Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I APPENDIX I Environmental Monitoring Plan Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I This Page Intentionally Left Blank. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I Peconic Estuary Program Environmental Monitoring Plan November 2000 Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I Table of Contents Introduction 1 Monitoring Plan Basis 1 Output Monitoring 2 Outcome Monitoring 3 Monitoring Plan Elements 3 Data Management 3 CCMP and NEP Requirements 4 Core Monitoring Workplan Elements 5 Measurable Goals 6 Brown Tide Issues 10 Nutrients Issues 12 Habitat and Living Resource Issues 20 Pathogens Issues 30 Toxics Issues 34 Monitoring Program Summary 47 Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  1  Introduction An effective monitoring program is necessary to assess the status and trends in the Peconic Estuary's water and sediment quality and in the health and abundance of the estuary's habitats and living resources. Assessing status and trends includes both spatial and temporal variations. This information will provide insights into the effectiveness of current management strategies, indicate where goals have been met, if actions should continue, and whether more stringent controls or management is warranted.

Monitoring the changes in a watershed is not a simple task. Watersheds, by their very nature, are dynamic systems where populations of fish, birds, and other organisms fluctuate with natural cycles. Water quality also varies, particularly as seasonal and annual weather patterns change. The task of tracking environmental changes can be difficult, and distinguishing the changes caused by human actions from natural variations can be even more difficult.

This Environmental Monitoring Plan describes the region's existing monitoring efforts as well as recommendations for expanding some existing programs and establishing new monitoring programs. The Plan also describes the environmental changes these data can be used to assess. While agencies or organizations carrying out monitoring programs may extend their efforts beyond the Peconic Estuary Program study area boundaries, the evaluation of the monitoring programs described in this document, whether existing or proposed, applies only to activities within the Peconic Estuary Program study area. By reporting on environmental changes, the Peconic Estuary Program will be able to evaluate whether measurable environmental results have been achieved and whether the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan ( CCMP) are being met. Efforts from Federal, state, county and local government agencies, non governmental organizations, and private citizens comprise the extant monitoring in the region. Monitoring has been and continues to be performed for water quality, habitats, land uses, and populations. Specific monitoring efforts are described in detail in this document.

Monitoring can be divided into output monitoring and outcome monitoring. Output monitoring is programmatic and addresses CCMP implementation issues ( resulting in Implementation Reports). Outcome monitoring focuses on changes in ambient conditions, ecological functions, and biological populations and communities ( resulting in Environmental Status Reports). This Environmental Monitoring Plan mainly focuses on outcome monitoring.

Monitoring Plan Basis The pollutants, biological indicators and performance criteria included in this Environmental Monitoring Plan were selected based on the priority management topics in the CCMP and the measurable goals the Program established for each priority management topic. The priority management topics were initially identified in the Peconic Estuary nomination document for inclusion in the National Estuary Program. These topics ( and lead agencies) are: Brown Tide ( SCDHS), nutrients ( SCDHS), habitats and living resources ( NYSDEC), pathogens ( NYSDEC), and toxics ( EPA). In the final CCMP, these topics are joined by critical lands protection, an overarching issue, to form the priority management issues for the Program, along with public education and outreach, financing, and overall implementation. The SCDHS along with The Nature Conservancy, the Suffolk County Department of Planning, and the Citizens Advisory Committee serves as the lead for critical lands protection. These priority issues have been selected, both initially and currently, based on impacts, threats, and importance in meeting the overall goals of the Peconic Estuary Program.

For each priority management topic, the PEP has developed measurable goals. In many cases, these measurable goals are first order estimates based on best available information and on management conference judgment. Each measurable goal in the final CCMP is linked to one or more of the actions in the final CCMP. Each element of the Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  2  Environmental Monitoring Plan is also linked to one or more of the measurable goals. The relationship between a monitoring program element ( and the parameters contained therein) and a CCMP measurable goal is the basis for its inclusion in this Environmental Monitoring Plan.

The Peconic Estuary Program's Environmental Monitoring Program consists of numerous existing monitoring programs, many of which have been expanded due primarily to the existence of the Peconic Estuary Program. The Peconic Estuary Program participants, in preparing this Plan, did not observe any duplication of effort among the agencies or organizations currently conducting monitoring in the estuary and its watershed. Where gaps in and among monitoring programs were identified, recommendations have been made to expand existing monitoring programs or establish entirely new monitoring programs. The Peconic Estuary Program Office in the Office of Ecology of the Suffolk County Department of Health Services serves as the overall coordinator of monitoring efforts in the estuary and watershed. The effectiveness of the Environmental Monitoring Plan will be reviewed as part of the Implementation Report as well as the Environmental Status Report. Recommendations for redirection of efforts will be included in these reports as needed; these proposed changes will be subject to public review.

The Peconic Estuary Program has developed a candidate list of indicators to be used in reporting on environmental outcomes. This list will be refined and finalized in the 2001 02 timeframe. The candidate indicators, related to key measurable goals in the CCMP and elements of the Environmental Monitoring Plan, are as follows:

 Brown Tide Levels  Dissolved Oxygen Levels  Nitrogen Levels  Water Clarity  Eelgrass Coverage  Extent of Shoreline Hardening  Finfish and Shellfish Landings  Acres Open to Shellfish Harvesting  Toxics in the Environment ( sediments, biota, and loadings)  Habitat Restoration ( and Land Acquisition/ Protection)

Output Monitoring Programmatic output monitoring will track the products from implementing the CCMP. Monitoring will help keep managers abreast of all implementation programs and the degree to which the programs are or are not achieving their intended outcomes. This type of monitoring holds designated lead organizations accountable for specific actions and steps outlined in the CCMP. Programmatic monitoring can also be used to assess whether an educational outreach program has reached its intended audience.

The Peconic Estuary Program will report on the status of the CCMP actions (" output monitoring") through periodic bulletins and has committed to a full accounting on the status of all CCMP actions every three years, consistent with EPA National Estuary Program Guidance, in the form of an Implementation Report. This reporting commitment is an action in the Post CCMP Chapter of the final CCMP. The report will evaluate whether the CCMP actions and steps should be modified in order to achieve the CCMP goals and objectives. Where appropriate, resources and efforts may be redirected to attain the desired outcomes of the Program. Recommendations for the redirection of efforts will be subject to public review. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  3  Outcome Monitoring Outcome monitoring assesses the success in attaining CCMP goals and objectives rather than the implementation of specific actions. For each measurable goal in the CCMP, the associated monitoring parameters provide a measure of success. Characterization reports prepared for the CCMP and summarized in the CCMP, as well as numerous existing monitoring efforts, represent outcome monitoring activities.

The Peconic Estuary Program will provide information on environmental quality (" outcome monitoring") through periodic bulletins and a report every three years on progress in achieving all of the measurable goals described in the CCMP in the form of an Environmental Status Report. This reporting commitment is an action in the Post CCMP Chapter of the final CCMP. Through the outcome monitoring process, existing and planned monitoring efforts will be incorporated, critical information gaps will be identified, and standardizing and coordinating future monitoring efforts will be attempted. As with the Implementation Report, the Environmental Status Report will include recommendations for redirection of efforts as needed; these proposed changes will be subject to public review.

Monitoring Plan Elements Compiling monitoring program information into one document, such as this one, promotes cooperation among agencies and stakeholders, clarifies the need for existing programs as well as for expanded or new programs, and provides an avenue for integrating results from different monitoring programs and projects for scientific, regulatory and general interests. The Peconic Estuary Program has identified thirty two core monitoring plan elements, which are necessary to determine whether the CCMP measurable goals are being met.

The monitoring plan elements are geared towards the chemical, physical and biological conditions of the estuary. As such, the workplan elements focus on the five substantive modules. Other modules such as Public Education and Outreach and Financing will be dealt with in other reports. The Critical Lands Protection Strategy Chapter outlines all the milestones that need to take place in developing a Critical Lands Protection Plan. Actual environmental goals and a monitoring workplan for critical lands protection will be developed as part of the Critical Lands Protection Plan.

Data Management The Peconic Estuary Program Data Management Strategy ( Peconic Estuary Program, 1993) designated the SCDHS Office of Ecology as the repository of water quality data and most Geographical Information System ( GIS) data. The Program Office also is the prime repository for natural resource data on a provisional basis. Since that time, the USFWS has worked on several mapping efforts and has provided GIS coverages to the Program Office for storage and distribution. For the foreseeable future, the Program Office in the SCDHS will continue its role as the data repository and data management agency. The Peconic Estuary Program is committed to reviewing the Peconic Estuary Program Data Management Strategy as part of the Post CCMP Implementation Report.

The Peconic Estuary Program intends to develop a real time, web based accountability system that will house information related to the CCMP goals and actions. Reports, newspaper articles, photographs and monitoring data will be available through the internet and in hard copy form. Monitoring data will be posted directly via links to a database. The intent of the accountability system is that all PEP related information will be web accessible. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  4  CCMP and NEP Requirements Consistent with EPA guidance, each of the individual elements of this Environmental Monitoring Plan includes the following:

  Program Objective( s): Program objectives are defined and performance criteria are specified ( i. e., parameter needed to guide management decisions).   Lead Entity: The lead entity is named or proposed.   Program Status: Program status describes whether the program is existing, existing but there are recommended expansions, or is new.   Monitoring Extent and Frequency: The geographical extent of the monitoring and sampling frequency is described.   Monitoring Hypotheses: Testable hypotheses are provided.   Measurable Goal: The Peconic Estuary Program measurable goal ( or goals) related to the monitoring program element is specified.   Program Description: Summary information addressing the particular monitoring program is included. In many cases, especially where there are existing programs, reference is made to an acceptable sampling and quality assurance/ quality control project plan. Those who are interested in the details and specifics of a particular program are encouraged to consult these existing documents. For monitoring programs that do not exist at the current time, but are recommended in this monitoring plan, complete information for all these factors has likely not yet been specified, but will be prior to the initiation of any environmental monitoring effort.   Costs: Information on costs, including estimates of current efforts and estimates for proposed new or expanded efforts is provided.

The program descriptions and the referenced sampling and quality assurance/ quality control project plans together include the following, where this information is available:

  Specification of monitoring variables, including sampling locations and frequency, field sampling locations, field and laboratory analytical procedures, quality assurance and control procedures.   Specification of the data management system and statistical test that will be used to analyze the monitoring data.   Description of the expected performance of the initial sampling design ( i. e., the minimum difference that can be detected in measured variables over time and between locations).   Provision of a timetable for analyzing data and assessing program performance.

Finally, information on costs is specified. If the monitoring activity is part of an existing or ongoing base program of an agency or organization, a cost is typically not specified. If it is a recommendation for a new or expansion of an existing monitoring program, to the extent possible, the cost has been estimated for planning purposes. These cost estimates will be the basis for securing additional funds. Potential sources of funding include agency or organization base programs, special funding sources ( i. e., the Suffolk County 1/ 4 percent Sales Tax Program, receipts from selective sales fees, special project grants through governmental and non governments sources). Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  5  Core Monitoring Workplan Elements Brown Tide Issues  Brown Tide Nutrients Issues  Nutrients  Dissolved Oxygen  Light Extinction  Groundwater  Point Sources  Land Use Habitat and Living Resources Issues  Eelgrass  Finfish and Macroinvertebrates  Wetlands  Shoreline Hardening  Piping Plovers, Shorebirds, Raptors, and Other Birds  Dredging  Restoration  Bay Scallops  Aquaculture and Transplanting Activities Pathogens Issues  Coliform Bacteria  Pfiesteria and Alexandrium  Vessel Waste No Discharge Areas Toxics Issues  Sediment  Coastal 2000  Biota ( Fish, Shellfish, and Crustaceans)  NOAA Mussel Watch Program  Surface Water  Groundwater  Hazardous Waste Sites  Point Source Discharges  Federal Toxics Release Inventory  Pesticide Use  Two Stroke Marine Engines  Underground Storage Tanks  Treated Lumber in the Marine Environment Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  6  Measurable Goals The PEP's measurable goals with respect to Brown Tide blooms include:

  Continue to better coordinate, focus, and expand Brown Tide research efforts ( measured by funding appropriated, frequency of Brown Tide symposiums and frequency of updating the Brown Tide Workplan and coordinations within the Brown Tide Steering Committee).

  Continue the current level of water quality sampling in the Peconic Estuary ( measured by the number and frequency of samples taken per year and the number of bays and peripheral embayments sampled). Currently, the Suffolk County Department of Health Services conducts biweekly monitoring at 32 stations in the Peconic Estuary throughout the year, resulting in over 830 samples taken annually.

The PEP's measurable goals with respect to nutrients include:

  Decrease the total nitrogen concentrations in the western estuary to a summer mean of no more than 0.45 mg/ l ( based on 1994 96 model verification conditions, and measured by surface water nitrogen concentrations as compared to the PEP nitrogen guidelines).

  Improve the dissolved oxygen concentrations in the western estuary to ensure that the New York State dissolved oxygen standard ( currently 5.0 mg/ l) is not violated ( measured by surface and bottom dissolved oxygen levels as compared to the New York State dissolved oxygen standard).

  Ensure that the total nitrogen levels in shallow waters remain at or below 0.4 mg/ l to help optimize water clarity, maintaining and potentially improving conditions for eelgrass beds, a critical habitat ( based on 1994 96 model verification conditions, and measured by light extinction coefficients as compared to the recommended eelgrass habitat optimization goal of at or below 0.75 ± 0.05 m 1).

  Ensure that the existing total nitrogen and dissolved oxygen levels are maintained or improved in waters east of Flanders Bay ( i. e., do not increase TN nor decrease DO) ( measured by surface water total nitrogen concentrations as compared to the PEP nitrogen guidelines and surface and bottom dissolved oxygen levels as compared to the New York State dissolved oxygen standard).

  Develop a quantitative total nitrogen load allocation strategy for the entire estuary ( measured by development of a strategy and timely endorsement by local and State agencies). Preliminary work group estimates, and work performed by other programs, indicate that a 10 25 percent fertilizer reduction goal is a reasonable first order target for existing residential and agricultural fertilizing programs.

  Implement a quantitative nitrogen load allocation strategy for the entire estuary ( measured by attaining the PEP recommendations including the implementation of the recommended Agricultural Environmental Management ( AEM) program, as well as other recommendations, which may include fertilizer reduction programs, sanitary system upgrade programs, point source controls, etc., as well as monitoring for the impacts on measurable groundwater quality parameters).

  Ensure that there is no substantial net increase in nitrogen loading to areas east of Flanders Bay and reductions in the Peconic River/ Flanders Bay region so that an increase in new development would be offset by reductions in loads from pre existing uses. The nitrogen work groups will develop means of attaining this goal, which may include groundwater performance standards ( e. g., nitrogen concentrations in groundwater resulting from post development discharge/ recharge), implementing fertilizer and clearing restrictions, and zoning.

  Continue sponsoring and coordinating research and information gathering ( measured by funding appropriated, and research conducted, relative to PEP recommendations). Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  7    Continue and expand open space acquisition programs ( measured by funding appropriated and acres acquired in target areas).

The PEP's measurable goals with respect to habitat and living resources include:

  Protect the high quality habitats and concentrations of species in the Critical Natural Resource Areas ( measured by acres of open space protected and development of model ordinances).

  Maintain current linear feet of natural shoreline and over the next 15 years reduce shoreline hardening structures by five percent ( measured by the percent change of natural vs. hardened shorelines through GIS mapping).

  Maintain current eelgrass acreage ( 2,100 acres in main stem of the estuary) and increase acreage by ten percent over 10 years ( measured by inter annual aerial surveys with GIS and SCUBA assessments).

  Maintain and increase current tidal and freshwater marsh acreage, and restore areas that have been degraded ( e. g., restricted flow, Phragmites australis dominated, hardened shoreline) ( measured as number of acres of marsh with GIS).

  Maintain a policy of no new mosquito ditches and not re opening ditches that have filled in by natural processes; and restore 10 15 percent of mosquito ditched marshes through Open Marsh Water Management ( measured by the number of acres of restored tide marsh using Open Marsh Water Management).

  Increase the number of piping plover pairs to 115 with productivity at 1.5 ( over a three year average), distributed across the nesting sites in the Peconic Estuary ( measured by annual piping plover surveys).

  Develop recommendations and guidelines to reduce impacts to marine life from dredging related activities ( measured by amount of reduced dredging volumes and protected benthic habitat acreage).

  Foster sustainable recreational and commercial finfish and shellfish uses of the Peconic Estuary that are compatible with biodiversity protection ( measured by juvenile finfish trawl surveys, bay scallop landings, and identifying, protecting, and restoring key shellfish and finfish habitat).

  Enhance the shellfish resources available to harvesting through reseeding, creation of spawning sanctuaries and habitat enhancement ( measured by scallop and clam abundance/ landings).   Link land usage with habitat quality in tidal creeks ( measured by continued funding of benthic and water quality surveys to measure the quality/ impacts to the habitats within selected tidal creeks).

  Ensure that the existing and future aquaculture ( shellfish and finfish) and transplanting activities are situated in ecologically low productive areas of the estuary and that they are mutually beneficial to the aquaculture industry, natural resources, and water quality ( measured by the extent and location of aquaculture/ transplant facilities, water quality measures, and natural resource data).

  Annually initiate five percent of the projects identified in the Habitat Restoration Workgroup Plan for the Peconic Estuary ( measured by the number of projects funded and implemented annually).

The PEP's measurable goals with respect to pathogens include:

  Maintain current level of lands available to shellfish harvesting, with the ultimate aim of re opening lands currently closed to harvesting ( measured through coliform levels and numbers of acres of shellfish beds available to harvest).

  Maintain and improve water quality of the estuary through a reduction of overall stormwater runoff, particularly key areas identified through the Regional Stormwater Runoff Study ( measured through the Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  8  number of stormwater remediation projects implemented).

  Eliminate all vessel waste discharge to the estuary ( measured by the adoption/ implementation of a Vessel Waste No Discharge Area in the Peconic Estuary, the number of pump out facilities and the volume of waste pumped annually).

  Attain a zero discharge of stormwater runoff in new subdivisions ( measured by site plans for new developments that achieve this goal and the development of new ordinances and Habitat Protection Overlay Districts).

The PEP's measurable goals with respect to toxics are:

  Improve the quality of the ambient environment ( surface waters, groundwaters, sediments and biota) where there is evidence that human inputs impair or threaten these resources ( as measured by surface water, groundwater, sediment and biota monitoring programs).

  Comply with schedules for conducting site characterizations, remedial actions and post remedial monitoring at hazardous waste sites; effectively characterize risks and protect human health and the environment at hazardous waste sites; ensure compliance with permit limits for point source discharges ( as measured by compliance with schedules at hazardous waste sites; conducting effective characterizations; and point source monitoring).

  Decrease overall emissions of reportable toxics from the five East End towns ( as measured by the Federal Toxics Release Inventory).

  Eliminate holdings of banned, unneeded and unwanted pesticides and hazardous substances by 2005 ( as potentially measured by collections during " Clean Sweep" programs, household hazardous waste collection programs and events, or surveys of farmers/ commercial landscapers/ homeowners).

  Decrease overall agricultural/ residential/ institutional pesticide applications in the five East End towns ( as potentially measured by point of sale surveys, surveys of residents, or commercial applicator tallies).

  Eliminate to the maximum extent practicable, pesticide applications on turf grass on all publicly held land by 2003 ( as potentially measured by resolutions passed [ or equivalent]).

  Eliminate underground storage tanks exempt from current replacement requirements via incentive programs and public education and outreach ( as potentially measured following baseline established of number of underground storage tanks [ USTs] and monitoring of the number of underground tanks removed, retired, and replaced).

  Decrease the total amount of treated lumber installed in the marine/ estuarine environment ( as potentially measured by baseline established from shoreline surveys and monitoring of permits issued for bulkheading installations, replacements, and removal).

  Reduce the number of two stroke marine engines in use in the estuary ( as potentially measured by harbormaster conducted surveys).

The PEP's measurable goals with respect to education and outreach are:

  Annually, embark on one new, substantial public education effort addressing each of the following areas:  Conducting Brown Tide education and outreach;  Reducing residential fertilizer use in the Peconic Watershed;  Improving, protecting or enhancing habitats and living resources;  Reducing pathogen loadings to the estuary; and Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  9   Reducing the use and loadings of toxics substances to the estuary. ( as measured by the Peconic Estuary Program Office and the PEP Citizens Advisory committee).

  Annually, conduct one major watershed effort involving students in estuary management ( as measured by the Peconic Estuary Program Office and the PEP Citizens Advisory Committee).

  Annually, conduct one major watershed wide event to educate those who live, work, or recreate in the Peconics ( as measured by the Peconic Estuary Program Office and the PEP Citizens Advisory Committee).

  Annually, support the establishment of one new local embayment or tidal creek association ( as measured by the Peconic Estuary Program Office and the PEP Citizens Advisory Committee).

The PEP's measurable goals with respect to financing are:

  Effectively use existing funding and secure new or additional governmental funding for CCMP implementation from the following sources:  Federal Government, particularly the U. S. Department of Agriculture;  State Government, particularly the Clean Water/ Clean Air Bond Act and State Revolving Loan Fund;  County Government, particularly the Suffolk County ¼ % Sales Tax Program;  Town Governments; and  Village Governments. ( as measured by the Peconic Estuary Program Office).

  Secure new or additional private sector funding for CCMP implementation, from the following sources:  Businesses; and  Not for profit organizations. ( as measured by the Peconic Estuary Program Office).

The Peconic Estuary Program's measurable goals with respect to post CCMP management and implementation are:

  Implement the Peconic Estuary Program Environmental Monitoring Plan. [ See Action M 2]

  Produce annual reports. [ See Action M 3]

  Update municipal officials. [ See Action M 4]

  Develop sub watershed implementation plans ( as measured by the number of sub watershed plans initiated). [ See Action M 5] Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  10  Brown Tide Issues Brown Tide Monitoring Program Objective To track the changes in abundance and distribution of the Brown Tide organism in the estuary and relate the changes to conventional water quality parameters ( e. g., dissolved organic and dissolved inorganic nutrients) as well as provide support to Brown Tide researchers.

Monitoring Hypothesis Knowledge of Brown Tide abundance and distribution may hold clues to preventing, stopping or mitigating Brown Tide blooms.

CCMP Measurable Goal Continue the current level of water quality sampling in the Peconic Estuary.

Lead Entity Suffolk County Department of Health Services; New York Sea Grant is the lead for Brown Tide Research Initiative projects.

Program Status Brown Tide monitoring is part of an existing program of the Suffolk County Department of Health Services. Existing Brown Tide Research Initiative Projects will be completed in 2002 03.

Monitoring Extent and Frequency Suffolk County Department of Health Services monitors estuary wide and year round ( weekly or biweekly) for Brown Tide cell counts and related water quality parameters. Monitoring under Brown Tide Research Initiative projects is in accordance with approved workplans.

Program Description Brown tide was first detected in the Peconic Estuary in June of 1985. The Brown Tide organism, Aureococcus anophagefferens, is a particularly small phytoplankton species and is only problematic under " bloom" conditions. Brown tide can persist for unusually long periods of time over large areas and has no predictable onset, duration, or cessation. Brown tide has recurred since 1985 and has had a serious impact on natural resources, the local economy, the general aesthetic value of the estuary, and possibly regional tourism. Brown Tide cell counts are included as part of the monitoring programs described below.

SCDHS Surface Water Quality Monitoring: In 1988 the Suffolk County Department of Health Services ( SCDHS) Office of Ecology expanded its monitoring operations in an effort to determine the cause of Brown Tide. While the cause of Brown Tide is still not known, the study's resulting final report, the Brown Tide Comprehensive Assessment and Management Program ( BTCAMP) ( SCDHS, 1992), served as the initial Brown Tide characterization for the Peconic Estuary Program.

Brown Tide cell counts are now part of the regular SCDHS surface water quality monitoring protocol. Refer to the SCDHS Surface Water Quality Monitoring section in the Nutrient Monitoring Workplan for more information and other parameters sampled by the SCDHS. The SCDHS Surface Water Quality Monitoring Standard Operating Procedure ( SCDHS, 2000) and the Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Peconic Estuary Program Surface Water Monitoring Program ( SCDHS, 1994) describe the standard operating procedures and the QA/ QC methods for the entire SCDHS Surface Water Quality Monitoring Program, which includes Brown Tide cell counts.. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  11  Brown Tide Research Initiative ( BTRI) Committee: The Brown Tide Research Initiative ( BTRI) Committee, chaired by the New York Sea Grant, follows the research and monitoring funded primarily through the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Coastal Ocean Program and Suffolk County. The BTRI program was developed to increase knowledge concerning Brown Tide by identifying the factors and understanding the processes that stimulate and sustain Brown Tide blooms. The Peconic Estuary Program is part of the BTRI Committee. The Initiative is composed of peer reviewed research projects that were selected from two national calls for projects. Brown tide research and characterizations are systematically updated through New York Sea Grant's Brown Tide Research Initiative Reports.

Brown Tide Steering Committee ( BTSC): The Brown Tide Steering Committee ( BTSC) was formed to broadly coordinate Brown Tide research efforts both inside and outside New York through the development of a comprehensive Brown Tide research and management plan or Brown Tide Workplan ( see Appendix F for the most recent Workplan). The BTSC includes representatives from various agencies and environmental groups as well as elected officials, commercial fisherman, and other interested parties. The Committee is coordinated by Suffolk County.

Costs Base Programs: Continued research and monitoring depends on continued funding. The SCDHS Surface Water Monitoring Program, along with the SCDHS Routine Point Source Monitoring Program, is funded in part by $ 20,000 in Post CCMP EPA funds awarded to SCDHS and by in kind match from Suffolk County, a minimum grant commitment of $ 120,000 per year to satisfy the EPA local match requirements. As with prior years, the costs for the monitoring program are likely substantially higher than the EPA grant.

Brown tide research is currently funded through many specially funded government grants. NOAA, through its Coastal Ocean Program, is providing Brown Tide research funding totaling $ 3.0 million over six years ( funding started in 1997). Between 1997 and 2000, Suffolk County has appropriated $ 583,000 to support Brown Tide monitoring and investigation efforts. Suffolk County has authorized $ 150,000 each year for the next three years ( 2001 2003) from the capital budget for more Brown Tide research and monitoring. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  12  Nutrients Issues Nutrients Monitoring Program Objective To track the long term trends in nutrient loading and the short term variations in nutrient concentrations in relation to the PEP nitrogen guidelines ( based on 1994 96 conditions) and to refine the guidelines as needed. This will support our review of the effectiveness of the CCMP actions in attaining dissolved oxygen standards.

Monitoring Hypothesis Increases or decreases in estuarine nutrient loading will be detected by monitoring water quality. Nutrient concentrations will change based on land uses and the implementation of management measures over time.

CCMP Measurable Goals Decrease the total nitrogen concentrations in the western estuary to a summer mean of no more than 0.45 mg/ l; Ensure that the existing summer mean total nitrogen levels are maintained or improved in waters east of Flanders Bay; Ensure that the summer mean total nitrogen levels in shallow waters remain at or below 0.4 mg/ l.

Lead Entity Suffolk County Department of Health Services.

Program Status Nutrient monitoring is part of an existing program of the Suffolk County Department of Health Services.

Monitoring Extent and Frequency Suffolk County Department of Health Services monitors estuary wide ( 32 stations) and year round ( biweekly) for nutrients and related water quality parameters.

Program Description Nitrogen is the nutrient of primary concern in the Peconic Estuary although the surface water quality conditions with respect to nitrogen levels are generally good. In the summer months, when environmental stresses are at their peak, nitrogen is the " limiting nutrient" for algal growth. Excessive nitrogen inputs stimulate algal growth, which may cause diurnal dissolved oxygen problems. Excessive nitrogen inputs may also harm eelgrass, a critical habitat, due to algal shading, stimulation of epiphytes, and, possibly, direct adverse metabolic impacts. In addition, increased nitrogen levels may affect the duration and/ or intensity of a Brown Tide bloom.

SCDHS Surface Water Quality Monitoring: The Suffolk County Department of Health Services ( SCDHS) Office of Ecology samples for a suite of nitrogen components ( NH3, NOx, NO2, NO3, Urea, TKN, and TDKN) in the Peconic Estuary. Other parameters sampled by the SCDHS include Secchi depth, Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen, Salinity, Total Coliforms, Fecal Coliforms, TPO4, TDPO4, O PO4, TOC, DOC, SiO3, TSS, Total Chl a, Fractionated Chl a, Aureococcus, Ambient Irradiance, depth at 20% of Ambient Irradiance, depth at 10% of Ambient Irradiance, and depth at 1% of Ambient Irradiance. While limited sampling began in 1976, the number of stations and samples taken in the Peconics has increased through the years. Currently, the SCDHS conducts biweekly monitoring at 32 stations throughout the year.

The Post CCMP Surface Water and Point Source Monitoring Plan ( SCDHS, 1999) further describes the post CCMP efforts of the SCDHS in the Peconics. As indicated in the Post CCMP Surface Water and Point Source Monitoring Plan, this program continues to adhere to the Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Peconic Estuary Program Surface Water Monitoring Program ( SCDHS, 1994), on file at SCDHS. The SCDHS Surface Water Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  13  Quality Monitoring Standard Operating Procedure ( SCDHS, 2000) document describes the standard operating procedures for the entire SCDHS Surface Water Quality Monitoring Program.

Costs Base Programs: Information on costs for the Suffolk County Department of Health Services Surface Water Quality Monitoring Program is included under Brown Tide Issues in this document.

Dissolved Oxygen Monitoring Program Objective To track the long term trends and the short term variations in dissolved oxygen concentrations in relation to the New York State dissolved oxygen standard.

Monitoring Hypothesis Improvements in the dissolved oxygen concentrations will be detected by monitoring water quality in the estuary.

CCMP Measurable Goals Ensure that the New York State dissolved oxygen standard ( currently 5.0 mg/ l) is not violated in the estuary; Ensure that the existing dissolved oxygen levels are maintained or improved in waters east of Flanders Bay where dissolved oxygen levels are currently better than standards require.

Lead Entity Suffolk County Department of Health Services.

Program Status Dissolved oxygen monitoring is part of an existing program of the Suffolk County Department of Health Services.

Monitoring Extent and Frequency Suffolk County Department of Health Services monitors estuary wide ( 32 stations) and year round ( biweekly) for dissolved oxygen and related water quality parameters.

Program Description Dissolved oxygen conditions in the Peconics are generally excellent although diurnal dissolved oxygen variations are a primary water quality management issue. The Peconic Estuary is a relatively shallow, well mixed estuary and as such is not subject to periods of severe dissolved oxygen depression, as can occur in deeper, more stratified estuaries like the Long Island Sound. Areas with limited flushing and/ or highly organic sediments exhibit bottom water, and sometimes surface water values below 5 mg/ l. SCDHS Surface Water Quality Monitoring: The SCDHS Office of Ecology has been recording dissolved oxygen levels, along with other water parameters, at numerous stations in the Peconic Estuary since 1976. With the help of the Peconic Estuary Program the number of stations and samples taken has increased through the years. Some stations that historically have had low dissolved oxygen measurements are sampled in the morning and afternoon. The Office of Ecology has also done intensive dissolved oxygen surveys ( sampling every two hours for 24 hours) in Flanders Bay, Meetinghouse Creek, and the Peconic River. The Post CCMP Surface Water and Point Source Monitoring Plan ( SCDHS, 1999) further describes the efforts of the SCDHS in the Peconics.

Costs Base Program: Information on costs for the Suffolk County Department of Health Services Surface Water Quality Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  14  Monitoring Program is included under Brown Tide Issues in this document.

Light Extinction Monitoring Program Objective To track the long term trends and short term variations in water clarity in relation to the PEP recommended eelgrass habitat optimization goal.

Monitoring Hypothesis Water clarity is improving in the estuary. By improving water clarity, eelgrass habitat and growth will be optimized ( see eelgrass monitoring section).

CCMP Measurable Goal Maintain and potentially improve water clarity conditions for eelgrass beds, a critical habitat in shallow waters. The PEP recommended eelgrass habitat optimization goal is a light extinction coefficient ( Kd) of 0.75 +/ 0.05 m 1.

Lead Entity Suffolk County Department of Health Services.

Program Status Light extinction monitoring is part of an existing program of the Suffolk County Department of Health Services.

Monitoring Extent and Frequency Suffolk County Department of Health Services monitors estuary wide ( 32 stations) and year round ( biweekly) for light extinction and related water quality parameters. Detailed long term investigations are taking place at three eelgrass beds in the estuary.

Program Description The single most important factor controlling the distribution of submerged aquatic vegetation, light attenuation, is partially linked to the amount of nutrient loading in a waterbody. High nutrient loading in the shallow waters of the estuary may stimulate algal blooms, decreasing the light penetrating into the water column and consequently hindering eelgrass' ability to photosynthesize. Rooted aquatic plants that are at a species' depth limit for clear water conditions would be expected to decline due to the lack of sufficient light energy in turbid waters.

SCDHS Surface Water Quality Monitoring: The SCDHS Office of Ecology has an extensive monitoring program in the Peconics, measuring light extinction and chlorophyll a, among other parameters. The Post CCMP Surface Water and Point Source Monitoring Plan ( SCDHS, 1999) further describes the efforts of the SCDHS in the Peconics.

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Long Term Monitoring Program: First initiated in 1997, three existing SAV beds were monitored to determine the annual and long term variations in eelgrass bed health and the cause of those variations. In 1999, the project was expanded to include three more locations. Monitoring of each site includes the following measures: depth and position of deeper edge of the eelgrass bed, biomass, shoot density, infauna, epifauna, light extinction, chlorophyll a, total suspended solids, dissolved inorganic nitrogen, and dissolved inorganic phosphorus, among others.

In 2000, the program will include a system wide survey based on aerial photographs and site visits. These data will be compared against the 1994 Cashin Associates report, Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Study to determine trends taking place in the estuary. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  15  Costs Base Program: Information on costs for the Suffolk County Department of Health Services Surface Water Quality Monitoring Program is included under the Brown Tide Issues in this document.

Information on the Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Long Term Monitoring Project is included in the Eelgrass Monitoring section of this document.

Groundwater Monitoring Program Objective To track the long term trends and short term variations in groundwater contaminants and better define the zones of groundwater input.

Monitoring Hypothesis Groundwater quality is changing in the Peconic watershed. The locations and rates of groundwater discharging into the estuary need to be studied.

CCMP Measurable Goals Implement a quantitative nitrogen load allocation strategy for the entire estuary ( measured by attaining the PEP recommendations including the implementation of the recommended Agricultural Environmental Management ( AEM) program as well as other recommendations which may include fertilizer reduction programs, sanitary system upgrade programs, point source controls, etc., as well as monitoring for the impacts on measurable groundwater quality parameters).

Ensure that there is no substantial net increase in nitrogen loading to areas east of Flanders Bay and reductions in the Peconic River/ Flanders Bay region so that an increase in new development would be offset by reductions in loads from pre existing uses. The nitrogen work groups will develop means of attaining this goal which may include groundwater performance standards, implementing fertilizer and clearing restrictions, and zoning.

Lead Entity Suffolk County Department of Health Services.

Program Status Groundwater nutrient monitoring is part of an existing program of the Suffolk County Department of Health Services; special projects have been completed in specific areas of concern.

Monitoring Extent and Frequency Suffolk County maintains a network of wells throughout the study that are sampled year round area to monitor the quality ( and quantity) of the groundwater supply, and conduct studies and investigations of the county's hydrology.

Program Description Groundwater is one of the largest external sources of nitrogen to the estuary, contributing approximately 7,560 pounds per day or about 21% of the total nitrogen load.

The nitrogen in the groundwater originates from fertilizer use, sanitary system waste and other sources. Dominant sources of total nitrogen to the estuary are agriculture ( 41% of TN loading) and residential development ( 40% of TN loading) ( SCDHS, 1999). Industrial and commercial uses contribute less than 10% of the total nitrogen load to the estuary. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  16  Nitrogen from synthetic fertilizer, applied as nitrate, ammonium salt or urea, may be the most important source of nitrate in the groundwater. Ammonium oxidizes to nitrate in the soil. Nitrate is leached to the groundwater supply through the sandy soils by the recharge of precipitation and by crop irrigation water. Nitrate contamination in drinking water is a serious concern. The SCDHS tested 45,985 private wells from 1972 to 1994 and 7.4% of the wells exceeded the nitrate Maximum Contaminant Level ( MCL) ( SCDHS, 1996). The USEPA and New York State drinking water MCL for nitrate is 10.0 mg/ l.

The SCDHS Bureau of Groundwater Resources selected ten wells in the county monitoring network to examine the effect of agriculture on groundwater quality from 1975 to 1994 ( SCDHS, 1996). For the 20 year period, the average annual nitrate concentration for all ten wells was 11.3 mg/ l, with an annual average range of 9.2 mg/ l in 1982 to a maximum of 13.7 mg/ l in 1988. A monitoring well in Southold contained the highest average nitrate concentration over the 20 year period ( 15.3 mg/ l) and also the highest individual sample concentration detected ( 33.0 mg/ l in 1990). Nitrate concentrations from a more recent study by the SCDHS, Water Quality Monitoring Program to Detect Pesticide Contamination in Groundwaters of Nassau and Suffolk Counties, NY ( 1999) are consistent with these 1996 study figures.

The SCDHS has also monitored groundwater for impacts from pesticide and fertilizer use on golf courses ( SCDHS, 1999). A total of 41 samples were collected from 31 wells at 18 separate golf courses. Nitrate concentrations in the Suffolk County golf course wells averaged 4.3 mg/ l with a median concentration of 2.6 mg/ l. The SCDHS has done a follow up study this year with an expanded list of analytes and with new monitoring wells at five more courses in the county, including Shinnecock, National, and Maidstone.

The United States Geological Survey ( USGS) has delineated the groundwater contributing areas, as well as preliminary sub boundaries for the main bays system. The USGS further characterized the Peconic River and Flanders Bay subwatersheds in 1999 by defining the sub sediment geology through seismic reflections. The Cornell Cooperative Extension together with the SCDHS developed an ultrasonic low flowmeter for use in Flanders Bay and West Neck Bay. The flowmeter data will be used to determine the quality, quantity and location of groundwater discharging into the estuary.

SCDHS Groundwater Monitoring: The SCDHS Bureau of Groundwater Resources maintains a network of wells throughout the county to monitor the quality and quantity of the groundwater supply, and conduct studies and investigations of the county's hydrology. The Bureau will continue to produce groundwater measurement reports. The Peconic Estuary Program will in turn review the trends and modify the CCMP actions and steps accordingly.

Suffolk County Groundwater Model ( Contractor Camp, Dresser, and McKee): A groundwater model is being developed for all of Suffolk County. The model will provide additional information on the groundwater flow paths and travel times in the Peconic watershed.

Costs Base Program: The NYSDEC has been funding the SCDHS ( pesticide) groundwater monitoring program for three years at about $ 100,000 per year. The NYSDEC recently agreed to a three year one million dollar contract with the SCDHS to expand the monitoring program, but funding is based on approval of an annual work plan. This work takes place throughout Suffolk County, not just in the Peconic Region.

Point Source Monitoring Program Objective To track the short term and long term variations in point source nutrient loadings into the Peconic Estuary. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  17  Monitoring Hypothesis Point source loadings to the estuary are changing over time.

CCMP Measurable Goal Implement a quantitative nitrogen load allocation strategy for the entire estuary ( measured by attaining the PEP recommendations including the implementation of the recommended Agricultural Environmental Management ( AEM) program as well as other recommendations which may include fertilizer reduction programs, sanitary system upgrade programs, point source controls, etc., as well as monitoring for the impacts on measurable groundwater quality parameters).

Lead Entity New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and Suffolk County Department of Health Services Program Status Point source discharge monitoring requirements and the Suffolk County Department of Health Services point source monitoring programs are existing program.

Monitoring Extent and Frequency Point source dischargers are required to monitor effluent quality in their state issued discharge permit, typically monthly monitoring is required. The Suffolk County Department of Health Services monitors ten routine point source influenced locations in the estuary during the year.

Program Description Point sources are minor nitrogen sources in the whole estuary, but may still be significant for water quality in specific embayments.

There are four major sewage treatment plants ( STP) in the Peconic region: Brookhaven National Lab, Riverhead, Sag Harbor, and Shelter Island Heights. The Brookhaven National Laboratory STP is assumed to be subsumed into the Peconic River baseline flow and loading. Operation of the Riverhead STP " avoids" 43 pounds of residential total nitrogen loading into the estuary each day ( i. e., groundwater TN load would have occurred, but for the STP collecting and treating the sanitary waste that would have been generated in the absence of a sewage treatment plant). The remainder of the Riverhead STP loading ( roughly 100 lbs/ day) is assumed to be " imported" sanitary waste TN loads to surface waters, mainly from commercial and institutional activity served by the facility ( SCDHS, 1999). The discharges from the Sag Harbor and Shelter Island Heights STPs are much less than 1% of the total nitrogen loadings in the eastern estuary ( SCDHS, 1999).

Major sewage treatment plant upgrades at Riverhead and Sag Harbor are being funded, in large part, by New York State. The upgrades at the Riverhead STP include building a 1.4 million gallons per day advanced wastewater treatment facility utilizing Sequencing Batch Reactor technology, including ultraviolet light disinfection. The Village of Sag Harbor has received NYS Bond Act funding to upgrade their STP to a denitrification system.

SCDHS Routine Point Source Monitoring: The SCDHS Office of Ecology monitors ten routine point source influenced locations including sites in the Peconic River, Meetinghouse Creek, Crescent Duck Farm, Fish Cove and the local sewage treatment plants on a monthly basis. To minimize the effects from the adjacent saltwater portion of Meetinghouse Creek, the two Corwin Duck Farm sites are sampled as close as possible to low tide.

New York State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( SPDES) Program: The SPDES program is administered by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Permits are written to ensure that point source discharges do not cause or contribute to the violation of ambient water quality standards. There are eight permitted surface water dischargers in the Peconic Estuary System: Brookhaven National Lab, Navy Weapons Industrial Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  18  Reserve Plant at Calverton, Riverhead Foundation Aquarium, Bayview Ventures, the Plum Island Animal Disease Center and the sewage treatment plants at Riverhead, Sag Harbor, and Shelter Island Heights. Each facility is required to monitor their effluents for a suite of parameters and report to the NYSDEC. The NYSDEC is responsible for reviewing the data and enforcing the permit.

Costs Base Programs: Funding for the SCDHS Routine Point Source Monitoring Program in the Peconic Estuary was calculated along with the SCDHS Surface Water Quality Monitoring Program. Information on costs for the Suffolk County Department of Health Services Surface Water Quality Monitoring Program is included under Brown Tide Issues in this document.

Land Use Monitoring Program Objective To track the short term and long term trends in land uses in the Peconic watershed.

Monitoring Hypothesis Land use is changing in the Peconic watershed.

CCMP Measurable Goals Continue and expand open space acquisition programs; Ensure that there is no substantial net increase in nitrogen loading to areas east of Flanders Bay and reductions in the Peconic River/ Flanders Bay region so that an increase in new development would be offset by reductions in loads from pre existing uses. The nitrogen work groups will develop means of attaining this goal which may include groundwater performance standards, implementing fertilizer and clearing restrictions, and zoning.

Lead Entity Suffolk County Department of Planning.

Program Status Land use monitoring for the study areas is part of an existing program of the Suffolk County Department of Planning that was initiated with the Peconic Estuary Program.

Monitoring Extent and Frequency Land uses ( and other related information such as zoning and ownership) at a tax map scale have been determined for the entire Peconic Estuary Program Study, including both upland areas and underwater lands. The SCPD will be developing a strategy for updating the GIS land use and zoning databases.

Program Description Land protection programs and other regulatory and non regulatory land planning efforts are critical to nitrogen management. Forty percent of the Peconic watershed was available for development in 1995 ( SCPD, 1997). If open space programs were not implemented and all 40% were developed at low density residential land uses, the current nitrogen loads to the western estuary, South Fork, and Shelter Island would more than double, as compared with existing conditions ( SCDHS, 1999).

Suffolk County Planning Department ( SCPD) Land Use Monitoring: The SCPD established an accurate Geographic Information System ( GIS) database for existing land uses at a tax map scale for the Towns of Riverhead, Southold, Shelter Island, Southampton, East Hampton, and the Peconic River corridor in the Town of Brookhaven ( SCPD, 1997). The SCPD also has a verified GIS database for existing zoning in this same region. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  19  With these databases, the Department is able to quantify the land use acreage by general categories, by jurisdiction and by watershed zone. The thirteen general categories of land use include low density residential, medium density residential, high density residential, commercial, industrial, recreation and open space, and vacant, among others. As a follow up to the report Peconic Estuary Program Existing Land Use Inventory ( SCPD, 1997) detailing the existing land uses in eastern Suffolk County in 1995, the SCPD is in the final stages of preparing the report 1999 Existing Land Use Inventory  Eastern Suffolk County.

The SCPD will develop a strategy for updating the GIS land use and zoning databases, to be included in the first post CCMP report. The update and maintenance of the GIS databases will require coordination of activities among the Suffolk County Planning Department, Suffolk County Real Property Tax Service Agency ( SCRPTSA), town tax assessors and town planners. Current land uses will be compared to the PEP Existing Land Use Inventory ( SCPD, 1997) to determine the rate of converting vacant or agriculture land to developed uses. Methods may include tax assessor codes, aerial photographs, building permits, and site inspections.

Other Programs: Several other programs will be addressed in the annual post CCMP report including open space and farmland preservation, Harbor Protection Overlay Districts ( HPODs)/ local ordinances, and clearing restrictions.

Costs Base Programs: Land use monitoring will be funded through base programs. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  20  Habitat and Living Resource Issues Eelgrass Monitoring Program Objective To monitor the abundance and quality of eelgrass beds in the estuary.

Monitoring Hypothesis Eelgrass bed abundance and quality is changing.

CCMP Measurable Goals Maintain current eelgrass acreage ( 2,100 acres in main stem of the estuary); Increase eelgrass acreage by 10% over 10 years.

Lead Entity Cornell Cooperative Extension of Suffolk County Program Status The Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Long Term Monitoring Project is an existing program. Aerial photo analyses of eelgrass coverage estuary wide was performed in 2000. It is recommended that aerial photo analyses of eelgrass coverage be repeated periodically, at an interval to be determined Monitoring Extent and Frequency The Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Long Term Monitoring Project involves intensive investigations at a limited number of sites ( presently six) in the estuary. Aerial photo analyses of eelgrass coverage estuary wide was performed in 2000. It is recommended that aerial photo analyses of eelgrass coverage be repeated periodically, at an interval to be determined ( perhaps every three years).

Program Description Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Long Term Monitoring Project: In 1997, Cornell Cooperative Extension's Marine Program began SAV monitoring at three sites in the Peconic Estuary: Orient Harbor, Town of Southold; Northwest Harbor, Town of East Hampton; and Bullhead Bay, Town of Southampton. A minimum of three stations was sampled per site for SAV, sediment analysis, and water quality analysis. SAV measurements include: species composition, dry weight biomass of algae and eelgrass, depth and position of deep edge of eelgrass bed, shoot density, presence and dry weight biomass of epiphytes, and presence of wasting disease. Each site was sampled twice a year. Cornell Cooperative Extension uses water quality data from the SCDHS surface water quality monitoring program. These data consist of the following parameters: chlorophyll a, total suspended solids, dissolved inorganic nitrogen, dissolved inorganic phosphorus, and light attenuation ( for further information see: Nutrients monitoring section). In addition, water temperature, salinity, and light measurements at the surface and at one meter increments are taken at the time of SAV sampling. Sediment measurements include grain size and percent organic matter.

In response to external scientific peer review, the monitoring program was revised ( 1998 sampling) as follows: SAV sampling was performed annually during the summer, the number of samples collected per site was increased to 12, and sediment sampling will be repeated every five years for each site. In 1999, Cornell Cooperative Extension expanded its monitoring program to include three additional sites in Gardiners Bay, Town of Shelter Island; Three Mile Harbor, Town of East Hampton; and Southold Bay, Town of Southold. Furthermore, underwater video of each site was also taken in 1998 and 1999. In 2000, the sampling plan was further refined to improve statistical replication and reduce any potential impacts of the sampling methods to the extant eelgrass beds. Within each of the six monitoring sites, six stations were sampled. At each station, eelgrass stem density counts were performed for six quadrats. Plants sampled from an additional four quadrats were cut to determine eelgrass Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  21  shoot and algal biomass, epiphytes, wasting disease, and stem density. This sampling protocol results in a total of 60 samples of eelgrass stem density, and 24 samples of shoot and algal biomass per monitoring site. Furthermore, the eelgrass roots are left intact to allow for regrowth. Aerial photo analyses of the eelgrass coverage estuary wide are being performed in 2000 in cooperation with the US Fish and Wildlife Service. Aerial photos will provide a more extensive view of existing eelgrass beds and provide estimates of percent cover.

See Dumais and Smith ( 1997) for further details on the data analysis and quality control and quality assurance of this project.

Costs Base Program: The Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Long Term Monitoring Project is funded at approximately $ 71,000 per year. Approximately $ 50,000 was provided from EPA Post CCMP funds awarded to SCDHS. The remainder is provided by in kind matching funds from Cornell Cooperative Extension. New Costs: External funding for future annual sampling has been estimated at approximately $ 30,000. A source of funding to carry out this work has not yet been identified.

Finfish and Macroinvertebrate Monitoring Program Objective To determine the temporal and spatial distribution, abundance, and different life stage habitat requirements of finfish and macroinvertebrate species throughout the Peconic Estuary.

Monitoring Hypothesis Finfish and macroinvertebrate abundance, distribution and survival, particularly in the early life history stages, are related to water quality, prey and predator structure and habitat quality and quantity.

CCMP Measurable Goals Identify the important and sensitive recruitment and spawning areas of targeted finfish and macroinvertebrates; Increase the abundance of finfish species through protection of their habitats, food sources and restoration of degraded spawning and recruitment areas.

Lead Entity New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Program Status Existing Program west of Shelter Island; recommended expansion of program to areas east of Shelter Island.

Monitoring Extent and Frequency NYSDEC has run an annual monitoring survey of juvenile finfish west of Shelter Island since 1987. Sampling is performed on a block grid design superimposed over the Peconic Estuary ( 77 sampling blocks). Sixteen stations are randomly selected each week and sampled with an otter trawl during daylight hours.

Program Description The CCMP recommends monitoring of finfish and macroinvertebrate species through: ( 1) habitat utilization mapping ( subtidal habitats including SAV beds), ( 2) seine surveys, and ( 3) trawl surveys to develop a species occurrence list throughout their life cycle and identify sensitive recruitment and spawning areas. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  22  NYSDEC Juvenile Finfish Survey While there are currently no monitoring efforts in the Peconics for the adult finfish, the NYSDEC runs an annual monitoring survey of juvenile finfish west of Shelter Island since 1987. Sampling is performed on a block grid design superimposed over the Peconic Estuary ( 77 sampling blocks). Sixteen stations are randomly selected each week and sampled with an otter trawl during daylight hours. The original intent of the surveys was to develop an annual index of recruitment of juvenile weakfish and examine the relationship between parental stock size and environmental factors ( water temperature, salinity, dissolved oxygen and secchi disc) on year class strength for weakfish ( Cynoscion regalis). Data collection was later expanded to derive similar information on several other finfish species including winter flounder ( Pleuronectes americanus), scup ( Stenotomus chrysops), bluefish ( Pomatomus saltatrix), tautog ( Tautoga onitis), butterfish ( Peprilus triacanthus), and northern puffer ( Sphoeroides maculatus). The surveys also provide important data on more than 70 other species of finfish and crustacea.

While the NYSDEC's survey is extensive, it should be expanded to the east of Shelter Island. This information is essential to better understand the significance of the Peconics to important finfish and invertebrate species. Additional efforts should focus on resident species such as winter flounder, tautog, as well as transient species such as alewife ( Alosa pseudoharengus), weakfish, scup, windowpane flounder ( Scopthalmus aquosus), summer flounder ( Paralichthys dentatus), northern puffer, butterfish, etc. Data on invertebrate species vulnerable to these gear types such as squid, horseshoe crabs, lady, blue, and green crabs, mantis shrimp, whelk, etc. should also be reported. For information on the trend analyses and QA/ QC, see Weber et al. ( 1998). Ideally, trawl data should be entered into a geographic information system ( GIS) to analyze spatial aspects of the data and to enable comparisons with habitat maps. Multivariate statistical analyses linking water quality and finfish data should also be performed.

Costs Base Program: The NYSDEC Peconic Bay Trawl Survey is annually funded by the Wallop Breaux Sport Fish Restoration Program. New Costs: Analysis and GIS mapping of the Peconic Bay Trawl Survey data would require an additional $ 45,000 annually. Expansion of the trawl survey East of Shelter Island has been estimated at approximately $ 500,000 and an additional $ 100,000 would be needed annually for staff.

Wetlands Monitoring Program Objective To monitor the abundance, distribution, diversity and quality of fresh and salt water wetlands in the Peconic Estuary.

Monitoring Hypothesis Wetlands in the Peconic Estuary sufficiently respond to developmental and environmental stressors ( e. g. sea level rise) to maintain and increase their abundance, distribution, diversity and quality.

CCMP Measurable Goals Maintain and increase current tidal and freshwater marsh acreage; Restore degraded tidal and freshwater wetlands ( e. g. restricted flow, Phragmites australis dominated, shoreline hardened); particularly those identified in the Habitat Restoration Workgroup Plan over 10 years; Restore 10 15% of the mosquito ditched saltwater marshes through Open Marsh Water Management ( OMWM) over the next 10 years, and maintain a policy of no new ditching.

Lead Entity New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, with the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  23  Program Status NYSDEC and USFWS mapping efforts ( described below) were completed as part of existing program. An expansion of the existing program is necessary for additional work to be completed ( also described below). Future surveys and trend analysis is recommended.

Monitoring Extent and Frequency The NYSDEC has performed GIS mapping of saltwater wetlands in the Peconic Estuary east of Shelter Island only ( includes spatial distribution, acreage, and marsh types). Funding is needed to complete the survey west of Shelter Island and routinely track the trends of wetland coverage approximately every 5 years. The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service surveyed wetlands in the entire Peconic Estuary watershed as part of the National Wetlands Inventory in 1997.

Program Description USFWS National Wetlands Inventory: In 1997, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service surveyed wetlands in the Peconic Estuary watershed as part of the National Wetlands Inventory. The data were GIS mapped and are useful for tracking wetland trends over time. See the USFWS ( 1998) report by Tiner for details on trend analyses and data QA/ QC.

NYSDEC Wetlands Inventory: The NYSDEC has also performed GIS mapping of saltwater wetlands in the Peconic Estuary East of Shelter Island only ( includes spatial distribution, acreage, and marsh types). The NYSDEC performs such GIS mapping through a combination of aerial photo surveys and ground truthing. Funding is needed to complete the survey west of Shelter Island and routinely track the trends of wetland coverage approximately every 5 years. This is particularly important in light of the increasing rate of developmental pressure and sea level rise.

Costs New Costs: At this time, no new or additional funding has been identified to finalize the NYSDEC mapping of saltwater wetlands west of Shelter Island. Finer scale survey saltwater wetland analysis and mapping west of Shelter Island is estimated at $ 500,000. Routine trend analysis would require an additional $ 50,000 annually. Marsh restorations have been funded through a variety of funding sources including: NYS Bond Act, USFWS, Towns and the private sector.

Shoreline Hardening Monitoring Program Objective To quantify estuarine wide shoreline hardening, assess impacts to habitat and living resources, and develop " environmentally friendly" systems to assist in implementing a CCMP priority of " no net increase" in shoreline hardening throughout the estuary.

Monitoring Hypothesis The Peconic Estuary is experiencing a net loss of natural shorelines and habitats from shoreline hardening structures such as bulkheads and rock revetments.

CCMP Measurable Goals Maintain current linear feet of natural shoreline and over the next 15 years reduce shoreline hardening structures by 5%; Maintain and increase current tidal and freshwater marsh acreage, and promote new growth through the removal of existing shoreline hardening structures. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  24  Lead Entity New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, in concert with the Peconic BayKeeper, the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Cornell Cooperative Extension of Suffolk County.

Program Status A one time monitoring survey of shoreline hardening structures ( including aerial and ground truthing surveys) was completed in 2000 through the Peconic Estuary Program. Future surveys and trend analysis of shoreline hardening structures is recommended Monitoring Extent and Frequency The entire Peconic Estuary Shoreline was monitored in this one time survey in 2000.

Program Description Quantitative mapping is an important first step and will be carried out through aerial photo interpretation by the US Fish and Wildlife Service under contract to the PEP during the year 2000. The Peconic BayKeeper, Cornell Cooperative Extension and the NYSDEC PEP Program Coordinator will assist in ground truthing. Once the baseline information is established ( e. g. percent coverage of hardened shoreline, types of structures, etc.), trend analysis of percent shoreline hardened will be tracked by future aerial and ground truthing surveys through GIS mapping and analysis. An assessment of detrimental effects of hardened shoreline and docks on the estuary is also needed to fully understand impacts on habitat and natural resources. The analysis will also include a characterization of all shoreline hardening found in the Peconics and an investigation of " environmentally friendly" systems. Future funding for additional surveys and trend analysis of shoreline hardening structures is recommended, but not yet appropriated.

Costs Base Program: This monitoring is funded in part by the PEP Natural Resources Subcommittee funds at $ 19,000 and Suffolk County Capital Budget Funds ($ 49,000). New Costs: Biennial trend analysis using GIS mapping is estimated at $ 70,000.

Piping Plovers, Shorebirds, Raptors and Other Birds Program Objective To determine piping plover habitat use, availability, and prey abundance in the Peconic Estuary and to assess affects of habitat changes to make recommendations to enhance plover breeding and productivity. To ensure that shorebirds, raptors and other birds and their habitats are monitored for productivity.

Monitoring Hypothesis The abundance and distribution of shorebirds, raptors, waterfowl and other birds in the estuary is related to habitat quantity and quality, prey abundance and predators.

CCMP Measurable Goals Increase the number of piping plover pairs to 115 with productivity at 1.5 ( over a 3 year average), distributed across the nesting sites in the Peconic Estuary; Maintain current linear feet of natural shoreline and over the next 15 years reduce shoreline hardening structures by 5% to increase habitats for shorebirds.

Lead Entity The NYSDEC in cooperation with The Nature Conservancy, and the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  25  Program Status Existing program for monitoring piping plovers and least terns in the Peconic Estuary Program Study Area. Recommended expansion of existing program for other birds and for enhancing habitat to improve shorebird productivity.

Monitoring Extent and Frequency Piping plover and osprey surveys in the Peconic Estuary Program Study Area are funded annually by NYSDEC and The Nature Conservancy. Waterfowl surveys in the Peconic Estuary Program Study Area are also conducted by U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Program Description Endangered Species Program: The NYSDEC in cooperation with the The Nature Conservancy monitor for piping plovers and least terns in the Peconic Estuary through the Endangered Species Program. Initial review of piping plover productivity data indicates that populations are down at a number of Peconic Estuary sites. The reasons are unclear, as there are multiple factors that can play a role in breeding success and overall productivity. Throughout Long Island, there is an interest in " enhancing" habitat to improve shorebird productivity. Therefore, baseline data on prey abundance and shorebirds' microhabitat ( i. e., intertidal zone  sand and cobble patches, wrack, areas where there is sparse vegetation, beach berm, and moist swales) preferences is important information, particularly in the Peconic Estuary, which consists of habitats that do not readily fit typical habitat descriptions found in the literature.

Furthermore, it is recommended that a comprehensive monitoring plan be developed for the Peconic Estuary that ties together other monitoring programs ( e. g. ospreys, terns waterfowl) and recommendations for improved comprehensive monitoring in this region be developed.

Costs Base Program: Piping plover and osprey surveys are funded annually by NYSDEC and The Nature Conservancy. Waterfowl surveys are also conducted by USFWS. New Costs: Costs for developing and implementing the comprehensive monitoring plan for ospreys, terns and waterfowl have not yet been developed.

Dredging Program Objective To track the volumes and locations of dredging in the Peconics and reduce impacts to critical marine habitats.

Monitoring Hypothesis The majority of dredging in the estuary is for navigational purposes and a portion of that dredging is impacting important finfish and shellfish habitats.

CCMP Measurable Goal Develop recommendations and guidelines to reduce impacts to marine life from dredging related activities.

Lead Entity ( proposed) New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, in coordination with the PEP Program Office and the Suffolk County Department of Public Works.

Program Status Proposed new program. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  26  Monitoring Extent and Frequency Proposal is to develop a tracking system of all dredge related activities ( public and private) that occur annually within the Peconic Estuary Program Study Area.

Program Description While there are no tracking programs yet established to evaluate the locations and volumes of annual dredging within the Peconic Estuary ( i. e., public and private), the NYSDEC maintains a permitting system that records all dredging activities in NY marine waters. Coordination between the PEP and NYSDEC Environmental Permitting should be established so as to. Additionally, Suffolk County Department of Public Works maintains records of navigational maintenance dredging that they perform in the estuary and therefore, should also be included in the coordination efforts.

Costs New Costs: A funding source for this monitoring has not been identified yet. Initial project cost is estimated at $ 30,000 ( contractor fee) with a biennial maintenance cost estimated at $ 15,000.

Restoration Monitoring Program Objective To assess the success of habitat restoration projects in the Peconic Estuary.

Monitoring Hypothesis To determine the short and long term success of habitat restoration projects in the Peconic Estuary, a tracking and evaluation system is required.

CCMP Measurable Goals Annually initiate 5% of the projects identified in the Habitat Restoration Workgroup Plan for the Peconic Estuary and identify reference wetlands for comparative purposes such as functionality; Restore degraded tidal and freshwater wetlands ( e. g., restricted flow, Phragmites australis dominated, shoreline hardened); particularly those identified in the Habitat Restoration Workgroup Plan over 10 years; Restore 10 20% mosquito ditched saltwater marshes through Open Marsh Water Management ( OMWM) over the next 10 years, and maintain a policy of no new ditching.

Lead Entity ( proposed) Peconic Estuary Program Habitat Restoration Workgroup, in concert with the New York State Department of State and Cornell Cooperative Extension of Suffolk County.

Program Status Proposed new program.

Monitoring Extent and Frequency Proposal is to develop a tracking system of all habitat restoration activities ( public and private) that occur annually within the Peconic Estuary Program Study Area, including both short and long term monitoring evaluations, and monitoring before, during, and after restoration as needed to evaluate success of restoration efforts.

Program Description The CCMP recommends evaluating the success of restoration efforts. While restoration efforts can be successful in reaching their goals, there have also been examples in the Peconics of restoration efforts that have not resulted in Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  27  actual long term recovery of the targeted habitat. Therefore, it is essential to quantitatively assess and monitor restoration projects in order to take steps, if necessary, to correct any problems. A number of restoration projects are now underway as a result of available funding from the NYS Clean Air Clean Water Bond Act. More restoration projects are expected to be funded in the future. It is critical for restoration projects to build in the capacity to monitor sites upon completion of restoration. Restoration assessment needs to be linked to the reference sites in order to make quantitative comparisons of functionality. As part of assessment, monitoring before, during, and after restoration is also needed to evaluate success of restoration efforts. It is strongly recommended that the Habitat Restoration Workgroup's Plan for the different types of restoration projects in the Peconic Estuary be followed as an initial guideline. The development of a tracking database for each restoration project should also be developed for both short and long term monitoring evaluations.

Costs New Costs: A funding source for this monitoring has not been identified yet. An estimated cost of $ 35,000 is required to initiate such monitoring and an additional $ 15,000 is necessary for database maintenance on an annual basis.

Bay Scallops Program Objective To monitor the quantity and quality of bay scallops in the estuary and evaluate the success of enhancement efforts. To perform a distribution focused study of the survival dynamics of juvenile bay scallops including and examination of settlement, recruitment, and size frequency and year class abundance of bay scallops located inside and outside of eelgrass beds Monitoring Hypothesis Bay scallop abundance and distributions are related to water quality, predator abundance and habitat quantity and quality in the estuary.

CCMP Measurable Goal Enhance the shellfish resources available to harvesting through reseeding, creation of spawning sanctuaries and habitat enhancements.

Lead Entity ( proposed) New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, in coordination with the PEP Program Office, the National Marine Fisheries Service and Cornell Cooperative Extension of Suffolk County.

Program Status Proposed new program.

Monitoring Extent and Frequency Proposal is to annually monitor the quality and quantity of bay scallops an evaluate the success of enhancement efforts in the Peconic Estuary Program.

Program Description A program should be established that tracks the annual recruitment success and survival dynamics of bay scallops. Anecdotal information indicates that adult bay scallops were once abundant enough that they were found outside of eelgrass beds in deeper waters where they were harvested by dredging. Today, bay scallops are harvested almost entirely in eelgrass beds because they are not as abundant and are no longer found in deeper waters. Given the Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  28  huge fluctuations that have occurred in bay scallop populations as a result of Brown Tide, it is important to perform a distribution focused study of the survival dynamics of bay scallops and to monitor for changes in abundance and distribution and evaluate the effectiveness of reseeding efforts.

NMFS Commercial Landings Program: The National Marine Fisheries Service ( NMFS) is in charge of coordinating the yearly landings and economic data on bay scallops caught in the Peconic Estuary and they have well established QA/ QC and statistical procedures.

Costs Base Program: NMFS provides funding for landings and economic data annually. New Costs: A funding source for the recruitment and survival monitoring has not been identified yet. It is estimated that a full evaluation and tracking of the parameters of interest would cost $ 200,000 over three years.

Aquaculture and Transplanting Activities Program Objective To monitor the locations and extent of aquaculture and transplanting activities in the Peconic Estuary to minimize potential impacts to critical habitats and conflicts with other uses.

Monitoring Hypothesis Aquaculture and shellfish transplanting have the potential to positively or negatively influence the Peconic Estuary. The type, scale and locations of the culturing and transplanting activities will influence the water quality and natural resources and other uses within the estuary.

CCMP Measurable Goal Ensure that the existing and future aquaculture ( shellfish & finfish) and transplanting activities are situated in ecologically low productive areas of the estuary, and that they are mutually beneficial to the aquaculture industry, natural resources and water quality.

Lead Entity ( proposed) New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, in coordination with the PEP Program Office, the Suffolk County Department of Planning and Cornell Cooperative Extension of Suffolk County.

Program Status Proposed new program.

Monitoring Extent and Frequency Proposal is to annually monitor the locations and extent of aquaculture and transplanting activities in the Peconic Estuary.

Program Description There are no coordinated monitoring programs for either aquaculture ( shellfish/ finfish) or transplanting activities in the Peconics. The NYSDEC issues permits for aquaculture and transplanting activities and therefore, can better monitor the types, scale and locations of these activities in the estuary annually through GIS mapping. Long term monitoring should be established to best situate culturing and transplanting activities that are mutually beneficial to the estuary and the aquaculturists. This coordination should also include the Suffolk County Planning Department, as Suffolk County is ultimately responsible for the development of an aquaculture plan for the Peconic Estuary. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  29  Costs Base Program: The NYSDEC annually funds the permitting of aquaculture and transplanting activities. New Costs: The initial cost to develop a GIS map is estimated at $ 10,000. Annual maintenance cost of the GIS map is estimated at $ 5,000. Mapping and ground truthing of the entire estuary bottom is estimated to cost $ 700,000. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  30  Pathogen Issues Coliforms Monitoring Program Objective To monitor and evaluate water quality in designated New York State Shellfish Growing Areas throughout the Peconic Estuary. Monitoring is necessary to properly classify growing areas for the safe harvest of shellfish to protect the public health.

Monitoring Hypothesis The management of nonpoint sources of pollution may lead to an increase in available shellfishing areas from which to harvest.

CCMP Measurable Goals Maintain current acreage of areas available to shellfish harvesting, with the ultimate aim of re opening lands currently closed to harvesting; Maintain and improve water quality of the estuary through a reduction of overall stormwater runoff, particularly key areas identified through the Regional Stormwater Runoff Study.

Attain a zero discharge of stormwater runoff in new subdivisions.

Lead Entity New York State Department of Environmental Conservation ( lead for the Shellfish Land Certification Program) and the Suffolk County Department of Heath Services ( lead for the bathing beaches and swimming pools program).

Program Status The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Shellfish Land Certification Program and the Suffolk County Department of Heath Services' Bathing Beaches and Swimming Pools Program Surface Water Quality Monitoring Programs are existing efforts.

Monitoring Extent and Frequency Monitoring takes place on a regular basis in the thirty shellfish growing areas under the Shellfish Land Certification Program ( a minimum of six times per year at each sampling station). Suffolk County Department of Health Services ( SCDHS) Bureau of Marine Resources routinely monitors for pathogen indicators at public beaches, and includes coliform sampling in the routine monitoring program estuary wide ( 32 stations) and year round ( biweekly).

Program Description New York State Shellfish Land Certification Program: The New York State Shellfish Land Certification Unit classifies all shellfish growing areas in the New York State Marine District. New York State defines shellfish as oysters, scallops, mussels and clams. There are seventy five individual shellfish growing areas in New York State. Approximately thirty growing areas are located within the Peconic Estuary. The Shellfish Land Certification Unit classifies all shellfish growing areas using the guidelines established in the National Shellfish Sanitation Program ( NSSP) Guide for the Control of Molluscan Shellfish. These guidelines require the establishment of water sampling stations to effectively evaluate all pollution sources that may affect a growing area.

New York State uses the NSSP Systematic Random Sampling ( SRS) Method of water sample collection and the Total Coliform Standard to evaluate shellfish growing areas. SRS requires that water sample collection be scheduled sufficiently far enough in advance to support random collection with respect to environmental conditions. Samples are collected under wet and dry weather conditions in warm and cold weather months. Surface and bottom temperature and salinity measurements are also collected at selected stations in each growing area in the Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  31  Peconics. SRS samples are collected a minimum of six times per year at each station. Following the collection of thirty SRS water samples the area is evaluated to determine proper classification for shellfish harvesting based on the NSSP total coliform criteria for certified shellfish growing areas. It is imperative that all growing areas be properly classified for shellfish harvesting for the protection of public health.

SCDHS Bathing Beaches and Swimming Pools Program: In order to protect beach goers from the human health risks associated with pathogens, the Suffolk County Department of Health Services ( SCDHS) Bureau of Marine Resources routinely monitors for pathogen indicators at public beaches. When water quality parameters fail to meet the established human health criteria, beaches are closed. In addition, the SCDHS generally recommends the closure of bay beaches for two tidal cycles after large rainfall events.

SCDHS Surface Water Quality Monitoring: The SCDHS Bureau of Marine Resources includes coliform bacteria counts in their suite of monitoring parameters for their sampling sites in the Peconic Estuary. Refer to the SCDHS Surface Water Quality Monitoring Section in the Nutrients Monitoring Workplan for more information about SCDHS' Program.

Costs Base Program: The shellfish land certification monitoring is funded annually by the NYSDEC. The SCDHS Bathing Beaches and Swimming Pools Program is funded annually by SCDHS. The SCDHS Surface Water Quality Monitoring Program is funded in part by PEP Post CCMP EPA funds and in kind match from Suffolk County ( see discussion under Brown Tide Issues in this document).

Pfiesteria piscicida and Alexandrium tamarense Monitoring Program Objective To monitor for the presence of harmful algal blooms and ensure public health and safety.

CCMP Measurable Goal Prevent the human ingestion and exposure to marine organisms that are affected by harmful algal blooms through routine monitoring.

Lead Entity New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, in cooperation with the Suffolk County Department of Health Services for Pfiesteria piscicida; Suffolk County Department of Health Services for Alexandrium tamarense.

Program Status The existing program of Pfiesteria piscicida sampling was conducted in 1999 2000; it is recommended this program be expanded to be conducted annually. Sampling for Alexandrium tamarense has been performed periodically; it is recommended this program be expanded to be conducted annually Monitoring Extent and Frequency A comprehensive characterization survey for Pfiesteria piscicida in the Peconic Estuary was conducted in 1999 2000. The Suffolk County Department of Health Services is currently estimating the concentration of Alexandrium at seven sites in the Peconic Estuary. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  32  Program Description Pfiesteria: The unusual dinoflagellate, Pfiesteria piscicida, has been implicated in major fish kills in the brackish coastal waters of North Carolina and several areas within the Chesapeake Bay. It has also been implicated in human health effects, the severity of which are apparently dependent on the length of contact with the organism, or an airborne toxin released by the organism. Pfiesteria normally occurs in non toxic forms unless triggered to develop into a toxic form; the exact conditions triggering toxin production are poorly understood.

Preliminary studies by SCDHS in 1998 showed the organism to be present at seven of the sixteen sites sampled within Suffolk County and at two of the three sites sampled within the Peconic Estuary. In the summer of 1999, the NYSDEC and the Nassau and Suffolk County Health Departments ( SCDHS) and the Town of Hempstead undertook a comprehensive monitoring effort to assess the marine waters of the state for the presence of Pfiesteria cells. The SCDHS Surface Water Quality Monitoring Standard Operating Procedure ( SCDHS, 2000) and the Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Peconic Estuary Program Surface Water Monitoring Program ( SCDHS, 1994) contain the standard operating procedures and the QA/ QC methods for Pfiesteria monitoring.

Water samples were tested for Pfiesteria along with a suite of other parameters, including dissolved oxygen, water temperature, and salinity. The test, using a molecular probe in the laboratory, detects the presence of Pfiesteria but not the toxicity. Water samples are shipped to Dr. Parke Rublee of the University of North Carolina where they are analyzed for Pfiesteria using their rigorously established QA/ QC standards.

The SCDHS is currently testing for the presence of Pfiesteria at fifteen sites, three of which are located in the Peconic Estuary. This project is meant to provide a comprehensive temporal analysis as samples are being collected from each of the fifteen stations on a biweekly basis from April to October 2000. Differential phytoplankton counts and water quality analysis ( including tests for nutrient levels) will be conducted in the lab. This monitoring is a cooperative effort with the NYSDEC and is being coordinated with funds from a Federal Program. It is recommended that monitoring for Pfiesteria piscicida continue annually.

Alexandrium: Paralytic shellfish poisoning ( PSP) red tides caused by the organism Alexandrium tamarense have been a problem mainly in the northern New England states. The organism produces a neurotoxin that can be concentrated by shellfish which, when consumed by humans can result in PSP. In a four year monitoring study, from 1986 to 1989, SCDHS found that a spring bloom of A. tamarense consistently occurred in Reeves Bay and also noted blooms in Terry's and East Creeks in 1989, the one year in which they were investigated. No other stations in the Peconic Estuary were sampled.

The SCDHS Bureau of Marine Resources is currently estimating the concentration of Alexandrium at seven sites in the Peconic Estuary. The investigation entails the placement of mussels ( Mytilis edulis) at the study sites, and their collection at specified intervals for PSP toxin analysis. The SCDHS Surface Water Quality Monitoring Standard Operating Procedure ( SCDHS, 2000) and the Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Peconic Estuary Program Surface Water Monitoring Program ( SCDHS, 1994) contain the standard operating procedures and the QA/ QC methods for PSP monitoring.

The present study is limited to the Peconic Estuary. Present plans are to investigate the south shore bays of the County in 2001 and the north shore bays the following year.

Costs Base Program: The estimated cost for handling and analyzing the water samples for this year's Pfiesteria monitoring project is $ 25,000. The estimated cost for handling and analyzing the samples for this year's Alexandrium monitoring project is $ 35,000. Neither estimate includes the cost of labor and boat maintenance.

New Costs: Additional funding is needed ($ 25,000 for Pfiesteria and $ 35,000 for Alexandrium) to annually continue these projects. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  33  Vessel Waste No Discharge Areas Program Objective To determine if the No Vessel Waste Discharge Areas improves water quality in targeted areas.

Monitoring Hypothesis Localized water quality in poorly flushed areas may improve as a result of establishing Vessel Waste No Discharge Areas.

CCMP Measurable Goal Eliminate all vessel waste discharges to the estuary upon adoption of the Vessel Waste No Discharge Area.

Lead Entity ( proposed) Peconic BayKeeper, in cooperation with the New York State Department of State, the east end towns, public and private marinas, and the Peconic Estuary Program Office. ( Note: This monitoring program element should be coordinated with Coliform Monitoring also contained in this monitoring plan).

Program Status Proposed new program.

Monitoring Extent and Frequency Annual monitoring of boat waste collected from pump out facilities estuary wide.

Program Description The Peconic Estuary may be designated as a No Vessel Waste Discharge Area by the 2001 boating season. The volume of boat waste collected from pump out facilities within the Peconic Estuary each year should be monitored with trend analysis. In addition, a comparative study evaluating the effectiveness of Vessel Waste No Discharge Areas at improving water quality should be done. An evaluation of the pertinent parameters to be measured is necessary, and the statistical analyses employed to compare these zones should be fully replicated.

Costs New Costs: A funding source for this monitoring has not been identified yet. Monitoring of boat waste collected from pump out facilities is estimated at a cost of $ 5,000 annually. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  34  Toxics Issues Sediment Monitoring Program Objective To monitor the quality of estuarine sediments to determine the levels of specific toxic substances and overall sediment toxicity.

Monitoring Hypotheses The quality of estuarine sediments is improving; New or emerging pollutants of concern or areas will be detected by monitoring sediments.

CCMP Measurable Goal Improve the quality of the ambient environment ( surface waters, groundwater, sediments and biota) where there is evidence that human inputs impair or threaten these resources.

Lead Entity U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, in cooperation with the Suffolk County Department of Health Services.

Program Status Sediment surveys were conducted in 1998, 2000 and 2001, and will be conducted annually hereafter.

Monitoring Extent and Frequency Up to 30 estuarine locations will be sampled annually. To date, bulk chemistry and overall toxicity data is available on approximately 60 embayments, harbors and tributaries.

Program Description Peconic Estuary sediments are now being regularly collected and analyzed for a broad range of contaminants and overall or cumulative toxicity. In the fall of 1994, the PEP contracted with the firm of A. D. Little, Inc. to analyze field collected sediments for toxic contaminants. In all, sediments from 12 sites were analyzed. In 1998, the USEPA Region II conducted a survey that involved the collection and sampling of sediments for chemical contaminants and overall sediment toxicity from 34 sites representative of a range of typical land uses across the estuary. Toxicity testing is a valuable gauge, in addition to chemical specific analyses, because the results provide an assessment of the overall toxicity resulting from exposure to multiple contaminants. In August 2000, EPA conducted a survey similar to the 1998 survey, again involving the collection and sampling of sediments for chemical contaminants and overall sediment toxicity. Some previously sampled sites were revisited for follow up work and some new sampling locations were selected. Additional sites were sampled in 2001.

Future monitoring efforts should be used to describe trends in sediment quality ( both for individual contaminants and overall toxicity) at previously sampled sites and the sediment quality status at any newly sampled sites. Sediment sampling, collection, analysis, and testing procedures should be consistent with those employed previously by EPA and are described in Peconic Estuary Tributaries Sediment Toxics Survey Field Sampling Plan/ Quality Assurance Project Plan ( USEPA Region II, August 1998) and the 2000 Peconic Estuary Tributaries Sediment Toxics Survey  Field Sampling Plan/ Quality Assurance Project Plan ( USEPA Region II, August 2000). The EPA target analyte list of polychlorinated biphenyls ( PCBs), polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons ( PAHs), pesticides, and metals, should also be matched, to the extent possible, but supplemented with any toxic substances of emerging concern, particularly with respect to pesticides. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  35  Costs Sample collection and analysis for toxic substances and toxicity is relatively expensive. Analysis alone can be several hundreds dollars to over one thousand dollars per sample, particularly if substances such as dioxins or furans are on the target analyte list. Typically more than one sample per location is necessary and QA/ QC samples must also be analyzed. Analysis alone for a limited survey can be upwards of $ 25,000 with additional resources necessary for sample collection. Interpretation of the results must be conducted after the analysis is complete.

To the extent possible, the PEP should seek to undertake annual sediment sampling until all major embayments in the estuary are sampled, and areas of concern are re sampled. Base programs of the USEPA and the SCDHS can provide sample collection and preparation costs.

New Costs: An estimated $ 25,000 per year will be necessary over three years to complete sample collection and analysis.

Coastal 2000 Program Objectives Assess the health or condition of the estuarine waters of the United States and trace changes in that condition through time.

Utilize the approach to identify reference conditions for estuarine waters in the United States.

Utilize existing state monitoring programs as appropriate CCMP Measurable Goal Improve the quality of the ambient environment ( surface waters, groundwater, sediments and biota) where there is evidence that human inputs impair or threaten these resources.

Lead Entity U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, in cooperation with the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation.

Program Status Program will be conducted in 2000 01.

Monitoring Extent and Frequency Twelve sites in the Peconic Estuary will be sampled, six in 2000 and the remaining six in 2001.

Program Description Coastal 2000 is a Federal EPA program to assess the ecological condition of our nation's estuarine resources using EPA's EMAP designs and methodologies. Unlike EMAP, which took on the entire task itself, Coastal 2000 has worked with the coastal states to form partnerships, incorporating the monitoring needs of the individual states into the overall design and providing funding to build up infrastructure for monitoring in the future. Such monitoring may be ideally suited to Clean Water Act Section 305( b) reporting. The EPA NHEERL laboratory in Narragansett, RI has worked with New York to develop probabilistic monitoring plans, and identified who will take the lead in carrying out the sampling. A number of core indicators will be monitored at each station; however, individual states can add to this list as they desire. The core suite includes water quality parameters, sediment chemistry, sediment toxicity, benthic community composition, fish community composition, fish pathology, and contaminants Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  36  in fish. Twelve sampling stations were planned for the Peconic Estuary.

Update as of August 2000: The monitoring plan was developed in cooperation with the NYSDEC, the EPA Long Island Sound Program, and the State University at Stonybrook. Karen Chytalo, Chief, Estuary Management Unit of NYSDEC initiated the cooperative agreement. Larry Swanson, Marine Science Research Unit of the Waste Reduction and Management Institute at Stonybrook has taken the lead for monitoring. He will be assisted by county and New York City monitoring staff.

Future Action: The Narragansett staff will meet with the agencies from New York in the early fall of 2000 to discuss how the monitoring went and what improvements or changes need to be made for the monitoring that will be done in 2001.

Costs Base Program: Current funding levels have allowed for sampling at half the stations in New York in 2000 with the other half planned for monitoring in the summer of 2001. All the cooperative agreements have been awarded and sampling has begun by all entities involved. All analyses will be provided by the Coastal 2000 Program.

Biota ( Fish, Shellfish and Crustacean) Monitoring Program Objective To monitor the quality of estuarine biota with respect to individual toxic substances, and provide updated information to be used in the establishment of Human Health Advisories.

Monitoring Hypotheses The quality of estuarine biota is improving; New or emerging pollutants of concern can be detected using biota.

Lead Entity U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, in cooperation with the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, the New York State Department of Health and the Suffolk County Department of Health Services.

Program Status In 1999 EPA conducted a one time survey involving the collection of finfish and shellfish samples for toxic analyses. Any efforts including compiling, evaluating and interpreting data for the Peconic Estuary Study Area represents a new program activity.

Monitoring Extent and Frequency Conducted as a one time survey of finfish and shellfish quality. Various species of finfish and shellfish were collected from locations throughout the Peconic Estuary. No further biota sampling is recommended until data analysis, evaluation and data interpretation is completed.

CCMP Measurable Goal Improve the quality of the ambient environment ( surface waters, groundwater, sediments and biota) where there is evidence that human inputs impair or threaten these resources.

Program Description At present, no entity has established a program whereby Peconic Estuary biota is regularly collected and analyzed for a broad range of contaminants. In 1999, EPA Region II conducted a Peconic Estuary Fish, Shellfish and Crustacean Survey. A primary objective of this survey was to determine whether the toxic compounds identified by the New York State Department of Health as being important for the issuance of human health advisories for the Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  37  consumption of aquatic species are relevant in edible tissues of selected fish and shellfish, and tissues and hepatopancreas ( tomalley) of selected crustacean species in the Peconic Estuary.

Future monitoring efforts should be used to describe trends in biota quality and to identify new or emerging chemicals of concern. Biota sampling, collection, analysis, and testing procedures should be consistent with those employed previously by EPA and described in the Peconic Estuary Fish, Shellfish and Crustacean Toxics Survey Quality Assurance Project Plan for Field Collection Effort ( USEPA Region II, 1999). The EPA target analyte list of dioxins and furans, polychlorinated biphenyls ( PCBs), polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons ( PAHs), pesticides, metals, and radionuclides should also be matched, to the extent possible, but supplemented with any toxic substances of emerging concern, particularly with respect to pesticides.

Costs Sample collection and analysis for toxic substances is relatively expensive. Analysis alone can be several hundreds dollars to over one thousand dollars per sample, particularly if substances such as dioxins or furans are on the target analyte list. Typically more than one sample per location is necessary and QA/ QC samples must also be analyzed. Analyses alone for EPA's 1999 survey was approximately $ 100,000 with additional resources necessary for sample collection and preparation. Interpretation of the results must be conducted after the analysis is complete.

No further biota sampling is recommended until analysis is completed for the 1999 EPA samples and data interpretation is completed.

NOAA Mussel Watch Program Program Objective The objective of the NOAA Mussel Watch Program is to measure concentrations of a broad suite of trace metals and organic chemicals in the whole soft parts of mussels and oysters.

Monitoring Hypotheses A nationwide program of monitoring mussels and oysters can address national concerns over the quality of the coastal marine environment and identify chemicals of concern.

CCMP Measurable Goal Improve the quality of the ambient environment ( surface waters, groundwater, sediments and biota) where there is evidence that human inputs impair or threaten these resources.

Lead Entity U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, using NOAA data Program Status The NOAA Mussel Watch Program is an existing program. Compiling, evaluating and interpreting data represents a new program activity.

Monitoring Extent and Frequency One site in Gardiners Bay is included in this national program, which is sampled annually. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  38  Program Description The NOAA Mussel Watch Program is part of the NOAA National Status and Trends ( NS& T) Program, the purpose of which is to measure concentrations of a broad suite of trace metals and organic chemicals in surface sediments and the whole soft parts of mussels and oysters. At present, one sampling site in Gardiners Bay is included in this national program. See Chemical Contaminants in Oysters and Mussels ( Tom O'Connor, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ( NOAA), 1998 ( on line)) and NOAA's State of the Coast Report ( Silver Spring, MD: NOAA. URL: http:// state of coast. noaa. gov/ bulletins/ html/ ccom_ 05/ ccom. html) for more information.

Costs Base Program: Sampling and analysis at this site is part of a national program.

Surface Water Monitoring Program Objective To monitor the quality of the surface waters with respect to individual toxic substances and overall toxicity.

Monitoring Hypotheses The quality of surface waters is improving; new or emerging pollutants of concern or areas will be detected by monitoring.

CCMP Measurable Goal Improve the quality of the ambient environment ( surface waters, groundwater, sediments and biota) where there is evidence that human inputs impair or threaten these resources.

Lead Entity ( no lead entity has been identified at present)

Program Status No existing programs. Various programs, typically of limited duration and scope, have been conducted in the past, investigating tidal creeks and the freshwater Peconic River. Compiling, evaluating and interpreting data for the Peconic Estuary Study Area represents a new program activity.

Monitoring Extent and Frequency Various programs, typically of limited duration and scope, have been conducted in the past including sampling of tidal creeks on the North Fork and the freshwater Peconic River. The need and specifications for a new ongoing surface water monitoring program should be investigated/ determined.

Program Description At present, no entity has established a program whereby surface water samples are regularly collected and analyzed for a broad range of contaminants and overall or cumulative toxicity. Monitoring for toxics in surface waters has occurred on a limited basis in the Peconic Estuary System. Detailed new investigations have focused on sediments and fish tissues where toxics tend to accumulate. Notably, the pesticide Aldicarb also has been detected in the surface waters of East Creek and other North Fork Creeks. While Aldicarb is no longer in use, its presence is likely due to the drainage of agricultural areas containing residues of Aldicarb. Another emerging concern is MTBE ( methyl tert Butyl Ether), an octane booster in gasoline, which has been showing up in surface water samples, including Sag Harbor Creek near Havens Beach ( perhaps related to an active recovery operation nearby), the Peconic River, and other surface waters. An ongoing North Fork Creek Study and other programs are described below. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  39  North Fork Creeks Study: The SCDHS Office of Ecology samples sixteen north fork creeks, located from Sawmill Creek to Narrow River, bimonthly with eight locations done each month. Sampling is done during the last of the ebb tide at each station in an attempt to quantify impacts that the stream may have on the estuary. Samples from each site are analyzed for 109 organic solvent and pesticide compounds.

Other Programs: In 1997, New York State and the U. S. Geological Survey began a cooperative effort to monitor pesticides in State waters, including one station in the Peconic River. Samples were analyzed for 47 pesticides, including herbicides, insecticides and their degradation products. The pesticide concentrations measured in this survey probably do not reflect maximum annual concentrations because most of the samples were collected during base flow ( low flow) conditions. While no pesticides with water quality criteria available were identified present in excess of the applicable criteria, two pesticides ( atrazine and simazine) were detected in surface water samples ( USGS, 1997).

Some trace metals analysis has been performed on Peconic Estuary waters ( see Distribution of Trace Metals and Dissolved Organic Carbon in a Brown Tide Influenced Estuary: The Peconics, E. Breuer, May 1997). Results for the metals sampled for which New York State has adopted and EPA has approved aquatic life based water column criteria ( cadmium, copper, lead, nickel, and silver), while showing evidence of anthropogenic ( man made) inputs, did not exceed the established criteria.

Recommendations for Monitoring: Periodic surface water sampling should continue and special projects supported, particularly investigations on pesticides. Such studies should, to the extent possible, be done in conjunction with sediment surveys and sample collection and analysis procedures should be consistent with those employed by EPA. The EPA target analyte list of polychlorinated biphenyls ( PCBs), polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons ( PAHs), pesticides, and metals, should also be matched, to the extent possible, but supplemented with any toxic substances of emerging concern, particularly pesticides. Overall water toxicity testing should also be employed. Toxicity testing is a valuable gauge, in additional to chemical specific analyses, because the results provide an assessment of the overall toxicity resulting from exposure to multiple contaminants. See Pesticide Concentrations in Surface Waters of New York State in Relation to Land Use  1997 ( U. S. Geological Survey, June 1998) and Pesticides in Streams in New Jersey and Long Island, New York and Relation to Land Use ( U. S. Geological Survey, May 1999) for additional information.

Costs Base Program: The North Fork Creeks Study is funded by the Suffolk County Department of Health Services.

Sample collection and analysis for toxic substances and toxicity is relatively expensive. Analysis alone can be several hundreds dollars to over one thousand dollars per sample, particularly if substances such as dioxins or furans are on the target analyte list. Typically, more than one sample per location is necessary and QA/ QC samples must also be analyzed. Analysis alone for a limited survey can be upwards of $ 50,000 with additional resources necessary for sample collection. Interpretation of the results must be conducted after the analysis is complete.

No new surface water sampling programs for toxics are recommended at the present time.

Groundwater Monitoring Program Objective To monitor the quality of groundwater with respect to individual toxic substances to determine public health threats. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  40  Monitoring Hypotheses Monitoring of groundwater will identify chemicals of concern in the raw water supply ( and ultimately chemicals that may be of concern in the estuarine environment). New or emerging pollutants of concern will be detected by monitoring these media.

CCMP Measurable Goal Improve the quality of the ambient environment ( surface waters, groundwater, sediments and biota) where there is evidence that human inputs impair or threaten these resources.

Lead Entity Suffolk County Department of Health Services, with support from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation.

Program Status Numerous studies have been conducted in the past. At present, the SCDHS to is carrying out a three year pesticides in groundwater monitoring program. It is likely that it will be recommended this program be continued annually thereafter.

Monitoring Extent and Frequency Groundwater is sampled throughout the study area. The Suffolk County Health Department has identified thousands of private wells in the Peconic Estuary Study Area that should be monitored due to the high risk of pesticide contamination.

Program Description The Suffolk County Department of Health Services Bureau of Groundwater Resources monitors the quality and quantity of the groundwater supply and conducts studies and investigations of the county's hydrology. Suffolk County is completely dependent on its groundwater resource for drinking water supply. The focus of groundwater protection measures has been on contamination caused by humans, from sewage to chemicals such as petroleum, solvents, degreasers, fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides. In eastern Suffolk County, agricultural chemicals are the primary contaminant of concern.

Groundwater discharge provides the base flow for the County's rivers and streams. Relatively small fluctuations in water table elevations can have a significant effect on wetlands, stream flow and lake levels. Stream flow and groundwater underflow to embayments influence the salinity of surface waters and effect the ecology, having impacts on the ability of shellfish and finfish to reproduce. The Bureau of Groundwater Resources is involved with several active groundwater investigations, contaminant studies and at superfund and hazardous waste sites. The Bureau of Groundwater Resources' Pesticide Monitoring Program is especially important, including investigations done in conjunction with the USGS and NYSDEC. There is an ongoing program involving public and private well monitoring. Groundwater impacts from vineyards and golf courses are being specifically evaluated. See Pesticides and their Metabolites in Wells of Suffolk County, New York 1998 ( U. S. Geological Survey, June 1999) and Water Quality Monitoring Program to Detect Pesticide Contamination in Groundwaters of Nassau and Suffolk Counties, NY ( Suffolk County Department of Health Services, June 1999) for more information.

The Suffolk County Health Department has identified thousands of private wells in the Peconic Estuary Study Area that should be monitored due to the high risk of pesticide contamination. Significant funding is needed to monitor for pesticide residues in potentially impacted residential and public water supply wells in the study area. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  41  Costs Groundwater monitoring is occurring under many specially funded studies and investigations as well as an ongoing program involving public and private well monitoring. The SCDHS has requested that the NYSDEC accelerate funding to test all 6,000 to 7,000 wells at risk in high pesticide use areas under the Pesticide Reporting Law.

The NYSDEC has been funding the SCDHS pesticide groundwater monitoring program for three years at about $ 100,000 per year. The NYSDEC recently agreed to a three year one million dollar contract with the SCDHS to expand the monitoring program, but funding is based on approval of an annual work plan. The SCDHS has requested that the full one million dollars be allocated to expand the monitoring program.

Hazardous Waste Site Monitoring Program Objective Perform monitoring as part of remedial investigations and following the implementation of remedies at hazardous waste sites; monitor compliance with clean up schedules.

Monitoring Hypotheses Monitoring of environmental media during remedial investigations is necessary in order to develop appropriate remedies. Monitoring following remedial actions assess the effectiveness of the remedy. Monitoring compliance with schedules helps ensures actions are timely.

CCMP Measurable Goals Comply with schedules for conducting site characterizations, remedial actions and post remedial monitoring at hazardous waste sites; effectively characterize risks and protect human health and the environment at hazardous waste sites; ensure compliance with permit limits for point source discharges.

Lead Entity U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, and the Suffolk County Department of Health Services.

Program Status Permittees, property owners, potentially responsible parties, and government agencies are investigating various sites and performing monitoring to document the effectiveness of remedial measures as part of existing programs. Compiling, evaluating and interpreting data for the Peconic Estuary Study Area represents a new program activity.

Monitoring Extent and Frequency At numerous sites throughout the study area, site investigations and post remedial monitoring is taking place according to compliance schedules, workplans and records of decisions.

Program Description Federal and State hazardous waste laws require monitoring as part of the remedial investigation process and once remedial actions are undertaken. The current program is effective to assess human health and ecological risks at hazardous waste sites.

Costs Base Programs: Costs are borne by permittees, property owners, potentially responsible parties, or the government. At this time, no new or additional investigations or monitoring is being recommended in the Peconic CCMP, outside of that required by existing authorities. The PEP will monitor compliance with schedules, as described in Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  42  the Toxics Chapter in the PEP Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan.

Point Source Monitoring Program Objective Perform monitoring of regulated point sources to determine compliance with permit limitations and conditions.

Monitoring Hypotheses Monitoring of compliance with point source discharge limits will help ensure protection of human health and the environment. CCMP Measurable Goals Comply with schedules for conducting site characterizations, remedial actions and post remedial monitoring at hazardous waste sites; effectively characterize risks and protect human health and the environment at hazardous waste sites; ensure compliance with permit limits for point source discharges.

Lead Entity U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, and the Suffolk County Department of Health Services.

Program Status Permittees perform monitoring of discharges part of existing programs. Compiling, evaluating and interpreting data for the Peconic Estuary Study Area represents a new program activity.

Monitoring Extent and Frequency Permittees perform monitoring of discharges at various locations throughout the estuary at a frequency specified in their permits.

Program Description National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES/ SPDES) Program: The National and State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES/ SPDES) Programs establish thresholds on discharges ( concentration or mass based) for toxic ( and other) pollutants in the form of permit limitations and conditions. Permittees are also required to self monitor their discharge and demonstrate compliance status with these limits/ conditions. This information is reported to regulatory agencies in the form of Discharge Monitoring Reports ( DMRs). The NYSDEC also inspects and samples discharges for compliance with permit requirements.

Costs Base Programs: Sampling and reporting costs are borne by permittees and ongoing compliance programs of regulatory agencies. At this time, no new or additional investigations or monitoring is being recommended in the Peconic CCMP, outside of that required by existing authorities.

Federal Toxics Release Inventory Program Objective To monitor major releases of toxics to the environment Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  43  Monitoring Hypotheses The Federal Toxic Release Inventory provides a measure of releases of toxic substances to the environment, and whether overall major releases are increasing or decreasing.

CCMP Measurable Goal Decrease overall emissions of reportable toxics from the five east end towns.

Lead Entity U. S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Program Status Reporting is required as a part of an existing program. Compiling, evaluating and interpreting data for the Peconic Estuary Study Area represents a new program activity Monitoring Extent and Frequency A limited number of facilities in the Peconic Estuary watershed report annually under the requirements for the Toxics Release Inventory.

Program Description Existing Federal program and reporting requirement. Costs Base Program: Reporting costs are borne by regulated entities. At this time, no new or additional monitoring is being recommended in the Peconic CCMP, outside of that required by existing authorities. New Costs: A mechanism needs to be established by the PEP to assemble and interpret the Federal Toxics Release Inventory data for the Peconic Estuary.

Pesticide Use Monitoring Program Objective Measure types and quantities of pesticides used, and unneeded and unwanted pesticides that are collected for proper disposal.

Monitoring Hypotheses Pesticide use and proper disposal, including trends in types and quantities, can be measured by various means.

CCMP Measurable Goals Eliminate to the maximum extent practicable, pesticide applications on turf grass on all publicly held land by 2003; Eliminate holdings of banned, unneeded and unwanted pesticides ( and other hazardous substances) by 2005; Decrease overall agricultural/ residential/ institutional pesticide applications in the five East End towns.

Lead Entity ( proposed) New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Program Status Reporting is required as a part of an existing program. Compiling, evaluating and interpreting data for the Peconic Estuary Study Area represents a new program activity. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X I  44  Monitoring Extent and Frequency Information is available annually for the Peconic Estuary Program Study Area.

Program Description The existing New York State Pesticide Reporting Law allows information about the amounts and types of pesticides being applied in the State to be obtained by health researchers. Under the Law, certified pesticide applicators are required to report for each pesticide application the name of the product applied, the product's U. S. Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA) Federal registration number, the quantity applied, the product's unit of measure, the date of application, the county, street address, municipality and zip code of the application. Commercial permittees who sell pesticides to private applicators at wholesale and retail, must report for each sale the name of the product purchased, its EPA Federal registration number, the quantity sold, the product's unit of measure, the date sold, as well as the county, street address, municipality and zip code of the intended application.