1994: connecting the harbor to its watersheds

Massachusetts Water Resources Authority · from the MWRA · 43 pages · 16.2 MB
open the file ↗ · original at the source ↗

The State of

Connecting the Harbor

io its
Watersheds

MASSACHUSETTS WATER RESOURCES AUTHORITY

The State of

October 1995 - Prepared under the direction of:

Douglas B. MacDonald, Executive Director

John F Fitzgerald, Director, Sewerage Division

Michael S. Connor, Director, Environmental Quality Department

Connecting the Harbor bur obec:

Trudy Coxe, Chairwoman

io its John J. Carroll, Vice-Chairman
Lorraine M. Downey, Secretary
Watersheds Michael E. Benullo
Norman P. Jacques
Charles Lyons
Joseph A. MacRitchie
Vincent G. Mannering
Manuel A. Moutinho, III
Samuel G. Mygatt
Thomas E. Reilly

Technical Report No. 95-12

MASSACHUSETTS WATER RESOURCES AUTHORITY

Prepared hy:

Wendy Smith Leo
Andrea C. Rex
Sally Rege Carroll
Michael S. Connor

Graphics, maps, and layout by:

Rita Berkeley
Carolynn DeCillo
Susan Curran Ford
Mark Goodwin
Jennifer Siegel

Many people contributed information and
advice to this report. The authors would
like to thank Eugene Benson, Anne
Canaday, Ellen Carney, Phil Carbone,
Michael Collins, Nancy Ettele, Carolyn
Fiore, Erin Graham, Ken Keay, David
Kubiak, Charles Lombardi, Lise Marx,
Kevin McManus, Richard O’Gara, Carl

Pawlowski, William Riley, Karen Rondeau,

Mark Sullivan, Meg Tabacsko, Nancy
Wheatley, and Nick Yannoni.

Special thanks to:

Kelly Coughlin, Douglas MacDonald,
Gretchen Roorbach, Leo Sommaripa,
Elisa Speranza, and Tim Watkins.

We would like to acknowledge especially
the help received from those outside
MWRA: Andy Ayers, Linda Beres, Robert
Buotte, Brad Chase, Bill Clark, Phil
Colarusso, James Goldstein, Dan Golumb,
Diane Gould, Steve Halterman, Joe
Horowitz, Bill Hubbard, Steve Ivas, Jeff
Kennedy, Laurie Kennedy, Carol Kowalski,
Justin Lancaster, Julia O’Brien, Karen Pelto,
Martin Pillsbury, Susan Redlich, Stewart
Sanders, Rich Signell, and Alex Strysky.

The

Watersheds}
of MWRA
Communities

he centerpiece of this

report is a series of maps

describing water quality

in the watersheds that
together form the larger
Boston Harbor watershed. The
following list links the munici-
palities in the MWRA service
area with the watersheds of
Boston Harbor and surround-
ing areas.

MWRA Communities in Boston Harbor
Watersheds

Winthrop Bay Watershed
Boston:

East Boston®
Revere®
Winthrop

Arlington®
Belmont®
Boston:
Charlestown®
East Boston®
Burlington
Cambridge
Chelsea
Everett
Lexington®
Malden
Medford
Melrose
Reading

Revere®
Somerville#
Stoneham
Wakefield
‘Watertown®
Wilmington
Winchester
Woburn
Charles River Watershed
Arlington®
Ashland
Belmont®
Boston:
downtown®
Allston
Back Bay
Brighton
Charlestown®
Jamaica Plain
Mattapan®
Roslindale
Roxbury#
West Roxbury®
Brookline
Cambridge®
Dedham=
Lexington®
Natick
Needham
Newton
Somerville#
Walpole#
Waltham
Watertown®

Wellesley
Weston
Westwood=

Boston:
downtown
Charlestown®
Dorchester®
East Boston®
Mattapan®
Roxbury ®
South Boston®
South End

Neponset River Watershed

Boston:
Dorchester#
Hyde Park
Mattapan®
South Boston®
West Roxbury#

Canton®

Dedham=

Milton®

Norwood

Quincy#

Randolph=

Stoughton

Walpole#

Westwood

Quincy®

Weymouth Fore and Back River Watershed

Braintree

Canton

Hingham=
Holbrook
Milton=
Quincy®
Randolph»
Stoughton™
Weymouth
Hingham=
Weymouth=

MWRA Communities Not in Boston
Harbor Watersheds

North Coastal Watershed
Lynn

Lynnfield
Marblehead
Nahant

Peabody

Saugus
Swampscott

Worcester

Concord River Watershed
Framingham
Marlborough
Northborough
Southborough

® A purple square indicates a commu-
nity that lies in more than one
Boston Harbor watershed.

Il |
1 Pollution in Watersheds: The Boston Harbor Example
3 Sewage Treatment Plants Are One Source of Pollution to the Harbor Watershed
# Can the impact of treatment plants be reduced?
a Sources Other Than Treatment Plants Are Also Important
5 Sanitary sewer overflows contribute to local watershed contamination
5 Stormwater carries pollutants from the streets to water bodies
6 Combined sewer overflows (CSOs) can be a major source of pollution in urban watersheds
7 ~— Watershed Planning: MWRA'S System Master Plan/€SO Plan
7 CSO Plan: History and Overview
8 CSO Plan: Optimizing Sewer System Performance
11 The Watershed Maps and How to Use Them
13 Winthrop Bay
15 Mystic River
17 Charles River
19 Lower Charles River
21 Inner Harbor
23 Neponset River
25 Dorchester Bay and Neponset Estuary
27 Quincy Bay
29 Weymouth Fore and Back Rivers
31 Weir River/Hingham and Hull Bays
33
34

3 Talile 1: Treatment plant violations
4 Tale 2:, MWRA has improved enforcement since Fiscal Year 1990

2 Figure 1: The watersheds of Boston Harbor and MWRAS sewer system
5 Figure 2: Miles of inspected pipe each year

6 Figure 8: Diagram of a combined sewer overflow

9

Figure 4: CSO volumes depend on rainfall
10 Figure 5: Pumping capacity of Deer Island
10 Figure 6: Predicted CSO discharge

Executive

s MWRAs new Deer Island treatment facility has progressed
towards a completion date in 1999, the annual State of
Boston Harbor report has documented that the harbor has
entered the early stages of ecosystem recovery. With start-
up of the new primary treatment plant in January 1995, this
recovery is expected to continue. However, the limited nature of
environmental improvements to date underscores the need to
press ahead with work on the new secondary treatment plant

and on the outfall tunnel that will discharge treated effluent 9.5

miles out in the deep waters of Massachusetts Bay. The full opera-

tion of these facilities remains a priority for the restoration of

Boston Harbor. However, greater understanding of the harbors

water quality problems and a recognition of the many pollution

sources that are not directly linked to the region’s sewer systems
point to the need for a water quality management approach with

a much broader scope.

Watershed management and watershed-based planning are
now the watchwords for citizens focused on improving the state
of Boston Harbor and other harbors, bays and rivers. This State
of Boston Harbor report focuses primarily on assessing each of
the eight watersheds that contribute to Boston Harbor and intro-
duces many of the pollution management issues affecting the
entire watershed. A sample of the local watershed issues demon-
strates the broad scope of water quality problems:

1% The 308 square-mile Charles River Watershed is Boston's
largest. The Charles River enjoys good water quality for much
of its length. However, as the Charles reaches the urban
communities along its route to the harbor, high bacteria
counts impair its use. Raw sewage from combined sewer
overflows (CSOs) and contaminated storm drains adversely
affect the Charles River Basin, the Back Bay Fens and the
Muddy River. The harbor in turn can be affected by Charles
River pollution

'@ The Neponset River Watershed is home to some of the area’s
richest wetlands resources. However, past industrial pollution
in the upstream portion of the river has resulted in high levels
of toxic contamination, while sewage discharge from down-
stream CSOs remains a problem for both the river and the
beaches along Dorchester Bay.

@ In the Mystic River Watershed, the Alewife Brook, which still
supports a few of its namesake fish, is among the most pol-
luted waterways in all of metropolitan Boston. Elsewhere in
the watershed, pollution from oil port operations in the
Chelsea and Island End rivers adversely affects the health of
marine animals and the biodiversity of the bottom-dwelling
community.

In applying a watershed approach to controlling pollution in
Boston Harbor, MWRA has undertaken several projects—both
planned and ongoing—within the watersheds. Among those dis-
cussed in this report are:

§% The new CSO Plan, with projects in Boston, Cambridge,
Chelsea, and Somerville, will dramatically reduce the frequen-
cy of untreated overflows to no more than four per year; pro-
vide for the treatment of the largest CSOs; and eliminate CSOs
altogether in Dorchester Bay, the Neponset River, and
Constitution Beach in East Boston.

® Interceptor construction and replacement projects will
increase the capacity of old interceptors and prevent untreated
sewage from entering the rivers and groundwater.

® Pollution prevention programs are helping industries,
municipalities, businesses, and residential neighborhoods
decrease the amounts of toxic metals and other contaminants
that enter the region’s sewers.

Go to Table of Contents Go to next section

Pollution in

uch of the pollution entering the harbor is carried by

water originating from the harbor's watersheds.

Watersheds come in all sizes—large watersheds are made

up of many smaller ones. For example, among the
Boston Harbor watersheds, the Alewife Brook watershed is part
of the Mystic River watershed. Quincy Bay, a part of Boston
Harbor, has a small watershed; the watershed of the Charles
River, a major tributary to Boston Harbor, is many times larger.
The Boston Harbor watersheds are shown in Figure 1.

MWR&s water and sewer systems serve more than two million
Massachusetts residents as well as industries and businesses in 61
cities and towns. The water system imports hundreds
of millions of gallons of water per day to the Boston
Harbor watersheds from several sources in western and
central Massachusetts that would otherwise naturally
drain to Long Island Sound via the Connecticut River or
to the Gulf of Maine via the Merrimack River. Much of
the imported water eventually becomes household and
industrial wastewater that is transported through a net-
work of local sewers and MWRA interceptors (large
regional sewers) to one of two MWRA treatment plants

on the shores of Boston Harbor. The wastewater also

the Boston Harbor Example

includes runoff, rainwater and snowmelt that is carried from
parts of Boston, Cambridge, Somerville, and Chelsea, and sewage
from communities that have non-MWRA sources of water, such
as Cambridge. Together these flows make up the 370 million
gallons of sewage collected for treatment on an average day. After
treatment, the treated wastewater, or effluent, is released into the
harbor.

Virtually all human development of the land affects the flow
of water over and under the ground and degrades water quality
by adding pollutants or compromising natural processes of water
purification. Undeveloped land acts to clean water that flows
through natural vegetation and layers of soil. In con-
trast, stormwater drainage systems and paved ground
drastically alter the response of land to a rainstorm.
Rainwater quickly runs off paved land, carrying pollu-
tants either into a stormwater collection system or
directly into a water body without benefit of natural fil-
tering. Thus urban stormwater, even without sewage
connections or industrial discharges, can have pollutant
concentrations as high as those in treated municipal

wastewater (Ellis, 1986; Bigornia-Vitale et al., 1995).

FIGURE |:

The watersheds
of Boston
Harbor and
MWRA‘s sewer
communities.

Charles River
HoListon Watershed
MEDI

MILLIS

NORFOLK
BELLINGHAM

MENON FRANKLIN

LEGEND

2 MWRA Sewer Communities

TABLE |:

Violations of interim discharge limits include
biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), total
suspended solids (TSS), and pH violations at
Deer Island and Nut Island in 1993 and 1994.

Wetlands are especially effective in
reducing pollution by absorbing water

that would otherwise run off, filtering out

i af WA PLANT VIOLATIONS

Sewage treatment plants are one source of
pollution to the harbor watershed

There are six sewage treatment plants

mpl

oh
mM :

pollutants, and recharging groundwater 1993 16 0 0 0 that discharge to Boston Harbor or its trib-
aquifers. Creating undeveloped buffers 1994 16 1 0 1 utaries. The two largest treatment plants
around water bodies reduces water pollu- = NUTS in the Boston Harbor watershed are oper-

tion, which is why MWRA and the

Metropolitan District Commission (MDC) 1993 6

maintain watershed protection areas
1994 8

around our drinking water reservoirs.

Boston Harbor and its watersheds receive

municipal and industrial wastewater from dozens of dischargers
ranging from the wastewater of a single home or factory or a
small single-town sewage treatment facility to the huge dis-
charges of 43 sewer communities through the two MWRA treat-
ment plants. These wastewater discharges often contribute sig-
nificant pollutant loads to their receiving bodies of water. The

focus of the federal and state clean water laws on strict permit-

ting, monitoring, and enforcement for such discharges has greatly

reduced their overall impact.

Upstream sources of pollution, whether industrial discharges,
contaminated runoff, or leaking septic systems that are poorly
sited and maintained, can affect water quality downstream as

well as locally.

‘Fiscal Year BOD TS$- Cliform ph

ated by MWRA. These treatment plants,

0 0 10 at Deer Island and Nut Island, must oper-

1 0 7 ate without interruption. At Deer Island

this has meant keeping the old plant run-
ning while building the new one around it. Flow was introduced
into the new, larger primary plant in January 1995. At Nut
Island, the aging plant must be kept running until the new Nut
Island-to-Deer Island tunnel is complete. Because these old pri-
mary treatment plants cannot meet federal and state standards,
MWRA has been given interim standards which it must meet
until the new, federally mandated secondary treatment plant is
completed. Table 1 shows the number of violations of the plants’
interim limits over the past two years.

At Deer Island, the number of violations has decreased over
the past ten years (Lavery et al., 1994). At Nut Island, total sus-
pended solids (TSS) and fecal coliform violations have generally
remained constant. There were a higher number of biochemical
oxygen demand (BOD) violations in Fiscal Years 1993 and 1994,
possibly due to changes in sludge processing and other construc-

tion-related factors. pH at Nut Island can fall below the standard

in the incoming wastewater, and pH cannot be adjusted at the
plant. Low pH may occur during periods of greater precipitation

and resulting high runoff.

Can the impact of treatment plants be reduced?

The most cost-effective way to control pollution, especially
from toxic chemicals, is to reduce both the use and the discharge
of toxic compounds at their sources—industries, businesses, and
residences. MWRA regulates the discharge of toxic pollutants
from industries by setting strict limits on the types and amounts
of pollutants that may be discharged to the sewer system; inspecting
and issuing discharge permits to over 1,100 industrial sewer users
and sampling their wastewater; and taking enforcement actions

against those sewer users who violate their permit requirements.

MWRA HAS IMPROV

NFORCEMENT SINCE FISCAL YEAR 1990

For example, strict mercury limits have essentially eliminated indus-
try as a source of toxic mercury to the MWRA system.

MWRA also provides technical assistance to industrial sewer
users on other methods of pollution reduction and prevention,
and works cooperatively with industry groups on solutions to
difficult discharge problems. For example, the MWRA-spon-
sored Mercury Products Workgroup assists hospitals and other
mercury users in identifying and eliminating their mercury
discharges.

With the aid of an improved computerized tracking system,
MWR&s follow-up and enforcement actions against industries
that do not meet their discharge permit requirements have con-

tinued to be aggressive in Fiscal Year 1994.

1990 1981 1982 1993 1994
0 16 127 370 48)
Noncompliance notice** 23 99 71 132 120
Penalty assessment notice 2 15 i 19 22
Penalties assessed $1,105,000 $611,000 $1,045,00 $800,000 $922,050
Significant Industrial Users
in significant noncompliance 116 107 114 113 98

*An informal notification to give the industry warning of potential problems and a chance to correct its violations.

**A formal notification if industry fails to correct its violations.

The New Deer Istand
Sewage Treatment Plant
MWRAs major accomplishment in the
past year has been the Phase One
start-up of the new primary treatment
plant on Deer Island, which currently
treats 260 million gallons of North
System flows on an average day.
Eventually the plant will have the
Capacity to treat up to a peak flow of
1,280 million gallons per day—although
the expected peak flow is 998 million
gallons-enough capacity to handle not
only North System flows but also
South System flows now treated at
Nut Island in Quincy. It is too soon to
evaluate the new plant's performance;
next year's State of Boston Harbor
report will discuss the start-up of this
major facility and assess effluent and
harbor quality as they relate to the
new plant.

TABLE 2

Many industries address viola-
tions at the first stage of enforce-
ment and avoid further action.

Sources other than treatment plants are also important

While we are increasingly able to control the quality of
MWRA treatment plant effluent through improved technology
and infrastructure, other sources of pollution seriously affect
water quality in the watershed. These include sanitary sewer
overflows, stormwater, deposition from the atmosphere, leaking
septic systems, contaminated groundwater, spills, and com-
bined sewer overflows. Some of these sources and their rela-

tionship to MWRA operations are addressed in this section.

Wi Sanitary sewer overflows contribute to local watershed contamination
Wet weather and high groundwater levels in the springtime
increase the overall amount of flow in the region’s sewers and
can lead to overflows where local system capacity is exceeded.
In order to prevent infiltration of groundwater through cracks in
pipes, or inflow of stormwater through unlawful sewer connec-
tions, MWRA and the service area communities have increased
pipe repair and inspection. Pipes are inspected using closed-cir-
cuit TV cameras to spot cracks and stormwater connections.
MWRA replaces or repairs deteriorated interceptors; local pipes

are the responsibility of each community.

Stormwater carries pollutants from the streets to water bodies

To preyent flooding in paved and built-up areas, stormwater
systems rapidly drain rainwater from our streets and channel it
through pipes into a nearby river or harbor. Oil, litter, animal

and bird waste, and other pollutants from the street are carried

FIGURE 2:

Pipes are inspected using closed-circuit TV cameras; in 1994 MWRA
and its communities inspected 57 miles of pipe. Between 1989 and
1994, a total of 232 miles of pipe was inspected, much of it for the first
time.

MILES OF INSPECTED PIPE EACH YEAR

60

50

40

Miles inspected
w
oO

1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994
Fiscal Year

along with the water. Unfortunately, motor oil, paint, and other
toxic pollutants are sometimes illegally dumped into storm
drains instead of being disposed of properly.

Stormwater systems can be the dominant source of many
pollutants to a water body. This is especially true when storm
drains are contaminated by untreated sewage from household,
business, or local sewer cross-connections. Such illegal connec-
tions can be a major contributor of bacteria and other pollutants
to the harbor. Although it may not stand out as a major source
of pollution when averaged over the whole year, stormwater can.
cause serious pollution problems during periods of heavy rain or

snowmelt.

Go the the Table of Contents Go the the next section

Watershed Planning:
MWRAS System
Master Plan/

ater pollution problems are complex, varying
between watersheds but crossing political
boundaries. Modern water quality manage-
ment strategies are based on understanding
each watershed’s geology, patterns of development, and
pollution problems. For example, CSOs may be the
worst problem in one watershed while contaminated
stormwater is the major pollutant in another.
Watershed-based planning is more flexible than traditional regu-
latory approaches, transcends town and state boundaries, and
permits targeting antipollution strategies to efficiently yield the
greatest benefit in water quality.
Current watershed-based plans in the Boston Harbor water-
shed include the following:
= The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Watershed

Initiative in the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs

began in 1994 with a pilot study of the Neponset River Basin.

The plan includes monitoring and protection of rivers and
critical resources, wetlands restoration and land acquisition,
and public education about watersheds. Citizens’ groups and
businesses are active participants.

= The Charles River Watershed Association Integrated
Monitoring, Modeling and Management Project empha-
sizes monitoring with community involvement to measure
the sources and effects of pollution and how pollution relates
to water use.

= MWRAs System Master Plan/Conceptual CSO Plan

(referred to as the CSO Plan) examines each sub-basin of

Boston Harbor and proposes a variety of sewer system
projects to improve water quality. The next section
describes in more detail how a watershed approach

focuses resources on the most serious CSO problems.

C80 Plan: History and Overview

The evolution of MWRAs CSO Plan (MWRA, 1994) pro-
vides a good example of the opportunities and chal-
lenges of watershed-based planning. In 1990, MWRA
developed a CSO Facilities Plan to build miles of deep rock tun-
nels to store combined sewage which would otherwise overflow
during rainstorms. The stored combined sewage would be
pumped to the treatment plant in dry weather. However, as
MWRA continued to gather environmental quality data and bet-
ter combined sewage flow data, we learned that both the volume
and the environmental effects of combined sewage had been
overestimated and that the costly tunnel system might not be
necessary.

To develop a better plan, MWRA collected data that greatly
increased our understanding of how the combined sewer system
functions in response to storms. Then the problem was reexam-
ined from a watershed-based perspective.

The new CSO Plan evaluates the relative impacts of pollution
sources. Different solutions are used in different locations
depending on the amount of CSO, amount of pollution from
other sources, existing water quality, water quality goals, and pre-
sent uses of the watersheds. The primary CSO pollution prob-

lem is the risk to public health from sewage-borne pathogens

(disease-causing bacteria and viruses), which make swimming
and shellfishing unsafe. Therefore, the plan puts special empha-
sis on eliminating CSOs near beaches and clam flats. By separat-
ing sewers or by relocating the CSOs to other, less sensitive areas,
beaches in East Boston and South Boston and shellfish beds in
the Neponset River estuary will be better protected.

In areas where CSOs appear to be a much less significant
source of pollution than other sources, a more modest level of
CSO control will be applied. For example, even with CSO disin-
fection in the Charles River, swimming in the Charles River Basin
will remain a health risk unless other sources of pathogens are
controlled as well.

Responsibility for implementing the CSO Plan is shared
between MWRA and the CSO communities. Larger, more com-
plex projects will be implemented and ultimately owned and
operated by MWRA. The communities will be responsible for
projects involving improvements to their pipes and to their CSO
outfalls. MWRA maintains several CSO treatment facilities that
remove some solids and disinfect the sewage before discharge.
Under the plan, dechlorination will be added to the treatment
process to reduce any toxic effects on the environment. More
flow will be treated by these facilities and several new ones will
be built. Some overflows will be prevented by enlarging sewers
or building small storage facilities. While some of this work can
be completed quickly, larger sewer separation projects will
extend over a number of years.

After the CSO Plan is fully implemented there will still be

occasional overflows in some areas (less than four times per year
on average) but the volume discharged will be greatly reduced.
Wherever the potential for large CSO discharge remains, includ-
ing the Charles River Basin, Fort Point Channel, and the
Reserved Channel, the discharge will be disinfected. Slicks, float-
ables, and odors from CSOs will be greatly reduced or eliminated

everywhere.

CSO Plan: Optimizing Sewer System Performance

Although the major construction projects of the CSO Plan are
still in the future, important elements of the plan are already
being implemented. The amount and impact of CSOs can be sig-
nificantly lessened through small construction projects, attention
to routine maintenance, and learning how to redirect flow within
the sewer system to maximize storage and protect sensitive areas
like beaches.

The amount of CSO is very dependent on the weather; large
storms or extended periods of wet weather can result in frequent
or large overflows. It is no surprise, then, that the record high
amounts of rain and snow in calendar 1993 and 1994 caused
increased runoff that overwhelmed combined sewer systems and
increased overflow into Boston Harbor and its tributary rivers
during those two years above the level of drier 1992.

Improvements to the sewer system appear to have reduced the
amount of CSO produced by heavy rainfall. For example, there
was slightly more precipitation in 1994 than in 1990, but the
amount of CSO discharge was less. Although CSO discharge will

FIGURE 4:

Combined sewer overflow volumes vary considerably
depending on the number and size of storms. (Source: MWRA
CSO treatment facility records)

always fluctuate with the weather, it has been reduced over the CSO VOLUMES DEPEND ON RAINFALL

2000 50

past 10 years. The following projects helped bring about that

reduction:

"Small-scale optimization projects—several sewer system
improvement projects have been completed by CSO commu-
nities recently, and others will continue over the next few
years. Projects include increasing the size of interceptors and
raising weirs to prevent overflow during smaller events. In

part because of such improvements, Boston Water and Sewer
Commission has been able to eliminate seven CSO outtfalls in

rainfall (inches)

the last five years.

=Improved system maintenance-MWRA and CSO communi-

ties have stepped up their efforts to clean sewers and main-

CSO discharge (

tain regulators and tide gates. If combined sewer structures 4 1990 1991 1992 1993
are not functioning properly, they can discharge sewage even Calendar Year

in dry weather. Because of system improvements, there have © annual treated CSO discharge
been no dry weather overflows since 1992. @ annual rainfall

=Changes to headworks operations-MWRAs headworks facili-

"Increased outfall flow capacity—repairs to existing outfalls on
ties remove rags, grit, and large objects from sewage before it pactty—tepalrs: 10 €xisung:oy

enters the treatment plants, When Deer Island plant capacity Deer Island in the last few years increased the amount of

is reached, the headworks can also “choke” back flow to pre- flow the plant can handle without flooding, When complete,

the new outfall tunnel will have sufficient capacity to convey

vent plant flooding. Flow then backs up into the collection

all plant flows.

system, taking advantage of in-system storage but also risk- ciel ae es

a i — "Increased pumping capacity-MWRA: e sewage pumping

ing greater CSO discharge. Recent operational improve- creased! pumping capacity-MW RAs nme sewage: puraping

4 stations he ve sewage eTCe o the treat-
ments at the headworks, especially in the coordination ell) Move sewage through:intercepiors'td t i

ment plants; two additional facilities eer Island also have
between headworks and treatment plant operators, have P : RUlIHeS OU) Desk Islan aso

2 : : pumps to lift sewage e plant. Over ast decade
optimized the system’ ability to protect the plant while mini- BME to hit sewage into the plant. ‘Over the past decade,
mizing CSOielfects. CSOs have been reduced due to improvements to the exist-
ing treatment plant at Deer Island and to the upgrade of

pumping stations in Charlestown and East Boston. Although

Go the the Table of Contents Go the the next section

The

Mans
and How to
Use Them

11

n the following pages, information is presented on the eight
Boston Harbor watersheds. Because two of the watersheds
are supplemented by close-up maps of specific areas, there
are 10 maps in all. Before you read the section on the water-
shed of concern to you, you might want to familiarize yourself

with the format in which the maps are presented.

Map descriptions: the text describes the general characteristics
and unique features of each watershed, and some of the plans
and projects that will improve water quality and public use in the
future.

Scale bars: The scale bar provides a point of comparison
between the very different sizes of the watersheds.

Land use pie charts: Land use, especially whether land is devel-
oped or undeveloped, can greatly affect water quality. These
1985 land use data are from MassGIS.

Open space: Major areas of open space (parks or conservation
land) are shown on the map. An Area of Critical Environmental
Concern (ACEC), designated by the state for special protection
because of its ecological value, is a darker green.

Pollutant sources pie chars: These pie charts show the annual
amounts of contaminants from various sources of pollutants in a
watershed. The pies show our best estimates of the relative
importance of each pollutant source. There is little information
about pollutant loads in the upstream reaches of the larger water-
sheds, so for the Mystic, Charles, Neponset, Weymouth, and

Weir watersheds only pollutant loads to the portions near the

harbor are calculated. The pollutant load entering from the
upstream part of these watersheds is given by the “upstream”
source. A brown line separates the area of a watershed included
in the upstream source from the downstream area included in
the other sources.

Pollutant loads are calculated by multiplying flow volume
times pollutant concentration. Because volume and concentra-
tion vary considerably over time, pollutant loads cannot be esti-
mated very precisely. Also, because we have insufficient infor-
mation on how pollutant concentrations in CSO, groundwater,
and stormwater vary, we generally used the same average con-
centration multiplied by that estimated flow.

Pollutant source locations: symbols indicate the locations of
wastewater discharges and of combined sewer overflows (CSOs).
Water quality charts: These charts summarize available data
from a wide variety of information sources. Where possible, we
compared the data to state standards or federal guidelines for
water quality. We considered several factors that make up water
quality: fecal coliform bacteria, dissolved oxygen, enrichment by
organic matter or nutrients, sediment contamination and enrich-
ment, toxicity, and aesthetics.

GSO tables: tn watersheds with CSOs, model estimates and pre-
dictions for 1985, 1992, 1997, and the implementation of the
CSO Plan recommendation are presented. All estimates assume
a “typical” rainfall year to allow comparison between years. The
model was not run for 1994; 1994 values would fall between
those predicted for 1992 and 1997.

Go to the Table of Contents Go to the next section

Except near the Deer
Island outfalls, the water
quality of Winthrop Bay is
§)001. Based on a computer
model of harbor currents, only
about 3% of the Deer Island
effluent enters Winthrop Bay;
nevertheless, it is the domi-
nant source of most pollutants
to Winthrop Bay. The effluent
contributes a high load of
solids, with associated toxic
contaminants and organic mat-
ter. Near the Deer Island out-
falls the water has lower dis-
solved oxygen, animals suffer
from the toxicity of the efflu-
ent, and sediments are conta-
minated and enriched. The
Constitution Beach CSO facility
discharge is also chlorinated
and may cause toxicity.
Shellfish beds in Winthrop Bay
are closed after rain, due to
bacteria in stormwater.

Pollutant Sources

Total suspended solids
tons/year

130

Stormwater!
@ Effluent?
Mncludes airport runoff

2 Assumes 3% of Deer Island
effluent enters Winthrop Bay

Winthrop Bay

his small, heavily developed watershed includes runoff and 260 mil-
lion gallons a day of effluent from the Deer Island treatment plant,
the largest single pollution source in Boston Harbor as a whole
Nevertheless, except near the Deer Island outfalls where water quali-
ty is poor (see water quality table), this water-
shed’s water quality is generally fair to good.
1500

METALS ENTERING THE TREATMENT PLANTS

ing the two MWRA treatment plants have declined.

For some metals, the downward trend seems to be lev- Other

eling off; for copper and lead, controlling the corrosion | developed
of residential pipes containing these metals will likely Z
be key to further reducing their levels.

Reductions of toxic contaminants discharged in the
effluent, and the end of sludge dumping in 1991, have
resulted in lower levels of contaminants (such as PAH)
accumulating in mussels set out in cages near the dis-

charge to monitor bioaccumulation

Total:

This surprisingly good water quality exists
because swift tidal currents disperse the efflu- 1200 Bol
ent around the harbor and flush it into :
Massachusetts Bay, with only a portion of the
effluent entering Winthrop Bay. Effluent domi-
nates the loads of most pollutants; stormwater

and groundwater are also major sources of pol-

The Future of Winthrop Bay

The addition of secondary treatment facilities to the
Deer Island treatment plant (in 1996) and the reloca-
tion of the treatment plant effluent outfalls from near
Deer Island to 9.5 miles offshore will remove the

beet “ largest source of most pollutants to this watershed.
a ee
a oe Later this year, MWRA will repair a breach in one of

lution in this watershed.

Shellfish beds in and around Winthrop Bay

produce a commercially important harvest.

Zinc

2 Nickel

Nut Island & Deer Island influent metal loads in Ibs/day

Belle Isle Marsh is one of the few large salt
marshes remaining in Boston Harbor, and is
state-designated an Area of Critical Environmental Concern deserving spe-
cial protection.

Constitution Beach in East Boston has generally good water quality,
especially since MWRA opened its local CSO treatment facility in 1987,
and contamination to a storm drain on the beach was corrected by the
Boston Water and Sewer Commission.

Because of source reduction, the amount of toxic pollutants entering
and leaving the treatment plants has fallen substantially over the past sev-

eral years. The metals trends figure shows that amounts of metals enter-

COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOW IMPROVEMENTS

1985 1992 1997 C50 PLAN
number of outfalls 1 1 1 0
number of overflows/yr 36 24 16 0
volume (million gallons) 7 4 1 0
% treated 0% 100% 100% N/A

Fiscal Year
) Cadmium & Silver

the effluent outfalls which has caused some effluent to

(im Lead

Copper
Chromium

discharge even closer to shore with less dilution than

intended.

MWRAS CSO Plan will completely eliminate CSO
discharges to the Constitution Beach area by con-
structing separate stormwater and sanitary sewers. The removal of these
discharges, along with the Boston Water and Sewer Commission’s ongoing

aggressive work to remove illegal sewer connections to storm drains, may

PAHS IN DEER ISLAND

2500

allow more shellfishing and improve condi-

tions for swimming.

Other water quality benefits will result from
MWRAS rehabilitation of the North
Metropolitan Trunk Sewer, the Massachusetts
Bays Program’ salt marsh restoration project

at Lewis Lake, and the Boston Harbor

‘g/kg Dry mussel weight
Ss
Ss
3

Beaches Commission's project to reduce a me
oo tee
1987 1991 192
©) Heavy PAH

{from soot)

stormwater runoff by improving landscaping
and planting at Constitution Beach. MWRAS
eventual construction of a park encircling the
PAH: Polycyclic Aromati
new Deer Island plant will create a much-

needed public recreation area with access to the harbor.

Go to the Table of Contents Go to the next section

Go to the Table of Contents Go to the next section

Go to the Table of Contents Go to the next section

a

The Charles River
maintains overall good
health, because of large
areas of wetlands and other
undeveloped land in its
watershed. However, sewer
overflows, sewage treat-
ment plant discharges, and
apparent unlawful sewer
connections cause localized
problems.

Charles River

t 308 square miles, the Charles River watershed is Boston
Harbor’s largest. The Charles flows approximately 80 miles from
Hopkinton to Boston. On the next page is a close-up map of the
lower Charles River (the section from Watertown to Boston
Harbor). The map on this page describes the Charles River as a whole.

In spite of the watershed’s long history of settlement and industrial
and commercial use (there are 20 dams along its length as a result), a
large amount of undeveloped land remains, especially in the upstream
reaches. Extensive wetlands are scattered throughout the upper and
central watershed, including 8,100 acres of Charles River Natural Valley
Storage Areas managed by the Army Corps of Engineers. These wet-
lands improve water quality and provide flood protection by smoothing
out fluctuations in river flow.

The downstream reach of the Charles River supports a large popula-
tion of migrating blueback herring, as well as smelt and eels. Fishways
allow passage of migrating herring up to Wellesley.

The Charles River watershed is an important source of drinking
water. It contains the reservoir which supplies the City of Cambridge,
three small MWRA reservoirs, Echo Lake, and many wells that provide
groundwater. Withdrawal of water from aquifers for water supply, or
other human uses of water resources in the watershed, must be careful-
ly balanced with concerns about low river flow and ensuing water qual-
ity problems.

The water quality of the Charles River is good for much of its length.
Individual pollution sources can lead to localized high counts of bacte-
ria, but the effect does not usually persist very far downstream. For
example, high bacteria counts have occasionally been seen near the

Medfield sewage treatment plant and some other locations, but the
counts fall to background levels a few miles downstream (J. Lancaster,
personal communication 1995). In the Dover-Wellesley-Needham
reach of the river, undersized MWRA sewer have spilled raw sewage
into the river, leading to high bacteria counts in wet weather (Webber,
1991). Just above the Watertown Dam, high bacteria counts and ele-

Wetland undeveloped

vated concentrations of other pol-
lutants have been measured but
the source of these problems is
unclear (Webber, 1991). ‘J pra

The Future of the Charles River

A number of long-term projects

will gradually improve Charles

River water quality. MWRAs plans
for CSO control are discussed on
the Lower Charles River map.

MWRASs Framingham Extension
Relief Sewer project will eliminate

ie 2 ee

Tata 194208 aores
Elm Bank Reservation in Dover, as the Wellesley Extension Sewer
Replacement is doing in Wellesley, Needham, Dedham, and Dover.

EPA has required eight communities abutting the Charles River to doc-
ument their stormwater discharges and identify unlawful sewer connec-

sanitary sewer overflows near the

tions. Projects by the Metropolitan Area Planning Council and
Metropolitan District Commission will also improve water supply and
river water quality in parts of the watershed.

The Charles River Watershed Association’ recently launched
Integrated Monitoring, Modeling, and Management (1M3) Project
includes a full range of monitoring and community involvement pro-
grams to better understand all aspects of the watershed.

Go to the Table of Contents Go to the next section

19

The Lower Charles
River has severe water
quality problems because

the dam at the river's mouth
blocks exchange of water
with Boston Harbor. The
Charles River Basin is further
degraded by high-density
development. Bacteria counts
are high in dry weather and
even higher after rainstorms.
High loads of nutrients from
sewage, stormwater, and
upstream sources cause
excessive growth of algae in
the Basin. The Muddy River
and Back Bay Fens have simi-
lar problems, made even
worse by very low flow.

Pollutant Sources

Fecal coliform
10"° bacteria/year

9.5

Nitrogen
tons/year

120

180

480
26

Stormwater
BB Upstream
@ cso
® Groundwater

Lower Charles River

eople come to the lower Charles River to visit the Esplanade, hear

concerts at the Hatch Shell, and to boat, bike, rollerblade, walk,

sunbathe, and relax. A previous generation of visionary planners,

including Frederick Law Olmstead and Charles Eliot, reclaimed the
land along the banks of the Charles and Muddy rivers and set it aside as
part of Boston's “Emerald Necklace.”

The lower Charles receives a heavy load of pollutants from upstream, as
well as pollutants from CSOs and stormwater. Unfortunately, the antiquat-
ed drainage system in this heavily populated area makes pollution reduc-
tion complex and difficult. The water quality, especially in the “Basin,” is
poor, and stormwater and CSOs make it worse in wet weather. Monitoring
data collected over the last five years also show that bacteria counts vary
little along the lower Charles, except near the mouth where the river water
is diluted by cleaner Boston Harbor water, indicating that there are a num-
ber of pollutant sources along the river in both dry and wet weather.

The old Charles River Dam at the Museum of Science was originally built
to solve a pollution problem: sewage discharges onto the mudflats of the
Charles River estuary were causing aesthetic and public health problems
that were obvious at low tide. The dam was built to maintain the water at a
constant level, but ironically has exacerbated pollution by eliminating tidal
exchange between harbor and river, making the Basin a virtual lake. The
small amount of salt water that leaks into the Charles River Basin by opera-

tion of the Gridley Locks in the new Charles River Dam stagnates at the

COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOW IMPROVEMENTS

1985 1992 1997 CSO PLAN
number of outfalls 27 20 20 18
number of overflows/yr 50 39 30 26
volume (million gallons) 787 394 225 121
% treated 54% 54% 57% 97%

river bottom because it is denser than fresh water. Oxygen from the surface
does not penetrate below this layer, and the river bottom is oxygen deficient
and virtually devoid of life. Bubblers were installed on the Basin bottom to
mix the water, but they are now broken. The Muddy River flows into the
Charles River Basin through the Back Bay Fens. The Fens have similar

water quality problems to those in the Basin because the Muddy River
receives pollutants from stormwater and CSOs, but the problems are made
more extreme by the very low flow of the Muddy River.

The Future of the Lower Charles River

MWR&S CSO projects in the lower Charles River will eventually cut the fre-
quency of overflows by half and reduce the volume to only 30% of current
overflows. In addition, 97% of the remaining CSO volume will be treated,

compared with about 50% of the CSO dis-
HIGH BACT

charge now. Specifically, screening and
100,000 -+

chlorination/dechlorination at a new Stony

Watertown
Dam

Cottage
Farm
D000 ite eam eine Sine:

Brook facility and at one near the Eliot Upstream
Bridge will improve aesthetics and reduce 4
the risk of exposure to pathogens. (Since

chlorination to kill pathogens can be toxic to
aquatic life, dechlorination will be performed

at the Cottage Farm and Prison Point CSO

Fecal coliform per 100 mi

facilities.) Increased sewer capacity leading
to the Prison Point CSO treatment facility
will reduce untreated CSOs near the river

mouth. These CSO projects will alleviate

Upstream<

some of the lower Charles Rivers very com-
s River! y ® Dry weather counts @ Wet

LOW OXYGEN |

plex water quality problems.
The Muddy River's water quality will be
helped not only by the CSO Plan but also

12
by Brookline’ and Boston’ work to remove ostream
illegal sewer connections to storm drains 10s) eee cotage
into the Muddy River, and by an Army ; Fann
Corps of Engineers’ project to increase 4 * i
Muddy River flow. Al

Even with new CSO control infrastruc-

Dissolved oxygen (mg/l)

ture, the water quality in the Charles River aa Shallow water
Basin is likely to remain poor to fair as long

as other sources remain. Over time, the a

combined efforts of the CSO program and 0

other projects, such as the Charles River © Surface @ Bottom

Watershed Association’s Integrated

Monitoring, Modeling, and Management (IM3) study, could lead to local
implementation of remediation projects which will result in substantial
water quality improvement.

Go to the Table of Contents Go to the next section

ai

The heavily developed
Inner Harhor watershed
has severe water quality
BrobleMS. Bacteria counts
are high in wet weather due
to CSOs and stormwater.
The Inner Harbor has the
highest levels of sediment
contamination measured in
Boston Harbor. Sources of
toxic contaminants include
the Charles and Mystic
rivers, stormwater, and com-
bined sewer overflows.

Pollutant Sources

Fecal coliform
10'° bacteria/year

22

6.9
84

Pyrene
kilograms/year

An

Stormwater!
@ Upstream
@ cso

‘includes airport runoff

Inner Harhor

hen most people think of Boston Harbor, it is the Inner Harbor

that comes to mind. On Boston's historical waterfront and in

adjacent downtown areas are several museums, the Freedom

Trail, numerous restaurants, the Harborlights concert pavilion,
and tour boats; all of these draw residents and tourists alike.

On the water, sailboats share the harbor with large ships heading for
shipping terminals in Charlestown, Chelsea, Everett or South Boston. A
number of water passenger shuttles also operate in the Inner Harbor.

In spite of large tides that flush the harbor, the Inner Harbor has many
water quality problems. Very little of the watershed is undeveloped.
Major pollutant sources include a large number of CSOs, stormwater
discharges, and the Charles, Mystic, and Chelsea rivers.

COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOW IMPROVEMENTS

: 1985 1992 1997 CSO PLAN
number of outfalls 26 26 24 21
number of overflows/yr 70 65 44 14
volume (million gallons) 1463 732 469 339
% treated 36% 36% 42% 96%

Water quality problems are most severe in Fort Point Channel, a small,
poorly flushed inlet that now receives the largest untreated CSO dis-
charge in the Boston Harbor watershed. The importance of local sources
is demonstrated by the bioaccumulation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocar-
bons (PAH) in mussels set out in monitoring cages near the New
England Aquarium (Downey et al., 1995). Caged blue mussels placed in

the water near the Aquarium for two months accumulated higher levels
of heavier PAH compounds (byproducts of burning fossil fuels) than did
mussels set out in the plume of the existing Deer Island outfall. These

Inner Harbor mussels accumulated more of many other contaminants too.

The Future of the Inner Harhor
If current plans and projects are fully implemented, the Inner Harbor
will become relatively clean for an urban harbor, especially if water qual-
ity in the tributary Charles and Mystic rivers can

be improved.

Other
developed

The Inner Harbor now receives the greatest
share of the untreated CSO discharge from the
sewer system (see CSO table), The MWRA CSO
Plan will disinfect or reroute to Deer Island much
of the CSO discharge that now enters Fort Point
Channel, greatly reducing the pathogen load to
this highly impacted area and improving dis-
solved oxygen levels. Through the CSO plan, a
small disinfection facility will reduce bacteria
loads to Little Mystic Channel in Charlestown;
interceptor relief will reduce discharges from East
Boston CSOs; and the relatively large CSOs in the
Reserved Channel will be consolidated and disin-
fected. The Prison Point CSO facility will be
upgraded, and two downtown waterfront over-
flows eliminated. Though the Inner Harbor will
continue to suffer impacts typical of busy urban

harbors, those who use and enjoy the water and
the waterfront should find it safer and more

attractive in years to come

: ..
“Gloucester Future

(control) Mass. Bay
. ~~ outfall site

z
A
=
B
5
2
a
=
2
2
B
S
5
?
i
&
:
2
=

Go to the Table of Contents Go to the next section

23

The water quality in the
Neponset River above the
Baker Dam in Milton is fair
10 POOP even though much of

the watershed is undeveloped.

Sanitary sewer overflows,
contaminated storm drains,
and failing septic systems
cause high bacteria counts.
Sediments are contaminated
by past industrial pollution.
The growth of aquatic weeds
that are choking some tribu-
taries may be accelerated by

excess nutrients from sewage.

Neponset River

his map focuses on the freshwater portion of the Neponset River,

and the following map illustrates the Neponset River Estuary

together with Dorchester Bay. Although the Neponset River

watershed includes urban areas of Boston, the map and land use
pie chart show that a surprisingly large portion of undeveloped land is
preserved for an area so close to a major city. The more than 6,000
forested acres of the Blue Hills Reservation, the wetlands of the Fowl
Meadow and Ponkapoag Bog Area of Critical Environmental Concern
(8,350 acres), and town conservation areas comprise more than half
the watershed. There is relatively little commercial and industrial
development. Unfortunately, despite the abundant open space and
limited industry, the Neponset River suffers severe degradation from
toxic pollutants, which accumulate in sediments and from sewage,
which causes high levels of bacteria.

In the Neponset, sediment concentrations of toxic contaminants vary
dramatically along the river. For example, cadmium levels in sediments
just downstream of the Neponset Reservoir were about 70 times higher
than concentrations generally expected to harm aquatic life, while the
metal was not detected in sites further downstream (Mass. DEP, 1995).

Bacteria in the water also show a pattern of areas of high contamina-
tion interspersed with relatively clean locations. Fecal coliform counts
during dry weather average about 10 times higher than standards and
can significantly increase during rainy weather.

Low levels of dissolved oxygen occur sporadically along the river,
caused in part by excess nutrients. Contributing to both bacterial and
nutrient pollution are myriad sources of sewage along the length of the
river: sanitary sewer overflows, failing septic systems, and storm
drains contaminated with animal waste and sewage.

The Future of the Neponset River
Although severely affected now, the Neponset is the focal point of
planning and remediation efforts that promise to restore it to ecological

health, and to enhance the potential for human use and enjoyment.

In 1993, MWRA began construction of the New Neponset Valley
Relief Sewer, which will alleviate sanitary sewer overflows from the
aging and overburdened Neponset Valley sewer and provide sewer
capacity for future population growth.

The Executive Office of Environmental Affairs has selected the
Neponset River watershed for a pilot study to develop a watershed
management methodology. The Department of Environmental
Protection’s Neponset River Resource Assessment studies began in
1994. The state, cities and towns,
and local citizens’ groups have iden-
tified many sources of sewage, from
failing septic systems to overflowing

municipal sewers. Several sources

have already been repaired. The

Metropolitan Area Planning Council
(MAPC), with funding from the
Massachusetts Bays Program, is

studying nonpoint sources and
stormwater runoff. The MAPC has
also evaluated water resources, land

use and potential contamination

sources in an effort to protect water
supplies in the watershed. Citizen
volunteers are working with the Division of Marine Fisheries to
improve and expand smelt and herring habitat.

Because large parts of the watershed have been preserved in a natur-
al state, the once-neglected Neponset has the potential to be reclaimed
as a haven for wildlife and people.

Go to the Table of Contents Go to the next section

Water quality in the
Neponset River estuary
generally improves dawn-
stream towards Dorchester
Bay, although the estuary and
bay suffer from sediment con-
tamination and nutrient enrich-
ment. Parts of the bay have
few bottom-dwelling species
because the sediments are
oxygen-poor. Northern Dor-
chester Bay has generally good
water quality. Beaches near
the mouth of the Neponset
River often have high bacteria
counts because of sewage
entering upstream and from
contaminated storm drains.

Pollutant Sources

Fecal coliform
10" bacteria/year

17

05 Pyrene
kilograms/year

3

Total suspended
solids
tons/year

110 160

Stormwater
BB Upstream
i cso

%

Dorchester Bay

and Neponset Estuary

his map focuses on the tidal portion of the Neponset River down-

stream of the Baker Dam, including Dorchester Bay. Here, some of

the richest wetlands resources remaining in Boston Harbor are abutted

by highways, a gas storage tank, railroads, commercial buildings, and
dense residential areas. Dorchester Bay beaches are among the most popu-
lar in Boston Harbor.

COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOW IMPROVEMENTS

1985 1992 1997 CSO PLAN
number of outfalls. 13 12 12 0
number ofoverflows/yr == 2 80 hw 0
volume (million gallons) 414 207 183 0
% treated 0% 90% 92% N/A

The Neponset River estuary was recently designated an Area of Critical
Environmental Concern; the ACEC’ 1,260 acres include the 700-acre
MDC Neponset River Reservation, one of the few salt marsh habitats in
Boston Harbor. The estuary is home to more than 200 bird species
including rare owls, egrets, and terns (Massachusetts Executive Office of
Environmental Affairs, 1995). Striped bass, bluefish, and winter floun-
der feed here. Blueback herring and rainbow smelt spawn below the
Baker Dam. There are abundant soft-shell clams in the mudflats,
although they are too contaminated by bacteria to harvest.

Where the Neponset River meets Dorchester Bay, marshlands give way to
development that includes seven beaches, yacht clubs, and walkways along
the shore. Although the water quality in Old Harbor and Pleasure Bay is rel-
atively good, sewage pollution prevents full use of the Bay area. Twelve
CSOs, contaminated storm drains, and upstream pollution of the river con-
tribute sewage-borne pathogens to this area. Water quality is worse after
heavy rains, when high counts cause closed beaches in Old Harbor. Beaches
that are unaffected by CSOs (Pleasure Bay) or which have only small CSOs
(Carson Beach, L Street Beach) have good water quality, and did not see
much change between 1993 and 1994. MWRA has constructed CSO treat-
ment facilities at Fox Point and Commercial Point, and thete has been

improvement in beach water quality over the past several years. However,

nearby Tenean and Malibu beaches continue to be
affected by storm drain contamination and by the
poor water quality of the Neponset River.

Other problems are found in the sediments: toxic
chemicals and organic matter enter the estuary
through storm drains and CSOs. Past discharges of
sewage sludge and untreated sewage contaminated
small embayments like Savin Hill Cove, depleting
sediment oxygen and affecting the health of marine
life. The bar graph shows the improvements, since
sludge discharges ceased, in the numbers of bottom-

dwelling species at the former Nut Island sludge dis-
charge site off Long Island. No significant change in species numbers has
been observed in Savin Hill Cove or at a less impacted site in Hingham Bay.

The Future of the Estuary and Dorchester Bay

MWR&s CSO Plan will eliminate all combined sewage in this area by build-
ing separate storm drains and sewers in the estuary and southern Dorchester
Bay and by collecting the CSOs along South Boston beaches in a new inter-
ceptor. Wet-weather aesthetic and bacterial pollution will be reduced, the
shellfish beds may reopen, and sediment quality should slowly improve. The
Boston Water and Sewer Commission is working to eliminate illegal sewer
connections to storm drains, for example in Pine Neck Creek near Tenean
Beach, which will further improve swimming and shellfishing. A regional
Plan for the Future of Boston Harbor Beaches includes re-sanding and other
physical improvements to the beaches here. The MDC is cleaning up a for-
mer landfill near the Neponset Reservation and creating bicycle and pedestri-
an pathways there.

BOTTOM-DWELLING SPECIES HAVE INCREASED |

2 60

5

2 50

S

22-40 =

F a iS

3 30 ete te

= =o

3 20

=

= =

2

& = 3. Las REZ sis oe 2
E 1991 1992 1993 1994 1991 1992 1993 1994 1991 1992 1993 1994

Savin Hill Cove Sludge site off Long Island Hingham Bay

Go to the Table of Contents Go to the next section

21

Water quality is
generally good, with local
DrObIEMS near contaminated
storm drains and the treat-
ment plant outfalls. Computer
modelling of harbor currents
shows that about 4% of the
Nut Island treatment plant
effluent enters the bay; this
fraction can increase during
an onshore wind. The effluent
contributes suspended solids
and associated contaminants,
and nutrients, which may
adversely affect water clarity
in the bay. Local bacteria
problems are associated with
contaminated storm drains.

Pollutant Sources

Fecal coliform
10'° bacteria/year

0.76

Total Suspended Solids
tons/year

70

Stormwater
Wi Effluent *
* Assumes 4% of

Nut Island effluent enters
Quincy Bay

Quincy Bay

ater quality in Quincy Bay is generally good. The land use in

Quincy Bay's small watershed is primarily residential. The

major pollution source within the watershed appears to be

stormwater discharge contaminated by sewer cross-connec-
tions. Quincy Bay can also be affected by effluent discharge from the
MWRA Nut Island treatment plant under certain wind and tide condi-
tions (see also Weymouth River watershed on following pages). There
are no CSOs in Quincy Bay, although the area was affected by CSO dis-
charges from Moon Island up until 1990 (Rex, 1993).

Wollaston Beach in Quincy Bay has variable water quality for swim-
ming. The amount of time that bacteria counts exceed the standard in
weekly beach monitoring has varied greatly over the past several years
and was particularly high in 1994. The City of Quincy is working to
repair problems with storm drain contamination in this area.

Quincy Bay has historically been one of the great recreational flounder
fishing areas on the east coast. However, in the last decade the number of
flounder has fallen dramatically, partially due to commercial overfishing of
flounder stocks throughout New England waters. The health of flounder,
however, has improved. The effects of eliminating sludge discharge and
reducing toxic contaminants in the effluent is seen in the decreasing
occurrence of liver disease in flounder. Boston Harbor flounder once had
a very high incidence of liver tumors, but this disease has not been
observed since 1991 in monitoring by researchers from Woods Hole and
other institutions (Moore and Stegeman, 1993, Hillman and Peven,
1995). The incidence of early liver disease, a precursor to tumors, has
also declined since the mid-1980s, apparently stabilizing since 1989 at
levels well below those found in 1984 .

Quincy Bay also has productive shellfish beds; half of the soft-shell
clams harvested in Massachusetts come from Boston Harbor, a substan-
tial fraction from Quincy waters. However, many other beds have been
closed because of pollution.

The Future of Quincy Bay

The City of Quincy’ ongoing repairs to contaminated storm drains

should lead to noticeable reduction in bacterial
contamination at Wollaston Beach. Many sections
of this areas crumbling infrastructure have already
been rehabilitated (Weston & Sampson Engineers,
1995). For example, the city and the Massachu-
setts Bays Program replaced a broken tide gate that
had let seawater into the storm sewer system on
every high tide. The Massachusetts Bays Program
is also investigating storm drain contamination
affecting a shellfish bed at the northern end of the
beach, and hopes to be able to restore the use of
this bed.

As part of MWRAs Boston Harbor Project, the
Nut Island treatment plant will stop discharging

to Nantasket Roads once a five-mile tunnel is built to carry wastewater
from Nut Island to the new Deer Island Treatment Plant. Once the Nut
Island plant is no longer needed, it will be replaced by a headworks
and a public park. In addition, MWRA has recently relined the
Squantum Force Main to eliminate seepage out of this major sewer.
The Plan for the Future of Boston Harbor Beaches includes many
improvements to Wollaston Beach: upgraded sanitary facilities, sand
replenishment, drainage facilities, and sea wall renovation. Once these
projects and the improvements to the sewer system are complete, we can
expect to see expansion of swimming and shellfishing in Quincy Bay.

HEALTHIER FLOUNDER IN BOSTON HARBOR

80
60 a -
50 \ : <a iwer ee

8
3
é
3
8 30
&
20
10 get mors
r i ogee r :
0 oe oe
1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994

NO DATA COLLECTED IN 1985 AND 1986

Go to the Table of Contents Go to the next section

This watershed
includes two rivers
with differing water
qualily. the Fore River
suffers from localized
bacterial contamination,
low dissolved oxygen, and
high nutrient levels. The
Back River, which has a
relatively undeveloped
watershed with parkland
surrounding the estuary,
has generally very good
water quality.

Pollutant Sources

Nitrogen
tons/year

66

Stormwater
@ Upstream
Wi Effluent *

@8 Groundwater
“Assumes 9% of

Nut Island effluent enters
the Fore River

Weymouth Fore an
Back Rivers

he Weymouth River watershed actually contains two rivers, the
Fore River and the Back River. Both of these rivers support
important fishery resources, including two of the three largest
smelt runs in Massachusetts Bay and river herring runs. Three
fishways on Back River dams allow passage for the river herring.
Shellfish flats are harvested for more than 12,000 bushels of clams
annually. There are also commercial lobster and menhaden (pogie)
fisheries, as there are in many other parts of Boston Harbor.

Except for the vicinity of the Fore River estuary, the Weymouth River
watershed consists of undeveloped and low-density residential land.
The watershed contains two Areas of Critical Environmental Concern
(ACECs), the Cranberry Brook Watershed ACEC (1,041 acres) on the
Fore River and the Weymouth Back River ACEC (957 acres) at the
mouth of the Back River. A portion of the Fowl Meadow ACEC is also
within the watershed.

The former Fore River Shipyard is evidence of the river’s industrial
past. The Back River was also once a center of boat building, particu-
larly during World War II. The decline in economic fortune of the
area's industry has, however, improved water quality in the rivers.
There are several industries still in the area, including the Twin Rivers
alternative diesel fuel manufacturing facility and an oil terminal.

MWRAS sludge-to-fertilizer plant in the old shipyard, now the Fore
River Staging Area for the Boston Harbor Project, contributes to water
quality improvements throughout the harbor by its role in ending the
sludge discharges from the two MWRA treatment plants.

Water quality in the Fore River is affected by the discharge of MWRAS
Nut Island treatment plant into Nantasket Roads. Although strong cur-
rents help disperse the effluent, field and computer model studies indi-
cate that some effluent tends to wash into the mouth of the river
(McDowell et al. 1991, Signell, 1992). There is also localized sewage
contamination; for example, there are sewer overflows from MWRAS
Braintree-Weymouth Interceptor in wet weather. The Massachusetts
Bays Program has identified local creek and storm drain contamination
as well. The Back River was also impacted by sewer overflows from the
Hingham Pump Station before MWRA completed its rehabilitation in
1992.

The Future of the Weymouth Fore and Back Rivers
The replacement of MWRAs Braintree-Weymouth Interceptor will elim-
inate sewage spills that currently occur in wet weather. The decommis-
sioning of the Nut Island treatment plant (see Quincy Bay) will also
improve conditions, especially at the mouth of the Fore River estuary.
The Massachusetts Bays Program’ Fore River Project is a joint effort of

LAND USE

Other
undeveloped
Wetland — = ae

concerned citizens and federal, state,
and local governments. The project's

management plan focuses on clean-

ing up local pollution sources that
are responsible for closing shellfish
beds, including beds in Mill Cove

and Town River Bay.

Other Industrial .
developed
Total: 39,876 acres

Go to the Table of Contents Go to the next section

tan ‘nl Hl

‘generally 00H. More than —

half the land in the watershed
is undeveloped forest and
wetland. However, ete
(primarily from stormwater)
may result in local shellfish
_bed closures and restrictions.

Little information i is available :

about the water quality in the
Weir River upstream, but

state monitoring has indicated
problems with dissolved oxy-

gen and bacteria.

Pollutant Sources

Fecal coliform
10" bacteria/year

Stormwater

Weir River

Hingham and Hull Bays

he Weir River, which drains into Hull Bay, gets its name from the

fishing weirs that were once used to harvest the river's rich fish-

ery. This watershed includes Hingham and Hull bays, the most

pristine areas of Boston Harbor. The good water quality is due
largely to the undeveloped nature of the watershed and the lack of
large point sources of pollution.

Clean water means that there is nearly full use of the area’s resources.
Swimmers enjoy Nantasket Beach on the ocean side and other beaches
on the harbor side of the Hull peninsula. Boating and fishing are pop-
ular here, and shellfish are harvested by commercially licensed master
diggers. The Weir River sustains a fairly good smelt run and a small
alewife run.

Stormwater is the most important source of bacterial pollution in
this watershed. Although water quality is generally good, there are
local sources of pollution that cause some problems, especially in the
Weir River. Straits Pond suffers from failing septic systems. To solve
this problem, homeowners may need to be connected to the Hull or
MWRA system. The Hull sewage treatment plant discharges three mil-
lion gallons per day of treated wastewater into the swift current of
Nantasket Roads.

The Weir River ACEC and the recently created Weir River Park pro-
tect the estuary and provide opportunities for environmental education.

W Eelgrass (Zostera marina) is a that grows in shallow coastal

areas below the low tide line. Eelgrass beds are an important

habitat for marine animals; the beds provide food and shelter
from predators, especially for young fish. Other animals, such as
scallops and lobsters, also prefer eelgrass beds as habitat, and
many animals and birds feed on eelgrass leaves (Buchsbaum,
1992). If the water is turbid, however, it is difficult for eelgrass
to get enough light. Eelgrass along the Atlantic coast has also

__ suffered several declines due to “wasting disease,” which occurs
when a parasite grows on the leaves. Eelgrass was once fairly
widespread in Boston Harbor, but disappeared, probably due to a
combination of wasting disease, water turbidity, and habitat
destruction by filling. Hingham and Hull bays are now the only
locations in Boston Harbor in which the presence of a has
been confirmed (R Colarusso, EPA, pers. comm. 1995).
However, with improved water quality due to pollution ot
efforts of MWRA and others, EPA i is interested in trying to
increase the extent of eelgrass habitat by replanting other areas.

Go to the Table of Contents Go to the next section

Aesthetic pollution: Floating debris and litter, oily slicks,
and odors.

A geologic formation that holds groundwater.
Many non-MWRA communities rely on wells drilled
into aquifers for their drinking water supply.

Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC): An ecologi-
cally valuable area designated by the state for special
protection.

Bioaccumulation: The process by which toxic chemicals
can accumulate in animal tissues and become concen-
trated when hey, move up the food chain.

2 A measure of the amount
of oxygen-consuming organic matter in water.

Chlorination: Disinfection by adding the chemical chlorine,
the active ingredient in household bleach. Chlorine is
very effective at killing pathogens but is also poisonous

to other organisms at high enough concentrations.

Combined sewer system: An antiquated sewer system in
which storm runoff and sewage from homes and busi-
nesses are carried By the same pipes.

: (1) A structure designed

to provide relief fora comnbined sewer system during
wet weather. (2) An overflow event that occurs when
the volume of stormwater entering a combined sewer
system overwhelms the capacity of the system

ts0 discharge: The discharge of stormwater and sanitary
sewage resulting from a CSO event that is discharged
into the receiving water through a CSO outfall.

CSO facility: A treatment facility that operates in wet
weather to treat combined sewage before discharge.
Includes disinfection; may also include some removal of
suspended solids or floatable pollutants.

EEGNGE The addition of a chemical (usually sodi-
um bisulfate or sodium thiosulfate) to neutralize the
toxicity of chlorine after it has been used for disinfec-
tion.

Dissolved oxygen: Fish and other aquatic animals breathe
oxygen dissolved in the water. Algae and other plants
growing in the water produce oxygen, and atmospheric
oxygen also dissolves in water at the surface. In pollut-
ed ecosystems dissolved oxygen can fall below levels
necessary to sustain life. [See also Oxygen-consuming
organic matter and Nutrients.}

Effluent: Disinfected wastewater, the final liquid by-prod-
uct of the wastewater treatment process flowing out of a
treatment plant.

S'008" A water body where salt and fresh water mix.
Examples are Boston Harbor, Plum Island Sound, and

Narragansett Bay.

Fecal coliform: Because most pathogens are very difficult
to measure directly, their presence is usually inferred
from the presence of fecal coliform bacteria which are
also found in human and animal waste but are easier to
measure. If counts of fecal coliform above state stan-
dards are measured by a monitoring agency, beaches are
posted as unsafe or shellfish beds are closed until levels
fall back down.

Groundwater: Water that saturates the rocks and soil. It
flows through the ground and, if it is contaminated, can
carry pollutants into surface water bodies.

Preliminary sewage treatment facilities that
remove grit and large objects from the sewage flow
before it enters MWRA treatment plants. First stage of
primary treatment.

Interceptors: Large regional sewers that collect sewage
from local sewerage systems.

Nonpoint sources: Pollution sources at many unspecified
locations, such as unsewered rainfall runoff, leaking
septic systems, and other intermittent sources of pollu-

tion.

ae Chemicals that are necessary for the growth of
plants, but an excess of which can accelerate growth of
algae or aquatic weeds. In marine waters the growth of
algae is usually limited by nitrogen, so that adding
nitrogen increases algae. In fresh water, the limiting
nutrient is usually phosphorus. Many detergent manu-
facturers have eliminated phosphates from their prod-
ucts in order to avoid causing nutrient pollution of
freshwater lakes and streams.

Outtall:

Often outfalls are placed away from shorelines in areas

Pipe releasing wastewater at a fixed location.

where the wastewater will be rapidly diluted.

Oxygen-consuming organic matter: Ifa large amount of
organic material-leaves, plants, wastewater or plant
growth spurred by excess nutrients-decomposes in a
body of water, it depletes the dissolved oxygen level
necessary to support aquatic life

Short for “pathogenic microorganisms.” These
disease-causing viruses and bacteria enter the harbor
through inadequately treated or raw sewage and from
animal and bird waste in storm runoff. They can cause
stomach ailments, ear, eye, or skin infections, and even
serious diseases such as hepatitis.

Point SoUPGES: Sources of pollution that enter the aquatic
environment through pipes or confined channels such
as ditches.

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH): Complex organic
chemical found in petroleum and in products of fossil
fuel combustion. Many PAHs are known carcinogens.
(Also called polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbon.)

\ The first stage of the wastewater treat-
ment process, which uses gravity to separate effluent
from sludge (which sinks) and scum (which floats).

Regulator: A structure within a combined sewer system,
such as the dam shown on Figure 3, that directs most of
the flow to the treatment facility while diverting excess
flow to a CSO outfall

Ruoff: Rain and other water that is not absorbed into the
soil and instead drains off the surface land.

A sewerage system which carries waste-
water only from the drains and toilets of homes and
businesses. (Compare to combined sewers.)

Sanitary sewer overflows:

the capacity of a sewer system is overwhelmed and the

These overflows occur when

sewer “backs up,” spilling untreated wastewater into
nearby waterways.

Secondary treatment: The second stage of the wastewater
treatment process, often using microorganisms to break
down oxygen-consuming organic matter in wastewater.

HGMNALEN” Sediments tell us the history of

pollitant inputs because, over time, sediments accumu-
late toxic con-taminants. Contaminants stick to parti-
cles, which settle to the bottom. Concentrations of toxic
organic compounds and most heavy metals in the water
in Boston Harbor meet state standards; there are very
few measurements of toxic chemicals in the freshwater
portions of the harbor’ tributaries, however. Even if
water quality standards are met, toxic chemicals can
accumulate in animal tissues or in bottom sediments to
levels that harm marine life.

Sediment enrichment: Even if the water's dissolved oxygen
does not fall too low, a lot of organic matter falling on
the bottom produces an organic-rich sediment. Bacteria
in the sediment use up oxygen as they consume the
organic matter. While healthy sediments have an oxy-
genated layer above a layer that is anaerobic (without
oxygen), very organic-rich sediments have no oxygenat-
ed layer. In this environment anaerobic bacteria can
thrive, as they use sulfur instead of oxygen, and pro-
duce toxic hydrogen sulfide. Few animals can live in
this oxygen-poor, sulfide-rich environment; the result-
ing low diversity and small number of animals indicate
an unhealthy ecosystem.

Spawn: Certain fish, such as alewives, blueback herring,
and smelt, live in the ocean and travel up into rivers to
lay their eggs, or spawn. Eels live in rivers and spawn
at sea

Rainwater and snow melt that runs off the
land. In developed areas, stormwater is collected by a
system of storm drains.

Adams, E.6, and X. Zhang, 1881. the impact of CSOs on
Boston Harbor: a new look based on 1990 data. Sept.
1991. MWRA ENQUAD Tech. Rept. No. 91-9.

Alen gel AD Thee, 1 Sources of contaminants to
Boston Harbor: revised loading estimates. MWRA, Mar.
1994. MWRA ENQUAD Tech. Rept. No. 94-1.

Bigornia-Vitale, G.,M. J. Sullivan, and E.K. Graham, 1895.
NPDES compliance summary report, Fiscal Year 1994.
MWRA ENQUAD Tech. Rept. No. 95-6.

Blake, J.A., 0.0. Rhoads, and 1.P Willams, Boston Harbor
sludge abatement monitoring program: soft-bottom ben-
thic biology & sedimentology 1991-1992 monitoring sur-
veys. MWRA ENQUAD Tech. Rept. No. 93-11,

Surfactants: Chemical compounds, such as those found in
detergents, that break down grease and other kinds of
dirt. In high concentrations they are toxic to aquatic
life.

Suspended solids: Tiny particles of material, like mud,
sand, and organic debris, that are suspended in water
but can settle out over time. Pollutants often attach to
solids or are solids themselves (e.g. pathogens, toxic
contaminants, and some nutrients). Excess suspended
solids can clog the feeding organs of some animals and
prevent light from reaching aquatic plants.

Structures that permit the discharge of waste-
water but prevent river or harbor water from entering
the sewer system.

Toxic chemicals: Also called toxic compounds, these chem-
icals are poisonous at high enough concentrations.
They include toxic organic compounds such as hydro-
carbons, PCBs, and pesticides. Heavy metals can also
be toxic at high concentrations, and include arsenic,
cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, molybde-
num, nickel, silver, and zinc.

Boston Water and Sewer Commission (BWSC), 1983. NeDEs
stormwater permit application, Part 2. May 17, 1993.
Prepared by BWSC, Rizzo Associates, Inc., and Sullivan
and Worcester.

u t Run of the river. In Streamer, Vol. 26,
No. 1, pp. 4-6. Charles River Watershed Association,
Auburndale, MA, Winter 1995.

Buchshaum, R. (ed.), 1982. Turning the Tide: Toward a Livable
Coast in Massachusetts. Massachusetts Audubon Society,
Lincoln, MA.

Cahill, J, and K. Imbalzane, 1991. an inventory of organic
and metal contamination in Massachusetts Bay, Cape Cod
Bay, and Boston Harbor sediments and assessment of
regional sediment quality. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Region 1, Massachusetts Bays Program.

Toxicity: the capability of a substance to poison living
Some of the substances found in wastewater
that can cause toxicity in water or sediments include

creatures.

chlorine, surfactants, heavy metals, and some organic

compounds.

A stream draining into another stream or river,
pond, lake, or estuary.

Water quality: The overall health of a water body and its
ability to support aquatic life and human uses (swim-
ming, boating, fishing, aesthetics). Properties that are
measured to evaluate water quality include fecal col-

iform bacteria, dissolved oxygen, pH, temperature,
salinity, the amount of algae, water clarity or suspended
solids, and concentrations of nutrients and toxic chemi-
cals.

Watershed: geographic area in which water, sediments,
and dissolved materials drain to a common outlet-a
point on a river or lake, an estuary (like Boston
Harbor), or an ocean.

Bioaccumulation of selected organic compounds and met-
als in mussels deployed near Deer Island discharge and in
Massachusetts Bay, 1994. MWRA ENQUAD Tech. Rept.
No. 95-9.

Ellis, JB., 1888. Pollutional aspects of urban runoff. Urban
Runoff Pollution, pp. 1-36. Springer-Verlag: Berlin, New
York. Cited in: Novotny, V. 1991. Urban diffuse pollution:
sources and abatement. Water Environment & Technology,
Dec. 1991, pp. 60-65.

EPA, 1988, Assessment of Quincy Bay contamination-sum-
mary report. Prepared by Metcalf & Eddy for the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 1, Boston, MA,
June 1988.

u . Anthropogenic influence of the sedi-
faentary regime of an urban estuary—Boston Harbor.
Ph.D. thesis, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution,
Woods Hole, MA, Sept. 1980, WHOI-80-38.

Gardner 6.8. and R.J. Pruell, 1987. 4 histopathological and
chemical assessment of winter flounder, lobster, and soft-
shelled clams indigenous to Quincy Bay, Boston Harbor
and an in situ evaluation of oysters including sediment
(surface and cores) chemistry. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Narragansett, RI.

Harbor Visions, 1994. Boston Harbor Visions—results of the
community-wide charrette on Boston Harbor. Sept. 23-
25, 1994, University of Massachusetts at Boston, MA.

'883. 1994 annual fish and
shellfish report. MWRA ENQUAD Tech. Rept. No. 95-5.

Kennedy, L., 1995. Neponset River resource assessment
report, final draft report. Mass. Department of
Environmental Protection, Boston, MA, June 1995.

Kropp, R.X. and R. J. Diaz, 1984, 1993 annual soft-bottom

benthic monitoring report: Boston Harbor studies.
MWRA ENQUAD Tech. Rept. No. 94-10.

The State of Boston Harbor: 1993. MWRA ENQUAD
Tech. Rept. No. 94-6,

Leo, W.S., M. Collins, M. Domenica, P. Kirschen, L. Marx, and
ALC. Rex, 1994. Master Planning and CSO Facility
Planning Baseline Water Quality Assessment.

Leo, W.S., M. Alber M.S. Connor K.E. Keay, and A.C. Rex,
1898. Contaminated sediments in Boston Harbor,

Submitted by MWRA to the Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 1. MWRA ENQUAD Tech. Rept. No. 93-
9.

Baseline environmental
assessment of the Fore River. Prepared by Tellus Institute,
Jan., 1994.

Massachusetts Bays Program, 1894. Draft environmental

management plan for the Fore River. Prepared by Tellus
Institute, Jan., 1994.

Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (Mass.

DEP), 1898. Commonwealth of Massachusetts summary

of water quality 1992, Appendix I - basin/segment infor-
mation. Publication No. 17339-172-75-3.60-4/93-C.R.

5. Draft 1994 Neponset River Basin Survey
Resource Assessment Report. Mar. 1995.
Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries, 1995.
Unpublished shellfish bed monitoring data.
Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs,

1985. Designation of Neponset River Estuary Area of
Critical Environmental Concern.

". Arc/Info coverages of 1985 land use, streams,

ponds, watershed and subbasin boundaries, Areas of
Critical Environmental Concern, and open space.

MWRA, 1991. Combined sewer overflow receiving water
monitoring: Boston Harbor and tributary rivers, June
oo Oct. 1990. MWRA ENQUAD Tech. Rept. No. 91-

Nr, 1994. System Master Plan/Conceptual CSO Plan.
fl Unpublished monitoring data, 1991-1995,
McDowell, 8., J. Rythen de, and C. Albro, 1981. Field stud-

ies of Nut Island sewage plumes and background water
properties in Boston Harbor: Oct.-Nov. 1990. MWRA
ENQUAD Tech. Rept. No. 91-7.

Metcalf & Eddy, 19948. Master planning and CSO facilities
planning, sub-task 2.5.2 receiving water boundary condi-
tions. Prepared for MWRA, Jan. 1994.

"Master planning and CSO facilities
planning, sub-task 2.5.5 final technical memorandum,

estimation of stormwater flows and loads. Prepared for
MWRA, Nov. 1994.

Metropolitan District Commission, 1984. Unpublished moni-
toring data, 1987-1994.

Moore, M.J, and J.J. Stegeman, 1993. Liver pathology of
winter flounder: Boston Harbor, Massachusetts Bay, and
Cape Cod Bay -- 1992. MWRA ENQUAD Tech. Rept.
No. 93-7.

Md B

Evaluation of chemical contaminant effects in the

Massachusetts Bays. Final report to the Massachusetts
Bays Program, Jan, 1995.

National Status and Trends (NS&T) Program, 1987. A sum-
mary of selected data on chemical contaminants in tissues
collected during 1984, 1985, and 1986. National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Rockville, MD,
Dec. 1987. NOAA Tech. Memo. NOS OMA 38.

NS&T, 1991. second summary of data on chemical contami-
nants in sediments from the National Status and Trends
Program. National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, Rockville, MD, Apr. 1991. NOAA
Technical Memorandum NOS OMA 59.

- Bioaccumulation. Appendix
X to Volume V of Secondary Treatment Facilities Plan,
prepared for MWRA by Camp Dresser and McKee, Mar.
31, 1988

Rex, A., 1993. Combined sewer overflow receiving water

monitoring: Boston Harbor and its tributary rivers, Oct.
1990-Sept. 1991. MWRA ENQUAD Tech. Rept. No. 93-
4

Robinson, WE,, Ta. Cottey, and PA, Sullivan, 1990. ew

England Aquarium$ ten year Boston Harbor monitoring
program, first report (Mar. 1987-July 1989). New
England Aquarium, Boston, MA, Aug. 1990.

“c. Tide- and wind-driven flushing of

Bostik Harbor, Massachusetts. Proceedings of the Second
ASCE International Conference on Estuarine and Coastal
Modelling, M. Spaulding, ed., 1992, American Society of
Civil Engineers, New York.

Webber M., 1988. Charles River 1987 water quality and
wastewater discharge data. Massachusetts Department of
Environmental Quality Engineering (DEQE), Division of
Water Pollution Control, May 1988, Publication No.
15,544-70-35-5-88-CR.

Webber M., 1991. Charles River 1990 bacteria study, bacte-
ria data and analysis. Massachusetts DEQE, Division of
Water Pollution Control, Mar. 19

City of Quincy,
MA, Wollaston Beach Bathing Water Quality
Improvement Program, Summary report on actions to
date. Report to the City of Quincy, Mar. 1995.

WRA is just one of many public and private entities
whose part in watershed management is critical to over-
all clean water objectives. Others include: *U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency *U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers *Mass. Department of Environmental Protection

Mass. Division of Marine Fisheries *Mass. Division of Fisheries,

Wildlife, and Environmental Law Enforcement *Massport

«Boston Water and Sewer Commission ecity and town govern-

ments and their public works departments * watershed associa-

tions *public interest groups citizens.
As concemed citizens, there are several ways each of us can
contribute to improved water quality in our watersheds:

® Learn about your watershed-its water resources and its water
quality problems. See the bibliography section at the end of
this report for more information.

@ Reduce excessive use of fertilizer and pesticides, both sources
of runoff contamination. Use only the water you really need
when you water your lawn, both to conserve water and to
reduce the amount of soil and fertilizer washing off.

§@ Reduce the amount of toxic materials you use at home, and
dispose of them properly. Store hazardous wastes until you
can bring them to a community hazardous waste pick-up.
Never pour oil or other hazardous wastes into a storm drain or
sewer. Oil can be returned to the point of purchase or to a
city waste oil disposal location. A reference guide to alterna-
tives to toxic household products is available from Denise
Breiteneicher at MWRA (617-242-6000 extension 2328).

@ If you have a septic system, make sure it is in good working
order and have it pumped out regularly.

@ Get involved in your community’ affairs. Be aware of possi-
ble pollution sources, such as erosion at construction sites or
illegal sewer connections to storm drains, and speak out if
you see problems (call the environmental strike force at 617-
556-1000 or MWRAs TRAC Dept. at 617-242-6000). Show
concern and help to inform local officials and political candi-
dates about the importance of local impacts on watershed
quality.

@ If you live in a neighborhood with combined sewer overflows
or use a water body affected by CSO, participate in a neigh-
borhood working group to comment on implementation of
the CSO Plan. Contact Vincent Ragucci, MWRA (617-242-
6000 ext. 1191).

@ Consider becoming a volunteer water quality monitor.
Contacts include:

"Betsy McEvoy, Massachusetts Bays Program, Coastal Zone
Management Office, EOEA, 100 Cambridge Street,
Boston, MA 02202 (1-800-447-BAYS).

=Edmund Toomey, Mystic River Watershed Association, 117
Dover Street, Medford, MA 02155 (617-395-7155).

Bob Zimmerman, Charles River Watershed Association,
2391 Commonwealth Avenue, Auburndale, MA 02166
(617-965-5975).

"lan Cooke, Neponset River Watershed Association, 2468A
Washington Street, Canton, MA 02021 (617-575-0354).

=Katie Barrett, Fore River Watershed Association, RO. Box
2356, Quincy, MA 02269 (617-472-3189),

=Linda Beres (Weir River), 24 Douglas Ave. Ext., Hull, MA
02045 (617-925-5693).

What iii

Can Do