are four projects involved in this section.
The first is a standard erosion control handbook
for loggers, landowners, VTTPA oanmitteemen and
Water Resource Investigators. The second is a
series of erosion control workshops for loggers and
landowners. The third element in the educational
portion of the plan is a program of television,
radio, newspaper and newsletter 'coverage of the
problems and solutions; the fourth is the
circulation of model timber sale contracts.
Workshops for loggers were held in 1978 and 1979 as
a means of providing technical information,
demonstrations, a review of legislation and
assistance regarding the control of non-point
source runoff control from logging activities in
the state. Evaluation forms completed by workshop
particpants revealed the huge success of these
activities. One survey revealed " an increased
application of best management practices following
a logger workshop.
Vermont intends to continue its present program
with the expectation that the documented increase
in the use of best management practices will
continue to occur with gentle prodding through
self-policing and intensive educational program.
Such an increase will consequently improve the
water quality of the area by eliminating the
deleterious effects of Silvicultural runoff.
Far further information on the Vermont 208 Forestry
Plan, please contact:
Stephan Syz
208 Program Coordinator
Vermont Department
of Water Resources
Montpelier, VT 05602
PHONE: 802-828-2761
FTS: 8-832-2761
From ENVIRONMENT NEWS 10/8U
One important component of the educational approach
to reduce erosion is the development of best
management practices (EMPs) in the form of non-
mandatory guidelines. BMP's are those practices
geared to the control of nonpoint sources of water
pollution. They are formulated primarily for the
improvement and protection of water quality and,
with respect to silviculture, secondarily for the
optimization of forested lands. The guidelines
include a review of existing State laws, the
resources available for technical assistance, and
specifications for construction design and layout of
erosion control devices.
WATER QUALITY PLANNERS EXPERIMENT WITH THE
RECYCLING OF SEPEHSE AS FERTILIZER
Many Massachusetts communities suffer from the lack
of an approved method of septage disposal. The
Town of Gill, in western Massachusetts, is one such
town. The success of their innovative water
quality plan concerning the land application of
septage was due primarily to Section 208 of the
federal Water Quality Pollution Control Act
Amendments of 1972.
The Clean Water Act (CWA) provides a series of
programs intended to protect and improve the
quality of the nation's waters. Specifically,
Section 208 of the Act calls for the development of
areawide water quality management plans designed to
control complex water quality problems. Designated
208 planning areas within each state work with the
state water quality management agency and the EPA
to develop areawide plans which delineate a course
of implementation and management of water quality
programs. After being approved by the local
communities, the state and EPA 208 plans serve as
the blueprint for all regional water quality
related activities.
-------
-
The septage which must be dealt with is the
material which is pumped out of individual septic
tanks. The preferred method of disposal has been
co-treatment in municipal wastewater treatment
plants along with sewage from sanitary sewer lines.
However, many communities with such plants are
begining to refuse wastes from neighboring towns,
doe to biological incompatabilities between the
added septage and the sewage already in the system.
The Town of Gill, although it has access to the
Montague treatment facilities, decided to attempt a
pioneer recycling of septic tank, material. Alan
Sharaf, the Director of the Franklin County
Planning Department, a non-designated 208 area
agency, was the primary force in the realization of
this project. Sharaf, along with Malcolm Hill of
the Franklin County Cooperative Extension and the
Gill Board of Health, developed and implemented a
plan for land application. The initial funds were
provided by Section 208, and the County's Water
Quality Advisory Board lent additional support,
also a result of 208.
Septage from Gill, Montague and surrounding towns
is brought to an isolated 300 acre lagoon off River
Road in Gill by six area septage hauling companies.
The facility is designed to hold a maximum of
200,000 gallons of septage. During this one year
demonstration, septage will be collected from
September to April and stored in the lagoon. It
will then be applied to agricultural land in April
where it will fulfill the nitrogen requirements of
a silage corn crop. Septage will continue to be
collected from April to September and after the
harvest will again be applied to support a cover
crop of rye.
Septage will be analyzed by the State Department of
Environmental Quality Engineering (DEQE) Laboratory
in Lawrence prior to application for heavy metals,
pathogens and nutrients. Heavy metal content will
be monitored but is not expected to be a problem
since it is significantly below that of industrial
wastewaters. Pathogens can be rendered harmless by
proper management practices. Test wells have been
dug and will be monitored to prevent groundwater
pollution and the lagoon is isolated enough so not
to cause an odor problem.
A complete analysis of this project will be
available fron the 208 agency in the fall of 1980.
Such results will be used to help clarify and
develop state policy and guidelines for the land
application of septage that may open the way for
recycling the nutrients contained in it. The
Massachusetts DEQE hopes that the results of this
project will demonstrate that the land application
of septage is an environmentally sound, cost-
efficient septage alternative for certain communi-
ties.
A state policy concerning land application will be
an important product of the 208 program in that it
will be an attractive option for communities
without access to wastewater treatment plants and
also those that have expressed an interest in en-
lightened resource management practices.
For further information please contact:
Dave Terry
Massachusetts Department of Environmental
Quality Engineering
100 Cambridge Street
Boston, MA 02202
PHONE: (617)727-7436
From ENVIRONMENT NEWS 12/79
DEVELOPING SEPTAGE DISPOSAL POLICY
IN MASSACHUSETTS
During the development of the Massachusetts Water
Quality Management Plan in 1979, the state
Department of Environmental Quality Engineering
(DEQE) recognized that the lack of state - approved
septage disposal sites was creating a major water
quality problem. Illegal and unmonitered septage
disposal practices caused pollution of both ground
and surface waters of the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts. Septage is the treatment residue
from septic systems.
Therefore, DEQE proposed to develop a comprehensive
state-wide septage management policy as the first
step in resolving this problem. EPA also
recognized the need to develop such a policy and
provided DEQE with Section 208 Water Quality
Management Planning funding to assist in the actual
development of the policy.
This Water Quality Management Planning funding is
authorized under Section 208 of the Clean Water
Act. The Act provides a series of programs
intended to protect and improve the quality of the
nation's water. Section 208 specifically calls for
the development of areawide water quality manage-
ment plans designed to control complex water
quality problems.
-------
In 1978, the DEQE 208 staff organized the Septage
Task Force composed of staff from various state and
local agencies and charged the task force with
developing the framework for policy formulation.
The task force approved a method for projecting
septage generation, reviewed the issue of septage
handling with Construction Grants Program personnel
and developed a comprehensive state policy for
septage disposal.
The septage disposal policy developed through the
208 program addressed four key issues. The first
point is the identification of co-treatment of
septage at wastewater treatment plants as the
preferred method of septage disposal in the state.
The second concerns the guidelines that are ueing
developed by DEQE for those areas where co-
treatment of septage is not possible, desirable,
cost-effective or for some other reason not the
preferred option of septage management. The
guidelines will include acceptable alternative
septage treatment technologies and will specify the
safeguards that must be taken in order to avoid
ground and surface water pollution, nuisance
conditions or other detrimental impacts of an
alternative septage management technology.
The third issue is the continuation of research and
demonstration efforts for both improved septage
handling facilities at municipal sewage treatment
works and alternative methods of septage treatment.
The fourth and final point of the policy is a
result of the time necessary for the implementation
of the first three points. During the several
years it will take to institute preferred septage
disposal methods, alternative temporary solutions
to septage treatment will be enacted. Such
temporary methods include aerobic and anaerobic
lagoons and/or other facilities that will provide
adequate treatment of septage. Guidelines to
regulate these temporary solutions are also being
developed by DHQt;.
DEQE has transmitted this policy to EPA and has
asked DEQE regional staffs bo distribute the policy
to boards of health and treatment plant operators.
The layout of this policy is only the first step in
developing a comprehensive state-wide plan to deal
with septage disposal in Massachusetts. Because of
this, the Commissioner has asked the DBQE Division
of Water Pollution Control to undertake several
activities. These projects will be conducted by
the original task force set up for the purpose of
developing the policy.
The first activity is to collect available data
regarding the capability of existing and proposed
publicly owned treatment works to accept and treat
septage for current or expanded service areas. The
second calls for an examination of equitable
mechanisms in order to induce towns to accept
septage from neighboring towns, where the technical
capability exists to do so. The third will be to
develop or collect model Memoranda of Understanding
for formalizing arrangements between towns. And
fourth, the Commissioner has requested that the
task force develop regulations for acceptable
alternative septage management practices for
application where co-treatment is not possible.
The 208 program is also involved in this latter
aspect of the policy. The 208 program has provided
8
both funds and technical studies to assist in the
attainment fo DEQE's goals.
DEyE Commissioner Anthony Cortese recently stated
tjiat "the development of this policy is an
important step in alleviating the water quality
problem resulting from unapproved septage disposal
sites. Until this policy existed, the state had
requested the cessation of unregulated disposal,
but a clear statement regarding a preferred
alternative had not been available. This policy
will enumerate the options available, direct towns
to neighboring plants that will accept their waste
and eventually lead to an environmentally, economi-
cally and politically sound procedure for septage
disposal." For further information please contact:
Dave Terry
Massachusetts Department of Environmental
Quality Engineering
100 Cambridge Street
Boston, MA 02202
PHONE: (617)727-7436
From ENVIRONMENT NEWS 7-8/80
THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SEPTIC SYSTEM INSPECTION/
MAINTENANCE PROGRAM ON MARTHA'S VINEYARD
Martha's Vineyard is a 100 square mile island lying
five miles off the coast of Cape Cod, Massachusetts.
The Island is divided into six towns each of which
has its own government. The local economy, once
based on fanning, now centers on tourism and
services, and construction as it relates to the
resort industry. Bach summer, the tourist
population swells the normal year round population
of 9,000 to 54,000.
-------
The tourists oome to Martha's Vineyard because of
its beauty, its unhurried way of life, and its high
quality water. Martha's Vineyard currently has
high quality groundwater to drink. It has over 60
miles of beaches and approximately 3,000 acres of
shellfish area open to the general public. The
residents of Martha's Vineyard have expressed a
strong desire to protect these valuable resources.
In future years, year-round population will
increase, more hones will be built, and more
tourists will visit the Island to escape from the
traffic and pressures of the mainland. The current
absence of major water quality problems, coupled
with increased pressure on its water resources
emphasized the need for good water quality
management planning. The impetus for such planning
was Section 208 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) of
1972. Through the CWA, local areas, such as
Martha's Vineyard were provided a unique opportunity
to plan and develop a comprehensive program to
protect their water resources. Since all water
supplies are drawn from wells in groundwater
underlying soils of high porosity, it is necessary
to regulate the materials placed above such
resources.
The initial 208 study identified land use zoning,
on-lot disposal systems, the siting of fuel storage
facilities, solid waste disposal facilities,
septage disposal sites, large wells, and other
activities which were existing or potentially
harmful to its water resource. The Martha's
Vineyard 208 study has initiated programs to
mitigate each of these problems.
The 208 Water Quality Management Plan revealed that
due to "improper design, installation and maintenance,
on-lot disposal systems are undoubtedly the most
serious threat to the Island's ground and surface
water". Except for the downtown area of Bdgartown,
Martha's Vineyard residents rely primarily upon
7,000 septic system and cess pools for treating
their wastewater. The downtown business districts
of both Oak Bluffs and Tisbury experience problems
of failing or inadequate septic facilities. The
problems are principally due to location on small
lots which do not allow for expansion or
rehabilitation of the system, or to very limited
elevation above the groundwater table. For these
two areas, the 208 study reconmended limited
wastewater collection and small wastewater treatment
facilities. For the remainder of these two towns
as well as the Towns of West Tisbury, Chilmark, and
Gay Head, the Marth's Vineyard Commission had
determined if on-lot disposal systems are properly
sited and cared for, and, if densities of disposal
systems are appropriate, it is entirely possible to
utilize these systems into the foreseeable future
without adverse impacts on the Island's water
resources. This solution is by far the most
economical solution to Martha's Vineyard's wastewater
problems.
To implement these recommendations, the Towns of
Oak Bluffs and Tisbury have retained the services
of consultants to develop cost-effective solutions
for those areas of their towns that need sewering.
The Martha's Vineyard Commission received an
additional one-year 208 grant to work with local
Boards of Health to help initiate a septic system
inspection and maintenance program. This-program
is intended to limit the need for sewering and to
help ensure that septic systems function properly
and protect the water resources in the remainder of
Oak Bluffs and Tisbury as well as the Town of West
Tisbury, Chilmark, and Gay Head. A minimum of four
factors which affect the operation and expected
life of subsurface disposal systems were addressed
by this program. They include location, design,
installation and maintenance.
The first problem that had to be solved was to find
an environmentally safe way to handle septage. The
five towns had no acceptable way of handling their
septage and were disposing of it at open pits at
their respective town landfills. Tisbury was
especially vulnerable, as its septage pits were
located within 600 feet of the town's public water
supply well. Massachusetts Department of Environ-
mental Quality Engineering (DBQE) has been putting
pressure on the five towns for many years to
provide adequate septage treatment and disposal
facilities. This pressure by the State was based
not only on their concern for water quality but
also their concern for public health and safety.
Massachusetts DEQE had advised each of the towns,
informally, that they must cease disposing of
septage in landfill receiving pits. The con-
sultants for two towns are currently evaluating
long-term solutions for septage disposal. It will
take several years to develop and implement these
solutions. In the interim, the local Boards of
Health were quite hesitant to become involved in an
inspection/maintenance program until there was an
acceptable way to handle septage. To overcome this
obstacle, the 208 manager for the Martha's Vineyard
Commission worked with the local Boards of Health
to find environmentally safe interim solutions for
septage disposal. This effort has been quite
successful. Massachusetts DBQE has approved
interim solutions for temporary septage lagoons in
Tisbury and West Tisbury and is currently reviewing
a proposed interim solution for Oak BlufL:,
Chilmark and Gay Head are disposing of their
septage in a sealed lagoon that does not impact its
water resources.
With environmentally acceptable interim solutions
for septage disposal, the local Boards of Health
were quite enthused to work with the Martha's
Vineyard Commission in developing inspection and
maintenance programs. The next task the 208
manager undertook was to work with the local Boards
of Health to help them develop the expertise to
ensure all new septic systems are properly
designed, sited, and installed. The final task
dealt with developing an inspection/maintenance
program in the five towns designed to detect and
correct failing systems and to continue the
operation of those systems which are working
adequately. The emphasis of this septic system
program was placed on strict adherence to Title V
of the Massachusetts Environmental Code. In order
that the Boards of Health might better understand
the requirements of the Code, and consequently
apply them in their decision-making, the 208
manager launched an educational program for the
Board members.
As a result of the 208 grant, a plan was developed
outlining priority septic system inspection areas
in all towns. An inspection form was designed and
a workshop for sanitary inspectors was conducted
demonstrating percolation tests, deep observation
holes, and other Environmental Code requirements.
-------
The need for a continuing septic system maintenance
program was stressed and initiated.
A filing system was initiated with the local
boards of health to record the physical properties
of each septic system and the frequency of pump
outs. Point of origin pump out certificates are
being issued by the boards of health for this
latter purpose. The intention is to identify
failing and near-failing systems by means of pump
out frequency.
"Septic Systems and their Maintenance", a manual
for property owners, board of health members,
pumpers, and installers was written, printed, and
distributed in quantity. There have been many
favorable comments regarding this publication
because it is readable and useable by local
residents and public officials.
Tisbury has became the model town an the Island for
this program. With the completion of its septage
disposal facility, it is recording pump outs,
analyzing frequencies, and following up potential
failures. It is in the process of sectioning the
town into a mandatory pump out frequency schedule
based upon the incentive of a tax rebate for
performance. The Board of Health has also been
successful in regulating and containing problem
installations.
The Town of West Tisbury instituted a pump out
permit program in July of 1979 with the
installation of a make-shift septage disposal
facility.
The Town of Chilmark instituted a pump out permit
system this past spring. Such a system checks to
make sure that individual homeowners periodically
clean out their septic systems. The Board of
Health sends out cards that must be completed by
the firm that does the pumping. This program hopes
to prevent overloading and back up of the systems
and the consequent groundwater pollution. The
inspection/maintenance program in this town is
effective and is conscientiously administered by
the Board of Health.
The Town of Gay Head shares a qualified septic
inspector with Chilmark. This town's Board of
Health has a strong comnitment to the State
Environmental Code. Failures and questionable
applications for disposal works construction
permits are worked through private engineers. No
pump out permitting program has been begun, but it
is on the Board's agenda.
Oak Bluffs has a serious septage disposal problem
which precludes emphasis on maintenance pumping.
The design of a facultative lagoon system was
approved by the local Board of Health and sent to
the State DBQE. Construction is expected to begin
this summer and upon its completion, the pump out
monitoring program, begun last year, can be
reinstated.
The instituation of these inspection/maintenance/re-
habilitation programs in the Towns of Martha's
Vineyard represent an important step in controlling
water pollution on the Island. Each program is
effective and each successful resolution strengthens
the 208 program through local experience. The
continuing success of the 208 program ensures that
the waters of the Island will remain drinkable,
fishable, and swiranable.
For further information on the septic system
inspection/maintenance program, please contact:
Bill Maravell
Martha's Vineyard
208 Project Manager
Box 1447
Oaks Bluff, MA 02557
PHONE: 617-693-3453
From EMVTBONMENT NEHS 11/80
-------
APPENDIX
208 Planning Agencies
James Friedlander, Exec. Dir.
Greater Portland COG
331 Veranda Street (3rd Floor)
Portland, ME 04103
PHONE: 207-774-9891
Brian Chernack, Exec. Dir.
Southern Maine RPC
Box Q - 2 School Street
Sanford, ME 04073
PHONE: 207-324-2952
Karl Hekler, Director
Berkshire County RPC
10 Fenn Street
Pittsfield, MA 01201
PHONE: 413-442-1521
Joseph Hannon, Director
Northern Middlesex Area Com.
144 Merrimack Street
Lowell, MA 01852
PHONE: 617-454-8021
James Barresi, Exec. Dir.
Northern Maine RPC
McElwain House
2 Main Street
Caribou, ME 04736
PHONE: 207-498-8736
John Jaworski, Exec. Dir.
Androscoggin Valley RPC
70 Court Street
Auburn, ME 04210
PHONE: 207-622-7146
Robert E. Robes, Exec. Dir.
Cape Cod Planning & Economic
Development Commission
1st District Court House
Barnstable, MA 02630
PHONE: 617-362-2511 X477
Alexander V. Zaleski, Exec. Dir.
Southeastern Regional Planning
Economic Development District
Town Hall Annex
Marion, MA 02738
PHONE: 617-748-2100
William H. Newton, Exec. Dir.
Central Mass. RPC
70 Elm Street
Worcester, MA 01609
PHONE: 617-756-7717
Daniel Crane, Exec. Dir.
Old Colony Planning Council
9 Belmont Street
Brockton, MA 02401
PHONE: 617-583-1833
Ronald Mechur, Exec. Dir.
Martha's Vineyard Com.
Box 1447
Oak Bluffs, MA 02557
PHONE: 617-693-3453
Mohammed H. Khan, Exec. Dir.
Montachusett RPC
150 Main Street
Fitchburg, MA 01420
PHONE: 617-345-7376
Donald E. Megathlin, Exec. Dir.
Metropolitan Area Planning Council
44 School Street
Boston, MA 02108
PHONE: 617-523-2454
K.M. Munnich, Exec. Dir.
Lower Pioneer Valley RPA
26 Central Street
West Springfield, MA 01089
PHONE: 413-739-5387
Richard Gladstone, Exec. Dir.
Merrimack Valley Planning Com.
5 Washington Street
Haverhill, MA 01830
PHONE: 617-374-0519
-------
208 COORDINATORS
CONNECTICOT
MAINE
MASSACHUSETTS
NEW HAMPSHIRE
RHODE ISLAND
VERMONT
Mark Possidento, Administrator
Areawide Waste Treatment Management Board
209 Court Street
P.O. Box 1088
Middletown, CT 06457
PHONE: 203-347-3700
FTS: 8-244-2000
Al Prysunka, Director
Evaluation and Planning Division
Department of Environmental Protection
Ray Building
Hospital Street
Augusta, ME 04333
PHONE: 207-289-2591
FTS: 8-868-2591
Daniel P. McGillicuddy, Chief Planner
Department of Environmental Quality Engineering
100 Cambridge Street
Boston, MA 02202
PHONE: 617-727-7770
Robert A. Cruess, P.E.
Assistant Chief Engineer - Administrator
Water Supply and Pollution Control Commission
Hazen Drive
Concord, NH 03301
PHONE: 603-271-3503
FTS: 8-842-3398
Victor Parmentier, Project Manager
Rhode Island Statewide Planning Program
265 Melrose Street
Providence, RI 02907
PHONE: 401-277-2656
Steven Syz, 208 Coordinator
Division of Environmental Engineering
Agency of Environmental Conservation
State Office Building
Montpelier, VT 05602
PHONE: 802-828-3130
FTS: 8-832-3130
------- |