Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutGroundWater Protection Area 1989NOMINATION P~TITIO~ SUBMITTED TO COMMISSIONER THOMAS C. JORLING NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION BY LONG ISLAND REGIONAL PLYING BOARD ON BEHALF OF THE SPECIAL GROUND-WATER PROTECTION AREA ADVISORY COUNCIL CALLING FOR THE DESIGNATION OF THE SOUTHOLD SPECIAL GROUND-WATER PROTECTION AREA December 1989 Introduction The proposed Southold Special Ground-water Protection Area (SGPA), shown in Figure 1, is located on the North Fork between Mattituck Inlet and the hamlet of Southold, with the major portion lying north of the ground-water divide. The area represents a major portion of the locally significant deep recharge region, even though the entire North Fork lies within shallow flow Hydrogeologic Zone IV. It is comprised of a central region within the Town, having an area of approximately 2,700 acres. The major land use is agricultural (approximately 75Z) with a scattering of low and medium density residen- tial uses throughout. Some commercial uses are located primarily along the major east/west roadways of Route 25 and Route 27, as well as a few institutional and industrial uses. Transportaton (LIPd{ corridor) and recreation/open space (park district/Town holdings) are also uses within the area. Vacant land encompasses approximately 10% of the area. The Town of Southold or Suffolk County have obtained developmental rights on over 15 agricultural parcels, which encompasses approximately 156 acres within the proposed Southold SGPA, or less than 1% of the SGPA's agricultural acreage. Agricultural uses include vineyards, nursery/greenhouses, sod farms and crops. This nomination petition calling for the designation of the Southold SGPA is organized in accord with the outline of petition information requirements contained in Article 55, Section 55-0109 of the NYS Environmental Conservation Law. (a) whether the special ground-water protection area is a recharge zone for ~round water with a present or future water supply potential. The proposed Southold SGPA encompasses the ground-water recharge zone east of Mattituck Inlet. This recharge area is separate and distinct from the recharge area west of the Inlet, which is part of the Central Suffolk SGPA. Figure 1 shows the boundary of the Southold SGPA in relation to the ground-water divide, which bisects the North Fork, and the five foot ground-water table contour line, as depicted on the Suffolk County Department of Health Services map entitled "Countour Map of the Water Table and Location of Observation Wells in Suffolk County, New York, March 1988". The depth of the freshwater resource in this proposed protection area is not as extensive as that in the other SGPA's in Suffolk County. In fact, it is so shallow that yearly fluctuations in water table elevation due to changing rainfall patterns are significant. The water dome, as defined by the five foot ground-water table contour line, will decrease in area during drought conditions, and will expand to some degree during periods of high rainfall. The proposed SGPA has sufficient freshwater volume to meet water supply needs in the eastern part of the Town of Southold. It has been determined that, despite limitations, it contains sufficient quantity to supply the projected saturation population of 40,000 to 45,000 people. The Town's current population is between 20,000 and 21,000 people, not including the seasonal tourist population. This recharge area represents the only feasible source of future water supply for the eastern portion of the Town. This has been documented in two major water resource management studies. 1. North Fork Water Supply Plan~ Suffolk County~ New York. This report, completed in 1983 by ERM-Northeast Engineers in conjunction with Camp Dresser & McKee for the Suffolk County Dept. of Health Services, concluded that the cost of transporting water from the Town of Riverhead or other locations west of the Town of Southold was cost prohibitive. The protection of the ground-water resource from further contamination and its continued use for water supply was recon~ended as the most cost effective solution. This study also made some other recommendations, which are included in Appendix A. 2. Suffolk County Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan. This report, completed in January of 1987 by Dvirka and Bartilucci, Consulting Engineers and Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. for the Suffolk County Dept. of Health Services, reaffirmed the findings of the 1983 North Fork Water Supply Plan. At the present time, the Suffolk County Water Authority is working jointly with the Town of Southold to develop a water resources development plan for the Core Watershed Corridor, the boundary of which may correspond to the five foot water table contour line shown in Figure 1. With regard to public drinking water supply, there is only one public water supply well field located within the boundaries of the proposed SGPA - - Greenport Water District's Plant 7 on Ackerley Pond Lane. Almost all the pumpage from this field is utilized and discharged outside (east of) the study area. Agricultural pumpage represents by far the largest consumptive use of the proposed Southold SGPA's ground-water resource. Using the Cooperative Extension Service estimated unit pumpage rate of 0.14 million gallons per acre per year for irrigation of mixed vegetable crops, the area's 2,015 agricultural acres consmne on the order of 262 million gallons ~er ye~, Which is equivalent to about 17 percent of average recharge to (or less than l percent of the ground water in storage below) the area. (b) whether the special ground-water protection area is largely undeveloped with tracts of natural vegetation, or geological conditions. natural Analysis of existing land use and zoning indicate that 2,176 acres within the 2,700 acre proposed Southold SGPA are available for develop- ment. The majority of the land available for development is used for agriculture, but it is zoned for one and two acre residential develop- ment according to present Town of Southold zoning regulations. This provides for a potential yield of 735 additional residential lots within the area with a total of 871 residential lots within all land use categories. Some additional future commercial and industrial development could also occur under the existing zoning. Agricultural properties with development rights that have been deeded to either the Town or Suffolk County have not been included in the acreage available for development discussed above. Such development restrictions are tied to approximately 15 parcels within the area. The bulk of the undeveloped land in the Town of Southold lies within the proposed SGPA. It is this land that is going to be the focus of future development activity. Most of the bay waterfront in the Town has been developed. Some of these waterfront areas have been impacted by development upgradient; not to mention by saltwater intrusion caused by the existing waterfront development itself. Clearly, the need to protect upgradient water supply to these areas is great. The Town of Southold intends to protect its water supply for both public and private wells. Towards this goal, the Town enacted its own water resources management program in June of 1987. A copy of same is enclosed as Appendix B. (c) whether the ground water which is recharged through the special ground-water protection area is of high quality. The quality of the water within the proposed SGPA is not of uniform quality. The water is generally considered by the Suffolk County Dept. of Health Services to be impacted by nitrates and pesticides. Agricultural chemicals have contaminated ground water throughout much of the horizontal and vertical extent of the aquifer below the area. These chemicals include the inorganic constituents of fertilizers (e.g., nitrate, sulfate, chloride) and various organic pesticides, including carbamates (aldicarb, carbofuran) and 1,2-dichloropropane used on potato crops. The impacts of these chemicals on the aquifer are reflected in the quality of most of the shallow private wells, Greenport Water District supply wells at Plant 7 and test wells at Plant 12 (located immediately east of the SGPA boundary), as well as SCDHS monitoring wells. Fertilizer contaminants can be found throughout the vertical extent of the aquifer system, since fertilizers have a long history of use, and their inorganic constituents are mobile and unreactive. Nitrate concen- trations in agricultural areas frequently exceed the 10 ppm drinking water standard, and are occasionally as high as 20-30 ppm. Concentra- tions at Greenport's Plant 7 wells have remained just below the 10 ppm standard, while the test wells at the Plant 12 site range from 5.7 ppm to 9.8 ppm. Elevated chloride and sulfate concentrations are usually found in association with elevated nitrates, but neither constituent is considered a health threat, nor is often found to approach its respective drinking water standard (250 ppm). Typical chloride and sulfate concentrations are on the order of 30-50 ppm, but both will occasionally occur in the 100-150 ppm range or higher. Pesticide contamination is also widespread within the area. Pesticides such as aldicarb, carbofuran, and dichloropropane have proven to be very mobile and unreactive as they move through the aquifer system; maximum concentrations decrease due to dispersion, but the total mass of contamination is not reduced by biodegradation, adsorption, or other processes. For example, aldicarb has been detected in about 20% of the 25,500 samples from East End private wells since monitoring began in 1980, and while the average concentration of positive samples has decreased from 25 ppb in 1980 to 12 ppb in 1988, the median value has remained around 8 ppb over this time span. On the average, 250 additional private wells (about 10% of those sampled) each year are found to exceed the 7 ppb drinking water guide- line for aldicarb and are fitted with carbon filters supplied by the manufacturer. At the same time, more than half of the 13,000 to 15,000 wells closest to farm fields, which were impacted by aldicarb first, have seen an improvement in raw water quality to the extent that filters can be removed. This trend should continue as aldicarb contamination moves away from the area of application. Given the relatively short period of time that aldicarb was used~ and the positive effects of dispersion on contaminant concentration$~ it is probable that virtually all ground water within the proposed SGPA will be suitable for drinking water purposes without the need for aldicarb treatment within the next decade or two. The outlook for nitrate is not as clear~ and will depend in large part on the effective- ness of future agricultural practices to limit nitrogen leaching from crops such as potatoes~ mixed ve~etables~ and sod. The ultimate poten- tial for treatment-free water supply~ however~ will depend on whether additional problems arise from past or future pesticide use. (d) whether the hydrogeologic conditions are such that development could lead to deEradation of water quality. Surficial deposits in the proposed SGPA consist of glacial outwash and gravel derived from the Harbor Hill terminal moraine, which forms a ridge along the north shore. In most portions of the area, these deposits are underlain by a significant clay unit formed in lake and shallow marine environments during the interval between the Ronkonkoma ice sheet retreat and Harbor Hill ice-front advance. The top of the unit lies 60'-120' below sea level. Below the clay unit are older glacial deposits, which rest upon continental margin deposits of the Magothy Formation. The only hydrogeologic unit of regional significance, from a water supply standpoint, is that portion of the upper glacial aquifer lying above the clay, since glacial deposits below the clay contain only limited amounts of fresh ground water (above the saltwater interface), and the underlying Magothy is entirely salty. The clay unit, therefore, limits the volume of the usable freshwater resource, but also protects large agricultural and public supply wells from upconing saltwater. Where the clay is absent, the usable freshwater resource extends down to the saltwater interface, but pumping is susceptible to saltwater upconing; such conditions exist in the Mattituck Creek area, where a large channel was eroded through the clay and was subsequently refilled by sand and gravel outwash deposits, and the westernmost portion of the proposed Southold SGPA. The general direction of ground-water flow in the area east of Mattituck Creek is toward Long Island Sound, normal to the line of the central divide. The tidal waters of Mattituck Creek, however, influence flow directions west of Cutchogue. Horizontal flow velocities within the proposed SGPA are generally less than one-half foot per day, but may increase to almost one foot per day during periods of high rainfall, when water table elevations have been observed to increase by 50 percent or more above long-term average values. Residence times for the area range from several years near Mattituck Creek to a century or more near the divide in Cutchogue. (e) whether portions of the ground water within the sole source aquifer area are already contaminated with toxic organics, nutrients, salts, or other pollutants so as to warrant special protection for areas which recharKe high quality 8round water. An overview of ground-water quality conditions in the proposed SGFA is contained in section C of this petition. It should be pointed out that as agricultural lands lie fallow, water quality improves, i.e., pesticide and nitrate concentrations decline, especially if such lands are located along the spine of the North Fork. Figure 1 shows that the proposed SGPA includes a large area north of the ground-water divide that is subject to intense development pressure. Measures to protect further degradation of ground-water quality will be most effective when applied to the recharge areas implementation are fewer in the already developed, especially shoreline. The Southold Town landfill near the divide. Opportunities for area south of the divide, which are as one approaches the Peconic Bay in Cutchogue is located north of the ground-water divide, just outside the area boundary. Leachate detected in ground water on the north side of the facility is characterized by an~nonia-nitrogen concentrations exceeding 100 ppm and chloride concentrations on the order of 300 ppm. The extent of the plume further downgradient has not been delineated. The Cornell University analysis of historic aerial photos identified four disturbed sites within the proposed SGPA, none of which are suspected of posing a significant threat to ground water. whether maintenance of existing high quality in the ground water recharged through the special ground-water protection area would have significant economic, social, ecological, recreational or aesthetic benefits for the sole source aquifer area. The core watershed corridor economically viable supply of water for eastern portion of the Town of Southold. constitutes the only available and future populations in the Designation of the proposed Southold SGPA will provide both a planning and policy implementation focus for protecting the limited water resources of the area from further degradation. With the proper water management plan in place, ground-water quality conditions within the proposed SGPA will improve over time, thus assuring a local source of water for the future, and precluding reliance on other more expensive water supply options for the region. For further discussion, see Appendix A. (g) whether degradation of such ground water would have significant economic, social, ecological, recreational and aesthetic costs for the area. Eighty percent of the area encompassed by the proposed Southold SGPA boundary is available for development. How this area is managed and regulated from the water resource protection point of view will ultimately determine feasibility of utilizing its ground-water resource (from both quantity and quality perspectives) as the principal source of water for the eastern portion of the North Fork in the Town of Southold. Extraordinary protection of this water resource is needed through the sole source aquifer SGPA vehicle. Preservation of local water supply potential is recommended as the preferred water supply alternative over those that involve significantly higher expenditures for either water quality remediation or infrastructure required for pumpage from a distant source. Problems could arise from management conflicts involving multiple jurisdictions, should the Town of Southold need to pump from a distant source. See the "Recommendations" and "Preventive Measures" sections in Appendix A for additional discussion. (h) the preliminary boundaries of the special ground-water protection area or areas. The boundary description of the proposed Southoid SGPA is as follows: Beginning at a point where the southerly boundary of Oregon Road intersects the easterly boundary of Mill Lane; then southward along the easterly boundary of Mill Lane to 500 feet south of the southern boundary of the L.I.R.R. property; then eastward 500 feet south of the southerly boundary of the L.I.R.R. property to Terry Court; then northward along the westerly boundary of Terry Court to Glover Lane; then northeastward along the northerly boundary of Glover Lane to Tucker Lane; then northward along the westerly boundary of Tucker Lane to Middle Road (County Road 48); then westward along the southerly boundary of Kenney's Road to Sound View Avenue; then westward along the southerly boundary of Sound View Avenue to Mill Road; then northwestward along the southwesterly boundary of Mill Road to View Avenue; then westward along the southerly boundary of View Avenue to Henry's Lane; then southward (approximately 50 feet) along the westerly boundary of Henry's Lane to the LILCO R.O.W.; then westward along the LILCO R.O.W. to Cox's Lane; then southward along the westerly boundary of Cox's Lane to Middle Island Road (County Road 48); then westward along the northern boundary of Middle Road (County Road 48) to Depot Lane; then northward along the westerly boundary of Depot Lane to Oregon Road; then westward along the southerly boundary of Oregon Road to the place of origin. (i) a brief outline of the plan of work. The outline of work for the Southold SGPA is the same as that already approved pursuant to Contract #C002145 (Development of Long Island Special Ground-water Protection Area Plan) between the Long Island Regional Planning Board and N. Y. State Dept. of Environmental Conservation for the preparation of a comprehensiv~ management plan for the other SGPAs in Nassau and Suffolk Counties. A copy of the outline included in Contract #C002145 is found in Appendix C. (j) a tentative membership list for any advisory committees. The Long Island Regional Planning Board will utilize the existing Special Ground-water Protection Area Advisory Council created in accord with Article 55, section 55-0113.6 as the advisory committee responsible for review of the proposed Southold SGPA comprehensive management plan. The membership of the Advisory Council is listed in Appendix D. An additional voting member representing the Town of Southold will be appointed to the Advisory Council. (k) a reasonable budget request for the pro~ect. The Long Island Regional Planning Board will prepare the comprehensive management plan for the proposed Southold SGPA at no additional cost to the State of New York. There is no request for state funds in this petition; hence, no budget is included herein. Appendix A NORTH FORK WATER SUPPLY PLAN SUFFOLK COUNTY, NEW YORK March 1983 Prepared For: Suffolk County Department of Health Services Hauppauge, New York Peter F. Cohalan, Suffolk County Executive David Harris, M.D., M.P.H., Commissioner Herbert W. Davids, Director, Division of Environmental Health Prepared By: ERM-Northeast Engineers, P.C. 88 Sunnyside Blvd. Pl ainview, New York Camp Dresser & McKee One World Trade Center New York, New York Conclusion. The towns of Riverhead and Southold can best implenent the study's recommendations: (1) by forming town Water Management Programs, as administrative functions, to coordinate all water supply activities in the respective towns, (2) by forming Water Supply Dist ricts or extending existing district boundaries to purchase, own and operate private water companies or to construct new public water sys- tems, and (3) by forming Home Treatment Unit Districts (covering all or portions of the town area not served by public water) and owning and maintaining the home units. (The towns may allow private industry to sell home treatment units after approval of the units by the town, but the town should retain maintenance responsibility.) 1.2 RECOMMENDATIONS General Recommendations (i) (2) (3) (4) This study has denonstrated conclusively that numerous technical and financial difficulties are encountered when attempting to provide potable water to the residents of the North Fork. Pre- ventive measures to minimize or eliminate additional groundwater contamination must be implenented. These measures are not immediate solutions to current water supply problems but are de$ireabl e and necessary long-term actions. Because of severe groundwater quality problems in the study area, a safe, dependable water supply must be provided to the residents of the North Fork. A combination of individual home treatment units plus public water systems should be implenented. Individual home treatment units can contribute significantly to solving current water supply problms but there should not be a long-term reliance on home units - instead, measures should be implenented to start cleansing the aquifers and protecting them against future contamination. The towns of Riverhead and Southold should individually assume responsibility for implementing water supply programs within their boundaries. Administratively, the towns should establish Water Management Programs, Water Supply Districts and/or water improvenents encompassing parts of, or the entire areas of, the towns, for implementation of the plans and recommendations of this study. As an incorporated village, Greenport cannot be included in the Southold District unless it petitions the Town for inclusion. The personnel operating the water systems in the hamlet of Riverhead and Village of Greenport have technical and adminis- trative water supply expertise which can be utilized by the towns. Since the Riverhead system is currently a part of Town government, institutional arrangements would not be required to 1-7 (6) (7) (8) (9) utilize this expertise. In Southold, the Town can do the fol- lowing: establish its own water supply staff; contract with Greenport for personnel services beyond those currently provided by the Village; or employ a combination of Town staff and Village services. The town Water Management Programs should include individual home treatment as part of their overall responsiblities as Home Treatment Unit Districts. In order to ensure safety and reli- ability, the town Home Treatment Unit Districts (not the home- owner) should own, operate and maintain the home treatment units, not the homeowner; private enterprise can also be allowed to supply units, as approved by the towns, but the towns should retain maintenance responsibilities. In areas of existing development where groundwater is contamina- ted, the Water Management Programs should provide public water systems, if economically feasible, through Water Districts. If public systems cannot be implemented, home treatment units should be publicized and recommended by the water programs and, if existing homeowners request service, the program should provide, own and maintain the home units. When new subdivisions are proposed in areas of groundwater con- tamination or potential contamination, connection to existing public water supplies of adequate capacity are required. If such supplies are not available, then new public supplies are to be constructed by the developer and deeded to a town Water Dist- rict. If an existing home is sold in an area of suspected groundwater contamination, the SCDHS or other appropriate agency should sample and test the home well and the results should be attached to the deed. If the water quality does not meet standards, the current homeowner or new owner should be required to make provi- sion through the Water Management Program to provide a safe water supply prior to the sale of the home. This requirement will necessitate a change in County Heal th Department regula- tions. The SCDHS is planning to locate a vending machine in the study area which will purify local groundwater and sell the purified water at a nominal cost. If the concept is accepted by the citizens of the area, other vending machines should be located by the Water Management Programs throughout the area as interim measures until the other recommendations of this study are implemented. I-8 Area-Speci fic Recommendations (10) Wading River/Northville--The existing individual water systems in Wading River, Baiting Hollow/Woodcliff Park and Reeves Park should be connected to new supply wells which will separately serve each of the three individual subsystems. This is neces- sary to improve the reliability of the supply and to assure potable water. The new facilities also should be located and sized to serve areas which do not currently have public water systems but the new service areas should be developed in a phased approach. (11) The Riverhead Town Water District should own and operate, the new supply wells and transmission lines, and should sell water to the individual water systems through metering facilities. If any of the private systens want to deed their facilities to the Town, the Water District should accept them. It is not economically feasible to provide public water systems to the remainder of the area; these residents should continue to be served by individual home wells, with treatment as required, provided by a Home Treatment Unit District. Riverhead/Jamesport--The Riverhead system should be extended to serve the Calverton area and should actively attempt to further expand its system to other areas adjacent to the present system, !ncluding presently unsewered portions of Aquebogue. Major ~mprovements are not required in the Riverhead system except for additional distribution system storage. The renainder of the area, including Jamesport, should continue to be served by indi- vidual home wells with treatment as required, since it is not economically feasible to serve those areas with public water facilities. (12) (13) Mattituck/Cutchogue__The Town of Southold should acquire and operate the existing water systen in Mattituck Hills (Captain Kidd); measures should be taken immediately to upgrade the performance and reliability of the systen and to augment its source of supply. In the renainder of the Mattituck/Cutchogue d~nand center (including Cutchogue, Mattituck, Little Hog Neck, East Cutchogue, Fleets Neck, New Suffolk and Indian Neck) it is not economically feasible to provide public water supply sys- tems. These areas should continue to utilize individual home wells; when treatment is required, it should be provided through the Home Treatment Unit District. Southold/Greenport__The Greenport Municipal System, which pre- sently serves Greenport and parts of Southold, should continue to rely on local groundwater sources. However, major improve- meats to the system are required. An agricultural well on 1-9 (16) County Rt. 48 (on the Donohue Farm) should be upgraded (450-gpm total capacity) and used for public water supply. A 2.2-mgd reverse osmosis treatment plant should be constructed in stages to treat the water from the Donohue Well and existing plants no. 6 and 7 used for removal of nitrates, pesticides and herbicides. After implementing the improvements, the Greenport system should actively attempt to further expand into other areas adjacent to the existing system. Such expansion should not be permitted, however, until the recommended modifications have been com- pl eted. The activities of any town Water Districts should not impact the existing customers of the Greenport system who are located in the Town; their charges should only reflect the costs of operat- ing the present Greenport system after it is upgraded. In the remainder of the Greenport/Southold area, including Great Hog Neck and East Marion, it is not economically feasible to provide public water supply systems. These areas should con- tinue to be served by individual home wells, with treatment as required, provided through a Home Treatment Unit District. Orient--The Orient area, with its relatively low density of development, cannot economically support public water supply. Existing development should continue to be served by individual home wells with treatment as required. The available fresh water supply is limited and future development should be tightly controlled and result in water requirements consistent with the permissive sustained yield of the aquifer in Zone S. It is further recommended that only variances resulting in less water usage be approved. If future development is more water-use intensive, the permissive sustained yield in the area will be exceeded and other more costly solutions will be needed. Neighborhood Systems--Public water systems for existing isolated neighborhoods in areas of groundwater contamination are gener- ally not economically feasible. Therefore, it is recommended to continue to serve these areas by individual home wells, with re- quired treatment provided through a Home Treatment Unit Dist- rict. Regional Pipeline System--The development of a major supply of uncontaminated groundwater in eastern Riverhead and piping it via a major transmission main to the eastern portions of the study area was a major alternative considered in the study. It is not recommended for the following reasons: i -10 (al (b) The pipeline would encourage 1 evel s of development which appear to be inconsistent with the current life style of the people and the general character of the area. The construction of such a pipeline would require the early commitment of major financial resources and resolution of numerous institutional issues. Both types of proPlems would require a great deal of time for resolution; the water supply probl ems of the North Fork cannot tolerate significant delays. (c) The pipeline alternative is economically competitive with treating local sources of groundwater in MattitucK, Cutch- ogue, Greenport and Southold only if an uncontaminated supply can be found in the Mago--6~IYy aquifer, below the clay layer and above the saltwater interface in eastern River- head. Preliminary data indicates such a supply exists, but its extent and yield needs to be verified with pump test information. To move further west in Riverhead into the Peconic Valley, where clean groundwater is known to exist in sufficient quantity, is not economically competitive with treating local sources of supply. (17) The cost estimates presented in the report for home treatment units should only be incurred by those homes requiring home treatment units. If a home's well tapped a clean supply, that home would not pay for any treatment costs. However, in the case of community-type water systems, all homes would have to pay for the water service, regardless of--'-the quality or safety of the local groundwater. Preventive Measures (18) This plan has identified numerous technical and financial prob- lems associated with providing water supply to areas of the North Fork where groundwater is contaminated. Preventive measures must be undertaken in parallel with recommendations 2 through 16 in order to eliminate or minimize additional con- tamination. The following preventive measures are recommended: (al Expand the SCDHS observation well network and home well sampling program. (b) Support the Cooperative Extension Service, Cornell Univer- sity and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) research and education programs directed to the homeowner and farmer relative to usage, dosages and timing of application of herbicides, pesticides and fertilizers. 1-11 (d) (e) (g) (h) Support the testing of agricultural chemicals by State or federal agencies in the local environment as a precondition to use by the farm community. Prohibit or control the sale or use of products and cheni- cals which threaten the groundwater resources. Control industrial, commercial and residential activities which impact negatively on groundwater quality. Incorporate detail ed water quantity and quality considera- tions into rezoning and variance decisions because of the critical water supply probl ems which exist in most of the study area. If rezoning and variance decisions result in more intensive water usage than is currently anticipated, costly water supply treatment systems (desalinization, for example) may be required. Encourage water conservation through public information programs and require water-saving fixtures in new home con- struction. Continue public information and education programs to enphasize the fragile nature of the area's water supply and to foster cooperation in the solutions to those problens. 1-12 T O-Wi : [SOU Southold, N.Y. 11971 (516) 765-1938 Appendix B SOUTHOLD TOWN WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PROGRAM GOALS Groundwater Resource The protection of the existing and future groundwater supply through a combination of environmentally sensitive land use policies and practices. The provision of groundwater quality that meets, and where feasible, exceeds the Federal, State and County drinking water standards. The provision of sufficient quantity of high quality groundwater to the highest projected population (year-round plus summer residents or visitors) without resorting to the importation of water from outside the borders of the Township of Southold. Surface Water Resource 4. The protection of the quality of the Town's fresh surface water resources such as the wetlands, ponds, and lakes. OBJECTIVES Groundwater Resource 1. To ensure that a sufficient quantity of potable watar is available to every resident of the Town at a reasonable cost. 2. To ensure that neither existing nor future development causes the pollution or contamination of the groundwater resource. 3. To ensure that new development does not diminish or deplete the the quantity of the groundwater to an extent greater than the recharge capability of the water budget within which the development is located. -2- SOUTHOLD TOWN - WATER RESOURCES ~NAGEMENT PROGR~ 4. To ensure that the overall population density and concentration of commerce and industry, as provided for in the Comprehensive Master Plan and the Zoning Map, do not exceed the capacity of the groundwater resource within the respective water budget area. Surface Waters 5. To ensure that neither the existing nor future development causes the pollution or contamination of the surface water resources. 6. To minimize and where possible eliminate the causes of ground and surface water pollution through changes in land use practices and disposal of waste products. CRITERIA Designated recharge areas which contribute to the deep water recharge of the groundwater shall be protected from any land uses or land use practices that result in or cause point or non-point sources of groundwater contamination. 2. Overall population density and concentration of industry and commerce within the Township's borders shall not exceed the carrying capacity of the groundwater resource with the respective water budget areas that lie completely within the Township boundaries. Population density and concentrations of industry and commerce' within the water budget area that is shared with the Township of Riverhead shall not create such a demand upon that budget area as to create inter-governmental tensions between the two townships. (The term "Carrying capacity" shall be defined in the STWRMP document. The term "Water budget area" shall be defined by the North Fork Water Supply Study by ERM). 3. Land uses or practices that are known point or non-point sources of pollutants shall be either prohibited or subject to mitigative measures that effectively prevent groundwater pollution. 4. Land uses and practices which must be allowed in order to provide for a vital local economy, but which are also known to be potential sources of point or non-point source pollutants shall be grouped together geographically in concentrations sufficient to support Surface Water Resources. Land uses or practices that are known point or non-point sources of pollutants shall be either prohibited or subject to mitigative measures that will effectively prevent surface fresh water pollution or destruction. -3- SOUTHOLD TOWN - WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS General Recommendations: 1. Take preventive measures to minimize or eliminate additional groundwater contamination. 2. In order to provide a safe, dependable water supply to Town residents, a combination of individual home treatment units plus public water systems should be implemented. 3. The Town of Southold should assume responsibility for implementing and managing a water management program. 4. In order to operate a water management program, the Town can hire its own staff, contract with the Village of Greenport or another entity with expertise, or a combination of both. 5. In order to insure proper administration of home treatment units. Home Treatment Unit Program should be established as part of the Water Management Program. 6. In areas of existing development where groundwater is contaminated, public water systems should be provided, if economically feasible. If not feasible, Town services similar to those provided by the Home Treatment Unit Program should be provided. 7. When new subdivision are proposed in areas of groundwater contamination or potential contamination, connection to existing public water supplies of adequate capacity are required. If such connections are not available, the new public systems are to be paid for by the developer and deeded either to a Town Water District or other public entity. 8. If an existing home is sold in an area of suspected groundwater contamination, the seller must arrange to sample and test the home well and the results should be attached to the deed. If the water quality does not meet standards, the current home owner or new owner should be required to make provision to provide treatment through the Water Management Program to provide a safe water supply prior to the sale of the home. Appendix C Outline for Special Ground-water Protection Area Study I. Identification of the Special Ground water Protection Areas (SGPAS) o Definition of SGPA ~ Relationship of SGPA and Deep Recharge Area o Study Area Boundaries o Jurisdictions Within the SGPAS (Town, Village, C.E.A.'s, etc.) II. Description of the SGPAS o Land Use o Land Ownership - Public vs. Private o Zoning o Land Subject to Future Development - Subdivisions that have been filed. o Population - Existing and Future o Ground Water -Hydrogeology -Ground water Elevations (Glacial and the Potentimetric Surface of the Magothy) -Ground-water Pumpage -Ground-water Quantity -Ground-water Quality (Public Monitoring and Private Well Analysis) -Wellhead Protection Area Identification -Sources of Ground-water Contamination -Impacted Areas o Surface Water Quality -Watershed Analysis -Soils - Description and Analysis -Slopes - Description and Analysis -Sources of Surface Water Contamination o Terrestrial Environment Characteristics -Wetlands -Vegetation -Wildlife -Significant Flora and Fauna o Existing Water Supply Districts, Existing Sewer Districts and Sewage Treatment Plants o Historic and Archaeologic Resources III. Consideration of Existing Plans Likely to Affect the SGPAS IV. Ground-water Management Problems and Concern, by SGPA o Existing Point Source Contamination o Existing and Anticipated Nonpoint Source Contamination o Problem Analysis o Protection and Mitigation Priorities V. Existing Controls and Ground-water Management o Inventory and Assessment, including Watershed Management Rules VI. Identification of Ground-water Protection and Mitigation Opportunities and Appropriate Implementing Agencies VII. Evaluation of Ground-water Protection and Mitigation Opportunities and Proposed Actions o Legal Requirements and/or Constraints o Institutional Needs o Manpower Requirements o Estimated Capital or Operational Costs o Political Feasibility o Potential Trade-offs VIII. Development of a Draft Ground-water Management Plan for Each SGPA IX. Seek Coments on the Plan Through Consultation With o SGPA Advisory Coancil o Local, State and Federal officials o The Public X. Publish a Revised or Final Plan for Submission to NYSDEC Appendix D Special Ground-Water Protection Area Advisory Council Mailing List - Voting Members Ted Burger Nassau County Health Dept. 250 Old Country Road Mineola, NY. 11501 (535-3642) James Mulligan Nassau County Dept. of Public Works Water Supply Unit 170 Cantiague Rock Road Hicksville, NY 11801 Philip Barbato N.Y.S. Dept. of Environmental Conservation Building #40 SUNY Stony Brook, NY 11794 (751-7725) Michael Burke N.Y.S. Dept. of Health Corning Tower Gov. Rockefeller Empire State Plaza Albany, NY 12237 (518-474-5577) Vince Vario Nassau County Planning Commission 222 Willis Avenue Mineola, NY 11501 (535-5846) George Proios N.Y.S. Comm. on Water Resource Needs of L.I. N.Y.S. Office Building Veterans Memorial Highway Hauppauge, NY 11788 (360-6206) Aldo Andreoli S.C. Dept. of Health Serv. 225 Rabro Drive East Hauppauge, NY 11788 (348-2782) Joseph Baier S.C. Dept. of Health Serv. 225 Rabro Drive East Hauppauge, NY 11788 (348-2898) Nancy Nagle Kelley Group for America's South Fork P.O. Box 569 Bridgehampton, NY 11932 (537-1400) Maryellen McNicholas N.Y.S. Comm. on Water Resource Needs of L.I. N.Y.S. Office Building Veterans Memorial Hwy. Hauppauge, NY 11788 (Maryellen - 360-6206) David Stern - 11 Middle Neck Rd. Suite 213-Great Neck 11021 - 829-3368 Stuart Buckner/Elsa Brunn Town of Islip - Dept. of Environmental Control 577 Main Street Islip, NY 11751 (224-5648) Kenneth Feustel, Waterways Management Supervisor Town of Baby - Dept. of Env. Control-281 Phelps Lane North Babylon, NY 11703 (422-7640) Voting Members -2- Andrew Walker, Director Nature Conservancy L.I. Chapter Box 72, Lawrence Hill Rd. Cold Spring Harbor, NY 11724 (367-3225) Carole Swick Town of Brookhaven Dept. of Planning, Environ- ment & Development 3233 Route 112 Medford, NY 11763 (451-6203) Richard Hanley Community Development Town of Ruverhead 200 Howell Avenue Riverhead, NY 11901 (727-3200, ext. 34) Thomas Thorsen Town of Southampton Planning Dept. Planning Director Southampton Town Hall 116 Hampton Road Southampton, NY 11968 (283-6000) Margo Myles Town of Huntington Environmental Review Commission 100 Main Street - Dept. of Plan. Huntington, NY 11743-6690 (351-3186) Larry Penny Town of East Hampton Div. of Natural Resources 159 Pantigo Road East Hampton, NY 11937 (267-8462) Russell Barnett/A~y Knutson Town of Smithtown Dept. of Environmental Protection 124 W. Main Street Smithtown, NY 11787 (360-7514) Kenneth Bergin Town of North Hempstead Dept. of Planning 220 Plandome Rd.-Town Hall Manhasset, NY 11030 (627-0590, ext. 380) Joan Kesner Town of Oyster Bay 150 Miller Place Syosset, NY 11791 (921-7347) Comm. of Planning Town of N. Hempstead - Planning 220 Plandome Road Town Hall Manhasset, NY 11030 (627-0590 ext. 382) Special Ground-Water Protection Are~ Advisory Council Mailing List - Non-Voting Members Don Bingham, Sub District Chief United States Geological Survey 5 Aerial Way Syosset, NY 11791 (938-8830) Tom Doheny Town of Hempstead Dept. of Conservation & Waterways 1 Parkside Drive Pt. Lookout, NY 11569 (431-9200) John Malleck USEPA Office of Groundwater Management Rm. 805 26 Federal Plaza New York, NY 10278 (212) (264-5635) Jack Follis Nassau County Planning Commission 222 Willis Avenue Mineola, NY 11501 (535-5848) Sarah Meyland Suffolk County Water Authority Sunrise Highway Corner Pond Road Oakdale, NY 11769 (589-5200) Mitchell Pally Long Island Association 80 Hauppauge Road Commack, NY 11725 (499-4400) Valerie Scopaz Town Planner-Planning Bd. Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 (765-1938) Jeffrey Fullmer Long Island Citizen's Campaign for the Environ. 10 Lawrence Ave. Suite 4 Smithtown, NY 11787 (360-0480) Edward Kaplan Brookhaven National Lab Bldg. 830 Upton, NY 11973 (282-2007) Darrel Kost NYS Dept. of Transportation NYS Office Bldg. Veterans Memorial Highway Hauppauge, NY 11788 (360-6677) Thomas A. Reamon, P.E. Assoc. Engg. of Public Water Supply Protect. State of New York Dept. of Health Empire State Plaza Corning Tower - Room 478 Albany, NY 12237 (518) 473-4641 Robert Villa, Chief Eng. S.C. Dept of Health Svcs. Rabro Drive Hauppauge, NY 11787 (348-2703) Mailing List - Non-Voting Members William j. Sanok Agricultural Program Leader Cornell Cooperative Extension 246 Griffing Avenue Riverhead, New York 11901 727-7850