Drinking Water Protection Plan for the Cold River Watershed

Transcription

DRINKING WATER PROTECTION PLAN
FOR THE COLD RIVER WATERSHED
December 2005
Primary Contacts:
Pam O’Hara, Vice Chair
Cold River Drinking Water Protection
Committee
191 Cold River Rd.
Walpole, NH 03608
Phone: (603) 445-5168
E-mail: [email protected]
Jennifer Palmiotto
Source Water Specialist
Granite State Rural Water Association
322 Village St
Penacook, NH 03303
Phone: (603) 753-4055
E-Mail: [email protected]
Bill Botting, Facilities Manager
Fall Mountain
Regional High School
East Street
PO Box 60
Charlestown, NH 03603
Phone: (603) 835-2473
Debby Hinman, Chair
Cold River Local Advisory Committee
PO Box 26
Acworth, NH 03601
Phone: (603) 835-2309
12/30/05
Review Annually and Update Every 3 Years
Date Reviewed
Reviewer
Changes or Comments
The six public water supplies covered in this plan:
Acworth Primary School (PWSID 0015010)
Alstead Vilas School (PWSID 0055010)
Alstead Primary School (PWSID 0055020)
Fall Mountain Regional High School (PSWID 1315010)
The Orchard School (PWSID 0055030)
Sarah Porter School (PWSID 1315020)
2
12/30/05
Adopted by the Cold River Drinking Water Protection Committee:
3
12/30/05
Cold River Drinking Water Drinking Protection Committee: (from left to right) Robert
“Chops” Polcari, Yurick Hurd, Debby Hinman, Peter Rhoades, Howard Weeks, Kathy Torrey,
Kathy MacDonald, and Pam O’Hara. Missing: Bill Botting, Jen Polcari
4
12/30/05
Table of Contents
I. Introduction ................................................................................................................. 7
1.1 Background and Purpose....................................................................................... 7
1.2 The Watershed Approach...................................................................................... 7
1.3 The Drinking Water Protection Planning Process................................................. 8
1.4 Purpose and Use of this Plan................................................................................. 9
II. Description of the Cold River Watershed ................................................................ 10
2.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 10
2.2 Drinking Water Supplies .................................................................................... 11
III. Source Protection Areas.......................................................................................... 15
IV. Public Water Systems Managed by Schools in the Watershed .............................. 16
4.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 16
4.2 Description of the School Water Systems, Their Wellhead Protection Areas and
Inventories of Potential Contamination Sources ...................................................... 16
V. Potential Sources of Contamination in the Cold River Watershed.......................... 37
5.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 37
5.2 Watershed-Wide Inventory of Potential Sources of Contamination .................. 37
VI. Recommendations for Improving Drinking Water Protection ............................... 48
6.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 48
6.2 Recommendations for Source Protection at Local Schools ............................... 48
6.3 Recommendations for Managing Watershed-Wide Concerns ........................... 51
6.4 Conclusion.......................................................................................................... 62
VII. Emergency Response Plans................................................................................... 62
VIII. References............................................................................................................ 62
5
Acknowledgements
Funding for this project was provided through a United States congressional
appropriation to the National Rural Water Association and the Granite State
Rural Water Association and was administered in cooperation with the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency.
12/30/05
I. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background and Purpose
Although more than 70 percent of the Earth’s surface is covered by oceans, lakes,
rivers, and other bodies of water, only a small fraction (2.4 percent) is fresh water. And
of this small percentage of fresh water, nearly 90 percent is tied up in glaciers, ice caps,
and snowfields. This means that of the fraction which is fresh water, only approximately
0.24 percent of the Earth’s water is in fresh liquid form and thus available for human use.
Preserving the purity of these fresh water resources has long been recognized as a
worthwhile goal. Fresh water is often vulnerable to both natural and anthropogenic
contamination. It is therefore critical that these resources be managed wisely for the
benefit of present and future generations.
With this understanding of the limited nature of fresh water, this drinking water
protection plan aims to increase the understanding of the drinking water resources within
the Cold River Watershed, and to provide a meaningful foundation for decision-making.
1.2 The Watershed Approach
A watershed can be defined as a natural unit of land within which all water drains
to a common outlet (Figure 1.1). A watershed includes two components: a surface water
drainage basin and a groundwater drainage basin. The surface drainage basin is the land
area from which all surface water flows drain toward a surface waterbody. The
groundwater drainage basin is the land area and subsurface through which groundwater
drains to a surface waterbody at a lower elevation (Figure 1.2). The surface drainage
basin may be larger or smaller than the groundwater drainage basin, depending on factors
such as soils, slope, and surface cover. One of the most important concepts is that
surface water and groundwater are inextricably linked. For example, groundwater and
surface water interact where groundwater discharges to lakes, rivers and in areas where
ground conditions impede the drainage of water, such as in wetlands. This means that
management of contamination and pollution sources throughout a watershed will benefit
both groundwater and surface water.
Figure 1.1 Depiction of a watershed.
7
12/30/05
Figure 1.2 Paths of surface and groundwater flow. Source: Jeer et al, 1997.
Managing water resources at a watershed scale has been identified as ecologically
sound and practical. This is because watersheds and subwatershed units are recognized
as the most practical management units for the development of local plans. Watersheds
provide important goods and services that enrich our daily lives. They provide critical
habitat for plants and animals, areas of scenic natural beauty, places to recreate and relax,
they often facilitate transportation of goods and people, and provide fresh water
necessary for human survival.
1.3 THE DRINKING WATER PROTECTION PLANNING PROCESS
In November 2004 the Cold River Local Advisory Committee approached Granite
State Rural Water for assistance in preparing a drinking water protection plan for the
Cold River Watershed. Granite State agreed to assist in this effort. Together Granite
State and the Cold River Local Advisory Committee met with New Hampshire
Department of Environmental Services to get feedback on this proposed project in
December 2004. The Department acknowledged its support of this project.
In January 2005 a working group was formed comprised of members of the Cold
River Local Advisory Committee and Granite State Rural Water Association, to develop
a drinking water protection strategy. The first objective of the working group was to host
a Water Quality Workshop. The workshop was held on March 31, 2005, for the purpose
of providing information on watershed statistics, water quality, and local public and
private water supplies and to get volunteers to serve on a planning committee.
An outgrowth of the workshop was the formation of the Cold River Drinking Water
Protection Committee. This ten member committee was established to identify and
assess threats to drinking water resources throughout the watershed and to develop
recommendations to address these threats. Members representing a variety of
perspectives, disciplines, and communities served on the Committee on a voluntary basis.
Since May 2005 the Committee has met at least monthly and completed the following
tasks:
8
•
•
•
12/30/05
Tour of six participating public water systems in the watershed.
Developed an inventory of potential contamination sources (PCS).
Prioritized watershed risks and developed recommendations to address these
risks.
The recommendations presented in this plan were developed by the Committee after
thoughtful and thorough examination of potential pollution sources. These
recommendations are presented in Chapter 6 and summarized in Tables 6.1-6.7.
Unfortunately in October 2005, during the course of this project, a devastating flood
occurred in the Cold River Watershed. Given the severity of this natural disaster, the
Cold River Drinking Water Protection Committee gave especially thoughtful care when
developing their recommendations, recognizing that there are many other pressing
priorities due to the destruction caused by the flood.
1.4 PURPOSE AND USE OF THIS PLAN
This drinking water protection plan identifies vulnerabilities to drinking water
resources within the watershed and enumerates techniques to manage potentially
contaminating land uses. There are a total of twelve public drinking water systems in the
watershed, six of which chose to actively participate in this source protection planning
process. These six systems include: Acworth Primary School (PWSID# 0015010),
Alstead Vilas School (PWSID# 0055010), Alstead Primary School (PWSID# 0055020),
Fall Mountain Regional High School (PWSID# 1315010), The Orchard School (PWSID#
0055030), and Sarah Porter School (PWSID# 1315020). This drinking water protection
plan was developed to protect the quality and quantity of these sources and was prepared
by the Cold River Drinking Water Protection Committee with assistance from Granite
State Rural Water Association.
This plan consists of the following basic elements:
• A description of the public water systems located within the watershed
• An inventory of potential contamination sources (PCS’s);
• A management plan to minimize risks to drinking water resources and
• A contingency plan for responding to emergency loss of the water supply.
This drinking water protection plan may be used to:
• Serve as a guidance document to assist the communities of Acworth, Alstead,
Langdon, Lempster, and Walpole in their planning efforts to protect water
quality in the Cold River Watershed.
• Guide New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services and other state
and federal agencies in their efforts to protect and improve State surface and
groundwaters.
• Outline the primary drinking water protection issues, based upon existing
data and local knowledge.
• Develop project ideas related to water quality or water resources
improvements.
• Help identify technical or financial resources.
• Identify the technical or financial need of potential projects and partners.
• Support development of grant proposals.
9
•
12/30/05
Provide guidance to local and regional planning and zoning processes.
This plan is a working document that will be reviewed at least annually and
updated every three years to remain current, active, and viable. A carefully researched
and thoughtfully drafted drinking water protection plan is an important first step in source
water protection because it sets priorities for actions to take in protecting a water source.
Actions taken by water system management, surrounding landowners, and the larger
community are key to achieving comprehensive protection.
It should be noted that this drinking water protection plan represents the first step
of a multi-stage process to protect the water resources in the Cold River Watershed. As
management activities are implemented and conditions change in the watershed, goals
and objectives will need to be changed and the plan will need to be amended to reflect
these changes. As watersheds are in a constant state of change, so too should planning
documents reflect their ever-changing nature.
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE COLD RIVER WATERSHED
2.1 Introduction
The Cold River Watershed is the land surface that serves as the drainage system
for the Cold River. This land feature is determined by tracing a line along the highest
elevations surrounding the river. Water flow is directed towards or away from the
watershed depending upon which side of the ridgeline the water falls.
The Cold River’s headwaters are located at Crescent Lake where the elevation is
1,211 feet above sea level. From here, the river descends steeply at an average slope of
44 feet per mile to its confluence with the Connecticut River where the elevation is 236
feet above sea level. The river runs approximately 22.4 miles and is a Class B waterway.
There are six known aquifers in the watershed all of which have small recharge areas.
The Cold River Watershed encompasses a drainage area of approximately 101.6 square
miles and is notable for its multitude of glacial sand and gravel deposits, geologic
features which typically store abundant water resources.
Figure 2.1 Location of the Cold River Watershed in Southwestern New Hampshire.
Source: http://www.des.state.nh.us/rivers/cold1.htm.
10
12/30/05
Located in Southwestern New Hampshire, the watershed encompasses parts of
Cheshire and Sullivan Counties and includes portions of the towns of Acworth, Alstead,
Charlestown, Langdon, Lempster, Marlow, Unity, and Walpole, NH. Approximately
4,000 people live in the watershed.
For many years this area was an industrial center with mills which processed
trees, wool, grain, apples and clay into products which were shipped by rail to population
centers. Today land use is primarily rural. Forests dominate the upper reaches of the
river from Crescent Lake to South Acworth. Downstream of South Acworth, land use in
the villages of Langdon, Alstead, and Drewsville (a hamlet of the Town of Walpole) is
primarily a mixture of residential, agricultural, and forest land with some commercial
areas in the center of villages. Below Drewsville there are industrial operations in the
form of sand and gravel excavations along the river. At the confluence with the
Connecticut River agricultural land use dominates the landscape.
2.2 Drinking Water Supplies
Nearly all of the residences and businesses in the watershed are served by
individual private wells. Only Walpole and North Walpole have municipal systems and
these two systems serve populations largely outside of the watershed boundaries. No
other watershed community has a municipal system. Regular monitoring of wells which
serve individual homes is not required by state or federal law. It is up to the homeowner
to assess water quality on a regular basis.
There are twelve public water systems which are either completely in the
watershed or intersect with the watershed boundary. These water systems provide water
for six schools, three campgrounds, a motorsports park, a mobil home park and a village
district system (which is largely outside watershed boundaries) (Table 1.1). Unlike
individual residential wells, there are monitoring and reporting requirements for public
water systems. A Public Water System is defined as “a system for the provision to the
public of piped water for human consumption if such system has at least 15 service
connections or regularly serves an average of at least twenty-five individuals daily at
least 60 days out of the year” (Chapter Env-ws 300 NH Drinking Water Rules). Public
water systems are further classified into three types: community water systems, noncommunity non-transient systems, and non-community transient systems.
• Community water systems serve at least 25 residents on a year round
basis. Examples include municipal water systems and systems at mobile
home parks, condominiums, and single family housing developments.
• Non-community non-transient systems serve at least 25 people, for at
least 6 months per year. These systems typically serve daycare facilities,
schools, and commercial properties.
• Non-community transient systems serve at least 25 people, for at least
60 days per year. These water systems serve restaurants, campgrounds,
motels, recreational areas and service stations.
There are two community water systems whose wellhead protection areas
intersect the watershed boundaries (North Walpole Village District and Pine Needles
Mobile Home Park). There are six non-community non-transient systems (the schools)
whose sources and wellhead protection areas lie entirely with the watershed boundary,
11
12/30/05
and four are non-community transient systems (Camp Goodnews, Tamarack Trails
Camping Park, Camp Kirkham, and Jolly Rogers Motorsports Park). All of these
systems get their water from groundwater. Currently the source for the Camp Kirkham
system is inactive although the water system itself is still considered in “active” status.
The North Walpole Village District has already completed a source protection
plan for its sources. The wellhead protection area for this system was delineated using a
calculated fixed radius methods as opposed to a hydrogeologic method which accounts
for local variables such as topography. For these reasons, this system was not included in
this planning project. Of the remaining systems, only the six schools had representatives
who chose to actively participate in this planning process and were instrumental in
developing recommendations for management activities (Chapter VI).
Due to the connection between surface water and groundwater, water resources
management in the watershed benefits all types of systems, whether they are public or
private, or get their water from groundwater or surface water. Source protection efforts,
including watershed planning, help to minimize the likelihood that contaminated water
will enter a drinking water system. NH DES recommends that source protection plans be
implemented for all public drinking water supplies. These plans should include
management activities such as public education and land protection. One of the goals of
this drinking water protection plan is to reduce the risk of contamination from entering
drinking water systems.
12
12/30/05
Table 1.1 Public Water Systems and Sources in the Cold River Watershed, New
Hampshire.
PWSID
Water System
Name
Town
Well Type
0015010001
Acworth
Primary
School
Alstead Vilas
School
Alstead
Primary
School
Camp
Goodnews
Camp
Goodnews
Camp
Kirkham
Fall
Mountain
Regional
High School
Jolly Roger
Motorsports
Park
The Orchard
School
N. Walpole
Village
District
N. Walpole
Village
District
N. Walpole
Village
District
N. Walpole
Village
District
Pine Needles
Mobile Home
Park
Pine Needles
Mobile Home
Park
Pine Needles
Mobile Home
Park
Sarah Porter
School
Sarah Porter
School
Tamarack
Trails
Camping
Park
Acworth
Alstead
0055010001
0055020001
0417010001
0417010002
1347010001
1315010001
1348030001
0055030001
2401030001
2401030002
2401030003
2401030007
0053010003
0053010001
0053010002
1315020001
1315020001
1347020001
Depth
(feet)
Bedrock Well
Yield
(gallons per
minute)
N/A
Bedrock Well
3
160
12
200
Spring
(Inactive Source)
Artesian
Unknown
8
7.00
455
Unknown
15
Langdon
Dug Well
(Inactive Source)
Bedrock Well
3
150
Lempster
Dug Well
Unknown
20
East Alstead
Bedrock Well
0.50
500
North Walpole
Bedrock Well
45
273
North Walpole
Bedrock Well
45
160
North Walpole
Bedrock Well
40
350
North Walpole
Gravel Packed Well
225
50
Alstead
Bedrock Well
3.00
160
Alstead
Bedrock Well
5.00
720
Alstead
Bedrock Well
9.00
500
Langdon
Inactive
Unknown
Unknown
Langdon
Bedrock Well
Unknown
Unknown
Lempster
Bedrock Well
25.00
160
Alstead
180
Bedrock Well
Charlestown
Charlestown
Lempster
13
12/30/05
14
12/30/05
III. SOURCE PROTECTION AREAS
There are several different types of protected areas associated with drinking water
sources. For example, watersheds are delineated to protect surface water supplies. The
area under which groundwater flows to a producing well is known as the Wellhead
Protection Area (WHPA). For bedrock wells, the WHPA is a circle whose radius is
calculated based on the maximum daily amount of water withdrawn from the well. For
till and gravel wells, the WHPA is calculated based on existing hydrogeologic
information.
Another type of protected area is a groundwater source’s Sanitary Protective
Radius. The Sanitary Protective Radius is a 75 - 400 foot radius around a well, which
under current law must be controlled by the water supplier through ownership or
easement. The size of the Sanitary Protective Radius depends on the permitted
production volume for the well (Table 3.1). To facilitate protection of the drinking water
source, it is necessary to know the delineation of the Sanitary Protective Radius and its
boundaries on the ground. Within the Sanitary Protective Radius only activities that are
both directly related to the water system and non-threatening to water quality should
occur. Regular inspections of the Sanitary Protective Radius help to identify any
potentially threatening land use activities.
Table 3.1 Sanitary Protective Radii. Source: Env-Ws 378.06 Sanitary Protective Area
Permitted Production
Volume (gallons per day)
< 14,400
14,401-28,800
28,801-57,600
57,601-86,400
86,401-115,200
115,201-144,000
> 144,000
Radius
(feet)
150
175
200
250
300
350
400
Within any of the aforementioned protected areas, land uses and/or naturally
occurring materials may cause a public water system to be vulnerable to contamination.
While naturally occurring contaminants can usually be controlled by treatment methods,
potentially contaminating land uses can be addressed by management activities outlined
in a Source Protection Plan. A drinking water protection plan identifies water system
vulnerabilities and enumerates techniques to manage potentially contaminating land uses.
The next chapter describes public drinking water systems managed by schools in the
Cold River Watershed.
15
12/30/05
IV. PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS MANAGED BY SCHOOLS IN THE
WATERSHED
4.1 Introduction
The Drinking Water Protection Committee reviewed school-managed water
systems to ensure that these systems are operated properly and can serve as models
within the watershed. This chapter provides a general description of each system and
describes potential contamination sources (PCS) within each of the wellhead protection
areas. An inventory of potential contamination sources is a list of land use activities that
have the potential to cause harm to a water system. With proper planning, education, and
outreach most potential sources of contamination can be effectively managed.
Recommendations to address potential contamination concerns are described in Chapter
VI.
A combination of methods was used to develop the PCS inventories for school
systems. In June 2005 the Drinking Water Protection Committee made site visits to 5 of
the schools to identify potential sources of contamination within the sanitary protective
radius and wellhead protection area. These visits were completed for all but the Acworth
Primary School. Granite State Rural Water Association completed a windshield survey of
the Acworth Primary School wellhead protection area in September 2005. Data supplied
by the NH DES One-Stop Data Retrieval web site (http://www.des.state.nh.us/OneStop.htm), NH
DES GIS data, and NH DES Source Water Assessment reports were used to further
develop these inventories.
The NH DES Source Water Assessment Reports provide information about
potential sources of contamination for each individual public water system. Categories of
potential contamination sources were ranked by NH DES as having a “Low”, Medium”,
or “High” risk. For this reason, the Committee did not perform an evaluation of risk for
the inventories presented below, but relied on the evaluation by NH DES.
Because of the Committee’s interest in protecting drinking water resources
throughout the watershed, the committee also conducted an inventory of potential
contamination sources on a watershed-wide basis. Findings from the watershed-wide
inventory are presented in Chapter V.
4.2 Description of the School Water Systems, Their Wellhead Protection Areas and
Inventories of Potential Contamination Sources
Acworth Primary School
Acworth Primary School obtains its water from a bedrock well known as Well #1.
Well #1 is 180 feet deep with an unknown yield. The well is located under the floor of a
classroom in the back of the school. Water flows from the well to a single WX-203
thirty-two gallon hydropneumatic storage tank. The water is not treated and is provided
to approximately 60 students and staff.
There are no outstanding water quality issues at this time. In August 2000 1.3
ug/L bis(2-Ethylhexyl) phthalate was detected in a water sample. This detection did not
exceed the maximum contaminant level of 6 ug/L bis(2-Ethylhexyl). Coincidentally this
contaminant, as well as associated compounds, was found in August samples for the
Alstead Vilas School and the Sarah Porter School. Perhaps these detections were the
16
12/30/05
result of contamination during the sampling process or due to concurrent work taking
place on these water systems. This contaminant has not been found since this detection.
There is an issue to consider for the future, however. In August 2000 a water
sample was tested for radon and the concentration measured 550pCi/L. A federal
drinking water standard of 300 pCi/L radon has been proposed by the Environmental
Protection Agency. Water analysis records for the Acworth Primary School indicate that
this system, like many public systems served by bedrock wells in New Hampshire will
exceed this new proposed standard. It is likely that radon treatment will be required for
this system at some time in the future. Options for radon treatment should be researched
and anticipated for the Acworth Primary School source.
The wellhead protection area for the Acworth Primary School is a circle around
the well with a radius of 1,300 feet (Figure 4.1). Within the wellhead protection area
there is residential development, a town hall, a church, a school, and transportation
corridors. Approximately 75% of the wellhead protection area is open space in the form
of agricultural land use or forested land. The agricultural fields are primarily used for
hay and are not considered a potential source of contamination. Four potential sources of
contamination for the Acworth Primary School water system were identified in the
wellhead protection area. These can be seen on Figure 4.1 and are listed in Table 4.1.
These potential sources of contamination include residential development, transportation
corridors, a church, a school, and town hall.
All public water supply system wells are required to have a sanitary protective
radius which is under the control of the well owner, within which no buildings, septic
tanks, leach fields, oil, debris, or other hazardous materials may be located or stored. The
sanitary protective radius for this source is a circle with a radius of 75 feet. The school
building, parking lot, and components of the septic system are located within the sanitary
protective radius.
Description of Potential Contamination Sources
PCS #1 Residential Development
There are a number of residences whose properties are in or intersect with the
wellhead protection area. Potential contamination sources associated with residential
land use include residential heating fuel storage, household hazardous waste, lawn care,
and septic systems.
PCS #2 Transportation Corridors
There are a number of roads which intersect the wellhead protection area.
Roadways serve as potential sources of contamination because these impervious surfaces
accumulate deicing materials and chemicals from automobiles. Stormwater runoff
carries these pollutants to nearby waterways and groundwater.
PCS #3 Church
The United Church of Acworth has a septic system and heating fuel storage tank
located just outside of the sanitary protective radius. If not functioning properly septic
systems can be sources of bacteria, viruses, and pathogens. Heating fuel storage is
vulnerable to leaks and spills. Simple measures can be taken to ensure that the septic
system and heating fuel tank are functioning properly.
In 1996, the Church conveyed an easement to the Fall Mountain Regional School
District which requires that the sanitary protective radius shall not be reduced or
17
12/30/05
encroached upon by any septic system component on the Church’s property (Appendix
1).
PCS #4 Acworth Primary School
The school building and a portion of the parking area are located within the
sanitary protection radius. The School shares a septic system with the Town Hall. This
septic system’s leach field is located outside of the sanitary protective radius south of the
School Building.
PCS #5 Acworth Town Hall
The Town Hall building is located within the wellhead protection area. This
building shares a septic system with the school.
Table 4.1 Potential Contamination Sources in the Wellhead Protection Area for the
Acworth Primary School, Acworth, NH.
Potential Contamination Sources
1. Residential Development
2. Transportation Corridors
3. Church
4. School Building
Potential Pollutants
• Residential Heating Fuel:
Volatile Organic
Chemicals
• Household Hazardous
Waste: Various
Contaminants
• Lawn care: Nutrients and
Synthetic Organic
Chemicals
• Septic Systems: bacteria,
viruses
• Automotive chemicals:
Volatile Organic
Chemicals
• Road salt
• Septic Systems: Bacteria,
Viruses
• Heating Fuel Storage:
Volatile Organic
Chemicals
•
•
•
•
School Building
Parking Lot: Volatile
Organic Chemicals
Septic System: Bacteria,
Viruses
Heating Fuel Storage:
Volatile Organic
Chemicals
Approximate Location
Within wellhead protection area
Within sanitary protective
radius and wellhead protection
area.
In wellhead protection area >75
feet from source.
In sanitary protective radius
In wellhead protection area.
An alternative well site for the Acworth School was approved by the Acworth
Board of Selectmen in August 1995. This alternative site serves as a back-up source of
supply if necessary.
Figure 4.1 shows the corrected well location in the rear of the school building as
well as the adjusted wellhead protection area. NH DES GIS data previously showed the
well location as being in the neighboring church.
18
12/30/05
19
12/30/05
Alstead Vilas School and Alstead Primary School
The Alstead Vilas School obtains its water from a bedrock well known as Well
#1. Well #1 is 160 feet deep and yields 3 gallons per minute. Water flows from the well
to two 450 gallon hydropneumatic storage tanks. The water is not treated and is provided
to approximately 190 students and staff at the Vilas School.
The Alstead Primary School obtains its water from a bedrock well known as Well
#1. Well #1 is 200 feet deep and yields 12 gallons per minute. Water flows from the
well to a 200 gallon pressure storage tank. The water is not treated and is provided to
approximately 180 students and staff at the Primary School.
There are no outstanding water quality issues at this time for either the Alstead
Vilas School or the Alstead Primary School. However, in August 2000 the contaminants
Di-n-butylphthalate, bis(2-Ethlhexyl)adipate and bis(2-Ethylhexyl) phthalate were
detected in a water sample collected at the Vilas School. As mentioned previously these
results are likely due to sampling error or work performed on the systems. These
contaminants have not been detected since August 2000.
In the future it is likely that both the Vilas School and the Primary School will be
required to treat for radon. Water samples were collected to test for radon in August of
2000. Radon was measured at 700 pCi/L at the Vilas School and 1900 pCi/L at the
Primary School. Options for radon treatment should be researched and anticipated for
these water systems.
The wellhead protection areas for the Alstead Vilas School and Alstead Primary
School water systems are circles around each well with a radius of 1,300 feet (Figure
4.2). Within the wellhead protection areas there is residential development, the Alstead
Town Office, a gas station, two schools and associated parking lots, playing fields, and
transportation corridors. Approximately 45% of the wellhead area is open space in the
form of forested land. The sanitary protective radius for the Alstead Vilas School is a
circle with a radius of 125 feet. Approximately half of the sanitary radius is forested.
The other half has portions of an athletic field and is used as a parking area. The sanitary
protective radius for the Alstead Primary School is a circle with a radius of 100 feet. The
sanitary radius for this school is comprised entirely of open space and is under the control
of the Alstead Primary School. Both schools own and manage a large portion of their
wellhead protection area.
Potential contamination sources for the water systems for the Alstead Vilas
School and the Alstead Primary School are identified on Figure 4.2 and listed in Table
4.2. Twelve potential contamination sources were identified in their wellhead protection
areas.
PCS #1 Athletic Field
Nutrients and pesticides are common pollutants associated with athletic fields.
Pesticides are sources of synthetic organic chemicals. These chemicals can be washed
from treated fields during a rain event and transported to groundwater and surface water.
Once these chemicals enter a drinking water supply they can pose potential health risks.
Fertilizers are a source of nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorus. According to the
Fall Mountain Facilities Director, these fields are not treated and therefore were
considered a low risk.
20
12/30/05
PCS #2 Parking by Well House
During the windshield survey in June 2005 cars were parked within the sanitary
protective radius of the Alstead Vilas School water system (Figure 4.3). Parked cars can
be sources of leaking automotive chemicals including volatile organic chemicals which
can negatively impact the quality of groundwater sources. This potential source of
contamination was considered by the Drinking Water Protection Committee to be a risk
worth addressing.
Figure 4.3 Parked cars adjacent to the athletic field and within the sanitary protective
radius of the well for the Alstead Vilas School.
PCS #3 Lack of Bathroom Facilities for Athletic Field
During the site visit, it became apparent that no bathroom facilities were available
for athletes. All of the Vilas school buildings were closed and inaccessible. This
potential source of contamination was considered by the Committee to be a risk worth
addressing.
PCS #4 School Septic Systems
Septic systems are potential sources of bacteria, viruses, and protozoa which can
cause gastrointestinal illness, cholera, hepatitis A, or typhoid if consumed. In addition, if
improperly used, such as for disposal of paints, solvents, petroleum products, septic
systems can be a source of organic compounds as well. Septic systems should be
maintained regularly by pumping out wastes every 3-5 years. The Facilities Director for
the Fall Mountain Regional School District regularly maintains septic systems for the
Vilas and Primary Schools. Systems are pumped every three years and “R”, an enzyme
product, is added to the systems every Friday. Due to the excellent maintenance of these
septic systems, they were considered a low risk.
21
12/30/05
PCS #5 Gas Station
This gas station is listed as a Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
site. RCRA sites generate or store hazardous waste. Two 10,000 gallon underground
storage tanks for the storage of gasoline are also present on the property. Underground
storage tanks can be potential sources of volatile organic chemicals due to spills, leaks,
and vapor releases. Because the gas station is a great distance from the wells and also
down-gradient this PCS is considered a low risk.
There is one road, Mechanic St. which bisects the wellhead protection areas.
Roadways serve as potential sources of contamination because their impervious surfaces
carries these pollutants to nearby waterways and groundwater. The road represents a low
risk to the school wells.
There are a number of residences whose properties are in or intersect with the
schools’ wellhead protection areas. Potential contamination sources associated with
residential land use include residential heating fuel storage, household hazardous waste,
lawn care, and septic systems. In this case, the activities from the residential properties
were considered a low risk to the wells.
PCS #8 Storm Drain
Storm drains can accumulate contaminants from stormwater runoff. The location
of this storm drain makes it a low risk for the schools’ wells.
PCS #9 Underground Storage Tank
This is the underground storage tank for the Vilas School. The tank holds 4,000
gallons of #2 heating fuel. Underground storage tanks can be sources of volatile organic
chemicals. As long as the tank is well monitored and maintained, it presents a low risk to
the wells.
This is the underground storage tank for the Alstead Primary School. The tank
holds 4,000 gallons of #2 heating fuel. During this review the tanks monitor/sensor test
was due. As long as the tank is well monitored and maintained, it presents a low risk to
the wells.
PCS #11 Horse Ring
A horse ring is located just within the schools’ wellhead protection areas. Horse
rings are considered potential contamination sources because of the pathogens associated
with horse manure. Pathogens found in manure include viruses, parasites, and bacteria
such as fecal coliform (e. coli). However, because this horse ring is a great distance from
the wells and also down-gradient it is considered a low risk.
22
12/30/05
PCS#12 Cemetery
Cemeteries, particularly those dating from the 1800s, are considered potential
sources of contamination because of the arsenic used to treat corpses during this time
period. Due to the cemetery’s distance from the wells and down-gradient location, this is
assessed as a low risk.
Table 4.2 Potential Contamination Sources in the wellhead protection areas for the
Alstead Vilas School and the Alstead Primary School, Alstead, NH.
Potential Contamination Source
1. Athletic Field
Nutrients, Synthetic Organic
Chemicals
2. Informal parking by Athletic
Field
3. Lack of bathroom facilities
available for athletes.
Volatile Organic Chemicals
4. Vilas School Septic System
Alstead Primary Septic System
Nitrates, Bacteria, viruses
5. Gas Station
(1) 10,000 gal. double
walled tank for gasoline.
Last monitor/sensor test
4/08/2005. Next test due
in April 2006. Last
corrosion test on tank:
7/1/2003. Corrosion
testing on piping not
required. Last line leak
detector test: 2/15/2005.
Next due 2/2006.
(2) (1) 4,000 gal double
walled tank for gasoline.
Last monitor/sensor test
4/08/2005. Next test due
in April 2006. Last
corrosion test on tank:
7/1/2003. Corrosion
testing on piping not
required. Last line leak
detector test: 2/15/2005.
Next due 2/2006.
RCRA Site
Underground Storage Tanks:
Bacteria, Viruses
Automotive chemicals, road salt
Residential Heating Fuel: Volatile
Organic Chemicals
Lawn care: Nutrients and
Synthetic Organic Chemicals
Septic Systems: Nitrates, bacteria,
viruses
Within Sanitary Protective
Radius (<125 feet) of the Vilas
School Well
Within wellhead protection
areas of both schools.
Within Sanitary Radius (<50
feet) of Vilas School well.
Potentially within sanitary
radius of Vilas School well and
both wellhead protection areas.
areas for both school water
systems.
systems.
systems.
systems.
23
8. Storm Drain
12/30/05
Toxic chemicals (e.g. cyanide,
phenolics, and trichloroethylene),
metals, oxygen depleting
chemicals, fecal coliform, oil,
grease, pesticides, fertilizers, and
trash
systems.
9. Vilas School
Underground Storage Tank
Former site of Leaking
Underground Storage Tank.
Discovered 9/12/1993. This tank
is “Closed”.
(1) 4,000 gallon Underground
Storage Tank for #2 heating oil
10. Alstead Primary School
(1) 4000 gallon double walled
tank for #2 heating oil. Last
monitor/sensor test 1/28/2004.
Next test due IMMEDIATELY.
Last corrosion test on tank:
7/19/2003.
11. Horse Ring
systems.
systems.
Bacteria, Viruses
12. Cemetery
Arsenic
systems.
systems.
Emergency Back-Up Supply
The Vilas School and Primary School water systems have the potential for
interconnection. This means that the two systems can serve as emergency back-up
supplies to each other.
24
12/30/05
25
12/30/05
Fall Mountain Regional High School
Fall Mountain Regional High School obtains its water from a bedrock well known
as Well #1. Well #1 is 150 feet deep and yields three gallons per minute. Water flows
from the well to a 10,000 gallon atmospheric tank. Duplicate booster pumps transfer
water from the atmospheric tank to a 1,000 gallon hydropneumatic storage tank. The
water is not treated and is provided to approximately 850 students and staff throughout
five buildings at the school.
There are no outstanding water quality issues at this time. Within the last ten
years there has been one water sample which tested positive for fecal coliform. The Fall
Mountain Facilities Director has attributed this occurrence to a lack of system flushing
during the summer months. There have been no other positive results since this
occurrence.
A water sample was collected to test for radon in August of 2000. Radon was
measured at 1300 pCi/L. It is likely that radon treatment will be required for this system
at some time in the future. Options for radon treatment should be researched and
anticipated for the Fall Mountain Regional High School source.
The wellhead protection area for the Fall Mountain Regional High School is a
circle with a radius of 2,000 feet (Figure 4.4). Within the wellhead protection area there
are buildings and parking lots associated with the high school, agricultural activities and
fields, a sand and gravel operation, conservation land, and transportation corridors.
Approximately 75% of the wellhead protection area is open space in the form of forested
land. The sanitary protective radius for this source is a circle with a radius of 175 feet.
Although the school owns and has control over the sanitary protection radius there are a
number of potential sources of contamination in this area (Table 4.3). These include the
school barnyard and associated parking and an aboveground storage tank for the sugar
house.
PCS #1 Agricultural Activities
Directly adjacent to the well is the school’s barnyard. Animals and manure are
both potential sources of contamination. The barn has been recently relocated farther
away from the well, however, it still remains within the sanitary protective radius. The
formerly uncovered manure pile is slated to be covered. Given the proximity and nature
of these activities, PCS #1 poses a significant risk to the well.
PCS #2 Aboveground Storage Tank
Approximately 75 feet from the well is an aboveground storage tank for the sugar
house. This tank has no secondary containment. Given the proximity of this
aboveground storage tank to the well, PCS #2 poses a significant risk.
PCS #3
Parking areas serve as potential sources of contamination because these
impervious surfaces accumulate deicing materials and chemicals from automobiles.
Stormwater runoff carries these pollutants to nearby waterways and groundwater.
Parking within the sanitary protective radius poses a risk to the well.
Similar to parking lots, transportation corridors serve as potential sources of
contamination because these impervious surfaces accumulate deicing materials and
26
12/30/05
chemicals from automobiles. Stormwater runoff carries these pollutants to nearby
waterways and groundwater. The transportation corridors within the wellhead protection
area pose a low risk to the well.
This 10,000 gallon underground storage tank contains #2 heating oil for the
school. Heating fuel is a potential source of volatile organic chemicals. The tank is
located approximately 400 feet from the well. As long as the tank is well monitored and
maintained, it presents a low risk to the well.
PCS #6 Aboveground Storage Tank
This tank is in the permitting approval process. It will contain approximately 500
gallons of gasoline and be located on a skidder. Best management practices are
necessary to ensure protection of the well.
This 10,000 gallon tank of diesel fuel is associated with the bus repair shop. The
tank is located approximately 1,700 feet from the well. As long as the tank is well
monitored and maintained, and best management practices are used for bus fueling, this
tank poses a low risk to the well.
PCS #8 Bus Repair Shop
The school bus repair shop is located approximately 1,700 feet from the well.
The shop employs best management practices and has hazardous waste materials that are
removed by a contractor. This activity poses a low risk to the well.
PCS #9 School Labs
Fall Mountain Regional High School has a written disposal plan which is required
by the New England Association of Schools accreditation process. The plan aims to:
• Not generate or purchase toxic materials wherever possible.
• Neutralize chemicals before disposal, where possible.
• Keep toxic material onsite that cannot be neutralized.
Currently some toxic chemicals are stored on site after use. Eventually, toxic chemical
storage will become limited and may become a concern. At this time, the school labs do
not pose a significant risk to the well.
PCS #10 School’s Septic System
Septic systems are potential sources of bacteria, viruses, and protozoa which can
cause gastrointestinal illness, cholera, hepatitis A, or typhoid if consumed. In addition, if
improperly used, such as for disposal of paints, solvents, petroleum products, septic
systems can be a source of organic compounds as well. Septic systems should be
maintained regularly by pumping out wastes every 3-5 years. The Facilities Director for
the Fall Mountain Regional School District regularly maintains the High School septic
system. Due to the excellent maintenance of these septic systems, they were considered a
low risk.
27
12/30/05
PCS #11 Sand and Gravel Operation
A sand and gravel operation is located nearly 2000 feet from the well. Due to the
large distance between the well and gravel operation, this activity poses a low risk to the
well.
PCS #12 Agricultural Land Use
There are two pastures and one field within the wellhead protection area used for
agricultural purposes. These activities pose a low risk to the well.
PCS #13 Athletic Field
Nutrients and pesticides are common pollutants associated with athletic fields. Pesticides
are sources of synthetic organic chemicals. These chemicals can be washed from treated
fields during a rain event and transported to groundwater and surface water. Once these
chemicals enter the drinking water supply they can pose potential health risks. Fertilizers
are a source of nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorus. This activity poses a low risk
to the well.
Table 4.3 Potential Contamination Sources in the wellhead protection area for the Fall
Mountain High School, Langdon, NH.
1. Agricultural Activities
Barnyard, manure storage,
animals
Nitrates, Bacteria, Viruses
radius. Located <45 feet from
well.
2.
Aboveground Storage Tank
(1) 275 gallon oil tank for
sugar house operations. No
secondary containment.
radius. Located <75 feet from
well.
3.
Parking Areas
4.
Transportation Corridors
Within sanitary protective radius
and wellhead protection area.
In wellhead protection area
5.
(1) 10,000 gal. tank of #2
heating oil
Volatile Organic Chemicals,
Road Salt
Volatile Organic Chemicals,
Road Salt
6.
Aboveground Storage Tank
(500 gallons)
(1) 10,000 gallon tank of
diesel fuel.
Bus Repair Shop
School Science Lab
School’s Septic System
Sand and Gravel Operation
Agricultural Land Use
Athletic Field
Various
Nitrates, Viruses, Bacteria
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
Nitrates, Bacteria, Viruses
Nutrients, Synthetic Organic
Chemicals
28
12/30/05
Emergency Back-up Supply
The current water system does not have a back-up source. Another well exists
near the athletic field which was drilled for irrigation purposes. The irrigation well is
currently unavailable as a drinking water source. Required water quality testing and
connection to the water distribution system would be necessary to make this source
available.
29
12/30/05
Figure 4.4 shows the corrected well location in the school’s barnyard area. NH
DES GIS data previously showed the well location as being in the forested area next to
the barnyard.
30
12/30/05
The Orchard School
The Orchard School obtains its water from a bedrock well known as Well #1.
Well #1 is 500 feet deep and yields 0.4 gallons per minute. Well # 1 is located adjacent
to the school building and school driveway. Water is pumped from the well and into the
school building.
Besides the relatively low yield of this well, there are no outstanding water quality
issues at this time. A water sample was collected to test for radon in March of 2001.
Radon was measured at 2300 pCi/L in the sample. It is likely that radon treatment will be
required for this system at some time in the future. Options for radon treatment should be
researched and anticipated for The Orchard School source.
The wellhead protection area for the Orchard School is a circle around the well
with a radius of 1,300 feet (Figure 4.6). Land use within the wellhead protection area is
approximately 25% agricultural fields, 70% forested with some residential land use
scattered throughout. The sanitary protective radius currently contains the school
building, a road, and a driveway which serves as a temporary parking area for student
drop off and pick-up (Table 4.4). Wood heat and propane are heat sources for Orchard
School.
School representatives report that stormwater runoff from the driveway flows past
the well and down the hill. According to NH DES “If water quality results, that may be
attributable to this potential sources of contamination in the sanitary radius, appear higher
than the Maximum Contaminant Level, effective treatment will have to be installed or a
new well will have to be established”.
PCS #1 Stormwater Runoff
Directly adjacent to the well is the school’s driveway. Vehicles drop and pick up
students in this area. Parking is temporary in nature. Although not an ideal location, the
risk from this activity appears low since stormwater flows past the well and down-slope.
By monitoring water quality, most notably for volatile organic chemicals, changes might
be quickly detected.
PCS #2 Agricultural Land Use
Within the sanitary protective radius and wellhead protection area there are many
agricultural fields. Closest to the well is an organic field maintained by the School. The
field poses a low risk to the well.
There is one dirt road with minimal traffic which bisects the wellhead protection
area. This road poses a low risk to the well.
PCS #4 Rural Residential Development
There are a few of residences in the wellhead protection area. Potential
contamination sources associated with residential land use include residential heating fuel
storage, household hazardous waste, lawn care, and septic systems. Due to its low
density, residential land use poses a low risk to the well.
31
12/30/05
Table 4.4 Potential Contamination Sources in the wellhead protection area for The
Orchard School, East Alstead, NH.
Potential Contamination
Sources
1. Stormwater from
driveway and parking area
2. Agricultural land
Automotive chemicals
Within Sanitary Radius
(<10 feet)
Within Sanitary Radius and
within wellhead
With in sanitary protective
radius and wellhead
protection area.
area
No pesticides used
Automotive chemicals,
road salt not used
4. Rural Residential
Development
Residential Heating Fuel:
Volatile Organic
Chemicals
Lawn care: Nutrients and
Synthetic Organic
Chemicals
Septic Systems: bacteria,
viruses
Emergency Back-Up Supply
There is a water system owned by the school, located across the street, which
could be used as a temporary alternative supply.
32
12/30/05
33
12/30/05
Sarah Porter School
The Sarah Porter School obtains its water from a bedrock well known as Well #2.
Well # 2 is located in the Fire Department’s parking lot, adjacent to the Fire Station. The
parking lot is unpaved. Water flows from this well to a single WX-203 (32 gallon)
hydropneumatic storage tank located within the fire station. Water is not treated and is
provided to the fire station and approximately 40 students and staff at the Sarah Porter
School. Due to water quality concerns, bottled drinking water is purchased for the
school.
Water sampling records show that monitoring results for lead exceeded the
maximum contaminant level allowed. The required follow-up sampling was performed
and the required education materials were given to consumers. In August 2000, 2.7 ug/L
di-n-butylphthalate was detected in a water sample. As mentioned in previous sections
this result is likely due to sampling error or work performed on the system. This
contaminant has not been detected since.
In August 2000 radon was measured at 1900 pCi/L in a water sample. Water
analysis records for the Sarah Porter School indicate that this system, like many public
systems served by bedrock wells in New Hampshire, will exceed this new proposed
standard. It is likely that radon treatment will be required for this system at some time in
the future. Options for radon treatment should be researched and anticipated for the
Sarah Porter School source.
The wellhead protection area for the Sarah Porter School water system is a circle
with a radius of 1,300 feet (Figure 4.6). Within the wellhead protection area there is a
fire department facility, transportation corridors, residential development and open space.
The sanitary protective radius for this source is a circle with a radius of 175 feet. There
are a number of potential sources of contamination within the sanitary protective radius
(Table 4.5). These include the fire department facility, transportation corridors, and
residential development.
PCS #1 Fire Department Facility
The Fire Department’s building and parking lot lie within the sanitary protective
radius for this well. In fact, cars were parked within ten feet of the source. The well is
vulnerable to automotive chemical spills and road salt contamination. These activities
are a significant risk for the well
A road is located within the sanitary protective radius. Roads are sources of
automotive chemicals and road salt.
There are a few residences in the wellhead protection area. Potential
contamination sources associated with residential land use include residential heating fuel
storage, household hazardous waste, lawn care, and septic systems. Due to its low
density, residential land use poses a low risk to the well.
34
12/30/05
Table 4.5 Potential Contamination Sources in the wellhead protection area for the Sarah
Porter School, Langdon, NH.
Potential Contamination
Source
1. Fire Department Facility
Vehicle washing and repair
road salt
Residential heating fuel:
Volatile organic chemicals
Lawn care: nutrients and
synthetic organic chemicals
Septic systems: bacteria,
viruses
In sanitary protective
radius, within 10 feet of
well.
Within sanitary radius and
wellhead protection area
area
Emergency Back-up Supply
The current water system does not have a back-up source.
35
12/30/05
Figure 4.6 shows the corrected well location in the fire department’s parking lot.
NH DES GIS data previously showed the well location as being in the forested area next
to the Sarah Porter School and fire department building.
36
12/30/05
V. POTENTIAL SOURCES OF CONTAMINATION IN THE COLD RIVER
WATERSHED
5.1 Introduction
Because of the Committee’s interest in the Cold River Watershed, a potential
contamination source inventory was developed on a watershed-wide basis. This inventory
is presented in this chapter. A combination of methods was used to develop the
watershed-wide inventory. Information was gathered from NH DES GIS data, and from
the NH DES One-Stop web-based retrieval database (http://www.des.state.nh.us/OneStop.htm).
These data were reviewed by the Drinking Water Protection Committee for accuracy and
in some cases were ground-truthed by Granite State Rural Water Association.
This process yielded five general categories of potential sources of contamination
which are described below. These categories include: residential development,
transportation corridors, stormwater runoff, lack of water resources protection, and
commercial, industrial and municipal land use. These concerns are not listed in order of
priority.
5.2 Watershed-Wide Inventory of Potential Sources of Contamination
Residential Development
Residential land use poses threats to drinking water resources from several
sources. For example, potential contamination sources include residential fuel storage,
household hazardous waste, lawn care and septic systems.
Residential Heating Fuel Storage
Residential heating fuel tanks are potential sources of contamination because they
are prone to leaks due to line breakage, corrosion, and fitting and filter leaks (Freill,
2004). Over-filling of tanks is also a concern. The primary pollutants associated with
residential heating fuel are volatile organic chemicals which can have negative impacts
on fisheries and human health.
The location of residential heating fuel tanks is significant. For example,
residential heating fuel tanks consist of aboveground storage tanks which are located
outside and inside tank installations which are usually located in a basement. There are
two common concerns associated with outside tanks. Aboveground storage tanks should
be located on an impermeable surface to prevent leaching of fuel spills into the
groundwater and the tanks themselves should be protected from harsh weather
conditions. Tanks may tip over or become damaged due to ice and snow. Often tanks are
not located on an impermeable surface and do not have weather protective structures.
Inside tanks are typically located in finished or unfinished basements. Finished
basements provide some spill or leak containment. In contrast, unfinished basements do
not have a physical barrier which helps to contain spills. Finished basements may also
have sump pumps to alleviate wet conditions. Although useful for removing water, sump
pumps can accidentally pump fuel or fuel-contaminated water into groundwater resources
or directly into surface water.
37
12/30/05
Household Hazardous Waste
Improper disposal of household hazardous wastes can lead to the contamination
of both ground and surface drinking water sources. While homeowners do not typically
intend to pollute, improperly disposed substances from auto repair activities, furniture
stripping, for example, can find their way into water resources. Proper storage, use, and
disposal can reduce the possibility of water resources contamination. Annual community
household hazardous waste collection days help to minimize the release of these
hazardous materials.
Lawn Care
Nutrients and pesticides are common pollutants associated with lawn care and
gardening activities. Pesticides are sources of synthetic organic chemicals. These
chemicals can be washed from lawns during a rain event and transported to groundwater
and surface water. Once these chemicals enter the drinking water supply they can pose
potential health risks. Fertilizers are a source of nutrients such as nitrogen and
phosphorus. Excess additions of these nutrients to surface waterbodies can result in
increased frequency and mass of algal blooms. Use of low maintenance grasses and
implementation of homeowner education programs can help to limit pollution from lawn
care activities.
Septic Systems
Everything that goes down the drain, into the toilet, dishwasher, and clothes
washing machine goes to some type of wastewater disposal system. In the watershed
there is generally one type of wastewater disposal system: a system associated with an
individual home or business. The majority of households in the watershed dispose of
their waste water using individual systems which include septic systems, cesspools, and
holding tanks. Of these three types of disposal systems, septic systems are the most
common.
When wastewater disposal systems fail they can be sources of bacteria, viruses,
and protozoa which can cause gastrointestinal illness. They can also be sources of
pollutants from improper disposal of household hazardous waste. The homeowner is
responsible for ensuring proper system operation and maintenance. Ideally, septic
systems should be maintained by pumping out wastes approximately every 3-5 years.
When septic systems function properly they can process household organic waste
and destroy disease-producing bacteria. The most commonly approved system consists
of a septic tank connected to a leach field. Wastewater first flows to the septic tank
where heavy solids sink to the bottom. Grease, oils, and lighter solids rise to the top
where they form a layer of scum. Beneficial bacteria which are naturally present in
materials that are flushed into the system, decompose the biodegradable waste. Liquids
flow from the tank to the leach field where unhealthful bacteria, viruses, and some
phosphorus are removed. Eventually the filtered water flows to the water table (CRJC,
1994). A failed system jeopardizes public health, is a neighborhood nuisance, and
negatively impacts water quality.
It is difficult to assess current levels of septic system maintenance in the Cold
River Watershed. None of the watershed communities collect information on septic
system maintenance. There are no septic system maintenance ordinances, tracking
programs, or municipal septic system programs present in the watershed.
38
12/30/05
The purpose of septic system ordinances is to promote inspection and periodic
pump-outs to prevent system failure. A tracking program is a non-regulatory way to
ensure that septic systems are functioning. Tracking programs typically require
registration of all systems and encourage routine inspections and pump-outs. Under a
municipal system, the municipality assumes responsibility for maintenance and repair of
septic systems. Homeowners are charged an annual fee for this service.
Prior to executing a purchase and sale agreement for any "developed waterfront
property" using a septic disposal system, an owner is required to engage a permitted
subsurface sewer or waste disposal system designer to perform an on-site assessment
study (RSA 485-A:39). "Developed waterfront property" means any parcel of land
which is contiguous to or within 200 feet of a great pond as defined in RSA 4:40-a and
upon which stands a structure suitable for either seasonal or year-round human
occupancy. A “great pond” is defined in RSA 4:40 as "... a public water body of more
than 10 acres." The site assessment study is required whenever any part of the property is
within 200 feet of the great pond, not merely when the structure or the septic disposal
system is within 200 feet of the water. Relevant Law includes RSA 4:40-a, 485-A:2,
485-A:39 and Administrative Rule Env-Ws 1025. These provisions are relevant, for
example, for properties surrounding Lake Warren.
Some communities choose to establish a hardship fund for septic system repair
and replacement. For example, the Town of Meredith, NH has established such a fund.
None of the watershed towns currently have a hardship fund for septic system
repair/replacement.
Transportation Corridors
Transportation corridors include roads, highways, and railroad right-of ways.
Roadways serve as potential sources of contamination because these impervious surfaces
carries these pollutants to nearby waterways and groundwater. In the watershed, there
are approximately 489 miles of roads (road classes 1-5).
Stormwater Runoff
Stormwater runoff occurs when the capacity of soils and vegetation to absorb water
from precipitation is exceeded and water flows across the land’s surface. In developed
areas, natural vegetation and permeable soils are replaced by tracts of impervious
surfaces such as roads, parking lots, rooftops, driveways, sidewalks, and compacted fill.
Because water cannot penetrate these impervious surfaces, it runs off into gutters and
storm drains picking up toxins and suspended solids along the way. In undeveloped
areas, water infiltrates the soil where some pollutants can be treated by natural processes.
In contrast, in developed areas, the rate of stormwater runoff increases allowing for less
time for natural pollutant treatment and increasing the volume of water flow.
According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, contaminated stormwater
discharges are responsible for the impairment of one-third of all assessed waters in the
United States. Common stormwater pollutants include sediments, toxic chemicals (e.g.
cyanide, phenolics, and trichloroethylene), metals, oxygen depleting chemicals, fecal
coliform, oil, grease, pesticides, fertilizers, and trash (Ballestero et al., 2005).
Little is known about the quality and location of stormwater runoff in the Cold
River Watershed. Water quality monitoring of stormwater and the identification and
location of stormwater inflows is in the very early stages. Also important for determining
39
12/30/05
the potential volume of stormwater runoff is the percent impervious cover present in the
watershed. Percent impervious cover has yet to be determined for the watershed.
Research has shown that percent of imperviousness cover in a watershed can be used to
estimate current and future water quality (Zielinski, 2002).
Lack of Water Resources Protection
Watershed towns need to protect water resources to meet both current and future
demand. These needs can be addressed by adopting local regulations for water resource
protection, through land conservation, and by developing a needs assessment of future
water needs.
Local regulations can help protect water quality by directing development away
from ecologically sensitive areas, by guiding the location of construction and
development projects, and by prohibiting high risk land uses in specific areas. Local
regulations include zoning bylaws and ordinances, subdivision and site plan review
regulations, and local health ordinances.
Many of the watershed communities could greatly improve protection of water
resources through the adoption of local regulations. There are at least five basic water
resource protection mechanisms which can be adopted by local communities. These
mechanisms include steep slope provisions, erosion control, soil based lot sizing, riparian
and wetland buffers, and the use of overlay districts for water resource protection.
At least two watershed towns use overlay districts to protect water resources. For
example, in Alstead there is an overlay protection district for Lake Warren. In Walpole
there is an overlay district which protects the wellheads for the town’s public water
sources. However, none of the watershed communities have adopted aquifer protection
overlay districts to facilitate protection of any of the watershed’s highly productive
aquifers.
A review for the presence or absence of water resource protection provisions in
the local regulations adopted by watershed towns would help to identify areas where
water resource protection could be improved. This review should examine zoning
bylaws and ordinances, subdivision regulations, local health ordinances, and site plan
review regulations.
Land conservation is one of the most effective ways to protect water resources.
There are two ways this is typically accomplished: fee simple land ownership and
purchase of conservation easements. Fee simple ownership refers to complete ownership
of all the “bundle of rights” associated with a property. In contrast a conservation
easement is a permanent legal agreement between a landowner and a public agency or
private nonprofit conservation organization which limits or restricts how land can be
used. By placing a conservation easement on a property, the landowner transfers some of
the development rights to a responsible third party, such as a land trust. The land trust is
then responsible for ensuring that the easement restrictions are met.
And lastly it is important to assess future water demand in order to ensure that
these resources will be available for future generations and potential future growth in
these watershed communities. This is necessary regardless of whether communities wish
to continue the trend of having the majority of residences and business served by private
individual wells or if communities wish to develop municipal systems in the future.
40
12/30/05
Commercial, Industrial, and Municipal Land Uses
Commercial, industrial, and municipal activities which require a state permit were
considered to be potential sources of contamination for this inventory. As mentioned
previously, information about these sources was collected from the NH DES One-Stop
web-based retrieval database (http://www.des.state.nh.us/OneStop.htm). Categories of
potential contamination sources include: aboveground storage tanks (AST), underground
storage tanks (UST), leaking underground storage tanks (LUST), Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act sites (RCRA), and nonpoint source pollution sites. Information on
each of these categories is presented on the following pages with associated summary
tables.
41
12/30/05
Aboveground and underground storage tanks are considered a risk to water
resources due to the potential for leaks, spills, and vapor leaks. Petroleum leaks and
spills are sources of volatile organic chemicals. This review found four sites with
aboveground storage tanks (Table 5.1), eight sites with active underground storage tanks
(Table 5.2) and two sites with leaking underground storage tanks which are considered
“active” by NHDES. An “active” LUST site indicates that activities such as water
quality sampling or site remediation are ongoing. One of the UST sites, Kmiec’s Garage,
was completely destroyed in the October flood.
Table 5.1 List of facilities with aboveground storage tanks (AST) in the Cold River
Watershed, New Hampshire. (Source: NH DES GIS data, NH DES One-stop data
retrieval web site: http://www.des.state.nh.us/OneStop.htm)
Type
Facility
ID
Facility
Name
Address
Town
AST
960647A
R L Balla
Sawmill
Acworth
AST
970256A
Cold River
Materials
(Frank W
Whitcomb)
Beryl
Mountain
Rd
Brewery
Rd.
Total
# of tanks
Currently
in Use
3
Walpole
21
AST
AST
C&L
Petroleum
Lempster
Highway
Department
Rte 123
Olds Rd.
Langdon
Lempster
4
2 tanks
Substance
Stored
Capacity
(gallons)
Year
Installed
Diesel
Diesel
Diesel
Gasoline
Diesel
Diesel
Hydraulic
Oil
Motor Oil
Motor Oil
Used Oil
Lubrication
Oil
Hydraulic
Oil
Motor Oil
Diesel
Diesel
#2 Heating
Oil
Diesel
Diesel
Used Oil
Asphalt
Asphalt
#2 Heating
Oil
Asphalt
Diesel
#2 Heating
Oil
#2 Heating
Oil
Kerosene
Diesel
Diesel
Gasoline
1000
4500
7500
10000
1000
500
500
500
275
500
500
1980
1988
1988
1990
1993
2001
1997
1997
1997
1997
1997
275
275
275
15000
10000
1997
1997
2000
1990
2004
10000
15000
20000
20000
20000
2000
2004
1990
1990
1996
1996
1995
6000
12000
1995
1996
30000
1979
1996
25000
15000
10000
500
250
1979
1979
1990
2003
42
12/30/05
Table 5.2 Facilities with underground storage tanks in the Cold River Watershed, New
Hampshire. (Source: NH DES GIS data, NH DES One-stop data retrieval web site:
http://www.des.state.nh.us/OneStop.htm)
Type
Facility
ID
Facility
Name
Address
Town
LUST
2906
Route 10
Lempster
UST
2910
Route 10
Lempster
UST
2761
56 & 136
FMRHS
Rd
Langdon
UST
26
Fulton’s
Service
Station
NH DOT PS
215
Fall
Mountain
Regional
High School
Vilas School
Alstead
1 active
(1 closed)
Closed LUST
site
UST
30
Kmiec
Garage
Alstead
1 active
(3 closed)
This site was
lost in the
flood.
UST
29
Joe’s Citgo
Alstead
UST
LUST
5669
Drewsville
General Store
82
Mechanic
St
Route 123
/ Route
12A
Mechanic
Street
Route 123
2 active
(4 closed)
4 active
(4 closed)
UST
55203
UST
58722
Bascom
Maple Farm
Alstead
Primary
School
Sugar
House Rd.
58
Mechanic
Street
Walpole
Acworth
Alstead
Total
# of tanks
Currently
in Use
(5 closed)
2 active
(2 closed)
2 active
(2 closed)
Notes
Active LUST
site, plume
dissipating
Closed LUST
site
LUST site
discovered
6/2003.
1 active
(1 closed)
1 active
(2 closed)
43
12/30/05
There are eight facilities classified as active “hazardous waste handlers” or
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) sites. These sites store, manage, or
generate hazardous substances which are, for example, ignitable, corrosive, or toxic.
Table 5.3 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Sites in the Cold River Watershed,
New Hampshire. (Source: NH DES GIS data, NH DES One-stop data retrieval web site:
RCRA ID
NHD510097967
NHD510124548
NHD510122815
NHD500031745
NHD500015953
NHD500014535
NHD500020664
NHD510126501
SITE NAME
FULTONS SERVICE/REPAIR
JOE’S TEXACO
DELGENIO DAVID SPORTS
CAR RACING
COLD RIVER MATERIALS
SUNSET MOTORS
COLD RIVER CYCLE PARTS
NH DOT DISTRICT 2
FULTON
CONSTRUCTION/REPAIR
ADDRESS
778 RTE 10
MAIN ST
COLD POND
RD
BREWERY RD
RTE 123
26 HIGH ST
RTE 10
TOWN
LEMPSTER
ALSTEAD
STATUS
ACTIVE
ACTIVE
ACWORTH
WALPOLE
ALSTEAD
ALSTEAD
LEMPSTER
ACTIVE
ACTIVE
ACTIVE
ACTIVE
ACTIVE
763 RTE 10
LEMPSTER
ACTIVE
According to NH DES records there are three junkyards present in the watershed
(Table 5.4) and a total of 34 known potential sources of contamination classified by NH
DES as nonpoint sources of pollution (Table 5.5). These sources include two covered
sand/salt pile storage facilities, two uncovered sand/salt pile storage facilities, two
hardrock mine quarries, twenty-four mine, sand and gravel operations, and four storm
drains (Figure 5.2).
Table 5.4. Junkyard sites in the Cold River Watershed, New Hampshire.
(Source: NH DES GIS data, NH DES One-stop data retrieval web site:
SITE_NAME
FULTON'S
ACWORTH GARAGE
DOUG’S AUTO
ADDRESS
763 US RTE 10
MULLIGAN ROAD
2 NH TURNPIKE
TOWN
LEMPSTER
ACWORTH
UNITY
44
12/30/05
Table 5.5 Nonpoint sources of pollution from commercial, industrial or municipal land
uses in the Cold River Watershed. Source: NH DES GIS data.
SITE ID
144-06
145-07
144-10
144-11
144-05
144-07
144-08
144-09
144-12
144-13
143-22
143-23
143-24
143-25
143-26
144-14
144-15
144-16
144-17
145-01
145-02
145-03
145-08
145-09
145-10
145-11
145-12
145-14
144-01
144-02
144-03
144-04
144-18
145-13
TYPE
COVERED SAND/SALT PILE STORAGE
COVERED SAND/SALT PILE STORAGE
MINE, HARDROCK QUARRY
MINE, HARDROCK QUARRY
MINE, SAND AND GRAVEL OPERATION
STORM DRAIN
STORM DRAIN
STORM DRAIN
STORM DRAIN
UNCOVERED SAND/SALT PILE
STORAGE
UNCOVERED SAND/SALT PILE
STORAGE
TOWN
ALSTEAD
LEMPSTER
ALSTEAD
ALSTEAD
ALSTEAD
ALSTEAD
ALSTEAD
ALSTEAD
ALSTEAD
ALSTEAD
LANGDON
LANGDON
LANGDON
LANGDON
LANGDON
ACWORTH
ACWORTH
ACWORTH
ACWORTH
ACWORTH
ACWORTH
ACWORTH
LEMPSTER
LEMPSTER
LEMPSTER
LEMPSTER
LEMPSTER
LEMPSTER
ALSTEAD
ALSTEAD
ALSTEAD
ALSTEAD
LANGDON
LEMPSTER
45
12/30/05
46
12/30/05
47
12/30/05
VI. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVING DRINKING WATER
PROTECTION
6.1 Introduction
After reviewing the inventories of potential contamination sources the Drinking
Water Protection Committee developed a list of six priority areas of concern. These
concerns were weighed carefully in light of the devastation caused by the flood in
October 2005. The Committee’s concerns include: water systems source protection for
local schools, education and outreach, protection of drinking water resources, emergency
response planning, and assessment of future drinking water needs. For each concern the
Committee developed specific action-oriented recommendations. Recommendations
include the promotion of education and outreach, partnerships with local agencies, land
conservation and adoption of local regulatory controls. These recommendations are
discussed in more detail in the following narrative and Tables 6.1-6.7 below.
6.2 Recommendations for Source Protection at Local Schools
After reviewing the inventories of potential contamination sources for each of the
schools, the Committee developed site specific recommendations for each school water
system.
Acworth Primary
Three potential contamination sources in the wellhead protection area of the
Acworth Primary School warrant management activities (Table 6.1). There are two septic
systems outside of the sanitary protective radius but within the wellhead protection area.
One system is used by the Acworth Primary School and the Town Hall, and the other
system is maintained by the United Church of Acworth. The Fall Mountain Regional
School District should work collaboratively with the church and ensure that both systems
are properly maintained. A second concern is the church’s heating fuel storage tank. The
Fall Mountain Regional School District should inquire about the age and condition of the
storage tank and request that the church help protect the school’s water source from this
potential contamination source. The Church is likely to be receptive to this request
because it has already given an easement to the District to help protect the sanitary
protective radius for this well.
Lastly, the District should research options for radon treatment for its water
system since it is likely that treatment will be required in the future.
Alstead Vilas School and Alstead Primary School
The Committee developed recommendations for six categories of concerns for the
Alstead Vilas School and Alstead Primary School (Table 6.2). These concerns include
the back parking lot at the Vilas School, the schools’ underground storage tanks, fire
safety, outreach, land protection, and radon treatment.
When the Committee visited the Vilas School water system, the Committee found
parked cars within the sanitary protective radius of this well. Because of the potential for
automotive chemical spills, parking should be prohibited within the 125 foot sanitary
protective radius. It would also be helpful to determine the pattern of drainage for the
Vilas School Parking lots. Stormwater from the lots should not flow towards the well.
48
12/30/05
During the Committee’s site visit to the Vilas School well the athletic field was
being used and no bathroom facilities were available. Bathroom facilities for athletes
should be made available whenever the fields are being used.
Underground storage tanks for heating fuel have the potential to contaminate
groundwater. The Fall Mountain Regional School District should continue to monitor the
Vilas School storage tank for heating oil. A monitor/sensor test is due for the Alstead
Primary School underground storage tank. The Fall Mountain Regional School District
should make sure this test is completed.
During the Committee’s site visit, the Fall Mountain Facilities Director shared
concerns about water storage for fire safety at the Vilas School. The Committee
recommends that an additional storage tank be installed to promote better fire safety.
Land conservation is one of the most effective ways to protect water resources.
There are two ways this is typically accomplished: fee simple land ownership and
purchase of conservation easements. To ensure future protection of the Vilas School well
the Committee recommends exploring the purchase of fee simple rights or conservation
easements of the land East and up-gradient of the well. Through land ownership the
School District can control land use activities in this area thereby protecting the well.
Lastly, options for radon treatment should be explored for both of these water
systems. Although not currently required, radon treatment will likely be required in the
future.
Fall Mountain Regional High School
The Committee developed recommendations for six categories of concerns for the
Fall Mountain Regional High School (Table 6.3). These concerns include source water
education, creation of a back-up water supply, outreach, fuel tank management,
agricultural activities, and treatment for radon.
Education is a key component of any drinking water protection plan. Protection
of the Fall Mountain Regional High School water system represents an excellent
opportunity to teach students about water resources management. The Committee would
like to invite a science teacher to use the school water system as a case study for students
to learn about the importance of source water protection. Already prepared educational
materials are available from Project WET. Contact Jessica Brock at NH DES, 603 2713303 for more information.
Currently there is no emergency back-up supply for the approximately 850
students and staff at the High School. The Committee recommends that Fall Mountain
Regional School District conduct a feasibility study to determine options for establishing
a back-up supply. Use of the irrigation well should be explored as one possibility. This
feasibility study should also review the location of the school’s current source, examine
potential health concerns given its close proximity to the school farm and weigh a range
of options.
It is important that entities which have the ability to make land use decisions are
informed of the location of the school’s wellhead protection area. The Fall Mountain
Regional School District should send copies of this drinking water protection plan to
administrators in Charlestown and Langdon, and also to the NH Division of Forests and
Lands (which is responsible for property adjacent to the school). These entities should be
advised of the purpose and location of the school’s wellhead protection area and be
encouraged to permit the District to participate in any relevant land use discussions which
might affect the well. In addition, the District should send a notification letter to vehicle
49
12/30/05
service and repair shops within the wellhead protection area to inform them of the well’s
location and the importance of source protection.
Within the sanitary protective radius approximately 75 feet from the well, there is
an aboveground storage tank which contains fuel for the sugar house operation. This
tank has no secondary containment. Given the proximity of this aboveground storage
tank to the well, a leak or spill would pose a significant risk to the water system.
Secondary containment should be created for this tank to ensure that any spills are not
released into the groundwater. As an added precaution, fuel should only be stored in the
tank during the sugaring season, when fuel is needed.
The current location of the well within the school’s farm complex is not ideal.
Animals and manure are both potential sources of contamination. Animal wastes can be
sources of pathogens when leaching and runoff occur. Manure storage should be in
storage sheds with impermeable floors and roofs so that organic wastes do not leach into
groundwater and contaminate nearby wells. The barn has recently been re-located
slightly farther away from the well, however, its location remains within the 175 foot
sanitary protective radius. Only drinking water related activities should take place within
this radius. The Committee wishes to express its concern to the Fall Mountain Regional
High School regarding this situation, and encourages the District to creatively resolve this
problem. The Committee would like to commend the District for its foresight of
increasing quarterly fecal coliform testing to a monthly testing schedule.
Lastly, the District should investigate radon treatment options for this well in
order to be prepared for future regulatory requirements.
The Orchard School
The Committee developed recommendations for two categories of concerns for
The Orchard School (Table 6.4). These categories include management of stormwater
runoff from the school’s driveway and radon treatment.
The school’s driveway is located within the well’s sanitary protective radius less
than 10 feet from the well. Vehicles drop off and pick up students in this area. Although
parking is temporary in nature, there is a potential for automotive chemical spills to
negatively impact the well. School representatives maintain that stormwater from the
driveway does not flow towards the well. The Committee recommends that the School
continue to ensure that stormwater flow from the driveway remains diverted away from
the school’s drinking water source. Periodic testing for volatile organic chemicals could
confirm the presence or absence of these contaminants.
Like the other schools in the watershed, The Orchard School should investigate
options for radon treatment since treatment is likely to be required in the future.
Sarah Porter School
The Committee developed recommendations for two categories of concerns for
the Sarah Porter School (Table 6.5). These categories include water quality and radon
treatment.
The well’s location in the Fire Department parking lot makes this source
vulnerable to a host of contaminants including volatile organic chemicals from the Fire
Department vehicles. Currently the school buys bottled water due to water quality
concerns, such as lead. The Committee encourages the Fall Mountain Regional School
District to explore the feasibility of developing an alternative water source for this
School.
50
12/30/05
Like the other schools in the watershed, the District should investigate options for
radon treatment since treatment is likely to be required in the future.
School-Managed Septic Systems
The Committee wishes to commend the Fall Mountain Regional School District
for their proactive septic system maintenance programs at the Acworth Primary School,
Vilas School, Alstead Primary School, Fall Mountain Regional High School, and Sarah
Porter School (Table 6.6). The Fall Mountain Facilities Director maintains a regular
pumping and maintenance schedule for these systems. The Committee will mention this
excellent program as part of an article about this drinking water protection project.
6.3 Recommendations for Managing Watershed-Wide Concerns
The Drinking Water Protection Committee developed recommendations to
address concerns which affect drinking water resource protection on a watershed scale.
These recommendations are described below and are summarized in Table 6.7.
Education and Outreach
Education and Outreach is central to any drinking water protection project. To
promote the implementation of this drinking water protection plan copies of this plan
should be distributed to the Fall Mountain Regional School District, watershed schools,
health officers, zoning boards, planning boards, boards of selectmen, and conservation
commissions in the watershed. Copies should also be made available at local libraries
and be posted on the website managed by the Cold River Local Advisory Committee.
Additional paper copies and copies on CD should be made available for interested
citizens.
In addition, the Cold River Drinking Water Protection Committee plans to hold
five community workshops to present findings of this report to Town Boards. Granite
State Rural Water has prepared a grant application to the NH DES Source Water
Protection Program on behalf of the Cold River Local Advisory Committee to help cover
the costs of printing, plan dissemination, and the hosting of community workshops. If
funded, the Cold River Drinking Water Protection Committee will carry out these
activities.
The Cold River Drinking Water Protection Committee will work with local
papers to publish an article about this drinking water protection project, highlighting the
recommendations of this report. As part of this article the Committee will commend the
Fall Mountain Regional School District for its proactive management of school septic
systems.
Six of the twelve public water systems participated in this drinking water
protection project. The Cold River Drinking Water Protection Committee will share the
results of this plan with the drinking water systems in the watershed who have not yet
participated in this project.
Protection of Drinking Water Resources
During the course of this planning project, zoning ordinances of the eight
watershed communities were briefly reviewed for the presence or absence of drinking
water protection mechanisms. Most notably this review found a lack of aquifer
protection throughout the watershed. There are six known aquifers in the watershed and
very little information is known about their safe yields. Local regulations, such as aquifer
protection overlay districts, can help protect water quality by directing development away
51
12/30/05
from ecologically sensitive areas, by guiding the location of construction and
development projects, and by prohibiting high risk land uses in specific areas. The Cold
River Local Advisory Committee and Cold River Drinking Water Protection Committee
are committed to working with watershed communities to help adopt aquifer protection
provisions in their ordinances.
Emergency Response Planning
The Cold River Drinking Water Protection Committee will work with fire
departments in the watershed to alert local emergency response teams to the location of
significant drinking water resources. The purpose of this collaborative work will be to
ensure that drinking water resources are protected during a crisis.
Assessment of Future Drinking Water Needs
During the community workshops described above and other opportune times, the
Cold River Drinking Water Protection Committee will encourage towns to assess and
plan for future drinking water needs. Specifically the Committee will encourage
watershed communities to undertake aquifer evaluation investigations and develop
groundwater protection programs. The purpose of these programs should be to protect
drinking water resources for current and future use.
52
12/30/05
Table 6.1 List of Source Protection Management Activities for the Acworth Primary School Drinking Water Supply, Acworth, NH.
Concern
Action
Potential Lead
Agencies and
Partners
• Fall Mountain
Regional
School District
• Cold River
Drinking Water
Protection
Committee
1. Septic Systems
a. Establish communication regarding the
condition and maintenance of septic systems
operated by the Church and Acworth School.
2. Fuel Storage
a. Communicate with Church regarding location
of the fuel storage tank and the sanitary
protective radius for the school’s well.
•
Fall Mountain
Regional
School District
3. Radon
a. Options for radon treatment should be
researched and anticipated.
•
Fall Mountain
Regional
School District
Funding
Source
Date
Completed
53
12/30/05
Table 6.2 List of Source Protection Management Activities for the Alstead Primary School and Vilas School Drinking Water Supplies,
Alstead, NH.
Concern
Action
1. Back Parking Lot at
the Vilas School
a. Prohibit parking in the sanitary protective
radius for the Vilas School well.
Potential Lead
Agencies and
Partners
• Fall Mountain
Regional
School District
b. Determine the pattern of drainage for the
Vilas School Parking Lots.
•
Fall Mountain
Regional
School District
c. Provide bathroom facilities for athletes and
spectators who use the Vilas athletic field.
Facilities should be available during sports
events.
•
Fall Mountain
Regional
School District
2. School
Underground Storage
Tanks
a. Continue monitoring for Vilas School tank.
Ensure that monitor/sensor test was completed
for Alstead Primary tank.
•
2. Fire Safety
a. Install an additional water storage tank at the
Vilas School to promote better fire safety.
Fall Mountain
Regional
School District
NH DES
Fall Mountain
Regional
School District
3. Outreach
a. Send a notification letter to the any gas
stations within the wells’ wellhead protection
areas, alerting them of the schools’ sources
and the need for source protection.
•
Fall Mountain
Regional
School District
4. Land Protection
a. Explore possible land protection East and
upslope of the Vilas School well. Protection
could be achieved through a memorandum of
understanding, conservation easement or
purchase.
•
Cold River
Drinking Water
Committee
Fall Mountain
Regional
School District
Alstead
Conservation
Commission
•
•
•
•
Funding
Source
Date
Completed
NH Department of
Education School
Building Aid
Program
School Budget
NH DES Water
Supply Land
Conservation
Program
54
Concern
Action
5. Radon
12/30/05
Potential Lead
Agencies and
Partners
• Fall Mountain
Regional
School District
Funding
Source
Date
Completed
55
12/30/05
Table 6.3 List of Management Activities for Source Protection of the Fall Mountain High School Drinking Water Supply, Langdon, NH.
Concern
Action
1. Education
a. Invite a science teacher to use the Fall
Mountain High School Water System as a case
study for students to study drinking water
resources and the importance of source
protection
2. Back-Up Water
Supply
a. Fall Mountain Regional High School should
conduct a study to determine feasible options
for establishing an emergency back-up water
source in the instance that the current source
becomes either temporarily or permanently
unavailable. As part of this analysis, determine
if the irrigation well at the school would serve
as a better primary source.
•
a. Send a copy of this Drinking Water
Protection Plan to the town administrators of
Charlestown and Langdon, and the NH Division
of Forest and Lands. Alert them of the location
of the wellhead protection area and the
school’s interest in participating in any land use
decisions that might affect the well.
•
3. Outreach
Potential Lead
Agencies and
Partners
• Fall Mountain
Regional
School District
• Cold River
Drinking Water
Protection
Committee
• NH DES
Project WET
• Antioch NE
Graduate
School
•
•
Funding
Source
Date
Completed
Fall Mountain
Regional
School District
Cold River
Drinking Water
Protection
Committee
Fall Mountain
Regional
School District
(Facilities
Director)
56
Concern
3. Outreach
(Continued)
4. Fuel Tank
Action
b. Send a notification letter to the vehicle
service and repair shops within the wellhead
protection area to inform them of the well’s
location and the importance of source
protection.
a. Create secondary containment for the
aboveground storage fuel tank associated with
the School’s sugar house.
12/30/05
Potential Lead
Agencies and
Partners
• Fall Mountain
Regional
School District
• (Facilities
Director)
•
•
5. Agricultural
Activities
6. Radon
b. Make sure that fuel is stored in tank only
when necessary . For example at the end of
the sugaring season, fuel tank should be
empty.
•
a. Communicate with the Fall Mountain
Regional School District regarding the
agricultural activities within the sanitary
protection radius. Express concern about
potential sources of contamination. Commend
School for conducting monthly fecal coliform
testing above and beyond quarterly sampling
requirements.
•
•
•
Funding
Source
Date
Completed
Fall Mountain
Regional
School District
(Facilities
Director)
Fall Mountain
Regional
School District
(Facilities
Director)
Cold River
Drinking Water
Protection
Committee
Fall Mountain
Regional
School District
57
12/30/05
Table 6.4 List of Management Activities for Source Protection of the Orchard School Drinking Water Supply, Alstead, NH.
Concern
Action
1. Stormwater Runoff
a. Continue to make sure that stormwater flow
from the driveway and parking area is diverted
away from the school’s drinking water source.
2. Radon
Potential Lead
Agencies and
Partners
• The Orchard
School
•
Funding
Source
Date
Completed
The Orchard
School
Table 6.5 List of Management Activities for Source Protection of the Sarah Porter School Drinking Water Supply, Langdon, NH.
Concern
Action
1. Water Quality
a. Explore feasibility of developing an
alternative water source for the school.
2. Radon
Potential Lead
Agencies and
Partners
• Fall Mountain
Regional
School District
• NH DES
•
Funding
Source
Date
Completed
Fall Mountain
Regional
School District
58
12/30/05
Table 6.6 Praise for Fall Mountain Regional School District for proactive septic system management.
Concern
Action
1. Schools-managed
Septic Systems
a. Commend the Fall Mountain Regional
School District for their excellent septic system
maintenance programs at the Acworth Primary
School, Alstead Primary School, Vilas School,
Sarah Porter, and Fall Mountain High School
Potential Lead
Agencies and
Partners
• Cold River
Drinking Water
Protection
Committee
Funding
Source
Date
Completed
59
12/30/05
Table 6.7 List of Management Activities for Source Protection for in the Cold River Watershed.
Concern
Action
1. Education &
Outreach Campaign
a. Distribute copies of drinking water protection
plan to all watershed town offices making this
information available to health officers, zoning
boards, planning boards, boards of selectmen,
and conservation commissions. Copies of the
plan should also be available at town libraries.
Copies on disk and on paper should be made
available for interested citizens.
b. Hold 5 community workshops to present the
findings of the plan. Workshop will include a
Powerpoint presentation and handouts.
Potential Lead
Agencies and
Partners
• Cold River
Local Advisory
Committee
• Granite State
Rural Water
Association
•
•
Funding
Source
NH DES Source
Water Protection
Grant
Cold River
Drinking Water
Protection
Committee
Cold River
Local Advisory
Committee
NH DES Source
Water Protection
Grant
c. Post drinking water protection plan on the
Cold River Local Advisory Committee’s
website.
•
Cold River
Local Advisory
Committee
NH DES Source
Water Protection
Grant
d. Work with local papers to publish an article
about the work of the Drinking Water Protection
Committee and its plan of recommendations.
In this article commend the Fall Mountain
Regional School District for it’s proactive
management of water and waste water
systems.
•
Cold River
Drinking Water
Protection
Committee
NH DES Source
Water Protection
Grant
•
Cold River
Drinking Water
Protection
Committee
e. Share the results of this plan with the other
public drinking water systems in the watershed
that have not yet participated in this project.
Date
Completed
60
Concern
Action
2. Protection of
Drinking Water
Resources
a. Work with watershed communities to adopt
zoning provisions which will protect water
resources for watershed residents. Provisions
may include aquifer protection overlay districts
and stream and wetland buffer provisions.
12/30/05
Potential Lead
Agencies and
Partners
•
•
•
3. Emergency
Response Planning
4. Assessment and
Planning for Current
and Future Drinking
Water Needs
a. Work with local emergency response teams
within the watershed to ensure that the
locations of public drinking water systems are
well known and that drinking water resources
such as aquifers are best protected during a
crisis.
•
a. Encourage watershed towns to assess and
plan for future drinking water needs.
•
•
Funding
Source
Date
Completed
Cold River
Drinking Water
Protection
Committee
Cold River
Local Advisory
Committee
National Park
Service
Cold River
Drinking Water
Protection
Committee
Fire
Departments in
the Watershed
Cold River
Drinking Water
Protection
Committee
61
12/30/05
6.4 Conclusion
Many different individuals, groups and agencies were involved in the process of
developing the recommendations in this source water protection plan. The next step is to share
this plan with the town boards, citizens, and businesses within the watershed with the goal of
plan implementation. The Cold River Drinking Water Protection Committee will continue to
exist for at least another year in order to shepherd implementation of these recommendations. As
evidenced by this plan, the Committee has already played an important role in developing source
protection awareness and identifying current concerns. By having a “shepherd”, the
recommendations in this plan are more likely to be implemented.
This source water protection plan represents one step of a multiple stage process to
protect water quality. As recommendations are implemented and goals and objectives are met,
new ones will need to be developed and the plan will need to be amended to reflect these
changes. This plan should be reviewed annually and updated every three years.
VII. EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLANS
An emergency response plan describes the steps that would be taken if any or all of the
sources for a water system become contaminated, declined in yield, or were lost for any reason.
Emergency Response Plans for Acworth Primary School, Alstead Vilas School, Alstead Primary
School, Fall Mountain Regional High School, and the Sarah Porter School were created as part
of this planning process. Emergency response plans are available for review at NH DES in
Concord, NH.
VIII. REFERENCES
Ballestero, T., Roseen, R., Wildey, R., Avellaneda,P., Briggs, J., and Houle, J. 2004 Powerpoint
presentation on the University of New Hampshire Stormwater Center.
http://www.unh.edu/erg/cstev/Presentations/UMASS-Lowell-_04_06_05_files/v3_document.htm
Best Management Practices to Control Nonpoint Source Pollution: A Guide for Citizens and
Town Officials. 2004. Eds. A. Donlon and B. McMillan. New Hampshire Department of
Environmental Services. Concord, New Hampshire.
CRCJ, 1994. A Home-Owner’s Guide to Nonpoint Source Pollution in the Connecticut River
Valley. Published jointly by Connecticut River Joint Commissions and NH DES.
Freill, M. 2004. “Industry Should Address Tank Issues Before Solutions Area forced upon It”.
December 2004. Oil & Energy. New England Fuel Institute.
Jeer, S., Lewis, M., Meck, S., and Witten, J. 1997. Nonpoint Source Pollution: A Handbook for
Local Governments. Planning Advisory Service, Report Number 476. American Planning
Association. Washington, D.C.
NH DES. Chapter Env-Ws 300 NH Drinking Water Rules.
62
12/30/05
NH DES One-Stop Data Retrieval web site (http://www.des.state.nh.us/OneStop.htm).
Zielinski, J. 2002. Watershed Vulnerability Analysis. Center for Watershed Protection. Elliot
City MD.
63
12/30/05
Appendix 1
64
12/30/05
65
12/30/05
66
12/30/05
67
12/30/05
68
12/30/05
69

Drinking Water Protection Plan for the Cold River Watershed

Transcription

Similar documents

Watershed Committee of the Ozarks

Community Pocket Folder - Prom

2016 Water Quality Bro-WEB

Kiamichi River Watershed - Oklahoma Water Resources Center

DrunkQuest is a drinking game for 2 to 6 players that is an actual

Ethiopian girl Drinking

Worksheet Drinking Quotes

Khiet Luong Pennsylvania Environmental Council 1315 W alnut

247699 16791_Rev B Ultrefiner II.indd

Little Uchee Creek Watershed