Peconic Estuary Program C H A P T E R S I X 6 1 C H A P T E R SIX TOXICS MANAGEMENT PLAN OBJECTIVES 1) Measure the levels of toxics in the environment to discern trends in environmental quality and to determine the effectiveness of management programs.

2) Minimize human health risks due to the consumption of shellfish, finfish, and drinking water.*

3) Protect and improve water and sediment quality to ensure a healthy and diverse marine community.

4) Eliminate where possible, and minimize where practicable, the introduction of toxic substances to the environment, through regulatory and non regulatory means.

5) Where toxic contamination has occurred, ensure clean ups occur quickly, and according to the most appropriate and stringent environmental standards.

* The Peconic Estuary Program is not primarily a drinking water protection program. However, many actions in this Plan, if implemented, may result in protection and improvement to groundwater resources. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 2 MEASURABLE GOALS The PEP's measurable goals with respect to toxics include:

  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, sediments, and biota monitoring programs). [ See Actions T 2, T 3, T 4, T 5, T 6, T 7, T 8, POE 4]

  Comply with schedules for conducting site characterizations, remedial actions, and postremedial 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). [ See Action T 2]

  Decrease overall emissions of reportable toxics from the five East End towns ( as measured by the Federal Toxics Release Inventory). [ See Action T 7]

  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). [ See Action T 4]

  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). [ See Actions T 4, POE 4]

  Eliminate to the maximum extent practicable, pesticide applications on turf grass on all publicly held land by 2003 ( as potentially measured by municipal resolutions passed [ or equivalent]). [ See Action T 4]

  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). [ See Actions T 6, POE 4]

  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). [ See Actions T 6, POE 4]

  Reduce the number of two stroke marine engines in use in the estuary ( as potentially measured by harbormaster conducted surveys). [ See Action POE 4] Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 3 INTRODUCTION Toxic contaminants refer to either man made or naturally occurring substances that, when found in certain concentrations, can cause adverse ecosystem or human health effects. Within the estuary system, toxic substances can be found in surface waters and groundwater, attached to sediments and soils, and in plants and animals. These substances can directly affect the ability of fish, shellfish, wildlife, and plants to survive or reproduce. Some toxic contaminants can accumulate in the tissues of edible fish and shellfish, making them dangerous to wildlife and unsuitable for unrestricted human consumption. Toxics of concern in the Peconic Estuary System are listed in Table 6 1.

The Peconic Estuary System generally has low levels of toxic materials in the water, sediment, and organisms, especially when compared to other regional coastal areas. There are, however, impairments that prevent the goals of the Peconic Estuary Management Conference from being fully realized and threats that should be addressed now to prevent impairments from occurring in the future.

OVERALL QUALITY AND USE IMPAIRMENTS Environmental Criteria and Standards for Toxic Substances The Federal and State governments generally take a chemical specific approach to regulating toxic contamination. Under this approach, the concentration of pollutants in the environment ( water column, fish tissues, or sediments) is measured and compared to numeric criteria, standards, or effect levels. These criteria are generally developed in such a way so as to be protective of aquatic life, wildlife, and humans. These criteria, standards, and effect levels serve as surrogates for direct measurements of adverse pollution effects and are used as guidelines for pollution control and management programs. An ecosystem or effects based approach can be utilized as a substitute for the chemical specific approach or as a check on the chemical specific approach. Under an effects based approach, direct field and laboratory studies of the adverse effects of toxic contamination in plants and animals are used to try to determine the level of contamination that results in an observed effect.

Surface Water Quality Criteria The State, under Federal and State Laws, establishes water quality criteria to protect both aquatic life and wildlife, ensure their propagation and survival, and prevent tainting of species consumed by humans or other wildlife. These criteria also are designed to protect human health from oncogenic ( tumor forming) effects and chronic non oncogenic effects from the consumption of fish, shellfish, and drinking water. Toxic substances can enter the estuary system from either point sources or nonpoint sources. Point source pollution is pollution that comes from discrete, identifiable locations or sources such as a discharge pipe from a sewage treatment plant. Nonpoint source pollution originates from a variety of dispersed and diffuse sources, including pollutants deposited within the watershed and then carried to the estuary through freshwater flows from rivers, runoff, and stormwater, as well as watershed drainage through groundwater underflow. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 4 Groundwater Quality Criteria Groundwater ultimately enters the estuarine system and contaminants that the groundwater delivers can affect aquatic life, wildlife, and humans. While groundwater is especially important as a source of nutrients to the estuary, it can also be an important source of toxic substances, particularly pesticides that are applied to the landscape. The extent of pesticide contamination of groundwater has been extensively studied on Long Island. Most groundwater quality criteria are based on the protection of human health, and are expressed as Federal Maximum Contaminant Levels ( MCLs) or New York State Maximum Contaminant Levels. Federal MCL standards are applicable for treated drinking water sources and are based on a one year average concentration of more than one sample. Other applicable criteria are Federal Lifetime Health Advisories ( HA) and New York State Class GA standards. Class GA standards are for fresh groundwaters whose best usage is as a source of potable water supply. New York State includes general standards of 50 ug/ L for unspecified organic contaminants and 5 ug/ L for principal organic contaminants.

Sediment Quality Criteria/ Dredged Material Guidelines Toxic contaminants in bottom sediments create the potential for continued environmental impact even where water column levels comply with established criteria. The EPA is in the process of establishing sediment quality criteria for chemicals which cause or have the potential to cause adverse effects to the pelagic ( water column dwelling) and benthic ( bottom dwelling) organisms and their food chains, including humans. Guidelines already exist for assessing dredged material.

The U. S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ( NOAA) has specified " Effects Range" values for toxics in sediments to indicate contaminant concentrations at which bottom dwelling organisms may be adversely affected, and as an indicator of overall ecosystem health. While the NOAA Effects Range values are not sediment quality criteria for regulatory purposes, they provide a benchmark for evaluating sediment contaminant measurements.

Finfish, Shellfish, and Game The State routinely monitors contaminant levels in fish and game and issues advisories on eating sportfish and game because some of these foods contain chemicals at levels that may be harmful to human health. These advisories are updated yearly. At the present time, chemical contaminants are present or believed to be present at elevated levels for a number of species throughout the State and within the Peconics which has led to the consumption advisories shown in Table 6 2.

Criteria for Radioactive Materials The presence of radioactive materials in the environment is of concern in the Peconic Estuary System, primarily due to the presence of Brookhaven National Laboratory ( BNL) in the headwaters of the Peconic River. Safe drinking water standards can be used to assess observed radiological measurements in the freshwater portion of the Peconic River, even though the Peconic River is not used as a source of drinking water. Standards for radionuclide concentrations in sediments or fish do not exist. Sediments and fish are normally evaluated in terms of their potential contribution to the radiation dose to the public. New York State has established limits for the effective dose equivalent to an individual from any facility. The NYSDEC has established guidance for evaluating clean up plans for radioactively contaminated soils and specifies an annual exposure ( greater than background Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 5 radioactive exposure) goal after the remedial action is complete, while also requiring that the radiation exposures to the public from residual radioactive material in soil after clean up be " as low as reasonably achievable" ( ALARA).

Risk Based Criteria The EPA and New York State both take a risk based approach toward the protection of human health from known, probable, and possible carcinogenic substances. In the scientific literature and as a matter of public policy, it is recognized that for some chemicals, the presence of any amount, however small, is associated with some adverse effect, though the risk of this adverse effect may likewise be small. Recognizing that achieving a " zero level" in the environment for some contaminants is not possible at this time, these agencies have established risk based criteria ( i. e., levels in the environment associated with a one in one million incremental cancer risk). This type of approach is not used for developing environmental criteria for the protection of aquatic life and wildlife. It is possible that the presence of some chemicals at any concentration may affect aquatic life and wildlife both at the level of the individual as well as populations, and, therefore, complex food webs. Individual criteria also do not, at this time, take into account additive or synergistic toxic effects. The risk associated with individual man made radionuclides is, however, considered additive, and the allowable risk reflects the additive effect of exposure to multiple manmade radionuclides. For these reasons, the Peconic Estuary Program participants do, therefore, recognize that zero discharge ( from point and nonpoint sources) of toxic and manmade radionuclide pollutants, and particularly of bioaccumulative chemicals, is a goal.

SOURCES OF TOXIC CONTAMINANTS WITHIN THE PECONIC ESTUARY SYSTEM Both point sources and nonpoint sources of pollution contribute toxic contaminants to the estuary system. Because there are a limited number of point source surface water discharges in the Peconic Estuary System, most toxic pollutants found in the area are nonpoint in origin, carried into the bays via groundwater and runoff.

Point Sources of Pollution Point source discharges in the Peconic Estuary consist of wastewater discharges, certain stormwater discharges, and a limited number of industrial discharges. Point source discharges to surface and ground waters are regulated under the State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( SPDES) Program administered by the NYSDEC. Permits are written to ensure that the discharge does not cause or contribute to the violation of ambient water quality standards. Under Phase I of the SPDES stormwater program, permits are required to be issued for municipal separate storm sewer systems serving large or medium sized populations ( greater than 250,000 or 100,000 people, respectively), and for stormwater discharges to surface waters associated with industrial activity, including certain types of marinas. At the present time, nine establishments in the Peconic Estuary Program Study Area have been issued SPDES stormwater general permits. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 6 Table 6 1. Toxics of Concern in the Peconic Estuary System.*

Contaminant Measured Levels and Area of Impact Potential Sources Polychlorinated Biphenyls ( PCBs) ER La exceeded for sediments in Meetinghouse Creek; elevated levels in freshwater fish at BNL ( on site only); Statewide consumption advisories in place for lobster and crab hepatopancreas, snapping turtles, and waterfowl; local consumption advisory in place for striped bass, bluefish, and American eels Potential sources are outside of the Peconics aside from evidence of historical discharges from BNL Mirex Statewide consumption advisory in place for waterfowl Statewide problem Chlordane ( banned from use in the 1980s) Statewide consumption advisory in place for waterfowl Statewide problem DDTb ( banned from use in the 1970s) ER Ls exceeded for sediments at Upper Sag Harbor Cove, East Creek, and Meetinghouse Creek Agricultural areas containing residual DDT Aldicarb ( an insecticide which is no longer in use) Does not exceed State water quality criteria for toxics; widespread groundwater contamination along North Fork; detected in surface waters of East Creek and other North Fork creeks Agricultural areas containing residual Aldicarb MTBE ( methyl tert Butyl Ether) Does not exceed State water quality criteria for toxics; detected in surface waters of Sag Harbor Creek near Havens Beach, Peconic River, and other surface waters Octane booster in gasoline PAHs ER Ls exceeded for sediments in East Creek, mouth of Peconic River, Upper Sag Harbor Cove, and Meetinghouse Creek Atmospheric deposition from the burning of fossil fuels, road runoff, and boat wet exhaust Arsenic ER Ls exceeded for sediments in six sites ( Great Peconic Bay, West Neck Bay, Fish Cove, East Creek, Mouth of the Peconic River, and Meetinghouse Creek) Pesticides and stormwater runoff; treated lumber Copper Elevated levels in Peconic River sediments at BNL BNL Lead ER Ls exceeded for sediments in four sites ( West Neck Bay, East Creek, Upper Sag Harbor Cove, and Meetinghouse Creek) Primarily historic anthropogenic sources such as lead additives in gasoline Mercury ER Ls exceeded for sediments at two sampling sites ( West Neck Bay and Meetinghouse Creek); elevated levels in Peconic River sediments outside BNL Stormwater and urban runoff; BNL Silver ER Ls exceeded for sediments at two sampling sites ( mouth of Peconic River and Meetinghouse Creek); elevated levels in Peconic River sediments outside BNL Stormwater and urban runoff; BNL Table continued on next page Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 7 Table 6 1. Toxics of Concern in the Peconic Estuary System. ( continued)

Contaminant Measured Levels and Area of Impact Potential Sources Radionuclides Water, sediment, and fish samples taken from Peconic River outside BNL contain measurable levels of radioactive materials; however, observed concentrations are well below State established criteria BNLc * Toxics of concern and potential sources are based on currently available data and information. Additional toxics of concern may be identified in the future.

a Under NOAA's effects range values for toxics in sediments, concentrations below the ER L ( effects range low) represent conditions in which adverse effects on bottom dwelling organisms would rarely be observed. Concentrations equal to and above the ER L, but below the effects range median ( ER M) represent a possible effects range within which effects would frequently be observed. b Concentrations of other organochlorine pesticides did not exceed ER L concentrations in any of the tested sediments. c Natural occurring radioactivity and fallout from atmospheric nuclear weapon tests also contribute to measurable levels of radioactivity, including areas not affected by releases from BNL.

Permits also are issued on a case by case basis if the EPA or the State determines that a stormwater discharge to surface water contributes to a violation of a water quality standard or is a significant contributor of pollutants to waters of the United States. No permits of this type have been issued to date in the Peconic Estuary Study Area.

Discharges to ground waters include sanitary wastes from residences and commercial establishments and noncontact cooling waters. There are no permitted discharges of wastewater from industrial activities to groundwater in the Peconic Estuary Study Area ( aside from a permit at BNL). Businesses which generate wastewater containing toxic substances dispose of such wastewater by containing the limited volumes on site, and then removing them by approved hazardous waste handlers/ transporters for treatment off site. This method is often referred to as " hold and haul."

Nonpoint Sources of Pollution There are numerous nonpoint sources of toxic substances in the Peconic Estuary. These nonpoint sources frequently contribute a wide variety of pollutants to the estuary in addition to toxic contaminants, such as pathogens and nutrients. Groundwater underflow and stormwater runoff are the primary pathways by which nonpoint pollution enters the estuary system. Loadings from suburban and urban areas ( residential and commercial uses), roads, agricultural land, marinas, boating, and industrial sites contribute pollutants to the estuary system. In addition, some toxics enter the estuary system via atmospheric deposition. Once deposited on land within the estuary, stormwater runoff and groundwater can carry these substances into receiving waters. While each of There are eight permitted surface water dischargers in the Peconic Estuary system: Brookhaven National Laboratory ( discharge includes sanitary wastewater and cooling waters as well as wastewater from industrialtype activities), Navy Weapons Industrial Reserve Plant ( NWIRP) at Calverton, Riverhead Sewage Treatment Plant, Plum Island Animal Disease Center, Riverhead Foundation Aquarium ( discharges wastewater from animal display and rehabilitation operations), Bayview Ventures ( discharges filter backwash from a potable water treatment plant), Shelter Island Heights Sewage Treatment Plant, and Sag Harbor Sewage Treatment Plant. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 8 these diffuse sources of pollution may seem unimportant, the cumulative effect of the nonpoint source loadings can be significant.

Pesticides, an emerging concern, may be introduced to the Peconic System from suburban and urban sources as well as from agricultural operations. Though no causal link has been identified, low levels of pesticides may be affecting aquatic resources, including eelgrass, sensitive larval stages of commercially and recreational important finfish and shellfish, including lobsters, and other ecologically important species. Even pesticides that are banned or not being applied can cause or contribute to environmental problems if they are not disposed of or improperly stored.

In 1995, Cornell Cooperative Extension of Suffolk County conducted an " Agricultural Clean Sweep" to provide Long Island farmers and agribusiness associates ( such as those involved with landscape and turf maintenance) with an opportunity to dispose of, in an environmentally sound manner, a variety of pesticide products that could no longer be used legally or effectively in current operations. The collected unusable/ unwanted pesticides became the property of the contracted hazardous waste disposal firm and were properly disposed of in an environmentally sound manner. Participation was voluntary and free of charge. Waste pesticides for collection were pre registered only after the participants attended a training session which prepared them to safely transport their own pesticides. In this single two day collection 28,150 pounds of waste pesticides were collected from 76 participants.

At the Suffolk County Pesticide Collection Project conducted on July 10, 1999 in Riverhead and on July 12, 1999 in Huntington, a total of ninety nine 55 gallon drums of unwanted and unusable pesticide were collected for appropriate disposal. This $ 75,000 program was funded by Suffolk County in connection with an Environmental Benefit Project associated with an enforcement action by the NYSDEC. Among the pesticides turned in were such outlawed agents as DDT and aldicarb ( Temik). Working in cooperation with NYSDEC, two trade groups sponsored the event: the Professional Certified Applicators of Long Island, Inc. and the Nassau/ Suffolk Landscape Gardeners Association.

Agricultural Inputs When rainwater drains agricultural lands where pesticides are in use or were used in the past, the water can carry contaminants into the estuary system. Both DDT and Aldicarb have been found in sediment and water samples in the Peconics, despite the fact that these substances can no longer legally be used. Pesticides are also believed to be a source of arsenic found in the estuary system.

Suburban and Urban Inputs Stormwater runoff and groundwater can carry many different substances from parking lots, roads and highways, and residential and commercial areas. When contaminants are introduced to these areas, they can be swept into receiving waterbodies with groundwater and stormwater runoff during rainfall events. Suburban and urban areas are believed to contribute a variety of chemicals, including arsenic, copper, lead, mercury, silver, cadmium, zinc, MTBE ( methyl tert Butyl Ether), and Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons ( PAHs) to the Peconic Estuary System. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 9 Potential sources of toxic substances include:

  Leaks from industrial facilities due to poor housekeeping practices, insufficient containment and improper storage;

  Improper storage, use, and disposal of household hazardous chemicals, including automotive fluids, solvents, cleaning fluids, and lawn and garden pesticides;

  Operation and maintenance of on site disposal systems, including organic solvents improperly used as septic system " cleaners" containing halogenated and aromatic hydrocarbons, which are now banned;

  Discharge of pollutants in storm drains, such as waste oils;

  Commercial activities and land uses, including parking lots, gas stations, and other entities not under SPDES permit purview; and,

  Existing underground storage tanks under 1,100 gallons for storage of heating oil, for use on premises, that are not double walled, constructed of non corrodible materials and equipped with leak detection or overflow prevention systems.

Pesticide use on residential and commercial properties, publicly owned lands, and golf courses is a concern. The Peconic Estuary Program encourages the management of lawns and landscaped areas in accordance with integrated pest management ( IPM) principles ( properly applying only those pesticides when needed). As reported in the Consumer Unions 1996 piece Pest Management at the Crossroads, " Consumer lawn care products and the formulation applied by lawn care companies tend to be mixtures of fertilizers and herbicides, insecticides and sometimes fungicides. By selling a few common mixtures, the industry keeps costs down, but on the downside, many applications include one or more active ingredients not really needed on a particular lawn or only marginally useful in many areas." Improper storage and disposal of pesticides can also result in impacts to groundwater and surface waters.

Vector control ditches ( mosquito ditches) are maintained by the Suffolk County Department of Public Works ( SCDPW), which typically applies sprays for larval control of mosquitoes. Problem areas are monitored to determine effective treatments. The primary insecticide used is Bti ( bacillus thuringiensis var, israelensis); in some areas methoprene is used. The use of the mosquito larvicides in storm drains and catch basins has been advocated as a mosquito control measure. This could contribute larvicides to surface waters following rainfall events. Recently, the pesticide malathion has been applied in residential areas. Malathion is labeled for use on adult mosquitoes and cannot be applied to water. Historically, spills or leaks of contaminants within the Peconic Estuary System have not been a major source of pollution. Records from October 1985 through August 1988 indicate that, of the 25 reported spills or leaks within the study area, approximately 25 percent involved volumes greater than 100 gallons. The predominant type of spill or leak during this review period involved electrical transformers on poles that spilled or leaked coolant oil. Such spills have on occasion contained PCBs. Most of these spills were reported to be one gallon or less in volume.

Major fuel storage sites pose a potential threat, in the event of catastrophic failure. In the Peconics, bulk storage exists at Plum Island, Shelter Island, and at Brookhaven National Laboratory. Spillage in Northville also could conceivably drift around the North Fork into the Peconics. Recommendations regarding the State Oil Spill Areawide Contingency Plan for the Peconic Estuary are discussed in the Habitat and Living Resources Chapter of this Plan ( see HLR 15.7). Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 10 Pollutants associated with construction sites ( including roads, highways, and bridges) and road, highway and bridge operation, maintenance and runoff systems include pesticides, petrochemicals ( oil, gasoline, and asphalt degreasers); construction chemicals such as concrete products, sealers, and paints; wash waters associated with these products and paint chips. Road runoff can contain petroleum products ( including the octane booster MTBE), heavy metals ( lead, zinc, copper, cadmium, chromium, nickel, and manganese) and cyanide from vehicle and tire wear and tear and exhausts.

MTBE is a special concern nationally, in New York, on Long Island, and in the Peconic Estuary study area. Congress required in the Clean Air Act of 1990 that areas of the country with the worst ozone smog problems use reformulated gasoline ( RFG). MTBE is the oxygen additive most commonly used by the petroleum industry to satisfy the RFG mandate. Ethanol is the second most commonly used additive. MTBE is very soluble in water, does not " cling" to soil well and has a tendency to migrate much more quickly than other components of gasoline. Most detections of MTBE are below levels of public health concerns and are within the range EPA has set for a taste and odor advisory ( at 20 to 40 ppb). Small individual fuel spills and stormwater runoff contribute to lowlevel detections of MTBE in water supplies. Even though significant air quality gains have been made using RFG, these air benefits can be maintained without using MTBE and without endangering water resources, through the use of safe alternatives like ethanol.

In March 2000, EPA and the USDA released a legislative framework to encourage immediate congressional action to reduce or eliminate the use of MTBE and promote renewable fuels like ethanol, through amendments to the Clean Air Act. Further, EPA announced the beginning of a regulatory action to eliminate MTBE in gasoline, issuing an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking under section 6 of the Toxic Substances Control Act. This section gives EPA the authority to ban, phase out, limit or control the manufacture of any chemical substance deemed to pose an unreasonable risk to the public or environment. EPA expects to issue a full proposal to ban or phase down MTBE, that will be followed by a time period required by law for analysis and public comment before a final action can be taken. Harbor Protection Overlay Districts The Town of East Hampton recognizes that those who own property bordering on the Town's harbors ( including flag lots, flag strips, and flag access strips) derive many benefits from proximity to these waters and therefore have a special responsibility to help protect them. The Town has established a Harbor Protection Overlay District ( HPOD) whereby all lots in this district are subject to special requirements for maintaining or protecting wildlife habitats and surface water quality to protect aquatic life. This includes:

  Requiring new parking lots and driveways to have " unimproved" surfaces or be constructed of one or more of the following: poured concrete, hot plant asphalt, rapid curing cut back asphalt or quartz gravel;

  Requiring that runoff from new paved roads, parking lots and driveways be managed on site;

  Requiring that fuel tanks be double walled fiberglass if installed below ground or include specified containment provisions if installed elsewhere;

  Requiring that swimming pools: be constructed or installed with a system to reduce the use of chlorine, such as an ozonator, ionizer, or ultra violet disinfectant system; have drywells constructed for evacuation of water from the pool; not be drained anywhere but to the dry well; and not be cleaned by means of an acid wash unless the acids used are neutralized prior to discharge from the swimming pool; and,

  Allowing the use of wood treated with copper chromated arsenate ( CCA), ammoniacal copper quat ( ACQ), or creosote in tidal waters only when it can be shown that no reasonable alternatives exist to using these treated woods. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 11 Golf Courses The use of pesticides and fertilizers on golf courses is a potential groundwater problem. A SCDHS 1999 study detected pesticides in seven of the 31 golf course wells tested, with two of these wells exceeding the drinking water MCLs. However, in shallow wells that would show impacts from recent pesticide and fertilizer applications, no pesticides were detected and average nitrate concentrations were below state and Federal MCLs. Thus, the recent implementation of Best Management Practices appears to have greatly reduced the risk of pesticide and fertilizer contamination in the golf courses tested.

Marinas and Boating During the course of normal marina operations, various activities and locations in the marina can generate polluting substances. Such activities include waste disposal, boat fueling, and boat maintenance and cleaning; such locations include storage areas for materials required for these activities and hull maintenance areas. Of special concern are substances that can be toxic to aquatic life, pose a threat to human health, or degrade water quality. Paint sandings and chips, oil, grease, and fuel are examples. Because marinas are located at the water's edge, there is often no buffering of the release of pollutants to waterways. There are 69 marinas in the Peconics.

The principal pollutants in runoff from marina parking areas and hull maintenance areas are suspended solids and organics ( predominately oil and grease). Toxic metals from boat hull scraping and sanding are part of, or tend to become associated with, the suspended solids. For example, lead is used as a fuel additive and ballast, and may be released through incomplete fuel combustion and boat bilge discharges. Arsenic is used in paint pigments, pesticides, and wood preservatives. Zinc anodes are used to deter corrosion of metal hulls and engine parts. Copper and tin are used as biocides in anti foulant paints. Other metals ( iron, chrome, etc.) are used in the construction of marinas and boats. Petroleum hydrocarbons ( including polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons, or PAHs) can be elevated in marina waters due to refueling activities and bilge or fuel discharge from nearby boats. National Toxic Substance Control Efforts In developing management strategies for toxics, some actions occur at the national level, such as decisions regarding pesticide use and toxic substance bans. For example, among its provisions, the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act ( FIFRA) authorizes EPA to control pesticides that may threaten ground water and surface water. FIFRA provides for registration of pesticides and enforceable label requirements, which may include maximum rates of application, restrictions on use practices, and classification of pesticides as " restricted use" pesticides ( which limits use to certified applicators trained to handle toxic chemicals). Under the Toxic Substances Control Act ( TSCA) and FIFRA, the sale, use or distribution of certain toxic substances has been banned or reduced.

State Pesticide Program Under the Pesticide Use Program, NYSDEC regulates the sale and use of restricted and general use pesticides in order to prevent the unsafe or excessive application of pesticides. This program is implemented through certification of pesticide applicators and backed up by examinations to ensure that only knowledgeable, qualified people are permitted to handle and apply these chemicals. A certification is required by commercial applicators if they handle and apply restricted or general use pesticides, and by private applicators ( e. g., farmers) if they plan to use a restricted use pesticide. It has been estimated that 50 percent of the commercial pesticide applicators on Long Island may be operating without the required approvals. While pesticides have not been identified as impairing water quality or living resources, the potential for misuse or unintended off site impacts exists, particularly from uncertified applicators. The NYSDEC is currently working with involved government agencies and other organizations to develop a Long Island Pesticide Management Plan that will further address pesticide use in the Estuary. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 12 It is important that marina operators and patrons take steps to control or minimize the entry of toxic substances into marina waters. For the most part, this can be accomplished with simple preventive measures such as performing boat cleaning and repair activities on protected sites, locating servicing equipment where the risk of spillage is reduced, providing adequate and well marked disposal facilities, and educating the boating public about the importance of pollution prevention. The benefit of effective pollution prevention to the marina operator can be measured as the relatively low cost of pollution prevention compared to the potentially high cost of environmental cleanup.

A marina is required to obtain a SPDES stormwater discharge permit if vehicle maintenance activities, such as vehicle ( boat) rehabilitation, mechanical repairs, painting, fueling, and lubrication or equipment cleaning operations are conducted at the marina. SPDES permits apply only to the point source discharges of stormwater from maintenance areas at the marinas.

Marinas not involved in equipment cleaning or vehicle maintenance activities are not covered under the SPDES stormwater program. Likewise, a marina that has no point source discharges of stormwater is not regulated under the SPDES stormwater program, regardless of its classification and the types of activities conducted. In addition, some marinas are marine service stations which are not regulated under the SPDES stormwater program. These types of marinas are primarily in the business of selling fuel without vehicle maintenance or equipment cleaning operations.

Marine Engine Wet Exhaust Small boat engines commonly use seawater to both cool and quiet their exhaust. Seawater passes through the heat exchanger, gear oil cooler, and aftercooler ( if equipped), and is then injected into the exhaust. When injected, some of the gaseous and solid component of the exhaust transfers into the cooling water. The cooling water then discharges into the receiving water. Small boats are powered by either inboard or outboard engines. Inboard engines are generally diesel fueled while outboard engines typically use gasoline. Inboard and outboard engines can be either two stroke or four stroke. The majority of small boat outboard engines are two stroke gasoline engines. The moving parts of gasoline powered, two stroke outboard engines are lubricated with oil that is pre mixed with gasoline. Thus, the oil is continuously burned with gasoline. In four stroke engines, lubricating oil is circulated and not intentionally introduced into the combustion chamber. The discharge consists of water injected as a cooling stream into the exhaust system of small boat engines. Exhaust constituents generated during the operation of the engines can be transferred to the engine's water cooling streams and discharged as wet exhaust. Inboard engines usually discharge wet exhaust above the water line, outboard engines generally discharge their wet exhaust through the propeller hub.

The main discharge constituents from all engines are oxides of nitrogen, organic compounds ( including hydrocarbons [ HCs]), carbon monoxide ( CO), and particulates. The hydrocarbon constituents are primarily the result of incomplete combustion. Since diesel fuels have a different composition than regular gasoline the distribution of constituents in their exhaust differ between the two engine types. In general, diesel engines produce higher particulate emissions and lower organic emissions than gasoline powered engines.

Some limited studies have been done on the impact of marine engine exhaust on water quality. A 1995 study measured the rate of introduction of volatile organic compounds ( VOCs) into water during the operation of gasoline powered two stroke and four stroke outboard engines. The VOC compounds found in the water were almost exclusively aromatic hydrocarbons, including pollutants such as benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and napthelene. In most cases, other types of hydrocarbons Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 13 were not found. No bioaccumulative pollutants are suspected to be present in these discharges. For many toxic constituents, there is a significant reduction in the individual pollutant loadings in twostroke vs. four stroke engines. While the reduction varies by pollutant, it typically ranges from 90 percent reduction to over 99 percent reduction.

Treated Lumber in the Marine Environment As reported in " Assessment of the Risks to Aquatic Life from the Use of Pressure Treated Wood in Water" ( T. J. Sinnott, NYSDEC, June 1999), when wood is used for in water construction such as pilings, breakwalls, abutments or other submerged or partially submerged structures, the potential exists for toxic preservatives to leach from the wood and harm adjacent aquatic ecosystems. Wood preservatives are chemical pesticides that are applied to wood to protect it from decay brought about by fungi or insect attack. While preservatives can be brushed on, sprayed on, or soaked into wood, the most effective treatment is to force preservative solutions deeply into the wood under high pressure.

Creosote, pentachlorophenol, and inorganic arsenicals are the three most widely used preservative compounds. Creosote is a mix of PAHs that are products of the fractional distillation of coal tar. Pentachlorophenol is a manufactured organochlorine pesticide. Inorganic arsenicals are various blends of metallic salts such as CCA ( chromated copper arsenic) or mixtures of metallic salts, arsenic, and organic compounds such as ACA ( ammoniacal copper arsenate) or copper naphthenate. All three wood preservatives work because they are toxic to insects and fungi.

Available scientific data for each of the three types of preservatives have been evaluated to attempt to assess the potential risks to aquatic life from the use of pressure treated lumber in water. For all three wood preservatives, the greatest amount of leaching occurs when the treated wood is first put in place. The rate of leaching drops off significantly after a short period of relatively high leaching. In general, any impacts to aquatic life are most likely to occur during the initial period of high leaching. The area where adverse effects occur is likely to be highly localized. The greater the distance from the treated wood, the more dilute the concentration of leached pesticide. For each of the preservative pesticides, fate processes such as volatilization, photolysis, sediment sorption, and microbial degradation work to degrade and reduce the concentration of the pesticide in the water even while it is leaching. For each specific type of wood preservative, recommendations are provided for minimizing the risks to aquatic life.

In recent years, a number of products made out of recycled plastic have come available. These products are designed to replace treated wood for fencing, pilings, and decking. Products made of recycled plastics appear to be safer. They do not function by inherent toxicity, rather they are simply unsuitable substrate for fungi or insects to subsist in or on. Whether or not recycled plastic products have the necessary structural or functional integrity or are economically viable replacements to pressure treated lumber is not assessed for this report. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 14 Atmospheric Deposition Acid rain has traditionally been a concern with respect to lowering the pH of freshwater ecosystems due to excessive loadings of acidity. In the context of the Peconic Estuary Program, acid rain is not a primary concern with respect to direct impact on surface water pH, due to the buffering capacity of the marine system. However, there may be a concern with respect to indirect impacts of rainfall acidity on the Peconic Estuary System. Such indirect impacts may be related to the effects of acidity on the Peconic River and on the solubility and transport of contaminants through soil, groundwater, and sediment.

While dry and wet deposition of toxic contaminants present in the atmosphere occurs, no particular toxic pollutants have been identified as being of concern from this source. PAHs, organic compounds derived from pyrogenic ( combustion) and petrogenic ( petroleum based) sources, have been detected in sediments within the estuary. The distribution of PAHs suggests loadings are airborne ( pyrogenic) PAHs, which are deposited directly on surface waters, as well as in the watershed, and then carried to the estuary through freshwater flows from rivers, runoff, and stormwater, and watershed drainage through groundwater underflow. Nationally, programs are being implemented by the Federal and State governments under the Clean Air Act Amendments to further study and reduce toxic emissions.

Dredged Material Placement At the present time, no toxic related restrictions have been imposed on the placement of dredged materials in the Peconics. All dredged material from the Peconics is put to beneficial uses, such as beach nourishment or wetland restoration, or is otherwise placed upland ( i. e., above the spring high tide water line).

The EPA and the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers ( Corps) have identified the likely need to continue marine placement of dredged material in the Long Island Sound Area. In 1999, the EPA in cooperation with the Corps issued a notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement to consider the potential identification of one or more placement sites for Long Island Sound dredged material. EPA and the Corps have decided to consider the use of four existing sites and their identification as dredged material placement sites under Section 102( c) of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act. Other alternatives will also be evaluated, including other open water placement sites and other placement and management options. Identification of a site does not itself result in placement of any particular material, it serves only to make the site a placement option available for consideration in the alternatives analysis for each individual dredging project in the area. Nonpoint Sources Addressed in the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990 In the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990 ( CZARA), Congress recognizes that nonpoint source pollution is a key factor in the continuing degradation of many coastal waters and establishes a new program to address this pollution. In enacting CZARA, Congress calls upon states to develop and implement State Coastal Nonpoint Source Control Programs, which must be approved by both the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ( NOAA) and EPA. Congress gives the EPA the responsibility to develop technical guidance for state development of such programs.

Under CZARA, EPA specifies " management measures" for three categories of nonpoint source pollution that may potentially contribute toxics to the Peconic Estuary: agriculture, urban areas, and marinas and recreational boating. " Management Measures" are defined in CZARA section 6217( g)( 5) as " economically achievable measures for the control of the addition of pollutants, which reflect the greatest degree of pollutant reduction achievable through the application of the best available nonpoint pollution control practices, technologies, processes, siting criteria, operating methods, or other alternatives." Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 15 The PEP participants consider it unlikely a placement site will be proposed within the PEP study area. ( See also the Habitat and Living Resources Chapter of this Plan.)

Site Specific Concerns There are a number of sites within the Peconic Estuary that contribute or have the potential to contribute toxic contaminants to the estuary system through point source discharges and/ or from stormwater runoff. The sites that are of particular concern are shown in Figure 6 1 and described briefly below.

Sewage Treatment Plants Sewage treatment plant ( STP) effluents are subject to disinfection to limit the discharge of pathogens. The most common method of disinfection is chlorination. Chlorinated discharges to surface waters are of concern because, in systems like the Peconics which contain high levels of organic matter, chlorinated compounds can be formed which, although short lived, can be quite toxic to aquatic organisms. The complexity of the reactions of chlorine in the environment increases the difficulty of assessing its impact. Increased attention is being given to addressing the possible need to limit all uses of chlorine as a means of reducing the input of chlorinated compounds into the environment.

Disinfection methods other than chlorination, such as ultraviolet ( UV) radiation and ozone, appear to be as effective as chlorine for reducing bacteria and may be more effective in reducing other pathogens. UV disinfection is now used at both the BNL and Plum Island Animal Disease Center STPs. UV has been proposed for use at Riverhead and Sag Harbor and has been tested on a pilot scale at Shelter Island Heights. Effective disinfection by methods other than chlorination can reduce impacts on aquatic life and human health while still being protective of human health from pathogens. These issues are discussed further in the Pathogens Chapter.

North Sea Municipal Landfill Site, North Sea, NY Remedial actions at this Superfund site have been completed and EPA has determined that no further action ( other than air and groundwater monitoring) is necessary. Impacts on surface waters were considered in the selected remedy. Contaminants of concern included volatile organic chemicals ( VOCs), PAHs, metals ( arsenic and lead) and other organics.

Based on the monitoring that has taken place, the EPA will be requiring the Town of Southampton to conduct additional benthic community and sediment toxicity testing, in accordance with an EPA approved plan. Based upon EPA's review of the monitoring, sampling and analysis results, EPA will evaluate the efficacy of the remedy under the Superfund law. If warranted, the Superfund record of decision will be amended and the remedy revised. The Riverhead, Sag Harbor, and Shelter Island Heights STPs receive and treat wastewater generated by residences and local commercial establishments. Brookhaven National Laboratory and the Plum Island Animal Disease Center have their own sewage treatment plants. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 16 Figure 6 1. Toxic Chemical Monitoring Stations and Potential Toxic Sources. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 17 Rowe Industries Site, Sag Harbor, NY Remedies selected for this Superfund site include in situ vapor extraction, soil excavation and disposal, treatment of contaminated groundwater, and long term monitoring. The toxic contaminants of concern are volatile organic chemicals, tetrachloroethylene ( PCE) and trichloroethylene ( TCE). The soil that required excavation has been excavated and disposed of off site. The in situ vapor extraction system is presently being operated. The groundwater remedy is currently under construction.

Brookhaven National Laboratory ( BNL), Upton, NY Point source discharges at BNL include sanitary wastewater and cooling waters as well as wastewater from industrialtype activities. The BNL SPDES permit requires monitoring of effluents from industrial type activities prior to discharge into the wastewater collection system. Information collected due to this monitoring requirement will be reviewed and considered when the BNL discharge permit comes up for renewal. EPA completed a Multi Media Compliance Evaluation Inspection at BNL, beginning May 5, 1997. This comprehensive inspection evaluated BNL's compliance with statutory and regulatory requirements including the effectiveness of its treatment and disposal practices, pollution controls, operations and maintenance procedures, and self monitoring/ reporting records and practices. BNL has, as a result of the inspection, entered into a memorandum of agreement ( MOA) to implement a facility wide environmental management system, and EPA has issued enforcement orders to BNL for the violations found during the inspection.

As described in the MOA, it is both EPA's and U. S. Department of Energy's ( DOE) objective that BNL be operated so as to maintain full compliance with applicable environmental requirements and to protect the environment and the health and safety of workers at the facility and the general public. While DOE as a generator of hazardous waste at BNL is subject to various legal requirements, the commitments in the MOA extend beyond such requirements and include a voluntary initiative on the part of DOE. The goal of these voluntary undertakings is to enhance environmental management at BNL through the development and implementation of an Environmental Management System ( EMS) that is focused on environmental compliance and pollution prevention.

Specifically, BNL has agreed to develop and implement an expedited process evaluation of all experimental and industrial operations at BNL for the purpose of identifying all waste streams produced at the facility. The evaluation will also include determining the proper regulatory status of each waste stream to ensure the wastes are managed in accordance with applicable local, State and Federal environmental regulations and in such a manner as to pose no threat to the environment. The evaluation establishes a baseline of on going BNL operations and will also be used to assess future activities. All experimental and industrial type operations will be inventoried and pollution prevention/ waste minimization and assessment/ prevention/ control opportunities will be identified, tracked and assessed for implementation. The Federal Superfund hazardous substance cleanup program was created by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 ( CERCLA). The Act authorizes the Federal government to respond to spills and other releases ( or threatened releases) of hazardous substances, as well as leaking hazardous waste dumps. There are three Federal Superfund Sites on the National Priority List in the study area: the North Sea Municipal Landfill, Rowe Industries, and a portion of the Brookhaven National Laboratory Site. Two other sites in the PEP Study Area have been identified as inactive hazardous waste disposal sites by the NYSDEC  Mattituck Airbase and the East Hampton Landfill Lagoons. These sites are not known to be impacting the Peconic Estuary and the State is addressing known and potential contamination problems. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 18 Actions under the Superfund Program Affecting the Peconic Estuary Study Area at Brookhaven National Laboratory BNL has been placed on the Federal Superfund Site National Priority List. Because of the complexity of the site, it has been broken into several " operable units" ( OU). OU V contains the portion of the site which influences the Peconic Estuary Study Area. The Superfund status is based on preliminary studies which indicate that contamination at BNL is impacting the Peconic River. A Remedial Investigation ( RI) for OU V has been completed to characterize the nature and extent of contamination and identify areas that pose an unacceptable risk to human health and the environment. The conclusions drawn from the RI form the basis for the remedial action alternatives to be conducted. Surface soil, subsurface soil, groundwater, surface water, sediments, and fish tissue samples have been collected and analyzed as part of the remedial investigation process. Samples have been analyzed for a comprehensive list of inorganic, volatile organic, and semi volatile organic substances, as well as for pesticides, PCBs, radionuclides, ammonia, phenols, and cyanide. The concern with respect to the Peconic Estuary watershed is elevated concentrations of metals in Peconic River sediments and other co located contaminants including radionuclides. No significant off site migration of these contaminants above sediment screening levels was found, aside from one depositional area just outside the Laboratory boundary on Suffolk County owned property.

A baseline risk assessment was prepared to evaluate potential risks from exposure to contaminants in the absence of remediation. The baseline risk assessments conducted for Operable Unit V were reported in the Final Operable Unit V Remedial Investigation Report ( May 27, 1998) and the Final Operable Unit V Plutonium Contamination Characterization and Radiological Dose and Risk Assessment Report ( January 31, 2000), in which the risk assessment also includes all radiologic data included in the Remedial Investigation Report. The results from the combined studies are reflected in the proposed remedy. An ecological risk assessment was also performed to determine if any contaminants posed an unacceptable risk to ecological receptors. Ecological receptors include any plants and animals that could be exposed to contaminants now, or in the future.

In the spring of 2000, the DOE released a plan proposing a remedy for Operable Unit V at BNL. This Proposed Plan provides a description of site concerns and discussion of completed investigations, a summary of risk assessments performed, evaluations of remedial alternatives, and recommendations for the preferred alternative. This area includes BNL's sewage treatment plant and the headwaters of the western branch of the Peconic River.

The proposed remedy included excavating Peconic River sediment containing copper, mercury, and silver at concentrations above cleanup goals. PCBs and DDD are largely co located with the elevated metals, and will be cleaned up during remediation of the metals. Radionuclides, mainly cesium 137 Tritium Contamination Concerns have been raised about possible tritium contamination from BNL in the Peconic River and adjacent areas with possible impacts to human health and the ecosystem, including possible implications regarding Brown Tide. However, the NYS Department of Health ( NYSDOH) has estimated the potential radiation dose to a person to be small, less than one percent of the applicable standard in NYSDOH regulations, and less than 10 percent of the NYSDEC remedial action threshold. Radiation experts from EPA have reviewed the NYSDOH report and concur with the findings. This contamination is separate and distinct from the groundwater tritium plume detected in December 1996 associated with BNL's High Flux Beam Reactor ( HFBR). The HFBR groundwater tritium plume is out of the Peconic Estuary Program Study Area. The Peconic Estuary Program will continue to involve radiation experts from the NYSDOH and EPA to assist in data interpretation and evaluation. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 19 and low levels of plutonium, are below acceptable levels established by the United States Environmental Protection Agency ( 15 millirem/ year above background), but will also be removed during sediment cleanup where they are co located with the elevated metals. The sediment will be dewatered and shipped to a licensed off site disposal facility. The proposed remedy also included a localized removal of soil at the Lab's sewage treatment plant and additional monitoring and characterization of contaminants in groundwater.

Soils in the sand filter beds and adjacent berms at the STP contain elevated levels of mercury, silver, chromium, lead and radionuclides as well. A best management practice, localized removal of soil contamination, is proposed to remove high levels of mercury and cesium 137. This removal of contamination will reduce the potential for leaching and subsequent migration to groundwater and the Peconic River and will reduce potential risks associated with cesium 137 in soils. Soils from the sand filter beds and berms exceeding cleanup goals would be removed through excavation. Excavated portions of the sand beds would be replaced with sand or gravel, and excavated areas on the berms would be backfilled with clean fill, compacted and graded. Excavated materials will be disposed of in a licensed off site disposal facility.

Low levels of VOCs, primarily trichloroethene ( or trichloroethylene, TCE) were detected in groundwater both on and off site. The highest concentration of TCE found on site was 32 parts per billion ( ppb), and offsite levels had a maximum of 8.5 ppb ( the drinking water standard is 5 ppb). These values are reported in the Remedial Investigation Report. A more recent sampling in 1999 found a maximum TCE concentration on site of 17 ppb and a maximum off site concentration of 8.2 ppb. Tritium was found with maximum levels about one tenth of the drinking water standard of 20,000 picoCuries per liter ( pCi/ l).

To be sure that the health of the residents located downgradient of OU V is protected, homes and businesses in the OU V area were offered public water in 1997. Outpost monitoring wells have been placed along the predicted path of the groundwater and additional monitoring data will be collected. If future monitoring data suggest a need for a groundwater remedy, the OU V remedy will be modified.

During the public comment period on the Proposed Plan, the community raised numerous concerns with the proposal to remove contaminated sediments from the Peconic River. The concerns included wetland restoration considerations; the exact extent of contamination, particularly in the County Park east of BNL; and other technologies. After considering all of the public comments, DOE has made a determination to work with the community to develop additional information regarding the best cleanup approach to the contaminated river sediments. DOE, EPA, and NYSDEC will make a final decision on the cleanup of the contaminated soil at the STP and the groundwater. The decision will be formalized in a document called the Record of Decision ( ROD). Attached to the ROD will be a Responsiveness Summary, which will summarize public comments and DOE responses to those comments. Following final remedy selection, these documents will be available for public review. Finally, the public will be kept informed during the remedy implementation phase.

After DOE works with the community to resolve the concerns related to the sediment cleanup, a new Proposed Plan will be issued for public comment on the portion of the OU V remedy related to the Peconic River sediments. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 20 Navy Weapons Industrial Reserve Plant ( NWIRP) Site ( Calverton, NY)

The NWIRP formerly engaged in the manufacture of aircraft parts and subassemblies The facility has phased out all of its manufacturing process operations and the former operator of the property, the Northrop Grumman Corporation, vacated the property in February 1996. Since that time all property contained within the perimeter fence, with the exception of four parcels of land totaling approximately 350 acres which have been retained by the Navy to continue the installation restoration ( IR) program, have been conveyed to the Town of Riverhead. There are no longer any process type operations that generate hazardous waste conducted on the Navy's 350 acres. Any waste ( solid or hazardous) generated will be the result of the continuation of the IR program. An initial assessment was completed by the Navy in 1986 and a site investigation has been completed. The site is currently being handled under the Federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ( RCRA) corrective action program. Corrective action implementation includes a RCRA Facility Assessment, a RCRA Facility Investigation ( RFI), and a Corrective Measures Study ( CMS). If determined necessary, the State will issue a permit for carrying out corrective measures selected from the corrective measures alternatives evaluated in the CMS.

The RCRA Facility Assessment has been completed at this site for all identified solid waste management units/ areas of concern ( SWMUs/ AOCs). The RFI has been completed for a majority of the SWMUs/ AOCs identified with contamination. The RFI process is still in progress at eight SWMUs/ AOCs. Solvents including toluene, 1,1,1 trichloroethane ( TCA), and methyl ethyl ketone ( MEK or 2 butanone) have been identified by the State as of concern in groundwater. The most recent permit for this facility was issued on April 24, 2000 and will expire on April 30, 2010. Underground Storage Tanks Leaks in excess of a thousand gallons from underground storage tanks are known to have occurred in the past in the Peconic Estuary, on Long Island, and nationally. The extent of these sources of pollution is potentially large because the contamination is underground and may go unnoticed for an extended period of time.

New York State law includes provisions for preventing spills of petroleum. These provisions require all facilities with a minimum capacity of 1,100 gallons to be registered, set forth standards for the handling and storage of petroleum, and set forth standards for new and substantially modified underground and aboveground storage facilities. Owners and operators must notify NYSDEC of any spills. Another State program addresses the requirements for the bulk storage of other hazardous substances, including the registration of storage tanks, spill reporting procedures and specifications for the sale and delivery of such substances.

Suffolk County sanitary code requirements ( Article 12) are even more stringent than state requirements. The County law went into effect in 1980 and addresses all underground and aboveground tanks storing fuels, solvents, and chemicals, anything that could contaminate groundwater or surface water. New underground tanks are required to have secondary containment and be constructed of non corrodible materials, and must have leak detection and overflow protection systems. All existing facilities had to be brought up to new construction standards by 1990.

The County law exempted existing tanks from the replacement requirement that were under 1,100 gallons and used for the storage of heating oil for on premises use. However, new tanks of this type must be made of non corrodible materials. The Financing chapter of this CCMP includes several recommendations regarding incentives for private homeowners to address this potential threat to groundwater and surface water. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 21 The ( Bulova) Watch Case Factory Site ( Sag Harbor, NY)

At this site, New York State is requiring continued operation of ongoing soil and groundwater remediation systems to treat VOCs. The VOCs include 1,1,1 trichloroethane ( TCA) and trichloroethylene ( TCE) which were the solvents used in intermediate cleaning operations during watch manufacturing. A fate and transport model demonstrated that chemicals at the site are not anticipated to impact Sag Harbor Cove. The treatment systems will operate until remediation goals are achieved or it is demonstrated to the State that achieving the goals is not technically practicable.

Plum Island Animal Disease Center The Plum Island Animal Disease Center surface water discharge to the Peconic Estuary System consists of a wastewater treatment plant, which includes boiler blowdown and diked tank farm stormwater discharges. The wastewater treatment plant effluent is disinfected by ultraviolet light ( UV) treatment process. This facility also has a separate general stormwater permit for the other stormwater outfalls that discharge to surface waters. The permit for this facility includes a special condition requiring the development and implementation of a Best Management Practices Plan to prevent or minimize the potential for the release of significant amounts of toxic or hazardous substances through runoff, spillage, leaks, sludge or waste disposal, and stormwater discharges, including but not limited to drainage from raw material storage.

CHARACTERIZATION OF THE RESOURCES OF THE PECONIC ESTUARY WITH RESPECT TO TOXICS The characterization of the resources of the Peconic Estuary with respect to toxics is based on an analysis of existing and new data on toxics in the estuary's surface water, groundwater, sediments, and living resources, along with information that has been collected on specific areas of concern ( such as Superfund sites). To supplement historical data and data collected through other environmental studies ( i. e., pesticides in groundwater), the Peconic Estuary Program commissioned a study of toxic chemical distributions in Peconic Estuary sediments for 12 sites that was completed in 1996. In 1998, the EPA conducted a survey of sediments from 34 tidal creeks and embayments. The sediments in this later study were evaluated both for chemical specific contamination and overall toxicity to a marine organism (" toxicity testing"). EPA conducted additional sediment sampling for chemical specific analyses and toxicity testing in 2000. In 1999, EPA collected finfish, shellfish and crustaceans and will be analyzing the edible portions for toxic substances, including radiological contaminants. " A Characterization of the Resources of the Peconic Estuary with Respect to Toxics" ( PEP, January 2001) may be consulted for additional information and detail.

Some toxic substances, which enter the estuarine system break down fairly rapidly and cause few, if any, problems. Others tend to be very slow to break down, often accumulating in bottom sediments, where they may eventually be ingested or absorbed by bottom dwelling organisms. Some toxic substances have a tendency to travel through the food chain and accumulate in the tissues of finfish, shellfish and crustaceans. For these reasons, the emphasis of the recent sampling efforts for toxics in the Peconic Estuary involved investigations of sediments and tissues of aquatic animals. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 22 Surface Water Quality Monitoring for toxics in the estuarine water column 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. The available data show no exceedances of State water quality criteria for toxics. Therefore, there are no identified surface water quality impairments due to toxics in the estuarine water column.

Data analysis has, however, indicated widespread contamination of groundwater from Aldicarb ( nematocide used on potato plants), particularly along the North Fork. 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 in surface waters is likely due to inputs from groundwater. Another emerging concern is MTBE ( methyl tert Butyl Ether) 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.

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 Estuary watershed on 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 ( lowflow conditions. While no pesticides with available water quality criteria were identified present in excess of the applicable criteria, the 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). Although 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) showed evidence of anthropogenic ( man made) inputs, they did not exceed the established criteria.

Observed radiological measurements in the freshwater portion of the Peconic River have been compared to safe drinking water standards, even though the Peconic River is not used as a source of drinking water. While the tritium concentration in a few samples exceeded the drinking water standard, the annual average concentrations have consistently been less than the drinking water standards.

Sediment Quality Under the Peconic Estuary Program, sediments from 12 locations were sampled for the presence of 98 naturally occurring and man made substances ( Arthur D. Little, 1996). Five stations were selected to characterize " main bays" water quality. The other seven were chosen because of specific management concerns.

In this study, pollutant concentrations were compared to " Effects Range Low" ( ER L) and " Effects Range Median" ( ER M) values developed by NOAA. ER L values generally correspond to concentrations below which contaminant induced effects are unlikely. Values at or above ER M levels indicate that contaminant induced effects are likely. None of the samples collected exceeded ER Ms. Some ER Ls were exceeded, which indicates the need for actions to reduce sources to prevent problems in the future. Sediments with levels above the ER L tended to be in sheltered bays Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 23 Table 6 2. Summary of New York State Health Advisories for Chemicals in Sportfish and Game Applicable to the Peconic Estuary System.

For additional and related information on these advisories, please consult the complete text of the NYSDOH Chemicals in Sportfish and Game, available from the NYSDOH or on the NYSDOH web site on the Internet at http:// www. health. state. ny. us.

Species Advisory Potential Toxic( s) of Concern Applicable Areas Lobster and Crab Do not eat hepatopancreas ( also known as the tomalley, mustard, or liver) Cadmium, PCBs, and other contaminants All marine waters of the State Marine Striped Bass, Bluefish, and American Eels Limit consumption to no more than ½ pound per week PCBsa Peconic Bay, Gardiners Bay, and Block Island Sound All Freshwater Fish Limit consumption to no more than ½ pound per week Multiple contaminants All fresh waters of the State Waterfowl: Mergansers Do not consume PCBs, mirex, chlordane, and DDT Statewide All Other Waterfowl Skin and remove all fat before cooking; discard stuffing after cooking; limit to two meals per month PCBs, mirex, chlordane, and DDT Statewide Snapping Turtles Remove fat, liver, and eggs prior to cooking meat or preparing soup; women of childbearing age, infants, and children under 15 should avoid eating snapping turtle meat or soups made with their meat. PCBs Statewide aThe source of PCBs leading to this advisory is not in the Peconic Estuary system and, therefore, management actions addressing this concern are not included in this CCMP.

and harbors in the vicinity of rivers where fine grained sediments and decaying organic matter tend to accumulate. ER Ls for metals were exceeded 18 times ( based on 12 stations and 9 metals with available ER L values). Two metals, arsenic and lead, accounted for 10 of the exceedances of the ER Ls. The other metals are copper, mercury, silver, cadmium and zinc. Overall, the Peconic Estuary has clear instances of elevated metal concentrations, especially in East Creek and Meetinghouse Creek. There is the potential for occasional adverse biological effects due to the presence of metals in sediments. Pesticide concentrations in sediments were low, except DDT residues, which were present in some locations. This is very likely due to the drainage of agricultural areas containing persistent residues of DDT. DDT was banned from use in the United States in the 1970s. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 24 The total PCB concentrations at Meetinghouse Creek exceeded the ER L. This measurement, when compared to the other PCB measurements in Peconic Estuary sediments, suggests a potential localized source of PCBs to Meetinghouse Creek.

In 1998, the EPA collected sediments for analysis under the " Peconic Estuary Tributaries Sediment Toxics Survey." Locations were selected to be representative of the typical land uses in the estuary ( undeveloped, developed residential, agricultural, mixed use urban/ industrial). A total of 34 sites were selected. The samples consisted of a composite of equal grab samples collected from three locations at each sampling site. Sediments were analyzed for a total of 108 toxic contaminants, including PCBs, PAHs, pesticides, and metals. In addition to the analysis for individual chemical constituents, the sediment was evaluated for overall sediment toxicity using the marine amphipod Ampelisca abdita. These toxicity tests lasted l0 days and the endpoint measurement is mortality. Toxicity testing is a valuable gauge because the results provide an assessment of the overall toxicity resulting from exposure to multiple contaminants.

A complete report is not yet available for the chemical specific results of the EPA Tributaries Sediment Toxics Survey. A majority of the analysis results, which have been subjected to a quality assurance crosscheck, are available, and some preliminary observations can be made. The preliminary results for metals are comparable with the A. D. Little Toxics Survey ( 1996), and as in that survey, some ER Ls for metals were exceeded, most noticeably for arsenic, but also for mercury and copper, and perhaps silver. In addition, Meetinghouse Creek sediments exhibited the only ER L exceedances of zinc, copper, and nickel. No ER M values for metals have been exceeded at those stations for which data are available. Also similar to the A. D. Little Toxics Survey, levels of the pesticide DDT and its breakdown products ( DDD and DDE) in excess of the ER L were observed in numerous locations. This included one station, Jockey Creek, where the level of DDT exceeded the level of its breakdown products, suggesting an ongoing or Endocrine Disruptors Injury to endocrine function by environmental contaminants is potentially debilitating to a variety of physiological systems. The endocrine system in animals consists of glands that produce hormones that enter the bloodstream to regulate important bodily functions such as growth, development, reproduction, and behavior. Previous studies have found correlations between specific impairments of reproductive activity and elevated tissue concentrations of certain contaminants. These contaminants may mimic or block endocrine system processes, potentially affecting critical bodily functions. The reproductive injuries reported to date include: reduced fertility; impaired hatchability and viability of offspring; impaired reproductive hormone activity; and altered sexual development and behavior. There are also reports of slow growth, atrophy, and lower rates of metabolic behavior. At least 45 chemicals have been identified as potential endocrine disrupting contaminants, including industrial contaminants ( such as polychlorinated biphenyls ( PCBs) and dioxins), insecticides ( such as DDT) and herbicides ( such as dichlorophenoxy acetic acid ( 2,4 D) and atrazine).

At the present time, environmental criteria are not being derived specifically to take into account endocrine disruption impacts. It is possible that these effects may occur when contaminant concentrations are below current criteria and standards.

Testing of dredged material for toxic substances is required only under certain conditions ( depending on factors including: volume; make up of the material ( i. e., percent sand); place of origin; likelihood of contamination; and proposed placement location). Typically, there are betweexn 50 and 100 permit applications approved per year in the Peconics involving dredging and dredged material placement. Generally, dredged material from the Peconic Estuary consists of coarse grained sandy material, and testing for the presence of toxics has not been required. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 25 continuing source or application of DDT. The individual levels of DDD and DDE in Sawmill Creek exceeded the ER M for total DDTs. Because of the special nature of the DDT related results for Jockey Creek and Sawmill Creek, these sites have been referred to the NYSDEC for further investigation. An analysis of the EPA sampling results for PCBs and PAHs has not been completed. A final complete report on chemical specific results with a rigorous analysis of the data is being prepared by the EPA.

A final report on the sediment toxicity testing results, for the 34 sites tested, is available ( Sediment Toxicity Testing in the Peconic Estuary/ Watershed Using the Amphipod, Ampelisca abdita, EPA Region II, August 1998). The survival rate was relatively high across all stations, from 76 percent to 97 percent. A percent survival result of less than 80 percent can indicate some toxicity, and this result occurred at five stations: Little Bay ( 76 percent), Paynes Creek ( 78 percent), West Neck Bay ( 78 percent), Sag Harbor STP ( 79 percent), and Northwest Creek ( 79 percent). Paradoxically, the stations with the highest survival rates included sites which had some of the most frequent incidences of exceedances of ER Ls for metals. The five stations with the highest Ampelisca survival rates were: the Peconic River at Riverhead ( 97 percent), Downs Creek ( 96 percent), Reeves Creek ( 95 percent), Meetinghouse Creek ( 95 percent) and Peconic River at the STP outfall ( 94 percent). These results illustrate the importance of investigations involving both chemical specific analyses and overall toxicity testing in assessing sediment quality. The toxicity testing results will be further assessed in light of the results on the chemical specific report now under preparation. EPA conducted additional sediment sampling for toxicity analyses in 2000. Results of this sampling will be available in 2001.

Finfish, Shellfish and Crustacean Quality Based upon the relative paucity of data available on the concentrations of toxics in the living resources of the Peconic Estuary, EPA initiated a " Peconic Estuary Fish, Shellfish and Crustacean Toxics Survey." The objectives of this survey were to:

  Determine whether the toxic compounds identified by the NYSDOH as being important for the issuance of human health advisories for the 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;

  Assess and compare concentrations of toxics identified by the NYSDOH as being important for the issuance of human health advisories in legal sized finfish, shellfish, and crustaceans in open areas or tributaries, as applicable to a given species, for the four Peconic Bays and selected tributaries;

  Assess and compare the general quality of representative open and closed shellfish areas in creeks of the Peconic Estuary with respect to toxics in hard clams;

  Assess and compare the general quality of representative open shellfish areas in creeks of the Peconic Estuary with respect to toxics in bay scallops; and,

  Evaluate whether radiochemicals associated with Brookhaven National Laboratories are present in blue crabs and fluke above background ( reference site) levels.

The species that were collected for analysis included: striped bass ( bluefish and weakfish were alternate species), American eel, fluke/ summer flounder ( bluefish and weakfish were alternative species), hard clams, bay scallops, blue crabs, and lobsters. Samples will be analyzed for a comprehensive suite of toxic chemicals including metals, pesticides, PCBs, dioxins, furans, as well as Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 26 radiological isomers of strontium, cesium, and plutonium and gross alpha, beta, and gamma radiation. The complete results of this survey should be available in 2001.

NOAA's Mussel Watch Program includes one sampling site in the Peconic Study area ( in Gardiners Bay). While samples from mussels from Gardiners Bay did not show concentrations of chemicals exceeding public health guidelines, concentrations of dieldrin and PAHs were identified as " high" relative to concentrations in other locations, though NOAA reported there is no reason to suppose such concentrations cause harm to marine organisms or to humans.

Dredged Material Quality At the present time, no restrictions have been placed on the placement of dredged material from the Peconic Estuary due to the presence of toxic substances. All dredged material from the Peconic Estuary presently is put to beneficial use, such as beach nourishment or wetland restoration, or is otherwise placed upland ( i. e., above the spring high tide water line).

Groundwater Quality Significant pesticide contamination of groundwater resources in the Peconic Estuary watershed has been found in connection with at least two recent studies. One, entitled Water Quality Monitoring Program to Detect Pesticide Contamination in Groundwaters of Nassau and Suffolk Counties, NY ( June 1999) relates to an 18 month study conducted by the SCDHS in cooperation with the NYSDEC. The second study is entitled Pesticides and their Metabolites in Wells of Suffolk County, New York 1998 ( June 1999) and was conducted by the USGS in cooperation with the NYSDEC.

Pesticides and their Metabolites in Wells of Suffolk County, New York 1998 ( June 1999)

As described in this report, the permeable soils in Suffolk County make the surficial sand and gravel aquifer highly susceptible to contamination from activities on the land surface. This highly permeable aquifer is a source of water for domestic and public supply systems in the county and is hydraulically connected to underlying aquifers that are also used for public water supply. Because of this vulnerability and the importance of the surficial sand and gravel aquifer and in response to the documented contamination of the surficial aquifer by Aldicarb in the early 1980' s, the SCDHS established a groundwater monitoring program for pesticides and other chemicals of concern. The SCDHS has consistently demonstrated the presence of older persistent residues from pesticides like Aldicarb, which are no longer used on Long Island. In a joint study conducted by USGS, NYSDEC and SCDHS, wells ( including water supply wells) with known or suspected pesticide residues were sampled. The primary purpose of this study was to supplement the SCDHS monitoring program. Because all of these samples were from raw, untreated water from the surficial aquifer, the results are not representative of chemical characteristics of drinking water.

Pesticides monitored included many of the most commonly used pesticides in the country. The laboratory methods used to analyze the samples collected had lower detection limits for many pesticides than do the methods used by SCDHS. Because this study was intended to complement the SCDHS program, however, many pesticides that are commonly detected by the SCDHS ( including Aldicarb and its degredates) were not investigated. Thus, the results do not represent a complete description of all pesticide residues in groundwater in Suffolk County. The report presents data on the concentration and frequency of detection of the 60 pesticide residues monitored and discusses the Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 27 concentrations in relation to Federal and State water quality standards. The report also relates the detection of selected herbicide residues to the predominant land use around 50 wells sampled and discusses the concentrations of these residues in relation to one another.

Of the 60 pesticide residues monitored, 25 were detected. Five of these were insecticides or insecticide metabolites ( i. e., pesticide breakdown products). At least one pesticide or metabolite was detected in 44 of the 50 samples. Some samples contained as many as 11 different pesticides or pesticide metabolites. Many of the compounds had not been previously monitored. The data collected indicated that some pesticides that are commonly monitored by the SCDHS are present at trace levels, well below the level of detection provided by the laboratory analytical methods used by the SCDHS. The concentrations of only a few compounds detected in the samples collected exceeded applicable State or Federal water quality standards. However, no Federal drinking water standards have been established for many of the pesticides and pesticide metabolites that were detected.

Comparison of the presence of seven frequently detected herbicides or herbicide metabolites with land use around the wells indicates that the occurrence of these pesticides is related to land use, such as weed control associated with agricultural production and at utility substations and utility rights ofway and possibly residential uses.

The 25 pesticide residues that were detected are as follows:

Insecticides: p, p, DDE; Carbofuran; Dieldrin; Carbaryl; Lindane. Herbicides: Atrazine; Simazine; Deethylatrazine; Metolachlor; Metolachlor ESA; Metolachlor OA; Tebuthiuron; Deisopropylatrazine; Metribuzin; Prometon; Alachlor; Alachlor ESA; EPTC; Linuron; Trifluralin; 2,6 Diethylanaline; Alachlor OA; Cyanazine; Hydroxyatrazine; Terbacil.

Water Quality Monitoring Program to Detect Pesticide Contamination in Groundwaters of Nassau and Suffolk Counties, NY ( June 1999)

As stated in this report, the goal of this study was to obtain water quality information across the full geographic area of both Nassau and Suffolk Counties. The main objective of the sampling program was to identify pesticides and metabolites that leach to groundwater and to help define where these pesticide impacts have occurred. The sampling program was not randomly conducted. In addition to obtaining the geographic coverage needed, specific areas thought to be vulnerable to pesticide impacts were targeted by the testing program. The results of the testing are representative only of the specific locales tested, and should not be considered representative of groundwater quality in all areas. The sampling program was conducted by collecting groundwater samples from monitoring wells, private domestic wells, and public supply wells, and analyzing them for a wide range of pesticide and metabolite compounds. In cases where a public or private well contained water treatment, only the raw water was sampled for this project. A total of 2,306 samples were collected and analyzed for this project, including 1,901 from Suffolk County. Fifty percent of the samples were collected in Suffolk's five eastern towns to determine pesticide impacts to private wells and because the region contains the bulk of Long Island's agricultural acreage.

Pesticides were found in every type of well tested, and were detected at levels exceeding drinking water Maximum Contaminant levels ( MCLs) in all well types. All of the community supply wells found to exceed MCLs were either removed from active service or fitted with granular activated carbon filtration for contaminant reduction. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 28 The results indicate that 89 percent of the wells exceeding pesticide related MCLs are located in Suffolk's five eastern towns, that is 15.4 percent of the wells tested in eastern Suffolk exceeded an MCL. Private wells in agricultural areas of Suffolk's five eastern towns are at the highest risk of pesticide contamination, with 50.5 percent ( 324 of 642 wells tested) containing detections of pesticides. The data show that 30 different pesticides ( including metabolites) were detected in ( western and eastern) Suffolk wells. Ten pesticides ( in Nassau and Suffolk) exceeding drinking water MCLs are now banned from use on Long island due to concerns of potential adverse health effects and ability to leach to groundwater. Banned or discontinued pesticides accounted for 88 percent of the wells that exceeded MCLs. The stability and persistence of pesticide residues in Long Island groundwater is clearly demonstrated by the fact that six of the 10 chemicals found to exceed drinking water MCLs have been banned from sale or use for 10 to 20 years.

Due to the movement of groundwater, and the migration of contaminants with it, private wells located hundreds to thousands of feet downgradient of the points of likely chemical applications, were found impacted by agricultural pesticides. Groundwater impacts resulting from pesticide use at golf courses were examined by testing 31 wells located at 18 Long Island golf courses. One pesticide/ pesticide metabolite was found above the MCL in the golf course monitoring, in one well in each county. The monitoring results indicate that turf management practices can effectively control impacts to groundwater at golf courses. The implementation of Best Management Practices can even further reduce the levels of pesticides found in the groundwater.

The SCDHS has done a follow up study of golf courses with an expanded list of analytes and with new monitoring wells at five more courses in the county, including Shinnecock, National, and Maidstone. Preliminary data suggests that a few low concentrations of pesticides exist. The NYSDEC has been funding the monitoring program for three years at about $ 100,000 per year.

The pesticide chemicals detected in Suffolk County Wells were:

alachlor; aldicarb sulfoxide+ sulfone; arsenic; atrazine; bis 2 ethylhexyl phthalate; cadmium; carbofuran; 2,4 D; dicamba; 1,2 dichloroethane; 1,2 dichloropropane, 1,3 dichloropropane; dieldrin; dinoseb; ethylene dibromide ( EDB); endosulfan sulfate; ethofumesate; MCPP; metalaxyl; methomyl; metolachlor; metribuzin; 4 nitrophenol; oxamyl; prometon; propachlor; simazine; tebuthiuron; tetrachloroterephthalic acid; 1,2,3 trichloropropoane ( Note: In this study chlordane and propoxur were detected in Nassau, but not Suffolk, County wells).

Environmental Impacts in the Peconic Estuary Study Area Associated with Brookhaven National Laboratory ( see Figure 6 2)

New York State Department of Health Sampling Water, sediment and fish samples taken from the Peconic River outside of BNL, as part of the New York State Department of Health monitoring program, contain measurable levels of different radioactive materials. The detected radioactive materials included tritium ( H 3), cobalt 60 ( Co 60), strontium 90 ( Sr 90), cesium 137 ( Cs 137), and americium ( Am 241). The observed concentrations of these radionuclides are more than can be attributed to fall out ( from above ground atomic weapon tests). This indicates that discharges from BNL have contributed to these observed concentrations. The radiation dose from the observed radionuclide concentrations in fish is small. At less than one millirem per year, the average committed effective dose equivalent from radioactive materials that Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 29 Table 6 3. Pesticide Chemicals Detected in Suffolk County Wells in Two Recent Studies.

Pesticide Chemical Pesticides and Their Metabolites in Wells of Suffolk County, New York 1998 ( June 1999)* Water Quality Monitoring Program to Detect Pesticide Contamination in Groundwaters of Nassau and Suffolk Counties, NY ( June 1999) Alachlor X X Alachlor ESA X Alachlor OA X aldicarb sulfoxide+ sulfone X arsenic X atrazine X X bis 2 ethylhexyl phthalate X cadmium X Carbaryl X carbofuran X X Cyanazine X 2,4 D X p, p, DDE X Deethylatrazine X Deisopropylatrazine X dicamba X 1,2 dichloroethane X 1,2 dichloropropane X 1,3 dichloropropane X dieldrin X X 2,6 Diethylanaline X dinoseb X ethylene dibromide ( EDB) X endosulfan sulfate X EPTC X ethofumesate X Hydroxyatrazine X Lindane X Linuron X MCPP X metalaxyl X methomyl X metolachlor X X Metolachlor ESA X Metolachlor OA X metribuzin X X 4 nitrophenol X oxamyl X prometon X X propachlor X simazine X X tebuthiuron X Terbacil X Tebuthiuron X tetrachloroterephthalic acid X 1,2,3 trichloropropoane X Trifluralin X * Because this study was intended to complement the SCDHS program, many pesticides that are commonly detected by the SCDHS ( including aldicarb and its degredates) were not investigated in this study. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 30 may be attributed to releases from BNL is less than one percent of the established New York State limit of 100 millirems per year. The projected radiation dose from Sr 90 and Cs 137 contamination in the river is less than 10 percent of the New York State guidance value for remedial action, and therefore no remedial action to reduce contamination in the Peconic River is called for. The overall trend of the concentration of Sr 90 and Cs 137 in fish shows a decrease with time.

Brookhaven National Laboratory Sampling BNL is a DOE laboratory conducting research in physical, biomedical, and environmental sciences, as well as in selected energy technologies. Brookhaven Science Associates, a not for profit research management organization, operates BNL under a contract with DOE. In 1980, the BNL site was placed on the NYSDEC list of Inactive Hazardous Waste Disposal Sites. In 1989, it was included on EPA's National Priorities List of Superfund sites. BNL's inclusion on the Superfund and NYSDEC lists was primarily due to the effects of discontinued past operations, which could impact Long Island's sole source aquifer, the Island's sole primary drinking water source.

As reported in the Proposed Plan for Operable Unit V: Peconic River/ Sewage Treatment Plant ( BNL, February 9, 2000) BNL has a total of 29 Areas of Concern. To ensure effective management of them, these areas were grouped into six distinct Operable Units ( see Figure 6 3). Only Operable Unit V potentially influences the Peconic Study area. Operable Unit V consists of three Areas of Concern: the Sewage Treatment Plant ( AOC 4)) ( see Figure 6 4); Capped and Retired Formerly Leaking Sewer Pipes within the Operable Unit ( AOC 21); and the Former Eastern Tritium Plume ( AOC 23). The Sewage Treatment Plant AOC includes Peconic River sediment and surface water, the soils in the area of the Sand Filter Beds, Hold up Ponds, and the Satellite Disposal Area.

An OU V Remedial Investigation was conducted to identify the nature and extent of soil, sediment, groundwater, and surface water contamination. The investigation included geophysical and biological surveys; sampling of soil, groundwater, surface water, and sediments; chemical and radiological analyses; benthic invertebrate toxicity testing; fish bioaccumulation studies; data validation; and preparation of the Remedial Investigation and Risk Assessment Report. Subsequent to the final Remedial Investigation report, BNL conducted a more comprehensive sampling of soils, sediment, and water for plutonium, uranium, and other radionuclides. The results of this study are presented in BNL's Plutonium Contamination Characterization and Radiological Dose and Risk Assessment Report ( January 21, 2000).

State and Federal standards, criteria and guidance values were reviewed to evaluate the nature and extent of contamination in soil, sediment, groundwater and surface water. Screening criteria used to identify contamination were derived from these requirements. These screening criteria are given in the Operable Unit V Remedial Investigation and Risk Assessment Report. The principle contaminants that have been released to the STP include metals, solvents, and radionuclides. Elevated levels of metals and PCBs, and low levels of pesticides and radionuclides, were detected in Peconic River sediment. Concentrations were highest in on site surface sediments and most prominent in the on site depositional areas located approximately 0.5 mile, 1 mile, and 1.5 miles downstream of the STP. The following is a summary of the range of contaminants found in the Peconic River sediments, STP soils, fish, sludge inside and soils surrounding the retired and capped sewer lines, and groundwater.

Peconic River Sediments: Fourteen inorganic contaminants were detected at concentrations greater than the sediment screening levels ( see Figure 6 5). Of these, the metals mercury ( maximum 24.5 mg/ kg), silver ( maximum 171 mg/ kg), and copper ( maximum 1140 mg/ kg) were detected most often, and at the highest concentrations above the screening level. Other analytes detected at concentrations Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 31 above the screening level included the PCB Aroclor 1254 ( maximum 1.5 mg/ kg), DDD ( maximum 0.096 mg/ kg), DDE ( maximum 0.089 mg/ kg), alpha chlordane ( maximum 0.073 mg/ kg), gamma chlordane ( maximum 0.043 mg/ kg), and endosulfan ( 0.018 mg/ kg). Contamination was highest in surface sediments and was most prominent in a depositional area approximately one mile downstream of the STP.

Cesium 137, americium 241, and plutonium 239/ 240 were found at higher activities in the Peconic River sediments than in the reference sediment samples collected from the Connetquot River, a river with similar characteristics as the Peconic River and outside the influence of the BNL site. The maximum cesium 137 concentration in sediments on site was 21.1 picoCuries per gram ( pCi/ g). The maximum americium 241 and plutonium 239/ 240 concentrations were also found on site at 1.91 pCi/ g and 0.158 pCi/ g, respectively. Similar to the inorganic contaminants, the low level radionuclides detected were highest in the surface sediments and were most prominent in a depositional area approximately 1 mile downstream of the STP.

Sewage Treatment Plant Soils: Surface soils and subsurface soils in, or in the vicinity of, the STP ( including the sand filter beds and related berms) were found to contain elevated levels of several inorganic constituents including mercury, silver, copper, chromium, lead, zinc, and thallium. The maximum concentrations were 15.1 milligrams per kilogram ( mg/ kg) for mercury, 112 mg/ kg for silver, 80.7 mg/ kg for copper, 157 mg/ kg for chromium, 95.5 mg/ kg for lead, 60.7 mg/ kg for zinc, and 1.2 mg/ kg for thallium. Elevated levels were concentrated in the top 6 inches and did not extend beyond a depth of 3 feet.

In the soils of the sand filter beds and berms, the most frequently detected radionuclides were naturally occurring uranium 233/ 234 and uranium 238; all detected activities of both were within the range of background. Plutonium was detected less frequently, and at low activities. The maximum activity of plutonium 239/ 240 in the berms was 7.31 pCi/ g, and in the sand filter beds was 0.399 pCi/ g. The radionuclide with the highest levels was cesium 137; its levels were highest in the berms and areas adjacent to the sand filter beds, with a maximum concentration of 98.8 pCi/ g. Americium 241 was highest in the sand filter beds with a maximum concentration of 3.74 pCi/ g. Generally, the activities of the radionuclides were highest in the top one foot of soil.

Peconic River Fish: Fish collected from the Peconic River headwaters had bioaccumulated PCBs ( the average Aroclor 1254 concentration in fish on site was 1.8 mg/ kg). Naturally occurring uranium radionuclides were detected in some of the fish samples, with highest activities in the inedible portions of the fish. The radionuclide cesium 137 was detected most frequently. It was found in higher concentrations in fish collected on site, and generally in slightly higher concentrations in the flesh and skin than in the bone and viscera. The highest activity of cesium 137 in fish was in a whole body sample of pickerel taken on site ( 2.712 pCi/ g).

Sludge and Soil ( retired and capped sewer line): The Laboratory sampled soils surrounding the areas where leaks were identified along the retired and capped sewer line during the Operable Unit V investigation. The results of the investigation identified only a few areas with low concentrations of inorganic constituents. This indicates that the sewer line leading to the STP is not a likely source of significant contamination to the surrounding soils. The formerly leaking pipes in Operable Unit V were replaced in 1993. As part of a more recent investigation, sludge was collected from the bottom of manholes along the retired and capped sewer line and analyzed for radionuclides. The results identified elevated activities of a few radionuclides. Americium 241 and cesium 137 were found at the highest activities relative to screening levels, and plutonium was detected, generally at low levels. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 32 Groundwater: Current groundwater sampling results indicate that levels of tritium in the groundwater are well below the drinking water standard. The highest concentration of trichloroethene ( TCE) found on site during the Remedial Investigation was 32 ppb. Maximum off site levels were 8.5 ppb, slightly greater than the drinking water standard of 5 ppb. Concentrations of VOCs are decreasing in magnitude. A more recent sampling in 1999 found a maximum TCE concentration on site of 17 ppb and a maximum off site concentration of 8.2 ppb.

The elevated levels of TCE in groundwater off site were found at depths ( 200 feet) below the depths at which residential wells are typically screened, and public exposure to TCE in groundwater is unlikely. Homes and businesses in the Operable Unit V area were offered public water in 1997. Seventeen new monitoring wells have been installed as outpost wells on the eastern perimeter of the public water hookup area. Monitoring of contaminants in groundwater will continue.

Both soil and groundwater samples were collected in the area of the Hold up Ponds during the investigations, and no evidence of leakage was found. No further action is planned and these ponds will remain as part of the operating Sewage Treatment Plant. A groundwater monitoring network will be put in place as part of the Lab's Groundwater Improvement Program ( Phase II) to assure continued effectiveness of the Hold up Ponds.

Extensive sampling and exploratory excavations were conducted at the Satellite Disposal Area and no evidence of contamination was found. In 1985, bromine trifluoride cylinders and two boxes of laboratory chemicals were removed from the Satellite Disposal Area. No additional remediation is planned for this area. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 33 Figure 6 2. Brookhaven National Laboratory's Location with Respect to New York State and Long Island ( from Proposed Plan for Operable Unit V: Peconic River/ Sewage Treatment Plant, Brookhaven National Laboratory ( BNL, February 9, 2000)).

Figure 6 3. Brookhaven National Laboratory's Six Operable Units and OU V Areas of Concern ( from Proposed Plan for Operable Unit V; Peconic River/ Sewage Treatment Plant, Brookhaven National Laboratory ( BNL: February 9, 2000)). Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 34 Figure 6 4. BNL's Sewage Treatment Plant ( AOC 4) and the Sub Areas of Concern within the plant ( from Proposed Plan for Operable Unit V: Peconic River/ Sewage Treatment Plant, Brookhaven National Laboratory ( BNL: February 9, 2000)).

Figure 6 5. Areal Extent of Sediments Contaminated or Potentially Contaminated with Metals above Toxicity Based Cleanup Goals ( from Proposed Plan for Operable Unit V: Peconic River/ Sewage Treatment Plant, Brookhaven National Laboratory ( BNL: February 9, 2000)). Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 35 MANAGEMENT ACTIONS The Toxics Action Plan addresses research and monitoring, specific strategies for sites of concern and nonpoint sources of pollution, and general management strategies for pollution prevention and regulation of toxics within the estuary. The actions encompass a wide scope of management strategies, including:

  Remediation at specific sites or sources;

  Enforcement of existing and new regulatory requirements that control toxics;

  Reduction of the use of toxics;

  Pollution prevention programs;

  Research, monitoring, and data analysis; and,

  Public Education ( included in the Public Education and Outreach Management Plan).

In the CCMP, some steps within the actions have been identified as priorities, as indicated under the step number. The PEP will seek to implement priority actions in the near term. Priorities may be either new or ongoing, commitments or recommendations. Completing some priority actions will not require any new or additional resources because they are being undertaken through " base programs" or with funding that has been committed. In other cases, new or additional resources need to be secured by some or all of the responsible entities in order to complete the priority actions. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 36 TOXICS MANAGEMENT ACTIONS T 1. Review Historical Monitoring Data and Conduct New Monitoring Studies Where Needed to Further Characterize Sources, Loadings, and Impacts of Toxic Contaminants.

T 2. Continue Remedial Efforts and Review of Regulatory Compliance at Sites of Concern in the Peconic Estuary.

T 3. Assess Alternatives to Chlorination for Disinfection at Sewage Treatment Plants.

T 4. Reduce Loadings of Pesticides and Herbicides within the Peconic Estuary.

T 5. Develop Requirements Regarding Proper Storage and Disposal of Toxic Substances and Chemicals Associated with Construction Sites and Road, Highway, and Bridge Operation and Maintenance and Construction Activities.

T 6. Adopt Requirements for Controlling Toxic Loadings in Stormwater Runoff and Activities in Developed Areas.

T 7. Explore Management Strategies that Emphasize the Elimination or Reduction of Toxic Substances.

T 8 Ensure that Dredged Material is Managed and Placed in Such a Way as to Reduce Toxic Impacts Associated with Contaminated Sediments. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 37 Addresses Toxics Management Objectives 1 and 5.

Periodic monitoring of the groundwater, surface water, sediments, and organisms of the Peconic Estuary is necessary to identify new or emerging problems and to assess and measure the impact of ongoing programs and CCMP management actions. In particular, additional sampling and analysis of sediments in creeks and peripheral embayments may be warranted as metals such as arsenic, lead, cadmium, and zinc, as well as PAHs have been detected in various surveys, and the potential for pesticide contamination also exists in the estuary. Investigations should focus on agriculturally influenced creeks ( including sampling for pesticides), as well as creeks influenced by development and those with significant stormwater runoff inputs. Former agricultural land may also be a continuing source of pesticide inputs.

Past and present marinas and boatyards are potential sources of heavy metal contamination if boat bottom scraping and painting takes place and paint scrapings ( which are almost entirely copper) were not collected and disposed of properly. Additional metals of concern in these sites include lead, zinc, mercury and tin. Historic aerial photos could be used to identify sites where boat bottom maintenance activities took place in the past.

Additional related actions are included in the Public Education and Outreach Chapter of this CCMP, including an action addressing fish consumption advisories.

Steps T 1.1 Include toxics monitoring in the PEP Long Term Monitoring Plan.

T 1.2 Conduct toxicity testing as well as chemical specific analyses of Peconic Estuary Priority sediments, including open water areas, tidal creeks, and peripheral embayments. Where toxicity is observed, identify the toxic agent( s) of concern.

T 1.3 Continue to collect and evaluate data on concentrations of bioconcentratable chemicals in mussel tissue through NOAA's Mussel Watch Program.

T 1.4 Analyze new data collected in EPA's 1999 " Peconic Estuary Fish, Shellfish and Priority Crustacean Toxics Survey." Review data on organic chemical and metal residues in fish and shellfish tissues to determine whether consumption advisories are due to sources and loadings of toxics within the Peconic Estuary System, and the appropriateness of existing NYS consumption advisories.

T 1.5 Re evaluate PEP sediment survey data to identify chemicals present above known effects Priority levels. Identify toxics present at low levels that individually or cumulatively may be affecting aquatic resources. T 1 Review Historical Monitoring Data and Conduct New Monitoring Studies Where Needed to Further Characterize Sources, Loadings, and Impacts of Toxic Contaminants. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 38 T 1.6 Determine the potential local source of PCBs in Meetinghouse Creek and, once Priority identified, control or otherwise remediate the source.

T 1.7 Monitor progress on research on endocrine disruptors, and encourage pollution prevention programs to reduce loadings or address potential sources of these contaminants.

T 1.8 Identify past and present marinas/ boatyard sites as potential sources of heavy metal Priority contamination to the estuary; quantify the extent of the problem and possible effects on the estuary.

Responsible Entities T 1.1 PEP ( EPA, NYSDEC and SCDHS), other public and private groups T 1.2 EPA ( lead), PEP T 1.3 Data collection: NOAA ( lead); data evaluation: EPA ( lead), PEP, NOAA T 1.4 EPA ( lead for data collection and report preparation); EPA, NYSDEC, NYSDOH for data interpretation T 1.5 PEP T 1.6 Investigation: NYSDEC; control/ remediation: NYSDEC, responsible parties T 1.7 EPA ( lead), NYSDEC T 1.8 PEP ( through contract) Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 39 Addresses Toxics Management Objectives 4 and 5.

There are three Federal Superfund Sites on the National Priorities List in the study area: the North Sea Municipal Landfill ( North Sea, NY), Rowe Industries ( Sag Harbor, NY), and a portion of the Brookhaven National Laboratory Site ( Upton, NY). The ( Bulova) Watch Case Factory Site ( Sag Harbor, NY) and a portion of the Navy Weapons Industrial Reserve Plant ( NWIRP) Site ( Calverton, NY) are also under investigation or being remediated or otherwise permitted at the Federal or State level. These sites are contributors or potential contributors of toxic contaminants to the estuary. The following actions address site specific concerns at Superfund sites, inactive hazardous waste disposal sites, remediation efforts under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ( RCRA) sites, and the facilities regulated under the State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( SPDES).

Marinas and boatyards represent areas of particular concern due to their proximity to the water and certain maintenance and repair actives that may occur there.

Steps T 2.1( A) Continue remedial efforts and evaluate impacts, monitoring, and ensure consistency with local requirements associated with the surface water discharge for the Rowe Industries site.

T 2.1( B) Continue groundwater monitoring at the North Sea Municipal Landfill; implement benthic community and sediment toxicity testing to ensure remediation efforts are achieved.

T 2.1( C) Continue oversight and remedial efforts at the ( Bulova) Watch Case Factory site.

T 2.2 Complete inventory of RCRA facilities within the Peconic Estuary System; review compliance history of facilities; ensure all facilities comply with regulatory and permit requirements.

T 2.3 Ensure that upon Environmental Benefits Permitting Strategy ( EBPS) review, the effluent limitations and/ or monitoring requirements in BNL SPDES Permit ( NY 0005835) for Outfall 001 ( the sewage treatment plant discharge) will be revised if findings from the industrial type effluent monitoring program or any other available data indicates that increased protection is needed. Permit elements that will be evaluated, as appropriate, include: pretreatment, BMPs, toxicity testing, and bioaccumulative contaminants.

T 2.4 Ensure that BNL adequately implements its Environmental Management System focused Priority on environmental compliance and emphasizing pollution prevention as specified in the EPA/ DOE March 1998 MOA. T 2. Continue Remedial Efforts and Review of Regulatory Compliance at Sites of Concern in the Peconic Estuary. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 40 T 2.5 Implement environmental clean up remedies under Superfund for Operable Unit V at Priority BNL. Ensure that the remedial investigation currently underway adequately addresses human health ( chemical and radiological) and ecological impacts, including potential downstream and off site impacts.

T 2.6 Continue to implement the RCRA corrective action program at the NWIRP. Ensure that the Corrective Measures Study adequately addresses human health and ecological impacts, including potential downstream and off site impacts.

T 2.7 Conduct seasonal inspections of marinas and boatyards to ensure maintenance and repair activities are being done properly and there is proper disposal of wastes.

Responsible Entities T 2.1( A) EPA T 2.1( B) EPA ( lead)

T 2.1( C) NYSDEC ( lead)

T 2.2 EPA ( lead)

T 2.3 NYSDEC ( lead), BNL T 2.4 EPA ( lead), USDOE, BNL T 2.5 EPA ( lead), NYSDEC, BNL, USDOE, NYSDOH T 2.6 EPA ( lead), NYSDEC T 2.7 NYSDEC Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 41 Addresses Toxics Management Objectives 3 and 4.

Disinfection of effluent from STPs is essential to prevent the spread of disease. Disinfection can be accomplished by a variety of methods, all of which have been proven effective under specific conditions. Chlorine may have toxic effects on living organisms following discharge when it becomes complexed in seawater with organic compounds. Ultraviolet ( UV) disinfection has proven to be an effective disinfectant alternative. Presently, the Brookhaven National Laboratory and Plum Island Animal Disease Center STPs use and the Riverhead and Sag Harbor STPs have proposed UV disinfection in planned plant upgrades; use of UV has been piloted on a portion of the Shelter Island Heights STP flow. The STP at the former Naval Weapons Industrial Reserve Plant ( NWIRP) in Calverton, New York, continues to use chlorine disinfection. The permit for this facility is expected to be modified significantly as redevelopment plans for this property move forward. This STP may ultimately discharge to groundwater ( outside of the Peconic Estuary watershed) in place of the current surface water discharge to the Peconic River System.

Steps T 3.1 Install UV disinfection at the Riverhead and Sag Harbor STPs. Evaluate alternatives to chlorine disinfection at the Shelter Island Heights STP and the NWIRP STP if the effluents are of sufficient quality for alternatives to be effective and protective of human health. See related action P 10 in the Pathogens Management Plan.

Responsible Entities T 3.1 Treatment plant operators at Riverhead, Sag Harbor, Shelter Island Heights, and the former NWIRP; NYSDEC T 3. Assess Alternatives to Chlorination for Disinfection at Sewage Treatment Plants. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 42 Addresses Toxics Management Objectives 2, 3, and 4.

Significant pesticide contamination of groundwater resources in the Peconic Estuary watershed has been documented in at least two recent studies. This includes some pesticides that were found in raw untreated groundwater at levels exceeding drinking water Maximum Contaminant Levels. However, at the present time, there are no known environmental impairments due to pesticides in the Peconic Estuary. There is also the potential for pesticide use to increase and change, particularly with shifts to intensive agriculture systems ( e. g., vineyards, turf grass, ornamentals) and increased residential development. Some pesticides may enter surface waters directly with stormwater runoff. Efforts to manage stormwater primarily due to concerns of pathogens contamination may also result in the prevention of direct loadings of pesticides ( and other toxic substances) to surface waters ( see Pathogens Management Chapter of this Report). It may be particularly important to ensure commercial applicators of pesticides are properly certified, and to eliminate or reduce pesticide use on or in the vicinity of wetlands. A " Clean Sweep" program was successful in collecting and properly disposing of a large quantity of agricultural and turf/ landscape maintenance pesticides that were unusable and unwanted.

The public has clearly indicated its preference for farmland preservation in the watershed. Creating additional pesticide program requirements may be in conflict with that goal, though there will continue to be opportunities for applying best management practices. In addition, market incentives should be explored as a possible driving force for producing agricultural products using the specified pesticide management measure or for producing natural/ organic agricultural products, particularly for local sale. Standards could be specified, labeling developed, and promotional materials prepared to advertise the availability of products which are produced using Integrated Pest Management techniques or which are pesticide free.

Cornell Cooperative Extension will continue work on the Peconic Estuary Pesticide Reduction Initiative funded under a EPA Pollution Prevention Grant, demonstrating on a pilot scale the use of " scouting" by trained personnel to determine the timing of pesticide applications for insects, diseases and weeds, and provide training to assist farm managers in acquiring their own " scouting" expertise.

State agencies have proposed the development/ establishment of enforceable State wide program requirements to manage pesticide use under the State Coastal Nonpoint Source Management Plan under the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments ( CZARA). However, the extent to which there is compliance with the pesticide use management measure for agricultural areas under CZARA is unknown. State agencies have also proposed the development of a Long Island Pesticide Management Plan.

Pesticide use on public lands can effectively be eliminated or significantly reduced, through initiatives such as the Federal government's Presidential Memorandum that addresses " Environmentally and Economically Beneficial Practices on Federal Landscaped Grounds" and Suffolk County's restrictions on pesticide use at county owned golf courses. " Environmental Principles for Golf Courses in the United States" is a program developed by golf and environmental organizations, and includes objectives regarding reductions in pesticide use. T 4. Reduce Loadings of Pesticides and Herbicides within the Peconic Estuary. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 43 Financial incentives for voluntary compliance by private growers with the pesticide management measure and for Integrated Pest Management ( IPM) strategies may be available through the 1995 Federal Farm Bill's Environmental Quality Incentives Program ( EQIP). The Suffolk County Office of the United States Department of Agriculture ( USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service ( NRCS) should apply for funding from the NYS NRCS Office for a 5 year comprehensive pesticide management program initially in the Towns of Riverhead and Southold as a priority and in the other towns in future years.

Additional related actions are included in the Public Education and Outreach Chapter of this CCMP, including actions addressing pesticide use near wetlands, dealing with certified commercial applicators, reducing residential pesticide use, and golf courses.

Steps T 4.1 Continue to pursue development/ establishment of the Long Island Pesticide Management Priority Plan and enforceable Statewide agricultural pesticide program requirements under CZARA, which reduce the potential for contamination of surface water and ground water due to the application of pesticides. In the meantime, seek commitments on a voluntary basis from landowners to comply with this management measure.

T 4.2 Plan, advertise, and carry out a " Clean Sweep" program to collect and properly dispose of Priority banned or unneeded agricultural and turf/ landscaping pesticides.

T 4.3 Ensure that commercial pesticide applicators and applicators of restricted use pesticides are properly certified. See related Public Outreach and Education Action POE 4.1.

T 4.4 Enforce the provisions of the State's Freshwater Protection Law to reduce or eliminate loadings of pesticides and herbicides on or in the vicinity of wetlands and associated waterbodies. See related Public Outreach and Education Action POE 4.2.

T 4.5 Develop and implement integrated pest management ( IPM) programs that manage pests with minimal impact on human health and the environment.

T 4.6 Develop and implement a comprehensive agricultural pesticide management proposal for Priority funding by the USDA.

T 4.7 Investigate opportunities for expansion of organic agricultural operations in the Peconic watershed, as well as marketing and labeling to encourage local sale.

T 4.8 Implement IPM programs on public lands, such as Suffolk County's IPM/ pesticide free golf course initiative. Ensure that all Federal facilities and operations in the PEP Study Area comply with the Presidential Memorandum of April 26, 1996 that addresses " Environmentally and Economically Beneficial Practices on Federal Landscaped Grounds."

T 4.9 Restrict or ban pesticides whose residues are frequently detected at levels of environmental or public health concern in groundwater or the estuary. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 44 Responsible Entities T 4.1 NYSDEC, NYSDOS ( co leads), NYS Department of Agriculture and Markets, NYSDOH, and other public and private groups T 4.2 Suffolk County Soil and Water Conservation District ( lead), with NRCS, EPA, PEP, Towns and the agricultural community T 4.3 NYSDEC ( lead)

T 4.4 NYSDEC ( lead)

T 4.5 State ( lead); County, Town and Village governments and agencies, homes, businesses and farms T 4.6 USDA NRCS and SCSWCD ( leads)

T 4.7 PEP ( lead)

T 4.8 Federal, County governments; other governmental entities T 4.9 NYSDEC Peconic Estuary Program CCMP C H A P T E R S I X 6 45 Addresses Toxics Management Objectives 3 and 4.

While there are existing State requirements regarding pesticide use and handling and solid and hazardous waste disposal on State funded projects, there are no comprehensive regulatory requirements specifically for construction site chemical use for projects at the County or local level. Aside from State pesticide management, spill management, and solid and hazardous waste disposal requirements, there are no comprehensive regulatory requirements regarding chemical controls at road, highway, and bridge construction sites and operation and maintenance activities at the county, town, and village level.

Steps T 5.1 Continue to pursue development/ establishment of enforceable State wide program requirements which manage the application, generation, and migration of toxic substances, and ensure the proper storage and disposal of toxic materials at all construction sites.

T 5.2 Adopt requirements consistent with State program requirements at the County, town, and village level regarding chemical controls at construction sites, including road, highway, and bridge construction sites. Until these are adopted, seek commitments on a voluntary basis from highway department personnel and contractors to comply with this management measure.

T 5.3 Adopt requirements consistent with State program requirements at the County, town, and village level regarding chemical controls for road, highway, and bridge operation and maintenance activities. In the meantime, seek commitments on a voluntary basis from highway department personnel and contractors to comply with this management measure.