[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
REPORT NUMBER 26 E North sm,,thf.e," V-11-110 Cvmb*rlanj ----------- ----- Control 0, Fell$ 4&e Coastal Zone Information j TO I Cenle, I Johnston goal ASIN I rringlon orr*n ER@ y fost G,*,n-ch a L Tiverten Little Compten own Now *rt Norrag;nsof t 11T IQ 193 R5 R 1 45b no.261: PREPARED BY A New ISLAND STATEWIDE PLANNING PROGRAM AND RHODE ISLAND DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH The Rhode Island Statewide Planning Program, a division of the Department of Administration, is the central planning agency for state government. The work of the Program is guided by the State Planning Council, comprised of state, local, public, and federal representatives. The objectives of the Program are to plan for the physical, economic, and social development of the state; to coordinate the activities of governmental agencies and private individuals and groups within this framework of plans and programs; and to provide planning assistance to the Governor, the General Assembly, and the agencies of state government. Pi' -ogram activities are assisted by federal grants through the Integrated Grant Administration Program and by direct grants. The Contents of this report reflect the views of the Statewide Planning Program, which is responsible for the accuracy of the facts and data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect: the official views or policies of the sponsoring agencies. This Publication is based upon publicly-supported research and may not be copyrighted. It may be reprinted, in part or in full, with the customary crediting of the source. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN for the PAWCATUCK RIVER BASIN Prepared Pursuant to Title III Section 303e Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 Property of CSC Library August., 1976 U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA COASTAL SERVICES CENTER 2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE CHARLESTON, SC 29405-2413 Prepared by RHODE ISLAND STATEWIDE PLANNING PROGRAM and RHODE ISLAND DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Nclb 4 STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS '14"4V Honorable Philip W. Noel, Governor V *' X1` RHODE ISLAND STATEWIDE PLANNING PROGRAM STATE PLANNING COUNCIL Mr. James Jerue, Director, Rhode Island Department of Administration (Chairman) Honorable Humphrey J. Donnelly, III, Mayor, City of Newport (Vice- Chairman) Mr. Edwara Casey, Executive Director, R.I. Federation of Teachers, AFT AFL-CIO Dr. Charles Fortes . Director, the Providence Corporation Rev. Francis J. Giudice, Vicar for Community Affairs, Diocese of Providence Miss Mary C. Hackett, Director, R.I. Department of Employment Security Mr. William Heisler, Citizens Bank Mr. Gordon G. Hoxie, Division Administrator., Federal Highway Adminis- tration Mr. Glenn Kumekawa, Executive Assistant for Policy and Program Review, Office of the Governor Mrs. Pauline Leven, President, R.I. Council of Community Services, Inc., Honorable Dennis M. Lynch, Mayor, City of Pawtucket Mr. Edmund M. Mauro, Jr., Chairman, the Providence Foundation Honorable Eugene J. McCaffrey, Jr., Mayor, City of Warwi ck mr. Dennis J. Murphy, Jr., Director, R.I. Department of Natural Re- I sources Mr. John C. Murray, Budget Officer, State of Rhode Island Mr. John R. Picerne,, R.I. Home Builders Association Mr. Robert Rahill,, Director, R.I. Department of Transportation Mr. James 0. Roberson, Director, R.I. Department of Economic Develop- ment i Mr. George B. Roorbach, President, R.I. Chamber of Commerce Mrs. Lucy Schmidt, Barrington, Rhode Island Mr. Raymond W. Stone, Federal Aviation Administration Honorable James L. Taft, Jr., Mayor, City of Cranston Mr. Natale A. Urso, President of the Town Council, Town of Westerly Mr. Frederick C. Williamson, Director, R.I. Department of Community Affairs Mrs. Marion Wolk, Save the Bay, Inc. THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE Mr. Ernest Friday, Planning and Program Coordinator, Rhode Island Department of Community Affairs (Chairman) Mr. Francis 11. Dutra, Chief of Planning, Rhode Island Department of Transportation (Vice-Chairman) Mr. Robert Bendick.5 Jr., Planning Director, City of Woonsocket Mr. Paul Carvisiglia, Executive Director, Health Planning Council,'Inc. Mr. Alfred A. Conca, Budget Division, Rhode Island Department of Ad- ministration Mr. Calvin Dunwoody, Chief, Division of Planning and Development, Rhode Island Department of Natural Resources Mr. Vartges Engustian, Director, Department of Public Works, City of East Providence Mr. William George, Planning Director, City of Warwick Professor Dieter Hammerschlag, Professor of Urban Design, University of Rhode Island Mr. Eric Jankel, Office of the Governor Professor Leo Kadanoff, Physics Department, Brown University Mr. Jerome Lessuck, Economist, Rhode Island Department of Economic Development Mr. Carleton Maine, Chief, Division of Water Pollution Control, Rhode Island Department of Health Mr. Joseph T. McDevitt, Executive Director, Rhode Island League of Cities and Towns Mr. Roger M. Parrish, Special Coordinator for Human Services Manage- ment., Rhode Island Department of Administration Mr. Francis J. Perry, Design Engineer, Rhode Island Department of Transportation Mr. Marvin Perry, Chief, Division of Standards and Planning, Rhode Island Department of Employment Security Mr. Nicolas P. Retsinas, Director, Pawtucket Office of Community Affairs Mr. David, Rosenfield, Planning and Research Engineer, Federal Highway Administration iv Mr. Robert Russ, General Manager, Rhode Island Water Resources Board Mr. William Sutton, Chief, Division of Planning and Developrent, Rhode Island Department of Community Affairs Mr. W. Edward Wood, Division of Public Utilities and Carriers., Rhode Island Department of Business Regulation v PREFACE The Pawcatuck River Basin Water Quality Management Plan pre- sented herein was prepared pursuant to Title III, Section 303(e) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 (PL 92-500). According to guidelines published by the U.S. Envir- onmental Protection Agency in September 1974, "... the basin plan is a management document that identifies the basints water quality problems and sets forth a remedial program to alleviate those problems." The goals of the plan are those established in the State Guide Plan: (1) to reduce stream pollution to levels set in the state's stream classification plan, and (2) to coordinate development., conservation and use of the statels water resources. This plan is one of seven water quality management plans (Blackstone, Moosup, Moshassuck., Narragansett, Pawcatuck, Pawtuxet and Woonasquatucket) which in total will constitute the water quality element of the State Guide Plan. Because water pollution is a problem which transcends local community boundaries, the water quality management plan must con- sider pollution problems and abatement programs from a basinwide rather than strictly local perspective. The plan provides the foundation for an orderly quality management program by: , (1) Determining existing water quality, identifying point sources of pollution., and assigning applicable water quality standards to the waters of the basin. (2) Assessing water quality and abatement needs in order to establish priorities for awarding construction grants. (3) Setting compliance schedules or target abatement dates, and coordinating the national pollutant discharge elimina- tion system permit program with these schedules. (4) Identifying needs and priorities for facilities planning (Section 201 of PL 92-500) and areawide wastewater treat- ment management planning (Section 208 of PL 92-500). To facilitate identification of water quality problems and the establishment of priorities.., the river has been divided into seg- ments according to water quality standards and classifications es- tablished by the Division of Water Pollution Control of the Rhode Island Department of Health. These segments are then further classified as "water quality limited" or "effluent limitedil segments depending on the degree of treatment required to meet the Health Department standards. In order to meet water quality standards., vi limits on pollutant loadings have been allocated to dischargers along these segments. These limits are termed "waste load alloca- tions" and are based on the assimilative capacity of the segment and on the uses designated for the segment, as determined by the Rhode Island Department of Health. Priorities have been assigned to all the segments and for con- struction grants based on the severity of pollution in the segments. Recommendations have been made for a pollution abatement facilities construction program and for further., more extensive planning under Section 201 and 208 of PL 92-500. The background information on population trends and suggested land use patterns provides a framework for estimating future trends and needs over a twenty year period. Construction and planning activities recommended in the plan are for a five year period. The plan will be revised every five years to establish water quality goals and construction programs for the next five year period. Annual revisions will be made to include changes in pollution sources, the results of water quality monitoring and surveillance programs, and information and recommendations from other planning activities. Plan Format The basin boundary used in this plan differs from the natural hydrologic boundary of the basin. The adjusted basin boundary coincides with the boundaries of the nearest "analysis zones." These analysis zones, which are subdivisions of census tracts, were developed by the Statewide Planning Program to provide inter- polated demographic data at a finer "grain" than that possible with census tracts. Adjustment of the basin boundary in this manner made the compilation of demographic, surface area and other quantitative data a manageable task, while maintaining reasonable accuracy. Both the hydrologic and adjusted basin boundaries are shown on the basin maps. This document incorporates a simple and efficient system for identifying source materials consulted. This scheme replaces the usual numbered footnotes placed at the bottom of text pages or in a separate list at the end of the document. Instead_, num- bers in double parentheses,, e.g. ((5:27)), follow the quoted or paraphrased material in the text, The first number (5, in this case) refers to reference number 5 listed in the BIBLIOGRAPHY. The number following the colon (27, in this case) refers to page number 27 in reference number 5. If a portion of the text is taken from several pages of a reference., the notation in the text would be: ((18:12, 30-33)), where pages 12 and 30 through 33 of reference number 18 have been summarized. If material in the text has been derived from more than one source., the notation would be ((26,47)), where references number 26 and number 47 have been used. Occasionally, a. reference will have no page numbers,, in which case a section, table or other feature will be cited'. e.g.: ((50: Table 6)) or ((35: Sec. IIA)). vii This plan is presented in seven parts. Part One presents a sketch of the physical characteristics of the basin. Part Two reviews the present situation in each basin community, including size, population, water quality and a summary of pollution sources. Part Three discusses the potential for growth in the basin, based on population projections, and proposed land use patterns and transportation system configurations. Part Four delineates and analyzes the river segment classifica- tions established by the Department of Health, Division of Water Pollution Control. These river segments are ranked on the basis of abatement priority. This ranking is one of the factors,con- sidered in determining municipal sewerage facility priorities. Part Five details the actions recommended to meet municipal sewer- age facility needs, and includes target abatement dates and estimated investment requirements. Part Six describes the water quality monitoring program carried on by the Rhode Island Department of Health. In the final part., the relationship of this plan to other elements of the State Guide Plan and to other related plans is out- lined. Acknowledgements This plan was prepared in cooperation with the Rhode Island Department of Health, Division of Water Pollution Control, which is the state agency charged with the responsibility to control and abate sources of pollution. Major activities include: (1) review and approval of facilities plans, engineering reports and con- struction plans for municipal sewerage facilities; (2) review and approval of industrial pollution abatement plans; (3) allocation of-state funds for municipal sewerage facilities planning and construction; (4) review and certification of National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits issued by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); and (5) monitoring of in- dustrial and municipal treatment facilities operations, and surface and groundwater quality. This work is supported by state appropriations and by federal grants under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of of 1972 (PL 92-500). This basin plan was prepared by Mr. William B. Brinson, Research Technician., with the assistance of Mr. Thomas G. Brueckner., Senior Sanitary Engineer, and Mr, Victor J. Parmentier, Principal Planner, under the general supervision of Mr. Patrick J. Fingliss, Super- vising Planner. Other Statewide Planning Program staff members involved in the preparation of this plan were: Ms. Janice Luther, Senior Clerk-Typist and Mr. Mansuet J. Giusti, Principal Engineering Aide. viii Additional assistance was provided by Mr. Carleton A. Maine, Chief of the Division of Water Pollution Control, R.I. Department of Health and the Division staff, as well as by Mt. Juan Mariscal_, Environmental Engineer,, of the Areawide Waste Treatment Management Planning staff. The preliminary draft of this plan was presented at a public meeting on June 10, 1976 at the Richmond Town Hall. Revisions have been made to the plan based on comments received at that meeting. This plan was adopted as an element of the State Guide Plan by the State Planning Council on FEB 10 1977 following a public hearing on JAN 17 1977 ix CONTENTS Page Preface, vi Contents X List of Tables . . . . . . . . xii List of Figures . . . . . xiii Summary . . . . . . . . . . . o . . XiV PART ONE: BASIN DESCRIPTION . . . . . . . . . o . . . . . . . . . . TWO: EXISTING CONDITIONS. o . . . . . . . .. II-1 A. General, ............. -1 B. Community Profiles . ............. -1 lo Town of' Charlestown. 2. Town of Exeter . . -3 3. Town of Hopkinton. . -3 4o Town of North Kingstown . . . . . . -3 5o Town of Richmond . o . -3 6. Town of South Kingstown, -4 7. Town of Westerly . -4 8. Town of West Greenwich -6 9 Connecticut Communities, -7 C. Water Quality. -8 D. Point Source Discharges . . . . . -10 E. Nonpoint Sources of Pollution . . . . . . . . . -16 THREE: GROWTH POTENTIAL o -1 A. Population . . . . . . a a -1 B. Patterns of Land Development . . . . . o 1 1. Land Use . 2. Transportation . . . . FOUR: SEGMENT CLASSIFICATIONS AND ANALYSES o o IV-1 A. Water Quality Planning Goals . . . B. Segment Classification -1 Co Segment Analyses -2 1. Water Quality Segments -2 2. Effluent Limitation Segments . . . x CONTENTS (Continued) PART Page FOUR (Cont1d.) Do Discharge Treatment and Target Abatement Dates . . . . iv-i4 E. Allowable Waste Loads for Water Quality Segments . . . -19 F. Load Allocations for Point Source Discharges to Effluent Limitation Segments . . . 20 FIVE: MUNICIPAL FACILITIES REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . . . . . V-1 A. Municipalities. . a 0 1. Town of Charlestown 2. Town of Exeter,-, . 3. Town of Hopkinton . -3 4. Town of North Kingstown . -5 5. Town of Richmond. . -6 6. Town of South Kingstown . -9 Town of Westerly. . . -12 -0 Town of West Greenwich. -16 9. Connecticut Communities -16 Bo Project Scope and Estimated Costs for Municipal Facilities. . . . . -17 SIX: MONITORING PROGRAM. . . .... . . . . . . . -61 SEVEN: RELATIONSHIP WITH OTHER PLANS . . . . VII-1 A. Federal, State., and Local Planning Coordination . . . -1 Bo Regional Plan - Southeastern New England Water and Related Land Resources (SENE) Study o . . -2 Co State Plans . -3 Do Local Plans -5 Eo Uses. of this Plan. . . -6 APPENDICES A. Standards of Quality for Classification of Waters -1 of the State, . . . A B. U.S. Geological Survey Stream Gaging Station Data and R.I. Department of Health Water Quality Sampling Station Data, , B-1 Co Segment Priority Ranking System C-1 BIBLIOGRAPHY GLOSSARY ABBREVIATIONS xi Tab le LIST OF TABLES Page 1 Selected Demographic Data (1970) - Basin Communities 11-2 2 Descriptions of Point Source Discharges II-11 3 Point Source Discharge Data . 11-13 4 Population Trends and Projections (1970-1995) Basin Communities . o . . 111-2 5 Proposed Distribution of Land Use Types (1990) Basin Communities 111-8 6 Characteri sties of River Segments iv-4 7 River Segments Out of Compliance with Rhode Island Depart- ment of Health Standards, IV-6 8 Discharge Treatment and Target Abatement Dates . . . . o . IV-15 9 Status of Pawcatuck River Basin Waters in Relation to the Water Quality Goals of PL 92-500. IV-17 10 Load Allocations for Point Source Discharges, . IV-21 11 South Kingstown Secondary Sewage Treatment Plant, Revised Flow Projections (1990) . . . . . . . . . . V-11 12 Westerly Secondary Sewage Treatment Plant Design Capa- city Criteria . . . . . V- 13 13 Sewer Service Characteristics o V-18 14 Project Scope and Estimated Costs for Municipal Facilities Requirements. . V-18 B-1 U.S, Geological Survey Streamflow Gaging Station Data . . B-3 B-2 R.I. Department of Health Water Quality Survey Data,.,, . B-4 C-1 Segment Priority Points (Need and Severity) . . . . . o o C-1 C-2 Segment Priority Points (Population Affected) . a C-3 Assignments of Segment Priority Points. C-3 xii LIST OF FIGURES 1 Location Map. 2 General Basin Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . o 1-3 3 Existing Public Sewerage Facility Locations 1-5 4 Water Quality and Point Source Discharges 11-12 5 Proposed Distribution of Land Use Types (1990 . . . . oIII-7 0 Transportation System - Existing and Proposed(1990) . 7 River Segment Classes and Priority Rankings . . . . . o IV-3 8 Sewer Service Areas and Treatment Facilities. 9 Westerly-Pai.tuck Area Characteristics B-1 Sampling and Gagiqr-Station Locations . . . B-2 Xiii SUMMARY The Pawcatuck River Basin, which drains nearly one-fourth of Rhode Island's land area, lies in the southwestern corner of the state. The total surface area of the basin is about 317 square miles, of which approximately 260 square miles are in Rhode Island and about 57 square miles are in Connecticut. The Rhode Island portion of the basin encompasses the towns of Exeter, Hopkinton, and Richmond and parts of the towns of Charlestown, North Kings- town, South Kingstown, Westerly, and West Greenwich. The basin also drains parts of four Connecticut communities: North.Stoning- ton, Sterling, Stonington, and Voluntown. All the basin communi- ties are primarily rural with isolated centers of concentrated development, some of which is seasonal and shore-oriented. All of the fresh water streams in the basin are of Class C or better and all tidal waters are of Class SC or better., as deter- mined by the Rhode Island Department of Health. Five areas are out of compliance with their water quality classification: one reach of t@e White Horn Brook, one reach of the Wood River, and three reaches of the Pawcatuck main stem. White Horn Brook: Degraded by University of Rhode Island sewage treatment plant and heating-boiler blowdown (cleaning) discharges, both scheduled for elimination, the first by March., 1977., the second by an unspecified date. (See page II-10.) Wood River: Moderate degradation by inadequate individual sewage disposal systems in Hope Valley (Hopkinton). Abate- ment techniques and schedule not yet determined. (See page II-10.) Pawcatuck River(upper): Degraded by Kenyon Piece Dye Works process water discharge (Charlestown), to be upgraded by November, 1976. (See page 11-9.) Pawcatuck River (middle): Degraded by New Bradford Dyeing Association process water discharge., (Westerly), to be up- graded by November, 1976; and by inadequate individual sewage disposal systems in Ashaway (Hopkinton),, to be eliminated by sewer connection to the Westerly municipal system, at a date not yet determined. (See page 11-9.) Pawcatuck River (lower) : Degraded by the Westerly municipal sewage treatment plant to be upgraded by June, 1978; and by combined sewer and indus@rial discharges in Pawcatuck, Conn.., scheduled for elimination sometime in 1978. (See page 11-8 and 9.) xiv All surface waters in the basin are expected to be in com- pliance with their classifications by 1978., with the exception of the middle reach of the Pawcatuck River, which is degraded by the Ashaway discharges; and the lower Wood River., which is de- graded by the Hope Valley discharges. Abatement dates for these discharges have not been determined. (See pages IV-13 through IV-20.) Basin streams are divided into 37 "segments" for the purpose of this plan. These segments are discussed in detail herein, as are seventeen identified point-source discharges, three of which consist only of non-contact cooling laater. (See pages IV-2 through IV-13.) The two largest discharges in the basin are: (1) the University of Rhode Island secondary treatment plant discharge to the White Horn Brook (0.6 million gallons per day), scheduled for elimination by mid-1977, and (2) the Westerly municipal primary treatment plant (1-05 million gallons per day), scheduled for upgrading to secondary treatment by June, 1978. Actions leading to improved surface water quality are summarized below (See TP art V) : Municipal facilities currently under construction (1) Westerly: Upgraded treatment plant from primary to second- ary treatment; New interceptor and collector sewers for expanded service area. (To be completed June, 1.978.) (2) South Kingstown (Narragansett) Regional System: New Second- ary treatment plant. (To be completed September, 1976.) New interceptor and collector sewers for expanded service. areas (both towns). (To be completed March, 1977.) Municipal facilities orogrammed (1) Stonington, Connecticut: New secondary treatment,plant. New interceptor and collector sewers to replace combined sewer system and for expanded service area. (Approved by EPA, December., 1975; construction delayed by ligiation, completion expected two @ears after start of construction, probably complete in 197 .) (2) Westerly: New interceptor and collector sewers to replace individual sewage disposal systems in the Watch Hill area, with treatment at Westerly municipal plant. (Timing con- tingent upon state and local funding.) xv (3) Hopkinton: New interceptor and collector sewers in Ashaway Village to replace individual sewage disposal systems; tie-in to Westerly system (Tentative; design, cost, and timing not yet esta,blish;d.) Municipal facilities needs to be determined under Section 208 areawide planning program (1) Hopkinton and Richmond: Solutions for abatement of pollu- tion from inadequate individual sewage disposal systems in the Hope Valley-Wyoming area, (Hopkinton-Richmond). (2) North Kingstown: Determination of need for and time frame of public sewer service to Saunderstown Village, with consideration for waste treatment by the South Kingstown regional treatment plant. (3) South Kingstown: Determination of need for and time frame of public sewer service to West Kingston Village, with consideration for impact on South Kingstown regional system currently under construction. Industrial and other treatment improvements programmed (1) Kenyon Piece Dye Works Richmond): Treatment to be up- graded by November, 194. (2) Cha.rbert, Inc (Richmond): Discharge to be eliminated by December, i976. (Constructioncurrently under way',) (3) New Bradford Dyeing Association (Westerly): Treatment to be upgraded by November, 1976. (4) Yardney Electric Corporation and Harris Intertype Corpora- tion., Cottrell Division (Stonington, Connecticut): Par- tial tie-in to new Stonington municipal system., remainder pre-treated before discharge to Pawcatuck River. (5) University of Rhode Island: Elimination of boiler blow- down discharge through in-ground disposal. (Timetable unavailable.) xvi PART ONE: BASIN DESCRIPTION The Pawcatuck River Basin, the largest in Rhode Island,, lies in the southwestern corner of the state, as Figure 1 illustrates. The basin also extends into two small portions of Connecticut: one along the Pawcatuck River main stem at its outlet into Block Island Sound, where the river forms the state boundary; and another, smaller portion of eastern Connecticut, which is tributary to the Falls River, a headwater stream. Figure 2 illustrates both the natural hydrologic boundary of the basin in both Rhode Island and Connecticut and the adjusted boundary established in Rhode Island for study purposes. The total surface area of the hydro- logic basin is about 317 square miles, of which approximately 260 square miles are in Rhode Island, and about 57 square miles in Connecticut. The basin encompasses all or part of twelve communities, also shown on Figure 2. Those included in the Rhode Island portion of.the basin are: Charlestown(part) Exeter Hopkinton North Kingstown(part) Richmond South Kingstown (part) Westerly(part) West Greenwich (part) and in Connecticut: North Stonington (part) Sterling (part) Stonington (part) Voluntown (part) All of these communities are primarily rural with isolated centers of population concentration and/or shore-oriented develop- ment. The basin, which drains nearly one-fourth of Rhode Island's land area, is over 25 miles long and nearly 24 miles wide at its widest point. The middle and upper regions of the basin are of a gently rolling landform interspersed with many wetlands and ponds. The main stem of the Pawcatuck River rises in the extreme eastern end of the basin at Worden Pond. It falls 90 feet in its meandering 33 mile-long course, flowing southwesterly through the rural Rich- mond-Charlestown countryside, and then southerly through the only urban concentration in the basin the Westerly-Pawcatuck area. FIGURE I LOCATION MAP PAWCATUCK North lif".00,41 k Cwmbvic"d RIVER BASIN f Fail$ to *nt* I - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Y Sc ituvit lost Poster previd-"ce a 4 fromottt" Weiris" otwl;ck lost Citte"With f1wich C.1 1@ Noft@ Kimosiown It fis utit yiv*etofq )a %town Litdri Compton own Norfase"Ittl t Prepared by the RHODE ISLAND SWEVADE KANNM PROGRAM Now FIGURE I LOCATION MAP 5woonsocl,iist PAWCATUCK Vill* North Smithfield Cumberland RIVER BASIN Smithfield L.nto control falls Glocesto ov -,-rfo nce k Johnston Scituate fast foster Providence Cranston 'O..o Frington All. Warren )Ventry iW arw1j!Ck Bristol East Greenwich nwich North Kirigstown 44 Is rtsm uth 1@ Tiv*rton arnitstown Little Compton ,.Middletown own Now ort Prepared by the RHODE ISLAND STATEWIDE PLANNNG PROGRAM I Now ---------- - - - - - - - - - - - IIf COVENTRY WARWIC STERL-ING WEST I WAR- WIC K_ ---------- 10101011T \J g a WEST EAST NWIC GREENWICH NORTH r 'N QUOISET ' 'ol'T _T I KINGSTOWN WtCKFOID VOLUNTOWN EXETER F@ I'd I 0 -NDER5TD11* P P@ .... ET* slo KI -l, o .11 U@ P. Ap 'd'o 'El -1 NORTH ST IN TO N I t 0 ARLE WIN SOUTH d 27 Pd KINGSTOWN 7 STONINGTON -p.V4 71, ESTO @dl S Id FIGURE 2 "T" GENERAL BASIN itT CHARACTERISTICS NIF@@ STATE PARKS, FORESTS, ETC. MAJOR SAND AND GRAVEL AQUIFER RAWCATUCK RIVER BASIN do PROPOSED RESERVOIR SITE RHODEISLAND =j AREAS OF DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY WELL SITE BASIN PLANNING BOUNDARY BASIN HYDROLOGIC BOUNDARY o 60PO 12000 180oo 24000 3oooo SCALE IN FEET N Pimp-d by th. M40DE IS-AND STATEVADE PLANNM MOGRAM The final five-mile reach of the river is tidal from Westerly to its mouth at Rhodes Point, where it enters Little Narragansett Bay and emerges into Block Island Sound. En route to the ocean, the river receives flows from over 60 tributaries with a total length of about 250 miles. The three major tributaries are the Usquepaug, the Wood and the Ashaway Rivers, all of which enter from the north. The Usquepaug River, with a drainage area of 44 squaremiles, accounting for about 15 percent of the Pawcatuck drainage area, rises in Glen Rock Reservoir in the northwest corner of South Kingstown and proceeds in a general southerly direction through open countryside for nearly 5 miles to its confluence with the Pawcatuck River in Great Swamp about 1.5 miles below the outlet of Worden Pond. Queen's River is the principal headwater tributary of the Usquepaug River. It rises in the southeastern corner of West Greenwich, Rhode Island in Bear Swamp and flows 9 miles in a southwesterly direction through Locke Swamp to Glen Rock Reservoir. The Wood River with a drainage area of 87 square miles, account- ing for 29 percent of the basin drainage area, is formed by the confluence of Phillips and Acid Factory Brooks in the southwestern part of West Greenwich. It flows a total distance of 17 miles through Beach Pond Reservation, Arcadia Reservation and then through the more heavily populated area of Hope Valley in Hopkinton, Rhode Island. Beyond Hope Valley, it continues south through very spar- sely settled countryside until it joins the Pawcatuck,,thereby form- ing the boundaries among the Rhode Island towns of Hopkinton, Rich- mond and Charlestown, about 22 miles upstream from the mouth of the Pawcatuck. The Ashaway River, with a drainage area of 50 square miles, accounting for 17 percent of the basin drainage area, is formed by the confluence of the Green Fall River and Parmenter Brook in the western part of Hopkinton. It flows southward for 3 miles, passing through the village of Ashaway in Hopkinton. It joins the main stem of the Pawcatuck at the juncture of the towns of Hopkinton, Westerly and the Connecticut community of North Stonington, about 10 miles upstream from the mouth of the Pawcatuck. ((44:42)) Drainage through the basin's gently sloping terrain is rela- tively slow, and often interrupted by swamps, marshes and ponds. The 63 bodies of open, fresh water in the basin, many of them man- made, have a total surface area of 3,635 acres, including the 1 036-acre Worden Pond, largest natural pond in the state. ((36:7)) Re hundreds of wetlands which dot the terrain cover more than 10,000 acres. 1-4 About ten percent of the approximately 171,000 acres of land in the planning area has been committed to recreation and conserva- tion uses. Most of this undeveloped land is included in the eleven state parks and management areas in the basin. Based on a study of 1970 land use ((6)), an estimated eight percent of the planning area is devoted to urban land uses, including highways. The re- maining 82 percent is open or woodland, primarily in private owner- ship. Approximately 11,000 of these 140,000 remaining open/woodland acres are estimated to be undeveloped wetland or steep landforms ((9B)), leaving (in 1970) approximately 129,000 open acres which are suitable for development in terms of these two factors. The State Land Use Policies and Plan proposes that approximately 37,000 acres (22 percent of the planning area) be committed to recreation and conservation uses by 1990. ((32:132)) Included in this proposed figure would be 2'000 acres of streambank along the Pawcatuck, Wood, Beaver, Queen's and Chipuxet Rivers, identified in the Rhode Island Audubon Society's survey of unique and signifi- cant natural areas as "...the only remaining major (river) system in Rhode Island that is pristine, has great stretches of wilderness shoreline, and is virtually pollution free." ((2: Area Number 53)) Extensive deposits of glacial outwash (stratified deposits of unconsolidated gravel, sand, silt and clay) fill depressions in the underlying bedrock and till throughout the basin. These deposits lie primarily along river valleys. They retain large amounts of groundwater for short periods of time and then discharge it to their associated streams. The U.S. Geological Survey and the Rhode Island Water Resources Board have jointly identified those stratified deposits of gravel and sand which have.potential as significant sources of water supply for public drinking, indus- try and irrigation. ((l, 5)) The general locations of these major gravel and sand aquifers are shown on Figure 2. There are five streamflow gaging stations maintained by the U.S. Geological Survey in the Pawcatuck River Basin in Rhode Island. The locations of these gaging stations and selected data from them are includedin Figure B-1 and Table B-1 in Appendix B. 1-5 PART TVIO: EXISTING CONDITIONS A. General All of the eight communities in the Pawcatuck Basin are primarily rural in character. Public sewer and water supply service are avail- able only in limited areas of concentrated population., the most significant of which are the central business districts of Westerly and Paw'catuck, Connecticut and the University of Rhode Island area in Kingston (See Figure 2). With these exceptions, the entire basin depends on individual, subsurface sewage disposal systems and in- dividual wells. Current public and private water supplies in the basin are dependent solely upon wells which draw upon groundwater reservoirs in the basin, The major public water supply well sites and aquifers are delineated on Figure 2. According to Rhode Island Department of Health records., basin- wide usage of groundwater approached six million gallons per day in 1973, with the Westerly Water Department., the Wakefield Water Company., and the University of Rhode Island extracting most of this total. The Westerly Water Department supplies downtown Westerly, the village of Bradford, and Pawcatuck Borough in Stonington, Connecticut. The Wakefield Water Company serves the Wakefield- Peacedale area of South Kingstown, which is in the Narragansett Bay Basin. The following section presents profiles of the eight communities in the planning area, as well as brief sketches of existing con- ditions in the Connecticut portion of the Pawcatuck Basin. Table 1 summarizes selected demographic data for the Rhode Island communi- ties in the basin, B. Community Profiles 1. Town of Charlestown Approximately 75 percent (31.68 square miles) of the land area of this town lies within the Pawcatuck Basin planning area. The remainder drains to Block Island Sound through minor coastal streams. This coastal area is discussed in the Narragansett Bay Basin Water Quality Management Plan. According to the U.S. Census, year-round population residing in the Pawcatuck Basin portion of the town in 1970 was approximately 1,574, or about 64 percent of the townfs total year-round population. This very low-density (0.08 persons per acre) year-round population ((33)) is approximately one-half of the summer population as a result of the predominantly shore-driented character of the community. The town contains a correspondingly large proportion of seasonal housing units (approximately 49 percent of all housing units were seasonal in 1970, on a town-wide basis). ((32:79)) The entire town is served by on-site sewage disposal and water supply systems. TABLE 1 Selected Demographic Data (1970) P awcatuck River Basin Con,-,qunities,-Rhode Island Total area Gross Persons (acres) Density Dwelling Percent (square (persons/ Units of DU's Per DU Municin@, @it Population miles) acre) (DU's)- occupied ((32:91) Charlestown (part) 1,574 20,278 o.o8 6oo 80.5 3.1 31.68 Exeter 3.,245 36$640 0.09 795 88.5 3-3*- 57.25 Hopkinton 53392 28.,o82 0.19 1_,693 93.6 3.4 43-88 North Kingstown (part) 1,157 7.,085 o. 16 391 88.2 3.1 11.07 ro Richmond 2.1)625 24.,965 0.10 830 90,5 3.5 39-01 South Kingstown (part) 75510 20.,580 0.36 11284 74.7 3.1* 32.16 Westerly (part) 165256 16.,528 0.98 5,476 92.0 3.2 25-83 West Greenwich (part) 501 20.,521 0,02 207 75.4 3.3 32.06 Planning Area Total 37.,859 174.1679 0.22 11.,276 88.9 3.3 272.94 Excludes population in group quarters. - 2. Town of Exeter This community is entirely within the Pawcatuck River Basin. The town is rural in character, with large state-owned recreation and management areas in the western part (see Figure 2 in Part One). The state-operated Dr. Joseph H. Ladd School for retarded children and adults occupies about 560 acres in the eastern @art of town. The 1970 census indicated a total population of 352 5 within a total surface area of 57.25 square miles (0.09 persons per acre.) (03)) At the present time,, the entire community is served by on-;ite sewage disposal systems and water supplies., 3. Town of Hopkinton With the exception of the villages of Ashaway and Hope Valley, this community, which is completely within the study area, is rural in character. The 1970 census indicated that the town's population totaled 5,,392, with 1.,675 in Ashaway and 1,326 in Hope Valley. The total surface area of the town is 43 .88 square miles. ((33)) There is no public sewer system in Hopkinton at the present time. Locally poor soil conditions, bedrock outcrops and inadequate individual disposal systems require that consideration be given to providing sewer service to the Ashaway and Hope Valley areas in order to improve and maintain water quality in the Ashaway and Wood Rivers., and associated groundwater reservoirs. 4. Town of North Kingstown That portion (26 percent) of this community which is within the Pawcatuck River Basin is rural in.character and totally dependent on on-site sewage disposal facilities. Public water is provided to the Slocum area as part of the North Kingstown municipal system. The Slocum area contains some of the finest agricultural land in the state. ((32:50)) In 1970, 1.,157 persons or 4 percent of the town's residents were located on the 11-07 square miles within the basin (0.19 per- sons per acre). (03)) They are reliant solely upon on-site sewage disposal systems. 5. Town of Richmond This community encompasses an area of 39 01 scuare miles with a population of 2.,625 (0.10 persons per acr;). ((33)) The town is completely within the Pawcatuck Basin.,, and is predomin- antly rural in character, with areas of concentrated development in the Wyoming-Hope Valley., Shannock-Kenyon and Alton-Wood River Junction areas. There is no public water or sewer service in the community, 11-3 6. Town of South Kingstown Approximately 54 percent of this townts area (32.16 square miles) 1*-es within the Pawcatuck Basin planning area, with the remaining 46 percent in the Narragansett Bay Basin. The 1970 population of the area was 7.,510., at a gross density of 0,36 per- sons per acre. There are no public sewerage systems in the town. However., the University of Rhode Island (URI), in Kingston, operates its own sewage collection system and treatment plant (See Figure 3). The URI-Kingston area is the only area of concentrated population' within the Pawcatack Basin portion of South Kingstown. The Wakefield- Peacedale area of South Kingstown, which lies in the Narragansett Bay portion of the town, is discussed in the plan for that basin. Engineering design has been completed for an interceptorsewer which will connect the Kingston-URI area and the Wakefield-Peacedale area to the South Kingstown regional treatment plant currently under construction in the town of Narragansett (See Figure 3). This facility will also serve Bonnet Shores,URIfs Bay Campus, and the Mettatuxet section of Narragansett's north end., as well as the Narragansett Pier section, where the new treatment plant is located. The treatment plant is expected to go into service in late 1976. The Kingston-Wakefield-Peacedale interceptor should be in service by March., 1977. ( (15) ) 7. Town of Westerly The town of Westerly includes part of the only densely developed urban area in the Pawcatuck Basin - the Westerly.-Pawcatuck area., which sits astride the Rhode Island-Connecticut state line near the mouth of the Pawcatuck River (see Figure 2 in Part One). The remainder of the town is primarily rural with concentrations of seasonal development along the coast. Approximately 25.8 square miles (85 percent) of the town lies within the planning area, In 1970., the population in the Westerly portion of the basin was 16.9256 (94 percent of the town total). The average gross density for the Pawcatuck Basin portion of the town was 0.98 persons per acre, while in Westerly Center it was about 5 persons per acre.((33)) The remaining area of the town (along the shore of Block Island Sound) lies in the Narragansett Bay Basin. The water supply needs of the urban area which encompasses portions of the towns of Westerly, Rhode Island and Stonington, Connecticut are served by the Westerly Water Department, which also serves the village of Bradford. The public water supply., which is derived solely from pumped wells, appears to be adequate for an- ticipated growth over the study period. Present supplies of electrical power appear adequate for the near future, but may require additional capacity if significant intensive development occurs. ((34:5-10)) 11-4 0. Y. B, COVENTRY WARWIC STERLING Id WEST I r Id Id WAR- Id - - - - - - - - - - PDT-MUT z P@ WEST @EA,T NWICH L GREENWICH )k I NORTH n -SET f _'T KINGSTOWN 11-RD VOLUNTOWN EXETER P97 Id @d SAUN-STOWN* "101CIETO Pd Pd i!T P a ST @T ..O.E .1 - zi ST (4 o 0 Al- PEA-*. NORTH P@ A- P STONINGTON @v t 0 on- HARLESTOWN UTH q d P. V%l r) If Qn Id STONINGTON KINGSTOWN Pd p e ESTERLY @d FIGURE 3 "TT- IL-T-TL,'.-- EXISTING PUBLIC SEWERAGE AY JET; FACILITY LOCATIONS EXISTING SEWERED AREA SEWERED AREA UNDER CONSTRUCTION PAWCATUCK RIVER BASIN Pt F EXISTING SEWAGE TREATMENT RHODEISLAND PLANT REGIONAL SEWAGE TREATMENT BASIN PLANNING BOUNDARY A PLANT (UNDER CONSTRUCTION) BASIN HYDROLOGIC BOUNDARY 60PO 12900 18COO 244000 3oooo SCALE IN FEET [email protected] by tM WODE ISLAND SrATEWIDE PLANNING PROGRAM The existing Westerly sewerage system, which includes approximately @5 miles of gravit eiver pipes and force mains., served about 10.,000 people in 197@. s This system was originally installed in the 1920ts and serves the downtown area. It is a sanitary system only_, which admits no stormwater intentionally., but did have severe groundwater infiltration problems until 1972, when repairs to a main trunk sewer reduced infiltration flows by about half. Programmed repairs are expected to reduce infiltration flows even further. This system is currently being upgraded and expanded. The existing treatment plant was built in 1957, with a design daily capacity of approximately two million gallons. It provides primary treatment and disinfection for the sewage influent. The primary treated sewage is discharged into the Pawcatuck River estuary 110 feet from shore through a single outfall sewer located near Major Island (see Figure 3). The digested sludge produced by the plant is dried and used as landfill at the treatment plant site. The plant removes approximately 25 percent of the biochemical oxygen demand and 60 percent of the suspended solids from the in- fluent. These levels of removal are not adequate to meet federal regulations. ((7: 1-6)) An upgraded treatment plant has been designed and has received EPA approval. In addition to the area served by the municipal sewerage system., several homes in the village of Bradford discharge sewage to the nearby New Bradford Dyeing Association lagoon which, in turn, discharges to the Pawcatuck River. ((15)) The remainder of the toi,m of Westerly depends on individual subsurface sewage disposal systems. 8. Town of West Greenwich Approximately 22.8 square miles or 45 percent of t he townts total area is within the Pawcatuck River Basin. In 1970, a total of 501 people, 27 percent of the townts@ total population_, resided within the basin (0.02 persons per acre). There is no public water or sewer service to the Pawcatuck Basin portion of the town. The site of the proposed Big River Reservoir is located in the eastern portion of this community., and lies in the Pawtuxet River Basin (See Figure 2). This site will encompass 11 square miles or 22 percent of the town's total land area. The Big River Reservoir project is discussed in greater detail in the Pawtuxet River Basin Plan. Under present plans no areas of the Pawcatuck Rivet Basin will be served by this water supply facility. 11-6 9. Connecticut Communities The approximately 57 square mile area of the basin which lies in Connecticut is divided into two portions (see Figure 2 in Part One). The northern part encorpasses approximately ten square miles in the towns of Sterling and Voluntown. There is no signi- ficant population in this area,, as most of it is under state management as part of the Pachaug State Forest, where the Wood River begins. The streams here are of high quality., and are likely to remain so, since there is minimal exposure to degrading influences in the state forest. The major portion of the Pawcatuck Basin in Connecticut lies along the state line in the towns of Voluntown, North Stonington and Stonington. The northern extremities of this portion of the basin (Voluntoim and North Stonington) also lie within the Pachaug State Forest and are very sparsely settled. a. Town of North Stonington Approximately 40 square miles (70 percent) of the toiTn of North Stonington are tributary to the Pawcatuck River, principally through the Green Fall and Shunock Rivers. In 1970.9, approximately 35400 people lived in the Pawcatuck Basin portion of the town. Most of this population is con- centrated in the Borough of North Stonington., which is under considerable residential development pressure. b. Town of Stonington Nearly 16,000 people live in the town of Stonington., with about one-third of this population (5,255 according to the 1970 census) concentrated in the Borough of Paw- catuck, immediately across the Pawcatuck River from downtown Westerly. Population concentrations and the condition of the combined storm and sanitary and indivi- dual sewage disposal systems in the borough require that a public sewage collection and treatment system be installed. At present there are only combined storm and sanitary sewerage facilities in the Connecticut portion of the basin.((3: 1-3)) In 1974, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, in con- currence with the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection and the towns of Stonington and Westerly., determined that separate sewage treatment plants should be constructed for Westerly and Pawcatuck. This solution appeared to be the most expeditious in light of the fact that bond issues for construction of separate facilities had, at that time,,, already been approved by the voters, 11-7 and some design work had been done. Construction of an interstate facility to serve both Westerly and Pawcatuck would have required negotiation of an interstate agreement and voter approval of new bond issues, resulting in an estimated delay of at least one year in proceeding with the design phase. The above material on Connecticut communities was prepared with the assistance of the Southeastern Connecticut Regional Planning Agency in Norwich and the Connecticut Department of En- vironmental Protection's Interim Basin Plan for the Eastern Con- necticut Coastal Basin (Pawcatuckj. (M) C. Water Quality All the waters of the state have been classified by the Rhode Island Department of Health according to their use or water quality. Standards associated with the classifications are defined by nine water quality parameters, The most important of these parameters is dissolved oxygen, since the survival of aquatic life and the streamts assimilative capacity are dependent on dissolved oxygen concentration. The Standards of Quality for Classification of Waters of the State are given in Appendix A. A water quality survey was undertaken in August of 1973 by the Division of Water Pollution Control of the Rhode Island Department of Health. Figure B-1 and Table B-2 in Appendix B present the sampling station locations and data for the 1973 surve The dis- solved oxygen levels noted at sampling stations 2. 3. @*and 5 fell below the 5.0 milligrams per liter (mg/1) minimum required of Class C waters. Substandard water quality at these locations was the result of discharges from the New Bradford Dyeing Association, the Collins and Aikman Company, and the Ashaway Line and Twine Company. Since this survey was conducted, the Collins and Aikman and Ashaway Line andTwine firms have eliminated their discharges. The Bradford Dyeing Association has drastically curtailed its manu- facturing activities, thus reducing the volume of its discharge and its consequent impact on the Pawcatuck River. All streams in the basin are now assumed to be in compliance with Class C (SC if tidal) standards. However, four river reaches in the basin are out of compliance with their B (SB) classifications and one is out of compliance with its SA classification, as a result of the types and amounts of pollutants being discharged from certain sources, These reaches are discussed in detail below. Their locations., as well as the water quality classification for each stream in the basin, are indicated on Figure 4. 1. Little Narragansett Bay Approximately 770 acres of Little Narragansett Bay between Napatree Point and the mouth of the Pawcatuck River at Rhodes Point are currently out of compliance with the SA classification, and are closed to shellfishing. Total coliform. bacteria counts (See Appendix 11-8 B) at sampling station 1. about two miles upstream, were well above both Class SB and SA limits. Water quality degradation in this area is the result of the combined effects of discharges from combined storm and sanitary sewers in Pawcatuck and from industrial and muni- cipal sources along-the lower main stem. 2. Pawcatuck River Estuary The Pawcatuck River is tidal from its mouth at Rhodes Point to the Old Stillmanville Dam at Main Street in Westerly. Approximately 260 acres at the lower end of the estuary do not meet the assigned SB classification', although there are no dis- charges to this segment. Data from sampling station 1 indicates total coliform. counts in excess of the Class SB maximum (see Appendix B). Water quality here is affected by discharges into upstream segments. These discharges include Westerly's primary treatment plant and industrial and combined sewer dischages in Pawcatuck, Connecticut. 3. Pawcatuck River Nearly five and one-half miles of the lower main stem of the Pawcatuck between the Bridge Street crossing in the White Rock section of Westerly and the R.I. Route 3 crossingare out of compliance with the assigned B classification. As mentioned earlier in this sectiont the New Bradford Dyeing Association, the Collins and Aikman Company and the Ashaway Line and Twine Company have eliminated or reduced their discharges sufficiently to allow the river.-t,o--attain its present Class C condition. Dissolved oxygen concentrations at sampling stations 3 and 4 were below Class C minimums in 1973, but are assumed to have improved with recent reductions in pollutional loading. Discharges from the New Bradford Dyeing Association operations and from individual se-v.Terage systems in the village of Ashaway in Hopkinton prevent this reach from attaining the Class B standards. An additional two and one-half mile stretch of the Paw- catuck main stem fails to meet Class B standards. This stretch extends downstream from the head of the Carolina Mill Pond (up- stream of Carolina Village) about halfway to the Meadow Brook confluence. Total coliform counts at sampling station 10 were above Class B limits. The segment fails to meet the Class B standard because of the type and level of pollutional loading placed upon the main stem by the Kenyon Piece Dye Works discharge at Kenyon Village. 11-9 4. White Horn Brook A two-mile reach of the White Horn Brook below the Univer- sity of Rhode Island fails to meet the assigned Class B usage standard as a result of the boiler blowdown and treatment plant effluent discharged by the University. 5. Wood River Approximately 2.4 miles of the Wood River, between Hope Valley and the Canonchet Brook confluence, do not comply with the assigned B classification., because of individual sanitary system discharges in Hope Valley, which are incompatible with Class B uses. ((15)) D. Point Source Discharges Fourteen discharges in the Pawcatuck Basin planning area have been identified by the Rhode Island Department of Health., Division of Water Pollution Control., and three by the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection. Table 2 identifies the dischargers., receiving waters, locations (river mile and town) and types of waste. The table also includes the severity of pollution ranking of each Rhode Island discharge. The severity of pollution ranking is a ranking among all point source discharges in the planning area according to the strength and/or toxicity of the wastewater discharge. The discharge with the greatest strength and/or toxicity has a ranking of 1. the second greatest., a ranking of 2, and so forth. The locations of the discharges are shown on Figure 4. Table 3 summarizes data on each discharge for several parameters. These data are the result of a cooperative monitoring program carried on by the Division of Water Pollution Control and the individual dischargers. The sampling or permit date is given in parentheses under the dischargerls name. The following descriptions of these discharges are based on R.I. Department of Health records and on National Pollutant Dis- charge Elimination System (NPDES) permit information provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The number in parentheses is the severity of pollution ranking for the discharge. Pl: (7) The Joseph H. Ladd School., Exeter., operates.-a secondary sewage treatment plant which discharges into the Queen's River, a Class C river in this area, The treatment process consists of primary sedimentation, a one-stage trickling filter,and chlorination. ((15)) II-10 TABLE 2 Descriptionsof Point Source Discharges Pawcatuck River Basin Ascharge Receiving River Number Water Mile Name of Discharger Location Pi Queen's River 307+9.7 Joseph J. Ladd School Exeter IC P2 White Horn Brook 32.o0q+4.7 University of Rhode I Island Kingston P3 White Horn Brook 32.00q+4.7 University of Rhode Island Kingston P4 Pawcatuck River 29.4 Kenyon Piece Dye Works Kenyon P5 White Brook 26.1+1.6 American Fish Culture, Inc. Richmond P6 Pawcatuck River 23.9 United Nuclear Corp, Charlestown P7 Wood, River 21.66q+o.6 Charbert, Inc. Alton P8 Canonchet Brook 21.6+3.3+ Green Plastics Corp. Canonchet C 2.8 Wood River 21.6+(6.4to 7 Individual sewers Hope Valley Po Brushy Brook 21.6-6q+2q66qk66q+ 0.2 Auralux Chemical Corp. Hope Valley Pil Pawcatuck River 16.o New Bradford Dyeing Assoc. Bradford P12 Ashaway River 9.4q9+(0.0 to 0.75) Individual sewers Ashaway P13 Pawcatuck River 3.4 Westerly sewage treat- P14 Little Narragan- Below ment plant Westerly sett Bay mouth Individual sewers Watch Hill P15 Pawcatuck River 4.4 to 6.3 Individual sewers Pawcatuck (Conn.) P16 Pawcatuck River 4.4 Yardney Electric Corp. Pawcatuc., (Conn.) P17 Pawcatuck River 4.2 Harris Intertype Corp. Pawcatuck Cottrell Division (Conn.) c9l."', wl. COVENTRY WARWIC STERLING WEST I WAR ---------- V WEST EAST NWICH J L GREENWICH k f I NORTH llws 19, \ 1% .11 - @l g Ir A I KINGSTOWN 'ICKFORD VOLUNTOWN EXETER empo .N - - - - - - s"llill", A A @ P, C) P@ Plo P9 R.. P. T-1, A A P2 [If P3 TU-_ zi Ag lo @ P5 aC If I e I a (D Pd A NORTTH 7 -T. A P. /* ON a P6 STONINGTON I i rN 12 A a_ MER TT c P, 0 *A-.1 SOUTH da HARLESTOWN @ *.-E PH P. p P15 STONINGTON KINGSTOWN 16 .--Ll p B T-1 p P,PESTERLY FIGURE 4 WATER QUALITY AND -T CLASSIFICATION OF WATER QUALITY POINT SOURCE DISCHARGES .APA- P14 CHANGE IN WATER QUALITY PAWCATUCK RIVER BASIN CLASSIFICATION RHODEISLAND REACH NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH CLASSIFICATION BASIN PLANNING BOUNDARY \217 POINT SOURCE DISCHARGE BASIN HYDROLOGIC BOUNDARY IDENTIFICATION 'NUMBER AND LOCATION 0 6ooo 12000 Booo 24000 30000 SCALE IN FEET N Pvpamd N the RHODE ISLAND STATEWIDE PLANNING PROGRAM TABLE 3 Point Source Discharge Data Pawcatuck River Basin Discharge Name of Discharger Flow* T BOD Suspended Coliform (MPN/100ml) Number (date of sample) LmZdl Solids Data r-21-1 (mg/1) Total Fecal pH Other** Source Pi Ladd School (4/17/75) 0.075 17 32 230 x 103 23 X.103 7.0 detergent MBAS = 0.7 A P2 URI - BoilGXP blowdown NO DATA AVAILABLE, NPDES PERMIT APPLICATION PENDING WITH EPA P3 URI - Treatment plant (5/15/75) 1.0 - 11 20 2.3 x 10 6 2.3 X lo3 7.0 detergent MBAS = 0.4 turbidity(JTU) = 15 A P4 Kenyon Piece Dye Works(5/12/76) o.557 68 38 lo4 2.4 x lo 6 2.4 x lo 4 7.3 detergent MBAS = 0.46 A P5 American Fish Culture, Inc, NO DATIL AVAILABLE color=500 standards units P6 United Nuclear Corp. (4/14/75) 0.031 70 - - 7.4 alpha radiation = 3.4 x 10-8 microcuries/ml beta4gamma radiation 2.0 X 16 microcuries/ml B P7 Charbert, Inc. (7/10/*r5-1/lo/76) 0.023 TO 201 162 6.8 detergent MBAS = 0.13 (averages) sulfide 0.375, iron 2.3, phenol 0.05 B P8 Green Plastics Cor-p.(10/1/74) 0.021 6 - 0.122 69 - - Pq Hope Valley - Individual sewers NO DATA AVAILABLE Plo Auralux Chemical Corp. (6/30/74) 0.0033 70 - 5.9 B Pil New Bradford Dyeing Assoc. NO DATA AVAILABLE, OPERATIONS TEMPORARILY HALTED P12 Ashaway - Individual sewers NO DATA AVAILABLE P13 Westerly Municipal Sewage Treatment Plant (4/22/75) 1.3 - 157 lo8 230 X lo3 0 6.6 turbidity (JTU) 85 A P14 Watch Hill Individual sewers NO DATA AVAILABLE P15 Pawcatuck Individual sewers NO DATA AVAILABLE P16 Yardney Electric Corp. (3/31/75) o.183 40 rise 200 200 - - 6.0 In Kg/day: Zn = 2.7, AL 0.2, in receiv. to NH-3-N=5.68, Iron = .02, Tin = water 9.0 .002. Silver = .05, Total Cr= .01, Nickel = O@, Cu = 0.2, Mercury = 24 x 150hexav.Cr.:P.008 C P17 Cottrell Division - Harris Inter- 0.0175 85 200 200 - Includes sanitary wastes, cool- type Corp. (8/26/74) ing water and boiler blowdown C Data Sources: A. Rhode Island Department of Health, B, Discharger, C. NPDES Permit Discharge Limits Lotantaneous rate of flow during sompling In mg1l unless otherwise noted FEB 11979 F Sm Zff. n P2: (10) The University of Rhode Island in Kingston has a boiler blowdown discharge which results from cleaning of the heating system boilers. This intermittent, low-volume discharge to the Class B White Horn Brook may be high in phosphates or other chemicals which are used as corrosion inhibitors. ((15)) P3: (2) The University of Rhode Island also discharges effluent from its 1.2 million-gallon per day (MGD) secondary sewage treatment plant to the White Horn Brook. Flows at the treatment facility are approaching design capacity and the brook cannot accept additional pollutant loading. The facility will be taken out of service by March., 1977., when URI will tie into the new South Kingstown sewerage system, currently under construction.((15)) P4: (3) The Kenyon Piece'D@eW 'orks, Charlestown, is a textile finishing firm which discharges treated process wastewater from an aerated lagoon into the Pawcatuck River, The river is classified C in this area. Upgraded treatment_, including an additional aerated lagoon, a settling pond and possible chlorinatim is programmed for late 1976. ((15)) P5: (11) American Fish Culture., Inc.,, a fish hatchery in Richmond, discharges from a series of settling ponds to White Brook., a tributary of the Pawcatuck River. White Brook is a Class C stream, ((15)) P6: (12) United Nuclear Corporation, a materials recovery opera- tion in Charlestown., discharges non-contact cooling water to the Pawcatuck River, which is classified C in this area. ((15)) P7: (4) Charbert., Inc._, a textile finishing firm in Alton Village, Richmond, discharges processing waste from an aerated lagoon to the Wood River, which is Class C in this area. The Rhode Island Department of Health has reviewed construction plans for a series of seepage pits which are expected to eliminate this dis- charge by December., 1976.((15)) P8: (13) Greene Plastics Corp... Canonchet., . Hopkinton., dis- charges non-contact cooling water to the Canonchet Brooka Class B tributary of the Wood River. ((15)) P9: (6)'Due to locally poor soil conditions and bedrock out- crops, inadequate individual domestic and commercial sewerage systems in Hope Valley discharge raw sewage and leachates into this Class C segment of the Wood River. Determination of the extent and severity of these discharges3 and of alterna- tive methods of abatement will be considered under the areawide (208) planning process. ((23:23)) 11-14 Plo: (14) Auralux Chemical Corporation,, Hope ValleyHopkinton., discharges non-contact cooling water into Locustville Pond on the Class B Brushy Brook, which is a tributary of the Wood River. ((15)) Pll: 5) The New Bradford Dyeing Association discharges textile process water to a lagoon., which in turn discharges to the Paw- catuck River, which is Class C in this area. Several nearby homes also discharge domestic wastes to the lagoon. Treatment of the Drocess water will be upgraded by November., 1976, by the addition of a neutralization pond. ((15)) P12: (8) Inadequate individual sewage disposal systems in Asha- way Village., Hopkinton, discharge raw sewage and leachates into the Ashaway River, which is classified C near the village. Ashaway is tentatively programmed for a system of interceptor and collector sewers to be tied into the Westerly municipal sewer,system. No schedule has been established. ((15)) P13: (1) The Westerly sewage treatment plant discharges primary effluent into the Pawcatuck River which is classified SC in this area. The treatment plant consists of pretreatment units, two primary setting tanks, and a chlorinator. The treatment plant is scheduled to be upgraded to secondary standards by June., 1978. ((15)) P14: (9) In recent years, most of the individual domestic and commercial sewage disposal system discharges in the Watch Hill area have been eliminated by consolidation and subsurface dis- posal, with the result that only minor water quality problems remain. A sanitary survey of the area, to be performed by the Rhode Island Department of Health later this year, will make a detailed assessment of sewer needs. ((15)) Watch Hill is pro- grammed for sewer service and tie-in to the Westerly treatment plant early in the 1980ts, contingent upon the availability of state and local funds. ((13:20)) The design capacity of the upgraded Westerly treatment plant (to be completed by June, 1978) provides for flows from the Watch Hill area. (M) P15: The combined storm and sanitary sewer system in Pawcatuck Borough., Stonington, discharges into the Pawcatuck River., which is classified C along this reach. The proposed municipal (Stonington) sewerage system for Pawcatuck will eliminate these discharges sometime in 1978. ((3,42)) 11-15 P16: Yardney Electric Corporation, located in Pawcatuck Connecticut discharges sanitary, boiler blowdown, cooling and process wastewaters into the upper tidal portion of the Paw- catuck River which is classified SC in this area. After com- pletion of the Stonington sewerage facilities., all sanitary and boiler blowdown wastewater and some process water will be diverted to the municipal system. The cooling water and the remaining process water, which contains concentrations of metals untreatable at the munici al facility, will be pretreated and discharged to the river. ((4 P17: Cottrell Division of the Harris Intertype Corporation, also in Pawcatuck, discharges into the tidal portion of the river. This discharge includes sanitary_, cooling and boiler blowdown wastewaters. The sanitary wastes will be discharged to the Stonington municipal sewerage system when it becomes operational. The cooling water and boiler blowdown wastes will continue to be discharged to the river. ((48)) E. NonDoint Sources of Pollution Nonpoint sources of pollution have not yet been assessed or identified in the Pawcatuck River Basin. Consistent with national priorities and strategy ((47,49)) nongoint source problems will be addressed during Phase 11 (1978-19 3) of the implementation of PL 92-500 through the areawide wastewater management plan (Section 208) to be prepared by the Statewide Planning Program. Potential nonpoint sources of pollution to be studied are: 1. Landfill sites 2. Individual subsurface disposal systems 3. Urban runoff 4. Erosion and sedimentation from land use practices 5. Marinas ((23: 30-39)) The effect of these nonpoint sources of pollution and alterna" tives for their abatement will also be determined by the "2o8l' study which is to be completed in 1978. 11-16 PART THREE.- GROWTH POTENTIAL In determining the need for municipal wastewater collection and disposal facilities., several factors affecting the growth potential of the planning area must be considered. Determinants such as population, patterns of land development_, and transportation will provide a basis for the recommendations which are found in Part Five: Municipal Facilities Requirements. A. Population The bulk of the population in the Pawcatuck Basin is concentrated in three urban centers: Kingston and Westerly in Rhode Island, and Pawcatuck in Connecticut. Kingston, sit 'e of the University.of Rhode Island is located in the eastern portion of the basin, in the town of South Kingstown. Westerly and Pawcatuck, in the southwestern portion of the basin., face each other at the head of navigation on the five-mile long tidal portion of the Pawcatuck River. The 1970 population of the Rhode Island-Pawcatuck Basin planning area was an estimated 38,300 people. (03)) Table 4 presents population pro- jections for each community in the planning area at five-year inter- vals to the year 1995, as well as the overall projected percent change for the period. By 1995., the total population of the planning area is projected to be about 53,600 which is a 39.9 percent in- crease over the 1970 populhtion, ((2t)) and makes the Pawcatuck the fastest growing of the seven Rhode Island basin planning areas. Although most communities in the basin will experience relatively large percentages of population increase over the next 20 years, only four areas of population concentration are likely to experience large enough numerical increases to necessitate consideration for the installation of municipal sewerage systems, These areas., which are identified in the State Land Use Policies and Plan ((32:59)) and illustrated on Figure 5 (page 111-7), are: 1) The Watch HillrwAvondiLle area, Westerly 2) TheoHope Valley-Wyoming area, Hopkinton-Richmond line (Wo d River) 3) The Shannock-Kenyon area, Richmond-Charlestown line (Paw- catuck River) 4) The Ashaway-Bradford area., Hopkinton-Westerly line'(Paw- catuck River) B. Patterns of Land Development The need for sewage collection systems must also be predicated on the nature of the development which is planned for an area. Since the population within the basin is expected to increase sub- stantially within the next 20 years., it is extremely important that development to accommodate this population increase occur in an orderly fashion. M man M M M M M M M mow M M No M TABLE 4 Population Trends and Projections-(1970-1995) (.(33,26: 20,21)) Pawcatuck River Basin Communities, Rhode Island (rounded to the nearest 100) Population Projections Trends-(1970Z1295) Numerical Percent Municipality 1-970 1975 1280 1985 1990 1995 Change Change Charlestown (part) 1.,6oo 21000 2.,200 2.,400 2,500 2.6oo 1.9000 62.5 Exeter 3_,200 4,ooo 4.,4oo 4,6oo 4,8oo 4.,goo 1,700 53.1 Hopkinton 5.,4oo 65loo 6.5oo 6.,800 7,000 7,300 15900 35.2 North Kingstown(part) 1,200 1@,OOO* 1.9,300 1@,600 21000 2,300 15100 91.7 Richmond 2.6oo 3,100 31600 3.8oo 4,ooo 41200 1.6oo 61.5 South Kingstown(part) 7,500 9.4oo 9.6oo 9.8oo 105200 10,600 3,100 41.3 Westerly (part) 16.,300 175100 17,900 18,800 195800 20.,700 419400 27.0 West Greenwich(part) 500 700 800 8oo goo 1,000 500 100.0 TOTALS 38,3oo 43,40o 46,3oo 48,600 515200 53,600 15@,300 39.9 Reflects Navy base closings in North Kingstown in 1973 Average Annual Growth Rate 1970-1995: 1.6% 1. Land Use A future land use plan for the State of Rhode Island entitled State Land Use Policies and Plan was adopted by the State Planning Council on June 5. 1975. Six broad land use categories are included in the state plan: residential, commercial., industrial, governmental and institutional, airports, and open space, The land areas designated in the residential category are intended for housing, in addition to associated public and semi-public uses ... and essential community facilities... The residential land use category includes three density levels: high., medium.9 and low. Residential areas in the high-density category are charac- terized by development at a minimum net density of four dwelling units per acre. The average net density in the high density areas throughout the state is 7.5 dwelling units per acre,..High density areas would contain a limited amount of single-family housing on small lots-, a substan- tial amount of multiple-family housing at net densities of around 20 or 30 dwelling units per acre, and some housing of much higher density in limited areas which have special site characteristics (such as downtown apartment buildings at a net density of 50 or 60 dwelling units per acre) ... The ... high-density residential areas tend to reflect exist- ing urban centers throughout the state ... If not already serviced,, they would eventu&lly require public water and sewer facilities., particularly in the most intensively developed areas in this density range... Residential development of medium-density., generally situ- ated on the fringes of urban areas., ranges from one to four dwelling units per acre, net density. The average net density among all these areas throughout the state is 1.8 dwelling units per acre...The typical housing type in medium-density areas would be the single-family dwelling on a one-quarter to one-half acre lot. There would be some medium-density multiple-dwelling development, such as low-rise apartments or town houses at a net density of 15 to 20 dwelling units per acre. In medium-density areas, community facilities would be available to a slightly lesser extent than in high-density areas. Public water and sewer systems would be constructed in most of the medium-density areas within the next five to ten years... 111-3 In low-density residential areas_, development is antici- pated to occur at a maximum net density of one dwelling unit per acre. The average net density in the low- density areas throughout the state is 0.5 dwelling units per acre ... The predominant housing type ... would be the single-family detached dwelling on a large lot. Public water and sewer service would not be available during the time frame of this plan... ((32: 63364)) The land use plan includes four distinct types of com- mercial area,, which vary according to the functions and services offered. One reason for this differentiation is to indicate the scale and nature of the public faci- lities (mainly transportation) which are needed to support a given type of commercial development... The central cores of the major urban areas in the state are indicated in the land use plan as central business districts. Included are Newport., Pawtucket, Providencej Westerly, and Woonsocket ... It is projected that these five areas will retain their function but that no new central business districts will develop... Regional shopping centers are also denoted in the land use plan, This type of commercial area is generally limited to retail shopping establishments such as department stores, supermarkets, chain stores,, and specialty shops, sometimes with one or two restaurants, branch banks, and movie theaters... ((32:.1211122)) The commercial recreation areas "category is designed to encom- pass commercial recreational uses which cover large tracts of land and are more commercial than recreational in nature. Examples of commercial recreation uses are race tracks, amusement parks, sports arenas, and drive-in theaters...All are existing facilities; no future commercial developments of this nature are projected in the plan." The general commercial areas category "consists of all large commercial areas in the state other than the three described above. It does not include commercial areas serving a single neighborhood or village and minor highway-oriented commercial areas, which are so small at the scale of the land use plan that they become absorbed into the residential category..." ((32: 123)) Also delineated in the 1990 plan is the industrial category. 111-4 Although industrial areas in the plan were not classified by distinct types or density levels., as with residential areas, a11 variety of different uses were considered "in- dustrial : extractive operations, such as gravel mining; manufacturing plants (processing, fabricating., and assem- bling); closely related non-manufacturing activities (warehouse and storage); public utility installations; and transportation terminals (railroad yards and port faci- lities), other than airports and military facilities. ((32: 97)) The need by industry for adequate facilities and services is reflected in the land use plan in that all development in the plan was initially analyzed in term of soil conditions, topography, public sewer service_, water service, and protection of water quality. All industrial areas were then analyzed through a field survey (the 1970 industrially zoned land inventory) ((25)) again in terms of site preparation., public services and facilities and the possibility of water pollution, Sites considered inappropriate for development because of any of these factors were eliminated. Thus the indus- trial areas comply with the land use plants goals of minimizing pollution and providing efficient, adequate public services.((32:116)) Large properties throughout the state (except for airports and open space, which form separate categories) used by governments, churches., schools, hospitals., and other in- stitutions are classified as "governmental and institutional" in the land use plan ... Specific types of governmental and institutional use include naval bases and other military facilities, state correctional and health facilities cemeteries and colleges and universities... ((32:123)5 Determination of the areas of the land use plan to be reserved .for airports was based on a series of surveys and inventories of air transportation in the state. ((22., 29, 30)) A revised summary planning report on the state airport system was completed in December, 1974.((31)) The findings of this summary report have been integrated into the Rhode Island Transportation Plan.- 1990 ((28))3 an element of the State Guide Plan approved by the State Planning Council on December 30, 1974. Open spa ce in the land use plan has been classified as recrea- tion'. conservation, or woodland and open land categories. "These three open space categories are very similar in that areas are often retained in a natural or open state and in that intended uses overlap among categories. In most large public frecreational areas'$ for example, multi-use management allows different recreational uses; conservation is practiced and development is limited." ((32:116)) However., the state land use plan differentiates among these three open space categories., according to both purpose and degree of use and development. 111-5 Figure 5 illustrates the future development pattern of the Pawcatuck Basin as proposed by the state's land use plan. ((32:59)) The plan map was developed on the basis of a 92 acre grid system in order to indicate generally the proposed distribution of the various land use categories. Table 5 summarizes the proposed dis- tribution of land use types for each community within the basis. ((32:132)) 2. Transportation Directly related to population and patterns of land develop- ment are transportation facilities and their effect on the need for municipal sewerage systems. Four modes of transportation (water, rail air, and high- way) provide access to the Pawcatuck Basin area (S3ee Figure 6). a. Water Access by water to the Pawcatuck River Basin' is con- centrated in Little Narragansett Bay and the Pawcatuck River estuary, where several marinas., boatyards and yacht clubs provide moorings and slips for recreational water craft. These facilities provide access to the heavily used shore-oriented recreational attractions and seasonal housing concentrated in Watch Hill, Avondale and other nearby areas of Westerly and Charlestown. There is no marine shipping terminal in the Pawcatuck River Basin. The Port of Providence, at the head of Narragansett Bay, is the only major marine terminal facility in the state. It is primarily an oil handling port, although it also has the capacity to handle con- tainerized and other cargo, ((35:38)) Travel time to the port from Westerly Center is approximately one hour. The port nearest Westerly Center is the New London har- bor-, which is outside of the Pawcatuck Basin. Travel time from New London to Westerly Center has been reduced from about one-half hour to about 20 minutes by.the recently completed Westerly By-pass highway which connects .U.S. Route 1 in the Westerly State Airport area to Route 2 in Connecticut (see Figure 6). The effect of this new highway on basin growth will be discussed laterin this section. b. Rail The Pawcatuck Basin is served by limited interstate passenger, intercity commuter, and freight rail.service 111-6 Id COVENTRY WARWIC STERLING WEST I ? WAR- WILK- ---------- &S IS, 'W" hu 'AZ WEST EAST ji NWICH A xu_ L NORTH N Quo-, 1011, OWN VOLUNTOWN ""N u )j, 13 M-:". -, _'w M,"""' u z 77-7, NORTH 1@ `%M STONINGTON H AR Ag STONINGTON Ur n FIGURE 5 PROPOSED DISTRIBUTION OF rMa RESIDENTIAL: HIGH DENSITY LAND USE TYPES(1990) ((32:59)) NAPAT- @T. RESIDENTIAL: MEDIUM DENSITY PAWCATUCK RIVER BASIN E] RESIDENTIAL: LOW DENSITY RHODEISLAND COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL BASIN PLANNING BOUNDARY AIRPORTS BASIN HYDROLOGIC BOUNDARY GOVERNMENTAL, INSTITUTIONAL 0 6ooo 12000 Isooo 24000 30000 OPEN SPACE: RECREATION SC AU IN FEE T OPEN SPACE: CONSERVATION N OPEN SPACE: WOODLAND, OPEN LAND. "paW by ff@ RHODE ISLAND STATEMDE PLANNM PROGRAM TABLE 5 Proposed Distribution of Land Use Types (1990) Pawcatuck River Basin Communities - Rhode Island ((32)) (in acres to the nearest lou). Percent Charlestown North Kings- South Kings- Westerly West-Green- Of (part) Exeter Hopkinton to- (partj Rich..nd town (part (nart) wich (part) Basin Totals Total Residential Total lTOO 900 100 1,000 8oo 6,200 0 133500 8.2 High density. 0 0 0 0 8oo 0 8oo medium density 1,200 00 1,500 0 500 500 2,500 0 6 Lamr density 800 500 300 2,900 0 6 o 500 1,300 100 :4000 - 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 100 0.1 Industrial 0 0 0 0 100 6oo 300 0 1,000 o.6 Airports 0 0, 0 0 0 0 4oo 0 4oo 0.2 Governmental/ Institutional 0 200 0 0 0 1,8oo 0 0 2,000 1.2 open Space Total 18,100 33,000 24,300 6,8oo 24,ooo 16,700 9'no 16,6oo 148,700 89.7 Rec"ation 5,8oo 7,200 3,000 200 5,200 1 8oo 1,700 27,900 Con1servat"m 300 1,700 0 0 4oo 3,500 2,300 800 9,000 woodlmw Open T-nd 12,000 24,2oo 21,300 6,6oO 18,4oo 11,4oo 5,200 12,700 lli,8oo Town Totals (acres) 19,800 34,ioo 27,100 6,goo 25,100 19,900 1.6,200 i6,6oo 165,700 100.0 (square Miles) 1 30.9 1 53.3 1 42.3 lo.8 39.2 31.1 25.3 25.9 258.9 *Theme figures do riot agree with actual land area data for the planning areas, due to the use of 92-acre grid cells in the land use plan. - - - - - - - - - - - - - Rd COVE TRY WARWIC STERLING WEST I r WAR- Ay -1011T BI JL9 P.11. z P. lcol WEST EAS NWII 10 L GREENWICH T RI-1- ORTH f J I TA N ou I VO NT N ETER - - - - - Id I Rd RZ7 s.. P P. . 138 P, IaR P@ RR '4\3 Id Rd" J A-11 P, Rd JA -01CIETS 138 .A. P, UR I ORESt ozo c 'd PEAIE NOR7@ @T r IA 49 N. F "'T"X P. "R-GA ETT o Pd le. HA STOWN SO H da d tr. , 11 .4u IA S TON 4-ERLI C.: p,l KINGS OWN lom N TERLY xl P. -.e cLO E IN 'd STATEJ'-/ @\LITTL I" A --m FIGURE 6 TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM HT INTERSTATE HIGHWAY S EXISTING AND PROPOSED (1990) ARTERIALOR MAJOR COLLECTOR- U S HIGHWAY RAWCATUCK RIVER BASIN STATE ROUTE RHODEISLAND PROPOSED HIGHWAY PRIMARY RAIL LINE ("SHORE LINE") BASIN PLANNING BOUNDARY TYPE OF RAIL SERVICE: BASIN HYDROLOGIC BOUNDARY P INTERSTATE PASSENGER (AMTRAK) 60PO r2l@Oo WOOD 24000 WOOD ___ -mmmt===@ P, C COMMUTER PASSENGER SCALE IN FEET F FREIGHT N MARINA,BOAT YARD, YACHT BASIN, ETC. Pmoul by ft RHODE ISLAND STATEVADE PLANNING PROGRAM on the "Shore Line" trackage (See Figure 6). Inter- state passenger service is available at Westerly and Kingston ((27:05.65)); commuter service at Westerly, Shannock, Kenyon, and Kingston ((27:05.43)); and freight service at Westerly, Bradford, Wood River Junction, Kenyon, Kingston and Slocum.((27:05.59)) Passenger rail service to the basin is part of the AMTRAK northeast corridor service connecting Washing- ton, D.C. and Boston. Service., both north and south- bound., connects New London, Westerly., Kingston, and Providence three times daily. Commuter rail service to the Rhode Island portion of the basin originates in Westerly and is limited to one round-triD each weekday., with stops at Westerly., Shannock., Kenyon, Kingston, Wickford Junction, East Greenwich., Warwick (Kilvert Street) and Union Station in Providence. The morning and evening Westerly-to- Providence rush hour trips cover 44 miles in 54 -minutes. ((27:05.43)) During 1973, the freight terminals listed above han- dled nearly 500 loaded rail cars,, carrying over 14,,000 tons of goods., most of which were inbound.((27:05-59)) Major categories of commodities shipped included food and kindred products; lumber and wood products; chemi- cals and allied products; pulp, paper and allied products; and farm products. The configuration and capacity of rail facilities in the basin appear adequate to accommodate future growth., but are not likely to induce it without the influence of other factors. c. Air The primary means of air access to the Pawcatuck Basin is the Westerly State Airport., which is a general aviation facility serving private, non-scheduled freight and passenger flights., as well as scheduled daily service to and from Block Island. Its two 4000- foot runways and associated facilities are capable of accommodating weather-instrumented jet and propeller aircraft weighing up to 63,000 pounds. It is approxi- mately 2 miles from Westerly Center (see Figure 6). III-10 Accessibility to the site has been improved by the newly- constructed Westerly By-pass highway which also serves the nearby Airport Industrial Park, as well as shore- oriented development along R.I. Scenic Route LA and U.S. Route 1. This highway connects with Route 2 in Connec- ticut near the Rhode Island border (see Figure 6). The state airport facility at Westerly appears adequate to meet future growth, and no plans for ex-Dansion are current- ly under consideration. ((28,29: 91-98)) Several other aircraft landing facilities are available in the basin, including the former Charlestown Auxiliary Landing Field (Navy) (Figure 6), which has been declared surplus by the Navy. It served as an auxiliary landing field for the Quonset Point Naval Air Station. Develop- ment of a nuclear power generating facility at the site is under consideration. The state land use lan has designated the site industrial (See Figure 5@ for the sole purpose of reserving it for further study of its use as a nuclear power plant location, and not as a general industrial site. If the site is not used for this purpose, it should be placed in open-space and low- intensity use. ((21:5)) In either case, public sewer service will not be required. While the question of the desirability of a nuclear power plant in Charlestown is beyond the scope of this plan, some conclusions about growth in the area can be drawn. If the site is developed for a nuclear power plant, all other development would be excluded within a certain minimum radius, perhaps 0.4 miles. ((50:4)) Population density within a considerably larger radius would have to be limited to low levels. The actual dimensions of this zone of limited development would be determined by a formula including po ulation density,, meteorological and other factors MA: 18-20, 50: 4 51: 4.7-4)) Clearly, a. nuclear power plant in Charles- town would limit growth in some areas of the community. The federal General Services Administration's decision on the disposition of the site is pending litigation by environmental interests. As a result of this court case the General Services Administration is currently preparing an environmentalimpact statement (EIS). Regardless of the findings of the EIS and the outcome of the litigation,, it is very unlikely that this facility will remain in use as an airport., given its proximity to the Westerly State Airport. The loCations and characteristics of the other minor airparks and landing strips in the basin make it un- likely that they will affect basin growth patterns significantly. ((29: 112-126) d. _ELE-hway The major highway through the basin is Interstate 95 which crosses from the south@vrest to the northeast cor- ner. Interstate 95-, which is the primary east coast auto- mobile and truck highway connecting the southeastern United States with the Canadian border in Maine, has eight interchanges in the basin (See Figure 6). The last three interchanges in Connecticut and'the first one in Rhode island provide access to the greater Westerly- Pawcatuck area and to seasonal shore-oriented attractions along U.S. Route l.and R.I. Scenic 1A on Rhode Island's south coast. The Westerly By-pass highviay, which has recently been completed as state Route 78 in Connecticut and Rhode Island., serves the two-fold purpose of providing a by-pass route around the Westerly-Pawcatuck,urbanized area for: (1) heavy summer traffic bound for Rhode Island beaches along U.S. Route 1 and R.I. Scenic 1A. and (2) truck and employee traffic to the 105 acre Westerly Air- port Industrial Park,, currently under development. The first Dhase in the development of this by-pass highway includes a. two-lane, grade seoarated., controlled access highway from U.S. Route 1 near the Westerly State Airport to Connecticut Route 2 in Stonington. It was completed in June,, 1976. Ultimately., the by-pass will be a four- lane,, limited access highway connecting U.S. Route 1 in Westerly with an upgraded Route 2 in Stonington. Com- pletion of this second and final phase is contingent upon the availability of funds and is probably five or more years distant. ((16)) Nevertheless, completion of Phase I accomplishes the purpose of providing relief from touristand truck traffic for downtown streets, as well as providing improved access and growth stimulation for the industrial park. U.S. Route 1 and R.I. Scenic 1A. as noted above, provide access to beaches and associated seasonal develoDment along Rhode Islandts southern coast. Developmen! ad- jacent to these two routes may be accelerated by im- proved access over the Westerly By-pass. 111-12 U.S. Route 1 is a four-lane limited access coastal highway crossing the basin east to west, carrying local and through auto and truck traffic %to points along Block Island Sound, Narragansett Bay and in- land. Some reconstruction to increase control of access is proposed for Route 1 ((28:11-10)), but is not likely to affect growth significantly. Thetwo-lane Scenic Route 1A is the only available route to seasonal developments at Watch Hill and Avondale on Little Narragansett Bay and the Paw- catuck estuary, and to the popular Misquamicut beach area on Block Island Sound. Minor improve- ments are planned for Route 1A in Westerly, ((28:11- 15)) but should not affect development. Other important basin highways include Connecticut Route 2 and Rhode Island Routes 2, 3 and 138. Con- necticut Route 2 is a north-south arterial highway joining Pawcatuck Borough, North Stonington Borough and Norwich. Rhode Island Route 2 is the major north- south arterial in the eastern portion of the basin. From its southern terminus at U.S. 1 in Charlestown Village., Route 2 runs north-north-east to Providence., passing through Kenyon and near the University of Rhode Island. R.I. Route 3., prior to the construction of 1-95,, was the basin's major north-south route from southeastern Connecticut to the Providence area. It passes through the western portion of the basin, parallelling 1-95 and linking Hope Valley-Wyoming, Ashaway and downtown Westerly. Route 138 crosses the basin east-west, connecting Voluntown, Connecticut and the East Bay area of Rhode Island through Hope Valley-Wyoming, URI, Kingston and communities on the mid-bay islands. It is a heavily travelled, winding, two-lane arterial with a high accident rate, A study recently initiated by the R.I. Department of Transportation will determine the recommended location of a proposed interstate highway (Interstate 895) to carry the heavy cross-state truck and auto traffic now handled by R.I. 138. This highway would also provide a safe., efficient route for the high volume of summer recreational traffic bound from Connecticut and New York to New-port and Cape Cod* The western 111-13 terminus of the proposed Interstate 895 would be at the existing 1-95 interchange at Hope Valley-Wyoming. After crossing western Rhode Island., it would join the new stretch of R.I. 138 between U.S. 1 and the Jamestown Bridge in North Kingstown (Figure 6). Preliminary plan- ning indicates tha,lu- an interchange should be provided north of the West Kingston-URI area of South Kingstown. This interchange would serve the West Kingston indus- trial park proposed by the state land use plan and zoned as such by the-Town of South Kingstown. Access to the University of Rhode Island would also be provided by the interchange. Construction of 1-895 can be expected to increase development potential and pressure in both Hope Va.lley-Wyoming and West Kingston-URI areas. ((28: 11-20 to 11-22)) An Environmental Impact Statement on 1-895 is currently being prepared by a consultant to the Rhode Island Department of Transportation, and should be completed by mid-1977. Two arterial roads cross the northern portion of the basin. State Route 165 crosses the western half of the Town of Exeter, connecting State Route 138 in Connec- ticut with R.I. Route 3. Rhode Island Route 102 is the primary north-south arterial in the north-west.quadrant of the state. Its southern stretch passes east-west across the northern portion of the planning area,, serv- ing as a major connector between 1-95 and U.S. Route 1. Bus service in the planning area is limited to inter- city and interstate runs, with no local transit routes. Greyhound Bus Lines serves Westerly on the daily Provi- dence to New York run, while Bonanza Bus Lines provides daily service from Providence to the University of Rhode Isla-nd., with a. stop at Davisville. The Rhode Island Public Transit Authority provides frequent runs along two intercity routes which serve the eastern end of the planning area: (1) Newport-jamestown-Narragan- sett Pier-Wakefield-URI-West Kingston., and return; and (2) URI-Wakefield-Galilee-Point Judith and return.((10A)) 111-14 PART FOUR: SEGMENT CLASSIFICATIONS AND ANALYSES A. Water Quality Planning Goals One of the major goals of the state land use plan is to "make efficient,use of available land and water., producin 9 a visually pleasing_, coherent, and workable environment."((32: )) The state water quality management plan is guided by this same general goal and by more specific goals: to "reduce stream pollution to levels set in the state's Stream Classification Plan" and to aid in the 11 coordinated development, conservation., and use of the statets water resources." ((18:11,14)) Another goal in the basin plan is the application of effluent limits specified in the Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 (PL 92-500) under Section 301(b),which are: (1.) (A). By July 1, 1977, effluent limits applying best prac- ticable treatment by industry as defined by the Admin- istrator (under section 304b) or treatment.to meet pre-treatment standards (under section 307). (B). By July l-, 1977, effluent limits applying secondary treatment as defined by the Administrator (section 304d(1-5-for publicly owned treatment works in exist- ence on July 1, 1977 or approved prior to June 30, 1974 with four years allowed for completion. (C). By July 1, 1977, any more stringent limitations includ- ing those necessary to meet water quality standards., treatment standards., or schedules of compliance. (2.) (A). By July l-, 198 . effluent limits applying the best available technology for industries which is economically achievable for that category ofo&oint source as defined by the Administrator (Section 3 (b)(2)), including the elimination of the discharge. (B). Byiuly 1, 1983, effluent limits applying the best prac- ticable treatment for the publicly owned treatment works. B. Segment Classification The Pawcatuck River Basin has been divided into effluent limita- tion and water quality class segments, according to the following definitions: IV-1 Effluent Limitation Class - Water quality standards are now being met or there is certainty that water quality standards will be met by the application of effluent limitations required by Sections 301(b)(1)(A) and 301(b)(1)(B)., of the Act. Water Quality Class - desired water quality standards will not be achieved even after the application of effluent limitations re- quired by Sections 301(b)(1)(A) and 301(b)(1)(B)., of the Act. The water quality and effluent limitation segments for the Pawcatuck Basin are shown on Figure 7 and their characteristics summarized in Table 6. The segment classifications were assigned by the Rhode Island Department of Health on the basis of whether or not the water quality classification could, in their judgement, be met by secondary or best practicable treatment. All Class A and Class B waters have been classified as water quality segments because ultimately there will be no discharges allowed to these segments with the exception of non-contact cool- ing water. Because of this non-degradation provision, no degree of treatment requiring a discharge to these segments will be sufficient to meet the water quality classification. I A segment priority ranking for all segments in the state was developed by the Rhode Island Department of Health on the basis of the following major criteria: 1). severity of problem 2) population affected; and 3) need for the preservation of pure waters. ((24:12)) The priority points for the segments of the Pawcatuck River basin are shown on Figure 7 and are listed in Table 6. The basin abate- ment priority ranking, also listed in Table 6. is a ranking among the segments of the basin assigning priority to the need for the abatement of the pollution within that segment. The segment with the greatest number of priority points in a basin is assigned the highest abatement priority ranking for the basin. The method used in assigning priority points to each segment is detailed in Appendix C. C. Segment Analyses 1. Water Quality SeEments There are 27 water quality segments in the Pawcatuck Basin., seven of which are out of compliance with their water quality classification. These seven segments are identified and described in Table 7. An analysis of each water quality segment in the basin, based on Department of Health records, is given below. IV-2 COVENTRY WARWIC STERLING WEST I WAR- A, ---------- "T z I WEST EAST NWICH Pd- L GREENWICH NORTH 18 W-X KINGSTOWN w-x KFOID EX w I VOLUNTOWN (ETER N ------ 17 c pd _x W-@ V_x Id - W-X 3 B 27 c -3 w 1251 ANPUS" _x zi W-X '.1 uF AN. z I o W-3 W-X _A7 *TINT@_ 36 r ..A A.. 4 IN @10 $HAN A _X 1E'1E11L1 NORTH E-X 'T'O@Z`M.e /.\ " STONIN50 b A g' E 2 1E-X F- to P _ T Id IANN- I TT E- F W-X 0 N_ 5'1, w.-3 w-x am HARL S WN UTH q B HI I- N o-1 W-X No. I'd NADFl) c E-6 -37 IN. AN KINGSTOWN STONINGTON B -CATUCA* 4 E p E-6 WESTERLY SIC FIGURE 7 -.T0N RIVER SEGMENT CLASSES AND .A, & PRIORITY POINT RATINGS SA WATER QUALITY SEGMENT PAWCATUCK RIVER BASIN EFFLUENT LIMITATION SEGMENT RHODEISLAND F3@7 SEGMENT IDENTIFICATION NUMBER @ CLASSIFICATION OF WATER QUALITY BASIN PLANNING BOUNDARY SEGMENT PRIORITY BASIN HYDROLOGIC BOUNDARY x fooo 12ooo Isom 24000 300M '>W <POINT RATING CLASSIFICATION SCALE IN FEET N P.P(N,N1 by th, RHODE ISLAND STATEWIDE PLANNING PROGRAM TABLE 6 Characteristics of River Segments Pawcatuck River Basin ((15)) Total Segment Length Segment Segment Identification (miles) Water Quality Out of Segment Discharge Priority Priority Number Stream Name or Area Classification Compliance Classa. Number(s) Pointsb Ranking 1 Little Narragansett Bay 770 ac. SA Yes W P14 4 5 2 Pawcatuck River Estuary (260 ac.) 2.3 SB Yes W None 4 5 3 Pawcatuck River Estuary (210 ac.) 3.0 SC E P13,pi6,Pl7 6 1 4 Pawcatuck River 1 0 C E P15 6 1 5 Pawcaltuck River 3:6 Shunock River, Etc. 27 B Yes W None 3 7 6 Pawcatuck River 1.7 B Yes W None 3 7 7 Pawcatuck River 4.4 C E Pil 3 7 Pawcatuck River 8.0 Poquiant Brook, Etc. 8 B W None x None 9 Pawcatuck River o.6 C E P6 x None 10 Pawcatuck River 3.2 B Yes W None 3 7 il Pawcatuck River 1.9 C E P4 6 1 12 Pawcatuck River 2.5 Queen River, Etc. 45 B W None x None 13 White Horn Brook, Etc. 7 B Yes W P2,P3 6 1 14 White Horn Brook, Etc, 2 A W None x None 15 Chipuxet River, Etc. 7 A W None x None 16 Chickasheen Brook 1.5 A W None x None 17 Queen's River o.6 C E Pi x None 18 Unnamed 4 A W None x None 19 Queen's River, Etc, 8 A W None x None 20 Sodom Brook, Etc. 12 A W None x None 21 Pasquiset Brook 2.0 A W None x None 22 Beaver River, Etc. 12 A W None x None 2@ Meadow Brook, Etc. 8 A W None x None 2 Wood River 0.7 C E P7 3 7 25 Wood River 2.7 Canonchet Brook, Etc, 10 B W P8 x None 26 Wood River 2.4 B Yes W None 3 7 27 Wood River 1.8 C E Pq 3 7 28 Wood River 3.4 Roaring Brook, Etc. 6 B W None x None 29 Wood River Falls River, Etc. 48 A W None x None TABLE 6 Characteristics of River Segments Pawcatuck River Basin ((15)) (Continued) Total Segment Length Segment -Ragm Ut Identification (miles) Water Quality Out of Segment Discharge Priority Priority Number Stream Name or Area Classification Compliance Classa Number(s) Points Ranking 30 Brushy Brook, Etc. 8 B W Plo X None 31 Brushy Brook, Etc. 5 A W None X None 32 Unnamed 2.1 A W None X None 33 Tomaquaug Brook, Etc. 10 A W None X None 34 Aquntaug Brook 1.4 B W None X None 35 Ashaway River 0.9 C E P12 3 7 36 Ashaway River, Etc. 37 A W None X None 37 White Brook 1.7 C E P5 None- TOTAL LENGTHS: 288.o mi. a - E-Effluent Limitation W-Water Quality b - X - No problem See Appendix C for details of points assignments IABL@_T River Segments Out Of Compliance With Rhode Island Department of Health Standards Pawcatuck River Basin ((15)) Length or Classification of Area Segment Segment Name of Stream Water Quality Out of Discharge(s) Affecting Number Class* or Water Body Proposed Existing Compliance Water Quality 1 W Little Narr. Bay SA SB 770 acres P14 Watch Hill individual sewers (minor) P13 Westerly sewage treat- ment plant P17 Harris Intertype Gorn... Cottrell Division P16 Yardney Electric Corp. P15 Pawcatuck combined sewers 2 W Pawcatuck River 2.3 miles P13 Westerly sewage treat- Estuary SB SC (260 acres) ment plant P17 Harris Intertype Corp. Cottrell Division P16 Yardney Electric Corp. P15 Pawcatuck combined sewers 5 W Pawcatuck River B C 3.6 miles P12 Ashaway individual sewers 6 W Pawcatuck River B C 1.7 miles Pll New Bradford Dyeing Assoc 10 W Pawcatuck River B C 2.5 miles P4 Kenyon Piece Dye Works 13 W White Horn Brook B C 1.7 miles P2 University of Rhode Island boiler blowdown P3 University of Rhode Island treatment plant 26 W Wood River B C 2.4 miles Pq Hope Valley individual sewers E Effluent Limitation W Water Quality Segment 1: (770 acres) Little Narraga nsett Bay from Napatree Point to the mouth of the Pawcatuck River at Rhodes Point is desig- nated Class SA by the Department of Healthe It is out of compliance with this designation and closed to shellfishing due to industrial, municipal and individual discharges to Segments 3 and 4. Although the severity of pollution is slight, it affects an extensive popula- tion because of the closure of shellfishing beds. For this reason the segment has been assigned four priority points (See Appendix C1. Most of the individual domestic and commercial discharges in the Watch Hill area of Westerly have been eliminated in recent years by consolidation and in-ground disposal, but, in order to protect water quality and provide for elimination of any remaining dis- charges, sewer service is programmed for the area for the early 19801s. ((13:20)) The exact timing of facilities construction is uncertain, as it is contingent upon the availability of federal, state and local funds. A detailed sanitary survey of Watch Hill will be performed by the Rhode Island Department of Health later this year. ((15)) Segment 2: (2-3 miles; 260 acres) The lower reach of the Paw- catuck River Estuary from its mouth at Rhodes Point to Pawcatuck Rock is classified SB. This segment is also out of compliance with its designated class due to upstream discharges in Segments 3 and 4. This segment's four-point priority rating is detailed in Appen- dix C. The discharges to Segment 3 include the Westerly municipal primary treatment plant (P13),, the Yardney Electric Company dis-. charge (P16). and the Harris Intertype Corporation,, Cottrell Division discharge (P17). Combined storm and sanitary sewer dis- charges in Pawcatuck (P15) on Segment 4 also contribute to problems in Segment 2. The upgrading of the Westerly treatment plant and the construction of a sanitary sewer system in Pawcatuck will bring this segment into compliance with its SB classification. Segment 5: (main stem: 3.6 miles) This segment of the Paw- catuck River main stem extends from the Bridge Street crossing in the White Rock section of Westerly to the confluence of the Ashaway River. The Shunock River in North Stonington., Connecticut., is a major tributary to this segment. The main stem portion of Segment 5 is out of compliance with its B classification as a result of discharge P12 (Ashaway Village) on Segment 35. Because of the effects of this d.ischarge., Segment 5 has received three priority points. Segment 6: (1-7 miles) This portion of the main stem from the Ashaway River confluence to the R.I. Route 3 crossing@is out of compliance with its B classification, because of pollutional load- ings from the New Bradford Dyeing Association (Discharge Pll) on Segment 7. immediately upstream. Additional treatment of the IV-7 Bradford Dyeing discharge by me ans of a neutralization pond may allow Segment 6 to attain Class B water quality. The neutralization pond is scheduled to go on line in November, 1976, and be observed for about one year to determine its effect- iveness in improving water quality in Segments 6 and 7. Domestic wastes from nearby homes will continue to discharge to the Dye- ing Association lagoon., as the Dresence of the nutrients in this type of waste is desirable for vigorous bacteriological activity in the lagoon. Segment 6 is assigned a three-point priority rating until it attains Class B water quality. (See Appendix C). SeGment 8: (main stem: 8.0 miles) This segment, in the middle portion of the Pawcatuck main stem -9 reaches from Kedinker Island near Discharge Pll (New Bradford Dyeing Association) to the con- fluence of Meadow Brook Poquiant Brook Watchaug Pond, Cedar Swamp Brook and Indian 6edar Swamp are al"so included in this segment, which is Class B. A "no problem" (X) priority rating has been assigned to this segment. Segment 10: (3.2 miles) A Class B segment, this stretch of the main stem extends from the United Nuclear Corporation dis- charge (P6) to the head of Carolina Mill Pond. This segment is out of compliance for most of its length, due to the Kenyon Piece Dye Works discharge (P4--Segment 11). Upgrading of treat- ment for this discharge is projected for November, 1976 and should result in compliance for Segment 10. Until brought into compliance, the segment will carry a priority point rating of three. Segment 12: (main stem: 2.5 miles) Most of the Class B head- waters of the Pawcatuck River main stem are included in this segment, which has a 11no problem" (X) priority point rating. The downstream end of this segment is at the Kenyon Piece Dye Works discharge (P14). The segment includes the upper reach of the Pawcatuck River from Kenyon to the Great Swamp and Worden Pond., as well as Alewife Brook and Tucker Pond. The lower por- tion of the Usquepaug-Queenfs River complex (which includes Glen Rock Reservoir., Glen Rock Brook., the lower Queen's River., and an unnamed tributary) is also part of Segment 12. The lower Chickasheen Brook, including Yawgoo and Barber Ponds, is part of the segment., as is the lower Chipuxet River, including Thirty. Acre Pond and Hundred Acre Pond. Segment 13:(approx. 7 miles) The lower reach of the White Horn Brook to its confluence with the Chipuxet River is classi- fied B, but is riot in compliance with this designation. Water quality here is degraded by the University of Rhode Island discharges (P2 and P3). The sanitary and laboratory wastewater presently treated at the Universityfs secondary treatment plant (P3) is scheduled for diversion to the South Kingston treatment iv-8 facility in Narragansett by mid-1977. The Universit .y has in- formed the Department of Health that it will divert its boiler blowdown discharge (P2) to a sub-surface disposal system, but has not made a construction timetable available. The elimina- tion of discharges P2 and P3 will allow Segment 13 to be in compliance with its B classification. ((15)) The segment will continue to have a six-point priority rating until that time, as noted in Appendix C. The segment also includes Genesee Brook, which is unaffected by the URI discharges, Segment 14: (approx. 2 miles) The Class A waters of-the upper White Horn Brook have received an X priority point rating tno problem" ). Segment 15: (approx. 7 miles) The upper reaches of the Chipuxet River are Class A and have a "no problem" (X) rating.. Segment 16: (1-5 miles) The upper reach of the Chickasheen Brook above Yawgoo Pond is also Class A., with a "no problem" (X) rating. SeEment 18: (approx. 4 miles) This segment is comprised of an unnamed Class A tributary of the Queen's River, and has an 11X11 (no problem) priority point rating. Segment 19: (approx. 8 miles) The uppermost reach of the Queents River above the Ladd School discharge (Pl) extends into West Greenwich and includes Edwards Pond. It is Class A., with no problems and an "X" priority rating. Segment 20: (approx. 12 miles) The Class A headwaters of the Queen's River., which include Pendock, Fishersville, Dutemple and Sodom Brooks and Dolly and Hallville Ponds have no problems (X priority point rating). Segment 21: (2.0 miles) Pasquiset Brook and its headwater pond comprise this Class A, "no problem" (X priority point rating) segment., which joins the Pawcatuck main stem at Kenyon. , Segment 22: (approx. 12 miles) The Beaver River, which flows due southward from Exeter to join the Pawcatuck main stem at Shannock is a Class A. 11no problem" (X priority point rating) stream which includes James Pond at its head. Segment 23: (approx. 3 miles) The Class A Meadow Brook joins the main stem of the Pawcatuck River at Wood River Junction after passing through Meadow Brook Mill Pond. The segment has an 11XII priority point rating. Segment 25:(Wood River: 2.7 miles) This segment includes the lower portion of the Wood River between the discharge from Char- bert, Incorporated (P7) at Alton and the confluence of Canonchet Brook. It also includes the tributary Canonchet Brook; Union Mill Pond at Canonchet Village, where the Green Plastics Corporation discharge (P8) enters- and Asherville, Blue, Ell, and Long Ponds. The segment has an 11X?T priority point ranking. IV-9 Segment 26: The 2,4 mile-long reach of the Wood River between the Canonchet Brook confluence and the USGS streamflow gaging station (See Figure B-1, Appendix B) is out of compliance with its B classification due to individual domestic and commercial sewerage system discharges to Segment 27 in Hope Valley (P9). The nature of these discharges has necessitated the Health Department's downgrading of this portion of the stream, as bath- ing and recreation here may be unsafe. A determination of the severity of the pollution from Hope Valley will be made under the Section 208 areawide waste treatment management planning program. Recommendations for abatement, if it is required, will be made through the 208 program. ((23:23)) Segment 26 has received a three-point priority rating (Appendix C). Segment 28:(Wood River: 3.4 miles) The middle reach of the Wood River above the Wyoming Pond dam is classified B as far as Frying Pan Pond and the confluence of Roaring Brook. This reach of the Wood River plus Roaring Brook, which includes Browning Mill Pond and Boon Pond, comprise Segment 28., which has a "no problem", (X) priority rating. Segment 29: (approx. 48 miles) Several Class A streams extend- ing from Exeter into the towns of West Greenwich, Rhode Island and Sterling and Voluntown., Connecticut comprise the headwaters of the Wood River. These streams and their associated ponds are assigned a 11no, problem" (X) priority rating and include: Woody Hill Brook., Parris Brook and Tippecansett Pond, Falls River and Porter and Hazard Ponds, Carson River and Bailey Pond, Kelley Brook and Wicka- boxet Pond., Coney Brook and Tillinghast Pond_, Phillips Brook, Acid Factory Brook and Eisenhower Lake (Louttit Pond), and Breakheart Brook and Pond. Segment 30: (approx. 8 miles) Brushy Brook, from its confluence with the Wood River at Hope Valley to its confluence with Moscow Brook is a Class B stream. This portion of Brushy Brook., along with Moscow Brook and Wincheck and Yawgoog Ponds, comprises a 11 no problem" (X priority point rating) segment. Auralux Chemical Corpor ation discharges cooling water to this segment (Plo). Segment 31: (approx. 5 miles) It Brushy Brook above its confluence with Moscow Brook., is a Class A, no problem" (X priority point rating) segment. SeEment 32: (2.1 miles) This segment is the Class A unnamed tributary of the Moscow Brook which feeds Wincheck Pond. It in- cludes Grassy Pond and has a "no problem" (X) priority point rating, IV-10 Segment 33: (approx. 10 miles) The Class A Tomaquaug Brook flows in a southerly direction through central Hopkinton to join the Pawcatuck main stem at Kedinker Island west of Bradford. The segment has an "X" (no problem) priority point rating. , Segment 34: (1.4 miles) This "no problem" segment is comprised of the Class B Chapman Pond and Aguntaug Brook in Westerly. Segment 36: (approx. 37 miles) The upper Ashaway River above the Village of Ashaway is a Class A stream with a "no problem" rating. In addition to the upper Ashaway River this segment includes Parmenter and Wine Brooks in Rhode Island and the follow- ing Connecticut waters: Green Fall River and Pond; Wyassup Brook and Lake; Spaulding Pond; and Hetchel Swamp, Pendleton Hill, Glade and Peg Mill Brooks. 2. Effluent Limitation Segments Ten of the 37 segments in the Pawcatuck Basin are effluent limitation segments., all of which are classified C or SC by the Department of Health. While none of these segments is out of com- pliance with its designated class, the level of pollutional loading on several of these exceeds the assimilative capacity of the seg- ment, thereby degrading the quality of downstream segments. The descriptions of effluent limitation segments which follow are based on Division of Water Pollution Control files. SeGment 3: (3-0 miles; 210 acres) This Class SC segment of the PaTacatuck River Estuary, which extends from Pawcatuck Rock to the Stillmanville Dam, in downtown Westerly_, receives three discharges: the discharge from the Westerly treatment plant (P13). which pro- vides only primary treatment at present; the Yardney Electric Corporation discharge (P16); and the Harris Intertype Corporation, Cottrell Division discharge (P17). Both industrial dischargers are in Pawcatuck, Connecticut. While the segment itself is in com- pliance with its Class SC designation., bacterial concentrations in Segments 1 and 2 downstream exceed permissible limits because of discharges to this segment and to Segment 4 immediately Up- stream. This segment has been assigned six priority points (See Appendix C) because of the moderate pollution caused by point source discharges to it. Problems in Segments 1. 23 3,, and 4 will be alleviated by actions currently underway. The upgrading of the Westerly faci- lity to secondary treatment should-be complete by June, 1978. .The Yardney and Harris industrial,discharges (P16 and P17) will be almost totally eliminated when they tie into the proposed Stonington (Pawcatuck) municipal system, possibly as soon as 1978. .The secondary-treated effluent from the Pawcatuck P@lant will dis- charge to the Pawcatuck River in Segment 3, about one-half mile below the Westerly treatment plant outfall. IV-11 Segment 4: (1.0 miles) This Class C segment is the first non- tidal reach of the Pamcatuck main stem. It lies between the Still- manville Dam in Westerly Center and the Bridge Street crossing in the White Rock section of Westerly. The segment has been assigned six priority points because of moderate pollution caused by flows from the combined sewer system in Pawcatuck (P15). These flows contribute to the degradation of segments 1 and 2. downstream. The combined sanitary and storm flows will be separated, and sanitary flows will be treated by the Stonington (Pawcatuck) municipal system. As construction of the system will require approximately two years, these flows will not be eliminated and segments 1 and 2 brought into compliance before 1978. ((42)) Segment 7: (4.4 miles) This Class C segment of the Pawcatuck main stem reaches from the R.I. Route 3 crossing to the New Brad- ford Dyeing Association discharge (Pll) upstream of Kedinker Island. Although this segment is in compliance with its C classi- fication, the level of pollutional loading degrades water quality in the Class B segment immediately downstream (segment 6). Segment 7 has been assigned three priority points, as detailed in Appendix C. This priority rating is a result of the New Brad- ford Dyeing Association discharge (Pll)., which is scheduled for upgrading by November, 1976. At that time a neutralization pond between the plant and the lagoon will go on line. If. after about a one-year trial period, this treatment proves inadequate., aerators may have to be installed in the lagoon. ((15)) Segment_g: (0.6 miles) This short stretch of Class C water lies on the Pawcatuck main stem between the Meadow Brook confluence and the United Nuclear Corporation discharge (P6). This "no problem" (X) priority segment is restricted to Class C or lower uses as a. precautionary measure in order to discourage swimming near the industrial discharge. Segment 11: (1.9 miles) The reach of the Pawcatuck main stem from the head of Carolina Mill Pond to the Kenyon Piece Dye Works discharge (P4) is a Class C segment, with a priority point rating of six as a result of the moderate pollution caused by the Dye Works discharge. Most of Segment 10 immediately downstream is out of compliance with its Class B designation because of high bac- terial concentrations. Upgrading of treatment at the existing aerated lagoon at the Kenyon Works will include additional aera- tion, a settling pond and possible chlorination, and is projected for a November, 1976 completion date. These improvements should bring Segment 10 into compliance with Class B standards. IV-12 (PJ)Segment_17: (0.6 miles) The Joseph H. Ladd School disc harges secondary-treated domestic wastewater to the upper Queen's River. For precautionary reasons the segment is classified C to discourage recreational usage. Because treatment of the school's effluent is adequate at present and has no impact on downstream segments, the stream has received a "no problem" (X) priority point rating. SeELient 24: (0-7 miles) The lower end of the Wood River from the Charbert discharge (P7) to the Pawcatuck River confluence has been assigned three priority points (See Appendix C). Although the segment is in compliance with its C classification and has little or no adverse impact on downstream segments, the discharge does cause a slight pollution problem within this segment. A design for seepage pits to receive this discharge is currently under preparation. Construction should be completed by December, 1976., after which the segment may be reclassified to Class B if treatment is adequate. Segment 27: (1.8 miles) The middle reach of the Wood River from the.U.S.G.S. streamflow gaging station south of Hope Valley to the Wyoming Pond Dam receives discharges from individual sewage disposal systems in Hope Valley (P9). Although these discharges do not affect the C classification of this segment_, they do cause the downstream Segment 26 to be out of compliance with its B classification because of high bacterial concentrations. The segment has therefore been assigned three priority points (see Appendix C). The steps necessary to abatement of these dis- charges will be determined under the Section 208 areawide waste treatment management planning program during the 1977 and 1978 fiscal years. ((23:23)) Progress toward elimination of the pro- blem may be expected to begin after completion of the 208 plan in 1978. Segment 35: (0.9 miles) The lower reach of the Ashaway River, from its confluence with the Pawcatuck River to the Ashaway Road crossing, is a Class C stream which receives discharges from in- dividual sewage disposal systems in Ashaway Village (P12). The segment has been assigned a three-point priority rating., as dis- charges to it degrade stream quality slightly in Segment 5 on the main stem. A system of interceptor and collector sewers to eliminate these discharges is tentatively programmed for construc- tion and tie-in to the Westerly municipal system. The details of the system have not yet been determined. ((15)) Segment 37: (1-7 miles) The Class C White Brook joins the Pawcatuck main stem in Segment 10 below Carolina Mill Pond. Ameri- can Fish Culture discharges process water to the segment through a series of settling ponds which provide adequate treatment, This segment has been assigned a "no problem" (X) priority rating. IV-13 D. Discharge Treatment and Target Abatement Dates The existing and proposed treatment for the seventten dis- charges in the basin are summarized in Table 8. This:table also includes the estimated dates by which the discharges will be eliminated or upgraded, if so required. The information in Table 8 is derived from the provisions of NPDES permits, and from Department of Health records and estimates of completion dates for municipal facilities currently under development. The present and anticipated status of the Pawcatuck River main stem and three tributaries in relation to the water quality goals of the Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 (P.L. 92-500), which were discussed on page IV-1., are summarized in Table 9. SeEment 1 is omitted from Table 9 because it encompasses an open water area (Little Narragansett Bay) which cannot be meaning- fully expressed as a length in miles_, as all other segments are. Segment I is expected to meet both 1977 and 1983 goals by 1978, when the new Pawcatuck and the upgraded Westerly treatment faci- lities are expected to begin operations. The segment is expected to attain Class A water quality at that time. ((15)) Segment 2 is expected to attain Class B water quality and meet both the 1977 and the 1983 goals upon completion of the Pawcatuck and Westerly treatment plants in 1978.((15)) Segment 3 receives several discharges as noted on page IV-11. The completion of the Pawcatuck sewer system and the upgrading of the Westerly treatment plant will allow this segment to meet the 1977 and the 1983 goals by 1978. By Department of Health policy, it cannot receive a classification higher than Class C. Seament 4 should attain Class B and the 1977 and 1983 goals by 19765 if the new Pawcatuck sewer system is completed during that year. ((15)) Seg ent 5 is out of compliance with its B classification because of inadequate individual sewage disposal systems in Asha- way Village (P12--Segment 35). A system of sewers for the village., to be tied into the Westerly system at White Rock, is pro osed., but has not yet been designed., scheduled or funded. ((15)3 Given these facts Segment 5 is not expected to meet either set of goals by 19@3- Segment 6 is degraded by the New Bradford Dyeing Association discharge (P11) to segment 7. This discharge is scheduled for upgrading late this year, which should allow segment 6 to meet the 1977 and 1983 goals by 1978. ((15)) IV-14 TABLE 8 Discharge Treatment and Target Abatement Dates Pawcatuck River Basin ((15,48)) Dis- Seg- seg- Treatment Compliance or charge ment ment Target Number Number Class* Name of Discharger Present Proposed Abatement Date Pi 17 E Ladd School Secondary No change P2 13 W Univ. of Rhode Island Elimination by Boiler Blowdown None subsurface dis- posal Not available P3 13 W Univ. of Rhode Island Tie into S.Kings- Treatment Plant Secondary town regional fa- cility March 1977 P4 11 E Kenyon Piece Dye Works Aerated Settling lagoon, lagoon additional aera- tion, possible chlorination November 1976 j',P5 37 E American Fish Culture Settling ponds No change P6 9 E United Nuclear Corp. None (cool- ing water) No change P7 24 E Charbert, Inc. Lagoon Elimination by in- ground disposal (seepage pits, in design phase) December 1976 P8 25 W Greene Plastics,Corp. None(cool- ing water) No change P9 27 E Hope Valley Individual To be determined under Section 2 Sewage Systems Inadequate areawide waste treatment plannin Plo 30 W Auralux Chemical Corp. None(cool- ing.water) No change Pil 7 E New Bradford Dyeing Lagoon Neutralization Assoc. pond November 1976 P12 35 E Ashaway Individual Interceptor and Sewage Systems Inadequate collector sewers tied into Wester- Not yet ly municipal sys- Established tem TABLE 8 Discharge Treatment and Target Abatement Dates Pawcatuck River Basin ((15,48)) (Cont'd) Dis- Seg- Seg- Treatment Compliance or charge ment ment Target Number Number Class* Name of Discharger Present Proposed. Abatement Date P13 3 E Westerly Municipal Sewage Treatment Plant Primary Secondary June 1978- P14 1 W Watch Hill IAdividual Tie into Wester- Early 1980s Sewage Systems None ly municipal sew- (Contingent up( age treatment funding) plant (Connecticut) ((3,41,47)) P15 4 E Pawcatuck Combined Separation of Sewers None sanitary sewers, 1978 (Estimate( retention of ex- Conn. DEN isting storm Fj sewers P16 3 E Yardney Electric Corp. None Tie into Stoning- ton(Pawcatuck) 1978 (Estimate( 'D N municipal sewage Conn. D treatment plant (Partial) P17 3 E Harris Intertype Corp. Tie into Stoning- Cottrell Division None ton (Pawcatuck) 1978 (Estimate( municipal sewage Conn. DEP) treatment plant (Partial) E - Effluent Limitation W - Water Quality TABLE 9 Status of Pawcatuck River Basin Waters In Relation to the Water Quality Goals of P.L. 92-500 ((15)) Class B or- Meets Meets Meets Meets Better By: 1977 1977 1983 1983 Segment Segment Segment Goals by Goals by Goals by, Goals by .Number* Class** Length 1975 1978 1975 _1978 1978 1983 Pawcatuck River Main Stem (from mouth at Rhodes Point to Worden Pond, in cl.lower Queen's R.). 2 W 2.3 mi. 2.3 mi. 2.3 mi. 2.3 mi. 2.3 mi. 3 E 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4 E 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 5(part) W 3.6 6 W .1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 H 7 E 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 8(part) W 8.0 8.o mi. 8.o 8.o mi. 8.0 8.0 8.0 9 E o.6 o.6 o.6 o.6 o.6 10 w 3.2 0.7 3.2 0.7 3.2 3.2 3.2 11 E 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 12(part) W 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 White Horn Brook 13 W 7 7 7 7 7 14 W 2 2 2 2 2 ? 2 QueenIs River(upper) 17 E o.6 o.6 o.6 o.6 o.6 18 W 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 19 W 8 8 8 8 61 8 8 20 W 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 Wood River(from Pawcatuck River to Wyoming Pond) 24 E 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 TABLE 9 Status of Pawcatuck River Basin Waters In Relation to the Wa.ter_Quality Goals of P.L. 92-500 ((15)) (ContCIda) 1 ss B or Meets Meets Meets Meets Better By.- 1977 1977 1983 1983 Segment Segment Segment Goals By Goals By Goals By Goals By Number* Class** Length 1975 1978 1975 1978 1978 1983 Wood River(from Pawcatuck River to Wyoming Pond) (Cont'd.) 22(part) W 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2 W 2.4 27 E. 1.8 Total Segment Lengths: 73.4 Total Class B or Better: 39.9 Total Meeting 177 Goals: 41.1 75-.6 'Total Meeting 183 Goals: 75--T Segment 1 omitted, see text E - Effluent Limitation W - Water Quality Segment 7 receives Discharge Pll, as noted above, Upgrading of this discharge by 1978 should allow Segment 7 to attain the 1977 and 1983 goals, although, by Department of Health policy, it cannot be classified higher than C. ((15)) Segment 8 receives no discharges and is adversely affected by none, and therefore meets all goals. Segment 9 receives only non-contact cooling water from the United Nuclear Corporation (P6), and meets all goals, but will retain its C classification for health safety reasons. SeGment 10 is, at present, only partly in compliance with its B classification. The soon-to-be-completed upgrading of Discharge P4 (Kenyon Piece Dye Works, Segment 11) will allow segment 10 to meet all goals by 1978. Segment 11 which, as noted above., receives Discharge P4, will meet all goals when that discharge is upgarded (November, 1976). It will remain Class C. Segment 12 has no problems, and meets all goals. Segment 13 will attain compliance with its B classification., L and meet all goals upon elimination of the URI discharges (P2 and P3). which will occur before 1978. Segment 14 has no problems, and meets all goals. Segment 17 receives effluent from the Ladd School secondary sewage treatment plant. Although waters receiving this type of discharge cannot, by Department of Health policy, be classified higher than C. the segment is expected to meet all goals. ((15)); Se ents 18, 19, and 20 are all no problem segments which meet all goals. Segment 24 receives the Charbert., Inc. discharge (P7). and will meet all goals when this discharge is eliminated (December, 1976). Its C classification will be retained, as overflow to the river will be allowed in emergencies. Segment 25 is a no problem segment which meets all goals. Segment 26 is downgraded by the Hope Valley individual sewage disposal system discharges (Pg--Segment 27)., which:are not likely to be eliminated before 1983. Segment 27 receives Discharge Pg. which, as noted above, will probably remain beyond 1983. E. Allowable Waste Loads For Water Quality Segments All of the water quality segments in the Pawcatuck Basin have either a Class A or Class B water quality classification. The policy of the Rhode Island Department of Health prohibits any new discharges to Class A or Class B waters and requires the eventual elimination of all discharges with the IV-19 exception of non-contact cooling water. These requirements dictate that the load allocations for point source discharges to these seg- ments will be zero for all parameters, except temperature. The three discharges to water quality segments (P2. P3 and P14) are programmed or recommended for elimination. Federal regulations also require the establishment of total maximum daily loads for nonpoint-sources of pollution, The severity and types of nonpoint-source pollution will be investigated as part of the Section 208 areawide waste treatment management planning process, and recommendations made for abatement, if necessary,, ((23:30-39)) F. Waste Load Allocations for Point Source Discharges to Effluent Limitation Segments Designation of effluent limitation segments was made by the Rhode Island Department of Health based on their judgement as to whether or not water quality standards could be met with secondary treatment for municipal discharges and best practicable treatment for industrial discharges. The National Pollutant Discharge Elimina- tion System (NPDES) permits issued by the U.S. Environmental Pro- tection Agency (EPA) establish limitations on the.waste load that may be placed on the receiving stream-by a discharge. NPDES permits specify effluent limitations for industrial discharges based on best practicable treatment. Load allocations for municipal wastewater treatment facilities are based on the average design flow and the residual concentrations of BOD and Total Suspended Solids (TSS) expected with secondary treatment. The NPDES permit limitations are summarized in Table 10. IV-20 mm"",M" 80,806dwasw mom TABLE 10 Load Allocations For Point Source Discharges ((48)) Pewcatuck River Basin Cooling Water Industrial Process or Municipal Wastewater Max. Daily BOD5 TSS Fecal Coli Discharge Flow(MGD) Temp.(OF) Flow (MGD) (mg/1) (mg/1) (WN1100 ml.) Number Name of Discharger Daily avg. Daily avg, Monthly aya. Weekly avg. Weekly avg. Weekly avg. Other or Remark Pi Ladd School - 0.23 45 45 4oo P2 URI - Boiler Blowdown To be eliminated Subsurface disposal P3 URI - Treatment plant - 1.2 45 45 4oo Until tie-in to S. Kingstown Narragansett regional systen P4 Kenyon Piece Dye Works - - 306ppd 306ppd Per operating day P American Fish Culture, Inc. - - 2.2kg Per 100kg fish on hand per day P United Nuclear Corp. 0.079 82 P Charbert, Inc. - - 30ppd 70ppd Per operating day Pz Greene Plastics Corp. 0.015 8o Two discharges 0.170 85 - Pq HopeValley - Individual Sewers Treatment and limitation recommendations to be made under the areawide (208) planning process Plo Auralux Chemical Corp. 0.010 75 - Pli New Bradford Dyeing Assoc. - - 3.2 434ppd 780ppd 2500(total Per operating day coli.) Phenols = 0.005 mg/l. Total Chrome 0.01 mg1l. Surfactants 16ppd. D.O.(summer months) = min.: 3.0 ro P12 Ashaway-Individual sewers Not determined - to be eliminated ave.: 4.0 mg/l. P13 Westerly Municipal Sewage Upon completion of upgraded Treatment Plant 3.3 45 45 4oo sewage treatment plant P14 Watch Hill-Individual sewers Not determined - to be eliminated Pi Pawcatuck-Combined sewers Not determined - to be eliminated M Yardney Electric Corp. Cooling Water 0.1235 75 Discharge No. 001B1 Before 12/31/75 - o.o48 Zinc = 15.0 mg/l. After 12/31/75 Zinc = 2.0 mg/l; Copper = 1.5 mg/l; 6.0 5pH !@ 9.0; no visible oil sheen, foam or floating solids; no visible discoloration of receiving waters Discharge No. 001B2 Before 12/31,,75 100gpd In mg/l;Aluminum=500.0; Ammonia Nitrogen=15,000; Iron = 20.0; Tin = 5.0 After 12/31/75 In mg/l: Aluminum = 2.0; Ammonia Nitrogen = 20.0.' Iron = 5.0; Tin= 1.0; 6.05 pH < 9.0; no visible oil sheen.' foam or floating solids; no visible discoloration of receiving wa@ters TABLE 10 Load Allocations For Point Source Discharges ((48)) Pawcatuck River Basin (Continued) Cooling Water Industrial Process or Munitipal Wastewater )(a4D&i 130D TSS Fecal Coli Disebane Flow(MGD) Te . (OF@ Flow(MGD) (mg/1) (mg/1) (MPN/100 ml.) NUmber Sum of Discharger Daily avg. Daily avg. Monthly avg. Weekly avg. jLeekly avg. Weekly avg. Other or Remark pig Yardney Electric Corp. (Continued) Discharge No.001C Before 12/31/75 mo18 After 12/31/475 Silver-0-05 mg/l;Zinc=2.0 mg/11 6.0-<pH:[email protected]; no visible oil sheen, foam or floating solids; no visible Discharge No.OOlDl discoloration of receiving waters Before 12/31/75 150gpd In mg/l:Iron-10.0;Total Chrome=2.0; Hexavalent Chrome=2.0;Nickel-2.0; Max.Temp-200OF After 12/31/75 In mg/l:lron-2.0;Total Chrome-1.0; Hexavalent Chrome-o.l;Nickel=2.0; 6.0!@pH:Sq.o; no visible oil sheenp foam or floating solids; no visible discoloration of receiving waters; rise in stream temp. <40F Discharge No.001D2 10gpd In mg/l:Iron-200.0;Copper=75.0; Before 12/31/75 Nickel=15.0; Total Chrome=50.0; Hexavalent Chrome-5.0; After 12/31/75 In mg/l:lron-5.0; Copper--l-5; Nickel=2.06 Total Chrome=1.0; Hexavalent Chrome=0.1; 6.0:s pH 69.0; no visible oil sheen, foam or float- ing solids; no visible discoloration of receiving waters Discharge No.001E Before 12/31/75 66.7gpd In mg/l:Iron=75.0;Copper=400.0; Zinc=2.0;Silver=75.0; Nickel=15.0; Aluminum=15.0;Total Chrorne=15.0 Hexavalent Chrome=10.0 After 12/31/75 In mg/I:Iron=5.0; Copper=1.5; Zinc=2,0; Silver=0.1; Nickel=2.0; Aluminum=2.0;Total Chrome=1.0; Hexavalent Chrome-0.1; 6.0@6pH:!@ 9.0; no visible oil sheen, foam or float- ing solids; no visible discoloration of receiving water TABLE 10 Load Allocations For Point Source Discharges ((48)) Pawcatuck River Basin Cooling Water Pontinued) Industrial Process or Municipal Wastewater Max. Daily BOD5 TSS Fecal Coli Discharge Flow(MGD) Temp.(OF) Flow (MGD) (mg/1) (mg/1) (MPN11OO ml.) Number Name of Discharger Daily avg. Daily avg. Monthly ME. Weekly avg. Weekly avg. Weekly avg. Other or Remark P16 Yardney Electric. Corp. (Continued) Discharge No. 001F Before 12/31/75 60gpd Mercury 0.1 mg/l After 12/31/75 0 Discharge No. 001G Before tie-in to Stonington sewers 0.00834 200 200 Discharge No. 001H Boiler Blowdown Before tie-in to Stonington sewers 0.0001 Rise in stream temp.@540F Discharge No. 001I Before tie-in to Stonington sewers 113gpd ro P JT Cottrell Division, Harris Intertype Corp. Before tie-in to Stonington sewers 0.005 85 0.0125 200 200 Includes 500 gpd boiler blowdown Max temp. = 200OF; Rise in stream temp.:@4OF After tie-in 0.005 85 0.0005 0 0 Boiler blowdown - max.temp.=200OF Rise in stream temp. 5 40F To be determined from Engineering Report bb 9 NO PART FIVE: MUNICIPAL FACILITIES REQUIREMENTS A. Municipalities Existing municipal sewerage facilities and those currently under construction,, those which have been designed, and those which have been recommended in engineering regorts are shown on Figure 8. along with their service areas. Figure also indicates those general areas (high and medium density residential, commercial, industrial, air- ports., government-institutional) which will require sewerage service if development occurs in a pattern consistent with that proposed by the State Land Use Policies and Plan (see Figure 5. page 111-7). These facilities, which are required if significant industrial, muni- cipal and individual wastewater discharges are to be eliminated or adequately treated, are described below on a town by town basis. 1. Town of Charlestown The only identified discharge to Charlestown waters at the present time is the United Nuclear Corporation cooling water dis- charge (P6). No wastewater treatment facilities., other than in- dividual sewage disposal systems, are currently operating, programmed or under construction in the town. If industrial and medium-density residential development occur as proposed in the 1990 state land use plan (see Figure 8), municipal facilities may be required in three areas of the town: an industrial area at Wood River Junction (Richmond town line), an area of seasonal development near Charlestown Beach., and the Shannock-Kenyon area along the Pawcatuck River (Richmond town line). Industrial and medium-density residential development in these areas, as proposed in the state land use plan, are consistent with the existing Charlestown zoning ordinance. ((38)) While these areas do not require service now, local soil conditions, the nature and density of future development, and other factors will determine the need for sewerage facilities in the future. When necessary, this basin plan will be revised to reflect changing conditions.. 2. Town of Exeter The Ladd School is the only identified discharger in Exeter. According to the Rhode Island Department of Health., this sanitary wastewater discharge is presently receiving adequate secondary treatment. ((15)) The state land use plan (See Figure 5,, page 111-7) calls for no industrial development and only one isolated area of medium- density residential development in Exeter. The town does not have a municipal zoning ordinance to compare with the state land use plan. V-1 ------------ -T ------- COVENTRY WARWIC STERLING Pd WEST I IIr d WAR WiaK- ---------- o i; WEST EAST L NWICH L GREENWICH t 11 NORTH T Iv 10IT' KINGSTOWN Iv c-@ "I'AZ' VOLUNTOWN EXETER s= gl. oz 0 NORTH /* le STONINGTON jr- P.'-.., T HARLE N SOUTH T@_T P P p , 1J, --w P@ KINGST( STONINGTON WN P. TERLY I-T FIGURE 8 J SEWER SERVICE AREAS SERVICE AREA EXISTING OR AND TREATMENT FACILITIES NAPATKE UNDER CONSTRUCTION PAWCATUCK RIVER BASIN @T. AREA REQUIRING SERVICE BY 1990 RHODEISLAND (BASED ON STATE LAND USE PLAN) SERVICE AREA PROPOSED IN BASIN PLANNING BOUNDARY ENGINEERING REPORTS BASIN HYDROLOGIC BOUNDARY MUNICIPAL SEWAGE TREATMENT 9 60@00 12qOO 18@00 24900 30?00 PLANT SCALE IN FEET REGIONAL SEWAGE TREATMENT N PLANT P@p@ by @e RHODE ISLAND SrATEWIDE PLANNING PROGRAM m " m m " m m m m " m " m m m m w " " 14 & lbm ooeo t v up w pl, i, WIV 4t 4p 24*11 iltl@ Public sewerage facilities will not be required within the time frame of this plan if development occurs consistent with the.state land use plan. 3. Town of Hopkinton There are no municipal sewerage facilities in Hopkinton at the present time. As projected by the 1969 Plan for Public Sewerage Facility Development 1 'pro a ., sewer service will b bly be required by @1990 in two areas of the town. ((19:27.,,36)) Existing pollution problems and proposed development in Hope Valley.and Ashaway support this projection. a. Hope Valley (Wyoming) Poorly drained soils and bedrock outcrops, which make installation of individual septic systems very difficult and expensive., have resulted in direct discharges (P9) of sanitary wastes into the Wood River at Hope Valley (See Part Two, Section D). Bedrock near the surface will also make installation of lateral sewers an expensive undertaking. Further medium-density residential development_, as recommended in the state land use plan (Figure 8), when combined with recent residential development, may aggravate an already undesirable situation. Inaddition, the Hopkinton zoning ordinance permits light industrial development immediately south of the village. ((39)) Such development would be consistent with the state land use plants proposal that the Hope Valley area be developed as an outlying small urbanized area. 'Industrial land'use in the Hope Valley area does not appear on Figure 5 and Table5 (pages 111-7 and:[II-8) because of the coarseness of 'the 92-acre grid cells used, Development induced by such zoning and by construction of the roposed 1-95/1-895 highway interchange (Figure 6.,page III-Jnearthe existing residential-commercial nucleus in the adjacent village of Wyoming (Richmond) may heighten the need for public sewers. Provision of public water service to the Hope Valley area by about 1990, as discussed in the 1969 Plan for the Development and Use of Public Water Supplies ((20: 40,,T7-,55)), may also induce development. The roundwater reservoir underlying the village (Figure 2., pagel-31 may take on major significance as a public water supply. The 1970 population of Hope Valley (Analysis Zone 175) was 1,326. ((33:12)) This figure may grow to about-2,000 persons by 1995.9 if one-third of the projected growth for Hopkinton (1,900 persons) is concentrated in Hope Valley, V-3 This projected figure for village growth seems reasonable in light of the fact that the only other significant concentra- tions of population are in Ashaway Village and in the arcr@ immediately across the river from Bradford. If the per capita per day sewage flow is assumed to be 100 gallons, then as much as 200.,000 gallons per day might be generated in Hope Valley by 1995, exclusive of commercial and indus- trial flows. Innovative solutions to pollution control in the Hope Va.Iley-Wyoming area will be required in the near future given existing problems, projected development pressures, and the presence of sensitive groundwater resources in the immediate vicinity. The Rhode Island Department of Health has recommended that the need for s'ewers in the Ho-oe Valley area be studied in detail under the Section 208 ar-e'awide waste treatment management planning process ((11: Section '8. Specific recommenda- IIA)) scheduled for completion in 197 tions for pollution control techniques and protection of groundwater supplies in Hope Valley-Wyoming should be forth-. coming as part of the 208 plan. The technical and economic feasibility of providing a municipal sewerage system for the area should be studied. ((23:23)) b 12,@@a The existing water quality problems caused by individual sewage system discharges (P12) to the Ashaway River from the Asha,way Village area (see Part Two, Section D) require that installation of municipal sewerage facilities be programmed. Although pressure for additional development in Ashaway does not appear as great as in the Hope Valley area of Hopkinton, @ ublic water service has been projected for 1980 ((20: 403 3, 47, 55)), and additional medium-density residential development has been proposed for 1990. (Figure 5., page III-. 7) The 1969 Plan for Public Sewerage Facility Development. projected that sewerage service would be necessary in Ashaway by 1990. ((19: 27,36)) The po-Qulation served could approach 23300 by 1995. This total would result if one-third (6oo persons) of the total town growth is added to the estimated 1970 village.(Analysis Zone 178) population of.1,675. ((33: 12)) Nineteen-ninety-five sewage flows would be about 230.,000 gallons per day., if 100 gallons per capita per day is assumed. This figure does not include commercial and industrial flows. Although the state land use plan proposes no major indus- trial or commercial development in the Ashaway area, municipal zoning does permit industrial uses in one small area of the village, as well as a large area of commercial development north, of the village at the I-95/Route 3 interchange (See Figure 6, page 111-9). V-4 The Rhode Island Department of Health proposes that a system of interceptor and collector sewers be installed in the Ashaway area and connected to the Westerly municipal system at White Rock village (across the Pawcatuck River to the southwest about three miles). No design scheduling, or funding details have been established. ((lM 4. Town of North Kingstown There are no identified pollution sources nor public sewerage facilities in the Pawcatuck Basin portion of North Kingstown at pre- sent, nor did the.Plan for Public Sewerage Facility Development pro- ject a need for sewers in the area during the study period. ((19:11)) Public water service was projected for the area by 1980, according to the Plan for Development and Use of Public Water Supplies. ((20:40)) a, Slocum Rhode Island Water Resources Board records indicate that the Village of Slocum., near the Exeter town line, was sup- plied with public water service from the North Kingstown Water Denartment in 1971. The service area includes the T roposed Slocum industrial park near the main rail line 'Shore Line") (Figure 6., page 111-9). While industrial develo ment is consistent with municipal zoning in the area ((39A)@, the state land use plan proposes only open space uses (Figure 5. page 111-7). based on restraints to develop- ment, including the existence of prime agricultural land. ((32: 44-62)) North Kingstownts Community Development Plan of 1972 recognizes the,difficulties in developing this site for industry, given: the potential for industrial pollution of nearby groundwater reservoirs (Figure 2, page 1-3). the high agricultural value of the site., and the desirability of maintaining a stock of open space in the town. From the town's point of view in 1972 economic advantages out- weighed the difficulties. ((10: 172,173,190)) However, the release of Navy land in North Kingstown since 1972 makes it likely that industrial development needed for the town's economic well-,being will be concentrated at Quonset Point. The need for and likelihood of industrial development at Slocum is thereby reduced significantly. In light.of this fact@ and in accordance with the state land use plan, it is recommended that land use in the Slocum area remain generally agricultural., and without pub- lic sewer service. V-5 b. Saunderstown Sewer service to the populated Saunderstown area of North Kingstown may be needed in the next few years. The 1969 Plan for Public Sewerage Facility Development pro- jected public sewer service by 1990. ((19:27)) The area already has public water service. ((20:4o)) The state land use plan proposes medium-density residential development in the area by 1990 (Figure 5, page 111-7). Analysis Zone 3013 which includes Saunderstown, had a population of 1 approximately 774 persons in 1970, with an average gross density of about 1.24 persons per acre. ((33:15)) The density in the village itself can be assumed to be sub- stantially higher than the zone average. Connection of the Saunderstown area to western portions of the state via. the proposed Interstate 895 (Figure 6. page 111-9) may in- crease development pressure in the village. The Division of Water Pollution Control of the Depart- ment of Health has recommended that the need for public sewerage facilities in Saunderstown be studied under the Section 208 areawide waste treatment management plannin Ig program, with consideration being given to tyin Saunders- town into the Narragansett sewerage system. k(N)) 5. Town of Richmond There are no public sewerage fa cilities and no water quality problems in the town, at present. None of the three pollution sources identified in the community is expected to require munici- 'pal treatment, as one P5 has adequate treatment and minimal impact on water quality, one R@ is scheduled for upgrading, and the third (P7) is scheduled for elimination (see Table 8, page IV-15). .As noted in Part Three, Section B., the state land use plan has proposed that population growth be concentrated in three areas of tfie -@own (see Figure 5, page 111-7): Wyoming (Ho pe Valley),. Shannock-Kenyon, and Carolina. a. Wyoming (Hope Valley) Wyoming village in the northwest part,of town, forms the Richmond portion of the Hope Valley-Wyoming area, a@ continuous, settled area on the banks of the Wood River (Richmond-Hopkinton line),at the intersections of Routes. 1383 3. and 1-95. Development in Wyoming includes a I cluster of interstate highway-oriented commercial estabi lishments: several gasoline service stations., a motel and a, large restaurant. A small shopping center serves Wyoming and Hope Valley_, including recent medium-density residential development. v-6 The proposed Interstate.Highway 895,, designed to carry heavy cross-state traffic now on R.I. Route 138., would intersect with 1-95 near the village (Figure 6., page 111-9). Municipal zoning near 1-95 includes industrial, general business, and medium-density residential zones (00)).,which are consistent with the state landuse plants recommenda- tion that the Wyoming-Hope Valley area continue to develop as an outlying center (See Figure 5.,page@III-7). Public water service is projected for the area by 1990 in the Plan for the Development and Use of Public Water Supplies. (20:40@,IT7_5 55) Should these development pressures combine with concen- trated urban growth in the village., as proposed by the state land use plan., 1995 domestic sewage flows might reach 80,000 gallons per day., which is considerably higher than the 50,000 gallons per day projected for 1990 for Wyoming by the Plan-for Public Sewerage Facility Development. ((19:37)) Although no population data is available for Wyoming Village specifically, the.estimated 1970 population of Analysis Zone 505 (which includes the village) was 422 persons, ((33:20)) There is no other center of concen- trated population in the zone., as most of the area is in open space.use as agricultural or state managed land. An estimate of 300 persons in the village itself seems reason- able, A 61.5 percent population increase of 1,600 is pro- ected for the Town of Richmond from 197b to 1995 (See Table page 111-2). If growth is distributed equally.among Wyoming, Alton-Wood River Junction., and Shannock-Kenyon., perhaps one-third will concentrate in Wyoming. If Wyomingts increase is housed in medium-density residential develop- ment consistent with.the state guide plan, the population needing sewer service could increase by 500. The 1970 estimate and this 1995 projection total 800 persons which may need sewer service by 1995. Assuming sewage flows of. 100 gallons per capita per day, as much as 80.,000 gallons per day might be generated, exclusive of commercial and industrial flows. This projection., combined with a pro- jected domestic flow of 2001000 gallons per day (2.,000 persons) from Hope Valley(See page V-3 above), totals nearly 0.3 million gallons per day., not including commercial and industrial flowsi Commercial and industrial flows could add significantly to this figure if industrial development and further highway-oriented business development are in- duced by local zoning and the proposed 1-895 interchange. V-7 The 1969 Plan for Public Sewerage Facility Development projected that the Hope Valley-Wyoming area would need sewer service for about 1 500 persons by 1990, with a flow of 0.15 mgd. ((19:36.,37)3 As calculated above, the es- timated 1995 served population of 2.,800 and a flow of 0 ..28 mgd (exclusive of commercial and industrial flows.) seems reasonable and supports the findings of the 1969 plan. Sewer service will be needed in the Hope Valley-Wyoming area by 1995. A more detailed projection of 1995 flows should be prepared, and analyses of alternative sewerage system configurations should be made. This work is within the scope of the 208 areawide plan. ((23: 23,24)) b. Shannock-KeMo Development pressure does not appear as great in this southeastern village area of Richmond as in the northwestern area around Wyoming, However, public water service is projected for 1980 for this area., which lies along the Pawcatuck River at the Charlestown line. ((20: 40.,55)) The state land use plan for 1990 proposes a concentration of low-and medium-density residential development (Figure 5). The area (Analysis Zone 508) encompasses about one-third (891 ;) of the townts po persons e3ulation, at a low level of density (0.14 persons per acr ((33:20)) The municipal zoning ordinance is generally consistent with the state land use proposal., in that it provides for half-acre (medium-density) house lots in Shannock.. Indus- trial zoning is limited to a minor industrial area to accommodate the Kenyon Piece Dye Works,,, which occupies land on both sides of the river at Kenyon. ((17)) Additional industrial development in the area is not anticipated. Water quality problems are limited to the soon-to-be-upgreded Kenyon Piece Dye Works discharge (P4). It does not appear likely that sewerage facilities will be required in this area within the time period of this basin plan (to 1995). However, the Shannock-Kenyon area is underlain by a significant groundwater reservoir (Figure 2., page 1-3). which should be protected from degradation. Water quality, growth, and@land use patterns in the area should be observed over the next few years, and this basin plan revised to reflect significant changes in the area, C, Carolina The limited medium-density residential development in the Carolina area will not require sewer service before 1995. v-8 d. Alton-Wood River Junction In addition to the three areas of development discussed above, the southwestern corner of Richmond., between the Paw- catuck River., the Wood River and the Meado@a Brook Analysis Zone 507) is estimated to contain about one-third @890 persons) of the town's population. This area includes the villages of Alton and Wood River Junction. Development density is relatively low, averaging approximately 0.14 persons per acre. ((33:20)) Municipal zoning allocates much of the area to one-acre house lots-, with some half- acre lots near the village centers. A significant portion of the Wood River Junction area is zoned industrial. ((40)) This area, which is along the Pawcatuck River, is served by the main rail line ("Shore Line"). The state land use plan proposes that the Alton-Wood River Junction area generally be left in open space uses.(See Figure 5, page III- 7), and does not reflect the existing limited residential development in the area, due to the coarseness of the 92- acre grid cells used. Although no water quality problems or major population concentrations exist in the area now., and sewer service does not appear necessary before 1995, future development Datterns should be observed as to their effect on i..,Tater auality. Particular attention should be, devoted to pro- tection of the adjacent groundwater aquifer (See Figure 2. page 1-3). 6. Town of South Kingstown The only discharges identified in the Pawcatuck Basin por- tion of South Kingstown are those of the University of Rhode Island. The URI boiler blowdown discharge (P2) reportedly will be eliminated by in-ground disposal. ((15)) The "@RI secondary sewage treatment plant @ Discharge P3) serves the only sewered area in the town (See Figure above). The remainder of the town is currently dependent solely upon individual subsurface disposal systems., which may be degrading the quality of groundwater, particularly in the West Kingston area. ((15)) a. URI-Kingston-Wakefield-Peace Dale A new sewerage system is currently under construction for the Town of South Kingstown. This system will connect the existing URI system (currently undergoing expansion) to a new system of laterals in Kingston Village and the Wakefield- Peace Dale area (See Figure 3, page 11-5) and Figure 8, page V-2). The treatment facility for the South Kingstown system is under construction in the Town of Narragansett, This activated sludge secondary treatment plant has a design capacity of 4.13 mgd. ((9:21)) Sludge will be dewatered., chemically stabilized., and disposed of by land- fill at an existing septage disposal site in South Kingstown. An estimated-20 cubic yards of filter cake will be produced daily when the system is in full operation. ((15)) V-9 The treatment plant was originally designed to handle flowsl to the year 1995, from South Kingstown and the Pier area of Narragansett only.((9)) After the plant's design capacity of 4.13 mgd had been established, South Kingstown agreed to also accept wastewater from the North End of Narragansett. ((36A:9)) This action will cause the plant to reach design capacity by about 1990. ((36B)) Table 11 presents the projected flows for the system in its ex- panded configuration. The South Kingstown sewage treatment plant may reach its design capacity even before 1990., if the village of West Kingston must be served by the system. This possibility is discussed below. b. West Kingston The new South Kingstown sewerage system is not pro- grammed to serve the West Kingston area., nor did the Plan. for Public Sewerage Facility Development project sewer service to the area before 1990.((19:27)) However, sewer service to this area may be needed to protect the under- lying groundwater aquifer. Water supplies for the Univer- sity of Rhode Island, the Kingston Fire District, and in- dividual industrial and domestic systems depend upon this aquifer (Figure 2, pageI-3 ). Additional water supply demands will be placed upon the aquifer if public water service is extended to West Kingston., as projected for 1980.((20:40)) Rhode Island Department of Health records indicate that some degradation of wells in West Kingston may already be occurring., probably from individual sub- surface sewage disposal systems. ((15)) The state land use plan for 1990 proposes a major expansion of.the existing industrial park immediately west of URI (See Figure 5., page 111-7). As Figure 6 on page 111-9, shows, this area has rail freight service'. and may be served by the proposed Interstate 895.,;as noted in Part Three, Section B. Additional light industrial develop- ment would be consistent with current development and municipal zoning in the West Kingston area. ((41)) Increased industrial activity at the industrial park; additional residential and related commercial development; and existing institutional activities, including the Washington County Courthouse and the University of Rhode Island, may place excessive pressure on the limited capa- cities of the soil for both water supply and sewage disposal. V-10 M M MM Mae man MM M M M TABLE 11 South Kingstown Secondary Sewage Treatment Plant Revised Flow Projections (1990) ((9:10,12,21))((36A:67))((36B))((26:20,26)) 1976 1990 South Kingstown Narragan- Region South Kingstown Narragansett Region URI Villages sett Pier Total URI Villages Pier North End Total Projected Total Town Population 21.,200 9.,6oo 30.,8oo 23.9000* lo.,8oo** 33.,8oo Served Popula- tion Winter 12.31000 9.'100 ,o4o 24.,14o 15.,300 11000 14oo 10.,000 4o.000 Summer 8.,ooo 9_'100 93450 253550 10.9100 11.,300 935010 10@,000 39.,900 Annual Average 11 H ,o8o %100 4,,4oo 24.,58o 12,700 11.,300 6.1000 10@9000 4o.,000 Average Daily Flow (in millions of gallons) Winter 1.20 1.12 o.43, 2.75 1.53 1.53 0 R4 o 85 4 2@ Summer 0.80 1.12 0.95 2.87 1.01 1.53 0: 5 0:85 4:2 Annual Average 1.11 1.12 0.58 2.81 1.27 1.53 o.6o o.85, 4.25 COASTAL ?oNE Treatment plant design flow: 4.13 million gallons per day lftjj@jFj FEB 1,1978 T10k CEWO Reference 26 assumes no growth in the URI population and a lower year-round population gro7.'Tth rate than that assumed in the engineering report. (Reference 9). Reference 26 assumes a lower year-round opulation growth rate than that assumed in the en- gineering report (References 36A and 36B5. In the course of preparing the Section 208 Areawide Waste Treatment Management Plan, the following will be determined: (1) the impact of further development in West Kingston on South Kingstown's water supplies, both in terms of quantity and quality; (2) projected West Kingston sewage flows (domestic, commercial, and indus- trial); (3) the cost of increasing the capacity of the South Kingstown regional sewage treatment system to accom- modate these sewage flows. ((23A)) 7. Town of Wester The 1969 Plan for Development and Use of Public Water Su-o- plies projected that the entire town will have public water service by l9dO. ((20: 40,55,56)) Current supplies appear to be adequate to meet development throughout the study period. ((34: 5,9)) Pro- posed 1990 land use as shown on Figure 5, page 111-7 is generally consistent with the municipal zoning ordinance. ((43)) The Plan for Public Sewerage Facility Development anticipated that the west- ern half of the town would have sewer service by 1990. ((19: 10)) More detailed projections of 1995 and 2025 served populations were prepared by CE Magure, Inc., in 1972., and are included in Table 12. The 1995 sewer service area as proposed in the engineering report ((7)) is shown on Figure 9. All three of the identified discharges in the Town of Wester- ly are scheduled for upgrading or elimination., and are discussed in detail below. a. Westerly Center The Westerly municipal sewerage system is currently undergoing expansion into the White Rock section to the north of the downtown area., as well as into two small @.D '(See Figure 9). The airport area nei,rhborhoods to the east southe ast of downtown will be served by an 18" interceptor which will circumvent the urbanized area on the east and south. This interceptor will also serve the airport indus- trial park being developed in conjunction with the Westerly By-gass highvja@. As noted in Table 12, approximately. 11, 00 people 611 percent of the total town population) will be served upon completion of this.phase of the expan.- sion (1976). Further expansion is programmed for the built- up areas east and south of dovmtown (Figure 9). Upgrading of the present municipal primary treatment plant to secondary.activated sludge treatment is taking place concurrently with the first phase.of service area expansion, and should be completed by June, 1978. ((15)) V-12 TABLE 12 Westerly Secondary Sewage Treatment Plant Design CapacL@y Criteria ((7,8)) 1995 2025 (Design (Ultimate 1974 1976 Basic) Design) ojected Town Population 17,250 18.'000 243000 31.sOOO b b Total Served Population 6,5oo 11,6oo 20,100 30s,500 Original Sewered Area 6.,500 6.@500 7,700 8.,loo Area A - 1.,6oo ,200 5.s7OO Area B 3,300 9.tloo 11"000 Area C 200 4oo 8oo Avondale-Watch Hill 2,700 4.,goo f0tal Average Daily Flow in millions of gallons) 1.29 1.90 4.70 Domestic o.67 1.26 2.16c 3.10 Industrial & Commercial 0.24 0.75 0.48 :'0.40a ,Infiltration o.6o t tal Peak Daily Flow in millions of gallons) 2.54 4.9o 7.8o 11.00 a Reflects repair to Margin Street interceptor b Based on residential densities consistent with existing municipal zoning ordinance c Includes estimated 0.27 million gallons per day from Watch Hill- Avondale area V-13 NOR Sri r, ONIN ca .... .... 0 1 cr- .... .. ..... ... . ...... HOPKINTON -V pill 11111111 ... .. ... ... .. ... ... ........ ... ..... ....... ........ ....... ... ........ ....... .... WESTERLY .. .. ....... . .................. ............... G ............... .... ... ...... .. . . ... ... .. ......... . . ........... .... ... ...... .. . . .......... .... . . . . ........... .... .......... .... . ..... ... .. .. ..... .... ... .... ..... . ...... ............ - ------ . ........ .. ...... I................... ............... . ...... ... . ... .. ............. ....... .... ...... .. ............. .. ............. ..... ....... .... .. ... ... ............. ............. ....... .... ....... . .. ........... I..... ....... ..... ..... ........ ....... ...... ..... ........... ...... . ..... S/ .......... ... .. ....... .. ...... ... ...... ........ ... ........... .. . ........ ........... 000 ..... ............ ........... . . ........ .... ... ........ ......... ........ ........ ........ ....... ........ ........ ....... ....... ... ....... ...... ....... p- 10 SoUtAD %-ocy, ........... .......... 0 6000 12000 18 SCALE IN FEET Prepdmd by the RHODE ISLAND STATEWIDE PLANNING PROGRAM This upgraded and expanded plant is designed to serve about 20.,100 people or 84 percent of the projected 1995 population of 24,000 (See Table 12). The design capa- city of the plant will accommodate a daily peak flow of 7.80 mgd (1995). It will utilize a conventional, activa- ted sludge process with provisions for step-aeration and contact stabilization. This process is expected to remove 90 percent of both the biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) and the suspended solids. Sludge will be stabilized by a physical-chemical (pressurized chlorine gas) process and dewatered by vacuum filtration. Nearly 25 tons of filter cake will be produced per day by 1995. Current plans call for the disposal of the sludge filter cake through landfill operations ((7:10-22)) The facility will also provide treatment for septage. b. Watch Hill The Fy 1977 Rhode Island Department of Health Water Pollution Control Strategy ((13:20)) proposes that sewer service be extended to the Watch Hill area in the extreme southwestern portion of town (Figure 9) in order to pro- tect surface and groundwater quality in the area. This proposal is consistent with the recommendation of the 1974 Facilities Plan, Westerly Sub-Basin (Alternate 1). ((35A: T3-@T A detailed sanitary survey will be performed by the Department of Health later this year, ((15)) Sewage collec- ted from the Watch Hill area would be ump d to the Westerly municipal treatment plant_, ((13: 20,M) @heich has been designed to accommodate these flows (Table 12). Construc- tion of gravity sewers and force mains for the area is con- tingent upon the availability of local.,, state and federal funds and will probably not occur until the early 198ors. ((15)3 c. Bradford The New Bradford Dyeing Association discharge (Pil) will be upgraded by November_, 1976. Treatment will be improved by adding acid to the discharge to neutralize its alkalinity,, and will be accomplished by means of a holding pond placed between the plant and the existing lagoon. Those homes discharging domestic wastes to the lagoon will continue to ,do so, as the nutrients'contained in these wastes aid the necessary biological activity in the lagoon. About a year will be needed to determine the success of the neutralization pond., after which aeration of the lagoon may be required if the discharge continues to degrade water quality in down- stream river segments. V-15 'Both the Westerly and Hopkinton zoning ordinances permit industrial development in the Bradford area. ((39,43)) The state land use plan provides for limited industrial use in the area to accommodate existing development on the Westerly side of the river. Only low-density residential and open space usesare proposed for the Hopkinton portion of the area (see Figure 5. page 111-7). If development occurs consistent with the state land use plan, sewerage service will not be needed in Bradford over the period of this plan (1975;@1995)- 8. Town of West Greenwich There are no identified discharges in the Pawcatuck Basin portion of West Greenwich. Water quality thrlughout the area is uniformly Class A. The local Comprehensive Community Plan ((17: 32-36)) and the state land use plan (Figure 5. page 111-7) propose no major areas of development in the town over the next 20 years, with the exception of water supply reservoirs. Public water ser- vice is not expected before 1990. ((20: 40554)) Individual subsurface systems are expected to be adequate for sewage disposal until at least 1995. 9. Connecticut Communities The Pawcatuck Basin portions of the communities of North Stonington and Stonington, Connecticut may, according to the South- eastern Connecticut Regional Planning Agency, need public sewer service by 1995. ((37)) a. North Stonington In 1970, approximately 3,400 people lived in the Paw- catuck Basin portion of the town. Most of this population is concentrated in the Borough of North Stonington, which is under considerable residential develo ment pressure and may.require sewer service by 1990. ((37)@ The Southeastern Connecticut Regional Planning Agency anticipate.s that if further significant development occurs on the fringes of North Stonington Borough near the proposed industrial park at the intersection of Connecticut Route 2 and Interstate 95 (Figure 9). municipal sewage collection facilities will be needed . ((37)) Current,planning proposes that a portion of the wastewater (0.2 mgd) from this area be conveyed, via an interceptor., to the proposed Pawcatuck treatment plant in the Town of Stonington ((3:2)). v-16 b. Stonington According to the 1970 census, 15,940 people live in the Town of Stonington, with about one-third of this population (5,255 persons) concentrated in the Borough of Pawcatuck. Further development pressure is anticipated in the-northern section of the borough in the area where the Westerly By- Pass highway intersects with Connecticut Route 2 (See Figure 9). ((37)) Population concentrations and t he level of pollutional loading placed on the Pawcatuck River by individual sewage disposal systems and by the municipal combined storm and sanitary sewer system require that a separate municipal sanitary sewer system for Pawcatuck be installed. @(3:1-3)) EPA approved reliminary plans for the Stonington Pawcatuck system in 19A. as noted in Part Two, Section 7 above. The design phase of the sanitary sewerage system has been completed and was approved by EPA in December, 1975 Con- struction is expected to be completed some time in i978. ((42)) The system for Pawcatuck, as designed, will serve an initial population of 7,000 with an anticipated 1990 served population of 9.6oo. The 1995 design average flow for the Pawcatuck treatment plant is 1.31 mgd, including 0.2 mgd from the Borough of North Stonington, as noted above. The system will include new laterals, pump stations, force mains, interceptors and a secondary sewage treatment plant. The existing combined sewer system will continue in service as a storm sewer system. Current litigation by environmental interests is delaying the start of 'ponstruction. ((42)) Sludge handling will be by digestion with land disposal at the Stonington municipal landfill adjacent to the pro- 'posed Pawcatuck treatment facility (See Figure 9). The location of the outfall sewer from the Pawcatuck facility will be in the tidal portion of the Pawcatuck River near Gavitt Point., approximately one-half mile down- stream of the Westerly treatment plant outfall (See Figure 9). ((3:1-3)) B. Project Scope and Estimated Costs for Municipal Facilities The projected populations to be served by sewers and projected average daily flows from the systems are listed in Table 13. Es- timated investment requirements for construction of needed municipal facilities are given in Table 14. V-17 TABLE 1@ Sewer Service Characteristics Programmed for 1_976 Pawcatuck River Basin Projected Projected Projected Population Population 1976 Average 1990 Average (1970 census) Served(1976) Daily Flow Daily Flow (nearest (Annual (mg) (Annual (mg) (Annual Design Municipality hundred) Average) Average) Average) Year Total-South Kingstown Regional S stem ((q.,10Aff 24.ooo 2.4,58o 2.81 4.25 1990 including: South Kingstown 16"900 %100 1.12 1.53* OD University of Rhode Island (Included above) li.,o8o 1.11 1,27 Narragansett 7,9100 4,400 0.58 1.45 Westerly ((7)) 18.,000 11.,6oo 1.90 3.30 1995 Pawcatuck Borough., (Stonin ton) Conn, (M) 5,,300 71000 0.70 1.31 1995 May be revised upward as a result of section 208 study of West KingstonIs sewer needs Of TABLE 14 Project Scope and Estimated Costs For Municipal Facilities _((13,157- Estimated Basin cost Abatement Construction Type of Project (millions Priority Grants Municipality and Scope of dollars) Ranking Priority* Westerly Secondary Treatment Plant 6.2 New Collector Sewer Systems (Center) 6.3 under construction New Interceptor Sewers @Center)) 2.8 New Interceptor Sewers Airport 2.5 1 14 South Kingstown Re- gional System** Secondary Treatment Plant 7.5 New Collector Sewer Systems South Kingstoi,.Tn 10.5 under construction Narragansett 8.2 New Interceptor Sewers South Kingstown 5.1 Narragansett Pier Area 3.1 under construction Narragansett @North End@ 3.2 Not in basin 42 Westerly(Watch Hill) New Interceptor Sewers 0.5 2 50 New Collector Sewer System 1.4 3 Not. deter. Hopkinton (Ashaway) New Collector Sewer System Not Not New Interceptor Sewers deter. 4 deter. Hopkinton-Richmond Sco e to be determined under Section Not Not (Hope-Valley-Wyomimg) 209 Areawide Waste Treatment Manage- deter. 5 detuer. ment Program TOTAL ESTIMATED COSTS (Rhode Island, exclud- ing Hopkinton and Richmond) 57.3 TABLE 14 Project Scope and Estimated Costs For Municipal Facilities ((13, f5M_ (Continued) Estimated Basin cost Abatement Constructioi Type of Project (millions Priority Grants Municipality and Scope of dollars) Ranking Priority* Stonington Conn. (Paw- Secondary Treatment Plan 1.9 ,catuck) ((3)) New Collector Sewer System Not avail. New Interceptor Sewers 1.8 Numbers indicate priority ranking for project construction on a statewide basis ((13: 15-20)) Entire system., including the portion in the Narragansett Bay Basin (see Figure 3, page 11-5 and Figure 8., page V-2) ro 0 PART SIX: MONITORING PROGRAM The Division of Water Pollution Control of the Rhode Island Department of Health is responsible for the water quality monitoring program in the state. This program consists of two types of moni- toring: (1) monitoring of wa'stewater discharges.(efflue,nt monitoring) and (2) monitoring of instream water quality (ambient monitoring). A. Effluent Monitoring Effluent monitoring consists of the sampling and analysis of industrial and municipal wastewater discharges. All discharges are sampled bimonthly, except major municipal discharges which are sam- pled monthly and spot-checked weekly. Effluent data on certain major industrial discharges (selected by EPA) are sent to EPA.for a determination of compliance with NPDES permit requirements. ((15)) The Westerly and South Kingstown (Narragansett) secondary treatment plants will be monitored monthly for: (1) turbidity, (2) BOD (5 day)., .(3) solids.both settleable and suspended, (4) total and fecal coli- forms, and (5) metals (as necessary). Dail sampling will be per- formed by the plant personnel. ((12: 30-33)@ B. Ambient Monitoring Instream water quality is monitored by both trend sampling and by intensive sampling. Trend sampling is performed at regular intervals throughout the year at each of twelve locations in the state, three of which are in the Pawcatuck Basin. These three trend sampling stations are all on the main stem of the Pawcatuck River, as shown on Figure B-1 in Appendix B. Two are in the Town of Richmond: one at the U.S. Geological Survey gaging station between-Carolina and Wood River Junction, the other just downstream of the Meadow Brook confluence. The third trend sampling station is in the Town of Westerly., up- stream.of the Ashaway River confluence. The chemical/physical parameters measured at least once every other month at the trend sampling stations are: (1) turbidity, (2) dissolved oxygen, (3) BOD (5 day), (4) tem erature, (5) pH., (6) chlorides or salinity (7) chromium, and (8@ phosphorous. Biologi- cal parameters, sampled at least once a year_, are: coliform/fecal coliform bacteria., and counts and identification of periphyton, macrophyton,, macroinvertebrates and fish. ((13: 45,47)) VI-1 Intensive sampling is done over a twenty-four hour period at several locations in sequence down the river. The purpose of this type of survey is to show variation in water quality over the length of the river in a short time period. Wastewater discharges are also sampled and their effect on water quality determined. Intensive sampling surveys are usually conducted for a specific .purpose, rather than as a routine procedure. The-purpose of an intensive sampling survey may be: 1. To obtain additional data in order to establish waste load allocations. 2. To determine a change in water quality caused by a change in a wastewater discharge. 3. To measure a change in water quality indicated by a shore- line survey. 4. To measure a change in water quality indicated by trend monitoring. Figure B-1. page B-2., shows the locations of the intensive sam- pling stations surveyed in the basin in August, 1973.' Selected data from that surveyare given in Table B-2, page B-4. C. Groundwater Aquifer Monitoring In addition to the effluent and ambient monitoring programs carried on by the Division of Water Pollution Control, the Depart- ment of Health, through the Division of Water Supply., monitors groundwater quality at seven locations in the basin (see Figure B-1. page B-2). Under this program all operating public and semi-public water supply wells are analyzed bi-weekly for color and coliform bacteria, Samples from all wells receive a complete physical, sanitary, chemical, mineral, and chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticide analysis twice each year, and a trace metal test annually. ((11: Section II-C)) VI-2 PART SEVEN: REIATIONSHIP WITH OTHER PLANS A. Federal, State, and Local Planning Coordination The Statewide Planning Program and the Department.of Health uti- lize a number of,mechanisms., described below, to insure that the state's water quality management plans are coordinated with other federal, state, and local plans and programs, 1, Governor's Office In 1973 a Policy and Program Review staff was created to more closely integrate the policy direction of the Chief Executive with the development activities of the operating agencies of state government. There are several agencies that make or implement 'policies by their respective mandates and actions. The Governor., as charged by the Constitution, is required to make short-range decisions that very often have long-range implications. An annual policy formulation process, accomplished through the coordination of state agencies with the Policy and Program Review staff will serve to link operational imperatives with long-range planning goals. The staff will work with the State Planning Council; the Statewide Planning Program staff; the Budget Office, Department of Administration; the Rhode Island Port Authority and Economic Development Corporation; the Department of Economic Development; the Department of Natural Resources; the Department of Community Affairs (particularly the Division of Planning and Development); the Department of Transportation; the Air and Water Pollution Control Divisions of the Department of Health; the Housing and Mortgage Finance Corporation; the State Energy Office; the Public Utilities Commission; and other state agencies that impact develop- ment policy in conducting this process, 2, State Planning Council The State Planning Council assists the Statewide Planning Program in coordinating the planning and development activities:-.:of state departments and agencies., local governments and private individuals. The State Planning Council and the Statewide Planning Program are also charged with the responsibility of developing and adopting a long-range guide plan for the state. All statements of1goals and policies and all elements of the State Guide Plan must be approved by the Council., following f3ublic, hearings. 3. Technical Committee Technical guidance for the Program is provided by the Techni- cal Committee., appointed by the State Planning Council, This Com-. mittee is also comprised of state, local, Private, and federal representatives. The Committee gives technical direction to the staff., reviews all work while in progress and upon completion., re- views all major reports and plans and recommends action thereon to the State Planning Council " and advises the Council on the perform- ance of all of its functions, VII-1 4. A-95 Review Process In Rhode Island, the Statewide Planning Program is designa- ted as the state clearinghouse for federal and federally-assisted projects under Office of Management and Budget Circular A-95. Under this regulation, proposed federal grants and loans under designated programs., direct federal development actions., and state plans are subject to review under provisions of 1) Section 2o4 of the Demon- stration Cities and Metropolitan Development Act of 1966, 2) Title IV of the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act of IL968 and 3) Section 102(2-c) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. Ac The A-95 review process in Rhode Island is further strength- to ened by close coordination with capital improvement programming., W__ which is designed to integrate capital acquisitions with a broad UWC4 scale long-term supporting fiscal program. As part of the capital development program the Budget Division estimates the cost of total long-term needs by categories corresponding to the state's program structure. Capital needs are then reviewed relevant to the needs mc nd priorities of the entire state. The sources of proposals for a " SIC the capital development program include agency requests for capitalGmr-% construction., functional elements of the State Guide Plan, and re- commendations of the Budget Division. B. Regional Plan Southeastern New England Water and Related Land Resources (SENE) Study The SENE Study is a comprehensive federal-state planning.effort. being coordinated by the New England River Basins Commission. Briefly stated, the purpose of the SENE Study is to identify and recommend actions to be taken by all levels of government and private interests to secure for the people of the region the full range of uses and benefits which may be provided by balanced con- servation and development of water and related land resources. The objective of the study is to determine ways through which water and related land management can help meet two of the compelling needs of the region: 1. Sound.and solid economic opportunity; and 2. A living environment of clean water., open space and beauty that enriches human dignity and enjoyment, The SENE Study was consulted and data incorporated into this water quality management plan where appropriate, The recommendations of this plan are consistent with those of the SENE Study.((9A.: 5-1)). VII-2 C. State Plans 1. State Guide Plan The State Guide Plan serves as a guide for the physical, social, and economic development of the state and provides for its long'range development. All planning studies are coordinated with this long range guide plan and because the completed elements of the State Guide Plan are being placed on a continuous maintenance basis., the plan will provide an essential framework that will be responsive in evaluating relevant capital improvement proposals as well as short-term proposals that have long-range implications. The water quality management plans for seven drainage basins (Blackstone-, Moosup Moshassuck, Narragansett., Pawcatuck.Pawtuxet and Woonasquatucket@ will constitute the water quality element of the State Guide Plan. In addition to water quality., other elements cover such areas as land use., recreation, highway transportation., public transit, airports, water supply, historic preservation, and administrative facilities for state government. . This water management plan is closely interrelated-with sewer and water service elements of the State Guide Plan ((19,20)), which were adopted by the State Planning Council in 1969. Frequent refer- ence to these plans was made in the preparation-of Part Five: Munici- pal Facilities Requirements. Because the availability of municipal sewerage facilities can be strongly development-inducing, Part Five of this.plan was also closel coordinated with the land use element of the State Guide Plan T(32))., which was discussed in detail in Part Three: Growth Potential. Because development trends are also affected by transportation services, the revised transportation guide plan element ((28)) was also considered in Part Three and Part Five. 2. Areawide Waste Treatment ManaEement Plan On April 23, 1975 the Governor designated the entire State of Rhode Island as a single areawide waste-treatment management planning area. The Ispecific objectives of the Rhode Island 208 plan as out- lined in the plan of study will include:- (1) the@establishment of problem type., severity., and area of influence; (2) the development or update of all needed facilities plans describing several alternative solutions; (3) the development of sludge management plans including the handling of septic tank sludge; VII-3 (4) an inventory and assessment of the effects of combined sewers on water quality including the development of several alternative solutions; (5) the evaluation of water quality classifications and revision where necessary., to reflect feasible uses of the water course; (6) an evaluation and development of alternative treatment systems for industry-, (7) the identification of m2,@�r non-point sources, of pollu- tion,, their effect on @7ater quality, priorities and alternatives for their consequent abatement; the determination and evaluation of groundwater pollu- tion problems and the development of the necessary con- strai'nts to protect groundwater resources; (9) the development of detailed soil surveys and mapping to identify areas amenable to individual sub-surface disposal and development; (10) the review of individual community land use plans and the development of the necessary controls and con- straints to regulate location and/or generation of potential non-point and point pollution sources; (11) the review of existing studies and authorities (e.g. Blackstone Valley Sewer District Commission) for the management of wastewater. Recommend the expansion and creation of the necessary arrangement to develop the necessary agency to manage or control waste@iater, generations; (12) a public participation program that will generate use- able and significant input through the interaction of citizens and the 208 planning staff and public officials by the.development of working committees and public meetings.6 (13) an implementation program to carry out the recommended alternatives and the associated arrangements in (11) above including a self-sustaining financial program and a continuing planning(@rocess to annually update the approved final plan. 23:1,,2)) The completed 208 plan will become a part of the Continuing Planning Process and its recommendations will be implemented by a management agency to be designated in the plan. vii-4 3. D ep artment of Health Plans This plan was prepared in conjunction with the Division of Water Pollution Control of the Rhode Island Department of Health. The division's files ((15)) and its water pollution control plans for Fiscal Years 1975 and 1977 'f((12,13)) provided extensive quantitative and background information, 44 Other State Plans The technical and planning efforts of the Rhode Island Water Resources Board in regard to groundwater resources ((1,5)) have major significance in the Pawcatuck Basin. Demand for these vital., yet limited resources, for both in-basin and out-of basin use, may in- crease rapidly in the near future, The water-supply significance of these aquifers_, their locations.in relation to development, and.their interrelationship with surface water quality and use have been con- sidered throughout this plan. The 1973 Interim Basin Plan for the Eastern Connecticut Coastal Basin (Pawcatuck) Including the Town of. Stoangton -and Wester Rhode Island. prepared bythe Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection7'(3)).,.provided the information on Connecticut communi- ties presented in this plan. This information was supplemented by discussions with the Southeastern Connecticut Regional Planning Agency, Norwich. As noted in Part Two, ironme ., Section B above, the U.S, Env ntal Protection Agency approved preliminary plans for a separate treat- ment facility for Stonington., Connecticut in 1974. As a result of this decision by EPA, the Pawcatuck Basin has been., for most basin planning purposes, divided into two separate sub-basins: one in Rhode Island and one in Connecticut. The information on basin plan- ning in Connecticut is presented herein so that the reader may have as full a picture as possible of water quality planning throughout the Pawcatuck watershed. D. Local Plans Facilities plans and engineering reports prepared for the Town of Westerly ((4,,7 and for the South Kingstown (Narragansett) re- gional systi provided much of the technical data contained herein. Their findings have been incorporated into this basin plan. Comprehensive community plans and local zoning ordinances were consulted and incorporated, particularly in the preparation of Part Five. VII-5 E. Uses of This Plan -This plan., which serves to coordinate water quality management planning on a basin-wide scale., can also provide guidance for the planning of related public facilities in the basin. Recommendations made in future revisions of other elements of the State Guide Plan and other state level plans should be considered in the light of those made;.herein. This coordination is particularly important for other development-inducing public services, particularly transportation and public water. Planning at the municipal level may make use of this plan and other elements of the State Guide Plan in encouraging desirable growth patterns within the community as well as in assuring the highest quality environment and public facilities possible. This plan sets forth recommendations which have significant implications for municipal economies., growth patterns., infrastructure and fiscal programs. in doing so., this plan serves to keep local interests abreast of planning at the state level - planning which can affect the future of municipalities for, many years to come. vii-6 APPENDIX A STATE OF RHODE ISLAND A ND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS DEPARTMEM OF HEALTH DIVISIOU OF WATER SUPPLY AID) POLLUTION CONTROL STANDARDS OF QUALITY FOR CLASSIFICATION OF WATERS OF THE STATE 1973 GENERAL POLICY The following are the standards of water quality adopted for use in the classification of the waters of the state. in classifica- tion of the waters, consideration is given to all factors involved including public health, public enjoyment, propagation and protection of fish and wildlife, and econcmic and social. develop- ment. Classifications are not intended to permit indiscrimina-.e waste disposal or to allow minimum efforts of waste treatment under any circumstances. In the discharge of waste treatment plant effluent-s to the receiving waters, cognizance shall be given both in time and. distance to allow for mixing of effluent and stream. Such distances required for complete mixing shall not affect the water usage Class adopted but shall be defined and controlled by the regula.tory'authority. A-1 FRESH WATER CLASS A Suitable for water supply and all other water uses; character uniformly excellent. (See Note 10) 1. Dissolved oxygen 75% Paturation, 16 hours/day 5 mg/I at any time 2. Sludge deposits--sol.id refuse None allowable floating solids, oils, and 3. Color and turbidity None other than of natural origin. Not to exceed 5jackson units. 4. Coliform bacteria per 100 ml Not to exceed a median of 100 100 ml nor more than 500 in more than 10% of samples collected 5. Taste and odor None other than of natural origin 6. 'PH As naturally occurs. 7. Allowable temperature None other than of natural origin increase S. Chemical constituents (See Note 5) 9. Fec-colifoqni (See Note 13) per 100 P.111 A-2 CLASS B Suitable for bathing, other recreational Dury Doses, agricultural uses, industrial or accesses and cooling; e-ccellent fish and Wild life habitat good aesthetic value; acceptable for Jublic wa ter suiy with appro- priate treatment. Standards of water Quality Dissolved oxygen 75`0 saturation, 16 hours/day 5 mg/l any time 2. Sludge deposits-- solid refuse None allowable floating solids, oils, and grease--scum 3. Color and turbidity None in such concentrations that would impair any usages secifically assigned to this Olass. Not to eq=eed 1D Jackson units. Not to exceed a median of 1, . Coliform bacteria per 100 ml 000 nor more than 2,400 in more than 20% of samples coll- ected 5. Taste and odor None in such concentrations that would impair any usages specifically assigned to this Class nor cause taste and odor in edible fish 6. pH 6.5 - 8.0 7. Allowable temperature only such increases that will increase not impair any usages specifi- cally assigned to this Class (See Note 6) a. Chemical constituents (See Note 5) 9. Fecil coliform bac,'C-eria (See Note 13) per 100 ml A-3 CLASS C Suitable for fish and wild life habitat, recreational boating, and industrial processes and cooling; good aesthetic value. Standards of Water Quality - me. Nor Dissolved oxygen Minimum 5 mg/l any L imal lasonal and diurnal variations above 5 mg/l will be maintained. For sluggish eutrophic waters, riot less than I mg/I at any time. Normal seasonal and diurnal varia. tions above , ing/l will be main_ Lained 2. Sludge deposits--solid refuse None (See Uote -Eloating solids, oils, anc grease--scum 3. Color and turbidity None in such concentrations that would impair any usages specifi- cally assigned to this Class. Turbidity shall not exceed 15 jackson Units. 4. Colifor acteria per 100 ml None in such concentrations that would any usages specifi- cally assigned to this Class 5. Taste Ftnd odor one in such concentrations that would impair any usages specifi- ca-ly assigned to this Class nor cause taste and odor in edible fish 6.0 3. 5 7. Allowable temperature increase Only such increases that will not increase impair any usage specifically asgned to this Class (See Note 6) 8. Chemical constituonts (Se e 5) A-4 CIASS D Suitable for navigation, power certain industrial processes and cooling, and migration of fish; good aesthetic value. Standards of Water Quality 1. Dissolved oxygen A minimum of 2 mgl L: any time 2. Sludge deposii-s--solids refuse None (See Nota 7 floating eolids, oils, and grease--scum 3. Color and turbidity qone in such concentrations -hat would impair any usages specifi- cally assigned to.this Class 1. Coliform bacter-Ia. per 100 ml No ne, _n such concen t rations that would impair any usages specifi cally assigned to this Class 5. 'Taste and Por None in such concent ations that would impair any usages specifi- cally assigned to this Class PH 6. 0 - 9.0 7. Allowable temperature Fone except where the increase increase will not exceed the recommended limits on the most sensitive water use and in no case exceed OOF 8. Chemical constituents (See Note 5) A-5 NOTES: I. These Standards do not apqly to conditions brought about by natural causes. class D waters will be assigned only where a big .her water use L-e waste treatment Class cannot be attained after all a;!Dropria_ methods are, utilized. Approj.riate wasta treatment shall be secondary treatment with disinfection or the equivalent. 3. All sewage treatment plant effluents shall receiv e disinfection before discharge into a watercourse. Any water falling below the -tandards of quality for a given Class shall be considered unsatisfactory for the uses indicated for that Class. Waters faUng below the standards of quality for Class D shall be Class E and considered to be in a nuisance condition. 5. Chemical Constituents a.. Waters shall be :Lree from chemical constituents and radio- a ive material in concentrations or combinations which . would be harmful to human, animal, or aquatic life for the appropriate most sensitive and governing water c lass use. b. In areas where fisheries are the governing considerations and approved limits have not been established, bioassays , shall be performed as required by the apropriate agencies. The latest edition of the federal publication Water Quality Criteria will be considered in the interioretation and application of bioassay results. c Phosphorus Concentration none in such concentration that would impair any usages specifically assigned to said class. New discharges of wastes containing phosphates will not be permitted into-or immediately upstream of laq"Ces or ponds. Phosphates shall be removed from existing discharges to the extent that such removal is or may become technically and .,reasonably feasible. A-6 d. For public drinking water supplies, the limit prescribed by the United States Public Health Service will be used where not superceded by more stringent signa-tory state requirements. 6. The temperature increase shall not raise the temperature of the receiving waters above the recommended limit on the most sensitive receiving water use and in no case exc eed C0qF. In no case shall -the temperature of the receiving water be raised more than 4F. 7. Sludge deposits, floating solids, oils, grease and scum shall not be allowed except for such small amounts that may result from the discharge of appropriately treated sewage or industrial waste effluents. 3. The minimum average daily flow for seven consecutive days that can be expected to occur once in ten years shall be the minimum flow to which the standards apply. 9. Class B and C waters shall be substantially free of pollutants that: a. Unduly affect the composition of bottc fauna, Unduly affect the physical or chemical nature of the bottom, c. Interfere with the propagation of fish. 10. Class A waters in use for drinking water supply be subject. to restricted use by State and local authorities. 11. T he latest edition of Standard methods for Examination of Water and Wastewater,, APTJP will be followed in the collection, pre- servation, and ana IS4S Of SaMple . where a method is not given, the latest procedures of the American Society for Testing Material (ASTM) will be followed. 12. No new waste discharges will be allowed into Class A or B waters. A-7 13. As a guideline, pending further research, a, focal. coliform criteria for Class A waters of a median of 20 per 100 mi, not more than 200 per 100 ml in more than 10% of the samples collected, and for Class B waters a median value of 200 per 100 ml, not more than 500 per 1.00 mi. in more than 20%, of the samples collected, will be used. 14 In the case of thermal discharges,.where mixing --ones are allowed, the mixing zone will be limited to no more than 1/4. of the cross sectional area and/or volume of flow of stream or estuary, leaving at least 3/4 free as a zone of passage. 4 A-8 SEA WATER CLASS SA Suitable for all sea water uses including shellfish harvesting for direct human consumption (approved shellfish areas), bathing, and other water contact sports. Standards of Quality Item Water qOuality Criteria 1. Dissolved oxygen Not less than 6.0 mg/1 at any time 2. Sludge deposits--solid refuse None allowable - floating solids--oil--grease ---scum 3. Color and turbid ity None in such concentrations that will impair any usages specifi- cally assigned to this Class 4. Coliform bacteria per 100 ml Not to exceed a median MPN of 70 and not more than 10 percent of the samples shall ordinarily exceed an MPN of 230 for a 5-tube decimal dilut-ion or 330 for a 3-tube decimal dilution (See Note S.6) Odor None allowable 6 pH 6.8 8.5 7. Allowable temperature increase (See Note S.12) A-9 Chemical constituents None in concentrations or coribina- tions which would be harmful to human, animal, or aquatic life or which would make the waters unsafe or unsuitable for fish or shellfish or their propagation, impair the palatability of same, or impair the waters for any other uses 9. Radioactivity (See "Tote S.8) 1.0. Fecal coliform bacteria (See' Note S.10) per 100 ml eRl Q0 44' A-10 CLASS SB Suitable for bathing, other recreational purposes, industrial cooling and shellfish harvesting for human consumption after depuration (restricted shellfish area); excellent fish and wild life habitat; qood aesthetic value. Standards of Quality 1. Dissolved oxygen Not less than 5.0 mg/1 at any tire 2. Sludge deposits--solid refuse None allowable floating solids--oils-- grease--scum 3. Color and turbidity None in such concentrations that would impair any usages specifi- cally assigned to this class 4. Coliform bacteria per 100 ml Not to exceed a median value of 700 and not more than 2,300 in more than 10 percent of the samples (See Note S.6) 5. Taste and odor None in such concentrations that would impalr any usages specifi- cally assigned to this class and none that would cause taste and. odor in edible fish or shellfish 6 pH 6.8 - 8.5 7. Allowable temperature increase (See Note S.12) 8. Chemical constituents. None in cooncentrations or combina- tions which would be harmful to human, animal, or aquatic life or which would make -'the waters unsafe or unsuitable for fish.or shellfish or their Propagation, or impair the water for any other usage assigned to this class 9. Radioactivity (See -.-..Tote S.3) 10. Fecal coliform bacteria (See Note S.10) .-per 100 ml A-11 CLASS SC Suitable fish, shellfish and i,@rild life habitat; suitable for recreational boating, and industrial coolingi good aesthetic value. Standards of.Quality 1. Dissolved oxygen Not less than 5 rig/l during at least 16 hours of any 24-hour period nor less than 4 ng/l at any time 2. Sludge deposits--solid refuse None except that amount thatmay --floating solids--oils-a- result from the discharge from a grease--scum waste treatment facility providing appropriate treatment 3. Color and turbidity None in such concentrations that would impair any usages specifi- cally assigned to this class 4. Colifdrm bacteria None in such concentrations that would impair any usages specifi- cally assigned to this class .5. Taste and odor None in such concentrations that would impair any usages specifi- cally assigned to this class and none that would cause taste and odor in edible fish or shellfish 6. pH 7. Allowable temperature -.(See Note S.12) increase 8. Chemical constituents None in concentrations or combina- tions which would be harnful to human, animal, or aquatic life or which would make the waters unsafe or unsuitable for fish or shell- fish or their propagation, or impair the water for any other usage assigned to this class 9. Radioactivity (See Note S.8) A-12 CLASS SD Suitable for navigation, industrial cooling an,'. migration of fish; good aesthetic value. Standards of quality 1. Dissolved Oxygen Not less than 2 mg/l at any time 2. Sludge deposits--solid refuse None except that amount that may --floating solids--oils-- result from the discharge from a grease--scum waste treatment facility providing appropriate treatment 3. Color and turbidity None in such concentrations that would impair any useges specifi- cally assigned to this class 4. Coliform bacteria None in such concentrations that would impair any' usages specifi- cally assigned to this class 5. Taste and odor None in such concentrations would impair any usages specifi- callv assigned to this Class and none that would cause taste and odor in edible fish or shellfish 6. pH 6.5 - 8.5 7. Allowable temperature increase None-except where the increase will nct exceed the recommended limits on the most sensitive water use 8. Chemical constituents None in concentrations or combina- tions which would be harmful to human, animal, or aquatic life or which would make the waters unsafe or unsuitable for fish or shellfish or their propagation, impair the palatability of same, or impair the water for any other usage 9. Radioactivity (See Note S.8) A-13 NOTES: S 1 Sea waters are those waters subject.to the rise.and fall of the tide. s.2 Class SD waters will be assigned only where a higher water use Class cannot be attained after a9propriate waste treat- ment methods are utilized. Appropriate waste treatment shall be secondary treatment with disinfection or the equivalent.. s.3 All sewage treatment plant effluents shall receive disinfection before discharge to sea waters. S.11 The water quality standards do not a?lply to conditions brought about by natural causes. S.5 The waters shall be substantially free of Pollutants that will:. a. Unduly affect the composition of bottom fauna, b. Unduly affect the physical or chemical nature @of the bot.tom, c. Interfere with the propagation of fish. S.6 Bacteriological surveys oz sea waters should include sampling during periods when the most unfavorable hydrograahic and gollution conditions prevail. s.7 Any water falling below the standards of quality for a given Class shall be considered unsuitable for the uses indicated for that Class. Waters falling below the standards of quality for Class SD shall be Class SE and considered to be in a nuisance condition. S.3 The level of radioactive materials in all waters shall not be in concentrations or combinations which would be harmful to human, animal or@aqpatic life. S.9 'In the case of thermal discharges, where mixing zones are allowed, the mixing zone will be limited to no more than 1/4 of the cross sectional area and/or volume of flow of stream or estuary, leaving at least 3/4-1. free as a --one of passage. A-14 S.10 As a guide, pending further research, for Class SA waters a fecal coliform criteria of a median value of 15 per 100 ml not more than 10 percent of the samples exceeding 50 per 100 ml a nd -for Class SB waters a f ecal coliform criteria of a .median value of 50 per 100 ml and not more than 500 per 100 ml in 10 percent of the samples collected, will be used. S.11 No new waste discharges permitted into Class SA or Class SB waters. S.12 Temperature increase: None except where the increase will not exceed the recommended limit on the most sensitive receiving Vater use and in no case exceed 830F or in any case raise the tormal temperature more than 1 5 0F, July through September 0 and not more than 4 F from Octo*ber through June. S.13 The latest edition of the federal publication Water Qualit Criteria will be considered in the interpret'atTon and application of bioassay results. S.14 The latest edition of Standard i,iethods for Examination of Water and Wastewater, APHA, will be followed in the collec- tion, preservation, and analysis of samples. Where a mathod is not given, the latest procedures of the 'American Society for Testing Iiaterials (ASTNI) will be followed. A-15 APPENDIX B United States Geological Survey Stream Flow Gaging Station Data and Rhode Island Department of Health Water Quality Sampling Station Data B-1 ---------- --- COVENTRY WARWIC STERLING WEST I Ul j WAR WaK- ---------- 1010WOMUT z I o T WEST EAS NWICH GREENWICH NORTH AbO-T -T KINGSTOWN v VOLUNTOWN EXETER RZ X.- @j Pd El P,, NDERSTCWI* I'd .-C.ET. ol E T. C) -A T- @.P P, 10 Z NORTH P rN STONINGTON .-II)APIE Ti l'. P- .1 T P. PIER* 0 Id 1b, 'a . R.- *AII... HARLESTOWN SOUTH W.. @IJHRP I'd V%, -I o " I, 4 ID PA I'd KINGSTOWN STONINGTON -Tuc% PII WESTERLY N .11.1 FIGURE B-I --N -E/ SAMPLING AND GAGING T@ POP, A U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY STATION LOCATIONS N A RATREE STREAMFLOW GAGING STATION PT@ PAWCATUCK RIVER BASIN R.I. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH RHODEISLAND 120 INTENSIVE SAMPLING STATION R.I. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH BASIN PLANNING BOUNDARY 0 TREND SAMPLING STATION BASIN HYDROLOGIC BOUNDARY R.I. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH GROUND- o Gooo 12ooo lsooo 24000 3oooo WATER QUALITY MONITORING STATION SCALE IN FEET Flip- by I" RHODE ISLAND STATEMDE PLANNING @GRAM 10.1 c2i,A- TABLE B-1 U.S. Geological Survey Streamflow Gaging Stati Pawcatuck River Basin 1 Yr. in 10 Yr. Drainage Period Average 7 Day Area of Discharge Low Flow Location of Gage (sq.mi.) Record (cfs) (cfs)((45)) A. Meadow Brook near Carolina., Not R.I. (Pine Hill Road) June'65- (Station #01117600) 5.5 Sept.73 9.9 Available Wood River near Arcadia,R.I. (Ten Rod Road)(Station Jan.'64- Not #01117800) 35.2 Sept.'73 71.8 Available C. Wood River at Hope Valley, Mar.'41- R.I.(Station #01118000) 72.4 Sept.173 149.0 18.8 Pawcatuck River at Wood River Junction, R.I.. Alton-Carolina Road) oct.'4o- station #01117500) 100.0 Sept.'73 190.0 26.7 Pawcatuck River at Westerly_, R.I (North of Main St.) Nov.'40- (Station #01118500) 295.0 Sept.'73 564.o 63.7 B-3 TABLE B-2 R,I. Department of Health Water Quality Survey Data ((15)) Pawcatuck River Basin August 22, 1973 (unless otherwise noted Totals. Fecala Ammonia b Total b Total b Station River River Flow Temp.a DOa BOD5a Coliform Coliform Nitrogen Copper Zinc Number Location Segment Mile (mgd) (OF) (mg/1) (mg/1) (MPN/100ml) (MPN/100ml) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) 1 Green Haven Road 6.1 1.2 2,100 150 Stonington, Conn. 2 1.3 Tidal 779 7.4 2.4 3,350 84o o.44 o.47 0.32 79 10.3 4.2 4,300 930 71 4.4 1.6 230 230 2 Main Street Bridge 3 4.8 157 75 4.6 2.5 2,615 430 0.18 0.10 m6 Westerly, R.I, 79 6.2 3.3 9,300 4,300 3 Boom Bridge 72 3.3 1.6 430 150 Highway Bridge 5 8.4 141 75 4.2 3.0 2,415 930 o.14 0.07 m6 Westerly, R.I. 77 4.5 5.3 9,300 930 4 Meeting House Bridge 72 3.1 1.9 750 73 (R.I. Route 3) 6/7 11.6 138 75 3.5 3oO 930 290 o.16 0.07 o.o6 Hopkinton, R.I. 78 3.7 3.7 4,6oo 430 5 Narragansett Electric 72 3.6 2.0 1,500 280 Company Substation 7 13.3 137 74 3.8 3.0 2,4oo 6 o o.16 0.05 o.o6 Hopkinton, R.I. 77 4.6 4.6 2,4oo 930 71 L9 1.1 2,400 43 6 Bradford Road Bridge 8 17.0 126 72 o2 2.2 3,500 585 0.11 OoO5 0.07 Westerly, R.I. 76 6.6 3.8 15,000 2,4oo C 65 6.5 1.1 9,300 9,300 7 Burdickville Road Bridge 8 20.5 - 65 6.9 1.9 33,500 19,500 0.13 m8 0.10 Hopkinton, R.I. 66 7.2 3.1 43,000 43,000 71 6.4 1.3 3,050 46o Same-August 30, 1973 118 74 6o8 1.4 4,6oo 46o o.14 o.o8 o.14 76 7.5 4.4 1,500 46o Wood River 21.6+ 66 6.6 0.5 390 240 8 Alton-Carolina Road 24 o.6 67 67 7.4 2.1 84o 315 0.09 0.03 0.09 (R.I. Route 91) 68 7.8 4.o 2,400 930 Richmond, R.I. 65 5.8 1.5 15,000 7,500 9 Kings Factory Road 8/9 24.o 92 65 6.6 1.8 68,ooo 15,000 0.17 0.05 0.07 65 6.9 3.0 390,000 43,000 TABLE B-2 R.I. Department of Health Water Quality Survey Data ((15)) (Continued) Pawcatuck River Basin August 22, 1973 (unless otherwise noted) a a b b b7- a a a Total Fecal Ammonia Total Total Station River River Flow Temp. DO BODrj Coliform Coliform Nitrogen Copper Zinc Number Location Segment Mile LmEdj OF (mg/1) (mg.11) (MPN/100ml) (MPN/100ml) JMR/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) 10 Alton-Carolina Road 64 6.4 1 23,000 2,300 (R.I. Route 91) 10 25.3 85 65 6.5 1:@ 43,000 33,000 0.20 0.07 0.10 Charlestown, R.I. 66 7.0 2.5 150,000 75,000 11 Carolina Dam 64 5.7 1.9 15,000 9,100 ,Charlestown, R.I. 10 27.1 82 66 7.2 2.0 84,ooo 32,000 0.23 o.o4 0.07 67 7.4 2.4 46o,ooo 43,000 65 4.8 2 1 430,000 24o,ooo 12 Shannock Dam 11 29.0 78 66 5.0 2:6 430,000 315,000 0.23 0.05 0.10 Richmond, R.I. 67 5.3 3.0 750,000 430,000 ,a Data tabulated presented in order: Minimum,- Median, and Maximum of values obtained during a twenty-four hour sampling period. Samples taken at two-hour intervals. u, b Composite of all samples collected at station. c Error in calculation suspected. APPENDIX C Segment Priority Ranking System Segment priority points are assigned by the Division of Water Pollution Control of the Department of Health on the basis of the following major criteria: 1@ severity of problem; 2 need for preservation of pure waters; and 3 Population affected The priority points for the first two factors (severity of problem and preservation of pure waters) are obtained from Table C-1. TABLE C-1 Need for Dreservation of Severity of pollution problems high.qualily water (Usage) (water quality) A Shellfishing & drinking None Slight Moderate. Great water supply 0 .2 6 10 B Bathing &recreation 0 2 5 8. C Propagation offish & aquatic life 0 2 5 8 D Industrial uses 0 1 2 3 The need for preservation of pure waters is based on'the usage assigned to a water body through its water quality classification. The severity of pollution-problems corresponds to existing water quality conditions. For any segment, a value indicating the effect of pollution on water usage can be obtained from Table C-1 by reading across the line for a specific usage to the column which corresponds to the severity of pollution in the segment. The third fact'or considered in assigning segment priority points is the population affected by the water quality of the segment. Since it is difficult to determine who is and who is not affected by the water quality in any given segment., the population affected is taken to be the population in the vicinity of the segment. Priority points for the population affected are obtained from Table C-2. C-1 TABLE C-2 Population Affected Priority Points, 0 - 10.9000 1 10.@001 - 50qO00 2 505001+ 3 'The total priority points for a segment would be the sum of the value obtained f rom. Tabl:e C-1 and the value obtained f rom Table C-2. For example, a Class B segment with moderate pollution in a modera- tely o ulated area (10.,001 - 50,000.people) would be assigned five P53 points from Table C-1 and two (2) points.from, Table C-2 for a total of seven (5+2) priority points. The priority ranking for a segment within a basin corresponds to the priority points assigned to the segment by the previously described method. The segment with the greatest number of priority points receives the highest basin abatement priority ranking, a lower number of priority points would correspond to a lower basin abatement priority ranking. Table C-3 provides a breakdown of the priority points assigned to segments in the Pawcatuck Basin. C-2 TABLE C-a Assig ents of Segment Priority Points Segment SegmeUt Identi- Water Quality Severity of Priority Tota fication Segment Classification Problem Points from Points from (Table C-1 + Number Class* (usage) (Water Quality) Table C-1 Table C-2- ..Table C-2) 1 W SA S I i g ht 2 2 4 2 W SB Slight 2 2 3 E SC Moderate 5 1 6 4 E C Moderate 5 1 6 5 W B Slight 2 1 3 6 W B Slight 2 1 3 7 E C Slight 2 1 3 8 W B None 0 0 x 9 E C None 0 0 x 10 W B Slight 2 1 3 .11 E C Moderate 5 1 6 12 W B None 0 0 x 13 W B Moderate 5 1 6 14 W A None 0 0 x 15 W A None 0 0 x 16 W A None 0 0 x 17 E C None 0 0 x 18 W A None 0 0 x 19 W A None 0 0 x 20 W A None 0 0 x 21 W A None 0 0 x 22 W A None .0 0 x 23 W A None 0 0 x 24 E C Slight 2 1 3 25 W B None 0 0 x 26 W B Slight 2 1 3 27 E C Slight 2 1 3 28 W B None 0 0 x W A None 0 0 x 30 W B None 0 0 x 31 W A None 0 0 x 32 W A None 0 0 x 33 W. A None 0 0 x 34 W B None 0 0 x E C ilight 2 1 P. W A one 0 0 37 E C None 0 0 *E Effluent Limitation W Water Quality BIBLIOGRAPHY Allen, William B.; Hahn, Glenn W.; and Brackley, Richard A. in cooperation with the R.I. Development Council and the R.I. Water Resources Board. Availability of Ground Water it the Upper Pawcatuck River Basin Rhode Island. U.S. Geological Survey Water supply Pa 1. Washington, D.C..: Government Printing Office, 1966. 2 Audubon Society of Rhode Island. "Unique and Significant Natural Areas of Rhode Island, Computer printout. Providence: August, 1972. 3 Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection. Interim Basin Plan for the Eastern Connecticut Coastal Basin (Pawcatuck In- cluding the Town of Stonington and Westerly, Rhode Island. Hartford: February, 1973. 4 Fay., Spofford and ThorndikeJ, Inc. Westerly, Rhode Island, Report on Preliminary Planning of Sewer Service Exte nsions. Boston: October, 1967. 5 Gonthier, Joseph B.; Johnston_, H.E..; and Malmberg., G.T in coopera- tion with the Rhode Island Water Resources Board. A@ailabilit of Ground Water in the Lower Pawcatuck River"Basin. U.S. Geologi- cal Survey Water Supply Paper 2033. Washington., D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1974. 5A Lapp, Ralph E. A Citizen's Guide to Nuclear Power. Washington., D.C.: Harrison-Blaine, Inc., 1971. 6 MacConnell, William P. Remote_Sensing Land Use and Vegetative Cover in Rhode Island.,, Bulletin No. 200. Kingston, R.I.: Cooperative Extension Service, July, 1974. 7 Maguire, CE, Inc. Preliminary Engineering Report on Additions and Modifications to Existing Sewage Treatment Facilities for the .Town of Westerly, Rhode Island. Providence: June, 1972, revised June, 1975. 8 Town of Westerly, Rhode Island, Infiltration/Inflow Study, Phase I - Analysis. Providence: November., 1974. 9 Maguire.5 Charles A. and Associates. Report on Waste Water Collection and Disposal Facilities for the Town of Narragansett, Rhode Island. Providence: September, 1968, revised 1975. 9A New England River.Basin Commission. "Pawcatuck Planning Area Report"., Volume 10 of Part III of How to Guide Growth in Southeastern New fnglanq.,.revised draft of the final report of the Southeastern New England Study of Water and Related Land Resources (SENE Study). Boston: October., 1975, 9B New England River' Basins Commission, "Planning Area Town Lists.," data base for the Southeastern New England Study of Water and Related Land Resources (SENE Study): 1971. 10 North Kingstown Planning Department in conjunction with the North Kingstown Planning Commision. Community Development Plan, North Kingstown, Rhode Island. North Kingstown: September., 1972. 10A Providence, Rhode Island bus terminal dispatcher. February, 1976. 11 Rhode Island Department of Health, Division of Water Pollution Con- trol. The State of the State's Waters - Rhode Island, A Report to Congress, PL 92-500,_305@1- Pr ovidence: April, 1975. 12 Water Pollution Control Plan, Fy 1975. April., 1974. 13 Water Pollution Control Strategy, Fy 1977. Providence: April,, 1976. 14 Inter-Office Memo to 208 Project Manager. Providence: October 14, 1975. 15 Unpublished material. Providence. 16 Rhode Island Department of Transportation., Division of Highway Planning. Unpublished material. Providence. 17 Rhode Island Development Council, Planning Division, Community Assistance Program. Town of West Greenwich " Rhode Island, Com- prehensive Community Plan. Providence: July, 1965. 18 Rhode Island Statewide Comprehensive Transportation and Land Use Planning Program. Goals and Policies for the Development of Rhode Island. Providence: September, 1969. 19 Plan for Public Sewerage Facility Development., Report Number 11. Providence: September, 1969. 20 Plan for the Development and Use of Public Water Supplies Report Number 10. Providence: September., 1969. 21 Rhode Island Statewide Planning Program. Addendum to the State Land Use Policies and P lan_, Report, Number 22. Providence: June., 1975. 22 . Airline Passenger Ticket Survey, Technical.Paper Number 17, and Suppleme 1, 2 and 3. Providence: September, October.,- 1970; February, November, 1971. 23 Areawide Waste Treatment Management Planning Work Program, Providence: May, 1975, 23A Letter from Daniel W. Varin, Chief, Rhode Is land Statewide Planning Program to John E. Connors., Jr,, Town Manager., Town of South Kingstown, Rhode Island,, dated June 28, 1976. 24 Continuin4 Planning Process, Prepared Pursuant to Title III, Section.303(e), Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amend- ments of 1972. Providence: 1974. 25 Land Zoned for Industrial Use:.Inventory and Analysis, Technical Paper Number 20,, Providence: January., 1972. 26 Rhode Island Population Projections by_County, City and Town, Technical Paper Number 25, Providence: April, 1975. 27 Rhode Island State Rail_-Plan Report Number 27. Providence: --Ue-cember., 1975. 28 -, Rhode Island Transportation Plan - 1990., Report Number 19-, revised edition. Providence: January., 1975-T-revised-December., 1975)o 29 State Airport System-Inventory, Technical Paper Number 14. Providence: October, lqbq. 30 State Airport System Plan - Aeronautical and Operational Activities, Technical Paper Number 16. Providence: April., 1970. 31 State Airport System Plan (1970 71990), Revised Summary Report., Report Number lb. Providence: December, 1974. 32 State Land Use Policies and Plan_, Report Number 22. Provi-dence: January, 1975. 33 . ', State of Rhode Island, Selected Population', Housing Unit and A-rea Data by Analysis Zone for 1970, Technical Paper Number 5 9- Providence: October, 1975. 34 Westerly-Charlestown-Hopkinton-Riclimond Economic.Growth Center Planning Study, Report Number 1T. -Providence: December, 1972. 35 1972 Rhode Island Transportat ion Inventory for 1974 National Transportation Study., Technical Paper Number 34. Providence: March.,.1973, 35A Rhode Island Statewide Planning Program and Rhode Island Department of Health. Facilities_Plan,-Westerly Sub-Basin. Providence: June, 1974.' 36 Rhode Island WaterResources Board. Rhode Island River Basins, Part 1. Providence: February, 1971. 36A Schwab, Raymond W... Associates, Comprehensive Sewer Study and Faci- lities Planning for Wastewater Disposal in-Narraganse t, Rhode Island. Peace Dale., Rhode Island: February., 1975. 36B Schwab, Raymond W.,, Associates. Letter to Mr. Daniel W. Varin., Department of Administration, Statewide Planning Program, dated October 22_, 1975. 37 Southeastern Connecticut Regional Planning Agency. Unpublished material.' Norwich Conn. 38 Town of Charlestown., Rhode Island, Zoning Ordinance. Adopted July 83, 1974. 39 Town of Hopkinton, Rhode Island. Zoning Ordinance. Adopted March 235 19710 39A Town of North Kingstown. Zoning Ordinance. Adopted April,8., 1974., as amended. 40 Town of Richmond, Rhode Island. ZoninE Ordinance. Adopted March 26.@ 1970. 41 Town of South Kingstown, Rhode Island. Zoning Ordinance. Adopted March 29., 1976, 42 Town of Stonington, Connecticut. Office of the Town Sewer Engineer. Unpublished material. 1975. 43 Town of Westerly, Rhode Island. ZoninE Ordinance. Adopted, 1965. 44 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New England Divisio*n. Water Resources DeveloRment by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in Rhode Island. Waltham., Mass.: 1971. 45 U.S. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey. Unpublished Material. Providence. 46 U.S. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey. 1973 Water Resources Data for Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont. Boston: 1975. 47 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Guidelines for the Preparation of Water Quality Management Plans. Washington., D.C.: September, 1974. 48 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits on file with the Rhode Island Department of Health, Divi- sion ofWater Pollution Control,,, 49 Water Quality StrateGy Paper, Second Edition. Washington., D.C.: March 15., 1974. 50 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Final draft recommendations of the Criteria Workshop. Washington., D.C.: May_, 1975. 51 . Regulatory Guide 4.7. General Site Suitability Criteria for Nuclear Power Stations. Washington, D.C.: November, 1975. GLOSSARY abatement-reduction of the degree or intensity of pollution. activated sludge process-a secondary.waste treatment process usini-, biologically active sewage sludge to hasten breakdown of o.-7,anic matter in raw sewage. advanced sewage treatmen@,-was te water treatment beyond the secondary or biological. stage that includes removal of nutrients such as phosphorous and nitrogen and/or high percentage of BOD and TSS. -Advanced waste t reatment, known as tertiary treatment, is the "polishing stage" of waste water treatment and produces a high quality effluent. algal bloom-a proliferation of living algae on the surface of lakes, streams, or ponds. ambient monitori@-monitorin- of instream water quality. Ambient monitoring consists Of trend and intensive monitoring. aquifer an underground bed or stratum of earth, gravel or porous stone that contains water. assimilative capacity-the capacity of a water body to receive waste- water discharges without violation of water quality standards. basin abatement priority ranking-the priority ranking assigned to municipal sewerage construction projects in a river basin. biochemical oxygen.demand (BOD)-a measure of the amount of oxygen consumed in the biological processes during the breakdown of organic matter in water. Large amounts of organic waste use up large amounts of dissolved oxygen, thus the greater the degree of pollution, the Cgreater the BOD. best practicable treatment (BPT)-the minimum degree of treatment as prescribed by EPA. For municipal discharges, this is secondary treatment. For industrial discharges, guidelines are established by EPA for each type of industry. BOD 5- -the amount of dissolved oxygen consumed in five days by biological processes breaking down organic matter. This value is usually obtained from a standard laboratory test. coliform bacteria-any of a number of organisms common to the intestinal tract of man and animals whose presence in waste water is an indicator of pollution and of potentially dangerous bacterial contamination. combined sewer-a sewer that carries both sanitary sewage and storm water. combined sewer overflow-discharges from a combined sewer. This usually occurs during wet weather when the flow in the sewer is beyond its capacity, but can also occur during dry weather if the sewer is not properly mantained. construction grant priority-the priority assigned to municipal sewera re construction projects on a statewide basis. cooling water-water which has been used for cooling. Its only contaminant is heat. dissolved oxygen (DO)-the oxygen dissolved in water. Adequate DO is necessary for the life of fish and other aquatic or,-anisms and for the prevention of offensive odors. Low DO concentrations generally are due to discharge of excessive organic solids having high BOD. effluent-the waste water discharged into a receiving water. The waste water may be partially or completely treated or in its natural state. effluent limitation-any restriction established for discharge into a water body. effluent limitation segment-a segment where application of the best practicable treatment to each discharge will result in the attain- ment of water quality goals. effluent monitoring-monitoring of waste water discharges. estuary-an area where fresh water meets salt water; for example bays, mouths of rivers, salt marshes and lagoons. eutrophication-the aging process by which a lake evolves into a bog or marsh and ultimately disappears. During eutrophication the lake becomes rich in nutritive compounds which spur algal growth and other microscopic plant life which fill in the lake over the years. facilities plan (201 plan)-a plan prepared by a municipality describing sewerage facilities needs and alternatives, and including an environmental assessment of the project. This plan must be prepared for the community to,be eligible for a federal construction grant. force main-(F.M.)-a sewer in which sewage is pumped under pressure rather than flowing by 'gravity. (2) hydrologic boundary-the boundary of a river basin as defined by its drainage area. individua 1 sewage disposal system-a sewage disposal system for a single dwelling unit or business establishment; usually a septic tank and leaching field or a cesspool. infiltration/inflow-total quantity of water, other than sewage, entering a sewer system. Infiltration is water -entering a sewer system and service connections from the ground through such sources as defective pipes, pipe joints, or manhole walls. Inflow is water discharged into a sewer system from such sources as roof leaders, drains, catch basins, manhole covers, street wash waters, etc. intensive monitori,:n&-ambient monitoring which is done over a twenty-four hour period,at a number of locations in sequence down the river. interceptor sewer-a sewer which collects the flows from main and trunk sewers and carries it to a central point for treatment or discharge. lateral sewer-sewers that collect sewage from homes or businesses and which discharge into a branch or other common sewer. most probable number (MPN)-a statistically derived estimate of the number of bacteria in a 100 ml sample of water. non-point source discharges-a source of pollution which is not discharged through a pipe or conduit; such as stormwater runoff and leachate. NPDES permit-a permit issued by EPA regulating the concentration of pollutantsin a wastewater discharge. nutrients-elements.or compounds essential as raw materials for organism growth.and development, such as nitrogen and phosphorous. outfall-the mouth of a sewer, drain or conduit where effluent is dis- charged into the receiving waters. parameter-a physical property whose value describes the condition of a water body. pH-a measure of the hydrogen-ion activity in a liquid. pH is represented on a scale of 0 to 14 with 7 representing a neutral state, 0 representing the most "acid" state and 14 the least "acid" state. point source discharge-a discharge of pollutants through a pipe or similar conduit. pollution-the man-made or man-induced alteration of the chemical, physical, biological, and radiological integrity of water. (3) pollution load-the amount of pollutants which are dischar7.ed to a receiving water.. pre-treatment-in waste water treatment, any process u-sed to reduce pollution load before the waste water is introduced into a main sewer system or delivered to a treatment plant for sub- stantial reduction of the pollution load. primary sewaFe treatment-the first stage in waste water treatment in which substantially all floatinF or settleable solids are mechanically removed by screening and sedimentation. receiving water-a water which receives either a point or non-point discharge. runoff-the portion of rainfall, melted snow or irrigation water that flows across ground surfaces and eventually is returned to streams. sanitary sewage-sewaFe dischar rinF, from the sanitary conveniences of dwellinfr ,s, office buildinFs, factories or institutions. sanitary sewers-sewers that carry domestic, commercial or industrial waste waters. Storm water is excluded from sanitary sewers. secondary treatment-waste water treatment beyond orimary treatment and providing at least 85 percent removals of BODand TSS. The most common method of secondary treatment is the activtLted sludge process. segment-azection of a waterbody with common water quality character- istics and use classification. Waterbodies are divided into seg- ments in order to facilitate the analysis and description of the impact of waste water discharfres. segment class-the classification of a segment as either an "effluent limitation" or "water quality" segment. segment priority points-the points assigned to a segment based on the severity of pollution in the segment, the water usage assigned to the segment and the population affected by the pollution. segment priority rankina-a rankinF among the segments of a basin based upon the segment's priority points. The purpose of the ranking is to indicate the priority for pollution abatement measures within that segment. (4) septage the solids and liquid which are pumped out of septic tank-5. septic tank-an underground tank used for disposal of domestic sewage. Heavy solids settle to the bottom and liquid flows into drains and then into the ground. Sludge is pumped out at regular intervals. severity of pollution ranking_-the ranking assigned to pollution sources based on the effect of the discharge on the receiving water. 2.ewage-the liquid wastes from residences and commercial and industria 1 establishments. When carried in sewers, it would also.include such ground water, surface water and storm water as may be present. sewer-any pipe of conduit used to collect and carry away sewage or storm water runoff from the generating source to treatment plants or receiving plants or receiving streams. sewerage-the entire system of sewage collection, treatment, and disposal. pj@jd@e-the solids removed from sewage during waste water treatment. storm sewer-a pipe or conduit that collects and transports rain and snow runoff to a receiving water. total oxygen demand (TOD)-the theoretical oxygen demand that would be exerted by the breakdown of organic matter in sewage and the conversion of ammonia to nitrate. TOD can be calculated by using the following formula: TOD Wday) 1.47 (BOD;) + 4.57 (NH3 where BOD five day OD Wday) and (NH ; 3- ammonia nitrogen in #/day. trend monitoring-monitoring at regular intervals throughout the year at the same site. trickling filter-a secondary treatment system consisting of a bed of rocks or stones that support bacterial growth. Sewage is trickled over the bed enabling the bacteria to breakdown organic wastes. waste water-water which has been used for a particular purpose and must be disposed of. water quality segment-a segment in which water quality standards will not be met even with the application of best practiable treatment. (5) ABBREVIATIONS BOD-biochemical oxygen demand BOD5-5 day biochemical oxygen demand BPT-best practicable treatment BVDC-Blackstone Valley District Commission CBD- Central Business District cfs-cubic feet per second DO-dissolved oxygen EPA-U. S. Environmental Protection Agency F.M.-force main aLcd-gallons per capita daily E2d-gallons per day JTU-Jackson Turbidity Units j@a-kilograms M-million gallons aL.d-millioh. gallons daily @/1-milligrams per liter NPDES-National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ppd-pounds per day P.S.-pump station RIDOH-Rhode Island Department of Health ,RISPP-Rhode Island Statewide Planning Program TOD-Total oxygen demand TSS-Total Suspended Solids USGS-U. S. Geological Survey I I t 1 4* , Ni @ @01 0 1 40, 1 e - :k@' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 11 @ I]I lif 1 3 6668 00001 3278- r I I