Annual Report 2013

Connecticut • Maine • Massachusetts • New Hampshire • New York • Rhode Island • Vermont

New England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission

Embracing an Evolving

Suite of Challenges

Embracing challenges is something the New England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission has been doing for a very long time. Established by an Act of Congress in 1947,

NEIWPCC is a not-for-profit interstate organization that since our infancy has employed a variety of strategies to meet the water-related needs of our member states—Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island, and Vermont. For decades, we have coordinated forums and events that encourage cooperation among the states, developed resources that foster progress on water and wastewater issues, represented the region in matters of federal policy, trained environmental professionals, initiated and overseen scientific research, educated the public, and provided overall leadership in water management and protection.

We still do all those things. But there can be no question that, as our 2011-2013 Chair Pete LaFlamme articulates on the next page, our region has entered a new era of water pollution control. It is an era defined by new challenges such as climate change as well as familiar challenges that have evolved to present new demands, such as the need to prepare wastewater operators to replace retiring plant managers. At NEIWPCC, this new era provides new opportunities to serve and assist our member states. It is the goal of this annual report to capture how we are doing so.

The report covers NEIWPCC’s accomplishments during fiscal year 2013, which began on October 1, 2012, and ended on September 30, 2013. Some activities that took place in fiscal 2014 are included to complete descriptions of work performed in fiscal 2013.

Embracing an Evolving Suite of Challenges

Contents

From the Chair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

Officers/Commissioners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2

Leadership by Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

Challenges of Our Times . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

Productive Relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29

Direct Assistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36

Quality Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40

Financial Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .41

Tim

New

com

b

1Annual Report 2013

March 2014

Across our region, throughout our states,

and within the offices of the New England

Interstate Water Pollution Control

Commission, we share the common goal of universally

clean and safe waters, characterized by healthy aquatic

ecosystems and the full support of uses. Over the

years, however, the principal challenges faced in

accomplishing this goal have evolved dramatically.

As a result, our planning and strategies are likewise

evolving. The focus of water resources management is undergoing a paradigm shift,

and at NEIWPCC and within its member states, we are embracing the change.

That this shift is occurring at all is a testament to our success. The federal Clean

Water Act was conceived and implemented in an era that was necessarily focused

on controlling ‘traditional pollutants’ from point sources. Strategies targeted visible,

tangible, and significant sources, such as municipal sewage and direct industrial

discharges. The result: substantial reductions in the point source pollution that had so

degraded our region’s lakes, rivers, wetlands, coastal waters, and groundwater.

While these traditional point sources will continue to be environmental stressors

that require ongoing control, a myriad of other potential threats have emerged

in recent years that demand our attention and an effective response. Urban,

agricultural, and other forms of contaminated stormwater runoff; the introduction of

invasive aquatic species; bioaccumulation of toxics; depletion of aquifers; pollutants

of emerging concern such as those found in pharmaceuticals and personal care

products; the effects of climate change—these threats and many more have required

and will continue to require the implementation of new initiatives. And it all must be

done in an environment of ever-tightening constraints on staffing and resources at all

levels of government.

Adapting to these changing needs requires an ongoing evolution of our practices

as we continually strive to maximize effectiveness in implementation through

carefully prioritizing our efforts across the region. As this annual report fully

demonstrates, NEIWPCC contributed significantly to progress in a great many

areas over the past year. Given the breadth of the suite of new challenges, it is

obvious that the Commission’s work—guided by its member states and NEIWPCC

Commissioners—is crucial to our collective success. There is both a great need and a

great opportunity for regional cooperation and collaboration as we push forward into

these new frontiers of water pollution control.

We’ve certainly come a long way together, yet we still have a long way to go. As

we in the states take these next steps, we do so in the same way as we have for many

decades—with NEIWPCC by our side. A very welcome constant amid the change.

Pete LaFlamme

NEIWPCC Chair 2011-2013

Director, Watershed Management Division

Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation

From the Chair

2

NEIWPCC 2013

NEIWPCC COMMISSIONERS*

Connecticut Daniel Esty, Commissioner,

Department of Energy and Environmental Protection Represented by Yvonne Bolton, Chief, Bureau of Materials Management and Compliance Assurance; and Denise Ruzicka, Director, Water Planning and Standards Division

Jewel Mullen, Commissioner, Department of Public Health Represented by Ellen Blaschinski, Branch Chief, Regulatory Services

Arnie Bevins, VernonAstrid Hanzalek, SuffieldMark Zessin, Glastonbury Maine Patricia Aho, Commissioner,

Department of Environmental Protection Represented by Michael Kuhns, Director,

Bureau of Land and Water QualityMary Mayhew, Commissioner,

Department of Health and Human Services Represented by Nancy Beardsley, Director,

Drinking Water Program James Parker, VeazieDavid Van Slyke, Yarmouth

Massachusetts Kenneth Kimmell, Commissioner,

Department of Environmental Protection Represented by Bethany Card, Assistant Commissioner,

Bureau of Resource ProtectionCheryl Bartlett, Commissioner,

Department of Public Health Represented by Michael Celona,

Bureau of Environmental HealthPaul Hogan, HoldenJohn Sullivan, DorchesterF. Adam Yanulis, Cambridge

New HampshireThomas Burack, Commissioner,

Department of Environmental Services Represented by Harry Stewart, Director, Water DivisionThomas Ballestero, MadburyFred McNeill, ManchesterNelson Thibault, NottinghamRobert Varney, Bedford

*As of September 30, 2013. An up-to-date list of NEIWPCC’s Commissioners is available at www.neiwpcc.org/commissioners.asp. For details on Commissioners whose service ended in fiscal 2013 and those we welcomed to the team, see page 5.

NEIWPCC OFFICERS* Chair: Pete LaFlamme, Vermont

Vice-Chair: Yvonne Bolton, Connecticut Treasurer: Richard Kotelly, Massachusetts

New YorkJoseph Martens, Commissioner,

Department of Environmental Conservation Represented by Mark Klotz, Director, Division of WaterNirav Shah, Commissioner, Department of Health Represented by Roger Sokol, Director,

Bureau of Water Supply ProtectionAlbert Bromberg, SchenectadyLeo Hetling, Delmar

Rhode Island Janet Coit, Director,

Department of Environmental Management Represented by Alicia Good, Assistant Director,

Office of Water ResourcesMichael Fine, Director, Department of Health Represented by June Swallow, Chief,

Office of Drinking Water QualityDonald Pryor, Providence

Vermont David Mears, Commissioner,

Department of Environmental Conservation Represented by Pete LaFlamme, Director,

Watershed Management DivisionHarry Chen, Commissioner, Department of HealthJames Ehlers, ColchesterEugene Forbes, BurlingtonDennis Lutz, Essex Junction

3Annual Report 2013

The New England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission in fiscal year 2013 was many things—an organization focused on pressing challenges, a partner with our states in sustaining

progress on multiple fronts, a collaborator with organizations pressing for positive and lasting change. But at our core, we were what we have always been—a commission. We aren’t a product, an address, a brand. We are, in essence, the men and women on the opposite page. It’s been that way since NEIWPCC’s founding and it will remain that way. Because it works.

The Act of Congress that established NEIWPCC in 1947 set the foundation. Each member state was to be represented by five Commissioners, with the states given some discretion with their choices. But the writers of the compact made it clear that state officials representing environmental and health departments should be included, and that has almost invariably been the case. For decades, virtually all states have been represented by the heads of their environmental and health agencies, supplemented by three highly experienced individuals from outside state government. It’s a structure that makes NEIWPCC a truly regional body made up of leaders of unquestionable integrity and influence. And it’s all due to the wisdom of those who conceived of NEIWPCC nearly 70 years ago. To put it simply, they got it right.

Constructive Communication

The 1947 compact requires the Commission to meet at least twice during a year, but we have long routinely exceeded that minimum. In fiscal 2013, NEIWPCC’s full slate of Commissioners met over two days on

three occasions—January 10-11, 2013, in Portland, Maine; May 16-17, 2013, in Westminster, Massachusetts; and September 26-27, 2013, in Killington, Vermont. As has been the case for many years, each gathering began with a morning meeting of NEIWPCC’s Executive Committee, which also met separately on December 6, 2012, and March 14, 2013, at NEIWPCC headquarters in Lowell, Massachusetts. Our Executive Committee brings together a select group of our Commissioners—the leaders of our states’ environmental agencies, who typically send a representative to attend on their behalf. It’s a prudent move; the representatives tend to hold high-level state jobs focused on water matters, making them well-versed in the issues on our table.

In fact, the man presiding over the meetings in fiscal 2013 was one of those representatives—Pete LaFlamme, director of the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation’s Watershed Management Division. LaFlamme represents David Mears, Vermont DEC’s commissioner, and fiscal 2013 marked his third year as our chair. Typically a chair serves for two years before the baton is passed to a representative from the next state

on our list (ascension to chair is done in a predetermined order so each state has equal opportunity). LaFlamme’s tenure, however, began a year early as he filled out the term of our previous chair. For NEIWPCC, the additional year yielded a direct benefit: more meetings guided by LaFlamme’s steady hand. Given the many complicated issues on the meeting agendas, that steady hand has served everyone well.

Early in the fiscal year, the meetings provided the ideal vehicle for pivotal discussions of how the states were coping with water-related challenges related to Hurricane Sandy, which in late October 2012 triggered a seawater surge that devastated our states’ coastlines. The Commissioners provided crucial guidance as NEIWPCC staff developed a workshop for our states and EPA to discuss lessons learned on storm response (see page 12). And as always in recent years, budget issues were at the forefront—perhaps more so than ever—as the states shared their experiences in

struggling with the automatic federal spending cuts known as sequestration. Such instability in financial support is exactly what the states don’t need, given the high costs associated with ensuring clean and safe water.

Many meetings also featured guest speakers. Of particular significance: Tom Uva of the Narragansett Bay Commission, who spoke at our May meeting about The Water Resources Utility of the Future: A Blueprint for Action, a document developed by the National Association of Clean Water Agencies, Water Environment Research Foundation, and Water Environment Federation. A member of the project’s task force, Uva described the urgent need for wastewater treatment facilities to move beyond what they have always done so successfully—collecting wastewater, moving it quickly downstream, treating it to acceptable standards, and disposing of waste

NEIWPCC Chair Pete LaFlamme oversees the discussion at our March 2013 Executive Committee meeting.

Leadership By Design

4

without harming the environment—to a future of managing resources to generate value for the utility and its customers, improving environmental quality at the least cost to the community, and contributing to the local economy. The talk only underscored that we are on the right path. Many of the prescribed action steps in the blueprint—biosolids reuse, energy efficiency and recovery, and green infrastructure, to name a few—have been a focus at NEIWPCC and within our states for a very long time.

The meetings gave the Commissioners the ideal opportunity to provide their perspectives on issues and to present their ideas on how NEIWPCC could assist the states in addressing challenges. After each meeting, a to-do list is generated for our

NEIWPCC Deputy Director Susan Sullivan has our Commissioners’ attention as she speaks during the September 2013 meeting in Killington, Vermont.

During the May 2013 Commission meeting, Ken Moraff, director of EPA Region 1’s Office of Ecosystem Protection, discusses the agency’s Hurricane Summit and Emergency Management Assistance Compact Workshop in Boston, which NEIWPCC staff attended. Top EPA officials participate in meetings with our Commissioners, providing our member states with an invaluable opportunity to communicate directly with the agency on its plans and perspectives.

staff, replete with tasks large and small that have been identified in the course of the meeting’s discussions. While our Commissioners are not entirely responsible for driving NEIWPCC’s agenda—ideas for projects often originate with NEIWPCC staff or the members of the many workgroups we coordinate—the Commissioners are an indispensable source of guidance and influence. In an era of evolving challenges, our region and our states all benefit from a template for leadership that brings together some of the finest minds working on water issues. It’s one tradition that will never change.

Outside Influences

While state agencies were certainly well represented on NEIWPCC’s list of Commissioners in 2013, the list also included, as it does every year, many Commissioners from outside state government. We call these women

and men our non-agency Commissioners, and their experience, which is often in the private sector, brings important perspectives to our table. Through the vigorous participation of practicing professionals actively engaged in their fields, we are far

NE

WE

A

NEIWPCC Commissioner John Sullivan (left), chief engineer at the Boston Water and Sewer Commission, with U.S. Representative Michael Capuano (D-Mass.) and New England Water Environment Association Executive Director Elizabeth Cutone at NEWEA’s 2013 Congressional Breakfast and Briefing on Clean Water Issues in Washington (more on NEIWPCC’s role with this event on page 7).

5Annual Report 2013

more effective in identifying, analyzing, and meeting our states’ water-related needs. They have the hands-on knowledge and in-depth understanding of specific areas that make them superb resources for staff seeking input and feedback on complex projects, such as technical reports and guidance documents.

As the photographs in this section attest, NEIWPCC’s non-agency Commissioners are connected individuals adept at forging strong working relationships. During the Commission meetings in 2013, they delivered some of the more memorable and important presentations. At the September meeting, for example, Massachusetts’s Paul Hogan (Woodard and Curran) and New Hampshire’s Fred McNeil (City of Manchester) joined NEIWPCC Director of Water Quality Programs Susy King to highlight key points in the dispute over EPA limits on aluminum levels in wastewater treatment plant effluent. As described on page 14, those limits aren’t sitting well with cities whose plants discharge to waters that naturally contain aluminum levels higher than the imposed restrictions.

Many of our non-agency Commissioners have been with us a long time—Connecticut’s Astrid Hanzalek, for example, since 1993—but regardless of their length of service, we salute them all for their contributions. Their support and guidance is vital to NEIWPCC’s efforts to help our member states implement effective water resource protection and management programs.

Two NEIWPCC Commissioners, James Ehlers (left) and Nelson Thibault, confer during the New England Water Environment Association’s 2013 Spring Meeting in Brewster, Massa-chusetts. Ehlers, who represents Vermont on the Commission, is CEO of Lake Champlain International, a nonprofit organization that aims to restore and revitalize Lake Champlain and its communities. Thibault, one of our New Hampshire Commissioners, is chief officer for all municipal clients at Hoyle, Tanner & Associates, a consulting engineering company.

NE

WE

A

Roster Moves

Since the governors of NEIWPCC’s member states appoint our Commission-ers, some turnover is inevitable as administrations change. Veteran Commis-sioners also periodically relinquish their posts as they retire. In fiscal 2013,

we bid farewell to three longtime non-agency Commissioners—Terry Campbell (Maine), William Taylor (Maine), and Salvatore Pagano (New York). Among our state agency Commissioners, departing were John Auerbach (Massachusetts) and his representative, Beverly Anderson, as well as Craig Jackson, representative of Nirav Shah (New York). Thank you all for your many contributions.

We said welcome aboard to two new non-agency Commissioners representing Maine. James Parker spent four decades as an environmental engineer and founded Civil Engineering Services, an environmental consulting company. He served in the Maine House of Representatives from 2011 to 2012. David Van Slyke is an environmental lawyer at Preti Flaherty, one of Maine’s largest law firms. He chairs Preti Flaherty’s Environmental Practice Group and co-chairs the Climate Strategy Group. We also welcomed Michael Celona as the new representative of Cheryl Bartlett (Massachusetts).

On a related note, the year saw the debut of our new way of spotlighting our Commissioners on NEIWPCC’s website. The traditional list, with only names and titles, has been replaced by a series of pages, organized by state, containing photos and short bios. Seen below is a portion of the Massachusetts page. Get the details on every NEIWPCC Commissioner from every state at www.neiwpcc.org/commissioners.asp.

6

NEIWPCC Commissioner and City of Manchester (N.H.) Environmental Protection Division Chief Engineer Fred McNeill welcomes a group touring Manchester’s incinerator upgrades as part of the North East Biosolids and Residuals Conference in Concord, New Hampshire.

Benefitting from Experience

Within Article IV of our founding compact is this: “[NEIWPCC] may appoint and employ a secretary… and may employ such stenographic and clerical employees as shall be necessary…” The thought was the Commission

would need a staff to do its daily work. True indeed, and as the scope and complexity of the needs in our member states have grown, so too have the size of NEIWPCC’s staff and the breadth of the work accomplished. An appointed leader, however, still oversees it all—though the title is no longer secretary but rather executive director. And in November of 2013, Ronald Poltak marked his thirtieth year in the post.

As executive director, Ron’s tenure has been

marked by an unwavering commitment to understanding the needs of NEIWPCC’s member states, acting upon those needs through staff programs and projects, and representing the needs at all levels, including in Washington. That commitment was clearly on display in fiscal 2013 as Ron engaged in a wide range of work, some of it designed to help our states get the help they need with one particularly pressing challenge—aging infrastructure. In its 2013 Report Card for America’s Infrastructure, the American Society of Civil Engineers said capital investment needs for the nation’s wastewater and stormwater systems are estimated to total $298 billion over the next 20 years. The need in New York State alone is $56.7 billion, indicative of the fact that this problem is acute in the Northeast, where our historic cities rely on water-related infrastructure that in some cases is more than a century old.

On April 16, 2013, Ron was among a select group invited to the White House for the National Water Infrastructure Summit, which brought together leaders in local and state government and the private sector to share perspectives on the economic need for resilient water infrastructure systems. Ron and the other participants discussed alternative financing mechanisms, including new means to entice the private sector to invest in public sector projects. The summit fostered a productive discussion of multiple options, and in the months that followed, the dialogue only increased. Working with the Association of Clean Water Administrators, Ron took a leadership role in raising awareness of the pros and cons of creating a

NEIWPCC Executive Director Ron Poltak speaks on the need to address climate change and build resilience to extreme weather. Ron accepted invitations to speak on the issue from numerous institutions, including the University of New Hampshire and University of Southern Maine.

Before the start of the New England Water Environment Association’s 2013 Congressional Breakfast and Briefing on Clean Water Issues in Washington, Ron speaks with Curt Spalding (left), administrator for EPA Region 1 (New England), and NEIWPCC Commissioner Harry Stewart, director of the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services’ Water Division.

NE

WE

A

NE

WE

A

7Annual Report 2013

Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Authority or WIFIA, which would provide a new way of making low-interest federal loans available for large water and wastewater infrastructure projects. At a meeting of NEIWPCC’s Executive Committee, Ron provided an update on the initiative, which, as this annual report went to press, remains an intriguing possibility. The Water Resources Development Act of 2013, which includes a well-funded WIFIA pilot program, has passed in both houses of Congress but is mired in a conference committee established to resolve discrepancies between the House and Senate versions of the bill.

This engagement in efforts that can and often do result in tangible benefits to our member states has always defined Ron’s activity. Some of the work may not reap immediate rewards; his participation, for example, in a June 2013 two-day summit in Vermont aimed at creating initiatives for greater public involvement in the stewardship of Lake Champlain helped set the groundwork for important work to come. With other work, however, the impact is readily apparent. At a meeting with senior officials at EPA Region 1 (New England), Ron and NEIWPCC Deputy Director Susan Sullivan shared a list of water priorities agreed upon during the year by the heads of the state environmental agencies in the region. The states’ priorities, which include addressing nutrient pollution, improving resilience to flooding, working together regionally to avoid duplication of efforts, and pursuing innovations in revenue generation and cost management, are priorities shared in many cases by EPA. But to increase the chances of success, it’s vital that each side

knows what the other is thinking.The value of making such connections has been emphasized at NEIWPCC since

the very beginning. Our staff play active, prominent roles in such organizations as the National Association of Clean Water Agencies, Water Environment Federation, Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials, National Onsite Wastewater Recycling Association, Environmental Council of the States, and many more. Deputy Director Sullivan, who joined NEIWPCC in 1989, has been particularly influential, serving over the years in multiple leadership roles, including her present service on the board of directors of the Interstate Council on Water Policy. In 2013, Susan concluded a successful three-year term as chair of the Government Affairs Committee of the New England Water Environment Association, during which she, among other things, coordinated an annual series of legislative breakfasts in the New England states that brought together state lawmakers and key members of the water and wastewater communities. Susan also played a pivotal role in putting together NEWEA’s Congressional Briefing on March 20, 2013, in Washington, which gathered high-ranking officials such as U.S. Representative Michael Capuano (D-Mass.) to discuss New England’s needs in the water arena.

Whether it’s through the many programs and projects described in this report, through meetings that open crucial lines of communication, or through working collaboratively with likeminded organizations, NEIWPCC is generating outcomes that contribute to progress on the path to cleaner water everywhere.

NEIWPCC Deputy Director Susan Sullivan delivers a presentation at the New England Water Environment Association’s 2013 Spring Meeting. Among those listening intently is NEIWPCC’s Tom Groves (center). Both have served in numerous leadership positions at NEWEA throughout their careers.

NE

WE

A

NE

WE

A

8

Division of Labor

Structurally, NEIWPCC’s staff is aligned to enable effective and efficient service to our states. The majority of our work falls within three main divisions: Water Quality Programs, Wastewater and Onsite Programs, and Water Resource

Protection Programs.Water Quality Programs, which is overseen by Susy King, includes work related

to water quality standards, nutrient criteria, total maximum daily loads (TMDLs), mercury, wetlands, monitoring, and harmful algal blooms. Also under the water quality umbrella: our hosting of the Interstate Environmental Commission District and Narragansett Bay Estuary Program and the work of our staff at the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management, Long Island Sound Study, New York-New Jersey Harbor and Estuary Program, and Peconic Estuary Program.

Wastewater and Onsite Programs, overseen by Tom Groves, includes our regional training program and Maine’s Joint Environmental Training Coordinating Committee as

well as work on Massachusetts waste- water and Title 5 training and certification, residuals, collection systems, permitting (NPDES), onsite wastewater systems, phar-maceuticals and personal care products, and underground storage tanks. The division also includes our staff at the New York De-partment of Environmental Conservation’s Division of Water and our independent environmental monitors in New York City.

Water Resource Protection Programs, overseen by Michael Jennings, includes our efforts related to climate change, turf fertilizer, nonpoint source pollution, stormwater, and groundwater and source water protection. Additional responsibil-ities include our relationships with the Lake Champlain Basin Program, Hudson River Estuary Program, and Hudson River National Estuarine Research Reserve. The division also includes our staff at the Maine Department of Health and Human Services’ Drinking Water Program and the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection’s Division of Watershed Management.

To share the expertise we have in-house, NEIWPCC’s Human Resources team initiated a series of staff-led and staff-oriented training sessions that covered everything from building and managing budgets to email etiquette. Here, NEIWPCC staff, including Bill Howland of the Lake Champlain Basin Program (foreground), listen to a January 2013 presentation on best practices for effective grant administration.

Susy King, Director of Water Quality Programs

Tom Groves, Director of Wastewater and Onsite Programs

Michael Jennings, Director of Water Resource Protection Programs

9Annual Report 2013

Service Statements

In February 2013, NEIWPCC and our sister interstate agencies—the Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management and Northeast Waste Management Officials’ Association—received a request from our

member states’ environmental commissioners to provide them with specific information about our structures, function, and work. The commissioners’ goal was straightforward: to look for ways to increase coordination, consider new opportunities for working together, and identify additional means of reaching our common goals. Each interstate agency was to prepare its own report, and we were more than happy to do so. Later in the year, Ron Poltak and Susan Sullivan delivered our report and a presentation to the commissioners, and the response was uniformly positive. The commissioners appreciated the focused opportunity to learn more about NEIWPCC and how much we achieve each year.

We also carried on our relatively new end-of-the-year tradition of distributing what we call our state summaries. For each of our member states, we produced a customized fact sheet in December 2012 that provided brief explanations of the regional and in-state work that we engaged in during the year. The summaries provide an effective and concise means of informing residents of a member state, and state officials in particular, of the benefits of Commission membership. Our latest series of summaries, developed in December 2013, is available on our website at www.neiwpcc.org/statesummaries.asp.

Recognition of Success

The work we do at NEIWPCC is never done with the intention of winning awards, but we cannot deny the satisfaction of periodically being recognized for a job well done. 2013 was an especially notable year in this regard.

At an awards ceremony in Boston held by EPA Region 1 (New England), NEIWPCC received a prestigious EPA Environmental Merit Award for our many years of work with multiple states on wastewater management training programs. Such training is critical to prepare operators to take on management positions at wastewater treatment facilities, which have been experiencing a surge in retirements at the manager level. The effort began in 2007, when NEIWPCC played a pivotal role in setting up and coordinating the first such program—the Rhode Island Operator Boot Camp. The success of the Rhode Island program led to NEIWPCC’s involvement with similar efforts in other states, including Connecticut, Massachusetts, and

NEIWPCC’s Leeann Hanson, coordinator of Maine’s Joint Environmental Training Coordinating Committee, and Tom Groves, NEIWPCC’s director of wastewater and onsite programs, pose with our EPA Environmental Merit Award. Joining them are Curt Spalding (left), administrator for EPA Region 1, and MassDEP Commissioner Ken Kimmell.

10

New Hampshire. In Maine, NEIWPCC’s training arm, JETCC, has for several years coordinated a highly successful management program that is open to wastewater and drinking water operators. See page 18 for more details on these efforts.

The Association of Clean Water Administrators presented Susy King, NEIWPCC’s director of water quality programs, with its Young Professionals Award, which honors ACWA members for notable contributions to the work of an ACWA committee, task force, or workgroup; and for demonstrated potential for future leadership in ACWA. King has participated for years in several ACWA groups, including the Legal Affairs Committee; Monitoring, Standards, and Assessment Committee; and the TMDLs and Watersheds Committee. She also represents ACWA on the Environmental Council of the States’ Quicksilver Caucus. ACWA also honored two individuals with strong NEIWPCC

NEIWPCC’s Susy King accepts the Association of Clean Water Administrators’ Young Professionals Award at ACWA’s annual meeting in Santa Fe, New Mexico.

NEIWPCC’s 2013 Annual Achievement Award recipients, Gabriela Munoz (left) and Kate Boicourt (right) of the New York-New Jersey Harbor & Estuary Program, celebrate the news with Deputy Director Susan Sullivan.

connections. Former NEIWPCC staffer Bethany Card, now an assistant commissioner at MassDEP and regular participant in our Executive Committee and Commission meetings, received the President’s Service Award, given to ACWA members for exceptional service to the association over the last fiscal year. New Hampshire DES’s Harry Stewart, a former NEIWPCC chair who’s long represented the commissioner of NHDES at our meetings, received the Environmental Statesman Award, ACWA’s highest honor. The award is presented to ACWA members who have demonstrated outstanding service to the association over many years.

Several years ago, NEIWPCC initiated an awards program of our own to honor exemplary service by our staff, and we were thrilled to present our 2013 Annual Achievement Award to our staff at the New York-New Jersey Harbor & Estuary Program, Kate Boicourt and Gabriela Munoz. The award was well-deserved recognition of the superb work they’ve done for years, from coordinating vital scientific projects to developing extraordinary products such as the program’s State of the Estuary report.

Fitting Tribute

In July 2013, we lost one of the greats of environmental protection in New England. Ira Leighton had worked for EPA for 41 years, the last

13 as EPA Region 1’s deputy regional administrator, overseeing environmental programs throughout the region. On tough challenges, Ira was a steadfast proponent of getting the states and all stakeholders to the table, an ardent believer in listening before deciding. As a tribute to this amazing man and his work, NEIWPCC joined with several other organizations to initiate the Ira Leighton “In Service to States” Environmental Merit Award.

The award will recognize an individual or organization that has made significant strides in facilitating state and federal partnerships through innovative sustainable solutions addressing critical environmental challenges in New England. Award recipients will have demonstrated outstanding accomplishments and contributions in improving the air, waste, or water environment in New England at the local, state, or regional level. They will be champions of sustainability and agents for positive change within New England.

Following Ira’s death, EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy said, “Ira was innovative, practical, and results-oriented, and his dedication and leadership were crucial… He improved the quality of life for millions of people across the country.” Now, we have a new way of honoring those who follow in Ira’s footsteps.

11Annual Report 2013

Challenges of Our Times

In NEIWPCC’s early years, the Commission played a major role in creating water quality standards and classifications for interstate waters in New England and New York State, which led naturally to an involvement

with issues surrounding wastewater treatment. That focus on wastewater continues to this day, but NEIWPCC is now about so much more.

As the pages that follow make evident, NEIWPCC works on many issues and in many ways—all of it driven by the needs in our member states. The challenges of our times are challenges that are continuously evolving, and the work must adapt to the changing demands. In fiscal 2013, we achieved much on many fronts, but rest assured—the push for progress will continue in earnest. There may well come a time to rest and revel in our success in dealing with water and wastewater issues. That time is not now.

Building Resilience

On the issue of climate change, the disturbing news keeps coming. Early in 2014, the Natural Resources Defense Council published results of research that looked at 75 scientific studies to compile a summary of predicted

water-related climate impacts for each of 12 cities, including Boston and New York. The report labels each potential impact as highly likely, likely, or possible, and the verdict for the cities is dire. In Boston, rising sea levels, more frequent and intense storm events, and increased flooding are predicted as highly likely, while increased annual precipitation is likely, and water supply challenges due to increased droughts are possible. Like so many reports before it, the NRDC study illustrated vividly how climate change has the potential to creep into every aspect of our daily lives, from commerce, to recreation, to public health.

The threats posed by climate change have spurred initiatives throughout NEIWPCC’s member states. At the Commission, we’ve also taken important steps:• NEIWPCC is developing an addendum to our most popular publication, TR-16

Guides for the Design of Wastewater Treatment Works, that will focus exclusively on strategies to improve storm resiliency. To write the supplement, NEIWPCC Environmental Engineer John Murphy is working with an advisory committee comprised of staff from our member states. In 2014, Murphy will visit wastewater treatment plants to gather insights from operators put to the test during storms. He’s also getting input from design engineers and academic researchers. The addendum will include potential design modifications to existing plants and will

describe pre-storm preparations, immediate post-storm steps, and actions to be taken well after a storm has passed to evaluate and improve preparation and response.

• NEIWPCC hosted a storm response workshop in the summer of 2013 that brought together top federal and state officials to discuss ways to mitigate the impact and more quickly recover from major storms (see story on next page). Storm response and climate change adaptation were also key topics of discussion at the annual Nonpoint Source Pollution Conference, which we coordinated with support from Vermont DEC (page 22).

• In a special report published in NEIWPCC’s print newsletter, Interstate Water Report, in April 2013, we reported in depth on how our member states were contending with an array of water challenges related to Hurricane Sandy and other episodes of extreme weather. To gather information, IWR editor Stephen Hochbrunn spent two days in New York with those caught in Sandy’s wrath, including managers of wastewater treatment plants besieged by the storm’s surge. The special report highlighted examples of preparedness initiatives springing up across the region.

• NEIWPCC staff communicated regularly with members of our Climate Change Workgroup, which consists of staff from our seven member states, EPA, the U.S. Geological Survey, NOAA, and academia. A meeting of the workgroup in our Lowell offices in February 2013 focused in part on EPA’s Draft Climate Change Adaptation Plan, and input from the workgroup members as well as from our Executive Committee proved instrumental as we developed a comment letter on the plan. Submitted to EPA in April 2013, the letter included a number of

Post-Sandy scenes such as this photo of a collapsed house on the beach in Charlestown, Rhode Island, visually captured the need to better plan for the extreme weather of the future.

Rho

de I

slan

d D

epar

tmen

t of

Tra

nspo

rtat

ion

12

A special report in the April 2013 issue of NEIWPCC’s Interstate Water Report featured stories that revealed strategies for coping with weather crises. Among those interviewed were New York City DEP’s Ravi Basant (left) and Sal Scapelito, who found themselves in the midst of chaos as the surge from Hurricane Sandy stormed into the city’s Rockaway Wastewater Treatment Plant. Damage included a cave-in of the concrete above the plant’s regulator (above), through which 36 million gallons of effluent flowed untreated into Jamaica Bay before the plant’s operations were restored.

suggestions, including a call for EPA to provide greater detail on “the sometimes complementary, oppositional, synergistic, and reiterative relationships between mitigation efforts and adaptation efforts.” The letter stated that “more effort to curb sea level rise (mitigation) will result in less need to armor vulnerable coastline areas (adaptation).” The comment letter drew significant attention and was highlighted in the publication Inside EPA.

• Key work related to climate change and extreme weather is also being done by our staff at programs with which we maintain close relationships. See page 30, for example, for details on a much-anticipated flood resilience report developed by NEIWPCC staff at the Lake Champlain Basin Program. For news about important scientific studies involving our staff at the Long Island Sound Study and Hudson River National Estuarine Research Reserve, see pages 32 and 34 respectively.

Lessons Learned

On June 25, 2013, top officials and staff from all seven of NEIWPCC’s member states and EPA gathered at NEIWPCC headquarters in Lowell to exchange insights on responding to major storms. What they had to

say proved that recent storms, for all the destruction they caused, also taught the states much about how to be better prepared the next time.

Each state delivered a presentation on a different aspect of storm response. In one presentation, Vermont DEC’s Mike Kline said that when Hurricane Irene hit in 2011, the state didn’t have the tools and regulations in place to deal effectively with river management during flood response and recovery. Now Vermont has the tools, due in part to passage of a state law that allows state regulators to implement new rules for stream alterations, stormwater discharges, and repairs to stormwater infrastructure during emergencies such as flooding.

Another speaker, Connecticut DPH’s Ellen Blaschinski, talked about small communities that had to issue boil-water advisories because their drinking water treatment systems were disconnected from the power grid for an extended period. “A big problem,” Blaschinski said, “was that if the systems had generators, they were designed to run for 3 to 4 days, not 9 to 11 days.” Blaschinski said Connecticut was looking into the possibility of using monies from the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund to help small systems acquire appropriate backup generator capacity.

After the workshop, the feelings of the participants may have been best summed up by Bethany Card, who represents MassDEP Commissioner Ken Kimmel at NEIWPCC Executive Committee and Commission meetings. “Because of the increased frequency and severity of storms, all the states are evaluating what we do well and what we need to do better in terms of protecting

public health and the environment,” Card said. “Sharing lessons learned with our state and federal counterparts was a great first step toward improving our storm response in the short term and coming up with adaptation strategies in the long term.”

MassDEP’s Bethany Card (left) at the NEIWPCC-hosted storm response workshop in June 2013.

13Annual Report 2013

Common Ground

From early spring through late fall, here in the Northeast we cherish green spaces in our neighborhoods. But over the last quarter-century it has become apparent that the way lawns are typically maintained isn’t compatible with downstream

water quality. Fertilizer runoff and leaching from lawns contributes to nutrient pollution that compromises the suitability of water bodies for recreation, fishing, swimming, aesthetic enjoyment, and drinking water supply. Residential lawns, along with commercially landscaped areas and low-traffic public areas (collectively defined as “urban turf”) make up a small but significant percentage of total land cover regionally–and how we manage urban turf has a substantial impact on the overall picture of landscape-generated water pollution.

In 2011, the New England state environmental agency commissioners asked NEIWPCC to develop a uniform set of regional urban turf fertilizer guidelines. It was thought that a regional approach would be helpful to both environmental managers working in watersheds crossing state boundaries and to fertilizer and turf industry companies operating in multiple states. The 2011 request called for the guidelines to be developed though a collaborative process, with input gathered from industry and non-industry stakeholders.

To get the process started, NEIWPCC established a project advisory group com-posed of state and federal environmental agency representatives. NEIWPCC worked

with the group to assemble draft guidelines that served as starting points for discussion. In 2012 and 2013, we convened four stakeholder meetings to refine the guidelines and seek consensus; the meetings attracted a diverse group, including turf fertilizer man-ufacturers, lawn care professionals, sports turf managers, turf industry trade groups and professional associations, researchers, university extension specialists, municipal and private groundskeepers, state and federal environmental agencies, and watershed groups. Input from the meetings informed NEIWPCC’s development of an interim final report that we released for comment in early October 2013. Based on the comments received, we made minor changes to the text, and in January 2014, we published our final report, NEIWPCC’s Regional Clean Water Guidelines for Fertilization of Urban Turf.

The report’s 33 guidelines illustrate that reducing nutrient pollution from fertilizer needn’t be at odds with lush green grass. On the contrary, many management practices that reduce runoff simultaneously improve the health of turf. At the suggestion of stakeholders, the guidelines are organized around the “5 R’s.” The first four—right formulation, right rate, right time, right place—are tenets espoused by turf fertilizer professionals and agronomists who advocate that if turf managers select the right products with the right nutrient composition, apply them at the correct rates according to soil conditions, and do it all at the right time and in the right place, there is a high likelihood that the fertilization practices will improve turf health with reduced potential for environmental impacts. The fifth R—right supporting practices—refers to the notion that fertilization is one practice under a broader umbrella of lawn care practices that can affect turf’s ability to absorb nutrients and prevent erosion losses.

The guidelines are designed to potentially alleviate the need for legislation in states that have not passed laws on residential turf fertilizer, to supplement laws in states that have passed legislation, and to serve as a basis for public education and outreach by any state or municipality. To download the complete report as well as a short-form list of the guidelines, visit the Northeast Voluntary Turf Fertilizer Initiative section of our website at www.neiwpcc.org/turffertilizer.asp.

The seats are filled at the March 26, 2013, stakeholder meeting in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, as NH DES’s Harry Stewart delivers opening remarks. NEIWPCC staff coordinated the meeting, which was one of four stakeholder meetings we convened to gather input used in the development of the turf fertilizer guidelines.

Standards and Limits

Under the Clean Water Act, EPA and the states play roles as co-regulators in establishing the water quality standards that are a cornerstone

of water resource protection in America. The standards process has three main parts: states must designate water bodies for specific uses, such as recreation, water supply, aquatic life habitat, or agriculture; describe the chemical, physical, and biological conditions necessary to meet the designated uses through specific water quality criteria; and establish an antidegradation policy to maintain and protect water quality. It’s EPA’s job to approve these proposed standards. At NEIWPCC,

Water quality standards serve as the foundation for

the water-quality based approach to

pollution control and are a fundamental

component of watershed

management.U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency

14

we look to help our states any way we can in their work to improve standards in ways that best protect their waters. Our Water Quality Standards Workgroup, comprised of our state and federal partners, provides a forum for identifying interstate water quality issues and developing solutions through regional communication.

The workgroup focused in 2013 on a range of topics, including downstream protection issues and water quality criteria to support recreational uses for waters. Of special interest was EPA’s proposed national rulemaking to clarify the water quality standards regulation, published in the Federal Register in the fall of 2013. EPA’s goal is to enhance the effectiveness of the standards process in restoring and maintaining the nation’s waters, but there’s room for improvement. NEIWPCC coordinated with our states to submit a comment letter on the rule in which we sought clarification on key points and expressed concern about the impact on states of some proposals, such as the development of new uses.

Another major subject of interest during the year: EPA’s national recommendations for aluminum criteria. In the Northeast, naturally high levels of aluminum in rivers and streams make it hard to meet the limits recommended nationally by EPA, and the science behind predicting aluminum’s toxicity is fiercely debated. That’s left some municipalities questioning the aluminum limits in wastewater treatment plant permits, especially when the high cost of compliance with the limits is considered. To assist with this difficult issue, NEIWPCC staff researched aluminum chemistry and toxicity, identified waters regionally and nationally where aluminum levels naturally exceed the criteria, and explored alternative criteria developed in other parts of the country.

Throughout the year, nutrient criteria—that is, limits on the amount of nitrogen and phosphorus a water body can tolerate and still meet its designated uses—continued to be a priority within the region. EPA is pushing states to take a numeric rather than a narrative approach to nutrient criteria, and we closely followed the progress of our states in this regard. But progress doesn’t come easily, as NEIWPCC’s Susy King made clear in a quote that appeared in an article on nutrient control in the Summer 2013 NEWEA Journal. “Developing numeric nutrient criteria is very complicated,” King said. “There is no one-size-fits-all approach. The effects of nutrients can vary widely from water body to water body. States are focusing not just on the concentrations of nutrients, but on their effects on algae growth, water clarity, and other indicators. They are looking at relationships between nutrient concentrations and other environmental responses—the process is very data intensive and complex.”

King added that the states are actively talking to each other to share approaches, challenges, and successes. One of the main vehicles for this communication is

NEIWPCC’s Nutrient Criteria Workgroup, which brings together staff from all our states. With the workgroup’s help, we hosted two regional webinars to allow states to share approaches to criteria development—and those approaches can differ markedly. Maine and Vermont, for example, are pursuing promising approaches that simultaneously incorporate nutrient concentrations and environmental response indicators, taking advantage of the value that each of these assessment tools offers. Connecticut, by contrast, has opted for unique models and equations to represent nutrient enrichment by examining relationships between nutrient loads and environmental responses. Amid such diversity and complexity, NEIWPCC’s ability to provide interstate forums for the exchange of ideas and information is proving to be especially valuable.

Ellen Weitzler, EPA Region 1’s water quality standards coordinator, makes a point during a meeting of NEIWPCC’s Water Quality Standards Workgroup.

TMDLs: Present and Future

In the water quality standards process, a state must place any water bodies that are not attaining standards for designated uses due to impairment by one or more pollutants on the state’s 303(d) list. For all waters on this list, a state is required to

develop a Total Maximum Daily Load, otherwise known as a TMDL, which specifies how much of a pollutant a water body can receive and still meet its water quality standards as well as how that pollutant limit is allocated to the various sources contributing to the waters. Developing and implementing TMDLs is and probably always will be a demanding task, but TMDLs have been successful in many cases in our region and across the country in restoring water quality. How to build on that experience and further enhance the TMDL program has been a major focus for a while—and especially in 2013.

EPA’s formal name for the effort is a Long-Term Vision for Assessment, Restoration, and Protection under the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) Program, but it’s typically referred to simply as the TMDL vision. During the year, the states and EPA finalized a multi-year national effort to develop the vision, which consists of six goals and associated implementation plans designed to maximize the water quality benefits of the TMDL program. Emily Bird, who manages NEIWPCC’s TMDL program, participated in the 2013 National Training Workshop on CWA 303(d) Listing and TMDLs, where the vision was presented and discussed in detail among members of state and EPA TMDL programs.

As a follow-up to the workshop, NEIWPCC held a meeting of our TMDL

15Annual Report 2013

Traci Iott of Connecticut’s Department of Energy and Environmental Protection explains the TMDL vision at the May 2013 meeting of NEIWPCC’s TMDL Workgroup.

Workgroup in May 2013 to help state staff further understand the vision—and we included plenty of experts to cover the topic. EPA’s Menchu Martinez called in from the agency’s Washington headquarters to provide an overview of the vision, which presents new ways for states to identify priorities for restoration and protection of water bodies. Connecticut DEEP’s Traci Iott, who has played a leading role in the vision effort, described how states are prioritizing while also developing strategic plans to address those priorities under the vision. EPA’s Ellen Weitzler and Rosella O’Connor gave regional perspectives on behalf of Regions 1 and 2 respectively. And NEIWPCC’s Bird presented examples of strategies states may choose from to support implementation of the vision in their state.

The value to the region of Bird’s expertise in TMDLs was evident in many ways during the year—and could clearly be seen in an article she wrote on the perils of ocean acidification for the October 2013 issue of NEIWPCC’s Interstate Water Report. Bird wrote that one possible management approach, as suggested by the Center for Biological Diversity, is to set a TMDL for carbon dioxide (CO2) air pollution. As the article explained, however, NEIWPCC’s member states have concerns about the TMDL approach since ocean acidification is a water impairment caused by air pollution from sources around the globe. Also, states currently lack the data and resources to develop a TMDL for CO2 air pollution. Thanks to Bird’s article, more people are aware of ocean acidification, its impacts on coastal ecosystems and communities, and the unique challenges it presents, including for those working in the TMDL world.

Sound Strategies

On the surface, Long Island Sound boasts 600 miles of coastline and provides reprieve from the summer heat and city bustle as millions of people take to this water body each year. Beneath the surface, the sound is the only

place where salt water from the Atlantic mixes with fresh water from the Thames, Housatonic, and Connecticut Rivers, creating a complex and vibrant ecosystem. Unfortunately, the state of the estuary isn’t what it used to be; excessive algal growth triggered by nutrients from wastewater treatment plants, polluted runoff, and other sources has led to major concerns about oxygen depletion. While only New York and Connecticut can boast Long Island Sound coastlines, the sound’s watershed stretches throughout Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Vermont, making it the responsibility of all five states to restore the health of this great water body.

To help live up to that responsibility, NEIWPCC coordinates a workgroup that includes representatives from the environmental agencies of the five watershed states as well as EPA. The group is working to enhance implementation of the Long Island Sound TMDL for dissolved oxygen, which EPA approved in 2001. Throughout 2013, members participated in conference calls and in-person meetings in an effort to evaluate nitrogen reductions from stormwater and nonpoint sources that have occurred since the TMDL baseline year of 1990. Tangible actions were identified to enhance TMDL implementation as well as to address data and information gaps to better measure progress made under the TMDL in the future.

Beyond the workgroup coordination, NEIWPCC staff focused on three main LIS TMDL-related projects, including the nitrogen removal study described on the next page. In another project, NEIWPCC’s Emily Bird assembled a qualitative evaluation of the scope and effectiveness of

16

stormwater and nonpoint source nitrogen controls. The report compiles documents written by each watershed state on urban and agricultural nitrogen management programs and includes a summary by Bird that draws conclusions at the watershed scale. In the third project, we are developing a stormwater and nonpoint source best management practices tracking and accounting system that will be used to evaluate and improve stormwater and nonpoint source TMDL implementation. The first phase of this work—evaluating existing tracking and accounting systems and making recommendations on a system for the LIS watershed—was conducted throughout 2013 and will be finalized in 2014.

In Progress: Nitrogen Removal Study

With NEIWPCC playing a central coordinating role, a project is underway to explore low-cost ways to reduce nitrogen in the effluent of wastewater treatment plants that discharge to rivers in the upper Connecticut River basin—that is, in Massachusetts,

New Hampshire, and Vermont. The waters ultimately drain into Long Island Sound, where excess nitrogen inflow is a major contributing factor in low dissolved oxygen events.

Funded through an assistance agreement granted by EPA to NEIWPCC on behalf of the Long Island Sound Study and the Long Island Sound TMDL Workgroup, the project officially got underway in the summer of 2013. A small team led by Jeanette Brown of JJ Environmental, the firm hired by NEIWPCC to conduct the study, visited 29 wastewater treatment plants in the three states. The team toured each facility to see the treatment processes and gauge the potential for changes that can reduce nitrogen for minimal capital costs. “Every single one of the visits was rewarding,” Brown said. “The plant personnel were all very interested in the project and very interested in doing what’s right for the environment. Just tremendous cooperation.”

Modeling is now being conducted to determine how particular modifications or retrofits at a plant would affect nitrogen removal. The modeling results will guide development of recommendations for each plant; these recommendations will be shared during a second visit to the plants to get staff feedback. By summer’s end in 2014, JJ Environmental is expected to provide a final report to NEIWPCC, EPA, and the three states that includes the recommendations for each plant along with cost estimates that convey the money that would have to be spent per pound of nitrogen removed. NEIWPCC and the Long Island Sound TMDL Workgroup will use the results of the study to estimate the dissolved oxygen improvements that could be seen in Long Island Sound if the recommendations are implemented as well as the cost-effectiveness of such improvements.

JJ Environmental’s Jeanette Brown (second from left) listens as Carl Shaw, supervisor of the wastewater treatment plant in Pittsfield, Massachusetts, explains the facility’s processes. The Pittsfield plant was among 29 WWTPs visited for the nitrogen removal study.

A Tradition of Training

Training our region’s wastewater treatment operators is something NEIWPCC has been doing successfully for more than 45 years. But we still aren’t satisfied. In 2013, we

continued to push to improve our regional training program, to build a lineup of class offerings that even more fully addressed the needs in our member states, and to ensure each course included precisely what today’s operators need to know. This constant emphasis on staying relevant and responsive ensures our training keeps experienced operators current on the latest treatment practices and technologies and provides critical instruction to those looking to enter or advance in the field.

In fiscal 2013, NEIWPCC trained 1,288 individuals in the process of conducting 68 wastewater classes across the region. As usual, our veteran in-house training coordinators—Don Kennedy and James LaLiberte—led many of the courses, but we also relied, as we always do, on expert instructors from the public and private sectors. Classes took place at locations throughout the region to assure

NEIWPCC Training Coordinator Don Kennedy leads a course in the operation and maintenance of wastewater collection systems.

17Annual Report 2013

plant staff in each member state could access a range of convenient educational opportunities. Standard courses, such as our basic, intermediate, and advanced classes in municipal wastewater treatment plant operation, continued to be popular and frequently were filled to capacity, while classes with a more narrow focus, such as Introduction to Predictive Maintenance and Machinery Health, also drew heavy attendance. We were pleased to see high turnout as well for newer courses, including Current and Emerging Nutrient Removal Technologies, reflecting strong demand for the instruction.

Beyond our regional program of training courses, NEIWPCC engaged in much other work aimed at enhancing the skills and increasing the knowledge of those in the

wastewater and water industries. That included delivering courses on a contract basis at companies and organizations ranging from North Shore Community College in Danvers, Massachusetts, to the Boston Water and Sewer Commission. Important outcomes were also achieved through the work by our staff at JETCC in Maine (see below) and our award-winning work on management training (next page). At NEIWPCC, training is a tradition that keeps growing stronger.

NEIWPCC Training Coordinator James LaLiberte assists a student during a course in industrial wastewater treatment at the coal-fired power plant in Salem, Massachusetts. With the plant being shut down to make room for a new natural gas-powered facility, we were contracted to deliver the course as part of a worker retraining program.

Northern Exposure

For nearly 30 years, NEIWPCC has managed the Joint Environmental Training Coordinating Committee, which coordinates affordable, high-quality training programs

that meet the needs of water pollution control personnel and other environmental professionals throughout Maine. Overseen by a board of directors representing all relevant sectors of the environmental field, JETCC delivers a wide range of well-attended programs every year on wastewater and drinking water topics. The 2013 offerings included multi-week wastewater treatment classes as well as popular one-day sessions such as Hands-On Laboratory Testing; GIS, Data Collection, and CCTV to Manage Assets; and Disinfection: From Source Water to the Estuary.

JETCC’s year-long Management Candidate School remains a particularly successful story. The school, which provides a comprehensive managerial education to select

On September 19, 2013, participants in Maine’s fourth Management Candidate School gather after receiving their diplomas during the Maine Wastewater Control Association’s annual convention.

18

operators, continued in 2013 for a fourth year with support from the Maine Wastewater Control Association, Maine Water Utilities Association, Maine Department of Environmental Protection, and Maine Department of Health and Human Services. As always, there was plenty of positive feedback. “It was by far the best class of my entire career,” said Christopher Curtis of the Yarmouth Water District. “The course provided the best group of speakers with real-life experiences that I have ever encountered.”

JETCC also assisted Maine DEP’s Non-Point Source Training Center with its courses on erosion and sediment control. Altogether, JETCC directly coordinated or assisted with 43 training sessions that reached a total of 1,225 participants. JETCC also conducted all recordkeeping and correspondence for Maine’s wastewater operator certification program, which serves Maine’s roughly 820 licensed wastewater treatment plant operators.

During JETCC’s North Country Convention in Presque Isle, Maine, on April 3-4, 2013, NEIWPCC’s Leeann Hanson (center), JETCC’s coordinator, speaks with Verdant Water’s Aubrey Strause (left), president of the Maine Wastewater Control Association, and keynote speaker Patricia Aho (right), commissioner of Maine DEP. The 2013 convention attracted 138 participants, the most ever for the event. Through the North Country Convention, held every other year in Presque Isle, JETCC provides water and wastewater operators in northern Maine with the type of rewarding educational and trade show experience typically reserved for the more populated southern portion of the state. One of the convention’s many exhibitors was the Maine chapter of the American Public Works Association (above), an avid supporter of wastewater training in Maine.

Meeting the Management Need

With many managers of wastewater treatment plants and drinking water treatment facilities at or near retirement age, a growing need exists for operators qualified to assume managerial roles. Since

2007, NEIWPCC has collaborated with state agencies and trade associations to provide comprehensive managerial education to mid-level wastewater and water facility operators. Currently, five of our member states run management training programs, all based on Rhode Island’s Operator Boot Camp, which NEIWPCC helped establish in 2007. (Rhode Island stopped offering the training in 2010 because demand for managerial candidates in the state had been met, but the program resumed in 2013 as the need for candidates returned.) Each year-long management curriculum covers subjects of relevance to new managers, including supervisory skills, labor relations, and budgeting.

To assess the impact of the management training programs, NEIWPCC conducted an online survey of graduates who had completed the programs at least six months earlier. Some respondents said a program helped them get a promotion, while others anticipate reaping dividends in the future. One respondent noted, “I was already plant manager, but as a direct result of this course, my career path now includes a very good possibility of succession to the position of superintendent of our district.” For people already in management positions, the programs made them better prepared for current responsibilities. One survey participant raved, “In every class there was something for me to take back and use in my day-to-day operations.” The survey revealed that the programs foster new connections, with some respondents saying they’d already contacted former classmates to get an opinion or answer to a question.

The survey provided solid evidence that the management programs are meeting their goals and generating results. In June 2013, NEIWPCC received an Environmental Merit Award from EPA Region 1 for our many years of work with multiple states on wastewater management schools (see page 9).

Bill Patenaude of Rhode Island’s Department of Environmental Management provides the instruction during one of the monthly sessions in the state’s year-long Operator Boot Camp, which grooms operators for positions in upper management.

19Annual Report 2013

Managing the By-Product

The options for disposing of the semi-solid residue left over from the wastewater treatment process are limited primarily to three—landfilling, incineration, and land application as fertilizer—and many people view land

application as the most environmentally benign choice. To be land-applied, residuals must be processed to meet regulatory limits on pollutants such as cadmium and mercury; the industry term for residuals that meet the limits is biosolids. Although skepticism lingers in some corners about the public health and environmental impacts of land-applying biosolids, their use is widespread. The photo at right shows biosolids freshly applied in October 2013 to a farm field just outside Concord, New Hampshire.

Through NEIWPCC’s Residuals Workgroup, we bring together the residuals coordinators of our member states’ environmental agencies, who over the years have discussed a litany of complex regulatory issues. 2013 was no exception. At the group’s meeting on August 8, members discussed state-specific issues related to land application including the statewide commercial food waste disposal ban taking effect in Massachusetts in October 2014. The ban will require any entity that disposes of at least one ton of organic material per week to donate or repurpose the useable food; any remaining food waste will be shipped to an anaerobic digestion facility. Anaerobic digesters, in which microorganisms break down material in the absence

Lindsay D’Anna of Casella Organics, a Maine-based provider of residuals management services, delivers a presentation at our May 2013 training session on the microbiology of anaerobic digesters.

Storms arriving from the sea often result in coastal erosion, which can lead to damage to septic systems. Pipes associated with this advanced onsite system in Westerly, Rhode Island, broke when its pod floated out of the ground as Hurricane Sandy pummeled the area. The storm’s surge impacted hundreds of onsite systems along the Rhode Island coastline.

of oxygen, are a key feature in processes that create biosolids, since the digesters not only reduce pathogens in residuals but also create methane that can be used as fuel. Workgroup members discussed the potential impacts of the Massachusetts law on biosolids operations employing anaerobic digestion.

NEIWPCC’s work surrounding this issue also includes training. On May 23, 2013, well over two dozen students attended a session that we coordinated and hosted on the microbiology of anaerobic digesters. One good reason for the strong turnout: the primary instructor was Michael Gerardi, one of the nation’s leading authorities on wastewater biology.

The Onsite Alternative

While most homes and businesses in NEIWPCC’s member states are connected to a centralized wastewater treatment facility, a significant number rely on an onsite septic system or small community cluster

system—and there are signs that number is increasing. Consider, for example, the figures provided in Connecticut DEEP’s Onsite Wastewater Management Section of the Long Island Sound TMDL Enhanced Implementation Plan Report. CT DEEP said the percentage of households managing sanitary waste with septic systems rose from roughly 29 percent in 1990 to 38 percent in 2010 (according to data collected by CT DEEP’s Municipal Facilities Section for the 2010 U.S. Census of Housing). Such high usage needn’t be an issue, since onsite systems are a perfectly acceptable option if they’re installed, operated, and maintained correctly. But therein lies the problem. Due primarily to poor maintenance, as much as 20 percent of onsite systems malfunction each year, potentially posing a threat to the environment and public health.

NEIWPCC’s primary vehicle for addressing onsite issues is our Onsite Wastewater Workgroup, which brings NEIWPCC and EPA staff together with our states’ onsite wastewater disposal directors. The group’s expertise is well recognized within the onsite realm, as evidenced by a request for the workgroup to review EPA’s draft of its Model Program for Onsite Systems Management in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed. During the year, the workgroup also discussed high-priority topics such as the states’ processes

Jona

than

Zw

arg,

RID

EM

20

for approving new onsite technologies and Rhode Island’s emergency regulations for onsite system repairs in the wake of damaging storms. As seen by the photo on the previous page, onsite systems on our states’ coastlines are not immune from the impacts of extreme weather.

NEIWPCC’s John Murphy, who coordinates the workgroup, also led one of our most well-attended training sessions of the year; more than 100 onsite professionals took part in his Technology Seminar on Massachusetts Title 5 Approved Technologies on May 1, 2013, in Taunton, Massachusetts. Earlier in the fiscal year, we hosted a course at our Lowell headquarters on advanced treatment technology for onsite systems, and it too proved popular. Instructors from the New England Onsite Wastewater Training Program at the University of Rhode Island discussed operation and maintenance practices for everything from dosing systems to pressurized drainfields. Advanced onsite systems differ from conventional septic tanks in a number of ways, but primarily by incorporating an additional treatment step between solids separation in a tank and the final dispersal of effluent.

Above: George Loomis, director of the University of Rhode Island’s New England Onsite Wastewater Training Program, has the partipants’ attention (right) during the Advanced Treatment Technology Operation and Maintenance for Onsite Systems training session at NEIWPCC’s Lowell headquarters.

Coordination in the Commonwealth

Since 2004, NEIWPCC has had one other large responsibility in the onsite arena: coordinating Massachusetts’s Title 5 Onsite Wastewater Training and Certification of System Inspectors and Soil Evaluators program. The program

plays a critical role in ensuring that the individuals who inspect septic systems in the state and evaluate the soils at installation sites are fully qualified for the tasks. In fiscal 2013, NEIWPCC staff administered the certification renewal process for approximately 2,800 Soil Evaluators and System Inspectors who were approved or last renewed in 2010. We also coordinated eight training classes—one certification course for Soil Evaluators, two for System Inspectors, and five Soil Evaluator refresher sessions—for a total of 213 students.

In addition, NEIWPCC and MassDEP staff worked on updating the written portion of the exam for Soil Evaluator certification. The staff revised existing questions and added new ones on various soils-related top-ics, making the exam more in line with cur-rent practices and also fully multiple-choice. Prospective Soil Evaluators must pass both a written and field exam to become an ap-proved Massachusetts Title 5 Soil Evaluator.

Since 2005, NEIWPCC has also

In Spencer, Massachusetts, a student assesses the color of a soil during one of the field sessions associated with a Title 5 Soil Evaluator certification course coordinated by NEIWPCC.

NEIWPCC’s Paul Spina (on right in photo at right) at the 2013 Massachusetts Health Officers Association Conference. Spina works with the MHOA and MassDEP in coordinating the Massachusetts Title 5 training and certification program.

21Annual Report 2013

coordinated Massachusetts’s extensive wastewater operator certification and training program. In fiscal 2013, NEIWPCC coordinated 24 exam prep courses serving a total of 551 students for this program and began the administration of the license renewal process for approximately 5,600 wastewater treatment plant operators.

Aside from the wastewater courses, which are coordinated by our wastewater training staff, NEIWPCC’s Paul Spina managed all this work in Massachusetts. If that wasn’t enough, he had one other important achievement: initiating our new Waste-water Certification Workgroup. The workgroup includes at least one participant from each of our member states, and it’s quickly proven to be a superb vehicle for ex-changing ideas on matters such as operator exchange programs, discussing changes in state protocols, and raising issues related to the testing and certification of waste-water treatment plant operators and the training hours required for license renewal.

MassDEP’s Tom Bienkiewicz (center), secretary of Massachusetts’s Board of Certification for Wastewater Treatment Plant Operators, participates in a meeting of NEIWPCC’s new Wastewater Certification Workgroup.

Permitting Matters

The 1972 amendments to the Clean Water Act provided the statutory basis for the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System program. In essence, the establishment of the program meant that, going forward, any entity that

wanted to discharge pollutants would need to get a NPDES permit or the discharge would be considered illegal. Sounds straightforward—but it isn’t, of course. For decades, NEIWPCC has assisted our states on matters related to permitting, which are invariably complex.

Our regional NPDES Workgroup brings together state and EPA staff whose work is connected to the NPDES program, including both those who write permits and those involved with permit compliance and enforcement. The group’s meetings always include a variety of perspectives, in part because not all our states administer their own NPDES permit programs; Massachusetts and New Hampshire are not currently delegated by EPA to issue NPDES permits, meaning EPA handles the process for them. At a workgroup meeting in January 2013, members discussed nutrients, stormwater, strategic implementation, illicit connections, final permit quality review, and national

EPA initiatives such as the push for e-reporting. During the January meeting, we also, for the first time, conducted what we expect will become a regular feature of the workgroup’s meetings: a roundtable discussion on how each state would approach a specific permit condition or topic. The subject for the January meeting—whole effluent toxicity (WET) requirements, which seek to limit the toxic effect to aquatic organisms from all pollutants contained in a facility’s effluent.

The meeting had one additional outcome. After workgroup members expressed interest in bringing EPA’s NPDES Permit Writers’ Training Course to our region, NEIWPCC made our facilities and staff assistance available. Six months later, on June 3, 2013, some 25 participants from throughout our region settled in for a week-long program in Lowell on what goes into developing, issuing, and complying with NPDES permits. The course is designed for new permit writers as well as more experienced writers who need a refresher, and it drew praise from participants. “They delivered a vast amount of knowledge about a complicated program,” said MassDEP’s Marybeth Chubb. “The course was very well presented.”

One topic that is virtually unavoidable in permitting discussions is EPA’s development of a framework for integrated planning. Under an integrated approach, municipalities may achieve the water quality objectives of the Clean Water Act through the integration of permitted wastewater and stormwater projects, allowing for cost-effective, sustainable plans addressing the totality of the work to be done rather than a series of uncoordinated efforts to meet different permit limits. To assist

Top federal, interstate, state, and municipal officials continue the discussion on integrated planning at a NEIWPCC-coordinated workshop held in September at the New Hampshire DES offices in Portsmouth.

Curt Spalding, administrator for EPA Region 1, addresses participants in the NEIWPCC-hosted February 2013 workshop on integrated planning.

22

with this complex effort, NEIWPCC held an integrated planning workshop in Lowell involving state and federal agencies in February 2013; we then coordinated a much larger workshop in September in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, that also included municipal officials. Some 85 participants, including staff from each of our member states, attended the September event, which featured roundtable discussions and case studies on integrated planning.

High Priority: Polluted Runoff

The progress made on cleaning up water pollution from point sources such as wastewater treatment plants has allowed for increased emphasis on what is considered the leading remaining cause of water quality problems: nonpoint

source pollution. As rainfall or snowmelt moves over and through ground, the runoff picks up pollutants, ultimately depositing them in lakes, rivers, wetlands, and groundwater. These pollutants include excess fertilizers on farmland and lawns; oil, grease, and toxic chemicals that accumulate on urban areas such as parking lots; sediment from poorly managed construction sites; and bacteria and nutrients from livestock, pet wastes, and faulty septic systems. NEIWPCC’s work on NPS issues included one of the year’s major achievements, the turf fertilizer guidelines highlighted on page 13. But there was much more.

Early in the fiscal year, NEIWPCC submitted a comment letter to EPA on behalf of our member states regarding the public review draft of the Nonpoint Source Program and Grants Guidelines for States and Territories. We explained in detail our states’ shared concerns—including the inclusion of language in the guidelines that appeared to give them the force of regulations—and suggested remedies. As with all NEIWPCC comment letters related to NPS pollution, members of our Nonpoint Source Pollution Workgroup played a pivotal role in generating the content. Other priorities for the group during the year included the states’ work on their Nonpoint Source Management Plans. Each state is updating its plan based on EPA’s guidelines, and through

the workgroup meetings, state staff had the opportunity to discuss successes and challenges and to pose questions to the EPA staff present.

Another major focus for NEIWPCC’s NPS staff was the annual Nonpoint Source Pollution Conference, which we’ve been coordinating since 1990. Working closely with Vermont DEC staff, we put together a highly successful event that took place May 14-15, 2013, in Burlington. The conference brought together 135 individuals from across the region to share information on NPS issues. In her keynote address, Sue Minter, deputy secretary of the Vermont Department of Transportation, explained lessons learned while

coordinating the emergency response to historic flooding brought on by Tropical Storm Irene in 2011. The event also featured a spirited panel discussion capturing a diversity of perspectives on how communities can approach adaptation to climate change.

Each year the conference also includes several field trips; in 2013, one option was to visit the site of a paired watershed study commissioned by the Vermont Agency of Agriculture in cooperation with USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service. To evaluate the effects of several agricultural best management practices, the study is comparing results in two very similar watersheds. Field trip participants learned about the equipment the researchers used to install alternative farming practices and the state-of-the-art monitoring tools in place.

Beyond our work on nonpoint source pollution, NEIWPCC also continued to focus on a type of polluted runoff that goes by a different name: stormwater. In the regulatory world, the term refers to

The rain-swollen Lamoille River, colored brown by sediment runoff, flows through farmland in northern Vermont. In much of the country, it’s common to find a farm’s fields extending right to the banks of a river, providing an easy route for contaminated agricultural runoff to reach water bodies.

Vermont DEC Commissioner David Mears delivers opening remarks at the 2013 Nonpoint Source Pollution Conference.

During an NPS Conference field trip, Dave Braun of Stone Environmental explains equipment used in a paired watershed study that is examining the effects of agricultural BMPs.

Bill Howland, NEIWPCC/LCBP

23Annual Report 2013

precipitation-induced runoff from construction and industrial sites in urban areas; this stormwater runoff is generally considered a point source and therefore regulated under the NPDES system. Through the meetings of NEIWPCC’s Stormwater Workgroup, our states have an efficient means of working together on stormwater issues, which can be contentious.

In fact, the 2013 meetings of our Stormwater Workgroup exemplified the crucial role NEIWPCC frequently plays as both an information clearinghouse for the states and an active representative for them. For example, the meetings enabled workgroup members to get up to speed on the status of potential changes to Residual Designation Authority, which gives EPA or a state the ability to require NPDES permits for any otherwise unpermitted discharge composed wholly of stormwater if the discharge contributes to the impairment of a water body; NEIWPCC subsequently relayed the states’ concerns about the potential RDA changes to EPA. The workgroup also discussed debates over the use of surrogate TMDLs, such as when impervious cover in a watershed is used in a TMDL as a surrogate for stormwater-source pollutants in streams listed for biological impairment. Another frequent topic of discussion during the year: stormwater utilities. In a stormwater utility, municipalities collect fees from businesses and residents for stormwater-related work, such as repairs to storm sewer systems, in the same way fees are collected for other public services. Group members reported on planned and existing stormwater utilities and discussed challenges such as the need for effective outreach to overcome any public resistance to the additional fees.

The Stormwater Workgroup meetings underscored a defining tenet of NEIWPCC’s work: when the issues are complicated, there’s no substitute for working through the options—together.

Working for Wetlands

In a statement in late 2013 announcing new EPA monies to protect wetlands in New York State,

EPA Region 2 Administrator Judith Enck summarized the reasons for the action. “Wetlands provide enormous economic, environmental, and flood protection benefits, but they are threatened by

development and the impacts of climate change,” Enck wrote. “Wetlands reduce and filter runoff that pollutes local waterways, serve as essential habitats for fish and wildlife, reduce the effects of climate change, and protect against flooding by absorbing stormwater.” It couldn’t be said any better. Enck’s statement succinctly captures all the reasons that NEIWPCC is deeply invested in working to protect wetlands, which provide so much and yet continue to disappear at an alarming rate.

As in so many areas in which we work, a workgroup provides the foundation. NEIWPCC’s Wetlands Workgroup is made up of wetlands staff from our member states, EPA, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, and Natural Resources Conservation Service. The group met three times during the year to discuss regionally relevant subjects including the National Wetlands Mitigation Action Plan. In addition, we organized a special meeting in May 2013 to talk about wetlands enforcement, and this successful meeting will likely become an annual event. NEIWPCC also hosted a webinar on the development of the Wetland Condition Assessment Tool (WetCat), a new GIS tool, and its potential use in regulatory and non-regulatory decision making.

One issue that received a lot of attention was a proposal from the New England District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to replace its existing separate general permits for each of the six New England states with one regional permit. (Activities in wetlands, such as depositing dredged or fill material, typically require such a permit from the Corps.) The states had numerous issues with the regional permit approach, and NEIWPCC took a series of steps to help communicate the concerns. Our staff coordinated conference calls between the states and the Corps and developed multiple letters summarizing the states’ concerns. These efforts continued into fiscal 2014, when NEIWPCC hosted a meeting between the New England state environmental agency commissioners and the Corps.

In addition to our regional efforts, NEIWPCC is coordinating a project that will support development of advanced protection and restoration measures for the remaining vegetated high marsh and intertidal marsh in New York’s Marine District. To address the need to assess changes to the area’s wetlands since the last regulatory inventory in 1974, NEIWPCC contracted with an engineering firm to develop a tidal wetlands trends analysis and loss characterization matrix that will help identify the causes of changes and assist in developing response strategies. The project is expected to be completed in 2014.

Development has proven to be no friend to wetlands, which may be drained and permanently altered to accommodate buildings. The proximity of human activity also increases the likelihood of degradation resulting from polluted runoff.

“We strongly encourage the Corps to increase its public outreach by conducting public meetings in all six states to present the draft New England General Permit to stakeholders and provide them the opportunity to ask questions and engage in a public discussion.”

NEIWPCC Executive Director Ron Poltak in an August 2013 letter to Colonel Charles P. Samaris, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New England District

24

Focus on Flora and Fauna

If you took part in the annual conference of the New England Association of Environmental Biologists in 2013, you had the opportunity to attend a workshop organized by NEIWPCC on R, an increasingly popular open-source statistical

computing tool. If you did attend, you had plenty of company. The workshop proved to be popular with state and federal agency staff who work on aquatic biomonitoring and bioassessment—that is, observing and evaluating the condition of aquatic biota to determine water body health. Matthew Baker, associate professor at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, led the workshop; he works with the same types of biomonitoring data as many of the attendees. The R workshop was such a hit that NEIWPCC invited Baker to teach an ecological statistics refresher workshop at the 2014 NEAEB conference.

In a related effort, NEIWPCC continued to coordinate efforts to develop a regionally consistent approach to lake bioassessment. Our Lake Bioassessment Workgroup partnered with Vermont DEC to execute a pilot project alongside EPA’s 2012 National Lakes Assessment to test a regional methodology and evaluate the response of near-shore (littoral) biotic communities to shoreline disturbances. The workgroup also developed a workplan for a project now underway that is using GIS mapping techniques to evaluate the use of satellite data and high-resolution aerial imagery for lakeshore condition assessments.

As part of our support for the New England Biological Assessment of Wetlands Workgroup (NEBAWWG), we coordinated a Floristic Quality Assessment (FQA) workshop in May 2013. The workshop built on our EPA-funded work with botanists to develop a regional list of coefficient of conservatism (CoC) values for the region’s vascular plants; these values, or scores, are used in FQAs to help evaluate wetlands restoration, mitigation, and conservation efforts. At the May workshop, staff from all our member states learned about efforts using FQA for wetlands monitoring and assessment and discussed potential revisions to the CoC list. To further this effort, NEBAWWG held a joint webinar with the Mid-Atlantic Wetlands Workgroup

At a NEIWPCC-hosted meeting of the New England Biological Assessment of Wetlands Workgroup, the focus is on Beth Alafat, EPA Region 1’s project officer for NEBAWWG.

that focused on the progressive work on FQAs being done in Minnesota. During the year, NEIWPCC was also awarded a new EPA grant to continue researching FQA in partnership with the states; the monies will go toward developing a regional wetland plant database to facilitate the study of FQA on a regionwide scale.

Growing Concern

Managers of water resources in the Northeast are increasingly concerned with

seasonal algal blooms. While algae are naturally present in slow-moving streams, lakes, marine waters, and ponds and are often harmless, they can proliferate to form mats, or blooms, under certain conditions. The blooms are not only unsightly but also can contain toxins that are potentially harmful to people, pets, livestock, and wildlife.

To help our states address this issue, NEIWPCC has established the Harmful Algal Blooms Workgroup, which is comprised of public health officials, water resource managers, and academic researchers from throughout our region. The workgroup’s first objective is to compile information from the growing body of knowledge about harmful algal blooms, monitoring techniques, and best management practices. This initial task will set the course for future workgroup projects, which may include developing regionally consistent monitoring protocols, creating public outreach materials,

identifying useful case studies, and providing guidance to water utilities on best management practices.

A mat of cyanobacteria, with the appearance of spilled green paint, is an increasingly common sight in our region.

Mar

y W

atzi

n

The first meeting of our new Harmful Algal Blooms Workgroup gets underway in Lowell. At rear is NEIWPCC Environmental Analyst Theresa Portante-Lyle, the workgroup’s coordinator.

25Annual Report 2013

Protecting the Source

In 2013, the U.S. Geological Survey released a study about the status of 40 distinct underground water storage areas, or aquifers, in the United States. When water is withdrawn from an aquifer for agricultural, industrial, and municipal uses at

a faster rate than it is recharged by precipitation or other water sources, the aquifer is depleted. The study showed that aquifer depletion is accelerating, resulting in reduced well yields and stream flows. We have depleted aquifers around the country, the study revealed, by more than twice the volume of Lake Erie.

The news only accentuated the need for a regional forum to address such issues—and NEIWPCC meets that need through our Groundwater and Source Water Protection Workgroup, which brings together state and EPA staff who coordinate programs that protect underground and aboveground sources of drinking water. The workgroup met three times in fiscal 2013, and during one session, a group member raised a concern about aquifer protection guidelines that call for restrictive zoning: how do states and municipalities ensure that protection areas are accurately delineated? The workgroup decided that each state would provide NEIWPCC with information about its guidelines for this kind of restrictive zoning, and at the next meeting, our staff distributed a document summarizing the information. The summary showed our states differ in their approaches to wellhead protection areas, but a trend emerged among municipalities: most do not refer to scientific delineations to determine zoning limitations.

This workgroup has always covered a lot of important ground, and we saw that again in 2013. Members reviewed a matrix, compiled by NEIWPCC staff, of state policies on discharging water treatment residuals to onsite septic systems. They discussed a proposed national groundwater monitoring network and heard numerous presentations from outside experts, including an instructive talk on nutrients in groundwater by two EPA Region 1 hydrologists. All this activity goes a long way toward improving the coordination of policy development and groundwater and source water management efforts throughout our region.

EPA Region 1’s Kira Jacobs at a meeting of our Groundwater and Source Water Protection Workgroup in March 2013.

Hidden Hazards

Issues associated with underground storage tanks remained a priority at NEIWPCC, given the tanks’ potential to harm the environment, especially groundwater. USTs, as they’re called in the industry, pose no risk when their

contents, typically gasoline, are contained. But leaking tanks, known as LUSTs, are a serious threat. For well over 25 years NEIWPCC has been working with EPA, states, tribes, and other partners on work aimed at preventing, detecting, and cleaning up LUSTs.

That work in 2013 included one especially notable highlight: Our staff coordinated the production of a training video for UST inspectors that covers the nature of petroleum, site assessment at tank closure, inspection equipment, field observations and analysis, planning and decision making, and site closure. The video also covers the basics of sampling and handling soil and water for field testing and for transport to a laboratory for analysis. If the title of the video, What Do We Have Here? An Inspector’s Guide to Site Assessment at Tank Closure, sounds familiar, there’s good reason: The video is based on a video of the same name that NEIWPCC produced in 1990. But everything about the 2013 video—from the scenes shot with actors to the information presented—is all new and updated to reflect current closure practices.

NEIWPCC also hosted several web-based UST training programs, including two webinars that focused on the unique challenges posed by biofuels. The first webinar, in March 2013, provided the 325 participants with an overview of the potential impact of biofuels on leak detection, the work of the National Work Group on Leak Detection Evaluations, and detection of water and phase separation. Another 238 people took part in the second webinar, held three months later, which focused on corrosion challenges; instructors discussed corrosion in submersible pump sumps of USTs containing ethanol blends and the corrosion of components and equipment in tanks containing ultra-low sulfur diesel. More than 92 percent of participants said they were very satisfied or satisfied with the first webinar, with the remainder saying they were neutral; for the second webinar, the very satisfied/satisfied percentage rose to 95 percent.

Actors (in hard hats) and crew prepare to shoot a scene for NEIWPCC’s new training video on site assessment at tank closure. Visit www.neiwpcc.org/ust/whatdowehavehere.asp to download the video or order a DVD.

Stew

art’s

Sho

ps C

orp.

26

The training programs and the video were among many subjects discussed during the year by NEIWPCC’s Tanks Workgroup, which remained one of our busiest and most committed workgroups. The group, which is comprised of representatives from UST, LUST, and State Fund programs in our member states as well as EPA, met three times in our Lowell offices. Other topics of discussion included the concern over UST compatibility with E15 (the new fuel containing 15 percent ethanol) and the issue of tank linings. States are deciding whether lining a single-wall tank provides a level of environmental protection nearly equivalent to that provided by a double-wall tank. If so, single-wall tanks could potentially be allowed to remain in the ground longer than unlined tanks. The workgroup also assisted with preparations for the National Tanks Conference (next column).

Members of NEIWPCC’s Tanks Workgroup are a study in concentration during a meeting in Lowell.

NEIWPCC continued to do its part to keep the tanks community informed on UST and LUST matters through our development and dissemination of LUSTLine, the nationally distributed publication sent free of charge to subscribing federal, state, and local government employees. The February 2013 issue featured a cover article on a tank closure in Rhode Island with an unexpected challenge: evidence of paranormal activity!

Pictures of Success

It was quite a gathering in Denver, Colorado, as more than 660 people attended the 24th National Tanks Conference and Expo, September 16-18, 2013. NEIWPCC coordinated the event, which brought together the whole

spectrum of people in the nation devoted to issues related to underground storage tanks. Attendees included federal, state and tribal representatives; engineers; contractors; and consultants. They attended sessions on everything from biofuels to remediation technologies, went on educational field trips, and frequented the Expo, which featured the latest tanks-related products and services. NEIWPCC reimbursed travel expenses for several staff from each of our member states so they could participate in this important event.

We received a lot of positive feedback on the evaluation forms, including: “Excellent conference! Cutting-edge technical information presented that will help me better evaluate and more cost-effectively clean up my LUST sites.” And: “This is the single most productive event that we have available. The combination of state and federal staff, owners, and vendors is unbelievable and makes for an awesome learning process for me as a state program manager.” To see the complete set of photos from the 2013 conference, visit our Flickr page at www.flickr.com/photos/neiwpcc/sets/. The conference presentations are available at www.neiwpcc.org/tanksconference/.

The National Tanks Conference begins with a breakfast plenary in a packed ballroom at the Denver Sheraton.

The conference’s Expo featured 46 booths displaying tanks programs, services, products, and technologies.

27Annual Report 2013

Emerging Threats

If you were looking to understand why there’s growing concern in our region about pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs) creeping into our waters, you didn’t have to look far from NEIWPCC’s home base. According

to the Lowell Sun, testing of the water table surrounding two lakes in the Groton, Massachusetts, area indicated the presence of five kinds of mostly prescription drugs, including tranquilizers, nicotine, insect repellent, pain relievers, and medicines needed to control seizures. The consultant who did the testing said there was no evidence the trace amounts of PPCPs posed any harm. But they were there, as they are in so many water bodies.

To help our member states address concerns about these emerging contaminants, NEIWPCC coordinates a PPCP Workgroup that brings together the leading state, federal, and academic staff in our region who are working on the complicated issues surrounding PPCPs in our waters. In 2013, the group’s activities included working on a set of instructions for water systems if they want to test for PPCPs; the instructions will cover how to collect and prepare samples and will include a

list of labs that do the preferred method of PPCP testing. During the workgroup’s meeting early in the fiscal year, members heard compelling presentations from two special guests. Laurel Schaider of the Silent Spring Institute spoke about inputs of contaminants of emerging concern into the Cape Cod aquifer from onsite and centralized wastewater treatment systems. Russell Mankes, a former professor at Albany Medical College, discussed hazardous pharmaceutical, cytotoxic antimetabolite, and antineoplastic drug disposal in the healthcare field.

While much more remains to be learned about PPCPs in the environment, one thing is clear: it’s far more efficient to keep them out of water than it will ever be to remove them. For that reason, great attention is being paid at NEIWPCC and in our workgroup to two priorities: green chemistry and prudent prescribing methods. In green chemistry, the design of chemical products and processes is done so as to reduce or eliminate the generation of hazardous substances. In prudent prescribing, doctors give patients only the amount of medication they will use. Consider that during the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency’s November 2013 National Take-Back Day, Americans turned in 647,211 pounds of expired and unwanted medications. We’re all in favor of take-backs, which help keep drugs from being improperly disposed of. But it would be far better if we didn’t need such events at all.

News and Information

At NEIWPCC, embracing our region’s challenges also means communicating about them.

Our print newsletter Interstate Water Report continues to provide articles that examine issues in an in-depth manner rarely seen today. Our April 2013 issue, for example, featured a nearly 14,000-word special report that dove deeply into the water-related impacts of Hurricane Sandy and the February 2013 blizzard while exploring strategies for dealing with the anticipated increase in the frequency and strength of intense storms. Articles in the October 2013 IWR included a feature on the often overlooked but very real threat posed by ocean acidification and an analysis of the prospects in our region for nonpoint-to-point source water quality trading. As always, all articles were written by NEIWPCC staff and carefully assembled and edited to engage and inform.

NEIWPCC also produces a quarterly email newsletter called iWR that emphasizes

condensed, timely news. The issues in 2013 covered everything from a “Future of Water” panel discussion in Boston to insights delivered at a conference by three men who played integral roles in developing EPA’s so-called Part 503 Rule, which for two decades has had such a profound effect on the use and disposal of biosolids.

If you’re not already subscribed to receive IWR and iWR free-of-charge, visit our website at www.neiwpcc.org/iwr.asp. While there, we encourage you to view the vast amount of information elsewhere within the website, which provides a comprehensive and constantly updated window into our work. NEIWPCC’s Mark Taylor is continually enhancing the site’s navigation, layout, and appearance. Users during the year would have noticed a wide range of improvements, including Google-powered site search, a redesigned annual report section that contains a copy of every report NEIWPCC has ever published, new staff and Commissioners pages that

28

include photos and bios, and an online RFP submission form.Data gathered by Google Analytics reveal the site is visited by many web users—

and visited often. In fiscal 2013, our website had 51,905 unique visitors—that is, individuals counted only once, no matter how many times they visit a site. The website’s popularity can be attributed to a number of factors including improved search engine optimization. Overall, site traffic and usage were up more than 18 percent over fiscal 2012.

In the increasingly important realm of social media, NEIWPCC maintained an active presence; our number of Twitter followers and Facebook likes increased significantly during the year, thanks to posts that grabbed attention and focused readers on important water news and developments in NEIWPCC’s work. This being social media, some posts were both informative and fun, as in our popular Facebook album featuring photos we obtained from the Newburyport

An image from a series of historical photos provided to NEIWPCC by the Boston Water and Sewer Commission and available for viewing on our Flickr page.

Urban Exposure

Ask inner-city high school students about their career plans, and few will say they want to work in the water or wastewater industries. To spur greater interest, NEIWPCC coordinates the Lowell Youth and the Environment

Program, a summer program funded by EPA that introduces economically disadvantaged inner-city youth to career opportunities in environmental fields.

During the 2013 program, five high school students worked at the Lowell Regional Wastewater Utility and rotated through different stations at the facility such as pretreatment, maintenance, and process control. The students gained extensive work experience and received academic training on chemical risks, toxics use

The 2013 YEP students and NEIWPCC staff during a tour of the MWRA’s Deer Island Sewage Treatment Plant in Boston.

NEIWPCC also works to expose college students to career opportunities in the water environment field. In April 2013, NEIWPCC’s Tom Groves (center, front row) spoke to the American Society of Civil Engineers’ student chapter at UMass Lowell.

(Mass.) wastewater treatment plant. The pictures showed an 8-month old bull that ended up at the facility after escaping from a farm; plant staff helped capture

the bull, which was brought safely home. During the year, we also expanded our presence on the Web by launching a page on Flickr, the image and video hosting website. Visit www.flickr.com/photos/neiwpcc/sets/ to see photographs of NEIWPCC events and activities. Our Flickr page also includes more than 150 fascinating historical photos provided to us by NEIWPCC Commissioner John Sullivan, chief engineer at the Boston Water and Sewer Commission.

Boston Water and Sewer Commission

reduction, public health threats, and safety procedures at a wastewater treatment plant. Field trips related to environmental science and water quality along with college career counseling provided the students with a look at the opportunities available to them.

With the exception of two years when funding cuts put the program on hold, NEIWPCC has coordinated the Lowell YEP every summer since 1990, with help from EPA, the Lowell Regional Wastewater Utility, the City of Lowell, and the Career Center of Lowell. Regardless of whether the YEP graduates eventually work in the water or wastewater fields, they come away from the program with practical skills and increased environmental awareness.

29Annual Report 2013

Productive Relationships

A major way in which we at the New England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission serve our member states is by entering into relationships with organizations that target the needs of a specific

area or water body. NEIWPCC’s role with these programs varies and is often invisible to those outside the organizations. But our involvement provides invaluable support.

For many years, for example, we have been providing funding and staff to vital New York State Department of Environmental Conservation programs that work to protect, conserve, restore, and enhance the Hudson River and its estuary. And our longtime relationship with the Lake Champlain Basin Program has been a key factor in that organization’s important and impressive work to restore and protect the legendary lake and its watershed. In 2013, we moved ahead with two new relationships that only further underscore the value of NEIWPCC’s services in our region.

Interstate Environmental Commission District

After entering into a memorandum of agreement in 2012 to become temporary host of the Interstate Environmental Commission District, we solidified the relationship in fiscal 2013 as IEC’s staff officially became

NEIWPCC employees. Formed in 1936, IEC is a congressionally-authorized interstate organization that assists New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut on a wide range of air and water pollution matters. In 2013, our staff at the IEC District continued the monitoring that the organization has done in western Long Island Sound for 23 straight years, complementing the monitoring done by Connecticut DEEP. From June through September, the staff performed 11 monitoring runs to 22 monitoring stations, recording temperature, salinity, dissolved oxygen, pH, and clarity on a weekly basis. (Chlorophyll a was quantified bi-weekly.)

In addition to ambient monitoring, IEC staff conduct inspections at pump stations to ensure this aging infrastructure maintains efficiency and functionality and at wastewater treatment facilities to ensure compliance with health, safety, security, and regulatory requirements, including NPDES permits. Beyond the field work, the IEC District’s operations include its laboratory on the campus of the College of Staten Island. The lab has National Environmental Laboratory

Approval Program accreditation granted through New York State and New Jersey and is certified by Connecticut as an approved environmental laboratory. All this accreditation means the lab is fully authorized at the highest levels to test for microbiological parameters such as fecal coliform, Enterococcus, and E. coli; inorganic chemistry parameters such as metals, solids, and minerals; as well as aggregate organic parameters such as oil and grease, biochemical oxygen demand, and chemical oxygen demand.

In September 2013, NEIWPCC hired Bill Shadel, an experienced science educator, researcher, and environmental advocate, to oversee the IEC District’s staff and operations. Shadel is also working to identify priorities in the tri-state area, diversify funding, and build new regional partnerships. Such work is key to the success of the IEC District and is increasingly being emphasized. During the year, for example, IEC District staff organized and facilitated the Interstate Shared Waters Monitoring Summit to assess interagency coordination and communication on monitoring activities in the district’s waters.

NEIWPCC Assistant Environmental Analyst Amanda Rollizo records water quality meter readings during an Interstate Environmental Commission District sampling trip in Long Island Sound.

At the IEC District Laboratory on Staten Island, New York, NEIWPCC’s Inna Golberg tests water samples for biochemical oxygen demand, a key indicator of water quality.

30

Narragansett Bay Estuary Program

In March 2013, NEIWPCC was selected as the new host of the Narragansett Bay Estuary Program, which works to protect and preserve the bay and its watershed through partnerships that conserve and restore natural resources, enhance water

quality, and promote community involvement. The NBEP is part of the National Estuary Program, a national network of 28 programs working for collaborative solutions for estuaries designated by the U.S. Congress to be of national significance and critical importance.

In our role as host, NEIWPCC worked with program partners to develop an annual workplan and secure grant funding from EPA, and we conducted an extensive and successful effort to hire a highly qualified new director for the program. Tom Borden’s previous positions include working in private practice as an attorney specializing in environmental and land use law and serving as deputy executive director and chief counsel at the New Jersey Highlands Council. A NEIWPCC employee since October 2013, Borden manages day-to-day operations at NBEP’s Providence office and is working with NBEP’s management committee and executive committee as well as NEIWPCC staff in Lowell on the development and implementation of initiatives and partnerships related to such matters as water quality, stormwater mitigation, habitat protection, and climate change.

The NBEP has much on its agenda for 2014, including the hiring of additional staff and the development of a status and trends report for Narragansett Bay as well as projects related to dissolved oxygen monitoring, water quality modeling, and restoration of diadromous fish passage.

NEIWPCC’s Tom Borden (fourth from left, wearing tie) participates in a meeting of the Narragansett Bay Estuary Program’s management committee, which in 2013 was expanded from 12 members to 26 to enable a greater variety of perspectives and a more regional approach. To the right of Borden is Judith Swift, director of the University of Rhode Island’s Coastal Institute and the new chair of the management committee.

Lake Champlain Basin Program

In 2013, we marked the 20th anniversary of NEIWPCC’s close relationship with the Lake Champlain Basin Program, which works throughout the lake’s watershed to reduce pollution loading and improve the lake’s water quality. LCBP’s many

partners include government agencies from Vermont, New York, and Quebec; federal agencies including EPA and the National Park Service; and watershed groups. Amid all this support, NEIWPCC’s role is especially important: our staff in Lowell manage LCBP’s Grand Isle, Vermont, office staff and its financial resources.

Among the many high-profile projects completed in fiscal 2013 was the launch of a redesigned LCBP website that is as visually appealing as almost any site on the web and features major navigational improvements. The program’s e-newsletter, Casin’ the Basin, also received a redesign along the theme of the new website. Upgrades of a physical nature were done as well; NEIWPCC’s LCBP staff oversaw improvements to the Resource Room, a space within the ECHO Lake Aquarium and Science Center in Burlington, Vermont, where visitors learn about the basin and their role in protecting it.

Other major achievements included publication of Flood Resilience in the Lake Champlain Basin and Upper Richelieu River, a report requested by New York, Vermont, and Quebec. Written by LCBP’s Stephanie Castle, a NEIWPCC environmental analyst, with plenty of support from her LCBP colleagues, the report explored the impacts of major floods in recent years on communities around the basin and described potential ways to improve flood resilience. Produced in English and French, the report was based on lessons learned from a series of LCBP-coordinated workshops and conferences attended by local, state, and provincial officials; federal partners; NGOs; and others. During

LCBP’s Ryan Mitchell, a NEIWPCC information officer, oversaw the impressive redesign of the program’s website.

31Annual Report 2013

Seeding Ideas

Amid all its other activities, the Lake Champlain Basin Program also works to provide farms in New York and Vermont with the information they need to minimize nutrient runoff while sustaining farming viability. In the spring of 2013, LCBP’s Myra Lawyer, a NEIWPCC environmental analyst

working as an agronomist with NYSDEC in the New York portion of the Lake Champlain basin, launched a series of meetings for farmers to inform them about lake-friendly farming practices. Aptly called Farming in the Basin, the effort relied on the much-appreciated cooperation of area farms to host the meetings. A key partner in the work, Cornell Cooperative Extension, Clinton County, contacted potential host farms and performed educational outreach, while Lawyer developed the meeting materials and conducted the demonstrations. County soil and water conservation districts and the USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service also assisted with the effort.

Held at twilight to accommodate the farmers’ workdays, the meetings covered a range of nutrient management practices, including pasture management, precision feeding methods for reducing phosphorus brought onto a farm as feed, machines for planting crops without tilling the soil (no-till drills), and strategies for capturing the value of manure as fertilizer. Participants also learned about cover crops, which farmers can plant while fields are fallow to increase nutrient retention. The roots of cover crops prevent soil erosion and utilize excess nutrients in the soil, decreasing the potential for damaging runoff. As the year progressed, the initiative continued with county fair presentations and more meetings, and in the fall, Lawyer led a tour on two of the fields that had been aerially seeded with a cover crop. The New York aerial seeding project was funded by NRCS and was similar to one initiated by LCBP and the University of Vermont on the Vermont side of Lake Champlain. Lawyer’s Farming in the Basin meetings have resumed in 2014.

LCBP’s Myra Lawyer, a NEIWPCC environmental analyst, explains nutrient retention strategies at the very first Farming in the Basin workshop, held in April 2013 in Peru, New York.

the year, LCBP also expanded its boat launch steward program, through which seasonal employees talk with boaters about preventing the spread of invasive species and perform courtesy vessel inspections. And the Champlain Valley National Heritage Partnership, managed by LCBP’s Bill Howland and Jim Brangan, hosted an International Heritage Summit in Montreal, which brought together organizations from across the region to discuss ways to expand cultural heritage and outdoor recreation-based tourism.

For an always busy organization, 2013 was an exceptionally busy year for the Lake Champlain Basin Program. For a full look at all its work, visit the new website at www.lcbp.org.

The new and improved LCBP Resource Room at the ECHO Lake Aquarium and Science Center. The Resource Room is staffed seven days a week by members of NEIWPCC’s LCBP staff who specialize in informing visitors of all ages about everything and anything to do with Lake Champlain, including the threat posed by aquatic nuisance species and the benefits of using lake-friendly cleaning products. Note the banner at top; in 2013, the Resource Room celebrated receiving 250,000 visits since its opening in 2003.

32

Long Island Sound Study

For years, NEIWPCC has assisted Connecticut, New York, and EPA Regions 1 and 2 with efforts by the Long Island Sound Study (LISS), a multi-agency partnership, to increase public awareness of the value of the sound and build

support for its protection. This emphasis on stewardship of the sound has a rich tradition. After all, Long Island Sound is where Theodore Roosevelt (at right), the “Father of the National Wildlife Refuge System,” got his feet wet as a teenage naturalist. We imagine the former president would have approved of the launch in 2013 of the Long Island Sound on-line Stewardship Atlas (www.lisstewardshipatlas.net), which features an interactive map with links to web pages on each of the 33 coastal areas designated by EPA, New York, and Connecticut as outstanding examples of places to protect and enjoy. Much of the content was provided by Robert Burg, a NEIWPCC information officer and the LISS communications coordinator, who also developed several other key publications and outreach products during the year.

NEIWPCC’s Victoria O’Neill monitoring one of three surface elevation table (SET) stations at Flax Pond marsh in Old Field, New York. SETs provide long-term data on marsh elevation changes to determine if marshes are able to keep pace with sea level rise.

Hudson River Estuary Program

Since 1999, NEIWPCC has been providing staff and project management support to the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation’s Hudson River Estuary Program, which works to protect and improve the

Hudson River and its watershed, from the federal dam at Troy to upper New York Harbor. A number of our staff at the program work with NYSDEC’s Hudson River Fisheries Unit on sampling programs for anadromous fish, including the sonic tracking of adult Atlantic sturgeon. From 2006 to 2008, the staff implanted tags in captured sturgeon, and they’ve been following them ever since, gathering information about sturgeon movement and spawning locations. Unfortunately, the tags’ batteries are losing power, and the push was on in 2013 to gather as much data as possible before the batteries run out. The data have proven immensely helpful in identifying and protecting areas of importance to the sturgeon; restrictions are often placed on activity in those areas to avoid disturbing the fish.

Our staff also continued work on a three-year river herring spawning stock monitoring program that began in 2012. Concerns are growing over coastal declines of river herring (alewife and blueback herring) stocks, and the goal of the study is to gather biological data needed to determine if river herring populations exist at sustainable levels in the Hudson. During the 2012 and 2013 sampling seasons, our staff collected data from over 12,500 river herring at more than 100 sampling sites; age data were collected and analyzed on more than 1,400 fish.

Through our staff at the Hudson River Estuary Program and in Lowell, we also manage contracts for work in the region on watershed management, flood response and mitigation, source water protection, and green infrastructure. Examples of

Nat

iona

l Par

k Se

rvic

e/Sa

gam

ore

Hill

Nat

iona

l His

tori

c Si

te

Other activities by NEIWPCC staff who work directly with LISS included participation in a regionwide effort to collect post-Sandy data at surface elevation table (SET) stations to determine impacts of the storm on sediment accretion and deposition in marshes along the Atlantic Coast. NEIWPCC’s Victoria O’Neill conducted SET monitoring work at four sites around Long Island Sound; she also expanded a program that enlists middle school and high school students to assist with habitat restoration projects. Other important LISS-related work takes place at our Lowell headquarters, where NEIWPCC staff coordinate a review team of LISS partners that develops RFPs for projects and reviews proposals, selects contractors, and manages projects through to completion. In 2013, the award program funded seven enhancement projects through NEIWPCC on topics ranging from TMDL implementation support and nitrogen management to ecological economics. In October 2013, we initiated the process of implementing four new enhancement projects, including one that will result in low-impact development and green infrastructure design on land surrounding two of the 33 LIS stewardship sites.

33Annual Report 2013

During an outreach event at Black Creek, a Hudson River tributary, NEIWPCC’s Bobby Adams helps a high school student collect biological data on a river herring. Adams is among the NEIWPCC staff who collect data on river herring in the Hudson River estuary as part of a spawning stock monitoring program.

Network Monitors

For two members of NEIWPCC’s staff, Alene Onion and Gavin Lemley, extensive and important monitoring can be done

without stepping outside. They coordinate the Hudson River Environmental Conditions Observing System (HRECOS), a network of environmental monitoring stations distributed throughout the Hudson River watershed. The stations have sensors that record a suite of water quality and weather parameters every 15 minutes, then transmit the data in near real-time to www.hrecos.org, where users such as researchers and resource managers can download the information. The network is operated and funded by a consortium of government agencies, research institutions, and non-profits.

The photo below shows one of several new HRECOS stations established in 2013. As the first mobile buoy station in the network, it’s designed to continuously monitor water quality in the Mohawk River downstream of Utica, New York. Stormwater runoff often overwhelms Utica’s aging wastewater infrastructure, triggering combined sewer overflows (CSOs) that result in high amounts of organic material (raw sewage) being released into the Mohawk River. The buoy is equipped with sensors for detecting environmental responses that are indicative of such events, such as decreases in dissolved oxygen and increases in conductivity. The data can be used in combination with CSO records to aid in developing a model for CSO detection.

With 2013 marking the fifth year of HRECOS operations, an external panel of experts conducted a review of the system. Successfully completed in the fall, the review yielded useful feedback that HRECOS managers will use in formulating a vision for the next five years of the network.

A HRECOS buoy in the Mohawk River monitors dissolved oxygen and conductivity as a means of detecting combined sewer overflows that may have occurred upstream in Utica, New York.

NEIWPCC’s Wes Eakin (standing) cruises on the Hudson River using equipment to “listen” for Atlantic sturgeon. In the water at the ends of the orange poles are hydrophones that allow for tracking of sturgeon using data relayed by tags implanted in the fish (inset). By matching the data up with sophisticated river-bottom maps generated by NEIWPCC’s John Ladd, researchers are learning which areas of the river are seasonally important to the fish and therefore warrant habitat protection measures.

new contract activity in 2013 included projects initiated to provide recreational and visual access to the Hudson River estuary and its tributary streams for environmental justice neighborhoods that lack access to the waters. Other work

is focusing on developing a plan to identify scientific and technical research necessary to advance the understanding of potential coastal green infrastructure strategies in New York City under sea-level rise scenarios.

34

Hudson River National Estuarine Research Reserve

Operated as a partnership between New York State and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Hudson River National Estuarine Research Reserve (HRNERR) encompasses four tidal wetland sites that are

designated as field laboratories for estuarine research, stewardship, and education. For years, NEIWPCC has supported staff who work with the reserve, and in 2013, two such staff—Daniel Miller and Emilie Hauser—continued their work on New York State DEC’s important and influential Hudson River Sustainable Shorelines project.

The project is providing science-based information about shoreline management options, and one way it’s doing so is by developing demonstration projects. In 2013, the Sustainable Shorelines team initiated the design phase of two such projects: one at a park in Cold Spring, New York, and the other at Nyack Beach State Park. In both cases, the parks are popular with the public but suffer from eroding Hudson River shorelines brought on by damage sustained during Tropical Storms Lee and Irene and Hurricane Sandy. NEIWPCC’s Miller is managing the projects, which are being

The Hudson River shoreline at Nyack Beach State Park, heavily damaged by Hurricane Sandy’s surge, is one of two sites selected for demonstration projects that will highlight the benefits of ecological treatments to slow erosion. NEIWPCC’s Dan Miller is managing the work, which is currently in the design phase.

funded by NYSDEC’s Hudson River Estuary Program in partnership with NEIWPCC. As designed, the projects will incorporate ecological shoreline treatments, such as the addition of plantings and the construction of gentler slopes, that will protect public property while enhancing natural habitat and encouraging public use.

In conjunction with Miller’s work, NEIWPCC’s Hauser has overseen an effort to develop case studies about sites where work similar to that being designed for Cold Spring and Nyack has already been done. An online compilation of the case studies, available on HRNERR’s website, provides a virtual tour of six shoreline sites that show how ecologically-engineered structures can prevent or reduce shore erosion while emulating the physical and biological conditions of naturally occurring stable shorelines.

35Annual Report 2013

New York-New Jersey Harbor & Estuary Program

Since 2003, NEIWPCC has assisted the New York-New Jersey Harbor & Estuary Program in its work to protect, conserve, and restore the estuary. NEIWPCC staff manage grants and contracts for the program; in fiscal year 2013, this

work once again included the awarding and tracking of small grants for stewardship and public access. The grants support projects ranging from a citizen science eel-monitoring program in the Bronx to a series of public estuary-focused boat tours out of Newark, New Jersey. We also manage multiple habitat restoration grants, which in 2013 included initial investigations into the feasibility of wetlands restoration and public access development at Sunset Cove in Broad Channel, a neighborhood on an island in New York City’s Jamaica Bay.

Helping to implement some of these grants were our two NEIWPCC staff members—Kate Boicourt and Gabriela Munoz—who work directly with NY-NJ HEP. Their work during the year included coordinating an event called Hooked on Our Waters, which focused on making wise choices about fish consumption; disseminating New Jersey DEP fish consumption materials in several New Jersey communities, particularly those with waterfront parks where many people fish; and the hosting of a citizen science water quality monitoring workshop. In close partnership with EPA, NJDEP, and NYSDEC, the staff also embarked on a citizen science project aimed at providing the tools needed to generate high-quality data with a focus on pathogen indicators in tributaries to the New York-New Jersey Harbor estuary. Data collection for this project will take place in the summer of 2014.

NEIWPCC’s Kate Boicourt (center) participates in work to investigate restoring wetlands and developing public access sites at Sunset Cove in Broad Channel, Queens.

Peconic Estuary Program

Since 2006, NEIWPCC has provided staff and project management support to the Peconic Estuary Program, which works to protect and restore Long Island’s Peconic Bays. NEIWPCC’s Julie Nace, who is based at the New York State DEC

office in East Setauket, helps coordinate the program and its vital water quality and habitat management efforts. In 2013, Nace continued to finalize an inter-municipal agreement between municipalities in the watershed. The agreement would allow cost savings and greater information-sharing to help better meet stormwater runoff requirements and, in the process, improve water quality.

Nace also continued to coordinate habitat restoration projects, the creation of subwatershed management plans, and various work on controlling invasive aquatic species. One of the program’s priorities is to improve storm resiliency in coastal areas of the Peconic Estuary watershed; this has led to a series of efforts related to wetlands restoration, vulnerability assessments, and land protection strategies. The Peconic Estuary Program has also renewed its focus on reducing nitrogen pollution to the estuary, which has resulted in a number of initiatives, including the creation of a nitrogen workgroup to assess and reduce nutrient loading.

In Riverhead, New York, young citizen scientists, led by retired NYSDEC marine fisheries biologist Byron Young, participate in monitoring of the population of alewife, a species of river herring that returns to Long Island each spring to spawn in the freshwater rivers. NEIWPCC staff at the Peconic Estuary Program and Long Island Sound Study help coordinate this volunteer monitoring effort, which is overseen by the Seatuck Environmental Association.

36

Direct Assistance

In 2013, NEIWPCC continued to assist our member states by providing staff who work directly with state agencies in a wide variety of ways. Through these staff, we provide specific skills and expertise that the

states require to address their water-related priorities. It’s an arrangement that works well for all involved; the states get the help they need, and at NEIWPCC, we get the satisfaction of knowing our staff are contributing directly to the states’ efforts to reach their clean water goals.

Over the years, the work of these staff members has often led them into the field to conduct studies that add to our understanding of water resources and how best to protect them. In other cases, the staff perform critical agency work that goes on behind the scenes and enables an agency’s more visible operations to function effectively and efficiently. Regardless of the specific nature of the work, the end result is the same—to help our member states make the progress that needs to be made.

Rhode Island Monitoring

NEIWPCC continues to assist Rhode Island DEM by providing technical support to

its water monitoring and assessment program. Working directly with RIDEM, NEIWPCC’s Katie DeGoosh, Mark Nimiroski, and Jane Sawyers engaged in their typically extensive

array of work. This included river sampling for EPA’s National Rivers and Streams Assessment; through this support, NEIWPCC is enabling Rhode Island to contribute to this significant EPA study in which information is being collected on water chemistry, biological health, and physical and human disturbance at randomly selected locations, some of which have never been assessed before. Other work by our staff included oversight of the state’s ambient river monitoring program, implementation of RIDEM’s multi-year rotating river basin survey program, and coordination of macroinvertebrate sampling and habitat assessments, which led to development of a preliminary index of biological integrity to advance biocriteria development and improve future bioassessments. The staff also collected field data on aquatic invasive species to make assessments and inform the public on the extent of their spread.

As she has done for several years, NEIWPCC’s Sawyers assisted in the development of numeric nutrient criteria for Rhode Island’s waters; the work in 2013 focused on statistical analysis of lake data and development of potential criteria, and, as always, the nutrient criteria development process involved significant internal and external vetting of the analysis through presentations and discussions. In a related activity, Sawyers continued fieldwork to address the need for information on algae, plants, and habitat

NEIWPCC staff are key members of the Rhode Island team that is conducting sampling for EPA’s National Rivers and Streams Assessment. At the West River, NEIWPCC’s Mark Nimiroski (right) and RIDEM’s Alan Libby employ the technique known as electrofishing. Electricity is used to temporarily stun fish so researchers can capture and study the fish before returning them unharmed to the water.

NEIWPCC’s Jane Sawyers (standing) is assisting Rhode Island in evaluating ways to measure algal growth in streams. This is challenging in low gradient streams, which seldom have an abundance of the rocks and sticks needed by algae as growth surfaces. To get around the problem, Sawyers placed artificial substrates in selected streams for about four weeks, then removed them to collect the accumulated growth. (The before-and-after photos above show the substrate in Crookfall Brook in Lincoln.) In all locations, the substrates are put in the water at the same depth to allow for comparability between streams.

37Annual Report 2013

in Rhode Island’s streams. For nutrient criteria development, it is critical to collect data on how biological communities, especially algae, respond to nutrients, but states across the country have struggled with how to appropriately measure this response. To help Rhode Island explore its options, Sawyers conducted analysis of several different field methods to quantify Rhode Island’s population of algae and aquatic plants.

Service to New York

For many years, NEIWPCC has employed staff who work directly with New York State DEC’s Division of Water, and in 2013, their work encompassed a multitude of responsibilities. The work included management of grants to

communities for implementation of projects related to nonpoint source pollution, wastewater treatment, and aquatic habitat restoration; development of database applications to process Division of Water permit applications and compliance monitoring; and extensive work on issues related to the New York City watershed program, Lake Champlain Basin Program, and Chesapeake Bay Regulatory and Accountability Grants Program, including project management, contractual issues,

Work on a new natural gas pipeline in New York State had to comply with the project’s SPDES general permit for stormwater discharges from construction activity. NEIWPCC’s Chris Lassell, who took these photos, monitored permit compliance as the work passed through NYSDEC’s Region 5. At left, workers minimize disturbance to a stream by installing the gas line beneath the stream’s channel, which was temporarily diverted through the black pipe. At right, a crew employs horizontal directional drilling to install pipe in a sensitive area where trenching wasn’t permitted.

RFP development, and metrics reporting. This is only a partial list as space doesn’t permit the highlighting of each staff members’ many achievements. But the work done by Chris Lassell merits special mention.

As a NEIWPCC employee working out of NYSDEC’s Region 5 offices in Ray Brook, Lassell has since 2003 focused on water quality complaint investigations related to the SPDES Construction Stormwater program and on inspections at wastewater treatment plants and stormwater general permit facilities. As part of this work in 2013, Lassell found himself monitoring construction by the utility Enbridge St. Lawrence Gas to install a 48-mile natural gas pipeline from Norfolk, New York, to Chateaugay, New York.

While the bulk of the work on such projects falls under the jurisdiction of New York State’s Public Service Commission, stormwater discharges from construction ac-tivities are regulated under the Clean Water Act. Hence, it was NYSDEC’s responsibility to ensure that work on the pipeline adhered to permit conditions pertaining to con-struction stormwater—and when crews were working in Region 5, that responsibility fell to Lassell. The oversight proved critical. Lassell spent many days on-site addressing issues of concern and working with project managers and contractors to prevent sed-iment runoff into adjacent streams and wetlands. It all goes to show that the watchful eye of an expert can be a powerful factor in ensuring environmental protection.

38

Monitoring the Gains

The national goals of the Clean Water Act are to achieve, wherever attainable, water quality that provides for the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife and recreation in and on the water.

Considerable progress has been made to achieve these goals in water bodies in and around New York City, but one problem that remains is combined sewer overflows—that is, discharges of untreated sewage that occur when a sewer system that carries both wastewater and stormwater is overwhelmed by flow. While CSOs have impacted many of the city’s waters, such as Flushing Bay, Bronx River, Hutchinson River, and Newtown Creek, the good news is something’s being done about it. Actually, a lot of things.

To date, New York City has implemented numerous projects to reduce CSOs, including construction of overflow storage tanks at Paerdegat Basin, Flushing Creek, Spring Creek, and Alley Creek. The projects are being implemented under the auspices of a CSO consent order between New York

After being dredged to remove CSO sediments, Hendrix Creek in New York City is a different water body; odors have been sharply reduced and the appearance dramatically improved.

NEIWPCC’s independent environmental monitors (left to right): Paul Kenline, Lindsey Walaski, and Linda Allen.

City and New York State, and it’s the job of two NEIWPCC staff members based in New York—Linda Allen and Paul Kenline—to monitor efforts to comply with the consent order. Over the past five years, Allen and Kenline have seen tangible improvements in water quality directly related to consent order-driven projects. The photo of Hendrix Creek below, taken by our staff, is a clear example of the results they’re seeing.

In addition to CSO abatement, New York City is working to reduce nitrogen discharges to large open water bodies—discharges that can cause algae blooms and hypoxic conditions. Under a consent judgment with New York State, the city is upgrading wastewater treatment plants to implement biological nutrient removal technology to reduce nitrogen loadings to Long Island Sound and Jamaica Bay. The progress on these upgrades and compliance with the consent judgment is monitored by Lindsey Walaski, a NEIWPCC staff member based in Albany. Walaski reports that the city has completed the first phase of the work, and in 2013, finished a major upgrade at the Wards Island WWTP. The result: a significant reduction in nitrogen loadings.

39Annual Report 2013

A Lake in Need

For Aimee Clinkhammer, a new NEIWPCC environmental analyst, the task of cleaning up Onondaga Lake is a challenge she has fully embraced. Since joining our team in August 2013 as Onondaga Lake watershed coordinator, Clinkhammer has

worked with community groups, businesses, and local government agencies in a unified effort to accelerate the progress made in restoring this Central New York lake with a long toxic history.

For centuries, Onondaga Lake has been considered sacred by the Onondagas and other Native American tribes, but industrialization severely tarnished its waters. In recent years, water quality has improved, thanks to the combined efforts of key stakeholders as well as the unique collaboration between federal, state, and local entities including the Onondaga Nation under the Onondaga Lake Watershed Partnership (OWLP). Clinkhammer is now building on that hard work. Based out of NYSDEC’s Region 7 office, she is helping to develop a shared community vision for the restoration of the lake’s watershed and its physical, chemical, and biological integrity. Her initial efforts have focused on assisting with the development of a principles document and planning community events that inform the public about the restoration process and the history of the lake. And momentum is building. Case in point: Experts from EPA, NYSDEC, the New York State Attorney General’s Office, Onondaga County, City of Syracuse, Onondaga Nation, and the U.S. Geological Survey are convening a panel to develop a strategy to reduce sediment loading, with a particular focus on managing the proliferation of sediment-producing mudboils in Onondaga County’s Tully Valley.

Clinkhammer’s many other activities have included developing a communications plan for the OLWP that has already resulted in her launch of a website (www.olwp.org) and a communications group to assist with OWLP outreach activities. It’s all a lot of work done

in a short bit of time, but then, there’s a lot at stake. Onondaga Lake means a great deal to a great many people. It’s only right that we do all we can to make it beautiful again.

NEIWPCC’s Aimee Clinkhammer on the shores of Onondaga Lake, the focus of her restoration efforts. Far in the background is one of the hydraulic dredges being used to remove contaminated sediments from the lake bottom.

Maine Drinking Water Support

At the Maine Department of Health and Human Services’ Drinking Water Program, im-

portant assistance is provided by two NEIWPCC staff members. Martha Nadeau does a tremendous amount of data management in her work as a liaison between the program’s Compliance Enforcement Team and its Information Management Team. She generates compliance reports for the enforcement team’s review, then issues violations if need be. David Welch works as part of a team that handles quality control in the Drinking Water Program. This team also supports all needs with regards to EPA’s Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS), which provides information about public water systems and any violations of EPA’s drinking water regulations, as reported to EPA by states. To support this responsibility, Welch developed an Access application that he uses to generate, directly from data in SDWIS, consumer confidence e-reports for each of Maine’s roughly 375 community water systems.

Welch is also managing the Drinking Water Program’s migration to a digital filing system, no small task. The multiple-year project involves processing into a digital format all the files related to about 1,900 public water systems, from transient supplies (such as campgrounds) to major water utilities. NEIWPCC and Maine DHHS have entered into several new agreements that will allow our staff to continue providing this Drinking Water Program assistance into 2014. NEIWPCC and Maine DHHS also entered into a new agreement for NEIWPCC to hire a contractor to provide technical support related to hydrology, compliance, enforcement, and program operations for the Drinking Water Program.

An Access application developed by NEIWPCC’s David Welch significantly eases the task of generating consumer confidence e-reports for Maine’s community water systems.

40

Quality Work in Massachusetts

In Massachusetts, NEIWPCC’s Richard Chase has made it a mission to ensure that any data produced by the MassDEP Division of Watershed Management’s

Watershed Planning Program is of the highest possible quality. Chase manages Watershed Planning’s Quality Assurance Program, in support of Clean Water Act data collection, water body health assessment, and TMDL development. His work in 2013 covered a lot of important ground: he participated in water quality surveys; evaluated new instrumentation; performed instrument calibrations and checks; managed laboratory contracts and coordinated lab audits; assisted in validating collected data; provided training as needed to staff; developed and reviewed draft quality assurance project plans, standard operating procedures, technical reports, and data submittals for projects; and participated in various program planning committees. During 2013, Chase also marked his tenth year as a member of NEIWPCC’s staff.

In March 2013, NEIWPCC’s Richard Chase prepares to sample the waters of White Island Pond in southeastern Massachusetts prior to the application of aluminum sulfate (alum) to the pond. The chemical application was one of the strategies employed to control phosphorus concentrations in order to meet the limit set by the White Island Pond TMDL.

As this annual report makes abundantly clear, one of the many ways in which we serve our member states is by coordinating projects that generate environmental data. Those data often drive important decisions about such matters as the merit of a strategy or the extent of a problem. Good

data lead to good decisions. Therefore, the quality of the data must be assured.To that end, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency requires that any organization receiving funds

from the agency for the collection of environmental data have an EPA-approved Quality Management Plan. NEIWPCC has had such a QMP in place since 2001, and in early 2013, we received EPA approval for our latest version. The QMP describes NEIWPCC’s system for planning, implementing, documenting, and assessing data collection to ensure the quality of the information generated by a project. The QMP also spells out our commitment to developing quality assurance project plans (QAPPs) for each project involving the collection of environmental data or the evaluation of environmental technology.

A QAPP describes how a project’s data are to be collected, analyzed, assessed, stored, and reported, and at NEIWPCC, we see a lot of QAPPs. In fiscal 2013, Michael Jennings, NEIWPCC’s quality assurance program manager (and our director of water resource protection programs) reviewed, revised, and approved 20 separate QAPPs covering a variety of projects to be done by NEIWPCC staff or a contractor we hired. And the job doesn’t end with a QAPP’s approval. To ensure that the promise of quality data is upheld, field assessments are conducted periodically to verify that approved procedures are being followed. In August 2013, Jennings accompanied NEIWPCC staff at the Interstate Environmental Commission District as they collected data in Long Island Sound associated with a project and QAPP entitled Ambient Water Quality Monitoring in the NEIWPCC (IEC District) Waterways. We’re pleased to report that all fieldwork observed in association with this monitoring effort was conducted in accordance with the approved QAPP and that no non-conformances were noted. The result continued a welcome trend; all NEIWPCC field assessments conducted to date have come to the same positive conclusion.

NEIWPCC’s commitment to quality management is also evident during our annual meeting each summer in Lowell that brings together all our staff from throughout our member states. At the 2013 meeting, Jennings delivered a training session on quality assurance awareness, something he has done every year at the all-staff meeting since 2009.

For more on our quality assurance work and to access a copy of NEIWPCC’s Quality Management Plan, visit www.neiwpcc.org/quality.

Quality Management

NEIWPCC’s Evelyn Powers (left) and Amanda Rollizo of the Interstate Environmental Commission District collect water samples in western Long Island Sound. The photo was taken during a NEIWPCC field assessment that confirmed they were properly following procedures outlined in the project’s quality assurance project plan.

41Annual Report 2013

Financial Information

From the Comptroller

This page contains the results of the latest audit of NEIWPCC’s program revenue and expenditures for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2013. The Commission is a not-for-profit organization, exempt from taxes under Section

501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. We continue to receive a sizable portion of our funding from the United States

Environmental Protection Agency in the form of grants and cooperative agreements. From our member states, we receive direct financial support in the form of annual dues as well as substantial funding for projects pertaining to specific water bodies. Among our other sources of revenue are our training and certification programs, including those we conduct for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the State of Maine. Fees generated by the Massachusetts and Maine programs are shown on the statement of program activities as separate sources of revenue.

This year, NEIWPCC assumed fiduciary responsibility for the Interstate Environmental Commission (a joint agency of the states of Connecticut, New Jersey, and New York) as a means of preserving IEC as a congressionally approved, viable, and effective organization. IEC was established in 1936 for the purpose of protecting its jurisdictional waters and the environment of its district in a regional manner.

New eNglaNd INterstate water PollutIoN CoNtrol CommIssIoN

Statement of Program ActivitiesYear Ended September 30, 2013

Revenue

Federal Grants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $7,828,849

Member State Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .148,664

Member State Support-IEC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14,821

State Contracts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,679,839

Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .690,383

Interest Income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4,350

Donated Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .917,003

Other Income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53,057

Other Contracts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,922,256

MA/ME License Renewal Fees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .326,302

MA/ME Certification Exam Fees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30,307

Total Revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,615,831

Operating Expenditures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,475,461

Investment Income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15,631

Change in Net Assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $156,001

NEIWPCC’s accomplished financial team (left to right): Jean Quigley, accountant; Linda Agostinelli, comptroller; Dick Kotelly, treasurer; Patti Brady, accountant.

Considering the economic climate and rising costs across the board, fiscal 2013 was a good year financially for NEIWPCC, with total revenue exceeding total operating expenses. This resulted in an increase in net assets, which provide a reserve for the organization to draw upon if necessary to temporarily support operations.

Independent auditors perform an audit of NEIWPCC’s annual financial statements, as required by our compact and our various grants and contracts. The audit is conducted in accordance with U.S. generally accepted auditing standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States.

Linda Agostinelli, C.P.A.NEIWPCC Comptroller

This annual report is a product of theNew England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission

650 Suffolk Street, Suite 410, Lowell, MA 01854Phone: 978-323-7929 • Email: mail@neiwpcc.org • Web: www.neiwpcc.org

Editor: Stephen Hochbrunn, NEIWPCC • Writers: Stephen Hochbrunn and Anna Meyer, NEIWPCC, with contributions from NEIWPCC staff (special thanks to Kristen Fitzpatrick)

Graphic design: Newcomb Studios • All photos by NEIWPCC except where noted.

650 Suffolk Street, Suite 410Lowell, MA 01854

Address service requested.

Non-profit OrgU. S. Postage

PAIDWhite Riv Jct, VT

Permit No. 86