A New Assessment of

Water Infrastructure:

Water quality, economics,

and smart growth at the

watershed scale

Sri Vedachalam, Brian G. Rahm and

Susan J. Riha

New York State Water

Resources Institute

Cornell University

• $36.2 Billion to repair, replace and update over 20 years • Federal funding through Clean Water Act has reduced

from $2.4 billion (1987) to $687 million (2008) – a 70% drop.

“Adequate water infrastructure funding is a critical component of urban revitalization, smart economic growth and property tax relief. It is essential for the protection of public health and environment.” – Wastewater Infrastructure Needs of New York State, NYSDEC

• 24% of declines in 30 year stream water quality due to organic waste and/or municipal & industrial inputs

“Many of these declines (in water quality) are considered to be caused by aging infrastructure, specifically wastewater treatment plants that were built or upgraded in the 1970’s and 1980’s, and are now functioning beyond capacity or at reduced levels of efficiency.” – 30 Year Trends in Water Quality of Rivers & Streams in NY State, NYSDEC

Hudson Basin Wastewater Inventory Analysis – Why Now?

New York State Water Resources Institute

A regional wastewater inventory

Assist planners and policy-makers at various

government levels

Generate insight on the strategic management of federal

and state funds

Ultimately support the maintenance and improvement of

New York’s public health and environmental assets

Goals

POTW capacity and room for growth

Source water quality: protection vs. remediation

Funding priorities and need for assessment

Potential for consolidation/cooperation and decentralized

treatment

Objectives

NYSPDES database

EPA ECHO compliance database

U.S. Census

NYSDEC Waterbody Inventory and Priority

Waterbodies List; TMDL status

NYSDEC Intended Use Plan, Clean Water

State Revolving Fund for Water Pollution

Control

Sources

New York State Water Resources Institute

>200 >100 25-50 <25

Years until POTW capacity reached at current growth rate

Smart growth & excess capacity

MG

D o

f ex

cess

cap

acit

y at

eac

h f

acili

ty

New York State Water Resources Institute

Headwater protection

1 – 2 % 5 – 6 % 14 – 15 %

% of stream length (not including the Hudson main stem) located downstream of POTW

New York State Water Resources Institute

<200 350-400 >500

Funds requested per capita on multi-year CWSRF project list ($000,000)

0 0-5 40-45

% Total Capacity that could be involved in consolidation

Funding equity and scope for municipal cooperation

New York State Water Resources Institute

0 5 10

# of POTWs discharging to Unassessed streams

Stream water quality assessment

Decentralization & the role of small systems

Soil suitability for septic in the Hudson

watershed counties

Percentage of total soil area in a county

that is either classified as ‘not limiting’ or

‘somewhat limiting’

Essex

Hamilton

Ulster

Warren

Greene

Dutchess

Albany

Rensselaer

Schenectady

Orange

Saratoga

Columbia

Fulton

Westchester

Putnam

Rockland

<25 25-35 >35

Washington

New York State Water Resources Institute

Typology and strategy by

sub-watershed

Hudson-Hoosic

Abundant excess capacity

Concentrated capacity in 1-2 urban cores

Headwaters relatively unaffected by POTWs

Not an immediate target for stream assessment

What could smart growth mean here?

- Maximize/promote infill; maintain current

wastewater infrastructure

Rondout

Capacity a critical concern

Distributed capacity across sub-region

Headwaters sensitive to POTW operation

Multiple candidates for assessment

- Consider expanding wastewater infrastructure; try to

minimize impact in sensitive headwaters

New York State Water Resources Institute

Conclusions & future directions

Some regions have excess capacity, while others do not. POTW capacity

is only one of the considerations for future planning

Stream lengths in some regions are impacted more by POTWs.

Effective use of federal funds depends on the goal. Consideration by

stream length, effluent treated and population impacted can lead to

different results.

All POTWs built after 1981 are small.

Only 2 plants have capacity larger than 2 MGD.

Rest have capacity less than 0.5 MGD.

Potential for consolidation among certain POTWs exists, although specific

cases need further investigation.

Decentralized wastewater treatment can be an alternative to small

POTWs in certain communities.

Some counties are more suited than others.

Site-specific analyses needed.

New York State Water Resources Institute

Coordinated Projects (Cornell University)

Project Title: New life for New York's marine highways and inland ports: A case study of the port of Albany PI: Dr. Susan Christopherson Issues Addressed: Economic vitality; Smart growth

Project Title: Water withdrawals and their impact on valued fish (brook trout) habitat PI: Dr. Bill Fisher

Issues Addressed: Integrated management; Source-water protection

Project Title: Hudson water and sewer smart growth infrastructure PI: David Kay Issues Addressed: Integrated management; Smart growth

Project Title: Innovative approaches to making a business case for water resource management PI: Dr. Mark Milstein

Issues Addressed: Economic vitality; Integrated management Project Title: Green infrastructure, water quality, and GHG emissions PI: Dr Todd Walter Issues Addressed: Infrastructure effectiveness; Integrated management Project Title: Geospatial analysis as a tool for identifying critical land use and infrastructure impacts on regional environmental water quality PI: Dr. Peter Woodbury Issues Addressed: Infrastructure effectiveness; Integrated management; Source-water protection

Project Title: New York state wastewater treatment inventory analysis PI: Dr. Sridhar Vedachalam Issues Addressed: Infrastructure effectiveness; Economic vitality; Integrated management; Smart growth; Source-water protection

In addition to the projects listed above, WRI staff and interns, in cooperation with HREP and MRBP staff will conduct research related to infrastructure effectiveness, economic vitality, integrated management, smart growth, and source-water protection. For more information on these efforts please contact either Brian Rahm (bgr4@cornell.edu) or Sri Vedachalam (sv333@cornell.edu).

For information on the HREP and MRBP Action Agendas please see: HREP - http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/remediation_hudson_pdf/hrepaabroch.pdf MRBP - http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/water_pdf/mohawkaafnl2010.pdf

Competitive Projects

Project Title: Relative abundance of blueback herring in relation to permanent and removable dams on the Mohawk River PI: Dr. Neil Ringler Institution: SUNY ESF Issues Addressed: Infrastructure effectiveness; Integrated management Project Title: Pollution trade-offs associated with the use of riparian zones as best management practices PI: Dr. Philippe Vidon Institution: SUNY ESF Issues Addressed: Integrated management; Source-water protection Project Title: Wetland mitigation of infill development: an evaluation of green infrastructure effectiveness in a near-urban setting PI: Dr. Mary Ann Cunningham Institution: Vassar College Issues Addressed: Infrastructure effectiveness; Integrated management; Source-water protection Project Title: Digitizing a 70-year record of land use change in New York State watersheds to examine the effectiveness of non-structural landscape modification on flood control PI: Dr. Stephen Shaw Institution: SUNY ESF Issues Addressed: Integrated management; Source-water protection Project Title: Land use leadership alliance training program: Integrating watershed protection into land use decisions PI: Tiffany B Zezula Institution: Pace University Issues Addressed: Integrated management; Smart growth

Suggestions & Questions

This work is supported by the USGS and the Hudson River Estuary Program of the New York State

Department of Environmental Conservation

New York State Water Resources Institute