EPA's BEACH Report: Massachusetts 2010 Swimming Season May 2011 Introduction The BEACIT Act of 2000 requires that coastal and Great Lakes states and territories report to EPA on beach monitoring and notification data for their coastal recreation waters. The BEACH Act defines coastal recreation waters as the Great Lakes and coastal waters (including coastal estuaries) that states, territories, and authorized tribes officially recognize or designate for swimming, bathing, surfing, or similar activities in the water. This fact sheet summarizes beach monitoring and notification data submitted to EPA by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts for the 2010 swimming season. Figure 1. Massachusetts coastal counties. Suffolk Norfolk Bristol Dukes Nantucket Table 1. Breakdown of monitored and unmonitored coastal beaches by county for 2010. Total Not County Beaches Monitored Monitored BARNSTABLE 269 269 0 BRISTOL 44 44 0 DUKES 52 52 0 ESSEX 88 88 0 NANTUCKET 18 18 0 NORFOLK 24 24 0 PLYMOUTH 86 86 0 SUFFOLK 24 24 0 TOTALS 605 605 0 ------- 2010 Summary Results How many notification actions were reported and how long were they? When water quality standards are exceeded at a particular beach, Massachusetts issues a beach advisory that warns people to avoid contact with the water. A total of 217 monitored beaches had at least one advisory issued during the 2010 swimming season. About 77 percent of Massachusetts' 511 notification actions lasted two days or less. Figure 2 presents a full breakdown of notification action durations. What percentage of days were beaches under a notification action? For Massachusetts' 2010 swimming season, actions were reported about two percent of the time (Figure 3). How do 2010 results compare to previous years? Table 2 compares 2010 notification action data with monitored beach data from previous years. What pollution sources possibly affect investigated monitored beaches? Figure 4 displays the percentage of Massachusetts' investigated monitored beaches possibly impacted by various pollution sources. In 2010, 88 percent of beaches investigated for possible pollution sources listed storm-related runoff as a possible pollution source. For More Information For general information about beaches: www.epa.gov/beaches/ For information about beaches in Massachusetts: www.mass.gov/dph/topics/beaches.htm or(617) 624-5757 Figure 2: Beach notification actions by duration. 300 250 in C 200 o o < 150 o o 100 z 50 0 275 121 85 26 ¦ ¦ , ¦ , ¦ , 4 2 3-7 8-30 Duration of Actions (days) >30 Figure 3: Table 2. Beach notification actions, 2008-2010. 2008 2009 2010 Number of monitored beaches 604 603 605 Number of beaches affected by notification actions 186 240 217 Percentage of beaches affected by notification actions 31% 40% 36% Percentage of beach days affected by notification actions 2% 3% 2% Figure 4: Percent of investigated monitored beaches affected by possible pollution sources (50 beaches). 0 10 20 30 Percent of beaches 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Investigated I no sources found o Non-storm related runoff o Storm-related runoff Agricultural runoff o Boat discharge o Cone, animal feeding operation o Combined sewer overflow 12 Sanitary sewer overflow o Publicly-owned treatment works o Sewer line leak or break o Septic system leakage o Wildlife Other (identified) source(s) o Unidentified source(s) o 10 Note: A single beach may have multiple sources. Beach days with no action _ 62,626 (97.7%) Beach days with and without notification actions. Beach days under an action: 1,504 (2.3%) ------- |